Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

the scheme of Irish National Education, in 1836; his speech on the Government Scheme of Education, in 1839; and on the Dissenters'

Chapels Bill. In the great controversy which agitated the National Society in 1839, when many of the Clergy insisted upon the unconditional enforcement of the Church Catechism in all National Schools, he fearlessly advocated the more enlightened policy which was subsequently adopted.

It was by no means as a mere theorist that the good Bishop held and maintained his liberal and catholic views. He availed himself of every opportunity of giving to them practical illustration. With little sympathy with those who attach much importance to minute doctrinal differences, he had yet less regard to differences of form. 'Nonconformity, as such, he never could regard as a sin.' 'Bible Societies, City Missions, British and Foreign Schools, Irish National Education-anything which brought together the different sects of Christians on some general and neutral ground, such as he was always persuaded might be found, had an attraction for him from that point of view over and above their intrinsic merits.' He hailed specially the opportunities which the annual meetings of the Bible Society afforded him of associating with, and inviting to his table, the Ministers of other denominations. I hear,' said he to Bishop Nixon, 'a great deal about zeal for the welfare of the Church; I wish I could hear more of anxiety for the welfare of Christianity.'

His free expression of these enlightened views laid him open to the severe criticism of many of his own Clergy. In his Installation sermon he took occasion to press upon the vast audience which thronged the Cathedral his views as to Dissent, and as to 'the desirableness of combining secular with religious instruction as a means of generally elevating and en

larging the mind.' A Clergyman, in proposing the Bishop's health, at the luncheon which followed the service, omitted to request the publication of his sermon. This omission 'was pointedly remarked upon by the champion of the opposite party.' A scene of excitement and angry recrimination ensued. The Bishop, however, sat unmoved; but afterwards' wrote to one of the keenest of his advocates amongst the liberal journals, insisting on a retractation of a coarse invective against the Clergyman chiefly concerned in the opposition to his views.' In a sermon preached in St. Paul's Cathedral before the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, he took occasion to disavow the doctrine of Apostolical Succession, in presence of a number of Bishops and a vast body of the Clergy. At the banquet which followed, the Lord Mayor thanked the Preacher' for the boldest sermon that had ever been delivered in St. Paul's Cathedral.' But the Committee of the Society 'deviated from their otherwise invariable rule by omitting to request its publication in the Report of that year.' But none of these things moved him, excepting to the exhibition of such charity and courtesy as one seldom sees in like circumstances. For when Mr. Mackenzie, afterwards Suffragan Bishop of Nottingham, was appointed to preach the visitation sermon at Yarmouth, and, being called upon to propose, after the visitation dinner, that the Bishop's charge should be published, accepted the duty, but intimated that the request must not be interpreted as committing himself or any of his brethren to the conclusions arrived at, the Bishop, far from taking offence, not only recognized the principle advanced, but appointed Mr. Mackenzie to preach at the ensuing Ordination.

Bishop Stanley's catholicity was as varied as it was consistent and bold.

At a time when the name of Dr. Arnold was 'regarded as a byword of reproach,' he nominated him to preach his Consecration sermon; and when Archbishop Howley declined to accept the nomination on the ground that it would give offence to the Clergy, the Bishop-elect refused to nominate any other, and the sermon had to be delivered by one of the Archbishop's Chaplains. When Father Mathew visited Norwich on his Temperance Mission, the Bishop not only joined him on the platform, but 'entertained him at the Episcopal Palace with the cordiality due to a distinguished guest.' A funeral sermon, on the death of John Joseph Gurney, the Quaker, was preached in the stately Cathedral which he never frequented, and with the muffled peals and solemn strains of that music of which he condemned the use'; and the Preacher was 'a prelate of that Established Church, which he had through life, as far as his gentle nature permitted him, opposed and controverted.' On hearing that Jenny Lind had engaged to sing at a concert in Norwich, the Bishop invited her to stay at his Palace during her visit to the city; and the fruit of that kindness was found after many days. For on a subsequent visit to Norwich, when the Bishop lay silent in the Cathedral vault, and when the distinguished singer had resolved to devote the fortune which she had realized to works of charity and mercy, she said: 'All this the Bishop of Norwich began in me-that is, it was in me, but it did not know how to come out.' It was a fitting and graceful tribute to the Bishop's memory, that after another visit to the Cathedral and to his grave, she returned to the Palace, and seating herself at his widow's feet, sang, as she only could sing, I know that my Redeemer liveth.'

