now of her other corruptions,) it is not in communion with her that any can seek for comfort from this rite.

It would be well for the modern controversialist with Rome, to weigh Bishop Bull's language on this subject (Sermon iii. ed. Burton, and "Corruptions of the Church of Rome, in answer to the Bishop of Meaux' queries," t. ii. p. 260.) lest he involve himself in difficulty for want of making this distinction. Bishop Bull says,

66

Prayers for the dead, as founded on the hypothesis of purgatory (and we no otherwise reject them), fall together with it :”

And with these he contrasts

"the prayers of the ancient Church, either the common and general commemoration of all the faithful at the oblation of the holy eucharist, or the particular prayers used at the funerals of any of the faithful lately deceased. The former respected their final absolution, and the consummation of their bliss at the resurrection, like as that our Church useth both in the office for the Communion, and in that for the burial of the dead, which indeed seems to be no more than that we daily pray for in that petition of the Lord's Prayer (if we rightly understand it), 'Thy kingdom come,'" &c.

Indeed, as Bishop Bull here implies, the very idea of an intermediate state involves in it a degree of prayer for God's departed servants; since, knowing them to be in a state of imperfect bliss until the resurrection, whenever we pray for the final "coming of God's kingdom," we do in fact (if we have any thought for the departed) pray at the same time for the perfecting of their bliss. And thus, in the service of the burial for the dead, when we pray God

"of His gracious goodness, shortly to accomplish the number of His elect, and to hasten His kingdom; that we, with all those that are departed in the true faith of His Holy Name, may have our perfect consummation and bliss both in body and soul;"

this undoubtedly implies a prayer for the consummation of the bliss of the departed. And we, who so lose out of mind God's departed servants, have also almost lost the notion of the intermediate state. On the other hand, as Bishop Bull also points out, these prayers for the departed servants of God,

exclude the false invention of purgatory. Bishop Bull

writes

"In a word, let any understanding and unprejudiced person attentively observe the prayers for the dead in the most undoubtedly ancient liturgies, and he will be so far from believing the Romish purgatory on the account of those prayers, that he will be found to confess that they make directly against it. For (to omit other arguments) they all run (as even that prayer for the dead, which is unadvisedly left by the Romanists in their own canon of the mass as a testimony against themselves) in this form:For all that are in peace or at rest in the Lord.' Now how can they be said to be in peace or at rest in the Lord,' who are supposed to be in a state of misery and torment?"

I may add the following extract from the "Antient Liturgy of the Church of Jerusalem," which formed part of the devotions of Bishop Andrews'. As being an antient liturgy, it of course expresses all which could be meant in this reference to "Antient Liturgies."

"Grant that we may all find mercy and favour with all thy saints, who, from the beginning of the world, have pleased Thee in their several generations, Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles, Martyrs, and every just spirit made perfect in the faith of Thy Christ, from righteous Abel even unto this day; do thou give them and us rest in the region of the living in the bosom of our holy Fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, whence sorrow, grief, and lamentation are banished away, where the light of Thy countenance shines continually; and vouchsafe to bring them and us to the full enjoyment of Thy heavenly kingdom."

I have dwelt the longer upon this subject, as being aware that you have reputed it a vulnerable point, and you have served your purpose well, by giving it a prominence, which it did not occupy in our Tracts, nor even in that one of our departed friend, wherein alone it was mentioned, and that but incidentally and of necessity. The object of his tract (and it was a very laudable one) being to point out the agreement as well as the antiquity of the existing liturgies, it would have been dishonest, wilfully to have suppressed any one point, wherein they so agreed. This, therefore, he stated; meanwhile he expressed no opinion on it, attracted no attention to it, but

1 See Dean Stanhope's translation, p. 47, ed. Christian Knowledge Society.

simply set it down, as he found it, a matter of fact; and but for your acute scent of a weak part, it might have remained unnoticed. No evil could have arisen from his simple statement of the fact. You, indeed, may possibly perplex men's minds, little prepared as they are for the discussion of the point, by confounding it with a popish superstition (which Calvin did not do), and thereby giving arms to opponents of our Church: it is ours to vindicate the early Church and our reformers.

It is, meanwhile, not a little remarkable that the main position of this tract which you have selected for censure, is precisely that incidentally maintained by the learned Archbishop Wake, of whose soundness never was any doubt in the Church. The position was;

"that although the several liturgies have been much interpolated and in parts corrupted, much likewise has been handed down from the first uninterpolated, and that means exist for ascertaining what parts are interpolated and what pure and genuine; the pure and genuine parts being those wherein all agree."

Archbishop Wake says in like manner (Dissert. on the Apostolical Fathers, c. ix. § 20.) :—

"However, since it can hardly be doubted but that those holy Apostles and Evangelists [St. Peter, St. Mark, and St. James,] did give some directions for the administration of the blessed eucharist in those Churches; it may reasonably be presumed that some of those orders are still remaining in those liturgies which have been brought down to us under their names; and that those prayers wherein they all agree, (in sense, at least, if not in words,) were first prescribed in the same, or like terms, by those Apostles and Evangelists; nor would it be difficult to make a farther proof of this conjecture from the writings of the ancient fathers, if it were needful, in this place, to insist upon it."

