initial commit of ebook 49116HEADmain

1 files changed, 914 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/49116-0.txt b/49116-0.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a0efe79
--- /dev/null
+++ b/49116-0.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,914 @@
+The Project Gutenberg eBook, Church Ministry in Kensington, by John Philip
+Gell
+
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
+other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions 
+whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of
+the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at 
+www.gutenberg.org.  If you are not located in the United States, you'll have
+to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook.
+
+
+
+
+Title: Church Ministry in Kensington
+       A Recent Case of Hieratical Teaching Scripturally Considered
+
+
+Author: John Philip Gell
+
+
+
+Release Date: June 2, 2015  [eBook #49116]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: UTF-8
+
+
+***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CHURCH MINISTRY IN KENSINGTON***
+
+
+Transcribed from the 1867 R. Clay, Son, and Taylor edition by David
+Price, email ccx074@pglaf.org
+
+
+
+
+
+                     _CHURCH MINISTRY IN KENSINGTON_.
+
+
+                                * * * * *
+
+                              A RECENT CASE
+                                    OF
+                           Hieratical Teaching
+                         SCRIPTURALLY CONSIDERED.
+
+                                * * * * *
+
+                                    BY
+                          JOHN PHILIP GELL, M.A.
+              PERPETUAL CURATE OF ST. JOHN’S, NOTTING HILL.
+
+                                * * * * *
+
+                                 LONDON:
+                   PRINTED BY R. CLAY, SON, AND TAYLOR,
+                            BREAD STREET HILL.
+                                  1867.
+
+                                * * * * *
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS.
+
+INTRODUCTION                                                  _page_ 3
+OUR SACRIFICE FOR SIN HAS CEASED                                     4
+OUR PEACE OFFERING ALSO HAS CEASED                                   5
+OUR PROPITIATION IS APPLIED BY FAITH ONLY                            6
+EUCHARISTIC PROPITIATION IS OF HUMAN INVENTION, CONTRARY          7–11
+TO THE LAW OF MOSES, THE APOSTOLIC RECORDS, AND THE
+ENGLISH LITURGY
+OUR ALTAR IS NOT THE HOLY TABLE                                 12, 13
+OUR PRIESTS CANNOT SACRIFICE CHRIST                             14, 15
+NOR MOVE HIM TO SACRIFICE HIMSELF                                   16
+OUR PRIESTS REMIT AND RETAIN SINS, BY THE MINISTRY OF THE        17–19
+WORD, IN COMMON WITH ALL THE MEMBERS OF CHRIST
+WITH WHOM THEY SHARE THE ROYAL PRIESTHOOD                           20
+THE “POWER OF THE KEYS”                                          _ib._
+BISHOP HICKES.  AN ERROR INDICATED                                  21
+THEOTÓKOS.  “CAUSES OF SALVATION”                                   22
+CONCLUSION                                                      23, 24
+
+                                * * * * *
+
+_To the_ REV. MAYOW WYNELL MAYOW, M.A.  _Perpetual Curate of St. Mary’s_,
+_West Brompton_, _late Student of Christ Church_, _Oxford_, _and Author
+of Eight Sermons an the Priesthood_, _Altar_, _and Sacrifice_. {3}
+
+YOUR Christmas offering to your former bishop, of Salisbury, to your
+flock in South Kensington, and to the public at large, has taken eight
+months to reach me; so slowly does literature circulate from end to end
+of the ancient parish of Kensington.  But I cordially hope that my
+present acknowledgments may arrive before Christmas comes again; for you
+have chosen an appropriate offering, your own workmanship, in the shape
+of Eight carefully-written Sermons, upon the Sacrifice, Altar, and Priest
+of the Christian dispensation.
+
+I.  “Sacrifice,” says the judicious Hooker (Eccl. Pol. v. 78), “is now no
+part of the Church ministry.”  Nevertheless your first position is, that
+“we (clergy) have this treasure in earthen vessels,” and you take the
+text of your First Sermon from the words, though not the meaning of S.
