C ^\'^^ . ^vT ) 
 
 ^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 ^^ \\\t (THcorogiV^j ^^ 
 
 ■'"% 
 
 % 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J 
 
 
 Shelf. 
 
 Division. L^yn. .' ' 
 
 Section .....IvV.^^I ...Q 
 
 iVumber...... C.y.....\. 
 
LECTURES ^*^ 
 
 ON 
 
 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 
 
 BY THE LATE 
 
 GEORGE^CAMPBELL, D.D. 
 
 PRIXCIFAL OF MARISCHAL COLLEGE, ABERDEEN, 
 
 THE THIRD EDITION. 
 
 LONDON: 
 PRINTED FOR THOMAS TEGG, 7^, CHEAPSIDE. 
 
 1824. 
 
Cameron ^- Hume, Printers, 
 Benoick. 
 
_ .OETON 
 
 hEC, NOV 1881 \^ 
 
 OGIG&L 
 
 ADA^ERTISEMENT. 
 
 The following Lectures on Ecclesiastical History 
 are an important branch of a course of Theological 
 Lectures, originally delivered in Marischal College, 
 Aberdeen, to the students of Divinity in that Uni- 
 versity. For more than the last twenty years of the 
 Author's life, he devoted the greater part of his time 
 to his Lectures delivered to the Students of Divi- 
 nity, and those contained in the present volume, and 
 now offered to the Public, were considered as the 
 most important and entertaining of the whole. He 
 had transcribed and revised them, and was every 
 season making considerable amendments and addi- 
 tions to the Work. The Publication has been called 
 for, by the Students and others, with an eagerness 
 which of late has seldom attended the appearance of 
 a theological piece. Those who are acquainted 
 with the other works of Dr. Campbell, will na- 
 turally expect in these Lectures something of that 
 clearness of apprehension, and acuteness of inves- 
 tigation, so conspicuously displayed in the Disser- 
 tation on Miracles, in answer to David Hume, Esq. 
 nor will they be disappointed. And such as un- 
 derstand the subject, will admire the Doctor's well- 
 
iV ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 digested learning, and easily discover the import- 
 ance of a correct historical deduction of the pro- 
 gress of church power, the establishment of a 
 hierarchy, and how clear and decisive it is, in all 
 that may be termed the hinge of the controversy be- 
 tween what has been denominated high church and 
 cthei-s. Very seldom, indeed, has the subject been 
 li'cated with the ability, impartiality, and modera- 
 tion, which characterize the following pages, 
 
CONTENTS, 
 
 LECTURE I. 
 
 THE SACRED HISTORY. 
 
 Of the Importance of a knowledge of Ecclesiastical His- 
 toryy - - - _ - - Page 1 
 
 LECTURE IL 
 
 Of the nature and utility of the history of the Sacred Ca- 
 non, 8^'c. --- _-. - 14, 
 
 LECTURE IIL 
 
 Of the rise and progress of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, - 27 
 
 LECTURE IV. 
 
 Of the nature and c&iisequence of the question about the po- 
 lity originally established in the church, §t. - 49 
 
 LECTURE V. 
 
 Of the nature of the apostolic office, - ^ - 82 
 
 LECTURE VL 
 
 Of the co7istitutiofi of the apostolic church, and the nature 
 of the episcopacy ivhich obtained in the second and third 
 c€?itu7'ies, - - - - --99 
 
 LECTURE VIL 
 
 Of the extent of the bishop's cure in primitive times, - 120 
 
 LECTURE VIIL 
 
 Of the origin of prelacy, or diocesan episcopacy, - 140 
 
 LECTURES IX, X. 
 
 Of the change which the establishment of Christianity by the 
 imperial laws, and the numerous conversions from Pa- 
 ganism consequent thereon, occasioned in the church, 157, 175 
 
 LECTURE XL 
 
 Of the office and ordination of Pastors, - - 19^ 
 
 LECTURE XIL 
 
 Of the Papacy, and the common plea on ivhich the retainers 
 to Rome, found the right of papal dominion, - 910 
 
 LECTURE XIIL 
 Of the primipal causes which tended to raise the church 
 
Vi CONTENTS. 
 
 of Borne to an iinequaUed degree of greatness and aiitho- 
 rlhj, Page 229 
 
 LECTURE XIV. 
 
 Of the origin, the nature, and the consequences of the con- 
 ' troversies that, in the early ages, arose in the church, and 
 on the methods that were taken to terminate them, 240 
 
 LECTURE XV. 
 
 Of the causes and maxims which contributed to the esta- 
 ' tilishment of the liouian hierarchy, - - - 257 
 
 LECTURE XVL 
 
 Of the part icif Jar a/lenfion which Rome invariably gave to 
 the great ofgect, POWER, - - - - ^ - 2T0 
 
 LECTURE XVIL 
 
 Of the claims ichich Home so long and so assiduously af- 
 fcct,ed to derive from the apostle Peter, - - 284 
 
 LECTURE XVIIL 
 Of some of the causes which co-operated in rearing the 
 Romish hierarchy ------ 299 
 
 LECTURE XIX. 
 
 OftJie Pope's pretension to grant exemptiotis from subjec- 
 tion to ordinary ecclesiastical supei^iors, - - 313 
 
 LECTURES XX, XXL 
 
 Of the actual state of Church power, and the different opi- 
 nions concerning it at the time of the Council of Trent, 327 
 
 LECTURE XXIL 
 Of the reception which the papal claims over the secular 
 powers met with from those against whom they were aimed, 353 
 
 LECTURES XXIII, XXIV, XXV. 
 
 Of the expedients adopted by Rome for securing the obe- 
 diefice of her votaries, viz. implicit faith, prohibition of 
 books, and persecution, - - _ 370^ 387, 398 
 
 LECTURE XXVL 
 
 Of the rise and progress of the Inquisition, - - 408 
 
 LECTURE XXVIL 
 
 Of the causes ivhich have contributed to the declension of 
 the Romish hierarchy, - - - - _ 420 
 
 LECTURE XXVIIL 
 
 Of the commencement and progress of the reformation, 432 
 

 CTURES^i^ 
 
 ON 
 
 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 
 
 LECTURE I. 
 
 THE SACRED HISTORY. 
 
 1 INTEND that the subject of the present, and some succeed- 
 ing Lectures, shall be the Sacred History, the first branch of 
 the theoretic part of the theological course which claims the at- 
 tention of the student. This is subdivided into two parts : the 
 first comprehends the events which preceded the Christian 
 cera ; the second, those which followed. The first, in a looser 
 way of speaking, is included under the title of Jewish History; 
 the second is what is commonly denominated Church History, 
 or Ecclesiastic History. — I say, in a looser way of speaking, 
 the first is included under the title of the Jewish History : for, 
 in strictness of speech, it compriseth several most important 
 events, which happened long before the existence of the na- 
 tion of the Jews. Such are the creation of the world, the fall 
 of man, the universal deluge, the dispersion of the human race, 
 the call of Abraham, and those promises which gave to man the 
 early hope of restoration. But as all the credible information 
 we have on these topics is from the Jews, and intimately con- 
 nected with their history, and as little or no light can be de- 
 rived from the Pagan histories, or rather fables, that have a re- 
 lation to ages so remote, it hath not been judged necessary to 
 have a regard to these in the general division. It seemed more 
 natural and commodious to allow all that part of sacred history 
 which preceded the commencement of the Christian church, to 
 come under the common name of Jewish. 
 
 A 
 
2 LECTURES ON 
 
 Ncctl any arguments be used in order to evince that every 
 tlieolooical student sliould make this, at least as far as the Bib- 
 lical records bring us, a particular object of his application ? In 
 every view we can take of the subject it is suitable ; in some 
 it is even necessary. Let it be observed, that all the articles of 
 our faith may be divided into three classes. Some may not im- 
 properly be denominated philosopliical, some historiciil, and 
 some prophetical. Of the first kind, the philosopliical, are 
 those which concern the divine nature and perfections ; those 
 also which concern human nature, its capacities and duties : of 
 the second kind, the historical, are those which relate to the 
 creation, the fall, the deluge, the Mosaic dispensation, the pro- 
 mises, the incarnation of the Messiah, his life, his death, his 
 resurrection, his ascension, the descent of the Holy Spirit, the 
 mission of the apostles, and the several purposes which, by 
 these means, it pleased the divine Providence to effectuate : of 
 the third, or the prophetical kind, are those which regard 
 events yet future, such as the second coming of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, the resurrection of the human race, the general judg- 
 ment, eternity, heaven, and hell. As therefore a considerable 
 portion of the Christian faith consists in points of ai> historic 
 nature, it must be of consequence for elucidating these, to be 
 acquainted with those collateral events, if I may so express my- 
 self, which happen to be connected with any of them by the 
 circumstances of time and place. 
 
 But this knowledge is of importance to us, not only for the 
 illustration of the Christian doctrine, but for its confirma- 
 tion also. When the religion of Christ was first promulgat- 
 ed throughout the world, as the difficulties it had to encounter 
 would have been absolutely insurmountable, had no other than 
 ordinary and human means been employed in its favour, it 
 pleased God, by an extraordinary interposition of Providence, 
 in tlie gift of miraculous powers, to ensure success to this great 
 design, in defiance of all the powers of the earth combined 
 against it. But no sooner was the strength of the opposition 
 broken, insomuch that the friends and the enemies of Christ 
 came, if I may so express myself, to stand on even ground, than 
 it pleased heaven to withdraw those supernatural aids, and leave 
 tliis cause to force its way in tlie world by its own intrinsic and 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. o 
 
 external evlclenco. I would not ])y this be iindcvstood to in- 
 sinuate, tliat the Christian cause hatli not always been under 
 the protection of a special and over-ruling providence. I would 
 not be understood to signify, that any external means what- 
 ever could have given to our religion its full effect on the hearts 
 and consciences of men, without the internal influences of the 
 Divine Spirit. I only mean to observe to you, what was cer- 
 tainly the fact, that, when matters came to be thus balanced be- 
 tween faith and unbelief, outward miracles and prodigies were 
 not judged, by the Supreme Disposer of all events, to be any 
 longer necessary for silencing gainsayers, and for reaching con- 
 viction to the understanding* 
 
 That the power of working miracles did at first accompany 
 the publication of the gospel by the apostles, we have at this 
 day the strongest evidence, — as from other sources, so espe- 
 cially from the success of their preaching, which without this 
 help, would be utterly unaccountable, and in direct contradic- 
 tion to all the laws of probability hitherto knovvn in the world. 
 For, not to mention the inveterate prejudices arising from im- 
 memorial opinions and practices, as well as from mistaken in- 
 terest, which the first preachers of Christianity had to encounter ; 
 not to mention the universal contempt and detestation where- 
 in the nation to which they belonged was holden, both by the 
 Greeks and by the Romans ; not to mention the apparent ridi- 
 cule and absurdity there was in exhibiting to the world, as a 
 saviour and mediator with God, a Jew, who had been ignomi- 
 niously crucified as a malefactor by a Roman procurator ; — how 
 inconceivably unequal must have been the combat, when on the 
 one side were power, rank, opulence, birth, learning, and art; 
 and on the other side, weakness, dependance, poverty, obscu- 
 rity, and illiterate simplicity. The success of the last, in a war- 
 fare so disproportionately matched, is an irrefragable demon- 
 stration, that the work was not of man, but of God. But as 
 the conviction we have of the reality of those events, and of the 
 means by which they were effected, is derived to us through the 
 channel of testimony, it behoves us to be as careful as possible, 
 in order that the evidence may have its full effect upon us, that 
 we be rightly informed, both as to the nature of the testimony 
 itself, and as to the character and capacity of the witnesses. 
 
4 LECTURES OX 
 
 Tliis is one consideration, wliich immediately affects the evi- 
 dence of the Christian revelation. 
 
 Ai^ain, as the last mentioned dispensation is erected on the 
 Mosaical, the divine origin of which it every where pre-sup- 
 poscth ; wliatever affects the credibiUty of the latter, will un- 
 questionably affect the credibility of the former; whatever tends 
 to subvert the basis, tends of necessity to overturn the super- 
 structure; and, on the contrary, when once the connection be- 
 tween the two establishments, the Mosaic and the Christian, 
 is thoroughly understood, whatever tends to confirm the one, 
 tends also, though more indirectly, to confirra the other. This 
 reflection naturally leads us to carry our researches further back, 
 and endeavour, as much as possible, to get acquainted with all 
 those circumstances and events which can throw any light upon 
 the scripture history. 
 
 But it may be objected, that if all this were necessary to 
 confirm our faith in the gospel, what would be the case of the 
 bulk of mankind, who, by reason of the time they must em- 
 ploy in earning a subsistence, have no leisure for such in- 
 quiries; and, by reason of the education they have received, 
 dre not in a capacity of making them? To this objection a two- 
 fold answer may be returned : first, such inquiries are not ne- 
 cessary to the man, who, through want of education and of 
 time, is incapacitated for prosecuting them. Those very wants, 
 which unfit him for the study, are hi* great security that he 
 shall have no occasion for it. The man of letters, on the con- 
 trary, whose time is much at his own disposal, is daily exposed, 
 especially in this age and country, both from reading and from 
 conversation, to meet with objections against revealed religion, 
 which the other has no probability of ever hearing; and which, 
 if he should by any accident come to hear, it is a thousand to 
 one he does not understand. As our resources, therefore, 
 ought to be in proportion to our needs, and as our means and 
 methods of defence ought to be adapted to the particular ways 
 wherein we are liable to be attacked, there is a peculiar reason 
 which men of letters have for entering so far at least into these 
 inquiries, as to be acquainted with both sides of the question, 
 and to be equitable judges between the friends and the enemies 
 of the gospel. There is also another reason, which ought to 
 
ECCLESIASTICA^t- HISTORY. 5 
 
 determine those in particular who have the holy ministry in 
 view. It is their business, and therefore in a special manner 
 their duty, to be furnished, as much as possible, for rcmovinir 
 not only their own doubts, but the doubts of other people. It 
 is their province to support the weak, to confirm the doubting, 
 and to reclaim the strayed. In spiritual matters, especially, 
 they ought to serve as eyes to the blind, and feet to the lame. 
 
 But further; the knowledge of the sacred history is not only 
 of importance for illustrating the truths of our religion, and 
 for strengthening the evidences of its divinity, but also in the 
 way of ornament and recommendation to the ministerial cha- 
 racter. Nor let it be imagined that this is a matter of little 
 moment. It will not require an uncommon share of penetra- 
 tion to discover, that this, on the contrary, is a matter of the 
 greatest consequence. Whatever tends to adorn the character 
 of a pastor, and render him respectable, is sure of procuring 
 him in general a more favourable reception with mankind. 
 When he speaks, he commands a closer attention, which gives 
 double weight to every thing he saj's. It is this respect to su- 
 periority in knowledge and discernment, which makes, as Job 
 poetically expresseth it, even princes refrain talking, and the 
 nobles lay their hand upon their mouth. The utility of every 
 such qualification, as serves to attract this veneration, will be 
 readily acknowledged by all who are duly sensible how. great a 
 point in instructing is carried, when the people to be instructed 
 are induced seriously to attend, to think, to feel. 
 
 Thus much shall suffice for what regards the propriety of the 
 study, and the several purposes of illustrating, confirming, and 
 recommending our religion, which it is fitted to serve. — Let us 
 next inquire into the manner in which we may hope successful- 
 ly to prosecute it. And here I beg leave to take notice, by the 
 way, that it is not my intention, either on this, or any other 
 branch of the theological science, or on what more immediately 
 regards the pastoral care, to recommend to your perusal a mul- 
 titude of books. Nothing could be easier for one who has the 
 honour to give lessons in theology, than to present the stu- 
 dents with a long catalogue of authors, who have, with some 
 reputation, treated the various topics to be studied. Ye might 
 get in one half hour the titles of more volumes, than a whole 
 
6 LECTURES ON 
 
 lifetime would suffice you to read over. There are several rea- 
 sons whicli induce me to be rather sparinir on this article. In 
 the first place, there is, in the practice of accumulating the 
 names of hooks and authors, addinir volume to volume, and fo- 
 lio to folio, something very forbidding, which tends greatly to 
 dishearten the young learner. The labour appears immense, 
 and the difficulties insuperable. The toils he hath to undergo, 
 and the obstacles he hath to surmount, arc all set full in his 
 view ; and that before he is made so sensible of the charms of 
 the pursuit, as to be heartily engaged in it, and animated to 
 persist, in defiance of every thing that might discourage or op- 
 pose him. The conduct of nature, in this respect, is more 
 worthy of imitation. She commonly renders the first difficulty 
 a screen, by which the second is concealed from sight ; the se- 
 cond answers the same purpose to the third, and so forwards. 
 In travelling over a ridge of mountains, like the Alps or Py- 
 renees, every summit the traveller approaches he imagines to 
 be the highest ; and it is not till he has reached it, that he is 
 sensible he must climb still higher. And this is what will hap* 
 pen to him for several successive times. Now there is this ad- 
 vantage in this gradual opening of the scene, that the time ho 
 lias already spent, and the difficulties he hath already overcome, 
 prove the most cogent arguments with him, not to lose his past 
 time and labour by giving over the pursuit. The farther he 
 advances, these arguments have the greater weight. And thus, 
 by the help of a growing zeal and perseverance, a man will, 
 with honour and advantage, come otf victorious in an enter- 
 prise, which, had he seen from the beginning all its difficulty, 
 he had never undertaken. 
 
 A second reason for using this method is, the great variety 
 of studies in which the divine, as ye have seen, must necesi- 
 sarily be conversant. None of them can, without hurt both 
 to his reputation and usefulness, be entirely neglected. Now, 
 the greater diversity there is of subjects in this study, the 
 more the incjuiry into each ought to be simplified, that the 
 young stu<lent may neither be perplexed, and as it were lose 
 himself in a cumbersome multiplicity; nor so attach himself to 
 one i)art of the study, as to swallow up all the time that should 
 bo employed on the other parts. He ought to be iulruduced 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOUY. 7 
 
 into every province of tliis extensive country : the most patent 
 roads should be pointed out to Inm : n perfect acquaintance 
 with each must be the work of time, and the fruit of his own 
 assiduity and hibour. Or, dropping the metaphor: of every 
 separate article of this stud}^, he ought, in the schools of divi- 
 nity, to acquire some general notions ; but to attain a thorough 
 j)roficiency in them all, is rather the business of a life-time, 
 than the effect of a few years application. It is indeed in this, 
 as in every other art or science, the foundation only is laid at 
 school, — the manner of building is indicated ; the scholar may 
 afterwards rear the superstructure as high as his disposition and 
 opportunities shall enable him. Now it is my design here, ra- 
 ther to lay a wide foundation, on which a goodly edifice may 
 in time be erected, though I should make but little or no pro- 
 gress in raising the walls ; than on a narrow bottom, to advance 
 farther in the building; because, in this case, the fabric, 
 though it be raised ever so high, must, by reason of the strait- 
 ened limits to which its foundation does necessarily confine it, 
 be both mean and incommodious, 
 
 I shall assign a third reason for not harassing my hearers, 
 by recommending a great variety of books. Young people are 
 but too apt to imagine, that learning and reading are synony- 
 mous terms, and that a man is always the more learned the 
 more he has read. Nothing can be a more egregious mistake. 
 Food is necessary for the support of the body, and without a 
 competency of it we could not enjoy either vigour or health ; 
 but we should not suspect him to be overstocked with wisdom, 
 who should conclude from this concession, that the more a man 
 eats, the more healthy and vigorous he must be. We know 
 from experience, that when a certain proportion is exceeded, 
 those corporeal endowments, health and strength, are impaired 
 by the very means which, if used in moderation, would have 
 increased them. The same thing exactly holds with reading, 
 which is the food of the mind. The memory may be loaded 
 and encumbered in the one case, as the stomach is in the other. 
 And in either case, if we take more than we can digest, it can 
 never turn to good account. There have been instances of such 
 hclluones lib?'orum, such book-gluttons, as very much resembled 
 the lean kinc in Pharaoh's vision, which, when they had de-* 
 
S LECTURES ON 
 
 voureil the I'at and wulUfavourccl kinc, were tlicmsclves as lean 
 and ill-favonied as before. It iti indeed necessary that we ac- 
 fustoin ourselves to read: but it is likewise necessary, and 
 much more difficult, that we accustom ourselves to reflect. 
 There oindit to be stated times for both exercises; but to the 
 last, particularly, our best endeavours ought frequently to be 
 directed. And for this purpose, I know no better helps, than 
 to be obliged, sometimes by conversation, sometimes by com- 
 posing, to express our sentiments on the subjects of which wc 
 read. The use which the student makes of the food of the 
 mind, hears the closest analogy to the use which the ruminat- 
 ing animals make of their pasture. They recall it, and enjoy 
 it a second time to much greater advantage than the first. Re- 
 sendjle them in this particular, — on whatever ye find instruc- 
 tive often ruminate. 
 
 The fourth and last reason I shall mention is, when a num- 
 ber of books on every topic are recommended, the student finds 
 it, I say, not difficult but, impossible, to get them all, or even 
 the greater part of them. Fruitless endeavours, often repeated, 
 will in time extinguish the greatest ardour ; and from finding 
 part of our task impracticable, we are but too apt to grow care^ 
 less about the whole. A few directions exactly followed, arc 
 more conducive to our improvement, than a much greater num- 
 ber little minded. 
 
 But to return from this, which will possibly be looked on as 
 a digression ; the first thing I would earnestly recommend, in 
 order to your acquiring the knowledge of the Old Testament 
 history, is the frequent and attentive perusal of the Old Tes- 
 tament itself. Let not this recommendation, far the most im- 
 portant I can give, be the more lightly esteemed by any of you, 
 becaiise it is a book so common, a book which all men, learned 
 and unlearned, have access to. Are not the greatest blessings 
 always the commonest ? Such is the sun, that glorious luminary 
 which enlightens us, the earth which we inhabit, and the air 
 which we breathe. Or are these invaluable benefits the less 
 regarded by the pious and judicious, because of their common- 
 ness ^ Indeed it may be thought, that ever so great proficiency 
 in the knowledge of a book which is in every body's hands, can 
 never procure a man the envied character of erudition. True ; 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. f) 
 
 but, on the other hand, will not that very circumstance of its 
 universality, justly fix the brand of* ignorance on him, in whom 
 there appears, in this respect, a remarkable deficiency ? Besides, 
 to be ignorant in one's own profession, is always accounted a 
 matter of the greatest reproach : the divine is, by profession, 
 an interpreter of Scripture ; therefore, to be deficient here, is 
 the most unpardonable kind of ignorance. I am the more par- 
 ticular on this point, because, by a very common tendency in 
 our nature, what we think we have it in our power to do at any 
 time, we are apt, by perpetually procrastinating, to leave un- 
 done at last. 
 
 But, it may be asked, in what manner shall we read this 
 book most profitably for the attaining of a thorough acquaint- 
 ance with the history it contains ? For this purpose, I would 
 liumhly suggest to you some such method as the following : It 
 will rccjuire but a superficial notion of the whole to be able to 
 xiistinguish the most remarkable epochs in sacred history ; let 
 these be marked for heads of study at different times. It is 
 not a matter of great consequence whether, in the division ye 
 make, ye consider most the celebrity of the aera at which the 
 period terminates, or what will nearly produce an equal division 
 of the subject. Let the first epoch, for example, be from the 
 creation till the call of Abraham ; the second, from that period 
 till Jacob's journey into Egypt ; the third, till the deliverance 
 from Egypt, by the passing through the Red Sea, and the ex- 
 tinction of Pharaoh's host; the fourth, till the death of Moses; 
 the fifth, till the death of Joshua ; the sixth, till the commence- 
 ment of the Israelitish monarchy; the seventh, till the defec- 
 tion of the ten tribes from liehoboam ; the eighth, till the cap- 
 tivity, and the ninth, till the restoration of the two tribes, Ju- 
 dah and Benjamin. Let the student, first, attentively read 
 over so much of the sacred volume as contains the account of 
 one period ; let him then lay by the book, and write in his own 
 style and manner, an abstract, or abridgement, of the narrative 
 he has read, carefully noting all the memorable events, and in- 
 terspersing such remarks of his own, as he shall judge to arise 
 naturally out of the subject. After finishing one epoch, let 
 him proceed in the same manner to the succeeding epoch. 
 By this method, he will fix in his mind the sacred his- 
 
10 LECTURES OX 
 
 tory more cfFectually than it could be done by twenty read- 
 in<rs. 
 
 Besides, there are several other very considerable advantages 
 which will redound tiom this plan regularly prosecuted. First, 
 llie student will acquire a habit of reading with greater atten- 
 tion, having close in his view the use he must make of what 
 lie reads, immediately after reading; secondly, he will find this 
 practice an excellent exercise of memory, and one of the best 
 methods of strengthening it ; thirdly, it will produce in him a 
 liabit of reflection ; fourthly, as it will render composition ha- 
 bitual to him, there is not an expedient that I know of, which 
 will contribute more to give him a readiness of writing his sen- 
 timents on any subject with a natural flicility, and perspicuity 
 of expression. 
 
 Permit me to add a few more directions for assisting you in 
 the prosecution of the plan proposed. In periods, of which an 
 account is given by more than one of the inspired historians, 
 it will be proper to read both accounts, and compare them to- 
 gether; those, for example, given in the books of Kings, and 
 in the books of Chronicles, before ye begin to compose the in- 
 tended abstract. It will not be improper to join, in like man- 
 ner, the reading of the prophets, with those parts of the his- 
 tory which relate to the times wherein they lived. The his- 
 torians, and the prophets, will often be found to reflect light 
 upon each other. As to other helps, the chief I would recom- 
 mend to you is Josephus, the Jewish historian ; and the best 
 way of studying him, as I imagine, is carefully to read his re^ 
 lation of every particular epoch, immediately after perusing the 
 account of it given by the inspired penmen of the Old Testa- 
 ment, as far as their history extends. Both may be read pre- 
 viously to the attempt of forming a narrative of the different 
 periods, as mentioned above. In this there will be a two- fold 
 advantage; first, by the double representation of the facts, 
 there is a probability they will be more deeply rooted in the 
 memory ; secondly, by the diversity of manner in which the 
 same things are tohl, a fuller view is given of the subject, and 
 the reader's own manner is better secured airainst too close an 
 imitation of either. 
 
 Bul'orc I conclude this lecture, allow mc to subjoin a few re- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 11 
 
 marks in regard to the character of that historian, and the cre- 
 dit that is due to him. That he was a man, \vho, to a con- 
 sidciTihle degree ot eminence in the Jewish erudition of those 
 days, addi,'d a tolerable share of Greek and Roman litera- 
 ture, is a character which, in my opinion, cannot justly be re- 
 fused him. As a compiler of history, it must be admitted, that 
 in every instance in which his account, on a fair examination, 
 is found to contradict the account given in holy writ, he is en- 
 titled to no faith at all. In cases wherein he may be said not 
 to contradict scripture, but to differ considerably from it, by the 
 detail of additional circumstances, it will be proper to distin- 
 guish between the earlier ages of his history and the later 
 ages. With regard to the first, we are sure that he had no 
 other authentic records to draw his information from, than 
 those we have at this day in our hands. These are Moses, 
 and those prophets, who came nearest to the time of that law- 
 giver. With regard to the last, though within the asra of the 
 Old Testament history, we are not so certain that he might 
 not have had the assistance of credible annals extant in his 
 time, though now lost. There are two things, however, in his 
 character, that aflPect his manner of writing, and require a par- 
 ticular attention : one is, too close an affectation of the manner 
 of the Greek historians. This appears, as in the general tenor 
 of his style, so especially in the endeavours he uses to embel- 
 lish his narration with long speeches, which he puts in the 
 mouths of the persons introduced, a silly device for displaying 
 the talents and eloquence of the writers, rather than of the 
 historical characters. I cannot help taking notice of one in- 
 stance, in which, through an ill-judged attempt to improve and 
 adorn, he hath spoiled, one of the finest speeches in all the his- 
 tory. The speech I mean, is that of Judah to his brother .Fo- 
 seph, then governor of Egypt, offering to ransom his brother 
 Benjamin, by the sacrifice of his own liberty. It is impossible 
 for any one, whose taste can relish genuine simple nature, not 
 to be deeply affected with that speech as it is in the Penta- 
 teuch. On reading it, we are perfectly prepared for the effect 
 which it produced on his unknown brotlier. We see, we feci, 
 that it was impossible for humanity, for natural affection, tq 
 hold out longer, lu Joscphus, it io a very different kind of 
 
lO LECTURES ON 
 
 i)crformancc : something so cold, so far-fctchcd, so artificial, 
 both ill sentiments and in language, that it savours more of" one 
 who had been educated in the schools of the Greek sophists, 
 than of those plain, artless, patriarchal shepherds. 
 
 The other thing that deserves our notice in this author, is 
 the excessive fear he had of exposing himself to the ridicule of 
 his Greek and Roman readers, whose favour he very assiduously 
 courts. This hath made him express himself on some points 
 with such apparent scepticism, as hath induced many to think^ 
 that he was not a firm believer in his own religion. But this, 
 on a closer examination, will be found entirely without founda- 
 tion : on the contrary, he piques himself not a little, on the dis- 
 tinction of his nation from all others, by the knowledge and 
 worship of the true God, But he did not write his history to 
 make proselytes, and therefore chose to put on those parts of 
 his work which he thought would expose him most to the sneer 
 of the infidel, such a gloss as would make it pass more easily 
 with Gentile, and even with philosophical readers, (for he had 
 an eye to both) amongst whom we know the Jews were brand- 
 ed with credulity, even to a proverb. It may be thought in- 
 deed, that with regard to the more ancient part of his history, 
 as nothing in point of fact can be got from it, which is not to 
 be learnt from the Bible, that part, at least, can be of little or 
 no service to Christians. But even this conclusion would not 
 be just. As the historian himself was a Pharisee, a contem- 
 porary of the apostles, and one who lived till after the destruc- 
 tion of the Jewish temple and polity by Titus Vespasian, we 
 may reap instruction even from his errors. They will serve to 
 shew, what were the tenets of the sect at that time, what were 
 their notions both concerning historical events, and sacred in- 
 stitutions, and what were some of their principal traditions. 
 All this to the Christian divine is a matter of no little conse- 
 quence for the elucidation of several passages in the New Tes- 
 tament, which allude to such erroneous sentiments, and vain 
 traditions. From the time of the rebuilding of the temple 
 under Ezra, to its final demolition, and the total extinction of 
 the Jewish government by the Romans, Josephus alone affords 
 almost all the light we have. 
 
 The two books of Maccabees are the only other ancient mo- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 13 
 
 numents now extant of the transactions of that people vvitliin 
 the aforesaid period. These books, though they are not ac- 
 knowledged by Protestants to be canonical scripture, very well 
 deserve your attention as historical tracts of considerable anti- 
 quity, and, to all appearance, worthy of credit. We have, in- 
 deed, in English, an excellent work of Prideaux, called, The 
 Connection of the Old Testament history with that of the 
 New, which I would also earnestly recommend to your perusal. 
 I hope I scarcely need to mention, that it is more proper for 
 the student to read Josephus in his own language than in a 
 translation : it will thus answer a double end, as an exercise in 
 Greek as well as in history. 
 
 To the knowledge of the sacred, it will be found proper to 
 add as much at least of profane history, as is most nearly con- 
 nected with it, and may serve to throw some light upon it, to- 
 gether with a little of the chronology and the geography of the 
 times and the countries about which the history is conversant. 
 The connection which the four great monarchies, the Assyrian, 
 the Persian, the Macedonian, and the Roman, have with the 
 Jewish history, is manifest; but as to these, it is by no means 
 requisite that, in this place, I should be particular. The Jew- 
 ish history is necessary to the theologian, the others are useful. 
 The former ought to be begun immediately, the latter should 
 be studied afterwards, as ye find leisure and opportunity : but 
 we do not incline to embarrass you with a needless multiplicity 
 of directions. 
 
 In the next prelection I intend to begin with some observa- 
 tions on the history of the sacred canon. 
 
14* LECTURES ON 
 
 LECTURE IL 
 
 X II K subject of this (lay*s discourse is, as I hinted to you at a 
 former meeting, some observations on the nature and utility of 
 tlie history of the sacred canon ; to which I shall add some re- 
 flections, tcndincj to explain both the origin and the character 
 of that species of history which is denominated ecclesiastical. 
 As to the history of the canon, it will be proper, in the first 
 place, to give an explanation of the phrase. That book which 
 we Christians denominate the Bible, *n B/i3x«?, the book, by way of 
 eminence, and which is also termed the canon, and the sacred 
 canon, comprehends a considerable number of treatises, or 
 pieces totally distinct, composed (for the most part) at periods 
 distant from one another, and in sundry places, written by di- 
 verse penmen, on different subjects, and in various styles : nor 
 were they all originally in the same language. The greater 
 part of the books which compose the Old Testament, are in 
 Hebrew, a small part in Chaldee, and all the books of the New 
 Testament in Greek ; at least, if the originals of any of them 
 were in another tongue, they are not now extant : some are in 
 prose, and others in verse ; some are historical, some juridical, 
 and some prophetical ; some instruct us by the way of simple 
 narrative ; some are written in a highly figurative and allegoric 
 diction; some in a vehement and declamatory; others address 
 us in a free epistolary strain : one piece is a collection of devo- 
 tional hymns and prayers, another is an assemblage of moral 
 maxims and observations. The name canon, in like manner as 
 the word Bible, we have borrowed from the Greek. The term 
 x«»^y, with them, signifies rule, or standard. Now the Scriptures 
 are thus denominated as being eminently the great rule or 
 standard to the Christian, in all that concerns both faith and 
 manners. Hence also those writings, of whose authenticity 
 and inspiration there is sufficient evidence, are termed canonical 
 scripture. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 15 
 
 Now concerning the several books of whieli tlic Bible is 
 composed, a number of" questions naturally arise in the mind of 
 the inquisitive student. Such are the following: Who were 
 the writers and compilers, and at what periods, in what places, 
 and on what occasions, were the writings and compilations 
 made? Whence arises that authority they have so generally 
 obtained ? Has this been an immediate, or a gradual, conse- 
 quence of their publication? Has the Christian world been 
 unanimous in this respect, in regard to all these books, or has 
 it been divided, as to all, or any of them ? And, if divided, 
 what have been the most eo^ent arguments on the different 
 sides ? How, by whom, where, and when, were they collected 
 into one volume? What hath been their fate and reception 
 since? What have been the most remarkable editions and 
 translations they have undergone? What the variations occa- 
 sioned by these, and what the most eminent paraphrases and 
 commentaries they have given rise to ? I would not be under- 
 stood by this enumeration, as meaning to insinuate, that all 
 these questions are of the same importance. There is a mani- 
 fest and very considerable difference among them in this re- 
 spect. A succinct account, however, of all the facts, which 
 would serve for a solution to the several queries above-mention- 
 ed, those at least which are of principal moment to the theolo- 
 gian, would constitute what is commonly called the history of 
 the sacred canon. 
 
 The utility of such inquiries to the theologian is the point 
 which naturally comes next to be discussed. As the questions 
 themselves are pretty different in their nature, however much 
 connected by their concurrence in composing the history of the 
 Bible, the purposes they are fitted to answer are also different. 
 In order to prevent mistakes, let it be observed once for all, 
 that by the history of the Bible, I do not here mean, the his- 
 tory contained in the Bible, but the history of the compile- 
 ment, and of the various fates of the book so denominated. 
 The same thing may be said of that synonymous phrase, the 
 history of the canon. As to those queries which regard the 
 origin of the sacred books, they are chiefly conducive for con- 
 firming the truth of our religion ; and as to those which regard 
 their reception, good or bad, with all the consequences it hath 
 
16 LECTURES OX 
 
 produced, they are chiefly conducive for illustrating its doctrines. 
 I use the word chiefly in both cases, because, in inquiries into 
 the origin of the scriptures, discoveries will sometimes be made, 
 which serve to illustrate and explain the meaning of things con^ 
 tained in them ; and, on the other hand, in inquiries into their 
 reception, with its consequences, we shall often be enabled to 
 discover the grounds of the favourable reception they have met 
 with, and thereby to trace the vestiges of a divine original. To 
 the former class belong questions like these : Who were the 
 writers? When, where, for whose use, and to what purpose 
 were they written ? Whence arises the veneration they have 
 drawn ? Why, by whom, and on what occasion or occasions, 
 were they collected ? To the latter class belong the following : 
 In what manner have they been received in different countries, 
 and at different periods ? To what causes does the reception, 
 whether good or bad, appear imputable? What are the most 
 eminent editions ? What are the principal variations to be found 
 in the editions and manuscripts, still extant? What translators 
 and commentators have been occupied in conveying and illus- 
 tratintr their doctrine to the most remote nations and distant 
 ages? — In the discussion of such questions, especially in what 
 regards the books of the New Testament, there arises a num- 
 ber of curious investigations, tending to discriminate the ge- 
 nuine productions of the authors, whose names they bear, from 
 the spurious pieces ascribed to them; the authentic dictates of 
 the Holy Spirit, from those which, at most, can only be styled 
 apocryphal, that is, hidden or doubtful. That the church was 
 early pestered with a multitude of fictitious accounts of the life 
 of Christ, and the labours of his apostles, is manifest not only 
 from the concurrent testimony of all antiquity, but even from 
 the introduction which the evauijelist Luke hath eiven to his 
 Gospel : " Forasmuch," says he, " as many have taken in 
 Iiand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which 
 arc most surely believed among us." It is universally acknow- 
 ledged, that John's Gospel was not written till a considerable 
 time afterwards ; and if none had preceded Luke in this work 
 but Matthew and Mark, he would never have denominated 
 them many. Besides, it is plain, from the manner in which 
 preceding attempts are mentioned, that several of the accounts 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 17 
 
 tliat had been given, were such as could not be depended on ; 
 otherwise, this circumstance, that many had undertaken the 
 work before him, instead of being a good reason for his taking 
 up the subject, would have been a very strong reason for his 
 not doing it, since Christians were already so amply sup- 
 plied with information. But the very expressions he uses, 
 evidently contain an insinuation, at least, that the writers he 
 alludes to, had not themselves been sufficiently informed of 
 the truth. " It seemed good to me," says he, " having 
 " had perfect understanding of all things, from the very first, 
 " to write them to thee in order, most excellent Theophi- 
 " lus." 
 
 But to return to the two classes into which the questions re- 
 lating to the history of the canon were divided, they will gene- 
 rally be found, agreeably to the observation already made, con- 
 cerning the principal utility of each, to be treated by authors 
 of different denominations, and with different views. Those 
 who, as defenders of revelation, have entered the lists with its 
 adversaries, more especially those, who, like Stillingfleet, in the 
 last age, or Lardner, in the present, have applied themselves to 
 support the authority and inspiration of the Scriptures, did al- 
 ways consider themselves as under a necessity of doing some- 
 thing for our satisfaction, in regard to the questions of the first 
 order. Those, on the other hand, who have assumed the cha- 
 racter not of the champions of religion, but of its interpreters, 
 do commonly attach themselves more to the discussion of the 
 questions of the second order. Accordingly, we find a great 
 deal of information on these topics in the works of some of our 
 scriptural critics ; whether they come under the denomination 
 of scholiasts, paraphrasts, commentators, translators, or barely 
 editors, particularly the two last. The only examples of these 
 I shall now mention, are Houbigant's prolegomena to the dif- 
 ferent parts into which he has divided his Latin version of the 
 Old Testament, and Mill's and Wetstein's prolegomena to the 
 splendid and valuable editions they have given of the Greek 
 New Testament, vntU the various readings. These I only 
 mention by the way, as deserving to be carefully perused by you, 
 if you should happen to meet with them. For all the three 
 (especially the first) being voluminous and expensive works, 
 
 B 
 
18 LECTURES OX 
 
 and not very common, there are not many that, in this part of 
 the world, have an opportunity of consulting them. 
 
 There is, indeed, one author, who, in a particular work 
 written on purpose, has, with a good deal of judgment and 
 acuteness, treated all the questions of both classes above enu- 
 merated : the author I mean, is Richard Simon, a priest of the 
 Oratory, commonly known by the name of Father Simon. 
 This man first published, in French, a book, entitled, A criti- 
 cal History of the Old Testament, which was soon after follow- 
 ed by another in the same language, entitled, A critical His- 
 tory of the New Testament ; both which together complete the 
 history of the sacred canon. This work has been translated, 
 not badly, into Latin. There is a translation of it into Eng- 
 lish [which I have seen] that is very ill executed, in regard 
 both to the sense and to the expression. In relation to the 
 character of the performance, it will not be improper to make 
 here a few observations. In the first place, it clearly evinces 
 in the author a large fund of erudition, accompanied with an 
 uncommon share of critical sagacity and penetration; and, I 
 may justly add, a greater degree of moderation, than is gene- 
 rally to be met with in those, either of his sect as a Romanist, 
 or of his order as a priest. What particularly qualified him 
 for the task he has undertaken, was not only his thorough ac- 
 quaintance with ancient history, sacred and profane ; but his 
 profound skill in the oriental languages, and in all branches of 
 rabbinical literature. To say thus much is no more, in my ap- 
 prehension, than doing justice to his abilities and indefatigable 
 application : at the same time, it is but doing justice to you, 
 my hearers, to take notice of what I think amiss in his perfor- 
 mance. I told you, and told you truly, that he shows more 
 moderation than is customary with those of his sect and order, 
 yet not so much of impartiality, as not to betray, on several oc- 
 casions, that (if he was not a disguised freethinker, as has been 
 suspected by some eminent Catholics) he was deeply tinctured 
 with the servile spirit of his church. Hence the implicit de- 
 ference he sometimes officiously displays, to human prescrip- 
 tions, to oral tradition, to those customs which can plead the 
 sanction of antiquity, or of a general reception, however absurd 
 they may be when examined on the principles of reason, how- 
 
FXCLESTASTICAL HISTORY. 19 
 
 ever unscnptural, or even antiscriptural, when exaiviiiieJ on 
 those of holy writ: nay, I might add, his deference to those 
 practices and tenets, concerning which his knowledge and dis- 
 cernment must have satisfied him, that their origin was such 
 as could by no means serve to recommend them. Hence also 
 the propensity he shows, on every occasion, to insist on the 
 ambiguity and obscurity of the Scriptures, which he greatly 
 exaggerates, and on the need of an infallible interpreter. 
 Hence the straitened and ambiguous manner wherein he ex- 
 prcsseth himself on some delicate points, which he could not 
 altogether avoid mentioning, and on which it is plain that he 
 did not think himself at liberty to speak out his sentiments. 
 On such topics, ye will perceive a timidity and caution very 
 unlike the generous freedom and boldness of a man, who hath 
 ever been unaccustomed to the galling yoke of human autho- 
 rity. He puts one in mind of the situation described by the 
 poet, and even appears to consider himself, as incedens per 
 irjnes suppositos cino'i doloso. But I shall say no more here 
 of this author, having had occasion, of late, both of giving, and 
 of supporting my opinion of him, more fully, in the third pre- 
 liminary dissertation to the translation of the Gospels, to which 
 I refer you. As to his work, I may justly say, that on the 
 whole, with all its errors and defects, (and what human compo- 
 sition is exempt from errors and defects?) The critical History 
 of the Old and New Testaments contains a valuable fund of 
 knowledge, and deserves an attentive perusal from every serious 
 inquirer into the divine oracles. On some points, he has been 
 warmly opposed by some Protestant divines, to whose animad- 
 versions on his work he has returned answers. The controversy 
 is published in the later editions of his book. In some things 
 they appear to be in the right, but not in all. 
 
 Houbigant, also, another priest of the Oratory, has, in the 
 work of his above-mentinod, freely animadverted on some of 
 Simon's observations. He too is no inconsiderable critic, 
 though of a very different turn. The excess of Simon (where 
 alterations appeared necessary) perhaps was diffidence; of 
 Houbigant, temerity. I am not sure, that some of our mo- 
 dern English critics on the Flebrew Scriptures are not charge- 
 able with this fault of Houbigant; I mean their making too 
 
 b2 
 
so LECTURES OX 
 
 free with the text, in setting aside the common reading for the 
 sake of emendations merely conjectural. But as to these 
 things, every person ought to judge for himself. I purpose to 
 lay only the materials before you, which may serve as pre- 
 mises : it is yours to canvass and arrange them, and to draw the 
 proper conclusions. It is not my province to dictate, but to 
 suggest. Your assent to any opinions, that might be laid be- 
 fore you, would be of little value, if it were the result of a 
 lazy and implicit confidence, and not of a careful examination 
 and rational conviction. Let me only subjoin, before dismiss- 
 ing this article, a recommendation of Michaelis's Introductory 
 Lectures to the sacred books of the New Testament, which 
 will deserve your serious perusal. Thus much shall suffice for 
 what concerns the history of the canon, and the valuable pur- 
 poses to which this branch of knowledge is subservient. 
 
 I proceed now to consider the ends which may be answered 
 by ecclesiastical history, and to inquire what is the readiest and 
 most profitable way of studying it. Before that memorable 
 sera, the incarnation of the Son of God, the history of the 
 church of God was the history of one particular people, first dis- 
 tinguished by the name of the patriarch Israel, (otherwise called 
 Jacob) whose descendants they were; and after the loss of the 
 ten tribes, who were carried into captivity by Shalmanezer, 
 king of Assyria, denominated from Judah, one of the sons of 
 Jacob, and one whose progeny the greater part of the remnant 
 were, the nation of the Jews. The history of that people, and 
 the history of the church, was, under the Mosaic economy, the 
 same thing. Neither do we find in the annals, and other re- 
 mains of those ancient times, the least vestige of the distinction 
 of a community into church and state, such as hath obtained 
 universally in the nations who have received the Christian law. 
 This distinction hath given rise to a species of history, where- 
 of the world before had not conceived so much as an idea. It 
 may not therefore be improper, in the first place, to trace its 
 origin, that we may the better apprehend what is meant by the 
 history of the church. 
 
 When we consider attentively the institution of Moses, we 
 perceive that it comprehends every thing necessary for forming 
 a civil establishment; not only precepts regarding the disposi- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 21 
 
 tion and morals of the people, and the public and private ofBces 
 of relii^ion, but also laws of jurisprudence ; such as regulate the 
 formalities of private contracts, inheritance, succession, and pur- 
 chases; such as fix the limits of jurisdiction and subordination 
 of judicatories, appoint the method of procedure in trials, both 
 civil and criminal, and the punishments to be awarded by the 
 judges to the several crimes. I may add, it comprehends also a 
 sort of law of nations for the use of that people, in adjusting 
 the terms of their intercourse with other states and kingdoms, 
 and prescribing rules to be observed in making and conducting 
 peace and war, entering into public treaties, and the like. In 
 this polity or state, however, we find that what concerns religion 
 forms an essential, or rather the principal part. Every thing in 
 their constitution seems to act in subserviency to this great end, 
 the preservation of the purity of their faith and worship. In 
 this there was a very material difference between them and 
 Pagan nations. In these last, the established superstition, in 
 whatever popular traditions it may have been originally founded, 
 was modelled by the ruling powers, in such a manner, as that 
 it might best answer the purpose of an engine of government. 
 The religion of such nations, therefore, can be considered in no 
 other light, than as one of those political machines which in 
 various ways co-operated for the support of the whole. With 
 the Jews, indeed, the case was totally different : for, in their 
 establishment, the religion was manifestly not the means but the 
 end. 
 
 God hath been considered as in some respect the chief magis- 
 trate or head of that community, and the government for that 
 reason has been not unfitly termed a theocracy. Thus much 
 seems even implied in the words of God to Samuel, when the 
 people became solicitous to have a king. And even when the 
 kingly sway was established among them, the preservation of 
 their religion, and of their code of laws, contained in the Pen- 
 tatlsuch, (for they had no other) effectually prevented this change 
 from being a subversion of their polity. The king himself was 
 considered (though in a way somewhat different) as a minister 
 of religion. His office was holy, and he was inaugurated with 
 the like religious ceremony of unction, with which tlie high- 
 priest was separated for the discharge of the duties of his sacred 
 
22 LECTURES OX 
 
 function; and the kind's person in consecjucnce of this rite, was 
 accounted holy as well as the priest's. A strong evidence of 
 the influence of tliis circumstance we have in the behaviour of 
 David to king JSaul, his enemy, who sought his life. David 
 found him asleep and unattended in the cave of Engeddi ; and 
 when desired by some of his followers to kill him, answered, "The 
 " Lord forbid that I should do this thing unto my master, the 
 " Lord's anointed, to stretch forth my hand against him, seeing 
 *' he is the anointed of the Lord : so David stayed his servants 
 " with these words." Nevertheless the legislative power was 
 not in the monarch. God was the sole legislator; for, as was 
 observed, they had no permanent body of laws other than the 
 books of Moses : besides, on every emergency of importance, 
 the deity was consulted by Lrim and Thummim. 
 
 It must be acknowledged, that this original constitution was 
 gradually corrupted by them. Having found means, in pre- 
 judice to the divine commandments, to foist in rules and pre- 
 cepts of their own devising, under the specious name of oral 
 traditions, they rendered them equivalent to laws ; but still, as 
 appears from the name they gave them, under the pretended 
 sanction of divine authority. Thus their religious and civil 
 rights were so blended, as not to admit a separation : the same 
 judcj-es indiscriminately took cognizance of both. These were the 
 elders of the city in smaller matters, and in the first instance ; and 
 the great sanhedrim, senate, or council of the nation, composed 
 of seventy senators and a president, commonly called the elders 
 of the people, in greater matters, and in the last resort. And in 
 this body there was generally a considerable number, though not 
 any fixed proportion, of priests, Levites, and scribes. I mention, 
 in conformity to our modes of thinking, the religious and the 
 civil as different kinds of rights. Their customs and modes of 
 thinking, on the contrary, prevented their making this distinction; 
 all being alike comprehended in the same code, established by 
 the same authority, and under the jurisdiction of the same ma- 
 gistrates. An attention to this is necessary, in order to make 
 us understand the import of some expressions used in the New 
 Testament. Thus the terms vo^/;^^/ and vo^o^/^^jxaXo/, which our 
 translators renders lawyers and doctors of law, are precisely 
 e(|uivalent to what would be termed by us theologists aud doctoiji 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Q3 
 
 of divinity. Not that the words are mistranslated in our ver- 
 sion ; it was even proper in this case, by paying a regard to the 
 etymology of the names, in rendering them into English, to 
 suggest to the unlearned reader the coincidence of the two pro- 
 fessions, divinity and law, among the Hebrews. With them, 
 therefore, the divine and the jurist, the lawyer and the scribe, 
 were terms which denoted nearly the same character ; inasmuch 
 as they had no other law of nations, or municipal law, but their 
 religion, and no other religion but their law. Of any of the 
 Pagan nations we may say with justice, that their religion was a 
 political religion; but of the Jews we should say more properly, 
 that their polity was a religious polity. 
 
 What may serve to give us an idea of such a constitution is 
 the present state of the Mahometan world. Though ]Ma- 
 hometism, in regard to its doctrine and its rites, borrows some- 
 what both from Judaism and from Christianity, it is, as an es«- 
 tablishment, raised more on the Jewish model than on the Chris-- 
 tian. With them the Alcoran is the only standing or statue 
 law of the country; and as it is conceived by them to be of di- 
 vine authority, and therefore unrepealable, it is both the only 
 rule in all judiciary proceedings, and the only check upon the 
 despotism of their princes. Hence it has happened, that though 
 there never arose such a conception among the Jews, as what I 
 may call the history of the synagogue, or among the ]Maho- 
 metans, as the history of the mosque, distinct from the histories 
 of their different nations ; the Christian church and Christian 
 empires, or commonwealths, form histories, which, though con- 
 nected as those of neighbouring republics or kingdoms may be, 
 are in their nature perfectly distinct. It is worth while to in^ 
 quire, what has given rise to this peculiarity in the religion of 
 Jesus. An inquiry of this kind is a proper introduction to the 
 study of ecclesiastical history. It will serve to throw light on 
 the spirit and genius of our religion, and may lead to the de- 
 tection of the latent springs, whence originally flowed that amaz- 
 ing torrent of corruption, by which, in process of time, this most 
 amiable religion has been so miserably defaced. 
 
 The moral precepts of our Lord Jesus Christ are remarkably 
 sublia^e and pure. They are admirably calculated for regulate 
 ing the passions and affections of the heart, out of which, as iSo-> 
 
24 LECTURES ON 
 
 loinoii has observed, are the issues of life. The doctrines he 
 tafu^^ht, which are the motives whereby an observance of the 
 precepts is enforced, are all purely scriptural, arising from con- 
 siderations of the divine nature, and of our own ; especially of 
 God's placability and favour, of the testimony of conscience, of 
 the blessedness which the principles of true religion, faith, and 
 hope, love to God, and love to man, infuse into the heart; and 
 from considerations regarding the future retribution both of the 
 righteous and of the wicked. The positive institutions or cere- 
 monies he appointed, are both few and simple, serving as ex- 
 pressions of the love and gratitude of his disciples to God, their 
 common parent, and to Jesus their master, the oracle of God; 
 of their engagements to the Christian life, and their perfect 
 union among themselves; and that, whilst these institutions 
 were suffered to remain in their native simplicity, wliich con- 
 stituted their true beauty and excellence, it was impossible they 
 should be misunderstood. Vv'ith regard to the founding of 
 what might be called a polity or state, it is manifest that no- 
 thing could be fiirther from his intention. " His kingdom," 
 he acquaints us, " is not of this world." It is not of a secular 
 nature, to be either propagated or defended by the aim of flesh, 
 or to have its laws enforced by human sanctions, or any such 
 temporal punishments as merely human authority can inflict. 
 
 It is impossible to conceive a greater contrast between the 
 spirit vv'hich his instructions breathe, and th^rt spirit of pride 
 and domination, which not many centuries afterwards became 
 the predominant spirit of what then came to be denominated 
 the church. Again and again did Christ admonish his apos- 
 tles and other followers, to live as brethren and equals, not to 
 affect a superiority over their fellow-disciples, or over one an- 
 other; inasmuch as, in this, his kingdom would differ in its 
 fundamental maxims from all the kingdoms of the world ; that 
 that person alone would there be deemed the greatest, whose 
 deportment should be the humblest; and he alone superior, 
 who should prove most serviceable to the rest. As to worldly 
 monarchies or commonwealths, of whatever kind, he taught them 
 to regard it as their duty to submit to such powers as Provi- 
 dence should set over them ; cheerfully paying tribute, and 
 yielding obedience to every human ordinance and command. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ^ 
 
 that should not be found to contradict the law of God. " Rcn- 
 " der to Caesar," said he, " the things which are Caesar's, and 
 " to God the things which are God's." Far from affecting any- 
 secular power himself, he refused a royalty of this sort, when 
 the people would have conferred it, and would not take upon 
 him to decide in a matter of civil right and property, though 
 desired. " Man," said he to the person who applied to him, 
 " who made me a judge or a divider over you?" Then he said 
 to the people, " Take heed and beware of covetousness;" — 
 supporting his admonition, as usual, by an affecting parable. 
 It was the end of his institution to purify the heart, and his 
 lessons were ever calculated for extirpating the seeds of evil 
 that remained there. In a similar manner, when the disciples 
 privately contended among themselves who should be greatest, 
 he took occasion to warn them against ambition., Jesus calling 
 to him a child, placed him in the midst of them, and said, 
 " Verily I say unto you, unless ye be converted," quite chan- 
 ged in your notions and conceptions of things, " and become as 
 " children, ye shall never enter the kingdom of heaven. Who- 
 " soever, therefore, shall become humble as this child, shall be 
 " the greatest there." The same maxim.s were warmly inculcat- 
 ed by his apostles ; and in their time, under the happy influence 
 of their instructions, generally prevailed among Christians. 
 
 Kow indeed was formed a community of the disciples of Je- 
 sus, which was called his church, — a vrord that denotes no more 
 than society or assembly, and is sometimes used in the New 
 Testament with evident analogy to the common use, to signify 
 the wliole community of Christians considered as one body, of 
 which Christ is denominated the head, and sometimes only a 
 particular congregation of Christians. In this general society, 
 founded in the unity of their faith, their hope, their love, ce- 
 mented, r.s it were, by a communion, or joint participation, as 
 occasion offered, in religious offices, in adoration, in baptism, 
 and in the commemoration of the sufferings of their Lord, pre- 
 served by a most friendly intercourse, and by frequent instruc- 
 tions, admonitions, reproofs when necessary, and even by the 
 exclusion of those who had violated such powerful and solemn 
 engagements : in all this, I sa}^, tliere was nothing that inter- 
 fered with the temporal powers. They claimed no jurisdiction 
 
QC) lectures on 
 
 over the person, the liberty, or the property of any man. And 
 if they expelled out of their own society, and, on satisfying 
 their conditions, re-admitted those who had been expelled, they 
 did in this only exercise a right, which (if we may compare 
 great things with small, and heavenly things with earthly,) any 
 private company, like a knot of artists or philosophers, may free- 
 ly exercise ; namely, to give the benefit of their own company 
 and conversation to whom, and on what terms, they judge pro- 
 per; a right which can never justly be considered as in the 
 least infringing on the secular powers. The Christians every 
 where acknowledged themselves the subjects of the state, whe- 
 ther monarchical or republican, absolute or free, under which 
 they lived ; entitled to the same privileges with their fellow-sub- 
 jects, and bound as much as any of them (I might say more, in 
 respect of the peculiar obligation which their religion laid them 
 niider,) to tlie observance of the laws of their country. They 
 pleaded no exemption but in one case; a case wherein every 
 man, though not a Christian, heis a natural title to exemption ; 
 that is, not to obey a law which is unjust in itself, and which 
 l)e is persuaded in his conscience to be so. But in regard to 
 rights merely of a personal or private nature over which the in- 
 dividual has a greater ])ovvcr, far from being pertinacious asser- 
 ters of those, they held it for an invariable maxim, that it is 
 much better to suffer wrong, than either to commit or to avenge 
 it. — This, in my judgment, is the true footing on which the 
 apostolical church stood in relation to the secular powers. To 
 what causes the wonderful change afterwards produced, ought 
 to bo attributed, I intend to make the subject of another pre- 
 lection. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 87 
 
 LECTURE III. 
 
 JL CONCLUDED tlic last discourse I gave you on the subject of 
 iSacred History, with an account of the origin and primitive 
 nature of the Christian church. I observed to you, that, 
 being founded in the concurrence of its members in the faith of 
 the doctrine, and the observance of the precepts of Christ 
 their common Lord, and being supported by brotherly affection 
 one to another, as well as ardent zeal for the happiness of the 
 whole, it was in no respect calculated to interfere with the 
 rights of princes, or afford matter of umbrage or jealousy to 
 the secular powers. But what God makes upright, man al- 
 ways corrupts by his inventions. This was the case of the hu- 
 man species itself. This was the case of the first religion, call 
 it traditional, or call it natural, which, in process of time, did, in 
 the different nations of the earth, degenerate into the grossest 
 idolatry and abominations. And as to what has been commu- 
 nicated since by written revelation, this was certainly the case 
 of the preceding or Mosaical institution. And this, upon in- 
 quiry, will be found to have been eminently the case of the 
 present or Christian dispensation. 
 
 When the disciples in populous cities began to multiply, as 
 no association of imperfect creatures will ever be found, in all 
 respects, perfect, it is by no means strange, that sometimes dif- 
 ferences and interferinjrs should arise between individuals con- 
 cerning matters of property and civil right. These differences 
 occasioned law-suits before the ordinary judges, who were Pa- 
 gans. Law-suits, as might be expected, not only occasioned, 
 to the great prejudice of charity, heart-burnings among them- 
 selves, but tended to bring a scandal on the profession, whose 
 criterion or badge had been expressly declared by their Master 
 to be their mutual love. Examples there were of these mis- 
 chiefs as early as the times of the apostles, particularly at Cq^ 
 
28 LECTURES ON 
 
 rinth, a city abounding in wealth and luxury. Tlie apostle 
 Paul, effectually to remedy this evil, and to prevent the scandal 
 and hurt which must arise from its continuance, first expostu- 
 lates with the Corinthians (1 Cor. vi. 1, &c.) on the nature and 
 dignity of their Christian vocation, to which it would be much 
 more suitable patiently to suffer injuries, than, with so inimin^ent 
 a risk of charity, to endeavour to obtain redress : — " Why do 
 *' ve not rather," says he, " take wrong? Why do ye not ra- 
 " ther suffer yourselves to be defrauded ?" And even should 
 the injury appear too great to be entirely overlooked, he enjoins 
 them, and with them doubtless all Christians in the like circum- 
 stances, to submit those differences which should unhappily 
 arise among them, to arbitrators chosen from among themselves. 
 By this expedient a double end would be answered: the parties 
 Vv'ould, by the mediation of their brethren, be more easily con- 
 ciliated to each other, and the reproach of the heathen would 
 be prevented. It is evident that in this there was no encroach- 
 ment on the province of the magistrate. A similar practice, 
 ever since the Babylonish captivity, had obtained among the 
 Jews in all the countries through which they were dispersed. 
 To put an end to differences, either by compromise or by arbi- 
 tration, is the exercise of a natural right, which all civil esta- 
 blishments acknowledge, and which most of them shew a dis- 
 position to encourage and promote. Jars and quarrels are uni- 
 versally admitted to be evils, though unavoidable in the present 
 lapsed condition of human nature. Judicatories are erected 
 to put an end betimes to these evils. The litigation of 
 the parties, though a bad consequence, is permitted solely to 
 prevent a worse. But no human polity commands men to be 
 litigious. The less a man is so, he is the better subject of the 
 state. The apostle's aim is to crush strife as early as possible, 
 and to prevent an ill effect, though not the worst effect, of pri- 
 vate differences; to wit, public contention in courts of law. His 
 advice is such as every good man, every lover of peace, and 
 therefore every good citizen, would very readily give to the 
 members of any society in which he had a concern. It was, 
 besides, perfectly suitable to the peaceable maxims of his great 
 master: " Resist not evil. Agree with thine adversary quick- 
 " ly whilst thou art in the way with him." And, " Blessed 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL IIISTOUV. ^9 
 
 " arc the peace-makers, for they shall he called the children of 
 " God." 
 
 Let it be remarked further, that those primitive and chosen 
 arbiters claimed no coercive power of any kind over their fellow- 
 Christians. The judgment they pronounced was very properly 
 termed, in primitive times, the judgment of charity or love. 
 By this principle alone were the judges influenced (without 
 salary or emoluments) to undertake the office : by this principle 
 alone were the parties disposed to submit to the sentence : and 
 by this principle alone, where an injury had been committed, 
 the offender was induced, as fiir as possihle, to make reparation, 
 and the offended as readily to grant forgiveness. No mention 
 do we find of bailiffs, or tipstaves, fines, imprisonments, or 
 distraining of goods. As their principal view in examining and 
 deciding such questions was the radical cure of the evil, that is, 
 of every thing that might look like animosity or discontent 
 among the disciples of Christ ; they neither had, nor desired to 
 have any other means of enforcing their decisions, than such 
 as the love of peace and union, and the interest of the com- 
 mon cause, necessarily gave them. To have applied, as um- 
 pires in Christian states are wont, for the interposition of the 
 secular arm to enforce their decrees, would have been recurring 
 to that very evil, for the prevention of which they had been 
 nominated as judges by their brethren. 
 
 It deserves also to be taken notice of, that the apostle, far 
 from taking upon him to assign this office of terminating their 
 differences to such as he might think properly qualified, does 
 not so much as recommend, or even mention to them any in- 
 dividual, or any class of men. On the contrary, he leaves the 
 matter entirely to their own free choice. And indeed it was 
 proper it should be so. This expedient is recommended 
 purely from the charitable and prudential considerations of 
 decency and peace. These could not be promoted otherwise 
 than by the people's perfect confidence, not only in the equity 
 but in the abilities of the persons to be entrusted, who there- 
 fore doubtless ought to be of their electing. Besides, it would 
 have ill suited the genuine but spiritual dignity of the apostolic 
 office, for Paul, so unlike the examples given by his Lord, to 
 have assumed an authoritative diction in matters merely tern- 
 
so LECTURES ON 
 
 poral. For this reason I am inclined to think, that, if he had 
 judged it necessary to offer his opinion as to the particular per- 
 sons proper to be chosen, he would have judged it fitter to 
 exempt the persons from a charge which might, in some re- 
 spects, appear foreign from their office, than to recommend 
 them to it. 
 
 The consequence, however, in fact was, that at least in seve- 
 ral congregations or churches, the choice fell upon their mini- 
 sters, a very natural effect of that confidence and respect which, 
 in those times of purity, we have ground to believe they merited. 
 Nor let it be imagined, from any thing advanced above, that 
 this was a charge which the ministers of religion, as things then 
 stood, ought to have declined. I have indeed acknowledged, 
 that, in some respects, the cognizance of secular matters did not 
 so naturally unite with their spiritual functions. But, consider 
 the affair in another view, and we shall find that both in regard 
 to the motive which influenced them, and the end which their 
 acceptance of this task tended to promote, there was a real suit- 
 ableness to the nature and design of their office. Hardly could 
 ambition be supposed to operate in inducing them to accept a 
 charge which added to their labour, and exposed them the more 
 to the notice of the common enemy, and consequently to dan- 
 ger, without adding to their wealth, or rank, or even power, in 
 the common acceptation of the term. For the award of these 
 judges was no more than the declaration of their opinion; and 
 the execution of the sentence was no more than the voluntary 
 acquiescence of the parties. The pastors derived no kind of 
 authority from this prerogative, except that which integrity and 
 discernment invariably secure with those for whose benefit these 
 talents are exerted. An authority this which depends entirely 
 on the right discharge of the trust, and is incompatible with the 
 abuse of it. Their motive, therefore, could only be the charitable 
 desire of making peace and preventing offences. The harmony 
 of Christians among themselves, and their unblemished reputa- 
 tion in respect of the heathen, were no less manifestly the bless- 
 ed ends to which their labour of love contributed. 
 
 But might it not be urged, on the other hand, that this work 
 would infallibly prove an avocation from the spiritual and more 
 important duties of their office? In those early ages, before the 
 
FXCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 31 
 
 love of many had waxed cold, before the Christian conr^regations 
 were become either so numerous or so opulent as some time af- 
 terwards they became, it is not to be imagined that such ques- 
 tions, in relation to property and civil rights, would be either 
 so frequent, or so intricate, as to occupy a considerable portion 
 of the arbitrator's time, and thereby interfere with his other 
 more essential duties. Had it been otherwise, this judiciary 
 charge ought doubtless, from the beginning, to have been devolv- 
 ed into other hands. The apostles themselves, we find, at first 
 took the trouble of distributing to the people, according to the 
 respective necessities of each, the money which the charity and 
 zeal of the converts had thrown into the common stock. But 
 when this work became so burdensome, as to interfere with the 
 peculiar functions of the apostleship, they made no delay in re- 
 signing it to others. " It is not reason," said they, " that we 
 " should leave the word of God, and serve tables." The like 
 part, no doubt, ought those primitive pastors to have acted; the 
 like part, no doubt, they would have acted, had there been the 
 like occasion. That they did not, ought to be accounted by us 
 as sufficient evidence that the like occasion did not exist, and 
 that the task was then no way cumbersome. They had apos- 
 tolical example alike for undertaking an office of benevolence, 
 when it did not interfere, and for renouncinfj it when it did in- 
 terfere, with the sacred duties of their spiritual function. 
 
 But to return, this custom of nominating their pastors to be 
 arbitrators of all their dift'erences in matters of civil property and 
 right, from being pretty common, seems very quickly to have 
 become general. The example of one Christian society in- 
 fluenced another, who did not choose to appear deficient in any 
 testimony of esteem for their teachers. From being general it 
 became universal. Every congregation would think it proper 
 to avoid distinguishing themselves by a singularity, which would 
 be understood to reflect either on the judgment or the discre- 
 tion of their pastors. 
 
 Some learned men seem to be of opinion, that the business of 
 determining such civil controversies as arose between Chris- 
 tians, belonged at first to the whole congregation; or, in 
 other words, to that particular church or society whereof the 
 parties concerned were members. But this mistake appears to 
 
3£ LECtURES ON 
 
 have arisen from confounding two things totally distinct. 
 When one Christian had ground, real or supposed, to complain 
 of the conduct of another as unbrotherly and injurious, after 
 private methods of reclaiming the offender had been tried in vain 
 by the offended, it belonged to the congregation to judge be- 
 ^tween them; and either to effect a reconciliation, or to discard one 
 who, by his obstinacy in the wrong, shewed himself unworthy 
 of their fellowship. This method had been clearly pointed out 
 to them by their great founder. " If thy brother," says he, 
 " trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault, between thee 
 *' and him alone : if he hear thee, thou hast gained thy bro- 
 " ther: but if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one 
 *' or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses, 
 *' every word may be established; and if he neglect to hear 
 ^* them, tell it to the church ; but if he neglect to hear the 
 *' church, let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican. 
 *' Verily I say unto you. Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, 
 *' shall be bound in heaven ; and whatsoever ye shall loose on 
 " earth, shall be loosed in heaven." What ye thus do, agree- 
 ably to the instructions I give you, God himself will ratify. 
 The practice of the apostolic age, which has the best title to the 
 denomination of primitive, is the surest commentary on this 
 precept of our Lord. Not only were such private offences then 
 judged by the church, that is, the congregation, but also those 
 scandals which affected the whole Christian fraternity. Ac- 
 cordingly, the judgment which Paul, by the Spirit of God, had 
 formed concerning the incestuous person, he enjoins the church, 
 to whom his epistle is directed, that is, (to use his own words 
 for an explanation) " them who at Corinth are sanctified in 
 *' Christ Jesus, called to be saints, to pronounce and execute." 
 And in his second epistle to the same church, (chap. ii. 6.) 
 he says, in reference to the same delinquent, " Sufficient to 
 " such a man is the censure which was inflicted by many ;" 
 'wro Tuv x?.novuv, by the community. And (ver. 10.) " To whom 
 '' ye forgave any thing," addressing himself always to the con- 
 gregation, " I forgive also." We admit, with the learned 
 Dodwell [a], that in the censure inflicted on the incestuous 
 person, the Christians at Corinth were but the executors of the 
 [rt] De Jure Laicorum sacerdotali, c. iii. § 10. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 33 
 
 doom awarded by the apostle. Nor does any one question the 
 apostolical authority in such matters over both the flock and 
 the pastors. But from the words last quoted, it is evident that 
 he acknowledges, at the same time, the ordinary power in re- 
 gard to discipline lodged in the congregation ; and from the 
 confidence he had in the discretion and integrity of the Corin- 
 thians, he promises his concurrence in what they shall judge 
 proper to do. " To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive 
 " also." Now, though in after-times, the charge of this matter 
 also came to be devolved, first on the bishop and presbyters, 
 and afterwards solely on the bishop, yet that the people, as well 
 as the presbyters, as far down, at least, as to the middle of the 
 third century, retained some share in the decision of questions 
 wherein morals v/cre immediately concerned, is manifest from 
 Cyprian's letters still extant. In his time, when congregations 
 were become very numerous, the inquiry and dehberation were 
 holden (perhaps then m.ore commodiously) in the ecclesiastical 
 college, called the presbytery, consisting of the bishop, the pres- 
 byters, and the deacons. When this was over, the result of 
 their inquiry and consultations was reported to the whole con- 
 gregation belonging to that church, who were called together 
 on purpose, in order to obtain their approbation of what had 
 been done, and their consent to the resolution that had been 
 taken : for without their consent no judgment could regularly 
 be put in execution. 
 
 But this is quite a different subject of enquiry from questions 
 merely in regard to right or property. The one is more ana- 
 logous to a criminal, the other to a civil process. Two persons 
 may differ in regard to the title to a particular subject, each 
 claiming it as his, though neither accuse the other of injurious, 
 or unchristian treatment; it is not because these pleas always 
 spring from some malignity of disposition, that this amicable 
 method of terminating them is recommended ; but it is because 
 there is an imminent hazard th.at, if long continued, and brought 
 to public view, they breed some malignity in the minds of the 
 parties towards each other, and afford a handle to idolaters to 
 blaspheme the good ways of the Lord. Now it is manifest, in 
 the first place, that questions of civil right are not so much 
 withiu the sphere of the multitude, as those which concern 
 
 c 
 
31 LECTUHES ON 
 
 practical religion and morals; and, secondly, that the apostle 
 does not recommend it to the people to take such secular mat- 
 ters under their own cognizance collectively, but only to appoint 
 proper persons to judge in them. " If then," says he, " ye 
 '' have judgment ot" things pertaining to this life, set them to 
 " judge who are least esteemed in the church." In the epithet 
 least esteemed^ I imagine he couches an ironical reproof to the 
 Corinthians, for their appearing to be at a loss in finding per- 
 sons proper to discuss matters in themselves of very little mo- 
 ment compared with those with which, as Christians, they were 
 conversant. But to guard against being mistaken by too literal 
 an interpretation of his words, he immediately subjoins, " I 
 " speak this to shame you. Is it so, that there is not a wise 
 " man amongst you? No, not one, that shall be able to judge 
 ** between his brethren?" So that it appears extremely pro- 
 bable, that unless what was first only a civil controversy, after- 
 wards became a scandal, by the improper behaviour of one or 
 both of the litigants, the people did not intermeddle in the 
 cause. They left it entirely to the arbiters, or wise men, whom 
 they had nominated for the purpose : and these, as was observed 
 before, came at last universally to be the pastors. 
 
 Time, the greatest of all innovators, though, when it ope- 
 rates by slow degrees, the least observable; — time, I say, which 
 alters every thing, did, from the universality of the practice of 
 committing this trust to the pastors, and from its continuance 
 for a course of successions in their hands, at length, in effect, 
 establish it as a right. As charity cooled, ambition, a very 
 subtle passion, insensibly insinuated itself. This it would do at 
 first more modestly, under the guise of public virtue, as a de- 
 sire of being more extensively useful to the people — afterwards 
 more boldly, as a commendable zeal for every thing that could 
 be deemed a prerogative of the sacred order. When persecu^ 
 tions had ceased, the churches, as they grew in the number and 
 the wealth of their members, produced, in proportion, more 
 fruits of contention, and fewer of brotherly love. Every thing, 
 then, that might give any sort of ascendancy over the minds of 
 others, would be greedily grasped at ; and this privilege of 
 judging, in civil matters, would then be very naturally claimed 
 by the bishops, as a part of their office. It must, however, be 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 35 
 
 acknowledged, that thoiigli, in particular instances, this trust 
 might be abused, it was, upon the whole, expedient for the 
 Christian brotherhood, and could scarcely be considered as dan- 
 gerous, so long as it remained on the original footing, and was 
 unsupported by the secular arm. 
 
 But when Christianity came to receive the countenance and 
 sanction of the ruling powers, the Roman emperors imagined 
 they could not more effectually show their zeal for the cause of 
 Christ, than by confirming ever}-- prerogative which had been 
 considered as belonging to his ministers. It is, besides, not 
 unlikely, that the happy influence which the pastoral decisions, 
 aided by the authority of religion, generally had in composing 
 differences among the people, would prove an additional motive 
 for their interposition in support of a practice seemingly so con- 
 ducive to public utility. But whatever be in this, so it was, 
 that the bishop's power of judging, in secular matters, was not 
 only ratified by law, but through an ill-judged indulgence, as 
 soon appeared by the event, was further extended, backed by 
 the secular arm, and rendered compulsory. Constantine, the 
 first Christian emperor, made a law, that the sentence of the 
 bishop should, in every case, be final, and that the magistrate 
 should be obliged to execute it; that if, in any cause depending 
 before the secular judge, in any stage of the process, either 
 party, though in direct opposition to the other party, should ap- 
 peal to the bishop — to his tribunal, from which there could be 
 no appeal — the cause should instantly be remitted. 
 
 Then indeed, began the episcopal judgment to be properly 
 forensic, having compulsive execution by the ministry of the 
 the magistrate. Then, indeed, began the prelates, for the 
 greater state and dignity, in their judicial proceedings, to adopt 
 the model and appendages of civil judicatories, and to have 
 their chancellors, commissaries, officials, advocates, proctors, 
 registers, apparitors, &c. &c. Then originated these phrases, 
 unheard before, episcopal jurisdiction^ episcopal audience, and 
 other such like. \\' hen one considers the origin of ecclesiasti- 
 cal judicature, as deduced above, and the reasons for which 
 some expedient of this sort was first recommended by Paul to 
 the Corinthians, it is impossible to conceive any thing more 
 unsuitable to his design, than the footing on which it was now 
 
 c2 
 
66 LECTURES ON 
 
 established. One principal ground for which the apostle advise 
 ed the measure was, to avoid the scandal which one Christian 
 suing another before a tribunal of infidels, must necessarily 
 bring upon their religion. " Brother," says he, " goeth to 
 '' law with brother, and that before the unbelievers." Now 
 this evil was radically cured when Christianity became the es- 
 tablished religion, and the secular judges themselves were taken 
 from the Christian brotherhood. I acknowledge, however, 
 that this is not the only ground of the apostle's recommenda- 
 tion : his other reason is, that to prevent law-suits entirely, by 
 a compromise of any differences that might arise, or by a 
 friendly reference to proper umpires, would be greatly condu- 
 cive to the cause of charity, which is the common cause, by 
 preserving peace among themselves : but no sooner is the bir 
 shop, or indeed any man, vested with legal and coercive autho- 
 rity, insomuch that people can be compelled to appear before 
 him, and to submit to his sentence, than he ceases to be an 
 umpire ; his court is erected into a secular tribunal, and the 
 procedure before him is as really a law-suit as that which is 
 carried on before any other judge. All the weight, therefore, of 
 the apostle's second reason from fraternal love, operates as 
 strongly against suing an adversary in this court, as it does 
 against suing him in any other. 
 
 It was not at first understood, or duly attended to, how 
 great the change was, which this new arrangement of Constan-r 
 tine made in the constitution of the empire. It was, in effect, 
 throwing the whole judiciary power of the state into the hands 
 of the clergy. All the ordinary judicatories were now reduced 
 to act solely in subordination to the spiritual courts, which 
 could overrule the proceedings of the secular, whilst their own 
 were not liable to be overruled by any. The civil magistrate, 
 who might be compelled to execute their sentences, but was 
 not entitled to revise or alter them, was, in fact, no better than 
 the bishop's serjeant. His office, in this instance, was by nq 
 means magisterial : it was merely ministerial and subservient. 
 
 It was in vain, at the period at which we are now arrived, tp 
 imagine, that in the same way as formerly, a sense of religion 
 should operate on the minds of the people. This is a senti- 
 ment of too delicate a nature to be rendered compatible with 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 37 
 
 the mcaisures now adopted. From the moment the pastor was 
 armed with the terrors of the magistrate, the power of rcHgion 
 was superseded, and the gentle voice of love was drowned in the 
 clamour of commitments, forfeitures, and distress of goods. It 
 deserves also to he remarked, that whilst matters remained on 
 the primitive footingj there was the strongest tie on the pastors 
 to a strict observance of equity, as it was thence only that their 
 judgments could derive authority, or command respect. The 
 power itself was of such a nature as could not long subsist after 
 being perverted : the case was quite different now. It appear- 
 ed of little consequence to draw respect to a verdict, to which 
 they could enforce obedience : and this could equally be effect- 
 ed, whatever were the sentence, just or unjust, reasonable or 
 absurd. Of the like pernicious tendency, as they flowed from 
 the same cause, were the measures that were afterwards adopt- 
 ed to enforce ecclesiastical censures and excommunications, by 
 the sanction of civil laws, inflicting pains and penalties. When 
 so much depended on the dignitaries of the church, they could 
 not fail to meet with all the adulation, and other seductive arts, 
 by which the favour of the great and powerful is, through the 
 influence of avarice, and other irregular desires, commonly 
 courted by inferiors and dependants. Whether this would 
 contribute to improve these shepherds of the flock in humility 
 and meekness, may be submitted to the determination of every 
 impartial and judicious hearer. One favourable circumstance, 
 however, which perhaps inclined the people more easily to 
 acquiesce in it, was, that it was the only considerable check 
 which they had, for ages, on the too absolute power of the em- 
 peror. It is thus that Providence, in the worst of circumstan- 
 ces, is ever at work, bringing good out of evil, making usurpa- 
 tions on different sides balance and control one another, and 
 rendering the greatest calamities reciprocal correctives. 
 
 But to proceed in our narration : the emperor Valens still 
 enlarged the jurisdiction of the bishops, assigning to them the 
 charge of fixing the prices of all vendible commodities, which 
 was, it must be owned, a most extraordinary assignment. It is 
 but doing justice to some worthy bishops to declare, that far 
 from being gratified by these changes, they loudly complained 
 of them. Possidonius relates concerning Augustine in parti- 
 
38 LECTURES ON 
 
 cular, that though he gave attendance to this forensic business 
 all the morning, sometimes till dinner-time, and sometimes till 
 night, he was wont to say, that it was a great grievance to him, 
 as it diverted his attention from what was much more properly 
 his charge ; that it was, in fact, to leave things useful, and to 
 attend to things tumultuous and perplexed ; that St. Paul 
 had not assumed this office to himself, well knowinjj how un- 
 suitable it was to that of a preacher of the gospel, but wds de- 
 sirous that it should be given to others. Such were the senti- 
 ments of that respectable father of the church. But every 
 bishop was not of the same mind with Augustine. 
 
 About seventy years afterwards, when this authority came to 
 be very much abused, the law of Constantino was repealed by 
 Arcadius and Honorius, who limited the bishops, in civil mat- 
 ters, to those only which were referred to their judgment by 
 the consent of both the litigants. But in some cities the bi- 
 shops were already become too powerful, and too rich, to be so 
 easily dispossessed. In Rome particularly, this new regulation 
 liad little or no effect, till Valentianus, about the middle of the 
 fifth century, being himself in Rome, renewed it, and caused 
 it to be put in execution. However, it was soon afterwards re- 
 voked by subsequent princes, \vho restored to the clergy a great 
 part of that jurisdiction which had been taken away. Justinian 
 in particular established the episcopal tribunal, allotting to it, in 
 the first place, all causes that could be any way understood to 
 concern religion, then the ecclesiastical delinquencies of clergy- 
 men, and also diverse sorts of voluntary jurisdiction over the 
 laity. By the methods above recited, it happened, we find at 
 last, that the brotherly corrections, and charitable interpositions, 
 instituted by Christ and his apostles, degenerated into mere world- 
 ly domination. When, on the one hand, the ministers of reli- 
 gion thought fit to exchange that parental tenderness, which 
 was the glory of their predecessors, for that lordly superiority 
 which succeeded, it was a natural consequence, that, on the 
 other hand, the amiable reverence of the child should be over- 
 whelmed in the fearful submission of the slave. " Perfect 
 " love," says the apostle John, " casteth out fear." It is no 
 less true in the converse. " Perfect fear casteth out love." 
 The great engine of the magistrate is terror; of the pastor, 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 39 
 
 lote. The advancement of the one is tlie destruction of the 
 other. To attempt to combine them in the same character, is 
 to attempt to form a hideous monster at the best. Paul under- 
 stood the difference, and marked it well in his epistles, especial- 
 ly those to Timothy and to Titus. " The servant of the Lord," 
 says he, " must not strive, but be gentle to all men, apt to teach^ 
 " patient and meek, not greedy of sordid lucre, no striker." 
 The weapons of his warfare are not carnal : he forbears threat- 
 ening, and does not employ the arm of flesh : his weapons are the 
 soft powers of persuasion, animated by tenderness and love. 
 In vain it is pretended, that the ecclesiastical jurisdiction, above 
 explained, is not of the nature of dominion, like the secular. 
 Where is the difference that can be called material? Is not the 
 execution, wherever there is either opportunity or delay on the 
 part of him who is cast, effected ultimately by the same methods 
 of coercion, imprisonment; distraining of goods, and the like, 
 as in the temporal judicatories ? Are not the parties loaded with 
 expenses to the full as heavy ? Or are there not as many hun- 
 gry vultures, retainers to the court, that must be satisfied ? Is 
 there not the same scope for contention, altercation, and chi- 
 cane ? Or are the processes in the spiritual courts (where such 
 spiritual courts still subsist) less productive of feuds and ani- 
 mosities than in the secular ? 
 
 In almost all cases wherein a particular mode of religion has 
 obtained, in a country, a legal establishment, in preference to 
 every other mode, there has been a strong tendency, in the acts 
 of the legislature, to confound civil rights and civil authority 
 with those that are purely moral or religious. Nor is it so easy 
 a matter in practice, to ascertain the boundary, in every in- 
 stance, and draw the line by which the one may be effectually 
 discriminated from the other, as one at first would be apt to 
 imagine. The distinction has been better preserved in our 
 own country, notwithstanding the few exceptions of little mo- 
 ment which I shall mention, than perhaps in any other. There 
 is a part of the office of a minister in this country that is purely 
 of a civil nature, derived from the law of the land, and quite 
 extraneous to the business of a pastor, which, in strictness, is 
 only what is called the cure of souls. By this secular branch, 
 I mean, the power with which presbyteries are vested by the 
 
40 LECTURES ON 
 
 legislature, in giving decrees, after proper inquiry, against the 
 laiid-holdcrs, or heritors, as we more commonly term them, for 
 the repairing, or the rebuilding, of churches, manses, and paro- 
 chial schools; in the taking trial, and the admitting of school- 
 masters ; in the allotting of glebes, and perhaps some other 
 things of a similar nature. That the presbytery, in these mat- 
 ters, does not act as an ecclesiastical court, is evident, not only 
 from the nature of the thing, but from this further considera- 
 tion, its not being in these, at least, in what relates to churches, 
 manses, and glebes, as in all other matters under the correction 
 of its ecclesiastical superiors, tlie provincial synod, and the na- 
 tional assembly, but under the review of the highest civil judi- 
 catory in this country, the court of session. 
 
 Another kind of civil power committed to presbyteries, is the 
 power of presenting (as some understand the law) to vacant 
 parishes, upon the devolution of the right, by the patron's neg- 
 lecting to exercise it for six months after the commencement 
 of the vacancy. In this, however, our ecclesiastical ideas, and 
 our political, so much interfere, that the power of issuing out a 
 presentation, has never yet, so far as I know, been exerted by 
 any presbytery, in the manner in which it is commonly exerted 
 by lay-patrons, or in the manner in which it was formerly ex- 
 erted by bishops in this country, in the times of episcopacy, or 
 in which it is at present exerted by bishops in Ireland, as well 
 as in the southern part of the island. Presbyteries do com- 
 monly, I think, on such occasions, consult the parish, and re- 
 gulate their conduct in the same manner as though patronages 
 were not in force by law. I should, perhaps, add to the afore- 
 said list of particulars not properly ecclesiastical, the concern 
 which the pastor must take, along with the heritors and elders 
 of the parish, in the management and disposal of the public 
 charities, also the power of church judicatories in appointing con- 
 tributions for pious uses, to be made throughout the churches 
 within their jurisdiction. 
 
 The conduct of a minister in regard to the few cases, which, 
 in strictness, are without the sphere of his spiritual vocation, is, 
 it must be owned, extremely delicate ; and not the less so that 
 in some of the particulars enumerated, as in what regards manses 
 and glebes, ho will naturally be considered as a party, from 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 41 
 
 the similarity of situation in which they are all placed, in the 
 very cause in which he must act as a jud^e. Whether it is a 
 real advantage to us to possess this kind of secular authority, is 
 a question foreign to my present purpose. For my own part, I 
 am strongly inclined to think, that if the legislature had made 
 proper provision for supplying parishes and ministers with suffi- 
 cient churches and manses, by means of the civil magistrate 
 only, it had not been the worse for us. As, on the one hand, 
 we should have been freed from temptations to partiality, which 
 will, no doubt, sometimes influence our judgment as well as 
 that of other men, so, on the other hand, we should have been 
 freed from the suspicion and reproach of it, i'rom which the 
 strictest regard to equity and right will not always be sufficient 
 to protect us. And in a character, on the purity whereof so 
 much depends, I must say, it is of no small consequence, not 
 only that it be unbiassed by any partial regards, but even that 
 it be beyond the remotest suspicion of such a bias. 
 
 In England, the natural limits have been very ill preserved, 
 and both kinds of jurisdiction, the civil and the religious, are 
 made strangely to encroach on one another. 1 do not here so 
 much allude to the judicial power of the consistorial courts, in 
 matters matrimonial and testamentary, though these are purely 
 secular, as to the confusion in what regards the executive part 
 of jurisdiction. As, with them, church censures are followed 
 with civil penalties, the loss of liberty, or imprisonment, and 
 the forfeiture of the privileges of a citizen, the clergy must have 
 become absolute lords of the persons and properties of the peo- 
 ple, had there not been lodged in the civil judicatories a para- 
 mount jurisdiction, by which the sentences of the spiritual courts 
 can be revised, suspended, and annulled. 
 
 Add to this, that the participation of one of the sacraments 
 having been with them, by a very short-sighted policy, pervert- 
 ed into a test for civil offices, a minister may be compelled, by 
 the magistrate, to admit a man who is well known to be a most 
 improper person, an atheist, blasphemer, or profligate. The 
 tendency of this prostitution plainly is, by the law of the land, 
 to make void the institution of Jesus Christ, as far as regards 
 its meaning and design. By the appointment of Jesus Christ, 
 the participation was to serve in the participants purely as a 
 
45 LECTURES ON 
 
 testimony of their faith in him, and love to him, *' Do this in 
 '* remembrance of me." By the law of the land, it is rendered 
 a qualification, or test, absolutely necessary for tlie attainment 
 of certain lucrative offices, and for securing a continuance in 
 them when attained; so that, in a great number, it can serve as 
 a testimony of nothing but of their secular views. And to 
 render this testimony, if possible, perfectly unequivocal, such 
 people must have a certificate from the minister of their receiv- 
 ing the sacrament, to present to their superiors when required. 
 For my own part, I do not see how the divine commandment, 
 in what regards its spirit, power, and use, could be more effec- 
 tually abrogated by statute than by thus retaining the form, 
 the letter, the body of the precept, and, at the same time, to- 
 tally altering the purpose, object, and intention. 
 
 jMen have been very long in discovering, and even yet seem 
 scarcely to have discovered, that true religion is of too delicate 
 a nature to be compelled, if I may so express myself, by the 
 coarse implements of human authority and worldly sanctions. 
 Let the law of the land restrain vice and injustice of every kind, 
 as ruinous to the peace and order of society, for this is its pro- 
 per province ; but let it not tamper with religion, by attempt- 
 ing to enforce its exercises and duties. These, unless they be 
 free-will offerings, are nothing ; they are worse. By such an 
 unnatural alliance, and ill-judged aid, hypocrisy and supersti- 
 tion may, indeed, be greatly promoted, but genuine piety never 
 fails to suffer. 
 
 Another consequence of the confusion of spiritual jurisdiction 
 and secular in that church, however respectable on other ac- 
 counts, (for these remarks affect not the doctrine taught, the 
 morals inculcated, nor the form of worship practised, but 
 only the polity and discipline,) another consequence, I say, is, 
 that ecclesiastical censures among them have now no regard, 
 agreeably to their original destination, to purity and manners. 
 They serve only as a political engine for the eviction of tithes, 
 surplice fees, and the like, and for the execution of other sen- 
 tences in matters purely temporal. Would it have been possi- 
 ble to devise a more effectual method, had that been the ex- 
 press purpose, for rendering the clerical character odious, and 
 the discipline contemptible? Luckily with us, in those few mat- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 4^fy 
 
 ters of a secular nature above specified, wherein presbyteries 
 are, in the first instance, appointed judges, when the presbytery 
 have given their decree, they have no part in the execution, 
 and, indeed, no further concern in the matter. Their decision 
 is merely declarative of right, and their power is exactly similar 
 to that of arbitrators. The only difference is, that the former 
 are authorized by law, the latter by the nomination of the par- 
 ties : but in neither is there any coercive authoiity. 'I'he partv 
 in whose favour the sentence is given, applies lor the interven- 
 tion of the lords of session to compel the obedience of all con- 
 cerned. This interposition is always granted as a thing of 
 course, unless v/hen the presbyterial decree is brought under the 
 review of that court by suspension. In this case the lords may 
 affirm, reverse, or alter, as they see cause. Then it becomes 
 their own sentence, and is enforced in the usual manner. But 
 no process in our church can terminate in excommunication, or 
 in any ecclesiastical censures, but a process of scandal, by which 
 term is commonly understood some flagrant immorality. These 
 censures our constitution does not permit us to employ, on any 
 occasion, as expedients for either securing our property, or as- 
 serting our prerogatives and pov/er. And as we have not the 
 same temptations with our neighbours to abuse them, so neither 
 does the constitution in this country permit the civil magistrate 
 to interfere with the procedure of the ecclesiastical courts. A 
 sufficient security is provided against the rashness or injustice 
 of the inferior judicatories, the presbyteries, by the right of ap- 
 peal to the immediately superior tribunal, the synod, and thence, 
 in the last resort, to the general assembly. Besides, where no 
 civil penalty follows the sentence of the church, as is now very 
 properly the case with us, the church courts have tliis additi-onal 
 motive, to be cautious of employing those censures except in 
 clamant cases, namely, that if their sentences be not supported 
 by what I may call the verdict of the country, the general sense 
 of the people, they will very soon, and very justly, become con- 
 temptible. And this is the true footing on which all eccle- 
 siastical censures ought to stand. But from what has been said, 
 it is evident that, in our establishment, sufficient care has been 
 taken that there be no material encroachment of cither side, on 
 the natural province of the other. What I have said on this 
 
44> LECTURES ON 
 
 article, it will be observed, militates chiefly, if not solely, against 
 what maybe called a coercive power in the ministers of religion, 
 either direct, by seizing the persons, and distraining the goods, 
 of obnoxious people, or, which, in my judgment, is still worse, 
 an indirect coercion, by employing ecclesiastical censures as the 
 tools for effecting the same worldly purpose. Thus much only 
 by the way. 
 
 I return to the narrative. When the western provinces were 
 entirely severed from the eastern, Italy, France, and Germany, 
 making one empire, and Spain a kingdom, the principal bishops 
 in all these four provinces, who, to a considerable share of the 
 national riches, had this advantage also, that they were at the 
 head of an order which engrossed almost all the little learning 
 of the times, were commonly chosen by the prince for his coun- 
 sellors. The weight which this honourable distinction gave 
 them in temporal matters, and in affairs of state, brought an im- 
 mense increase of authority to the episcopal tribunal. In less 
 than two hundred years afterwards, they pretended an absolute 
 and exclusive right to all criminal and civil jurisdiction over the 
 clergy, and, in various cases, over the laity also, under pretext 
 that, though the persons were not, the causes were, ecclesiasti- 
 cal. Beside those, they invented another sort of causes, which 
 they denominated causes of mixed cognizance, insisting that, in 
 them, the bishop might judge, as well as the magistrate, and 
 that the right of prevention ought to take place in favour of 
 that court before which the cause should first be brought. In 
 consequence of this curious distinction, they, at length, through 
 their exquisite solicitude, and the attention of their agents and 
 dependents, who found their account in their diligence, appro- 
 priated all such causes, leaving none of them to the secular 
 judge. And as to those which remained still uncomprehended, 
 under either denomination of ecclesiastical or mixed, they came 
 at last to be comprised under one universal rule, which they 
 most assiduously and strenuously inculcated as the very founda- 
 tion of the faith; which was, that every cause devolved on the 
 ecclesiastical tribunal, if the magistrate either refused, or neg- 
 lected, to do justice. It was no wonder that in those days it 
 should prove a common saying, that " except in cases border- 
 *' ing on the infidels, a good lawyer makes a better bishop than 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 45 
 
 ** a f^ood divine :" for the more he was occupied in licarin<T 
 causes, and in other secular functions, the less leisure he had 
 for teaching, which fell at last to be totally disused by those of 
 that station. Thus what at first was the bishop's principal, I 
 may say his whole, business, came to be regarded as no part 
 of it. 
 
 But if the clerical claims had rested here, the state of Chris- 
 tendom had yet been tolerable. There still remained a remedy. 
 Whenever the people in republics, and the princes in mo- 
 narchies, should see the abuses become insupportable, they 
 would, by their ordinances and edicts, reduce this overgrown 
 authority of churchmen within reasonable limits, as, in former 
 times, had been often done when judged necessary. But that 
 encroaching spirit, which first put Christian states under the 
 yoke, in a great measure succeeded at last in depriving them of 
 the means of wrenching it from their necks. The lordly pre- 
 lates having already arrogated to themselves all the pleas of 
 clergymen, together with so many pleas of laymen, under the 
 colour of spirituality, and having shared in almost all the rest, 
 either by the name of mixed cognizance, or by superseding the 
 magistrate, under the pretext that justice had been denied, or 
 unduly delayed, they proceeded, about the middle of the eleventh 
 century, aided by the profound ignorance and gross superstition 
 of the age, to broach and maintain, that this extensive power 
 of judging in the bishop was not derived from the concession of 
 princes, or from their connivance, or from the consent of the 
 people, or from immemorial custom, but that it was essential to 
 the episcopal dignity, and annexed thereto by Christ. Now al- 
 though the imperial laws are still extant in the codes of Theo- 
 dosius and Justinian ; in the capitulars of Charlemagne, and 
 Lewis the Pious, and other later princes, both oriental and oc- 
 cidental; though all clearly show how, when, and by whom 
 such power was conceded ; though all the histories, both eccle- 
 siastical and civil, agree in relating the same concessions, and 
 the usages introduced, mentioning the reasons and causes; yet 
 so notorious a truth has not been able to surmount the single 
 affirmation of the canonist doctors, who have, on the contrary, 
 had the audacity to support the divine origin ofprelatical domi- 
 l)ion. They have even boldly proclaimed those to be heretics, 
 
46 LECTURES OX 
 
 who pny any regard to evidence as clear as sunshine, — \vlio can- 
 not submit entirely to renounce their understandings, and to be 
 treated as fools, and blind. 
 
 They did not even confine themselves within these bounds, 
 but maintained, that neither the magistrate, nor the prince 
 himself, could, without sacrilege, intermeddle in any of those 
 causes which the clergy had appropriated, because they are 
 things spiritual, and of spiritual things lay-men are incapable. 
 The light of truth was not, however, so perfectly extinct, but 
 that even in those dark times there was some learned and pious 
 persons who opposed this doctrine, showing that both the pre- 
 mises were false. The major, that laymen are incapable of 
 spiritual things is, said they, absurd and impious, since they 
 ^re, by adoption, received into the number of the sons of God, 
 made brethren of Jesus Christ, and citizens of the New Jeru- 
 salem : since they are honoured to participate in the divine 
 grace, in baptism, and in the communion of the body and 
 blood of the Lord. What spiritual things are there superior 
 to these? And if there be none, how can he, who partakes in 
 these supreme blessings, be called absolutely incapable of spi- 
 ritual things? But the minor also is false, that the causes ap- 
 propriated to the episcopal tribunal are spiritual, since they are 
 reducible to these two classes, transgressions and contracts, 
 which, if our judgment is to be determined by the qualities 
 assigned to things spiritual in scripture, are as far from being 
 such as earth is from heaven. 
 
 But it seldom fares so well with mankind, that the majority 
 is on the side of truth and reason. So it is in regard to our 
 present subject, that, upon the spiritual power given by Christ 
 to the church, or whole community of his disciples, of binding 
 and loosing, that is, of excluding from, and receiving back into 
 their communion, and upon the institution of Paul for termi- 
 nating amicably their differences in matters of property by re- 
 ference, without recurring to the tribunal of infidels, there has 
 been erected, in a course of ages, and by several degrees, the 
 principal of which have been pointed out to you, a spiritual- 
 temporal tribunal, the most wonderful the vvorld ever saw. 
 In consequence of this it has happened, that in a great part of 
 Cliristendom, (I speak not of Protestant countries, nor of the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 47 
 
 Greek church) in the heart of every civil government there 
 subsists another, independent of it, a thing which no political 
 writer could before have imaoined possible. How churcli 
 power came all at last to centre in the Roman pontiff, 1 intend 
 particularly to illu^rate in some subsequent lectures, some of 
 those I purpose to give on the rise and progress of the 
 hierarchy. In the history of ecclesiastical jurisdiction I have 
 now given, ye see the gradual usurpations of the church, or ra- 
 ther of the clergy, on the temporal powers; in the next, I pro- 
 pose to begin the sketch which I intend to lay before you, of 
 the history of ecclesiastical polity, and trace the usurpations of 
 part of the church upon the collective body. 
 
 I cannot conclude without acquainting you what will proba- 
 bly appear surprising, that, for a great part of tlie account now 
 given, I am indebted to the writings of a llomish priest, Fra 
 Paolo Sarpi, the celebrated historian of the council of Trent, 
 one who, in my judgment, understood more of the liberal spi- 
 rit of the gospel, and the genuine character of the Christian in- 
 stitution, than any writer of his age. Why he chose to con- 
 tinue in that communion, as I judge no man, I do not take 
 upon me to say. As little do I pretend to vindicate it. The 
 bishop of Meaux (Histoire des Variations des Eglises Protes- 
 tantes, liv. 7^^^, ch. 1 lG"^e.) calls him a Protestant and a Calvin- 
 ist, under a friar's frock. That he was no Calvinist, is evident 
 from several parts of his writings. I think it also fairly deduci- 
 ble from these, that there was no Protestant sect then in exist- 
 ence with whose doctrine his principles would have entirely coin- 
 cided. A sense of this, as much as any thing, contributed, in 
 my opinion, to make him remain in the communion to which he 
 originally belonged. Certain it is, that as no man was more 
 sensible of the corruptions and usurpations of that church, no 
 man could, with greater plainness, express his sentiments con- 
 cerning them. In this he acted very difrerenlly from thoso 
 who, from worldly motives, are led to profess what they do not 
 believe. Such, the more effectually to disguise their hypocrisy, 
 are commonly the loudest in expressing their admiration of a 
 system which they secretly despise. This was not the maimer 
 of Fra Paolo. The freedoms, indeed, which he used, would 
 havp brought him early to feci the weight of tiie church'ji m* 
 
48 LECTURES ON 
 
 sentment, had he not been protected by the state of Venice, of 
 which he was a most useful citizen. At List, however, he fell 
 ii sacrifice to the enemies which his inviolable regard to truth, 
 in his conversation and writings, had procured him. Fie was 
 privately assassinated by a friar, an emissary of the holy see. 
 He wrote in Italian, his native language; but his works are 
 translated into Latin, and into several European tongues. His 
 History of the Council of Trent, and his Treatise on eccle- 
 siastical Benefices, are both capital performances. One knows 
 not, in reading them, whether to admire most the erudition and 
 the penetration, or the noble freedom of spirit every where dis- 
 played in those works. All these qualities have, besides, the 
 advantage of coming recommended to the reader, by the greatest 
 accuracy of composition and perspicuity of diction. This tri- 
 bute I could not avoid paying to the memory of an author, to 
 M'hom the republic of letters is so much indebted, and for whom 
 I have the hi^rhest ref^ard. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL IIISTOKY. ifj 
 
 LECTURE IV. 
 
 In my last lecture, I attempted a brief detail of the principal 
 causes which contributed to the rise and progress of ecclesiasti- 
 cal jurisdiction. In doing this, I had occasion to show how, 
 from regulations originally the wisest and the best imaginable, 
 there sprang, through the corruptions that ensued, one of the 
 grossest usurpations, and one of the greatest evils that have in- 
 fested the Christian church. This we are well entitled to call 
 it, if what has proved the instrument of avarice, ambition, con- 
 tention, and revenge, as well as the source of tyranny and op- 
 pression, can justly be so denominated. Ye knov/ that the rise 
 and progress of that form of government, into which the church, 
 by degrees, came at last to be moulded, and which has been 
 termed the ecclesiastical polity, and the hierarchy, is to be the 
 subject of the present, and of some subsequent lectures. The 
 former regarded only the jurisdiction of churchmen, the bishops 
 in particular, in civil matters : the present subject is the inter- 
 nal polity of the church, and the form she has insensibly as- 
 sumed, with the rules of subordination which have obtained, 
 and, in many places, do still obtain, in the different orders. 
 The one refers properly to the secular power of ecclesiastics, 
 the other to the spiritual. The two discussions arc nearly re- 
 lated, and have generally a joint connection with the same 
 events, operating either as causes, or as instruments. How- 
 ever, in treating that which I have just now mentioned as the 
 theme of this discourse, I shall avoid repetition, as much as pos- 
 sible, and shall not recur to what has been observed already, 
 unless when it appears necessary in point of perspicuity, for the 
 more perfect understanding of the argument. 
 
 Permit me to premise in general, that the question so much 
 agitated, not only between Protestants and Papists, but also be- 
 tween sects of Protestants, in regard to the orifjinal form of 
 government established by the apostles in the church, though 
 
 D 
 
50 LECTURES ON 
 
 not a trivial question, is by no means of that consequence which 
 some warm disputants, inislead by party prejudices, and that in- 
 temperate zeal, into which a struggle long maintained commonly 
 betrays the antagonists on both sides, would affect to make it. 
 It is said proverbially by the apostle, as holding alike of every 
 thin^T external and circumstantial : " The kino-dom of God is 
 " not meat and drink, but righteousness, and peace, and joy, in 
 *' the Holy Ghost. For he that in these things serveth Christ, 
 *' is acceptable to God, and approved of men." To me nothing 
 is more evident, than that the essence of Christianity, abstractly 
 considered, consists in the system of doctrines and duties re- 
 vealed by our Lord Jesus Christ, and that the essence of the 
 Christian character consists in the belief of the one, and the 
 obedience of the other. " Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ," 
 says the apostle, " and thou shalt be saved." Again, speaking 
 of Christ, he says, " being made perfect, he became the author 
 " of eternal salvation to all them that obey him." The terms 
 rendered sometimes believing, and sometimes obeying, are com- 
 monly of so extensive signification as to include both senses, 
 and are therefore used interchangeably. Now nothing can he 
 conceived more absurd in itself, or more contradictory to the 
 declarations of scripture, than to say that a man's belief, and 
 obedience of the gospel, however genuine the one, and how- 
 ever sincere the other, are of no significancy, unless he has re- 
 ceived his information of the gospel, or been initiated into the 
 church by a proper minister. This is placing the essence of re- 
 ligion not in any thing interior and spiritual, not in what Christ 
 and his apostles placed it, something personal in regard to the 
 disciple, and what is emphatically styled in scripture, the hidden 
 man of the heart ; but in an exterior circumstance, a circum- 
 stance which in regard to him is merely accidental, a circum- 
 stance of which it may be impossible for him to be apprized. 
 Yet into this absurdity those manifestly run who make the 
 truth of God's promises depend on circumstantials, in point of 
 order no where referred to, or mentioned, in these promises; 
 nay, I may say with justice, no where, either explicitly declared, 
 or implicitly suggested, in all the book of God. 
 
 Not but that a certain external model of frovernment must 
 
 o 
 
 have been originally adopted for the more effectual preservation 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 51 
 
 of tlic evangelical institution in its native purity, and for the 
 careful transmission of it to after ages. Not but that a pre- 
 sumptuous encroachment on what is evidently so instituted, is 
 justly reprehensible in those who are properly chargeable with 
 such encroachment, as is indeed any violation of order, and 
 more especially when the violation tends to wound charity, and 
 to promote division and strife. But the reprehension can affect 
 those only who are conscious of the guilt: for the fault of an- 
 other will never frustrate to me the divine promise given by the 
 Messiah, the great interpreter of the Father, the faithful and 
 true witness to all indiscriminately, without any limitation, that 
 " he who receiveth his testimony hath everlasting life." I 
 may be deceived in regard to the pretensions of a minister, who 
 may be the usurper of a character to which he has no right. I 
 am no antiquary, and may not have either the knowledge or the 
 capacity necessary for tracing the faint outlines of ancient esta- 
 blishments and forms of government, for entering into dark 
 and critical questions about the import of names and titles, or 
 for examining the authenticity of endless genealogies ; but I 
 may have all the evidence that consciousness can give, that I 
 thankfully receive the testimony of Christ, whom I believe, and 
 love, and serve. If I cannot know this, the declarations of the 
 gospel are given me to no purpose : its promises are no better 
 than riddles, and a rule of life is a dream. But if Imay be 
 conscious of this, and if the Christian religion be a revelation 
 from heaven, I may have all the security which the veracity of 
 God can give me, that I shall obtain eternal life. 
 
 " No," interposes a late writer [a], " Cannot God justly 
 *' oblige men, in order to obtain the benefits which it is his good 
 '' pleasure to bestow, to employ the means which his good plea- 
 " sure hath instituted? It pleased not him to cleanse Naaman 
 " the Syrian from his leprosy by the water of any other river 
 " than the Jordan ; insomuch, that had Naaman used the 
 " rivers of Syria for this purpose, he would have had no title to 
 " expect a cure." Certainly none, Mr. Dodwell. But could 
 any thing be more explicit than the oracle of God pronounced 
 by the prophet? " Wash in Jordan seven times, and thou 
 " shalt be clean." Naaman did not, and could not misunder- 
 [fl] Dodwell Paraenesis, 3k 
 
 b2 
 
52 LECTURES ON 
 
 stand it. Whereas, had the prophet said barely, " Wash 
 " seven times, and thou shalt be clean ;" and had the Syrian 
 then washed seven times in Abana or Pharphar, rivers of Da- 
 mascus, and remained uncured, would he have had reason to 
 regard Elisha as a true prophet? Could he have formed from 
 this transaction the conclusion which he did so justly form in 
 favour of the God of Israel? Yet such an expression of the 
 promise, vvdierein an essential article of the condition is sup- 
 pressed, would be necessary to make the case parallel to the 
 present. He luho believeth, and is baptized, saith our Lord, 
 shall be saved. You qualify his promise with the additional 
 clause, " if he be baptized by a minister who has himself re- 
 •" ceived baptism and ordination in such a particular manner." 
 But where do you find this qualification specified ? scripture is 
 silent. The Spirit of God hath not given us the remotest hint 
 of it; would it not then be wiser in you to follow the advice 
 which Solomon hath given by the same Spirit? Add thou not 
 unto his ivoi'ds, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. 
 The terms of the gospel-covenant are no where, in the sacred 
 pages, connected with, or made to depend on, either the mini- 
 ster, or the form of the ministry, as Naaman's cure manifestly 
 was on his washing in one particular river. But so strange is 
 the inconsistency of which human nature is susceptible ! No 
 person can be more explicit than this man, in admitting that 
 there is nothing in scripture from which we can infer that any 
 particular form of polity was, for every age and country, ap- 
 pointed in the church. A passage to this purpose 1 shall soon 
 give you in his own words. Nay more, that very episcopacy, 
 for which he so strenuously contended, making the existence of 
 Christianity depend upon its reception, is, by his own account, 
 not only destitute of scriptural warrant, but is not properly of 
 apostolical origin, not having been instituted till after the death 
 of the apostles, in the sixth or seventh year of the second century: 
 for even John, who lived the longest, is not said to have reached 
 that period. Arrogant and vain man ! what are you, who so bold- 
 ly and avowedly presume to foist into God's covenant, articles 
 of your own devising, neither expressed nor implied in his 
 words? Do YOU venture, a worm of the earth? Can you think 
 yourself warranted to stint what God hath not stinted, and. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 53 
 
 following the dictates of your contracted spirit, enviously to 
 limit the bounty of the Universal Parent, that you may confine 
 to a party, what Christ hath freely published for the benefit of 
 all? Is your eye evil, because he is good ? ^Shall I then believe, 
 that God, like deceitful man, speaketh equivocally, and with 
 mental reservations ? Shall I take his declaration in the extent 
 wherein he hath expressly given it; or as you, for your own 
 m ilignant purpose, have new-vamped and corrected it? " Let 
 " God be true, and every man a liar." But as for you, who 
 would thus pervert the plainest declarations of the oracles of 
 truth, and, instead of representing Christ as the author of 
 a divine and spiritual religion, as the great benefactor of 
 human kind, exhibit him as the head of a faction, your party 
 forsooth, — I must say that I have stronger evidence that you 
 have no mission, than all your traditions, and antiquities, and 
 catalogues, will ever be able to surmount. For if "he whom 
 " God sendeth, speaketh the words of God," (and this is a 
 test which Christ himself hath given us) he who contradicteth 
 God's words is not sent by him. This is alike the language of 
 scripture, and the language of common sense. Your's is nei- 
 ther. 
 
 In regard to the outward order, however important it be, it 
 affects not the essence of religion in the least ; and even our 
 adversaries themselves being judges, is not represented in 
 scripture as affecting it. The garments which a man wears, or 
 the house in which he lodges, however necessary for his ac- 
 commodation and comfortable subsistence, are not, as his limbs 
 and members, and still less, as the powers and faculties of his 
 mind, a part of his person. Now in this respect there appears 
 a very close analogy. For though, in our present situation, 
 clothes and dwelling are requisite for protecting us against 
 the inclemencies of the weather, and other external ac- 
 cidents, we may, nevertheless, have both clothes and dwelling 
 of different forms, yet equally commodious. Nay, one form 
 may be more convenient in certain climates, and certain situa- 
 tions, which is less convenient in other climates, and other 
 situations. The same thing may, with equal truth, be affirm- 
 ed concerning the form of church-government. This is evi- 
 dently true also of civil government. Of whatever mode it be, 
 
54} LECTURES ON 
 
 absolute or limited, monarchical or republican, unless it degene- 
 rate into tyranny, it is entitled to the obedience of the subjects. 
 For " the powers that be," ai aa-xt tlacnxt, " are ordained of 
 *' God." No criterion is mentioned but established posses- 
 sion. Now, I can see no reason why a church may not subsist 
 under different forms as well as a state; and though it must be 
 owned that one form may be more favourable than another to 
 the spirit and design of the constitution, we cannot always judge 
 with safety from the first of these how much it has retained of 
 the last. Nay, I must acknowledge, that for any thing I could 
 ever discover in the sacred oracles to the contrary, the external 
 order may properly undergo such alterations, as the ends of 
 edification in different exigencies may require, and prudence 
 may direct. The only thing of real importance is, that nothing 
 be admitted which can, in any way, subvert the fundcimental 
 maxims, or infringe the spiritual nature, of the government. 
 
 Thus much in general is conformable to the doctrine both of 
 the church of England, and of the church of Scotland. For 
 how different soever these churches are in the plans of govern- 
 ment they have adopted, and how much soever each of them is 
 attached to its own, they equally avoid limiting the Christian 
 ministry to one particular model. The former, in her 23d 
 article, intitled, Ofministring in the Congregation, says express-^ 
 ly, " Those we ought to judge lawfully called and sent, which 
 " be chosen and called to this work by men who have public 
 " authority given unto them in the congregation, to call and 
 *' send ministers into the Lord's vineyard." This, if it mean 
 any thing, and be not a mere identical proposition, of which, I 
 own, it has some appearance, refers us ultimately to that autho- 
 rity, however modelled, which satisfies the people, and is settled 
 among them. Again, in the Westminster Confession of Faith, 
 which is of equal authority with us, as the 39 articles are of in 
 England, chap. xxv. entitled. Of the church, sect. 3. " Unto 
 *' the catholic visible church Christ hath given the ministry, 
 " oracles, and ordinances of God, for the gathering and per- 
 *' fecting of the saints in this life, to the end of the world." 
 And this is all that is said on the subject. Neither has presum- 
 ed to delineate the essentials of a Christian ministry, or to say 
 any thing which could be construed to exclude those who are 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 53 
 
 governed in a clifFcrent manner from that in which they them- 
 selves aic governed. So much moderation lias on this article 
 been shewn by both churches. I shall add to these the doc- 
 trine of the episcopal reformed church of Scotland, contained in 
 a confession of faith ratified by law in this country in 15G7; 
 which, though set aside in the time of the civil wars to make 
 room for the Westminster Confession, was re-enacted after the 
 Restoration, and continued in force till the abolition of prelacy at 
 the Revolution. I recur to it the rather, in order to shew how 
 much, on this article, the sentiments of our late nonjurors (for 
 we have none of that description at present) differ from the sen- 
 timents of those whom they considered as their ecclesiastical 
 predecessors, and from whom they derived their spiritual pedir 
 gree. 
 
 In article 19. entitled. Of the Notes of the TrueKii% (I use 
 tlie words of that formulary) it is affirmed, " They are neither 
 ** antiquity, title usurped, lineal descence^ place appointed, nor 
 *' multitude of men approving an errour." — Again, article 23. 
 Of the right Administration of the Sacraments : — " Thatsacra- 
 " ments be rightly ministrate, we judge two things requisite : 
 '' the one, that they be ministrate by lawful ministers, whom we 
 " affirm to be only they that are appointee! to the preaching of 
 *' the word, they being men lawfully chosen thereto by some 
 " kirk, &c. We fly the doctrine of the Papistical kirk in par- 
 " ticipation of their sacraments : 1st. Because their ministers 
 ^' are no ministers of Christ Jesus," &c. Here not only is 
 Uneal descent expressly excluded, but its very channel is re- 
 moved, as the Popish clergy are declared (I think with too lit- 
 tle ceremony and too universally) to be no ministers of Christ. 
 Kay, all that appears externally necessary, according to them, 
 to constitute a minister, is the choice of some congregation. 
 Far from believing one particular form of ecclesiastic polity to 
 be sacred and inviolable, they say, article 21. Of General Coun- 
 cils^ &c. " Not that we think that any policy, and any order 
 " of ceremonies can be appointed for all ages, times, and 
 " places." 
 
