![of art, and which have the gift, so precious to those who sell them,
of inducing people who make the first purchase to continue
indefinitely; for each new object of that class acquires additional
value in the eyes of a connoisseur, and in such matters, more than
any other, l'appétit vient en mangeant.139
We remained more than an hour in the first shop we stopped at.
Lorenzo was in his element. He was a genuine connoisseur in
everything. He examined bronzes, porcelains, furniture of every
epoch, carved wood from all countries, and old tapestry, with a sure
and experienced eye, and the merchant, seeing whom he had to
deal with, brought out of his secret recesses treasures hidden from
the vulgar, and multiplied temptations Lorenzo seemed very little
inclined to resist. As for me, I took a seat beside the counter, and
looked with indifference at the various objects that were spread out
before me, but of which I was quite unable to perceive the value,
which was somewhat conventional. I was a little astonished at the
number and value of Lorenzo's purchases, but, on the whole, the
business did not interest [pg 608] me much, and I felt glad when it
was at an end.
“Bravo! Lorenzo,” said Lando as soon as we re-entered the carriage.
“You don't do things half way. That is the way I like to see other
people spend their money. It consoles me for not having any myself
to throw out of the window.”
“I have got to entirely refurnish my palace in Sicily,” said Lorenzo,
“as well as to decorate my house in Naples, which is quite unworthy
of her who is to live in it.”
“You are jesting, Lorenzo,” said I. “You know very well I think
nothing is lacking.”
“That is the consequence of your extreme youth, my dear cousin,”
said Lando. “Wait a while, and you will find out how much becomes
indispensable to one who has lived in Paris.”](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/7143-250313124543-8e85b7c9/85/Encyclopedia-of-Soils-in-the-Environment-1st-Edition-Daniel-Hillel-27-320.jpg)
![promenades less picturesque and less varied. I missed particularly
the lovely vistas which everywhere in Italy form the background of
the picture, and attract the eye, and elevate the mind to something
higher than the mere treasures of history and art that have
accumulated in all old Italian cities.
And yet it cannot be denied that Paris has the power of making itself
[pg 609] preferred to any other place in the world. It speaks a
different language to every individual, and is comprehended by all. It
is filled with treasures of every kind, and has wherewithal to gratify
every taste indiscriminately, from that which is evil in its vilest form
to an excess of goodness amounting to sublimity; from the most
refined extravagance of fashion to the extreme renunciation of
charity; and from pleasure in its most dangerous aspect to piety in
its most perfect manifestations. It flatters vanity and vice more than
would be dared anywhere else, and yet it prides itself on being able
to produce examples of goodness, devotedness, and humility that
are almost unparalleled. In a word, every one, for a different reason,
feels more at home there than anywhere else in the world. He who
once learns to love Paris finds it difficult to like any other city as
well; and he who has lived there finds it hard to resign himself to
live in any other place. It is the one city on earth that has been able
to vie with Rome in the honor of being the home of all nations....
To Be Continued.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/7143-250313124543-8e85b7c9/85/Encyclopedia-of-Soils-in-the-Environment-1st-Edition-Daniel-Hillel-29-320.jpg)
![Brussels, Belgium.
[pg 610]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/7143-250313124543-8e85b7c9/85/Encyclopedia-of-Soils-in-the-Environment-1st-Edition-Daniel-Hillel-32-320.jpg)
![formâ ecclesiæ consuetâ impensum fuit). By these last words power
is given “to consider cases in which the ancient form of the
sacrament had not been observed, and, if the form used was
sufficient for validity, to admit it as such, and to admit a person
ordained in such a manner to exercise the orders so received.”
Canon Estcourt shows that the “minus rite” cannot be intended to
designate, as Mr. Haddan and others have maintained, the
Edwardine orders. He appeals to the dispensations granted to no
less than eight bishops, all ordained according to the Pontifical in
Henry VIII.'s time, wherein their orders are referred to as received
“ab episcopis hæreticis et schismaticis aut alias minus rite.”
In the faculties granted by Pole to his bishops for the absolution and
rehabilitation of priests, he carefully explains their limitation to cases
in which “the form and intention of the church have been
preserved.” Thus it is clear “that though the cardinal had power to
recognize ordinations in which some departure had been made from
the accustomed form, yet that, on examination, he found no other
form in use which could be admitted by the church as valid.” In the
same faculties he permits the ordination, if they are otherwise fit, of
[pg 611] those whose orders are “null.” He describes them as
persons holding benefices without being ordained.
In 1554, Bonner, Bishop of Bath and Wells, gave a commission to his
vicar-general “to deal with married laics who, in pretence and under
color of priestly orders, had rashly and unlawfully mingled
themselves in ecclesiastical rights, and had obtained de facto
parochial churches with cure of souls and ecclesiastical dignities,
against the sacred sanctions of the canons and ecclesiastical rights,
and to deprive and remove them from the said churches and
dignities.” It is impossible to conjecture who else these unordained
beneficiaries can be, if they are not the Edwardine clergy.
Anglicans, on the other hand, have made a great deal of a certain
testimonial letter granted by Bonner to Scory, which speaks of the](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/7143-250313124543-8e85b7c9/85/Encyclopedia-of-Soils-in-the-Environment-1st-Edition-Daniel-Hillel-34-320.jpg)
![from the priesthood. Canon Estcourt's reviewer in the Dublin Review
of July, 1873, maintains that Foxe was right. The reviewer thinks
that Ridley and Latimer were not degraded from the episcopate,
because the status episcopalis was not recognized in those who,
though validly consecrated, had not received the Papal confirmation.
Upon this we remark, 1st, that the [pg 612] ceremonies of
degradation came into use when it was a very common opinion in
the church that degradation destroyed the potestas ordinis. 2. That
the form of degradation, in so many words, expresses the taking
away the potestas ordinis—“amovemus a te,” “tollemus tibi,”
“potestatem offerendi,” “potestatem consecrandi”—and this in
contradistinction to another form of perpetual suspension—“ab
executione potestatis.” The ceremony aims at effecting the
destruction of orders, so far as this is possible. It may be called a
“destruction of orders,” in the same sense that mortal sin is called
the crucifixion of Christ anew. Indeed, in one place, the clause,
“quantum in nobis est,” is introduced. 3. Degradation does not
depend upon previous confirmation; for Innocent II. (1139) thus
deals with those who had been consecrated bishops by the antipope
Peter Leo, who therefore assuredly had never been confirmed or
acknowledged in any way by the pope. After exclaiming,
“Quoscunque exaltaverat degradamus,” etc., etc., “he violently
wrested their pastoral staffs from their hands, and ignominiously
tore from their shoulders the pontifical palls in which their high
dignity resides. Their rings, too, which express their espousals with
the church, showing them no mercy, he drew off.”140
If the Bishop of
Gloucester really acted as Foxe describes, he did so on his own
responsibility, and in the teeth of ecclesiastical precedent.
Perhaps the most important and interesting portion of Canon
Estcourt's book is that in which he discusses the theological value of
the Edwardine form. It is not merely of controversial importance, but
is really calculated to throw light upon the theology of orders, which,
as a Catholic contemporary well observes, is still in course of
formation.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/7143-250313124543-8e85b7c9/85/Encyclopedia-of-Soils-in-the-Environment-1st-Edition-Daniel-Hillel-36-320.jpg)
![Canon Estcourt, following Benedict XIV., De Syn. Dioc., lib. viii. cap.
10, maintains, as the more probable opinion, 1, that, in the case of
the priesthood, the second imposition of hands, with the prayer for
the infusion “of the virtue of the sacerdotal grace,” is all that is really
necessary for validity; although, in practice, we of the West must
ordain again sub conditione, if the tradition of the instruments has
been omitted. 2. That in the case of priests, the third imposition of
hands, with the words, “Receive the Holy Ghost; whose sins thou
dost remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose sins thou
retainest, they are retained,” is not essential, and, if omitted, is to be
supplied without repeating the rest. 3. That as to the episcopate, the
“Accipe Spiritum Sanctum,” with the imposition of hands, is all that is
essential; and, finally, he allows, in deference to the Holy Office
(vide infra), that the form—i.e., the prayer immediately
accompanying the imposition of hands—need not express the
specific character or work of the order conferred, as, for instance,
the Holy Sacrifice in the ordination of a priest.
Consistently with these principles, Canon Estcourt admits that, so far
as words go, “Receive the Holy Ghost” is a sufficient form both for
the episcopate and the priesthood. As regards the episcopate, this
has been long a common opinion. As regards the priesthood, the
Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition, in 1704, decided that certain
Abyssinians had been validly ordained priests by imposition of hands
and the words, “Accipe Spiritum Sanctum.” From this it follows that
the Anglican forms for ordaining priests and bishops are, so far as
words go, sufficient. They [pg 613] are as follows, from 1549 to
1662, for the priesthood: “Receive the Holy Ghost; whose sins thou
dost forgive, they are forgiven; and whose sins thou dost retain,
they are retained; and be thou a faithful dispenser of the word of
God and of his holy sacraments, in the name of the Father, etc.” For
the episcopate: “Take the Holy Ghost, and remember that thou stir
up the grace of God which is in thee by imposition of hands; for God
hath not given us the spirit of fear, but of power and love and
soberness.” In 1662, certain changes were introduced by the High
Church party. In the form for the priesthood, after the words “Holy](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/7143-250313124543-8e85b7c9/85/Encyclopedia-of-Soils-in-the-Environment-1st-Edition-Daniel-Hillel-37-320.jpg)
![is also given to the ordained to acquit himself worthily in the duties
of his calling; 3d, a constant recognition of, and appeal to, the main
scope and duty of orders—the offering of the Holy Sacrifice.
Canon Estcourt next proceeds to examine the Anglican liturgy and
ordinal with special reference to these three points: 1. The divine
election. 2. The sacramental virtue. 3. The Holy Sacrifice. And he
finds that both the liturgy and the ordinal are the result of a
deliberate manipulation of the ancient Catholic ritual previously in
use, in order to the exclusion of these three points, which contain
the essential idea of holy orders.
Ordination in the Anglical ritual no longer appeals to a divine
election, [pg 614] of which it is the expression and the fulfilment. It
is merely the public expression of the approval of the authorities of
church and state. For the “virtus sacramentalis” it has substituted a
mere grâce d'état. From this it only naturally follows that episcopal
ordination cannot be of indispensable necessity, or more than a
matter of regulation and propriety which, in an emergency, may be
abrogated. This is the express teaching of many of the early
Anglican reformers. Even when engaged in defending their episcopal
succession, they are careful to say that they do not regard it as
indispensable. Hooker, who is in many respects so much more
orthodox than his predecessors and contemporaries, allows “that
there may be sometimes very just and sufficient reason to allow
ordination to be made without a bishop.”
Canon Estcourt prints considerable portions of the Anglican ordinal
and liturgy in parallel columns, with the corresponding text of the
Sarum and Exeter pontificals and missals. We see with what an
unerring sacrilegious instinct everything bearing upon the Holy
Sacrifice, and even upon the Real Presence, is either cut out or
perverted.
