BR A5 .B35 1838 
 Hampton lectures 
 
The Authoritative Teaching of the Church shewn to he in 
 conformity with Scripture^ Analogy^ and the 
 Moral Constitution of Man. 
 
 EIGHT SERMONS 
 
 PREACHED KErORE 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD, 
 
 IN THE YEAR MDCCCXXXVIII. 
 
 LECTURE 
 
 FOUXDED BY 
 
 THE LATE REV. JOHN IBAMPTON, M.A. jl-e.C--V'U 
 
 CANON OF SALISBURY. 
 
 HENRY ARTHUR WOODGATE, B.D. 
 
 FELLOW OF ST. JOHN'S COLLEGE, AND RECTOR OF BELLBROUGHTON, 
 WORCESTERSHIRE. 
 
 'ESt/catw^Tj T] '2,o(pia airh twp t^kvujv avrrjs. 
 
 OXFORD: 
 
 PRINTED BV T. COMBE, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY. 
 FOR 
 
 J. H. PARKER, 
 
 AND J. G. AND F. RIVINGTONS, ST. PAUl's CHURCHYARD, 
 AND WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON. 
 
 1839. 
 
TO 
 THE REVEREND 
 
 JOHN HENRY NEWMAN, B. D. 
 
 FELLOW OF ORIEL COLLEGE. 
 IN TOKEN OF LONG AND INTIMATE FRIENDSHIP, 
 
 AND AS A TRIBUTE OF RESPECT 
 
 TO THE HIGHEST INTELLECTUAL ENDOWMENTS, 
 
 CONSECRATED, 
 
 THROUGHOUT A LIFE OF CONSISTENT PURITY AND HOLINESS, 
 
 TO THE CAUSE OF CHRIST'S CHURCH, 
 
 THIS VOLUME IS INSCRIBED, 
 
 BY HIS SINCERE AND AFFECTIONATE FRIEND, 
 
 H. A. W. 
 
EXTRACT 
 
 THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT 
 
 OF THE LATE 
 
 REV. JOHN BAMPTON, 
 
 CANON OF SALISBURY. 
 
 " I give and bequeath my Lands and Estates to the 
 
 " Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars of the University of 
 " Oxford for ever, to have and to hold all and singular the 
 " said Lands and Estates upon trust, and to the intents and 
 " purposes hereinafter mentioned ; that is to say, I will and 
 " appoint that the Vice- Chancellor of the University of Oxford 
 " for the time being shall take and receive all the rents, issues, 
 " and profits thereof, and (after all taxes, reparations, and 
 " necessary' deductions made) that he pay all the remainder to 
 " the endowment of eight Divinity Lecture Sermons, to be 
 '* established for ever in the said University, and to be per- 
 " formed in the manner following : 
 
 " 1 direct and appoint, that upon the first Tuesday in Easter 
 " Term, a Lecturer be yearly chosen by the Heads of Colleges 
 " only, and by no others, in the room adjoining to the Print- 
 " ing-IIouse, between the hours of ten in the morning and 
 " two in the afternoon, to preach eight Divinity Lecture Ser- 
 " mons, the year following, at St. Mary's in Oxford, between 
 " the commencement of the last month in Lent Term, and the 
 " end of the third week in Act Term. 
 
 a 2 
 
iv EXTRACT FROM CANON BAMPTON^S WILL. 
 
 " Also I direct and appoint, that the eight Divinity Lecture 
 " Sermons shall be preached upon either of the following 
 " Subjects — to confirm and establish the Christian Faith, and 
 " to confute all heretics and schismatics — upon the divine 
 " authority of the holy Scriptures — upon the authority of the 
 " writings of the primitive Fathers, as to the faith and practice 
 " of the primitive Church — upon the Divinity of our Lord and 
 " Saviour Jesus Christ — upon the Divinity of the Holy Ghost 
 " — upon the Articles of the Christian Faith, as comprehended 
 " in the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds. 
 
 " Also I direct, that thirty copies of the eight Divinity 
 " Lecture Sermons shall be always printed, within two months 
 " after they are preached, and one copy shall be given to the 
 " Chancellor of the University, and one copy to the Head of 
 " every College, and one copy to the Mayor of the city of 
 " Oxford, and one copy to be put into the Bodleian Library ; 
 " and the expense of printing them shall be paid out of the 
 " revenue of the Land or Estates given for establishing the 
 " Divinity Lecture Sermons : and the preacher shall not be 
 " paid, nor be entitled to the revenue, before they are printed. 
 
 " Also I direct and appoint, that no person shall be qualified 
 " to preach the Divinity Lecture Sermons, unless he hath 
 " taken the degree of Master of Arts at least, in one of the 
 " two Universities of Oxford or Cambridge ; and that the 
 " same person shall never preach the Divinity Lecture Ser- 
 *' mons twice. 
 

 *%m. 
 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 n^HE peculiar circumstances under which the following 
 work, and those undertaken under the same or a like 
 appointment, are necessarily executed, present obstacles 
 in the way of properly treating the subject, from which 
 a work not placed under the same restrictions would be 
 comparatively free. The ordinary rules of composition 
 and arrangement are necessarily to a certain extent vio- 
 lated, and a corresponding room for criticism, of course, 
 thereby afforded, as to the mode in which the subject is 
 treated. 
 
 The circumstance of its being delivered openly, and 
 that at intervals, before its general publication, renders 
 it necessary, for the proper understanding of the subject, 
 to place in the text what, in a work written solely for 
 publication, would have been more appropriately placed 
 in a preface ; while the limit placed to the number and 
 extent of the Lectures, not only renders it difficult to 
 give to the subject generally the expansion it requires, 
 but even causes the insertion of remarks thus transferred 
 from the preface, to be attended by the sacrifice of what 
 would materially conduce to its elucidation. 
 
 A preface, therefore, to works of this nature, may be 
 aeS 
 
vi PREFACE. 
 
 said to be rendered in some degree necessary, to supply 
 such things as may have been omitted in the text to 
 make room for prefatory matter — things necessary to 
 give full effect to the subject, though not so much required 
 at the earlier stages of its development. 
 
 It was my intention, when I first commenced this 
 work, to take a far more extended range. I had long 
 thought that the arguments derived from analogy and 
 the constitution of our moral nature, which have been 
 used for the defence of the Christian Revelation gene- 
 rally, might be applied with equal force to the constitu- 
 tion and polity of the Christian Church. 
 
 On commencing, however, with that which naturally 
 claimed the earliest attention, as being first in the order 
 of importance. The Rule of Faith, I found the subject 
 grow in my hands ; and it was soon obvious that 
 the present work must be confined to that branch. 
 The Scriptural statement alone of the principle which 
 it was necessary to defend, occupied a whole Lecture ; 
 and the application of the same to doctrines and 
 ordinances, I found could not be satisfactorily disposed 
 of in less space ^. 
 
 a I ought here to mention, perhaps, that when these Lectures were 
 delivered, I had not read Mr. Newman's Lectures on the Prophetical Office 
 of the Church. Had I done so, I might have been induced to omit, or state 
 in a different form, some things which I have said, as being infinitely better 
 treated in that work. At the same time, it is no small satisfaction to find 
 what 1 have advanced confirmed by a work of such acknowledged value 
 and authority, of whidi it may be truly said-, that it is more calculated to 
 check the progress and destroy the influence both of Romanism and Sec- 
 tarianism, than any which has appeared in our day — a work as yet 
 unanswered, and likely so to continue, alike by Romanist and Sec- 
 tarian. 
 
PREFACE. vii 
 
 A peculiarity which must strike many persons as 
 attending this and the like discussions, is, that from the 
 prevailing ignorance and prejudice on the subject, one 
 is obliged to treat it with a degree of earnestness and 
 caution against being misunderstood, (involving, I fear, 
 not unfrequently, a degree of repetition amounting to 
 tedium,) not indeed unsuited to the importance of the 
 subject, but disproportionate to the degree of knowledge 
 which ought to be assumed to exist, among churchmen 
 at least, on the subject. And it is impossible not to 
 feel, that hereafter, when the nature of Church prin- 
 ciples generally shall be better understood, as it was 
 indeed till puritanism and profligacy in succession gave 
 birth to the latitudinarian principles of the present 
 and preceding century, the now urgent advocacy of 
 Catholic principles will require the recollection of what 
 men now think and hold, to account for the fact, 
 which will otherwise appear inexplicable, that truths 
 which will then appear self-evident, should ever have 
 required to be set forth with so much earnestness. For 
 this we must be prepared ; and to those truly zealous 
 for the faith once committed to the saints, although this 
 will require to be taken into account, it will not occasion 
 any real practical difficulty. 
 
 Looking, however, to the case as it stands at present, 
 the necessity of calling men''s attention to the nature and 
 constitution of the Apostolic Church, does not stand in 
 need of much proof. Whatever may have been the 
 meaning attached to the word Protestant in its original 
 acceptation, as distinguished from Romanism, however 
 
 a 4 
 
viii PREFACE. 
 
 dear to those by whom it was first employed, it is obvious 
 that, in its ordinary and popular acceptation in the pre- 
 sent day, it has little to commend it to those who hold 
 the Apostles' doctrine in its primitive purity, and who 
 love the Lord Jesus in sincerity. In its original accepta- 
 tion, when the whole Christian world was Catholic, or 
 nearly so. Protestantism, as forming the distinctive fea- 
 ture of that portion of the Western Church which pro- 
 tested against the corruptions of Romanism, had a definite 
 and tangible meaning. Its meaning was differential and 
 specific^ not generic. If this was not expressed in words, it 
 was only as being deemed unnecessary ; and if, by the 
 conventional force of language, it was used as a term by 
 itself, rather than as having only the force of an adjec- 
 tive y it was only because at that time there was scarcely 
 any other form of Christianity, by being combined with 
 which, it might itself receive a corresponding limitation. 
 
 It must be clear, however, to the commonest observer, 
 that from the various sects and heresies which have 
 sprung up in Christendom since that period, each of 
 which assumes to itself the title of Protestant, (and truly, 
 as regards the mere denial of Romanism,) the term has 
 itself assumed a generic character, which requires to be 
 limited on the other side ; unless, indeed, we are pre- 
 pared to merge all positive differences in the mere nega- 
 tive point of resemblance, which consists in dissent from 
 Romanism. 
 
 Now, whatever may be the views and feelings of sec- 
 tarians on this point, no one who truly receives the Apo- 
 stles' doctrine, even in its simplest form, as contained in 
 
PREFACE. ix 
 
 the Creed, will be content with this negative distinction. 
 However anxious he might be, through abhorrence of 
 Popery, to know that those with whom he has to do, 
 whether persons or opinions, are not Romanist, yet his 
 regard for the truth would make him no less anxious to 
 know, on the other hand, what they are. And for this, 
 the term Protestant, in its modern acceptation, will not 
 suffice. It merely tells us, that a man is not a Romanist : 
 as Christian men, it behoves us to know what he is. 
 
 This confusion has arisen, as was observed above, from 
 the circumstance that, in popular language, the term 
 Protestant is no longer considered as necessarily joined 
 to that of Catholic, as in its primary acceptation ; and 
 being, when thus disjoined, of a purely negative character, 
 it affords no guarantee in itself, that the person to whom 
 it is applied holds any essential article of the Christian 
 faith. It affords no security that the doctrine of which 
 it is predicated is otherwise than deadly error, ruinous 
 to the souls of those who hold it. For it must be re- 
 membered, that there is no sect or heresy which does 
 not profess to have formed its creed from the Scriptures, 
 and which does not lay claim to the title of what is popu- 
 larly termed (to use their own expression) Bible Christian. 
 I say not with what justice, I speak merely of the fact, 
 that in their oicn estimation, each of these finds its creed 
 in the Bible. Nor, again, is there any sect which does 
 not lay claim to the designation of Protestant, and whose 
 claims are not admitted by most of the Societies which 
 are so designated. Unless, therefore, we are prepared to 
 admit, as some of these virtually do, that religious faith 
 
X PREFACE. 
 
 is a mere matter of opinion, depending for its truth solely 
 on the persuasion of those who hold it; that the doctrines 
 of the Incarnation, Atonement, Sanctification, Baptismal 
 Regeneration, the divinity of the Son and Spirit, the Holy 
 Trinity, have no real existence but in the minds of those 
 who hold them ; or that having an existence, their recep- 
 tion is a mere matter of indifference as regards indivi- 
 duals, involving no responsibility or obligation, save that 
 what they believe they believe conscientiously ; it is evi- 
 dent that mere Protestantism, as such, is no security 
 whatever against the most deadly error, nor the appeal 
 to Holy Scripture, without some authority external to 
 the opinions of individuals, any pledge that a tenet so 
 alleged to be proved, is any portion whatever of the 
 Christian faith. It is evident that we require some limi- 
 tation to Protestantism itself, some distinctive character 
 in it, besides the mere negation of Romanism, some limi- 
 tation to the deductions which may be made from Holy 
 Scripture, some guide in the interpretation of it, external 
 to, and independent of, the caprice or fancy of each indi- 
 vidual or sect. The churchman at once sees that this is 
 effected by re-uniting to the differential characteristic of 
 Protestantism the generic one of Catholicity^ with which it 
 was combined (in England at least) in its original accepta- 
 tion : a process which restores to us the Reformers' Rule 
 of Faith, and with it their creed. To this many objec- 
 tions will be found to exist in practice, both among the 
 advocates of sectarianism, universally, and among ortho- 
 dox Protestants in part ; with the one, as bringing their 
 differences with the Church to an issue, and placing them 
 
PREFACE. xi 
 
 in the wrong ; with the other, as introducing (to them) 
 a new element in determining the rule of faith, which in 
 former times has in practice led to grievous error, as 
 none will deny when used alone^ but the nature and 
 value of which, when used in conjunction with Holy 
 Scripture, they have yet to learn, and which they as yet 
 view with jealousy and alarm. 
 
 Let me, however, state the case more definitely. 
 
 We, as members of the Anglican Church, believe in 
 her doctrines, and assent to her ritual and government. 
 We do this, because we believe them to have the sanc- 
 tion and authority of Holy Scripture, as w^ell as that of 
 Catholicity and Antiquity. Having had our minds early 
 taught to perceive them, and our hearts to love them, 
 we are enabled to trace them in the written word, and 
 to see them pervading it throughout. From w4iatever 
 source our first impressions may have been derived, here, 
 at least, they receive confirmation and proof, giving them 
 the force of convictions. 
 
 But the Socinian and Sectarian deny these, wholly or 
 in part, though professing to receive the Christian Scrip- 
 tures, and to found their views of doctrine and discipline 
 solely upon them : for they all profess to abide by the 
 Sixth Article of our Church. 
 
 Here we are at issue with them on a definite question, 
 having between us the common ground from which to 
 proceed, of our mutual belief in the genuineness and au- 
 thenticity of Holy Scripture. Our first step is to cite on 
 either side the scriptural authorities in favour of our 
 respective opinions : on the force of these we join issue. 
 
xii PREFACE. 
 
 calling to our aid critical or other learning in support of 
 the meaning of particular passages or words: yet the 
 result is, that we remain as we were, each retaining his 
 previous convictions — they pleading, on their part, the 
 assumed Protestant principle, that Scripture alone is 
 the rule of faith, and the right to exercise their own 
 judgment upon it to the best of their ability. We, of 
 course, deem them to be in lamentable error. They allege 
 the same of us. Who is to judge between us 1 Our 
 personal convictions, however satisfactory to our own 
 minds, clearly will not by themselves place them in the 
 wrong, without some other authority external to both 
 parties, to whose decisions both must be assumed, on their 
 own principle, to be amenable, whether practically admit- 
 ting it or not. Still less will they satisfy the painful 
 doubts of some third party who may be, as is frequently 
 the case, looking on, anxious to form his opinions, yet 
 unable to do so amid conflicting arguments, where no 
 better ground has as yet been taken, than the individual 
 convictions of the respective disputants. 
 
 The fundamental laws of all reasoning require, in 
 every argument, this external authority or rule, common 
 to and admitted by each disputant. It is obvious, that, 
 in the present instance, it cannot be the Scripture, inas- 
 much as we have, by the hypothesis, already advanced 
 beyond that stage of the argument ; the interpretation of 
 Scripture itself being now the point in question, for which 
 this common and external rule is still required. 
 
 What is this rule ? where is it to be found, and how 
 defended ? 
 
PREFACE. xiii 
 
 But besides the objection alleged against the various 
 texts of Scripture which we cite in support of specific 
 doctrines, the Socinian has another argument of no in- 
 considerable weight to urge against us — the a priori argu- 
 ment, founded on the assumed improbability against 
 such proof altogether. He asks, whether it is probable, 
 that doctrines so important as we allege these to be, 
 would be left to depend on proofs so difficult to be arrived 
 at, and admitting of such variety of construction, hunted 
 through distant and detached parts of Scripture, depend- 
 ing on the critical examination of words. This will be 
 seen from the extracts from Milton and the modem 
 Socinians, which I have quoted in the second Lecture. 
 
 Now it must be admitted that there is much apparent 
 force in this objection ; nor can we easily disprove the 
 assumption, on the supposition that Scripture is "the 
 first informant and sole guide. It may be contended, 
 I admit, and as I have attempted to shew in the second 
 Lecture, that the analogy of Natural Religion, so called, 
 favours the presumption of such proofs : but this argu- 
 ment from analogy, however satisfactory to the Church- 
 man, would be of little avail to the Sectarian generally, 
 as opposed to the Socinian, because it involves the 
 assumption that a previous knowledge of the main truths 
 of natural religion precedes, and in fact causes, the per- 
 ception of these truths in the outward world; which, when 
 used as an argument, would imply the admission of 
 a corresponding previous knowledge in relation to the 
 force which Scripture texts possess, as proofs of the 
 Christian mysteries. At the same time, even the admis- 
 
xiv PREFACE. 
 
 sion of the Socinian assumption, mentioned above, would 
 by no means pledge us to admit, in the slightest degree, 
 the inference which the Socinian would draw from it. 
 
 The truth is, that we might, without risk, admit his 
 assumption of the antecedent improbability in question, 
 and his objections to the indirect and alleged defective 
 nature of Scripture proofs of important doctrines, viewed 
 as sole informants. But there our agreement would end : 
 from that point there is this essential difference between 
 us : — that he uses the indirect nature of the proofs as 
 arguments against the doctrines themselves ; — we regard 
 it as the natural and consistent result of what Scripture 
 itself reveals to us respecting our rule of faith. With the 
 Socinian, it is the premiss of his argument ; with us, the 
 conclusion. The doctrines, he maintains, are untrue — 
 or If true, unimportant — because the Scripture proofs 
 are indirect and by implication. We reply, that before 
 coming to the perusal of the Holy Scripture, we are 
 assumed to have derived our elementary knowledge of 
 the Christian doctrines through another channel, though 
 ultimately from the same authority with that of Holy 
 Scripture ; and that therefore the notices in Scripture of 
 these doctrines are often brief and indirect, as addressed 
 to those not unacquainted with the subject. For one and 
 the same principle furnishes us with an answer both to the 
 Sectarian's objections against specific texts, and likewise 
 to his a priori argument founded on the general character 
 of such texts. To the latter we reply, on the authority of 
 Scripture itself, that the doctrines in question were not 
 left to be gathered from these texts alone, nor in the 
 
PREFACE. XV 
 
 way which he describes. We reply that the reader of 
 the Christian Scriptures is supposed to be ah'eady ac- 
 quainted with its leading doctrines ; that those Scrip- 
 tures were written for Christians, and are addressed to 
 Christians ; and that consequently proofs indirect, 
 latent, or by implication are sufficient, where, had we to 
 derive our first notions from Scripture alone, we should 
 require, as the Sectarian professes to do, full and direct 
 statements. 
 
 The same principle furnishes us with our conclusive 
 argument in disputing on the force of particular texts of 
 Scripture. Admitting even that two apparently opposite 
 texts, or that even the same text, may be made to 
 support opposite conclusions, according to the prepos- 
 sessions or view taken by each side, — allowing the pre- 
 sumption to be equally balanced, it is clear that any 
 authority which can be assigned to the opinion of either 
 side, especially if it can be shewn, or can be presumed on 
 reasonable evidence, that such was the doctrine taught 
 by the sacred writer himself, must impart its authority to 
 the texts cited in support of such view. Let us take, 
 for example, the texts commonly urged against the 
 doctrine of the divinity of our Lord and the Holy Spirit, 
 or those against Baptismal Regeneration, or Episcopacy 
 and Apostolical Succession ; and likewise, on the other 
 side, those by which we support these articles. Let it be 
 granted, for argument's sake, that their respective force 
 is equal, as texts ; that they might prove cither position 
 in themselves, though the force of each is much neutral- 
 ized at present by the existence of the opposite : if it 
 
xvi PREFACE. 
 
 can be shewn, that there are reasonable grounds for be- 
 lieving that either of the propositions which they can 
 thus be made to support was maintained by the writer 
 of the same Scripture, or by those who, from personal 
 knowledge of him or other circumstances, may be as- 
 sumed to represent his sentiments, some of them having 
 received their instruction from him or from those who 
 had so received it ; the force of the texts in question, as 
 an evidence or proof, assumes a very different character. 
 Or again, if it can be shewn that, at the period when the 
 Church may be assumed to have been most pure, this or 
 that interpretation was uniformly held by those whose 
 numbers and unanimity afford a presumption against their 
 having been in error, the probabilities in favour of such 
 interpretation would possess a force littk short of direct 
 proof. This would be the case without reference to any 
 previous teaching, on the mere assumption that the 
 Scripture was our sole informant on the subject of 
 Christian doctrine, the instrument for teaching as well as 
 provmg — the guide, as well as the standard of faith. It 
 was observed however above, that these Scriptures pre- 
 suppose the existence of some knowledge, on the part of 
 the reader, of the things of which they speak, being 
 addressed, (as we learn from the opening of St. Luke's 
 Oospel, as well as all the Epistles, without a single ex- 
 ception,) to persons already instructed, and that for 
 many years previously, in the Christian faith. The pecu- 
 liarity of this feature in the Gospel, as distinguished 
 from the Law, I have adverted to in the third Lecture, 
 ^s also its adaptation to our moral nature. Viewed 
 
PREFACE. xvii 
 
 however as a matter of fact, it is unquestionable, from 
 the account which the Scripture gives of itself, that the 
 Christian Church, as well as the body and form of 
 Christian doctrine, and the Christian ordinances, are 
 of earlier date by several years than the Christian 
 Scriptures ; that the latter are addressed to Christians, 
 and presuppose in every case a knowledge (and of 
 course with it a bias) of views and doctrines of sowe 
 kind. It is a plain historical fact, that the Apostles 
 themselves, under the inspiration and direction of the 
 Holy Ghost, delivered some form of doctrine and ordi- 
 nances, and that too at some length, to which their 
 subsequent writings refer as to things well known to 
 those whom they addressed. Also from the circum- 
 stance that the Apostles themselves died without com- 
 mitting to wTiting the form of doctrine which they had 
 taught, and the system of Church government and ordi- 
 nances which they had appointed, there is the strongest 
 presumption, certainly no intimation to the contrary, 
 that the system was designed to be continued as it had 
 begun, by means of human agents, as distinguished from 
 tables or a written covenant ; a system shewn to be 
 adapted to tlie Gospel itself, and more peculiarly so, 
 when viewed in relation to our moral nature, and our 
 state of moral probation. This would suggest itself 
 a priori., from the nature of the case ; while the appoint- 
 ment of a body of men to succeed the Apostles in their 
 office of teachers and rulers, and the instructions given 
 to the former to appoint others after them, to whom they 
 wero to communicate both theirauthority and commission, 
 
 b 
 
xviii PREFACE. 
 
 add to the presumption alluded to the force of a com- 
 plete proof — as complete, that is, as could be reasonably 
 expected, where not only the evidence itself is moral, but 
 the whole system is one designed to promote a high 
 degree of moral probation, the leading feature of which 
 \^ faith, and which, from its very nature, requires not only 
 the testimony of external evidence to produce conviction, 
 but also the predisposition of the heart, and a state of 
 moral preparation, partaking, in kind, of that more per- 
 fect state of faith and submission of our nature to a moral 
 and spiritual control, which it is the avowed object of 
 the whole system of the Gospel to form within us. 
 
 Now we maintain that the form of doctrine which the 
 Apostles taught, as well as the system of government 
 and ordinances which they appointed — to which the 
 Christian Scriptures refer — which St. Paul directed 
 Timothy to hold fast, and to transmit to his successors, 
 together with the Apostolical commission — have re- 
 mained in the church ever since, according to the 
 promise, having come down to us together with the 
 Scriptures themselves. We maintain that the body 
 of doctrine which the Anglican Church now holds, 
 is substantially the same with that which the Scrip- 
 ture records the Apostles to have taught, before they 
 penned the Christian Scriptures ; and in the belief 
 of which men lived and died, who could not possi- 
 bly have even heard of those Scriptures, at that time 
 not in existence. There may be adduced, doubtless, 
 objections to the proofs of this identity of our doc- 
 trines with those of the Apostolic age : could it be 
 
PREFACE. xix 
 
 otherwise without a miracle, or without a degree and 
 kind of evidence ill suited to exercise our faith in a 
 state of trial? But without entering on the specific 
 proofs of the doctrines themselves, which does not fall 
 within the scope of these Lectures, I have attempted to 
 shew, with regard to the objections alleged against such 
 proofs generally, that they prove too much : that they lie 
 against the proofs of the genuineness of Scripture itself, 
 as well as against the testimony of things past alto- 
 gether, as mere objections ; but that as parts of a sys- 
 tem, besides being sufficient for their purpose, they have 
 analogy in their favour, and are, like the evidences of 
 the genuineness of Scripture itself, calculated to pro- 
 mote the object of the Revelation itself, as suitable cor- 
 respondent means, being adapted to our moral constitu- 
 tion, and calculated to forward the end of our being as 
 moral agents. But ^^dthout contending for the exact de- 
 gree of proof, it is clear that whatever proof can be adduc- 
 ed that our doctrine and ritual is that of the Apostolic 
 age, is, as far as it goes, decisive of the question between 
 the Sectarian and ourselves, as to the force of opposite 
 or ambiguous texts of Scripture cited on either side in 
 support of our respective positions. It takes the matter 
 out of our hands, referring it to a tribunal, the authority 
 of which the Sectarian must admit, if he receives as au- 
 thentic the Scripture account of the mode in which the 
 Gospel was first revealed and taught ; and if he is 
 unable to shew that the form of sound words, which 
 St. Paul committed to Timothy, with the command that 
 he should in his turn commit the same to faithful men 
 
 1) 2 
 
XX PREFACE. 
 
 who might be able to teach others also, is other than 
 that which we profess to have received through the 
 same channel, and which, by the blessing of God, and 
 the covenanted promise of Christ's abiding in his 
 Church, we hope, in our turn, to teach others also. 
 
 It unquestionably adds to the difficulties we have to 
 encounter in defending this principle, that to this trans- 
 mission and descent of the Christian verities should 
 have been attached a term, against which, in former 
 times, the fears and prejudices of men had been, and 
 not altogether without reason, so strongly excited. 
 Doubtless it had been so far better, as regards the 
 present popular temper on the subject, could some other 
 term than Tradition have been adopted, against which no 
 such prejudice existed — as, for example. Historical testi- 
 mony, Witness of the Church, or one of like kind ; under 
 which names it will be found that there is sufficient 
 proof of the Apostolic origin of the great truths which 
 the Sectarian and Rationalist now reject as deficient in 
 authority — proceeding on the assumption, that the Scrip- 
 tures by themselves were designed to teacli^ as well as 
 to proce^ the Christian verities. And yet, were the 
 term Tradition abandoned, we should feel as it were in 
 some sort separated from many wise and holy men who 
 have adhered both to the principle and the name. It 
 were better, as regards the ultimate triumph of truth, 
 and what is due to the memory of elder saints, to retain 
 the term, however grating to the ears of sectarianism 
 and licentiousness, however it may even awhile offend 
 the weaker brethren ; and endeavour to redeem it from 
 
PREFACE. xxi 
 
 the obloquy under which it has fallen, and to restore it 
 to its right meaning and use. 
 
 It is some satisfaction to reflect, that other terms, 
 equally or more significative of Apostolic truth, have, in 
 tlieir turn, suffered under the like abuse. It is something 
 to reflect that even the term Catholic has in like manner 
 been abused and driven from its original meaning, and has 
 been even regarded as a badge of error, though a professed 
 article of belief with every member of our communion. 
 It need create no surprise, therefore, that other terms 
 also indicative and preservative of Apostolic truth, 
 should have fallen under the like abuse : that when the 
 sins of the Church have brought them into disrepute, 
 and caused them to be invested with a meaning foreign to 
 their original design and acceptation, God should in his 
 wrath have allowed it so to be ; consistently with his 
 mode of dealing with those who abuse his gifts, and hold 
 the truth in unrighteousness. Let us rather hope, in 
 patient faith, that as the minds of men have been 
 gradually disabused in regard to the term Catholic, so 
 will they also be in regard to Apostolic tradition. And 
 it is no slight encouragement to know that, as the out- 
 cry against it has had its origin in ignorance or mis- 
 conception of its real meaning, so when men have been 
 at length led to read and consider for themselves, 
 and to judge from recorded and authenticated views, 
 they have, with very few exceptions, and these easy 
 to be accounted for, uniformly arrived at the same 
 result. With truly good and sj)iritual minded men, 
 who had adopted Sectarian views from a miscon- 
 ception of their real nature, and from ignorance of the 
 
 b 3 
 
xxii PREFACE. 
 
 Scriptural foundation and truly evangelical character of 
 sound and pure Apostolic principles, their return to the 
 latter is a question of time rather than of fact. 
 
 Let me, however, here offer a few remarks on some 
 misrepresentations and objections which are found to 
 exist on the subject. 
 
 In consequence of having traced the connection be- 
 tween the Sectarian principle and Socinianism, the 
 advocates of Tradition and of the authority of the 
 Church, have been represented as maintaining that 
 the reading Scripture by itself, without any external 
 guide or assistant, will lead a man to Socinianism : than 
 which nothing can be more illogical or unjust. That a man 
 should read Scripture without any Mas at all^ is next to 
 impossible. That the reading without the authority and 
 guide of antiquity has, as a mere fact, led in tJie long 
 run to Socinianism, no one can deny without shutting 
 his eyes to the state of belief among the great bulk of 
 foreign Protestants, who read Scripture in this way, and 
 form their creed on this principle, and whose distinctive 
 feature, as opposed to the Protestant Anglican Church, 
 consists in their adoption of this principle. But that 
 this would be the result to any particular individual, 
 reading Scripture in this way, it is a very different thing 
 to affirm, and by no means follows. It is only negatively 
 and accidentally that this principle leads to Socinianism, 
 by removing that which would prevent such a result. 
 As has been observed, to read without any bias at all is 
 barely possible, and can only occur in the case of perfect 
 vacuity of mind : every one must have his own tone of 
 mind and thought, such as it is, however faint and weak ; 
 
PREFACE. xxiii 
 
 and this, whether consciously or not, must constitute his 
 bias, with reference to which, facts of whatever kind, 
 which are brought before him, acquire their relative im- 
 portance. Scripture, like external nature, is capable of 
 being viewed in different and opposite lights, and of 
 proving different and opposite conclusions to the minds 
 of individuals, according to their bias and prepossessions. 
 This involves no objection in itself, being analogous to 
 the laws of external nature, and conformable to the laws 
 of moral subjects generally. 
 
 Whether this, in the case of any individual, will lead 
 to his becoming a Presbyterian, Wesleyan, Independent, 
 Baptist, Irvingite, or Socinian, will depend on the prepos- 
 session, natural or instilled, of the individual. Thus much, 
 however, may be suggested a j^i^iori, that if the blessed 
 Gospel be designed to correct and contravene our corrupt 
 nature, and if the doctrines of original sin, the atonement, 
 the divinity of the Saviour and of the Holy Spirit, are, 
 as articles of belief, essentially conducive to that object, 
 it might be expected that they would be far from meeting 
 with a ready acceptance with those in whom that ng^re 
 is least renewed, and who have yet to learn the first 
 principle, which even the science of Morals declares to be 
 essentially connected with our nature and necessary to fit 
 it for its proper end, and which from morals is adopted 
 into revelation, viz. the great moral truth, that our moral 
 perceptions reqiure to be developed and strengthened by 
 a course of training under the authority and guidance 
 of others. Unquestionably, the disregard for authority 
 which is essentially involved in the Sectarian principle, 
 
 b 4 
 
xxiv PREFACE. 
 
 and tlie violation thereby of what may be considered a 
 moral obligation, would be no small preparative for a 
 state of religious belief which was connected, in the 
 relation either of cause or effect, with a moral deteriora- 
 tion. In this sense, Socinianism would be the tendency, 
 if not the probable result ultimately, of the absence of all 
 external bias in reading Holy Scripture. As far as ex- 
 perience is at all decisive of the question, the existing 
 state of the so called Protestant Churches on the conti- 
 nent of Europe, who profess to have formed their 
 respective creeds from the Scriptures alone, would fur- 
 nish no inconsiderable presumption that man's nature 
 gravitates, as it were, towards Socinianism ; that the 
 principle of resorting to Scripture alone, without any 
 external guide and authority, does, if time is allowed it, 
 lead to that fatal heresy. But that this will be the 
 result to any given individual, is a separate question, by 
 no means following from the other. To this tendency, 
 however, whether in the individual or a generation, the 
 Church at once interposes an authoritative and ef- 
 fecttial check, by teaching her children the Creed, before 
 placing the Scriptures in their hands. This, indeed, 
 Sectarians likewise do : but with them, the practice is 
 in despite of their principle, not in conformity with it ; 
 and consequently it provides no security ; nor could 
 any individual member be said to depart from his pro- 
 fessed principle in acting otherwise, either as regards 
 himself or those who may be placed under him. And, 
 moreover, the Church alone is enabled to affirm, that of all 
 the forms of faith which the Scriptures may be made to 
 
PREFACE. XXV 
 
 prove, tlitit which she teaches, iiiul which she proves from 
 the Scriptures, can alone offer any evidence of apostoHc 
 origin. In this way it may be allowed, that the au- 
 thority and teaching of the Church are preventive of 
 Socinianism, and their absence productive of it. More 
 than this, in addition to the moral tendency of the 
 Sectarian principle, is not contended for. Nor, as re- 
 gards individuals, does the warning that they are reading 
 Scripture on the Heretical or Socinian principle, at all 
 involve any charge oi ^wrsonal Heresy or Socinianism. 
 
 For my own part, I should rather believe, nay affirm, 
 that if a case could be met with of a person reading the 
 New Testament, literally without the slightest previous 
 knowledge or prepossession, he would, in the first in- 
 stance, be far from taking up any positively erroneous 
 view. I would affirm, that the result of his reading 
 would be that of inquiry founded on partial knowledge, 
 rather than that of decided conviction, either way, on 
 the Christian mysteries. I believe, that one situated as 
 I have described, would, from a simple (literally) un- 
 biassed reading of the New Testament, follow, as nearly 
 as possible, the line of thought which I have sketched 
 out in the third Lecture : that finding the direct histo- 
 rical narrative relate to him the rise, progress, and 
 gradual extension, for several years, of a certain course 
 of teaching, of the vital importance of which it speaks 
 throughout, but with the full particulars of which, while 
 it alludes to them, it has not made him acquainted ; next, 
 finding the epistolary portions which immediately follow 
 in order, occupying a more remote position in point of 
 
xxvi PREFACE. 
 
 ti7iie^ divided by a period of several years from the direct 
 historical narrative, yet referring to it retrospectively, 
 speaking of the teaching mentioned in it, as of something 
 of considerable date, known and familiar to the persons 
 whom themselves address, — I believe that his first and 
 natural inquiry would be for that circumstantial teaching 
 of which the Acts of the Apostles speaks, and to which 
 the apostolic Epistles refer. The Epistles to Timothy and 
 Titus, especially the injunctions contained in 2 Tim. i.1,2. 
 would probably give the first direction to the inquiry, by 
 informing him that the form of doctrine of which he was 
 in search, had been committed, by its first teachers, to men 
 whom they had appointed for the purpose of receiving 
 and teaching it, and of transmitting it, together with 
 the commission spoken of in the narrative, to others, 
 who were in their turn again to transmit it in like man- 
 ner — by a system designed to continue, as far as therein 
 appears, indefinitely. His next and natural step would 
 be, to inquire whether the system was continued — 
 whether such a succession of men did arise and continue, 
 receiving, and in turn transmitting, the commission and 
 the knowledge spoken of both in the Acts and Epistles. 
 And this inquiry would lead, step by step, when the 
 inspired narrative closed, into uninspired history; and 
 the more so, if the writings of men, some of them fellow- 
 labourers and disciples of the Apostles themselves — 
 writings, the genuineness of which is unquestionable, 
 affording as it were a link connecting the inspired nar- 
 rative with those historical records of the Church, which 
 were removed by distance of years, as well as in point 
 
PREFACE. xxvii 
 
 of aiitliority from the sacred writings, — exhibited to 
 him a form of faith professing to be received from the 
 Apostles, through those persons, as intermediate chan- 
 nels, to whom the Scriptures describe it as having been 
 committed. 
 
 Or his inquiry might take this direction in preference : 
 having followed the stream downwards to the point where 
 it takes leave of inspired testimony, having seen the 
 commencement of that apostolic succession of which the 
 Scripture speaks, and finding the existing church pro- 
 fessing to be in the direct line of that succession, he 
 would commence from this point, and trace the stream 
 upwards in his inquiry after the point of its conjunction 
 with that, the commencement of which is related in the 
 sacred writings. ^Vhat the result of his inquiry would 
 be is of little importance to the present argument. But 
 this may at least be said, that if it should terminate in 
 error, and he should have to commence afresh, he would 
 have to conduct it on the same principle, merely from 
 what Scripture itself relates on the subject. If literally 
 unbiassed, and believing in the New Testament, he would 
 there seek for the form of Christian doctrine, where, whe- 
 ther at present existing or not, the Scripture at least 
 records it to have been originally deposited. 
 
 Hence it would also appear, that the Catholic or 
 Church principle, in regard to the rule of faith, is, 
 strictly speaking, more Scriptural, both in its origin and 
 character, than that which professes to be formed from 
 and to be guided by Scripture alone. The latter is not 
 only without sufficient authority in Scripture, but, if 
 
xxviii PREFACE. 
 
 closely examined, will be found to be in opposition to 
 the direct declarations of Scripture, as a principle ; its 
 conformity with Scripture in particulars being, as it 
 were, accidental, and one which it possesses in common 
 with the Church and Sectarianism of whatever kind, as 
 regards any authority external to the mere judgment of 
 individuals. The Church principle, on the contrary, is 
 founded in Scripture from the beginning to its termina- 
 tion. It commences with the first intimation which 
 Scripture gives us of the origin of our faith. It follows 
 that Scriptural account step by step, as long as it con- 
 tinues to guide us, and when that ceases, it continues its 
 course of inquiry in the direction to which the Scripture 
 points, and by the means which the Scripture prescribes; 
 holding in its hand, as it proceeds, those other blessed 
 portions of Holy Scripture, which, though not designed 
 as our guides, are yet appointed to light us on our way, 
 and to assure us that the way in which we walk, is that 
 in which the Apostles walked under the immediate light 
 of Heaven, and to which the sacred writings point, ere 
 they ce^se, as that in which the Church should here- 
 after go. 
 
 The principle which, in reply to the Sectarian's posi- 
 tion generally, may be thus shewn to be Scriptural in its 
 origin and character, I have attempted to shew, in reply 
 to the Rationalist, is moreover conformable to the ana- 
 logy both of Natural Religion and of Morals, and likewise 
 adapted to our moral nature, and calculated to promote 
 the end of our being as moral agents in a state of trial. On 
 this branch of the subject, however, though the chief one, 
 
PKEFACK. xxix 
 
 I have not felt it necessary to make any prefatory re- 
 marks, further than to observe, that the arguments from 
 analogy and adaptation, though in themselves distinct, 
 yet are so closely connected through their common 
 origin, that it is difficult, and sometimes impossible, in 
 treating the subject, to keep them entirely distinct. 
 I trust, therefore, that I shall be excused, nor be deemed 
 to have bestowed on the subject less care than its import- 
 tance demands, if, instead of running parallel through- 
 out, these two arguments should appear occasionally to 
 converge, and to occupy the place one of the other. 
 
 The objection which might at first appear to lie 
 against the advocacy of these principles, viz. of ap- 
 pearing to make the Church, rather than Eevelation or 
 Christianity, the object of defence, I have noticed in the 
 eighth Lecture. I would merely add here, that the 
 point of defence has been determined by that of at- 
 tack. If Christianity has been assailed through the 
 Church, it is through the Church that it must be de- 
 fended. In the vague indefinite sense in w^hich the 
 terms Christian and Christianity are employed in the 
 present day, being made in popular language to include 
 the worst forms of Heresy, not excepting even Socinian- 
 ism, it must be obvious that the purity of the Gospel 
 cannot, at present at all events, be defended under that 
 general name, so as to satisfy those who love the Lord 
 Jesus in sincerity, and are anxious for the faith once de- 
 livered to the saints. AMien Christianity and the Church 
 Catholic were synonymous terms, as to the true Catholic 
 Churchman they still are, the case was widely different ; 
 
XXX PREFACE. 
 
 and to the Christian, his Churchmanship, instead of 
 being used to distinguish him from the Heretic and Schis- 
 matic, served rather, as a term of love, to embody in the 
 more endearing form of domestic relation, (if the ex- 
 pression may be allowed,) as a member of Christ's family 
 and household, what, as a Christian, he might be led to 
 view in the more awful relation of a weak and sinful 
 creature towards his future judge. But now, since 
 every one, how little soever he may believe respecting 
 the nature and office of his Redeemer, is allowed in 
 popular language to retain, or rather to usurp the name 
 of Christian, it follows that, since we cannot control the 
 fluctuating variations in the meaning of words, Chris- 
 tianity must be defended under the more lengthened de- 
 finition of the Church's creed, or by that term which 
 assigns to it a definite and substantial, as well as its 
 original meaning. 
 
 It must not be forgotten that the Infidels of the last 
 century are tlie Rationalists and Socinians of the pre- 
 sent. 
 
 On the more popular objections commonly alleged 
 against the principle contended for in these Lectures, be- 
 sides those replied to in the Lectures themselves, little 
 need be said. Indeed it may be observed that they 
 scarcely admit of any reply beyond that of simple denial, 
 being, in general, allegations of facts which have no ex- 
 istence but in the minds of those who allege them. It 
 is asserted, for example, that the advocates of primi- 
 tive tradition set up its authority as equal, if not su- 
 perior to, Scripture itself; that they would establish on 
 
PREFACE. xxxi 
 
 its aiitliority, as essential aiiicles of faith, what the 
 Scriptures do not contain ; that they represent the 
 apostles as having delivered to the church, as esoteric 
 doctrines, what they in no way committed to writing ; 
 that they assi^i to the church the power of delivering, 
 on independent authority, doctrines of her own, instead 
 of giving form and shape to that which, in substance, is 
 diffused over the face of Scripture, and interwoven with 
 its structure ; and that they also claim for her the power 
 of determining s2io arbitrio, on the interpretation of 
 Scripture, in fundamentals, instead of bearing testimony, 
 as a witness, to the truth as it has been received : con- 
 founding, throughout, the authority claimed for the 
 church from the beginning, as a witness of primitive 
 apostolic truth, with that claimed by the Romanist of 
 making the ejcisting church the independent judge in 
 matters of faith ; and as a part of the same error, charg- 
 ing us with adopting the opinions of the ancients, as 
 opinions, instead of receiving their testimony of what 
 they had themselves received. 
 