 It will be owned, likewise, by those who on this subject are 
 capable of examining with coolness, and pronouncing with im- 
 partiality, that wo have not that sort of information in holy 
 
56 LECTURES ON 
 
 writ, from which we can with certainty form a judgment con- 
 cerning the entire model of the apostolic church. What we 
 can learn thence on this subject, we must collect from scattered 
 hints given, as it were, incidentally, when nothing seemed less 
 the intention of the writers, than to convey to us a particular 
 account of the plan of the society they had formed. It is a 
 just observation of a writer of the last century, and deserves the 
 attention of disputants on both sides : — " Videmus apostolos in 
 " scriptis suis magis sollicitos fuisse de ministrorum virtutibus 
 " quam gradibus, et pluribus inculcasse et descripsisse eorum 
 *' mores, c^uales illo statu digni essent et loco, quam quidem de 
 " forma regiminis disceptasse." [Hoornbeck de episcopatu.] 
 But who can be more express on the silence of scripture, in re- 
 gard to this article of church-government, than that zealous de- 
 fender of prelacy, Mr. Dodwell, in a passage which I but 
 just now promised to give you in his own words. They are 
 these [a] : — " Est sane admodum precaria omnis ilia argumen- 
 " tatio, qua colligitur disciplinse ecclesiastlcce in posterum re- 
 *' cipiend^ rationem omnem e scripturis N. Foederis esse hau- 
 " riendam. Nulliis enim est qui id profiteatur aperte sacri 
 " scriptoris locus. Et ne quidem ullus qui ita de regimine agat 
 *' ecclesiasiico quasi id voluisset scriptor, aut scriptoris auctor 
 " Spiritus Sa7ictus, ut formam aliquam unan regiminis ubique 
 '' et in omne sevum duraturi describeret. Nusquam scriptores 
 '' sacri satis expresse tradiderunt, quanta secuta fuerit in regi- 
 '' mine ecclesiarum mutatio cum primum discederent a syna- 
 *' gogarum communion e ecclesice. Nusquam satis aperte, quan- 
 '' turn donis concessum fuerit Spiritus S. personalibus, quantum 
 " vicissim locis et qfficiis. Nusquam officiai'ios extraordinarios 
 " qui illo ipso seculo finem habituri essent ah ordi7iariis satis 
 *' accurate secernunt qui nullo unquam seculo essent, dum 
 " iterum veniret Christus, in desuetudinem abituri. Imo sic 
 *' omnia turn passim nota ipsi quoque nota supponunt, nee ipsi 
 " posterorum causa explicant, quasi eum duntaxat, qui turn ob- 
 " tinuerit, statum in animo haberent. Officia ipso nuspiam 
 *' qualia fuerint, aut quam late patuerint, ex professo descri- 
 ** bunt, quod tamen sane faciendam erat si formam prescripsis- 
 *' sent perpetuo duraturam." To this I shall only subjoin. If 
 [o] Paraenesis, N. 14. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. .57 
 
 the case be as you, Mr. Dodwcll, have, in my opinion, in the 
 passage above cjuotetl, fairly represented it ; if" all the reasoning 
 be quite precarious from which men conclude, that the whole 
 model of ecclesiastical discipline may be extracted from the writ- 
 ings of the New Testament ; if there be no passage of any sa- 
 cred writer which openly professes this design; if there be not 
 one which so treats of ecclesiastical government, as if the writer, 
 or the writer's author, the Holy Spirit, had intended to describe 
 any one form of })olity, as being to remain every where, and for 
 ever inviolate ; if the sacred penmen have no where declared, 
 with sufficient clearness, how great a change must take place in 
 church-government, when the churches should first withdraw 
 from the communion of the synagogues ; if they no where 
 clearly enough shew how much was allowed to the personal gifts 
 of the Holy Ghost, and how much also to places and offices; if 
 they no where, with sufficient accuracy, distinguish the extraor- 
 dinary officers who were not to outlive that age, from the ordi- 
 nary who were not to cease till the second coming of Christ ; 
 nay, if all the things then generally known, they also suppose 
 known, and never, for the sake of posterity, explain, minding 
 only the state wherein things were at that time ; if they no 
 where professedly describe the ministries themselves, so as to 
 explain either their nature or their extent ; which was surely 
 indispensable, if they meant to settle a model in perpetuity ; in 
 brief, if the case was really as that gentleman affirms it to have 
 been, (for what is here put by me hypothetically, is positively 
 averred by him in terms the most express) what can we con- 
 clude, but that nothing was farther from the view of the inspir- 
 ed writers, than to prescribe any rule to us on the subject, or 
 to give us any information which could lead us to imagine, that 
 a particular form of polity was necessary, or even more accept- 
 able to God than another? What can we conclude, but that it 
 was intended by the Holy Spirit thus to teach us to distinguish 
 between what is essential to the Christian religion, the princi- 
 ples to be believed, and the duties to be practised, and which 
 are thej:efore perpetual and unchangeable; and what is compa- 
 ratively circumstantial, regarding external order and discipline, 
 which, as matters of expedience, alter with circumstances, and 
 arc therefore left to the adjustment of human prudence ? What 
 
58 LECTURES ON 
 
 can better account for the difterence remarked by Floorn- 
 bcck, that the apostles were more solicitous about the virtues 
 than the degrees of the ministers, and more strenuous in 
 inculcating the manners to be observed by them as suitable to 
 their office, and conducing to their usefulness, than copious in 
 describing the form of their government ? The one is essen- 
 tial, the other only circumstantial; the one invariable, the other 
 wot. 
 
 But what shall we say of a doctrine which, like this of the 
 episcopal polity, was never alleged to belong to the religion of na- 
 ture, and is now discovered by one of its warmest advocates, to 
 have no better title to be accounted a principle of revelation, 
 not having been instituted by Christ, or his apostles, or even in 
 their time? No mention is made of it in scripture, the canon of 
 which was finished, before this novelty appeared upon the earth ; 
 nor is any appointment given in holy writ by anticipation con- 
 cerning it. Whence then have we either the institution, or the 
 doctrine of its necessity ? I know not what answer Dodwell could 
 give to this, except the following. From frequent study, pro- 
 found researches into antiquity, and critical investigations con- 
 cerning doubtful idioms, we have made the discovery. These 
 exercitations, I acknowledge, have their use, and are sometimes 
 subservient to the cause of religious verity ; chiefly indeed for 
 illustrating its evidences, or repelling objections, but never for 
 teaching its fundamental principles or essential duties. These, 
 like the prophet's vision, are written in characters so legible and 
 plain, that he 7nay run who readeth them. No scope for 
 Herculean labour, bodily or mental. Say not. Who shall as- 
 cend into heaven ? No need for scaling the firmament, diving 
 into the abyss, or crossing the ocean. The word is nigh thee^ 
 in thy mouth, and in thine heart. That system must con-- 
 vey a strange idea of revelation, which exhibits it as, in respect 
 of the truths necessary to be known by all, perfectly mute to 
 the unlearned, and of service only to linguists, critics, and anti- 
 quaries. How different is the notion conveyed by Christ, the 
 founder and the finisher of the faith ! / adore thee, O Fa- 
 ther, Lord of heaven and earth, because having hidden these 
 things from sages and the learned, thou hast revealed them to 
 babes. It was to instruct and save the ignoraut and the siu- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 50 
 
 fill tliat Jesus Christ came into the world. And, in consequence 
 of this divine purpose, nothing recommended wretches to this 
 charitable attention more than their needs. Besides, if tlic 
 scriptures contain a revelation from God, and consequently be 
 true, we must admit them to be perfect, and to want nothing es- 
 sential to the information of Christians in faith and practice ; for 
 this is what they affirm concerning themselves. They are ahle 
 to make men wise unto salvation : for all scripture, given by in- 
 spiration of God, is profitable for doctrine, for reproof for cor- 
 rection in righteousness, that the man of God mag be perfect, 
 tJtoroughly furnished unto all good works. But in this a true 
 Dodwellian can never consistently acquiesce, who maintains a 
 certain ecclesiastical polity to be essential, concerning which he 
 at the same time admits, that scripture has given us neither in- 
 formation nor command. This necessarily forces us into the 
 dilemma of affirming, either that the doctrine of Dodwell is 
 not only false but pernicious, in subverting the authority of 
 scripture ; or that scripture is both false and self-contradictory, 
 in asserting the perfection of its own doctrine, whilst it has 
 withholden all intelligence upon one article, without the ob- 
 servance of which, all the other instructions it gives are vain, our 
 faith is vain, we are yet in our sins. And who is the revealer 
 of this article, this mystery which hath been hidden from ages 
 and generations ? If the revelation itself be of importance, it is 
 but just to acknowledge, that the world is indebted for it more 
 to Mr. Plenry Dodwell, than to all the apostles and evangelists 
 of our Lord, or even to all the sacred penmen of either Old or 
 New Testament put together. 
 
 But as it is not every one's province or humour to trace non- 
 sense through all its dark and devious windings, I shall desist 
 from expatiating further on the absurdity of making that a doc- 
 trine of the gospel with which the New Testament does not 
 acquaint us, or a Christian institution which did not commence 
 till after the decease of the last of the apostles ; and shall only 
 further observe, that the defect of scriptural evidence, so frank-* 
 ly acknowledged on the other side, will be allowed by any per- 
 son of understanding to be an irrefragable argument, that the 
 polity or model of government was not judged by the apostles 
 to be of so great consequence, as that it should of necessity bo 
 
60 LECTURES ON 
 
 cither fixed or perfectly known. Whereas it must have beeii 
 of the last consequence, if the very existence of a church, and 
 the efficacy of God's word and ordinances, totally depended on it. 
 But that there was no such dependance, as is supposed, on 
 any thing in the form of the ministry, is manifest also from 
 this, that in the directions given to Christians, as to the judg- 
 ments they ought to make of those who may assume the cha- 
 racter of teachers in divine things, the people are never direct- 
 ed to an examination of, what I may call, the ostensible source 
 of the authority of those teachers, but solely to the considera- 
 tion of their character and conduct, and of the doctrine which 
 tliey teach. " Beware of false prophets," said our Lord, " who 
 " come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are raven- 
 " ing wolves." But how shall we beware of them, or by what 
 criterion shall we distinguish the false from the true? Shall we 
 critically examine their spiritual pedigree, and see whether, by 
 an uninterrupted succession of regular baptisms and ordinations, 
 they be lineally descended from the apostles ? Impossible. A 
 method this which would involve every thing in impenetrable 
 darkness, and plunge all the hopes and prospects of the Chris- 
 tian into a scepticism, from which there could be no recovery. 
 On the contrary, the test he gives is plain and familiar. Mark 
 his words : " Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men ga- 
 " thcr grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so, every 
 '' good tree bringeth forth good fruit, but a corrupt tree bring- 
 *' eth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil 
 '' fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 
 ** Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, 
 '' and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall 
 " know them." And the apostle John says, " Beheve not 
 " every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God." 
 And how are we to try them ? The sequel plainly shews, that 
 it is by the coincidence of their doctrine with that of the gos- 
 pel. The like was also the method prescribed under the for- 
 mer dispensation by the prophet. " To the law and to the 
 " testimony," says he, " if they speak not according to this 
 *' word, it is because there is no light in them." A very dif- 
 ferent mode of trial would now be assigned by a zealous patro- 
 uizer of the hierarchy, Popish or Protestant. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. (jl 
 
 Tlicre is a memorable incident, and entirely apposite to the 
 point in hand, which is recorded by two of the evangelii;ts, 
 Mark and Luke. John said to Jesus, " ^Master, we saw one 
 " casting out devils in thy name, and we forbade him, because 
 " he followeth not us." Jesus answered, " Forbid him not; 
 ** for there is no man who shall do a miracle in my name, that 
 *' can lightly speak evil of me. For he that is not against us 
 " is for us." The apostles still retained too much of the Jew- 
 ish spirit, not to consider more the party than the cause. " He 
 " followeth not us," — a reason which, to this day, alas ! would 
 be thought the best reason in the world by most Christian 
 sects, and by every individual who possesses the spirit of the 
 sectary. From Christ's testimony we have ground to believe, 
 that what this man did, was done with an intention truly pious ; 
 not to make disscntion, or form a party against the disciples, 
 but to promote the common cause. And what was so done, 
 would probably be productive of the great end of the Christian 
 ministry, the conversion of the hearers to the faith, love, and 
 obedience of the Messiah. 
 
 But even where so much cannot be said of the coodness of 
 the intentions, we are not warranted to decide against the uti- 
 lity of success. The apostle Paul observes, that ^^hilst some 
 preach Christ of love, others do it of envy, and strife, and con- 
 tention. This, I imagine, is the scriptural, I say not the ec- 
 clesiastical, notion of schismatical teachers. For that alone is 
 schism, in the sense of holy writ, which wounds charitv, and 
 which, in order to unite Christians more closely to a sect or 
 faction, alienates their hearts from one another, and consequent- 
 ly from the interest of their common Master; or which detach- 
 es them in respect of love, even though outward unity should 
 not be violated, from the whole community of Christians, in 
 order to attach them more firmly to a part. The former only, 
 those who preach out of love, the apostle regards as true; the 
 latter, those who preach out of envy and strife, he considers as 
 pretended preachers, or heralds of Christ. Yet he adds : 
 "What then? Notwithstanding everyway, whether in prc- 
 " tence or in truth, Christ is preached, and I therein do rc- 
 "joice, yea and will rejoice." — Would lie have said so, think 
 ye, if a defect, either in the mission, or in the disposition of the 
 
62 LECTURES ON" 
 
 minister, could have rendered their iTiinistrations ineffectual to 
 the hearers? In those days of the church's infancy, when the 
 far greater part of tUe world was Jews and Pagans, such teach- 
 ers as the apostle speaks of, though bad men themselves and 
 uncommissioned, might have been instrumental in converting 
 infidels and idolaters to the faith of Christ. But there had 
 been no subject of joy here, if the conversion of such, however 
 sincere, and their participation in the ordinances of religion, 
 however piously intended by the participants, had been, accord- 
 ing to the doctrine of our antagonists, rendered ineffective by 
 the defects of the instrument. The very success of the preach- 
 ing of such unauthorised pretenders would, in that case, have 
 been a fitter subject of grief to the apostle, than of joy, as the 
 unhappy proselytes might, by an apparent conversion to Christ, 
 have been lulled into a security much more fatal than the unbe- 
 lief in which they were before. His joy, on the contrary, was 
 a demonstration of his sentiments, that the people might receive 
 spiritual benefit, whatever exceptions there might be to the mi- 
 nistry. I own the case is, in many respects, worse with the 
 modern authors of division, the founders of new sects, in coun- 
 tries where Christianity is universally professed, and where there 
 is free access by the scripture, both to its doctrines, and to its 
 precepts. — It is hard to conceive, to what the disciples of some 
 recent sectaries can be made proselytes, unless to uncharitable- 
 ness, hatred, and calumny against their fellovz-Christians, and 
 that on the most frivolous or unintelligible pretexts. For nei- 
 ther idolatrous worship, nor the exaction of unlawful terms of 
 communion, are so much as pretended. If, according to our 
 Lord's criterion, we are to know the tree by the fruits, the evil 
 fruits above-mentioned, the invariable effects of such divisions, 
 will be thought more analogous to the nature of briars and 
 thorns, than to the fruit of the fig-tree, or of the vine. How- 
 ever, even of such contentious teachers I would not presume to 
 say, that they may not occasionally do good, though there be but 
 too great reason to dread that the evil preponderates. And even 
 here I am to be understood as speaking of the first authors of such 
 unchristian separations. I know too well the power of education, 
 and of early prejudice, to impute equal malignity to those who 
 may succeed them, whether teachers or disciples. — Cut to return, 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 63 
 
 To assign to the Messiah, or rather, under tliat colour, to 
 procure for themselves a worldly kin<^dom, was not an error pe- 
 culiar to the Jews. The same evil principle which, in them, 
 proved the cause of the rejection of the true Messiah, proved 
 quickly among the Gentiles, who acknowledged him, the source 
 of the grossest corruption and perversion of his institution. 
 After it became the aim of church rulers to secularize the 
 kingdom of Christ : they uniformly had it for their object, iu 
 exact conformity to the example the Pharisees had given them, 
 to remove the attention of men from things spiritual and essen- 
 tial, to things corporal and circumstantial. And in this, as in 
 all other corruptions, they have but too well succeeded. The 
 more effectually to answer this purpose, they have not scrupled 
 to introduce such dogmas, (of which that I have been examin- 
 ing in this lecture is an example,) as tend to subvert the spirit 
 of tlie gospel, and are inconsistent with the veracity of God. 
 
 Of a very different character and tendency are some senti- 
 ments I have lately met with concerning the spiritual king- 
 dom of the Messiah, in the Sermons of Mr. Comings, pre- 
 bendary of St. Patrick's, Dublin, now deceased. They convey 
 an idea of the church truly rational, enlarged, and sublime ; 
 such as strongly distinguishes it from all the pitiful and con- 
 tracted pales, so uncharitably erected by the different sectaries 
 of all known denominations, Popish and Protestant, established 
 and unestablished : for it is not a legal establishment, as some 
 vainly imagine, or any thing merely external, that either makes 
 or unmakes a sectary in the scriptural sense : it is solely the 
 spirit by which a man is actuated. — But without any further 
 comment, I shall leave this author to speak for himself, by 
 giving you his own words. In my judgment, he unfolds his 
 conceptions on this subject with uncommon energy. It may 
 not, however, be improper to premise, that the words in the 
 gospel to which the preacher specially refers, are these : (Luke 
 xvii. 15, 19.) One of tliem^ ichen he saw that he teas healed, 
 turned hack, and with a loud voice glorified God, and fell down 
 on his face at Jesus' feet, giving him tlianhs ,- and he was a 
 Samaritan. And Jesus answering, said, IVere there not ten 
 cleansed ? But where are the nine ? There are not found that 
 returned to give glory to God, save this stranger. And he 
 
64 LECTURES ON 
 
 said unto him, Arise, go thy way, thy faith hath made thee 
 whole, " Thus you see, though the Jev/s learnt no humility, 
 <' no gratitude, yet the Samaritan, ignorant as he was then 
 *' thought, misinformed as he is now reckoned ; yet the Sama- 
 ** ritan was deeply impressed with both. The Almighty him- 
 '^ self taught him, and he was obedient to the divine instructor. 
 " The pride of religion would make the Jews brand him with 
 *' the factious name of heretic or schismatic ; but were he 
 *' heretic or schismatic, he offered to heaven as grateful a sacri- 
 *' fice as was ever laid on the altar at Jerusalem by prophet or 
 " by saint. The contentions about the forms of religion de- 
 *' stroy its essence. Authorised by the example of Jesus 
 '' Christ, he will send men to the Samaritan to find out how to 
 *' worship. Though your church was pure, without spot or 
 *' imperfection, yet if your heart is not turned to God, the wor- 
 " ship is hateful, and the prayers are an abomination. The 
 *' homage of the darkest Pagan, worshipping he knows not 
 *' what, but still worshipping the unknown Power that formed 
 *' him, if he bows with humility, if he praises with gratitude, 
 "' his homao;e will ascend grateful to heaven : while the dead 
 ^' careless formality of prayer, offered up in the proudest Chris- 
 " tian temples, shall be rejected as an offering unholy. For 
 " think you that the Almighty esteems names and sects ? No : 
 " it is the heart that he requires ; it is the heart alone that he 
 *' accepts. And much consolation does this afford to the con- 
 *' templative mind of man. We may be very ignorant in spiri- 
 " tual matters, if that ignorance cannot be removed, and yet 
 " may be very safe. We may not know in what words to 
 " clothe our desires in prayer, or where to find language wor- 
 *' thy of being presented to the Mnjest}'' of heaven. But 
 *' amidst the clouds that surround us, here is our comfort : in 
 *' every nation, he that worshippeth with humility, worshippeth 
 *' aright; he that praiseth with gratitude, praiscth well. — The 
 *' pride of establishments may despise him, but the wisdom and 
 " the righteousness of heaven will hear, and will approve him. 
 *' It was to the humble thankful Samaritan, though separated 
 '' from the true church ; yet it was to him alone, because he 
 " alone returned to glorify God, that Jesus Christ said. Arise, 
 *' go thy way, thy faith hath made thee whole. Thus, in a mo- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. C)5 
 
 " ment, vanished, and became of no effect, tlie temple of tlie 
 " Jews, built by prophetic direction : its ritual given by their 
 *' illuminated legislator: all gave way to the profound humility, 
 " and the sublime gratitude, of what they called an unbeliever, 
 a — of what Jesus Christ called the only faithful servant of 
 " God among them." — Permit me only to subjoin, to the above 
 quotation, what is particularly apposite to the subject now in 
 hand. Let us but reflect who were at that time the sacred mi- 
 nisters, the teachers and the priests of the Samaritans? In the 
 very beginning of their defection, in the revolt of the ten tribes 
 under Jeroboam, the sacred historian acquaints us, that this 
 idolatrous king cast out the priests of the Lord, and made 
 priests of the lowest of the people, who were not of the family 
 of Aaron, or of the sons of Levi. And of the same character 
 they still remained. No order of men, existing at present in 
 the Christian church, can give any evidence of a divine right, 
 compared with that of the tribe of Levi, and of the posterity of 
 Aaron in the Jewish. Yet this passage, in relation to the hum- 
 ble, the pious, and the thankful Samaritan, may show us effec- 
 tually, if we be capable of being taught, that under no dispen- 
 sation of things whatsoever, can the validity of God's covenant 
 be made to depend on the ministry, or his promises be rendered 
 ineffectual to the humble believer, and grateful worshipper, on 
 account of any defect in the priesthood. We see that such de- 
 fects were no obstruction to the efficacy of the humble Samari- 
 tan's faith, or the acceptance of his person. Arise, go thy way, 
 thy faith hath made thee whole. 
 
 Thus much I thought proper to premise, in regard both to 
 the nature and to the consequence of the question about the 
 government instituted by the apostles in the church. 1 next 
 proceed to the examination of the fact. And in this it is my 
 purpose to proceed with all the candour and impartiality of 
 which I am capable ; and to speak out boldly what appears to 
 me most probably to have been the case, without considering 
 ^vhat sect or party it may either offend or gratify. I am sensi- 
 ble that, in historical inquiries of this kind, it becomes us to be 
 modest, since we must know, that persons, both judicious and 
 candid, have mistaken ; for, on all the questions that arise from 
 the subject, there have undoubtedly been men of this character 
 
 E 
 
66 LECTURES ON 
 
 on tlie opp&slte sides. It is comparatively of little moment, 
 whether we approve most the monarchical, the aristocratical, or 
 the democratical form of church-government, or to which of the 
 three we have thought it our duty to subject ourselves. The 
 only error that is here of consequence is, when people are led to 
 consider this as a ground of disunion, op, which is still worse, of 
 alienation of affection from those who, though differing in thi» 
 particular, liave received the like precious faith with themselves; 
 when thev think themselves warranted by this difference in un- 
 churching their brethren, as the phrase is, that is, in pronoun- 
 cing them to have no concern, no portion in the common- 
 wealth of Christ. This I take to be indeed a fundamental er- 
 ror, as it strikes at the root of that charity which is the end 
 of the commandment, and the bond of perfectness ; and conse- 
 quently, without which, whatever be our boasted attainments in 
 faith, in knowledge, or in clerical degrees, we are, in all that 
 concerns the vitals of religion, absolutely nothing. It was to 
 guard yon all against an extreme of this kind, that I have been 
 so particular in the discussion of this preliminary point. 
 
 Now, as to the form of the church first instituted by Christ 
 and his apostles, let it be observed, that there were at that time 
 especially two objects which seemed equally to claim attention. 
 The one was the conversion of the world to the Messiah ; the 
 other wvas not only the preservation of the converts that should 
 be made, but the securing of a continuance of the faith in their 
 families. These two, though they concur to the ultimate end 
 they are fitted to answer, the glory of God in the salvation of 
 men, are very different in themselves, and require very different 
 instruments and measures. To take a similitude from temporal 
 things : it is one thing to conquer a kingdom, and become mas- 
 ter of it, and another thing to govern it, when conquered, so as 
 to retain the possession which has been acquired. The same 
 ao-ents, and the same expedients, are not properly adapted to 
 both. For the first of these purposes, there was a set of extra- 
 ordinary ministers or officers in the church, who, like the mili- 
 tary forces intended for conquest, could not be fixed to a parti- 
 cular spot, whilst there remained any provinces to conquer. 
 Their charge was in a manner universal, and their functions 
 ambulatory. For the second, there was a set of ordinary mini- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOIIY. (37 
 
 sters, or pastors, corresponding to civil governors, to whom it 
 was necessary to allot distinct charges or precincts, to which 
 their services were chiefly to be confined, in order to instruct 
 the people, to preside in the public worship and religious ordi- 
 nances, and to give them the necessary assistance for the regu- 
 lation of their conduct. Without this second arrangement, the 
 acquisitions made could not have been long retained. There 
 must have ensued an universal relapse into idolatry and infideli- 
 ty. This distinction of ministers into extraordinary and ordi- 
 nary has been admitted by controvertists on both sides, and 
 therefore cannot justly be considered as introduced (which some- 
 times happens to distinctions) to serve an hypothesis. The 
 great patron of prelacy avows the difference, in a quotation lately 
 given from his ParzEuesis, at the same time that he complains 
 that the sacred writers have not been explicit in assicrninsr the 
 boundaries of either: an oversight which I own I think would 
 have been unpardonable in them, if they had believed the know- 
 ledge of this article so indispensable as Mr. Dodwell did. 
 
 Of the first kind, or extraordinary ministers, were the apos- 
 tles, prophets, and evangelists. These at least were the chief. 
 For, from some passages in Paul's writings, it appears very 
 probable, that all those who were endowed, in an eminent de- 
 gree, with any of the xh"^^"^\«-^ or supernatural gifts, were con- 
 sidered as a sort of extraordinary ministers. Compare 1 Cor. 
 xii. 28, &c. with Eph. iv. 11, &c. But it is not with that ex- 
 traordinary and temporary arrangement, supported by the power 
 of working miracles, which was calculated chiefly for the found- 
 ing of the church, that we are here concerned. It is with the 
 ordinary and permanent establishment, to the suitable discharge 
 of the duties of which, it is not the ;^>x^i^^<«V, but the x'^^^iu not 
 the miraculous and shining gifts of the Spirit, but the less con- 
 spicuous, though more important, graces of knowledge, faith, 
 and charity, which are requisite. 
 
 In regard to these, it is from the Acts of the apostles and the 
 epistles, that we principally derive our information. Thence 
 we learn, that the apostles regularly established churches, and 
 settled therein proper ministers in every city and village, where 
 they had made as many proselytes as might form a congrega- 
 tion. I do not say that the settlement of pastors, and other of- 
 
 e2 
 
6B LECTURES ON 
 
 ficers, took place immediately on the conversion of the people, 
 but on the first convenient occasion afterwards. The converts 
 every where seem, for some time, to have been instructed chiefly 
 by such of their number as were endowed with supernatural 
 gifts, those called prophets in particular, who also had the prin- 
 cipal part in conducting the public otHces of religion. Of these, 
 mention is made in the thirteenth chapter of the Acts. This 
 was the footing on which the apostles commonly left the places 
 they travelled to, on their first visit. It was not till afterwards, 
 either by messengers sent on purpose, or on a second or third 
 visit, that they gave them fixed teachers. It has been said, that 
 in the extraordinary and unsettled state of the church, the sa- 
 cred offices were not so much appropriated to the ministers, as 
 to exclude private Christians from occasionally exercising them, 
 especially in the absence of the former. The first order given 
 to the eleven to make converts (for such is the import of [A,ah'riv. 
 call) to baptize and to teach, carries in it nothing from which we 
 can discover, that it was a commission entrusted to them ex^ 
 clusively as apostles or ministers, and not given them also as 
 Christians ; and that the apostles were particularized, because 
 best qualified, from their long attendance on Christ's ministry, 
 for promoting his religion in the world; but not with a view to 
 exclude any Christians, who were capable, from co-operating 
 with them in the same good cause. That this last was the con- 
 struction then put upon that charge, appears not improbable, 
 from the subsequent part of the scripture history. PhiHp, 
 though no apostle, and probably at that time no more than a 
 deacon, (that is, a trustee for the poor, in matters purely secular) 
 did all to the Ethiopian eunuch, which the apostles had in charge 
 with regard to all nations. He converted, baptized, and taught 
 him. No reasonable man can doubt that any private Christian 
 was then, and is still, warranted, if he can, to convert an infidel, 
 and to teach him the principles of Christianity. Yet these are 
 two important parts of the apostolical commission. If I should 
 say the most important parts, I should not speak without war- 
 rant. Our Lord himself made proselytes, and instructed them, 
 but baptized none, leaving this merely ministerial work to his 
 disciples. — Peter was sent to open the door of faith to the Gen- 
 tiles, by the conversion of Cornelius and his family. But the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. OQ 
 
 charge of baptizing them, he trusted entirely to the Christian 
 brethren who attended him. Ananias, a disciple, was employed 
 to baptize Paul. And Paul says himself of his own mission, 
 that Christ sent him not to baptize, but to preach the gospel, 
 denoting thereby, according to the import of the Hebrew idiom, 
 that baptizing, compared with preaching, though a part, was 
 but an inferior and subordinate part of his charge. — Nothing 
 here advanced can justly be understood to combat the propriety 
 of limiting, for the sake of discipline, the power of baptizing, 
 to fewer hands than that of preaching, when once a fixed mi- 
 nistry is settled in a church, and regulations are adopted for its 
 government. 
 
 The doctrine I have been illustrating, so far from being, as 
 some Romanists ignoraiitly pretend, one of the many novelties 
 sprung from the Protestant schism, was openly maintained at 
 Rome, without censure, about the middle of the fourth century, 
 by Hilary, a deacon of that church, a man of erudition and dis- 
 cernment, of whom I shall have occasion to speak afterwards. 
 This commentator, in his Exposition of the Epistle to the 
 Ephesians, iv. H, 12. has these words; — " Postquam omnibus 
 " locis ecclesisB sunt constitutse, et officia ordinata, aliter com- 
 " posita res est, quam coepercit; primum enim omnes docebant, 
 ** et omnes baptizabant, quibuscunque diebus vel temporibus 
 " fuisset occasio." A little after, — " Neque Petrus diaconos 
 'Miabuit quando Cornelium cum omni domo ejus baptizavit ; 
 " nee ipse, sed jussit fratribus qui cum illo ierant ad Cornelium 
 '' ab Joppe." Again : " Ut ergo cresceret plebs, et multipli- 
 " caretur, omnibus inter initia concessum est et evangelizare, 
 " et baptizare, et scripturas in ecclesia explanare." Such were 
 the sentiments of a respectable member of the Roman presby- 
 tery in those days ; for conclave, both in name and thing, was 
 as little known at Rome then as it is with us at present. Now 
 though the gradual settlement of a regular ministry throughout 
 the church, would gradually abolish an usage of this kind, it is 
 natural to conclude, that wherever there happened to be a return 
 of the like exigencies, through want of licensed pastors, every 
 private Christian would not only be entitled, but bound, if ca- 
 pable, to supply the defect. So thought the Christians, who 
 were dispersed on the persecution mentioned Acts viii. For 
 
70 LECTURES ON 
 
 " they that were scattered abroad," the historian makes no dis- 
 tinction, " went every where, preaching the word." Now the 
 apostles remained in Jerusalem, and ordinary pastors were not 
 yet appointed. This is agreeable to what appears to have been 
 the general opinion, and even the practice where circumstances 
 required, as far down as Tertullian's time, about the beginning 
 of the third century. This author, the first of the Latin fa- 
 thers, in his Exhortatio ad castitatem, wherein he inveighs 
 against second marriages, having urged that Paul made it ne- 
 cessary in a bishop that he be the husband of one wife, intro- 
 duces an antagonist replying, that the prohibition to pastors im- 
 plies a permission to others to marry oftener. He answers, 
 that the distinction among Christians, between the priesthood 
 and the people, who, by the evangelical law, are all priests, is 
 of the church's making, that is, as I understand him, is not of 
 divine original; referring to what appears to have been the ap- 
 proved practice of laymen even then, who, when none of the 
 clerical order could be had, celebrated the eucharist, and baptiz- 
 ed, and served as priests to themselves. ** Three persons," 
 says he, " though laymen, make a church." " Ubi ecclesias- 
 *' tici ordinis non est consessus, et offers, et tinguis, et sacerdos 
 " es tibi solus. Sed ubi tres, ecclesia est, licet laici." It mat- 
 ters nothing to the present question, that his doctrine of the un^ 
 lawfulness of second marriages is unreasonable; it matters no- 
 thing, that his argument is inconclusive ; we are concerned only 
 with the fact, to which he refers as notorious. 
 
 Hardly could any attentive reader, who is a stranger to the 
 disputes that in latter ages have arisen about holy orders, think 
 the passages susceptible of any other meaning than that I have 
 given it, and which indeed Rigaltius, a Romanist, and Grotius, 
 a Protestant, had given before me. I know the pains which 
 has been taken by some learned men, who cannot conceive a 
 kingdom of Christ, that is not a kingdom of priests, totally to 
 disguise this passage. The French Jesuit Petavius admits, in- 
 deed, according to the obvious meaning of the words, that Tcr- 
 tullian argues from the known practice in the case specified; 
 and as the Romish church acknowledges the validity of lay-bap- 
 tism, he admits also, that tinguis means, you baptize ; but ad- 
 hering sacredly to the principles of his party, does ^lot admit 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 71 
 
 that offers can be interpreted, you consecrate tlic cucliarist. 
 The Irish nonjuror Dodwoll, of wliosc system lay-baptism and 
 lay-consecration are equally subversive, not only admits, but 
 proves, that unless offers refer to the priestly office, as well ns 
 tingnis^ there can be no meaning in the argument. At the 
 same time he affirms, that this author does not argue from a 
 known practice, but from his own opinion of the rights of lay- 
 men in such emergencies, explaining offers et ti?igi/iSy you have 
 a right to celebrate the eucJiarist, and to baptize. I'he impar- 
 tial inquirer, who has no hypothesis to serve, will readily agree 
 with Dodwell, that the only interpretation o'i offerre^ as connect- 
 ed with tinguere^ is to celebrate the eucharist; and no less 
 readily agree with Petavius, that the only natural import of the 
 present of the indicative here used, is, you do, and not, yoii 
 have, in my judgment, a title to do. The argument drawn from 
 an allowed and known custom, in support of his opinion, was 
 confessedly of some weight, but an argument in support of his 
 opinion, drawn from another opinion of his, equally question- 
 able, and, as Dodwell thinks, contradicted by the universal prac- 
 tice of the age, was of no conceivable weight, and could not 
 have been adduced by any person of common understanding. 
 Tertullian, like Dodwell, held some extravagant tenets, but 
 was incapable of arguing so ridiculously as this critic would re- 
 present him. That laws, declarative of right, are sometimes 
 expressed in the present of the indicative, is true, but never 
 when the common practice is in contradiction to the law. Dod- 
 well's quotations from the apostolical constitutions are so far 
 from answering his purpose, that they are a confirmation of 
 what was just now observed. They are not more declarative 
 of the canons than of the customs which then obtained. If the 
 prevailing practice had been repugnant to those canons, no 
 writer of common sense, who did not intend to deceive, would 
 have expressed himself in that manner. The words which con- 
 clude the argument, Igitur si habes jus saeerdotis, &c. show 
 no more than that the author inferred the right from the prac- 
 tice. Is there any incoherence in saying. In an urgent case, 
 when no priest can be found, you baptize, you give the eucharist, 
 and you alone serve as priest to yourself. If, then, you have 
 Uie right of priesthood in yourself, in a case of necessity, you 
 
72 LECTURES ON 
 
 ougJit to have the discipline of a priest, wherever it may be ne- 
 cessary to exercise the right. This is literally Tertullian's ar- 
 gument. 
 
 But to return from this digression to those fixed officers or 
 ministers, whom the apostles assigned to the churches which 
 they planted ; beside some general names used promiscuously 
 in scripture, such as \y\if^ivot, ^I'^atrxaXoi, 'v^'/i^tla,, ksfja^yoi, guidcs, 
 teachers, ministers, officers, and perhaps a few others, there are 
 three terms more frequently applied to them, which are, j^r/c-^o^a/, 
 -u^iffQviioo,, ^iccKovoi, bishops or overseers, presbyters or elders, and 
 deacons or attendants. Now the doubts that have arisen are 
 chiefly concerning the two first of these names, s^r/^xo^o; and 
 ^^j<r/3J]:^5/ ; and the question is, whether they are names for the 
 same office, or for different offices. This, at least, is the first 
 question ; for it must be owned, that there have been some 
 strenuous advocates for the apostolical origin of episcopacy, who 
 have entirely given up the argument founded on the names. 
 As to the last title of the three, ^taxovo,, it is allowed on all hands, 
 that it is the name of a different office, though commentators are 
 not entirely agreed as to the nature and extent of that office. 
 
 That the terms iTTKraovos and ^^£(r/3Ji=^o,-, are sometimes used pro- 
 miscuously in the New Testament, there is no critic of any 
 name who now pretends to dispute. The passage. Acts xx, is 
 well known. Paul, we are told, ver. 17. " from Miletus sent 
 " to Ephcsus, and called the elders of the church" r^; w^^^/sJ/^ps 
 Ty.i tzK7.'A<nau lu the spccch hc made to them, when they were 
 convened, he has these words, ver. 28 : " Take heed, therefore, 
 " to yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost 
 " hath made you overseers," i7n(rzo-7r-^;, bishops is the term in the 
 Greek. Here there can be no question that the same per- 
 sons are denominated presbyters and bishops. Pretty similar 
 to this is a passage in the epistle to Titus, ch. i. The apostle 
 says, ver. 5, " For this cause left I thee in Crete, that tliou 
 '' shouldst set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain 
 ** elders, -TTr^nrf^vii^as, in every city." Ver. 6, " If any be blame- 
 less," &c. Ver. 7. " For a bishop must be blameless," s^^ff- 
 xoTov. Here, unless we will say that the apostle argues very 
 incoherently, he must mean the same thing hy elder, at the fifth 
 verse, and bishop, at the seventh. In like manner the apostle 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 73 
 
 Peter: 1 Pet. v. 1. " The elders, arf3o-/SJ/£^K,-, which are among 
 " you, I exhort," &c. Ver. 2. " Feed the flock of God which 
 " is among you, taking the oversight thereof," £CT/(rr,o5r»y';2,-, dis- 
 charging the office of bishops. The truth is, the word iTurxoTii 
 was properly the name of office, and w^iffr^vis^d^ was a title of re- 
 spect, borrowed from the Jewish custom, (which was, indeed, 
 analogous to that of other nations) of calling not only the mem- 
 bers of the sanhedrim -sroio-r^uliooi, elders or senators, but also the 
 members of the city councils. 
 
 To all this, indeed, the common answer is, that most of 
 the names of offices arc, in scriptural language, not so uni- 
 formly appropriated to the particular offices, as not occasional- 
 ly to be applied to others, agreeably to the etymological import 
 of the words. Thus the term ^iccxovoi, is applied to the apos- 
 tles themselves. John calls himself sr.siriSj]^^^?, elder; so also 
 does Peter; and Christ is styled eminently both apostle and bi- 
 shop. To the same purpose it is urged, that sometimes in the 
 Old Testament the high-priest is called simply the priest. It 
 would, however, be much more to the point, if a passage could 
 be named wherein an ovdiuary priest is styled high-priest. The 
 superior order, it is universally admitted, includes the iiiferior, 
 but this docs not hold conversely. Now in the first passage 
 above quoted from the Acts, it is manifest, that the ordinary 
 pastors of Ephesus are styled bishops; for in no period of e})is- 
 copacy, according to the present acceptation of the word, was 
 there a plurality of biishops in one city and church. It is indeed 
 affirmed, that in one passage, 2 Cor. viii. 23. the term apostle is 
 applied to those who were of a lower order than the apostles, 
 properly so called. It is, however, observable, that tl.e expres- 
 sion there used, is xto'toXoi i>cy.xr,(riuv, apostles, or messengers of 
 the churches, not apostles of Jesus Christ, or apostles simply, 
 without any addition, which are the common expressions used 
 for those vvho were selected to be the principal promulgators of 
 the faith. And it shows, tiiat Thcodoret, who lived several 
 hundred years after, was very much puzzled where to find the 
 origin of the office of bishop, as the word in his time implied, 
 when he imagined he discovered it in a jdirase which occurs 
 but once in the New Testament, and of which the application 
 is extremely doubtful. 13 ut the short, though fully reply, to 
 
74 LECTURES ON 
 
 the aforesaid answer, is this : It is not denied, that tliose terms 
 urged by the objectors, are, on certain occasions, urged with 
 greater latitude than in the ordinary appUcation. Nevertheless, 
 the ordinary and peculiar application is supported by so many 
 clear passages of sacred writ, as to be rendered quite indubit- 
 able. On the contrary, one single passage from the apostolical 
 writings has not yet been produced, in which it appears from 
 the context, that the two terms zf^i(r(hvii^os and iv^rKo-r©' mean dif- 
 ferent offices. 
 
 Nay, we can say more than this, which may be called a nega- 
 tive and presumptive proof only, that there is the strongest 
 positive evidence which the nature of the thing can admit, that 
 in those writings the two terms uniformly mean the same office. 
 The apostle Paul, in the directions he gave to Timothy, about 
 the proper supply of churches with suitable ministers, takes 
 particular notice of two orders, and no more. One of them he 
 calls bishops, and the other deacons. Now, if by bishops he 
 meant what in modern style is so denominated, those who have 
 the charge of many presbyters, it is astonishing that he should 
 not think it of importance to give any directions about the 
 qualifications of presbyters, who had the immediate inspection 
 of the flock; at the same time that he is very particular in re- 
 gard to the qualifications of deacons, though their order has 
 ever been allowed to be much inferior to the other. And if (as 
 even some friends of episcopacy have admitted) he here means 
 by bishops only presbyters ; that an office of so great import- 
 ance as the bishops, (if it was a diiferent and superior office) 
 should have been entirely overlooked, is no less surprising. 
 Further, in support of this argument, that there were but two 
 orders then established, let it be observed, that Paul, in ad- 
 dressing the Philippians, i. 1. expresses himself in this man- 
 ner: ^^ To all the saints at Philippi, with the bishops and 
 *' deacons." All commentators of any name, except Dr. Ham- 
 mond, of whom I shall take notice afterwards, agree, that by 
 bishops here is meant the ordinary pastors or presbyters; for it 
 is almost universally allowed, as I had already an occasion of 
 hinting, that when the distinction came to be established, there 
 was never more than one bishop in a city, or church. And as 
 true it is also, that then there was no city which had a church. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 755 
 
 and not a l)is!iop. Now if tliere was a bishop, in tlie modern 
 sense, at Piiilippi, when the apostle wrote tliat letter, it looks 
 a little strantre, that he who was the chief of that Christian 
 society should be the only person that was neglected by the 
 apostle on that occasion. The arbitrary suppositions that have 
 been framed, in order to elude the force of this argument, as 
 they are without even the shadow of evidence, can merit no 
 regard. On the other hand, it is remarkable, and may serve, 
 if possible, to convince the most obstinate, of the futility of 
 those suppositions, that in the epistle written by Polycarp to 
 the same congregation, about sixty years alter, we find mention 
 only of those two orders, the presbyters and the deacons ; and 
 no more allusion made either to a vacancy in their number, or 
 to any spiritual superior, present or absent, than was made by 
 Paul in his letter to them so long before. Now whether we 
 call their pastors bishops^ with the apostle, or preshyters, with 
 Polycarp, is a matter of no consequence, as it is evident that 
 both speak of two orders only among them, and not of three; 
 and wherever one of these names is employed, the other is 
 dropped, this being the surest evidence which the nature of the 
 thing admits, that the words are synonymus. 
 
 But I observe further, that the sacred penmen, in speaking 
 of, or to particular churches, if the spiritual instructors and 
 guides of the people be mentioned at all, always mention them 
 in the plural number, which, though it may be comjiatible with 
 some little difference in rank or precedency, can scarcely be 
 thought compatible with so material a difference as that of 
 office or trust. Thus the apostle to the Thessalonians, 1 
 Thess. v. 12. " We beseech you, brethren, to know them 
 " which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and 
 '* admonish you, ''in; xo-nafiu; xxt 'zs'pai'ra.fiiviis x.a.4 vt^S £'/»>'']«?. It is re- 
 markable too, that the term ■^p^jt^-af/.i^'^, as every other name im- 
 plying direction, or government, came afterwards to be appro- 
 priated to the bishop ; with whom, according to the doctrine of 
 high church, the whole authority over the congregation was 
 originally lodged. The presbyters could do nothing but as 
 they happened to be authorized or commissioned by him. The 
 use of such terms here, in the plural, when the apostle was ad- 
 dressing the members of one single churchj shows, that the a^i* 
 
76 LECTURES ON 
 
 plication was very tlifFerent, and that matters were then on a 
 very different footing. In the Acts, also, it appears very plain, 
 that all the stated pastors are always considered as coming un- 
 der one denomination. Thus we are told of the apostles Paul 
 and Barnabas, Acts xiv. 23. that, when journeying together, 
 they ordained elders, 'ff^i(rp>v\^'„ in every church. This is, in- 
 deed, the common title given to the ministers settled in parti- 
 ticular churches throughout that book. When a collection is 
 made for the poor Christians in Jerusalem, it is sent ron iz^ia-- 
 (•>vii^oti : and if the pastors of any church are sent for, that they 
 may receive proper directions, it is ts? t^^s^rjSJ/i^aj. In the fifteenth 
 chapter, where we have an account of the consultation held at 
 Jerusalem, about the Mosaic ceremonies, the ordinary pastors 
 are no less than five times, to wit, in verses 2d, 4th, 6th, 22d, 
 and 23d, distinguished by this appellation from either the 
 apostles, or private Christians, or both. Nor do we find a 
 single hint in the whole book of any thing like different classes 
 of Tsr^iffihvii^oi. The name I'rtffKo-.roi occurs there but once, which 
 is in the place above quoted, where it is applied to the same 
 individuals, who, in the same chapter, are termed i^^itr^vii^oi. 
 
 In regard to the imposition of hands, which is considered by 
 many as a necessary attendant on ordination, we find this also, 
 1 Tim. iv. 14. attributed to the presbytery. The word w^s^^w- 
 •Js^/flv, though it occurs sometimes in the New Testament as ap- 
 plied to the Jewish sanhedrim, or council of elders, is found 
 only in the passage now quoted, applied to a Christian council. 
 The sense of the word z^^scrfiv^os, as well as the application of 
 the word sr^iffiivji^iov, in other places, to a convention of those call- 
 ed zr^iff^vn^oi, determines the sense of the word in this passage. 
 And, indeed, all Christian antiquity concurs in afl[ixing this 
 name to what may be called the consistory of a particular 
 church, or the college of its pastors. 
 
 It must be remarked by every person who gives due attention 
 to the apostolical writings, that the custom then, if not uni- 
 formly, was, with very few exceptions, to give a plurality of 
 teachers to every church. The state of the Christian commu- 
 nity at that time, which consisted almost entirely of new con- 
 verts, men and women, who had been habituated to principles 
 and practices very different from those they were to be in- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 77 
 
 strncted In, beside the more iminincnt dangers to wliich all 
 Christians, but especially the pastors, were then exposed, ren- 
 dered this precaution absolutely necessary. They had, by this 
 means, a probable ground to expect, that if some of the teach- 
 ers sliould fall a sacrifice to the malice of their enemies, some 
 would escape their fury, and that in every church a timely op- 
 portunity might thus be found of supplying their vacancies, 
 so that the congregations should never be entirely destitute of 
 pastors. 
 
 To what has been adduced from sacred writ, I shall add 
 two very ancient testimonies : one of them is from the most re- 
 spectable remains we have of Christian antiquity next to the 
 inspired writings. The piece I allude to, is the first epistle of 
 Clemens llomanus to the Corinthians as it is commonly styled, 
 but as it styles itself, the epistle of the church of God at 
 Rome to the church of God at Corinth. It is the same Cle- 
 ment whom Paul (Phil. iv. 3.) calls his fellow-labourer, and 
 one of those whose names are in the book of life. There we are 
 told, chap. xlii. that " the apostles having preached the gospel 
 *' in countries and towns, constituted the first-fruits of their 
 '* ministry, whom they approved by the Spirit, bishops and 
 '* deacons of those who should believe." And in order to sa- 
 tisfy us, that he did not use these words in a vague manner for 
 church-officers in general, but as expressive of all the distinct 
 orders that were established by them in the church, he adds, 
 *' Nor was this a new device, inasmuch as bishops and deacons 
 "' had been pointed out many ages before : for thus says the 
 *' scripture, I will constitute their bishops in righteousness^ and 
 " their deacons in faiths The passage quoted is the last clause 
 of the 17th verse of the 60th chapter of Isaiah. It is thus ren- 
 dered in our version : " I will make thine officers peace, and 
 *' thine exactors righteousness." Whether this venerable an- 
 cient has given a just translation, or made a proper application 
 of this prediction, is not the point in question. It is enough 
 that it evinces what his notion was of the established ministers 
 then in the church. And if (as no critic ever questioned, and 
 as his own argument necessarily requires) he means the same 
 by bishops with those who, in the Acts, are called -ar^eo-zSJ/s^a/, 
 whom the apostles Paul and Barnabas ordained in every 
 
78 LECTURES ON 
 
 church, and whom Clement, in other parts of his epistle, also 
 calls Tsr(>i<r[iuis^oi, namely, the ordinary teachers, it would seem 
 strange, that the bishop, properly so called, the principal officer 
 of all, should be the only one in his account, of whom the holy 
 Spirit, in sacred writ, had given no previous intimation. Nay, 
 do not the words of this father manifestly imply, that any other 
 office in the church than the two he had mentioned, might be 
 justly styled a ?iew device or invention ? Dr. Pearson, in his 
 Vindicias Ignatianee, insists much, that whenever any of the fa- 
 thers purposely enumerate the diflPerent orders in the church, 
 they mention always three. If the above account given by Cle- 
 ment is not to be considered as an enumeration, I know not what 
 to call it. If two were actually all the orders then in the 
 church, could he have introduced the mention of them, by tell- 
 ing us he was about to give a list, or catalogue, or even to make 
 an enumeration of the ecclesiastical degrees ? Is this a way of 
 prefacing the mention of so small a number as two ? It is this 
 writer's express design to acquaint us what the apostles did for 
 accommodating the several churches they planted, in pastors 
 and assistants. And can we suppose he would have omitted 
 the chief point of all, namely, that they supplied every church 
 with a prelate, ruler, or head, if any one had really been en- 
 titled to this distinction ? 
 
 If it should be urged, that under the term s-r.-try.ocroi both func- 
 tions of bishop and presbyter are comprehended, it is manifest, 
 that as it was the writer's scope to mark the different offices es- 
 tablished, as being predicted by the prophets in the Old Testa- 
 ment, there cannot be a stronger indication, that there was then 
 no material, if any difference, between them, and that they were 
 properly denominated and considered as one office. The appel- 
 latives also by which they are denoted, are invariably employed 
 by him in the plural number, as being equally applicable to all. 
 It is said in chap. i. rot; '/fynfuvots \(luv 'v^oiaffiroi^ivoi, submitting to 
 your governors or guides. It is remarkable also, that the word 
 \y^fj^ivo;, here used in the plural of all their pastors, is one of 
 those terms which came afterwards to be appropriated to the 
 bishop. Nay, since it must be admitted, that in the New Tes- 
 tament, as well as in the ancient Christian monument just now 
 quoted, the words t-yfiVKo'^oi and w^£^/3J]£^o?, are not occasionally, 
 
rXCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 79 
 
 but uniformly, used synonymously, the very discovery, that 
 there was not any distinctive appellation for such an office as is 
 now called bishop, is not of inconsiderable weight to prove that 
 it did not exist. We know that every other office, ordinary 
 and extraordinary, is sufficiently distinguished by an appropriat- 
 ed name. 
 
 But I cannot help observing further, concerning tliis epistle 
 of Clement, that though it was written with the special view of 
 conciliating the minds of the Corinthians to their pastors, com- 
 monly in this letter called presbyters, some of whom the peo- 
 ple had turned out of their offices, or expelled, a'ro rr,: i-riffKoTn;, 
 from their bisliopric, as his words literally imply, there is not 
 the most distant hint of any superior to these ^^ufi'Tisooi, whose 
 proper province it was, if there had been such a superior, to in- 
 spect their conduct, and to judge of it; and whose authority the 
 people had treated most contemptuously, in presuming, without 
 so much as consulting him, to degrade their presbyters. It was 
 natural, it was even unavoidable, to take notice, in such a case, 
 of the usurpation whereof they had been guilty upon their bi- 
 shop, the chief shepherd, who had the oversight of all the un- 
 der shepherds, the presbyters, as well as of the people, and to 
 whom alone, if there had been such a person, those presbyters 
 were accountable for their conduct. Yet there is not so much 
 as a syllable in all this long letter that points this way. On 
 the contrary, he argues from the power with which those pres- 
 byters themselves were vested, and of which they could not be 
 justly stripped, whilst they discharged faithfully the duties of 
 their office. I will appeal to any candid person who is toler- 
 ably conversant in Christian antiquities, whether he thinks it 
 possible, that in the third century, such a letter, on such an 
 emergence, could have been written to any Christian congrega- 
 tion, by any man in his senses, wherein there was no more no- 
 tice taken of the bishop, who was then, in a manner, every 
 thing in his own church, than if he were nothing at all. And 
 that there was so great a difference, in less than two centuries, 
 in people's style and sentiments on this article, is an uncontro- 
 vertible proof that, in that period, things came to stand on a 
 very different foot. This epistle of Clement, who was a disci- 
 ple of Paul, appears, indeed, from one passage, to have been 
 
80 LECTURES ON 
 
 written so early as before the destruction of the temple at Jeru- 
 salem, and, consequently, before the seventy-second year of 
 Christ, according to the vulgar computation. And if so, it was 
 written before the Apocalypse, and, perhaps, some other parts 
 of the sacred canon. Nothing, therefore, that is not scripture, 
 can be of greater authority in determining a point of fact, as is 
 the question about the constitution of the apostolical church. 
 
 The other testimony I shall produce, is that of Polycarp, 
 who had been a disciple of the apostle John, and must certainly 
 have written his epistle to the Philippians a considerable time 
 before the middle of the second century. He also takes no- 
 tice only of two orders of ministers in the church, enjoining . 
 the people, chap. v. to be subject to their presbyters and dea- 
 cons, as to God and Christ. He could go no higher for a si- 
 militude; nor could he decently have gone so high, had he 
 known of a higher order in the church. Not a syllable of the 
 bishop, who, in less than a hundred and fifty years after, would 
 liave been the principal, if not the only, person, to whom their 
 subjection would have been enjoined by any Christian writer. 
 Let it be observed further, that though, in chap. v. he lays 
 down the duties and qualifications of deacons, and, in chap. vi. 
 those of presbyters, wherein every thing befitting judges and 
 governors is included, and, through the whole epistle, those of 
 tlie people, there is no mention of what is proper in the charac- 
 ter and conduct of a bishop. 
 
 I shall remark here, by the way, that there is one very an- 
 cient author, Ignatius, who also comes within the denomination 
 of the apostolic fathers, whose writings are supposed to have in- 
 tervened between those of Clement and those of Polycarp, and 
 whose authority is strongly urged on the opposite side. Of 
 him I shall have occasion to take notice afterwards. I shall 
 here only add, in regard to Polycarp, that what has been now 
 observed of his epistle to the Philippians, is a full confutation 
 of that hasty assertion of Dodwell [«], that tlie Christian wri- 
 ters, posterior to Ignatius, most accurately observe even the dis- 
 tinction of the names ; to wit, of bishop and presbyter, of which 
 he had been speaking. His words are, " Juniores autem Ig- 
 " natio scriptores Christiani et nominum distinctionem obser- 
 [ct] Parcen. 27. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 81 
 
 " vant accuratissimam." It is evident, from tlie above quota- 
 tion, that Polycarp knew of no Christian minister superior to 
 the presbyters. If the bishop was of a different order, and yet 
 included in the term, he has been as little observant of accuracy 
 in the distinction of the names, as of propriety and decency in 
 his injunctions on this head. 
 
 But there are other topics from which the episcopate has, by 
 its warmest patrons, been supported, and which it will be pro- 
 per to examine particularly in the following lectures. I shall in 
 these also endeavour to trace (as far as at this distance of time 
 it is practicable) the outline of the apostolic church, and inquire 
 into the origin and progress of subordination in the pastors. It 
 will be observed by the judicious and the candid, that what has 
 been advanced, does not affect the lawfulness, or even, in certain 
 circumstances, the expediency of the episcopal model ; it only 
 exposes the arrogance of pretending to a jus diviniim. I am 
 satisfied that no form of polity can plead such an exclusive char- 
 ter as that phrase, in its present acceptation, is understood to 
 imply. The claim is clearly the offspring of sectarian bigotry 
 and ignorance. In regard to those polities which obtain at pre- 
 sent in the different Christian sects, I own ingenuously, that I 
 have not found one of all that I have examined, which can be 
 said perfectly to coincide with the model of the apostolic church. 
 Some, indeed, are nearer, and some are more remote ; but this 
 we may say with freedom, that, if a particular form of polity 
 had been essential to the church, it had been laid down in an- 
 other manner in the sacred books. The very hypothesis is, in 
 my opinion, repugnant to the spiritual nature of the evangelical 
 economy. It savours grossly of the conceit with which the 
 Jews were intoxicated of the Messiah's secular kingdom, — a 
 conceit with which many like-minded Christians are intoxicated 
 still. 
 
82 LECTURES OS 
 
 LECTURE V. 
 
 J\.FTER some considerations an tlie nature and consequence of 
 the question about the polity originally established in the 
 church, I discussed in the former lecture the principal topics 
 relating to the equality of the pastors, at least in point cf func- 
 tion and oincial duties. I observed also, in the conclusion of 
 that discourse, that there were other topics, from which those 
 who maintain a subordination among them, have endeavoured 
 to defend their sentiments. Many, indeed, convinced by such 
 arguments as were then adduced, that it is in vain to search for 
 the office of bishop, as the word is understood by moderns, in 
 those ministers ordained by the apostles in the churches which 
 they founded, have referred us for its origin to the apostolate 
 itself. I have passingly observed already, that this was one of 
 those extraordinary offices, which were in their nature tempo- 
 rary, and did not admit succession. But this point, as so much 
 stress is laid upon it, will deserve to be examined more particu- 
 larly. 
 
 The apostles may be considered in a twofold view, either in 
 their general character as the first pastors of the church, and 
 teachers of the Christian faith, or in what is implied in their 
 special character, of apostles of Jesus Christ. — In the first ge- 
 neral view they are, doubtless, the predecessors of all those w^ho, 
 to the end of the world, shall preach the same gospel, and ad- 
 minister the same sacraments, by whatever name we distinguish 
 them, bishops, priests, or deacons, overseers, elders, or mini- 
 sters. But the question still recurs. Whether, agreeably to the 
 primitive institution, their successors, in respect of the more 
 common character of teachers and directors of the churches, 
 should be divided into three orders, or only into two? To pre- 
 sume, without evidence, that the first, and not the second, was 
 the fact, is merely what logicians call a pelitio principii, taking 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL IIISTOIIY. 83 
 
 that for granted, which is the very point in dchate. But \i' it 
 be alleged, that not in the general character of teachers, but 
 in their special function as apostles, the bishops are their pro- 
 per successors, the presbyters and deacons being only the suc- 
 cessors of those who were, in the beginning, ordained by the 
 apostles, this point will require a separate discussion. And for 
 this purpose, your attention is entreated to the following re- 
 marks. 
 
 First, the indispensable requisites in an apostle sufRciently 
 demonstrate, that the ofRce could be but temporary. It was 
 necessary that he should be one who had seen Jesus Christ in 
 the flesh, after his resurrection. Accordingly they were all 
 specially destined to serve as eye-witnesses to the world of this 
 great event, the hinge on which the truth of Christianity de- 
 pended. The character of apostle is briefly described by Peter, 
 who was himself the first of the apostolical college, as one or- 
 dained to be a witness of Christ's resurrection. Acts i. 22. ; a 
 circumstance of which he often makes mention in his speeches 
 both to the rulers and to the people. See Acts ii. 32. ; iii. 15. ; 
 V. 32. ; X. 41. ; xiii. 31. And if so, the oflice, from its nature 
 and design, could not have an existence after the extinction of 
 that generation. 
 
 Secondly, the apostles were distinguished by prerogatives 
 which did not descend to any after them. Of this kind was, 
 first, their receiving their mission immediately from the Lord 
 Jesus Christ, not mediately through any human ordination or 
 appointment ; of this kind also was, secondly, the power of con- 
 ferring, by imposition of hands, the miraculous gifts of the Spi- 
 rit on whomsoever they would; and thirdly, the knowledge 
 they had, by inspiration of the whole doctrine of Christ. It 
 was for this reason they were commanded to wait the fulfilment 
 of the promise which their Master had given them, that they 
 should be baptized with the Holy Ghost. \\^hat pains does 
 not Paul take to show, that the above mentioned marks of an 
 apostle belonged to him as well as to any of them ? That he 
 had seen Christ after his resurrection, and was consequently 
 qualified, as an eye-witness, to attest that memorable event, he 
 observes, 1 Cor. ix. 1.; xv. 8.: that his commission came di- 
 rectly from Jesus Christ and God the Father, without the in- 
 
 F 2 
 
S4f LECTURES ON 
 
 tervention of any human creature, he acquaints us, Gal. i. 1.; 
 ii. G. To his conferring miraculous powers as the signs of an 
 apostle, he alludes, 2 Cor. xii. 1*2. ; and that he received the 
 knowledge of the gospel not from any other apostle, but by im- 
 mediate inspiration. Gal. i. 11, &c. 
 
 Thirdly, their mission was of quite a different kind from that 
 of any ordinary pastor. It was to propagate the gospel 
 throughout the w^orld, both among Jews and Pagans, and not 
 to take the charge of a particular flock. The terms of their 
 commission are, " Go and teach all nations." Again : " Go 
 ~" ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every crea- 
 '' ture." No doubt they may be styled bishops or overseers, 
 but in a sense very different from that in which it is applied to 
 the inspector over the inhabitants of a particular district. 'They 
 were universal bishops; the whole church, or rather, the whole 
 earth was their charge, and they were all colleagues one of an- 
 other. Or to give the same sentiment, in the words of Chry- 
 
 SOStom, Eiffiv 'uTTo Biis ^it^o]ov/i^iviii axoa'ioXot a^;^(9v/cj, ax, i^vn xui zfoXus- ^ta- 
 (ps^a; XcifilitzvovjiSy ukXa -i^xavlis noiv/) <r'/iv oi:t^i^iv'AV Sf/.'prts-i'J^iv%. '' The apOS- 
 
 '* ties were constituted of God, rulers, not each over a separate 
 *' nation or city, but all were entrusted with the world in com- 
 " mon." If so, to have limited themselves to any thing less, 
 would have been disobedience to the express command they had 
 received from their Master, to go into all nations, and to preach 
 the gospel to every creature. If, in the latter part of the lives 
 of any of them, they were, through age and infirmities, con- 
 fined to one place, that place would naturally fall under the im- 
 mediate inspection of such. And this, if even so much as this, 
 is all that has given rise to the tradition, (for there is nothing 
 like historical evidence in the case) that any of them were bi- 
 ships or pastors of particular churches. Nay, in some instances, 
 it is plain, that the tradition has originated from this single cir- 
 cumstance, that the first pastors, in such a church, were appointed 
 by such an apostle. Hence it has arisen, that the bishops of 
 different churches have claimed (and, probably, with equal truth) 
 to be the successors of the same apostle. 
 
 Fourthly and lastly, as a full proof that the matter was thus 
 universally understood, both in their own age, and in the times 
 immediately succeeding, no one, on the death of an apostle, 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 85 
 
 was ever substituted in liis room, and when that original sacred 
 
 collcire was extinct, the title became extinct with it. The elec- 
 ts ^ 
 
 tion of Matthias by the apostles, in the room of Judas, is no 
 exception, as it was previous to their entering on their charge. 
 They knew it was their Master's intention, that twelve mis- 
 sionaries, from among those who had attended liis ministry on 
 the earth, should be employed as occular witnesses to attest bis 
 resurrection, on which the divinity of his religion depended. 
 The words of Peter, on this occasion, are an ample confirmation 
 of all that has been said, both in regard to the end of the office, 
 and the qualifications requisite in the person who fills it, at the 
 same time that they afford a demonstration of the absurdity as 
 well as arrogance of modern pretenders. " Wherefore of these 
 '' men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord 
 *' Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism 
 *' of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, 
 " must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resur- 
 " rection." But afterwards, when the apostle James, the bro- 
 ther of John, was put to death by Herod, as recorded in the 
 Acts of the Apostles, we find no mention made of a successor. 
 Nor did the subsequent admission of Paul and Barnabas to the 
 apostleship form any exception from what has been advanced ; 
 for they came not as successors to any one, but were specially 
 called by the Holy Spirit as apostles, particularly to the Gen- 
 tiles ; and in them also were found the qualifications requisite 
 for the testimony, which, as apostles, they were to give. 
 
 It is a similar subterfuge to recur to any of the other extra- 
 ordinary ministers who were at that time in the church. It 
 holds true of them all alike that their office was temporary, and 
 the charge they had was universal : it extended to the whole 
 church. Of this kind evidently was the office of evangelist, a 
 title which, like apostle, fell with those who first enjoyed it. 
 Such was Philip, such was Timothy, and such certainly was 
 also Titus. The last mentioned, I own, is no where expressly 
 called so. But from a proper attention to what we learn con- 
 cerning him and Timothy, both in the Acts of the Apostles, 
 and in Paul's epistles, we find their situations, services, and 
 trusts, so perfectly to correspond, that we cannot hesitate a mo- 
 ment in affirming, that their functions were the same, and 
 
86 LECTURES OX 
 
 that they both served as assistants to the apostle Paul. Such 
 also, probably, were Mark and Luke. I do not here allude to 
 the right they acquired to this title from the gospels which 
 they wrote, but as due to them from having assisted some of 
 the apostles in that capacity. Luke was long the companion of 
 Paul; Mark is said to have attended Peter. And if he was a 
 different person from this evangelist (about which some have 
 doubted) John, surnamed Mark, ought also to be included, 
 vvho for some time attended the apostles Paul and Barnabas, 
 and after tlieir separation, Barnabas. 
 
 The v/ork of an evangelist appears to have been to attend the 
 apostles in their journeys for the promulgation of the gospel, to 
 assist them in the office of preaching, especially in places which 
 tlie gospel had not reached before. This conveys the true 
 distinction between the Greek words x^j^yirc-s/v and ivayyiXiZjiv, from 
 which last the name evangelist is taken. The former signifies 
 io preacJt in general, or proclaim the reign of the Messiah ; 
 the latter, though frequently rendered in the same way, de- 
 notes, properly, to declare the good news, that is, the gospel, 
 to those who had before known nothing of the matter. The 
 evangelists assisted also in settling the churches, always acting 
 under the direction of the apostles, and bearing messages from 
 tliem to those cons^regations which the apostles could not then 
 personally visit, serving to supply their places in reforming 
 abuses, and settling order. But the whole history manifestly 
 proves, that their superintendenc}^, in particular places, was not 
 stationary, and for life, but occasional and ambulatory. The 
 words of Paul to Titus clearly show thus much. " For this 
 " cause loft I tliee in Crete, that thou shouldst set in order the 
 " things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I 
 " appointed thee." This is not the language of one who had 
 assiiincd him this as his fixed station, but of one who had en- 
 trusted him with the execution of a special purpose, which the 
 apostle could not then execute himself; and which, when Titus 
 had executed, the sole intention of his presence there was ac^ 
 complished. But, that they remained still in their extraordi- 
 nary character of evangelists, and were still under the direction 
 of those apostles whom they assisted in that capacity, appears 
 also from this, that Paul enjoins Timothy to make dispatch, in 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 87 
 
 regard to the tnatters he was cliargcd with in Asia, tliat he 
 might be with him in R-ome before the winter. As to Titus, 
 he orders him to meet iiim at Nicopolis, in Macedonia, where 
 lie intended to pass the winter; and afterwards, he writes to 
 
 . Timothy, (for the second epistle to Timothy was posterior to 
 the epistle to Titus) that Titus was gone to Dahnatia. 
 
 As to the dates or postscripts subjoined to the epistles in the 
 common bibles, it is universally agreed, among the learned, that 
 they are of no authority. They are not found in some of our 
 best and most ancient manuscripts : they arc not the same in 
 all copies, and some of them are evidently false. The time in 
 which they have been annexed, is not thought to have been 
 
 ^ earlier than the fifth century. We know how far at that time 
 a species of vanity carried people, to trace the line of their pas- 
 tors upwards, through a very dark period, to apostles and evan- 
 gelists, supplying, by their guesses, the imperfections of tradi- 
 tion. Certain it is, that in the three first centuries, neither 
 Timothy nor Titus is styled bishop by any writer. It also de- 
 serves to be remarked, that in the island of Crete, of which 
 Titus is said, in the postscript of Paul's epistle to him, to have 
 been ordained the first bishop, there were no fewer, according to 
 the earliest accounts and catalogues extant, than eleven bi- 
 shops. Hence it is that Titus has been called by some of the 
 later fathers an archbishop; though few of the warmest friends 
 of episcopacy pretend to give the archiepiscopal order so early a 
 date. Yet it is not without some colour of reason that they 
 have named him so ; since he was appointed to ordain ciders in 
 every city, and had therefore a superintendency for the time 
 over the whole island. Whereas it is well known, that in the 
 earliest times of episcopacy, every city wherein there was a 
 church, that is, wherein there were Christian converts enow, had 
 its own bishop. Now if such was the case with Titus, he en- 
 joyed an office there in which he had no succession ; since in all 
 the ancient history of the church, after the death oi' the extra- 
 ordinary ministers, till the rise of the metropolitical jurisdiction, 
 which was near two centuries afterwards, the bishop of a single 
 congregation was the highest order known in the church. 
 But our adversaries in this question do not reflect, that by mak- 
 ing him a metropolitan, they deprive themselves of the only 
 
88 LECTURES ON 
 
 plausible account that has been given on their side, why he got 
 no directions concerning the consecration of bishops, namely, 
 that he himself was the bishop. For being, in that island, by 
 their hypothesis archbishop, he had several suflPragans of the 
 episcopal order, in whose ordination alone he was immediately 
 concerned. The ordaining of presbyters and deacons was pro- 
 perly their work, and not his. Paul, on that supposition, 
 omitted to give him instructions on the only point in which he 
 had a concern. This holds still more evidently in regard to 
 Timothy, whom the same persons have made primate, or ra- 
 ther patriarch, of the proconsular Asia, wherein there were 
 many bishops. What excuse will their ingenuity invent for 
 this repeated oversight of the apostle, in mentioning only two 
 orders instead of three ? Indeed, so little can the instructions, 
 given by Paul to Timothy and Titus, be made to quadrate with 
 any ordinary ministry that ever obtained in the church, that 
 we are forced to conclude, with the learned Dr. Whitby, (see 
 his preface to the epistle to Titus) that their's was extraordi- 
 nary as well as temporary, and that they were not succeeded 
 in it by any that came after them. But if we must have suc- 
 cessors to those extraordinary missionaries, why do we not 
 retain both their titles and their offices ? And why have we not 
 successors to them all ? Why have we not still our apostles, and 
 evangelists, and prophets, and governments, and tongues, and 
 interpreters, and miracles, and discerners of spirits, as well as 
 they ? This would be no more than the native consequence of 
 that principle, that we must have something corresponding and 
 successive to offices which were then, by the wisdom of God, 
 judged necessary for the subversion of idolatry, and the first 
 publication of the faith. 
 
 It is of as little weight to urge, that committing the charge 
 of ordaining presbyters and deacons to those extraordinary mi- 
 nisters, Timothy and Titus, was an evidence that there was no 
 such power in the presbyters or bishops, as they are also called, 
 who had been ordained in those places before. But how does 
 it appear, that there had been any ordained in the churches, to 
 which their charge then extended ? The congregations, as was 
 hinted already, were for some time left under the tutelage of 
 those extraordinary ministers, the prophets and wise men who 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 89 
 
 happened to be among them. The first mention that is made 
 of the ordination, or settlement, of* elders in every city, is in the 
 fourteenth chapter of the Acts, whereas many thousands had 
 been converted to Christianity in difFcrent places long before. 
 And that some of the churches to which Paul's epistles were 
 directed, had no fixed ministry, is evident from the tcnour of 
 the epistles themselves, particularly from those written to the 
 Corinthians. Now the directions given to both Timothy and 
 Titus clearly shew, that they relate to the planting of churches, 
 by supplying, for the first time, with stated pastors, those con- 
 verts who had none before. This must have been done by the 
 extraordinary ministers, if it was ever to be done at all. But 
 when that was once effected, no other than ordinary means, to 
 which the pastors to be ordained were equal, were requisite for 
 the supply of occasional vacancies, and for preserving an order 
 once established. Accordingly, the execution of the charge 
 which Paul gave to Timothy, whereof the planting of churches, 
 by supplying them with pastors, was a principal part, he deno- 
 minates doing the work, not of a bishop, but of an evangelist, 
 and fulfilling that ministry. Aaron, the first high-priest under 
 the former dispensation, and after him Eleazar his son, were so- 
 lemnly consecrated by Moses, who was an extraordinay mini- 
 ster, in as much as he was the steward and sole superintendant 
 over the house of God. But was this ever understood to imply, 
 that no succeeding priest, and especially no succeeding high- 
 priest, could be legally consecrated by any who was inferior in 
 office to Moses ? Plad that been the case, the priesthood must 
 have expired with that generation. Moses, in his exalted sta- 
 tion, had no successor. And till the coming of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, it might be justly said, " There arose not a prophet 
 " since in Israel, like unto Moses, whom the Lord knew face 
 *' to face." It was necessary indeed that he should lay the 
 foundation of the Israclitish church, but that he sliould raise the 
 superstrncture was not necessary. To effect this was left to 
 meaner hands. And the priesthood, once established, was suf- 
 ficient of itself for filling up the voids that might be made by 
 death, and other accidents. And is it reasonable to think, that 
 the case, in this respect, would not be similar with the church 
 gf Christ ? Hence it is evident} that ail the arguments, iu fa- 
 
90 LECTURES ON 
 
 vour of the distinction, which are brought by Epiphanius, and 
 others, from some passages in the epistles to Timothy and Titus, 
 being built on a false hypothesis, must fall to the ground. They 
 proceed upon the notion, that these were properly bishops in the 
 modern acceptation ; a notion utterly unknown to that Chris- 
 tian antiquity, which alone deserves the name of primitive ; a 
 notion, besides, incompatible with the authentic accounts we 
 have concerning these extraordinary ministers, who were not 
 made bishops till about five hundred years after their death. 
 
 There is only one other plea of any consequence in favour of 
 the apostolical antiquity of episcopacy, which I shall now ex- 
 amine. I have reserved it for the last, because it affords an ex- 
 cellent handle for inquiring into the real origin of subordination 
 among the Christian pastors. The plea I mean is taken from 
 the epistles to the seven Asian churches in the Apocalypse, ad- 
 dressed to the angels of these churches severally, and in the 
 singular number ; to the angel of the church of Ephesus, and 
 so of the rest. It appears from the first chapter of that book, 
 that each epistle is intended for all the church or congregation 
 mentioned in the direction or superscription. But one person, 
 called the angel of that church, is addressed in nam.e of the 
 whole. This is evidently different from the uniform style both 
 of the Acts of the Apostles and Paul's epistles. In them, as we 
 have seen, the pastors in every church are always spoken of in 
 the plural number. The same titles are used promiscuously of 
 all, (except the deacons) as of persons quite co-ordinate in pow- 
 er and trust. Here, on the contrary, the singular number is 
 used, and a name given which is not commonly applied to those 
 in the ministry, ordinary or extraordinary. Angel properly de- 
 notes messenger or ambassador. It is the name usually assigned 
 to the celestial spirits, as expressive of the relation they stand 
 in to God. The infernal spirits are, in like manner, called the 
 devil's angels. It is sometimes also used of men. Thus it is 
 predicted in scripture concerning John the Baptist: — "Behold, 
 ** I send my angel before thee, who shall prepare thy way." 
 But what shall we say of the import of the expression in that 
 part of the Apocalypse now referred to ? Shall we, vvith many, 
 consider this unusual application of a name, and the adopting 
 oi the singular number in reference to the sacred office, though 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 01 
 
 but in one single book, and that a very mysterious and prophe- 
 tical book, as a sufficient counterpoise to all the arguments in 
 favour of the co-ordination of the pastors, taken from the uni- 
 form style of the plain and historical part of scripture, which in- 
 forms us of the planting of churches ; and from the familiar 
 epistles of the apostles to those churches that had been planted, 
 or to their assistants in the ministry ? 1 do not think, that by 
 any just rule of interpretation we can. This would be not to 
 borrow light from the perspicuous passages, in order to dispel 
 the darkness of the obscure, but to confound the light of the 
 clearest passages, by blending it with the obscurity of the 
 darkest. 
 
 Shall we then maintain with some zealous patrons of the 
 prcsbyterian model, that in the sublime and allegorical style of 
 prophecy a community is here personified and addressed as one 
 man ? Shall we affirm, that by the angel is meant the presbytery, 
 which our Lord, the better to express the union that ought to sub- 
 sist among the members, emphatically considers as one person ^ 
 With this interpretation I am equally dissatisfied. It is indeed 
 evident, that each of these epistles is ultimately intended for the 
 congregation. The faults reprehended are therefore to be un- 
 derstood as the faults not of the minister or ministers peculiarly, 
 but as the faults that predominated among the people, and with 
 which both the pastors and the fiock are more or less charge- 
 able ; and the warnings and admonitions, as given to them all. 
 Accordingly, when there is a necessity of distinguishing the con- 
 duct of some from that of others, the plural number is adopted, 
 as in chap. ii. 10. : — " Behold, the devil shall cast some of 
 " you into prison, that ye may be tried." See also verses 13, 
 2'i, 21, and 25. But to understand by the name angel^ another 
 community, namely, that of the pastors, appears to me an uinia- 
 tural supposition, which does violence to the text. Though we 
 have instances, especially in precepts and denunciations, where- 
 in a community is addressed by the singular pronouns thou and 
 thee^ I do not recollect such an use of an appellative as the ap- 
 plication of the word angel here would he, on the hypothesis of 
 those interpreters. I^ut is there no medium? Must the angel 
 of each church here addressed be of an order differing from that 
 of the other ministers, and superior to it, or must it imply their 
 
02 LECTURES ON 
 
 collective boc]}^? To me an intermediate opinion, which has 
 been adopted by some critics, appears much more probable than 
 either. My sentiment therefore is, that, as in their consistories 
 and congregations, it would be necessary, for the sake of order, 
 that one should preside, both in the offices of religion, and in 
 their consultations for the common good, it is their president 
 or chairman that is here addressed under the name of angel. 
 A regulation of this kind all sorts of societies are led to adopt 
 from necessity, in order to prevent confusion in conducting 
 business; and those Christian societies would also fall into it by 
 example. They had adopted the name ■sr^io-CJ'isoiay, presbytery or 
 senate, from the name frequently given to the Jewish sanhe- 
 drim. The term Tf.irSvn^^, elder or senator, they had also bor- 
 rowed from the title given to the members of that council. No- 
 thing could be more natural, than to derive from that court also 
 the practice of conducting their affairs more decently and expe- 
 ditiously by the help of a president. 
 
 Let it not be imagined that I mean to signify, that the pres- 
 bytery was formed on the model of the sanhedrim, because they 
 adopted the same name. This, far from being necessary, is not 
 even probable. Their different uses and purposes must suggest 
 the propriety of many differences in their structure and pro- 
 cedure. But on the first erection of this Christian senate, or 
 council, they could hardly fail to take as much of the form of 
 the Jewish, as was manifestly of equal convenience in both. It 
 still adds to the probability of this, that in the synagogue from 
 which many of the terms used in the church in those early times 
 were borrowed, he who presided in conducting the worship, and 
 in directing the reading of the law, was styled the angel of the 
 conffrefl-ation. 
 
 An example they likev.ise had in the apostolical college it- 
 self, in which Peter appears, by the appointment of his master, 
 to have presided; though in no other particular was he endow- 
 ed with any power or privilege not conferred on the rest, who 
 were, in respect of apostleship, his colleagues and equals. I 
 shall not detain you with entering into the controversy that has 
 been so much laboured between Protestants and Papists, and 
 of the latter, between some more and some less papistical, in 
 regard to the prerogatives of Peter. I think it has been made 
 
FXCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 93 
 
 sufficiently manifest, that there was not any kind of power con- 
 ferred on him, in vvhicli his fellow-apostles were not sliarers 
 with him. He is indeed made a principal foundation of the 
 cluirch [a] ; but they are also foundations [6] ; for the house of 
 God is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets ; 
 aud on the twelve foundations of the wall of the New Jerusa- 
 lem were inscribed the names of the twelve apostles [c]. The 
 power of binding and loosing, that is, of pronouncing, without 
 danger of error, the sentence of God in either retaining or re- 
 mitting sins, was indeed first conferred upon Peter [c/], but af- 
 terwards, as we learn in other passages, particularly from the 
 apostle John [e], on all the eleven. Yet 1 think it would be 
 putting a forced construction on the words used by Christ, when 
 Peter first confessed his faith in him as the INIessiah, and had 
 his name changed from Simon to Cephas, or Peter, that is, 
 Rock, to affirm, that they convey to this apostle no pre-emi- 
 nence or distinction whatever. For though we are taught 
 from scripture to consider the declarations made to Peter as 
 being also applicable to them all, still they are to be regarded as 
 most eminently applicable to him, to whom, in the singular 
 number, our Lord, in the audience of the rest, addressed him- 
 self in this manner : ^' I say to thee," — and " I will give to 
 '' thee." The confession which Peter made was doubtless the 
 confession of them all. They were therefore all made par- 
 takers of the same benefits. But as Peter's zeal had led him 
 to be, as it were, their mouth, in making this profession to his 
 master, Christ, after the effusion of the Spirit, honoured him to 
 be their mouth also, in first preaching this doctrine, and giving 
 testimony for him to the Jews, and afterwards, by the special 
 call of God, to the uncircumcised Gentiles. It is thus this 
 apostle himself speaks of it : — " Brethren, ye know that God 
 " made choice among us, that the Gentiles, by my mouth, 
 *' should hear the word of the gospel." This is called, in an- 
 other place, " opening the door of faith to the Gentiles,'^ and 
 affiards a natural exposition of Christ's declaration to Peter, 
 *' I give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven." Yet even 
 here there is nothing peculiar given to Peter, but merely that 
 
 [a] Matt. xvi. 18. [b] Eph. ii. 20. [c] Rev. xxi. It. 
 
 [d] i\latt. xvi. 19. [c] Matt, xviii. 18.— Jobnxx. 23. 
 
•;j34i LECTURES ON 
 
 he should he honoured to he the first. In the conversion of 
 the Gentiles afterwards, Paul was incomparably more eminent 
 than he. 
 
 That Peter, however, was considered as the president of that 
 college, appears from several particulars. One is, he is not 
 only always named first in the gospels, and in the Acts, but by 
 Matthew, who was also an apostle, he is called n^a''i<^, the Jirsf, 
 which I imagine is equivalent to president or chief. Uourcj ^m^v, 
 • — the first Simon. It is not the adverb -reuiov, that is used here, 
 which would have barely implied, that the historian began with 
 his name, but the adjective or epithet ^^^lov. This is the more 
 remarkable, that he was not first called to the apostleship, for 
 liis brother Andrew was called before him, as we learn from the 
 gospel of John. There is hardly therefore any other sense, 
 than that now given, that can be put upon the expression. 
 Sometimes when the apostles are spoken of, Peter alone is 
 named. Thus : '^ Tell his disciples and Peter." I acknow- 
 ledge, however, that as another reason may be assigned for the 
 distinction that is made in this passage, very little stress can be 
 laid on it. Again : " Peter stood up with the eleven." 
 " They said to Peter and the rest of the apostles." And of 
 the three whom our Lord, on some occasions, distinguished 
 from the rest, honouring them to be witnesses of his transfigu- 
 ration, his raising from the dead Jairus^s daughter, and his 
 agony in the garden, Peter is not only one, but invariably nam- 
 ed first. Paul indeed once, in mentioning those three, arranges 
 them otherwise, (Gal. ii. 9.) James, Cephas, and John. It 
 appears, however, from this very passage, that Paul considered 
 him as the head of the twelve. When he says the gospel of 
 the circumcision was committed to Peter, it is evident that he 
 is particularized by way of eminence, for no person can doubt 
 that Peter had this ministry in common with the other eleven. 
 And in taking notice of the success of the gospel among the 
 Jews, Peter alone is again named as the great instrument God 
 had employed for that purpose. And in another place, he men- 
 tions his own visit to the mother church at Jerusalem, as made 
 peculiarly to Peter, with whom he abode fifteen days. These, I 
 acknowledge, are but slight circumstances taken severally, but 
 taken in conjunction, they are strong enough for supporting all 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL IIISTOIIY. 9^ 
 
 that I intend to build upon them. For nothing is here ascrib- 
 ed to him as peculiar but the presidentship, or the first phice in 
 the discharge of the functions of an apostle common to them 
 all. He was not among the apostles as a father among his 
 children, of a different rank, and of a superior order, but as an 
 elder brother among his younger brothers, the first of the same 
 rank and order. " Be not ye called rabbi," siiid Jesus to the 
 twelve, some time after the honourable declaration made to Pe- 
 ter, " for one is your master, even Christ, and all ye are bre- 
 *' thren ; and call no man your father upon the earth, for one 
 " is your father, who is in heaven." It is perhaps unnecessary 
 to add, that whatever was conferred on Peter was merely per- 
 sonal, and could descend to none after him. This indeed is an 
 unavoidable consequence of another point, that the apostolate 
 itself was personal, and did not admit succession, which I have 
 proved to you in the preceding part of this discourse. As to 
 Dodwell's notion of the presidency of the apostle James, the 
 son of Alpheus, otherwise James the Less, also called the Lord's 
 brother, and supposed to have been the first bishop of Jerusa- 
 lem, and likewise of the temporary primacy, first of the church 
 of Jerusalem, afterwards of the church of Ephesus, 1 have 
 taken notice of both in another place. 
 
 Some keen controvertists on the Protestant side would be apt 
 to censure what has been now advanced in regard to tlic apos- 
 tle Peter, as yielding too much to the Romanist. Yet in fact 
 nothing at all is yielded. The bishop of Home has no more 
 claim to be the successor of Peter, than the bishop of London 
 has, or indeed any pastor in the church. It is but too common- 
 ly the effect, though a very bad effect, of religious contro- 
 versy, that impartiality and even judgment are laid aside by 
 both parties, and each considers it as his glory to contradict the 
 other as much, and to recede from his sentiments as far as pos- 
 sible. One is afraid of every thing that looks like concession : 
 it is like losing ground in a battle. For when once unhappily 
 the controversial spirit has gotten possession of a man, his ob- 
 ject is no longer truth but victory. Against this evil I would 
 warn you, my young friends, as much as possible. Revere 
 truth above all things wherever ye find it- Attend coolly and 
 candidly to the voice of reason, from what quarter soever it 
 
96 LECTURES ON 
 
 coraes. Let not the avenues to your understanding be cholced 
 up with prejudices and prepossessions, but be always open to 
 conviction. 
 
 Now, though, what has been advanced in regard to the apos- 
 tolate should not be deemed sufficiently established, yet that 
 one, on account either of senioritj', or of superior merit habitual- 
 ly presided in the presbytery, will still remain probable, for the 
 other reasons assigned, the obvious conveniency of the thing, 
 the commonness of it in all sorts of councils and conventions ; 
 particularly in the sanhedrim and synagogue, the only rational 
 account, that, in a consistency with other parts of sacred writ, 
 or with any Christian relics of equal antiquity, can be given of 
 the address, in the singular number, to the pastors of the seven 
 churches severally in the Apocalypse; and I may add, the most 
 plausible account which it affords of the origin of the more con- 
 siderable distinction that afterwards obtained between bishop 
 and presbyter. The whole of life shows us, that from the most 
 trivial causes the greatest effects sometimes proceed. History 
 in particular evinces this truth, and no sort of history more ¥e- 
 markably than the ecclesiastical. 
 
 It may further be observed, in support of the same doctrine, 
 that some of the most common appellations, whereby the bishop 
 was first distinguished, bear evident traces of this origin. He 
 was not only called ^r^o-.s-cu;, but zs'^o'Joo^, president, chairman ; and 
 by periphrasis the presbyters were called 'm m m huit^a S^ovs, they 
 who possessed the second seat or throne, as the bishop was 
 vQi^oxeth^^oi, he who possessed the first. Thus he was in the 
 presbytery, as the speaker in the house of commons, who is not 
 of a superior order to the other members of the house, but is a 
 commoner among commoners, and is only, in consequence of 
 that station, accounted the first among those of his own rank. 
 The same thing might be illustrated by the prolocutor of either 
 house of convocation in England, or the moderator of an eccle- 
 siastical judicatory in Scotland. Now as the president is, as it 
 were, the mouth of the council, by which they deliver their 
 judgment, and by which they address themselves to others, it 
 is natural to suppose, that through the same channel, to wit, 
 their president, they should be addressed by others. A letter 
 therefore to ^he congregation might very naturally be direct- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL IIISTORV. 9? 
 
 eel to him who possessed the first place, and presided among 
 them. 
 
 But it may he said, Is not this at most but a plausible con- 
 jecture, and not a proof? I acknowledge, indeed, that the point 
 does not admit so positive a proof as might be wished. But in 
 a case of this kind, the most plausible conjecture, as it is all 
 that can be had, will be accounted sufficient by a reasonable 
 man for determining the question. This solution appears to 
 me the best, because it puts no undue stretch upon the words, 
 and is perfectly compatible Avith that equality in power and 
 order, which the uniform style of the Acts and the epistles, in 
 the promiscuous application of the same appellatives, and in the 
 use of the plural number on such occasions, proves to have sub- 
 sisted among the pastors first settled by the apostles and evan- 
 geUsts. This equality is, in my opinion, strongly supported. 
 It is only the solution now given of the difficulty, arising from 
 the noted passage in the Apocalypse, that I admit to be conjec- 
 tural. And all I plead in its favour is, that of all the conjec- 
 tures I have seen on that article, it is the most likely. 
 
 It was doubtless the distinction of one pastor in every church, 
 marked by this apostle, though not made by any who had writ- 
 ten before him, which has led Tertullian, whose publications 
 first appeared but about a century after the apostles, to consider 
 him as the institutor of episcopacy. These are his vv-ords, (lib. 
 iv. adv. Marcionem,) " Ordo tamen episcoporum ad originem 
 " recensus, in Joannem stabit auctorem ;" which Bingham 
 (Christian Antiquities, b. ii. chap. 1. sect. 3.) translates thus: 
 — " The order of bishops, when it is traced up to its original, 
 " will be found to have St. John for one o'i its authors." A 
 palpable misinterpretation of our antiquary. Tertullian says 
 expressly, " Our inquiries into the origin of the episcopal order 
 " terminate in John the author." Had that father said, 
 " Mundus ad originem recensus, in Deum stabit creatorem ;" 
 would Bingham have rendered it, " The world, when it is 
 '' traced up to its original, will be found to have God for one 
 *' of its creators?" I cannot allow myself to think it. \et the 
 interpolation in rendering creatoi^em one of its creators, is not 
 more flagrant, than in rendering auctorem one of its authors. 
 By this version he avoids showing what is extremely plain from 
 
 G 
 
98 LECTURES OX 
 
 the words, that Tertullian did not think there was any subordi- 
 nation in the pastors of the churches instituted by the other 
 apostles. Else how should he refer us to John, of whom, 
 though an eminent propagator of the faith, we have not such 
 particular accounts as of some of his colleagues? If he had dis- 
 covered any traces of such a disparity in the settling of the 
 churches, recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, or mentioned 
 in the epistles of Paul, it is impossible he should have referred 
 us solely to John, of whom we have so little information, as the 
 author. But this opinion he has evidently founded on the 
 Apocalypse, a book mentioned by him in the same sentence. 
 Kow if he thought that that apostle gave a model to the churches 
 established by him, which the other apostles had not given to 
 theirs, (though in after-times it came to be universally adopted) 
 we must conclude, at least, that he did not consider any parti- 
 cular external form as essential to the Christian church, but as 
 a thing entirely discretionary in the several founders. And 
 that this was his opinion, appears at least probable from this, 
 that he had mentioned John's paternal care of certain churches 
 in the preceding sentence, which he therefore considered as 
 peculiarly his. " Habemus et Joannis aluranas ecclesias." To 
 me, however, it is more likely, that John, in the direction of 
 the epistles to the seven churches, availed himself of a distinc- 
 tion, which had subsisted from the beginning, but as it implied 
 no difference . in order and power, was too inconsiderable to be 
 noticed in the history. This I think at least more credible, 
 than that either the church was new modelled by this apostle, or 
 that the different apostles adopted different plans. 
 
 In my next lecture, I shall make a few more observations on 
 the constitution of the apostolic church, and on the nature and 
 character of episcopacy, which obtained in the second and third 
 centuries ; and shall, in that and some subsequent discourses, 
 proceed in tracing the progress of the hierarchy from the latent 
 and inconsiderable seeds or principles whence it sprang, to the 
 amazing height it at length arrived at. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 99 
 
 LECTURE VI. 
 
 X HE purpose of this lecture is to make a few more observations 
 on the constitution of the apostolic church, and on the nature 
 of the episcopacy which obtained in the second and third cen- 
 turies. 
 
 When the gospel was preached by the apostles throughout 
 the different cities and countries into which they travelled, 
 wherever they made as many converts as would be sufficient to 
 form a congregation, they caused them to unite together for 
 this purpose; and with the first convenient opportunity, settled 
 (as Clemens Romanus expresses it) bishops and deacons among 
 them, for instructing them more fully, both publicly and pri- 
 vately, for guiding them by their counsel in every doubtful or 
 difficult exigence, and for conducting more regularly in their 
 assemblies the public worship and ordinances. When the dis- 
 ciples in any place were not numerous enough to form a congre- 
 gation by themselves, they united them to that which was near- 
 est. To the congregation they gave the name xy.r-.y-ntnet, which is 
 commonly rendered church. 
 
 The deacons, who seem at first to have been chosen merely 
 in consequence of a particular exigence, as we learn from Acts 
 vi. 1, S:c. to wit, for the inspection of the poor, and the distri- 
 bution of the charitable collections, were admitted very early, 
 probably in the time of the apostles, to an inferior part in the 
 sacred ministry, such as attending the pastors in the discharge 
 of the religious offices, and acting under their direction. The 
 deaconship served in fact as a noviciate to the ministry. 
 
 The bishops or presbyters (for these terms, as we have seen, 
 were then used synonymously) appear to have been all perfectly 
 co-ordinate in ministerial powers. That a certain priority or 
 presidentship, for order's sake, and in deference cither to senior- 
 ity, or to distinguishable talents, was allowed to one of their 
 
 g2 
 
100 LECTURES ON 
 
 number, is probable for the reasons assigned in my last dis- 
 course. That the pastors were from the beginning vested with 
 a superintendency over the congregation purely in what con- 
 cerned spiritual matters, cannot be questioned. Some of the 
 titles that are given them in scripture, '-/j^s^jvo/, -ar^^s-a^^jvo/, guides, 
 governors, undoubtedly imply thus much, as do also the terms 
 in which the duty of the people to their pastors is recommend- 
 ed; ^u^iffh, 'vTitKiii, obey, submit, which manifestly require a 
 respectful observance on their part. For this reason I imagine, 
 that the generality of those modern sects, which have adopted 
 the congregational, or independent plan, as it is called, have 
 gone to an extreme, though not the most common extreme, in 
 bringing the pastoral authority too low. 
 
 It is however certain, that when authority of any kind is un- 
 attended with what are commonly called coercive measures, or 
 the power of the sword, and unsupported by temporal splendour, 
 or worldly sanctions, it is impossible to preserve it otherwise 
 amongst an enlightened people, than by purity of character in 
 those vested with it, and by diligence in the discharge of the 
 duties of their station. In such cases, this is the only founda- 
 tion on which the respect, obedience, and submission of others 
 can be raised. It was therefore a pertinent advice that Paul 
 gave to Timothy, however oddly it may appear at first : — " Let 
 " no man despise thee." For we may justly say, that in ninety- 
 nine cases out of a hundred, if a pastor is despised, he has him- 
 self to blame. All however that I purpose, by quoting the 
 aforesaid titles and commands, is to show, that in what related 
 to the peculiar duties of their office, a reverential attention was 
 acknowledged to be due to them, as the guides and guardians 
 of the flock. 
 
 There were some things, however, which, from the begin- 
 ning, were conducted in common, by the pastors, the deacons, 
 and the whole congregation. This appears particularly and 
 most properly to have been the casein all matters of scandal and 
 offence. In regard to these, it is the community, that, in strict- 
 ness of speech, is offended. The very word scandal or stum- 
 bling-block implies this. It is the community, therefore, that 
 ought to be satisfied. It is to them our Lord appears (Matth, 
 xviii. 15, 8cc.) to have committed the charge of admonishing de- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 101 
 
 linquents, and even of excommunicating obstinate offenders. 
 But I shall have occasion to examine the import of that passage 
 in the gospel afterwards. Only it may be further observed, in 
 confirmation of what has been now advanced, that the earliest 
 practice of the church was conformable to the interpretation now 
 given. Clement, in the epistle above quoted, (chap, liv.) calls 
 church censures ra, ■sr^o^a.ffffoy.i'/a, 'vzsro rn -rXri^ovs^ the things Com- 
 manded by the multitude, that is, the congregation. 
 
 Another point, in which they had doubtless all a share, was 
 the election of their pastors and deacons. That the deacons 
 were at first chosen by the people, is manifest from the account 
 we have of their institution above referred to. Yet this point, 
 however clear in its origin, seems very clearly to have under- 
 gone a change. In regard to the choice of pastors, the matter 
 is not so plain. Some expressions in ancient authors seem to 
 fovour the opinion, that these also were constituted in conse- 
 quence of the election of the people. Other expressions favour 
 more the notion, that the choice was in the presbytery, who pro- 
 posed the candidate they had elected to the people; and that 
 the people had the power of rejecting, without assigning a rea- 
 son, when they did not approve the choice. It is not improba- 
 ble, that different methods, in this respect, obtained in diiterent 
 congregations. From scripture we have not sufficient ground 
 for concluding positively on either side. Clement, in the fore- 
 cited epistle, seems to favour the second opinion. The passage 
 I allude to is in chap. xliv. where, speaking of the pastors, he 
 uses this expression : " Those who were constituted by th.c 
 " apostles, and afterwards by other eminent men, with the con- 
 
 '' sent of the whole congregation." trvvfJoz'/io'cctry,; tt,; iKy-X-Acna.-, -xxcrr.i. 
 
 It is not to be imagined, that among people so artless, and at 
 the same time so charitable, as we have reason to think the first 
 Christian societies actuall}^ were, the bounding lines of the pow- 
 ers and privileges of the different orders would be accurately 
 chalked out. It is more than probable, that the people, in a per- 
 fect reliance on the knowledge, zeal, and experience of their 
 pastors, would desire, before every thing, to know whom they, 
 who were the fittest judges, and had the same object in view, 
 w^ould think proper to recommend; and that, on the other hand, 
 the pastors, having nothing so much at heart as the edification 
 
loe 
 
 LECTURES ON 
 
 of the people, would account their disapprobation of a candidate 
 a sufficient reason for making another choice. It is indeed cer- 
 tain, as appears by the epistles of Cyprian, which were written 
 about the middle of the third century, that for the three first 
 ages of the church, though most matters came at last to be pre- 
 viously discussed in the presbytery, where some judgment was 
 formed concerning them, no final resolution was taken in any 
 aflPair of moment, without communicating it to the people, and 
 obtaining their approbation. I signified before, that the presby- 
 tery, of which there is frequent mention in the ancient fathers, 
 consisted not only of the presbyters, with their president, to 
 whom the name bishop, at first common to them all, came soon 
 to be appropriated, but also of the deacons. 
 
 It has, in modern times, been made a question, whether the 
 presbyters, even exclusive of their president, could all come 
 under one denomination ; or whether some of them were pro- 
 perly pastors and teachers, and others only assistants in matters 
 of government and discipline. Some keen advocates for presby- 
 tery, as the word is now understood, on the model of John Cal- 
 vin, have imagined they discovered this distinction in these 
 words of Paul to Timothy, (1 Tim. v. 17.) — " Let the elders 
 *' that rule well be counted worthy of double honour ; especially 
 *' they who labour in the word and doctrine." Here, say they, 
 is a two-fold partition of the officers comprised under the same 
 name, into those who rule, and those who labour in the word 
 and doctrine, that is, into ruling elders and teaching elders. To 
 this it is replied, on the other side, that the especially is not in- 
 tended to indicate a different office, but to distinguish from 
 others those who assiduously apply themselves to the most im- 
 portant, as well as the most difficult, part of their office, public 
 teaching; that the distinction intended is therefore not official, 
 but personal ; that it does not relate to a difference in the pow- 
 ers conferred, but solely to a difference in their application. It 
 is not to the persons who have the charge, but to those who la^ 
 hour in it, 'oi zaTiwyn;. And to this exposition, as far the most 
 jiatural, I entirely agree. What was affirmed before, in rela- 
 tion to the coincidence of the office of bishop and presbyter, 
 from the uniform and promiscuous application of the same names 
 and titles, may doubtless be urged, in the present case, with 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 103 
 
 still greater strength. The distinction is too considerable be- 
 tween a pastor and a lay-elder, as it is called, to be invariably 
 confounded under one common name. When the character of 
 such as are proper for the office of elder is pointed out by Paul 
 to Timothy [a], apt to teach, or fit for teaching, l4lu;c,r,i<^, is 
 mentioned as an essential quality ; and though the words be 
 different in the charge to Titus [6], the same thing is implied, 
 
 tva. '^uvoTl'^ >c,at Ta^xxccXnv iv rvj 'hita.ffxuXia tti 'uyiecivuffri }cat Tag avrtXiyovra; iXiy- 
 
 x'->v, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and 
 to convince the gainsayers. This is spoken indiscriminately of 
 all who were proper to be nominated bishops or elders, which 
 we cannot suppose would have been done, if part of them were 
 to have no concern in teaching. We find no such quality 
 among those mentioned as necessary in deacons. And a dn- 
 bious, not to say a forced, exposition of a single passage of 
 scripture, is rather too small a circumstance, whereon to found 
 a distinction of so great consequence. If, therefore, it were 
 only from this passage that an argument could be brought for 
 the admission of those denominated laymen to a share in the 
 management of church affairs, I, for my part, should most readily 
 acknowledge, that our warrant for the practice would be extreme- 
 ly questionable. But I shall have occasion to consider this af-v 
 terwards. 
 
 In the second century, it is very plain, that a settled' distinc- 
 tion, in several respects, obtained between the bishop and his 
 colleagues in the presbytery, for as yet they may still be called 
 colleagues. Many titles which had before been common to 
 them all, came at length to be appropriated to him who was 
 considered as their head, such as tw^rKO'Tr'^, 'jj^s^^iv^, w^oi^u?, t^:-,. 
 rsKa^il^©^, z3-^si?-x/u.iv(^, -zsroifit^y, and some others. Though names 
 are but sounds, those who are conversant in the history of man- 
 kind will readily allow, that they have greater influence on the 
 opinions of the generality of men, than most people are aware of. 
 Besides, it is of the nature of power, unless guarded by a 
 watchful jealousy, (rarely to be found in unexperienced and un- 
 designing people) to accumulate and gather strength. Distin- 
 guish one at first but by a small degree of superiority, and the 
 distinction you have made will very soon, and as it were na- 
 {«] 1 Tim. iii. 2. [I,] Tit. i. 9. 
 
lOi LECTURES ON 
 
 turally, carry other distinctions along with it. There is some- 
 thing here that resembles gravitation in material things. As 
 the quantity of matter increases, its attractive force increases, 
 and it more easily draws other matter to itself. 
 
 Some have represented it as an insuperable objection to the 
 presbyterian hypothesis, concerning the rise of episcopal supe- 
 riority, that it seems to imply so great ambition in one part, 
 and so great supineness (not to give it a worse name) in the 
 rest of the primitive pastors, ordained by the apostles, and by 
 the apostolic men that came after them, as is perfectly incredi- 
 ble : this they seem to think a demonstration a priori, that 
 the thing is impossible. Let it be observed, that I have all 
 along admitted an original distinction, which, though very dif- 
 ferent from that which in process of time obtained, served 
 for a foundation to the edifice. And so far am I from think- 
 ing that the ambition, or the vices, of the first ministers 
 gave rise to their authority, that I am certain, that this effect 
 is much more justly ascribed to their virtues. An aspiring 
 disposition rouses jealousy — jealousy puts people on their guard. 
 There needs no more to check ambition, whilst it rem.ains un- 
 armed v/ith either wealth or power. But there is nothing which 
 men are not ready to yield to distinguished merit, especially 
 when matters are in that state wherein every kind of pre-emi- 
 nence, instead of procuring wealth and secular advantages, ex- 
 poses but to greater danger, and to greater suffering. Even the 
 small distinction of being accounted the first in the society, and, 
 as it were, the senior brother among the pastors, would be a 
 strono; incitement to a faithful and zealous minister to distin- 
 guish himself, by being the first also in every difficulty, and in 
 every danger. This would beget in the people a more implicit 
 deference to his judgment, and respect to his person. A de- 
 ference at first merely paid to virtue, coraes at last, through the 
 gradual operation of habit, to be considered as due to office. 
 What was gratuitously conferred on the meritorious predeces- 
 sor, is claimed by the undeserving successor as a right. And 
 the very principles of our nature tend to favour the claim. But 
 when ease and affluence succeed to danger and distress, then 
 indeed ambition on the one side, and dependance on the other, 
 will be able to secure what virtue alone could earn. Such is 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 105 
 
 the ordinary progression of human things. Similar to this, if 
 traced backwards, will be found the ori^jin of almost all the ^o- 
 vernments that are not founded in conquest. 
 
 It were easy, on the same ground with those objectors, to 
 evince a p7'io?'i, (if a specious declamation on a sort of general 
 principles, which pay no regard to fact and testimony, could 
 evince) that monarchy, or the dominion of one man over innu- 
 merable multitudes of men, who, taken severally, may be his 
 equals, both in understanding, and in bodily strength, is, in the 
 nature of things, impossible. But how do all such futile rea- 
 sonings vanish, like shadows, before the torch of history. This 
 I observe only by the way, not that I think the steps so difficult 
 to imagine, by which this ecclesiastic power has first arisen. 
 For example, from making their president a man of great con- 
 sequence among them, the transition is easy to their makinfj- his 
 concurrence in all measures a conditio sine qua non ,- that is to 
 say, their considering every step as invalid that is done against 
 his judgment. It is but one step further, and every thing be- 
 comes valid which bears the stamp of his authority. Now if, 
 in this manner, the president had been raised in the churches 
 of some principal cities, these would soon become a standard to 
 the rest. And to their first rising in such cities to this pre-emi- 
 nence, analogy to the civil government (as appears both from 
 the testimony of antiquity, and from the reason of the thing) did 
 not a little contribute. In this judgment we can plead the con- 
 currence of some of our keenest antagonists. " Civitatum 
 " Romanorum," says Dodwell, " Grjecarumque disciplinam in 
 " civitatem ecclesiastica etiara administratione observatam con- 
 " Stat e TertuUiani aliquantisper coa^vo Origine. Sic enim 
 " ille illas invicera contendit, ut partes partibus etiam respon- 
 '' derent." Thus he who presided was considered as corre- 
 sponding in ecclesiastic matters to their prefect, proconsul, or 
 chief magistrate, by whatever title he was distinguished, the 
 presbytery to their senate or council, and the congregation to 
 the comitia, or convention of the people. I make no doubt, 
 as Jerome plausibly supposes, that the acquiescence of the peo- 
 ple would be given the more readily, from the consideration of 
 the expediency of such an arrangement for prcservijig union. 
 ^Vlleu one and the same congregation was under the direction 
 
106 LECTURES ON 
 
 of a plurality of pastors entirely equal, unless there were an 
 umpire, to whose decision they were all considered as under an 
 obligation to submit, there might be some danger of a rupture, 
 in case their sentiments should jar. But we shall see in the 
 sequel, (what is fully as unaccountable) that from causes per- 
 fectly similar, to wit, an allowed presidentship in synods and 
 councils to the bishops of the capitals of provinces, kingdoms, 
 regions, and of the empire itself; and from the gradual appro- 
 priation of titles, formerly common, arose insensibly the real 
 presidency of metropolitical, patriarchal, and even papal power. 
 The first ecclesiastical author who mentions bishop, presbyter, 
 and deacon, as three distinct orders of church-officers, is Igna- 
 tius, bishop of Antioch, who is supposed to have written about 
 the sixteenth year of the second century, and by some even 
 sooner. Indeed, several of the epistles ascribed to him, are now 
 acknowledged, by critics of all denominations, to be spurious, 
 and some of the rest are admitted, even by his ablest advocates, 
 to be interpolated ; insomuch, that it would not be easy to say 
 how we could, with safety, found a decision on an author, with 
 whose works transcribers, in the judgment of both sides, have 
 made so free. What makes his testimony the more to be sus- 
 pected is, first, because the fore-mentioned distinction is so 
 frequently and officiously obtruded on the reader, sometimes not 
 in the most modest and becoming terms, as was the manner of 
 the apostles, when speaking of their own authority ; and obcr 
 dience is enjoined to the bishop and presbyters, even where the 
 injunction cannot be deemed either natural or pertinent, as in 
 his epistle to Polycarp, who was himself a bishop : secondly, 
 because the names bishop and presbyter are never used by him 
 for expressing the same office, as they had been uniformly used 
 by all who had preceded him, and were occasionally used by 
 wost of the ecclesiastic writers of that century : thirdly and 
 principally, because Polycarp, a contemporary and survivor of 
 Ignatius, in a letter to the Philippians, quoted in a former dis- 
 course, pointing out the duties of all ranks, pastors and people, 
 makes mention of only two orders of ministers, to wit, presby- 
 ters and deacons, in the same manner as Luke, and Paul, and 
 Clement, had done before him ; nay, and recommends to the 
 p.eople submission to them, and only to them, in terms which I 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 107 
 
 must say, were neither proper, nor even decent, if these very 
 ministers had a superior in the church, to whom they them- 
 selves, as well as the people, were subject. To me the diftcr- 
 ence between these two writers appears by no means as a diver- 
 sity in style, but as a repugnancy in sentiment. They cannot 
 be both made applicable to the same state of the church. 80 
 that we are forced to conclude, that in the writings of one, or 
 the other, there must have been something spurious or interpo- 
 lated. Now I have heard no argument urged against the au- 
 thenticity of Polycarp's letter, equally cogent as some of the 
 arguments employed against the authenticity of the epistles of 
 Ignatius. And indeed the state of the church, in no subse- 
 quent period, can well account for such a forgery as the epistle 
 of the former to the Philippians; whereas the ambition of the 
 ecclesiastics, for which some of the following centuries were re- 
 markable, renders it extremely easy to account for the nauseous 
 repetition of obedience and subjection to the bishop, presbyters, 
 and deacons, to be found in the letters of Ignatius. 
 
 The way in which Dodvvell accounts for it, (though in itself 
 not implausible) is very singular, as his sentiments are on many 
 subjects. He says, that it was because the bishop's authority 
 was at that time a perfect novelty, totally unknown in the 
 church, that Ignatius found it necessary to exert himself to the 
 utmost, to recommend and establish it. According to this mo- 
 dern, the power and all the prerogatives of bishops were a mere 
 upstart of the second century, after the death of all the apos- 
 tles, and after the compilement of the canonical scriptures. It 
 is in vain, therefore, he acknowledges, to look for any trace of 
 episcopal authority in the New Testament. In the days of the 
 apostles, it was not by prelacy that the church was governed, 
 but by a species of popery, with which, if I mistake not, Mr. 
 Dodwell was the first who brought the world acquainted. The 
 pope was not the apostle Peter, but the apostle James; the pa^ 
 pal throne was erected not at Rome, but at Jerusalem ; and, 
 after the destruction of this city by the Romans, transferred to 
 Ephesus; and when finally suppressed, the episcopacy was rear^ 
 ed upon its ruins. Yet of this episcopacy, though neither cor 
 eval with the Christian religion, nor of apostolical institution, 
 for it did not obtain till after the death of John, the last of tlio 
 
108 LECTURES ON 
 
 apostles, and of which we cannot have scriptural evidence, as it 
 did not exist till several years after the finishing of the canon, 
 the absolute necessity since the sixth year of the second cen- 
 tury, and no sooner, is such, that without it there is no church 
 of Christ, no salvation of men. Damnation or annihilation is 
 all the prospect that remains even for those who believe and 
 obey the gospel. For the rejection of an innovation which has 
 no place there, and of which all the sacred writers were igno- 
 rant, can never imply either disbelief or disobedience of the 
 gospel. But why, it may be said, detail extravagancies, more 
 like the ravings of a disordered brain, than the sober deduc- 
 tions of a mind capable of reflection ? I should indeed have 
 thought the task unnecessary, if experience had not proved, 
 that even such extravagancies have sometimes been productive 
 of infinite mischief. If Dodwell, with all his learning, had not 
 been a perfect idolater of his own eccentric imagination, he 
 could not have acquiesced in a system so chimerical, so ill-com- 
 pacted, so destitute of every kind of proof, external or internal, 
 and to w4iich all the sources of evidence, hitherto known in theo- 
 logical controversy, reason, scripture, and tradition, are equally 
 repugnant. If it had been his express object to produce a 
 scheme which might outdo even the Rom.ish, not only in absur- 
 dity but in malignity, he could not have succeeded better. His 
 unceasing cry was schism ; yet in the scriptural sense, a greater 
 schismatic than himself the age did not produce. Whose doc- 
 trine was ever found more hostile to that fundamental principle, 
 declared by our Lord to be the criterion of our Christianity, 
 mutual love? Whose doctrine ever was more successful in plant- 
 ing, by means of uncharitable and self-opinioned judgments, 
 the principle of hatred in its stead? The test to which scrip- 
 ture points is. Does the teaching in question alienate the hearts 
 of Christians, or unite them? Does it conciliate the affections 
 where differences have unhappily arisen? or does it widen the 
 breach? If the former, the spirit is Christian; if the latter, 
 schismatical. The former is not more productive of charity, 
 the end of the commandment, or gospel-covenant, and the bond 
 of perfectness, than the latter is of its opposite, malignity, the 
 source of discord, the parent of intolerance and persecution. It 
 would be unjust not to add, in extenuation of the guilt of those 
 
KCCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ' lOQ 
 
 who mistake bigotry for zeal, what our Lord pleaded in behalf 
 of his murderers, They know not ivhat they do. This charity, 
 where there appears the smallest scope for it, is due even to the 
 uncharitable. In regard to vital religion, it is to be regretted, 
 that men, even of talents and science, often show little penetra- 
 tion, rarely going deeper than the surface. The natural man 
 (saith Paul, 1 Cor. ii. 14. more properly the animal man, 
 ^vx'y-^, not (p'jiny.(^ uv^pu9r(^) reccivetk not tJie tilings of the Spi^ 
 rit of God : for they are foolishness to him, neither can he know 
 them, because they are spiritually discerned. Their acquaint- 
 ance is merely with the outside : they break their teeth upon 
 the shell, without reaching the kernel. 
 
