i mi cg as ¥EO4 OG ICAL SEM ee BX5131 .W65 1846 Wordsworth, Christopher, 1807-1885. Theophilus Anglicanus; or, Instruction for young student, concerning the church and “Angiican branch of it 7 τὶ Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2015 https://archive.org/details/theophilusanglicOOword_0O a THEOPHILUS ANGLICANUS; OR, INSTRUCTION FOR THE YOUNG STUDENT, CONCERNING The Church, THE ANGLICAN BRANCH OF IT. BY CHRISTOPHER ‘WORDSWORTH, D.D. CANON OF ST. PETER’S, WESTMINSTER, AND LATE HEAD MASTER OF HARROW SCHOOL, FOURTH EDITION. LONDON: FRANCIS & JOHN RIVINGTON, ST. PAUL’S CHURCH YARD, AND WATERLOO PLACE, 1846. Hers ad LONDON: PREFACE, A FEW words will suffice to explain the occasion and object of the present Work. The Master of a Grammar School, in cate- chizing his scholars in the higher classes, has to contend with a difficulty arising from the want of books suited to his purpose. It is well known that the Expositions of the Catechism of the Church of England, which are in most common use in our Grammar Schools, were not designed for persons who have made any proficiency in the Greek or Latin languages ; and, it is obvious, therefore, that these treatises are not able to convey to the classical student all that in- struction and satisfaction which he could not fail to derive from the application of his literary at- tainments to the illustration of sacred truth. It may also be observed, that although the Cuurcnu Carecuism, by means of the Ninth and A2 iv PREFACE. Tenth Articles of the Apostles’ Creed, viz.—The Holy Catholic Church, The Communion of Saints, and The Forgiveness of Sins,—and of the ques- tions which it contains on the Christian Sacra- ments, naturally leads a Teacher, with the Book of Common Prayer in his hands, to such a series of inquiries concerning the Church generally and Our Own Branch of it in particular, as may be found in the following pages,—yet it would appear to be desirable, that these interrogatories should be put systematically before the eye of the scholar, and that he should receive such instruction con- cerning them, as is due to his character of an English Theophilus receiving a liberal education, and desirous to “ know the certainty of the things wherein ” he has “ been instructed *.” The Author trusts that these statements, the truth and importance of which have been for some time forcibly impressed on him by practical expe- rience, may be thought to justify the endeavour of which the result is now before the reader; and also that the considerations, which have been men- tioned, may serve to account, not only for the materials here presented to the scholar, but also for the form in which they appear, particularly as regards the extracts annexed to the Answers in the volume. It will readily be perceived, that these An- 1 ‘uke 1. 3,4. PREFACE, Ν swers are not intended to be committed to memory, but that the design is, that the teacher should exercise the scholar, or that the scholar should ex- ercise himself, by first reading a chapter through, translating the extracts as he proceeds, and by then reverting more than once seriatim to the questions for subjects of subsequent examination. Harrow on the Hill, Oct, 3, 1843. ADVERTISEMENT TO THE FOURTH EDITION. CONSIDERABLE additions have been introduced in’ the present impression of this volume; but the Author begs leave to state, for the informa- tion of those schoolmasters and tutors who have adopted or may adopt this work as a class-book, that it is not his intention to increase its bulk, or make alterations in its arrangement, in any future edition. Cloisters, Westminster, Nov. 19, 1845. PRELIMINARY NOTE CONCERNING THE PASSAGES OF AUTHORS CITED, AND THE INDEX OF THEM. Tue names of the Auruors, from whom the extracts are derived, are printed in Sma Carrrats ; and the passages, which begin immediately to follow those names, are extracts from the authors whose names are thus printed, except in certain cases where there will not be any ambiguity con- cerning their origin. The Inpex of AutHors and places cited is designed to show synoptically the general nature of the testimonies which are added to corroborate the statements in the volume ; and it will also afford the young Scholar, to a certain extent, a knowledge of such authorities as will be of service to him in his future studies. The ditions referred to in the cita- tions are specified in the Index. An Index of the Scrir- TURE Citations did not appear to be necessary, especially as the references to Scripture are placed, by themselves, on the margin of the volume. CONTENTS. ΕΟ Delle ON THE CHURCH. CHAP. ᾿ PAGE I. On the Name and Attributes of the Church......... 1 II. On the Attributes of the Church as visible and mili- tant, and as invisible and triumphant ......... “ὃ III. On the Dignity and Glory of the Church.......... 22 IV. On Salvation only in the Church ..... ......+006. 24 ΠΕ ΟΠ ΕΣΤΟΥ͂Β πὶ theyChurch) τς τς acie=\s\slels/ele cle’ eleteisie 36 VI. On Privileges in the Church: Word of God—The Church its Witness and Keeper ....... τ 29 .« On Privileges in the Church : Right Interpretation of WER WOR Of GO aerclotateroiciale’tctetelsi slain etal δ 6. 58 . On Privileges in the Church : Due Administration a the Sacraments by a lawful Ministry ....ceceeee. 71 . On the Three Orders of Ministers in the Church .. 83 . Bishops ; Divine Institution of Episcopacy........ 87 . Functions of Bishops ...... iateloteiele¥ela/el ποῦδρο ἠδ 100 XII. Of Bishops as Diocesans, Metropolitans, and Patri- ISRO dg Gtgu.docbOUDEIE 05.00 LOSDOOCSSHOOnoEe +. 105 XIII. On Privileges in the Church : Desig Poiver of HOGI Boot Sonn acdavo0edeado0d “δ ο 69.652. 118 XIV. On Privileges in the Church: Absolution..... gadao ls XV. On Privileges in the Church : Sacerdotal Intercession GNASBERCAOHOT “delsoieciacees.cecse ce esis . 134 XVI. On Privileges in the Church : Set Jorms of “Public Prayer τι: sdodddupogoagoo dono σῷ DtOU ΟΣ 147 ΡΣ VANE ON THE ANGLICAN BRANCH OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. I, The Church of England: its Origin.............. 149 11, The Church of England independent of Rome: Period before the Arrival of St. Augustine........ 154 ILI. The Church of England independent of Rome ; Mis- ΠΡ OI be AUGUSTINE o's \cie\ele e+ τιν οἷν οἷν εἴων ει abeis\ois 163 Vili CONTENTS. CHAP. PAGE IV. The Church of England independent of Rome: Period between the Mission of St. Augustine and the RefOrMAHOn <\..'s «2, =, Ba'0\0[0a\ es 06's rion eine eee V. The Reformation in England a removal of what was new, and a restoration of what was old ........ 189 VI. On the uninterrupted succession of Holy Orders in the (Church offingland 7... sslenee eee 207 VII. The Church of England did not ee herself a the \Charch/of, Rome’ mas totes s = wise eae eee owes Dy VIII. The Church of England has never beer separate from the Catholie Church . one cq reopen 05 ioe IX, The Bishop of Rome has no eipretae ἜΡΤΗΙ or temporal, in these realms ...+......00. τ ΄-- PART III. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND IN ITS CIVIL RELATIONS. I. Church and State One Society under different names 259 II. On the duty of Kings and States to profess and to promote the trne Barth’ τον τον cisloielsiel oietenietetaieiete 265 III. On the Church of England, as the Seuaad Mother of all Christians in this country............++ . 279 IV. On the Ecclesiastical supremacy of Princes....,... 289 V. On the Royal supremacy in the Church of England 298 VI. On the Royal supremacy in the Church of England : In Ecclesiastical Synods o+seccsscccccccscecees 914 VII. On the Royal Supremacy in the Church of England : In Ecclesiastical Promotions and Judicature ...... 319 PARW Wve RITES AND CEREMONIES OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. I. On Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England 330 IT. Objections considered........0..0ss000++esenees GOD INDEXES. INDEX: ..1., Of Matters peitenites)sint- eee ΡΠ - Inpex ITI. Of Authors, and Places cited .....++++++++.+. 949 THEOPHILUS ANGLICANUS. PART I. @n the Churrh. CHAPTER I. ON THE NAME AND ATTRIBUTES OF THE CHURCH, @. Wuar is the etymology and meaning of Cuar. 1 the English word Cuurcn ? as A. It is derived from the Greek word Κυριακὴ» 1 Pet. ἡ. 5. a feminine adjective, from Κύριος, the Lord ; and H¢ i 6. it means Κυριακὴ οἰκία; or the Lord’: House’. το δὰ ' Casauzon, Exercit. Baron. xiii. § xvii. Ecclesias primi Christiani vocabant Dominica et Κυριακὰ, unde mansit apud Anglos appellatio Church. Hooker, V. xi. 1, ed. Keble. Bp. Pearson on the Creed, Art. ix. Bp. Beveripexr, ap. Routh, Reliq. Sacre, ii. 488 ; and on XXXIX Articles, Art. xix. yol. ii. 98, ed. Oxf. 1840. The word Κυριακὸς occurs twice in the N. Test. 1 Cor. xi. 20, and Rey. i. 10. Κυριακὴ, in the Eastern Church, is the Lord’s Day, as Dominica and Dimanche in the Western. The German Domkirche, for the Basilica or Cathedral, seems to be a combination of both the Latin and Greek words for Cuorcu, i. e. Dominicum (whence iJ Duomo in Italian) and Κυριακόν. @. Is there not another word, the same both B Parr I. ᾿Ξ τς 55.» 2 THE NAME AND ATTRIBUTES in Greek and Latin, by which Cuurcn is ex- pressed ? @. Yes, Eccuesia. @. Whence is this word derived ? @. From the Greek ἐκ, forth, and καλέω, to call. @. How is this word modified in living Euro- pean languages ? A. In Italian it has become Chiesa ; in French, Eglise ; and in Spanish, Jg/ésia. @. What did the word Zeelesia originally mean ? @. A Public Assembly; and it was specially applied to designate the Popular Assembly? at Athens, to which all free citizens were convoked, and which was summoned by Presidents (πρυτά- veic), each of whom (as ἐπιστάτης) held in rotation the keys’ of the Civic Treasury and Archives and the State Seal. ' Bp. Pearson on the Creed, Art. ix. 2 Junius Portux, viii. 6. Hermann’s Manual of Polit. Antig. of Greece, § 127. @. What do you infer from the two words, Κυριακὴ and ᾿Εκκλησία, with respect to the cha- racter of the Church ? @. That it is the Lord’s House, or Common Assembly of His People, presided over by Persons entrusted with certain powers, and to which men are convoked as the Athenians were to their Ecclesia’. 1 Frecp on the Church, i. 5. Bp. Pearson on the Creed, Art. ix. note. Ἐκκλησία is the same with the κλητοὶ, or the company called and gathered together. @®. But is not the Christian Church some- thing more than an assembly ? OF THE CHURCH. 3 @. Yes, the Church is indeed an assembly, it CHa? | being convoked; but it is a permanent Society’, in that having been convoked it never will be dissolved. 1 Hooker, III. 1. 14. The Church is always a Visible Society of men. @. And this Assembly or Society is presented to us in Holy Scripture under what form ? @. As consisting of believing and baptized per- sons, continuing “ stedfastly in the Apostles’ doc- Acts ji. 41 trine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread and —*”: **: 7 in prayers ;’ and who were thus reputed to be Members of the same Church, and to which were gs ji, 47. added (οἱ σωζόμενοι) such as were being saved". pepe 1 Bp. Pearson, Lectiones in Acta Apostolorum, pp. 34, 35, ed. 1688. (in Act. i. 13. ii. 48.) Hee nobis forma quasi atque imago prime Ecclesiz ab Apostolis congregate, for- mate, gubernate. Fide semel Apostolico sermoni habita per Baptismum in Ecclesiam admittebantur ; in Ecclesiam admissi Ccetus Publicos frequentabant; in ccetu publico Doctrine Apostolorum sedulo attendebant ; et Eucharistic participes fiebant (fractione panis, i. 6. Encharistia, p. 384) ; Publicis denique et Communibus Orationibus in eodem Ceetu factis Deum colebant. Atque ita Zcclestis omnibus usque ad consummationem seculi Lxemplum preebebant. @. What are the designations by which the Church is described in the Apostles’ and Constan- tinopolitan Creeds ? A. It is called Onze, Hoty, Caruonic, and AposTOoLic (μία, ayia, καθολικὴ, ᾿Αποστολική). @. How is the Church Ong, or United? @. Inasmuch as all its members have one God gyhes. ἵν. and Father; and are united as sheep of one fold, Jom x. 10. under one Shepherd, and as members, under } Cor. xii. Christ their Head, of one Body, into which they ee ee are all baptized in one Spirit; and are all par- 5?" ἦν B 2 ᾿ Parr I. 1 Cor. x. 17. Jude 3, Col. iii. 12—15, Acts iv. 32, 1 Pet. iii. 8, Eph. iv. 3. Phil. iii, 16. Acts ii. 41....47. Rom. xv. 6, 4. THE NAME AND ATTRIBUTES takers of one Bread and of one Cup in the Holy Eucharist ; have all one Faith *, and one Hope of their calling; are of one heart and one Soul, loving each other as Brethren, and keeping the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace; walking by the same rule, and minding the same thing; united by the same’ Apostolic government, disci- pline, and worship ; and all living with this one aim, that they may with one mind and one mouth glorify God’. 1S. Inen. adv. Heereses, i. ¢. iii. p. 46, Grabe. τοῦτο τὸ κήρυγμα καὶ ταύτην τὴν πίστιν, ὡς προέφαμεν, ἡ ᾿Εκκλησία καίπερ ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ διεσπαρμένη παρειλειφυῖα ἐπιμελῶς φυλάσσει, ὡς ἕνα οἶκον οἰκοῦσα, καὶ ὁμοίως πιστεύει τούτοις ὡς μίαν ψυχὴν καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν ἔχουσα καρδίαν, καὶ συμφώνως ταὐτὰ κηρύσσει καὶ διδάσκει καὶ παραδίδωσιν ὡς ἕν στόμα κεκτημένη. S. Cyprian, Unit. Eccles. p. 108, Fell. Ecclesia una est que in multitudinem latius incremento feecunditatis exten- ditur, quomodo solis multi radii, sed lumen unum, et rami arboris multi, sed robur unum tenaci radice fundatum, et cum de fonte uno rivi plurimi defluunt, numerositas licet diffusa videatur exundantis copiz largitate, unitas tamen servatur in origine. 3 Tertutiian, Apol. 39. Corpus sumus de conscientia religionis et discipline unitate et spei foedere. S. Cyprian, ad Antonian. p. 112, Fell. Cum sit a Christo una Ecclesia per totum mundum in multa membra divisa, item Episcopatus unus Episcoporum multorum concordi numerositate diffusus.—Ep. Ixvi. Florentio, p. 168, Fell. Ecclesia a Christo non recedit, et illi sunt Ecclesia plebs sacerdoti adunata, et pastori suo grex adhzrens, unde scire debes Episcopum in Ecclesia esse et Ecclesiam in Episcopo ; et si qui cum Episcopo non sint in Ecclesia non esse, et frustra sibi blandiri eos qui pacem cum sacerdotibus Dei non habentes obrepunt et latenter apud quosdam communicare se credunt ; quando Ecclesia, quee Catholica una est, scissa non sit neque divisa, sed sit utique connexa et coherentium sibi invicem sacerdotum glutino copulata. S. Cyerrian, ad Cornel. Ep. 52. Nee remanere in Ecclesia ™ OF THE CHURCH. 5 possunt qui Deificam et Ecclesiasticam Disciplinam nec actiis Cuap. I. sui conversatione nec morum pace tenuerunt. Nay Hooker, III.1. 4. and 14. See below, aie ix. and x. and Pt. ii. ch. vi. 3 Barrow on the Unity of the Church, p. 297, sak 1683. Pavmer on the Church, ch. iv. y. @. How is the Church Hony ? A. In respect of its Head, Christ; of its Toby.) Bet Calling; of its Holy Baptism, τὴν ein we are 9 tim i.9. created anew after God in righteousness and true P ἵν. 54. holiness ; of the Holy Offices performed in it; of the Holiness of Life required from its members ; of the “Inheritance, Holy and undefiled,” ae 2 Timi God has promised to them. ἐν. @. What is the derivation and meaning of the term CaTHOLic ? A. Catholic is from the Greek adjective καθ- oAtkoe, universal, and is derived from the adverb καθόλου, throughout, which is from the preposition κατὰ, according to, and ὅλος, whole; and Catholic means diffused throughout the whole, or’ universal. 1 Bp. Pearson ad 5. Ignat. ad Smyrn. 8, ex Valesio. Prima Catholice Ecclesiz mentio in Polyearpi Martyrio sub Marco Antonio, secunda in passione Pionii sub Decio. @. How is the Church thus CarHouic or UNIVERSAL? A. In respect of ¢ime', as enduring throughout Mate. xxviii. all ages, from the beginning till the end of the 2”. **v- 31. world. In respect of place’, as not limited, like the Jewish Church, to one People, but as compre- Mark xvi. hending those of αὐ Nations who are in the main ye a points of religion one and the same. In respect 47. of Faith® and Practice, as teaching all truth, and as requiring holiness from all; and as ministering, B 3 6 THE NAME AND ATTRIBUTES partI. by God’s appointment, all His means of spiritual . Grace*. 1S. Cyr. Hreros. Catechesis xviii. p. 296, ed. Ven. 1763. Καθολικὴ καλεῖται διὰ τὸ κατὰ πάσης εἶναι τῆς οἷ- κουμένης ἀπὸ περάτων γῆς ἔως περάτων, καὶ διὰ τὸ διδά- σκειν καθολικῶς καὶ ἀνελλιπῶς ἅπαντα τὰ εἰς γνῶσιν ἀν- θρώπων ἐλθεῖν ὀφείλοντα δόγματα περί τε ὁρατῶν καὶ ἀορά- TOV πραγμάτων ἐπουρανίων τε καὶ ἐπιγείων, καὶ διὰ τὸ πᾶν γένος ἀνθρώπων εἰς εὐσέβειαν ὑποτάσσειν ἀρχόντων τε καὶ ἀρχομένων, λογίων τε καὶ ἰδιωτῶν, καὶ διὰ τὸ καθολικῶς ἰατρεύειν μὲν καὶ θεραπεύειν ἅπαν τὸ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν εἶδος, τῶν διὰ ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος ἐπιτελουμένων, κεκτῆσθαι δὲ ἐν αὐτῇ πᾶσαν ἰδέαν ὀνομαζομένης ἀρετῆς ἐν ἔργοις καὶ λόγοις καὶ πνευματικοῖς παντοίοις χαρίσμασιν. 3. 5. Aue. in Ps. lvi. (iv. p. 754, ed. Paris, 1855.) Corpus Christi est Ecclesia, non ista aut illa sed toto orbe diffusa, nec ea que nunc est in hominibus qui presentem vitam agunt sed ad eam pertinentibus etiam his qui fuerunt ante nos et his qui futuri sunt post nos usque ad finem seculi. Tota enim Ecclesia constans ex omnibus fidelibus, quia fideles omnes sunt membra Christi, habet illud Caput positum in ceelis, quod gubernat corpus suum. 3S. Irnen. v. xx. p. 480. Ecclesia quidem predicatio vera et firma, apud quam una et eadem salutis via in universo mundo ostenditur. Huie enim creditum est lumen Dei.— Ubique enim Ecclesia preedicat veritatem. 4 Archbp. Cranmer, Works, iv. p. 278, ed. Jenkyns, De Ecclesia. Bp. Butt, Corruptions of the Church of Rome, in Answer to the Bp. of Meaux’s (Bossuet’s) Queries. Works, ii. p. 243, ed. Burton. Archbishop Porrer on Church Government, p. 29, ed. 1724. Archdn. Mannine, Unity of the Church, pp. 21—30. See below, chap. iv. p. 26—29. ©. Are the members of any particular or national Church (for example, of Italy, Greece, France, England, &c.) rightly called Catholics ? @. Yes; being Members of the Universal Church of Christ, they are Catholics ', generally ; OF THE CHURCH. γέ or more particularly Italian Catholics, Greek CHar.!. Catholics, French Catholics, and English or Anglo- Catholics, ''S. Pacran, Ep. 1, ad Sempronian. Christianus mihi nomen, Catholicus cognomen; illud me nuncupat, istud ostendit. @. And what thence do you conclude con- cerning the claim often preferred by the Church of Rome to be called the Catholic Church Ὁ a. The Church of Rome is a part of the Catholic Church, as the other Churches before mentioned are ; but neither the Church of Rome’, nor the Church of England, nor the Greek Church, nor any other particular Church, is the Catholic or Universal Church’, any more than a Branch is a Tree, or a Hand is the whole Body. 1S. Hieron. ad Evag. Ixxxy. Et Galliz, et Britannia, et Africa, et Persis, et Oriens, et India, et omnes barbare nationes unum Christum adorant, unam observant regulam veritatis. Si auctoritas queritur, Orpis major est Urbe. Casavzon, ad Cardinal. Perron. Epistol. p. 493, ed. 1709. Romana, Greea, Antiochena, Agyptia, Abyssina, Mosco- vitica, et plures alize membra sunt Ecclesiz Catholicee.—Mi- randum igitur Romanam Ecclesiam jus omne Universitatis ad se trahere, appellationem Ecclesiz Catholice sibi pro- priam facere, et reliquas omnes que in ulla re a se dissentiant excludere communione sua ac statim illas ad Catholicam nihil pertinere audacter affirmare. Necessary Doctrine and Erudition for any Christian Man, Art. ix. a.v. 1543. And therefore the Church of Rome, being but a several Church, challenging that name of Catholic above all other, doeth great wrong to all other Churches, and doeth only by force support an unjust usurpation : for that Church hath no more right to that name than the Church of France, Spain, England, or Portugal, which be justly called Catholic Churches, B 4 Part I, eS Ephes. ii. 20. Acts ii. 42. Acts viii. 36. Matt. xxviii. 19: 8 THE CHURCH AS VISIBLE ? TueopuyLacr ad | Cor. xii. 27. τὴν ἁπανταχοῦ τῆς οἷ- κουμένης καθολικὴν ἐκκλησίαν, is TO σῶμα συνέστηκεν ἐκ τῶν ἁπανταχοῦ ἐκκλησιῶν. See below, Pt. ii. ch. i. and Pt. ii. ch. viii. @. How is the Church AposTouicau? @. As built on the foundation of the Apostles, Jesus Christ Himself being the Chief Corner Stone ; as continuing stedfastly in the doctrine of the Apostles, and in communion with them and their lawful successors *. 1 Revel. xxi. 14. And the wall of the city had twelve foun- dations (foundation-stones, θεμελίους, se. λίθους), and in them the names of the Twelve Apostles of the Lamb. S. Icnar. ad Smyrn. 8. Ὅπου ἂν φανῇ ὁ ἐπίσκοπος, ἐκεῖ τὸ πλῆθος ἔστω. . . . οὐκ ἐξόν ἐστιν χωρὶς ἐπισκόπου οὔτε βαπτίζειν οὔτε ἀγάπην ποιεῖν. TeRTuLtian, de Bapt. ο. 17. Dandi quidem (Beptigesiail habet jus summus sacerdos, qui est Episcopus; dehine Presbyteri et Diaconi, non tamen sine Episcopi auctoritate. S. Oprarus, II. 2. and 28. IV. 3. VI. 2. See below, Pt. i. ch. ix. and x. p. 71. Pt. ii. ch. vi. p. 179. and ch. ix. p. 216. CHAPTER II. ON THE ATTRIBUTES OF THE CHURCH AS VISI- BLE AND MILITANT, AND AS INVISIBLE AND TRIUMPHANT. @. How did you become a Member of this One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church ? @. By Baptism * with water, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 1 Hooker, III. 1.6. Entered we are not into the visible church before our admittance by the door of Baptism. AND AS INVISIBLE. 9 Bp. Pearson in Acta Apostolorum, p. 33. (in Act. ii. 41.) Hi per Baptismum recipiebantur in Ecclesiam Christi, neque alio modo unquam recipi potuerunt aut Christiani fieri ; quicquid in contrarium nuper deliravit Socinus. @. Are all, who have been duly baptized, to be considered as continuing thenceforward in a state of Grace, and in the way to Salvation ? @. No. They were placed at Baptism ina state of Grace, and in the way to Salvation ; but Baptism did not destroy their free will’, A man may quench the Spirit, and reject the good counsel of God towards himself (εἰς ἑαυτόν). 1§. Avucustin, Tract. v. In Epist. Joannis, 6. Ecce accessit Sacramentum nativitatis homo baptizatus ; Sacramen- tum habet, et magnum Sacramentum, divinum, sanctum, ineffa- bile. Considera quale: ut novum hominem faciat dimissione omnium peccatorum. Attendat tamen in cor, si perfectum est ibi, quod factum est in corpore: yideat si habet charita- tem, et tune dicat, Natus sum ex Deo. See also contra Faustum, xix. xii. Hooker, V. tvit. 4. Sacraments are not physical, but moral instruments of salvation; duties of service and wor- ship which, unless we perform as the Author of grace re- quireth, they are unprofitable. Ibid. rx. 2. rx, 2. Warervanp, Regeneration Stated and Explained, Works, vi. 361. @. May there, then, be evil men in the Church ? @. Yes. “All are not Israel who are of Israel.” @. How do you show this? @. From the figures and parables by which the Church is described in Holy Scripture. @®. Mention some of these. @. The Church is the Ark!, in which were clean and unclean animals; the Holy City, in which Jebusites remained mixed with God’s faith- B 5 Cuap. ἢ, —_——, Eph. iv. 30. 2 Tim. i. 6. 1 Thess. v. 19. Luke vii. 30. Rom. ix. 6. and ii, 28. Gen, vi. 19. 1 Pet. iii, 20. Jos. xv. 63. Judges i, 21. Part I. §Xe—_j —-YY Matt. x. 24, 1 Cor. i. 2, ekol ys Le vi. Ὁ. iv. 18. xv. 12. Gal. i. 6. iv. 2], Rev. ii. 15. 20. iii. 16. 10 THE CHURCH AS VISIBLE ful people: the Apostolic Company, in which was Judas, as well as Peter, James, and John. 1 §. Hieron. adv. Lucifer. p. 428, ed. 1643. Ut in areca Noe pardus et hedi, lupus et agni, sic in Ecclesia peccatores et justi... . Dies me deficiet si omnia Arcee Sacramenta cum Ecclesia componens edisseram. S. Aveustin, Epist. cvut. ii. p.471. Agnoscamus Arcam que preefiguravit Ecclesiam ; simul illic munda animalia si- mus; nec in ea nobiscum etiam immunda portari usque in finem diluvii recusemus. Simul in arcad fuerunt, sed non simul in odorem sacrificii de immundis obtulit Noé. Nee ideo tamen a mundis aliquibus arca ante tempus propter im- munda deserta est.— Corvus tantum arcam deseruit. Orricer of Public Baptism, in the Book of Common Prayer, Wash him and sanctify him with the Holy Ghost, that he being delivered from Thy wrath may be received into the Ark of Christ's Church. i See below, p. 11 and 27. @. You thence infer that a Church does not cease to be a Church by reason of the bad lives of some of its Members ? A. Ido. St. Paul recognizes the Christian So- ciety at Corinth to be a Church, although it con- tained within it, as he himself says, contentious persons, carnal, envious, striving, fornicators, litigious, insubordinate, and sceptics concerning the Resurrection; and he calls the Galatians a Church, though some of their number had re- lapsed into Judaistical opinions. So the Church of Pergamus contained Nicolaitans, that of Thya- tira a Jezebel; and that of Laodicea was luke- warm; yet they were still Churches’. 1S. Hieron. adv. Lucifer. p. 429. Galatas ad obserya- tionem legis traductos Apostolus iterum parturit ; Corinthios resurrectionem carnis non credentes pluribus argumentis ad verum iter trahere conatur. ... Angelo Ephesi deserta cha- AND AS INVISIBLE. 11 ritas imputatur. In Angelo Pergamene Ecclesiw idolothy- Cyap. I. torum esus et Nicolaitarum doctrina reprehenditur. Item —-~——” apud Angelum Thyatirorum Hiezabel prophetissa et simu- lacrorum esce et fornicationes increpantur. Et tamen omnes hos ad Penitentiam Dominus hortatur sub comminatione quoque futuree peenz nisi convertantur.... Numquid dixit, Rebaptizentur, qui in Nicolaitarum fide baptizati sunt ? Hooker, V. -xvilt. 6. @. You mentioned Séripture Parables; how then does this appear from any of them ? @. Our Blessed Lord describes the Church under the similitude of a Field in which Wheat Matt. xiii. ‘ : 0. and Tares (i.e. ζιζάνια, which closely resemble Is. ν. 2. the wheat) remain together until the Harvest. oe The Church is a Threshing-floor, in which lie che ine ἢ att, lil. le Grains and Chaff together’ (the chaff often part- ing and obscuring the grain); a Fold, with both Matt. xxv. Sheep and Goats mixed together; a Net,inwhich — are enclosed many Fish, both good and bad; aa 19. x1 Marriage Feast, with Guests both bad and ΑΗ ΠΩΣ ; Matt eit a Vine, with fruitful and unfruitful branches ; St. 10 Tein Peter’s Sheet’ let down from heaven, containing ἐς 11. . Aug. in clean and unclean beasts; a great House, in Sohn vil. which are vessels not only of gold and silver, but 2° 2 Tim. ii. 20. also of wood, some to honour, and some to dis- Ceeneae on. honour *. 1888, p. 175, dé. 1 Furcent. de Fide ad Petrum, c. 43. Firmissimé tene Aream Dei esse Catholicam Ecclesiam, et intra eam usque in finem seculi frumento mixtas paleas contineri, hoc est bonis malos Sacramentorum communione misceri. 2 §. Aucusr. contra Faust. lib. xii. 15. Quod cuncta ani- malium genera in arcé clauduntur: sicut omnes gentes, quas etiam Petro demonstratus discus ille significat, Ecclesia con- tinet. Quod et munda et immunda ibi sunt animalia: sicut in Ecclesiz Sacramentis et boni et mali versantur. 3.5. Cyprian, ad Antonian. Ep. lv. p. 112. B 6 Parr I. 1 Kings xix. 18 Rom. xi. 4, 12 THE CHURCH AS VISIBLE S. Avucustin, in S. Joann. Evangel. 61. De Fide et Oper. c. y. et in Ps. viii. et lv. et in Tichonii Regulam de permixté Ecclesia, t. iii. p. 101, ed. Paris. Contra Faustum, viii. p, 386. Hooker, V. xvi. 6. Heresy and many other crimes, which wholly sever from God, do sever from the (Visible) Church of Godin part only. To this, and no other purpose, are meant those Parables which our Saviour in the Gospel hath concerning mixture of yice with virtue, light with darkness, truth with error. See below, p. 13, and p. 261, and Pt. iii. ch. iii. @. Will this state of things which you have described continue to the end of the world ? @. Yes. “*On earth the evil will ever be mingled with the good.” 1 XXXIX Arrictes. Art. xxyi. Hooker, III. 1. 8, @. What are the moral and religious lessons to be learnt from this state of things ? @. We are to consider it as an exercise of our Faith. The present mixture ought to make us look forward to the time of final separation. The Field ought to remind us of the Harvest. We ought to carry our thoughts from the earthly Threshing-floor to the heavenly Garner ; from the present union of the Sheep and Goats to their future severance; from the Net we should look to the Shore to which it is to be one day drawn. This state of things is also to teach us other lessons, with respect to our fellow-men. @. What are these ? Q@. Weare to learn from it the duties of bear- ing and forbearing'; of remembering, that while there are many dad men in the Church, who do appear, there are many good ones who are not AND AS INVISIBLE. 13 known to men as such; of taking care, that while we communicate with sinful men, we do not com- municate with them in their sims’; of not dis- paraging or condemning a Church, much less of separating ἡ from it, for the errors or vices of some of its members, but of endeavouring to promote its general welfare, and the repentance and amend- ment of particular members, by our prayers and our example. 1S. Aue. iv. 497 (addressing the Donatists). Tolera:et zizania si triticum es; tolera paleam si triticum es; tolera pisces malos inter retia si piscis bonus es. Quare ante tempus ventilationis avolasti? Quare ante tempus messis frumenta eradicasti tecum? quare, antequam ad littus venires, retia disrupisti ? S. Aue. y. 129. Geme in area ut gaudeas in horreo. 2S. Aucusr. Epist. cv. 16. Quos autem corrigere non yalemus, etiamsi necessitas cogit pro salute czterorum ut Dei Sacramenta nobiscum communicent, peccatis tamen eorum non communicemus, quod non fit nisi consentiendo et favendo. Sic enim eos in isto mundo, in quo Ecclesia catholica per omnes gentes diffunditur, quem agrum suum Dominus dicit, tanquam zizania inter frilicum, vel in hac unitatis area tanquam paleam permixtam frumento, vel intra retia verbi et sacra- menti tanquam ma/os pisces cum bonis inclusos, usque ad tempus messis aut ventilationis aut littoris toleramus, ne propter illos eradicemus et triticum, aut grana nuda ante tempus de area separata, non in horreum mittenda purgemus, sed volatilibus colligenda projiciamus ; aut disruptis per schismata retibus, dum quasi malos pisces cavemus, in mare perniciosz libertatis exeamus. 3S. Cyprian, de Unit. Eccles. p. 111. Nemo existimet bonos Ecclesia posse discedere. Triticum non rapit ventus; inanes palee tempestate jactantur. S. Cyprian, Epist. trv. p. 99. Nam etsi videntur in Ec- clesia esse zizania, non tamen impediri debet aut fides aut caritas nostra, ut, quoniam zizania esse in Ecclesia cernimus, ipsi de Ecclesia recedamus. Nobis tantummodo laborandum Cuap. 11. Part J. 14 THE CHURCH AS VISIBLE est ut frumentum esse possimus, ut, cum cceperit frumentum Dominicis horreis condi, fructum pro opere nostro et labore capiamus. Apostolus in Epistola sua dicit: In domo autem magna non solum vasa sunt aurea, et argentea ; sed et lignea, et fictilia, et quedam quidem honorata, quedam vero inhonorata. Nos operam demus, et quantum possumus laboremus, ut vas aureum vel argenteum simus : ceterum fictilia vasa confringere Domino soli concessum est, Cui et virga ferrea data est. Ipem, Ep. tiv. p. 99. @. By what name is the Church called, in this condition, upon earth ? @. It is called the Visible Church. @. Why is it so called ? @. Because it is a Visible “Congregation of faithful” or believing persons, “ in which the pure Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments are duly administered’ according to Christ’s ordi- nance, in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same,” and which enjoys the right use of Ecclesiastical Discipline *. 1S. Ave. Brey. Coll. 3. Ecclesia est corpus vivum in qua est Anima et Corpus: Anima significat interna dona Spiritds Sancti; Corpus vero externam fidei professionem et sacra- mentorum communionem. XXXIX Arricres, Art. xix. Hooker, III. 1. 14. 2 Homitirs, p. 428. (Homily on Whitsunday.) See the passage cited below, chap. xiii. King Epwarp VL., Catechism, 1553. The Marks of this Church are, first, pure preaching of the Gospel; then brotherly love; thirdly, upright and uncorrupted use of the Lord’s Sacraments ; last of all, brotherly correction and excom- munication, or banishing those out of the Church that will not amend their lives. This mark the holy fathers termed discipline.—See also Certain Conferences between Ridley and Latimer, 4 .p. 1555, and Hooper’s Fifth Sermon on Jonas. Hence it appears, that although in her nineteenth Article cited above, the Church of England has specified only the two marks of Sacraments and the Word of God, yet she does not en AND AS INVISIBLE. 15 regard them as sufficient of themselves to constitute a visible Church, without the additional note of discipline and govern- ment, concerning which it may be well to cite the words of CassanveEr on the Augsburgh Confession, Art. vii. Quod autem subjicitur, ad veram Ecclesie unitatem satis esse con- sentire de doctrind evangelii et administratione sacramentorum, id non satis est ad schismaticos ab Ecclesiz societate segre- gandos. Requiritur ad hance unitatem Ecclesiz preter doc- tring et morum similitudinem etiam wnitas animorum in qua potissimum spectanda est obedientia que debetur Ecclesiarum Preefectis, qui inde usque ab Apostolis per successionem Ecclesiam Dei gubernandam et verbo vitee pascendam sus- ceperunt, qui etsi non semper eadem fide officium suum prestiterunt, in illis tamen que officii sunt obtemperari illis necessum est, tum in auditu vere doctrine, tum in legitimo usu sacramentorum, tum in disciplind et correctione ecclesiasticd.— Hane tertfiam notam necessariorequiri etiam hujus Confessionis (Augustanz) auctor postea agnovit, qui multis in locis, ubi de signis Ecclesize agit, tertio loco addit obedientiam debitam ministerio Evangelii seu Catholice Ecclesiz. Groru Opera, iii. p. 566-7. See also his own adhesion to Cassander’s remarks on this subject, ibid. p. 617. @. For any other reason ? @. Yes, as distinguished from the Invisible ' Church. 1S. Hieron. ad Galat. i. p. 120. Noscendum Ecclesiam dupliciter dici posse, et eam que non habeat maculam et rugam et vere corpus Christi sit, et eam que in Christi nomine absque plenis perfectisque virtutibus congregetur. Archbishop Cranmer, Works, iv. p. 278. Bp. Tay or, x. p. 333, ed. 1828. Barrow on the Unity of the Church, p. 296. @. What do you mean by the Invisible Church ? Cuap. Il. Sa τοῦδ Eph. ii. 19. Heb. ASE A. I mean the family of God, both in earth and 22, 93 heaven; the city of the living God; the Spouse Rey. iii. 12. John iii. 29. of Christ, without spot or wrinkle ; ‘the mystical ἢ Eo xxi. 2. x. Ve Body of Christ, whose members are known to ἘρΙ. v. 27. Part I, peter See, Rom. xii. 1, Eph. iv. 11-16; Col. ii. 19. _ John x. 14. 2Tim, ii. 19. Luke x. 20. John x. 14, 27. 1 Cor. viii. 3. 2 Tim. ii. 19. Matt.xx.16. Rev. xvii. 14, 16 THE CHURCH AS VISIBLE God, and to God alone, and whose names are written in heaven’. 1 Hooker, III. 1. τι. 4—8. That body consisteth only of true Israelites, true sons of Abraham, true servants and saints of God. VIII. 1. 6. @. You speak of the Visible and Inyisible Church ; are there then to Churches ἢ @. No: these two terms describe not two diffe- rent subjects, but the same subject considered in two different states. The Church is viside, in that it contains persons existing only on earth, and known to men by certain visible tokens: it is in- visible, in that it consists of persons both in heaven and earth, from the beginning to the end of the world, known to Gon *, but not clearly distinguish- able by men. The visible Church is the Church as far only as it is seen by men; the invisible, as it is known by God. The former contains both bad and good; the latter consists of good only. In the former are wheat and chaff, wheat and tares, mixed together: in the latter, wheat alone. The one is the Church of the Called, the other of the Elect only ’. 1 §. Aucustin in Evangel. Joannis Tract. xii. 12. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt Ejus : novit qui permaneant ad coro- nam, qui permaneant ad flammam ; novit in area sua triticum, novit paleam ; novit segetem, novit zizania. S. Aucustin, Breviculus Collat. 8. 10. Eadem ipsa una et sancta Ecclesia nunc est aliter, tunc autem aliter futura ; nunc habet malos mixtos, tune non est habitura. 3 Hooker, III.1.9. For lack of diligent observing the difference, first, between the Church of God Mystical and the Church Visible ; then, between the Visible (Church) sound, and (the same Visible Church) corrupted, sometimes more and sometimes less, the oversights are neither few nor light that have been committed. AND AS INVISIBLE. 17 Bp. Pearson on the Creed, Art. ix. One and the same Cnap. II. Church, in relation to different times, admitteth or not ad- ~~——_ mitteth the permixtion of the wicked, or the imperfection of the godly. 4 @. By what other name is the Church on a vi. 10, earth known ? Heb. xii. 22. @. It is sometimes called the Church Militant, eae: τ as existing in a State of Warfare against evil, and as distinguished from what it will be in its future condition as Triumphant or Glorified. @. Is there any one single Visible Head of the Church on earth ? @. No. Cunrist is the Head of all Principality mie A and Power; He is over all things to the Church, ; which is His Spouse, and has no other Head or Husband but Christ. He only * that hath the Bride aC is the Bridegroom’.” He is the Chief Pastor. J/1 Pet. v. 4. Christ had appointed any one Visible Head over , Mate aa His Church, it is unaccountable that we ΠΝ Ἢ find nothing in Scripture concerning our own duty to this Supreme Head, where so much is said of our duty to temporal governors, and to our spiritual Guides. But Christ never appointed any one Visible Head of the Catholic Church, any more than He did One Visible Monarch of the whole world; nor did the Christian Church ever hear of any supremacy over itself in one man, for six hundred years from the birth of Christ’; and ever since that supremacy once began to be main- tained, it brought with it great and innumerable calamities ἧ. 1 Tueornycacr in S. Joan. ili, Οὐδεὶς ἄλλος ἐστὶ νυμ- ios εἰ μὴ μόνος ὁ Χριστὸς, πάντες δὲ οἱ διδάσκοντες νυμφ- , > a © , > ( \ a , αγωγοί εἰσιν ὥσπερ ὃ πρόδρομος" οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἄλλος δοτήρ Part I. ue — 18 THE CHURCH AS VISIBLE ἐστι τῶν ἀγαθῶν εἰ μὴ ὁ Κύριος" οἱ δὲ ἄλλοι πάντες μεσῖται καὶ τῶν παρὰ τοῦ Κυρίου δεδομένων ἀγαθῶν διάκονοι. . 3. Cardinal Cusanus, de Concord. Eccles. ii. 34. Hoe (inquit Gregorius) temerarium nomen nullus adhue Romanus Pontifex sibi arripuit. Sed Bonifacius III., qui fuit secun- dus a Gregorio, magna contentione demum a Phoca id obti- nuit, ut Roma caput omnium Ecclesiarum diceretur, teste Platina in Bonif. 111. CraxanruorprE, Def. Eccl. Anglic. p. 167. Bp. Burt, ii. 242. If a Visible Head were necessary, the Church did not exist for the first six Centuries after Christ, during which that title was never heard of. 3 Hooker, VIII. 11.6. See note p. 22. Bp. Overatt’s Convocation Book, pp. 285—306. Abp. Laup against Fisher, sect. 26. The Church of England does not believe there is any necessity to have one Pope or Bishop over the whole Christian world ; which, were it possible, she cannot think fit. Les.ie, Letter on an Universal Bishop, xi. Christ ap- pointed no universal Bishop over his Church, more than an universal monarch over the world. See below, Pt. ii. ch. ix. @. But since the Church is always a Visible Society of men, united by visible tokens (above, p- 14) and since every Society requires a governing power for its own preservation, what is the power which governs the Visible Church ? @. The Church, as a whole, is subject, under Christ, to the Laws given her in Holy Scripture, and to those laws which (not contrary to Scripture) have been enacted by her for herself, and which have been generally received and put in use in the Church. @. But Laws require living Interpreters and Executors: who then have this power in the Church ? A. The Bishops of the Church, convened in AND AS INVISIBLE. 19 General and Provincial Councils; each having Cuar. Il. full spiritual jurisdiction in that National Church ', or portion of it, committed to his charge. 1 Bp. Overati’s Convoc. Book, ed. Lond. 1690. p. 256. We have before laboured to make it manifest, that our Saviour Christ is the Creator of the world, and the Govern- our of it; that He hath redeemed and sanctified unto Him- self His Church, whereof He is the sole Monarch; that He hath neither appointed any one Emperour under Him to govern the whole world, nor any one Priest or Archbishop to rule the whole Catholic Church; that, as in respect of Christ, the Creator, all the world is but one kingdom, where- of He is the only King; so in respect of Christ our Re- deemer, all that believe in His name, wheresoever they are dispersed, are but one Catholic Church; and that the said one Catholic Church is not otherwise visible in this world, than is the said one universal kingdom of Christ, the Creator of it, viz. by the several and distinct parts of them, as by this or that National Church, by this or that temporal kingdom. For our Saviour Christ, having made the external government of His Catholic Church, suitable to the govern- ment of His universal monarchy over all the world, hath, by the institution of the Holy Ghost, ordered to be placed in every kingdom, Archbishops, Bishops, and inferior Minis- ters, to govern the particular Churches therein planted ..... as He hath in like manner appointed Kings and Sovereign Princes, with their inferior Magistrates of divers sorts, to rule and govern His people under Him, in every Kingdom, Country, and Sovereign Principality. See also Mason De Ministerio Anglicano, p. 278, 279, 419, 425. Bp. Sriruincrieet’s Rational Account of the Grounds of Protest. Relig. fol. 1665, p. 801---808, on the words of St. Cyprian, “ Episcopatus unus est, cujus a singulis in soli- dum pars tenetur.”. When Cyprian makes the universal government of the Church to be but one Episcopal office, and that committed in the several parts of it with full power to particular Bishops, can any one be so senseless to imagine that he should ever think the government of the Church in general to depend upon any one particular Church as chief — Parr. I, 20 THE CHURCH AS VISIBLE over the rest? And that the former words do really import such a full power in particular Bishops, over that part of the flock which is committed to them, appears from the true import of the phrase in solidum; a phrase taken out of the civil law, where great difference is made between an obli- gation in partem and in solidum, and so proportionably be- between a tenure in partem and in solidum: those things were held in solidum, which were held in full right and power without payment or acknowledgment. And in this speech he compares the government of the Church to an estate held by several freeholders, in which every one hath a full right to that share which belongs to him. Whereas, according to the Romish principle, the government of the Church is like a manor or lordship, in which the several inhabitants hold at the best, but by copy from the Lord, and they would fain have it at the will of the Lord too. @. And have they the power of putting these Laws in force ? A. Yes, in foro conscientie, by spiritual censures. See note to next question, and below, ch. xiii. xiv. and Pt. ili. chaps. νυ. vi. vii. ; @®. But since the Church, as such, has πὸ secular power, how can these laws have temporal force ? @. Christ, as Creator, Redeemer, and Governor of the world, has delegated to every supreme Governing power, in a Christian State, an ezter- nal superintending, directing, and controlling ju- risdiction, with the exercise of which no foreign Prelate, Prince, or Potentate, can interfere. This jurisdiction is what the Emperor Constantine called that of an Episcopus ab extra’; and it con- sists, not only in maintaining and defending the Church of Christ in its own dominions, but in regulating and governing it*; not however after any new code of Laws, but of those of God and of AND AS INVISIBLE. 21 the Church. And so Christ has provided for the maintenance of Unity in the Church, by the dis- tinct though concurrent exercise of the spiritual and temporal Powers, and not by the commission of both or of either of them to the hands of one man ἧ. 1 Geruanrp, Loci Communes, VI. p. 589. Distinguendum inter potestatem Ecclesiasticam internam et externam, que dis- tinctio colligitur ex verbis Constantini apud Euseb. lib. iv. de vita Constant. c. 24. Vos Episcopi in Ecclesia, ego extra Ecclesiam seu templum Episcopus a Deo constitutus sum; illa ministris Ecclesiz in solidum relinquitur, hee vero magistra tui Christiano communis est : Distinguendum inter eorum, que ad divinum cultum pertinent, administrationem et externam eorundem dispositionem ; illa ministrorum Ecclesiz est ; heec vero magistrattis. Minister predicat verbum, utitur gladio Spiritds, et ore pugnat adversus hostes et impios ; magistra- tus custodit verbi preecones et confessores, vibrat gladium contra hostes Christianze Reipublicee et manu armata eosdem oppugnat. Ut ergo oris et manuum ministeria distincta manent, licet ad eundem finem, corporis scilicet incolumitatem, conspirent, sic Ministerii Ecclesiastici et Magistratts poli- tici officia distincta manent, licet ad eundum jinem Reipubl. se. Christiane, que itidem mysticum aliquod corpus consti- tuit, salutem, tutelam et incolumitatem utraque sint directa. 2 Bp. Overatr’s Conyoc. Book, p. 262. Under such a form of Ecclesiastical Government the Christian Magistrate is become to be, as the chief member of the Church, so the chief Goyernour of it; to keep as well the said Arch- bishops within their bounds and limits, as all the rest of the Clergy, and Christians, Bishops, Ministers, and Parishioners, that every one, in their several places, may execute and discharge their distinct offices and duties which are com- mitted unto them. See also Bp. Beveridge on XXXIX Articles, Art. xxxvii. and below, Pt. iii. ch. v. and yi. 3 Hooker, VIII. uz. 5. Dissimilitude in great things is such a thing which draweth great inconvenience after it. And the way to prevent it is, not as some do ima- gine, the yielding up of supreme power over all churches Cuap., 11. ~_———— Parr I. Matt. xvi. 18. Acts xx. 28. 1 Cor. xi. 16. Eph. iii. 10.11.9]. 22 DIGNITY AND GLORY into one only pastor's hands ; but the framing of their govern- ment, especially for matter of substance, everywhere accord- ing to the rule of one only law, to stand in no less force than the law of nations doth, to be received in all kingdoms. This shall cause uniformity even under several dominions, without those woeful inconveniences whereunto the state of Christendom was subject heretofore, through the tyranny and oppression of that one universal Nimrod who alone ruled all. And, till the Christian world be driven to enter into the peaceable and true consultation about some such kind of general law concerning those things of weight and moment wherein now we differ, if one Church hath not the same order which another hath: let every Church keep as near as may be the order it should have, and commend the just defence thereof unto Gop, even as Judah did, when it differed in the exercise of religion from that form which Israel followed. See further on this subject, below, Pt. ii. ch. ix. toward the end. CHAPTER III. ON THE DIGNITY AND GLORY OF THE CHURCH. (Ὁ. By whom was the Church founded ? A. By Jesus Christ. 4). For what purpose ? A. In order that by it might be known the manifold wisdom of God, and that in it, by the salvation of men, there might be glory to Him for ever. @. Whence appears the dignity and glory of the Christian Church ? A. From the titles before mentioned (chap. I.), which indicate her Unity, Holiness, and Univer- sality: from the promises made to her by God, that “all the Gentiles should come to her light ;” OOOO EEE EEE EEE ΣΝ ΝΙΝ δον OF THE CHURCH. 23 that “ Kings should be her nursing Fathers, and Cuar, UL. Queens her nursing Mothers ;” that “no weapon Is. Is. 1x3. 10. formed against her should prosper ;” that “the 77% πον. Nation and Kingdom which will not serve her should perish and be utterly wasted ;” and from other expressions by which she is described in Holy Writ, so that, therefore, the Psalmist says, “ Glorious things are spoken of thee, thou City of Fi Ps, Luxxvii God.” Lowru on Isaiah Ixii. 1—12, and notes on Hosea ii. 19. S. Aue. de Civ. Dei, xvii. 28—35. @. Mention some of these expressions ? ΖΦ, She is there called the Body and Spouse! of Rom. xii. 1. Christ, the King’s Daughter, the Queen at the Τ᾽ (ον. yi. right hand of the Messiah, the Lord’s Vineyard, ! 15. ΟΣ es the Kingdom of Heaven, of God, of Grace, of Rev. xix. 7. Light ; the Mountain of the Lord, to which all aa xxii. 17. nations shall flow; the House built on a Rock, Muah iv. the Pillar and Ground of the Truth, the City of Eph. i. 23. God, the Jerusalem which is above, which is the 93, 30, Ps. xlv. Mother of us all. a xlv 1 Bp. Taytor, Sermon xvii. The Marriage Ring, v. ΜῈΝ ἦ 1. Ρ. 254. This is a great mystery, but it is the symbolical and Τὸν xxx, 8. sacramental representation of the greatest mysteries of our Matt. iv. 17. religion, Christ descended from His Father’s bosom, and aE ue Bouiracted His Divinity with flesh and blood, and married Dan. ii. 44. our nature, and we became a Church, the Spouse of the Conte Bridegroom, which He cleansed with His blood, and gave Matt. xvi. her His Holy Spirit for a dowry, and Heaven for a jointure ; Tee: 24. ᾿ im. iii. begetting children unto God by the Gospel. This Spouse 15, He hathjoined to Himself by an excellent charity ; He feeds τεῦ xii, 22. her at His own table, and lodges her nigh His own heart ; Gabe provides for all her necessities, relieves wher sorrows, deter- mines her doubts, guides her wanderings; He is become her Head, and she as a signet upon His right Hand. Here is the eternal conjunction, the indissoluble knot, the exceed- Parr I, Eph. ii. 6, Col. i. 12, 24 SALVATION ONLY IN THE CHURCH. ing love of Christ, the obedience of the Spouse, the commu- nicating of goods, the uniting of interests, the fruit of mar- riage, a celestial generation, a new creature. Sacramentum hoc magnum est; this is the Sacramental mystery, repre- sented by the holy rite of Marriage. @. But do not these latter titles refer to the Invisible Church, purified and glorified in Heaven? A. They do indeed specially belong to the Church, as she will be hereafter in a state of bliss ; but they appertain also to the Universal Church upon Earth, for they describe that which she is in tendency, in endeavour, in desire, and in expecta- tion’. Barrow, Discourse concerning the Unity of the Church, pp. 2°6-7, ed. 1683. CHAPTER IV. ON SALVATION ONLY IN THE CHURCH. (Ὁ. We have seen that the Visible Church is a Society, and since every Society has some essen- tial characteristic by which it is distinguished from other Societies, what is that by which the Church is discerned ? @. The profession of the true Religion’. ' Hooker, V. rxvut. 6. Of the Visible Church of Christ in this present world, we are thus persuaded ; Church is a word which art hath devised thereby to sever and distinguish that society of men which professeth the érue religion from the rest which profess it not. @. And what is the essential characteristic of this profession of the true Religion ? A. It is faith in our Lorp Jesus Curist, which SALVATION ONLY IN THE CHURCH. 25 distinguishes the ¢rue Religion from the false ; and separates the Church from all other societies of men, such as Pagans, Jews, Mahometans, Infidels, and Apostates’. Hence it is that when a name was to be given to the members of the Church, to distinguish them from all others, they were called Christians. 1 Hooker, V. rxvit.6. There have been in the world, from the very first foundation thereof, but three religions, Paganism, which lived in the blindness of corrupt and de- prayed nature, Judaism, embracing the law which reformed heathenish impiety, and taught salvation to be looked for through one whom God in the last days would send and exalt to be Lord of all; [and Mahometanism, see Bp. Andrewes, Catechist, Doctr. p.34;] finally, Christian belief, which yieldeth obedience to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and acknowledgeth Him the Saviour whom God did promise. .. . Seeing, then, that the Church is a name which art hath given to professors of true religion, religion being a matter partly of contemplation, partly of action, we must define the Church which is a religious society by such differences as do properly explain the essence of such things, that is to say, by the object or matter whereabout the contemplations and actions of the Church are properly conversant. For so all knowledges and all virtues are defined. Whereupon because the only object which separateth ours from other religions is Jesus Christ, and whom none but the Church doth worship, we find that accordingly the Apostles do everywhere distinguish hereby the Church from infidels and from Jews, accounting ‘‘ them which call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to be His Church.” If we go lower, we shall but add unto this certain casual and variable accidents, which are not properly of the being, but make only for the happier and better being of the Church of God, either in deed or in men’s opinions and conceits. This is the error of all popish definitions that hitherto have been brought. They define not the Church by that which the Church essentially is, but by that wherein they imagine their Cc Cuap. IV. Acts xi. 26. ν Parr I. Ps. Ixvii. 7. Is. xxv. 6. XXxvii. 32. Ezek. xiii. 9. Joel ii. 32. Eph. iv. 11. 26 SALVATION ONLY IN THE CHURCH. own more perfect than the rest are. Touching parts of eminency and perfection, parts likewise of imperfection and defect in the Church of God, they are infinite, their degrees and differences no way possible to be drawn unto any certain account. There is not the least contention and variance, but it blemisheth somewhat the Unity that ought to be in the Church of Christ, which notwithstanding may have not only without offence or breach of concord her manifold varieties in rites and ceremonies of religion, but also her strifes and con- tentions many times, and that about matters of no small im- portance, yea, her schisms, factions, and such other eyils, whereunto the body of the Church is subject, sound and sick remaining both of the same body, as long as both parts retain, by outward profession, that vital substance of truth which maketh Christian religion to differ from theirs which acknowledge not our Lord Jesus Christ the blessed Saviour of mankind, give no credit to His glorious Gospel, and have His sacraments, the seals of eternal life, in derision. @. Ir we desire to be saved, is it necessary, that, if we are able, we should be members of the Christian Church ? Ae It is *: 1S. Cyprian, Ep. iv. p. 9. Domus Dei una est; et nemini Salus nisi in Ecclesia esse potest. S. Aue. m1. 1985, 1992, 2027, 2028. @. How does this necessity appear ? Q@. From the nature of the case. Christ Himself having instituted a Society on earth, in which men are to receive the means of* grace and salvation, and having revealed no other way to this end, they who will not enter into, and continue in, this society, exclude themselves from participation in the pri- vileges of the Gospel. 1S. Inen. adv. Hereses, iii. 40. Spiritis Sancti non sunt participes qui non concurrunt ad Ecclesiam, sed semet ipsos fraudant a vita. Ubi enim Ecclesia Dei ibi Spiritus Dei. SALVATION ONLY IN THE CHURCH. 27 @. Does this assertion further rest on the ex- press authority of any examples in Holy Scripture ? A. Holy Scripture presents us with many instances where God appointed certain means for men’s preservation, and where all were de- stroyed who would not avail themselves of those means. @. Mention some of these. Cuapr. LV. a A. It was necessary to enter and remain in the Gen. vii. 23. Ark (which is a type of the Church’) for safety 1 Pet. iii. 21. from the Flood; it was necessary to have the door-post’ sprinkled with blood, and that no one Exod. xii. 7. should go out of the doors’, in order to be safe DI 20; 27. Jos. ii, 18, from the sword of the destroying Angel; and it !% was necessary for the members of the family of Rahab ἡ to adide in her house, if they wished to escape death. 1 TeRTULLIAN, de Baptism. 8. Ecclesia est Arca figurata : y. de Idol. ad fin. S. Cyrrian, Ep. Ixix. p. 181, et Ep. Ixxiy. p. 198. S. Hieron. ad Esa. xi. Quod Arca in Diluvio hoc Ecclesia prestat in Mundo. S. Aue. iv. p. 1315.—De Ciy. D. xy. 27. Procul dubio Arca Noe figura est peregri- nantis in hoe seculo Ecclesie, que fit salva per lignum in quo pependit Christus. See above, p. 9. Hooker, V. rxvuit. 6. The privilege of the visible Church is to be herein like the ark of Noah; that for any thing we know to the contrary, all without it are lost sheep. 2S. Cyprian, de Unit. Eccles. p. 110. Sacramentum Paschee in Exodi lege nihil aliud continet quam ut agnus qui in figura Christi occiditur in domo und edatur. Nec alia ulla credentibus preeter unam Ecclesiam domus.— Vid. et p. 182. 3 §. Inen. i. 3. OriceEn, in lib. Jesu Naue, Hom. iy. Extra hanc domun, id est, extra Ecclesiam, nemo salvatur. S. Cyprian, Ep. 69. Rahab typum portabat Ecclesie, cui dicitur, Omnis, qui evxierit domus tue foras, reus sibi erit.— Quo sacramento declaratur, in wnam domum solam, hoc est, in Ecclesiam, victuros colligi oportere. c 2 Part I. a ey Col. i. 18. 24. Acts ii. 47. 28 SALVATION ONLY IN THE CHURCH. Bp. Pearson on the Creed, Art. ix. As none were saved from the deluge but such as were within the Ark of Noah, framed for their reception by the command of God ; as none of the first-born of Egypt lived but such as were within those habitations, whose door-posts were sprinkled with blood by the appointment of God for their preservation ; as none of the inhabitants of Jericho could escape but such as were within the house of Rahab, for whose protection a covenant was made ; so none shall ever escape the eternal wrath of God which belong not to the Church of God. These are the vessels of the Tabernacle, carried up and down, at last to be translated into and fixed in the Temple. @. What do we learn from these examples ? A. We are taught by analogy, that, since God has appointed the Church to be the dispenser of the means of pardon, grace, and salvation to men, we cannot hope to escape death or inherit life, if we do not belong to it; that is, if we do not enter in, and abide in it. ; @. But does it appear directly from Holy Scripture that there is no sure way to salvation but in the Church ? @. Yes. The Church is called in Holy Scrip- ture the Body of Christ: and while ἐέ is said in Scripture, that the Lord added to the Church such as were being saved, (τοὺς σωζομένους.) and that Christ is the Saviour of His Body* (σῶμα) the Church’, salvation is nowhere promised to those who are not members of that Body *. 1 Ephes. v. 23. Σωτὴρ TOY σώματος (where the connexion of the Greek words σῶμα aud σώζω is made use of by the Apostle). Col. i. 18. αὐτός ἐστι κεφαλὴ TOY σώματος, τῆς Ἐκκλησίας. Hence of σωζόμενοι ( Acts ii. 47) are the incor- porated into Christ’s σῶμα or Body, the Church, and thus placed in a state of salvation. ee νὼ, SALVATION ONLY IN THE CHURCH. 29 3 §. Auveustin. in S. Joann. Evan. Tract. xxvi. 13. Vis Cuap. IV. vivere de Spiritu Christi? In Corpore esto Christi. =a 3 Bp. Pearson on the Creed, Art. ix. Christ never ap- pointed two ways to heaven, nor did He build a Church to save some, and make another institution for other men’s salvation. Bp. Tayxor on Repentance, vol. ix. p. 258. There is, in ordinary, no way to heaven but by serving God in the way which He hath commanded us by His Son; that is, in the way of the Church, which is His Body, of which He is the Prince and Head. @. But may there not be more than one Church in which salvation is offered ? @. No: the Church is Una, Universa, and Unica’; United, Universal, and One only. Christ is the ΤΌΣΟΣ; Head of every man, says St. Paul. As one Head Col. 118.. He has but one spiritual Body; and this Body, as Taphaac ie the Apostle tells us, is the Church, and no one can !*—®5. “hold the Head ” who is not inthis Body. Again; the Church is called in Scripture the fulness of Ephes. i. 23. Him who filleth all in all. This universal fulness admits of no other fulness. Again; the Church is the Spouse of Christ, united for ever to Him, Who 15. Ixii. 5. loved her and gave Himself for her, and Who has Ephes. v. no other or second Spouse besides that which He 32, ~ has sanctified and cleansed with water and the word, that He might present’ ¢he Church glorious to Himself, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing. She is the one Spouse of one Hus- band*®, There is one Fold and one Shepherd ; “One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism ;” and thus 2 Ger =i 2: the Church is one for us men and for our Ephes. ἵν. ὅ. Salvation ‘. 1S. Amsrose, Hexaém. iii. 1. Non multe Congregationes sunt; sed wna est Congregatio, wna Ecclesia. ς 3 Ephes. vy. 27. ἵνα παραστήσῃ ἑαυτῷ ἔνδοξον ΤῊΝ ἐκ- c 3 Part I. SS 30 SALVATION ONLY IN THE CHURCH. κλησίαν. The force of the article in the original (expressive of the oneness of the Church) is to be observed. 3S. Firmirian ap. Cyprian. p. 224. Neque enim multe Sponse Christi; una est, que est Ecclesia Catholica, qu sola generat Dei filios. 2 Cor. xi. 2. ἡρμοσάμην ὑμᾶς ἑνὶ ἀνδρὶ παρθένον ἁγνήν. φοβοῦμαι δὲ μήποτε ὡς ὁ ὄφις Evav ἐξηπάτησεν ἐν τῇ πανουργίᾳ αὐτοῦ, οὕτως φθαρῇ τὰ νοήματα ὑμῶν ἀπὸ τῆς ἁπλότητος τῆς εἰς τὸν Χριστόν. 4 ΟἸΕΜΕΝΒ ALEXANDRIN. Strom. vii. 17. Ἔκ τῶν εἰρη- μένων φανερὸν οἶμαι γεγενῆσθαι μίαν εἶναι τὴν ἀληθῆ ᾿Ἐκκλησίαν τὴν τῷ ὄντι ἀρχαίαν, εἰς ἣν οἱ κατὰ πρόθεσιν δίκαιοι ἐγκαταλέγονται: ἑνὸς γὰρ ὄντος τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ ἑνὸς τοῦ Κυρίου, διὰ τοῦτο καὶ τὸ ἄκρως τίμιον κατὰ μόνωσιν ἐπαινεῖται, μίμημα ὃν ἀρχῆς τῆς μιᾶς.---Καὶ ἡ ἐξοχὴ τῆς Ἔκκλη- σίας καθάπερ ἡ ἀρχὴ τῆς συστάσεως κατὰ τὴν μονάδα ἐστὶν πάντα τὰ ἄλλα ὑπερβάλλουσα καὶ μηδὲν ἔχουσα ὁμοῖον ἢ ἴσον ἑαυτῇ. S. Cyprian, Ep. Ixxiy. p. 216. Fell. Deus unus et Chris- tus unus, et una Spes et Fides una, et una Ecclesia; see ibid. p. 83. Sacerdotium noyum fieri preter unum altare et unum Sacerdotium non potest. S. Cyprian. Ep. Ixix. p. 181, ed. Fell. Quod autem Ecclesia una sit declarat in Cantico Canticorum Spiritus Sanctus, ex persona Christi dicens, Una est Columba Mea, De Unit. Eccl. p. 119. 5. Opratus, i. 7. Prater unam Ecclesiam altera non est. S. Hieron. Esa. xix. Cunctaaltaria que contra Ecclesiz eriguntur altare, sciamus esse non Domini. S. Aucustin, Serm. exxv. Quia unica est Ecclesia, per to‘um orbem unitas salvatur. Ab unitate ergo noli recedere, si non vis esse immunis a salute. Bp. Pearson on the Creed, Art. ix. Except a man be of the Catholic Church, he can be of none. For being the Church which is truly Catholic containeth within it ail which are truly Churches, whosoever is not of the Catholic Church cannot be of the true Church. Whatsoever Church pretendeth to a new beginning, pretendeth at the same time to anew Churchdome ; and whatsvever is so new, is none. ©. What other evidence have we of this truth a a a Lee ee SALVATION ONLY IN THE CHURCH. 31 from Holy Scripture, as interpreted by the Fathers Cup. Iv. of the Church ? τ @. The Church was prefigured by Eve, “ the Gen. iii. 20. Mother of all living :” and, as there is no way of being naturally born, as men, but by descent from Adam and Eve, so is there no way of being spiri- tually born as Christian men, but from Christ and the Church’. As Adam was united to Eve, so is Christ, “the second Adam,” to His Church, and @l. iv. 26. 2 Rev, xxi. 2. no one belongs to Christ who does not belong to . Christ’s Church. “Christianus non est qui in Christi Ecclesiaé non est*.” What God hath Matt. xix.6. joined together, let not man put asunder. 1 OriceEn, ap. Routh, Rel. Sacr. iii. 265. S. Meruoptus, Conviv. Virg. iii. 8. Galland. Bibl. P. P. iii. p. 688. S. Hieron, ad Ephes. c. v. Quomodo de Adam et uxore ejus omne hominum nascitur genus, sic de Christo et Eccle- sia omnis credentium multitudo generata est. S. Curysosr. in Ephes. ec. v. p. 864, Savil. S. Ampros. in S. Luce. iii. 22. Adam noyissimus Christus est : Costa Christi vita Ecclesie. Hee est Eva mater om- nium viventium. S. Aue. Serm. xxii. Parentes qui nos genuerunt ad mor- tem, Adam et Eva; parentes qui nos genuerunt ad vitam, Christus et Ecclesia. Vide et t. iv. p. 498, et Tractat. in 8. Joh. xi. et c. Faustum, xiii. 8. S. Aucustin in S. Joann. Tract. ix. Dormit Adam ut fiat Eva; moritur Christus ut fiat Ecclesia. Dormienti Adz fit Eva de latere ; mortuo Christo lancea percutitur latus ut profluant sacramenta quibus formetur Ecclesia. Hooker, V. rv1. 7. The Church is in Christ, as Eve was in Adam. Yea by grace we are in Christ and in His Church, as by nature we are in our first parents. God made Eve out of Adam. And His Church He framed out of the very flesh, the very wounded and bleeding side, of the Son of Man. His body crucified and His blood shed for the life c 4 Part I. ee) Below, chap. Vi. Vii. Vili. xiii. Xiv. xv. 32 SALVATION ONLY IN THE CHURCH. of the world, are the true elements of that heavenly being which maketh us such as Himself is of whom we come. Bp. Brveripee on Article xxv. ii. p. 210. 2S. Cyprian, ad Anton. p. 112. @. What was the Judgment of the primitive Church upon this point ? A. It declared in its creeds', that the means of grace and salvation could only be obtained in the Church ; that remission of sins could only be had there; that the Sacrament of the Eucharist’, the graces of the Spirit *, and the Word of God *, pure and incorrupt, could be received only in the Church ; that Prayer could only be offered up acceptably to God, and that Benediction could only be received in Communion with the Church of Christ*®. In the words of St. Jerome*, “ Qui matrem Ecclesiam contempserit, morte morie- tur.” And in those of St. Augustine, “ Sanctus mons Dei sancta Ecclesia ejus; qui non ei com- municant, non exaudiuntur ad yitam zternam.” And of St. Ambrose’, “ Ecclesia est Corpus Chris- ti; et ille negat Christum, qui non omnia, que Christi sunt, confitetur.” And of St. Augustine δ again, “ Ecclesia Catholica sola corpus est Christi, cujus Ille Caput est et Salvator corporis Sui. Extra hoc corpus neminem vivificat Spiritus Sanc- tus.” “ Nulla salus, nisi in Ecclesia,’ was the concurrent language of all Christian antiquity ; and in the words of St. Cyprian *, and of St. Augus- tin °, * Nemo potest habere Deum Patrem, gui non habet Ecclesiam Matrem.” 1S. Cyprian, ad Magn. Credis remissionem peccatorum et vitam eternam per sanctam Ecclesiam. SALVATION ONLY IN THE CHURCH. 99 5. Ασα. Enchir. vi. p. 379. Extra Ecclesiam non remit- tuntur peccata: ipsa nam proprie Spiritis Sancti pignus accepit, sine quo non remittuntur peccata. S. Aue. Serm. eexecy. Claves non homo unus sed Unitas accepit Ecclesiz ; praeter hane Ecclesiam, nihil solvitur. See KerrLewett on the Creed, pt. ii. chaps. vi. and vii. pp. 323—335, ed. 1713. 2S. Ienar. ad Ephes. y. ἐὰν μή τις ἦ ἐντὸς τοῦ θυσιαστη- ρίου, ὑστερεῖται τοῦ ἄρτου τοῦ Θεοῦ. Cf. ad Trall. ο. vii. 3S. Iren. iii. 40. Spirittis non sunt participes qui non concurrunt ad Ecclesiam ; qui non participant eum neque a mammillis Matris nutriuntur in Vitam, neque percipiunt de Corpore Christi procedentem nitidissimum fontem, sed effo- diunt sibi lacus detritos de fossis terrenis, et de cceno putri- dam bibunt aquam, effugientes fidem Ecclesize—nunquam scientiam stabilem habentes, non fundati super unam Petram sed super arenam. 4S. Inen. iii. 4. Non oportet apud alios querere Veri- tatem, quam facile est ab Ecclesia sumere, cum Apostoli quasi in depositorium dives plenissimé in eam contulerint omnia que sint Veritatis, uti omnis quicunque velit sumat ab δὰ potum vite. Hec est vite introitus. Omnes autem reliqui fures sunt et latrones. 5 S. Prosper Aaquir. in Psalm. cxlvii. 18. Benedixit fitios inte. Extra Jerusalem nulla benedictio est: quia non sanc- tifieatur nisi qui Ecclesize que est Christi corpus unitur. 6 S. Hieron. in Mich. vii. i. S. Aucustin. iv. p. 520. vi. p. 976.in S. Joann. 118. ο. Lit. Petil. ο. 38. 7S. ΑΜΒΒΟΒῈ in S. Lue. iv. 6. 9. S. Cyprian, p. 96. ed. Fell. Cum Apostolus (Ephes. νυ. 31) Christi pariter atque Ecclesiz unitatem individuis nexibus coherentem sancta sua voce testatur, quomodo potest esse cum Christo qui cum sponsa Christi et in Ejus Ecclesia non est ? 8 S. Cyprian, p. 109. p. 119, ed. Fell. Bp. AnpREwEs, Sermon on Matt. vi. 17. This is sure: ‘No man hath God to his Father, that hath not the Church for his mother ; and that once or twice in the Proverbs order is taken, as to “keep the precepts of our Father, so not to set light by the laws of our Mother.” Ira Patris and dolor matris CuO Cuap. IV. —-_=es— Parr I. John viii. 56, 1 Cor. x. )—4, 2 Cor. iv. 13. Heb. xi. 7—35. 94. SALVATION ONLY IN THE CHURCH. are together in one verse; “he that grieves her, angers Him.” Ὁ. You say that there is no salvation but in the Church, and that the Church is distinguished from all other Societies by Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, do you hereby intend to say that all who were born Jefore the coming of Christ, and all who since His Incarnation have remained in ig- norance of Him, are excluded from all hope of salvation ? @. No: certainly not. The Church consists of the covenanted People of God in all countries and ages, whether before or after the coming of Christ: and the object of its Faith has ever been one and the same, Jesus Curist. The members of the Church before His coming believed in Him ἕο come; we believe in Him having come. The sea- sons of the Church are changed, but her faith is unchanged and unchangeable ', and we doubt not that by that faith men have been saved in every age and country of the world. 1S. Aue. Tract. in Joann. xly. iii. p. 2131. Ante adventum Domini Nostri Jesu Christi, quo humilis venit in carne, pre- cesserunt justi, sic in eum credentes venturum, quomodo nos credimus in eum qui venit. Tempora variata sunt, non fides. Diversis quidem temporibus sed per unum fidei ostium yi- demus ingressos. See also S. Ave. ii. pp. 415. 420, and above, p. 5, 6, and p. 16. S. Iren. iv. 13—24. XXXIX Arricies. Art. viii. Both in the Old and New Testament everlasting life is offered to mankind by Christ. @. But what then do you say of those who remain in entire ignorance of Christ ? @. I do not venture to say any thing except that Christ’s merits and mercy are infinite’, | SALVATION ONLY IN THE CHURCH. ϑῦ and that they are in God’s hands and not in ours. Cuap. IV. Our duty here, is to adore in silence the depth of ~~ _ the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God, and to discharge those practical duties which the consideration of their case forces upon us. ? Barrow, Sermons on Universal Redemption, iii. p. 464. @. What are these ? A. First the duty of thankfulness to God, that “ He hath called us with a holy calling to His 2 Tim.i.9. kingdom and glory,” by admitting us into Cove- ae nant with Himself in Jesus Christ; next, since it is revealed unto us in Scripture, that’ “no one John xiv. 6. cometh unto Him but by Christ, Who is the Way, the Truth and the Life, and that there is none other Acts iv. 12. Name given under heaven whereby men may be saved,” we are bound to commiserate the condi- tion of those who have not been admitted into this covenant ; and, thirdly, to pray ἡ God for them, and to do all in our power to promote the cause of Christian Missions, in order that all nations of the world may be brought within the sacred pale of the Christian Church. 1 Casavuzon. Exere. Baron. p. 3. Credendum sane, etiam ante natum ὃ B.Virgine Dominum, alios quoque salutis factos esse participes, paucos, qui vel apparent in Scripturis, vel in genere humano latent, ut ait B. Augustinus in Epistola 99, ad Euodium Episcopum; sed illud quoque simul credendum, neminem ulla unquam etate ad spiritalem Jerusalem per- tinuisse, nisi cui divinitus revelatus fuerit unus Mediator Dei et hominum, homo Christus Jesus ; qui venturus in carne, sic antiquis sanctis prenuntiabatur, quemadmodum nobis venisse nuntiatus est, ait idem Augustinus, de Civit. Dei, lib. xvi. cap. xlvii., et in Epistola 28, ad Hieronymum, verba illius sunt : Certus sum, non esse animam ullam in genere humano cui non sit necessarius ad liberationem Mediator Dei et hominum, homo Christus Jesus. c 6 Part I. Naa Rey. li. 5. Matt. xvi. 18. Ib. xxviii. 20. Luke xviii. 8. 2 Thess. ii. 3. 1 Tim. iv. 1. 2 Pet. ii. 2. Rev. xii. 4. Tb. xiii. 8. 36 ON ERRORS XXXIX Arricres. Art. xviii. Of obtaining eternal sal- vation only by the name of Christ. "They also are to be had ac- cursed, that presume to say, that every man shall be saved by the law or sect which he professeth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that law, and the light of nature. For holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the name of Jesus Christ, whereby men must be saved. ? Leo Maenus, ed. Lugduni, 1700, tom. i. pp. 8, 9. De Vocat. omn. Gent. lib. 1. cap. xii. Supplicat ubique Ecclesia Deo non solum pro sanctis et in Christo jam regeneratis, sed etiam pro omnibus infidelibus et inimicis crucis Christi, pro omnibus idolorum cultoribus, pro omnibus qui Christum in membris ipsius persequuntur, pro Judwis quorum cexcitati lumen Evangelii non refulget, pro hereticis et schismaticis qui ab unitate fidei et charitatis alienisunt. Quid autem pro istis petit, nisi ut relictis erroribus suis convertantur ad Deum, accipiant fidem, accipiant charitatem, et de ignorantie tenebris liberati, in agnitionem veniant veritatis ? See Third Collect in Boox of Common Prayer for Good Friday, CHAPTER V. ON ERRORS IN THE CHURCH. @. Can the Church fail ? A. No. Particular Churches may fail’, but the entire Catholic Church cannot; for it is Christ’s body; and He has promised that “ the gates of hell shall not prevail against it,” and that He will be with it “alway, even unto the end of the world.” The Church is subject to vicissi- tudes, but cannot be destroyed; its Light* may wane, but shall never be extinct. The seven branched candlestick of the Universal Church will always stand; but any one of its branches may be IN THE CHURCH. 37 removed from its socket, and another branch Cuar. V. placed in its room. 1 Abp. Bramuatt, i. 43. There is a vast ‘ditterence be- tween the Catholic Church, and a patriarchal one. The Catholic Church can never fail; any patriarchal Church may. 2S. Amspros. Hexaém. iv. 2, and iv. 8. Ecclesia sicut Luna defectus habet et ortus frequentes, sed defectibus suis crevit. S. Auc. Ep. 48, ad Vincent. Ecclesia aliquando obscuratur et tanquam obnubilatur scandalorum multitudine. Wacpensis, Doct. Fid. i. 2,2,c.19. Nulla Ecclesia est indefectibilis in fide nisi symbolica seu universalis. Alize omnes errare possunt et deficere. @. Can the Church err ὃ A. The Invisible Church, or company of God’s John x. 29. Pet. i. 5. elect People, is safe from error; and the entire Matt. xxiv. visible Church cannot err, but it may be so much 3/2" ji, 1. affected by the depraved lives, corrupt tenets, or violent passions of many of its members, that its true voice may at times falter or be suppressed’ ; and though there will be always truth in it by rea- son of Christ’s perpetual presence in the Church, Ps. xlvi. 5. and as it is “the pillar and ground of the truth,” oct om ὃ: yet that truth will be more or less generally and 0b: 17. publicly apparent at different times. Christ Him- self has spoken of a time when iniquity will Puke xviii abound and Charity will wax cold, and when the Matt. xxiv. Faith will be hard to find’. He has said that as ee See it was in the days of Noah and in the days of Lot, } Tim. iv. 1. ess. ii. so will it be at his Second Coming, the circum- 3—5. stances of which were prefigured by those of the eae taking of Jerusalem. Though there will be always grain in the threshing-floor of the Church, yet the chaff may sometimes nearly hide it; though wheat will be ever in the field, yet it may sometimes be Part I. Above, p.19. Below, Pt. ii. ch. ix. at end, 38 ON ERRORS almost choked with tares. Therefore, though the Universal Church cannot err, yet any particular, and even the representative, Church (i.e. the Church as represented by Councils) may *. 1 5, Ave. lib. ii. ec. 3. de Bapt. ς. Donat. Provincialia Concilia emendari posse per Plenaria, et Plenaria priora per posteriora. Fietp, On the Church, iy. ec. 5. CrakANTHorPE, Vind. Eccles. Anglican. p. 19. Bp. Pearson, On the Creed, Art. ix. p. 343. (ed. 1715.) * S. Hieron. in cap. 2. Sophon. Veruntamen yeniens Filius hominis, putas, inveniet Fidem supra terram? Non mirabi- tur de externa Ecclesiz vastitate, quod regnante Antichristo redigenda sit in solitudinem? S. Amprosrin S. Lue. xxi. 25. S. Aue. de Civ. Dei, x. 8. Antichristi tempore Diabolus solvendus ; et proinde gravior erit illa persecutio, quanto crudelius potest sevire solutus quam ligatus. ΙΡῈΜ, Tract. in S. Joann. xxv. p. 1966. 3 XXXIX Arricres. Art. xxi. General Councils may err. Art. xix. As the Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch, have erred, so also the Church of Rome has erred, not only in their living and manner of ceremonies, but also in matters of faith. Abp. Laup against Fisher, p. 114, sect. 22; p- 134, sect. 25; and p. 185, sect. 81---88. ed. Oxf. 1839. Bp. ΒΕΥΕΒΙΡΘΕ on xixth and xxist articles. ®. But if the representative Church may err, what is the use of General or C&cumenical Councils in which the Universal Church is repre- sented ? A. Very great: first, though the representative Church may err’, yet it is not to be presumed that it will err, but that it will not; and we know that such Councils are of Apostolic institution, and have been eminently serviceable for the main- tenance of truth, and suppression of error : and though, ἃ priori, it be admitted that they may err, —— ἢ. «νἀ. IN THE CHURCH. 39 yet, ἃ posteriori, it is to be believed that they have Cnar. V. “--΄: not erred in whatever, having been decreed by them, has been universally received in the Church, as, for example, the doctrinal canons of the first four General Councils; and though it should be thought that they are in error, yet, until the error be plainly shown to be against Scripture’, private opinions are to give way to Public Authority, for the sake of peace and for the end or avoidance of strife*. Though the Church may err, it does not follow that she is not to be obeyed, for mater errans mater est. In controverted points, we must stand by the determination of the Church, for the sake of the preservation of her Peace and Unity, which is of the very essence of Christianity. 1 XXXIX Arricres. Art. xxi. 2S. Arwanas. de Syn. Arim. et Seleuc. p. 673. θεία γραφὴ πασῶν Συνόδων κρείττων. S. Hieron. in Epist. Galat. Spirittis Sancti doctrina est, que canonicis literis est prodita, contra quam si quid statuant Concilia, nefas duco. 3 Hooker, Il. vu. 5. For it to have been deceived is not impossible. Hooker, Preface, ch. vi. 3. Ye will perhaps make answer, that being persuaded already as touching the truth of your cause, ye are not to hearken unto any sentence ; no, not though angels should define otherwise, as the blessed Apostle’s own example teacheth. Again, that men, yea, Gal. i. 8. Councils, may err; and that, unless the judgment given do satisfy your minds, unless it be such as ye can by no further argument oppugn : in a word, unless you perceive and ac- knowledge it yourselyes consonant with God’s Word; to stand unto it, not allowing it, were to sin against your own consciences. But consider, I beseech you, first as touching the Apostle, how that, wherein he was so resolute and peremptory, our Part I. 40 ON ERRORS Lord Jesus Christ made manifest unto him, even by intuitive revelation, wherein there was no possibility of error. That which you are persuaded of, ye have it no otherwise than by your own only probable collection ; and therefore such bold asseverations as in him were admirable, should in your mouths but argue rashness. Neither wish we that men should do anything which in their hearts they are persuaded they ought not to do, but this persuasion ought (we say) to be fully settled in their hearts, that in litigious and controverted causes of such quality, the will of God is to have them do whatsoever the sentence of judicial and final decision shall determine ; yea, though it seem in their private opinion to swerve utterly from that which is right: as, no doubt, many times the sentence amongst the Jews did seem unto one part or other contending, and yet in this case God did then allow them to do that which in their private judgment it seemed, yea, and perhaps truly seemed, that the law did disallow. For if God be not the Author of confusion, but of peace, then can He not be the Author of our refusal, but of our contentment to stand upon some definitive sentence ; without which almost impossible it is that either we should avoid confusion, or ever hope to attain peace. To small purpose had the Council of Jerusalem been assembled, if once their deter- mination being set down, men might afterwards have de- fended their former opinions. When, therefore, they had given their definitive sentence, all controversy was at an end. Things were disputed before they came to be deter- mined; men afterwards were not to dispute any longer, but to obey. The sentence of judgment finished their strife, which their disputes before judgment could not do. This was ground sufficient for any reasonable man’s conscience to build the duty of obedience upon, whatsoever his own opinions were as touching the matter before in question. So full of wilfulness and self-liking is our nature, that without some definitive sentence, which being given may stand, and a necessity of silence on both sides afterward imposed, small hope there is that strifes thus far prosecuted will in short time quietly end. IN THE CHURCH. 4] Archbishop Laup against Fisher, sects. 82 and 83, p. 216. Cuap, V. The Church is never more cunningly abused than when ~~ men out of this truth that she may err [when represented in a Council called General] infer this falsehood, that she is not to be obeyed. It will never follow, she may err, therefore she may not govern. @. In what respects may individuals in a Church err as well as entire national Churches ? Q@. Principally by Heresies or by Schisms. ®. What is the meaning of the word Heresy ὃ A. It comes from the Greek, αἵρεσις, a choice’, and it means an arbitrary adoption, in matters of faith, of opinions at variance with the doctrines Row. xvi. delivered by Christ and His Apostles, and received Ae ae iii. from them by the Catholic Church. See GG 1 TertuLyian, Prescript. Heret. 6. Sed et in omni pzne epistola Paulus Apostolus de adulterinis doctrinis fugiendis inculcans, hereses taxat, quarum opera sunt adulterz doctrine : Hereses dictee Grecd voce ex interpretatione elec- tionis, qua quis sive ad instituendas, sive ad suscipiendas eas utitur. Ideo et sibi damnatum dixit hereticum, quia et in quo damnatur, sibi elegit. Nobis vero nihil ex nostro arbitrio inducere licet, sed nee eligere quod aliquis de arbitrio suo induxerit. Apostolos Domini habemus auctores, qui nec ipsi quicquam ex suo arbitrio, quod inducerent, elegerunt, sed acceptam a Christo disciplinam fideliter nationibus adsignave- runt. Itaque etiamsi Angelus de celis aliter evangelzaret, anathema diceretur a nobis. S. Hieron. in Epist. ad Titum, c. 3. Heresis Greece ab electione venit, quod scilicet unusquisque id sibi eligat quod ei melius videatur. @. Is every one who holds an error in religion to be called a Heretic ? A. No. Error neither voluntarily adopted, nor Luke xii. pertinaciously defended, does not, but error’ will- ἜΠΡΤῚ 17. ingly adopted, publicly avowed, and obstinately Jude 22. maintained, does, make a man a Heretic, Parr I. 1 Cor. iv. 6. 2 Cor. xi. 2. 2 Pet. ii. 1. 2 Tim. iii. 8. Gal. i. 8. Titus iii. 10, Ele 2 John 10. 42 ON ERRORS 1S. Aue. Ep. 43. tom. ii. p. 181. Qui sententiam suam quamvis falsam atque perversam nulla pertinaci animositate defendunt, presertim quam non audacia presumptionis sue pepererunt, sed a seductis atque in errorem lapsis parentibus acceperunt, querunt autem cauta solicitudine veritatem, corrigi parati cum invenerint, neguaquam sunt inter hereticos deputandi. S. Aue. de Civ. Ὁ. xviii. 51. Qui in Ecclesia morbidum aliquid prayumque sapiunt, resistunt contumaciter, suaque pestifera et mortifera dogmata emendare nolunt, sed defen- sare persistunt, heretici fiunt. Archbishop BraMHaLt, i. p. 110, ed. Oxf. @. In what consists the sin of Heretics ? @. In that they proudly presume -to be wise concerning the things of God above what is writ- ten, and to obtain salvation from Him on terms invented by themselves *. 1 TERTULLIAN, Prescrip. Heret. ec. 6. Nobis nihil ex nostro arbitrio inducere licet.—c. 11. Regula a Christo insti- tuta nullas habet apud nos questiones nisi que Heereses in- ferunt.—c. 8. Nobis curiositate non opus est post Christum Jesum, nec inquisitione post Evangelium. @. What is the language of Scripture concern- ing Heresy ? @. Heresy is a corruption of that purity which is the characteristic of Christ’s Church, who is described in Scripture as a chaste Virgin*. St. Peter speaks of “ false teachers bringing in privily damnable heresies.” St. Paul compares them to the magicians of Egypt who resisted Moses, and says, “Though we, or an Angel from heaven, preach any other Gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” “A man that is an Heretic after the first and second admonition reject, knowing that IN THE CHURCH. 48 he that is such is subverted and sinneth, being condemned of himself,” i. 6. by his own choice, viz. by what he himself has chosen (e/egif). 1 §. Amsrose ad Ey. 5. Lue. xv. 18. Vir Christus est, Uxor Ecclesia ; caritate Uxor, integritate Virgo. __S. Prosper Aguiran. Epigr. Ixxvi. Virginitas anime est intemerata fides. S. Auc. Serm. i. de Verb. Doin. Ecclesiz concessit Christus in Spiritu quod Mater Ejus habuit in corpore, ut et Mater et Virgo sit.