The use of Creeds is often a ground of complaint against our Church; but, like most of the other charges that are brought against her, is without any solid foundation. The primitive Church, like our own, acknowledged the all-sufficiency of the holy Scriptures in matters of doctrine; but, as the fundamental articles of the christian faith are dispersed in them, it was at a very early period deemed advisable to collect out of the sacred writings a plain and short summary of these important truths, which might be easily understood and remembered by all professing Christians. Hence those summaries which we call Creeds were compiled, and at so early a period, that the origin of two of them, viz. the Apostles' Creed, and that of St. Athanasius, is lost in their high antiquity. That which is called the Nicene Creed was originally drawn up by the first general Council of Nice, in the year 325, and it was enlarged, and some of the articles were more fully expressed, about the year 381. These ancient Creeds we still use in our Church, with the same view, and in the same manner, as they were used at their first introduction into the primitive Church. As they are collections of important and fundamental truths scattered over the pages of the inspired volume, they are, as might be expected, founded upon express declarations of the revealed will of God, each article being supported by various texts. These Creeds, therefore, thus established, and thus preserved, having for many ages been the bulwark and test of sound doctrine, were properly embodied in that scriptural liturgy, the Prayer Book. Although many dissenters admit that the fundamental doctrines of our holy religion are contained in the Prayer Book, yet they condemn the use of a ritual. It might be imagined, from the objections which are made against it, that rituals are of modern introduction, or at least were unknown in the early and pure ages of Christianity. So far, however, are rituals from being of modern origin, that we find they have been used in the Church from the beginning of the christian era; and many of the prayers which are in our Prayer Book have been in use, in our own Church, upwards of twelve hundred years, and have been in existence a much longer period. There are at the present day Liturgies in existence, containing the substance of many of these prayers, which have been ascribed to St. Peter, St. Mark, and St. James; and, although it is doubtful whether these liturgies were the productions of the apostles whose names they bear, there is no doubt of their great antiquity, being spoken of as ancient by writers who lived in the fourth and fifth centuries. Our own Church possessed a liturgy before the arrival of Augustin in the island, which, it is supposed, was received from the Gallican Church, although the exact period of its introduction cannot be ascertained. If, therefore, rituals were in ancient use in the Church, and if our own Liturgy is essentially scriptural, there can be no reasonable ground of objection against it. It was truly observed by Hooker, that, "No doubt, from God it hath proceeded, and by us it must be acknowledged a work of singular care and providence, that the Church hath evermore held a prescript form of Common Prayer, although not in all things every where the same, yet, for the most part, retaining still the same analogy. So that if the Liturgies of all ancient churches throughout the world be compared among themselves, it may be easily perceived they had all one original mould, and that the public prayer of the people of God, in churches thoroughly settled, did never use to be voluntary dictates, proceeding from any men's extemporal wit."* What a close affinity, then, exists between the Church of England and the Church of primitive Christianity! How great a privilege ought we to consider it, that we belong to a Church holding fast the form of sound words, and carefully maintaining the faith once delivered to the saints! It manifests a shallow acquaintance with the apostolical writings to require an express apostolical sanction for every rite and ceremony which we observe, and to charge us with acting contrary to Scripture if we do not adduce it. St. Paul himself frequently alludes to rites and customs which have never been positively enjoined, but which it is clear, from his own remarks, were lawfully and scripturally observed.† There is a wide difference, too often lost sight of, between things unscriptural, and things which are not positively authorized by Scripture. It would be folly to suppose that every thing which is not mentioned in Scripture is therefore contrary to Scripture: such a line of argument would condemn even the apostles themselves. The principles upon which church government ought to be founded are laid down in Scripture, and the interpretation of them is confirmed by eighteen centuries. When we thus agree in essentials with the primitive Church, i.e. in our doctrine, in our government, and, as far as the altered circumstances of the times will admit, in discipline too, we justly call ourselves a branch, a living and a fruitful branch of Christ's holy Catholic Church. Against those unimportant, or, at all events, unessential forms which are observed in our Church, that "all things may be done decently and in order," our enemies loudly rail. But the invalidity of the objections which they thus raise have been again and again exposed, and those who urge them are truly kicking against the pricks. There are