 However true it may be that the things here alleged 
 are maintained in the Roman church, it rests with 
 their opponents to shew that any of these has been 
 advanced or maintained by the advocates of primitive 
 tradition and ecclesiastical authority, in the Anglican 
 church. 
 
 The vague general charge of Popery, and of admitting 
 Popish principles, is in itself not of a nature to require se- 
 rious notice. That it should be made, is not to be wondered 
 at ; inasmuch as there will always be those, who either 
 
xxxii PREFACE. 
 
 from prejudice will refuse to entertain a question which 
 militates against judgments already formed; or who, 
 from defective moral and intellectual vision, are unable 
 to judge of the proportions of objects in perspective, or 
 to distinguish their relative distance ; blending in one 
 confused mass whatever things are removed from their 
 own centre of vision, no matter how distant one from 
 the other. 
 
 Any specific charges of Popery however are, like the 
 charges mentioned above, in no way difficult to reply 
 to, being, ivhen specifically made^ resolved into simple ques- 
 tions of fact, to be determined by a comparison of the 
 principles in question on the one hand, with those of the 
 Anglican church on the other. I need scarcely add, that 
 as yet the onus prohandi lies on the other side. What- 
 ever has been hitherto alleged, has been found to be, on 
 inquiry, either not true as a matter of fact ; or, if true, 
 not at variance with the Anglican church. 
 
 The practice on the part of Sectarianism of branding 
 with the charge of Popery whatever differs from it on 
 the side of church authority, and places a restraint on its 
 licentiousness and its wild interpretation of Scripture, 
 is an ancient device on the part of the enemies of the 
 Gospel. It was not unaptly compared, by Hammond, to 
 the ancient practice of dressing up the martyrs in the 
 skins of animals, in order to induce the wild beasts to fall 
 on them with the greater ferocity. 
 
 With what spirit it was conducted, of what atrocities 
 it was made the pretext, let the history of the past bear 
 witness, in the sufferings of the church from the bitter- 
 
PREFACE. xxxiii 
 
 ness of sectarian persecution during the Rebellion and 
 the Commonwealth. 
 
 From this charge of Popery on the assertion of church 
 principles, however, there arises a question entitled to no 
 small consideration from those who value their Christian 
 liberty ; which is, that those who use it would not only 
 limit our terms of communion, but virtually introduce a 
 neio^ and that a human standard of faith. When a truth 
 is proposed, a doctrine set forth, or an ordinance revived, 
 which from neglect had fallen into disuse, the rule by 
 which it is tried is not its conformity with any acknow- 
 ledged standard. The question forthwith asked, is not 
 whether it be true or Scriptural ; not even whether it be 
 maintained by our own church : but whether it be not 
 held by Romanists. Now what is this but virtually to 
 make Romanism in the negative the standard of faith ; 
 running into the error they profess to shun, and making 
 the judgment of men in some shape their rule and guide? 
 
 This is a serious blow aimed at our Christian liberty, 
 which may well excite the apprehensions of all who are 
 truly zealous for the gospel in its simplicity and purity. 
 
 It has been well observed that it is the peculiar glory 
 of the English church, as distinguished from other Pro- 
 testant societies, that we are not the followers of any 
 human teachers : that we are not, for example, Luther- 
 ans, or Calvinists : that we are not even followers of our 
 reformers as masters, nor called by their name : that in 
 none of our formularies or confessions of faith is allusion or 
 reference made to the Reformation or Protestantism, even 
 by name, still less as forming any part of our rule of faith ; 
 
 c 
 
xxxiv PREFACE. 
 
 nor is even an expression of opinion upon them recognised 
 as in any degree entering into our terms of communion : 
 that in fact we own no master but Christ and his Apostles. 
 
 But they who would make the negation of Popery 
 their rule of faith, would rob us of this high privilege 
 and distinction, deprive us of our Christian liberty, and 
 enclose us with trammels more oppressive and tyrannical 
 than those of Popery itself. What security have we, by 
 this rule, that the blessed doctrines of the Atonement and 
 Sanctification, the divinity of the Son and of the Holy 
 Spirit, the Trinity in Unity, the efficacy of the Sacra- 
 ments, the Communion of Saints — in short, what 
 security have we that every article of the Creed will not 
 be denied to us, if tested by this rule of the negation of 
 the Romish faith ; seeing that all of them form integral 
 portions of that faith ? 
 
 This question deserves the serious consideration, not 
 only of those who value their Christian liberty, but of 
 those who are zealous for the entireness and purity of the 
 Christian faith. It is clear that the enemy of all truth 
 has endeavoured to establish this spurious standard of 
 truth among us ; and unfortunately indolence, ignorance, 
 and prejudice, have alike combined to a certain extent 
 to give it currency. But in truth this very resorting to 
 Romanism as a negative standard of truth, serves but 
 to betray the weakness of the cause it is designed to 
 uphold. It contains the virtual admission, that by any 
 acknowledged standard it is incapable of being main- 
 tained. 
 
 With regard to the rule of faith which it has been my 
 
PREFACE. XXXV 
 
 object to vindicate in these Lectures, this may at least 
 be said, that no true member of the Anghcan church will 
 find room to object to it, either in its principle or its 
 results. It adds no article of faitli by the mere 
 authority of the Church, because what it proposes, it also 
 tests and proves by holy Scripture : it risks no article 
 of faith by requiring the sanction of Scripture, because 
 the teaching and testimony of the Church give weight 
 and authority to those portions of Scripture which Sec- 
 tarians and Socinians reject as not being sufficiently ex_ 
 plicit as proof, on the (assumed) principle that Scriptur© 
 is the guide and teacher, as well as the standard and 
 proof. It fences the faith as it were by a double wall 
 against the Romanist on the one side, and the Sectarian 
 on the other. To the spurious traditions of the one, it 
 opposes the authority of holy writ, as testified by the 
 voice of the Church from the beginning : to the selfwise 
 interpretations, or wild deductions from Scripture, which 
 the other would impose, it opposes the genuine traditions 
 of the Church' Catholic as confii-med by holy Scripture. 
 To both of these, however opposed to each other, it will 
 naturally prove a restraint and an offence, even as, in civil 
 matters, despotism and democracy alike find a check, and 
 a consequent cause of hatred, in that form of government 
 which combines the due protection of life and property 
 with the exercise of rational liberty. To us however it 
 may be truly said to set our feet in a large room. To 
 the true member of the Anglican church it will bring 
 no difficulty, if true to the principles which he pro- 
 fesses to hold, and to the confession of faith which he 
 
 c 2 
 
xxxvi PREFACE. 
 
 has made. That it does so to many nominal members 
 of that church, as the fact cannot be denied, so neither 
 need it create surprise, nor form any ground of objection. 
 For herein Hes the real cause of their hostility : that 
 they are not true to their principles, nor to the faith 
 which they profess : that they reject, for example, the 
 efficacy of the Sacraments, Infant baptism, Apostolic 
 succession, and the authority of the Church; even if 
 they reject not doctrines more immediately relating to 
 the eternal Godhead. And Tradition, giving its au- 
 thority to the Scriptural proofs of these articles, which 
 would otherwise be put aside by such men as unimport- 
 ant or ambiguous, naturally becomes an object of dislike 
 and hostility. 
 
 But where the whole body, both of doctrines and ordi- 
 nances of our church, is truly held, no such objections 
 will arise. 
 
 It may in truth be said, that of all those who profess 
 to make Scripture in any way their rule, the Church alone 
 practically and consistently abides by its principle. The 
 Socinian will suppress or gloss over those texts which refer 
 to the divinity of the Son and the Spirit, and the Holy 
 Trinity; the Presbyterian, those relating to Episcopacy 
 and Sacraments ; the Romanist, those that are at vari- 
 ance with his spurious traditions; the Baptist, those which 
 regard Infant baptism; the Independent, those which 
 refer to Apostolical authority and succession, and the 
 whole constitution of the Church. In fact, not to mul- 
 tiply examples, each denomination in turn rejects, or 
 makes of no account, such portions of Scripture as are 
 
PREFACE. xxxvii 
 
 at variance with its own tenets and views. It is the 
 Church alone which may be truly said to receive " the 
 whole Bible.'' * And this by the grace of God the church 
 is enabled to do, because, retaining the whole counsel 
 of God as received from the Holy Spirit by the 
 apostles, and by them delivered to the Church, she 
 needs not to suppress or pervert any portion of Scrip- 
 ture, as proving things not in her creed ; possessing that 
 which gives a meaning and authority to those portions 
 of holy writ, which others either pass over as insufficient 
 to prove what they would wish to be untrue, or mutilate 
 and pervert, to support errors they would wish to sub- 
 stantiate. Retaining in its primitive purity the form of 
 sound doctrine which the Apostles received and taught, 
 she is enabled, authoritatively, to communicate form and 
 shape to the suhstance of the same, as contained in the 
 Scriptures which, under the inspiration of the same 
 Spirit, the same apostles wrote. 
 
 The barriers thus formed by the authority of Scrip- 
 
 * " None, however, it would seem, but a complete and accurately moulded 
 Christian, such as the world has never or scarcely seen, would be able to 
 bring out harmoniously and perspicuously the full divine characters which 
 lie hid from mortal eyes within the inspired letter of the revelation. And 
 this, by the way, may be taken as one remarkable test, or at least charac- 
 teristic of error, in the various denominations of religion which surround 
 us; none of them embraces the whole Bible, none of them is able to inter- 
 pret the whole, none of them has a key which will revolve through the 
 entire compass of the wards which lie within. Each has its favourite text, 
 and neglects the rest. None can solve the great secret, and utter the 
 mystery of its pages. One makes trial, then another : but one and all in 
 turn are foiled. They retire, as the sages of Babylon, and make way for 
 Daniel. The Church Catholic, the true prophet of God, alone is able to 
 tell the dream and its interpretation." 
 
 (Newman's Lectures on the Prophetical Office of the Church.) 
 
xxxviii PREFACE. 
 
 ture on the one side, and by that of the church on the 
 other, while they serve to protect each other, together 
 form as it were the spiritual Thermopylae in which, and 
 there alone, the Christian soldier will successfully defend 
 the fair and goodly heritage of his Lord, from the invading 
 hordes alike of the Romanist, Sectarian, Socinian, and 
 Infidel. Of these two citadels, the one, in time past, 
 usurped by the Romanist, was made the instrument of 
 arbitrary power and oppression, wherewith to assail the 
 other fortress, and to keep in subjection all around it ; a 
 protection to those only who were willing to be his slaves. 
 They who would drive the Romanist from his exclusive 
 and unlawful possession of it, have in the excess of their 
 zeal well nigh levelled it with the ground, leaving the 
 vineyard as much unprotected from external aggression, 
 as it was before oppressed by those who should have 
 been its protectors. 
 
 God grant that it may be our lot to witness the re- 
 building of this pillar and ground of the truth : that it 
 may fall to the lot of this generation to build the old 
 waste places, to raise up the foundations of many gene- 
 rations, and to be called the repairer of the breach, the 
 restorer of paths to dwell in*. 
 
 ■» Isuiah Iviii. 12. 
 
LOGIG&L 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 LECTURE I. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 2 Tim. i. 13. 
 
 Holdfast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, 
 in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. P. 1 
 
 LECTURE n. 
 
 ARGUMENT FROM ANALOGY, IN FAVOUR OF (ALLEGED) 
 IMPERFECT PROOFS. 
 
 Luke i. 4. 
 
 That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein 
 thou hast been instructed. 41 
 
 LECTURE IIL 
 
 THE SCRIPTURE STATEMENT AND PROOF OF THE 
 PRINCIPLE. 
 
 2 Cor. v. 19, 20. 
 
 And hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. Now 
 
 then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech 
 
 you by us : we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to 
 
 God. 82 
 
 LECTURE IV. 
 
 APPLICATION OF THE FOREGOING TO DOCTRINES AND 
 ORDINANCES. 
 
 2 Tim. ii. 2. 
 
 The things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, 
 the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to 
 teach others also. 1 29 
 
xl CONTENTS. 
 
 LECTURE V. 
 
 ARGUMENT IN FAVOUR OF A BIAS OR PREJUDICE 
 
 DRAWN FROM ANALOGY AND ITS ADAPTA- 
 
 TION TO OUR MORAL NATURE. 
 
 Luke xviii. 17. 
 Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, 
 he shall not enter therein. 17B 
 
 LECTURE VL 
 
 APPLICATION OF THE FOREGOING ARGUMENT TO 
 
 INFANT BAPTISM, NATIONAL EDUCATION, 
 
 AND SUBSCRIPTION TO THE ARTICLES OF RELIGION. 
 
 Mark x. 15. 
 
 Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, 
 he shall not enter therein. 221 
 
 LECTURE VII. 
 
 TRADITION AND THE WITNESS OF THE CHURCH 
 
 ILLUSTRATED BY ANALOGY, AND 
 
 ITS ADAPTATION TO OUR MORAL NATURE. 
 
 Romans x. 10. 
 
 With the heart man believeth unto righteousness. 270 
 
 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 ARGUMENT IN FAVOUR OF THE CHURCH'S PRINCIPLE 
 
 DRAWN FROM THE LANGUAGE OF ST. PAUL— FROM 
 
 THE CONSEQUENCES OF ITS VIOLATION— THE 
 
 ANALOGY OF CIVIL GOVERNMENT— THE 
 
 ORIGINAL QUESTION REVERTED TO 
 
 —CONCLUSION. 
 
 Matthew vi. 10. 
 
 Thy kingdom come. 321 
 
LECTURE I 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 2 Tim. i. 13. 
 
 Mold fast the form of sound words, ivhieh thou 
 hast heard ofme, in faith and love which is in 
 Christ Jesus. 
 
 IT is the lot of all institutions admin- 
 istered by human agency, that in their 
 passage through the hands of men, they 
 have a tendency to deteriorate ; and this, 
 not so much in themselves and in their 
 own nature, as by departing from their 
 original principles, and thus becoming cor- 
 rupted. 
 
 Hence it becomes necessary, from time 
 to time, to return to their original prin- 
 ciple and purpose, to compare their present 
 state with their first design, their practice 
 with their theory. To this, all institutions 
 
2 LECTURE I 
 
 incorporated on human society are liable, 
 whatever their origin, whether human or 
 divine; our natural tendency is to gravitate, 
 to sink from the point at which we set out 
 on any moral course. In peaceable times, 
 we are more especially prone to this; we 
 are apt to lose sight, partially or entirely, 
 of the principle on which the institution 
 of which we are members was originally 
 based ; and then it is, that on looking back, 
 and comparing our principle with our prac- 
 tice, we discover, perhaps for the first time, 
 how far we have deviated from it. 
 
 If this is true of institutions generally, it 
 may be more peculiarly said of those of 
 divine appointment ; inasmuch as there 
 exists in these, besides that natural ten- 
 dency to deteriorate just spoken of, another 
 risk, arising out of the very circumstance 
 of their divine origin. For it is a peculiar 
 feature of those dispensations which pro- 
 ceed more immediately from God himself, 
 that, agreeably to the general analogy of 
 his works, they are framed with reference 
 to the moral condition of man, and the 
 state of probation in which he is placed as 
 
LECTURE I. 3 
 
 a moral and responsilDle agent. This very 
 circumstance implies a liability to err, nay 
 a certainty of doing so in particular cir- 
 cumstances, to a degree from which mere 
 human institutions, which had no such 
 end in view, w^ould be comparatively free. 
 Human institutions, for example, would 
 be fenced by all the preservatives of wliicli 
 they were capable, limited only by the im- 
 perfection of human nature, or tlie want 
 of sufficient control over circumstances on 
 the part of the founder. Those of divine 
 origin, on the contrary, would seem to find 
 an earlier limit to these preservatives, at 
 that point where greater security from error 
 than that afforded, would interfere with a 
 state of probation, by not leaving sufficient 
 scope for moral trial, and for its conse- 
 quence, the liability of falling into error. 
 A state of probation must always require a 
 degree of risk and temptation, sufficient to 
 promote its exercise and the moral dis- 
 cipline of the agent ; and this, in a greater 
 degree than would be allowed in a mere 
 human institution, where there existed at 
 least the power to i)revent it. 
 
 B 2 
 
4 LECTURE I. 
 
 Another feature to be observed in regard 
 to divine dispensations, is, that in the coun- 
 sels of God, time does not appear to be 
 taken into account ; that extraordinary 
 means are not resorted to, nor is the course 
 of nature interrupted, to effect results 
 which time, however remote, would bring 
 about in the ordinary course of things as 
 appointed by himself. Having, for instance, 
 revealed a divine purpose, and having ap- 
 pointed his instruments for carrying it into 
 effect, the Almighty appears to have left 
 them to operate through ordinary causes, 
 and to allow the result to follow, at how- 
 ever distant a period of time, as it would 
 follow, except the course of things should 
 be interrupted and the design delayed, by 
 the waywardness and wickedness of the 
 agents themselves. Or again, having given 
 intimations of his will, accompanied by a 
 general warning of the evils which would 
 follow from a neglect of it, and of the con- 
 sequences which would be visited on those 
 through whom that neglect should arise, 
 he has left them to find out by experience, 
 in the apparently ordinary course of events. 
 
 i 
 
LECTURE I. 5 
 
 the sad reality of those evils of which they 
 had been forewarned, and the truth of the 
 denunciations. 
 
 These, which may be said to be the 
 ordinary features of God's dispensations, it 
 will be further seen are strictly analogous 
 to those observed in the moral government 
 of the world, as far as it can be traced 
 in the course and constitution of nature. 
 In all our moral obligations, for example^ 
 while the course prescribed for us is suffici- 
 ently clear and definite to direct those who 
 desire to be so guided, and who are willing 
 to seek Truth in the way she herself pro- 
 fesses to be found, there is still consider- 
 able difficulty in following it, and room for 
 doubt and error, together with a degree of 
 temptation and risk of falling into vice, 
 which, though very great, we cannot but 
 feel is no more than is required for our 
 probation as moral and responsible agents. 
 And again, the effects of vice, or the viola- 
 tion of our moral obligations generally, are 
 often remote — not perceptible for a con- 
 siderable period ; yet when they do come, 
 bearing testimony to the truth of the warn- 
 
 B 3 
 
6 LECTURE I. 
 
 ing implied in the admission of a moral 
 obligation. And though we cannot but feel, 
 that to have been checked at an earlier 
 period of our course by some interposition 
 of Providence, might have saved us from 
 the present consequences ; yet that as a 
 general rule, such visitations are less suited 
 to a state of probation, and less calculated 
 to promote the habit of self-denial and of 
 practising virtue for its own sake, than the 
 consequences of vice, which fall more re- 
 motely in the appointed order of things. 
 The revealed dispensations of God, there- 
 fore, are analogous to those of the course 
 and constitution of nature, both in respect 
 of the greater scope they afford for error, 
 as having reference to a state of moral 
 trial, and in the remoteness of the period 
 at which, in either case, the consequences 
 of a violation of them become perceptible. 
 
 Nor do the visitations which God occa- 
 sionally interposes to recall us to our duty 
 within the covenant, form any greater ex- 
 ception to his general law, than those which 
 he sends on individuals to reclaim them 
 from a course of vice, form to the general 
 
LECTURE I. 7 
 
 law, that the consequences of such a course 
 are, as a rule, remote. 
 
 Let us apply these observations to the 
 dispensation of the Gospel, especially to 
 the provision made by our Lord for its 
 propagation, in the twofold instrument 
 appointed for that purpose, the Church 
 and the Holy Scriptures; and the proba- 
 tion provided by the relation in which 
 these two instruments stand to each other, 
 and the consequent room for error of the 
 most fearful magnitude to those who would 
 violate that relation. We might suppose 
 the appointment of instruments leaving far 
 less room for trial and for error — as was 
 the case with the Law, whose precepts were 
 more specific, and consequently more easily 
 determined. We might suppose the case 
 of the Christian Scriptures having been 
 given, like the Law, with such specific state- 
 ments as to matters of faith, and such de- 
 terminate directions on points of discipline, 
 government, and practice generally, that 
 no question could arise as to their meaning 
 and object — so that he might run that read- 
 eth ; instead of their being, as they really 
 
 B 4 
 
8 LECTURE I. 
 
 are, of that nature, that the perception of 
 their truths is made to depend much on 
 the prepossessions, the bias, the wishes, 
 the general tone and character of mind on 
 the part of the reader. We might suppose 
 it otherwise ; but it is obvious to any one 
 who reflects, that such a state of things 
 would be unsuited to a state of probation, 
 and the moral discipline required to attain 
 the high and spiritual character of mind, 
 which it is the tendency of the Christian 
 Scriptures to form within us. 
 
 Again, we might suppose a case where 
 the Church, the other instrument, having 
 been fully instructed in the doctrine of 
 Christ, and commanded to teach it, was 
 to be kept by an extraordinary providence 
 from corrupting the truth, through the 
 instrumentality of continual warnings and 
 chastisements, instead of being left, as it 
 has been, to find out its errors by experi- 
 ence, and to meet with punishments, more 
 slow and remote indeed, but far more se- 
 vere, in the constituted course of things. 
 It is obvious here also, that such a process, 
 though pursued towards the earlier Jewish 
 
LECTURE I. 9 
 
 Church, would be little suited to a state 
 of probation now required for those who 
 are ordained to walk by faith and not by 
 sight, nor analogous to the dealings of 
 God generally. 
 
 This feature in the divine dispensations 
 may serve both to account for, and to re- 
 concile to our minds, the greater degree 
 of vitiation which has from time to time 
 been observed in the administration of the 
 Gospel, than would be expected, or be found 
 generally to exist, in institutions merely 
 human ; while the consideration that time 
 is not considered in the divine counsels, if 
 purchased at the expense of probation or the 
 exercise of the principle of faith, may tend 
 to check the despondency in which many 
 might be disposed to indulge, at the com- 
 paratively little progress which the Gospel 
 has made in the course of eighteen cen- 
 turies. 
 
 The circumstances which generally lead 
 us to turn to and reconsider our principles 
 in regard to institutions, are various ; but 
 the most obvious and of most frequent 
 occurrence, will be found to be attacks 
 
10 LECTURE I. 
 
 raade upon them, either from without or 
 by those ostensibly within, and that viti- 
 ation of the original principle before 
 spoken of, which at first, and for some time, 
 was too small to attract observation ; but 
 gradually increasing, and thus becoming 
 more visible, both in itself and by compa- 
 rison with that which it professes to be, 
 our attention is more forcibly drawn to it ; 
 and w^e are made to perceive to how great 
 an extent we have departed from our prin- 
 ciple. At the same time, even this would 
 perhaps esca])e our observation for a longer 
 period, and till a great degree of vitiation 
 had ensued, were it not for the circum- 
 stance of some external assault, which com- 
 pels us to turn our eyes inwardly on our- 
 selves, with a view to see how we may best 
 meet it. And then again it is that our 
 attention is awakened to any diminution 
 of our internal resources occasioned by our 
 previous neglect. 
 
 Such may be said to have been the case 
 with the Church for the period preceding 
 the Reformation : not that we need limit 
 to that period the evils which it was the 
 
LECTURE I. 11 
 
 object of that event to remove, but because 
 it was then chiefly that the attention of the 
 Enghsh Church was called to it by being 
 placed in circumstances similar to those de- 
 scribed. Its internal principle had long 
 been vitiated; but without determining for 
 what period violence had been offered to it, 
 it was not till then that the English Church 
 had begun formally to consider how she 
 stood in regard to the original principles of 
 her constitution, by adhering to which she 
 might best place herself in the position of 
 defence requisite for her protection. 
 
 A remarkable feature, however, in the 
 Reformation in this country, and one which 
 strongly denoted a superintending Provi- 
 dence, was the circumstance that the Re- 
 formers so little followed the ordinary ten- 
 dency of human nature, nor allowed them- 
 selves to be carried away into the opposite 
 extreme to that from which they had re- 
 cently suffered and were now set free — that 
 having seen the authority of the Church 
 so greatly abused, and carried to that ex- 
 tent as almost to lead to the virtual ex- 
 clusion of Scripture from having any share 
 
12 LECTURE I. 
 
 of authority in forming a standard of faith, 
 they did not, by a natural reaction, assign 
 to it a corresponding excess of authority, to 
 the exclusion of that of the Church ; but 
 that many of them were still willing to re- 
 ceive as the apostles' doctrine whatever had 
 come down to them through the apostolic 
 succession, whether embodied in liturgies, 
 creeds, formularies, or even oral tradition, 
 provided it could be found in, and proved 
 by. Holy Scripture ; admitting the pre- 
 sumptive claims of all that the Church 
 had hitherto taught, until found to be at 
 variance with Holy Scripture ; but at the 
 same time claiming the right to refer all 
 such teaching to the written Scripture, be- 
 fore they would receive it as necessary to 
 be believed for salvation — claiming, in fact, 
 the right to try the alleged Apostles' doc- 
 trine by those Scriptures, which, by the 
 admission of their opponents themselves, 
 the same Apostles wrote. Both these prin- 
 ciples, viz. 1st, the authority of antiquity, 
 which may be termed the generic character 
 of the faith ; and, 2nd, the right of appeal 
 to Scripture, which was its specific charac- 
 
LECTURE I. 18 
 
 ter, and which are ahke essential for the 
 attainment of truth in regard to Christian 
 doctrine — both these principles were main- 
 tained by the English Reformers, though 
 popular ignorance and sectarian prejudice 
 too frequently attribute to them the latter 
 alone, and speak of the principle of the 
 Reformation, as though there were but one 
 — as though the Reformers, in appealing to 
 Scripture as the ultimate standard of faith 
 for proof of doctrine, overlooked the divinely 
 derived claims of the Church to be the 
 teacher of Christian doctrine, and her au- 
 thority in matters of faith. And if they 
 seemed to lay a greater stress on one, and 
 to say little, in comparison, of the other, it 
 was not that they underrated the latter, 
 but that the circumstances of the times 
 did not require them to give it an im- 
 portance which it possessed already. At 
 that time there were few who were not 
 Catholics ; few who denied the presump- 
 tive claims of the Church to be heard, till 
 found to be at variance with Scripture. It 
 was the right of appeal to Scripture for the 
 truth and proof of what was taught, the 
 
U LECTURE I. 
 
 specific character of the faith, for which 
 they had to contend ; and to that they 
 naturally attached, for the time, a greater 
 importance ; but that they did so, consi- 
 dering the circumstances under which they 
 acted, would afford no proof that they 
 underrated the authority of the Church 
 and the presumptive claims of primitive 
 antiquity, even were their own testimony 
 on the subject wanting. 
 
 Their energies and labours would natu- 
 rally be directed to the assertion and vindi- 
 cation of the authority of Holy Scripture ; 
 but that they did not undervalue or lose 
 sight of the other principle, that of Catho- 
 licity, and that the apparently secondary 
 importance they attached to it was purely 
 relative, having relation to the peculiar cir- 
 cumstances of the times, is sufficiently ob- 
 vious from their own recorded sentiments 
 on the subject. Nay, even if they had 
 made it a point of secondary importance 
 absolutely, without reference to the temper 
 and spirit of the times, it would not have 
 been a matter of much surprise; nor would 
 it have afforded a sure test of their real 
 
LECTURE I. 15 
 
 sentiments, still less of the truth of the 
 principle itself, considering the natural ten- 
 dency of human nature, after being unduly 
 forced into one extreme, to react in the 
 other ; especially when the principle, on the 
 side of which they are tempted to excess, 
 has been asserted at the expense of per- 
 sonal risk and suffering,, and sealed by the 
 blood of their dearest friends and brethren. 
 When therefore we find that, with all this 
 temptation to go into an opposite extreme 
 from that into which the tyranny of the 
 Romish Church would have forced them, 
 with the disgust which men w^ould natu- 
 rally take, even at the legitimate exercise of 
 a principle, from the excess of which they 
 had suffered and seen others suffer so deep- 
 ly ; when, notwithstanding all this, we find 
 that our English Reformers did speak de- 
 cidedly (no matter how briefly in compa- 
 rison) on the subject of Antiquity, Church 
 Authority, and Primitive Tradition, we 
 may form some estimate of the importance 
 which they at least attached to it. 
 
 It may not unreasonably be questioned, 
 whether at the present day we have not 
 
16 LECTURE I. 
 
 again arrived at that point in a departure, 
 though in a different direction, from the 
 original principles of the Gospel, at which 
 the consequences of that departure, though 
 following in the natural course of things 
 rather than from any special visitation, are 
 beginning to tell most fearfully, as well as 
 perceptibly, on the interests and prospects 
 of Christianity. For it would seem that 
 the reaction in favour of the sole supre- 
 macy of Scripture, to the prejudice if not 
 the suppression of Antiquity and Catholi- 
 city, from which the Reformers appear to 
 have been providentially protected by the 
 spirit of truth, that reaction (from causes 
 into which it is unnecessary now to enter) 
 did take place in the times succeeding them, 
 and its fruits are seen not only in the 
 errors and heresies which have in conse- 
 quence sprung up and daily increase in 
 number among us, but also in the circum- 
 stance that, with many persons, the mere 
 mention of, or bare allusion to Catholic 
 principles. Antiquity, and Primitive Tra- 
 dition, creates alarm and suspicion, little 
 inferior to that of Popery in its worst and 
 
LECTURE I. 17 
 
 most hideous form. A proof, if such were 
 required, how greatly we have departed 
 from the principles, as w^ell of the Re- 
 formers, as also of the Apostles. 
 
 In returning, therefore, to the original 
 principles of our faith, it is obvious that 
 our primary object should be, to redeem 
 from the obloquy and disuse into which 
 they have fallen, the true Catholic, or 
 Church principle, as distinguished from 
 the Sectarian and Rationalistic free-think- 
 ing principle of the age, and to assign to 
 the Church and the Scriptures respectively, 
 their part and province in the establish- 
 ment of the Christian faith. To do this 
 is indeed a work of some difficulty, not 
 indeed in itself, nor from any deficiency 
 of proof, but from the obstacles which pre- 
 sent themselves in the prejudices and fears 
 of men, which at times seem so strong as 
 to refuse, not conviction merely, but to 
 entertain the question at all, as though it 
 savoured of impiety, and were derogatory 
 to the word of God, and the sufficiency 
 of Holy Scripture. Nor is the difficulty 
 lessened by the consideration, that there 
 
 c 
 
IB LECTURE I. 
 
 is to be found among the objectors to these 
 principles, who, while they retain the doc- 
 trines, yet rest them on different grounds, 
 so much piety, so much zeal, so much sin- 
 cere regard for what they conceive to be 
 the word of God, so much devotion to what 
 they believe to be the cause of truth, that 
 the utmost caution is requisite to avoid 
 giving pain or needless outrage to the feel- 
 ings ; and still more lest, in removing what 
 we conceive to be an erroneous principle, 
 we fail to establish in its stead that which 
 we believe to be a safer and more legiti- 
 mate one, and thus leave in painful doubt 
 and perplexity, perhaps in hopeless error, 
 those whom we would fain have guided 
 into truth. All which considerations may 
 well serve to impress, on those who profess 
 to advocate a return to those principles we 
 have so long been losing sight of, the ex- 
 tent of the responsibility they incur, and 
 how narrow is that way of truth in which 
 the Church teaches them to pray that all 
 those may be led who profess and call 
 themselves Christians, so that they may 
 hold the faith in unity of spirit, in the 
 
LECTURE I. 19 
 
 bond of peace, and in righteousness of 
 life. 
 
 Add to this, that we have to contend 
 against fearful difficulties in the temper 
 and spirit of the times. The same spirit 
 which, in ecclesiastical and spiritual mat- 
 ters, has given birth to heresies and errors 
 of such fearful magnitude, far from being 
 confined to these, is embodied in the events, 
 political or social, which are passing around 
 us : it seems to infect the atmosphere in 
 which we have our moral being, and, like 
 the atmosphere of the natural world, its 
 pressure, even on ourselves, is that from 
 which we vainly try to escape ; we our- 
 selves must be more or less affected, and 
 our judgments influenced by it, however 
 unconscious of it ourselves. Not that 
 there is any thing surprising or otherwise 
 than natural in this ; and so far, it may 
 seem to assist us in seeing our through the 
 difficulties which beset us. For the spirit 
 or principle of an age, be it what it may, 
 will not vary in different things, but will 
 be the same in all; — be it licentiousness, 
 tyranny, indolent impatience of inquiry, 
 
 c 2 
 
20 LECTURE I. 
 
 restless impatience of restraint — the spirit 
 of undue submission, or lawless resistance ; 
 be it what it may, it will pervade the whole 
 moral atmosphere, and shew itself alike in 
 all our acts or institutions — public or pri- 
 vate, ecclesiastical, civil, or social. The 
 union, for example, of Popery wdth Despot- 
 ism, of Sectarianism with Republicanism, 
 of true apostolical principles with mixed 
 institutions securing rational liberty, where, 
 in the one case^ the authority of the Church 
 is limited by the supremacy of Holy Scrip- 
 ture, and the wildness of individual inter- 
 pretation of Scripture is checked by the 
 authoritative teaching of the Church, pro- 
 tecting the judgment against itself; and 
 where, in the analogous case, the power of 
 the executive and popular representation 
 mutually exercise a check on each other; — 
 the union of civil and spiritual institutions, 
 marked by these analogous features, is far 
 from being accidental. 
 
 To proceed then : let it be observed, that 
 two instruments were appointed by our Lord 
 for propagating the Christian Revelation — 
 the Church and the Holy Scriptures. 
 
LECTURE I. 21 
 
 To both of these were their respective 
 offices assigned : to the one to teach, the 
 other to prove. The teaching of the one, 
 after the Apostles were dead and the 
 Canon of New Testament complete, was not 
 to be received as essential to salvation, (as 
 our portion of the western church teaches,) 
 unless what it taught could also be found 
 in, and be proved by. Holy Scripture ; 
 while, on the other hand, the written word 
 presupposes, on the part of the reader, a 
 knowledge of the doctrines of which it 
 speaks, being addressed, as the opening 
 of each Epistle sets forth, to Christians, 
 and those of some standing ; and there- 
 fore speaks by implication, in the way of 
 allusion and reference, clearly indeed, but 
 still in this way ; nor does it any where 
 intimate that it was designed to instruct in 
 the elements of the Christian faith the 
 persons whom it addresses ; nor is there 
 any intimation that persons reading it 
 with that view, will ever, without some 
 other and external assistance, attain to a 
 knowledge of its truths. This will also be 
 spoken of more fully hereafter. It is clear, 
 
 c 3 
 
22 LECTURE I. 
 
 however, thus far, that if these were the 
 two instruments ordained to be used con- 
 jointly for propagating and maintaining 
 the truth, the suppressing, or in any way 
 injuring either, would be calculated to give 
 an undue preponderance, or a wrong direc- 
 tion to the other, and would necessarily 
 have the effect of corrupting the truth; it 
 is obvious, for instance, that the Church, 
 unchecked by the appeal to the written 
 Scripture, would be tempted to make, from 
 time to time, such additions to the truth it 
 professed to have received and to be em- 
 powered to teach, as the caprice or wicked- 
 ness of men might suggest. It would be 
 no less obvious, that the written Scripture, 
 unless preceded in its perusal by instruc- 
 tion in those doctrines of which it speaks 
 throughout as of things already well known, 
 would not only incur the risk of having 
 those doctrines overlooked, (certainly called 
 in question from the absence of more posi- 
 tive proof,) but would also be wrested to 
 prove points they were not designed to 
 prove, but which they might be made to 
 prove to the mind of any given individual, 
 
LECTURE I. 23 
 
 who was already prepossessed with the 
 notion, and desirous of finding proofs for it. 
 That the first of the two evils here spoken 
 of, would arise from the suppression of the 
 one instrument, Holy Scripture, the whole 
 History of the Papacy is at once the exem- 
 plification and the proof. That the cor- 
 responding evil on the other side would 
 arise from the suppression of the Church's 
 teaching, men are more slow to learn. Still 
 that they are learning it, and that by sad 
 experience, we may now trust, cannot be 
 denied; and that too, for the reason spoken 
 of at the commencement of this Lecture, viz. 
 that the corruptions and evils springing from 
 it, though less distinguishable at first, are 
 now, from their increasing magnitude, be- 
 coming visible to the commonest observers. 
 That the Church's teaching has been 
 sadly lost sight of and undervalued, and 
 its paramount authority to hold the first 
 place in the order of time absolutely de- 
 nied, even where its usefulness as a pre- 
 vious guide has not been questioned, is too 
 obvious to require proof; but that the 
 evils which now overhang the spread of 
 
 c 4 
 
24 LECTURE I. 
 
 true evangelical truth among us — the ra- 
 tionalistic free-thinking spirit of the age, 
 the increase of the Socinian heresy, and, 
 still more, the increase of the Socinian 
 pynnciple; the proud, flippant, self-sufficient 
 temper of the times, in all that regards 
 divine things and the spiritual condition 
 of man — that these have any necessary or 
 even accidental connexion with the sup- 
 pression of the Church's teaching, or the 
 attempts to change the relation w^hich, by 
 God's appointment, it bears to Holy Scrip- 
 ture, this men have yet to learn. The 
 great enemy of souls long since tried how- 
 he could establish his kingdom by the sup- 
 pression of the second instrument, and for 
 a while he succeeded. When detected in 
 that shape, he took advantage of men's 
 fears and the natural reaction of their 
 minds, to assume the opposite form, and 
 to assail them in the other extreme, — 
 with what success, need not be asked 
 by those who will look around and see 
 the numerous sects of heretics which 
 daily spring up and increase among us, all 
 of whom, as they suppose, find in Holy 
 
LECTURE I. 25 
 
 Scripture the proofs of their respective 
 creeds. That such do find their proofs in 
 the Bible, as they think, we cannot deny. 
 True, ive may think them in lamentable 
 and dangerous error ; but it is difficult to 
 say with what justice we can take upon 
 ourselves to pronounce them responsible 
 for it, or to say that we are better than 
 they, if, denying the need of previous 
 teaching, still less admitting the presumptive 
 claims of the Church to be that teacher, 
 we admit the principle that each person is 
 to take up his Bible as that from which 
 alone he is to derive his faith and his 
 knowledge of his relation to God. 
 
 It was observed above, that for this 
 principle there is not the slightest authority 
 in the Scripture itself; a circumstance of 
 which there will be occasion to speak more 
 fully hereafter. It might not unseasonably 
 be mentioned however, at this stage, as 
 tending to disarm, in some degree, the pre- 
 judice which may have been excited in 
 the minds of any thus far, by what has 
 been already said of the authority of the 
 Church, and the relation in which it stands 
 
26 LECTURE I. 
 
 to Holy Scripture. Mention has been al- 
 ready made of the difficulties which present 
 themselves in treating this subject;, from 
 the prejudices of men. Nor let it be 
 thought that the term is used in any offen- 
 sive sense. It is not denied that this preju- 
 dice frequently has for its base a sincere ve- 
 neration for divine truth, a holy zeal for the 
 honour of God and the purity of his w^ord, 
 and an honest indignation at those w^ho for 
 that w^ord w^ould substitute the vain tradi- 
 tions of men. But it should be observed, that 
 both its direction and its object are w^rong, 
 when aroused against the authority and 
 teaching of the Church in cofijunction with 
 Holy Scripture ; and that to object to such 
 previous authoritative teaching is at best 
 unsiippoi'ted by Scripture, even were it not, 
 as it will be shewn that it is, repugnant to 
 Scripture. With a view therefore to re- 
 move the prejudices which might be ex- 
 cited by what has been said thus far, let it 
 be noted, that for the assertion, that the 
 Bible is that from which each person or 
 body of persons, is at liberty to form their 
 own system of faith, as they severally think 
 
LECTURE I. 27 
 
 best; in other words, that the Bible by itself 
 is the sole rule and guide of faith, (as distin- 
 guished from the standard of faith, which it 
 is,) there is no authority whatever in Sanp- 
 ture itself ; nay more, that even the right to 
 try by the standard of Scripture what we 
 have already heard, the substance in fact of 
 our Sixth Article, that even this is, in a cer- 
 tain sense of the word, an assumption — 
 one, which God forbid should ever be ques- 
 tioned, but still an assumption for which 
 there is no direct proof in Scripture it- 
 self, though abundantly proved from other 
 sources, which, however, do not come into 
 consideration here, as not being recognised 
 by the advocates of the Sectarian principle. 
 Until, therefore, the teaching of the 
 Church, and the sufficiency of Holy Scrip- 
 ture, have each their respective authority 
 assigned and maintained in instructing sin- 
 ners in the way of life, it is hopeless to ex- 
 pect that the Apostles' doctrine can be 
 retained in its primitive purity, or the true 
 Gospel of peace preached among men. The 
 corruptions which have arisen from denying 
 its due authority to Holy Scripture, form 
 
28 LECTURE I. 
 
 the history of Popery ; those which flow 
 from the opposite error of denying its pro- 
 per authority to the Church, will form the 
 history of the eighteenth or nineteenth 
 centuries ; and if we are less able to trace 
 them than we could wish, it is because, as 
 is the case with the outward vision, the 
 objects are too near to us to be so clearly dis- 
 cerned as those of former days : we live in 
 the midst of them : they surround us like 
 a dark vapour ; and though obscuring from 
 our spiritual vision the light of heavenly 
 truth, they are in their actual form less 
 distinguishable than those which exhaled 
 from the corruptions of Popery, which, in 
 their day, were as little distinguishable, to 
 those who lived in the midst of them ; but 
 which, as the breath of heavenly wisdom 
 has dispelled them, have now, when viewed 
 in the distance of years, or from a higher 
 point of spiritual knowledge, like clouds 
 viewed from a distance, assumed to our eyes 
 a distinguishable and tangible shape. 
 
 The errors, therefore, which corrupt the 
 truth of Jesus in our day, are mainly to be 
 traced, as were those of Popery, to one cause 
 
LECTURE I. 29 
 
 — a violation of the harmony which ought 
 to exist, in the relation of the Church's 
 teaching to Holy Scripture : with this dif- 
 ference in our clay, that whereas Popery 
 suppressed Scripture, men now suppress or 
 keep back the teaching of the Church : to 
 this are all the heresies and errors of the 
 day, with few exceptions, to be more or 
 less remotely traced. 
 