—Serm. 16, de Temp. Ecclesia mater est visceribus charitatis, Virgo integritate fidei. @. What is Schism ὃ A. It is the act by which any entire or national Church, or any individual member thereof, volun- tarily divides’, or separates itself or himself from the unity of the visible Church, or makes divisions in it. 1 Archbp. Bramuatt, vol. i. p. 112. Schismatics are,— whosoever doth uncharitably make rupture, or “sets up altar against altar” in Christ’s Church, or withdraws his obedience from the Catholic Church, or its representative a general Council, or from any lawful superiors, without just grounds ; whosoever doth wilfully break the line of Apo- stolical succession, which is the very nerves and sinews of ecclesiastical unity and communion, both with the present Church, and with the Catholic symbolical Church of all suc- cessive ages; he is a schismatic (qua talis), whether he be guilty of heretical pravity or not. (Ὁ. What is the difference between Heresy and Schism ? A. In the words of St. Jerome ’, “ Heresy main- tains perverse doctrine. Schism is a separation (σχίζει, scindit) from the Church, in the nature of an Episcopalis dissensio,” or dissent from Eccle- siastical governors ; when a man wholly or occa- sionally withdraws himself from communion with Cuar. V ae I, ἘΠ Sing Xii. Num. iii. 4. Num. xvi. Jude 11.19, 1 Kings xii, 27-39 1 Cor. i. 10, 1 Cor. xiii. 3. 1 Cor. iii. 3. Gal. ν. 20, 21. 44, ON ERRORS his lawful Bishop and Pastor, and takes any part in setting up or maintaining Bishop against Bishop, Pastor against Pastor, or altar against altar. “But,” adds St. Jerome, “there is no schism which does not tend to generate for itself some Heresy ;” whence St. Augustine* calls Heresy a Schisma inveteratum. Heresy is contra dogmata, contra Fidem, et contra veritatem; Schism, contra per- sonas*, contra Ὁ Ὁ ΤῊΝ et contra caritatem. ‘ S. Hieron. in Tit. 6. 3. He calls it dissensio episcopalis ; there being in that age no fore congregation apart from, or independent of, a Bishop. See below, Pt. i. ch. x. ? S. Cyprian, Ep. lxvi. p. 167. Inde schismata et hereses, dum Episcopus, qui unus est et Ecclesiz prwest, superba presumptione contemnitur. 5. Aue. De Fide et Symb. ο. 10. Heretici de Deo falsa sentiendo ipsam fidem violant ; schismatici autem dissensioni- bus iniquis a fraterna caritate dissiliunt, quamvis ea credant que credimus. 3 §. Aue. c. Crescon. ii. 7. @. What do we learn from Scripture concern- ing Schism ? A. As the punishment and fearful judgment of God on Nadad and Abihu' is a warning against Heresy, so is that on Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, against Schism. Jeroboam, who is characterised in Scripture more than twenty times as he that ‘made Israel to sin,” is an example of both Heresy and Schism. St. Paul says to the Corinthians, “I beseech you, brethren, by the name of Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions (σχίσματα) among you.” And he declares that nothing, not even martyrdom’, pro- fiteth without charity*. Schism is a carnal work, and as such excludes from heaven; it tends to the IN THE CHURCH. 45 subversion of a Church, for a kingdom or house Cuar. V. divided against itself cannot stand; it is a rend- Mai oe ing of Christ’s blessed body; a violation of the marriage-compact between Him and the Church (μοιχεία πνευματική) ; a disregard of His Divine John xiii.34. Example, by which He taught His disciples to love one another; an open contempt of His Prayer, * As Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee; so John xvii. may they also be one in Us: that they may be one, as We are one;” a breaking of the bond of love, by which Christ’s disciples are to be known ; John xiii.35. a falling away from the practice of the members A“: 46. of the Apostolic Church, who were all of one Col. i. oe Gal. v accord, of one heart and one soul ἡ. 1S. Iren. iii. 48. Heretici quidem alienum ignem offe- rentes ad altare Dei, id est alienas doctrinas, a ccelesti igne comburuntur, quemadmodum Nadab et Abiud. Qui vero exsurgunt contra veritatem, et alteros adhortantur contra Ecclesiam Dei, remanent apud inferos voragine terre ab- sorpti, quemadmodum qui circa Chore, Dathan, et Abiron. S. Cyprian, de Unit. Eccl. p. 116. 2S. Ienarius concerning Schism, Frag. p. 454, ed. Jacob- son, οὐδὲ μαρτυρίου αἷμα ταύτην δύνασθαι ἐξαλείφειν τὴν ἁμαρτίαν.---ϑο S. Cyprian, de Unit. Eccles. p. 118. Inex- piabilis culpa discordize nec passione purgatur: esse Martyr non potest qui in Ecclesia non est, occidi_talis potest, coro- nari non potest. 3 See p. 47, note 3. 4 Bp. Horne’s Discourse on Schism (in the Scholar Armed, ii. 8520 -- 826). @. But if the Legislature of a country tolerates schismatics, does it not make Schism to be inno- cent ? @. No; this is beyond all human power. As, if the State prescribed Schism under a penalty, it would oblige ad penam, but not ad culpam; so, Part I, ———— τς. -Π) Above, pp. 15—17. 1 Cor. xiii. 3. 46 ON ERRORS although it may remove all the civil penalties of Schism ', it cannot diminish its religious guilt, “ Pena potest demi; culpa perennis erit.” 1 Norris, John, in Christian Institutes, iii. 302, note. @®. To consider the case of wilful and obstinate Heretics and Schismatics ; are they in the Church? @. We may not say they are in the Invisible Church; for wilful and obstinate Heretics’, as far as their heresy, and Schismatics, as far as their schism, is concerned, have forsaken the true Church of God, which is sownd in doctrine, and joined together in unity; but by virtue of the Sacra- ments” which they may have received, and of such articles of Christian Faith as they may still con- tinue to hold, they are so far in the Visible Church. Being Heretics or Schismatics, but not being Jews, Saracens, Infidels, Atheists, or Apos- tates, they are still members of the Visible Church, though peccant and wnsound members; they are a part, though a maimed and corrupt part, of the Visible Church. “ Sunt in Ecclesia, quamyis non * salubriter in Ecclesia ‘.”” They are indeed in the Church, but as long as they are wilful Heretics or Schismatics they receive no benefit from it*. They are subjects of Christ, but rebellious* ones. By breaking Unity, they have forsaken Charity, with- out which other things profit them not *, but rather increase their condemnation. (See further below, Pt. iii. ch. 111.) 1 Hooker, III. 1. 7—11, and V. rx. 7. V. vxvir. 6. Many things exclude from the kingdom of God, although from the visible Church they separate not. Mason, de Ministerio Anglican. p. 195. 2 §. Ασα. de Bapt. iii. c. 19. Heretici aliquo modo sun IN THE CHURCH. 47 in Ecclesia etiam postquam ex illa exierunt, propter sacra- mentorum administrationem. S. Aue. in Breviculo Collationis 8. Ecclesia est corpus viyum, in quo est Anima et Corpus; et quidem Anima sunt interna Spiritus Sancti dona, Fides, Spes, Caritas. Corpus sunt externa professio fidei et sacramentorum communicatio. Ex quo fit ut quidam sint de animd et de corpore Ecclesiz, et proinde uniti Christo Capiti interius et exterius, et tales sunt perfectissimée de Ecclesia, sunt enim quasi membra viva in corpore: rursum aliqui sunt de animd et non de corpore, ut catechumeni et excommunicati, si fidem et caritatem habeant. Denique aliqui sunt de corpore et non de animd, ut qui nullam habeant internam yirtutem et tamen spe aut timore aliquo profiteantur fidem, et in sacramentis communi- cent, et tales sunt sicut capilli aut ungues aut mali humores in corpore humano. Hooker, III.1. 11. We must acknowledge even Here- tics themselves to be, though a maimed part, yet a part of the Visible Church. 3S. Aue. in Ps. liv. Zn multis erant mecum : Baptismum habebamus utrique, Evangelium utrique legebamus : erant in eo mecum ; in schismate non mecum, in heresi non me- cum. Sed in his paucis in quibus non mecum non prosunt multa in quibus mecum. Etenim videte, fratres, quam multa enarrayit apostolus Paulus, (1 Cor. xiii.) unum dixit (carita- tem) si defuerit, frustra sunt illa. 4 Crakantuorre, Def. Eccl. Angl. p. 83. 5 Κ΄, Hieron. Ephes. i. Dominus noster cum sit Caput Ecclesize habet membra eos omnes qui in Ecclesia congre- gantur tam sanctos quam peccatores, sed sanctos voluntate, peccatores necessitate sibi conjunctos. @. What are the consequent duties of indivi- dual members of the Church toward Heretics and Schismatics ? a. To feel deep sorrow for them; to act to- wards them in a spirit of charity and gentleness ; not to communicate with them in their Heresy or Schism, nor to encourage or flatter them in it, nor Cuap. V. ᾿Ξ — Parr I. = Ps, cxxxiii. exxii. 6. 1 Pet. i. 23. James i. 18. iii. 17, Deut. x. 2. 1 Tim. iii. 15. 48 PRIVILEGES IN THE CHURCH. to treat it lightly, but to speak the truth in love concerning its sin and danger; to pray for them, to offer them counsel and exhortation, and ‘to employ all practicable means for bringing them to the enjoyment of the spiritual * blessings which are - promised to those who love the peace of Christ’s Church, and are joined together in Unity. 1 §. Aue. in S. Joann. Tract. xxxiii. 8. Accipimus ergo et nos Spiritum Sanctum, si amamus Ecclesiam, si charitate compaginamur, si catholico nomine et fide gaudemus. Cre- damus, fratres ; quantum quisque amat Ecclesiam Christi, tantum habet Spiritum Sanctum. CHAPTER VI. ON PRIVILEGES IN THE CHURCH. Word of God.—The Church its Witness and Keeper. ®. Wuar privileges do the members of the Church derive through her means from God? Q. First, the Word of God pure and entire, @®. How is the Word of God received through the Church ? Q. As the two tables of the Law were by God’s command consigned to the Ark, so by His divine Will the two Testaments are committed to the Church ', who is the appointed Witness, Keeper, and Interpreter of Holy Writ, and is thence called by St. Paul στῦλος καὶ ἑδραίωμα τῆς ἀληθείας. “the pillar and ground of the truth.” 1 Lord Bacon, Confession of Faith, Works, iii. p. 124, ed. 1778. The Church is as the Ark, wherein the Tables WORD OF GOD. 49 of the First Testament were kept and preserved. See also y. 530. De Ecclesia et Scripturis. Contradictiones linguarum ubique oceurrunt extra tabernaculum Dei. Quare quocunque te verteris, exitum controversiarum non reperies nisi huc te receperis. @. How is the Church a Witness and Keeper of Holy Writ? @. The Old Testament is received by us from the Church of the Jews, to whom were committed the oracles of God, and who received those “lively oracles to give unto us',” and by whom “of old time they were read in the Synagogues every Sab- bath day ;” and we know that they were by them delivered, pure and entire, into the hands of the Christian Church, from the fact, that Christ, when reproving the Scribes and Lawyers, never charges’ them with the sin of corrupting the Books of the Law, which He would not have omitted to do, had they been guilty of it; and that He and His Apostles quote the Scriptures of the Old Testa- ment as they existed then amongst the Jews, and as they still exist derived through them to us. 1 §. Aveusr. tom. ii. 610. iv. 501. 760. viii. 891, Judeei Librarii, Capsarii, et Scriniarii Christianorum iis Sacros Codices portant. S. Curysosrom, i. p. 631, ed. Savil. 2S. Hieron. in Esai. vi. Nunquam Dominus et Apos- toli, qui cetera crimina arguunt in Scribis et Phariszis, de hoe crimine, quod erat maximum, reticuissent. Bp. Cosin on the Canon, p, J1. ed. 1672. Bp. Brve- RIDGE on Art. vi. vol. i. p. 275—280. (Ὁ. Next, what has been the office of the Chris- tian Church with respect to the New Testament. A. To deliver it, as well as the Old Testament, down to us also, from age to age, as it was first written. That these writings, as we now possess D Cuap. VI. Isa. viii, 20. Rom. iii. 2. Acts vii. 38. xiii. 14, 15. 27. xv. 21. Part I, --.--. Col. iv. 16. 1 Thess. v. 27. 2 Pet. iii, 15, 16. 50 PRIVILEGES IN THE CHURCH. them, are precisely the same as when they were first given to the world, we know from the facts of their having been publicly received by Synods of the Church '; from their having been openly read, immediately after their publication, in Congrega- tions of the Church in numerous places very dis- tant from each other; from their having been translated at an early period into different lan- guages” for the use of various Churches, which versions thus made are found to coincide precisely with the present text; and from the fact, that the Fathers of the Church, in all parts of the world, beginning with the Apostles themselves, have re- ferred to them, guoted them, and commented upon them, without any discrepancy from the copies which have been handed down to us. 1 Canon lx. Concil. Laodicenum, (about a. p. 352,) p. 79, ed. Bruns. compared with the sixth Article of the Church of England: the two catalogues coincide with the excep- tion of the Apocalypse, (of which see Concil. Tolet. iy. can. 16) not contained in the former; and the book of Baruch not received as canonical in the latter. See also the very ancient Fragmentum de Canone SS. Scripturarum, of the New Test. in Routh’s Reliquiz Sacre, iv. pp. 3—5, with the notes of the Editor. S. Cyriz. Cateches. iv. n. xxii. p. 66. S. Cyriz. Cateches. iv. xxxv. πρὸς τὰ ἀπόκρυφα μηδὲν ἔχε κοινόν: ταύτας μόνας μελέτα (βίβλους) σπουδαίως ἃς ἐν Ἐκκλησίᾳ ἀναγιγνώσκομεν᾽" πολὺ σοῦ φρονιμώτεροι ἦσαν οἱ Ἀπόστολοι, καὶ οἱ ἀρχαῖοι ᾿Ἐπίσκοποι οἱ τῆς ᾿Εκκλησίας προστάται οἱ ταύτας παραδόντες, σὺ οὖν τέκνον τῆς Ἔκ- κλησίας ὧν μὴ παραχάραττε τοὺς θεσμούς. S. Aue. Epist. xciii. p. 369. Canonica Scriptura tot lin- guarum litteris et ordine et successione celebrationis Eccle- siasticze custoditur. 2S. Aue. c. Faust. xxxii. c. 16. Corrumpi Scripture non possunt, quia sunt in manibus omnium Christianorum ; et WORD OF GOD. 51 quisquis hoe primitus ausus esset, mulforum codicum vetus- Cuar. VI. tiorum collatione confutaretur ; maxime quia non und lingud ———~ sed multis continetur Scriptura. S. Curysosr. in S. Joann. i. thus speaks of Translations existing in his time :--- Σύροι καὶ Αἰγύπτιοι καὶ Ἴνδοι καὶ Πέρσαι τε καὶ Αἰθίοπες καὶ μυρία ἔθνη ἕτερα, εἰς τὴν ἑαυτῶν γλῶτταν μεταβαλόντες τὰ παρὰ τούτου (εὐαγγελιστοῦ) εἰσαχθέντα δόγματα ἔμαθον. S. Aue. c. Faust. xiii. Nostrorum Librorum Auctoritas tot Gentium consensione, per successiones Apostolorum, Episecoporum Conciliorumque roboratur. (Ὁ. How do we know that the Books of the New Testament are genuine, i. e. were written by those persons whose names they bear? A. From the testimony of the Church, which received them as such, both in General Councils collectively, and also separately in different and distant parts of the world, and read them publicly as the works of such writers, from the time of their first appearance '. 1 Ornicenes et S. AmBrosius in 5. Lue. init. TeErTuLiian, e. Marcion. iy. 5. Auctoritas Ecclesiarum Apostolicarum patrocinatur Eyangeliis, que proinde per illas et secundum illas habemus. Abp. Laup against Fisher, p. 87. ed. Oxf. 1840. It is morally as evident that St. Matthew and St. Paul writ the Gospel and Epistles which bear their names, as that Cicero or Seneca wrote theirs. See Hooxrer, V. xx. ἘΣ @. Next, have we any witness of the Church that these writings are inspired, i. e. are the Word of God? @. Yes; the Primitive Church, which had both 1 John iv. 1. th t l £ trvi d di 5 1 Cor, xii.10. e supernatural power of trying and discerning 9 john 7. the spirits, and also the best natural opportunities 7,Pst. *- for ascertaining the truth’, every where received Rev. ii. 2. D2 Part I, 52 PRIVILEGES IN THE CHURCH. and publicly read them as inspired, while at the ~~ same time she rejected other writings falsely pre- 1 Cor. x. 15. 1 Cor. xi. 13. Luke xii.56, 57. tending to be so; and excommunicated those who published them ἢ. 1 §. Aue. de Doct. Christ. ii. 13. Rurrin. in Symbol. p. 26. (ad calc. Cyprian. ed. Fell.) Novi et Veteris Instrumenti Volumina, que secundum majorum traditionem per ipsum Spiritum Sanctum inspirata creduntur et Ecclesiis Christi tradita, competens yidetur in hoe loco eyidenti numero, sicut ex patrum monumentis ac- cepimus designare.— He then gives the catalogue. Hooker, V.xxi1.2. If with reason we may presume upon things which a few men’s depositions do testify, suppose we that the minds of men are not both at their first access to the school of Christ exceedingly moved, yea, and for ever after- wards also confirmed much, when they consider the main con- sent of all the Churches in the world witnessing the Sacred Authority of Scripture ever since the first publication thereof even till this present day and hour? 3 Bineuay, Eccl. Antiq. XVII. v. 18. @. Have we any other foundation for our belief that the Bible is the Word of God? @. Yes; we have internal, as well as external evidence; God gives us reason and grace; the Church prepares, predisposes, and moves us to this belief by her authority, and by showing us that it is supported by the testimony of all successive ages, even from the time of the Apostles and Evangelists, who were incompetent of themselves to write and do what they wrote and did; and whose lives, actions, and sufferings, with the effects produced by them, prove that they could neither be deceived nor deceive in this matter; ‘his is external evidence: and then, through the grace of the Spirit of God, the Scripture itself, by its own power, its moral purity, its divine beauty, the WORD OF GOD. 53 wonderful harmony and unity of all its parts (ex- tending over many thousand years), and by the fulfilment of its prophecies, confirms, establishes, and settles us in the belief of what the Church has before testified ; and this is internal evidence that the Bible is the Word of God’. 1 Hooker, III. vir. 14. By experience we all know that the first outward motive leading men so to esteem of Scrip- ture is the authority of Christs Church: afterwards, the more we bestow our time in reading and hearing the mys- teries thereof, the more we find that the thing itself doth answer our received opinions concerning it: so that the former inducement, prevailing somewhat with us before, doth now much more prevail when the very thing hath ministered further reason. Abp. Laup against Fisher, p. 69. Tradition of the Church is the first motive to belief; but the belief itself, that the Scripture is the Word of God, rests upon Scripture, when a man finds it to answer and exceed all that which the Church gave in testimony, as will after appear; and then here is double authority, and both divine, that confirms Scripture to be the word of God; Tradition of the Apostles delivering it, and the internal worth and argument in the Scripture obvious to a soul prepared by the present Church—tradi- tion, and God’s grace. See also ibid. pp. 97. 103. @. How does the Church employ the Scripture, of which she is the Witness and Keeper, in teach- ing us the true faith ? @. Both by her language and by her practice, in her own person, and in that of our Parents and Teachers, who act by her guidance and with her authority, she invites and leads us by the hand to Christ, to Whom she is subject, and Whom she hears, worships, and obeys, as her Husband, her Head, her Teacher, and her Saviour ; she instructs us in His will, she calls us to hear His doctrine, D3 Cuap. VI. Eph. v. 24. 54 PRIVILEGES IN THE CHURCH. ParrI. as revealed by Him in Holy Scripture, of which uke azo. she is the Witness and Guardian ; and then the John xvi. 13. 2 Pet. i. 2]. John ii. 5. John x. Luke x. John iy. John iy. 27. 39. 29. 42. doctrine itself finally persuades, convinces, settles, and stablishes us in the Faith, through the influ- ence of the Holy Spirt, Whose word the Scrip- ture is, by its own inherent truth and power. The Church, like the Virgin Mary at Cana, tells us “whatsoever He saith unto you, do it.” Like the sister of Lazarus, she sits at Christ’s feet, and listens to His words. She performs to us the part of the Samaritan woman, who brought her friends to Christ; concerning whom we read, that they first believed on Him for her saying; but when He had remained with them two days, and they had heard Hi, they believed because of His own word, and said unto the woman, as we now say to the Church, “‘ Now we believe: but no longer (οὐκέτι) because of thy saying; for we have heard Him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world *.” 1S, Avcustin, in S. Joann. iv. Homines, illa muliere, hoe est Ecclesia, annuntiante, ad Christum veniunt, credunt per istam famam: manet Christus apud eos biduo, et multo plures et firmius in eum credunt quoniam vere ipse est Sal- vator Mundi. Fretp, Of the Church, p. 355. Jo. Geruarp, de Ecclesia, t. v. pp. 299. 318. @. What inferences do we then derive from Scripture with respect to the Church ? @. From Christ speaking to us in Holy Scrip- ture we learn which is His true Church. “Jn Sacro Codice Ipsum Cavrut ostendit nobis corpus suum.” The Church shows us Scripture by her ministry: the Scripture shows us the Church by Christ Himself’. WORD OF GOD. 55 1S, Ασα. de Unit. Ecclesie, c. 4, et c. 16. Ecclesiam corpus Christi sicut ipsum Caput in ipsis Scripturis debemus agnoscere. (See above, chap. iv.) S. Ave. De Symb. ad Catechum. iv. c. 18. Scripture sunt tabulze matrimoniales Christi et Sponse ejus que est Ecclesia. Abp. Laup, p. 103. After we are moved, prepared, and induced by tradition (of the Church, to believe Scripture to be the Word of God), we resolve our faith into the written Word ; in which we find materially, though not in terms, the very tradition that led us thither. And so we are sure, by Divine authority, that we are in the way, because at the end we find the way proved. Bp. Carterton, contra Trident. p. 162. @. By what name did the Church call those writings which she received as inspired ? A. Canonical’. 1 Rurrin. in Symbol. ad cale. Cypriani. Hee sunt que Patres intra Canonem concluserunt, ex quibus fidei nostra assertiones constare yoluerunt. S. Auc. de Doct. Christ. lib. iv. tom, iii. p. 113. Canonem in auctoritatis arce salubriter collocatum., In Κα, Joann. exti. Libri, quos in auctoritatem Canonicam recipit Ecclesia. XXXIX Arricres, Art. vi. Canonical Books,—of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church.— All the Books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive. @. What is the derivation and meaning of this word? @. It comes from the Greek, κανὼν, a rule; and Canonical Scriptures are those which are the Rule of Christian Faith and Practice. @. What were the rejected Books called by the early Church ? A. Apocryphal'. 1 Bineuam, Antiquities, X.1.7; XIV. ut. 15. D 4 Cuap. VI. 56 PRIVILEGES IN THE CHURCH. @. Whence is this word derived, and what does it mean ? A. It is derived from the Greek ἀπὸ, from, and κρύπτω, to hide ; and it generally designated those Books which were kept apart, and not read in the Church '. 1 Rorrin. in Symbol. Apostol. 38. apud Cyprian. p. 26, ed. Fell, ad fin. Ccteras Scripturas (beside the Canonical and Ecclesiastical) Apoeryphas nominarunt, quas in Ecclesiis legi noluerunt. @. How then does it happen, that the majority of the Books (seven of the twelve), which are called Apocrypha in our English Bible, are read in the Church ? @. These Books, which are so read, were not commonly called Apocryphal by the ancient Church, but Ecclesiastical’, and were read in the Christian Church (Ecclesia), (though not in the Synagogues of the Jews,) “for example of life and instruction of manners, but not to establish any doctrine’ ;” and are by some authors, in a restricted sense, sometimes even called Canonical, as being found in the Canon or Sacred Catalogue of certain Churches; and they are not to be confounded with those which were called Apocryphal in early times, and which were noé received at all by the Church. 1 Rourrin. in Symbol. c. 38. Alii libri sunt qui non Cano- nici sed Ecclesiastici a majoribus appellati sunt, ut est Sapientia Solomonis, et alia Sapientia que dicitur Filii Sirach, (hence now called κατ᾽ ἐξοχὴν Ecclesiasticus,) qui liber apud Latinos hoc ipso generali vocabulo Ecclesiasticus vocatur, quo non auctor libelli sed scripture qualitas cognominata est. Ejus- dem ordinis est libellus Tobie et Judith et Machabzeorum libri—quz omnia /egi quidem in Ecclestis voluerunt, non tamen a — WORD OF GOD. on proferri ad auctoritatem ex his fidei confirmandam. Cf. Bp. Cosin, p. 57, et S. Athanas. ibid. p. 58, where he distin- guishes between Apocryphal and Ecclesiastical books, τὰ ἀπόκρυφα οὔτε ἐν τοῖς κανονικοῖς οὔτε ἐν τοῖς ἐκκλη- σιαστικοῖς ἀριθμεῖται. Hooker, V. xx. 7, 8. Bp. Pearson, Vind. Ignat. i. p. 41. Rourtu, Rel. Sacr. i. p. 251. 2 S. Hieron. Pref. ad lib. Salomonis. Ad edificationem plebis, non ad auctoritatem dogmatum. XXXIX Anrrictes, Art. vi. and Bp, Breveripce on. it, i. p. 274. @. In what language were the Canonical Books written ? A. Those of the Old Testament in Hebrew; those of the New Testament in Greek. @. Ought any Version or Translation of the Scriptures to be received as of equal authority with the Original ? @. Certainly not: every Version of the Scrip- tures, both as a Version, and as the work of man, must yield to the original Word of God'. The human stream cannot rise to a level with the Di- vine source’. 1§. Aue. de Doctr. Christ. ii. 16. Latine lingue homines duabus aliis ad Scripturarum divinarum cognitionem opus habent, Hebred scilicet et Grecd, ut ad exemplaria precedentia recurratur si quam dubitationem attulerit Lati- norum interpretum infinita varietas: et (ii. 22) Latinis qui- buslibet emendandis Greci adhibeantur, in quibus 1 ΧΧΙΙ Interpretum, quod ad Vetus Testamentum attinet, excellit auctoritas. Consistently with this statement a distinction may be made to a certain extent in favour of the Septuagint, as a Version rising in some degree towards the authority of a Text, from its use by the Holy Spirit in the New Testa- ment. See Bp. Pearson, Minor Works, ii. 246.259, 264-5. 2 5, Hieron. ad Damas. Ad Hebraicam linguam tanquam δ Cuap. VI. Parr I, US 2 Cor. xiii. 8. Art. xx. 58 RIGHT INTERPRETATION ad fontem revertendum in Vetere Testamento. S. Hieron. Pref. ad 1v. Evangelia. In Novo Testamento ad Grecam originem revertendum. Rerormatio Legum Eccles. De Fide Cathol. c. 12. Czterum in lectione D. Scripturarum, si que occurrerint ambigua vel obscura in Vetere Testamento, earum interpre- tatio ex fonte Hebraice veritatis petatur: in Novo autem Greci codices consulantur. Pietro Soave, Storia di Concilio Tridentino, Lib. ii. p. 159, ed. 1629. Dr. R. Benriey, Serm. v. Nov. 17135. iii. p- 247, ed. Dyce. CHAPTER VII. ON PRIVILEGES IN THE CHURCH. Right Interpretation of the Word of God. @. You said that the Church is an Interpreter of God’s Word ; how is this the case? @. First, and that negatively, as not being a Legislator ; that is, not legislatively, but judicially, —not by making laws, but by explaining and de- claring those which God has promulgated. She has no power against the truth, but for the truth, and may not “so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another.” This being pre- mised, the doctrinal interpretations of God’s Word, which have been generally declared and received by the Universal Church from the beginning, and ascertained partly from Creeds, Confessions of Faith, Liturgies, and the practice of the Church, partly from Commentaries on Scripture, and partly from other expositions of the most eminent Di- vines and Preachers, are justly concluded to be true’; and those which are zovel may be presumed OF THE WORD OF GOD. 59 to be false: “ Id verius quod prius, id prius quod Cuap. VI. ab initio.” Δ Articte XX. Bp. AnpReEweEs on Decalogue, p. 54—56. 3 Trertuciian, c. Marcion. iv. 5. Bp. Butt, ii. p. 238, ed. Oxf. 1827. The primitive Catho- lic Church ought to be the standard by which we are to judge of the orthodoxy and purity of all other succeeding Churches, according to that excellent rule of TertuLuian, Prescript. Heret. c. 21. Constat omnem doctrinam que cum Ecclesiis Apostolicis matricibus et origi- nalibus fide conspiret, veritati esse deputandam sine dubio tenentem quod Ecclesiz ab Apostolis, Apostoli a Christo, Christus a Deo accepit ; omnem yero doctrinam de mendacio prejudicandam que sapiat contra veritatem Ecclesiarum et Christi et Dei. King Cuartres I. Fifth Paper to Mr. Henderson. My conclusion is, that, albeit I never esteemed any authority equal to the Scriptures, yet I do think that the unanimous Consent of the Fathers and the universal Practice of the primi- tive Church to be the best and most authentical Interpreters of God’s Word. Bp. Sanperson, Prelect. p. 79. Admonendi estis, judicio et praxi universalis Ecclesie in Sacrarum Literarum Inter- pretatione plurimum deferri oportere. See the citations from Abp. Wake, Bp. StTiLLincFLeer, and Dr. Warertanp, below, p. 66. 68, 69. @. But if what you have said be so, might it not be objected that our faith rests on the autho- rity, not of the Bible, but of the Church? A. No. The Church and the Bible are doth from God: the one is God’s Kingdom, the other is His Word. As soon as we are conscious of anything, we jind the Church with Holy Scripture in her hands, and appointed by God to deliver it to us, and to instruct us in its meaning. The p 6 Part I. a Eph. iii. 10. Jer. XXiii. 28. Gal. i. 8. ph. ii. 20. 2 Cor. i. 24, 60 RIGHT INTERPRETATION Church speaks to us ministerially, the Bible au- thoritatively ἡ. 1 Geruarp. de Ecclesia, p. 318. Utrumque est res Dei, Ecclesia et Scriptura. Ecclesia est regnum Dei, Scriptura est verbum Dei. Regnum Dei administratur per verbum Dei. Verbum Dei auctoritatem habet in Ecclesiam, et in filios Dei, non autem illi auctoritatem habent in Scripturam sive Dei sapientiam: mutuas sibi operas prestant Ecclesia et Scriptura, sed auctoritas est Scripture, ministerium yero Ecclesie. : @. She does not, therefore, on her own autho- rity, impose on us any article of faith as necessary to salvation ? @. No. The manifold wisdom of God is made known to us by the Church; but she dares not teach anything, as necessary to salvation, except what she has received from Christ and His Apos- tles: she does not exercise dominion over our faith, but is a helper of our joy *. 1 XXXIX Articles, Art.xx. The Church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies, and authority in controversies of faith: and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any- thing that is contrary to God’s Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore, although the Church be a witness and a keeper of Holy Writ, yet, as it ought not to decree any- thing against the same, so besides the same ought i not to enforce any thing to be delivered for necessity of salvation. See also Art. vi. and below, Pt. ii. ch. y. from middle to end. @. Since the Word of God is difficult to be understood, both from its own nature and from the nature of man, and since man is prone to forget and to neglect what he understands, what ordi- nances are there in the Church for its exposition and perpetual inculcation ? OF THE WORD OF GOD. 61 @. Those of Catechizing, or Oral instruction Cuapr. Vu. (κατήχησις ἢ) by question and answer, and of Pub- rep. vi.1,2. lic Preaching. Luke i, 4. 2 Tim. iv, 2. 1 Bp. Anprewes, Pattern of Catechistical Doctrine, p. 4. Hooker, V. xvii. 3. ®. What is the subject-matter of Catechizing in the Christian Church ? @. First, the Apostles’ Creed; secondly, the Ten Commandments ; thirdly, the Lord’s Prayer ; fourthly, the Two Sacraments. (Ὁ. What do we learn from these ? @. From the Creed we learn credenda, i. 6. what we are to believe; from the Decalogue, agenda, what we are to do ; from the Lord’s Prayer, petenda or postulanda, what we are to pray for; in the Sacraments we have adhibenda, means to be used for our growth in grace. @. In what does Preaching consist ὃ A. In the Public Reading ' and Expounding’ of Holy Writ’. 1 Hooker, V. xix. ]. V. xx1. 4, 5 2 Hooker, V. xXII. ®. To whom is the ministry of these or- dinances committed ? @. Our Lord commanded His Apostles to “ go Matt. xxviii. and teach all nations:” saying, “As my Father ee hath sent Me, so send I you:” and, “Lo! 1 am Matt. xxvii. with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” His Apostles sent others, as He sent them, and with the same commission, ordering them to com- mit their doctrine “to faithful men, who should 2 Tim. ii. 2. teach others also.” Thus Christ made a perma- nent, hereditary, and successive, provision of Pas- Part I. See below, Chap. viii. 62 RIGHT INTERPRETATION tors and Teachers for His Church ; and they, who hold the form of sound words of the Apostles, and who derive their commission through them and their successors consecutively from Christ Himself, are the authorized Teachers and Ex- pounders of the Word of God’. 1S. Inen. iv. 45. p. 345, Grabe. Ibi discere oportet veri- tatem apud quos est ab Apostolis Ecclesize successio, et id quod est sanum et irreprobabile conversationis et inadultera- tum et incorruptibile sermonis constat. S. Inen. iv. 68. Agnitio vera (γνῶσις ἀληθὴς) est Aposto- lorum doctrina, et antiquus Ecclesie status, in universo mundo, et character corporis Christi secundum successiones Episcoporum, quibus illi (Apostoli) eam que in unoquoque loco est Ecclesiam tradiderunt. Cf. y. 20. TERTULLIAN, Prescr. Her. 21. Alii non sunt recipiendi Predicatores quam quos Christus instituit.—c. 19. Ubi veritas et discipline et fidei, illic veritas Scripturarum et Expositionum. See further below, Part ii. chap. vi. @. Is this method of teaching by human means consistent with the usual course of God’s dispensations ? @. Yes. To the Jews God not only gave a Deut. iv. 8, Law, but He commanded Parents to teach it to eet their children, and appointed a succession of Yevit: x. 1. human Expounders of it, and of Ministers under —18. it. At St. Paul’s conversion Christ sent Ananias vii. 26. to him. The angel sent Philip the Evangelist to 5. instruct the Ethiopian. And Cornelius was or- Rom. x.17. dered in a dream to send for St. Peter’. “ Faith εἰ cometh by hearing; and hearing by the word of God.” “And how shall men hear without a Preacher ?” God ordinarily instructs the minds of See below, MED» as He heals their bodies, by means of other Pt. i. ch. xiv. men’. OF THE WORD OF GOD. 63 1S. Aucust. de Doctrina Christiana, lib. i. (Paris, 1886. Cuap. VII. = vol. iii. pp. 15, 16.) Imo vero et quod per hominem discen- dum est, sine superbid discat: et per quem docetur alius, sine superbia et sine invidia tradat quod accepit: neque tentemus Eum Cui credidimus, ne talibus Inimici versutiis et perversitate decepti, ad ipsum quoque audiendum Eyange- lium atque discendum nolimus ire in Ecclesias, aut Codicem legere, aut legentem pradicantemque hominem audire ; et exspectemus rapi usque in tertium ccelum, sive in corpore, sive extra corpus, sicut dicit Apostolus, et ibi audire ineffa- bilia verba, que non licet homini loqui, aut ibi yidere Domi- num Jesum Christum, et ab Illo potius quam ab hominibus audire Evangelium. Caveamus tales tentationes snperbissimas et periculosissimas, magisque cogitemus et ipsum Apostolum Paulum, licet divind et celesti yoce prostratum et instructum, ad hominem tamen missum esse, ut sacramenta perciperet, atque copularetur Ecclesize : et centurionem Cornelium, quamvis exauditas orationes ejus eleemosynasque respectas ei angelus nuntiave- rit, Petro tamen traditum imbuendum ; per quem non solum sacramenta perciperet, sed etiam quid credendum, quid sperandum, quid diligendum esset, audiret. Et poterant utique omnia per angelum fieri, sed abjecta esset humana con- ditio, si per homines hominibus Deus verbum suum ministrare nolle videretur. Cf. S. Aue. Prolog. lib. i. de Civ. Dei, p- 131. 2S. Aucusr. de Doct. Christ. p. 131. Sicut enim cor- poris medicamenta, quee hominibus ab hominibus adhibentur, non nisi eis prosunt quibus Deus operatur salutem, qui et sine illis mederi potest, cum sine ipso illa non possint, et tamen adhibentur ; et si hoc officiose fiat, inter opera miseri- cordiz vel beneficentiz deputatur: ita et adjumenta doc- trinz tune prosunt anime adhibita per hominem, cum Deus operatur ut prosint, qui potuit Evangelium dare homini, etiam non ab hominibus, neque per hominem. @. What are the beneficial ends of this arrange- ment ? Q. It is “useful for the humiliation of man’s pride, who would not be debtor to any one but —— 604 RIGHT INTERPRETATION Parti. himself’.” It tends to promote charity between iGo Man and man, by a mutual interchange of bless- 1 Cor. iii. 6. ings 7, It is a condescension to his weakness, and a trial of his obedience. It is an evidence of the truth and efficacy of the Gospel, which is com- 2Cor. iv.7, mitted to earthen vessels, that all may see that the excellency of its power is of God, and not of man. 1 Hooker, V. rxxvi. 9. 2 §. Aue. ]. ο. iv.c.i.6. Ipsa Charitas que sibi invicem homines nodo charitatis astringit, non haberet aditum refun- dendorum et quasi miscendorum sibimet animorum si homi- nes per homines nihil discerent. @. But since even authorized Expositors are human, are they not fallible? and why ought I then to listen with reverence to their exposi- tions ? @. Because they have the professional aids of learning, study, and experience ; and because they are publicly known to have given their assent to aoe xii. certain authorized Confessions of Faith, and are : accountable to their Ecclesiastical Superiors for 1Cor.ix.16, their public teaching; because also it is their ah ΣΟΙ: greatest duty and interest to avoid error, and to ate, 7 teach the truth, since “ they watch for the souls” of 1 Pet. iv.5. their hearers, “as they that must give account’ ;” Acts xx. 28. and because they are Ministers appointed by God 2Tim.i.6, “for this very thing,” and receive Divine grace 1 Tim.iy, 13 and assistance from Him. Ξ 1 Barrow, on Obedience to our Spiritual Guides and Governors. Sermons lvi. lvii. lviii. lix. @. Have we any direct precept from Scrip- ture, commanding us to seek for and to receive in- struction from them ? Mark xvii @. Yes. They are charged by Christ and His OF THE WORD OF GOD. 65 Apostles to preach. “The priest’s lips should keep Cuav. ΥἹΙ. knowledge, and we should seek the law at his ; σον 18. mouth; for he is the messenger of the Lord of },!6 Hosts.” On the other hand, the greatest wicked- 1,2. _ ness is described by the words, “Thy people are as they that strive with the priest;” and our Lord Hos. iv. 4. said to His Apostles, “He that heareth you, heareth Me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth Me; and he that despiseth Me, despiseth Him Luke x. 16. that sent Me;” and, “ He that receiveth a pro- Matt. x. 41. phet in the name of a prophet, shall receive a pro- phet’s reward '.”’ 1 Abp. Porrer on Church Government, ch. y. p. 221— 240, ed. 1724. @. But authorized expositors may err; am I then to follow them in their error? @. No; not when you know it to be so: our Lord has left us the rule, what to follow, and what to avoid. He says, “The Scribes and Pharisees sit (ἐκάθισαν) in Moses’ seat, (i. e. teach the Law’, in his place,) all therefore whatsoever they (so sitting and teaching) bid you to observe, that ob- Matt. xxiii. serve and do.” But He says also, “ Beware of αν δ. the leaven (that is, of the false doctrine) of the ee Ne Pharisees :” that is, we are to follow authorized teachers, and them alone’, in that, and as far as, they teach by, and according to, Divine authority ; but are not to follow them in any errors of doc- trine. There may be teachers who do not faith- fully keep to their engagements and duties. 1 §. August. in S. Joann. Evang. Tract. xlvi. 6. Multi quippe in Ecclesia commoda terrena sectantes, Christum tamen predicant, et per eos yox Christi auditur : et sequuntur oves, non mercenarium, sed vocem PastToRIs per mercenarium, Part I. ——_ -—’ 1 Cor. ii. 13. Rom. xii. 6. Gal, i. 8. 66 RIGHT INTERPRETATION Audite mercenarios ab Ipso Domino demonstratos: Scribe, inquit, et Pharisei cathedram Moysi sedent: que igitur dicunt, facite ; que autem faciunt, facere nolite. Quid aliud dixit, nisi, per mercenarios yocem Pastoris audite? Sedendo enim cathe- dram Moysi, legem Dei docent: ergo per illos Deus docet. Sua vero illi si velint docere, nolite audire, nolite facere. Quod enim facit male, non predicat de cathedra Christi : inde ledit unde mala facit, non unde bona dicit. Rarnotp, Conference with Hart, 1598, pp. 255—269. 2 Below, Pt. iii. ch. iii. toward the end. @. Am I then to make my own mind the judge whether they are in error; and if not, to what test and standard of doctrine am I to ap- peal? A. We may not listen to our own private inde- pendent reason, but, first, and above all, Holy Scripture, as received, guarded, and interpreted by the Catholic Church from the beginning “ac- cording to the proportion of faith,” is the Rule to which all teaching of Individuals is to be re- ferred, and against which no one is to be heard, no, not even “an angel from heaven ;” and next, subordinately and by way of confirmation and explanation, the consent of the Church herself, speaking in her public Expositions, Creeds, Coun- cils, Liturgies, Confessions, and writings of her early Fathers, Bishops, and Doctors’. 1 Rarnoip’s Conference, p. 46. Bp. ANDREWEs on the Decalogue, p. 57. WarTERLAND, Works, vy. p. 265. On the Use and Value of Ecclesiastical Antiquity. A very particular regard is due to the Public Acts of the Ancient Church appearing in Creeds made use of in baptism, and in the censures passed upon heretics. It is not at all likely that any whole Church of those times should vary from Apostolical doctrine in things of moment ; but it is, morally speaking, absurd to imagine, OF THE WORD OF GOD. 67 that ax the Churches should combine in the same error, and Cunap. VII. _ conspire together to corrupt the doctrine of Christ. =a @. You speak of her early Fathers, Bishops, and Doctors; but are not they also private and fallible individuals ? A: Yes. @. What ground then is there for any special deference to their opinions? and what is the nature of that deference ? @. The first act of duty to them is not to at- tempt to raise them to that place where they them- selves are not willing to stand’; namely, to a level with the writers of Hoty Scriprure. Scripture alone*® can neither deceive nor be deceived; but the expositions of Scripture by the Fathers of the Church are entitled, on many grounds, to special reverence. 1 Tertuciianus, ady. Hermogenem. Non recipio quod extra Scripturam de tuo infers. Iprm, De Carne Christi, 2. Si Apostolicus es, cum Apostolis senti. S. Hieron. ad Theophilum. Aliter habeo Apostolos, aliter reliquos tractatores. [1105 semper vera dicere ; istos in qui- busdam ut homines errare. S. Avcusr. Epist. 82, Hieronymo. Ego solis eis Scriptu- rarum libris qui jam Canonici appellantur, didici hune timo- rem honoremque deferre, ut nullum eorum auctorem scri- bendo aliquid errasse firmissimé credam. Alios autem ita lego, ut quantalibet sanctitate doctrinaque preepolleant, non ideo yerum putem, quia ipsi ita senserunt, sed quia mihi vel per illos auctores Canonicos, vel ratione probabili, persua- dere potuerunt. See also below, p. 71. 3 Trrruct. Prescrip. ady. Heres.c.3. Non ex personis probamus fidem, sed ex fide personas. S. Aueusr. lib. iii, de Trinit. Noli meis literis quasi Seripturis Canonicis inservire. Noli meas literas ex tua opinione vel contentione, sed ex diyina lectione vel incon- cussa ratione corrigere. Part I. ν-- ,.-. 68 RIGHT INTERPRETATION S. Aveusr. contra Cresconium, lib. ii. cap. 31. Nos nul- lam facimus Cypriano injuriam, quum ejus quaslibet literas a Canonica divinarum Scripturarum auctoritate distinguimus. Neque enim sine causa, tam salubri vigilantia Canon Eccle- siasticus constitutus est, ad quem certi prophetarum et Apo- stolorum libri pertinent, quos omnino judicare non audemus, et secundum quos de ceteris literis vel fidelium yel infidelium judicamus. See also c. DowaristTas, ii. c. 3. 4). State these grounds. @. First, because the times in which they lived were in immediate succession from that of Christ Himself and His Apostles; next, because the ver- nacular language of many of them was that in which the Evangelists and Apostles themselves wrote ; next, because of their undivided devotion to the ministry of the Word; because, also, they pos- sessed and had the use of religious and other treatises which are now Jost; on account of their habitually using mutual conference, publicly and privately, with one another; on account of their piety and sufferings urging and requiring them to examine the truth, as they valued their highest interests, temporal and eternal; and from their needs and prayers for Divine Grace, which we know to have been especially shed in abundant supplies upon the early Church' ; and, lastly, from their writings having been approved and held in great respect by the Church. 1 Abp. Wake’s Apostolical Fathers, c.x.p.110. 1. They were contemporary with the Apostles, and instructed by them. 2. They were men of an eminent character in the Church, and therefore such as could not be ignorant of what was taught in it. 8. They were careful to preserve the doctrine of Christ in its purity, and to oppose such as went about to corrupt it. 4. They were men not only οἵ ἃ per- fect piety, but of great courage and constancy, and therefore OF THE WORD OF GOD. 69 such as cannot be suspected to have had any design to pre- (yap. VII. varicate in this matter. 5. They were endued with a large ——>—— portion of the Holy Spirit, and, as such, could hardly err in what they delivered as the Gospel of Christ. 6. Their writings were approved by the Church in those days, which could not be mistaken in its approbation of them. Warervanp on the Trinity, vii. On the Use and Value of Ecclesiastical Antiquity, Works, y. pp. 253—333 ; p. 260. 1. The ancients who lived nearest to the apostolical times are of some use to us, considered merely as contemporary writers, for their diction and phraseology. ..2. A further use of the ancient Fathers is seen in the letting us into the know- ledge of antiquated rites and customs, upon the knowledge of which the true interpretation of some Scripture phrases and idioms may depend. 8. They are further useful as giving us an insight into the history of the age in which the sacred books (of the New Testament, I mean) were written. 4. The ancientest Fathers may be exceedingly useful for fixing the sense of Scripture in controverted texts. Those that lived in or near the Apostolical times might retain in memory what the Apostles themselves or their immediate successors said upon such and such points.—Their nearness to the time, their known fidelity, and their admirable endowments, ordi- nary and extraordinary, add great weight to their testimony or doctrine, and make it a probable rule of interpretation in the prime things. It deserves our notice, that the Fathers of the third and fourth centuries had the advantage of many written accounts of the doctrine of the former ages, which have since been lost ; and therefore, their testimonies also are of considerable weight, and are a mark of direction to us, not to be slighted in the main things. .. . 5. There is one consideration more, tending still to strengthen the former, and which must by no means be omitted ; namely, that the charismata, the extraordinary gifts, were then frequent, visibly rested in and upon the Church, and there only. @. What inferences do you draw from this statement ? @. These considerations show their works to be entitled to great weight, especially in a nega- Parr I. Ecclus. Xxxix. 34, 70 RIGHT INTERPRETATION tive sense; i.e. if any doctrine appears to have been unknown to them, or to be contrary to their sense, as expressed in their writings, it may be concluded to be novel, and consequently false’. 1 WarTeERLAND, ibid. p.275. This negative way of arguing is generally allowed, and can hardly bear any controversy. Bishop Stillingfleet (Rational Account, ii. p. 58,) observes, that it is sufficient prescription against any thing which can be alleged out of Scripture, that if tt appear contrary to the sense of the Catholic Church from the beginning, it ought not to be looked upon as the ¢rue meaning of Scripture. ©. But have not modern Expositors special advantages, not possessed by the ancient; and are they not entitled, in certain respects, to pre- ference to them ? @. Modern Expositors have, no doubt, certain advantages. They have the experience of the past, whence they may see how error has been confuted by truth, which has gained in strength and clearness from the contest, for “ Ex hereticis,” says St. Augustine, “asserta est Catholica’:” and thus they learn to avoid error and to maintain truth. They have the benefit of the advancement of knowledge of languages and criticism, of the discoveries in science, of the geographical and antiquarian researches of later days. But with respect to preference,—both ancient and modern Interpreters have their respective uses : and in the case of two good things, both of which are given us for our use by Almighty God, it is unwise to say, “this is worse than that :” our duty is to be thankful to Him for doth, and according to our means and opportunities to use them accord- ingly. OF THE WORD OF GOD. 71 1 §. Aue. i. 1218—1215. iii. 2066. iv. 730. 782. 978. 1729. ν. 412, viii. 392. ed. Paris. S. Curysosrom, ii. 836, ed. Savil. @. I infer from what you have now said, that you do not allow that there is any one living, visible, infallible Judge in controverted causes of Faith? @. There is one visible and infallible Judge in such causes, and one only, namely, Hoty Scripv- TURE; as St. Augustine ᾿ says, “ Scriptura sancta sola nescit fallere, nec falli:” and to this standard, “To the Law and to the Testimony,” all appeals in such cases must be made, as St. Optatus and St. Augustine said, in their controversies with the Donatists, “On earth we can find no Judge; we must seek one from heaven; but why from hea- ven when we have it in the Gospel? quid ad celum, quum habemus in Evangelio? Why do we strive together? Quare de hereditate litigamus ἢ fratres sumus, quare contendimus? Non sine Testamento dimisit nos Pater; sedet Christus in ceelo; et contradicitur Testamento ejus — Aperi, legamus*.” 1 §. Aue. de Meritis, i. 22, compared with Epist. Ixxxii. Tantummodo scripturis hane debeo servitutem, qua eas sodas ita sequar ut conscriptores eas nihil in eis omnino errasse dubitem. See also his words above, p. 67. 2 Abp. Laup against Fisher, sect. xxvii A.C. would know what is to be done for reuniting of a Church divided in doctrine of the faith, when this remedy by a general council cannot be had. “Sure Christ our Lord,” saith he, “hath provided some rule, some judge, in such and such like cases, to procure unity and certainty of belief.” I believe so too : for he hath left an infallible rule, the Scripture, and that by the manifest places in it (which need no dispute, no ex- ternal judge), is able to settle unity and certainty of belief, in necessaries to salvation: and in non necessariis, in and Cuap. VII. U~+- -—Y Isa, viii. 20. Part I. —_[—_——— Acts xv. 3.7. 72 RIGHT INTERPRETATION about things not necessary, there ought not to be a con- tention to a separation. @®. But Scripture, though a visible and in- fallible, is no living Judge, and is not a single living Judge necessary ? a. Christ knows best what is necessary for His Church; and He never appointed one. Jf there ever had been such a thing as one living Judge, it must have existed in the time of the Apostles; and they never would have summoned a CounciL’ at Jerusalem, if any one living man, and specially any one actually present among them when they sum- moned it, had possessed authority to decide the controversy which occasioned its convocation. And it is preposterous to imagine that Bishops would have been put to the pains of coming to- gether from the most distant parts of Christen- dom to meet in Church Synods, in different places, at different times, during so many centuries, if the Church had known any thing of any such one living Judge, existing in one place’. 1 Abp. Laup against Fisher, sect. xxvi. To draw all to- gether to settle controversies in the Church, here is a visible judge and infallible, but not living, and that is the Scripture pronouncing by the Church ; and there is a visible and a living judge, but not infallible, and that is a general council, lawfully called and so proceeding. ? See further below, Part ii. chap. ix. @. But in cases where General Councils cannot be summoned, how are litigated questions to be settled, and necessary Reforms to be made in the Church, since it cannot be by one living Judge ὃ @. Let each National Church keep itself as close as it can to God’s Law: and, whereinsoever OF THE WORD OF GOD. 73 it may have gone astray, (whatever other Churches Cuar. VU. may do,) let it amend itself. And if, after all, con- ~~ troversies should arise and defects exist in it,— which will always be the case more or less in every See above, part of the Visible Church,—such things must be Ὁ regarded by its members as trials’ of their faith, as incitements to watchfulness, fasting, and prayer, and as exercises of their Christian faith, hope, and desire, calling on them to raise their eyes from the present strifes, confusion, failings, and trials in the Church militant on earth, to the future peace, order, beauty, and felicity of the Church glorified in heaven. 1 Hooker, 111. 1.10. The indisposition, therefore, of the Church of Rome to reform herself must be no. stay unto us from performing our duty to God, even as desire of retaining conformity with them could be no excuse if we did not perform that duty. Abp. Laup against Fisher, sect. xxiv. Was it not lawful for Judah to reform herself when Israel would not join? Sure it was, or else the prophet deceives me, that says expressly, Though Israel transgress, yet let not Judah sin. And St. Jerome fos, iy, 15. expounds it of this very particular sin of heresy and error in religion. * Abp. Laup against Fisher, sect. xxiv. When a general council cannot be had, the Church must pray that it may, and expect till it may; or else reform itself per partes, by national or provincial synods (as hath been said before). And in the mean time it little beseems A. C., or any Chris- tian, to check at the wisdom of Christ, if He have not taken the way they think fitting to settle Church differences ; or if, for the Church’s sin or trial, the way of composing them be left more uncertain than they would have it, that they which 1 Coy. xi. 19. are approved may be known. 74 ADMINISTRATION OF SACRAMENTS Part {. CHAPTER VIII. ON PRIVILEGES IN THE CHURCH—DUE ADMI- NISTRATION OF THE SACRAMENTS BY A LAW- FUL MINISTRY. @. Wuar other privileges are received from God through the medium of the Church? Matt xxvii @. The Sacraments of Baptism and of the ΞΞΞ ΤῊ: Lord’s Supper, which are the visible symbola and 4x. characteres Ecclesia, the signs, badges, and τὴν en we bonds of the Christian Church’. iii. 5. 1 §. Ασα. contra Faustum, xix. 11. In nullum nomen re- ligionis sive vere sive false coagulari homines possunt nisi aliquo stgnaculorum vel sacramentorum visibilium consortio col- ligantur. S. Ασα. contra Parmen. ii. c. 13, De Cathechiz. Rudibus, Sacramenta signacula rerum divinarum yisibilia in quibus res ipse invisibiles honorantur. S. Βάξιι, Homil. xiii. @. Why is the Administration and Reception of the Sacraments necessary ? @. Because it has pleased God, in His infinite wisdom and goodness to us, to ordain them as Jederal rites wherein the new Covenant is ratified 1 Cor. xii, to us; to make them the imstruments of our in- ἘΠΕ ΝΣ corporation, union, life, and growth, in the Body of Christ; and because He has constituted them the proper and efficacious means for the convey- ance of His grace, pardon, and goodness to us; and because He has made them to be memorials of His past mercy, pledges of His present, and earnests of His future love to all who receive them worthily ; because He has appointed them to be 70 BY A LAWFUL MINISTRY. visible tokens by which the members of Christ Car. VIII. shew their love for each other, and thus edify each John iii, other, and strengthen the unity of the body; and °?, 5 because our Saviour Christ Himself has declared ao xvi. them to be necessary to salvation’. 1 Hueco, de Sacramentis, lib. i. cap. 5. Institutio sacra- mentorum, quantum ad Deum auctorem, dispensationis est ; quantum vero ad hominem obedientem, necessitatis : quoniam in potestate Dei est preter ista hominem salvare ; sed in potestate hominis non est sive istis ad salutem pervenire. Hooker, V. xvi. 4. It is not ordinarily God's will to bestow the grace of sacraments on any but by the Sacra- ments ; which grace also they that receive by Sacraments, or with Sacraments, receive it from Him, and not from them. For of Sacraments the very same is true which Solomon’s Wisd. xvi.7. Wisdom observeth in the brazen serpent. He that turned towards it was not healed by the thing he saw, but by Thee, O Saviour of all. The use of them is in our hands, the effect in His. Hooker, V. rx. 4. If Christ Himself, which giveth sal- vation, do require Baptism, it is not for us, that look for salvation, to examine Him whether unbaptized men may be saved, but seriously to do that which is required, and reli- giously to fear the danger which may grow from the want thereof. @. By whom are the Sacraments adminis- tered ? @. By special persons lawfully * called and sent John xx. 21, for that purpose. ze. Matt. xxviii. 19. 1 XXXIX Arrictres, Art. xxiii. @. By what name are the Ministers of the Sacraments distinguished from those to whom they minister ? @. They are called κληρικοὶ, clerici, clerks, or clergy ; and are thus distinguished from the other E 2 Part I. Is, xxiv. 2. Hosea iv. 4. Jer. Xxiii. Sex Xvay ἡ. 76 ADMINISTRATION OF SACRAMENTS members of the Church, who are called λαὸς; or laity’. 1S. CLement, Ep. ad Cor. i. 40. Abp. De Marca, Dis- sertatio de discrimine laicorum et clericorum (in the Ap- pendix to his Concordia), p. 84. @. What is the origin of these words ? @. The Clergy are so called from κλῆρος"; a lot or portion, because they are allotted and conse- crated to God, or because He and His Church is their lot and inheritance ; and the Laity’ of the Christian Church are so termed, as being the chosen nation and peculiar people of God. 1 Surpas, κλῆρος, τὸ σύστημα τῶν διακόνων καὶ πρεσβυτέρων. S. Hreron. ad Nepotian. de vita Clericorum. Propterea vocantur Clerici vel quia de sorte sunt Domini vel quia Do- minus sors, id est pars, Clericorum est. S. Curysost. in Act. Apost. i. 17, 18. Ἔλαχε τὸν κλῆρον τῆς διακονίας ταύτης" κλῆρον δὲ αὐτὸν καλεῖ δεικνὺς τῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ χάριτος τὸ πᾶν ὃν, καὶ ἀναμιμνήσκων αὐτοὺς τῶν παλαιῶν, ὅτι ὁ Θεὸς αὐτοὺς ἐκληρώσατο καθάπερ τοὺς Aeviras. Vide et in i. 26. ἔδωκαν κλήρους αὐτῶν, καὶ ἔπεσεν ὁ κλῆρος ἐπὶ Ματθίαν. Num. xvili.24. Vers. ΠΧ ΧΤ]. ἐγὼ ἡ μερίς σου καὶ ἡ κληρο- νομία σου. The word κληρικοὶ was sometimes, indeed, ap- plied in ancient times to the inferior Ministers, the superior being called ἱερεῖς. 2 Bp. Brzrson, Perpet. Government of Christ’s Church, chap. x. p. 202, ed. Oxf. 1842. And so the learned know the word Aads, whence /ay is derived, importeth even “the Lord’s peculiar people ;” which distinction of people from priest is neither profane nor strange in the Scriptures. “There shall be,” saith Esay, “like people, like priest.” And so saith Osee ; as also Jeremy divideth the Church into the “ prophet,” “ priest,” and “ people.” As for the name of Clergymen, Jerome saith, “ Therefore are they called Cler- gymen, or Clerks, either because they are the Lord’s por- tion (to serve the Church of Christ), or for that the Lord is BY A LAWFUL MINISTRY. te their portion and part (to live on such things as are dedi- Cuap.VUI. cated to the Lord).” τὰν πα @. But how is this assertion of the necessity of a call and ordination of special persons con- sistent with the expressions of St. Peter to whole congregations, “ Ye are a chosen generation, ἃ ! Pet. ii. 9. royal priesthood ;” and of St. John, “He hath Rev. i.6. made us unto our God kings and priests?” Do not these words seem to intimate that all Chris- tians are priests to God? A. Certainly they do. A// men, especially all who are in authority and in eminent stations, as kings, nobles, magistrates, statesmen, legisla- tors, poets, parents, are in a certain sense Priests of God’, and consecrated to His service. In the words of St. Augustine ", “ Christians, whether lay or clergy, are priests, for they are all members of the one High Priest Jesus Christ. They are a holy Temple of God, and their souls are His altars, on which they do sacrifice to Him:” but then the special ministration of God’s Word and Sacraments is committed to certain persons, who have accordingly, in Scripture, special designa- tions, as being separated for the work whereunto Acts xiii, 2. they are called*; whence arise the relative duties 1 Cor, ix. of Clergy and Laity which are enjoined in nume- (1%. |. rous places of Holy Writ; and “ Ecclesia non est,” 1 Me ν. says St. Jerome, “ que non habet Sacerdotes *.” pyii, ἢ. 29. Christ gave not all, but some Apostles, and some {{{ τι. 17. Prophets, for the work of the ministry, says St. 17. . 28, Paul, and he asks, “ Are αἱΐ Apostles? are all Pro- mee 39 ᾿ ΜῈ 1112 phets ? are all Teachers?” No; every one in} ἀρ: χῇ. his own order. And St. James would not have 39. directed Priests to be sent for, if every one was 16. E 3 James v. 14. or, Xiv. 78 ADMINISTRATION OF SACRAMENTS _Partl. ἃ Priest ; and by such a general interpretation of St. Peter’s and St. John’s words, all degrees, civil as well as ecclesiastical, would be confounded ; for then every one would be not only a Priest, but every one would also be a King. Onthe contrary, the expression is itself an evidence and proof that special Priests as well as special Kings are designed of God; and its true meaning is, that Christians are to be distinguished, in spiritual things, from the rest of the world; as Kings and Priests, each in their respective functions, are distinguished from others who have not their duties. 1 §. Aucusr. in Joan. Evang. Tractatus li. Cum ergo auditis, fratres, Dominum dicentem, Udi ego sum, illic et minister meus erit; nolite tantummodo bonos Episcopos et Clericos cogitare. Etiam vos pro modo yestro ministrate Christo, bene vivendo, eleemosynas faciendo, nomen doctri- namque ejus quibus potueritis predicando ; ut unusquisque etiam pater familias hoc nomine agnoscat paternum affectum sue familize se debere. Pro Christo et pro vita eterna, suos omnes admoneat, doceat, hortetur, corripiat ; impendat bene- volentiam, exerceat disciplinam ; ita in domo sua ecclesias- ticum et guodammodo Episcopale implebit officium, minis- trans Christo, ut in eternum sit cum ipso. 2S. Ασα. de Ciy. Dei, xx. 10. Psalm χοῖν. p. 1465. 8 TrertruLiian, de Baptism. 17. Dandi baptismum jus habet summus sacerdos, qui est Episcopus, dehine Presbyteri et Diaconi non tamen sine Episcopi auctoritate. TErtur- LIAN, de Coron. 3. Eucharistize sacramentum non de aliorum manu quam presidentium sumimus. See S. Hreroy, below, p: 91, 92. Tertutiian, de Prescript. Heret. 39, on the practice of heretical as opposed to that of Catholic congregations :—Ordi- nationes eorum temerariz, leves, inconstantes. Itaque alius hodie Episcopus, cras alius ; hodie Diaconus qui cras Lector ; hodie Presbyter qui cras Laicus. Opratus, ad Parmen. ii.25. Quatuor genera sunt in Eccle- sia, Episcoporum, Presbyterorum, Diaconorum, et Fidelium. BY A LAWFUL MINISTRY. 79 4S, Hieron. adv. Lucif. c. 8. S.Curysostom ad 1 Cor. Guar. VII. ——— xiv. 16. Orprnat of the Church of England. There shall be a Sermon declaring ... how necessary the Order of Priests is in the Church of Christ. Hooxer, III. x1. 18. We hold that God’s clergy are a state which hath been and will be (as long as there is a Church upon earth) necessary, by the plain Word of God Himself, a state, whereunto the rest of God’s people must be subject as touching things that appertain to their souls’ health. See below, p. 83, 84. 4). You spoke of special persons, lawfully called and sent ; who are they ὃ Q. Those “ who are tried, examined, and known to have such qualities as are requisite for their office, and are also, by public prayer and imposi- tion of hands, approved and appointed thereto by lawful authority *.” 1 Pref. to Orprnat of the Church of England. XXXIX Arrictes, Art. xxiii. Canons of 1603, xxxili. xxxiy. xxxv. @. You mean, therefore, that no man may undertake of himself the duties of the Christian Ministry ? 1 Cor, xiv. 16. Q. I do. “No one taketh this honour unto him- [38 *!'x: 1. Jer. xxiii.21. self', but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.” Gal. i. 15. Heb. ν. 4. Aaron and his sons were appointed by God to kxod. wait on the Priest’s office; and “ the stranger that xxviii. 1, Num, iii. 10. came nigh” was to be put to death. “ Aman can xviii. 3—6. receive nothing unless it be given him from above. “ He that entereth not by the door into the Sheep- fold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.” The sons of Sceva who assumed Apostolic functions were overcome by the evil Spirit. And an awful warning against any such assumption is contained in the history of E 4 35 Jobn x, 1. 80 ADMINISTRATION OF SACRAMENTS ti. Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, who were destroyed Acts xix Ἐπ ἢ i. by God for invading the priestly office, and of King Uzziah, who was smitten with leprosy for so doing. Nay, more, Uzzah was smitten by God . for touching the ark, (which not being a Levite he ‘could not lawfully do,) though he put forth his hand with a good intention to stay it. 1S. Cyprian, de Unit. Eccl. p. 111. Hi sunt qui se pre- positos sine ulla ordinationis lege constituunt, qui, nemine Episcoporum dante, Episcopi sibi nomen assumunt. S. Cyprian, Ep. 69, p. 182. Quomodo Pastor ille vocari potest qui, manente vero Pastore et in Ecclesia Dei ordina- tione succedanea presidente, nemini succedens, et a se ipso incipiens, alienus sit et Dominice pacis ac divine unitatis inimicus ? Bp. Bartow, on the Necessity of a Lawful Call to the Ministry. Remains, p. 613. See also below, p. 81, and chap. xi. @. But if Aaron was called by God, why may not a person who believes that he has a Divine call take upon him this function ? @. Aaron was not only called by God, but, at _God’s express command, was visibly ordained by Moses. And St. Paul asks, “ How shall they preach . except they be sent’ ?” 1 XXXIX Articres, Art. xxiii. Hooker, II]. x1. 18. A solemn admittance to charge in the Church is of such necessity, that without it there can be no Church Polity. Lestiz, Discourse on the Necessity of an outward Com- mission. @. Does the necessity of a due visible mission apes from the New Testament ? A. Yes. Even Christ glorified not Himself, to Bai 16, ἊΣ made an High Priest. He did not enter on _ His office till He was visibly and audibly commis- BY A LAWFUL MINISTRY. 8] sioned to do so. And in the same way the Twelve Cuar. VII. and the Seventy were chosen and sent by Him’. Matt. <.40. xv. 24, 1S. Amprose, Epist. xliv. sant Vi. / @. Does not this further appear from the Acts i 24 titles of Christ’s Ministers ἢ uke x. 1. @. Yes. An Apostle ( Απόστολος) does not 1 Tim. i. 7. signify one who comes, but one who is sent; 80 ν. 48. Ministers are called in Scripture Κήρυκες, namely, 5 [imi tl Heralds, and Πρέσβεις, Ambassadors ; that is, 2 Cor. v. 20. they are persons who do not present themselves on their own authority, but who come with a com- mission publicly given them by others‘; and their Jer. τ XX office is there named a διακονία, λειτουργία, and” οἰκονομία, that is, a ministry, service, and steward- Rom. xii.7. ie ship, and not an independent function. Phe ee 1S. Aue. iv. Lee: Dixit Christus, ‘ Omnes qui venerunt ae = i. Ffures sunt et latrones ; id est qui venerunt sud sponte, a Me Col. iv. 17. non sunt missi, qui venerunt sine Me, in quibus Ego non fui. pire ys S. Aue. in 8. Joann. xlv. Non preter Christum sed cum Phil. ii. 17. Illo Prophete yenerunt. Venturus Christus illos praecones Foor ὭΣ: ἡ misit.—c. Faust. xvi. 12. oor. ix. 12. Tueopuytact in ]. c. S. Joann. p. 645. κλεπταὶ καὶ λῃσταὶ --- ὅσοι ἦλθον, οὐχ ὅσοι ἀπεστάλησαν, οἱ μὲν γὰρ προφῆται ἀποσταλέντες παρεγένοντο, οἱ δὲ ψευδοπροφῆται οἷοι καὶ οἱ ῥηθέντες στασιασταὶ, μηδενὸς ἀποστείλαντος ἦλθον, ἐπὶ διαστροφῇ τῶν ἀπατωμένων. S. Ητεπον. Prom. in 8. Matth. In venientibus est pre- sumptio temeritatis, in missis est obsequium servitutis. @. Since, then, a man cannot take this office upon himself, but must receive it visibly from some lawful authority, what is that lawful au- thority ? A. First, in the beginning that of Christ Him- John xvii. self; and then after Him, that of those whom }° 4, Christ sent, saying unto them, “ds my Father Matt xxvii. ~ EO Parr I. — —~ lRetawls Acts xiii. 3. xiv, 23. 1 Tim. iy. 14, v. 22. 2 Tim. ii. 2. See above, p. 61 Matt. xxviii. 19. John xx. 2]. QB xiv. is Matt. x. 13. 82 ADMINISTRATION OF SACRAMENTS. hath sent me, even so send I you:” “and lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the world ;” and who therefore, being thus sent, were commis- sioned to send others, in a never-ending succession, as Christ, Who sent them, was sent of God. Christ was ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ ᾿Απόστολος ; the twelve were Christ’s Apostles; and every Minister, law- fully ordained, is an ᾿Απόστολος of the Apostles’. 1S. Cremens, Ep. ad Cor. cap. xlii. ἐξεπέμφθη ὁ Χρισ- τὸς ἀπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ of ἀπόστολοι ἀπὸ τοῦ Χριστοῦ, οἵ κατὰ χώρας καὶ πόλεις κηρύσσοντες καθέστανον τὰς ἀπαρχὰς αὐτῶν εἰς ᾿Επισκόπους καὶ Διακόνους. Hooker, V. rxxvu. 1. In that they are Christ’s Ambas- sadors,—who should give them authority, but He Whose most inward affairs they manage? What angel of heaven could have said to man, as our Lord did unto Peter, ‘ Feed My sheep ;—preach,— baptize ;—do this in remembrance of Me ;—whose sins ye retain, they are retained; and their offences in heaven pardoned, whose faults ye shall on earth forgive 2? @. Together with a lawful call and visible mission, what else is necessary to constitute a person duly and fully a Minister of Christ ? @. He must also receive the ordaining grace of the Holy Spirit of God, investing him with the power of dispensing God’s word and sacraments ; of remitting and retaining sins; of praying for God’s people, and of blessing them in His Name ; and this the Holy Spirit’ confers by the hands of the successors of the Apostles, in the Office of Ordination’. 1 Bp. Burson, Perpetual Government of Christ’s Church, p- 160. To create Ministers by imposing hands, is to give them not only power and leave to preach the Word and dispense the Sacraments, but also the Grace of the Holy ON THE THREE ORDERS OF MINISTERS. 89 Ghost, to make them able to execute both parts of their function. This can none give but they that first received the same. Hooker, V. txxvu. 8. When we take ordination, we also receive the presence of the Holy Ghost.—Whether we preach, pray, communicate, condemn, give absolution, or whatsoever we do, as disposers of God’s mysteries, our words, judgments, acts, and deeds, are not ours, but the Holy Ghost’s. Bp. Pearson on the Creed, Art. viii. It is the office of the Holy Spirit to sanctify and set apart persons for the duty of the Ministry, ordaining them to intercede between God and His People, to send up prayers to God for them, to bless them in the Name of God, to teach the doctrine of the Gospel, to administer the sacraments instituted by Christ, to perform all things necessary “for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ.” 2 On the Subject of this Chapter, see further below, Part 11. Chapter yi. CHAPTER IX. ON THE THREE ORDERS OF MINISTERS IN THE CHURCH. @. Are all ordained Ministers of egual rank and dignity ? Aa. No. @. How many degrees are there of them Ὁ @. There are Three Orders in the Christian Church, as there were three in the Church of the Jews. @. What are they called ? @. The orders of Bisnops, Priests, and Dra- E 6 Cuap. IX. ‘ ee Eph. iv. 12. 84 ON THE THREE ORDERS OF PartI. CONS’, corresponding to those of High Priest, Priests, and Levites?. 1S. Icnar. ad Trall. ili. χωρὶς τούτων (Ἐπισκόπου, Πρεσ- βυτέρων καὶ Διακόνων) ᾿Εκκλησία οὐ καλεῖται. Oprarus de Schismate Donatist. ii. 14. Certa membra sua habet Ecclesia, Episcopos, Presbyteros, Diaconos, Minis- tros, et turbam fidelium. Opratus, ii. 24. “ Cum sint (sicut supra dixi) quatuor genera capitum in Ecclesia, Episcoporum, Presbyterorum, Diaconorum, et Fidelium: nec uni parcere yoluistis : evertistis animas hominum.” See above, p. 78. “ Agnoscite vos animas evertisse. Invenistis Diaconos, Presbyteros, Episcopos: fecistis Laicos. Agnoscite vos ani- mas eyvertisse.” Bincuays, i. xix. 15. 2 S. Hieron. Ep. lxxxy. ad Evag. Ut sciamus traditiones Apostolicas sumptas de vetere Testamento, quod Aaron et Filii ejus atque Levitz in Templo fuerunt, hoc sibi Episcopi, et Presbyteri, et Diaconi, vindicent in Ecclesia. S. Cem. cap. xl. p. 188—140. ed. Jacobson. Τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ (Episcopo) ἴδιαι λειτουργίαι δεδομέναι εἰσὶν, καὶ τοῖς ἱερεῦσι (Presbyteris) ἴδιος ὁ τόπος προστέτακται, καὶ λευΐταις (Diaconis) ἴδιαι διακονίαι ἐπίκεινται 6 λαϊκὸς ἄνθρωπος τοῖς λαϊκοῖς προστάγμασιν δέδεται. ΤΉΕΟΡΗΥΙ. in S. Luc. xix., on the difference and yarious functions of the Three Orders. @. What is the derivation and meaning of the word Bishop ? Q. It is derived from the Greek ᾿Επίσκοπος. which signifies one who inspects or overlooks others, for the sake of guiding, governing, and correcting them’. 1S. Ασα. ad Ps. exxvi. Ideo altior locus est Episcopis, ut ipsi superintendant et quasi custodiant populum. Nam et Grece quod dicitur Episcopus, hoc Latine Superintentor dici- tur. Quo modo Vinitori altior locus ad custodiendam Vineam, sic et Episcopis altior locus factus est. MINISTERS IN THE CHURCH. 85 @. What is the derivation and meaning of the name of the second order Ὁ A. Priest, or Presbyter, is derived from the Greek Πρεσβύτερος, and signifies a superior, pro- perly in age, and thence also in worth and gravity ". 1 Bp. Bitson, Perpetual Goy. p. 202. The name of Presbyter I use for those whom the Apostles call Πρεσ- βυτέρους, presbyters, (whence our tongue, following the French, long since derived Priests,) who for their age should be elders, and by their office are Ministers of the Word and Sacraments, and Overseers of the Flock of Christ. VatckEN. in Theocr. Adoniaz. p. 111. 150. Ὃ Προφὺς, yetere lingua Πρέσβυς, etate venerandus. Biomr. Gloss. ad isch. 5, c. Theb. 386, on its derivative meanings. @. Whence is the word Deacon derived ἢ @. From the Greek Διάκονος, a minister or servant, from διήκω, to go through or dispatch’; and the term διακονεῖν, to serve, is used in the Acts of the Apostles (vi. 12), to designate their office, which was a holy’ function, though partly concerned about secular matters. 1 Burrmann, Lexilogus, p. 232, ed. 1836. The writers of the Western Church use also the participial form Diacon, genitive Diaconis. 2 Bp. Pearson in Acta Apostolorum, p. 53, in cap. vi. 1. Hos (Diaconos) constituerunt ante conspectum Apostolo- rum et (Apostoli scilicet) imposuerunt eis manus. Ita Ordo quidam in Ecclesia singularis jam tum impositione manuum institutus est. Actus quidem ad quem tum instituti sunt nihil est quam διακονεῖν τραπέζαις. . . Officium tamen non fuit mere civile aut @conomicum, sed sacrum etiam sive Eccle- siasticum. Mense enim tum temporis communes et sacre etiam fuere ; hoc est, in communi convictu Sacramentum Eucharistie celebrabant. Clarum autem est hos viros septem ad sacrum officium electos fuisse atque ordinatos. Elige- bantur enim non alii quam qui erant pleni Spiritu Sancto et sapientia ; ordinabantur autem per manuwn Apostolicarum Cuap. IX. ee’ Part I. eae 2 Tim. i. 6—14. Ὁ Tam. ii. 2: 1 Tim. iii. 2): Titus i.]—9. Actsvi.1—5. 1 Tim. iii. 2. 8—13. James v. 14. 2 Tim. iv. ΕΞΞ Θ᾿ 86 ON THE THREE ORDERS OF MINISTERS. impositionem. Quin et Stephanus paulo post predicavit Evan- gelium, et Philippus catechizavit et baptizavit Eunuchum. Qui quidem ἀπὸ τοῦ διακονεῖν dicti sunt διάκονοι, de quibus sepe in Epistolis Apostolicis legimus ; quorum officium nullibi quam in hoc loco (Act. vi. 1) legitur institutum. Ut autem hi septem viri Apostolis adjuncti sunt in procurando ministerio quotidiano, ita in primitiva Ecclesia Diaconi sem- per Episcopis Apostolorum successoribus adjuncti sunt. @. How long have these Three Orders of Minis- ters existed in the Christian Church ? @. In and from the times of the Holy Apostles. @. How does this appear ? @. That there are these Three Orders in the Church, and that a religious community is not duly and fully a Church without them, is evident “ from Scripture and ancient authors *;” especially from the writings of St. Ignatius’, the disciple of St. John, and bishop of Antioch, and martyr; of St. Polycarp *, the disciple and companion of St. John, and bishop of Smyrna, and martyr; of St. Trenzus, disciple of Polycarp, bishop of Lyons, and martyr; and of St. Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, and martyr; and of other Fathers and Doctors of the Christian Church in succession, from General and Provincial Synods, and from the universal primitive and successive practice of the Church. 1 Preface to the Orprnat of the United Church of Eng- land and Ireland ; and Canons of 1603, Canon xxxii. 2S. Ienat. ad Trall. iii. χωρὶς τούτων (ἐπισκόπου, mpeo- βυτέρων, καὶ διακόνων.) ᾿Εκκλησία οὐ καλεῖται.---ΤὈ14. 7. ad Magnes. 7. μὴ ὑμεῖς ἄνευ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου καὶ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων μηδὲν mpaooere.— Ad Phil. 7. ad Smyrn. 8. Concert. Nica&n. can. 18. ἐμμενέτωσαν οἱ διάκονοι τοῖς ἰδίοις μέτροις, εἰδότες ὅτι TOD μὲν ἐπισκόπον ὑπηρέται εἰσὶ, τῶν δὲ πρεσβυτέρων ἐλάττους. DIVINE INSTITUTION OF EPISCOPACY. 87 3 °Os Ἰωάννῃ καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ᾿Αποστόλοις συνδιέτριψε. Cuar. X. (Concil. Lugdun. sub Irenzo. Routh, R. S. i. p. 393.) Vie S. Ingen. iii. 8. Tertullian de Preescr. Heret. 32. Lesuiz, C. Supplement to Discourse on the Qualifications requisite to administer the Sacraments (in the Scholar Armed, i. 105). See above, p. 78. CHAPTER X. BISHOPS 5 Divine Institution of Episcopacy. @. Whom do Bishops succeed and represent ? A. The Holy Apostles °. 1 §. Iren. iii. 8. Habemus enumerare eos qui ab Apo- stolis instituti sunt Episcopi, et successores eorum usque ad nos. TertTuLuian, Prescr. Heret. 32. Edant (sc. heretici) origines Ecclesiarum suarum, evolyant ordinem Episcoporum suorum ita per successiones ab initio decurrentem, ut primus ille Episcopus aliquem ex Apostolis vel Apostolicis viris habuerit auctorem et antecessorem. S. Cyprian. Ep. 66. Episcopi sunt przepositi qui Apostolis yicaria ordinatione succedunt. S. Hreron. Ep. ad Evag. Omnes Episcopi Apostolorum successores sunt.—Ad Marcellam, Ep. 5. Apud nos Aposto- lorum Episcopi locum tenent. S. Ασα. in Ps. xliv. Patres missi sunt Apostoli, pro Apostolis Fidi nati sunt Eeclesiz, constituti sunt Episcopi. Eriruan, Heres. 79. ἐξ Ἰακώβου καὶ τῶν προειρημένων ᾿Αποστόλων κατεστάθησαν διαδοχαὶ ἐπισκόπων καὶ πρεσβυτέρων. @. Why then are they not called Apostles ? @. Because in the first Christian age the name Apostle described one who had been personally Part I, = ——— Matt. x. 5. xxviii. 19. Mark xvi. 15. Acts i. 26, ix. 15. xiii. 2. xiv. 14. Ps. cix. 8. 88 DIVINE INSTITUTION sent by Curist HimsE tr; it was therefore re- served‘ to the Twelve appointed and sent by Him, and was not assumed by any of their successors, except St. Matthias, St. Paul, and St. Barnabas, whose calls were of a peculiar kind, (St. Matthias being chosen by lot, St. Paul being called by Christ Himself, and he and St. Barnabas being separated for their work by special command of the Holy Ghost,) and who are thence called Apostles in Holy Writ. 1 See THEopoRET, quoted below, p. 89. @. The successors of the Apostles could not then, it seems, take the name of ᾿Απόστολος, but why did they assume that of ᾿Επίσκοπος ὃ @. Because none was more appropriate than Episcopus, on account of its signification before- mentioned (p. 84), and because the term ἐπισκοπὴ * had been already used in the Septuagint version of the Psalms to describe the apostleship of Judas, to which St. Matthias succeeded; and because, in the Apostolic age, ᾿Επίσκοπος was the name of the order immediately nevt in rank to that of the Apostles. Henceforth, then, ᾿Επίσκοπος was ap- plied to an overlooker of (many) pastors, having previously signified in the Church an overlooker of a (single) flock’. 1 Act. Apost. i. 21. Ps. cix. 8. τὴν Ἐπισκοπὴν αὐτοῦ λάβοι erepos.—Cp. Esa. lx. 17. δώσω τοὺς ἄρχοντάς σου ἐν εἰρήνῃ καὶ τοὺς ᾿πισκόπους σου ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ. Compare especially S. Clem. Ep. ad Cor. xii. xliii. xliy. 2 Hence St. Peter writes, 1 Pet. v. 1, 2, πρεσβυτέρους παρακαλῶ ὁ συμπρεσβύτερος, ποιμάνατε TO ποιμνίον, ἐπι- σκοποῦντες μὴ ἀναγκάστως. OF EPISCOPACY. 89 @. Had then, before this period, the terms Cuar. Xx. Bishop and Presbyter signified the same thing ? @. No. They never meant the same thing, though they sometimes designated the same per- son’, who was called ᾿Επίσκοπος with respect to his office, as inspector of a Christian flock, and Πρεσβύτερος with respect to his age and dignity. 1 §. Curysosrom, Theodoret, et GEcumen. in Epist. Phi- lipp. c. i. rods πρεσβυτέρους ἐπισκόπους ἐκάλεσε. TuHEOopDORET, in 1 Tim. ὁ. ill. τοὺς αὐτοὺς ἐκάλουν ποτὲ πρεσβυτέρους kal ἐπισκόπους, τοὺς δὲ viv καλουμένους ἐπισκόπους ᾿Αποστόλους ὠνόμαζον" τοῦ δὲ χρόνου προ- ἰόντος τὸ μὲν τῆς Αποστολῆς ὄνομα τοῖς ἀληθῶς ᾽᾿Αποστό- λοις κατέλιπον, τὸ δὲ τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς τοῖς πάλαι καλου- μένοις ᾿Αποστόλοις ἐπέθεσαν, οὕτω Φιλιππησίων ᾿Απόστολος ὁ ᾿Επαφρόδιτος ἦν.---Ορ. ad Phil. i. 1. This fact of Epa- phroditus being the Bishop of Philippi, will explain why the Epistle is addressed ἐπισκόποις καὶ διακόνοις, for Epaphrodi- tus, their ᾿Απόστολος (as he is called by St. Paul) or Bishop, was then with St. Paul (ch. ii. 25). @. It appears then that the same word ’Ezi- σκοπὸς was employed to designate two different offices in two successive ages ? @. Not exactly; for even from the beginning 1 Pet. ii. 25. the word Episcopus was applied to the highest 3" ** \7- office in the Church, although it did not ewclude Τὶς i. 5.7. im, 11}. the second order. 1,2: 4). But is it not somewhat surprising that a term (Ἐπίσκοπος) which you say did not exclude the second order in the first age of Christianity, should have afterwards been applied exclusively to the first ὃ @. No; there is no more cause for surprise that an overlooker of pastors should afterwards be specially called ᾿Επίσκοπος; when an overlooker of 90 DIVINE INSTITUTION Parrl. a flock had been previously called so, than that “π΄ Augustus and all his successors in the Roman empire should be called Imperatores, when in the age preceding him, and indeed in his own age, all victorious Generals, as Lucullus, Pompey, and Mark Antony, had been called Jmperatores ; or that a large combination of provinces should be called Diecesis by and after the Emperor Constantine, when, before his time, a single province had been termed so’. 1 Bentiey, Remarks upon a late Discourse of Freethink- ing, Cam. 1743. p. 136, 187. They (the Bishops), with all Christian Antiquity, never thought themselves and their order to succeed the Scripture ᾿Ἐπίσκοποι, but the Scripture ᾿Απόστολοι : they were διάδοχοι τῶν ᾿Αποστόλων, the succes- sors of the Apostles. The sum of the matter is this :—Though new institutions are formed, new words are not coined for them, but old ones borrowed and applied. ᾿Ἐπίσκοπος, whose general idea is overseer, was a word in use long before Christianity ; a word of universal relation to ceconomical, civil, military, naval, judicial, and religious matters. This word was assumed to denote the governing and presiding persons of the Church, as Διάκονος (another word of vulgar and diffused use) to denote the ministerial. The Presbyters, therefore, while the Apostles lived, were Ἐπίσκοποι, overseers. But the Apostles, in foresight of their approaching martyrdom, haying selected and appointed their successors in the several cities and communities, as St. Paul did Timothy at Ephesus, and Titus at Crete, a.D. 64, four years before his death ; what name were these successors to be called by ? not ᾿Απόστολοι, Apostles ; their modesty, as it seems, made them refuse it: they would keep that name proper and sacred to the first extraordinary messengers of Christ, though they really succeeded them in their office, in due part and measure, as the ordinary governors of the Churches. It was agreed, therefore, over all Christendom at once, in the very next generation after the Apostles, to assign and appropriate to them the word Ἐπίσκοπος, or Bishop. From OF EPISCOPACY. 91 that time to this, that appellation, which before included Cuap. X. a Presbyter, has been restrained to a superior order. And ——~——~ here’s nothing in all this but what has happened in all languages and communities in the world. See the Notitia of the Roman and Greek Empires, and you'll scarce find one name of any state employment that in course of time did not vary from its primitive signification. The time has been when a commander eyen of a single regiment was called Imperator: and must every such, now-a-days, set up to be Emperors ὃ @. But does not St. Jerome’ say that, even in the Apostolic times, the Churches were governed by several Presbyters, who were also called Epi- scopi, anteguam instinctu diaboli studia in religione jierent, et diceretur in populis, Ego sum Apollo, ego sum Cephe; postquam autem unusquisque eos quos baptizaverat suos esse putabat, non Christi, tum in toto orbe decretum est ut uNus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur ceteris, ad quem omnis cura ecclesie pertineret, et schismatum semina tollerentur ? @. Yes, he does; but in another place’ he says that Bishops are the ordained successors of the Apostles; that St. James was Bishop of Jeru- salem, immediately after the Ascension of Christ ; that Episcopacy is an Apostolic ordinance ; that Presbyters cannot ordain; that the safety of the Church consists in the dignity of its Bishop; and his assertion, just quoted, does, when examined, tend rather to confirm the doctrine of the Apos- tolic and Divine institution of Episcopacy. 