+Paul (2 Cor. iv. 7), where he writes, not, as you expound (p. 5), of the
+treasure of sacerdotal privilege, but of the treasure of Gospel
+knowledge; as he speaks elsewhere of the treasures of knowledge remaining
+hid in Christ (Col. ii. 3); a passage which you apply more accurately, as
+the text of your Eighth Sermon.  You even go so far (p. 40) as to aver
+that “by Christ’s own appointment . . . his very body and blood are truly
+offered . . . day by day;” though S. Paul says of Christ, that “He
+needeth not daily to offer up sacrifices” (Heb. vii. 27).  Must we then
+offer sacrifices without Him?  Surely when you remember the same Apostle
+pleading for one death, one judgment, and one offering, as co-ordinate
+verities (Heb. ix. 27, 28); and declaring that “there remaineth no more
+sacrifice for sins” (Heb. x. 26), you will no longer find a difficulty in
+“admitting it to be conceivable,” (should you not say, certain?) “that it
+was intended that sacrifice should altogether cease when the Great
+Sacrifice was completed” (p. 46).
+
+The sacrificial Hebrew language will always repay attention.  It is more
+subtle and exact, in matters of sin and conscience, than the Greek;
+whereon the inspired writers frequently pile a weight of meaning, to
+which the latter language is hardly equal.  Hebrew distinguishes
+sacrifice from sacrifice, sin from sin.  You argue, for instance, in your
+Second Sermon, that if Job offered a daily sacrifice, before the coming
+of the Law, then Christians also, after the Law, may probably offer the
+like.  But Job made a sacrifice for sin (Job i. 5), which was all burnt;
+we offer nothing for sin, and our oblation is all eaten.  And though the
+Eucharistic sacrifice of praise might perhaps have been deemed, as a
+peace-offering, to be also in some sense an offering of blood (Lev. vii.
+12), yet S. Paul has carefully obviated the idea.  He will not even allow
+the venerable reading of the prophetic text (Hos. xiv. 2), which he
+quotes (Heb. xiii. 15), _pharim_, or “calves” of our lips, because the
+blood of beasts must be excluded entirely from Eucharistic comparisons,
+and, with blood, all idea of expiation in the Eucharist.  And, therefore,
+with the LXX. he reads _pheri_, “fruit” of our lips giving thanks to the
+name of God.
+
+Rightly, therefore, do you style the Eucharist (p. 124), “the sum and
+substance of our praises and thanksgivings;” though S. Paul does not go
+with you in adding that “it is the highest means of applying to our sins
+the mercies of God through the ever-availing sacrifice of Christ.”  He
+reserves this pre-eminence to faith (Gal. v. 5); and faith is actually
+represented as the sacrificing priest of the spiritual house by Romanus
+the martyr of Antioch, about the beginning of the fourth century, in his
+dying address, which Prudentius versifies (Peristephanon x. 351).  You
+will pardon the rudeness of an old English translation, made in the days
+of our Reformation, when heart answered to heart between the martyrs of
+earlier and later ages:
+
+    “At th’ holy porch a Priest is standing there,
+    And keeps the doors, before the church which been;
+    Faith is her name, a virgin chaste and clear,
+    Her hair tied up with fillets, like a queen.
+    For Sacrifices, simple, pure, and clean,
+    And such she knows are pleasing, bids this Priest
+    Offer to God, and to his dear Son, Christ.”
+
+The sacrifices, thereafter described, being such as holy fear, sound
+knowledge, sobriety, and liberality.  This, you will say, is declamation,
+not doctrine.  But so is the mass of Nicene and ante-Nicene material
+which contradicts Romanus.  If the one pleases you, the other may equally
+please me.  Let, then, both of us be cautious, consistent, and
+scriptural.