 But to return to Ignatius, I say not that the epistles in ques- 
 tion ought to be rejected in the lump, but that undue freedoms 
 have been used even with the purest of them, by some over zea- 
 lous partizans of the priesthood. They have, in many things, a 
 remarkable coincidence with the sentiments repeatedly inculcat- 
 ed in the Apostolic Constitutions, a compilation probably begun 
 in the third century, and ended in the fourth or fifth. Among 
 the writers of the second age, I shall mention also Ireneus, who 
 is supposed to have written about the middle of the second cen- 
 tury, and in whose writings the names bishop and presbyter, 
 and others of the like import, are sometimes used indiscrimi- 
 nately. I acknowledge, however, that the distinction of these, 
 as of different orders, began about this time generally to pre- 
 vail : the difference was not indeed near so considerable as it 
 became afterwards. Accordingly, Ireneus talks in much the 
 same style of both. What at one time he ascribes to bishops, 
 at another he ascribes to presbyters : he speaks of each in the 
 same terms, as entitled to obedience from the people, as suc- 
 ceeding the apostles in the ministry of the word, as those by 
 whom the apostolic doctrine and traditions had been handed 
 down. Thus (lib. iii. chap. 2.) he says, concerning the heretics 
 of his time, " Cum autem ad eam iterum traditionem qu£e est 
 " ab apostolis, qu£e per successiones presbyterorum in ecclesiis 
 " custoditur, provocamus eos, qui adversantur traditioni, dicent 
 " se non solum presbyteris, scd etiam apostolis existentes sa- 
 " pientiores, synceram invenisse veritatem." — Here not only are 
 the presbyters mentioned as the successors of the apostles, but 
 
110 LECTURES ON 
 
 in ranging the ministries, no notice is taken of any intervening 
 order, such as that of the bishops. It is not always easy to say, 
 whether by the two appellations, bishop and presbyter, Ireneus 
 means the same order, or different orders. In the former case he 
 would appear to make no distinction, and in the latter very little 
 between them. Dr. Pearson admits, (which by the way is con- 
 tradicted by Dodwell) that the names bishop and presbyter, are 
 often interchanged by this father, and others of his time, even 
 to the end of the century. This, however, he maintains, hap- 
 pened only when they spoke of the mhiistry in general terms, 
 or mentioned those ministers in particular who had preceded 
 them ; affirming that, in regard to their own contemporaries, 
 the offices of individuals are never thus confounded. A man, 
 who was in their time a bishop, is not called a presbyter, nor is 
 a presbyter called a bishop. I admit the truth of this remark, 
 and consider it as a very strong confirmation of the doctrine I 
 have been defending. For what reasonable account can be 
 given of this manner (otherwise chargeable with the most un- 
 pardonable inaccuracy) but by saying, that in the time of the 
 predecessors of Ireneus, there was no distinction worthy of no- 
 tice in the ministry; whereas, in his own time, the distinction 
 began to be marked by peculiar powers and prerogatives. If 
 this had not been the case, it was as little natural as excusable, 
 to be less accurate in speaking of those that went before, than 
 in speaking of the people of his own time. Was it ever ob- 
 served of writers in the fourth and fifth centuries, to come no 
 lower, that they in this manner confounded the different eccle- 
 siastical offices of the third ? Is Cyprian, for instance, in any 
 succeeding age, styled a presbyter of Carthage, or Rogatian the 
 bishop ? Are not their respective titles as uniformly observed in 
 after ajjes as in their own? 
 
 But to return to the epistles of Ignatius, it is not only what 
 we find singular in them, for so early a period, relating to the 
 different orders of ministers in the church, which has raised sus- 
 picions of their authenticity, or at least of their integrity; there 
 are other causes which have co-operated in producing the same 
 effect; one is, the style in many places is not suited to the sim- 
 plicity of the times immediately succeeding the times of the 
 apostles. It abounds with inflated epithets, unlike the humble 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Ill 
 
 manner of tlie inspired writers ; and in this, as in other respects, 
 seems more formed on tliat which became fashionable after the 
 acquisition of greater external importance-, winch opulence never 
 fails to brinfTi and after the discussion of certain theolomcal 
 questions agitated in the third and fourth centuries, to which 
 we find, sometimes, a manifest allusion. What I am going to 
 observe has much the appearance of anachronism, which often 
 betrays the hand of the interpolator. The expression, the 
 church which is in Syria^ occurs twice. Now nothing can be 
 more dissimilar to the dialect which had prevailed in the apos- 
 tolic age, and which continued to prevail in the second century. 
 Except when tJie church denoted the whole Christian commu- 
 nity, it meant no more than a single congregation. Of this I 
 shall have occasion to take notice presently. Now there were 
 many churches in Syria in the days of Ignatius, and many bi- 
 shops* Indeed when, through the increase of converts, a bi- 
 shop's parish came to contain more people than could be com- 
 prehended in one congregation, the custom continued, in con- 
 tradiction to propriety, of still calling his charge a churchy in 
 the singular number. But it was not till after the distinction 
 made between the metropolitan and the suffragan, which was 
 about a century later, that this use originated, of calling all the 
 churches of a province the church (not the churches) of such a 
 province. To this they were gradually led by analogy. The 
 metropolitan presided among the provincial bishops, as the bi- 
 shop among the presbyters. The application of the term was, 
 after the rise of patriarchal jurisdiction, extended still fiirther. 
 All that was under the jurisdiction of the archbishop, or pa- 
 triarch, was his church. 
 
 But it is not the style only which has raised suspicion, it is 
 chiefly the sentiments. " Attend to the bishop," says Igna- 
 tius to Polycarp, " that God may attend to you. I pledge my 
 " soul for theirs who are subject to the bishop, presbyters, and 
 " deacons. Let my part in God be with them." avt/n/'v^m tya* 
 rav v-jroruffffofiivuv ru iTiffzoTu ». r. X. whicli Cotclerius renders, De- 
 vovear ego pro lis qui subditi sunt episcopo, &c. Admit that, 
 from his adopting the plural of the imperative «r^/»<r£;^;s]s, in the 
 beginning of the paragraph, he is to be considered as address- 
 ing the congregation of Smyrna, and not the bishop, to whom 
 
113 LECTURES ON 
 
 the letter is directed: Is there nothing exceptionable in what 
 he says? Was it the doctrine of Ignatius, that all that is ne- 
 cessary to salvation in a Christian, is an implicit subjection to 
 the bishops, presbyters, and deacons. Be it that he means 
 only in spiritual matters ; is this the style of the apostles to 
 their Christian brethren ? Was it thus that Ignatius exhibited 
 to his followers the pattern which had been given by that great 
 apostle, who could say of himself and his fellow-apostles, ap- 
 pealing for his voucher to the people's experience of their mini- 
 stry, — J Ve preach not ourselves^ hut Christ Jesus the Lord, and 
 ourselves your servants for Jesus^ sake. In exact conformity to 
 this, Paul expressly disclaims all dominion over the faith of his 
 hearers, who, he was sensible, were not to be dictated to, but 
 to be reasoned with ; not to be commanded, but to be convin- 
 ced. Not that we have dominion over yourfaith^ hut are help^ 
 ers of your joy. And a little after. Knowing the terrors of the 
 Lord, we persuade men. It is no part of our office to constrain, 
 it is merely to teach ; it is not to extort an outward, and per- 
 haps reluctant, compliance, but it is by the efficacy of persua- 
 sion to subdue the refractory will, and completely engage the 
 heart ; for no obedience in this cause is available, which is not 
 voluntary, and does not proceed from love. It suits not even 
 the apostolic diction to prescribe, to order, but to entreat, to 
 pray. As though God, says the apostle, did beseech you by us, 
 we pray you, in Christ's stead, Be ye reconciled to God. The 
 most authoritative language that he employs, runs in this strain ;: 
 I beseech you by the mercies of God; and, / beseech you by 
 tlie meekness and gentleness of Christ. Nor is this manner pe- 
 culiarly Paul's. Peter, the prince of the apostles, as Romanists" 
 style him, recurs neither to bulls nor to rescripts, but with equal 
 mildness as his colleague Paul, employs exhortation and en- 
 treaty. The presbyters amongst you, says he, /, their fellow- 
 presbyter, exhort. Feed the flock of God among you, taking 
 the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly. It is 
 added, neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being en- 
 samples to the flock ; and, consequently, engaging their imita- 
 tion by the attraction of an amiable example, and not enforcing 
 submission by stern authority and command. Had Ignatius 
 been such as the letters ascribed to him represent him, could 
 
F,CCLESIASTICAL IIISTOliY. 113 
 
 he have had tlie assurance to address his Aiitiochiaiis in the 
 words of Paul above quoted, " We preach not ourselves, but 
 " Christ Jesus the Lord, and ourselves your servants for Jesus* 
 " sake?" For is it not his predominant scope, in those letters, 
 to preach himself and other ecclesiastics, inculcating upon the 
 people the most submissive, unlimited, and blind obedience to 
 all of the clerical order? This is an everlasting topic, to which 
 he never slips an opportunity of recurring in season, and out of 
 season. The only consistent declaration which would have 
 suited the author of these epistles, must have been the reverse 
 of Paul's. We preach not Christ Jesus the Lord, but so far 
 only as may conduce to the increase of our influence, and tlie 
 exaltation of our power; nay, for an object so important, wc 
 are not ashamed to preach up ourselves your masters, with un- 
 bounded dominion over your faith, and consequently, over both 
 soul and body. For surely, if, in the application of words, any 
 regard is due to propriety as well as consistency, those only 
 must be called masters who are entitled to command, and those 
 must be servants who are obliged to obey. There are, besides, 
 several things in these letters, which, though expressed with 
 simplicity of diction, I find in meaning unintelligible. Such is 
 that in his letter to the Ephesians, chap. vi. " The more silent 
 " a man finds the bishop, he ought to reverence him the more." 
 Consequently if, like the Nazianzene monk, celebrated by Gre- 
 gory, he should, in praise of God, devote his tongue to an in- 
 violable taciturnity, he would be completely venerable. This, 
 one would be tempted to think, has originated from some opu- 
 lent ecclesiastic, who was by far too great a man for preaching ; 
 at least we may say, it seems an oblique apology for those who 
 have no objection to any thing implied in a bishopric, except 
 the function. None whose notion of the duties of a bishop cor- 
 responded with Isaiah's idea of a watchman, (Ivi. 10.) would 
 have thoufjht dumbness a recommendation. Yet Ezckiel did 
 not think his prophetical office disparaged by God's telling him, 
 that he had made him a watchman to the house of Israel, (iii. 
 17.) I shall only add, that if I be not perfectly unprejudiced 
 on this subject, the prejudice by which I am biassed is not 
 against Ignatius, but in his favour. It is because I think very 
 highly of the martyr, and have a strong impression of his virtue, 
 
 u 
 
114 LECTURES ON 
 
 and of the service wliich his sufferings and testimony did to the 
 cause of his Master, that I am unwilling rashly to attribute to 
 him what could not fail to lessen him in my estimation. I 
 would save him, if possible, from a second martyrdom in his 
 works, through the attempts, not o-f open enemies, but of de- 
 ceitful friends. 
 
 But should we admit, after all, in opposition to strong pre- 
 sumptive evidence, the en'tire genuineness of the letters in ques- 
 tion, all that could be fairly inferred from the concession is, 
 that the distinction of orders, and subordination of the presby- 
 ters, obtained about twenty or thirty years earlier than I have 
 supposed, and that it was a received distinction at Antioch, and 
 in Asia Minor, before it was known in Macedonia, and other 
 parts of the Christian church. That its prevalence has been 
 gradual, and that its introduction has arisen from the example 
 and influence of some of the principal cities, is highly proba- 
 ble. 
 
 I shall only mention one other ancient author by whom the 
 three orders seem to be discriminated, and whose testimony is 
 commonly produced in support of their apostolical institution. 
 The author is Pius, bishop of Rome, reckoned by the Roman- 
 ists the ninth in succession from Peter and Paul, and conse- 
 quently, the sixth or seventh from Clement, for they are not 
 entirely agreed about the order. All that remains of him are 
 two short letters to Justus, bishop of Vienna. He is supposed 
 to have written these a little before the middle of the second 
 century, but after Ignatius and Polycarp. This comes so close 
 to the time when I admit the distinction to have generally ob- 
 tained, that even the clearest testimony from him, though there 
 were no doubt as to the authenticity of the letters, could not be 
 said to weaken my hypothesis. There is something in his 
 words which appears even to favour that hypothesis. At the 
 same time that they mark a distinction, they show it to be but 
 in its infancy, and not comparable to what it arose to in a few 
 centuries. Passing the obscure and indefinite expression, colO' 
 hio eplscoponim vestitiis, the only passage which is apposite to 
 the question, is in his second letter : " Presbyteri et diaconi 
 " non ut majorem, sed ut ministrum Christi te observent." 
 ** Let the presbyters and deacons reverence thee (the bishop) 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 115 
 
 '*' not as their superior, but as Christ's minister." I do not say 
 that these words imply that there was no superiority in the 
 bishop. If there had been none, I do not think it woukl have 
 been natural to add the clause, noil ut mojorem. But they im- 
 ply that the writer thought this difference too inconsiderable to 
 be a ground of esteem from colleagues in the ministry; and 
 that he accounted the true foundation of their respect to be su- 
 perior diligence in the service. I believe it will be admitted by 
 the impartial and intelUgent, that such an expression from a 
 bishop (not to say the bishop of Rome) in the fourth or fii'th 
 century, would have been reckoned rather derogatory from the 
 authority of the office, which would have been thought justly 
 entitled to respect and obedience, independently of the personal 
 merit of the officer. 
 
 But that the two functions of the bishop and presbyter were, 
 through the whole of that age, occasionally comprehended under 
 the same name, and considered as one office, and not two, I 
 shall show further, by an example from Clement of Alexandria, 
 who wrote at the close of the second century. Having observ- 
 ed (Strom. L. 1.) that in most things there are two sorts of mi- 
 nistry; the one of a nobler nature than the other, which is sub- 
 servient; and having illustrated this distinction, as by other ex- 
 amples, so by that of philosophy and pliysic, the former of which 
 he considers as superior, because it administers medicine to the 
 soul; the latter as inferior, because it administers only to the 
 
 body, lie adds, Ounu; 0£ xm xcTjCc rr.y iKK.y.y,(riccv, r-ZiV fiiv (ox>!'iia)rixr,v 'ot zr^iff' 
 ^vliaoi o-M^aa-iv uxsvx rr^v 'vT'/ioi'iiy.nv 'm Oicixovoi, rxv-ci; afi^ura; otaxovias ayyiXot 
 vi vTyipiiai'la.i tu B^tco, xcfix ttjv tuv znoiynuv oixovifiierv. JUSt SO lU tnC 
 
 *' church, the presbyters are entrusted with the dignified mini- 
 " stry, the deacons with the subordinate. Both kinds of ser- 
 " vice the angels perform to God in the administration of this 
 " lower world." Here the distinction is strongly marked be- 
 tween presbyter and deacon; but is it not plain, from his 
 words, that Clement considered the distinction between bishop 
 and presbyter as, even in his days, comparatively not v.orthy of 
 his notice ? 
 
 But passing all critical disquisitions in regard to the precise 
 time ancl manner of the introduction, as necessarily involved in 
 darkness and uncertainty, and admitting that the distinction 
 
 H 2 
 
116 LECTURES ON 
 
 obtained generally before the middle of the second century, let 
 us now inquire into the nature of that episcopacy which then 
 came to be established. It has once and again been observed 
 passingly, that every church had its own pastors, and its own 
 presbytery, independently of every other church. And when 
 one of the presbyters came to be considered as the pastor by 
 way of eminence, while the rest were regarded only as his as- 
 sistants, vicars, or curates, who acted under his direction ; as 
 then every church or congregation had but one who was called 
 bishop, so every bishop had but one congregation or church. 
 This is a remark which deserves your particular notice, as it re- 
 gards an essential point in the constitution of the primitive 
 church, — a point which is generally admitted by those who can 
 make any pretensions to the knowledge of Christian antiquities. 
 In the epistles written to particular congregations, or churches, 
 during the third century, and in some before, notice is almost 
 always taken of their own bishop and presbytery, as belonging 
 specially to themselves. The great patrons of the hierarchy, 
 who found so much on the testimony of Ignatius, will not deny, 
 that on this article he is quite explicit. The bishop's charge is, 
 in the primitive writers, invariably denominated iKKXr.eriK, a church, 
 or congregation, in the singular number, never inKXiffiu?, churches, 
 or congregations, in the plural. 
 
 But as this argument may not appear so strong to those who 
 are accustomed to form their opinion of things from the import 
 of their names in modern dialects, it will not be amiss to in- 
 quire particularly into the ancient applications of the word. 
 Properly there are, in the New Testament, but two original 
 senses of the iKKXvcnot, which can be called different, though re- 
 lated. One is, when it denotes a number of people actually as- 
 sembled, or accustomed to assemble, together, and is then pro- 
 perly rendered by the English terms, congregation, convention, 
 assembly, and even sometimes crowd, as in Acts xix. 32, 40. 
 The other sense is to denote a society united together by some 
 common tie, though not convened, perhaps not convenable, in 
 one place. And in this acceptation, as well as in the former, it 
 sometimess occurs in classical writers, as signifying a state, or 
 commonwealth, and nearly corresponding to the Latin civitas. 
 When the word is limited, or appropriated, as it generally is in 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 117 
 
 the New Testament, by its regimen, as -m ^m, tv y.v^in, m x^i^a, or 
 by the scope of the place, it is always to be explairjccl in one or 
 other of the two senses following, corresponding to the two ge- 
 neral senses above mentioned. It denotes either a single congre- 
 gation of Christians, in correspondence to the first, or the whole 
 Christian community, in correspondence to the second. We 
 can hardly ever be at a loss to know from the context which of 
 the two is implied. That it is in the former acceptation, is 
 sometimes evident from the words in construction, as rm iKx^.yjo-iKt 
 rr, £1/ Y^iyx,^ia,ti, and tn ix.K'kinaia. m Sss t>? iv Ko^di^u, and the like. In 
 the latter sense it ought always to be understood, when we find 
 nothing in the expression, or in the scope of the passage, to de- 
 termine us to limit it; for instance, in the following: E7ri'laJ]v m 
 
 TV txxXjiff/a. In this last acceptation of the word, for the whole 
 body of Christ^s disciples, wheresoever dispersed, it came after- 
 wards to be distinguished by the epithet Ka^ox,K-^. They said, 
 'f, iKxXr,(Tnt'n xst^oXtxYi, the catholic or universal church. 
 
 But in any intermediate sense, between a single congregation 
 and the whole community of Christians, not one instance can 
 be brought of the application of the word in sacred writ. We 
 speak now, indeed, (and this has been the manner for ages) of 
 the Gallician church, the Greek church, the church of Eng- 
 land, the church of Scotland, as of societies independent and 
 complete in themselves. Such a phraseology was neyer adopt- 
 ed in the days of the apostles. They did not say the church of 
 Asia, or the church of Macedonia, or the church of Achaia; 
 but the churches of God in Asia, the churches in Macedonia, 
 the churches in Achaia. The plural number is invariably used 
 when more congregations than one are spoken of, unless the 
 subject be of the whole commonwealth of Christ. Kor is this 
 the manner of the penmen of sacred v/rit only. It is the con- 
 stant usage of the term in the writings of ecclesiastic authors 
 for the two first centuries. The only instance to the contrary 
 that I remember to have observed, is in the epistles of Ignatius, 
 on which I have already remarked. 
 
 It adds considerable strength to our argument, that this is 
 exactly conformable to the usage, in regard to this term, which 
 had always obtained among the Jews. The whole nation, or com^ 
 
118 LECTURES ON 
 
 monwealth of Israel, was often deiioraiiiated wao-a 'yi sxKXyitna. Ui^ar.x. 
 And after the revolt of the ten tribes, when they ceased to 
 make one people or state with the other two, we hear of w«o-a 
 'y, ty.KX'/i(Tia lala. This is the large or comprehensive use of the 
 word, as above observed. In regard to the more confined ap- 
 plication, the same term £r.xX57^/«, was also employed to denote a 
 number of people, either actually assembled, or wont to as- 
 semble, in the same place. Thus all belonging to the same sy- 
 nagogue were called indifferently &y.xXnffia., or <rvva.yuyn, as these 
 words, in the Jewish use, were nearly synonymous. But never 
 did they call the people belonging to several neighbouring sy- 
 nagogues iy,KKvt(r:ci, OY iruvayuyn^ in thc singular UUmbcr, but iKuXna-iat 
 
 and evvaycoya.,, iu the plural. Any other use in the apostles, 
 therefore, must have been as unprecedented and unnatural as 
 it would have been improper, and what could not fail to lead 
 their hearers or readers into mistakes. There are some other 
 differences between the modern and the ancient applications of 
 this word, which I shall take another opportunity of observing. 
 
 Now as one bishop is invariably considered, in the most an- 
 cient usage, as. having only one ix,KXr,ffia., it is manifest that his 
 inspection at first was only over one parish. Indeed, the words 
 congregation and parish are, if not synonymous, predicable of 
 each other. The former term relates more properly to the peo^ 
 pie as actually congregated, the other relates to the extent of 
 ground which the dwelling houses of the members of one con- 
 gregation occupy. Accordingly, the territory to which the bi- 
 shop's charge extended, was always named, in the period I am 
 speaking of, in Greek -sra^oiKiu, in Latin parochia, or rather pa- 
 rcBc/a, which answers to the English wovd parish, and means 
 properly a neighbourhood. 
 
 Let it not be imagined that I lay too great stress on the im-r 
 port of words, whose significations in time come insensibly to 
 alter. It merits to be observed, that in the first application of 
 a name to a particular purpose, there is commonly a strict re- 
 gard paid to etymology. As this word, together with the ad- 
 jective z^a^oiK(^, vicinus, neighbouring, are conjugates of the 
 verb -zs-a^oixieu, accolo juxta hahito, it can be applied no otherwise 
 when it relates to place, than the term parish is with us at this 
 day. And this exactly agrees with the exposition of the word 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL IIISTOllY. IIQ 
 
 given by Steplianus, that learned and accurate lexicographer. 
 " Ego non parochias primum, sed paroccias appellatas esse cen- 
 "seo: Tsrx^nKoi emm sunt accolae, quare qui f'anum aliquod ac- 
 " colunt paroeci dicti sunt, ejusdem scilicet fani consortes, ct 
 '' paroecia accolarum conventus et accolatus, sacraque vicinia, 
 *' nani -s^aooiKoi dicuntur etiam «< sr^/xroixoi, id est vicini." 
 
 Let it be observed further, that in those early ages the bi- 
 shop's charge or district was never called hoixyjtn:, a diocese ; 
 concerning the import of which, I sliall add the following pas- 
 sage from the same authority: — " Latini quoque utuntur hoc 
 " vocabulo : dioeccscs vocantes quasdam quasi minorcs provin- 
 " cias, quas aliquis, qui eis prajfectus est, administrat, et in qui- 
 *' bus jus dicit, unde et pontificum hoix'/icms apud recentiores." 
 Thus in a few ages afterwards, when the bishop's charge became 
 so extensive, as more to resemble a province than a parish, nay, 
 when in fact it comprised many churches and parishes within it, 
 the name was changed, and it was then very properly called a 
 diocese. The other term, without deviatinfj in the least from 
 its original and proper import, received a new application to 
 that which was put under the cure of a presbyter only. 
 
 But I shall offer a few more thoughts on this subject in my 
 next prelection, and shall consider more particularly tlie consti- 
 tution of the church, and the powers of the several orders of its 
 ministers in the second and third centuries. 
 
120 LECTURES ON 
 
 LECTURE VII. 
 
 In some preceding discourses, I have considered the nature 
 and diflPerent orders of the ministry in the church constituted by 
 the apostles. Particularly in my last lecture on this subject, I 
 entered on the examination of that which immediately succeed- 
 ed it, and took place in the second and third centuries. I ob- 
 served, that, before the middle of the second century, a subor- 
 dination in the ecclesiastic polity, which I call primitive epis- 
 copacy, began to obtain very generally throughout the Christian 
 world ; every single church or congregation having a plurality 
 of presbyters, who, as well as the deacons, were all under the 
 superintendency of one pastor or bishop. I observed, that all 
 antiquity are unanimous in assigning to one bishop no more 
 than one iy.nXvtna. or congregation, and one zsrapsixicc or parish. For 
 this reason, though it was a proper episcopacy, in respect of the 
 disparity of the ministers, it was a parochial episcopacy, in re- 
 spect of the extent of the charge, I endeavoured to set this 
 matter in a stronger light from the consideration of the import 
 of these words txaxncnx and zo-cc^hkiu, according to the ancient 
 usage. 
 
 But that I may not be thought to depend too much on the 
 signification of names and words, I shall evince, beyond all pos- 
 sible doubt, that the bishop's cure was originally confined to a 
 single church or congregation. This I intend to show from 
 the particulars recorded in ancient authors, in relation both to 
 him and to it. For brevity's sake, I shall not produce the pas- 
 saijes at lenfrth from the fathers of the second or third centuries 
 referred to, but shall barely mention the principal topics which 
 serve to vouch the fact, and which can be verified from the 
 clearest and most explicit declarations of those primitive writers, 
 particularly of Ignatius, (for though the work ascribed to him 
 is with reason suspected to have been interpolated with a view 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 121 
 
 to aggrandize the episcopal order, it was never suspected of any 
 interpolation with a view to lessen it) of Justin Martyr, of 
 Ireneus, of Tertullian, of Cyprian, and several others. Indeed, 
 the facts I found upon are incontrovertible. 
 
 Now, from the writings of those fathers, it is evident, that 
 tlie whole flock assembled in the same place, '.tti to avro, with 
 their bishop and presbyters, as on other occasions, so in parti- 
 cular every Lord's day, or every Sunday, as it was commonly 
 called, for the purposes of public worship, hearing the scrip- 
 tures read, and receiving spiritual exhortations. The persever- 
 ance in this practice is warmly recommended by the ancients, 
 and urged on all the Christian brethren, from the consideration 
 of the propriety there is, that those of the same church and 
 parish, and under the same bishop, should all join in one 
 prayer and one supplication, as people who have one mind and 
 one hope. For it is argued, " If the prayer of one or two 
 *' have great efficacy, how much more efficacious must that be, 
 " which is made by the bishop and the whole church. He, 
 " therefore, who doth not assemble with him is denominated 
 " proud and self-condemned." Again, as there was but one 
 place of meeting, so there was but one communion table or 
 altar, as they sometimes metaphorically called it. " There is 
 " but one altar," said Ignatius, as there is but one bishop." 
 
 'Ev ^u(Tik;71oiov 'eu; it; iTifxaT^ . 
 
 Nothing can be more contemptible than the quibbles which 
 some keen controvertists have employed, to elude the force of this 
 expression. They will have it to import one sort of unity in the 
 first clause, and quite a different sort in the second, though the 
 second is introduced merely in explanation of the first. In the 
 first, say they, it denotes not a numerical, but a mystical, unity, 
 not one thing, but one kind of thing; in the second, one iden- 
 tical thing. One would think it impossible for a writer more 
 accurately, by any words, to fix his meaning. The illustration 
 of 07ie bishop puts it beyond question what sort of unity he as- 
 cribes to the altar, one altar as one bishop ; insomuch that if, 
 in a consistency with his assertion, there can be, in one diocese, 
 but one individual bishop, there can be, in one diocese, but 
 one individual altar; and contrariwise, if, in a consistency with 
 his assertion, there may be, in one diocese, many individual 
 
l'^^ J.ECTURES ON 
 
 aUars of the same kind, there may be also many individual bi- 
 shops of the same kind. Indeed, by their mode of interpretintr, 
 the simile adduced, so far from tending, agreeably to the au- 
 thor's design, to explain and illustrate, serves only to confound 
 and mislead. What he ought to have said, is the reverse of 
 what he did say. He ought, on that hypothesis, to have said, 
 There is one altar, but not as there is one bishop, for in regard 
 to the last, the bishop, we affirm, that there is literally and pro- 
 perly but one in a diocese ; in regard to the first, the altar, we 
 affirm the unity only figuratively and improperly, since, in the 
 literal sense, there may be many. The like chicane has been 
 employed for eluding the argument founded on the expressions 
 one -prayer and one supplication. 
 
 But to return ; when the eucharist (which we more commonly 
 denominate the Lord's supper) was celebrated, the whole peo- 
 ple of the parish, or bishopric, if ye please to call it so, commu- 
 nicated in the same congregation, and all received the sacra- 
 ment, if not from the hands of the bishop, at least under his 
 eye. Hence it was that the setting up another altar within the 
 limits of his parish, beside the one altar of the bishop, was con- 
 sidered as the great criterion of schism.. And as the whole of 
 the bishop's parish generally received the symbols of Christ's 
 body and blood, mediately or immediately, from his hand, so 
 they were, for the most part, baptized, either by him, or in his 
 presence. He had also the particular superintendence of all the 
 Christian poor, the widows, the orphans, the strangers, the 
 prisoners, within the bounds of his charge, and the chief direc- 
 tion in the disposal of the public charities. The testimonials, 
 or liter (B form atce, as they were called, which private Christians 
 were£)bliged to have, when removing from one district to an- 
 other, that they might be received as brethren in other Chris- 
 tian congregations, were all signed by the bishop, in like man- 
 ner as with us they arc signed by the minister of the parish. 
 Kow all the particulars above-mentioned were considered as be- 
 loncinfT to his office. No doubt when, throuj^h sickness or 
 necessary absence, he could not discharge any part himself, his 
 place was supplied by one or more of his presbyters or vicars. 
 Kay, it was even thought befitting, that the bishop should 
 knowj by name, every individual of his flock, and that there 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 123 
 
 should not be a marriage among them without his approba- 
 tion. 
 
 When all these things, which are supported by unexception- 
 able testimonies, are duly weighed, is it possible to conceive 
 otherwise of the bishop, during the period I am here speaking 
 of, than as of the pastor of a single parish ? He answers pre- 
 cisely to what, in latter times, has been called the parson ,- a 
 title of respect when it first came into use, though I know not 
 how, through the caprice of custom, it at present conveys an 
 idea of disrespectful familiarity. The presbyters were his 
 counsellors and assistants, or, as people would now denominate 
 them, his curates. I do not pretend that this resemblance 
 holds in every particular, though it plainly does in most. Per^ 
 haps, in some things, the case may bear a greater analogy to 
 some Highland parishes in this northern part of the island, 
 wherein, by reason of their territorial extent, the pastor is 
 under the necessity of having ordained itinerant assistants, 
 whom he can send, as occasion requires, to supply his place in 
 the remote parts of his charge. 
 
 This, by the way, suggests the principal difference between 
 those ancient and the greater part of modern parishes. In gene^ 
 ral (not indeed universally) they were larger in respect of terri- 
 tory, though even, in this respect, far short of a modern diocese. 
 But it is not so much by the measure of the ground as by the 
 number of the people, that the extent of a pastoral charge is to 
 be reckoned. Now that, in this last respect, they did not, at 
 first, exceed modern parishes, is manifest from the several par-^ 
 ticulars which have been observed above. Nay, if every cir- 
 cumstance be considered, there is no reason to believe that 
 they were less. There were yet no magnificent edifices, built 
 for the reception of Christian assemblies, such as were after-» 
 wards reared at a great expence, and called churches. Their 
 best accommodation, for more then a century, was the private 
 liouscs of the wealthiest disciples, which were but ill adapted to 
 receive very numerous conventions. However, as it was but a 
 small part of the people of a city or village, with its environs, 
 which composed the church, the extent of territory that would 
 be necessary to supply the pastor with one sufficient congrega* 
 tion, must be so much the greater in proportion as the numbe? 
 
I24f LECTURES ON 
 
 of unconverted Jews and heathens would exceed the number of 
 converts. Suppose at the time the churches were first planted 
 by the apostles, the Christians at a medium were one-thirtieth 
 part of the people. This, I believe, is rather counting high, 
 for in very populous cities, like Rome and Alexandria, we have 
 no reason to think that they amounted to one-hundredth part. 
 However, as in a supposition of this kind, intended merely for 
 illustration, there is no occasion for historical exactness ; let the 
 number of Christians be reckoned one-thirtieth of the inhabi- 
 tants over all Asia Minor. Suppose farther, that country to 
 have been equal then, in point of populousness, to what Great 
 Britain is at present, — one of their bishoprics, in order to afford 
 a congregation equal to that of a middling parish, ought to 
 have been equal in extent to thirty parishes in this island. Yet 
 take them at an average, and they will be found to have been 
 scarcely equal to one-third of that number. By the account 
 which Bingham gives us, in his Christian Antiquities, (b. ix. 
 ch. ii. sect. 8.) an author by no means inclined to diminish the 
 episcopal dignity, the whole forty- eight bishoprics, in the fourth 
 century, comprehended in the patriarchate of Jerusalem, were no 
 more than equal to two middling German dioceses. And as 
 that patriarchate included three provinces under their respective 
 metropolitans, the district of a primate, or metropolitan, in Pa- 
 lestine, under whom there were many bishops, wanted one-third 
 to be of equal extent v,ith the precincts of an ordinary bi- 
 shopric in Germany. We may, however, form some notion of 
 the origin of those extensive parishes, (for, considered as 
 parishes, they must be called extensive,) from what happens in 
 the manner of proceeding adopted by any new religious sect, 
 which springs up amongst ourselves. Where their proselytes 
 are not numerous, the parishes or districts assigned to their mi- 
 nisters must be so much the more extended. In fact, they are 
 not less sometimes, if we reckon by the distance of one con- 
 venticle from another, than twenty, thirty, or even fifty, miles 
 in length. 
 
 Bingham has observed, on the province of Pontus Pole- 
 moniacus, that it comprehended only five dioceses, and that of 
 those, Neocesaria, the metropolis, was no less, than a hundred 
 miles from Polemonium, and sixty from Comana, the two 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 125 
 
 nearest bishoprics, or rather the two nearest episcopal resi- 
 dences. But he has not thought proper to observe also, what 
 Tillemont hath shewn from Basil and Gregory of Nyssa, both 
 natives of Cappadocia, that, in the middle of the third century, 
 there were no more than seventeen believers in that extensive 
 diocese: and these probably all resided in the city. Could 
 fewer be properly associated into one congregation ? 
 
 It deserves likewise to be remarked, that the largeness, even 
 in point of territory, of those primitive parishes or dioceses, if 
 you please to call them so, was more in appearance than in 
 reality. In a particular province, I shall suppose there were, 
 immediately after the first publication of the gospel, twelve 
 parishes erected. This does by no means imply, that the 
 whole province was divided into twelve parishes, though this is 
 the way in which we too commonly understand it. There 
 might be, and often were, many towns, and villages, and tracts 
 of land, in the province, wherein there were no Christians at all, 
 and which therefore were not at first considered as belonging 
 to any of those parishes. A parish generally was in fiict no 
 more than one city or village, with its suburbs and environs. 
 Afterwards, indeed, when in such places as had not been 
 originally included, there came to be some Christian converts, 
 these would naturally join themselves to the congregation as- 
 sembling in the nearest town or village ; which, agreeably to 
 the fraternal love that then prevailed among the disciples of 
 Christ, would cordially receive them. This was one principal 
 cause of the gradual enlargement of parishes, as it proved after- 
 wards the cause, (when Christianity became the religion of the 
 empire, and when, by the sudden accession of multitudes of 
 converts from all quarters, a subdivision of what appeared to be 
 comprehended under the original districts was necessary, it 
 then, I say, proved the cause) that the ancient parishes, still 
 retaining their first names, assumed the form as well as the 
 extent of dioceses. But of this more afterwards. 
 
 It adds not a little to the credibility of the account now given, 
 that it represents the Christian churches as originally analogous, in 
 point of polity, to the Jewish establishment of synagogues. No- 
 thing can be more evident, than that, in respect of the exterior 
 part, it was the intention of the founders of the church to adopt, 
 
1^6 LECTURES O^ 
 
 as far as possible, thai model which, under the conduct of Pro- 
 vidence, had been settled in Judea, as some learned men think, 
 by the prophet Ezra. Certain it is, that the very names of 
 church-officers were borrowed from the synagogue, which had 
 also its elders, overseers, deacons, or almoners ; and amongst 
 whom one usually presided, who was called the angel of the con- 
 gregation, the title given by our Lord in the Apocalypse to the 
 presidents of Christian assemblies. Now it is well known, that 
 among the Jews, every synagogue had its own ministry, and was 
 complete in itself, having no dependency except on the sanhe- 
 drim, or supreme council of the nation. Such a thing as several 
 synagogues, under the inspection of the same minister or mini- 
 sters, was never heard of. 
 
 But to return to the administration of religious ordinances in 
 those primitive parishes, let it be observed, that though the pres- 
 byters were all assistants to the bishop, in the discharge of all 
 parochial duties, the parish was not then divided or parcelled 
 out among them like a modern diocese. They all, with their 
 bishop and the people, as was observed above, assembled in one 
 place, for the public offices of religion. " For where should the 
 " flock be," says Ignatius, " but with their shepherd?" And 
 this title was given to him by way of eminence. The principal 
 part of the work of the presbyters, beside what belonged to their 
 judicial capacity in the presbytery, was, by the bishop's direc- 
 tion, to execute the less public parts of the pastoral function, as 
 visiting the sick, instructing and preparing the catechumens, 
 exhorting the penitents, and other such ministerial offices, in 
 those parts of the parish, (for all the presbyters belonged in 
 common to the whole) to which he found it reasonable to send 
 them. They also assisted him in the public offices of religion; 
 and when he was sick, or otherwise necessarily absent, they sup- 
 plied his place. As the charge of the parish was eminently de- 
 volved upon him, they acted in all the ministerial duties by his 
 direction, or at least with his permission. The only question 
 of moment that has been raised on this head is whether, by his 
 order or allowance, they could exercise every part of the pastoral 
 office as well as the bishop, or whether there were some things, 
 such as ordaining others to the ministry, which even his com- 
 mands could not empower them to do. As the power of the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 127 
 
 bishops arose, and that of the presbyters sunk, gradually, I am 
 disposed to think, that in the course of two centuries, or even a 
 century and a half, there was a considerable difference, in this 
 respect, in the state of things, at the beginning and at the end. 
 Towards the conclusion of that period, I imagine, it became 
 very unusual for a bishop to delegate this, which was ever look- 
 ed upon as the most sacred and most momentous trust, to his 
 presbyters. The transition is very natural from seldom to 
 never ; and in our ways of judging, the transition is as natural 
 from what never is done, to what cannot lawfully be done. 
 
 We know that some time after the period to which I have 
 here confined myself, ordination by presbyters was prohibited, 
 and declared null by ecclesiastical canons. But tlie very prohi- 
 bitions themselves, the very assertions of those whom they con- 
 demned as heretics, prove the practice, then probably wearing, 
 but not quite worn out. There was no occasion for making 
 canons against ordination by deacons, or by laymen, who did not 
 pretend to such a right. In deference, however, to the apostle 
 Paul's authority, the bishop still admitted, and even required, 
 all the presbyters present to join with him in ordaining a pres- 
 byter, by the imposition of their bands with his, but not in or- 
 daining a bishop. They did not reflect, that in the only in- 
 stance mentioned by Paul, the presbytery had assisted in ordain- 
 ing an evangelist, an extraordinary minister, even superior to a 
 bishop. The arbitrary supposition of Chrysostom, who was 
 himself a bishop and a patriarch, about four hundred years after- 
 wards, when things were on a very different footing, and when 
 the episcopate, on account of the wealth and secular power that 
 accompanied it, was become a great object of ambition, (Chry- 
 sostom's supposition) that by the presbytery the apostle meant 
 a synod of bishops, a notion totally unsupported by evidence, 
 and repugnant to the uniform usage of the term in Christian 
 antiquity, has hardly merit enough to entitle it to be mentioned. 
 
 But that, about the middle of the third century, the presby- 
 ters were still considered as vested with the power of conferring 
 orders, has been plausibly argued from an expression of Firmi- 
 lian, in his letter to Cyprian : " Quando omnis potestas et gra- 
 " tia in ecdesia constituta sit, ubi praesidcnt majores natu, qui 
 *' et baptizandi, et manum imponendi, et ordinandi, possident po- 
 
128 LECTURES ON 
 
 " testatem." Cypr. Epist. 75. in some editions the 43d. That 
 by majores natu, in Latin, is meant the same with w^nr^vn^ot, in 
 Greek, of which it is indeed a Uteral versian, can scarcely be 
 thought questionable. Besides, the phrase so exactly coincides 
 with that of Tertullian, who says, " Probati prsesident seni- 
 " ores," approved elders preside, as to make the application, if 
 possible, still clearer. Indeed, if we were not to consider the 
 Latin, majores natu, as meant to correspond to the Greek 
 Tsr^t<r(hvir,^oi, the only translation we could give to the phrase, used 
 by Firmilian, would be, " where old men preside;" an affirma- 
 tion which could hardly ever have been in such general terms 
 given with truth. For when the canonical age of bishops came 
 to be established, it was no more than thirty : and it is a cer- 
 tain fact, that both before and after that canon, several were or- 
 dained younger. I am far from thinking, that under this term, 
 majores natu, those who were then peculiarly called bishops are 
 not included, or even principally intended ; but what I maintain 
 is, that, now that the distinction had obtained, the use of so 
 comprehensive a terra seems sufficiently to shew, that it was not 
 his intention to affirm it of the latter order, exclusively of the 
 former, else he would never have employed a word which, when 
 used strictly, was appropriated to the former order, and not to 
 the latter. Thus the name priests, in English, in the plural 
 number, is often adopted to denote the clergy in general, both 
 bishops and priests. But no intelligent person, that understands 
 the language, and does not intend to deceive, would express 
 himself in this manner : " In the church of England, the priests 
 " have the power of baptizing, confirming, and orduining." 
 Nor could he excuse himself by pretending, that in regard to 
 the two last articles he meant by the word priests, the bishops, 
 exclusively of those more commonly, and for distinction's sake, 
 called priests. Yet the two cases are exactly parallel ; for, in 
 Firmilian's time, the distinction of the three orders was, though 
 not so considerable, as well known by the Christians in Cappa- 
 docia, and in Africa, as they are at this day in England. This 
 also serves to shew how little truth there is in that observation 
 ol' Dodwell's quoted in a former discourse, that from Ignatius's 
 time, the distinction of the names was most accurately observed 
 by all Christian writers. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 121) 
 
 As another eminent authority, I shall produce Cyprian. I 
 recur to him the more vvillingl}^, because he is held the great 
 apostle of high-church. Cyprian's own words, in Epist. 5. di- 
 rected to his presbyters and deacons at Carthage, when he him- 
 self, for sometime, found it necessary to retire, are tliese: 
 " Qaoniam mihi interesse nunc non permittit loci conditio, peto 
 '' vos pro fide et religione vestra, fungamini illic et vestris par- 
 " tibus et meis, ut nihil vel ad disciplinam vel ad diligcntiam 
 *' desit." Is it to be supposed, that he would have so expressly 
 enjoined them, without exception or limitation, to discharge the 
 duties of his function, as well as their own, if neither presbyters 
 nor deacons could do any thing in ordination, that part which 
 was the chief of all? Nay, might it not be justly thought, that 
 if he meant to except this, he would have given them some hint 
 in that letter, what method, in case of any vacancy in their 
 presbytery, (which, during his absence, v>'ould be doubly incom- 
 modious) they should take, to get it quickly and properly sup- 
 plied? But his general rule for the removal of all doubts, and 
 which renders the descending to particulars unnecessary, is, that 
 they are to discharge his office, and their own. 
 
 To come to the writers of the age that succeeded, the first I 
 shall mention is Flilary, a Roman deacon, whom I had occasion 
 to mention once before, who wrote a commentary upon Paul's 
 epistles, about the middle of the fourth century. His works 
 are always bound up with those of Ambrose, bishop of Milan ; 
 and, by some blunder in the editors, continue to pass under his 
 name. He is sometimes quoted by moderns under the name 
 of Pseudambrose and Ambrosiaster. Of his commentary, Six- 
 tus de Sienna has given this character : " In omnes Pauli epis- 
 " tolas libri quatuordecim, breves quidem in verbis, sed sentcn- 
 *' tiarum pondere graves;" which is entirely approved by Rich- 
 ard Simon of the Oratory, (Plist. Crit. du Nouveau Test. p. 
 3. chap, ix.) who adds, '' There are few ancient commentaries 
 " on the epistles of St. Paul, and even on the whole New Tes- 
 " tament, which can be compared with this." This commenta- 
 tor, in his exposition of the third chapter of the first epistle to 
 Timothy, has these words : " Post episcopum tamen diaconi 
 " ordinationem subjecit. Quare? nisi quia episcopi et presby- 
 '* teri una ordinatio est? Uterque enim saccrdos est. Sed 
 
 I 
 
130 LECTURES OX 
 
 " episcopus priinus est; ut omnis episcopus presbyter sit, non 
 " omnis presbyter episcopus. Hie eiiim episcopus est, qui in- 
 *' ter presbyteros primus est. Denique Timotheum presby- 
 *' terum ordinatum significat, sed quia ante se alteram non 
 *' habebat, episcopus erat." Nothing can be more evident, than 
 that the whole distinction of the episcopate is here ascribed to 
 seniority in the ministry, without either election or special or- 
 dination. When the bishop died, the senior colleague succeed- 
 ed of course. As to ordination, it was the same in both ; and 
 bishop meant no more than first among the presbyters, or the 
 senior presbyter. This is very probably the footing on which 
 the precedency in the presbytery originally stood, though it did 
 not long remain so. It was out of the earliest converts that 
 the first pastors were chosen ; and the conclusion is analogical, 
 that the oldest pastor would be entitled to preside. 
 
 Another witness whom I shall adduce, is Jerome, who wrote 
 about the end of the fourth century, and the beginning of the 
 fifth. The testimony which I shall bring from him, regards 
 the practice that had long subsisted at Alexandria. I shall 
 give you the passage in his own words, from his epistle to Eva- 
 grius. " Alexandrine a Marco evangelista usque ad Heraclara 
 " et Dionysium episcopos, presbyteri semper unum ex se elec- 
 '••' tum, in excelsiori gradu coUocatum, episcopum nominabunt: 
 " quomodo si exercitus imperatorem faciat : aut diaconi eligant 
 *' de se quem industrium noverint, et archidiaconum vocent." 
 I know it has been said, that this relates only to the election 
 of the bishop of Alexandria, and not to his ordination. To 
 me it is manifest that it relates to both ; or, to express myself 
 with greater precision, it was the intention of that father to sigr 
 nify, that no other ordination than this election, and those cere- 
 monies with which the presbyters might please to accompany 
 it, such as the instalment and salutation, was then and there 
 thought necessary to one who had been ordained a presbyter 
 before; that, according to the usage of that church, this form 
 was all that was requisite to constitute one of the presbyters 
 their bishop. But as I am sensible that unsupported assertions 
 are entitled to no regard on either side, I shall assign my rea- 
 sons from the author's own words, and then leave every one to 
 judge for himself. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 131 
 
 Jerome, in the preceding part of this letter, had been main- 
 taining, in opposition to some deacon, who liad foolislily boasted 
 of the order of deacons as being superior to the order of presby- 
 ters, Jerome, I say, had been maintaining, that in the original 
 and apostoHcal constitution of the church, bishop and presbyter 
 were but two names for the same office. That ye may be sa- 
 tisfied that what he says implies no less, I shall give it you in 
 his own words : — " Audio quendam in tantam erupisse vecor- 
 '' diam, ut diaconas presbyteris, id est episcopis, anteferret. 
 *' Nam cum apostolus perspicue doceat eosdera esse presbytcros 
 *' quos episcopos, quid patitur mensarum et viduarum minister, 
 " ut supra eos, se tumidus efferat." — For this purpose he had, 
 in a cursory manner, pointed out some of those arguments from 
 the New Testament, which I took occasion, in a former dis- 
 course, to illustrate. In regard to the introduction of the epis- 
 copal order, as then commonly understood, in contradistinction 
 to that of presbyter, he signifies, that it did not exist from the 
 beginning, but was merely an expedient devised after the times 
 of the apostlesj in order the more effectually to preserve unity 
 in every church, as in case of differences among the pastors, it 
 would be of importance to- have one acknowledged superior, in 
 whose determination they were bound to acquiesce. His words 
 are : — " Quod autera postea ;" he had been speaking imme- 
 diately before of the times of the apostles, " unus electus est, 
 '' qui cseteris preponeretur, in schismatis reraedium factum est, 
 " ne unus quisque ad se trahens, Christi ecclesiam rumperet." 
 Then follows the passage quoted above concerning the church 
 of Alexandria. Nothing can be plainer than that he is giving 
 an account of the first introduction of the episcopate, (as the 
 word was then understood) which he had been maintaining was 
 not a different order from that of presbyter, but merely a cer- 
 tain pre-eminence conferred by election, for the expedient pur- 
 pose of preventing schism. And in confirmation of what he 
 had advanced, that this election was all that at first was requi- 
 site, he tells the story of the manner that had long been prac- 
 tised and held sufficient for constituting a bishop in the metro- 
 polis of Eg}'pt. It is accordingly introduced thus: '^ Nam ct 
 " Alexandrian," as a case entirely apposite, to wit, an instance 
 of a church in which a simple election had continued to be ac- 
 
132 LECTURES ON 
 
 counted sufficient for a longer time than in other churches, an 
 instance which had remained a vestige and evidence of the once 
 universal practice. 
 
 Now if he meant only to tell us, as some would have it, that 
 there the election of the bishop was in the presbyters, there 
 was no occasion to recur to Alexandria for an example, or to a 
 former period, as that continued still to be a very common, if 
 not the general, practice throughout the church. And though 
 it be allowed to have been still the custom in most places, to 
 get also the concurrence or consent of the people, this shews 
 more strongly how frivolous the argument from their being elec- 
 tors would have been in favour of presbyters, as equal in point 
 of order to bishops ; and consequently superior to deacons ; 
 since, in regard to most places, as much as this could be said 
 concerning those who are inferior to deacons, the very meanest 
 of the people, who had all a suffrage in the election of their 
 bishop. But, understood in the way I have explained it, the 
 argument has both sense and strength in it, and is in effect as 
 follows : — There can be no essential difference between the 
 order of bishop, and that of presbyter, since, to make a bishop, 
 nothing more was necessary at first (and of this practice the 
 church of Alexandria long remained an example) than the no- 
 mination of his fellow-presbyters ; and no ceremony of consecra- 
 tion was required, but what was performed by them, and con- 
 sisted chiefly in placing him in a higher seat, and saluting him 
 bishop [«]. 
 
 Add to this, that the very examples this father makes use of 
 for illustration, shew manifestly, that his meaning must have 
 been as I have represented it. His first instance is the elec- 
 tion of an emperor by the army, which he calls expressly making 
 an emperor. And is it not a matter of public notoriety, that 
 the emperors, raised in this manner, did, from that moment, 
 without waiting any other inauguration, assume the imperial 
 
 [a] Was ever any thing more fj'ivolous than Pearson's criticism on the dis- 
 tinction between a se and ex se, the phrase used in the above quotation * ? Or 
 coukl any thing be conceived more foreign to Jerome's purpose, than the whole 
 passage, as the bishop has thought fit to interpret it? 
 
 * Vindicice Igncitiancv, p. 1. e. x. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 133 
 
 titles, and exercise the imperial power? And did they not treat 
 all as rebels who opposed them ? If possible, the other ex- 
 ample is still more decisive. To constitute an archdeacon in 
 the sense which the word was then used, no other form of in- 
 vestiture was necessary, but his election, which was in Jerome's 
 time solely in his fellow-deacons ; though this also, with many 
 other things, came afterwards into the hands of the bishop. 
 By this example he also very plainly acquaints us, that the bi- 
 shop originally stood in the same relation to the presbyters, in 
 which the archdeacon, in his own time, did to the other dea- 
 cons, and vvas, by consequence, no other than what the arch- 
 presbyter came to be afterwards, the first among the presbyters. 
 
 But does not Jerome, after all, admit, in the very next sen- 
 tence, the superiority of bishops in the exclusive privilege of or- 
 daining? True: he admits it as a distinction that then actually 
 obtained; but the whole preceding part of his letter was written 
 to evince, that from the beginning it was not so. From ancient 
 times he descends to times then modern, and from distant coun- 
 tries he comes to his own ; concluding, that still there was but 
 one article of moment whereby their powers were discriminated. 
 *' Quid enim facit, excepta ordinatione, episcopus, quod pres- 
 *' byter non faciat?'* This indeed proves sufficiently, that at 
 that time presbyters were not allowed to ordain. But it can 
 prove nothing more; for in regard to his sentiments about the 
 rise of this difference, it was impossible to be more explicit than 
 he had been through the whole epistle. I shall only add, that, 
 for my part, I cannot conceive another interpretation, that can 
 give either weight to his argument, or consistency to his words. 
 The interpretation I have given, does both, and that without 
 any violence to the expression. 
 
 I might plead Jerome's opinion in this case — I do plead only 
 his testimony. I say I might plead his opinion, as the opinion 
 of one who lived in an age when the investigation of the origin 
 of any ecclesiastical order, or custom, must have been incom- 
 parably easier than it can be to us at this distance of time. I 
 might plead his opinion, as the opinion of a man who had more 
 erudition than any person then in the church, the greatest lin- 
 guist, the greatest critic, the greatest antiquary of them all. 
 But I am no friend to an implicit deference to human authority 
 
134 LECTURES ON 
 
 ill matters of opinion. Let his sentiments be no further re- 
 garded than the reasons by which they are supported arc found 
 to be good. I do plead only his testimony, as a testimony in 
 relation to a matter of fact, both recent and notorious ; since it 
 regarded the then late uniform practice of the church of Alex- 
 andria, a city which, before Constantinople became the seat of 
 empire, was, next to Rome, the most eminent in the Christian 
 world. To the same purpose the testimony of the Alexandrian 
 patriarch Eutychius has been pleaded, who, in his annals of that 
 church, takes notice of the same practice, but with greater par- 
 ticularity of circumstances than had been done by Jerome. 
 Eutychius tells us, that the number of presbyters therein was 
 always twelve ; and that, on occasion of a vacancy in the epis- 
 copal chair, they chose one of themselves, whom the remaining 
 eleven ordained bishop by imposition of hands and benediction. 
 In these points, it is evident there is nothing that can be said 
 to contradict the testimony of Jerome. All that can be affirmed 
 is, that the one mentions particulars about which the other had 
 been silent. But it will be said, there is one circumstance, the 
 duration assigned to this custom, wherein there seems to be a 
 real contradiction. Jerome brings it no farther down than 
 Heracla and Dionysius; whereas Eutychius represents it as 
 continuing to the time of Alexander, about fifty years later. 
 Now it is not impossible that a circumstantial custom might 
 have been in part abolished at one time, and in part at another. 
 But admit that, in this point, the two testimonies are contra- 
 dictory, that will by no means invalidate their credibility as to 
 those points on which they are agreed. The difference, on the 
 contrary, as it is an evidence that the last did not copy from 
 the first, and that they are therefore two witnesses, and not one, 
 serves rather as a confirmation of the truth of those articles 
 v/herein they concur. And this is our ordinary method of judg^- 
 ing in all matters depending on human testimony. That Jerome, 
 who probably spoke from memory, though certain as to the main 
 point, might be somewhat doubtful as to the precise time of the 
 abolition of the custom, is rendered even probable by his men- 
 tioning, with a view to mark the expiration of the practice, two 
 successive bishops rather than one. For if he had knov/n cer- 
 tainly that it ended with Heracla, there would have bceu up 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 135 
 
 occasion to mention Dionysius ; and if he had been assured ot" 
 its continuance to the time of Dionysius, there would have been 
 no propriety in mentioning Heracla. 
 
 Some have inferred from a passage in TertulHan, that how- 
 ever general the practice was in the second and subsequent cen- 
 turies, of settling in every church all the three orders above ex- 
 plained, it was not universal that, in parishes where there were 
 but a few Christians remotely situated from other churches, it 
 was judged sufficient to give them a pastor or bishop only, and 
 some deacons. The presbyters then being but a sort of assis- 
 tants to the bishop, might not, in very small charges, be judged 
 necessary. The thing is not in itself improbable, and the autho- 
 rity above-mentioned, before I had examined it, or seen a more 
 accurate edition, led me to conclude it real. But on examina- 
 tion I find, that what had drawn me and others into this opinion, 
 was no more than a false reading of a sentence quoted in a for- 
 mer lecture. In some editions of Tertullian we read, (De ex- 
 hort, cast.) " Ubi ecclesiastici ordinis non est consessus, et offert, 
 " et tinguit, sacerdos qui est ibi solus." I need not urge that 
 this expression is quite different in all the best manuscripts, and 
 most correct editions : this being one of those glaring corrup- 
 tions which, after a careful perusal, betray themselves to an at- 
 tentive reader of any penetration. The words, as I have now 
 transcribed them, considered in connexion with the subject treat- 
 ed in the context, have neither sense nor coherence in them; 
 whereas nothing can be more apposite to the author's argument 
 than they are in the way formerly quoted. " Ubi ecclesiastici 
 " ordinis non est consessus et offers, et tinguis, et eacerdos es 
 " tibi solus." So sensible of this were the two learned critics, 
 Petavius and Dodwell, that though both were violently disposed 
 in their different ways to pervert the meaning, neither thought 
 proper to avail himself of a variation in the reading, which would 
 have removed at once what to them was a great stumbling-block. 
 It is indeed a reading which savours more of art than of negli- 
 gence, and has much the appearance of those inquisitorial cor- 
 rections which were made on several ancient books in the six- 
 teenth century, especially those published in the papal domi- 
 nions, or where the holy office was established, in order to adapt 
 the ancient doctrine to the orthodoxy of the day. Now nothing 
 
136 ^ LECTUrtES ON 
 
 could be more opposite to this, than what seemed to admit, that 
 any necessity or exigence whatever could entitle a layman to 
 exercise the functions of a priest. — But this by the way. 
 
 The opinion of Dr. Hammond, (Annotations, Acts xi. 30.) 
 that the apostles instituted only the office of bishop and deacon, 
 and that the intermediate office of presbyter was soon afterwards 
 introduced, is not materially different from the doctrine which 
 I endeavoured, in a preceding lecture, to prove from the New 
 Testament. Provided it be allowed, that the ministry, accord- 
 ing to the apostolical arrangement, consisted of two orders, and 
 not of three, the one properly the ministry of the word, the 
 other the ministry of tables, it would be no better than logo- 
 machy, or altercation about words, to dispute whether the mi- 
 nister of the former kind should be called bishop, or presbyter, 
 since it is evident, that these names v/ere used synonymously by 
 the inspired writers. Were we to be confined to one term, I 
 should readily admit, that the first is the moreproper of the two. 
 The name i-pn^xoTr^, bishop, inspector, strictly expresses the 
 charge of a flock ; the term T^^itrfivis^^, presbyter, elder, senator, 
 is a title of respect, which has been variously applied. And in 
 the ecclesiastic use it has been rendered ambiguous, by having 
 been so long misapplied to a kind of subordinate ministry, which 
 the true presbyterian maintains, with Jerome, was not from the 
 beginning in the church. The only material difierence between 
 the doctor's sentiments and mine, on this article, is the follow- 
 ing : — That very learned and pious author, misled, as I imagine, 
 more by the dialect of ecclesiastic writers, when the distinction 
 had actually obtained, than by the practice of the primitive 
 church rightly understood, maintains that there was no more 
 than one bishop or pastor allotted to every church, whereas, in 
 my judgment, there were allotted several. Nothing can be more 
 incompatible than his opinion, in this particular, with the style 
 of the sacred penmen, to which, in support of that opinion, he 
 is perpetually doing violence in his commentary. Admitting 
 that the phrases xar '.y.^cx-^^iav, and xara ToXiv, may be rendered, as 
 he affirms, church by churchy and city by city, and that conse- 
 quently what is called, in the common translation, " ordaining 
 elders or bishops in every city, or in every church," may be 
 understood to imply one in each, what shall be said of the many 
 
ECCLEl3;iASTICAL HISTORY. 137 
 
 pnssagcs not in the least ambiguous, wherein mention is made 
 of the pastors in the plural number of but one cliurch? Some- 
 times thev arc denominated bishops, sometimes presbyters, some- 
 times those tliat are over them, their guides or directors in the 
 Lord. Indeed, what we are told, (Acts xx. 17.) that Paul sent 
 from Miletus to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church, 
 might (if there were not another passage to this purpose) servo 
 as a sufficient confutation of that hypothesis. " Ay but," re- 
 plies our annotator, " by the church is here meant, not the 
 *' single church of the city of Ephesus, but the metropolitical 
 '' church of Asia." Is it possible, that a man of Dr. Ham- 
 mond's erudition and discernment, should have been so little ac- 
 quainted with, or attentive to, the idiom not only of all the in- 
 spired, but of all the ecclesiastical, writers of the two first cen- 
 turies, as, in support of his interpretation, to recur to such an 
 unexampled phraseology? Where will he find all tlie churches 
 of a province or country called the church of a particular city? 
 But if there were nothing incongruous in the phrase, there is an 
 absurdity in the supposition. How could the apostle expect to 
 find at Ephesus all the bishops of Asia? Or was he, though in 
 so great haste to get to Jerusalem before Pentecost, that be 
 could not conveniently go to Ephesus himself, — was he, I say, 
 to wait till expresses were sent thence by the metropolitan 
 throughout that extensive region, and till, in consequence of 
 this summons, all the Asiatic bishops were convened at Miletus? 
 By this strange way of wresting the plainest words, the saints 
 at Philippi (Phil. i. 1.) are in another place made to mean all 
 the Christians in Macedonia; and, by parity of reason, I ac- 
 knowledge, the bishops and deacons of Philippi are all those in 
 the holy ministry throughout the Macedonian kingdom. But 
 as amplification does not always answer, the opposite method is 
 sometimes found convenient. When James, (Jam. v. 14.) en- 
 joins the sick person to send for the elders of the church, he 
 means, according to our learned doctor, the elder, bishop, or 
 pastor, of that particular flock. What sentiments might not 
 the words of scripture be made to favour, by this loose and ar- 
 bitrary mode of interpreting? It is strange that one, whose dis- 
 cernment and impartiality, notwithstanding his prejudices, led 
 Jiim to discover that, in the sacred writings, there was no dis- 
 
138 LECTURES ON 
 
 tinction between bishop and presbyter, was not able to dis- 
 cover (what was fully as evident) that they contained not a sin- 
 gle vestige of metropolitical primacy. The language of the fa- 
 thers of the fourth and succeeding centuries, (for then all these 
 detrrees were firmly rooted) concerning the offices of Timothy 
 and Titus, and the current maxim, " one church, one bishop," 
 which naturally sprang from the distinction of bishop and pres- 
 byter, had entirely warped this interpreter's judgments in 
 every case wherein the subject of the ministry was con- 
 cerned. 
 
 I must beg leave to add, that if what this gentleman and I 
 are both agreed in, that there was originally no intervening 
 order between bishop and deacon, be admitted to be just, the 
 account given above of the rise of such an order, has, abstract- 
 ing from its external evidence, the advantage of his in respect of 
 internal probability. That a middle order (as that of presbyter 
 is in the church of England, and the church of Rome) was, 
 notwithstanding the silence of history, erected at once imme- 
 diately after the times of the apostles, is, to say the least, 
 much more unlikely, than that it arose gradually out of an in- 
 considerable distinction, which had obtained from the begin- 
 ning. Dodwell's hypothesis, that all those ordained by the 
 apostles were no more than presbyters, in his acceptation of the 
 term, labours under the like defect with Hammond's. It is 
 very remarkable, that these two strenuous defenders of episco- 
 pacy, do, in effect, both renounce its apostolical origin, admit- 
 ting no subordination among the ministers of the word in the 
 churches planted by the apostles; and that they do not differ 
 more widely from their allies in this cause, than they do from 
 one another. It is a shrewd presumption, that a system is ill 
 founded, when its most intelligent friends are so much divided 
 about it; and in order to account for it, recur to hypothesis so 
 contradictory ; — a presumption too, let me add, that their judg- 
 ment would lead them soon to adopt the premises of their ad- 
 versaries, to which they sometimes approach very near, if their 
 passions would allow them to admit the conclusion. 
 
 Thus we have advanced from the perfect equality, in respect 
 of ministerial powers, in the stated pastors of the churches 
 planted by the apostles, to that parochial episcopacy which 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 139 
 
 immediately succeeded it ; and which, though it arose gradually 
 from an inconsiderable cause, seems to have assumed the model 
 of a proper episcopate, as the word is now understood, before 
 the middle of the second century. And this I consider as the 
 first step of the hierarchy. I shall continue to trace its pro- 
 gress in the succeeding lectures on this subject. 
 
140 LECTURES ON 
 
 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 X SHOULD not have thought it necessary to be so partlcuhir as 
 I have been, in ascertaining the nature of that poUty which ob- 
 tained in the primitive church, both in the simple form wherein 
 it was first settled by the apostles, and in that which it soon 
 after assumed, and almost universally retained, till the expira- 
 tion of the third century, were not this a matter that is made 
 a principal foundation of dissent by a pretty numerous sect in 
 this country. I do no here allude to those amongst us, who 
 barely prefer the episcopal form of government, whom, in ge- 
 neral, as far as I have had occasion to know them, I have 
 found moderate and reasonable in their sentiments on this sub- 
 ject. Such do not pretend that the external model of the 
 church (whatever they may think of the antiquity of theirs) is of 
 the essence of religion. They are sensible, that an ecclesiasti- 
 cal polity, however necessary, is but a subsidiary estabUshment, 
 totally distinct from the spiritual and vital principle, or the re- 
 ligion, properly so called, for whose preservation and advance- 
 ment it is calculated ; that the merits of any form can be judg- 
 ed of only from its fitness for answering the end; that in this 
 as in all other matters of experience, different times and dif- 
 ferent places may require some differences. 
 
 The notion that it was the intention of the apostles, that the 
 particular mould which they gave the church should be held in- 
 violable, or that it was their doctrine, that the continuance of 
 the same mould is essential to the being of the church, appears 
 to me not indeed problematical, but utterly incredible. One 
 might have justly expected in that case (the matter being of 
 such infinite consequence) a fuller and clearer account not only 
 of what they did in this way, but also of their doctrine in rela- 
 tion to its importance. I shall add a few observations for the 
 further support of the general point in regarding the merits of 
 the question. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 141 
 
 As to the origin of one of the offices, that of deacon, it is re- 
 lated in such a manner as bears all the marks of a prudential 
 expedient, suggested by a present inconvenience. The office 
 too, on its first erection, was a trust in things merely temporal ; 
 or what Jerome, not unjustly, though perhaps too contemp- 
 tuously, called, the service of tables and windows. They were 
 no other than wliat, in modern language, we should call the 
 church's almoners. Nor is it any objection to this representa- 
 tion, that we find both Stephen and Philip, who were among 
 the seven deacons, that were first presented by the people to 
 the apostles, exercising spiritual functions, such as preaching 
 and baptizing. This power they certainly did not derive from 
 the superintendency of the people's charities, to which alone 
 they were chosen, with which they were intrusted, and which 
 the apostles, in the very institution of the office, expressly dis- 
 tinguish from the ministry of the word. " It is not reason," 
 said they, when harassed by the murmurs of the Hellenists 
 against the Hebrews, on account of the supposed neglect of 
 their widows, " that we should leave the word of God, and 
 ^' serve tables. Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you 
 '' seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wis- 
 '* dom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will 
 *' give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of 
 '' the word.'* Here the lixzovix TpccTi^m, and the huxovix xoyn, are 
 manifestly contrasted to each other. Stephen and Philip, on 
 the contrary, derived their spiritual functions either from that 
 title with which, according to Tertullian and the deacon Hi- 
 larius, every qualified person, in that state of the church, was 
 invested for promoting the common cause, or from the superna- 
 tural gifts they had received for the advancement of the faith, 
 before the election to the deaconry, or (as some have thought 
 roost probable) from their being called of God to the office of 
 evangelists. Philip is, in another place, but at a later period, 
 expressly called an evangelist. Acts xxi. 8. It is worthy of 
 notice, that his office of deacon is there also named, that we 
 may not confound them, or ascribe to the one what belonged to 
 the other. We entered into the house of Philip the evange- 
 list, who was one of the seven. Though it might be unsuit- 
 able, when the number of believers was greatly increased, to an 
 
142 ' LECTURES OX 
 
 office of so much weight as the apostleship, to be encumbered 
 with a charge of this nature, it might not be incompatible with 
 any office (like that of evangelist) of less importance. But soon 
 after the apostolic age, (or perhaps sooner) though, by the way, 
 we have no direct information concerning it, the deacons were 
 admitted to assist in the inferior parts of the sacred service. 
 At present, indeed, in almost all the churches where the three 
 orders of bishop, presbyter, and deacon, are found, the last 
 mentioned has no sort of charge in that particular which at first 
 was his whole charge, and which alone gave occasion for the in- 
 stitution of the office; insomuch that we cannot say that the 
 modern deacon is in any respect the same with the apostolic 
 deacon, unless it be in the name. Properly the original charge 
 of the institution, of which we are informed, Acts vi. 1. is abo- 
 lished, though the name be retained, and applied to an office 
 totally distinct. At present, the oversight of the poor belongs, 
 in England, to the church-wardens, who are annually elected 
 in each parish by the vestry. The deacons have no concern in 
 it. In other churches, other methods are adopted. 
 
 There was another office also in the primitive church, from 
 the times of the apostles, which was conferred on elderly wo- 
 men, commonly widows,, that of deaconess. Like the former, 
 it did not belong to the ministry of the word, but to that of 
 tables, and seems to have been devised for the discharge of cer- 
 tain charitable services to strangers and to the female poor, 
 which could not be so properly performed by the deacons. 
 That it was of apostolic institution, though we be not informed 
 of the occasion and manner, there is no ground to doubt, since 
 mention is made of it in the New Testament. Phebe is deno- 
 minated by Paul, Rom. xvi. 1. "a deaconess, vtrav '^iaxovov, of the 
 " church in Cenchrea." And the directions fjiven in the fifth 
 chapter of the first epistle to Timothy, have always been con- 
 sidered, and with great appearance of reason, as regarding those 
 women who were proper to be admitted to this function. Yet 
 this is an office which has now, for many centuries, been uni- 
 versally disused. 
 
 What is truly of divine right in this whole matter of polity 
 is, in my judgment, plainly this, — that those important and 
 divine lessons, which have been transmitted to us by the pas- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 143 
 
 tors who preceded us, should by us be committed to faithful 
 men, who shall be able to teach others also ; and that, as much 
 as possible, every thing shouhl be done for the advancement of 
 the knowledge, the faith, and the obedience of the gospel. 
 This is, doubtless, a duty incumbent on the church and her 
 governors to the end of the world. 
 
 But though it be admitted, that a ministry is essential to the 
 church, there are many things regarding the form of the mini- 
 stry which must be accounted circumstantial. For my own 
 part, I acknowledge it to be my opinion, that there is not a 
 church now in the world which is on the model of that formed 
 by the apostles. The circumstances of men and things are per- 
 petually varying, in respect of laWs, civil polity, customs, man- 
 ners : these, in every society, give rise to new regulations, ar- 
 rangements, ceremonies : — these, again, insensibly introduce 
 changes in the relations of different classes and ranks of men one 
 to another, exalting some, and depressing others. Sometimes 
 alterations arise from a sort of necessity. A particular measure 
 may be expedient at one time, and in certain circumstances, which 
 is inexpedient at another time, and in different circumstances. 
 But it is equally certain, on the other hand, that changes do 
 not always spring from prudential considerations of fitness. 
 "As little can we say that they are always for the better. They 
 more frequently result from the unbridled passions of men, fa- 
 voured by circumstances and opportunity. 
 
 From what hath been said above, therefore, let it not be ima- 
 gined, that I consider the outward form of polity, because not 
 of the essentials of religion, as a matter absolutely indifferent. 
 That, I imagine, would be an error in the other extreme. To 
 recur to an illustration I formerly employed, though the house 
 in which a man lodges, make no part of his person, either of 
 his body or of his soul, one house may prove a very comfort- 
 able and convenient lodging, and another so incommodious as 
 to be scarcely habitable. Under whatever form of ecclesiastic 
 polity a man lives, it will still hold an infallible truth, that if 
 he believe and obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, he 
 shall be saved. But certain it is, that one model of church-fjo- 
 vernment may be much better calculated for promoting that be- 
 lief and obedience than another. Nay, it is not impossible that 
 
144 LECTURES ON 
 
 such changes may be introduced, as are much more fitted for 
 obstructing the influence of true rehgion than for advancing it ; 
 nay, for inspiring a contrary temper, and nourishing the most 
 dangerous vices. How far this proved the case with the Chris- 
 tian community, is submitted to every judicious student of ec- 
 clesiastic history. 
 
 I now proceed to the brief detail of changes which ensued. — 
 In my last discourse on this subject, I brought the history of 
 the ecclesiastic polity as far down as the end of the third cen- 
 tury. I observed, that the government which then very gene- 
 rally prevailed, might justly be denominated a parochial episco- 
 pacy. The bishop, who was properly the pastor, had the charge 
 of no more than one parish, one church or congregation, the 
 parishioners all assembling in the same place with him for the 
 purposes of public worship, religious instruction, and the so- 
 lemn commemoration of the death of Christ; that in all these 
 the bishop commonly presided; that each congregation, almost 
 universally, had also a college of presbyters, who were more or 
 less in number, as the exigencies of the parish required ; that 
 these constituted the bishop's council in judicial and delibera- 
 tive matters, and his assistants in the performance of religious 
 functions, both in public and in private. And when the bishop 
 was detained by sickness, or was otherwise necessarily absent, 
 they supplied his place. He was also attended by those called 
 deacons, who, beside the care of the public charities, assisted 
 in some of the inferior offices of religion, as in distributing the 
 sacramental elements in the eucharist, in making the prepara- 
 tions necessary for baptism, and other the like services. Some- 
 times these also were specially empowered by the bishop to bap- 
 tize, and even to preach. The pastor, with his colleagues the 
 presbyters, (for so Cyprian frequently denominates them) and 
 the deacons, constituted the presbytery, with the assistance of 
 which, but not entirely without the people, in matters of prin- 
 cipal concernment, he conducted the affairs of his church. 
 
 Fra Paoli Sarpi, of whom I gave you a character in a for- 
 mer lecture, speaking of the ancient government of the churches, 
 affirms, after Jerome, that in the beginning they constituted so 
 many aristocracies, governed by the council of their respective 
 presbyteries, among the members whereof there subsisted a per- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 14.0 
 
 feet parity; that afterwards, in order the more effectually to ob- 
 viate the divisions which sprang up, the monarchical form came 
 to be adopted. The superintendcncy of the whole was given 
 to the president or bishop, to whom all the orders of the church 
 were bound to submit. It is to be observed, that he speaks 
 not of the church universal, but of individual churches or con- 
 gregations. As to the government of the .whole Christian com- 
 monwealth, I shall have occasion to consider it afterwards. But 
 even in the original form of government in single parishes, it 
 was not, as Sarpi seems to signify, a pure aristocracy, but ra- 
 ther a mixture of the two forms, the aristocratical and demo- 
 cratical ; for in some matters at least, as I observed before, no- 
 thing was done without the consent of the people, not declared 
 by representatives, but by themselves, assembled in a collective 
 body. And even when afterwards it came to assume more of 
 the monarchical form, it was not, at least, till after the middle 
 of the third century, as we learn from Cyprian's letters, an un- 
 mixed monarchy, but a monarchy limited, and checked by the 
 mixture it still retained of the two other sorts of government, 
 the one in the presbytery, the other in the congregation. Hi- 
 therto, however, it held, with but a few exceptions, towards the 
 end of the aforesaid period, that to one bishop there was only 
 one parish, one church, one altar or communion-table, (for both 
 names were used) one baptistery, and though there were seve- 
 ral presbyters, the parish was undivided, each of them belonged 
 equally to the whole, and was, in the discharge of his functions, 
 at the direction of the bishop. 
 
 The first thing that next deserves our notice, is to inquire 
 from what causes it proceeded, that one bishop came to have 
 the oversight of many congregations, and that the several pres- 
 byters came to have their several parishes, every congregation 
 having its own church, altar, and baptistery, as well as pastor or 
 presbyter, to whose care the smaller parish, or subdivision of 
 the larger one, was peculiarly allotted, they all continuing still 
 in subordination to the bishop, who was acknowledged their 
 common head. 
 
 We have seen already, that in the first planting of churches, 
 (however wonderful the progress which the apostles made may 
 justly be accounted) as the disciples bore but a small proportion 
 
 K 
 
146 LECTURES ON 
 
 compared with the unconverted Jews and heathens, the tract 
 of country that woukl be necessary to yield but a middhng con- 
 gregation, must have been of pretty hirge extent. The extent 
 for some time would occasionally be enlarged, by the accession 
 of new converts in neighbouring places, where there were none 
 before. This would frequently cause an increase not only to 
 the number of people .in the congregation, bnt also to the terri- 
 tory of the parish. As additions were made gradually to this 
 profession, by tlie diffusion of Christian knowledge to places it 
 had not reached before, the method which would naturally oc- 
 cur would be, to annex the converts, where there were but few, 
 to the parish that lay nearest. It would be only when consi- 
 derable acquisitions were made all at once to the Christian 
 cause in remoter places, where formerly there had been few or 
 none, that the notion of new erections would suggest itself. 
 And that in the purest and simplest times, (before vanity or 
 avarice had insinuated themselves) recourse was had to this me- 
 thod of erecting new parishes, the x'-'p--^"^'''-'>'^'>'^ country bishops, 
 mentioned by ecclesiastic writers, is an undoubted evidence. 
 But what would make people in most cases recur rather to the 
 other method, is the consideration of the plurality of presbyters 
 they had in every church. As in this they were not confined 
 to a set number, but had more or fewer, as the exigencies of 
 the parish required, they would, when the charge grew greater, 
 think it necessary to add to the number of the presbyters, in 
 order to prevent its becoming burdensome. 
 
 Further ; it is no reflection on the church in general, or even 
 on the pastors in particular, to suppose, that however sincere 
 their zeal for the cause of Christ might be, as it undoubtedly 
 was with a very great majority, they would not be entirely su- 
 perior to considerations either of interest or of ambition, when 
 such considerations were not opposed by motives of a higher na- 
 ture. Now as the pastors were supported by the voluntary con- 
 tributions of the people, of which the bishop had a fixed pro- 
 portion, the number and wealth of his people, and the extent of 
 his parish, added both to his importance and to his interest. 
 Indeed, it would be impossible otherwise to account for it, that 
 because in a large city, when only one congregation of Chris- 
 tians could be collected, they had but one bishop, they should 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY. 147 
 
 continue to have but one, when there were more Christians in 
 it than would be sufficient to constitute forty, fifty, or a hun- 
 dred congregations. This, at the same time, strongly shows 
 the influence of names and titles on mankind. The chief pas- 
 tor had been distinguished, as was observed, from about the 
 middle of the second century, by the title of bishop of such 
 a city or town, suppose Rome, Alexandria, or Antioch, when 
 he had only one congregation, and that perhaps a little one. 
 But this congregation was collected not only from all parts of 
 the city, but from the suburbs, and, probably, some of the near- 
 est villages. This suggested the notion, that however much 
 the number of the disciples might be increased, it would be un- 
 suitable to his title, derogatory from his dignity, as well as 
 hurtful to his interest, to cut off any part of the city, or suburbs, 
 or suburban territory, which had always been considered as un- 
 der his inspection before, and to which he seemed to have ac- 
 quired a right by prescription. It would have looked like a 
 sort of degradation to make him exchange the title of bishop of 
 Rome, or Alexandria, into bishop of such a street or lane. 
 
 It is indeed certain, that a pastor's charge is properly the 
 people, not the place. It is accordingly styled cura animartim, 
 the cure of souls. Nevertheless, there are several reasons 
 which contribute to make the territorial boundaries have more 
 influence on the imagination in the notions of right, than the 
 number of the people has. In the first place, the former are 
 more easily ascertained than the latter. Those are permanent, 
 these are perpetually changing. The people are denominated 
 from the place, not the place from the people. "Whatever revo- 
 lutions come, the inhabitants of Rome will always be Romans; 
 of Carthage, Carthaginians ; and of Alexandria, Alexandrians. 
 Add to this, that the restriction of a pastoral charge to a part 
 of the former local precinct, would have withdrawn many people 
 from that bishop, under whose care they had been, perhaps, the 
 greater part of their lives. This would have had the appearance 
 of an injury both to him and them too, if they esteemed him. 
 But nobody could be considered as injured by the addition of 
 numbers, who had no pastor at all before. That it is not a 
 mere hypothesis, that sentiments of dignity and rank contri- 
 buted to prevent a new partition, better suited to the circum- 
 
 k2 
 
148 LECTURES ON 
 
 stances that ensued, of districts which, with great propriety, had 
 been called parishes, when each contained no more Christians 
 than were sufficient to compose a single congregation ; appears 
 from this, that in the canons afterwards estabhshed, it is assign- 
 ed as a reason for the suppression of the x'^v-"^^'^"-"'^'"^ and for not 
 ordaining, in time to come, bishops in villages and little towns, 
 lest the episcopal name and authority should he brought into 
 contempt. Such canons, however, were not always observed. 
 Augustine, bishop of Hippo, more regardful of his Master's 
 service, than of any honours or profits he might derive from the 
 extent of his charge, erected a bishopric at Fussala, a village 
 in his diocese, as the bishop's charge came then to be denomi- 
 nated. 
 
 But to return to the first subdivision of the pastoral charge 
 into smaller precincts, since called parishes, the name which 
 had formerly belonged to the whole, there can be no doubt 
 that there had been instances of it in great cities long before 
 the expiration of the third century ; in some, perhaps, as 
 Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, even before the expiration of the 
 second; though it was far from being general, till a consider- 
 able time after the third. Churches, or oratories, for the ac- 
 commodation of the people, now that these were too numerous 
 to assemble as formerly in one place, began to be built, at first 
 only in the remoter parts of the parish. They were then no 
 more than what we call chapels of ease, and scarcely so much. 
 They had not yet fixed presbyters of their own, but got occa- 
 sionally sometimes one, sometimes another sent them, from the 
 mother church, which was the parish church, to preside in the 
 religious service, among those who assembled in these chapels 
 or conventicles, as they were also called, for it was not a name 
 of reproach then. Still, however, the idea so much prevailed, 
 that where there was but one bishop, there was properly but 
 one congregation, and ought to be but one altar, that as far 
 down as the beginning of the fifth century. Pope Innocent I., 
 as appears from his epistles, wherein he mentions his sending 
 the eucharistical bread to the presbyters officiating in those su- 
 bordinate churches, assigns this for his reason, that they might 
 not, on such occasions, consider themselves as separated from 
 his communion. It had been chiefly in the century immediate- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 149 
 
 ly preceding, when tlie Christian religion was legally establish- 
 ed as the religion of tlic empire, and when, through the con- 
 currence of secular with spiritual motives, there came to be an 
 immense accession of people to the church, that there was a ne- 
 cessity for building so great a number of chapels, or titiili, as, 
 in the Latin churches, they were, for distinction's sake, at first 
 denominated. And hence the English phrase to have a title, 
 when used of one who has obtained a presentation to a parish. 
 
 But as changes must be gradual not to shock those senti- 
 ments to whicli men have been long habituated, they could not, 
 at first, have any notion of the propriety of settling, in these 
 chapels, presbyters to officiate constantly, at their appointed 
 times of meeting. This could not fail to look too much like 
 what they had been always taught to consider as the principal 
 outward badge of schism, cutting off a part from the rest of the 
 congregation, separating, as it were, the members from the 
 head, assigning them pastors different from the bishop, — pres- 
 byters, who, when allotted to particular charges, could not 
 remain in the same immediate dependance on the bishop as 
 formerly, or in the like intimate connection with the presbytery. 
 Gradually, however, the sense of obvious convenience wore 
 off their prejudices; and, first in the suburban villages at the 
 greatest distance, a single presbyter was assigned to every cha- 
 pel as their minister. The chapels in the city long continued 
 to be supplied occasionally from the mother church, or. bishop's 
 church, according to any arrangement he thought proper to 
 adopt. Hence arose a distinction between city presbyters and 
 country presbyters. The former were more properly, of the 
 bishop's council ; and the latter, as having their fixed charges 
 in the country, were not entitled to officiate in the city, unless 
 by special desire. At length the custom crept into the cities 
 also, from the sense of its manifest conveniency. Alexandria, 
 by Epiphanius's account, with which Sozomen's agrees, was the 
 first wherein every church or chapel had its own ministers or 
 chaplains, one presbyter, and one or more deacons, as its extent 
 and necessities seemed to require. In Rome, the practice, 
 though not so early, appears to have been, to give two presby- 
 ters to every chapel or titulus. It were easy, if necessary, to 
 give a still stronger confirmation of this account, from the ves- 
 
150 t^ECTURES ON 
 
 tiges that yet remain of Christian antiquities in most countries 
 of Europe. I shall only instance in England, and, for this pur- 
 pose, adduce some quotations from Burn's Ecclesiastical Law, 
 — a book universally and justly held a standard on the subject 
 \vhereof it treats, and in which the author has been careful to sup^^- 
 port, by the best authorities, whatever he advances. On the ar-^ 
 tide cathedral, he affirms, " The cathedral church is the parish 
 " church of the whole diocese, (which diocese was therefore 
 ** commonly called parochia in ancient times, till the application 
 " of this name to the lesser branches into which it was divided, 
 '' made it, for distinction's sake, to be called only by the name 
 '^ o{ diocese : ) and it hath been affirmed, with great probability, 
 " that if one resort to the cathedral church to hear divine service, 
 ^' it is a resorting to the parish church, within the natural sense 
 *^ and meaning of the statute." Again, on the word oppro- 
 priadoii, he has these remarks: — *' For the first six or seven 
 '^ centuries, the parochia was the diocese, or episcopal district, 
 *' wherein the bishcp and his clergy lived together at the cathe^ 
 '^ dral church ; and whatever were the tithes and oblations of the 
 " faithful, they were all brought into a common fund, from 
 " whence a continual supply was had for support of the bishop, 
 " and his college of presbyters and deacons, and for the repair 
 '^ and ornaments of the church, and for other suitable works of 
 '* piety and charity. So that before the distribution of Eng- 
 ^' land into parishes, (as the word is now used) all tithes, offer-r 
 ^' ings, and ecclesiastical profits whatsoever, did entirely belong 
 ^' to the bishop and his clergy, for pious uses. This commu^ 
 " nity and collegiate life of the bishop and his clergy, appears to 
 " have been the practice of our British, and was again appoint- 
 " ed for the model of our Saxon churches. While the bishops 
 ^' thus lived amongst their clergy, residing with them in their 
 " proper seats, or cathedral churches, the stated services, or 
 *' public offices of religion, were performed only in those single 
 " choirs, to which the people of each whole diocese resorted, 
 ^' especially at the more solemn times and seasons of devotion. 
 '' But to supply the inconveniencies of distant and difficult ac- 
 ^' cess, the bishops .sent out s^me presbyters into the remoter 
 ^' parts, to be itinerant preachers, or occasional dispensers of 
 ^' the word and sacraments. Most of these missionaries re- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 151 
 
 " turned from their holy circuit to the centre of unity, the 
 " episcopal college, and had there only their fixed ahode, giving 
 '* the bishop a due account of their labours and successes in 
 " their respective progress. Yet some few of the travelling 
 '' clergy, where they saw a place more populous, and a people 
 " zealous, built there a plain and humble conveniency for divine 
 '* worship, and procured the bishop to consecrate it for an 
 " oratory^ or chapel at large, not yet for a parish church, or any 
 " particular congregation, to be confined witliin certain bounds 
 " and limits. And while the necessities of the country were 
 " thus upon occasion supplied, it did not alter the state of ec- 
 '• clesiastical patrimony, which still remained invested in the 
 " bishop, for the common uses of religion. The division of a 
 *' diocese into rural parishes, and the foundation of churches 
 " adequate to them, cannot be ascribed to any one act, nor in^- 
 " deed to any one single age. Several causes and persons did 
 " contribute to the rise of the parochial churches." Then 
 • follows an enumeration of the principal causes. Once more on 
 the word parish : — " At first there were no parochial divisions 
 " of cures here in England, as there are now. For the bi- 
 " shops and their clergy lived in common ; and before that the 
 ^* number of Christians was much increased, the bishops sent 
 " out their clergy to preach to the people as they saw occasion. 
 " But after the inhabitants had generally embraced Christianity, 
 " this itinerant and occasional going from place to place was 
 ^' found very inconvenient, because of the constant offices that 
 " were to administered, and the people not knowing to whom 
 ^* they should resort for spiritual offices and directions. Here- 
 ^' upon the bounds of parochial cures were found necessary to 
 *' be settled here by those bishops, who were the great instru- 
 *' ments of converting the nation from the Saxon idolatry. At 
 ** first they made use of any old British churches that were 
 " left standing, and afterwards, from time to time, in successive 
 ^* ages, churches were built and endowed by lords of manors 
 ^' and others, for the use of the inhabitants of their several 
 ** manors or districts, and, consequently, parochial bounds af-- 
 " fixed thereunto. And it was this which gave a primary title 
 " to the patronage of laymen ; and which also, oftentimes, made 
 ^* jthe bounds of a parish commensurate to the extent of a 
 
152 LECTURES ON 
 
 " manor." I have been the fuller in these quotations, as I 
 thought it of consequence to produce the sentiments of a learn- 
 ed divine of the church of England, who is, besides, a cele- 
 brated jurist and Christian antiquary, that it might be evident 
 to every impartial inquirer, that the account I have given is not 
 the misrepresentation of a party, but strictly conformable to the 
 judgment of the most candid and best informed of opposite par- 
 ties. — I return to the general state of things in the empire, 
 on the establishment of the Christian religion by Constantino. 
 
 When almost the whole people were proselyted to Christian- 
 ity, these chapels were so greatly multiplied, that it was no 
 longer possible to supply them all with the eucharist from the 
 bishop's altar or communion-table. Then it was judged expe- 
 dient to permit the erecting of other altars in those inferior 
 churches, wherein the presbyters settled as pastors in the sub- 
 -divisions, or smaller districts severally assigned to them, should 
 officiate in consecrating the sacramental elements, and distribut- 
 ino- them to the people. Each presbyter came to have a pecu- 
 liar tie to the discharge of all pastoral duties to those allotted to 
 him, such as baptizing, visiting the sick, instructing the cate- 
 chumens, admonishing the irregular, public and private teach- 
 ino", and giving testimonials to such as removed. In these, on 
 account of the vast multiplicity which the change of circum- 
 8tances had occasioned, it was impossible now, as formerly, that 
 the bishop should be always consulted, or that the presbyters 
 should always act by immediate direction. Every presbyter 
 came to be considered as the pastor of the charge committed to 
 him, and in every material respect as the same to his part of the 
 parish, which the bishop had been to the whole. His charge 
 itself came to be denominated wa^a/«/a, a parish, a name which, 
 as I remarked before, had been uniformly given to the whole 
 bishopric, whereof this was but a portion, and the latter began 
 to be distinguished by the name 2my~ficri;, diocese, though the dis- 
 tinction was not regularly observed till long afterwards. The 
 names xu^tccxov and ecclesia came to be given universally to those 
 meeting-houses as to proper parish churches, and then the mo- 
 ther church got the name cathedral, as there the throne of the 
 bishop and the bench of the presbytery were erected. 
 
 By the account given above, one woul(J imagine, that in some 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 153 
 
 things tlic power of tlie bishop was now impaired, though the 
 number of* his spiritual sul)jc(:ts wms greatly muhiphcd. The 
 presbyters had more authority in their respective flocks, and 
 were not under the necessity, as formerly, of recurring always 
 to his warrant or permission. When the chnrge became so ex- 
 tensive, and consequently burdensome, the bishops were obliged 
 to sacrifice some of their prerogatives to the love of case. But 
 this sacrifice had, in effect, more the appearance of abridging 
 their power, than the reality. The change, upon the whole, 
 tended much, in the eye of the world, to aggrandize the order. 
 From being the pastor of a particular flock, he was become the 
 superintendent of many pastors. Whereas formerly he had 
 the charge of one parish and one congregation, for these terms 
 are correlates, he had now the charge of, perhaps, fifty parishes 
 and fifty congregations, comprised within the same compass. 
 He was not so closely connected with the people as before, but 
 that was solely because he was raised higher above them, his 
 immediate connection being u'ith their pastors. Besides, in re- 
 spect of wealth, he drew great advantages from the increase of 
 numbers, being entitled to the same proportion from the public 
 contributions of the whole diocese. Not to mention that the 
 superstition, or mistaken piety, of some wealthy converts, also 
 contributed to the increase of his opulence. And if, in regard 
 to most official duties, the presbyters did more of themselves in 
 their several charges, they were totally excluded by canons 
 from confirming and ordaining, which sufficiently secured their 
 dependance and inferiority. 
 
 Add to this, that the separation of the presbyters, from one 
 another, by their being obliged to reside in their several parishes, 
 and their having opportunity only when called for a particular 
 purpose to come together, assisted the bishop in engrossing the 
 jurisdiction in spiritual matters, which formerly belonged to the 
 presbytery, or body of the pastors. And as in things temporal 
 {which I showed in a former discourse) the judicial power had, 
 before now, come entirely into his hands, the immense accession 
 of people to his jurisdiction, added immensely to his importance. 
 And if the aristocratical part of church government was great- 
 ly diminished, the democratical was totally subverted. The 
 impossibility there was that business should be managed by the 
 
154 LECTURES ON 
 
 people of a diocese collectively, when they amounted, as in se- 
 veral bishoprics, to some hundred thousands, put an end, in 
 matters of discipline, to their pretensions. The only vestige 
 that remained of their former rights was, that in several places 
 they continued to assemble tumultuously at the election of a 
 bishop. But as this affair was generally conducted with riot 
 and clamour, and sometimes ended in blood, the principles of 
 sound policy required, that a practice so fruitful of bad conse- 
 quences, and so barren of good, should be abolished. It was 
 not now, as formerly, a single congregation choosing their own 
 pastor, who was to have the immediate charge of their spiritual 
 instruction and guidance, but it was a mob, often a most outrage- 
 ous one, collected from a whole diocese or province, to nomi- 
 nate a great man, better known by his extensive jurisdiction and 
 splendid titles, than by any pastoral duties he had to exercise. 
 
 The train in which things were now put, gave rise to a new 
 application of the word iKx.'kn(rtci. I observed that this term bad 
 before been always used to denote either a single congregation, 
 or the whole Christian community. When the bishop's charge 
 was no more than a single congregation, it was very proper to 
 denominate it by that name and call it a church in the singular 
 number. Now that the term had, for ages, been employed to 
 express all that was under the inspection of one bishop, and 
 that people were inured to such phrases as these, the church 
 of Antioch, the church of Cesarea, the church of Constantinople, 
 and the church of the bishop of Antioch, &c. the word continued 
 to be so applied, notwithstanding the change of circumstances, 
 in consequence of which many congregations came to be in- 
 cluded. This paved the way for extending still farther the im- 
 port of the term, and employing it in the singular number, to 
 denote all the churches of a province under the same metropo- 
 litan, or even one or more kingdoms under the same patriarch. 
 
 It may not, however, be improper to remark, that for seve- 
 ral acjes there remained here and there the traces of the foot- 
 ing on which things had formerly stood. In small and distant 
 towns and villages, wherein bishops had been planted, and 
 whereof the circumjacent country was but thinly peopled, the 
 charge, even after the conversion of all the inhabitants, remain- 
 ed undivided, and the bishop waa still no more than what every 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 155 
 
 bishop was primitively, the pastor of a single congregation, with 
 his assistant, presbyters, and deacons. But these changes, in 
 process of time, gave place to still greater. When the division 
 of ancient parishes, which I shall henceforth call dioceses, be- 
 came universal, the principal reason for confining them within 
 moderate bounds entirely ceased, and motives of interest and 
 ambition operated the contrary way without control. The im- 
 mediate dependance of the people, and even of the clergy, upon 
 the bishop, and the connection of ninety-nine parts in a hundred of 
 the diocese with the bishop's church, formerly the parish church, 
 now the cathedral, being totally dissolved, and the people more 
 commodiously supplied in every part of tlie religious services, 
 worship, sacraments, and teaching, by those tituli, now called 
 parish churches, newly erected, there needed no more to abolish 
 the presbytery, whose principal use subsisted no longer. The 
 diocese accordingly underwent a new division into deaneries, so 
 named from their including at first ten parishes, or ten presby- 
 ters in each, though they did not long confine themselves to 
 that number. The president, called decanus, the dean, is pro- 
 perly an arch-presbytcr, such as anciently, in the bishop's ab- 
 sence, presided in the presbytery. The deanery of the cathe- 
 dral, consisting of the clergy, whose duty it is to perform there 
 the sacred service, and to preach, is denominated ca])ituJum, the 
 chapter, being, as it were, the head of the clergy of the diocese. 
 But the rural deaneries, as they ansv.-ered little purpose, have, 
 in most places, gone into disuse. The presbyters, who under 
 the dean officiated in the mother church, came to be distin- 
 guislicd from the parochial clergy by the titles of prebendaries 
 and canons. The former name they derived from appointments 
 called prebends, to which they were entitled ; the latter, from 
 the regulations to which they were subjected. The chapter 
 served instead of the presbytery in matters of election, not only 
 in electing the inferior officers, but in supplying vacancies, in 
 concurrence with the bishop, in the prebends or canonries, and 
 deanship ; nay, that they anciently, on the decease or transla- 
 tion of the bishop, elected his successor, the conge d' elire, still 
 in use in England, though now no better than a form, is a 
 standing evidence. They had the superintendency of the fa- 
 bric, with the goods and ornament;> belonging to the cathedral, 
 
156 LECTURES ON 
 
 and were also guardians of what is now called the spiritualties 
 of the bishopric, when the see was vacant. 
 
 In regard to the episcopal jurisdiction, which extended over 
 the whole diocese, the chapter, consisting only of the clergy of 
 the cathedral, could not be considered as a proper council. In 
 the bishop's court of judicature, denominated the consistory, his 
 counsellors and assessors in judgment when he was present, 
 and delegates in his absence, were those called archdeacons. 
 The archdeacon was originally of the order of deacons, as the 
 name imports. There was but one of them in a diocese. He 
 presided among those of his own order ; was a constant attend- 
 ant upon the bishop ; and was considered as his prime minister. 
 But some time after, the partition of dioceses became very ge- 
 neral, particularly after the country bishops were, through a 
 jealousy that they would lessen the dignity of the order, sup- 
 pressed by canon, and their parishes annexed to those of the 
 next city bishops, it was found convenient to elect those dele- 
 gates, the archdeacons, from the order of the presbyters, and 
 to have more or fewer in a diocese, according to its extent. 
 Through the influence of custom, in opposition to propriety, the 
 name archdeacon was retained. The diocese was accordingly 
 divided into archdeaconries, and these subdivided into deaneries, 
 not unlike the division of counties that obtains in England into 
 hundreds and tithings. It was then judged expedient to invest 
 archdeacons with a share of episcopal jurisdiction, both in tem- 
 porals and in spirituals, within their archdeaconries, where they 
 perform regular visitations, like the bishops, hold spiritual 
 courts, either in person, or by their deputies, called oflBcials, 
 and are accounted dignitaries. The only acts peculiar to the 
 bishop are confirming and ordaining. 
 
 I have been the more particular in this deduction, in order 
 to give at once a faint sketch of the model which, in a great 
 measure, still subsists in England and Ireland, and among the 
 secular clergy of the church of Rome. The variations, indeed, 
 are considerable, which the influence of time and local customs 
 have produced in different places. A perfect uniformity in these 
 things is not to be expected. We are now arrived at the 
 second step of the hierarchy, when prelacy or diocesan episco- 
 pacy succeeded the parochial, and began generally to prevail. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 157 
 
 LECTURE IX. 
 
 AN my last lecture, I traced the onsr'm of prelacy, or diocesan 
 episcopacy. I shall now, ere I proceed, for the further illus- 
 tration of the suhject, contrast the two methods that might na- 
 turally he supposed to have suggested themselves, upon the 
 great revolution in circumstances which the estahlishment of 
 -Christianity by the imperial laws, and the numerous conver- 
 sions from paganism consequent thereon, occasioned in the 
 church. There was then, indeed, an absolute necessity to make 
 a considerable alteration in the arrangement which had subsist- 
 ed formerly, in order that such multitudes of people might be 
 supplied with pastors, and with the ordinances of religion. One 
 way of answering this end was to attempt anew the division of 
 "Christian countries into such parishes as were no more than ne- 
 cessary for affording each a sufficient congregation, and to give 
 each, as formerly, its own bishop, presbyters, and deacons, in- 
 dependently of every other parisli. In this way, indeed, there 
 would have been vast alterations made on the territories and 
 local extent of pastoral charges, which would have had the ap- 
 pearance of dispossessing, in a great measure, those then ac- 
 tually in office. But the form, as well as the spirit, of the 
 model adopted in the second century, would have remained. 
 And, indeed, this was the only possible method whereby it 
 could have remained unimpaired. 
 
 The other way was to preserve the same division of territory 
 that had been made so long before, and which the people, 
 through custom, were brought to regard as sacred, to continue 
 the same nominal parishes in the same hands, but in order also 
 to accommodate the parishioners without overloading the pas- 
 tors, to increase the number of the presbyters, and, as they 
 could not now all convene in one place, to erect a sort of subor- 
 dinate chapels or churches, (a thing in the two first centuries 
 probably not conceived) to affix to each, in subordination to the 
 
158 LECTURES ON" 
 
 prelate, its proper presbyter, who in most things was to be, in 
 respect of this smaller parish, what the bishop had been in re- 
 spect of the larger parish whereof it was a part. If the former 
 of these methods suited more the primitive constitution of the 
 church, the latter (which in fact was adopted) was more accom- 
 modated to the natural bent of the imagination. It had the 
 appearance of paying a proper regard to ancient land-marks, of 
 accommodating the people without injuring individuals, by 
 stripping them both of the titles and of the territories which had 
 been immemorially possessed by them and their predecessors. 
 
 Besides, though the accession of proselytes to the Christian 
 cause was both great and sudden on the establishment of Chris- 
 tianity as the religion of the empire, there had been a real, 
 though more gradual accession, for centuries before. And as 
 this, through its being gradual, had never given rise to any 
 new division, but, perhaps, in a few distant places, to the erec- 
 tion of country parishes, under the care of those called chorepis- 
 copi, or to the addition of some presbyters to the bishop's coun- 
 cil, they would be prepared by custom to adopt the second me- 
 thod rather than the first. I have hinted already, that both in- 
 terest and ambition pointed to the same conduct. I might add 
 another thinir* which has no inconsiderable influence on our 
 apprehensions of fitness, that a certain analogy to the civil go- 
 vernment would also contribute to recommend this plan. How 
 far this principle operated on the advancement of the hierarchy 
 to the grandeur which in process of time it attained, as it is 
 admitted by every judicious and candid historian, shall be evin- 
 ced tnore fully in the sequel. 
 
 Thus a circumstance in itself merely accidental, and which 
 we have reason to think was not regarded as of any moment by 
 the first publishers of the gospel, namely, the extent of territory 
 that was necessary for afibrding converts enow to make a con- 
 gregation, (this circumstance, I say,) aided by some concurring 
 causes, proved the secret source of that total change, in respect 
 to government, which the church in a few ages after underwent. 
 Some of those concurrent causes have been explained already, 
 and we shall have occasion to investigate others of them as we 
 proceed. But that we may, if possible, be more fully satisfied 
 of the truth of the foregoing remark, in regard to the rise of the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 159 
 
 dioceses, comprehending many congregations out of parishes, 
 wliich, though generally the same, or nearly so, in local extent, 
 comprehended each hut one congregation, let us suppose that 
 the apostles and other founders of the churches, instead of con- 
 verting, as they did, a thirtieth, or a fortieth part of every city 
 where they preached, had converted all the inhahitants, is it not 
 manifest that the same principle of combining as many converts 
 as would constitute a congregation, which made them include 
 the whole city in the parish, when the whole could furnish no 
 more than one congregation, would have led them to erect as 
 many parishes as there were streets or lanes, when each street 
 or lane could afford the same number which, as things happened, 
 were afforded by the whole city. Had this been the case from 
 the beginning, such a revolution in the circumstances of the 
 church as I have endeavoured to explain to you, could never 
 have happened. 
 
 But I promised to advert briefly to some other causes, which 
 concurred in producing the same effect. The more effectually 
 to accomplish this promise, it will be necessary to turn back a 
 little, that we may trace the origin and progress of ecclesiastic 
 courts. I have had frequent occasion to mention the presby- 
 tery. It was the radical court, and subsisted from the begin- 
 ning. Mention is made of it in scripture. And as a plurality 
 of pastors was settled in most Christian congregations, planted 
 by the apostles, and as those pastors were required to conduct 
 their m.atters with harmony and prudence, there was a necessity 
 that, for this purpose, they should often meet and consult to- 
 gether. This was ])roperly the council of the congregation. 
 And the different congregations, with their ministers, seemed, 
 in a great measure, independent of one another. Every thing 
 regarding their own procedure in worship, as well as discipline, 
 was settled among themselves. But it is extremely plain, that 
 a total independency was not adapted to the more general cha- 
 racter that belonged to all as members of the commonwealth of 
 Christ. It was not the beino; members of the same conureiija- 
 tion that constituted their Christian brotherhood and unity, but 
 the being all, through one Mediator, adopted as children into 
 the family of God, or, as it is otherwise expressed, the being 
 members of the same body whereof Christ is the head, and. 
 
16*0 LECTURES ON 
 
 consequently, all members one of another. As Christ is not 
 divided, as his cause and interests will ever be the same, it was 
 not less expedient for maintaining union, and consequently 
 charity, through the whole Christian fraternity} that the churches 
 should preserve a proper correspondence and intercourse with 
 one another, than it was necessary for preserving the peace and 
 harmony of a congregation, that there should be a settled order 
 among them for conducting the religious ordinances, and for 
 consulting, deliberating, and determining, in all matters of com- 
 mon concern. 
 
 That such a union in every thing essential to the cause, was 
 what the apostles had much at heart, is very plain, not only 
 from the strain of their writings, but from the measures they 
 took to get the same rule universally to prevail, in relation to 
 the great dispute that, in their time, was so hotly agitated about 
 circumcision, and the other ceremonies of the law. The rule 
 which, in consequence of the consultation holden at Jerusalem^ 
 was unanimously established by the apostles, elders, and bre- 
 thren, there assembled, at the same time that it tended to unite 
 the disciples in love, and in the observance of every thing es- 
 sential, breathed a spirit of forbearance and toleration in 
 matters merely circumstantial, that bears but little resemblance 
 to the greater part of the ecclesiastical canons of later date. 
 
 This example, doubtless, suggested to the churches founded 
 by the apostles, prophets, and evangelists, to devise some regu- 
 lar plan of intercourse with one another, in order the more ef- 
 fectually to promote unity and brotherly affection in the church 
 universal. For this purpose, the congregations, in the same 
 canton or province, agreed to have stated conjunct meetings, 
 wherein they might discuss those matters which were of gene- 
 ral concern ; concert the measures that would be necessary both 
 for the propagation of the faith amongst idolaters, and for the 
 defence of its purity from internal scandals and pernicious errors. 
 Since it was impossible for the whole people of many churches 
 to assemble thus for consultation, it would naturally occur, as 
 being of practicable methods the most expedient, that the pas- 
 tors and deacons, who, in respect of o See, were most nearly con- 
 cerned in the cause, should, together with a delegation from the 
 j)eoplc of the different congregations, convene in the most com- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. l6l 
 
 modlous place, and treat together of those matters that concern- 
 ed the common salvation. 
 
 That in these, at first, the people had a share as well as the 
 pastors, we have sufficient ground from primitive writers to he- 
 lieve. I shall mention but a few of the many authorities which, 
 in support of this matter, might be produced. Eusebius, in 
 the synodical epistle he has preserved in his history, b. vii. 1. 30. 
 from the assembly or synod at Antioch, which condemned 
 Paulus Samosatenus, thus titles the persons (or rather repre- 
 sents them as titling themselves) who had concurred in that 
 
 measure, i-riffKOToi, ««< zrota-fotjji^ot, xat ^iuKovot, xat'ai iKx.Xr,ffiKi <r» S=y; the 
 
 bishops, and presbyters, and deacons, and the churches of God. 
 When the term churches is thus contradistinguished from the 
 pastors, it always denotes the people. Nor are some of these 
 classes represented here as actors, and others only as spectators, 
 or passive consenters. What was acted on this occasion, is ex- 
 hibited as alike the action of all. Uytcyy.a^r.uiv av. k. t. a. " We 
 *' were therefore under a necessity of expelling this adversary 
 *' of God, and settling another bishop in his stead [«]." 
 
 I shall produce but one other authority, which is a letter to 
 Cyprian, the 31st in his epistles, from the presbyters and dea- 
 cons of Rome, in relation to the lapsed, wherein we find these 
 womds : " Quanquara nobis in tam ingentinegotio placeat, quod 
 *' et tu ipse tractasti prius ; ecclesise pacem sustinendam, deinde, 
 *' sic coUatione consiliorum cum episcopis, presbyteris, diaconis, 
 " confessoribus, pariter ac stantibus laicis facta, lapsorum trac- 
 " tare rationem." — Here laymen, who had continued firm in 
 times of persecution, are judged proper to be joined in council 
 on this most important subject, with bishops, presbyters, dea- 
 cons, and confessors, or those, whether laymen or clergymen, 
 who had suffered for the testimony of Jesus. The same thing 
 may be evinced from the 14th and the 26th of his epistles, and 
 
 [a] How trifling is the attempt to elude the force of this argument, by say- 
 ing, that as to the inferior orders and the people, this address ought to he con- 
 sidered as conveying only their salutations. The only place in a letter for com- 
 plimental salutations, is the end. The title hears always (and to this use it is 
 appropriated) the designation of those by Avhom, and of those to whom, the let- 
 ter is sent. Here we perceive, as plainly as we can conceive any thing by the 
 help of language, the different classes of ])ersons above-mentioned, giving an ac- 
 count of their joint proceedings. 
 
 L 
 
16^ LECTURES ON 
 
 from the account he gives of the African synod, holden at Car- 
 thage, for determining the question that had been raised about 
 the rebaptization of heretics. To what purpose insist that those 
 courts were often styled synods of bishops, and that the decisions 
 are sometimes ascribed to the bishops, and no mention made of 
 any other order. It is admitted, that this was the principal 
 order, and at that time essential to the existence of a synod, 
 which, probably, the other orders were not. Hence a synod 
 might naturally be denominated a convention of bishops. It is 
 admitted further, that there have been no synods in which no 
 other members were present. From neither of these conces- 
 sions can we infer, in contradiction to direct testimony, that this 
 was the case with all synods, and that none of any inferior ordet 
 had a voice among them, either legislative or judicial. In our 
 church-judicatories in Scotland, presbyteries, synods, and as- 
 semblies, (for church-sessions consist mostly of the laity) the 
 numbers of ministers and of laymen, who are constituent mem- 
 bers, are nearly equal. Yet they are familiarly termed meetings 
 of the clergy, and it sometimes happens, both in presbyteries 
 and in synods, that none are present but ministers. They make 
 a regular court notwithstanding; whereas lay-elders without 
 ministers would not make an ecclesiastical judicatory. But to 
 return. 
 
 In the manner above explained, the churches maintained a 
 mutual correspondence, consulting with one another in all mat- 
 ters of very great and general concernment, insomuch that there 
 arose a sort of republic from the association of the churches in 
 a particular province, which was, in a manner, governed by its 
 council or synod. Some of these synods met annually ; others 
 twice a year, or even oftener, if occasion required. The divi- 
 sions of the country made by the civil government, were com- 
 monly adopted here, not as necessary, but as commodious, and 
 affording opportunities, on other accounts, of asserabhng more 
 frequently. The metropolis of the province, as being the most 
 centric, or at least the most convenient, was the usual place of 
 meeting; and the bishop of that place, from a sort of natural 
 title to preside in the convention, came, by the gradual, but 
 sure operation of custom, to be regarded as the head of the body. 
 Hence the bishop of the metropolis came very naturally to be 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 163 
 
 denominated the nietropolitan ; and this term was, by conse- 
 quence, understood to denote his presidency over the bishops 
 of the province. This custom, however, did not obtain every 
 where from the beginning. At first, the office of president 
 seems generally to have been elective, and to have continued 
 no loncrer than the session of the svnod. Nor did it ever ob* 
 tain in the provinces of Africa (except Africa Propria, of which 
 the bishop of Carthage was always metropolitan) nor of Numi- 
 dia and Mauritania, for in these the honour of presidency was 
 determined by seniority. The senior bishop was president of 
 the synod, and head of the province. Accordingly with them 
 he was denominated jf??7*;?2?^5, primate, and not metropolitan. In 
 this, however, the African churches remained singular. But 
 even this singularity sufficiently confutes those vain patronizers 
 of the hierarchy, who are absurd enough to derive the metropo- 
 litical primacy, as well as the patriarchal sovereignty from apos- 
 tolical constitution. Thus the presidency of this new dignitary 
 over the bishops, evidently sprang from the identical causes 
 which first raised the bishop above the presbyters, and not 
 long after, as we shall see, subjected the metropolitans them- 
 selves. 
 
 For this fraternal intercourse was, in process of time still 
 further extended. As all the provinces within the same prefec- 
 ture had a closer connection with one another, than those which 
 happened to have different civil governors, and to be more dis- 
 joined, this communion, in respect of ecclesiastic polity, was en- 
 larged, and councils were sometimes convened from all the 
 churches within the prefecture, or at le^st the civil diocese, 
 which gradually gave the bishop of the capital, where the pre- 
 fect had his residence, and kept his court, the like ascendant 
 over the metropolitans, within the bounds of that jurisdiction, 
 which the latter had obtained, from similar causes, over the bi- 
 shops within their respective provinces. These prefectures 
 were the imperial city of Rome, which presided over all the 
 suburbiary provinces, as they were called ; the city of Alexan- 
 dria, which governed Egypt, Lybia, and Pentapolis ; the city 
 of Antioch, comprehending under it Syria, and otiier oriental 
 provinces; the city of Jerusalem, comprehending Palestine and 
 Arabia Petrrea, originally and properly a part of the civil diocese 
 
 l2 
 
l64i LECTURES ON 
 
 of Antioch ; and lastly, Constantinople, Which being the seat 
 of empire, came by degrees, through the favour of the emperors, 
 to attain such extensive dominion, and high prerogatives, as to 
 appear, for a while, a formidable rival, if not an overmatch, for 
 Home herself. In the western dioceses of Gaul, Spain, and 
 Britain, there seem to have been no patriarchs, though there 
 were as many metropolitans as provinces, which were pretty 
 numerous. Indeed, this want appears to have given the bishop 
 of Rome, in after-ages, a great ascendant over them, the metro- 
 politans being too inconsiderable to cope with him. The patri- 
 archs were likev.'ise called archbishops, though this denomina- 
 tion was also given to the primates, and even sometimes as an 
 honorary title to those who were but bishops. There were 
 some other bishops of less note than the patriarchs, but supe- 
 rior to the metropolitans, in those governments by the Greeks 
 called eparchies, on whom the immediate title and dignity of 
 exarch were conferred. Thus the bishop of Ephesus was styled 
 exarch of the Asiatic diocese, and the bishop of Cesarea, in 
 Cappadocia, exarch of the Pontic. Now each of these compre- 
 hended ten or eleven provinces under their respective metropo- 
 litans, and each province a considerable number of bishoprics^ 
 But I do not intend to enter into minute particulars. Those I 
 have named were the chief. 
 
 This polity having been gradually introduced, and establish- 
 ed partly by custom, partly by imperial authority, received, ac- 
 cording to some, the sanction of the first ecumenical council as- 
 sembled at Nice, under Constantine, the first Christian empe- 
 ror, in which a canon (so the laws of the church are denominat- 
 ed) was enacted, making the subordination which then obtained, 
 perpetual. But there are who think, that that canon extended 
 only to the power of metropolitans; for that the patriarchal, 
 not having yet got firm footing, did not receive the sanction of 
 the church till about fifty years afterwards. It is remarkable, 
 that the very same powers which the bishops had claimed and 
 acquired over the presbyters, were now first claimed and acquir- 
 ed by the metropolitans over the bishops, and soon after by the 
 patriarchs over the metropolitans. The presbytery was the bi- 
 shop^s court, which he had the power of convening when he 
 judged it proper, and wherein he presided. The same prero- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. lC)5 
 
 gatlves were exercised by the metropolitan, in regard to tlie pro- 
 vincial synod, and by the patriarch, in regard to the diocesan 
 council. And as to the power of convoking an ecumenical coini- 
 cil, notiiing is more evident than that, for some ages, it was 
 claimed and exercised only by the emperor. Such a council or 
 assembly was denominated ecumenical, from the Greek word 
 ertai^iyn, the name tlien commonly given to the Roman empire. 
 The charge of a presbyter was now called a parish, and that of 
 the bishop a diocese; and sometimes, for distinction's sake, a 
 smaller diocese, the district under the metropolitan's jurisdic- 
 tion was named a province, and that under the patriarch's a 
 larger diocese, being the same (or nearly so) with what was 
 termed a, diocese in the civil division of the empire. As the bi- 
 shop claimed an exclusive title to ordain his presbyters, the same 
 was challenged by the metropolitan, in regard to the consecra- 
 tion of the bishops of his province, and by the patriarch in the 
 instalment of the metropolitans of his diocese. The umpirage 
 exercised by the bishop in determining the differences that 
 arose amongst his presbyters, came also to be exercised by the 
 metropolitan over the bishops, and by the patriarch, or exarch, 
 over the metropolitans. Thus there was an established scale of 
 authority from the lowest orders in the church to the patriarchs, 
 who were the highest, and who were the judges of all ecclesias- 
 tical matters in the last resort ; for there obtained also a re- 
 gular course of appeal from the inferior to the superior orders, 
 as well as synods. 
 