As regards the Second Book of 1552, it is clear that it was the work
of sacramentarians who disbelieved in the Real Presence in any](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/7143-250313124543-8e85b7c9/85/Encyclopedia-of-Soils-in-the-Environment-1st-Edition-Daniel-Hillel-39-320.jpg)
![sense, and was undertaken for the express purpose of purging the
ritual of what previous handling had still allowed it to retain of the
impress of that Presence. Mr. Cardwell, in his comparison of the
“Two Books of Edward VI.,” pref. xxvii., admits that Cox and Taylor,
who were probably the working members of the commission, appear
to have looked upon the oblation of the Eucharist as consisting
merely of “prayer, thanksgiving, and the remembrance of our
Saviour's passion.” Of Cranmer, the most influential member of the
commission, we are told that “about a year after the publication of
King Edward's First Book, Archbishop Cranmer abandoned his belief
in the Real Presence—a change which seems to have been very
acceptable to the young king and his favorites.”141
In the revision of
1662, an apparent attempt was made to attain to the expression of
a higher doctrine, both as regards orders and the Holy Eucharist; but
even if the expressions introduced were in themselves adequate, as
Canon Estcourt fairly shows they were not, of what avail could have
been so tardy a restoration? But if we examine these restorations
and emendations, we can hardly avoid coming to the conclusion that
they were not really dictated by any conception of, or aspiration
after, a higher doctrine, but were the genuine fruits of a conservative
reaction fired by controversial pique. The First Book substituted for
the Catholic faith a hazy Lutheranism; the Second Book for this
again a hazy sacramentarianism; and the revision of 1662, a hazy
compound of the two, with the addition of a Catholic phrase or so in
order to support claims to a wider sweep of church authority. Thus
the revisers of 1662 introduced the words “priest” and “bishop” into
the ordination form, whilst doing absolutely nothing toward restoring
the idea of sacrifice to the liturgy.
But, it may be urged, there is one portion of the Anglican form for
making priests which expresses the Catholic doctrine of priestly
virtue—the power of forgiving sins. Unfortunately for Anglicans,
whatever force may lie in this expression—and all precedents are
against its being regarded [pg 615] as a sufficient form—is
neutralized by the Lutheran new form of absolution which had been
introduced in addition to the two Catholic forms. At best, one is left](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/7143-250313124543-8e85b7c9/85/Encyclopedia-of-Soils-in-the-Environment-1st-Edition-Daniel-Hillel-40-320.jpg)
![He hath instituted and ordained holy mysteries, as pledges of his
love, and for a continual remembrance of his death, to our great and
endless comfort.
The Sarum Missal.
“The body of our Lord Jesus Christ [1549: which was given for thee]
preserve thy body and thy soul unto everlasting life.”
1552.
“Take and eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee, and
feed on him in thy heart with thanksgiving.”
(This form was substituted for that of 1549, in 1552, and was
appended to it in 1662.)
Canon Estcourt's argument against the validity of Anglican orders is
no argument from lack of sufficient intention on the part of
Anglicans. Neither do we think that such an argument could be
maintained, in accordance with the commonly-accepted principles of
theology. If it is a sufficient intention for valid baptism to intend to
administer the form of Christian initiation, it is sufficient, in the case
of orders, to intend to administer the form of Christian ordination,
although the ceremony in either case may be regarded as merely an
external form without any intrinsic value. It is only as a witness to
the sense of the form that the intention of Anglicans is brought into
court; and it is not the intention with which they ordain at which we
demur, but the intention with which they have altered the ordination
service and liturgy—i.e., the form of ordination and its context. Had
these alterations been merely the result of an antiquarian leaning
towards a more primitive though less perfect utterance of the same
truth, or of a puritanic craving after simplicity, the irreverence would
have been of the extremest kind, but still there would have been no
grounds for disputing the orthodox sense, and so the validity of the
form. But, on the contrary, the very object of the alterations, as
Canon Estcourt has shown, was the elimination of the orthodox](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/7143-250313124543-8e85b7c9/85/Encyclopedia-of-Soils-in-the-Environment-1st-Edition-Daniel-Hillel-42-320.jpg)
![doctrines of priesthood and sacrifice, and therefore of the
significance upon which the validity of the form depends.
The doubts which should beset the minds of honest Anglicans on the
subject of their orders, if they have the least scruple as to the
orthodoxy of their position, are simply overwhelming. If they turn to
the early church, they find that there are at least as many
precedents and authorities for regarding as null the ordinations [pg
616] of heretics and schismatics as for accepting them. Morinus'
opinion is that such ordinations are invalid, except where the church
has thought fit to dispense with the impediment; and Morinus is a
genuine student of antiquity, and no mere controversialist. True it is
Anglicans may appeal to what is undeniably the more common
doctrine in the Roman Church—viz., that such ordinations are valid—
but then she unflinchingly condemns Anglicans, whereas she has
never condemned Morinus. It is nothing to the purpose to say that
the practice of the church prevents her using Morinus' opinion
against Anglicans—which is begging the question against Morinus;
the point is, Can Anglicans escape using it against themselves?
Again, when they direct their attention to the special facts of their
own history, their view is to the last degree discouraging. Their latest
antagonist, Canon Estcourt, has notoriously given up to them every
point to which they could make the remotest claim, and has broken
and thrown away every weapon to which the least exception could
be taken; and yet it has come to this: that their only title to orders is
a succession probably broken by the non-consecration of Barlow,
and an ambiguous form which, when read in the light of their
mutilated ordinal and liturgy, is unlike any that has been accepted as
even probably adequate either by East or West.
Even if Anglicans could find their identical form, as far as words go,
in approved ordinals, they could not argue from this the sufficiency
of their own form. Mutilation and involution, although they contract
within the same span, can never be identical. You might as well
pretend that there is no difference between a stamen from which
you have plucked the leaves and an undeveloped bud.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/7143-250313124543-8e85b7c9/85/Encyclopedia-of-Soils-in-the-Environment-1st-Edition-Daniel-Hillel-43-320.jpg)
![It is true that originally different portions of the church were
allowed, in regard to orders, to give expression to the same truth in
various forms with various degrees of explicitness; but this can
afford no precedent to an individual church for mutilating a common
form in order to deny a common truth.
The Abyssinian Decision.
We cannot conclude our review without noticing an important
criticism made upon our author in the shape of a letter to the Month,
November-December, 1873, by the Rev. F. Jones, S.J. F. Jones, whilst
expressing his thorough concurrence with Canon Estcourt in every
other particular, thinks that he has attached an undue force to the
decision of the holy office upon Abyssinian orders.
Canon Estcourt has understood the Sacred Congregation of the
Inquisition, in their decree in 1704, to have ruled that the form,
“Accipe Spiritum Sanctum,” understood in the sense of the
Abyssinian liturgical books, is valid for the priesthood, although, in
the particular case, no further expression is given to this sense, at
least no expression within the limits of the form strictly so called—
i.e., the verbal formula synchronous with the matter. The decree
which he so understands is as follows:
Question: “The ordainer passed hurriedly along a line of deacons,
laying his hands upon the head of each, and saying, ‘Accipe Spiritum
Sanctum’; are they validly ordained in tal modo e forma, and
admissible to the exercise of their orders?” Answer: “The ordination
of a priest with the imposition of hands and utterance of the form as
in the question is undoubtedly valid.”
[pg 617]
F. Jones, whilst allowing that Canon Estcourt's interpretation is the
natural one according to ordinary canons of criticism, insists that the
decree, “when interpreted in the light of certain rules which arise out
of what is called the stylus curiæ,” asserts, indeed, the sufficiency of](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/7143-250313124543-8e85b7c9/85/Encyclopedia-of-Soils-in-the-Environment-1st-Edition-Daniel-Hillel-44-320.jpg)
![relation to the sacrifice, which is its principal object. Now, if, as F.
Jones suggests was the case, the unmutilated Coptic rite was in use
in Abyssinia up to 1704, and the examples given by Ludolf and
Monsignor Beb are merely imperfect copies; and if no decision as to
the form was given in 1704, then, so far as anything has been
shown to the contrary, Lequien's objection holds good that no
approved form for the priesthood fails to make an appeal to the Holy
Sacrifice.
And now as regards F. Jones' rules for interpreting the “stylus curiæ,”
and their application to the Abyssinian decision. We have no criticism
to make upon Rules 1 and 2. They are sufficiently obvious even to a
non-expert. Rule 3 cannot, we think, be admitted without
qualification. It is no doubt an important principle that the
presumption is in favor of an interpretation which leaves intact a
probable opinion, supposing that this is not the formal subject of the
decision; but we must not do violence to the natural sense of words,
and it is quite possible that such a decision might completely [pg
618] evacuate the probability of an opinion of which it took no direct
cognizance whatever. The Council of Florence did not directly intend
to condemn the opinion requiring as absolutely necessary the
tradition of the instruments, yet effectively it has done so. As to Rule
4, “Standum est pro valore actûs,” its application to the case before
us must depend upon whether the course indicated is equivalent to
the introduction of a new “actus.” To ask, as the dubium does,
concerning the validity of “tal modo e forma,” implies that this is
given in its integrity. In the Abyssinian case, it was a question
whether certain persons were to be allowed to say Mass and
perform other priestly functions, and the Sacred Congregation
allowed them. As to Rule 5, no doubt an inspection of the ordinals is
to be presumed; but here the very contention of the questioner is
that the ordinal had not been followed. Moreover, there was ample
evidence, in the sacred books quoted by Ludolf and Monsignor Beb,
accessible to the Sacred Congregation, and which, according to F.
Jones' principle, we may assume it had before it, that in Abyssinian
hands the Coptic ritual had been seriously tampered with. The](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/7143-250313124543-8e85b7c9/85/Encyclopedia-of-Soils-in-the-Environment-1st-Edition-Daniel-Hillel-46-320.jpg)
![As to Rule 6, obviously nothing can be more important than the
estimate of a decision expressed by contemporary theologians; but it
is [pg 619] very easy to misinterpret their silence. In his defence of
the Coptic rite, urges F. Jones, Assemani ought to have quoted the
authorization of a form which à fortiori authorized the Coptic. We
reply that Assemani had no lack of far more obvious and splendid
instances of the recognition of the Coptic rite; that he had no need
of such indirect support. The examination of the Abyssinian monk
Tecla Maria, in 1594, sufficiently shows that it was impossible to
judge of Abyssinian ordinations by the Coptic rite. Assemani himself
acknowledges, p. 227, that either Tecla Maria's memory failed him,
or his ordainers must have been “poco pratici del rito Coptico o
l'avessero in qualche parte alterato.” F. Godigno (l. c.) says that the
reason of Tecla Maria's reordination was the corruption of the rite.
On the other hand, it is clearly a great exaggeration to say that the
missionaries made nothing of Abyssinian orders, and that the motive
of reordination was the non-tradition of the instruments. Of John
Bermudes, the first of the Jesuit patriarchs, Ludolf (pars. ii. p. 473)
tells us that he (Bermudes) has recorded in so many words, that he
received all the sacred orders, including the episcopate, with right of
succession to the patriarchate, from the Abuna Mark, under
condition that the pope would confirm it, and that the pope
confirmed and ratified all Mark's acts. Again, the Portuguese De
Francia, one of the negotiators for the Jesuits, tells the Abyssinian
king that he had been taught that, if he is in danger of death, and
cannot get a Catholic priest, he must ask the Abyssinians for
communion.143
Certainly, this Abyssinian decision has not as yet made much mark in
theology. Canon Estcourt is able to mention one work in which it
occurs—a certain edition of the theology of Antoine, a Jesuit, and
Prefect of Propaganda under Benedict XIV. But then there is a vast
technical difference, anyhow, between a decision taking the shape of
a practical rule of procedure and a speculative definition. For more
than a century after the Council of Florence, its recognition of Greek
orders had no perceptible influence upon the language of](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/7143-250313124543-8e85b7c9/85/Encyclopedia-of-Soils-in-the-Environment-1st-Edition-Daniel-Hillel-48-320.jpg)
![theologians concerning the matter of the priesthood. It takes time to
translate from the language of action into that of speculation; but
who can deny that in any fair controversy such action must be
discounted.