1S. Hieron, in Tit.i. Ep. Ixxxy. ad Evagrium. 2 S. Hieron. (See above, note to first question in this chapter.) De Scriptoribus Ecelesiasticis. Jacobus qui ap- pellatur frater Domini,—post passionem Domini statim ab Apostolis Hierosolymorum Episcopus ordinatus. S. Higron. in Lucif. c. 4, Ecclesize salus in summi sacer- 92 DIVINE INSTITUTION ParrI. dotis dignitate consistit, cui si non exsors quedam et eminens =a detur potestas, tot in Ecclesia efficientur schismata quot sacerdotes. Inde venit ut sine Chrismate et Episcopi jus- sione neque Presbyter neque Diaconus habeat jus baptizandi. S. Hirron. in Evagr. lxxxv. Quid enim facit, excepté or- dinatione, Episcopus, quod Presbyter non faciat? See below, chap. xi. @. How do you show this? @. We do not deny that in the Apostolic age the names Episcopi and Presbyteri were applied to the same persons; but then there were at that time Bishops also, in our sense of the word, namely, the Hoty Aposries themselves: and (whatever may be alleged as the reason for the institution of Episcopacy) the fact and time of its institution are the only questions with which we are concerned. Now in this very passage St. Jerome testifies, that it was “toto orbe decretum ut unus ceteris preponeretur, ad quem omnis Ecclesiz cura pertineret.” And that which was received throughout the whole world, and of which the origin does not appear, (and which Jerome himself seems to ascribe to the age of Apollos and Cephas, that is, to the Apostolic age, and, in the case of St. James, does, as we have seen, make im- mediately consequent on our Lord’s Ascension,) could not be of human institution, if it were only from the rule of St. Augustine ', “ Id quod universa tenet Ecclesia, (as St. Jerome says is the case with Episcopacy,) nec Conciliis institutum, (and Councils all presuppose Bishops, for they consist of them,) sed semper retentum, non nisi auctoritate Apostolicd traditum esse rectissimé creditur.” 1 5, Ασα. c. Donat. de Bapt. iy. 24. ἃ y. c. 23. Qua OF EPISCOPACY. 93 universa tenet Ecclesia, ob hoc ab Apostolis praecepta bene GCyap. X, ereduntur, Hooker, VII. v. 2. 2, ἃ VII. v.8. Barrow, de Regi- mine Episcopali, iv. p. 24, sq. folio ed. 1687. Abp. Porrer, ch. iv. p. 193—197. Bp. Pearson, Vind. Ignat. p. 177. H. Grortus, iv. p.272. Episcopatum ab universali Eccle- sid receptum fuisse apparet ex Conciliis Universalibus : apparet etiam ex collectione Synodorum aut nationalium aut provin- cialium. Patres omnes, nemine excepto, Episcopalem emi- nentiam testantur, quorum is qui minimum Episcopatui defert est Hieronymus; hujus sufficit testimonium, “Zn toto orbe decretum,” &c. Episcopatum initium Apostolicis temporibus habuisse testantur catalogi Episcoporum apud Irenzeum, Euse- bium, Socratem.—Episcopatum divino jure approbatum fuisse, irrefragabile argumentum prebet divina Apocalypsis. See also Groru Epist. p. 914. Cum queritur an Episcopatus juris divini sit—sats est Christum in Apostolorum Collegio id dedisse exemplum : Apostolos id secutos et Ecclesiz Uni- versee consensum manifestissimum, si pauci et quidem nostri tantum szeculi novatores excipiantur : cf, p. 923. So writes Grotius, although he was by birth and education a Presby- terian. See below, at end of chap. xi. Hooker, VII. v. 8. In all this there is no let why S¢. Jerome might not think the Authors of Episcopal regiment to have been the very blessed Apostles themselves, directed therein by the special motion of the Holy Ghost, which the ancients all before and beside him, and himself also elsewhere, are known to hold. Giszon, Rom. Hist. ch. xv. “ Nulla Ecclesia sine Epi- scopo” has been a fact as well as a maxim since the time of Tertullian and Irenzeus: after we have passed over the diffi- culties of the first century, we find the Episcopal government universally established, till it was interrupted by the repub- lican genius of the Swiss and German reformers. See below, Ρ. 96. @. Since then it was both rational and proba- ble that, if there was such an individual super- intendent of pastors as you have described, he should be called an ᾿Επίσκοπος, can you prove ΡΑΒΤΊΙ. Tit. i. 5. 1 Tim, v. 17—22. Titus ii. 15. 1 Tim. i. 3. Titusi. 11. iii. 10. re op BS 1 Tim. v. 19, 20. Titus ii. 15. Tit. i. 5. 94. DIVINE INSTITUTION from Scripture that at the close of the Apostolic age there were in fact such superintendents besides the Apostles ? @. Yes; such were St. Timothy and St. Titus. They were not Apostles',—not being of directly Divine appointment, as all the Apostles, including St. Matthias, St. Paul, and St. Barnabas, were,— they were never so called; and they were not mere Presbyters, for they are commanded by St. Paul to ordain’, to charge, to rebuke Preachers, and to superintend the doctrine and conduct of both Presbyters and Deacons, and this with all authority (μετὰ πάσης ἐπιταγῆς), but, Par in parem non habet imperium. 1 Eoses. H. E. iii. 4. iii. 12—15, pp. 149—176, ed. Bur- ton. See above, p. 87, 88. 2 Bp. Birson, on the Perpetual Government of Christ’s Church, chap. v. p. 89. Oxford, 1842. These were charged by Paul to “require and command” the pastors and preachers to refrain from false doctrine, and “to stop their mouths” or “reject” them that did otherwise ; “to ordain elders” ac- cording to the necessity of the places, and “receive accusa- tions against them ;” and “sharply” and “ openly to rebuke” them if they sinned, and that “ with all authority.” These things the Apostle earnestly requireth, and, before Christ and His elect angels, chargeth Timothie and Tite to do. It is, then, evident they might so do: for how vam and frivolous were all those protestations made by St. Paul, if Timothie and Tite had only voices amongst the rest, and nothing to do but as the rest ! @. You say that they were not Apostles; was then their power Apostolic ? @. Yes: their office was similar to, and in the place of, that of the Apostles. @. How do you show this ? Q. St. Paul tells Titus, that he had left him in OF EPISCOPACY. 95 Crete, that he might perfect the things which he Cuar. Χ. (St. Paul himself) had left incomplete '. ἕξι 1S. Hieron. ad Tit. ο. i. Reliquit Titum Crete, ut rudi- menta nascentis Ecclesie confirmaret, “ut ea que deerant corrigeres.” Omne autem quod corrigitur imperfectum est. Et in Greco prepositionis adjectio qua scribitur ἐπι διορ- θώσης non id ipsum sonat quod διορθώσῃς corrigeres, sed super corrigeres; ut que a me correcta sunt nedum ad plenam veri lineam retracta a te corrigantur et normam zequalitatis accipiant. @. Does this superintending and governing power, resident in one individual, appear in any other part of Scripture ? @. Yes; in the Revelation of St. John, where each of the seven Asiatic Churches is represented as having a chief pastor, who is called by the Holy Spirit the Angel of the Church’. 1S. Ασα. Ep. xliii. Divina voce laudatur sub Angek nomine Prepositus Ecclesie. (S. Ασα.) in Apocalyps. Hom. ii. Ecclesiw et angeli Ecclesiarum intelligi debent Episcopi aut Praepositi Ecclesiarum. Saravia, de Minist. Eccl. p. 29, observes, that the Spirit blames some of the Angels of the Churches, but that He never blames them for being Angels. See also Grorius, quoted above, p. 93. @. But to ascend higher; does the succession of the chief pastors to the Apostles appear to have been directly authorized by Curist ἢ A. It does. The Episcopal government of the Church was originally founded in the person and office of our blessed Lorp Himself. @. How does this appear ? @. As follows: Curist being sent by His Father’, to be the great Apostle, Bishop, and ae nf Pastor of the Church, as He is called in Scrip- a: 96 DIVINE INSTITUTION ParrlI. ture, and being visibly consecrated to that office Acts x. 88, by the Holy Ghost, sent his Apostles as His Luke iii 22. Father had sent Him. He gave to them the Je Holy Ghost as His Father had given to Him; “~~ and commissioned them to execute the same apos- tolic, episcopal, and pastoral office, in their own 2Tim.ii.2, persons, and in that of their successors, for the governing of His Church until His coming again, Matt. xxviii, Promising to be with them “alway, even unto the 18-20. —_ end of the world.” 1 Bp. SanpErson, Postscript to Episcopacy not preju- dicial to Regal Power, pp. 137. 140. 1673. @. Do we read in Scripture of any act of the Apostles done with a view to continue this suc- cession to themselves ? A. Yes: their very first act after the Ascension ~ Acts i, 20— of Christ was done with a view to the appoint- Ps cix.g, ment of one to take part in the ministry of the Apostleship (ἐπισκοπὴ); from which Judas by transgression fell, and whose office (ἐπισκοπὴ) was to be taken by another. @. It is justly said, that the best Commentary upon a law is practice, especially contemporary, universal, and uninterrupted practice’. Now how does the practice of the Church bear on the pre- sent question concerning the institution, authority, and obligation of Episcopacy ? @. The universal practice of the Church of Christ, from its foundation for more than’ fifteen hundred years without interruption, shows Epi- scopacy to be of Divine institution, and to have been regarded by the Church as of inviolable authority. Ezitus varidsse debuerat error ; cete- rum quod apud multos unum invenitur, non est OF EPISCOPACY. 97 erratum sed traditum; et id Dominicum est et verum guod prius traditum, id extraneum οὐ fal- sum quod posterius immissum ὃ, 1 Ch. Justice Coxe. Consuetudo optimus legum interpres. Contemporanea expositio optima. 2 Bp. Birson, Perpetual Government of Christ’s Church, xili. p. 348, ed. Oxf. 1842. No example before our age can be showed that ever the Church of Christ, in any place or time, since the Apostles died, had any other form of govern- ment than by Bishops succeeding and ruling as well the Presbyters as the people that were under them. Hooker, Pref. 1v. 1. We require you to find out one Church wpon the face of the whole earth that hath not been ordained by Episcopal Regiment since the time that the blessed Apostles were here conversant. Abp. Laup, Sermon iii. A Paritie they would have ; no Bishop, no Governor; but a Parochial Consistory. This paritie was never left to the Church of Christ. He left Apostles, and Disciples under them. It was never in use with the Church. No Church ever any where, till this last age, without a Bishop. Grorius, tom. iy. p. 273. Episcopatus est ab Ecclesia Universali receptus ; initium habuit ab Apostolicis tempori- bus, et divino judicio est approbatus. See above, p. 93 ; below, p. 105. 3 TerToLiian, Prescr. Heret. c. 28. ο. 3]. ady. Marcion. ἵν. ὃ. @. Does any other form of Church Government appear to have existed in any of the Apostolic Churches ? @. No. In every case where Catalogues’ of Church Governors are extant, the series of pastors is traced back through individual and successive, and not through several, equal, coexistent, and contemporaneous, Governors; the first of them being some Apostle or some disciple of the Apostles. F Cuap. X. —S— Ὁ Ἃ Part I. 98 DIVINE INSTITUTION 1S, Iren. iii. 3. Evses. H. E. III. 4. 10. V. 5. 22. 24. v— VII. 32. Hooxer, VII. vy. 9. Bp. Bitson, Perpet. Gov. ch, xiii. pp. 334340. Binenam, Antiq. ii. 1. 3, 4. 4). What additional proof is there of the Divine institution of Episcopacy from ancient practice? Q. There is a strong confirmation of it in the fact, that not only catholics, but also heretics and schismatics’, differing from the Church and from each other in many other respects, all agreed in recognizing the necessity of Episcopal Govern- ment, with one single exception, that of Aerius * (of Sebastia, in Pontus), in the fourth century, who on that special account, as well as for other reasons, is placed among heretics by the Fathers of the Church, and whose doctrine on that point was condemned by the Church as sacrilegious *. 1 Bp. Pearson, Vind. Ignat. ο. 13. 2 §. Auc.de Heres. i. 33. Aerius dicebat Presbyterum ab Episcopo nulla differentia debere discerni. Barxow, vol. iii. Serm. xxiv. All Arians, Macedonians, Novatians, Donatists, maintained the distinction of Eccle- siastical Orders, and the duty of the inferior Clergy to their Bishops; and of this distinction was never made any ques- tion, except by Aerius, who found very few followers in his heterodoxy. Epipnan. de Hereticis, 75. 3 The General Council of Chalcedon declared, can. 39, Ἐπίσκοπον eis Πρεσβυτέρου βαθμὸν φέρειν ἱεροσυλία ἐστίν. Cp. Bp. ANDREWEs, in Christian Institutes, iii. 234, and Hooker, VII. 1x. @. What are the words in which Hooker con- cludes his argument upon this subject ? Q@. “Let us not fear,’ he says, “to be herein bold and peremptory, and if anything in the Church’s government, surely the first institution OF EPISCOPACY. 99 of Bishops was from heaven, even of God, the Cuar. X. Hoxy Guosr was the Author of it '.” ' Hooker, VII. vr. 1. Compare VII. 1.4. Add to this the summary of the argument by Dr. Isaac Barrow. “ The primitive general use of Christians most effectually doth back the Scripture, and interpret it in favour of this distinction (of Episcopal Government) ; for how otherwise is it imaginable, that all the Churches founded by the Apostles in several most distant and disjoined places (at Jerusalem, at Antioch, at Alexandria, at Ephesus, at Corinth, at Rome) should presently conspire in acknowledgment and use of it? how could it without apparent confederacy be formed, how could it creep in without notable clatter, how could it be admitted without considerable opposition, if it were not in the foundation of those Churches laid by the Apostles? How is it likely that in those times of grievous persecution falling chiefly upon the Bishops (when to be eminent among Christians yielded slender reward, and exposed to extreme hazard; when to seek pre-eminence was in effect to court danger and trouble, torture and ruin), an ambition of irregularly advancing themselves above their brethren should so generally prevail among the ablest and best Christians? How could those famous martyrs for the Christian truth be some of them so unconscionable as to affect, others so irresolute as to yield to, such injurious encroachments ? and how could all the holy Fathers (persons of so renowned, so approved wisdom and integrity) be so blind as not to discern such a corruption, or so bad as to abet it? How, indeed, could all God’s Church be so weak as to consent in judgment, so base as to comply in practice with it? In fine, how can we conceive, that all the best monuments of antiquity down from the beginning (the Acts, the Epistles, the Histories, the Commentaries, the writings of all sorts coming from the blessed Martyrs and most holy Confessors of our faith), should conspire to abuse us; the which do speak nothing but Bishops; long Cata- logues and rows of Bishops succeeding in this and that city ; Bishops contesting for the faith against Pagan Idolators, and Heretical corrupters of Christian doctrine ; Bishops here teaching, and planting our religion by their labours, there F 2 100 FUNCTIONS OF BISHOPS. Part. suffering and watering it with their blood ?}— Works, Lon- ἀπε τ τ 0 don, 1686. Folio, Serm. χχῖν. vol. iii. p. 278. See also Bp. Pearson, Minor Works, i. 271—286. CuitiincwortH, Apostolical Institution of Episcopacy demonstrated (in Christian Institutes, iii, 210. 214). CHAPTER XI. FUNCTIONS OF BISHOPS. ©. When you say that Bishops are the suc- cessors of the Apostles, do you mean that they succeed them in a// their Apostolic functions ? @. No: some of the functions of the Apostles were ordinary and permanent in their nature, such as those of’ preaching, administering the Sacra- ments, feeding the flock of Christ, giving attend- ance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine, exer- cising discipline, judging controversies, conferring with each other in Councils and Synods, confirm- ing the baptized, ordaining (καθιστάναι, χειροτο- veiv”) and superintending ministers. Other func- tions were extraordinary and temporary, such as healing the sick, casting out devils, and speaking with tongues. Bishops succeed the Apostles in their ordinary, but not in their extraordinary offices *. 1 Bineuam, Antiquities, ii. 3. 2S. Curysosv. in Tit. i. 5. Wa καταστήσῃς κατὰ πόλιν πρεσβυτέρους --- τῶν ἐπισκόπων λέγω τὰς χειροτονίας. In Philip. i. 1. οὐκ ἂν πρεσβύτεροι ἐπίσκοπον ἐχειροτόνησαν. Αμμονιῦβ ad Act. Apost. xiv. 23. οἱ περὶ Παῦλον ἐπι- σκόπων εἶχον ἀξίαν, ἐξ ὧν ἐχειροτόνουν οὐ μόνον δια- κόνους ἀλλὰ καὶ πρεσβυτέρους. FUNCTIONS OF BISHOPS. 10] 3 K. Cuartes I. in Christian Institutes, iii. p. 220. The mission both for teaching and governing (at least for the substance of it) was ordinary, and to continue to the end of the world; and, therefore, necessarily to descend, and be by them transmitted to others, as their substitutes and successors. But the wnction, whereby they were enabled to both offices or functions, by the effusion of the Holy Ghost in such a plenteous measure of knowledge, tongues, miracles, prophesyings, healing, infallibility of doctrine, dis- cerning of spirits, and such like, was, indeed, extraordinary in them, and in some few others, though in an inferior measure, as God saw it needful for the planting of the Churches and propagation of the Gospel in those primitive times ; and in this (which was indeed extraordinary in them) they were not necessarily to have successors. His Majesty conceives that the succession of Bishops to the Apostles into so much of their office as was ordinary and perpetual, and such a distinction of Bishops and Presbyters as his Majesty has formerly expressed, needs no further confirmation from Scripture to such as are willing to make use of their reason also ; which, in interpreting Scripture, upon all other occasions they are enforced to do. Bp. Carteton, de Enclesia, cap. xi. p. 278. Evtraordi- naria Apostolorum potestas cum ipsis finem habuit ; ordinaria vero Episcopis commendata fuit atque in illis permansit. @. You speak of Ordinations —do you intend to say that no one can confer Holy Orders except Bishops ? @. Yes; “cases of inevitable necessity ex- cepted, none may ordain but only Bishops’ : and all other ordinations, whether by Presbyters or any one else, have ever been regarded by the Church as invalid’. 1 Hooker, VII. xiv. 11. 2 Leo M. Ep. 88. Nunquam auditum est quod Presbyteri Presbyteros aut Diaconos nedum Episcopos ordinaverint. Bp. Carterton, de Consensu Ecclesiz contra Tridentinos, ii. p. 277. Si omnia Ecclesize seecula lustremus ab Apostolis Ε 3 Caap. XI. Matt. xxviii. 18 —20, Pare I. SS 102 FUNCTIONS OF BISHOPS. usque ad Patrum nostrorum memoriam, non alia ordinandi ratio invenitur nisi per Episcopos. Saravia, de Diy. Minist. Grad. p. 33. Bp. Birson, Perpet. Goy. of Christ’s Church, p. 321. Bp. Prarson, Minor Works, ed. Churton, ii. 75. Per traditionem Apostolicam fofa ordinandi potestas in Episcopis resedit ; nulli alii unquam in Novo Testamento indulta est ; nulli in vetere Ecclesia permissa. See also ibid. on Pro- miscuous Ordinations, 232—237. Abp. Porrer, on Church Government, p. 285. The opinion of the primitive Church in this matter will be put beyond dispute, if we compare the judgment concerning Ischyras, who was ordained by one Coluthus, a mere pres- byter, with that about the presbyters ordained by Meletius, a schismatical bishop. The latter having been ordained by one who had the episcopal character, were received as presbyters without being re-ordained ; whereas Ischyras having received his orders from one who had not power to give them, was reckoned as a mere layman. This appears from the synodical epistles of the bishops of Egypt, Thebais, Lybia, and Penta- polis. On this subject, see Casassutius, Concilia, cap. xi. p. 44. Osius Alexandriz Concilium indixit, cujus meminit Athana- sius, Apol. 2, yocatque generale Concilium, meminit ejus Socrates, ili. 5.—Addit Athanasius in ea synodo Coluthum Presbyterum Alexandrinum eo quod episcopus non esset munus tamen episcopale obire et ordinare clericos attentasset fuisse redactum in ordinem.—Ibid. cap. ii. p. 18. Synodus Alexandrina synodicam (epistolam) scripsit ad Julium Rome episcopum, czeterosque omnes orbis Christiani preesules, quam integram epistolam refert Athanasius ; ea fidem facit Ischy- ram ne presbyterum quidem esse sed Jaicum, quippe quia Colu- tho manuum suscepisset ordinationem, qui non erat Episcopus sed Presbyter. Hence the Church of England has decreed in her Ordinal, “that no man shall be accounted or taken to be a lawful bishop, priest, or deacon in her communion, or suffered to execute any of the said functions, except he hath had episcopal consecration or ordination.” Srreitworr, Libri Symbolici in Catechism Cone. Trid. FUNCTIONS OF BISHOPS. 103 e. vii. p.442. Etiam schismaticis atque hereticis persuasum fuisse solas ordinationes ab episcopis factas ratas esse deducitur ex iis, que Cornel. P. de Novatiano tradit in Ep. ap. Euseb. H. E. vi. 43; and the Greek Church expressly condemned the opinion that non-episcopal ordinations were valid, in the Synodus Hierosolomytana, 1672, p. 436-7, ed. Kimmel, 1848. @. In maintaining the necessity of Episcopal Government, are we not guilty of want of charity by condemning those who are without it ? @. Veriras est maxima CARITAS; TRUTH is the greatest cuarity. It is no charity to con- nive at error, and to suppress truth; but it és charity to remove error, and to maintain and communicate truth. Therefore our duty is, if we enjoy Episcopal Government, to thank God for it; and to pray to Him that they who have not yet recovered it, whether that be from necessity *, real or supposed, from inadvertence, indifference, or deliberate purpose, may at length become able and willing to return to the ancient divinely ap- pointed constitution of the Church; and further we are bound to be ready, willing, and desirous’, as far as we are able, to encourage and promote its restoration *. 1 Hooker, III. x1. 14. Bramua ct, ii. 70. Cp. Note to Christian Institutes, vol. iii. p. 258. Geruarp, de Ecclesia, p. 372. vi. 183. 231. Art. Smaleald. art. x.; and the words of Calvin, Inst. iv. 4, 1. The following is the very important testimony of the writers of the Aucspurcu Conression on this subject, sub- scribed by Carvin himself, shewing the desires of its framers for the preservation of Episcopacy in the foreign Reformed Churches. (See De la Motte, Correspondance Fraternelle, Ρ. 424, and Calvin, Opera, ix. p. 113.) Lisri Symporici Ecclesie Evangelice, &e. Lipsie, 1837. p. 204. Apologia Confessionis, (a P. MeLancuruon,) art. vii. F 4 Cuap. XI. ed 104 FUNCTIONS OF BISHOPS. Parti, § 24. “Hac de re in hoc conventu seepe testati sumus, nos -—~ summa voluntate cupere conservare politiam Ecclesiasticam, et gradus in Ecclesia factos etiam humand auctoritate. Scimus enim bono et utili consilio a Patribus Ecclesiasticam discipli- nam hoe modo, ut veteres canones describunt, constitutam esse. Sed Episcopi sacerdotes nostros aut cogunt hoe doc- triné genus, quod confessi sumus, abjicere et damnare, aut nova et inaudita crudelitate miseros et innocentes occidunt. He cause impediunt, quo minus agnoscant hos Episcopos nostri sacerdotes. Ita svitia Episcoporum in causa est, quare alicubi dissolvitur illa canonica politia, quam nos mag- nopere cupiebamus conservare. Ipsi viderint, quomodo ratio- nem Deo reddituri sint, quod dissipant Ecclesiam. “Porro hie iterum volumus testatum, nos libenter conser- vaturos esse Ecclesiasticam et Canonicam politiam, si modo Episcopi desinant in nostras Ecclesias sevire. Hee nostra voluntas et coram Deo, et apud omnes gentes, ad omnem posteritatem excusabit nos, ne nobis imputari possit, quod Epis- coporum auctoritas labefactatur, ubi legerint atque audierint homines, nos injustam sevitiam Episcoporum deprecantes, nihil zequi impetrare potuisse.” The above is the LurHeran statement; for the Armi- NIAN, the language of Grorius (above, p. 93, 105, and below, pt. ii. ch. v.) may be referred to; and the following are the words of Carvin and Beza :— Caxvinvs, Epist. ad Cardinal Sadolet. Disciplinam, qua- lem habuit vetws Ecclesia, nobis deesse non diffitemur—sed Cujus erit aquitatis nos everse discipline ab iis accusari qui eam penitus sustulerunt ὃ Episcopatus a Deo profectus est ; Episcopi munus Dei authoritate constitutum est et legibus definitum. Catvinus, de Necessit. Reform. Eccles. Talem nobis hierarchiam si exhibeant in qua sic emineant Episcopi ut Christo subesse non recusent, ut ab Illo tanquam ab unico Capite pendeant et ad Ipsum referantur ; tum vero nullo non anathemate dignos fatear, si qui erunt, qui non eam reye- reantur, summaque obedientia observent. Beza ad Saray. Tract. de ministrorum Gradibus. Si qui sunt qui omnem Episcoporum ordinem rejiciant, absit ut quis- quam sane mentis furoribus illorum assentiatur ! OF BISHOPS AS DIOCESANS, &c. 105 2 See the desires to this effect, expressed by Abp. Laud, Cuar. X11. Bps. Andrewes and Sanderson ; Christian Institutes, iii. pp. ——~—~ 261. 216. 3 The exhortation of Grorius to the Reformed Churches of his own times may, it is to be hoped, find some persons in the present day able and willing to give it effect.—Epist. p. 975. Suaderem eis ut constituerent inter se quosdam in emi- nentiore gradu ut Episcopos, et ut iis χειροθεσίαν sumerent ab Archiepiscopo Hiberno, qui ibi est, et ita ordinati ordi- narent deinde pastores cateros, atque sic initium facerent redeundi ad mores et antiquos et salutares ; quibus contemptis licentia inyaluit pro novis opinionibus faciendi novas Ecclesias, quee quid post aliquot annos crediturz sint nescimus. CHAPTER XII. OF BISHOPS AS DIOCESANS, METROPOLITANS, AND PATRIARCHS. @. You have spoken of Bishops in general, and of their institution and offices; is not the per- formance of their duty, individually, and the exer- cise and application of their powers, restrained habitually in Christian States by laws ecclesiasti- cal and civil, within certain limits ἢ a. Yes. @. And do not bishops bear certain titles ac- cording to the limits within which their functions are exercised ? A. They do. @. Can you give any instances of such restric- tions from Holy Scripture ? Malt αν @. Yes. Our Lord Himself says, He was not ~ “ sent but to the lost sheep of the House of Israel.” St Peter was specially the Apostle of the circum- Gul. ii.7—9. F 5 Pary I. ---᾿ Rom. xi. 13. Acts xii. 17. xv. 13. xxi. 18. Gal. i. 19. ii. 12. 1 Tim. i. 3. Dit 1. δ: Rev. i. 20. Above, p. 95. 97. 106 OF BISHOPS AS DIOCESANS, cision, and St. Paul of the Gentiles. St. James had special jurisdiction at Jerusalem, St. Timothy at Ephesus, St. Titus in Crete; and the seven Asiatic Churches had each their own Bishop re- spectively *. 1 Archbp. Usuer, Original of Bishops and Metropolitans, Oxford, 1641. Archbp. De Marca, De Concordia, yi. 1. @. Does this principle of distribution and re- striction appear to have been generally received in the Church in ancient times ? @. Yes: and there were certain circumstances of a providential nature which rendered the uni- form reception of it very easy and natural. @. What were these ? A. The civil divisions of the Roman empire’, that is to say, of the greater part of the civilized world, in the early ages of Christianity, were admirably adapted to, and prepared for, the appli- cation of this distributive system and economy of Church government, throughout the whole extent of the Roman sway. 1 Hooker, VII. vir. 7. Barrow, on the Pope’s Supre- macy, p- 163. ΒΙΝΟΗΑΜ, Antiquities, 11. xvi. xvii. Ix. i, 7. Hence the expression of 5. Orrarus, iii. 3. Non Res- publica in Ecclesia, sed Ecclesia in Republica, i. e. in Im- perio Romano. Pancirott, Notitia Dignitatum utriusque Imperii, in Grevii Thesaur. Antiq. vii. p. 1308. Bp. Beveripce, Codex Canonum, v. 13, de Metropoli- tanis, in Patres Apostolici, ed. Cotelerii, ii. 2, p. 87. Jounson’s Code of the Universal Church (in νοὶ]. ii. of Clergyman’s Vade Mecum, 1709).—Canones Apostol. et Concil. Seculorum tv. v. v1. vu. Bruns. Berolin. 1839. @. You mean, that the system of civil govern- METROPOLITANS, AND PATRIARCHS. 107 ment invited the application of a similar system Cuap. XII. of ecclesiastical polity ? 7. a @. Yes: and this aptitude was recognized by General Councils of the Church, and made by them the occasion and groundwork ' of their own legislation; so that, when the empire became Christian, (i. e. early in the fourth century,) the lines of the ecclesiastical map coincided very nearly with those of the civil chart of the whole empire. 1 Concil. Antioch. a.p. 341, can 9, p. 80, ed Bruns. τοὺς καθ᾽ ἑκάστην ἐπαρχίαν ἐπισκόπους εἰδέναι χρὴ τὸν ἐν TH μητροπόλει προεστῶτα ἐπίσκοπον, καὶ τὴν φροντίδα ἀνα- δέχεσθαι πάσης τῆς ἐπαρχίας διὰ τὸ ἐν τῇ μητροπόλει παντα- χόθεν συντρέχειν πάντας τοὺς τὰ πράγματα ἔχοντας---ἕκαστον ἐπίσκοπον ἐξουσίαν ἔχειν τῆς ἑαυτοῦ παροικίας--περαιτέρω δὲ μηδὲν πράττειν ἐπιχειρεῖν δίχα τοῦ τῆς μητροπόλεως ἐπι- σκόπου. Archbp. De Marca, de Concordia, vi. cap. 1. Barrow, On the Pope’s Supremacy, p. 165. Durin, De Ant. Eccles. Discipl. 1. § 8. @. As, then, at that time the Eastern Empire consisted, politically, of seven districts called Di- aceses (διοικήσεις), and seven also composed the Western, there were, I suppose, seven ecclesi- astical districts coinciding with them in the East and seven in the West also Ὁ @. Yes; and these ecclesiastical districts were also termed Dioceses. @. And as in these fourteen dioceses there were altogether about one hundred and eighteen minor territorial divisions called Provinces (ἐπ- apxiat), so there were as many sub-divisions in the Church ? F 6 ᾿ Part I, 108 OF BISHOPS AS DIOCESANS, A. Yes; and these ecclesiastical sub-divisions were also termed Provinces. @. And as in each province there were several cities, with their respective precincts (παροικίαι) attached to them, so there were several Chief Churches, each having its own territorial range allotted to it ? @. There were ; and these too were called παρ- oxiae', Parecie, which word in English has now descended to describe a Parish, from signifying what we now term a Diocese; as διοίκησις has also descended to designate a Diocese, from signifying as it once did, a combination of several Dioceses. 1 Bp. Birson, Appendix to Perpetual Government of Christ’s Church, p. 540. Παροικία, Parecia, tion civitatem solum in qua Episcopus sedem habuerat, sed totam regionem finitimam civitati assignatam sive subjectam significat. Cazassutius, Notit. Concil. cap. xxviii. Cazassutius, Concilia, cap. xxvii. p. 114. Iste Canon (Antioch. 9) tres commemorat Ecclesiasticee Prefecture gradus, 1. ἐπαρχίαν, Provinciam sub Metropolitano Presule ; 2. παροικίαν, Pareciam, sub comproyinciali sive suffra- ganeo Episcopo ; 3. χώραν, locum seu minorem locum, unde χωρεπίσκοποι dieti, locorum particularium intra Pareeciam prefecti ; Sed omnes gradus illos antecellebat Diacesis, habens plures Provincias, qualis erat singulorum Paériarcharum ditio. Nune vero Diecesis usurpari pro Pareecia solet, ipsa vero Parecia pro infima Prefectura pagorum, quarum prefectus vulgo Parochus audit, melits tamen juxta Greecorum Cano- num expressionem Parecus diceretur. (ὃ. And now, to ascend in an inverted order, what, first, were the rulers of these Chief Churches called ? @. Bishops. METROPOLITANS, AND PATRIARCHS. 109 @. Could there be more than one Bishop in a Cuap. XII. city ? @. No’; there could not: this was specially prohibited by the laws of the Church, and cen- sured by them as schismatical; and a second Bishop in a city is regarded by them as no Bishop ἡ. 1 Concil. Nicen. ο. 8. ἵνα μὴ ἐν τῇ πόλει δύο ἐπίσκοποι ὦσι. S. Hieron. ad Ep. Philipp. i. Non in und urbe plures Episcopi esse potuissent. ? §. Cyprian. ad Antonian. ep. 52. Quisquis post unum (Episcopum) factus est, non jam secundus ille sed nullus est. S. Cyprian. ad Step. ep. 67. oris esse ccepit qui, Epi- scopo Cornelio ordinato, profanum altare erigere, adul- teram cathedram collocare, et sacrilega sacrificia offerre tentaverit. S. Curysosz. Theodoret. et Gicumen. in Epist. ad Phil. i. BINGHAM, 11. xiii. 1. xvu1. v. 3. @. What were the Episcopal Rulers of the Pro- vinces styled ? @. Metropolitans, (Ecclesiastical Governors of the mother city, μητρόπολις.) and sometimes Archbishops, though this latter title was more generally applied to a still more dignified eccle- siastical office; and all were called Apostolic. (Ὁ. And what were those of the Dioceses called ἢ A. Patriarchs’, Exarchs, or Archbishops’. 1 Cone. Chalcedon. act. ii. vol. iy. p. 338. ed. Labbe. ὁσιώτατοι πατριάρχαι διοικήσεως Exdoryns.—Act. iii. p. 395. ἀρχιεπισκόπῳ καὶ πατριάρχῃ τῆς μεγάλης Ῥώμης Λέοντι. 2 Concil. Chalcedon. can. 30. Justin. Novell. ii. Con- cerning their limits, see Conc. Const. c. 2. Conc. Ephes. i. Act. 7. @. So that there were, on the whole, fourteen Patriarchs in the Roman Empire ? SSS Parr I. ae Canon 6, 110 OF BISHOPS AS DIOCESANS, A. Yes’. 1 BincuaM, τι. xvii. 20. Caszassutius, Notit. Concil. xxvii. xxviii. The importance of this subject will justify the insertion of the following large extract from Dr. Richarp CraKan- THoRPE’S Defensio Ecclesiz Anglicane, Lond. 1625, p. 144. Ecclesiam, in sua Diocesium et Provinciarum divisione ac regimine, civilem formam et Regimen sequutam esse, neminem qui antiquitatis paulo studiosior est, latere arbitror. Docet hoe preter alia Concilium Chalcedonense. Hine fae- tum, ut sicut Imperium Romanum in duas generales partes, seu duos orbes (sie yocari solebant) divideretur, ita Eccle- siam generaliter primo, in Orientalem et Occidentalem par- tirentur. Ut in Oriente septem erant Imperii Diaceses, in Occidente, preter Romane urbis Prefecturam, sex: Itidem et guatuor- decim dicceses antiquitus habuit Ecclesia. Septem orientis tam Imperii quam Ecclesiz Diceceses he erant, 1. Agyptus, cujus ut et Libya, Thebaidis, ac Pentapolis Provincie, Alexandrino suberant Patriarehe. 2. Oriens, cujus provin- οἷς Antiocheno Patriarche subjecte. 3. Asiana, cujus olim Provincize Ephesino Primati, post Constantinopolitano Patriar- che subdite. 4. Pontica, cujus metropolis Cesarea. 5. Thra- cia, cujus Provinciz Grecia, Achaia, alizeque Thessalonicensi olim Episcopo, ut primati Dicaceseos, post Constantinopolitano Patriarche subjecte fuerunt. 6. Macedonia, et 7. Dacia. Septem quoque in Occidente. Prima omnium erat Ro- mana, cujus propria, et, ut Hinemarus vocat, specialis Diecesis, erant illee Provinciee que suburbicarie dicte sunt, quia Vi- cario Imperatoris in civilibus, in Ecclesiasticis Romano Patri- arché suberant ; queeque ab Italie Provinciis omnino secer- nuntur. Quis vel certius cognoscere potuit, vel rectius explicare Romani pontificis antiquos limites, quam Ruffinus, Presbyter ipse Romane Ecclesig, in ea enutritus, in his pervestigandis diligenter versatus 5 Is de industria quasi explicans Nicenum Canonem, Romano Episcopo non alias quam suburbicarias attribuit Provincias, aut Ecclesias. He in universum decem erant Provinciz. Insule tres, Sicilia, Corsica, et Sardinia, METROPOLITANS, AND PATRIARCHS. 11] et septem aliz in eo Italiz tractu, qui ad Orientem vergit et παν, XII. Austrum, ad Occidentem vero non ultra Magram fluvium, —~—~ qui Hetruriz limes, et Asiwm fluvium (Esis Plinio et Blondo yocatur) non longe ab Ancona protendebantur. Cujus illud certum omnino indicium, quod Piceni (in quo Ancona sita) pars una Picenum suburbicarium dictum sit, altera, Annonarium, quia in Picena regione suburbicarium provinciarum terminus. Siigitur Italia juxta Antonini Itinerarium in sedecim, aut rectius juxta Notitiam in septemdecim, Provincias dividatur, preeter tres illas Insulas, 4. Campania, 5. Tuscia, 6. Picenum suburbicarium, 7. Apulia cum Calabria, 8. Bruttium, 9. Sam- nium, et 10, Valeria, quia suburbicarie regiones, et Provincia erant, Romano subjectee Patriarche, illiusque Diecesis propria ae peculiaris fuerunt. Secunda, Jtalica Diccesis dicta est, quee septem alias Italie complectebatur Provincias. 1. Venetias nempe, cum Istria, 2. Amiliam, 3. Liguriam, 4. Flaminiam cum Piceno Anno- nario, 5. Alpes Cottias, 6. Rhetiam primam, 7. et Rhe- tiam secundam; que omnes Proyincie, ut in civilibus sub ab Imperatore illis dato vicario, ita in Ecclesiasticis, Mediolanensi Primati, ut suo Metropolitano, parebant. Quare ab Athanasio Mediolanum Italie Metropolis, sicut Romane ditionis Metropolis Roma, nominatur. Ita in duas Dieceses Τιαϊῖα olim divisa, una Italice appellationem reti- nuit, altera ab urbe et Suburbicariis Provinciis nomen accepit : illa Romano, hee Mediolanensi Episcopo subjecta. Tertia, Africana dicecesis erat, in qua Episcopi olim plusquam ducenti, Metropolitani etiam complures ; qui omnes et ipsorum Pro- vineiz, Carthaginiensi Episcopo ut Primati totius diacesis suberant. Quarta Jllyrium, quee ut suas Provincias, ita suum, qui eis preerat, Primatem olim habuit, sed post, tota ipsa Dicecesis Constantinopolitano subjecta erat Patriarche. Quinta est Gallia, cujus olim Metropolis fuit Augusta Tre- verorum, et totius Diccesis Primas Treverensis Episcopus ; sed ea dignitas ad Arelatensem postea translata. Sexta, His- paniarum, cujus ut Regia, ita Metropolis quoque Hispalis fuisse videtur: posted una cum Regia, primatus quoque dignitas To/etano concessit Episcopo. Septima et Brittanni- arum, cujus ut olim Regia, ita et Metropolis Hboracum fuisse conjicitur ; sed iste ἃ multis retro seeculis, Cantuariensi Epis- Part I. 112 OF BISHOPS AS DIOCESANS, copo ut Primati, aut (ut eum Malmsburiensis, et Glossa Juris yocant) Patriarche Dicecesis tota subjecta. Et quidem antiquitis hee Diccesium in Ecclesia, juxta Imperii formam facta divisio; sed ea et mutata sepils a Conciliis, et ab Imperatoribus. Nec in divisione solim Diéacesium Imperium sequuta est Ecclesia, sed et in ipsius regimine, mirum omnind est, quam illius formam imitata sit. Nam sicut in quatuordecim illis Diecesibus erant in universum Provincie centum et octodecim ; ita et totidem Provincias numerabat Ecclesia. Ut in sin- gulis Provinciis erant complures urbes, quibus singulis infe- rioris ordinis Judices ciyiles, quos Defensores civitatum feré vocabant, preponebantur; ita in singulis civitatibus Epi- Scopos Suos, qui eas cum pareecia tota circumjacente guberna- bant, preeficiebat Ecclesia. Ut Provincie singule suos habe- bant Proconsules Consulares, aut Provinciarum presides, qui in Metropoli Provincie residentes, aliis in e& Provincia authoritate praibant: itidem habuit et Ecclesia Episcopos suos Metropolitanos, seu Archiepiscopos, quibus ut Presidi Provinciz, czteri illius Provincize Episcopi subjecti erant. Ut singule illee quatuordecim Dicaceses Vicarios Imperatoris Augustales, Prefectos Pretorio, aut alio nomine yocatos, in primaria urbe, seu Metropoli totius Diacesis, velut generales illius Rectores habuerint, quorum tanta autoritas, ut nulla post Imperatorem major : itidem et Ecclesia in singulis suis guatuordecim Dicecesibus, Primarios quosdam et pra omnibus eminentes suos habuit Episcopos, qui κατ᾽ ἐξοχὴν Patriarche, vel Primates Patriarchales dicebantur, qui in primaria sede et totius Diecesis Metropoli constituti, non Episcopis solim qui Parecias, sed et Metropolitanis qui Provincias regebant, preponebantur, quorum singulorum tanta est in Ecclesia autoritas, ut non sit in Episcopo ullo post Imperatorem Jesum Christum ulla major. Ut in toto Imperio antiquitis tres inter omnes eminebant civitates, “ Prima urbes inter, divtim domus, aurea Roma :” secunda, Alexandria, que a Dione Chrysostomo per excellen- tiam Civitas; et secunda omnium que sub sole sunt, yocatur. Tertia, Antiochia, que teste Hegesippo ¢ertium omnium in orbe civitatum locum obtinet: itidem in Ecclesia, tres illarum urbium Episcopi pre aliis omnibus insignes erant et specta- METROPOLITANS, AND PATRIARCHS. 113 biles: ideoque per excellentiam Patriarche dicti: cum Cnap. XII. reliqui wndecim Diacesium Episcopi, licét Patriarchali_ omni ——~— potestate illis pares, non Patriarche, sed Primates dicerentur : Primates, inquam, Patriarchales, non solum Metropolitani : et Primates Dicecesium suarum Patriarchalium, non wnius Pro- vincie Primates. Hee antiquitus et divisio et regimen in Ecclesiis instituta. Nee certé vel ad pacem in Ecclesia conservandam, vel ad jurisdictionem cuique Episcopo suam sartam tectam tuendam, aut facilior aut commodior ulla Pareciarum, Provinciarum, et Diecesium distributio fieri potuit aut inveniri. @. We have before seen what are the functions of a Bishop; what next is the office of a Metro- politan ὃ @. To consecrate or confirm his suffragan Bishops *, and no one could be ordained a Bishop in his province without his consent and approba- tion, and any such ordination was null and void ; to receive appeals, and decide controversies among the Bishops of his province, either by himself, or by commission, or by reference to a Provincial Synod’; to convoke and to preside in Provincial Synods*, (generally summoned twice a year,) which all his Suffragans were bound to attend ; to give to his Suffragans litere formate when going into foreign parts *, and to publish imperial decrees on ecclesiastical matters. 1 Concil. Nic. can. 4. τὸ κῦρος (confirmation of Bishop) διδόσθω Kal ἑκάστην ἐπαρχίαν τῷ μητροπολίτῃ.--- (αη. 6. χωρὶς γνώμης τοῦ μητροπολίτου μὴ δεῖν εἶναι ἐπίσκοπον .---- Cone. Sardic. ο. 6.—Cone. Ephes. Decret. de Epise. Cypr. —Conce. Chaic. Act. 16. Antioch. 9. Laodic. 12. Chaleed. 19.25. Carth, 11, 12. Arelat. 5, 6. 2 Cod. Justin. 1. ν. 29. Cone. Const. 6. 35. Conc. Nie. 5. Chalced. 19. Antioch. 9. 20. 38. Arelat. 19. 3 Conc. Nic. ο. 5. Chaleed. 19. 4 Cone. Carth. iii. 28. Parr I. ae ee ey See above, p. 112. 114 OF BISHOPS AS DIOCESANS, @. What is the office of a Patriarch ὃ A. To ordain or confirm the Metropolitans of his Dicecesis or Patriarchate’ ; to convoke them to Synods, which they were obliged to attend’; to receive appeals from the Metropolitans * and from the Synods* in his jurisdiction; to communicate imperial decrees * to his Metropolitans. 1 Justin. Novell. 7. 131, ¢. 3. ? Theodoret. Epist. 81. 3. Cone. Chale. ce. 9. c. 17. Justin. Novell. 123. 187. * Concil. Chalced. can. 9. ° Justinian, Epilog. Novell. 6. @. Were any of the Cities, in which the four- teen Patriarchs resided, superior in civil dignity to the rest ? A. Yes, three: Rome, Alerandria, and Antioch. @. And were the Patriarchs of these superior in ecclesiastical rank to the other eleven? @. They were not higher in order, (for all Patriarchs possess co-ordinate and independent authority,) but they had precedence of the others in place. @. And was this precedence liable to change ? @. Yes: it was'. Ifa city rose or declined in civil power and importance, then, after mature consideration of the circumstances of the case, its ecclesiastical precedence was modified. Thus, for instance, the Bishop of Constantinople, from not being a Patriarch at all, was raised, a. ἢ. 381, under Theodosius the Great, to the dignity of the second among the fourteen Patriarchs *. 1 By Concil. Constantinop. a. p. 381, can. 3, [and Con- cilium Chalcedon, a. p. 451, can. 28,] the second place is assigned to Constantinople, διὰ τὸ εἶναι νέαν ἱῬώ μην ; and in Concil. Chalcedon, ἃ. ν. 451, can. 28, Constantinople is METROFPOLITANS, AND PATRIARCHS. 115 declared to be on a parity with Rome. (τῶν ἴσων ἀπολαύ- Cuar. XI. ουσαν πρεσβείων τῇ πρεσβυτέρᾳ βασιλίδι Ρώμῃ.) See Concil. ae = Trull. or Quini-Sext. can. 36. On the same principle as the first place had been given to Rome, διὰ τὸ βασιλεύειν τὴν πόλιν ἐκείνην. Cp. act. 16. Cone. Chaleed. Constanti- nople is called the Head of all the Churches (Constantino- politana Ecclesia omnium aliarum est caput) by Justinian, Cod. i. Tit. 3. c. 24. Compare Concil. Trullan. a. p. 692. can. 88. Concil. Chalcedon. can. 17, εἴ τις ἐκ βασιλικῆς ἐξουσίας ἐκαινίσθη πόλις ἢ αὖθις καινισθείη, τοῖς πολιτικοῖς καὶ δημοσίοις τύποις καὶ τῶν ἐκκλησιαστικῶν παροικιῶν ἡ τάξις ἀκολουθείτω. Βιναηάμ, Antiq. IX. 1. 7. 2 Abp. Bramuatt, 1. 130. 177. @. By what process were these variations effected ? @. It was unlawful’ for a bishop to take any steps to obtain the elevation of his own see; but it was competent to a General Council, convoked by the Emperor, to deliberate, and decide, with the imperial sanction, on questions of this nature. 1 Concil. Chalced. 12. BrincHam, XVII. v. 37. @. It appears, then, that while the Episcopal Office is of Divine institution, and cannot, in its spiritual nature and ministrations, be affected by any human laws, the actual exercise of authority of Bishops, as Diocesans, Metropolitans, and Patriarchs, may depend, for its distribution and apportionment, upon secular circumstances, and be subject to modifications from civil authority after ecclesiastical consultation ? @. Certainly. The history of the Church affords many proofs and examples" of this. By the order of God’s Providence in the world, king- ag ΝΣ Dan. ii. 21. doms are augmented and diminished, they are ,.3p,'3). 116 OF BISHOPS AS DIOCESANS, Parrl. transferred from one sceptre to another, as He Sa Rom. xiii. 1—5 Tit. iii. 1. 1 Pet. ii. 1317. wills in His supreme wisdom and power; and the bounds of ecclesiastical jurisdiction have been usually modelled accordingly ἡ, 1 Concil. Constant. a.p. 381, can. 2. Concil. Ephes. A.D. 431. tom. iii. p. 801, Labbe. Chalcedon, a.p. 451. can. 12. Justin Novell. 11. case of Justiniana Prima. * Barrow, Treatise on the Pope’s Supremacy, pp. 17], 172, London, 1683, thus states the law and practice of the Church on this subject. Patriarchs are an human institution. As they were erected by the power and prudence of men, so they may be dissolved by the same. They were erected by the leave and confirmation of Princes ; and by the same they may be dejected, if great reason do appear. No ecclesiastical power can interpose in the management of any affairs within the territory of any Prince without his concession. By the laws of God, and according to ancient practice, Princes may model the bounds of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Wherefore, each Prince (having supreme power in his own dominion, and equal to what the Emperor had in his) may exclude any foreign Prelate from jurisdiction in his territories. It is expedient for peace and public good that he should do thus. Such Prelate, according to the rules of Christianity, ought to be content with his doing so, Any Prelate exercising power in the dominion of any Prince, is eatenus his subject; as the Popes and all Bishops were to the Roman emperors. Abp. Brana tt, i. 177-8. ii. p. 185, 186, ed. Oxf. In a.v. 1721, the Church of Russia, and in a.p. 1833 the Church of Greece, was detached from the Patriarchate of Constantinople. @. How does the practice or adoption of such ecclesiastical modification appear to be consequent on God’s government of the world in civil affairs ἢ A. Kings and Emperors would not be what God has made them, namely’, His deputies and Vicegerents upon earth, and He would not be “the only Ruler of Princes,” if any of their sub- METROPOLITANS, AND PATRIARCHS. 117 jects, and,—in the case supposed,—if the Eccle- Cuar. ΧΗ. siastical Persons of their Realm,— were under ΄ foreign allegiance, so that they not only acknow- ledged an external authority as the source of their jurisdiction, but could be summoned by it out of their own country, be brought to trial, and be deprived of their jurisdiction by a power over which their lawful sovereign had no control. 1 TrerTULLIAN, ad Scap. 2. Colimus Imperatorem, ut hominem a Deo secundum et solo Deo minorem. Oprratus, iii. 3. Super Imperatorem non est nisi solus Deus, qui fecit Imperatorem. S. Curysostom, ad Rom. xiii. 1. Every one is bound to obey the higher powers; κἄν τις ἀπόστολος 7, Kav εὐ- αγγελιστὴς, κἂν προφήτης --- ταῦτα διατάττεται ἱερεῦσι, οὐχὶ τοῖς βιωτικοῖς (laicis) μόνον. S. Bernarp, de Officio Episcoporum, ed. Paris, 1839- tom. ii. cap. viii. p. 1123. Intelligitis que dico : cui hono- rem, honorem. Ommnis anima, inquit, potestatibus sublimioribus subdita sit. Si omnis, et vestra. Quis vos excipit ab univer- sitate? Si quis tentat excipere, conatur decipere. Nolite illorum aequiescere consiliis, qui cum sint Christiani, Christi tamen yel sequi facta, vel obsequi dictis opprobrio ducunt. Ipsi sunt qui vobis dicere solent ; “Servate vestre sedis honorem. Decebat quidem ex vobis, yobis commissam Ec- clesiam crescere : nunc vero saltem in illa qua suscepistis maneat dignitate. Et vos enim vestro pradecessore impo- tentiores? Si non crescit per vos, non decrescat per vos.” Hee isti: Christus aliter et jussit, et gessit. Reddite, ait, que sunt Cesaris, Cesari; et que sunt Dei, Deo. Quod ore locutus est, mox opere implere curavit. Conditor Ceesaris Cesari non cunctatus est reddere censum: exemplum enim dedit vobis, ut et vos ita faciatis. See below, pt. iii. chap. v. 118 DISCIPLINE. Parr I. eer) CHAPTER XIII. PRIVILEGES IN THE CHURCH. Discipline.— Power of the Keys. (ἢ. We have spoken of the Word of God, and of the ministration of the Word and Sacraments ; what other privilege must we next notice as pos- sessed by the Church? Q. That of Discipline’. 1 Homiuies, Homily for Whitsunday, Part II. ed. Oxon. 1822, p. 428. The true Church hath always three notes or marks whereby it is known: pure and sound doctrine, the sacraments ministered according to Christ’s holy institution, and the right use of Ecclesiastical discipline. This description of the Church is agreeable both to the Scriptures of God, and also to the doctrine of the ancient Fathers, so that none may justly find fault therewith. See above, p. 14. @. What is this power of exercising Church Discipline usually called ? . It is usually termed by divines the Power of the Keys’, of which it is one main and primary portion. 1 Abp. Cranmer’s Catechism, pp. 193—204, ed. Oxf. 1829. @. Whence did it receive this name? @. From the words of Christ to St. Peter, and in him to all Presbyters: “I will give to thee the Matt.xvi. Keys of the kingdom of heaven.” - @. You say, “in St. Peter to all Presbyters * ;” how does this appear ? @. From the fact, that the power which our Matt. xviii, Tord here gave to St. Peter, He gave to all the 17, 18. ay τὴς xx. Apostles’,and to the Church * generally ; and this is POWER OF THE KEYS. 119 further apparent from the universal language and practice of the Church, according to which all Presbyters have ever used this power. 1 Orverine or Priests, in the Book of Common Prayer of the United Church of England and Ireland. Receive the Holy Ghost for the Office and Work of a Priest in the Chureh of God, now committed unto thee by the Im- position of our Hands. Whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven ; and whose sins thou dost retain, they are retained. And be thou a faithful Dispenser of the Word of God, and of His Holy Sacraments; in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. 2 See below, 5. Curysosr., S. Auc., S. Amprosr, at the close of this chapter, and the beginning of the next, and Pt. ii. last chapter. 8. Aue. in Joannis Evang. Tract. exviii. Sicut in Apo- stolis cum esset etiam ipse numerus ducdenarius, id est, quadripartitus in ternos, et omnes essent interrogati, solus Petrus respondit, Tu es Christus Filius Dei vivi: et ei dicitur, Tibi dabo claves regni celorum, tanquam ligandi et solvendi solus acceperit potestatem: cum et illud unus pro omnibus dixerit, et hoe cum omnibus tanquam personam gerens ipsius unitatis acceperit : ideo unus pro omnibus, quia unitas est in omnibus. S. Cyprian, de Unitate Ecclesiz, p. 106. Loquitur Do- minus ad Petrum, go ἐϊδὲ dico, inquit, quia tu es Petrus, &c. Et iterum eidem post resurrectionem suam dicit : Pasce oves meas. Super unum edificat Ecclesiam suam, Et quamvis Apostolis omnibus parem potestatem tribuat et dicat : Sicut misit me Pater, et Ego mitto vos, accipite Spiritum Sanctum. δὶ cui remiseritis peccata, remittantur illi ; si cui tenueritis, tene- buntur: tamen ut unitatem manifestaret, unitatis ejusdem originem ab uno incipientem sua auctoritate disposuit. Hoc erant utique et ceteri Apostoli, quod fuit Petrus, pari con- sortio prediti et honoris et potestatis, sed exordium ab unitate proficiscitur, ut Ecclesia una monstretur. S. Firmirian, Epist. apud Cyprian. p. 225. Potestas pec- Cnar. XIIT. 9 Part I. Isa. xxii.22. Rey. i. 18. 1 (fGes-s Ie Job xii. 24. 120 DISCIPLINE. catorum remittendorum Apostolis data est, et Episcopis qui eis vicaria ordinatione succedunt. 3.8. Aue. in Joannis Evang. Tract. exxiv. 5. Quando ei dictum est, Tibi dabo claves regni ccelorum, universam signifi- cabat Ecclesiam, que in hoc seculo diversis tentationibus velut imbribus, fluminibus, tempestatibus quatitur, et non cadit, quoniam fundata est super petram, unde Petrus nomen accepit. Non enim a Petro petra, sed Petrus a petra; sicut non Christus a christiano, sed christianus a Christo yocatur. Ideo quippe ait Dominus, Super hance petram edificabo Ec- clesiam meam, quia dixerat Petrus, Tu es Christus Filius Dei vivi. Super hane ergo, inquit, petram quam confessus es, zdificabo Ecclesiam meam. Petra enim erat Christus : super quod fundamentum etiam ipse edificatus est Petrus. Funda- mentum quippe aliud nemo potest ponere preter id quod positum est, quod est Christus Jesus. Ecclesia ergo que fundatur in Christo, claves ab eo regni ccelorum accepit in Petro, id est, potestatem ligandi solvendique peccata. @. In what respects are keys an emblem of ecclesiastical authority ? @. Keys are wont to be given to stewards, trea- surers, warders, and other officers, domestic and civil, as badges of trust and power’. The proper use of keys is to open, to admit, to shut in or shut out, and again to re-admit: and so Christ has given to His Ministers the power, in subordina- tion to Himself, of admitting to the Kingdom of Heaven, of excluding from it, and of re-admitting to it; and this is what is meant, when it is said that they have from Christ the power of the Keys’. 1 Thence Christ’s Ministers are called ταμίαι, οἰκονόμοι. See 1 Cor.iv. 1. 2 Cor. vi. 4. Col. i. 25. Tit.i. 7. 1 Pet. iv. 10. 2 Hooker, VI. 1v. 1. They that have the keys of the kingdom of heaven are hereby signified to be stewards of POWER OF THE KEYS. 197 the house of God, under whom they guide, command, and = Cuap. judge His family. The souls of men are God’s treasure, , XIII. Peaaitied to the trust and fidelity of such as must render aw a strict account for the very least which is under their custody. Barrow, de Potestate Clavium, iy. p. 50, ed. 1687. This Latin Treatise is fuller and more complete than the Hnglish one of the same author, entitled On the Power of the Keys. @. You speak of admitting to the Kingdom of Heaven ; when so speaking, what do you mean by the Kingdom of Heaven ? @. I mean, first, the Visible Church, or the Kingdom of Grace ; and, secondly, that to which it leads the faithful Christian',—namely, the Invisible Church, or the Kingdom of Glory. 1 See above, chaps. ii. and iii. ®. How do Christ’s ministers admit persons into the kingdom of heaven in the former sense ? A. By the Ministry of the Word of God, that is, by Preaching; and by Baptism. @. How do they exclude from the kingdom of heaven ? @. By Church censures after solemn investi- 1 Cor. v. gation, trial, and admonition, and specially by the ἢ 1 7a i. 20. judicial sentence of excommunication. 2 Tim Δ 17- ©. What are the intents and ends of Church censures ? A. With respect to Christ, The ends and aims Levit, x10: of Church censures are, to maintain His honour; O6 slike 38 with respect to the Church, to preserve her ἘΠ bapa a ness, purity, and unity; with respect to offenders, Joa ii, 12 to warn them by a pre-announcement of the final tae judgment’, to inspire them with godly sorrow, }°3" “ to the intent that “they may learn not to blas- 2 C0 vi. Ξ = 12 Part I. uJ _ 1Tim. 1. 20. 2 Cor. ii. 4. vii. 9. 2 Cor. v. 11. Heb. x. 91]. 122 DISCIPLINE. pheme,” and “ that their spirits may be saved in the day of the Lord;” and with respect to all others, to deter them from similar offences. For, Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat*, says the Common Law; and, Minatur innocentibus qui parcit nocentibus *. 1 Tertutcian, Apol. 38. Summum futuri judici preju- dicium est si quis ita deliquerit ut a communicatione orationis et conventus et omnis sancti commercii relegetur. S. Cyprian, de Habitu Virginum, p. 92. This treatise com- mences with a recital of the benefits of Church Discipline. Commination Office of the Church of England. 2 5 Coxe, 109. 3 4 Coxe, 45. @. What, further, is the true character of Church censures ? @. They are acts of charity to the offender and to others; and the omission of them, when they ought to be exercised, is an act of imjury and cruelty’. Knowing God’s wrath against sin, the Church must censure it. Terreo, quia timeo’, is her motto, and δὲ perdo, pereo. 1 Wispom vi. 17. The very true beginning of Wisdom is the desire of Discipline, and the care of Discipline is Love, and Love is the keeping of her laws. Eccivs. xxiii. 1—8. O Lord, . . . who will set scourges over my thoughts, and the Discipline of wisdom over mine heart ? that they spare me not for mine ignorances, and it pass not by my sins ; lest mine ignorances increase, and my sins abound to my destruction, and I fall before mine adyer- saries, and mine enemy rejoice over me, whose hope is far from Thy mercy. Errstora Cleri Rom. ap. 5. Cyprian. ep. 31. Ubi poterit medicina indulgentie proficere si etiam ipse medicus, inter- cepta peenitentia, indulget periculis? si tantummodo operit vulnus! Hoe est non curare, sed occidere. S. Curysostom, ii. 112, ed. Savil. ὁ μηδεμίαν αὐτοῖς τιμωρίαν τιθεὶς, μονονουχὶ ὁπλίζει τῇ ἀδείᾳ. 2 POWER OF THE KEYS. 123 S. Auc. Serm. xiii. Disciplinam qui abjicit, infelic est; Crap. qui negat, crudelis est. es, 2S. Aue. in Ps. lxili. iv. 895, et ad Litt. Petilian. iii. 4. Ecclesiastica Disciplina, medicinalis vindicta, terribilis lenitas, charitatis severitas. @. Is it, then, to be considered a matter of choice with the ministers of Christ whether they will exercise such discipline or no ? @. No. Christ neither said nor did anything in vain. When He said’, “If he will not hear Matt. xviii, the Church,” He ordered the Church to speak; 4. and when He gave the Apostles power for the 7—13. government of His Church, He commanded them τς τ to exercise it; and, accordingly, St. Titus and St. Tae 20. Timothy are commanded by St. Paul to rebuke 2 Tim. iv. 2. 5 A Σ itus ii. 15. with all authority ; and the Bishops * of Pergamus and Thyatira are severely reproved by St. John rey. ji, 14, for suffering false doctrines and corrupt practices Ὁ" 7? in their Churches. Non regit, says St. Augustine, gui non corrigit *. 1 §. Curysostrom, ii. p. 160, ed. Savil. καὶ 6 Χριστὸς ἐπέστησε (τοὺς ἀποστόλους) ἐπιτιμῶντας, Kal ov μόνον ἐπι- τιμῶντας ἀλλὰ καὶ κολάζοντας, τὸν γὰρ οὐδενὸς τούτων ἀκού- σαντα ἐκέλευσεν ὡς ἐθνικὸν εἶναι καὶ τελώνην" πῶς δὲ αὐτοῖς τὰς κλεῖς ἔδωκεν ; εἰ γὰρ μὴ μέλλουσι κρίνειν, ἁπάντων ἔσονται ἄκυροι, καὶ μάτην τὴν ἐξουσίαν τοῦ δεσμεῖν καὶ τοῦ λύειν εἰλήφασι, καὶ ἄλλως δὲ, εἰ τοῦτο κρατήσειεν, ἅπαντα οἰχήσεται καὶ τὰ ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις, καὶ τὰ ἐν ταῖς πόλεσι, καὶ τὰ ἐν ταῖς οἰκίαις ---καὶ ἄνω καὶ κάτω πάντα γενή- σεται. 3.5, Hreron. in Mich. ec. v. Legamus Apocalypsin Joannis Apostoli, in qua laudantur accusanturque Angeli Ecclesiarum pro virtutibus vitiisque eorum quibus praesse dicuntur. It is observable, that in the original Greek of the Revela- tion of St. John (ii. 9, 10. iii. 2. 15—18), the epithets assigned to the several Churches agree in gender with the G2 194. POWER OF THE KEYS. word Angel, and not with the word Church, so that the Holy Spirit seems emphatically to identify each Church with its respective President, and to lay on him the responsibility of its failings and corruptions. 3. §. Ασα. in Ps. xliv. iv. p. 552. Tractat. in Joann. xlvi. Qui sua querit, non que Jesu Christi, peccantem non libere audet arguere. Ecce nescio quis peccavit ; graviter pec- cayit ; increpandus est, excommunicandus est. Sed excom- municatus, inimicus erit. Jam ille qui sua querit, non que Jesu Christi, ne inimicitiarum humanarum incurrat moles- tiam tacet, non corripit. Ecce lupus ovi guttur apprehendit ; tu taces, non increpas! O mercenarie, lupum venientem vidisti, et fugisti! Fugisti, quia tacuisti; tacuisti, quia timuisti. Fuga animi timor est. Archbp. Cranmer’s Catechism, ed. Oxon. 1829, p. 201. And this also is to be reproved, that some men, whiche con- tinue in manyfest and open synne, and go not about to amend their lyfes, yet they wil be counted Christen men, and inter- poyse to receaue the same sacramentes that other do, to come to the Churche, to worship God, and to pray with other. Suche muste be warned of their fautes, and yf they refuse to heare and amende, then they ought to be excom- municate and put out of the Christen congregation, yntil they repente andamende their lyfes ; lest by suche manifest sinne and euil examples, other men might be provoked to do the lyke, and so at length many might be infected, and the Christen relygyon despised and euil spoken of, as though it were the worst relygyon, forasmuche as Christian men shoulde then leade a shameful and ungodly lyfe. » ABSOLUTION. 195 CHAPTER XIV. PRIVILEGES IN THE CHURCH. Absolution. @. You spoke of re-admission to the Visible Church, or Kingdom of Grace ; and, secondly, by its means, to the Invisible Church or Kingdom of Glory; how do the Ministers of Christ re-admit offenders into the Church or Kingdom of Heaven, both Visible and Invisible ? A. By disposing them to repentance by appli- cation of the salutary medicine of the promises to penitence, and threats against sin, revealed in the Word of God, and thus producing compunction and contrition in them; then by declaring, as God’s heralds, His readiness to pardon all who truly repent and believe in Him; then, by pro- nouncing their pardon and restoring them, on their repentance and faith, and confession of sins, through the ministry of reconciliation, which has been appointed and entrusted to them as Minis- ters in the’ Church of God. 'S. Aue. Serm. cexiv. eelesia Dei vivi claves accepit regni ccelorum, ut in illa per sanguinem Christi, operante Spiritu Sancto, fiat remissio peccatorum. In hae Ecclesia reviviscit anima que mortua fuerat peccatis, ut convivificetur Christo, cujus gratia sumus salvi facti. F. Mason, de Ministerio, v. 10. Minister Evangelicus du- pliciter peccata remittit, dispositive et declarative: dispositive, quia homines ad remissionem peccatorum consequendam dis- ponit perducendo ad fidem et pcenitentiam ; declarative, quia jam penitentibus et credentibus peccatorum remissionem tan- quam divinus preeco declarat. Ita teneras conscientias cum peccatorum mole et desperatione luctantes per promissiones G 3 2 Cor. v.19. Gal. vi. 1. Part J. ener we ARIE, Matt. xviii. 18 John xx, 23. Mark ii. 7. Luke v. 21, viii. 47. Rey. iii. 7. 126 ABSOLUTION. evangelicas spe veniz erigimus, jamque pcenitentibus et cre- dentibus remissa peccata pronunciamus. See also Barrow, de Potestate Clavium, p. 58. €). By what other figure beside that of opening and shutting by the Keys does Christ describe the exercise of Church authority ? A. By that of binding and loosing. “ Whose- soever sins ye remit,” says He to His Apostles, “they are remitted; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained.” @. Have men then the power of absolving their fellow-men from sin committed against God ? @. No; not originally and of themselves, but only derivatively and ministerially: for “Who can forgive sins but God alone?” They no more give pardon to the sinner, than the Physician gives health to the sick, or the Judge gives release to the accused: but they apply the means appointed and given by God for its attainment. 1S. Cyprian, de Lapsis, p.129. Nemo se fallat, nemo se decipiat. Solus Dominus misereri potest. Veniam peccatis, que in ipsum commissa sunt, solus potest ille largiri, qui pec- cata nostra portavit, qui pro nobis doluit, quem Deus tradidit pro peccatis nostris. S. Amprose in S. Luc. v. 19. Quis potest peccata di- mittere nisi solus Deus, Qui per eos quoque dimittit, qui- bus dimittendi tribuit potestatem ? (Ὁ. Would it not then be more reverential to God to reserve the office of remitting sins to Him alone? @. Obedience to God is true reverence. It would be grievous disrespect to Him, and great wrong to His heritage, to rescind and refuse His gifts. The Church shews her reverence to God, ABSOLUTION. 127 by obeying Him, and using them; i.e. by re- (παν. mitting and retaining sins *. = 1S. Amprosg, de Peenitentid, lib. i, cap. 2. 6. Sed aiunt se Domino deferre reverentiam, Cui soli remittendorum criminum potestatem reseryent. Immo nulli majorem inju- riam faciunt, quam qui ejus volunt mandata rescindere, com- missum munus refundere. Nam cum Ipse in Evangelio suo dixerit Dominus Jesus: Accipite Spiritum sanctum ; quorum remiseritis peccata, remittuntur eis; et quorum detinueritis, de- tenta erunt; quis est ergo qui magis honorat, utrum qui mandatis obtemperat, an qui resistit ? Ecclesia in utroque seryat obedientiam, ut peccatum et alliget et relaxet. @. But if no one can forgive sins but God, how can men be said to bind or loose? @. The Priest is like a civil’ Judge, who does not sit on the judicial tribunal to make laws, but to administer them. He does not pronounce sentence of forgiveness, in his own name, or on his own authority; but in that of God’, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and upon the con- ditions of repentance and faith prescribed by Christ, and required and ascertained after careful investigation by the Priest in the exercise of his ministry. The penitent must resort to the Priest, and the Priest must examine, exhort, and make trial of his sincerity. Christ’s power is here avuTokoaropiky, or imperial; the Priest’s is διακο- Acts x. 43. vik, or ministerial. It is Curist who raises the 3)" > * sinner from the death of sin*; but when He has Markxvi.l6. raised him by His Spirit, His word, or His 2Cor. v. 20, ministry, He further says to His ministers, “ Loose John xi. 43, him, and let him go.” oe 1 F, Mason, de Ministerio, v. 10. Absolutio non est de- claratoria tantum, est etiam judicatoria : Sacerdotem judicem G A Part J. ——" \ ἘΞ - Matt. vii. 6. Rey. iii. 7. 128 ABSOLUTION. esse fatetur Apologia Ecclesia Anglicane (non longé a prin- cipio) ;, requiritur autem judicium non discretionis modo sed authoritatis etiam et potestatis ; siquidem persone ab- solvendee fidem suam et peenitentiam palam profitentur, hic est cause cognitio; dein Minister iisdem peccatorum indulgen- tiam declarat et obsignat ; hie est sententia: dictio- * S. Curys. in S. Joann. p. 923, Savil. Πατὴρ καὶ 6 Υἱὸς καὶ τὸ ἅγιον Πνεῦμα πάντα οἰκονομεῖ, 6 δὲ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἑαυτοῦ δανείζει γλῶσσαν καὶ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ παρέχει χείρα. S. Amsrost, de Peenitentia, cap. 2.- Munus Spiritis Sancti est Officium Sacerdotis ; jus autem Spiritas Sancti in solvendis ligandisque criminibus est. Cap.8. Omnia dedit Christus discipulis suis; sed nulla in his hominis potestas est, ubi divini muneris gratia viget. * S. Aue. Serm. οοχου. Quatriduano mortuo dicitur, Lazare, prodi foras. Excitat Dominus, si cor tangit. Per se excitat, per discipulos solvit. @). Are then all who are absolved by Christ’s minister pardoned by Christ? or are ali they who are condemned by Christ’s minister condemned by Christ ? ; A. No; ἃ right sentence is the only one which Christ has authorized, and the only one which He will ratify, by giving it validity, spiritually and internally Ὁ. “ Clavis potestatis nihil operatur sine clave scientie’.” The key of knowledge or discretion is necessary to give effect to that of power. No one can be admitted through the door of Pardon, who has not passed through that of Penitence. Christ alone “openeth, and no man shutteth ; and shutteth, and no man openeth ;” and He turns the key in the hand of His minister only when it is moved aright. 1 Hooker, VI. 1v.2. Whether they remit or retain sins, whatsoever is done by way of orderly and lawful proceeding, the Lord Himself hath promised to ratify. ABSOLUTION. 129 * Petrus Asitus, de Tyr. Pont. cap. v. p. 107, ex Cuap. Wesselio. 2a @. If this be so, is not the sentence of the Priest superfluous ? @. No; for God, in this as in other cases, is Wisd. xvi.7. pleased to work by means, and to use the agency 7°"): Τ' of His creatures, especially of men, as instruments See above, in conferring His benefits upon other men; and ae δ though His power is not tied to means, yet, when He has appointed certain means for dispensing His grace, our salvation is restricted to the due and reve- rent use of them. He remits the punishment of o7i- ginal sin* by means of the Sacrament of Baptism ; Acts ii. 38. and in the case of actual sin, He confers the grace ἔλιν τον of His own pardon by the instrumentality’ of ὁ--ἴ. priestly Absolution *, ordinarily and where it may be had, and whenever justly pronounced and duly received ; and thus He makes repentance ayail- able to the true penitent, through the declaration and pronunciation of pardon by the Minister of Christ, acting by His authority, at His command, and by His power. Absolution does not give repentance, but makes it effectual; as the loosing of Lazarus did not give him /ife, but the full and John xi. 43, free use of it. an 1S. Amprosg, de Peenit. lib. i. cap. 8. Cur presumitis aliquos a colluvione diaboli per vos mundari posse? Cur baptizatis, si per hominem peccata-dimitti non licet ? In Baptismo utique remissio peccatorum omnium est : quid in- terest, utrum per pcenitentiam, an per lavacrum hoc jus 510] datum sacerdotes vindicent? Unum in utroque mysterium est. S. Ασα. Tractat. in S. Joann. xi. ili. p. 1815. Regene- ratio spiritualis una est, sicut generatio carnalis una est: sicut ad nativitatem carnalem valent muliebra viscera ad semel G 5 Parr I. ——_— -|.-..-.0ῳὈὨ 130 ABSOLUTION. pariendum, sic ad nativitatem spiritualem valent viscera Ecclesiz, ut semel quisque baptizetur. Ibid. p. 1830. Quomodo non caruit populus Israel pres- sura Aigyptiorum, nisi cum yenisset ad mare Rubrum, sic pressuraé peccatorum nemo caret nisi cum ad fontem Bap- tismi venerit. P. 2070. Propter hoc etiam sugens parvulus ἃ matre piis manibus ad Ecclesiam fertur ne sine Baptismo exeat et in peccato quo natus est moriatur. Orrice for Public Baptism of Infants in the Church of England and Ireland. We call upon Thee for this infant, that he coming to Thy Holy Baptism, may receive remission of his sins by spiritual regeneration. . . . It is certain that chil- dren which are baptized, dying before they commit actual sin, are undoubtedly saved.—Orrice of Private Baprism. Seeing now that this Child is by Baptism regenerate and grafted into the Body of Christ’s Church. Orper of Con- FIRMATION. Almighty and everliving God, Who hast youch- safed to regenerate these Thy servants by Water and the Holy Ghost, and hast given unto them forgiveness of all their sins. WarerLanp, Regeneration stated and explained, Works, vi. p. 356. 2 F. Mason, de Ministerio, v. 12. Minister est efficar Dei instrumentum ad remissionem efficiendam, et preco ad pro- mulgandam. ... Ministri tanquam viva Dei instrumenta Deo cooperantia primo animas ad credendum et pcenitendum perducunt, deinde iisdem peccatorum remissionem ex officio idque secundum Christi institutum annunciant. Quod munus quoties qua decet reverentia preestatur, singularis benedictio a Deo expectari potest. 3S. Amprose, de Cain et Abel, ii. 4. Remittuntur pec- cata per officium sacerdotis sacrumque ministerium. S. Hieron ad Esai. iii. Secunda post naufragium tabula Peenitentia est—See Form of Assoxurion in the Visitation of the Sick. Homity on Common Prayer, p. 330. (ed. 1822.) Abso- lution hath the promise of forgiveness of sins. Bp. Jewext, Apol. ii. Sententiam quameumque ministri ad hune modum tulerunt, Deus ipse comprobat. Abp. Cranmer on the Power of the Keyes, Catech. p. 202. ABSOLUTION. 131 God hath given the keyes of the kingdom of heaven, and authority to forgyve sin, to the ministers of the Church. And when the minister does so, then I ought stedfastly to believe that my sins are truly forgyyen me.—Compare CRANMER’s Works, iv. p. 283, ed. Jenkyns. Bp. Sparrow, Rationale, p. 14, ed. 1704. If our confes- sion be serious and hearty, this absolution is effectual, as if God did pronounce it from heaven: so says the Confession of Saxony, and Bohemia, and the Augsburgh Confession, (xi. xii. xiii.) and so says St. Chrysostom in his Fifth Homily on Esay, “ Heaven waits and expects the Priest’s sentence here on earth ; and what the servant rightly binds or looses on earth, that the Lord confirms in heaven.” St. Augustine and St. Cyprian, and general Antiquity, say the same. Hooker, VI. vi. 8. Bp. Monracue, Appello Cesarem, 25. Protestants hold that Priests have power, not only to pronounce, but to give, remission of sins. Cmittinewortn, p. 409. (Serm. vii.) Come to your spiritual physician, not only as to a learned man, expevienced in the Scriptures, as one that can speak quieting words to you, but asto one who hath Authority delegated to him from God Himself, to absolve and acquit your sins. (0. What are the effects produced by Absolu- tion, as respects the relation of the person ab- solved to the Visible Church? Q. First a declarative one; for, even though the penitent simmer may indeed be pardoned by God without Absolution, yet he is not regarded so to be in the eye of the Church without the sacerdotal declaration of it; just as the lepers among the Jews, when healed, were not regarded as clean, and restored as such to society, till they had been pronounced to be clean by the Priest. @. Is not some other visible effect produced by absolution ? A. Yes. When a person under Church cen- 6 6 CHapP. XIV. —_— Levit. xiii. 17—23. xiv, 2. Matt. viii. 4. Luke xvii. Parr. I. —_ +, - 1382 ABSOLUTION. sures is, on his repentance, reconciled to the Church by absolution, he is restored to ἃ partici- pation in the Holy Communion, and in the other means of grace in the Church, which is the De- pository of Grace’ as well as the House of Dis- cipline’. 1 See above, p. 32. . * S. Aueustiy, de Disciplina Christ. vi. p. 977. Dicente Scriptura, Accipite disciplinam in domo discipline, (where Ecclus. li. 31. 36, is called ‘ Scriptura, though an Ecclesias- tical book only ; see above, p. 56.)—Discipline domus est Ecclesia Christii—S. Aue. de Moribus Eccl. i. 1146. See the citation from Peter Lombard in Hooker, VI. νι. ‘8. Albeit a man be already cleared before God, yet he is not in the face of the Church so taken, but by virtue of the priest’s sentence, who likewise may be said to bind by im- posing satisfaction, (and by censures constraining to amend their lives he doth more than declare and signify what God hath wrought. VI. vr. 5.) and to loose by admitting to the Holy Communion. @). These are visible effects; but what influ- ence has absolution on a man’s relation to the Invisible Church ? A. The visible effects lead to invisible results, which follow, as we have seen, from the right use of the means of grace in the Church; but, in ad- dition to the grace conveyed by these means, the true penitent, for whose benefit absolution was Luke vii. 47 mainly intended, will derive great spiritual com- —50. Luke xxiv. 4 fort and assurance from it. @. In what respects? A. First, in obeying God, by using the ordi- 9. ον. ν.18 nance which God has appointed for his good. —20. Next, he will receive aid and encouragement in his own supplications for pardon and grace, from ABSOLUTION. 133 the further co-operation of the prayers of God’s Minister, and of His Church’, that his sins may be forgiven, and his fidelity confirmed; and he will feel his scruples removed’, and his faith, hope, and love to God increased by an assurance of par- don from God, delivered to him by His ambassa- dor *, authorized and commanded to act in His Name. And thus he is openly and effectually re- admitted by Absolution into the Kingdom of Heaven. 1S. Amsrose, De Peenitentid, ii. c. 10. Fleat pro te Mater Ecclesia, et culpam tuam lachrymis lavet.—Amat Christus ut pro uno multi rogent. TertuLuian, De Pen. c. 9. 3 Hooker, VI. v1.14. The last and sometimes hardest to be satisfied by repentance are our own minds ; are we not bound, then, with all thankfulness to acknowledge His infinite goodness whom it hath pleased ( VI. νι. 17) to ordain for men’s spiritual comfort consecrated persons, who by sentence of power and authority given from above, may as it were out of His mouth ascertain timorous and doubtful minds, ease them of their scrupulosities, leave them settled in peace, and satisfied of God’s mercy to them? 3. Hooker, VI. vi. 5. Having first the promises of God for pardon generally unto all offenders penitent ; and for our own unfeigned meaning the infallible testimony of a good conscience, then the sentence of God’s appointed officer and vicegerent to approve the quality of what we have done, and as from his tribunal to assoil us of any crime, I see no cause but we may rest ourselves very well assured touching God’s most merciful pardon and grace. Cuap. XIV. > ν 134 SACERDOTAL INTERCESSION CHAPTER XV. PRIVILEGES IN THE CHURCH. Sacerdotal Intercession and Benediction. €). Wuar other benefits, besides those already considered, of doctrine, the sacraments, and the exercise of the keys, do we derive from God through the ministry of the Church ? A. Those of sacerdotal Intercession (ἔντευξις) and Benediction (εὐλογία). @. You speak of sacerdotal Intercession ; what do you understand by that term ? &. I mean by it the act of the Minister praying for the people, and presenting their prayers to God’. * Abp. Porrer on Church Government, ch. v. To present the people’s prayers to God, and to intercede with Him to bless them, has always been reckoned an essential part of the Sacerdotal Office. €). What authority have we for believing that the prayers of special persons, as of Christian Ministers, have any peculiar efficacy with God ? A. The authority of God’s own Word, and the records therein contained of the Patriarchal, Mosaic, and Christian Dispensations '. 1 Hooxer, V. xxv. 8. As the place of public prayer is a circumstance in the outward form thereof which hath moment to help devotion, so the Person much more with whom the people of God do join themselves in action, as with him that standeth and speaketh in the presence of God for them. The authority of his calling is a furtherance, because if God have so far received him into favour as to impose upon AND BENEDICTION. 135 him by the hands of men that office of blessing the people Cuapr. in His Name, and making intercession to Him in theirs, XV. which office he hath sanctified with His own most gracious promise (Numbers vi. 23), and ratified that promise by mani- fest actual performance thereof, when (2 Chron, xxx. 27) others before in like place have done the same; is not his very Ordination a seal, as it were, to us that the self-same Divine Love that hath chosen the Instrument to work with, will by that instrument effect the thing whereto He ordained it, in blessing His people, and accepting the prayers which His servant offereth up unto God for them ὃ @. To speak, first, of the efficacy of sacerdotal Intercession in Patriarchal times, can you give examples of it from Holy Writ ? A. Yes. God says to Abimelech, that He would heal him, when Abraham had prayed for him, “for he is a prophet.” He says to Job’s Gen. xx. 7. friends, “My servant Job shall pray for you, He xlii. 8 for him will I accept’? Abraham and Job ini: 45 the Patriarchal dispensation, were not only Fathers Gen. xxii. 3. but Priests. The Priesthood in that dispensation 7°” ** was in the first-born of each family in hereditary succession. 1 Bp. Anprewes, v. 355. It is an opinion very erroneous, that we have no other use of the Apostles of Christ and their successors, but only for preaching ; whereas, as it is a thing no less hard to pray well than to preach well, so the people reap as great benefit by the Intercession of their Pastors which they continually make to God, both privately and publicly, as they do by their preaching. For this cause Isa. 1xii. 6, 7. the Priests are called the Lord’s Remembrancers, because they (See Mar- put God in mind of His people, desiring Him continually alice to help and bless them with things needful; for God hath a note.] greater respect to the prayers of those who have a spiritual charge, than to those that are of the common sort. Thus the Lord would have Abimelech deal well with Abraham, and deliver him his wife, ‘because he is a Prophet, and ῬΆΗΤ I, eas Num. xvi. 48. Joel ii. 17, 18 1 Kings xiii. 6. 196 SACERDOTAL INTERCESSION should pray for him that he may live.’ So to the friends of Job the Lord said, ‘ My servant Job shall pray for you, and I will accept him.’ (Sermon on Luke xi. 1.) 2 Bp. Birson, on the Perpetual Government of Christ’s Church, p. 37, ed. 1842. God did consecrate the first- born of their family as holy to Himself to be Priests in His Church. Scuttetus in Jobi. 4. Sucrificabat Job tanquam Primo- genitus, et Pater familias ut ante Legem fieri solebat. And see Bp. Patrick and Mercer on Job xlii. 8. Jobus sacerdos a Deo eligitur. See Gen. xiv. 18. xviii. 19. xx. 7. xxi. 33. xxvi. 25. xxxiii. 20. Psalm ev. 22. Heb. vii. 7. 2 Pet. ii. 5.7. Jude 14. @. Have we further evidence of the efficacy of sacerdotal Intercession in the Mosaic Dispen- sation also ? @. Yes; Aaron the Priest’ stood between the dead and the living, (as Moses commanded him by God’s order,) and the plague was stayed. The Lord says by the Prophet Joel, “ Let the Priests, the Ministers of the Lord, weep between the porch and the altar, and let them say, Spare thy people, O Lord, .... and then will the Lord pity His people.” ' Bp. Anprewes, Sermons, y. 231. Prayer is good, and that Phinehas’ Prayer. Phinehas was a Priest, the son of Eleazar, the nephew of Aaron. -So as there is virtue, as in the prayer, so in the person that did pray, in Phinehas him- self.... Every Priest being taken from among men, and ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer prayers ; the prayers he offereth he offereth out of his office, and so, even in that respect there is, ceteris paribus, a more force and energy in them, as coming from him whose calling it is to offer them, than in those that come from another whose calling it is not so to do. (Ὁ. But have we any evidence of the special AND BENEDICTION. 137 virtue of priestly Intercession under the Christian Se Dispensation ? Eom @. Yes; St. James says, “Is any sick among 15. you? let him call for the Elders of the Church, and ae : 24. let them pray over him: and the prayer of faith ere shall save the sick: and if he have committed 160. sins, they shall be forgiven him.” And in the Book of Revelation, the four-and-twenty Elders fall down before the Lamb, having golden vials full of odours,” (or incense,) “which are the prayers of saints.” So that Priests pray with and for the people, and “it is the office of the Holy Spirit to set apart persons for the duty of the Ministry, ordaining them to intercede between God and His people, and send up prayers to God for them '.” 1 Bp. Pearson, on the Creed, Art. viii. Abp. Porter, on the Church, chap. vy. Binenam, Antiq. 11. xix. 15. Tt was one act of the Priest’s office to offer up the sacrifice of the people’s prayers, praises, and thanksgivings, to God, as their mouth and orator, and to make intercession to God for them. Another part of the office was, in God’s name, to bless the people, particularly by admitting them to the bene- fit and privilege of remission of sins by spiritual regeneration or baptism. ev, v. 8. @. But is not ail Priestly Intercession super- seded and taken away by the Intercession of Christ ? A. There is indeed to us but One Mediator be- John x. 9. tween God and man, Christ Jesus; and all inter- ote ii. δ. cessions are available only by and through Him '; Meb. vi. 25. but the intercession of His Ministers, acting in ix. 34. His name, and by His authority and appoititment, may be considered to be, in a certain sense, His act and His Intercession ?. 198 SACERDOTAL INTERCESSION 1S. Aue. c. Ep. Parmen. ii. 16. 3 Corrrerius in Const. Apost. 11. xxy. p. 240. Warer- Land, Works, vii. p. 349. Authorized ministers perform the office of proper Evangelical Priests in the Commu- nion Service, in three ways :—1]. as commemorating ; 2. as handing up, if I may so speak, those prayers and services of Christians to Christ our Lord, Who, as High Priest in heaven, recommends the same in heaven to God the Father ; 8. as offering up to God all the faithful who are under their care and ministry, and who are sanctified by the Spirit. In these three ways the Christian Officers are priests or Li- turgs to very excellent purposes far above the /egal ones, in asense worth the pursuing with the utmost zeal and assi- duity. Ricuarp Baxrer, Christian Directory, p. 714, folio ed. 1673. Christ's Ministers are to be the Guides of the Con- gregation in Public Worship, and to stand between them and Christ in things pertaining to God as subservient to Christ in his Priestly Office ; and so both for the People, and in their names, to put up the public Prayers and Praises of the Church to God. It is their duty to administer to them, as in the name and stead of Christ, His Body and Blood ; and to subserve Christ, especially in His Priestly Office, and to be their agent in offering themselves to God. @. You spoke of Sacerdotal Benediction, what do you intend by this expression ? A. I mean the act of the Bishop or Priest pre- senting persons to God by Prayer’, (and thus being an act of Intercession, of which we have already spoken,) and imploring and pronouncing His blessing upon them. 1S. Ασα. Epist. cxlix. 17. Interpellationes (ἐντεύξεις, intercessions, 1 Tim. ii. 1. on which passage he is comment- ing) fiunt cum populus Jenedicitur; tune enim Antistites velut advocati susceptos suos per mantis impositionem miseri- cordissime offerunt Potestati. 5. Aue. de Baptism. iii. 16. Quid aliud est impositio mands nisi oratio super hominem ? Hooker, V. txx. 1. To pray for others is to bless AND BENEDICTION. 