The difficulty and opposition which

he encountered during the earlier years of his episcopate subsided gradually, as his Clergy and others were constrained to realize the rectitude of his principles and the purity of his motives. Though Though always perhaps to a large degree distrusted by those in authority,'-as well he might be in those days,-he gained the confidence and affection of those who knew him, and he reaped a further reward in the growing prosperity of his diocese. He had found it,' says one well qualified to give an opinion, a wilderness, and he left it in comparison a cultivated field.' But the severe and exacting toil of his office told upon one who had crossed the line which separates the prime of life from its decline, even before his elevation to the See of Norwich; and early in the autumn of 1849 he was induced to take a tour in Scotland. The cholera was then raging in some districts of England; and he stipulated before starting for the North, that if the epidemic should reach Norwich he must return instantly to his post. At the house of the Hon. Mrs. Stewart Mackenzie, in Ross-shire, he was seized with sudden illness; and after a few days of unconscious struggle, lighted up now and then with gleams of intelligence, he passed away. At his own request he was buried in the Cathedral of his See, where, under the light which streams through the stained-glass' of the western window which was restored as his memorial, a simple black marble slab marks the place of his rest.

6

It would be invidious to institute parallels between Bishop Stanley and other occupants of the Episcopal bench. He certainly was not a Bishop of the traditional type. As has been stated, he had little taste for scholarship; and though by sheer industry at college he won for himself a place in the list of Wranglers, he never attempted any further distinc

tion in the world of letters.

He was & pronounced Liberal in politics, but not a political partisan. The Government of the day owed nothing to his advocacy, nor did he even interest himself in political schemes which did not bear directly on the work of his life. Loyal in his attachment to the Church of England, he entertained none of those assumptions as to her supremacy in relation to other Churches which have too often received Episcopal sanction. He did not desire the office of a Bishop': his diary bears continuous witness to his sense of personal deficiency and incompetence; but, having been appointed, he' used the office' well. Whether as Rector of a country parish, or ruler of a vast diocese, he was always the shepherd of his flock; and there was not a detail in the daily toil of the humblest 'parish Priest' which he regarded as unworthy of Episcopal dignity. There is a title which courtesy and custom assign to a Bishop of the Established Church. It has been in not a few cases sadly inapplicable. But among the thousands who flocked to the venerable Cathedral to pay their last homage to Bishop Stanley's remains, there were few who did not feel that they were laying in the grave a 'Father in God.'

In the whole course of his work, whether in the parish or in the metropolis of his See, Bishop Stanley was nobly sustained by the courage, piety and intelligence of his wife. The copious extracts given in the volume from her letters and journals-too diffuse and disconnected for citation-while they are too sacred for criticism, exhibit her as a woman of unwonted independence and breadth of thought, of fine catholicity of spirit, and of serene and unfailing faith. Even in the records of her earlier years there is the evidence of a power of discrimination in dealing with abstract questions which is not common. Readers of the Memorials

of a Quiet Life will recall the motherly letters which she addressed to her younger sister, full of the wisest counsel and the tenderest affection. The public institutions of the City of Norwich bear witness to her unflagging industry and zeal for the public good. And in her journals, probably never meant for any eye but her own, there is the story of an intelligent, lowly and loving trust in God. One of the latest entries in her memorandum-book was a hymn of Charles Wesley on Catholic Love.

She survived her husband a little more than twelve years, and died in great peace on Ash Wednesday, 1862, when her son was absent in the Holy Land. She lies under the shade of the yew-tree in Alderley churchyard. While these lines are being written, a grave is being dug in that churchyard for her eldest daughter, who, after years of devotion to works of love and charity, fell under the fascinations of the Church of Rome, and entered its communion. But she never ceased to cherish the Church of her father with affection and reverence, and it was her dying wish that she might be buried in the graveyard of the parish of which he was so long the Rector, with the rites of the Church in which she had been born.

on

By a strange and sad coincidence,

.

Ash Wednesday, 1872, the Dean of Westminster was called to stand by the death-bed of that 'elect lady,' by whose supporting love he had been "comforted" after his mother's death, and whose character, although cast in another mould, remains to him, with that of his mother, the brightest and most sacred vision of his earthly experience.' The beautiful and touching lines with which the memorial volume closes, bear witness to the depth of his affection for both mother and wife, to his sense of indebtedness to their influence, and to the bright hope which he cherishes of reunion in the better life:

'O Day of Ashes! twice for me

Thy mournful title hast thou earned, For twice my life of life by thee

Has been to dust and ashes turned.
No need, dark day, that thou shouldst
borrow

The trappings of a formal sorrow:
In thee are cherished, fresh and deep,
Long memories that cannot sleep.

'My Mother-on that fatal day,

O'er seas and deserts far apart,
The guardian genius passed away

That nursed my very mind and heart-
The oracle that never failed,
The faith serene that never quailed,
The kindred soul that knew my thought
Before its speech or form was wrought.

My Wife-when closed that fatal night,
My being turned once more to stone,
I watched her spirit take its flight,
And found myself again alone.

The sunshine of the heart was dead,
The glory of the home was fled,
The smile that made the dark world
bright,

The love that made all duty light.

