Love

be freely admitted that terror will never win the heart to God. only can do that, and well would it be if all preachers felt deeply the love of God in their own hearts, and were able to set it clearly and impressively before the minds of their hearers. Yet it is questionable whether this side of the truth alone would have the desired effect. Some minds are drawn by love without any terror at all, and none will ever confide in God until persuaded of His love. But there are vast multitudes that must be convinced that God is just before they will appreciate His mercy, who must feel that they are lost before they will value salvation. Alarming truth will not indeed bring the sinner back to God, but it often prepares him for returning. Alarming preaching often answers the end of heavy trials. It convinces the sinner of his wretchedness and his need of Christ as his Saviour and portion. It would scarcely do for preachers in our day to try to imitate the sermon of Edwards on "The Sinner in the Hands of an Angry God," and yet it is worthy of note that the preaching of that discourse was followed by one of the greatest revivals of modern times. Much must depend on the temperament of the preacher and the character of his audience. What is contended for is not that all should preach in the same strain, but that no preacher should leave a single soul attending his ministry unwarned of the fearful consequences which must follow a life of sin. A thousandth part of the love that dwells in the heart of God to the sinful children of men can never be told by mortal lips; but the Divine Father must never be represented as too tender-hearted to punish the transgressor. Both the danger of the sinner and the responsibility of the preacher are here involved. "So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman to the house of Israel, therefore thou shalt hear the word at my mouth, and warn them from Me. When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man thou shalt surely die, if thou didst not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood will I require at thine hand."

A. N.

THE RUSSIAN CHURCH.

BY REV. A. F. SIMPSON, M.A., DALKEITH.

III.

IN our last paper, some explanation was given of the sacramental theory, as held by the Russian Church; a theory which is at once the cornerstone of her doctrinal system, and the chief support of her ceremonial. As she maintains that the powers of salvation are conveyed to the people through her, she claims validity for all those external acts, by which, or in connection with which, grace is bestowed;-no matter what the nature of the connection between the act and its supposed

virtue, between the sign and the thing signified. Spiritual blessings are made to depend upon the action of the Church, and are only to be obtained through compliance with her observances. This being the case, the people must come to look upon the outward act prescribed by the Church as the chief part of religion. Ritualism will always be the natural counterpart of the sacramental theory; if not by a necessary logical connection, at least, by the practical need which is felt for something calcul ated to impress the senses, and to form the object to which faith shall be attached. The outward ceremonial being regarded as the channel of spiritual benefit, will soon come to usurp the place of first importance in the religious life of the people. Religion is dissociated from morality, and piety degraded to such things as bodily gestures of devotion, the repeating of prayers in a mechanical way, and the superstitious observance of church rules.

The symbolism of the Russian Church is in our opinion more a hindrance than a help, as regards the religious education of the people. Yet it is in this latter respect alone, that we can discover any significance in it, or any adaptation to the spiritual needs of man. If the sacraments are also symbols of spiritual truths, the proper observance of them is calculated to promote religious instruction. And as a matter of fact, the symbolic meaning, supposed to belong to them, and to the church-ritual as a whole, is considered the proper ground of defence, in regard to them. The representation of scripture scenes and incidents in dramatic fashion, the sprinkling of things and persons with consecrated water, processions on Saints' days, as well as acts properly sacramental, are meant for popular instruction, and if accompanied by appropriate explanations might be serviceable in this way, though in most cases, we suspect, the people are left to guess a meaning of their own, or without any meaning at all. Yet it must be admitted that the materials of her ritual, being derived from Scripture, and the most significant facts in the church's own history, may be well enough adapted to the purposes of popular instruction. One would suppose that, in such a case, the worship of the Church would be at once impressive and edifying, seeing that it represents in outward form, the most important facts of Christianity, and of her own history, embodying not only the chief elements of her faith, but also evoking and expressing the sentiments associated with the most eventful scenes in her past existence. But alas! the history of Eastern Christianity shows us that such expectations are vain. Principles which seem unimpeachable in theory often produce most unexpected results. A wide experience evidently proves that sensuous impressions are not conducive to the growth of a healthy religious life.

Symbolism is the leading principle and chief characteristic of the Church's entire ritual and worship. Pictures of sacred persons and scenes, the dramatic representation of Scripture incidents, sundry move

ments of the priests before the people, all contribute to swell the pomp and circumstance of a religious service. The worship of an English dissenting congregation would appear extremely uninteresting, except by contrast, to a Russian who has been accustomed to his own church service; and the most ostentatious pretentions of ritualism a meagre and feeble imitation. The ordinary weekly services contain a certain amount of dramatic or scenic performance. The priest must wear the robes appropriate to the occasion. A choir composed of men and boys supplies the music, for women have no acknowledged standing in the church, and are not permitted to take part in its service of song, instrumental music is also forbidden. An ordinary service usually consists of portions of the liturgy chanted by the choir, or intoned by the priest, the Scripture lessons for the day read by the reader, hymns or anthems by the choir, and the offering of incense by the priest, accompanied by sundry gestures in presence, of the pictures on the wall, kneeling, bowing and crossing, etc. At certain intervals in the service the officiating priest passes before the picture of the Virgin or the Saviour, holding a censer with burning incense. As he passes the image he swings the censer, the smoke of which is rising towards the roof, and kneels with his face towards the ground. At the mention of the Divine name the people who stand on the floor of the church, (there are no seats, as the people are only spectators) throw themselves prostrate on the floor, repeating in low sepulchral tones; "Gospodi Poymilu; Gospodi Poymilu;" Lord have mercy on us; Lord have mercy on us. This refrain comes in at almost every part of the service, indeed so often that the stranger will wonder at first if the liturgy contains anything else. Then as to preaching, it is conspicuous by its absence. The church has apparently lost this gift. At any rate, it has fallen entirely into disuse;—a logical consequence we think of the sacramental theory. And does not ritualism in England, also, push the sermon into a corner, making it a mere appendage to the service? Who could be expected either to make sermons or to listen to them, when a few mechanical acts performed at appropriate times procure a title to heaven?