+
+At times you seem to retreat from your position that the Eucharist is a
+true sacrifice, describing it only as “the presenting afresh, and
+pleading afresh, and causing Christ himself to plead afresh, the merits
+of that one precious death” (p. 60).  Certainly, to commemorate, present,
+or plead afresh a sacrifice once offered, is not the same thing as to
+offer it.  But ever and anon you re-assert the Eucharist to be a true
+sacrifice, agreeably, you say, “to the sense of Holy Scripture, as
+attested by the consent of the Church from the beginning” (p. 77).  Yet
+no such word as “sacrifice” is ever mentioned, in a Eucharistic sense, in
+any of the Apostolical Fathers; and an interpolation in S. Ignatius shows
+how much this deficiency of evidence was afterwards felt.  “Without the
+bishop, baptize not [neither offer nor present sacrifice], nor make a
+feast of love” (Smyrn. 8).  You extenuate the same significant absence of
+the word “priest,” which is never applied by those Fathers to any church
+minister, by telling us (p. 66), that Mr. Carter informs you that the
+omission is satisfactorily accounted for by the smallness of their extant
+writings, extending, he says, over no more than thirty octavo pages.  You
+will find, however, in the Oxford edition, about 3,300 lines of SS.
+Clement, Ignatius (the shorter recension), and Polycarp, in Greek;
+besides some Latin fragments.  This would fill a hundred printed pages in
+octavo, and is just equal to the united Gospels of S. Mark and S. John.
+Yet those most primitive Fathers know of no such thing as a Priest, or a
+Sacrifice, among the ministers and ordinances of the Church on earth;
+though it is the subject upon which their compositions almost exclusively
+turn, and they tell us much about Elders.  This hardly looks like “the
+consent of the Church from the beginning” (p. 77).
+
+But you urge that “the doctrine was maintained continuously for fifteen
+hundred years” (p. 99); and let me rejoin, opposed continually, upon
+scriptural grounds.  Not seventy years after the decease of S. John, the
+Christian Athenagoras tells the Emperor Aurelius (Legat. 13), “The Framer
+of the Universe needs not blood, nor the fragrance of flowers and
+incense; the noblest sacrifice to Him is to know Him:” (here we have S.
+Paul’s “treasure”) “offering bloodless sacrifice,” (here is S. Paul’s
+“fruit of the lips,”) “and reasonable service,” (meaning, after S. Paul,
+our own bodies.  Rom. xii. 1.)  But it would fill a volume were I to
+trace onwards, from age to age, these Pauline streams of thought.
+
+It is true that the Church liturgies are, many of them, full of the idea
+of Eucharistic sacrifice.  But does the Church of England, as you say (p.
+99), “maintain, in her office, the whole substance of these liturgies,”
+or even “all their main points”?  Now, we will not assume as main points
+any but those which are repeated in all the principal classes, somewhat
+fancifully termed the liturgies of SS. James, Mark, Peter, and John.  And
+these points are twelve; whereof seven—the _Sursum corda_,_ Tersanctus_,
+recital of the Institution, Prayer for the Church on earth, Lord’s
+Prayer, the act of Communion, and the act of Praise—are preserved in our
+English liturgy; while four have disappeared—the Kiss, the Prayer for the
+descent of the Spirit on the elements, the Prayer for the dead, and the
+Mingling of the bread and wine.  A fifth main point, the Oblation of the
+elements, had disappeared as well, from ordinary eyes, until recently
+discerned in a slight addition made to the rubric in 1662: “the Priest
+shall then place upon the table . . . bread and wine.”  Not without
+reason did our liturgical Reformers shake themselves clear of the whole
+arrangement, and of four-twelfths of the substance of these offices,
+reducing the residue to a more Scriptural type.  The Reformers knew the
+web that could be woven out of these liturgical materials, to entangle
+men, not merely in your “perfect accordance and harmony with the doctrine
+of a true propitiatory commemorative sacrifice offered up in the
+Eucharist to God” (p. 104), but in other doctrine, more advanced than
+you, or any man who studies the Bible, would be willing to accept.