It remains to be determined whether, everything considered, the
decision of the Sacred Office admits of F. Jones' interpretation;
whether the dubium can be understood, as he suggests (p. 456), to
turn exclusively upon these two points: the non-tradition of the
instruments and the deviation from the Coptic rite which prescribes
that the bishop's hands should be imposed upon each ordinandus
during the whole of the form Respice, instead of during the one
phrase, “Repleeum Spiritu Sancto,” which F. Jones thinks the
missionaries paraphrased by “Accipe Spiritum Sanctum.” Now, we
must say that it is hardly probable that in 1704 the missionaries
should be seriously exercised about the non-tradition of the
instruments. Neither is it likely that they should have proposed, in
the same breath, the two difficulties suggested by F. Jones; for why
should deviation from a rite, the substantial validity of which they
doubted, be a difficulty? They ask about the validity of a form and a
manner of imposing hands, which they describe “talmo do e forma.”
There may have been other prayers used in the service [pg 620]
from the Coptic ordinal and liturgy, but the dubium excludes them
from “tal forma.”
F. Jones' notion that the “Accipe Spiritum Sanctum” is a
mistranslation of the Coptic “Reple eum Spiritu Sancto”—which is not
found in the Abyssinian version—is, we think, quite untenable. No
distinction was more thoroughly appreciated on both sides than that
between an imperative and a precatory form. The Patriarch of the
Maronites, in 1572, informs the pope: “In our Pontifical, the orders
are conferred without a form by way of prayer.”144
In 1860, the
missionaries inform the Sacred Congregation “that the Monophysites
believe the essence of ordination consists in the expiration
(insuflazione) the ordainer makes in the act of saying, ‘Accipe
Spiritum Sanctum.’ ”145
Amongst the various deviations from the](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/7143-250313124543-8e85b7c9/85/Encyclopedia-of-Soils-in-the-Environment-1st-Edition-Daniel-Hillel-49-320.jpg)
Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment 1st Edition Daniel Hillel
- 1. Visit https://ebookultra.com to download the full version and explore more ebooks or textbooks Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment 1st Edition Daniel Hillel _____ Click the link below to download _____ https://ebookultra.com/download/encyclopedia-of-soils-in- the-environment-1st-edition-daniel-hillel/ Explore and download more ebooks or textbooks at ebookultra.com
- 2. Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be interested in. You can click the link to download. Enzymes in the Environment Books in Soils Plants and the Environment 1st Edition Burns R.G. https://ebookultra.com/download/enzymes-in-the-environment-books-in- soils-plants-and-the-environment-1st-edition-burns-r-g/ Introduction to Environmental Soil Physics 1st Edition Daniel Hillel https://ebookultra.com/download/introduction-to-environmental-soil- physics-1st-edition-daniel-hillel/ Metals in the Environment Analysis by Biodiversity Books in Soils Plants and the Environment 1st Edition M.N.V. Prasad https://ebookultra.com/download/metals-in-the-environment-analysis-by- biodiversity-books-in-soils-plants-and-the-environment-1st-edition-m- n-v-prasad/ Pesticides in Agriculture and the Environment Books in Soils Plants and the Environment 1st Edition Willis B. Wheeler https://ebookultra.com/download/pesticides-in-agriculture-and-the- environment-books-in-soils-plants-and-the-environment-1st-edition- willis-b-wheeler/
- 3. Security in an IPv6 Environment 1st Edition Daniel Minoli https://ebookultra.com/download/security-in-an-ipv6-environment-1st- edition-daniel-minoli/ Climate Change and Global Food Security Books in Soils Plants and the Environment 1st Edition Rattan Lal https://ebookultra.com/download/climate-change-and-global-food- security-books-in-soils-plants-and-the-environment-1st-edition-rattan- lal/ Hot Spot Pollutants Pharmaceuticals in the Environment 1st Edition Daniel R. Dietrich https://ebookultra.com/download/hot-spot-pollutants-pharmaceuticals- in-the-environment-1st-edition-daniel-r-dietrich/ Business in the Contemporary Legal Environment 3rd Edition Daniel D. Davidson https://ebookultra.com/download/business-in-the-contemporary-legal- environment-3rd-edition-daniel-d-davidson/ Soil and Environmental Analysis Modern Instrumental Techniques Books in Soils Plants and the Environment 3rd Edition Keith A. Smith https://ebookultra.com/download/soil-and-environmental-analysis- modern-instrumental-techniques-books-in-soils-plants-and-the- environment-3rd-edition-keith-a-smith/
- 5. Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment 1st Edition Daniel Hillel Digital Instant Download Author(s): Daniel Hillel, Jerry L. Hatfield ISBN(s): 9780123485304, 0123485304 Edition: 1 File Details: PDF, 17.25 MB Year: 2004 Language: english
- 7. ENCYCLOPEDIA OF SOILS IN THE ENVIRONMENT FOUR-VOLUME SET by Daniel Hillel (Editor-in-Chief) Hardcover: 2200 pages Publisher: Academic Press; 1 edition (November 8, 2004) Language: English ISBN-10: 0123485304 ISBN-13: 978-0123485304 Book Description More than ever before, a compelling need exists for an encyclopedic resource about soil the rich mix of mineral particles, organic matter, gases, and soluble compounds that foster both plant and animal growth. Civilization depends more on the soil as human populations continue to grow and increasing demands are placed upon available resources. The Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environmentis a comprehensive and integrated consideration of a topic of vital importance to human societies in the past, present, and future. This important work encompasses the present knowledge of the world's variegated soils, their origins, properties, classification, and roles in the biosphere. A team of outstanding, international contributors has written over 250 entries that cover a broad range of issues facing today's soil scientists, ecologists, and environmental scientists. This four-volume set features thorough articles that survey specific aspects of soil biology, ecology, chemistry and physics. Rounding out the encyclopedia's excellent coverage, contributions cover cross-disciplinary subjects, such as the history of soil utilization for agricultural and engineering purposes and soils in relation to the remediation of pollution and the mitigation of global climate change. This comprehensive, yet accessible source is a valuable addition to the library of scientists, researchers, students, and policy makers involved in soil science, ecology, and environmental science. Also available online via ScienceDirect featuring extensive browsing, searching, and internal cross-referencing between articles in the work, plus dynamic linking to journal articles and abstract databases, making navigation flexible and easy. For more information, pricing options and availability visit www.info.sciencedirect.com. * A distinguished international group of editors and contributors * Well-organized encyclopedic format providing concise, readable entries, easy searches, and thorough cross-references * Abundant visual resources — photographs, figures, tables, and graphs — in every entry * Complete up-to-date coverage of many important topics — essential information for scientists, students and professionals alike
- 8. EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Daniel Hillel Columbia University New York, NY USA
- 9. EDITORS Jerry L Hatfield National Soil Tilth Laboratory Ames, IA USA Kate M Scow University of California Davis, CA USA David S Powlson Rothamsted Research Harpenden UK Michael J Singer University of California Davis, CA USA Cynthia Rosenzweig NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies New York, NY USA Donald L Sparks University of Delaware Newark, DE USA
- 10. EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD R Bardgett Lancaster University Lancaster UK J L Boettinger Utah State University Logan, UT USA G Gee Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Richland, WA USA R Keren The Volcani Center Bet Dagan Israel J Kimble USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Lincoln, NE USA M B Kirkham Kansas State University Manhattan, KS USA M Kutilek Prague Czech Republic D Martens Southwest Watershed Research Center Tucson, AZ USA K Mengel Justus Leibig University Giessen Germany K Reichardt Center for Nuclear Energy in Agriculture Piracicaba Brazil K Ritz Cranfield University Silsoe UK R Schulin Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich Schlieren Switzerland N Senesi Università di Bari Bari Italy J T Sims University of Delaware Newark, DE USA K Smith University of Edinburgh Edinburgh UK R L Tate Rutgers University New Brunswick, NJ USA N van Breemen Wageningen Agricultural University Wageningen The Netherlands W H van Riemsdijk Department of Soil Quality Wageningen The Netherlands
- 11. FOREWORD The Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment is a vitally important scientific publication and an equally important contribution to global public policy. The Encyclopedia brings together a remarkable range of cutting-edge scientific knowledge on all aspects of soil science, as well as the links of soils and soil science to environmental management, food production, biodiversity, climate change, and many other areas of signi- ficant concern. Even more than that, the Encyclopedia will immediately become an indispensable resource for policy makers, analysts, and students who are focusing on one of the greatest challenges of the 21st century. With 6.3 billion people, our planet is already straining to feed the world’s population, and is failing to do so reliably in many parts of the world. The numbers of chronically poor in the world have been stuck at some 800 million in recent years, despite long-standing international goals and commitments to reduce that number by several hundred million. Yet the challenge of food production will intensify in coming decades, as the human population is projected to rise to around 9 billion by mid-century, with the increased population concentrated in parts of the world already suffering from widespread chronic under-nourishment. Unlessthebestscienceisbroughttotheseproblems,thesituationislikelytodeterioratesharply.Foodproduction systems are already under stress, for reasons often related directly to soils management. In Africa, crop yields are disastrously low and falling in many places due to the rampant depletion of soil nutrients. This situation needs urgent reversal, through increasing use of agro-forestry techniques (e.g. inter-cropping cereals with leguminous nitrogen-fixingtrees)andincreasingthe efficientapplicationsofchemicalfertilizers.Inotherimpoverished,aswell as rich, parts of the planet, decades of intensive agriculture under irrigation have led to salinization, water-logging, eutrophication of major water bodies, dangerous declines of biodiversity and other forms of environmental degradation. These enormous strains are coupled with the continuing pressures of tropical deforestation and the lack of new promising regions for expanding crop cultivation to meet the needs of growing populations. Finally, there looms the prospect of anthropogenic climate change. Global warming and associated complex and poorly understood shifts in precipitation extremes and other climate variables all threaten the world’s natural ecosystems and food production systems in profound yet still imperfectly understood ways. The risks of gradual or abrupt climate change are coupled with the risks of drastic perturbations to regional and global food supplies. The Encyclopedia offers state-of-the-art contributions on each of these challenges, as well as links to entries on the fundamental biophysical processes that underpin the relevant phenomena. The world-scale and world- class collaboration that stands behind this unique project signifies its importance for the world community. It is an honor and privilege for me to introduce this path-breaking endeavor. Jeffrey D Sachs Director The Earth Institute at Columbia University Quetelet Professor of Sustainable Development Columbia University, New York, USA