 It may not be improper to take notice here in passing, that 
 as the superior orders, above-mentioned, sprang up, and grew 
 into consideration in the church, there was also introduced, es- 
 pecially in the populous cities, a number of inferior orders, by 
 whose means the deacons were relieved of some of the more me- 
 nial parts of the service, which had formerly, before they were 
 grown so considerable, been required of them. Such were sub- 
 deacons, acolytes, readers, singers, exorcists, janitors, and some 
 others, for they were not the same in all churches. What Car- 
 dinal Bona said of the inferior orders may be justly said of all 
 the orders, the two original ones (bishop and deacon) alone ex- 
 cepted. " Contigit nimirum ecclesiae quod hominibus solet, 
 " qui dum tcnue patrimonium habent, uno servo contenti sunt, 
 
166 
 
 LECTURES ON 
 
 " qui solus omnia atlministrat. Si vero reditus augcantur, 
 " servorum etiam augetur Humerus ; eoque magis crescit fami- 
 " lia, quo illi locupletiores et spectabiliores evadunt. Sic evan- 
 " gelicse predicationis initio parvula adhuc et latitans ecclesia 
 '* paucis indiguit ecclesiasticarum functionum ministris. Cres- 
 " cente autem credentiura multitudine, et auctis facultatibus, 
 " ex fidelium oblationibus, cum soli diaconi non possent omni- 
 " bus incumbere, diversa onera et officia diversis personis dis- 
 " tributa sunt; ex quo factum est ut splendidiori et augustiori 
 '* apparatu ecclesiasticarum functionum ceremonise perageren- 
 *' tur." [De Rebus Liturg. 1. 1. c. xxv. § 17/] on which 
 Basnage remarks " Atque ex incremento ecclesise non officia, 
 " sed ministri, crescere debuerunt." True. And if the in- 
 crease of the church had been solely in the number of believ- 
 ers, an increase of ministers, and not of ministries would possi- 
 bly have sufficed. But as there came also a great accession of 
 wealth and splendour to the church and churchmen^ as the 
 words are now understood, a variety of offices or degrees was 
 requisite to suit the claims and expectations of men of various 
 conditions. Kings and princes have not only many servants, 
 but many offices under them, adapted to men of different ranks. 
 But to return to the superior orders. I do not say that all 
 the adjustments I have mentioned, in regard to their respective 
 privileges and authority, were observed uniformly and universal- 
 ly. There still remained considerable differences in the cus- 
 toms that obtained in different places. And it was hardly pos- 
 sible it should be otherwise, considering the manner in which 
 this pqw^r arose. But the account given above, is a just repre- 
 sentation of what was, in the main, the state and constitutioa 
 of the church universal, during part of the third, fourth, the 
 fifth, and some successive centuries. There were no doubt 
 many causes which cannot be here specified, that co-operated in 
 raising this wonderful fibric of church-dominion, which was 
 wow become a kind of oligarchy, the administration whereof 
 rested ultimately in the patriarchs. Among these causes none 
 of the .least was (as power always follows property) the vast ac- 
 cession of wealth which, by the numerous conversions of Pagans 
 of high rank, accrued at last to the bishops of the principal 
 cities. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. iGj 
 
 When, in the fourth century, Christianity, as we usually 
 speak, became the religion of" the empire, the like combination 
 of a still greater number of churches, and such as were more 
 widely diffused through Christendom, was effected with the as- 
 sistance of the emperor. This last kind of congress was deno- 
 minated a general or ecumenical council. Every one must per- 
 ceive, that the greater the number of churches was, from whom 
 a deputation was required, the fewer deputies they could admit 
 from each. The natural consequence of this would be, that 
 when the Christian community came to spread over an immense 
 extent of territory, and to become very populous by the acces- 
 sion of multitudes of new proselytes, the privilege of represent- 
 ing the different congregations would come entirely into the 
 hands of the pastors. Nay, even of these at last, especially in 
 the diocesan synods and ecumenical councils, there would be 
 found access for none but dignitaries. And in this manner the 
 laity would come by degrees (as in fact it happened) to be en- 
 tirely justled out. We cannot be surprised that, in conse- 
 quence of this, a power which at first may be justly said to have 
 been derived, should, in process of time, be accounted original, 
 and that what in the beginning had been conferred by elec- 
 tion, should at last be considered as inherent in particular 
 offices. 
 
 From the imperfection of the ecclesiastic history of the first 
 ages, it is impossible to trace the progress of usurpation. through 
 its various stages with all the clearness that could be wished. 
 Enough, however, may be clearly discovered, when we compare 
 the state of things in latter times with what we learn from the 
 sacred records, and from the genuine undisputed remains of the 
 apostoHc fathers, to satisfy us both of the reality and of the 
 greatness of that usurpation. 
 
 There are very few, either Protestants or Papists, who, with 
 Baronius, and the other tools of ecclesiastic tyranny, pretend to 
 assign to the metropolitical or patriarchal authority an apostoli- 
 cal original ; yet there is not a single objection that can be 
 raised against the feasibility of an acquisition of power in the 
 bishops over the presbyters, that does not operate with at least 
 equal force against the feasibility of such an acquisition in the 
 metropolitans over the bishops, and in the patriarchs over the 
 
168 LECTURES ON 
 
 metropolitans; and, I may add, with equal reason, (as it came 
 afterwards, in a great measure, to obtain) in the Pope over the 
 whole, or greater part, of the Christian world. There is a 
 gradation in the whole progress : the steps by which we ascend 
 are exactly similar. Nor is the origin of any one part of the 
 system more unaccountable than of another. 
 
 Many strenuous advocates for episcopacy do not admit, that 
 there was originally any visible power in the church paramount 
 to that of tbe bishops, who were all, in this respect, on a foot of 
 perfect equality. There was no " episcopus episcoporum," say 
 they, no bishop of bishops, but Christ. Yet the fact is un- 
 deniable, that the jurisdiction of the metropolitans and pri- 
 mates, which these men consider as mere usurpation, came, in 
 a few centuries, very easily and universally to obtain ; inso- 
 much, that Dodwell's smart expostulation with the Presby^ 
 tcrians, may, without the smallest diminution of energy, be re- 
 torted upon himself. Change but the wore? presbyteriis into 
 provinciis, and the argument is the same. " Quid cnim ? 
 " Fatebuntur fuisse (piXoTi'^rjjriss, qui pares non ferrent, Pompcios? 
 '' Nee interim agnoscent in provinciis fuisse Csesares, priorum 
 *' pariter impatientes ?" Will they acknowledge, that amo7ig so 
 many Pompeys, zvho could endure no equal, there was not in 
 the provinces one Ccesar, who could suffer no superior ? In fact, 
 the rise of the bishop's power over the presbyters, is more 
 easily accounted for, than that of the metropolitans over the 
 bishops. The situation of things in the church was totally 
 changed ; and it could not be said now, as it might with truth 
 of the second century, that as no secular end could be promot- 
 ed, there was no rational motive to excite either avarice or am- 
 bition on the one side, and consequently to rouse jealousy on 
 the other. An ascendant, which appeared to be the result 
 merely of superior zeal and virtue, and attended with more im- 
 minent danger, would not be warmly opposed, whilst worldly 
 motives had hardly scope to operate. 
 
 If, for our direction in forming a judgment concerning the 
 persons who were originally, and seem to be naturally, entitled 
 to have a share in all consultations about church affairs, we 
 recur to tiie account given us in the fifteenth chapter of the 
 Acts, concerning the assembly convened at Jerusalem, on occa- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, ICQ 
 
 slon of the dispute about circumcision, we can be at no loss as 
 to the privilege of the people in this respect. Those who com- 
 posed that convention were (as the sacred historian informs us) 
 the apostles, elders, and brethren : first, the apostles, the ex- 
 traordinary ministers of Jesus, who were destined to be the 
 founders of his church, and whose office, like the title tliat ex- 
 pressed it, was temporary, and expired with them : secondly, 
 the elders, Tzo',a[iviy,ooi, the stated and ordinary pastors, whose 
 office was successive and perpetual: thirdly, the brethren, that 
 is, as the term in the New Testament is known to denote, pri- 
 vate Christians, who possessed no particular charge or office in 
 the church. And to cut off all pretext, that these last were 
 present only as witnesses or bystanders, the decree runs as 
 much in their name as in the name of the apostles and presby- 
 ters, being given expressly and authoritatively as the joint com- 
 inand of all the three classes mentioned. Thus, ver. 23, &c. 
 " The apostles, and elders, and brethren, send greeting to the 
 '' brethren which are of the Gentiles. Forasmuch as we have 
 *' heard, — it seemed good unto us, being assembled with one 
 " accord, to lay upon you no greater burden than these neces- 
 *' sary tilings." — 
 
 I do not say that that meeting could be denominated either a 
 provincial or a diocesan synod, and far less a general council. 
 This model of management, in regard to ecclesiastic matters, 
 was not then devised. But that the apostles thcm.sclves, not- 
 withstanding their supernatural gifts, called the private disciples 
 to assist in the determination of matters of public concernment, 
 may serve as demonstration to us of the natural title that such 
 have (whatever be the model) to participate in those councils 
 whereby the Christian community are to be concluded. And 
 that private Christians continued, in the first ages, to share in 
 the deliberations of their synods, we have sufficient evidence, as 
 was signified already, from the ancient ecclesiastical writings 
 still extant. 
 
 However, as in the space of a few centuries matters were, in 
 this respect, greatly altered, and the church wore a new face, 
 and as these came at last to be totally excluded, it began of 
 course to be maintained as a doctrine, that those persons who 
 did not belong to any of the sacred orders, were absolutely 
 
170 LECTURES ON 
 
 unfit for being received into their councils, to deliberate and 
 judge in spiritual and holy things ; that for the pastors to admit 
 them, would be to betray their trust, and profane their office; 
 and for such unhallowed men to arrogate any power in these 
 matters, would be no better than a sacrilegious usurpation. 
 
 But before such tenets as these, which savour so much of the 
 political views of an aspiring faction, and so little of the liberal 
 spirit of the gospel, could generally obtain, several causes had 
 contributed in preparing the minds of the people. On every 
 occurrence the pastors had taken care to improve the respect of 
 the lower ranks, by widening the distance between their own 
 order, and the condition of their Christian brethren ; and, for 
 this purpose, had early broached a distinction, which, in process 
 of time, universally prevailed, of the whole Christian common- 
 wealth into clergy and laity. The terms are derived from two 
 Greek words, xx^j^o?, lot or inheritance, and xaoj, people. The 
 plain intention was to suggest, that the former, the pastors, or 
 clergy, for they appropriated the term K^rt^oi to themselves, were 
 selected and contradistinguished from the multitude, as being, 
 in the present world, by way of eminence, God's pecuUuiriy or 
 special inheritance. 
 
 It is impossible to conceive a claim in appearance more arro- 
 gant, or in reality worse founded. God is indeed in the Old 
 Testament said to be the inheritance of the Levites, because a 
 determined share of the sacrifices and offerings made to God 
 was in part to serve them instead of an estate in land, such as 
 was given to each of the other tribes. But I pray you, mark 
 the difference ; no where is the tribe of Levi called God's inhe- 
 ritance, though that expression is repeatedly used of the whole 
 nation. Concerning the whole Israelitish nation, Moses, who 
 was himself a Levite, says, in an address to God, Deut. ix. 29, 
 — " They are thy people and thine inheritance, which thou 
 " broughtest out by thy mighty power." The words in the 
 Septuagint translation deserve our particular attention. 'Owrtu 
 
 >~a.o; era zxi Kkupos tra 'as sl'/iyxyi; ix, yyi? Aiyvria £f */>? tirp(^ot ffa m [/.nyuXn- 1 hc 
 
 same persons are in the same sentence declared to be both the 
 x«5f and the y.x-^^oi. What, says the canonist, at once laymen 
 and clergy ? That is certainly absurd ; the characters are incom- 
 |)atible; yet it did not then appear so to Mokcs. Now, would 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 171 
 
 it be thoufylit reasonable or just, tbat what was allowed to be 
 the privilege and the glory of every Israelite, under the more 
 servile establishment of Moses, should, under the more liberal 
 dispensation of the gospel, be disclaimed by all those disciples 
 of Jesus, who have not been admitted into the sacred order, 
 which they, for this reason, have called clerical. 
 
 When we recur to the use of the term in the New Testa- 
 ment, we find one passage, and but one, wherein it is applied 
 to persons. The passage is in the first epistle of Peter, the 
 fifth chapter, and third verse, which is thus rendered in our 
 version. " Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but 
 " being ensamples to the flock." The words in the original are, 
 
 Itt*!^' US xvpiivovjis rav xXr.puv, aXXei rwot yivof^ivoi ra 'Toiy.via- 1 hey are part 
 
 of a charge given to the presbyters, or pastors, relating to their 
 care of the people committed to them, who are called God's 
 flock, which they are commanded to feed; of which they are to 
 take the oversight, not the mastery; and to which they are to 
 serve as patterns. The same persons, therefore, who, both iu 
 this, and in the preceding verse, are styled ^<5/^v;«v, the flock, 
 under the direction of God's ministers, the shepherds, are also 
 called xxoriooi, his inheritance, over whom their pastors are com- 
 manded not to domineer. It is somewhat extraordinary, that 
 in the choice of distinctions, which the church-rulers so soon 
 showed a disposition to affect, they should have paid almost as 
 little attention to the style, as they did to the spirit and mean- 
 ing of the sacred books. Let it be observed, then, i;i the first 
 place, that this distinction, so far from having a foundation in 
 scripture, stands in direct contradiction both to the letter, and 
 to the sense of that unerrincr standard. I am not ignorant that 
 
 ^ O it) 
 
 some expositors, jealous for the priesthood, render the term *x»7^oi 
 here, the church's possessions. Not to mention that this ex- 
 plication but ill suits the context, and annihilates the contrast 
 between an imperious master and an engaging pattern, and sup- 
 poseth an awkward ellipsis in the words, allow me to ask. What 
 were the church's possessions in those days? Was she so early 
 vested with lands and hereditaments, for it is to such only that 
 the term xx??^©", when denoting property, or possession, is ap- 
 plied? Or have those interpreters been dreaming of the truly 
 golden age of Pope Gregory YII. when the patrimonies 
 
172 LECTURES ON 
 
 of some metropolitlcal and patriarchal sees were indeed like 
 dukedoms and principalities, and the grand hierarch himself 
 could dispose of kingdoms and empires? In the apostolic times, 
 on the contrary, the church's patrimony consisted mostly, I may 
 say, in persecution and calumny, hatred and derision, agreeably 
 to the prediction of her Lord. 
 
 Some have ascribed, but very unjustly, the origin of the dis- 
 tinction we have been considering, to Clemens Romanus, who, 
 in his epistle to the Corinthians, which I had formerly an occa- 
 sion of quoting, contradistinguishes xaix,ot (the laics, as we should 
 be apt to render it) among the Jews, from the high-priest, the 
 priests, and the Levites. It ought to be observed, that it is in- 
 troduced by him when speaking of the Jewish priesthood, and 
 not of the Christian ministry: neither does it stand in opposi- 
 tion to any one general term, such as KXr.pos, or xXupixor, but after 
 mentioning three different orders, he uses the term xaixoi, to in- 
 clude, under one comprehensive name, all that were not spe- 
 cially comprised under any of the former; and in this respect 
 it exactly corresponds to the application sometimes made of the 
 Latin word popularis. In this view it may, with equal pro- 
 priety, be contrasted with men in office of any kind whatever. 
 Thus, in speaking of civil government, it may be opposed to 
 o:pxo^is, to denote the people as distinguished from the magis- 
 trates; or, in speaking of any army, to ?po^nyoi, to denote the 
 soldiers as distinguished from the commanders or officers. 
 
 I maintain further, that in the way the term is employed by 
 Clement, it does not imply that he considered it as in itself ex- 
 clusive of the priesthood and Levitical tribe, to which the term 
 xa,,Kot is opposed in that passage. They are here indeed excluded, 
 because separately named, but not from the import of the word. 
 But as this criticism may, to a superficial hearer, appear a mere 
 subtlety or refinement, I shall illustrate it from some similar 
 examples, which I hope will be thought decisive. Acts xv. 22. 
 *' Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole 
 " church." Here are three orders plainly mentioned and dis- 
 tinguished, the apostles, or extraordinary ministers, the elders, 
 or fixed pastors, and the church, or Christian people. But 
 docs this imply that the name church does not properly com- 
 prehend the pastors as well as the people ? By no means. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. lyo 
 
 They arc not, indeed, in this passage, comprised under the 
 term, not because it does not properly extend so far, (which is 
 not fact) but because they are separately named. The import 
 of the expression is, therefore, no more than this, — " The 
 " apostles and ehlcrs, with all the Christian bretliren, who 
 " come not under either of these denominations." Of the same 
 kind exactly is the passage lately quoted from Peter, where the 
 T^ifffhvu^oi are opposed to the xx-/i09t, not as though the former con- 
 stituted no part of God's heritage, or, to adopt the modern 
 style, clergy : they only do not constitute that part, of which 
 they are here commanded to take the charge. In like manner, 
 Clement's mention of x^i^o/, after speaking of the several orders 
 of the Jewish priesthood, imports neither more nor less than if 
 he had said, " And all the Jewish people." So that his manner 
 of usinjT this term affords no foundation for the distinction that 
 was long after his time introduced ; no more than the general 
 argument against the encroachment of the people, or of the pas- 
 tors, on each other, taken from the rigid observance which the 
 different classes, under the Mosaic economy, had of their re- 
 spective functions, affords a foundation (as some have ridicu- 
 lously urged) for concluding that the orders, in the Christian 
 ministry, were the same in number with the Jewish. So fas 
 indeed is Clement from giving any insinuation of this kind, 
 that, in a passage formerly quoted, he expressly mentions the 
 Christian orders as being two, and as having been clearly, and 
 by name, predicted in the prophetical writings of the Old Tes- 
 tament. 
 
 But to return to the distinction of the whole church into 
 clergy and laity: in after-ages they even improved upon their 
 predecessors. The schoolmen (a modest race, all clergymen) 
 thought it was doing the laymen too much honour to derive their 
 name from xao;, populus. It suited their notions better to deduce 
 it from yocxi, lapis, a stone. Take for a specimen a few things 
 advanced on this subject by some celebrated doctors, as quoted 
 by Altensfaig in his Lexicon Theologicum. " Capitur clcri- 
 " cus pro viro docto, scientifico, pcrito, scieutia plcno, repleto 
 " et experto. E contra laicus capitur pro viro indocto, imperito, 
 " insipiente et lapidco. Unde laicus diceturaAft«? Gra^ce, quod 
 " est lapis Latine. Et sic omnis clcricus, in quantum clcricus. 
 
174« LECTURES ON 
 
 " est laudabilis ; laicus vero, in quantum laicus, est vitaper- 
 " andus. Clerici quoque a toto genere de jure preeponuntur, 
 " et debent prseponi laicis." To these I shall add the senti- 
 ments of Cardinal Bona, in relation to the care that ought to 
 be taken by the clergy, that laymen may not be allowed to do 
 themselves harm by studying the profounder parts of scripture, 
 which their stupidity is utterly incapable of comprehending. 
 He kindly mentions, at the same time, the books which he 
 thinks they will not be the worse for, and which, therefore, 
 they may be permitted to peruse. " De laicis in quibus mater 
 " csEcitatis superbia regnat, quatenus ad ea quse sunt fidei et 
 *' morem. Cum enim sicut idiotre presumunt sacram scriptu- 
 " ram exponere, quse est profundissima omnium scripturarum. 
 " Cum iterum habeant quandam honestatem exteriorem, con- 
 " temnunt vitam omnium aliorum, et merito hujus duplicis su- 
 " perbise excsecantur, ut incidant in errorem istum pessimum, 
 " per quem exsecantur a Deo, ut nesciant discernere quid bo- 
 '* num est et quid malum. Quare non omnes scripturas libros 
 " legant laici. Quoniara nihil est tarn sanctum et salubre et 
 " pium quo non contingat abuti, sic de libris evenit, quorum 
 " non est culpa, neque scribentium, sed sccelus est in abusu : 
 '.' non tamen arcendi videntur ab opuscuHs moralibus et devotis, 
 " nullam in se difficultatem, nee ambiguitatem, nee absurdita- 
 " tem in translatione gerentibus, cujusmodi sunt historise, vel 
 " vitae, vel legendas sanctorum, nee non meditationes sanctae." 
 — How condescending is the good doctor ! He does not abso- 
 lutely prohibit the stupid and conceited generation of laymen 
 from reading some of the plainer books of scripture, and in- 
 dulges them freely in what is better for them, story books, and 
 godly meditations, and the legends of the saints. 
 
 I shall have occasion afterwards to trace a little further the 
 most material changes, to which those above-mentioned, as well 
 as other novel names and distinctions, were rendered subser- 
 vient. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 175 
 
 LECTURE X. 
 
 X HAVE met with the observation, though I do not at present 
 recollect where, tliat the world is ruled by names. It matters 
 not who said so : but experience shows us, that there is more 
 truth in the remark, than any one, at first hearing, would be 
 apt to imagine. When names are first assigned to offices, or 
 even to orders of men, there is commonly an association of ideas 
 favourable or unfavourable in some respect or other, which is 
 derived from the more ancient to the more recent application 
 of the term. And even if the term should be coined for the 
 occasion, the materials whence it is taken, that is, the known 
 etymology, produces the same effect. It invariably gives rise 
 to certain associations; these influence opinion, and opinion go- 
 verns practice. We have seen the tendency which the dis- 
 tinction of mankind into clergy and laity had to heighten, in 
 the minds of the populace, that is, more than, nine-tenths of the 
 people, the reverence for the sacred order. The effect thus ac- 
 tually produced, in ignorant ages, through the arrogance of the 
 one side, and the superstition of the other, is sufficiently mani- 
 fest, and perfectly astonishing. I shall proceed to take notice 
 of the consequences of some other innovations in the style 
 adopted on these subjects. 
 
 A close resemblance, both in titles and functions, to the Jew- 
 ish priesthood, came soon to be very much affected by the pas- 
 tors of the church. The very names of high-priest, priest, and 
 Levite, which the inspired writers had never once applied to 
 any class of ministers, ordinary or extraordinary, in the Chris- 
 tian commonwealth, appeared to have a wonderful fascination in 
 them, that rendered them incomparably superior to any appella- 
 tions which Jesus Christ, or his apostles, had thought fit to 
 bestow. Beside the fancied dignity, the sacerdotal titles had 
 been always understood to convey the notion of certain rights, 
 which conduced both to the honour, and to the emolument, of 
 
IjG LFX'TURES ON 
 
 those to whom these titles belonged. Now, having availed 
 themselves of the supposed analogy, they thought they had the 
 best right in the world to extend their claims much farther; ar- 
 guing, that because the bishops, presbyters, and deacons, wei-e 
 the high-priests, priests, and Levites, of a superior, a more hea- 
 venly and spiritual dispensation, they ought to possess more of 
 the unrighteous mammon, that is, more earthly treasure, and 
 greater temporal power. And, what is still more extraordinar}'', 
 by such wretched reasoning the bulk of mankind were con- 
 vinced. 
 
 It is worth while to remark the great difference between the 
 style adopted by the apostles, in relation to all sacred matters, 
 and that which, in the course of a few ages, crept into the 
 church, and even became universal in it. Under the Mosaic 
 economy, which exacted the rigid observance of a burdensome 
 ritual, the only place devoted to the ceremonial and temporary 
 service, consisting in sacrifices and oblations, ablutions, asper- 
 sions, and perfumes, was the temple of Jerusalem, forno where 
 else could the public ceremonies be lawfully performed. The 
 places that were dedicated to what may be called comparatively 
 the moral and unchangeable part of the service, consisting in 
 prayers and thanksgivings, and instructive lessons from the law 
 and the prophets, were the synagogues, which, as they were 
 under no limitation, in point of number, time, or place, might 
 be built in any city, or village, where a suitable congregation of 
 worshippers could be found ; not only in Judea, but wherever 
 the Jewish nation was dispersed, and that even though their 
 temple and their polity should subsist no longer. The ceremo- 
 nies of the law being represented in the gospel as but the sha- 
 dows of the spiritual good things disclosed by the latter, and 
 its corporal purifications, and other rites, as the weak and beg- 
 garly elements, intended to serve but for a time, and to be in- 
 strumental in ushering a more divine and rational dispensation, 
 it was no wonder that they borrowed no names from the priest- 
 liood, to denote the Christian ministry, or from the parade of 
 the temple service, much calculated to dazzle the senses, to ex- 
 press the simple but spiritual devotions and moral instructions, 
 for which the disciples of Jesus assembled under the humble 
 roof of one of their brethren. On the contrary, in the name 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL IIISTOIIY. 177 
 
 tlicy gave to the sacred offices, as well as to other things, re- 
 garding their religious observances, they showed more attention 
 to the service of the synagogue, as in every respect more ana- 
 logous to the reasonable service required by the gospel. The 
 place where they met is once, (James ii. 2.) called a synagogue, 
 but never a temple. " If there come into your assembly," 
 lis Tvv ffvixyuyviv 'vy.u^. And it is woU kuowu, that the names teach- 
 er, elder, overseer, attendant, or minister, and even angel, or 
 messenger, of the congregation, were, in relation to the ministry 
 of the Jewish synagogue, in current use. 
 
 When we consider this frequent recourse to terms of the one 
 kind, and this uniform avoidance of those of the other; and 
 when, at the same time, we consider how much the sacred wri- 
 ters were inured to all the names relating to the sacerdotal func- 
 tions, and how obvious the application must have been, if it had 
 been proper; it is impossible to conceive this conduct as arising 
 from any accidental circumstance. We are compelled to say 
 with Grotius, (De imperio sum. Potest, cap. ii. 5.) " Non dc 
 '* nihilo est, quod ab eo loquendi genere, et Christus ipse, ct 
 " apostoli semper abstinuerunt." It is, indeed, most natural to 
 conclude, that it must have sprung from a sense of the unsuit- 
 ableness of such an use to this divine economy, which, like its 
 author, " is made not after the law of a carnal commandment, 
 '* but after the power of an endless life." I may add, it must 
 have sprung from a conviction, that such an application might 
 mislead the unwary into misapprehensions of the nature of the 
 evancrelical law. 
 
 In it Jesus Christ is represented as our only priest ; and as 
 he ever liveth to make intercession for us, his priesthood is un- 
 changeable, untransraissive, and eternal. A priest is a mediator 
 between God and man. Now we are taught, in this divine 
 economy, that as there is one God, there is one mediator be- 
 tween God and men, the man Christ Jesus. The unity of the 
 mediatorship, and consequently of the priesthood, in the strict- 
 est sense of the word, is as really an article of our religion, as 
 the unity of the Godhead. I do not deny that, in a looser 
 sense, every minister of religion may bo called a mediator, or, 
 if ye please, a priest; inasmuch as he is tlie mouth of the con- 
 gregation, in presenting their prayers to God, and is, as it were, 
 
 M 
 
178 LECTURES ON 
 
 nlso the mouth of God, on whose part he admonishi^s the peo- 
 ple. The great reason against innovating hy the introduction 
 of these names is, not because the names are in no sense appli- 
 cable, (that is not pretended,) but because, first, they are unne- 
 cessary ; secondly, their former application must unavoidably 
 create misapprehensions concerning the nature of the evangeli- 
 cal ministry; and thirdly, because the inspired penmen of the 
 New Testament, who best understood the nature of that mini- 
 stry, never did apply to it those names. But to return ; the 
 only proper sacrifice, under the new covenant, to which all the 
 sacrifices of the old pointed, and in which they were consum- 
 mated, is the death of Christ. This, as it cannot, like the legal 
 sacrifices, be repeated, neither requires nor admits any supple- 
 ment. " For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them 
 " that are sanctified." Sometimes, indeed, in regard to the 
 Mosaic institution, an allegorical style is adopted, wherein all 
 Christians are represented as priests, being, as it were, in bap- 
 tism, consecrated to the service of God; the whole community 
 as a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices to him : the 
 bodies of Christians as temples destined for the inhabitation of 
 Clod through the Spirit. The oblations are thanksgivings, 
 prayer, and praise. The same name is also given to acts of be- 
 neficence and mercy. " To do good, and to communicate, for- 
 '^ get not; for with such sacrifices God is well pleased." This 
 is also the manner of the earliest fathers. Justin Martyr, in 
 his dialogue with Trypho, the Jew, after mentioning Christ as 
 our all-sufficienfhigh-priest, insists, that in consequence of our 
 Christian vocation, we, his disciples, not the pastors exclusively, 
 arc God's true sacerdotal family, h^s/j a^j:t:i£^a]<xav, ro axn^ivov y^ua^ 
 iffyAv^a^iH. In this allusive way, also, the terras circumcision, 
 passover, unleavened bread, altar, sabbath, and the like, are 
 sometimes allegorically applied by the sacred penmen. But no 
 where are the terms high-priest, priest, or Levite, applied pecu- 
 liarly to the ministers of Christ. 
 
 Doctor Hickes, a zealous asserter of what he calls the Chris- 
 tian priesthood, has a wonderful method of solving this difficul- 
 ty. He supposes, that Christ and his apostles acted the poli- 
 ticians in this particular. According to him they were afraid, 
 that with all the miracles and supernatural gifts they could 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL IIISTOIiY. 179 
 
 boast, it was an undertaking too bold to be Iiazardcd, to appear 
 as rivals to the Jewish priests. Here he inadvertently ascribes 
 a conduct to Jesus Christ, which, in my apprehension, reflects 
 not a little on the sincerity of that spotless character. "• As a 
 " Jew," says he, (Let. I. ch. iii. § 1.) " he was to observe the 
 '' law and the temple worship, and live in communion with the 
 *' Jews; which, though he could do as a king and a prophet, 
 " yet he could not do it with congruity, had he declared himself 
 " to be their sovereign pontiff, that very high-priest, of which 
 " Aaron himself was but a type and shadow." But allow me 
 to ask, Why could he not ? Was it because there was a real 
 incongruity betwixt his conforming to the Jewish worship, and 
 liis character of high-priest ? If there was, he acted incongru- 
 ously, for he did conform ; and all he attained by not declaring 
 himself a priest, was not to avoid, but to dissemble, this incon- 
 gruity. And if there was none in conforming, where was the 
 incongruity in avowing a conduct which was in itself congruous 
 and defensible. We are therefore forced to conclude, from 
 this passage, either that our Lord acted incongruously, and was 
 forced to recur to dissimulation to conceal it, or that Doctor 
 Hickes argues very inconsequentially. The true Cliristian can 
 be at no loss to determine which side of the alternative he ought 
 to adopt. 
 
 But to consider a little the hypothesis itself; the apostles 
 might boldly, it seems, and v.'ithout such offence as could en- 
 danger the cause, call their master the jMessiah, the king, (a 
 name with the Jews above every other human title.) They 
 might, in this respect, say safely, that though their chief priests 
 and rulers had killed the Lord of life, God had raised him from 
 the dead, nay, had done more, had exalted him to his ov/n right 
 hand, to be a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance to the 
 people, and the remission of sins. They might thus openly, 
 if not put him in the place of the priest, put him in the place 
 of the Almighty, to whom the priests are bound to minister, 
 and from whom ultimately all the blessings must be obtained; 
 nay, and represent his power as more extensive in procuring 
 divine forgiveness and favour, (the great object of all their sa- 
 crifices) than any that had ever been experienced through the 
 observance of the INIosaic rites; inasmuch as " by him all that 
 
 M 2 
 
180 LECTURES ON 
 
 «* believe, are justified from all things, from which they eould 
 " not be justified by the law of Moses." Yet, says the Doctor, 
 they durst not call him a priest. Now we know that the usurp- 
 ing of this title was not, by the Jewish institute, either treason 
 or blasphemy; whereas, the titles and attributes, which the 
 apostles gave their master, were accounted both treasonable 
 and blasphemous by the unbelieving Jews, and with too much 
 appearance of truth, if Jesus had been the impostor they ima- 
 gined him; for the disciples set him in their representations 
 above every thing that is named, either in the heaven, or upon 
 the earth. I might say further. Did the first preachers hesitate 
 to maintain the cause of their master, notwithstanding that, by 
 implication, it charged the guilt of his blood on the chief priests 
 and rulers, as those rulers themselves but too plainly perceived? 
 But why do I say by implication ? They often most explicitly 
 charged them with this atrocious guilt. It was in the midst of 
 the sanhedrim that Stephen boldly said, Which of the prophets 
 have not your fathers persecuted ? and they have slain them 
 who shewed before of the coming of the Just One, of whom ye 
 have been noic the betrayers and murderers. Might they thus 
 with safety to the cause, at least, though not with impunity to 
 their persons, exhibit those priests as homicides, parricides, regi- 
 cides, and, if I may be allowed a bold expression, even deicides; 
 and yet durst not, without involving the whole in one general 
 ruin, so much as insinuate that they also had their priests ? Cre- 
 dat Judcens Apella. 
 
 In short, the whole pretext of tins learned doctor is precisely 
 as if one should say, that if, in a country like this, for instance, 
 one were to raise a rebellion in favour of a pretender to the 
 crown, the partizans might, with comparatively little danger or 
 offence, style the sovereign in possession a tyrant and usurper, 
 and proclaim the man they would set up, King of Great Bri- 
 tain, France, and Ireland, and even add. Defender of the Faith. 
 But it would be imminently hazardous, and would probably 
 ruin the cause, to insinuate, that he had the patronage of any 
 ecclesiastic benefices. They may with safety denominate him 
 the head of the church, and of the law, the source of all ho- 
 nours and authority in the state, and even give him higher 
 titles than ever monarch had enjoyed before; they may assume 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 181 
 
 to themselves the names of* all sorts of offices, civil or military, 
 under him ; but if they would avoid inevitable perdition, let 
 them not style any of themselves his chaplains. In fact, the 
 absurdity here is not equal to the former. 
 
 Let it not be imagined. Gentlemen, from what has been ad- 
 vanced above, that I mean to contend with any man abont 
 words and names. I know they are in themselves but mere 
 sounds, and things indifferent. And, doubtless, any one sound 
 is naturally as fit to serve as the sign of any idea as another. 
 It is a matter of no moment to us, at present, whether we call 
 a minister of religion bishop, prelate, presbyter, priest, or 
 clergyman. And pertinaciously to refuse the use of the names 
 which custom, the arbiter of language, has authorized, miglit 
 be thought to savour of puritanical fanaticism. The allusion 
 they plainly bore at first is now scarcely minded, and their ety- 
 mology is, in regard to most people, either unknown or forgot- 
 ten. But in deducing the train of changes which, in process of 
 time, was effected both in things and in opinions, it is pertinent 
 to take notice of the purpose originally served by the introduc- 
 tion of such novel names and phrases as those on which we 
 have been remarking once were, as well as of the meanings 
 originally conveyed by them. To causes in appearance the 
 most trivial often effects the most important are to be ascribed. 
 
 I might add to the above observations, that some carried this 
 species of innovation so far as even, one would think, to envy 
 the Pagans the appellations they bestowed on the ministers of 
 an idolatrous worship, and on those who presided in their secret 
 and abominable rites. The learned doctor lately quoted, 
 though a sincere Christian in his way, possessed much of that 
 spirit, and seems to regret exceedingly that we have no such 
 fine words and high-sounding titles as hicrophant, hicromyst, 
 and mystagogue. It was the same spirit that prompted, in the 
 pastors, the affectation of epithets, added to their names, ex- 
 pressive of their virtues, and of the esteem and veneration of 
 those that approached them, such as most holy, most blessed, 
 most religious, most worthy of God, beloved of God, reverend, 
 venerable, and many others, which it were tedious to enumerate, 
 together with certain ceremonies, such as bowing the head, 
 kissing the hands, and the like. Of these I shall only say, 
 
182 LECTURES ON 
 
 that though some of them became afterwanls, as words of 
 course, mere marks of civil respect for the office, they were, in 
 their application at first, entirely personal. If we were to set- 
 tle a sort of spiritual barometer for determining the precise 
 quantity at which piety and virtue, at any given time, arrived 
 in the church, I could not assign a better than the use of these 
 epithets and ceremonies, holding it as an invariable canon, that 
 in proportion as the external signs multiplied, the substance of 
 internal religion decreased. At no time could the pharisaical 
 scribes be accused of greater ostentation, or more desire of 
 greetings in the markets, and to be called of men Rabbi, 
 Rabbi, then v/ere, a few ages afterwards, the ministers of the 
 humble Jesus, who had so expressly warned his followers 
 against the imitation of their vain-glorious manners. Yet such 
 are the manners v.^hich even, in these more enlightened times, 
 the priestly pride of some prelatical preachers has instigated 
 them to write whole volumes to revive. 
 
 One of the natural consequences of all those great distinctions 
 of the sacred order was, that they made way for another, by 
 which the ministers of religion, in a manner, appropriated the 
 term church to themselves. I have had occasion, in these lec- 
 tures, to lay before you the only undoubted acceptations where- 
 in I find the word jy.xx>j(r/a employed in the New Testament, and 
 have observed that, when applied to the disciples of Christ, it 
 always denotes, either the whole Christian community, or all 
 those of a particular congregation, under the guidance of their 
 own pastors. I have also pointed out one deviation from the 
 latter of these original meanings, naturally consequent on the 
 change that in a few centuries ensued, when the bishop, instead 
 of the oversight of one congregation, had the superintendency 
 of many congregations, that is, when his own congregation, on 
 account of the increase of proselytes, was split into several, and 
 v.'hen the habit of applying tlie word in the singular number to 
 the whole of a bishop's charge, prevailed over strict propriety, 
 and the primitive use of the term. This prepared men for a 
 still farther extension of the name to all the congregations of a 
 province under the same metropolitan, and afterwards to all 
 those of a civil diocese under tlie same patriarch or exarch, 
 
 I now intend to point out another still more remarkable dc- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 183 
 
 viation; a deviation not from the latter, as those now mention- 
 ed were, but from the former of the two primitive senses, 
 whereby the word is applied to the Christian commonweahh. 
 Then it means, as is pretended, either the church collective, 
 that is, the whole community of Christians, or the church repre- 
 sentative, that is, say some, the whole clerical orders ; say 
 others, the church judicatories, especially the supreme. And 
 this, I acknowledge, is a distinction that is favoured not only 
 by those of the Romish communion, but by most sects of Pro- 
 testants also. To many, however, and I acknowledge myself 
 one af the number, it is manifest, that it is no less a novelty 
 than the former, having no foundation in the scriptural usage. 
 
 The Hebrew word hel, exactly corresponds to the Greek 
 iXM^viata., and is commonly rendered by it in the Septuagint, the 
 only Greek translation of the Old Testament in use in the days 
 of our >Saviour. Its idiom and phraseology was consequently 
 become the standard, in all matters that concerned religion, to 
 all the Jewish writers who used the Greek lancrua^e, and were 
 commonly distinguished by the name of Hellenists. From them 
 the term was originally borrowed by the penmen of tlie New 
 Testament. From their manner of using it, therefore, the ge- 
 neral meanings of the word are to be sought. But though the 
 phrases col hel Israel, m Hebrew, and z3-a«-« 'n iKKUffia. i^^«a, in 
 Greek, the whole church of Israel, do frequently occur in the 
 Old Testament, there is not a single passage in which they are 
 not confessedly equivalent to the phrases col gut Israel, and 
 ■arav ro s^voi 1(t«%ix, all the nation of Israel. The same may be 
 said of the phrases lei Eloim and om Eloim, ';; ixy^xr^^ia ^m, and 
 'o xac; ^za, the church of God, and the people of God. A dis- 
 tinction between these would have been pronounced by them 
 inconceivable, as being a distinction between the church and its 
 constituent members. In the Latin translation, called the Vul- 
 gate, the date of which, or a great part of which, if I mistake 
 not, is about the beginning of the fifth century, the Greek word 
 is commonly retained, having been long before naturalized 
 among Christians. Accordingly they rendered those phrases iu 
 the Old Testament, omnis ecclesia Israel, and eccksia Del. 
 
 I know not for what reason our English translators have 
 never admitted the word clturch into their version of the QlcJ 
 
ISi LECTURES ON 
 
 Testament, notvvitlistanding the frequent use tliey have made 
 of it in their translation of the New. They have always ren- 
 dered the Hebrew word above mentioned, by the English words 
 congregation, assembly, or some synonymous term. I do not 
 mean to say, that in so doing, they have mistranslated the word. 
 Either of these English names is, perhaps, as well adapted to 
 express the sense of the Hebrew, as the appellatives of one lan- 
 guage commonly are to convey the ideas suggested by those of 
 another. But these English words were altogether as fit for 
 expressing the sense of the word ly.y-Xr.cia. in the New Testament, 
 as of the word kel in the Old, the former being the term by 
 which the latter had been rendered almost uniformly in the 
 Septuagint, and which had been employed as equivalent by all 
 the Hellenist Jev/s. What I blame, tlrerefore, in our transla- 
 tors, is the want of uniformity. They ought constantly to have 
 rendered the original expression either church in the Old Tes- 
 tament, or congregation in the New. Terms so perfectly coin- 
 cident in signification as those Hebrew and Greek names are, 
 ought to have been translated by the same English word. 
 There is one advantage, at least, resulting from such an atten- 
 tion to uniformity, which is this, — that if the application of the 
 word should, in a few passages, be dubious, a comparison with 
 the other passages wherein it occurs, often serves entirely to re- 
 move the doubt. They are the more inexcusable, in regard to 
 the present instance, that they do not refuse the title of church 
 to the Israelitish commonwealth, when an occasion of giving it 
 occurs in the New Testament, though they would take no occa- 
 sion in the Old. Thus they have rendered the words of Ste- 
 phen, who says, speaking of Moses, Acts vii. 38. " This is he 
 *' that was in the church in the wilderness." oJi^ i^iv 'o yivof^ivo; 
 
 But in the use neither of the Greek word in the New Tes- 
 tament, nor of the correspondent Hebrew word in the Old, do 
 we find a vestige of an application of the term to a smaller part 
 of the community, their governors, pastors, or priests, for in- 
 stance, as representing the whole. The only passage, as far as 
 I can learn, that has been, with any appearance of plausibiHty, 
 alleged for this purpose, is Matt, xviii. 17. where our Lord, in 
 \hQ directions he gives for removing offences between brethren. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 185 
 
 enjoins the party offended, after repeated admonitions in a more 
 private manner have proved ineffectual, to relate the whole to 
 the church, u'^n tv ixx.xr,tTict. ; and it is added, " If he neglect to 
 " hear the church, let him be to thee as a heathen and a pub- 
 " lican." Now I ask, by what rule of sound criticism can we 
 arbitrarily impose here on the word churchy the signification of 
 church representative, a signification which we do not find it 
 bears in one other passage of scripture ? To affirm, without 
 proof, that this is the sense of it here, is taking for granted the 
 very point in question. 
 
 But we have more than merely negative evidence, that the 
 meaning of the word is here, as in other places, no more than 
 congregation, and that the term ought to have been rendered 
 so. Let it be observed, that our Lord gave these directions 
 during the subsistence of the Mosaic establishment; and if we 
 believe that he spoke intelligibly, or with a view to be under- 
 stood, we must believe also, that he used the word in an accep- 
 tation with which the hearers were acquainted. Dodwell him- 
 self saw the propriety of this rule of interpreting, when he 
 said [a], " It very much confirms me in my reasonings, when 
 " I find an interpretation of the scriptures not only agreeable 
 " to the words of the scriptures, but agreeable also to the no- 
 " tions and significations of words then received. For that 
 " sense which was most likely to be then understood, was, in 
 *' all likelihood, the true sense intended by the Holy Ghost 
 *' himself. Otherwise there could be no security that his true 
 '' sense could be conveyed to future ages, if they had been 
 *' themselves mistaken in it, to whose understanding the Holy 
 *' Ghost was then particularly concerned to accommodate him- 
 *' self." Now all the then known acceptations, as I showed 
 before, of the name iy,y.xn<rto!., were these two, the whole Jewish 
 people, and a particular congregation. The scope of the place 
 sufficiently shows it could not be the former of these senses; it 
 must therefore be the latter. What further confirms this in- 
 terpretation is, that the Jews were accustomed to call those as- 
 semblies, which met together for worship in the same syna- 
 gogue, by this appellation ; and had, if we may believe some 
 Jearncd men conversant in Jewish antiquities, a rule of procc- 
 [«] Distinction between soul and spirit, &c. § 7. 
 
186 LECTURES ON 
 
 dure similar to that here recommended, which our Lord adopts- 
 cd from the synagogue, and transplanted into his church. 
 
 Another collateral and corroborative evidence, that by sKaXvcna 
 is here meant not a representative body, but the whole of a par- 
 ticular congregation, is the actual state of the church for the 
 first three hundred years. I had occasion formerly to remark, 
 that as far down as Cyprian's time, which was the middle of the 
 third century, when the power of the people was on the dc^ 
 cline, it continued to be the practice, that nothing in matters of 
 scandal and censure could be concluded without the consent and 
 approval of the congregation. And this, as it appears to have 
 been pretty uniform, and to have subsisted from the beginning, 
 is, in my opinion, the best commentary which we, at this disr- 
 tance, can obtain on the passage. 
 
 If any impartial hearer is not satisfied on this point, I would 
 recommend it to him, without the aid of any commentator on 
 either side of the question, but with the help of proper concorr- 
 dances, attentively to search the scriptures. Let him examine 
 every passage in the New Testament wherein the word we render 
 church is to be found: let him canvass in the writings of the 
 Old Testament every sentence wherein the correspondent word 
 occurs; let him add to these the apocryphal books received by 
 the Romanists, which, as they were either originally written, or 
 translated by Hellenists, amongst whom the term i>c>c^rt<ria was in 
 frequent use, must be of some authority in ascertaining the 
 Jewish acceptation of the word ; and if he find a single pas- 
 sage, wherein it clearly means either the priesthood, or the 
 rulers of the nation, or any thing that can be called a church 
 representative, let him fairly admit the distinction as scriptural 
 and proper. Otherwise he cannot admit it, in a consistency 
 with any just rule of interpretation. 
 
 I observed, in a preceding lecture, that the term iKzXfitnx is, 
 in some passages, applied to the people, exclusively of the pas-- 
 tors. The same was remarked of the word Kkyipoh (not as 
 though these terms did not properly comprehend both, but be- 
 cause, in collectives, the name of a whole is often given to a 
 great majority) but I have not discovered one passage wherein 
 4'ither iy^^iXy.a-iu or nXyipo;, is applied to the pastors, exclusively of 
 the people. The notion, therefore, of a church representative, 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 187 
 
 how commonly soever it has been received, is a mere usurper 
 of later date. And it has fared here, as it sometimes does in 
 cases of usurpation, the original proprietor comes, thougli 
 gradually, to be at length totally dispossessed. Should any man 
 now talk of the powers of the church, and of the rights of 
 churchmen, would the hearers apprehend, that he meant the 
 powers of a Christian congregation, or the rights of all who are 
 members of the Christian community? And if thev should 
 come to learn that this is his meaning, would they not be apt 
 to say, " It is a pity that this man, before he attempt to speak 
 " on these subjects, does not learn to speak intelligibly, by 
 '' conforming to the current use of the language ?" It is, there- 
 fore, not without reason that I affirm, that the more modern ac- 
 ceptation, though an intruder, has jostled out the rightful and 
 primitive one almost entirely. But as every man, who would 
 be understood, is under a necessity of employing words, accord- 
 ing to the general use of the time present, 
 
 Quern penes arbitrium est, et jus, et norma loquendi; 
 
 when I employ, for the future, any of the words affected by 
 this remark, I am always, unless where the connection indicates 
 the contrary, to be understood as using them in the sense in 
 which they are now commonly received. Only by the deduc- 
 tion that has been given of the origin of this change, we may 
 perceive, that from what is said in relation to the church in 
 scripture, nothing can justly be concluded in support of church- 
 authority, or the privileges of church-men, in the sense which 
 these terms generally have at present. 
 
 The distinction just now taken notice of, in concurrence with 
 the interferences between the civil magistrate and the minister 
 of religion, or between the spiritual tribunals (as they were 
 called) and the secular, gave rise to another distinction in the 
 Christian community between church and state. \'\^l)en the 
 gospel was first published by the apostles, and the apostolic men 
 that came after them, it was natural and necessary to distin- 
 guish believers from infidels, living in the same country, and 
 under the same civil governors. The distinction between a 
 Christian church or society, and a Jewish or an idolatrous state, 
 was perfectly intelligible. But to distinguish the church froDi 
 its own members, those duly received into it by baptism, and 
 
188 LECTURES ON" 
 
 continuing in the profession of the faith, we may venture to 
 affirm, would have been considered then as a mere refinement, 
 a sort of metaphysical abstraction. For where can the differ- 
 ence lie, when every member of the state is a member of the 
 church, and, conversely, every member of the church is a mem- 
 ber of the state ? Accordingly, no such distinction ever obtain- 
 ed among the Jews, nor was there any thing similar to it in 
 any nation before the establishment of the Christian religion 
 under Constantine. 
 
 But what hath since given real significance to the distinction 
 is, in the first place, the limitation of the term church to the 
 clergy and the ecclesiastical judicatories; and, in the second 
 place, the claims of independency advanced by these, as well as 
 certain claims of power and jurisdiction, in some things differing, 
 and in some things interfering, with the claims of the magistrate. 
 For however much connected the civil powers and church-go- 
 vernors are in Christian states, still they are distinct bodies of 
 men, and, in some respects, independent. Their very connec- 
 tion will conduce to render them rival powers, and if so, confe- 
 derate against each other. When this came actually to be the 
 case, considering the character and circumstances of the times, 
 it will not be matter of great astonishment, that everything con- 
 tributed to give success to the encroachments of the latter upon 
 the former. 
 
 Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury, once wrote to the 
 empress Matilda, mother of Henry II. king of England, in 
 these words : — God has drawn his bow, and will speedily shoot 
 from thence the arrows of death, if princes do not permit his 
 spouse, the church, for the love of whom he had deigned to die, 
 to remain free, and to he honoured with the possession of those 
 privileges and dignities which he had purchased for her with his 
 blood on the cross. " Whoever has read the gospel," says the 
 noble historian [a], " must be astonished to hear, that an ex- 
 *' emption for clergymen from all civil justice, was one of the 
 ** privileges purchased by the blood of Christ for his church." 
 He might have said further, must be astonished to hear, as the 
 words manifestly imply, that the church, the spouse of Jesus 
 Christ, for the love of whom he died, is no other than the clergy, 
 [p] Lord Littleton. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ISQ 
 
 and that the heavenly blessings, (for tliat his kingdom was not 
 of this world he himself plainly declared) wliich were the price 
 of his blood, were, secular dominion, earthly treasure, and au 
 unlimited licence in the commission of crimes with impunity. 
 It is not easy to conceive a grosser perversion of the nature, de- 
 sign, and spirit of the gospel. Yet by means of the artful ap- 
 propriation of some names, the word church in particular, and 
 misapplication of others, such absurdities were propagated by 
 one side, and believed by the other. Nay, the frequency of the 
 abuse is acknowledged, even by such Roman Catholic authors 
 as can make any pretension to discernment and candour. 
 Fleury, the ecclesiastical historian, has pointed out the perver- 
 sion of the term church in more places than one. " Peter de 
 Blois," he tells us, " warmly recommended to the bishop of 
 *' Orleans, to remonstrate with his cousin king Philip, and warn 
 " him against laying any subsidies whatever upon the clergy, in 
 *' support of the war, even though a holy war, for extending 
 " the dominions of the church ; as nothing, he affirms, should 
 " be exacted from the clergy but prayers, of which the laity stand 
 " greatly in need." Further, he acquaints us, that this zeal- 
 ous man wrote also to John of Coutances, whom he exhorted to 
 employ his credit with the king of England, to maintain the 
 dignity of the church. " She is free," says he, " by the liberty 
 " which Jesus Christ has procured us; but to load her with ex- 
 " actions, is to bring her into bondage, like Hagar. If your 
 " princes, under pretence of this new pilgrimage, will render 
 " the church tributary, every son of the church ought to resist, 
 " and die, rather than submit to servitude." The historian per- 
 tinently subjoins [a], " We see here the equivocal use made 
 " in those days of the words church and liberty ; as if the church 
 " delivered by Jesus Christ were only the clergy, or as if our 
 " deliverance were from aught but sin and the legal ceremonies." 
 Again, from the same hand, we are informed, that, in reply to 
 a letter from Pope Boniface VIII., wherein, by the same per- 
 version of words, the pontiff had appropriated the title church 
 
 [r/] On voit ici les quivoques ordinaires on cetems la snr les mots d'Eglise et 
 de Liberte; conixiie si I'Eglise delivree par Jesus Christ n'etoitque leclerge, ou 
 qu'il nous eut delivrez d'autre chose que du peclie et dos ceiomonics legales. 
 L. Ixxiv. ch. XV. L. Ixxxlx. cli. cxliv. 
 
190 LECTURES ON 
 
 to ecclesiastics, king Philip of France, amongst otlier tilings, 
 wrote to him, — " The church, the spouse of Jesus Christ, does 
 " not consist of clergy only, hut of laymen also. He has de- 
 " livered it from the slavery of sin, and the yoke of the old law, 
 " and has willed, that all who compose it, both clerks and laics, 
 " enjoy this freedom. It was not for ecclesiastics only that he 
 " died, nor to them alone that he promised grace in this life, 
 '' and glory in the next. It is but by an abuse of language, 
 " that the clergy arrogate peculiarly to themselves the liberty 
 " which Jesus Christ has purchased for us." Which of the 
 two, the king or the priest, was the greater statesman, I know 
 not; but it docs not require a moment's hesitation to pronounce 
 which was the better divine. The inferiority of his Holiness 
 here, even in his ovrn profession, compared with his majesty, 
 in a profession not his own, is both immense and manifest. 
 
 But amongst a rude and ignorant people, in ages of barbarity 
 and superstition, it was easy to confound, in their minds, the 
 cause of the priest with the cause of God, in every quarrel 
 which the former happened to have with the magistrate. — I shall 
 liere remark in passing, and with it conclude the present dis- 
 course, that it is doubtful whether the word ixzxna-ia. ever occurs 
 in the New Testament in a sense wherein the word church is 
 very common with us, as a name for the place of worship. 
 There are only two passages that I remember, which seem to 
 convey this sense. They are both in the eleventh chapter of 
 the first epistle to the Corinthians. The first is, verse 18th, 
 When ye come together in the church, trun^x'^y.ivai'i'vfjiu'i iv"!)! sy^zk-^trtx. 
 Here, however, the word is susceptible of another interpretation, 
 as a name for the society. Thus we say, " The lords, spiri- 
 " tual and temporal, and the commons, in parliam,ent assem- 
 *' bled," here parliament does not mean the house they meet 
 in, but the assembly properly constituted. The other is verse 
 22d, Have ye not hoiiscs to eat and drink in, or despise ye the 
 church of God? ryi; ixzx^.incc; m Bm xr/,ci(p^ovuit: whcro it is urgcd, 
 the opposition of i^zXriffia. to oixta, the church to their houses, 
 adds a probability to tliis interpretation. But this plea, though 
 plausible, is not decisive. Tlie sacred writers are not always 
 studious of so much accuracy in their contrasts, nor is it here 
 necessary to the sense. The apostle's argument, on my hypo- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 191 
 
 thesis, staiuls thus : What can he the reason of this ahuse? Is 
 it hecause yc have not houses of your own to eat and drink in? 
 Or is it because ye despise the Christian contrregation to whicli 
 ye belong ? This, though it do not convey so exact a verbal 
 antithesis, is, in my judgment, more in the spirit and style of 
 the New Testament, than to speak of despising stone walls. 
 But as to this I affirm nothing. To express the place of meet- 
 ing, we find the word (ruvayuyyj, as observed above, used by the 
 apostle James. In ancient authors, the words first adopted, 
 were ixxXnena; x.^iov, iKxXriffta.; oiko;, and y.viitocxov, whcncc the words 
 kirk and church. At length the term ixxxn^rtx, bv a common 
 metonymy, the thing contained for the thing containing, came 
 to be universally employed in this acceptation. 
 
192 LECTURES ON 
 
 LECTURE XL 
 
 X HE steps I have already mentioned and explained, advancing 
 from presbytery to parochial episcopacy ; thence to prelacy or 
 diocesan episcopacy; from that to metropolitical primacy; and 
 thence again to patriarchal superintendency ; together with 
 those methods I have pointed out to you, whereby the ministers 
 of religion distinguished themselves from their Christian bre- 
 thren; — insensibly prepared the minds of the people for the no- 
 tion, that in ordination there was something exceedingly mys- 
 terious, and even inscrutable. It came at length not to be con- 
 sidered as a solemn manner of appointing a fit person to dis- 
 charge the duties of the pastoral office amongst a particular 
 flock or congregation, and of committing them to his care ; but 
 to be regarded more especially as the imprinting of a certain 
 character, or unperceivable and incomprehensible signature on 
 a person ; a character which, though in consequence of human 
 means employed by the proper minister, it was conferred, could 
 by no power less than omnipotence be removed. And though 
 at first hearing, one would be apt to imagine, that by this tenet 
 they derogated as much from the ecclesiastic power on one 
 hand, as they enhanced it on the other, since they maintained, 
 that the persons who gave this character, could not take it 
 away, the effect on men's conceptions was very different. If a 
 single ceremony, or form of words, could with as much facility 
 withdraw as confer a gift in its nature invisible, nobody would 
 be impressed with the conception, that any thing very wonder- 
 ful had been either given or taken. The words or ceremony of 
 ordainino^ would be considered as nothing more than the esta- 
 blished mode of investing a man with the riijht of exercisinor 
 canonically the sacred function ; and the words or ceremony 
 used in the deposition, as the mode of stripping him of that 
 right, or privilege, so that he should no longer be entitled to 
 exercise it. In this way he would be under the same canonical 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 103 
 
 incapacity he lay under before his ordination, which answers to 
 what was, for many ages, called in the church, reducing a cler- 
 gyman to lay communion. There would be nothing more ex- 
 traordinary here, than the creating of a lord high steward, for 
 instance, by certain solemnities accompanying the delivery of a 
 white baton into his hands, and placing him on an eminent seat, 
 and his putting an end to his office, by publicly breaking the' 
 baton, and coming down from his seat. Whereas for a man to 
 do a thing, which nothing less than omnipotence can undo, and 
 which even that, in fact, will never be employed in undoing; 
 to imprint a character — a something which, in spite of angels, 
 men, and devils, shall, to eternity, remain indelible, appears the 
 result of a power, inconceivable indeed, and little less than divine. 
 
 Whence ideas of this kind oricrinatcd, — ideas that do not 
 seem to quadrate with the so much boasted power of the keys, 
 which implies, alike, that of opening, and that of shutting, ad- 
 mitting and excluding, binding and loosing; ideas, of which 
 the apostles and evangelists have no where given us the slight- 
 est hint, and of which it is plain they had not themselves the 
 smallest apprehension ; is a matter of curious inquiry, and 
 closely connected with the subject of the hierarchy. I shall 
 tlierefore endeavour briefly, in this lecture, to trace the rise and 
 progress of so strange a doctrine. 
 
 Ecclesiastical degrees were not instituted originally under the 
 notion of dignities, pre-eminencies, or honours, as they became 
 afterwards, but as ministries, charges, and what tlie apostle Paul 
 called £/iya, works, 1 Tim. iii. 1. " If a man desire the office of 
 " a bishop," says he, " he desireth a good work." Conse- 
 quently if, in any thing denominated the office of a bishop, 
 there be no work to do, it cannot be the office whereof th.e 
 apostle speaks ; for the misapplication of the name can never 
 alter the i^ature of the thing. The persons accordingly pos- 
 sessed of such offices were styled, both by our Lord and by 
 Paul his apostle, tpycTiu,, labourers, workmen. " The labourers 
 " are few," says the former, and, " the workman is worthy of 
 " his meat." The latter recommends it to Timothy to acquit 
 himself as " a workman that needeth not be ashamed." 
 
 For some time, indeed it could hardly enter into the mind of 
 any man, to think himself entitled to decline executing pcrson- 
 
 N 
 
194 LECTURES ON 
 
 aliv, whilst able to execute, a trust solemnly committed to him, 
 and which he had himself undertaken. For the terms ordina- 
 tion, and appointment to a particular personal charge, were 
 perfectly synonymous. If one, however, in those truly primi- 
 tive times (which but rarely happened) found it necessary to re- 
 tire from the work, he never thought of retaining either the 
 title, or the emoluments. And though the ministers were of 
 two kinds, the one called anciently the ministry of the word, 
 and, in later times, the cure of souls, and the other a ministry 
 in things temporal, for the support and relief of the poor and 
 infirm, as was the deaconship, those in both offices were equally 
 held bound to personal service. Nor would any one have 
 thought, in the earliest ages, of serving by a deputy, unless for 
 a short time, and on account of some remarkable and unavoid- 
 able impediment; much less would he have accepted another 
 charge that was incompatible with his former one. But to be 
 made a bishop, and in being so to receive no charge whatever, 
 to have no work to execute, could have been regarded no other- 
 wise than as a contradiction in terms. 
 
 Indeed, the name of the office implied the service, without 
 which it could not subsist, that is, without which there was no 
 office. The name bishop, as I have observed, means overseer, 
 and this is a term manifestly correlative to that which expresses 
 the thing to be overseen. The connection is equally necessary 
 and essential as between father and child, sovereign and subject, 
 husband and wife. The one is inconceivable without the other. 
 Ye cannot make a man an overseer to whom ye give no over- 
 sight, no more than ye can make a man a shepherd, to whom 
 ye give the charge of no sheep, or a husband to whom ye give 
 no wife. Nay, in fact, as a man ceases to be a husband, the 
 moment that he ceases to have a wife, and is no longer a shep- 
 herd than he has the care of sheep, so in the only proper and 
 original import of the words, a bishop continues a bishop only 
 whilst he continues to have people under his spiritual care. 
 These things, indeed, are so plain, that one is almost ashamed 
 to attempt to illustrate them. Yet the changes that too soon 
 ensued, have turned matters so entirely off their original bot- 
 tom, that propositions which, in the age of the apostles, must 
 liave appeared self-evident, require a careful devclopcment to 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 195 
 
 US moderns ; so much is the import of names and phrases alter- 
 ed in the course of some successive centuries. Let us tlierefore 
 endeavour to investigate the source of these alterations. 
 
 When, as it happened in a few ages, the church was hecome 
 populous and extensive ; and when, released from persecution, 
 it was beginning to taste the sweets of case and affluence ; when 
 men, by consequence, were growing less zealous and more re- 
 miss; as the several congregations were supplied by their re- 
 spective presbyteries, which were a sort of colleges of ministers, 
 who, under the bishop, had the charge in common ; it happen- 
 ed sometimes that one of these, without creating great incon- 
 venience to his colleagues, retired from the service, and either 
 for the sake of study and improvement, or from some other rea- 
 son, resided elsewhere. The presbyters had not then separate 
 charges, and the consistory could sufficiently supply the neces- 
 sary functions with one more or one fewer. But he, who in 
 this manner retired from the parish, did not retain any charge 
 of the people; as little did he draw thence any emolument 
 whatever. Thus Jerora, a presbyter of Antioch, Ruffinus, in 
 like manner, of Aquileia, and Paulinus of Barcelona, resided 
 little in those places. 
 
 Afterwards, as evil customs always spring from small begin- 
 nings, the number of such absentees daily increasing, this de- 
 generated into a very gross abuse ; and those nominal pastors 
 having become odious, on account of their idle way of living, 
 got the name of vagabond clerks, of whom frequent mention is 
 made in the laws and novels of Justinian. But before the com- 
 mencement of the sixth century, none ever thought of holding 
 the title, and enjoying the profits of an office, without serving. 
 Then, indeed, in the western church, the condition of ecclesias- 
 tical ministries underwent a considerable change, and came to 
 be regarded as degrees of dignities, and honours, and rewards of 
 past services. As formerly, in ecclesiastic promotions, the need 
 of a particular church being considered, a person fit for the 
 charge was provided, so now the rule was inverted, and the con- 
 dition and rank of the person being considered, a degree, dig- 
 nity, or benefice, was provided, which suited his quality and 
 expectations, whence sprang very naturally the custom of doing 
 the work by a delegate. And as one abuse commonly ushers 
 
 N 2 
 
196 LECTURES ON 
 
 in another, the assistance, the presence, nay, the residence, of 
 the principal, came also gradually to be dispensed with. In- 
 deed, when the man is not chosen, because fit for the charge, 
 but when the charge is chosen, or (to speak more properly) when 
 the rank, the titles, and the revenues are chosen as convenient 
 for the man, things must inevitably take that course. The pri- 
 mitive view is totally reversed. The man's accommodation is then 
 become the primary object; the people's accommodation, if an 
 object at all, is but the secondary at 'the most. That is the end 
 — this is only the means. 
 
 In process of time, this became so frequent in some places, 
 and particularly in some of the richest dioceses and parishes, 
 wherein, for several successions, the residence of the occupant 
 had been dispensed with, that through the gradual, but sure 
 operation of custom, he came to be considered as not obliged to 
 perform any pastoral function, or so much as to reside among 
 the people, of whom he was denominated the pastor, and from 
 whom he drew a considerable stipend, or revenue. The apos- 
 tle's maxim was a maxim no longer. " If a man desire the of- 
 " fice of a bishop, he desireth a good work." Many then de- 
 sired the office of a bishop, if without absurdity we can say so, 
 who desired no work at all, good or bad, and they desired it for 
 that very reason, because they chose to be idle. Indeed, it 
 must be owned, the term i-rKrKo^yi, charge, oversight, used by the 
 apostle, necessarily implies work. These two are indistinguish- 
 able. But in the times we now speak of, men were become 
 much more refined than the apostles, both in distinguishing and 
 in separating. First, sprang the distinction, then the separa- 
 tion of the order from the office. Hence arose the odious dis- 
 tinction of benefices with residence, and benefices without resi- 
 dence. Of much the same import is the distinction of bene- 
 fices cum citra, and those sine cura animarum ; from the last 
 of which comes the English name sinecure. This corruption, 
 in practice, was followed by the absurdity in doctrine, which 
 some did not blush to maintain, that one miglit acquire an eccle- 
 siastical title and salary, without coming under any obligation. 
 The absurdity here was the more glaring, that it had been an 
 old and established maxim of the canonists, " beneficium datur 
 *' propter officium." The benefice is given for the office. In 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 197 
 
 order, however, to palliate, though inefFcctually, their contra- 
 dicting a maxim so reasonable, and so universally approved, they 
 explained the office to mean his reading the horary prayers of 
 the breviary ; so that for once taking into his hand the bre- 
 viary, and reading the prayers in public, in a muttering voice, 
 as quick as his tongue was able to utter them, which they ex- 
 plain to be doing the office, (for thus the best laws are eluded,) 
 he was entitled to a yearly rent of, perhaps, ten thousand crowns.. 
 There is a practice in England, when a man is presented to a 
 rectory, which is there called reading himself in, that has but 
 too close an affinity to the former. 
 
 But this was not all; there carae insensibly into use, proba- 
 bly through the influence of such examples as those of Jcrom 
 and Paulinus above-mentioned, what was called loose or absolute 
 ordination, wherein a man received the degree of presbyter, 
 though of no particular church, and equally without a benefice, 
 and without a cliarge. Some time after, for things always ad- 
 vance from less to greater, the degree of bishop was conferred 
 in the same manner. This may be said, in some respect, to be 
 much more pardonable than the former abuse, because here, if 
 there was no office or duty required, there was no benefice given. 
 Nothing, however, could be more repugnant both to primitive 
 practice, and to the only meaning which the word originally 
 bore. To ordain a man was nothing else but, in a solemn man- 
 ner, to assign him a pastoral charge. To give him no charge, 
 and not to ordain him, were perfectly identical. It has been 
 urged in support of these honorary degrees, that a bishop is not 
 so much to be considered under the notion of the pastor of a 
 particular church or congregation, as under the notion of a 
 catholic bishop, or pastor of the universal church ; that this last,, 
 being the more important relation, ought to be regarded as the 
 principal. But I beg to know what w^e are to understand by the 
 term catholic^ or universal bishop. In the strictest acceptation, 
 it is applicable only to the apostles, as I had occasion formerly 
 to observe. Nor was the title in that sense, after their time, 
 assumed by any, till, in the decline of all rational religion and 
 useful knowledge, it was, to the great scandal of the better part 
 of Christians, arrogated first by the bishop of Constantinopk^ 
 and afterwards by the bishop of Home. But though it may be 
 
198 LECTURES ON 
 
 allowed that, in a looser sense, every bishop may be styled a 
 catholic bishop, that is, a pastor belonging to the catholic church, 
 and one who hath a share in its government, he is not other- 
 wise accounted so, but as he has the charge of a particular church, 
 which is a component part of the catholic church. The ca- 
 tholic, or universal church, is no other than the aggregate of all 
 the individual churches, and the one Christian episcopate, 
 wherein all bishops have been said to be sharers, is the aggre- 
 gate of all the individual episcopates possessed by the several 
 bishops. Thus Cyprian (Epist. 55.) denominates the church 
 of Christ, "Una ecclesia in multa membra divisa;" and the 
 episcopal office, (De unitate ecclesia,) " Unus episcopatus, 
 " cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur," — One episcopate, 
 whereof each bishop occupies a distinct part; or still more ex- 
 plicitly in our language. One great superintendency, whereof 
 each is the superintendent of a part. He therefore can have 
 no share in this one episcopate, who is bishop or pastor of no 
 part, and has nothing to superintend. Again, the same father 
 tells us, " Singulis pastoribus portio gregis adscripta est, quam 
 " regat unusquisque, rationem actus sui Domino redditurus." 
 He consequently can be no bishop or pastor in the church, to 
 whom no portion of Christ's flock is committed, and who has 
 none to govern or instruct. That only is a member, which has 
 in the body a particular function, by the proper discharge where- 
 of the good of the whole is promoted. Any thing else, such 
 as a wen, or other excrescence, though in the body, is no mem- 
 ber, with whatever name you may please to dignify it. 
 
 We have seen, however, that from a few instances at first, 
 in which men, for urgent reasons, obtained exemptions from 
 ministering, when there diduot seem to result any inconveniency 
 from dispensing with their service, and when they readily re- 
 nounced both the title and the profits of the place, there gradu- 
 ally sprang the abuse of ordaining more presbyters and deacons 
 than the particular church wherein they were ordained could 
 have any occasion for, and to the care of which they were not 
 considered as being destined. Some found their account in 
 being once named of the order. It was a kind of episcopal tes- 
 timonial of their qualifications and abilities. And, indeed, if 
 those ordinations had been universally understood as importing 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 199 
 
 no more, and the persons so ordained had been regavded not as 
 actual ministers, but as licentiates in the ministry, properly tried 
 and attested, the practice, to say the least, might have admitted 
 some plausible excuses. But this was not the footing on which 
 they stood. Worldly motives, exemptions from secular juris- 
 dictions, and other privileges, often induced men to court this 
 distinction. The bishops too, beginning to consider it as a sort 
 of addition to their dignity, to have a numerous clergy under 
 them, even though some of these were rather nominally than 
 really such, were often too easily persuaded to grant this favour 
 to those who asked it. Sometimes, as I observed, even bishops 
 were ordained at large without a diocese. 
 
 This abuse, when once it had gotten footing, increased daily, 
 insomuch that it became necessary at last to give a check to it. 
 Accordingly, in the council of Ghalcedon it was prohibited, and 
 all such loose ordinations were declared, (Canon 6th,) I say not, 
 irregular or uncanonical, but, absolutely null. The words are, 
 
 XXI fA-^letfjiv "hwccffScti ivi^yiiv. — Nothing in language can be more ex- 
 press ; ctxv^ov x'-ioo^'-?t«-v^ irritam ordijiationem, a void ordination. 
 
 Further, they do not say, that when men, so ordained, offi- 
 ciate, their conduct is criminal, as was the style some centuries 
 afterwards, in regard to those who officiated, in contempt of 
 church censures, but they affirm that such can no where offi^ 
 ciate, [j^rMy-^ ^wi^i&«.t inpyu'j, and consequently, that their ministra- 
 tions are no ministrations at all. It deserves our notice, that 
 notwithstanding the corrupt practice which had prevailed, there 
 still remained so much of the primitive notion of ordination to 
 the episcopal office, (for they had long considered the presbyters 
 as only the bishop's curates and assistants,) as the solemn as- 
 signment of a person to a particular congregation, to discharge 
 among them the functions of a pastor, that they could not con- 
 ceive it to be an ordination, where no such charge was given, 
 and when a man properly got no office to exercise. It appeared 
 a mere illusion, the name without the thing. Nothing can be 
 plainer, than that as yet they had no conception of the mystic 
 character impressed by the bishop's hand in ordaining, which 
 no ])owcr on earth can cancel. The canon above-mentioned, 
 was confirmed by many posterior canons. Hence it came to be 
 
200 LECTURES ON 
 
 regarded as an established rule, or maxim, in tlie church, that 
 none could be ordained without a title, which, though at first 
 it was applied only to bishops, came, after the subdivision of his 
 parish into separate charges, to be also sometimes applied to 
 presbyters. By a title was then understood the actual charge 
 of some congregation. I had occasion, in a former lecture, to 
 observe, that the Latin word titulus was the name that was 
 given to the inferior churches, or chapels, allotted to presbyters, 
 when it was found necessary, on account of the vast accession of 
 new converts, that the bishop's charge, anciently a parish, and 
 having but one church, should be divided and apportioned to the 
 several presbyters. A man was said then to have a title, when 
 he had obtained a chapel or church wherein, and a people in 
 whose behoof, he was to execute the ministry. But as the im- 
 port of words gradually changes with the manners and the times, 
 by the terra title, people came at length to understand only a 
 living, whether there was any charge, any cura animarum, or 
 not. Thus the canons originally intended to prevent any, un- 
 <ler the denomination of clergy, from being idle, were construed 
 in such a manner as though they had been intended to prevent 
 any, under the denomination of clergy, from being indigent. 
 And the reason they then gave for the rule was, lest such cler- 
 gymen should be compelled, by necessity, to acquire a liveli- 
 hood by manual labour, and thus derogate from the dignity of 
 the priesthood. Idleness, in their apprehension, was no way 
 derogatory; manual labour was. Paul's notions were surely 
 very different ; for he did not think that he brought any dis- 
 grace on the apostleship, when he worked with his hands at the 
 humble trade of tent-making. But this by the way. 
 
 Some ages afterwards. Pope Alexander III. adopting the 
 aforesaid interpretation, gave to the rule this turn, that none 
 should be ordained without a title from which he could draw a 
 subsistence ; and added this exception, unless he has enough of 
 his own, or by paternal inheritance; an exception, doubtless, 
 very reasonable, if the sole purpose of a title was to afford a 
 man whereon to live. Hence sprang new abuses, and some of 
 the vilest artifices for making that pass for a patrimony, which 
 had been lent to a man merely for the purpose of assisting him 
 fraudulently to obtain ordination. In consequence whereof, 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 201 
 
 tlicrc were numbers of these nominal and fictitious clergy, 
 slicphcrds that had no sheep, and overseers that had nothing to 
 oversee, who Uved in indigence as well as in idleness, to the no 
 small scandal of the people, and dishonour of those functions of 
 which they bore the name. At length, however, the import of 
 the word title, seems to have sunk so low, as to imply neither 
 church, nor charge, nor living, but a bare name; insomuch, that 
 a titular priest, or a titular bishop, came universally to denote 
 a priest, or a bishop, who (in all the former acceptations of the 
 term) has no title. Such were those Utopian clergy, whom 
 Panormitan has not improperly, though derisively, styled nul- 
 latenentes, holding nothing, and who have been sometimes ho- 
 noured with the addition of bishops, in partibiis iiifiddium ; 
 this serving as a convenient sort of general designation, to sup- 
 ply the name of a particular bishopric. Indeed, the custom still 
 uniformly retained in the church of Rome, of annexing some 
 such addition, is an irrefragable evidence of the ideas which 
 were from the beginning entertained of the office, as incapable 
 of subsistinjT without a chartre. 
 
 In the later ages, the policy of the court of Rome came to be 
 concerned in supporting this, with many other irregular prac- 
 tices. The power of dispensing with ecclesiastical canons was 
 a prerogative, which that ambitious see had for some time arro- 
 gated, and not without success. It found its account in it in 
 more ways than one. When once the minds of men became 
 familiarized to this usage, (however much the wiser part would 
 condemn it on account of its consequences) it would be no 
 longer viewed in the same light. People would still be sensible 
 of the irregularity and faultiness, but would no longer perceive 
 the absurdity aud nullity of it. Not only the commonness of 
 the practice, but the very epithets and titles given to these no- 
 minal pastors, together with the sameness in respect of privi- 
 leges, and of the jurisdiction to which they were amenable, with 
 those properly of the clerical body, would all serve to cover the 
 defect. People would no longer be apt to think with Leo, who 
 was bishop of Rome about the middle of the fifth century, and 
 is, on account of his writings, considered as a doctor of the 
 church, who affirms positively in one of his letters, (Epist. 92. 
 ad Rustic, cap. 1.) " Vana est habenda ordinatio, qujE nee loco 
 
202 LECTURES ON 
 
 " fundata est, nee auctorltate munita." That ye may better 
 understand the phrase loco fundata, it may be proper to ob- 
 serve, that among the Latins, at that time, when a roan, in being 
 ordained, was assigned to a particular parish, or charge, it was 
 called ordinatio locails, and the incumbents, by way of distinc- 
 tion from the nullatenentes, were called locales. However 
 much the vague kind of ordination, opposed to localis, was, 
 from ambitious motives, patronised by his successors, this Pope 
 does not hesitate to style it, not illicita, but vana ; not unlaw- 
 ful, (though this might also have been said with truth) but of 
 no effect. To have said the former only, would have implied 
 no more, than that there was a fault in granting such orders ; 
 what he did say implies, that there was no real ordination in 
 them. The doctrine of the character had not yet been dis- 
 covered. 
 
 One will perhaps be surprised to hear, that our Scotch epis- 
 copal party, who have long affected to value themselves on the 
 regular transmission of their orders, have none but what they 
 derive from bishops merely nominal. I do not mention this 
 with a view to derogate from their powers, but only as an argu- 
 mentatum ad hominem, to show how much their principles mi- 
 litate against themselves. It does not suit my notion of Chris- 
 tianity, to retaliate on any sect, or to forbid any to cast out de- 
 vils in the name of Christ, because they follow not us. If the 
 lust of power had not with churchmen more influence than the 
 spirit of the gospel, greater attention would have been given to 
 the decision of their master in a like case. Even their own 
 writers acknowledge, that immediately after the death of Dr. 
 Ross, bishop of Edinburgh, the last of those ordained before 
 the revolution, there were no local bishops in Scotland, not 
 one appointed to any diocese, or having the inspection of any 
 j)eople, or spiritual jurisdiction over any district. But there 
 were bishops who had been ordained at large, some by bishop 
 Ross, others by some of the Scotch bishops, who, after the re- 
 volution, had retired to England. The warmest partisans o-f 
 that sect have not scrupled to own, that at that gentleman's de- 
 cease all the dioceses in Scotland were become vacant, and even 
 to denominate those who had been ordained in the manner above- 
 mentioned, Utopian bishops: a title not differing materially 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 203 
 
 from that I have given them merely nominol bishops. For, as 
 far as I can learn, they were not titular, even in the lowest 
 sense. No axiom in philosophy is more indisputable than that 
 Qtiod nulllbi est, non est. The ordination, therefore, of our 
 present Scotch episcopal clergy, is solely from presbyters ; for 
 it is allowed, that those men who came under the hands of bi- 
 shop Ross had been regularly admitted ministers or presbyters, 
 in particular congregations, before the revolution. And to that 
 first ordination, I maintain that their farcical consecration by 
 Dr. Ross, and others, when they were solemnly made the de- 
 positaries of no deposit, commanded to be diligent in doing no 
 work, vigilant in the oversight of no flock, assiduous in teach- 
 ing and governing no people, and presiding in no church, add- 
 ed nothing at all. Let no true son of our church be offended, 
 that I acknowledge our non-jurors to have a sort of presbyte- 
 rian ordination ; for I would by no means be understood as 
 equalizing theirs to that which obtains with us. Whoever is 
 ordained amongst us is ordained a bishop by a class of bishops. 
 It is true we neither assume the titles, nor enjoy the revenues, of 
 the dignified clergy, so denominated in other countries; but we 
 are not the less bishops in every thing essential, for being more 
 conformable to the apostolical and primitive model, when every 
 bishop had but one parish, one congregation, one church or 
 place of common worship, one altar or communion table, and 
 was perhaps as poor as any of us. Whereas the ordination of 
 our non-jurors proceeds from presbyters, in their own (that is, 
 in the worst) sense of the word, men to whom a part only of 
 the ministerial powers was committed, and from whom particu- 
 larly was withheld the ricrht of transmitting: orders to others. 
 When we say that our orders are from presbyters, we do not 
 use the term in their acceptation, but in that wherein we find 
 it used by Luke, in the Acts of the apostles, by Paul in his epis- 
 tles, and (if the name of fathers be thought to add any weight) 
 by the purest and earliest fathers, Clemens Roman us, Polycarp, 
 and others, presbyters, in short, whom the Holy Ghost has 
 made bishops of the flock. But when we say their orders are 
 from presbyters, we use the word not in the apostolical, but in 
 the more recent, sense, for a sort of subordinate ministers, who 
 arc not authorised to ordain, and who, on Dr. Hammond's 
 
204 LECTURES ON 
 
 hypothesis, as well as ours, were not originally in the 
 church. 
 
 Pope Leo's way of thinking, on this subject, is indeed the 
 way that every man would naturally think, previously to the 
 impression which habit never fails to produce. For example, 
 what would one think of the pretext of making a man a king, 
 a'jroXiXvfA.ivto',, that is, without giving him either subjects or a king- 
 dom? Ye will say. But may not the right to a kingdom be con- 
 ferred on a man, whom we cannot put in possession ? Admit it 
 may; that is not parallel to the case in hand. Those merely 
 titular bishops get no more the right, than they get the posses- 
 sion, of any one diocese on the face of the earth. Nor was it 
 ever denied, that if, on the pretence of their consecration, they 
 had seized any charge, whether vacant or full, they would have 
 been as much intruders, as though they had never been ordain- 
 ed at all. The only thing, therefore, that could be said to be 
 exactly similar, would be the coronation and enthronement of 
 a man, with many pompous ceremonies, whom ye in the end 
 saluted king, but to whom ye gave neither the right nor the 
 possession of a single subject, or of a single foot of territory. 
 What could be said more justly of such a ceremony than what 
 Pope Leo said of those ordinations ? " Vana est habenda inau- 
 " guratio." It ought to be held a sham inauguration, " Quae 
 *' nee loco fundata est, nee auctoritate munita." Should it be 
 urged, that the title king must be very blank without the name 
 of some region or country, over which the kingly power ex- 
 tends. I answer, not a jot blanker than the title bishop ox priest, 
 without the name of diocese or parish. And if a bare name will 
 serve, nothing is more easily supplied : king of the planet Sa- 
 turn, or of Terra australis incognita, will sound as well, and 
 mean as much, as bishop in partibus injideliwn. By the way, 
 a bishop's charge is a church, ixy.kyisia, and a church consists only 
 of believers. Lifidels, therefore, are properly no part of his 
 charge, no more than wolves or foxes are part of the flock of a 
 shepherd. 
 
 With the Romanists, matrimony and holy orders are both 
 equally sacraments, and are, besides, thought to have a great 
 analogy to cacli other. The relation which Christ bears to his 
 church, that is, the church universal, is in scripture compared 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Q05 
 
 to tlie relation which the husband bears to the wife. And the 
 relation which the bishop bears to the particular church under 
 liis care, has been often represented by the fathers as an em- 
 blem of the relation which Christ bears to the church univer- 
 sal. Pope Innocent III. adopts the same metaphor, calling 
 ordination the spiritual marriage of the bishop to his church. 
 To this idea also the ceremony of the ring in consecration, still 
 retained in the church of Rome, unquestionably owes its origin. 
 Ko consistent Roman Catholic, therefore, can be offended, that 
 I borrow an illustration from what he accounts likewise a sacra- 
 ment, and the most analagous of them all, by the consent of 
 popes and fathers, to the subject in hand. Now if it had hap- 
 pened to be (as, no doubt, if it had suited any political purpose, 
 it would have been) the practice to celebrate marriages some- 
 times, aToXiXu/u-ivaj;, whcreiu, if you will admit the absurdity of 
 the expression, which, in these cases, is unavoidable, you make 
 a man a husband, or marry him without giving him a wife, 
 what would really have been conferred on the man by such a 
 ceremony ? By marriage, indeed, you lay him under certain ob- 
 ligations, and give him certain rights. But as the wife is the 
 object of the one, and the source of the other, where there is 
 no wife, they can have no existence. The case of the bishop 
 is precisely the same. If you give him no charge, the obli- 
 gations to superintendency, and the claims of submission and 
 support, for want of a subject, can have no existence. What 
 then is there in the one ceremony more nugatory than in the 
 other? For if unmeaning words will satisfy, why may not the 
 mystical, invisible, indelible character of husband be imprint- 
 ed by the first, as that of priest or bishop is by the second? 
 Holy writ gives just as much countenance to the one as to the 
 other. But we may venture to afErm, that if it had not suited 
 the church's policy to have some examples of such ordinations, 
 unauthorised alike by scripture, and by the nature of the 
 thing, the notion of the character, in the way it has been pro- 
 pounded by the schoolmen, had never been heard of. 
 
 When those merely titular bishops and priests came to be 
 elected into diocesan or parochial charges, the question was, in 
 what manner were they to be received ? To re-ordain them 
 would have thrown an imputation on the first ordination, as 
 
S06 LECTURES ON 
 
 though it had been of no significancy, and little better than a 
 solemn farce. This (though manifestly for some ages the doc- 
 trine of the church concerning them) was now by all means to 
 be avoided, as it might tend both to correct an abuse, which 
 the rulers of the church found their account in supporting, and 
 to derogate from the people's reverence for the solemnities of 
 religion. Therefore, beside what may be said to be conferred 
 visibly and intelligibly in all regular ordinations, the charge of 
 a certain district, in what regards spiritual matters, and the 
 oversight of the people, there must be something invisible and 
 unintelligible, which is nevertheless the principal, else all those 
 loose ordinations would be mere nullities. This mysterious 
 something they called the character impressed, which was no 
 sooner discovered or devised, than it constituted the essence of 
 the sacrament; the other particulars relating to the charge of a 
 flock, which to an ordinary understanding might appear to be 
 the whole, were then found to be but circumstances. And as 
 the general practice of the church came at length to be, (for in 
 this they were for several ages far from being uniform) to dis- 
 approve re-ordaining, as well as re-baptizing and re-confirming; 
 and that even though the baptism, confirmation, or ordination, 
 had been given by a heretic, or schismatic, or though the re- 
 ceiver had afterwards apostatized, they conceived that a charac- 
 ter, though not the same character, was the immediate result of 
 all these ordinances, and that being indelible, it needed not to 
 be renewed. 
 
 It were in vain to look for this tenet in scripture, where 
 there is not the faintest trace of any sucli conception. It were 
 no less vain to search for it in the fathers, who were unacquaint- 
 ed alike with the name and with the thinff. This even some 
 of the Romish doctors themselves have not scrupled to admit, 
 founding the doctrine solely on the authority of the church. 
 But indeed on this (as on many other articles) the doctrine of 
 the church has varied with the times. The council of Nice, 
 the first of the ecumenical councils, expressly decreed, that 
 such bishops and presbyters as had been ordained by Miletius, 
 a deposed bishop, for the merely nominal or Utopian bishops 
 were not then known, should not be admitted to serve the 
 church as cither bishops or presbyters, till they had been duly 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 0(TJ 
 
 re-ordaineu, fivrixu'Js^a ^^t^o'iovia, StSxiua-h'ficcs [«]. If an overture of 
 this kind, in regard to any degraded prelate, had been made at 
 Trent, in the last of their councils, it would have been received 
 with universal abhorrence, and considered as proceeding cither 
 from the rankest heresy, or from the grossest ignorance. But 
 that it was no heresy for many centuries after the Nicene sy- 
 nod, is manifest from the uniform style on this subject, both of 
 the ecclesiastical writers, and of the councils. Would we then 
 track this nonsense to its source. We must dip, or rather dive, 
 into the futile logomachies of the schoolmen ; for it will be 
 found to be the genuine production of the darkly subtle meta- 
 physico-scholastical theology of the middle ages. Nothin^r 
 could be idler than to attempt the refutation of a dogma, for 
 which a vestige of evidence has never been produced. But 
 were the business of refuting incumbent upon us, a little fur- 
 ther examination of the subject, and of the opinions that have 
 been advanced concerning it, would entirely supersede the ne- 
 cessity. 
 
 Two puzzling questions have been moved on this subject, 
 which were hotly agitated, but not solved, in the council of 
 Trent, where it was thought necessary, however, to make a de- 
 cree, affirming the character in opposition to one of the Lutheran 
 articles denying it. One question is, wherein it consists; the 
 other, whereon it is imprinted. In answer to the former, relat- 
 ing to the quiddity of the character, as these sophisters love to 
 express it, it has been observed, first negatively, that it cannot 
 be an infusion of grace, as of faith, hope, or charity, because, 
 say our profound disquisitors, all the seven sacraments confer 
 grace, whereas it is only the three that cannot be repeated, the 
 unreiterable, which imprint a character; besides, it can be nei- 
 ther grace nor virtue for this other reason — both these may be 
 lost, whereas the character is indelible. As little can it be a 
 particular qualification, which fits the person for the discharge 
 of the duties of the office, for a man may become totally unquali- 
 fied by age and infirmities, or he may unqualify himself by vice. 
 Besides, it has never been denied, that persons, very ill qualified, 
 have been ordained, and never appeared one jot better quali- 
 fied after their ordination than before. It could not be the "ift 
 [a] Theodor. Ilist. 1. i. c. ix. 
 
^08 LECTURES O^ 
 
 of justification, because this is what the impenitent, in moral 
 sin, docs not receive in any sacrament ; and yet an impenitent, 
 in moral sin, may be ordained and receive the character. But 
 to consider the thing positively, there were who maintained that 
 it was a quaUty. Among those there were four different opi- 
 nions, according to the four sorts of qualities distinguished in 
 the schools. Some affirmed that it is a spiritual power, otliers 
 a habit or disposition, others a spiritual figure ; nor was the no- 
 tion that it is a sensible metaphorical quality without its advo- 
 cates. Some would have it to be a real relation, others a fabric 
 of the mind ; though it was by no means clear how far these 
 considered it as removed from nothing. 
 
 As to the second question, the uhi of the character, there 
 was no less variety of sentiments than about the first, some pla- 
 cing it in the essence of the soul, others in the understanding ; 
 some in the will, and others more plausibly in the imagination ; 
 others even in the hands and the tongue; but, by the general 
 voice, the body was excluded. So that the whole of what they 
 agreed in amounts to this, that in the unreiterable sacraments, 
 as they call them, something, they know not what, is imprinted, 
 they know not how, on something in the soul of the recipient, 
 they know not where, which never can be deleted. 
 
 In regard to the indelibility all agreed, insomuch, that though 
 a bishop, priest, or deacon, turn heretic or schismatic, deist or 
 atheist, he still retains the character, and though not a Chris- 
 tian man, he is still a Christian bishop, priest, or deacon ; nay, 
 though he be degraded from his office, and excommunicated, he 
 is, in respect of the character, still the same. Though he be 
 cut off from the church, he is still a minister in the church. In 
 such a situation, to perform any of the sacred functions, would 
 be in him a deadly sin, but these would be equally valid as be- 
 fore. Thus he may not be within the pale of the church him- 
 self, and yet be in the church a minister of Jesus Christ. He 
 may openly and solemnly blaspheme God, and abjure the faith 
 of Christ ; he may apostatize to Judaism, to Mahometism, or 
 to Paganism, he still retains the character. He may even be- 
 come a priest of Jupiter, or a priest of Baal, and still continue 
 a priest of Jesus Christ. The character, say the schoolmen, is 
 not cancelled in the damned, but remains with the wicked to 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ^09 
 
 tlieir disgrace and greater confusion ; so that even in Ijcll tliev 
 are the ministers of Jesus Christ, and tlie messengers of the 
 new covenant. Nor is it cancelled in the blessed, but remains 
 in heaven with them for their greater glory and ornament. 
 
 I have been the more particular on this topic, because it is a 
 fundamental article, with a pretty numerous class (and these not 
 all Romanists.) I was willing to explain it, as far as it is ex- 
 pHcable, from the writings of its defenders, being persuaded 
 that on those who do not discover there a sufficient confutation, 
 reason, and argument, scripture and common sense will make 
 no impression. An author, of whose sentiments I took some 
 notice in my last lecture, has observed [«], that as the civilians 
 have their fictions in law, our theologists also have their fictions 
 in divinity. It is but too true, that some of our theological sys- 
 tems are so stuffed with these, that little of plain truth is to 
 be learnt from tlicm. And I think it will be doing no injury 
 to this dogma of the character, to rank it among those fictions 
 in divinity, God forbid I should add in the not very decent 
 words of that author, (though I reidly believe he meant no harm 
 by them) " which infinite \visdom and goodness hath devised 
 *' for our benefit and advantage." The God of truth needs not 
 the assistance of falsehood, nor is the cause of truth to be pro- 
 moted by such means. The use of metaphorical eipressions, 
 or figurative representations, in scripture, give no propriety to 
 such an application of a term so liable to abuse. 
 
 [a] Hickes, Christian Priesthood, 1. 1. ch. ii. § 8. 
 
210 LECTURES ON 
 
 LECTURE XII. 
 
 An the prelections I have already given on the ecclesiastical 
 history, I have traced the progress of the hierarchy as far up as 
 the patriarchate, and shown by what steps that kind of oligarchy 
 arose in the church. The only article that now remains to be 
 considered, and which completes the edifice of spiritual despo- 
 tism, is the papacy. Ye all know the common plea, on which 
 the retainers to Rome have, not indeed from the beginning, but 
 for many ages past, founded the right of papal dominion ; name- 
 ly, first, the prerogatives they affirm to have been given by our 
 Lord to the apostle Peter; and secondly, the succession of their 
 bishops to that apostle, and consequently to those prerogatives. 
 Every judicious and impartial inquirer must quickly discover, 
 that both the premises, by which their conclusion is supported, 
 are totally without foundation. Neither had Peter the prero- 
 gatives which they pretend he had, nor have their bishops the 
 shadow of- a title to denominate themselves his successors. 
 
 I acknowledged, in a former lecture, that Peter appears to 
 have been honoured by his Master to be the president of the 
 sacred college of his apostles, and the first in announcing the 
 doctrine of the gospel both to the Jews and to the Gentiles, 
 I have also shown, that this is the higliest prerogative of which 
 there is any vestige in the writings of the New Testament, and 
 that there was not any particular species of power which was 
 given to him, that was not also, by their common Lord, com- 
 municated to the rest. They are all represented as alike foun- 
 dations of this new Jerusalem, which, in their Master's name, 
 and as his spiritual kingdom, was to be reared. They all re- 
 ceive from him the same commission for the conversion and in- 
 struction of all nations. They are all encouraged by the same 
 promises and the same privileges. Nay, as a convincing proof 
 that Peter, far from claiming a superiority over the other apos- 
 tles, did, on the contrary, subject himself to their commands. 
 
KCCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ':^11 
 
 we see (Acts vlii. 14.) that " when the apostles which were at 
 " Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, 
 " they sent unto them Peter and John.'* Nor did Peter, any 
 more than John, disdain to serve in the capacity of legates from 
 that sacred body. Now whether is greater, tlie sender or the 
 sent? Canonists, and other Romish writers, affect much to com- 
 pare the Pope and his cardinals, to Peter and his fcllow-apos- 
 tles. Yet, I suppose, they will acknowledge, it would look very 
 oddly in the Pope, and be in fact incompatible with papal dig- 
 nity, to be sent ambassador from the conclave, though nothing 
 be more common, in the members of that college, than to re- 
 ceive legatine commissions from him. But passing this; what- 
 ever were the prerogatives of Peter, they were manifestly per- 
 sonal, not official, in reward of the confession which he was the 
 first to make, that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God ; a 
 confession which may justly be denominated the foundation of 
 the whole Christian edifice. Besides, the apostleship itself, as 
 I showed at some length, was an office in its nature temporary, 
 extraordinary, and incapable of succession. In point of right, 
 therefore, no peculiar privilege can be claimed by any church as 
 derived from this apostle. 
 
 And if from the question of right we come to the matter of 
 fact, the special relation of the see of Rome to this eminent am- 
 bassador of Christ, the partizans of papal ambition have never 
 been able to support their affirmations by any thing that de- 
 serves the name of evidence. It has been questioned whether 
 Peter ever was at Rome. The only ground on which the Pa- 
 pist builds his assertion, that he was in that city, and founded 
 the church in it, is tradition ; and such a tradition as must ap- 
 pear very suspicious to reasonable Christians, being accompanied 
 with a number of legendary stories, which are totally unworthy 
 of regard. 
 
 In opposition to such traditionary legends, it has been urged, 
 that mention is no where made in scripture that this apostle 
 was ever there ; notwithstanding that there were so many fa- 
 vourable occasions of taking notice of it, if it had been fact, that 
 one is at a loss to conceive how it could have been avoided. No 
 hint is there of such a thing in the Acts of the Apostles, though 
 a great part of that book is employed in recording the labours 
 
 o 2 
 
212 LECTURES ON 
 
 of this apostle for the advancement of the gospel, and mention 
 is made of different places, Jerusalem, Samaria, Lydda, Joppa, 
 and Csesarea, where he' exerted himself in this service. In the 
 first of these, he assisted at the consultation which the apostles, 
 elders, and brethren, held in regard to circumcision, and the 
 ceremonies of the law ; though this happened a good deal later 
 than the time when the Romanists suppose his charge at Rome 
 to have commenced. When Paul afterwards came himself to 
 Rome, mention is made of the Christians he found there, but 
 not a syllable that Peter either then was, or had been formerly 
 among them. Paul, in his long epistle to the Romans, or the 
 church of Christ at Rome, docs not once mention the person 
 whom these men pretend to have been their bishop. This si- 
 lence is the more remarkable, that, towards the close of the epis- 
 tle, he seems solicitous not to omit taking particular notice of 
 every one by name, who, residing there, could be denominated, 
 in any respect, a fellow -labourer in the common cause. Nay 
 more, in the beginning of that epistle, he expresses the earnest 
 desire he had to visit them, that he might impart to them some 
 spiritual gifts, that they might be established. This, if we con- 
 sider the purpose for which Peter and John were sent by the 
 apostles to the Samaritans, converted by Philip, as recorded in 
 the eighth chapter of the Acts, will appear at least a strong pre- 
 sumption that no apostle had been yet at Rome. Paul after- 
 wards wrote from Rome, where he was twice a prisoner, to the 
 Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Phihppians, to the Colos- 
 sians, to Philemon, to Timothy, without taking notice of Peter 
 in any of the six letters, or sending any salutations from him, 
 notwithstanding the attention, in this respect, he pays toothers. 
 When he said to Timothy, " At my first answer," to wit, be- 
 fore the emperor at Rome, " no man stood with me, but all 
 '' men forsook me," — there would surely have been an excep- 
 tion in favour of Peter, if any such person had been there. 
 Would he have said, in writing to the Colossians from the same 
 place, that Tychicus, Onesimus, Aristarchus, INIarcus, and Jus- 
 tus, were his only fellow-labourers to the kingdom of God, who 
 had been a comfort to him, if Peter had been in Rome ? Or 
 lastly, when he told his beloved son Timothy, that the time of 
 his departure was at hand, and sent him salutations from all the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 213 
 
 brethren, naming Eubiilus, Pudens, Linus, and Claudia, would 
 lie have omitted Peter, if, agreeably to that very tradition Ibr- 
 merly alluded to, he had been not only in that capital at the 
 time, but a fellow-prisoner in the same jail ? 
 
 The only pretence of scriptural evidence, advanced by the 
 Romanists, is indeed a very poor one, not to call it ridiculous. 
 Peter, say they, in his first epistle, presents the salutations of 
 the church at Babylon, by which they would have it, that he 
 must certainly have meant Rome. If they think he spoke pro- 
 phetically, they do not, by this interpretation, pay a great com- 
 pliment to the throne of the hierarchy. The propriety of the 
 application, in this view, we do not mean to controvert. But 
 our adversaries, on this question, must be sensible, that their 
 explanation is merely conjectural. And is not the conjecture, 
 which others make, at least as plausible, that by Babylon is 
 here meant Jerusalem, which the apostle so denominates, on ac- 
 count of its apostacy, by the rejection and murder of the Mes- 
 siah, and on account of its impending fate, so similar to that de- 
 nounced against Babylon ? But why, say others, should we, 
 without necessity, recur to a figurative sense, when the words 
 are capable of being literally interpreted? To do so, would seem 
 the more unreasonable, in this case, as the epistle is written in 
 a simple, and not an allegorical, style. Why must the apostle 
 be supposed not to mean the ancient Babylon in Chaldea, which 
 was still in being, and was then, I may say, the head-quarters 
 of the Jews in the East; a place famous for the residence of 
 many of their most celebrated doctors, and for giving birth to 
 some of their most learned performances on the law? That the 
 apostle of the circumcision should go to preach the gospel in 
 Babylon, the capital of the Jews in dispersion, will be thought 
 to have a degree of probability, which it would require positive 
 evidence to surmount. Yet I have heard nothing, on the op- 
 posite side, but supposition, founded on vague and obscure tra- 
 ditions. — But, setting aside the imperial seat of the Chaldeans, 
 there was, at that time, a Babylon in Egypt, a city of consider- 
 able note. What should make it be thought improbable, that 
 this epistle was written there ? That either of these was the 
 fact, appears to me beyond comparison more likely, than that 
 the apostle should date a plain letter in so enigmatical a man- 
 
214 LECTURES ON 
 
 ner, as could not fail either to mislead his readers, or to puzzle 
 them. A tolerable reason for this conduct I have never heard. 
 For had there been any danger to the writer from what was con- 
 tained in the letter, it would have led him rather to suppress 
 his own name, than to disguise the place where it was written, 
 a thing of no imaginable consequence. But the openness with 
 which he introduces his name and addition at the head of the 
 epistle, ought, in my opinion, to remove every suspicion of that 
 kind. The case is very different in the interpretation of pro- 
 phetic writing, such as the Apocalypse, in which the style is 
 purposely symbolical and obscure. Thus we are fully warrant- 
 ed to say, that there is no notice taken in scripture, notwith- 
 standing the numerous occasions there were of doing it, that 
 Peter ever was in Rome. I add, that there is not the least no- 
 tice of such a thing to be found in the writings of any of the 
 apostolic fathers, who had been in the former part of their lives 
 contemporaries of the apostles, and had survived them, and con- 
 sequently, of all the ecclesiastical writers, had the best oppor- 
 tunity of knowing. Clement of Rome, it is true, mentions 
 Peter's martyrdom as a known fact, without specifying the place. 
 It had, besides, been foretold by our Lord. I am inclined to 
 think that it must have been at Rome, both because it is agree- 
 able to the unanimous voice of antiquity, and because the suf- 
 ferings of so great an apostle could not fail to be a matter of 
 such notoriety in the church, as to preclude the possibility of 
 an imposition in regard to the place. But with this opinion I 
 see no way of reconciling the silence of scripture, but by saying 
 that Peter's journey to Rome was posterior, not only to the 
 period with which the history of the Acts concludes, but to the 
 writing of Paul's epistles. In this case it is manifest, that he 
 could not have been the founder, nor even one of the earliest 
 instructors, of the Roman church. It is astonishing, that at 
 the very time, as is pretended, of the institution of the papal 
 supremacy, and of the instalment of the first hierarch, from 
 whom all the rest in succession derive their authority, an autho- 
 rity by which the whole church, to the end of the world, was 
 to be governed, at the time when among Christians it ought to 
 have been most conspicuous, and to have attracted the greatest 
 attention, so profound a silence, in regard to it, is observed on 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ' 215 
 
 every side. No hint is given of such a thing, or of any cir- 
 cumstance relating to it, by apostle, evangelist, or father. And 
 that mighty sovereign the Pope, that king of kings, the sub- 
 lime head of the church universal, vvhosc throne was erected at 
 Rome, is treated alike by all, as one utterly unknown and un- 
 heard of. No one seems to have formed the least conception of 
 any such personage. 
 
 I shall admit, however, that all that has been advanced, can- 
 not be accounted a proof either that Peter, in the course of his 
 apostolical peregrinations, was never at Rome, or even that he 
 was not the founder of that church ; but I believe that every 
 candid and capable inquirer will consider it as perfectly sufficient 
 to evince, first, that he was not the bishop of the place, accord- 
 ing to the proper acceptation of the term ; and, secondly, that 
 their bishop, whoever he was, was not, by any prerogative what- 
 ever, distinguished from ahy other bishop. If, setting aside 
 the apostles, Linus, agreeably to the common opinion, was the 
 first bishop of that see, and was ordained before the martyrdom 
 both of Peter and of Paul, the latter, when writing to Timothy 
 a very little before his own death, as he acquaints us himself, 
 seems to have had very odd conceptions of the papal dignity, 
 when he could huddle the name of the sovereign pontiff with 
 certain obscure names, no where else to be found in the annals 
 of history. " Eubulus," says he, " greeteth thee, and Pudens, 
 " and Linus, and Claudia, and all the brethren." He docs not 
 so much as give the pope the precedency. Is this the manner 
 in which Paul would have treated the vicar of Christ, had he 
 known or acknowledged any such character? With regard to 
 Peter, if what has been said does not satisfy, that he could not 
 be the Roman prelate, the words of Paul, in his epistle to the 
 Galatians, (Gal. ii. 7 — 9.) an epistle written from Rome, are 
 perfectly decisive. There Peter is expressly denominated the 
 apostle of the circumcision, and is said to have had the conver- 
 sion of the Jews, throughout the world, eminently entrusted to 
 his care. In this, his mission is contrasted with that of Paul, 
 who is styled by way of eminence, the apostle of the Gentiles. 
 That Peter, then, should be fixed in the metropolis of the Gen- 
 tile world, as their particular pastor, the pastoi* of a church con- 
 sisting mostly of converts from idolatry, is palpably irreconcile- 
 
216 LECTURES ON 
 
 able with the account given of him by his brother Paul. Some 
 ancient writers, in order to remove this difficulty have supposed, 
 that there were at first t'vvo distinct churches at Rome, one of 
 believing Jews, of which Peter, the other of believing Gentiles, 
 of which Paul, was the teacher. But this, for aught appears, 
 is unexampled in apostolical antiquity. Though the Jewish 
 converts, by themselves, continued for some time in the obser- 
 vance of rites to which the converts from heathenism were not 
 obliged, these rites nowise entered into, or affected, their social 
 worship as Christians. Being one in Christ Jesus, and members 
 one of another, it is much more probable, that they all assem- 
 bled in the same congregation, communicated with one another, 
 and had their pastors in common. To have done otherwise, 
 could not fail to occasion a schism between the two parties. 
 
 And in regard to the other point, that Peter was not the bi- 
 shop of that city, those very testimonies evince, which have 
 been pleaded by the Romanists, to prove that he was there, and 
 that he was the founder of their church; so that when any ec- 
 clesiastical writers style him bishop (which, by the way, is not 
 done by the earliest,) it is manifest that they use the terra not 
 in the strict sense, but with a certain latitude, denoting only that 
 whilst he remained there, he took a concern in regulating the 
 aftairs of that church. Ireneus, one of the most ancient autho- 
 rities that have been produced in support of the tradition that 
 Peter was at Rome, shows manifestly, in the passage quoted 
 from him by Eusebius, that Peter was not considered, in his 
 time, which was near the end of the second century, as having 
 been bishop of that church, or even as its sole founder. His 
 
 VVOrds are these (I. v. C. 6.) Qii^iXtasav'lis »» xcct oiK,ohof^nerav]i; 01 fACiKu^tot 
 a-TToroXoi iKx,Xyiffttx.v, Aiva tjjv t'/is iTisxa-zr*;; Xi^a^yiccv ivi;:^u^io-a.v, '' 1 llC blcSS- 
 
 " ed apostles," (observe he speaks in the plural number, as he 
 had mentioned a little before both Peter and Paul,) " having 
 " founded and constructed that church, delivered the episcopal 
 '.' office into the hands of Linus." Accordingly, in mention- 
 ing some of her first bishops, he always counts from Linus, not 
 from Peter, calling Anaclctus the second bishop, and Clement 
 the third. All these three are mentioned also by Ruffinus, in 
 the fourth century, as succeeding one after another during Pe- 
 ter's lifetime, and not as succeeding Peter himself. Nay, he 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 217 
 
 affirms still more particularly, tliat Peter committed to them 
 the office of bishop that lie might not be detained from dis- 
 charging the duties of the apostleship. Several of the ancients, 
 with Ireneus, ascribe tlie founding of that church equally to 
 both apostles, whom, in a looser style, some denominate bishops 
 as well as apostles. In this manner both Epiphanius and Euse- 
 bius speak of them. The Apostolical Constitutions, a compila- 
 tion ascribed to Clement of Rome, but manifestly of a much 
 later date, though probably extracted in part out of the old 
 apocryphal writings, called didascalies, attributed to the apos- 
 tles, and to apostolic men, say, that Linus was the first bishop 
 of Rome, and was ordained by Paul, and, that Clement was 
 the second, and ordained, after Linus's death, by Peter. That 
 most of these Constitutions, as we now have them, were not 
 compiled sooner than the end of the fourth, or the beginning of 
 the fifth century. Bishop Pearson [a], and Dr. Grabe [6] have 
 put beyond a doubt. That the order about the observance of 
 Easter [c] is copied from a canon to that purpose of the coun- 
 cil of Nice, and stands in direct opposition to the primitive prac- 
 tice in the east, and to an express injunction in that more an- 
 cient writing, called ^t^ax>i i^-^oroXcuv, some fragments whereof are 
 preserved in Epiphanius, is manifest, and sufficiently shows, 
 that the compilers made no scruple of making such alterations 
 in those didascalies, as they judged proper for adapting them to 
 the doctrine and usages of their own time. In the end of the 
 fourth century, therefore, Peter and Paul were equally honour- 
 ed by tradition as the founders of the Roman church, but nei- 
 ther of them was numbered among the bishops properly so call- 
 ed. 
 
 But it does not satisfy the ambitious views of Rome, to say, 
 that Peter was the founder of their church ; for they will readi- 
 ly acknowledge, that he was the founder also of the church at 
 Antioch, and indeed of many others, in the different places 
 where this eminent apostle first published the gospel. Paul 
 too, was the founder, though not the bishop, in the ordinary 
 and proper acceptation of tlie term, of many churches in Asia 
 Minor, in Macedonia, and in Greece. And though we have 
 
 [<)] Vind. Ign. Pars i. c. 4-. [h] Spicileg. pati-um. sec. 1. 
 
 [c] Lib. V. cap. 17. 
 
SI 8 LECTURES ON 
 
 not so particular information about the rest, we have reason to 
 believe, that every one of the apostles was the founder of some. 
 But, says the Romanist, is it not agreeable to the voice of 
 antiquity, that James, an apostle, was the first bishop of Jeru- 
 salem ? And if that see had one apostle for their bishop, why 
 might not Rome have another for theirs ? This, if the fact 
 from which they argue, were, as they suppose it to have been, 
 proves only, that the point which they would establish in the 
 conclusion, might have been that there was nothing incompati- 
 ble in it, but by no means that it was. The fact itself, how- 
 ever, on which they build, must appear, even on their own prin- 
 ciples, an absolute uncertainty. It is universally agreed, that 
 the name of the first bishop of Jerusalem was James, and that 
 he was surnamed the Just, but it is not agreed that this James 
 was an apostle. Eusebius, Hegesippus, Epiphanius, Jerom, 
 Gregory of Nysse, Chrysostom, have been numbered among 
 those who held, that this James was only one of the seventy 
 disciples. Some critics have thought, and with great appear- 
 ance of reason, that out of the seventy, and after them out of 
 the five hundred, to whom, Paul tells us, our Lord appeared at 
 once after his resurrection, all the first pastors of the churches 
 of Judea, in particular, were selected. This, too, is entirely 
 agreeable to what Clemens Romanus, in a passage I had occa- 
 sion formerly to quote, acquaints us, was the uniform custom, 
 that those who were the first fruits to the faith of Christ, were 
 constituted the bishops of the congregations planted by the apos- 
 tles and evangelists. Whereas, to suppose that an apostle, 
 who, with his fellows in that sacred college, had received this 
 express commission, as the last orders from the mouth of his 
 Master, " Go throughout all the world, teach" (rather convert, 
 make disciples, f^a.^r^\iv(rotii) " all nations, and preach the gospel 
 " to every creature," — to be confined to the charge of a parti- 
 cular flock, is to suppose him either voluntarily to resign his im- 
 portant commission, or to be deprived of it, and thus to under- 
 go a real degradation. Eor beside the difterence, in respect of 
 extent, between these two missions, the department of an apos- 
 tle is chiefly amongst infidels, whom he is commanded y^x^y^iivuvy 
 to convert ; the department of a bishop is chiefly among believ- 
 ers, whom he is appointed, ItlxiKnv, to teach. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. QIQ 
 
 An argument hath sometimes been formed in support of the 
 papal pretensions, on the ancient use of such appellations as 
 these applied to Rome, apostolic see, chair, throne, and the like. 
 But it is too well known to require illustration, that these phra- 
 ses, though, in after ages, appropriated by the bishops of Home 
 to their own charge, were, in the first three centuries, applied 
 to all the churches indiscriminately, in which bishops had at 
 first been placed by the apostles. Such were Ephesus, Smyrna, 
 Antioch, Corinth, Thessalonica, Philippi. Afterwards these 
 titles were still further extended, to distinguish the metropoli- 
 tical churches throughout the Christian world from the sees of 
 their suffragans. Of the same futile kind are the arguments 
 drawn from the title pope, (a Greek word signifying ^a^/ze?*,) and 
 from the ascription of holiness and blessedness in the form of 
 addressing the bishop of Rome. These things, it is well known 
 to all who are conversant in church-history, were at first com- 
 mon to most bishops, especially metropolitans and patriarchs, 
 and were given, as well as received, by the Roman pontiff him- 
 self; though afterwards they were gradually, with many other 
 things, arrogated by Rome as her peculiar prerogatives. 
 
 Indeed, it is so evident to those who are ever so little ac- 
 quainted with these matters, that the true source of the gran- 
 deur of the Roman bishop was the dignity of the place, and not 
 any honours he derived from Peter, that to attempt to illustrate 
 so clear a point, would, on the one hand, be, to the impartial 
 and intelligent, but a mis-spending of time, and would, I fear, 
 on the other, have no effect on persons whose minds are, either 
 by prejudice or interest, swayed to the opposite side of the 
 question. If the succession to Peter could be fairly claimed 
 by any, the church of Antioch, beyond all comparison, would 
 have a preferable title. We have express scripture evidence 
 that Peter was there, (see Gal. ii. 11.) and at least as clear a 
 tradition that he was the founder of that see. I do not say 
 that Peter, if he was the founder, could properly be called the 
 bishop of Antioch any more than of Rome ; but I say, that in 
 whatever sense he can be styled bishop of Rome, we have much 
 better ground to denominate him bishop of Antioch. 
 
 Pope Innocent, who, about the beginning of the fifth cen- 
 tury, appears to have been the first who thought of deriving the 
 
220 LECTURES ON 
 
 prerogatives of his see from the apostle Peter, acknowledges, 
 in a letter to the patriarch of Antioch, that that church, as well 
 as Rome, had properly been the see of St. Peter, and that it 
 was, on that account, of very great dignity, and entitled to a 
 very extensive jurisdiction ; nay, further, that it yielded to the 
 see of Rome only because Peter had accomplished there what 
 he had begun at Antioch. I cannot help thinking, however, 
 that this was a dangerous confession, made by Innocent ; for it 
 does not seem so clear a case, that it should be the last church 
 that the prince of the apostles had founded and possessed, and 
 not the first, which had the best title to priority in respect of 
 honour and power. I believe most people would think it more 
 reasonable to consider the first foundation of the first of the 
 apostles as entitled to the preference, or first place, if there was 
 to be a primacy in the church. Indeed, by the pontiff's man- 
 ner of expressing himself concerning this great apostle, one 
 would imagine he were talking of a mere modern, who, though 
 settled at Antioch as bishop of the place, had no scruple to ac- 
 cept a call to a better bishopric, and therefore came soon after- 
 wards to be translated (how, when, or by whom, we know not) 
 to the metropolis of the empire. 
 
 No historical fact, however, can be more evident, than that 
 the origin of the superiority of one episcopal see over an- 
 other, arose from the secular division of the empire, and from 
 no other consideration whatever. Hence the pre-eminence 
 of the see of Rome, whose bishop, before the conversion 
 of Constantino, had only the precedency among the prelates, 
 as bishop of the imperial city; but no jurisdiction beyond 
 the bounds of the provinces, lying within the vicariate of 
 Rome, as it was called, which was properly no patriarchate, 
 being but the half of the civil diocese of Italy, and consider- 
 ably inferior in extent to some of the patriarchates. In 
 every thing we may observe the dignity of the episcopal see 
 was determined by the rank which the city itself held in the 
 empire. Otherwise why should Alexandria have been ranked 
 as it was before Antioch ? The latter they acknowledge to have 
 been founded by him, whom they denominate the prince of the 
 apostles, whereas the former was not founded by any of the 
 apostles : its erection is universally ascribed to the evangelist 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. QQl 
 
 Mark. But the true reason is, that Alexandria was the second 
 city of the Roman empire, and the prefect of that capital had 
 tlie precedency of the prefect of Antioch. 
 