+
+If you would suffer the Law to be your schoolmaster, instead of these
+Liturgies, you would scarcely be able so much as to imagine that the
+“signs” of the Holy Communion could, under any circumstances, “be
+effective for sinners’ pardon through Christ’s body broken and his blood
+shed” (p. 104).  For you would never bring yourself to understand how an
+unbloody could effect any part of the work of a bloody sacrifice, in a
+matter of propitiation.  What a sacrificial solecism is it to speak, as
+you do (p. 131), of “an unbloody . . . propitiatory sacrifice”!  Without
+shedding of blood is no remission of sins.  “All that true and holy thing
+which the Church has ever had, as Christ’s own appointed means for the
+pardon of our sins,” is not, as you surmise (p. 131), the Eucharistic
+sacrifice, but faith in the blood of Jesus.  The Church has never had
+anything else.  Hers the faith; His the blood.  “Lord, save me,” she
+prays; “thy faith hath saved thee,” He replies, from age to age.  And her
+“pure offering,” which you correctly adduce from Malachi (i. 11), as
+referable to the Eucharist, is but a _mincha_, a bloodless meat-offering;
+fruit, of no use for pardon or propitiation.
+
+Your reference (p. 150) to “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the
+world” (Rev. xiii. 8), might suggest, though it does not establish, your
+idea that the one offering of Himself is, in some sense, continuous (p.
+56) to the present day.  But I know not why the framers of our Authorized
+Version did not render this passage as they rendered the same phrase when
+they came upon it again, four chapters further on (Rev. xvii. 8); “whose
+names were not written from the foundation of the world in the book of
+life of the Lamb that was slain.”  However translated, the passage must
+be expounded in accordance with S. Paul (Heb. ix. 26, 28), “Christ was
+once offered, in the end of the world.”
+
+                                * * * * *
+
+II.  And so vanishes the Sacrifice from our altars, all but the fruit of
+our lips, giving thanks to the name of the Lord.  But have we any Altars?
+
+One of your three arguments in the affirmative, taken from Scripture, is
+that our Lord would not have said, “Leave there thy gift before the
+altar,” unless we all had altars (p. 48).  Nor in the same strain, could
+you forbear to add, would He have said, “Cast not your pearls before
+swine,” unless we all had pearls.  But to proceed to your more serious
+proofs.
+
+“We have an altar” (Heb. xiii. 10) is a strange text for you to adduce in
+the second place (p. 97); for it is S. Paul’s illustration of the fact
+that Christian hearts are “not established with meats, which do not
+profit those who have been occupied therein” (_v._ 9); as we find in
+parochial experience, when a more than Scriptural emphasis is put upon
+the Eucharistic bread and wine.  The Apostle simply observes, in the text
+you quote (_v._ 10), that the ministers of the (Christian) tabernacle
+cannot eat, like Jews, of their altar; because the body of the single
+Christian sacrifice was, ritually speaking, wholly burnt without the
+camp.  Granting, therefore, that we have an altar, it is not a
+Eucharistic one, whereof we eat.
+
+And this further shows that in your third Scriptural proof (p. 45): “Are
+not they which eat of the altar, partakers with the altar?” (1 Cor. x.
+18,) no altar but the Jewish is meant; and you should not suppress the
+beginning of the sentence, “Behold Israel after the flesh,” but permit
+the Apostle to limit his remark to Jews, as distinct from Christians,
+exactly in the way he himself proposes.  And here you come to the end of
+your Scriptural arguments for altars in church.
+
+Passing from Scripture, the belief of the Church is not, as you assume
+(p. 53), continuous in favour of our having a ritual altar.  The Gentile
+heathens blamed the early Christians for having no altars in their
+churches, and the Christians admitted the truth of the allegation.
+(Origen, c. Cels. 8. 17; Minucius Felix, Octav. 32; Arnobius, adv.