- 12. PREFACE The term ‘soil’ refers to the weathered and fragmented outer layer of our planet’s land surfaces. Formed initially through the physical disintegration and chemical alteration of rocks and minerals by physical and biogeochemical processes, soil is influenced by the activity and accumulated residues of a myriad of diverse forms of life. As it occurs in different geologic and climatic domains, soil is an exceedingly variegated body with a wide range of attributes. Considering the height of the atmosphere, the thickness of the earth’s rock mantle, and the depth of the ocean, one observes that soil is an amazingly thin body – typically not much more than one meter thick and often less than that. Yet it is the crucible of terrestrial life, within which biological productivity is generated and sustained. It acts like a composite living entity, a home to a community of innumerable microscopic and macroscopic plants and animals. A mere fistful of soil typically contains billions of microorganisms, which perform vital interactive biochemical functions. Another intrinsic attribute of the soil is its sponge-like porosity and its enormous internal surface area. That same fistful of soil may actually consist of several hectares of active surface, upon which physicochemical processes take place continuously. Realizing humanity’s utter dependence on the soil, ancient peoples, who lived in greater intimacy with nature than many of us today, actually revered the soil. It was not only their source of livelihood, but also the material from which they built their homes and that they learned to shape, heat, and fuse into household vessels and writing tablets (ceramic, made of clayey soil, being the first synthetic material in the history of technology). In the Bible, the name assigned to the first human was Adam, derived from ‘adama,’ meaning soil. The name given to that first earthling’s mate was Hava (Eve, in transliteration), meaning ‘living’ or ‘life-giving.’ Together, therefore, Adam and Eve signified quite literally ‘Soil and Life.’ The same powerful metaphor is echoed in the Latin name for the human species – Homo, derived from humus, the material of the soil. Hence, the adjective ‘human’ also implies ‘of the soil.’ Other ancient cultures evoked equally powerful associations. To the Greeks, the earth was a manifestation of Gaea, the maternal goddess who, impregnated by Uranus (god of the sky), gave birth to all the gods of the Greek pantheon. Our civilization depends on the soil more crucially than ever, because our numbers have grown while available soil resources have diminished and deteriorated. Paradoxically, however, even as our dependence on the soil has increased, most of us have become physically and emotionally detached from it. Many of the people in the so-called ‘developed’ countries spend their lives in the artificial environment of a city, insulated from direct exposure to nature, and some children may now assume as a matter of course that food originates in supermarkets. Detachment has bred ignorance, and out of ignorance has come the delusion that our civilization has risen above nature and has set itself free of its constraints. Agriculture and food security, erosion and salination, degradation of natural ecosystems, depletion and pollution of surface waters and aquifers, and decimation of biodiversity – all of these processes, which involve the soil directly or indirectly – have become abstractions to many people. The very language we use betrays disdain for that common material underfoot, often referred to as ‘dirt.’ Some fastidious parents prohibit their children from playing in the mud and hurry to wash their ‘soiled’ hands when the children nonetheless obey an innate instinct to do so. Thus soil is devalued and treated
- 13. as unclean though it is the terrestrial realm’s principal medium of purification, wherein wastes are decomposed and nature’s productivity is continually rejuvenated. Scientists who observe soil closely see it in effect as a seething foundry in which matter and energy are in constant flux. Radiant energy from the sun streams onto the field and cascades through the soil and the plants growing in it. Heat is exchanged, water percolates through the soil’s intricate passages, plant roots extract water and transmit it to their leaves, which transpire it back to the atmosphere. Leaves absorb carbon dioxide from the air and synthesize it with soil-derived water to form the primary compounds of life. Oxygen emitted by the leaves makes the air breathable for animals, which consume and in turn fertilize plants. Soil is thus a self-regulating bio-physio-chemical factory, processing its own materials, water, and solar energy. It also determines the fate of rainfall and snowfall reaching the ground surface – whether the water thus received will flow over the land as runoff, or seep downward to the subterranean reservoir called groundwater, which in turn maintains the steady flow of springs and streams. With its finite capacity to absorb and store moisture, and to release it gradually, the soil regulates all of these phenomena. Without the soil as a buffer, rain falling over the continents would run off entirely, producing violent floods rather than sustained river flow. Soil naturally acts as a living filter, in which pathogens and toxins that might otherwise accumulate to foul the terrestrial environment are rendered harmless. Since time immemorial, humans and other animals have been dying of all manner of disease and have then been buried in the soil, yet no major disease is transmitted by it. The term antibiotic was coined by soil microbiologists who, as a consequence of their studies of soil bacteria and actinomycetes, discovered streptomycin (an important cure for tuberculosis and other infections). Ion exchange, a useful process of water purification, also was discovered by soil scientists studying the passage of solutes through beds of clay. However unique in form and function, soil is not an isolated body. It is, rather, a central link in the larger chain of interconnected domains and processes comprising the terrestrial environment. The soil interacts both with the overlying atmosphere and the underlying strata, as well as with surface and underground bodies of water. Especially important is the interrelation between the soil and the climate. In addition to its function of regulating the cycle of water, it also regulates energy exchange and surface temperature. When virgin land is cleared of vegetation and turned into a cultivated field, the native biomass above the ground is often burned and the organic matter within the soil tends to decompose. These processes release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, thus contributing to the earth’s greenhouse effect and to global warming. On the other hand, the opposite act of reforestation and soil enrichment with organic matter, such as can be achieved by means of conservation management, may serve to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. To an extent, the soil’s capacity to store carbon can thus help to mitigate the greenhouse effect. Thousands of years are required for nature to create life-giving soil out of sterile bedrock. In only a few decades, however, unknowing or uncaring humans can destroy that wondrous work of nature. In various circumstances, mismanaged soils may be subject to erosion (the sediments of which tend to clog streambeds, estuaries, lakes, and coastal waters), to leaching of nutrients with attendant loss of fertility and eutrophication of water bodies, to waterlogging and impaired aeration, or to an excessive accumulation of salts that may cause a once-productive soil to become entirely sterile. Such processes of soil degradation, sometimes called ‘desertification,’ already affect large areas of land. We cannot manage effectively and sustainably that which we do not know and thoroughly understand. That is why the tasks of developing and disseminating sound knowledge of the soil and its complex processes have assumed growing urgency and importance. The global environmental crisis has created a compelling need for a concentrated, concise, and definitive source of information – accessible to students, scientists, practitioners, and the general public – about the soil in all its manifestations – in nature and in relation to the life of humans. Daniel Hillel Editor-in-Chief May 2004 PREFACE ix
- 14. INTRODUCTION The Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment contains nearly 300 articles, written by the world’s leading authorities. Pedologists, biologists, ecologists, earth scientists, hydrologists, climatologists, geographers, and representatives from many other disciplines have contributed to this work. Each of the articles separately, and all of them in sequence and combination, serve to summarize and encapsulate our present knowledge of the world’s variegated soils, their natural functions, and their importance to humans. Concise articles surveying specific aspects of soils (soil genesis, soil chemistry and mineralogy, soil physics and hydrology, and soil biology) are complemented by articles covering transdisciplinary aspects, such as the role of soils in ecology, the history of soil utilization for agricultural and engineering purposes, the develop- ment of soil science as a discipline, and the potential or actual contributions of soils to the generation, as well as to the mitigation, of pollution and of global climate change. This comprehensive reference encompasses both the fundamental and the applied aspects of soil science, interfacing in general with the physical sciences and life sciences and more specifically with the earth sciences and environmental sciences. The Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment manifests the expanding scope of modern soil science, from its early sectarian focus on the utilitarian attributes of soils in agriculture and engineering, to a wider and much more inclusive view of the soil as a central link in the continuous chain of processes constituting the dynamic environment as a whole. Thus it both details and integrates a set of topics that have always been of vital importance to human societies and that are certain to be even more so in the future. Daniel Hillel Editor-in-Chief May 2004
- 15. CONTENTS Contents are given as follows: CHAPTER NAME Author(s) Page number VOLUME 1 A ACID RAIN AND SOIL ACIDIFICATION L Blake 1 ACIDITY N Bolan, D Curtin and D Adriano 11 AERATION D E Rolston 17 AGGREGATION Microbial Aspects S D Frey 22 Physical Aspects J R Nimmo 28 AGROFORESTRY P K R Nair 35 AIR PHASE see AERATION; DIFFUSION ALBEDO see ENERGY BALANCE; RADIATION BALANCE ALLOPHANE AND IMOGOLITE see AMORPHOUS MATERIALS ALLUVIUM AND ALLUVIAL SOILS J L Boettinger 45 ALUMINUM SPECIATION D R Parker 50 AMMONIA D E Kissel and M L Cabrera 56 AMORPHOUS MATERIALS J Harsh 64 ANAEROBIC SOILS P W Inglett, K R Reddy and R Corstanje 72 ANION EXCHANGE see CATION EXCHANGE APPLICATIONS OF SOILS DATA P J Lawrence 78 ARCHAEA J E T McLain 88 ARCHEOLOGY IN RELATION TO SOILS J A Homburg 95 B BACTERIA Plant Growth-Promoting Y Bashan and L E de-Bashan 103 Soil L J Halverson 115 BACTERIOPHAGE M Radosevich, K E Williamson and K E Wommack 122
- 16. BIOCONTROL OF SOIL-BORNE PLANT DISEASES C E Pankhurst and J M Lynch 129 BIODIVERSITY D H Wall 136 BUFFERING CAPACITY B R James 142 BULK DENSITY see POROSITY AND PORE-SIZE DISTRIBUTION C CALCIUM AND MAGNESIUM IN SOILS N Bolan, P Loganathan and S Saggar 149 CAPILLARITY D Or and M Tuller 155 CARBON CYCLE IN SOILS Dynamics and Management C W Rice 164 Formation and Decomposition C A Cambardella 170 CARBON EMISSIONS AND SEQUESTRATION K Paustian 175 CATION EXCHANGE L M McDonald, V P Evangelou and M A Chappell 180 CHEMICAL EQUILIBRIA A P Schwab 189 CHEMICAL SPECIATION MODELS see SURFACE COMPLEXATION MODELING CHERNOZEMS see GRASSLAND SOILS CHILDS, ERNEST CARR E G Youngs 195 CIVILIZATION, ROLE OF SOILS D Hillel 199 CLASSIFICATION OF LAND USE see LAND-USE CLASSIFICATION CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS R W Arnold 204 CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS Australian R W Fitzpatrick 211 FAO F O Nachtergaele 216 Russian, Background and Principles M Gerasimova 223 Russian, Evolution and Examples D Konyushkov 227 USA D J Brown 235 CLAY MINERALS D G Schulze 246 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS P Bullock 254 CLIMATE MODELS, ROLE OF SOIL P Smith 262