139 them for whom we pray, because Prayer procureth the (παρ. blessing of God upon them, especially the Prayer of such Ee as God either most respecteth for their piety or zeal that way, or else regardeth for that their place and calling bindeth them above others unto this duty, as it doth both natural and spiritual Fathers. See Hooxerr, below, p. 141. @. Have then any particular persons a special power of conveying blessings from God to men? @. Yes. It has pleased God that certain indi- viduals, as His Ministers‘, by virtue of their office and appointment from Him, and of the ordaining grace of the Holy Spirit, should communicate His blessings which are given by Him through the ministry of man to all who by faith and love have the capacity of receiving them. 1S. Curysosr. ii. 222, ed. Savil. ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ 6 προ- εστὼς δίδωσιν εἰρήνην, καὶ τοῦτο Χριστοῦ τύπος ἐστί καὶ δεῖ μετὰ πάσης αὐτὴν δέχεσθαι τῆς προθυμίας. Bp. Taytor, Preface to Apology for Authorized and Set Forms of Liturgy, Works, vii. p. 307. The blessings of religion do descend most properly from our spiritual fathers, and with most plentiful emanation. And this hath been the religion of all the world, to derive very much of their blessings by the Priest’s particular and signal benediction. @. Can you give Examples of this being the case from the Old Testament ? @. Yes; Melchizedek, the type of Christ, Gen.xiv.18, blessed Abraham. “The Lord spake unto Moses, a ΡΞ, saying, Speak unto Aaron and unto his sons, say- |”. ,, ing, On this wise ye shall bless the children of &. " Israel, saying unto them, The Lord bless thee, 3¢°"""?" and keep thee: the Lord make His face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee: the Lord lift up His countenance upon thee, and give thee Part I. ἘΠΞΞΞΘῚ -Ὡ-- Deut. xxi. 5, xxvii. 1]. 1 Chron. xxiii. 13. Matt. x. 13. Luke x. 5. John xiv. 27. Rom. xv. 33. xvi. 20. 1 Cor.i. 3. 2 Cor. i. 2. Gal. i. 3. Eph. i. 2. 2 Cor. xiii. ae 1 Thess. v. 28 2 Thess. iii. Philem, 3. 140 SACERDOTAL INTERCESSION peace. And they shall put My Name upon the children of Israel; and J will bless them”? And again, “ The priests, the sons of Levi, shall come near; for them the Lord thy God hath chosen to bless in the Name of the Lord.” (Ὁ). Can you give similar Examples from the New Testament ὃ a. Yes. Our Lord thus charged both His Apostles and His seventy Disciples, “ Into what- soever house ye enter, first say, Peace be to this house. And if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it; if not. it shall turn to you again.” And Christ says, “ Peace I leave with you, My peace I give unto you.” And in conformity with these words the Apostles of Christ imparted their benediction to individual 2. Christians and Christian Churches, not only by ' word of mouth, but in their letters also‘. ‘ 1 S. Curysosrom, ap. Damascen. Par. Sac. ii. p. 514. Grorce Hersert, Country Parson, chap. xxxvi. The Country Parson wonders that the Blessing the people is in so little use with his brethren, whereas he thinks it not only a grave and reverend thing, but a beneficial also. That which the Apostles used in their writings, nay, which our Saviour Himself used, Mark x. 16, cannot be vain and superfluous. But this was not proper to Christ, or the Apostles only, no ~ more than to be a spiritual Father was appropriated to them. --+ But the Parson first values the gift, and then teacheth his Parish to value it. The same is to be observed in writing letters also. ®. By what significant action has the com- munication of spiritual grace and blessing to sin- gle individuals been always accompanied in the Church ? AND BENEDICTION. 141 @. By laying on of hands upon the head of the recipient of the benediction '. 1 See references on the next question. (Ὁ. In what rites and offices of the Church is it imparted in this manner ? @. In the Confirmation * of those who have been baptized,—wherein spiritual weapons are given to those who enlisted themselves as soldiers of Christ at their baptism ;—in the reception or re-admission of reconciled sinners’; and in the making, or- daining, and consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons’. 1 In dlessing, Gen. xlviii. 14. Matt. xix. 15. Mark x. 16. Ordaining, Num. viii. 10. 20. xxvii. 18. Acts vi. 6. xiii. 3. 1 Tim. iy. 14. vy. 22. 2 Tim. i. 6. Confirming, Acts viii. 17. xix. 6. S. Hieron. ady. Lucif. 4. Ad eos qui longe in minoribus urbibus per presbyteros et diaconos baptizati sunt, Episcopus ad invocationem Sancti Spiritis manum impositurus excurrit. See Hooker, V. 1xvr. Hammonp, De Confirmatione, iv. 851. Bp. Tayxor, χρίσις τελειωτικὴ, xi. 215. Comerr, ili. 45]. ° 'S. Hieron. adv. Lucif. 11. 173. Recipio pcenitentem per mantis impositionem et invocationem Spirittis Sancti. Concil. Nicen. 8, 9. Antioch. 17. 22.—S. Aue. ix. 267. Hooker, VII. vi. 5. 3 Concil. Nic. c. 19. Chaleed. ο. 15. S. Hreron, in Esai. ο. 58. χειροτονία, id est, ordinatio clericorum non solum ad imprecationem vocis sed ad impo- sitionem impletur mants; ne scilicet vocis imprecatio clan- destina clericos ordinet nescientes. Hooker, V. rxvi. 1. With prayers of spiritual and per- sonal benediction the manner hath been in all ages to use imposition of hands, as a ceremony betokening our restrained desires to the party whom we present unto God by prayer. Putter, Moderation of the Charch of England, chap. 8, § 9. Our Church doth rightly suppose its ministers have Part I. \ =—’ ] Cor, x. 16. 142 SACERDOTAL INTERCESSION authority given them to declare and pronounce the Divine promises of blessing, with the conditions of receiving the same: and that they have a special commission given them to pray for God’s people and bless them: as the Priests under the Law had commission to bless the people in the name of God, Num. vi. 22. Deut. x. 8. 1 Chron. xxiii. 13. Which practice had nothing ceremonial in it and peculiar to the Law. Wherefore Christ put His hands upon the little children and blessed them, Matt. xix. 13, and commanded His Apostles and Ministers to bless His people, Matt. x. 13. Luke x. 5. And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the greater, Heb. vii. 7. Wherefore for the dignity of the Episcopal Office, the Church doth especially delegate that power and commission te her Bishops, for Confirmation, with imposition of hands, and in Ordination. Neither do our religious Kings refuse the benedictions of the Church’s ministers either as Christians, or as Kings, at their Coro- nations. @. You have spoken of the sacerdotal bene- diction of persons; have we any Scriptural autho- rity for the blessing of particular ¢hings also ? A. Yes. St. Paul says, “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the Communion of the blood of Christ?” hence in the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper the Priest lays his hand on the elements ', when he offers up the prayer of Conse- cration. 1 §. Ave. iii. p. 2290. Accedit verbum ad elementum et fit sacramentum. @. You have given Scriptural examples of the efficacy of Sacerdotal Intercession and Benediction, how, further, does this efficacy appear from the nature and constitution of the Church of Christ ? A. The Christian Church is One spiritual Body (p. 3), and, its members being joined together in this one Body, all their solemn public acts par- AND BENEDICTION. 143 take of this character of Unity; and one of the chief of those acts is the making of their wants known to God, which is Prayer; another is the reception of His grace, by Blessing. Accordingly, Christ Himself has declared that there is special efficacy’ in united Prayer; and for the mainte- nance and public exhibition of this unity in the sacred assemblies of the Church, God has ap- pointed certain Persons to be Orators for the People, who are, as it were, Angeli ascendentes et descendentes*, messengers ascending to Him with Prayer from the people, and descending from Him with Blessing fo them. And if Unity be the divinely appointed character of the Church, God will assuredly bless those means which con- duce to maintain that Unity, and which He has appointed for the attainment of that end. 1S. Aucusr. de Bap. lib. ii. cap. 18. Multum valet ad propitiandum Deum fraterna concordia. “Si duobus ex vobis,” ait Dominus, “ conyenerit in terra, quicquid petieritis, fiet vobis.” Si duobus hominibus, quanto magis duobus populis? Simul nos Domino prosternamus, participamini nobiscum unitatem, participemur yobiscum dolorem, et cha- ritas cooperiat multitudinem peccatorum. 2 Bp. AnpRewEs, v. 355. (Sermon on Luke xi. 2.) Thus much are we to learn from hence, that the Priests are Angeli Domini ewercituum. If Angels, then they must not only descend to the people to teach them the will of God, but ascend to the presence of God to make intercession for the people. Hammonp on Rev. i. 23. They are like Angels ascending and descending between God and His people, in ruling them, in delivering God’s messages to them, and also returning their messages or prayers to God. 4). You say that these Ministrations of Sacer- Cuap. XV. Cus ey Matt. v. 24. xviii. 19, 20, Acts ii. 1, Part I. eee Matt. v. 24. xviii. 19,20. Ἱ ΠΤ τυ. 11. 8: 1Cor. xiii. 1. Exod.xx.25. xxv. 1. 8. 2 Chron. vii Π 1955} Deut. xii 5. 18 xxxi, [1.5 13. Ps. cvii. 32. Is, 11. ὃ. Luke xxiv. ‘Acts ii, 1. 46. iii. 1. Heb. x. 25. Prayer for Unity. Ps. xxvii. 4. Ixxxiv. 1, 2. 144. SACERDOTAL INTERCESSION dotal Intercession and Benediction conduce to maintain Church Unity, how is this the case ? @. Since, as has been shown from Scripture, Public Prayer derives its efficacy from being offered in a spirit of Unity, that is, not only in a special Place, but also in communion with special Persons, and since God has appointed that Public Prayer should be offered, and His Benedictions _be received, in this manner’, it follows that we must be careful not to separate ourselves from such appointed Places and Persons’, lest we for- feit the benefits promised and conferred, in and through them, by Prayer and Blessing, on those “who are gathered together in Christ’s Name,” ἡ. 6. in a spirit of love to Him and to His Church; and we must endeavour to “maintain the Unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace ;” “ not for- saking the assembling of ourselves together,” but being all “ of one heart, and of one soul, united in one holy bond of Truth and Peace, of Faith and Charity, and with one mind and one mouth glorify- ing God.” 1 Hammonn’s Practical Catechism, lib. iii. sect. 2, p. 200. The union of so many hearts being most likely to preyail, and the presence of some godly to bring down mercies on those others whose prayers for themselves have no pro- mise to be heard, especially if performed by a consecrated person, whose office it is to draw nigh unto God, namely, to offer up Prayer, &c. to Him, and to be the ambassador and messenger between God and man, God’s ambassador to the people, in God’s stead beseeching them to be reconciled ; and the people’s ambassador to God, to offer up our requests for grace, for pardon, for mercies to Him. See Hooker, V. XXIV. ? Bineuam’s Antiquities, XVI. 1.5. The fifth Canon (of the Council of Gangra) is to the same effect: “ If any one AND BENEDICTION. 145 teach that the House of God, and the assemblies held therein, are to be despised, let him be anathema.” The sixth forbids all private and irregular assemblies : “ If any hold other assemblies privately out of the Church, and contemning the Church will have ecclesiastical offices performed without a Presbyter licensed by the Bishop, let him be anathema.” @. How was this principle for the maintenance of Unity by these Ministrations practically carried out in the Primitive Church ? @. In the early ages of the Church, Christen- dom consisted of independent Provinces, as has been shown, (above, p. 108,) and these were sub- divided into what are now termed Dioceses, each of which had a Bishop as its Centre of Unity’, the Presbyters of the Diocese being subject to and united with their Bishop, and the People being in communion with their respective Pastors’. And as the Bishop was the Centre of Unity’, for the purposes of diffusing Grace to all, and of joining all together, and of presenting them unitedly to God, so the Cathedral* was the common Mother Church of the whole Diocese; and thus, by per- sonal and local communion, the Faithful of each Diocese were united together as one man in the offices of Public Worship, and were partakers of those Graces‘ which are specially promised by God to those who “ dwell together in Unity.” ' Brncuam, XVI.1.6. The standing rule of the Catholic Church was to have but one Bishop in a Church as the Centre of Unity. 2S. Cyprian, Ep. Ixix. al. Ixvi. ad Florent. p. 168. Ec- clesia sunt plebs sacerdoti adunata, et pastori suo grex ad- herens. Unde scire debes Episcopum in Ecclesia esse, et Ecclesiam in Episcopo. S. Cyprian, Ep. xxvii. al, xxxiii. ad Lapsos, p. 66. Inde Il CHapP. XY. ed Ps. exxxiii. Part I. 146 SACERDOTAL BENEDICTION, &c. per temporum et successionum vices Episcoporum ordinatio et Ecclesiz ratio decurrit, ut Ecclesia super Episcopos con- stituatur, et omnis actus Ecclesie per eosdem prepositos gubernetur. 3 Bp. Gipson, Codex, p. 171. The Cathedral Church is the Parish Church of the whole Diocese. 4 §. Ienatius ad Ephes. v. εἰ ἑνὸς καὶ δευτέρου προσευχὴ ταύτην ἰσχὺν ἔχει, πόσῳ μᾶλλον ἥ τε τοῦ Ἐπισκόπου καὶ πάσης τῆς Ἐκκλησίας; Ad Magnes. μὴ ὑμεῖς μηδὲν ἄνευ ᾿Ἐπισκόπου πράσσετε, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ μία προσευχὴ, μία δέησις. on which passage see Hammonp, iv. 750. Palam est de unitarum Ecclesie Precum beneficio sermonem institui. Hane inquit Unitatem in eo consistere ut omnes Episcopo morem gerant. Hie ἐντὸς τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου εἶναι significat Unitatis illius potissi- mam partem, sic Episcopo ut Capiti concorporari, ut precum Ecclesiasticarum particeps fiat. S. Curysostom, vi. p. 408, Savil. εὔχεσθαι μὲν ἐπὶ τῆς ἰδίας οἰκίας δυνατὸν, οὕτω δὲ εὔχεσθαι ὡς ἐπὶ τῆς ἐκκλη- σίας ἀδύνατον, ὅπου πατέρων πλῆθος τοσοῦτον, ὅπου βοὴ πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν ὁμοθυμαδὸν ἀναπέμπεται---ἐνταῦθα γάρ ἐστι τί πλεῖον, οἷον ἡ ὁμόνοια, ἡ συμφωνία, καὶ τῆς ἀγάπης ὃ σύνδεσμος καὶ αἱ τῶν ἱερέων εὐχαί. See also vi. 668. Prayer for Uniry, in Form of Prayer for Queen’s Ac- cession. On this and the two preceding chapters, consult W. Law’s Three Letters to Bp. Hoadly, i. p. 364 (in the Scholar Armed). See also i. p. 362, on Benediction ; i. p. 368—370, on Intercession ; i. 382—391, 495, on Absolution ; i. p. 500, on Excommunication. SET FORMS OF PUBLIC PRAYER. 147 CHAPTER XVI. PRIVILEGES IN THE CHURCH. Set Forms of Public Prayer. @. Wuar other benefit do we receive through the Church, besides the pure Word of God, the Administration of the Sacraments, Discipline, In- tercession, and Benediction? (Chaps. vi.—xyv.) A. That of sound set Forms of Common or Public Prayer. @. How do we receive them through the Church ? @. Because, even if the Church could exist without them, they could not exist without the Church: that is, they could not exist without stated Times, Places, and Persons, set apart for the exercise of religious worship. @. What authority have we for expecting to receive special benefits from Pudlic Prayer ἢ @. When our Lord described the Temple, He called it a “ House of Prayer ;” and to Public Prayers, as distinguished from Private, a special blessing is promised by Christ Himself: “ Where two or three are gathered together in My Name, there am I in the midst of them ’.” 1 Hooker, V. xxXIv. @. In what way are set Forms of Public Prayer advantageous ? A. Set forms of sound words, as distinguished from extemporaneous Prayers, are free’ from the H 2 CHapP. --- > Matt.xxi.13. Tsa. lvi. 7. Matt. xviii. 20. ᾿ ῬΑ I. - Rom. xii. 6. Above, p- 144. 148 SET FORMS OF PUBLIC PRAYER. danger of offending the majesty of God by irre- levant and irreverent expressions, and “ endless and senseless effusions of indigested prayers, and of thus disgracing the worthiest part of Christian duty towards God’;” they are formed after Christ’s own precept*; they give fervour to the luke- warm, and are a restraint on fanaticism ; they are public, solemn professions of true Religion, which they maintain and keep alive; they preserve un- injured the “proportion of faith,’ τὴν ἀναλογίαν τῆς πίστεως : they deliver the Minister from the peril of pride, and of unduly exalting and dwell- ing upon one doctrine, and depressing and neg- lecting another; they are a standard of preaching, and a rule for hearing; they unite the hearts and voices of Christian men and of Christian congre- gations with each other and with the saints departed; they give public significations of Chris- tian charity for those who cannot or will not communicate in them; they serve to maintain Unity by Unison and Uniformity; they are a sacred anchor, by which the Church is safely moored in the peaceful harbour of Catholic Truth. 1 Bp. Tayxor, vol. vii. p. 285—307. 3 Hooker, V. xxv. 5, ibid. 4. No doubt from God it hath proceeded, and by us it must be acknowledged a work of His singular Care and Providence, that the Church hath evermore held a prescript form of Common Prayer, although not in all things every where the same, yet for the most part retaining still the same analogy. King Cuantes I. Works, Icon Basiliké, chap. xvi. Bp. Butt, Serm. xiii. vol. i. p. 336 3 Hooker, V. xxvi. 2. Who hath left us of His own framing a Prayer which might both remain as a part of the Church Liturgy, and serve as a pattern whereby to frame all our prayers. PART IL. On the Anglican ranch of the Catholic Church. CHAPTER I. CHURCH OF ENGLAND. ITS ORIGIN. @. ‘The Catholic Church is compared by the Christian Fathers to the Sea’, as being diffused throughout all the world; as being, like the Sea, one; as having one name, that of the Catholic Church ; and as containing within it many Catholic Churches with various names, as the Ocean has many various seas and bays within it: is the Cuurcu of ENGLAND one of these Churches ἢ @. Yes. 1S. Turopmit. Antioch. Autolye. ii. 14. See the beautiful comparison of St. Amprosr, Hexaém. iii. 5. Bene Mari plerumque comparatur Ecclesia, &c. S. Amsrose de Benedict. Patriarch. lib. i. cap. 5. Εο- clesia, spectans Hereticorum procellas, et naufragia Jude- orum, tanquam Portus salutis, que expansis brachiis in gre- mium tranquillitatis suze vocet periclitantes, locum fide sta- tionis ostendens. Ecclesiz igitur in hoe seculo tamquam Portus maritimi per littora diffusi occurrunt laborantibus, H 3 Cuap. 1. 150 CHURCH OF ENGLAND. Parr IJ. dicentes esse credentibus refugium preparatum, quo ventis quassata navigia possint subducere. Hooker, III. 1.14. As the main body of the Sea being one, yet within divers precincts hath divers names, so the Catholic Church is in like sort divided into a number of distinct societies, every one of which is termed a Church within itself. @. How do you prove that she is a part of the Catholic Church ? @. Because she is united with it in Origin, in Doctrine, and in Government. (Ὁ. How in Origin ὃ @. By means of the unbroken succession of her Bishops and Pastors, through whom she traces her origin’ from the Apostles, some of whom are recorded to have preached the Gospel in the British Isles. 1 TERTULLIAN, Prescr. Heret. c. 20. Omne genus ad Originem suam censeatur necesse est. Itaque tot et tante Ecclesiz Una est Illa ab Apostolis Prima, ex qua Omnes. Sic omnes Prima et Apostolica dum una omnes probant unitatem. Ibid. Apostoli Ecclesias condiderunt a quibus traducem fidei et semina doctrine cetere Ecclesize mutuate sunt et quotidie mutuantur ut Ecclesie fiant, ac per hoe Apostolice deputantur ut soboles Ecclesiarum A postolicarum. See below, Pt. ii. chap. vi. On the Apostolical Succes- sion in the Church of England. @. You say that the Church of England was founded in the Apostolic age; how is this con- sistent with the opinion sometimes maintained, that its inhabitants were first converted to Chris- tianity by St. Augustine, sent from Rome for that purpose by Pope Gregory the First, at the close of the sixth century (4. ἢ. 596) ὃ @. St. Augustine converted the Saxon inha- ~ ITS ORIGIN. 151 bitants of a part of England’ (Kent), who had invaded that region and dispossessed the ancient British inhabitants; but they relapsed into hea- thenism in a little more than twenty years after the arrival of Augustine’®; and there were Chris- tian Bishops in Britain several hundred years before he landed there *. 1 Abp. BRaMHALL, 1. p. 266-8. 3 Cuurton, Early English Church, chaps. i. ii. See also the Brief Account, in the form of a chronicle, of the Scottish and Italian Missions to the Anglo-Saxons, by the Rey. Ὁ. I. Hearn, Lond. 1845, p. 4. 3. Gixrpas, Britannus Sapiens, (seculi vit) de Excid. Brit. init. See below, p. 154. CrakanTHorrE, Defens. Eccl. Anglic. p. 25. Amplifi- cavitAugustinus inter Anglos Ecclesiam, non fundavit, @. What proof have you of this ? @. Eusebius’ asserts that some of the Apostles passed over to Britain. Tertullian, who lived in the second century after Christ, speaks of “ Bri- tannorum inaccessa Romanis loca, Christo vero sub- dita.’ Origen, who lived in the next age, speaks of Britain consenting in the worship of the true God. And St. Alban was martyred under Dio- cletian (A.D. 305), nearly three hundred years before the landing of St. Augustine. 1 TerTUuLt. c. Judeos, c. vii. Evses. Preep. Evang. iii. 7. Ortcrn, Hom. in Ezek. iy. in S. Luc. i. hom. 6. See also S. Curysostom, tom. ii. p. 499. v. 919. vi. 638. viii. 3, ed. Savil. @®. Since, then, there were Christians in England even from the Apostolic times, can you further show that there were Christian Bzshops ὃ A. Yes; it follows, first from the very nature of the case. Ecclesia in Episcopo was the motto of Η 4 Cuar. I. Part II. 152 CHURCH OF ENGLAND. primitive Christianity: and also, Ubi Ecclesia, ibi Episcopus*. There was in those ages no idea of such a thing as a Church without a Bishop ’. 1S. Icnar. ad Trall. vii. ad Phil. iv. ad Smyrn. vii. S. Cyprian, Ep. 66. p. 168, ed. Fell. Scire debes Epi- scopum in Ecclesia esse, et Ecclesiam in Episcopo ; et si qui cum Episcopo non sunt, in Ecclesia non esse. Ὁ Graze, ad S. Irenzeum, p. 199. Casauson, Exerc. Baron. pp- 307-8, ed. 1654. See above, pt.i. ch. x.’ @. Does the existence of British Bishops ante- cedent to Augustine appear from any other evi- dence ? A. Yes. British Bishops were present at the earliest Councils of the Church; viz. at the Council of Arles’, a.p. 314, (At which time there were three Metropolitans in Britain, as there were three Provinces, one Maxima Czsa- riensis, the other Britannia Prima, the third Britannia Secunda; the seat of the Metropolitan of the first being York; of the second, London; of the third, Caerleon on Usk in Monmouthshire.) Again, at the Council of Sardica’, a. Ὁ. 347; and again, probably, at that of Ariminum’, a. Ὁ. 359; and there were, we know, seven British Bishops and a British Archbishop, when Augustine landed in England *. ? Concert. ArExat. Labbe, i. p. 1480. (Contra Dona- tistas, Concilium conyocante Constantino M.) to which are attached the following subscriptions :— Eborius, Episcopus de civitate Eboracensi, provincia Bri- tannia.—Restitutus, Episcopus de civitate Londinensi, pro- vincia suprascripta. — Adelphinus, Episcopus de civitate colonia Londinensium, (Colonia Lindi, Lincoln. Bingham, ix. 6, 20. Cave, Hist. Lit. i. 350.) exinde sacerdos Presbyter, Arminius Diaconus. ITS ORIGIN. 153 - From the above signatures it is clear that there were then in England the three Orders of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. Abp. Ussuer, Brit. Eccles. Antiq. p. 73. Brerewoop, in Abp. Ussher’s Original of Bishops and Metropolitans, Oxford, 1641. Craxanruorpe, Defens. Eccles. Anglic. p. 28. Bp. Srirtinerceer, Orig. Brit. p. 78, ed. 1837. 2S. Aruanas. Apol. ii. init. Brneuam, IX. 1. 5. 3 Surp. Sever. H. S. ii. ad fin. 4 Gixrrip, De Gest. Britt. viii. Eo tempore quo Augus- tinus Monachus in Britanniam missus est a Gregorio Chris- tianismus viguit, cum fuerint in ea septem Episcopatus et unus Archiepiscopatus. Vide Bed.ii.2. The Archbishop was the Menevensis Episcopus (Bp. of St. David’s). Concerning the transfer of the archiepiscopal see, first from Caerleon to Llandaff, and thence to St. David’s, Sir H. Spetman thus speaks: Discesserat hee dignitas archiepiscopalis a Caer- legione ad Landaviam sub Dubritio, primo Landavensis ecclesize archiepiscopo, a. Ὁ. 512; mox a Landavia ad Mene- viam cum S. Davide proximo ejus successore, annos plus minus 80 ante istam Augustini synodum, translationi aspirante Arthuro rege invictissimo ; sed retento pariter Caerlegionis titulo (Wikis, Concil. i. p. 24, not.). See below, chap. iii. p. 165—169. Bishop Beveripce, ad Canon. Concil. Niczn. i. p. 58. Ecclesia Britannica erat αὐτοκέφαλος, nulli extraneo Epi- scopo sed suo soli Metropolitano subjacens. It may here be added, that not only the Britons, but also the Scots and Picts had received the Gospel before the time of Augustine. See Mason, de Minist. ii. 4. Cuap. 1. Part II. —— 154 CHURCH OF ENGLAND CHAPTER II. CHURCH OF ENGLAND INDEPENDENT OF ROME. Period before the Arrival of St. Augustine. @. THERE were, then, Christians and Chris- tian Bishops in Britain from the Apostolic times * ; but can you show, further, that the British Church did not derive its origin from that of Rome, and was not dependent on it ? @. There is no evidence whatever of any such dependenee. No trace whatever can be found of the Pope of Rome having exercised any ecclesias- tical authority in England for the first siz hun- dred years after Christ’; and it is certain that England did not receive her Christianity at first through Rome; indeed there is very good ground for believing that the Church of England is some years older than that of Rome ἧ. 1 Brneuam, Antiquities, IX. vi. 20. Indeed it would ap- pear that there were more Bishops in England and Wales at the time of the Saxon Invasion [i. e. 150 years before the arrival of Augustine], than there are at this day. 2 Abp. BramMuHAtt, p. 158. 3 CraxantuorPE, Defensio Eccl. Ang]. p. 28. De Britan- nica Ecclesia nostra liquidum est fuisse eam aliquot ante Romanam annis fundatam. . . . Glaciali (inquit Gildas) frigore rigenti insulze (de Britannia agit) Christus suos radios, id est sua precepta, indulget, tempore ut scimus summo Tiberii Cesaris. Supremum Tiberii tempus incidit in xvii. kal. April. A.D. xxxix. natalitia vero Romane Ecclesie in xy.kal. Feb. A. D. xly. (teste Baronio). Disce jam hine sapere. Disce Romanam Ecclesiam Britannic nostra non matrem sed INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 155 sororem atque sororem integro quinquennio minorem. See also F. Mason, de Ministerio, p. 72. Apparet Evangelium in Britannia citius quam Rome emicuisse. @. Give evidence of this non-reception of Christianity, in the first instance, from Rome. A. To omit other proofs, we may appeal to the English word Church’, which is derived, as has been before said (part i. chap. i.), from the Greek Κυριακὴ: a term which no Roman ever applied to the Church (which he called Ecclesia, and by no other name): and it is not credible that, if the Church of England had been derived from Rome, it should have been designated by a title foreign to Rome. ? Bp. Beveriper, in Canon xy. Concil. Ancyran., and on Art. xix.— Routh, Rel. Sacr. iii. 489. It is probable that this word is due immediately to the Scottish and Saxon missionaries under Arpan, who followed the Eastern Church in the time of observing Easter. @. Yes. The word Church is, no doubt, of Greek origin, and is unknown to the Roman tongue ; is there any other proof that the English Church was derived from some country where the Greek, and not Roman, language was spoken ? @. Yes. The facts that the British Church, and indeed a great portion of the Saxon Church, from A.D. 635 till a. Ὁ. 664, followed the Asiatic custom in keeping Kaster, and in its manner of administering Baptism—(points in which they differed from the Roman Church, as St. Augustine himself said in his speech to the British Bishops, adding, that there were also other things “ que agitis moribus nostris contraria *”’)—seem to show that the Church of England was derived, through H 6 Cuap. 11. —— 156 CHURCH OF ENGLAND Parr ll. a Greek or Asiatic channel’, from that whence the 3. Roman itself came, namely, from the Mother of all Isa. ii. Micah iv. 2. Churches, the Church of Jerusalem ὃ. Luke xxiv. ΕἾ 1 Bena, Ecclesiast. Histor. Gentis Anglorum, ii. c. 2. > Sir Rocer Twispen, Historical Vindication of the Church of England in point of Schism, p. 7. Crakantuorpr, Def. Eccl. Angl. p. 24. 3. Concix. Const. (i. 6. the second General Council) in Synodic. Epist. Theodoret. v. 9. μήτηρ ἁπασῶν τῶν ἐκκλη- σιῶν ἡ ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις. ὃ. Hieron. in Esai. ii. In Hieru- salem primum fundata Ecclesia tofius Orbis Ecclesias seminavit. Bp. Butt, ii. p. 192. 199. Ed. 1827. @. The Church of England, then, was not planted by Rome: was it in any way dependent on it? P. 154, @. As has been before said’, for the first six centuries after Christ, no ecclesiastical authority was exercised in Britain by the Bishop of Rome. So true is this, that Gregory himself, about a. p. 590, being told that certain children whom he saw at Rome were “de Britannid insula,’ did not even know ’, but enquired for information, whether Britain was Pagan or Christian? and the British Bishops declared to St. Augustine that they were under a Metropolitan of their own, the Bishop of Caerleon, and that they knew nothing of the Bishop of Rome as an ecclesiastical superior *. 1 Inert, Church History. Origines Anglicane, ii. p. 488. ? Jon. Dirac. Vit. Gregor. i. c. 21, Gree. M. Opera, tom. iv. p. 8. 3 See speech of Dinoth, Abbot of Bangor, to Augustine ( Wilkins, Concilia, i. p. 26, compared with Bingham, IX.i.11). And even as late as a. ἢ. 787, the legate of Pope Adrian the First writes to him from England thus: {7ὲ scitis, a tempore Sancti Augustini Pontificis sacerdos nudlus illue (i. e. to INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 157 England) missus est nisi nos. ( Wilkins, Concil. i. 146.) And Gyap, IT. Girald. Cambr. Itinerar. ii. c. 1, states that all the Bishops of ——~——~ Wales received their consecration from their own Metro- politan (Menevensi Antistite) the Bishop of St. David’s, till the time of Henry I. “nulla penitus alii Ecclesiz facta pro- fessione vel subjectione.” Brpa, Eccl. Hist. ii. c. 2. See also above, p. 152; below, chap. iii. (Ὁ. But did not the first General Council, that of Nice in Bithynia (a. D. 325), acknowledge the Bishop of Rome to be Patriarch of the West (Canon 6) ? @. No; the Council of Nice’ recognized the Bishop of Alexandria as having authority over the Churches of Aigypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, as the Bishops of Rome, Antioch, and other patri- archal Churches, had over their own Ecclesiastical Districts respectively, and no further. And the Bishop of Rome’s jurisdiction extended only (see above, pt. i. c. ΧΙ. note, p. 110—112,) to what were called the Suburbicarie Ecclesie’?, that is, to the Churches of middle and southern Italy, Sicily, Sar- dinia, and Corsica : and even the Bishops of Milan, Ravenna, and Aquileia in Italy, were not ordained by, nor dependent on, the Bishop of Rome, for more than six hundred years after Christ. So far, then, from his being Patriarch of the West, the Bishop of Rome’s Patriarchate did not even in- clude all Italy ; for the ordination or confirmation of Metropolitans in a Patriarchate is an essential part of patriarchal power. (See above, p. 114.) ! Canones et Concil. Bruns. p. 16. 2 Rurrin. Hist. Eccles. xi. 6. Apud Alexandriam et in urbe Roma vetusta consuetudo seryetur, ut ille ( Alexandrinus Episcopus) gypti, hic Suburbicariarum Ecclesiarum sollici- tudinem gerat. Ruffinus was a Roman Presbyter, and flou- 158 CHURCH OF ENGLAND Parrll. rished in the next century to the Nicene Council, and ———— therefore his evidence concerning the limits of the Roman Patriarchate, and on the meaning of this Nicene canon, is unexceptionable. The ianguage of the Church historian, Durin, himself a member of the Church of Rome, is very explicit as to this point (viz. the limits of the Roman Patriarchate), as follows. Dorin, de Antig. Eccles. p. 32. Patriarchatus Romani limites non videntur excessisse provincias eas, que Vicario Urbis parebant, dicunturque a Ruffino suburbicarie. Nam extra istas provincias etiam in Italia Metropolitani Episcopos omnes ordinabant, et ipsi ab Episcopis provincie ordina- bantur... At in aliis provinciis minime suburbicariis jus ordinationum pontificem Romanum habuisse probari non potest. Imo constat, non tantum Episcopos omnes a Metro- politanis sed et Metropolitanos ipsos ab Episcopis cujusque provinciz fuisse ordinatos: ergo extra controyersiam esse debet, Rom. pontificem in solis provinciis suburbicariis pri- mum ac precipuum patriarcharum jus habuisse. ... Nihilo- minus tamen successu temporis Romanus Pontifex patri- archattis sui limites, quantum potuit, extendit: ac primo Illyricum ditioni suze per vicarios adjicere conatus est: deinde vero non modo totam Italiam, sed et Gallias atque Hispaniam patriarchattis sui limitibus comprehendi voluit. Durty, de Antiq. Eccles. p. 70. Provincize autem subur- bicariz aliz dici non possunt, quam ille, que circa Romam adjacebant : quae Urbs dicitur ἀντονομαστικῶς. Docet id vei ipsum nomen, quod regiones ab urbe non longe positas signi- ficat, tum etiam imperatoriarum legum auctoritas, in quibus provinciz suburbicariz adpellantur ez, que circa Romam adjacebant. Et procul dissitis ab urbe regionibus, ut Africa, Galliz, et Hispanize, opponuntur. = S. Lronis Opera, ii. p. 452, ed. 1700. The nofe in this edition, published by P. Quesnel, another member of the Church of Rome, proves this. See also on this point the Abbé Frieury, Histoire Ecclésiastique. Bruxelles, 1721. tom. viii. p. 41. Saint Grégoire n’entroit dans ce détail que pour les Eglises qui dépendoient particulicrement du Saint Siége, et que par cette raison on nommoit Suburbicaires : sgavoir celles de la partie méridionale d’Italie, ov il était seul INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 159 Archevéque, celles de Sicile et des autres iles, quoiqu’elles Cuap. 11. eussent de Métropolitains. Mais on ne ¢rouvera pas quil ——~—~ exercat le méme pouvoir immédiat dans les provinces dépendantes de Milan, αἰ Aquilée, ni dans ? Espagne et les Gaules. Archbp. Lavup against Fisher, sect. 25. In ancient times Britain was never subject to the see of Rome; for it was one of the dioceses of the Western Empire (Notitia Prov. Occident. Panciroli, ii, c. 48), and had a Primate of its own ; whence Pope Urban the Second, at the Council of Bari, accounted St. Anselm (of Canterbury) as his own compeer, and said he was the Apostolic and Patriarch of the other world. (Guil. Malmsbur. de Gestis Pontif. Angl. p. 223.) Now the Britons, having a Primate of their own, (which is greater than a Metropolitan,) yea, a Patriarch, if you will, (ibi Cantuariz prima sedes archiepiscopi habetur, qui est totius Anglize Primas et Patriarcha, says William of Malms- bury, in Prol. lib. i. de Gestis Pont. Ang. p. 195,) he could not be appealed from to Rome, by St. Gregory's own doc- trine, Epist. xi. 54, Patriarcha secundum canones et leges prebeat finem. CraxantuorrE, Def. Eccl. Angl. p. 96. Brineuam, Antiq. IX. i. 9—11. Paver on the Church, ii. 538 —543. @. But did not the Council of Arles in Gaul, A.D. 314, at which three British Bishops were present, in their synodical letter to Pope Sylves- ter’, acknowledge him as holding the majores Diceceses ὃ A. Yes, certainly it did; but the term Dio- cese’ did not then mean a Patriarchal Pro- vince, but one of several subdivisions of a Pro- vince; and it is certain that it never understood these majores Dieceses to extend beyond the Sub- urbicarian Churches above mentioned; and the Fathers of that Council never conceived the Bishop of Rome, who was not present there, to have any jurisdiction over themselves, as is clear from 160 CHURCH OF ENGLAND PartIl. their enacting Canons without him, and from the — following words in the same synodical letter, “ Te pariter nobiscum judicante, ceetus noster majore letitia exultasset :; and from the appellation “ frater carissime,” by which they address him. 1 Ep. Synod. Concil. Arelat. i. p. 1426, ed. Labbe, 1671. Placuit ergo, praesente Spiritu Sancto et angelis Ejus, ut et his qui singulos quos movebat judicare proferremus de quiete presenti. Placuit etiam antequam ἃ te qui majores diaceses tenes, per te potissimum omnibus insinuari. The text of both these sentences is corrupt ; for conjectural emendations of the latter, see Bingham, IX. i. 11. ? Suiceri Thesaur. p. 919. Diviso a Constantino imperio latior fuit διοικήσεως appellatio. Tum enim Diecesis non fuit una provincia, sed administratio multarum simul provincia- Tum. ®. But what do you say to the appellate juris- diction given to the see of Rome by the Council of Sardica in Illyria, a.p. 347 (Canons 3, 4, 7) ? A. If given then, we may infer that it was not possessed before, and, whatever it may be, it is therefore not only of human, but not of primitive nor very early institution. But further, the Coun- cil of Sardica, wishing to have means of meeting a particular case, that of St. Athanasius, permits ἢ, but does not require, that a reference may be made, not to the Bishop of Rome generally ’*, but personally to Julius, the then Bishop of that see, if a Bishop thinks himself aggrieved in a judicial matter; and this reference is to be made by the judges who tried the cause; in which case the Bishop of Rome may desire the cause to be re- heard by the neighbouring Bishops, in the country where it arose, and may send assessors to them. So far was the Council of Sardica from giving a INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 161 right of appeal ¢o Rome in the common sense of the term. And further still, it is to be observed, that this Council of Sardica was not a General one; and that the whole of this decree was sub- sequently reversed by a General Council, that of Chalcedon (Can. ix. xvii. xxy.); and lastly, we must remember that the Sardican decrees were never received in this country ἧ. 1 Canones Apost. et Concil. Bruns, p. 90. Ὅσιος ἐπι- σκοπος εἶπε---εἴ τις ἐπισκόπων ἔν τινι πράγματι δόξει κατα- κρίνεσθαι, καὶ ὑπολαμβάνει ἑαυτὸν μὴ σαθρὸν ἀλλὰ καλὸν ἔχειν τὸ πρᾶγμα, ἵνα αὖθις ἡ κρίσις ἀνανεωθῇ, εἰ δοκεῖ ὑμῶν τῇ ἀγάπῃ, Πέτρου τοῦ ἀποστόλου τὴν μνήμην τιμήσωμεν καὶ γρα- φῆναι παρὰ τούτων τῶν κρινάντων ᾿Ιουλίῳ τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ Ῥώμης ὥστε διὰ τῶν γειτνιώντων τῇ ἐπαρχίᾳ ἐπισκόπων, εἰ δέοι, ἀνα- νεωθῆναι τὸ δικαστήριον καὶ ἐπιγνώμονας αὐτὸς παράσχοι. 3. Οκάκαντη. Def. Eccl. Ang. Ad Julium, non ad Papam Romanum ; privilegium Sardicense personale fuit, ideoque cum persona Julii extinctum. 3 This is clearly stated by Casaubon, De Lib. Eccles. p- 223, ad finem ; Abp. Bramhall, ii. p. 583, ed. Oxf. ; Bp. Stillingfleet, Orig. Brit. ch. iii. p. 146; Bingham, ΓΧ. τ. 1]. XVII. ν. 14; Routh, Preef. ad Script. Ecel. p. iii: and also by Romanist writers, as Archbp. de Marca, de Conciliis, vii. c. ii.—iy. Du Pin, Dissert. Eccl. 11. § 8, p. 84. 89, 110, and P. Quesnel, in his edition of Pope Leo’s Works, ii. Ρ. 256, who says, Illi (Sardicensi) Concilio debetur earum appellationum origo, et inde appellationum usui ratio quesita est a Romanis Pontificibus, licet revera nihil de appellationibus decernant Sardicenses Patres, sed tantum retractationis seu reyisionis cause decernendze potestatem faciant Romano Episcopo.—Qu potestas retractationis in ipsa Provincia decernende, etsi jure appellationum longe inferior sit, tre- pidé tamen et dubitanter admodum ab Osio proposita est, qui rem novam canonibus Nicznis minimé consonam, con- stantique adversam consuetudini quasi supplex et honoran- dam 5. Petri memoriam pretendens exoravit ; si vobis placet, Cuap. II. --.--.. .ὄ 162 CHURCH OF ENGLAND ParrII, inquit, Petri Apostoli memoriam honoremus.—Vide ibid. 207,808. Archbp. De Marca, de Concordia, vi. 30, also refutes the notion that this Council gave any right of appeal to Rome— vil. 3, 2. Satis modesté hee lex Synodi Sardicensis observata est usque ad secuium x.—till the time of Gregory VII. who elevated the Legatine authority above that of all Provincial Bishops.— Vide ibid. y. 47. vi. 30, 9. Dupin thus expresses himself on the same subject, Eccles. Dissertat. ii. p. 89. Sciunt omnes quantum sit discrimen inter jus istud revisionis decernende, et jus adpellationis ad- mittendz, nam adpellatio, ut definit Petrus de Marca, causam in inferiori tribunali judicatam ad superiorem transfert, ut litem excutiat, et definiat in suo tribunali, ita ut quamdiu durat adpel- latio, sententia inferioris judicis non possit exsequutioni deman- dari. At nihil simile est in eo privilegio, quod Romano pontifici concedit Synodus Sardicensis.—P. 91. Porro canones isti Sardicenses nunquam in oriente et sero in occidente recepti sunt. De oriente jam constat illo ipso tempore, quo condebantur, orientales episcopos contrarium prorsus sta- tuisse. Deinceps autem tum in concilio Constantinopolitano, tum in Chalcedonensi, tum in Trullano, nullam hujus reyi- sionis mentionem fecerunt, jusseruntque causas omnes synodi provincialis, aut ad summum patriarchalis judicio finiri. In occidente porro post hane synodum adversus disciplinam in ea sancitam reclamarunt Africani, reclamarunt et Galli, ut dicemus infra, imo ne ipsi quidem Itali illos in authoritatem admiserunt.—P. 110. At non ita se gessit Concilium Triden- tinum, nam illud omnem prorsus judicandorum Episcoporum potestatem Episcopis aliis ademit, et Soli Pontifici Romano reservavit sessione vigesima quarta de reform. cap. v. The correspondence of St. Augustin (of Hippo) and the African Bishops with Pope Zosimus, a.p. 418, shows that the Sardican Canons were unknown in Africa in the fifth century, and that Rome was not then acknowledged to have any such appellate jurisdiction as, on the ground of those Sardican Canons, it has since claimed. See Cabassutii Concilia, p. 236. INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 163 CHAPTER III. CHURCH OF ENGLAND INDEPENDENT OF ROME. Mission of St. Augustine. @. The Bishop of Rome exercised no juris- CHP. 11. diction in England during the first six centuries ; can it be justly alleged that he might acquire Patriarchal authority over England by the con- version of the Saxons to Christianity by Augus- tine, sent from Rome by Pope Gregory the First, A.D. 596? @. No. By conversion they became not Gre- yore gory’s, nor Augustine’s, but Curist’s. And fur- © °° ther, Augustine, it is true, converted Ethelbert, king of the Cantii, and the inhabitants of part of his kingdom; but Bertha, his queen, was a Christian already; and there was a Christian Bishop, Liudhard, and a Christian Church in his capital city, Canterbury, before Augustine’s ar- rival’: and even if Augustine had converted the whole Heptarchy, no such right could by that act have been acquired’. If such right were to accrue by conversion, all Christian Churches, and Rome among them, would be subject to “ the Mother of all Churches, the Church of Jerusalem,” (above, p- 156). 1 Bena, Hist. Eccles. i. 25. 2 Archbp. BramuHact, i. 266—268. @. Did the Pope obtain any Patriarchal autho- Parr II. ——~— ,--......0 164 CHURCH OF ENGLAND rity by the ordination of St. Augustine, and of those who were ordained by him ? @. No. This plea is, under another form, the same as that of conversion, for that supposes the planting of a Church, and a Church supposes an ordained ministry of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons’; and, besides, as Britain had never been under the Bishop of Rome’s jurisdiction, but had been always governed by her own Bishops, the assertion of such authority on the part of the Popes of Rome is an infraction of the Canon of the General Council of Ephesus (4.0. 431); which Pope Gregory himself declared that he regarded, as he did the three other General Councils, with the highest veneration ’. 1S. Ienar. ad Trall. 3. χωρὶς τούτων ᾿Εκκλησία οὐ κα- λεῖται. See above, pt. i. ch. ix. ? Gree. Mace. ii. p. 515. 632. Sicut quatuor Evangelii libros, sic guatuor Concilia suscipere et venerari me fateor, totd devotione complector, integerrimd approbatione custodio. ©. What is the tenor of that Ephesine Canon? @. It is expressed as follows: “Rheginus and his fellow Bishops of the province of Cyprus, Zeno and Evagrius, having brought under our no- tice an innovation against the laws of the Church and the Canons of the Holy Fathers, and affecting the liberty of all; This holy Synod, seeing that public disorders require greater remedies, inas- much as they bring greater damage, decrees that, if no ancient custom has prevailed for the Bishop of Antioch to ordain in Cyprus—as the deposi- tions made to us attest there has nof—the Prelates of the Cyprian Churches shall, according to the decrees of the Holy Fathers and to ancient prac- INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 165 tice, exercise the right of ordaining in the said Churches unmolested and inviolable. And the same rule shall be observed in all other dioceses and provinces whatsoever, so that no Bishop shall occupy another province which has not been sub- ject to him from the beginning; and if he shall have made any such occupation or seizure, let him make restitution, lest the Canons of the Holy Fathers’ be transgressed ; and lest under pretext of sacerdocy the pride of power should creep in, and thus we should, by little and little, lose the liberty which the Liberator of all men, JEsus Cuarist, has purchased for us with His own blood’.” By this right, which is called the Jus Cyprium’, the Church of England is inde- pendent of all foreign jurisdiction; and by the same authority the Pope, if he claim any such authority, is guilty of unwarrantable usurpation. 1 Eristota Episcoporum Aigyptiad Melet. circa a.p. 306. Routh, Reliq. Sacer. iii. p. 882. Lex et Patrum et Pro- patrum, constituta secundum Divinum et Ecclesiasticum ordinem, in alienis Parceciis non licere alicui Episcoporum ordinationes celebrare. Cp. ibid. p. 391, and vol. iv. p. iv. 3 Concit1a Generalia, iii. p. 802, ed. Labbe, 1671. And this was again affirmed by the Council of Trullo (Cone. Quini-Sextum), the Vth and VIth General Council, canon 39. 3 Binenam, Antiquities, bk. ii. chap. xviii. § 3. And this (jus Cyprium) was also the ancient liberty of the Britannic Church before the coming of Austin the Monk, when the seven British bishops paid ubedience to the Archbishop of Caer-Leon, and acknowledged no superior in spirituals over him: as Dionothus, the learned Abbot of Bangor, told Austin in the name of all the Britannic Churches ; ‘that they owed no other obedience to the Pope of Rome than they did to every godly Christian, to love every one in his degree in Cuap. IIT. —/ 166 CHURCH OF ENGLAND Parr ΤΙ. perfect charity ; other obedience than this they knew none “~~ due to him whom he named pope. But they were under the government of the Bishop of Caer Leon-upon-Uske, who was their overseer under God.’ See also Brneuaw, ix. ch. i. 11, 12; and above, chap. i. at the end, p. 153. Hammonp’s Works, Reply on Schism, ii. pp. 31. 93. Abp. Bramua yt, ii. p. 406. And this is confessed even by some Roman Catholic writers, as by Barns Cath. Rom. Pacif. sect. 3, in the Ap- pendix to Brown’s Fasciculus Rerum Expetendarum, p. 839. Insula Britannia gavisa est olim privilegio Cyprio. Hoe autem privilegium cum tempore Henrici Octavi totius Regni con- sensu fuerit restitutum, videtur pacis ergo retineri debere abs- que schismatis ullius noté. See also ibid. p. 841, 842. @. But is not the case of England very dif- ferent from that of Cyprus, inasmuch as in Cy- prus, at the time of the Council of Ephesus, there were Christian Bishops discharging their spiritual functions; whereas, when Augustine landed in England, the greater part of it had fallen into heathenism, and without him it is alleged, there would have been no Church in this country; and did not Pope Gregory, therefore, it is asked, ob- tain a patriarchal jurisdiction over England by giving it what is called the grace of Holy Orders? @. The grace of Holy Orders, like all other Luke xix. spiritual grace, is not to be dispensed for private Acts viii.18 advantage ; “ gratis datur, quia gratia vocatur’ ;” —20. “ gratis accepistis, gratis date.” It might also first be inquired, whether St. Augustine used all proper means to enter into’ and maintain com- munion with the existing British Bishops. Next it may be asked, whether, on the ground of a mere ceremonial difference concerning the time of ob- serving Easter, and one or two similar matters, (such as had zo¢ interrupted the communion of INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 167 St. Polycarp* and Pope Anicetus, and concerning Cuar. III. = which St. Irenzeus*, in his letter to Pope Victor, had left both a warning and a rule,) he ought to have stood apart from them, and required a change of their customs as a condition of communion with Rome; and lastly, it may well be doubted whether, because the British Bishops were un- willing to renounce obedience to their own Pri- mate *, and to swear allegiance to the Bishop of Rome, the rights of these native Bishops and of the British Church ought to have been set at nought by him, and sacrificed. But even on the supposition that St. Augustine proceeded regularly in all this, yet the ordination of St. Augustine, and of those who were ordained by him, gave to the Bishop of Rome no patriarchal jurisdiction over the country in which St. Augustine was received, 'S. Ασα. Tract. v. in S. Joann. S. Amerose in §. Lue. xix. 40. 2 Augustine’s conference with the British Bishops did not take place till near the close of his mission and life ; and this, Bede says, was adjutorio Regis Ethelberti, lib. ii. 1.—Sir H. Srerman, in Wivkins’ Concilia, i. 26, animadverts on the proceedings of St. Augustine in his intercourse with the British Bishops. Mason, F. Vindiciz Eccl. Ang]. lib.ii. cap. 5, says, Augus- tinus ipse nisi superbo et elato fuisset animo rogasset ut suam in predicando Anglis operam Britanni una collocarent, non etiam ut sibi et domino suo obtemperarent : and again, Quic- quid in Augustino resplendet boni, illud amplectimur atque laudamus ; quicquid vero in eo reperitur mali, in ipsa radice flaccescat. Sanctum paganos conyertendi desiderium, et pia in Principem desideria, aureis literis inscribi merentur ; at, ut ceremoniarum quas intulit redundantiam et nimiam fimbriz pontificize dilationem silentio preeteream, negari non potest quin erga Brittannos superbé se gesserit atque superciliose. — Part II. —_ — 168 CHURCH OF ENGLAND 3 Evans, Biography of the Early Church, London, 1837, Ρ. 81. The Churches of Asia differed from the Western Churches with respect to the day of termination of the fast which introduced the festival of Easter. Each side claimed apostolical authority for their usage—the former that of St. John, the latter of their predecessors. This dif- ference, which, within forty years after, very nearly pro- duced a schism in the Church (under Pope Victor, who excommunicated the Quartodecimani), broke no bonds of love between Polycarp and the Roman Bishop Anicetus, the heads of the two parties at this day. So far from it, they partook together of the body and blood of the Lord; thus signifying, in the most solemn and distinct manner, their essential unity in the same body, and displaying their un- feigned love. In this rite, too, Anicetus showed his deep sense of the character and services of his illustrious guest, by conceding to him, in his own Church, the post of consecrating the elements of the Eucharist. Here was indeed a proof of spiritual unity. 4 Evans, p.263. St. Ireneus stepped forward to check Victor’s violent proceedings, and the successor of Anicetus was obliged to beara rebuke from the successor of Polycarp. Nor did Irenzus address Victor only, but also the rest of the Bishops on the same side as Victor himself had done : on this Victor was obliged to retire from his bold position. 5 See above, note 3 to the last question. Mason, Vindicie Eccl. Anglic. ii. 5. Ne Augustini jugo Britanni colla sua subderent, causa erat justissima ; ne scilicet Archiepiscopi Menevensis auctoritatem minuerent, quod per Canonem Nicenum, (Canon vi.) quo cautum est ut suis privilegia serventur Ecclesiis, non licuit. @. You say that the ordination of St. Augustine gave the Bishop of Rome no jurisdiction over England; explain the grounds on which this assertion rests. A. It is one thing to give a power, and another thing to give the privileges, which may accrue, by the will of a third independent party, to the recipient INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 169 of that power. Gregory had, indeed, the power to ordain Augustine a Bishop, (though, be it remem- bered, Augustine was not consecrated by Gre- gory at Rome, but by the Archbishop of Arles, in Gaul’,) but he had no power to place St. Augustine at Canterbury as Metropolitan and Patriarch of England, and to give him Jurisdiction as such over its Bishops and Clergy. ' ΒΕΡΕ, Hist. i. 27. ©. To whom, then, did this power of placing belong ? @. As has been before said, (part i. chap. xi. pp- 115, 116,) no ecclesiastical power can interpose in the management of affairs in the territory of a Prince without his consent; and in Christian king- doms and states, the placing of Bishops as Dio- cesans, Metropolitans, and Patriarchs, depends on the permission of the sovereign power of the country‘; thus even Pope Gregory himself, as he himself declares *, could not have become Bishop of Rome and Metropolitan of the suburbicarian Churches, without the consent of the Roman Emperor Maurice ; and, again, in the words also of Gregory * himself, “ Kings have from God supreme power over all their subjects.” It was no more in Pope Gregory’s power to place St. Augustine at Canterbury as Metropolitan in England, than it was in King Ethelbert’s to have made St. Augustine α Bishop of the Church. Ethelbert did not lose any of his royalties by becoming a Christian king, (for Christianity gives new rights, but does not take away old ones,) and St. Augus- tine became an English subject by being received and placed on English ground. 1 — Cuar. IIT. —— See below, Pt. iii. ch. vii. 170 CHURCH OF ENGLAND Parr II, 1 Barrow, Pope's Supremacy, p. 228. It is notorious that Ἐπ τ τὐ mat princes in the West, in Germany, France, and England, did invest Bishops till the time of Gregory VII. 2S. Grecortus, tom. ii. lib. i. Indictione ix. Epist. v. p- 492. Paris, 1705. Sed mihi hee difficilia sunt, quia et valde onerosa: et quod mens voluntarié non recepit, congrué non disponit. Lcce serenissimus Dominus Imperator fieri simiam leonem jussit. Et quidem pro jussione illius vocari leo potest, Jieri autem leo non potest. Unde necesse est, ut omnes culpas ac negligentias meas non mihi, sed sue pietati deputet, qui virtutis ministerium infirmo commisit. Vira S. Grecoru, Opera, Paris, 1705, ed. Benedict. lib. i. cap. vii. p. 216. Nonnullorum quoque mentem haud dubié pulsabit, quod narrat laudatus scriptor, de petito et expectato Imperatoris consensu, antequam Gregorius electus ordinaretur. Neque vero Gregorius, qui sacrum sii minis- terium ab Imperatore commissum agnoscit, hunc morem usquam damnare visus est, aut improbasse.—Restituto in Occidente Imperio, Carolus Magnus ejusque posteri, hoe jure confir- mandi summi Pontificis, nullo repugnante, potiti sunt, ut ex Anastasio Ecclesiz Romane Bibliothecario, et ex aliis passim non iniquis erga sedem Apostolicam scriptoribus constat.— So Gregory, IV., a. Ὁ. 820, could not become Pope without the Emperor’s consent. Cp. Abp. De Marca, de Concordia, viii. 14; and Jus Canonicum, p. 204—8, ed. Richter, Lips. 1839. 3S. Grecor. Epist. iii. 65. Potestas super omnes homines Dominorum meorum (Imperatorum) pietati calitus data est. Ego indignus famulus vester. @. And does Augustine in fact also appear to have been placed in England by King Ethelbert, and not by the Bishop of Rome? @. Yes, certainly. Ethelbert gave him permis- sion’ to land, and to preach in his realm. Even his place at Canterbury is a proof of the exercise of the royal power: for Ethelbert placed him at Canterbury (as being the civil Metropolis of his kingdom) and not at London*, which Gregory had INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 171 desired; and Ethelbert endowed the Cathedral Coe Churches of Canterbury, London, and Rochester, which were the only Episcopal Sees founded or restored in England in the life of Augustine. 1 Beng, ii. 1. Ut Augustinus in urbe Regis sedem Epi- scopattis acceperit.—i. 25. Rew Edelberthus in Cantio poten- tissimus, qui ad confinium usque Humbri fluminis maximi fines imperii tetenderat . . . dedit eis mansionem in civitate Doroyernensi (i. e. Canterbury), que imperii sui totius erat metropolis. Et locum sedis in Doroyernia metropoli sua donavit.—Similarly, ii. 3. Rex Edelberthus fecit in civitate Londinia Ecclesiam sancti Pauli Apostoli, in qué locum sedis Episcopalis Mellitus et successores ejus haberent.—Simi- larly, at Rochester, Rea Edelbertus Ecclesiam B. Andree Apostoli fecit, qui etiam Episcopis utriusque hujus Ecclesiz dona multa, sicut et Doroverniensis, obtulit, sed et territoria ac possessiones in usum eorum qui erant cum Episcopis adjecit. No other sees were founded in Augustine’s life- time but these three, viz. Canterbury, London, Rochester ; and from a comparison of Bede’s account with Gregory’s letter (quoted in the next note) it will appear that the placing and endowment of the English Bishops was the work, not of Gregory, but of Ethelbert, acting in this respect independently of him, and indeed not consistently with his plans for the ordering of the external polity of the Church. Cp. Bp. Sriztinercerr on the True Antiquity of London, p. 550, and Coprex Diplomat. Anglo-Saxonum, p- 1. sq. Bp. Bitson, on Christian Subjection, p. 57. They that came (with S. Austin from Gregory) would not enter this land, nor preach there without the king’s express licence. Archbp. Bramua ct, i. p. 132. When Austin first arrived in England, he stayed in the Isle of Thanet until he knew the king’s pleasure ; and offered not to preach in Kent, until he had the king’s licence for him and his followers to preach throughout his dominions. (Bed. Hist. i. 25,26.) So not only their jurisdiction, but even the evercise of their pastoral function within that realm was by the king’s leave and autho- rity. See vol. ii. p. 188, 12 172 CHURCH OF ENGLAND Parr IL 2 S. Grecor. lib. xi. p. 1163. ep. Ixy. (to Augustine.) ———~ Per loca singula duodecim Episcopos ordines, qui tue * ditioni subjaceant : quatenus Londoniensis civitatis Episcopus semper in posterum a Synodo propria debeat consecrari, atque honoris Pallium ab hac sancta et apostolica, cui auctore Deo deservio, sede percipiat, ad Eboracam vero civitatem te yolu- mus Episcopum mittere, quem ipse judicaveris ordinandum ; ita ut si eadem civitas cum finitimis locis verbum Dei rece- perit, ipse quoque duodecim Episcopos ordinet, et Metropoli- tani honore perfruatur : quia ei quoque, si vita comes fuerit, Pallium tribuere Domino fayente disponimus, quem tamen tuze Fraternitatis volumus dispositioni subjacere. Post obitum vero tuum ita Episcopis quos ordinayerit preesit, ut Londoni- ensis Episcopi nullo modo ditioni subjaceat. Sit vero inter Londonie et Eborace civitatis Episcopos in posterum honoris ista distinctio, ut ipse prior habeatur qui prius fuerit ordi- natus. The reader will have observed, that it appears from the above passage that, according to the plan there specified, there were to be twenty-four sees erected in England; and there already existed eight sees in Wales at this time; so that the number of Bishops in England and Wales, in a. Ὁ. 600, was to be thirty-two. See also Brncuam, above, Ρ. 154. Mason, de Ministerio, iv. c. xvi. (Ὁ. You therefore consider St. Augustine and * On which Alteserra, the Canonist of Toulouse, thus writes : Anglis recens conyersis ad fidem, preedicante Augus- tino et sociis, Gregorius duas metropolitanas sedes constituit in Britannia, unam Londini, alteram Eboraci: ita ut per sin- gulas metropoles ordinarentur duodecim episcopi: de quo Beda, lib. i. cap. 29. Sed postquam Cantuaria, gue erat caput regni Cantii et sedes regia, ab Ethelberto Rege concessa est Augustino, qui sedem sibi et suecessoribus suis hic locavit, ibique diem obiit et sepultus est—, Metropolitica dignitas, qu a Gregorio statuta fuerat Londini, Cantuariam translata est, ut patet ex Kenulfi Regis Merciorum ad Leon. III. Pon- tificem, quee est apud Wilhelmum Malmsbur. de Regum Angliz Gestis, lib. i. cap. 4. INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 17 his successors as occupying the place and as in- heriting the rights of the ancient Metropolitans and Patriarchs of England, and succeeding to the privileges secured to them by the canons of the Church ? @. Yes*, so far as was allowed by the sovereign power; and since it cannot be pleaded that any act of a General or Provincial Council canoni- cally done with the sovereign’s consent has ever placed Britain in the patriarchate of Rome, in which it never was defore the landing of Augustine, the Bishop of Rome’s subsequent usurpation of the metropolitan and patriarchal rights of the English Primate, is an invasion of the Royal Pre- rogative, and an infraction of the Canons of the Universal Church*, and a violation of the precept of Scripture concerning the removal of a neigh- bour’s land-mark. 1 Vita S. Augustini Archiepiscopi (vid. Lanfranci Opera, Venet. 1745. p. 329). Augustinus, transfretato eequore, (after his consecration at Arles,) acecepto Apostolatu a Domino primarium Anglice genti retulit Patriarchatum et Patriarchale patrocinium. » Not only of those of the Council of Ephesus, but of those which, like the ‘Decreta Nicena, Clericos et Epi- scopos suis Metropolitanis apertissimé commiserunt.’ Syn. Afr. in Ep. ad P. Ceelestin, Conc. Constant. can. 2. 4. 6, Chalced. c. 8. 17, Miley. Ἢ. 22. @. And therefore the Patriarch of Rome cannot claim jurisdiction over the Patriarch of England on the alleged ground of the mission and ordi- nation of St. Augustine or any other ? @. No; all Patriarchs are independent of each other (p. 114); and with respect to this plea of ordination, the Bishop of Rome might as well 13 Cuap. ILL. Ree Deut. xxvii. te See above, Ρ. 163, 164, Part II. πος 1 Cor. iii. 6. 174 CHURCH OF ENGLAND claim jurisdiction over the Patriarch of Alexandria, and over the Bishops and clergy of his patriarch- ate, on the ground of St. Mark, the first Bishop of Alexandria, having been sent into Egypt by St. Peter, as over the Patriarch of England *, (and such the Archbishop of Canterbury was acknowledged by Pope Urban II. to be,) and over his patriarchate, on the ground of the mission of St. Augustine by St. Gregory. 1 Sir R. Twispen, p. 18. After the erection of Canter- bury into an archbishoprick, the Bishop of that see was held quasi alterius orbis Papa, as Urban II. styled him (Wil. Malmes. de Gestis Pont. Angl. i. Eadmer. ii. p. 52); and is, therefore, called frequently in our writers Princeps Epi- scoporum Angliz, Pontifex summus, Patriarcha Primas, and his seat Cathedra Patriarchatis Anglorum. See above, Abp. Laup, chap. ii. p. 159. @. In speaking thus, you do not mean to disparage the labours of St. Gregory and St. Augustine in propagating Christianity in Eng- land ? @. By no means. In that holy and blessed work of religion let God first be praised for putting it into the hearts of its various agents to do what they did; let a grateful remembrance be preserved of Gregory the Great for sending St. Augustine, and of St. Augustine for coming into England ; of Queen’ Bertha for assisting and en- couraging, and of King Ethelbert for receiving, protecting, and maintaining him, and of establish- ing him and his followers, and their successors in this country, by the building and endowment of Cathedral Churches. But we may not suppose that we can show our gratitude to Augustine, or INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 175 to Gregory, and above all to Almighty God, by Cuap. Iv. disparaging the prerogatives of Ethelbert and his ἡ successors, and by doing injury to the rights of the lawful Sovereign Princes whom God has set over us, and of the Church which is our spiritual Mother in Jesus Christ. ' Gregory himself, in his Epistles, compares King Ethel- bert to Constantine, and Queen Bertha to Helena, on ac- count of their pious munificence to the English Church. See Vita S. Augustini, ]. c. pp. 330, 331. CHAPTER IV. CHURCH OF ENGLAND INDEPENDENT OF ROME, Period between the Mission of St. Augustine and the Reformation. @. Even on the supposition that the Bishops of Rome had possessed a patriarchal jurisdiction in England before or during the papacy of Gregory, could they have had any such power after it ? @. No. As was before said, that part of Eng- land which was converted by Augustine and his p, 151. companions, relapsed into Paganism a few years after his decease; and not only that part, but a very large portion of the whole country was Chris- tianized in the seventh century, by Scottish and Saxon Missionaries, under A1pAn of Lindisfern, and the Bishops and Priests (St. Chad, his brother 1 4 176 CHURCH OF ENGLAND Part II. Cedda, Finan, Diuma,) connected with him, who a were entirely independent of Rome’. But, further, a year and a half after the death of Gregory, Boni- face III. occupied the papal chair, and by his as- sumption of the anti-scriptural and anti-catholic title (condemned as such by Gregory his prede- cessor ἢ) of Universal Bishop, by which he violated the Unity of the Church; he forfeited® the name and jurisdiction of Patriarch ; as one of the great- est of the Popes‘ says, Propria perdit qui indebita concupiscit. 1 στε, Ch. Hist. -book ii. cent. vii., and see the authorities in Hearu’s Brief Account, p. 18, who observes that “ Aidan had little suspicion that a Bishop not in the Patriarchate of Rome could be considered a schismatic solely for preserving the independence of his character: he had not so read the decrees of Ephesus.” 2 See below, part ii. chap. ix. 3 Abp. BramuaLt, i. 260—263. F. Mason, Vind. Eccl. Angl. pp. 586—541. 4 Pope Leo I. Epist. 54. @. But after this time did not the Bishops of Rome in fact exercise a patriarchal jurisdiction over the British Metropolitans, by sending them their Pallium, or archiepiscopal pall, at their con- secration ? @. Unhappily after the age of Gregory there was a maxim in Romish state-policy', Da, ut habeas, Give, in order that you may have. The pall was at first a badge given by the Emperors to Patriarchs*; when it came to be given by Popes, it was, for some time, nothing but a symbolum fraternitatis—a mark of communion with Rome: _it was. no necessary part of the archiepiscopal dignity, and many archbishops never had it*. At length, however, it was imposed as essential to INDEPENDENT OF ROME. Wig them, about A. Ὁ. 1990 ὁ, and was sold*® for vast sums of money. 1 Sir Rocer Twispen’s Vindication of the Church of England in point of Schism, 1675, p. 176. 3 Hammonv’s Works, ii. p. 97, folio, ed. 1684. The Pall was an honorary ornament, which the Emperors first gave to the Patriarchs, and the Patriarchs sent to Archbishops and Metropolitans, and was then far from being a sign of subdjec- tion to him that sends it. BraAMHALL, i. 193, The following are the testimonies of Romanists concerning the Pallium:—Abp. De Marca, de Concordia, vi. c. 6. (p. 332.) Pallium antiquitus fuit genus quoddam imperatovii indumenti, cujus usum Jmperatores permisere Patriarchis, a quibus dein communicatum est cum Metropolitanis, sed non absque Imperatorum consensu.—P. 331. Optabant olim Pon- tifices (Romani) ut Metropolitani aliquod confirmationis genus a sede Apostolica acciperent. Verum, quia ubique receptum erat consecrationes fieri posse extra Italiam absque eorum con- sensu, yim ei legi palam afferre noluerunt ; sed Metropoli- tanos rei cujusdam nove miraculo yeluti obstupefecerunt, que in initio magnifica, paulatim tamen earum libertatem per cuniculos infregit et synodorum provincialium auctoritatem pessumdedit. De Paillii usu loquor. Du Pin, de Antiq. Eccles. Discipl.i. § 12. p. 53. Succe- dente vero tempore, pontifices Romani ordinandorum per uniyersum occidentem Episcoporum potestatem non sine multa contradictione sibi vindicavere, et omnium Metro- politanorum jura paulatim pessumdederunt. Primum quidem Metropolitica ordinationum jura ad se trahere conati sunt per concessionem pailii ; ed enim dabatur a pontificibus, ut possent plena auctoritate sue provincie Episcopos ordinare: unde sequebatur hance potestatem a Pontifice Metropolitanis simul cum pallio concedi. Hine postea noyo jure Metropolitanis interdictum est uniyersis functionibus episcopalibus, donec pallium recepissent, jura- mentumque fidei introductum est. See further the definition of the Pallium in Bp, Grsson’s Codex, p. 105, note. 3 TwispeEn, pp. 43, 44. After Paulinus, five in the cata- 15 Cuap. IV. — —_ 178 CHURCH OF ENGLAND Parrli, logue of York are said expressly to have wanted it (the Pal- —~,—— lium), yet are reputed both archbishops and saints. 4 ΤΨΙΒΡΕΝ, p. 47. 5 TwisDEN, p. 45. @. Did not those Metropolitans then take an Oath of Canonical Obedience to the see of Rome ? @. The Oath of Bishops at Consecration, to whomsoever it was taken, was anciently nothing more than a Profession of Faith’; and any other oath than this was prohibited by the eighth General Council (a. Ὁ. 870): nor was any oath imposed with the Pall before the year a. Ὁ. 1115; and the oath of canonical obedience, when it came to be taken to the Pope, even under Gre- gory VII., Hildebrand (a. p. 1073—1085,) obliged a Bishop to observe the Regulas Sanctorum Pa- trum’, and not, as these words were afterwards transformed, to maintain the Regalia Sancti Petri; and the Oath now taken ἡ dates only from the Pon- tificate of Clement VIII. (a. p. 1592—1605.) ? Conciz. Constant. iv. tom. viii. p. 1131, Labbe. Visum est sancte huic et Universali Synodo nequaquam id ex hoc a quopiam fieri excepto eo quod, secundum formam et con- suetudinem, pro sincera fide nostra, tempore consecrationis Episcoporum exigitur, quod enim aliter fit omnino non expedit, sed neque ad edificationem Ecclesie pertinet. Quisquis ergo ausus fuerit solvere hance definitionem nostram, aut expetierit aut paruerit expetentibus, honore proprio decidat. The following are corroborating testimonies from Romanist writers :—Archbp. de Marca, de Concordia, vi. c. 7. Res eo devenit ut coacti sint Europe Metropolitani scripto polli- ceri subjectionem et obedientiam Apostolic Sedi. Novi hujus juris repertor erat Bonifacius Moguntinus in Synodo ab eo celebraté anno 742. Gregorius VII. formulam auxit quibusdam clausis que illam obedientiz sponsionem prorsus conyertunt in juramentum fidelitatis quod vassallus domino suo prestare tenetur. Adeo autem principum jura yiolavit hee INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 179 formula, ut Gregorius prohibuerit ne quis Episcopus homagium regibus prestaret, quod a successoribus ejus Urbano 11. et Paschali II. confirmatum est. Attamen Gregorius potuit animadyertere canonem octavum octave synodi (A.D. 870) prohibere ne Patriarchee ab Episcopis ‘aliam sponsionem exigerent quam eam que fieri consueverat, nimirum illos veram fidem servaturos. Father Waxsu, Defence of Church of Rome, sect. 25. In the beginning there was no such oath or any other, nor any promise of fidelity or obedience made by the Bishops to the Pope, but only a bare profession of the common faith, even such as he also made to them by his encyclical letters ; and afterwards, when promises began, they were only of canonical obedience in general terms. Dr. O'Connor, Columbanus 3. 159. Even those Bishops who were consecrated by the Pope himself, swore no other oath than that they would, to the best of their power, main- tain the Catholic religion in their dioceses. See also, Dicresr of the Evidence, ἄς. &c. concerning Ireland. London, 1826. Part ii. chap. i. p. 2, note a. ® These were the terms of the oath even under Gregory VII. a.pv. 1079. Concerning the changes in its terms, see Barrow, Pope’s Supremacy, xiv. TwisDEN, p. 46. Archbp. BraMuatt, i. p. 148, and note. During the wars between the houses of York and Lancaster, the Popes some- times invaded this undoubted right of our kings, de facto, not de jure; and tendered to the Bishops, at their investitures, another oath, at first modest and innocent enough, that they should observe Regulas Sanctorum Patrum; but after they altered the oath, changing it into Regalia Sancti Petri, that they should maintain the royalties of St. Peter. Bp. Grsson, Codex, p. 117. 3 Van Espen, Jus Ecclesiast. I. xy. ii. 8. ©. But was not the pall received by English Archbishops, and the oath to maintain the Re- galia Sancti Petri taken by English Bishops, from the beginning of the twelfth century ? @. Yes; that oath was framed by Pope Pas- chalis 11. (1099—1118) and imposed by him, to 1 6 Crap. ly. »ἼΞ-.. Parr Il. ἘΞΞ Ξ - Ὁ Jer. iv, 2. Num. xxx. 25 10; 1 Sam. xiv. 28. 45, xxv. 99. Mark vi. 29. Acts xxiii, 12. 180 CHURCH OF ENGLAND the great astonishment! of Kings, Nobles, and Ecclesiastics, on Archbishops, and afterwards by Gregory IX. (1227—1241) on Bishops. But neither could the pall be lawfully received from a foreign prelate under conditions of allegiance to him, nor an oath of obedience taken to him by any subject without the consent of his Prince, and much Jess so against it; for it is essential to the goodness of an oath, that it should be in pos- sibilibus et licitis’, or, as the Scripture expresses it, in veritate, judicio et justitid. And further, as the papal decretals* themselves declare, non valet juramentum in prejudicium juris superioris ἡ. Hence when an English Bishop had received the pall, and taken the oath, King William II. declared that he would banish him from England, if he violated his allegiance to the crown under plea of compliance with the oath®, 1 Jus Canon. Decret. Greg. IX. De Elect. c. 4, Signi- ficasti, (says Pope Paschalis to the Abp. of Palermo, which was even in the Roman Patriarchate, see above, p. 110,) reges et regni majores admiratione permotos quod pallium tibi ab apocrisiariis nostris tali conditione oblatum fnerit si sacramen- tum quod a nobis scriptum detulerant exhiberes. See also Baron. Anno 1102. Mason, Vind. Ec. Angl. iv. 16. p. 539, ? Bp. AnpREwEs on the Decalogue, p. 245. S. Hieron. in Jerem. iy. ἢ. Animadvertendum quod jus- jurandum hos habet comites, Veritatem, Judicium atque Justi- tiam ; si ista defuerint, nequaquam erit juramentum, sed per- jurium, Art. XXXIX. A man may swear, when the magistrate requireth, in a cause of Faith and Charity, so it be done according to the Prophet’s (Jerem. iv. 2) teaching, in Justice, Judgment, and Truth. Homitirs, p. 77, ed. 1822, Oxon. “ Whosoever maketh any promise, binding himself thereunto by an oath, let him INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 18] foresee that the thing he promiseth be good and honest, and not against the commandment of God, and that it be in his own power to perform it justly ; and such promises must men keep evermore assuredly. But if a man at any time shall, either of ignorance or of malice, promise and swear to do any thing, which is either against the law of Almighty God, or not in his power to perform, let him take it for an unlaw- ful and ungodly oath.” Of an unlawful oath the same Homily declares in the case of Herod, “that as he took a wicked oath, so he more wickedly performed the same.” Upon these determinations of the Church, the Adjuration of the Solemn League and Covenant, “as an unlawful oath, and imposed on the subjects of this realm against the known laws and liberties of this kingdom,’ was required in the Act of Uniformity, a.p. 1661, 13 and 14 Car, II. cap. 4. 5. DecreETAL. ii, xxiv. 4. 4 Compare Bp. Sanperson’s Prelectiones de Juramenti Obligatione, ii. p. 31. Rei illicitee Nulla Obligatio, p. 66. Juramentum ejus qui sub alterius potestate est absque illius consensu nec Jicitum neque obligatorium. See also Prelect. vii. p. 140. 5 Marr. Paris, in Guil. Ruf. The King said, neque Archiepiscopum neque Episcopum sui regni Papze subesse. Si juramento suscepto promitteret (Anselmus) se neque Apostolorum limina visitaturum, nec Romane sedis audien- tiam appellaturum, rebus suis frueretur. Si secus faciat, exilium perpetuum ei denunciat. @. But the pall being received, and the oath taken, did not the Popes acquire a Patriarchal right in England by practice ? A. No; the Pope both quitted and forfeited whatever Patriarchal jurisdiction he possessed any where by his assumption of Universal Supremacy over the Church, and by his acts of tyranny, usurpation, exaction, and rebellion against Church Canons, and lawful Sovereigns’: and the ewercise of such Patriarchal jurisdiction on his part was neyer acknowledged in England, but, on the con- Cuap. LY. Part Il, —— — 182 CHURCH OF ENGLAND trary, was resisted by protests continually made by the Kings of England, by the Church in her Synods, and by the State in Parliament; and as it rested not on any sound basis of right’, but, on the contrary, was destructive of the funda- mental rights of the Crown and of the Church, (and nullum tempus occurrit Regi aut Ecclesie,) and as Patriarchal authority depends on the consent of both, (see above, p. 114. 117, and below, p. 185,) it never could have acquired legal validity, for, as Pope Boniface the VIIIth® says, Non firmatur tractu temporis quod de jure ab initio non subsistit*. 1 Abp. BraMua tt, i. 261. ? Abbé Freury, iv. Discours sur l’Histoire Ecclésias- tique. See below, chap. vii. 3 RecuLz Juris, xviii. 4 Sir R. Twispen thus emphatically concludes his exami- nation of this subject ... “I dare boldly say, that whoever will, without partiality, look back, will find that the reverence yielded by this Church of England to Rome, for more than 1000 years after Christ, was no other than the respect of love, not of duty.”—p. 67. @. What evidence is there of opposition to the Papal encroachments ? Q. Protests, such as have been mentioned, were made by Egfrid’, King of Northumberland, and his successor King Aldfrid, on occasion of the first great appeal to Rome; by King Edward the Confessor, by Henry the First, and succeeding sovereigns; and the same spirit which dictated these remonstrances, declared itself publicly and legislatively in the’ Constitutions of Clarendon, a. D. 1164; and again, a.p. 1246; in the Statute of Carlisle, a. Ὁ. 1297; in the Articles of the Clergy, in the Statutes of Provisors, a. Ὁ. 1350, a. Ὁ. 1363, INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 183 and A.D. 13889; of Mortmain and of Premunire, A.D. 1391-2; and, finally, in the Statutes of Henry VIII., from a. ἢ. 1531 to a. ἢ. 1543, which in the opinion of the soundest English lawyers, were not operative but declaratory acts ; that is, they were no new laws, but only vindicated and enforced the old ὃ. 1 TwispEN, 29—37. Egfrid, styled by Bede piissimus et Deo dilectissimus, imprisoned Wilfrid, Archbishop of York, with the advice of his Bishops, for appealing to Rome, about a.D. 680. No papal legate came into England between a.p. 595, and a.p. 787. BRAMHALL, i. 37. 133. 136. 144. Bp. Sritxincr.eet, Eccles. Jurisd. p. 87—91. ? Constitutions of Clarendon on the Controversy between Henry 11. and Becket. Bramuatt, i. 136—143. ArricuLi ΟἼΕΙ, made at Lincoln 9 Ed. II. a.p. 1315. Bp. Grzson, Codex, p. 175. Elections of dignities of the Church to be free. Bramuatt, i. 146. Concerning the Protest in a.p. 1246, see BRAMHALL, i. 194. Srarutes for the Crierey, 14 and 18 Ed. III. a.p. 1340, 1344. The Sratures of Provisors, i. e. ‘that the king and other lords shall present unto benefices of their own or their ancestors’ foundation, and not the Bishop of Rome,’ 25 Edw. III. a.v. 1350. Greson’s Codex, p. 65, and 38 Edw. III. a.p. 1363. Ibid. p. 69, and 13 Rich. 11. 2. ο. 2, a.v. 1389. Ibid. p. 71. Pramonire ‘for suing in a foreign realm, or impeaching judgment given,’ 27 Edw. III. ec. 1; ‘for purchasing of bulls from Rome; the Crown of England subject to none,’ 16 Rich. 11. ο. 5, a.v. 1392, ibid. p. 73; against appeals to Rome, 25 Henry VIII. c. 19, ibid. p. 86. For RESTRAINT of APPEALS to Rome, ‘in all cases what- soeyer, prohibited, 24 Henry VIII. c. 12, a.v. 1532; ibid. p- 83; and ‘to restore to the Crown its ancient jurisdiction,’ ibid. p. 86; against payment of annates and first-fruits. 23 Henry VIII. p. 105. An act for taking away the burden of Peter-pence, and other papal exactions, 25 Henry VIII. Cuap. IV. SS 184. CHURCH OF ENGLAND Parrll. ο. 21, a.p. 1533; for taking away dispensations, 25 Henry —~—~ VIII. ¢. 21, a.v. 1583, p. 87; against the Pope’s supremacy, 26 Henry VIII. c. 1, a.p. 1534, ibid. p. 23 ; 35 Henry ViII. c, 8, a.p. 1543, ‘ for ratification of the King’s Majesty's style, ibid. p. 29. Archbp. Courtenay, Archbishop of Canterbury, (a.p. 1395,—Parl. Hist. vol.i. p.219,) and Primate of all England, made protestation in open Parliament, “that the Pope ought not to excommunicate any Bishop, or intermeddle as to pre- sentations to any ecclesiastical dignity recoyered in the king’s courts. That the said holy father ought not to make translations to any bishopric within the realm without the king’s leave ; for that this practice tended to the destruction of the Realm and Crown of England, which had always been free, and subject to no earthly power, but to God only, as to regalities, and no other.” See ibidem, p. 257. The Crown of the kingdom of England, and the rights of the said Crown, and the kingdom itself, have in all time past been so free, that our Lord the Pope, nor any other without the kingdom, ought to concern himself about the same. 3 As Lord Chief Justice Coxe and others. See Abp. BramMuAtt, i. p. 151, and Bp, Grsson’s Codex, p. 42. @. But even although no such protests had been made, could the Bishop of Rome have ac- guired ecclesiastical jurisdiction in England, so that it should be his indefeasibly ? A. No, he could not. The Sovereigns of Eng- land are, jure divino, the Lorp’s Vicegerents in that country ; and it is their “ Prerogative to rule all Estates and Degrees committed to their charge by God, whether they be Ecclesiastical or Tem- poral,” and to see that all persons, ecclesiastical * and civil, do their duty ; and Kings cannot execute this function, unless they have supreme authority in causes ecclesiastical. It is indisputable that Patriarchal jurisdiction is purely a matter of human law, and liable to be altered, according to 4 INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 185 the circumstances of countries and of times’. Cuar. IV. And as the Christian Emperors, with advice of their Synods, transferred Pontus and Asia to the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which they had created; as in England the Primacy had been transferred *, in the reign of King Arthur, a. ἢ. 516, from Caerleon to Llandaff, a. p. 512, thence in the reign of King Arthur, a.p. 516 to St. David’s, and thence by Henry the First to Can- terbury; so, even ?f England had ever been legally and canonically in the Patriarchate of Rome, which it never was, the Kings of England, in a Church Synod, might have transferred their kingdom from it to some other Patriarchate *; and much more they ought to maintain it in its reason- able, undoubted, ancient, and primitive eccle- siastical relation both of right and duty toa Patri- arch of their own Realm of England ἢ. 1 XXXIX Arrtictes, Art. xxxvii. See below, part iii. chapters ii. iii. iy. y., and above, part i. ch, xii, p. 114—116. Leces Epvarpr Conressoris, c. xvii. Rex, quia Vicarius Summi Rects est, ad hoc est constitutus, ut regnum terre- num et populum Domini et super omnia sanctam yeneretur Ecclesiam Ejus et regat et ab injuriosis defendat. Ibid. Debet Rex Sanctam Ecclesiam regni sui cum omni integritate et libertate juxta constitutiones Patrum et Preede- cessorum servare, fovere, manu tenere, regere. 2 Abp. Bramuatt, i. p 162, note ; i, 178. 260—264 ; ii. pp: 303—305 ; and above, p. 114—117. 3 Mason, Vind. Eccl, Angl. iv. 16. Qui jure humano niti non yult nobis patriarcha esse non potest ; cum pa- triarchatus sit juris humani. See also Barrow, above, p. 116, and Hammonp in following note, and Abp. BraMHa t, i. 260—264 ; 11. 303—305. 4 Hammonp on Schism, i. p. 520. “It is and always hath rs, «.-.-.--.. 186 CHURCH OF ENGLAND Part II, been in the power of Christian Emperors and Princes, within ——~-— their own dominions, to erect patriarchates, or to translate them from one city to another; and therefore” (even on the supposition that the Pope had acquired any title on the first planting of the Gospel here) “the Kings of England may freely remove that power from Rome to Canterbury, and subject all the Christians of this Island to the spiritual power of that Archbishop or Primate.”—p. 522. And this power, vested in the Regal Power, cannot be taken away by foreign laws, nor be alienated by prescription. 5 Hammonp, Works, ii. 28. 119. 126. 132. BramMHALL, i. 178, @. But did not King Stephen, and more fully King Henry the Second, concede the right of Appeal to Rome; and did not the latter resign his right of Investiture of Bishops to the Pope; and did not King John give up to him the civil and ecclesiastical Supremacy of the Crown ? @. Whether they did or no, matters little’; for Kings have their kingdoms from God to rule, and not to give away; and nihil potest Rex nisi quod jure potest. As Lord Chancellor Clarendon’ says, “The King hath no power to release a single grain of the allegiance which is due to him as such.” Therefore those acts, whatever they were, were of no validity whatsoever ἧ. ' Abp. BraMHaLL, i. 188, says, “ The answer of Sir Thomas More” (himself a Romanist) “is beyond all excep- tion, that if either King Henry II. or King John had done such a thing it was not worth a rush, nor signified any- thing but the greediness of the Popes.” 