 In support of this assertion, it may be 
 observed, that every denomination of he- 
 resy appeals to Scripture for proofs of its 
 creed, and professes to have deduced it 
 fj'om Scripture, in pursuance of an assumed 
 right of private judgment, in the interpre- 
 tation of Scripture, limited only by its ul- 
 timate responsibility to God himself. There 
 is no sect of heresy which does not profess to 
 abide by the Sixth Article of our Church ; 
 that is, according to their view of that 
 Article, (for they will not allow the Church 
 to be the expositor of her own Article,) 
 overlooking the important circumstance 
 that that Article was framed for Catholics, 
 to whom, at that period, the authoritative 
 teaching of the Church required to be but 
 
30 LECTURE I. 
 
 little set forth, in comparison of the other 
 neglected truth, the authority of Holy Scrip- 
 ture ^ 
 
 We adhere to pure evangelical truth, so 
 far only as it is determined whether we 
 regard the Scripture as that from which we 
 are to form our religion, according to our 
 own interpretation and views ; or whether 
 we regard it as that to which, after having 
 been instructed by the apostolical Church, 
 we are to approach, in prayer and in hum- 
 ble leaning for guidance on the Spirit of 
 truth, " in order that we may know the 
 " certainty of those things, in which we 
 " have been instructed." The first of these 
 may be called the Sectarian or Heretical 
 principle; the other, the Catholic or Church 
 principle : it is only by adhering to the 
 latter, that w^e can hope to maintain in its 
 
 a The logical fallacy of which they are guilty, consists 
 in assuming the converse of the universal affirmative 
 proposition, that " Whatsoever is Christian doctrine, is 
 to be found in and proved by Holy Scripture.'"* Inde- 
 pendently of the fact, that the terms will not of them- 
 selves bear this conversion, the framers of the article 
 never contemplated that the subject itself would ad- 
 mit it. 
 
LECTURE I. 31 
 
 purity, the truth as it is in Jesus. It will 
 be my object in the following Lectures, to 
 offer some arguments in defence of this 
 principle, and to meet some of the objec- 
 tions commonly brought against it. This, 
 it must be confessed, is a somewhat wide 
 field, affording copious materials from which 
 to select. Of the objections alleged against 
 tlie Church's principle, 1 propose to meet 
 those chiefly which are urged by the Sec- 
 tarian and the Rationalist ; that of the 
 former being that the principle is unscrip- 
 tural ; that of the rationalist, that it is ir- 
 rational, and unsuited to the nature of 
 man as a moral and intellectual being, 
 being calculated to fetter his moral and 
 mental energies, pervert and enfeeble his 
 judgment, and to make him the mere crea- 
 ture of prejudice; and likewise the ob- 
 jection, that it is opposed to what is sup- 
 posed to be the progTessive chai^actei^ of 
 Christian knowledge. 
 
 Another feature objected to in the 
 Church's system, is the admission of the 
 principle of indirect, and, as some would 
 term it, imperfect proofs in Scripture of 
 
32 LECTURE I. 
 
 many essential articles of belief. The ob- 
 jections to this, I propose to meet, among 
 other arguments, by shewing that the kind 
 of proof thus afforded, (assuming it to be as 
 the objectors state,) is as complete as that 
 which we find out of the Bible, in nature, of 
 things their belief in which the objectors 
 admit unhesitatingly. This argument from 
 analogy will be first used elenchtically^ shew- 
 ing that the objection proves too much: 
 that it leads to Deism ; and this might, for 
 the main purpose, appear sufficient. But 
 it will admit of being carried farther, and 
 used deictically^ shelving that the kind of 
 proof w^hich Scripture gives us of these 
 articles of faith, is such as might have been 
 expected a priori^ or the assumption that it 
 would bear an analogy to the proofs we 
 meet with, external to the Bible, of things 
 believed, on such proofs, by the objector. 
 
 It is desirable to keep distinct these two 
 modes of using the argument from analogy, 
 because, if to some, the a p7'iori argument 
 should appear unconclusive, we may at 
 least fall back on the elenchtic argument, 
 and place the objector in the position of 
 
LECTURE I. 33 
 
 admitting our principle, or of giving up his 
 own. 
 
 The like distinction may be made, if ne- 
 cessary, in the argument from the adapta- 
 tion of the church system to human nature, 
 using it first elenchtically, by shewing that 
 it does no more in the way of placing re- 
 straints on the freedom of thought, than is 
 done every day by the objectors themselves, 
 in matters where the defence of the prac- 
 tice would be, that is rendered necessary 
 by the actual state of human nature : and 
 then carrying the argument on to one of a 
 demonstrative character, shewing the ante- 
 cedent grounds in favour of the system. 
 But as the arguments in either case will 
 rest on nearly the same statements, and as 
 the demonstrative argument is in itself suf- 
 ficiently strong to be ventured at once, and 
 to be admitted by every one, who wx)uld not 
 impugn whatever has been written on the 
 subject, and run counter to the universal 
 practice of mankind, it will not be neces- 
 sary here to make this distinction. We may 
 therefore use the argument from the adapt- 
 ation to human nature, at once as demon- 
 
34 LECTURE I. 
 
 strative, as regards the a priori argument, 
 endeavouring to shew, that the very points 
 objected to in the catholic or church prin- 
 ciple, especially those v^hich regard the 
 restraints placed on the exercise of freedom 
 of thought, and the control assumed over the 
 right of private judgment, that these are no 
 more than might have been expected ante- 
 cedently, on the assumption, that the Gospel, 
 being itself adapted to the actual condition 
 and wants of man, would be propagated by 
 instruments calculated to promote its ef- 
 ficiency in meeting and providing for them ; 
 and by instruments, and in the mode, adapt- 
 ed to the moral constitution of the recipient. 
 It will be seen, that the persons to be re- 
 plied to by each of these three arguments 
 respectively, are different from each other ; 
 especially those to whom refer the arguments 
 from Scripture, and that from the adaptation 
 of the system to human nature. The one 
 are frequently of a decidedly more religious 
 character than the other, and generally 
 strong and sincere assertors of the supre- 
 macy and sufficiency of Holy Scripture. The 
 others are less marked by this, than by 
 
LECTURE I. 35 
 
 their hostility to the restraint which the 
 Church lays upon them. 
 
 The one are primarily jealous, really or 
 avowedly, of the alleged infringements on 
 the authority of Holy Scripture ; and only 
 secondarily so, of the restrictions placed 
 on their own liberty of judgment. The 
 other are primarily jealous of the inter- 
 ference with their right of private judgment; 
 and only secondarily, and as it would seem 
 accidentally so, as regards the Scriptures. 
 
 It is obvious, therefore, that the Scrip- 
 tural defence of the system, and that found- 
 ed on analogy and its adaptation to our 
 moral constitution, apply in different de- 
 grees to each of these two classes of ob- 
 jectors respectively. At the same time, each 
 class requires both : the rationalist, for ex- 
 ample, while asserting with all his might 
 the supremacy of reason, and therefore 
 being mainly to be replied to by the philo- 
 sophical defence of the system, yet admits 
 the authority of Scripture in a certain w^ay, 
 and after his own fashion ; and therefore 
 requires the argument from that, as far as 
 l^is principle will admit of it. 
 
36 LECTURE I. 
 
 The Sectarian on the other hand, though 
 professing to rest chiefly on Scripture, yet 
 contends strongly on the reasonableness of 
 exercising his own judgment upon it, in 
 his own way. It will be seen, that " the 
 " right of private judgment," which is, as 
 it were, his w^atchword, is enthymematic^ as 
 though it were claimed on abstract grounds 
 of reason. He therefore cannot shrink from 
 the argument drawn from the reasonable- 
 ness of the system, as exhibited in the phi- 
 losophical elucidation of it. 
 
 The argument from analogy, in defence 
 of the Scripture proofs of the Church's doc- 
 trine, is addressed chiefly to those who, 
 believing in the divine origin of the know^- 
 ledge of God and of a future state, (which 
 must be conceded,) are dissatisfied wdth the 
 alleged imperfect and insufficient charac- 
 ter of the proofs from Scripture, which the 
 Church brings in support of doctrines which 
 they reject, and reject on the ground of 
 that insufficiency. These will consist of 
 the lowest class of Sectarians — lowest, that 
 is, as regards the number of Church doc- 
 trines they admit, and farthest removed, in 
 
LECTURE I. 37 
 
 the scale of orthodoxy, from the Church's 
 creed. At the same time, although it is to 
 this class mainly, if not exclusively, that 
 the argument from analogy addresses it- 
 self, it applies to sectarians of every other 
 grade, who are for that purpose reduced, on 
 their own principle, to one class — I say on 
 their own principle, because it is difficult 
 to conceive how any one who objects to 
 the Church's doctrines, on the ground of 
 the nature of the proofs by which they 
 are supported, can, consistently with his 
 principle, stop short of absolute Socinian- 
 ism. This of course does not regard his 
 personal belief, but the tendency of his 
 principle as an argument which must 
 lead to that: it proves in fact too much. 
 This will be denied by him. The Trinita- 
 rian dissenter, while rejecting Apostolical 
 succession. Infant-baptism, or the efficacy 
 of the Sacraments as means and pledges 
 of grace, on the ground of the insufficiency 
 of proof of them in Scripture, will deny 
 that the proofs of the doctrines which he 
 does admit, are in any way inconclusive or 
 unsatisfactory. Yet what says the Socinian 
 
 D 3 
 
38 LECTURE I. 
 
 respecting those same doctrines ? Is he sa- 
 tisfied with these proofs which to the other 
 are so convincing ? And how the former is 
 to reply to him, consistently with his prin- 
 ciple^ it is difficult to conceive. True, they 
 will join issue on the force with which 
 the proofs strike each of them respect- 
 ively ; and each may, and probably will, 
 retain his opinion. But the former has, 
 by his own principle of the right of private 
 interpretation, put it out of his power to 
 condemn the creed of the other, or to main- 
 tain that his own is more scriptural or more 
 essential to salvation. Let us now introduce 
 a third party to the discussion in the person 
 of the churchman. To him the proofs of 
 doctrines, which the other rejects as insuffi- 
 cient, are quite sufficient and satisfactory. 
 
 The Sectarian for example, admitting 
 the doctrines of the Divinity of Christ, and 
 the Trinity, rejects Apostolical succession, 
 and the efficacy of the Sacraments; while to 
 the Churchman, the proofs of these are satis 
 factory. Again ; the same Sectarian is per- 
 fectly satisfied with the proof of doctrines, 
 which to the Socinian are insufficient ; while 
 
LECTURE I. 39 
 
 to the churchman, the Socinian's grounds 
 for his heresy are no worse than those by 
 which the other attempts to justify his. 
 Hence arises an important result ; that it 
 rests with the Sectarian, of whatever grade 
 or denomination, to shew how he can argue 
 with the churchman respecting their points 
 of difference, on the ground of the imper- 
 fect character of the Scripture proofs ; and 
 likewise with the Socinian, respecting their 
 points of diiference, on the ground of the 
 sufficiency of Scripture proofs, which the So- 
 cinian will not receive, without the admission 
 that some previous teaching or knowledge 
 is implied, (or, on the supposition that this 
 is the only proof which can be adduced in 
 support of them.) He is in this position — 
 arguing with the Churchman on Socinian 
 grounds ; and with the Socinian on Church 
 grounds, (if on any beyond those of in- 
 dividual interpretation ;) and in reference 
 to either of these, his argument leads to 
 the opposite principle. To one or the 
 other of these he must belong. As regards 
 his own individual convictions, he may re- 
 main where he is, at the expense of his 
 consistency; but his jmnciple becomes of 
 
 D 4 
 
40 LECTURE I. 
 
 necessity merged in one or the other of 
 these two. 
 
 As regards the principle therefore, we 
 may fairly be allowed to place all who 
 separate from the Church catholic, in the 
 like position ; or to lay down, that among 
 Protestants there are but two principles : 
 the Catholic or Church principle, and the 
 Sectarian or heretical, which may be also 
 termed the Rationalistic or Socinian prin- 
 ciple — the Catholic, which assumes that 
 the Church is the divinely appointed in- 
 strument for teaching the Gospel, with the 
 Scripture for its credentials and proof, be- 
 yond which it cannot go — the Heretical, 
 which regards the Scripture as the sole in- 
 strument from which, by virtue of this as- 
 sumption, every individual and society is at 
 liberty to form their own creed, as they 
 may deem best, without any previous bias 
 or external restriction. 
 
 That the latter of these two principles is 
 at variance with Scripture, Analogy, and 
 the Moral constitution of Man, it will be 
 my attempt to trace out more fully in the 
 following Lectures. 
 
LECTURE II. 
 
 ARGUMENT FR03I ANALOGY, IN FAVOUR OF (ALLEGED) 
 IMPERFECT PROOFS. 
 
 Luke i. 4. 
 
 That thou mightest know the certainty of those 
 
 things, wherein thou hast been instructed. 
 
 IN a work professing to give a summary 
 of the tenets of the (so called) "Uni- 
 " tarian Christians," published by authority 
 by one of the teachers of that sect, the fol- 
 lowing passage occurs, with reference to the 
 doctrine of the Trinity, and their reasons 
 for rejecting it. 
 
 " So entirely do the Scriptures abstain 
 " from stating the Trinity, that when our 
 " opponents would insert it into their 
 " Creeds and Doxologies, they are com- 
 " pelled to leave the Bible, and to invent 
 " forms of words altogether unsanctioned 
 " by scriptural phraseology. That a doc- 
 " trine so strange, so liable to inisapprehen- 
 
42 LECTURE II. 
 
 " sion, so fundamental as this is said to be, 
 " and requiring such careful exposition, 
 " should be left so undefined and unpro- 
 " tected, to be made out by inference, and 
 " to be hunted through distant and de- 
 '' tached parts of Scripture, is a difficulty 
 " which, we think, no ingenuity can ex- 
 '' plain V 
 
 Before offering any remarks on the pre- 
 ceding passage, let us turn to the following, 
 to the same effect, from Milton's Treatise 
 on Christian Doctrine. 
 
 First, with reference to his reasons for 
 rejecting the doctrine of the divinity of the 
 Son, and his unity with the Father; he 
 writes : " If indeed I were a member of the 
 " church of Rome, which requires implicit 
 " obedience to its creed on all points of 
 '' faith, I should have acquiesced from edu- 
 " cation or habit to its simple decree or au- 
 " thority, even though it denies that the 
 " doctrine of the Trinity, as now received, 
 " is capable of being proved from any pas- 
 " sage of Scripture. But since I enrol 
 " myself among the number of those who 
 
 ^ Statement [of the views of the Unitarian Christians 
 by Dr. Channing. 
 
LECTURE II. 43 
 
 " acknowledge the word of God alone as 
 " the rule of faith, and freely advance what 
 " appears to me much more clearly dedu- 
 " cible from the Holy Scriptures than the 
 " commonly received opinion, I see no rea- 
 " son why any one who belongs to the same 
 " protestant or reformed Church, and pro- 
 " fesses to acknowledge the same rule of 
 " faith as myself, should take offence at my 
 " freedom, particularly as I impose my au- 
 " thority on no one, but merely propose 
 " what I think more worthy of belief, than 
 " the creed in general acceptation. I only 
 " entreat, that my readers will ponder and 
 " examine my statements, in a spirit which 
 " desires to discover nothing but the truth, 
 " and with a mind free from prejudice. 
 " For without intending to oppose the au- 
 " thority of Scripture, which I consider in- 
 " violably sacred, I only take upon myself 
 " to refute human interpretations, as often 
 " as the occasion requires, conformably with 
 " my right, or rather with my duty as a 
 '' man. If indeed those w^ith whom I have 
 " to contend were able to produce direct 
 " attestation from Heaven to the truth of 
 " the doctrine which they espouse, it would 
 
44 LECTURE II. 
 
 " be nothing less than impiety to venture 
 " to raise, I do not say a clamour, but so 
 " much as a murmur against it. But inas- 
 " much as they lay claim to nothing more 
 " than human power, assisted by that spi- 
 " ritual illumination which is common to 
 " all, it is not unreasonable that they should 
 " on their part allow the privileges of dili- 
 " gent research and free discussion to an- 
 " other inquirer, who is seeking truth 
 " through the same means, and in the 
 " same way as themselves, and whose desire 
 " of benefiting mankind is equal to their 
 " own." p. 80—81. 
 
 " Surely what is proposed to us as an 
 " object of belief, especially in a matter 
 " involving a primary article of faith, ought 
 " not to be an inference, forced and ex- 
 " torted from passages relating to an en- 
 " tirely different subject, in which the 
 " readings are sometimes various, and the 
 " sense doubtful ; nor hunted out by care- 
 " ful research, from among articles and par- 
 " tides ; nor elicited by dint of ingenuity, 
 " like the answers of an oracle, from sen- 
 " tences of dark or equivocal meaning ; 
 ,' but should be susceptible of abundant 
 
LECTURE II. 45 
 
 " proof, from the clearest sources. For it 
 " is in this, that the superiority of tlie 
 '' Gospel to the Law consists ; this, and this 
 " alone, is consistent with its open simpli- 
 " city ; this is that true light and clearness, 
 " which we had been taught to expect 
 " would be its characteristic." p. 118. 
 
 Add to this passage the following, from 
 the same work, in reference to the Holy 
 Spirit : 
 
 " If it be the divine will, that a doctrine, 
 " which is to be understood and believed 
 " as one of the primary articles of our faith, 
 " should be delivered without obscurity or 
 " confusion, and explained, as is fitting, in 
 " clear and precise terms ; if it be certain, 
 " that particular care ought to be taken in 
 " every thing connected with religion, lest 
 " the objection urged by Christ against the 
 " Samaritans, should be applicable to us, Ve 
 " ivo7\ship ye know not what : (John iv. 22.) 
 " if our Lord's saying should be held sa- 
 " cred, whenever points of faith are in 
 " question, — we know what we worship^ — 
 " the particulars which have been stated, 
 " seem to contain all that we are capable of 
 " knowina\ or are required to know, re- 
 
LECTURE II. 
 
 " specting the Holy Spirit, inasmuch as re- 
 " velation has declared nothing else ex- 
 " pressly on the subject. 
 
 " Wherefore it remains now to be seen, on 
 '^ what grounds and by what arguments we 
 " are constrained to believe that the Holy 
 " Spirit is God, if Scripture nowhere ex- 
 " pressly teach the doctrine of his divinity, 
 " not even in the passages where his office 
 " is explained at large, nor even in those 
 " where the unity of God is explicitly as- 
 " sented." p. 161. 
 
 " It seems exceedingly unreasonable, not 
 " to say dangerous, that in a matter of so 
 " much difficulty, believers should be re- 
 " quired to receive a doctrine, represented 
 " by its advocates as of primary importance 
 " and of undoubted certainty, on any thing 
 " less than the clearest testimony of Scrip- 
 " ture ; and that a point which is con- 
 " fessedly contrary to human reason, should 
 " nevertheless be considered as susceptible 
 " of proof from human reason only, or 
 " rather from doubtful and obscure dispu- 
 " tations.'' p. 162. 
 
 Now the Church claims for the Chris- 
 tian doctrines an authority far higher 
 
LECTURE II. 47 
 
 than that of human interpretations and de- 
 ductions from Holy Scripture ; it assigns to 
 them an antiquity, antecedent even to that 
 of Scripture itself; and believes that inform, 
 (while it leaves their pi'oofs with Scripture) 
 they have descended with the succession of 
 the Christian ministry, to whom the New^ 
 Testament describes them as having been 
 committed before that sacred volume was 
 itself wTitten. We know, moreover, that 
 the New Testament is addressed to Christ- 
 ians, and written for Christians ; and that 
 it presupposes, on the part of the reader, a 
 course of previous teaching, and a know- 
 ledge of the leading Christian doctrines ; 
 and therefore naturally speaks in the way 
 of allusion and reference to such truths, as 
 to things already " most surely know^n and 
 " believed" by him, to whom a formal state- 
 ment of such truths would therefore have 
 been unnecesaary. We therefore, as Church- 
 men, believing this, are not vmwilling to 
 admit, that on the principle that the 
 Scripture was given as that from which, as 
 containing the whole revelation of God in 
 form, as well as substance, (which we do 
 7iot admit,) every individual or sect is at 
 
48 LECTURE II. 
 
 liberty to form their own system of belief, as 
 they may deem best, the Socinian argu- 
 ment against the doctrine of the Holy 
 Trinity is extremely difficult to answer. 
 The conclusion appears to follow legiti- 
 mately from their principle, which however 
 it will be at once seen they assume. " If it 
 " be admitted," as the first work quoted 
 above proceeds to say, that "the leading 
 " principle, in interpreting the Scriptures 
 " is," not only, " that the Bible is a book 
 " written for men, in the language of men," 
 but also, " that its meaning is to be sought 
 " in the same manner as that of other 
 " books," if this principle be admitted, it 
 is no easy matter to explain the difficulty 
 involved in the fact, " that a doctrine so 
 " strange, so liable to misapprehension, so 
 " fundamental as this is said to be, and 
 " requiring such careful exposition, should 
 " be left so undefined and unprotected, to 
 " be made out by inference, and to be 
 " hunted'' through distant and detached 
 " parts of Scripture." 
 
 ^' It is not altogether unimportant to observe the 
 adoption of this same figure, by both the authors quoted 
 above. The expression in the Latin original of Milton s 
 work is " aucupio quodam captari.'' 
 
LECTURE II. 49 
 
 Again, if we admitted the assumption 
 on which Milton's argument rests, viz. 
 that we must come to the study of Holy 
 Scripture, ' with a mind free from j)reju- 
 dice ;' that the Christian verities are only 
 the result of ' human interpretation,' mere 
 deductions from those portions of Scripture, 
 to which the Church refers for their proof 
 luheii taught ; we should not be unwilling 
 to " allow the privilege of diligent research 
 " and free discussion, to those who are seek- 
 " ing truth through the same means, and in 
 " the same way as ourselves ;" which on that 
 hypothesis indeed they might be doing, 
 but which, on our present principle of 
 teaching and proving the Christian doc- 
 trines, they are confessedly not doing. Nor 
 should we be unwilling to agree with him, 
 that "an object of belief involving a pri- 
 " mary article of faith, ought not to be an 
 " inference forced and extortedfrom passages 
 " relating to an entirely different subject, in 
 " which the readings are sometimes various 
 " and the sense doubtful." This difference 
 of interpretation, the apparently incidental 
 and casual way in which these doctrines 
 
50 LECTURE II. 
 
 are mentioned, which now comes recom- 
 mended to us by its peculiar fitness to its 
 object, and its adaptation to a state of trial, 
 where the reception of these truths on the 
 peculiar evidence thus afforded, forms an 
 essential feature in our spiritual probation, 
 all this would, in that case, become a diffi- 
 culty and a stumblingblock. 
 
 Against this admission, on our part, of the 
 Socinian's conclusion from his principle, the 
 Trinitarian dissenter will protest, feeling 
 probably that the Scripture proofs of what 
 he believes, as opposed to the Socinian, are 
 not of the character described by the other. 
 To the Churchman, it is a matter of com- 
 parative indifference whether they be so 
 or not ; to him, this difference between So- 
 cinian and Sectarian is perfectly intelligible, 
 and creates no difficulty ; he sees that the 
 principle of the Sectarian, if fairly carried 
 out, leads to Socinianism. Not that he i^ 
 otherwise than pained at seeing this direc- 
 tion of any principle ; much as he rejoices, 
 for the truth's sake, to see that this is 
 the natural consequence of the Sectarian 
 and heretical principle ; but he feels, that 
 
LECTURE II. 51 
 
 against each of these, he possesses, as a 
 Churchman, a principle, which, while it satis- 
 fies his own mind, brings them both to an 
 issue, and places them both in the wrong ; 
 a principle which, if pressed, they too must 
 admit, on any fair system of reasoning, on 
 the authority of Scripture itself. He sees 
 also, that whatever differences these two 
 classes have between them, are but the 
 natural result of their respective characters 
 and feelings ; that the one wishes certain 
 points to be true — the other, not ; and 
 that accordingly, as in any other moral 
 subject, each finds the proof of his own 
 view, varying in strength and degree, ac- 
 cording to the interest he takes in the 
 point to be proved. 
 
 It should be observed, however, that the 
 same argument which is so shocking to the 
 Trinitarian dissenter, when applied to the 
 Trinity, he uses without scruple against 
 the Church, in regard to his difference 
 with her. And therefore he places himself 
 in this position ; — that he is unable to main- 
 tain his ground against the Church, without 
 admitting the Socinian principle, as regards 
 
 E 2 
 
52 LECTURE II. 
 
 the right of private judgment in the inter- 
 pretation of Scripture ; he puts it out of 
 his power to say that the Socinian is more 
 in error, (certainly not more responsible for 
 his opinions and belief,) than himself. Nor 
 can he maintain his argument against the 
 Socinian, without calling to his aid a prin- 
 ciple, which involves the admission of the 
 whole point at issue between himself and 
 the Church. Therefore, for the purpose of 
 considering the alleged defective character 
 of the Scripture proofs of doctrines, we may 
 reduce to one class, all those who differ 
 from the Church's full doctrine : a process, 
 which tends much to simplify the case, en- 
 abling us to take as our opponents, all those 
 who require full and direct statements from 
 Scripture, of all that the Church requires 
 them to believe. 
 
 Now the Churchman will not be un- 
 willing to admit, that, for many important 
 points which the Church holds and calls 
 upon her children to believe, the proofs in 
 Scripture are not direct and explicit in the 
 sense in which Sectarians regard proofs ; 
 nor is it necessary that they should be so — 
 
LECTURE II. 53 
 
 say, e.g. the proofs in favour of Confinn- 
 ation, Episcopacy, Apostolical Succession, 
 Infant Baptism, or the efficacy of the Sa- 
 craments as essential means of grace. 
 The question we are content to ask is, are 
 the proofs such as we have a right to ex- 
 pect ? or, without even going so far as this, 
 are the objections brought against the kind 
 of proof, other than may be brought against 
 proofs of things external to the Bible, which 
 those who object to these Scripture proofs 
 are content to regard as sufficient ? Now we 
 maintain, that the very character and kind 
 of proof of the Christian doctrines which 
 we derive from Scripture, is at least as 
 good as men are content to take in natural 
 religion for what they there believe; and 
 further, that it is such as we might expect 
 antecedently, on the assumption, either that 
 they would be analogous to those of Na- 
 tural Religion, or that they would be 
 adapted to our nature, viewed in reference 
 to a state of probation ; or from what Scrip- 
 ture would itself lead us to expect, from its 
 account of itself and its origin, and of the 
 mode in which the Gospel was first revealed 
 
 e3 
 
54 LECTURE 11. 
 
 and taught. Let it be granted that it 
 is as the Socinian or Sectarian (we have 
 before merged them in one class as regards 
 the principle of their objection) maintains ; 
 that the proofs of things which the Church 
 holds and which they reject, are, as proofs, 
 defective. It may be asked, is there no- 
 thing in this analogous to what we find in 
 Natural Religion, and that in matters of 
 deep interest? And if it is not what we 
 should have expected antecedently from 
 analogy, is it not at least that which, whe?i 
 we find it, may be accounted for by ana- 
 logy ? Here again it will be seen that the 
 principle of the Sectarian, if followed up, 
 proves too much, that after having led to 
 Socinianism, the argument of both leads to 
 a form of Deism. It was before shewn, 
 that admitting, for argument's sake, that 
 the Church's proofs from Scripture are, on 
 the Sectarian principle, imperfect ; those of 
 Sectarianism are, on the same principle, im- 
 perfect also, and would justify the Socinian 
 heresy. Again, assuming with the Sectarian 
 of whatever denomination, that the only 
 knowledge we possess of God, or of our 
 
LECTURE II. 55 
 
 relation to him, is derived from revelation, 
 we do not see how the Sectarian can deny 
 the Deist's pretensions to the same know- 
 ledge from the light of nature, without 
 calling in to his aid the principle which 
 the Churchman contends for in arguing 
 with him, by which he accounts for the 
 supposed force of the proofs in question, 
 by the possession of previous knowledge 
 and instruction, of which, when once 
 known, it is impossible to divest himself, 
 even in imagination, so as to ascertain, in 
 the most remote degree, what force such 
 proofs would have had to his mind with- 
 out that previous knowledge. That, in 
 short, his argument against the Churchman 
 leads to Socinianism, and thence to Deism ; 
 while his argument against the Deist leads 
 to and involves the recognition of the 
 Church principle. 
 
 The advocates of the sufficiency of Na- 
 tural Religion take upon themselves to 
 deny the necessity of a divine revelation. 
 There is nothing surprising in this : when 
 we possess knowledge, it is often difficult, 
 if not impossible, to determine how or 
 
 E 4 
 
56 LECTURE 11. 
 
 whence we obtained it; especially if we 
 have within us moral perceptions corre- 
 sponding to it, and if we find obvious proofs 
 of it, not only in its harmony with our 
 nature, but in things around us and exter- 
 nal to us. Now the facts which even na- 
 tural religion professes to teach, are so 
 congenial to our nature, are in every way 
 so intimately connected with our being, 
 and moreover are confirmed by such pal- 
 pable proofs in nature and the world around 
 us, that it is by no means surprising that 
 persons should be led to believe they 
 originally derived their knowledge from 
 these sources, when every one is willing to 
 admit that it is confirmed and exemplified. 
 And they are the more likely to feel this, 
 if there exist reasons of strong self-interest, 
 though they may not be conscious of being 
 influenced by them, for wishing it to be 
 thus. This would be the case, if they 
 merely felt it was that which their nature 
 required, and which, when known, seemed 
 as it were to belong to them. Much more 
 will it be so, in matters of which there are 
 obvious evidences in the world around, as 
 
LECTURE II. 57 
 
 e.g. the existence of God and his attributes, 
 and a future state. Tlie proofs of these 
 articles of faith, drawn from nature, are so 
 strong, that the Deist believes he is claim- 
 ing for them no more than their due, in 
 maintaining that his knowledge is derived 
 solely from them, denying altogether the 
 necessity of a divine revelation for that 
 purpose. 
 
 This position of the Deist is denied by 
 the Sectarian ; in which we thoroughly 
 coincide ; though we speak in the name 
 of the latter as distinct from ourselves, 
 since our argument is with him presently. 
 He admits the visible proofs which the 
 w orld affords of natural religion, but denies 
 that they are sufficient to derive that know- 
 ledge from in the first instance, though 
 strong proofs of the fact when known. 
 He maintains that their force is derived 
 subsequently from reflection, analogous to 
 the meaning of a prophecy elicited by its 
 fulfilment; which, though very clear and 
 satisfactory whe7i brought to pass, so much 
 so, in fact, as to make us feel that it must 
 have been obvious from the beginning, 
 
58 LECTURE 11. 
 
 yet we know, as a matter of fact, that until 
 fulfilled, few even of those most interested 
 in it, appear to have had any conception of 
 its real drift, or the mode of its fulfilment. 
 
 These are the arguments mainly by 
 which the Sectarian replies to the Deist, 
 when, from the force which the evidences 
 of natural religion possess as pi^oofs of re- 
 vealed religion, the Deist would argue to 
 their sufficiency, as sources of knowledge 
 for superseding it in the first instance : 
 and in this reasoning we, as Churchmen, 
 fully concur. And we further agree with 
 him in the unfairness with which the Deist 
 assumes the whole point at issue. As to 
 the question how far these truths could 
 have been known without revelation, we 
 cannot, of course, in arguing with the Deist, 
 derive any presumptive argument against 
 him, from the fact that they were first 
 revealed. But we have a right to maintain 
 that his position must at least be for ever 
 incapable of proof; we may at least throw 
 on him the onus of shewing that they 
 could be discovered from these evidences 
 in nature. The mere fact of their being 
 
LECTURE II. 59 
 
 believed by those who knew not revelation, 
 proves nothing to us who hold that they 
 were revealed in the first instance, and 
 when once known, would, from their con- 
 geniality to man's nature, cling to him in 
 every stage of society or knowledge, in 
 some shape or other, however corrupted 
 and debased, long after the source from 
 which they were derived had been forgotten 
 in the distance of years. This argument 
 we cannot, of course, use against him, who 
 denies the revealed origin of them, as 
 it presents no common ground on w^hich 
 we can proceed ; but it prevents him, on 
 the same principle, from using, against our 
 position, the circumstance that nations, un- 
 acquainted with revelation, have yet held 
 these truths. We are therefore severally 
 left where we w^ere before, as regards that 
 ground. The abstract question could only 
 be determined by experiment, and that too 
 by an experiment not likely to occur. 
 
 We must, for that purpose, find a nation, 
 or an individual, either brought up pur- 
 posely in ignorance of these things, or else 
 so far debased and gone back in the scale 
 
60 LECTURE II. 
 
 of humanity, as to have lost the entire 
 knowledge of them ; we must then place 
 them in the way of advancing in civiliza- 
 tion and knowledge, with the further con- 
 dition that they were restrained (supposing 
 it were possible) from all access, whether 
 to persons, books, or other records, which 
 could convey the slightest intimation of 
 these things ; and this being done, in their 
 progress in civilization, (the limits of which 
 we need not fix, nay, every assistance to 
 which we will be supposed to furnish, pro- 
 vided nothing was done which could con- 
 vey the remotest intimation of the truths 
 which w^e wished to keep from them,) we 
 must watch and see whether, by the force of 
 their own minds, and the assistance furnish- 
 ed by external nature,* they would arrive 
 at the conclusion that there was any supe- 
 rior being not of this world, or any conti- 
 nuation elsewhere of that principle of life 
 in themselves, the termination of which 
 here at least they daily witnessed. Nor 
 would it at all meet the case of this sup- 
 posed experiment, to produce a nation, or 
 an individual, with whom these articles, 
 
LECTURE II. 61 
 
 though believed, were still held in the 
 most debased and corrupted form, — and 
 then to draw any argument from the 
 effect which improved civilization would 
 have on them. This would not meet 
 the case, for here it is already known, 
 and when known is, we admit, proved 
 by things around on all sides, and will 
 abide with them through their several 
 stages of civilization or debasement ; and 
 that they improve as knowledge improves, 
 is obvious from the superiority of the 
 opinions held by the wiser of heathen phi- 
 losophers, over those of the multitude, re- 
 specting the Deity and a future state ; a 
 superiority which was obviously the result 
 of more education and deeper thought, 
 which enabled them to see the folly of the 
 popular theology ; the natural result of a 
 cultivated mind reasoning on facts already 
 known ; but proving nothing whatever re- 
 specting its capacity to have discovered 
 those facts in the first instance. 
 
 We have gone into this discussion with 
 the Deist, concurring, as we proceed, with 
 the Sectarian, not as arguing with the 
 
62 LECTURE II. 
 
 former, but as shewing the argument by 
 which, changing the terms, we also reply 
 to the Sectarian himself. It will not be 
 said that the argument against the Deist 
 has been overstated, nor will the Sectarian 
 deny that it is thus that he replies to the 
 Deist's denial of the necessity of a divine 
 revelation for the knowledge of these things; 
 nor that, unless thus replied to, the Deist 
 is able to advance that which, prima facie^ 
 has great weight. 
 
 Let us now apply the same process of 
 reasoning to the Sectarian, in reply to 
 his assertion, that for the knowledge and 
 proof of the great mysteries which we meet 
 with in the Bible, no knowledge or assist- 
 ance is requisite beyond that furnished by 
 the Bible itself; and likewise to his rejec- 
 tion of some, on the ground that the pas- 
 sages adduced in support of them are not 
 sufficiently explicit, nor of that prominent 
 character which would be expected in the 
 proofs of such important doctrines; though 
 he is not unwilling to admit that their force 
 as collateral proofs would be considerably 
 augmented, on the assumption of a previous 
 
LECTURE II. 63 
 
 knowledge of them on the part of the 
 reader. The Sectarian admits then the ge- 
 nuineness and authenticity of the canonical 
 books of Holy Scripture. He admits like- 
 wise that, without them, the facts which 
 he does believe would not have been known ; 
 in other words, he admits the necessity of 
 a divine revelation — though iche7i know^n, 
 he allow^s^that corroborating proofs of these 
 facts are to be seen in many things out 
 of the Bible ; say, e. g. in external nature, 
 or in the constitution of human nature. 
 He admits also that the Deist, obtaining 
 possession of these facts from Revelation, 
 makes an unfair use of them, ascribing his 
 knowledge of them to his own reason act- 
 ing on proofs which it cannot be denied 
 are furnished by many things, when the 
 facts themselves have been previously known 
 or even suggested ; but which till then are 
 insufficient. He admits, therefore, that the 
 proofs external to the Bible for truths re- 
 vealed in it, are of this character — insuffi- 
 cient in themselves to have even suggested 
 the idea without a revelation, yet so strong 
 when the truths are once known, that it is 
 
64 LECTURE II. 
 
 difficult to persuade any one, not a believer 
 in revelation, but that he derived his know- 
 ledge of these truths from their proofs 
 originally. We may therefore, in fairness, 
 include him among those of v^hom we ask 
 this question ; " If Scripture gives the 
 " proofs of the truths we are called upon to 
 " believe ; what is the kind of proof we 
 " should expect, antecedently, to find there, 
 " on the supposition that this work of God, 
 " his written word, would bear any analogy 
 " to the other works of the same divine 
 " Author, especially those, from which we 
 " may be presumed to gather, directly or in- 
 " directly, any manifestations of his nature 
 " or his will ?" For we have two arguments 
 with the Sectarian : I. The a priori argu- 
 ment in favour of the Church's view of 
 the real nature of Scripture proofs, drawn 
 from analogy. II. The elenchtic argu- 
 ment, drawn, either from that which he 
 uses against the Deist, which proves too 
 much in our favour ; or from that against 
 us, which proves too much in favour of the 
 Deist : leading in fact either to Deism, or 
 to the admission of the Church's principle. 
 
LECTURE II. 65 
 
 Of these two, the argument from analogy 
 presents the strongest presumption against 
 his main objection, founded on the alleged 
 defective character of the Scripture proofs 
 of doctrines without previous teaching ; i.e. 
 if, in the written word, we should expect 
 antecedently, to find proofs of important 
 doctrines, analogous to those which natural 
 religion furnishes of divine things ; in 
 other words, on the assumption, that the 
 proofs w^e meet with in Scripture, would be 
 analogous to those which we find in natural 
 religion, whether of the same divine truths, 
 or of others. If the existence of any pre- 
 vious teaching were admitted, to which the 
 Scripture would be supposed to refer, and 
 of which, it might be supposed to be a 
 continuation, the indirect character of its 
 proofs would follow naturally enough ; we 
 should expect to find, and be content with, 
 allusions, references, and proofs by implica- 
 tion, where, on the supposition that Scrip- 
 ture contained our jjriinary instruction, we 
 should require full and direct statements. 
 At present however this is not admitted; 
 it will be proved in its proper place. We 
 
 F 
 
66 LECTURE 11. 
 
 are now considering the objections brought, 
 a priori, against indirect proofs, as such, 
 as well as (carrying the argument a stage 
 further) the grounds which might be sup- 
 posed to exist antecedently, in favour of 
 the probability of such proofs. It might 
 here be observed, however, that whatever 
 evidence is established thus far of the ex- 
 istence of such proofs, is an argument a 
 priori, as far as it goes, in favour of the 
 probability of some previous teaching and 
 knowledge. 
 
 It should be borne in mind here, that in 
 estimating the antecedent probability of 
 this kind of proof, the opponent is sup- 
 posed to admit the necessity of some divine 
 revelation, in order to have arrived at the 
 truths he holds, in opposition to the Deist, 
 who maintains the sufficiency of the light 
 of nature, and of external proofs, to have 
 given the same knowledge ; and that the 
 former maintains, that though proofs of 
 these are to be seen every where, luhen once 
 known, yet that the truths themselves are 
 originally derived from some other source ; 
 and that if it appears otherwise to the 
 
LECTURE II. 67 
 
 Deist, it is, because he cannot divest him- 
 self of such knowledge when once obtained, 
 and that he unfairly ascribes to the proofs 
 in nature, a power, which though they 
 possess, they only derive by reflecting, as it 
 were, revealed light. 
 
 To this may be added another pecu- 
 liarity of the natural evidences of religion 
 (which does not however refer to any one 
 class of Religionists, as to their being Deists 
 or otherwise) ; that besides the intellectual 
 perception of them, their force depends 
 much on the moral condition of the person, 
 for the time being, to whom they address 
 themselves ; that though adduced as proofs 
 even of things familiar to him, yet they 
 often fail of having any effect as evidences. 
 And as a rule, as far as may be drawn 
 from induction and observation, it may be 
 said that their force as proofs, or the 
 capacity to feel them as such, varies in 
 proportion to the moral character of each 
 individual ; and that frequently to the 
 same person, the very same proofs possess 
 a different force at different times, if, 
 
 F 2 
 
68 LECTURE II. 
 
 during the interval, any change has taken 
 place, for the better or worse, in his moral 
 state. 
 
 Some, for example, will see in the na- 
 tural world, proofs of the benevolence of 
 God, and the prevailing features of love, 
 mercy, and justice ; subject to apparent ex- 
 ceptions, which to their minds, create no 
 serious difficulty : others, on the contrary, 
 will see, as they imagine, arguments against 
 these, if not against the presumption of 
 there being a superintending Providence. 
 
 The attention of some, is more called to 
 the devastating effects of sin, on our moral 
 condition ; while that of others, will be 
 rather awakened to the harmony still to 
 be traced in the constitution of our nature, 
 notwithstanding the effects of sin ; their 
 respective views being often determined, 
 among other things, by the morbid or san- 
 guine temperament of each. 
 
 Again, the views of the very same person 
 will change, both in kind and degree, if 
 any change has taken place, meanwhile, 
 in his bodily or mental condition. In fact. 
 
LECTURE II. 69 
 
 not to multiply examples, it may be truly 
 said of all of us, 
 
 " Our eyes see all around in gloom or glow, 
 
 " Hues of their own fresh borrowed from the heart." 
 
 If then we take up the Scripture, as con- 
 taining the proofs of great truths relating 
 to the Deity, and to men as regards their 
 relations to him, should we not, on the as- 
 sumption, that the author of nature was also 
 the author of revelation, and that the pro- 
 cess in each would be analogous, expect to 
 find in the latter, proofs of that character, 
 which, though very abundant, and though 
 simple and obvious n'hen knoiim^ are such 
 as, if any one could be found, or even be 
 supposed, to have been brought up in ig- 
 norance of the truths to which they refer, 
 would leave a considerable question, (with- 
 out at present urging the probability that 
 they would not^) whether they would of 
 themselves, and without the least previous 
 teaching, suggest these truths ? In what 
 way they would be exhibited to us, so as to 
 have this particular effect, is not a matter of 
 any moment for the present argument, as 
 long as they would stand in this particular 
 
 F 3 
 
70 LECTURE II. 
 
 relation to the truths of which they were 
 the evidence. 
 
 Again ; in reference to the other pecu- 
 liarity just alluded to, respecting the de- 
 pendance of external evidence on the 
 moral condition of the person ; admitting 
 even, that the proofs were in themselves 
 sufficient, as regards their independence of 
 any previous instruction, should we not 
 expect to find them of that peculiar cha- 
 racter, as proofs of great moral truths, that 
 they would have to depend, for their re- 
 ception and force, very much on the moral 
 condition of the persons to whose belief 
 they were proposed, and therefore, so far 
 imperfect in themselves, as to require to be 
 filled up by the predisposition, if not the 
 actual wish, to be influenced by them, on 
 the part of the reader ? 
 
