« PreviousContinue »
the usual confession of sin should give place tò a suitable selection from the Gospel narratives of Christ's sufferings. The confession, however, should follow the sermon, as on Fast-days, and be connected with the concluding prayer. It should not be of that general description, merely acknowledging our transgressions of the law, but a special confession, that because of our sins Jesus has suffered and died. After this prayer, the congregation should sing a part of the Hymn" Lamb of God, &c." and as the prayer is long, and is broken up into several parts, it would be well, perhaps, if the congregation were to fall in, and occupy the intervals in chanting brief antistrophes. The
order would accordingly be this: Chanting by the Choir(something from Isa. 53). Prayer before the Sermon, and Lesson, with the Apostles' Creed. Hymn, and Sermon. Principal prayer. Serinon. Singing by the Congregation, the Hymn, is o Lamb of God.” In conclusion, the preparatory service for the Easter communion, or the cominunion itself.
On AscENSION-DAY, the usual confession of sin should give place to the lesson introduced in connexion with the Feast-prayer; and to the prayer after sermon should be added the Absolú11on. The order then would be; Singing by the Choir. Feastprayer and Lesson. Hymn and Sermon. Prayer and Absolution, with the Benediction.'
For the COMMUNION SERVICES of the three principal Feasts, that of Ascension-day will suffice; and here again the Feastprayer, and Lesson will take the place of the Confession of sin, and the Absolution will be omitied. The Apostles' Creed, in case it is not introduced in the Communion service, will be appended to the Feast-lesson. The PREPARATORY Service, on ihe contrary, may be commenced with the reading of the pray. er, together with the Confession and Penitential-verse.
Such then are my sincere wishes and propositions for the development of the worship of the Reformed Church in general.
to the division of the Church-year into periods, the following six will naturally suggest themselves: 1. Advent.-Characteristics of the prayers, should be: the need, and expectation of Salvation. 2. Tue EPIPHANY.-Characteristics : Christianity, the light of the world, and its reception by the world. 3. The Passion.-Char.: Repentance, and the Atonement. 4. EasTER—from Easter to Whitsunday.—Char.: the spiritual king
"On Good day, the Absolution is dispensed with, because it is rendered superfluous by the Communion, which involves a Sacramentally sealed absolution.
dom of Christ, and his world-subduing victorious power. 5. WHITSUNDAY from Trinity to the Autumn coinmunionChar.: the inward transfusion of humanity, in all its powers by the Spirit of Christ, by means of the Church. 6. The concluding period from the Autumn communion to the end of the Church-year-reminds us, as the close of the ecclesiastical year, of the end of the world. The characteristics should be the christian's hope, his expectation of death, eternal life, resurrection and judgment. The cycle of the Feas!s, including these six periods, constitutes of itself the higher seventh.
If now, in the grouping of these prayers, I have so managed it, that they would be applicable, at once, to such a worship as has been here described, it is hoped that no one will conclude from this, that they are to the same extent inapplicable to our existing worship. The captions for instance, in the first chapter : Advent, Epiphany, &c., compel no one to make use of these
, particular prayers, the one only in Advent, the other in Epiphany, and prevent no one from using them at any other time, or from using other prayers in their place. In like manner, no one is compelled to make use of the Nicene Creed, and the form of Absolution, as I have taken them from the German Reformed and Netherland Agenda. I so arranged the collection that it could be used for the order of worship described ; at the same time, it may be used for other orders of worship. I would nevertheless humbly venture to hope that the arrangement I have made in my collection, so far as it brings the order proposed into view, will serve to commend it to favor. Baltimore, Md.
B. C. W.
THE HUMAN TRINITY.
It is believed that the same distinction in the Divine Nature, which is indicated by the term Trinity, holds also with equal force in the Human Nature. Of course, an anthropological doctrine of this sort, needs to be well supported.
To the Theory of Humanity thus proposed, a few of the more thoughtful will at once be disposed to listen with candor; a second class, however, will regard it as a ridiculous attempt at claiming for man a relationship altogether too high; while a third, sick with sentimental piety, will have their nerves completely shattered at a monstrosity so profane, or even blasphemous.
: But this notion is not so new, nor yet so strange, as by some may at first be imagined. Indeed, if the charge of novelty could be sustained against it with any degree of plausibility, this in itself were sufficient reason for giving it up at once. There is truly no new thing under the sun; and whenever any thing is announced as new, the simple fact of its novelty is prima facie, and even sufficient evidence against its pretensions. Even He whose advent upturned and re-shaped the entire order and form of the world, came not to "destroy" what had been, but
“ ” simply to "fulfil” it. So it is believed that the philosophical doctrine here propounded, if faithfully evolved to its legitimate consequences, and to none else, instead of confounding aught that is good, beautiful or true in science, philosophy or religion, would only serve as a lamp and leading string to guide us through the labyrinth of human knowledge; instead of destroying any thing that is now known, would only tend to fulfil it, by putting contradiction out of the way, and so making peace among the sciences; and all this, by first stationing the human Reason in the Triune God, as its proper stand and starting point, whence it could look through the entire universe of being, and by referring every thing to its right relations, could see the harmony which the almighty Father, the all-wise Logos, and the everywhere present Spirit, have created, ordered and animated in all their works; and whence, consequently, it could take its departure, and with absolute a priori infallibility, thread the remotest spheres of thought and being, without ever once losing itself for a moment.