 But above all, why was not Jerusalem vested with the supre- 
 macy; Jerusalem, the mother of churches, where our blessed 
 Lord, by his death and resurrection, laid the foundations not of 
 a particular churcli only, but of the church universal ? I may 
 add, where the Holy Ghost first descended on the apostles, 
 where they were commanded to commence their ministry, " be- 
 " ginning at Jerusalem," and whence the faith was propagated 
 and diffused, as from its fountain, throughout all the world. 
 And even with regard to the particular church of that city, it 
 was surely entitled to the highest honours, inasmuch as it was, 
 in the strictest sense, founded by Jesus Christ himself. For 
 on occasion of the election of Matthias, before the descent of 
 the Holy Spirit, and, consequently, before the apostles entered 
 on their office, the number of disciples that were convened 
 there, probably not all that were in Jerusalem, was, says the 
 sacred historian, about an hundred and twenty. And as the 
 foundation of that individual church was laid by him who is the 
 Lord and head of the whole, so the raising of the superstructure 
 may most justly be accounted the work not of one apostle, but 
 of the whole college of apostles. Yet the bishop of Jerusalem, 
 though honoured with some special privileges, came in fact to 
 be ranked among the patriarchs only in the fifth place, his pa- 
 triarchal diocese being, in reality, but a small part, taken from 
 the diocese of Antioch. And if the rejection of the Jews, on 
 account of their unbelief, be held a good reason for the rejec- 
 tion of Jerusalem from being the capital of this spiritual king- 
 dom, consisting mostly of convertsj'rom gentilism ; why was not 
 Caesarea, or, as it was anciently called, Straton's Tower, pre* 
 ferred before every other city ; concerning which we have un- 
 doubted evidence, that it was honoured to be the place, where, 
 by the preaching of Peter to Cornelius and his friends, th6 
 door of faith was first opened to the Gentiles? Yet the bishop 
 of this CiEsarea never attained any higher dignity than that of 
 metropolitan. 
 
 What but its new acquired importance raised the see of Con- 
 stantinople, formerly Byzantium, whose bishop, till the city was 
 
QQ2 LECTURES OX 
 
 made by Constantlne the seat of empire, was suffragan to the 
 exarch of Heraclea, to be one of the principal patriarchates in 
 the Christian world ; and to which its former superior became, 
 in its turn, suffragan ? That it arose from no other cause, is 
 manifest from the canon which first vested this see with that 
 pre-eminence. The canon, I mean, is the third of the council 
 of Constantinople, in the year 381, being the second ecumenical 
 
 council. JThe words are, tov f^v rai Kov^avmn'roXiui i'TTuxoTov txiiv r» 
 «^iffp>itce, rrii TtfJi^yis (Jt-ira, rov rns 'Puf^'Ai iTisxo'rov, dice ro avat cLvrm vzav Vaftfiv. 
 
 '' The bishop of Constantinople shall enjoy the honour of pre- 
 ** cedency next after the bishop of Rome, because it is new 
 ** Rome." The first place is given to Rome as the elder sis- 
 ter, and that from which the empire still continued to be named. 
 The second is given to Constantinople, because now an impe- 
 rial city as well as the other. In the reason assigned for giving 
 the second place to the latter, they clearly indicate the only rea- 
 son then known for giving the first place to the former. This 
 is still more explicitly expressed in the twenty- eighth canon of 
 the council of Chalcedon, holden in 451, being the fourth ecu- 
 menical council. It is said to have consisted of 630 bishops, 
 and consequently, was the most numerous that had yet been as- 
 sembled. The reason on which the fathers ground their re- 
 solve, is thus expressed in the canon : Ka/ yao toj ^^ova, rvsg -ar^nriiu. 
 
 Ti^ttS Teafins, diet ro fiectriXiunv mv zs'oXiv txuvm, ei Tsran^is uxoru; ccTrt^ihui'Kaffi tas 
 ■:sf^i(;^ua, kcci ru ocuru tfKOTra x,iviif/,ivoi oi ^v ^io<l>i\i^aToi iTriffxoTroi, to. laa. sr^sa-lis/x 
 a-riviifiCiVTu tyi; vixg Tufiyis ^wytuTumj B-^ovm, iuXoyu; x^ivavr'/is' njv SairiXiitx, xai 
 evyxXy,ru Tifivi^tKrav zfoXiv, xat tuv ktcov a'Xo'koe.v^iffce.v -zr^ia-Snuy r'/j -^^KrfivTi^yi Qa;iXiSi 
 Vufiriy xai tv rot; txxkyiffixfixots, 'us ixuvr,v fiiyaXnuffScci isf^ayf/.cca'i, ^ivn^uv [jt-ir 
 
 txuvyi^ 'vvot^x^ffav — " Whercas the fathers, with great propriety, 
 *' bestowed the chief honours on the see of Old Rome, be- 
 *' CAUSE IT WAS THE IMPERIAL CITY, and whereas the 150 
 ** (Constantinopolitan) fathers beloved of God, actuated by the 
 '* same motive, conferred the like dignity on the most holy see 
 *' of New Rome, (that is, Constantinople) judging it reasonable 
 *' that the city honoured to be the seat of empire, and of the 
 " senate, and equal in civil privileges with ancient royal Rome, 
 " should be equally distinguished also by ecclesiastical privi- 
 *' leges, and enjoy the second place in the church, being next 
 " to Old Rome — we ratify and confirm," &c. And as the 
 council of Constantinople had given rank to that patriarch, this 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Q^S 
 
 of Chalcedon proceeded to add jurisdiction. My principal rea- 
 sons for adducing this passage are to show first, that the rank 
 and dignity of the several bishops was, at that time, considered 
 by them as conferred by the church, and not as derived from 
 Jesus Christ, St. Peter, or the college of apostles, none of 
 whom are so much as mentioned by them ; that therefore it is 
 of human, not of divine institution : and, secondly, that the 
 only reason assigned for the preference given is the dignity of 
 the city, and the rank it bears in the empire. It is to no pur- 
 pose to urge, that the bishop of Rome could never be prevailed 
 on to ratify this canon of Chalcedon. It obtained, notwith- 
 standing his opposition, was engrossed in the acts of the coun- 
 cil, and remained a rule in the east ever after. It was no won- 
 der, that the sudden rise of this new dignitary roused the jea- 
 lousy of Rome. Constantinople, from a place of no considera- 
 tion, was, in half a century, become the principal see in the east. 
 An obscure suffragan was raade chief of the Greek patriarchs, 
 and next in rank to the Roman pontiff. Since the removal of 
 the seat of empire, Constantinople was grown a great and flou- 
 rishing city, and still appeared to be increasing; Rome was as 
 evidently on the decline. It was natural for the pope to argue 
 in this manner: " If things proceed thus, can it be doubted, 
 *' that a bishopric, scarcely named in former ages, which has, 
 '' with so little ceremony, been at one step exalted above all 
 *' the patriarchates of the east, and had the second place in the 
 *' church assigned it, will, at the next, with as little ceremony, 
 *' be raised above the Roman see, and made the first ?" There 
 appeared some danger in overlooking these alterations, and 
 therefore, under pretence of defending the rights of the sees of 
 Alexandria and Antioch, and the canons of Nice, which, by the 
 way, had not a syllable relating to the question, he warded off 
 the evil which he suspected it would bring upon Rome. It is, 
 however, sufficient for my purpose to show, what may be justly 
 called the sense of the universal church at that time on this ar- 
 ticle ; for the above canon was subscribed by all the bishops of 
 that numerous council, with the exception of a very few, who 
 favoured Rome. Allow me to add, that these councils, the 
 Constantinopolitan and the Chalcedonian, are two of the four 
 which pope Gregory the Great declared he held in equal vene- 
 
^M LEc'rUR:es on 
 
 ration with the four gospels, and which are to this day In tlie 
 highest authority in the Romish church. I pass the considera- 
 tion of the validity of those canons, leaving it to the discussion 
 of scholastic sophisters and Roman canonists. I regard them 
 solely as the unanimous testimony of the leading men, and, con- 
 sequently, of the church in those periods, concerning the source 
 of the prerogatives enjoyed by particular sees, and the grounds 
 on which they were bestowed. And in this view they are cer- 
 tainly of the greatest moment. 
 
 Indeed, so notorious it is, that the dignity and authority of 
 the sees were almost entirely correspondent to the dignity and 
 authority of the civil governors of the place, that when the em- 
 peror judged it proper to divide a province into two, a thing 
 which often happened, giving them separate magistrates : the 
 ecclesiastical polity underwent the like alteration, and the bi- 
 shop of the new metropolis was raised to the dignity of a metro- 
 politan. The provincial churches also were divided, and all 
 those situated within the province newly erected, were with- 
 drawn from their old metropolitan. This would not fail to 
 create great animosities and discontents among the clergy, as 
 well as to prove a strong incentive to ambitious prelates, who 
 had interest at court, to apply for such a division of the pro- 
 vince, as would raise their city to a metropolis. But as this 
 practice was attended with great inconveniences, and productive 
 of very gross abuses, a timely check was put to such alterations 
 in the ecclesiastical jurisdiction, by the council of Chalcedon, 
 that very council which established the prerogatives of the Con- 
 stantinopolitan patriarch. Nothing, however, can be more evi- 
 dent, or is more universally admitted by all who know anything 
 of these matters, than that the whole fabric of ecclesiastical go- 
 vernment was raised on the model of the civil polity, that the 
 very manner in which power was distributed, and apportioned 
 to the great officers of the state, v/as, in most cases, servilely 
 copied by the rulers of the church. Nay, the very erection of 
 their dignities, and the investiture of the dignitaries, were ge- 
 nerally effected by the imperial edict ; for those never hesitated 
 to acknowledge the power of the emperor in these matters, who 
 were themselves benefited by his power. Afterwards, indeed, 
 when perfectly secured by long possession, the possessors were 
 
FX'CLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ^^25 
 
 not so willing to acknowledge the source whence their wealth 
 and lionours were originally derived. 
 
 In regard to Rome in particular, it is astonishing to think 
 how suddenly, upon the establishment of Christianity, its bi- 
 shops arose, by the munificence of the emperors, and the mis- 
 judged devotion of some great and opulent proselytes, especially 
 among the ladies, from a state of obscurity to the most envied 
 opulence and grandeur. Ammianus Marcellinus, a pagan and 
 contemporary writer, speaking of the horrible conflict betwixt 
 Damasus and Ursinus for the episcopal chair of Rome, which 
 happened about the middle of the fourth century, a conflict in 
 which the prefect of the city was compelled to take refuge in 
 the suburbs, and which ended in the cruel massacre of a hun- 
 dred and thirty-seven people in the basilic of Liberius, says, iu 
 order to account, in some measure, for the violence and fury 
 with which this contest had been conducted, " I must acknow- 
 " ledge, that wlicn I reflect on the pomp attending that dignity, 
 " I am not surprised, that those who are fond of parade should 
 " quarrel and fight, and strain every nerve to attain this office, 
 " since they are sure, if they succeed, to be enriched with the 
 ** presents of the matrons, to appear abroad no more on foot, 
 " but in stately chariots, and gorgeously attired, to keep sump- 
 " tuous tables, nay, and to surpass kings themselves in the 
 *' splendour and magnificence of their entertainments. But 
 " how happy vrould they be, if despising the voluptuousness 
 " and show of the city, which they plead in excuse' for their 
 *' luxury, they followed the example of some bishops in the 
 '' provinces, who, by the temperance and frugality of their diet, 
 " the poverty and plainness of their dress, the unassuming mo- 
 *' desty of their looks, approve themselves pure and upright to 
 *' the eternal God, and all his genuine worshippers [«]." I 
 bring this quotation the rather, because it affords the testimony 
 of a heathen, (who, therefore, cannot be supposed partial to the 
 cause of Christianity) that to whatever pitch of pride and arro- 
 gance the church potentates in the great cities, were now arriv- 
 ed, there were not wanting Christian pastors in the country, 
 whose lives did honour to their profession, showing that the 
 spirit of the meek and humble Jesus was not totally extinct 
 [a] Lib. xxvii. cap. 3. 
 P 
 
^26 LECTURES ON 
 
 among those who were denominated his followers and servants. 
 Let me add, that the readiness with which that author gives so 
 honourable a testimony to the temper and manners of several 
 ministers of Christ, raises him above the suspicion of being ac- 
 tuated by malice to the causej in the reproaches he throws on 
 the ostentation and sensuality of others. 
 
 In confirmation, if it be thought necessary, of the account 
 given by an infidel, of the grandeur, and even more than royal 
 state, in which the Roman pontiff then lived, I shall add what 
 is told by Jerom, a Christian writer, and a father of the church, 
 who was also a contemporary and an intimate friend of the bi- 
 shop. Prsetextatus, a nobleman of the highest rank, and ho- 
 noured with the greatest and most lucrative employments of the 
 empire, but zealously attached to paganism, conversing once fa- 
 miliarily with Damasus, the successful candidate, on the subject 
 of their different religions, said to the prelate, in a sort of plea- 
 santry, " Make me but bishop of Rome, and 1 will turn Chris- 
 *' tian immediately." Now it deserves to be remarked, that 
 Christianity, considered as an establishment, supported by legal 
 sanctions, and enjoying the countenance of the magistrate, was 
 then only of about fifty years standing. It was no longer since 
 the church had emerged out of obscurity, and been released 
 from a most bloody persecution, begun by Dioclesian, about the 
 beginning of the century, and continued with little interruption 
 for ten successive years. That in so short a compass this epis- 
 copal see should have mounted almost to the summit of earthly 
 grandeur, would be looked upon, if not so amply attested, as a 
 thing incredible. 
 
 But whatever its wealth and splendour might be even at this 
 early period, its power was yet but in its infancy. It is, how- 
 ever, certain, that a remarkable superiority in respect of proper- 
 ty, is the surest foundation on which a permanent dominion can 
 be raised. But to account, in some measure, for the sudden- 
 ness of this acquisition of riches, it ought to be observed, that 
 it had been, long before, customary for all Christians that were 
 capable, but especially the more wealthy, to make liberal offer- 
 ings to the church, as on other occasions, so particularly at the 
 celebration of the more solemn festivals. These offerings, after 
 supplying the needs of the church, and supporting its ministers, 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL PIISTORY. 2(37 
 
 were understood, at first, to be devoted to the relief of the dis- 
 tressed and needy, strangers, orphans, widows, prisoners, and 
 sick. Accordingly, with these truly pious and charitable dona- 
 tions, the bishops of Rome used, in earlier times, in the first 
 place, to relieve the poor of their own church, and when that 
 end was attained, to send the overplus to other churches, where 
 the poor were numerous, the people in general less affluent, and, 
 consequently, the offerings insufficient. 
 
 Of this humane and generous practice, the duration was only 
 whilst the church itself remained in affliction and obscurity. It 
 may appear a paradox, but it is too well confirmed by experi- 
 ence, that nothing is a greater enemy to generosity, than the 
 unexpected acquisition of boundless wealth. This proves al- 
 most invariably the parent of ambition. And when ambition 
 comes to supplant charity, and a pompous species of supersti- 
 tion to be substituted for rational devotion, the poor are forgot- 
 ten on all sides. The exaltation of the priesthood, the exterior 
 glory of the sacred service, magnificent temples, richly furnished 
 and decorated, gorgeous vestments, with whatever can dazzle 
 the senses of those present at the public ministrations, appear 
 even to the bulk of the people the noblest object of their liber- 
 ality, as tending more than any other to the honour of God, 
 and the advancement of religion. In consequence of this gra- 
 dual change in men's sentiments, the oblations made to the 
 church would be gradually alienated from the primitive purpose, 
 not only with impunity, but even with general approbation. 
 Though the support of the ministers, in many places, did not 
 now, as formerly, depend on the voluntary contributions of the 
 people, all the principal sees having fixed revenues and tempo- 
 ralities annexed to them, the ministers were still, by a kind of 
 prescription, or immemorial custom, considered as having a per- 
 sonal interest in the sacred offerings. And though these were 
 not wanted for the supply of the necessaries, or even of the con- 
 veniences of life, there is no imaginable limit can be set to its 
 luxuries, and for the supply of these there would ever be occa- 
 sion. The thoughts of these upstart princes would then natu- 
 rally fix on splendid equipages, numerous retinues, princely ap- 
 parel, expensive tables, superb palaces, and whatever else could 
 feed their vanity, and put them upon the level (as in a few cities, 
 
 p2 
 
228 LECTURES ON 
 
 Rome and Constantinople in particular, they were quickly put 
 upon the level) with the greatest monarchs. 
 
 But to take a brief survey of the principal causes which con- 
 tributed to raise the papacy to that zenith of glory, which it ac- 
 tually reached, shall be reserved for the subject of some other 
 lectures. In this I have only examined the foundation. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 229 
 
 LECTURE XIII. 
 
 AN my last lecture, I entered on the consideration of the rise 
 of papal dominion. I showed that the pretensions made by 
 papists, in regard to the distinguishing prerogatives of the apos- 
 tle Peter, and in regard to the title which the Roman pontiff 
 derives from him, are equally without foundation ; that neither 
 had that apostle any such prerogatives as they ascribe to him, 
 nor has the bishop of Rome a better title to be called his suc- 
 cessor than any other pastor in the Christian church. I took 
 notice, that the very first pontiff who advanced this plea as the 
 foundation of his primacy and power, lived no earher than the 
 fifth century. I showed particularly, that the true origin of the 
 Pope's supremacy was the dignity of the sec, and not of its found- 
 er, the wealth and temporal advantages derived from the congre- 
 gation of that great metropolis, and not any spiritual authori- 
 ty and jurisdiction, transmitted from the fisherman of Galilee, 
 who was styled the apostle, not of the nations, but of the cir- 
 cumcision. I showed further, that this account of the origin of 
 Romish dominion, perfectly corresponds with the model that the 
 church very soon assumed in conformity to the civil constitu- 
 tion of the empire ; the dignity and secular power of the ma- 
 gistrate, in every city, especially in every capital, almost inva- 
 riably determining the dignity and spiritual jurisdiction of its 
 pastor. Hence the different degrees among the bishops, of 
 suffragan, primate, or metropolitan, and exarch. Hence also 
 among those of the same class, the exarchs, a few, who presided 
 in the principal cities of the empire, such as Rome, Constan- 
 tinople, Alexandria, and Antioch, were dignified with the title 
 of patriarch. And even among these, the precedency was al- 
 ways regulated by the rank of their respective prefects. To 
 these, indeed, was added Jerusalem, from respect to the place 
 where Christ had consummated his ministry, and our redemp- 
 tion had been accomplished, that is, where expiation had been 
 
230 LECTURES O^ 
 
 made for the sin of man by the sacrifice of the Son of God, 
 where the first fruits of the resurrection had been produced in 
 him who was both the founder and the finisher of the faith, 
 where the Holy Spirit was first given, and whence the gospel 
 issued, as from its fountain, to bless, with its salutary streams, 
 the remotest parts of the habitable world. But this was the 
 only city which was honoured with any pre-eminence from other 
 considerations than such as were merely secular. And even 
 Jerusalem came but in the fifth place. 
 
 I observed before, that power has a sort of attractive force, 
 which gives it a tendency to accumulate, insomuch that what, 
 in the beginning, is a distinction barely perceptible, grows, in 
 process of time, a most remarkable disparity. In every new 
 and doubtful case that may occur, the bias of the imagination is 
 in favour of him who occupies the higher place, were the supe- 
 riority ever so inconsiderable. And what was originally no 
 more than precedency in rank, becomes at length a real supe- 
 riority in power. The effect will be considerably accelerated, 
 if superior opulence join its aid in producing it. This was emi- 
 nently the case with Rome, the wealthiest see, as well as the 
 most respectable, because the seat of empire, of any in the 
 church. 
 
 But it may be urged, on the other side, that when the im- 
 perial throne was transferred from Rome to Constantinople, it 
 might have been expected, that this latter place would rise to a 
 still greater eminence than the former. That, indeed, notwith- 
 Standing its obscurity for ages, it did rise to very great emi- 
 nence, in consequence of the translation of the seat of empire, 
 is itself a very strong confirmation of the doctrine here main- 
 tained. That, though the youngest of the patriarchal sees, it 
 did, through the favour of the emperors, arise to such distin- 
 guished grandeur and authority, as long to appear a formidable 
 rival to haughty Rome, and often to awake her most jealous at- 
 tention, is a point which will not be disputed by any who is but 
 moderately conversant in ecclesiastic history. But then it is to 
 be observed, that Rome had been a church in the highest esti- 
 mation for ages before the name of Constantinople had been 
 heard. And as for Byzantium, the name by which the place 
 had formerly been known, it never was a see of any note or 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 231 
 
 consideration. In regard to the Romans, however uiicertaln it 
 may be who it was that first preached tlie gospel to them, and 
 founded a church among them, there can be no doubt of the 
 antiquity of this event, since Paul, as we learn from the Acts 
 of the Apostles, on his first coming prisoner to Rome, found a 
 church there already planted; and since, in one of his longest 
 letters, manifestly written some time before, and directed to 
 that church, he mentions their faith as even, at that early pe- 
 riod, celebrated throughout the world. Rome may therefore be 
 justly reckoned nearly coeval with the oldest Gentile churches. 
 Certain it is, that the tradition which prevailed most concerning 
 this church, in the days of Constantine, and for a considerable 
 time before, was, that it had been founded by the two apostles, 
 Peter and Paul. These were considered as the most eminent 
 in the apostolical college, the one as the doctor of the Jews, the 
 other of the Gentiles; the people, therefore, seemed to think, 
 that it was an honour due to the mistress and capital of the 
 world, to believe, that she had had a principal share in the mi- 
 nistry of both. Here was an original disadvantage that Con- 
 stantinople, or New Rome, as she was sometimes called, labour- 
 ed under, which it was impossible for her ever to surmount. 
 Antiquity has great influence on every human establishment, 
 but especially on those of a religious nature. What advantage 
 Old Rome derived hence, when she found it convenient in sup- 
 porting her claims, to change her ground, as it were, and rear 
 the fabric ©f spiritual despotism, not as formerly, on the dignity 
 of the world's metropolis and human constitutions, but on di- 
 vine right, transmitted through the prince of the apostles, is too 
 well known to need a particular illustration. And though the 
 younger sister soon learnt to imitate the elder, and claim an 
 origin and antiquity nearly equal, pretending, on I know not 
 what grounds, to have been founded by the apostle Andrew, 
 the brother of Peter, thought to be the elder brother, and who 
 was certainly, as we learn from John's gospel [a], a disciple of 
 Christ before him ; yet the notorious recency, the suddenness^ 
 and the too manifest source of her splendour and power, render- 
 ed it impracticable for her, witliout arrogance, ever to vie with 
 the elder si?ter in her high pretensions. 
 [a] John i. 41—4,3. 
 
232 LECTURES OX 
 
 But with the two causes above mentioned, namely, the supe- 
 rior dignity of the city of Rome, and the opulence of her church, 
 there were several others which co-operated in raising her to 
 that amazing greatness and authority, at which, in the course 
 of a few centuries, she arrived. To enumerate all would be 
 impossible. I shall therefore only select a few of the principal 
 of them. 
 
 The first I shall take notice of is, the vigilant and unremitted 
 policy she early showed in improving every advantage for her 
 own aggrandizement, which rank and wealth could bestow. 
 Scarcely had Christianity received the sanction of the legisla- 
 ture, erecting it into a sort of political establishment, before the 
 bishops of this high-minded city began to entertain the tower- 
 ing thoughts of erecting for themselves a new sort of monarchy, 
 a spiritual domination over their brethren, the members of the 
 church, which might in time be rendered universal, analogous 
 to the secular authority lodged in the emperors over the sub- 
 jects of the empire. The distinctions already introduced, of 
 presbyter, bishop, primate, and (which soon followed) patriarch, 
 seemed naturally to pave the way for it. These distinctions, 
 too, having taken their origin from the civil distinctions that 
 obtained in regard to the villages, towns, and cities, that were 
 the seats of these different orders, seemed to furnish a plausible 
 argument from analogy, that the bishop of the capital of the 
 whole should have an ascendant over the exarchs of the civil 
 dioceses Into which it was divided, similar to that which every 
 exarch enjoyed over the metropolitans of the provinces within 
 his diocese, or exarchate, and which every metropolitan exer- 
 cised over his suffragans, the bishops of his province, and simi- 
 lar to that which the emperor himself exercised over all the 
 members of the empire. Yet, by Constantine's establishment, 
 the bishop of Rome, in strictness, was not so much as an exarch ; 
 the civil diocese of Italy having been, on account of its greater 
 populousness and opulence, divided into two parts, called vi- 
 cariates, or vicarages; the vicariate of Rome, containing ten 
 provinces, and including the islands, Sicily, Corsica, and Sardinia, 
 under the bishop of Rome ; and the vicariate of Italy, contain- 
 ing seven })rovinces, under the bishop of Milan. In deference, 
 however, to a name which was become so venerable as that of 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Q3o 
 
 Rome, the precedency, or, as it was also called, the primacy, 
 of its pastor, seems to have hecn very early, and very generally, 
 admitted in the church. But that for some a<xes nothinij fur- 
 ther was admitted, would have been at this day universally 
 acknowledged an indisputable historical fact, had not many 
 learned and indefatigable writers found it their interest to exert 
 all their abilities to perplex and darken it. It was difficult, 
 however, for wealth and splendour, the genuine parents of am- 
 bition, to rest satisfied with so trifling a pre-eminence. 
 
 Besides, many fortunate incidents, as the minions of Rome 
 no doubt thought them, contributed greatly to assist and for- 
 ward her ambitious schemes. The council of Sardica, about 
 the middle of the fourth century, at the time that the Arian 
 controversy inflamed and divided the whole Christian commu- 
 nity, (this council, I say,) after the oriental bishops were with- 
 drawn, was, by Osius, bishop of Cordoua, a zealous defender 
 of Athanasius, and a firm fi-iend of Julius, bishop of Rome, 
 who was on the same side with him in the great controversy, 
 then agitated with such furious zeal, was induced to make a 
 canon, ordering, that if any bishop should think himself unjust- 
 ly condemned by his comprovincials and metropolitan, his judges 
 should acquaint the bishop of Rome, who might either confirm 
 their judgment, or order the cause to be re-examined by some of 
 the neighbouring bishops. In this, Osius had evidently a double 
 view. One view was, to confer an honour on his friend Julius, 
 the other, to give an additional security to the clergy of his own 
 side. In those times of violence and party rage, bishops who, 
 on the controverted points, happened to be of a different side 
 from their colleagues in the same province, and especially from 
 the primate, were sometimes, for no other reason, very tumul- 
 tuously and irregularly deposed. A revisal of this kind seemed 
 then, at least, to secure the final determination in favour of the 
 orthodox, (an epithet which, in church-history, commonly ex- 
 presses a concurrence in opinion with the majority,) whose doc- 
 trine was at that time vigorously supported by the Pope. This 
 end, however, though probably the principal, it does not appear 
 to have answered. The eastern bishops paid no regard to the 
 acts of a synod, from which they thought they had the justest 
 reasons to separate themselves. Nor was it ever accounted, by 
 
g34 LECTURES ON 
 
 the African bishops, of authority sufficient for establishing a 
 custom so totally repugnant to ancient practice, and so subver- 
 sive of the standing discipline of the church. 
 
 But the popes, long after these disputes were terminated, 
 well knew how to avail themselves of a canon so favourable to 
 the exaltation of their see. Not many years afterwards, Valen- 
 tinian, the more effectually and speedily to crush the dissen- 
 sions and schisms that obtained, in his time, among the pre- 
 lates, especially in Italy, and the West, enacted a law, empow- 
 ering the bishop of Rome to examine and judge other bishops, 
 that religious and ecclesiastical disputes might not be decided 
 by profane and secular judges, but by a Christian pontiff and 
 his colleagues. For this immunity, and the power thus confer- 
 red on the order, a considerable number of bishops, mostly in- 
 deed Italian, soon after synodically convened at Rome, express- 
 ed a grateful sense of the emperor's generosity and indulgence. 
 The opinion, that the order had a superior, even a divine right, 
 to be independent of the civil powers, — a notion so prevalent 
 some ages afterwards, — had not yet been broached. The sin- 
 gle agreeable circumstance, that the imperial edict gave an ex- 
 emption to the clergy from the power of laymen, made them 
 overlook a very fatal circumstance in it, which was, its tenden- 
 cy to enslave the whole order, (not to say the Christian com- 
 munity,) by subjecting them to the tyranny of one of their own 
 number. But the bitter was surmounted by the sweet, or, 
 more properly, the poison was greedily swallowed, as it was hid- 
 den under a vehicle extremely palatable. But no advantage, 
 once obtained, was ever overlooked by that politic and watch- 
 ful power. 
 
 It is evident, that neither the canon of Sardica, nor the im- 
 perial rescript, produced at first much effect beyond Italy, and 
 its immediate dependencies. For a long time, no regard was 
 paid in the East, or even in Africa, to these new regulations. 
 And their influence over the clergy in the West, it must be 
 owned, advanced by very slow degrees. The subordination of 
 bishops to their own metropolitan, along with the other com- 
 provincial bishops, and of metropolitans to their own exarch, 
 with the other diocesan prelates, had by this time been so well 
 established, that it was no easy matter to remove foundations so 
 
FX'CLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ^235 
 
 firmly laid. Indeed, about thirty-four years afterwards, in the 
 pontificate of Damasus, the primitive order was expressly re- 
 stored, and the canon of Sardica virtually revoked by a council 
 assembled at Constantinople, greatly more numerous, and held 
 for many ages in much higher estimation, than the council of 
 Sardica. 
 
 One thing, however, in the policy of Rome, to which they 
 sacredly adhered, was never to lose sight of any privilege or ad- 
 vantage once obtained ; never to be disheartened at any parti- 
 cular check, or present want of success, in asserting a right, but 
 carefully to watch their opportunity, and anew to urge a plea 
 that appeared favourable to their pretensions, however often 
 they had been baffled in urging it before. This perseverance 
 never failed, on some occasion or other, to be of use to their 
 cause. And one instance of success (the increase of the ig- 
 norance and superstition of the people keeping pace with the 
 superiority of the Roman pontiffs) did them more service, than 
 twenty defeats did them hurt. 
 
 To this unabated perseverance, they added another maxim, 
 namely, to make the raising of the pa|^al power their primary 
 object, to which it behoved every other consideration to give 
 way. As this showed itself on numberless occasions, so on 
 none more eminently than on the difference which arose betwixt 
 the eastern churches and the western, on the subject of Aca- 
 cius. This Constantinopolitan pontiff, who lived towards the 
 end of the fifth century, had, in some of those absurd and un- 
 intelligible logomachies, with which the Christian world, in 
 those ages, was without intermission pestered, taken the side 
 opposite to that espoused by the Roman pontiff. The conse- 
 quence was, they first disputed, and, by a very usual progress, 
 from disputing they came to quarrelling, and from quarrelling 
 to an open breach. These holy priests, at last, most piously, 
 according to the fashion of the times, abused, cursed, and ex- 
 communicated each other. The Roman bishop, indeed, at this 
 time, made a bold attempt for surpassing all that his predeces- 
 sors had enterprised hitherto. He summoned before himself, 
 and a synod of Italian bishops, who were his dependants, and, 
 on non-appearance, tried, condemned, and deposed, a patriarch, 
 nay, the first patriarch of the East, an order over which even 
 
236 LECTURES ON 
 
 the insatiable ambition of tbat restless power had never, till 
 then, dared to claim any jurisdiction. The reciprocal anathe- 
 mas followed of course. This produced a most memorable 
 schism between the oriental churches, and the occidental — a 
 schism which continued for no less than five-and-thirty years, 
 and subsisted through no fewer than five successive pontificates. 
 The seeds of the dissension may be said to have been sown iu 
 the time of Pope Simplicius. It was by his successor, Felix, 
 the Second, that the patriarch was cited, judged, and deposed. 
 
 Though it was impossible that such extravagant proceedings 
 should take effect, in opposition to the emperor, and all the 
 oriental churches, they showed but too clearly to what height of 
 pride and arrogance the boundless and ill-judged profusion of 
 former emperors, senators, matrons, and opulent cities, had al- 
 ready raised this novel but formidable power. On this there 
 ensued immediately a division of the church into two : the v.est 
 adhering to the pope, and the east declaring for the patriarch, 
 both obstinately refusing to communicate with each other. It 
 was but too visible, by the sophistical evasions and subterfuges 
 which the Roman pontrfF, and his immedicctc successor, employ- 
 ed in the manifestoes published to apologise to tlie world for 
 this conduct, that they began to be apprehensive lest the papal 
 power had been stretched too far, and beyond what the world 
 was yet prepared to bear. For this reason, they were fain to 
 vindicate it on principles, which the see of Rome has now, for 
 several ages, absolutely disclaimed. But what was to be done? 
 They had gone too far to retreat, without giving a mortal wound 
 to all their high pretensions. And to persist, had tlie appear- 
 ance of entailing a perpetual schism on the church. This last 
 effect, however, was, on many accounts, rather to be hazarded. 
 Their maxim seems to have been. Better be absolute despots in 
 a narrower territory, than have, in an extensive empire, an au- 
 thority not only more limited, but co-ordinate, with that of other 
 potentates. 
 
 It was a practice in the churches, at that time, and had been 
 for some ages before, to enrol the names of those who died in 
 the communion of tlie church, in certain records, which they 
 eallcd diptychs, wherein the bishops were registered by them- 
 selves. And of these, public commemoration was made, by the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Q3J 
 
 officiatinfT dearon, at a certain part of the service. After tlio 
 death of Acacius, repeated attempts, both in Felix's lifetime, 
 and after his death, in the time of his successors, were made on 
 the part of the Greeks, to restore the amity that had formerly 
 subsisted between Greeks and Latins. And, in eftect, the 
 whole ground of the quarrel, the henaticon, or decree of union ; 
 a compromise by observinfr silence on some disputed points; 
 the objections against the synod of Chalcedon, and against the 
 doctrine contained in a letter of Pope Leo, on the controverted 
 articles; were given up. The only thing that served to obstruct 
 the proposed union, was, that the names of Acacius, ar>d the 
 bishops who succeeded him, during the continuance of the 
 schism, were, in the oriental churches, still retained and read in 
 the diptychs. 
 
 This, though it did not in the least affect the doctrine in de- 
 bate, affected, what more nearly touched Rome, the supremacy 
 she aspired at over all other churches. Wliilst the names of 
 those prelates continued there, they were acknowledged as law- 
 ful bishops, notwithstanding that they had all been either de- 
 posed by the Roman pontiff, or at least refused his communion. 
 And though nothing could be a more barefaced usurpation than 
 the power then, for the first time, arrogated by the pope, it was, 
 after repeated trials, found impossible to obtain reconciliation on 
 any other terms. This obstinacy, or, if ye will, firmness in the 
 pontiff, will appear the more remarkable, when the other circum- 
 stances of the case are attended to. The Constantinopolitans 
 were so attached to the memory of Acacius, that, for many years, 
 no successor could permit his name to be erased, without en- 
 dangering not only his own life, but the tranquillity both of the 
 city, and of a great part of the empire. The emperors, them- 
 selves, long considered it as too hazardous a thing even for them 
 to authorise. Besides, the East was at this time divided into 
 two great factions, the eutychians and the orthodox. It gave 
 the former no small subject of triumph, and no little advantage 
 over the latter, their antagonists, that these, whilst the variance 
 subsisted, could reap no benefit or assistance from the western 
 churches, though of the same sentiments, in the profound dis- 
 putes of the time, with themselves. It was in vain for the 
 Greeks to urge the impossibility of a compliance, without rais- 
 
,^8 LECTURES ON 
 
 ing a combustion in the then capital of the empire. It was in 
 vain to urge, that the continuance of the breach would endan,-? 
 ger the total subversion of orthodoxy in the East, that is, 
 throughout the better half of Christendom. The pope remained 
 inflexible. 
 
 The truth is, these arguments served rather to confirm him 
 in the resolution he had taken, than to induce him to relinquish 
 it. The more difficult the accomplishment of the condition was, 
 on the part of the orientals, the more complete would be the 
 victory of Rome. In like manner, the greater the clamour and 
 the disturbances it might raise in the imperial city, and other 
 Grecian churches, the more signal would be both the triumph 
 of the Latins, and the mortification of the Greeks ; and the less, 
 in time to come, would the latter be disposed to hazard a breach 
 with the former. And as to the arguments from the imminent 
 dangers to which the orthodox faith, in the east, would be ex- 
 posed by the continuance of this unnatural division, nothing can 
 be plainer, than that this very circumstance hardened the ob- 
 stinacy of the pontiff into downright inflexibility. He saw but 
 too well the necessity the Greeks were under of obtaining peace 
 on any terms, that they might be able to withstand and sur- 
 mount so formidable a faction as that of the Eutychians, sprung 
 up in the heart of their own country, and daily gathering 
 strength from the divisions of the orthodox. 
 
 But, may one say, is it possible that the Romans should, from 
 such selfish and political considerations, have made so small ac- 
 count of endangering, throughout the half of the Christian 
 world, what they reckoned the purity of the faith, and absolute- 
 ly necessary to salvation? That in reaHty they acted this part, 
 is an historical fact incontrovertible. So far from abating of 
 their terms, as the danger of the faith increased, they, on the 
 contrary, raised their demands, in the persuasion that the 
 Greeks, from the urgency of the necessity, would be disposed 
 to yield them every thing. In fact, by this artful management, 
 more was obtained at last than had at first been insisted on. 
 
 To one who reads the history of the church with attention and 
 understanding, nothing can be more manifest, than that, with 
 the Romans, power was uniformly the primary object, doctrine 
 was always but the secondary. Their great political talents and 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Q39 
 
 address were constantly exerted in modelling and employing 
 the latter in such a manner as to render it instrumental in pro- 
 moting the former. This cannot, with equal truth, be affirmed 
 of the Greeks. The many philosophic sects which had arisen 
 among them, when in a state of paganism, had produced the 
 pestilent itch of disputation, together with that species of sub- 
 tlety, which enables those possessed of this miserable cacoethes, 
 to find, on every subject, materials ibr gratifying it. Such were 
 the disposition and habits, which, on their conversion to Chris- 
 tianity, they brought with them into the new religion ; every 
 doctrine of which was, by this frivolous, though ingenious, in- 
 quisitive, loquacious, and disputatious people, most unnaturally 
 perverted into matter of metaphysical discussion. Hence sprang 
 those numerous sects, into which the Christian community was 
 so early divided. 
 
 It deserves our notice, that, for several ages, all the contro- 
 versies, almost without exception, originated among the Greeks. 
 I use the term Greeks in the same latitude wherein it is gene- 
 rally used, in ecclesiastic history, for the oriental churches which 
 spoke the Greek language, as contradistinguished to the occi- 
 dental, which spoke the Latin. Almost the only exception to 
 the remark I have made is the Pelagian heresy, which doubtless 
 arose in the west. The origin of the African sect of the Dona- 
 tists was more properly a difference, in regard to discipline, than 
 in the explanation of any article of faith. It may also deserve 
 our notice, that though the Jewish state, from the time of Mo- 
 ses, had subsisted for many centuries, in very different situa- 
 tions, and under different forms of government, yea, and in dif- 
 ferent countries, there were no traces of different sects, or of 
 any theological disputes among them, till after the Macedonian 
 conquests, when they became acquainted with the Grecians. 
 
 But some remarks on the origin, the nature, and the conse- 
 quences of the controversies, that arose in the church, and on 
 the methods that were taken to terminate them by diocesan sy- 
 nods, and ecumenical councils, which constitute a most essential 
 part of ecclesiastical history, and therefore require to be treated 
 more particularly, shall be reserved for a separate discourse. 
 
240 LECTURES ON^ 
 
 LECTURE XIV. 
 
 X HE subject of the present lecture is remarks on i\ie origin, 
 the nature, and the consequences of the controversies that, in 
 the early ages, arose in the church, and on the methods that 
 were taken to terminate them by diocesan synods, and ecumeni- 
 cal councils. Though this may, at first sight, appear a digres- 
 sion from the examination of the Roman policy, exercised in 
 raising the wonderful fabric of spiritual tyranny; yet, on a 
 nearer view, it will be found to be intimately connected with 
 that policy, insomuch, that the progress of the latter is, with- 
 out a competent knowledge of the former, scarcely intelligible. 
 
 I observed, in my last prelection, that, for several centuries, 
 almost all our theological disputes originated among the Greeks; 
 that to this sort of exercitation their national character, their 
 education, and early habits, conspired to inure them. They 
 spoke a language which was both copious and ductile to an 
 amazing degree. Let me add, that the people in general, es- 
 pecially since they had been brought under a foreign yoke, were 
 become extremely adulatory in their manner of address, abound- 
 ing in titles and complimental appellations. To this their native 
 speech may be said, in some respect, to liave contributed, by 
 the facility wherewith it supplied them with compound epithets, 
 suited to almost every possible occasion, and expressive of al- 
 most every possible combination of circumstances. — This pecu- 
 liarity, in the genius of tlieir tongue, gratified also their taste 
 both for variety and for novelty; for they were thereby enabled 
 to form new compositions from words in use, almost without 
 end ; and when they formed them analogically, were not liable 
 to the charge of barbarism. 
 
 Hence sprang up the many flattering titles they gave to 
 
 their saints and clergy, 'npoy.afl-jp, 'n^o-4yvx,'>;, rfiaayia, r^itrucacuiii©', t^kt- 
 
 B-:auciKaptr^^!u%, x^'To^i^.o;, xp'^^^'p^> xi>i?-o;iiyiu&, and a thousand others. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. '24)1 
 
 The same mode of adulation they introduced into their public 
 worship ; for though no terms can exceed, or even equal, the 
 majesty and perfections of the Supreme Being, the practice of 
 loading their addresses with such epithets, betrayed but too evi- 
 dently their tendency to think God such a one as themselves, 
 to be gained by fair speeches and pompous titles : for it is a 
 common and just observation, that they are the greatest flatter- 
 ers who love most to be flattered. An exuberance of inade- 
 quate and vain words does but injure the simplicity and the 
 dignity of worship. In their explanation of the mysteries, as 
 they were called, and in their encomium.s on the saints, they 
 abounded in such terms, and were ever exercising their inven- 
 tion in coining new ones. 
 
 The genius of the Latin tongue, on the contrary, did not 
 admit this freedom; nor had the people, who spoke it, to do 
 them justice, so much levity and vanity as to give them the like 
 propension. What they afterwards contracted of this disposi- 
 tion, they derived solely from their intercourse with the Greeks, 
 and the translation of their writings. Indeed, in tlicir versions 
 from the Greek, as the translator was often obliged, in order to 
 express in Latin such compound epithets, to recur either to cir- 
 cumlocution, or to some composition which the analogy of the 
 language could hardly bear, those things appeared awkward and 
 stiff in a Latin dress, which, in a Grecian habit, moved easily 
 and agreeably. 
 
 Now, several of the early disputes, it may be remarked, took 
 their rise from the affectation of employing these high-sounding 
 titles. Hence, in a great measure, the noise that was raised 
 
 about the terms 'o/aonffi'^, 'o/jt-omcrt©^, 'wot'iccth, vro^-altx®^, ^io'loKs;, ;v;«/f»- 
 
 voKo?, when first introduced into their theology. To these terms, 
 the Latins had no single words properly corresponding. Au- 
 gustin, one of the most eminent of the Latin fathers, seems to 
 have been so sensible of this defect in discoursing on the Tri- 
 nity, (L. V. c. 9.) that he apologizes for his language, and con- 
 siders the expressions he employs, as only preferable to a total 
 silence on the subject, but not as equally adapted with the 
 Greek. " Dictum est," says he, " tres personse, non ut illud 
 " diceretur, sed ne taceretur." The truth is, so little do the 
 Greek terms, and the Latin, on this subject correspond, that if 
 
 <2 
 
242 LECTURES ON 
 
 you regard the ordinary significations of the words, (and I know 
 not whence else we should get a meaning to them,) the doctrine 
 of the East was one, and that of the West was another, on this 
 article. In the East, it was one essence and three substances^ 
 fjt.10, nffio,, TfUi 'uToroiffU',', in the West, it was one substance andtbree 
 persons, " una substantia, tres personae." The phrases rpix -r^a- 
 ffu^x, in Greek, t?'es subsiantice, in Latin, would both, I imagine, 
 have been exposed to the charge of tritheism. But which of 
 the two, the Greek or the Latin phraseology, was most suited 
 to the truth of the case, is a question I will not take upon me 
 to determine. I shall only say of Augustin's apology, that it 
 is a very odd one, and seems to imply, that on subjects above 
 our comprehension, and to which all human elocution is inade- 
 quate, it is better to speak nonsense than be silent. It were to 
 be wished, that on topics so sublime, men had thought propet 
 to confine themselves to the simple but majestic diction of the 
 sacred scriptures. 
 
 It was, then, the extravagant humour of these fanciful and 
 prating Orientals, assisted by their native idiom, which produced 
 many of the newfangled and questionable terms I have been 
 speaking of ; the terms produced the controversies; and these, 
 in return, gave such consequence to the terms that gave them 
 birth, and created so violent an attachment in the party that fa- 
 voured them, that people could not persuade themselves that it 
 was possible that the doctrine of the gospel should subsist, and 
 be understood or conveyed by any body without them. Men 
 never seemed to reflect, that the gospel had been both better 
 taught and better understood, as well as better practised, long 
 before this fantastic dress, borrowed from the schools of the so- 
 phists, was devised and adapted to it. Llowever, the conse- 
 quence which these disputes gave to the Greek terms, occasion- 
 ed an imitation of them in the less pliant language of the Occi- 
 dentals. Hence these barbarisms, or at least, unclassic words, 
 in Latin, essentialls, substantialis, consubstantialis, Christiparay 
 Deipara, and several others of the same stamp, to be found in 
 the writings of the ecclesiastic authors of the fifth and following 
 centuries. All those subtle questions, which so long distracted 
 and disgraced the church, would then, we may well believe, both 
 from the character of the people, and from the genius of the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 543 
 
 tongue, much more readily originate, as history informs us that 
 they did, among the Greeks than among the Latins. Indeed 
 the hitter were often slower than we should have expected in 
 coming into the dispute. For this we may justly assign, as one 
 principal reason, the general ignorance of the Latins at that 
 time. Letters had, long before Constantinc, been in their de- 
 cline at Rome ; insomuch, that at the period 1 allude to, when 
 those controversies were most hotly agitated, the greater part, 
 even of men in respectable stations, understood no tongue but 
 their own. If they had studied any other, doubtless it would 
 have been Greek, which was become the language of the impe- 
 rial court, now at Constantinople ; and not only of Greece it- 
 self, but of almost all the east, particularly of all the men of 
 rank and letters in Asia, Syria, and Egypt. And if even Greek 
 was little understood at Rome, we may safely conclude, that 
 other languages were hardly known at all. 
 
 Yet that it was very little known in the fifth century, in the 
 time of Pope Celestine, when the controversy betwixt Cyril and 
 Nestorius broke out, is evident from this sino-Ie circumstance: 
 When Nestorius wrote to the Pope, sending him an account 
 of the contest, together with a copy of his homilies, containing 
 his doctrine on the point in question, all in Greek, his mother 
 tongue; not only was the pontiff himself ignorant of that lan- 
 guage, but it would seem, all the Roman clergy, consisting of 
 many hundreds, knew no more of it than he. And, though we 
 cannot suppose, that there were not then many in Rome who 
 understood Greek, yet there seem to have been none of that 
 consideration, that the Pope could decently employ them in a 
 business of so great consequence. Accordingly, he was obliged 
 to send the whole writings to Cassian, a man of learning, a na- 
 tive of Tlirace, who then resided at Marseilles in Gaul, to be 
 translated by him into Latin. This delay gave Cyril no small 
 advantage; for though he wrote to the Pope after Nestorius, 
 yet knowing better, it would seem, the low state of literature at 
 that time in Rome, he prudently employed the Latin tongue, 
 in giving his representation of the affair; and, in this way, pro- 
 duced a prepossession in the mind of the pontiff, which it was 
 impossible for Nestorius afterwards to remove. 
 
 Perhaps, too, it may have contributed to make the Latins 
 
 22 
 
244 LECTURES OX 
 
 less disposed, at first, to enter with warmth into the controver- 
 sies which sprang up, that the terms w^hereby the Greek words, 
 on both sides of the question, were latinized, rather than trans- 
 lated, appeared so uncouth and barbarous, that they had little 
 inclination to adopt them. But when time had familiarized 
 their ears to them, we find they could enter into the subject as 
 passionately as the Greeks. 
 
 When controversies once were started, the natural vanity of 
 the disputants, together with the conceived importance of the 
 subject, as relating to religion, (an importance which every one, 
 in proportion to the resentment contracted from the contradic- 
 tion he had met with, was disposed to magnify,) inflamed their 
 zeal, and raised a violence in the parties which the world had 
 never witnessed before. In whatever corner of Christendom 
 the controversy originated, the flame came by degrees to spread 
 throuschout the whole, so that the Latin as well as the 
 Greek churches never failed, sooner or later, to be involved 
 in the dispute. As the former, however, for the reasons above- 
 mentioned, came almost always last into the contest, they had 
 previous opportunity of knowing both on what side those who, 
 for learning, parts, and piety, had attained the highest reputa- 
 tion, declared themselves, and to what side the people generally 
 swayed. With these advantages, the Latins, though less intel- 
 ligent in philological and metaphysical disputes, yet being more 
 united among themselves, a consequence, in a great measure, 
 of their ignorance, which made them more implicit followers, 
 (these I say) when they did declare in favour of a side, com- 
 monly, by their number, decided the question, thereby ascer- 
 taining what was orthodox, and what was not. 
 
 It may also account in part for their greater unanimity, that 
 they had fewer leaders. There were several eminent sees in 
 the east, which were a sort of rivals to one another, for not to 
 mention the exarchal sees of Ephesus and Csesarea, there were. 
 the patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, and Constantinople, 
 each considerable enough to be a check upon the rest. In the 
 west, there vvas no see whatever that could cope with Rome. 
 But it must be owned, that there was not only a closer union, 
 but in general, more steadiness, among the Latins, than among 
 their rivals, the Greeks. This may be accounted for partly 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 245 
 
 from the same causes, partly from the difference of national 
 character. The Romans were as remarkable for their gravity, 
 as the Greeks for their levity. Indeed, the Roman pontiffs, 
 who were the chief leaders in the west, did not often renounce 
 a cause, in favour oi' which they had once declared themselves. 
 I say they did not often; for that they acted this part some- 
 times, is unquestionable. However far, therefore, this argu- 
 ment may go, in support of the policy of Rome, it cannot be 
 urged in support of her infallibility, as it admits several glaring 
 exceptions. Nothing is more notorious than Rome's desertion 
 of the side which she had long maintained, on the ridiculous 
 question about the three chapters : in regard to which. Pope 
 Vigilius, as is observed by Maimburg [cf], shifted sides no 
 fewer than four times. It is well known, that Pope Honorius 
 was, after his death, by a council holden at Constantinople, to- 
 wards the end of the seventh century, commonly called the sixth 
 general council, condemned as a heretic, and an organ of the 
 devil, for holding the doctrine of the Monothelites. To this 
 judgment the then reigning Pope Agatho consented, not only 
 by his legates, but by the reception and approbation he gave to 
 the decrees of that assembly. Also Leo II. Agatho's suc- 
 cessor, declared his concurrence in the anathema pronounced 
 by the council against Pope Honorius, 
 
 Were it necessary to produce an instance of change in the 
 same pontiff, beside Vigilius above-mentioned, Liberius fur- 
 nishes a most apposite example. This pope, about the middle 
 of the fourth century, when the Arian controversy was at its 
 heighth, intimidated by the power of the reigning emperor Con- 
 stantiuj, whom he knew to be a zealous disciple of Arius, de- 
 clared publicly in favour of that party, and excommunicated 
 Athai-asius, whom all the orthodox regarded as the patron and 
 defeiiler of the catholic cause. This sentence he soon after re- 
 voked, and after revoking it, his legates, at the council of Aries, 
 ovenWed by the emperor, concurred with the rest in signing 
 the condemnation of Athanasius, yielding, as they expressed 
 it, 'o the troublesome times. Afterwards, indeed, Liberius 
 wasso far a confessor in the cause of orthodoxy, that he undcr- 
 weit along and severe banishment, rather than lend his aid and 
 [a] Traite IIistori<iue de I'Eglise de Rome, chap. vii. 
 
S46 
 
 LECTURES ON 
 
 countenance to the measures which the emperor pursued for es- 
 tablishing Arianism throughout the empire. But however firm 
 and undaunted the pope appeared for a time, he had not the 
 magnanimity to persevere, but was at length, in order to re- 
 cover his freedom, his country, and his bishopric, induced to 
 retract his retractation, to sign a second time the condemna- 
 tion of Athanasius, and to embrace the Arian symbol of Sir- 
 mium. Not satisfied with this, he even wrote to the Arian bi- 
 shops of the east, excusing his former defence of Athanasius, 
 imputing it to an excessive regard for the sentiments of his pre- 
 decessor Julius ; and declaring, that now, since it had pleased 
 God to open his eyes, and show him how justly the heretic 
 Athanasius had been condemned, he separated himself from his 
 communion, and cordially joined their holinesses, (so he styled 
 the Arian bishops) in supporting the true faith. Before he re- 
 turned from exile, meeting with the emperor, who was by this 
 time turned semiarian, the pliant pontiff, impatient to be agaiti 
 in possession of his see, was induced to change anew, and sub- 
 scribe the semiarian confession. 
 
 This apostacy of Liberius, which has given infinite plague to 
 tlie prostitute pens employed in support of papal usurpations, 
 whose venal talents are ever ready for the dirty work of defend- 
 ing every absurdity, that can gratify the views of their supe- 
 riors, this, which in their hands has proved a copious source of 
 sophistry, chicane, and nonesense, whilst, as Bovver well ex- 
 presses it, like men struggling for life in deep water, and catch- 
 ing at every twig, they flounce in vain from quibble to quibble, 
 and from one subterfuge to another ; this apostacy, I say, was 
 acknowledged and lamented by all the contemporary fathers, 
 who take occasion to mention these transactions, even by those 
 who have since been canonized, and are, at this day, worshipped 
 in the Romish church, as saints of the first magnitude. A 
 plain proof, that the plea of infallibility had not then been heard 
 of. Jcrom, Athanasius, Hilarius, all in one voice, accuse this 
 i)ope of giving the sanction of his name to heresy. The last of 
 these, St. Hilarius, cannot refrain, when he mentions him, 
 from anathematizing him, and all his perfidious adherents. All 
 the ancient historians concur, in like manner, in attesting, that 
 he apostatized from the faith. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 247 
 
 Moreover, the same Liberius afterwards admitted to his com- 
 munion, being, probably, ignorant of their sentiments, the 
 Macedonians, who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit. Last 
 of all, after the death of the Arian emperor, and the accession 
 of Julian, commonly called the apostate, who, though not a 
 Christian, professed to be a friend to toleration, the venerable, 
 the infallible head of the church universal, as the partizans of 
 Rome now denominate their pontiff, made one change more, 
 and returned to orthodoxy. 
 
 To give but one instance more. Pope John XXII. in two 
 sermons, (for even so low as the fourteenth century, popes 
 sometimes preached) maintained that the saints departed are 
 not admitted to the beatific vision till after the resurrection-. 
 This doctrine gave great and general offence. One Wallis, 
 an Englishman, was the first who ventured to preach publicly 
 against it. This he did in Avignon itself, where the pope then 
 resided. Wallis, for his uncommon audacity, was thrown into 
 prison, and condemned to live on bread and water. Afterwards 
 the question was canvassed by several theologians of character^ 
 particularly by those of the university of Paris, with all the bi- 
 shops and abbots then in that metropolis, and also by a synod 
 assembled at Vincennes, who unanimously condemned the 
 pope's opinion as repugnant to scripture, and heretical. Philip, 
 the sixth king of France, sent the pontiff an authentic copy of 
 this decision, signed by twenty-six eminent divines, requiring 
 his holiness to acquiesce in their judgment, and (if cardinal 
 d'Ailly may be credited) threatening, that in case he did not, 
 he would cause him to be burned for heresy. The pope at first 
 attempted to vindicate his doctrine, but findirrg, soon after, that 
 the dissatisfaction, and even scandal, which it had given, were 
 almost universal, he was induced to declare, in a public consis- 
 tory, that he never intended to support any tenet contrary to 
 the scriptures and the catholic faith; but that if he had inadver- 
 tently dropt any such thing in his sermons, he retracted it. 
 This, though not an acknowledgment of his error, was a plain 
 acknowledgment of his fallibility. In his last illness, however, 
 a few hours before his death, he made a public and solemn re- 
 tractation of his erroneous doctrine, in presence of all the car- 
 dinals and bishops then iit Avignon, called together on purpose. 
 
S48 LECTURES ON 
 
 declaring, that the saints departed were admitted to the sight of 
 God's essence, (such was the jargon of the time) as soon as they 
 were purged from their sins ; and retracting whatever he had 
 said, preached, or written to the contrary. His successor, Be- 
 nedict XII. that his own orthodoxy might not be suspected, 
 took an early opportunity of preaching on the beatific vision, 
 and, in his sermon, showed his sentiments to be the reverse of 
 those which had given so much scandal in his predecessor. Not 
 satisfied with this, he caused the point to be discussed in a con- 
 sistory, to which he invited all who had adopted Pope John's 
 opinion, that they might produce what they had to offer in its 
 defence. Afterwards he published a constitution, wherein, 
 without naming his predecessor, he expressly condemned his 
 doctrine, commanding all to be prosecuted as heretics, who 
 should thenceforth obstinately maintain or teach it. I might 
 produce another instance from the same Pope John, who main- 
 tained, in a decretal, that the Franciscan friars had property, in 
 direct contradiction to the decretal of his predecessor Nicolas IV. 
 affirming, with other popes, that they had none, and was not less 
 zealous for the side he took in this profound controversy than 
 if the whole of Christianity had depended on it ; commanding 
 the inquisitors to extirpate, by all possible means, the contrary, 
 pestilential, erroneous, heretical, and blasphemous doctrine. 
 
 But to return to our subject, it is certain that the bishops of 
 Rome cannot be accused of having often acted so weak a part 
 as Pope Liberius, Pope Vigilius, or Pope John. Besides, the 
 case of the first, and that of the church, in his time, were par- 
 ticular. Heterodoxy had then a powerful and bigotted prince 
 for its protector, who stuck at no means by which he could ac- 
 complish the extirpation of the faith of Nice, and the establish- 
 ment of Arianism in every part of his dominions ; and, in fact, 
 what with persuasion, what with compulsion, the defection was 
 become universal, insomuch, that before the death of that vio- 
 lent antitrinitarian persecutor, there was, in the whole church, 
 but one orthodox bishop who kept possession of his see, Gre- 
 gory of Elvira, in Andalusia. However justly, therefore, the 
 versatility of Liberius may be considered as totally subversive 
 of the plea of infallibility, it does not invalidate what has been 
 *aid in regard to the profound policy and address generally 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 249 
 
 maintained by that watchful power. The case of Vigilius was, 
 in some respects, similar. 
 
 We have seen with what steadiness, and at how great a risk, 
 the re-union of the eastern church and the western was so ef- 
 fected as to give a very considerable ascendancy to the latter, 
 which she had never enjoyed before. The manner of conduct- 
 ing the measure did but too manifestly show, that it was a mat- 
 ter of no consequence to her, whether the Greeks were ortho- 
 dox or heterodox, whilst they continued independent of her au- 
 thority, and did not dread her displeasure. These, at least the 
 greater part of their doctors, were a race of quibbling sophists, 
 engrossed with the imaginar)'- importance of their unintelligible 
 speculations, and futile disquisitions, who did not conceive a 
 nobler object of their pursuit, than that their particular explana- 
 tions and phraseology should be adopted into the system and 
 language of the church. 
 
 Though the Greeks, taken together, were, in all literary 
 matters, an overmatch for the Latins, yet, as the latter kept 
 pretty close united, whilst the former were split into parties, 
 eternally disputing and squabbling, the Latins derived hence 
 an inconceivable advantage. For however much the Greeks in 
 general affected to despise them as rude and illiterate, compared 
 with themselves, no sooner did they take a side in any contro- 
 versy, than they were sure to gain over that party of the Greeks 
 whose side they took : the general rivalship between Greeks 
 and Latins was swallowed up in the love of victory, so natural 
 to professed combatants, and in the particular emulation that 
 each entertained against a hated antagonist in the controversy. 
 Though both nations were greatly degenerated from what they 
 had been in the Augustan age, the vestiges of their original 
 and respective national characters, as described by the prince of 
 Latin poets, were still discernible : 
 
 Excudent alii spirantia mollius sera : 
 
 Credo equidem : vivos ducent de marmore vultus : 
 
 Orabunt causas melius : coelique meatus 
 
 Describent radio, et surgentia sidera dicent. 
 
 Tu regere imperio populos, Romane, memento, 
 
 (Hffi tibi erunt artes) pacisque imponere morein : 
 
 Parcere subjectis,. et debelJai-e superboa. JEa, L. 6. 
 
250 LECTURES ON 
 
 That the Romans, by their valour, their public virtue, and 
 their immense superiority in the art of war, should have raised 
 an empire over the undisciplined surrounding nations, who were 
 all, except the Greeks, so much their inferiors in every thing 
 but animal courage and brute force, is not so very astonishing, 
 as to a careless eye it may at first appear. But that, after their 
 extraordinary success had enriched them with the spoils of all 
 nations ; after their riches had introduced luxury, eflPeminacy, 
 and indolence ; after they had, by their vices, become, in their 
 turn, a prey to the barbarians they had formerly subdued; after 
 the empire came to be torn to pieces by Goths, Vandals, Huns, 
 and Lombards ; when the sun of science was now set, and the 
 night of ignorance, superstition, and barbarism, was fast advan- 
 cing ; that out of the ruins of every thing great and venerable, 
 there should spring a new species of despotism, never heard of, 
 or imagined before, whose means of conquest and defence were 
 neither swords nor spears, fortifications nor warlike engines, but 
 definitions and canons, sophisms and imprecations ; and that by 
 such weapons, as by a kind of magic, there should actually be 
 reared a second universal monarchy, the most formidable the 
 world ever knew, — >vill, to latest ages, afford matter of astonish- 
 ment to every judicious inquirer. 
 
 Of the numerous controversies wherewith the church was, for 
 several ages, pestered, some related only to things ceremonial. 
 Of this sort was the contention about the time of the observance 
 of Easter, which, so early as the second century, raised a flame 
 in the church. Others, doubtless, concerned essential articles 
 in the Christian theology. Such were the Arian controversy 
 and the Pelagian. Whether Jesus Christ was a divine person, 
 and existed from eternity, or a mere creature, and had a begin- 
 ning ; whether by grace, in scripture, we are to understand ad- 
 vantages with regard to us properly external, such as the remis- 
 sion of sins, the revelation of God's will by his Son, the benefit 
 of the examples of Christ and his apostles, the promises of the 
 gospel, and the gifts of Providence ; or whether we ought also 
 to comprehend, under that name, as things equally real, certain 
 internal benefits conferred on the mind by the invisible opera- 
 tion of the Holy Spirit; are momentous questions, which nearly 
 affect the substance d' Christian doctrine. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Q51 
 
 But from this fund many other questions may, by men more 
 curious than wise, be easily started, which no modest man will 
 think himself capable of answering, and no pious man will think 
 it his duty to pry into. Such are some of those that have been 
 moved in regard to the manner of the Spirit's operation, in re- 
 gard to the generation of the second person of the Trinity, and 
 the procession of the third. To this class may be added, those 
 impertinent inquiries which have sometimes produced as great 
 a ferment as the most momentous would have done. Of this 
 sort is the question concerning the natural corruptibility of the 
 body of Christ, and that about the palpability of the bodies of 
 the saints after the resurrection. 
 
 There is a fourth set of questions, which are mere logoma- 
 chies, in regard to which the different combatants have either 
 no fixed meaning to the words they employ, or mean precisely 
 the same thing under different expressions. In this last case, 
 the controversy is either absolutely nonsensical, or purely ver- 
 bal. Nor has this been the least fruitful source of contention 
 in the church. What could be a more flagrant example of this 
 than the question which created, in the time of Pope Hormis- 
 das, and some of his successors, so much animosity and strife ? 
 The point was, whether we ought to say, " One oi' the Trinity 
 "suffered in the flesh ;" or, " One person of the Trinity suf- 
 *' fered in the flesh." On this pretty puzzle there were four dif- 
 ferent opinions. One set approved both expressions ; a second 
 condemned both; a third maintained the former expression to 
 be orthodox, the latter heterodox; and a fourth aflBrmed the re- 
 verse. In this squabble, emperors, popes, and patriarchs, en- 
 gaged with great fury. The then reigning emperor, Justinian, 
 was as mere a dotard on all the sophistical trash then in vogue 
 among the theologians, as any scholastic recluse, who had been 
 inured to wrantjlinc; from his cradle, and had nothin*]^ else to 
 mind. Luckily, however, no council was convened to discuss 
 the point, and give it sufficient importance. In consequence of 
 this cruel neglect it died away. 
 
 The dispute with Nestorius, though equally frivolous, being 
 treated differently, took deeper root. The point in debate at 
 first was. Whether the Virgin Mary might be denominated 
 more properly the mother of God,^ or the mother of him that is 
 
252 LECTURES ON 
 
 God ? It is plain, that there could not arise a question which 
 might be more justly said to turn merely on grammatical pro- 
 priety. Both sides admitted that Jesus Christ is God as well 
 as man; both sides admitted, that his human nature was born 
 of the Virgin, and that his divine nature existed from eternity; 
 both sides admitted the distinction between the two natures, 
 and their union in the person of Christ. Where then lay the 
 difference? It could be no where but in phraseology. Yet this 
 notable question raised a conflagration in the church, and prov- 
 ed, in the east, the source of infinite mischief, hatred, violence, 
 and persecution. It is reported of Constantine Copronymus, 
 in the eighth century, that he one day asked the patriarch, 
 " What harm would there be in calling the Virgin Mary the 
 '^ mother of Christ?" God preserve your Majesty, answered 
 the patriarch, with great emotion, from enter tainmg such a 
 thought. Do you not see how Nestorius is anatheraatized for 
 this by the whole church ? — " I only asked for my own infer- 
 *' mation," replied the emperor, " but let it go no farther," 
 A few emphatical strokes like this are enough to make the peo- 
 ple of that age appear to those of the present as not many re- 
 moves from idiocy. Had Nestorius, whose correctness of taste 
 (for opinion is out of the question,) made hira sensible of the 
 irreverence of an expression, which seemed greatly to derogate 
 from the divine majesty, and tended manifestly to corrupt the 
 religious sentiments of the vulgar,^ who are incapable of enter- 
 ing into metaphysical distinctions, been but a better politician, 
 (for to do him justice, Rome herself cannot accuse him of the 
 most unclerical sin of moderation,) and, consequently, had he 
 been a more equal match for his adversary, St. Cyril, the de- 
 cision of the church had infallibly been the reverse of what it 
 was, and we should at this day find Cyrilianism in the list of 
 heresies, and a St. Nestorius in the calendar of the beatified. 
 On such accidental circumstances it often depended, whether 
 a man should be deemed an heresiarch or a saint, a devil or an 
 angel. " I shall only remark," says a modern Roman Catho- 
 lic author, (Richard Simon, not Father Simon of the Oratory, 
 J)es Ceremonies et contumes des Chretien^ orientaux, Ch. 7.) 
 *' that some might infer, that Nestorianism is but a nominal 
 ** heresy, and that if Nestorius and St. Cyril had understood 
 
ECCLESIASTTCAL HISTORY. ^53 
 
 "one another, tliey might have reconciled their opinions, and 
 " prevented a great scandal in the church. But the Greeks 
 " were always keen disputants, and it was by them that most 
 " of the first heresies were broached. Commonly their dis- 
 " putes consisted in a sort of metaphysical cliicancry on ambi- 
 " guous phrases. Hence they drew inferences after their man- 
 " ner, and from inferences proceeded to personal abuse, till the 
 *' parties at last became irreconcileable enemies. Had they but 
 " coolly explained their thoughts, they would hvave found, that, 
 " in most cases, there was no scope for the imputation of here- 
 " sy on either side. This is what some allege to have happen- 
 " ed in the affair of Nestorius and St. Cyril." — True, indeed, 
 Mr. Simon, and for a specimen of their spirit and coolness, let 
 us but hear the final judgment of the council of Ephcsus in this 
 famous cause. " Our Lord Jesus Christ, against whom the 
 " most wicked Nestorius has levelled his blasphemies, declares 
 " him, by the mouth of this council, deprived of the episcopal 
 '^ dignity, and cut off from the communion of the episcopal 
 " order." The note bearing this sentence was thus directed : 
 " To Nestorius, a second Judas." In every thing they were 
 guided by Cyril, whom, in respect of meekness, they might, 
 with equal truth, have denominated a second Moses. 
 
 Nobody is at a loss to perceive the opinion of the French au- 
 thor above quoted in regard to this affair. Yet we may observe 
 in passing, in what an indirect manner he is obliged to express 
 it. Some might infer, and some allege. And no wonder that 
 he should take this method of suggesting a principle totally sub- 
 versive of the doctrine of the infallibility, wheresoever placed; 
 a doctrine which now, among the learned of that communion, 
 seems to be regarded as purely of the exoteric kind, that is, as 
 proper, whether true or false, to be inculcated on the people, as- 
 an useful expedient in governing them. This Frenchman's 
 principle plainly subverts the pope's pretensions ; for Cclcstine 
 freely acceded to the sentence, condemning Nestorius as a most 
 pestilent heretic. It subverts tlie pretensions of an ecumenical 
 council, which that of Ephcsus, however disorderly and tumultu- 
 ous, has always been acknowledged by the Romanists to be. It 
 subverts the pretensions of the church collectively, which did, 
 for many ages, universally (the not very numerous sect of Nes- 
 
S54 LECTURES ON 
 
 torius only excepted) receive the decrees of that synod. This 
 Ephesian council was one of the four, concerning which Pope 
 Gregory, who is also called St. Gregory, and Gregory the 
 Great, declared, that he received them with as much veneration 
 as he did the four gospels. 
 
 Yet so little of consistency in speculations of this sort is to be 
 expected from either popes or councils, that when, so late as the 
 pontificate of Clement the eleventh, in the beginning of the pre- 
 sent century, some affected to style St. Ann the grandmother of 
 God, (no doubt, with the pious view of conferring an infinite 
 obligation on her) his holiness thought fit to suppress the title, 
 as being, in his judgment, offensive to pious ears. Yet it is im- 
 possible for one, without naming Nestorius, to give a clearer 
 decision in his favour. For what is the meaning of grandmo- 
 ther ? Is it any more than saying, in one word, what mother's 
 mother^ qy father's mother^ expresses in two ? To say then of 
 Ann, that she was the mother of the mother of God, which tliey 
 admit, and to say that she was God's grandmother, which they 
 reject, are absolutely the same. The sole spring of offence is 
 in the first step : if that be admitted, the propriety of such ex- 
 pressions, as God*s grandmother or grandfather, uncle, aunt, or 
 cousin, follows of course. The second council of Nice, with 
 greater consistency, in quoting the epistle of James, do not he- 
 sitate to style the writer God's brother. Kaia rav ahxipo^tav ixKuihov, 
 are their very words. Only from this more recent circumstance, 
 we may vvarrantably conclude, that if the phrase, mother of God, 
 had never been heard till the time of Clement the eleventh, it 
 had fared well with the author, if he had not been pronounced 
 both a blasphemer and a heretic. What made the case of Nes- 
 torius the harder was, that he was, in no respect, the innovator. 
 He was only shocked at the innovations in language, if not in 
 sentiments, ofthe newfangled phrases introduced by others, such 
 as this, of the mother of God, and the eternal God was born ,• 
 the impassible suffered ; the immortal and only true God ex- 
 pired in agonies. I have seen a small piece, called, if I remem- 
 ber right, '• Godly riddles," by the late Mr. Ralph Erskine, 
 one of the apostles and founders of the Scotch secession, written 
 precisely in the same taste. " There is nothing new," says 
 Solomon, " under the sun." In the most distant ages and re- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Q^5 
 
 mote countries, kindred geniuses may be discovered wherein the 
 same follies and absurdities, as well as vices, spring up and 
 flourish. To men of shallow understandings, such theologic 
 paradoxes afford a pleasure not unlike that which is derived 
 from being present at the wonderful feats of jugglers. In these, 
 by mere slight of hand, one appears to do what is impossible to 
 be done; and in those, by mere slight of tongue, (in which the 
 judgment has no part) an appearance of meaning and consistency 
 is given to terms the most self-contradictory, and the incredible 
 seems to be rendered worthy of belief. To set fools a staring, 
 is alike the aim of both. I shall only observe, that of the two 
 kinds of artifice, the juggler's and the sophister's, the former is 
 much the more harmless. 
 
 To proceed; the contention that arose soon after, on occa- 
 sion of the doctrine of Eutyches, appears to have been of the 
 same stamp. The whole difference terminated in this, that the 
 one side maintained, that Christ is of two natures, the other, 
 that he is of and in two natures, both agreeing, that in one per- 
 son he is perfect God and perfect man. Yet this dispute was, 
 if possible, conducted with more fury and rancour than the for- 
 mer. Much need, in those days, had the rulers of the church, 
 who called themselves the followers and ministers of the meek 
 and humble Jesus, to go and learn what this meaneth, (2 Tim. ii, 
 14.) Charge them before the Lord^ that they strive not about 
 words to no profit^ but to the subverting of the hearers. They 
 acted, on the contrary, as if they could not conceive another 
 purpose for which a revelation had been given them, but to af- 
 ford matter of endless wrangling, and to foster all the most ma- 
 lignant passions of human nature. Had they so soon forgotten 
 the many warnings they had received from inspiration, of the 
 mischievous tendency of such a conduct, that profane and vain 
 babblings would increase to more ungodliness, that their pitiful 
 logomachies, their oppositions of science, falsely so called, their 
 foolish and unedifying questions and vain janglings, could only 
 gender strife ? Is it possible they could be so blind as not to 
 see their own character, as well as the consequences of their con- 
 duct, so distinctly delineated in these words of the apostle : If 
 any man co?isent not to wholesome words, practical and useful 
 instructions, not idle speculations, even the words of our Lord 
 
256 LECTURES ON 
 
 Jesus Christ, and the doctrine that is according to godliness ; 
 he is proud, knowing nothing, but doating about questions and 
 strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil sur- 
 misings, perverse disputings of men of co7'rupt minds, a7\d des- 
 titute of the truth, who think that gain is godliness ? Could they 
 read these things and not be struck with so bright a reflec- 
 tion as they exhibited of their own image ? We must think, 
 that at that period, these things were but little read, and less 
 minded. 
 
 From the fifth century downwards, it became the mode, in all 
 their controversies, to refer to the councils and fathers, in sup- 
 port of their dogmas, and to take as little notice of sacred writ, 
 as if it no way concerned the faith and practice of a Christian. 
 But their despicable and unmeaning quibbles (to say the truth) 
 were not more remote from the doctrine of the gospel, than the 
 methods whereby they supported their dogmas were repugnant 
 to the morals which it inculcates. Let us hear the character 
 given of their councils, their procedure, and the effects produced 
 by them, by a contemporary author, a bishop too, who spoke 
 from knowledge and experience. St. Gregory Nazianzen, writ- 
 ing to Procopius, thus excuses his refusal to attend a synod, 
 at which his presence was expected : " To tell you plainly, I 
 <* am determined to fly all conventions of bishops ; for I never 
 *' yet saw a council that ended happily. Instead of lessening, 
 *' they invariably .augment the mischief. The passion for vic- 
 ** tory, and the lust of power, (you'll perhaps think my freedom 
 *' intolerable) are not to be described in words. One present 
 *' as a judge will much more readily catch the infection from 
 " others than be able to restrain it in them. For this reason 
 " I must conclude, that the only security of one's peace and 
 *' virtue is in retirement." Thus far Nazianzen. How a man, 
 who, in the fifth century, could talk so reasonably, and so much 
 like a Christian, came to be sainted, is, not, indeed, so easily 
 to be accounted for. 
 
 On the whole, when one seriously considers the rage of dog- 
 matizing, which, for some ages, like a pestilential contagion, 
 overspread the church ; when one impartially examines the 
 greater part of the subjects, about which they contended with 
 so much vehemence, and their manner of conducting the con- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ^SJ 
 
 test, especially in those holy convocations, called synods, it is 
 impossible not to entertain a low opinion of their judgment, and 
 abhorrence of their disposition. At the same time, it is but 
 doing them justice to remark, that in cases wherein their ima- 
 ginations were not heated by controversy and party-spirit, when 
 they kept within their proper sphere, the making of regulations 
 or canons for maintaining order and discipline in the church, 
 they did not often betray a want of judgment and political capa- 
 city. On the contrary, they frequently give ground of admira- 
 tion to the considerate, that the same persons should, in the 
 one character, appear no better than sophisters and quibblcrs, 
 fanatics and furies, and, in the other, no less than prudent 
 statesmen and wise legislators. 
 
 But it is time to return from this digression, if it can be call- 
 ed a digression, about councils, to the policy of Home, and the 
 means by which she rose to the very pinnacle of worldly pro- 
 sperity and grandeur. I thought it of consequence to give in 
 passing a slight sketch of the general nature, and rise, and con- 
 sequences of those disputes, which constitute so essential a part 
 of ecclesiastical history. 1 shall, in my next, proceed in tracing 
 the causes and maxims which contributed to the establishment 
 of the Roman hierarchy. 
 
258 LECTURES ON" 
 
 LECTURE XV. 
 
 In my last discourse, I gave you a general account of the na- 
 ture, rise, and progress, of those controversies, which continued 
 for many ages to disturb the peace of the church, and which 
 were, in a great measure, the consequence of a defection from 
 the genuine spirit of the gospel, from the primitive simplicity 
 of its doctrine, and purity of its morals, and no less evidently 
 the cause of still greater corruptions, and a more flagrant apos- 
 tacy, though men still retained the abused name of Christian. 
 I took notice also of the methods taken to terminate those dis- 
 putes by synods and councils, a remedy which commonly proves 
 worse than the disease; rather, I should say, a prescription of 
 that kind, which, instead of curing, inflames the distemper, and 
 renders it epidemical; nay, is often productive of several others. 
 The very convoking of such numerous assemblies, from all the 
 corners of the empire, for the discussion of such senseless de- 
 bates, as the greater part of them manifestly were, gave, in the 
 eye of the world, a consequence to their logomachies, and drew 
 an attention to them, which it was impossible they should ever 
 otherwise have acquired. Besides, the sophistry and altercation 
 employed by both parties in the controversy naturally gave birth 
 to new questions, insomuch, that they sprang up faster on every 
 side, than it was in their power to terminate them. What the 
 poets feigned of the hydra was here verified. By lopping off 
 one of the heads of the monster, they gave rise at least to two 
 others. " Reges ignari (says Le Clerc, Ars Crit. p. 2. s. 2. 
 " c. 5,) nee inter bonos principes numerandi, convocarunt Graj- 
 *' culos, qui linguaB acuendae per totam vitam operam dederant, 
 " rerum ipsarum ignaros, contendendi studiosos, perpetuis rixis 
 " inter se divisos ; et bardos aliquot homines ex occidente, ru- 
 " diores quidem illis, sed non meliores; iique post pudendas 
 " contentiones, obscurissima qusedam dogmata, verbis scepe pa- 
 '' rum aptis, auctoritate sua firmant ; quce stupidi populi sine 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 259 
 
 " examine adorcnt, quasi divinitus accepta. Non ficta nic loqui 
 " norunt qui synodorum historias legerunt ; uec ccrtc vanus 
 " crat qui dixit : 
 
 Ovh 
 
 T< zsra ffuvoooio'iv ofjto^povoi i(Tiro[i, lyuyi 
 
 Xrivuv 'v yipccvcov oocpfia. iJba.^va.(jLiMmt 
 E>y j^/f, £vSa fto^os T£ xm oiKr^ia x.pv'r''iix, zfccpot^iv 
 E;j 'ivx OviTfjbiviajv ^oj^ov ayetpofiiva. 
 
 " Nunquam ego sedebo in synodis anserum aut gruum temcrc 
 " pugnantium. Illic contentio, illic rixa, et probra antea laten- 
 " tia saevorum hominum in unura locum collecta." I shall make 
 a supposition, which may at first appear extravagant, but which 
 will, I hope, on examination, be found entirely apposite to the 
 case in hand. Suppose that a single province in the empire 
 had been visited with the pestilence, and that the distemper 
 raged with so much violence that few in that neighbourhood 
 escaped ; suppose further, that the ruling powers had, in their 
 great wisdom, determined to summon, from all the provinces 
 infected and uninfected, the whole medical tribe, physicians, 
 surgeons, and apothecaries, sound and diseased indiscriminately, 
 in order to consult together, and fix upon the most effectual 
 method of extirpating the latent poison ; would it have been 
 difficult to foresee the consequences of a measure so extraordi- 
 nary? The diseased in that assembly would quickly communi- 
 cate the infection to the sound, till the whole convention, with- 
 out exception, were in the same wretched plight; and when all 
 should be dispersed and sent home again, they would return to 
 their respective countries, breathing disease and death w'herever 
 they went; so that the malignant contagion which had, at first, 
 afflicted only a small part, would, by such means, be rendered 
 universal, and those who ought to have assisted in the cure of 
 the people, would have proved the principal instruments of poi- 
 soning them. Exactly such a remedy were the decisions of 
 councils, to the plague of wrangling, at that time not less terri- 
 ble, if its consequences were duly weighed. 
 
 What an ecumenical council is, has never yet been properly 
 ascertained. If we are to understand by it an assembly, where- 
 in every individual church is represented, there never yet was 
 such a council, and we may safely predict, never will be. 
 There was so much of independency in the primitive churches, 
 
 R 2 
 
2^0 LECTURES ON 
 
 before the time of Constantine, that at first their provincial and 
 diocesan synods (for they had not then any general councils) 
 claimed no authority over their absent members, or even over 
 those present, who had not consented to the acts of the majo- 
 rity. Thus they were, at first, more properly, meetings for 
 mutual consultation and advice, in what concerned the spiritual 
 conduct of their flocks, than societies vested with legislative 
 powers, even over the members of their own community. In 
 proportion as the metropolitans rose above the suffragans, and 
 the patriarchs above the metropolitans, the provincial synod, in 
 concurrence with the metropolitan, and the diocesan synod, in 
 concurrence with the patriarch, acquired more authority and 
 weight. 
 
 But when, after the establishment of Christianity, ecumeni- 
 cal councils, or what, in a looser way of speaking, were called 
 so, were convoked by the emperor, (which continued for ages 
 to be the practice in the church) if the patriarchs, or exarchs 
 themselves, were divided, as each was commonly followed by 
 the bishops of his diocese, there was no one person of weight 
 enough to unite them. Sometimes, indeed, the emperor, when 
 bigotted to a side, interfered in their debates; and when he 
 did, he rarely failed, by some means or other, to procure a de- 
 termination of the dispute in favour of his opinion. But this, 
 though commonly vindicated by those who were, or who chose 
 to be of the emperor's opinion, was always considered by the 
 losing side as violent and uncanonical, notwithstanding that his 
 right to convene them was allowed on ail hands. However, as 
 it never happened, even, in their most numerous councils, that 
 every province, nay, that every civil diocese, or exarchate, I 
 might say, that every Christian nation, had a representation in 
 the assembly, so there was not one of those conventions which 
 could, with strict propriety, be called ecumenical. With those 
 who were not satisfied with their decisions, there were never 
 wanting arguments, not only specious, but solid, against their 
 universahcy, and, consequently, against their title to an univer- 
 sal submission. 
 
 Certain it is, that no party was ever convinced of its errors 
 by the decision of a council. If the church came to an acqui- 
 escence, the acquiescence will be found to have been imputable 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 26l 
 
 more to the introduction of the secular arm, that is, of the em- 
 peror's authority, who sometimes from principle, sometimes from 
 policy, interposed in churcli affairs, than to any deference shown 
 to the synodical decree. Accordingly, when the imperial pow- 
 er was exerted in opposition to the council's determination, as 
 was frequently the case, it was, to the full, as effectual in mak- 
 ing the council he universally rejected, as, on other occasions, 
 in making it be universally received. I may say further, that 
 this power was equally effectual in convoking councils to esta- 
 blish the reverse of what had been established by former coun- 
 cils. In what passed in relation both to the Arian and to the 
 Eutychian controversies, and afterwards in those regardin^r the 
 worship of images, these points are, to every intelligent reader, 
 as clear as day. 
 
 Indeed, the doctrine of the infallibility of councils is, compa- 
 ratively, but a novel conceit. Those of the ancients, who paid 
 the greatest deference to their judgment, did not run into this 
 extravagance. What was St. Gregory Nazianzen's opinion of 
 the matter, may be learnt from the quotation I gave you from 
 that author in the preceding prelection. But the futility of re- 
 curring to this method for terminating disputes is what the 
 whole Christian world, Greek and Latin, Protestant and Pa- 
 pist, seems now to be sufficiently convinced of, insomuch, that 
 without the spirit of prophecy, one may venture to foretel, that, 
 unless there is a second dotage which the church has yet to un- 
 dergo, the council of Trent will remain the last under the name 
 of ecumenical, assembled for the purpose of ascertaining articles 
 of faith. 
 
 But to return to the steps and maxims by which the papal 
 power arose. I have already mentioned two things very re- 
 markable in the Roman policy; one is the steadiness with 
 which they pursued a measure once adopted ; the other, the sa- 
 crifice they always made of every other consideration to the ad- 
 vancement of their authority and grandeur. In the controver- 
 sies that sprang up, I have observed the advantages the Latin 
 church derived from the following circumstances, to wit, that 
 they were commonly later than the Greeks in becoming ac- 
 quainted with the subject in debate, had much less of a contro- 
 versial genius, and were more united among themselves. » 
 
S62 LECTURES ON 
 
 In many of the disputes, especially the earlier disputes, we 
 cannot say of one of the two opposite tenets more than of the 
 other, that it tended to advance the hierarchy. Several of 
 them, as we have seen, were either mere verbal cavils, or such 
 jumbles of ill-adapted ideas, in the form of propositions, as were 
 quite incomprehensible, and no otherwise connected with prac- 
 tice than in the general, but very strong, tendency they had, to 
 divert men's attention and zeal from what was essential and use- 
 ful, to what was entirely imaginary and frivolous. Neverthe- 
 less in these, hovvever unimportant in themselves, it was of 
 great importance to Rome, for the advancement of her autho- 
 rity, that her explicit declaration on either side should prove 
 decisive of the question. In the latter controversies, indeed, 
 such as those concerning purgatory, image worship, transub- 
 stantiation, indulgences, the indelible character, the efficacy 
 of the opus operatum, that is, the exterior of the sacramental 
 action, and some others, we may say with truth, that ecclesias- 
 tical authority was clearly interested on one side of the ques- 
 tion. It would even imply an uncommon degree of stupidity 
 not to discern how much in those questions the victorious side, 
 or that which obtained the sanction of Catholicism, tended to 
 exalt the priesthood. But before these controversies came 
 upon the carpet, the power of Rome was so far advanced, that 
 she had not the same occasion as formerly for reserve and cau- 
 tion in making her election. Accordingly her election was in- 
 variably on the side which most advanced her power. It is for 
 this reason that the very origin of such doctrines, as well as the 
 methods she employed in supporting them, are not improperly 
 imputed to priestcraft. 
 
 In regard to the maxim abovementioned, (which is, indeed, 
 of the essence of priestcraft,) namely, to make every considera- 
 tion give way to the aggrandizement of her priestly authority, 
 we have already produced one strong evidence of it, in the man- 
 ner wherein the peace was effected, after what is called the 
 great schism of Acacius, or the first schism of the east. But 
 in nothing does this Roman maxim appear more glaring, than 
 in the encouragement invariably given to those who, from any 
 part of the world, could be induced to appeal to the Roman 
 pontiff. For many centuries, always indeed till the right of 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 263 
 
 receiving such appeals came by custom to be firmly established, 
 it was the invariable maxim of the Roman court, without pay- 
 ing the smallest regard to the merits of the cause, often with- 
 out examining it, to decide in favour of the appellant. No 
 maxim could be more unjust. At the same time, for a power 
 which had, by her opulence and arts, and some peculiar advan- 
 tages, become so formidable, no maxim, ere the practice of ap- 
 pealing to her judgment had taken root, could be more politic, 
 or effectually tend to encourage and establish that practice. 
 
 That ye may be satisfied I do not wrong the Romish hierarcli, 
 do but examine a little how the case stood in some of the first 
 causes that were in this manner brought before his tribunal. 
 Indeed, in the very first of any note, his holiness was rather un- 
 fortunate in following the maxim I have mentioned. The ap- 
 peal I allude to was that of the heresiarch Pelagius, and his dis- 
 ciple Celestius, from the sentence of an African synod, by which 
 their doctrine had been condemned, and they themselves, and 
 all the teachers and holders of their tenets, had been excommu- 
 nicated. From this sentence they appealed to Rome. Zozi- 
 mus, then pope, agreeably to the maxims of his court, imme- 
 diately, but very unfortunately for himself, declared in their fa- 
 vour, vindicated their doctrine, and, in a letter directed to the 
 African bishops, upbraided these prelates in the strongest terms 
 for the temerity of their procedure, ordered the accusers of Pe- 
 lagius and Celestius, within two months, to repair to Rome, 
 to make good their charge before him, declaring, that if they 
 did not, he would reverse the sentence which had been pro- 
 nounced. And as to Heros and Lazarus, who had taken a prin- 
 cipal part in the prosecution ; men who, if we may credit the 
 testimony of St. Prosper and 8t. Jerom, (for Rome is in this 
 confronted by her own saints) were eminent for the purity of 
 their lives, as well as for their faith and zeal; the pope, in a 
 summary manner, without so much as giving them a hearing, 
 or assigning them a day for offering what they had to plead in 
 their own defence, deposed and excommunicated them. The 
 steadiness of the Africans, however, co-operating with other 
 causes, at last compelled the pontiff not only to relax, but totally 
 to change his style and conduct. Tliough neither the bishops, 
 nor Paulinus the accuser, whom the pope had summoned by 
 
Q64> LECTURES ON 
 
 name, paid the least regard to his summons, or to his declared 
 intention of having the cause tried anew at Rome, they gave it 
 a re-hearing in another, and a very numerous African synod, 
 convened at Carthage, wherein, without showing any deference 
 to the sentiments of the Roman bishop, they unanimously ad- 
 hered to their former judgment. 
 
 The ardour of the pontiff to favour an appellant did manifest- 
 ly, in this instance, carry him beyond the bounds of prudence. 
 The condemnation of the Pelagian doctrine had been, in some 
 respect, ratified by his predecessor Innocent. Two African 
 synods and one Numidian synod, assembled at Milevis, had with 
 one voice condemned it. Celestius, after his condemnation 
 in Africa, having taken refuge in Ephesus, was soon driven 
 thence, in consequence of the general odium which his opinions 
 raised, and had afterwards no better treatment in Constantino- 
 ple, when he thought proper to betake himself thither. Be- 
 sides, the emperor Honorius, without waiting the judgment of 
 Rome, was induced, by a deputation from the African synod, 
 not only to approve their decrees, but to enact a very severe law 
 against the Pelagians, ordering all that should be convicted of 
 this heresy, to be sent into exile. Add to all this, that the two 
 greatest lights of the Latin church, Jerom and Augustin, whose 
 judgment was of very great weight all over the west, had openly 
 declared against them. 
 
 The pontiff therefore discovered, though late, that he had 
 been precipitate, and had (through an excessive attachment to 
 what in the main would be admitted by politicians to be a wise 
 maxim) engaged in a desperate cause, and had so many and pow- 
 erful enemies to encounter, as the papacy, in so early a period, 
 was not a match for. It was become, therefore, absolutely ne- 
 cessary for him to retreat, lest, by grasping unseasonably at too 
 much, he should lose every thing, and even be deserted by those 
 who, on other occasions, firmly supported him. This he endea- 
 voured to do with the best grace he could ; but to do it with a 
 good grace was impossible. Accordingly, he was at length un- 
 der a necessity to anathematize as impious, what he had former- 
 ly, in the most explicit terms, pronounced innocent. In the 
 whole affair, Rome evidently showed the truth of an observation 
 I. formerly made, that with her, doctrine was ever but a matter 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOUY. Q63 
 
 of* secondary consideration, the primary object was invariably 
 power. 
 
 The conduct of Zozimiis, on tlie appeal of Apiarius, a pres- 
 byter of Sica, in Africa, who had been deposed and excommu- 
 nicated for several heinous crimes, was very remarkable. The 
 pone, without so much as hearing his adversaries, restored him 
 not only to the communion of the church, l)ut to the rank from 
 which he had been degraded. The vile arts of lying and for- 
 gery, which, on this occasion, were employed by the holy see, 
 never weakly scrupulous about means, and the compromise which 
 the African bishops, though not deceived by papal artifices, were, 
 for peace-sake, compelled to make ; the second deposition of 
 that irreclaimable profligate, his second appeal to Rome, and 
 his second hasty restoration by Pope Celestine, without hearing 
 his accusers; the methods taken by Rome to patronize and re- 
 instate him, and the defeat of those methods, by the explicit con- 
 fession, which, in an African synod, the culprit made, of the 
 most atrocious crimes, to the unspeakable confusion of the pope's 
 legate, sent to defend his innocence ; all these, I say, furnish a 
 scene, wherein the very arcana of Roman policy may be thorough- 
 ly penetrated by the discerning mind. Nothing could more 
 clearly demonstrate, than did the conduct of Rome in the whole 
 transaction, that she paid no more regard to guilt or innocence, 
 in the judgments she pronounced, than she did to truth or false- 
 hood, in the means she employed. With no person or state did 
 the maxim, ascribed by Suetonius to Julius Csesar, more exactly 
 quadrate than with the see of Rome. " Si violandum est jus, 
 " regnandi gratia violandum est, aliis rebus pictatem colas." 
 With her all was just, and all was true, that promoted the great 
 object, power; all was false, and all was criminal, that opposed 
 it. Indeed, the black confession which Apiarius publicly made, 
 of crimes judged too shocking to be recorded, tended to give 
 but a very unfavourable impression of the decisions of a tribunal, 
 since called infallible. For let it be observed, that this man 
 at Rome was twice absolved as guiltless, (both times indeed 
 without a trial) first by Pope Zozimus, then by Pope Celestine, 
 both now worshipped as saints by the Romanists. 
 
 It were easy to show, were it proper to descend into more 
 particulars, that the conduct of Leo, on occasion of the appeal 
 
266 LECTURES ON 
 
 of Celedonius, of Besanc^on, from the diocesan synod of Aries, 
 in reversing their sentence, restoring the deposed bishop, and 
 the procedure of the pontiff soon after against Hilarius, bishop 
 of Aries, and exarch of the seven Narbonnese provinces, who 
 had presided at the synod above mentioned ; whom he not only 
 cut off from his communion, and, as far as in him lay, degraded, 
 but every where defamed by his letters, were equally precipitate, 
 unjust, and scandalous. In this attempt, however, on the rights 
 of the Gallican church, Rome seems to have been more success- 
 ful, through a peculiar felicity in the juncture, than in those 
 formerly made on the churches of Africa. The prince then 
 upon the throne, Valentinian the third, was both weak and cre- 
 dulous, and one over whom the pontiff appears to have had an 
 unlimited influence. The pope, therefore, on this occasion, 
 glad to recur to the secular arm, easily obtained from the em- 
 peror a rescript, exactly in the terms he desired, confirming all 
 that he had done, commanding all the Gallican bishops to yield 
 implicit obedience to the decrees and awards of the pontiff, and 
 enjoining the magistrates of the several provinces to interpose 
 their authority, in compelling those who should be summoned 
 to Rome to obey the summons. Many attempts were used by 
 Hilarius to effect a reconciliation ; but he found it was utterly 
 impracticable, except on such conditions as an honest man will 
 ever account totally unworthy of regard — the sacrifice of truth, 
 and the surrender of those rights and liberties of his church and 
 people, with which, as a most sacred depositum, he had been 
 entrusted. In this state, therefore, which surely a modern pa- 
 pist would think desperate, unreconciled to Christ's vicar, and 
 as a rotten member cut off from the body of the faithful, being 
 cut off from all connection with the church's visible head, died 
 the famous Hilarius, bishop of Aries. And what shall we say 
 of Roman consistency, when we reflect, that this very excom- 
 municated, cursed, anathematized Plilarius, (I cannot say by 
 what strange .oversight) as well as Pope Leo, who, to the last, 
 treated him in the manner we have seen, are both at present 
 first-rate saints in the Roman calendar? What account can the 
 Romish church give of this? If ye be curious to know, ye may 
 consult Baronius, or any other of the hireling writers of that 
 communion, whose business in brief it was to explain nonsense. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. QGJ 
 
 darken facts, confound the judgment, and reconcile contradic- 
 tions. 
 
 In what further concerns the matter of appeals, I shall only, 
 without multiplying instances, refer you to what happened in 
 the cases of Talia, bishop of Alexandria, charged with simony 
 and perjury; the two Gallican bishops, Salonius and Sagit- 
 tarius, who had been convicted, before a synod at Lyons, of the 
 crimes only of murder, adultery, robbery, and house-breaking, 
 but whose merit, in appealing to the apostolic sec, cancelled all 
 in an instant, and procured, without further inquiry, a declara- 
 tion of their innocence, and restoration to their bishoprics ; and 
 who, (I speak of the two last) in confidence of their security 
 under the pope's protection, soon relapsed into the same enor- 
 mities, were deposed a second time, and shut up in a monas- 
 tery, to prevent a second recurrence to Rome. Ye may ob- 
 serve, also, the case of Hadrian, bishop of Thebes, in Thes- 
 saly; of Honoratus, archdeacon of Saloni, in Dalmatia; that 
 of John, bishop of Lappa, in Crete; and that of Wilfrid, of 
 York, in England. For many centuries ye will find, that the 
 judgment of the apostolic see, as it affected to be styled, in con- 
 tradistinction to others, was uniformly in favour of the appellant. 
 
 IF history had given us no information about the persons, or 
 cases, there would still be a strong presumption that, in so con- 
 siderable a number, some had deserved the treatment they had 
 received from the provincial, diocesan, or national synod, to 
 which they had belonged. As the matter stands, there is the 
 clearest historical evidence, that the far greater part of them 
 had been justly degraded, and could never have obtained the 
 patronage or countenance of any power, which did not make 
 every consideration of religion and equity give way to her am- 
 bition. 
 
 What but this favourite maxim can account for the many 
 falsehoods and forgeries, to which she so often recurred, in sup- 
 port of her exorbitant claims. The ignorance and superstition 
 of the dark ages that ensued, (for those I have had occasion to 
 refer to in this, and my two preceding lectures, are but as the 
 evening twilight, compared with those which followed,) soon 
 gave scope for attempting the very grossest kinds of imposition. 
 And the friends and patrons of the hierarchy were not remiss. 
 
^68 LECTURES ON 
 
 in using the opportunity while it lasted. The fruits of their 
 diligence, in this way, were fictitious councils as well as canons, 
 and fictitious decrees of real councils, false deeds of gift, such 
 as the instrument of donation of Rome and all Italy, made, as 
 was pretended, by the emperor Constantino to Pope Sylvester, 
 and his successors in the popedom, the decretal epistles of the 
 popes, not to mention the little legerdemain tricks of false 
 jniracles, and other such like artifices. For the lying spirit, 
 which had gotten possession of the head, quickly diffused itself 
 throughout the members ; and every petty priest supported his 
 particular credit among the people by the same arts, exhibited, 
 as it were, in miniature, which were on a larger scale displayed 
 by the pontiff, for the support of the great hierarchal empire. 
 It must be owned, the greater part of their forgeries, especially 
 Constantine's donation, and the decretal epistles, are such bare- 
 faced impostures, and so bunglingly executed, that nothing less 
 than the most profound darkness of those ages could account 
 for their success. They are manifestly written in the barbarous 
 dialect which obtained in the eighth and ninth centuries, and 
 exhibit those poor, meek, and humble teachers, who came im- 
 mediately after the apostles, as blustering, swaggering, and 
 dictating to the world in the authoritative tone of a Zachary, or 
 a Stephen. 
 
 But however gross the artifices were, they were well suited 
 to the grossness of the people, in times wherein almost all ves- 
 tiixes of literature and arts were buried in the ruins of the fallen 
 empire. These acts and decretals had, accordingly, for several 
 centuries, a powerful effect in imposing on mankind; an effect 
 which continued, whilst its continuance was of principal mo- 
 ment, when all the little remains of knowledge in the world 
 were in the hands of those, who considered it as their interest 
 to deceive the people, and keep them in ignorance. Thus the 
 progress, as well as the coming, of this power, has been indeed 
 after the working of Satan, in signs and lying wonders, and all 
 dcceiveableness of unrighteousness. 
 
 Indeed, such sacrifices of truth, to what was called the cause 
 of the church, have always been regarded as among the most 
 Iiarmlcss of tbeir innumerable expedients. The term pious 
 fraud was, in most places, and for several ages, not introduced 
 
FXCLESIASTICAL IITSTORY. QC)9 
 
 sarcasticalh", as it is used with us at present ; nor was it ima- 
 gined to connect ideas incompatible with each other ; but em- 
 ployed to denote an artifice not only innocent but commendable. 
 The patrons of sacerdotal power had every advantaf^c therefore: 
 their tricks, when undiscovered, wrought powerfully in their 
 favour ; and when discovered, (such was the woful superstition 
 of the times,) were, on account of the supposed holy purpose to 
 be effected by them, easily excused by all, and highly approved 
 by many. 
 
 It is true, that now, since the restoration of letters, men's 
 sentiments on these subjects are very much altered. Those 
 graceless devices have been, for the most part, fully detected 
 and exposed ; insomuch, that all the learned and ingenuous 
 part, even of Roman Catholics, quite ashamed of them, have 
 long since abandoned their defence. But Rome may now 
 laugh at a detection, which can never restore things to the state 
 they were in before those frauds were employed. What has 
 been at first produced solely by imposture, comes, tlirough the 
 slow but sure operation of time and immemorial custom, t© ac- 
 quire a stability totally independent of its origin. When that 
 is the case, the discovery is not able to shake the fabric, to 
 which the imposture originally gave a being. Antiquity sup- 
 plies the place of truth. Custom rules the world, and is the 
 principal foundation of obedience in all the governments that 
 are, and ever were, upon the earth. It is but one of a thou- 
 sand that is capable of examining into the origin of tilings; the 
 remaining nine hundred and ninety-nine have no reason to as- 
 sign for their obedience but custom, or what they are wont to 
 see exacted on the one hand, and complied with on the other. 
 A set of customs, gradually established, may, in like manner, 
 be gradually abolished ; but the discoveries of the learned 
 (though not totally ineffective) have not a very sudden, and a 
 very sensible effect upon them. 
 
 I shall, in my next lecture, proceed to illustrate, in other 
 instances, the particular attention which Rome invariably gave 
 to the great object, poaver; and consider how far the very best 
 of her pontiffs sacrificed every other consideration to its ad- 
 vancement. 
 
270 LECTURES ON 
 
 LECTURE XVI. 
 
 1 PROCEED, in this lecture, to illustrate, in other instances, the 
 particular attention which Rome invariably gave to the great 
 object, power. The proof that I am now to produce, is differ- 
 ent in kind from the former, but still corroborative of the same 
 capital point in her policy, which was, to make every considera- 
 tion of truth and right, give place to her ambition. 
 
 For this purpose, I shall not recur to those pontiffs, who 
 were far from reaching even the low standard of virtue, recom- 
 mended in the latter part of the Julian maxim, aliis rehus pieia- 
 tein colas. And that there were popes, who, in no part of their 
 conduct, showed that they either feared God, or regarded men, 
 all persons. Popish and Protestant, who have the least acquaint- 
 ance with church history, will readily admit. But I shall recur 
 to one, who was thought, as much as any that ever sat in the 
 papal chair, to mind the better part of the apophthegm, and was 
 observant of piety, equity, and charity, in cases which did not 
 interfere with the favourite pursuit ; and shall clearly evince, 
 that he was not a less rigid observer of the former part of it, 
 regnandi gratia jus vlolandum est ; that he did not hesitate at 
 any means, falsehood and injustice, the prostitution of religion, 
 and of the most sacred rites of humanity, when these could be 
 rendered instrumental in promoting the primary papal object, 
 
 POWER. 
 
 The pope I intend to produce as an example, is no other 
 than Gregory I. a man at present adored in the church of 
 Rome, as one of her most eminent saints, and respected as one 
 of her most learned doctors. The Greeks, I know, were wont 
 to style him (as it would seem) contemptuously, Gregory Dia- 
 logue, on account of some silly dialogues which he wrote. Yet 
 even these are not inferior to some of the productions of their 
 own approved authors in the same period. His pontificate com- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Qj i 
 
 menccd towards tlie end of tlie sixth century, and extended to 
 tlie beixinniniT of the seventh. 
 
 Who knows not the extraordinary zeal which this pope ma- 
 nifested against the ConstantinopoHtan patriarch, who, in those 
 days, began to assume the title of universal bishop? For who is 
 so great an enemy to the pride and ambition of others as the 
 proud and ambitious ! I'hat a relentless jealousy was at the bot- 
 tom of the violence which he showed on that occasion, there was 
 no considerate and impartial person who did not discern then, 
 and there is none of this character who docs not discern still. 
 It were unnecessary here to mention all the odious epithets by 
 which he stigmatised that obnoxious appellation. Suffice it to 
 observe, in general, that he maintained strenuously, that who- 
 ever assumed that heretical, blasphemous, and infernal title, (so 
 he expressly terms it,) was the follower of Lucifer, the forerun- 
 ner and herald of Antichrist, and that it neither did nor could 
 belong to any bisliop whatever. He had nothing, it appears 
 of the prophetic spirit, else he would have spoken more cautious- 
 ly of a title so soon afterwards assumed by some of his own suc- 
 cessors. It must be owned, indeed, that in this conduct the 
 Grecian patriarch was the precursor of the Romish. If, there- 
 by, the pope is rendered antichrist, it is a deduction from Pope 
 Gregory's reasoning, and not from mine. 
 
 Gregory, when that title was first assumed at Constantinople, 
 was quite indefatigable in his applications by letter, and by the 
 intervention of his nuncios, with the patriarch himself, and with 
 the emperor, to effect the suppression of it. But all was to no 
 purpose. The matter could never be made appear to them as 
 of that moment, which Gregory was so immoderately solicitous 
 to give it. They considered it only (like most of the titles then 
 conferred on the potentates of the church) as a complimental 
 and respectful manner of address, well befitting the l)ishop of 
 the imperial city. Rome's remonstrances were accordingly 
 made light of. The other patriarchs, particularly the An- 
 tiochian and the Alexandrian, Gregory endeavoured, by all 
 possible means, but to no purpose, to engage in the quarrel. 
 The bishop of Alexandria, probably with a view to mollify his 
 incensed brother at Rome, gave him a title, which he thought 
 would be deemed equivalent, calling him universal pope. Hut 
 
^7^ LECTURES ON 
 
 his holiness had proceeded too fi^r to be taken in by so simple a 
 device, and therefore he did not hesitate to reject it with disdain, 
 as being in the same way derogatory, with the other title, to the 
 whole episcopal order. He did more : for, in order to show 
 how different a spirit he was of, he assumed, for the first time, 
 (and herein he has been followed by his successors.) this hum- 
 ble addition, the sei'vant of the servants of God : servus servo- 
 rum Dei. We have heard of people's making humility the 
 subject of their vanity, and mortification the ground of their 
 pride. The Pharisees were ostentatious of their dirty and dis- 
 figured faces when they fasted, and there are even some Chris- 
 tian sects who seem to make the Pharisees, in this respect, their 
 pattern. The pope aUvays since, to this day, introduces his 
 bulls with the modest title assumed by Gregory. One would 
 expect from it, that they should consist only of entreaties and 
 lowly petitions to those whom he acknowledges to be his supe- 
 riors and his masters. Instead of this, ye find him commanding 
 imperiously, even with menaces, denunciations, and curses. Is 
 this like a servant to his masters ? If we could consider the ti- 
 tle, therefore, as any thing but words, we should pronounce the 
 using it as a sort of refinement in the display of power; adding 
 insult to tyranny, like those despots, who, when they are inflict- 
 ing tortures on their slave, mock him with the title of sovereign 
 and lord. 
 
 About this time the emperor Mauiicius, whom the pope 
 could by no arts prevail on to enter into his viev.'s, nay, whom 
 he found rather favourable to the use of a title, by which an 
 honourable distinction was conferred on the bishop of the impe- 
 rial residence, was first dethroned, and then murdered, by a 
 centurion, one of his subjects and soldiers, who usurped his 
 throne. The usurper Phocas (for that was his name) was a 
 man stained with those vices which serve most to blacken hu- 
 man nature. Other tyrants have been cruel from pohcy, and 
 through want of regard to justice and humanity ; the cruelties 
 of Phocas are not to be accounted for, but on the hypothesis of 
 the most diabolical and disinterested malice. Witness the in- 
 human manner wherein he massacred five of his predecessor's 
 children, all that were then in his power, before the eyes of the 
 unhappy father, whom he reserved to the last, that he might 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Q^S 
 
 be a spectator of the destruction of his family before his death. 
 The slaughter of the brother, and of the only remainin(»- son of 
 the emperor Mauricius, with all the patricians of any name who 
 adhered to his interest, the methods by which Phocas got the 
 empress Constantina, and her three daughters, into his power, 
 with the murder of whom he closed the bloody scene, manifest 
 a mind totally corrupted, incapable of being wrought upon by 
 any principle of religion, sense of justice, or sentiment of hu- 
 manity. 
 
 Unluckily for the Constantinopolitan ])atriarch, the innocent 
 consort of his late sovereign, with the three princesses, her 
 daughters, had taken refuge in one of the churches of the city. 
 The prelate, moved partly by compassion to the royal suftcrers, 
 partly by the reverence of the place, would not permit them to 
 be dragged by force from their asylum ; hu'c defended them, 
 whilst there, with great spirit and resolution. The tyrant, one 
 of the most vindictive and inexorable of mankind, and who 
 could therefore ill brook this spirited opposition from the priest, 
 thought it prudent then to dissemble his resentment, as it would 
 have been exceedingly dangerous, in the beginning of his reign, 
 to alarm the church. And he well knew how important, and 
 even venerable, a point it was accounted, to preserve inviolate 
 the sacredness of such sanctuaries. He desisted, therefore, 
 from using force; and, by means of the most solemn oaths, 
 and promises of safety, prevailed at length upon the ladies to 
 quit their asylum. In consequence of which, they soon after 
 became the helpless victims of his fury, and suffered on the 
 same spot whereon the late emperor, and five of his sons, had 
 been murdered a short while before. 
 
 Now what should we expect would be the reception which 
 the accounts of this unnatural rebellion, and dethronement of 
 ]\Iauricius, the horrid butchery of the whole imperial family, 
 the usurpation and coronation of such a sanguinary fiend as 
 Phocas, would meet with at Rome, from a man so celebrated for 
 piety, equity, and mildness of disposition, as Pope Gregory? 
 Look into his letters of congratulation on the occasion,* and yc 
 will find them stuffed with tlie most nauseous adulation. Were 
 we to learn the character of Phocas only from St. Gregory, we 
 should conclude him to have been rather an angel than a man. 
 
f274 LECTURES ON 
 
 But if we recur to facts, — if we take our Saviour's rule, and 
 judge of the tree by the fruits, (and I know no rule we can so 
 safely follow,) we shall rather conclude him to have been a 
 devil incarnate. The actions, on which this judgment is found- 
 ed, are not only incontrovertible, but uncontroverted. Ye may 
 read the account that is given of the earliest and the principal 
 of these murders, by Gregory himself, in the preamble to the 
 eleventh book of his epistles; where, to say the truth, they are 
 recited with as much coolness, as though they were matters of 
 the utmost indifference, and as though religion and morality 
 could be nowise affected by such enormities. 
 
 Observe, then, in what manner the sanctity of a Gregory 
 congratulates the blood-thirsty, but successful, rebel, regicide, 
 and usurper. I sliall give you a specimen of his manner in his 
 own words. (L. 11. Ep. 36.) The classical scholar will make 
 the proper allowances for the low Latinity of the seventh cen- 
 tury. " Gregorius Phoebe Augusto." His exordium is, 
 " Gloria in excelsis Deo, qui juxta quod scriptum est, mutat 
 " tempera et transfert regna : et quia hoc cunctis innotuit, quod 
 " per prophetam suum loqui dignatus est, dicens. Quia domi- 
 " natur excelsus in regno hominum, et cui voluerit, ipse dat 
 " illud." After this preamble, he observes, that God, in his 
 incomprehensible providence, sometimes sends kings to afflict 
 his people, and punish them for their sins. This, says he, we 
 have known of late to our woful experience. Sometimes, on 
 the other hand, God, in his mercy, raises good men to the 
 throne for the relief and exultation of his servants. Then ap- 
 plying his remark to the present juncture, he adds, " De qua 
 " exultationis abundantia, roborari nos citius credimus, qui be- 
 " nignitatem pietatis vestrse ad imperiale fastigium pervenisse 
 " gaudemus." — Then breaking out in a rapture, no longer to 
 be restrained, he exclaims, " Lsetentur cceli et exultet terra, et 
 *' de vestris benignis actibus, universas reipublicag populus nunc 
 " usque vehementer afflictus hilarescat. Comprimantur jugo 
 ^' dominationis vestra? superbae mentes hostium. Releventur 
 *' vestra misericordia contriti et depressi animi subjectorum." 
 Proceeding to paint their former miseries, he concludes with 
 wishing, that the commonwealth may long enjoy the present 
 happiness. A few instances, and but a few, of the benignity, 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Qrj5 
 
 and piety, and mercy, of this emperor, here so hi<rhly extolled 
 by Gregory, may be learnt from the treatment, above related, 
 given to his predecessor's family. Another letter to Phocas, 
 written soon after, the pope begins in this manner: (Ep. 13.) 
 " Considerare cum gaudiis et magnis actionibus gratiarum libet, 
 *' quantas omnipotenti Domino laudes debcmiis, quod remoto 
 " jugo tristiti^ ad libertatis tempora sub imperiali benignitatis 
 " vestra; pietate pervenimus." His not having a nuncio at 
 Constantinople, at the time of the emperor's accession, he ex- 
 cuses from the insupportable tyranny of the former reign, and 
 concludes in this manner: " Sancta itaque Trinitas vitam ves- 
 ' tram per tempora longa custodiat, ut de bono vestras pictatis 
 quod tarde suscipimus, diutius gaudcamus." 
 
 As a subject, and a Christian," says Mr. Gibbon [a], " it 
 was the duty of Gregory to acquiesce in the established go- 
 ' vernment; but the joyful applause with which he salutes the 
 ' fortune of the assassin, has sullied, with indelible disgrace, 
 ' the character of the saint. The successor of the apostles 
 ' might have inculcated, with decent firmness, the guilt of 
 ' blood, and the necessity of repentance : he is content to cclc- 
 ' brate the deliverance of the people, and the fall of the oppres- 
 ' sor; to rejoice that the piety and benignity of Phocas have 
 been raised by Providence to the imperial throne: to pray 
 that his hands may be strengthened against all his enemies ; 
 and to express a wish, that, after a long triumphant reign, he 
 may be transferred from a temporal to an everlasting king- 
 dom." He proceeds : — " I have traced the steps of a revo- 
 lution, so pleasing, in Gregory's opinion, both to heaven and 
 ' earth; and Phocas does not appear less hateful in the exer- 
 ' cise than in the acquisition of power. The pencil of an im- 
 ^ partial historian has delineated the portrait of a monster, his 
 
 * diminutive and deformed person, &c. Ignorant of letters, of 
 ' laws, and even of arms, he indulged, in the supreme rank, a 
 ' more ample privilege of lust and drunkenness; and his brutal 
 ' pleasures were either injurious to his subjects, or disgraceful 
 
 * to himself. Without assuming the office of a prince, he re- 
 ' nounced the profession of a soldier; and the reign of Phocas 
 ' afflicted Europe with ignominious peace, and Asia with dcso' 
 
 [a] History, chap. nIvI. 
 
 s2 
 
 i 
 
276 LECTURES ON 
 
 '* lating war. His savage temper was inflamed by passion, har- 
 " dened by fear, exasperated by resistance or reproach. The 
 " flight of Theodosius, the only surviving son of Mauricius, 
 *' to the Persian court, had been intercepted by a rapid pursuit, 
 *' or a deceitful message: he was beheaded at Nice; and the 
 *' last hours of the young prince were soothed by the comforts of 
 *' religion, and the consciousness of innocence." 
 