 Now it is obvious, that this is what no 
 proofs could be liable to, which were simple 
 direct statements in themselves, and more- 
 over repeated and reasserted in each por- 
 tion of the work, as frequently as their im- 
 portance demands, and as they would be, if 
 the author were himself impressed with a 
 
LECTURE II. 71 
 
 sense of their importance. And that they 
 are at least not thus categorically stated in 
 Scripture, will, I think, hardly be denied ; 
 still leaving open the question, how far 
 they are independent of any thing but them- 
 selves for having their meaning elicited. 
 This therefore would lead us to expect, that 
 the statements involving these proofs would, 
 in the first place, not be formal and direct, 
 so that he may run that readeth, however 
 independent of any external or previous 
 teaching. 
 
 In the next place, we should expect, 
 that besides being indirect, they would be 
 of that description, as to admit of two op- 
 posite constructions ; and yet that each 
 should be satisfactory to those by whom 
 they were respectively adopted : that the 
 adoption of each should be attended by a 
 distinct moral condition, a distinct cha- 
 racter of mind, sufficiently uniform in the 
 respective holders of each, to warrant the 
 presumption, of there being a close con- 
 nexion betw^een the character of mind and 
 the views of Scripture with which it is as- 
 sociated ; and further, that the interpreta- 
 
 F 4 
 
72 LECTURE II. 
 
 tion of each would vary, in proximity or 
 the reverse, according to the degree in 
 which the holders exhibited a resemblance, 
 or the reverse, in regard to tone of mind 
 and general moral character. 
 
 We are thus furnished with strong 
 grounds, from analogy, of an antecedent 
 probability in favour of proofs, in a written 
 revelation, so far imperfect in themselves, 
 as to require to be filled up, in the one case 
 by previous knowledge, in the other, by the 
 predisposition of the moral inclinations. 
 How far this probability is realized by 
 facts, in regard to previous knowledge, we 
 shall see when we come to examine the 
 written Scripture itself. How far it is 
 realized, in regard to their depen dance on 
 the heart and moral capacity, will be seen 
 by every one who has observed, with any 
 degree of attention, the various kinds and 
 degrees of Heresy or of Infidelity, which 
 have fallen under his notice, whether in 
 different individuals and bodies, or in the 
 same individual or body at different pe- 
 riods. He cannot have failed to observe 
 the different, and sometimes opposite force, 
 
LECTURE II. 73 
 
 with whicli the very same Scriptural proofs 
 of the Christian verities have been at- 
 tended ; at one time, and to one person, 
 carrying complete conviction ; at another, 
 completely powerless, or explained away. 
 Nor will he have failed to observe, in a 
 general way, for it is not given us to scan 
 the motives and judge the feelings of 
 others too closely, how much the force of 
 these doctrinal proofs will vary, according 
 as he beholds, in the individual or body to 
 whom they are proposed, an approach to, or 
 a departure from, that peculiar character 
 and tone of mind, which it is obviously the 
 tendency of a belief in such doctrines to 
 form within us. And, to those who will 
 turn their eyes inwardly on themselves, and 
 search into the secret recesses of their own 
 hearts, it needs not that another should 
 tell them, that the doctrinal statements of 
 Holy Scripture speak to them with more 
 or less force of proof, are received by them 
 with hope or fear, willingness or distaste, 
 in a way calculated in either case, to ex- 
 ercise a most powerful influence on their 
 faith through the medium of the will, 
 
.74 LECTURE II. 
 
 according as they feel within themselves, 
 that they can realize in their hearts those 
 motives to serve God, which it is the effect, 
 if not the object, of a belief in those 
 blessed verities to create within them, and 
 the absence of which motives gives them 
 a direct interest in wishing the doctrines 
 untrue, which in that case they cannot but 
 feel must condemn them. 
 
 The first argument then which we use 
 with the Sectarian, as regards his objections 
 to the (alleged) imperfect and indirect 
 nature of the Scripture proofs which the 
 Church is content to receive in support 
 of her doctrines, is that of antecedent 
 probability derived from the assumed ana- 
 logy of Scripture to nature. It should be 
 observed, however, that though stated in 
 this form, as regards its being antecedent, 
 yet it is by no means necessary that it 
 should amount to a positive declaration of 
 probability, if to any the argument should 
 appear incapable of being carried to that 
 extent. It is quite enough for the present 
 purpose, if, without urging it to this, we 
 use it elenchtically, to remove any objections 
 
LECTURE II. 75 
 
 which might seem to lie antecedently 
 against such a supposed feature in Scrip- 
 ture proofs. It would at least serve to 
 shew that the same objections lie, accord- 
 ing to the statement of the Sectarian him- 
 self, against the proofs in natural reli- 
 gion ; that, granting they do exist in 
 Scripture, they are no more than we 
 might expect to find, on the supposition 
 that they would be analogous to those of 
 the former. 
 
 This argument, it will be seen, has refer- 
 ence to those doctrines, the proofs of which 
 the Sectarian rejects on the ground of not 
 being sufficiently explicit in themselves, 
 nor such as we should be led to expect 
 in a divine revelation. 
 
 The other argument which we employ 
 against the Sectarian, has reference to 
 proofs which he does admit, but to esta- 
 blish the validity of which he has uncon- 
 sciously called to his aid the principle for 
 which the Church contends on behalf of 
 those doctrines which he rejects ; and 
 which he in his turn uses against the 
 Deist, to account for the seeming suffi- 
 
76 LECTURE 11. 
 
 ciency in nature to discover divine truths ; 
 viz., the principle that he is already in pos- 
 session of the question before coming to 
 the testimony : while the argument w^hich 
 the Sectarian uses against us in favour of 
 those proofs, the independent sufficiency of 
 w^hich he admits, is no more than the 
 Deist might, on his own principle, employ 
 against him. 
 
 The Sectarian is in this position between 
 the Churchman and the Deist. He argues 
 with the Churchman on deistical princi- 
 ples : he argues with the Deist on Church 
 principles : whatever he contends for in 
 favour of the sufficiency of his own Scrip- 
 ture proofs to teach so as to supersede the 
 teaching of the Church, the Deist contends 
 for against him in favour of his own natural 
 proofs, so as to supersede the need of a 
 divine revelation. On the other hand, 
 whatever he alleges against the sufficiency 
 of the Deist's proofs, as only deriving their 
 force by reflection from previous know- 
 ledge gained from other sources, though 
 admitted to be so clear, ivheyi knowii^ as to 
 make the mistake not unnatural ; the same 
 
LECTURE IL 77 
 
 the Churchman might and does allege 
 against his claim to have derived his first 
 views of Christian doctrines from those 
 portions of Holy Scripture, which, while 
 refusing to recognise them as the primary 
 instrument of instruction in regard to time, 
 or as transmitting the Jm^m of Christian 
 doctrine, the Churchman would be as jealous 
 as the Sectarian in guarding with his life, 
 as containing the proof of those blessed 
 truths on which depend his only hope of 
 salvation, and as being the ultimate stand- 
 ard of divine truth. 
 
 Whether, in either of the cases we have 
 been considering, men could have dispensed 
 with their guide^ and have depended on 
 their proof alone ; whether, for example, the 
 Sectarian could have deduced the doctrines 
 he believes from Scripture alone ; whether 
 the Deist could have deduced from the 
 light of nature and the evidences of the 
 natural world, the existence of God and 
 of a future state, are questions which can 
 never be determined till children are 
 brought up in utter ignorance of these 
 truths, apart from the habitations or con- 
 
78 LECTURE II. 
 
 verse of those who in any degree believe 
 them. Till this experiment has been tried, 
 and every opportunity thus afforded by 
 free access to the Scriptures, every inter- 
 course with men, whether by tongue or 
 writing, being debarred, it were utterly un- 
 warranted by any thing in the word of God 
 to assert that they would so learn. Neither 
 is the solution of this question at all requi- 
 site for the present purpose : all that is 
 here contended for is, that the argument 
 of the Deist against the Sectarian, is at 
 least as good as that of the latter against 
 the Church — that in fact the argument of 
 the Sectarian leads to Deism : and, that 
 the argument which the Sectarian employs 
 against the Deist, tells with equal force 
 against himself in the hands of the Church- 
 man — that it leads to an admission of the 
 Church principle. 
 
 Tell us not of men who, having long 
 lived as infidels, have at length been 
 brought, under grace, to a knowledge of 
 the truth by reading the Holy Scriptures. 
 Such cases prove nothing respecting the 
 point under consideration. Although re- 
 
LECTURE II. 79 
 
 jectiiig these sacred truths, they have long 
 dwelt among men who believed them, and 
 among whom they heard them spoken of; 
 nay, that they knew them, is implied in the 
 assertion that they disbelieved them. It 
 was impossible but that they were in pos- 
 session of that elementary instruction for 
 the need of which the Church contends ; 
 and when at length they were in mercy 
 led by the Holy Spirit to the perusal of 
 the Holy Scriptures, they came to that 
 sacred study — it will be said, " to judge for 
 " themselves." Be it so; this is all that the 
 Church contends for. But she would 
 embody that admission in the words of the 
 inspired evangelist ; and in " coming to Holy 
 " Scripture to judge for themselves," she sees 
 the unconscious fulfilment of the divine ap- 
 pointment, " that they might know the cer- 
 " tainty of those things in which they had 
 " been " (no matter whether they believed 
 them) " instructed." That men should thus, 
 in the pride of the human heart, deny the 
 heavenly source from which they derived 
 their knowledge, is surely not a matter of 
 wonder ; still less a reproach to that source 
 
80 LECTURE II. 
 
 of light and knowledge, as though it were 
 not needed for our blindness and infir- 
 mities. 
 
 " For it is not to be imagined that men 
 " fail to profit by the light that has been 
 " shed upon them, though they have not 
 " always the integrity to own the source 
 " from whence it comes ; or may turn their 
 " back upon it, whilst it fills the atmo- 
 " sphere around them ; no, not even if in a 
 "higher strain of malice, they address the 
 " great luminary, only, as the apostate spirit 
 " once did, ' to tell it how they hate its 
 " beams.' "^ 
 
 If " the fact is not to be denied, --that 
 " the religion of nature has had the op- 
 " portunity of rekindling her faded taper 
 " by the Gospel light, whether furtively or 
 "unconsciously taken;" as little can it be 
 denied that Sectarianism has lighted her 
 torch at the altar of that holy flame, which, 
 on the day which witnessed the new-born 
 Church of Christ, descended from the 
 Father of lights, and rested on each of the 
 Apostles, with whom, and their appointed 
 
 ^ Davison on Prophecy. 
 
LECTURE II. 81 
 
 successors, it will, if we believe the holy 
 promise, abide till the angel shall be sent 
 forth to gather together the elect whom 
 that light shall have guided into the way 
 of salvation which is by Christ Jesus. 
 
 Let not Sectarianism, like the religion of 
 nature, "dissemble the obligation and the 
 " conveyance, and make a boast of the 
 " splendour, as though it were originally 
 ''her own, or had always in her hands 
 "been sufficient for the illumination of 
 "the world ^" 
 
 t> Davison on Prophecy. 
 
LECTURE III. 
 
 THE SCRIPTURE STATEMENT AND PROOF OF THE 
 PRINCIPLE. 
 
 2 Cor. v. 19, 20. 
 
 And hath committed unto us the word of recon- 
 ciliation. Now then we are ambassadors for 
 Christy as though God did beseech you by us: 
 we pray you in Chris fs stead, be ye reconciled 
 to God. 
 
 ONE of the objections alleged against 
 the Church's principle, that portion of 
 it at least which regards the relation of the 
 Christian doctrines to Holy Scripture, from 
 which it was proposed to vindicate it in these 
 Lectures, is that urged by the Sectarian, that 
 it is repugnant to Scripture itself. There- 
 fore, before entering upon the subject of 
 the adaptation of the principle to the moral 
 constitution of man, it will be desirable 
 
LECTURE III. 83 
 
 first to examine the Scriptural grounds on 
 whicli it rests ; although in doing this we 
 shall be necessarily led over a somewhat 
 beaten track, and be exposed to the charge 
 of repeating obvious truths. This is ren- 
 dered the more necessary, however, from 
 the circumstance that the Sectarian, as- 
 suming to himself exclusively the credit 
 of being guided by Scripture in the forma- 
 tion of his views, is apt to stigmatize the 
 Church's principle, as though it were with- 
 out sufficient foundation in Scripture, if 
 not actually repugnant to it. And it is 
 somewhat remarkable, that this party, while 
 contending for their principle of the Bible, 
 and that alone, being the authority by which 
 they are to be guided in the formation of 
 their creed, overlook entirely the fact, that/or 
 this^ theh* fundamental position^ the Scrip- 
 ture itself furnishes no autJiority whatever. 
 It is true, they will adduce passages to that 
 effect, as for example, 2 Tim. iii. 15 — 17, 
 but a moment's reflection will shew any 
 one that this furnishes no argument ; and 
 if it be admitted as evidence, referring as it 
 does to the Old Testament exclusively, it 
 
 G 2 
 
S4 LECTURE III. 
 
 would at once, on their own principle, go 
 to prove the New Testament utterly un- 
 necessary. And they may be safely chal- 
 lenged to produce any authority from the 
 New Testament, (which must of course be 
 the authority, if any,) in support of their 
 position. 
 
 This principle of theirs, which may be 
 described as being represented by that un- 
 meaning, or at any rate perverted saying, 
 "" The Bible, and Bible alone, is the reli- 
 " gion of Protestants," is one which men 
 have gone on repeating, till, as is often 
 the case, they have persuaded themselves 
 of its reality. Nor is it one difficult to 
 be accounted for, considering the natural 
 tendency of men's minds to react in an 
 opposite extreme, after being unduly forced 
 into the other ; but more particularly, from 
 the liberty of choice and unlimited right 
 of private judgment which the principle 
 involves, and the absence of those whole- 
 some restraints upon the heart and mind, 
 which the Holy Spirit mercifully imposed 
 in the constitution of the Apostolic Church, 
 and which, though in truth a protection 
 
LECTURE III. 85 
 
 against ourselves, are repulsive to the 
 natural pride and independence of man ; 
 like those laws of civil society, which, 
 while they protect us in the exercise of 
 rational liberty, are an offence to the tur- 
 bulent, and the hatred of evil doers. 
 
 The Sectarian principle, therefore, is one 
 the existence of which is by no means diffi- 
 cult to be accounted for, whether considered 
 historically, or with reference to its bearing 
 on some of the passions of our nature ; but 
 at the same time, it is one for which there 
 is no warrant whatever in Holy Scrip- 
 ture. And in saying this, it may further 
 be observed, that there are not only no 
 direct statements in Scripture in support 
 of this principle, but not even those in- 
 direct proofs, those proofs by implication, 
 which would be satisfactory on the as- 
 sumption that the principle was already 
 understood and admitted by those for whom 
 the Scripture was written — those proofs 
 which the Church receives in support of 
 the doctrines which she holds, and which 
 even Sectarians are content to take in proof 
 of those points which they hold in common 
 
 G 3 
 
86 LECTURE III. 
 
 with the Church. There are not even 
 proofs or notices of this description in the 
 New Testament, that the Sacred Scriptures 
 were designed to be the sole work of inspi- 
 ration, the sole work of the Holy Ghost 
 speaking through men ; still less that they 
 are designed by themselves to teach Chris- 
 tianity ; or are that from which alone men 
 were to derive their knowledge of God, of 
 their relation to him, or of the mode in 
 which they were to worship him. 
 
 If there be any to whom this assertion is 
 new, and whom, from its apparent novelty, 
 it may startle, while it might seem for the 
 moment to strike at the authority which 
 should be ascribed to the Holy Scriptures, 
 and detract from the reverence with which 
 they have been accustomed to regard them, 
 (and God forbid that authority should be 
 weakened or that reverence diminished,) 
 I would entreat such to bear with me 
 a while, while I proceed to shew that the 
 Church, in asserting her authority as the 
 depositary and teacher of God's word in 
 conjunction with Holy Scripture^ and deny- 
 ing the office of the Scripture as a primary 
 
LECTURE III. 87^ 
 
 and sole guide to the knowledge of the 
 whole counsel of God respecting them, 
 does not trifle with their hopes or the 
 grounds of their salvation; does not, as 
 they may think, take the authority from 
 God to give it to man ; does not, while 
 removing with parental hand that on which 
 they now lean, leave them without support ; 
 but replaces what she takes away by an- 
 other prop, more sure, more consoling in the 
 hour of doubt and darkness, more conform- 
 able to the general analogy of God's deal- 
 ings, and, what is of the chief importance 
 in the truly Protestant sense of the word, 
 more strictly in accordance with his written 
 word, more purely scriptural. For, in as- 
 serting her authority to be the primary 
 instrument (in point of time) for teaching 
 the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Church is 
 not left, as is the principle of Sectarian- 
 ism, unsupported by the testimony of Holy 
 Scripture. Nay further, she is not com- 
 pelled to rest, for the credentials of this 
 authority, on Scripture proofs as indirect 
 as those on which she is often content 
 to rest for the proof of her particular doc- 
 
 G 4 
 
88 LECTURE III. 
 
 trines; but the grounds on which the 
 Church asserts her claims and her authority 
 primarily, are no other than those furnish- 
 ed by Holy Scripture itself, and that not 
 by implication merely, but by direct his- 
 torical statement. These we will now pro- 
 ceed to review. 
 
 The notion here contended against, re- 
 specting the relation of the Christian doc- 
 trines to Holy Scripture, is probably in 
 some measure to be ascribed to a confusion, 
 in the minds of those who hold it, of the 
 principles and provisions of the Gospel 
 with those of the Law. If any one, pre- 
 viously familiar with the Old Testament, 
 had been told that the New Testament 
 was written by men under the immediate 
 inspiration of the Holy Spirit, on things 
 pertaining to man's eternal salvation, to 
 which he was to refer, as to an unerring 
 standard, for the proof of all things said 
 to be essential to that salvation, it would 
 be not unnatural for him to suppose, at 
 first, and before he had read it, that it 
 was also the primary, if not the sole instru- 
 ment for revealing these things to him. 
 
LECTURE III. 89 
 
 This he would infer from the analogy he 
 might naturally assume it to bear to the 
 Law and Revelation given by Moses, which 
 was, in its day, the primary, if not the 
 sole instrument of making know^n, to those 
 who lived under it, their relation to God, 
 and the duties arising out of it. 
 
 And yet, though the Law had the same 
 ultimate end in view with the Gospel, 
 though it was preparatory to it, and the 
 schoolmaster to bring men to it, yet in 
 many respects, in its form, its sanctions, 
 the mode of its promulgation, and the in- 
 struments by which it was promulgated, it 
 was not only different, but essentially, and, 
 as it would seem, designedly, opposed to it. 
 The one was a covenant of works — the other, 
 of grace ; the one, of the letter — the other, 
 of the spirit : of the one the sanctions were 
 temporal — of the other, spiritual and eter- 
 nal: the one brought men into bondage — 
 the other gave them liberty. The design 
 of the Almighty in thus giving this oppo- 
 site character to each of his two dispensa- 
 tions, it would not be part of the present 
 subject to inquire into. We first notice 
 
90 LECTURE III. 
 
 the fact that they we7*e thus opposed. 
 Published, however, as the Gospel was, first 
 among the Jews, who had not only received 
 the Law previously, but had been taught 
 to regard the Gospel as the fulfilment of 
 it, and as the second and final revelation 
 from the God of their fathers, it would 
 not be unnatural nor surprising, that they 
 should expect to find, in the one, the main 
 features which had characterized the other. 
 Certainly, we know that its dissimilarity 
 was the first, if not the chief cause, which 
 served first to prejudice them against it, 
 and ultimately led them to reject it. That 
 this resemblance to the elder covenant 
 would be expected by them, would seem to 
 be implied in the repeated warnings and 
 cautions which were given of those things 
 in which the dissimilarity would be most 
 felt, and be most likely to prejudice the 
 Israelite against the new religion. This is 
 strikingly seen in the repeated warnings 
 of the sufferings which would befall the 
 first converts, as well as in the sufferings 
 themselves when they actually arrived : as 
 though it were designed to impress on the 
 
LECTURE III. 91 
 
 Jew, that, whereas the elder covenant had 
 been one of this world, sanctioned by tem- 
 poral rewards and punishments, having the 
 promise of present prosperity to those who 
 obeyed its precepts; lest the Christian con- 
 vert should be led to expect that the new 
 covenant, proceeding from the same mighty 
 Author, should partake of the same charac- 
 ter ; — in addition to the differences, revealed 
 at the time, respecting the fundamental 
 features of the two covenants, it was ex- 
 pressly and repeatedly intimated, that the 
 sanctions would not be like those of the 
 former one. And when the hour of trial 
 came, painful experience attested that those 
 warnings had not been given in vain — that 
 it was not without reason that divine mercy 
 had " told them of these things before they 
 " came to pass, that when they did come to 
 " pass, they might remember that he told 
 " them," and not imagine, from the contrast 
 which their sufferings bore to the blessings 
 which had attended their fiithers, that it was 
 because they had forsaken his Law, that 
 God had given them over to their enemies. 
 Now^ looking at the dissimilarity between 
 
92 LECTURE III. 
 
 the two covenants, in all the points which 
 have just been briefly adverted to, we 
 might be led to expect, certainly not sur- 
 prised to find, a dissimilarity in the instru- 
 ments by which, and the mode in which, 
 the two revelations would be respectively 
 made ; and the more so, if the character 
 of the instrument would be likely to be 
 determined by that of the covenant, or the 
 more immediate object of the Revelation 
 itself. 
 
 We thus arrive, if not at the antecedent 
 argument in favour of a different instru- 
 ment, and a different mode of promul- 
 gating the new covenant, at least at grounds 
 for removing any objections which might 
 be supposed to lie antecedently against 
 such a different instrument or mode being 
 adopted, (and to the mind of a Jew such 
 would lie, but for the precautions which 
 appear to have been divinely taken to pre- 
 vent them.) And when we further con- 
 sider the more important features of the 
 new covenant, in respect of its being not of 
 the letter but of the spirit, involving the 
 highest state of probation and spiritual dis- 
 
LECTURE III. 93 
 
 cipline, completely adapted to man's nature 
 as a moral and responsible agent, and cal- 
 culated to promote the end of his being 
 in a state of trial ; we might not unreason- 
 ably expect, that the mode and the instru- 
 ments by which knowledge should be com- 
 municated and he exercised therein, should 
 have relation to these features of the cove- 
 nant, should have regard to his nature as a 
 moral and responsible agent, and be in them- 
 selves also designed to promote, in their 
 office of channels of divine knowledge, the 
 main end of his being, as in a state of pro- 
 bation. How far and in what way this was 
 realized in the Gospel, we have now to see. 
 The chief feature that meets us on taking 
 up the Historical account which Scripture 
 gives us of the Gospel Revelation, as distin- 
 guished from the Law, is, that whereas the 
 Law was promulgated in writing, the Gospel, 
 on the contrary, was committed, in the 
 first instance, to human agents, by direct 
 inspiration, and by them communicated to 
 the people, without the intervention of, or 
 reference to, any written document, as re- 
 garded that which they were commissioned 
 
94 LECTURE III. 
 
 to teach, or an appeal to any authority 
 beyond their own commission ; the divine 
 origin of the latter being attested by the 
 miracles they were empowered to work in 
 confirmation of it. The Law was commit- 
 ted to tables — the Gospel to men. The 
 Law was designed to be perpetuated, as it 
 had begun, in writing. — The Gospel was to 
 be perpetuated and preserved, not in writ- 
 ing, (as regards any express divine appoint- 
 ment to that effect) but by a society of 
 human agents, especially by a body of men 
 (without being confined to them) ordained 
 to this purpose by those before them, who 
 were in their turn, by the appointment of 
 the same Spirit, to communicate what they 
 had thus received to others, whom they 
 were empowered to ordain for the purpose. 
 The ordinances of the Law were made 
 known by what God said in that Law. 
 
 The ordinances of the Gospel were made 
 known by what God, through the inspired 
 Apostles, actually did; the existence of such 
 ordinances being, in many cases, the first 
 intimation to us of their appointfne^it ; e.g. 
 Infant Baptism — the Eucharist, as an es- 
 
LECTURE III. 95 
 
 sential means of grace — the appointment 
 and observance of tlie Lord's Day — Epi- 
 scopal Ordination — Confirmation — Aposto- 
 lical Succession. The Law, once delivered 
 in its written form, was complete, thence- 
 forth nothing could be added to it nor 
 taken away, till recalled by its Divine 
 Author. 
 
 The Gospel, on the other hand, received 
 by the Apostles from the Holy Ghost, was 
 doubtless delivered by them in all essential 
 points of doctrine, withholding nothing — 
 " the whole counsel of God" being declared 
 by them. But in respect of ordinances, 
 which, though indifferent till appointed, 
 yet when appointed became essential, and 
 were, as proceeding from them, of divine 
 appointment, these the Apostles, acting 
 under inspiration, appointed from time to 
 time as circumstances might require ; act- 
 ing under the authority of the commission 
 given to them, " As my Father hath sent 
 " me, so send I you ;" and the sanction, that 
 " whatsoever they should bind on earth 
 " should be bound in heaven." 
 
 Let us now consider the Gospel as a sys- 
 
96 LECTURE III. 
 
 tern of doctrine, and as the revelation of 
 God's purpose towards us in his Son Jesus 
 Christ. This was described as having been 
 committed to human agents, without the 
 intervention of, or reference to, any written 
 law or commission, and without any inti- 
 mation that it was to be committed after- 
 v^^ards to writing as Moses was enjoined to 
 do in regard to the Law ; thereby declaring, 
 as far as could be inferred from the exist- 
 ence of a divinely appointed and complete 
 mode of instruction, and the absence of all 
 intimation, that any alteration was hereafter 
 to be made in the system ; that such were 
 the divinely appointed means, under the 
 new dispensation of grace, for communi- 
 cating its glad tidings, and the revelations 
 connected with it, till the end of the world. 
 Many are willing to admit this to a cer- 
 tain extent ; so far that is, as to allow that the 
 Church is the expounder of Scripture, and 
 that the Church's views are of essential 
 assistance in determining the meaning of 
 Scripture ; that the Scripture is the pri- 
 mary revelation, the Church its interpreter 
 only. But the Scripture itself warrants us 
 
LECTURE III. 97 
 
 in going much further than this ; and, if we 
 consider it attentively, it will exhibit to us 
 the Church as containing the primary reve- 
 lation, (in regard to time^) the body and 
 foi^m of Christian doctrine, as being the 
 instrument expressly appointed for the pur- 
 pose of teaching it ; and the Scripture, as 
 containing the substmice and the proof, 
 beyond which the Church cannot go in 
 teaching or commanding any thing to be 
 believed as necessary to salvation. 
 
 Let us review what the Scripture itself 
 tells us on the subject. Let us take, as 
 the point at which to commence, the period 
 at which, after the resurrection and before 
 the ascension of our Lord, the Apostles, 
 having been previously chosen, received 
 from him the commission to baptize, and 
 to preach the Gospel; with the injunc- 
 tion, however, that they should remain at 
 Jerusalem till they had received power 
 from on high, and the knowledge of the 
 truth into which the Holy Spirit should 
 guide them ; in other words, until they 
 should have revealed to them that on which, 
 though they were so soon to preach it, they 
 
 H 
 
98 LECTURE III. 
 
 were as yet very imperfectly informed. It 
 should be remarked, however, here, that in 
 viewing the Scripture account of this origin 
 of the Gospel, the same difficulty meets us 
 which was spoken of in a former Lecture, 
 as being caused by the mere possession of 
 knowledge. When once we possess know- 
 ledge, we cannot divest ourselves of it, 
 even in imagination ; and therefore it is 
 impossible for us to ascertain how we should 
 have felt without it, in regard to things 
 which to us, perhaps, have little or no exist- 
 ence, except in relation to such knowledge, 
 as is the case with many proofs in Scripture 
 of the Christian doctrines. It is on this 
 principle, that, familiarly acquainted as we 
 are with the contents of the four Gospels, 
 as also of the Epistles, it is difficult, if not 
 impossible, for us to place ourselves in the 
 position of those to whom these things 
 were unknown, as was the case with most 
 of those to whom the Apostles first preach- 
 ed the Gospel, and who consequently had 
 no knowledge of these things, except so far 
 as they learned them by oral communica- 
 tion from the Apostles. 
 
LECTURE III. 99 
 
 Let us, however, keeping as nearly as 
 possible in thought to this ignorance, com- 
 mence our view of the progress of the 
 Gospel from this point. 
 
 The Apostles, then, having received their 
 commission to preach and to baptize, were 
 to remain at Jerusalem till, according to the 
 promise, they should receive knowledge and 
 power from on high — both their Commission 
 and Credentials. Li the interval, they do 
 not appear to have had much conception of 
 the nature of the knowledge they were to 
 receive, nor of the real object for which Jesus 
 had come into the world and died. The 
 language of disappointed hope, as expressed 
 by the disciple on the w^ay to Emmaus, 
 " We trusted that it had been he who should 
 "have redeemed Israel," shews what their 
 expectation had been prior to their Lord's 
 death ; w^hile the question, " Lord, wilt 
 " thou at this time restore again the king- 
 "dom to Israel?" shews, that even after 
 their assurance of his resurrection, they had 
 made little progress towards attaining to 
 the knowledge of the spiritual nature of 
 his kingdom ; and at the s;une time, his 
 
 H 2 
 
100 LECTURE IIL 
 
 reply to this question points to the coming 
 of the Holy Ghost, as that which was to 
 remove their ignorance and enlighten them 
 on the subject of his kingdom. On the day 
 of Pentecost, however, we find the whole 
 aspect of things changed. The minds of the 
 Apostles respecting our Lord's death and the 
 object of it, are no longer undetermined; all 
 ignorance is in an instant removed by the 
 revelation, then made, of the great scheme 
 of man's redemption by the death and resur- 
 rection of Christ. From that moment, the 
 events of his life become to them connected 
 with the mighty work which they were now 
 commissioned to reveal. Those events, be- 
 fore known, indeed, yet not understood, 
 now had a distinct meaning; words and 
 deeds were now, as he had foretold, brought 
 to remembrance, and the Apostles them- 
 selves guided into all truth. And that day, 
 at whose dawn the Church as yet had not an 
 existence nor a name, had, before its close, 
 beheld that Church receive into its bosom 
 three thousand souls. On that day, and on 
 every occasion on which the Apostles, by 
 their teaching, converted sinners to God, 
 
LECTURE III. lot 
 
 from the day of Pentecost to the last event 
 recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, they 
 advanced what they did advance, on the 
 authority of their commission, confirmed 
 by the miracles they were empowered to 
 work in attestation of it. In no case is 
 any written document referred to, as form- 
 ing the message they were commissioned 
 to deliver. If the Scriptures of the Old 
 Testament were on any occasion referred 
 to, (those of the New were not yet in exist- 
 ence,) it was generally either in corrobora- 
 tion of what they taught, as shewing there- 
 in the fulfilment of a prophecy, as in the 
 sermon of St. Peter on the day of Pentecost, 
 and the address of St, Paul in the syna- 
 gogue of Antioch in Pisidia ; or to re- 
 move some objections which might seem to 
 lie against the doctrines they preached, as 
 being opposed to the testimony of the Law 
 and the Prophets ; of which kind was the 
 address of St. Stephen previous to his mar- 
 tyrdom — and even this may be regarded 
 primarily as the legal defence of a prisoner 
 on trial, though used no less as an instru- 
 ment, in God's hands, for preaching the 
 
 H 3 
 
102 LECTURE III. 
 
 Gospel to those to whom it was spoken. 
 But on no occasion is any Christian Scrip- 
 ture spoken of as their authority for what 
 they taught, or as designed, either with or 
 without the aid of their exposition, to teach 
 what they were teaching. 
 
 It is unnecessary to advert to the several 
 cases in which, and in some instances for a 
 long period, St. Paul is described in the Acts 
 of the Apostles, as preaching the Gospel 
 and founding Churches in particular places ; 
 but it may be observed, that in no instance 
 is allusion there made to any written Scrip- 
 ture having been used for communicating 
 the truths of the Gospel, nor is the most 
 remote intimation given, notwithstanding, 
 that those whom he taught, were other- 
 wise than fully instructed in the whole 
 truth. And in connection with this, it 
 should be particularly observed, that when 
 St. Paul told the Ephesian elders, that " he 
 " had not shunned to declare to them all 
 " the counsel of God," although this was 
 some years after the Church at Ephesus 
 had been founded, and it may be reason- 
 ably assumed that men had lived and died 
 
LECTURE III. 103 
 
 in tlie faith, yet at that time the Epistle to 
 the Ephesians had not been written. 
 
 Thus, then, for a period of several years, 
 the Gospel had been preached, and Churches 
 founded, without any intimation, however 
 remote, that any Christian Scripture had 
 been employed for the purpose. Regard- 
 ing, as we must, the Acts of the Apostles 
 as containing the direct inspired narrative 
 of the History of the Gospel Revelation, 
 commencing with its first promulgation on 
 the day of Pentecost, it may be said that, 
 from its beginning to its termination, it 
 makes reference to no written documents 
 as its authority, nor speaks of any such 
 being designed as instruments for the pur- 
 pose of communicating it : so entirely was 
 the whole revelation, the whole scheme 
 of salvation, communicated directly by the 
 Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and from the 
 Apostles to the Church, without any inter- 
 mediate channel or instrument being em- 
 ployed in either case. 
 
 Neither again are we told to the full 
 extent, in this history of the Revelation, 
 what that Revelation, whose origin and 
 
104 LECTURE III. 
 
 early progress are thus described, consisted 
 in ; at least, we are not told, to the degree 
 we should expect, were it designed that 
 we should derive our knowledge of it from 
 this narrative. We are told that it was 
 revealed to the Apostles, and by them 
 communicated orally to the converts; but 
 what it was which was thus revealed and 
 thus communicated, we are not told, ex- 
 cept, as it were, incidentally, where the cir- 
 cumstances of the history appear to require 
 a fuller allusion to it. In this way some 
 articles, and those fundamental ones, are 
 spoken of, which, to those previously im- 
 bued with Christian doctrine, would be at 
 once recognized, and would appear to be 
 stated with a degree of plainness and pre- 
 cision, equivalent to the declarations of pri- 
 mary instruction. But without going to 
 the question, whether we should have un- 
 derstood the full allusion and meaning of 
 these passages, without being thus imbued 
 in the doctrines by previous instruction, it 
 is obvious, from the way in which they are 
 there introduced, that they were not design- 
 ed by themselves to give that instruction. 
 
LECTURE III. 105 
 
 But granting, for arguments' sake, that 
 this was the method in which these chief 
 doctrines were intended to be communi- 
 cated to us ; and that, stated as these are 
 supposed to be, we have no excuse for not 
 recognizing and receiving them, even though 
 we had not heard of them before ; what 
 becomes of many other doctrines, which 
 we hold to be equally sacred, and as essen- 
 tially parts of the Gospel revelation, of 
 which, however, there is confessedly not the 
 same full notice in this history of that reve- 
 lation ? as, for example, first of all the Holy 
 Trinity, next the efficacy of the sacraments 
 as means of grace. Infant Baptism, Episco- 
 pacy, and Apostolical Succession ? Believing 
 these to form part of the commission which 
 the Apostles received from the Holy Spirit, 
 we cannot account for their omission, (for 
 certainly, whatever allusion is made to them, 
 there is little direct statement,) on the as- 
 sumption that the history which relates the 
 progress of the Gospel revelation, would tell 
 us also in what that revelation consisted. 
 
 It must therefore be admitted, that to 
 the close of the History of the Gospel Re- 
 
106 LECTURE III. 
 
 velation, as narrated in the Acts of the 
 Apostles, (for it doubtless does terminate 
 with this book, though more may be in- 
 ferred from allusions and notices in the 
 other writings,) we are not told with any 
 precision or fulness, what it w^as which, 
 during that time, the Apostles preached as 
 the Gospel Revelation, which, throughout 
 the narrative, Christians are represented as 
 believing, and in the belief of which they 
 died. For this, therefore, we must go to 
 other parts of the New Testament; and we 
 shall perhaps be told by our opponents, 
 that there, in the Epistles especially, we 
 shall find the doctrines fully stated, whence 
 we are to gather our know^ledge of them, 
 as well as inform ourselves on points of 
 discipline and church government, as far as 
 God has therein revealed his will concern- 
 ing them ; beyond which we have no liberty 
 to inquire for ourselves, or authority to 
 prescribe for others. And we shall per- 
 haps be further told, that though the 
 Apostles, during the chief period of their 
 ministry, communicated the Gospel by 
 means of oral instruction, yet that after- 
 
LECTURE III. 107 
 
 ^vards they committed it to writing for the 
 instruction of the Church ; and that the 
 writings of the New Testament now stand 
 to us m the place of that oral instruction, 
 called the " form of sound words," which 
 they had employed with the first converts, 
 and in the early period of the Church. Let 
 us ascertain how^ far this is so by a refer- 
 ence to these Scriptures themselves. But 
 here the caution must be again repeated, 
 that we mistake not proofs for teaching ; 
 nor be too hasty to conclude that a notice, 
 which is sufficient to furnish proofs of a 
 fact acknowledged to be previously known, 
 is for that reason sufficient to have inform- 
 ed us of, or to have suggested that fact, by 
 its own force, w^ithout such previous know- 
 ledge. With this caution, let us refer to 
 the Apostolic Epistles, with the predispo- 
 sition, it may be, to find in them that full 
 and direct information on the Christian 
 doctrines, with which the narrative of the 
 Acts, while it relates their history and pro- 
 gress, does not furnish us. Here, however, 
 we are met, in the outset, by a circumstance 
 which at once places a bar upon any such 
 
108 LECTURE III. 
 
 expectation. On taking up the Epistles one 
 by one, we find, in their preamble or salu- 
 tation, that they are, without a single ex- 
 ception, addressed, not to strangers, but to 
 Christians ; not even to beginners in the 
 Christian faith, but to Christians of some 
 standing. This circumstance alone, in the 
 absence of other proofs, would be no incon- 
 siderable argument, previous to an exami- 
 nation of the fact, that they would not be 
 designed to convey the primary knowledge 
 of these truths. We should expect to find 
 antecedently that, addressed as they are to 
 Christians, they would presuppose, in the 
 hearer or reader, a knowledge of the chief 
 Christian doctrines ; however we might ex- 
 pect to find that they would enlarge upon 
 them, and point out the great practical re- 
 sults which would flow from a belief in 
 them ; or that they would remedy any 
 misconceptions which may have been formed 
 of them, either from misunderstanding them 
 at the time, or from subsequent forgetful- 
 ness, or from counteracting errors since 
 instilled by false teachers : whatever we 
 might expect to find said in reference to 
 
LECTURE III. 109 
 
 all or any of these several points, we should 
 certainly expect that they would presup- 
 pose a knowledge of the doctrines them- 
 selves ; and that in speaking of them, they 
 would do so, not in the way of formal 
 enunciation, but by way of allusion and 
 reference, as to things already known in 
 some form or other. 
 
 Now that this actually is the case in 
 regard to the Apostolic Epistles, it can 
 scarcely be necessary to repeat here, being 
 obvious to any one who will examine 
 those sacred writings fairly and impar- 
 tially, however cursorily. Take, e. g. one 
 of the strongest passages to which the 
 Church refers in proof of the divinity of 
 Christ, Phil. ii. 5 — 11. The Apostle is not 
 mentioning it, as if for the first time, nor 
 as though his chief object in mentioning it 
 were to propound the fact ; but citing it 
 as a fact already known, he refers to it to 
 cheer and encourage the Philippians, by 
 so bright and glorious an example, as 
 became the acknowledged servants of Him 
 of whom he speaks^, to bear, with like hu- 
 mility and Christian fortitude, the perse- 
 
110 LECTURE III. 
 
 cutions and sufferings under which it is one 
 great object of this Epistle to comfort and 
 encourage them. 
 
 That this indirect mode of stating, in 
 the Christian Scriptures, this and other 
 vital doctrines, does not affect their vali- 
 dity to us as a standard of faith, nor the 
 value and blessedness of the same Scrip- 
 tures, for many and great purposes belong- 
 ing to our peace, besides the mere proof of 
 doctrines and articles of faith — their ines- 
 timable value as radiations of heavenly light, 
 reflecting, as it were, though in these scat- 
 tered coruscations, the divine glory — their 
 profitableness " for reproof, for correction, 
 " for instruction in righteousness, that the 
 " man of God may be perfect, thoroughly 
 '^ furnished unto all good works ;" — all this, 
 we as Churchmen admit to the utmost, 
 and acknowledge with thankful devotion. 
 And further than this, it might be shewn, 
 that for these blessed objects, the indirect 
 mode here spoken of, not only presents no 
 objection, but comes recommended to us by 
 its analogy to the rest of God's works, and 
 its adaptation to the wants of our nature. 
 
LECTURE Iir. Ill 
 
 What was said above of the Epistles, 
 respecting their not being designed to teach 
 the Christian doctrines, from their being 
 addressed to Christians and presupposing 
 a knowledge of those doctrines, as well as 
 their validity and sufficiency for the jn^oofs 
 of those doctrines, applies also to the 
 Gospels. These also are addressed to 
 Christians, and presuppose a know^ledge, 
 if not of the facts recorded, at least of the 
 doctrines founded upon them, and subse- 
 quently revealed by the Holy Spirit. The 
 object of St. Luke's Gospel, and of the 
 circumstances, in part, under which it w^as 
 written, he states himself in the fourth 
 verse of the first chapter — that the disciple 
 " might know the certainty of those things 
 4' wherein he had been instructed ""." And 
 
 ^ Or catechized — Trept S)v Karrix'iOrjs. It is Impossible 
 to urge too strongly the important testimony which these 
 words of St. Luke bear to the principle maintained by 
 the Protestant Catholic against the Romanist on the 
 one side, and the Sectarian on the other. 
 
 While against the one, they point directly to previous 
 instruction, if not to Catechetical teaching, previous to 
 knowing the certainty and proof of the same from Holy 
 Scripture ; against the other, in regard to oral tradition, 
 they shew " that St. Luke thought not what was de- 
 
112 LECTURE III. 
 
 the same Evangelist, in the preceding 
 verses, speaking of the writings of others 
 who had done as he was then doing, hav- 
 ing previously been "eyewitnesses from 
 "the beginning and ministers of the word," 
 terms them " a declaration of those things 
 " which are most surely believed among 
 " us." Of the immediate object of St. John's 
 Gospel, and its peculiar and immediate 
 reference to the heresies of his day, espe- 
 cially those of the Ebionites, Cerinthians, 
 and others, there can be no doubt. His 
 Gospel appears to presuppose not only a 
 knowledge of the doctrines themselves, but 
 also, in part, of the controversies which had 
 been raised upon them. 
 
 It cannot, therefore, be said that the 
 
 Christian Scriptures, written as they were 
 
 for Christians, and addressed to Christians, 
 
 were designed, in their original purpose, 
 
 " delivered by word of mouth only, even by the eye- 
 " witnesses and ministers of the word, sufficient to give 
 " Theophilus a knowledge of the certainty of these things, 
 " without writing the Gospels ; and this the wisdom of 
 " God shewed, in causing them to be written, saith 
 " Irenseus, ' to be the pillar and foundation of the faith." " 
 — Whitby in loco. 
 
