Correspondence.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume II, Issue 183, 7 August 1867, Page 3

Correspondence.

To the Editor op tub Nelson Evening Mail. Sir — My attention has been called to an article that appeared in the Colonist of y Friday last, headed "The Ultra HighChurch Bishop of Dunediu," and which certainly furnished a fresh illustration of the &aying that "fools rush in where angels fear to tread." The Colonist accuses the Bishop of perverting the doctrine of the Church of Englaud on the eucharistic sacrifice. Let us see how far I he is borne out in making such a reckless 1 and mischievous statement. I The word "sacrifice" has two sign ifis cations (1) the act of slaying a victim ; p (2) the victim itself which has been slain. If In the first sense we speak of the sacrifice H on the cross ; in the second of the sacrifice 1 in the eucharist. The body of Christ was I sacrificed once for all on the cross (Heb. I vii. 27. ; ix. 26. 28.), but is continually I offered to God, as the sacrifice, by Christ | himself in heaven naturally (Rom. viii. 3. 1 4.; Heb. x. 21.; 1 John ii. 1. 2.), by the \ church on earth in the holy eucharist, I supernaturally. : The Church of England views the euI charist as a continuation of the sacrifice I on the cross and commemorative of it, as ] well as the means of applying its beuefits j to our souls and bodies. The victim is | one and the same, even Christ ; the only | difference beiug that on the cross His \ blood really flowed, whilst the eucharist is | an unbloody sacrifice. In both respects | He is also the priest, for the ministers of :] the altar personate Him and consecrate the \ oblation, not in their own name, but in ■ Christs, and by His commission and aur ' thority" (see Article 26). Wherefore they say not " this is the body of Christ," but simply and absolutely " this is my body." Though our Saviour made a perfect sacrifice on the cross, yet. He "did institute , and in His holy G-ospel command us to | continue a perpetual memory of that His I precious death until his coming again" (see prayer of consecration in communion service). He " instituted and ordained holy mysteries as pledges of His love and for a continual remembrance of His death" (see exhortation in Commuuion Service). Its continued identity is strikingly ex- | hibited in the distribution of the sacred | elements. When the priest says, " The 1 body of our Lord Jesus Christ — take and | eat this;" (he blood of our Lord Jesus I Christ — drink this ;" he at the same time 1 connects them with the sacrifice on the I cross thus — " which was given for thee," " which was shed for thee." Christ is really present in the eucharist, but He is concealed, and cannot be perv' ceived by our bodily senses. He is. present \ under the form of bread and wine. That ; the Church of England teaches what is '' known as the real presence no churchman can deny. We teach our little ones that " the body and blood of Christ are verily ) and indeed taken and received by the faithful in the Lord's Supper" (sea Catechism). If the body and blood are "taken," it follows that they must be there. Iv one of the Thirty-nine Articles (28) it is more i explicitly said to be " given, taken, and | eaten." | In short then Bishop Jeremy Taylor I and others of our best divines, as well as I the ancient fathers, call the eucharist the U Christian sacrifice. I 1 The holy eucharist is the continuation of 1 1 the sacrifice on the cross ; a means by 1 | which the benefits of that sacrifice, first ifeapplied in holy baptism, are constantly ||henewed to individual souls. St. Paul |||tells us that Christ entered upon the office |i|of the church's great High Priest when SEEe ascended into heaven, and we believe fethat He exercises that office by presenting Oto His Father the merits of His own adorilfable sacrifice of the cross, so often as His Srepresentatiye priesthood on earth offer

the memorial sacrifice of the eucharist on the altar. I said that many of our best divines spoke of the eucbarist as a sacrifice. I will quote one or two as proofs of the assertion. Bishop Overall, "This is no new sacrifice but the same which was once offered, and which is every day offered to God by Christ in heaven. It is a true and propitiatory sacrifice." Bishop Cosio, "We say that that (the sacrifice on Calvary) was a sufficient sacrifice, but withal that this is a true, real, efficient sacrifice, and both of them propitiatory for the sins of the whole world." St. Cyril of Jerusalem, "We offer Christ slain for our sios, propitiating God for the people and for ourselves." Let Bishop Ridley to:> speak — "We adore and worship Christ in the eucharist." See also the late Charge of the Bishop of Salisbury. Quotations might be multiplied, but your space is limited. However enough has been said to show that Bishop Jenuer is not the only bishop who boldly puts forth the teaching of the church. Yours, etc., An English Churchman. August 5, 1867. " Oh yes, Oil yes, God save the Queen! " To the Editor of the jSTklsok Evenikg Mail. Sir — Would you allow me through the medium of your valuable paper, to ask the public of Nelson one question, and that is, are the red-tapists masters of the situation and of the public of Nelson, or are we to be their servants? But perhaps, Mr. Editor, you will wonder what I am driving at. I will tell you. Some time ago a number of diggers, I am told, were sent up from the West Coast by the diggers there, in order to ascertain whether there was any road or route from Nelson to the Upper Kaiamea, and at the same time to go over there and see the country and to report on it, so that if it proved to be a promising one, and the road to it a practicable one, some hundreds of them would be prepared to come up to Nelson to go into and prospect the country, and also to open it up. These diggers, lam told, got a tracing of the rour.e .rom Mr Hough and had no difficulty in finding their way into it, although none of the Governn^ent officials during the last four or five years had ever been able to find it, although furnished with similar tracings. Well, these diggers have now returned to Nelson, stating that every inch of the country is a gold country. They have waited upon his Honor's Honor, and have stated that there is no mistake about the pass, they have guaranteed to make a road by which any man shall be able to go to the Baton in three hours, and that provisions in any quantity shall be carried over, so as to lay the whole country open to the diggers, and further, that should the road or work not be made to the satisfaction of the Government Engineer, they will not ask anything for it. This effer we are told, has been rejected, the Government Engineer stating that in some two months' time from this, he may be in a position to go and examine the route for himself. This decision is considered by these diggers as condemning the country for another season. Is it possible, sir, that the Government have not got one honest man that they can entrust with this important business? Have they got no master-mind amongst them, or have they nothing but Grooms for this sort of business? If so, I think that it is high time for the public of Nelson to bestir themselves, to call a public meeting, and to convince these red-tapist obstructives, that not they, but the pGblic are masters of the situation. Yours, etc., A Looker Ont.