 Now that we may be satisfied, that all Gregory's fulsome and 
 detestable flattery was not without a view, we need only peruse 
 the congratulatory letter to the empress Leontia, immediately 
 following : for, by this channel, he thought it most prudent to 
 suggest, for the first time, the distinguishing favour he expect- 
 ed they vvould show, in return, to the see of St. Peter, as the 
 popes had now, for some centuries, affected to denominate the 
 church planted at Rome. He begins this, as the other letters 
 above-mentioned, with such high strains of praise and thanks- 
 giving, as suited only the birth of the Messiah : his expressions 
 are generally borrowed from those used in scripture, in rela- 
 tion to that memorable event; and he never forgets to contrast 
 the present happiness with the evil times which had preceded. 
 ** Reddatur ergo creatori omnium ab hymnidicis angelorum 
 " choris, gloria in ccelo, persolvatur ab omnibus gratiarum actio 
 " in terra, &c." 
 
 His manner of applying to this lady is indeed very artful. 
 After recommending to her, and her most pious lord, the see 
 of the blessed apostle Peter, he signifies his persuasion, that 
 what he had said was quite unnecessary, that their own piety 
 must have suggested the same thing to them before. H^e takes 
 notice of the great prerogatives of Peter in such a manner, 
 (which was now become common at Rome, though no where 
 else in the church) as though they had been his peculiarly; 
 namely, the founding of the universal church, the power of the 
 keys, the power of retaining sins, and of remitting them, or of 
 binding and loosing ; whence he takes occasion indirectly, but 
 with great address, to insinuate, that their hopes of those fa- 
 vours, which none but Peter could bestow, must be in propor- 
 tion to their zeal for his honour. " Unde nobis dubium non 
 *' est, quam forti amore ad eum vos stringitis, per quem solvi 
 " ab omnibus peccatorum nexibus desideratis. Ipse ergo sit 
 
FXCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY. '277 
 
 '' vestri custos imperii; sit vobis protector in terra, sit pro vo- 
 " bis intercesso, in ccelo." It was then froin Peter only they 
 were to expect remission. To liis guardianship their govern- 
 ment was recommended, and their persons to his protection on 
 the earth, and intercession in heaven. There is (ye must know) 
 much less word of the providence and protection of God, and 
 of the intercession of Jesus Christ, now that people had got 
 themselves so liberally provided in guardians, protectors, and 
 intercessors, among the saints. The abuse thrown with such 
 an unspairing hand on the unfortunate emperor who had pre- 
 ceded, as though he had been one of the worst of tyrants, na- 
 turally leads one to enquire into his character. The fault, of 
 which he is principally accused by contemporary historians, and 
 which, doubtless, proved the cause of his untimely fate, was too 
 much parsimony : than which, no vice could render him more 
 odious to the soldiery, who were, in those degenerate times of 
 the empire, lazy, undisciplined, debauched, rapacious, and sedi- 
 tious. As tlic government w^as become military, the affection 
 of the army was the principal bulwark of the throne. It was 
 ever consequently the interest of the reigning family to secure 
 the fidelity of the legions as much as possible. This, in times 
 so corrupt, when military discipline was extinct, was to be ef- 
 fected only by unbounded indulgence, and by frequent largV.'?5- 
 ses. These the prince was not in a condition to bestow, without 
 laying exorbitant exactions on the people. For levying these 
 the army were, as long as they shared in the spoil, always ready 
 to lend their assistance. Hence it happened, that among the 
 emperors, the greatest oppressors of the people were commonly 
 the fjreatest favourites of the armv. Tiie revolt of the lefjions, 
 therefore, could be but a slender proof of mal-administration. 
 It was even, in many cases, an evidence of the contrary. 
 
 But it is more to our present purpose, to consider the cha- 
 racter, which this very Pope Gregory gave of INIauricius, when 
 in possession of the imperial diadem. For if the former and 
 the latter accounts, given by the pontiff, cannot be rendered 
 consistent, we must admit, that, first or last, his holiness made 
 a sacrifice of truth to politics. Now it is certain, that nothing 
 can be more contradictory than those accounts. In some of 
 his letters to that emperor, ye will find the man, whom he now 
 
278 LECTURES ON 
 
 treats as a perfect monster, extolled to the skies, as one of the 
 most pious, most religious, most Christian princes, that ever 
 lived ; and withal, (which deserves particular notice) as the most 
 gracious and bountiful. In proof of this, I could adduce a va- 
 riety of passages from several letters of the pontiff, written at 
 different times, some earlier, and some later. Take a few for 
 a specimen. Let the first be (L. 5. Ep. 63.) to Mauricius. 
 " Inter armorum curas et innumeras sollicitudines, quas inde- 
 *' fesso studio, pro Christiante reipublic^ regimine sustinetis, 
 *' magna mihi cum universo mundo Icetitise causa est, quod pie- 
 " tas vestra custodiae fidei, qua dominorum fulget imperium, 
 '' prsecipua sollicitudine semper invigilat. Unde omnino confi- 
 *' do, quia sicut vos Dei causas religiose mentis amore tuemini, 
 " ita Deus vestras majestatis suae gratia tuetur et adjuvat." 
 Here the emperor's pious zeal, solicitude, and vigilance, for the 
 preservation of the Christian faith, being such as no public 
 cares, no tumults of war, could ever divert his attention from, 
 are represented as the glory of his reign, as a subject of joy, 
 not to the pontiff only, but to all the world. Again, (L. 6. Ep. 
 30.) to the same, he concludes in these words; — " Omnipotens 
 " autem Deus serenissimi domini nostri vitam, et ad pacem ec- 
 ^\ clesiae, et ad utilitatem reipublicse Romanse, per tempora lon- 
 '• ^a custodiat. Certi enim sumus, quia si vos vivitis, qui coeli 
 " dominum timetis, nulla contra veritatem superba praevalere 
 " permittitis." Could any man suspect, that one who writes 
 in so earnest a manner, did not entertain the highest opinion of 
 the emperor's piety and zeal, as well as the most fervent wishes 
 for his welfare. I shall produce but one other example (L. 8. 
 Ep. 2.) to the same. The subject of the letter is thus express- 
 ed in the title : " De denariis sancto Petro transmissis." After 
 the warmest expressions of gratitude, on account of the pious 
 liberality and munificence of his imperial majesty, and after 
 telling how much the priests, the poor, the strangers, and all 
 the faithful, were indebted to his paternal care, he adds, " Un- 
 '' de actum est, ut simul omnes pro vita dominorum concorditer 
 " orarent, quatenus omnipotens Deus longa vobis et quieta 
 " tempora tribuat, et pietatis vestras faslicissimam sobolem diu 
 *' in Romana republica florere concedat." Yet he no sooner 
 hears, which was not long after, of the successful treason of 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 27^ 
 
 Phocas, in the barbarous murder of his sovereign and liis I'ami- 
 ly, an event, the mention of which, even at tliis distance, makes 
 a humane person shudder with horror, than he exclaims, with 
 rapture, " Glory to God in the highest." He invites heaven 
 and earth, men and angels, to join in the general triumph. 
 How happy is he, that the royal race is totally exterminated ; 
 for whom, but a little before, he told us, that he poured out in- 
 cessant and tearful prayers, {lachrymabili ])rece is one of his 
 expressions) that they might, to latest ages, flourish on the 
 throne, for the felicity of the Roman commonwealth. Surely 
 truth and sincerity had no part in this man's system of morality. 
 
 An honest heathen would at least, for some time, have avoid- 
 ed any intercourse or correspondence with such a ruffian as Pho- 
 cas ; but this Christian bishop, before he had the regular and 
 customary notice of his accession to the purple, is forward ta 
 congratulate him on the success of his crimes. His very crimes 
 he canonizes (an easy matter for false religion to effi[?ct) and 
 transforms into shining virtues, and the criminal himself into 
 what I may call a second Messiah, he that should come for the 
 salvation and comfort of God's people. And all this was purely, 
 that he might pre-engage the favour of the new emperor, who 
 (he well knew) entertained asecret grudge against the C'onstan- 
 tinopolitan bishop, for his attachment to the preceding emperor 
 Mauricius; a grudge which, when he saw with what spirit the 
 patriarch protected the empress dowager, and her daughter, soon 
 settled into implacable hatred. 
 
 But Gregory, who died soon after the aforesaid revolution, 
 did not live to reap the fruits of his accursed policy. Indeed, 
 Boniface III. the next but one who succeeded him, for the pon- 
 tificate of his immediate successor was very short, did very soon 
 obtain of the emperor not only the revocation of the edict, by 
 which the title of universal bishop had been conferred on the 
 patriarch of Constantinople, but the issuing of a new decree, 
 whereby that title was entailed in perpetuity on the lioman pon- 
 tiff, who was vested with the primacy of all the bishops of the 
 empire. And the churcli of Rome, by accepting these, not only 
 declared that she derived her honours from the secular powers, 
 but proclaimed herself, in the opinion of (Trcgory, who is ac- 
 knowledged to have been as great a pontiifas ever filled the- 
 
^80 LECTURES ON 
 
 chair of 8t. Peter, to be vain-glorious, proud, profane, impious, 
 execrable, blasphemous, antichristian, heretical, diabolical ; for 
 these are some of the epithets he bestows on whosoever shall ac- 
 cept the title of universal bishop. 
 
 Now if such was the conduct of a Gregory, who, it must be 
 owned, in cases, wherein their politics did not interfere, appears 
 to have been endowed with several virtues and good qualities, 
 what are we to expect from other popes? We need not be sur- 
 prised that a Zachary, in the middle of the eighth century, should, 
 for the interest of the holy see, assist with his counsel, and 
 countenance, the usurper Pepin, to depose his master and bene- 
 factor Childerick, king of France, with all his family, and to 
 possess himself of his crown and kingdom ; a favour which Pe- 
 pin, in the very next pontificate, returned in kind, assisting the 
 pope to usurp the imperial dominions in Italy; or that pope 
 Stephen and king Pepin became reciprocally guarantees of each 
 other's usurpations, the former by the sanction of religion, the 
 latter by an armed force. As little need we wonder at the many 
 flagrant injustices of other pontiffs, when they happened to be 
 influenced by the like motives. 
 
 After so much has been said of Gregory, it may not be amiss 
 to make some remarks on his character, that we may not be 
 thought to attribute to him things absolutely incompatible. To 
 me he appears to have been a man, whose understanding, though 
 rather above the middle rate, w^as much warped by the errors 
 and prejudices of the times wherein he lived. His piety was 
 deeply tinctured with superstition, and his morals with monkery. 
 His zeal was not pure, in respect either of its nature or of its 
 object. In respect of its nature, it was often intolerant; wit- 
 ness the sanguinary measures he warmly recommended against 
 the Donatists; and in respect to its object, it is manifest, that 
 his attachment was more to the form than to the power of re- 
 ligion, to the name than to the thing. Plis aim was not so 
 much to turn men from sin to God, and from vice to virtue, as 
 to bring them by any means within what is called the pale of 
 the church, and, consequently, under the dominion of its rulers; 
 to draw them from the profession of paganism to the profession 
 of Christianity. If this was effected, he cared not though they 
 remained more than half heathen still. His zeal was exactly 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 281 
 
 that of those Pharisees, who compassed sea and land to make a 
 proselyte, which, when they had accomplished, they rendered^ 
 him twofold more a child of hell tlian themselves. Witness 
 the advice he gave to the monk Augustine, who had been sent 
 into Britain for the conversioir of the An^lo-Saxons, not trt 
 abolish their paganish ceremonies, but rather to adopt them, and 
 give them a new direction, that so the conversion of the people 
 might be facilitated, and their relapse to the superstition of their 
 fathers prevented. The plain language of this conduct is, if 
 they are but called Christians, and are subjects of the church, 
 to which they yield an external conformity, it matters not what 
 sort of Christians they are at bottom, or how much of the pagaa 
 they may still retain in their heart, principles, and conduct. 
 
 1 must own, that this turn of thought has a very natural con- 
 nection with that kind of zeal, which has for its object the erec- 
 tion, or preservation, of a hierarchy, or what is called an eccle- 
 siastical polity. With zealots of this stamp, a bare exterior will 
 serve the purpose. Obedience, whether voluntary or extorted ; 
 attachment, whether sincere or dissembled : submission, whether 
 it proceed from love or from fear; equally, as in other worldly- 
 polities, tend to support the secular honours and emoluments 
 of the different orders, which are the great pillars of the fa- 
 bric. 
 
 This kind of zeal is, in like manner, tlie true source of per- 
 secution for conscience sake, and of a maxim inseparably con- 
 nected with the principle of intolerance, that the end will sanc- 
 tify the means. That Gregory had, through the misfortune 
 and error of the times, thoroughly imbibed both these principles, 
 will never be doubted by any person, who, with judgment and 
 impartialit)'-, reads his history. Indeed, in the sacrifices which 
 he made, as appears from the above observations, of truth, hu- 
 manity, an9 integrity, we can hardly, at present, thougli the 
 maxim were admitted, consider the end as having goodness- 
 enough to justify the means. His object in the contest with 
 the Constantinopolitan patriarch, about the title of universal 
 bishop, was not the advancement of Christianity, or so much as 
 the profession of it; it v.-as not the enlargement of the pale of 
 the church, or the increase of the number of her nominal chil- 
 dren. It was purely the honours and pre-eminence of his see. 
 
g82 LECTURES ON 
 
 But such was the infatuation of the times, that even this was 
 become, in their imaginations, an important and a rehgious ob- 
 ject. 
 
 Nor was this the case only with the see of Rome, though it 
 was evident that she had dran\ most deeply of this spirit, but, 
 in some measure, of every particular church. It was become a 
 popular and plausible cloak, for the pride and ambition of church- 
 men, that they acted out of a principle of zeal for the dignity of 
 the see with which they were entrusted, that is, said they, for 
 the honour of the founder. This was thought to be of great 
 weight, if the founder happened to be a saint in the calendar ; 
 of greater still, if he was, or (which is all one) if he was believ- 
 ed to have been, a scripture saint, or an evangelist; and great- 
 est of all, if an apostle. They acted on the supposition, that 
 they could not more effectually ingratiate themselves with their 
 patron, though in heaven, than by exalting the church he had 
 erected or endowed upon the earth, above the churches erected 
 or endowed by others, and, consequently, in exalting him above 
 his fellow saints. They, in this way, were disposed to excuse 
 their interferences with one another, thinking it reasonable, 
 that each should do his best for the saint to whom he was most 
 indebted, and who, from being the founder, commonly became 
 the tutelar saint of his diocese or parish. And then, as to the 
 idea they supposed those saints to entertain of the dignity of 
 their respective churches, it was altogether secular, or suited to 
 the apprehensions of mere men of the world. This dignity con- 
 sisted not at all in the virtue and piety of the parishioners, but 
 in the opulence and pre-eminencies of the clergy, in the extent 
 and populousness of the parish or diocese, the magnificence of 
 the churches, sacred utensils, and vestments, particularly the 
 rank, the titles, the privileges, the prerogatives, and the riches 
 of the pastor. 
 
 It is true, the apostles, when on this earth, before they were 
 fully instructed concerning the kingdom of heaven, and the spi- 
 ritual nature of the Messiah's government, were found contend- 
 ing with one another Vvho should be greatest. And it is equally 
 true, that their Lord and Master severely reprehended their 
 conduct, and taught them, that unless they were converted, and 
 acquired a very different disposition, as well as different senti- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 283 
 
 mcnts concerning true greatness, far from being great in that 
 kingdom, they should never enter it. And it is to be believed, 
 nay, their conduct demonstrates, that they were soon after far 
 superior to thoughts so grovelling, to an ambition so ill adapted 
 to their profession. But from the sentiments which gradually 
 sprang up in the church, on the decline of true knowledge and 
 genuine piety, men seemed universally to be convinced, that in 
 these squabbles for greatness, eminence, and precedency, the 
 apostles and saints were still as keenly engaged in heaven as 
 ever they had been on the earth ; and that they could not be 
 more highly gratified, than by the successful struggles of their 
 clients here in maintaining their respective honours and pre-emi- 
 nencies. 
 
 Nor does any person seem ever to have entered more into 
 these views than the celebrated Pope Gregory. He was ever 
 holding forth the prerogatives of St. Peter, (who was, in his 
 time, acknowledged as the founder of his church) nor did he 
 make any ceremony of signifying, that this prime minister of 
 Jesus Christ, like other prime ministers, would be most liberal of 
 his favours to those who were most assiduous in making court to 
 him, especially to them who were most liberal to his foundation 
 at Rome, and most advanced its dignity and power. So much 
 for St. Gregory, and for the nature and extent of Roman papal 
 virtue. 
 
284^ LECTURES ON 
 
 LECTURE XVII. 
 
 In the preceding lecture, I illustrated, at some length, in the 
 instance of Gregory, one of the best of the Roman pontiffs, 
 how far the maxim could go, of reckoning every thing just and 
 lawful, by v.'hich the papal power could be advanced, and the 
 supremacy of Rome secured. But it was not in one or two 
 ways only, that they showed their attention to the aforesaid 
 maxim, but in every way wherein they could apply it to advan- 
 tage. I have also observed to you some of their other prac- 
 tices of the like nature and tendency. The only artifice I shall 
 consider at present, is the claims which Rome so long and so 
 assiduously affected to derive from the prerogatives of tlie apos- 
 tle Peter, the pretended founder of that see. I have hinted at 
 this, by the wa}^, once and again; but as it was one of her most 
 potent engines, it will deserve our special attention. 
 
 In my first discourse, on the rise of the pontificate, I showed 
 sufficiently how destitute this plea is of every thing that can de- 
 serve the name of evidence, and observed, that the first pontiff 
 who seemed directly to found the honours of his see on the pri- 
 vileges of Peter, was Pope Innocent, about the beginning of 
 the fifth century. As to the apostolic age, and that immedi- 
 ately succeeding, there is not a vestige of either authority or 
 precedency in the Roman pastor, more than in any other bishop 
 or pastor of the church. Nor is this to be imputed to a defect 
 of evidence through the injury of time, in relation to the point 
 in question. So far from it, that next to the sacred canon, the 
 most ancient and most valuable monument we have of Cliristian 
 antiquity, is a very long letter to the Corinthians, from a bishop 
 of Rome, Clement, who had been contemporary with the apos- 
 tles, and is mentioned by Paul, in one of his epistles. So 
 much the reverse do we find here of every thing that looks like 
 authority and state, that this worthy pastor, in the true spirit of 
 primitive and Christian humility, sinks his own name entirely 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 28.5 
 
 in that of the congregation to which he belonged, and does not 
 desire that he should be considered otherwise than as any other 
 individual of the society; a manner very unlike that of his suc- 
 cessors, and quite incompatible with their claims. The letter 
 is titled and directed thus : " The church of God, which so- 
 *' journs at Home, to the church of Ciod, which sojourns at Co- 
 " rinth." Tlie words of the congregation were then considered 
 as of more weight than those of any bishop, even the bishop of 
 Rome. Nor is there, in the whole performance, any trace of 
 authority lodged either in him, or in his church, over the church 
 of Corinth, or, indeed, over any person or community. In 
 every part, he speaks the language not of a superior to his infe- 
 riors, a master to his servants, or even a father to his children, 
 but of equal to equal, friend to friend, and brother to brother. 
 lie uses no dictating and commanding : he only exhorts and 
 entreats. To the contraveners there are no menacing denun- 
 ciations, such as have, for many centuries, accompanied the pa- 
 pal bull, of the vengeance of Almighty God, and the maledic- 
 tion of the blessed apostles, Peter and Paul. The modesty of 
 the style of this truly primitive pastor, is an infallible index of 
 the modesty of his pretensions : and, let me add, a very strong 
 evidence of the great antiquity and perfect authenticity of the 
 epistle. 
 
 The first who appeared to claim any thing like authority, was 
 Victor, bishop of Rome, (or pope, if ye please to call him so, 
 though that name was not then peculiar,) who lived near the 
 end of the second century. This man, the first noted stickler 
 for uniformity, quarrelled with the Asiatic bishops for follow- 
 ing a different rule in the observance of Easter, or the feast of 
 the passover, from that followed in the west. This festival ap- 
 pears from the beginning to have been distinguished by Chris- 
 tians, not on its own account as a Jewish solemnity, in comme- 
 moration of their deliverance from Egypt, but on account of its 
 coincidence, in respect of time, with those most memorable of 
 all events, the death and resurrection of Christ. In the east^ 
 they were accustomed to observe the 1 Ith day of the first month, 
 on whatever day of the week it happened. In the west, when 
 the lith did not fall on Sunday, they kept it the first Sunday- 
 after. AVhen Mctor found that the Orientals were no more 
 
286 LECTURES ON 
 
 impelled by his menaces than persuaded by his arguments, to 
 relinquish the custom they had been taught by their founders, 
 and to adopt implicitly the Roman practice, he, in a rage, cut 
 them ofFfrom his communion. It is of importance here to ob- 
 serve, that this phrase, as used then, was not (as it is often mis- 
 understood by modern readers,) of the same import with ex- 
 communicating, in the strictest sense. It only denotes refusing, 
 in respect of one's self, to join with such a person in religious 
 exercises. And this every bishop whatever, considered himself 
 as entitled to do, in regard to those whom he thought to err in 
 essential matters. That the pope himself considered it in this 
 manner, is manifest from the pains he took (though to no pur- 
 pose) to induce other bishops to follow his example ; sensible, 
 that his refusal of communicating with the Quarto-decimans, 
 as they were called, did neither exclude them from the commu- 
 nion of the church, unless the resolution had become universal, 
 nor oblige any other bishop to exclude them, till satisfied of the 
 propriety of the measure. Accordingly, he is not considered 
 by his contemporaries as assuming an extraordinary power, but 
 as using very absurdly and uncharitably a power which every 
 one of them had as well as he. Even those of the same opinion 
 with him in regard to Easter, would not concur in this measure. 
 They looked on the time of observing that festival as merely 
 circumstantial, and therefore not a sufficient reason for a breach. 
 Such had been the opinion of his own predecessors, and such 
 also was the opinion of all his successors, till the time of Con- 
 stantine, when, by the emperor's influence with the Nicene 
 council, the practice of the west was established throughout the 
 church. So far, therefore, is this passage of history, as some 
 have represented it, from being an evidence of power in the 
 Roman pastor at that early period, that it is a very strong evi- 
 dence of the contrary. In Victor, we have a pope that was 
 wrong-headed and violent enough to attempt an extraordinary 
 exertion, if he had had but as much influence as would have se- 
 cured to his endeavours some probability of success. But in 
 any other way than that of example and persuasion, he knew 
 that his endeavours could only serve to render himself ridicu- 
 lous. Of so little account, however, were his judgment and ex- 
 ample made, that, in this step, to his no small mortification, he 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Q^J 
 
 remained singular. All were ashamed of it, and lils imme- 
 diate successor did not judge it proper to adopt it. I need not 
 add, that on this occasion we hear not a syllable of the autho- 
 rity of St. Peter, or of any right in the Roman see to direct 
 and command all other churches. 
 
 Of no greater consequence was the excommunication of St. 
 Cyprian, and most of the African bishops, about half a century 
 afterwards, by Pope Stephen, on occasion of the question about 
 the validity of heretical baptism. These sentences were mere 
 hruta falmina, had no consequences, and, as Augustin observes, 
 produced no schism. The pope's excommunication, when un- 
 supported by other bishops, did, in effect, rebound upon him- 
 self, and he himself was properly the only person cut off by 
 such a sentence from the full communion of the church. No- 
 thing can be juster than the sentiment of Firmilian on this sub- 
 ject. " O Stephen," says he, " by attempting to separate 
 *' others from thee, thou hast separated thyself from all other 
 " churches. Pie is the true schismatic who departs, as thou 
 " hast done, from the unity of the church." When the bishop 
 of Rome acted unreasonably, no person considered himself as 
 under any obligation to follow his example more than that of 
 any other pastor in the church. Kor was Stephen's conduct, 
 any more than Victor's, imitated by his successor; for thougli 
 the African bishops rebaptized, and most others did not, they 
 lived peaceably in communion with each other till rebaptization 
 was condemned in the following century, first by the synod of 
 Aries, and then by the council of Nice. 
 
 Even as far down as the pontificate of Damasus, towards the 
 end of the fourth century, when the see of Rome was, through 
 the munificence of the emperors and persons of opulence, great- 
 ly increased in riches and splendour, and, consequently, in dig- 
 nity and power, a synod of Italian bishops, with the pope at 
 their head, in a letter to the emperor Gratian, thus express 
 themselves in regard to the superiority of the see of Rome : 
 " The bishop of Rome is above other bishops, in respect of the 
 " prerogatives of his apostolic see, but on a level with them in 
 " respect of his ministry." Let it be observed, that the term 
 apostolic was not yet peculiarly appropriated to tlic Roman see, 
 but was conceived to belong to it, as has before been observed, 
 
288 LECTURES ON 
 
 in common not only witli all the churches that had heen found- 
 ed by apostles, but even with all patriarchal and metropolitical 
 churches. By his superiority, therefore, no more is meant than 
 isuch a precedency as they supposed Peter to have enjoyed 
 amongst his fellow-apostles. As to the latter part of the decla- 
 ration, the equality of the ministry in the bishops, though it be 
 the doctrine of all antiquity, nothing can be more repugnant to 
 what has been the doctrine of Rome, for many centuries, name- 
 ly, that all power, both spiritual and temporal, is lodged in the 
 pope ; that all the bishops are no more than his deputies ; that 
 all the authority and jurisdiction they are vested with, are but 
 emanations from the plenitude of power lodged in him. But 
 Damasus, who, though far from being unambitious, had not 
 formed a conception of so exorbitant a claim, appears to have 
 been well satisfied with the respect shown to his see in the 
 above declaration. , 
 
 From this event, to the time of Innocent, in the beginning 
 of the fifth century, though the popes piqued themselves not a 
 little on the tradition they had, however implausible, that their 
 see was founded by the apostle Peter, they did not pretend to 
 derive any peculiar authority from him ; but in maintaining 
 their power, always recurred to the dignity of Rome, the queen 
 of cities, the capital of the world; to the. imperial rescripts, the 
 decrees of Sardica, which, on some occasions, they wanted to 
 impose on mankind for the decrees of Nice; and to canons, 
 real or suppositious, of ecumenical councils. That there were 
 real canons, which gave the bishop of Rome a precedency be- 
 fore other bishops, is not denied ; but in these it is never as- 
 signed as a reason, that this church had Peter for its founder, 
 -but solely, that the city was the world's metropolis. 
 
 But no sooner was this other foundation suggested, than its 
 utility for the advancement of the papal interest was perceived 
 by every body. First, this was a more popular plea. It made 
 the papal authority much more sacred, as being held directly 
 jure divino, whereas, on the other plea, it was held merely y?^?*e 
 humano. Secondly, this rendered that authority immoveable. 
 What one emperor gave by his rescript, another might resume 
 in the same manner; the canons of one council might be re- 
 pealed by a posterior council. Such alterations, in matters of 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 589 
 
 discipline, arrangement, and subordination, liad been often 
 made. But who durst abrogate the prerogatives granted by his 
 Lord and Master to the prince of the apostles, and by him 
 transmitted to his church ? Thirdly, the power claimed in this 
 way was more indefinite, and might be extended, nobody knows 
 how far, as long as there was found enough of ignorance and 
 superstition in the people to favour the attempts of the priest- 
 hood. Besides, when the claim was of divine right, the pontift* 
 had this advantage, that he alone was considered as the proper 
 interpreter of his own privileges. The case was totally differ- 
 ent with all human decrees, authority, and claims whatever. 
 Add to this, that whilst they derived from any terrestrial power, 
 they could never raise their claims above the authority v;hich 
 was acknowledged to be the source. But when the source was 
 believed to be in heaven, no claim over earthly powers, how- 
 ever arrogant, could endanger their exceeding in this respect. 
 And though I believe, that all these considerations were not 
 fully in view at the beginning, yet it is certain, that for these 
 purposes they employed this topic, in the course of a few cen- 
 turies, when they would have all power, secular as well as spi-» 
 ritual, to have been conferred by Peter, a poor fisherman of 
 Galilee, upon the pope. 
 
 It was some time, however, before the old ground of canons, 
 imperial edicts, and ancient custom, was entirely deserted. 
 Zosimus, the successor of Innocent, and a most aspiring pontiff, 
 recurred to these as the sole foundation of his pretended right 
 of judging in the last resort. It was, perhaps, prudent not to 
 desert a plea at once which had great weight with many, and to 
 risk all upon a novelty, which, till men's ears were familiarized 
 with it, might, for aught he knew, be but little regarded. In 
 process of time, however, the credulity of the people keeping 
 pace with their degeneracy in knowledge, and virtue, and ra- 
 tional religion, dispelled all apprehensions on this head, and 
 the repeal of the canons of Sardica by other councils, compelled 
 bis holiness to recur to the new ground pointed out by Inno- 
 cent, which was found, upon trial, to afford a much firmer bot- 
 tom whereon to erect the wonderful fabric of the hierarchy. 
 
 Accordingly, in less than fifty years after this plea had been 
 ushered in by Innocent, it began to be a common topic with the 
 
 T 
 
^90 LECTURES ON 
 
 pontiffs, and all the advocates of pontifical jurisdiction. Hila- 
 rius, in the first letter he wrote after his accession to the papal 
 chair, mentions, with much exultation, the primacy of St. Peter, 
 and the dignity of his see. There was the greater need of this 
 alteration, as Rome was, both in riches and splendour, daily 
 declining, and, from being the imperial city, was become only 
 the capital of Italy, a Gothic kingdom, as Constantinople was, 
 in strictness, the only imperial city, and was now become much 
 superior to the other in populousness and wealth. Accordingly, 
 in the time of Pope Gelasius, about the close of the fifth cen- 
 tury, in a synod, consisting mostly of Italian bishops, and de- 
 pendents on the pontiff, a decree was obtained, declaring boldly, 
 (as if, says Bower, all records had been destroyed, and men 
 knew nothing of what had happened but a few years before,) 
 " that it was not to any councils, or the decrees of any, that 
 " the holy Roman Catholic and apostolic church owed her pri- 
 " macy, but to the words of our Saviour, saying, in the gospel, 
 " ' Thou art Peter^ &c. ; and thereby building the church upon 
 '' him, as on a rock which nothing could shake ; that the Ro- 
 *' man church, not having spot or wrinkle, was consecrated and 
 *' exalted above all other churches, by the presence, as well as 
 " by the death, martyrdom, and glorious triumph, of the two 
 " chief apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul, who suffered at Rome 
 " under Nero, not at different times, as the heretics say, but at 
 " the same time, and on the same day; and that the Roman 
 " church is the first church, being founded by the first apostle ; 
 '* the church of Alexandria the second, being founded by his 
 *' disciple, St. Mark, in his name ; and that of Antioch the 
 " third, because St. Peter dwelt there before he came to Rome, 
 " and in that city the faithful were first distinguished by the 
 " name of Christians." 
 
 Why was there no mention here, I must beg leave to ask, of 
 the church of Jerusalem, which had been infinitely more highly 
 honoured, even in their own way of estimating honours, than 
 any or all of those churches put together? It had been honour- 
 ed by the presence, the ministry, the martyrdom, the resurrec- 
 tion, and glorious triumph, of the Lord Jesus Christ, the sole 
 founder and king of the church universal; honoured by the de- 
 scent of the Holy Ghost, on the whole college of apostles, 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Q()l 
 
 whereby they were both authorized and quahfied to commei)ce 
 their ministry ; honoured further by the express command of 
 Jesus Christ to all his apostles, to begin the discharge of their 
 office at Jerusalem. 
 
 But, says the Romanist, it was for this very reason, the mur- 
 der of the Lord of glory, that the Jews were rejected from be- 
 ing God's people, and Jerusalem in particular humbled, in 
 being denied the honours she had otherwise enjoyed, as the 
 capital of the church of Christ. Is it then reasonable, that 
 Jerusalem should be punished for the death of the Master, and 
 Rome rewarded and honoured for the slaughter of his servants? 
 Shall that be pleaded as a merit to the one, which is accounted 
 a dishonour to the other? And if not the guilt of the murder- 
 ers, but the testimony given to the truth by the sufferers, and 
 the importance of the oblation, are the things to be considered, 
 the martyrdom of Jesus Christ was infinitely more important, 
 in respect both of the victim, and of the consequences, than 
 that of all his apostles and followers put together. It is true, 
 the infidel Jews were rejected as a nation, because they had pre- 
 viously rejected the Lord's Messiah ; and, in this fate, the un- 
 believing inhabitants of Jerusalem justly shared, when their 
 temple and polity were destroyed ; but this was no reason why 
 the church of Jerusalem, that is, the believing inhabitants and 
 believing Jews, a church which Christ himself had planted, and 
 which was, for some time, watered by the joint labours, of all his 
 apostles, should be involved in that punishment. On the con- 
 trary, their faith, their fortitude, their glory, are enhanced by 
 the unbelief, apostacy, and unrelenting cruelty, of their coun- 
 trymen and fellow-citizens. And that our Lord himself meant 
 to show a particular respect to his faithful servants or church 
 in that city, is manifest from what has been observed, the order 
 he gave to his disciples, to wait there the fulfilment of the Fa- 
 ther's promise, the efiPusion of the Spirit in a variety of miracu- 
 lous gifts, after which they were there to begin their ministry. 
 For out of Zion this new law was to issue, and the word of the 
 Lord from Jerusalem. 
 
 I adduce all this, more as an argumentum ad hominem to the 
 papist, than as implying, that it was intended that one church 
 ought to have jurisdiction over another, by whomsoever founded, 
 
 T 2 
 
292 LECTURES OX 
 
 The disciples were commanded to call no man father upon the 
 earth, because they had only one Father, who is in heaven, and 
 they themselves were all brethren; and to call no one master, 
 teacher, or guide; because Christ alone was their master, their' 
 teacher, their guide. It is scarcely worth while to criticise mi- 
 nutely this decree of Gelasius. It founds their whole claim on 
 a tradition, which has been shown to be not only uncertain, but 
 exceedingly improbable. It is somewhat remarkable, that he 
 takes just as much of tradition as will suit his purpose, and no 
 more. The tradition was as universal, and much more proba^ 
 ble, that Peter was likewise the founder of Antioch ; but this 
 he did not judge convenient to admit. Besides, that Mark 
 founded Alexandria, in Peter's name, had never been heard of 
 in the church before. In this pitiful manner, he was obliged 
 to mutilate and misrepresent tradition, that by all means he 
 might avoid letting it appear, that the dignity of those several 
 cities in the empire, and that alone, had determined the rank 
 of their respective bishops. With a gross and ignorant people, 
 such as the Romans were now become, bold assertions would 
 supply the place both of arguments and of testimonies. The 
 pope had also this further motive in this new conceit, to mortify, 
 as much as possible, the patriarch of Constantinople, (the only 
 prelate powerful enough to be a rival,) by exalting the bishops 
 of Alexandria and Antioch above him; and doubtless, by this 
 expedient, he hoped the more easily to gain the two last men- 
 tioned bishops to his side. 
 
 Nothing from this time forwards was heard from the patroni- 
 zers of Romish usurpation, but Thou art Peter, and I give to 
 thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and so forth. These 
 things began now to be echoed from every quarter. What is 
 often repeated, how weak soever, never fails to make some im- 
 pression, especially on the illiterate. The hard stone is at 
 length hollowed by the eave's drop, however feeble and unper- 
 ceivable the effect of a single drop must be accounted. 
 
 Matters were advanced so far at the beginning of the sixth 
 century, that when Pope Symmachus was summoned to appear 
 before an assembly of bishops, and undergo a trial for several 
 crimes of which he was accused, it was pleaded by some, (for 
 the first time indeed,) that no synod or council had a right to 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. QQ^ 
 
 judge the pope; that he was accountable for his actions to God 
 alone. It must be owned, that this notion, though at present 
 like an article ot faith with every genuine son of Home, (I mean 
 not every Roman Catholic,) appeared to the generality of Chris- 
 tians, at the time it was broached, exceedingly extravagant and 
 absurd. But tlie synod (for it was not a general council) which 
 Theodoric king of the Goths had convened, consisting entirely 
 of Italian bishops, who were, in several respects, dependent, and 
 had now, of a long time considered the exaltation of the Ro- 
 man see as the exaltation of their country, and the only means 
 left of raising themselves above the eastern part of the empire; 
 though they were not inclinable to give a positive decision in 
 this extraordinary question, were satisfied to supersede the ne- 
 cessity of deciding it, by absolving the pontiff from all the 
 charges brought against him, and restoring him to all his au- 
 thority both within and without the city. 
 
 It was impossible to foresee how far the advocates for the hi- 
 erarchy would carry the privileges they derived from the prince 
 of the apostles, as they commonly affected to style 8t. Peter. 
 What shall we think of this high prerogative, the title, the ab- 
 solute jus divinum, to commit all crimes with impunity, at least 
 in this world, being amenable to no jurisdiction, temporal or spi- 
 ritual? Yet nothing less than this was the pope's benefit of 
 clergy ! Some, to avoid one absurdity in giving an unbounded 
 licence, have run into another, maintaining the impeccability of 
 popes in action, as well as their infallibility in judgment. But 
 let any man who has read their history, even as written by their 
 own friends and favourers, believe them to be either impecca- 
 ble, or infallible, if he can. I shall only remark, by the way, 
 that, in an Italian synod, assembled little more than a century 
 before the pontificate of Symmachus, the bishops, however par- 
 tial to the pope, were so far from exempting him from the ju- 
 risdiction of a council, that they presented a petition to the em- 
 peror Gratian, begging it, as a special favour, that the bishop 
 of Rome might not be judged by a subordinate magistrate, but 
 cither by the emperor himself, or by a council: And to obtain 
 so much as this, was then thought a very great acquisition, 
 though now it would be accounted extremely derogatory to the 
 holy see. 
 
294 LECTURES ON 
 
 The progress of the pontiffs was indeed rapid. One attain- 
 ment, though at the time it was made, it appeared the utmost 
 extent of their ambition, always served but as a step to facili- 
 tate the acquisition of something still higher. " A person 
 ** never mounts so high," said Cromwell, " as when he does 
 *' not know himself how far he desires to go." Nothing is 
 more certain than that, in later centuries, there were many pre- 
 rogatives strenuously contended for by the papal see, which the 
 popes of earlier ages explicitly disclaimed. 
 
 But to return to the new plea, in support of the hierarchy, 
 first suggested by Innocent, and afterwards solemnly ratified in 
 a synod by Gelasius, there was even a gradation in the use 
 they made of this, and in the consequences they deduced from 
 it. At first, it was little more than a sort of divine title, in the 
 see of Rome, to that honour and precedency which she had for 
 several ages enjoyed by such a human title as I have formerly 
 explained. The altering of their ground, therefore, seems not 
 at first to have been so much intended for extending their pre- 
 rogatives, as for rendering them more venerable, and more un- 
 assailable, by every human power. But matters did not long 
 rest here. 
 
 For some ages, the primapy of Peter was understood by no- 
 body to imply more than that he was a president, chairman, or 
 first in rank, in the apostolic college. But now that his prero- 
 gatives were considered as the ground-work of the Roman 
 claims, every true Romanist was disposed to stretch them as 
 much as possible. The primacy they first raised into a super- 
 intendency; then the superintendency into a supremacy; and 
 the supremacy they at length exalted into despotism, or an abso- 
 lute and uncontrollable jurisdiction. Again ; what was granted 
 to Peter by his Master, was no longer considered in the way 
 it had been formerly, as a personal reward for the important 
 confession he was the first to make. Every prerogative, which 
 they fancied to have belonged to him, they now ascribed to the 
 pope as the representative of his person, and the inheritor of 
 all that was his. What a wonderful deduction from a number 
 of premises, every one of them assumed without proof, and 
 some of them in direct opposition to the clearest evidence. 
 
 As their claims advanced, their style varied. In the primi- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ^29^ 
 
 tive ages, the utmost that was pretended, was, tliat the church, 
 or Christian society in Rome, was Ibundcd hy tlic apostle Pe- 
 ter; that is, in other words, that the first converts to Christi- 
 anity, in Rome, were made by his preaching and ministry. 
 But not satisfied with what is impHcd in this account, that he 
 was the first who preached the gospel to them, they afterwards 
 would have that capital to be the peculiar see of St. Peter, 
 where he was settled as the bishop, or fixed pastor, of the con- 
 gregation. The Romans were denominated the peculiar peo- 
 ple of St. Peter. The pontiff was become his successor in of- 
 fice. Nay, as if this were not enough, they quickly affected to 
 talk of Peter as still personally present there, and of the pope 
 as the organ through which he spoke. Their episcopal throne 
 is accordinirly the chair of St. Peter. What is ffiven to that 
 church is given to St. Peter. To disobey the pope is to affront 
 St. Peter ; nay, it is to rebel against God, and to renounce his 
 Son Jesus Christ, and is therefore no better than total apostacy. 
 This was now become their manner universally. 
 
 Nay, so far did Pope Stephen the second, about the middle 
 of the eighth century, carry this matter, that in writing to Pepin, 
 king of France, on a very urgent occasion, he thought proper to 
 use the apostle's name instead of his own, and thus beo-ins his 
 letter : " Simon Peter, the servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, 
 " to three most excellent kings, Pepin, Charles, and Carloman, 
 " to all the holy bishops, abbots, &c. ; to all the dukes, counts, 
 " and captains of the army ; and to the whole people of France : 
 " grace to you and peace be multiplied. I am the apostle Peter, 
 " to whom it was said, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will 
 " I buildmij church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail 
 " against it. And to thee will I give the keys of the kingdom 
 " of heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt hind on earth, shall he 
 " hound in heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, 
 " shall be loosed in heaven. Feed my sheep. As all this was 
 " said to me peculiarly, all who hearken to me, and obey my 
 *' exhortations, may be certain that their sins are forgiven, and 
 " that they will be admitted into everlasting life, cleansed from 
 " all guilt," &c. He proceeds to enjoin them to assist the pope, 
 his vicar, and the Romans, his favourite people, his chosen flock, 
 by making war upon tl,\c Lombards, those ravening wolves, as 
 
596 LECTURES ON 
 
 they would hope for remission here, or admission into heaven 
 hereafter ; and assures them, that in this entreaty and command, 
 he is joined by our lady, the virgin Mary, the mother of God, 
 the thrones and dominions, the principaUties and powers, and 
 the whole multitude of the heavenly host. Now this, on Pope 
 Stephen's authority, ye may call the third epistle of Peter. But 
 on comparing it with the former two, we cannot help remarking 
 the wonderful change in the apostle's style. In this he is a per- 
 fect braggart ; whereas in those, we find not a syllable of his 
 high prerogatives and claims. So far was he then from assum- 
 ing any superiority, that he put himself on a level not only with 
 apostles, but with every minister of the word. — The elders (says 
 he, 1 Pet. V. 1.) that are amongst 7jou^ I exhort^ who am also 
 an elder. The Greek words are more emphatically expressive 
 
 of equality than the English, •rpurl^JJi^s; ra; sv "vy^tv Ta^Mioi.\u'o ffvy'r^KT- 
 
 ^■Sii^^. The " presbyters amongst you," he says not, I their 
 archpresbyter command, but " I their fellow-presbyter exhort." 
 And to what does be exhort them ? To " feed the flock of God, 
 " which was among them, acting the parts of bishops or over- 
 '•' seers, not of lords, over God's heritage, but serving as pat- 
 " terns to the flock, teaching them not so much by precept as 
 ** by example." Was it not, however, as under shepherds, that 
 they were to feed and guide the Christian community? Un- 
 doubtedly. Who then was the chief shepherd? This also we 
 learn from his words. It was not Peter himself. He is very 
 far from giving such a suggestion. But it was Jesus Christ, 
 his and their common master. " When the chief shepherd, 
 " 'o apxi'Toiyvv, shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that 
 " fadeth not away." Nothing here of that arrogant and impe- 
 rious style which his pretended successors so soon assumed, and 
 so injuriously fathered upon him. In regard to the spirit of 
 the epistles, I say not how different, but how opposite, are they ! 
 This, transmitted by Pope Stephen, is an incentive, by every 
 means, the grossest flattery not excepted, to war, bloodshed, 
 and vengeance. Those we have in the sacred canon, breathe 
 nothing but humility, peace, and love, a meek and patient sub- 
 mission to the worst evils that men could inflict. In regard to 
 the new-fangled titles conferred on Mary, of our lady, and the 
 mother of God, so foreign from the simple manner of the in- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 297 
 
 spired penmen, I suppose a Romanist would account for them 
 by saying, that the apostle must have learnt these improvements 
 on his language from St. Cyril, who had, long ere now, carried 
 to heaven the news of the Ncstorian controversy, and his own 
 triumph at the council of Ephesus. 
 
 To give you a specimen of the mode of proving which now 
 came in vogue. — The pope is the sole foundation of the Chris* 
 tian edifice ; for Christ said to Peter, Oji this rock I will build 
 my church. In other places, however, all the apostles arc re- 
 presented equally as foundations. Again, the pope alone has 
 the whole jurisdiction ; for Christ said to Peter, To thee will I 
 give the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou 
 shall hind on earthy shall be bound in heaven. Yet the same 
 power is, almost in the same words, in another passage, given 
 to all the apostles, nay, and to the whole church. The pope is 
 the chief shepherd, the only apostle and pastor that derives his 
 power from Christ: all other bishops are under-shepherds that 
 derive their power from the pope. And how is this evinced ? 
 After the shameful fall of Peter, in thrice denying his master, 
 Jesus Christ judged it meet to bring him thrice solemnly to pro- 
 fess his love, and subjoined this precept, as affording the apostle 
 the means of giving the only satisfactory evidence of the truth 
 of his profession. Feed my sheep, and feed my lambs. Hence 
 the Romanist sagely concludes, that this charge belonged only 
 to Peter. Pie might, with equal reason, have maintained, that 
 as the question, Lovest thou me ? was put only to Peter, and 
 the threefold profession required of none, and given by none 
 but him, it was not a duty incumbent on the other apostles, to 
 love their master, or to confess him. It is on this ground, also, 
 that some have dared to advance, in contradiction equally to the 
 sense and to the words of scripture, that Peter was properly the 
 only apostle of Jesus Christ, and that all the rest were the apos- 
 tles of Peter. Seriously to refute such a principle, would be 
 almost as absurd as to maintain it. 
 
 Nay, to show a little more of their wonderful dexterity in 
 reasoning, and the surprising advantages they derive from this 
 fund of St. Peter, the pope's infallibility is thus demonstrated 
 by them. Our Lord said to Peter, before the denial, as being 
 the only disciple who was in imminent danger, (for the traitor ii> 
 
!298 LECTURES ON 
 
 out of the question,) Simon, Simon, Satan hath desired to have 
 you, that he may sift you as wheat ; hut I have prayed for thee, 
 that thy faith fail not ; and ivhen thou art converted, strengthen 
 thy brethren. — Those who think it necessary to mind the scope 
 of the place, and the principles of reason, allege, that the prayer 
 that his faith might not fail, means evidently, that he might 
 not proceed so far as to make a total defection from Christiani- 
 ty, which he would soon, by repeatedly abjuring his master, ap- 
 pear on the brink of doing. But who thinks it necessary to 
 mind these in disputing? The import of this passage, says the 
 Romanist is — Christ prayed that Peter might have the gift of 
 infallibility, or, as they also term it, inerrability, in his judg- 
 ment concerning all articles of Christian doctrine. Peter then 
 alone was, and consequently the pope, his sole heir and repre- 
 sentative, alone is, infallible. 
 
 I shall give but one other specimen of this Romish logic. 
 When, in the ages of the church posterior to those I have yet 
 remarked on, the popes claimed to be the true depositaries of 
 all secular as well as spiritual jurisdiction, how satisfactory was 
 the proof they produced in support of their claim, from this pas- 
 sage : They said. Lord, behold here are two swords. And he 
 said, It is enough. Here they shrewdly ask. Why were there 
 neither more nor fewer than two swords? The answer is plain: 
 It was to denote that there were two sorts of power, neither 
 more nor fewer, deposited with the church, the temporal and 
 the spiritual; and that these two were sufficient for all her oc- 
 casions. But why are these supposed to be entrusted solely to 
 the pope? If they were entrusted to Peter, they are certainly 
 entrusted to the pope. And that they were entrusted to Peter 
 is manifest from this, that Peter afterwards used one of them, 
 as we learn from the evangelist John, in cutting off the right 
 ear of Malchus, a servant of the high priest. And if he had 
 one of these swords, what good reason can be given why he 
 should not have both? Thus, by a regular deduction, as con- 
 vincing to a Romanist as demonstration, it is proved, that the 
 pope is the only fountain of all authority, both temporal and 
 spiritual. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. QQQ 
 
 LECTURE XVIII. 
 
 In my preceding lectures on the rise and progress of the pa- 
 pacy, I have been more particular, and treated things more in 
 detail, than I had at first intended. But on so complex a sub- 
 ject, to which so great a variety of different, and even dissimilar, 
 circumstances contributed, it is not easy to consult at once 
 brevity and perspicuity. Besides, in this deduction, I have 
 found it impossible to elucidate the latent causes which co-ope- 
 rated in rearing this wonderful fabric, in a narrative of its ad- 
 vancement, according to the order of time. To have attempted 
 this would have led me to make an abridgement of ecclesiastic 
 history, and to interweave with it such critical inquiries as 
 would serve to expose the secret springs and progress of that 
 enormaus power. But this would have occasioned a still more 
 minute detail, and would, after all, have scarcely been so satis- 
 factory as the manner I have adopted. A number of different 
 springs in the great machine, which operated separately, though 
 simultaneously, I have been obliged, for the sake of distinct- 
 ness, to consider separately. In the deductions I have given of 
 each, I have conformed myself, as much as possible, to the or- 
 der of time, that the different phases, if I may so express my- 
 self, of the same plea, at different periods, might be considered 
 and compared. Something of this kind ye may have observed 
 from what has been said on the subject of appeals, and on the 
 different foundations on which Rome, at different periods, raised 
 her title to jurisdiction. But when leaving one topic, I recur- 
 red to another, I have been obliged to turn back, as it were, 
 in order to resume the history of that particular also, from the 
 beginning. My object, in these discourses, is not to give a 
 narrative of facts, but from known facts, with their attendant 
 circumstances, by comparing one with another, to deduce prin- 
 ciples and causes. I have already gone so far this way, not 
 with a view to supersede the accoui^ts given by the historian. 
 
SOO LECTURES OX 
 
 but rather to enable you to read those accounts with greater at- 
 tention and advantage. Many circumstances, apparently trivial, 
 in a detail of facts, are apt to be overlooked by a hasty reader, 
 which yet may be of very considerable consequence for bringing 
 to lii^ht the springs of action, and accounting for other things 
 with which, at first, to a superficial observer, they may appear 
 to have little or no connection. In what remains of this en- 
 quiry into the Roman hierarchy, I do not intend to be so par- 
 ticular, but shall briefly take notice of some of the principal 
 causes (for to name all would be impossible) which co-operated 
 in rearing this strange medley of divine (as it was called) and 
 human, spiritual and secular, dominion. 
 
 There is none who has read church history with the least at- 
 tention, but must be sensible, that from the very beginning of 
 papal power, it has been much more considerable and conspi- 
 cuous in the west than in the east. Indeed, for some centuries, 
 the Roman pontiff hardly made any pretensions in the east, ex- 
 cept in regard to his precedency, which, as it had been settled 
 by early but tacit consent, and preserved by custom, the east- 
 ern prelates were not disposed to controvert. But when, from a 
 bare precedency, in point of rank, he came to extend his claim to 
 jurisdiction, he always met from them a vigorous and often suc- 
 cessful opposition. The case was not entirely similar with the 
 western bishops, over whom the pope obtained a considerable 
 ascendant, much earlier than it was in his power to do, in re- 
 gard to his oriental brethren. Several causes may be assigned 
 for this difference. 
 
 In the first place, in some of the earliest ages, if we except 
 the inhabitants of Rome, Carthage, and some principal cities, 
 those in the west were, in general, beyond all comparison, in- 
 ferior both in knowledge and acuteness to the Orientals, and 
 were therefore much better adapted to be implicit followers, 
 first, during the church's worldly obscurity, of the most respect- 
 able characters ; afterwards, during her worldly splendour, of 
 the most eminent sees. Victor, bishop of Rome, in the violent 
 measures he adopted against the Quarto-decimans, in Asia, in 
 the second centur}-, seems to have had no adherents, even among 
 those who, in the observance of Easter, the only point in dis- 
 pute, followed the same custom with himself. As little had 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 301 
 
 Stephen I. in the third century, in his measures against the 
 African rehaptizers of those who had been baptized by heretics 
 or schismatics. Ireneus, bishop of Lyons, on account of his 
 personal character, was often times more authority even in the 
 west than Pope Victor; and Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, than 
 Pope Stephen. But matters underwent a very great change 
 after Christianity had received the sanction of a legal establish- 
 ment. Then, indeed, the difference between one see and an- 
 other, both in riches and in power, soon became enormous. 
 And this could not fail to produce, in the sentiments of man- 
 kind, the usual consequences. Such is the constant progress 
 in all human polities whatever. In the most simple state of 
 society, personal merit, of some kind or other, makes the only 
 noticeable distinction between man and man. In polities purely 
 republican, it is still the chief distinction. But the farther ye 
 recede from these, and the nearer ye approach the monarchical 
 model, the more does this natural distinction give place to those 
 artificial distinctions created by riches, office, and rank. 
 
 When Home was become immensely superior both in splen- 
 dour and in opulence, to every western see, she would, with 
 great facility, and, as it were naturally, (if nothing very unusual 
 or alarming was attempted,) dictate to the other sees in the 
 west ; the people there having had, for several ages, very little 
 of the disputatious, dogmatizing humour of their brethren in 
 the east. It no doubt contributed to the same efiect, that 
 Rome was the only see of very great note, which concurred 
 with several of them in language ; Latin being the predomi- 
 nant tongue among the western churches, as Greek was among 
 the eastern. It was natural for the former, therefore, to con- 
 sider themselves as more closely connected with the Roman pa- 
 triarch than with the Constantinopolitan, or any of the other 
 oriental patriarchs. A similar reason, when not counteracted 
 bv other causes, operated among the Creeks, to make them 
 prefer a Grecian patriarch before a Latin one. 
 
 I acknowledge, as I hinted before, that this natural bias was 
 frequently surmounted by other causes. When the Orientals 
 were divided into parties by their disputes, as was often tlie 
 case, the Romans could then obtain almost any thing from the 
 side they favoured, such was the violence of the parties against 
 
302 LECTURES ON 
 
 each other. But this humour, though it was not entirely with- 
 out effect, was but temporary with them, and commonly lasted 
 no longer than the controversy which gave rise to it. Like an 
 elastic body, though it may be very much bent by the proper 
 application of external force, no sooner is the force removed, 
 than of itself it resumes its former state. Nevertheless, on bo- 
 dies of this sort, such violence, frequently repeated, will produce 
 some change. 
 
 One thing which rendered it very difficult to effect a hearty 
 coalition between Greeks and Latins, was the contempt which 
 the former were, from early childhood, inured to entertain of 
 the genius and understanding of the latter. Notwithstanding 
 the superiority the Romans had obtained over them by sub.du- 
 ing their country, and all the eastern monarchies which had 
 sprung out of the Macedonian conquests, the Grecians could 
 not help considering them as no better than a sort of barbarians, 
 a little more civilized than the Scythians or the Tartars. 
 " These men," said Photius, the Greek patriarch, who, in the 
 ninth century, proved the occasion of the schism between the 
 oriental churches and the occidental; these men, speaking of 
 the Latins, *' sprung from the darkness of the west, have cor- 
 " ruptcd every thing by their ignorance, and have even pro- 
 " ceeded to that pitch of impiety and madness, as to foist words 
 " into the sacred symbol confirmed by all the councils." The 
 Greeks often bragged that the Latins were their scholars. 
 " They have nothing," said they, " which they have not got- 
 " ten from us, not even the names of their ceremonies, mys- 
 " teries, and dignities, such as baptism, eucharist, liturgy, pa- 
 <' rish, diocese, bishop, presbyter, deacon, monk, church, which 
 " they often stupidly misunderstand, and wretchedly misapply." 
 But though the Greeks never showed much inclination to a 
 cordial union with the Latins, they were far from being so 
 closely united among themselves as the Latins generally were. 
 I have already hinted at some of the causes of this difference in 
 the Greeks, such as their ingenuity itself, which could ill brook 
 the dictatorial manner, and their disputative and inquisitive turn 
 of mind. 
 
 But there was another remarkable cause arising from the dif- 
 ferent constitutions of these two great parts of the empire, the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 303 
 
 oriental and the occidental. The former, as being beyond all 
 comparison the richest, the most populous, and the most civiHz- 
 ed, was sooner brought to a regular form of government, eccle- 
 siastical as well as civil. I had before occasion to observe, that 
 the ecclesiastic polity was, in a great measure, modelled upon 
 the civil. All the cities of greatest eminence, as well as the 
 most ancient churches, were situated in the east ; Alexandria, 
 Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople, Cesarea, Ephesus, were 
 cities of that note, with which nothing in the west, if we abstract 
 Rome itself, was worthy to be compared. Accordingly, except 
 Milan in Italy, and Carthage in West Africa, there does not 
 appear to have been any bishop in the occidental churches above 
 the rank of a metropolitan. 
 
 And even those I have named, Milan and Carthage, were 
 considerably inferior, both in jurisdiction and in wealth, not 
 only to the three great patriarchal sees in the east, Constanti- 
 nople, Alexandria, and Antioch, but even to the principal of 
 those called exarchal, such as Ephesus and Cesarea. Conse- 
 quently, the pope had not in the west a single bishop of consi- 
 deration and rank, sufficient to be, in any degree, qualified for 
 either a rival, or a check. It is manifest, that in Gaul, Spain, 
 and Britain, there were not, at least for some ages, any who 
 had the inspection of more than a single province. The dis- 
 parity, therefore, was so exceedingly great in the west, as to 
 give the utmost scope for the ambition of a see, which, in re- 
 spect of worldly circumstances, had been so remarkably distin- 
 guished. 
 
 When there is an equality, or even nearness, in riches and 
 power, among those who share it, we may be assured, there 
 will always be emulation ; but if you raise one of the possessors 
 distinguishably above the rest, you not only destroy their emu- 
 lation, but give a contrary direction to their ambition, and make 
 them fain to court the man whom they cannot hope successfully 
 to emulate. Nay, the very rivalship which the rest entertain 
 of one another, leads them to act this part with regard to him 
 whom more fortunate circumstances has raised into their supe- 
 rior; that, by his means, they may the more easily surmount 
 their equals. Rome, it must be owned, was not at first consi- 
 dered as a patriarchate. The whole of Italy made but one civil 
 
304^ LECTURES OX 
 
 diocese, wlilcli, as I observed once before, was, on account of its 
 extreme populousness, as well as opulence, divided into two lieu- 
 tenancies, or vicariates. The one was called the vicariate of 
 Rome ; the other, that of Italy : the capital of this last was Milan. 
 — The first title, therefore, the pope enjoyed, after the church, 
 in Constantino's time, had been modelled in this manner, was 
 the vicar of Rome, as the bishop of Milan was called the vicar 
 of Italy; nor was the pope, if I remember right, honoured with 
 the tiame of patriarch, though he was always allowed the pre- 
 cedency, till the synod of Chalcedon in the fifth century. But 
 as he had been, time immemorial, denominated the vicar, and 
 as it is not easy to suppress a title firmly established by custom, 
 it is not improbable that the bishops of Rome, near that period, 
 have judged it more political not to attempt the suppression ; 
 but to add to vicar, by way of explanation, in order to disguise 
 its inferiority, the words, of Jesus Christ, and with this addi- 
 tion, to arrogate it as peculiar. 
 
 The bishop of Milan, who, by that first division was vicar of 
 Italy, was on a foot of equality, in respect of his title, and even 
 of the nature, though not of the extent, of his jurisdiction, with 
 the bishop of Rome ; insomuch, that nothing but the immense 
 disparity there was in riches and splendour, and almost all ex- 
 ternal circumstances, could have prevented him from being 
 a rival. This disparity, however, did effectually prevent all ri- 
 valry, and mj^ke it conducive both to the interest and to the am- 
 bition of the former, to forward, instead of opposing, the de- 
 signs of the latter. It is evident, therefore, that the popes, 
 even from the beginning, had, in the west, incomparably a more 
 advantageous situation for the acquisition of power, than any 
 patriarch in the east was possessed of. It is, in like manner, 
 evident, and might almost have been concluded beforehand, 
 that he could not, without a concurrence of events quite extra- 
 ordinary, have brought the Oriental, to the same implicit sub- 
 mission and obedience, to which he actually brought the Occi- 
 dental, churches. 
 
 It is proper also here to observe another fortunate circum- 
 stance, which operated very early for the advancement of his 
 authority. To the vicarage of Rome belonged ten provinces, 
 including the islands Sicily, Corsica, and Sardinia. As in these 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 305 
 
 there were no metropolitans; as all were under the immediate 
 jurisdiction of the capital itself, and thence were denominated 
 suburbicary provinces, the vicar of Rome, or pope, as he was 
 called, had not only all the power of an exarch over the whole 
 ten provinces, but that also of the primate in every province. 
 There was in him a coalition of both jurisdictions, the metropo- 
 litical and the patriarchal. As the metropolitan had the charge 
 of ordaining the bishops of his province, and the patriarch that 
 of ordaining the metropolitans, the bishop of Rome had the 
 charge either by himself, or by his delegates, of ordaining every 
 bishop within the provinces of his vicariate. These rights he 
 gradually extended, as circumstances favoured his views, first, 
 to the whole prefecture of Italy, which included West Illyri- 
 cum, and West Africa; afterwards, to all the occidental 
 churches, Gaul, Spain, and Britain ; and lastly, as of divine 
 right, and therefore unalienable, over the whole catholic 
 church. This last claim, however, hath subsisted only in 
 theory. 
 
 That these pretensions were introduced gradually, is a fact 
 indisputable. Pope Leo, in one of his letters still extant, to 
 the bishops of Gaul, explicitly disclaims the right of ordaining 
 them. That pontiff was not deficient either in ambition or in 
 abilities. And one would have thought he might have been 
 better instructed in the divine and unalienable rights of his see, 
 if any conception of such rights had been entertained in his 
 time. But the zenith of the hierarchy was too sublime a pin- 
 nacle to be attained by a few bold leaps. It was by innumer- 
 able steps, not considerable, taken severally, that that amazing 
 and dizzy height at length was reached. It was not till after 
 repeated successes in the attainments of objects far below the 
 summit, that this great antitype of Lucifer said in his heart, / 
 will ascend into heaven ,- / will exalt my throne above the stars 
 of God; I will sit upon the mount of the congregation, (or 
 church, as the word imports,) / will ascend above the heights of 
 the clouds, I will be like the Most High. — But to return ; there 
 can be no doubt that the want of patriarchs in the west did 
 greatly facilitate the attempts of the Roman pontiffs to supply 
 their place, first, in consecrating their metropolitans, and after- 
 wards even in ordaining the suffragans. 
 
306 LECTURES ON 
 
 Ao-ain: one ofreat advantafre which Rome derived from her 
 vast opulence and rich domains, both in Italy and in the neigh- 
 bouring islands, was the power she acquired of employing and 
 supporting missions, in distant parts of Europe, for the propa- 
 gation of the gospel. When, by means of missions and ex- 
 pense, churches were planted in any country, they were always 
 accounted dependent on that as the mother church by whom 
 the missionaries were employed. In this manner, by the 
 monk Augustine, a missionary of Gregory I., the Anglo- 
 Saxons in Britain were converted from idolatry near the end of 
 the sixth century. The Britons, or ancient inhabitants, had 
 indeed been Christians for some ages before. But they were 
 ere now dispossessed of their ancient habitations, and confined 
 bv those new comers to a small part of the island, the principa- 
 lity of Wales. In the beginning of the eighth century, the 
 Germans were, in like manner, converted by Winfrid, or 
 Boniface, a missionary of Gregory II., which Bonifi\ce, I 
 may remark in passing, is the first ecclesiastic on record, who 
 took a solemn oath of fealty to St. Peter, that is, to the Ro- 
 man see, — a security which was afterwards exacted by the pope, 
 not only of all legates and servants of his court, but of all bi- 
 shops whatever; and the more effectually to prevent its being 
 omitted, it was engrossed in the pontifical, among the rites to 
 be observed in consecration. Nor did a question of this kind 
 of pre-occupancy prove, about a century afterwards, the least 
 considerable cause of the great schism still subsisting between 
 the oriental and occidental churches. The disputed titles of 
 Ignatius and Photius to the patriarchate of Constantinople, and 
 even the differences in doctrine and ceremonies between the 
 Latins and the Greeks, would have been much more easily ad- 
 justed than tho lucrative pretensions that both Rome and Con- 
 stantinople made to the superiority and patronage of the new 
 converted churches of Bulgaria. That of riffht from all the 
 principles which then prevailed, they should have been depend- 
 ent on the Constantinopolitan patriarch, can scarcely be made 
 a doubt. But Rome was ever interfering; and this was too 
 great an acquisition to lose sight of. Paul, indeed, avoided to 
 ])romulge the gospel in places where Christ had already been 
 made known, lest he should build on another man's foundation. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 307 
 
 and thereby bestow his time and labour less profitably for the 
 common cause. That maxim answered admirably, when the 
 end was the advancement of a spiritual kingdom, peace, and 
 truth, and righteousness, the honour of God, and happiness of 
 mankind. He might then well say, that if Christ is preached, 
 wheresoever and by whomsoever, I do, and will, rejoice. But 
 the case was quite altered, when conversions to a nominal, more 
 than real, Christianity, were made the instruments of a new sort 
 of conquest, — mere engines for extending ecclesiastical domi- 
 Dion. Constantinople could do a good deal in this way, but 
 Rome still more. 
 
 I shall mention another excellent piece of papal policy, first 
 introduced by Damasus, near the end of the fourth centur}', 
 and commonly called the legatine power. The introduction of 
 this practice, and what gave rise to it, I shall give you from our 
 English biographer's history of that pope. — " Acholius, bishop 
 ' of Thessalonica, was the first who enjoyed, under Damasus, 
 the title of the pope's vicar. He was nominated to this office, 
 in East Illyricum, on the following occasion : Illyricum, com- 
 
 * prising all ancient Greece, and many provinces on the Da- 
 nube, whereof Sirmium was the capital, had, ever since the 
 time of Constantino, belonged to the western empire. But 
 in the year 379, Daciaand Greece were, by Gratian, disjoin- 
 
 ' ed from the more westerly provinces, and added, in favour of 
 Theodosius, to the eastern empire, being known by the name 
 of East Illyricum, whereof Thessalonica, the metropolis of 
 Macedon, was the chief city. The bishops of Rome, as pre- 
 siding in the metropolis of the empire, had begun to claim a 
 kind of jurisdiction, or rather inspection, in ecclesiastical mat- 
 ters, over all the provinces of the western empire ; which was 
 the first great step whereby they ascended to the supremacy 
 they afterwards claimed and established. This, Damasus was 
 unwilling to resign, with respect to Rlyricum, even after that 
 country was dismembered from the western, and added to the 
 
 * eastern, empire. In order, therefore, to maintain his claim, 
 he appointed Acholius, bishop of Thessalonica, to act in his 
 stead; vesting in him the power which he pretended to have 
 over those provinces. Upon the death of Acholius, he con- 
 
 ' ferred the same dignity on his successor Anysius, as did 
 
 u2 
 
308 LECTURES ON 
 
 " the following popes on the succeeding bishops of Thessa- 
 " lonica ; who, by thus supporting the pretensions of Rome, 
 *' became the first bishops, and, in a manner, the patri- 
 " archs, of East Illyricum, for they are sometimes distin- 
 " guished with that title. This, however, was not done 
 " without opposition ; the other metropoUtans not readily 
 " acknowledging for tlieir superior, one who, till that time, 
 " had been their equal. Syricius, who succeeded Dama- 
 " sus, enlarging the power claimed by his predecessor, de- 
 " creed, that no bishop should be ordained in East Illyricum, 
 *' without the consent and approbation of the bishop of Thessa- 
 " lonica. But it was some time before this decree took place. 
 " Thus were the bishops of Thessalonica first appointed vice- 
 " gerents of the bishops of Rome, probably in the year 382. 
 " The contrivance of Damasus was notably improved by his suc- 
 " cessors, who, in order to extend their authority, conferred the 
 " title of their vicars, and the pretended power annexed to it, on 
 " the most eminent prelates of other provinces and kingdoms, 
 " engaging them thereby to depend upon them, and to promote 
 " the authority of their see, to the utter suppression of the an- 
 *' cient rights and liberties both of bishops and synods. This 
 " dignity was, for the most part, annexed to certain sees, but 
 *' sometimes conferred on particular persons. The institution 
 " of vicars was, by succeeding popes, improved into that of le- 
 " gates ; or, to use De Marca's expression, the latter institu- 
 " tion was grafted on the former. The legates were vested with 
 " a far greater power than the vicars ; or, as Pope Leo ex- 
 " presses it, were admitted to a far greater share of his care, 
 " though not to the plenitude of his power. They were sent, 
 " on proper occasions, into all countries, and never failed exert- 
 " ing, to the utmost stretch, their boasted power ; oppressing, 
 " in virtue of their paramount authority, the clergy as well as 
 " the people, and extorting from both large sums, to support 
 " the pomp and luxury in which they lived." 
 
 Thus far our historian. Nothing, indeed, could be better 
 calculated, for both extending and securing their authority, than 
 thus engaging all the most eminent prelates in the different 
 countries of Christendom, from a principle of ambition, as well 
 as interest, to favour their claims. Rome was already gotten 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 309 
 
 too far, as we have seen, above the episcopal sees of the west, 
 for any of them to think of copinf; witli her, and was, besides, 
 too distant to excite their envy. 15ut it woukl greatly gratify 
 the covetousness, as well as the pride and vanity, of those bi- 
 shops whom she was thus pleased to distinguish, to be, by her 
 means, raised considerably above their peers and neigh- 
 bours. 
 
 Add to this, that not only the ambitious views of individuals 
 served to promote the schemes of Rome, but the general am- 
 bition of the clerical order greatly forwarded her views. The 
 western empire soon came to be divided into a number of inde- 
 pendent states and kingdoms. Now, in the form into which the 
 church had been moulded before the division, a foundation had 
 been laid for incessant interferings and bickerings in every coun- 
 try, between the secular powers and the ecclesiastical. In these 
 interferings, the principal advantage of the latter arose from the 
 union that subsisted among the churches of different countries, 
 as members of one great polity. And even this connection, 
 (however possible it might have been to preserve it, for the 
 single purpose of promoting piety and virtue,) it was absolutely 
 impossible to preserve, for the purpose of spiritual dominion, 
 unless they were united under a common head. The republi- 
 can form of any kind, democratical or aristocratical, could never 
 answer in such a situation of affairs. Not only arc common- 
 wealths slower in their operation than the exigencies, of such a 
 state would admit, but they can do nothing without the autho- 
 rity of a legislative council ; and this it would be in the power 
 of a few temporal princes totally to obstruct, either by prevent- 
 ing them from assembling, or by dispersing them when assem- 
 bled. And from any state, or kingdom, it would be in the pow- 
 er of the chief magistrate to prevent a deputation being sent. 
 The monarchical form, therefore, supported by the prejudices 
 and superstition of the people, was the only adequate means 
 both of preserving and of extending the high privileges, ho- 
 nours, titles, and immunities, claimed universally by the sacred 
 order, and which they most strenuously contended for, as the 
 quintessence of Christianity, the sum of all that the Son of 
 God had purchased for mankind. This could not fail to induce 
 them to put themselves under the protection of" the only bishop 
 
310 LECTURES ON 
 
 in the west, who was both able and willing to support their bold 
 pretensions. 
 
 I must likewise add, however unlikely, that the ambition of 
 secular princes concurred in the establishment and exaltation of 
 the hierarchy. Nothing can be more evident, than that it was 
 the interest of the princes of Christendom, and their people, to 
 combine against it. But though this was the general and most 
 lasting interest of all the states of Europe, what was, or at least 
 was conceived to be, the immediate interest of a particular prince, 
 or state, might be, to favour the hierarchy. Let it be observed, 
 that the European monarchs were almost incessantly at war 
 with one another. Neighbour and enemy, when spoken of 
 states and kingdoms, were, and to this day too much are, terms 
 almost synonymous. The pope, therefore, could not make even 
 the most daring attempt against any prince, or kingdom, which 
 would not be powerfully backed by the most strenuous endea- 
 vours of some other prince, or kingdom, whose present designs 
 the pope's attempts would tend to forward. 
 
 If England was the object of papal resentment, — if the en- 
 raged ecclesiarch had fulminated an excommunication, or inter- 
 dict, against the kingdom, or issued a bull deposing the king, 
 and loosing his subjects from their oaths and allegiance, (for all 
 these spiritual machines were brought into use one after an- 
 other,) France was ready to take advantage of the general 
 confusion thereby raised in England, and to invade the king- 
 dom with an armed force. The more to encourage the French 
 monarch to act this part, the pontiff might be prevailed on (and 
 this hath actually happened) to assign to him the kingdom of 
 which he had pretended to divest the owner. A man may af- 
 ford to give what never belonged to him. But if the owner 
 found it necessary to make submissions to the priest, the latter 
 was never at a loss to find a pretext for recalling the grant he 
 had made, and re-establishing the degraded monarch. In like 
 manner, when France was the object of the pontiff's vengeance, 
 England was equally disposed to be subservient to his views. 
 Nay, he had the address, oftener than once, to arm an unna- 
 tural son against his father. Such was the situation of affairs 
 all Europe over. Those transactions, which always terminated 
 in the advancement of papal power, could not fail, at last, to 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 31 1 
 
 raise the mitre above the crown. Every one of the princes, I 
 may say, did, in liis turn, for the gratifying of a present passion, 
 and the attaining of an immediate object, blindly lend his assist- 
 ance in exalting a potentate, who came, in process of time, to 
 tread on all their necks, and treat both kings and emperors, who 
 had foolishly given their strength and power to him, as his vas- 
 sals and slaves. 
 
 It were endless to take notice of all the expedients which 
 Rome, after she had advanced so far as to be esteemed, in the 
 west, the visible head of the church universal, and vested with 
 a certain paramount, though indefinite, authority, over the 
 whole, devised, and easily executed, both for confirming and ex- 
 tending her enormous power. It is true, she never was absolute 
 in the east ; and, from about the middle of the ninth century, 
 these two parts of Christendom were in a state of total separa- 
 tion. But that became a matter of less consequence to her 
 every day. The eastern, which may be said to have been the 
 only enlightened, and far the most valuable, part of the empire, 
 in the days of Constantine, was daily declining, whilst the west- 
 ern part was growing daily more considerable. In the eastern 
 empire, one part after another became a prey to Turks and Sa- 
 racens, — Egypt, Barbary, Syria, Asia, and at length Greece, 
 Macedonia, and Thrace. The only part of the western em- 
 pire that not only was, but still continues to be, subjectetj to 
 the depredations of these barbarians, is Proconsular and West 
 Africa. Whereas, in the western and northern parts of Europe, 
 there were, at the same time, springing up some of the most 
 powerful and polished, and, I may now add, the most enlight- 
 ened monarchies and states, with which the world has ever been 
 acquainted. The very calamities of the east, particularly the 
 destructian of the eastern empire, the last poor remains of Ro- 
 man greatness, and the taking of Constantinople by the Turks, 
 left the western patriarch totally without a rival, and Christen- 
 dom without a vestige of the primitive equality and independence 
 of its pastors. 
 
 When Rome had every thing, in a manner, at her disposal, 
 it was easy to see that all canons, in regard to discipline, and 
 decrees, in relation to doctrine, would point invariably to the 
 support of this power. Hence the convenient doctrines of 
 
512 LECTURES ON 
 
 transubstantlation, purgatory, prayers and masses for the dead, 
 auricular confession, the virtue of sacerdotal absolution. Hence 
 the canons extending so immensely the forbidden degrees of 
 marriage, the peculiar power in the popes of dispensing with 
 these and other canons, the power of canonization, the celi- 
 bacy of the clergy, the supererogatory merits of the saints, in- 
 dulgences, and many others. 
 
 There is, indeed, one right that has been claimed, and suc- 
 cessfully exerted by Rome, which, as being a most important 
 spring in this great and complex machine of the hierarchy, will 
 deserve a more particular notice : — I mean, the pope's pretend- 
 ed title to grant exemptions to whomsoever he pleases, from 
 subjection to their ordinary ecclesiastical superiors. But this I 
 shall reserve for the subject of another lecture. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOItY. 313 
 
 LECTURE XIX. 
 
 X^ ROM what has been discovered, in the course of our enquiries 
 into the rise, the progress, and the full establishment of the pa- 
 pacy, we may justly say, that if happiness consist in dominion, 
 (which it certainly does not, though all mankind, by their con- 
 duct, seem to think it,) what a wonderful good fortune has ever 
 attended Rome ! From the first foundation of the city, by a par- 
 cel of banditti, she rose but to command, and gradually advanced* 
 into an empire of such extent, renown, and duration, as has been 
 unexampled in the world, either before or since. And from the 
 first declension of that enormous power, for it could not subsist 
 always, she is insensibly become the seat of a new species of em- 
 pire, which, though not of equal celebrity with the former, is much 
 more extraordinary, and perhaps more difficult to be surmount- 
 ed, being deeply rooted in the passions and sentiments of men. 
 Nay, how fortunate has been this queen of cities in what con- 
 cerned both the formation and the advancement of this second 
 monarchy. She continued the imperial city during the non- 
 age of the hierarchy, that is, as long as was necessary to give 
 her priest, though under the humble title of pastor, the primacy, 
 or precedency among his brethren, for these two terms were at 
 first synonymous, and by the wealth and splendour to which 
 she raised him, to lay the foundation of those higher claims lie 
 hath since made, of supremacy and jurisdiction over them. 
 And she ceased to be the seat of empire at the critical period 
 when the residence of a court must have eclipsed his lustre, 
 confined him to a subordinate part on the great theatre of the 
 world, and stifled, in the birth, all attempts to raise himself 
 above the secular powers. Had the eastern empire remained 
 to this day, and Constantinople been the imperial residence, it 
 would have been impossible that her patriarchs should ever have 
 advanced the claims which the Roman patriarch not only ad- 
 vanced, but compelled the Christian world to admit, ^^'hell 
 
314} LECTURES ON 
 
 Rome was deserted by the emperors, her pontiff quickly became 
 the first man there ; and in the course of a few reigns, the in- 
 habitants came naturally to consider themselves as more con- 
 nected with him, and interested in him, than in an emperor 
 who, under the name of their sovereign, had his residence and 
 court in a distant country, who spoke a different language, and 
 whose face the greater part of the Romans did not so much as 
 know. Nor was the matter much mended in regard to them 
 after the division of the empire, as the royal residence, neither 
 of the emperor of the west, nor afterwards of the king of the 
 Goths, was Rome, but either Milan or Ravenna. 
 
 And when, in succeeding ages, the pope grew to be, in some 
 respect, a rival to the German emperor, the Romans, and even 
 many of the Italians, came to think, as it might have been fore- 
 seen that they would, that their own aggrandizement, the ag- 
 grandizement of their city, and of their country, were more con- 
 cerned in the exaltation of the pontiff, who, by the way, was 
 then, in a great measure, a creature of their own making, (for 
 the office was not then, as now, in the election of the conclave,) 
 than in that of a monarch, who, from whatever origin he de- 
 rived his power, was, in fact, an alien, and not of their creation, 
 and who was as ill situated for defending them against their 
 enemies, as the successors of Constantine had been before. Of 
 the inability of both to answer this purpose, the invasions and 
 conquests made at different times by Goths and Lombards, 
 Franks and Normans, but too plainly showed. In short, had 
 Rome never been the imperial city, its pastor could never have 
 raised himself above his fellows. Had it continued the imperial 
 city, he might, and probably would have had, such a primacy, as 
 to be accounted the first among the patriarchs, but without any 
 thing like papal jurisdiction over church and state. Had Rome 
 remained the seat of empire, the pope's superiority to councils 
 had never been heard of. The convocation of these, whilst the 
 empire subsisted, would, in all probability, have continued, as 
 it was for several ages, in the hands of the emperor. The dis- 
 memberment of the empire tended but too visibly to subvert 
 the emperor's claim, and occasion the setting up of another in 
 its stead. A sovereign has no title to convoke the subjects of 
 another sovereign, of whatever class they be, and call them out 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 315 
 
 of his dominions, whatever title he may have to assemble any 
 part of his own subjects within his own territories. Now wliat- 
 ever weakened the emperor's claim, strengthened the pope's. 
 Immemorial custom had taught men to consider councils as es- 
 sential to the church. And if the right to call them could no 
 longer be regarded as inherent in any secular prince, where 
 would they so readily suppose it to inhere as in him, to whose 
 primacy in the church they had been already habituated? And 
 even after the dismemberment of the empire, and the succession 
 of a new power over part, under the same title, had it been pos- 
 sible for the emperors of Germany, who, in the former part of 
 the eleventh century, made and unmade popes at their plea- 
 sure, to have made Rome their residence, and the capital of 
 their empire, the pope, as Voltaire justly observes, had been no 
 other than the emperor's chaplain. Nay, much of the power 
 which the former, in that case, would have, been permitted to 
 exercise, would have been more nominal than real, as it would 
 have been exercised under the influence of a superior. ]3ut 
 luckily for the pope and for Italy, to reside at Rome was what 
 the emperor could not do, and at the same time retain posses- 
 sion of his German dominions, of which he was only the elec- 
 tive sovereign. 
 
 The obscurity of the occidental, in the beginning, compared 
 with the oriental churches, occasioned that their ecclesiastic po- 
 lity was left imperfect, so as to give Rome too great an ascen- 
 dency in that part of the world ; the gradual but incessant de- 
 cline of those eastern nations, whose opulent sees were alone ca- 
 pable of proving a counterpoise to the power of Rome ,* and, on 
 the other hand, the slow, but real advancement of the occi- 
 dental countries, after the power of the pontiff bad been firmly 
 established ; their real but late advancement in arts, populous- 
 iiess, wealth, and civilization, all alike conspired to raise him. 
 His rivals sank, his subjects rose. 
 
 For many ages, he seems to have conceived no higher aim 
 than to be at the head of the executive and the judicial power 
 in the church. No sooner was that attained than his great ob- 
 ject came to be the legislative power. Ye do not find, for se- 
 veral centuries, the least pretext made by the pope, of a title to 
 establish canons, or ecclesiastical laws j his pretence was mere- 
 
316 LECTURES ON 
 
 ly, that he was entrusted with the care that the laws enacted 
 by councils should be duly executed. He was then only, as it 
 were, the chief magistrate of the community; nothing now will 
 satisfy him but to be their legislator also. A doctrine came ac- 
 cordingly much in vogue with the partizans of Rome, that the 
 pope was not subject to councils, nay, that he was not only in- 
 dependent of them, but above them ; that he was himself en- 
 titled to make canons, to declare articles of faith, to pronounce 
 what was orthodox, what heterodox, and that he needed not the 
 aid of any council. 
 
 If such were really the case, all the world, popes as well as 
 others, had been greatly deceived for many ages. When an ef- 
 fectual remedy was at hand, they had thought it necessary to 
 take a very difficult and circuitous method to attain a cure, at 
 most not more certain. To what purpose bring such a multi- 
 tude together from all the quarters of the globe, with great ex- 
 pence and infinite trouble, to tell us, after whole days spent in 
 chicane, sophistry, and wrangling, what one single person could 
 have told us at the first, as soon as he was consulted? In all 
 these different claims, made at different periods by the pontiff, 
 though he generally succeeded at last, he never failed to en- 
 counter some opposition. It has, however, on this article of 
 the pope's authority, been justly observed, that the advocates 
 for it have been much more numerous than those for the autho- 
 rity of councils. The manner in which JEneas Sylvius, who 
 was himself afterwards raised to the popedom, under the name 
 of Pius II., accounted for this difference is strictly just : " Be- 
 " cause," said he, " the popes have benefices to give, and the 
 " councils have none." Whether he would have returned the 
 same answer after he had reached the summit of ecclesiastical 
 preferment, may be justly made a question. Certain it is, that 
 the pontiffs cannot be charged with want of attention to those 
 who have stood forth as champions for their authority. W^here- 
 as there is hardly a motive, except a regard to truth, which can 
 induce any one, in Roman Catholic countries, to defend the 
 other side of the question. For on this article there are dif- 
 ferent opinions, even among Roman Catholics. This, how- 
 ever, is a point of which there has never been any decision that 
 has been universally acquiesced in ; and, indeed, on the footing 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. .11 7 
 
 whereon matters now stand in that church, wc may affirm, with 
 great prohahility, that it will always remain undecided. 
 
 In the conclusion of my last lecture, I mentioned one great 
 engine of papal policy, the exemptions granted by the pontifts 
 to particular ecclesiastics or communities, by which their sub- 
 jection to the ordinary was dispensed with, and their dependence 
 rendered immediate upon Rome. The legatine power, of which 
 I have already spoken, was somewhat of the same nature, 
 though it had a more plausible excuse. But exemptions were 
 not limited to those who mir^ht be considered as a sort of agents 
 for the pontiff, and employed to represent his person. He pre- 
 tended a title to make such alterations in the ecclesiastical ju- 
 risdiction of any country as he should judge proper, and parti- 
 cularly to exempt bishops, when he found it convenient, from 
 the jurisdiction of the archbishop ; priors and abbots, from that 
 of the bishop. This privilege came at length to be so far ex- 
 tended, that almost all the orders of regulars, and the universi- 
 ties, were taken, as it was termed, under the pope's immediate 
 care and protection, that is, released from all subordination to 
 the secular clergy, in whose dioceses they were situated, or 
 might happen to reside. 
 
 For several ages after the church had been modelled on the 
 plan of the civil government under Constantine, it was consider- 
 ed as a thing totally inadmissible, that a presbyter should with- 
 draw his obedience from his bishop, a bishop from his metropo- 
 litan, or a metropolitan from his exarch or patriarch, where there 
 was an ecclesiastic vested with that dignity. Accordingly, in 
 the oriental churches, nothing of this sort was ever attempted. 
 And, indeed, if the aristocratical form then given to the church 
 had continued unviolated also in the west, such an attempt 
 never had been made. But to say the truth, there was no pos- 
 sibility of supporting the monarchical form now given to the 
 occidental churches, without some measure of this kind. 
 
 It is true, tiiere had been established a subordination in all 
 the clerical orders, from the pope downwards to the most me- 
 nial officer in the church. The pope was the judge in the last 
 resort, and claimed the exclusive title to give confirmation and 
 investiture to all the dignitaries. Rome, by her exactions, as 
 well as by the frequent recourse to her from all parts, for dis- 
 
318 LECTURES ON 
 
 pensatioiis, and the like trumpery, as we should call them, 
 which had gradually obtained, and were then of the most se- 
 rious consequence, had taken all imaginable care, that the seve- 
 ral churches might not forget their subjection and dependance. 
 Yet however sufficient this might have proved in a single king- 
 dom or country, such as Italy, where the whole is more imme- 
 diately under the eye of the governors, who can quickly get 
 notice of, and provide against, a rising faction, before it bring 
 any purpose to maturity, it is far from being sufficient in a wide- 
 established empire. The primates, or archbishops, and even 
 some of the wealthiest bishops, were like great feudatory lords. 
 The owed a certain acknowledgment and duty to their liege- 
 lord the pope ; but the dependance of their inferior clergy, the 
 suffragans and priests, like that of the vassals upon the barons, 
 was immediately or directly on the prelates, and but indirectly 
 and remotely upon the pope. As whilst the feudal government 
 subsisted, the greater barons, in most kingdoms, with their train 
 of vassals and dependants, by whom they were sure to be at- 
 tended, found it an easy matter to rebel against their sovereign, 
 and often to compel him to accept terms very humiliating to 
 royalty, we may conclude, that a subordination pretty similar, 
 in a sovereignty so much wider, could not have subsisted so 
 long without some additional and powerful check. This was 
 the more necessary in the present case, because, if there had 
 arisen any factions or discontents among the more potent eccle- 
 siastics against their spiritual lord, they would, in most cases, 
 have had the assistance of the secular powers of the country, 
 who, in spite of their superstition and ignorance, could not brook 
 the reflection, that they were tributary to a foreign power, and 
 a power which even claimed a sort of superintendency, or what 
 was equivalent to a superintendency, over their judicatures and 
 senates. The different claims set up by Rome, under the 
 name of annats, tithes, peterspence, reservations, resignations, 
 expectative graces, beside the casualties arising from pilgrim- 
 ages, jubilees, indulgences, the dues of appeals, confirmations, 
 dispensations, investitures, and the like, were so many sorts of 
 tribute ; nor could any nation which paid them to another, be 
 said to be independent of the nation to which they were paid, 
 or to possess sovereignty within itself. The right of appeals, 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 319 
 
 not only in all cases ecclesiastical, but in most cases wherein ec- 
 clesiastics were concerned, the many clerical privileges, of" which 
 Rome pretended to be both the guardian and the judge, laid a 
 restraint both on the judiciary powers, and on the legislative. 
 No wonder, then, that in the different states of Christendom, 
 there should subsist, in the civil powers, an unextinguishable 
 jealousy of Rome. As the pretensions of the latter were exor- 
 bitant, it was necessary that her resources for supporting her 
 pretensions should be powerful. 
 
 Now the right of exemption I have been speaking of, proved 
 exactly such a resource, being an effectual check on the secu- 
 lar, or established clergy. Accordingly when, in the council of 
 Trent, an attempt was made by some bishops to have this abuse, 
 as they accounted it, totally removed, the pope's legates, and all 
 those who supported papal authority, saw but too clearly, that 
 the scheme of those bishops, if they were gratified in it, would 
 undermine the hierarchy, and make, as they expressed it, every 
 bishop a pope in his own diocese ; for when papal exemptions 
 should be abrogated, every person would depend on his bishop, 
 and none immediately on the pope; the consequence whereof 
 would be, that people would soon cease altogether to recur to 
 Rome. And this consequence had, doubtless, long ago taken 
 place, had not the monastic orders come very opportunely, 
 though, in some respect, accidentally, to support a fabric, be- 
 come at length so unwieldy, as to appear in the most imminent 
 danger of falling with its own weight. They proved as so many 
 buttresses to it, which, though originally no part of the build- 
 ing, added amazingly to its strength. 
 
 As some of the largest and loftiest trees spring from very 
 small seeds, so the most extensive and wonderful efllects some- 
 times arise from very inconsiderable causes. Of the truth of 
 this remark, we have a striking example in the monastic order, 
 of the rise and progress of which I am now to speak. In times 
 of persecution in the church's infancy, whilst the heathen yet 
 raged, and the rulers took council together against the Lord, 
 and against his anointed, many pious Christians, male and fe- 
 male, married and unmarried, justly accounting, that no human 
 felicity ought to come in competition with their fidelity to 
 Christ, and modestly distrustful of their ability to persevere in 
 
3^0 LECTURES ON 
 
 resisting the temptations wherewith they were incessantly lia- 
 rassed by their persecutors, took the resolution to abandon their 
 possessions and worldly prospects, and, whilst the storm lasted, 
 to retire to unfrequented places, far from the haunts of men, 
 the married with or without their wives, as they agreed between 
 them, that they might enjoy in quietness their faith and hope, 
 and, without temptations to apostacy, employ themselves prin- 
 cipally in the worship and service of their Maker. The cause 
 was reasonable, and the motive praise-worthy. But the reason- 
 ableness arose solely from the circumstances. When the latter 
 were changed, the former vanished, and the motive could no 
 longer be the same. When there was not the same danger in 
 society, there was not the same occasion to seek security in so- 
 litude. Accordingly, when the affairs of the church were put 
 upon a different footing, and the profession of Christianity ren- 
 dered perfectly safe, many returned without blame from their 
 retirement, and lived like other men. Some, indeed, familiar- 
 ized by time to a solitary and ascetic life, as it was called, at 
 length preferred, through habit, what they had originally adopt- 
 ed through necessity. They did not waste their time in idle- 
 ness ; they supported themselves by their labour, and gave the 
 surplus in charity. These likewise, without blame, remained 
 in their retreat. But as it was purely to avoid temptation and 
 danger that men first took refuge in such recesses, they never 
 thought of fettering themselves by vows and engagements, be- 
 cause, by so doing, they must have exposed their souls to new 
 temptations, and involved them in more, and perhaps greater 
 dangers — a conduct very unlike that self-diffidence which cer- 
 tainly gave rise to so extraordinary a measure. This, therefore, 
 was not monachism in the acceptation which the word came 
 soon afterwards to receive, though, most probably, it suggested 
 the idea of it, and may be justly considered as the first step to- 
 wards it. 
 
 Such signal sacrifices have a lustre, which dazzles the eyes 
 of the weak, and powerfully engages their imitation. The imi- 
 tators, regardless of the circumstances which alone can render 
 the conduct laudable, are often, by a strange depravity of un- 
 derstanding, led to consider it as the more meritorious, the less 
 it is reasonable, and the more eligible, the less it is useful. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. SQ\ 
 
 Nay, the spirit of the thing comes to be reversed. Wliat at 
 first, through humble diffidence, appeared necessary for avoid- 
 ing the most imminent perils, is, through presumption, volun- 
 tarily adopted, though itself a source of perpetual peril. This 
 I call monachism, according to the common acceptation of the 
 term, of the progress of which I propose to give some account 
 in the sequel. 
 
 Monachism, one of the most natural shoots of superstition, 
 which, viewing the Deity as an object of terror rather than of 
 love, regards it as the surest recommendation to his favour, that 
 men become both burdens to society, and torments to them- 
 selves, and which, in some shape or other, may be found in all 
 religions, was not, in its original state, even in the Christian 
 church, considered as clerical; nor were the monks, as monks, 
 accounted ecclesiastics of any order or denomination. They 
 were no other than people who had bound themselves by a vow 
 to renounce the world, to live in poverty and chastity, to confine 
 themselves in respect of meat, and drink, and apparel, to what 
 appeared merely necessary, and to devote their time to prayer 
 and penance, reserving a small portion for works of industry. 
 This way of life was, in its commencement, open to the laity 
 of all conditions, and even of both sexes. But it was not open 
 to the clergy, whose parochial duties were incompatible with 
 such a seclusion from society. For it must be observed, that 
 they had not then, as afterwards, any clergy merely nominal, 
 or, to speak more properly, clergymen who were no mini- 
 sters of religion, having no charge or office in the church of 
 Christ. 
 
 This engagement, at first, led many unhappy fanatics to fly 
 the world without necessity, to pass their lives in solitude, in 
 remote and desert places, whence they were called hermits, from 
 the Greek word £^/?/*«?, signifying desert, and monks, from 
 fiovaxo;, denoting a solitary, from ^avA?, alone. They were also 
 named anchorets, from a.vax'^p^^;, a recluse. Every one of their 
 ancient names, or titles, bears some vestige of this most distin- 
 guishing trait in their character, their secession from the world 
 and society. They sheltered themselves accordingly in some 
 rude cell or cavern, and subsisted on herbs and roots, the spon- 
 taneous productions of the soil, covering themselves with the 
 
 X 
 
522 LECTURES ON 
 
 skins of beasts, for defending their bodies from the inclemencies 
 
 of the weather. 
 
 But things did not remain long in this state. Give but time 
 to fanaticism, and its fervours will subside. It was soon found 
 convenient to relax this severity, to fall on a method of uniting 
 society with retirement, property with indigence, and abstinence 
 with indulgence. They then formed communities of men, who 
 lived too-ether in houses, called monasteries ; where, though the 
 individuals could acquire no property for themselves indivi- 
 dually, there was no bounds to the acquisitions which might be 
 made by the community. The female recluses also had their 
 nunneries, and were named nuns. The word we have borrow- 
 ed from the French nonne ; its etymology I know not. Thus 
 people fell, at length, on the happy expedient of reconciling 
 loud pretences to sanctity and devotion, not only with laziness 
 and spiritual pride, but with the most unbounded and shameless 
 avarice; unbounded, because apparently in behalf of a public 
 interest; and shameless, because under the mask of religion. 
 And if they excluded some natural and innocent gratifications, 
 the exclusion, as might be expected, often served to give birth 
 to unnatural lusts. Hardly, one would think, can an imposi- 
 tion be too gross for deceiving a gross and superstitious people. 
 So much was the world infatuated by the sanctimonious appear- 
 ance of the recluses, (which consisted chiefly in some ridiculous 
 singularity of garb) that men thought they could not more ef- 
 fectually purchase heaven to themselves, than by beggaring 
 their offspring, and giving all they had to erect or endow mon- 
 asteries ; that is, to supply, with all the luxuries of hfe, those 
 who were bound to live in abstinence, and to enrich those who 
 had solemnly sworn, that they would be for ever poor, and who 
 professed to consider riches as the greatest impediment in the 
 road to heaven. 
 
 Large monasteries, both commodious and magnificent, more 
 resembling the palaces of princes, than the rude cells which the 
 primitive monks chose for their abode, were erected and endow- 
 ■ed. Legacies and bequests, from time to time, flowed in upon 
 them. Mistaken piety often contributed to the evil; but of- 
 tener superstitious profligacy. Oppression herself commonly 
 judged, that to devote her wealth at last, when it could be kept 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 3^3 
 
 Tio longer, to a religious house, was a full atonement for all the 
 injustice and extortion by which it had been amassed. But 
 what can set in a stronger light the pitiable brutishness, to 
 which the people were reduced by the reigning superstition, 
 when men of rank and eminence, who had shown no partiality 
 to any thing monastical, during their lives, gave express orders, 
 when in the immediate views of death, that their friends should 
 dress them out in monkish vestments, that in these they might 
 die, and be buried, thinking, that the sanctity of their garb 
 would prove a protection against a condemnatory sentence of 
 the omniscient Judge. It is lamentable, it is humiliating to 
 think, that we have unquestionable evidence, that human na- 
 ture can be sunk so low. The ignorance and superstition of 
 the times, by degrees, appropriated the term religious to those 
 houses and their inhabitants. 
 
 I have often observed to you, how great an influence names 
 and phrases have on the opinions of the generality of mankind. 
 I should have remarked, that soon after things were put upon 
 this footing, it was, on many accounts, judged expedient that 
 the religious should be in orders. For the absurdity of shep- 
 herds without a flock, pastors without a charge, was an absurdi- 
 ty no longer; so much can men be familiarized by custom to 
 use words with any latitude, and even to assign a meaning to 
 them incompatible with their primitive use. Accordingly the 
 companions in the monastery had commonly what was called 
 priest's orders, and were termed friars, fratres, brethren ; the 
 head, or governor of the house, was denominated abbot, from 
 a Syriac word, signifying father. Sometimes he was only a 
 priest, and sometimes had episcopal ordination. Hence the 
 distinction between mitred abbots, and unmitred. All these, on 
 account of the rules to which they were bound by oath, were 
 styled regular clergy, whereas those established as bishops and 
 priests over the dioceses and parishes, were called secular. I 
 know that some distinction is made also between monks and 
 friars. Suffice it to observe at present, that the rules of the 
 former are stricter than those of the latter. 
 
 When spacious monasteries were built, and supplied with a 
 numerous fraternity, governed by an abbot of eminence and 
 character, there often arose a jealousy between the abbot and 
 
 X 2 
 
3^4 LECTURES ON 
 
 the bishop, m whose diocese the abbey was situated, and to 
 whom, as things stood at first, the abbot and the friars owed 
 spiritual subjection. Out of their mutual jealousies sprang 
 umbrao-es, and these sometimes terminated in quarrels and in- 
 juries. In such cases, the abbots had the humiliating disadvan- 
 tage, to be under the obligation of canonical obedience to him, 
 as the ordinary of the place, with whom they were at variance. 
 That they might deliver themselves from these inconvenien- 
 cies, real or pretended, and might be independent of their rivals, 
 they applied to Rome, one after another, for a release from this 
 slavery, as they called it, by being taken under the protection 
 of St. Peter; that is, under immediate subjection to the pope. 
 The proposal was, with avidity, accepted at Rome. That po- 
 litic court saw immediately, that nothing could be better calcu- 
 lated for supporting papal power. Whoever obtains privileges 
 is obliged, in order to secure his privileges, to maintain the au- 
 thority of the granter. 
 
 Very quickly, all the monasteries, great and small, abbeys, 
 priories, and nunneries, were exempted. The two last were 
 inferior sorts of monasteries, and often subordinate to some 
 abbey. Even the chapters of cathedrals, consisting mostly of 
 regulars, on the Hke pretexts, obtained exemption. Finally, 
 whole orders, those called the congregations of Cluni and Cis- 
 tertio, Benedictines, and others, were exempted. This effec- 
 tually procured a prodigious augmentation to the pontifical au- 
 thority, which now came to have a sort of disciplined troops in 
 every place, defended and protected by the papacy, who, in re- 
 turn, were its defenders and protectors, serving as spies on the 
 bishops as well as on the secular powers. Afterwards the men- 
 dicant orders, or begging friars, though the refuse of the whole, 
 the tail of the beast, as Wickliff termed them, whereof the Ro- 
 man pontiff is the head, obtained still higher privileges, for they 
 were not only exempted every where from episcopal authority, 
 but had also a title to build churches wherever they pleased, 
 and to administer the sacraments in these independently of the 
 ordinary of the place. Nay, afterwards, in the times imme- 
 diately preceding the convention of the aforesaid council, things 
 had proceeded so far, that any private clerk could, at a small ex- 
 pence, obtain an exemption from the superintendency of his 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 3^5 
 
 bishop, not only in regard to correction, but in relation to or- 
 ders, which he might receive from whomsoever he pleased, so as 
 to have no connection with the bishop of any kinth 
 
 What had made matters still worse was, that the whole busi- 
 ness of teaching the Christian people had, by this time, fallen 
 into the hands of the regulars. The secular clergy had long 
 since eased themselves of the burden. Preaching and reading 
 the sacred scriptures properly made no part of the public offices 
 of religion. It is true, it was still the practice to read, or ra- 
 ther chant, some passages from the gospels and epistles, in an 
 unknown tongue: for all in the western churclies must now, for 
 the sake of uniformity, to which every thing was sacrificed, be 
 in Latin. Now, for some centuries before the council of Trent, 
 Latin had not been the native language of any country or city 
 in the world, not even of Italy or of Kome. That such lessons 
 were not understood by the people, was thought an objection of 
 no consequence at all. They were not the less fitted for mak- 
 ing a part of the solemn unmeaning mummery of the liturgic 
 service. The bishops and priests having long disused preach- 
 ing, probably at first through laziness, seem to have been con- 
 sidered at last as not entitled to preach ; for, on the occasion 
 above-mentioned, they very generally complained, that the charge 
 of teaching was taken out of their hands, and devolved upon 
 the friars, especially the mendicants, who were a sort of itinerant 
 preachers, licensed by the court of Rome. 
 
 LIow the friars discharged this trust, we may learn from the 
 most authentic histories, which sufficiently show, that the re- 
 presentations of the scope of their preaching, made by the bi- 
 shops in that council, were not exaggerated, when they said, 
 that the end of their teaching was not to edify the people, but 
 to collect alms from them, either for themselves or for their con- 
 vents ; that, in order to attain this purpose, they solely consider- 
 ed not what was for the soul's health, but what would please, 
 and flatter, and soothe the appetites of the hearers, and there- 
 by bring most profit to themselves ; so that the people, instead 
 of learning the doctrine of Christ, are but amused, said they, 
 with mere novehies and vanities. But whatever be in this ac- 
 count, the pope could not fail to draw an immense advantage 
 from this circumstance, that the instruction of the people was 
 
3^26 LECTURES ON 
 
 now almost entirely in the hands of his own creatures. How 
 great, then, must be the advantage, of a similar, but still more 
 important kind, resulting from the exemptions granted to uni- 
 versities, who being taken, as it were, under his immediate pa- 
 tronage, were engaged from interest to instil principles of obe- 
 dience to the pope into the minds of the youth, of whose edu- 
 cation they had the care. 
 
 Now if the chain of dependance of the secular clergy on the 
 head, be similar to that which subsists in a civil, particularly a 
 feudatory constitution, where the obligation of every inferior 
 through the whole subordination of vassalage is considered as 
 being much stronger to the immediate superior than to the so- 
 vereign, the dependance of the regulars may justly be represent- 
 ed by the military connection which subsists with the sovereign 
 in a standing army. There the tie of every soldier and subal- 
 tern is much stronger to the king than to his captain or his 
 colonel. If, then, the secular clergy, in Romish countries, may 
 be called the pope's civil officers, the regulars are his guards. 
 This matter was too well understood by the friends of Rome, 
 who were the predominant party in the council of Trent, ever 
 to yield to any alteration here that could be called material. 
 Some trifling changed, however, were made, in order to conciliate 
 those who were the keenest advocates for reforming the dis- 
 cipline of the church, or at least to silence their clamours. The 
 exemptions given to chapters were limited a little. The bishops 
 were made governors of the nunneries within their bishoprics, 
 not as bishops of the diocese, but as the pope's delegates ; and 
 friars, who resided in cloisters, and were guilty of any scandal- 
 ous excess without the precincts of the cloister, if the superior 
 of the convent, whether abbot or prior, refused, when required, 
 to chastise them within a limited time, might be punished by 
 the bishop. 
 
 I have now traced the principal causes, which co-operated to 
 the erection of the hierarchy, and shall, in what remains to be 
 observed on the subject, in a few more lectures, consider both 
 the actual state of church power, and the different opinions con- 
 cerning it at the time of the council of Trent, which shall ter- 
 minate our inquiries into the rise and establishment of the 
 hierarchy. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 327 
 
 LECTURE XX. 
 
 1 HAVE now, in a course of lectures, endeavoured, with all pos- 
 sible brevity, to lay before you the principal arts, by which the 
 Roman hierarchy was raised, and have also pointed out some of 
 the most remarkable events and occurrences, which facilitated 
 the erection. It is chiefly the progress of ecclesiastical domi- 
 nion, that I have traced. The papal usurpation on the secular 
 powers, though I have explained its source in the erection of 
 episcopal tribunals, and glanced occasionally at its progress, I 
 have, for several reasons, not so expressly examined. One is, 
 it does not so immediately affect the subject of the hierarchy, 
 with which I considered myself as principally concerned. An- 
 other is, that the usurpation here is, if possible, still more glar- 
 ing to every attentive reader of church history, and therefore 
 stands less in need of being pointed out. A third reason is, 
 that though the claims of superiority over the civil powers, for- 
 merly advanced by Rome with wonderful success, have never 
 been abandoned, but are, as it were, reserved in petto for a pro- 
 per occasion, yet, at present, the most sublime of their preten- 
 sions are little minded, and are hardly, as affairs now stand in 
 Europe, capable of doing hurt. Nothing can be better founded 
 than the remark, that the thunders of the Vatican will kindle 
 no conflagration, except where there are combustible materials. 
 At present there is hardly a country in Christendom so bar- 
 barously superstitious (I do not except even Spain and Por- 
 tugal) as to afford a sufficient quantity of those materials for 
 raisincT a combustion. We never hear now of the cxcommuni- 
 cation and deposition of princes, of kingdoms laid under an in- 
 terdict, and of the erection and the disposal of kingdoms by the 
 pope. Such is the difference of times, that these things, which 
 were once the great engines of raising papal dominion, would now 
 serve only to render it contemptible. The foundation of all 
 is opinion, which is of great consequence in every polity, but is 
 
3^S LECTURES ON 
 
 every thing in an ecclesiastic polity. To the above reasons, I 
 shall add a fourth. It is only a part, and not the greater part 
 neither, of the Roman Catholics, who acknowledge that the 
 pope, as pope, or bishop, has any kind of authority in secular 
 matters over the civil powers. They make but a party com- 
 paratively small, who carry the rights of the papacy so far as to 
 include therein a paramount authority over all the powers of 
 the earth, spiritual and temporal. A gentleman of the house of 
 commons, in a celebrated speech on the affiiirs of America, in 
 the bco'inning of the American revolt, speaking of the religious 
 profession of those colonies, denominated it the protestantism 
 of the protestant religion. In imitation of the manner of this 
 orator, I shall style the system of that high-flying party in the 
 church of Rome, the popery of the popish religion. It is the 
 very quintessence of papistry. Nay, we have some foundation 
 even from themselves for naming it so ; for those who hold it 
 are, even among Roman Catholics, distinguished by the name 
 pontificii^ or papists, and mostly consist of the people and clergy 
 of Italy, the immediate dependencies on the papal see, and the 
 different orders of regulars. It was in a particular manner the 
 system strenuously supported by the order of Jesuits now abo- 
 lished. The doctrine of the more moderate Roman Catholics, 
 which is that of almost all the laity, and the bulk of the secular 
 clergy in all European countries, except Italy and its islands, is 
 unfavourable to those high pretensions of the Roman pontiff. 
 But even these are far from being entirely unanimous in regard 
 to the spiritual power and jurisdiction, which they ascribe to 
 him. The bounding line, which distinguishes the civil from 
 the ecclesiastic, is one of the arcana of that church's policy, and 
 therefore never to be precisely ascertained. I shall then, in or- 
 der to give you some idea ere I conclude, of the sublimity and 
 plenitude of the ecclesiastic power, claimed in behalf of his ho- 
 liness over the ministers of the church, by the advocates of that 
 see, and to give you some notion of their manner of supporting 
 those claims, exhibit to you the substance of a speech on epis- 
 copal jurisdiction, delivered in the council of Trent, by father 
 Lainez, general of the Jesuits, translated from the Italian of Fra 
 Poalo Sarpi. Afterwards I shall take a little notice of the en- 
 croachments made on the civil powers. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 3Q9 
 
 ** Lainez," says that historian, " spoke more than two hours 
 " with great vehemence, in a distinct, hut magisterial tone. 
 " The argument of his discourse consisted of two parts. Tlic 
 " first was employed in proving, that the right of jurisdiction 
 " over Christ's kingdom here had hcen given entirely to the 
 ** Roman pontiff, and not a single particle of it to any other in 
 " the church. The second contained his answers to all the ar- 
 " guments on the opposite side, adduced in former meetings. 
 
 " The suhstance was, that there is a great difference, nay, a 
 " contrariety between the church of Christ and civil communi- 
 " ties, inasmuch as these have an existence previous to the lor- 
 " mation of their government, and are thereby free, having in 
 ** them originally, as in its fountain, all the jurisdiction, which, 
 *' without divesting themselves of it, they communicate to ma- 
 " gistrates. But the church did neither make herself, nor form 
 "her own government. It was Christ the prince and monarch 
 *' who first established the laws whereby she should be govern- 
 " ed ; then assembled his people, and, as scripture expresses 
 ** it, built the church. Thus she is born a slave, without 
 ** any sort of liberty, power, or jurisdiction, but every where, 
 *' and in everything, subjected. In proof of this he quoted 
 ** passages of scripture, wherein the gathering of the churcii is 
 " compared to the sowing of a field, the drawing of a net to 
 "land, and the rearing of an edifice; adding, that Christ i^ 
 " said to have come into the world to assemble his faithful peo- 
 " pie, to gather his sheep, to instruct them both by doctrine 
 " and by example. Then he subjoined; the first and principal 
 " foundation whereon Christ built the church was Peter and 
 " his succession, according to the word which he said to him, 
 " Thou art Petei\ and upon this rock I icill huihl my church ; 
 *' which rock, though some of the fathers have understood to 
 *' be Christ himself, and others the faith in him, or the confes- 
 " sion of the faith, it is nevertheless a more catholic exposition 
 " to understand it of Peter himself, who, in Hebrew or Syriac, 
 " is called Cephas, that is. Rock. He affirmed, in like man- 
 " ner, that while Christ lived in mortal flesh, he governed the 
 " church with despotic and monarchical government, and leav- 
 *' ing this earth, he left the same form, constituting St. Peter 
 " and the successors of St. Peter, his vicars successively, to ad- 
 
360 LECTURES ON 
 
 ** minister it, as it had been exercised by him, giving them 
 '* plenary power and jurisdiction, and subjecting to them the 
 *' church in the way wherein it is subjected to him. This he 
 *' proved from what we are told of Peter, because to him alone 
 ** were given the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and by conse- 
 *' quence, power to admit and exclude, which is jurisdiction; 
 ** and to him alone it was said. Feed, that is, rule my sheep, 
 ** silly animals, which have no part, no choice whatever in con- 
 '* ducting themselves. These two things, namely, to be porter 
 *' and pastor, being perpetual offices, it was necessary that they 
 *' should be conferred on a perpetual person, that is, not on the 
 ** first only, but on the whole succession. Hence the Roman 
 *' pontiff, beginning from St. Peter to the end of the world, is 
 *' true and absolute despot, with plenary power and jurisdic- 
 ** tion ; and the church is subject to him as it was to Christ. 
 " And as when his divine majesty governed it, it could not be 
 *' said, that any of the faithful had the smallest power or juris- 
 " diction, all being in total subjection, the same may be said 
 '' in all perpetuity. Thus we ought to understand these de- 
 *' clarations, that the church is a sheepfold, that it is a king- 
 ** dom, and what St. Cyprian says, that the episcopate is one, 
 " and that a part thereof is held by every bishop; that is, that 
 *' the whole undivided power is placed in one single pastor, 
 *' who apportions and communicates it to associates in the mini- 
 ** stry, as exigencies require; and that, in allusion to this, St. 
 " Cyprian compares the apostolic see to the root, the head, the 
 " fountain, the sun ; showing, by these comparisons, that the 
 ** jurisdiction is essentially in her alone; in others, only by de- 
 *' rivation, or participation. And this is the meaning of that 
 ** most usual expression of antiquity, that Peter and the pon- 
 " tiff possess the plenitude of power — others do but participate 
 " in the cure. And that he is the sole shepherd, is demon- 
 *' strated by the words of Christ, who said that he had other 
 ** sheep, which he would gather, that there might be but one 
 " sheepfold, and one shepherd. The shepherd spoken of here 
 *' cannot be Christ himself, because it could not be said, in the 
 '* future tense, that there shall be one shepherd, he being al- 
 '' ready the shepherd. It must, therefore, be understood of 
 ** another sole shepherd, to be constituted after him, who can be 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 331 
 
 *' 110 other than Peter with his succession. He remarked here, 
 " that the precept to feed the flock, occurs but twice in scrip- 
 " ture, once in the singular number, when Christ said to Peter, 
 *' Feed my sheep ,- once in the plural, when Peter said to others, 
 " Feed the focks assigned to you. Now if the bishops had 
 "received any jurisdiction from Christ, it would be equal in 
 " them all, which would destroy the difference between patri- 
 " arch, archbishop, and bishop ; besides, the pope could not 
 " intermeddle with that authority, either by diminishing it, of 
 " by removing it entirely, as he cannot intermeddle with the 
 *' power of orders which is from God. Wherefore the greatest 
 *' caution is necessary here, lest by making the institution of 
 " bishops de jure divifio, they should subvert the hierarchy, 
 *' and introduce into the church an obligarchy, or rather, an 
 " anarchy. Pie added, To the end that Peter might govern 
 " the church well, so that the gates of hell should not prevail 
 " against her, Christ, a little before his death, prayed effica- 
 *' ciously, that his faith might not fail, and ordained him to con- 
 " firm the brethren; in other words, he gave him the privilege 
 " of infallibility, in judging of faith, manners, and the whole of 
 " religion, obliging all the church to obey him, and stand firm 
 " in whatsoever should be decreed by him. He concluded, 
 ** that this is the true foundation of the Christian doctrine, and 
 *' the rock whereon the church is built. lie proceeded to cen- 
 " sure those who held that bishops have received any power 
 ** from Christ; an opinion subversive of the privilege of the 
 *' Roman church, whose pontiff is head of the church universal, 
 *' and the only vicar of Christ upon earth. It is very well- 
 " known, that by the ancient canon, omues sive patriarchcB, &c. 
 " it is enacted, that whoever takes away the rights of other 
 *' churches, commits injustice, but whoever takes away the pri- 
 *' vileges of the Roman church, is a heretic. He added, that 
 " it is an absolute contradiction to maintain, that the pontift' is 
 " head of the church, and its government is monarchical ; and 
 " to affirm, that there is either power or authority in it, which 
 *' is received from others, and not derived from him. 
 
