OCR Text |
Show Ilburzb and tin 'Papacy. Christianity Before the Reformation Concerning the First Prayer Book of Edward VI. (Written for the Intermountain Catholic. The conclusion of my last communication communi-cation was that to preserve unity of faith a head was necessary, and that without an infallible head, disintegration disintegra-tion followed. All controversies had their origin in the supremacy of the Roman Pontiff. Keen, self-thinking minds are not concerned about certain doctiines in which church-going people peo-ple agree or disagree, but whether there exists some supreme authority that brings certainty to the doubting mind. Its claim and exercise from Peter to Leo XIII are recorded. The existence of a pure and unchangeable faith requires it. It involves the entire en-tire Christian belief, for as doctrine must depend on its authority, so also musi discipline, oruer aim reguiai n . The doctrines of today are no more the doctrines of the early Reformers than are the vagaries of Mrs. Bddy. The first self-made Pontiff of the Anglican church, Henry VIII, in his defence of the seven sacraments did not conceal from Luther that "the church in England had from the first centuries believed all Roman doctrine," adding that "it cannot be denied that the whole church of the faith recognizes recog-nizes the Holy Roman See as its mother and chief." His daughter, Elizabeth, discarded five of the sacraments. sacra-ments. Those claiming continuity and separate existence of the Anglican church before the Reformation forget that men like Sir Thomas More, who suggested to Henry VIII the writing of his "Defensio Septem Sacramentor-um," Sacramentor-um," and who by Henry's appointment filled the most important offices of state, opposed the reforms passed by parliament of Nov. 3, 1529; also the projected divdrce of Henry from Catherine, Cath-erine, sealing his faith with his very blood. If the supremacy of the Pope had not been a matter of faith when parliament in March, 1534, required its renunciation. Sir Thomas More, the accomplished chancellor, erudite scholar schol-ar and former friend of Henry, would not refuse to subscribe to the odious act of parliament, for which refusal he was committed to the Tower, April 17, 1535, and executed in July of the same year. John Fisher, bishop of Rochester, renowned as a great scholar, schol-ar, is another witness of the faith of English Catholics at the time of the Reformation. For opposing the doctrine doc-trine of royal supremacy and the divorce di-vorce of Henry VIII he was beheaded on Tower hill, London, June 22, 1535. These two eminent scholars, one a saint and the other a learned divine, impelled by conscientious motives, presumably pre-sumably knew as much about primitive prim-itive Christianity as did the weak-minded, weak-minded, cowardly courtiers who, to placate the king, subscribed to the oath making Henry supreme in spirituals, spirit-uals, and contrary to the divine law, "What God hath joined together let no man put asunder," annulling his marriage with Catherine. Separated from the center of unity and the fountain foun-tain of an authoritative teacher, their faith was continually changing, and as they formed themselves into different differ-ent sects, each reviling the other, the true Christian spirit, namely, charity, was soon losi, all "becoming wise in their own ciceits." Are the Mtualistic clergy of the twentieth century, who claim continuity contin-uity of the Anglican church down through the middle ages and up to the time of the Reformation, and allege that Catholics, before the Reformation, were misinformed, better or more competent com-petent judges of the primitive faith than More and Fisher? Having, after a space of 300 years, introduced into their divine services the Mass, candles and bell, they certainly must be aware that the Anglo-Saxon believed in the Mass and Transubstantiation, and said Masses for the dead. But this belief and practice are confined to the Ritualistic clergy who belong to one wing of the Anglican church, whilst the PJvangelical or Low church ignore both belief and practice. The High church not only claims, but insists, on the- identity of origin of the Cath- olio and Anglican priesthoods, while the Low church repudiates the claim. In ISMt; Dean Farrar wrote -hat there were "5.0!:; churches in the Church ot England in which sacerdotalism is triumphant," tri-umphant," meaning a belief in the power inherited by apostolic succession. succes-sion. Then there remains 10,000 or 12,000 churches which condemn "sac- i eruotalism" whose ministers give the J assurance that their priesthoo.i is "not I sacrificial." To show that the Low I church repudiates Catholic orders, we i have the authority of Dr. I'erowne. j bishop of Worcester, who, when treat- ing of the ordinal in the lirst Prayer I Bonk of Edward VI. for making arch- l iiismos, nisr.ops. priests ;i:ni ucacoits, wrote: "There is no formula or document docu-ment which marks more clearly the essentia.! es-sentia.! difference between the otlice of ministers of the Church of Rome and that of ministers of the Church of England." Another witness is the archdeacon of Warrington, who a few ; years ago wrote that "seventeen sacrificial sac-rificial statements in the Saruni i Missal were omitted from the fust book of Edward and ten reliquiae, or survivals of sacrificial doctrine, which were left in the first book statements p capable of. though, not necessarily involving, in-volving, sacrificial doctrine were expunged ex-punged from the second book of Edward, Ed-ward, thus eliminating th" sacrificial ; element in no less than twenty-seven instances." I Conclusion (1) In the Anglican i church established by law are two en- j tirely distinct priesthoods, (2) one j wing, numbering 8,00o, claiming iden- j tity in their origin with the Cathouc priesthood, and the other, numbering 12,000, repudiating, all claims of iden- j tity; (3) both priesthoods were or- 5 dained by the same bishop and have the approval of the Anglican primate. f (1) In the same church are two op- j posing churches, one with its altar. t claiming apostolic succession and ad- ji hering to Catholic tradition, attempt- ing to offer up the sacrifice of the i Mass; the other declaring the Mass to be not only a superstition, but idol- I atry. (5) Faith not founded on the- f assured certainty of an infallible t teacher, but resting on human author- I ity, is subject to disintegration, and to I preserve unity is impossible. (6) All past history shows that the teaching of the English universities, up to the time of the Reformation, was always ; . submissive to the Holy See, and that I all English archbishops in pre-Refor- mation times, promised on their knees. ) before the altar to be "faithful and obedient to the Holy Apostolic Roman Church, and my Lord Pope"; and even the constitutional law of Eng- land had laid it down that "to the Pope and the priesthood belong spir- ! j Itua! things: to the king and kingdom those that are tempordl." (T) In Eng- land for 900 years after the advent of j St. Augustine the Roman ritual alone t was used, the holy sacrifice of the Mass which he offered up on the altar was continuously offered In all Eng- ', lish cathedrals, churches and chapels, and constituted the only divine service I for English Catholics during that long I space of time. Was the Roman liturgy, which 13 i coeval with the introduction of Chris- '? tianity and in use down to the time ! of the Reformation, a corruption of true Christianity, or. as it is often : .termed, "rank popery"? Had the Church of the living God. under the guidance of Peter's successors, within a few hundred years so changed the primitive Christian truths as to have - nothing left in the sixteenth century , but idolatrous practices? If the charge - be true, the conclusion is inevitable. i namely, that Christianity is as human ? as was the authority of Queen Eliza- f beth when she dispensed with five of the seven sacraments: or as that of the present English privy council. f ((To be Continued.) j ' j |