+Gentes, 6, 7.  I borrow these references from the Bishop of Chester’s
+_Patres Apostolici_.)  The earliest meaning of “altar” in a Christian
+sense seems derived from the Jewish idea, that the LORD took equal
+pleasure in the several portions of the sacrifice, whether burnt or
+eaten; and that the eaters were as much his altar, as was the altar of
+burnt-offering itself.  Hence Polycarp (Phil. 4) says the widows are an
+altar; and Ignatius, probably in one place (Philad. 4), and certainly
+elsewhere (Trall. 7), calls the clergy, and (Eph. 5) the congregation,
+the altar.  It was left to after ages to suggest, in the last passage,
+“the society where sacrifices are offered.”  But before they admitted the
+propitiatory character of such sacrifices, men had lost S. Paul’s
+doctrine (Heb. xiii. 11), that JESUS was a sin-offering, wholly burned
+without the camp; and they had become insensible to the incongruity of a
+symbolism which could imply the eating of such an offering.  Far from
+blending the idea of an altar, whether Jewish or heathen, with that of a
+Christian table, as you seem to assume that he did (p. 54), S. Paul was
+too learned a ritualist not to keep them distinct.  And as the point of
+comparison, throughout the passage which you discuss (1 Cor. x.), was not
+the offering, but the eating; as it was eating which joined Christians to
+Christ, Jews to their altar, and Gentiles to demons; S. Paul had no need
+to speak of a Christian altar.  A table was the symbol which he required,
+and to that he carefully adhered.  He certainly knew of a Christian
+altar, but it was one of which neither he, nor any other servant of the
+true tabernacle (Heb. viii. 2; xiii. 10), had a right to eat; and I
+cannot see how you are enabled to say (p. 98), “of course, it is in the
+celebration of the Holy Eucharist that this altar,” on which Jesus died
+(Heb. xiii. 12), “is used, and the sacrifice made;” after all the pains
+with which the Apostle has set forth the premises which forbid your
+conclusion.
+
+III.  But without your Sacrifice and Altar, what becomes of your Priest?
+“The priesthood,” you say (p. 6), “is the chiefest means for applying to
+us the pardon of the Cross.”  In the priesthood you also find (p. 16)
+“the appointed mode of our applying to Christ for his intercession;” and
+you indicate a danger which may arise from shaking men’s confidence in
+such opinions, “that they would, no doubt, begin to fail in their
+allegiance to the Church, and be afraid longer to trust their souls to
+her teaching or her keeping” (p. 16).  I should recommend such adherents
+to be fed on very little of S. Paul, less of our judicious Hooker, and no
+Church history.  And even could they be thus dieted and kept, I should be
+inclined to question whether they would prove worth their feed.  Access
+to the Jewish ritual would be sure to awaken their suspicions as to the
+meaning of a Christian ordination.  For who ever heard of a real
+sacrificing priest of God being ordained by the imposition of hands?  On
+the contrary, when the people laid hands on the Levites’ heads (Numb.
+viii. 10), it meant quite a different thing from ordination.  Melchisedec
+was not so ordained, nor Aaron, nor any of his race, nor our Great High
+Priest, though He condescended to every form of the Law for man.  Yet
+laying on of hands was well used and understood, as conveying a divinely
+authorized ministry in the congregation to such men as Joshua (Deut.
+xxxiv. 9), “in whom was the Spirit” (Numb. xxvii 18), and the church
+elders and ministers of a later age (Acts xiv. 23).  But none of these
+ordained men sacrificed as priests.
+
+And now, taking up your own appeal (p. 43), “if it be true that a
+Christian priesthood and . . . these sacrificial powers . . . remain, and
+must remain ever in Christ’s Church, what words shall describe”—the error
+of saying with S. Paul (Heb. x. 26), “there remaineth no more sacrifice
+for sin,” nothing that calls for the exercise of these sacrificial powers
+in the Church.
+
+But, leaving S. Paul, “the whole sense,” you say (pp. 60, 77), “and usage
+of the Church from the beginning is explained and justified,” will we but
+see more in Scripture than Scripture says, and assume the existence of
+the Christian priesthood.  But your “beginning” is not the very
+beginning.  You omit the Apostolical Fathers again, a generation of good
+men, who never mention Christian priests.  Perhaps you will rather
+commence with a later age, and will prefer applying your theory to
+mitigate such lofty flights as we find in S. Chrysostom (On the
+Priesthood, iii. 2): “When you behold the Lord sacrificed and prostrate,
+and the Priest standing over the sacrifice and praying, and all stained
+with that precious blood, do you then suppose you are among men, and
+standing upon the earth?”  But why attempt to explain or justify such
+perilous matter as this?  Why admit its eloquent author to the privilege
+of developing S. Paul, or lightening the darkness of the Apostolical
+Fathers?  And if not S. Chrysostom, whom can we admit besides?  Often do
+I wonder at the artless boldness with which our homilists quote those
+Nicene Fathers, whose uncertain authority is just as much opposed to the
+Scriptures in some places, as it sustains them in others.