certain vestments which it has been judged convenient and right to enjoin the minister of religion to wear. These are brought forward as spots and blemishes in the Church. Vain and frivolous are such charges. These nonessential things are no justification for destroying the unity of the Spirit, and bursting asunder the bond of peace. Is the robe of royalty ever alleged as a ground of excuse for joining in a treasonable conspiracy to overthrow the monarchy? Does the minister of justice inspire less awe, or obtain less respect, because he is attired in those robes which the use of former ages has stamped with approbation? Why then should that which is seemly in royalty and in the minister of justice be unseemly and offensive in the minister of religion? Vain, indeed, would be the attempt to assign an adequate reason. Various robes were appointed, with singular exactness, by the Almighty for the Levitical priesthood. Robes, therefore, are not in themselves sinful: it is when they are used in an idolatrous service that they become sinful. Robes of different sorts were introduced at a very early period into the Church of Christ, and have continued therein, with various alterations, ever since. And thus have they come down • Ecc. Pol. b. v. 1. 25. See also Palmer's Origines Liturgicæ. to us, and are considered suitable and becoming in all the public offices of divine worship. Nor are these vestments the only ground of clamorous objection. The attitudes which the Church has prescribed for the devout worshipper have also been the object of unbecoming ridicule. It may, indeed, be asked of those who make these frivolous objections, whether they are not guilty in the sight of God of a greater sin in debasing religion by such vain disputes, than those are who, following the example of antiquity, stand up when they praise God, and when they make profession of their faith, and fall down upon their knees when they acknowledge their sins, and seek for favour from God? Because "the gesture of constancy," remarks Hooker, "becomes us the best in the one; in the other, the behaviour of humility." If we were to carry our examination into the most minute particulars of our Liturgy, either as regards the doctrine or the rubric, we should find the former abundantly supported by holy writ, and the latter by the practice of the Church in the early and pure ages of the Gospel Dispensation. It matters not that an idolatrous church has certain similar rites and observances with ourselves: these do not make her idolatrous. It would be just as reasonable to reject the doctrine of the Trinity because the Church of Rome holds it, as to reject outward ordinances only because that church observes them. At the time of the Reformation, the Reformers discriminated between ordinances which were contrary to Scripture, and those which were edifying and conducive to order, although not expressly appointed by an apostle, and while they rejected the one, they wisely retained the other. That our Church is a pure branch of the holy Catholic Church we are moreover assured by the blessing of God which rests upon it. The Church established in these realms has been, and is still, blessed with the favour of God; and established, as it has been, upwards of fifteen hundred years, and connected, as it is, by the ties of holy fellowship with the primitive Church, it may bid defiance to its enemies, and rely with confidence upon its Lord's immutable promise, that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. S. F. MISCELLANEOUS. CONTINENTAL CHURCHES: With Observations on the Romish Worship, and the State of Religion Abroad. No. VI. ST. JAMES'S CHURCH, Antwerp. Or the Antwerp churches, the most interesting is that dedicated to St. James. It is not so rich, perhaps, in paintings as the Cathedral, but it has some far more splendid specimens of sculpture both in marble and wood. In the several chapels, which are all of marble of different colours, there are, however, some of the best pictures of Rubens, and many, though not perhaps of first-rate merits, by Jordaens, Van Dyke, Otto Venius, and other artists; but, above all these, it is the depository of the mortal remains of the great painter Rubens himself, which lie in a chapel, built after his own design for their reception. It is unknown at what period the building of the church commenced; but the date of the erection of the choir is 1327, and in 1502 it was decorated at the expense of Balthazar de Robiano on that scale of magnificence which it now exhibits. The tower was raised in 1491, and, though not remarkable for architectural regularity, it has an appearance of simple grandeur, which cannot fail to attract admiration. In 1656, the church was made collegiate by virtue of a bull of Pope Alexander VII., which was confirmed by a decree of Clement XI. in 1707. The interior of the church is peculiarly striking. Entering by the great west door, the effect produced by the exquisite workmanship, and superb decoration of the maître autel, which is considered the chefd'œuvre of the younger Quellyn, can scarcely be surpassed. The tasteful columns, the colossal statue of the patron saint, those of St. Peter and St. Paul, by Cocks, which are placed at the entrance of the choir, the figures on the north and south side by Van Hool and Van Géel, and a statue of St. John by Vervoot, claim and receive universal admiration. There is also fixed against a pillar, opposite to the altar of St. Sacrement, an alto-relievo by the