- 17. COLD-REGION SOILS C-L Ping 268 COLLOID-FACILITATED SORPTION AND TRANSPORT R Kretzschmar 276 COMPACTION J J H van den Akker and B Soane 285 COMPOST T L Richard 294 CONDITIONERS R E Sojka, J A Entry and W J Orts 301 CONSERVATION see EROSION: Water-Induced; Wind-Induced; SUSTAINABLE SOIL AND LAND MANAGEMENT; TERRACES AND TERRACING CONSERVATION TILLAGE M R Carter 306 COVER CROPS L Edwards and J Burney 311 CROP ROTATIONS C A Francis 318 CROP WATER REQUIREMENTS L S Pereira and I Alves 322 CROP-RESIDUE MANAGEMENT D C Reicosky and A R Wilts 334 CRUSTS Biological J Belnap 339 Structural R L Baumhardt and R C Schwartz 347 CULTIVATION AND TILLAGE M R Carter and E McKyes 356 D DARCY’S LAW D Swartzendruber 363 DEGRADATION C J Ritsema, G W J van Lynden, V G Jetten and S M de Jong 370 DENITRIFICATION D A Martens 378 DESERTIFICATION D Hillel and C Rosenzweig 382 DIFFUSION T Addiscott and P Leeds-Harrison 389 DISINFESTATION A Gamliel and J Katan 394 DISPERSION see FLOCCULATION AND DISPERSION DISSOLUTION PROCESSES, KINETICS K G Scheckel and C A Impellitteri 400 DRAINAGE, SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE N R Fausey 409 DRYLAND FARMING G A Peterson 414
- 18. E EARTHWORMS see FAUNA EDAPHOLOGY A L Ulery 419 ELECTRON PARAMAGNETIC RESONANCE see ELECTRON-SPIN RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY ELECTRON-SPIN RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY N Senesi and G S Senesi 426 ELECTROSTATIC DOUBLE-LAYER see CATION EXCHANGE ENERGY BALANCE M Fuchs 438 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING P J Loveland and P H Bellamy 441 ENZYMES IN SOILS R P Dick and E Kandeler 448 EROSION Irrigation-Induced G A Lehrsch, D L Bjorneberg and R E Sojka 456 Water-Induced J E Gilley 463 Wind-Induced T M Zobeck and R S Van Pelt 470 ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS E A Kirkby 478 EUTROPHICATION A J Gold and J T Sims 486 EVAPORATION OF WATER FROM BARE SOIL C W Boast and F W Simmons 494 EVAPOTRANSPIRATION G Stanhill 502 F FACTORS OF SOIL FORMATION Biota A H Jahren 507 Climate O C Spaargaren and J A Deckers 512 Human Impacts J Sandor, C L Burras and M Thompson 520 Parent Material K R Olson 532 Time E F Kelly and C M Yonker 536 FAUNA T Winsome 539
- 19. FERTIGATION U Kafkafi and S Kant 1 FERTILITY J L Havlin 10 FERTILIZERS AND FERTILIZATION H W Scherer 20 FIELD CAPACITY see WATER CYCLE FLOCCULATION AND DISPERSION I Shainberg and G J Levy 27 FLUORESCENCE SPECTROSCOPY N Senesi and V D’Orazio 35 FOLIAR APPLICATIONS OF NUTRIENTS M Tagliavini and M Toselli 53 FOOD-WEB INTERACTIONS P C de Ruiter and J C Moore 59 FORENSIC APPLICATIONS W F Rowe 67 FOREST SOILS J R Boyle 73 FOURIER TRANSFORM INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY D Peak 80 FRACTAL ANALYSIS Y Pachepsky and J W Crawford 85 FREEZING AND THAWING Cycles B Sharratt 98 Processes G N Flerchinger, G A Lehrsch and D K McCool 104 FUNGI K Ritz 110 VOLUME 2 G GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS J Bo¨hner, T Selige and R Ko¨the 121 GERMINATION AND SEEDLING ESTABLISHMENT A Hadas 130 GLOBAL WARMING see CARBON EMISSIONS AND SEQUESTRATION; CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS; GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS GRASSLAND SOILS J A Mason and C W Zanner 138 GREEN MANURING see COVER CROPS GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS K A Smith 145 GROUNDWATER AND AQUIFERS Y Bachmat 153 GROUNDWATER POLLUTION see POLLUTION: Groundwater
- 20. H HEAT AND MOISTURE TRANSPORT R Horton and A Globus 169 HEAT CAPACITY see THERMAL PROPERTIES AND PROCESSES HEAT FLOW see THERMAL PROPERTIES AND PROCESSES HEAVY METALS D C Adriano, N S Bolan, J Vangronsveld and W W Wenzel 175 HILGARD, EUGENE WOLDEMAR R Amundson 182 HOOGHOUDT, SYMEN BAREND P A C Raats and R R van der Ploeg 188 HUMIFICATION T C Balser 195 HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES, TEMPERATURE EFFECTS S A Grant 207 HYDRIC SOILS G W Hurt 212 HYDROCARBONS P Kostecki, R Morrison and J Dragun 217 HYDRODYNAMIC DISPERSION see SOLUTE TRANSPORT HYDRODYNAMICS IN SOILS T P A Ferre´ and A W Warrick 227 HYSTERESIS J H Dane and R J Lenhard 231 I IMMISCIBLE FLUIDS R J Lenhard, J H Dane and M Oostrom 239 INCEPTISOLS A Palmer 248 INDUSTRIAL POLLUTION see POLLUTION: Industrial INFILTRATION T P A Ferre´ and A W Warrick 254 INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY see FOURIER TRANSFORM INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY IRON NUTRITION K Mengel and H Kosegarten 260 IRRIGATION Environmental Effects S Topcu and C Kirda 267 Methods D L Bjorneberg and R E Sojka 273 ISOTOPES IN SOIL AND PLANT INVESTIGATIONS K Reichardt and O O S Bacchi 280 ISOTROPY AND ANISOTROPY T-C J Yeh, P Wierenga, R Khaleel and R J Glass 285 J JENNY, HANS R Amundson 293
- 21. K KELLOGG, CHARLES J D Helms 301 KINETIC MODELS P M Jardine 307 KIRKHAM, DON D R Nielsen and R R van der Ploeg 315 L LAMINAR AND TURBULENT FLOW see HYDRODYNAMICS IN SOILS LANDFILLS see WASTE DISPOSAL ON LAND: Municipal LAND-USE CLASSIFICATION J A LaGro Jr 321 LAWES, JOHN BENNET AND GILBERT, JOSEPH HENRY A E Johnston 328 LEACHING PROCESSES B E Clothier and S Green 336 LIEBIG, JUSTUS VON R R van der Ploeg, W Bo¨hm and M B Kirkham 343 LIMING E J Kamprath and T J Smyth 350 LIPMAN, JACOB G. J C F Tedrow 358 LOESS A J Busacca and M R Sweeney 364 LOWDERMILK, WALTER CLAY J D Helms 373 LYSIMETRY T A Howell 379 M MACRONUTRIENTS C W Wood, J F Adams and B H Wood 387 MACROPORES AND MACROPORE FLOW, KINEMATIC WAVE APPROACH P F Germann 393 MAGNESIUM IN SOILS see CALCIUM AND MAGNESIUM IN SOILS MANURE MANAGEMENT J T Sims and R O Maguire 402 MARBUT, CURTIS FLETCHER J P Tandarich 410 MATRIC POTENTIAL see HYDRODYNAMICS IN SOILS; WATER POTENTIAL; WATER RETENTION AND CHARACTERISTIC CURVE MEDITERRANEAN SOILS J Torrent 418 METAL OXIDES A C Scheinost 428 METALS AND METALLOIDS, TRANSFORMATION BY MICROORGANISMS S M Glasauer, T J Beveridge, E P Burford, F A Harper and G M Gadd 438 METALS, HEAVY see HEAVY METALS
- 22. MICROBIAL PROCESSES Environmental Factors P G Hartel 448 CommunityAnaly sis C H Nakatsu 455 Kinetics N S Panikov 463 MICRONUTRIENTS L M Shuman 479 MINERAL–ORGANIC–MICROBIAL INTERACTIONS P M Huang, M C Wang and M K Wang 486 MINERALS, PRIMARY P M Huang and M K Wang 500 MINERALS, SECONDARY see CLAY MINERALS MINIMUM TILLAGE see CONSERVATION TILLAGE MISCIBLE DISPLACEMENT see SOLUTE TRANSPORT MORPHOLOGY P R Owens and E M Rutledge 511 MULCHES C L Acharya, K M Hati and K K Bandyopadhyay 521 MYCORRHIZAL FUNGI L M Egerton-Warburton, J I Querejeta, M F Allen and S L Finkelman 533
- 23. N NEMATODES D A Neher and T O Powers 1 NEUTRON SCATTERING M J Fayer and G W Gee 6 NITROGEN IN SOILS Cycle M S Coyne and W W Frye 13 Nitrates D S Powlson and T M Addiscott 21 Nitrification J I Prosser 31 Plant Uptake A Hodge 39 Symbiotic Fixation J I Sprent 46 NITROGEN FERTILIZERS see FERTILIZERS AND FERTILIZATION NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL G W Gee, P D Meyer and A L Ward 56 NUTRIENT AVAILABILITY N K Fageria and V C Baligar 63 NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT G D Binford 71 VOLUME 3 O ORGANIC FARMING C A Francis 77 ORGANIC MATTER Principles and Processes M Schnitzer 85 Genesis and Formation K M Haider and G Guggenberger 93 Interactions with Metals N Senesi and E Loffredo 101 ORGANIC RESIDUES, DECOMPOSITION A J Franzluebbers 112 ORGANIC SOILS D L Mokma 118 OVERLAND FLOW T S Steenhuis, L Agnew, P Ge´rard-Marchant and M T Walter 130 OXIDATION–REDUCTION OF CONTAMINANTS C J Matocha 133 P PADDY SOILS C Witt and S M Haefele 141 PARENT MATERIAL see PEDOLOGY: Basic Principles; FACTORS OF SOIL FORMATION: Parent Material PEDOLOGY Basic Principles M J Singer 151 Dynamic F C Ugolini 156
- 24. PEDOMETRICS I O A Odeh and A B McBratney 166 PENMAN, HOWARD LATIMER J L Monteith 176 PENMAN–MONTEITH EQUATION R Allen 180 PERCOLATION see HYDRODYNAMICS IN SOILS PERMAFROST see POLAR SOILS PERMEABILITY see HYDRODYNAMICS IN SOILS PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTS (POPS) see POLLUTANTS: Persistent Organic (POPs) PESTICIDES R H Bromilow 188 PETROLEUM see HYDROCARBONS pH N Bolan and K Kandaswamy 196 PHOSPHORUS IN SOILS Overview J T Sims and P A Vadas 202 Biological Interactions M D Mullen 210 PHYTOTOXIC SUBSTANCES IN SOILS M Qadir, S Schubert and D Steffens 216 PLANT–SOIL–WATER RELATIONS R A Feddes and J C van Dam 222 PLANT–WATER RELATIONS C Gimenez, M Gallardo and R B Thompson 231 POISEUILLE’S LAW see HYDRODYNAMICS IN SOILS POLAR SOILS J C F Tedrow 239 POLLUTANTS Biodegradation P B Hatzinger and J W Kelsey 250 Effects on Microorganisms M E Fuller 258 Persistent Organic (POPs) D Johnson 264 POLLUTION Groundwater H Rubin 271 Industrial S P McGrath 282 POLYMERS AND MICROORGANISMS M C Rillig 287 POORLY CRYSTALLINE ALLUMINOSILICATES see AMORPHOUS MATERIALS POROSITY AND PORE-SIZE DISTRIBUTION J R Nimmo 295 POTASSIUM IN SOILS P M Huang, J M Zhou, J C Xie and M K Wang 303 PRECIPITATION, WATERSHED ANALYSIS J V Bonta 314
- 25. PRECIPITATION–DISSOLUTION PROCESSES W P Robarge 322 PRECISION AGRICULTURE see SITE-SPECIFIC SOIL MANAGEMENT PREFERENTIAL FLOW see UNSTABLE FLOW; MACROPORES AND MACROPORE FLOW, KINEMATIC WAVE APPROACH PRODUCTIVITY D L Karlen 330 PROFILE see MORPHOLOGY PROTOZOA W Foissner 336 Q QUALITY OF SOIL B J Wienhold, G E Varvel and J W Doran 349 R RADIATION BALANCE J L Hatfield, T J Sauer and J H Prueger 355 RADIONUCLIDES see ISOTOPES IN SOIL AND PLANT INVESTIGATIONS RAINFED FARMING see DRYLAND FARMING RANGE MANAGEMENT G L Anderson 360 RECYCLING OF ORGANIC WASTES see POLLUTANTS: Biodegradation REDISTRIBUTION see WATER CYCLE REDOX POTENTIAL R D DeLaune and K R Reddy 366 REDOX REACTIONS, KINETICS P S Nico and S Fendorf 372 REMEDIATION OF POLLUTED SOILS E Lombi and R E Hamon 379 REMOTE SENSING Organic Matter D K Morris, C J Johannsen, S M Brouder and G C Steinhardt 385 Soil Moisture T J Jackson 392 RHIZOSPHERE A C Kennedy and L Z de Luna 399 RICHARDS, LORENZO A. W R Gardner 407 ROOT ARCHITECTURE AND GROWTH L E Jackson 411 ROOT EXUDATES AND MICROORGANISMS B-J Koo, D C Adriano, N S Bolan and C D Barton 421
- 26. Other documents randomly have different content
- 27. of art, and which have the gift, so precious to those who sell them, of inducing people who make the first purchase to continue indefinitely; for each new object of that class acquires additional value in the eyes of a connoisseur, and in such matters, more than any other, l'appétit vient en mangeant.139 We remained more than an hour in the first shop we stopped at. Lorenzo was in his element. He was a genuine connoisseur in everything. He examined bronzes, porcelains, furniture of every epoch, carved wood from all countries, and old tapestry, with a sure and experienced eye, and the merchant, seeing whom he had to deal with, brought out of his secret recesses treasures hidden from the vulgar, and multiplied temptations Lorenzo seemed very little inclined to resist. As for me, I took a seat beside the counter, and looked with indifference at the various objects that were spread out before me, but of which I was quite unable to perceive the value, which was somewhat conventional. I was a little astonished at the number and value of Lorenzo's purchases, but, on the whole, the business did not interest [pg 608] me much, and I felt glad when it was at an end. “Bravo! Lorenzo,” said Lando as soon as we re-entered the carriage. “You don't do things half way. That is the way I like to see other people spend their money. It consoles me for not having any myself to throw out of the window.” “I have got to entirely refurnish my palace in Sicily,” said Lorenzo, “as well as to decorate my house in Naples, which is quite unworthy of her who is to live in it.” “You are jesting, Lorenzo,” said I. “You know very well I think nothing is lacking.” “That is the consequence of your extreme youth, my dear cousin,” said Lando. “Wait a while, and you will find out how much becomes indispensable to one who has lived in Paris.”