+
+Such variations and discrepancies must be perplexing to those who expect
+to find safe guidance in the early Church.  You and I, however, “are
+persuaded that Holy Scripture contains sufficiently all doctrine required
+of necessity for eternal salvation, through faith in Jesus Christ.  And
+we have determined, by God’s grace, out of the said Scriptures to
+instruct the people committed to our charge; and to teach nothing, as
+required of necessity to eternal salvation, but that which we shall,”
+each of us, “be persuaded may be concluded and proved by the Scripture.”
+(Ordination Vow, II.)
+
+The Established Church of England knows only of the “lawful” priest,
+whose character is evident to all men reading Holy Scripture and ancient
+authors.  He has been spoken of from the time of the Apostles, at first
+by the name of Elder, and afterwards by that of Priest; and, like every
+other member of Christ, he is God’s fellow-worker, he has a share in
+Christ’s priesthood, and he has received the Holy Ghost for his
+particular ministry.
+
+You truly observe (p. 94), that “if we can discover what are the truths
+which have been held always, everywhere, and by all, we may be certain we
+shall run into no serious error nor perverted interpretation of Holy
+Scripture dangerous to our souls.”  Caution, therefore, is requisite in
+handling the divine words used by our Bishops for the ordination of our
+lawful clergy: “whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven; whose
+sins thou dost retain, they are retained;”—this form not having been
+employed always, for we do not find our Church using it till the twelfth
+century; nor everywhere, since it only appears as a prayer in the Eastern
+churches; nor by all, never having been used at the ordination of some of
+our most eminent pastors of non-conforming churches, who, though not
+lawful ministers in our sense, have been clearly blessed in their
+spiritual work.
+
+We are thus reduced to interpret the form scripturally; and we find that
+it has nothing in it peculiar to priests or elders, because our Saviour
+first addressed it to others, as well as to ten of the Apostles (Luke
+xxiv. 33, 36 = John xx. 24), but not to S. Thomas.  Our ordaining Bishop,
+in repeating it, reminds the candidate priest of his ministry of
+reconciliation and condemnation, entrusted both generally to him, as to
+every other member, and likewise specially as to every other minister of
+the Church.  But not entrusted to him as to a mediating priest, since
+none such, so far as we are told, were present before Christ, when first
+He spoke the words.  Your “sacrifice by means of a priest” (p. 53) is
+unknown to S. Paul, who says, of JESUS only, “by Him, therefore, let us
+offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually” (Heb. xiii. 15).  And
+the privilege of forgiveness, which S. Paul exercised, he delegated, not
+to the priests of the Church of Corinth, but to the whole people (2 Cor.
+ii. 10).  Even the Decretals allow that in necessity Christian lay people
+may both hear confessions and absolve.  A layman, too, or a woman, may
+baptize; surely not without remission of sins, as Bishop Jewell remarks.
+
+You ask (p. 89), what our Prayer-book means by “benefit of absolution,”
+if there be no power to absolve vested in the priest?  Why do you not, in
+this case, relinquish “priest,” and adhere to the Prayer-book expression,
+“minister of God’s Word,” as it appears in the passage to which you
+refer?  This is not a question of power in laying on a drastic _absolvo
+te_, but of skill in the use and application of God’s Word.  Even as the
+Pharisees used the word to bind heavy burdens on men, and to unbind the
+fifth commandment; or as our LORD used it to unbind the law of the
+Sabbath and bind the law of murder; so the Christian minister shows his
+might, like Apollos, in the Scriptures.
+
+Nor can you bind and loose consciences with anything less tenacious than
+Scripture, accurately declared and reasonably applied.  All theological
+language, except that of Scripture, breaks down under the tension of
+strict use.  Take, for instance, your own observation (p. 107), “the body
+and blood of Christ are verily and indeed taken and received by the
+faithful, that is, by the baptized Christian people; for so the word is
+always used, in strict theological language.”  Yet this strict language,
+on which you rely, fails whenever the baptized happen to be void of a
+lively faith, in which case “they are in no wise partakers of Christ”
+(Article XXIX).  Take, again, your quotation of “the brief but weighty
+saying of Jerome, _Ecclesia non est_, _quæ non habet Sacerdotes_” (p.