LECTURE III. 113 
 
 to teach Christianity to those ignorant of 
 it, however complete the proofs they afford 
 of it to those who have been taught. 
 Nor is there any better ground for sup- 
 posing that, admitting their original object 
 to have been different, their divine author 
 intended them to serve that purpose now^ 
 as supplying the place, in these later times, 
 of the oral instruction of the first inspired 
 teachers. This will be seen more clearly 
 presently ; but it may be observed here, 
 that even in their original application, they 
 seem to be shielded by a sort of jealous 
 precaution, lest their object and their rela- 
 tion to the Christian doctrines should be 
 hereafter misunderstood ; as though the 
 Holy Spirit designed to warn us, through 
 the sacred writers, of the use to which these 
 Scriptures would afterwards be perverted'. 
 
 The relation of the Epistles to the Chris- 
 tian doctrines would perhaps be best seen, 
 if we could suppose that, in the Acts of the 
 Apostles, at the exact point in the history 
 at which the Apostle had written each of 
 
 ^ See Rom. xv. 14, 15 ; 1 Peter v. 12 ; 2 Peter i. 12. 
 iii. 1, 2; I.John ii. 21. 
 
 I 
 
114 LECTURE III. 
 
 his Epistles, (of those at least the dates of 
 which fall within the period comprised by 
 the Acts of the Apostles,) the sacred histo- 
 rian had notified the name of each of them 
 in its proper place : as if, e. g., he had said. 
 Here the Apostle wrote such or such an 
 Epistle. Or, which would make it clearer, 
 if, after having arranged the Epistles in 
 chronological order, we were to place them 
 in the Acts of the Apostles at the particular 
 period, as marked by time and place, when 
 they were written ; and having done this, 
 to read the whole as one continued history. 
 We should thus, by bringing them in juxta- 
 position with the history of the Apostles' 
 teaching, form a juster estimate of their 
 office in relation to Christian doctrines. 
 Finding the history relate to us the pro- 
 gress of a certain teaching on the part of 
 the Apostles, with the particulars of which 
 it has not as yet acquainted us, but which 
 it might be supposed we should find stated 
 in the other Scriptures, we turn to those 
 Scriptures for that purpose ; and find that 
 they, instead of giving us, in full or in 
 detail, the particulars of that teaching, 
 
LECTURE III. 115 
 
 treat it as though it were ah^eady taught, 
 and speak of it in the way of allusion 
 rather, as to something already known ; 
 thus declaring, by implication, that there 
 was something between that history and 
 those Epistles, which the written Scriptures 
 as yet have not communicated, but which 
 obviously is understood to exist somewhere, 
 unless we can find which, we are in the 
 situation of a person (if the comparison may 
 be allowed) who has lost one in a series 
 of volumes on a given subject, the substance 
 of which he thinks he can gather from 
 the remainder, but of which he desires to 
 be assured from authority ; especially since 
 he finds that others also profess to deduce, 
 from the same, a system materially opposed 
 to his own, but which mat/, after a fashion, 
 be deduced from them, and which he feels 
 that he has no authority for pronouncing 
 to be erroneous, beyond his own private 
 opinion, if it be admitted that this principle 
 of mere deduction is the only, or even an 
 authorized mode of ascertaining the truth. 
 This teaching, to which the T'pistles refer, 
 the Apostles obviously possessed, having 
 
 I 2 
 
116 LECTURE III. 
 
 been described as receiving it, according to 
 promise, from the Holy Ghost ; and the 
 Epistles are too circumstantial in their 
 allusions to it, not to have been written 
 consequent upon it, and with immediate 
 reference to it. It should also be particu- 
 larly observed, that the Epistles continually 
 speak of, and allude to, " the Word of God." 
 And this Word is evidently spoken of as 
 denoting the revelation of God in his Son, 
 and the glad tidings of salvation offered 
 through his name ; nor does it appear in 
 any case to be used in any other sense, 
 except in Heb. xi. 3. and 2 Peter iii. 5, or 
 as otherwise than comprehending all that is 
 necessary to be known and believed for salva- 
 tion, " the whole counsel of God" towards 
 those to whom it was preached. In the 
 Gospels, " the word," and " the Word of 
 " God," though used parabolically and pro- 
 phetically, (inasmuch as at that time the 
 Gospel scheme of salvation had not been 
 revealed, and was known to none but its 
 divine author,) yet appears to be intended, 
 frequently though not exclusively, in the 
 same sense when used by himself; as, for 
 
LECTURE III. 117 
 
 example, in the parable of the sower, and in 
 Mark iv. 17, (and perhaps John xii. 48,) 
 Luke viii. 21, xi. 28. 
 
 It is remarkable, however, though gene- 
 rally overlooked, that the expression ''the 
 " word of God," when used to denote the 
 Christian revelation, though denoting that 
 word as something past and alreadi/ delive?'- 
 ed, yet in no instance, either in the Epistles 
 or Acts of the Apostles, means the W7ntten 
 Scrijjture ; nor in any other sense does the 
 term " word" in the Epistles refer to any 
 thing written, unless perhaps we except the 
 instance in 2Thess. iii. 14, where the Apostle 
 refers it indeed to what he had written 
 in the same Epistle ; but this, not on a 
 point of doctrine, but of discipline. 
 
 I do not say in what sense the term is 
 used in the Gospels, because that would be 
 to assume the point in question. Being 
 used prophetically, its reference will depend 
 on the sense in which, when brought to 
 pass, it was to be employed ; which, as 
 we have seen in the Acts and Epistles, 
 which speak of it as a matter of fact, is 
 never that of written Scripture. 
 
 I 3 
 
118 LECTURE III, 
 
 We are therefore compelled, by the ne- 
 cessity of the case, as shewn by the simple 
 statements of Scripture, to fall back on the 
 principle laid down above : that it was the 
 peculiar design of God, that the Gospel, as 
 distinguished from the Law, should be com- 
 mitted, as regards its form, not to tables 
 of writing, but to men. Or to shew this 
 more clearly by these several parallelisms : 
 The history of the Gospel, prior to the 
 day of Pentecost, will be analogous to that 
 of the elder covenant, previous to the de- 
 livery of the Law, (as far as any analogy is 
 there required.) 
 
 The Revelation by the Holy Ghost, of 
 the scheme of redemption by Christ, on 
 the day of Pentecost, is strictly analogous 
 to the delivery of the Law on Mount Sinai ; 
 while its being ordained to take place on 
 the anniversary of that delivery, and on 
 the day appointed for its commemoration, 
 was symbolical of the fact now also re- 
 vealed, that henceforth it was designed to 
 supersede it and to supply its place. 
 
 But there is wanting, in the Gospel 
 revelation, the analogous appointment to 
 
LECTURE III. 119 
 
 that in the Law, by which Moses was com- 
 manded to commit to writing that which 
 the Lord had spoken in his hearing and 
 that of the people, as the future instrument 
 for teaching that Law. There is no record 
 that the Apostles received a command to 
 commit to writing the new Revelation as 
 it had been communicated to them by 
 the Holy Spirit. There is no record that 
 the Apostles did so commit it to writing. 
 That the writings which they have left to 
 us are not that communication in its form^ 
 (which the analogy requires,) however in- 
 fallibly they furnish its proofs when known, 
 we have already seen. But that they com- 
 municated that word of God, as it had 
 been delivered to them ; that they kept 
 back none of it, nor had shunned to de- 
 clare the whole counsel of God, at the very 
 time they were penning the inspired Scrip- 
 tures, those same Scriptures plainly tell us. 
 Let us however here turn, with thankful 
 devotion and wonder, to that peculiar and 
 merciful adaptation to the nature and 
 wants of men, displayed in the appoint- 
 ment, that the Gospel, a dispensation, not 
 
 I 4 
 
120 LECTURE III. 
 
 of the letter but of the spirit; not of 
 judgment, but of mercy ; not of wrath, but 
 of love ; involving the highest form of pro- 
 bation and discipline, yet bringing men 
 into personal connexion with its author; 
 placing them in those relations to him, out 
 of which arise motives to serve him of a 
 personal character, making their duty 
 henceforth one of personal obligation, the 
 result of a faith working by love ; — that a 
 dispensation of this nature should be ad- 
 ministered, not by the stern unbending 
 written tables of the Law, but by men of 
 like passions and infirmities with those to 
 whom as ambassadors they were sent; 
 themselves once sinners and aliens, yet now 
 pardoned and made vessels of mercy ; men 
 who could sympathize with those to whom 
 they ministered ; who could bear with 
 their waywardness, and feel for their mi- 
 sery and obduracy, having been themselves 
 in the like condemnation ; men, feeling in 
 their own persons the blessedness of par- 
 don and of reconciliation with God, of that 
 change from death to life, which is the 
 portion of Christ's redeemed people here, 
 
LECTURE III. 121 
 
 and the earnest of that future inheritance 
 which is their portion hereafter ; men who, 
 feeling all this, combining the wisdom of 
 the serpent with the simplicity of the dove, 
 and thinking no cost or trouble too great 
 which could save a soul from perdition 
 and bring it to Christ, would, being by the 
 Spirit of truth instructed unto the king- 
 dom of heaven, bring out of their treasure 
 things new^ and old, able to give the milk 
 of the word to babes, and stronger meat 
 to those of fuller age and spiritual stature ; 
 willing and able, if needs be, to be made all 
 things to all men, that they might by all 
 means save some; — who, whatever authority 
 was and must have been assumed by 
 them in Christ's flock, of which he had 
 made them overseers, yet felt this was no 
 cause of human boasting, but rather of 
 fearful responsibility ; w ho must have felt, 
 in the words of one of their number, " Yea 
 " though I preach the Gospel, I have 
 " nothing to glory of; for necessity is laid 
 " upon me ; yea woe is me if I preach not 
 "the Gospel;" who, under the sense of 
 their own weakness, must, with the same 
 
122 LECTURE III. 
 
 Apostle, have asked, " Who is sufficient for 
 " these things ? " and who could have 
 found no answer to meet the despondency 
 which this feeling must otherwise have en-, 
 gendered, save the promise of their divine 
 Master, the last he breathed before he 
 returned to glory, (surely was it then most 
 needed,) " Lo, I am with you alway ; even 
 " to the end of the world. Amen." 
 
 If, however, this Scriptural account of 
 the promulgation of the Gospel be a just 
 one, and I am not aware that it is overstated 
 or partially represented, a most important 
 result suggests itself, which should be briefly 
 adverted to here, but which will be con- 
 sidered more fully in another Lecture. 
 If it was the design of God that the Gospel 
 should thus be confided in the first instance 
 to human agents, and by them communi- 
 cated to the Church orally ; and if the 
 Canon of Scripture closes without itself 
 giving us that form of doctrine committed 
 to writing, or intimating that the first 
 teachers of it had themselves provided for 
 its being so committed ; the question at 
 once presents itself, " What provision was 
 
LECTURE III. 123 
 
 " ordained for transmitting this form of 
 " doctrine to the Church when the Apostles 
 "should be no more?" That no such 
 provision should have been made, would 
 be most unaccountable ; that it was not by 
 being committed to writing, we have already 
 seen. The question therefore, as it were, 
 forces itself upon us ; " Was there no pro- 
 " vision made for transmitting it, as it 
 " had commenced, by human instruments?" 
 Were the Apostles commissioned to appoint 
 no persons who might hereafter occupy 
 their place and exercise their functions; 
 to whom, together with the word of God 
 which they had received from the Holy 
 Ghost, they might give authority to preach 
 it ; and who might in their turn hereafter 
 appoint others to succeed them, with the 
 like powers ; thus perpetuating the merciful 
 purpose of God as manifested in the first 
 Christian converts, and transmitting the 
 form of doctrine and the authority from 
 generation to generation ? 
 
 Now antecedent to any evidence of the 
 fact, this question would seem to force 
 itself upon us, from the very nature of the 
 
124 LECTURE III. 
 
 case, as shewn in the preceding circum- 
 stance. We thus arrive at the strongest 
 presumptive grounds in favour of a suc- 
 cession of Apostolic Ministers. This we 
 possess, even though we were in possession 
 of no subsequent knowledge ; though we 
 had never seen the clear and unquestion- 
 able declarations on the subject in St. 
 Paul's Epistles to Timothy; though we had 
 no historical evidence of the fact, nor the 
 testimony furnished by the uninterrupted 
 practice of the Church to the present hour. 
 Without such a provision, the whole matter 
 would be perplexing and unaccountable. 
 
 We arrive also at another important 
 conclusion — viz. that while for proofs of the 
 Christian doctrine we should refer to Scrip- 
 ture as the standard of faith, yet for its 
 foi^m, if ever reduced to writing, we should 
 look to the writings of those who succeeded 
 the Apostles and had received the truth 
 from them ; or to those records which, 
 though uninspired, were likely to furnish 
 the most authentic accounts of what those 
 primitive Christians held and taught. And 
 in regard to matters of discipline and ordi- 
 
LECTURE III. 125 
 
 nances : since the Scripture is comparatively 
 silent respecting them, having merely stated 
 that our Lord had delegated to the Church 
 the power of ordaining and regulating these, 
 w^ith the promise of his sanction to their 
 appointments, — we must look for them both 
 in primitive practice, and in the universal 
 practice of the Church ever since ; with the 
 limitation, of course, as in the case of doc- 
 trines, that nothing is to be received as 
 necessary to salvation in the one case, or 
 binding on the conscience in the other, 
 which is repugnant to the written word of 
 God. 
 
 Lastly. Believing that evei^y Christian 
 verity was revealed by the Holy Spirit to 
 the Apostles, and by them communicated 
 to the Church, if new doctrines are pro- 
 posed to us as being supported by Scripture 
 proofs, we shall not be content with that, 
 knowing that not even our own rest on 
 that alone, and that Scripture is, by its 
 own statement, capable of being wrested 
 to a wrong purpose— independently of the 
 analogy of things, which tells us that the 
 evils of blessings abused, are proportion- 
 
126 LECTURE III. 
 
 ate to their benefits when used as God 
 designed ; but we shall also endeavour to 
 ascertain whether the doctrine or tenet in 
 question was held in those ages of the 
 Church in which, from its proximity to 
 the fountain head, the stream would natu- 
 rally be assumed to be most pure. 
 
 Having brought the subject therefore to 
 this point, let us for the present leave it, 
 reserving the fuller consideration of these 
 and other deductions from the Scripture 
 account of the Gospel for another Lecture ; 
 merely observing, in concluding this, that 
 if to any it may seem superfluous, if not 
 dangerous, to raise questions as to the origiii 
 of our Christian knowledge, while we are 
 content with its proofs^ and to dispute about 
 the rule and guide of our faith, while we are 
 agreed as to the ultimate staiidaixl by which 
 all truth must be eventually tried ; our 
 reply is, that it might frequently perhaps 
 be spared, did the question merely regard 
 our own personal convictions ; and likewise, 
 in many cases, (for it cannot be conceded as 
 an absolute rule,) in our dispute with the 
 Romanist, who, holding what we hold, but 
 
LECTURE III. 127 
 
 holding at the same time much that we do 
 not hold, as finding no warrant in Scripture, 
 may in these be combated rather with the 
 written word, as testing those things which, 
 through the vain traditions of men, he has 
 added on to the pure word of God as 
 embodied in the Apostolic traditions of 
 the primitive Church, and confirmed by 
 the testimony of holy Scripture. But the 
 battle in our day is with Socinianism ra- 
 ther than with Popery ; with the Epicurean 
 laxity of a self-styled intellectual age, rather 
 than the ascetic gloom of the dark ages — 
 with Rationalism, rather than with Super- 
 stition. With these new enemies we must 
 fight with other weapons. It is not enough 
 for them to shew that a proposed article 
 of faith is such as may, by some inge- 
 nuity, be made to find its authority in 
 Scripture. With us, that authority is not 
 initiatory, but appellative ; and with them 
 we claim the right of trying their doctrine 
 by the testimony also of Catholic Tradition. 
 Neither is it any valid objection they urge 
 against the Christian verities, that their 
 Scriptural proofs are indirect, often latent, 
 
128 LECTURE III. 
 
 and implied rather than stated. We do 
 not rest on this proof alone the specific 
 character of our faith, without regard to 
 its generic character also — that it is the 
 catholic faith, held from the days of the 
 Apostles downward. 
 
 It is only by preserving this Apostolic 
 relation between the Christian verities and 
 their proofs in Holy Scripture, that, in 
 the study of those " Holy Scriptures which 
 " were written for our learning," we can 
 have a reasonable hope that it will be 
 granted to us, in answer to our prayers, 
 that " we may in such wise hear them, 
 " read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest 
 " them, that by patience, and comfort of 
 " God's holy word, we may embrace, and 
 " ever hold fast the blessed hope of ever- 
 ^' lasting life, which God has given us in 
 "our Saviour Jesus Christ." 
 
LECTURE IV, 
 
 APPLICATION OF THE FOREGOING TO DOCTRINES AND 
 ORDINANCES. 
 
 2 Tim. ii. 2. 
 The things that thou hast heard of me among 
 many witnesses, the same commit thou to faith- 
 ful men, who shall he able to teach others also. 
 
 HAVING reviewed, in the last Lecture^ 
 the account which Scripture itself 
 gives us of the origin and progress, both 
 of the doctrines and of itself, up to the 
 period when the Canon of the New Testa- 
 ment closes, we are brought to this point. 
 We have seen that the Gospel, unlike the 
 liaw, was committed by the Holy Spirit? 
 not to tables of writing, but to men. And 
 that during the lifetime of those men, as 
 far as the New Testament informs us, it 
 was taught, not by written Scripture, but 
 by oral instruction. In what form they 
 
 K 
 
130 LECTURE IV, 
 
 taught it, or what it was in fact which they 
 did teach, the New Testament does not 
 inform iis very minutely. It intimates that 
 they kept back no part of what they had 
 received from the Holy Ghost, but taught 
 the whole counsel of God. Whether, at any 
 future period, the Apostles themselves com- 
 mitted to writing what they had thus 
 taught for so many years by w^ord of 
 mouth, the Scripture is silent. For that the 
 books of the New Testament do not consti- 
 tute it in form, (however satisfactorily they 
 provide the proofs of it,) we have already 
 seen from the testimony of those sacred 
 writings themselves. We have seen that 
 those writings are in every case addressed 
 to Christians, and presuppose an acquaint- 
 ance with the Christian doctrines, being 
 addressed, in most cases, to the same per- 
 sons whom the writer himself had pre- 
 viously instructed in the form of Christian 
 doctrine. And not only is this set forth in 
 the preamble, or form of salutation, at the 
 beginning of each Epistle, but any one who 
 reads with an ordinary share of attention, 
 will see that the notices of the most im- 
 
LECTURE IV. Ifil 
 
 portant doctrines, even that in Phil. ii. 
 6 — 11, however satisfactory and indis- 
 pensable now as proofs, yet are introduced 
 in reference to truths already known and 
 familiar to the reader, not as those made 
 known to him for the first time ; and ob- 
 viously never could have been designed 
 for that object, even had their own decla- 
 rations on the subject been wanting. 
 
 We are, therefore, naturally brought to 
 the question — Where is that body and form 
 of Christian doctrine which the Apostles re- 
 ceived from the Holy Ghost, and which they 
 communicated to the Church? or rather, 
 w^hich will facilitate the inquiry. What be- 
 came of it when the Apostles themselves were 
 dead, if the Apostles themselves did not, as 
 we believe to be the case, themselves commit 
 it to writing ? It was not from any want 
 of importance in the doctrine itself that 
 they did not so write it down ; for it is 
 spoken of as a " form of sound words," a 
 " sacred thing committed, and to be kept 
 "by the Holy Ghost dwelling" in the per- 
 son to whom it had been committed; it 
 is described as " the faith once committed 
 
 K 2 
 
132 LECTURE IV. 
 
 " to the saints," and in another passage, as 
 "the whole counsel of God." It were un- 
 reasonable, therefore, to suppose that it 
 was designed to die wnth the Apostles ; 
 and if we do not find that they made any 
 provision to preserve it in a written form, 
 still less that they wrote it down themselves, 
 the question remains to be answered— What 
 became of the form of doctrine when they 
 were dead ? It would be utterly unac- 
 countable if 710 provision were made for 
 perpetuating a thing of such vast import- 
 ance to the souls of a lost world, and for 
 transmitting it to future ages. 
 
 Being convinced then that some provision 
 must have been made, what provision would 
 suggest itself to our minds as likely to be 
 appointed for perpetuating the doctrine, 
 other than that which its divine author 
 appointed for making it known in the first 
 instance; unless it can be shewn that there 
 exist reasons, on some other ground, why 
 this could not be continued? Should we 
 not expect to find the same system con- 
 tinued, at all events, until some intimation 
 should be given that it was to cease ; or 
 
LECTURE IV. 133 
 
 unless there was something in the system 
 unsuited to the object to be attained, either 
 in itself, or in reference to its being con- 
 tinued beyond the Apostolic age? Now as 
 regards the suitableness of the means adopt- 
 ed in the first instance, in committing the 
 Gospel to human agents and instruments, 
 allusion was made, in the last Lecture, to 
 the merciful adaptation to the wants of our 
 nature, exhibited in this appointment, by 
 which, considering its object, its sanctions, 
 its living principle of active faith, its rela- 
 tion to us as placed in a state of moral pro- 
 bation, the Gospel was committed to men 
 of the like passions and infirmities with 
 those whom they were commissioned to 
 bring to a knowledge of its saving truths, 
 and who could attest from their practical ex- 
 perience, and exhibit in their own persons, 
 the efficacy and blessedness of its saving 
 power. Unless therefore it could be shewn 
 that such a system would be less suited to 
 subsequent ages of the Church than to that 
 of its commencement, should we not expect, 
 antecedently to inquiry, to find that some 
 provision had been made for its continu- 
 
 K 3 
 
134 LECTURE IV. 
 
 ance, especially if there is no intimation of 
 any other system having been ordained for 
 the purpose ? Should we not expect to 
 find that the first inspired Apostles would 
 be commissioned to appoint others, to 
 whom, before they left the world, they 
 might confide the sacred truths committed 
 to themselves ; and who, in their turn, might 
 commit the same to others whom they had 
 appointed for the purpose both of preserv- 
 ing and of teaching it ; thus, by a succession 
 of agents expressly and lawfully appointed 
 for the purpose, transmitting the same form 
 of doctrine to the end of the world? It 
 would not be overstating the case to affirm, 
 that this would suggest itself from the very 
 nature of the case, as being the obvious 
 solution of what must otherwise present a 
 great difficulty, viz. that the body and form 
 of Christian doctrine, after the immense im- 
 portance attached to it in the Sacred History, 
 should be left without any visible means 
 for its perpetuation and transmission. The 
 nature of the case M^ould suggest the neces- 
 sity of some means being provided for these 
 objects; — the harmony of God's designs 
 
LECTURE IV. 135 
 
 and the analogy of his dispensations would 
 suggest, that those just described would 
 be the means adopted. 
 
 We thus arrive at the strongest antece- 
 dent probability in favour, not only of 
 some channel for transmitting the form 
 and body of Christian doctrines exterior 
 to the Scriptures, but of the appointment 
 of a series of ministers who might succes- 
 sively occupy the place and office of the 
 Apostles, both for receiving the doctrines 
 and transmitting them to others ; both as 
 the depositaries and trustees of the truth, 
 and as the instruments for teaching it 
 Now view this in connexion with our 
 Lord's declaration to his Apostles, that 
 whatsoever they should bind on earth, 
 should be bound in heaven ; and that what- 
 soever they should loose on earth, should be 
 loosed in heaven ; and with his promise to 
 be with them even to the end of the w^orld. 
 Turn from this to the account which the 
 Scripture gives us of the appointment and 
 ordination of Timothv and others, and 
 view these in connexion with the following 
 injunctions delivered by St. Paul to Timo- 
 
 K 4 
 
136 LECTURE IV. 
 
 thy, after his separation and ordination to 
 the work of the Christian ministry, and his 
 appointment to be a Bishop in the Church. 
 
 " Neglect not the gift that is in thee, 
 " which was given thee by prophecy, with 
 " the laying on of the hands of the Presby- 
 " tery." (1 Tim. iv. 14.) " Take heed to 
 " thyself and unto the doctrine — continue 
 " in them." v. 16. " Hold fast the form of 
 " sound words which thou hast heard of 
 " me, in faith and love which is in Christ 
 " Jesus. That good thing which was com- 
 " mitted unto thee, keep by the Holy 
 " Ghost which dwelleth in us." (2 Tim. i. 
 13, 14.) And especially the following 
 striking passage : " Thou therefore, my son, 
 " be strong in the grace that is in Christ 
 " Jesus : — And the things that thou hast 
 " heard of me among many witnesses, the 
 " same commit thou to faithful men, tvho 
 " shall be able to teach others also'' {2 Tim. 
 ii. 1, 2.) 
 
 These passages of Scripture, viewed 
 in connexion with the antecedent proba- 
 bility in favour of Apostolic succession and 
 Catholic tradition, as exhibited by Scripture 
 
LECTURE IV. 137 
 
 itself, and especially with the circumstance 
 that what the Apostles taught, is not related 
 in Scripture, circumstantially or in form, are 
 so strong and clear, that they would seem, 
 when viewed impartially, sufficient of 
 themselves to establish the fact, even on 
 the assumption that we are to deduce our 
 opinions on these subjects from Scripture 
 alone, without the aid of any collateral or 
 subsequent testimony. And when we come 
 to consider the case as it really is ; to add 
 the testimony of ecclesiastical history ; and 
 to see, from this, the unquestionable fact 
 that, from the beginning to the present 
 hour, there ever has been such a succession 
 of Apostolic ministers — such a transmission, 
 with them, of the doctrines received by the 
 Apostles themselves, and by them delivered 
 to their immediate successors ; and that 
 these have, in every age, been regarded as 
 the appointed means and instruments for 
 perpetuating and transmitting the form of 
 doctrine ; it is difficult to conceive what 
 further evidence on the subject could be 
 reasonably expected as to the purpose of 
 Christ to his Church in this respect ; nor is 
 
138 LECTURE IV. 
 
 it easy to propose any other solution of the 
 matter, which does not, either in itself or 
 in its consequences, (which must of course 
 be taken into account in estimating the 
 force of a principle,) present greater diffi- 
 culties. 
 
 Moreover, consider that, however griev- 
 ously particular branches of the Church 
 may have erred; (and God forbid those 
 errors should be extenuated or lightly 
 accounted;) however they may in turn 
 have corrupted or suppressed individual 
 doctrines; yet that the Church, as a whole, 
 has never yet been in vital error, — never yet, 
 as a whole, suppressed or corrupted any one 
 fundamental or essential doctrine. Con- 
 sider, further, that in the Divine dispensa- 
 tions, ti7ne is no object to Him in whose 
 hands is eternity, and with whom a thousand 
 years are but as one day; and that in His 
 dispensations, natural and revealed, extra- 
 ordinary means are not interposed to bring 
 about results which time, however distant, 
 would effect in the ordinary course and 
 constitution of things ; nor to save men 
 from error, of which, after he has once 
 
LECTURE IV. 139 
 
 forewarned them and provided such means 
 of escape as are consistent with a state of 
 probation and trial, time, however remote, 
 and sad experience would at length con- 
 vince them, when they had neglected those 
 means ; — thus leaving them to find out, if 
 they will, the reality of those shoals and 
 quicksands, of which the light of his pro- 
 phecy had warned them, as calculated to 
 make shipwreck of their faith. Consider 
 all this, and it must be admitted, that there 
 is nothing in the consequences, real or 
 probable, of the principle here contended 
 for, from which any argument could be 
 drawn against that principle, as tending, in 
 any one of its results, to militate against 
 the analogy of his dealings, whether as 
 exhibited in Holy Scripture, or in the 
 course and constitution of nature. 
 
 Admitting then, that the body and form 
 of Christian doctrine w^as to be continued as 
 it had begun, being vested in human agents, 
 subject to the proof of Holy Scripture ; 
 (which, in one sense, after the Apostolic age, 
 stood in the place of the miracles, as the cre- 
 dentials of the teacher;) there result, from 
 
140 LECTURE IV. 
 
 this, deductions of the greatest moment, 
 which may be regarded as representing, in 
 the main, the chief features of the Church 
 principle, and those commonly objected to 
 by the Sectarian. What these are, I shall 
 proceed to state in the remainder of the 
 present Lecture, before shewing, in the 
 following ones, their analogy to God's 
 other appointments, and their adaptation 
 to the moral constitution of man. 
 
 In order, however, to obviate any 
 undue prejudice which might be excited 
 against these, I would again observe, 
 though at the risk of being charged with 
 needless repetition, that although they 
 are deductions from a particular principle, 
 yet that the principle itself is one of 
 purely Scriptural origin, deduced from the 
 account which the Scripture itself gives us 
 of the origin and early progress of the 
 Gospel. 
 
 The flrst result then to which we arrive, 
 is, that for the form of Christian doctrine 
 we must look out of the Scriptures ; whe- 
 ther as declared in controversial writings, 
 or formally drawn out in articles of belief. 
 
LECTURE IV. m 
 
 or embodied in liturgical or other formu- 
 laries. If ever it was committed to writing, 
 it would be subsequently to the days of 
 the Apostles and the writing of the New 
 Testament. And it is to be expected 
 that it would be so committed to writing 
 by men who would desire to retain and 
 perpetuate what they had derived from the 
 fountain head ; and it would also be more 
 called for as the Church increased in num- 
 bers, when the want of some system and 
 compendium of doctrine would be felt, 
 to meet the demand for teachers, and as 
 means to facilitate instruction : though, 
 probably, some of the first indications of it 
 would be found in the controversial writings 
 of the Fathers, being called forth by the 
 heresies and departures from the faith, 
 which had begun to spring up even in the 
 Apostles' days. 
 
 Neither is it any valid objection to these 
 doctrines that they are not found expressed 
 in formal statements, until drawn forth at 
 this or that period, and then perhaps by some 
 controversy or heresy. This mode of gra- 
 dually developing the truth, and of making 
 
142 LECTURE IV. 
 
 these apparent incidents the occasions of 
 doing so, is not only that which it has 
 pleased God to adopt in regard to doc- 
 trines, but is strictly analogous to the 
 course pursued in the gradual development 
 of matters of more practical character in 
 the Scriptures themselves. Such e. g. is 
 the course observed in regard to offences ; 
 such also in regard to the due celebration 
 of the Lord's Supper, in 1 Cor. xi. The 
 instruction given l)y the Apostle on these 
 occasions, though at first sight the result, 
 in the one case, of questions referred 
 to him,— in the other, of an abuse which 
 had been brought under his notice, is 
 more valuable to us in this form, than 
 it would have been in the form of 
 bare precepts without reference to any 
 existing circumstances. Being drawn forth 
 by circumstances which actually occurred 
 from the Gospel coming in contact with 
 human nature, they are much more cal- 
 culated to meet our wants than bare rules 
 or precepts. St. Paul's direction not to 
 make the Lord's Supper an occasion of 
 excess or wrangling, would perhaps have 
 
LECTURE IV. Uf5 
 
 been by many deemed superfluous, if de- 
 livered in the form of mere precept, before 
 a case had actually occurred which called 
 for them. 
 
 Analogous to this is the method wliicli 
 seems to have been adopted by the Holy 
 Spirit for the gradual development, to the 
 w^orld, of the form of Christian doctrines, 
 through the medium of heresy and con- 
 troversy, or of questions arising from doubt 
 or misconception. 
 
 Hence, apart from the fact that it is 
 historically true, the inquiry after what it 
 was that the Apostles taught, would na- 
 turally take this direction. Finding the 
 history of the commencement and early 
 progress of the Gospel, (as related in the 
 Acts of the Apostles,) and the Epistles 
 running parallel to each other, both of 
 them speaking fully of the word of God, 
 yet neither of them distinctly stating what 
 it is, we should be led naturally to follow 
 ecclesiastical history, step by step, into the 
 region of uninspired testimony, and look 
 out for the first intimations we could meet 
 with there, of any thing in the shape of 
 
144 LECTURE IV. 
 
 system or body of doctrine, professing to 
 represent the creed of the Church, and the 
 faith as received from the Apostles ; subject, 
 of course, to the corroboration and testi- 
 mony of Holy Scripture. We should 
 expect that its descent would be neces- 
 sarily traditional, as distinguished from 
 any inspired written form, seeing that the 
 Apostles themselves, though professing to 
 have communicated it wholly and unre- 
 servedly to those whom they taught and 
 appointed to succeed them, yet died with- 
 out having themselves reduced it to writing. 
 The first stage in its communication being 
 in this sense traditional, every subsequent 
 one necessarily became so, the successors 
 of the Apostles having, as uninspired men, 
 no authority for transmitting it as the 
 word of God, beyond their own assertion 
 of having received it from the Apostles, 
 (whether immediately or through more 
 links in the chain of descent,) and the 
 testimony of the Scriptures admitted to 
 have been written by the same Apostles. 
 In another sense it would not be tradi- 
 tional, seeing that it was committed to 
 
LECTURE IV. 145 
 
 writing, its most essential doctrines at 
 least, in the very earliest ages, in forms 
 in which we receive and use it to this 
 very day. 
 
 And here it may be well to observe on 
 the indefinite meaning attached by many 
 to the word Tradition^ and the needless 
 and inconsistent alarm and prejudice with 
 which any mention of it is received, when 
 spoken of as the channel through which 
 we receive any portion of the Christian 
 faith. It is not difficult to account for the 
 prejudice against Tradition, knowing the 
 sad abuses to which it has been perverted 
 in past ages of the Church. But this does 
 not affect the part which God designed it 
 should occupy in the transmission of the 
 Christian doctrines ; nor render it less in- 
 cumbent on us to endeavour at least, to 
 redeem it from the obloquy and prejudice 
 under which it has fallen. It has been 
 before observed, that for the assertion that 
 the Bible alone is our guide to the know- 
 ledge of the Christian verities, there is no 
 satisfactory authority in the Bible itself. It 
 may be said with no less truth, that there 
 
146 LECTURE IV. 
 
 are intimations, if not positive declarations, 
 in the Bible, to which those who profess to 
 take the Bible for their guide cannot be 
 blind without wilfully shutting their eyes 
 to them, that Tradition, in conjunction 
 with Holy Scripture, was the instrument 
 ordained by the Holy Spirit for preserving 
 and transmitting the Christian verities; Tra- 
 dition conveying its form — the Scriptures 
 supplying the proof. Nay, further, if we 
 take the strict letter of Scripture, the inti- 
 mations in favour of Tradition being the 
 instrument, are stronger and more frequent 
 than those in favour of Scripture. The rela- 
 tion of Scripture to those verities, as set forth 
 in the Sixth Article of our Church, rests, as 
 was observed above, on other authority than 
 that of any direct Scripture proof: and es- 
 sential as is the protection of this Article to 
 the purity of our faith and our Christian 
 liberty, we have no right to abuse it so 
 as to attempt to overturn God's own ap- 
 pointments, as though we were wiser than 
 he — as though we were so well able to 
 determine how the Gospel ought to be 
 taught, that we may take upon ourselves 
 
LECTURE IV. 147 
 
 to affirm that it was and rnust be so taught, 
 in the face of God's own declaration to the 
 contrary, as revealed in the very Scriptures 
 w^hich we profess to make our guide. Every 
 one who is aware of the fearful extent to 
 which tradition has been abused, and the 
 purposes to which it has been perverted 
 in past ages of the Church ; and who also 
 feels, as every Christian should feel, that, 
 as a member of Christ's body, he cannot 
 but partake of whatever befalls that body, 
 whether of guilt or suffering; would be 
 willing to bear long with the prejudices 
 he has to encounter, and must acknowledge 
 that it is not his to shew impatience or a 
 want of forbearance towards those whose 
 fears render them slow to receive, even in 
 its legitimate form, that, with the abuse of 
 which alone they have been hitherto ac- 
 quainted. At the same time, those who are 
 thus strongly prejudiced against Tradition, 
 even when used in conjunction with Scrip- 
 ture and ultimately subjected to it for proof 
 and authority — tradition occupying the first 
 place in the order of time — these should 
 be reminded that the genuineness of Scrip - 
 
 L 2 
 
148 LECTURE IV. 
 
 ture itself is likewise a matter of tradition — 
 received on similar traditional evidence — a 
 tradition, which God forbid we should ever 
 be led to question ; nor should we overlook 
 the consideration of the wants of our nature 
 exhibited in this peculiar provision, nor its 
 suitableness to us as placed in a state of 
 probation. Still it is, after all, as matter 
 of fact, traditional. Men are accustomed 
 to think and speak of the New Testament, 
 as if, like the Law, it had been committed 
 to the ark, and there kept, as if by an 
 extraordinary protection of the Almighty, 
 from all possibility of change or corrup- 
 tion ; or as if, more sure than even the 
 Law in the days of Josiah, it had been 
 suddenly found and recovered, in a way 
 calculated to preclude all doubts of its 
 genuineness, even to the most sceptical — 
 regarding its genuineness as a kind of 
 axiom in theology, which it were as un- 
 reasonable to question, as the evidence of 
 a miracle worked before their eyes. It is 
 hardly necessary to remark, how entirely 
 repugnant to any notion of a state of trial, 
 would be this mathematical demonstration 
 
LECTURE IV. 149 
 
 as it were of a fact, the belief of whicli 
 forms so vital a feature in our moral pro- 
 bation. It is unnecessary to dwell on the 
 improbability that God would liave left it 
 in this state, independently of the fact that 
 he has not so left it. To those to whom 
 the doctrines of the Church Catholic are 
 an offence, whether from sincere though 
 mistaken scruples, or, as is more commonly 
 the case, from the barriers they interi)ose 
 to the self- wise inquirer, and the restraints 
 they impose on the presumptuous and self- 
 sufficient spirit, in which, under the name 
 of free inquiry and liberty of thought, the 
 pride of the natural man delights to exer- 
 cise itself — to these it is doubtless acceptable 
 to imagine that the grounds on which they 
 receive the Scriptures as genuine, do not 
 pledge them to any principle which may 
 hereafter, on some other subject, be em- 
 ployed against themselves. And yet, if 
 questioned as to these grounds, they are 
 unable to refer them to any other source 
 than tradition, and the authority of the 
 Church — the very same tradition, the very 
 same authority with that on which we 
 
 L 3 
 
150 LECTURE IV. 
 
 receive that body of Christian doctrine, 
 that form of sound words, for the proof 
 of which we afterwards refer to Scripture. 
 Twist and turn this as we will, it comes to 
 the same point. Call it Historical evidence, 
 or by whatever name we will, it is but 
 another name for Tradition ; we receive 
 these Scriptures (as regards their external 
 evidence, of which alone I am now speak- 
 ing) on the traditional testimony of past 
 ages ; we receive them because they always 
 have been received as the original sacred 
 writings — on precisely the same grounds 
 as those on which we receive the Christian 
 doctrines, (subject to Scripture proof here- 
 after,) viz., the testimony of the Churchy on 
 which, by whatever name we call it, we are 
 ultimately compelled to lean ; as our Article 
 expressly says, " In the name of the Holy 
 Scripture we do understand those canonical 
 books of the Old and New Testament, of 
 whose authority was never any doubt in the 
 Church\'' 
 
 ^ It is curious to observe, how those who are most 
 vehement in their professions of adherence to the Sixth 
 Article of the EngHsh Church, either virtually omit the 
 sentence here quoted, or entirely overlook their admis- 
 
LECTURE IV. 151 
 
 In order, however, to obviate any undue 
 prejudice or misconception, it might be well 
 to state here, what will be explained more at 
 length hereafter, that for things past we can- 
 not have any other testimony than that of 
 tradition, or a miracle. The kind of tradi- 
 tional testimony may differ in degree ; still 
 it is but in degree ; the only alternative in- 
 volving a difference of kind, is a miracle. 
 And if this should appear to weaken the evi- 
 dence for Scripture rather than strengthen 
 that of the doctrines, it will be shewn in 
 its proper place, that the objections which 
 might seem at first to lie against both, 
 necessarily arise out of the nature of the 
 case ; and next, that they are no more 
 than is requisite for our probation, as trials 
 of faith — that they form essential parts of 
 our trial, and are overcome by the same 
 kind of faith which it is the aim of the 
 Gospel to form within us, and by which we 
 receive the doctrines themselves, even when 
 the genuineness and authenticity of the 
 Scriptures themselves are fully admitted. 
 
 sion of the authority and traditional testimony of the 
 Church, impHed in their assent to it. 
 
 L 4 
 
152 LECTURE IV. 
 
 Moreover, there may be drawn, as some 
 may think, a collateral argument in favour 
 of the genuineness of the Christian Scrip- 
 tures, from the circumstance that the chan- 
 nel by which we receive those Scriptures, 
 is the same by which we also receive, not 
 only the true Catholic tradition, but the 
 spurious traditions of the Romish Church, 
 which the appeal to those Scriptures has 
 contributed to overturn. Had the traditions 
 of the Church, and the writings of the New 
 Testament, been in the keeping of two par- 
 ties respectively opposed to each other, I 
 will not say there would have been any 
 thing prejudicial to the Scriptures from 
 their being opposed to the traditions, when- 
 ever they were found to differ ; but there 
 would, at all events, have been wanting that 
 testimony in their favour, which is now 
 furnished by the circumstance of their 
 having been in the keeping of those with 
 whose doctrines they are at variance, and 
 who might be supposed to have an interest 
 in suppressing or corrupting such portions 
 of Scripture as were unfavourable to their 
 cause. The argument thus furnished in 
 
LECTURE IV. I5:i 
 
 favour of the genuineness of the New Tes- 
 tament, is analogous to that in favour of 
 the Jewish Scriptures, provided by the cir- 
 cumstance, that the Jews themselves were 
 the guardians and keepers of that book, 
 which at once related the history of their 
 apostasies, rebellions, and punishments; and 
 which declared, by an appeal to itself, 
 how, according to their own shewing, they 
 had made the word of God of none effect 
 by their traditions. 
 
 Admitting, then, the traditional cha- 
 racter of the fo7'm of Christian doctrines, 
 seeing that the Scriptures themselves give 
 us little account of it, yet speak of its 
 having been unreservedly communicated 
 to the Apostles, and by them to their dis- 
 ciples ; and refer distinctly to a provision 
 already made, by which the form of doc- 
 trines should be perpetuated by being com- 
 municated to a body of men especially set 
 apart for the purpose, who were, in like 
 manner, in their turn, to set apart and teach 
 others after them ; — there arises from this, 
 
 I. The absolute necessity, on the part of 
 those who are dissatisfied with, and would 
 
154 LECTURE IV. 
 
 appeal from the doctrinal decisions of the ex- 
 isting Church, of referring, not to Scripture 
 only, but also to history and to antiquity ; 
 especially to the writings of those who, living 
 either in or near to the Apostolic age, were 
 likely to have received the Apostles' doctrine 
 in a less adulterated form than when, in a 
 later period, it had contracted more defile- 
 ment in passing through the hands of cor- 
 rupt and fallible men. But, as regards the 
 popular notion of taking up the Scriptures 
 and judging for ourselves, making such 
 deductions from Holy Scripture as the 
 sacred text may to us seem to suggest, 
 without reference to any previous instruc- 
 tion, or any historical intimation that such 
 a tenet has been at least spoken of in the 
 Church, though requiring proof before it is 
 to be received as true — reading in fact for 
 new knowledge on things necessary to salva- 
 tion, rather than to " know the certainty of 
 " the things in which we have been in- 
 "structed" — for this we have no warrant 
 whatever; however fresh light may break 
 upon us, from repeated perusal, on things 
 not essential to salvation. 
 
