THE CHURCH OF THE FUTURE.

Evening Star, Issue 4059, 29 February 1876, Page 2

THE CHURCH OF THE FUTURE.

, The above was the subject of a lecture delivered in the Congregational Church on Sunday evening by the Eev. Dr Boseby. ; The lecturer began by pointing out, though in no., ,’censorious spirit, some of the more qonspiotions ’ faults of the Church of to-day; its cwefulness | abpat comparative tnflles, its auxiety about.merd; forms and names, its slow progress, its sUjieivj stitions, its impatience of dissent, its tow average, •of piety. He was sure they must all feel tlmt.toe' Church of their hopes—the Church of the futufe*ought to be very different from that of to-day; and, indeed, there were already such signs of movement and advance as might encourage and confirm their hopes. Doubtless there were reaction s here and there. There was the reaction of Vaticanism. There was the reaction of Sacra* mectalism. There was the reaction (in some r<fipe’6tfi ifr^<^ , ’certainly- a •©! **-ner tain. revivalist degmatisnTin the EvHhgclie&l~Qhurcb> But, on the whole, men were beginning to feel that the old hard lines of ecclesiastical separation, the unlovely distinctions of narrow and bigoted secmust be made 'dt^hbYPutuiW'wtoh^

should embrace all t,he Cod-fearing, and the brotherly among ine children' or men. In trying to form some estimate of .what ,Qiat Church would he, the ledturek’said they might conficldhtly hffiifriy that she would not realise the Boman Catholic dream of a visible, ’ Orgarhsatt-’ unity. The liberty' of- opr.Christian manhood disdained the manacles of a:’priesthood, any ’numerical majority’; . and. the asaertfch. of that liberty would provequite • fatal -to ‘ >nyj external organised unity. / Did anyoile think it IwCdd hq • possible' to, keep Charles' Spurgedn l and Dr. Pusey vrithln thb stuije COblesiaStioal’ fold?: Would the same visible Church be’ able bo keep the peace between two Christian men bo different as Dr Gumming' and Cardinal: Manning ? Why, there was the greatest difficulty in the world ih bringing together even , thjope naturaUy-kindred churches, the, Free Church .and the , United Presbyterian Church of Scotland. Add #hao A disturbance -they hadjjuite reoenflyhkdiUtheirqwn quiet comhiunity —what a' hatd; tediouff, stormy courtehip—unlovely wooihg apd whptnn, ,ppgraciops rejection —in the, negotiations, for union between ‘the two 7 Presbyterian Churches Of this landl A singleelight sufficed’ to -keep, y then? apart.,Quixotic there must be .the attempt to reduce to visible and external unity the 'thousand and one Churches,into which the Christian world was at present divided. He (the lecturer) did not look for any material changes 4u existing forms and organisations. So long as there were Christians who loveda; stately and qrnate service, and an ecclesiastical hierarchy, po long there would be found a place for the various Episcopal Churches ; so : h>ngas i -tiiere Were persons wno loved order bettvOT th/ui freedom

, there would be Preshytetians; Be long asthefewort ; people who caredmorefor. freedom thoh 6rthr the»6‘ woMdbeCongregationalists : bo long aa there Were Christiana.of a ferveiit enthusiastic typotherewonld be Methodists'; and so Ibng as there ware quiet people, whdthought that While >“ speech is silvern, •slienoaia golden”.'there.. would he Quakers. If the lifting of Mb (the lecturer's) finger would abolish all existing sects bnt one, even were that one his own, he wonld not lift it: for he believed that if they were all absorbed' and comprehended to-day,' theyWonld be found divided anddisp*ate to-morrow. .. Bat while theChuroh of the j Future-would exist under; , a variety of forms!'it, would be one in spirit. Its end wonld be bringing of its members.",to theMatoncSWjtafect maii?’ 'lts 'Means>one—" speaking thetruthin, love its pattern wonld be one—Christ; its, fii&Bpi-rationone^-loVO.vf,„ ; ri.,, i I -And became the aim of!the Church of hot on creed but ph character. ' Edification,‘the building up of a holy, Manly, Christian character: that was the end.. Ijnso (ar as any creed helped to that, it was a true creed; for it was‘Only truth -that really and permanently edified'. ■ And in so far as any creed did not hinder the development of Christian manhood, it waS at least harmless, and might' he let alone. The Church of the Future wonld have a creed—not, he (the, lecturer) thought,'a very long one, It certainly would not .deal with the solemn verities Of Scripture and conscience aftw-the fearfully dogmatic maimer of former theologians. It would remember whatignorant, prejudiced, mis-; judging creatures we are.. It wouldremember that God is in heaven, and man upon earth, and, there*, fore, wonld its words he few. And it would snbor- , dinate the creed to character. It Would let a man hold the truth in any form in wMoh-be could hold

it, its a means of edification 1 to 'himself, and in charity to others. ... Then, as following from this, the Church of the Future would be ant to reverse the order of Importance of some things.. Its hortbr would be, not hell but sin; its glory would be, hot'heaven but . righteousness. It would have its doctrine of Retribution,and would teach it j but it would remember that tbe end of all Qod’s dispensations was to, make men love righteousness Jor..its own sake, and hate ain. for what it is. Xt would purge religion of that unworthy selfishness that is for ever tbiukihg about . saving the soul instead of about cooing one’s duly’ f that is, for ever 'fdrihulating plans of salvation instead of striving in a humble, reyerent, and loving spirit to serve the living Groft.' ! It would give a new emphasis to those'words of .the:'Masier,:' “ He that will save bis • soul, shall lose it, and he that will lose his soul for my sake shall find it." Again, the religion of the Churchlof thO Future would be equally removed .-from a mere -hold morality and a heated fanaticism. It would have - its. salnts. but it . would not' have forgotten the meaning of right, and oonf oience, and doty. Ah d i \ because the Church. of 'the Future would put the! strefia oncharapter (continued thelecturerj.rtwonld ( be, in the best sense, a Broad Chhrch.' < 'It would be broad enough to comprehend all good fear God andwork i righte6ameßß, i 7lt would aci knowledge as belonging to.its fellowship those m \ I all landslip allagps, of all creeds, and-au nations, ; who accordihgto ttykir light; lived 'in! 1 the fear, and laboured ohtbo' services of Odd. r - It 1 would revoke many a canonization, and it would re-■; verse many an anathema. The lecturer then dwelt i at length upon the .fact* thatr the cornerstone of i the Church of .tl}0; Future would be—then .as row j : —the Jesus .Christ; Wdr '.shoUld they Com-.' ' plain, he boho'-nddd, that the' Churches of -to-day So i feebly anticipated her glory of Catholicity and her! : beauty of for like Het Lord, it would be i her mission not to destroy bjit to fulfil; ...; "~v !