+111); which is only true when reduced to S. Peter’s standard (1 Peter ii.
+9), “ye are a royal priesthood,” or the “kingdom of priests,” of the
+Hebrew formula (Ex. xix. 16), exactly as interpreted by the Septuagint.
+In any other sense, Jerome’s dogma is liable to endless exceptions,
+whenever all the claims of the Church come to be conscientiously weighed.
+
+The “Power of the Keys” is another slippery phrase, which you introduce
+(p. 114) rather in the way of suggestion than of argument.  It means much
+in theological, and little in Scriptural language.  In the latter, I read
+of the keys being given to S. Peter; he used them, and what he did with
+them afterwards I do not find; but the door which he unlocked to the Jews
+(Acts ii. 14) and Gentiles (Acts x.) has stood open ever since.
+
+Hickes, the non-juring bishop of Thetford, was not perhaps the worse
+theologian for being a schismatical intruder into the diocese of Norwich;
+but to quote him page after page, as you have done (pp. 102, 103), in
+your orthodox Kensington pulpit too (pp. 109, 110, 121), was a grand
+experiment upon the historical predilections of your people, and a
+dubious addition to the authorities in support of your view.
+
+We nowhere read in Scripture, though you appear to inform us that it was
+the fact (pp. 12, 86), that Jesus appeared to the Eleven between the
+resurrection and his breathing on the disciples.  Though it is always
+worth while to be accurate, I should be far from making a man an offender
+for a word, did not your error, though minute, indicate a certain want of
+strength in the Scriptures.  If the divine who said _rúbricæ_ for
+_rubrícæ_, in the Jerusalem Chamber, could not be trusted to make a copy
+of verses in praise of Convocation, far less should an inaccurate student
+of Scripture venture on pulpit statements of Church doctrine.  Strict,
+constant, indefatigable reference to those old Fathers, Matthew and Mark,
+Peter and John, James and Paul, is the only means of keeping the younger
+Fathers right, and of testing the miscellaneous coinage of terms and
+doctrines which have passed current from their day to ours.  Such coinage
+as Theotókos, for instance, which appears in the fine argument of your
+closing Sermon (p. 140), never rings so truly as the words which have met
+and satisfied the ear of an inspired writer.  The term may cover good
+doctrine, and it may escape the almost profane triviality of its Latin
+equivalent, _Deipara_, as well as the unreasoning coarseness of the
+English “Mother of God:” but, take it which way you will, it is a poor
+ambiguous piece of Greek, which must mean one thing in a Christian
+pulpit, and another on Mount Olympus, had Homer condescended to introduce
+it there.
+
+Is it not refreshing to pass from the discussion into which you venture
+with Calvin, who fortunately is not alive to answer for himself, on the
+causes of grace (p. 118); or, again, your thesis on the causes of
+salvation (p. 153), wherein you do not mention, what the Schoolmen tell
+us, that most things have five kinds of causes; and to range at large in
+the simplicity of the Scriptures, which teach us that the cause of
+salvation is not only JESUS, His life, His love, His work, His blood; but
+also faith (Eph. ii. 8), hope (Rom. viii. 24), grace (Eph. ii. 5), the
+bath of regeneration (Tit. iii. 5), the engrafted Word (James i. 21), the
+gospel minister (Rom. xi. 14), and student (1 Tim. 16); and then, the
+hearer (Phil. ii. 12), his prayers (Phil. i. 19), and penitence (2 Cor.
+vii. 10); cause heaped upon cause with creative profusion, until we begin
+to see that your proposal of priestly mediation, in the Eucharistic way,
+as another cause of salvation, however kindly meant, is like the offer of
+a church candle in broad day.
+
+                                * * * * *
+
+To conclude.  I have found fault with your Sacrifice, Altar, and Priest;
+but I think I can answer for it that you will find no fault with mine.
