strongest form of absolution which is found in the Visitation of the Sick, repentance is made an essential qualification for pardon,-not the priest's words, but the sick man's heart. All those exercises of the power conferred, when fairly and consistently interpreted, provide an explanation of the words of the Ordination service, as simply authorizing the presbyter to declare and pronounce the pardon which God has already granted the penitent. The daily exercise of the authority which has been imparted is the most just exposition of its real nature which we could hope to discover.

But it is not on this point only that the Ordination service raises. scruples in sensitive minds. There are those other momentous words which the bishop utters, "Receive the Holy Ghost." Does the bishop, then, assume to himself the power of bestowing that great gift? At least it may be answered, that his words will admit of a different meaning,-that they may be no more than a desire, a benediction, or a prayer; and that they cannot be proved to have a stronger signification. Such being the case, is this a matter in which scruples ought to arise, and the conscience to be troubled?

The Edinburgh Review asserts, and we may accept the assertion as true, that these five "are unmistakeably the points wherein men feel their consciences offended or perplexed." The question now raised is, whether there is adequate reason for such offence and perplexity? It is suggested, in reply, that there is not. For to what do these five sources of disquietude amount? They concern (i.) the measure, or extent, of the peril which is unquestionably attendant. upon an awful heresy; (ii.) the meaning to be attached to a word and its cognates, which admit of various explanations, and which evidently must be taken in the Prayer-book in a sense accordant with the Articles; (iii.) a particular form of absolution, which, however, when "allowed such just and favourable construction as in common equity ought to be allowed to all human writings," may be interpreted as agreeing in principle with the other and approved forms of absolution in the Prayer-book; (iv.) certain terms in the Burial service, not objected to as wrong in themselves, but as used inappropriately, which also were not intended to assert what is ascribed to them by objectors; (v.) a particular construction of certain words in the Ordination service, which yet are susceptible of a different and unobjectionable interpretation.

Such are the chief difficulties which do unhappily produce perplexity. and distress in some minds, and provoke them to crave a revision of the Prayer-book, vexing them meanwhile with doubts as to the propriety of their subscription.

Now, it is natural that we should wish that there were no ambiguity in any of the expressions used in the Prayer-book, nothing liable. to erroneous construction, nothing inviting it, and nothing susceptible of being represented as at issue with other parts, and requiring much consideration in order to our discerning its harmony with the rest. But surely, on these five points, (the gravest of the difficulties which have been raised,) if the explanations now offered be valid, the conscience ought not to be disturbed by the obligations involved in subscription. On the other hand, it is lawful to desire that these defects may be remedied. Only let us at the same time Vol. 61.-No. 300.

6 F

remember what hazards would attend the process, how many would covet and demand other changes which would be palpable deteriorations, and how uncertain it would be whether any accommodation of our wishes would not be counterbalanced by far greater losses in doctrine and in devotional fervour. The Prayer-book is not perfect; it does not pretend to be so; but we fear that it would be issued far less perfect from any revisors' hands to whom it would be likely to be entrusted.

It only remains to notice the actual terms by which the clergy declare their assent and consent to the Book of Common Prayer. These are as follows:

"I, A. B., do willingly, and from my heart, subscribe to the Thirtynine Articles of Religion of the United Church of England and Ireland, and to the three Articles in the 36th Canon, and to all things therein contained."

Of those "three Articles," the second and third are—

"2. That the Book of Common Prayer, and of Ordering of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, containeth in it nothing contrary to the Word of God; that it may lawfully so be used; and that he himself will use the form in the said book prescribed, in public prayer, and administration of the Sacraments, and none others."

"3. That he alloweth the Book of Articles, agreed upon by &c. . . . . and that he acknowledgeth all and every the Articles therein contained, being in number nine-and-thirty, besides the ratification, to be agreeable to the Word of God."

There remains the Declaration which is to be read, before the congregation, by all newly instituted incumbents ::

"I, A. B., do here declare my unfeigned assent and consent to all and everything contained and prescribed in and by the book intituled The Book of Common Prayer," &c. &c.

Now, if the "just and favourable construction" which the Preface to the Prayer-book claims as due, "in common equity," for its interpretation, be exercised, mere verbal questions will not be allowed to raise scruples about the truthfulness of giving that unfeigned assent and consent. The Visitation and Ordination services, and the Athanasian Creed, if construed as here suggested, will not occasion any uneasiness. The Burial service, in itself approved, does not contain the provisions, with regard to its use, to which exception is taken, and which is owing to the state of the law.