- 28. “At all events,” said Lorenzo, “now or never is the time for me to gratify my fancy. I am just going to housekeeping. I have barely spent a third of my present fortune, and am perfectly confident as to that I shall have; for everybody knows that a cause undertaken by Fabrizio dei Monti is a cause gained.” At that instant a beautiful lady in a conspicuous dress passed us in an elegant calèche, and the conversation suddenly took a different turn. Lorenzo silently questioned his cousin with a look, and Lando began to give him in a low tone some information which an instinctive repugnance prevented me from listening to.... I began (perhaps unjustly) to conceive a strong dislike to this Cousin Landolfo, and I imagine he would have been very much astonished had he guessed with what eye I now looked at his face, generally considered so handsome. It was of a type often admired out of Italy, because somewhat different from that foreigners are accustomed to, who have no idea to what a degree it is common in that country. A dark complexion, rather handsome eyes, fine teeth, and curly black hair, formed in my eyes a most unpleasing combination, and, without knowing a word they were saying, I felt positively certain he had never in his life uttered a syllable I should think worth listening to. At length we left the boulevards, drove through the Champs Elysées, and at last found ourselves in the shade of the Bois de Boulogne. While my two companions were conversing together in a low tone, I abandoned myself to the pleasure of being in a cool place where I could breathe more freely; for, unaccustomed to going out during the middle of the day in summer, the heat had seemed overpowering. Apart from this, there was nothing here to strike a person accustomed to the loveliest scenery in the world. Unused as I was to Parisian life, the charm of which often produces an impression that effaces all others, the things I saw had no other prestige in my eyes than what they were in themselves. Viewed in this light, the museums, churches, and palaces seemed less grand and magnificent than those we had seen before, and the
- 29. promenades less picturesque and less varied. I missed particularly the lovely vistas which everywhere in Italy form the background of the picture, and attract the eye, and elevate the mind to something higher than the mere treasures of history and art that have accumulated in all old Italian cities. And yet it cannot be denied that Paris has the power of making itself [pg 609] preferred to any other place in the world. It speaks a different language to every individual, and is comprehended by all. It is filled with treasures of every kind, and has wherewithal to gratify every taste indiscriminately, from that which is evil in its vilest form to an excess of goodness amounting to sublimity; from the most refined extravagance of fashion to the extreme renunciation of charity; and from pleasure in its most dangerous aspect to piety in its most perfect manifestations. It flatters vanity and vice more than would be dared anywhere else, and yet it prides itself on being able to produce examples of goodness, devotedness, and humility that are almost unparalleled. In a word, every one, for a different reason, feels more at home there than anywhere else in the world. He who once learns to love Paris finds it difficult to like any other city as well; and he who has lived there finds it hard to resign himself to live in any other place. It is the one city on earth that has been able to vie with Rome in the honor of being the home of all nations.... To Be Continued.
- 31. The Rock Of Rest. S. Matthew xvi. 18. Tossed on many a wave of doctrine, Restless, weary, ill at ease With beliefs that quiet others, But as vague to me as these; I have done with idly chasing Phantom lights, that rise and fall; Drift no more with drifting doctrines— Grown indifferent to them all! Shall I long regret the visions Of a rest so inly wooed? Shall I long go on deploring Creeds, that but opinions proved? Quenched be every weak emotion! Bring my future weal or woe, Weal nor woe shall blight or bless me— Faith, nor creed, shall move me now! Murmuring thus, there came a whisper From the Friend who knew me best: “Seek the rock on which I builded: On that rock alone is rest.” Suddenly, with light supernal, Faith, the higher reason, came, And my foot touched base eternal— Benedictions on his name! R. S. W.
- 33. Anglican Orders. II. The Validity Of The Edwardine Rite. Before entering upon the theology of the question, we must meet an initial objection of Anglicans to our attempting to criticise the Edwardine rite. They insist that the question has been settled long ago, and in their favor, by no less an authority than the Holy See and its legate, Cardinal Pole. The cardinal, they say, in accordance with instructions from Rome, admitted all the schismatical bishops and clergy, who were not irreconcilables, in the orders they had received in schism, whether according to the Pontifical or according to the Edwardine rite. Great stress has been laid upon this by Anglican controversialists from Bramhall down to Mr. Haddan; and certainly, if it be a true statement of the case, the value of the objection can scarcely be overrated. Its truth must be decided by an appeal to the Papal briefs and to the official acts of the legate. The bull of March 8, 1553-4, granting full legatine faculties to Pole, authorizes him to deal with two classes of the bishops and clergy— viz., of the clergy, those who have not received orders at all, and those who have received them ill; that is to say, orders null and orders irregular (ordines quos nunquam, aut male susceperunt). The bishops, in like manner, who have received cathedral churches from Henry or Edward are divided into those on whom “the gift of consecration has been heretofore conferred,” and “those on whom it is not yet conferred” (munere consecrationis eis hactenus impenso vel si illud eis nondum impensum exstiterit). The cases in which the ordination or consecration had been validly though irregularly conferred are also described as “received from heretical or schismatical bishops, or in other respects unduly” (quod iis ab episcopis hæreticis et schismaticis aut alias minus rite et non servatâ
- 34. formâ ecclesiæ consuetâ impensum fuit). By these last words power is given “to consider cases in which the ancient form of the sacrament had not been observed, and, if the form used was sufficient for validity, to admit it as such, and to admit a person ordained in such a manner to exercise the orders so received.” Canon Estcourt shows that the “minus rite” cannot be intended to designate, as Mr. Haddan and others have maintained, the Edwardine orders. He appeals to the dispensations granted to no less than eight bishops, all ordained according to the Pontifical in Henry VIII.'s time, wherein their orders are referred to as received “ab episcopis hæreticis et schismaticis aut alias minus rite.” In the faculties granted by Pole to his bishops for the absolution and rehabilitation of priests, he carefully explains their limitation to cases in which “the form and intention of the church have been preserved.” Thus it is clear “that though the cardinal had power to recognize ordinations in which some departure had been made from the accustomed form, yet that, on examination, he found no other form in use which could be admitted by the church as valid.” In the same faculties he permits the ordination, if they are otherwise fit, of [pg 611] those whose orders are “null.” He describes them as persons holding benefices without being ordained. In 1554, Bonner, Bishop of Bath and Wells, gave a commission to his vicar-general “to deal with married laics who, in pretence and under color of priestly orders, had rashly and unlawfully mingled themselves in ecclesiastical rights, and had obtained de facto parochial churches with cure of souls and ecclesiastical dignities, against the sacred sanctions of the canons and ecclesiastical rights, and to deprive and remove them from the said churches and dignities.” It is impossible to conjecture who else these unordained beneficiaries can be, if they are not the Edwardine clergy. Anglicans, on the other hand, have made a great deal of a certain testimonial letter granted by Bonner to Scory, which speaks of the
- 35. latter's sin and repentance, and of his subsequent rehabilitation by Bonner, and restoration to the public exercise of the ecclesiastical ministry within the diocese of London. As Scory is spoken of as “our confrère, lately Bishop of Chichester,” it is urged that the ministry to the exercise of which he was restored must have been that of a bishop. Canon Estcourt, after pointing out certain grounds for suspecting the authenticity of this letter, remarks that Bonner's faculties only extended to the case of priests, “so that Scory must have acknowledged the nullity of his consecration, in order to enable Bonner to deal with him at all”; and, after all, “the letter does no more than enable him to celebrate Mass in churches within the diocese of London”—in fact, to exercise that office, and that office only, which he had received “servatâ formâ et intentione ecclesiæ.” So much for the Holy See's approval of the Edwardine orders. Anglicans have tried to make out a charge of inconsistency against the Holy See, on the ground that it did not recognize the episcopate of Ridley, Latimer, and Ferrer—who were all three supposed to have been consecrated according to the Roman Pontifical—but degraded them from the priesthood and inferior orders only. Canon Estcourt admits that Ferrer was treated merely as a priest, but he shows that his consecration had been a medley rite, in which the order of the Pontifical was not followed. As to Latimer, he remarks that there is no pretence for saying that he was not degraded from the episcopate; and that, with regard to Ridley, the great weight of authority makes for his having been degraded from the episcopate. Cardinal Pole, in his commission, ordered that both Ridley and Latimer should be degraded “from their promotion and dignity of bishops, priests, and all other ecclesiastical orders.” The Bishop of Lincoln, in his exhortation to Ridley, says: “You were made a bishop according to our laws.” Heylin says that they were both degraded from the episcopate. The only authority for the contrary opinion is Foxe, who makes the acting commissioner Brookes, Bishop of Gloucester, conclude an address to Ridley thus: “We take you for no bishop, and therefore we will the sooner have done with you.” Foxe then proceeds to describe the actual ceremony as a degradation
- 36. from the priesthood. Canon Estcourt's reviewer in the Dublin Review of July, 1873, maintains that Foxe was right. The reviewer thinks that Ridley and Latimer were not degraded from the episcopate, because the status episcopalis was not recognized in those who, though validly consecrated, had not received the Papal confirmation. Upon this we remark, 1st, that the [pg 612] ceremonies of degradation came into use when it was a very common opinion in the church that degradation destroyed the potestas ordinis. 2. That the form of degradation, in so many words, expresses the taking away the potestas ordinis—“amovemus a te,” “tollemus tibi,” “potestatem offerendi,” “potestatem consecrandi”—and this in contradistinction to another form of perpetual suspension—“ab executione potestatis.” The ceremony aims at effecting the destruction of orders, so far as this is possible. It may be called a “destruction of orders,” in the same sense that mortal sin is called the crucifixion of Christ anew. Indeed, in one place, the clause, “quantum in nobis est,” is introduced. 3. Degradation does not depend upon previous confirmation; for Innocent II. (1139) thus deals with those who had been consecrated bishops by the antipope Peter Leo, who therefore assuredly had never been confirmed or acknowledged in any way by the pope. After exclaiming, “Quoscunque exaltaverat degradamus,” etc., etc., “he violently wrested their pastoral staffs from their hands, and ignominiously tore from their shoulders the pontifical palls in which their high dignity resides. Their rings, too, which express their espousals with the church, showing them no mercy, he drew off.”140 If the Bishop of Gloucester really acted as Foxe describes, he did so on his own responsibility, and in the teeth of ecclesiastical precedent. Perhaps the most important and interesting portion of Canon Estcourt's book is that in which he discusses the theological value of the Edwardine form. It is not merely of controversial importance, but is really calculated to throw light upon the theology of orders, which, as a Catholic contemporary well observes, is still in course of formation.