LECTURE IV. 155 
 
 Still less have we any authority for wliat 
 is popularly called free and bold inquiry in 
 reading Scripture ; still less for fancying 
 that we can make any doctrinal discoveries, 
 or that knowledge of this kind is pi^ogres- 
 sive. Believing, as we must, that the whole 
 counsel of God was revealed by the Spirit 
 to the Apostles, and by them communicated 
 to those whom, led by the same Spirit, they 
 appointed to succeed them ; the utmost w^e 
 can hope to attain to, after the most labo- 
 rious researches into Scripture and antiquity 
 combined, is at best to recover such portions 
 of those blessed verities, those sources of 
 hope and rejoicing, w^hich the vain traditions 
 of men have overlaid with corruption and 
 error, or which, for the sins of his Church, 
 the Lord has in wrath caused to be hid from 
 his people. 
 
 II. In regard to ordinances. We find 
 from Scripture that the Apostles w^ere ap- 
 pointed to " preach the Gospel," or " the 
 " Word ;" in which would necessarily be 
 included every thing necessary to carry that 
 word home to the hearts of their hearers, 
 as well as to keep it there— its machinery, 
 
156 LECTURE IV. 
 
 if the expression may be allowed — every 
 thing necessary for implanting the seed of 
 eternal life in their hearts, as well as for 
 retaining it there, and nourishing it, so that 
 '^ it might bring forth fruit unto holiness. 
 For these objects, ordinances become of es- 
 sential importance as instruments. Now of 
 these, little direct mention is made in the 
 New Testament, while their necessity would 
 be such, that it were unreasonable to sup- 
 pose for a moment that the Gospel would 
 be devoid of them, when viewed in relation 
 to its object, and the beings whom it was 
 designed to influence. Where, then, shovdd 
 we look for them, or how should we defend, 
 or what weight and authority attach to, 
 those which we may find actually existing 
 in the Church? 
 
 Here, then, we are again referred to the 
 authority and commission given to the 
 Apostles, to preach the Gospel and to found 
 Churches ; together with the sanction, 
 which applies here also, that whatever they 
 should bind on earth should be bound in 
 heaven. That they did appoint ordinances, 
 under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and 
 
LECTURE IV. 157 
 
 that, besides preaching the Gospel, they 
 wrapped it up, as it were, in outward forms 
 and ordinances, we have ample intimations ; 
 as also that they attached great importance 
 to the observance of them, as of the ap- 
 pointments of an authority which every 
 member of the Church was peremptorily 
 called upon to obey. Yet what these ordi- 
 nances actually were, we are not told very 
 explicitly in Scripture itself; though we find 
 sufficient proof of them, when we believe 
 that we have learned what they were. 
 
 Now from these considerations it follows, 
 that for a fuller account of the ordinances 
 themselves, we must, as for the form of 
 doctrine, look out of Scripture, either in 
 the past or present practice of the Churcli ; 
 still, as in the case of doctrines, not regard- 
 ing them as essential to salvation, (what- 
 ever might be the pi^esumptive claims to our 
 acceptance furnished by their mere edust- 
 ence^) unless they can also be proved by 
 Scripture. At the same time, to know 
 what the ordinances were, which the Apo- 
 stles instituted, we must, if we dispute the 
 Apostolic origin of those which the Church 
 
158 LECTURE IV. 
 
 offers us, and the sufficiency of the texts to 
 which she refers in support of them, look 
 out of Scripture into uninspired ecclesias- 
 tical history ; especially where that history 
 assumes any thing like a systematic form, 
 and where we have good ground to believe, 
 that those who speak of them or who are 
 described as adopting them, received them 
 either immediately, or through satisfactory 
 channels, from the Apostles themselves. 
 
 Now those ordinances which, under these 
 limitations, we find that the Church re- 
 ceived and adopted, we may reasonably 
 assume to be of divine appointment; — 
 divine, that is, as regards the appointment 
 by the Apostles, and those Apostles acting 
 under the guidance of the Spirit, and in 
 pursuance of the authority delegated to 
 them by their Lord. This, I say, we may 
 reasonably assume — as reasonably, at least, 
 as any thing else of which the statements 
 are not positive and direct. It appears to 
 follow directly from the scriptural state- 
 ments of the authority given to the Apo- 
 stles, from the comparative silence of Scrip- 
 ture respecting ordinances, the necessity of 
 
LECTURE IV. 159 
 
 which would be unquestionable, and from 
 the existence of the ordinances themselves 
 traced historically to the days of the 
 Apostles. 
 
 If, therefore, we find them in accordance 
 with Holy Scripture, we have a right to 
 regard them as the institutions of the Apo- 
 stles themselves. It is important to urge 
 this, because so little express mention is 
 made in Scripture itself of particular ordi- 
 nances, especially of Episcopacy ; and Sec- 
 tarians have taken upon themselves, from 
 this circumstance, to deny their divine 
 origin. Now admitting, with some, that 
 the doctrines of the Gospel are sufficiently 
 clearly gathered from Scripture without 
 preliminary instruction, are they prepared 
 to admit the same of the ordinances of the 
 Christian Church ? And yet it were unrea- 
 sonable to imagine that such would be 
 entirely omitted in the scheme ; we should 
 expect to find instructions and authority 
 for them somewhere, and in some shape. 
 And instead of being driven about in 
 painful perplexity, we find a simple solution 
 of the question in the principle laid down 
 
160 LECTURE IV. 
 
 in a former Lecture, respecting the pecu- 
 liarity of the Gospel as distinguished from 
 the Law, in being committed to human 
 agents, instead of to tables; its merciful 
 revelation and its covenant being made 
 through the one rather than the other, 
 and committed to instruments of the like 
 passions and infirmities with those to whom 
 they were commissioned to impart the 
 knowledge of its saving truths. 
 
 In conformity with the same principle, 
 the appointment of its ordinances appears 
 to have been committed to the same agents, 
 and to be made known to the Church by 
 what God, through the Apostles, did^ rather 
 than what he commanded. The sacred 
 writings would themselves seem to imply, 
 from many expressions in them, that a 
 minute ritual was contemporaneous with 
 them ; that the Apostles recognise it as 
 existing and binding ; that it was founded 
 on religious principles, and tended to the 
 inculcation of religious truth. Not that 
 any formal proof is conceivable or attain- 
 able, considering the brevity and subjects 
 of the inspired documents ; but such fair 
 
LECTURE IV. l()i 
 
 evidence of the fact, as may recommend it 
 to the belief of the earnest and sinirle- 
 minded Christian. 
 
 It is abundantly evident that the Epistles 
 were not w^ritten to prescribe and enforce 
 the ritual of religion ; all then we can 
 expect, if it existed in the days of the 
 Apostles, is an occasional allusion to it in 
 their Epistles, as existing, and a plain ac- 
 quiescence in it: and thus much we find''. 
 
 First we have the more general allusion 
 to ordinances, as to things well known and 
 understood by those to whom it was ad- 
 dressed ; such, e. g., would be the clear and 
 forcible command given by the Apostle to 
 the Thessalonians, (2 Thess. ii. 15.) ''Bre- 
 " thren, stand fast, and hold the traditions 
 " which ye have been taught, whether by 
 " ico7'd, or our epistle." It would seem 
 indeed as if the very multiplicity of the 
 details of the Church ritual made it 
 plainly impossible for St. Paul to write 
 them all down, or to do more than re mi fid 
 the Corinthians of his way of conducting 
 
 b Rites and Customs of the Church — No. 34. of tlie 
 series called Tracts for the Times. 
 
 M 
 
16^ LECTURE IV. 
 
 religious order when he was among them. 
 " Be ye followers of me," he says : " I praise 
 " you that ye remember me in all things." 
 It is evident that in the working of any 
 large system, there are a thousand little 
 points which a present instructor alone can 
 settle. This did St. Paul, as regards the 
 system of Christian discipline and wor- 
 ship ; and when he could not go himself, 
 he sent Timothy in his place. " I beseech 
 
 " you, be ye followers of me For this 
 
 " cause I sent unto you Timotheus, who 
 " shall bring you into remembrance of my 
 " ways which be in Christ, as I teach every 
 " where in every Church." 
 
 Here there is the same reference to an 
 uniform system of discipline, whether as 
 to Christian conduct, worship, or Church 
 government. 
 
 Let us turn from these more general 
 allusions to those of a more specific cha- 
 racter ; e.g. " What, have ye not houses to 
 " eat and drink in ? or despise ye the 
 "Church of God?" a passage which is re- 
 markable as being a solitary allusion in 
 Scripture to houses of prayer under the 
 
LECTURE IV. 163 
 
 Christian system, which nevertheless we 
 know from ecclesiastical history, were used 
 from the very first. Here then is a most 
 solemn ordinance of primitive Christianity, 
 which barely escapes, if it escapes, omission 
 in Scripture. 
 
 Next, in the original institution of the 
 Eucharist, as recorded in the Gospels, and 
 the account given us of our Saviour's wash- 
 ing the disciples' feet, followed by the 
 injunction that they should do the like to 
 each other, — there is little intimation there 
 given, that the one was to be of less perma- 
 nent observance than the other — certainly 
 not sufficient to reconcile the total omission 
 of the one with the regular and solemn ob- 
 servance of the other. We are compelled 
 mainly to refer the distinction to the 
 practice of the Church, confirmed by the 
 seemingly incidental allusion to the one in 
 St. Paul's Epistle to the Corinthians, which 
 thenceforth acquires the force of a proof, 
 referring as it does to an ordinance spoken 
 of as existing then, and which we continue 
 to observe to the present hour, though the 
 origin of its permanent character, as distin- 
 
 M 2 
 
164 LECTURE IV. 
 
 guished from the washing of feet, is no 
 where expressly recorded. 
 
 Neither, in the original institution of the 
 Eucharist, is there any mention of conse- 
 crating the elements, nor any authority for 
 our practice and the prayer of consecration ; 
 but St. Paul, in 1 Cor. x. 16, calls it "the 
 " cup of blessing which we bless," and obvi- 
 ously alludes to it as to something well 
 know^n to those whom he addressed. 
 
 Similar to this are the seemingly inci- 
 dental notices respecting household and 
 infant baptism, the observance of the Lord's 
 day, the assembling for the purpose of 
 divine worship ; none of which, taken by 
 themselves, would have the force of inde- 
 pendent proofs, according to the Sectarian 
 principle ; but which, taken as parts of a 
 system, and viewed in connexion with the 
 fact that they were addressed to those 
 whom the writer had himself previously 
 taught, and among whom he had long 
 dwelt; next, with the fact that the ordi- 
 nances to which they refer have existed 
 from that day to the present, furnish suffi- 
 cient evidence of the fact contended for. 
 
LECTURE IV. 165 
 
 to recommend it to the belief of every 
 earnest and single minded Christian. 
 
 These instances then, not to notice others 
 of a like or different kind, are surely suffi- 
 cient to reconcile us to the complete ritual 
 system which breaks upon us in the writ- 
 ings of the Fathers, and to lead us to attri- 
 bute to the latter something more than the 
 respect due to mere human institutions. If 
 any parts of it indeed are contrary to Scrip- 
 ture, that is, of course, a decisive reason at 
 once for believing them to be additions and 
 corruptions of the original ceremonial ; but 
 till this is shewn, we are bound to venerate 
 what is certainly primitive, and probably is 
 Apostolic. 
 
 If, then, we have the clearest intimations 
 of authority given to the Apostles, with 
 the promise of a divine sanction to their 
 appointments ; if we find that in pursuance 
 of this they made these appointments, why, 
 it may be asked, are we to regard these as 
 less of divine appointment, than if we found 
 a specific command to that effect in an 
 Epistle — if (which must be conceded) we 
 have reasonable grounds to believe that the 
 
 M 3 
 
166 LECTURE IV. 
 
 Apostles did institute them ? Why is that 
 which God, through the Apostles, thus did, 
 less sacred or less binding upon us, than 
 that which God, through the same Apostles, 
 said? If we find the Apostles speaking of 
 what they had done^ surely, knowing as we 
 do that they acted under the immediate 
 inspiration and direction of the Holy Ghost, 
 we ought to regard that which they had 
 then done, as being as much of divine 
 appointment as any more specific precept 
 of theirs in the same Scripture. If we find 
 them speaking of a certain order of men 
 whom they had ordained, or of certain 
 ordinances which they had either appointed 
 or were ministering, how can we, without 
 placing a limit to their infallibility and 
 authority, which would go to shake the 
 whole foundation of our faith, regard these 
 appointments as less proceeding from God, 
 as less declaratory of his will as regards 
 his Church, or as less binding on the Church 
 now, than if the Apostles had said, " I will 
 " that such and such men be ordained ; 
 " that such and such a succession of minis- 
 " ters shall continue as teachers of the word; 
 
LECTURE IV. 167 
 
 "and that such and such ordinances he 
 " estabhshed ?" Did the Apostles speak only 
 as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, 
 and did they act merely as fallible men^ 
 with no further intimations of their divine 
 Master's will than such as is vouchsafed 
 under the ordinary operations of the Spirit 
 in our day ? 
 
 If it be thus, where is our authority for 
 the practice of Infant Baptism, and the 
 rite of Confirmation? where our autho- 
 rity for the observance of the Lord's Day, 
 and of public worship? the notices of which 
 in Scripture are too scattered and remote 
 to have the force of proofs on the Sectarian 
 principle ; though conclusive to those who 
 view them in connexion with the historical 
 fact that the Apostles themselves observed 
 these ordinances. 
 
 But, it will be said, on this principle each 
 branch of the Church may still claim an 
 assent to its own creed, however discordant 
 one with another, and plead the authority of 
 Tradition and Antiquity for what it teaches. 
 
 This we deny. On the part of the Church 
 we maintain, that if vve resort to this rule 
 
 M 4 
 
168 LECTURE IV. 
 
 of faith, viz. Antiquity and Catholic Tradi- 
 tion, subject to the proof of Holy Scripture^ 
 (the former being the generic, the latter 
 the specific character of our faith,) and 
 moreover with a mind morally qualified for 
 the investigation and perception of truth in 
 such a matter, content to take such evi- 
 dence as the subject, from its nature, is 
 necessarily confined to, which is an essen- 
 tial element in forming a right judgment 
 in morals and on moral subjects, we shall 
 7iot differ in our respective creeds. Men 
 do differ, because they will not resort to 
 this rule ; at least it rests with our oppo- 
 nents to shew, that there exists any branch 
 of the Church which, having resorted to it, 
 holds a faith different from ourselves who 
 profess to have determined ours by it. This 
 principle the Church lays down on the 
 common ground, of the authority of Scrip- 
 ture. Herself gives the result of this in our 
 Articles, Creeds, and Liturgies. For the 
 presumptive claims of these to belief, she 
 pleads Universality and Antiquity ; for the 
 ultimate proof of the several articles of 
 faith stated or implied in them, she appeals 
 
LECTURE IV^ 169 
 
 to Holy Scripture. Surely it remains for 
 our opponents to shew that we are in error — 
 to shew that others, after having adopted 
 this rule, have attained to a different faitli- 
 When they have done this, it will then be 
 time enough for us to join issue on points 
 of difference, and to determine whence they 
 have arisen. 
 
 It must be confessed, that there is, even 
 in this modified and Scriptural view of the 
 use and importance of Tradition, much that 
 is at variance, in the minds of many, with 
 strong and early prepossessions, (of which I 
 would not be thought unmindful,) calcu- 
 lated to lead them, however unjustly, to 
 receive it with suspicion and prejudice. 
 And, as was observed in a former Lec- 
 ture, were the question merely our indi- 
 vidual conviction, or were our contest with 
 Popery alone, there would be less urgent 
 reason to contend for it ; though, even 
 with the Romanist, it would not be suffi- 
 cient to argue upon Scripture proofs alone; 
 lest he retort on us the argument we 
 employ against the Sectarian's alleged 
 right of private judgment; viz. that his 
 
170 LECTURE IV. 
 
 principle puts it out of his power to con- 
 demn the Socinian who proceeds upon the 
 same. In neither case would there be any 
 authority external to the opinions of indi- 
 viduals on disputed or doubtful texts. 
 
 But here we have no choice to make. 
 The question does not rest with us : it has 
 been already opened by the assailants of 
 the truth ; and we are compelled to act on 
 the defensive. The fundamental articles 
 of the Christian faith are called in question 
 on the alleged insufficiency of proof in 
 Scripture ; and heresies are held and taught 
 on the alleged authority of texts of Scrip- 
 ture, which, whether valid or no, are main- 
 tained to be as good as those to which we 
 refer in support of our creed. Whether 
 w^e will or no, we are met by the Socinian 
 argument, founded on the assumption that 
 Scripture is our sole guide from which each 
 is at liberty to deduce his own creed as 
 appears best to himself. We are here met, 
 first by his powerful argument — that on this 
 assumption, it is unreasonable that truths 
 of such magnitude should be left to be so 
 gathered and learned, as many (to us) most 
 
LECTURE IV. 171 
 
 important doctrines would confessedly ap- 
 pear to be; next, by his argument — that on 
 the principle of the right of private judg- 
 ment in the interpretation of Scripture, his 
 views of Christian doctrine may be as cor- 
 rect as ours: both which arguments are 
 employed by the authors quoted in the 
 Second Lecture. 
 
 On this assumption, it is difficult, if not 
 impossible, to reply to him, or to pronounce 
 him to be in error by the decision of any 
 other authority than that of our own pri- 
 vate judgment, for which w^e have there no 
 more right to claim a deference than he has 
 for his. And, what is more fearful, we have 
 no better authority than this, (which at 
 any hour of individual trial of darkness 
 and doubt may fail us,) on which to rest, 
 not only our own eternal hopes, but also 
 the sacred duty, (which, whatever be our 
 belief, we must in consistency practise,) of 
 instilling by the earliest possible bias, and 
 of tending in their growth by all the autho- 
 rity, natural or otherwise, with which we 
 may be invested, the principles of that form 
 of faith which we ourselves believe to be 
 
172 LECTURE IV. 
 
 the true one, in the hearts of those whom 
 God has made dependant upon us, and 
 for whose salvation, as far as it is dependant 
 on such means, we feel ourselves responsible. 
 The name of Tradition need convey no 
 alarm to the minds of those who will view 
 it in the light in which it has been here 
 attempted to set it forth, or to those who 
 assign to it no further authority than that 
 w^iich is here contended for. If there are 
 difficulties connected with its adoption ; if 
 it limits the exercise of our private judg- 
 ment on the words of Scripture ; if it re- 
 duces us to the alternative of adopting the 
 decisions of those w^ho have gone before, 
 or of forming a judgment for ourselves 
 only at the cost of much labour and re- 
 search into History and Antiquity; it is at 
 least only in accordance with the divine 
 provisions respecting us in matters of equal 
 importance. For it is in like manner only 
 that we can be satisfied of the evidences of 
 our faith, nay, even those furnished by the 
 Christian miracles : it is thus only that we 
 can be satisfied of the credibility as well as 
 genuineness of the Scriptures themselves. 
 
LECTURE IV. 17.^j 
 
 Does it follow then that every one who 
 would inform himself on the Christian 
 verities, must necessarily go through the 
 laborious process of investigating History 
 and Antiquity, and of making those re- 
 searches for which the longest life would 
 scarce suffice, even were there no other 
 demands on his time and thoughts ? By 
 no means. It must be remembered that 
 the argument here is not with members of 
 our own communion, (except accidentally,) 
 who both believe in the doctrines, and are 
 satisfied with the proofs of them in Holy 
 Scripture ; but with those who take upon 
 themselves to question our faith as em- 
 bodied in the Liturgy and Articles. Such 
 as these we are compelled to refer to the 
 grounds of our faith. The Church gives 
 all these verities at once into the hands of 
 her children ; places before them the whole 
 body of Christian doctrine ; offers a gua- 
 rantee for the truth of it, and requires 
 their assent to it. The disciple has but to 
 prove and hold fast what he has thus learn- 
 ed ; for which purpose, after having taught 
 him, the Church places the Scriptures in 
 
174 LECTURE IV. 
 
 his hands, by reading which, under the 
 teaching of the Holy Spirit, he may " know 
 " the certainty of the things in which he 
 " has been instructed ;" and for this, Scrip- 
 ture will, to the humble inquirer after 
 truth, suffice. But those who desire to 
 investigate by reading the course of primi- 
 tive and Catholic tradition, and have time 
 and ability for the task, are not forbidden, 
 but are encouraged to the undertaking. 
 Only it behoves such to take heed to the 
 motives which lead them to it ; whether it 
 be in the humble, teachable spirit of inquiry, 
 which earnestly hopes that the truths which 
 the Church has taught them may be fur- 
 ther proved and confirmed to their minds ; 
 or in the presumptuous self-sufficient spirit 
 of human pride, which delights in novelty, 
 and in questioning the collective wisdom of 
 former days: whether it be in the hope 
 to find things true, or the desire to find 
 them false. Nor would the opposite result, 
 to which the latter of these two courses 
 might possibly lead, furnish any argument 
 against the efficiency of the Church's prin- 
 ciple for the attainment of truth when used 
 
LECTURE IV. 
 
 /-> 
 
 aright : it is that to which the investigation 
 of all moral truth, and the actions of all 
 moral agents must necessarily be liable. 
 But for any other course for the attainment 
 of truth in regard to the Christian doc- 
 trines, we have no warrant either in God's 
 word or in reason. If any one is disposed, in 
 the popular language of the day, to judge for 
 himself, and to exercise an imfettered opinion 
 on things sacred, (to say imhiassed opinion 
 would involve a contradiction in morals and 
 on moral subjects,) let him at least be so 
 far consistent and honest, as to judge by 
 those means which are appointed for the 
 purpose, and through which alone the sub- 
 ject itself professes, through the medium 
 of Holy Scripture, that the truth will be 
 attained : it is to her children only that 
 wisdom can with reason be expected to 
 justify herself. Let him refer to the pri- 
 mitive faith and practice ; let him search 
 the records of antiquity ; let him trace 
 back the truth to the fountain head, or to 
 that point where it may be expected to 
 be found most pure and unadulterated. 
 And this let him do in an humble 
 
176 LECTURE IV. 
 
 spirit — one that is not easily fatigued or 
 frighted at the task before it. Let him 
 bear in mind what he has undertaken, 
 which is no less than to reconsider the 
 decrees of former councils, to reopen ques- 
 tions long since set at rest, to appeal from 
 the collective testimony of the Church for 
 eighteen centuries. A project bold as this, 
 an undertaking of this magnitude, ought to 
 shrink from no labour, should be deterred 
 by no difficulties. Let him use every col- 
 lateral aid within his reach. Then let him 
 refer to the test of the wTitten word, what- 
 ever, in the course of the investigation, he 
 may meet with. Above all, let him ever 
 invoke the especial guidance of the Spirit of 
 truth, by whom the holy penmen were 
 themselves " guided into all truth," and 
 without whom all our labour and reading 
 were in vain. And it may so be, that when 
 he has done all this, he may, by God's 
 mercy, learn the first step towards divine 
 knowledge, of which perhaps he was before 
 ignorant — he may learn humility. He may 
 learn that the Church has been indeed a 
 faithful witness and guardian of the truth. 
 
LECTURE IV. 177 
 
 He may discover that the faith which has 
 been sealed by the blood of martyrs, is 
 indeed " the faith once delivered to the 
 " saints." He may learn perhaps not too 
 late, that it is not only in respect of purity 
 of heart and life, but of childlike simplicity 
 and humility, in the willingness to be 
 taught, in filial submission and depend- 
 ance on those whom God had appointed his 
 spiritual pastors, that it has been said, 
 " Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom 
 " of God as a little child, he shall not enter 
 " therein." 
 
 N 
 
LECTURE V 
 
 ARGUMENT IN FAVOUR OF A BIAS OR PREJUDICE 
 DRAWN FROM ANALOGY, AND ITS ADAPTA- 
 TION TO OUR MORAL NATURE. 
 
 Luke xviii. 17. 
 
 Whosoeve?' shall not receive the kingdom of God 
 as a little child, he shall not enter therein. 
 
 IF the view be correct which has been 
 taken in the two preceding Lectures, 
 of the scriptural intimations respecting the 
 relation in which the doctrines and ordi- 
 nances of the Christian Church stand to 
 the text of Holy Scripture ; and if it be 
 true that the New Testament presupposes, 
 on the part of the reader, a knowledge of 
 the main doctrines of which it speaks, and 
 of the main articles of the Christian faith ; 
 the necessity of previous teaching before 
 
LECTURE V. 179 
 
 coming to the perusal of the sacred volume, 
 would seem to be at once admitted. And 
 it would follow, as a necessary consequence, 
 that before reading it ourselves, or putting 
 it into the hands of those whose relii^^ious 
 education we were conducting, we should 
 endeavour to acquaint ourselves, or them, 
 what those doctrines and articles of faith 
 consist in, to the best of our belief, or 
 according to the best means we can resort 
 to for the purpose of ascertaining : we 
 should otherwise be placing ourselves, or 
 them, in the situation of the Ethiopian 
 mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles ; and 
 with him should wish that some one had 
 informed us before, or were at hand to in- 
 form us now, on the several points to which 
 the Scripture refers ; and should be driven to 
 confess with him, " How can I understand, 
 "except some man should guide me?" 
 
 Whether we have possessed ourselves of 
 this previous teaching in its pure and 
 genuine form ; whether that whicli we 
 teach is that which the Apostles had them- 
 selves taught, before they penned their 
 respective writings, is a separate question ; 
 
 N 2 
 
180 LECTURE V. 
 
 as is, likewise, the vindication of the mode 
 in which we profess to have determined 
 that question. 
 
 Moreover, from the moral character of 
 the doctrines themselves, from their avowed 
 influence on our hearts, dispositions, and 
 characters, which would of itself presup- 
 pose and imply some moral preparation 
 and fitness on the part of the recipient; 
 from the fact that the very same passages 
 give rise to such opposite interpretations 
 and deductions, varying according to the 
 several preconceptions of the various 
 readers ; it would follow, that we should 
 not only give the enunciation of the 
 doctrines, — not merely propound them to 
 the intellect^ but that we should also endea- 
 vour to prejudice the will of the disciple 
 in their favour ; that we should try to 
 make him feel a personal interest in them, 
 to lead him to xmsli those things proved to 
 be true which we have placed before him. 
 This would follow from the moral and 
 practical character of the doctrines, and 
 their personal relation to ourselves as 
 moral agents ; so that the bias or prejudice, 
 
LECTURE V. 181 
 
 which is rendered necessary by the very 
 circumstances under whicli the Scriptures 
 were written and their relation to the 
 Christian doctrines, would be further re- 
 quired by the character of the doctrines 
 themselves. 
 
 That the Church adopts such a course of 
 preliminary teaching ; that she resorts to 
 this bias or prejudice in reference to Holy 
 Scripture, in the spiritual instruction of 
 her children, it is unnecessary to state 
 here ; as also that the instruments she 
 adopts for this purpose are mainly the 
 Catechism, Creeds, Articles, and Liturgy, at- 
 tended by all the jealous precautions taken 
 to keep them from being altered in them- 
 selves or superseded by others ; as well as 
 the immediate and strenuous opposition 
 offered to views or interpretations of Scrip- 
 ture of an opposite tendency, not merely 
 those which might contradict her own 
 views, but those even which have not re- 
 ceived her sanction. 
 
 Now it is this feature in the Church's 
 teaching and views of scriptural truth, 
 which causes offence to a large class of 
 
 X 3 
 
182 LECTURE V. 
 
 dissentients ; to all those, in fact, who dis- 
 sent from her on the lower side of the 
 scale, if it may be so termed ; that is, not 
 on the side of catholicity. I do not say 
 that their oiFence at the system causes 
 their dissent : it is the consequence rather 
 than the cause of it : it is the circumstance 
 that they have adopted a creed opposed to 
 that of the Church, as well as the grounds 
 on which they are obliged to defend it, 
 that not unnaturally engenders a feel- 
 ing of a deeper and stronger character 
 than would be accounted for by a mere 
 difference of opinion, in a supposable case, 
 between parties free to form their respect- 
 ive opinions, in pursuance of some prin- 
 ciple held in common between them; — 
 which principle, involving, as it would in 
 this case, the right of forming their re- 
 spective creeds from the text of Scripture 
 alone, is not admitted on the part of the 
 Church. 
 
 Their objections take a twofold direction. 
 
 I. Against the principle, as such, of bias- 
 sing or prejudicing the mind in the pursuit 
 of truth ; and — 
 
LECTURE V. 183 
 
 II. Against the particular instruction 
 and form of faith by which the Church 
 effects this. 
 
 The objections brought against these are 
 to be rephed to on different grounds. And 
 in each, the grounds will vary according 
 to the nature and origin of the objection 
 alleged. In regard to the former of the 
 two questions, that regarding the principle, 
 it is objected that it is unscriptural — that 
 it is erroneous as a principle in the ab- 
 stract — that it is irrational and unphiloso- 
 phical, unsuited to the nature and consti- 
 tution of man ; and this, for reasons which 
 will be adverted to more fully presently. 
 The assertion that it is unscriptural has 
 been replied to in the two preceding 
 Lectures. 
 
 Next, it is objected, that even were the 
 principle admitted, yet that the particular 
 instruction and bias adopted by the Church 
 is unauthorized, and incapable of proof to 
 the extent which would be required, so as 
 to justify the Church on insisting upon it, 
 in the way she does, to the necessary exclu- 
 sion of other creeds — and this too on a sub-^ 
 
 N 4 
 
184 LECTURE V. 
 
 ject which, from its very nature, would seem 
 necessarily to admit of much variety of opin- 
 ion — that the proofs alleged are unsatisfac- 
 tory — nay, that the mode and principle of 
 the proof are still more so ; — that it is 
 unreasonable and improbable that things, so 
 important as these are affirmed to be, should 
 be left to a mode of proof so inadequate 
 and unsatisfactory as this obviously is. 
 
 Reserving to its proper place the fuller 
 consideration of these objections to the 
 particular bias and instruction which the 
 Church adopts, I would merely observe, in 
 alluding to the subject at this stage, that 
 for this authority and proof we must of 
 course refer chiefly to the authority of the 
 Church, to traditional and historical testi- 
 mony, which, in all matters relating to the 
 genuineness of Scripture or Christian doc- 
 trines, must be very much dependent on 
 the evidence which the Church itself 
 affords ; and which, from its very nature, 
 implies that it is moral, and therefore, in 
 one sense, defective testimony. But that 
 such evidence is not inappropriate to a 
 subject of this nature, will be shewn in its 
 
lecturp: v. 185 
 
 proper place ; as also its conformity to 
 general analogy, its adaptation to our 
 moral constitution, and its suitableness to 
 a state of probation. Let us now proceed 
 with the first branch of the subject, the 
 objections brought against the principle, 
 as such. 
 
 The objections commonly alleged against 
 the Church's principle of biassing the 
 mind, and of demanding from the disciple 
 an assent to her doctrines before putting 
 the Scriptures into his hands, are chiefly 
 these : — that it is irrational and unphiloso- 
 phical — unsuited to man's nature — placing 
 undue and unwarrantable restrictions on 
 his mind ; — that it is unfavourable to the 
 spirit of free inquiry, and hostile to the 
 progressive character of Christian know- 
 ledge. It is urged, moreover, that it in- 
 volves the fallacy of reasoning in a circle 
 — defending the practice on the ground of 
 our own convictions, yet unable to give any 
 other account of our convictions but the 
 fact that they were formed by a similar 
 process : — that the Church defends indeed 
 her principles, as well as her doctrines, by 
 appealing to Scripture : but assumes to her- 
 
186 LECTURE V. 
 
 self the office of interpreter of Scripture. 
 Of these objections to the principle, that 
 founded on its opposition to the progressive 
 character of Christian knowledge has been 
 already replied to by what has been said 
 above', on the relation of the Christian 
 doctrines to Holy Scripture. 
 
 In a lax age, like the present, especially 
 when we consider the popular dread (of 
 which it is not my intention here to speak 
 disrespectfully) of Popery, and of every 
 thing, whether true or not, connected with 
 it, it is not difficult to conceive that some 
 portions of primitive apostolic truth, though 
 of course not of first importance, may have 
 been partially lost ; which, by a diligent 
 search into the records of the Church, we 
 might by God's grace be enabled, if not to 
 recover, at least to confirm. But that Chris- 
 tian truth, as such, in things essential to 
 salvation, is progressive, beyond the point 
 at which the Apostles left it, is a principle 
 which cannot be for one moment entertained, 
 but on the supposition, from which our feel- 
 ings recoil, that the Holy Spirit had failed 
 of guiding the Apostles, according to the 
 
 ^Lectures III. IV. 
 
LECTURE V. 1S7 
 
 promise, into (/// truth ; or that the whole 
 counsel of God, which the Aj)ostle spoke of 
 having declared to the Ephesian Church, 
 regarded in them, in respect of their rela- 
 tion to God and their means of salvation, a 
 state different to that which the supposed 
 progressive character of Christian truth 
 would seem to imply in those who have 
 lived since. 
 
 The other objections to the principle are 
 to be replied to in different ways, having 
 reference to the grounds of the several 
 objections respectively. We might here 
 reply first elenchtically, shewing that what- 
 ever is alleged against the Church principle 
 on account of its biassing or prejudicing 
 the mind, is no more than might be urged 
 against the principle pursued on all moral 
 subjects, and in all moral instruction : and, 
 in strict justice, our opponents could have 
 no reason for complaint, if w^e were content 
 to rest our defence upon this elenchtic 
 argument alone. 
 
 We may, however, wdthout stepping out 
 of the science of morals, or advancing any 
 thing which would not be sanctioned by it, 
 
188 LECTURE V. 
 
 go on to the demonstrative argument, and 
 affirm, that the principle in question, so far 
 from being unphilosophical, or calculated 
 to fetter the human mind and impede the 
 progress of truth, is perfectly in accordance 
 with that philosophy whose province it is 
 to treat of man's moral nature ; (to which 
 branch it must in common sense and fair- 
 ness be referred ;) and that it is not other- 
 wise than might have been expected ante- 
 cedently, on the assumption that it would 
 be analogous to other systems of instruction 
 on moral subjects, or that the Gospel, itself 
 a great moral truth, and addressing itself 
 to the several parts of our moral nature, 
 would be taught and conveyed by instru- 
 ments adapted to the moral constitution of 
 the recipient. 
 
 It should not be forgotten, that the 
 object of the system is not investigation 
 and inquiry, but instruction — not to dis- 
 cover truth, but to teach it. The confusion 
 of these objects is one great cause of the 
 fallacy which leads men to object to the 
 Church's principle. There must be, of 
 course, in evangelical, as well as in other 
 
LECTURE V. 189 
 
 truth, both the liberty and the means of 
 investigation and inquiry, even to tracing 
 things back to their first principles ; but then 
 in evangehcal, as in other trutli, this must 
 be pursued by the method w^hich the sul)ject 
 itself, and the revealed will of its divine 
 author, point out as the legitimate one. 
 
 Viewing the system objected to, however, 
 as one of instruction rather than investiga- 
 tion and inquiry, we might, before proceed- 
 ing to shew its analogy and fitness, call on 
 our opponents to adduce any case of moral 
 (as distinguished from demonstrative) truth, 
 where the same principle is not adopted in 
 teaching it, and in the formation of opinions 
 and character under it — where the mind of 
 the disciple is not first biassed or prejudiced 
 in favour of it, before the proofs and illus- 
 trations are brought before him ; and where 
 at least a temporary and conditional assent 
 to the opinions and belief of the teacher is 
 not both demanded and given, on the sole 
 authority of the latter, as being presumed 
 to be rightly informed ; or if there is any 
 thing reciprocal in the agreement, it is the 
 promise, on the part of the teacher, that 
 
190 LECTURE V. 
 
 after a given time, the assent of the dis- 
 ciple will be demanded on no other ground 
 than his own personal convictions. And, 
 allowing for exceptions, to which even the 
 laws of nature are liable, and which, in the 
 case of moral truth, can generally be traced 
 to some violation of the conditions by 
 which it is perceived, it will be found 
 that the convictions of persons thus taught 
 and trained, proceed with a degree of 
 uniformity and agreement, indicating the 
 existence of some general law, for which 
 the uniformity in the system of instruction 
 is by no means sufficient to account. 
 
 In demonstrative and physical truth it is 
 otherwise. There is here no previous sub- 
 mission of the judgment to the teacher, on 
 moral considerations ; no assent to his au- 
 thority independently of proof, or beyond 
 the willingness to try his experiments or 
 refer to his facts and demonstrations. The 
 intellect is satisfied on one point before it 
 proceeds to the next stage of proof. There 
 is no personal relation implied. The 
 standard of truth is determined already, 
 being purely ohjectivey and rendered sub- 
 
LECTURE \'. 191 
 
 jective afterwards, by means of the intellect 
 alone. 
 
 The instant, however, we touch on moral 
 truth, — not only that which is exclusively so, 
 but the instant the subject becomes not 
 purely intellectual and abstract, — from that 
 moment a different course becomes requi- 
 site for the perception of it ; we then assign 
 to the disciple, not the faculty to judge of 
 truth, but merely the capacity to form that 
 faculty under a given course of instruction. 
 And although the standard in subjects of 
 this kind is as satisfactory as in physics, 
 though, unlike physics, existing in the deci- 
 sions and minds of men, rather than capa- 
 ble of actual demonstration, yet we never, if 
 we can avoid it, leave the learner to find 
 out the truth for himself, nor take for 
 granted that he possesses the power of per- 
 ceiving it without the previous formation 
 of habits. This is the case with all moral 
 truth, pure or mixed — all which is not the 
 subject of mere demonstration : we assume 
 that the disciple possesses the innate seed 
 of the faculty, which, however, does not grow 
 into the faculty itself of perceiving truth, 
 
192 LECTURE V. 
 
 except it be trained to do so, and formed 
 into a habit. Consequently, being ourselves 
 convinced, as we believe, of the truth, we 
 scruple not to do w^hat seems at first sight 
 perfectly inimical to the very principle of 
 investigation and free inquiry ; w^e begin 
 by telling him that such and such a course 
 is truth, requiring him to receive this solely 
 on our assertion ; we then train him to 
 think so, by placing before him every thing 
 which mav tend to confirm our assertion, 
 and keeping from him whatever might lead 
 to the risk of his thinking otherwise. And 
 if any thing should happen to be brought 
 in his way, calculated to warp or retard the 
 growth of his judgment, we interfere to 
 remove it, with an arbitrariness of decision 
 and authority which will not for an instant 
 admit the supposition of interference with 
 our system. 
 
 Our defence of this apparently arbitrary 
 proceeding, is our own conviction that we 
 are ourselves right, confirmed by an appeal 
 to the opinions and practices of others ; and 
 the certainty, that as soon as his judgment 
 is matured and his opinions formed, our 
 
LECTURE V. 193 
 
 disciple will adopt the same standard of 
 truth. 
 
 It will be at once seen, that there is in 
 this course an apparent fallacy — an appa- 
 rent practical reasoning in a circle : we 
 form the judgments of others in this deci- 
 sive way, on the strength of our own con- 
 victions — and our own convictions would 
 seem to have been the result, in a great 
 measure, of a similar process exercised to- 
 wards ourselves : so that, to an indifferent 
 spectator, there does not appear at first any 
 external standard, independent of our per- 
 ceptions, to indicate any legitimate process 
 of reasoning, proceeding from a fixed or 
 definite principle. At present, however, I 
 am only describing the practice, as generally 
 adopted, and the impression it would na- 
 turally convey to one not concerned in it. 
 Now this practice, this apparent reasoning 
 in a circle, exists of necessity in the instruc- 
 tion pursued on all moral subjects — on all 
 subjects, in fact, which are not purely intel- 
 lectual and demonstrative. This will be 
 seen at once in the highest and purest moral 
 science, that which treats of the moial 
 
 o 
 
194 LECTURE V. 
 
 nature of man, which may be regarded as a 
 purely moral subject — all, in fact, which is 
 comprehended in the term " Moral Philoso- 
 " phy." It will also be seen in the lower and 
 more mixed subjects, say, e. g., that of taste, 
 which may be regarded in a great degree 
 as an intellectual faculty, but which par- 
 takes in a degree of a moral character, and 
 by virtue of that, is brought within the 
 operation of the principle of prejudice and 
 bias, just described as applying arbitrarily 
 to all questions of a moral character in their 
 respective degrees. 
 
 In moral philosophy, let us take the two 
 first great principles in morals : 
 
 I. That relating to the developement and 
 strengthening of the moral sense. 
 
 II. That the identity of our duty with 
 our happiness and best interest, is only per- 
 ceived by making the former our primary 
 object — the latter being perceptible to those 
 only who have so done — or if perceived 
 before, it being only through faith in the 
 means which lead to it — thus still leaving 
 duty the primary object. 
 
 Now in developing the moral sense, and 
 
LECTURE V. 195 
 
 in establishing a standard of riglit in the 
 mind of the disciple, we learn from tlie 
 science of Morals, that he possesses naturally 
 not the full moral perception, but the capa- 
 city, under a certain course, to attain it — the 
 germ in fact : — that this is liable to go wrong, 
 and that it will go wrong if left to itself; 
 and that it therefore requires the earliest 
 possible care and attention, to be arrested 
 as soon as reason itself dawns, if not earlier, 
 before it shall be overrun or destroyed by 
 the growth of evil passions : — that for this 
 purpose there is required in morals an un- 
 conditional submission of the will as well 
 as the actions to some external authority, 
 under which it is to be placed in a course 
 of training : — that a young person, who has 
 not gone through this course nor brought 
 his passions under control, is not compe- 
 tent to form a judgment on morals ; that 
 those only are competent to this, who have 
 been brought up carefully under the guid- 
 ance and authority of others in the way 
 just described : — that this system of acting 
 and thinking on the authority of others, is 
 not designed to continue for ever ; but tliat, 
 
 o 2 
 
196 LECTURE V. 
 
 in process of time, the sense will be fully 
 developed, and the faculty strengthened, by 
 which he will be able to judge for himself; 
 so that, though trained in this way, and 
 not allowed, for a time, to think for him- 
 self, (and if, either spontaneously or at the 
 suggestion of others, he should think differ- 
 ently from our standard, we have no scruple 
 in checking it by all the means in our 
 power,) yet afterwards, in pursuance of the 
 same principle of moral probation, he is 
 compelled to think and act for himself, on 
 his own responsibility. For it is part of 
 the same principle of moral probation, which 
 makes it necessary for him to trust at first 
 to our older judgment, in opposition to his 
 own passions and natural pride ; and after- 
 luards to be thrown on his own responsibi- 
 lity, at the period when he would naturally 
 wish to be guided in matters of practical 
 difficulty by the authority or example of 
 others, and to shift the responsibility on 
 them. 
 