2 See the authorities quoted in the note in Wordsworth’s Eccl. Biog. i. pp. 283—25, ed. 1839. GeruarD, de Magistratu Politico, vi. p. 513. Princeps non diminuere debet imperium sed augere. ᾧ 2, Prowm. Inst. Jur. Nec potest Regalia in prejudicium successorum INDEPENDENT OF ROME. 187 alienare. HamMonpD, vol. ii. p. 133. The King cannot alienate Cuap. IV. his Regality. as 3 The following will show the zational recorded opinion and judgment of this transaction: Parriamentary History, vol. i. p.180. “ His majesty (King Edward ITI.) had lately received notice that the Pope, in consideration of the homage which Jobn, king of England, had formerly paid to the see of Rome, intended by process to cite his majesty to appear at his court at Avignon, to answer for his defaults, in not performing what the said king, his predecessor, had so undertaken for him and his heirs, kings of England. Whereupon the king required the advice of his parliament what course he had best take if any such process should come out against him. The Bishops, Lords, and Commons, desired until the following day to give in their answer, when they declared as follows, ‘That neither King John, nor any other king, could bring himself, his realm and people, under such subjection without their assent; and if it was done, it was without consent of parliament, and contrary to his Coronation Oath: that he was notoriously compelled to it by the necessity of his affairs and the iniquity of the times ; wherefore the said Estates enacted, that in case the Pope should attempt anything by process or any other way, to constrain the king and his subjects to perform what he says he lays claim to in this respect, they would resist and withstand him to the utmost of their power.” @. But was not the English Reformation brought about by Henry VIII. to gratify his own evil passions ; and was it not attended with corrupt and sacrilegious practices ? @. Admitting, for argument’s sake, all that has been said against King Henry VIII. by the ad- versaries of the Reformation ; admitting also, that he was a leading agent in effecting it; still the workman is not the work. The Temple of Solo- mon was constructed with cedars of Lebanon ᾿ Kings v. 6. hewn by workmen of heathen Tyre. Jehudid nots, please God; but his Reformation did. Nebu- ΠΣ 188 CHURCH OF ENGLAND INDEPENDENT, &c. Part. chadnezzar and Ahasuerus were idolatrous; but tesa 2 τὶ Dan. iii. their Edicts for God’s service were religious. The 38: ix, ‘Temple in which our Lord was presented, and in 92, which He preached and worshipped, had been repaired and restored by the impious and cruel Herod, who sought our Lord’s life. And so with respect to the charge of sacrilege, we are not careful to defend the character and conduct of all those who had any part in the Reformation; but we bless God for His own work, and for many of ἱ the instruments He raised up for it, and for over- ' ruling and directing others to His own glory in the good of His Church '. 1 Abp. BraMuatt, i. p. 128. @. What is the conclusion from the arguments against the Pope’s exercise of any Patriarchal jurisdiction in England ? @. In the words of a learned Bishop’, “ By God’s law, the Pope of Rome hath no such juris- diction ; for six hundred years after Christ he had none; for the last six hundred years, as looking to greater matters, (i. e. to be Universal Bishop.) he would have none; above or against the Prince he can have none; to the subversion of the faith, or oppression of his brethren, he ought’ to have none; therefore this land oweth him none.” 1 Bp. Bizson, True Difference between Christian Sub- jection and Unchristian Rebellion, pt. ii. p. 321. Mason, Vind. Eccl. Angl. p. 541. 2 Oatu of Queen’s Sovereignty and Supremacy, to be taken by Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, in the Ordinal of the Church of England,—I do declare that no foreign Prince, Person, Prelate, State, or Potentate, hath, or ought to have, any Jurisdiction, Power, Superiority, Pre-eminence, THE REFORMATION, &c. 189 or Authority, Ecclesiastical or Spiritual, within this realm. So help me God. XXXIX Arricres, Art. xxxvii. The Queen’s Majesty hath the chief power in this realm of England, and other her dominions, unto whom the chief government of all estates in this realm, whether they be ecclesiastical or civil, in all causes doth appertain ; and ἐς not, nor ought to be, subject to any foreign jurisdiction. The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this realm of England. Bp. Garpiner, de Vera Obedientia (in Brown, Fasciculus, pp- 812. 817). No foreign Bishop hath authority among us. . . - All sorts of people are agreed with us in this point, that no manner of persons bred or brought up in England hath aught to do with Rome. Arrorney and Soritciror Grnerat’s (R. Gifford and J. S. Copley) Reply to Letter of Right Hon. Grorce Cannine, &c. We beg leave to state, that advisedly and wittingly to attribute by any speech, open deed, or act, any manner of jurisdiction, &c., to the see of Rome, or to any Bishop of the same, within this realm, subjects a party for the first offence to the penalties of premunire, &c., and any answer to his letters (announcing his elevation to the ponti- ficate) might be considered as bringing the party, being a subject, writing or advising it within the operation of the statute of 5 Eliz. c. i. § 2.—See Puixtimore’s Burn’s Eccl. Law, 111. 145, ed. 1842. CHAPTER V. THE REFORMATION IN ENGLAND A REMOVAL OF WHAT WAS NEW, AND A RESTORATION OF WHAT WAS OLD. @. Is it not sometimes said that the Church of England, as she now exists, arose at the Reform- ation, and is therefore a new Church, not more Cuap. V. «— Part Il. 190 THE REFORMATION than 300 years old? How then can she be united by origin with the Catholic Church ? @. The language of the Church of England, when she reformed herself, was similar to that of the Fathers at the Nicene Council, in a.p. 325, TA APXAIA EOH KPATEITQ, Let the ancient customs prevail *. 1 Hammonp contr. Blondell, in Prelim. c. xiv. f. 13. Ecclesia Anglicana hoc se universo orbi charactere dignos- cendum, hoc que posteritati zstimandum proponit, quod in controversiis fidei aut praxeos decernendis, illud firmum ratumque semper habuerit, et huic basi Reformationem Britannicam niti yoluerit, ut Scrirruris prime, dein pri- morum seculorum episcopis, martyribus, scriptoribus, eccle- siasticis secundeé deferantur. The following are the testimonies of three eminently learned foreigners, Isaac Casauzon, Hngo Grortus, and Dr. Hadrian Saravia, to the restorative and primitive cha- racter of the Reformation in ENGLAnp. Casauzon, ad Salmas. Epist. 837, p. 489. a.p. 1612. Quod si me conjectura non fallit, totius Reformationis pars integerrima est in ANexta, ubi cum studio Veritatis viget studium Antiquitatis. Casaubon, Epist. ad Cardinal. Perron. p. 494. (See below, p. 199.) Parata est Eccresta Aneticana fidei sue reddere rationem, et rebus ipsis evincere, auctoribus Reformationis hic institutee non fuisse propositum, novam aliquam Ecclesiam condere, ut imperiti et maleyoli calum- niantur ; sed que erant collapsa, ad formam revocare quam fieri posset optimam ; optimam autem judicarunt nascenti Ec- clesiz ab Apostolis traditam, et proximis seculis usurpatam. Hvuco Grortus, Epist. ad Boetselaer. (Ep. 62, p. 21, ed. 1687.) Certum est mihi λειτουργίαν ANGLICANAM, item mo- rem imponendi manus adolescentibus in memoriam Baptismi, auctoritatem Episcoporum et Presbyteria ex solis Pastoribus composita, multaque alia ejusmodi satis congruere institutis vetustioris Ecclesie, a quibus in Gallia et Belgio recessum negare non possumus, NOT INNOVATING BUT RESTORATIVE, 191 Grorius, Epist. ad Corvinum, Epist. p. 434. Qui illam optimam antiquitatem sequuntur ducem iis non eveniet ut multum 510] ipsis sint discolores. In Anetra vides quam bene processerit dogmatum noxiorum repurgatio ; hac maxime de causa, quod qui id sanctissimum negotium procurandum sus- cepere, nihil admiserit novi, nihil sui, sed ad meliora secula intentam habuere oculorum aciem. Haprian Saravia, cited by Dr. Puller, Moderation of the Church of England, chap. xvi. p. 427. Among others that have reformed their Churches, I have often (saith Saravia) admired the wisdom of those who restored the true worship of God to the Church of ENcLanp,—who so tempered thein- selves that they cannot be reproved for having departed from the ancient and primitive custom of the Church of God ; and that moderation they have used, that by their example they have invited others to reform, and deterred none. See also the references to the next question. 4). But you say she reformed herself; did she not thus become a new Church ? @. No. She reformed herself, because she loved what was old, and did not love what was new’. As was before shown, (chap. i. ii. pp. 149—162) she was founded in the Apostolic age; at the Reforma- tion she recovered herself from the errors into which in course of time she had fallen; and she proceeded in all this gradually and moderately, lawfully ἡ and wisely, with the joint deliberation and co-operation of her Universities, her Clergy, and the People of England in Parliament assem- bled; and finally, with the ratification of the Crown. The errors of the English Church were not the Church herself; and in quitting them she did not quit herself *, any more than a man changes his skin when he cleanses it, or loses his identity when he recovers from a disease. The English Church after the Reformation was as much the English Cuap. V. .--. -- 192 THE REFORMATION Part ll. Church, as Naaman was Naaman after he had ? Kings v. washed in the river Jordan: indeed, as “ his flesh then came again,” so was she restored to her health- ful self at the Reformation. She might then have applied to herself the language of the Bishop of Carthage *, “In quo nutaverit Veritas, ad Originem Dominicam et Evangelicam et Apostolicam Tradi- tionem revertamur, et inde surgat actdés nostri Ratio unde et Ordo et Origo surrexit |” 1 CasauBon, Dedicat. Exerc. Baron. p- 128, ed. 1709. Qua fronte hee xovationis criminatio in Reformationis auc- tores aut assertores hodie confertur qui ἃ centum fere jam annis hoe wnum clamant, Reddite populis Christianis Primam Fidem! Reddite primitive Ecclesiz ritus ; desinite nuper inventa pro credendis necessario et quidem sub anathemate, gregibus magni Pastoris obtrudere (!)— Volumus scire que sit vera fides : ea est, auctore Juda Apostolo, (v. 3,) que semel fuit tradita. * Archbp. Lavp against Fisher, sect. 24. In the English Reformation our Princes had their parts, and the Clergy theirs ; and to these two principally the power and direc- tion for Reformation belong. That our Princes had their parts is manifest, by their calling together of the Bishops and other of the clergy to consider of what might seem worthy of Reformation. And the clergy did their part; for being then called together by Regal Power, they met in the National Synod of sixty-two, and the Articles then agreed on were afterwards confirmed by acts of state and the Royal assent.— And it is more than clear, that if the Roman Church will neither reform nor suffer reformation, it is lawful for any other particular Church to reform itself, so long as it doth it peaceably and orderly. See also Bp. Pearson, Minor Works, ii. 233. Archbp. Waxes, Letter to Dupin, Oct. 1, 1718, in Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. Appendix iii. No. vy. Tandem defa- tigato regno dura necessitas sua jura tuendi oculos omnium aperuit. Proponitur questio Episcopis ac Clero in utriusque Provincie Synodo congregatis, an Episcopus Romanus in NOT INNOVATING BUT RESTORATIVE. 193 Sacris Seripturis habeat aliquam majorem jurisdictionem in regno Anglize quam quivis alius externus Episcopus? In partem sanam, justam, veram utriusque concilii suffragia coneurrere. Quod Episcopi cum suo Clero statuerant, etiam regni Academie calculo suo approbarunt, Rea cum Parliamento sancivit : adeoque tandem, quod unice fieri poterat, sublata penitus potestas, quam nulle leges, nulla jura, vel civilia vel ecclesiastica, intra debitos fines unquam poterant continere. Siquam prerogativam Ecclesiz concilia Sedis Imperialis Episcopo concesserint (etsi, cadente imperio, etiam ea pre- rogativa excidisse merito possit censeri); tamen quod ad me attinet, servatis semper Regnorum juribus, Ecclesiarum libertatibus, Episcoporum dignitate, modo in ceteris con- veniatur, per me licet, suo fruatur qualicunque primatu. At in alias ecclesias dominari ; episcopatum, cujus partem Christus unicuique episcopo in solidum reliquit, tantum non in solidum sibi soli vindicare ; siquis ejus injuste tyrannidi sese opposuerit, ccelum ac terram in illius perniciem commo- vere ; he nec nos unquam ferre potuimus, nec vos debetis. In hoe pacis fundamento si inter nos semel conveniatur, in czteris aut idem sentiemus omnes, aut facile alii aliis dissen- tiendi libertatem absque pacis jactura concedemus, % Bp. Jewrx1, Apology, c. vi. in Christian Institutes, p- 352, and ibid. p. 312, and note. Hooker, III. 1.10. As if we were of opinion that Luther did erect a new Church of Curist. Bp. Harsnert, Parl. Hist. i. 1481. We fetch not our Reformation from Wickliffe, Huss, and Luther, of latter times, but from the first 400 years next after Christ. Archbp. Bramnatt, i. 119. We do not arrogate to our- selves a new Church, a new Religion, or new Holy Orders. Our Religion is the same as it was, our Church the same, our Holy Orders the same, differing from what they were only as a garden weeded from a garden unweeded. Bp. Butt, ii. p. 205. We maintain that our Church, and the Pastors thereof, did always acknowledge the same Rule of Faith, the same fundamental Articles of the Christian Religion, both before and since the Reformation; but with this difference, that we then professed the Rule of Faith, with the additional corruptions of the Church of Rome, but now, God be thanked, without them. ἡ K Cuap. V. Part If. dD ---- 194. THE REFORMATION 4 St. Cyprian, Ep. 74. @. But since then the English Church was, as you affirm, restored at the Reformation, can we say that she could have been properly called a Church while she was infected with so many Papal corruptions as she was before it ? @. Yes; under Popery she was a Church, though an erring one. The Israelitish Church still remained a Church even under Ahab; the Jewish Church still existed under the Pharisees ; the Scribes sat in Moses’ seat, and were to be obeyed in all things lawful and indifferent. Jeru- salem was “the Holy City,” though its rulers did not receive Christ. The Christian Church existed still, when the “world groaned that it had become Arian'.” The ark of God was still the ark of God, even when in the hands of the Philistines; and the vessels of the Temple were holy, even at Babylon. So the Church of Eng- land, though she had fallen from her former purity, was stili a Church while under the Pope’. If she was not a Church then, we admit that she is no Church now ; and we would then allow that she was founded at the Reformation, that is, that she was the work of men, and not of God; that she sprang from earth, and not from heaven, that she is a new Church, and therefore no Church. But no; we believe her to have been a ¢rue Church, and (corruptions excepted) the same Church, defore Papal times, im them, and after them. 1S. Hieron. ady. Lucif.c. 7. Ingemuit totus Orbis, et Arianum se esse factum miratus est. 2 Archbp. Laup against Fisher, p. 105, ed. Oxf. 1839. A Church that is exceedingly corrupt is yet @ frue Church in NOT INNOVATING BUT RESTORATIVE. 195 verity of essence, but it is not a right Church: as a thief is a true man in the verity of essence, but is not a right man. Archbp. Bramua t, ii. p. 88. ‘“ A Church may be said to be a true Churchin two senses, metaphysically and morally ; and every Church which hath the essentials of a Church, how tainted soever it be in other things, is metaphysically a true” (though not morally a right) “ Church.” See also ii. 26. 55. Hooker, V. vxvimt. 9. We earnestly advise them to con- sider their oversight, in suffering indignation at the faults of the Church of Rome to blind and withhold their judgments from seeing that which withal they should acknowledge, concerning so much nevertheless still due to the same Church, as to be held and reputed a part of the House of God, a limb of the Visible Church of Christ. Bp. Sanprrson, Preface to his Sermons, p. xviii. “ The great promoters of the Roman interest among us, and betrayers of the Protestant cause, are they who, among other false principles, maintain that the Church of Rome is no érue Church.” The truth of the above assertion of Bp. Sander- son will appear on examination of the use which Bossuet makes of the allegation, that “ Rome is no true Church,” in his Variations, xv. 26,27. See also Dr. Putter, Moderation of the Church of England, chap. xvii. p. 454. “ Casauson had good reason to say, The denying the Church of Rome the being of a Church, hath been a great hindrance of Reformation : and I verily believe the opinion most Papists are kept in, that the religion of Protestants is a new religion, is not of little force to make them averse from it to this day.” @. But can you explain further, how she could be a Church in Papal times ? @. Because as both the Israelites and Jews had the Law and the Prophets and a Priesthood in the worst times, and were so God’s people ', as we have seen, and were recognized by Him and by Christ as such, so in Popish times the Church of England had, by God’s mercy, the essentials of a Church, though greatly marred and obscured. She had the Christian Sacraments; the Holy Scriptures ; K 2 Cuap. VY. --- -Ο-’ Parr 11: 196 THE REFORMATION an Apostolic succession of Ministers: the Lord’s Prayer ; the three Creeds, and the Ten command- ments ἢ, and thus she was a Church. 1 Hooker, III. τ. 8—10. 3 The words of the Reformers on this important point, as for instance of Martin Luruer, in S. Joann. c. xvi. and contra Anabaptistas, are very observable. Nos fatemur sub Papatu plurimum esse boni Christiani, imo omne bonum Christianum, atque etiam illinc ad nos advenisse ; quippe fatemur in Papatu yeram esse Sacram Scripturam, yerum Sacramentum Altaris, veras claves ad remissionem pecca- torum, verum praedicandi officium, verum Catechismum, ut sunt Oratio Dominica, Decem Precepta, Articuli Fidei: dico insuper sub Papatu yeram Christianitatem imo yerum Christianitatis nucleum esse. See also Carvin, Instit. iv. 11, 12. Hine patet nos minime negare quinsub Romani quoque Pontificis tyrannide Eeclesie maneant. See also, concerning the English Reformers, NEAL, History of the Puritans, pt.i.ch.iy. “Τὸ was admitted by the Court-Reformers,” (by which the writer means Abp. Parker, Bps. JewEt, Grinpar, ἅς.) “that the Church of Rome was ἃ érue Church, though corrupt in some points of doctrine and government ; that all her ministrations were valid, and that the Pope was a true Bishop of Rome, though not [Supreme Head] of the. Universal Church.” And, finally, Rome is called a Church in the XXXIX Arrictzs, Art. xix., on which Dr. Hey,—‘* The Church of Rome is here allowed the essence of a true Church.” rv. xix. 8. tom. ii. p. 373. ed. 1841, and in the Canons (Canon 29 ) it is said, “So far was it from the purpose of the Church of England to forsake and reject the Churches of Italy,” &c. @. You speak of the Church of England as existing before Popery, and as holding the ancient faith; but is she not called a Protestant Church, and is it then consistent to say, that she is older than Popery, when Protestantism is a renunciation of Popery ὃ and how then can she be united by doctrine with the Catholic Church ? NOT INNOVATING BUT RESTORATIVE. 197 @. The Church of England, as a Church, is as old as Christianity. Her Protestantism is indeed comparatively recent, and ¢his for a good reason, because the Romish errors and corruptions, against which she protests are recent: but the fact is, that, as the Universal Church, for the maintenance of her Catholicity, was Protestant at the first four General Councils; as she protested at Nicaea against the heresy of Arius, and at Constantinople against Macedonius, as she protested at Ephesus against Nestorius, and at Chalcedon against Kutyches, so the Church of England became Pro- testant’ at the Reformation, in order that she might be more truly and purely Catholic ; and if Rome will become truly Catholic, then, but not till then, the Church of England will cease to be Protestant. 1 Archbp. Laup, Conference with Fisher, sect. 21. The Protestants did not get their name by protesting against the Church of Rome, but by protesting (and that when nothing else would serve) against her errors and superstitions. Do you remove them from the Church of Rome, and our Pro- testation is ended, and the separation too.—Thus far Abp. _Lavup; and it may be added, that if Rome would become Catholic, Popery would cease too ; for as Grorius observes, Epist. p. 5, Fermé yerum est quod quidam magni nominis theologi prodiderunt, omnia que vera sunt, et que nos credimus, etiam a Papistis agnosci ; sed addi insuper falsa alia, quorum queedam sunt talia ut cum primis illis additis yeris nequeant consistere. Unde sequitur, redacta Religione ad ea in que omnes Ecclesize omnium temporum consen- tiunt, collabi Papismum, ut qui conflatus sit ex privatis opinionibus. See also Bp. ANprewes, ad Card. Bellarmin. cap. i. p. 20. Bourke, y. p. 180. We are Protestants, not from indiffer- ence, but zeal. K 3 Cuav. V. SS Above, Pt. ii, chap. i. Parr IT. — Jude 3. 1 Tim. vi. 3. -ὦ, 20. Art. VI. Art. VI. Art. VIII. 198 THE REFORMATION ©. But it is said, do not what are called the Thirty-nine Articles contain an exposition of the doctrines of the Church of England, and were they not first drawn up, as they now stand, in the year 1562: and if so, where was the Faith of the English Church defore that time? and if she had no Articles of Faith, how could she be a Church ? and how therefore be united in doctrine with the Catholic Church ? @. Where, we might ask in reply, was the faith of the Universal Church of Christ before the year 325, when the Nicene Creed was promul- gated ?—And the answer would be—It was in the Holy Scriptures as interpreted by the Church from the beginning. So the Church of England holds neither more nor less than ‘ the Faith once (for all, ἅπαξ) delivered to the saints’ The Thirty-nine Articles contain no enactment of any thing new in doctrine, but they are only a declara- tion of what is old. In them the Church of Eng- land affirms that Hoty Scriprure ‘ “ containeth all things necessary to salvation,” and that by Holy Scripture she means “ those Canonical books of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church ;? in them she asserts that the three Creeps’, which have been received by the Catho- lic Church ever since they were framed, “ought thoroughly to be received and believed.” She rejects the practice of public prayer in a tongue not understood by the people as “plainly repug- nant to the Word of God, and the custom of the Art. XXIV. primitive Church.” Similarly, she appeals to “ An- cient Authors,” “ Ancient Canons,” “ Fathers,” and “ Decrees” of the Church in her Ordinal *, Homi- NOT INNOVATING BUT RESTORATIVE. 199 lies, and Canons. She is ready to be judged by Cnar. Vv. the earliest and best ages of the Church*®. But, a on the contrary, the Church of Rome, on other occasions, and especially at the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century (A.p. 1545-63), in defi- ance of the prohibition of the Third General Council* (that of Ephesus), imposed Twelve new Articles of faith® (which she acknowledges not to be found in Holy Scripture) to be believed, on pain of damnation, on the authority of this Coun- cil, which was uncanonical® in its convocation, illegal in its convention, and uncatholic in its constitution ; and thus she claims to herself the power of publishing a quintum Evangelium; or rather, as may be truly said, she convicts herself of obtruding on the world a New Religion, and of being, so far, a New Church. 1 XXXIX Arricres, Art. vi. Art. viii. Art. xxiv. 2 Preface to the Ordinal, a.p. 1552. See the passage below cited, p. 209, also Orricr for Consecration of Bishops ; Brother, forasmuch as the Holy Scripture and the ancient Canons command, &c. Homiuies passim. As a specimen, see the Homily against Peril of Idolatry, pt. ii. p. 178. “It shall be declared that this truth and doctrine . . . was believed and taught of the old holy Fathers, and most ancient learned Doctors, and received in the old Primitive Church, which was most uncorrupt and pure ; and this declaration shall be made out of the said holy Doctors’ own writings, and out of the ancient Histories Ecclesiastical to the same belonging.” Canons of 1603; in the 3lst Canon, “ Forasmuch as the ancient Fathers of the Church, led by the example of the Apostles, appointed, &e., we following their holy and reli- gious example, do constitute and decree, &c.—Canon 82, According to the judgment of the ancient Fathers, and the practice of the primitive Church, We do ordain, &c,— Canon 38, It hath been long since provided by many de- K 4 Parr If. ---.,.ἔ - 200 THE REFORMATION crees of ancient Fathers, That, &c. According to which example we do ordain.—Canon 60, Forasmuch as it hath been a solemn, ancient, and laudable custom in the Church of God, continued from the Apostles’ time, That, ἄς. We will and appoint, &e. 3 Of the Scriptural, Primitive, and Catholic foundation of the doctrine of the Church of England, a very clear and emphatic statement was made by Kine James L., aided by Bishop Anprewes and Isaac Casavzon, to Cardinal Perron, (Casauboni Epist. p. 493,) as follows, (see above, p. 190, 2, and below, p. 219). Beatus Chrysostomus, cum alibi, tum ex professo in Homilia, in Acta, xxxiii. tractans illam queestio- nem, Quo pacto vera Ecclesia inter plures societates, que hoe sibt nomen vindicant, possit discerni? duo docet esse instru- menta judicandi et questionis hujus decidendz ; primo qui- dem Verbum Dei, tum autem antiquitatem doctrine, non ab aliquo recentiore excogitate, sed ab ipso Ecclesiz nascentis principio semper cognite. Hee duo κριτήρια REx cum Eccresta ANGLIcANA tota voluntate amplectens pronuntiat eam demum se doctrinam pro vera simul et necessaria ad salutem agnoscere, que e fonte Scripture Sacrze manans per consensum Ecclesiz veteris, ceu per canalem, ad hee tem- pora fuerit derivata. Pag. 498. Rex igitur et Eccrestra ANGLIcANA, quatuor prima Concilia ecumenica quum admittant, eo ipso satis declarant, verze ac legitimee Ecclesia tempus non includere se uno aut altero demum seculo ; yerum multo longius producere, et Marciani Imperatoris, sub quo Chalce- donense concilium est celebratum, tempus complecti. . . . . Primitive Ecclesie testimonio et pondere sublato, controver- sias hodiernas finem nunquam τὸ kar ἀνθρώπους accepturas, neque ulla disputatione fore terminandas, ultro Serenissimus Rex agnoscit. Dogmata fidei, et quicquid ad salutem neces- sarium meretur credi, ἃ sola Scriptura sacra peti debere, neque ἃ quorumyis mortalium auctoritate pendere, sed e Verbo Dei duntaxat, quo suam Ipse nobis voluntatem per Spiritum Sanctum declaravit. Patribus enim et Ecclesie veteri Fidei Articulos eliciendi ὃ Sacra Scriptura, et expli- candi, jus fuisse ; novos articulos comminiscendi nullum jus fuisse. Isto posito fundamento et τῇ θεοπνεύστῳ paging sua majestas manebit sarta, tecta; et piis Patribus que debetur *: NOT INNOVATING BUT RESTORATIVE. 90] reyerentia preestabitur. Hoc voluisse omnes veteris Ecclesiz Doctores facilé potest ex eorum scriptis demonstrari. Cui jam nota non sunt verba aurea Basilii Magni, in libello de Fide? Φανερὰ ἔκπτωσις πίστεως, ἢ ἀθετεῖν τι τῶν γε- γραμμένων, ἢ ἐπεισάγειν τῶν μὴ γεγραμμένων. Abp. Laup, Conference, Sect. 88. The Council of Trent having added twelve new articles to the Creed, says thus of them, ‘ Hee est vera Catholica Fides, extra quam nemo salvus esse potest.’ (Bulla Pii IV. super Forma Juramenti Prof. Fid. in fine Cone. Tridentini.) Barrow on the Pope’s Supremacy, p. 290. The New Creed of Pius IV. (i. e. of the Council of Trent) containeth these novelties and heterodoxies, 1. Seyen Sacraments. 2. Trent Doctrine of Justification and Original Sin. 8, Propitiatory Sacrifice of the Mass. 4, Transubstantiation, 5. Communicating under one kind. 6. Purgatory. 7. Invocation of Saints. 8. Veneration of Reliques. 9. Worship of Images. 10. The Roman Church to be the Mother and Mistress of all Churches. 11. Swear- ing obedience to the Pope. 12. Receiving the decrees of all Synods and of Trent. The Oath declares, Hane veram Catholicam Fidem, evtra quam nemo salvus esse potest—voveo spondeo et juro.—a. Ὁ. 1564, This Oath is to be taken by all Romish Priests, lay and secular, and by all members of monastic orders. * Concert. Generat. Labbe, iii. p. 689, a. see below, p. 218. ὥρισεν ἡ ayia σύνοδος ἑτέραν πίστιν μηδενὶ ἐξεῖναι προσ- φέρειν ἢ συντιθέναι παρὰ τὴν ὁρισθεῖσαν παρὰ τῶν ἁγίων πατέρων τῶν ἐν τῇ Νικαίᾳ συναχθέντων σὺν ἁγίῳ πνεύματι--- and it anathematizes all who dare to do so. 5 XXXIX Arricregs, Art. xxi. General Councils may not be gathered together without the commandment and will of princes. Abp. Laup, Conference, sect. 27,28, 29. The Council of Trent was not /egalin the necessary conditions to be observed in a General Council—both through defect of legal convoca- tion and of legal presidency, and therefore without synodical order; for there is no such thing as a General Council without imperial or royal convocation and presidency.—(It was partial in its constitution,) there being more Jtalkan Bishops KO Cuap, V, Part Il. ey 2 Tim. iii. 5. 1 Pet. iv. 11. Rom. xii. 6. Jude 3. Gal. 1. 9. 202 THE REFORMATION than of all Christendom besides ; and in some sessions scarce forty or fifty Bishops present. See also Bramuatt, i. 258, 259, and note. @. But may not a similar defence be made for these twelve articles of the Council of Trent, as was just now alleged in behalf of the Thirty-nine Articles? May it not be said that they also were only declaratory, and that, though first enounced at that Council, they had been believed by the Catholic Church from the beginning ? @. This has indeed been said ; but it is written in Scripture, that “the Holy Scriptures are sufficient (ἱκαναὶ) to make men wise unto salvation ;” that, “if any man speak, let him speak as the Oracles of God,’ and he that interpreteth (προφητεύων) “ let him interpret according to the proportion of faith ;” that “the faith was once for all (ἅπαξ) delivered to the saints ;” that we are to hold fast the form of sound words, and that, “if any man, or even an Angel from heaven, preach any other doctrine” than what the Apostles have delivered, and the Apostolic Churches have received, “let him be anathema ;” and it is incredible that the Church should have believed from the beginning so many articles which it did not publicly profess till the Council of Trent; and no proof has ever been adduced of such a belief as is here affirmed. And further, the Thirty-nine Articles not only do not enforce any new doctrine, but they affirm (Article xx.) that none can be enforced which is not found in Scripture; whereas the greater num- ber of these articles of the Council of Trent were first declared then: and they, be it observed, are articles of doctrine ; and are required on oath, and NOT INNOVATING BUT RESTORATIVE. 203 under solemn anathemas, to be believed as neces- sary to salvation. Now, ἃ Communion which enforces articles of faith which it does not find in Scripture, and which it allows to have been first declared in the sixteenth century after Christ, and which it cannot show to have been held in the early ages of the Church, does, in that respect, what is very unwarrantable; and, also, it leaves the world in uncertainty as to what it may here- after declare to be necessary to salvation ; it proves itself to have been very remiss in not having before declared doctrines which it asserts to be necessary to salvation ; it removes the Faith from the rock on which Christ has set it, and places it on the shifting sand; it overthrows the authority of ScripTuRE; it sets at defiance the Divine com- mand, “To the Law and to the Testimony! Jf they speak not according to this Worp, it is because they have no light in them:” and it sub- jects itself to the fearful anathema, “ Adoro Scrip- ture plenitudinem; si non est scriptum, timeant Va illud adjicientibus aut detrahentibus desti- natum ἡ! ” 1 Tertoxuian, c. Hermog. c. 22. de Virg. Vel. i. Regula Fidei una est immobilis, et irreformabilis. The words of the ancient Scrrrror ANonymus, ap. Euseb. H. E. y. 16. Routh, Rel. Sacra, ii. p. 73, are very worthy of remark ; δεδιὼς καὶ eEevdaBovpevos, μή mn δόξω τισὶν ἐπι- συγγράφειν ἣ ἐπιδιατάττεσθαι τῷ τῆς τοῦ εὐαγγελίου Καινῆς Διαθήκης λόγῳ, ᾧ μήτε προσθεῖναι μήτ᾽ ἀφελεῖν δυνατὸν τῷ κατὰ τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον αὐτὸ πολιτεύεσθαι προ- ῃρημένῳ. S. Hieron. in Aggeum, cap. i. Que absque auctoritate et testimoniis Scripturarum quasi Traditione Apostolicd sponte reperiunt atque confingunt percutit gladius Dei. K 6 Cuap. V. a Deut. iv. 2. xii. 32, xviii. 20. Prov. xxx. 5 Θὲ Isa, viii. 20. Matt. xv. 9. Rom. xv. 4. Gal. i. 9. iii. 15, 2 Tim. iii. 15. 1 Ῥοι. ἵν, 11. Rev. xxii. Part IL. 204 THE REFORMATION S. Ave. 6. liter. Petil. iii. 6. Si angelus de clo vobis ——~—~ annuntiaverit preterquam quod in Scripturis Legalibus et Evangelicis accepistis, Anathema sit ! Hooker, II. ν. 4. To urge anything upon the Church requiring thereunto that religious assent of Christian belief wherewith the words of the Holy Prophets are received, to urge anything as part of that supernatural and celestially revealed truth, which God hath taught, and not to shew it in Scripture, this did the Ancient Fathers eyermore think unlawful, impious, execrable. @. But, although the Church of England de- clares that the Scriptures contain all things neces- sary to salvation, yet she is often said to admit the right of private judgment also, and may not therefore novel expositions of the Scriptures be publicly pro- pounded with her permission by Ministers in her communion ? @. The term private judgment is often used very erroneously by those who do not understand, or will not consider, its true meaning, which is, when men set up their own private opinions in opposition to the declared public sentence of the Church. Now we affirm that the Church of England no where gives any countenance or sanction to any such judgment, but on the contrary, openly and strongly condemns it. Thus in her xxth Article, she asserts the power of the Church to decree rites and ceremonies, and that it has “authority in controversies of faith.’ And with respect to discipline also, she says in her xxxtvth Article, “ Whosoever through his private judgment will- ingly and purposely doth break the traditions of God’s Church, which be not repugnant to God’s Word, and be ordained and approved by common NOT INNOVATING BUT RESTORATIVE. 205 Authority, ought to be rebuked openly, that others may fear to do the like.” She denies not indeed, the liberty to any one to determine whether he will engage to expound according to her public formularies; but she admits no right in any one who has made such an engagement, to alter, weaken, and subvert, what he is by his own act pledged to maintain: on the contrary, she censures ἡ all impugners of her doctrine and disci- pline; and no minister of her communion may expound’ at all, unless examined, approved, and licensed by the Bishop; and all preachers are under the jurisdiction of their Ordinary *. As, then, she professes no novelties herself, so she tolerates none in her ministers; and she has emphatically declared her reverence for Scripture, as expounded by Antiquity, in her Canon of 1571, concerning Preachers; In primis videbunt Con- cionatores, nequid unguam doceant pro concione quod a populo religiose teneri et credi velint, nisi quod consentaneum sit doctrinz Veteris aut Novi Testamenti, guodque ex illa ipsa doctrinaé Catholici Patres et veteres Episcopi collegerint ἡ, 1 Canons of 1603. Canons 5, 6, 7, 9. 36, 2 Canons 48, 49. 3 Canon 53. * Called by Bp. Cosrns “ the Golden rule of the Church of England.” On the Canon of Scripture, Table ad finem. See also Bp. Brverines, yol. i. Serm. yi. p. 126, on this Canon. “So wisely hath our Church provided against novelties ; insomuch that had this one rule been duly ob- served as it ought, there would have been no such thing as heresy or schism amongst us ; but we should all have con- tinued firm both to the doctrine and discipline of the Uni- yersal Church, and so should have ‘held fast the form of Cuap. V. Part II, Ss 206 THE REFORMATION sound words’ according to the Apostle’s counsel ;” And Hvuco Grorius, de Imperio Sum. Pot. cirea Sacra, vi. 8. Non possum non laudare preclarum Angliz Canonem, ‘ Im- primis, ἄς. See also Bp. Pearson, Posthumous Works, i. 436. @. But if the Church of Rome be chargeable with error and corruption in doctrine and dis- cipline, is not the Church of England tainted with error and corruption, since she has derived so much from that of Rome? and if she wishes to be a pure Church, ought she not to renounce and utterly destroy what she has so received ? A. Let it be allowed for argument’s sake, that the Church of England has received from the Primitive Church many things through that of Rome, and not rather through the medium of the ancient British, Irish, and Scotch Churches, and some few things from that of Rome herself. But the nature of the former, as, for example, the Sacraments, the Word of God, Holy Orders, Episcopal Government, Prayers, Creeds, Places for Divine Worship, the observance of the Lord’s Day and of Fasts and Festivals, has not been impaired by transmission; and if, because they had been abused’, she had lost these, she would have lost herself; for the abuse of a thing does not take away its lawful use, but on the contrary, Is confirmat usum, qui tollit abusum; the latter were not derived from Romanists, as such, but from them as being therein Reasonable and Chris- tian men; and the Church of England, by retain- ing both, has prudently, charitably, and piously vindicated and restored God’s things to God’s service*: whereas, if she had permitted the ac- NOT INNOVATING BUT RESTORATIVE. 207 cidental association of bad with good to deprive Cuar. VI. her of the good, and had chosen to destroy, eis instead of to restore, she would have been guilty of the folly and of the sin of promoting the cause of evil against Almighty God and against Herself. 1 Canons of 1603. Canon xxx. See further below, pt. iii. ch. ii. last question but one. δὲ ΤΟ κα DVo mm. ΤΥ. vim. 1.2. TV. x. ΨΥ. x16. ΝΕ αν Os, Va) XXVIII CHAPTER VI. UNINTERRUPTED SUCCESSION OF HOLY ORDERS IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. @. I wovup next inquire, if the Church of England can stand the test applied by the ancient Fathers to try Christian communities, whether they were sound branches of the Catholic Church ? A. Of what test do you speak ? @. That before mentioned (p. 8. 61-2. 79— 105); viz. whether her ministers derive their commission by succession from the Apostles *. @. Yes; the Church of England traces the Holy Orders of her Bishops and Presbyters in an unbroken line from the Apostles of Christ’; and she declares in her Ordinal, (approved in her Articles [Art. xxxvi.] and Canons, [Canon Xxxvi.] and subscribed by all her Ministers and by all who have taken Academic Degrees in her Universities of Oxford and Cambridge,) that “there have ever been three orders in Christ’s Church, those of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, 208 SUCCESSION OF HOLY ORDERS ParrIL from the Apostles’ time ;” and she recognizes none as having these orders, who have not re- ceived Episcopal Ordination*. (See above Pt. i. ch. xi. Pt. ii. ch. i.) " S. Inen. iv. 43, p. 343. Grabe. Oportet obedire his, qui, cum successionem habent ab Apostolis, cum Episcopatis successione charisma veritatis certum, secundum placitum Patris, acceperunt. See also above, p: 61, 2. Tertuuian, Prescript. Heret. c. 31. Edant (Heretici) origines Ecclesiarum suarum ; evolyant ordinem Episcoporum suorum ita per successiones ab initio decurrentem ut primus ille Episcopus aliquem ex Apostolis vel Apostolicis yiris habuerit auctorem et antecessorem. S. Cyprian, Ep. 69. Non Episcopus computari potest qui nemini succedens a se ipso ortus est ; such an one S. Cornettius, Routh, Rel. Sacr. ii. p. 10, calls ἐπίσκοπον ὥσπερ ἐκ μαγγάνου τινὸς εἰς μέσον ῥιφθέντα. S. Aveusr. in Joannis Evang. Tract. xxxvii.6. Catholica fides veniens de doctrina Apostolorum, plantata in nobis, per seriem successionis accepta, sana ad posteros transmittenda, inter utrosque, id est, inter utrumque errorem, tenuit yeri- tatem. Abp. Bramuatt, i. p. 112. Apostolical succession is the nerve and sinew of Apostolic Unity. See above, p. 43. Bp. Pearson, Minor Works, ii. 232. * Bp. Beveriper, Serm. i. vol. i. p. 23, on Matt. xxviii. 20. They certainly hazard their salvation at a strange rate, who separate themselves from such a Church as ours, wherein the Apostolical succession, the root of all Christian communion, hath been so entirely preserved, and the Word and Sacraments are so effectually administered ; and all to go into such assemblies and meetings as can have no pretence to the great promise in my text. For it is manifest that this pro- mise was made only to the Apostles, and their successors, to the end of the world. Whereas in the private meetings, where their teachers have no Apostolical or Episcopal im- position of hands, they have no ground to pretend to suc- ceed the Apostles, nor, by consequence, any right to the Spirit which her Lord here promiseth. IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 209 3 Book or Common Prayer of the United Church of Guar. VI. England and Ireland; Preface to Ordination Service. It is ——~—~ eyident unto all men diligently reading the Holy Scripture and ancient authors, that from the Apostles’ time there have been these orders of Ministers in Christ’s Church, Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. Which offices were evermore had in such reverent estimation, that no man might presume to execute any of them, except he were first called, tried, examined, and known to have such qualities as are requisite for the same ; and also by publick Prayer, with Imposition of Hands, were approved and admitted thereunto by lawful authority. And therefore, to the intent that these Orders might be continued and reverently used and esteemed in the United Church of England and Ireland, no man shall be accounted or taken to be a lawful Bishop, Priest, or Deacon in the United Church of England and Ireland, or suffered to execute any of the said functions, except he be called, tried, examined, and admitted thereunto, according to the Form hereafter following, or hath had formerly Episcopal Consecration or Ordination.—See also Act or UNirorMIry, xiii. xiv. @. And this series was never interrupted ? @. No; never’. 1 Abp. Bramuatt, ii. 203. We have set up no new Chairs, nor new Altars, nor new successions, but have con- tinued those which were from the beginning. Mason, F. Vindiciz Eccles. ch. viiiimxvii. See Casavuzon, below, Pt. ii. ch. vii. p. 219. The story of the Ordination of our first Bishop in Queen Elizabeth’s reign at the Nag’s Head Tavern in Cheapside thoroughly examined, and proved to be a late inyented, in- consistent, self-contradictory, and absurd fable, &c. By Tuomas Browne, B.D., formerly Fellow of St. John’s College, Cambridge, 1731, 8vo. Couorayer’s (P. F. Le) Dissertation sur la Validité des Ordinations des Anglois, 1733. Bp. Butt, ii. 204. “The story of the Nag’s Head Ordination is so putid a fable, that the more learned and ingenuous Papists” (and Puritans, see Neat, i. iv. p. 99) “are now ashamed to make use of it.” PERcevaL on Apo- stolical Succession, with an Appendix on the English Orders, 210 SUCCESSION OF HOLY ORDERS Pant II, 1841. See also the recent very able Preface to Abp. Bram- "—~— μαι Works, vol. iii. Oxford, 1844, p. 4, and Of the Validity of the Matter and Form of English Orders, see Bp. Prear- son’s Minor Works, i. 296. Pripravux’s Tracts, 1716, pp. 72 —144. Bramuatt, i. 271; and on the novelty in the form of the Romish Orders, see BraMHALt, ii. 36. 40. The following are testimonies of Romanists to the validity of English Orders :—Coxzerv, Bishop of Montpellier, in the Catechism published by his Authority for the use of the Clergy of his Diocese, 1701, pt. i. sect. ii. ch. iii. § 7, p. 297, ed. 1795. Demande. Vous ne pouvez pas nier au moins que la sue- cession Apostolique ne convienne a plusieurs Evéques de lEglise qu’on nomme Anglicane, méme depuis qu’ils se sont séparés de la communion de l’Eglise Romaine ὃ Réponse. Je conviens qu'il peut y avoir quelques-uns de ces Evéques qui aient cette succession.—For the testimony of BossvEt on this subject, see Courayer, Preuves Justif. § 1; and PatmeEr on the Church, ii. 453; and the Preface by the present Archbishop of Paris to the work of Cardinal de Luzerne sur les Droits des Evéques:—L’Eglise Anglicane fut la seule des sectes Protestantes qui conserva son Episcopat. Paris, 1845; and Dr. Linearp, Hist. of England, vol. vii. note i. says, “ The Ceremony (of Archbishop Parker's Con- secration) was performed, though with a little variation, according to the Ordinal of Edward VI. Two of the conse- crators, Barlow and Hodgskins, had been ordained Bishops, according to the Roman Pontifical ; the other two according to the Reformed Ordinal. (Wilk. Cone. iv. 198.) Of this consecration, on the 17th of December (1559), there can be no doubt.” €. Did, then, the Romish Church give an Apos- tolic commission to those teachers who preached against herself? A. No. It was not Rome, but it is Curist, and Christ alone, Who gives the commission to preach and to send preachers, and Who prescribes what is to be preached, viz. His own Gospel. The Church of Rome was only one’ of the Channels through which IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 211 that commission flowed, and not the Source from Cuav. VI. which it rose. 1 Archbp. Bramua tt, ii. 94. Before Austin, there were in Britain, British Bishops and Scottish Bishops, to which he added English Bishops. These three successions, in tract of time, came to be united into one; so as every English Bishop now derives his succession from British, Scottish, and English Bishops. @. And this commission was not invalidated by the errors of those through whose hands it passed, so that the continuity of the Apostolic succession could thus have received any inter- ruption ? A. No. The divine office must be distinguished from the human officers. The Grace of Holy Orders which was transmitted by them was the Grace, not of men, but of Christ and of the Holy Spirit, and could not be impaired by any personal defects or demerits of the Ministers who trans- mitted it. In the’ communication of God’s or- Num. xxiv. dinances non merita personarum consideranda sunt, 1 Sam. x.11. ] Matt. xxiii. sed officia sacerdotum'. 2 at xxiii me Η John xi. 49. 1 See 8. Amsrosg, Epist. i. ad Chromatium. Acts i. 25. tener S. Orratus, y. 4. Sacramenta per se sancta sunt, non per Wor, ih is homines. Hooker, V. rxxvur. 8. Much less is it necessary which some haye urged concerning the re-ordination of such as others in times more corrupt did consecrate before. Which error, already quelled by St. Jerome, doth not now require any further refutation. (In Dialog. c. Luciferianos.) Geruarp, de Sacramentis, tom. iv. p. 233, and vi. 148, 149, where he cites passages from Martin Luther, resting his claim to the ministerial office on his Lpiscopal Ordination under the Papacy in 1507. Bp. Anprewss, vol. iii. p. 278, Sermon on the Sending of the Holy Ghost. Hath not the Church long since defined Part II. ᾿Ξ..." John xiv. 6. xvii. 17. 1 Tim. ii. 5. 1 John v. 6. 9212 SUCCESSION OF HOLY ORDERS it positively, that the Baptism Peter gave was no better than that which Judas, and exemplified it that a seal of iron will give as perfect a stamp as one of gold? (Greg. Naz. Orat.de Baptism.) Semblably is it with these ; they that by the word, the sacraments, the keys, are unto other the Con- duits of Grace, to make them fructify in all good works, may well so be, though themselves remain unfruitful, as do the pipes of wood or lead, that by transmitting the water make the garden bear both herbs and flowers, though themselves never bear any. (S. Aug. Tract. y.in 5. Joann.) Sever the office from the men; leave the men to God, to whom they stand or fall ; det the ordinance of God stand fast. XXXIX Arricces, Art. xxvi., and Bp. Bevermce on it: and see above, pt. ii. ch. v. p. 193—196; and below, pt. iii. ch. iii. @. But were not the Churches in which those teachers preached, built and endowed by Roman Catholics, many of whose religious opinions the Church of England has declared to be erroneous, and ought they therefore to belong to her? @. These Churches, by whomsoever they were founded, were dedicated “Dro er Eccuesi& ;” and by consecration they became the property and the dwelling-places of the Most High’, and ceased to be the possessions of man. Since then they belong not to man, but to God, and since God is Trurtu, therefore whatever doctrine and whatever worship is true, may, nay, must be taught and offered therein. Moreover, to speak of the intention with which they were founded, they were built for Christian preaching and worship, and not for the promotion of Popery, as such, much less of Popery such as it decame in the sixteenth century at the Council of Trent; they were built, not for the maintenance of error, but of truth; and their endowments, though given, indeed, in IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 213 some cases, to an erring Church, were not given Cuap. VI. to its errors. And further (as the Churches of — ὦ the Donatists in Africa and their endowments were transferred to the Catholic Church by Chris- tian Emperors in the fifth century, and this was done legibus religiosis*, as St. Augustin calls them; so) when the whole body of the Church and State of England, Sovereign and People, Clergy and Laity, (doubts and questions having arisen concerning divers points of doctrine and discipline,) did, after consulting Reason, Scripture, and Antiquity, in a lawful and deliberate manner * consider and decide the question what is truth and what is error, it would have been inconsistent with the duty of Rulers and People to Almighty God, and injurious to the Founders of those Churches, and to the Nation at large, to have suffered error mixed with truth, and corrupting it, both in teaching and worship, to be perpetuated in them, instead of truth alone. The Pantheon of Agrippa, at Rome, was once a heathen temple, dedicated to all the gods, and it is now a Christian Church; and the members of the Church of England might ask the Romanist why he does not there offer sacrifice to Jupiter, if he should enquire of them why they do not invoke saints and worship images in their Churches. 1 Ecclesia (says the English Law, 2 Inst. 64) est domus mansionalis OmnirpotentIs Dex. Cp. Hooker, V. xi. 3. The Dedication of Churches serveth to surrender up that right which otherwise their founders might have in them, and to make Gop Himself their Owner. See also Sour, in Christian Institutes, iii. p. 429. 2S. Aveustin, Epist. 50, ad Boniface. Quicquid nomine Ecclesiarum partis Donati possidebatur, Christiani Impera- Part Il. ΜΞ Preface to the Ordinal. Ecclus. xlii. 1 James Ls Jude 16. Acts xix. 5, 214 SUCCESSION OF HOLY ORDERS tores /egibus religiosis cum ipsis Ecclesiis ad Catholicam trans- ire jusserunt. Saravia, de Sacrilegio, p. 88. In Reformatione Ecclesia fit casta conjux, et vero suo Christo reconciliatur ; quare bona mariti tanquam uxor sibi yendicat legitima Ecclesia. 3 See above, ch. v. p.190—4. Of 9400 beneficed Clergy, only 243 (according to Neal, i. ch. iv.) or 199 (according to Bp. Burnet) did not conform to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England as reformed in 1559. @. You have before spoken of the Church of | England as Protestant (p. 197); is she not then liable to a charge of inconsistency and partiality in recognizing the Holy Orders of the Church of Rome, while she does not acknowledge those of such Protestant Communities as do not possess Episcopal Government ; and does she not, it may be enquired, in so doing, prefer Romanists to Protestants ? @. No. The Church of England does in no respect prefer persons, as such, to any other per- sons. But, as the baptism given by Judas was the baptism of Christ not less than that given by Peter or by John, and therefore the primitive Church’ did not re-baptize those who had been baptized by Judas, but it did baptize those who had been baptized by John the Baptist; and in so doing, it did not prefer Judas to John, but it preferred the baptism of Christ, though given by Judas, to the baptism of John the Baptist, though given by John himself ; so the Church of England prefers the Holy Orders of Christ*, by whom- soever they may be given, to a commission from man, whoever he may be. In this matter, there- fore, she is resolved to “follow the perfection of IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 215 them that like not her, rather than the defect of Cnar. VI. them whom she loves *.” ; 1S. Avcusz. in Joannis Evang. Tract. v. 18. Baptis- mum Christi das, ideo non post te baptizatur ; post Joannem (Baptistam) ideo baptizatum est, quia non Christi baptismum dabat, sed swum. Non ergo tu melior quam Joannes: sed baptismus, qni per te datur, melior quam Joannis. Ipse enim Christi est, iste autem Joannis. Et quod dabatur a Paulo, et quod dabatur a Petro, Christi erat: et si datum est a Judd, Christi erat. Dedit Judas, et non baptizatum est post Judam ; dedit Joannes, et baptizatum est post Joan- nem: quia si datus est a Judd baptismus, Christi erat ; qui autem a Joanne datus est, Joannis erat. Non Judam Joanni, sed baptismum Christi, etiam per Jude manus datum, baptismo Joannis etiam per manus Joannis dato recté preeponimus. 2 See above, p. 210. 3 Hooker, V. xxvut. 1. @. But it is asked, since a Church cannot exist without a priesthood’, nor a priesthood with- out a sacrifice, can it be said that there is any sacrifice in the Church of England; and if not, has she a true priesthood, and is she a true Church ? @. The Church of England has a// the sacrifice which the Catholic Church has, and she dares not have more. In her Office for the Holy Communion she has a sacrificium primitivum, 1. e. a sacrifice in Phil. iv. 18. which she offers “alms and oblations,”’ primitie, ek or first-fruits, of His own gifts’, to God, as the Creator and Giver of all; she has a sacrifictum pee ercum, i. 6. a “sacrifice of praise and thanks- giving ;” she has a sacrificium votivum, in which Ps. exvi. 12. the communicant presents himself, his “ soul and BG SNBAL body, to be a reasonable sacrifice to God,” and in Heb. xii. 1. Rom. xii. i. which the Church offers herself, which is “ Christ’s 1 Pet. ii. 5. Part Il. ee John vi. 51 —56. Heb. vii. 27. x, 12. 14. Heb. vii. 15. 216 SUCCESSION OF HOLY ORDERS mystical body,” to God*; a sacrificium commemo- rativum, commemorative of the death and sacrifice of Christ; a sacrificium representativum, which represents and pleads His meritorious sufferings to God; a sacrificilum impetrativum, which implores the benefits of Christ’s death from Him; and she has a sacrificium applicativum, whick applies them to the worthy receiver. But she has zo sacrificium defectivum, in which the cup is denied to the lay communicant; nor, on the other hand, has she a sacrificium suppletivum, to supply any supposed defects in the one great sacrifice offered once for all for the sins of the world, upon the cross, by Him who “remaineth a Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek’*.” 1S. Hieron. ady. Lucif. c. 8. Ecclesia non est que non habet Sacerdotes. 2 Grae, ad S, Iren. iii. xxxii. Ante consecrationem, yeluti primitias creaturarum, in recognitionem supremi Ejus super universa dominii. pp. 323—328, and p. 396. “ Hoe est,” (says Grorius, Annot. in Cassand. Art. x. p. 620,) “ quod dicitur in Liturgiis, ra Σὰ ἐκ τῶν Dav.” 3 Grortus, iv. p. 620. Tertium sacrificium est quod facit Ecclesia offerens corpus Christi quod est Ipsa, ut loquitur Augustinus. Offerunt enim fideles suum corpus et sanguinem Deo, parati, si res ita tulerit, pro Ejus gloria vitam pro- fundere. Sic Abraham dicitur filium obtulisse defunctione cordis, ut explicat Salvianus. 4 Archbp. Laup against Fisher, 35. In the Eucharist we offer up to God three sacrifices ; one by the priest only, that is the commemorative sacrifice of Christ’s death, represented in bread broken and wine poured out ; another by the priest and people jointly, and that is the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving for all the benefits and graces we receive by the precious death of Christ ; the third by every particular man for himself, and that is the sacrifice of every man’s body and soul to serye Him in both all the rest of his life.; IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 217 Bp. Anprewes, v. 67. Archbp. Brana tt, ii. 276. Bp. Van Mitpert’s Preface to Waterland’s Works, i. 267—276, and Warertanp, Works, vii. p- 349. viii. p. 161. Gror1us in Cassand. Art. x. p. 620. CHAPTER VII. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND DID NOT SEPARATE HERSELF FROM THE CHURCH OF ROME. (Ὁ. Iv is one of the marks of the true Church to be always visible: was then, it is asked, the Protestant Church of England visible before the Reformation? and if not, can it bea true Church ἢ @. Yes, (as has been before stated, chap. i—vi.) the Church of England has been always visible since the time of the Apostles, not indeed as Protestant, but as a branch of the Catholic Church. A man is a man, and a visible man, even when he is labouring under a sore disease. Job was visibly Job when he was covered with sores. So was the Church of England visible in the worst times. She was visible in her Churches, her Clergy, her People, her religious assemblies ; she was visible in the Holy Sacraments, in the Holy Scriptures, in the Decalogue, in the Lord’s Prayer, and in the Creeds, which she retained’ ; she was visible in the flames of her martyrs, and even in the ordained ministry of those who burnt them. 1 Hooker, III. 1. 8—10. See above, chap. v. p. 191—211. @. But if the Church of England was still a L Cuap. VII. tt Matt. v. 14. Part II. _S_ -πἰἊὔοη] Below, p. 39.7 See above, ° p. 201, 218 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND DID NOT Church in Papal times, was she not guilty of the sin of schism in separating herself from the Church of Rome? A. Schism is a voluntary separation (Part i. Ρ. 43). The Church of England did never sepa- rate herself from any Christian Church’, or make a division in the universal Church; she purified herself indeed from Romish errors, usurpations, and corruptions; but she did not sever herself from the Catholic Church, nor even from the Church of Rome’. 1 Canons, 1603. Canon xxx. So far was it from the purpose of the Church of England to forsake and reject the Churches of Italy, France, Spain, Germany, or any such like Churches, that it doth with reverence retain those ceremonies which do neither endamage the Church of God, nor offend the minds of sober men ; and only departed from them in those particular points, wherein they were fallen from themselves in their ancient integrity, and from the Apostolical Churches which were their first founders. Archbp. Bramuatt, ii. p. 39. We have not left the Roman Church in essentials —We retain the same Creed to a word, and in the same sense, by which all the Primitive Fathers were saved, which they held to be so sufficient, that in a General Council (Council of Ephesus, a. p. 431, pt. ii. act. vi. cap. 7. Labbe, Concil. iii. p. 689. a.) they did forbid all persons, under pain of deposition to Bishops and Clerks, and anathematization to laymen, to compose or obtrude any other upon any persons conyerted from Paganism or Judaism. We retain the same Sacraments and Discipline which they retained ; we derive our Holy Orders by lineal succession from them. It is not we who have forsaken the essence of the modern Roman Church by subtraction, but they who have forsaken the ancient Roman Church by addition. Can we not forsake their New Creed, unless we forsake their Old Faith? See also BrRaMHALL, ii. 200. Hooker, III.1.10, We hope that to reform ourselves, if at SEPARATE FROM THAT OF ROME. 219 any time we have done amiss, is not to sever ourselves from Cuap. VII. eS the Church we were of before. 2 Bp. Brirson, Perpet. Gov. c. 15. Casausoni Epistola, Roterodami, 1709, p. 483. Eccle- siam enim Anglicanam adeo non desciyisse a fide veteris Ecclesiz Catholic, quam veneratur et suspicit, ut ne a fide quidem Romane Ecclesiz desciverit, quatenus illa cum vetere Catholicé consentit. Si queeritur successio perso- narum, in promptu sunt nomina Episcoporum et series a primo nusquam interrupta. Si successio doctrine, agite, periculum facite. See above, chaps. iv. and vi., and below, chap. viii. @. How can you further show this? @. Even by the confession and practice of Popes and Romanists themselves. The doctrine and discipline of the Church of England is to be found in her Book of Common Prayer. Now the Popes of Rome, Paul the Fourth, and Pius the Fourth, offered to confirm this* Book, if Queen Elizabeth would acknowledge the Pope’s supremacy ; and Roman Catholics here habitually conformed to the worship of the Church of Eng- land for the first twelve years of Queen Elizabeth’s reign *, after which time they were prevented from doing so by the excommunicating bull of Pius V. (dated Feb. 23, 1569.) * 1 Twispen, p. 175. BRaAMHALL, ii. 85. 2 Campen, Annal. 1570. Bp. Anprewes, Tortura Torti, pp. 180—1382. Archbp. Bramuatt, i. 248. For divers years in Queen Elizabeth’s reign there was no recusant known in England ; but even they who were most addicted to Roman opinions yet frequented our Churches and public assemblies, and did join with us in the use of the same prayers and divine offices, without any scruple, till they were prohibited by a papal bull for the interest of the Roman court. Bp. Taytor, vii. L 2 —~ 220 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND DID NOT ParrIl. 289, 290. Bp. Butt, ii. 207. See authorities quoted in ——~—— Christian Institutes, iv. 251, and Parmer on the Church, i. 457. 3 Burtarium Romanom, viii. p. 98. @. How was this separation from Romish errors occasioned ? A. First, through the unjust claims’, usurpa- tions, encroachments, and exactions of the Bishop of Rome with respect to Investiture, Annates, Peter-pence, Papal Bulls, Appeals, &c.; which claims rested on forged Papal Decretals’ published by Dionysius Exiguus in the sixth century, and by Pseudo-Isidorus in the ninth century, and the Decretum of Gratian in the twelfth; and which were enforced with great rigour and rapacity, in defiance of reason, law, custom, and long and oft- repeated remonstrance*; and, secondly, through the principles of state policy propounded by the see of Rome, which rendered resistance to its domi- nation on the part of Princes and Governments necessary for their own preservation; thirdly, through the imposition of new and corrupt doc- trines on the part of the Church of Rome‘ as necessary to salvation and as indispensable terms of Communion with her. 1 Sir R. Twispen, p. 117, 134.176. 179. Archbp. Bram- HALL, i. 149—151. Bp. Butt, ii. 907. Bp. SvirxinGrLeer on Eccles. Jurisdict. p. 52. (in Eccl. Cases, vol. ii.) Parmer on the Church, i. 434—439. 2 Bupper Isagoge, i. p. 757. 759. 763. Lazze, Concil. i. p- 78. Asze’ Frevury, Discours IV. de lHistoire Ecclési- astique, pp. 159. 290. Purrrrr, Historical Development of the Constitution of the German Empire—Dornford’s Trans- lation, i. p. 79. It had been customary for the learned to employ themselves in collecting the decrees of the ancient SEPARATE FROM THAT OF ROME. 221 synods of the Church, and sometimes the letters of the Bishops of Rome. A certain Dionysius Exiguus had published such a collection at Rome about a.p. 526, from Pope Siricius, A.D, 385, to Pope Anastasius, a.p. 498, Isidorus, Bp. of Seville in Spain, who died a.p, 636, made a similar collection. An impostor about the middle of the ninth century made use of the name of Isidorus to promote the circulation of a col- lection he had fabricated, which he pretended contained the letters of Bishops of Rome from as far back as a.p. 93. The subjects of them tended chiefly to prove that the Bishop of Rome was the successor of the Apostle Peter, that the keys of Heaven were in his hands, and that the foundation of the Church rested on him; that all Archbishops and Bishops were subject to the Pope, from whom they derived all the power they enjoyed ; that it was his prerogative to excom- municate both kings and princes, and to declare them in- capable of reigning. The decrees of councils were falsified ; no less than fifty forged decrees were added to the Council of Nice, and the sense of other passages, in which the patri- archs of Alexandria and Constantinople were placed on an equality with the Bishop of Rome, was reversed by the in- sertion of a negative. The authors of this scheme contrived to disperse the collection, which was at last so universally received as genuine, that the greatest part of it was received into the Papal Code, which is still the source of Roman Catholic Ecclesiastical law ; and whole nations and general Councils of the Church were unable to resist the conse- quences of the Collection of Isidorus, the spurious character of which was first exposed to the world by the divines who compiled a laborious work on Ecclesiastical History, called the Centuries of Magdeburgh, about the middle of the 16th century. The establishment of the Isidorian principles was reserved for a man who carried them even far beyond their original design, by endeavouring to make the Holy See independent of all temporal power, and to place the whole secular state in subjection to the spiritual power. This was the object of Hildebrand, as counsellor of the Popes, till he ascended the pontifie throne as Gregory VII. 3 Bp. Bitson, Christian Subjection, Pt. i. p. 105. * See aboye, p. 198—201, below, p. 225—227, LO Cuap. VII: ———— στὸν Part II. 222 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND DID NOT Abp. BraMuatt, ii. 56. 199, 200. @. Mention some of these main principles of State Policy. @. The Bishop of Rome, in his public enact- ments’, never yet revoked, claimed power to de- throne Kings, to dispose of their Kingdoms, to prohibit Ecclesiastics from taking Oaths of Alle- giance, and to release all subjects from the obli- gation of such oaths to their lawful Sovereigns ”. 1 The following are the statements of the Papa SEE con- cerning tts own powers ; they are all derived from the Canon Law approved and published by its authority. See the Bull of Pope Grecory XIII. prefixed to the Canon Law. The Pope has power to absolve subjects from their Oath of Allegiance to Kings. Decreti ii. Pars. Causa xv. Qu. vi. Gratian. A fide- litatis juramento Romanus Pontifex nonnullos absolvit cum aliquos a sua dignitate deponit. Oaths of Allegiance, if against the interest of the Church, are Perjuries. Pope Gree. IX. Decret. lib. ii. Tit. xxiy. de jurejurando. InnocenT III. ibid. Tit. xxvii. Circa a.p. 1204. Non juramenta sed perjuria potius sunt dicenda que contra utili- tatem Ecclesiasticam attentantur. Oaths of Allegiance cannot be imposed on Ecclesiastics. Pope Innocent III. ibid. Tit. xxiv. Cirea ἃ. Ὁ. 1216. Nimis de jure divino quidam laici usurpare nituntur cum viros Ecclesiasticos ad preestandum sibi fidelitatis juramenta compellunt. Sacri concilii (Lateranensis) auctoritate prohi- bemus ne tales Clerici personis secularibus praestare cogantur hujusmodi juramenta. Oaths of Allegiance against the see of Rome, or the private interests of Ecclesiastics, are not binding. Pope Honortus III. ibid. Tit. xxiv. Princeps Antiochenus timens conspirationes aliquas fieri contra eum, a yobis jura- mentum extorsit, quod contra ipsum non essetis. Interpre- SEPARATE FROM THAT OF ROME. 9299 tatione congrua declaramus vos juramento hujusmodi non teneri quin pro juribus et honoribus ipsius Ecclesiz ac etiam specialibus vestris legitimé defendendis contra ipsum principem stare libere valeatis. The Pope has power to depose Kings even for private reasons, and to absolve soldiers from their oaths. Pope Gree. III. a. p. 1080. ibid. Alius Romanus Ponti- fex, Zacharias scilicet, Regem Francorum non tam pro suis iniquitatibus quam pro eo quod tante potestati erat inutilis, regno deposuit, omnesque Francigenas a juramento fidelitatis quod illi fecerant absolvit. Quod etiam ew auctoritate fre- quenti agit sancta Ecclesia, cum milites absolvit a vinculo juramenti. The Pontifical power is universally paramount to the Royal. Pope Gree. IX. Decret. lib. i. Tit. xxxiii. Pope Innocent III. a.p. 1198. Nosse debueras quod fecit Deus duo magna luminaria in firmamento celi. Ad firmamentum igitur ceeli, hoe est universalis Ecclesiz, fecit Deus duo magna lumi- naria, id est duas instituit dignitates, quee sunt Pontificialis autoritas et Regalis potestas. Sed illa que preest diebus, id est spiritualibus, major est, que vero carnalibus, minor; ut quanta inter solem et lunam, tanta inter Pontifices et Reges differentia cognoscatur. Subjection to the Roman Pontiff is necessary to salvation. Pope Bontrace VIII. Extray. Com. lib. i. Tit. viii. Circa an. 1302. (Bull Unam Sanctam.) Uterque gladius est in po- testate Ecclesiz, spiritalis scilicet gladius et materialis. De Ecclesia et Ecclesiasticd potestate verificatur vaticinium Hieremiz, (Hier. i.) Ecce constitui Te hodie super gentes et regna. Et autem hee autoritas non humana sed potius divina, ore divino Petro data, sibique suisque successoribus, in ipso quem confessus fuit, Petra firmata. Porro subesse Romano Pontifici, omni humane creature declaramus, dicimus, definimus, et pronuntiamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis. 5. The secular claims of the popedom are thus stated by Carpinat Bevrarmin, de Pontifice Romano, v.c. 6. Pontifex ut Pontifex etsi non habet ullam meré temporalem potesta- tem, tamen habet in ordine ad bonum spirituale, [of which, who is to be judge but himself?] summam potestatem dispo- L 4 Cuap. VII. Se Part IT. — 224 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND DID NOT nendi de temporalibus rebus omnium Christianorum. Yet vast as this claim is, it is to be remembered, that Pore Sixtus V. placed the work of Bellarmin among the prohibited books on account of this reservation in ordine ad spiritualia. Homrtirs, p. 540, ed. 1822. The Bishop of Rome, being by the order of God’s word none other than the Bishop of that Church and Diocese, did challenge not only to be head of all the Church dispersed throughout all the world, but also to be lord of all the kingdoms of the world, as is ex- pressly set forth in the book of his own canon laws. Townson’s Works, ed. Lond. 1810. vol. ii. p. 252. This is declared with great solemnity from the portico of St. Peter’s Church, in the presence of a numerous assembly, at the coronation of a Pope; when a Cardinal Deacon having taken the mitre from his head, another places on it the triple crown, and says, Accipe Tiaram tribus coronis ornatam, et scias te esse Patrem Principum et Regum, Rec- torem orbis, In terra Vicarium Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi. See also C. Lesuixz, Case Stated, p. 75. Archbp. Laup, Conference with Fisher, sect. 25. Ina synod at Rome, about the year 1076, Pope Gregory the Seventh established certain brief conclusions, twenty-seven in number, upon which stands almost all the greatness of the papacy. These conclusions are called Dictatus Pape, and they are reckoned up by Baronius in the year 1076, num. 81, 32, ἄς. But whether this dictatorship did now first invade the Church, I cannot certainly say. The chief of those propositions follow here : ‘Quod solus Rom. pontifex jure dicatur universalis” “Quod solius Papz pedes omnes Principes deosculentur.’ * Quod liceat illi Imperatores deponere.’ ‘ Quod nulla Synodus absque precepto ejus debet Generalis vocari.’ * Quod nullum Capitulum, nullusque Liber Canonicus habe- atur absque illius authoritate.’ ‘ Quod sententia illius ἃ nullo debet retractari, et ipse omnium solus retractare potest.’ ‘Quod Rom. Ecclesia nunquam erravit, nee in perpetuum, Scriptura testante, errabit.’ ‘Quod Rom. Pontifex, si cano- nicé fuerit ordinatus, meritis B. Petri indubitanter efficitur sanctus.’ ‘ Quod ἃ fidelitate iniquorum subditos potest ab- solvere,’ SEPARATE FROM THAT OF ROME. 225 4). But were these such grievances as concerned Cuap. VII. the Church of England as well as the State ? @. Yes, certainly, they concerned both; and any remonstrance against them was treated by the Bishop of Rome as resistance to his spiritual authority, and denounced by him as heresy: and, in addition to these, there were other grievances purely spiritual. @. What were these? Q. Sundry Articles of Doctrine promulgated by the Bishop of Rome. @). Specify them. @. In the Year a.v. 606, Pope Boniface the Third demanded that the Bishop of Rome should be recognized by Christendom as Episcopus Epis- coporum, or Universal Bishop; A.D. 787, Pope Hadrian the First ordered that amages should be worshipped; A.D. 1302, Pope Boniface the Eighth * decreed that subjection to the Pope was necessary to salvation; A.D. 1516, Leo the Tenth decreed that the Pope was superior fo all general councils’ of the Church. 1 Popr Bonirace VIII. Extravag. Commun. 1, viii. 1. Qui in Potestate Petri temporalem esse gladium negat, male verbum attendit Domini proferentis, ‘ Converte gladium tuum in vaginam.—Porro subesse Romano Pontifici, omni humane creature declaramus, dicimus, definimus, et pro- nuntiamus omninod esse de necessitate salutis. Dat Laterani, Pont. Nost. Ao. viii. Decretal. p. 1160, ed. Lips. 1839. On which, says Carpinat Barontus (Annal. anno 1303, § 14), Hee Bonifacius, cui assentiuntur omnes nisi qui dissidio ab Ecclesia excidit; and his constitution was aflirmed by Pore Leo X. Concil. Lateran. Sess. ii. tom. xiv. p. 309, Labbe. Christus . . Petrum ejusque successores vicarios suos instituit, quibus ex libri Regum testimonio ita obedire necesse ὙΠ Ὁ ——_ 226 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND DID NOT Parr Il. est, ut, qui non obedierit, morte moriatur; and the Bull in ——~— Ceen Domini (declared by Juris II. in 1511, to be of uni- versal obligation) anathematizes all who appeal from a Pope to a General Council. 2 CraxantuorreE, Defens. Eccl. Angl. pp. 20. 87. Abp. BraAMHALL, i, 247. 249.257. Bp. Butt, ii. 248. 273. @. But although these tenets were novel and false, and were condemned by the Church in her Councils ', and had been opposed even by Popes * of Rome, still, since a Church may err and yet continue a Church, as we have before seen (Pt. i. ch. ν. Pt. ii. ch. v.), did the maintenance of these errors render all intercourse with the Church of Rome impossible ? @. No; and therefore the Church of England, though it could not communicate with that of Rome in these errors’, and was bound to reform herself, whatever Rome might do, yet she did not separate from her; ‘ Nam, as Luther said, ‘Christum propter diabolum non deseri debere ;’ and, by allowing her baptism and holy orders; she stil] communicates with her (see above p. 218, below, p. 231): but the fact is, that the Church of Rome, so far from showing any disposition to reform, was not satisfied with propounding these errors and novelties herself, but proceeded to exact a belief in them from all, as a necessary condition of communion with her, and persecuted, excommuni- cated, condemned, and anathematized as heretics those who could not believe them; and so what separation took place was occasioned not by Eng- land, but by Rome. 1 Image worship was condemned in the Council of Frank- fort ; the Hildebrandine principles in the councils of Ma- yence, Worms, and others; the Leonine at Constance and SEPARATE FROM THAT OF ROME. 227 Basle ; and they had been previously condemned by some of Gyap. VII. the Popes themselves: Pore Grecory the Great, Epist. ii, ——— 62, says, Regia Potestas celitus est Imperatori super omnes homines data.—Epist. vii. 3. Ab imaginum adoratione pro- hibeat, et zelum eorum laudet qui nihil manufactum adorare yolunt.—In Ezechiel i. Hom. 9. In yolumine sacro scripta sunt et continentur omnia que erudiunt. His opinion of the title Episcopus Episcoporum is quoted below in this part, chap. ix.; and of the authority of General Councils, his words have been referred to above, chap. iii. p. 164. 3 Hooxer, III. τ. 10. With Rome we dare not com- municate, concerning sundry her gross and grievous abomi- nations ; yet touching those main parts of Christian truth wherein they constantly still persist, we gladly acknowledge them to be of the family of Jesus Christ. Bramuatt, ii. 35. 39. 41. 3 Archbp. Laup, Conference, sect. 24. Was it not lawful for Judah to reform itself when Israel would not join? Sure it was, or else the prophet (Hos. iy. 15) deceives me that says, ‘ Though Israel transgress, yet let not Judah sin.’ See also Hooker, III. 1. 10. @. When did she enforce these articles as terms of communion with her, and as necessary to sal- vation ? @. On several occasions, but especially and emphatically at the illegal, uncatholic, and un- canonical Council of Trent’, when she anathe- matized all who did not believe these and other new, unscriptural, and anti-scriptural’ articles, as necessary to salvation, on her authority. 1 Burra Pi 1Vti Concil. Trident. pp. 209,210. Lips. 1837. Forthis character of this council, see above, Archbp. Laovp, p. 201, 2. 2 See above, pt. ii. chap. ν. p. 198—201. @. This was a general denunciation ; but has she not gone further than this in her conduct towards the Church of England ? L 6 Part II, --- 228 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND DID NOT A. Yes. In the year 1535, Pope Paul the Third not only excommunicated the supreme governor of the Church of England, Henry the Eighth’, but forbad his subjects to obey him, commanded his nobles to rebel against him, and ordered all Bishops and Pastors to leave England, having first placed it under an Interdict. In 1558’, Paul the Fourth excommunicated and deprived of their kingdoms au heretical princes, both present and to come. He sent in the same year a menacing message to Queen Elizabeth ?, In 1670", Pius the Fifth (who was canonized as a Saint by the Church of Rome in the year 1712) issued a Bull denouncing and dethroning Queen Elizabeth, and commanding her subjects to rise in insurrection against her. Pope Urban VIII. forbad by his Bull, in 1626, all English Roman Catholic subjects to take the oath of allegiance to their lawful Sovereign; and in the year 1640, Paul V., and in 1671, Clement the Tenth, excom- municated and anathematized the members of all Protestant Churches in a bull annually read every Maundy Thursday‘ at Rome till the year 1740, and which is still in full force*. And in the oath to the Pope which all Roman Catholic Bishops now take * on their consecration, is the following clause, “ Hzreticos omnes, Schismaticos, et rebelles eidem Domino nostro (Pape) vel successoribus, pro posse, persequar et impugnabo*.” Hence, with respect to the separation from Rome, the Church of England non schisma fecit sed patitur’; and her members may well say, with Bp. Jewell ἢ, “Non tam discessimus, quam ejecti sumus ; and with King James the First, ‘ Non fugimus, sed JSugamur "ἢ SEPARATE FROM THAT OF ROME. 229 1 Bullarium Romanum, vi. p. 129. ? Bullar. Rom. vi. p. 355. Pierro Soave, Stor. di Concil. Trid. lib. v. Il Papa rispose (alla Regina) che quel Regno (d’Inghilterra) era feudo della sede Apostolica; cera stata una grand’ audacia dell’ haver assonto il nome ed il governo senza lui. 3 Bull. Rom. vii. p. 99. 4 Thence called the Buti in Cand Domini, Bull. Rom. y. p. 319. xxi. p. 95. For the history of this Bull, see Frevry, Histoire Ecclésiastique, xxxiy. p. 532. an. 1568. Quelques-uns ont cru qu'elle commenga ἃ paroitre en 1420. D’autres la font remonter ἃ Clément VY. et méme au ponti- ficat de Boniface VII., élu en 1224, Jules II. statua en 1511 quwelle obligeait partout. See also, on this Bull, Lestir, Case Stated, ἅς. Lond. 1714, Appendix, where the Bull is printed; and see the full details given in Lisrt Sympoticr Ecct. Carn. ed. Steit- wolf, Gott. 1838, p. xcix. 5 CarpinaL Erskine (Promotore della Fede, and Uditore del Papa) in his letter to Sir J. C. Hippisley, Aug. 1793, says, “ This bull, though the formality of its publication is now omitted, is nevertheless implicitly in vigour in all its extension, and is likewise observed iu all cases where there is no impediment to the exercise of the Pope’s authority. It must therefore be looked upon as a public declaration to preserve his rights.” See Report of Committee on Rom. Cath. Subjects, p. 340. 1816. ® This clause is, in some countries, dispensed with in practice by special indulgence from Rome, but it stands in the Roman Pontiricat, p. 63, ed. Rom, 1818. 7 Archbp. Laup against Fisher, p. 109. I never said or thought that the Protestants made this rent. The cause of the schism is yours; for you thrust us from you, because we call for truth and redress of abuses. A schism must needs be theirs whose the cause of it is. The woe is against him that gives the offence. (Matt. xvili. 7.) The Protestants did not depart, for departure is voluntary. Archbp. Laup, Sermons, 1651, p. 19. The Church of Rome challengeth us for breach of this peace in our separa- tion from them : but we say, and justly, the breach was -theirs Cuap. VII. ——~ 230 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND HAS NEVER PartIl. by their separation not only from disputable but from evident ~— truth. Nor are we fallers out of the Church, but they fallers Art, xx. off from verity. Let them return to primitive truth, and our quarrel is ended. See also Hooker, III. 1. 10. 8 Bp. Jewett, Apol. iv. 9 CasavsBont Epist. p. 494. Postremo addit Rex (Jaco- bus Primus) magnum se quidem crimen judicare, defectionem ab Ecclesia; sed huic crimini affinem se esse, aut Eeclesiam suam, penitis penegat: Non enim fugimus, aiebat ejus Ma- jestas, sed fugamur. CHAPTER VIII. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND HAS NEVER BEEN SEPARATE FROM THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. @. You say that the Church of England did not separate herself from that of Rome; but did she not separate herself from the Universal Church ; and (as St. Augustine says against the Donatist Schismatics) Ecclesia que non communicat cum omnibus gentibus, non est Ecclesia* ? @. The Church of England never separated herself from any Catholic Church, much less from the Catholic Church: on the contrary, she reformed herself, in order to become again more truly ὁ and soundly Catholic, both in doctrine and discipline; and so far from not communicating with the Catholic Church, she declares, that * Ex- cept a man believe faithfully the Catholic faith, he cannot be saved :’ she acknowledges the authority of the Catholic Church; she prays daily for its ‘good estate; she believes nothing that the Ca- BEEN SEPARATE FROM THE CATHOLIC. 99] tholic Church has rejected, and rejects nothing Cxar.VIII. that it believes; she is United in faith, hope, and > charity, with every member of it, under Christ the Head of the Church*; and she admits the Above, p. 3. Baptism and Holy Orders of the Church of Rome, and thus communicates with her‘: and as for the comparison with the Donatists, it is much more applicable to a communion which limits the Ca- tholic Church to its own body, which® iterates the Sacrament of Baptism, and repeats Holy Orders, as the Donatists did; and separates her- self from the Catholic Church, by making new Articles of Faith, thus in fact excommunicating Above, herself from the Church, while in words she ex- ἢ 1°°—?0l- communicates others °. 1S. Ave. ili. 2511. ix. 549. 3 Dr. Horn’s Preface to his discourse at the Conference at Westminster Abbey, 1559; Strype, Annals, i. p. 11. —465 ; Cardwell’s Conferences, p. 55; Bp. Jewrxx, Apol. p- 170, 1591. Accessimus quantum maximé potuimus ad Ecclesiam Apostolorum... Nee tantum doctrinam nostram sed etiam precum publicarum formam ad illorum ritus direxi- mus. See above, Pt. ii. ch. v. On this subject see the important and authoritative state- ment made in the letter written, in the name of Henry VIIL., by Tunsratt, Bishop of Durham, to Cardinal Pole, July 18, 1536. (Bp. Burnet, Hist. of Reformation, vol. iii pt. ii. Records, No. 52, p. 163, ed. Oxf. 1829)........ Ye pre-suppose the King’s grace to be swerved from the unity of Christ’s Church: and that in taking upon him the title of supreme head of the Church of England, he intendeth to separate his Church of a a rhe the Unity of the whole body of Christendom. His full purpose and tone is, Ἔ see ihe laws of Almighty God purely and sincerely preached and taught, and Christ’s faith, without blot, kept and observed in his realm ; and not to separate himself or his realm anywise from the unity of Part II. 232 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND HAS NEVER Christ's Catholic Church, but inviolably, at all times, to keep and στ΄ observe the same ; and to redeem his Church of England out of all captivity of foreign powers heretofore usurped therein into the Christian state that all Churches of all realms were at the beginning, and to abolish and clearly put away such usurpations as heretofore the Bishops of Rome have, by many undue means, increased to their great adyantage. So that no man therein can justly find any fault at the King’s so doinge, seeing he reduceth all thinges to that estate, that is conformable to those auncient decrees of the Churche, which the Bishop of Rome (at his creation) solemnly doth profess to observe hymself. ae By which (Councils) ye should have Goel that ΕἿΣ Church of Rome had never of old such a monarchie, as of late it hath usurped. And if ye will say, that those places of the gospel, that ye do allege in your book, do prove it, then must ye grant also that the Council of Nice and others did erre, which ordained the contrary. And the Apostles also, in their Canons, did ordain, that al ordering of Priests, consecrating of Bishops, and all matters spirituall, shuld be finished within the Diocese, or at uttermost within the Pro- vince where the parties dwelle. . . . as Oe Now it is not like that the four first chief Οὐ, Ge- neral would have ordained so as they did, if the gospel, or the scripture, had been to the contrary. And where ye in your book much do stick to common custom of the Church, surely after Christ, above a thousand year, the custome was to the μα that now is used by the kid: of Rome. : And to assure aon cor my mand aie T do tbikes : ae whosoever shall go about, by the primatie of Peter, which was in preaching the word of God, to establishe the worldly authoritie of the Bishop of Rome, which he now claimeth in diverse realms, in worldly things so perfect temporal, shall no more couple together than light and darkness. . . . Wherefore since the King’s grace goeth about to reform his realm, and reduce the Church of England into that state, that both this realm and all others were in at the beginning of the faith, and many hundred years after ; if any prince or realm will not follow him, let them do as they list; he doth ee BEEN SEPARATE FROM THE CATHOLIC. 