 " In refuting the arguments on the opposite side, he advan- 
 " ced, that, according to the order instituted by Christ, the 
 '* apostles must have been ordained bishops, not by Christ, but 
 
S32 LECTURES ON 
 
 " by Peter, receiving jurisdiction from him alone; an opinion, 
 '* he said, extremely probable, and held by many catholic doc- 
 " tors. Others, however, who maintain that the apostles were 
 *' ordained bishops by Christ, add, that his divine majesty, in 
 " so doing, exercised, by prevention, Peter's office, doing for 
 *« once what belonged to Peter to do, giving to the apostles 
 '* himself that power which they ought to have received from 
 " Peter, just as God took of the spirit of Moses, and imparted 
 " it to the seventy judges, so that it was as much as if they had 
 " been ordained by Peter, and had received all authority front 
 '* him ; and therefore they continued subject to Peter, in re- 
 " gard to the places and modes of exercising their authority. 
 " And though we do not read that Peter corrected them, it 
 " was not through defect of power, but because they exercised 
 *' their office properly, and so did not need correction. Who- 
 " ever reads the celebrated canon, Ita Do?ni?ius, will be assured, 
 *' that every catholic ought to believe this; and thus the bi- 
 " shops, who are successors of the apostles, receive the whole 
 " from the successor of Peter. He observed, also, that the? 
 " bishops are not called successors of the apostles, unless, as 
 " being in their places, in the way that a bishop succeeds his 
 '* predecessors, and not as being ordained by them. He re- 
 " plied to what some had inferred, that the pope might then' 
 " leave off making bishops, choosing to be the only bishop him- 
 *' self. He admitted, that ordination is divine, that in the? 
 " church there is a multitude of bishops, coadjutors of the pon- 
 '' tiff, and therefore that the pontiff is obliged to preserve the' 
 ** order ; but that there is a great difference between saying* 
 " that a thing is dejure divino, and that it is appointed of God. 
 " Things instituted de Jure divino, are perpetual, and depend" 
 " on God alone, at every time, both universally and particu- 
 " larly. Thus baptism, and all the other sacraments, wherein 
 " God operates singularly in each particular, are dejure divino. 
 " Thus the Roman pontiff is of God. For when one dies, the' 
 '* keys do not remain with the church, for they were not given' 
 *' to her. But when the new pope is created, God immediately 
 " gives them to him. But it happens otherwise in things bare- 
 ** ly of divine appointment ; inasmuch as from God comes only 
 " the universal, whereas the particulars are executed by men. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 83S 
 
 " Thus St. Paul says, that princes and temporal powers are or- 
 " dained of God ; that is, from him alone comes the universal 
 " precept, that there should be princes ; nevertheless, tlic par- 
 " ticulars are made by civil laws. In the same manner bishops 
 " are ordained of God ; and St. Paul says, they are placed by 
 *' the Holy Ghost for the government of the church, but not 
 '' dejure divino. The pope, however, cannot abolish the uni- 
 " versal precept for making bishops in the church, because it is 
 *' from God : but each particular bishop, being only de jure 
 *' canoiiico, may, by pontifical authority, be removed. And to 
 " the objection, that the bishops would be delegates, and not 
 *' ordinaries, he answered : It behovcth us to distinguish juris- 
 ^' diction into fundamental and derived, and the derived into 
 " delegated and ordinary. In civil polities, the fundamental is 
 '' in the prince, the derived is in all the magistrates. And in 
 *' these, ordinaries are different from delegates, because they 
 " receive the authority diversely, though they all derive equally 
 " from the same sovereignty ; but the difference consists in 
 *' this, that the ordinaries are by perpetual laws, and with suc- 
 '' cession : the others have single authority, either personal or 
 *' casual. The bishops, therefore, are ordinaries, being insti- 
 " tuted by pontifical laws, dignities of perpetual succession in 
 ^' the church. He added, that those passages wherein Christ 
 " seems to give authority to the church, as that wherein he 
 ^' says, that it is the pillar and basis of the truth, and that other, 
 ^' Let him who will not hear the church he to thee as a heathen 
 " and a puhlican, are all to be understood solely in respect of 
 *' its head, which is the pope. For this reason the church is 
 " infallible, because it has an infallible head. And thus he is 
 '^ separated from the church, who is separated from the pope its 
 *' head. As to what had been urged, that the council could 
 '' have no authority from Christ, if none of the bishops had 
 " any, he answered, that this was not to be regarded as an ob- 
 *' jection, but as a certain truth, being a very clear and neces- 
 " sary consequence of the truly catholic doctrine he had demon- 
 " strated; nay, added he, if each of the bishops in council be 
 " fallible, it cannot be denied, that all of them together are fnl- 
 •" lible ; and if the autliority of the council arose from the au-, 
 " thority of the bishops, no council could ever be called gene- 
 
334« LECTURES ON 
 
 " ral, wherein the number of those present. Is incomparably less 
 " than the number of those that are absent. He mentioned, 
 " that in that very council under Paul III. the most moment- 
 '' ous articles concerning the canonical books, the authority of 
 '* translations, the equality of tradition in scripture, had been 
 *' decided by a number less than fifty: that if multitude gave 
 " authority, these decisions had none at all. But as a number 
 '' of prelates, convened by the pontiff, for the purpose of con- 
 " stituting a general council, however few, derives not the name 
 " and efficacy of being general, from any other cause than the 
 '' pope's designation, so likewise he is the sole source of its au- 
 " thority. Therefore, if it issue precepts, or anathemas, these 
 " have no effect, unless in virtue of the pontiff's future confir- 
 " mation. Nor can the councils bind any by its anathemas, 
 " further than they shall be enforced by the confirmation. 
 " And when the synod says, that it is assembled in the Holy 
 " Ghost, it means no more than that the fathers are assembled, 
 '* by the pope's summons, to discuss matters, which, when ap- 
 " proved by him, will be decreed by the Holy Ghost. Other- 
 " wise, how could it be said, that a decree is made by the Holy 
 " Ghost, which may, by pontifical authority, be invalidated, or 
 " has need of further confirmation ; and therefore, in councils, 
 " however numerous, when the pope is present, he alone de- 
 " crees, nor does the council add any thing but its approbation ; 
 " that is, it receives. Accordingly, the authentic phrase has 
 " always been, Sac7'o approbanie concilio ; nay, in determina- 
 " tions of the greatest weight, as was the deposition of the em- 
 *' peror Frederic II. in the general council of Lyons, Innocent 
 '' IV., a most wise pontiff, refused the approbation of the synod, 
 *' lest any should imagine it necessary : he thought it enough 
 '' to say, sacro presente concilio. Nor ought we hence to con- 
 *' elude, that a council is superfluous. It is convened for the 
 " sake of stricter inquisition, easier persuasion, and for giving 
 " the members some notion of the question. And wheiT it 
 " judges, it acts by virtue of the pontifical authority, derived 
 '' from the divine, given it by the pope. For these reasons, 
 '' the good doctors have subjected the authority of the council 
 " to the authority of the pontiff, as totally dependent thereon. 
 " Without this, it has neither the assistance of the Holy Spirit, 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 3S5 
 
 " nor infallibility, nor the power of binding the church. It has 
 " nothing but what is conceded to it by him alone to whom 
 " Christ said, Feed my sheep" 
 
 Such was the famous discourse of Lainez, in which, I must 
 own, we have much greater reason to admire Jesuitical im- 
 pudence than even Jesuitical sophistry. 80 many bold asser- 
 tions, some of which are flatly contradicted by sacred writ, and 
 others by the most unquestionable records of history, required 
 a man of no common spirit, or, as scripture strongly expresses 
 it, who had a brow of brass, to advance them. Is it possible, 
 that he himself was so ignorant as to believe what he advanced? 
 Or could he presume so far upon the ignorance of his audience, 
 as to think of makinfj them believe it ? Or did he imajjine that 
 his hearers would be so overborne by his eloquence, his assum- 
 ing tone and dictatorial manner, as to be thrown into a kind of 
 stupor, and rendered incapable of discovering the notorious 
 falsehoods with which his oration was stuffed? Passinfj the 
 contradictions to holy writ, (a book with which the divines of 
 his day were but beginning to be acquainted,) was it prudent 
 to ascribe a power to the papacy, not only unheard of in former 
 ages, but which popes themselves had explicitly disclaimed? 
 Nothing can be more express than the words of Gregory, sur- 
 named the Great, who, though remarkably tenacious of the ho- 
 nours of his see, says, in arguing against the Constantino- 
 politan patriarch, for assuming the title of universal bishop, 
 " Si unus episcopus vocatur universalis, universa ecclesia cor- 
 " ruit, si unus universus cadet." If one should fall, the uni- 
 versal church falls with him. Here, taking it for self-evident, 
 that all bishops, without exception, are fallible, he infers the 
 absurdity there is in any one calling himself universal. Again, 
 " Absit a cordibus Christianorum nomen istud blasphemias, in 
 *' quo omnium sacerdotum honor adimitur, dum ab uno sibi 
 " dementer arrogatur ;" where he no less plainly arraigns the 
 impious usurpation of any one, who, by claiming such a supe- 
 riority, would strip all other priests of their dignity, and madly 
 arrogate the whole to himself. Was it well-judged to misre- 
 present so common an author as Cyprian in so flagrant a man- 
 ner, and make him compare the apostolic (that is, in the 
 Jesuit's dialect, the Roman) see to the root, the head, the 
 
S36 LECTURES OX 
 
 fountain, the sun, In a passage where Cyprian mentions no see 
 whatever, but speaks solely of the necessity of union with the 
 universal church? Cyprian, in writing to popes, and of them, 
 uniformly shows, that he considered them as, in respect of their 
 ministry, entirely on a foot of equality with himself, denominat- 
 ing them brethren, colleagues, and fellow-bishops. Whether 
 he paid an implicit deference to their judgment, let the dispute 
 he had with Pope Stephen, about the rebaptization of those 
 who had been baptized by heretics, testify. By this firmness, 
 he incurred excommunication from the pope; and, in this state 
 he died, though now worshipped as a saint and a martyr by the 
 very church which excommunicated him. 
 
 But not to enter farther into particulars, was it judicious in 
 Lainez to trust so much to the ignorance of the whole assembly, 
 as not only to quote such men as Cyprian, an eminent and in- 
 flexible opposer of papal arrogance, but to talk of the pope's 
 power in convoking councils, and confirming their decrees, as 
 what had always obtained in the church, and was essential to 
 the very being of a council, when every smatterer in ecclesiastic 
 history, and in ancient ecclesiastic writers, must have known, 
 that this practice was comparatively recent ? Passing the cus- 
 tom of the earlier ages, when the imperial authority was used, 
 was it already quite forgotten, that, in the very preceding cen- 
 tury, the council of Pisa was not convened by any pontifi:', and 
 yet proceeded so far as to try and depose two pretenders to the 
 popedom, and elect a third in their stead ? Or, had they now 
 no knowledge of the council of Constance, which was still later, 
 and, in like manner, deposed two claimants, one of them the 
 pope, who had convoked it, and, after accepting the resignation 
 of a third, proceeded to the election of a fourth ? Or could it 
 be imagined, that the whole audience was so stupid, as not to 
 be sensible that, if those proceedings at Constance were null, 
 there was no vacancy made by the deposition of John and Bene- 
 dict; consequently, that the council's election of Martin, fol- 
 lowing thereon, was null; consequently, that Pius IV., the 
 pope then reigning, had no right, as he derived his title lineally 
 from an usurper, who, by creating cardinals whilst he himself 
 was destitute of authority, had perpetuated, in his successors, 
 the failure of his own title ; and consequently, that there was 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. f^SJ 
 
 an irreparable breach made in tbe succession to tlie popedom? 
 Was it possible, that they should not perceive, that the subver- 
 sion of the authority of that council, an authority claimed over 
 popes, was the subversion of the title of Martin V., and that the 
 subversion of the title of Martin V., was the subversion of the 
 title of all succeeding popes to the end of the worhl. 
 
 How curiously does Lainez argue from the mctaj)hor of sZ/rf/;, 
 that the Christian people, indeed tlie whole church, clergy as 
 well as laity, (the pope, tlie one shepherd of the one sheepfold, 
 alone excepted,) have no more judgment in directing themselves 
 than brute beasts. He docs not, indeed, so cleverly account 
 how that superior sort of being, the pope, can think of choosing 
 any of these irrational animals, as partners in the ministry with 
 him, to assist in guiding and directing their fellow-brutes. I 
 admire the wonderful fetch by which he makes Jesus Christ, 
 when he commissioned the twelve apostles, act in ordaining 
 eleven of them, (though no distinction is pointed out in the his- 
 tory,) merely in the name of Peter, and as Peter's substitute; 
 borrowing back, for this purpose, part of the authority exclu- 
 sively conferred on him. He is, indeed, greatly at a loss, 
 (these deputy-apostles, or apostles of the apostle Peter, un- 
 luckily behaved so properl}"-,) to find an instance of Peter's so 
 much boasted authority in judging and correcting them. But 
 we are at no loss to find an instance wherein, on Peter's behav- 
 ing improperly, Paul not only opposed, but publicly and sharp- 
 ly rebuked him. The passage well deserves your notice. Ye 
 will find it in the epistle to the Galatians, ii. 11, &c. Jl/icn 
 Peter was come to Antiocli, says Paul, / icitJistood him to the 
 face, because he icas to be blamed : for before that certain came 
 from Jitdea, he did eat with the Gentiles, but when they were 
 come, he withdrew, and separated himself fearing than trhich 
 were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled like- 
 wise with him, insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away 
 with their dissimulation. But when I saio that they walked 
 not uprightly, according to the truth of the gospel, I said to Pe- 
 ter, before them all. If thou, being a Jew, livest after the man- 
 ner of the Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compcllcst 
 thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews ? ^^'as this a treatment 
 from a mere delegate to his principal, nay more, from one of the 
 
 V 
 
558 LECTURES OX 
 
 sheep, those stupid irrational animals, to his shepherd, (for 
 mark, that according to Lainez, Peter was the sole shepherd ; 
 they all, in respect of him, were sheep,) from a fallible member 
 of the church to Christ's only vicar, to the infallible head and 
 pastor? What matter of triumph would there have been here 
 to the Romanist, if the case had been reversed, and Peter had,' 
 in a manner, to appearance, so authoritative, judged and rebuked 
 Paul ? Our ears would have been stunned with the repetition of 
 a demonstration, so irrefragable, of the supremacy of Peter, and 
 consequently of Rome. Yet there would have been no real 
 ground of triumph had it been so. If any regard is to be had 
 to the accounts of inspiration, it is manifest, that none of them, 
 though apostles, were infallible ; and that as they were all, by 
 their vocation, brethren and equals, and expressly called so by 
 their master, in a passage wherein he prohibits their either giv- 
 ing or assuming a superiority one over another, it was their 
 duty to correct one another in love, and not permit a brother 
 unadmonished to persist in any practice truly blame-worthy. 
 Passing, however, the article of correction, of which it appears, 
 that Peter, the only infallible apostle, was the only person of 
 the society that ever stood in need; what evidence have we, of 
 any authority, in other respects, exercised by Peter over the sa- 
 cred college? Does he ever call them together, to assign them 
 their several charges, and to give them instructions in relation 
 to the duties of their office? or, Do they ever have recourse to 
 him for the proper information in regard to these? Not a ves- 
 tige to this purpose, do we find in the Acts of the Apostles, 
 where, if there had been such a thing, it could hardly have been 
 omitted ; nor is there the least suggestion, that points this way, 
 in any of the epistles. Nay, not one of the apostles do we find 
 sent on any mission whatsoever by him. We have, indeed, as 
 I had occasion to remark in a former discourse, a notable in- 
 stance, in which Peter and John were sent on a mission by the 
 other apostles, who were at Jerusalem at the time, but not a 
 single example of an apostle, who received either direction or 
 orders of any kind from Peter. 
 
 But it would be trifling to enter more into particulars. Who 
 sees not that, by this Jesuit's way of commenting, not only 
 ihere is no evidence, that any powers were conferred on the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 330 
 
 other apostles, or on the church, but it would liavc been impos- 
 sible for the inspired writers themselves to give us evidence that 
 there were? For, however clear and decisive their expressions 
 might have been, this brief* reply would have cut them down at 
 once : " All such passages are to be understood solely in re- 
 '* spect of the church's head, which is the pope." Suffice it 
 then to say of the whole piece, as we may say with the greatest 
 justice, that it is a mass of falsehoods and chicanery. Some 
 things are affirmed in opposition to the fullest evidence, many 
 things are assumed without any evidence, and nothing is proved. 
 But it is of some consequence to consider the reception it 
 met with in the council, as this consideration will serve to show 
 the different sentiments which prevailed at that time among Ro- 
 man Catholics, in relation to the hierarchy, and ecclesiastical 
 dominion. This, together with some remarks on the present 
 state of the papacy, shall be reserved for the subject of another 
 lecture. 
 
 y2 
 
240 LECTURES ON 
 
 LECTURE XXI. 
 
 In my last lecture, in order to give you some idea of the su- 
 blimity and plenitude of the spiritual power and prerogatives, 
 claimed in behalf of his holiness, by the partizans of the see of 
 Rome, and, at the same time, to give you some taste of their 
 manner of supporting their claims from scripture and antiquity, 
 I exhibited to you the substance of a speech on episcopal juris- 
 diction, delivered by the Jesuit Lainez in the council of Trent. 
 I made also a few strictures on his mode of probation. But as 
 it is of more consequence, for understanding the present state 
 of parties and opinions in the Romish church, to know the re- 
 ception which the Jesuit's sentiments met with in the council, 
 I reserved this for a principal part of the subject of my present 
 lecture. I shall therefore begin with it. 
 
 " Of all the orations that had yet been delivered in the coun- 
 ** oil, there was not one," says our historian, " more commend- 
 " ed and more blamed, according to the different dispositions of 
 ** the hearers, than was this of Lainez. By the pontificii, or 
 *' papists, (so do even Roman Catholics term the minions of 
 *' Rome, and sticklers for every claim made by the papacy) it 
 ** was cried up as most learned, bold, and well-founded; by 
 ''others it was condemned as adulatory, and by some even as 
 " heretical. Many showed that they were offended by the as- 
 ** perity of his censures, and were determined, in the following 
 *' congregations, (so the meetings holden for deliberation and 
 *' debate were named) to attack his speech on every occasion, 
 *' and point out the ignorance and temerity which it betrayed. 
 
 " The bishop of Paris having, when he should have given 
 ** his sentiments, been confined by sickness, said to every body 
 *' who came to see him, that when there should be a congrega- 
 " tion that he could attend, he would deliver his opinion against 
 *' that doctrine without reserve, a doctrine which, unheard of 
 *' in former ages, had been invented about fifty years before by 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 541 
 
 " Gaetan, in hope of being made a cardinal, and had been cen- 
 " sured, on its first publication, by the tlicological collefre in 
 ** Paris, called the Sorbon, a doctrine which, instead of rcpre- 
 " senting the church as the heavenly kingdom, agreeably to the 
 " denomination given lier in scripture, exhibits her as not a spi- 
 " ritual kingdom, but a temporal tyranny, taking from her the 
 " title of the chaste spouse of Christ, and making her the slave 
 " and prostitute of one man." 
 
 It was not difficult to discover what man he alluded to. In- 
 deed, methinks, this Parisian theologist was not far from the 
 opinion of those protestants, who interpret the whore of IJaby- 
 ion, in the Apocalypse, to be the church of Rome. I Je plainly 
 acknowledges, that the accounts, given of this church by the 
 pope's partizans, are e?:actly descriptive of such a character. 
 And may we not justly say, that a church, which could tamely 
 bear such treatment from Lainez, or any of the creatures of 
 papal despotism, deserved to be branded with the disgraceful 
 appellation? Or may we not rather say, that her bearing it in 
 the manner she did, was a demonstrative proof, that the repre- 
 sentation, given of her state at that time, was just ? It may, in- 
 deed, excite some wonder, that the above-named Jesuit should 
 have chosen to adopt a style on this subject, so directly contra- 
 dictory to the style of holy writ. Our Lord promises IVeedom 
 to his disciples. " Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall 
 " make you free." By convincing your judgment, it shall pow- 
 erfully operate upon your will, and make your duty to become 
 your choice. Herein lies the most perfect freedom. Again, 
 " If the Son make you free, ye shall be free indeed." The 
 service of his disciples is not like that of a slave by constraint, 
 arising solely from fear; it is entirely voluntary, proceeding 
 from the noblest of motives, love. He therefore calls them not 
 servants, so much as friends, and treats them as such, commu- 
 nicating his purposes to them, and engaging them, not by co- 
 ercive methods, but by persuasion. His law is, for this reason 
 styled a law of liberty : and those who receive it are required to 
 act as free, yet not using their liberty fur a clohe of walieious- 
 ness, but as the willing servants of God, Not the most distant 
 hiot has he any where given of his people's slavery. . IJut 
 Lainez tells you, judging of the conduct of Christ from that of 
 
342 LECTURES ON 
 
 Rome, the very worst model he could have taken, that Jesus 
 Christ has made his church (that is, the whole community of his 
 disciples) a mere slave, that has not any sort of liberty, but is every 
 where, and in every thing, subjected to the dominion of an abso- 
 lute despot. So different is the language of this son of Loyola 
 from that of the Son of God. Yet not more different than is 
 the spirit of the different religious institutions which they teach. 
 
 But to return to the bishop's remarks, " Lainez," said he, 
 " maintains, that there is only one bishop instituted by Christ, 
 " and that the other bishops have no power unless dependently 
 " on him. This is as much as to say, that one only is bishop, 
 " the rest are but his vicars, removeable at his pleasure. For 
 " his own part, he acknowledged, he wished to rouse the whole 
 " council, to consider how the episcopal authority, so much de- 
 " pressed, could be preserved from annihilation, since every new 
 " congregation of regulars, which springs up, gives it a violent 
 *' shock. The bishops had maintained their authority entire 
 *' till the year 1050." With this good prelate's leave, their 
 authority was, by the gradual encroachments of Rome, long be- 
 fore that period greatly reduced. Her supreme jurisdiction, 
 both as lawgiver, and as judge, were, ere then, pretty firmly es- 
 tablished. Her orders and canons were generally, throughout 
 the western churches, promulged and obeyed : recourse was had 
 to her for dispensations, for confirmation, and collation, in ec- 
 clesiastic oflBces, and for judgment by appeals. But these usurp- 
 ations were, long before the time of this council, acquiesced in 
 as rights. An acquiescence, thus far, may be considered as at 
 least virtually comprehended in the solemn oath of fidelity, sub- 
 jection, and obedience, to the pope, exacted of, and given by, 
 prelates immediately before their consecration. In regard to 
 these, therefore, however objectionable, they had precluded 
 themselves, and could not decently object to them. Whereas, 
 those claims, to which the Parisian alluded, being more recent, 
 though they had surmounted the force of opposition, had not 
 yet survived the murmurs and discontents which the introduc- 
 tion of them had created. 
 
 I resume the prelate's account of the matter; " It was then 
 " in 1050, that the Cluniac and Cistertian congregations, and 
 " others, which arose in that century, gave a signal blow to 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 3iS 
 
 " the episcopal order: many functions, proper and essential to 
 " bishops, being, by their means, devolved upon Rome. lUit 
 " after the year 1200, when the mendicants arose, almost the 
 " whole exercise of episcopal authority has been taken away, 
 " and given to them by privilege. At length, this new con- 
 " gregation, (the Jesuits) a society of yesterday, which is scarce- 
 " ly either secular or regular, as the university of Paris, eight 
 " years ago, knowing it to be dangerous in matters of faith, 
 ''■ pernicious to the peace of the church, and destructive of mo- 
 " nachism, has well observed, (this congregation, I say) that it 
 " might outdo its predecessors, has attempted to subvert cntire- 
 " ly episcopal jurisdiction, denying it to be from God, and want- 
 '' ing it to be acknowledged as from men, and therefore preca- 
 " rious and mutable. 
 
 " These things," says the historian, " repeated by the bi- 
 " shop to different persons, as occasion offered, moved many 
 " others to reflect, who had at first given little attention to the 
 " subject. But among those who had any knowledge of his- 
 " tory, not a little was spoken concerning that observation, sacro 
 ^^ pi'cesente concilio, which appeared in all the canonical codes, 
 " but not having been attended to, seemed new to every body. 
 " Some approved the Jesuit's interpretation, some interpreted 
 " it in a sense quite contrary, that the council had refused to 
 " approve that sentence ; others, taking another rout, argued, 
 " that as the matter treated on that occasion was temporal, and 
 " the contentions were worldly, one could not infer from its 
 " procedure, in that instance, that the same thing ought to be 
 " done in treating matters of faith, and ecclesiastic rites ; espc- 
 " cially, when it is considered, that in the first council of the 
 " apostles at Jerusalem, which ought to be our rule and exem- 
 " plar, the decree was not made by Peter, either in presence of 
 " the council, or with its approbation, but was entitled the 
 " epistle, with the addition of the names of three degrees, as- 
 " sembled in that congregation, apostles, elders, and brethren ; 
 '' and Peter, unnamed, was, without prerogative or distinction, 
 " included in the first degree, apostles; an example which, in 
 " respect of antiquity and divine authority, ought to discredit all 
 " the examples, on the opposite side, that can be deduced from 
 " subsequent times." 
 
544 LECTURES ON 
 
 I have observed how degradhig and dishonourable, according 
 to the bishop, the picture was which Lainez had drawn of the 
 church of Christ, and taken notice of the strong resemblance, 
 though perfectly unintended, which, from the Parisian's com- 
 ment, appears, in the Jesuit's sentiments, to what was then af- 
 firmed by their adversaries, the protestants, in regard to the 
 church of Rome. It may not be improper to observe here, 
 that even an avowed coincidence with these, if we may judge 
 from the language they used, was at that time not unfrequent 
 in some of those who, though greatly dissatisfied, never chose to 
 separate from the Romish communion. It may not be impro- 
 per to give one specimen of the complaints then so common, in 
 order to show how great the dissatisfaction was at the torrent 
 of corruption which universally prevailed, and to suggest what 
 was the general opinion in regard to the fountain whence the 
 prevalent corruption flowed. Among many instances that might 
 be given, I shall select one of a very public nature, the speech 
 pronounced by the French ambassador Ferrier, when he pro- 
 duced his credentials in the above-named council. Let it be 
 remarked, that France was then involved in a civil war between 
 the Roman Catholics and the Hugonots, the name then given 
 to the reformed in that country, by their enemies. After a 
 preamble, in which he expatiates on the pious intentions of the 
 king, his master, his great merits in respect of the zeal he had 
 shown for the catholic church, and even for the dignity and au- 
 thority of the sovereign pontiff; he, on the matter, acknow- 
 ledges, that it is this zeal alone which occasioned all the intes- 
 tine broils wherewith his reign was at that time disturbed; for 
 that if he had no further aim, than securing due obedience to 
 his own civil authority, and maintaining the peace of the king- 
 dom, every thing might be settled to his satisfaction in three 
 days. In this his excellency gave a more honourable testimony 
 to the dispositions of the protestants, in his country, than pro- 
 bably he had intended. At least, he showed that the aggres- 
 sion and persecution were entirely on the other side, and that 
 the protestants, whether right or wrong in resisting, acted 
 merely on the defensive. When coming towards a conclusion, 
 after many free and spirited things, he adds, " The most Chris- 
 " tian king demands of this council nothing but what all the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 34^5 
 
 " Christian world demands, what the great Constantine de- 
 " manded of the fathers of the Nicene council. His majesty's 
 " requests are all comprehended in the sacred scriptures, the 
 " ancient councils of the catholic church, the old constitutions, 
 *' decrees, and canons, of the pontiffs and fathers. He demands 
 " of those whom Christ hath constituted judges, the entire re- 
 *' storation of the catholic church, not by a decree in loose and 
 *' general terms, hut according to the form of tlie express words 
 *' of that perpetual and divine edict, against which usurpation 
 " or prescription can have no place ; so that those good ordi- 
 " nances, which the devil has violently rohhcd us of, and long 
 " concealed, may at length return, as from captivity, into the 
 *' holy city of God, and the light of men." 
 
 He adduced the example of Darius, who quieted the tumults 
 of Judea, not by arms, but by executing the ancient edict of 
 Cyrus. That of Josiah also, who reformed religion by causing 
 the book of the law, which had been hidden through the ma- 
 lice of men, to be read to the people, and observed by them. 
 Then, continues the historian, he made use of a very cutting 
 expression : " If the fathers," said he, " should ask, why 
 " France is not in peace, no other answer can be given, than 
 " that which Jehu gave to Joram, What peace can there be so 
 
 " long as " Here he stopped, and after pausing 
 
 a little, added, " Ye know the rest." The story referred to 
 we have in the ninth chapter of the second book of Kings. The 
 words to which he pointed so distinctly that they could not be 
 mistaken, but which he judged it convenient to suppress, we 
 have in the twenty-second verse, where we are told, that when 
 Jehu was asked by Joram, whether there was peace, he answer- 
 ed. What peace^ so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jeze- 
 bel, and her witchcrafts are so mamj? It was impossible, con- 
 sidering, when, where, and to whom, the ambassador was di- 
 recting his discourse, to entertain a doubt concerning his mean- 
 incr. The respectable appellation of mother had been given to 
 the church time immemorial — individual Christians were de- 
 nominated her children. In regard to particular churches, they 
 had been for ages, in the west, considered as the daughters of 
 Rome. The Roman church was their common mother, so that 
 this <^entlcman, addressing himself to the Tridcntinc fathers. 
 
346 LECTURES ON 
 
 who represented their respective churches in the council, and 
 in the midst of whom the pope's legates sat as presidents, had 
 the boldness to call the church of the haughty and imperious 
 Rome, not in so many words, but as intelligibly and manifestly 
 a harlot, a sorceress, a Jezebel, the source of all their calami- 
 ties. Indeed, the happy aposiopesis he employed, rendered the 
 invective more energetical, and the intended application more 
 unquestionable, than if he had spoken out. If he had spoken 
 out, there would have been still room for suspicion, that (how- 
 ever unlikely) he must have had some other meaning to the 
 words, else he could not, to their faces, have employed terms 
 so opprobrious. The method he took, at the same time that it 
 left no doubt as to the expression to be supplied, betrayed a 
 consciousness, that he considered it both as incapable of any 
 other application, and as too gross for utterance. Would not 
 one be tempted to think, that either the French monarch had 
 mistaken the principles of the servant he employed on this oc- 
 casion, or that the latter had mistaken totally the intent of his 
 embassy, and was actually pleading the cause of the protestants 
 before the council, and not that of his master, who was endea- 
 vouring, by all possible means, to exterminate them? He con- 
 cluded with declaring, that if the reformation he proposed was 
 not quickly and seriously applied to, all the assistance of the 
 king of Spain, (by arms doubtless he meant) of the pope, and 
 of the other princes, would be to no purpose, and that the blood 
 of those who should perish, though deservedly, on account of 
 their own sins, would be required at the hands of the fathers 
 then assembled. This discourse, as may well be imagined, ex- 
 cited very great indignation ; but matters were then so critically 
 circumstanced, and the fear of offending the king of France, 
 and perhaps provoking him to adopt less sanguinary measures 
 with his revolted subjects, made even the keenest advocates for 
 the papacy to stifle their resentments, and take no notice of the 
 offensive expressions. 
 
 Having exhibited to you the state of the papal claims of ju- 
 risdiction over the clergy, at that most memorable era, the re- 
 formation in the sixteenth century, I shall now attempt to con- 
 vey some idea of the claims then advanced in behalf of the 
 clergy, in the first instance, and ultimately of the pope, iu 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 3^7 
 
 whom they all terminated, over the laity, especially over the 
 secular powers. For this purpose, 1 shall here lay before vou 
 the scheme prepared in the same convention, for the reforma- 
 tion of princes and civil magistrates, which, though in the situa- 
 tion of things at that time, and on account of the strenuous op- 
 position from the temporal powers, it was not found convenient 
 to push, yet has never been departed from, nor abandoned, by 
 those of that establishment ; on the contrary, the several arti- 
 cles have, for ages, afforded matter of contention and struffo-lcs 
 in all nations of Christendom, Much has been attained, and 
 hardly has a proper opportunity been omitted of asserting even 
 the most extravagant of them. The bill prepared for this pur- 
 pose, contained a preamble, thirteen decrees, and a conclusion. 
 It was in substance as follows : — 
 
 The council, beside the statutes enacted for reforming per- 
 sons ecclesiastical, have judged it their duty to reform also se- 
 cular persons of those abuses, which have been introduced 
 against the immunities of the church, confident that princes will 
 acquiesce, and cause due obedience to be rendered to the clergy. 
 To this end they are admonished, before other things, to oblige 
 their magistrates, delegates, and other temporal lords, to render 
 their pastors that obedience, which those princes themselves are 
 bound to perform to the sovereign pontiff*; and for this purpose 
 anew enforces whatever has been decreed by the sacred canons^ 
 and the imperial laws in favour of ecclesiastical immunities, 
 which ought to be observed by all, under pain of anathema. 
 The principal decrees are the following : that persons ecclesias- 
 tical, even though their clerical title should be doubtful, and 
 though they themselves should consent, cannot, under any pre- 
 text, even that of public utility, be judged in a secular judica- 
 tory. Even in cases of notorious assassination, or other except- 
 ed cases, their prosecution must be preceded by a declaration of 
 the bishop of the diocese. That in causes spiritual, matrimo- 
 nial, those of heresy, tithes, &:c. civil, criminal, mixed, belong- 
 in o- to the ecclesiastical court, as well over persons as over 
 goods, tenths, &:c. pertaining to the church, the temporal judge 
 cannot intermeddle, notwithstanding any appeal, &c. ; and those 
 who, in such causes, shall recur to the secular power, shall be 
 excommunicated, and deprived of the rights coutcndcd for. 
 
348 LECTURES ON 
 
 Secular men cannot constitute judges in causes ecclesiastical^ 
 and clergymen, who shall accept such offices from laymen, shall 
 be suspended from orders, deprived of benefices, and incapa- 
 citated. The secular cannot command the ecclesiastical judge 
 not to excommunicate without licence, or to revoke, or suspend, 
 an excommunication fulminated. No king or emperor can make 
 edicts, relating to causes or persons ecclesiastical, or intermeddle 
 with their jurisdiction, or even with the inquisition, but are 
 obliged to lend their arm to the ecclesiastical judges when call- 
 ed on. Rulers may not put their hand to the fruits of vacant 
 benefices, under pretence of custody, protection, &c. ; secular 
 persons, who shall accept such offices, shall be excommunicated, 
 and clergymen suspended and deprived. Ecclesiastics shall not 
 be constrained to pay taxes, excise, &c. not even under the name 
 of free gifts, or loans, either for patrimonial goods, or the goods 
 of the church. The letters, sentences, and citations, of the 
 ecclesiastic judges, especially of the court of Rome, shall, im- 
 mediately on being exhibited, be, without exception, intimated 
 and executed, &c. If there be any doubt that the letters are 
 forged, or that tumults will arise, the bishop, as apostolic dele- 
 gate, may order the needful precautions. Princes and magis- 
 trates shall not quarter their officers, &c. on the houses, or 
 monasteries of ecclesiastics, nor draw thence ought for victuals, 
 or passage money. There were several other articles of the 
 same stamp, which it is not necessary to enumerate. The above 
 will sufficiently serve for a specimen. 
 
 By way of conclusion, there was an admonition to all princes, 
 to have in veneration the things which are of ecclesiastical right, 
 as pertaining to God, and not to allow others herein to offend, 
 renewing all the constitutions of sovereign pontiffs and sacred 
 canons in favour of ecclesiastical immunities ; commanding, 
 under pain of anathema, that, neither directly, nor indirectly, 
 under any pretence, aught be enacted or executed against ec- 
 clesiastical persons, or goods, or against their liberty; any pri- 
 vilege or immemorial exemption to the contrary notwithstanding. 
 
 8uch was the famous bill of rights, (if I may so express my- 
 self) of the clergy of Christendom in the sixteenth century, on 
 which I shall beg leave to make a few remarks. In the first 
 place, it is evident, that these articles imply a total independ^ 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. .^19 
 
 ence of the ecclesiastic on the secular powers, inasmuch as the 
 latter could, on this plan, use no coercive measures, either lor 
 preventing the commission of crimes hy the Ibrmcr, or lor pu- 
 nishing them when committed ; could not, even for the eviction 
 of civil debts, or discharge of lawful obligations, affect the clergy 
 either in person, or in property, moveable or immoveable; could 
 exact from them no aid for the exigencies of the state, however 
 urgent. Now allowing that the independence were ecjual on 
 both sides, it might admit a question, whether it be possible that 
 two such independent states, whereof the subjects of each live to- 
 gether as members of the same community, and are blended in all 
 the ordinary duties and concerns of life, could subsist any time 
 on that footing. I observe, secondly, that the independence 
 was solely on the side of the clergy. The laity could not, by 
 their civil sanctions, affect the clergy without their own concur- 
 rence; but the clergy, both by their civil and by their religious 
 sanctions, could affect the laity, and, in spite of their opposition, 
 whilst the people had any religion, bring the most obstinate to 
 their terms. The civil judge could not compel a clergyman to 
 appear before his tribunal; the ecclesiastic judge could compel 
 a layman, and did, daily compel such to appear before him. 
 And in all the interferings and disputes between individuals of 
 the different orders, the clerical only could decide. The eccle- 
 siastic powers could command the aid of the secular ; the secu- 
 lar could not that of the ecclesiastical. I observe, thirdly, that 
 though the kinds of power, in the different orders, were com- 
 monly distinguished into spiritual and temporal, the much 
 greater part of the power of ecclesiastics was strictly temporal. 
 Matters spiritual are those only of faith and manners, and the 
 latter only as manners, that is, as influencing opinion, wounding 
 charity, or raising scandal. Whereas, under the general term 
 spiritual, they had got included the more important part of ci- 
 vil matters also, affairs matrimonial and testamentary, questions 
 of legitimacy and succession, covenants and conventions, and 
 wherever the interposition of an oath was customary. Add to 
 these, that they were the sole arbiters of tlie rights avowedly 
 civil of the church and churchmen, and in every thing wherein 
 these had, in common with laymen, any share or concern. 
 Though these privileges (weakly called immunities, since they 
 
350 LECTURES ON" 
 
 imply dominion) had, for centuries, been claimed by the clerical 
 order, many of them in most countries actually obtained, and 
 the rest made matter of incessant broils and contentions ; yet 
 all of them were never any where acquiesced in by the secular 
 powers. Had they, indeed, admitted them in their full extent, 
 the abolition of the secular authority would have quickly en- 
 sued; the priesthood would have engrossed every thing. Chris- 
 tendom would have then become in a sense very different from 
 that of the apostle, a royal priesthood, or, as some like to ren- 
 der his words, a kingdom of priests. In scripture the church 
 is so denominated in the same sense, wherein it is said of all 
 Christians, without exception, that they are made kings and 
 priests to God; because all have free access to him through 
 the blood of his Son ; not because our instructors in holy things, 
 men specially called to be ensamples to the flock, in faith and 
 patience, in resignation and humility, were constituted lords 
 with plenary power, both temporal and spiritual, over God's 
 heritage. I observe, in the last place, that an ordinary reader, 
 who has not entered thoroughly into the spirit of those times, 
 cannot fail to be exceedingly surprised, (as I acknowledge I 
 was myself) on the first perusal of the aforesaid overtures. 
 They are ushered in as pious resolutions to be adopted by the 
 council, for the reformation of princes and secular persons. One 
 is naturally led to expect, that in such a writing, calculated 
 purely to reform the great, their faults will, with Christian free- 
 dom, but in the spirit of meekness, be animadverted on ; that 
 one shall find a just censure on the pride, the luxury, the im- 
 piety, the extortion, the envy, the revenge, and the other vices 
 which so often abound amono; those in high rank and authori- 
 ty; or that one shall see branded with proper severity, that un- 
 christian ambition, which leads sovereigns so often, though fel- 
 low-Christians in profession, to make war on one another, on 
 the most trivial pretences, to the destruction of one moiety of 
 their subjects, the oppression of the other, and dishonour of the 
 Christian name. But not a syllable of these. Was there no- 
 thing of this kind, then, among the powers of Europe? Never, 
 perhaps, was there more. Yet this venerable body seemed to 
 think, that there was nothing in their earthly potentates which 
 would need correction, were they sufficiently submissive to their 
 
FXCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 351 
 
 ghostly fathers, the bishops and the priests, that is, in cH'ect, 
 would they but resifrn to them their whole authority, and con- 
 sent to become their humble slaves, a virtue, it seems, more 
 successful, in the eyes of their reverences, than charity itself in 
 covering sins. 
 
 In the same spirit, the seventeenth canon of general reforma- 
 tion, passed in the last session of that council, has these words: 
 " Against those bishops, who in church, or out of it, behave 
 " themselves meanly towards the ministers of kings, persons of 
 " quality, and barons, and with too much indignity, not only 
 " give place to them, but do them personal service, the synod, 
 *' detesting this conduct, and renewing the canons concerning 
 *' the decorum of episcopal dignity, commands bishops to be- 
 " ware of such practices, and every where to challenge due re- 
 " spect to their degree, remembering they are pastors; and also 
 " commands princes and all others to bear them the honour and 
 " reverence due to fiithers." How high their claims went, we 
 learn from a canon of the council of Troyes, in the ninth cen- 
 tury, which orders, that no man shall presume to sit in the pre- 
 sence of a bishop, unless he command it. M'e know who tliev 
 were in ancient times that sought honour one of another, wlio 
 affected the principal seats in the synagogues, and the upper- 
 most rooms at feasts, who loved greetings in the markets, and 
 to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. We know also who it was 
 that expressly prohibited, amongst his disciples, such unbecom- 
 ing emulation and worldly vanity, who enjoined them not to 
 seek honour from men, or to contend who, in the judgment of 
 men, should be greatest, but to seek that honour only which 
 cometh from God ; we know also who it was that made uscfnl- 
 ness the standard of greatness, and pronounced him to be 
 possessed of the highest dignity, who is most humble and most 
 serviceable; who, instead of courting, is solicitous to avoid such 
 enviable distinctions. On which of these models the conven- 
 tion at Trent, and other preceding councils were formed, I shall 
 leave to the candid and impartial to determine. I shall con- 
 clude this lecture with a story, homely indeed, but ajiposite : 
 An English country parson was bragging, in a large company, 
 of the success he had had in reforming his paribhioncrs, on 
 whom his labours, he said, had produced a wonderful change to 
 
5.5^ LECTURES ON 
 
 the better. Being asked in what respect, he replied, tliat when 
 lie came first among them, they were a set of unmannerly 
 clowns, who paid him no more deference than they did to one 
 another; did not so much as pull off their hat when they spoke 
 to him, but bawled out as roughly and familiarly as though he 
 were their equal ; whereas, now, they never presumed to ad- 
 dress him but cap in hand, and, in a submissive voice, made 
 him their best bow, when they were at ten yards distance, and 
 styled him your reverence, at every word. A Quaker, who had 
 heard the whole patiently, made answer: " And so, friend, the 
 " upshot of this reformation, of which thou hast so much car- 
 *' nal glorying, is, that thou hast taught thy people to worship 
 ** thyself." So much for clerical and papal claims. But, in 
 order to know more exactly the state of those times, we must 
 be acquainted with the sentiments of both sides on every prin- 
 cipal question. I shall, therefore, in my next lecture, take no- 
 tice of the reception, which those articles of reformation I have 
 read to you, met with from the secular powers. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. S59 
 
 LECTURE XXII. 
 
 In my two last prelections, I laid before you, in tlicir utmost 
 extent, the papal claims of jurisdiction over the cler^ry, and the 
 clerical claims not only of independence, but of authority over the 
 secular powers. I promised to take notice, in the present lecture, 
 of the reception which the last mentioned claims over the secu- 
 lar powers met with from those against whom they were aimed. 
 
 Copies of those articles, for the reformation of princes and 
 magistrates, having been sent by the ambassadors to their re- 
 spective courts, they were instructed to give them all the oppo- 
 sition in their power. In this resolution, none were more de- 
 termined than the emperor, and tlie king of France. The for- 
 mer wrote to cardinal Moron, that neither as emperor, nor as 
 archduke, would he ever consent, that they should speak in 
 council of reforming the jurisdiction of princes, or of divesting 
 them of their right to draw contributions from the clergy ; that 
 he considered all their past evils as having sprung from the op- 
 pressions attempted by ecclesiastics, both on the people and on 
 the princes. The French ambassadors prepared a protestation, 
 which they were commanded to make, if there should be occa- 
 sion for it. 
 
 In one of the m.eetings called congregations, one of the fa- 
 thers, in a long speech, advanced, that the cause of all their 
 corruptions proceeded from the princes, who, of all men, had the 
 greatest need of reformation ; adding, that the heads of a 
 scheme for this purpose were already digested, meaning that 
 which I gave you in a preceding lecture, and that it was now- 
 time to propose them, and not to suffer so important a design 
 to come to nothing through their dilatoriness. As here the 
 rights of sovereigns were touched, the ambassador Ferrier, of 
 whose vehemence, as well as freedom in speaking, I have already 
 given you a specimen, interposed, and, in a very resolute tone, 
 supported the rights of the secular powers in general, and of his 
 master, the king of France, in particular. Though he was by 
 
 z 
 
354f LECTURES ON 
 
 no means destitute of eloquence, his eloquence was not always 
 adapted to time and place. 
 
 The liberty of expression, in which he indulged himself, was 
 too o-reat for the prejudices of the age in which he lived ; and 
 the reflections which he threw out were too galling, to be borne 
 by men of so much importance as those reverend fathers, who 
 looked on themselves as the only rightful legislators of the uni- 
 verse, and whose authority they deemed it treason, or what was 
 still worse, sacrilege, even in sovereigns to dispute. 
 
 Ferrier, in his oration, lamented, that Christian kings had 
 now, for more than a hundred and fifty years, at the councils of 
 Constance, Basil, Lateran, and Trent, been earnestly requiring 
 of popes the reform of ecclesiastic discipline, and that all their 
 endeavours had proved abortive. They had, indeed, got a 
 large return of decrees and anathemas. They demanded one 
 thing, and they are put off with another; insomuch, that in all 
 probability, for three hundred years to come, the same griev- 
 ances will be lamented, and the same requests of redress will 
 be made to no better purpose. In regard to the huge mass of 
 reforms which had occupied the council for some months past, 
 they had sent their opinion of it to the king, who, in return, 
 wrote them, that he found therein few things conformable, but 
 many contrary to ancient discipline. 
 
 Ferrier maintained further, that the plaster which they had 
 been preparing, far from being adapted to heal the wounds of 
 the church, could serve only to make them fester, and to cause 
 even sores that had been healed, to break out afresh : particu- 
 larly that those expedients of excommunicating and anathema- 
 tizing princes were unexampled in the primitive church, and 
 solely calculated for opening a wide gate to rebellion in every 
 state; that the whole chapter of the reformation of kings and 
 princes had no other aim, than to divest their temporal rulers 
 of all authority. Yet by such rulers some excellent ecclesiastic 
 laws had been made, which even popes had not disdained to 
 adopt, honouring their authors with the name of saints ; that 
 by those laws the church had been governed, not only since the 
 times of the pragmatic and the concordate, but before, nay, for 
 more than four hundred years before the book of decretals, 
 which later popes had got substituted into their place, had been 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 355 
 
 so much as heard of. lie tlicn attempted n comparison be- 
 tween the ancient canons and the modern, particularly the regu- 
 lations made for the reform of discipHne in the preceding ses- 
 sions of the present coancil, exposing the futihty of their new- 
 canons in a strain of contemptuous irony, the most provoking 
 imaginable. He maintained, that the king his master, the foun- 
 der and patron of ahnost all the churches of France, may, for 
 the instant and urgent necessities of the state, in consequence 
 of the power given him of God, and by the most ancient laws 
 of the kingdom, freely avail himself of even the ecclesiastical 
 goods and rents of his subjects. lie said, that the king was 
 particularly surprised at two things; that those fathers adorned 
 with great ecclesiastical power in the divine ministry, and as- 
 sembled solely for restoring ecclesiastical discipline, not attend- 
 ing to that, had turned aside to reform those whom, though 
 wicked, it behoved them to obey and pray for; and he was sur- 
 prised still more, that they should imagine themselves entitled, 
 without admonition, to excommunicate and anathematize prin- 
 ces, who are given them of God, a thing not to be done even 
 to a plebeian, who perseveres in a heinous transgression ; that 
 Michael the archangel did not dare to curse the devil, neither 
 did Michaiah or Daniel curse the most impious kings ; yet those 
 fathers vented all their curses against kings and princes; nay, 
 their maledictions were levelled even afjainst his most Christian 
 majesty, for defending the laws of his ancestors, and the^ liberties 
 of the Gallican church. He concluded, that the king required 
 them not to decree any thing against those laws and liber- 
 ties ; and, if they should, commanded his ambassadors to op- 
 pose their decrees, as they then did, adding, that if, not med- 
 dling with sovereigns, they would attend to that which all the 
 world expected of tliem, their conduct would be most agreeable 
 to his majesty, and should have the utmost aid of his ministers. 
 Hitherto he spoke in the name of the king. Then, in a bold 
 epiphonema, he invoked heaven and earth, and the fathers 
 themselves, to consider whether it suited the time, to show no 
 sympathy with the church, in the present distractions, or with 
 France, involved in a civil war on account of religion, but to have 
 all their sensibility engrossed by their own dignities, and ho- 
 nours, and revenues, which cannot be preserved by other arts 
 
 z 2 
 
356 LECTURES ON 
 
 than those whereby they were acquired; that in such confusions, 
 it was their duty to repent, and when Christ cometh, not to 
 bawl out, Send us into the herd of Swine ; that if they would 
 restore the church to its ancient reputation, bring adversaries to 
 repentance, and reform princes, they should follow the example 
 of good king Hezekiah, who did not imitate his impious father, 
 nor the first, counting backwards, second, third, and fourth, of 
 his very deficient progenitors, but went further back to the imi- 
 tation of his remote, but more perfect, ancestors ; in like man- 
 ner it behoved those fathers not to attend to their immediate 
 predecessors, however learned, but to ascend to an Ambrose, an 
 Augustin, a Chrysostorae, who conquered heretics, not by the 
 modern method of instigating princes to slaughter them, but by 
 methods more primitive, by their prayers, by the example of a 
 godly life, by preaching pure doctrine ; for if the fathers whom 
 he addressed would first form themselves into Ambroses, Augus- 
 tines, and Chrysostomes, and thus purify the church of Christ, 
 they would soon transform princes into Theodosiuses, Honorius- 
 es, Arcadiuses,Valentinians, and Gratians. This he prayed that 
 with the help of God they might effectuate, and so concluded. 
 
 We cannot wonder, that this bold, and even dictatorial lan- 
 guage, should irritate, as in fact it did, in a very high degree, 
 not the pontificii only, but the other prelates, even the French 
 clergy themselves. The historian tells us, that he had no soon- 
 er ended, than there arose such a general murmur, that it was 
 found necessary to dismiss the congregation. Some taxed the 
 discourse with heresy ; others said it looked very suspicious ; al- 
 most all agreed that it was offensive to pious ears, (meaning, no 
 doubt, their own) and could be calculated only to break up the 
 council ; that he attributed to kings more than belonged to them ; 
 that he inferred the pope's authority not to be necessary to en- 
 title them to ecclesiastical goods; that he made the king of 
 France like the king of England, Harry the eight, head of the 
 church within his ov/n dominions. Above all, nothing offended 
 more grievously than his suggesting, that the authority of the 
 king of France over persons and goods, was not founded on the 
 pragmatic, concordate, and papal privileges, but on the law of 
 nature, the sacred scriptures, the ancient councils, and laws of 
 Christian emperors. As his speech was every where attacked, 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. S3J 
 
 and often misrepresented, he was obliged to disperse some copies 
 of it for his own vindication. This occasioned a formal answer 
 in writing, to which he made a spirited reply. 
 
 The principal instruction to be drawn from such altercations, 
 is the knowledge they afford of the opinions and the spirit of 
 the times, and of the mode of reasoning employed in their con- 
 troversies. We are sometimes surprised to observe, that the 
 things which proved matter of reprehension, were such as we 
 should have least suspected. Thus, what he affirmed of princes 
 that they were given of God, was combated with great keenness 
 as heretical, and condemned by nnam sanctam, one of the de- 
 crees very happily named extravagantes of pope Boniface VIII. 
 He ought, said they, to have distinguished, by affirming, they 
 are of God, mediante suo vlcario. An easy device for making 
 all power, temporal and spiritual, to be immediately from the 
 pope, and but mediately from God. To their exceptions on 
 this head, his excellency's answer was very brief. He had not 
 said more simply and absolutely, that princes are from God, -than 
 the prophet Daniel and the apostle Paul had said before him, 
 and that if there be no heresy in their expressions, there can be 
 none in his ; that for his own part, the distinction of mediate 
 and immediate, and the extravagant constitutions of Boniface, 
 never entered into his mind. His apology, instead of diminish- 
 ing, only increased the odium and clamour against him. He 
 obstinately defends, said they, those errors which he ought pe- 
 nitently to recant. His opposition, however, and the alarm 
 taken by sovereigns, were sufficient to prevent those attempts 
 on the secular power being carried further. In the other ques- 
 tions agitated, as those about residence, and the jurisdiction of 
 bishops, there was a division of the clergy into two parties, the 
 pontificii, or patrons of papal despotism, on one side, and those 
 on the other, who maintained, that the bishops had a divine 
 right to a share in the jurisdiction. But in the struggle be- 
 tween the spiritual power and the temporal, the ambassadors 
 had the whole council for antagonists. Both the contending 
 factions were united on this head. It had been, indeed, uni- 
 formly the policy of Rome to exert herself in supporting the 
 attempts, made in every country, to draw both power and pro- 
 perty out of the hands of the laity into those of the clergy. 
 
S58 LECTURES ON 
 
 When this was once effected, she was never at a loss for ex- 
 pedients, whereby she might again draw the whole, or the great- 
 er part, out of their hands into her own. By the first, she se- 
 cured in her interest the clergy of every nation, and laid the 
 foundation of such a close dependence on herself, as rendered 
 the exertion necessary for obtaining the second object much 
 easier, than what had been employed for obtaining the first. 
 
 To adduce some instances : with what infinite labour and con- 
 tention did the pope, aided by the bishops, (always ready, at 
 his instigation, to rebel against the civil powers) wrest the in- 
 vestitures in church livings out of the hands of princes, in order, 
 as appeared at the time, to restore them to the chapters of the 
 several dioceses ; and with what ease, comparatively, were the 
 chapters afterwards wormed out of their right by the pope ! 
 First, he employed the gentler method of recommendation. 
 When this was ineffectual, he commanded. As even commands 
 were sometimes disregarded, he proceeded to cause his com- 
 mands to be conveyed by nuncios, empowered to give collation, 
 if necessary; and armed with the highest censures against the 
 disobedient. Thus the clergy found, to their cost, that the last 
 error was worse than the first, and that, under the appearance 
 of recovering their liberty, they had brought themselves (as is 
 often deservedly the case with rebels) into greater bondage. 
 The monarch had commonly some regard to the merits of the 
 candidate. The pope acknowledged no merit but that of a 
 weighty purse. Natives were formerly preferred, now often 
 aliens and strangers, who could not speak the language. Thus 
 Roman courtiers, minions of the pontiff, men who resided con- 
 stantly in Italy, frequently drew the richest benefices of distant 
 countries, whilst the duties of the charge lay neglected. We 
 have another example in the monks, who, at first, under pre- 
 tence of vowed poverty, acquired great credit with the public, 
 as aiming at no temporal advantage, but doing all through 
 charity, for the service of the people. Afterwards, when their 
 credit was fully established, Rome quickly devised reasons for 
 dispensing v/ith their vow. From that time they enriched 
 themselves. When they were become opulent, the pope treat- 
 ed them as he treated bishoprics ; bestowed them on his favour- 
 ites, sold them to the highest bidder, or gave them in commeu- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 359 
 
 dam. Rome always asserted resolutely, and, in most cases, 
 successfully, the clergy's right of exemption from being taxed 
 by the secular powers ; but it was in order to slip into the phice 
 of those powers, and assume the prerogative of taxing them her- 
 self. This, though always controverted by temporal rulers, 
 she so eflPectually secured, that sovereigns, in any remarkable 
 exigency, especially when they could plead some holy enter- 
 prize, such as a crusade for the massacre of infidels or heretics, 
 were fain to recur to the pope, as the easiest and surest way of 
 obtaining the assistance of their own clergy. This also gave 
 the pope an easy method of bribing princes to his side, when 
 Jie wanted to destroy or mortify any adverse power. It was his 
 usual game, to ply the bishop against the king. But this, when 
 his subalterns proved mutinous, he could successfully reverse, 
 and ply the king against the bishop. At the time of this very 
 council, he was forced to recur to these artifices. Both the 
 Spanish clergy and the French, having proved refractory, on 
 the article of episcopal jurisdiction, his holiness did not find it 
 a fruitless expedient, for preventing their obtaining the coun- 
 tenance and support of their respective sovereigns, to give hopes 
 to the latter, of the aids solicited from him, for extirpating 
 heresy, and securing the catholic faith, namely, the tenths of 
 the ecclesiastic revenues, in their own dominions. 
 
 Thus I have, in this and the two preceding lectures, given you 
 a sketch of the state at which the papal authority was arrived in 
 the sixteenth century, at the time of the sitting of the council 
 of Trent, the last which, under the name of ecumenical, (though 
 not universally received even by the Roman Catholics) has been 
 holden in the church. I have also given you some idea of the 
 different sentiments, on this article, entertained by difFerent 
 parties of Romanists ; for, on this subject, and on some others, 
 they are far from being unanimous. I shall now add a fcvv 
 things on the present state of the hierarchy, in regard to the 
 form, particularly on the dignity and office of cardinal, which 
 has naturally sprung up out of the changes gradually effected 
 in the constitution of the Roman church, in respect both of the 
 extent of her dominion, and of the exaltation of her power, con- 
 cluding with some account of the manner in which the hicrarch 
 was wont to be installed in his sublime station. 
 
360 LECTURES o^' 
 
 As to the oflBce of cardinal, there can be no doubt, that for 
 several hundred years, there was no appearance in the church 
 either of the name or the thing. Though some other accounts 
 have been given of its origin less honourable for the office, what 
 appears to me the most plausible is the following. 
 
 When the distinction of patriarchs and metropolitans, and 
 their suffragans, came to be established, it naturally gave rise to 
 some distinction in the presbyters and deacons of the archiepis- 
 copal churches, whether patriarchal or metropolitical, from the 
 presbyters and deacons of the ordinary, that is, of the suffragan 
 bishops. The dignity of an archiepiscopal see, as it raised its 
 bishop above the other bishops of the province, would readily 
 be conceived to confer some share of superiority, at least in ho- 
 nour and precedency, on the presbyters and deacons belonging 
 to it, above the presbyters and deacons of the subordinate bi- 
 shoprics of the province. The former were counsellors and 
 assessors to a man, who had a certain jurisdiction over those to 
 whom the latter were counsellors and assessors. In consequence 
 of this, the presbyters and deacons, which constitute what, in 
 the primitive church, was called the presbytery, or bishop's se- 
 nate, came to be denominated in some capital cities, where the 
 primates resided, (for the custom was neither universal nor con- 
 fined to Rome) cardinal presbyters and cardinal deacons, that 
 is, according to the original import of the name, chief, or prin- 
 cipal presbyters and deacons ; being accounted such when com- 
 pared with th^r com-provincials of the same order. But still 
 the more essential difference of the orders deacon, presbyter, 
 and bishop, was sacredly preserved. Thus a cardinal deacon, 
 though superior to the other provincial deacons, was held infe- 
 rior to an ordinary provincial presbyter, and a cardinal presby- 
 ter, though superior to the other provincial presbyters, was in- 
 ferior to a suffragan bishop. Accordingly, in the most noted 
 councils held at Home, we find, that the cardinal Roman priests 
 always signed under the Italian bishops. Nor did any bishop 
 then accept at Rome the office of cardinal priest, though it be 
 not uncommon now, for those who are bishops in other cities, 
 to be priests or deacons in the Roman conclave. 
 
 As gradually a number of titles, that had before been enjoyed 
 by many, were engrossed by Rome, whose supcreminence came 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 36l 
 
 in process of time to swallow up all other distinctions; as the 
 term pope, and the epithets 7nost blessed, most holy, wliich had, 
 for several centuries, been attributed to all bishops, at least to 
 all patriarchs and metropolitans, were arrogated by Rome, as 
 belonging peculiarly to her pontiff; so the title cardinal was, 
 from the like principle, assumed as belonging peculiarly to her 
 clergy. Yet it remained at Ravenna till the year 1543, when 
 it was abrogated by Paul III. Indeed, as the Roman see rose 
 in power and riches, the revenues of all belonfriiKr to it rose in 
 proportion, and the patrimony annexed to adeaconship in Rome 
 was far more considerable, than the revenue of an ordinary 
 bishopric in the provinces. And if such was the case with the 
 deacons, we may be assured, that not only no provincial bishop, 
 but very few metropolitans, were able to vie in splendour and 
 magnificence with a Roman presbyter. 
 
 Exorbitant wealth annexed to offices may be said universally 
 to produce two effects. There are singular exceptions; but 
 these cannot affect the general truth. The two effects are, ar- 
 rogance and laziness. When the priests of Rome were made 
 petty princes, one might be assured, they would be no longer 
 officiating priests. Opulence is never at a loss to find expedients 
 for devolving the burden of the incumbent service on other 
 shoulders. Another effect is arrogance. When Roman pres- 
 byters and deacons could live in greater pomp and magnificence 
 than most bishops, or even archbishops, could afford to do, they 
 would soon learn to assume a state and superiority, in other re- 
 spects unsuited to the different functions. Accordingly, we 
 find, that in the three last councils of note, to wit, Pisa, Con- 
 stance, and Trent, there were many and warm complaints on 
 the haughtiness, and even insolence of these new dignitaries, 
 who affected to be styled the princes of the church, and who 
 thought themselves well entitled to this distinction. For they 
 were both the electors and the counsellors of the sovereign pon- 
 tiff, and had got it pretty well established, that in every vacancy 
 one of their college should be chosen pontiff. It could not 
 easily, for some time, be relished, that those who, by canonical 
 rules, belonged to a lovver order, as priests and deacons, should 
 treat the greatest prelates in the church as their inferiors and 
 vassals. The honourable distinctions conferred on them by 
 
362 LECTURES ON 
 
 popes still widened the distance. They got the red hat from 
 Innocent IV. in 1244. Paul II. added the red cap and scarlet 
 housings ; and Urban VIII. in the last century, dignified them 
 with the title of eminence. 
 
 At the same time it must be observed, on the other hand, in 
 excuse for their uncommon exaltation, that when the bishop of 
 Rome, that is, the pastor of a single diocese, or, as it was still 
 more properly called at first, a single parish, a single church, 
 or congregation, was risen insensibly into the head of the church 
 universal, or, at least, the greater part of it; and when his pres- 
 bytery, that is, his small consistory of colleagues and ministers, 
 who assisted him in conducting the affairs of the parish, was, by 
 the same insensible degrees, advanced into the senate, by whose 
 assistance and consultations the affairs of the whole church were 
 to be conducted, the members must, of necessity, become men 
 of another sort of importance. This gave rise to the conse- 
 quences I have mentioned, and these again gave rise to regu- 
 lations in which (unless men's view had been to overturn the 
 fabric of the hierarchy altogether, and bring things back to their 
 primitive model) it was proper, and even necessary, to consider 
 more what the office of cardinal then was, than what it originally 
 had been when the church -of Rome was no more than the 
 church of Corinth, or any other Christian congregation. 
 
 At different periods there have been made changes, both in 
 the number of the members of this college, and in their func- 
 tions. The footing whereon it now stands is this : the conclave, 
 which is the name of the court constituted by the cardinals, 
 consists of seventy members, exclusively of the pope their head. 
 Of these there are six bishops ; for though this could not have 
 been from the beginning, or rather from the time that the dis- 
 tinction between bishop and presbyter was first settled; for then 
 no more than one bishop was allowed to one church, it was not 
 unreasonable, to have also some of this order in the number, 
 when it was no longer the presbytery of a single church, but 
 the privy council of the monarch for the management of the 
 whole. There are fifty priests, and fourteen deacons. They 
 are, on occasion of vacancy by death, nominated by the pope, 
 and may be of any country whatever. That they should be, as 
 much as possible, taken from the different countries of Chris- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 363 
 
 tcndom, or rather, the different Roman Catholic countries, since 
 they have a share in the government of the whole Roman Ca- 
 tholic church, is entirely suitable, and is now in a manner esta- 
 blished by custom. 
 
 But the very great alterations made in this college, or society, 
 are a demonstration of the prodigious change that arose in the 
 nature and destination of the office. The bishop of Rome, for 
 several ages after the time of Constantino, was elected, as most 
 others were, by the presbytery, that is, the officiating clergy 
 within the bishop's cure, and by the people of Rome, which, 
 with the concurrence of the com-provincial bishops, and the 
 emperor's ratification, were always sufficient for settling their 
 prcesyl, or president, as he was frequently denominated. In- 
 deed, for an office of such immense wealth and eminence, as it 
 quickly rose to, after the establishment of Christianity, the elec- 
 tion continued too long in such improper hands. The conse- 
 quence was, that for some centuries the choice of a bishop was 
 almost as necessarily attended with a civil war in Rome, as that 
 of a king was in Poland. The election is now in none of the 
 societies it was in forraely. The officiating priests, who serve 
 the several cures in Rome, with their subordinate ministers or 
 deacons, have no concern in it. As little has any temporal mo- 
 narch, the bishops of the provinces, or the Roman people. And 
 though the conclave may be said to have sprung out of the pres- 
 bytery, yet, by a thousand successive alterations, they are at 
 length so completely changed, that, except the election of the 
 pope, there is not one office they have in common; and even 
 this, when examined critically, is no otherwise the same but in 
 name. The ancient presbytery's concern was only in giving a 
 pastor to the Romans, the modern conclave's concern is in giving 
 a sovereign to the church. 
 
 I need not mention the expedients that have been devised-, 
 by pluralities, bishoprics in commendam, and the like, for in- 
 creasing the splendour and luxury of those princes of the 
 church, and electors of its monarch. In the time of a vacancy 
 in the papal chair, the practice is now, that all the cardinals in 
 Rome are shut up together, in a place, called, from this usage, 
 the conclave, where they are to remain, (there being all neces- 
 sary accommodation for them) till they elect a pontiff. Cardi- 
 
364 LECTURES ON 
 
 nals, who arrive before the election is over, are enclosed with 
 the rest. They give their votes by ballot. And if, upon scru- 
 tiny, none of the candidates has two thirds of the votes, the 
 balloting must, after a stated interval, be repeated. And this 
 continues to be reiterated, if they should remain shut up for 
 years, always till one of them attains the superiority I have 
 mentioned. 
 
 It may not be amiss to subjoin here, the description of the 
 pope's consecration, given by cardinal Rasponi, in his book con- 
 cerning the church of the Lateran, which is also related by fa- 
 ther Bonanni, in his medallic history of the popes, and by Len- 
 fant, in his history of the council of Constance. " Before the 
 '' usage of the conclave was introduced by Gregory the tenth," 
 says cardinal Rasponi, " the cardinals, three days after the ob- 
 " sequies of the former pope, convened in the Lateran church, 
 " where, after the invocation of the Koly Spirit, and the cele- 
 **• bration of mass, they proceed to the election of a pope. The 
 " election being made, the first cardinal deacon invested the 
 *' pope elect in his pontifical habits, and announced the name 
 ** which he chose to take :" for it has been the custom now, for 
 several centuries, that the pope should assume a new name on 
 being elected. " Afterwards, two cardinals, the most eminent 
 '' in dignity, one on his right hand, the other on his left, con- 
 '' ducted him to the altar, where he prostrated himself in ado- 
 *' ration of God, whilst they sang the Te Deum. After the 
 ** Te Deum, the cardinals seated tlie pope in a marble chair, 
 " which was behind the altar, under a sort of dome, or vault, 
 " where the pope, being set, admitted the cardinals, the bishops, 
 " and some others, to kiss his feet, and to receive the kus of 
 ^' peace. Then the pope rising, the cardinals conducted him 
 " through the portico to another chair, bored like what is called 
 " in French, selle percee. This chair was thence very proper- 
 " ly named stercoraria, the stercorar3\ It was formerly placed 
 *' before the portico of the patriarchal basilic, and is now to be 
 " seen in the cloister of that basilic. The use of these chairs, 
 " however, was afterwards abolished by Leo X., probably for 
 " this, amongst other reasons, because the perforated chair was 
 "^ become connected with the fabulous story of the female pope. 
 " That, however, is not a protestant fable, as some persons ig- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 365 
 
 " norantly pretend, for it was current long before the days of 
 *' Luther. But the continuance of the use of that chair pre- 
 " served the memory of the story, and might appear to tlie 
 '* credulous an evidence of its truth. Whilst the pope sat on 
 " the stercorary, the choir sang these words of scripture: Sus- 
 '' citat de pulvere egenum, et de stercore erigit pauperem, ut 
 " sedeat cum principibus, et solium glorias teneat. Psalm cxiii. 
 " 7. The last clause is not in the Psalm. He raiseth the poor 
 " out of the dust, and lifteth the needy off the dunghill, that he 
 " may set him with the princes of his people, and that he may 
 " possess the throne of Glory. The intention of this ceremony, 
 " it was said, was to insinuate to the pope the need there is of 
 " the virtue of humility, which ought to be the first step of his 
 " greatness. After remaining some time in this chair, the pope 
 " received from the hands of the chamberlain three deniers, 
 *' which he threw to the people, pronouncing these words : Sil- 
 " ver and gold I have none for my pleasure, but what I have I 
 " give you. Afterwards, the prior of the Lateran basilic, and 
 *' one of the cardinals, or one of the canons of that basilic, took 
 " the pope between them, and whilst they walked in the porti- 
 " CO, shouts of acclamation were raised near the basilic, and 
 *' the election was declared, with the name which the pope had 
 " taken. In this manner they conducted the pope to the basi- 
 " lie of St. Sylvester, where, being placed before this basilic in 
 *' a chair of porphyry, the prior of the basilic put into his hands 
 " a ferula, in sign of correction and government, and the keys, 
 ^' to denote the power which God gave to St. Peter, Prince of 
 *' the apostles, of opening and shutting, of binding and loosing, 
 *' and which passes (according to our historian) successively to 
 '* all the Roman pontiffs. Thence the pope, carrying the feru- 
 '* la, and the keys, went to place himself in another chair, re- 
 " sembUng the former ; and after remaining there some time, 
 '' restored the ferula and the keys to the prior, who girt him 
 " with a girdle of red silk, giving liim a purse of the same co- 
 " lour and stuff, wherein there were twelve precious stones, and 
 " a small bit of musk. Onuphrius, in his treatise on the basi- 
 " lie of the Lateran, says, that it was the prior of this basilic 
 " who gave these things to the pope. His sitting in the two 
 *' chairs, denoted the primacy which St. Peter conferred on 
 
.366 LECTURES ON 
 
 " him, and the power of preachhig the gospel conferred by St. 
 " Paul. The girdle signified continence and chastity; the 
 " purse denoted the treasure, out of which the poor were to be 
 " nourished ; the twelve precious stones represented the power 
 " of the twelve apostles, which resides totally in the pontiff; 
 '' in fine, the rausk denoted the fragrancy of good works, ac- 
 " cording to that saying. We are to God a sweet savour of 
 " Christ. In this chair the pope elect admitted the ministers 
 " of the palace to kiss his feet, and to receive the kiss of peace. 
 *' There, too, several pieces of silver were delivered to him by 
 " the chamberlain, to the value of ten pence. These he threw 
 " to the people at three different times, pronouncing these 
 " words. He hath scattered ; he hath given to the poor ; his 
 " righteousness remaineth for ever. All this being done, the 
 " pope elect went next Sunday, attended by all the orders of 
 *' the sacred palace, and the principal people of the city, to the 
 " basilic of the Vatican, and there, before the confession of St. 
 " Peter, he was solemnly consecrated by the bishop of Ostia, 
 *' to whom this office specially belongs. After this function, 
 " the archdeacon and the second deacon gave the pall to the 
 " pope, the archdeacon pronouncing these words. Receive the 
 " pall^ which is the plenitude of the pontifical office, to the ho- 
 " nour of Almighty God, of the most happy virgin his mother, 
 " of the blessed apostles St. Peter and St. Paul, and of the holy 
 " Roman church.'^ 
 
 After this description, cardinal Rasponi adds these words : — 
 " This is what was done when the pontiff was announced or 
 " proclaimed in the church of the Lateran ; but when the elec- 
 " tion was made in the Vatican, the pope, immediately after 
 " being conducted to the altar by two cardinals, or after hav- 
 " ing performed his adoration, and offered a secret prayer, 
 " kneeling, was placed in a chair behind the altar, where he 
 *' admitted the cardinal bishops, and the others, during the 
 *' singing of the Te Deum, to kiss his feet, and to receive the 
 '' kiss of peace. The following Sunday, they assembled in the 
 *' same church, and the pope, crowned according to the custom 
 '^ of his ancestors, went to the Lateran palace; but before en- 
 '' tering it, he seated himself in the stercorary, where, sitting 
 *' down thrice, according to custom, he was introduced by the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 567 
 
 '* cardinals into the basilic, distributing money to the populace. 
 '' There he ascended a throne behind the altar, where he ad- 
 *' mitted the canons of the basilic to kiss his feet, and to receive 
 " the kiss of peace : which being done, he went to place him- 
 " self in the chairs that were before the oratory of St. Sylves- 
 " ter, where all was performed that has been recited above. 
 *' But if it happened that the pope was creaicd out of Rome, 
 " all the clergy, when he made his entry into that city, and 
 " before entering the gate of the Lateran, went to meet him 
 " without the gate, in pontifical habits, with the standard of 
 *' the cross and censers ; and, entering thus into the Lateran 
 " church, they observed, though in an order somewhat differ- 
 " ent, all the ceremonies mentioned above. And if the pope, 
 " coming to Rome after his consecration, went to the church 
 '' of St. Peter, the same rites were used there as in the Late- 
 " ran church, except only that he did not receive the canons of 
 *' St. Peter to kiss his feet in the portico, and that he did not 
 " sit down on the stercorary, which is not in that church. For 
 " this reason, the next day after mass, he went, without the 
 " tiara, to the Lateran palace, and before entering the basilic, 
 " he placed himself on the stercorary, with the accustomed 
 " ceremonies." 
 
 These ceremonies, it must be owned, appear to us very silly, 
 and some of them absolutely ridiculous. But ye may depend 
 on it, that there is neither exaggeration nor misrepresentation 
 in the account above given. It is not given by an enemy to 
 that profession, or by a stranger to the customs used on such 
 occasions, who could relate them only from hearsay. It is a 
 relation given by a friend, a cardinal too, one who had probably 
 witnessed them oftener than once, and who had himself a prin- 
 cipal part to act on those occasions. The ceremonies of conse- 
 cration as bishop, in case the pope elect had, previously to his 
 election, been only in priest's or deacon's orders, have not been 
 related by the cardinal, as not differing materially from those 
 used in the ordination of bishops, which are to be found in the 
 Roman pontifical. There was, besides, a ceremony of corona- 
 tion used in the instalment of the popes, which seems not to 
 have been introduced earlier than the thirteenth century ; and 
 it was in the following century, the fourteenth, that the triple 
 
3G8 LECTURES ON 
 
 crown vvas devised. Benedict the twelfth seems to have been 
 the first pope that wore it. The reasons which the canonists 
 give for the use of the triple crown are so diverse, and so fan- 
 tastic, that it is not worth while to report them. 
 
 The rites employed in coronation I shall give you some no- 
 tion of, from the account given by Lenfant, in his history of 
 the council of Co JStance, of the coronation of Martin the -fifth, 
 created pope in a peculiar manner, agreed on by that council, 
 
 n the room of John the twenty-third, whom they had deposed. 
 
 ' There was erected in the court of the palace," says our 
 historian, " a grand theatre, which could contain about a hun- 
 
 ' dred persons. Close to the wall was a very high throne, 
 
 ' above which there was a canopy of cloth of gold, the seat 
 
 * destined for his holiness. On the right hand, and on the 
 ' left, were ranged several other seats, a little lower, but mag- 
 ' nificent, for the princes and the prelates to sit on. At eight 
 ' o'clock in the morning, the two patriarchs, (for since the time 
 ' of the crusades, they had got titular Latin patriarchs in the 
 
 eastern patriarchal sees subdued by the Mahometans) the 
 twenty-two cardinals, (for there were no more then present) 
 ' the archbishops, the bishops, the mitred abbots, entered the 
 court of the palace, on horseback, in pontifical habits. The 
 emperor, and the other princes, followed on foot. When all 
 the people were assembled, the pope mounted the theatre, 
 preceded by the clergy, carrying the cross and waxen tapers. 
 On the forepart of the theatre there was an excellent choir of 
 
 * music, which sang and played on all sorts of instruments. 
 ' The pope had on his head a superb tiara, seeded with gold 
 ' crowns, with a golden cross on the top. At his right hand, 
 ' a little behind, were cardinal Viviers, and a patriarch ; at his 
 ' left, cardinal Brancas, with anotlier patriarch. Then march- 
 •^ ed the other cardinals, and the grand master of Rhodes, who 
 ' were all received by the emperor, the electors, and the 
 ' princes. The pope being placed on the throne, the patriarch 
 ' of Antioch took his tiara, or crown, off his head, and kneeled 
 ' before him, holding his crown in his hand: Near him other 
 ' cardinals kneeled also; one of whom carried some tow at the 
 ' end of a stick, another a cross, and the rest wax tapers. At 
 
 * the pope's right hand sat cardinal de Brancas, with eight 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 3(39 
 
 " Other cardinals; at his left, the grand master of Rhodes, with 
 " eight cardinals. Next them, on the right, the emperor, on 
 " the left, the elector of Brandenburg, both attended by arch- 
 " bishops. Next them, electors, princes, bishops, and other 
 " prelates, as many as the place could contain. The rest sat 
 '' on the stairs, which had been made very wide for the pur- 
 " pose. There was, beside these, in the court, a great number 
 " of archbishops, bishops, and other great lords, both ecclesias- 
 " tic and secular, who surrounded the theatre on horseback. 
 *' There was, likewise, an immense crowd of people, wlio could 
 " not get into the court. When the music had ceased, one of 
 " the cardinals, who was kneeling before the pope, and who 
 " carried the tow, lighted it, and twice said aloud, addressing 
 " himself to the pope, Sancte patei\ sic transit gloria mwidi, 
 *' After which, three cardinals, who had been selected for put- 
 ** ting the crown on the pope's head, standing up with the 
 " grand master of Rhodes, and taking the crown from th« 
 " hands of the pope, they all four kneeled on the highest step 
 " of the throne, whence, after saying a prayer, they arose, and 
 " put the crown on the pope's head, after which, resuming their 
 " former places, they heard the Te Deiim, and the music. 
 " When they left the place, the pope mounted his white horse, 
 " which was preceded by three led horses, that were also white, 
 *^ and had red caparisons. The inferior clergy walked before, 
 " followed by the abbots, bishops, archbishops, and cardinals, 
 " on horseback. The emperor, on foot, held the reins of the 
 " pope's bridle on the right, walking in the dirt, (which is par- 
 " ticularly observed by the historian) whilst the elector of Bran- 
 " denburg did the same on the left. Thus the pope was car- 
 " ried in procession from the cathedral to the Augustin monas- 
 " tery, and thence re-conducted to the episcopal palace. Here 
 " ended the ceremony.'* And here shall end our account of 
 the rise and establishment of papal dominion. 
 
 A a 
 
370 LECTURES 0>f 
 
 LECTURE XXIII. 
 
 JLXAVING now given you some account of the rise and esta- 
 blishment of the Romish hierarchy, it is but reasonable, that 
 before I dismiss the subject of ecclesiastic history, I should 
 consider the causes which have contributed to the declension of 
 that wonderful empire. This will lead me to remark a little on 
 the latent springs, the progress, and the effects of the reforma- 
 tion. 
 
 In all governments, of what kind soever, it may be justly 
 said, that the dominion of the few over the many is primarily 
 founded in opinion. The natural strength among beings of the 
 same order, which is equal in the individuals, or nearly so, lies 
 always in the multitude. But the opinion both of right, and of 
 occupancy, or secur? possession, can and does universally invest 
 the smaller with the direction or government of the greater 
 number. By the opinion of right, we are restrained, through 
 justice, or a sense of duty, from divesting a man of what we 
 think him entitled to enjoy. By the opinion of occupancy, we 
 are restrained, through prudence, or a sense of danger, from 
 disturbing a man in the possession of what we think he has a 
 firm hold of. Either opinion, when strong, is generally suffi- 
 cient to ensure peace ; but they operate most powerfully in con- 
 junction. When the two opinions are disjoined, that is, when 
 unfortunately, under any government, it is the general opinion, 
 that the right is in one, and the occupancy in another, there 
 frequently ensue insurrections and intestine broils. 
 
 The above remarks hold equally with regard to property, 
 which is in effect a species of power. Now these opinions, 
 which, from the influence of custom, and insensible imitation, 
 men have a natural tendency to form, prove, in all ordinary 
 cases, a sufficient security to the few rich and great, in the en- 
 joyment of all their envied advantages, against the far superior 
 force, if it were combined, of the many poor and small. In- 
 deed, it is opinion that prevents the combination, and makes 
 
ECCLEJSIASTICAL HISTORY. 3/1 
 
 tliat a master may sleep securely amid fifty servants and depen- 
 dents, each of whom, perhaps, taken singly, is, both in bodily 
 strength, and in mental abilities, an overmatch for him. It is 
 this which vests a single person with the command of an army, 
 who, in contradiction to their own will, give implicit obedience 
 to his; notwithstanding that they carry in their hands what 
 would prove the instruments of working their own pleasure, 
 and his destruction. It will not be doubted, that it is in the 
 same way, by means of opinion, that ecclesiastical power has a 
 hold of the minds of men. 
 
 There is, however, this remarkable difference in the two sorts 
 of power, that knowledge and civilization, unless accompanied 
 with profligacy of manners, add strength to those opinions on 
 which civil authority rests, at the same time that they weaken 
 those opinions which serve as a basis to a spiritual despotism, or 
 a hierarchy like the Romish. The more a people becomes 
 civilized, the more their notions of justice and property, pre- 
 scription and peaceable possession, become steady; the more 
 they see the necessity of maintaining these inviolate, and the 
 ruinous consequences of infringing them. The love of peace 
 and science, the encouragement of industry and arts, the desire 
 of public good and order, the abhorrence of crimes, confusion, 
 and blood, all co-operate to make those opinions take deep root. 
 Nothing seems to endanger them so much as tyranny and op- 
 pression in the rulers. These tending directly to undermine 
 the opinion of right, (for no man is conceived to have aright to 
 tyrannize over his fellows) leave only in the minds of the peo- 
 ple, in favour of their superiors, the opinion of occupancy. 
 Thus one of the great pillars, by which magistracy is support- 
 ed, the sense of duty, is removed, and the whole weight is left 
 upon the other, the sense of danger. T'irtue, in that case, we 
 consider either as out of the question, or as in opposition to the 
 powers that be, and consult ovXy prudence. Now wherever the 
 present evils of oppression, wherein a people is involved, appear 
 intolerable, and greater than any, or even as great as any which 
 they dread from opposition, the other support, prudence, is re- 
 moved also ; and men will both think themselves entitled to re- 
 volt, and, after balancing the chances on both sides, be disposed 
 to hazard every thing. 
 
 A a2 
 
372 LECTURES ON 
 
 On the other hand, the opinions, which are the great bul- 
 warks of spiritual tyranny, are founded in ignorance and super- 
 stition, which are always accompanied with great credulity. Of 
 these, nothing can be so subversive as knowledge and im- 
 provement. Virtue, and even piety itself, when its exalted and 
 liberal spirit begins to be understood, become hostile to 
 opinions which, under the sacred name and garb of reUgion, 
 prove the bane of every virtue, and indeed of every valuable 
 quality in human nature, as well as the nurse of folly and ma- 
 levolence. Luxury and vice are often pernicious to the best 
 constituted civil governments, because whilst, on one hand, 
 they strengthen and inflame the passions, the great incentives 
 to criminal attempts, they, on the other hand, loosen and un- 
 dermine our regards to equity and right. But no kind of vice 
 in the people, if accompanied with ignorance, is an enemy, 
 every kind is, on the contrary, a friend to the reign of supersti- 
 tion. Consciousness of profligacy will at times excite terror 
 even in the most obdurate. Superstition, especially when 
 formed into a politic system, like the Romish, is never deficient 
 in expedients for conjuring down that terror, and rendering it 
 subservient to the invariable aim, priestly dominion. It re- 
 quires but little knowledge in the history of Christendom, to 
 enable us to discover, that many of those persons, both princes 
 and others, most highly celebrated by ecclesiastics as the great 
 benefactors of the church, were the most worthless of the age 
 wherein they lived, the most tyrannical, the most rapacious, the 
 most profligate, men who have concluded a life stained with the 
 blackest crimes, by beggaring their offspring, and devoting all 
 that they had, by way of atoning for their sins, to one of those 
 seminaries of sloth, hypocrisy, and unnatural lusts, commonly 
 called convents ; or by enhancing, in some other way, the power 
 and wealth of churchmen. Few contributed more to the erec- 
 tion and establishment of the hierarchy than the emperor 
 Phocas ; and a greater monster of cruelty and injustice never 
 disgraced the human form. 
 
 That the great enemy which superstition has to overcome is 
 knowledge, was early perceived by those, who found their ac- 
 count in supporting her throne. Nor were they slack in taking 
 measures for stifling this dangerous foe. Among the chief of 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. S^^S 
 
 these measures were the following : — 1st, They judged it proper 
 to confine to a few those divine illuminations which they could not 
 totally suppress, and which they could not deny had originally 
 been given for the benefit of all. 2dly, When that formidable 
 thing, knowledge, in spite of all their efforts, was making progress, 
 they, in order to give it a timely check, affixed a stigma on all 
 the books which tended to expose their artifices, and open the 
 eyes of mankind. 3dly, For the more effectual prevention of this 
 danger, through the terror of example, persecution was employed, 
 which has, in their hands, been digested into an art, and con- 
 ducted with a cool, determinate, systematic cruelty, that defies 
 alike all the principles of justice and humanity; and of which, 
 among Jews, Mahometans, or Pagans, the world has hitherto 
 furnished us with nothing that deserves to be compared. 
 
 In what regards the first method, we comprehend under it 
 the means that have been used to render the scriptures inacces- 
 sible to the common people, by discouraging, as much as pos^ 
 sible, translations into the vulgar tongue ; and, by confining 
 the whole public service to a dead language, thereby rendering 
 it to the congregation no better than insignificant mummery. 
 Nothing is more evident from the scriptures themselves, than 
 that they were written for the benefit of all. Accordingly, ell 
 are commanded to read and study them. And indeed, soon 
 after the different books came abroad, one of the first effects of 
 the pious zeal, with which the primitive Christians were inspired 
 was, in every country, to get those inestimable instructions, as 
 soon as possible, accurately translated into the language of the 
 country. It is astonishing to observe how early this was effect- 
 ed in most of the languages then spoken. Indeed, there was 
 nothing in those purer times which could induce any one, who 
 bore the Christian name, to desire either to conceal, or to dis- 
 guise, the truth. To propagate it in its native purity, and 
 thus diffuse to others the benefit of that light which they them- 
 selves enjoyed, was the great ambition, and constant aim, of all 
 the genuine disciples of the Lord Jesus. 
 
 As no tongue (the Greek excepted, which is the original of 
 the New Testament) was of so great extent as Latin, — into 
 this a translation seems very early to have been made. It was 
 commonly distinguished by the name Italic, probably because 
 
374 LECTURES ON' 
 
 undertaken for the use of the Christians in Italy. It is not 
 known who was the author. This is also the case of most of the 
 old translations. About three centuries after, a new version 
 into Latin was undertaken by Jerom. Our present vulgate 
 consists partly of each, but mostly of the latter. No version 
 whatever could, in early times, be more necessary than one into 
 Latin. This was not the language of Italy only; it had ob- 
 tained very generally in all the neighbouring countries, which 
 had long remained in subjection to Rome, and in which Roman 
 colonies had been planted. But in the other western churches, 
 where Latin was not spoken by the people, the scriptures were 
 translated into the vernacular idiom of the different nations, 
 soon after their embracing the Christian doctrine. There 
 were, accordingly, Gothic, Frankish, or old German, Anglo- 
 Saxon, and Sclavonic versions. In like manner, in the east, 
 they had very early Syriac, Armenian, Arabic, Persic, Ethiopic, 
 and Coptic. The same may be said of the divine offices, or 
 prayers and hymns, used in public in their churches. It is 
 pretty evident, that for some centuries these were, in all the 
 early converted countries, performed in the language of the 
 people. But in the first ages there were no written liturgies. 
 
 Indeed, nothing can be more repugnant to common sense 
 than the contrary practice. For if the people have any concern 
 in those offices, if their joining in the service be of any conse- 
 quence, it is necessary they should understand what is done : in 
 an unknown tongue, the praises of God, and the praises of 
 Baal, are the same to them. In like manner, in regard to the 
 reading of the scriptures, if the edification of the people be at 
 all concerned, still more if it be the ultimate end, how can it be 
 promoted by the barbarous sounds of a foreign or dead lan- 
 guage? How can instructions, covered by such an impenetrable 
 veil, convey knowledge or comfort, produce faith, or secure 
 obedience? The apostle Paul, (1 Cor. xiv.) has been so full 
 and explicit on this head, that it is impossible for all the so- 
 phistry, that has been wasted on that passage, to disguise his 
 meaning from any intelligent and ingenuous mind. 
 
 " The church," says the Romanist, " by this avcrsencss to 
 " change so much as tlie external garb, the language of the 
 " usages introduced soon after the forming of a Christian so- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 375 
 
 ** ciety at Rome, demonstrates her constancy, and inviolable 
 " regard, to antiquity, and consequently ought to inspire us 
 " with a greater confidence in the genuineness and identity of 
 " her doctrine." But so far in fact is this from being an evi- 
 dence of the constancy of that church, in point of doctrine, that 
 it is no evidence of her constancy even in point of ceremonies. 
 It is the dress, the language only, in which she has been con- 
 stant, the ceremonies themselves have undergone great altera- 
 tions, and received immense additions, (as those versed in 
 church history well know) in order to accommodate them to the 
 corruptions in doctrine, which, from time to time, have been 
 adopted. Nor has it been the most inconsiderable motive for 
 preserving the use of a dead language, that the whole service 
 might be more completely in the power of the priesthood, who 
 could thereby, with the greater facility, and without alarming 
 the people, make such alterations in their liturgy, as should, in 
 their ghostly wisdom, be judged proper. 
 
 It may at first appear a paradox, but on reflection is manifest, 
 that this mark of their constancy, in what regards the dead let- 
 ter of the sacred ceremonies, is the strongest evidence of their 
 mutability, nay, actual change, in what concerns the vitals of re- 
 ligion. Consider the reason why Latin was first employed in 
 the Italian churches. It was not the original lanjTuase of any 
 part of sacred writ. They had the New Testament in the ori- 
 ginal Greek. There were also forms of public prayer, or litur- 
 gies, in that language, before any appeared in Latin. What 
 then could induce them to usher into their churches a fallible 
 translation of the scriptures, in preference to the original, ac- 
 knowledged to have been written by men divinely inspired, and 
 consequently infallible? I ask this the rather, because the Ro- 
 manist admits, that the original was written by inspiration. He 
 agrees with us, also, in not affirming the same thing of any ver- 
 sion whatever. For, though the council of Trent has pronoun- 
 ced the Latin vulgate to be authentic, it has not declared it per- 
 fect, or affirmed that the translator was inspired. By the 
 authenticity, therefore, no more is meant, in the opinion of 
 their most learned doctors, than that it is a good translation, and 
 may be used, by those who understand Latin, safely and profit- 
 ably. But that this is not considered by themselves as signify- 
 
376 LECTURES ON 
 
 ing that it is totally exempt from error, is manifest from this, 
 that the critics of that communion use as much freedom in 
 pointing out and correcting its errors, as the learned of this 
 island do, in regard to the common English version. I return 
 to my question, therefore, and ask the Italians, of the present 
 age, Why did their forefathers, in the early ages, prefer a La- 
 tin version ; a performance executed indeed by pious, but falli- 
 ble, men, with the aid of human learning, to the Greek origi- 
 nal, which they believed to contain the unerring dictates of the 
 Holy Ghost? Why was not the latter read in their churches 
 in preference to the former? The answer which they would re- 
 turn, or which at least their progenitors would have returned, 
 is plain and satisfactory. " We do not dispute that the Greek 
 " was in itself preferable; but to our people it was useless, be- 
 *' cause not understood. Latin was their mother tongue. 
 " Much, therefore, of the mind of the Spirit they might learn 
 *' from a good Latin version, notwithstanding its imperfections. 
 *' Nothing at all could they acquire from hearing the sounds of 
 " a language with which they were unacquainted. And better, 
 *' as the apostle says, speak but five words with understanding, 
 " that is, intelligibly, or so as to teach others, than ten thousand, 
 '' in an unknown tongue, by which nobody can be edified." 
 Nothing can be more pertinent than this answer, with which 
 Paul has furnished us; only make the application to the case in 
 hand. Latin is not now your native tongue. It is not at pre- 
 sent the language of any nation or city in the world. Your 
 people understand it no more now than they do Greek. If the 
 Romans, sixteen hundred years ago, thought it necessary to re- 
 ject the public use of an infallible original, because unintelligi- 
 ble to the hearers, and to admit in its place a fallible version, 
 because intelligible; and the Romans now refuse to reject one 
 fallible version, that is become unintelligible, for another not 
 more fallible, which may be understood by every body; can 
 there be a stronger demonstration of the total difference of sen- 
 timents, in regard to religious worship in the present Romans, 
 from the sentiments of their ancestors in those early ages? Can 
 there, consequently, be a stronger demonstration of the truth of 
 the paradox I mentioned, namely, that this mark of Roman 
 constancy, in what regards the dead letter, is the strongest evi- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 377 
 
 dence of their mutability, nay, actual change, in what concerns 
 the vitals of religion ? Their ancestors considered religion as a 
 rational service; the present Romans regard it merely as a me- 
 chanical operation. The former thought that the understand- 
 ing had a principal concern in all religious offices : the latter 
 seek only to attach the senses. With them, accordingly, the 
 exercises of public worship are degenerated into a motley kind 
 of pantomime, wherein much passes in dumb show, part is mut- 
 tered so as not to be audible, part is spoken or chaunted in a 
 strange tongue, so as not to be intelligible; and the whole is 
 made strongly to resemble the performance of magical spells 
 and incantations, to which idea, their doctrine of the opus opera- 
 turn is wonderfully harmonized. But the smallest affinity to 
 the devotions of a reasonable being to his all-wise and almighty 
 Creator, it is impossible to discover in any part of it. Well 
 may we address them, therefore, in the words of Paul to the 
 Galatians, " Oh ! infatuated people, who hath bewitched you ; 
 " having begun in the Spirit, are ye made perfect by the 
 « flesh ?" 
 
 If any thing could be more absurd than worship in an un- 
 known tongue, it would be the insult offered to the people's un- 
 derstanding, in pretending to instruct them by reading the scrip- 
 tures to them in such a tongue. The people are thus mocked 
 with the name of instruction without the thing. They are tan- 
 talized by their pastors, who give and withhold at the same time. 
 They appear to impart by pronouncing aloud what they effec- 
 tually conceal by the language. Like the ancient doctors of the 
 Jewish law, they have taken away the key of knowledge: they 
 entered not in themselves, and those that were entering they hin- 
 dered. Ah blind guides ! Unnatural fathers ! for ye affect to 
 be styled fathers, how do ye supply your children with the food 
 of their souls? When they ask bread of you, ye give them a 
 stone. They implore of you spiritual nourishment from the di- 
 vine oracles, that they may advance in the knowledge of God^ 
 in faith and purity; and ye say, or sing to them, a jargon, (for 
 the best things are jargon to him to whom they are unintelligi- 
 ble) which may make them stare, or nod, but must totally Frus- 
 trate their expectation. They starve, as it were, in the midst 
 of plenty; and arc shown their food, but not permitted to taste 
 
378 LECTURES ON 
 
 it. They seek to have their souls edified, and ye tickle their 
 ears with a song. 
 
 If witnesses were necessary to evince the contrariety of this 
 their present practice to the intention of their forefathers, as 
 well as the natural purpose of reading the scriptures in the con- 
 gregation, I would ask no witness but themselves. They still 
 retain a memorable testimony against themselves, in the form of 
 ordaining readers enjoined in the pontifical, for with them this 
 office is one of the minor orders. In the charge given to the 
 readers by the bishop at their ordination, we have these words : 
 " Studete igitur verba Dei, videlicet lectiones sacras distincte, et 
 " aperte, ad intelligentiam et sedificationem, fidelium, absque 
 " omni mendacio falsitatis proferre ; ne Veritas divinarura lec- 
 " tionum, incuria vestra, adinstructionem audientium corrumpa- 
 *' tur. Quod autem ore legitis, corde credatis, atque opere com- 
 " pleatis ; quatenus auditores vestros, verbo pariter et exeraplo 
 '' vestro, docere possitis. Ideoque, dum legitis, in alto loco ec- 
 " clesiae stetis, ut ab omnibus audiamini et videamini." In- 
 structions entirely apposite when they were first devised, for 
 then Latin was their mother tongue; but which now can serve 
 only as a standing reproach upon their practice, by setting its 
 absurdity in the most glaring point of view. For what can it 
 avail for the edification of the people, that the reader pronoun- 
 ces distinctly and openly, and stands in a conspicuous place, 
 when he pronounces nothing but unmeaning words? Is this 
 teaching them by word, verbo ? Can this be called addressing 
 the understandings of the faithful? Out of thy own mouth will 
 I judge thee, thou pageant of a teacher. 
 
 What shall we say of the power of prepossessions, when an 
 abuse, so palpable, is palliated by such a writer as father Si- 
 mon ? I can bear to hear the most absurd things advanced by 
 weak and illiberal minds. I can make great allowance for the 
 power of education over such, and am led more to pity than to 
 condemn. But it must awake real indignation, to see parts and 
 literature prostituted to the vile purpose of defending what the 
 smallest portion of common sense shows at once to be indefen- 
 sible, and giving a favourable gloss to the most flagrant abuses 
 and corruptions. Simon acknowledges, (Flist. Crit. des Ver- 
 sions du N. T. chap. 1,) tliat when Christianity was first plant- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 379 
 
 ed, it was found necessary, for the instruction of the people, to 
 translate the scriptures, especially the New Testament, into the 
 language of each country that received this doctrine; and adds, 
 that this remark must be understood as extending to the service 
 performed in the churches, which, in those early days, was every 
 where in the language of the people. The same thing, he af- 
 firms, cardinal Bona [a] had observed in his work upon litur- 
 gies. Now if the case was so, it will not be easy to account, 
 without recurring to papal usurpations, for the uniformity in 
 using Latin in all the public offices of religion, that bad been 
 introduced, and actually obtained, through all the occidental 
 churches, for ages before the reformation. Will Simon say, 
 that Latin was the languageof Britain for example, when Chris- 
 tianity was first planted among the Britons ; or, indeed, of any 
 of the northern countries of Europe ? So far from it, that, for 
 the service of those countries, there were, by his own confes- 
 sion, translations made into Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, Frankish, 
 Sclavonic, &c. Yet these versions (whatever they were former- 
 ly) are no where used at present, nor have they been used for 
 many centuries, though fragments of some of them are still to 
 be found in the libraries of the curious. 
 
 " Nothing," says Mr. Simon, " is more extravagant, than 
 '' what Pierre du Moulin has written on this subject against car- 
 *' dinal du Perron. The end, says this minister, which thepope 
 " has proposed to himself, in establishing the Latin tongue in 
 " the public service, has been, to plant amongst his conquered 
 " 7iations the badges of his empire ; as if," subjoins Simon, 
 
 [a] Bona, however, does not say so much as seems here to be attributed to 
 him by Simon. All tLat his words necessarily denote is, that the apostles, and 
 their successors, in converting the nations, taught the people, and officiated 
 every where, in the idiom of the countiy. But this does not imply, that they 
 used, for this purpose, either a ^vTitten translation of the scriptures, or any 
 written liturgy. What he says afterwards, tJiat in all the Avestem churches 
 they had no liturgy but in Latin, evidently implies the contrary. He knew 
 well, that Latin was never the language of the people, in most countries, of the 
 western empire. Even in Africa, where, for manifest reasons, that tongue 
 must have been much more generally spoken than in the northern parts of 
 Europe, he acknowledges, on Augustine's authority, that it was not understood 
 by the common people. " In Africa etiam Latinje linguse usus in sacris sem- 
 *' per viguit, licet earn populus Con iutelligeret, ut Augustiuus testis est.'* 
 L. 1. C. v. § 4. 
 
in. 
 
 380 LECTURES^ ON 
 
 ** it had been the popes by whom the Latin language had been 
 *' extended throughout all the west." Now to me there appears 
 great extravagance in this censure of Simon's, none in Pierre 
 du Moulin's remark. For if the priest of the Oratory mean, 
 by the Latin being extended throughout the west, that it was 
 become the language of the people in all the western nations, 
 nothing can be more evidently false. It was never the language 
 of Scandinavia, of the greater part of Germany and Gaul ; nor 
 was it ever the language of this island in particular. The com- 
 mon language here, at least of the southern part of the island 
 when the nation was subject to the Romans, was not Lati 
 but the ancient British, a dialect of the Celtic, which the peo- 
 ple, when driven out of the greater and better part of their own 
 country by their conquerors the Saxons, carried with them into 
 Wales; which, in confirmation of what I say, is still spoken 
 there, though, doubtless, in so many ages, considerably altered, 
 and is now called Welsh. The Anglo-Saxon, the language of 
 the invaders, succeeded it, which, after the conquest, being 
 blended with the Norman French, hath settled at last into the 
 present English. The like changes might be shown to have 
 happened in most other European countries. Nor is this hy- 
 pothesis of Simon's more contrary to fact, than it is inconsistent 
 with his own concessions. For if the Latin had been so wide- 
 ly extended in the west, as his reflection on Pierre du Moulin 
 manifestly implies, where had been the occasion for the versions 
 into Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, Prankish, Sclavonic, 8cc. of which 
 he himself has made mention. 
 
 Further; Mr. Simon's account, that men, after their language 
 had been totally vitiated by the irruptions of barbarians, and the 
 mixture of people that succeeded, still retained the practice of 
 reading the scriptures and liturgies in the language which their 
 forefathers spoke, when Christianity was first introduced among 
 them, is absolutely incompatible with the universal use of Latin 
 for so many ages in the west ; and is, consequently, the amplest 
 vindication of the remark of Du Moulin, which he had so se- 
 verely and unjustly censured. For, on this hypothesis, it would 
 not be Latin in any of the northern countries that would be 
 used in their churches; for Latin never was, in those countries, 
 the language of the people. In ^^''alcs it would be ancient 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 381 
 
 British, in England the Anglo-Saxon, in Sweden the Gothic, 
 in France and Germany the Frankish. Nor can any thing be 
 more foreign to the cause in hand, than the examples brought 
 from the different churches and sects in Asia, who still retain 
 the scriptures in their ancient native tongues. Had all these 
 churches and sects been, by any address or management, induced 
 to employ Greek, some resemblance might have been fairly 
 pleaded ; for that language, to say the least, had as great a cur- 
 rency in the east as Latin ever had in the west. Nor do I con- 
 ceive any thing a stronger evidence of an undue ascendant that 
 one church had obtained over other churches, than that she had 
 influence enough to make them either adopt at once a jargon 
 they did not understand, or, which is worse, abandon their an- 
 cient versions, not for the sake of others more intelligible, in 
 the modern language of the people, but to make way for what 
 was to them foreign, as well as unintelligible, being in the lan- 
 guage of the Romans. 
 
 I can make allowance for the prepossession, though unreasonr 
 able, that the present Armenians, Syrians, Copts, and Ethio- 
 pians, may retain, for books held venerable by their forefathers, 
 though now no longer understood. For the same reason I can 
 make allowance for the attachment of the people of Italy and its 
 dependencies to the Latin vulgate and ritual, as Latin was once 
 the language of their country. And though it arise in them 
 all from a silly prejudice, which manifestly shows, that the form 
 of religion has supplanted the power; yet I can easily, without 
 recurring to authority or foreign influence, especially in the de- 
 cline of all literature and science, account for it from the weak- 
 ness incident to human nature. But totally different is the 
 case of the northern regions, whose language Latin never was, 
 and who, by the confession of Romish critics, once had the scrip- 
 tures and sacred offices in their native tongues. Their admit- 
 ting this foreign dress in their religious service, and submitting 
 to wear the livery, and babble the dialect of Rome, is the surest 
 badge of their slavery, and of the triumph of Roman policy over 
 the combined forces of reason and religion both. That the na- 
 tural consequence of this practice would be to promote ignorance 
 and superstition among the people, it would be a mis-spending 
 of time to attempt to prove. 
 
S8S LECTURES ON 
 
 But would there not be some hazard, that those sage politi- 
 cians should overshoot the mark? Religion, the Christian reli- 
 gion in particular, has always been understood to require faith 
 in its principles ; and faith in principles require some degree of 
 knowledge or apprehension of those principles. If total ignor- 
 ance should prevail, how could men be said to believe that of 
 which they knew nothing? The schoolmen have devised an ex- 
 cellent succedaneum to supply the place of real belief, which 
 necessarily implies, that the thing believed is, in some sort, ap- 
 prehended by the understanding. This succedaneum they have 
 denominated implicit faith^ an ingenious method of reconciling 
 things incompatible, to believe every thing, and to know no- 
 thing, not so much as the terms of the propositions which we 
 believe. When the sacred lessons of the gospel were no longer 
 addressed to the understandings of the people; when, in all the 
 public service, they were put off with sound instead of sense; 
 when their eyes and ears were amused, but their minds left uu- 
 instructed; it was necessary that something should be substitut- 
 ed for faith, which always presupposes knowledge; nay, that it 
 should be something which might still be called y«'/M; for this 
 name had been of so great renown, so long standing, and so uni- 
 versal use, that it was not judged safe entirely to dispossess it. 
 Exactly such a something is implicit faith. The name is re- 
 tained, whilst nobody is incommoded with the thing. 
 
 The terms implicit faith are used in two different senses. 
 With us protestants, at least in this country, no more is com- 
 monly meant by them than the belief of a doctrine, into the 
 truth of which we have made no enquiry, on the bare authority 
 of some person or society declaring it to be true. But this al- 
 ways supposes, that one knows, or has some conception of the 
 doctrine itself. All that is denoted by the term implicit in this 
 acceptation is, that in lieu of evidence, one rests on the judg- 
 ment of him or them by whom the tenet is affirmed. No ig- 
 norance is implied but of the proofs. But the implicit faith re- 
 commended by the schoolmen is quite another thing, and is 
 constituted thus; if you believe that all the religious principles, 
 whatever they be, which are believed by such particular persons, 
 are true; those persons who hold the principles, are explicit be- 
 lievers, you are an implicit believer of all their principles. Nor 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 383 
 
 is your belief tlie less efficacious, because you arc iguorant of 
 the principles themselves. Perhaps you have never heartl them 
 mentioned, or have never enquired about them. For it does 
 not hold here as in the faith whereof the apostle speaks. How 
 shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? In the 
 presence of those profound doctors the schoolmen, the apostle 
 would be found to be no other than an arrant novice. The 
 transcendent excellency of implicit faith consists in this, that 
 you have it then in the highest perfection, when, in regard to 
 its object, you know nothing, and have even heard nothing at 
 all. In brief, it is neither more nor less, than being a believer 
 by proxy. Scripture saith, " Ye are saved through faith," 
 and " without faith it is impossible to please God." Now im- 
 plicit faith is a curious device for pleasing God, and being 
 saved by the faith of others. It is, in fact, imputative faith, at 
 least as extraordinary as the imputative justice, which brought 
 so much obloquy on some of the reformers. It is as if I should 
 call one an implicit mathematician, who knows not a tittle of 
 mathematics, not even the definitions and axioms, but is con- 
 vinced of the knowledge of some other person who is really, or 
 whom he supposes to be, an adept in that science. 
 
 " To believe implicitly," says Bona, " is to believe in ge- 
 '* neral universally all that holy mother church beheves ; so as 
 " to dissent from her in nothing, nor disbelieve any of her arti- 
 *' cles. And though it be convenient (licet opportunum sit) 
 '' for all, not only to believe all the articles implicitly, but even 
 " some of them, since the coming of Christ, explicitly; yet it is 
 " not necessary (non tamen est necessarium) for all, especially 
 " the common people, to believe them all explicitly. It is pro- 
 " per rather for those, who assume the office of teaching and 
 " preaching, as they have the cure of souls." Further, to show 
 the wonderful virtues and efficacy of such a faith, another of the 
 doctors, Gabriel Byel, maintains, that " if he who implicitly 
 *' believes the church, should think, misled by natural reason, 
 " that the Father is greater than the Son, and existed before 
 " him, or that the three persons are things locally distant from 
 " one another, or the like, he is not a heretic, nor sins, pro- 
 " vided he do not defend his error pertinaciously. For he be- 
 *^ lieves what he does believe, because he thinks that the church 
 
384 LECTURES ON 
 
 ** believes so, subjecting his opinion to the faith of the church. 
 " For though his opinion be erroneous, his opinion is not his 
 " faith, nay, his faith, in contradiction to his opinions, is the 
 ** faith of the church. What is still more, this implicit faith 
 " not only defends from heresy and sin, but even constitutes 
 " merit in heterodoxy itself, and preserves in that merit one 
 *' who forms a most heterodox opinion, because he thinks the 
 " church believes so." Thus far Byel. It is then of no con- 
 sequence what a man's explicit faith be ; he may be an Arian, 
 a Socinian, an Anthropomorphite, a Polytheist, in short, any 
 thing; he cannot err, whilst he has an implicit faith in the 
 church. This they give as their explanation of that article of 
 the creed, " I believe in the holy catholic church ;" though, 
 agreeably to this interpretation, there should have been no other 
 article in the creed. This point alone supersedes every other, 
 and is the quintessence of all. Implicit faith has been some- 
 times ludicrously styled fides carbonaria, from the noted story 
 of one who, examining an ignorant collier on his religious prin- 
 ciples, asked him what it was that he believed. He answered, 
 " I believe what the church believes." The other rejoined, 
 '' What then does the church believe ?" He replied readily, 
 " The church believes what I believe." The other desirous, 
 if possible, to bring him to particulars, once more resumes his 
 inquiry : " Tell me then, I pray you, what it is which you and 
 *' the church both believe." The only answer the collier 
 could give was, " Why truly, Sir, the church and I both — be- 
 " lieve the same thing." This is implicit faith in perfection, 
 and in the estimation of some celebrated doctors, the sum of 
 necessary and saving knowledge in a Christian. 
 
 It is curious to consider the inferences, which they themselves 
 deduce from this wonderful doctrine. A person, on first hear- 
 ing them, would take them for the absurd consequences object- 
 ed by an adversary, with a view to expose the notion of implicit 
 faith as absolutely nonsensical. But it is quite otherwise; they 
 are deductions made by friends, who are very serious in sup- 
 porting them. One of these is, that a man may believe two 
 propositions perfectly contradictory at the same time, one expli- 
 citly, the other implicitly. Another is, that in such a case, the 
 implicit, (which, to a common understanding, appears to include 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. SS5 
 
 no belief at all,) not the explicit, is to be accounted his reli- 
 gious faith. *' It may be," says Gabriel, " that one may believe 
 " implicitly a certain truth, and explicitly believe the contrary." 
 Put the case that a man believes, that whatever the church be- 
 lieves is true ; at the same time disbelieving this proposition, 
 Abraham had more wives than one^ and believing the contrary, 
 as thinking it the belief of the church ; such a man implicitly 
 believes this proposition, Abraham had two wives, because the 
 church believes so, and explicitly he disbelieves it. Now the 
 great virtue of implicit faith in the church lies here, that it saves 
 a man from all possible danger, in consequence of any explicit 
 erroneous opinions, and renders, it, indeed, unnecessary in him 
 to be solicitous to know whether his opinions be right or wrong, 
 orthodox or heterodox. No wonder, then, that the utility of 
 this simple principle is so highly celebrated by the schoolmen. 
 ** Haec fides implicita, qua fidelis credit quicquid ecclesia credit,' 
 *' utilissima est fideli. Nam si fuerit in corde, defendit ab 
 ** omni haeretica pravitate, ut dicit Occam in tractata de sacra- 
 ** mentis, et post eum Gerson. Non enim aliquatenus haereti- 
 *' cari valet, qui corde credit quicquid ecclesia catholica credity 
 ** id est, qui credit illam veritatem, quicquid ecclesia credit est 
 ** verum" And, indeed, its efficacy must be the same, as the 
 reason is the same, in protecting from the consequences of every 
 error, even in the most fundamental points, as in protecting 
 from what might ensue on that trifling error, that Abraham had 
 but one wife. 
 
 We must at least confess not only the consistency, but even; 
 the humanity of the Romish system, in this amazing method of 
 simplifying all the necessary knowledge and faith of a Christian. 
 For surely, when the means of knowledge were, in effect, put 
 out of the reach of the people; when in public they were tan- 
 talized with the mere parade of teaching, by having instructions 
 chaunted to them in an unknown tongue ; when it was not the 
 understanding, but the senses solely, which were employed in 
 religious offices ; when every thing rational and edifying was 
 excluded from the service ; it would have been unconscionable, 
 worse than even the tyranny of Egyptian taskmasters, to require 
 of the people any thing like real faith, which always presupposes 
 some information given, and some knowledge acquired, of the 
 
 Bb 
 
S86 LECTURES ON 
 
 subject. A merely nominal faith (and such entirely is this 
 scholastic fiction of implicit faith) suited much better a merely 
 mechanical service. In this manner the knowledge of God, 
 which is declared in scripture to be more valuable than burnt 
 offerings, and faith in him, and in the doctrine of revelation, 
 are superseded, to make room for an unbounded submission to, 
 and confidence in men, to wit, those ghostly instructors, whom 
 the populace must invariably regard as the mouth of the uner- 
 ring church. 
 
 I would not, however, be understood as signifying by what 
 has been now advanced on the subject of implicit faith, that 
 io this point all Romanists are perfectly agreed. What I 
 have adduced is supported by great names among their doctors, 
 and mostly quoted in their words. Nor was the doctrine, 
 though every where publicly taught in their schools and in their 
 writings, ever censured by either pope or council, ecumenical or 
 provincial. But though all the Romish doctors pay great de- 
 ference, they do not all, I acknowledge, pay equal deference to 
 implicit faith. Some seem to think it sufficient for every thing;- 
 others are curious in distinguishing what those articles are, 
 whereof an explicit faith is requisite, and what those are, on the 
 other hand, whereof an implicit faith will answer. But it is 
 not necessary here to enter into their scholastic cavils. 
 
 So much shall suffice for the first expedient employed by su- 
 perstition for the suppression of her deadly £oe knowledge, which 
 is, by perverting the rational service of religion into a mere 
 amusement of the senses. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. SHJ 
 
 LECTURE XXIV. 
 
 xJuT though by sucli means as those now illustrated, rehgioiis 
 knowledge might long be kept low, it was not so easy a matter 
 to suppress it altogether. Such a variety of circumstances have 
 an influence on its progress, that when the things which have 
 been long in confusion begin to settle, it is impossible to guard 
 every avenue against its entrance. One particular art, and one 
 particular branch of science, has a nearer connection with other 
 arts and other branches of science than is commonly imagined. 
 If you would exclude one species of knowledge totally, it is not 
 safe to admit any. This, however, is a point of political wis- 
 dom, which, luckily, has not been sufficiently uiiderstood even 
 by politicians. When the western part of the Roman empire 
 was overrun, and rather desolated than conquered by barbarians ; 
 matters, after many long and terrible conflicts, came by degrees 
 to settle; and several new states and new kingdoms arose out 
 of the stupendous ruin. As these came to assume a regular 
 form, the arts of peace revived, and were cultivated; knowledge 
 of course revived with them. Of all kinds of knowledge, I own 
 that religious knowledge was the latest. And that it should be 
 so, we cannot be surprised, when we consider the many terrible 
 clogs by which it was borne down. But notwithstanding these, 
 the progress of letters could not fail to have an influence even 
 here. History, languages, criticism, all tended to open the 
 eyes of mankind, and disclose the origin of many corruptions 
 and abuses in respect of sacred as well as profane literature. 
 How much this was accelerated by the invention of printing, 
 which renders the communication of knowledge so easy, bring- 
 ing it within the reach of those to whom it was inaccessible be- 
 fore, it would be superfluous to attempt to prove. Suffice it to 
 remark, that towards the end of the fifteenth and beginning of 
 the sixteenth century, the visible face of things in Europe was, 
 
 Bb2 
 
.388 LECTURES ON 
 
 in respect of cultivation, and the liberal as well as useful arts, 
 very much altered. 
 
 The change had been insensibly advancing for some centuries 
 before. As this was an indication of a second dawn of reason, 
 and the return of thought, after a long night of barbarity and 
 ignorance, it proved the means of preparing the minds of men 
 for a corresponding change in greater matters. Indeed, there 
 began to be disseminated such a dissatisfaction with the corrup- 
 tions that had invaded all the provinces of religion, that mur- 
 murs and complaints were almost universal. In every part of 
 Christendom, the absolute necessity of a reformation in the 
 church was become a common topic. It is true, the clamour 
 regarded chiefly discipline and manners, but by no means solely. 
 It had, indeed, long before that time, been rendered very un- 
 safe to glance at received doctrines, though in the most cursory, 
 or even guarded manner. Yet it was impossible, that the abuses 
 in practice should not lead to those errors in principle, which 
 had proved the parents of those abuses. The increase of know- 
 ledge brought an increase of curiosity. The little that men 
 had discovered, raised an insatiable appetite for discovering 
 more. The increase of knowledge, by undeceiving men in re- 
 gard to some inveterate prejudices, occasioned, not less infalli- 
 bly, the decrease of credulity; and the decrease of credulity sap- 
 ped the very foundations of sacerdotal power. Now as the prin- 
 cipal means of conveying knowledge was by books, the spiritual 
 powers were quickly led to devise proper methods for stopping 
 the progress of those books, which might prove of dangerous 
 consequence to their pretensions. 
 