The previously quoted forms of consent are somewhat less rigid in their terms than this, and therefore what is said on this last Declaration will apply to any difficulties which they are likely to raise. They seem, however, to be sufficient for every purpose. A solemn avowal that the book "containeth nothing contrary to the Word of God," and that it may "lawfully be used," united with willing and hearty subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles, ought to be enough. And if these engagements were retained, and were openly read in the congregation, instead of the Declaration, ease might be afforded to unduly sensitive minds, and the Church would sustain no loss. The scruple which arises out of the notion that the Declaration asserts the Prayer-book to be perfect would have no foundation at all to rest upon, as indeed it has, at present, no tenable foundation.

ONE OF THE ASSENTERS.

"Ruskin as a Religious

"RUSKIN AS A RELIGIOUS WRITER." To the Editor of the Christian Observer. SIR,-In reference to your able article on Writer," allow me to call attention to one point which seems to have escaped your notice; I mean, the manifest change which has passed over Mr. Ruskin's own religious views during the ten years occupied in the production of Modern Painters. In the later volumes of the series, he no longer appears as the champion of Scriptural Protestant truth, but seems by gradual steps to have passed over into the ranks of those whom we too justly fear as its adversaries. In the fourth volume the term "inspiration" is used in a more than doubtful sense; but the change I speak of shows itself most distinctly in the fifth volume, whole chapters of which are devoted to the discussion of religious questions. For the sake of the many inexperienced readers who, on the testimony of the Christian Observer, may receive Mr. Ruskin as a writer who "means well," and, though eccentric, sound in the main, I beseech you to find room in your pages for the following extracts, which sufficiently speak for themselves.

In vol. v. pp. 203, 204, he thus expresses himself on the vital subject of revelation:

"The soul of man is still a mirror wherein may be seen, darkly, the image of the mind of God. . A mirror dark, distorted, broken, use what blameful words you please of its state; yet, in the main, a true mirror, out of which alone, and by which alone, we can know anything of God at all.

"If the sea is for ever invisible to you, something you may learn of it from the pool. Nothing, assuredly, any otherwise. But this poor miserable me! is this, then, all the book I have got to read about God in ? Yes, truly so. No other book, nor fragment of book, than that, will you ever find;-no velvet-bound missal, nor frankincensed manuscript; nothing hieroglyphic nor cuneiform; papyrus and pyramid are alike silent on this matter; nothing in the clouds above, nor in the earth beneath. That flesh-bound volume is the only revelation that is, that was, or that can be. In that is the image of God painted; in that is the law of God written; in that is the promise of God revealed. Know thyself; for through thyself only thou canst know God."

Contrast the following remarks on the Reformation with the vigorous protestantism of the earlier volumes :

"In this faith (the Romish) it was possible to attain entire peace of mind,—to live calmly, and die hopefully,—is indisputable. But this possibility ceased at the Reformation. Henceforward human life became a school of debate, troubled and fearful. A dark time for all men. We cannot now conceive it. The great horror of it lay in this,-that as in the trial-hour of the Greek, the heavens theinselves seemed to have deceived those who had trusted in them.

"We had prayed with tears; we had loved with our hearts. There was no choice of way open to us, no guidance, from God or man, other than this; and behold, it was a lie. When He, the Spirit of Truth, is come, He shall guide you into all truth.' And He has guided us into no truth. There can be no such Spirit. There is no Advocate, no Comforter. Has there been no Resurrection? Then came the Resurrection of Death. Never since man first saw him, face to face, had his terror been so great. Swallowed up in victory!' Alas! no! but king over all the earth. All faith, hope, and fond belief, were betrayed. Nothing of futurity was now sure but the grave." (Modern Painters, vol. v, pp. 235, 236.)

And further :

"The strength of the Reformation lay entirely in its being a movement towards

purity of practice. The Catholic priesthood was hostile to it in proportion to the degree in which they had been false to their own principles of moral action, and had b ceome corrupt and worldly in heart. The Reformers indeed cast out many absurdities, and deinonstrated many fallacies, in the teaching of the Roman Catholic church. But they themselves introduced errors which rent the ranks, and finally arrested the march of the Reformation, and which paralyse the Protestant church to this day.” (Vol. v. p. 254.)

In p. 297 he thus describes English Protestantism as it presented itself to the mind of Turner, contrasting it with the Romanism of Venice :

"Not to be either obeyed, or combated, by an ignorant, yet clear-sighted youth; only to be scorned. And scorned not one whit the less, though also the dome dedicated to it looms high over distant winding of the Thames; as St. Mark's campanile rose, for goodly landmark, over mirage of lagoon. For St. Mark ruled over life: the Saint of London over death; St. Mark over St. Mark's Place, but St. Paul over St. Paul's Churchyard.”

....