233 nothing but stablisheth such laws as were in the begin- Cuap.VIII. ning, and such as the Bishop of Rome professeth to observe. ———— Wherefore, neither the Bishop of Rome himself, nor any other prince ought of reason to be miscontent therewith. 5. Casauzoni Epistole, p. 491. Roterodami, 1709. Didicit Rex (he is speaking of King James I,) é lectione Sacra Scripture (neque aliter Patres olim sentiebant ad unum omnes) veram et οὐσιώδη Ecclesize formam esse, ut audiant oves Christi vocem sui Pastoris, et ut Sacramenta administren- tur rité et legitimé, quomodo videlicet Apostoli preiverunt, et qui illos proximé sunt secuti. Que hae ratione sunt in- stitute Ecclesia, necesse est ipsas multiplici communione inter se esse devinctas. Uniuntur in capite suo Christo, qui est fons vite, in quo yivunt omnes, quos Pater elegit pretioso sanguine ipsius redimendos, et vita eterna gratis donandos. Uniuntur unitate fidei et doctrine, in iis utique capitibus, que sunt ad salutem necessaria ; unica enim salutaris doc- trina, unica in ccelos via. Uniuntur conjunctione animorum et veré charitate charitatisque officiis, maximé autem precum inutuarum. Uniuntur denique spei ejusdem communione, et promissz hzereditatis expectatione. 4 Abp. BraMHatt, ii. 88. ἢ The seyere censures directed by the Church against - Iteration of Baptism, and of Holy Orders, may be seen in Binenam, XII. ν. XVI.i. 4. XVII. v. 16. If it be alleged that the Iteration of Baptism specified in the text, is not, in all cases, strictly speaking, Iteration, as being in some cases accompanied with the use of the conditional form ‘ Si non es baptizatus,’ &c., a reply will be found to this allegation ; in the Carrcuismus Βομαάνυβ itself (ex Decreto Concil. { Trid. Pii V. P. M. jussu editus) P. ii. c. ii. Qu. 48. It will there be seen that the conditional form may not be used except in those cases when diligent enquiry has been made ὦ whether baptism has been administered or no,—Alexandri Pape auctoritate in illis tantum permittitur, de quibus re diligenter perquisitd dubium relinquitur an Baptismum rite susceperint. Aliter vero nunquam fas est, etiam cum ad- junctione (i. e. of the conditional form) Baptismum alicui administrare. Such are the words of the Trent Catechism. Now, by the Council of Trent, Sess. vii. de Bapt. iy. it is 234 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND HAS NEVER PartIlI. decreed, that if any one affirms “that baptism administered ‘“——— even by heretics in the name of the Trinity with the inten- tion of doing what the Church does, is not true baptism, let him be anathema.” And yet (as is affirmed in the evi- dence of Archbp. Macer, in Phelan’s Digest, i. 291) “ The Romanist Ciergy in Ireland in many cases administer Baptism a second time to those who conform from Protest- antism to their communion,” and the following precept is given to the Clergy of France by the Vicar General of one of the Bishops, (Dieulin, Guide des Curés, Lyon, 1844, p. 624. 8rd edition.) Le Protestantisme de nos jours ayant dé- généré en pur rationalisme, au point que la plupart de ses ministres ne croient ni a la Trinité ni a la divinité de Jésus Christ, on est fondé a craindre que, mettant leurs doctrines in pratique, ils n’altérent la forme du Sacrement, et ne bap- tisent au nom du Pére, du Fils et du Saint-Esprit ; c'est pourquoi il est généralement prudent de réitérer le Sacrement de baptéme aux hérétiques qui rentrent dans le sein de lEglise. The doctrine of the Council of Trent, (Sess. vii.) that the intention of the Minister is of the essence of the Sacrament, appears to render its iteration necessary. See the perplexities of the Tridentine Divines on this subject, stated by Sarpi. Lib. ii. > Ibid. p. 494, col. 2. Roderodami, 1709. Et vetus quidem Ecclesia, ut refractarios Donatistas ad suam communionem revocaret, etiam commodis temporalibus Episcoporum resi- piscentium, et aliorum quoque, admirabili charitate prospicere solita. Romana vero Ecclesia, ut gratiam cum Anglicana redintegraret, fulmina primo bullarum, deinde vim, modo apertam, modo occultam adhibuit ; proditores nefarios suscepti hic parricidii manifestos gremio suo excepit, et nune cum maximeé fovet ; sententiam ex eadem caussa passos martyri- bus adscribit, et eorum innocentiam contra divina omnia humanaque jura quotidie propugnat. Ipse Carpinatis BEL- LARMINUS nuper, ut Recemserenissimum alliceret, istud mira efficacie ad persuadendum argumentum adhibuit, ‘ Angle regnum ad Papam pertinere; et Regem Anglie Romani Pon- tificis etiam in temporalibus esse subditum, atque feudatarium. Omitto alias et Regis et Ecclesie Anglicane, qua veteres, qua novas querelas, minimé hoc loco commemorandas. See BEEN SEPARATE FROM THE CATHOLIC. 235 above, p. 158-9, For a further parallel between Romanism Guyar.VIIL. and Donatism, see BramHatz ii. 106. aaa ® Frrmirian, in S. Cyprian, Ep. p. 228. Bishop of Cesa- rea in Cappadocia, to Pope Stephanus, when he had excom- municated the Asiatic and African Churches. Lites quantas parasti per Ecclesias mundi! Peccatum quam magnum tibi exaggerasti quando te a tot gregibus scidisti! Excidisti enim te ipsum. Noli te fallere. Siquidem ille est veré schismaticus, qui se ἃ communione Ecclesiastice unitatis Apostatam fecerit. @. But can it be said that the Church of Eng- land communicat cum omnibus gentibus, which was the sign and test of a true Church, cited from St. Augustine ? @. As was before stated, the Church of Eng- land communicates in faith and prayers with the whole world. If she does not perform all those practical offices of communion with other Churches, which one Church was enabled to discharge to another in the time of St. Augustine, we must bear in mind that the difficulties of actual communion are now much greater than at that period, when almost all Christendom was under the same civil government, and the members of Kuropean, Asi- atic, and African Churches, were fellow-citizens as well as fellow-Christians, speaking one or two languages only, whereas now there are thirty different kingdoms and states in Europe alone, with nearly as many languages as countries '. Further, we must remember, that the most Catholic of all things is Truth; (whence the word Catholic is opposed by St. Augustine’ and _ the 1Tim.iii1s. other fathers of the Church to what is false and heretical ;) and that therefore, if the Church of Above, England holds fast the Truth, she is united to the ™ ore: 236 THE BISHOP OF ROME HAS Pann I Catholic Church. “If we walk in the light, we 1 Johni.7. have fellowship one with another.” We must also bear in mind that true Catholic communion is communion with the past as well as with the present ; and the Church of England communi- cates in doctrine, discipline, and sacraments, with the Catholic Church from the beginning; and thus she communicates with the primitive and apostolic Church of Rome*; whereas the present Romish Church, by her corrupt and new doc- trines, has, as far as they go, put herself out of communion with the Truth, with the present Catholic Church, and also with her former Catholic self. 1 Casauson, Epist. p. 493, col. i. Distractionem Imperii distractio Ecclesize Catholicee est secuta; et illa omnia paullatim cessarunt, qua modo dicebamus conservande uni- oni, et communioni exteriori corporis Catholici apprime ser- yiisse. 2S. Ασα. Quest. in S. Matth. xi. Boni Catholici sunt qui et fidem integram servant et bonos mores. 3 Sir R. TwispEn, p. 196. Upon the whole, it is so absolutely false, that the Church of England made a depar- ture from the Church, which is “the Pillar and Ground of the Trurtu,” that I am persuaded it is impossible to prove that she did make the separation from the Roman itself ; but that, having declared in a lawful Synod certain opinions held by some in her communion to be no articles of faith; and having, according to the precedent of former times, and the power which God had placed in her, redressed particular abuses crept into her, the Pope and his adherents would needs interpret this a departing from the Faith. But as St. Augustine said in a dispute with a Donatist, (c. lit. Petil. ii. 85,) uérum schismatici nos simus, an vos, non ego, nec tu, sed Curistus interrogetur. See also BRAMHALL, i. 257, ii. 61—63, 148. NO SUPREMACY IN THESE REALMS. 237 CHAPTER IX. THE BISHOP OF ROME HAS NO SUPREMACY, SPIRITUAL OR TEMPORAL, IN THESE REALMS, @. AuruoucH the Church of England is united in origin, doctrine, and discipline, with the Catholic Church, and although she is not, as the Church of England, dependant on that of Rome, yet is not the Bishop of Rome the successor of St. Peter? and did not our Lord give to that Apostle wniversal supreme authority over His Church? and has not, therefore, the Bishop of Rome authority over the Church of England as a part of the Catholic Church ? @. Although we should allow that St. Peter was Bishop of Rome’, and not rather of Antioch *, and that the Bishop of Rome is the successor of St. Peter, and that he inherits by office * what was given to St. Peter in person, for a special purpose, (see below, p. 239,) yet we are clear that Christ gave no pre-eminent power to St. Peter over his brother Apostles; but that αἰ" the Apostles were equal in the quality of their mission, commission, power, and honour. ᾿ S. Inen. ap. Euseb. H. E. ν. ο. 6. Θεμελιώσαντες καὶ olko- δομήσαντες of μακάριοι ᾿Απόστολοι (St. Peter and St. Paul) τὴν ἐκκλησίαν (of Rome) Λίνῳ τὴν τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς λειτουργίαν ἐνεχείρισαν. Bp. Beveriper, p. 389, (art. xxxvii.) brings strong proofs to show that St. Peter was never at Rome, as Bishop of that particular Church, but in the same manner as St. Paul was at Rome, viz. an Apostle. ? Abp. Bramuatt, ii. 160, Cuap. IX. Part Il. Δ... 2 Cor, xi. 28. 238 THE BISHOP OF ROME HAS The Secular Claims have been mentioned above. p. 220—4; the Spiritual Claims of the Popedom are thus stated by Car- DINAL BeLiarmin, de Rom. Pontirice :—Lib. ii. c. 2. Epis- copus Romanus in Monarchia Ecclesiastica Petro succedit : c. 18, habet potestatem constituendi et confirmandi Episcopos per totum Orbem ; item deponendi omnes Episcopos, et injusté depositos restituendi per totum Orbem; c. 18, habet potes- tatem ferendi /eges et dispensandi per universam Ecclesiam ; c. 20, illi competit jus mittendi /egatos ad alias Ecclesias, qui in ipsius nomine omnia administrent ; c. 21, ex gudvis Chris- tiani Orbis parte legitime ad ipsum provocari potest ; ab ejus vero auctoritate nulla conceditur appellatio ; c. 31, est Carut et Sponsus Ecclesie. Lib. iv. c. 16, habet potestatem ferendi leges que conscientias obligent; c. 24, Omnis ordi- naria Episcoporum potestas ab eo descendit. 3S. Cyprian, de Unit. Ecclesiz, p. 107. Hoe erant ceteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus ; pari consortio prediti et honoris et potestatis. Barrow, Pope’s Supremacy, i. p. 57. Archbp. Bram- HALL, 1. p. 153. Whether a new Apostle was to be or- dained (Acts i.), or the office of Deaconship to be erected (Acts vi.), or fit persons to be delegated for the ordering of the Church, as Peter and John, Judas and Silas ( Acts viii. and xy.), or informations to be heard, against Peter himself (Acts xi.), or weightier questions, of the calling of the Gentiles, circumcision, and the Law of Moses, to be de- termined, we find the supremacy in the College of the Apostles. Bp. Taytor, x. p. 178. Bp. Butt, ii. 295. @. But does not St. Peter appear in Holy Scripture as taking the lead of the Apostles, and speaking in their behalf? and is he not designated by titles of special dignity in the writings of the early Fathers of the Church ? @. Yes, doubtless he is; as are some of the other Apostles, especially St. Paul’, who “had the care of all the Churches.” But we must not confound primacy with supremacy. St. Peter NO SUPREMACY IN THESE REALMS. 999 often appears as first in order among his brethren, Cuar. 1X. but never as higher in place than the rest of the Apostles; as Primus inter pares, not as swmmus supra inferiores ὅ. 1 Thus S. Ave. iii. 2313, Ipse Caput et Princeps Apo- stolorum, speaking not of St. Peter, but of St. Paw. Again, x. 256, (Paulus) tanti Apostolattis meruit principatum. S. Amsrose, de Spir. Sanct. ii. 18. Nec Paulus imferior Petro ;—cum primo quoque facile conferendus et nulli secun- dus ; nam qui se imparem nescit, facit eequalem. Thus both St. Peter and St. Paul are called Κορυφαῖοι in the same sentence by Euruym. Zyc. Pref. ad S. Lue. Λουκᾶς Παύλῳ τῷ Κορυφαίῳ συναρμοσθεὶς καὶ συνέκδημος, καθάπερ δὴ καὶ ἸΤέτρου τοῦ Κορυφαίου Μάρκος" and all the Apostles are called Κορυφαῖοι by THroruyract, in S. Lue. X. εὑρήσομεν τὰς δώδεκα πηγὰς τοὺς κορυφαίους λέγω τοὺς δώδεκα ᾿Αποστόλους. 2 Abp. Ῥοττεᾷ, on the Church, ch. iii. p. 80, note. Barrow, Pope’s Supremacy, p. 35, on the question, What St. Peter’s primacy was ? 4). What, then, are we to say to the words of Christ to St. Peter, “Verily I say unto thee, Matt. xvi. Thou art Peter, and on this rock I will build my ὃ Church ?” Q. First, that although in a certain sense the Church may be said to be built on St. Peter’, as confessing Christ in the name of the other Apostles, and so, through them, of the whole Isa. xxviii Christian world, and thus showing the Uniry’ ες =e of the Church, and that its foundation is the ἘΝ Trev Apostolic Farr‘ confessed with one mind and 42. one mouth, yet the Church is built not on St. Peter, but on Curist; for “other foundation can 1 Cor. iii. 11. no man lay than that is laid, Jesus Christ ;’ “Who me eu gave (not one apostle but) apostles, for the edify- ing of His Church,” and it is built not on “= 240 THE BISHOP OF ROME HAS _Parr Il one Apostle, but “ on the foundation of the Apostles ee ὑπὸ - τ Rev, xxi.14, and Prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner-stone.” Unity in the Faith is the solidity of the Church ; but the Rock on which it is built is CuRIsT. * OricEN, in Matt. 1. ¢. εἰ δὲ ἐπὶ τὸν ἕνα ἐκεῖνον Πέτρον νομίζεις οἰκοδομεῖσθαι τὴν ἐκκλησίαν μόνον, τί ἂν φήσαις περὶ ἸΙωάννου τοῦ τῆς βροντῆς υἱοῦ καὶ ἑκάστου τῶν ᾿Αποστόλων ; S. Cyprian, de Unit. Eccles. ‘in typo unitatis.” Pacian, Epist. iii, Ad Petrum locutus est Dominus: ad unum ideo ut wntatem fundaret ex uno; mox idipsum in commune preci- piens. S. Aue. Serm. cexxxii. Petrus respondit, unus pro omnibus, quia unitas in omnibus. * S. Aucusr. v. 3757. Serm. cexev. Quando Christus ad unum loquitur Unitas commendatur.—y. 1013. Serm. exlvii. In uno Petro figurabatur unitas omnium bonorum Pastorum.— vy. 595. Petrus Apostolus unice Ecclesia typus. Serm. Ixxvi. S. Avcusr, iii. 2488. iv. 835. 1314. S. CurysosroM, ii. 555. Rarvorp’s Conference with Hart. London, 1598, chap. ii. Div. i. As the confession of Peter touching Christ showed their common faith by the mouth of one: so the answer of Christ directed unto one, continued that blessing that should be common to them all. And this is declared by the Holy Eph. ii. 20. Scripture ; which to the Ephesians (members of the Church) saith that “they are built upon the foundation of the Apo- stles and Prophets,” not of Peter only, but of the Apostles, who lay the same foundation (all) that Peter did, and there- Rev. xxi.14. upon are called (all of them) foundations ; and the Chureh, relying upon their doctrine, that is the Christian faith, (the only and sure foundation of the Church,) may be justly said to be built on them, even as well on all of them as on Peter. S. Aucusrine, Retractat. i. xxi. thus speaks of the inter- pretation of this passage: Dixi in quodam loco de Apostolo Petro, quod in i/o tanquam in petra fundata sit Ecclesia; sed scio me postea sepissimé sic exposuisse ut super Hune intelligeretur Quem confessus est Petrus dicens, Tu es filius Dei vivi: ac sic Petrus ab hac Petra appellatus personam NO SUPREMACY IN THESE REALMS. 24] Ecclesia figuraret, quee super hane Petram edificatur, et accepit claves regni ccelorum. Non enim dictum est illi, Tu es Petra, sed, tu es Petrus. Petra autem erat Curistus, quem confessus Petrus, sicut tota Ecclesia confitetur, dictus est Petrus. Iterum autem duarum interpretationum quee probabilior est, eligat lector. Other interpreters understand Petra of the Jaith or confession of Peter, as for instance, S. Amprose de Incarn. Dom. i. v. Fides Ecclesie est fun- damentum ; non enim de carne Petri sed de fide dictum est quia “porte mortis ei non prevalebunt.” It will be per- ceived on consideration, that these interpretations do in fact Tun into each other. ©. But is not St. Peter called by our Lord the Rock of His Church, in the words Just cited Ὁ @. No. St. Peter was Πέτρος, a stone; and hence he- and the other Apostles with him are called in Scripture the Twelve Foundation Stones of the Church; but Christ was ἡ Πέτρα, the Rock’, out of which St. Peter and they were hewn, and on which they were built. Tu es Petrus, quia EGO Perra, as St. Augustine explains the words, neque enim, he says, ἃ Petro Petra, sed ἃ Petréd Petrus ; and again, Petrus edificatur super Petram, non Petra super Petrum'. 1 5. Aucust. Serm. cclxx. Non supra Petrum sed supra Petram quam confessus est dificatur Ecclesia.—Serm. Ixxyi. Tues Petrus quia Ego Petra, neque enim a Petro Petra, sed ἃ Petra Petrus. Bp. Anprewes, Tortura Torti, p. 234, Craxanruorpr, Def. Eccl. Angl, p. 118. ® Casavus. Exerc, Baron. p- 840. Si vocum proprietatem respiciamus, probavimus aliud esse Πέτρον aliud Πέτραν. Ετμβι. Gd. Col. 1590. Bromr. Asch. Pers, 466. It is to be regretted that the French word Pierre is applied both to the person and the thing, and thus gives rise to confusion between them. @. But did not our Lord use (not the Greek, M Cuap. IX. Gas John i, 42, Rev. xxi. 1 θεμέλιοι λίθοι. 58: li. 1. Xxvili. 16. Xxxiii. 16, 242 THE BISHOP OF ROME HAS ParrII but) the Syro-Chaldaic language in His speech to π΄ §t. Peter, in which there is no such difference of genders as between Petrus and Petra? @. He did; but this objection, from the cha- racter of the Syriac tongue, as has been shown, has no weight; and we must remember, that St. Matthew’s Greek account of our Lord’s speech is divinely inspired, and must be understood in its literal and grammatical sense, and in that sense in which it has been always understood by the Church, and which has been now expressed. 1 Ratnoiy’s Conf. with Hart, pp. 23,24. Bp. Bevermee, on xxxyiith Article, vol. ii. p. 869, ed. Oxf. @. But what do you say to the words which Matt. xs). follow : “And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven ?” was not the Power of the Keys, as it is called, (see above, p. 118,) here given by Christ to Peter? and in him to his successors, the Bishops of Rome? @. Yes, but not more so than to the rest of the Matt. xviii. Apostles. Christ gave that power to the Church, 17,18. See when He said, “Tell it to the Church; but if he p- 118-120. neslect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as an heathen ;” and having said these words, He proceeded to declare by whom this power was to be exercised, viz. by all His Apostles and their successors ‘ even to the end of the world.’ “ 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:” and again, after His resurrection, “ He breathed on NO SUPREMACY IN THESE REALMS. 248 them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost; whose soever sins ye remit, they are re- faitted ; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.” It would be to contradict these words, to say that the power of the keys was given specially to St. Peter and his successors ; and it is the concurrent language’ of all Christian antiquity that he received that power as a figure of the Church in her Unity as all the Apostles did in her Universality. It was not one man in the Church, but the Church in one man which received the keys. The words of our Lord were addressed to Peter, as representing by his Faith, by his Office, and by his Acts, all the Apostles and their Successors, as one of the Bishops of Rome, Leo the Great’, says; and St. Ambrose*, Jn beato Petro claves has regni celorum cuncti suscepimus sacerdotes. 1 TERTULLIAN, Scorpiac. 10. Memento claves hic Domi- num Petro et per illum Zcclesi@é reliquisse. S. Cyprian, de Unit. Eccles. p. 107. Apostolis omnibus post resurrectionem suam parem potestatem tribuit.—p. 108. Ecclesia una est, in qua Episcopatus unus est ecujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur. S. Hieron. c. Jovinian. lib. i. Super omnes ex @quo Ecclesiz fortitudo solidatur. Dices, super Petrum fun- datur Ecclesia; licet id ipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat et ewncti claves regni ccelorum accipiant. S. Basir, Const. Monast. 22. πᾶσι τοῖς ἐφεξῆς ποιμέσι καὶ διδασκάλοις παρέχει ἴσην ἐξουσίαν" καὶ τούτου σημεῖον τὸ δεσμεῖν ἅπαντας καὶ λύειν ὥσπερ ἐκεῖνος. S. AMBROSE, in Psalm xxxviii. Quod Petro dicitur, οεθίθυῖβ Apostolis dici- tur. S. Aueusr. Serm. xli. Nunquid istas claves accepit Petrus, et Paulus non accepit? Petrus accepit, et Joannes et Jacobus non accepit et czteri Apostoli? Aut not sunt iste in Ecclesia clayes ubi peccata quotidie dimittuntur ὃ Serm. ccxcy. Has claves non homo unus sed unitas accepit Ecclesia. Vide et iii. p. 2470. Awnsexm, in loc. Potestas M 2 ee εἰς some XX. x. 90. 1 Cor. v. 4. 2 Cor. ii. 10. Part II. —_ John xxi. 15, 16 16: John xx, 21, 22, Acts xx, 28. 1 Pet. v. 1,2. 244 THE BISHOP OF ROME HAS clavium non solum Petro data est, sed, sicut Petrus unus pro omnibus respondit, sic Christus in Petro omnibus dedit. Casavzon, Exerc. Baron. pp. 344—347. Bp. ANDREWES, Tortura Torti, p. 42. Petro promissz claves non tamen ut Petro huic homini, quin Petro Ecclesie personam gerenti. Vide et pp. 62—64. Barrow, Pot. Clay. p. 47. Promis- sum commune est et ad Ecclesiam totam ejusque rectores pertinet : nee enim occasio promissi Petrum uniceé spectabat ; neque causa propter quam promitteretur ; nec alligabatur uni Petro promissi materia, nec in Petrum solum derivatus est ejus effectus. See above, p. 237-—239. 2 S. Leo, a. Ὁ. 450. Serm. iii. p. 53, ed. 1700. Transivit in alios Apostolos jus potestatis illius et ad omnes Ecclesize Principes decreti hujus constitutio commeavit. Sed non frustra uni commendatur, quod omnibus intimetur. Serm. de Nativ. Hee clavium potestas ad omnes etiam Apostolos et Ecclesize Presules est translata. Quod autem sigillatim Petro sit commendata, ideo factum est quod Petri exemplum omnibus Ecclesiz Pastoribus fuit propositum. And again, Serm. ii. p. 51. Christus etsi multis Pastoribus curam suarum ovium delegavit, Ipse tamen dilecti gregis custodiam non reliquit ; and, p. 52, he addresses the Bishops present as his fratres and consacerdotes, See also vol. i. p. 217; the notes, vol. li. p. 434, ed. 1700. ; 3S, Amprose, de Dign. Sacerd. ο. 1. ®. But did not Christ give supreme power to St. Peter when He said to him, Feed my sheep ? @. No; these words were not so much verba ordinandi, as verba hortandi’; and do not affect the general commission before given by Christ to all His Apostles in a solemn act of consecration. Whence St. Paul says to the presbyters at Ephe- sus, “Take heed to the flock over which the Holy Ghost has made you overseers, to feed the Church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood ;” and St. Peter, “ The elders I exhort, who am also an elder, feed the flock of God which is NO SUPREMACY IN THESE REALMS. 945 among you, taking the oversight thereof not by big, constraint but willingly.” Wherefore, as St. Augustine says, guum Petro dicitur, ad omnes dicitur, Pasce oves meas’. 1 Casauzon, Exerc. Baron. p. 8344—3847. ? S. Aue. de Agone Christiano, c. 30. Tract. in Joann. xlyii. Christus, quod pastor est, dedit et membris suis. Nam et Petrus pastor, et Paulus pastor, et caeteri Apostoli pas- tores, et boni Episcopi pastores. See also νυ. pp. 345. 969. col. 3, 1763, See St. Leo in note to preceding question. Bp. Fett’s note on S. Cyprian, de Un. Eccl. p. 106. Hammonn’s Works, i. p. 516, Barrow, Pope’s Supremacy, p. 68. pp. 37. 39. @. Since, as has been before said (p. 96, 7), the best commentary ona law is contemporary and successive practice, what conclusion do we derive from ἐξ with respect to the alleged supremacy of St. Peter ? A. As it is certain ἃ priori, that St. Peter could have no supremacy over the other Apostles, from the fact that Christ did not authorize, but did plainly prohibit, such a supremacy, when He told His Apostles, “ that the kings of the Gentiles exer- Matt. xx. 25. cise lordship over them (the Gentiles), but it should Rae not be so with” them; and again, “ whosoever will 35. Matt. xx. 26. be great among ae let him be your minister ;? Mark x. 43. and “he that is greatest among you shall be your 310, Se servant ;” and that they had “One Master, Jesus 3} χίχ, Christ, and that they were Brethren ;” and again, fake xxii. when He spake to them of twelve thrones, and Rey. xxi. 14. not one throne, thus placing them on an equality ; and the wall of the Church in the Revelation has “twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve Apostles ;” so it is also clear, ἃ posteriori, M 3 246 THE BISHOP OF ROME HAS fast il. that St. James, who took the lead at a Council, 5. Cares, that of Jerusalem, at which St. Peter was present, Acts xv.13, and in which St. Peter took part as one of the speakers, knew nothing of such a supremacy in St. Peter; that St. Paul knew nothing of it, who 2 Cor. xi. 5, Sald that “he himself was not a whit behind the 28, very chiefest Apostles ;? who had “ the care of all moe the Churches,” and who says accordingly, “so I ordain in all the Churches; who classes Peter with James and John, and who withstood St. Peter and rebuked him to his face; and that St. Acts viii. 14. Peter himself knew nothing of it, who was sent by the authority of the Apostles to Samaria; who 2 Pet. iii. 2. Speaks of “ws the Apostles,” as his compeers, not inferiors, and of Curist, “the living Stone ;” and 1 Pet. ii. 5. Who writes on terms of equality, and not of δ: superiority, as “a brother-Elder” to Elders. And, to descend to St. Peter’s Successors, it is certain also that St. Polycarp', Bishop of Smyrna, knew nothing of such a supremacy in Pope Anicetus; that Polycrates*, Bishop of Ephesus, and the synod of Asiatic Bishops, and St. Irenzeus, Bishop of Lyons, and the Council assembled in that city, knew nothing of any such supremacy in Pope Victor’; that St. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, and the African Bishops, knew nothing of it in Pope Stephanus‘; that St. Augustine and the Bishops of Africa knew nothing of it in Popes Zosimus and Boniface’; and that the Bishops of Rome themselves for six hundred years were so far from knowing any thing of such supremacy as residing in themselves or in any one else, that Pope Gregory the First ° denounced the assump- tion of the title of Universal Bishop as arrogant, τ δ NO SUPREMACY IN THESE REALMS. 947 wicked, schismatical, blasphemous, and anti- Cuar. 1X. ~“——_ Christian; “ Quisquis se universalem sacerdotem vocat,” says he, “ Anti-Christum precurrit.” (Lib, vii. Epist. xxxiil.) 1 Euses. H. E. v. 23. 2 Rovuru, Rel. Sac. 1. 370—387. Bp. Bitson, Christian Subjection, p. 49. Peter, as you say the first Bishop of Rome, was resisted by Paul the teacher of the Gentiles; Anicetus by Polycarpus, St. John’s own scholar; Victor by Polycrates, Irenzus, and all the brethren of Asia; Stephen by Cyprian ; Damasus, Syri icius, and Anastasius, by Flavianus, and all the Churches of the east of Asia, Pontus, Thracia, and Lllyricum; Innocentius by Cyril; Zosimus and Bonifacius by Augustin and two hundred and sixteen Bishops of Africa.—See p. 123. 3 Root, i. 891—419. 4 Routh, iii. 90. Compare, on these cases, Euseb. H. E. v.14. Grase ad Iren. ii. c. 3. p. 201. See above, p. 168 —170. Bp. Pearson, Annales Cyprianici, pp. 48. 56. ed. Fell. S. Cyprian. in Concil. Carthag. vii. Routh, Reliquiz Sacre, iii. p.91. Neque enim quisquam nostram Hpiscopum se Episcoporum constituit, aut tyrannico terrore ad obse- quendi necessitatem collegas suos adigit, quando habeat omnis Episcopus pro licentia libertatis et potestatis suze arbitrium proprium. Hooxer, VII. xv1.7. Whereby it appears that among the African Bishops none did use such authority over any as the Bishop of Rome did afterwards claim over all, forcing upon them opinions by main and absolute power. 5 Conc. Cartu. iii. 28. Conc. Hirron. i, 27. Casassut. Notit. Concil. cap. xt1x. Binenam, IX. 1. 11. 5 Grecorit Maeni, Pontificis Romani, Epistole, vy. 43, ed. Paris, 1705, tom. ii. pp. 771—773. Nullus unquam decesso- rum meorum hoc tam profano vocabulo uti consensit ; quia videlicet si unus Patriarcha Universalis dicitur, Patriarcharum nomen ceteris derogatur. Sed absit hoe, absit ἃ Christiani mente, id sibi velle quempiam arripere, unde fratrum suorum honorem imminuere ex quantuldcunque parte videatur! M 4 Parr Il. UY 248 HE BISHOP OF ROME HAS Propterea Sanctitas yestra neminem unquam Universalem nominet. Si enim hoc dici licenter permittitur, honor Patri- archarum omnium negatur, Ep. v. 20, p.748. Quis est iste qui contra statuta evangelica, contra canonum decreta noyum sibi usurpare nomen presumit? Utinam sine aliorum immi- nutione unus sit qui yocari appetit Universalis! Sed absit ἃ cordibus Christianis nomen illud blasphemie in quo omnium sacerdotum honor adimitur, dum ab uno sibi dementer arro- gatur! Ep. vii. 27, p- 873. De eodem superstitioso et superbo vocabulo eum admonere studui, dicens, quia pacem nobiscum habere non posset, elationem predicti verbi corri- geret, quam primus Apostata invenit. Ep. vii. 33, p. 881. Ego fidenter dico, quia quisquis se universalem sacerdotem yocat vel vocari desiderat in elatione sua, Anti-Christum pre currit, quia superbiendo se ceteris preponit. Nec dispari superbia ad errorem ducitur, quia, sicut perversus ille, Deus videri vult super omnes homines ; ita quisquis iste est, qui solus sacerdos appellari appetit, super reliquos sacerdotes se extollit.—See also iv. 82. v. 29. vii. 31. 34. ix. 68. Hooxer, VII. vi. 9. What the Bishop of Constan- tinople (i. e. after the Council of Trullo or Quini-Sextum) challenged, and was therein as then refused by the Bishop of Rome (i.e. the title of Universal Bishop), the same the Bishop of Rome, in process of time, obtained for himself ; and having gotten it by bad means, hath both upheld and augmented it, and upholdeth it by acts and practices much worse.—See VIII. m1. 5. Archbp. Laup against Fisher, sect. 25. Mauricius being deposed and murdered by Phocas, Phocas conferred on Boniface III. that honour which two of his predecessors (Pelagius and Gregory) had declaimed against as monstrous and blasphemous, if not anti-Christian. Barrow, Pope’s Supremacy, p. 122. Bp. Overatt, Con- vocation Book, p. 285. Bp. Beverrpce on the XXXVIIth ARTICLE, @. Has then the Bishop of Rome no peculiar jurisdiction which does not belong to another Bishop ? a. Every Bishop possesses the highest spiritual NO SUPREMACY IN THESE REALMS. 249 authority in his own diocese, with respect to the (Ἢ Rae ὦ ordinary affairs of his own Church; and ab = Bishops, as Bishops, are equal’, nage their dioceses may be. As St. Jerome’, the secretary of a Pope (Damasus), says,— Ubicungue est Episcopus, sive Rome, sive Eugubii, ejusdem est meriti, ejusdem sacerdotii: potentia divitiarum et paupertatis humi- litas sublimiorem vel inferiorem Episcopum non facit?, On account of the civil eminence of Rome, the Bishop of Rome, as has been before stated (p. 114), anciently enjoyed precedence among Bishops, by the Canons of the Catholic Church ; but his jurisdiction as Bishop, Metropolitan, τῷ Patriarch, was and is limited to his own Diocese, Province, and Patriarchate, in the same manner as that of every other Bishop, Metropolitan, and Patriarch °. 1 S. Cyprian. Ep, ad Antonian. p. 177. Manente con- cordiz vinculo, et perseyerante Ecclesiz Catholics indi- viduo Sacramento, actum suum disponit et dirigit wunusquisque Episcopus, rationem propositi sui domino redditurus. —Ep. ad Papian. 69. Quis longé est ab humilitate, an ego, an tu qui te Episcopum Episcopi et Judicem Judicis constituis ?— Against appeals to extra-diocesan authority, Epist. 55. Cum statutum sit ab omnibus nobis, et eequum sit pariter ac justum ut cujusque causa ‘lic audiatur ubi est crimen admissum, et cum singulis pastoribus portio gregis sit adscripta, quam regat unusquisque et gubernet, rationem sui acttis Deo redditurus, oportet utique eos non circumcursare, Sc. S. Cyprian. Ep. 54. p. 112. Fell. Una Ecclesia, item Episcopatus unus, Episcoporum multorum concordi numero- sitate diffusus. De Unit. Eccles. p. 108. LEpiscopatus unus est cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur (i. 6. ita ut singuli omnem pleno jure possideant. Fell). It is to be observed, that in solidum is a term of civil law, expressing that every M 5 250 THE BISHOP OF ROME HAS Parr II, one of the holders has a right to his share without acknow- ——-— ledgment to any one. See above, p. 19, 20. Archbp. Laup, Conference with Fisher, p. 166. Bp. Brtson, Christian Subjection, p. 60. The Bishop of Rome was before the rest in honour and dignity, but not over the rest in power and authority. His place was first when the patriarchs met ; but his voice was not negative: he was subject both to the decrees of Councils and to the laws of Christian emperors, even in causes ecclesiastical. Barrow, Pope’s Sup. p. 149. The ancients did assert to each Bishop a free, absolute, independent authority, account- able to none on earth in the administration of affairs properly concerning his particular Church.—P. 151. The ancients did hold all Bishops, as to their office (originally according to Divine Institution, or abstracting from human sane- tions framed to preserve order and peace), to be egual; for that all are successors of the Apostles, all derive their commission and power in the same tenour from God. One Bishop may exceed another in splendour, wealth, extent of jurisdiction, as one King may surpass another in amplitude of territory ; but as all Kings, so all Bishops are equal in office and essentials of power derived from God. * S. Hieron. ad Evagr. Ep. 85. 5. August. ii. p. 310. 3 CrakanTHorPE, Def. Eccl. Angl. p. 176. Romanus Episcopus ad pareciam suam Romanam qua est Episcopus, ad provinciam suam Romanam qua est Metropolitanus, ad diecesin suam Romanam qua est Patriarcha, qué constrin- gitur ac quivis in toto orbe Episcopus, Metropolitanus, aut Patriarcha, seu patriarchalis Primas ; et illius censuree, excom- municationes, judicia, decreta, omnesque omnino episcopales actus quos extra aut ultra istos limites preestare tentat aut exercere, irriti plane sunt et pro nullis habendi. @. But it being granted that the Bishop of Rome cannot claim supreme jurisdiction over the Universal Church as a matter of Right, still is it not expedient for the maintenance of Unity in the Church, that it should have One Supreme Visible Head ? NO SUPREMACY IN THESE REALMS. 251 @. Let all the Kingdoms and States of the Cuar. 1X. earth be first placed under One Civil Ruler, and Above Sal then let the trial be made. If such a personal!” supremacy was not thought expedient by the Church when the greater part of the civilized world was under One Temporal Governor (the Emperor of Rome), it cannot be thought so now, when, as was before said (p. 235), there are about thirty different States and Kingdoms in Europe alone ; if it was not desirable at a time when the range of Christendom and of the known world was comparatively narrow, it cannot be so, when the limits of both have been enlarged to a vast extent, and are becoming more and more intricate and comprehensive ; and if it was even condemned as anti-Christian, before its effects had been seen, Above, | it cannot be reasonable to desire it now, when the ἢ ee world has had bitter eaperience of its tendency to promote disunion instead of peace, both in spiritual and secular affairs. @. In what respects has this tendency shown itself? @. The claim of universal spiritual headship naturally leads to that of secular supremacy, which is indeed essential to render the former reasonable: and the fact has been, and is, that, in defiance of Reason ahd Scripture, the Bishop 1 Pet. = 13, of Rome, on the ground, in the first place, of Beloas spiritual, and then of temporal supremacy, asserts ?* i oan a right to depose’ princes, to dispose of their domi- Ee ΕΣ nions, and to dmpose oaths on their subjects incon- ἢ ρ΄ sistent with and contrary to their duty to their ᾿ Pet 1% lawful sovereign ἢ; and thus does all in his power mM 6 252 THE BISHOP OF ROME HAS Part I. to annul the obligations of civil allegiance, and et to dissolve the bonds of civil society *. 1 Card. Bertarmin. De Rom. Pontif. vy. 7. Omnium consensu heeretici Principes possunt et debent privari suo dominio. Bp. Bartow, Brutum Fulmen, p. 9—12. In the words of the bull by which Gregory VII. deposed Henry IV., the Pope claims the right “in terra Imperia, Regna, Principatus, et omnium hominum possessiones pro meritis tollere unicuique et concedere.” Of the political consequences of these principles, see Bp. Bartow on Papal Power dangerous to Protestant Princes, p. 82—109 ; and his Brutum Fulmen, p. 174. Grecory VII., Hildebrand, was canonized, and on his festival he is thus lauded in the Lesson for the Day, for deposing Henry IV. “Contra Henrici Imperatoris impios conatus fortis per omnia athleta impavidus permansit, seque pro muro domui Israel ponere non timuit; eundem Henri- cum fidelium communione regnoque privavit.” This service was authorized by Pope Benedict XIII. Sept. 25, 1728. 2 See above, p. 222—228. Pueran’s and O’Sutrivan’s Digest of Evidence on Ire- land, pt. ii. p. 21. Roman Catholic Bishops are Peers of the creation of the Sovereign Pontiff, who claims to be Supreme Feudal Lord wherever he has a hierarchy of Bishops or Vicars Apostolic. Archbp. Magee, Digest of Evidence on Ireland, 1826, p- 12, says, “I am not able to explain to myself how the heads of the Roman Catholic Church, under a Protestant King, can consistently preserve the oath of allegiance to the sovereign. I find myself unable to reconcile the most solemn oath that is taken upon the appointment of a Roman Catholic Bishop, with his allegiance to his sovereign. It appears to me, that there is an obligation as deep as that which can grow out of the feeling of Christianity at war with the civil obligation. 1 can find in this oath no reservation or circumscription what- soever.—P. 13. If this disturbing influence exerted on the Bishop be carried down through the Priest, either from the NO SUPREMACY IN THESE REALMS. 909 nature of his oath, or any other way, it must be unnecessary CHar. IX. to say, from the close and influential contact into which eyery officiating Priest is brought with the Roman Catholic population of the country, what the effect must be as to the general loyalty..—The Editors of the Digest say, p. 16: “As the preceding clauses of the oath were so many suc- cessiye aggressions upon the honour of the Crown and the liberty of the subject, so the last sentence straitens, instead of relaxing, the obligations they impose. It virtually re- capitulates the previous pledges ; it declares that all things therein contained, the feudal vassalage of the Bishop, the Regal Supremacy of his Lord, and the duty of extending indefinitely the dominion of the Papacy, shall be main- tained more inyiolably than ever; and it concludes by making the party abjure all right in his local Prince to infringe on those prerogatives of the Universal Sovereign.” Upon the whole, then, we may ask, with Dr. O’Connor, Columbanus iii. 160, “How can the Bishop’s oath be reconciled with the oath of civil allegiance, which excludes all indirect temporal power of the Pope in this realm ?” See also Bp. Grsson, Codex, p. 117. ®. You have spoken of the secular evils of such a headship; what are the spiritual ones ? A. It destroys’ Unity in the Church on the plea of preserving it. It pretends to be the Centre of Unity, but is the Source of Confusion to all Christendom. It rejects the wisdom, revokes the judgments, and annihilates the authority of the Universal Church, as represented in General Councils’, by its claim to negative and rescind Ore their decrees; it claims infallibility, but not only eA has it erred grievously *, but it reduces the Church to a perpetual necessity of erring by committing it to the uncontrolled will of one man; it destroys the Order and Jurisdiction of Bishops‘, by re- solving all into its own power; and so deprives 254 THE BISHOP OF ROME HAS Parr II. the Apostles of their legitimate posterity and suc- se 3 5 cession; thus perverting the character of the Church from Apostolic into Papal, and degrading ας, Bishops into its own Vassals, as is evident from the oath now imposed upon Bishops by the Pope of Rome, which fully confirms the prophetic mage 179. speech of Pope Gregory the First to the Bishops 298, of Greece, “ Si unus Universalis est, restat ut vos Episcopi non sitis.” (Epist. lib. v. 68. tom. ii. p- 984.) ? Archbp. Laup, Sermons, p- 122, London, ed. 1651. While they seeke to tye all Christians to Rome by a divine precept, their ambition of soveraignty is one and maine cause that Jerusalem, even the whole Church of Christ, is not at Unity in itselfe this day.—Ibid. p. 258. The Pope, which Bellarmine hath put into the definition of the Church that there might be one ministerial Head to keepe all in Unity, is as great as any, if not the greatest, cause of divided Christianity. * Card. Bertarm. De Pontifice. Tota firmitas Concili- orum est ἃ Pontifice. By the bull In Cand Domini, all who dare appeal from the Pope to a Council are under sentence of excommunication. 3. Pope Grecor. I., ii. p. 771. Cum fortasse is in errore perit, qui Universalis dicitur, nullus jam Episcopus remansisse in statu Veritatis invenitur. For an enumeration of errors and heretical opinions maintained by individual Bishops of Rome from time to time, see Geruarp, V. Ρ. 407. E Papis, Zephyrinus fuit Montanista, Marcellinus idololatra, Liberius et Felix Ariani. Anastasius communicavit cum Photino, Vigilius fuit Eutychianus, Honorius Monothelita. Com- pare also Rouru, Script. Eccles. ii. 512—516; Binenam, XVI. 1, 14. And even Bossurr in his Défense de la Dé- claration ; and Hist. Eccl., Paris, 1768, i. Ρ. 342. Liillustre M. Bossver donne ἃ ce scandale du Pape Zosime le nom de chiite terrible (casus gravis), de méme qu’a celui qu’avoit auparavant causé le Pape Libére. * Archbp. Bramuatt, i. p. 252. Though the Popes do NO SUPREMACY IN THESE REALMS. 255 not abolish the order of Bishops or Episcopacy in the Cuar. IX. abstract, yet they limit the power of Bishops in the concrete at their pleasure by exemptions and reservations, holding themselves to be the Bishops of every particular see in the world, during the vacancy of it, and making all Episcopal jurisdiction to flow from them, and to be founded in the Pope’s laws, because it was but delegated to the rest of the Apostles for a term of life, but resided solely in St. Peter as an Ordinary to descend from him to his successors the Bishops of Rome, and to be imparted by them to other Bishops as their Vicars or Coadjutors, assumed by them into some part of their charge. (Bellarmin. de Rom. Pontif. i. ii. iv. 23—25.) By this account the Pope must be the Universal or Only Bishop of the world; the Keys must be his gift, not Christ’s ; and all the Apostles, except St. Peter, must want their successors in Episcopal jurisdiction, What is this but to trample upon Episcopacy, to dissolve the primitive bands of primitive Unity, to overthrow the discipline instituted by Christ, and to take away the line of Apostolical succession? See also Bramua ct, i. 189. That all Power of Order is resolved by the Papacy into itself, is clear from the Ponriricate Rom. p. 87, ed. Rom. 1818. Antequam obtinuerit quis Pallium, licet sit conse- cratus, non sortitur nomen Patriarche aut Primatis aut Archiepiscopi, et non licet ei Episcopos consecrare, nec con- vocare concilium, nec Chrisma conficere, neque Ecclesias dedicare, πές Clericos ordinare. Cardinal ZaBaReELta, in ec. licet extra de electione. Papa inyasit omnia jura inferiorum Ecclesiarum, adeo ut inferioris Ordinis Przlati pro nihilo sint ; et nisi Deus succurrat, vehe- menter periclitaturus est status Ecclesiarum. @. But since it cannot be by the claims of the Pope, how, then, is the Unity of the Church to be preserved ? ,.--.2 @. St. Paul informs us. “ There is one Body, Eph. iv. and one Spirit, and one Hope of our calling ; one ie Lord, one Faith, one Baptism; one God and Father of us αἰ". He does not add, “ One Visible Parr II. YY 1Cor. xii. 28. Eph. iv. 10. Above, p. 8. 19. Matt. xviii, 17. 20. Acts xv. 2. 28, xvi. 4. 256 THE BISHOP OF ROME HAS Head.” Tet all the members of the Catholic Church be “joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment,” let them “ walk by the same rule, and mind the same thing,” let them be united in the same Faith, in the same Sacraments, and in the same Apostolic Discipline and Government; let them communicate with one another* by means of their lawful Bishops, in National and in General Councils, according to the institution of Christ, and to universal primi- tive practice; let them all, each in his own sphere, “endeavour to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace ;” and they will then enjoy the blessing of primitive Christian Unity. But they will never attain this Unity by subjection to one supreme visible Head, of which the Primitive Church knew nothing; and especially they cannot expect it from subjection to such a supreme visible Head as subverts the one Faith by a New Creed, mutilates the Sacraments, destroys Apostolic go- vernment, and sets at nought the authority of the Church in her Synods, and having thus dissolved all the bands of Unity, exacts an implicit subjec- tion to all these Innovations and Infractions, as an essential condition of Communion with itself, as a test of Church Membership, and as necessary to eternal salvation *. (See also above on this subject, pt. i. ch. 11. & pt. i. ch. ix. at end.) 1 S. Aue. in Epist. 5. Joann. vi. In uno corpore sumus ; Unum Caput habemus in Ceelo. Trrturxtan, De Prescript. ce. 10. Communicatio pacis, appellatio fraternitatis, contes- seratio hospitalitatis. See the Prayer for Unrry, in the Form of Prayer and Service for the QUEEN’s Accession. > Rarvorp’s Conf. with Hart, p. 206. 1598. The wisdom NO SUPREMACY IN THESE REALMS. 257 of God hath committed that chieftie of judgment, not to the sovereign power of One, but to the common care of many. For when there was a controversie in the Church of Antioch about the observation of the law of Moses (Acts xy. 2), they ordained that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem to the Apostles and Elders about that question. So by their common decree the controversie was ended, the truth of faith kept, and peace maintained in the Church. After which example the Bishops who suc- ceeded the Apostles made the like assemblies on like occa- sions. (Euseb. H. E. v. 14. 21, 22. vii. 26. 28. ἅς.) So did Apostles and Apostolic men provide against schisms, Their wisedome reached not to the policie of one Chief Judge. See also Bp. Birson, Christian Subjection, p. 305. Hooker, I. x. 14. VIII. 11. 6. Bp. Carreron, de Ecclesia, 234—242. Multi Episcopi unum Episcopatum constituunt. Archbp. Bramwact, ii. 820, 615. On Councils as means of Unity. Barrow on Unity of the Church, vi. p. 534—548. Bp. Parricx, Sermon on St. Peter’s Day, 1687, p. 69. The Holy Ghost hath told us that there is but one God the Father, of Whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by Whom are all things, and we by Him (1 Cor. viii. 6) ; and one God and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, so that to use any other, is to fall into a Schism, and break the communion of the Church of Christ, as they of the Church of Rome have done, both by this and by changing the ancient Government Discipline and Faith of the Church; they have separated themselves from the rest of the Christian world, by usurping universal jurisdiction, as well as by many other things, and so broken that charity which gives the greatest efficacy to our prayers. Lrsuiz, Rey. Charles, Case Stated, &c. p. 208, ed. 1714. This Universal Supremacy is merely imaginary ; it was never named by Christ, and never was in fact. And so far is it from being the Centre of Unity, that the pretence to it has been the great breach of Unity among Christian Churches, and is at this day : for this is it which stops the Bishops in the communion of Rome from exercising that authority which Christ has given them over their own flocks, and Cuap. IX, es) Part II. 258 ROME HAS NO SUPREMACY, &c. which was freely exercised by the Bishops in the primitive Church ; and which, if restored, would open the way to that Catholic Communion wherein the true Unity of the Church doth consist. Bincuam, XVI. 1. 14. The unity of the Church was sufficiently provided for by the agreement of all Churches in the same Faith, and the obligation that lay upon the whole College of Bishops, as equal sharers in one Episcopacy, to give mutual assistance to each other in all things that were necessary to defend the faith, or preserve the unity of the Church entire in all respects, when any assault was made upon it. It was by this means, and not by any necessary recourse to any Single, Visible, Standing Head, that anciently the Unity of the Church was preserved. 3 Conciz. Lareran. sub Leone X. sess. 10. De neces- sitate salutis est omnes Christi fideles Romano Pontifici subesse, prout Divine Scriptures et Sanctorum Patrum tes- timonio edocemur, et Constitutione Bonifacii Pape VIII. que incipit Unam Sanctam (quam) sacro prasenti Concilio approbante innovamus et approbamus. Archbp. Bramuatt, ii. p. 201. Pius the Vth did not only enjoin all ecclesiastics, seculars and regulars, to swear to his new Creed, but he imposed it upon ail Christians as “ veram fidem Catholicam, extra quam nemo salvus esse potest.” (Bulla Pii IV. in Act. Concil. Trident. Labbe, Concil. xiy. p. 946. B.) PART III. The Church of England in tts Cthtl Relations. CHAPTER I. CHURCH AND STATE ONE SOCIETY UNDER DIFFERENT NAMES. @. You have spoken of the English Church Cuar. 1. ----ἕ -- -- as independent; but is it not dependent on the State ? @. No: in the case of a Christian community, the words Church and State designate the same thing under different relations. The term Church describes the Whole National Community in its religious capacity, the State describes it in its civil. Church and State are duce formaliter, sed una mate- rialiter ; they are different names of the same body politic’, as Christian and Citizen are different names of one human body.—And as an indivi- dual’s Christianity does not depend on his citizen- ship, though his happiness as a Christian greatly depends on his conduct as a Citizen; so the existence of the Community as a Church does not 260 cHURCH AND STATE ONE SOCIETY Parr IIL. depend on its constitution as a State, though its efficiency and prosperity as a Church is greatly affected by its civil acts as a State, 1 Hooxer, VIII. 1. 5. The Church and Commonwealth are names which import things really different, but those things are accidents, and such accidents as may and should always dwell lovingly together in one subject, (Hooxer, VIII. τι. 6) in a free Christian state or kingdom, where one and the selfsame people are the Church and the Com- monwealth. Archbp. Laup, Sermons, 1651. Sermon i. on Ps. exxii. 6, 7. When you sit down to consult, you must not forget the Church ; and when we kneel down to pray, we must not forget the State: both are but One Jerusalem.—P.9. Both Commonwealth and Church are collective bodies, made up of many into one ; and both so near that the same men which in a temporal respect make the Commonwealth, do in a spiritual make the Church: so one name of the mother city serves both, that are joined up into one ; and p- 35, The same men which, in respect of one allegiance, make the Commonwealth do, in respect of one Faith, make the Church. Saravia, de Honore Presulibus debito, p. 71. Sunt qui Ecclesiam in Republica esse putant tanquam ejus sit queedam pars, et quod Ipsa tota Respublica non sit Ecclesia. Verum hee distinctio in Christiano populo locum non habet. Ubi totus aliquis populus nomen dedit Christo, et nemo illic sit qui Christi Baptismo non sit tinctus, Ecclesia est Respublica, et Respublica est externa et yisibilis quedam Ecclesia. See below, p. 279. Casavson, de Lib. Eccles. ii. Ex eo tempore quando Christianismi professio vulgé erat recepta, qui Rempublicam constituebat populus idem etiam Ecclesia fuit. G. I. Vossius, De Jure Magistratus in Rebus Ecclesias- ticis, p. 863, ed. 1701. Potestas eorum qui publica sunt vocatione instructi vel civilis est vel Ecclesiastica. Civilis procurat humanum bonum uti εὐδαιμονίαν πολιτικήν. Atque hoc respectu Societas hominum non Ecclesia sed Respublica vocatur. Potestas vero Ecclesiastica procurat Spirituale UNDER DIFFERENT NAMES. 261 bonum uti beatitudinem ccelestem ; atque eo respectu hee ipsa Societas non jam Reipublice sed Ecclesie nomen obtinet. Bourke, νοὶ. x. p. 48. An alliance between Church and State in a Christian Commonwealth is, in my opinion, an idle and a fanciful speculation. An alliance is between two things that are in their nature distinct and independent, such as between two sovereign states. But in a Christian Commonwealth the Church and State are one and the same thing. The Church has been always divided into two parts, the clergy and the laity ; of which the /aity is as much an essential integral part, and has as much its duties and privi- leges as the clerical member, and in the rule, order, and government of the Church has its share. @. You say that Church and State are dif- ferent names of the same thing; and that the same men who in spiritual respects make the Church do in temporal make the State; can you explain by what process this comes to be so? @. Let us suppose, for example, the condition of the Roman Empire when Christianity appeared. The State was heathen, and its citizens were Pagans. The Gospel was preached, many Roman citizens became Christians, and at length the Emperor himself professed his faith in Christ. But neither did the citizens Jose their civil rights, nor the Emperor' his imperial, by embracing Chris- tianity ; but both brought with them their secular privileges and functions into their new religious condition. And thus the Roman State became a Christian Church ; and so it continued long to be. And when the Roman Empire was broken up into several nations, each nation became not only an independent State but also a National Church. And every heathen nation which now embraces Christianity becomes a Church in the same Cuap. 1. “.--.,-- Part III. το .. Prov. xiv. 34. Ps, exxvii. 1. Ps, xxxiii. 262 CHURCH AND STATE ONE SOCIETY manner as the Roman State did. And thus every Christian Nation is both a Church and a State, according to the relations in which it is viewed ; not, however, that it is in any case a perfect Church (for no visible Church is perfect) any more than it is a perfect State, but one Church varies greatly from another in soundness, and from itself at various times. On the other hand, the Emperor gained new rights and was called to new duties, as Governor of the Community, not only as a State, but as a Church; or as Bp. ANDREWES expresses it, Tortura Torti, p. 377, Cesari, si Christianus fit, ut Constantino, idem juris in Ecclesiam est in Novo Testamento quod in Vetere Josiz fuit. Tum Reges Ecclesiz gubernacula capessant cum conyersi ad fidem fuerint. Red- denda enim Ce@sari que Cesaris sunt. Czsaris sunt que Cesari debentur. Debentur autem Cesari Christiano que- eunque olim a Populo Dei sub Veteri Lege Regibus suis officia vel debita vel persoluta sunt—non in Regni rebus solum sed etiam Heclesie. ®. But may not a National Community acting as a State divest itself of its religious character, and exist only in its civil one? A. No doubt it may de facto, by utterly apo- statizing from Christianity, and relapsing into heathenism ; but no Community’ can prosper without religion any more than an Individual can: non aliunde beata Civitas, aliunde homo, as St. Augustine says, and malé vivitur ubi non de Deo bené creditur. 1 Archbp. Laup, Sermons, vi. p. 176. Unity is a binder up ; and Unity of Spirit (which is Religion’s Unity) is the fastest binder that is. And lest it should not bind fast enough, it calls in the bond of peace; so that no man can exhort unto, and endeavour for the Unity of the Church, but UNDER DIFFERENT NAMES. 263 at the same time he labours for the good of the State. . Unity not kept in the Church is less kept in the State. And the schisms and divisions of the one are both mothers and nurses of all disobedience and disjointing in the other. So the Apostle’s exhortation (Eph. iv. 3) goes on directly to the Church, by consequent to the State. @®. But did not ancient Republics flourish with- out religion ? @. No; on the contrary, their wisest citizens maintained that they flourished dy religion '. 1 See the copious citations by ae Taylor on this subject, ®. But how could ie flourish by idolatry ὃ Q. They did not flourish by idolatry, as cdo- latry ; but they flourished by it, as far as it was a Religion, opposed to Atheism or no Religion. Hooker, V. x1. 6. V. Lxxvi. 6. (Ὁ. Are, then, civil communities bound to main- tain religion ἢ Cuar. I. @. Yes; and Christian men united together in Deut. xxviii. that Society which is called a Body Politic, are |'¢ 14. Sam. xii. bound to maintain the Christian Religion in Isa. iii. 10. soundness and purity, not merely Zs an important Be Helow but as their most important concern’. 1 Hooker V. τ. 2. We agree that pure and unstained Religion ought to be the highest of all cares appertaining to public regiment ; as well in regard of the aid and protection which they who serve God confess that they receive at His merciful hands, as also for the force which Religion hath to qualify all sorts of men, and to make them in public affairs the more serviceable ; Governors the apter to rule with conscience ; Inferiors for conscience sake the willinger to obey. Bp. Anvrewes, Tortura Torti, p. 381. Religionis cura non est regia tantum, sed in regiis prima. Burke, yol. x. p. 43. Religion is so far, in my opinion, Parr ΠῚ. UU Prov. xiv, 34. Ps. exxvii.l. exliv. 15. Judith y. 17—21. xi. 10. 264 THE DUTY OF KINGS AND STATES from being out of the province or the duty of a Christian magistrate, that it is, and it ought to be, not only his care, but the principal thing in his care ; because it is one of the great bonds of human society ; and its object, the supreme good, the ultimate end and object of man himself. @. By what law are they so bound? A. By the will of ALmigury Gop, whose work human Society is’, which He wills not only to exist, but to exist in the most perfect condition of which it is capable; and since “ Righteousness exalteth a Nation,” and “ Religion is the root of every virtue ’,” and the Christian Religion is the foundation of all Christian virtue ; therefore a Christian community is bound to maintain and promote by all means in its power the public (whereby it also promotes the private) exercise of the Christian Religion. 1 Bourke, vol. vi. p. 326. God wills the State. 2 Hooker, V. 1. @. Its duty, then, to itself, as well as to God, prescribes the same thing ? @. Yes, certainly, “happy and blessed are the People who have the Lord for their God ;” “all things religiously taken in hand are prosperously ended ';” and what the heathen poet said to his own country, may be said to all States and King- doms, Dis te minorem quod geris, imperas : Huc omne principium, hue refer exitum. Di multa neglecti dederunt Hesperia mala luctuose. (Hor. Carm. iii. 6, 5—-8.) 1 Hooker, V.1. 5. Aucust. Civ. Dei, y.c.24. Lord Ch. J. Corr, Litt. 95. Nunquam res humanz succedunt, ubi negligunter divine. Hooker, V.1.4. When the Kings of | TO PROMOTE THE TRUE FAITH. 265 Israel, to better their worldly estates (as they thought), left their own and their people’s ghostly condition uncared for, by woful experience they both did learn that to forsake the true God of heaven is to fall into all such evils upon the face of the earth, as men either destitute of divine grace may commit, or unprotected from above may endure. CHAPTER II. ON THE DUTY OF KINGS AND STATES TO PRO- FESS AND TO PROMOTE THE TRUE FAITH. @. Bur, it is said, if a State provides for the interests of Religion, does it not seem to intrude upon God’s own office ? A. God graciously vouchsafes to Kings and States the privilege of advancing His glory. This is the greatest honour they can enjoy, and the forfeiture of it is their severest punishment ; and as it would be sin and folly on their part to ask Him why He gives them this privilege, so it would be very unreasonable if they, who derive all their power from God and are most indebted to Him and dependent on Him, should not also be foremost to make acknowledgments to Him of this their obligation and of their dependence, by their faithfulness in His service, and by their zeal for His glory. @. You say that Kings and States derive their power from God; can then a power which is sometimes abused tyrannically be said to be divinely derived ? N Cuap, Il. ἘΞ . Parr ILI. Sa 1 Pet. ii. 18, Rom. xiii. 1. 266 THE DUTY OF KINGS AND STATES A. God is the only source of all power; but He is the source of none of its abuses; yet in His wisdom He often uses bad Governors to chastise bad subjects, and to prove and try good ones’, and to train them by wholesome discipline to higher degrees of goodness, and thus to prepare them for greater fruition of glory. 1S. Inen. y. 29. Quidam Regum ad correctionem et utilitatem subditorum dantur a Deo, quidam ad timorem et penam. S. Curysosrom, ad Rom. xiii. 5. Aucusrin, de Civ. Dei, y. c. 21. Qui dedit imperium Constantino Chris- tiano, Ipse etiam Apostate Juliano. Qui Mario imperium dedit, etiam Caio Cesari; qui Augusto, Ipse et Neroni. S. Ασα. Epist.ad Vincent. Terror temporalium potestatum, quando veritatem oppugnant, justis et fortibus gloriosa pro- batio est, infirmis periculosa tentatio. @. You say that God is the source of all power, but does not St. Peter call the Civil Ma- gistrate an Ordinance or Creation (κτίσις) of Man? @. The Government and Commonwealth, its power and authority, is from God; but the form and manner of it is often by the choice and ordinance of man: thus the ordinance of the Civil Magistrate is per populum, who is its mediate and instrumental, but it is a Deo, who is its prin- cipal and efficient, cause’; and therefore St. Peter says, “ Submit yourself to every creation of man, for the Lord’s sake ;” and St. Paul, “ Let every soul be subject to the higher powers (ἐξουσίαις), for there is no power but from God (ἀπὸ Θεοῦ) : the powers that be, are ordained of God (ὑπὸ Θεοῦ) ; and he that resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God.” TO PROMOTE THE TRUE FAITH. 267 1 Col. i. 16. ἐν αὐτῷ (Χριστῷ) ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα .. Cuar. 1]. ca a ” , ” > \ ” ᾽ ᾿ " , _—_—_— εἴτε θρόνοι, εἴτε κυριότητες, εἴτε ἀρχαὶ, εἴτε ἐξουσίαι, τὰ πάντα δὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται. See below, p. 268, above, 19, 20. Bp. Sanverson, Preel. vii, 15. @. Kings and States, then, derive their power from God; but did not Christ disclaim all civil power, and renounce all exercise of it in His be- half, when He said to Pilate, My kingdom is not of τὶς xviii. this world ? ; A. Christ, when He spake these words, was Zohn xix, standing before the Roman governor, being ac- cused by the Jews of usurping Cezesar’s authority ; this is what He disclaimed; and it is to be ob- served that He does not say, My kingdom is not in this world (ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ τούτῳ), but, it is not from, that is, not derived from, this world (ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου τούτου '), an expression which He used in the same sense on two other occasions. And it 15 John viii. clear from Holy Scripture, that though Christ 2% *v- 19 did not come into the world to exercise earthly power in His own person, yet that all they who have earthly power, are bound to exercise it for the promotion of His glory. Christ, to Whom as matt. Creator and Redeemer of the world “ all power *xv"". 18, in heaven and earth is given,” Who is “the Prince of the Kings of the earth,” did not come to make Himself an earthly King, but He did come to make Kings members of His kingdom. . = 1 Tueornycact, in Joann. c. 18, p. 748. εἶπε, ὅτι ἡ βασιλεία μον οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου τούτου" καὶ αὖθις, ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν ἐντεῦθεν" οὐ γὰρ εἶπεν, οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν τῷ ; παν Senge i ; Se ineeuyar κόσμῳ, οὐδὲ ἐστὶν ἐνταῦθα" βασιλεύει μὲν yap (ὁ Χρισε τὸς) ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ καὶ προνοεῖται τούτου, καὶ, ὡς βούλεται, περιάγει τὰ πάντα, οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου ἡ βασιλεία ν 2 Parr III. eee Rom. xiii. 14.6: Col. i. 16. ἔκτισται . ἐκτίσθη... in the ori- ginal. Dan. ii. 21, iv. 25. : Tim. vi. Proy. viii. Bp, Isa. xlix. 23. 1x. 16, Acts iv. 25, Psalm ii, 12. Rey. iv. 10. Rev. xi. 15. Rev. xix. 16, 17. xxi, 24, 268 THE DUTY OF KINGS AND STATES > a > > + ‘4 , aa ΄ a , αὐτοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ ἄνωθεν καὶ προαιώνιος--- ἔπειτα πῶς ἂν vonbein A > ‘ ᾿, > > ‘ > « ΄ ἍΜ > = TO εἰς Ta ἴδια ἦλθεν, εἰ μὴ ἦν ὁ κόσμος ἴδιος αὐτοῦ ; S. Ave, Tract. in S. Joann. exv. Non ait, ‘Regnum meum non est hic,’ sed ‘non est hinc : Hic enim est Regnum Ejus, usque in finem szeculi. ©. How does this duty of Kings to maintain and promote the true Faith appear from Scrip- ture ? A. Kings’ are, as has been before stated, there represented to us as God’s Vicegerents and “ Mi- -nisters for good” to men (διάκονοι, λειτουργοί). They derive their power? from Curist, by Whom “all things were created, whether they be Thrones, or Dominions, or Principalities, or Powers ;” and “Who is the only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; by Whom kings reign and princes decree justice ;” and God has promised that “Kings shall be the nursing-fathers, and Queens the nursing-mothers,’” of His Church. And the second Psalm, which prophesies of this very event, which has just been mentioned, I mean of Christ standing before Pilate, when, it is also to be observed, our Lord spake of Pilate’s official power as derived from above (ἄνωθεν) (i. e. from Himself), concludes with an exhortation from the Royal Psalmist to Kings and all in authority, to be wise and serve the Lord with fear, and to kiss the Son, i. e. to reverence Him, as their subjects reverence them. And, in the Revelation, the twenty-four elders, i.e. all the heads of the tribes of the earth, cast their crowns before His throne ; and the voices in heaven say, “ The king- doms of this world are become the kingdoms of the Lord, and of His Curisy.” That cannot be other- TO PROMOTE THE TRUE FAITH. 269 wise than glorious for Kings and Nations to do, which, when done, is sung of by Angels in heaven, as redounding to the glory of Christ. 1S, Inen. y. 20. Cujus jussu nascuntur homines, Hujus jussu et reges constituuntur. Trrturtian, Apolog. 30. Ideo magnus est imperator, quia ccelo minor est ; inde est imperator unde et homo ; inde potestas illi unde et spiritus. Ad Seap. 2. Imperator homo a Deo secundus, quicquid est a Deo consecutus ; et solo Deo minor, omnibus major, dum solo Deo minor. S. August. iy. 722.1141. Jam in fronte Regum Crux illa fixa est, &c. 2 Hooker, VIII.1v.6. No power (saith the Apostle) but from God, nor doth anything come trom God but by the hands of our Lord Jesus Christ.—All authority of man is derived from God through Christ, and must by Christian men be acknowledged to be no otherwise held than of and under Him. See Bp. Overart, Convocation Book. Book j. 6. 2. xxxv. xxxvi. Casauzon. de Lib. Eccles. ὁ. 11. iv. @. But if the National Community is obliged to promote religion, must it not profess some one form of religion, and one at variance with that of many of its members, where they differ in their religious opinions ? @. The Community supposed consists of Christ- ian men, who are bound, as they desire to be saved, to profess the true faith, which is one, and one only’. 1S. Hreron. in Esai. xix. Unum altare dicitur, sicut wna Jides, et unum baplisma, et una Ecclesia. See above, pp. 29—832. See further below, pt. iii, ch. iii. pp. 279—288. ©. But when they differ in their belief, how can this be done? is it not very difficult to be attained ? Q. All good things are difficult ; and Unity we know is one of the Jest. Unity is too great a good N 3 Cuap. I. .-ὄ..- Rom. xiii. J. Eph. iv. 5. Ps. ¢xxxili. 2 Cor. xiii. 11: Part III. ut Phi 20s 1 Cor. iii. 3. Gal. ν. 20. Psalm exxxiii. 1. Eph. iv. 2. 1 Cor. i. 10. 270 THE DUTY OF KINGS AND STATES to be acquired except by a hearty combination of desire, resolution, and earnest endeavour (σπουδή). They who differ ought, therefore, as they value their salvation and the cause of Piety and Charity, first of all carefully to consider the grounds of their differences, remembering the evil and sinfulness of strife and the blessings of unity ; and they ought to endeavour therefore to put an end to their differ- ences, according to the advice of the Apostle, “ endeavouring earnestly (σπουδάζοντες) to keep the Unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace;”? “I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment” (vol καὶ γνώμῃ) ; “ doing nothing through strife, but being of one accord, earnestly following after the things which make for peace, and wherewith one may edify another.” 1 Archbp. Laup, Sermons, vi. On Unity. Keep then the Unity of the Spirit ; but know withal (and it follows in the text, Eph. iv. 8) that if you will keep it you must endeavour to keep it. For it is not so easy a thing to keep Unity in great bodies as it is thought; there goes much /abour and endeavour to it. The word is σπουδάζοντες ; study, be care- ful to keep it. St. Augustine reads it, satagentes, do enough to keep it: and he that doth enough, gives not over till it be kept. Nay, the Apostle comes so home, that he uses two words, and both of singular care for Unity : for he does not simply say, Keep it; norsimply, Endeavour it ; but, Study, endeavour to keep it. Now no man can keep, that is not careful ; and no man will endeavour, that is not studious. ‘“ Neither is it” (says St. Chrysostom) “every man’s sufficiency to be able to keep Unity.” And the word implies such an endeavour as TO PROMOTE THE TRUE FAITH. 271 makes haste to keep: and indeed no time is to be lost at this Cuap. II. work. are @. But if they who differ are sincere in their differences, are they responsible for their opinions, even if they are erroneous ? A. Certainly they are. God has not only given Prov. xvi. us Conscience, but He has also given us His Law 3 to regulate it. It is not indeed to be supposed that any man is guilty because he is sincere, or could be innocent, without sincerity ; but sincerity in error may be, and generally is, the result of bad moral habits, and of wilful resistance to God’s grace, and of violation of His commands, and of John xvi. 2. neglect and abuse of moral and religious advan- pif αν 5. tages; 1. 6. it proceeds from such a temper and practice as is forbidden and condemned by the law of God, and as can produce no good fruits ; and therefore it is not conscience, or good intention, alone which can give us any well-grounded assur- ance of acquittal and acceptance with God. @. You mean then, that we ought to derive no assurance from our conscience, simply as con- science, and that we have no right to presume that its persuasions are not punishable, provided only that they are sincere ? A. I do’. The Jews, even when they put our Blessed Lord to death, thought that they were doing God service. 1 XXXIX Arricres. Art. xviii. They are to be had accursed, that presume to say that every man shall be saved by the law or sect that he professeth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that law and the light of nature. See also Art. xiii., and W. Law, Letters to Bp. Hoadly, p- 8331—334, and p. 570, in Scholar Armed, vol. i. Of Sin- cerity and Private Judgment. N 4 Parr IIT. ——— 1) Acts xxiv. 16. 1 Tim. i. 5 19. iii. 9 iv. 2. Rev. iii. 15. 1 Kings Xviii. 31. 2 Kings xvii, 2441, Zeph. i. 5. Levit. xix. 19. Hos. viii. 11. Deut. xxii. 9. Exod, xxii. 20. xxiii. 13. xxxiv. 14, 272 THE DUTY OF KINGS AND STATES @. In what cases, then, may our conscience excuse us ? @. First, when our conscience is right, i. e. re- gulated by God’s Law; and, secondly, when we have used all the means in our power to reform it where it is erroneous, to inform it where it is ignorant, and to conform it to Reason and Religion where it is refractory ἡ. * Canons, 1603. Canon lvii. We require and charge every person seduced as aforesaid to reform their wilfulness, and submit to the order of the Church ; and if any will not be moved to reform their error and unlawful course, &e. Hooker, Preface, v1.6; above, p. 40.—IV. x.1. The most effectual medicine to heal their grief is not the taking away of the things whereat they are grieved, but the altering of their own persuasion concerning them. See also Bp. San- DERSON, Sermons, iy. ᾧ 24.29. Notes in Christian Institutes, iv. 417. 511—513. 607—609. See below, pt. iy. chap. ii. @. But if the endeavour for unity fails, must still some one form of religion be professed ? A. There is, as has been shown (p. 29—32), one true faith, and one only ; and it is not less necessary for Communities to receive, nor less important for them to profess, this one true faith, than it is for Individuals to do so’. How long halt ye be- tween two opinions?” was addressed by God’s prophet not to Individuals, but to a State; and a mixture of Religions was denounced by God as a national sin in the case of the Cuthites, Avites, and Sepharvites, and other inhabitants of Samaritan cities. Gop declares that He will cut off all who “make many altars to sin,’ and “worship and swear by the Lord, and that swear by Malcham ; i. e. who combine false religions TO PROMOTE THE TRUE FAITH. 273 with the true. He has revealed Himself “as a jealous * God,” one who will bear no rival in the worship which is to be paid to Him; and that He is to be “ worshipped in fruth ;” and He has declared that He will not spare those. who join error and corruption with His pure faith and worship. Religious differences, religious compro- mises, and religious indifference, are all sinful; and none of them can be remedied except by an earnest desire on the part of the members of the community to join in the steadfast and zealous pro- fession of the One true Faith ; and it is the duty of a Nation, and specially therefore of its Rulers, as they hope to escape God’s anger and to receive His blessing, as they value His favour, and their own welfare, and that of the State, to aid and en- courage all desires and endeavours for the attain- ment of this end, and to promote and maintain national Unity in religion by national Acts, and to abstain carefully from all that is of a contrary tendency. 1 Bp. Brrson on Christian Subjection, p. 29. ? Lord Bacon, De Unitate Ecclesiz, iii. Inter attributa Veri Dei ponitur, quod sit Deus zelotypus, (Exod. xx. 5. xxil. 20. xxxiy. 14.) itaque cultus ejus non fert mixturam. Bp. AnpreweEs on the Decalogue, p. 101. ®. But is it not unjust to levy taxes on those who dissent from a Church for the endowment and extension of what they disapprove ? @. If every man were to be taxed only for what he approved, there would soon be no State Revenue. A Country is not to be deprived of its army and navy because many religionists disapprove of war. No; salus populi suprema Lex. Soa Nation is N 5 Cuap. LI. - os Jud. vi. 10. 1 Cor. v. 6. 2 Cor. vi. 14. Part III. —— 274 THE DUTY OF KINGS AND STATES not to suffer loss of or weakness in its spiritual army and navy, the Church, because many men do not approve of its doctrines. Besides, Dissenters are Christians, and as such, must desire the maintenance and extension of Christianity ; and they cannot suppose, or at least they can never prove, that a Nation can obey God, or hope for Peace and Prosperity, without promoting Religion. @. But may not it promote different forms of Religion ? @. And where is it to stop, when it once begins to do so ? ullusne excludet jurgia finis ? Besides, by endowing various forms of Religion, it would virtually endow none. It would promote, not Religion, but irreligious Indifference to all Re- ligion. It would tend to produce in the public mind the opinion that all Religions are alike ; and thus create universal laxity of belief and practice both in public and private, and so hasten its own dissolution. But no: the plain duty of a State is to maintain the one true form of Religion, and if it does this steadily and zealously, all religious differences and difficulties, which arise mainly from the neglect of this duty, will with God’s blessing soon disappear. @. Have we any Scripture Rules for such cases as these, where religious differences prevail ? @. During the ministry of Jesus Christ and His Apostles, no State or Governing Power had as yet become Christian; but St. Paul writing to Christian Communities, sundry members of which differed from each other in religious opinions, does not teach them that on this account they ΡΥ. TO PROMOTE THE TRUE FAITH. 275 are to maintain no form, or different forms, of Cuap. 11. religious belief; but, on the contrary, he exhorts ita =e them all to stand fast in the one true faith, not to | be corrupted from the simplicity ΟΥ singleness pyii, ;.27. (ἁπλότητος) that is in Christ, and by speaking ton in ibe the truth in love, to confirm themselves and others in the true faith. @. But may not the Community err in its religious belief ? @. It may, as an Individual may; but the pos- sibility of its making a mistake in its belief will never excuse a State, any more than an Individual, for professing no belief at all; but it ought to make it careful to prove the truth and to hold it fast. @. Ought not this possibility of error to make a Community charitable to those who hold dif- ferent opinions in religion ? @. Certainly ; and therefore it ῬΒεδΣ to abstain Luke xiv. from persecuting those who err’, though at the ἢν Rev. iii. 9. same pine it ought to endeavour to reclaim the 2 Co i. 24. erring’, by setting before them, promoting, and 17. encouraging what is true, and by scrupulously | 5”? abstaining from giving any encouragement to what 2 John 10. is false. 1 TerTuiian ad Scapulam. Religionis non est religionem cogere. S. Aucusr. ii. 403, 404. (Epist.c.) Lacranr. Diy. Inst. v. 20. Defendenda religio est non occidendo sed moriendo.—y. 19, 20. Religio cogi non potest. Verbis potius quam verberibus res agenda est. 2 Hooker, V. Lxviit. 7. @. Is there any exception to this rule? @. Yes; when the religious error tends to Dan. iii. 29. public scandal, to the subversion of order, the de- ~ arcu nN 6 276 THE DUTY OF KINGS AND STATES ParrIt. struction of loyalty, and the dissolution of the Vv Fxod. xxi, Community, there it may properly be made the 28. object of civil disqualifications, restraints, and penalties *. 1 Bp. Bartow, Case of a Toleration, p. 30, ed. 1692. @. But if the Community, acting as a State, touches religious matters at all, is there not a danger that it may intrude into some concerns which ought to be treated by it as a Church, and not as a State ? @. This, no doubt, may happen; but there is a check upon such a deviation, in the fact that, as the laymen of the community are members of it Ezek. xxii. as a Church, so the Clergy are members of it as a 26. xliv. 23. Matt. xxii. State’: and as the Clergy are commanded by God Mark xii, ἴο teach the difference between the holy and the 7 profane, so the civil Rulers of the State are to Luke xx. Ξ 2 25. consider well the sin and danger of profanely intermeddling with holy things. But although such results may happen, it would be very un- patriotic, unloyal, and unchristian to desire, on that account, that the State should be without the power of exercising the noblest of her functions, that of promoting the glory of Gop; and although, Below, _ in Christian prudence and charity, individuals prc ought to forego the use of indifferent things, not 2 Kings xvill. 3,4. ublicly ordered, when there is a very great pro- Rom. xii, Ἵ . 21. = bability of their abuse, and when this abuse is Above, ard® to rectify; yet in the case of a positive p- 266, 207, nublic good, it would be very unwise and uncharita- ble to allow that any danger of its abuse should make us forget and forfeit its great legitimate uses ; rather, we ought to endeavour to remove the TO PROMOTE THE TRUE FAITH. Ὁ 7 danger of the abuse, and thus to confirm and extend the use. 1 Bp. Greson, Codex, pp. 1—20. 3 Hooker, V. rxv. 12—17. @. What are the uses in the present case ? A. The State, by professing publicly the true Christian Faith in its national acts; by mixing Prayers, and religious Services, and Sacraments, 7 . . . ome . ») with the solemn discharge of its civil duties; by supporting the moral and religious Discipline of the Church, both as relates to Clergy and Laity ; by giving additional vigour to ecclesiastical laws ;_ by providing for the erection, endowment, and repair of Churches and schools’; by securing the com- petent maintenance of the Clergy ; by assigning to Bishops a place in Courts and Parliaments’ ; confers great benefits, both spiritual and temporal, on all classes of society: it animates the whole body with religious life, and maintains it in peace and unity; by giving external dignity to religion, it preserves the rich from the danger of despising it; by endowing it, it provides for the regular Cuap. II. ee, eed fle 1 Tim. ν. 18, Deut. xxxii. 28—31. Matt. xi. 5, Luke iv. 14. vii. 22. preaching of the Word and due administration of James ii. 3. the Sacraments, and for pastoral superintendence and religious consolation to both rich and poor ; it consecrates * itself to God, and brings down a blessing from Him on all its undertakings. ' See S. Hreron. in Zech. viii. on the erection of Churches “ expensis reipublice.” GeEruaRD de Magistratu Politico, vi. 589. Schole sunt seminaria ac plantaria Ecclesiz. Quem- admodum in corpore humano est suavissima yenarum et arte- riarum συζυγία sive combinatio, ita in corpore Christi mys- tico, Ecclesize et Schole pulcherrima quidam harmonia sibi Micah iv. 13. 278 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND THE SPIRITUAL ParrIIJ. invicem sunt conjuncte. De scholis igitur recte institu- ~~ endis Magistratus solicitus sit vel maximé. * Hooker, VII. xv. 8. Let not envy so far prevail as to make us account that a blemish, which, if there be in us any spark of sound judgment or of religious conscience, we must, of necessity, acknowledge to be one of the chiefest orna- ments unto this land, by the ancient laws whereof the Clergy being held for the chief of those Three Estates, which toge- ther make up the entire body of this Commonwealth, under one supreme Head and Governor, it hath all this time ever borne a sway proportionable in the weighty affairs of the land: wise and virtuous kings condescending most willingly thereunto, even of reverence to the Most High, with the flame of whose sanctified inheritance, as it were with a kind of divine presence, unless their chiefest civil assemblies were so far forth beautified, as might be without any notable im- pediment unto their heavenly functions, they could not satisfy themselves as having showed towards God an aftee- tion most dutiful. Archbp. Laup, Answer to the Lord Say’s Speech against the Bishops, (Remains, vol. ii. pt. 2, fol. 1700.) pp. 1—21. The Bishops of England have ever sat all of them in Parlia- ment, the highest Court of Judicature, ever since Parliaments were in England. See Bp. Grsson, Codex, p. 125, note w, and p. 128. Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France, v. 195. While we provide first for the poor, and with a parental solicitude, we have not relegated Religion, like something we were ashamed to show, to obscure Municipalities or rustic Villages. No; we will have her exalt her mitred front in Courts and Parliaments; we will have her mixed throughout the whole mass of life, and blended with all the classes of society. 3 Archbp. Laup, Sermon i. The Commonwealth can have no blessed and happy being but by the Church. Lorp CHanceLtor Expon (Letter to Rev. M. Surtees, Feb. 1825). My opinion is, that the Establishment is framed not for the sake of making the Church political, but for the purpose of making the State religious ; that an Establishment with an enlightened toleration is as necessary to the peace of MOTHER OF ALL CHRISTIANS THERE. 