But an historical exhibition of the notions entertained concerning a trinity in man, whether by sacred or profane writers, in ancient or modern times, is alike beyond the purpose and the learning of the writer. His present aim is simply to present such facts and considerations as may serve as hints and suggestions to others.
A human trinity, to be of any avail, must stand in three conorete personal forms of humanity; and these last must be necessary both in themselves and to each other, in order to constitute the unity of that humanity. Such a concrete distinction, almost any one after a moments reflection, will find has ever existed, though unconsciously, in our own, and probably in every language, with more or less distinctness, as the spontaneous revelation or utterance of an internal, living reality. That distinction is into Soul, Mind and Spirit. In almost every species of writing, these three terms are perpetually used to indicate the entire man-not indifferently, but with instinctive discrimination, to
represent man as existing or acting in the spheres which they severally denote. There is therefore no need of manufacturing a new terminology, in order to express this idea, nor in fact any part of it, however extensively developed. All this, simple though it be, should furnish some slight presumption at least, in favor of the doctrine proposed, that humanity is constitutionally triune in principle, though formally unconscious of the fact.
Possibly it may be objected that these three terms are mere synonymes, or as nearly so as any three words can be. But this is manifestly not the case. Thus : “My mind, my spirit, is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death."-" Though absent in body, yet present in mind in soul.”—“ The souls, the spirits of the jury were soon made up.”—Any one can see the confusion and absurdity of speaking thus, The words soul, mind, and spirit, are not each absolutely equal to man, and so equal to each other; but they are each equal to man when existing in the spheres which they severally indicate, thus : soul=man in the sphere of
nature; mind = man in the sphere of intelligence; and spirit =man in the sphere of morality—for it is the spirit, wheiher good or bad, heavenly, human or hellish, that moves, that furnishes the motives, and so determines the character of actions and the quality of beings. Thus then soul is man, mind is man spirit is man; and man is soul, is mind, is spirit.
But these three do not stand apart, or simply run parallel with each other. Each has indeed its separate principle to unfold and its proper offices to fulfil; yet for all this, it cannot be sundered from the other two, either in fact, or even in thought. The mind sees them apart, but only as it sees them together. It makes a distinction between them, but only by still keeping each full in its view. Its prismatic eye decomposes the unity wherein they stand, and refracts them into their logical and actual order and relations, like the three ground colors of the spectrum; and yet it sees them running through and underlying each other, and thus discovers that there is not and cannot be any definite line of separation between them. Each therefore pre-supposes the other two, and is pre-supposed by them ; they all exist by, in, and for each other, and are thus absolutely necessary in order to constitute the unity of man. Root out either one, or confound them all, and the very idea of humanity is reduced to a nullity. Whatever cannot be divided, or is incapable of distinction, is a mere zero. Reduce humanity to this, and it becomes a point, the negation of all being, just as a mathematical point is the negation of space.
Of this triunity in man, the natural world furnishes complete analogies on every side. The difficulty is not to find, but to select them. In the entire universe, however, first of all, and not merely in nature, the simplest, most fundamental category to which all things can be reduced, gives us this unity and triumity at once. This category as seen by the natural understanding, is simple Being; as apprehended by the reason, it is Personality; as viewed by the eye of the spirit, it is God. Each of these forms, is, from the nature of the case, cognizable, in its ground principle, only by a corresponding principle in the hu. man coustitution. Like alone apprehends like. No one of them can generate the other two, or be generated by them ; it can never develop their substance out of its own, or have its substance developed out of theirs; nor, on the other hand, can it ever absorb and swallow them up, or be absorbed and swallowed them. The distinction between them, alike when taken in their ideal, real and actual states, is an essential and eternal one. No logic, therefore, when proceeding logically, can ever confound them in one, or educe them out of each other. For instance, God and Personality can never be merged in mere Being, and so be fully measured and apprehended by the understanding ; infinite spirit can never compress itself into finite Being, or thread the logic of Personality ; nor can the abstract differential reason ever apprehend the concrete integral unity of either the Deity or created Being.
But though thus distinct the three can never be totally sundered from each other. For, first there can be no universe of Being, save as there is a God by, in, and for whom it exists; secondly, we cannot conceive of a God that simply is, but that never acts or speaks, never creates, animates or reveals, that is all subject without either object or process, and that has beneath him no universe of Created Being ; nor, finally, can we think of Personality that is wholly and absolutely abstract, totally destitute of a mutual subject and object in which it inheres. Each, therefore, in its diversity, and all in their unity, are indispensably necessary to complete the simplest and most fundamental of all categories, namely, Existence.
At this point it may be said once for all, first, that every category, wheiher in the sphere of soul, mind or spirit, of the relative, mediate or absoluie, does at once spring asunder and polarize itself as subject and object, the static and dynamic, the real and ideal; and that in the very act of so doing, it eliminates and brings into play its third organic principle which gives us the living process of the actual: secondly, that every category preents a different triunily, according as it is viewed from the