 To one thus trained, the process is this : 
 He believes a certain course of action to be 
 right. For the truth of it he appeals to 
 
LECTURE V. 197 
 
 his own convictions and those of others, as 
 that on which no doubt exists; and tliis, 
 not as a mere question of feeling or im- 
 pulse^ but as some acknowledged trutli, 
 having the force of a first principle, con- 
 taining its reason within itself, the very 
 mention of which seems to imply its claims 
 to universal recognition. Those by whom 
 he was thus trained would seem to have 
 derived their principles from the same pro- 
 cess, from having been brought up in the 
 same way by persons entertaining similar 
 principles, who, in their turn, derived 
 theirs in a similar way : so that there ap- 
 pears at first to be a complete reasoning in 
 a circle ; each person training those under 
 him on the strength of his own convictions, 
 and himself possessing those convictions 
 because he has been trained to think in 
 this way. 
 
 How this seeming fallacy is explained will 
 be shewn hereafter. Let us now observe the 
 practice as a matter of fact, as a first princi- 
 ple in morals ; merely noticing, at this stage 
 that although there is this apparent fcdlacy, 
 and although the system would seem open 
 
 o 3 
 
198 LECTURE V. 
 
 to the objection that each might, by thus 
 early prejudicing the mind^ create a separate 
 standard for himself, yet, as a matter of fact, 
 such is not the case ; that the standard of 
 right, thus established and thus taught, is 
 sufficiently uniform throughout the world 
 to indicate its dependance on some general 
 law ; for the exceptions to it, which doubt- 
 less exist, furnish no argument against it, 
 any more than the physical peculiarities 
 of individuals or tribes would invalidate 
 the general laws applicable to the species 
 as a whole — and still less so, inasmuch 
 as they can in most cases be accounted 
 for on the very principle here contended 
 for. It should be observed, moreover, that 
 although the convictions and impressions 
 of each individual might seem attributable 
 to the particular system under which he 
 has been trained, yet no one in practice 
 ever thinks of referring them to this cause, 
 but to some external standard, which both 
 himself and others appear as little disposed 
 to question as the laws which govern the 
 natural world. 
 
 Here again is the same apparent reason- 
 
LECTURE V. 199 
 
 ing in a circle in another shape : The 
 standard is true, because all mankind (sub- 
 ject to the exceptions alluded to) agree in 
 thinking so ; and they all think thus, be- 
 cause they are brought up to think so. 
 
 Let us now take another case, lower 
 down in the scale of morals, one of a mixed 
 character, where, though much depends on 
 the intellectual perceptions, yet the subject 
 does not admit of demonstration nor of 
 being reduced to rule ; but a certain por- 
 tion of moral perception is also implied ; 
 viz. that of taste — which appears to stand 
 upon the confines of the moral and intel- 
 lectual parts of our nature, and which, from 
 not being purely intellectual, would fidl 
 partly within the province of morals, and 
 become subject, in a proportionate degree, 
 to its laws and provisions. 
 
 To take one branch of this by way of 
 example. If we wish to form the taste of 
 a young person in regard to works of art — 
 say, e. g., sculpture or painting — and to 
 enable him to acquire the faculty of judg- 
 ing for himself in these matters ; wliat is 
 the course we pursue ? 
 
 o 4 
 
200 LECTURE V. 
 
 Assuming his utter incapacity to judge for 
 himself, we should direct his attention to 
 what we conceive to be the best specimens 
 of the art, and most conformable to what 
 we believe to be its rules ; at the same time 
 giving such theoretic instruction as the 
 subject admitted, or the pupil was capable 
 of receiving. But we should never for an 
 instant assume that he possessed naturally 
 the power of judging for himself, nor any 
 thing beyond the capacity to form such a 
 power of judging, under the course of in- 
 struction which we thought proper to give. 
 We should assume that he possessed this ca- 
 pacity, analogous to the germ of the moral 
 sense in Pure Morals ; but that the faculty 
 itself requires to be developed and strength- 
 ened, as in morals, by continued exercise 
 under the guidance and authority of others; 
 and that at a certain point, to be deter- 
 mined by age, natural capacity, application, 
 and other circumstances, the faculty will 
 be sufficiently formed to enable him to 
 judge for himself. During this process, 
 however, we require a complete surrender 
 of his judgment to ours ; and hesitate not. 
 
LECTURE V. 201 
 
 in the most arbitrary and determined man- 
 ner, to remove out of his way every thing, 
 whether in the form of rules, specimens, or 
 associates, which may tend, in oui* estima- 
 tion^ to vitiate the judgment, or prevent the 
 formation of what we beheve to be a pure 
 taste. This sounds arbitrary and exclusive 
 enough, and utterly subversive of all free- 
 dom of thought. Yet such is the practice ; 
 and it must be remembered that the object 
 of it is not to discover truth, but to teach it ; 
 it is assumed to be known and admitted 
 on the part of the instructor. But we our- 
 selves had our tastes formed by the same 
 process, being brought up to think in this 
 way. And yet we feel that we think so at 
 this time, not simply because we were 
 trained to do so, but because we possess an 
 internal sense which declares to us, as 
 clearly as our outward vision, that our 
 judgments are based on truth, as such ; that 
 they have reference to laws as real as those 
 which govern the natural world, though 
 perhaps incapable of demonstration, or of 
 beins: reduced to abstract rules; but which, 
 at the same time, no demonstration of a 
 
W2 LECTURE V. 
 
 contrary nature could overturn ; and to the 
 truth of which, testimony is borne by the 
 concurrent decisions of those whom the 
 universal voice of mankind has pronounced 
 to be the most fit judges on this subject. 
 
 For thus it is that here, as in Morals, 
 we get out of the apparent reasoning in 
 a circle ; viz. by falling back on the uni- 
 formity of the standard thus established, 
 which is referred, in the mind of each, to 
 principles which he feels to be true and 
 strictly philosophical, though perhaps not 
 admitting of demonstration nor of being 
 reduced to abstract rules ; confirmed more- 
 over by the universal testimony and prac- 
 tice of mankind. For there is here, as in 
 Morals, the same apparent reasoning in a 
 circle, as is obvious on the most cursory 
 view. If, for example, any one, after ex- 
 pressing his opinion on any work of art, 
 were to be asked on what his judgment was 
 founded, he would refer us to the rules of 
 taste. If asked by what standard he formed 
 his taste, his reply would be, that it was by 
 studying the best masters, and making him- 
 self acquainted with the best productions. 
 
LECTURE V. 203 
 
 If asked how he knew that the masters or 
 productions referred to were the best, he 
 would (unless he at once broke through the 
 circle by referring to the general opinion of 
 mankind) reply, that he had been told so by 
 those w^ho were deemed (which is another 
 outlet from the circle in the same direction) 
 the best judges. If asked again how these 
 formed their judgment, the reply would 
 again be, that it was by studying the best 
 specimens and productions : thus reasoning 
 apparently from the work to the rule; from 
 the rule to the particular judgment; and 
 from the judgment back again to the work; 
 going round again and again in the same cir- 
 cle, in a way which in demonstrative science 
 would be most illogical and absurd, and 
 which doubtless appears so to those who 
 would apply the rules of demonstrative 
 science to moral subjects ; but which in 
 such subjects is neither illogical nor absurd, 
 because in morals we step out of that circle 
 on to a principle which, if it cannot be esta- 
 blished by demonstration, neither can it be 
 overturned by it ; which, though it seem to 
 rest on no surer ground than the testimony 
 
204 LECTURE V. 
 
 of human feeling, is sufficiently uniform in 
 its operation and results, to indicate design 
 on the part of the divine Author of our 
 nature ; and which, if it be less demon- 
 strable than the laws w^hich he has given 
 to the natural world, is at least better 
 adapted to a state of probation, with which 
 mechanical laws of demonstration would 
 be utterly at variance, and quite in accord- 
 ance with that fundamental feature of his 
 dealings with us as moral and responsible 
 agents, by which both our moral percep- 
 tion and our moral standard are made to 
 depend on the obedience to the moral sense 
 and the fulfilment of our moral relations, 
 in which humility of character, and the 
 willingness to learn according to his ap- 
 pointments, form an essential feature. 
 
 As an additional corroboration of the 
 reasonableness of surrendering the judg- 
 ment and submitting to the guidance of 
 others, though such a course be opposed to 
 our immediate opinions and wishes, we may 
 appeal to the experience of almost every 
 one, when, on looking back in after-life to 
 the restrictions laid both on our actions and 
 
LECTURE V. 205 
 
 opinions when young, we see that the ad- 
 vantage, still less the necessity of such re- 
 strictions, could not, by any explanation, 
 have been made intelligible to us at that 
 period ; and yet that now we are convinced, 
 not only of their necessity, but that the 
 opinions and tone of thought which they 
 were designed to establish within us, are 
 unquestionably true ; and this, not merely 
 by the judgment of our own habits and 
 feelings, but with reference to a standard 
 obviously external to ourselves, but the 
 perception of which we feel to be mainly, 
 if not exclusively, owing to the course of 
 training and discipline which we have gone 
 through. 
 
 A supposed case should be alluded to here, 
 on account of the application, to be made 
 presently in the way of analogy, to a sup- 
 posed case in regard to Christian doctrines. 
 It will be admitted in regard to taste and 
 works of art, that although incapable of 
 being reduced to any very definite or ab- 
 stract rules, yet there does exist a standard, 
 external to and independent of the percep- 
 tions of the individual, sufficiently uniform 
 
206 LECTURE V. 
 
 throughout the world, to indicate its de- 
 pendance on some fixed principles or general 
 law. 
 
 Now let us suppose for a moment that 
 this knowledge was entirely lost; — that 
 every individual possessing it was removed 
 from the world, without having the oppor- 
 tunity of communicating it previously ; — 
 but that the works and specimens them- 
 selves remain, and that mankind were 
 commanded, under a most severe penalty, 
 to recover this knowledge. Let it be con- 
 ceded that it is possible to recover this 
 knowledge — to re-establish the standard. 
 By what a long and tedious process must 
 this be effected — at what a cost of time 
 and labour — what a long and careful pro- 
 cess of induction on the part of individuals 
 — what an equally long and careful process 
 of comparison of the judgments, first of 
 those individuals one with another, in the 
 same nation ; next, of what might appear 
 the collective judgment of each nation, one 
 with another ; and then of one age with 
 another; before any thing like a deter- 
 minate standard could be established. And 
 
LECTURE V. 207 
 
 when at length the standard had been thus 
 regained, it cannot, I think, be questioned, 
 that, knowing how much was at stake, the 
 experience of the difficulties encountered 
 in its recovery, added to the conviction that 
 it was the true standard, would lead to the 
 establishment, by universal consent, of the 
 principle, even now virtually established 
 and generally adopted in practice, — that 
 hereafter the study of such subjects should 
 be preceded, first by the communication of 
 such general principles as were capable 
 of being reduced to rule; and next by a 
 selection, made by those supposed to be 
 competent judges, of such specimens and 
 productions as were deemed the best ; the 
 disciple being assumed to possess nothing 
 but the willingness to be thus instructed, 
 and the germ of a faculty within him, 
 capable, under a course of instruction like 
 this, of being at length matured into the 
 power of judging in like manner for him- 
 self. 
 
 Before applying the case here supposed, 
 by way of parallel to a similar one in 
 regard to the Christian doctrines, it may 
 
208 LECTURE V. 
 
 be observed, that what has been above 
 shewn to exist respecting both the prin- 
 ciples and practice of mankind in morals 
 and in taste, at least serves to shew that a 
 prejudice or bias in conveying truth, or in 
 forming the capacity to judge of it, is not 
 the unreasonable thing which some would 
 represent it to be, being neither unsuited 
 to the nature of men, nor contrary to their 
 practice. And here some might be con- 
 tent to leave it, being satisfied with having 
 shewn that the principle, however loudly it 
 may be condemned, is at least no more 
 than is sanctioned by the universal practice 
 of mankind, where opinions are to be 
 formed and truth conveyed, on subjects 
 not purely intellectual and demonstrative. 
 The argument will, however, admit of 
 being carried much further. We might 
 fairly throw on our opponents the onus of 
 shewing why a principle, observed in every 
 other case of moral truth and moral in- 
 struction, should find its only exception in 
 the greatest of all moral subjects. The po- 
 pular fallacies on the subject arise, in fact, 
 from overlooking the circumstance that 
 
LECTURE V. 209 
 
 faith is a moral, not an intellectual ([ues- 
 tion, concerned with moral evidence; and 
 that its absence or defect is connected with 
 moral causes. The practice described 
 above, as universally observed in morals 
 and in taste, as well as the princi})lc to 
 which it is referred for its defence, is, 
 merely changing the terms, precisely that 
 which, whether principle or practice, the 
 Church has always maintained in convey- 
 ing that truth of which she is the ap- 
 pointed teacher. So that even if the 
 principle were not as scriptural as it is, — 
 even if it did not necessarily follow from 
 what the Scripture relates of the instru- 
 ments and the mode of teaching the Chris- 
 tian verities, it would at least come recom- 
 mended to us by the clearest analogy, and 
 by such presumptive grounds of its adai)ta- 
 tion to our nature, as would be furnished 
 by the universal practice of mankind. 
 
 If any further argument in its favour 
 were needed, it might be found in the 
 practice of all those who profess to object 
 to it as a principle, yet are practically 
 unable to act in opposition to it. 
 
 p 
 
210 LECTURE V. 
 
 They object to the Church's principle of 
 instruction by means of Creeds and Cate- 
 chisms and Formularies, generally on the 
 ground that they prejudice the mind and 
 prevent it from forming an unbiassed and 
 unfettered judgment ; denouncing as arbi- 
 trary and subversive of truth, any attempt 
 to control the judgment or influence the 
 will. This they object to ; and as a juster 
 course, and one better calculated for the 
 attainment of truth, they prefer that each 
 should read for himself, and make his own 
 deductions from the sacred text. Yet what 
 is their practice, when they have thus de- 
 duced their form of belief from the Bible, 
 and that alone ? They immediately pro- 
 ceed to teach it on the Church's principle : 
 they thoroughly imbue the minds of their 
 disciples and children with it, before giving 
 them the Scripture ; and having done this, 
 they, like the Church, place the Bible in 
 their hands, that they may know the cer- 
 tainty of those things in which they have 
 been (would that we could say truly) in- 
 structed. The deduction is but for one 
 s:eneration at the utmost ; thenceforward it 
 
LECTURE V. 211 
 
 becomes a tradition^ Its origin is hereti- 
 cal ; the means of its perpetuation, catholic. 
 It is notorious that none are so rigid, so 
 tyrannical, if we may use the expression, in 
 their observance of the catholic princi])le 
 in their instruction, in thoroughly prepos- 
 sessing the minds of their disciples witli 
 their views before giving them the Holy 
 Scriptures, as sectarians generally, espe- 
 cially those furthest removed from the 
 Church catholic, as Socinians, — none so 
 jealously vigilant lest the disciple, when he 
 does peruse the Scripture, should exercise 
 a free judgment, and question the views 
 with which he had been imbued — none so 
 intolerant, so vehement in their denuncia- 
 tions of hopeless error, if he should deem 
 he found in Holy Scripture the certainty of 
 other things, than those in which he had 
 been instructed : so truly in this, as in 
 other things, do the enemies of truth bear 
 their unconscious testimony to it ; and jus- 
 
 a What do Heretics and Sectarians, who profess to 
 object to the use of Creeds, &c. mean when tliey speak 
 of persons being educated in the tenets, e. g., of the Uni- 
 tarian, or any other persuasion ? 
 
 P 2 . 
 
212 LECTURE V. 
 
 tify wisdom of her children, even by the 
 testimony of them that hate her. 
 
 With this strong corroborative testimony, 
 unwittingly furnished by the practice of the 
 avowed opponents of the Church's professed 
 principle and practice, we can hardly doubt 
 what would be the probable, if not certain, 
 course pursued in the supposed event — 
 analogous to that supposed above in the 
 case of morals or of works of art and taste — 
 of the Christian doctrines being lost or for- 
 gotten ; or if, which is expressing the same 
 hypothesis in a different shape, the Chris- 
 tian Scriptures were suddenly introduced 
 into a nation who had never before heard 
 of them, nor were in possession, either be- 
 fore or given with the Scripture, of any 
 knowledge whatever of the doctrines but 
 such as could be gathered from the Scrip- 
 tures themselves ; so as to place the Church 
 in circumstances analogous to those sup- 
 posed above in regard to morals and taste. 
 
 It is not conceded that any such case has 
 ever yet occurred, whatever may be con- 
 tended to the contrary. Those who, in 
 Christian lands, after having lived as in- 
 
LECTURE V. 013 
 
 fidels, are recorded to have searched the 
 Scriptures for themselves, and to have hcen 
 brought to a knowledge of the trutli, witli 
 no guidance but that of Scripture itself, and 
 the assistance of the Holy Spirit sought in 
 prayer, — these furnish no evidence on the 
 point in question, because they have, by the 
 terms of the supposition, previously lived 
 among Christians ; and therefore, not only 
 must they be presumed to have had a de- 
 gree of elementary knowledge, unless it can 
 be specifically shewn to the contrary ; but, 
 as was observed in a former Lecture, a cer- 
 tain portion of knowledge is necessarily 
 implied in the very notion of rejection and 
 disbelief Besides, it is not proved whether 
 such persons ultimately possessed, after all, 
 the doctrine of the Apostles, or merely that 
 vague indefinite faith, which, in popular 
 langauge, is denominated a belief in Chris- 
 tianity,— a faith to which the lowest grade 
 of Socinianism lays claim ''. 
 
 'j In a notice of the death of a distinguished Asiatic in 
 this country, not long since, it was stated that he had, 
 since his arrival in England, renounced Paganism and 
 embraced Christianity : that it was not known, however, 
 
 p 3 
 
214 LECTURE V. 
 
 Nor, again, is any thing proved respecting 
 the question, by the stated results of the 
 circulation of the Scriptures alone among 
 heathen people in our day ; because it is 
 well known that assistance of some kind, 
 either from books or teachers, precedes, 
 accompanies, or follows it. Neither in this 
 case is sufficient known of the actual state 
 of belief among such people, to say what 
 portion of the Christian verities they are 
 acquainted with, or of what they are igno- 
 rant. 
 
 If, however, we suppose a case, (and at 
 present it can only rest upon hypothesis,) 
 in which the Christian Scriptures could be 
 suddenly introduced among a people till 
 then in perfect ignorance both of them and 
 of the doctrines they contain, accompanied 
 by nothing, in the way of external instruc- 
 tion, which could convey any idea of their 
 object and meaning; and if the people in 
 question were told that they were to de- 
 duce a system of faith from the book, and 
 
 whether he had embraced any particular form (!) of 
 Christianity ; but that he was generally supposed to 
 have adopted the Unitarian persuasion (!) 
 
LECTURE V. 215 
 
 tliat their eternal interests were concerned 
 in their deducing a right one, what do we 
 suppose would be the result ? 
 
 Without citing at full length, step by step, 
 the several points of analogy to the case of 
 morals and art Apposed above, we may rea- 
 sonably assume, that in their searcli after 
 the meaning of that book, in making their 
 several deductions, they would arrive in 
 succession at the several persuasions and 
 heresies to which men have arrived and 
 daily do arrive, who read Scripture in this 
 way and on this principle. This would be 
 one necessary result. Whether they would 
 arrive at that form of faith which the 
 Church both receives and teaches as the 
 Apostles' doctrine, yet for the proof of 
 every article of which she refers to the 
 same Scriptures, is a question which we 
 cannot take upon ourselves to determine, 
 on the authority of the experience of any 
 age or country ; nor, as has been observed 
 before, on any authority of Holy Scripture 
 itself. But this at least we may take upon 
 ourselves to affirm : that if by any means 
 they did succeed in deducing this pure form 
 
 p 4 
 
216 LECTURE V. 
 
 of faith ; having now gone the whole cycle of 
 truth and error, — having determined among 
 themselves which was the best interpreta- 
 tion of Scripture, the best form of faith, 
 and the system best adapted to promote 
 the moral and spiritual welfare of mankind ; 
 and having seen how materially the adop- 
 tion of this or of any other system depended 
 on the mind of the disciple being pre- 
 viously imbued with it and prejudiced in its 
 favour, — since all were, in the judgment of 
 their respective advocates, equally capable 
 of proof from the Scriptures ; they would, 
 whenever they were interested for the wel- 
 fare of others, and had the power to reduce 
 their interest to practice, take every precau- 
 tion, before putting the Scriptures into the 
 hands of their disciples, to prepossess and 
 bias their minds in favour of those views of 
 doctrine which they desired them to find 
 in Scripture ; using for this purpose Creeds, 
 or Catechisms, or such methods of prelimi- 
 nary instruction, written or unwritten, as 
 they should deem best calculated to effect 
 this object. 
 
 Surely then it must be admitted, that, 
 
LECTURE V. 217 
 
 even were we not assured of the divine 
 origin of the Church's principle, it conies 
 recommended to us from its adaptation to 
 our nature, and has incalculable claims on 
 our veneration and gratitude from the pro- 
 vision it makes for our wants, the protection 
 it affords us as a preservative from error, a 
 protection against some of our worst enemies 
 — ourselves, and our own corrupt hearts. 
 
 What if the form of sound w^ords which 
 we now hold, is not, dow^n to its minute 
 details and expressions, that of which the 
 Apostles spoke as coeval with, nay ante- 
 cedent to Scripture itself; but that por- 
 tions of it, as doubtless is the case with 
 some, are the result of later days, as the 
 assaults of enemies from without compelled 
 the Church to throw up, from time to time, 
 those bulwarks of the faith committed to 
 her keeping ? What if the simpler forms of 
 elder days are now succeeded by the jeal- 
 ously guarded definitions of the Athanasian 
 Creed, when they who would steal the Lord's 
 body from his people, have comi)elled the 
 Church to guard his sacred form with holy 
 jealousy, less needed in ai)ostolic days, when 
 
218 LECTURE V, 
 
 he walked more openly among them, and 
 no man sought to lay hands upon him ? 
 What if, in later times, the corruptions of 
 one branch of the Church, have caused the 
 erection on that side, of those outwarks 
 which are formed by the defensive and con- 
 troversial articles of our own branch ? 
 
 Every creed, every article thus formed, is 
 an historical record of the errors and here- 
 sies of former ages. They are the marks 
 which warn us of the shoals and quicksands 
 on which others have aforetime made ship- 
 wreck of their faith. If we were to take 
 up the buoys and destroy the light houses 
 around our coast, and bid the deluded 
 mariner find out for himself the shoals and 
 rocks which endanger his course, or dis- 
 cover in the darkness of night " the haven 
 where he would be," we should be acting 
 as reasonably as those who, to the learner 
 in the doctrine of Christ, would abolish 
 all creeds or formularies which the Church, 
 under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, has 
 established to warn from error, or to guide 
 into truth. 
 
 What if attacks are made upon them by 
 
LECTURE V. 219 
 
 an evil generation? what if we are told that 
 all creeds are alike, that it matters little 
 which creed we take, provided we are sin- 
 cere ? These attacks, as well as the presump- 
 tuous efforts of others to explain or reject 
 w hat God designed to be a mystery, are but 
 the natural efforts of human pride to escape 
 from the restraint of doctrines w^hich are irk- 
 some, chiefly because they involve motives 
 which the heart refuses to acknowledge. 
 Let us not regard them as restraints and 
 burdens, but as pillars of faith on which we 
 lean in hours of temporary darkness and 
 despondency. Remember they have been 
 
 the support of saints in every age that 
 
 martyrs who have died in their defence, 
 have been in turn supported by them in 
 the hour of trial. That bosom of the 
 Church, which to the believer is a home 
 and protection against the storms which 
 endanger his faith, though far from designed 
 to protect him in indolent ease or to prevent 
 him from pursuing his course through a 
 world of trial, may, by the rationalist or 
 freethinker, be deemed a restraint and a 
 prison. He may, like a wilful headstrong 
 
220 LECTURE V. 
 
 child, break from his parents' roof, rush 
 into what he may call a more liberal system 
 of faith, and exult awhile in his imaginary 
 liberty. But in the wide ocean of error, in 
 vain will he seek a resting-place. He may 
 traverse the dark waters free and uncon- 
 trolled ; but he will there find no rest for 
 the sole of his foot. And happy will he be, 
 if, before night closes upon him, the merci- 
 ful interposition of Providence should again 
 bring him within sight of the ark, and the 
 hand of redeeming love should be again 
 extended to take him to his rest. 
 
LECTURE VI 
 
 APPLICATION OF THE FOREGOING ARGUMENT TO 
 INFANT BAPTISM, NATIONAL EDUCATION, 
 
 AND 
 
 SUBSCRIPTION TO THE ARTICLES OF RELIGION. 
 
 Mark x. 15. 
 
 Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God 
 as a little child, he shall not enter therein. 
 
 FROM the view which was taken, in the 
 preceding Lecture, of the adaptation 
 of the Church's principle to Human Nature, 
 in prejudicing the mind and will in favour 
 of the Christian doctrines before giving the 
 proofs of them as contained in Holy Scrip- 
 ture, and the strict conformity of the prac- 
 tice with that pursued in conveying know- 
 ledge on all subjects not purely abstract 
 and intellectual,— there follow important 
 results, relating to the application of the 
 
2291 LECTURE VI. 
 
 same principle in other matters of faith 
 or practice, which are also supported by 
 the same argument drawn from the adapta- 
 tion of the principle to our moral consti- 
 tution. 
 
 Among the chief of these results, is the 
 defence provided for the institution and 
 practice of InfantJBaptism. Before entering 
 on this, however, it should be here repeat- 
 ed, that according to the principle deduced 
 in a former Lecture for determining the 
 divine origin of this or other appointments 
 in the Church, founded on the authority 
 given to the Apostles for these purposes, 
 with the promise of a divine sanction to 
 what they should thus appoint, together 
 with the absence of direct statements in 
 Scripture respecting the time and manner 
 of their appointment ; — it would follow that, 
 in order to ascertain what was the appoint- 
 ment or practice of the Apostles on these 
 matters, we shall look not only to Scrip- 
 ture, but to those records out of Scripture 
 which, being either contemporary with the 
 Apostles, or near to their day, might be 
 assumed to afford the fairest testimony of 
 
LECTURE VI. 223 
 
 their institution, and record of their prac- 
 tice. And if, finding these institutions 
 spoken of both as then existing and as of 
 divine appointment, from these we turn to 
 Scripture, and there find tliose notices and 
 allusions to them, which would be satisfac- 
 tory evidences on the assumption that they 
 were supposed to exist at that time, and to 
 be well known to the writer of the sacred 
 text as well as those to whom it was 
 addressed, — we should, in strict conformity 
 with the spirit of the Sixth Article of our 
 Church, and the known principle of the 
 Reformers on the subject of the Catholic 
 Faith, be quite content to rest the Scrip- 
 tural defence of the Institutions upon such 
 notices and allusions, where, on the assump- 
 tion that Scripture was the only guide as 
 well as the sole standard of faith, we doubt- 
 less should not be warranted, on the Soci- 
 nian or Sectarian principle, in resting such 
 momentous matters on such indirect and 
 apparently imperfect proofs. It is on proofs 
 of this nature that we must rest our defence 
 of the divine appointment of Infiuit bap- 
 tism, the Sacramental character of tlie I^u- 
 
2214 LECTURE VI. 
 
 charist, the Observance of the Lord's Da/, 
 Public Worship, Episcopal Ordination and 
 Apostolical Succession, and those spiritual 
 functions and powers with which the Church 
 maintains that the Apostolic Priesthood 
 has been ever invested. Nor should it be 
 forgotten^ that it is on proofs of a similar 
 character that we are often said to rest the 
 more fundamental and vital articles of our 
 faith — the Divinity of the Holy Spirit ; the 
 doctrine of the Trinity in Unity ; and we 
 might add, the whole body of the faith 
 once delivered to the Saints. 
 
 Our object at present, however, is to 
 point out the argument in favour of the 
 institutions and practices drawn from their 
 conformity to the principle, which we have 
 shewn to exist in the Church's teaching, 
 of adaptation to our moral nature. 
 
 In regard, then, to Infant Baptism : this 
 Institution would not only follow from the 
 principle in question, but its absence would 
 be an omission for which it would be diffi- 
 cult to account. We have seen that, on 
 moral subjects, our perceptions and opinions 
 depend on an early bias, and an early 
 
LECTURE VI. %95 
 
 training for the purpose of retaining it ; 
 that we begin by arresting the passions, 
 and by enlisting the feelings and the will, 
 as early as possible ; that the opinions and 
 views, in favour of which we thus pre])ossess 
 the mind, are those which we ourselves feel 
 to be right, — the only limit being the extent 
 of our own conviction of their truth ; that 
 when our convictions are decided, and we 
 feel ourselves responsible for the opinions 
 of those committed to us, we do not hesi- 
 tate to use all the means in our power to 
 form them aright, not only by persuasion, 
 but even consider it a duty to use the 
 power, where we possess it, if not to make 
 them think as we would have them, at least 
 to put those things before them which may 
 tend to that effect, and to debar them from 
 access to those of an opposite tendency. 
 We have seen that we do this at the ear- 
 liest possible opportunity, as soon as reason 
 dawns, or the capacity to receive moral im- 
 pressions developes itself; and that if we 
 do not this at an earlier period, it is o?i/f/ 
 because this capacity does not exist, nor is 
 the will capable of being influenced by us : 
 
 Q 
 
226 LECTURE VI. 
 
 (though even here we do endeavour to 
 create associations in favour of or against 
 things we respectively approve or condemn.) 
 If then we thus do all we can to create a bias 
 and to engage the will, the only limit being 
 — in point of time, the assumed incapacity of 
 the recipient — or in point of degree, any 
 possible misgivings on our part as to the 
 truth of our own convictions ; — if this is the 
 theory of the formation of moral habits and 
 impressions, as evolved by the science of 
 morals, confirmed moreover by the uni- 
 versal practice of mankind, as far as the 
 condition of human nature and the circum- 
 stances of human relations will admit of its 
 being reduced to practice; (and we know 
 that the result is comparatively defective 
 only from the weakness and corruption of 
 nature, and the want on our part of some 
 power sufficient to meet and control that ;) 
 surely it would follow from this, that if a 
 system be proposed as coming from God, 
 which, besides adopting the principle and 
 method prescribed by morals for the for- 
 mation of moral habits and character, pro- 
 fesses moreover to be supported by a super- 
 
LECTURE VI. 227 
 
 natural power, unlimited in its extent, of 
 influencing the will, correcting the pas- 
 sions, and forming tlie habits, — infusing, in 
 fact, an entirely new and divine principle 
 of action into the heart ; — if we believe in 
 its efficacy for this object, and if, before 
 the knowledge of this, or in matters which 
 even now do not fall within its operation, 
 the only limit to the period of our in- 
 fluencing the wall, was the want of liuman 
 power to reach it, — the want of such a 
 power being an acknowledged though an un- 
 avoidable defect in the system ; — surely we 
 should expect that the all-powerful divine 
 influence would at least supply this defect ; 
 unless it could be shewn that such a provi- 
 sion would be unsuited to the state of pro- 
 bation in which w^e are here placed. It were 
 unreasonable to suppose that, professing to 
 supply our wants, it should stop in its ope- 
 ration at that precise point where human 
 power had stopped merely because it was hu- 
 man; that it should not follow up the prin- 
 ciple, and commence at a still earlier period. 
 It would be unaccountable if there were m^t 
 this provision. To say that it is incompre- 
 
 q2 
 
228 LECTURE VI. 
 
 hensible or irrational, is no reply. The 
 whole doctrine of Divine grace is incom- 
 prehensible, and to human means, impos- 
 sible. But if it is promised at all ; if its 
 influence is adapted to our nature, sup- 
 plying our wants where obedience to the 
 moral law without it had felt and declared 
 those wants ; it would have been unaccount- 
 able, on any acknowledged principle of 
 God's dealings with us, if it did not supply 
 that of which reason felt the want, and for 
 which she did not provide, only because 
 she could not, nor dreamed that in the 
 inexhaustible storehouses of Divine love, a 
 way had been provided by which it might 
 be supplied. 
 
 Nor is it necessary, for this, to enter on the 
 question of the degree of grace, vouchsafed 
 to the new-born soul of one brought to 
 Christ in infancy, and washed in the laver 
 of regeneration. It is enough that it be 
 commensurate with the reason and the 
 will. If the one be but a germ, a mere 
 seed, as yet latent and undeveloped, the 
 other is not more. If the one be not per- 
 ceptible, neither is the other: though he 
 
LECTURE VI. 229 
 
 would be rash who would take upon liim- 
 self to determine when moral responsibihty 
 commences, even to those who are not 
 under grace ; still more, to fix it at tliat 
 point where the evidences of it are first 
 discernible to the eyes of others. All that 
 is here contended for is, that if the influ- 
 ence of the Blessed Spirit be, in its opera- 
 tions, adapted to the nature of man, and 
 calculated to supply, as far as was com- 
 patible with a state of probation, the wants 
 which reason had pointed out ; we should 
 expect that it would begin with, (if sought 
 in time through the appointed means,) and 
 be commensurate with, the moral powers ; — 
 that if designed to purify the heart, correct 
 the passions, and regulate the will, it would 
 not wait for that period to which the oi)era- 
 tion of human power would necessarily be 
 limited. We should expect that it would 
 be implanted early, from the beginning, as 
 seed, perhaps the smallest of all seeds; 
 dormant awhile and undeveloped, like the 
 germ of the moral sense and moral facul- 
 ties; yet taking the lead of them; able 
 to keep that lead, if duly cultivated and 
 
 q3 
 
2S0 LECTURE VI. 
 
 watered by the refreshing dews of God's 
 grace, sought through his appointed means; 
 springing up in the goodly heritage, thus 
 mercifully reclaimed from the waste and 
 wilderness of sin; increasing day by day, 
 utterly abolishing the whole body of sin, 
 and bringing forth fruit unto holiness. 
 
 This a priori argument in favour of 
 Infant Baptism, — or rather Infant Regene- 
 ration, against which the objections are 
 urged, — would* seem to follow from the 
 mere revelation, in conjunction with morals, 
 of a divine influence capable of supplying 
 the wants of human nature, and of ef- 
 fecting that which the science which treats 
 of that nature had pointed out, as wanted 
 to enable it to fulfil its proper end. If the 
 moral truth be admitted, as it must, that in 
 order to fulfil the end of our being, the 
 passions are to be subdued, and the affec- 
 tions engaged in a given course, limited in 
 the period of its commencement, only by 
 the limit placed to human powers ; and if 
 it be admitted that a divine influence is 
 given, able to effect that vv^hich reason had 
 pointed out as necessary, rather than as 
 within her reach, for controlling our nature 
 
LECTURE VI. 2tU 
 
 and directing it aright; it rests witli the 
 opponents of Infant Regeneration to shew 
 why the limits which nature places to 
 unassisted human powers, should be made 
 to circumscribe the operation of a divine 
 power ; or how they reconcile their posi - 
 tion with the principle which pervades tlie 
 whole of God's dealings with his creatures 
 under every dispensation, in making them 
 first feel their wants and weakness while 
 ivithout his covenant, and then shewing 
 how, to those imthht it, he can mercifully 
 and abundantly supply them. 
 
 Another important result of this defence 
 of the Church's principle is, the answer it 
 furnishes to the fallacy of what is, in popu- 
 lar language, termed religious lihertu^ and 
 of supposing that men either possess the 
 power by nature, or have any authority in 
 revelation, for choosing a religion for them- 
 selves ; as well as to the daring and unchris- 
 tian assertion, that religion is an affair 
 resting entirely between the conscience of 
 each individual and his God, with whicli no 
 other authority has any right to interfere. 
 It is a charge alleged against the Church 
 
 Q 4 
 
232 LECTURE VI. 
 
 in every country, that she has claimed the 
 authority to preside over public instruction 
 and national education, and to prescribe 
 the course and the principle on which it 
 should be conducted, demanding that the 
 children of the state should be brought up 
 in her creed. Now that the Church sanc- 
 tions such a principle as this, will not be 
 denied; which however is not the same 
 thing with claiming its adoption as a matter 
 of right, or enforcing it by civil penalties. 
 But if we inquire further, we shall find 
 that the authority is claimed by the State 
 rather than the Church — by churchmen 
 in their capacity of statesmen and civil 
 legislators, rather than as churchmen. We 
 shall find that the principle on which it is 
 founded, existed in morals and in nature, 
 before its adoption by the Church or by 
 revelation ; and that it is resolved not only 
 into the first principles of morals, but those 
 which actuate the universal practice of 
 mankind, from the highest duty which can 
 devolve on moral agents, to the lowest 
 instinctive impulse of humanity or of self- 
 preservation. 
 
LECTURE VI. 233 
 
 We learn from the science of morals, nay 
 even from a less accurate observation than 
 is required for philosophic investigation, 
 that if to moral agents we wish to convey 
 moral impressions, and to create moral 
 habits, we must begin early ; and that the 
 degree of success which may attend our 
 instructions, will depend mainly on the 
 period at which we commence : that al- 
 though, even then, the success is less than 
 we could have wished or expected, it is at 
 least more than we could attain by any 
 other human means, and certainly an ap- 
 proach to that which we require. We 
 learn too, from the same sources, that men, 
 if left to themselves, will never attain to 
 these habits; that they will never volun- 
 tarily subject themselves to the authority 
 necessary to put them in a course of train- 
 ing, or to the discipline necessary to con- 
 tinue them in it and to form their character 
 under it. Reason, philosophy, analogy, 
 experience, every thing is against such a 
 supposition. It is only by beginning in 
 childhood that we can expect, on any 
 acknowledged principles, that they can be 
 
234 LECTURE VI. 
 
 placed in a course of training and moral 
 discipline, or derive, in any effectual degree, 
 the formation of character and tone of 
 mind to be produced under it. We might 
 as readily expect that children would vo- 
 luntarily find out and place themselves 
 under the discipline, physical or moral, 
 necessary for their present health or future 
 welfare, as that men would voluntarily 
 place themselves under those restraints, 
 and that moral discipline, which is essen- 
 tially necessary for the developement and 
 strengthening of their moral and intel- 
 lectual powers. 
 
 No one who pretends to the slightest 
 knowledge of human nature will deny, that 
 this is the case with men, considered merely 
 as moral and responsible agents, apart from 
 religious considerations, or the knowledge 
 of motives and assistance derived from 
 Revelation. If such was not the universal 
 practice of ancient governments, it was at 
 least their theory, — and a theory founded 
 on deep and comprehensive views of human 
 nature, and the science of man viewed in 
 his moral and social relations. Such, too. 
 
LECTURE VI. 235 
 
 was the theory of whatever hiid claim to 
 the philosophy of man's nature ; which was 
 not reduced to practice, only from obstacles 
 beyond the reach of control, and from the 
 existence of spurious principles founded on 
 the prejudices and ungoverned passions of 
 mankind, which may at once be as far pro- 
 nounced to have been unsuited to man's 
 nature, morally and politically, that when 
 measured by their consequences, spread 
 over a sufficiently large surface of time, 
 they are decided to have been intimately 
 connected, in the relation of cause and 
 effect, with the social degradation and 
 moral deterioration of those who professed 
 them. 
 
 Why a principle which formed so essen- 
 tial an ingredient in the moral and political 
 philosophy of man, in its best days, when, 
 in the absence of revelation, it must be 
 regarded as an impartial description of 
 human nature as it really is, — why this 
 should be less advocated under the Gospel, 
 which is so peculiarly adapted to man's 
 nature, is a paradox not difficult to explain, 
 but to which it would not be necessary to 
 
2136 LECTURE VI. 
 
 advert at the present moment, further than 
 to observe, that the rejection of it by many 
 professing the Gospel, especially the reasons 
 they allege for so doing vy^hen called upon 
 to defend it, form the best testimony to the 
 truth of the principle, and shew unconsci- 
 ously what the adoption of it would be, 
 under the Gospel, if truly and scripturally 
 followed up. 
 
 It was observed, however, that the Church 
 does sanction the adoption of this principle 
 in civil government, as applied to the bring- 
 ing up, by authority, the children of the 
 state in her own creed, But then, as was 
 also observed, the adoption of it originates 
 with the state, the Church being only 
 secondarily a party to it : the principle 
 existed in our nature, and was recognised 
 in the philosophy of government, long before 
 it formed the ground of any connection 
 between the Church and the civil power. 
 And indeed, the principle itself being ad- 
 mitted, as it must on any acknowledged 
 theory of human nature, unless it can be 
 shewn that the Gospel is opposed to man's 
 nature or calculated to defeat the end of 
 
LECTURE VI. 237 
 
 his being as a moral and responsible agent, 
 the application of the principle to the 
 Gospel, in the education of a nation, follows 
 as a necessary consequence. Surely the 
 common sense of duty, the common feelings 
 of humanity — feelings strong as instinct 
 could make them, which do not even wait 
 for a process of reasoning to justify them 
 to our minds, — these prescribe, that when 
 we are interested, not to say responsible, 
 for the welfare and happiness of others, w^e 
 use, whatever power we possess, to promote 
 them. Whether we have formed right 
 views of what will conduce to their happi- 
 ness and w^elfare, is a separate question : 
 but such as our views are, if we have the 
 power of carrying them into effect, on w hat 
 principle should w^e hesitate to do so ? If 
 in morals a given habit of mind, or in reli- 
 gion a given form of faith, is in our esti- 
 mation calculated, if not necessary, to pro- 
 mote these ; and if w^e feel that we 
 have the powder of bringing them to it ; in 
 what relation can we suppose ourselves 
 placed to them, which w^ould relieve us of 
 the duty of exercising that power ? and 
 
238 LECTURE IV. 
 
 the more convinced we were of being 
 ourselves right, the more sure we felt of 
 success in endeavouring to conform their 
 views to ours, the more determined and 
 resolute should we be in our efforts to do 
 so, however disagreeable at the time to 
 them. We should do this, on the same prin- 
 ciple that we should prevent a man from 
 committing suicide, using even force if 
 necessary ; the only limit to the exercise 
 of our power being, any defect in the con- 
 viction that we were ourselves right, and 
 in the grounds we possessed for expecting 
 success. 
 