66

"So far as in it lay, this century has caused every one of its great men, whose hearts were kindest, and whose spirits most perceptive of the work of God, to die without hope; Scott, Keats, Byron, Shelley, Turner." (Three of them, be it observed, professed infidels.) Great England, of the Iron-heart now, not of the Lion-heart; for these souls of her children an account may perhaps be one day required of her." "So far as they are concerned," (the infidels above named) "I do not fear for them; there being one Priest who never passes by. The longer I live, the more clearly I see how all souls are in His hand, the mean and the great. Fallen on the earth in their baseness, or fading as the mist of morning in their goodness; still in the hand of the potter as the clay, and in the temple of their master as the cloud. It was not the mere bodily death that He conquered -that death had no sting. It was this spiritual death which He conquered-so that at last it should be swallowed up-mark the word-not in life, but in victory. As the dead body shall be raised to life, so also the defeated soul to victory, if only it has been fighting on its Master's side, has made no covenant with death, nor itself bowed its forehead for his seal." (How can such be "defeated souls ?") "Blind from the prison-house, maimed from the battle, or mad from the tombs, their souls shall yet sit, astonished, at His feet who giveth peace.”"

Whatever this burst of passionate eloquence may mean, it is not the echo of that voice which says, the wicked "shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life eternal." But let us hear Mr. Ruskin further, as he proceeds to hint, rather than state, his views respecting the world and its "Phases of Faith." The ironical insinuation of the following paragraph embodies in short summary the religious teaching of the whole volume:

"Who giveth peace? Many a peace we have made and named for ourselves; but the falsest is in that marvellous thought, that we, of all generations of the earth, only know the right; and that to us, at last, and us alone, all the scheme of God, about the salvation of men, has been shown. This is the light in which we are walking. Those vain Greeks are gone down to their Persephone for everEgypt and Assyria, Elam and her multitude, -- uncircumcised, their graves are round about them-Pathros and careless Ethiopia-filled with the slain. Rome, with her thirsty sword, and poison wine, how did she walk in her darkness! We only have no idolatries-ours are the seeing eyes; in our pure hands, at last, the seven-sealed book is laid: to our true tongues entrusted the preaching of a perfect Gospel. Who shall come after us? Is it not Peace? The poor Jew, Zimri, who slew his Master, there is no peace for him; but for us, tiara on head, may we not look out of the windows of heaven ?"

Is this only the rashness of a writer who means well?

F. C.

REV. ROBT. McGHEE'S LETTER TO THE REV. J. H. NEWMAN, D.D. To the Editor of the Christian Observer.

SIR,-May I ask the favour of your giving insertion to the following letter to Dr. Newman. Although some time has elapsed since his letters to which it refers were published, the subject must be always new to those who are ignorant of the real difference between the creeds of the Church of England and the Church of Rome.-I remain, your obedient servant, R. J. Mc GHEE.

Holywell Rectory, Nov. 6, 1862.

To the Rev. Dr. Newman, The Oratory, Birmingham.

Reverend Sir, I have waited several weeks past in the hope that some hand more skilful and less unworthy than mine might have taken up the gauntlet cast down by you to all members of the Church of England, in your letters to the "Globe," and to the "Lincolnshire Express," letters which the celebrity of your name has caused to be copied in most of the leading newspapers. Not having seen any reply to them, I am impelled by a sense of duty to submit to your own consideration, and to that of all who have read your letters, the following proposition; and I trust that those newspapers which have copied your letters will give a place in their columns to this also.

You proclaim (and your former position and reputation for learning give weight to your words with many) that you have an undoubted faith in the Creed of the Church of Rome in all its articles ;" and you congratulate yourself upon your happiness, which you ardently desire should be shared by all dear to you, in having escaped from "the city. of confusion and the house of bondage,"-by which appellations you designate the Church of England.

As a member of that Church, I need not say that I do not consider a desertion from her creed and doctrines, and an adherence to the creed and doctrines of the Church of Rome, as a subject of gratulation; inasmuch as the Church of England holds pure and unadulterated the faith of the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, while the Church of Rome holds a creed unknown until the latter part of the sixteenth century, and which, consequently, being a novelty, has no claim upon the grounds either of antiquity, or of divine authority.

In confirmation of this statement, I offer the following proofs. I

assert

1. That the symbol of faith, commonly called "the Apostles' Creed," is a summary of all the articles of faith taught by the apostles as necessary to salvation.

2. That when, in order to meet the Arian heresy, it was necessary to expand this creed, the articles were not thereby altered or changed, but expressed in more full and scriptural detail at the two first General Councils of Nicæa, A.D. 321, and of Constantinople, A.D. 381; and that this expanded creed was ratified by the two next General Councils of Ephesus, A.D. 431, and of Chalcedon, A.D. 451. The Council of Ephesus having decreed as follows:-"Those who shall have dared to compose, or to profess, or to offer any other form of