diff options
Diffstat (limited to '49116-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 49116-h/49116-h.htm | 1159 |
1 files changed, 1159 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/49116-h/49116-h.htm b/49116-h/49116-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c0f07d8 --- /dev/null +++ b/49116-h/49116-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,1159 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html + PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> +<head> +<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII" /> +<title>Church Ministry in Kensington, by John Philip Gell</title> + <style type="text/css"> +/*<![CDATA[ XML blockout */ +<!-- + P { margin-top: .75em; + margin-bottom: .75em; + } + P.gutsumm { margin-left: 5%;} + P.poetry {margin-left: 3%; } + .GutSmall { font-size: 0.7em; } + H1, H2 { + text-align: center; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + } + H3, H4, H5 { + text-align: center; + margin-top: 1em; + margin-bottom: 1em; + } + BODY{margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; + } + table { border-collapse: collapse; } +table {margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto;} + td { vertical-align: top; border: 1px solid black;} + td p { margin: 0.2em; } + .blkquot {margin-left: 4em; margin-right: 4em;} /* block indent */ + + .smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} + + .pagenum {position: absolute; + left: 92%; + font-size: small; + text-align: right; + font-weight: normal; + color: gray; + } + img { border: none; } + img.dc { float: left; width: 50px; height: 50px; } + p.gutindent { margin-left: 2em; } + div.gapspace { height: 0.8em; } + div.gapline { height: 0.8em; width: 100%; border-top: 1px solid;} + div.gapmediumline { height: 0.3em; width: 40%; margin-left:30%; + border-top: 1px solid; } + div.gapmediumdoubleline { height: 0.3em; width: 40%; margin-left:30%; + border-top: 1px solid; border-bottom: 1px solid;} + div.gapshortdoubleline { height: 0.3em; width: 20%; + margin-left: 40%; border-top: 1px solid; + border-bottom: 1px solid; } + div.gapdoubleline { height: 0.3em; width: 50%; + margin-left: 25%; border-top: 1px solid; + border-bottom: 1px solid;} + div.gapshortline { height: 0.3em; width: 20%; margin-left:40%; + border-top: 1px solid; } + .citation {vertical-align: super; + font-size: .5em; + text-decoration: none;} + img.floatleft { float: left; + margin-right: 1em; + margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; } + img.floatright { float: right; + margin-left: 1em; margin-top: 0.5em; + margin-bottom: 0.5em; } + img.clearcenter {display: block; + margin-left: auto; + margin-right: auto; margin-top: 0.5em; + margin-bottom: 0.5em} + --> + /* XML end ]]>*/ + </style> +</head> +<body> +<pre> + +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: ISO-646-US (US-ASCII) + + +***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CHURCH MINISTRY IN KENSINGTON*** +</pre> +<p>Transcribed from the 1867 R. Clay, Son, and Taylor edition by +David Price, email ccx074@pglaf.org</p> +<h1><i>CHURCH MINISTRY IN KENSINGTON</i>.</h1> + +<div class="gapshortline"> </div> +<p style="text-align: center">A RECENT CASE<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">OF</span><br /> +<b>Hieratical Teaching</b><br /> +SCRIPTURALLY CONSIDERED.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p style="text-align: center"><span class="GutSmall">BY</span><br +/> +JOHN PHILIP GELL, M.A.<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">PERPETUAL CURATE OF ST. JOHN’S, +NOTTING HILL.</span></p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p style="text-align: center">LONDON:<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">PRINTED BY R. CLAY, SON, AND +TAYLOR,</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">BREAD STREET HILL.</span><br /> +1867.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<h2><a name="page2"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +2</span>CONTENTS.</h2> +<table> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">Introduction</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><i>page</i> <span +class="indexpageno"><a href="#page3">3</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">Our sacrifice for sin has +ceased</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page4">4</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">Our peace offering also has +ceased</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page5">5</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">Our propitiation is applied by faith +only</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page6">6</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">Eucharistic propitiation is of human +invention, contrary to the Law of Moses, the apostolic records, +and the English Liturgy</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page7">7</a></span>–11</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">Our altar is not the holy +table</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page12">12</a></span>, 13</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">Our priests cannot sacrifice +Christ</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page14">14</a></span>, 15</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">Nor move Him to sacrifice +himself</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page16">16</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">Our priests remit and retain sins, by +the ministry of the Word, in common with all the members of +Christ</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page17">17</a></span>–19</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">With whom they share the royal +priesthood</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page20">20</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">The “Power of the +Keys”</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><i>ib.</i></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">Bishop Hickes. An error +indicated</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page21">21</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">Theotókos. “Causes +of Salvation”</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page22">22</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">Conclusion</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page23">23</a></span>, 24</p> +</td> +</tr> +</table> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p><a name="page3"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 3</span><i>To +the</i> <span class="smcap">Rev. Mayow Wynell Mayow</span>, +M.A. <i>Perpetual Curate of St. Mary’s</i>, <i>West +Brompton</i>, <i>late Student of Christ Church</i>, +<i>Oxford</i>, <i>and Author of Eight Sermons an the +Priesthood</i>, <i>Altar</i>, <i>and Sacrifice</i>. <a +name="citation3"></a><a href="#footnote3" +class="citation">[3]</a></p> +<p><span class="smcap">Your</span> 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.</p> +<p><a name="page4"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 4</span>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).