- 37. Canon Estcourt, following Benedict XIV., De Syn. Dioc., lib. viii. cap. 10, maintains, as the more probable opinion, 1, that, in the case of the priesthood, the second imposition of hands, with the prayer for the infusion “of the virtue of the sacerdotal grace,” is all that is really necessary for validity; although, in practice, we of the West must ordain again sub conditione, if the tradition of the instruments has been omitted. 2. That in the case of priests, the third imposition of hands, with the words, “Receive the Holy Ghost; whose sins thou dost remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose sins thou retainest, they are retained,” is not essential, and, if omitted, is to be supplied without repeating the rest. 3. That as to the episcopate, the “Accipe Spiritum Sanctum,” with the imposition of hands, is all that is essential; and, finally, he allows, in deference to the Holy Office (vide infra), that the form—i.e., the prayer immediately accompanying the imposition of hands—need not express the specific character or work of the order conferred, as, for instance, the Holy Sacrifice in the ordination of a priest. Consistently with these principles, Canon Estcourt admits that, so far as words go, “Receive the Holy Ghost” is a sufficient form both for the episcopate and the priesthood. As regards the episcopate, this has been long a common opinion. As regards the priesthood, the Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition, in 1704, decided that certain Abyssinians had been validly ordained priests by imposition of hands and the words, “Accipe Spiritum Sanctum.” From this it follows that the Anglican forms for ordaining priests and bishops are, so far as words go, sufficient. They [pg 613] are as follows, from 1549 to 1662, for the priesthood: “Receive the Holy Ghost; whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven; and whose sins thou dost retain, they are retained; and be thou a faithful dispenser of the word of God and of his holy sacraments, in the name of the Father, etc.” For the episcopate: “Take the Holy Ghost, and remember that thou stir up the grace of God which is in thee by imposition of hands; for God hath not given us the spirit of fear, but of power and love and soberness.” In 1662, certain changes were introduced by the High Church party. In the form for the priesthood, after the words “Holy
- 38. Ghost” was added, “for the office and work of a priest in the church of God, now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands.” For the form of the episcopate was substituted, “Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a bishop in the church of God, now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands, in the name of the Father, etc.” Of course the value of Anglican orders “secundum formam” must depend upon the value of the form as it originally stood. The subsequent alterations are important as marking, 1st, the dissatisfaction of the High Church party with the forms upon which their orders depended; 2d, the low theological standard which satisfied them, after all. So far as the material words of the Edwardine forms go, they are sufficient—i.e., they are words capable of being used in a sense in which they would be sufficient—but the words are ambiguous. The form of ordination, although it need not express, must signify or mean, the essential idea of the order. Where it does not carry its meaning on the face of it, we must look for it in the rite and liturgy of which it forms a part. This is not an appeal to the mere subjective intention of the minister, but to the objective meaning of the words. Upon this principle we must, in order to get at the value of the Anglican forms, discover, 1st, by an examination of the various admittedly valid rites of ordination, what such words should mean; 2d, by an examination of the Anglican rite, what these words, in the position which they occupy in that rite, do or do not mean. Canon Estcourt examines the numerous rites which the Roman Church acknowledges to be valid, whether fallen out of use, and only to be found in the pages of ancient sacramentaries, or still living and operative, in East or West, among Catholics or among those who have separated from Catholic unity. He finds three qualities in which they all unite: 1st, a recognition of the divine vocation or election of the ordained; 2d, a recognition of the “virtus sacramentalis” of orders, as something quite distinct from and beyond the grace which
- 39. is also given to the ordained to acquit himself worthily in the duties of his calling; 3d, a constant recognition of, and appeal to, the main scope and duty of orders—the offering of the Holy Sacrifice. Canon Estcourt next proceeds to examine the Anglican liturgy and ordinal with special reference to these three points: 1. The divine election. 2. The sacramental virtue. 3. The Holy Sacrifice. And he finds that both the liturgy and the ordinal are the result of a deliberate manipulation of the ancient Catholic ritual previously in use, in order to the exclusion of these three points, which contain the essential idea of holy orders. Ordination in the Anglical ritual no longer appeals to a divine election, [pg 614] of which it is the expression and the fulfilment. It is merely the public expression of the approval of the authorities of church and state. For the “virtus sacramentalis” it has substituted a mere grâce d'état. From this it only naturally follows that episcopal ordination cannot be of indispensable necessity, or more than a matter of regulation and propriety which, in an emergency, may be abrogated. This is the express teaching of many of the early Anglican reformers. Even when engaged in defending their episcopal succession, they are careful to say that they do not regard it as indispensable. Hooker, who is in many respects so much more orthodox than his predecessors and contemporaries, allows “that there may be sometimes very just and sufficient reason to allow ordination to be made without a bishop.” Canon Estcourt prints considerable portions of the Anglican ordinal and liturgy in parallel columns, with the corresponding text of the Sarum and Exeter pontificals and missals. We see with what an unerring sacrilegious instinct everything bearing upon the Holy Sacrifice, and even upon the Real Presence, is either cut out or perverted. As regards the Second Book of 1552, it is clear that it was the work of sacramentarians who disbelieved in the Real Presence in any
- 40. sense, and was undertaken for the express purpose of purging the ritual of what previous handling had still allowed it to retain of the impress of that Presence. Mr. Cardwell, in his comparison of the “Two Books of Edward VI.,” pref. xxvii., admits that Cox and Taylor, who were probably the working members of the commission, appear to have looked upon the oblation of the Eucharist as consisting merely of “prayer, thanksgiving, and the remembrance of our Saviour's passion.” Of Cranmer, the most influential member of the commission, we are told that “about a year after the publication of King Edward's First Book, Archbishop Cranmer abandoned his belief in the Real Presence—a change which seems to have been very acceptable to the young king and his favorites.”141 In the revision of 1662, an apparent attempt was made to attain to the expression of a higher doctrine, both as regards orders and the Holy Eucharist; but even if the expressions introduced were in themselves adequate, as Canon Estcourt fairly shows they were not, of what avail could have been so tardy a restoration? But if we examine these restorations and emendations, we can hardly avoid coming to the conclusion that they were not really dictated by any conception of, or aspiration after, a higher doctrine, but were the genuine fruits of a conservative reaction fired by controversial pique. The First Book substituted for the Catholic faith a hazy Lutheranism; the Second Book for this again a hazy sacramentarianism; and the revision of 1662, a hazy compound of the two, with the addition of a Catholic phrase or so in order to support claims to a wider sweep of church authority. Thus the revisers of 1662 introduced the words “priest” and “bishop” into the ordination form, whilst doing absolutely nothing toward restoring the idea of sacrifice to the liturgy. But, it may be urged, there is one portion of the Anglican form for making priests which expresses the Catholic doctrine of priestly virtue—the power of forgiving sins. Unfortunately for Anglicans, whatever force may lie in this expression—and all precedents are against its being regarded [pg 615] as a sufficient form—is neutralized by the Lutheran new form of absolution which had been introduced in addition to the two Catholic forms. At best, one is left
- 41. in doubt whether the mighty words have not shrivelled into a Lutheran sense, in which sins are not forgiven, but the forgiveness of sin is merely declared. It is impossible to do justice in a review to the exhaustive completeness of Canon Estcourt's treatment of this portion of his subject. His conspectus of the Catholic missals and the different editions of the Book of Common Prayer in parallel columns enables us, as it were, to detect the pulsations of each several heresy, and to appreciate its share in what may be called the passion of the Catholic liturgy in England. A quotation from each of his parallels may serve as examples of, 1st, the action of the Lutheran First Book upon the missal; 2d, the Zuinglian Second Book upon the First Book; 3d, the compromise of 1662. The Sarum Missal. We thy servants, and likewise thy holy people, do offer to thy excellent Majesty, of thy gifts and bounties, a pure victim, a holy victim, the holy bread of eternal life, and the chalice of everlasting salvation. The Book Of Common Prayer, 1549. We, thy humble servants, do celebrate and make here before thy divine Majesty, with these thy holy gifts, the memorial which thy Son hath willed us to make. 1549. He hath left us in those holy mysteries, as a public pledge of his love, and a continual remembrance of the same, his own blessed body and precious blood for us to feed upon spiritually, to our great and endless comfort. 1552, Untouched In 1662.
- 42. He hath instituted and ordained holy mysteries, as pledges of his love, and for a continual remembrance of his death, to our great and endless comfort. The Sarum Missal. “The body of our Lord Jesus Christ [1549: which was given for thee] preserve thy body and thy soul unto everlasting life.” 1552. “Take and eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee, and feed on him in thy heart with thanksgiving.” (This form was substituted for that of 1549, in 1552, and was appended to it in 1662.) Canon Estcourt's argument against the validity of Anglican orders is no argument from lack of sufficient intention on the part of Anglicans. Neither do we think that such an argument could be maintained, in accordance with the commonly-accepted principles of theology. If it is a sufficient intention for valid baptism to intend to administer the form of Christian initiation, it is sufficient, in the case of orders, to intend to administer the form of Christian ordination, although the ceremony in either case may be regarded as merely an external form without any intrinsic value. It is only as a witness to the sense of the form that the intention of Anglicans is brought into court; and it is not the intention with which they ordain at which we demur, but the intention with which they have altered the ordination service and liturgy—i.e., the form of ordination and its context. Had these alterations been merely the result of an antiquarian leaning towards a more primitive though less perfect utterance of the same truth, or of a puritanic craving after simplicity, the irreverence would have been of the extremest kind, but still there would have been no grounds for disputing the orthodox sense, and so the validity of the form. But, on the contrary, the very object of the alterations, as Canon Estcourt has shown, was the elimination of the orthodox
- 43. doctrines of priesthood and sacrifice, and therefore of the significance upon which the validity of the form depends. The doubts which should beset the minds of honest Anglicans on the subject of their orders, if they have the least scruple as to the orthodoxy of their position, are simply overwhelming. If they turn to the early church, they find that there are at least as many precedents and authorities for regarding as null the ordinations [pg 616] of heretics and schismatics as for accepting them. Morinus' opinion is that such ordinations are invalid, except where the church has thought fit to dispense with the impediment; and Morinus is a genuine student of antiquity, and no mere controversialist. True it is Anglicans may appeal to what is undeniably the more common doctrine in the Roman Church—viz., that such ordinations are valid— but then she unflinchingly condemns Anglicans, whereas she has never condemned Morinus. It is nothing to the purpose to say that the practice of the church prevents her using Morinus' opinion against Anglicans—which is begging the question against Morinus; the point is, Can Anglicans escape using it against themselves? Again, when they direct their attention to the special facts of their own history, their view is to the last degree discouraging. Their latest antagonist, Canon Estcourt, has notoriously given up to them every point to which they could make the remotest claim, and has broken and thrown away every weapon to which the least exception could be taken; and yet it has come to this: that their only title to orders is a succession probably broken by the non-consecration of Barlow, and an ambiguous form which, when read in the light of their mutilated ordinal and liturgy, is unlike any that has been accepted as even probably adequate either by East or West. Even if Anglicans could find their identical form, as far as words go, in approved ordinals, they could not argue from this the sufficiency of their own form. Mutilation and involution, although they contract within the same span, can never be identical. You might as well pretend that there is no difference between a stamen from which you have plucked the leaves and an undeveloped bud.