It is however, at the larger churches and cathedrals, which can command the service of a numerous clergy, and on special occasions, such as Christmas or Easter, where the character of the worship appears to best advantage. Having frequently attended the services on passion week, in Novo Isaakvoski, which is considered the first church in St. Petersburg, I may speak of what I have seen there, by way of illustration. Services are held throughout the week, but the two at which the greatest dramatic effect is produced, are held on the forenoon of Thursday, and from 10 o'clock on Saturday night to Easter Sunday moning; the one in commemoration of the washing of the disciples' feet, in the upper room, and the other, of the resurrection itself. Christ's injunction to the disciples on the occasion of washing their feet, that they should so

do to one another as He had done unto them, is taken in its literal import, and on Thursday, the day before that on which our Lord suffered, His example is imitated in literal fashion. A platform is raised in the centre of the Church on which twelve ecclesiastics are seated during the service, waiting the time when the formal ceremony shall begin. The district metropolitan, or other high dignitary, personates our Lord. Entering in the full array of his official vestments, he begins by laying aside the upper portions of his attire, and then being girded with an apron he takes a towel and proceeds to wash the disciples' feet. In the Easter morning service, an attempt is also made to dramatise the resurrection. A full-sized coffin is placed on a temporary platform, in the church. The crowd are allowed to pass up one side and over the platform to look at the coffin, cross themselves, kneel before it, murmuring the well-known form; 66 Gospodi Poymilu." The coffin is usually beautifully decorated, and has a life-size picture of Christ on the lid. The crowd of worshippers throng past the coffin with lighted tapers in hand, while the service is proceeding, till 12 o'clock has struck. Shortly after, the coffin is speedily carried away, and soon a procession party is heard singing outside. This party has come to search for the body of Jesus: and on entering and finding the place empty, they receive the reply, " He is not here but is risen." The beautiful Easter hymn then bursts forth from the assembled multitude; "Christos voskress: Christos voskress:" The Lord is risen: The Lord is risen. By this time all the bells of the city have begun to toll, and the people are embracing each other everywhere, repeating the accustomed salutation, "Christos voskress." In the joy of the moment old enmities, and the distinction of rank are forgotten. Friend and foe, prince and peasant alike, greet each other. The Lord is risen, sin and death are overcome; there is' peace on earth and good will among men. The custom of Easter eggs survives in Russia in full glory. Eggs, real and artificial, dyed and painted in all colours, and forms are the usual presents of the season. They are given in expression of good will and of best wishes for health and prosperity. Some vestiges of the same custom survive in Scotland in the "pace eggs" of "pace Sunday." "Pace" is a worn form of the Greek pascha, the word for Easter, and is really the old Hebrew word for passover." The use of eggs at this season in connection with a Christian festival is thought to be of heathen origin, very probably derived from the nature-symbolism of our Aryan ancestors, but adopted into the Christian church, and baptised with a Christian meaning. The Christmas tree and the Easter egg played a part in the ancient nature-worship of the Aryan peoples, as symbols probably of the living and recuperative powers of nature. And probably something higher than a superstitious feeling may have dictated the consecration of these two symbols to Christian purposes; so that they now stand connected with that event from which the redemption of the world

66

proceeds and in which lie the seeds of the "new heavens and the new earth."

The limits of this brief paper warn me that I must hasten to conclusion. But I may briefly allude to another particular which illustrates further the symbolism of the Russian Church; the architecture of the churches and temples. The temples differ from the churches as our cathedrals differ from the churches or chapels; and the ecclesiastical symbolism is seen to best advantage in the temples. They are built after the model of the ancient temple of Jerusalem, and are meant to express the same general idea. Indeed, the Church as a whole, in spirit and character, is more of the Jewish than the Christian type. The altar occupies the east end, corresponding to the Holy of Holies in the Temple, and consists of a raised platform which stretches over the entire width of the building, and is separated from the body of the Church by a wall or veil. The floor of the altar projects a few feet before the dividing wall so as to afford space for the priests to pass with incense before the sacred pictures, which are painted on the veil and facing the nave. In the centre of the veil there is a large gate which is parted and drawn aside at special parts of the service, so as to expose the altar furniture. In Novo Isaakovski a large golden cross stands behind the door and an image of the Deity painted on the window behind.

Abundant use of candles is made at all the services. The candle flame is said to be a symbol of the Church, which is the light of the world. A large candle surrounded by a number of smaller ones will be found in front of some of the pictures. The large one represents Christ, the lesser the apostles and saints, the subordinate lights of the world. This idea is curiously reproduced in various forms. It is maintained that the domes which crown the roofs of the churches have the same meaning. The dome resembles the flame of a candle and thus symbolises the spiritual function of the Church as the light of the world. But this idea is more ingenious than true. The dome was used in Oriental architecture long ere Christianity was born, and was adopted in all likelihood in the erection of churches, simply because it was the common style for sacred buildings.

I need scarcely say that I am not anxious to advocate the introduction of Russian Church customs among ourselves. My object has been to describe in such manner as to show that the faith and practice of many millions of Christians as understood by themselves is not all unreason and absurdity. The use of an elaborate symbolism may be of some benefit to them, though a more spiritual Christianity which addresses the understanding and the heart would be a greater blessing. Pictorial representations will strike the imagination and abide in the memory when verbal instruction is only heard and forgotten. For the education of children in the truths of Christianity, or at least,

T