+The Christian Sacrifice was a sin-offering, once made eighteen centuries
+ago, without the gate of Jerusalem.  It has often since been remembered,
+but never repeated.  The Altar was of earth, the vast sin-burdened wreck
+of this fallen world, so well beloved of God, which drank up the blood.
+The Priest is JESUS; but He has made no sacrifice since, nor used an
+earthly altar.
+
+So much for the doctrine.  I will make you a free gift of all the poetry
+which attaches to the words Sacrifice, and Altar, and Priest, in the
+varied play of religious imagination and allegorical induction.  But we
+cannot build anything so serious as the way of our acceptance with God,
+or the character of our ministry in the Church, upon such frail
+foundations as these.  And if we will but avoid the inconvenient
+confusion of sacrificial and Eucharistic terms, and adhere to the
+accurate phraseology of Scripture, as in a great measure our Liturgy
+does, we shall clear our thoughts, and expedite our conclusions, upon the
+important points to which you have ably directed attention.
+
+                                * * * * *
+
+“_For the priest’s lips should keep knowledge_, _and they should seek the
+law at his mouth_; _for he is the messenger of the LORD of
+hosts_.”—Malachi II. 7.
+
+                                * * * * *
+
+                                * * * * *
+
+               LONDON: R. CLAY, SON, AND TAYLOR, PRINTERS.
+
+
+
+
+Footnote.
+
+
+{3}  J. Parker & Co. Oxford and London.  1867.  8vo. pp. 156.
+
+
+
+
+***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CHURCH MINISTRY IN KENSINGTON***
+
+
+******* This file should be named 49116-0.txt or 49116-0.zip *******
+
+
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/4/9/1/1/49116
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
+be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
+law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
+so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
+States without permission and without paying copyright
+royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
+of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
+concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
+and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive
+specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
+eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
+for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
+performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given
+away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks
+not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the
+trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.
+
+START: FULL LICENSE
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
+Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at
+www.gutenberg.org/license.
+
+Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+
+1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
+destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your
+possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
+Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
+by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
+person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
+1.E.8.
+
+1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
+paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this
+agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the
+Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
+of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual
+works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
+States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
+United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
+claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
+displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
+all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
+that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting
+free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm
+works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
+Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily
+comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
+same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when
+you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
+in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
+check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
+agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
+distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
+other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no
+representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
+country outside the United States.
+
+1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
+immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear
+prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work
+on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed,
+performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
+
+  This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
+  most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
+  restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
+  under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
+  eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
+  United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you
+  are located before using this ebook.
+
+1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is
+derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
+contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
+copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
+the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
+redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
+either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
+obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm
+trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
+additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
+will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works
+posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
+beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
+any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
+to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format
+other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official
+version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site
+(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
+to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
+of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain
+Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the
+full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+provided that
+
+* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+  the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+  you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
+  to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has
+  agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
+  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
+  within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
+  legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
+  payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
+  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
+  Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
+  Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+  you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+  does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+  License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
+  copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
+  all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm
+  works.
+
+* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
+  any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+  electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
+  receipt of the work.
+
+* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+  distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than
+are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
+from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The
+Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
+Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
+contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
+or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
+intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
+other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
+cannot be read by your equipment.
+
+1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
+with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
+with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
+lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
+or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
+opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
+the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
+without further opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO
+OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
+LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
+damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
+violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
+agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
+limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
+unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
+remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in
+accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
+production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
+including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
+the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
+or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or
+additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any
+Defect you cause.
+
+Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
+computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
+exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
+from people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future
+generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
+Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
+www.gutenberg.org 
+
+Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary 
+Archive Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
+U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the
+mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its
+volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous
+locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt
+Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to
+date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and
+official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
+
+For additional contact information:
+
+    Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+    Chief Executive and Director
+    gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
+DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
+state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
+donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
+
+Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be
+freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
+distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of
+volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
+the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
+necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
+edition.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
+facility: www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+