279 the State as to the maintenance of Religion ; without which the State can have no solid Peace. DecraraTIon of the Enerisn Larry, a.p. 1833. We find ourselyes called upon by the events which are daily passing around us, to declare our firm conyiction that the consecra- tion of the State by the public maintenance of the Christian Religion is the first and paramount duty of a Christian People ; and that the Church established in these Realms, by carrying its sacred and beneficial influences through all orders and degrees, and into every corner of the land, has for many ages been the great and distinguishing blessing of this country ; and not less the means, under Divine Provi- dence, of National Prosperity, than of individual Piety. CHAPTER III. ON THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND, AS THE SPI- RITUAL MOTHER OF ALL CHRISTIANS IN THIS COUNTRY. @. You have said (above, p. 259) that a Chris- tian community bears the name either of a State or of a Church, according to the functions which it exercises; is this true of the community of ENGLAND ? Q. Yes’. 1 Archbp. Bramuatt, Reply to Bishop of Chalcedon, Disc. iii. p. 182. The English Church and the English Kingdom are one and the same society of men, differing, not really, but rationally, from one another in respect of some distinct relations. See aboye, p. 259—264. @. But however true this theory might have been in England in former times, as e. g. the Cuapv. III. ——— Part III. ᾿ ce, —__ Matt.xiii.38. Above, p- 5,19. Rey. xi. 15. Above, Pt. i. ch. iv. 280 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND THE SPIRITUAL sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, is it not in- consistent to speak now of the Church and State, as two names for the same community, when a great number of persons no longer belong to the Church, but are separated from it and opposed to it ? &. According to Gon’s counsels, and Christ’s _ own words, “The field is the World,” i. 6. the Whole World is His Church, “ totus mundus Ee- clesia est’; and, in Christ’s gracious design, every Nation and Kingdom is an integral Member of His One Universal Church; and no one does not belong to the Church, except Atheists, Jews, Infidels, and Apostates’. If those persons, of whom you speak, are Christians, and if the Church of England is what she has been shown to be, (above, Pt. ii. chapters i.—ix.,) namely, a true branch of the Universal Church, it follows that she is their spiritual Mother. She, we say, is the Mother of αἱ Christians in this country. In the words of Scripture, she is to them all, “the house of God,” “the body of Christ,” “ the mother of all living:” and as such, she is appointed by Christ Himself to be the dispenser of His grace ¢o all; and they can receive no sacramental grace*, ex- cept by her*. She is the Spouse of Christ, and these spiritual gifts are dos Ecclesie, her dowry, and hers alone. As Christians, then, even Schis- matics are Members, though unsound members, of the Church, and must be objects of her regard, as she ought to be an object of reverence to them ; they are children of the Church, though not obe= dient ones; and as long as she is a Church, and as long as they are Christians, neither can she “a MOTHER OF ALL CHRISTIANS THERE. 281 forget her maternal love to them, nor can they cast off their filial duty to her. 1S. Ασα. ili. 2808. 2 Hooker, [i]. τ. 7. V. rxvait. 6. 3S. Cyprtan, Ep. 55, p. 112. Fell. Christianus non est qui in Christi Ecclesia non est. 4S. Auc. de Bapt. c. Don. i. c. 23. Ecclesia omnes per Baptismum parit, sive apud se sive extra se ; Ecclesia jure, quod est in Baptismo, nascuntur quicunque nascuntur. Ibid. 6. 18. Baptizantur extra Ecclesia communionem, sed tamen baptismate Eccrestm, quod, ubicunque est, sanctum est per se ipsum, et ideo non est eorum qui se separant. Neque enim (6. 14) separatio eorum generat (in baptismo), sed quod cum Ecclesia tenuerunt.—S. Avec. in Ps. xxxii. Velint, nolint schismatici, fratres nostri sunt.—S. Ave. ce. Crescon. ii. 16, compares the sacramental graces of the Church, when diffused in schismatic congregations, to the rivers of Eden flowing out of Eden: these graces are then waters of Para- dise, but not in Paradise. In what respect Schismatics may be said to belong to the Church, and in what to be separated from it, see above, pt. i. ch. 11, and ch. y., and Bincuam, XVI. 1. 17. Bramuatt, ii. 81. 4). You intend therefore to say that the opinion of Hooker, Casaubon, Vossius, Laud, Saravia, Burke, and others, (above, pp. 260, 261,) who asserted the coincidence of Church and State in a Christian country, has not become inapplicable in England, through the prevalence and growth of religious dissent in this country? A. Certainly Ido. This opinion of which you speak, is not so much the opinion of Hooker, &c. as of the English Divines who preceded them’, and of the early Christian Fathers ; or rather, as we have seen, it is the doctrine of Holy Scripture itself: “The Field,” says our Lord, “is the World :” there will always be tares in the Field, and Cuap. III. Ἑο--ΘὄΟ-ςν.--- Matt. xiii.38. Part III. . Above, p- 193—196. Above, p. 195. 282 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND THE SPIRITUAL in every several portion of it, (i.e. in all national Churches) even to the Harvest: and the World does not cease to be the Field, although it may be nearly overgrown with Tares. There was abundance of Tares in the national field of England in the age of Hooker and of Laud, (as is notorious from their history and writings,) and tares abounded in the field in the antecedent times of Popery; but yet, as we have seen, the English Nation was then the English Church, and was by them so affirmed to be. It is true, indeed, that where tares abound in it, a Nation is a Church in a corrupt and un- sound state ; but it is stilla Church. The fallacy of those who would thence argue that it is not then a Church, proceeds from the same source as the error of Cyprian who affirmed that heretics were’ wholly severed from the Church, and that therefore baptism administered by them was no sacrament. It is like the error of those who think that because Rome is a very corrupt Church, there- fore she is no Church. It arises from not carefully observing the difference, first, between the Church Visible and Invisible, and then between the Church Visible in a sound and the same Church in an unsound state, more or less *. Bp. Garpiner, in his important treatise de Vera Obe- dientia, (ed. Hamburg, 1536,) p. 806. Tom. ii. of Browne's Fasciculus Rerum expetendarum et fugiendarum. Quatenus in Anglia commoratur, de regno est ; quatenus vero Christi- anus est, in Anglia etiam commorans, de Ecclesid Anglicand esse censetur. Caput, inquiunt, Princeps est Regni, non Ec- clesiz ; clm tamen Ecclesia Anglicana nihil aliud sit quam virorum et mulierum, clericorum et laicorum in regno Angliz commorantium in Christiana professione unita congregatio. ? Whereas the true doctrine is, that “ men remain in the MOTHER OF ALL CHRISTIANS THERE. 283 visible Church till they utterly renounce the profession of Christianity.” Hooker, III. 1. 8, 9. 8 Against which error Hooker carefully warns his readers (see aboye, p. 16.) in his Third Book (III. 1. 9), without the aid of which the Highth cannot be rightly understood. @. But if, as you have said, the Church regards Schismatics as belonging to her, does she not thereby encourage Schism ? @. No. ‘The Church is charitable to schis- matics, not to schism: she knows, on the con- trary, that it is a work of charity to schismatics to declare wilful schism to be mortal sin; for such God declares it to be. And in all this, she re- members that many schismatics are not such either wilfully or willingly ; and even they, who are so, are still men and Christians, and as such, they profess to obey the voice of God and of Christ. Therefore she cannot reject them; she cannot despair of them. Though they are tares, or bad' wheat (ζιζάνια), still they are in her field, and by God’s converting power they may here- after become good wheat. They are now chaff, but they are on her area, and they may become good grain*. And though they are schismatical, yet She is Universal: and she therefore regards them as still hers, though their schism is not hers. Odit errores, sed amat errantes*, she loves the erring, but not their errors ; and because she loves the erring, therefore she loves not their errors, but desires they may be exchanged for truth. Ὁ It is to be observed, that ζιζάνια does not here properly signify tares, but a bad kind of wheat, (resembling it, ὃ. Aue. iv. 9. 11,) which may become good, as the good may become bad. (See Scultet. in Matt. xiii. 25.) Hence S. Chrysostom in loe. αὐτῶν τῶν ζιζανίων πολλοὺς εἰκὸς μετα βαλέσθαι Cuap. IIT. — -ΞΞ Above, p. 44. Above, Ρ. 46. Above, p. 12—16. Part ITI. -- — 284 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND THE SPIRITUAL καὶ γίγνεσθαι σῖτον. See also S. Ave. in Ps. Ixiv. 19.-- TERTULLIAN, Preeser. Her. 31, renders ἔιζάνια by avene. 7S. Aue. v. 1519. Homo heri fuit palea, hodie fit fru- mentum. * S. Aug. de Baptismo c. Donat. i. 12. @. But if, as you seem to imply, schismatics may receive the graces, which are the dowry of the Church (p. 280), are they, as far as these graces are concerned, in a worse state than if they were not schismatics ? A. Yes, certainly they are. It is one thing to have, and another thing to have profitably’ ; one thing to possess, another to use and enjoy. The graces which schismatics may have, “ insunt lis, (says St. Augustine,) sed non iis prosunt, verum etiam obsunt,” they are in them”, but not Jor them, but they are even against them, as long as they remain wilfully separated from the Unity of the Church, i. e. as long as they continue schismatics : and it is only when they return to the Unity of the Church, that these graces then “ incipiunt prodesse in unitate, que in schismate prodesse non poterant *,” begin to profit them in their unity with the Church, which could not profit them in their separation from it. S. Aue. ec. Donat. iv. 24. Salus extra Ecclesiam non est, et ideo quecunque ipsius Ecclesie habentur extra Ec- clesiam (i. 6. in schismate) non yalent ad salutem ; aliud est habere, aliud utiliter habere. 7S. Aue. in S. Joann. vi. In bonis sancta insunt ad salutem, in malis ad judicium.— Ctra Gaudentium, ii. 11. 5 5. Aue. c. Donat. i. 18. 6. Crescon. ii. 12. ce. Petil. ¢. 15. Tractat. in S. Joann. vi. Rem Columbe sed preter Colum- bam habes ; veni igitur ad Columbam, ut prodesse tibi inci- piat, quod habes. MOTHER OF ALL CHRISTIANS THERE. 285 4). But if grace does not profit in separation from the Unity of the Church, how then did it happen, that when the Apostles forbad one who cast out devils in Christ’s name, because he did not follow them, Christ said, ‘‘ Forbid him not ?” Q. It does not appear that the person spoken of separated himself from Christ, though he did not follow in person in the company of the Apostles ; on the contrary, he worked miracles, not in his own name, but in Christ’s. But even supposing him to have been separated from Christ, then Christ approved His own power, even when exercised by one separated from Him; but He did not approve the separation of him who exercised it, any more than God approved the sins of Balaam, Saul, Caiaphas, or Judas, when He prophesied and preached by their mouths; on the contrary, Christ says, “ He thatis not with Me is against Me; and he that gathereth not with Me scattereth.” @. But do we not read in the book of Numbers that when Eldad and Medad prophesied in the Camp, and not in the Tabernacle with the other Elders, and Joshua said, “ My Lord Moses, for- bid them,” Moses replied, “ Enviest thou for my sake? Would God that ali the Lord’s People were Prophets, and that the Lord would put his Spirit upon them!” And does not this seem to justify the act of Preaching in Separation ? @. No. Eldad and Medad had been visibly called and sent by God, and ordained by Moses; and while they prophesied, “the Spirit rested upon them.” Moses, too, it is to be observed, approves their prophesying, but does not approve their pro- phesying in a different place from the other Elders. Cuar. IIL. — qx“ Mark ix. 38 Luke ix. 49. Luke xi. 23. Matt 30. = Xa Num, xi, 28. Num Ἷ. 2 17. 2426 τἀ 16, Parr III. Above, p. 194. 21]. Phil. i. 15-- 18. 1 Cor. iii. 3. Phil. ii. 3. James ili. 14, 16. Gal. v. 20. 1 Cor. xii. 2. 286 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND THE SPIRITUAL A Prophet may be in error and in sin, while his prophesying is true and holy. Their case shows indeed that the Spirit of God is not restricted to a particular place’; but their example in no respect justifies any one in preaching without a due call and mission, for they were duly called and sent; nor does it justify any one, if duly called and sent, in preaching in Separation. 1 Bp. BeveripcE, Sermons, i. 33. ®. But if preaching in schism be sinful, how is it that St. Paul says, in the first chapter of his Epistle to the Philippians, that when some preached Christ even of envy, strife, and contention (ἐρίθεια), yet every way, whether in pretence or truth, Christ was preached, therein he rejoiced, yea, and would rejoice ? A. St. Paul approved the preaching of the Gos- pel, but not’ the preaching of it in envy and strife ; for he teaches us that envy and strife are carnal ; and in the very next chapter of this same Epistle to the Philippians, he says, using the same word as here for strife (ἐρίθεια), “Let nothing be done through strife ;” and St. James says, using again the same word (éo{@ea), that “ where there is strife, there is every evil work ;” and “if ye have bitter envying and strife (ἐρίθεια) in your hearts, this wisdom is earthly, sensual, devilish.” St. Paul again says, that strife (ἐρίθεια) is a carnal work, and excludes from heaven. Schism is against Charity ; and the same Apostle says, “ Though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mys- teries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith so that I could remove mountains, and have MOTHER OF ALL CHRISTIANS THERE. 287 not Charity, it profiteth me nothing’ :” and those Cuar. ΠΙ. have not Charity, who love not the Unity of the Church, “ Non habent Dei charitatem, qui non diligunt Ecclesie Unitatem*.” 1 Zonan. in Canon. Apostol. 66, p. 34. Τὰ καλὰ καλῶς γινέσθω. Οὐ καλὸν τὸ καλὸν ἐὰν μὴ καλῶς γένηται. --- καλὰ μὲν ἐδίδασκον, οὐ καλῶς δὲ, (bona quidem, sed non δεπὲ,) says Theodoret in locum ; and see S. Chrysostom’s Sermon on this text, v. p. 416, ὑγιὲς ἦν τὸ δόγμα, ἑαυτοὺς δὲ ἀπολλύουσιν ἐκεῖνοι ἐξ ἀπεχθείας κηρύττοντες. S. Aucust. Tractat. in Joann. xlvi. Quod fecit male, non predicat de Cathedra Christi ; inde ledit, unde mala facit, non unde bona dicit ; cum audis bona dicentem, ne imiteris mala facientem. Tom. iii. 1735, 1836, 1837. Hooker, V. txu.5. Whatsoever we do without religious affection is hateful in God’s sight, who is therefore said to respect adverbs more than verbs,—and the mind approves itself to God, not by doing, but by doing well. 2S. Aveusr. in Joann. Evang. Tract. xiv. Omnia illa que laudantur in Ecclesia, nihil illis prosunt, quia conscindunt unitatem, id est, tunicam illam charitatis. Quid faciunt ὃ Diserti sunt multi inter illos, magne linguze, flumina lingua- rum. Numquid Angelicé loquuntur? Audiant amicum sponsi zelantem sponso, non sibi: δὲ Anguis hominum loquar et Angelorum, charitatem autem non habeam, factus sum ut @ramentum sonans, aut cymbalum tinniens. 3S. Avucust. c. Don. iii. 21. @. What, therefore, would you infer from the doctrines of this chapter, respecting the practical duties of individual members of the Church toward their dissenting brethren ? @. That they owe them the charitable offices of counsel, exhortation, assistance, and prayer, in order that they may be induced to reconsider the grounds of their dissent, and examine the true principles of the Church as instituted by Christ, and to meditate on the sin and danger of schism, 288 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND, &c. Part Ul. and on the blessings of Unity, and on the Divine promises to those who promote it. And if, in the Same manner, the Sratrr would discharge its office as a Christian community, dependent on the bounty of Almighty God for all its blessings, and duly grateful to Him for them, by providing additional Bishops and Clergy, Churches and Schools, in proportion to the increased and in- creasing population, and consequent exigences of the country, then there is good ground for hope that our strifes, dissensions, and animosities, would be greatly abated, that individuals, families, and districts, would return into the bosom of the Church, in entire and happy communion, and that, with the increase of private and national piety, the national peace and prosperity would be Prov. xiv. greatly promoted. And the Sovereign, Statesmen, τς ἡ. 10, and Individuals who should have effected, or have 11. aided in effecting, this great work, would be the truest Benefactors of their country, and would be Dan. xii. 3. blessed for ever by God’. 1 Hooker, V. rxxvi. 8. We confess with St, Augustine, (de Civ. Dei, ν. 24,)that the chiefest happiness for which we have some Kings in so great admiration above the rest, is not because of their long reign, but the reason wherefore we most extol their felicity is, if so be they have virtuously reigned ; if the exercise of their power hath been service and attend- ance upon the Majesty of the Most High ; if they have feared Him as their own subjects have feared them; and thus heavenly and earthly happiness are wreathed into one Crown, as to the worthiest of Christian Princes it hath by the Providence of Almighty God hitherto befallen, The Encuisu Transtarors of the Hoy Biste, Autho- rized Version, a.v. 1611. It doth certainly belong unto Kings, yea, it doth specially belong unto them, to have care of religion, yea, to know it aright, yea, to profess it zealously, OF CHRISTIAN PRINCES. 289 yea, to promote it to the uttermost of their power. This is their Cuavr. IV. glory before all nations which mean well ; and this will bring ἢ [a unto them a far more excellent weight of glory in the day of the Lord Jesus. See below, pt. ili. chap. iv. CHAPTER IV. ONTHE ECCLESIASTICAL SUPREMACY OF CHRISTIAN PRINCES. @. Nor to speak here of other forms of Civil Government,—in cases where the form of Civil Government is a Monarchy, what is the relation of the Sovereign Power to the Church ? A. In Christian Kingdoms the Sovereign Power is ordinarily the “Supreme Governor over all Persons, in all causes,” in the community as a Church ᾿ as well as a State. 1 Casavson, de Lib. Eccles. c. y. Quin suprema aucto- ritas in Republica Christiana ad principes jure pertineat, ne dubitandum quidem videtur. Bps. Carteton, Birson, ANDREwEs, and Warp, cited by Archdeacon Pott on the Rights of Sovereignty in Christian States, pp. 31. 33, 34. 143.227. Hooker, Preface, ch. vii. 6. See below, p. 311—313. Parmer on the Church, ii. p. 340. @. But how is this ecclesiastical supremacy of Princes consistent with Curist’s Headship of the Church ? @. Christ’s Headship differs from that of Kings in objects, in order, in measure, and in kind’. In objects,—Christ is the Head over all things to the js 17: ο Part III. ᾿ἜΞΞΞΕΕ ΤΕ τττῦ Above, p. 116. 268, Matt. vi. 24. Luke xvi. 13. 290 THE ECCLESIASTICAL SUPREMACY Universal Church; Kings are Heads over all per- sons in the Churches of their own Kingdoms. In order,—Christ ruleth over Kings; they rule under Him. In measure,—His power is universal and absolute ; theirs is special and restrained. In kind, —He is the One Invisible source of inward life to His Body, the Church; Kings exercise an external rule over those visible members of it who live in their times and realms. Kings are Christ’s officers, for the promotion of His Glory, and the advancement of His Kingdom. The ecclesiastical Headship of Kings is, therefore, so far from being inconsistent with that of Christ, that it is sub- ordinate and ministerial to it. 1 Hooxer, VIII. rv. 1—8. Bramuatt, ii. 218. See below, Pt. iii ch. v. @. On what grounds does the Ecclesiastical supremacy of Kings rest? @. On those of Reason, Scripture, and Au- thority. @. How of Reason ? @. For the maintenance of order in a civil com- munity, there must be degrees ; and where there are degrees, there must be some one highest of all: and this highest degree is best assigned to one person. And in the case of a Monarchy, as Eng- land, where it is so assigned, it is most fit that this supreme power should reside in the temporal Monarch, for otherwise there would be ἔσο su- preme heads; and no one “can serve two mas- ters.” And this supremacy of Kings is warranted also by express precepts and examples of Holy Writ. OF CHRISTIAN PRINCES. 291 @. How does this appear ? . Kings are there shown to us as God’s Vice- gerents upon earth, and, as such, claiming subjec- tion from all persons in their dominions without distinction; and as it would be not only degrading to them as His Ministers, to suppose that they have no concern but with the dodies* of their sub- jects, so by His ordinance spiritual things are to be their special care; and if their regal duty extends to these things, they must have regal authority in them, for God never commands to do anything without also authorizing the proper means of doing it. 1 Bp. Birson, Christian Subjection, p. 339. If Princes were first ordained of God for those things only which are needful to maintain this temporall life, the power and charge of princes would consist in meats, drinkes, and apparell ; and princes would have no further care of their people than they have of their hounds and horses, to see them well fed and smooth kept ; which is a very wicked and brutish opinion. Praiers must be made for kings, and for all that are in autho- rity, in order that they may discharge their duties according to God’s ordinance, which is, that their subjects, by their help and means, may lead an honest, godly, and quiet life ; godliness and honesty being the chiefest ends of our praiers and effects of their powers. P. 343. If their dutie stretch so far, their authority must stretch as far. Their charge ceaseth where their power endeth. God never requireth princes to do what He per- mitteth them not to do. Τί, then, godliness and honestie be the chiefest part of their charge, ergo they be likewise the chiefest end of their power. Hooker, VIII. m. 2. A gross error it is to think that regal power ought to serve for the good of the body and not of the soul, for men’s temporal peace, and not for their eternal safety ; as if God had ordained kings for no other end o 2 Cuap. IV. --- Above, p. 268, 269. Rom. xiii. 1, 1 Tim. ii. 2. 1 Tim. ii. 2. Parr III. SS See below, p. 312, 313. Josh. i. 7,8. Deut. xvii. 18. ] Kings xv. 3, 4. LI—15. 2 Chron. xvii. 6. xix. 4. xxiv. 4. Xxix. 3. xxxiv. 2. 292 THE ECCLESIASTICAL SUPREMACY and purpose but only to fat up men like hogs, and to see that they have their mast—Cp. V. rxxvi. 4. VIII. vi. 11. See Bp. Anprewes, below, p. 323. Casauzon, Dedicat. Exerc. Baron. Utinam considerare principes yellent, aliud esse sacerdotem agere, ex umbone Scripturas interpretari, Sacramenta administrare, in nomine Christi ligare et solvere ; aliud auctoritate sua prospicere ut que sunt sacerdotis agat sacerdos. Has partes in Ecclesia Dei pii principes sibi semper vindicarunt. Nova, infanda, execranda theologia est, que docet curam subditorum perti- nere ad principem tantim quatenus homines sunt, non qua- tenus Christiani. See also Saravia, de Imperandi Auctori- tate et Christiana Obedienti, ii. c. 52. iii. ο. 35. ©. But you spoke of Scripture Examples as authorizing the Ecclesiastical supremacy of Kings ? @. Yes. The Leaders and Kings of God’s own people of Israel had this authority. They were appointed by God to be custodes utriusque tabule, i.e, guardians of the first table of His Law as well as of the second. His Law was never “to depart from their mouth ;” and they were “to read therein all the days of their life.” And therefore the Kings, by God’s command, as soon as they were enthroned ', were to transcribe the Law into a book, from that of the Priests and Levites ; and they who exercised this authority well and faith- fully were spiritually and temporally blessed by God in themselves and in their people, and are commemorated in Scripture with special com- mendation by the Holy Spirit of God. This power was their trial, and the manner in which they exercised it was the very substance and essence of their character ἡ. 1 Bp. Bixson, Christian Subjection, p. 178—180. There- fore this touched not the king’s private conyersation as a OF CHRISTIAN PRINCES. 293 man, but his princely function as a magistrate. Archbp. Cuar. IV. Wuirceirr’s Sermon, Appendix, 42. Strype’s Life of Whit- Σ τ τῇ gift, folio, p. 182. Bp. Beverrnce on XXXIX Articles, Art. xxxvii. vol. ii. p. 368. 2 §. Aueusr. Epist. ad Bonifac. 50. (al. 185.) Omnes Reges qui in populo Dei non prohibuerunt nec everterunt qu contra Dei precepta fuerant instituta, culpantur ; qui prohibuerunt et everterunt, super aliorum merita probantur, Bp. Bitson, pp. 262—271. @. This is true; but we hear of nothing done for the Church of Christ by kings in the New Testament, nor of any power exercised by them in ecclesiastical affairs. @. No. Kings had not yet become Christians ; but they were to become so. As St. Augustine says’, from the second Psalm, which is _pro- phetic of the glories and triumphs of Chris- tianity, “ Nondum implebatur illa prophetia (of that Psalm), Et nunc, Reges, intelligite ; erudi- mint qui judicatis terram; servite Domino in ti- more ;” but now, he adds, that the prophecy has been fulfilled, and they have become Christians, * Serviant Reges terre Christo, legem ferentes pro Christo :? and again, “ Rew, quia homo est, servit Deo, vivendo fideliter ; quia vero etiam Rex est, servit, leges justa precipientes et contraria pro- hibentes convenienti vigore sanciendo.” 1 §. AuGusTIN, ii. pp- 349, 350. 357. 446. 448. 594. 970. 976. 977. 983. 1148. 1161. 111. 1814. iv, 388. 783. 917. ed. Paris, 1836. ©. Does he support this by any Scripture authority ? @. Yes. Hezekiah and Josiah (he adds ') served God by destroying the groves and high places 03 Part ΠῚ. ---ο.ο-.-..-. Ps, Ixxii. 11, 294 THE ECCLESIASTICAL SUPREMACY and idolatrous temples; even the king of the Ninevites served Him by reducing his people to repentance and holiness of life; Darius served Him, by punishing the enemies of the prophet Daniel ; Nebuchadnezzar served Him by a severe law (terribili lege) against blasphemy. Who, there- fore, (he asks,) after the completion of the pro- phecies which foretold that adorabunt Eum omnes Reges, omnes Gentes servient Illi, “ all Kings shall fall down before Him (Christ), and all Nations shall do Him service,” “ Who now in his sober senses will venture to say to Christian princes, Take no care who attacks and who maintains the Church of Christ; take no thought who among your subjects is religious, and who guilty of sacrilege ? No, (he adds,) this cannot be; Kings serve God ” when they order what is good, and prohibit what is bad, not only in secular matters, but in spiritual. They then serve Him as Kings, when they do for Him what they could not do unless they were Kings; and if they fail so to do, what account will they be able to render hereafter to Almighty God? This then (he concludes) is their duty,— to maintain the peace of the Church, whose spiri- tual children they are.” 1S. Aue. Epist. ad Bonifacium, ii. 977. Quis mente sobrius Regibus dicat, Nolite curare in regno vestro ἃ quo teneatur vel oppugnetur Ecclesia Domini vestri; non ad vos pertinet in regno vestro quis velit esse religiosus sive sacrilegus ? 2 §. Ασα. c. Crescon. iii. 51. Tractat. in Joann. xi. Quo- modo (aliter) redderent rationem de imperio suo Deo? Pertinet hoe ad reges seculi Christianos, ut pacatam velint matrem suam Ecclesiam unde spiritualiter nati sunt. OF CHRISTIAN PRINCES. 295 Bp. Bitson, Perpetual Government of Christ’s Church, Cuar.1V. ἢ chap. x. p. 206, ed. Oxf. 1842. ®. These are indeed the words of St. Augus- tine; but were the same sentiments generally entertained by Christians after the empire became Christian ? Q. Yes, universally; and he who would raise objections to the supreme power, both of right and duty as exercised in spiritual matters by the sovereigns of England, would be undermining the foundations of Reason on which all Christian Monarchy rests ; he would be contravening the examples of the Old Testament ', and the precepts of the New; he would be not only condemning the practice of Constantine, Theodosius, Justi- nian”, and all the great Christian Emperors and Kings, and especially those of England*®; but im- pugning the judgment of all the wisest and most pious Fathers of the Church. 1 Boox or Wispom, chap. vi. ver. 1—6. Hear therefore, O ye Kings, and understand ; learn, ye that be Judges of the ends of the earth. Give ear, ye that rule the people, and glory in the multitude of nations. For power is given you of the Lord, and sovereignty from the Highest, Who shall try your works, and search out your counsels. Because, being Ministers of His Kingdom, ye have not judged aright, nor kept the law, nor walked after the counsel of God ; horribly and speedily shall He come upon you: for a sharp judgment shall be to them that be in high places. For mercy will soon pardon the meanest : but mighty men shall be mightily tormented. Bp. Birson, Christian Subjection, pp. 179. 183. Τῇ you Deut. xvii. deny that this is the prince’s charge, to see the law of God 18. fully executed, His Son rightly served, His Spouse safely a a tO nursed, His house timely filled, His enemies duly punished, Is. xlix. 23. you must countervail that which Moses prescribed, David BE πττος 0 4 296 THE ECCLESIASTICAL SUPREMACY Parr HI. required, Esay prophesied, Paul witnessed, and Christ com- — Luke xiv. 23. manded, with some better and sounder authority than theirs is. 2 Bp. Birson, Christian Subjection, pp. 189. 273. 280. Constantine, Epist. ad Ecclesias post Synod. Niczen.— Euseb. Vit. Const. iii. Tueroposius (says St. Ambrose) morti vicinus potiorem Ecclesize quam imperii curam egit. Justintan. Novell. 3. Ea que sanctis Ecclesiis conducunt non minori nobis curse sunt gudm ipsa anima. Cod. Tit. i. 1. iii. lib. ii De Summa Trinitate. Decere arbitramur nostrum imperium subditos nostros de religione commonefacere ; ita enim et pleniorem acquiri Dei ac Salvatoris Nostri Jesu Christi benignitatem possibile esse existimamus, si quando et nos pro viribus ipsi placere stu- duerimus et nostros subditos ad eam rem instituerimus. S. Lzo, Epistola xxi. ad Theodosium juniorem, a.p. 449. Preter imperiales. curas piissimam solicitudinem Christiane religionis habetis, ne in populo Dei schismata aut hereses aut ulla scandala convalescant, quia tune est optimus regni yestri status quando Sempiterne Trinitati servitur gloriosis- sime. See also the answer of S. Orrarus, ili. 3, to the question of the Donatists, “ Quid est Imperatori cum Ecclesia ?” Casauson, Ded. Exerc. Baron. Religionis aut neglecte aut restitutee decus dedecusve divina eloquia regibus non adscriberent si ad illorum officium ejus rei cura non perti- neret. Constantinus M. Theodosius, Justinianus, et omnes pii imperatores, negotiis religionis quam diligenter se immis- cuerint, quis ignorat ? Ample evidence will be found of this fact in the authori- ties cited by Barrow, Pope’s Supremacy, pp. 227—284 ; Grort. de Potestate, 215. 244. 263. 269, 270; Binenam, XVI. vi. 6. 3 See Sir R. Twispen on Schism, pp. 97—100, for ex- amples of exercise of regal power in matters ecclesiastical in England from the earliest time—and further, ibid. pp. 208— 210. See above, p. 185, Leges Edvardi Confessoris. Paumer on the Church, ii. 335. (ἢ. How did the diversity of God’s dealings OF CHRISTIAN PRINCES, 297 with the Church in its relation to Kings at different times conduce to one and the same end? A. In the first ages of Christianity, to show the divine power of His Gospel, God maintained His Church, not only in independence of the aid of Kings, but even in opposition to their furious attacks ; and He did this in such a glorious man- ner as to win Kings to His Church, for her and for themselves; but when He had so done, He completed the grand work, and consummated the sacred evidence of the divine truth and power of Christianity, by enlisting Kings in His service, and by making them the Defenders of the Faith and the Champions of the Church’. 1S. Cyritzt. Hierosol. Cat. xviii. Ἢ καθολικὴ ἐκκλησία διὰ τῶν ὅπλων τῆς δικαιοσύνης τῶν δεξιῶν Kal ἀριστερῶν, διὰ δόξης καὶ ἀτιμίας, πρότερον μὲν ἐν διωγμοῖς καὶ θλίψεσι, τοὺς ἁγίους μάρτυρας τοῖς τῆς ὑπομονῆς ποικίλοις καὶ πολυ- ανθέσιν ἔστεψε στεφάνοις, νυνὶ δὲ ἐν καιροῖς εἰρήνης Θεοῦ χάριτι τὰ τῆς ὀφειλομένης ἔχει τιμῆς ὑπὸ βασιλέων καὶ τῶν ἐν ὑπεροχαῖς ὄντων καὶ παντὸς ἀνθρώπων εἴδους τε καὶ γένους. S. Amprosr, Epist. xvii. to the Emperor Valentinian. Cum omnes homines, qui sub ditione Romand sunt, Vobis militent Imperatoribus terrarum atque Principibus, tum Ipsi Vos Omnipotenti Deo et sacre Fidei militatis. S. Leo M. Serm. xxxy. 96. Tanttim contulit fidei im- pugnatio persequentium, ut nihil magis Regium ornet prin- cipatum quam quod domini mundi membra sunt Christi, nec tam gloriantur quod in Imperio geniti, quam gaudent quod in Baptismate sunt renati. Hesycuius ad 5. Augustin. (August. Opp. ii. p. 1112.) Ex quo clementissimi Imperatores Christiani esse ccepe- runt, quanquam paulatim fides, causa persecutionis, crescebat in seculo, factis regibus Christianis, ubique in parvo tempore Christi Evangelium penetravit. Ὁ Ὁ Cuap. IV. Matt. xi. 25, 1 Cor. i. 2O— 2s ii. 8. Ps. Ixviii. 12: Pant III. SS 298 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN CHAPTER V. THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. @. WuartT is the title which describes the English Sovereign’s relation to the Church of England ? @. The Sovereign of England is styled “su- preme Governor over all persons, in all causes, ecclesiastical as well as civil,’ in his own do- minions *. 1 XXXIX Arricres, Art. xxxvii. The Queen’s Majesty hath the chief power in this realm of England, and other her dominions, unto whom the chief government of all estates of this realm, whether they be ecclesiastical or civil, in all causes doth appertain, and is not, nor ought to be, subject to any foreign jurisdiction. Canons, 1603. Canons 1, 2. 36. King Cuartzs I. Declaration prefixed to XXXIX Arti- cles. @. Therefore no foreign power has any eccle- siastical jurisdiction in this kingdom ? @. None’. 1 See above, p. 188, 189. Canons, 1603. Can. xxxvi. The Queen’s Majesty under God is the only supreme governor of this realm, and of all other her Highness’ dominions and countries, as well in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things or causes as temporal, and no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate, hath, or ought to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre- eminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within her Majesty’s said realms, dominions, and countries. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 299 @. And the Sovereign is supreme over all spi- Cuar. V. ritual persons ? Q. Yes; St.Paul teaches us that “every soul Rom. xiii. 1. is to be subject to the higher powers” (ἐξουσίαις) : Above, and spiritual persons, being enjoined in Scripture Baier to put others “in mind to be subject to princi- Tit. iii. 1. palities and powers,” and “to obey magistrates,” are specially bound to show in their practice the obedience which they are enjoined to preach. 1 Bp. Bitson, Christian Subjection, p. 174. He that speaketh to all exempteth none; Let every soul be subject to the higher powers (Rom. xiii. 1). In these words clergie~ men be not excepted, ergo comprised.— P. 176. Christ Him- self was a priest and a prophet, yet He not only submitted Himself to the Roman Governor, but confessed the Presi- dent’s power over Him to be from Heaven. 8. Paul ap- pealed unto Cwsar, and appeared before Cesar as his lawful Governor. S. Jude detested them for false prophets that despised Governments, or spake evil of Rulers. It is no religion, it is rebellion against God, for clergiemen to exempt themselves from the Prince’s power. The command is general: Let every soul be subject. The punishment is eternal: Whosoever resisteth the power resisteth the ordi- nance of God, and they that resist shall receive to them- selyes damnation.—P. 177. Of the Clergy and the Laity, the Clergy must rather obey, that they may be teachers of obedience ; not in words only but in deeds also: they must not hinder their doctrine by their doings. Hooker, V. vxu. 9. ®. Do then spiritual persons derive their spiri- tual power from Kings ? Q. No. The Sovereign is supreme over all per- sons, and in all causes, but not over all causes‘. Spiritual persons derive their spiritual power from Christ alone; but the authority to ewercise? it ac- tually and legally upon particular persons, and in ο 900 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN Parr ΠῚ. particular districts, as dioceses and parishes,— στ΄ this they derive from laws, ecclesiastical and civil, and from the Sovereign who, by his royal assent, is the efficient cause of law’. 1 Bp. Birson, Christian Subjection, p. 173. We confess princes to be supreme governors of their realms and domi- nions ; 2 all spiritual things and causes, but not of the things themselves, but of all their subjects. See above, p. 116, and Pt. i. ch. xii., and below, chap. vii. p. 319—321. ? Archbp. Laup, Speech at the censure of Bastwick. (Re- mains, vol. ii. pt. 2, p. 68.) Our being Bishops jure divino takes nothing from the King’s right or power over us. For though our office be from God and Christ immediately, yet may we not exercise that power, either of Order or Jurisdic- tion, but as God has appointed us; that is, not in His Majesty’s or any Christian King’s Kingdoms, but by and under the power of the King given us so to do. 3 Bp. Sanperson, Prelect. VII. c. v.—viii. @. May not then the Church of England be called a Royal and State Church ? @. No; not unless the Primitive Church might have been so called, after the Emperor Constan- tine was converted, and the empire became Chris- tian. It would be ingratitude and impiety to sup- ΝΣ pose, that the Church of God is injured by the fulfilment of His promises to her; and that her spiritual constitution is necessarily impaired, be- 5s *5x- 7. cause, according to His gracious prophecy, “Kings have become her nursing-fathers, and Queens her nursing-mothers ;” and temporal laws have been made in her behalf’. 1 Hooker, VIII. vr. 10. = @. You speak of the ancient Church, but is hone, not what is called in England the Oath of Royal p. 188, 189. Supremacy of modern date ? THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 301 A. The principle of the Royal Supremacy is Cuar, Ve coeval with the English monarchy, and, indeed, with all Christian monarchy. And with respect to the declaration of this principle, it is found, not only in the Oath of Supremacy’, but in the ancient Statutes’ of the Realm; and it must be remem- bered that the assertion of the Royal Supremacy, in this Oath, being a defensive protest* against modern usurpations, became more necessary in proportion as the usurpations, against which it was a safeguard, became more prevalent and more dangerous. 1 95, 26, and 28 Henry VIII. ο. 7, a.p. 1536, Grsson’s Codex, pp. 22—24. 2 As in 16 Richard II. ¢. 5, a. p. 1892 (Grsson’s Codex, p- 74). So the Crown of England, which hath been so free at all times that it hath been in no earthly subjection, but immediately subject to God, in all things touching the regality of the same crown, and to no other, should be sub- mitted to the Popes, and the laws and statutes of the realm by him defeated and ayoided at his will, in perpetual destruc- tion of the sovereignty of the King our Lord, his crown, his regalty, and of all his realm ; which God defend! 3 Hooker, VIII. 1. 3. Supremacy is no otherwise in- tended or meant than to exclude partly foreign powers, and partly the power which belongeth in several unto others contained as parts within that politic body over which those kings have supremacy. @. To what usurpations do you refer ? @. On the one hand, to those of the Bishop of Rome, who would not allow princes the power of doing any thing in ecclesiastical matters in their own kingdoms unless he gave them leave’; and on the other, to the principles of the Puritanical 302 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN Parr Ill. Discipline, which, in this respect, as in several others, are identical with the Popish’. 1 Hooker, VIII. 1. 14. What persons devoted to the Papacy yield that princes may do, it is with secret excep- tion always understood, if the Bishop of Rome give leave. Our own Reformers (i. e. the maintainers of the Puritan Discipline) do the very like. See VIII. rv. 9, and VIII. νι. 12, and Bp. Taytor, below, p. 305. 2 Archbp. Bancrorr, Survey of the Pretended Holy Discipline, 1593, p. 240—258. The Puritans take from Christian Princes, and ascribe to their own pretended regi- ments, the supreme authority under Christ in causes eccle- siastical ; and thus they join with the Papist. Bp. SanvErson on Episcopacy, xvi. p. 41. The rest [i. 6. the other Religious Communities, Popish and Puritanical] (not by remote inferences, but) by immediate and natural deduction out of their own acknowledged principles, do someway or other deny the King’s supremacy in matters Ecclesiastical ; either claiming a power of jurisdiction over him, or pleading a privilege of exemption from under him. The Papists do it both ways; in their several doctrines of the Pope’s Supremacy, and of the Exemption of the Clergy. The Puritans of both sorts (who think they have sufficiently confuted every thing they have a mind to mislike, if they have once pronounced it Popish and Anti-christian,) do yet herein (as in very many other things, and some of them of the most dangerous consequence) symbolize with the Papists, and after a sort divide that branch of Anti-chris- tianism wholly between them; the Presbyterians claiming to their Consistories as full and absolute Spiritual Jurisdie- tion over Princes (with power even to excommunicate them, if they shall see cause for it,) as the Papists challenge to belong to the Pope: and the Independents exempting their Congregations from all spiritual subjection to them, in as ample manner as the Papists do their Clergy. Whereas the English Protestant Bishops and Regular Clergy, as becometh good Christians and good subjects, do neither pretend to any Jurisdiction over the Kings of England, nor withdraw THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 303 their subjection from them ; but acknowledge them to have Sovereign Power over them as well as over their other sub- jects. @. But is not the sovereign of England some- times styled Head of the Church ? @. No; not by those who speak properly. To satisfy the scruples of some who objected to it, that title was laid aside by Queen Elizabeth, and exchanged for that of Supreme Governor over all persons, in all causes, ecclesiastical as well as civil, and it has not been borne by any English monarch since that time '. 1 Hooker, VIII. 1v. 8. Archbp. Bramuatt, i. p. 29, and the notes of the learned Editor. Bp. Grsson’s Copex, p- 45, note. @. In what does this supremacy consist ? @. The Sovereign’s office as “supreme Gover- nor over all persons in all causes” in the Church, is “to maintain it in the unity of true religion’ ;” not to suffer “any unnecessary questions to be raised ;” “‘ to have a princely care, that Churchmen may do the work which is proper to them;” to * contain within their duty all estates and degrees committed to his charge by God;” and “to re- strain the stubborn and evil-doers with the power of the civil sword.” 1 K. Cuartes I. Declaration prefixed to XX XIX Ar- ticles, Art. xxxvii. Canons of 1603, Canons i. ii. Canons of 1640, Canon i. See above, p. 188. 298, 299. Orricr for the QurEn’s Accession, Book of Common Prayer.— Blessed Lord, Who hast called Christian princes to the defence of Thy Faith, and hast made it their duty to promote the spiritual welfare, together with the temporal interest of their people ; We acknowledge with humble and Cuap. V. 304 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN Parr ΠῚ. thankful hearts Thy great goodness to us, in setting Thy —~— servant our most gracious QuEEN over this Church and Nation; give her, we beseech Thee, all those heavenly graces that are requisite for so high a trust ; let the work of Thee, her God, prosper in her hands; let her eyes behold the success of her designs for the seryice of Thy true religion established amongst us; and make her a blessed instrument of protecting and adyancing Thy truth. To show that the Principles here stated are consistent with the doctrine of other branches of the Catholic Church, it may be observed, that Archbp. Praron, Metropolitan of Moscow, in his ᾿Ορθόδοξος Διδασκαλία, authorized by com- mon use in the Eastern Church, (Koray’s Greek version, Athens, 1836, p. 135,) thus speaks on this subject :—“ Chris- tian kings are the prime guardians and champions of the Church, and are bound to provide (χρεωστοῦσι va φροντίζωσι) for the welfare of the Church, as for that of the State. The Christian Church demands of princes, first that they be learned in God’s law (Deut. xvii. 18); secondly, that they be examples of piety and virtue to all men ; thirdly, that they take care that the Church be well governed (εὐτάκτως), and that they encourage faithful ministers and governors ; fourthly, that they repress schism and defend the Church from persecutors and scoffers ; fifthly, that they propagate true religion, and provide suitable maintenance for its teachers. Hence every one may see clearly how closely the body politic is united with the Church (βλέπει πᾶς ἕνας πόσον εἶναι σφικτὰ ἡνωμέναι ἡ πολιτικὴ κοινωνία καὶ ᾿Εκκλησία). And since the sovereign of a Christian state has no superior upon earth, and no one in this world can recompense him for these his labours, he lives on the faithful assurance of attain- ing hereafter an unfailing and inestimable reward.” To this may be added the following testimony of the Greek presbyter, Constantinus (Economus, περὶ τῶν τριῶν τῆς ἐκκλησίας βαθμῶν: Nauplia, 1835, p. 318. We honour princes as pastors of their people, according to God's ordi- nance ; we honour the king ; we make prayers for all men, for kings and all in authority. To the Cuurcu or Ene- LAND, and all other Churches in which the sovereign is reyerenced as the supreme governor, we say, Let this your THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 305 custom prevail, as seems to you good; and may all your Christian people be blessed by God, and your sovereign reign and prosper for eyermore ! ©. But does not the ascription of these powers in Ecclesiastical matters to the Civil Magistrate lead to what is termed Erastianism ὃ @. Erastianism (so called from Erastus, a phy- sician of Heidelberg, whose work on Church government appeared in 1589, after the author’s death) appears to have owed its rise and influence to the domineering claims ' of the Genevan Eccle- siastical Regimen in the infliction of Church cen- sures *. This Genevan Regimen, seeing * no other mode of overthrowing Episcopacy, (and perceiving that this mode might probably be successful,) enlisted the Laity on its side by associating Lay Elders with Presbyters in the exercise of spiritual discipline, contrary to all former practice in the Church*. But by so doing it led the way to its own destruction ; for it thus lent its countenance to the principle of Erastianism, which being ex- asperated by the spiritual pride and tyranny of the Calvinistic discipline, turned the Calvinistic weapon of the Lay-eldership, by which Presby- terianism had overthrown Episcopacy, against Presbyterianism itself, and proceeded to transfer the power of Excommunication entirely to Lay hands, and to vest it in the Civil Tribunals. 1 See Zuricu Lerrers, Second series, Epist. c. p. 154. 2 Bp. Taytor, xiii.471. The Presbytery pretends mightily to the Sceptre of Christ, as the Pope does to the Keys of St. Peter ; and they will have all Kings submit to that. 3 Hooxer, VI. 1. 2, with Mr. Keble’s Note. * Archbp. Bancrort, Suryey of the Pretended Holy Dis- Cuap. V. “Ὡ---.Ψὦ- Above, p. 301, 302. 900 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN Parr III. cipline, Lond. 1593, p. 28. By reason of the great authority ——~— that the Preachers had intituled the Civil Magistrates to, for the banishment of their Bishop, Calvin very wisely con- sidered with Farellus and Viretus, that, if they took that course, (of making his Ecclesiastical Senate consist solely of Ministers,) he should find unresistible opposition. And their device therefore was, that their Ecclesiastical Senate should consist of Twelve Citizens, to be chosen yearly, and but of Six Ministers, who were to continue for their lives. And this was the first time, for aught I find, that the Consistorian Dis- cipline ever drew breath. @. But did Erastianism limit itself to the ques- tion of the power of excommunication ? @. No; its partisans in England, about the year 1645, went on still further to maintain that all the authority of the Church consisted only in persuasion’ ; that no Church government was of divine right, but was merely of human consti- tution, depending wholly on the will of the secular magistrates. The Erastians, then, having made a league with the Independents, overthrew the Pres- byterian power in England. But the assertors of Erastian opinions were powerful not so much by their own arguments’, as by the errors of their adversaries the Presbyterians ; and if they had enjoyed* such a form of government as that of the English Constitution in Church and State, where the spiritual power is vested solely, by divine right, in spiritual persons, and where the Civil magistrate has such a general external con- trol “ over all persons in all causes” as to check all unlawful exertion of authority, Erastianism would either never have existed at all, or would never have gained the influence which it did *. 1 Buppet Isagoge, i. p. 734. Censebant Erastiani Eccle- THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 307 siz nullum regimen, nullam potestatem per censuras excom- municationem imprimis applicandi ἃ verbo Dei datam esse ; potestatem clavyium in solo yerbi preconio consistere ; et Ecclesiam Magistratui Christiano subjectam omnem auctori- tatem ex mera Magistrattis delegatione derivare. Rutuerrorp, Divine Right of Church Government, Lon- don, 1646, p. 537. Gutiesriz, Aaron’s Rod, Lond. 1646, p- 161. Batrrie’s Letters, ii. p. 149, ed. 1775. Hucues, Pref. ad 5. Chrysost. de Sacerdotio, p. exx. Hey on the xxxvuth Artricte. Keste, Pref. to Hooker’s Works, 2d ed. p. lviii. ? Hammonpv on the Power of the Keys, i. p. 429, folio. In taking up his opinion and maintaining it, Erastus had more to impute to Beza and the Genevans’ errours, inno- vations, and excesses, than to his own arguments. See Hooker, Preface, § 2. Bp. Sanperson, Prelect. vii. 29, p. 208, gives a very clear and concise summary of the Papal, Puritan, and Erastian theories of Church Government. 8 Hamwonn, ibid. p. 247. With respect to the quarrel of Erastus against Excommunication, I shall give you no other account of it than what from himself I have received ; certain it is that the fabrie of the Church of England would neyer have provoked him to this enmity, if he had lived here under the best, or perhaps the worst, days of our Epi- scopacy. 4 Archdeacon Porr, in his work entitled the Rights of Sovereignty in Christian States defended, &c., a charge to the Clergy of the Archdeaconry of London, 1828, has shown, with great learning, how the Doctrine of the xxxviith Ar- ticle (in illustration of which he cites Hooker, Bp. Sanderson, Bp. Andrewes, and Bp. Bilson) is an effectual safeguard against Erastianism on one side, and Popery and Puritanism on the other. “In a word, (says he, p. 24,) the personal union of the Church and Commonwealth, where the same individuals compose both, cannot be denied: but this does not destroy the natural distinction of societies, or cancel those rights which belong essentially to each. The spiritual Pastor retains his privilege, of which he cannot be divested ; and the sovereign Power keeps its supremacy within those Cuap. V. 308 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN Parr III. limits which the word of God and the known ends of goyern- “——~—~ ment must always put. It is impossible to deny that this supremacy may be exercised in things relating to religion by the sovereign power in Christian states, unless we will take one of these opinions, either that the Christian character itself (1) excludes all such dominion ; or (2) restrains it to a fancied reign of Christ on earth, distinct from his universal rule ; or (8) confines it to his Ministers alone ; or (4) vests it in some supposed Vicegerent, to whom it is thought to be derived. All these notions have had their turn in the world, and are most opposite to Scripture, Reason, and the Judgment (conformable to both) upon which the model of our own happy and well-settled Government in Church and State hath been established. “By defending the capacity and privileges of sovereign powers to bear sway in all causes that are left free to discre- tion, and by showing at the same time the perpetual excep- tions to things determined and provided by Divine authority, Mr. Hooker has for ever overthrown both the wild sugges- tions of Erastian theorists, and the groundless claim of a per- petual Empire in the Church, independent, even in Christian countries, on the sovereign power.” @. You attribute, then, to the Sovereign of England a sacred as well as a civil character ? @. Certainly, as the laws of the land do, which give to the King the title of Sacred Majesty. @. And does the Church of England recognize this sacred character in the Kings and Queens of England ? @. Yes; and therefore the Sovereigns of Eng- land, at their Coronation, having taken the Coro- nation Oath, are first anointed with holy oil, and are blessed and “consecrated Kings over the people, whom the Lord their God has given them to rule and govern';” they then receive the sword from God’s Holy Table, to be used by them as ministers of God, “for the punishment of eyil- THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 909 doers, and the protection of the holy Church of Cuar. ν. God ;” they then receive the “orb set under the al cross,” that they may remember that “the whole world is subject to the power and empire of Christ their Redeemer, who is the Prince of the kings of the earth, King of kings, and Lord of lords; so that no man can reign happily who derives not his authority from Him, and directs not all his actions by His laws :” and when they afterwards receive the Ring, “the ensign of kingly dignity, and of defence of the Catholic Faith,” and the Sceptre and the Crown, the badges of kingly power and justice, and the Rod of equity and mercy, they “ in lowly devotion bow the head to God,” and acknow- ledge that they rule by Him, and, when enthroned, that they sit in judgment under Him, which that they may the better discharge, they receive the Holy Bible from the altar of God. 1 Orrice for the Coronation of the Kings and Queens of England. See also the Prayer for the High Court of Par- liament, in which the designation ‘ most religious’ is applied to the Sovereign as an official attribute. Hooker, VIII. wu. 14. Crowned we see our kings are and enthronized and anointed: the crown a sign of mili- tary, the throne of sedentary or judicial, the oil of religious or sacred power. Archbp. Laup’s Sermons, vi. p. 151. And the eye of nature could see aliquid Divinum (Arist. Ethic. i. 2,) some- what that was Diyine in the governors and orderers of Commonwealths. In their very office: Inasmuch as they are singled out to be the ministers of Divine Providence upon earth, and are expressly called the officers of God’s Kingdom, Sap. 6. And therefore the School concludes that any the least irreverence of a King Sacrilegium dicitur, is justly extended to be called Sacrilege. And _ since all Sacrilege is a violation of some thing that is holy, it is evident Parr III, SS Above, p. 186. Below, ch, vi. & vii. 310 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN that the office and person of the King is sacred, and therefore cannot be violated by the Hand, Tongue, or Heart, of any man, that is, by deed, word, or thought ; but tis God’s cause, and He is violated in him. And here kings may learn that those men which are sacrilegious against God and His Church, are for the very neighbourhood of the sin the likeliest men to offer violence to the Honour of Princes first, aud their Persons after.—(This last sentence, written in 1628, was prophetic.) @. You speak of the Sovereign having a Sacred character, but you do not mean, I suppose, that the Sovereign, as supreme governor, claims any power of performing any sacred function in the Church; such as the ministry of the Word and Sacraments, the exercise of the power of the Keys, or in propounding articles of Faith, or in conferring Holy Orders ? @. Certainly not. The Kings of England chal- lenge’ no such authority in the Church; on the contrary, they have always protested against any such assumption whenever it has been imputed to them ; their office is not in their own persons ἴθ minister, but to exercise royal care that they who are appointed to minister in the Church, do that which they are appointed to do. Theirs is what is called a δύναμις οἰκονομικὴ; OF ἀρχιτεκτονικὴ; 1. 6. ἃ power to distribute and regulate, a power not to build but to rule the builders. Imperantis est non imperata facere, sed imperando facere ut fiant *, the commander effects not what is commanded, but by commanding, he effects that it may be effected ;— and this power is exercised by them, ποΐ in any new or arbitrary manner, but according to the re- ceived laws of the Church; for, as was before said, “ Rex nihil potest nisi quod jure potest *.” THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 311 1 XXXIX Arrictes, Art. xxxvii. Where we attribute to the Queen’s Majesty the chief government, by which titles we understand the minds of some slanderous folks to be offended, we give not to our princes the ministering either of God’s Word, or of the Sacraments, the which thing the injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen do most plainly testify ; but that only prerogative, which we see to have been given always to all godly princes in Holy Scrip- tures by God Himself; that is, that they should rule all states and degrees committed to their charge by God, whether they be ecclesiastical or temporal, and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil-doers. Queen Exizazetu’s Admonition; Bp. Gibson, Codex, p- 54, note. Her Majesty forbiddeth all manner her sub- jects to give ear or credit to such perverse and malicious persons, which most sinisterly and maliciously labour to notify to her loving subjects, how by the words of the Oath of Supremacy it may be collected that the Kings or Queens of this realm may challenge authority and power of Ministry of Divine Service in the Church, whereby her said subjects are much abused by such evil-disposed persons. Her Ma- jesty neither doth nor ever will challenge any authority than that which is and was of ancient time due to the im- perial crown of this realm ; that is, wuder God to have the sovereignty and rule over all manner of persons born within her realms, of what estate, either ecclesiastical or temporal, soeyer they be, so as no other foreign power shall or ought to have any superiority over them. Hooker, VIII. m1. 4. Casauson, Dedicat. ad Exerc. Baron, ii. vy. Sir R. Twispen on Schism, p. 94. Abp. BraMuA ct, ii. 219, 220. Bp. Stirtrncrieet, Eccles. Cases, on Jurisdict. ii. 97. 2 Grortius, de Imperio Potestatum summarum circa Sacra, p- 240, 245. 3 Hooker, VIII. τι. 17. Jor the received laws and liberty of the Church the King hath supreme authority, but against them none. The comprehensiyeness, perspicuity, and authoritative character of the annexed note, on the important subject of Cuap. V. \ a) Part III. ~.—+ Exod. Xxxii. 4. 1 Rey. xii. 2 Chron. xxvi. 16. 2 Sam. vi. 6. Deut. xvii. 18. Jos. i. 8. Rom. xiii. 1. 312 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN the nature of the Royal Supremacy in England, both with respect to what it zs, and also to what it is not, will justify its insertion, notwithstanding the length of the extract : Bp. Anprewes, Tortura Torti, p. 380. Primo, sub Pri- matis nomine Papatum noyum Rex non inyehit in Eccle- siam ; sic enim statuit, ut non Aaroni Pontifici, ita nee Jero- boamo Regi jus ullum esse, conflatum a se Vitulum populo proponendi, ut adoret, (id est) non vel fidei novos articulos, vel cultis Divini novas formulas procudendi. Neque vero id agit Rex, ne patitur quidem, ut sibi potestas sit, vel incensum adolendi cum Ozid, vel Arcam attrectandi cum Ozd. Docendi munus, vel dubia Legis explicandi, non assumit, non vel Conciones habendi, vel Rei Sacre preeundi, vel Sacra- menta celebrandi; non vel personas sacrandi, vel res ; non vel clavium jus, vel censure. Verbo dicam ; nibil ille sibi, nihil nos illi fas putamus attingere, que ad Sacerdotale munus spectant, seu potestatem Ordinis consequuntur. Procul hee habet Rex ; procul a se abdicat. Atqui in his que Ezterioris Politie sunt, ut precipiat, suo sibi jure vendicat ; nosque adeo illi lubentes merito deferimus. eligionis enim curam rem Regiam esse, non modo Pontificiam, et tv Recis PRIMAM, quamque ille non solim foris ab externa vi, sed et domi ab incuria hominum asserere teneatur. Nam cum Lege ipsa Dei custos sit et vindex; non secunde modo tabule, sed et prime: prime quoque ad se curam pertinere putat, et primam prime. Et cum omnis anima ei subjici jubetur: anime etiam consultum yult ; magis autem id quam corpori. Vis illa dicam sigillatim que sint? Quodcunque in rebus . Religionis Reges Jsrael fecerunt, nec sine laude fecerunt, id Dan. iii. 29. Jonah iii. 7. Est. ix. 26. 1 Mac. iv. 56. 59. ut οἱ faciendi jus sit ac potestas. Leges auctoritate Regia ferendi ne blasphemetur Deus, non negabitis; fecit Rer Babel; ut jejunio placetur Deus, fecit Rex Ninive ; ut festo honoretur, fecit Ester cam Purim, Machabeus cim Encenia promulgaret. Denique iis omnibus de rebus, de quibus in Codice, in Authenticis, in Capitularibus ἃ Constantino, Theodosio, Justiniano, Carolo Magno, Leges late leguntur. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 918 Tum, delegandi qui de Lege sic lata judicent, quod Josa- phat. Tum subditos, ne sic latam violent, juramento obstrin- gendi, quod et Asa et Josias. Quod siqui in Leges ita latas committant, etsi Religionis ea causa sit, sive Pseudoprophete crimen est, sive Idololatre, sive Blasphemi, sive Sacra polluentis, in eos auctoritate Regia animadvertendi. Conventus auctoritate sud indicendi ; etiam de Arca redu- eenda, et figenda loco suo, quod fecit David: etiam de populo ad Dei cultum revocando, quod Josaphat: etiam de Templo dedicando, quod Salomon : collapso instaurando, quod Joas : polluto purificando, quod Ezekias. Quamquam vero, non frustra sibi praceptum putat a Deo, .°4 ut describat sibi Legis exemplar, secum habeat semper, legat seduld, dies noctesque meditetur, condiscat inde cultum Dei vel ad ipsas usque Ceremonias ; nec hoc illi dictum, ut totus ab alieno ore pendeat, ipseque a se nihil plané dijudicet: In his tamen Os Eleazari, non invitus consulit et requirit legem ab iis, quorum labia scientiam custodiant: adhibebit in sacris legibus ferendis, quod adhibere par est, quosque ratio suadet, rerum illarum consultissimos, deque iis optime respondere posse. Et in his, quee ad Deum pertinent, Amariam Sacer- dotem, non Zabadiam Ducem jubebit presidere. Quoad Personas, omnibus omnium Ordinum jus dicendi: qui sit (dicam stilo Scripture) Caput Tribés Levi, non minis 17 quam ceterarum, nee minus Clericorum quam Laicorum Rex: contra Abiathar siquis superbierit, Decreto suo com- pescendi: etiam Adiathar ipsum, si ita meritus, pontificatu abdicandi. Quoad Res, excelsa diruendi; id est, peregrinum cultum abolendi; nec modo Vitulum aureum ab Aarone conflatum, quod Moses, sed et Serpentem eneum ἃ Mose erectum con- fringendi, quod Hzechias ; et sive in idololatriam abeat Vitu- lus aureus, Sive in superstitionem Serpens eneus, utrumque comminuendi. Nam de rebus, que ad decorem Domi Dei spectant, que dici solent Adiaphora statuendi, quod Joas; et quee materia schismatis esse assolent, futiles et inutiles quaestiones, aucto- ritate sua compescendi, quod Constantinus ; ne yos quidem ipsi negatis jus esse. Ῥ Cuap. Υ͂, —S 5. τ 2 Chron. xix. 8. xy. 14, xxxiv. 32. Deut. xiii. 5. 10. Ley. xxiv. 23. Num. xv. δ. 1 Chron. Xin, 2. 2 Chron. xix. 4. 1 Reg. viii. 2 Chron. xxiv. 4. ΧΧΙΣ. ΟΣ Deut. xvii. 19. Jos. i. 8. Num. xxvil- 2 Mal. ii. 2 Chron. ΕΣ wie 1 Sam. xv. Deut. xvii. 12. 1 Reg. ii, 27. Exod. Xxxii. 20. 2 Reg. Xviii. 4, 2 Chron. xxiv. 12, 9514 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN Parr III. Postremo ; si de Christianis exemplum malitis, id postulat, π΄ ut Episcopus sit τῶν ἐκτὸς, quod Constantinus: ut Rector Religionis, quod non modo Carolus Magnus, sed et Ludovicus Pius. Hec Primatts apud nos jura sunt, ex jure Divino. CHAPTER VI. ON THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. In Ecclesiastical Synods. @. In what manner is the supreme power exer- cised by the Sovereign in the Church of England ἢ @. In four ways, viz. 1. Citatio ; or the convoking and dissolving Ecclesiastical Councils or Synods, and presiding in the same. 2. Assensio; or the right of assenting to the decrees of those Synods (provided they be not contrary to the laws and cus- toms of the land) before they become law. 3. Promotio ; or, “the advancement of prin- cipal Church governors to their places of prelacy '.” 4. Judicatio; or, “higher judicial authority than others are capable of *.” 1 Hooker, VIII. 1. 1. @. Have Christian Princes always possessed the power of convoking and presiding at Eccle- siastical Synods ? ECCLESIASTICAL SYNODS. 315 A. Yes. Before the Empire became Christian, the Church had no General Synod; and no General or National Council was ever regarded as legal, unless convened with the consent of the Ruler of the country where it was held’. 1 See the note at the end of this chapter. XXXIX Arrictes, Art. xxi, General Councils may not be gathered together without the commandment and will of princes ; and Bp. Beveriner on Art. XXX VII. p. 373. Canons of 1603, Preface ; Canon exxxix. Hooker, V. 1,2. Archbp. Bramuatt, i. 30. 171. Barrow, Pope’s Supremacy, 185. Nothing can be more evident than that the emperors at their will and by their authority did congregate all the first general Synods.—186. 188. 191. 193. It inseparably doth belong to sovereigns in the General Assemblies of their states to preside and mode- rate affairs ; proposing, stopping, controuling (in person or by proxy, p. 203). Parliamentary Report on Roman Catholic Regulations in Foreign States, 1816, p. 159. Note in Christian Institutes, iii, p. 254. @. And Councils therefore were not summoned by the Bishops of Rome ? @. There is no instance of any Council, claim- ing to be General, convoked by the Bishop of Rome for more than a thousand years after Christ’. 1 CarpinaL Cusanus de Concord. Eccles. ii. cap. 25. Ex illo tempore quo Imperatores Christiani esse coeperunt, ex illorum nutu pendere yisa sunt negotia Ecclesiz, atque adeo maxima Concilia ex eorum sententia conyocabantur, ut ex Eusebio, Socrate, Sozomeno, Nicephoro patet. Octo prima Generalia Concilia ab Imperatoribus erant collecta, et Pontifex Romanus, ad instar aliorum Patriarcharum, divales (h. e. imperatorias) sacras jussiones pro veniendo aut mit- tendo ad Concilia recepit. Bp. Anprewes on the Right and Power of calling Assem- biies, 4to, 1606, p. 45, vol. v. 141—168 Thus farre the P2 Cuap. VI. 316 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN Part III. trumpet giveth a certaine sound. Now after this there is ——~— ἃ great silence in the volumes of the Councils in a manner for the space of 200 yeres, until the yere 1180 or there- about, when the Council of Lateran was; and then indeed the case was altered. By that time had the Bishop of Rome got one of the trumpeis away, and carried with him to Rome, so leaving princes but one. But so long they held it. See the note at the end of this chapter. 4). What is the National Synod of the English Church called ? @. The Convocation. @. Is the Convocation a Representative assem- bly ? @. Yes; in the words of the Canon Law of England, “ the sacred Synod of this nation, assem- bled in the name of Christ, and by the King’s authority, is the true Church of England by Re- presentation *.” 1 Canons of 1603. Canon 189. Carpwett, Synodalia, Preface, x.—xxiii. (Ὁ. If, then, as that Canon Law declares’, “ the Convocation be the representation of the Church,” “both Clergy and Laity,” “absent and present,” can it be said that “the Canons of the Church do not bind the Laity ?” @. Canons Ecclesiastical have no authority against Statute or Common Law, or against the Royal Prerogative; but, as Chief Justice Coke says, “when the Convocation makes Canons con- cerning matters which properly appertain to them, and the Sovereign has confirmed them, they are binding on the whole realm ἢ. 1 Canons of 1603. Canons 139,140. 25th Henry VIII. 18. ECCLESIASTICAL SYNODS. 917 2 Lord Chief Justice Coxr, in Gripson’s Codex, p. xxix. Cuap. VI. Vaughan, 327, ibid. p. xxviii. A lawful Canon is the law of ——~——~ the kingdom, as well as an Act of Parliament. Whatever is the law of the kingdom is as much the law as any thing else that is so. @. You say, “ When the Sovereign has con- firmed them ;” is then the Regal Power exerted in making laws for the Church ? @. It is not concerned in the framing of those laws, any more than of secular laws, but in their Below, | . . . . ἌΡ κα + Ρ. 041, ὑἐξὸ, ratification, (wherein by its royal assent it is their Above, . . 5 . 300. efficient cause,) and in preventing the enactment ?: Ὁ of such laws as may not be conducive to the wel- fare of the community’. Ὁ Kine Cuartus I., Declaration, prefixed to the XXXIX Articles. Out of our Princely care that the Churchmen may do the work which is proper unto them, the Bishops and Clergy from time to time in Convocation, upon their humble desire, shall have licence under our Broad Seal to deliberate of and éo do all such things as, being made plain by them, and assented to by us, shall concern the settled continuance of the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England now established. Casauson, de Lib. Eccles. y. Imperatores Pii, quee Patres in Ecclesia decreyerant, ea ut reciperentur ἃ populo universo sanciebant. Barrow, Pope’s Supr. 206. The effectual confirmation of Synods, which gave them the force of laws, depended on the Imperial sanction.—P. 207. By long prescription, commencing with the first General Synod, did the Emperor enjoy this prerogative. Hooker, VIII. νι. Grorius, de Potestate, p. 262. Abp. BRaMHALL, i. 146. 272. Bp. Anprewes, Tortura Torti, ed. 1629, p- 165, thus states the ancient and uniform practice of Christendom with respect to the Convocation of Ecclesiastical Synods, and the ratification of their decrees by the Imperial power. P 3 Parr 111: ue —— 318 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN Refero jam verba, loca etiam cito, Conciliorum Quatuor Generalium, ἃ quibus illa constet Imperatorum authoritate convocata. Nicmnum I. Constantini authoritate, ex Concilii ipsius Synodicd Epistold ; Gonvocata est (hee Synodus) Dei amantissimo Rege Constantino congregante nos ex variis urbi- bus et provinciis. CoNSTANTINOPOLITANUM PRIMUM, Theo- dosti Senioris, ex Concilii ipsius Epistola ; Convenientes secun- dim rescriptum Pietatis tue ; et ibidem, literis vocationis tue Ecclesiam honorasti. Epursinum, Theodosii Junioris et Va- lentiniani. Nam et Imperatores jubent, suo Oraculo cogi; et Concilium septem Epistolis septies fatetur se, nutu auctori- tatis vestre coactum, et aliis multis secundim oraculum, man- datum, rescriptum, toties, verbis tam disertis, ut nihil Ephe- sino clarius, nihil planius. CHatceponense, Valentiniani et Martian. Quod, preeterquam frons ipsa loquitur, facta est Synodus ex decreto piissimorum et fidelissimorum Imperatorum Valentiniani et Martiani, Concilium quoque ipsum Epistola sua fatetur ; Sancta et magna Synodus, secundim Dei gratiam et sanctionem vestre Pietatis congregata. Tum et in definitione ipsa expressé idem habetur, et ab illis denique missionem petunt, ut et Ephesini. Possent et quatuor alia hic Generalia subjungi, nisi tu hoe non postulasses ; post, ubi postulas, faxo ut illa habeas. (vide ibid. p. 346.) Submisisse autem sese Imperatori, ab eoque confirmationem suam habuisse, profero tibi verba, cito loca. Nicmnum ἃ Con- stantino ; et Synodi decreta confirmans consignavit. CoNsTAN- TINOPOLITANUM a Theodosio ; ex ipsa Concilii ad eum Epi- stola. Necessarid que facta sunt in Sacrd Synodo ad Pietatem tuam referimus. Petimus autem, ut Clementie tue scripto confirmetur Synodi sententia, et quemadmodum honordsti nos literis tuis cium huc convocares, ita et eorum que decreta sunt clausulam velis etiam obsignare. Eprnesinum ἃ Theodosio et Valentiniano, ex Concilii ipsius Epistola. Unde confugimus omnes ad auctoritatem Pietatis vestre, petentes, ut que contra Nestorium acta sunt, eosque qui cum eo decipiunt, habeant vim suam atque robur; que vero ab illis gui Nestorium vindicant vacua sint atque writa. CHALCEDONENSE @ Martiano: Sacro nostro Serenitatis Edicto venerandam Synodum confirmantes. En tibi loca! en verba! ECCLESIASTICAL PROMOTIONS. 319 Fateris autem jussw Imperatoris congregata Concilia, sed Cnav. VII. addis interdum. Dele vero interdum, vel designa nobis ——~—— GENERALE UNUM aLiquop de primis illis octo, et doce absque illius jussu conyocatum. Sed nec interdum etiam vis factum hoe fuisse ab Imperatore, nisi in ewecutione mandati: summi Pontificis, ubi, quid tu summum Pontificem crepas, vel man- datum ejus, vel Executorem mandati Pontificii Casarem ? Nullum tum quidem Pondificis mandatum, quin submissa sup- plicatio; nee Pontifex tum mandavit, sed Cesar ; nec Cesar executus est, sed Pontifex. Quin nullus tum Pontifex sum- mus; Episcopus tantum Romanus: parvus ad Romanwn tum habebatur respectus : alii Episcopi illum tum fratrem et coépi- scopum nominabant. Ita tum Cyprianus Episcopo Romano seribit ; Cyprianus, fratri: Cornelio. Ita Dionysius Corinthius Stephano et Sivto, frater mi. Ita Marcellus, Julio Com- ministro. Ita Johannes Constantinopolitanus, Hormisde fratri. Carthaginenses, Innocentio, Bonifacio, Ephesini, Ccelestino, fratribus suis, Comministris suis. Frater autem, Consacerdos, Comminister, Coépiscopus, societatis sunt et zequalitatis no- mina ; Swmmitas ibi nulla. CHAPTER VII. ON THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. In Ecclesiastical Promotions and Judicature. @. To pass to the third mode in which the Regal Supremacy is exercised; are the Bishops of the Church of England made by the Sove- reign ? @. No; no earthly power can make a Bishop. * Kings do not make’, but only do place, Bishops’.” Consecration makes a Bishop; the Royal grant Ρ 4 Part III. Sa Above, 299, 300, 320 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN places him. His beneficium is a Rege, but his Officium isa Deo. His commission is from Curist 2 his permission to exercise it in special places, and over special persons, is from the Prince. The English Ordinal is entitled, “ The Form and Man- ner of Making, ὅζο. of Bishops,” &c. * Hooxer, VIII. vu. 1, ©. Can you explain this more fully ? &. A Bishop’s power consists in two things: l.in Order; and 2, in Jurisdiction’. His power of Order is either Episcopal, and consists in Ordain- ing Priests and Deacons, in Confirmation, and other Apostolical acts 3 or it is Sacerdotal, and is exercised in the Preaching of the word, and in the administration of the Sacraments; and this power of Order he receives wholly and exclusively from Gop, the Sacerdotal at his Ordination as Priest, the Episcopal at his Consecration as Bishop, and not before. His Jurisdiction is partly of divine, partly of human origin, * Hooker, VI. τε ἢ. When the Apostle doth speak of ruling the Church of God, his words have evident reference to the power of Jurisdiction: our Saviour’s words to the power of order, when He giveth His disciples charge, saying, “ Preach—Baptize—Do this in remembrance of Me.” Bp. Burson, Christian Subjection. Bishops have their authority to preach and minister the Sacraments, not from the Prince, but from Christ Himself; only the Prince giveth them publicke liberty, without let or disturbance, to do that which Christ commandeth, Bp. Sanverson, Episcopacy not prejudicial to Royal Power, p- 82, ᾧ ii. 12, All power, to the exercise whereof our Bishops haye pretended, cometh under one of the two ECCLESIASTICAL PROMOTIONS. 321 heads, of Order, or of Jurisdiction. The power of Order consisteth partly in preaching the word and other offices of public worship, common to them with their fellow-ministers ; partly in ordaining Priests and Deacons, admitting them to their particular cures, and other things, of like nature, pecu- liar to them alone. The power of Jurisdiction is either in- ternal, in retaining and remitting sins in foro conscienti@, com- mon to them also (for the substance of the authority, though with some difference of degree) with other Ministers ; or external, for the outward government of the Church in some parts thereof peculiar to them alone. For that ev- ternal power is either Directive, in prescribing rules and orders to those under their jurisdictions, and making Canons and constitutions to be observed by the Church, wherein the inferior Clergy, by their representatives in Convocation, have their votes as well as the Bishops; and both depen- dently upon the King (for they cannot either meet without his writ, or treat without his Commission, or establish with- out his Royal Assent): or Judiciary and Coercive, in giving sentence in foro exteriore, in matters of ecclesiastical cogni- zance,—excommunicating, fining, imprisoning offenders, and the like. Of these powers, some branches, not only in the exercise thereof, but even in the very snbstance of the power itself (as namely that of external jurisdiction coer- cive), are by the laws declared, and by the Clergy acknow- ledged to be wholly and entirely derived from the King, as the sole fountain of all authority of external jurisdiction, whether spiritual or temporal, within the realm, and conse- quently not of Divine Right. 4). In what respects ὃ @. It is divine as far as it consists in the use of the Keys, and in the spiritual superintendence of those under his care, in foro conscientie. But the authority which he may possess over them, in foro exteriore, (that is, by means of civil censures, or secular punishment in the Exterior Court ',) is of human origin. St. Peter’ received the Keys from Christ, but was ordered by Him to put up the Pp 5 Cuap. VII. : v Above, pp. 800— B10. Matt. xvi. 19, xxvi. 52, Parr ΠῚ. Sy Matt. xx. 25. Luke xxii. 25, Matt. xxvi. 52 1 Tim, iii, 3. th ee 322 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN sword, when he drew it without any authority or commission to do 80, 1 Archbp. BRaMHALL, i. 272. We do not draw or derive any spiritual jurisdiction {rom the Crown ; but either liberty and power to exercise actually and lawfully upon the subjects of the Crown that habitual jurisdiction which we received at our ordination, or the enlargement of our jurisdiction objec- tively by the prince’s referring more causes to the Church than it formerly had; or, lastly, the increasing it subjec- tively, by their giving to ecclesiastical judges an external coercive power.—P. 129. We must distinguish between the interior and exterior court. The power which is exercised in the court of Conscience for binding and loosing is solely from Ordination. It is not the power of the Keys, or any part thereof, in the exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, even in the exterior court, which is from the Crown ; but it is the application of the matter, the regulating the exercise of actual ecclesiastical jurisdiction in the outer court, to pre- vent oppression of their subjects, and to provide for the tranquillity of the commonwealth, which belongs to soye- reign Princes. See Bp. Grsson’s Codex, p. 114, where it will be seen that the secu/ar power is not possessed by a Bishop till his Election has been confirmed by the Metropolitan. 2 Bp. Bitson, Christian Subjection, p. 174. The word Governor doth sever the magistrate from the minister. Bishops be no governors of countries; Princes be. Bishops bear not the sword to reward and revenge; Princes do. This appeareth by the words of our Saviour, expressly for- bidding His Apostles to be rulers over countries, and leaving it to princes. The princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them ; and they that exercise authority over them are called Benefactors ; but ye shall not be so.— P.175. Peter was sharply rebuked by Christ for using the sword ; and a Bishop must be no striker. @. But you said that a Bishop is placed in his See by the Crown ? @. Yes; the right of designation, nomination, ECCLESIASTICAL PROMOTIONS. 3823 and presentation for confirmation of his election, Cuar. VU. 5 5 . ——~— -Ἢἤ- for investiture, and for consecration’, of the per- Avove, . 9 δ son whom they may judge most fit to hold the ™ get temporalities and to discharge the duties of any particular see, has, from time immemorial, been vested in the Kings of England. 1 Bp. Grsson, Codex, p. 110. Srarurr or Provisors, 25 Edward III. a.p. 1350. Gursson’s Codex, pp. 65, 66. Bp. Stivuinerieer, Eccl. Cases, i. pp. 161. 313. @. Whence does it arise, that the Crown is entitled to place English Bishops ? @. From the nature of the office of Christian Kings, as God’s Ministers for the general welfare of His People, and for the guardianship’ of His Law, and trom the ancient practice of the Catho- lic Church generally, and of the Church of Eng- land in particular; and because their sees were founded and endowed with their temporalities by Sovereigns of England. These Sees being all of the King’s foundation, he is patron of them all’. 1 Bp. AnprEweEs, Catechet. Doct. p. 801. It is the duty of Princes, who are custodes utriusque tabula, keepers of both tables, seeing they cannot perform the work of sanctification themselves, to take care that fit persons be provided and encouraged in this work. It’s true, if a Prince were only tanquam subulcus, like a herdsman, that keepeth cattel, to See above. take care of men’s bodies, and of their outward estate only, P° 391, 392. and that they wrong not one another by fraud or force, and had no charge of men’s souls, nor of Religion, he might neglect this work; but seeing it is otherwise, and that the eare of the Church is committed to him, and that the soul is the principal part, therefore it is his duty to see that fit and able persons be provided for this work, such as may be doctores gentium, teachers of the Nations. ΡΟ 994. THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN Parrlil. 2. Hooxer, VIII. 1m. 3. Grorius, de Summa Potestate, —~— pp. 263. 267. Archbp. Bramuatt, ii. pp. 401—408. Bp. Grsson’s Codex, p. 104, note. See also Van Espen, Jus Eccles. ]. Tit. XIII. m1. iv. 4). But since it is provided by an Act of the Legislature, that “if any Archbishop or Bishop refuse to consecrate the person elected or nominated within twenty days after such election is signified to him by the King’s letters patent, he shall incur the pains and penalties of the statute and provision of Premunire,” may it not be asked,—on the principle si vis scire an velim, effice ut possim nolie,—are not Bishops virtually made as well as placed by the Crown? and is not, therefore, their mission human, and not divine ? A. No. First of all,—on the sound principle of the English Law, Distingue tempora et concordabis Leges (2 Inst. 256)—the time and circumstances of this statute’ are to be considered. It was made A.D. 1538, for the recovery of the ancient and un- doubted rights of the Crown and realm of Eng- land from the usurpation of the See and Court of Rome, which had then strong and active partizans in England. It was directed, not against English Bishops, acting in the discharge of a sacred duty, but, as its Preamble plainly declares, against the Pope’s and the Court of Rome’s spiritual and secular usurpation and rapacity. And there are other important considerations connected with this statute. 1 Act of Premunire, 25 Henry VIII. cap. 20. a.p. 1533. Gipson’s Codex, p. 107. 2 See the Preamble. Where sithens the beginning of this Parliament for the repress of the exaction of Annates and ECCLESIASTICAL PROMOTIONS. 325 first fruits of Archbishopricks and Bishopricks of the realme wrongfully taken by the Bishop of Rome, it is ordained that the payment of Annates, &c. or for any Bulls, &c. should cease. The statute (23 Henry VIII.) referred to in the Preamble recites that “ great and inestimable sums of money have been daily conveyed out of this realme to the impover- ishment of the same, and especially such sums of money as the Pope’s holiness, his predecessors, and the Court of Rome by long time have taken of all those spiritual persons which have been named, elected, presented, or postulated to be Archbishops or Bishops within the realme of England under the title of Annates, &c.—which they have been compelied to pay before they might receive any fruits of the said Arch- bishoprick or Bishoprick whereunto they were named—which Annates were first suffered to be taken within this realme for the only defence of Christian people against the infidels, and now they be claimed as mere duty, only for lucre, against all right and conscience. (Ὁ. What are these considerations ὃ Q. First of all, Kings are bound by their Oaths at their Coronation to “ maintain the laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel; and to maintain and preserve inviolably the Doctrine, Worship, Discipline, and Government of the Church;” and their power is given them for the edification, and not for the destruction, of the Church; and, as Bishops are warned by the Apostle not to be guilty of haste in laying on of hands’, so is it to be supposed that Kings will not dare to incur that guilt indirectly themselves, and to call on others to do so, by presenting to them improper persons for consecration. Again, we must remember that a penal law of this kind, unjustly enforced, obliges ad penam, but not ad culpam’, and leaves the consciences of Cuap. VII. ---ΟΟοΟ..