last-named artist, which is looked upon by connoisseurs as a masterpiece of sculpture. It represents the "Descent from the Cross," and is cut out of a single block; and the grouping, the action, the expression of the several objects are inimitable. The organ-loft is supported by lofty Ionic columns, some cut out of proportion indeed, but not inelegant withal, at least to an unscientific observer. It is the work of Verbruggen. The confessionals are exquisitely carved in wood; and the pulpit, by Willensens, exceeds perhaps in chaste simplicity any thing of the kind in Belgium. Each of the side-aisles contains several chapels. In the first, on the north, is a picture painted by W. Coberger in 1605, of Saint Helena presenting to her son, Constantine, the Cross on which our Lord was crucified. There is a "Crucifixion," by Vandyke, in the second chapel, by the sight of which alone the amateur would be amply repaid for a visit to the city of Antwerp. Above the altar is a performance of Martin de Vos, representing the Saints worshipping the Trinity. The window, painted by Diepenbeck, is a "Last Supper," copied from the celebrated picture of Leonardo di Vinci. A singular, and not very prepossessing, "Last Judgment," by one of Raphael's pupils, named Bernard Van Orley, decorates the third chapel, which is consecrated to the memory of M. Rockox, formerly mayor of Antwerp. Portraits of himself and family are painted on the wings of the picture. The altarpiece of the fourth chapel is an "Adoration of the Magi," by Van Hock, a pupil of Rubens. On a tablet inscribed to M. Van Lanstchot is a portrait, painted on marble, by Van Dyke. A "Christ," in the manner of this celebrated artist, painted by Goebouw in 1657, hangs in the last chapel of this aisle. By the same artist was painted the fine portrait of the Dutch priest, Van der Bossche, in the first chapel of the south aisle; as also the "Resurrection" on the opposite pillar. The portraits of M. Van Baelen and his Wife are attributed to Van Dyke himself. In the second chapel, on this side, is "The Temptation of St. Anthony," by Martin de Vos. The altar of the third chapel is of white marble, with twisted columns, intertwined with flowers and cherubs. It contains a painting of the "Death of St. Roch," by Erasmus Quellyn; and several pictures by Hemmeling, executed before the invention of oil-colouring. A work of an unknown artist is the altar-piece of the fourth chapel; and, that of the fifth, Francis Flore, with wings by M. de Vos. The two pictures of Martyrdoms were painted by De Reyker in 1591. In the sixth chapel is a "Baptism of Christ," by M. de Vos, with wings by Otto Venius; and beneath it is a marble bas-relief, representing Mount Calvary, with Jerusalem in the distance. This magnificent specimen of the art was carried to the Louvre by the French, and restored after the fall of the empire. In the south transept, looking up the aisle, is the altar of St. Sacrement, in black and white marble, and ornamented with a statue of St. Peter by Verbruggen, and another of St. Paul by Willensens. The bas-reliefs, the representation of the Almighty, and the cherubs which support the altar-table, are by A. Quellyn. The altar-piece is a "Last Supper," by Otto Venius. It has two wings; on one of which are painted Moses and Aaron, and on the other Melchisedec. On the right is a small chapel, in marble, which was once richly decorated, and filled with pictures; but it is now in a state of complete dilapidation. A window, representing the History of Rodolph of Habsbourg, emperor of Germany, is still entire, and is much admired. The chapel is now used as a depository for the sacred vessels, and other furniture of the church. The enclosure behind the choir contains six chapels, besides the splendid mausoleum of the family of Rubens. At the entrance of the first of these are placed the two statues already mentioned, by Cocks, of St. Peter and St. James. Two fine pictures, the "Holy Trinity," by Van Baelen, and the "Martyrdom of St. James," by De Vos, occupy the interior. The second chapel contains a picture of "St. Ives," by Gerrhard Seghers, and two superb bas-reliefs, by Sheemaekers, bearing date in 1700. On a pillar opposite is a "Dead Christ and Weeping Virgin," by Cornelius Schut, after the manner of Van Dyke. "Christ appearing to Mary," by J. Cossiers; and two groups in marble, the "Flagellation," and the "Raising of Lazarus," both by Vervoot, are the chief ornaments of the third chapel. The altar-piece of the fourth chapel, on the other side of the choir, is a fine picture by Jordaens, representing the "Intercession of St. Charles to the Virgin for the cure of the Plague-stricken." In the next, the "Separation of St. Peter and St. Paul before their Martyrdom" is by Peter Lint; and opposite to it is a copy from Rubens by the same artist. In the last chapel is a "Visitation," by Victor. The two statues at the entrance of the enclosure," Christ crowned with Thorns," and the " Mater Dolorosa," by Van Beveren, are admirably executed. On the right of the entrance is a chapel dedicated to the Virgin Mary. The altar, in marble, supported by twisted pillars, is the performance of Van-der-Eynde; and the painted windows, of which the colours are somewhat faded, are by Diepenbeck. A monument by Vervoot, to the memory of an English family, named Peters, represents Eternity under the image of a young female. Against one of the pillars is a fine statue of the "Baptist," by Willensens; and opposite is one |