- 44. It is true that originally different portions of the church were allowed, in regard to orders, to give expression to the same truth in various forms with various degrees of explicitness; but this can afford no precedent to an individual church for mutilating a common form in order to deny a common truth. The Abyssinian Decision. We cannot conclude our review without noticing an important criticism made upon our author in the shape of a letter to the Month, November-December, 1873, by the Rev. F. Jones, S.J. F. Jones, whilst expressing his thorough concurrence with Canon Estcourt in every other particular, thinks that he has attached an undue force to the decision of the holy office upon Abyssinian orders. Canon Estcourt has understood the Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition, in their decree in 1704, to have ruled that the form, “Accipe Spiritum Sanctum,” understood in the sense of the Abyssinian liturgical books, is valid for the priesthood, although, in the particular case, no further expression is given to this sense, at least no expression within the limits of the form strictly so called— i.e., the verbal formula synchronous with the matter. The decree which he so understands is as follows: Question: “The ordainer passed hurriedly along a line of deacons, laying his hands upon the head of each, and saying, ‘Accipe Spiritum Sanctum’; are they validly ordained in tal modo e forma, and admissible to the exercise of their orders?” Answer: “The ordination of a priest with the imposition of hands and utterance of the form as in the question is undoubtedly valid.” [pg 617] F. Jones, whilst allowing that Canon Estcourt's interpretation is the natural one according to ordinary canons of criticism, insists that the decree, “when interpreted in the light of certain rules which arise out of what is called the stylus curiæ,” asserts, indeed, the sufficiency of
- 45. the imposition of hands as matter, when used with the form, but does not define the sufficiency of the particular form, “Accipe Spiritum Sanctum.” The rules in question are as follows: 1. The meaning of the answer depends upon the meaning of the dubium. 2. Nothing but what is directly stated is decided. 3. “If there is anything in the wording of a decision which appears inconsistent with the teaching of an approved body of theologians—such teaching as amounts to a true theological probability—the decision is to be interpreted so as to leave such teaching intact, unless the decision should itself show that it intended to condemn that teaching, and to take away that probability.” 4. Such decisions are formed on the presumption that every point except the one in question is correct, on the maxim, “Standum est pro valore actûs.” 5. When the validity of an ordination is the subject-matter of a decision, it must be assumed that the decision has been made after an inspection of the ordinal. 6. “It is hardly safe to allege the authority of a decision (I speak merely of a curial decision), particularly when the details of the case are but imperfectly known to us, without having ascertained the sense in which, after its promulgation, it was understood by those who were most competent to measure its importance.” We shall examine these rules when we come to consider the worth of F. Jones' application of them to the case in hand. But first it will be well to see what effect the elimination of the Abyssinian decision would have upon Canon Estcourt's controversial position. Pp. 158-163. Canon Estcourt considers various objections made by Catholic controversialists to the Anglican form of the priesthood. He is considering the question of the form in its strict sense—viz., that portion of the ordination formulary which is synchronous with the matter, whether this last consist in the tradition of the instruments or in the imposition of hands. One objection urged by Lequien, amongst others, is grounded upon the very common doctrine that the form of priestly ordination must express the principal effect of the sacrament of order by making mention of the priesthood in
- 46. relation to the sacrifice, which is its principal object. Now, if, as F. Jones suggests was the case, the unmutilated Coptic rite was in use in Abyssinia up to 1704, and the examples given by Ludolf and Monsignor Beb are merely imperfect copies; and if no decision as to the form was given in 1704, then, so far as anything has been shown to the contrary, Lequien's objection holds good that no approved form for the priesthood fails to make an appeal to the Holy Sacrifice. And now as regards F. Jones' rules for interpreting the “stylus curiæ,” and their application to the Abyssinian decision. We have no criticism to make upon Rules 1 and 2. They are sufficiently obvious even to a non-expert. Rule 3 cannot, we think, be admitted without qualification. It is no doubt an important principle that the presumption is in favor of an interpretation which leaves intact a probable opinion, supposing that this is not the formal subject of the decision; but we must not do violence to the natural sense of words, and it is quite possible that such a decision might completely [pg 618] evacuate the probability of an opinion of which it took no direct cognizance whatever. The Council of Florence did not directly intend to condemn the opinion requiring as absolutely necessary the tradition of the instruments, yet effectively it has done so. As to Rule 4, “Standum est pro valore actûs,” its application to the case before us must depend upon whether the course indicated is equivalent to the introduction of a new “actus.” To ask, as the dubium does, concerning the validity of “tal modo e forma,” implies that this is given in its integrity. In the Abyssinian case, it was a question whether certain persons were to be allowed to say Mass and perform other priestly functions, and the Sacred Congregation allowed them. As to Rule 5, no doubt an inspection of the ordinals is to be presumed; but here the very contention of the questioner is that the ordinal had not been followed. Moreover, there was ample evidence, in the sacred books quoted by Ludolf and Monsignor Beb, accessible to the Sacred Congregation, and which, according to F. Jones' principle, we may assume it had before it, that in Abyssinian hands the Coptic ritual had been seriously tampered with. The
- 47. translation from the Abyssinian, as given by the above-named writers, is certainly not an imperfect version of the Coptic, but a deliberate compilation from the Coptic form and that of the apostolic constitutions, which would hardly have been made except for ritual purposes. If we may accept the earliest and most precise evidence as to actual practice in Abyssinia—that of the missionary Francis Alvarez (1520), the one prayer used by the Abuna, with the imposition of hands, is not the form “Respice,” but, in the Coptic tongue, the prayer “Divina gratia quæ infirma sanat.”142 But these words, as Canon Estcourt points out, p. 181, “in the Coptic and Jacobite rites, are said by the archdeacon or one of the assisting bishops. In the Nestorian and ancient Greek, they are said by the bishop without imposing his hands; and only in the modern Greek, the Maronite, and the Armenian are they united with the imposition of hands.” This looks as if the Abyssinian ritual was a complete medley. This view is borne out by F. Godigno, S.J. (De Abyssin. Rebus, p. 224), who tells us that the Jesuit Patriarch of Abyssinia, Oviedo, as long as he lived in Æthiopia, always doubted very much, and with good reason, if the Abyssinian priests had been duly and lawfully ordained, inasmuch as the forms of consecration used by the Abuna were so uncertain that they seemed to have been corrupted. On which account, in those matters which belong to orders, and which require in the minister a real character, he never could persuade himself to use their offices, lest haply the sacraments should be rendered void. F. Jones thinks that Assemani would certainly have noticed these corruptions, had they existed, in his Controversia Coptica, composed for the information of Propaganda in 1731. But Assemani was not called upon to consider the corruptions of Abyssinia; for, as he tells us in his preface, the occasion of his writing was the conversion of two Egyptian monks of the Alexandrian Church, of whose reordination there was question.
- 48. As to Rule 6, obviously nothing can be more important than the estimate of a decision expressed by contemporary theologians; but it is [pg 619] very easy to misinterpret their silence. In his defence of the Coptic rite, urges F. Jones, Assemani ought to have quoted the authorization of a form which à fortiori authorized the Coptic. We reply that Assemani had no lack of far more obvious and splendid instances of the recognition of the Coptic rite; that he had no need of such indirect support. The examination of the Abyssinian monk Tecla Maria, in 1594, sufficiently shows that it was impossible to judge of Abyssinian ordinations by the Coptic rite. Assemani himself acknowledges, p. 227, that either Tecla Maria's memory failed him, or his ordainers must have been “poco pratici del rito Coptico o l'avessero in qualche parte alterato.” F. Godigno (l. c.) says that the reason of Tecla Maria's reordination was the corruption of the rite. On the other hand, it is clearly a great exaggeration to say that the missionaries made nothing of Abyssinian orders, and that the motive of reordination was the non-tradition of the instruments. Of John Bermudes, the first of the Jesuit patriarchs, Ludolf (pars. ii. p. 473) tells us that he (Bermudes) has recorded in so many words, that he received all the sacred orders, including the episcopate, with right of succession to the patriarchate, from the Abuna Mark, under condition that the pope would confirm it, and that the pope confirmed and ratified all Mark's acts. Again, the Portuguese De Francia, one of the negotiators for the Jesuits, tells the Abyssinian king that he had been taught that, if he is in danger of death, and cannot get a Catholic priest, he must ask the Abyssinians for communion.143 Certainly, this Abyssinian decision has not as yet made much mark in theology. Canon Estcourt is able to mention one work in which it occurs—a certain edition of the theology of Antoine, a Jesuit, and Prefect of Propaganda under Benedict XIV. But then there is a vast technical difference, anyhow, between a decision taking the shape of a practical rule of procedure and a speculative definition. For more than a century after the Council of Florence, its recognition of Greek orders had no perceptible influence upon the language of
- 49. theologians concerning the matter of the priesthood. It takes time to translate from the language of action into that of speculation; but who can deny that in any fair controversy such action must be discounted. It remains to be determined whether, everything considered, the decision of the Sacred Office admits of F. Jones' interpretation; whether the dubium can be understood, as he suggests (p. 456), to turn exclusively upon these two points: the non-tradition of the instruments and the deviation from the Coptic rite which prescribes that the bishop's hands should be imposed upon each ordinandus during the whole of the form Respice, instead of during the one phrase, “Repleeum Spiritu Sancto,” which F. Jones thinks the missionaries paraphrased by “Accipe Spiritum Sanctum.” Now, we must say that it is hardly probable that in 1704 the missionaries should be seriously exercised about the non-tradition of the instruments. Neither is it likely that they should have proposed, in the same breath, the two difficulties suggested by F. Jones; for why should deviation from a rite, the substantial validity of which they doubted, be a difficulty? They ask about the validity of a form and a manner of imposing hands, which they describe “talmo do e forma.” There may have been other prayers used in the service [pg 620] from the Coptic ordinal and liturgy, but the dubium excludes them from “tal forma.” F. Jones' notion that the “Accipe Spiritum Sanctum” is a mistranslation of the Coptic “Reple eum Spiritu Sancto”—which is not found in the Abyssinian version—is, we think, quite untenable. No distinction was more thoroughly appreciated on both sides than that between an imperative and a precatory form. The Patriarch of the Maronites, in 1572, informs the pope: “In our Pontifical, the orders are conferred without a form by way of prayer.”144 In 1860, the missionaries inform the Sacred Congregation “that the Monophysites believe the essence of ordination consists in the expiration (insuflazione) the ordainer makes in the act of saying, ‘Accipe Spiritum Sanctum.’ ”145 Amongst the various deviations from the
- 50. Coptic rite which Assemani notes in the evidence of Tecla Maria, the Abyssinian says of his ordainer, “Insufflavit in faciem meam.” This “insufflatio” almost implies an imperative form, and so far isolates the words from any precatory formularies that may precede and follow them. Most probably this form was obtained from the missionaries with whom the Abyssinians had been so long in intercourse. Doubtless the Sacred Congregation did not sanction the form “Accipe Spiritum Sanctum” taken by itself simply, but specificated in the sense of the Abyssinian liturgy; but this is exactly Canon Estcourt's contention against Anglicans. In spite of F. Jones' shrewd and interesting observations, we are of opinion that Canon Estcourt's appreciation of the Abyssinian decision is the true one. At any rate, his interpretation is sufficiently probable to make it most important to show that, even so understood, it cannot sanction Anglican orders. Postscriptum Since the above was written, the discussion has been continued in the Month by an answer from Canon Estcourt in January, and an elaborate rejoinder by F. Jones in February. Something of what we have written has been anticipated; but, on the whole, we have thought it better to leave our article as it stands, and content ourselves with appending such further remarks as may seem called for. F. Jones, in his second letter, insists that Canon Estcourt has mistaken what the missionaries proposed as a solitary deviation from a well-known and approved rite for the whole form used on the occasion. He proceeds to support his position by italicizing the concluding words of the answer of the Holy Office allowing the missionaries to admit the person so ordained “to the exercise of his orders according to the rite, approved and expurgated, in which he
- 51. Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to specialized publications, self-development books, and children's literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system, we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading. Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and personal growth! ebookultra.com