 This was the second expedient above-mentioned, adopted by 
 superstition, or rather by spiritual tyranny, of whose throne 
 superstition is the chief support, for checking the progress of 
 knowledge. The origin and growth of this expedient, till it 
 arrived at full maturity, I shall relate to you nearly in the terms 
 of a celebrated writer, to whom I have oftener than once had 
 recourse before. In the earliest ages of the church, though 
 there was no ecclesiastical prohibition in regard to books, pious 
 persons, from a principle of conscience, always thought it right 
 to avoid reading bad books, that they might not transgress the 
 sense of the divine law, which prohibits us from spending the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 389 
 
 time unprofitably, and which commands us to abstain from all 
 appearance of evil, to avoid every thing by which we may be led, 
 without necessity, to expose ourselves to temptation, and be 
 drawn into sin. These are obligations arising from the princi- 
 ples of the law of nature, and therefore perpetually in force. 
 We are all, doubtless, obliged, though there were no ecclesias- 
 tical law to that purpose, to beware of mis-spending the precious 
 hours in the perusal of worthless writings. But, in process of 
 time, when these considerations were less minded than at the 
 beginning, Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, a celebrated doctor, 
 about the year 240, being reproved by his own presbyters, for 
 reading books which they accounted dangerous, found it con- 
 venient to plead in his excuse, that his doubts on this head had 
 been removed by a vision, wherewith he had been favoured from 
 heaven, which permitted him to read any book, because he had 
 discernment sufficient to enable him to do it with safety. It 
 was, however, the general opinion in those days, that there was 
 greater danger in the books of pagans, than in those of heretics, 
 which were much abhorred. 
 
 The reading of the former, the Greek and the Latin books 
 which we now call classics, was most severely censured, not as 
 being intrinsically worse than the other, but because those books 
 were more engaging, and the reading of them was more fre- 
 quently practised by many Christian doctors, through a desire 
 of learning eloquence, and the rules of composition. And, for 
 indulging himself in this practice, Jerom was said to have been 
 either in vision, or in dream, buffeted by the devil. Much about 
 that time, to wit, in the year 400, a council in Carthage prohi- 
 bited the bishops from reading the books of Gentiles, but per- 
 mitted them to read those of heretics. This is the first prohi- 
 bition in form of a canon. Nor is there any thing else, on this 
 subject, to be found in the fathers, except in the way of advice, 
 on the general principles of the divine law, as represented 
 above. 
 
 The books of the heretics, whose doctrine had been con-, 
 demned by councils, were indeed often, for political reasons, 
 prohibited by the emperors. Thus Constantine prohibited the 
 books of Arius. Arcadius those of the Eunomians and Mani- 
 chees. Thcodosius those of Ncstorius, and Martian the writ- 
 
390 LliCl'URES ON" 
 
 ings of the Eutychians. In Spain, king RicareJo proliibitec! 
 those of the Arians. Councils and bishops thought it sufficient 
 to declare what books contained doctrine condemned or apocry- 
 phal. They proceeded no further, leaving it to the conscience 
 of every one either to avoid them entirely, or to read them with 
 a good intention. After the year 800, the Roman pontiffs, who 
 had usurped the greater part of ecclesiastical government, ex- 
 pressly forbade men to read, nay, gave orders to burn the books 
 whose authors they had condemned as guilty of heresy. Never- 
 theless, till the age of the reformation, the number of books ac- 
 tually prohibited was but small. 
 
 The general papal prohibition, on pain of excommunication, 
 and without any other sentence, to all those who read books 
 containing the doctrine of heretics, or of persons suspected of 
 heresy, was grown into disuse. Martin V., in his bull, excom- 
 municated all heretical sects, especially Wickliffites and Huss- 
 ites; but made no mention of those who read their books, 
 though many of them were then every where circulated. Leo 
 X., when he condemned Luther, prohibited, at the same time, 
 on pain of excommunication, the keeping and the reading of his 
 books. The succeeding pontiffs, in the bull called in ccena, 
 having condemned and excommunicated all heretics, did, toge- 
 ther with them, excommunicate all those who read their books. 
 This produced greater confusion, because the heretics not being 
 condemned by name, the books would be discovered rather by 
 the quality of the doctrine contained in them, than by the names 
 of their authors. Now the quality of the doctrine contained 
 could not be known till the book was read, and consequently, 
 till the excommunication was incurred, if the doctrine was here- 
 tical. Besides, the doctrine might appear very different to dif- 
 ferent readers. Hence arose innumerable scruples in the minds 
 of those weak but conscientious persons, who paid an implicit 
 deference to the authority of the church. The inquisitors, who 
 were more diligent than others, made catalogues of such as came 
 to their knowledge, which, however, as the copies taken of those 
 catalogues were not collated, did not entirely remove the diffi- 
 culty. King Philip of Spain was the first who gave them a 
 more convenient form, having enacted a law in 1558, that the 
 catalogue of books, prohibited by the Spanish inquisition, should 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. SQl 
 
 be printed. After this example, Paul IV. ordered the inquisi- 
 tion in Rome to prepare, and cause to be printed, an index of 
 books proper to be forbidden, which was executed in the follow- 
 ing year 1559. In this they proceeded much fartlier than had 
 ever been done before, and laid the foundations of a very curious 
 system of policy, for maintaining and exalting, to the utmost, 
 the authority of the court of Rome, by depriving men of the 
 knowledge necessary for defending themselves against her usur- 
 pations. 
 
 Hitherto the prohibition had been confined to the books of 
 heretics, nor had any book been prohibited whose author had not 
 been condemned. They now judged it expedient to go more bold- 
 ly to work. Accordingly, the new index, which, from its known 
 purpose, came to be called index expurgatorius, was divided into 
 three parts. The first contained the names of those authors, whose 
 whole works, whether the subject were sacred or profane, were 
 forbidden ; and in this number are included not only those who 
 have professed a doctrine contrary to that of Rome, but even 
 many who continued all their life, and died in her communion. 
 In the second part were contained the names of particular books 
 which are condemned, though other books of the same authors 
 be not. In the third, beside some anonymous writings speci- 
 fied, there is one general rule, whereby all those books are for- 
 bidden, which do not bear the author's name, published since 
 the year 1519. Nay, many authors and books are condemned, 
 which for three hundred, two hundred, or one hundred years, 
 had passed through the hands of all the men of letters in the 
 church, and of which the Roman pontiffs had been in the know- 
 ledge for so long a time without finding fault. Nay, what is still 
 more extraordinary, some modern books were included in the 
 prohibition, which had been printed in Italy, even in Rome, 
 with the approbation of the inquisitors, nay, of the pope him- 
 self, signified by his brief accompanying the publication. Of 
 this kind are the annotations of Erasmus on the New Testa- 
 ment, to which Leo X., after having read them, gave his ap- 
 probation, in a brief, dated at Rome 1518. Above all, it is 
 worthy of notice, that under colour of faith and religion, those 
 books are prohibited, and their authors condemned, wherein the 
 authority of princes and civil magistrates is defended against ec- 
 
392 LECTURES ON 
 
 cjesiastical usurpations ; those wherein the authority of bishops 
 and councils is defended against the usurpations of the court oi 
 Rome ; and those wherein are disclosed the tyranny and hypo* 
 crisy with which, under pretence of religion, the people ar? 
 abused either by deceit, or by violence. In brief, a better ex- 
 pedient was never devised, (had it been a little more capable of 
 being carried into effect) for employing religion, so as to divest 
 men not only of all knowledge, but of every vestige of rationali- 
 ty. So far did the Roman inquistion, at that time, proceed, 
 that they made a list of sixty-two printers, prohibiting all the 
 books printed by tbem, of whatever author, subject, or lan- 
 guage, with an additional clause still more comprehensive, to 
 wit, and all the books printed by other such like printers, who 
 have printed the books of heretics. In consequence of which, 
 there hardly remained any books to read. Nay, to show the 
 incredible excess of their rigour, the prohibition of every book, 
 contained in the catalogue, was on pain of excommunication to 
 the reader ipso facto, reserving to the pope the power of inflict- 
 ing the deprivation of offices, and benefices, incapacitation, per- 
 petual infamy, and other arbitrary pains. Thus was the court 
 of Rome, in defence, as was falsely pretended, of the doctrine 
 of Christ, but in reality of her own despotism, as the Turks and 
 Saracens, in defence of the superstition of the impostor Maho- 
 met, engaged in a war against literature and knowledge, tend- 
 ing evidently to the extermination of arts and sciences, and to 
 the transformation of men, in every thing but external form, 
 into brutes. And, with equal reason, was this the aim of both 
 mahometism and popery. False religion, of every kind, must be 
 a mortal enemy to knowledge : for nothing is more certain, than 
 that knowledge is a mortal enemy to all false religion. 
 
 How similar have been the aims and the pretensions of pagan 
 and of papal Rome ! Both aspired, and with amazing success, 
 at universal empire. But how dissimilar have been the means 
 employed for the attainment of the end. The former, pagan 
 Rome, secured the superiority which her arms had gained, by 
 diffusing knowledge, and civilizing the conquered nations : thus 
 making, as it were, compensation to them by her arts for the 
 injustice she had done them by her arms. The latter, papal 
 Rome, who, for a long time indeed, employed more fraud than 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 398 
 
 violence, (though far from rejecting the aid of either,) secured 
 her conquests by lulling the people in ignorance, diverting their 
 curiosity with monstrous legends, and monkish tales, and by 
 doing what she could to render and keep them barbarians. 
 
 In regard to the expedient, of which I have here been treat- 
 ing, the prohibition of books by an index expurgatorius, there 
 seem to have been two capital errors in Rome's method of ma- 
 naging this affair, notwithstanding her political wisdom. But 
 nothing human is on all sides perfect. One was, that she was 
 some centuries too late in adopting this measure, It would be 
 difficult to say what might have been effected, had the attempt 
 been earlier made, and supported with her usual firmness. The 
 other error was, that things had proceeded too far for so violent 
 a remedy. Had less been attempted, more would have been 
 attained. The inquisitors, in the true spirit of their calling, 
 and in compliance with the impetuous temper of the reigning 
 pontiff, breathed nothing but extirpation and perdition. They 
 had not so much knowledge of legislation as to perceive, that 
 when a certain point is exceeded in the severity of laws, they 
 are actually enfeebled by what was intended to invigorate them. 
 Hardly was there a man that could read, who was not involved 
 in the excommunication denounced by an act so extravagant. 
 Nor could any thing render the sentence more contemptible, or 
 prove a greater bar to its execution, than its being made thus 
 to comprehend almost every body. 
 
 This error was quickly perceived. Recourse was had, not 
 without effect, to Paul's successor, Pius the fourth, who, being 
 a man of more temper than his predecessor, remitted to the 
 council of Trent, then sitting, the consideration of the affair^ 
 They, accordingly, committed to some of the fathers and doc- 
 tors the examination of suspected books, and the revisal and 
 correction of that absurd act of pope Paul, acknowledging, that 
 it had produced scruples, and given cause for complaints. Since 
 that time, the prohibitory laws, though, in other respects, far 
 from being more moderate, have avoided the most exceptionable 
 of those indefinite and comprehensive clauses complained of in 
 the former; and I suspect, have by consequence proved more 
 effectual, at least in Italy and Spain, in retarding the progress 
 of knowledge. 
 
394 LECTURES OX 
 
 Indeed, for some ages past, no heresy has appeared so dam- 
 nable in Italy to the ghostly fathers, to whom the revisal of books 
 is entrusted, as that which ascribes any kind of authority to ma- 
 gistrates, independent of the pope : no doctrine so divine, as 
 that which exalts the ecclesiastical authority above the civil, not 
 only in spiritual matters, but in secular. Nay, the tenet on this 
 subject, in highest vogue with the canonists, is that which 
 stands in direct opposition to the apostle Paul's. The very 
 pinnacle of orthodoxy with those gentlemen is, that the lawful 
 commands of the civil magistrate do not bind the conscience; 
 that our only motive to obedience here is prudence, from fear of 
 the temporal punishment denounced by him ; and that, if we 
 have the address to elude his vigilance, and escape the punish- 
 ment, our disobedience is no sin in the sio-ht of God. It is 
 impossible for any thing to be more flatly contradictory to the 
 doctrine of all antiquity, particularly that of the great apostle, 
 who commands us to be subject to those powers, not only for 
 fear of their wrath, but for conscience sake. It was lucky for 
 Paul, the apostle I mean, not the pope, that he had published 
 his sentiments, on this subject, about 1500 years before that 
 terrible expedient of the index was devised. He had, by this 
 means, obtained an authority in the Christian world, which 
 Rome herself, though she may, where her influence is greatest, 
 for a time, elude it, cannot totally destroy. Otherwise that mis- 
 sionary of Christ must have long ago had a place in the index 
 expurgatorius. 
 
 But to return ; Rome has obstructed the progress of know- 
 ledge, not only by suppressing altogether books not calculated 
 to favour her views, but by reprinting works, which had too 
 great a currency for them to suppress, mutilated and grossly 
 adulterated. Those editions, when they came abroad, being for 
 the most part neatly, many of them elegantly, printed, and well 
 executed, were ignorantly copied by the printers of other coun- 
 tries, who knew not their defects. In this way those corrup- 
 tions have been propagated. Besides, Rome wants not her in- 
 struments in most countries, protestant as well as popish, such 
 as priests and confessors, who are always ready to lend their as- 
 sistance in forwarding her views. PIcnce it is often rendered 
 extremely difficult to disthiguish the genuine editions from the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 395 
 
 spurious. For let it be observed, that their visitors of books 
 do not think it enough to cancel whatever displeases them in 
 the authors they examine : they even venture to foist in what 
 they judge proper, in the room of what they have expunged. 
 In the year 1607, the index expur gator ius^ published at Rome, 
 specified and condemned all the obnoxious places in certain au- 
 thors, which were judged worthy to be blotted out. This, to 
 those who possess that index, shows plainly what were the thino-s 
 which, in several authors of reputation, were either altered or 
 erased. But such indexes, which, in the hands of a critic, 
 would prove extremely useful for restoring old books to their 
 primitive purity and integrity, are now to be found only in the 
 libraries of a very few, in the southern parts of Europe. 
 Whether there be any of them in this island I cannot say. 
 But the consequence of the freedom, above related, which has 
 been taken by the court of Rome with Christian writers of the 
 early ages, (for it luckily did not answer their purpose to meddle 
 with the works of pagans) has rendered it, at this day, almost 
 impossible to know the real sentiments of many old authors of 
 great name, both ecclesiastics and historians : there being of se- 
 veral of them scarcely any edition extant at present, except those 
 which have been so miserably garbled by the court of Rome, 
 or, which amounts to the same thing, editions copied from those 
 which they had vitiated by their interpolations and corrections. 
 But what would appear the most incredible of all, if the act 
 were not still in being, pope Clement VIII. in the year 1595, 
 in his catalogue of forbidden books, published a decree, that all 
 the books of catholic authors, written since the year 1515, 
 should be corrected, not only by retrenching what is not con- 
 formable to the doctrine of Rome, but also by adding what may 
 be judged proper by the correctors. That ye may see I do not 
 wrong him, (for that, in corruptions of this kind they should 
 be so barefaced is indeed beyond belief) it is necessary to sub- 
 join his own words : In libris catholicorum recentiorum, qui post 
 annum Christiance salutis 1515 conscripti si7U, si id quod corri- 
 gendum occurrit, paticis demptis aut additis emendari posse vi- 
 deatm\ id correctores faciendum curent ; sin minus omnino de- 
 leatur. The reason why the year 1515 is particularly specified, 
 as that after which the writings, even of Roman Catholics, were 
 
396 LECTURES ON 
 
 to undergo a more strict examination and scrutiny than any pub- 
 lished by such before, is plainly this : It was in the year imme- 
 diately following, that Luther began to declaim against indul- 
 gences, which proved the first dawn of the reformation. His 
 preaching and publications produced a very hot controversy. 
 Now many of those who defended what was called the catholic 
 cause, and strenuously maintained the perfect purity of the 
 church's doctrine, did not hesitate to acknowledge corruptions 
 in her discipline, and particularly in the conduct of Rome, which 
 needed to be reformed. They affected to distinguish between 
 the court and the church of Rome, a distinction no way pala- 
 table to the former. Now it would have been exceedingly im- 
 prudent to suppress those controversial pieces altogether, espe- 
 cially at that time, when they were universally considered as 
 being, and in fact were, the best defence of the Romish cause 
 against the encroachments of protestantism, and the reforma- 
 tion. On the other hand, the concessions made in them, in re- 
 gard to discipline, and the court of Rome, and the distinctions 
 they contained, bore an aspect very unfavourable to Romish 
 despotism. Hence the determination of correcting them, not 
 only by expunging what was not relished at court, but by alter- 
 ing and inserting whatever was judged proper to alter, or insert, 
 by the ruling powers in the church. Authors had been often 
 falsified before, and made to say what they never meant, nay, 
 the reverse of what they actually said; but of a falsification so 
 imprudently conducted, this of pope Clement was the first exam^ 
 pie. Their interpolations, however, of the works even of Ro- 
 man Catholics, though not so avowedly made, have by no means 
 been confined to those who have written since the year 1515, 
 Platina, a writer of the fifteenth, and therefore of the former 
 century, who gave the world a history of the popes, though far 
 from being unfavourable to the pretensions of Rome, has not 
 escaped unhurt their jealous vigilance. For though he had 
 said very little, as Bower well observes, that could be sus* 
 pected of being any way offensive, that very little has been 
 thought too much. Accordingly, he has been taught, in all the 
 editions of his work, since the middle of the sixteenth century, 
 to speak with more reserve, and to suppress, or disguise, some 
 truths which he had formerly told. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 597 
 
 Hence it happens, that in regard to all the books which have 
 passed through the hands of Roman licensers, or inquisitors, 
 we can conclude nothing from what we find in them, in re- 
 gard to the sentiments of their authors, but solely in regard 
 to the sentiments of Rome, to an exact conformity to which, it 
 was judged necessary, that by all possible methods of squeezing 
 and wrenching, maiming, and interpolating, they should be 
 brought. Nor has the revisal been confined to books written 
 on religious subjects, but extended to all subjects, politics, his- 
 tory, works of science, and of amusement. Nay, what is more, 
 the pope came at last to claim it as an exclusive privilege, to 
 prohibit, and to license, not for Rome only, and the ecclesiasti- 
 cal state, but for all Christendom, at least for all the countries 
 wherein his authority is acknowledged, insisting, that what he 
 prohibits, no prince whatever, even in his own dominions, dares 
 license, and what he licenses, none dares prohibit. The first of 
 these has been generally conceded to him, though not perhaps 
 punctually obeyed. 
 
 The second occasioned a violent struggle in the beginning of 
 the last century, between the pope and the king of Spain, on 
 occasion of a book written by cardinal Baronius, containing many 
 things in derogation of that monarch's government and title, and 
 traducing, with much asperity, many of his ancestors, the kings 
 of Arragon. The book was licensed at Rome, but prohibited 
 in the Spanish dominions. The monarch stood firm in his pur- 
 pose, and the pope thought fit to drop the controversy, but not 
 to renounce the claim. This Rome never does, actuated by a 
 political maxim formerly suggested, of which she has often avail- 
 ed herself when a proper opportunity appeared. A more parti- 
 cular account of this contest ye have in father Paul's discourse 
 on the constitution and rules of the inquisition at Venice. How 
 great would be the consequence of this papal privilege, if uni- 
 versally acquiesced in, any person of reflection will easily con- 
 ceive. Who knows not the power of first impressions on any 
 question, the influence of education, and the force of habit, in 
 riveting opinions formed in consequence of being uniformly ac- 
 customed to attend to one side only of the question. All these 
 advantages the pontiff would have clearly in his favour, could 
 he but secure to himself that high prerogative, and become, in 
 effect, our supreme or only teacher. 
 
Si)8 LECTURES ON 
 
 LECTURE XXV. 
 
 jHIaving discussed, in the two preceding lectures, what relates 
 to the concealment of scripture, and of all the public offices of 
 religion, by the use of an unknown tongue, and to the check 
 given to the advancement of knowledge by the index expurga- 
 torius, I intend, in this discourse, to consider the third grand 
 expedient adopted by Rome for securing the implicit obedience 
 of her votaries, namely, persecution. 
 
 Nothing is clearer, from the New Testament, than that this 
 method of promoting the faith is totally unwarranted, as well by 
 the great author, as by the first propagators of our religion. 
 His disciples were sent out as sheep amidst wolves, exposed to 
 the most dreadful persecutions, but incapable of ever giving to 
 their enemies a return in kind, in a consistency with this signa- 
 ture of Christ's servants : for in no change of circumstances will 
 it suit the nature of the sheep to persecute the wolf. As it was 
 not an earthly kingdom which our Lord came to establish, so it 
 was not by carnal weapons that his spiritual warfare was to be 
 conducted. The means must be adapted to the end. My king- 
 do7}i, said he, is not of this world; if my kingdom were of this 
 world, then would my servants fight. Worldly weapons are 
 suited to the conquest of worldly kingdoms. But nothing can 
 be worse adapted to inform the understanding, and conquer the 
 heart, than such coarse implements. Lactantius says with rea- 
 son, Defendenda est religio non occidendo, sed moriendo, non 
 scevitia, sed patientia. To convince, and to persuade, both by 
 teaching and by example, was the express commission given to 
 the apostles. The only weapons which they were to employ, or 
 which could be employed, for this purpose, were arguments and 
 motives from reason and scripture. Their only armour, faith 
 and patience, prudence and innocence, the comforts arising from 
 the consciousness of doing their duty, and the unshaken hope 
 of the promised reward. By means of this panoply, however 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 399 
 
 lightly it may be accounted of by those who cannot look beyond 
 the present scene, they were, in the spiritual, that is, the niobt 
 important sense, invulnerable; and by means of their faith, as 
 the spring which set all their other virtues in motion, they ob- 
 tained a victory over the world. 
 
 Beside the declared enemies from without, pagans and infidel 
 Jews, whom Christians had, from the beginning, to contend 
 with, there arose very early, in the bosom of the church, as had 
 been foretold by the apostles, certain internal foes, first to 
 the primitive simplicity of Christian doctrine, and afterwards, 
 by a natural progress, to the unity, sympathy, and love, which, 
 as members of the same society, having one common head, they 
 were under the strongest obligations to observe inviolate. From 
 the very commencement of the church, the tares of error had by 
 divine permission, for the exercise and probation of the faithful, 
 been sown among the good seed of the word. The only reme- 
 dies which had been prescribed by the apostles against those who 
 made divisions in the Christian community, founding new sects, 
 which commonly distinguished themselves by the profession of 
 some erroneous doctrine, or at least some idle and unedifying 
 speculation, were, first, repeatedly to admonish them, and after- 
 wards, when admonitions should prove ineffectual, to renounce 
 their company, that is, to exclude them from their brotherhood, 
 or excommunicate them : for the original import of these ex- 
 pressions is nearly the same. On this footing matters remained 
 till Constantine, in the beginning of the fourth century, embra- 
 ced the faith, and gave the church a sort of political establish- 
 ment in the empire. 
 
 From the apologies of the fathers before that period, (so the 
 defences of our religion written by them are named) it is evi- 
 dent, that they universally considered persecution for any opi- 
 nions, whether true or false, as the heighth of injustice and op- 
 pression. Nothing can be juster than the sentiment of Tertul- 
 lian, which was, indeed, as far as appears, the sentiment of all 
 the fathers of the first three centuries. " Non religionis est 
 " cogere religionem, quae sponte suscipi debeat, non vi." And 
 to the same purpose Lactantius, " Quis imponat mihi necessi- 
 " tatem vel colendi quod nolim, vcl quod velim non colendi ? 
 " Quid jam nobis ultcrius reliuquitur, si etiam hoc, quod vo- 
 
400 LECTURES ON 
 
 ** luntate fieri opportet, libido extorqueat aliena?" Again, 
 '* Non est opis vi et injuria ; quia religio cogi non potest, verbis 
 " potius quam verberibus res agenda est, ut sit voluntas.'* Once 
 more, ** Longe diversa sunt carnificina et pietas, nee potest aut 
 *' Veritas cum vi, aut justitia cum crudelitate, conjungi." Their 
 notions, in those days, in regard to civil government, seem also 
 to have been much more correct than they became soon after. 
 For all Christians, in the ages of the martyrs, appear to have 
 agreed in this, that the magistrate's only object ought to be the 
 peace and temporal prosperity of the commonwealth. 
 
 But (such alas ! is the depravity of human nature) when the 
 church was put on a diflPerent footing, men began, not all at once, 
 but gradually, to change their system in regard to those articles, 
 and seemed strongly inclined to think, that there was no in- 
 justice in retaliating upon their enemies, by employing those un- 
 hallowed weapons in defence of the true religion, which had 
 been so cruelly employed in support of a false : not considering, 
 that by this dangerous position, that one may justly persecute 
 in support of the truth, the right of persecuting for any opinions 
 will be effectually secured to him who holds them, provided he 
 have the power. For what is every man's immediate standard 
 of orthodoxy but his own opinions ? And if he have a right ta 
 persecute in support of them, because of the ineffable importance 
 •of sound opinions to our eternal happiness, it must be even his 
 duty to do it when he can. For if that interest, the interest of 
 the soul and eternity, come at all within the magistrate's pro- 
 vince, it is unquestionably the most important part of it. Now 
 as it is impossible he can have any other immediate directory, in 
 regard to what is orthodox, but his own opinions, and as the 
 opinions of different men are totally different, it will be incum- 
 bent, by the strongest of all obligations, on one magistrate to 
 persecute in support of a faith, which it is equally incumbent on 
 another by persecution to destroy. Should ye object, that the 
 standard is not any thing so fleeting as opinion ; it is the word 
 of God, and right reason. This, if ye attend to it, will bring 
 you back to the very same point which ye seek to avoid. Th^ 
 dictates both of scripture and of reason, we see but too plainly, 
 are differently interpreted by different persons, of whose sin- 
 cerity we have no ground to doubt. Now to every individual, 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 401 
 
 that only, amongst all the varieties of sentiments, can be his 
 rule, which, to the best of his judgment, that is, in his opinion, 
 is the import of cither. Nor is there a possibihty of avoiding 
 the recurrence at last. But such is the intoxication of power, 
 that men, blinded by it, will not allow themselves to look for- 
 ward to those dreadful consequences. And such is the pre- 
 sumption of vain man, (of which bad quality the weakest judg- 
 ments have commonly the greatest share,) that it is with diffi- 
 culty any one person can be brought to think, that any other 
 person has, or can have, as strong conviction of a different set 
 of opinions, as he has of his. 
 
 But to return to our narrative. When the secular powers had 
 changed sides, and were now come to be on the side of Christi- 
 anity, this was the manner, on the subject of religion, in which 
 some men among the clergy began to argue. Princes ought 
 to be considered in a twofold capacity ; one is, that of Christians, 
 the other, that of princes, in both which characters they are 
 bound to serve God: as Christians, by observing the divine 
 commandments, like every other disciple of Christ : as princes, 
 by puriring the church of all schisms, heresies, and blasphemies, 
 punishing all transgressors of the divine precepts, but more es- 
 pecially those who, by the transgressions above mentioned, vio- 
 late the first table of the decalogue : for as those sins are com- 
 mitted more immediately against God, they are much more hei- 
 nous than theft, adultery, murder, or any sins committed against 
 our neighbour. Now under the general denomination of sins 
 of the first table, every sect (were their verdicts to be severally 
 taken) would comprehend almost all the distinguishing tenets of 
 every other sect. And though, in support of their plea, they 
 might have many specious things to advance, they would all be 
 found to lean on a false hypothesis. 
 
 First, it is false, that the concerns of the soul and eternity 
 fall under the cognizance and jurisdiction of the magistrate. 
 To say that they do, is to blend the very different and hardly 
 compatible characters of magistrate and pastor in the same per- 
 son ; or, which is worse, to graft the latter upon the former, the 
 sure method of producing a most absurd and cruel despotism, 
 such as obtains in all Mahometan countries : nor is that much 
 better which prevails more or less in popish countries, especially 
 
 c c 
 
402 LECTURES ON 
 
 in the ecclesiastical state, and in Spain and Portugal, where the 
 magistrate is grafted on the pastor, or rather on the priest. 
 
 Secondly, it is false, that spiritual concerns, if they did fall 
 under the cognizance of the magistrate, are capable of being 
 regulated by such expedients as are proper for restraining the 
 injuries of violence and fraud, and preserving tranquillity and 
 good order in society. Though, by coercion, crimes, which are 
 outward and overt acts, may effectually be restrained, it is not 
 by coercion that those inward effects can be produced, convic- 
 tion in the understanding, or conversion in the heart. Now 
 these in religion are all in all. By racks and gibbets, fire and 
 faggot, we may as rationally propose to mend the sight of a man 
 who squints, or is purblind, as by these means to enlighten the 
 infidel's or the heretic's understanding, confute his errors, and 
 bring him to the belief of what he disbelieved before. That by 
 such methods he may be constrained to profess what he disbe- 
 lieves still, nobody can deny, or even doubt. But to extort a 
 hypocritical profession, is so far from being to promote the cause 
 of God and religion, that nothing, by the acknowledgment of 
 men of all parties can stand more directly in opposition to it. 
 Nihil est tarn voluntarium quam religio, says Lactantius, in qua 
 si animus sacrificantis aversus est, jam suhlata, jam nulla est. 
 
 Thirdly, it is a false, though a very common notion, that 
 errors concerning the divine nature and perfections ought to be 
 denominated blasphemies, or considered as civil crimes. Blas- 
 phemy, in regard to God, corresponds to calumny in regard to 
 man. The original name for both is the same. As the latter 
 always implies what, in the language of the law, is called malus 
 animus, a disposition to calumniate, so does the former. Mere 
 mistake, in regard to character, especially when the mistake is 
 not conceived, by him who entertains it, to derogate from the 
 character, constitutes neither of those crimes. That no impu- 
 tation, however, is commoner, can be ascribed solely to that 
 malevolence, which bigotry and contention never fail to produce. 
 Thus the arminian and the calvinist, the protestant and the pa- 
 pist, the Jesuit and the jansenist, throw and retort on each other 
 the unchristian reproach of blasphemy. Yet each is so far from 
 intending to lessen, in the opinion of others, the honour of the 
 divine majesty, that he is fully convinced that his own principles 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 403 
 
 are better adapted to raise it than those of his antatronist, and 
 for that very reason he is so strenuous in maintaining them. 
 But to blacken, as much as possible, the designs of an antngo- 
 nist, in order the more easily to bring odium on his opinions, is 
 the too common, though detestable, resource of theological con- 
 trovertists [«]. 
 
 I proceed to show the advances which, from time to time, 
 were made, till that system of persecution which, in a great part 
 of the world, still obtains, was brought to maturity, and esta- 
 blished. For ages after the opinion first took place amon<r 
 Christians, that it was the magistrate's duty to restrain heretics 
 by the infliction of civil penalties, they retained so much mo- 
 deration as not to think that the punishment could justly extend 
 to death, or mutilation, or even to the effusion of blood. But 
 now that the empire was become Christian, there gradually 
 arose in it diverse laws against this new crime heresy, which 
 are still extant in the codes of Theodosian and Justinian, 
 imposing on the delinquents fines, banishments, or confisca- 
 tions, according to the circumstances, and supposed degree, of 
 the delinquency. All that regarded the execution of those laws, 
 the trial, as well as the sentence, devolved on the magistrate. 
 Only the nature of the crime, what was heresy or schism, was 
 determined by the ecclesiastical judge. One stcn in an evil 
 course naturally leads to another. The first step was made 
 when civil penalties were denounced against particular opinions 
 and modes of thinking. This may be considered as the first 
 stage of the doctrine and practice of intolerance, in the Chris- 
 tian church. Nor could any thing be more explicitly, or more 
 universally, condemned than this had been, by the fathers of 
 the first three centuries, and several of the fourth. Humani 
 juris et natiiralis potestatis est, said Tertullian, in the begin- 
 ning of the third century, unicuique quod putaverit colere, and 
 Hilary of Poitiers, in the fourth, in opposition to those who fa- 
 voured the interposition of the magistrate. Deus cognitionem 
 sui dociiit, potius quam exegit, et operationum ccclestimn admi- 
 ratione, prceceptis stiis concilians auctorltatem coactam covfden- 
 
 [a] For the scripture import of blasphemy, and the nature of that crime, see 
 " Preliminary Dissertations to a Version of the Four Gospels," by the Author, 
 YoL 1. p. 395, &c. 
 
 C c2 
 
404* LECTURES ON 
 
 dl se aspernatus est volwitatem. Again, Deus universitatis est, 
 ohsequio non eget necessario, non requirit coactam confessionem ; 
 no7i fallendus est sed j^romerendus, simplicitate queer endiis est, 
 confessione discendus est, charitate amandus est, timore vener- 
 andus est, iioluntatis prohiiate retinendus est. At vero quid is- 
 tud, quod sacer dotes timei'e Deum vinculis coguntur, pcenisju- 
 hentur? Sacerdotes carcerihus continentur? Men's system of 
 conduct may come, we see, to be totally reversed. But this is 
 always the work of time. Every advance has its difficulty, and 
 is made with hesitation. But one difficulty surmounted em- 
 boldens a man, and renders it easier for him to surmount an- 
 other. That again makes way for the next, and so on till the 
 change be total. 
 
 Several bishops and pastors, who had not yet been able to di- 
 vest themselves of the more pure and harmless maxims of pri- 
 mitive times, or rather of their divine master, who totally repro- 
 bated all secular weapons in this warfare, thought, that after 
 they had declared opinions heretical, and denied their commu- 
 nion to those who held them, they could not innocently inter- 
 meddle further, or give information to the magistrate, dreading 
 that such a conduct would be irreconcileable to the great law of 
 charity. Others more hardy, (for there will always be such dif- 
 ferences among men) resolved, by any means, to silence such as 
 they could not confute, and to compel those to dissemble, whom 
 they despaired of convincing : the plain language of which con- 
 duct was, if we- cannot make them better, we will make them 
 worse, — if they will not be believers, they shall be hypocrites. 
 And whoever will not be induced to be of what we account the 
 family of God, we shall be sure to render twofold more the 
 children of the devil than they were before. 
 
 People of this stamp, possessed of a pride, (misnamed zeal) 
 which cannot brook contradiction, were forward in giving infor- 
 mation to the magistrate on those whom they called heretics, and 
 in prompting him, where there appeared a remissness, to inflict 
 the punishments which the imperial edicts had denounced. To 
 such are these words of Hilary very pertinently addressed: Miser- 
 eri licet nostrce cetatis laborem, et prcesentium temporum stultas 
 opiniones congemiscere, quibus pati'ocinari Deo humana cre- 
 duntur, et ad tuendam Christi ecclesiam amhitione sectdari laho- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 405 
 
 ratur. Oro vos, episcopi, quibusnam suffragiis ad prccdkan' 
 dum evangelium apostoli usl sunt ? (^uibus adjutl potestatibus 
 Ch'lstum p7'cBdicaveru7if, gentasque fere omnes ex idolis ad 
 Deum transtulerunt ? Anne aliquam sibi assiimebant e palatio 
 dignitatem, hymnum Deo in carccre inter catenas et Jiagella 
 cantantes ? Edictisque regis Paulus Ckristo ecclesiam con^ 
 gregabat ? Neron ese, credo, aut Vcspasiano patrocinanlibus, 
 tuebatur, quorum in nos odds confessio divince prcedicationis 
 effloruit? At nunc, proh dolor I divinamjidem suffragia terrena 
 commendant inopsque virtutis sucb Christus, dum ambitio nomini 
 suo conciliatur, arguitur. Terret exiliis et carceribus ecclesia, 
 credique sibi cogit, qucB exiliis et carceribus credita est ; pendet 
 a dignatione communicantium, quce persequentium est conse^ 
 crata terror e ; fiigat sacerdotes, quce fugatis est sacerdotibus 
 propagata, diligi sese gloriatur a raundo, quce Christi esse non 
 potuit, nisi mundus earn odisset. Such were the sentiments of 
 St. Hilary, for he has obtained a place in the calendar, which 
 I take notice of the rather, that we may perceive, in the stronger 
 light, the different temperaments which prevailed in the saints 
 acknowledged by Rome who belong to different ages. Light 
 and darkness are not more opposite than the spirit of a St. 
 Hilary, in the fourth century, and the spirit of a St. Dominic, 
 the inventor of the inquisition, and the butcher of the Albi- 
 genses, in the thirteenth. But this by the way. I return to 
 the early times. 
 
 It happened, not often at first, that on account of sedition, 
 real or pretended, the person accused of heresy was punished 
 capitally. This, if people were not satisfied of the reality of 
 the sedition, rarely failed, for some ages, to raise against the 
 informers, especially if pastors, much clamour and scandal. Our 
 Lord's words, / came not to destroy men's lives, but to save them, 
 had not yet totally lost their force among Christians. The 
 spirit of the master, and that of the servant, made too glaring a 
 contrast to escape the notice of those who had any knowledge 
 and reflection. Indeed, for several ages, those ministers who 
 thought themselves warranted to call in the secular arm, did not 
 think themselves authorised to proceed so far, as to be aiding 
 in what might affect cither life or members. They therefore 
 abstained not only from giving information where there was any 
 
406 LECTURES ON 
 
 danger of this kind, but from appearing at the secular tribunal 
 in any capacity, unless that of intercessor in behalf of the ac- 
 cused. And this office was not in them, as it is in the clergy 
 of some Romish countries at present, under a disguise of mer- 
 cy, quite transparent, a downright insult upon misery. But a 
 long tract of time was necessary before matters could be brought 
 to this pass. St. Martin, in France, (another instance of hu- 
 manity and moderation, even in those whom Rome now adores 
 as saints) excommunicated a bishop in the fifth century, for ac- 
 cusing certain heretics to the usurper Maximus, by whose 
 means he procured their death. That worthy minister de- 
 clared, that he considered any man as a murderer, who was ac- 
 cessary to the death of another, for being unfortunate enough 
 to be mistaken in his opinions. On this foot, however, things 
 remained till the year 800. It belonged to councils and synods 
 to determine what is heresy, but (except in what relates to 
 church censures) the trial, as well as the punishment of the 
 heretic, was in the magistrate. Neither was the punishment 
 legally capital, unless when the heresy was accompanied with 
 crimes against the state. That this pretence was often made 
 without foundation, by men of an intolerant temper, there is 
 little ground to doubt. 
 
 About this time happened what is called the great schism of 
 the east, the breach betwixt the Greek and the Latin churches, 
 since which time, till the destruction of the eastern empire by 
 the Turks, the cause of heresy and schism remained in the 
 Greek churches on the same footing as before. In the west, 
 however, it has undergone immense alterations; insomuch, 
 that the popular sentiments concerning zeal and charity have 
 long stood in direct opposition to those which obtained, and 
 rendered the Christian character so completely amiable, as well 
 as venerable, in the days of the martyrs. Indeed, for some 
 centuries, particularly the eighth, ninth, and tenth, remarkable 
 for nothing so much as the vilest superstition and grossest ig- 
 norance, and for insurrections, revolutions, and confusions, 
 every where, heretics and sectaries made but little noise, and 
 were as little minded. With the revival of knowledge, even 
 in its dawn, these also revived. There is no human blessing 
 without some foil. But considering the grossness of the reign- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 407 
 
 ing superstition, one might be at a loss to say, whether any 
 new absurdity could be, comparatively, pronounced an evil. 
 Whatever served to rouse men out of their lethargy, seemed 
 to promise good in its consequences* 
 
408 LECTURES ON 
 
 LECTURE XXVI. 
 
 After the year 1100, in consequence of the perpetual jars 
 which had been betwixt the popes and emperors for more than 
 fifty years back, and which still subsisted, and in consequence 
 of the frequent wars and scandals in the Christian world, and 
 the irreligious lives of the clergy, innumerable heretics sprang 
 up, whose heresies (as they are called) were commonly levelled 
 against ecclesiastical authority, the abuse of which was, indeed, 
 so excessive, and so flagrant, as to give but too much weight 
 with every body, to the severest reproaches that could be utter- 
 ed. All attacks upon received doctrines must ultimately affect 
 the power by which they are established. But when the as- 
 sault is made directly on that power, the fabric of church au- 
 thority is in the most imminent danger. The aim of the for- 
 mer is only to make a breach in the wail of the edifice, but that 
 of the latter is an attempt to sap the foundation. As we have 
 seen all along that the darling object of Rome is power, to 
 which every other consideration is made to yield, we may be- 
 lieve that attempts of this kind, would excite a more than ordi- 
 nary resentment. This, in fact, was the consequence : an un- 
 usual degree of rancour in the ecclesiastics, more especially in 
 the pontiff and his minions, mingled itself with their bigotry or 
 mistaken zeal, (for it would be unjust to impute the effect to either 
 cause separately) and produced the many bloody, and till then, 
 unexampled scenes of cruelty, which ensued. The popes, by 
 letter, frequently excited the bishops as well as princes — the 
 bishops instigated the magistrates, by all possible means, to sub- 
 due or exterminate the enemies of the church. When the 
 number of these enemies was so great, that it was impossible to 
 attain this end by means of judicatories, civil or ecclesiastical, 
 princes were enjoined, on pain of excommunication, interdict, 
 deprivation, &c. to make war upon them, and extirpate them by 
 fire and sword. And in order to allure, by rewards, as well as 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 400 
 
 terrify by punishments, the same indulgences and privileges 
 were bestowed on them who engaged in those holy battles, and 
 with equal reason, as had been bestowed on the crusaders, who 
 fought for the recovery of the holy sepulchre against the Sara- 
 cens in the east. 
 
 It was not till the year 1200 that the names inquisition into 
 heresy, and inquisitor, were heard of. The bishops and their 
 vicars being, in the pope's apprehension, neither so fit nor so 
 diligent as he desired and thought necessary in such a cause, 
 there were, at that time, opportunely for his purpose, two new 
 orders of regulars instituted, those of St. Dominic, and those of 
 St. Francis, both zealously devoted to the church, and men 
 with whom the advancement of Christianity, and the exaltation 
 of the pontifical power, were terms perfectly synonymous. To 
 St. Dominic, indeed, the honour of first suggesting the erection 
 of this extraordinary court, the inquisition, is commonly as- 
 cribed. It was not, however, in the beginning, on the same 
 footing on which it has been settled since, and still continues. 
 The first inquisitors were vested with a double capacity, not 
 very happily conjoined in the same persons ; one was, that of 
 preachers, to convince the heretics by argument; the other, that 
 of prosecutors, to instigate magistrates, without intermission, 
 to employ every possible method of extirpating the contuma- 
 cious, that is, all such as were unreasonable enough not to be 
 convinced by the profound reasonings of those merciless fana- 
 tics and wretched sophisters. I may add a third, that of being 
 spies of Rome, on the bishops, on the secular powers, and on 
 the people, both Romish and heretical. They had it in charge 
 to make strict inquiry, and report to his holiness the number 
 and quality of the heretics, the zeal discovered in those called 
 catholics, the diligence of the bishops, and the forwardness or 
 backwardness, which they found in the secular powers, to com- 
 ply with the desires of the pope. It was from this part of their 
 charge in particular, that they were denominated inquisitors. 
 They had, however, no tribunals. Only they stirred up judges 
 to banish, or otherwise chastise those heretics, whom they 
 brought before them. Sometimes they excited potentates to 
 arm their subjects against them ; at other times they addressed 
 themselves to the mob, and inflamed the populace whom they 
 
410 LECTURES ON 
 
 headed, to arm themselves, and join together in extirpating 
 them. For this purpose they put a cross of cloth upon the gar- 
 ments of those who were willing to devote themselves to this 
 service, and titled them crusaders. This badge (for a badge in 
 such cases is of great consequence, it matters little what it be, 
 whether a red cross, or a blue cockade) operated like a charm 
 on those holy idiots, (pardon the misapplication of the epithet 
 holy in conformity to the style of the barbarians spoken of) and 
 gave the finishing stroke to their delusion. If they were in- 
 flamed before, they now became infuriate, and raised to a super- 
 celestial sort of virtue, which defies all the humbler restraints of 
 reason and humanity. In this way things continued till the 
 year 1250, that is, for half a century. 
 
 The attempts of the fathers inquisitors during that period 
 were greatly aided by the emperor Frederic II., who, in the 
 year 1224, being in Padua, had promulgated four edicts in re- 
 lation to this matter, taking the inquisitors under his protection, 
 imposing on obstinate heretics the punishment of fire, and per- 
 petual imprisonment on the penitent, committing the cognizance 
 of the crime to the ecclesiastical, and the condemnation of the 
 criminal, to the secular judges. This was the first law which 
 made heresy capital. This, however, at first, by reason of the 
 circumstances of the times, and the differences which soon arose 
 betwixt the pope and the emperor, had not all the effect that 
 might have been expected from it. However, it proved very 
 pernicious in example, in denouncing against heresy the punish- 
 ment of death, to w4iich, before that time, it had never been by 
 law subjected. The example was, besides, of a most cruel death; 
 which, nevertheless, came gradually to be adopted, almost uni- 
 versally, into the laws of other countries. 
 
 After the death of Frederic, which happened about the mid- 
 dle of the century, pope Innocent IV. remaining, as it were, 
 sole arbiter of affairs in Lombardy, and some other parts of 
 Italy, applied his mind to the extirpation of heresies, which, 
 during the late troubles in the state, had increased exceedingly. 
 And, considering the labour which had hitherto been employed 
 in this service, by the Franciscan friars, as well as the Domini- 
 can, whose zeal and diligence, unrestrained by either the respect 
 of persons, or the fear of dangers, by any regards to justice, or 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 411 
 
 feelings of humanity, recommended them highly to the pontiff; 
 he judged it the surest remedy, to avail himself of their ardour 
 and abilities, not as formerly, in preaching, or even enlisting 
 crusaders, and inflicting military execution, but by erecting 
 them into a standing tribunal, with very extensive authority, and 
 no other charge than that of the expurgation of heretical pravity. 
 There were two objections against this expedient. One was, 
 that this judicatory appeared an incroachment on the jurisdic- 
 tion of the ordinary, or bishop of the place; the other was, that 
 it was unprecedented, that the secular magistrate, to whom the 
 punishment of heretics was committed, should be excluded from 
 the trial and judgment. All the imperial laws hitherto, even 
 the last severe law of Frederic, and the municipal statutes of 
 every country, had put the cognizance of the fact, and the trial 
 of the accused, though not the description of the crime, into the 
 hands of the magistrate. For removing the first difficulty, the 
 pope devised this temperament : he made the tribunal consist of 
 the inquisitor, and the bishop of the place; wherein, however, 
 the inquisitor v/as not only to be principal, but, in effect, every 
 thing, the bishop having little more than the name of a judge. 
 For removing the second, and in order to give some appearance 
 of authority to the secular powers, they were allowed to appoint 
 the officers to the inquisition, but still with the approbation of 
 the inquisitors, and to send with the inquisitor, when he should 
 go into the country, one of their assessors, whom the inquisi- 
 tors should choose. A third part of the confiscations was to go 
 to the community, in return for which the community was to be 
 at all the expence of keeping the prisons, supporting the prison- 
 ers, &c. These things made the magistrate, in appearance, co- 
 ordinate with the inquisitor, but, in reality, his servant. The 
 infliction of the legal punishment was also in the magistrate, 
 after the heretic had been tried and condemned by the inquisi- 
 tors. But this was so much a thing of course, and which he 
 well knew he could not avoid executing, without incurring the 
 vengeance of the church, that in this he was, in fact, no better 
 than the spiritual judge's executioner. His office was, in no 
 respect, magisterial, it was merely servile. 
 
 On this footing the inquisition was erected in the year 1251, 
 in those provinces in Italy most under the pope's eye, Romania, 
 
412 LECTURES ON 
 
 Lombardy, Marca Trevigiana, and entrusted to Dominican 
 friars. Afterwards it was extended to more distant provinces. 
 Thirty-one rules, or articles, defining the powers and jurisdic- 
 tion, and regulating the procedure of this new judicatory, were 
 devised ; and all rulers and magistrates were commanded, by a 
 bull issued for the purpose, to give, under pain of excommunica- 
 tion and interdicts, punctual obedience, and every possible assist- 
 ance to this holy court. The inquisitors were empowered to 
 fulminate against the refractory. 
 
 Afterwards, in the year 1484, king Ferdinand the catholic, 
 having put a period to the reign of the Mahometans in Gra- 
 nada, did, to purge his own, and his consort Ehzabeth's domi- 
 nions, from both Moors and Jews, erect, with consent of pope 
 Sextus IV., a tribunal of inquisition in all the kingdoms pos- 
 sessed by him, which took cognizance not only of Judaism and 
 mahometism, but also of heresy and witchcraft. The form of 
 the judicatory then introduced, and still remaining there is, 
 that the king nominates an ecclesiastic to be general inquisitor 
 for all his dominions, and his holiness confirms him, if he ap- 
 prove the choice; for he may reject him if he please. The in- 
 quisitor named by the king, and confirmed by the pontiff, names 
 the particular inquisitors destined for every place, who, before 
 entering on their office, must obtain the royal approbation. The 
 king, besides, deputes a council, or senate, over this business, 
 who sit where the court resides, and of which the inquisitor 
 general is president. This council has supreme jurisdiction, 
 makes new regulations when it sees occasion, determines differ- 
 ences between particular inquisitors, punishes the faults of their 
 officers, and receives appeals. From Spain it extended to its 
 dependencies, and was introduced into Sicily, Sardinia, and the 
 Indies. 
 
 Attempts, however, of this kind have not proved equally suc- 
 cessful in all Roman Catholic states, or even the greater part 
 of them. It was never in the power of the pope to obtain the 
 establishment of this tribunal in many of the most populous 
 countries in subjection to the see of Rome. In some it was in- 
 troduced, and soon after expelled, in such a manner as effectual- 
 ly to preclude a renewal of the attempt. The difficulties arose 
 from two causes: one was, the conduct of the inquisitors, and 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 413 
 
 their immoderate severity, as well as their unbounded extortion 
 and avarice, to which I may add, the propensity they showed, 
 on every occasion, to extend, beyond measure, their own au- 
 thority; insomuch, that they were proceeding to engross, on 
 one pretext or other, all the criminal jurisdiction of the magis- 
 trate. Under heresy, they insisted that infidelity^ blasphemy^ 
 perjury, sorcery, poisoning, bigamy, usury, were comprehended. 
 The other cause was, that the tribunal was found to be so bur- 
 densome, that the community refused to be at the expence. In 
 several places it was found necessary to ease the public of this 
 charge, and in order to abate somewhat of the excessive rigour, 
 which had raised so much clamour against it, a greater share of 
 the power was given to the bishop. These things served to 
 facilitate its introduction into Tuscany and Arragon, and even 
 into some cities of France ; but in this last country it was not 
 long permitted to remain. 
 
 It is not entirely on the same footing in the diflPerent places 
 where it has been received. In Spain and Portugal this scourge 
 and disgrace of humanity glares, monster like, with its most 
 frightful aspect. In Rome it is much more tolerable. Papal 
 avarice has served to counterbalance papal tyranny, and, in de- 
 fect of a better principle, produced what, if it do not deserve the 
 name, has some of the good consequences of moderation. The 
 wealth of modern Rome arises very much from the constant re- 
 sort of strangers of all countries and denominations, and, for 
 the most part, of the higher ranks. Nothing would prove a 
 more effectual check to that resort, and, consequently, to the 
 unceasing influx of riches into that capital, than such a horrid 
 tribunal as those which, from Lisbon and Madrid, diffuse a ter- 
 ror which is felt in the utmost confines of those miserable king- 
 doms. In Venice it is, indeed, as moderate as it is possible for 
 a judicatory to be, which is founded on a principle not more 
 false than tyrannical, that men are responsible for their opinions 
 to any human tribunal. But the particular constitution of that 
 court was settled by an express stipulation between the pon- 
 tiff and the state. The Venetian senate would not admit an 
 inquisition into their dominions on any other terms, than such 
 as secured at least some regard to justice and humanity in their 
 proceedings, and prevented them from extending their jurisdic- 
 
414 LECTURES ON 
 
 tion beyond the original limits, or arriving at an independency 
 on the secular powers. With so much caution and jealousy 
 did that wise aristocracy guard against the incroachment of the 
 church. 
 
 It is no more than doing justice to many Roman Catholic 
 states to acknowledge, that they are almost as much enemies to 
 that infernal tribunal, as even protestants themselves. Nor can 
 I in this be justly accused of advancing any thing rashly : the 
 tumults which the attempts to introduce it into some parts of 
 Italy, Milan and Naples in particular, and afterwards into 
 France, and other countries called catholic, and its actual expul- 
 sion from some places, when, to appearance, settled, are the 
 strongest evidences of the general sentiments of the people con- 
 cerning it. It is only to be regretted, that those who, in this 
 matter, think as we do, should be inconsistent enough to ima- 
 gine, that a despotism, which required for its support such dia- 
 bolical engines, could, wdth any propriety, be said to come from 
 God. But so far have those called Christians departed from 
 the simplicity that is in Christ, that they will admit any rule 
 for judging of the title of prophets, or teachers, in divine things, 
 rather than the rule given by him whom they call Master. By 
 their fruits ye shall know them. Do men gather grapes off 
 thorns, or Jigs off thistles ? No test of a divine mission, if Jesus 
 Christ may be credited, is of any significance without this. 
 
 It may not be improper to conclude our account of the origin 
 of the inquisition, with a few things in illustration of the spirit 
 in which it proceeds, that every one may have it in his power to 
 judge, whether the relation it bears to the spirit of Christ be 
 denominated more properly resemblance, or contrariety. It is 
 so far from following the rules of almost all other tribunals, 
 where any regard is shown to equity, or the rights of human na- 
 ture, that, in every respect, where the ecclesiastic power has 
 not been checked by the secular, those rules have been reversed. 
 The account is entirely just, as far as it goes, which is given by 
 Voltaire of the Spanish inquisition, and he might have added, 
 of the Portuguese, for both are on the same model. " Their 
 '' form of proceeding is an infallible way to destroy whomsoever 
 ** the inquisitors please." And let it be observed, that they 
 have strong motives for destroying a rich culprit, as their sen-' 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 415 
 
 tence of condemnation is followed by the confiscation of all his 
 estate, real and personal, of which two-thirds go to the church, 
 and one-third to the state ; so that it may be said, with the 
 strictest propriety, that the judges themselves are parties, hav- 
 ing a personal interest in the issue against the prisoner. " The 
 " prisoners are not confronted with the accuser or informer." 
 Nay, they are not so much as told who it is that informs. His 
 name is kept secret to encourage the trade of informing. And, 
 surely, a better expedient could not have been devised for pro- 
 moting this dark business, than by thus securing at once conceal- 
 ment and gratification, with impunity, to private malice, envy, 
 and revenge. Further, " there is no informer, or witness, who 
 " is not listened to. A public convict, a notorious malefactor, 
 " an infamous person, a common prostitute, a child, are in the 
 " holy office, though no where else, creditable accusers and wit- 
 " nesses. Even the son may depose against his father, the 
 " wife against her husband." The detection of the grossest 
 prevarication in the delator and witnesses is hardly ever punish- 
 ed, unless with a very gentle rebuke ; let it be observed, by the 
 way, that to the profligate and abandoned they can be very 
 gentle, for they dread, above all things, to do aught that might 
 discourage informers, spies, and witnesses. And that there may 
 be no risk of a want of information, they have, in all parts of 
 the kingdom, spies of all different qualities, who are denomi- 
 nated the familiars of the holy office, a place of which even men 
 of high rank are sometimes ambitious, from different motives, 
 some for the greater personal security, others because it em- 
 powers them to take a severe revenge on their enemies, and 
 others, no doubt, because they think they do God good service. 
 The wretched prisoner is no more made acquainted with his crime 
 than with his accuser. His being told the one, might possibly 
 lead him to guess the other. To avoid this, he is compelled, 
 by tedious confinement, in a noisome dungeon, where he never 
 sees a face but the jailor's, and is not permitted the use either of 
 books, or of pen and ink, or, when confinement does not succeed, 
 he is compelled, by a train of the most excruciating tortures, 
 " to inform against himself; to divine and to confess the crime 
 " laid to his qharge, of which often he is ignorant." An ef- 
 fectual method to bring nine-tenths of mankind to confess any 
 
416 LECTURES ON 
 
 thing, true or false, which may gratify their tormentors, and put 
 an end to their misery. " This procedure," adds our historian, 
 *' unheard of till the institution of this court, makes the whole 
 ^* kingdom tremble. Suspicion reigns in every breast. Friend- 
 *' ship and openness are at an end. The brother dreads his bro- 
 ^' ther, the father his son. Hence taciturnity is become the 
 ** characteristic of a nation endued with all the vivacity natural to 
 <' the inhabitants of a warm and fruitful climate. To this tribu- 
 ** nal we must likewise impute that profound ignorance of sound 
 ^' philosophy, in which Spain lies buried, whilst Germany, Eng- 
 ** land, France, and even Italy, have discovered so many truths, 
 ** and enlarged the sphere of our knowledge. Never is hu- 
 *' man nature so debased, as where ignorance is armed with 
 *' power." 
 
 In regard to the extent of power given to inquisitors by papal 
 bulls, and generally admitted by the secular authority in those 
 countries where the inquisition is established, I shall give the 
 few following instances out of many that might be produced. 
 First, it is ordered, that the convicts be burnt alive, and in pub- 
 lic; and that all they have be confiscated : all princes and rulers 
 who refuse their concurrence in executing these and the other 
 sentences authorised by the church, shall be brought under cen- 
 sure, that is, anathematized and excommunicated, their states 
 or kingdoms laid under an interdict, &c. The house also, in 
 which the heretic is apprehended must be razed to the ground, 
 even though it be not his, but the property of a person totally 
 unsuspected. This ferocious kind of barbarity, so utterly irre- 
 concileable to all the principles of equity, is, nevertheless, ex- 
 tremely politic, as it is a powerful means of raising horror in the 
 ignorant populace, and of increasing the awe of this tribunal in 
 men of all denominations, who must consider it as extremely 
 ■dangerous to have the smallest connection with any person sus- 
 pected of heresy, or so much as to admit him into their houses. 
 The inquisitors are also empowered to demand of any person 
 whom they suspect, (and, for their suspicions, they are not obliged 
 to give a reason,) that he solemnly adjure heretical opinions, and 
 even give pecuniary security that he shall continue a good ca- 
 tholic. The court of inquisition are also privileged to have their 
 own guards, and are authorised to give licenses to others to 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 417 
 
 carry arms, and to enlist crusaders. One of Paul the I\'th's 
 bulls does not allow a reprieve from the sentence to one who, on 
 the first conviction, recants his opinion, if the heresy be in any 
 of the five articles mentioned in that bull. But what is, if pos- 
 sible, still more intolerable, is, that, by a bull of Pius the Vth, 
 no sentence in favour of the accused shall be held a final acquit- 
 tal, though pronounced after canonical purgation ; but the boly 
 office shall have it in their power, though no new evidence or 
 presumption has appeared, to re-commence the trial, on the very 
 same grounds they had examined formerly. This ordinance 
 ensures to the wretch, who has been once accused, a course of 
 terror and torment for life, from which no discovery of inno- 
 cence, though clear as day, no judgment of the court can re- 
 lease him. Another bull of the same pontiff ordains, that who- 
 ever shall behave injuriously, or so much as threaten a notary, 
 or other servant of the inquisition, or a witness examined in the 
 court, shall, beside excommunication, be held guilty of high 
 treason, be punished capitally, his goods confiscated, his chil- 
 dren rendered infamous, and incapable of succeding to any body 
 by testament. Every one is subjected to the same punishment, 
 who makes an escape out of the prison of the office, or who 
 attempts, though unsuccessfully, to make it ; and whoever fa- 
 vours or intercedes for any such. In these clauses, persons of 
 the highest rank, even princes, are comprehended. 
 
 Every one must be sensible, that there is something in the 
 constitution of this tribunal so monstrously unjust, so exorbitant- 
 ly cruel, that it is matter of astonishment, that in any country, 
 the people, as well as the secular powers, would not rather have 
 encountered any danger, than have submitted to receive it. 
 Nor can there be a stronger evidence of the brutish ignorance, 
 as well as gross depravity of any nation, than that such a judi- 
 catory has an establishment among them. The exorbitance of 
 their power, as well as the pernicious tendency of their rules, 
 are, in effect, acknowledged by their superiors at Rome. In a 
 directory printed there, by authority, in 1584, it is said ex- 
 pressly, that if the inquisitors were resolved to exercise their 
 power in its utmost extent, they could, with facility, drive the 
 whole people into rebellion. Now if the power be so excessive 
 and so hazardous, what shall we say to this additional circum- 
 
 Dd " 
 
418 LECTURES ON 
 
 stance that attends it, that it is, in several instances, so ill de- 
 fined, as to furnish a pretext to him who is possessed of it, 
 whenever his ambition or inclination leads him, of stretching it 
 to any extent. This, indeed, may be said to be consequeivt on 
 all exorbitant power. Though all the power of a state or na- 
 tion be not formally given to one particular branch or member, 
 if so much is given to it, that what remains is too weak to serve 
 as a controul upon it, the whole is virtually given to it. And 
 if, in Spain and Portugal, the ecclesiastical power has not swal- 
 lowed up the secular, and thereby engrossed the whole authori- 
 ty, they are more indebted to the light which has been diffused 
 through the rest of Europe, in these latter centuries, and the 
 jealousy of the other European states, than to any remains of 
 either sense or virtue in those nations themselves. It must be 
 attended to, that the ecclesiastic power, in every country, which 
 acknowledges the pope, is but a branch of a foreign jurisdiction, 
 namely, that of Rome. Now it is the interest of the secular 
 powers, in every kingdom and state, to take care that the fo- 
 reign power, the papal, (absurdly called the spiritual) do not 
 quite overwhelm the temporal, either among themselves, or in 
 any other kingdom or state. For if it should in any country, 
 there would be ground to dread, that with such acquisitions it 
 might gradually prove an overmatch for the civil powers in 
 every other. Now this is a danger to which popish countries 
 are much more exposed than protestant. In the former, Rome 
 is already possessed of a considerable share of jurisdiction, and 
 has great influence on the minds of the people; whereas, in 
 the latter, she has neither jurisdiction nor influence ; and, con- 
 sequently, could have no hold for effecting a revolution in her 
 favour. With these she could do nothing but by invasion and 
 conquest, for which, with all her advantages, she is very ill fur- 
 nished. That Spain and Portugal, therefore, as civil powers, 
 are of any weight in the balance of Europe, they owe more to 
 the discernment, the vigilance, and the virtue of others, than to 
 their own. 
 
 From what has been said, we may remark by the way, the 
 injustice there is in so connecting, or associating, the Romish 
 religion with the inquisition, as to conclude, that, to be a Ro- 
 manist, and to be a friend to that tribunal, denote one and the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 410 
 
 same thing. The case is so fiir otherwise, that we arc, on the 
 best grounds, warranted to affirm, tliat nine-tenths of that com- 
 munion detest the inquisition as much as we do. And of this 
 the most irrefragable evidences have been given in France, in 
 Germany, and even in Italy itself. How they should have the 
 inconsistency, notwithstanding this, to acknowledge a power as 
 from God, which has found it necessary to recur to expedients 
 so manifestly from hell, so subversive of every principle of sound 
 morality and religion, can be regarded only as one of those con- 
 tradictions, for which human characters, both in individuals and 
 in nations, are often so remarkable. That the policy of Rome 
 bears the marks, not of the wisdom which is from above, which 
 is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, 
 full of mercy and of good fruits, without partiality, and without 
 hypocrisy ; but of that which flows from a very different source, 
 and is earthly, sensual, devilish, is so manifest, that the person 
 who needs to be convinced of it, seems to be beyond the power 
 of argument and reason. 
 
 Upon the whole, how amazingly different, nay, how perfect- 
 ly opposite, in disposition, in maxims, and in effects, are the 
 spirit of primitive Christianity, and the spirit of modern Rome? 
 Let any considerate and ingenuous mind impartially examine 
 and say. Are heaven and hell, Christ and Belial, more adverse 
 than the pictures I have, in this discourse, and the preceding, 
 exhibited to your view? Let it be observed also, that these are 
 not caricatures drawn by enemies, but the genuine features, as 
 exhibited in the works of their own authors. 
 
 D d2 
 
420 LECTURES ON 
 
 LECTURE XXVII. 
 
 1 HAVE now given you some account of the rise and pro- 
 gress of the spirit of persecution in the church, and have par- 
 ticularly traced the origin, and unfolded the constitution, of 
 that dreadful tribunal, the inquisition. Ye must have perceiv- 
 ed, that in every thing which relates to the procedure of that 
 court, there is an unrelenting barbarity, which bids defiance to 
 all the principles of justice; and as, in all respects, it is without 
 example in past ages, so I hope it will remain without a paral- 
 lel in future. The favourers of ecclesiastic tyranny, sensible 
 of the horrid appearance which the rapacity, as well as the fe- 
 rocity, of this tribunal exhibits, and the very unfavourable con- 
 clusion it suggests to the discerning, have put their ingenuity 
 to the rack to devise reasons, or what may pass with their vota- 
 ries for reasons, in support of it. 
 
 According to Fra Paolo, in his account of the inquisition of 
 Venice, amongst other peculiarities of the holy office in that 
 state, which were, I may say, extorted by the secular from the 
 ecclesiastic power, one is, that they do not admit the confisca- 
 tion of the property of the accused, whether he be present and 
 convicted, or declared contumacious, and condemned in absence ; 
 but appoint, that his estate, both real and personal, shall go to 
 his lawful heirs, as though he had died a natural death. He 
 says, very justly, in vindication of this article, that it is always 
 pernicious, to mingle pecuniary matters with what concerns re- 
 ligion, which ought to proceed solely from a view to the glory 
 of God. For when men see, that the zeal of the judges, in con- 
 signing heretics to the flames, is the sure means of procuring 
 great acquisitions of worldly pelf, it will be impossible to pre- 
 vent their being scandalized, or to persuade them, however true, 
 that the service of God was the sole, or even the primary mo- 
 tive. He adds, the court of Rome never ceases, on every oc- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 4'21 
 
 currcnce, to blame this Venetian ordinance, reckoning, that the 
 moderation enjoined by the most serene republic reproaches the 
 Roman ordinance with excessive severity. That, says he, 
 which their partisans maintain in pubHc in defence of their own 
 practice is, that heresy is treason against the divine Majesty, 
 which it is proper to avenge more severely than treason commit- 
 ted against a human creature; and that therefore it is a perver- 
 sion of order, when he who offends man receives a greater pu- 
 nishment, than he who offends God. Now treason against 
 man is punished with the confiscation of goods; much more 
 then ought treason against God, a crime always incurred by he- 
 resy, to be so punished. 
 
 I shall give you this author's answer, rendered literally from 
 his own words, in a work written in Italian, published at Ve- 
 nice, a Roman Catholic state, and composed by order of the 
 Doge, the chief magistrate of the republic, to whom it is dedi- 
 cated. And I desire you farther to take notice, that the au- 
 thor is not only a Roman Catholic, but a priest, nay, a friar. 
 AVhen this is considered, you will be surprised much more at 
 what he controverts with the advocates of papal despotism, than 
 at what he yields to them. " This argument," says he, " more 
 *' specious than solid, is as a shadow without a body. For it 
 ** would condemn their own constitutions, which pardon heresy, 
 " the first time, upon being recanted; whereas treason against 
 ^' the sovereign is not, on any terms, pardoned even the first 
 " time; whence it would follow, that by their own reasoning, 
 " they make less account of offending God than of offending 
 ** man. But the truth is, that in imposing punishments, re- 
 " spect is had not solely to the hcinousness of the transgression, 
 ** but to the attendant circumstances of the injury done to 
 '' others, of the baseness wherewith the action was accompanied, 
 '^ or of the malignity of disposition shown by it. Royal ma- 
 ^'jestyisnot injured, unless through the evident malice and 
 ** intention of the oflPender, whereas heresy is commonly the ef- 
 " feet of ignorance. Hence this almost always merits compas- 
 ** sion, that never. Penalties are intended more for an exam- 
 '* pie to others, than for the chastisement of the delinquent. 
 " The confiscation of goods for treason terrifies others, who are 
 ** restrained, through love to their offspring, preferring their 
 
42^ LECTURES ON 
 
 *' interest to the gratification of those passions, which instigate 
 *' them against the prince. But in the case of heresy, every 
 *' one conceives himself incited by spiritual motives, to which 
 " all regards to family ought to be postponed. The event de- 
 " monstrates, that through divine grace, this most happy state 
 '' of Venice, whose clemency gives great and universal satisfac- 
 " tion, remains as free from the tares of heresy, without pillag- 
 " ing any man, as other states where this pillage is made with 
 " the utmost rigour. Wherefore, without regard to the rules, 
 " examples, or reflections of others, it is proper for us to pre- 
 " serve those usages, of whose utility we are ascertained by ex- 
 *' perience." 
 
 Thus far our author. He admits the argument used by 
 Rome to be specious. And so it is, doubtless, to a Roman 
 Catholic. It falls in with his earliest and most rooted preju- 
 dices, and suits the mode of reasoning, to which he has been 
 habituated from his infancy. To a judicious and consistent 
 protestant, it is a palpable sophism, and has as little specious- 
 ness as solidity. It is, in effect, the same argument, of which 
 I showed the futility in a former discourse, with only the change 
 of the terra. There the misapplication was of the word blas- 
 phemy ; here it is of the word treason. The abuse of the term 
 is, in this instance, if possible, still more flagrant than in the 
 other. In treason there is always a malicious design against 
 the life or crown of the sovereign; there is nothing analogous 
 to this in what they call heresy. On the contrary, the principal 
 inducement with the alleged heretic, to bear his suffering pa- 
 tiently, is an opinion (which, whether true or false, is genuinely 
 his opinion) that he thereby honours God, does his duty, and 
 discharges his conscience. What they call obstinacy, he cannot 
 avoid considering as perseverance and Christian fortitude, both 
 of which are incumbent, and very important duties. A retrac- 
 tation not produced by conviction, but extorted by terror, for 
 himself and his children, he does and must consider, as a real 
 defection from God, a betraying of the rights of conscience, and 
 of the interests of truth, as the vilest hypocrisy and impiety. 
 Nay, it cannot be considered otherwise even by his tormentors 
 themselves, who arc always ready to acknowledge the guilt of a 
 false confession, (to which they arc doing their utmost to bring 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 423 
 
 the prisoner). At the same time, I acknowledge, that there 
 is a sort of treason in heresy ; hut it is not treason against God, 
 nor is it treason against the state, but it is treason against the 
 priesthood ; for whatever calls its iniallibility in question, as an 
 avowed difference in religious opinions undoubtedly does, is an 
 attack upon the hierarchy, and, consequently, subversive of the 
 more than rayal pretensions of church authority. This is the 
 true source of that rancour and virulence, with which this ima- 
 ginary crime has been persecuted by popes and ecclesiastics, 
 and by none more than by those, whose whole lives bore wit- 
 ness, that they regarded no more the principles than the pre- 
 cepts of that religion, for which they seemed to be inflamed with 
 a zeal so violent. 
 
 I shall only add on this subject, that if there were no other 
 article, (as tliere are more than fifty,) we should have here suf- 
 ficient ground for confuting those bold pretensions to constancy 
 and uniformity in religious sentiments, in what is called the ca- 
 tholic church, with which the bishop of Meaux introduces his 
 history of the variations of protestants [a]. Opinions, on the 
 subject I have been treating, more opposite to those held uni- 
 versally by Christians of the first three centuries, than those 
 openly avowed by the Romish church in later ages, and strenu- 
 ously supported by her rulers, it would be impossible to con- 
 ceive. But of this I have given sufficient evidence in the two 
 preceding discourses. The difference is, indeed, great in this 
 respect, between Romanists of the two last ages and Christians 
 of the fourth and fifth; but in these there cannot be said to be 
 a direct contrariety. Changes of this kind are always gradual. 
 In regard to the present century, there are some evident symp- 
 toms, that even in Roman Catholic countries, the tide of opi- 
 nion on these articles begins to turn, and that their notions are 
 becoming daily more favourable to right reason, justice, and 
 Iiumanity. Every sincere protestant will rejoice in the change. 
 But how much, on the other hand, will it prove to such, a sub- 
 ject of heart-felt sorrow, when he sees, in any protestant na- 
 tion, (as sometimes undeniably happens, and of which we had 
 some terrible examples in this very island, no farther back than 
 the years seventeen hundred and seventy-nine, and eighty) a 
 [a] Sec the Preface to that Woi'k. 
 
4'2i LECTURES ON 
 
 strong propensity to those very principles, which are the surest 
 badge of spiritual tyranny, and have long remained the distin- 
 guishing disgrace of Roman usurpation. 
 
 I have now illustrated, with as much brevity as the subject 
 would admit, Rome's three great engines for promoting catholic 
 ignorance, and preventing every acquisition in knowledge which 
 might prove subversive of her high pretensions ; first, the con- 
 cealment of scripture from the people, and even of the import 
 of the forms of public worship, by the daily use of a dead lan- 
 guage : secondly, the prohibition, under the severest penalties, 
 of every thing which might serve to enlighten, and undeceive 
 the world ; and thirdly, their system of persecution. The first 
 two were chiefly calculated for preventing all intercourse with 
 that most formidable enemy of superstition, knowledge ; the 
 third, intended principally for checking its progress wherever it 
 appears to have made any advances ; and that both by silencing all 
 who had ventured to listen to her dictates ; and, by deterring 
 others from the imitation of those over-curious enquirers, who 
 are not satisfied to see with other men's eyes, and hear with 
 other men's ears, but would have more light and information 
 on the most interesting of all subjects, than their ghostly fathers 
 think their organs capable of bearing. 
 
 The second expedient, however, is of a later date than the 
 other two ; for, though there were prohibitions of books some 
 centuries before the reformation, they were very general, and 
 related only to the books of those who had been, by the church, 
 declared heretics. It was not till after the invention of printing, 
 nay, and after the reformation, that the indices expurgatorii 
 were devised. These have improved this engine, by giving it 
 all the perfection whereof it is susceptible. If they had timely 
 thought of smothering the art of printing in its infancy, which 
 was about the middle of the fifteenth century, I believe this 
 preventive device, as it was simpler, would have been more 
 easily executed, and more effectual, than that corrective expe- 
 dient of the index, which was adopted afterwards. Simpleryhe- 
 cause preventive, doing the business at once; whereas, the cor- 
 rective method stands incessantly in need of additions made to 
 it, on account of the many volumes which are annually, in all 
 parts of Europe, issuing from the press ; and which, from the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 425 
 
 easy intercourse that now obtains between different, and even 
 distant, nations, are quickly circulated through the whole. It 
 might also have been more easily executed ; for, though there 
 were many of those called heretics then scattered through the 
 world, they were not persons of any rank or influence, nor was 
 there, at that time, any nation in the west which had separated 
 from Rome. And though, as was before observed to you, 
 every state had not admitted the inquisition, the paramount au- 
 thority of Rome, in spirituals, was acknowledged, and in mat- 
 ters that seemed to regard solely the purity of the faith, very 
 implicitly submitted to by all. 
 
 Nay, the ignorance and most absurd prejudices of the age 
 might have been of great service to the ecclesiastics, in secur- 
 ing success to the preventive remedy, if it had but occurred to 
 their reverences, and been attempted in time. There was then 
 not only a strong, and, I may say, an universal, belief in sor- 
 cery, and judicial astrology, but the first specimens that were 
 exhibited of the typographical art were, in fact, strongly sus- 
 pected to be derived from the suggestion of evil spirits. And 
 this itself proved the foundation of a great deal of trouble and 
 persecution to John Faust, the inventor, (whom some of you 
 perhaps will know better by the name of Dr. Faustus.) Nor 
 did his acquittal by the parliament of Paris, when prosecuted y 
 before them for magic, remove the suspicions, which the peo- 
 ple had entertained concerning him ; insomuch, that there was 
 no defect of combustible materials for the ecclesiastic thunders 
 to set on fire, if the matter had been timely attended to. But 
 Mentz, the city where printing was first attempted, lay luckily 
 at a great distance from Rome ; in consequence of which, this 
 admirable invention had advanced too far, was grown too con- 
 siderable, and had gotten too many rich, and great, and learned, 
 patrons, to support it, before an alarm, of sufificient force to de- 
 stroy it, could be given; whereas, had the attempt at printing been 
 first made in the heart of Italy, where that terrible Argus, the 
 pope and conclave, is ever on the watch, or in Spain, or Portu- 
 gal, under the eye of a vigilant and able inquisitor, capable of 
 foreseeing the consequences to the empire of ignorance and su- 
 perstition, there is reason to believe, that the inventor, though 
 in effect a greater benefactor to the human race, than all the 
 
426 tECTURES ON 
 
 conquerors and heroes that ever existed, one who has done more 
 to enlighten and civilize mankind than even the wisest legisla- 
 tors, had, in reward of his ingenuity, been put to an ignomini- 
 ous and tormenting death, his name branded with indelible in- 
 famy, and this most useful and beautiful invention had been 
 stifled in the cradle, and never more heard of. If this had been 
 accomplished, no body can doubt, that it would have been a 
 much more effectual method than the index for answering their 
 purpose; for that would have struck at the root of the evil, 
 whereof this serves only to lop off the branches. 
 
 But it pleased providence to bless with success the noble dis- 
 covery, which has brought learning, formerly inaccessible to all 
 but men of princely fortunes, within the reach of persons in mo- 
 derate circumstances, and has diffused, almost every where, a 
 knowledge which has proved more baneful to the cause of super- 
 stition and tyranny, than any event that has happened since the 
 first promulgation of the gospel. Knowledge had, indeed, been 
 gaining ground for some centuries before, but its progress was 
 slow. This served to accelerate its progress to an inconceivable 
 degree. Light, acquired by one, was quickly diffused every 
 where, and communicated to multitudes. Nor was it only by a 
 wider diffusion, but by occasioning also an immense increase of 
 knowledge, that the discovery of the typographic art proved the 
 source of the changes which were soon after effected. When, 
 by the remarkable facility of communication, learning was 
 brought within the reach of the middle ranks, the dead languages 
 became a very general study. The scriptures were read by most 
 students in the Latin vulgate, and, by a few deeper scholars, in 
 the Greek. The early writers of the church were also read. 
 Reading naturally brought reflection, and occasioned comparison. 
 They could hardly avoid comparing the simplicity, and poverty, 
 and meanness, in respect of worldly circumstances, of our Lord, 
 and his apostles, and most of the primitive saints and martyrs, 
 with the pomp, and splendour, and opulence, of the rulers of 
 the church in their own days. It is said, that a picture which 
 Huss had procured, and exhibited to the people, wherein the 
 entry of our Lord into Jerusalem, riding on an ass, attended by 
 his disciples on foot, in a very homely garb, was contrasted by 
 a procession of the pope and cardinals, in their pontifical habits, 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 4^J 
 
 and magnificently mounted on the finest horses, richly capari- 
 soned, and adorned with gold and silver and jewels, did not a 
 little contribute to excite the indignation of spectators against 
 their spiritual lords, as bearing no resemblance to those meek, 
 humble, and unassuming men, from whom they pretended to 
 derive all their high powers and prerogatives. 
 
 But the difference, in respect of wealth and worldly grandeur 
 between the predecessors and their pretended successors, would 
 not have had a great effect, had this been the only difference. 
 It was but too evident, that the disparity was not less in dispo- 
 sition and character than in external circumstances. When 
 once the clergy of any note had gotten considerably above the 
 middling ranks of life, and lived not only in ease, but in opu- 
 lence, and even in splendour, it was but too visible, that, in pro- 
 portion as they became more rich and powerful, they grew less 
 active and useful. They lived in luxury and idleness, often in 
 the most gross and scandalous vices. As to what were properly 
 the duties of their charge, the instruction of the people, and 
 presiding in the public worship, and sacred offices amoncr them, 
 these were but too commonly considered as a sort of drudo-ery, 
 very unsuitable to men of their dignity and figure, and were 
 therefore either totally neglected, or devolved on those whose 
 poverty, however ill qualified they were, might induce them, for 
 a living, to undertake the task. At the same time, whatever 
 could be considered as a prerogative, or privilege of the office, 
 whatever could contribute to the augmentation of their riches, 
 or of their power, was contended for with such an earnestness 
 and zeal, as the apostles and primitive martyrs never displayed, 
 unless in support of the faith and religious institution once de- 
 livered by their master unto the saints. 
 
 Thus every thing had run into extremes among them. The 
 dignified clergy, as they were both wealthy and powerful, were 
 generally lazy, proud, ambitious, envious, vindictive, and some- 
 times profligate. Those again, on whom the burden of the ser- 
 vice was devolved, as they were both needy and dependent, and 
 often ignorant, had a share of the vices, which commonly accom- 
 pany those circumstances. They were false, mercenary, and 
 servile. How much men were confirmed in the very worst opi- 
 nions, which had been formed of the order, by the great schism 
 
428 LECTURES ON 
 
 in the papacy, which lasted about half a century, when the 
 Christian world was divided between two, at first, and afterwards 
 three, rival popes, some nations adhering to one, and others to 
 another, each claiming to be the only true head of the church, 
 and calling every other an usurper, it would be superfluous to 
 remark. It was this division in the popedom, both in the head, 
 and in the members, which, as much as any thing, exposed, in 
 the strongest light the irreligion, the worldly ends, the vile in- 
 trigues, and even the infamy, of ecclesiastic leaders. I would not, 
 however, be understood, in the character now given, as mean- 
 ing to include all, without exception. I know that, even in the 
 worst times, there were, both in the higher and in the lower 
 ranks of clergymen, exceptions of persons, whose characters were 
 irreproachable, and lives exemplary. But what I say regards 
 the generality, or the much greater number, of the clerical body. 
 And for the truth of it, I desire no other vouchers than their 
 own most celebrated historians and writers, men who not only 
 lived and died in the communion of Rome, but also were zeal- 
 ous for preserving her unity, and advancing her honour. It 
 will readily be admitted, as a circumstance of additional weight, 
 that the different kingdoms and states of Europe had, at length, 
 attained a better defined and more settled constitution than for- 
 merly ; that statesmen had begun to entertain more extensive 
 views of policy, and princes to understand better their own rights 
 and interests. As men's eyes were opened, they saw more 
 clearly the encroachments and usurpations of the priesthood. 
 
 This discovery, co-operating with the abhorrence and contempt 
 they entertained of many of the priests themselves, on personal 
 accounts, namely, the neglect or prostitution of the sacred func- 
 tions, and the dissoluteness of their lives, led them to enquire a 
 little into the foundations of the high powers and privileges 
 which they claimed. This was a subject that would not bear 
 examination. As the great foundations of the hierarchy were 
 in the people's ignorance, superstition, and credulity, when these 
 are removed, the whole fabric falls to pieces. 
 
 Now it is remarkable, that in all the heresies which sprang 
 up in the different parts of Europe, since the revival of letters, 
 church power seems to have been the principal object struck at. 
 Whereas, in ancient times, it was only incidentally affected. 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 429 
 
 Tins will appear manifest to one who considers the accusations 
 brought against Waldo, of Lyons, or at least his followers, 
 WiclifF of England, Huss of Bohemia, Luther of Germany, 
 and Zuinglius of Switzerland ; and compares them with those 
 brought against the heresiarchs of the primitive ages, such as 
 Arius, Pelagius, Nestorius, Eutychius, in none of whom was 
 there any direct or pointed aim against ecclesiastics. In those 
 early times, indeed, church power, far from being grown up to 
 such an enormous pitch as it arrived at afterwards, was but in 
 its non-age; nor were churchmen themselves become obnoxious 
 to universal odium, by their laziness and arrogance, as well as 
 by the immorality of their lives. This difference of circum- 
 stances gave a taint to the modern sects, which plainly distin- 
 guished them from the ancient, and contributed not a little to 
 the virulence which their disputes excited in their adversaries. 
 The wounds given to these were the deeper, and the more apt 
 to fester, inasmuch as they awaked in their breasts a conscious- 
 ness, that they were not unmerited. Those antagonists saw 
 but too clearly, that the majority, even of their friends, who 
 would not admit the conclusions drawn by the reformers, (as 
 they called themselves, or heretics, as their enemies called them) 
 agreed but too much with them in their premises : a reflection 
 which could not fail to gall them exceedingly. 
 
 The usurpation and tyranny of ecclesiastical superiors, the 
 ignorance in which they kept the people, were at first almost 
 the only topics. From this they proceeded to censure practical 
 abuses in ceremonies and discipline. The third and last step of 
 their progress was to expose errors in doctrine. In these, in- 
 deed, when once they were propounded for discussion to the 
 public, they laid the principal stress of their cause. These they 
 considered as the source of every thing else that was amiss. 
 But it was not with them that they began. The shameful in- 
 continence and debauchery of the clergy were the occasion, that 
 very early and very generally, the canons, which enjoin celi- 
 bacy, became the subject of offence and clamour. The absur- 
 dity of reading the scriptures to the people, and performing the 
 public offices of religion in a language which they do not 
 understand, it required but a small share of knowledge, or ra- 
 ther of reflection and common sense, to enable them to discover. 
 
430 LECTURES ON 
 
 The manifest inconsistency of the practice, which had been in- 
 troduced, had gradually spread, and was at last become univer- 
 sal, of administrating the eucharist to the people in one kind 
 only, the bread, (the inconsistency of this I say) with the ex- 
 press words of the institution, recorded in no fewer than four 
 books of scripture ; the exorbitant power and immunities, which, 
 through the criminal, as well as weak, indulgence of the secular 
 powers, clergymen had obtained, and of which they made so 
 bad a use, aflPorded matter of loud and universal outcry. 
 
 For some centuries before Luther's days, these, and the like 
 corruptions, had been the subject of complaint and murmur in 
 various places. But, from the time of Wicliff's preaching in 
 England, and sending abroad his sentiments to the world in 
 Latin tracts, which was near a century and a half before the 
 reformation, men's attention was roused to such topics, and 
 people grew bolder every day in speaking out their opinions. 
 What they had ventured only to mutter, as it were, in a whis- 
 per before, they did not hesitate to proclaim in the most public 
 manner. Ye know the influence which WiclifF's doctrine had, 
 even in the remote kingdom of Bohemia, and the unhappy fate 
 (I mean to outward appearance) of his two famous disciples, 
 John Huss and Jerom of Prague. I do not say, that in all 
 things they adhered to the opinions of the celebrated English 
 doctor- But as, in what relates to the corruptions of the 
 church, and of the clergy, the exorbitance and abuse of eccle- 
 siastic power, they were evidently his followers ; so by his writ- 
 ings and example, they were emboldened to give an open testi- 
 mony to the truth in their native country, and to seal it with 
 their blood in Constance. This, though it be not considered 
 as the era of the reformation, for it happened about a century 
 before the public remonstrances of Luther, is justly regarded 
 as having paved the way for it. WicliflPhad left a seed of re- 
 formation in England, which it was not in the power of the 
 combined rulers, both spiritual and temporal, to destroy. The 
 martyrdom of Huss and Jerom by the Romish sanhedrim, at 
 Constance, confederated with the imperial authority basely pro- 
 stituted in violation of plighted faith, through the accursed 
 casuistry of those bloody and deceitful men, proved, as in 
 primitive times, the means of promoting, and not of obstruct- 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 431 
 
 ing, the cause. In short, men were now arrived at such a 
 measure of knowledge, as rendered the methods employed to 
 keep their minds in subjection, formerly so successful, perfectly 
 ridiculous. The clergy had lost that veneration and respect 
 from the people, which mere external trappings, and arrogant 
 pretensions, had once been found sufficient to secure to them. 
 Nay, so much were the sentiments of many of the laity changed 
 in regard to those articles, that the spiritual denunciations and 
 curses, (when unaided by the secular arm) which would have 
 made their forefathers tremble, served only to make them 
 smile. 
 
 Thus stood matters, in regard to religion, throughout 
 Europe, about the end of the fifteenth, and beginning of the 
 sixteenth, century. Nothing could be more evident to men of 
 discernment, than that Christendom was ripe for a revolution 
 in its ecclesiastical polity, and seemed only to wait for a favour- 
 able occasion. Such an occasion, the avarice of pope Leo the 
 tenth, and the impiety, as well as indiscretion, of his ministers 
 and agents, soon furnished. The use that was made of that 
 occasion, and the effects produced by it, I shall briefly consider 
 in my next lecture. 
 
432 LECTURES ON 
 
 LECTURE XXVIII. 
 
 In spite of all the endeavours, so assiduously used by Rome, 
 to shut out the light of the understanding, and to keep men's 
 minds in bondage; in spite of all her affected mysteriousness in 
 religious offices, and even in the lessons she gives publicly from 
 the word of God, by employing a language unknown to the 
 vulgar ; in spite of her prohibitions with regard to books, and 
 her inquisitions into heresy; it was impossible for her so to ex- 
 clude the dawn of truth, now rising on the world, after a long 
 and dreary night of superstition and ignorance, as to prevent 
 the discovery both of the weakness of her empire, and of the 
 badness of the foundation on which it stands. Men were be- 
 come at length pretty generally disposed to listen to those who 
 declaimed against their spiritual guides, whose faults they could 
 iiot now avoid perceiving. They no longer entertained for 
 them the bHnd veneration, wherewith they had formerly been 
 affected. Nay, they seemed to be running fast into the op- 
 posite extreme, that of entertaining for their ecclesiastical su- 
 periors an immoderate aversion and contempt. The pride, the 
 avarice, the Tmbition, the laziness, and the sensuality, of the 
 clergy, were n.^^er failing topics of satire every where. 
 
 If things had not been in this train, when Luther began his 
 public declamations against the validity of indulgences, and 
 other powers, which Rome had usurped over the Christian peo- 
 ple, converting their ignorance and brutishness into useful en- 
 gines for filling her coffers; that great reformer had never 
 been so successful amongst all ranks and degrees of people, as 
 he evidently proved. But as the knowledge and personal ex- 
 perience of the much greater part of his hearers perfectly con- 
 firmed the severest of his censures, he found no difficulty in 
 fixing their attention, and in exposing, to the conviction of 
 many, the total want of support from scripture, reason, and an- 
 tiquity, of the arrogant claims to dominion, which had been 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 433 
 
 raised by their spiritual guides. It is indeed manifest, that 
 when Luther first assumed the character of reformer, he had 
 no intention, nor even idea, of proceeding so far as he afterwards 
 found himself under a necessity of going. He first struck only 
 at the abuse, which had proved the immediate handle of 
 examining the papal prerogatives. And though from the be- 
 ginning he did not ascribe to the pope that omnipotence, which 
 has not very decently been attributed to him by the canonists, 
 he was, on the other hand, far from disputing his primacy, or 
 even his supremacy, in any sense short of absolute despotism. 
 
 It has often been objected to him, and his followers, under 
 which denomination the Romanists are wont to include all pro- 
 testants, that he himself appealed to the pope from the judgment 
 of his antagonists, that he declared repeatedly, that he would be 
 determined by his judgment; and yet, when his holiness inter- 
 posed, and gave judgment on the question in debate, he did not 
 depart, in the smallest circumstance, from the doctrine he had 
 maintained in direct contradiction to that judgment. The truth, 
 I believe, is : When Luther declared his submission to Rome, he 
 spoke sincerely, though unadvisedly ; he flattered himself, that 
 the reasons which had influenced his opinion were exceedingly 
 plain, and could not fail to influence the pontiff's, when examin- 
 ed seriously. I do not question, that he was then willing to 
 impute the scandals and abuses committed in preaching the in- 
 dulgences, more to the instruments employed than to the enj- 
 ployer; and persuaded himself, that when the •■'jpe should be 
 informed of the whole, he could not avoid bein^ashamed of the 
 conduct of his agents, and would justify Luther, so far, at leasts 
 as either to recal, or to qualify, the powers which had been 
 given in relation to indulgences, and to pronounce no censure 
 on the principles, which, on this subject, had been maintained 
 hy that appellant. Perhaps he even thought that, through the 
 superintendency of providence, (for at that time he seems to 
 have entertained no sentiments hostile to the monarchial form 
 of church government) such a scandal would be prevented, as 
 "the public justification of a doctrine of the most pernicious ten- 
 dency, disseminated by many of the monks on this occasion. 
 
 But whatever was his opinion in regard to the conduct which 
 would be held by Rome, certain it is, that he was egregiously 
 
 E e 
 
434 LECTURES ON 
 
 disappointed. His doctrine was solemnly anathematized, and 
 condemned by the pope as heretical; he himself was command- 
 ed, within a limited time, to recant, on pain of incurring all the 
 censures and punishments denounced against obstinate heretics. 
 Luther then but too plainly perceived, that he had not sufficient- 
 ly known himself, when he professed such implicit submission 
 to the pope. By his preaching and publications he had involv- 
 ed himself in controversy, and brought a number of adversaries 
 upon him. This set him upon enquiring into the foundations 
 of the received doctrine, and examining the fabric of ecclesiastic 
 dominion which had been erected. Both these he had, before 
 that time, received as submissively as any the most implicit 
 son of the church. Neither of them could bear a critical ex- 
 amination. Of this, the further he went, he had the fuller evi- 
 dence. 
 
 It was not easy for any man, especially a man of so sanguine 
 a temper, and of so great acuteness, to confine himself entirely 
 to those topics, which gave rise to the debate. We must be 
 sensible, it would have been the more difficult, when the hu- 
 mour of his antagonists is duly considered. They argued from 
 principles generally received at the time, and which he thought 
 himself under a necessity either to admit or to deny. This led 
 him to enquire into those principles, and the enquiry often ter- 
 minated in a detection, as he thought, of their falsehood. He 
 was too honest, and too intrepid, not to avow the discovery, and 
 this always engaged him in a new controversy. The scholastic 
 art of disputation then in vogue, which abounded with subtle, 
 but unmeaning, distinctions, might have given him considerable 
 assistance in eluding the address and malice of his enemies, 
 without explicitly declaring himself on several points, which 
 ihey had very artfully dragged into the dispute. That this 
 should be their method we cannot be surprised. The more arti- 
 cles of the received doctrine they could, by plausible inference, 
 show his principles to be subversive of, the more they exposed 
 him to popular odium, and embarrassed him for a reply. The 
 success, however, of his preaching, and of his writings, was so 
 far beyond expectation, that he was not discouraged from going 
 as far into every question as his adversaries could desire. 
 
 Nay, now that he was led into the discussion, now that Rome 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 435 
 
 had gone all the lengths which his enemies could desire, now 
 that the rupture was complete, he seemed forward to examine 
 every thing to the bottom. He was no longer desirous of keep- 
 ing any measures with the ecclesiastical establishment. The 
 whole fabric appeared ruinous : No soundness in the materials 
 of which it had been raised. Rottenness was discernible in 
 every part. In spite of all the arts of his enemies, who to argu- 
 ment were not slow in employing more formidable weapons : in 
 spite of the power, as well as number, of those he had to con- 
 tend with, his doctrine spread, and gained proselytes every day. 
 Among these were some of high rank and consideration, who 
 were able to protect him, and did protect him, against all the 
 dangers with which he was environed. The influence of his 
 doctrine is not to be judged of barely by the converts which he 
 made. The conversion of so many kingdoms and principalities 
 to his system, though the greatest, was not the only effect of 
 ] his teaching. It waked men thoroughly out of that profound 
 sleep, in which the understandings of the far greater part lay 
 buried, and roused a spirit of enquiry, that has not been with- 
 out effect in countries which still' continue Roman Catholic, in 
 humanizing the spirit, and bringing even their theologians to ex- 
 tenuate, by refined explanations, not dreamt of in former ages, 
 the absurdities of popery itself. 
 
 It has been objected to protestants, that Luther preserved no 
 uniformity, or even consistency, of conduct, with regard to 
 Rome: that he professed the utmost submission to whatever 
 sentence she should pronounce, before it was pronounced, and 
 paid no regard to common decency afterwards; allowed himself 
 to be so much transported by passion and resentment, as to give 
 vent to the grossest scurrilities and abuse ; nay, that adopting 
 the very spirit of that power against which he declaimed, he, as 
 it were, erected himself into a counter-pope, retaliated upon the 
 Roman pontiff, by returning excommunication for excommuni- 
 cation, and burning the pope's bulls and decretals, in return for 
 the burnincr of his books. 
 
 o 
 
 Rational protestants do not hesitate to acknowledge both the 
 inconsistency of his conduct, and the violence of his passion. 
 Their faith standeth not in the wisdom of man, but in the power 
 of God. It pleased God to make men the instruments of effect- 
 
 E e2 
 
436 LECTURES ON 
 
 ing the wonderful revolution, which, in the course of his provi- 
 dence, was to be produced. And doubtless, those men are en- 
 titled to some honour, on account of the character which they 
 bore, and the virtues which they displayed, as instruments of 
 providence for promoting our good. They served as monitors 
 from God, for rousing our attention to the dangers wherewith 
 we were surrounded, for bringing us to assert the rights of men, 
 and of Christians, of using the reason which God hath given us, 
 in judging for ourselves, in what concerns our highest interest, 
 for time and for eternity. But then, we say, they were sent, 
 not to command us to receive the doctrine of eternal life impli- 
 citly from them, but to excite us to search the scriptures, to en- 
 quire and decide for ourselves. Their interposition, in offering 
 their sentiments in contradiction to their superiors, could be de- 
 fended only on the right of private judgment, and on this fun- 
 damental tenet, that God, having given us his written word for 
 our rule, had seen no necessity for empowering any man, or 
 number of men, to serve as an infallible interpreter of his will. 
 A character, therefore, which they had declared unnecessary, 
 and which they found no man or society entitled to assume, 
 they could not consistently arrogate to themselves. And if any 
 of them presumed to do so, or acted in such a manner as impli- 
 ed this presumption, they were entitled to no regard from their 
 hearers. Protestants, so far from asserting the infallibility of 
 the reformers, do not affirm that they were inspired. They 
 were admonishers, not dictators. If even of the apostles, who 
 were endowed with the miraculous gifts of the Spirit, and often 
 both spoke and wrote by inspiration, much more of the reform- 
 ers concerning whom the same things cannot be affirmed, we 
 ought to be followers no further than they were of Christ. 
 They spoke as to wise men — it belonged to the hearers to judge 
 what they said. 
 
 It is admitted also as undeniable, that the reformers, who 
 arose about the same time in different places, differed on several 
 articles in the doctrine which they taught. This was particular- 
 ly the case of Luther and Zuinglius, the two earliest. As long 
 as they confined themselves to the abuses which had, from 
 worldly motives, been introduced into the church, there was a 
 wonderful harmony among them all. The sale of indulgences, 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 437 
 
 the celibacy of the clergy enforced by canon, the withholding 
 of the eucharistical cup from the people, the religious service in 
 an unknown tongue, the worship paid to images and relics, the 
 invocation of saints and angels, the clerical usurpations of secular 
 power, the rendering of church censures subservient to the 
 avarice and ambition of ecclesiastics, were practical corruptions 
 in worship and discipline, wherein all the reformers were agreed. 
 In these points, and several others such as these, a majority of 
 the people would, I am persuaded, in most Christian countries, 
 have been found to concur. 
 
 We ought to consider it as a very strong proof of this, that 
 some of those articles had afforded matter of general complaint 
 for a long time before. Thus the permitting of the clergy to 
 marry, the allowing of the cup to the people, the performing of 
 the religious offices in the language of the country, had afforded 
 matter of application to popes and councils for more than a cen- 
 tury back. In regard to the corrupt use so flagrantly made of 
 excommunications and indulgences, the scandal was in a manner 
 universal ; nor was there a country, province, or city of note, 
 where there were not frequent murmurs against the exorbitant 
 power and wealth, and the consequent laziness and arrogance, of 
 churchmen. And if their idolatries and superstitious usages did 
 not excite the like general offence, it is more to be ascribed to 
 this consideration, that the knowledge of the scriptures had 
 hardly yet descended to the lower ranks. But we may rest as- 
 sured of it, that the increase of this knowledge, and the de- 
 crease of superstition and idolatry, must have accompanied each 
 other. 
 
 When a man enters keenly into controversy on any subject, 
 it is impossible to say (unless he is uncommonly circumspect) 
 how far it may carry him. It generally leads to the discussion 
 of questions little connected with that which began the dispute. 
 In this warfare, a man is so much at the mercy of his antagonist, 
 that if he enter into it with more warmth than circumspection, 
 he will follow his enemy that he may fight him, wheresoever he 
 shall shelter himself; and in this way, both combatants come to 
 be soon off the ground on which the combat began. Exactly 
 such a disputant was Luther. And this may be said, in a great 
 measure, of all who had a leading hand in the reformation. To 
 
438 
 
 LECTURES ON 
 
 conquer the foe, wherever he was, came, ere they were aware, to 
 be more an object to them, than to drive him ofF the field, and 
 keep possession of it. In consequence of this tendency, they 
 were often diverted from the subject. From plain and practical 
 questions, both parties soon turned aside into the dark recesses 
 of metaphysics, where they quickly bewildered themselves in a 
 labyrinth of words. Such was the unhappy consequence of their 
 dogmatizing on abstruse, not to say unintelligible, points of scho- 
 lastic theology, wherein it might often admit a doubt, whether 
 the same thing was meant by them under different expressions, 
 or different things under the same expression ; nay, sometimes 
 whether either party had any meaning at all to what he said. 
 Though the reformers, and Luther in particular, were far from 
 being deficient in the powers of reasoning, they were men of 
 strong passions, and great ardour of spirit. This rendered them 
 liable to be drawn off from the subject; and, when heated with 
 contradiction, to go such lengths as cool reflection could not 
 justify. We ought to remember, too, that, being ecclesiastics, 
 some of them regulars, they had been inured to all the scholastic 
 quibbles and chicanery in vogue at the time, and from which it was 
 impossible, that, without a miracle, they should entirely emanci- 
 pate themselves. We ought, also, to make allowances for some 
 theological opinions, with which their minds had been strongly 
 prepossessed, long before they thought of a breach with Rome. 
 Of this sort of rooted prejudices was the doctrine of the real 
 presence, as it was called, with the reformer Luther. This, on 
 the one hand, seems with him to have been a favourite principle, 
 at the same time that, on the other, the hatred he had contract- 
 ed to Rome, made him that he could not bear to think of agree- 
 ing with her almost in any thing. Therefore, though he would 
 have a real presence of Christ in the eucharist, it must not be 
 the popish real presence. His ingenuity soon devised another. 
 Accordingly, transuhstantiation was rejected, and consubstantia- 
 tion adopted in its stead. That is, the bread and wine were not 
 transubstantiated, or changed into the substance of the body and 
 blood of Christ, but the body and blood of Christ were consub- 
 stantiated, that is, actually present in, with, and under, the ele- 
 ments of bread and wine, and were therefore literally eaten and 
 drank by the communicants. In no part of Luther's conduct docs 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 439 
 
 he appear so extravagant as in tliis absurd conceit, as to which I 
 agree with the bishop of Meaux, that it has all the disadvantages 
 which the Romanists, and the Sacramentarians, charge on one 
 another, without having a single advantage that can be claimed 
 by either. It has all the absurdity which the latter charge upon 
 the former, inasmuch as it represents the same body existing in 
 different places at the same time, and inasmuch as it represents a 
 substance existing without its accidents, or under the accidents of 
 another substance, but has not the advantage of simplicity which 
 the Romish doctrine has, in interpreting literally the words, This 
 is my body. The expression, on the Lutheran hypothesis, ought 
 to have been, not 211(8 is my hody^ but in, with, and under tJiis, 
 is my body. .For they maintain, that the bread remains unchan- 
 ged, and is that which is seen, touched, and tasted ; but that the 
 body of Christ, the same which he had upon the earth, and has 
 now in heaven, accompanies the bread. It has all the obscurity 
 which the Romanists charge upon the Sacramentarians, nay, a 
 great deal more, inasmuch as the words are to be understood 
 neither according to the letter, nor according to any figure of 
 speech ever heard of before. For, by their account, it is nei- 
 tlier literally Christ's body, nor figuratively the sign or symbol 
 of his body; but it is something with which his body is accom- 
 panied. Indeed, this novel hypothesis is, in every view, so ex- 
 travagant, that it is impossible to conceive whence it could have 
 originated, but from the collision, (if I may so express myself) 
 of a strong prejudice in favour of the real presence, and a violent 
 inclination to dissent from Rome, as much as possible, on every 
 subject. 
 
 The controversies in which this novelty of consubstantiatiorj 
 involved him, not only with the papists, but with the Zuingli- 
 ans, and other reformers, drew him at last to take refuge in a 
 doctrine, if possible, still more extraordinary, the ubiquity, that 
 is, the omnipresence, and consequently, the immensity, of the 
 body and human nature of Christ : hence they are called ubiqui- 
 tarians. This monstrous hypothesis was imagined to remove 
 all difficulties ; as though a less absurdity (if there be degrees 
 in absurdities) could be removed by substituting a greater in its 
 place. But if this did in fact solve the difficulty, in regard to 
 the presence of Christ in the eucharist, it solved it by annihi- 
 
440 LECTURES ON 
 
 latiiig the sacrament. For what, I pray, on that hypothesis, 
 were the sacramental elements ? They will not call them signs, 
 or figures, for that suits only the language of those whom they 
 denominated sacraraentarians. They could not, with the church 
 of Rome, call them the identical body and blood of Christ; 
 for they do not think the elements changed or transubstantiated. 
 They remain as they were. And if they should call them bare- 
 ly accompaniments of the body and blood of Christ, wherein do 
 they raise them above any other kind of food; for according to 
 the ubiquitarian doctrine, the body and blood of Christ being 
 every where, may be justly said to be in^ with, and under, every 
 morsel we eat, and every drop of liquor we drink, and every 
 breath we draw. Instead of raising the sacrament, therefore, 
 by this extravagant conception, they destroy the distinction be- 
 tween it and every ordinary meal. Nothing more common, 
 when one attempts to explain what is inexplicable, and to de- 
 fend what is absurd, than to multiply absurdities, as one advan- 
 ces, and to give one's self every moment more nonsense to ex- 
 plain, and more to defend. 
 
 Let it not be imagined, that by these free remarks on that 
 first and most eminent reformer, I mean either to lessen his cha- 
 racter, or to depreciate his work. Few, on the contrary, have 
 a greater veneration for the one, or set a higher value on the 
 other. Luther had certainly great qualities and virtues : he had 
 also great faults; but the former much preponderated. His 
 penetration and abilities were considerable. 1 mean his know- 
 ledge, his eloquence, his skill in disputation, and his readiness 
 in finding resources, even in the greatest difficulties. But these 
 are only intellectual talents; he was largely supplied with those 
 active virtues, which are necessary for putting the afore-named 
 qualities to the best account. An unconquerable zeal for what 
 he believed to be truth, constancy in maintaining it, intrepidity 
 in facing danger, an indefatigable industry in employing every 
 opportunity that offered for exposing error and superstition, and 
 defending what he thought the unadulterated religion of Jesus 
 Christ. But his virtues were not without defects. Nay, his 
 great qualities themselves were not untainted with those vices, 
 to which they are thought to bear an affinity. His logical acute- 
 ncss sometimes degenerated into chicane. But this was the 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 441 
 
 fault of the age he lived in, and of his education. His zeal, and 
 the warmth of his temper, often betrayed him into an unjustifi- 
 able violence. His magnanimity was not untinctured with prido 
 and resentment. His transports of rage, and even his bufibon- 
 eries, against the pope, did unspeakable injury to his cause with 
 the wiser and more intelligent part of mankind; even with 
 those who desired nothing more ardently, than a reformation 
 from the corruptions which prevailed, and a defence of Christian 
 liberty against the too well established tyranny of ecclesiastical 
 superiors. His perseverance would, perhaps, on some occasions^ 
 be more properly termed obstinacy. When he had once pub- 
 licly supported a tenet, he seemed incapable of lending an im- 
 partial ear to any thing advanced in opposition to it. In short, 
 what he did, and what he was, notwithstanding his errors, just- 
 ly merit our admiration, especially when we consider the times 
 in which, and the people amongst whom he lived; I may add, 
 the kind of education he had obtained. 
 
 No true protestant considers him, or any of the reformers, as 
 either apostle or evangelist. It is a fundamental principle with 
 such, to call no man upon the earth master, knowing that we 
 have one master, one only infallible teacher, in heaven, who is 
 Christ. All human teachers are no further to be regarded, than 
 they appear, to the best of our judgment, on impartial examina- 
 tion, to be his interpreters, and to speak his words. The right 
 of private judgment, in opposition to all human claims to a dic- 
 tatorial authority, in matters of faith, is a point so essential to 
 protestantism, that were it to be given up, there would be no 
 possibility of eluding the worst reproaches, with which the Ro- 
 manist charges the reformation ; namely, schism, sedition, he- 
 resy, rebellion, and I know not what. But if our Lord, the 
 great author and finisher of the faith, had ever meant that we 
 should receive implicitly its articles from any human authority, 
 he would never have so expressly prohibited our calling any 
 man upon the earth master, xtc^yiyrir,-,^ leader, or guide. 
 
 A general dissatisfaction prevailed at the time. By universal 
 acknowledgment, things were not as they ought to be. Abuses 
 and corruptions were on every hand complained of, and a cry 
 for reformation was every where raised. Such men as Luthcj*, 
 at such a time, were well entitled to a fair and patient hearing. 
 
44^ LECTURES ON 
 
 But, on the other hand, the hearers were also entitled to put 
 this honour upon themselves ; namely, to receive what was. 
 spoken hoth by them, and by their antagonists, as spoken to 
 wise men, to weigh and judge what was said. We are doubt- 
 less, now, when the ferment of disputation is over, in a better 
 situation forjudging coolly and equitably of the merits of those 
 extraordinary preachers, than the people who lived in that age. 
 And upon the most deliberate examination, I believe the un- 
 prejudiced will admit, that, with all their imperfections, they 
 did unspeakable service to the interests of knowledge, of Chris- 
 tianity, and of human liberty. 
 
 Having said so much of their talents and virtues, I shall, 
 with all the deference due to the judgment of my hearers, offer 
 a few things in regard to their defects and blemishes, particu- 
 larly considered as teachers. The first I shall observe is an 
 unavoidable consequence of the education they had received, 
 and the habits to which they were inured ; a sort of metaphy- 
 sical reasoning, or rather sophistry, the genuine spawn of the 
 scholastic logic, which had for ages been in vogue, and which, 
 in some measure, tainted all their disputes. This led them to 
 dogmatize on every point, and was that which first produced 
 dissension among themselves. As long as they confined their 
 declamation to church tyranny, to the correction of superstitious 
 and idolatrous practices, to those clerical artifices for enhancing 
 power and wealth, which were subversive of sound morality, 
 they concurred harmoniously in every thing; but no sooner did 
 they enter on the endless and unprofitable discussion of ab- 
 struse and unedifying questions, of which holy writ has either 
 said nothing, or given no decision, than their harmony was at 
 an end. They subdivided immediately. They alarmed those 
 who were inclined to think favourably of their cause. They 
 made many retreat who had made advances. They supplied 
 their enemies with arms against them, and made enemies of 
 friends ; inasmuch as many became enemies one to another. 
 Then arose the distinctions of Lutheran, and Zuinglian, and 
 Calvinist, and Sacramentarian, and Ubiquitarian : the first 
 three as implying not barely the disciples of such particular 
 teachers, but as the partizans of different systems. By this 
 conduct, also, they furnished an argument to the common 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 443 
 
 enemy, to wliicli I do not find that any sect lias yet given a sa- 
 tisfactory reply. " If these nice and ahstract questions," said 
 the Romanist, ** about which ye make so great a bustle, are 
 " really so essential to salvation, as ye pretend, it is impossible 
 " that the scriptures can be so perspicuous as ye account them, 
 " else ye would never, after a careful examination, entertain 
 " sentiments so opposite in regard to those questions." What 
 made the impropicty of their conduct more flagrant, was, that 
 they did not treat those differences in opinion as matters of 
 small moment, as curious speculations with which the pious and 
 contemplative might amuse themselves, but on which, without 
 affecting their Christian character, persons might think difi'er- 
 ently. Far otherwise ; they treated them as equally funda- 
 mental with those which they made the subject of their decla- 
 mations against the common foe ; and were often transported 
 with equal fury against one another, on account of those differ- 
 ences, as they were against him. " Ye all appeal" (said Eras- 
 mus, whom they wanted to gain, and who at first appeared fa- 
 vourable, being as much an enemy to superstition and ecclesias- 
 tic tyranny as any of them, ye all appeal, said he) " to the pure 
 *' word of God, whereof ye think yourselves true interpreters. 
 '' Agree then amongst yourselves about its meaning, before yc 
 *' pretend to give law to the world." " It is of importance," 
 said Calvin, in a letter to his friend Melancthon, " that no 
 *' suspicion of the divisions which are amongst us descend to 
 "future ages; for it is ridiculous beyond imagination, that, 
 '' after having broken with all the world, we should, from the 
 *' beginning of our reformation, agree so ill amongst ourselves." 
 Indeed, this bad agreement, as it was a great stumbling block 
 in the way of those who inclined to examine the matter to the 
 bottom, so it proved a greater check to the cause of the refor- 
 mers, than any which the open or the secret assaults of theiir 
 enemies had yet, either by spiritual weapons, or by carnal, been 
 able to give it. 
 
 But unfortunately, (for the truth ought, without respect of 
 persons, to be spoken) they had not sufficiently purged their 
 own minds from the old leaven ; they still retained too much 
 of the spirit of that corrupt church which they had left. A» 
 they were men, we ought to form a judgment of them not only 
 
444 LECTURES ON 
 
 with candour, but with all the lenity to which their education, 
 the circumstances of the times, the difficulties they had to sur- 
 mount, and the adversaries they had to encounter, so justly en- 
 title them. But as they were teachers of religion, we ought to 
 be at least as careful not to allow an excessive veneration for 
 their great and good qualities, to mislead us into a respect for 
 their errors, or to adopt implicitly the system of any one of 
 them ; that we must learn not to think of men above that which 
 is written, that no one of us be puffed up for one against an- 
 other. The spirit of the church, especially that nourished in the 
 cloisters, was a spirit of wrangling and altercation. Never 
 could any thing better suit the unimportant and undeterminable 
 questions there canvassed by the recluses, than the words of the 
 apostle, vain jangling s and oppositions of science falsely so call- 
 ed. As therefore they had not avoided these, nor taken the 
 apostolical warning, not to dote about questions and strifes of 
 words, they soon experienced in themselves, and in their fol- 
 lowers, the truth of the apostolical prediction, that envy, con- 
 tention, railings, evil surmisings, and perverse disputings, would 
 come of them; but that they would never minister to the edify- 
 ing of themselves in love; that so far would their disputations 
 be from answering the end, and terminating their differences, 
 that they would incessantly give birth to new questions, and 
 would increase unto more ungodliness. This contentious spiritj 
 derived from the schoolmen, and commonly accompanied with 
 spiritual pride, and a vitiated understanding, did not fail of pro- 
 ducing its usual consequences, uncharitableness in judging of 
 others, on account of diflPerence of opinion, and intolerance in 
 the manner of treating them. Of the first of these, the evi- 
 dences are coeval with the questions, and perfectly unequivo- 
 cal ; and of the last, that is, of the intolerant spirit they had 
 retained of the church they had deserted, it must not be dis- 
 sembled, that they gave but too manifest proofs as soon as they 
 had power. 
 
 Ye will do me the justice to believe me, when I add, that it 
 proceeds not from any pleasure in depreciating, that I have 
 taken so much of the invidious task of exposing the blemishes 
 in those truly meritorious characters. But of men so much ex- 
 posed to public view, and so highly distinguishable, as were our 
 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 445 
 
 reformers from popery, there is a considerable danger on either 
 side in fornnntr a wrong judgment. One is, indeed, that a pre- 
 judice against the instruments may endanger our contracting a 
 prejudice against the cause. Of this extreme, in this protest- 
 ant country, I imagine, we are in little danger. To prevent 
 it, however, their faults ought not to be mentioned without 
 doing justice to their virtues. The other is, lest a preposses- 
 sion in favour of the cause prove the source of a blind devotion 
 to the instruments. Of this extreme, the danger here is, 1 
 think, very great. Nay, though different men's attention, ac- 
 cording to their various circumstances, has been fixed on dif- 
 ferent instruments in the hand of providence, in effecting the 
 wonderful revolution then brought about, yet an immoderate 
 attachment to one, or other, has been, since the beginning, the 
 rock on which the far greater part of protestants have split. 
 
 THE END. 
 
Cameron ^ Hume, Pnnters, 
 Berwick. 
 
,* BW901.C181824V.1 
 
 Lectures on ecclesiastical history. 
 
 Princeton Theological Semlnary-Speer Library 
 
 
 1 1012 00077 6346 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^-/^ 
 
 ^5: 
 
 
 
 ^^^