- --- 1 Tim. vy. 22. 326 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN Parr lil. the parties who are liable to the penalty where they were before. Next it is to be observed, that in the case sup- posed, the choice is controuled by spiritual and ecclesiastical restraints. 1 Hooker, VIII. vu. 7. 2 Bp. Sanverson, Prelect. viii. p. 228. @. What are these? @. The person * nominated by the Crown must be above a stated age; he must have received the holy Orders, first of Deacon and then of Priest (ordinarily after a year’s probation as Deacon), from the Bishop ; and defore his ordination to the Priesthood, must have brought to the Bishop a testimonial signed by three or more Ministers of religion; and have subscribed certain Articles of doctrine and discipline ; he must have taken cer- tain oaths, and “ have taken some Academic de- gree ;” or “ at the least be able to render an account of his faith in the Latin tongue ;” he must have been examined, tried, and approved in learning and godliness by the spiritual authority ; and “if any Bishop shall have admitted any to Holy Orders who is not so qualified and examined,” he is to be suspended from ordaining for two years’; so that we see the foundation of all his power is spiritual; and further, it is justly ob- served, that this very statute of Premunire affords a clear proof that the essence of the episcopal power in England is regarded by this statute as spiritual, for by the very mention of coercion in the case supposed, it declares that consecration is necessary to constitute that power’. ECCLESIASTICAL PROMOTIONS. 327 1 13 Eliz.c. 12. XXXIX Arricres. Canons of 1603, Guar. VIL Canon xxxiy. Preface to Ordinal, in Book of Common Prayer. 3 Articles of Canon xxxvi. Oath of Supremacy and Allegiance, and of Canonical Obedience. F. Mason, In Christian Institutes, iv. p. 475. 2 CANON xxxv. 3 PLowDeEN on the Constitution, p. 251. @®. You said that one of the modes in which the Kings of England exercise their supreme authority over all persons in the Church is by judicatio in causes ecclesiastical: of what kind is this administration of justice ? A. It is partly forensic and partly synodical. @. How is it forensic ? Q. In trying ecclesiastical causes not in foro conscientie, but in foro exteriore, and inflicting civil punishments in pursuance of spiritual cen- sures ἡ. 1 Bp. Bison, Christian Subjection, p. 327. We give princes no power to devise or invent new religions, to alter or change sacraments, to decide or debate doubts of faith, to disturb or infringe the canons of the Church.—P. 332. We never said that princes had any spirituall power, and the sword which they beare we never called but externall and temporall ; for the true spirituall and eternal sword is the Word of God. @. How is it synodical ὃ @. In determining controversies after consi- deration had and report made of them by the Convocation of the Church; where the judicium directivum is in the Church, the imperativum in Rege. @. Has, then, the Crown the power of pro- nouncing on religious dogmas? and may it de- _— -- πα 328 THE ROYAL SUPREMACY IN Parr III, clare one doctrine to be orthodox, and another —~_ — Above, p. 910. ~ heretical, as it thinks fit? A. No. By the laws of England’, “nothing is to be adjudged heresy, but that which heretofore has been so adjudged by the authority of the canonical Scriptures, or the first four General Councils, or some other General Council, wherein the same hath been declared heresy by the express word of Scrip- ture; or such as shall be termed heresy by the High Court of Parliament with the assent of the Clergy in Convocation.” The Sovereign, therefore, pro- nounces, in all religious questions, not according to any new principles, but according to the re- ceived religious laws of the Church. But for the trying of religious controversies the proper court, it is generally held, is that of the Bishop of the diocese, or of the Metropolitan of the province where the cause arises ἢ, 11 Eliz. cap. i. Α. Ὁ. 1558. Bp. Gisson’s Codex, pp. 48. 351. Hooxer, VIII. vir. 3. The King judges not of, but after (i. 6. according to) the Laws. Jenx. Cent.9. Rex non debet judicare sed secundum Legem. Bp. Birson, Christian Subjection, p. 297. That princes may prescribe what faith they list, what service of God they please, what form of administering the Sacraments they think best, is no part of our doctrine ; and yet that princes may by their laws prescribe the Christian Faith to be preached, the right service of God to be used, the Sacraments to be mini- stered according to the Lora’s institution, this is no absurdity in us to defend. Parliamentary Report on Rom. Cath. Subjects, pp. 129, 130. 1816. Lord Crarenvon on Religion and Polity. It is the duty of Sovereign Princes to preserve and provide for the ad- vancement of religion, and for the due exercise of it, and devout reverence for it in their dominions. As they cannot «ἢ ECCLESIASTICAL PROMOTIONS. 829 prescribe what laws they please, contrary to the laws of nature Cuap. VII. ἔξεξε or of God, so they cannot impose what religion they please, contrary to what He has enjoined, 2 Bp. Grzson’s Codex, pp. 351. 853. The cognizance of Heresy and punishment of Heretics belongs to the Arch- bishop as Metropolitan of the Province, and to every Bishop within his own proper Diocese, who are to punish only by Ecclesiastical censures. And so, saith my Lord Coke, ἐξ hath been put in ure in all Queen Elizabeth's reign, and so it was resolved by the Chief Justice, Chief Baron, and two of the Justices upon Consultation, 9 Jac. 1, in the case of Legate.— How far the Convocation of each province, which had once an un- doubted right to convict and punish Heretics in a Synodical manner, doth still retain, or not retain, that right, I shall not presume to say, till the learned Judges be clear and final in their opinions. πὶ PART IV. Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England. CHAPTER I. ON THE RITES AND CEREMONIES OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. Parriv. @. Wuart is meant by Rites and Ceremonies ὃ @. By Rites are meant religious observances, ordained by competent Authority. @. Why are they called Rites ὃ @. Because they are ῥητοί, i. 6. prescribed or ordered. @. What do you mean by Ceremonies ὃ @. Solemn and sacred observances’. 1 Vossius, Etymol. Lat. p. 89, inv. Verisimilius longé Josephus Scaliger, qui censet cerimonias dici ab antiquo cerus, id est sanctus, unde in Saliari carmine cerus, manus, id est, sanctus bonusque. Ita ἃ cerus erit cerimonia, ut a sanctus sanctimonia, ἃ castus castimonia. Sunt et ejusdem generis alimonia et querimonia. @. In the terms Rites and Ceremonies, as here used, do you include the two Christian Sacra- ments ὃ RITES AND CEREMONIES OF THE CHURCH. 331 Q. No. These two Sacraments were “ ordained by Curist Himself ;” but by Rites and Cere- monies, I here mean sacred and solemn observ- ances appointed by lawful human authority. @. What rules are to be observed by those who prescribe Rites and Ceremonies ἢ @. That they appoint nothing inconsistent with the Apostolic injunctions, Let all things be done Cuap. 1. 1 Cor. xiv. decently and in order; and, Let all things be done ape to edifying, and for the promotion of the glory of God. Wence they must take care that the Rites which they ordain be reasonable and decorous, and, as much as may, be in conformity with the ancient practice of the Universal Church; and that Ceremonies, which are commandments of men, be not taught for doctrines, and, as such, enjoined as necessary to salvation’. SeEOOKER, Dil. vir. 1. 1.9. V. γι. V. xxx. 9. Ἐς Mason, in Christian Institutes, iv. pp. 483—460. @. Whence do we ascertain the Rites and Cere- monies of the Courcu or ENGLAND? @. From the Tables and Rules prefixed to the Book of Common Prayer, and from the Rubrics of the same. @. What is meant by a Rubric ? A. Properly, a law written in red letters (rubris litteris), as the titles of the old Roman laws, and the ritual directions in the Prayer-Book formerly were. @. When were these Rubrics drawn up ? @. At the times of the promulgation of the Book of Common Prayer; in the reign of Ed- ward VI. in 1549, 1550, 1552; in that of Queen 19. 1 Cor. x. 31. Matt. xv. 9, 332 RITES AND CEREMONIES OF Pant Iv. Elizabeth in 1560; of King James I. in 1604; and at the Restoration of King Charles II. in 1661. ©. By whom were these Rubrics framed? @. By Bishops and Presbyters of the Church. ®. Do you think yourself bound in conscience to observe them, where competent authority or the necessity of the case does not exempt you from the observance ? a. Certainly. ®. On what grounds? @. Because they are laws made by the Com- munity, both as a Church and a State, approved by the two Houses of Parliament, and ratified by Royal authority. @. How by it as a Church? @. In Convocation ἡ regularly assembled *. 1 Prerace to the Boox of Common Prayer. Yet we have good hope, that what is here presented, and hath been by the Convocations of both Provinces with great diligence examined and approved, will be also well accepted and approved by all sober, peaceable, and truly conscientious sons of the Church of England. See also the preamble of the Act of Uniformity, 1662, sect. 1. Upon mature and full deliberation the said Presidents (of the Convocations of the two Provinces of Canterbury and York), Bishops and Clergy of both Provinces, have reviewed the said Books (of Com- mon Prayer, and of the Form and Manner of the Making and the Consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons), &e. 2 Canons of 1603, Canons iv. xiy. xviii. xxxvi. ®. How by it as a State? @. In the High Court of Parliament. @®. In what Statutes ὃ Q. In the Acts of Uniformity passed in the THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 333 reigns of Edward VI., Queen Elizabeth, and Cuar. Το Charles II.’ ran 1 a.p. 1548. 1551. 1558. 1661. Bp. Grzson’s Codex, pp. 259. 265. 267. 275 (Ὁ. Is not the force of the Spiritual enactment weakened by this Civil sanction ? A. No. On the contrary, it is strengthened by it; Lex humana, jubendo quod jubet lex divina, novam superaddit obligationem'. Therefore, when we obey the Rubric, we obey not only as Chris- dee xxvii. tians, but as Citizens; and he who disobeys, when ~~ God commands by the voice both of the State and of the Church, is doubly guilty; apud homines penas luit, et apud Deum frontem non habebdit?. 1 Bp. Sanperson, Prelect. v. 10. Grotrus, de Sum. Potest. pp. 214. 244. 2 8. Ασα. cited by Grotius, 214, and de Vera Relig. C. Xxvi. Barrow, iii. 288. ΤῈ is a great mistake to think that the civil law doth anywise derogate from the ecclesiastical : their concurrence yieldeth an accession of weight and strength to each. Now that spiritual laws are backed by civil sanc- tions, the knot of our obligation is tied faster; and by dis- obedience to them we incur a double guilt, and offend God two ways, both as Supreme Governor of the world, and as King of the Church. @. You have specified the authority by which these Rites are ordered; but in addition to them may not the Ministers and members of a par- ticular Church adopt Ceremonies from ancient or foreign Churches; such Ceremonies having been appointed by those Churches, as edifying and decorous ? A. No; no private person’, lay or clerical, may Parr IV. US 334 RITES AND CEREMONIES OF THE CHURCH. introduce any thing into a Church on his own authority: it is not his province, but it is exclu- sively the office of the particular Church to which he belongs to decree the Ceremonies to be ob- served by its Members; and whether such addi- tional Ceremonies, as you have mentioned, be derived from ancient or from modern practice, they are equally innovations and usurpations of the authority of the Church, and their intro- duction is equally irregular and presumptuous. It is not less an act of pride and disobedience in an individual to introduce into a Church what is not than to despise what is ordered by lawful authority *. 1 Boox or Common Prayer. Of Ceremonies. Although the keeping or omitting of a ceremony, in itself considered, is but a small thing, yet the wilful and contemptuous trans- gression and breaking of a common order and discipline is no small offence before God. “ Let all things be done among you,” saith St. Paul, “in a seemly and due order ;” the appointment of the which order pertaineth not fo private men; therefore no man ought to take in hand nor pre- sume to appoint or alter any public or common order in Christ’s Church, except he be lawfuliy called and authorized thereto. 2S. Aue. Regula ad Servos Dei, 3. (i. p. 1273.) Nolite cantare nisi quod /egitis esse cantandum; quod autem ita scriptum est ut non cantetur, non cantetur. Hooker, V. rxx1. 7. We had rather glorify and bless God for the fruit we daily behold reaped by such ordinances as His gracious Spirit enableth the ripe wisdom of this National Church to bring forth, than vainly boast of our own peculiar and private inventions, as if the skill of profitable regiment had left her public habitation to dwell in retired manner with some few men of our liking ; we make not our childish appeals sometimes from our own to foreign Churches, sometimes from both unto Churches ancienter than both are ; OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 335 in effect always from all others to our own selves; but, as Cuar. II. becometh them that follow with all humility the ways of ——~—— peace, we honour, reverence, and obey in the yery next degree unto God the voice of the Church of God wherein we live. CHAPTER II. OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED, ®. Bur may it not be said that—as these Rites and Ceremonies are indifferent things’, and may vary in different Churches, and very reasonably and advantageously so’, and may be changed from time to time in the same Church *—it is of little importance whether we conform to them or no? @. If this were so, there would be an end of all human authority*. Things indifferent are properly those concerning which Almighty God has not spoken by any law, either for them or against : and indifference (ἀδιαφορία) is the special character of the legitimate objects of human law, as distinguished from divine; τὸ νομικὸν δίκαιον is that ὃ ἐξ ἀρχῆς οὐδὲν διαφέρει, ὅταν δὲ θῶνται, διαφέρει. “Τὴ mediis rebus Lex posita est Obe- dientiz.’ Thus the attitude of the body, and similar outward observances in Public Worship, may in themselves be matters of no great moment, and so be left free or indifferent as regards any express law, (though even natural Reason tells us that certain states of the body are appropriate ac- companiments and exponents of certain affections Part IV. ———— Luke xxii, 41. Acts vii. 60. Phil. ii, 10. Eph. iii. 14. Exod, xxii. 28. Acts xxiii. 3.5. 2 Pet. ii. 10. Jude 8. 1 Tim. i. 4. vi. 4. 20. 2 Tim. ii. 16. 23. 1 Cor. xiv. Ὁ Tit. i. 10. Matt. xxiii. 23 Luke xi. 42. 336 OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. of the mind®, and tend to general edification 7; and for the recommendation of certain attitudes in devotion we have the authority of Scripture Example ; and in the Public Worship of a Church discrepancy is to be deprecated, and Uniformity is greatly to be desired, as tending to promote Unity,) but when express laws have been duly made concerning these things, we are no longer free to do or omit them, as we please, for Obedience to constituted Authority is so far from being a matter of Indifference ὃ, that nothing is more destructive toa Community, and nothing more displeasing to God, Who is the Author not of confusion but of peace, than its absence. Besides this, if these things be, as some suppose, matters of indifference, no- thing can be more frivolous than wranglings con- cerning them. Jn a word, the fruits of disputing, instead of obeying, are contempt of lawful autho- rity, loss of time and labour, detriment of peace and charity, and the neglect of the “ weightier matters of the law °.” 1S. Aucust. ii. 186. 188. 291. (Epist. liv. Ixxxii.) Hooker, IV. xu. 8. Barrow, in Christian Institutes, iii. 157. Ε΄ Mason, ibid. iv. 463. 487. Bp. SanpERson, ibid. iv. 574. Bincuam, XVI. 1. 15. 2 S. Ingen. ap. Euseb. y. 24. The διαφωνία in ceremonies in different Churches τὴν ὁμόνοιαν τῆς πίστεως συνίστη- σιν. 8. Grec. Mag. Ep.41. In uné fide nihil officit ϑαποῖς Ecclesize consuetudo diversa. 3 XXXIX Arricres, Art. xxxiy. Of the Traditions of the Church. It is not necessary that Traditions and Cere- monies be in all places one, or utterly like ; for at all times they have been divers, and may be changed according to the diversity of countries, times, and men’s manners, so that nothing be ordained against God’s Word. Every particular OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 337 or National Church hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish Ceremonies or Rites of the Church, ordained only by man’s authority, so that all things be done to edifying. 4 Prerace to Book of Common Prayer. XXXIX Articztes, Art. xxxiv. δ Anistor. Ethic. y. 10. 5. Bernarp, Ep. vii. Canons of 1603. Can. xxx. Things of themselves indifferent do in some sort alter their natures, when they are either com- manded or forbidden by a lawful magistrate, and may not be omitted at every man’s pleasure, contrary to the law, when they be commanded, nor used when they are prohibited. Hooker, V. vit. 2. Matters ritual are the just province of authority. δ Hooker, V. xxx. 2. When we make profession of our faith we stand ; when we acknowledge our sins we fall down, because the gesture of constancy becometh us best on the one ; in the other the behaviour of humility —V. Lxviu. 3, Our kneeling at Communions is a gesture of piety ; what doth better beseem our bodies than to be sensible witnesses of minds unfeignedly humble ? 7 Hooker, VI. i. 8. 5. XXXIX Arrictes, Art. xxxiy. F. Mason, in Chris- tian Institutes, iv. 463, and notes. Bp. Sanperson, ibid. pp- 557, 623, and W. Wall, ibid. p. 464. 9 Hooker, V. xxx1.1. By them which trouble us with these doubts (i. e. concerning the propriety of wearing the surplice, and such like matters), we would more willingly be resolyed of a greater doubt, whether it be not a kind of taking God’s name in vain, to debase religion with such fri- volous disputes, a sin to bestow time and labour upon them. Things of so mean regard and quality, although necessary to be ordered, are notwithstanding yery unsayoury when they come to be disputed of. Hooker, III. 1x, 8. Unto laws made and received by a whole Church, they which live within the bosom of that Church must ποῦ think it a matter indifferent either to yield or not to yield obedience. Is it a small offence to despise the Church of God? “ My son, keep thy father’s command- ment,” saith Solomon, “and forget not thy mother’s instruc- 2: tion ; bind them both always about thy heart.” It doth not Q Cuap. IL. 1 Cor. xi. ) 22. Prov. vi. 30, 998 OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. Parr IV, stand with the duty which we owe to our Heayenly Father, ———~’ that to the ordinances of our Mother the Church we should James iy. 11, 12, 1 Pet. ii. 13—19. Ephes. vi. 5, 6 , 6. Col. iii. 23. ἘΠῚ. aia. 1. Rom. xiii. es, show ourselves disobedient. Let us not say we keep the commandments of the one when we break the law of the other: for unless we observe both, we obey neither. @. You say we must obey these laws; and you acknowledge that these laws are human ; do then human laws bind the conscience ? A. Not as human laws*: nothing but the law of God can do so; but all human laws, which are not contrary to the Divine law, can and do bind the conscience indirectly, by virtue of the Divine law, which commands us to obey them. Thus, in the case supposed, we are bound to conform to the Rubric, because God says in His word, “Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake.” For example, we are not bound in conscience to kneel on account of any special virtue in the act itself; but we are bound in con- science to obey the lawful authority which enjoins us to do so’. ‘Thus, in obeying the Rubrics of the Church, we do in fact obey Gop: Cum Christo Jubente, servis homini, non homini servis, sed Illi qui jussit® ; and in wilfully and obstinately disobeying them, we do in fact despise the Worn of Gop *. 1 Bp. Sanperson’s Prelections and Sermons, i. 802. ii. 177. iii. 10. Note in Christian Institutes, iii. p. 4. 2? XXXIX Arrictes, Art. xx. The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies. 3 8. Aucust. iv. 2018. 1028. 1056. y. 418. 4 Hooker, V. vu. 4. Suppose we that the Sacred Word of God can at their hands receive due honour by whose in- citement the holy ordinances of the Church endure open con- tempt? No; it is not possible that they should observe as they ought the one, who from the other withdraw unneces- sarily their own or their brethren’s obedience. OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 339 @. It is not meant, I suppose, that we should obey every human ordinance, without reference to the nature of the thing commanded ? A. No; weare not to obey a human ordinance, if it be plainly against the divine law: we are to obey Man for the sake of God, but we are not to disobey Gop for the sake of man. (Ὁ. But these Ceremonies of the Church are not enjoined in Holy Scripture; and does not, in the language of the Church, “ Holy Scripture contain all things necessary to salvation ?” @. Yes. Scripture contains all things neces- sary to salvation; and of these necessary things one of the very first is obedience to lawful autho- rity in all things not unlawful’, that is, in all things not contrary to the general laws of Nature and Reason, and to the positive ones of Holy Scrip- ture. And both the precept and example of our blessed Lord, Who was obedient to the law for man, is conclusive on this point’. 1S. Aveustin, Ep. 86. In his rebus de quibus nihil certi statuit Scriptura divina, mos populi Dei vel instituta majorum pro lege tenenda sunt. S. Hreroy. Ep. xxviii. ad Lucinium Beticum. Ego illud te breviter admonendum puto, traditiones Ecclesiasticas (presertim quz fidei non officiant) ita observandas, ut a majoribus traditee sunt : nec aliorum consuetudinem aliorum contrario more subverti. Sed unaqueeque provincia abundet in suo sensu, et precepta majorum leges Apostolicas arbitretur. 2? Hooker, II. vin. 6, 7. ILI. vz. and III. vir. 2—4. ITI. ἘΠ 1.4. Ve LkxX. 6. V. LXXI. 7: Bp. Anvrewes on the Decalogue, pp. 209. 271. @. But if I have ascruple of conscience as to the lawfulness of a ceremony, ought I to conform to it ? A. It is true, certainly, that our conscience Q 2 Cuap. Il. Ge Exod. i. 16, Ἰ7: Dan. iii. [ὃ vi. 9. 1 Mace. i. 45. ii. 34. 2 Chron. xv. 16. Luke ii. 49. Acts νυ. 29. Art. vi. Above, pp- Rom, xiii. 2. Matt. xvii 27. ΧΧΊΙ Ὁ], ΣΧ ΧΙ ὦ, ὧν Luke iv. 16. xvii. 14. John x, 22. Acts ii. 15, iii. 1. Above, p. 271, 272, Parr IV. SS es Rom, xiii. 5. Jer. xxxy. 340 OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. obliges us, even when it errs ; but then it does not exempt us from the guilt and punishment of error. Hence we must take all the care in our power, that our conscience may not err, but be rightly instructed and informed. And with this view we must consider, that lawful authority has pronounced a public judgment in favour of the Ceremony, by ordering it; and in Christian cha- rity, humility, and discretion we shall not be dis- posed to doubt that this public judgment is worth more than our own private opinion. Our private conscience must remember that the public con- science is better than itself’; and it ought, there- fore, to endeavour to bring itself into conformity with it. Next, we must bear in mind, that the thing is established, and for the sake of peace ought not to be stirred by private persons, without urgent necessity; that the order, which enjoins the observance, is the judgment of the competent authority, to which, by God’s Word, Wwe owe obedience in all things not clearly unlaw- ful, “not only for wrath but also for conscience sake ;” that the command is clear, but our exemp- tion is not so; (and “in dudiis rebus tutior pars est eligenda ;’) and lastly, that there are many things which it may not be expedient for others to command, in which, notwithstanding, when they are commanded, it is very necessary for us to obey *. 1 Hooker, IV. 1.12. Their sentences will not be greatly regarded, when they oppose their me-thinketh to the Orders of the Church of England. * S. Aue. c. Faust. Man. xxii, 75. Reum facit superiorem iniquitas imperandi, innocentem subditum ordo serviendi. Bp. Anprewes on the Decalogue, p. 340. OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 341 @®. But does not St. Paul say, “ Let every one be fully persuaded in his own mind ;” and, “ w hat- R soever is not of faith is sin?” A. St. Paul is there speaking of indifferent matters, that is, of matters not prescribed or for- bidden by God, and on which the lawful public authority had pronounced no judgment, and in which, therefore, every one was at liberty to do what in his own conscience he thought best; but where such public authority has pronounced its judgment, he condemns those who resist it in the following words, “If any man thinks fit (δοκεῖ) to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the Churches of God :” and “ whosoever resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God.” 1 Hooker, ΓΝ, xu. 6, 7. 4). But if I give scandal or offence to others by compliance, ought I to comply, when St. Paul says, “If meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth ;” and, “ It is good to do nothing whereby thy brother stum- bleth, or is offended, or is made weak ?” A. St. Paul is speaking of things, by abstinence from which he sacrificed his own appetite and not public authority. The former is right, but not the latter. And, with respect to giving scandal, it is not possible for us to give greater scandal to the weak, than by teaching them disobedience to authority by an example of resistance to it; and this too in a matter of Religion. This is indeed to make our brother to offend. And this is to give scandal not only to the weak, but to the strong; and, lastly, it is to offend owr own con- sciences, and to disobey God’. a 3 _Cuap. 11. a Rom xiv. 5. 1 Cor, xi. 16. Rom. xiii. 2. 1 Cor, viii. ww Rom. xiv. Parr IY. _—_ Luke ii. 34. 1 Cor. i. 23. I Pet. ii. 8. Matt. xiii. 57. xv. 12. Rom, ix. 33. Gal. v. 11. vi. 14. 842 OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 1 XXXIX Arricres, Art. xxxiv. Of the Traditions of the Church. Whosoever through his private judgment willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church, which be not repugnant to the Word of God, and be ordained and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church, hurteth the autho- nity of the magistrate, and woundeth the consciences of the weak brethren. Hooker, III. 1x.3. The laws thus made, God doth Him- self in such sort authorize, that to despise them is to despise Him. Bp. Tayzor on Scandal, Life of Christ, § xiii. 7. ©. But may scandal be never lawfully given ? A. No. Scandal can never be lawfully given, but it is not seldom unlawfully taken. A scandal means a stumbling-block; and Christ Himself was a stumbling-block to the Jews. The Phari- Sees were offended (ἐσκανδαλίσθησαν) by His words, yet He did not desist from preaching’, St. Paul speaks of the offence of the cross, yet it was not to ccase ; and he says, “ God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Offence may be taken, where none is given ; and offence not justly taken hurteth none but the taker. 1 Turoruyt. in 5. Luc, xiii. Οὐ τοῦτο ἐσκόπησεν 6 Χρι- στὸς, ὅπως μὴ σκανδαλίσῃ αὐτοὺς, ἀλλ᾽ ὅπως εὐεργετήσῃ τὸν θεραπείας δεόμενον" δεῖ γὰρ ἡμᾶς, ἐνθὰ ὠφέλεια ἀνα- κύπτει πολλὴ, μὴ φροντίζειν τῶν ἀνοήτως σκανδαλιζο- μένων. ΤΕΚΥΌΕΓΙΑΝ de Vel. Virg.3. Bone res neminem scandali- zant nisi malam mentem, ΙΝΌΕΧ 1. OF MATTERS. AARON, his ordination, 79, 80 ABSOLUTION, 125—133; requisites for, and power of, 127—132 ABUSE, takes not away the lawful use, 206 3 Acts oF PARLIAMENT. (See Index IT.) ADVENT, the Second, 37, 38 AERIUS, his heresy, 98 Arpan of Lindisfern, 175, 176 ALBAN, St., 151 ALEXANDRIA, Patriarch of, 114 ANGELS or CuuRCHEs, 110 ANICETUS, Pope, 167, 168 ANTIOCH, Patriarch of, 110. 114 APocRyYPHAL Books, 55—57. APOSTLES, meaning of the term, 81, 82; their offices, ordinary and extraordi- nary, 100,101 (see Bishops, Episco- pacy, Apostolic Succession) ; equality of, 237—240. 245 AposTouic Succession (see Succession) in the Church of England, 208 APPEALS TO Rome, 160—162; re- strained, 183 Ark, the, 9. 27 ARMINIAN testimonies to Episcopacy, 104 ARTICLES, THIRTY-NINE, racter, ] 98—202 ARTICULI CiErr, 183 AUGUSTIN, St., of Canterbury, 150—174 their cha- Baptism. Sacrament of admission into the Church, 8, 9. 74, 75; of regene- ration and remission of original sin, 129, 130; of Infants, 130; against iteration of, 231—234: conditional form of administering, 233 ; schisma- tical, 234. 28] BENEDICTION, episcopal and sacerdotal, 134—145 BerTHA, Queen, 163—174 BisHovrs (see Episcopacy), meaning of the term, 84; successors and represen- tatives of the Apostles, 87—99; fune- tions of, 18. 100—105: as Diocesans, Metropolitans, and Patriarchs, J05— 117; not more than one in a city, 109; benediction by, 141, 142; the centres of unity in their respective Dioceses, ]45; their equality as Bi- shops, 297, 238. 249, 250 ΒΙΞΗΟΡΒ of England (see Church of England), number of at the Saxon Invasion greater than at this day, 154, see also 172; as Peers of Parliament, 277, 278; derive their office from God; how far its ewercise is by man, (see Jurisdiction) placed, not made, by the Crown, 169. 319—323 of the Church of Rome, their Oath to the Pope (see Oath); are feudal vassals of the Papacy, and Peers of the Pope’s creation, 252 Bonrrack IIL., Pope, 176. 225; VIII., 225 BritisH Cuurcnu, 151—175 Butts, Parpat, Unam Sanctam, 223 ; and in Caen& Domini, 228 of Exeommunication, 226. 228 CAERLEON, Bishop of, 152, 153 CALVINISTIC testimonies in favour of Episcopacy, 103, 104 Canon Law (see Councils, Decretals), statement of, with respect to Papal Power, 220—224 of England, 316 (see Con- vocation) Canon of 1571, concerning Preachers, 205 of 1603, their regard for anti- quity, 198 ; their rules for preaching, 204, 205 CanonicaL Booxs of Scripture, 49, 50, 55 Q 4 544 CanTErRBuRY, the Patriarchal See of England, 174, 185 CaTALoGuss of Church Governors, 97 CaTEcHiziNG. 61 CaruEpRaLCuurcu the Parish Church of the Diocese, 145, 146 Caruoxic, 5, 6. 280 CATHOLIC Communion, what, 235, 236 CATHOLICcs, who, 6. 235 CEREMONIES (see Rites) Curist (see Jesus CurisT) CuurcH, etymology, 1.156; names for, 1,2; definition Militant, 9—22, 281, 282; types of, 9. 27; Parables concerning, 11; notes of, 14.118; Invisible, 15: hasno One Visible Head, 17, 18. 237—258 ; her dignity and glory, 99. 94. salvation only in, 26—34: one only, 29, 30; prefigured by Eve, 31 ; the Spouse and Body of Christ, 23. 29. 3] ; On errors in, 36—48. 73; Catholic, cannot fail, 36; waxes and wanes, 36, 37; liken- ed to a Sea, 148, 149; keeper and witness of Holy Writ, 4958; inter- preter of Scripture, 58—73; Discipline (see Power of Keys); the depository of grace, and the house of discipline, 132. 280; communion and unity, 142. 233236. 255258: the duty of kings and states to the Church, 264—329 (see Kings); her state in persecution and in peace, 297 or ENGLAND, her catholicity, 148, 149; her origin, 148—155; her Bishops in unbroken succession from the time of the Apostles, 150, and following ; independent of Rome, 150 —189; her reformation, restorative character of, 189—217, her primitive character,190—1] 92. hercontinuity, 193 —230; how Protestant,197 ; her regard for antiquity, 190—200. 205; “her Scriptural character, 198, 200. 205 ; how far she admits private judgment, 204; the Apostolic succession of her Bishops, 207-217 her priesthood and sacrifice, 215, 216: her ordina- tions, 207—216; her visibility from the Apostolic age, 192—196. 217 231; did not separate herself from the Church of Rome, 217—230; a true branch of the Catholic Church, 144 of, 2426; her con- | stitution, 24. 8. 18, 19; how one or united, 3; her unity, how maintained, | 4 (see Unity); how Holy, 5; Catho- | lic, 5. 280; ae 8; Visible and | INDEX I. 155. 230236; why she recognizes Roman Catholic orders, 214. 206; her conduct towards reformed com- munions, 214 - Church and State of England, two names for one com- munity, 259262: the Church the spiritual mother of all Christians in England, 279288 ; supremacy of Kings (see Kings) Cuurcu and Starr, 277288 or Rome (see Rome) CuvrcuEs, who is their real owner, 212; Consecration of, 212; endow- ment of, 272__278 CuurcHEs, SUBURBICARIAN (see Sub- urbicarian) CLERGy, their authority in matters of doctrine, 63—65 : origin of name, 75, 76 ; necessity of, 77—79 ; lawful call. 79; and mission, 80; grace received by at ordination, 82: three orders, 83 —87; in England, 152. 207: their duty to the Sovereign, 117. 299, 310; (see Priest, Ministry, Orders) CoLuruus, case of, 102 Common Praysr, 143, 144; set forms of, benefit of, 147, 148: Book of (see Index. IT.) Paul IV. and Pius IV. offered to confirm, 219; its history, 330—333 ComMMUNION of Churches, 235. 255 (see Unity) CoNFIRMATION, 141—142 ConscrENcE, an erroneous, no excuse ας conscience, 271 ; is to be reformed, 272 141; Benediction in, ConsTANTINOPLE, Patriarch of, 114 ConstTITUTIONS of Clarendon, 183 Convocation of Church of England, its nature, power, and duties, 316. 327 CoronaTion of English Sovereigns, 308 Councits, General, use of, 19. 38; authority, 38, 39. 72; right of calling, and of presidency in, belongs to Sove- reign Princes, and not to the Bishop of Rome, 314319: the first four, reverence of Gregory the First for, 164; by whom called, 315—319: their authority recognized by English Par- liament, 328 (see Index IT.) of Arles, 152 Chalcedon, 197 ———— Constantinople, 197 Ephesus, 164, 165. 197. 218 Nice, 157. 190. 197 Sardica, 152. 160—162 Trent, not a General Coun- INDEX I. cil, its illegality, 199—201; its creed, 199—202; its anathemas, 227 Councit of Trullo, 165 CovENANT, Solemn League and, abju- | ration of, 181 Cyprus, Case of Church of, 163—165. Daviw’s, St., Bishops of, 156, 157. 185 Deacons, 84; their name and office, 85 Decreratsof Dionysius Exiguus, Isido- rus, and Gratian, 220; others, 221 DinotH, Abbot of Bangor, 165 Diocese, meaning of the word, 108 Diocrsan Episcopacy, 105—118 Discipuine of Cuurcn, 14, 15; its in- stitution, aims, ends, and obligations, 118—130 ae St. 48; duties to, 274 —28) Donartists, 213. 231. 234, 235 Faster, time of keeping, 156. 168 ἘΣΘΟΙΈΒΙΑ, its meaning, 2; of Athens, 2 permixta (see Church, Visible) ΙΝ Eprscopo, the maxim il- lustrated, 151, 152 (see Succession) EcciestasticaAL Booxs of Scripture, 56, 57 ELpAp and Mepap, case of, 285 ELIZABETH, Queen, excommunicated, 219. 228; on the limits of the royal supremacy, 91] Empire, Roman, its divisions how pre- paratory tothe Polity of the Church, 106—113; how it becamea Church, 261 ENDOWMENTS, RELIGIOUS, 272—278 ENGLAND (see Church, Church and State, and Kings) Eriscopacy (see Bishops), Divine Insti- tution of, 87—100; Lutheran, Ar- minian, and Calvinistic testimonies in favour of, 103, 104 , Diocesan, 105—117 Episcorus, 88. 96 ERASTIANISM, 305—308 EruELBer?, King, 150—174 Eye, a figure of the Church, 31 EVIDENCE, internal and external, of Scripture, 52, 53 Evir men in the Church, 9—16 Exposirors of Scripture, 61—71 Farru, the one true, 269—275 FATHERS OF THE CHURCH, Authority of, 67—70 FipE.Es, 78 GENERAL Councits (see Councils) 345 Grace, gratis datur, 163—166 Grecory I., Pope, 150—174; his de- clarations irreconcileable with later claims of the Papacy, 227. 247 (sec Index IT.) Grecory VII., 178. 221; canonized, and lauded by the Church of Rome for deposing Henry IV., 292 Heap or THE CHURCH (see Jesus Christ, Church, and Kings) HEATHEN, condition of, and duties of Christians to, 34, 35 Henry II., his concessions to the Pope, 186 - VIII., his acts in Ecclesiastical matters, 183. 187, 188; his cha- racter, 87 ; excommunicated, 228 Heresy, what is, 4!; guilt of, 42; how differs from schism, 43 (see Schism) ; causes of, where to be heard, 328 Heretics, how far in the Visible Church, 46; duties towards, 47, 48 ; formerly agreed on one point, 99 HILDEBRAND (see Gregory VII.) Hoty Guost, the Author of Episco- pacy, 99; His office in Ordination, 82, 83 Hominiss, 198, 199 Human Laws, how they bind the con- science, 338 TEACHING, 62, 63 INDIFFERENCE, RELIGIOUS, 273 INDIFFERENT THINGS, 335 In sotipum, 19, 20. 250 INTENTION, GOOD (see Conscience) INTERCESSION, 134—145 INTERPRETATION (see Scripture) INVESTITURE of Bishops, 170 IscuyRas, case of, 102 Iraty, Diocese of, distinct from that of Rome, 111 James I., 200 JEROBOAM, an example of Schism and Heresy, 44 JERUSALEM, CHURCH of, the Mother of all Churches, 163 Jesus Curist, how He governs the world, 19—21; the object of the Faith of the Church both before and after His coming, 34, 35; the Church His house, 23; His body, 23. 28. 32; His Spouse, 15. 17; the second Adam, 31; the Great Apostle, 80—82. 95; and Founder of Apostolic and Episco- pal Office, 95; His Office in Absolu- αὖ 346 tion, 127: in Intercession, 137; Bene- diction, 140; His commission to St. Peter, and in him to all Bishops and Pastors, 239245 : his language when He stood before Pilate, 267269: all Human Power is derived through Him, 267269; the rock on which the Church is built, 239. 541]. His Headship of the Church distinguished from that of Kings, 289 Jews, the Librarii of Christians, 49 sat THE Baptist, his baptism, 214 —216 Joun, King of England, his concessions to the Pope, 186, 187 Jupas, 96; baptism by, 212. 214 JUDGE, no one living infallible in con- troverted causes, 71 —73 Jurispiction, spiritaal source of, 300. 320—323 (see Keys) Jus Cyprium of the Church of Eng- land, 163—166 Keys, Power of, 118133; given to all Presbyters, 119. 242 9: of divine, not human, origin, 300. 320323 KINGs and QUEENS, Christian, Deputies and Vicegerents of Almighty God, 116; derive their power from Him, 266; through Jesus Christ, 20. 267 —269; Ecclesiastical Supremacy of Christian Princes in their own Realms, 20, 21. 115, 116. 169. 184, 262 ; Founders of Episcopal Sees, 323; in what their true happiness consists, 264, 265. 288—309; their religious duty, 265—288 KINGS or ENGLAND, their Ecclesiastical | Su remacy, its zatwre and Limits, 289 δ ΓΝ their headship distinguished from Christ's, 289 ; their sacred cha- racter, 309 Korau and his company, examples of Schism, 44, 45 Auotakos, 1 Lary, 76 (see Fideles) Lay Expers, the novelty of their office, 805 Lazarus, 127, 128; sister of, 54 LITERS FORMAT, 113 Lirurey (see Prayer, Common Prayer) LiupHARD, Bp., 163 Lonpon, 152. 172 Epes AN testimonies to Episcopacy, Os Mary, St., the VirGIn, at Cana, 54 INDEX I, MATrHLis, St., 94. 96 METROPOLITANS (see Bishops), 109, 112 MINISTERS, unworthiness of, hinders not the effect of the ordinances which they minister, 212-2] 4 Ministry, LAWFUL, what constitntes a, 75—99 (see Clergy, Priest,Ordination) NADABand Abihu, examples of heresy, 45 Nac’s Heap Fare, 209 OTH, qualifications of a good, 180 of Supremacy, its history and nature, 300—302 —— of Roman Catholic Bishops to the Pope, 178- 180, 252. persequi Hereticos, 228: and obligation of vas- salage, 252: inconsistent with civil allegiance, 252 ORDERS, THE THREE, of Christian Mi- nisters, 83. 85. 207 (sce Clerg: Orp1NatL, English, 207. 210 (see Church of England) ORDINATION, requisites to a lawful one, 79—83. 101. 209: the Office of the Holy Ghost in, 82; grace of, 83. 166. 210, 211 (see Clergy and Priests) OriGINAL Sin, punishment of, remitted in baptism, 129, 130 PaLiium, its origin, use, and abuse, 176—180. 255 ῬΑΒΚΑΒΙΈΒ, Scripture, concerning the Church, 11—16 Parker, Abp., his consecration, 210 ParisuEs, 108 PARLIAMENT, Bishops of England in, 277, 278 PaTRIARCHAL DIsPENSATION, Priest- hood of, 135, 136 PATRIARCHS (sce Bishops), 109—117 ῬΑΤΕΙΑΚΟΗΑΤΕ of England (see Can- terbury) PATRIARCHATES, modification and transfer of precedence of, 11416; tenets of, by Nicene Canon, 110: and by Ephesine, 163. 166. 173 PavL, St., his primacy, 239 Peter, St., his primacy, faith, confes- sion, keys, pastoral office, 118—]20, 237—258 Prrra and Perrvs, 24] Picts and Scors, Church among, 153 Pius LV., 219; his creed, 199. 509 — V., his bull against Queen Eliza- beth, 219. 228 Porz oF Romg, his claim to be the INDEX I. Head of the Visible Church, 17—20. 22. 237—258; his claim to be an in- fallible Judge in controverted causes, 71—78; ancient precedence and ex- tent of his Patriarchate, 110; has no jurisdiction in England, 154. 237— 258 (see Church of England); Oath imposed by him on Ecclesiastics, 177—180, 228; protests against his usurpations in that country, 182—184; his secular claims, 220—224. 252; form of coronation, 224; his spiritual claims, 225—227. 238; destructive of Church Unity, 253; his treatment of Councils and Bishops, 225, 253— 255; examples of resistance to en- croachments of, 182—189. 246, 247; errors and heresies of various Popes, 254 (see Visible Head) PorisH and PuriranicaL Principles of Polity, the similarity of, 301, 302 PowER, the true source of, 267—269 a the best interpreter of laws, PREMUNIRE, Statute of, 183—189. 324—327 Prayer, Public (see Common Prayer) PreEAcHING, 61—66; Canons of the Church of England, concerning, 204, 205; Schismatical Preaching, 285— 289 PreEsBYTERS (see Priest and Bishops) Prigst (see Clergy), meaning of term, 85; how far Presbyter and Episcopus commutable, 89, 90; Presbyters can- not ordain, 101—103; power in Ab- solution (see Absolution); in Inter- cession and Benediction (see [nterces- sion); Priesthood of Patriarchal Dis- ensation, 135; of Christian Church, 15; Priests as Angeli Ecclesia, 143; Priesthood in the Church of England, 215 PriusTHoop, necessity of, 77—79 (see Priest, Clergy) PrivaTE JUDGMENT defined, 204 PROTESTANTISM, 197 Provinces of the Church, 107—]12 Provisors, Statute of, 183 Puritans, in the Principles of their civil and ecclesiastical polity symbolize with the Papists, 180. 301, 302 QuaRTODECIMANI, 168 RawaB, House of, 27 Recusancy, Romish in England, date of its origin, 219 347 REFORMATION in England, not inno- vating, but restorative, 189—217 (see Church of England) REFORMATIONS in a Church, how to be made, 72, 73. 192 ReEGALIA Sancti Perri, 178 REGENERATION, 129, 130 RELIGION, its political effects, 262—288 REPENTANCE, 128—133 RireEs and CEREMONIES in the Church of England, origin of the terms, 330; their nature and obligation, 332—342 RocueEstTeEr, 17] Rome, Bishop of (see Pope) Church of, not the Catholic Church, 6,7; when founded, 154; its novel, unscriptural, and antiscrip- tural dogmas and practices, 199—204. 216 ; violent obtrusion of them, 218. 225—231; anathemas, 228 ; reiterates Ordination and Baptism, 231—234; Bishops of (see Oath and Pope); in what sense a true Church, 194— 197. 217 Rusricks, history and authority of, 331 994 ἘΠΕ oF ΒΆΙΤΗ. 66. 7] SacrAMENTs, the, from Christ on the Cross, 31; nature of, 74, 75; neces- sity of, 74; due administration of, by a lawful Ministry, 74-—83 Sacriricg, the Christian, 215 SAMARITAN WoMAN, 54 ScanDAL, on giving and taking, 341,342 ScuIsM, its nature and sin, 43—45. 218. 286 ; its political effects, 263. 274 ScuisMAricaL Assemblies and Preach- ing, 285—289 Scuismatics, how far in the Visible Church, 46; duties to, 47, 48. 283— 289; formerly agreed in one point, 99 Scuoo.ts, their connexion with the Church, 277 Scorcu Church, 153. 155. 206 ScriBEs and PHARISEES, why and how far to be heard, 65. 194 ScripTrurE, Hoty (see Canonical, Ee- clesiustical, Apocryphal), committed to the keeping of the Church, 48; its integrity, 49, 50; genuineness, 51; authority, and Inspiration, 51, 52; evidence, internal and external of, 52, ———— Custody and Interpretation of, 48—73 -- —, Sufficiency of, 71. 198. 202 —204 a6 548 ΞΟΚΙΡΤΟΒΕ Versions of, 57 Sincerity (see Conscience) Srates and Princes, religious duty of, 265—277 (see K ings) SEAMEN, duties of, 77. 273. 276, SratutTe of Provisors, 183 STEPHEN, King, hisconcessionsto Rome, 186, 187 SrriFE, preaching in, 285—289 SuBuRBICARIAN CHURCHES, 111, 112. 158. 169 Succession, Apostolic (see Apostolic), 207—215 SuFrFrraGANn Bishops, 113 Supremacy (see Oath, King’s) σωζόμενοι, σῶμα, TABLEs of the Law in the Ark, 48. Tares and WuHeEatT, 11—13. 284 Taxess for Religion, 272—288, ToLeRaTion, 275 283, INDEX I. TRENT, Council of (see Councils) Uniry of the Church, in what it con- sists, and how to be maintained, 3, ]9—22. 142. 145. 232, 233. 255— 258. 270—288 ; advantage and duty of maintaining both religious and civil, 269—274 (see Church) UNIVERSAL Bisuop (see Church) UniversitTi&s of England, their part in the Reformation, 191—193; Sub- scription at, 207 Ursan VIIL., Pope, 228 Victor, Pope, 167, 168 VistBLE Heap, no one, of the Church, 17. 22.71 Wirrrip, 183 Worop oF Gop (see Scripture) York, 152. 172 ζιζάνια. 1I—138 INDEX II. OF AUTHORS, AND PLACES CITED. Acts or PARLIAMENT, (Bp. Gibson's Codex Juris Eccles. Anglican. 2nd ed. Oxford, 1761, folio. See also Index I.) Of uniformity, 209; abjuration of covenant, 181; statute of pro- visors, 183; of premunire, 183; for restraint of appeals to Rome, 183; to restore to the Crown its style and jurisdiction, and against annates, Peterpence, &c., 183; on the royal supremacy, 183. 184; on heresy, its definition, 328; on the first four general councils, 328 ALTESERRA on the Metropolitan See of England, 172 AMBROSE, Sr. (ex ed. Bened. Paris, 1836. TV Voll. 8vo) on the oneness of the Church, 29; Evea figure of the Church, as Adam of Christ, 31; on salyation only in the Church, 32, 33; in the Church as Uxor and Virgo, 43 ; visible Church subject to increase and decrease, 37; on the power of absolu- tion, 126129. 133; given to all Pres- byters, 243; on the Church com- pared to a sea, 149; on St. Paul's primacy, 239; on St. Peter’s confes- sion, 241. 243; on the religions duty of Christian kings, 297 eonns on Episcopal ordination, ANDREWES, Bp. (Pattern of Catechis- tical Doctrine, Lond. 1650, fol. Ser- mons ; Oxford, 1841. V Voll. 8vo) salvation only in the Church, 33; on catechizing, 61; on sacerdotal intercession and benediction, 135, 136; on priests as Angeli Eccle- st@, 143; on the English Reforma- tion, 200; on the unworthiness of mi- nisters not affecting the validity of the ordinance which they minister, 211; on the Christian Sacrifice, 217; on the beginning of Popish recusaney, 219; on St. Peter’s confession, pri- macy, and name, 239. 244; on the reli- gious duties of princes, 263. 323 ; on the nature and limits of the royal supremacy, 262—298. 312; on theright of calling synods, 315. 317—319; on the right of placing bishops, 323 ANSELM on St. Peter’s primacy, 243; the keys given to all the Apostles, 244 244 ARTICLES, THIRTY-NINE, enact nothing new, 198; on the visible Church, 14; on the only way of salvation, 34. 36; councils may err, 38; on the canon of Scripture, 50. 55; on the power and authority of the Church, 60; on a lawful call to the ministry, 95; on lawful oaths, 180; on royal supremacy, 184. 188; its limits, 311 —3l4; Rome a Church, 196; on general councils, 201; on the un- worthiness of ministers, 212; on an erring conscience not a safe con- science, 271; on summoning of coun- cils, 815; on the authority of the Church in decreeing rites and cere- monies, 336 ATHANASIUS, St., on Scripture para- mount to Councils, 39 AUGSBURG, Confession of, on episco- pacy, 103 (Libri Symbol. Eccles, Evan- gelice. Hase. Lipsie, 1837) Avugusting, St. (ed. Benedict. Paris, 1836—1838. XT Voll. 8vo) on the Catholicity of the Church, 6; on Baptism profitably received, 9; on the types of the visible Church, 10; the ark, 11; St. Peter’s sheet, 11; field of wheat and tares, 12; threshing floor, 12; net, 13; on the body and " 350 INDEX soul of the Church, 14; difference between a visible and invisible Church, 16. 47. 281; on the salva- tion of man before the Incarnation, 34; on the invisible Church, 16; on the prophecies respecting the Church, 23; on the oneness of the Chureh, 29; analogy between Adam and Eye and Christ and the Church, 31; re- mission of sins only in the Church, 33; visible Church may be more or less clear at different times, 37 ; coun- cils may err, 38; on the latter days, 39; on heresy and schism, 42; on the Church as Virgo et Mater, 43: on difference.of heresy and schism, 44; heretics and schismaties, how far in the Church, 47, 48; on the Jews as the librarii of the Christians, 49 ; on the Church as a witness of Holy Writ, 50—52. 55; on the Scripture proving the Church, 54: on canonical books, 50; on the Hebrew and Greek originals, on versions, 57; on human teaching, 63, 64; on authorized teachers, 65; on the authority of the doctors of the Church, 67; on | the paramount authority of Scripture, 67, 68.71. 204: on the good educed from the evil of heresy, 70; on the sacraments, 74142; on Christians as Priests, 78; on a due mission, 81 ; on Episcopacy, 84; whatever is held by the whole Church is Apostolical, 92, 93; on the heterodoxy of Aerius, 98; on regeneration, 129, 130; on benediction and intercession, 138; on the angels of Churches, 95; on Church discipline, 123, 124; on the ower of absolution in the Church, 195 the Church the house of disci- pline, 132; on efficacy of public ac 143; on Apostolic succession, 08; on unworthy ministers, but valid ministrations, 215; on the transfer of Donatist endowments, 213; on true Catholicity, 236; on St. Paul's pri- macy, 239; on Peter's, ix typo unice ecclesia, 240,243; on St. Peter’s name, 241; the keys were given to all the Apostles, who were ail Pastors, 119, 120. 243. 245; on the true Head of the Church, 256; on the source of all power, 266—268; its uses, 266; totus mundus Ecclesia, 280; on the graces of the Church in schis- matical congregations, 281—284. 287 ; on true charity, and its opposites, II. 286, 287; on religious rights, power, and duty of Princes, 293, 294: on obedience to rubrics, 334 AUGUSTINI CANTUARIENSIS Vita, 172 Bacon, Lord, (Works, Lond. 1778. V Voll. 4to) the Church the keeper of ty 48; on mixtures in re- é Bancrorr, Archbp. (Survey of the Pre- tended Holy Discipline, Lond. 1593. Dangerous Positions, ὅς. under Pre- tence of Reformation, Lond. 5. A.) on the identity of Popish and Puritan principles of polity against sovereigns, 302; on Lay Elders, 305 Bartow, Bp. (Remains, Lond. 1693. Cases of Conscience, Lond. 1692. Pope- ry dangerous to Protestant Kings, Lond. 1679) 252: on the necessity ofa lawful call to the ministry, 80; on Toleration, 276 Barns, J., Catholico-Romano Pacificus, on the Jus Cyprium of England, 166 Baronivus, Cardinal, on necessity of submission to the Pope, 224, 225 Barrow, Dr. Isaac, ( Works, Lond. 1683. IV Voll. folio) on the Visible Church, 22; on salvability of heathen, 34; on authorized preaching, and obe- dience to our spiritual guides, 64; on the apostolic institution, and uni- versality of episcopacy, 99: on dio- cesan episcopacy, ἴ06. on modifica- tions in the precedence and extent of patriarchates, 116; on the power of the keys, 121; on right of investiture, 170; on changes in the Oath of Ro- man Catholic Bishops to the Pope, 179; on the novelties of the Trent Creed, 201; on St. Peter's primacy, 238. 244; on Councils, 238; on the parity of Bishops, 250; on calling and presidency of Church synods, 315: and ratification, 315. 317; on obe- dience to rubrics, 333; cumulative ae of civil sanction of Church laws, 33 Basi, St. (Opera, Paris, 1618. 111 Voll. folio) on the Sacraments, 74; on St. Peter’s commission, 243 | Baxrer, Richard, on priestly interces- sion, 138 Bepa, Ven., on the British Episcopate, 157 ; on the erection of sees in ng- land, 172; on St. Gregory, St. Au- gustine of Canterbury, King Ethelbert, and Queen Bertha, 163—171, passim INDEX II. 351 BeLiARMIN, Cardinal, on the secular claims of the Papacy, 223; on its sp7- ritual claims, 236.254; on the depo- sition of heretical Princes, 252; on the Pope’s superiority to Councils, 254 Brntiey, Richard, D.D. (Works, ed. Dyce, Lond. 1838. 111 Voll. 8vo) on versions of Scripture, 58; on Bishops, successors of the Apostles, and on the difference of episcopi and presbyteri, 90, 91 Bernarp, St. (ed. Benedict. VI Voll. Paris, 1839) on the supremacy of Kings over ecclesiastical persons, and the obedience due from the latter, 117 Brveriwce, Bp. (Sermons, Oxford, 1842. On XXXLX Articles, Orford, 1840. JZ Voll. 8vo) on the word Church, 1; the Church the keeper of Holy Writ, 49; on diocesan episcopacy, 106; on the independence of the British Church, 153; on the Canon de Con- cionatoribus, 205; on apostolic suc- cession, 208; how St. Peter was at Rome, 287; on the royal supremacy, 21; on general Councils, 315 Beza, Theodore, on episcopacy, 104 Birson, Bp. (Perpetual Government of Christ's Church, Oxford, 1842. On Christian Suljection, Lond. 1586) on the words Clergy, Laity, and Priest, 76; on the grace given by the Holy Spirit in ordination, 82; on episcopacy, 94. 97; on the priesthood of the patriarchal dispensation, 136; on the mission of St. Augustine, 171; on resistance to encroachments of Bishops of Rome, 247; on parity of Bishops, 250; the Pope has no jurisdiction in England, 188; nor out of his own diocese, 250; nor over other Bishops, 250; the duty and power of Kings not limited to temporals, 291. 295; on the duty of ecclesiastics to their sovereign, 299; on the source of episcopal powers, 320; eaterior and interior, 322. 327 ; on the limits of the royal supremacy, 300, 527, 328 BinGuam, Rev. J. (Orig. Eccl. Lond. 1834. VIZ Vols. 8vo0) on apocryphal books, 55; on the three Orders, 84; on priests, 85; on priestly interces- sion, 137; on functions of Bishops, 100; on modification of sees, 115; on Church assemblies, 144; on Bishops as centres of unity, 145; on the number of Bi- shops in England, 154; on the Bishop of Rome’s jurisdiction, 159; on the Jus Cyprium of England, and on the British episcopacy, 165; on iteration of Baptism, 233; on the true means of Church unity, 258 Bossuer, Bp. (History of the Variations of Protestant Churches, English Trans- lution, Dublin, 1829. IT Voll. 8vo) 195; his testimony to the Apostolic ee of the Church of England, 210 BLomFIELD, Bp., on Πρέσβυς, 85; on Πέτρος and Πέτρα. 241 BRAMHALL, Archbp. (Works, Oxford, 1842—1844) on the difference be- tween particular Churches and the Universal one, 37; on schism, 43; on the British Church, 154; on St, Austin’s mission, 163—166. 171. 176; on the Pallium, 177; on the inaliena- bleness of the Regale, 186; on the Trent Creed, 201; on Apostolic Suc- cession, 208, 209; on the title of Uni- versal Bishop, 17€; on the transfer of patriarchates, 116. 182. 185; on Henry VIiIIth’s character as affecting that of the Reformation, 188; on the oath of Roman Catholic Bishops to the Pope, 179; on the Reformation, 193; on the primitive character and continuity of the Church of England, 193; how Rome a frue Church, 195 ; on English ordinations, 211 ; on the Christian sacrifice, 217; the Church of England not liable to the charge of schism, 218; origin of Ro- man Catholic recusuncy in England, 219; on Roman errors and novelties, 218; on the parity of the Apostles, 237; on the Pope’s conduct toward the Apostles and their successors, and to councils, 255; on the Trent Creed, 258; on Church and State, two names forone community, 279; on the royal supremacy, and on the title Head of the Chnrch, 303; on the source of episcopal powers, 322 Bea sore, E., on British episcopacy, 53 Brown, Fasciculus Rerum Expetenda- rum, 166 Browne, Thomas, B.D., on English Orders, 209 Buppxus (Isagoge, Lips. 1727. 177 Voll. 4to) on the forged deeretals, 220; on Erastianism, 306 352 Butt, Bp. ( Works, Oxford, 1827. VI Voll, 8vo) on the Catholic Church, 6; no one visible head of the Church, 8; on the authority of the Primi- tive Church as a standard for other Churches, 59; the Church of Jern- salem the mother of all Churches, 156; on the true foundation and con- tinuity of the Church of England, 193; the orthodoxy of the Church of Eng- land acknowledged by Popes and Ro- manists generally ἴῃ practice, 220; on the Nag’s Head fable, 209; on Ro- man errors and corruptions, 193; on the parity of the Apostles, 238 Butts, Papal, 229 Burxg, Rt. Hon. E. (Lond. 1826, 1827, XVI Voll. 8v0) on the Protestantism of the Church of England, 197; on Church and State, two names Sor one thing, 261; on the religious duties of a State, 263; on the cause of a State, 264; on Bishops as Peers of Parlia- oo 278; on Church and State 8 Burrmann, P. ( Lexilogus, Lond. 1836) on διάκονος, 85 CaBassutius (Notitia Conciliorum Sancte Ecclesia, Lovani, 1776) on lawful Ordination, 102; on diocesan episcopacy, 108 Catyin, John, on sires ced 103, 104; Rome a true Church, 196 CANNING, Rt. Hon. G., Letter of Attor- ney and Solicitor General to, on the statute of Premunire, 189 Canonicum Jus Romanum (Corpus, J.C. L. Richter, Lipsie, 1839.) [See eee 1.1 claims of Papacy, 222— 225 Canons of the Church of England, of 1603 (see Cardwell, and Index I.) ; Rome a Church, 196; on Preaching, 205; on abuse not taking away /aw- Sul use, 207 ; the Church of England not liable to a charge of schism, 218; their regard for antiquity, 199; on Pa supremacy, 298. 303; on right of calling Councils, 315,316; on the Eng- lish Convocation, 316; on an erring conscience to be reformed, 272 CarpWELL, E., D.D.(Synodalia, from 1547 to 1717, Oxford. IT Voll, 1842) (see Canons) Careron, Bp.,on the divine institu- tion of episcopacy, 101; on episcopal INDEX II. ordination, 101; on the royal supre- macy, 289 Casauzon, Isaac, (Exercit. in Baronii Annales, Genev. 1654. Epistole, Rater. 1709, folio) on the word Church, 1; on its Catholicity, 7; on the only way of Salvation, 35; is Rome atrue Church, 195; on episcopacy, 152; on the English Reformation, 190— 192. 200; on Anglican Orders, 209 ; on the scriptural and apostolical cha- racter of the English Church, 209, 219; vindication from the charge of schism, 219; on Church unity and communion, 233. 236; on the treatment of the Church of England by Rome, 234; on Πέτρα and Πέ- Tpos, 241; on St. Peter's confession, 244; on Church and State, two names for one thing, 260; on the royal su- remacy, 289; the duty and power of rinces not restricted to tem rals, 291. 296; on Church synods, 317 Carecuism of King Edward VL., 1553, 4 Discipline as a note of the Church, 4 CaTECHISMUS RoMANUS, on iteration of baptism, 233 Cuarvxs L, King, ( Works, Lond. 1687, Solio) on the Church as an interpreter of Holy Writ, 59; on the functions of Bishops, 101; on Common Prayer, 148; on the royal supremacy, 317 CHILLINGWoRTH, W. (Works, Lond. 1674, folio) on episcopacy, 100 3on the power of absolution, 3] Curysostom, St. (ed. Savil. Etone, 1612, 1613. VIII Voll. folio) on translations of Scripture, 51; on the word κλῆρος. 76; on the three Orders, 79; on episcopal ordination, 100; on the supremacy of Kings over spiritual persons, 117. 266; on Church disci- pline, 122, 123; on the power of the keys, 128 ; on Christianity in Britain, 151; on sacerdotal intercession and benediction, 139; on efficacy of public prayer, 146 ; on wheat and tares, 284. CuurTon, Rey. Edward, History of Early English Church, 151 CLARENDON, Lord, on the inalienability of regalia, 186; on the limits of the royal supremacy, 328 CLEMENS Romanus S. (Patres A posto- lici, ed. Jacobson, Oxon. 1838. IT Voll. 8vo) on the difference of Clergy and Laity, 76; on the three Orders, 84; INDEX II. 3538 on apostolic ordination, 82; on the apostleship of Christ, and on the three Orders, 82, Cremens Alexandrinus 8. (ed. Lips. 1831. WITT Voll. 8vo0) on the one- ness of the Church, 30 Coxe, Lord Chief Justice, on practice as the interpreter of daw, 97 ; on im- punity, 122; on the acts of the Re- formation, 184; on the political uses of religion, 264; on the authority of the canons, 317 CoLBeErT, Bp., on English ordinations, 210 Comprr, Thomas, D.D. (Companion to the Temple, Oxford, 1841. VIT Vols. 8vo) on confirmation, 141 Common PrayYER, Book of (see Index. ); Church figured by the ark, 10; office of baptism, 130; ordinal, 79; on necessity of the Priesthood, 79; and its qualification, 79. 326, 327; on the three Orders, 86; on lawful ordina- tion, 102. 209; gift of the Holy Spirit in, 119; on Church discipline, 122; on regeneration, 130; its regard for antiquity, 198, 199; on the reli- gious duties of Kings, 303 (see Arti- cles); on making Bishops, 320; on rites and ceremonies, 332. 334; abso- lution, 119 ; commination, 122; con- firmation, 130; preface to, 332; on ceremonies, 334 CorRoNATION Office, 309 Costin, Bp. (Scholastic History of the Canon of Holy Scripture, Lond. 1672) on the Canon of Scripture, 49; on the Canon de Concionatoribus, 205 CorELERIUS on sacerdotal interces- sion, 138 Councits [see Index I.) (ed. Labbe, Paris, 1641, 1672. XVII Voll. folio) of Laodicea on Canon of SS., 50; Nicene on the three Orders, 86; on the Roman patriarchate, 157; Chalcedon on Episcopacy,98 ; Antioch and others on diocesan episcopacy, 106—116, passim ; on the difference of Bishops and Presbyters, 98. 102; of Nice, 197; Arles, 152. 159; Sar- dica, 152. 160; of Ephesus on Metro- politan Jurisdiction, 164; on profes- sions of faith, 218; of Mayence, &c., 226; of Constantinople, 197 , Courayer, P. F. Le, on English ordi- nations, 209 CourTENAy, Archbp., on the regalia of | England, 184 CRAKANTHORPE, Richard, D.D. (De- Sensio Ecclesia Anglicane, Lond.1625) the Church has no one visible head, 18; on councils, 38; on heretics and schismatics, how far in the Church, 47 ; on patriarchs, metropolitans, and diocesans, 110—113; on the limits of the Roman jurisdiction, 110; on the British Church, 151; on the azterio- rity of the English Church to that of Rome, 154; on the Sardican canons, 161; on novelties and cor- ruptions of Rome, 226 ; on the Pope’s authority, 250 Cranmer, Archbp. (Works, edited by Rev. H. Jenkyns, Oxford, 1833. IV Voll. 8vo. Catechism set forth by him in 1548, ed. Oxford, 1829) on the Catholic Church, 6; on the visible Church, 15; on the power of the keys, 124; on Church discipline, 124; on absolution, 130 CusaNnus, Cardinal, no one visible head of the Church, 18; on the zmperial Ce papal) right of convening synods, 315 Cyprian, St. (ed. Fell. Amst. 1691) on the unity of the Church, 4; its disci- pline, 4; on the types of the visible Church, 13, 14; salvation only in the Church, 27. 33; on the oneness of the Church, 30; on graces of the Church, 32; onschism and heresy, 44; on’the necessity of a lawful call to the minis- try, 80; on Bishops the successors of the Apostles, 87; one Bishop only in a city, 109; on Peter as a figure of the Church, 119; on Church disci- pline, 122; on absolution, 126; on St. Peter as the figure of the Apostles, 240; on the necessity of episcopacy to a Church, 145, 146; on Bishops as centres of unity, 145; on apostolic succession, 208; on the equality of the Apostles, 238. 243; and of Bi- shops as such, 249; on the title Episcopus Episcoporum, 247; against appeal to Rome, 249 CyriL, St., of Jerusalem, (ed. Benedict. Venet. 1763, folio) on the ecatholicity of the Church, 6; on canonical and apocryphal] books, 50; on the glory of the Church, both in persecution and peace, 297 DEcLARATION of English laity, A.p. 1833; on the consecration of the State 354 by the public maintenance of the Church, 279 De Marca, Archbp. (De Concordié Sacerdotii_et Imperii, Venet. 1770. Libri VIII. quibus accesserunt Dis. sertationes Ecclesiastice) on the word Clergy, 76; on diocesan episco 106; on appeals to Rome, 161, 163: on the pallium, 177; on the oath of “or Catholic Bishops to the Pope, 7 Dupin (Dissertationes Ecclesiastice) on diocesan episcopacy, 107; on the limits of the Roman patriarchate, 158; on | appeals to Rome, 162; on the pal- lium, 177 EDWARD THE ConFEssor, Laws of, 185 Expon, Lord Chancellor, on Church and State, 278 ELizaBETH, Queen, on the royal supre- macy, 311 LMSLEY, Peter, D.D. on ἹΤέτρος and Πέτρα, 241 Epipxantus on Bishops successors of the Apostles, 87: Aerius, 98 Erskine, Cardinal, on the Bulla in Οωπᾶ Domini, 229 Evsestivs (/ist. Eccles. ed. Oxon. 1843. IV. Voll. 800) on episcopacy, 94 ; on the cases of Popes Anicetus and Victor, 24 Evruymuivs ZyG¢aBENvs, 239 Evans, Rev. Robert Wilson, on St. Polycarp and Anicetus, 168 Fierp, Richard, D.D. (On the Church, Oxf. 1655, folio) on the Church asa Witness of Scripture, 54 Firmiiian, S., on the oneness of the Church, 30; on the remission of sins, 119; to Pope Stephanus, 235 Frixrury, Abbé, (Descours sur ? Histoire Ecclésiastique, Nismes, 1785. His- toire Ecclesiastique, Bruxelles, 1713. XXXVI Tomes, 12mo) on ancient limits of Roman Patriarchate, 158. 182; on the forged decretals, on the bull in Cena Domini, 229 FuLceEnrtius on the Church as a thresh- ing-floor, 11 Garpiner, Bp., on the Regale, 189. 282 Geruarn, Jo. (Loci Theologici, Genev, 1639. X Voll. folio) on the nature and limits of Jurisdiction, civil and acy, | on the heresy of | 220; | INDEX II. ecclesiastical, 21; on the Church as Witness and interpreter of Scripture, 54—56. 60: on errors of Popes, 254; on the inalienability of regalia, 186; on the connexion of schools with the Chureh, 277 ΟἾΒΒΟΝ, Edward, on episcopacy, 93 Ginson, Bp. (Codex Juris Eccles. Angli- can. Oxf: 1761; see Acts of Parlia- ment) on cathedrals, 146: on the pallium, 177; on the Oath of Roman Catholic Bishops to the Pope, 179, 253; as Peers in Parliament, 278: on the Royal Supremacy, 303. 311: on source of Episcopal powers, 322 ; on right of placing Bishops, 323: on Premunire, 324; on the cognizance of aaicrs 329; on censures of heresy, Gipas on the planting of Christianity into England, 151 GILFRm on Augustin’s arrival in Eng- land, 153 GILLESPIE on Erastianism, 307 Graze, J. Ernest, on the Eucharistic sacrifice, 216 Greeorius Manus, S. (ed. Bened. Paris, 1705. IV Voll. folio) on the authority of the first four general coun- cils, 164; on his own elevation to the see of Rome, 170; on the royal su- premacy and the right of investiture and ecclesiastical supremacy of the emperor, 170; on English sees, 172: on King Ethelbert’s pious munifi- cence, 175; against image-worship, 227; on the sufficiency of Scripture. 227; on one visible Head of the Church, 247, 248. 254 Grotius (Opera, Lond. 1679, III Voll. Solio) on episcopacy, 97. 104, 105; on the English Reformation as compared with others, 190,191: on the English Canon de Concionatoribus, 206; on the Eucharistic sacrifice, 216: on the spiritual power and duty of Christian princes, 296 Hammonp, Henry, D.D. ( Works, Lond. 1684. IV Voll. folio) on confirmation, 141; on priests as Angeli Ecclesia, 143; on sacerdotal intercession, 144: on the efficacy of public prayer, 144 —146; on St. Augustine’s mission, 166; on modification of patriarchates, 185; on equality of Apostles, 245: on the pallium, 177; on the pa- triarchate of England, 185; on the INDEX inalienability of regalia, 186; on the primitive and Scriptural foundation and character of the Church of Eng- land, 190; on the title of Universal Bishop, 245; on Erastianism, 307 ; on English Church government, 307 Harsnet, Bp., on the true principles of the English Reformation, 193 Herbert, George, on episcopal and sacerdotal benediction, 140 ee on religious acts of Kings, ‘ Hey, John, D.D. (On the XXXIX Articles, Cambridge, 1841. 11 Voll. 8vo) Rome a Church, 196 Hominies (appointed to be read in Churches in the time of Queen Eli- zabeth, ed. Oxf: 1822) on discipline, a note of a Church, 118; on their re- yard for antiquity, 199; on the secu- ar claims of Papacy, 24 « on absolu- tion, 1380; on the qualifications of a good oath, 180 Hooxer, Richard, (Works, edited by Rev. John Keble, Oxf. 1836. IV Voll. 8vo) on the word Church, 1; the Church a permanent Society, 3; on Baptism the door of the Church, 8; on Baptism profitably received, 9; on the Invisible Church, 16; differ- ence between, and Visible, 16. 25. 282, 283; on the means of Church unity, 21; on the definitions of the term Church, 24, 25; on salvation only in the Church, 27; Councils may err, 39; on catechizing, 61; on human teaching, 60; England must reform though Rome would not, 73; on the nature of the sacraments, 9; on the visible Church, 16. 25. 282 ; has no one visible head, 18; on the ark as a type of the Chureh, 27; on the ne- cessity of submission, in ‘controverted points, to the decisions of the Church, 39; on heretics and schismatics, how far in the Church, 46. 47. 203 ; on the Church as a witness of Scrip- ture, 53; on preaching, 61; on the sacraments, 75; on the necessity of clergy, 79; on the authority of the priesthood, 82; whence derived, 82, 320; grace in ordination, 83 ; on epis- copacy, 93. 97, 98; on diocesan epis- copacy, 106; on the power of absolu- tion, 120. 131133 ; on sacerdotal in- tercession and benediction, 134. 138. 141; on confirmation, 141; on set forms of Common Prayer, 147, 148; 11. 355 on the Church as a sea, 150; on the Reformation, 193; in what sense Rome a true Church, 195. 217, 227 on the sufficiency of "Scripture, 504: on reordination. 211.215; abusus ron tollit usum, 207; vindication of Eng- lish Church from charge of schism, 218; on consecration of Churches, 213; the Pope’s usurped jurisdiction, 247, 248 ; on the Church and State, two names for one thing, 260; on the civil fruits of true religion 263; on the religious duty and true felicity of kings, 264. 288; on the source and channel of all power, 269; on tite: remedy for an erring conscience, 272; on Bishops as Peers of Parliament, 278; on schis- matical teaching, 287; on the royal supremacy, 311; on the Headship of Christ, how distinct from that of kings, 289; their duty not restricted to bodily things, 291; the duty of the clergy to their sovercign, 299; on the Puritan principle of polity iden- tified with the Popish, 302; on the sacred character of Bagliak sovereigns, 309; on the nature and limits of the Royal Supremacy, 301. 314; on the right of placing Bishops, 319, 320. 324; on the duty and authority of the Church in ordering rites, 331, 334 ; on obedience to it, 336 Horn, Dr., 231 Horne, Bp., on Schism, 45 HuGues on Erastianism, 307 Hue6o on the Sacraments, 75 Ignatius, St. (Patres Apostolici, ed. Jacobson, Oxon. 1838. IT Voll. &vo) on Episcopacy, 8. 86; on sin of schism, 45; the three orders of ministers neces- sary toa Church, 152. 164; on Church assemblies, 146 ; on sacramental grace dispensed only through the Church, 33 Inert, John, D.D., origin of English Church, 156 IrENzUS, St. (ed. Grabe, Oxon. 1702. folio) on the unity of the Church, 4 its Catholicity, 6; on divine truth, grace, and salvation, dispensed only through the Church, 26, 27. 33; the true faith only in the Church, 33; on the sins of heresy and schism, the one the sin of Nadab and Abihu, the other that of Korah, 45; on lawful teach- ers and interpretation of Scripture, 62; on the necessity of Apostolic 356 Succession, 62. 208; on the indirect use of power ill-employed, 266; on the source of all power, 269; on variety of rites, 336 JAmEs I., King, on the Scriptural, pri- mitive, and Catholic character of the Church of England, 200; non fugimus, sed fugamur, 230 JEROME, St. (Victorii, Paris, 1643, AT Voll. folio) on the Catholic Church and on that of Rome, 7; on the types of the visible Church, 10; on errors in the Church, 10; on Scripture para- mount to Councils, 39; on the suf- ficiency of Scripture, 203; on the one altar, that of the Church, 30. 269: on the latter days, 38: Eve figure of the Church, 31; on heresy, 41; on schism, 43; heretics how far in Church, 47; on the integrity of the text of the Old Testament,49: on the Hebrew and Greek originals, 57 ; on ecclesias- tical books, 57; on the word clergy, 76; on the three orders of ministers, 84; on the Bishops successors of the Apostles, 87. 92—95; his language concerning episcopacy, 91—93: on the angels of the Churches, 123; on repentance, 180: on laying on of hands in confirmation and ordination, and reception of penitents, 141; on the necessity of priests to a Chureh, 216; on the proper conditions of an oath, 180: on the equality of the Apostles, 243: and of Bisho s, 249. on Arianism, 194 ; on Church exten. sion, 277 ; on the observance of Church customs, 339 JEWELL, Bp., on absolution, 130; on the English Reformation, 230: non tum discessimus quam ejecti sumus, 228; on the primitive character of the English Church, 193, 231 JOHNSON (Codex Canonum, in the Cler- gyman’s Vade Mecum, Lond. 1709. I Voll. 12mo) on the diocesan epi- scopacy, 106 JUSTINIAN, his care for religion, 296 ΚΈΒΙΕ, Rey. John, on lay elders and Erastianism, 305 KETTLEWELL, Rev. John,(On the Creed, Lond. 1713) on the Church the depo- sitory of grace, 33 LAcTANTIUS on religious toleration, 275 INDEX II. Lavp, Archbp., (Sermons, ed. London, 1651. Conference with Fisher [ Pier- sey] the Jesuit, ed. Cardwell, Oxford, ] Remains, Lond. 1700, folio) the Church has no one visible head, 18; on councils, 38: is to be obeyed, 41; on the genuineness of Scripture, 51; on the Church as a witness of Scripture, 53. 55; on Scripture the one infallible Judge, 72: on the course to be taken when General coun- cils cannot be had, 73; England must reform though Rome PS not, 73; on episcopacy, 97; on the patriarchate of England, 159; on the English Re- formation, 192; in what sense Romea true Church, 194; on the Protest- antism of the Church of England, 197; on the novelties of the Trent creed, 201; on the uncatholie and illegal character of the Trent council, 201; on the Christian sacrifice in the Chureh of England,216: on spiri- tual and secular claims of the Pa- pacy, 224; on the lawfulness of the Reformation, 227: the Reformation not schismatical, 229: on the Pope’s usurped jurisdiction, 248. 250; the Bishop of Rome not a centre of unity, but a cause of disunion, 254; on Church and State, two names for one thing, 260; on the fruits of Church unity, 262; on the necessity of σπουδὴ to secure it, 270; upon Bishops as Peers of Parliament, 278; on Church and State, 278; on the sacredness of Princes, 309; on the office of Bishops, whence derived ; and its exercise, how regulated, 300 Law, Rev. William, on benediction, intercession, and absolution, 146 ; on sincerity, 271 Lro Macnus, 5. (ed. Lugd. 1700. IT Voll. folio) on prayers for heathen, 36; Presbyters cannot ordain, 101; on the equality of the Apostles, 244; on the religious duties of kings, 296, 297 Lestiz, Rev. Charles, (Case stated be- tween Rome and England, Lond. 1714) the Church has no one visible head, 18; on necessary qualifications for the priesthood, 80; on the Bull ἐπ Cena Domini, 229; on the true means of unity, 257 Linearp, Dr., on the Nag’s Head fable, 210 INDEX II. Lowru, Rey. William, on the prophe- cies respecting the Church, 23 Luruer, Martin, Rome, how a true Church, 196; traces his own minis- terial commission through Rome, Ὁ Φ ΜΆΘΕΕ, Archbp., on the oath of Ro- man Catholic Bishops to the Pope, 252; on iteration of Baptism, 234 Mannine, Henry E., Archdeacon, on the unity of the Church, 6 Mason, Francis (Vindicie Ecclesie Anglicane, Lond. 1625), on absolu- tion dispositive, declaratory, and autho- ritative, 125. 127. 130; on Augus- tine’s mission, 167. 172. 176; on modification of patriarchates, 185; on the rights of the British Church, 168; on Apostolic succession in the Church of England, 209; on rites and ceremonies, 331. 336 MELANCHTHON on episcopacy, 103 Monracuve, Bp., on absolution, 131 NEALE, Daniel, ( History ofthe Puritans, Lond. 1837. IIT Voll. 8vo) on Rome a _true Church, 196; on the Nag’s Head fable, 210; on the number of clergy conforming at the Reformation, 214 NEcEsSSARY doctrine, &c., (A. Ὁ. 1543) on the Catholic Church, 7 Norris, Rey. J., on acts of toleration, 46 O'Connor, Dr., on the oath of Roman Catholic Bishops, 179 ee owtus on the royal supremacy, 304 Opratus, Κ΄... (de Schismate Donatist- arum, Oberthur, Wiceberg, 1789— 1791. ZI Voll. 8vo) his appeal to Scripture, 71; on the three Orders of ministers, 78. 84; on the supremacy of Kings, 117 ORIGEN on the canon of Scripture, 5]; on Christianity in Britain, 15; on St. Peter’s primacy, 240 OVERALL, Bp. (Convocation Book con- cerning the Government of God’s Ca- tholie Church, and the Kingdoms of the whole World, Lond. 1690) the Church has no one visible Head, 18; on government, civil and ecclesiastical, 19; on national Churches, 19, 21; on the ecclesiastical supremacy of 357 Christian princes, 21; on the source of power, 19 PactAn, S., on the word Catholic, 7 Paumer, Rev. William, (On the Chureh, Lond. 1839. IT Voll. 8vo) on the unity of the Church, 5; on the limits of the Roman patriarchate, 159; on English ordinations, 210; on the com- mencement of recusancy in England, 220; on Romish usurpations, 220; on the royal supremacy, 289 PANctRo_t, Notitia, on dioceses, 106 Paris, Matthew, on king Rufus and Anselm, 181 PARLIAMENT (see Acfs) PARLIAMENTARY Report (on Regula- tion of Roman Catholic Subjects in Foreign States, 1816) 229, 315 Parrick, Bp., on schismatical Acts of Rome, 257 Prarson, Bp., (Opera Postuma, Lond. 1688. Vindicie Epistolarum Ignatii, Cantab. 1672. On the Creed, fol. Lond. 1715, Minor Theological Works, edited by Edward Churton, M.A. IT Voil. Oaford, 1844) on the word Church, 1; on the word Ecclesia, 2; on the definition of a Church, 3; on the term Catholic, 5; on baptism, the entrance of the Church, 9; on the Chureh visible and invisible, 17; on salvation only in the Church, 28—30; Bishops alone can ordain, 102; on ecclesiastical books, 57 ; on the spiri- tual grace given in ordination, 83; on deacons, 87; on episcopacy, 93. 102; on sacerdotal intercession and bene- diction, 137; on the Apostolic Suc- cession, 208; on resistance to Papal encroachments, 247 PrERcEVAL, Hon. and Rey. Arthur, on English ordinations, 209 PHELAN and O’SuLLIVAN, (Digest of Evidence on the State of Ireland, 1824, 1825, Lond. 1826. IT Voll. 8vo) on oath of Roman Catholic Bishops to the Pope, 179. 252 PLATON, Archbp., on the royal supre- macy, 304 PonriricaL, Roman, oath of Roman Bishops, 229; on the dependence of all Bishops on the Pope, 255 Port, Joseph Holden, M.A., Arch- deacon, (Fights of Sovereignty in Chris- tian States Defended, Lond. 1821,) 289; on different theories of Church government in reference to the State, 307, 308 358 Porrrr, Archbp. (On Church Govern- ment, London, 1724, 8vo) on the Ca- tholic Church, 6; on authorized teach- ing, 65; on the case of Ischyras, 102; on sacerdotal intercession and bene- diction, 134 PripEaux, Humphrey, Dean, on the Sri and form of English orders, Prosper, Aquitanus S., (Opera, ed. Venet. 1782. 171] Voll. 4to) benedic- tion only in the Church, 33; on vir- ginitas anime, 43 PutieEr, Timothy, D.D., on sacerdotal intercession and benediction, 141, 142 PirreErR, Professor, on the forged de- cretals, 220 QUESNEL on limits of Roman patri- archate, 158; on appeals to Rome, 161 Ratvorps, John, D.D., on authorized preaching, 66; on the authority of the Scribes and Pharisees, 66; on St. Peter’s confession and primacy, 240; on Church unity, and the means of maintaining it, 257 RerormatTio LeGum Eccrezs. on the Hebrew and Greek originals, 58 Rourtu, Martin Joseph, D.D., ( Reliquie Sacre, Oxon. 1814—1818. IV Voll. 8ro. Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Opuscula, Oxon. 1832. IT Voll. 8vo) on the canon of Scripture, 50; on the title Episcopus Episcoporum, 247 ; on the sufficiency of Scripture, 203; on peaanve to Papal encroachments, 47 RuFFINus on the canon of Scripture and apocryphal books, 52. 55; on the “ee of the Roman patriarchate, 5 RvuTHERFORD on Erastianism, 307 SANDERSON, Bp., (Sermons. Lond. 1674, Solio. Prelectiones VII de Juramenti Obligatione, Lond. 1710. De Obliga- tione Conscientia, Lond. 1710. Epis- copacy not prejudicial to Regal Power, Lond. 1673) on the authority of the universal Church, 59; on episcopacy, 96; on unlawful oaths, 181; how Rome a true Church, 195; on the remedy for an erring conscience, 272; on the Source of Power, 267; on the sovereign the efficacious cause of law, 300 ; on the identity of Popish and Puritanical principles of polity, INDEX II. 08 ; on the source of episcopal powers, Saravi, Hadrian, D.D., on the angels of Churches, 95; on the English Re- formation, 190. 214; on Church and State, two names for one thing, 260; — on royal supremacy, 292 ScuLTetus, on the Patriarchal Priest- hood, 136 Soave, Pietro, (Historia del Concilio Tridentino; sine loci noté, 1629) on the original text of Scripture, 58; on Paul ΤΌΣ conduct to Queen Elizabeth, Sparrow, Bp., on absolution, 131 ΞΡΕΙΜΑΝ, Sir H., on Angustine’s Mis- sion, 167 STILLINGFLEET, Bp., (Zccles. Cases, Lond. 1702—1704. JI Voll. 8vo. Origines Britannice, Lond. 1837) on the Episcopatus unus cujus a singulis Episcopis zz solidam pars tenetur, 19 ; on the British Church, 171; on the Sardican decrees, 16); on protests against Papal usurpations, 183 ; on the royal supremacy, 311 Srreitwo tr (Libri Symbolici Ecclesie Catholice, Gott. 1831. IT Tomi, 8x0) on Lawful Ordinations, 102; on the Bull iz Cena Domini, 229 Suicerus (Thesaurus Eccles. ed. Amst. 1682. IZ Voll. folio) on the word Diecesis, 160 Taytor, Bp. Jer., (Works, edited Bp. Heber, Lond. 1828. XV Vol 8vo) on the visible Church, 15; on the Church as the Spouse of Christ, 23; on salvation ouly in the Church, 29 ; on benediction, 139: on confirmation, 141; on set forms of public prayer, 148; on the cause of the prosperity of heathen states, 263; on the similarity of Popish and Puritan principles, 302 — —305 TerRTULLIAN (Rigaltii, Paris, 1641, folio) on the unity of the Church, 4: on Episcopacy, 8; on the Rule of Faith, 42. 97. 203; on the Canonical Scriptures, 5] ; on lawful teachers, 62; on the paramount authority οὗ Scripture, 67; on Bishops the suc- cessors of the Apostles, 87; on the power of the Keys, 122; on heresy, 41; on the authority of the ἘΞ mitive apostolical Churches, 5 on the ministers of the Sacraments, 78; on the supremacy of Kings, 117; INDEX II. on apostolic succession, 150. 208; on Christianity in England, 151 ; on the sufficiency of Scripture, 205; on the parity of the Apostles, 239; on Church unity, 2506; on the source of royal power, 269; on religious toleration, 275; on scandal, 342 TuHEopoRET (ed, Schulze, Hale, 1769, V Voll. 8vo) on Bishops, successors and representatives of the Apostles, 89; on the ev of schism, though good may indirectly come out of the evil, 287 THEOPHILUS, Ant. 8., on the Church compared to a sea, 149 TueEopHytact (ed. Benedict. Venet. 1754. IV Voll. folio) on the Catholic Church, 7; no one visible head, 17; on the necessity of a due mission for the ministry, 81; on the universal dominion of Christ, 267; on giving scandal, 342 Townson, T., D.D., on the Pope’s coronation, 224 TRANSLATORS, English, of the Bible, on the religious duty of Princes, 288 TUNSTALL, ek on the primitive and Catholic character of the Church of England, 231—233 TwisDEN, Sir Roger, (Historical Vindi- cation of the Church of England in point of Schism, as it stands separated from the Roman, Lond. 1675) on origin of Church of England, 156; on the English Patriarchate, 174; on the English Reformation, 236 ; on the pallium, 177, 178; on the independence of the English Church, 182; on appeals to Rome, 183; on the religious acts of English Kings, 296 a UsHer, Archbp., on diocesan episco- pacy, 106 VarLckENakr, L. C., on IpéoBus, 85 Van ΕΒΡῈΝ (Jus Eeclesiasticum Uni- versum, Colonie Agripp. 1748, folio) on the oath to the Pope, 179; on the right of placing Bishops, 324 Van MitpeEr?, Bp., on the Christian sacrifice, 217 THE 359 Vossius on Church and state, 260; on the word Ceremonia, 330 Wakg, Archbp., on the use of Christian antiquity, 68; on the Reformation in England, 192 W ALDENSIs on the indefectibility of the Universal Church, 37 Watsu, Father, on the oath of Roman Catholic Bishops to the Pope, 179 WATERLAND, Daniel, D.D. (Works, edited by Bp. Van Mildert, Oxford, 1823. XT Voll. 8vo) on regeneration 9. 130; on use and value of Christian antiquity, 69, 70; on baptismal rege- neration, 130; on priestly interees- sion, 138; on the Christian priest- hood, 188; on the Christian sacrifice, 217 Wuireirt, Archbp., on the royal supre- macy, 293 Wikis, David, (Concilia Magn. Brit. et Hibern. ab A.D, 446 ad A.D. 1717. IV Voll. folio, 1737) on the British episcopate, 153. 167; Dinoth’s speech to Augustin, 156; the letter of the Roman legate to Pope Adrian, 157; on St. Augustin’s intercourse with the British Bishops, 167 Worpswortu, Christopher, D.D., late Master of Trinity College, Cam- bridge, (Christian Institutes, Lond. 1837. IV Voll. 8vo. Ecclesiastical Biography, Lond. 1839. IV Voll. 8vo) (see Inett) on toleration, 46 ; on epis- copacy, 100; on ordinary and extraordi- nary functionsof Apostles, 101; on un- episcopal reformed communions, 105; on the Crown’s inability to alienate its regalities, 186; on the primitive and Catholic character of the Church of England, 193; on the true and sole proprietor of Churches, 213; on the beginning of recusancy in England, 219; on an erroneous conscience, 272; on rites and ceremonies, 991. 337. on human laws, how they bind the comacionse; 338 ; on General Councils, ZABARELLA, Cardinal, on the Popc’s conduct to Bishops, 255 Zonaras. Let good be done well, 287 END. GiLsert ἃ RiyineTon, Printers, St. John’s Square, London. By the same Author. DIARY in FRANCE, mainly on topics concerning EDUCA- TION and the CHURCH. 1845. 6s. 6d. DISCOURSES on PUBLIC EDUCATION, 1844. 9s. 6d. SERMONS preached in Harrow School Chapel, 1841. 8s. 6d. THEOCRITUS Codicum MSS. ope recensitus et emendatus, cum Indicibus locupletissimis. 13s. 6d. ATHENS and ATTICA, with Maps, Plans, and Inscriptions. Second edit. 12s. ANCIENT WRITINGS copied from the Walls of the City of Pom- peii, with Fac similes. 5s. GREECE. Second edit. 12. 115. 6d. The CORRESPONDENCE of RICHARD BENTLEY, D.D., Master of Trinity College, Cambridge ; with Notes and Illustrations. 2 vols. Bvo. 2]. 29. LATINZ GRAMMATICA RUDIMENTA;; or, King Edward the Sixth’s Grammar. In usum Scholarum, Editio Nova. 3s. 6d. ἊΣ ological Seminary-Speer 1 1012 010 5 17 338