'Now that those scenes of bliss are gone,
Now that the long years
roll away,
The two Ash Wednesdays blend in one,
One sad yet almost festal day:
The emblem of that union blest,
When lofty souls together rest,
Star differing each from star in glory,
Yet telling each its own high story.

'When this day bids us from within

Look out on human strifes and storms:
The worst man's hope, the best man's sin;
The world's base arts, Faith's hollow
forms-

One answer comes in accents dear,
Yet as the piercing sunbeam clear,
The secret of the better life
Read by my Mother and my Wife.'

CANON FARRAR AND THE THEOLOGY OF ST. PAUL:

BY THE REV. H. W. WILLIAMS, D.D.

It is not the design of this Paper to examine the general character of Canon Farrar's recent volumes on The Life and Work of St. Paul. That subject has been already carefully treated in this Magazine by a very able writer. It may suffice here to say that, notwithstanding some defects, and a few exaggerated statements into which he has been betrayed by the vividness of his imagination, Canon Farrar's flowing narrative is calculated to arrest and rivet the attention of large classes of readers; while many of the criticisms contained in the notes so profusely scattered through the volumes evince considerable reading, and an intimate acquaintance with the niceties of the Greek language.

But Canon Farrar has not always been successful in regard to one of the main objects which he proposed to himself, the clear and full development of the Pauline theology. Many of his statements are indistinct

and vague; and many others are superficial, not indicating the depth and grandeur of the Apostle's conceptions, and failing to present the harmony of the great scheme of truth which pervades his Epistles.

In attempting to develop the theology of St. Paul, Dr. Farrar naturally gives prominence to his greatest doctrinal Epistle-that addressed to the Church at Rome. All the Epistles, indeed, pass under review; and it is one pleasing and valuable feature of the work, that the circumstances in which each Epistle was written are vividly portrayed, and the feelings awakened in the Apostle's mind by the state of the Churches he addressed are set forth clearly and naturally. But on the Epistle to the Romans Canon Farrar dwells with special interest: he devotes one hundred and ten pages to its consideration. He endeavours to trace the course of thought which pervades it; and he comments at

length on some of the

passages which have the most direct bearing on the scheme of human salvation. We are doing him no injustice, then, if we take this portion of his work as exhibiting the views which he has formed of the Pauline theology.

It is a pleasure to acknowledge

that Canon Farrar is faithful to the cardinal verities of the Christian faith. Among these we may specify the Divine-human Person of our Lord; the expiatory character of His death; the method of justification by faith; the connection between a living faith and practical holiness; and the work of the Holy Spirit in the renewal and sanctification of man. But in his exposition of the Apostle's statements respecting some of these doctrines we are sorry to find an indistinctness, and sometimes even a confusion of thought which detracts greatly from the value of his work. He has failed, also, to apprehend, in their full significance, some of the characteristic features of the Pauline theology.

We may first take the exposition of the comprehensive passage which St. Paul places in the very front of his great argument: 'I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ : for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, The just shall live by faith.' Canon Farrar thus states the truths conveyed in the latter portion of this passage: In the Gospel is being made known to the world that inherent righteousness of God, which, by a judgment of acquittal pronounced once for all in the expiatory death of Christ, He

[ocr errors]

imputes to guilty man, and which beginning, for each individual, with his trustful acceptance of this reconciliation of himself to God in Christ, ends in that mystical union. with Christ whereby Christ becomes to each man a new nature, a quickening spirit.' (Vol. ii., p. 188.) This passage is deemed so important that the whole of it is printed in italics.

6

Now, we demur, first of all, to the assertion, that the phrase, The righteousness of God,' as here used by the Apostle, signifies the inherent righteousness of God, and that this inherent righteousness of God is imputed to guilty man. The righteousness which God imputes to man is opposed to condemnation; and marks the relation in which the forgiven and restored sinner stands to the just and holy government of God. This appears to us to be clear and explicit; while the imputation to the sinner of the inherent righteousness of the Divine Nature, which Canon Farrar makes prominent, introduces obscurity and confusion.*

We can scarcely conceive of language less happily chosen to express the scheme of salvation than this: 'That righteousness of God which, by a judgment of acquittal pronounced once for all in the expiatory death of Christ, He imputes to guilty man, and which beginning, for each individual, with his trustful acceptance of this reconciliation of himself to God in Christ, ends in that mystical union. with Christ whereby Christ becomes to each man a new nature, a quickening spirit.' In these words important truth is mixed up with erroneous and misleading views. There is a recognition of the fact, that the justification of man rests on the expiatory death of the Lord

An 'Evangelical,' not to say a Wesleyan divine, would regard this as a very extreme and adventurous putting of the doctrine of imputation. Certainly, it is not deducible, by any fair process of exegesis, from the words of St. Paul. It is an extravagant conception, irreconcilable with the tenor of Holy Writ.-EDITOR.

H

« ForrigeFortsæt »