Nor even in these last days, has "prayer for God's departed servants" been by well-instructed writers confounded with purgatory. The following passage evidently proceeds from the heart of one, whom no one will accuse of a blind adherence to the antient Church (Short's History of English Church, § 15):

"To pray for the dead was the dictate of human nature, and the

practice of the early Church, and no reasonable Christian will blame Dr. Johnson for the cautious manner in which he mentions his mother in his prayers; but in the hands of the Church of Rome this feeling was soon directed to the unscriptural object of delivering the souls of departed friends from purgatory, and the practice converted into a source of profit to the priesthood.-There is no necessary connection between praying for the dead, and the belief in purgatory. The Greek church, for instance, prays for the dead, without admitting any idea of purgatory. Prayers and oblations for the dead were probably established in England from the first, and a short form of prayer to that effect is inserted in the Canons of Cloveshoo; with regard to the latter doctrine, the Saxon homilists generally refer to the awards of a final judgment, though traditional notices exist, in which there appears to be at first an indistinct, but afterwards more clear reference to purgatory.-Later writers, and among the rest Alfred, adopted the popular notions of purgatory, which were still very different from the opinions on that subject established as articles of Faith by the councils of Florence and Trent."

Take again the following full statement of another writer, who seems, certainly, over-anxious to vindicate the purity of the foreign ultra-Protestants, against Romish assailants, and so is obviously free from bias. It is from the vindication of the learned Dr. Field', against a Romish controversialist, who it seems had set you an example which you have faithfully followed, "drawing me," Dr. F. says, "into the defence of that he knoweth I impugn."

"In the fourth place he saith: I accept the rule of St. Augustine, that whatsoever is frequented by the universal Church, and was not instituted by Councils, but was always holden, that is believed most rightly to be an Apostolical tradition. And that liberally I add, that whatsoever all, or the most famous or renowned in all ages (or at least in divers ages) have constantly delivered, as received from them that went before them, no man doubting, or contradicting it, may be thought to be an apostolical tradition. Whence he thinketh he may conclude inevitably by my allowance that prayer for the dead may be thought to be an Apostolical tradition, many famous and renowned Fathers in divers ages mentioning Prayer for the Dead, and none disliking or reproving it. For answer whereunto I say; that prayer for the resurrection, public acquittal in the day of judgment, and bliss of them that are fallen asleep, in the sleep of death, is an Apostolical tradition, and so proved by the rule of St. Augustine, and that other added by me; as likewise prayer made respectively to the passage hence, and entrance into the other world: and hereof there is no controversy between us, and our adversaries, but prayer to ease, miti

1 Of the Church, App. p. 1, § 4, p. 750, sqq., where is much more on this subject.

gate, suspend, or wholly take away the pains of any of them that are in hell, or to deliver men out of the supposed purgatory of Papists, hath no proof from either of these rules, as shall appear by that which followeth : and, therefore, this poor novice hath not yet learned his lesson aright, nor knoweth what it is he is to prove. But if he will be content to be informed by me, the thing he must prove (if he desire to gratify his new masters, and to maintain the Romish cause) is, that all the Fathers, or the most famous amongst them, from the beginning of Christianity, did in the several ages wherein they lived, teach men to pray for the deliverance of their friends and brethren, out of the pains of Purgatory; which, if he will undertake to do, he must bring some better proofs, than such as are taken from the mutual dependance and conjunction of Purgatory, and prayer for the dead, which yet principally he seemeth to urge. For many Catholic Christians (whom this gentleman must not condemn) made prayers for such, as they never deemed to be in Purgatory. Neither did the ancient Catholic Church (as he fondly imagineth) in her prayers and oblations for the dead, intend to relieve souls temporally afflicted in a penal estate; but in her general intention (whatsoever private conceits particular men had) desired only the resurrection, public acquittal, and perfect consummation and blessedness of the departed, and respectively to the passage hence, and entrance into the other world, the utter deletion, and full remission of their sins, the perfect purging out of sin, being in, or immediately upon the dissolution in the last instant of this life, and the first of the next, and not while the soul and body remain conjoined. This is strongly proved, because the most ancient amongst the Fathers make but two sorts of men dying, and departing out of this world, the one sinners, the other righteous; the one profane, the other holy: so Dionysius in his Hierarchy; so Epiphanius against Arius; so Ambrose in his Book de Bono Mortis; and Cyril of Jerusalem in his Catechism; and all of them teach, that the souls of the just are in a joyful, happy, and good estate, and present with God in an excellent sort, immediately upon their dissolution, and departure hence. The falling asleep of the holy ones,' saith Dionysius,' is in joy and gladness, and immoveable hope, because they are come to the end of their combats; and again, they know they shall altogether be partakers of the rest of Christ, being come to the end and bound of this life: so that they are filled with holy joy and gladness, and with great delight and pleasure, enter the way of the most happy regeneration.""

And now I would venture to ask any Clergyman, I would even appeal to yourself, if a Parochial Minister, whether, when you have heard of the death of one of your flock, of whom you hoped well, your first impulse has not been to pray to God to make up to the departed whatever had been deficient in your ministrations? whether (as Luther did) you have not prayed for the perfecting and increased blessedness of a departed