FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153  
154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   >>   >|  
of the temple, and the sheep and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables; and said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house a house of merchandise.' It will perhaps be remembered by our readers, that in referring to the Scotch estimate of the sacredness of ecclesiastical edifices, we employed words to the following effect:--'We (the Scotch people) have been taught that the world, since it began, saw but two truly holy edifices; and that these, the Tabernacle and the _Temple_, were as direct revelations from God as the Scriptures themselves, and were as certain embodiments of His will, though they spoke in the obscure language of type and symbol.' Now the passage of Scripture here cited is in harmonious accordance with this view. It was from one of these truly holy edifices that our Saviour drove the sheep and oxen, and indignantly expelled the money-changers. Without, however, begging the whole question at issue--without taking for granted the very point to be proven, _i.e._ the intrinsic holiness of Christian places of worship--the text has no bearing whatever on the view taken by the 'English Gentleman.' If buildings such as York Cathedral, Westminster Abbey, and St. Paul's, be holy in the sense in which the temple was holy, then the passage as certainly applies to them as it applied, in the times of our Saviour, to the sacred edifice which was so remarkable a revelation of Himself. But where is the evidence of an intrinsic holiness in these buildings? Where is the proof that the rite of consecration is a rite according to the mind of God? Where is the probability even that it is other than a piece of mere will-worship, originated in the dark ages; or that it confers one whit more sanctity on the edifice which it professes to render sacred, than the breaking a bottle of wine on the ship's stem, when she is starting off the slips, confers sanctity on the ship? Stands it on any surer ground than the baptism of bells, the sacrifice of the mass, or the five spurious sacraments? If it be a New Testament institution, it must possess New Testament authority. Where is that authority? Can it be possible, however, that the shrewd English really differ from us in our estimate? We think we have good grounds for holding they do not. On a late occasion we enjoyed the pleasure of visiting not only York Cathedral, but Westminster Abbey and St. Paul's, and saw qu
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153  
154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

edifices

 

passage

 

Saviour

 

confers

 

edifice

 

sanctity

 

authority

 

Testament

 

sacred

 
buildings

English

 
worship
 
holiness
 

Cathedral

 
Westminster
 

intrinsic

 

changers

 

Scotch

 
estimate
 

temple


originated

 

overthrew

 

breaking

 
bottle
 
render
 

professes

 

probability

 

Himself

 

revelation

 

remarkable


evidence

 
poured
 

consecration

 

tables

 

starting

 

grounds

 

differ

 

shrewd

 
holding
 

visiting


pleasure
 
enjoyed
 

occasion

 

possess

 

Stands

 

applied

 

ground

 
baptism
 

sacraments

 
institution