</p> +<p><a name="page5"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 5</span>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), <i>pharim</i>, 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 <i>pheri</i>, “fruit” of our lips giving +thanks to the name of God.</p> +<p>Rightly, therefore, do you style the Eucharist (p. 124), +“the sum and substance of our praises and +thanksgivings;” though S. Paul does not go <a +name="page6"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 6</span>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:</p> +<blockquote><p>“At th’ holy porch a Priest is +standing there,<br /> +And keeps the doors, before the church which been;<br /> +Faith is her name, a virgin chaste and clear,<br /> +Her hair tied up with fillets, like a queen.<br /> +For Sacrifices, simple, pure, and clean,<br /> +And such she knows are pleasing, bids this Priest<br /> +Offer to God, and to his dear Son, Christ.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>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.</p> +<p><a name="page7"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 7</span>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 <a name="page8"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 8</span>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).</p> +<p>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.</p> +<p>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 <a name="page9"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 9</span>(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 <i>Sursum corda</i>,<i> +Tersanctus</i>, 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 +<a name="page10"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 10</span>to +God” (p. 104), but in other doctrine, more advanced than +you, or any man who studies the Bible, would be willing to +accept.</p> +<p>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 +<i>mincha</i>, a bloodless meat-offering; fruit, of no use for +pardon or propitiation.</p> +<p><a name="page11"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 11</span>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.”</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>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?</p> +<p>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.</p> +<p><a name="page12"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +12</span>“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” (<i>v.</i> 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 (<i>v.</i> 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.</p> +<p>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.</p> +<p>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 <a name="page13"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 13</span>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 +<i>Patres Apostolici</i>.) The earliest meaning of +“altar” in a Christian sense seems derived from the +Jewish idea, that the <span class="smcap">Lord</span> 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 <span +class="smcap">Jesus</span> 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. <a +name="page14"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 14</span>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.</p> +<p>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 <a +name="page15"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 15</span>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.</p> +<p>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 <a name="page16"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +16</span>(Heb. x. 26), “there remaineth no more sacrifice +for sin,” nothing that calls for the exercise of these +sacrificial powers in the Church.</p> +<p>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 <a name="page17"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +17</span>Scriptures in some places, as it sustains them in +others.</p> +<p>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.)</p> +<p>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.</p> +<p>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 <a name="page18"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 18</span>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.</p> +<p>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, <a name="page19"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +19</span>when first He spoke the words. Your +“sacrifice by means of a priest” (p. 53) is unknown +to S. Paul, who says, of <span class="smcap">Jesus</span> 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.</p> +<p>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 <i>absolvo te</i>, 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 <span class="smcap">Lord</span> 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.</p> +<p><a name="page20"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 20</span>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, <i>Ecclesia non est</i>, <i>quæ non habet +Sacerdotes</i>” (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.</p> +<p>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 <a name="page21"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 21</span>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.</p> +<p>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.</p> +<p>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 +<i>rúbricæ</i> for <i>rubrícæ</i>, 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 <a name="page22"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +22</span>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, +<i>Deipara</i>, 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.</p> +<p>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 <span class="smcap">Jesus</span>, His life, His love, His +work, His blood; but also faith (Eph. ii. 8), hope (Rom. viii. +24), <a name="page23"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 23</span>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.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>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 <span +class="smcap">Jesus</span>; but He has made no sacrifice since, +nor used an earthly altar.</p> +<p>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 <a name="page24"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 24</span>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.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>“<i>For the priest’s lips should keep +knowledge</i>, <i>and they should seek the law at his mouth</i>; +<i>for he is the messenger of the </i><span +class="smcap"><i>Lord</i></span><i> of +hosts</i>.”—Malachi <span class="GutSmall">II.</span> +7.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> + +<div class="gapmediumline"> </div> +<p style="text-align: center"><span class="GutSmall">LONDON: R. +CLAY, SON, AND TAYLOR, PRINTERS.</span></p> +<h2>Footnote.</h2> +<p><a name="footnote3"></a><a href="#citation3" +class="footnote">[3]</a> J. Parker & Co. Oxford and +London. 1867. 8vo. pp. 156.</p> +<p>***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CHURCH MINISTRY IN KENSINGTON***</p> +<pre> + + +***** This file should be named 49116-h.htm or 49116-h.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. + +</pre></body> +</html> |