 It will be seen that we are discussing the 
 question, thus far, without reference to any 
 particular form of faith, or any particular 
 condition of mind ; merely defending, as 
 an abstract question, the duty of every 
 state to educate its citizens in that parti- 
 cular mode, whether as regards religion or 
 any other condition of mind or thought, 
 which it is itself convinced is most likely 
 to ensure their welfare and promote their 
 best interests as moral and responsible 
 agents ; the only limitation being any 
 
LECTURE VI. 239 
 
 doubts they may have of the 'goodness of 
 the mode, or of the success which may 
 attend it. Now Revehition tells us, tliat 
 in addition to the value of early imj)res- 
 sions and early habits, a divine influence is 
 capable of being implanted in the heart, to 
 enable it to be born again, to be formed 
 anew; and that provision is made for the 
 cultivation and increase of this divine prin- 
 ciple, so that it may grow^ with our growth, 
 not only keeping pace with the growth of 
 the evil passions it is designed to conquer, 
 but maintaining the lead which was given 
 to it at its commencement. It tells us 
 how, to those who hold a certain faith, this 
 divine principle is to be obtained — how 
 increased — and likewise how it may be lost. 
 Surely then, it must be admitted, on the 
 commonest principles of reason, that one 
 possessed of authority, whether an indi- 
 vidual or many, who believed tliis, who 
 was convinced that a particular form of 
 faith was essential to the well being of 
 those entrusted to him, would, on princi- 
 ples of humanity alone, use all tlie power 
 he was possessed of, not indeed to force 
 
240 LECTURE VI. 
 
 conviction, as is unjustly charged against 
 the Church, (that were irrational and un- 
 philosophical, as well as unwarranted by 
 any thing in God's word,) but to create 
 conviction by early training, such as morals 
 would prescribe, by exercising parental 
 restraints, by removing, even by force, 
 which he may here use if necessary, what- 
 ever is likely to injure what he conceives to 
 be the best interests of those dependent on 
 him, through vicious contamination, exam- 
 ple, or other interference with the principles 
 and general character, which he is desirous 
 of forming within them. This he would 
 do by the same right and duty as that by 
 which he would prevent them from com- 
 mitting self-destruction. If force, to use 
 the expression, is justifiable in the one 
 case, (and where is the code of laws which 
 would not recognise it ? ) why is it less so 
 in the other? or rather, why not more jus- 
 tifiable, proportionately to the greater im- 
 portance of the point at stake ? The only 
 limit to the exercise of this power would 
 be that of his own convictions. If these 
 are settled, if he is sure that these opinions 
 
LECTURE VI. 241 
 
 or belief are essential to the well bein*^' ol' 
 his dependants ; if he feels that the surest, 
 at all events the most probable mode of 
 establishing them, is by an early and ex- 
 clusive course of training in them, and he 
 has the power to enforce this ; on what 
 principles of reason or of common huma- 
 nity w^ould he be justified in hesitating to 
 do so ? If he doubts the truth of his own 
 creed, the very fact of knowing that success 
 can be ensured, under a divine promise, to 
 the true faith, would lead him, if consistent, 
 to find out, by every legitimate means, 
 which was the true faith. This, even a 
 wise heathen, legislating on principles de- 
 rived from a knowledge of human nature, 
 w^ould prescribe for him ; and if he delayed 
 to enforce the authority he possessed, it 
 would only be till this question had been de- 
 termined. Any delay without such plea, were 
 most unreasonable ; and any delay founded 
 on this plea, yet unaccompanied by the most 
 active and careful inquiry for the purpose 
 of removing it, would be a shameful be- 
 trayal of a sacred trust, for which the i)rin- 
 ciples and practice of Heathenism, acting 
 
 R 
 
242 LECTURE VI. 
 
 by the light which had been vouchsafed to 
 it, would rise in judgment against him. 
 Let it be admitted, for argument's sake, 
 that a question may fairly arise, whether 
 the Church's Creed be the true one: then 
 let him investigate the subject in the mode 
 in which the subject itself professes to 
 be capable of investigation, and determine 
 which is the true creed. If those who 
 object to the Church's creed, were to en- 
 deavour, with equal zeal, to substitute their 
 own for it, they would at least be ra- 
 tional; but to be indifferent on the sub- 
 ject, or to remove the one without supplying 
 its place, betrays a want of acquaintance 
 with the nature and object of the Gospel, 
 an ignorance of human nature, or a most 
 culpable disregard of the claims of huma- 
 nity. Nothing can be more unphilosophical, 
 as well as unscriptural, than what is termed 
 liberality in matters of faith. In moral 
 subjects, no less than in demonstrative, of 
 two contradictory propositions only one can 
 be true at the same time. The truth may 
 be more difficult to arrive at in morals and 
 religion, than in physics, and therefore men 
 
LECTURE VI. 243 
 
 are more likely to dispute and dilFer re- 
 specting it. This we must ex])ect; and did 
 contending parties, retaining this ol)vious 
 principle, join issue on the trutli of their 
 respective creeds, and contend for their 
 exclusive adoption, they would be more 
 difficult to reply to. The bigot, however 
 erroneous his creed, has more of reason and 
 philosophy on his side, than the (so called) 
 liberal or the lukewarm. We can meet him 
 on some common ground, and bring him to 
 an issue ; while the other proceeds on a 
 principle disallowed alike by Morals and 
 Revelation. Without fixing the limits to 
 which charity may go in tolerating differ- 
 ence of belief, as soon as it is gravely main- 
 tained that of two opposite creeds both may 
 be right, the proposition is too monstrous 
 to be listened to. There may be rights of 
 conscience, as they are termed, as well as 
 rights of person ; but there must also be 
 admitted the right, where we possess the 
 power, to save from ruin by the undue 
 exercise of the one, as well as of the other. 
 But it will perhaps be said, that the pro- 
 test against any interference in the forma- 
 
 r2 
 
2U LECTURE VI. 
 
 tion of religious belief, is grounded, not on 
 any assumed indifference to the claims of 
 opposing creeds, but upon the difficulty of 
 determining which, after all, is right : that 
 since there is obviously, as daily experience 
 shews, such great diversity of opinion acting 
 on the same data, and no appointed author- 
 ity to decide between the claims of each, it 
 is a manifest injustice to assign the absolute 
 precedence to any one, in such a way as to 
 place a virtual prohibition on the exercise 
 of the others : that this liberty may be 
 contended for under the existing circum- 
 stances of the Christian world, without 
 encroaching on the principle, otherwise 
 admitted, of enforcing uniformity where 
 the standard of truth is sufficiently deter- 
 minate. 
 
 In reply to this, the Church claims the 
 right to ask, whence and by what right 
 exists this variety of opinion and belief? 
 By what right is the principle assumed, the 
 adoption of which leads to this contrariety 
 of belief ? For it will be at once admitted, 
 that the variety in question arises from the 
 fallacy, before spoken of, of supposing that 
 
LECTURE VI. 246 
 
 the Scriptures were given to us as tliat 
 from which each individual or body was at 
 liberty to deduce their own creed as they 
 think best, without any external or colla- 
 teral assistance: that the Scripture in fact 
 is the 7'ule and guide, as well as the fitnn- 
 dard of faith. The Church therefore asks, 
 by what authority is this right assumed? 
 For that it is not on the authority of 
 Scripture itself, w^e have seen before ; and 
 the challenge may be here repeated to the 
 deductionist, to produce any authority 
 from Scripture itself, in favour of his prin- 
 ciple of deducing his creed from the Scrip- 
 ture, instead of proving his creed, derived 
 from some other source, by the Scripture. 
 
 The Church's principle, on the contrary, 
 for determining the truth of Christian doc- 
 trine, viz.. Antiquity and Catholic Tradi- 
 tion, in conjimction ivith Scripture — the one 
 supplying its form, the other its proof — the 
 one being the guide, the other the stan- 
 dard of faith, — was considered at some 
 length in a former Lecture, together with 
 the scriptural authority on which it rests. 
 But, in reply to the otherwise formidable 
 
 R 8 
 
246 LECTURE VI. 
 
 objection to the attempt authoritatively to 
 establish uniformity in a matter admitting 
 of such contrariety of opinion, it must be 
 here repeated, that it rests with our oppo- 
 nents to shew that, on the Church's prin- 
 ciple of determining the rule of faith, any 
 such contrariety of opinion would arise : 
 and this principle, it will be remembered, 
 was shewn to be perfectly scriptural, as well 
 as philosophical, being founded mainly on 
 the account which Scripture gives of itself 
 and of its origin, and of its relation to the 
 Christian verities. In this way the Church, 
 while requiring uniformity, prescribes the 
 mode by which it will be attained, — a mode 
 too, not created by herself for the purpose 
 of defending her practice, but one coeval 
 with Christianity itself, completely con- 
 firmed by Scripture, and the testimony of 
 those whose name and authority, though 
 uninspired, the Church has ever held in 
 highest reverence. If, therefore, the Church, 
 while requiring uniformity of faith, provides 
 a rule competent to effect this, and defends 
 #, that rule against its opponents on the com- 
 mon ground of its scriptural origin, surely 
 
LECTURE VI. 247 
 
 it rests with the opponents to shew, either 
 that it is unscriptural, or else, that though 
 scriptural, it has in practice failed to pro- 
 duce a more uniform system of faith, than 
 the direct appeal to Scripture alone without 
 any intermediate or external guide : tliat 
 persons adopting this rule, have arrived at 
 a different faith from that which we hold. 
 Till one of these two cases has been shewn 
 to exist, viz., want of Scripture authority 
 for the rule, or its failing to produce uni- 
 formity when fairly carried into practice; 
 the objections to the principle of a compul- 
 sory education of the children of the state 
 in the faith of the Church, founded on the 
 assumed want of a sufficiently determinate 
 rule of faith, are incapable of being sus- 
 tained. 
 
 Now although the Church undoubtedly 
 sanctions the practice here spoken of, yet 
 the principle on which it is founded existed 
 before, in the constitution of our nature, 
 and is coeval with the creation of that 
 nature . 
 
 Moreover it will be seen, that the prac- 
 tice, having reference to principles and 
 
 R 4 
 
248 LECTURE VI. 
 
 designed to meet wants which belong to 
 man in every stage of his moral and social 
 existence — wants which were acknowledged 
 and attempted to be provided for by the 
 adoption of the like principle, prior to the 
 knowledge of the Christian Revelation, — it 
 will be seen that the practice originates 
 with the state rather than the Church, 
 being rendered necessary to men in their 
 civil and social, independently of their 
 religious relations. A government founded 
 on a proper knowledge of the moral nature 
 of man, and of what is requisite to fit him 
 for the end of his being, in his moral and 
 political relations, would necessarily main- 
 tain the principle of educating its citizens 
 in that tone of mind, and condition of 
 thought, which it deemed best calculated 
 to promote their true interests. And if it 
 deemed that the principles and belief of 
 the Church Catholic were best calculated 
 for this end, it is difficult to say on what 
 principle of consistency it could fail of 
 adopting them ; or with what plea of jus- 
 tice complaints could be brought against 
 the Church itself, as assuming to itself a 
 
LECTURE VI. 249 
 
 secular authority, merely because the state, 
 as an independent agent, holding itself re- 
 sponsible for the proper education of its 
 children, and conceiving that the principles 
 of the Church are such as it ought to pre- 
 scribe for that object, uses its legitimate 
 authority, not, as was observed before, to 
 enforce conviction, but to provide that her 
 people shall be trained in them, and to 
 suppress, by the civil authority, whatever 
 may have a tendency to cause them to 
 offend and fall away from them. It is strange 
 that men will overlook this obvious distinc- 
 tion in the functions of the Church and 
 civil power respectively, in this connection, 
 and cite, as an argument against the prac- 
 tice, our Lord's declaration, that " His 
 " kingdom was not of this world." This 
 would be valid if the Church, as the Churchy 
 claimed the right of enforcing conformity 
 to its faith and discipline by civil author- 
 ity; but on what plea can it be urged as 
 an argument to prevent the State, as the 
 State, from educating those for whom she 
 feels responsible, in that condition of mind 
 and thought, by which she feels she can 
 
250 LECTURE VI. 
 
 best discharge to her own conscience that 
 solemn obligation ? 
 
 The Church itself rests on no human 
 power for support : she relies on a divine 
 agency — she trusts to a divine promise : 
 she instructs in her faith and extends her 
 covenanted blessings, by means and instru- 
 ments appointed for the purpose by her 
 Divine Founder ; means consonant to rea- 
 son herself, and which had previously re- 
 ceived, as far as the tendency of unassisted 
 reason could give it, the sanction of the 
 best and wisest decisions of human philoso- 
 phy. She claims no right to inflict punish- 
 ment on men here, beyond that which, by 
 the laws of nature, is inherent in every 
 society, — the right to exclude from her com- 
 munion, and whatever benefits may be con- 
 nected with it, those who will not conform 
 to her laws. If, from the circumstance of 
 a civil power incorporating her principles 
 with its own, the exclusion from her com- 
 munion leads to an abridgment of what 
 are termed civil rights ; surely it were most 
 unjust and unreasonable that this loss, 
 which is purely accidental on the part of 
 
LECTURE VI. 251 
 
 the Church, should be charged on her, as 
 though it were an essential part of her 
 provisions. If the state should deem that 
 some heretical creed were preferable, or 
 more Scripturally true, and were to deter- 
 mine that her children should be educated 
 in that creed, and that those only who pro- 
 fess it should be admitted to offices of 
 trust and power, surely it were most un- 
 just to charge on that creed, or the sect 
 that professed it, the restraints or temporal 
 disabilities to which men were made liable 
 in a relation purely civil. 
 
 Doubtless the Church goes further than 
 Sectarianism in sanctioning the principle ; 
 but it does so, because it is more in con- 
 formity with the principles which regulate 
 human nature, to which men must, after 
 all, revert in their theories of civil govern- 
 ment, and from which, in Christian states, 
 they are only frighted, paradoxical as it 
 may seem, because they are Christiaii — 
 because, if they act upon the principles 
 most suited to human nature as such, those 
 principles are so essentially those of the 
 Church, that it is difficult to adopt the one 
 
^52 LECTURE VI. 
 
 without the other ; — and if the Sectarian 
 spirit is possessed of sufficient secular 
 power to prevent the principles of the 
 Church from being acted upon in the 
 State, the latter must, in abandoning them, 
 abandon also those principles of legislation 
 and government, which, putting revelation 
 aside, would have been adopted, and were 
 adopted, from the necessity of the case, as 
 exhibited by the nature and actual condi- 
 tion of man, viewed in his moral and social 
 relations. 
 
 Yet, surely, if the question is dispassion- 
 ately considered, it mil not be maintained, 
 as it virtually is by those whose principles 
 we are combating, that a statesman must 
 betray his duty, as a statesman, because he 
 happens also to be a churchman ; or that a 
 churchman is to renounce his principles as 
 a churchman, because he happens also to be 
 possessed of civil power. For example — if 
 a statesman feels, as every wise one must, 
 that it is his duty to train the children of 
 the state in the best form of Christian 
 faith, and to provide means for their con- 
 tinuance in it afterwards ; is he, because 
 
LECTURE VI. 253 
 
 Christ's kingdom is not of this world, nor 
 dependent on the arm of flesh, to neglect 
 the duty incumbent on him, and the au- 
 thority vested in him, in the parental 
 relation of civil governor, to provide that 
 those dependent on him shall be brought 
 up in the fear and nurture of the Lord, 
 and that no offence shall come to the little 
 ones entrusted to him ? What parent would 
 act thus in regard to his own children ? 
 Why is the parental relation of the state less 
 real, or its obligations less binding ? why 
 are the restraints and compulsions to be 
 charged on the civil governor as a Church" 
 man, which he exercises in his relation of 
 statesmayi ? Or, on the other hand, if a 
 Churchman feels that he must, by the pro- 
 visions of his faith, begin in infancy with 
 those whom he would instruct in the faith 
 of Christ, and that he cannot expect a 
 blessing on his labours, unless he watch the 
 seed which he has sown, and keej) from it 
 whatever, in the way of influence or ex- 
 ample, may tend to injure it or impede its 
 growth ; if he acts thus in regard to his 
 own children, and feels that, as civil go- 
 
254 LECTURE VI. 
 
 vernor, he possesses the power to act in the 
 like manner towards the children of the 
 state ; is he, possessing this power, to dis- 
 regard the claims of humanity, and to 
 refuse to exercise it, on the principle that 
 Christ's kingdom is not of this world ? Will 
 it be seriously and gravely maintained, even 
 by the lowest Sectarianism, that our Lord's 
 words can be applied to a case like this ? 
 that the authority to enforce a given course 
 of education, is to be confounded with the 
 attempt to force personal conviction when 
 the habits and belief are already formed ? 
 or that the right to suppress expressions of 
 opinion prejudicial to the eternal welfare 
 of those for whom we are responsible, is to 
 be confounded with the principle, which is 
 not contended for, of punishing by human 
 penalties, opinions, as opinions, without 
 reference to their effect on the welfare of 
 others when attempted to be propagated^? 
 Because the Gospel, by the omnipotent 
 
 b The confusion of these two cases is as if a state 
 were accused of punishing a man for his bodily infirmities, 
 because it prevented him from spreading an infectious 
 disease, or affixed civil penalties to those who should 
 
LECTURE VI. 255 
 
 power of grace, am, as it has done, triumph 
 over all the evils which the craft or subtlety 
 of the devil or man can work against it; 
 is it therefore better that those evils should 
 continue, and that no human power should 
 be used to remove them ? (which is virtu- 
 ally implied in the assertion, that the Gospel 
 should receive no assistance from the civil 
 power because in its divine strength it caw, 
 if needs be, do without it.) 
 
 Then might we on the same principle 
 tolerate an infidel persecution, nor afford 
 the Christian the protection of the law in 
 the free exercise of his faith, because in the 
 first ages (and we believe that the same 
 result would ensue now under the like cir- 
 cumstances not of our own creation) the 
 Christian faith increased in the midst of 
 persecution, and grew abundantly when 
 watered by the blood of martyrs. 
 
 It will be urged, however, against the 
 principle in question, that this is the very 
 principle objected to in the Roman Church, 
 
 wilfully do so. The penal laws enacted in some countries 
 respecting inoculation, furnish a case somewhat in point; 
 as do also quarantine laws. 
 
256 LECTURE VI. 
 
 by which she endeavours, as a duty, to 
 make all, nations as well as individuals, 
 conform to her own creed ; and that for 
 this reason it is not considered safe to en- 
 trust with civil power those who profess it. 
 In reply to which, it may be said that the 
 principle of the Roman Church here spoken 
 of, is, as a principle, right, whether referred 
 to the decision of the Gospel or of reason; 
 and were her doctrines also true, and her 
 faith pure, according to the Church's ac- 
 knowledged rule and standard of faith, her 
 practice would be completely defensible. 
 But the latter condition cannot be shewn 
 to exist on the part of the Roman Church : 
 we reply to her, (though this is not the 
 place to enter on the subject,) that she is in 
 error on points of faith, not only on the 
 Sectarian principle that the Bible alone, 
 without any external aid, is the guide and 
 rule of faith ; not only on the Church's 
 principle, of Antiquity and Catholic Tra- 
 dition in conjunction with Holy Scripture 
 being the rule of faith ; but even on her 
 own avowed principle, that of Antiquity 
 and Catholic Tradition, though unsupported 
 
LECTURE VI. 257 
 
 by Scripture. We tell her that her tenets 
 will not abide the test even of Antiquity 
 and Primitive Tradition; that, besides 
 being unscriptural in their foundation, they 
 are the interpolations of a later date, ex- 
 crescences as it were adhering to the body 
 of Catholic doctrine, thrown out by an 
 unhealthy and anti-cathohc state of the 
 Church's system, the date of whose intro- 
 duction, long since the Apostolic days, may 
 be ascertained by reference to the doctrinal 
 history of the Church. Knowing this, we 
 do not regard her faith as pure, nor deem 
 her a fit guardian of public instruction, 
 or more fit to be entrusted with the forma- 
 tion and protection of a nation's creed, than 
 the various sects who constitute the other 
 extreme of heresy. But her prmciple of 
 establishing conformity to the creed she 
 professes to hold, we must admit on any 
 acknowledged principles of Morals or of 
 Revelation. In this consists the true theory 
 of the connection between the Church and 
 the State. This is the meaning of the pro- 
 phecy in Isaiah, (xlix. 23.) " Kings shall be 
 " thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy 
 
 s 
 
258 LECTURE VI. 
 
 " nursing mothers." Not, as is too com- 
 monly supposed, that they shall foster the 
 Church itself, or that the Church either 
 needs their support, or will surrender its 
 independence to them ; but that the civil 
 power shall bring its own children to the 
 Church, carry them in its arms, tending 
 the children of the Church, but as a nurse 
 {TLOrjvh % and in that capacity ministering, 
 as servant, not as ruler, to the Church. 
 
 The connection of the Church with the 
 State, thus established, originates, as a prin- 
 ciple, with each in the same degree perhaps ; 
 with the State, as prescribing for the good 
 of its members, on principles adapted to 
 the nature and wants of men ; while the 
 Church, being in conformity with the same 
 principles, cannot but sanction the same 
 course, though possessed of a divine power 
 and promise to effect her own object with- 
 out human aid. The exercise of power, 
 however, to produce conformity to the 
 Church, originates with the State in her 
 relation of guardian to her subjects, for 
 
 c Cf. Numbers xi. 12. 
 
LECTURE VI. 259 
 
 whose best and highest interests she is 
 responsible. The objection, that the in- 
 stant the two characters are united in the 
 same person, force is used — in other words, 
 that the instant the Church obtains civil 
 power, she uses that to remove offences 
 from her children ; or that the instant the 
 statesman becomes a Churchman, he uses 
 his secular authority to promote the exten- 
 sion of his faith — this very objection is but 
 the substance and fulfilment of Isaiah's 
 prophecy cited above : it points to the 
 relation which, in a healthy state of things, 
 the State will necessarily bear to the 
 Church, as the nurse, so to say, of her 
 children. 
 
 Another application of the same prin- 
 ciple should here be noticed, which, al- 
 though it does not fall so immediately 
 within the province of these Lectures, yet 
 is too intimately connected with the sub- 
 ject, as a branch of it, and of too great 
 local interest, independently of its own 
 intrinsic importance, to be passed over in 
 silence. For it is on the same principle of 
 biassing the mind in the formation of reli- 
 
 s 2 
 
260 LECTURE VI. 
 
 gious belief, as being in its nature essen- 
 tially connected with our moral constitu- 
 tion, and in its results one to which we 
 have the hope of success founded on a 
 divine promise, save through our own fault 
 in neglecting or abusing the means, — that 
 we best defend our academical practice of 
 subscription to the Articles of Religion — 
 viewed, that is, as a religious question ; — for 
 as a preliminary to a course of education 
 in moral subjects, such as form our studies 
 here, it rests on different grounds — those of 
 necessity — from the circumstance that, from 
 the very nature of things, there must exist 
 in the pupil some bias, or tone of mind and 
 thought, from their relation to which facts 
 acquire an existence to his mind ; and that 
 to expect a mind to be entirely devoid of it, 
 would be little less unreasonable than to 
 expect a vacuum to exist in nature: that 
 therefore, in giving what we conceive to 
 be a good condition of mind, we only pre- 
 occupy by good what must otherwise, in 
 the very nature of things, have been pre- 
 occupied by some other, and perhaps a bad 
 condition of thought. 
 
LECTURE VI. 261 
 
 Viewed, however, in relation to reli- 
 gious belief alone, the practice will find 
 its best defence in the principle discus- 
 sed in this and the preceding Lecture, 
 respecting the formation of habits and 
 moral perceptions. The objections urged 
 against it, lie with equal force against every 
 application of the principle, under which 
 our moral habits and perceptions are neces- 
 sarily the offspring, in the first instance, of 
 bias and prejudice, and of a certain course 
 of training under the guidance and author- 
 ity of others. The objection that the 
 persons subscribing may be, from ignorance 
 or other circumstances, incompetent to 
 form an opinion, would lie equally against 
 the requiring from a child the confession 
 of faith embodied in the Apostles' Creed, 
 and involved in his repetition of the Church 
 Catechism. It would lie against the de- 
 mand which nevertheless we are obliged 
 to make in all moral subjects, from the 
 highest to the lowest, of the assent of the 
 disciple to our judgment, without refer- 
 ence to proof, on the sole authority of our 
 assertion. 
 
 s3 
 
262 LECTURE VI. 
 
 It is not, however, an opinion which we 
 require, but a cojifession of faith ; made, 
 if you will, in blind reliance on the author- 
 ity and judgment of others, — not however 
 on the authority of casual persons, but, 
 which involves the whole question, on the 
 authority of those towards whom there 
 previously exists a relation, involving a 
 moral obligation to obey and confide in 
 them. 
 
 This childhke submission of the judg- 
 ment to others for a time, which pervades 
 the whole system of morals as well as Reve- 
 lation, is completely reconciled to the minds 
 of those who make the demand, by the 
 conviction that they are themselves right, 
 and that those of whom they require this, 
 will assuredly, save through neglect of the 
 necessary means, attain ultimately to the 
 same mind, if they possess it not already. 
 How far the views in favour of which we 
 create this prejudice are right— in other 
 words, how far the Creed of the Church is 
 capable of defence and proof, is a question 
 not necessary to enter into for the defence 
 of the principle in question. 
 
LECTURE VI. 263 
 
 Now the application of the Church's 
 principle in these several instances, it will 
 be said, is bigotry, and opposed to every 
 received notion of hberality and the rights 
 of conscience. Probably it is. Truth is 
 bigoted and exclusive, and it is its unbend- 
 ing character, its unchanging nature, that 
 arms the prejudices of mankind against it, 
 especially when it interferes with their pas- 
 sions or their interests. Moreover, popular 
 ignorance on subjects of moral truth, en- 
 ables men to assail it without laying them- 
 selves open, in the eyes of the many, to the 
 charge of folly and ignorance whenever 
 they assail it, as would be the case if they 
 assailed in like manner the principles of 
 physical and demonstrative science. The 
 same assaults would be made, however, on 
 demonstrative truth, if it interfered in like 
 manner with their passions and interests, 
 and if they could be protected in their 
 folly by a similar degree of popular igno- 
 rance. A proof of this might be seen in 
 the outcry which was raised at the first 
 intimation of many discoveries in natural 
 science, as long as the outcry was protected 
 
 s 4 
 
264 LECTURE VI. 
 
 by popular ignorance. However men's 
 passions might have been at first excited 
 by the contradiction supposed to be involv- 
 ed in these to the Mosaic account of the 
 creation, yet popular knowledge has long 
 since advanced beyond that point at which 
 any such objection would be alleged, and 
 the outcry has long died away. 
 
 On morals however, and on moral subjects, 
 there is so much popular ignorance, that in 
 ordinary society, and to ordinary readers, a 
 man may boldly advance statements as un- 
 reasonable as the denial of the theory of 
 the solar system, or of the principle of gra- 
 vitation, without injuring the reputation 
 for common sense or ordinary knowledge, 
 of which every man would naturally be 
 tenacious. We might mention, among other 
 instances of this, the credence given, or at 
 best the indifference shewn, to the assertion 
 that we are not responsible for our opin- 
 ions on moral and religious subjects ; that 
 our behef does not depend upon ourselves ; 
 the denial of the moral sense, or the doc- 
 trine of expediency, as gravely propounded 
 by Paley and adopted by his followers now ; 
 
LECTURE VI. 265 
 
 all of which are denials of elementary 
 truths in morals, to which in demonstrative 
 science would correspond, the denial of the 
 fact that earth revolved round the sun, 
 because to the eye it seemed otherwise, — or 
 that the antipodes of the globe could be 
 attracted to the same centre of gravity w^ith 
 ourselves. The popular knowledge on 
 morals does not extend beyond the point, 
 corresponding to that at which, in natural 
 philosophy, these truths are proved. And 
 an audience doubtless might be found 
 among the uneducated, before whom one 
 so disposed might successfully deny these 
 very same truths in natural philosophy. 
 The contempt, however, in which such 
 miserable fallacies would be held by any 
 educated person, would not exceed that felt 
 by those possessed of a moderate acquaint- 
 ance with morals or human nature, at the 
 assertion of our irresponsibility for opinions 
 and belief, the doctrine of expediency, or 
 the denial of the moral sense ; or if this con- 
 tempt is not felt, it is from being absorbed 
 in the deeper and more intense feeling of 
 indignation at those who can thus trifle with 
 
^66 LECTURE VI. 
 
 the eternal interests of those whom they 
 mislead, with some admixture of pity at their 
 own fatal blindness. But no human decision, 
 no human changes, no human concessions 
 to the passions and prejudices of men, can 
 affect the immutable character of truth, 
 physical or moral. No liberality of senti- 
 ment can change the laws of gravity, affect 
 the relations of quantity, or alter the pro- 
 perties of matter. As little can it affect 
 moral and revealed truth. No liberality of 
 feeling can affect the unchangeable nature 
 of the eternal Godhead. No liberality of 
 faith can make the death of Christ an 
 empty name, nor render the atonement of 
 his precious blood needless to sinners : for 
 surely this is implied in that unholy saying, 
 which it was reserved for a superficial and 
 irreligious age to produce — that " it matters 
 " little what faith we hold provided we are 
 " sincere"— in other words, that the atone- 
 ment of the blood of Christ, and the rege- 
 nerating influence of the Holy Spirit, are 
 unnecessary to those who deetn them unneces- 
 sary ! If we believe a pure faith to be 
 essential to everlasting salvation, no liberal- 
 
LECTURE VI. 267 
 
 ity can absolve us from the duty, where we 
 possess the power, of training and keeping 
 in it those dependent upon us. Let every 
 man render an account of his own belief to 
 the Searcher of all hearts. No human 
 power will interfere with it, while he con- 
 fines it to himself; he may then revel in 
 his favourite maxim, that it is a question 
 between his own conscience and his God ; 
 and confound eternal truth with the hal- 
 lucinations of a perverted and reprobate 
 mind. But when such men attempt to 
 infect the minds of others for whose spi- 
 ritual condition we feel responsible, the 
 case is widely different : we then claim the 
 right to interfere, not as upholding divine 
 truth by the arm of civil power, but on 
 principles of justice and humanity, for the 
 protection of those committed to us by God. 
 When thus interfered with, men are 
 too ready to cry out against the infringe- 
 ment on their religious liberty, and the 
 interference with the rights of conscience ; 
 they complain of the injustice of being 
 punished for their religious belief They 
 are 7iot punished for this^ but for mak- 
 
268 LECTURE VI. 
 
 ing those opinions, by giving them pub- 
 licity, injurious to the eternal welfare of 
 those whose spiritual condition we have it 
 in our power, as a sacred trust, to promote ; 
 and for whom we are, to a proportionate 
 extent, accountable. And any erroneous 
 opinions which, in our estimation, are cal- 
 culated to injure that, we do claim the 
 right to denounce and suppress, on the 
 same principle as that by which we should 
 oppose the introduction of a contagious 
 disease. The Christian statesman is not so 
 ignorant of the moral nature of man, as 
 to imagine that he can correct, by the 
 exercise of civil power, inveterate habits 
 confirmed by a long course of moral 
 neglect. He is not so ignorant of the pro- 
 visions of the Gospel of Christ, as to imagine 
 that he can effect, by civil penalties, what 
 it is reserved for divine power and mercy 
 alone to effect — to reclaim the evil heart 
 of unbelief brought on by continued resist- 
 ance to grace and light. But as himself one 
 of the household of Christ — as responsible 
 for those whom God has entrusted to him, in 
 however small a degree — as possessed of an 
 
LECTURE VI. 269 
 
 immortal soul, which must hereafter render 
 account of the way in which he has dis- 
 discharged that solemn trust — he has a 
 right to remember the awful denunciation 
 which is addressed to him, if, having the 
 power to promote Christ's kingdom, we fail 
 to exercise it, and thereby become par- 
 taker with those who would offend the 
 little ones whom Christ would have in part 
 saved through his instrumentality, — " It 
 " must needs be that offences come, but woe 
 " unto him through whom the offence 
 " Cometh." 
 
LECTURE VII 
 
 TRADITION AND THE WITNESS OF THE CHURCH 
 
 ILLUSTRATED BY ANALOGY, AND 
 
 ITS ADAPTATION TO OUR MORAL NATURE. 
 
 Romans x. 10. 
 With the heart man helieveth unto righteousness, 
 
 THE defence of the principle asserted on 
 behalf of the Church, of prepossessing 
 the mind and will in favour of particular 
 views of Scripture and of specific doctrines, 
 before coming to the study of the Holy 
 Scriptures themselves, is distinct from the 
 question whether the views and doctrines 
 thus instilled are themselves right; as it is 
 also from the grounds on which the Church 
 professes to have determined them. 
 
 Hitherto we have been defending the 
 principle in question against those whose 
 
LECTURE VII. 271 
 
 objections to it are not framed with refer- 
 ence to any particular creed ; who, even if 
 their own views of doctrine were admitted 
 to be right, yet profess to object, as a prin- 
 ciple, to prejudicing the mind in favour of 
 them, however in practice they are led, as 
 experience uniformly shews, to act in oppo- 
 sition to their avowed principle. 
 
 That some previous bias or prepossession 
 would be designed by its divine Author, on 
 the assumption that the Gospel was adapt- 
 ed to our moral nature, would appear from 
 the principle and practice observed in re- 
 gard to all moral truth, both in communi- 
 cating it, and in forming the character and 
 habits under it ; and from the improbability 
 that God would have left us without the 
 means of forming a similar preconception, 
 and of giving a similar bias, in this the 
 most important subject of all ; and this 
 more especially, when it is admitted by all 
 that that to which we must eventually 
 refer as our standard and proof, is capable 
 of various and opposite interpretations. To 
 which may be added the testimony fur- 
 nished by universal practice, even of those 
 who professedly object to the principle in 
 
27S LECTURE VII. 
 
 question, all of whom nevertheless act upon 
 it, and before they place the Scriptures in 
 the hands of their disciples, prepossess their 
 minds with their own tenets, though they 
 reject those of the Church. 
 
 It should be remembered, however, that 
 the argument in favour of the principle 
 drawn from its adaptation to our moral 
 nature, is quite independent of that in- 
 volved in the fact, as related in the New 
 Testament itself, that the Christian Church 
 is, by many years, antecedent to the Chris- 
 tian Scriptures, and that the latter are ad- 
 dressed to those already instructed in the 
 chief doctrines. 
 
 There are, then, three questions to be 
 kept distinct one from the other. 
 
 I. The principle itself of biassing the 
 mind, as such. 
 
 II. The rule by which we are to ascer- 
 tain the views and doctrines in favour of 
 which that bias is to be exercised. 
 
 III. Whether the views and doctrines 
 which we profess to have determined by 
 this rule, and in favour of which we bias the 
 mind, can be shewn to be correct according 
 to that rule. 
 
LECTURE VII. 273 
 
 It is necessary to keep these questions 
 distinct, because many, while differing 
 with us respecting the origin and descent 
 of the Christian doctrines, yet hold them 
 as doctrines, though on different grounds; 
 and likewise admit the principle of pre- 
 possessing the disciple, and of biassing his 
 mind in favour of them. In defending, 
 therefore, the principle of a bias, and the 
 practice of previous teaching, before giving 
 the Scriptures to read, we make common 
 cause with those who, while they agree with 
 us in regard to doctrine and discipline, yet 
 differ from us as to the rule by which they 
 are to be tried, against the Sectarian and 
 Rationalist, who protest against biassing the 
 mind by any previous instruction, or fetter- 
 ing it by any restrictions whatever. 
 
 Of these three questions, then, the first 
 we have considered already. 
 
 Of the other two, that which regards the 
 specific proofs of our own creed, we may 
 leave, as not falling within the scope of the 
 present work, the object of which is not to 
 defend the particular Creed of the Churcli, 
 save indirectly, so much as to vindicate the 
 
 T 
 
274 LECTURE VII. 
 
 grounds on which we profess to receive it, 
 and to defend the principle, which we 
 maintain, of teaching it by Creeds and 
 Catechisms and Formularies generally, and 
 of thoroughly prepossessing the mind and 
 will in favour of it, before referring to the 
 proofs of it in Holy Scripture. The de- 
 fence of the doctrines themselves, as regards 
 our present object, would not be necessary, 
 to the Churchman, who admits them, while 
 together with him we have to defend our 
 mode of teaching them ; nor to the Secta- 
 rian, who, even were the doctrines ad- 
 mitted, would, if consistent, still deny the 
 Church's principle of instruction. 
 
 In leaving this question, however, it 
 should be observed, that if, to suppose a 
 case, the doctrines in question should here- 
 after be proved to be untrue, that even 
 this would not invalidate the principle here 
 contended for, for determining the truth of 
 doctrines; and that if we should be obliged 
 to form an entirely new form of faith and 
 body of doctrine, we should still have to 
 form it on the same principle, and to abide 
 by the same rule of faith. 
 
LECTURE VII. 275 
 
 It remains, therefore, for us to proceed 
 with the question of Tradition, or the Tes- 
 timony of the Church under whatever 
 name, being an element in determining our 
 rule of faith — subject, in all cases, to the 
 ultimate appeal to Holy Scripture. Or 
 rather it remains for us to meet some of 
 the objections brought against it. 
 
 The Scripture argument in favour of it 
 was developed at some length in the third 
 and fourth Lectures. We may, however, 
 here adduce, as was done in reference to 
 the Church's principle of instruction, the 
 collateral arguments furnished by analogy 
 and its adaptation to our moral nature. 
 And in doing this our argument is with all 
 who deny it : we cannot^ as in the question 
 of a bias, make common cause with the 
 orthodox deductionist ; but are compelled 
 to class him, for the time, with those who, 
 on every other point, are opposed to him. 
 In this case also, the argument will assume 
 a twofold shape, as regards the degree 
 of force of which it may be deemed capa- 
 ble in the estimation of different persons. 
 It may be shewn, for example, that the 
 
 T 2 
 
276 LECTURE VII. 
 
 objections urged against Tradition, lie with 
 equal force against other similar principles 
 maintained by the objectors — that they 
 prove too much. To those again who may 
 be disposed to carry the argument further, 
 it may be shewn, that the principle is no 
 more than might have been expected ante- 
 cedently, on the assumption that it would 
 be analogous to that observed in parallel 
 cases of moral evidence. 
 
 Now the objections alleged against Tra- 
 dition are mainly these : — 
 
 That it is at best an uncertain and un- 
 satisfactory guide, and one in no way adapt- 
 ed to a subject of this magnitude, though 
 nothing definite were proved against it ; — 
 that as it is, it has come to us through 
 channels admitted on all sides to have 
 been in many things corrupt ; — that it has 
 in practice been grossly and notoriously 
 abused, and been cited to substantiate doc- 
 trines admitted to be unwarrantable ; and 
 that it leads to Popery. 
 
 Before noticing these objections, we might 
 be allowed to ask, what is the aim and ob- 
 ject of Christian doctrines, as regards the 
 
LECTURE VII. 277 
 
 life and practice of those who hold them ? 
 What is the kind of faith by which they 
 are received? Is it intellectual, or does it 
 partake of, in any degree, a moral charac- 
 ter? What is the kind of evidence and proof 
 best adapted to, and calculated to exercise, 
 that kind of faith, involving, as it does to a 
 considerable degree, a moral probation ? 
 Is it demonstrative or moral ? And, lastly, 
 are the difficulties and objections in the 
 way of Tradition, which are said to be 
 against its use, such as are unsuited to that 
 moral probation ? On the answers to be 
 given to these several questions, will mainly 
 depend the force of the objections men- 
 tioned above. 
 
 Of the objections generally, it might be 
 shewn that they prove too much; that they 
 lie also against the proofs of the genuineness 
 of Scripture, and likewise the testimony of 
 miracles ; both of which, as was observed in 
 a former Lecture, rest on traditional evi- 
 dence. In short, if pushed to their full ex- 
 tent, they would go to invalidate all testi- 
 mony whatever of things past, if not human 
 testimony generally. 
 
 T S 
 
278 LECTURE VII. 
 
 As the objector is assumed to admit the 
 genuineness and authenticity of the written 
 Scripture, it would be sufficient, for the 
 purpose of replying to him, to shew that 
 his objections to Catholic Tradition lie also 
 against the former. This mode of reply, 
 however, might appear to some to be 
 open to a serious practical objection on 
 another ground, as tending, not so much 
 to strengthen and confirm Tradition, as to 
 weaken Scripture itself. Now even if it 
 should have this tendency on the minds of 
 some, it is no more than what all elenchtic 
 arguments must, from their very nature, be 
 liable to. At the same time, if ever they 
 should be found practically to be attended 
 with this result, it might be shewn that 
 they are the occasion rather than the cause 
 of it ; that the same habit of mind which 
 would raise doubts on the parallel case to 
 which they were designed to reply, would 
 not, as a habit or test of character, be made 
 worse by it, having already admitted the 
 principle, which would not be aiFected in 
 its moral character or responsibility by 
 shewing its practical application ; while on 
 
LECTURE VII. 279 
 
 the other hand, as a mere tendency, or the 
 result of ignorance not formed into a habit, 
 it may be checked, and may serve to sug- 
 gest watchfulness and self discipline, by 
 shewing that our thoughts may unwarily 
 betray us into the admission of principles, 
 from which our habits and feelings are as 
 yet completely abhorrent. Strictly speaking, 
 those who use arguments of this nature, 
 are not responsible for the consequences to 
 which they may lead. They merely take 
 up their opponents' own principle, the ten- 
 dency of which they have an unquestion- 
 able right, as it is also their duty, to point 
 out ; and whatever evils may possibly arise 
 from this, are chargeable solely on those 
 who first advance the position. If, for 
 example, the argument by which Bishop 
 Butler shews that the grounds of the Deist's 
 objections against Revelation lead to Athe- 
 ism, should ever, as has been objected, 
 lead any one to that result, the responsibi- 
 lity would unquestionably lie with the Deist 
 who first advanced those grounds, not with 
 him who pointed out their natural and 
 necessary consequence : the conclusion was 
 
 T 4 
 
280 LECTURE VII. 
 
 involved in the premiss previous to its de- 
 velopement. 
 
 The same answer may be given to any 
 objections which may be urged against 
 shewing the application of the Sectarian's 
 argument against Catholic Tradition, to the 
 grounds of our belief in the genuineness 
 and authenticity of Holy Scripture. At 
 the same time, the justification of the use 
 of an argument does not preclude us from 
 pointing out any further positive benefits 
 resulting from it, although its negative and 
 refutative character might absolve us from 
 any obligation to do so. In the present 
 instance, it might be shewn that the 
 alleged objections, which are asserted to 
 lie alike against Tradition and the genu- 
 ineness and authenticity of Scripture, so far 
 from invalidating either, afford a presump- 
 tion in favour of both, when viewed in 
 reference to their object, the subjects with 
 which they are conversant, and our own 
 moral constitution. And further, that the 
 resemblance of the two, in regard to the 
 alleged objections against each, affords a 
 presumption of their proceeding from the 
 
LECTURE VII. 281 
 
 same Author. We may therefore take the 
 arguments against Cathohc Tradition out 
 of the Sectarian's hands, and apply them 
 to our own purpose. 
 
 The evidence by which the Church 
 establishes the identity of her doctrines 
 with those of the Apostolic days, is, both 
 in regard to its objections and its force, 
 analogous to that on which we are com- 
 pelled to rest the genuineness of the 
 Christian Scriptures. Like that, it rests 
 partly on probabilities independent of di- 
 rect testimony ; partly on tradition and 
 historical testimony : like that, it is in its 
 nature, moral, not demonstrative evidence : 
 like that, it is defective and open to many 
 objections to those disposed to find them — 
 who require more demonstrative proof than 
 the case either admits of, or would bear 
 without defeating its object as a moral 
 trial ; and who want the moral state of the 
 heart, which the subject itself avows to be 
 an essential element in belief. Whatever 
 may be alleged against the evidences of 
 the one, lie against the other. And fur- 
 ther, it may be contended that the pecu- 
 
282 LECTURE VII. 
 
 liarities objected to in the one, are no 
 more than might be expected, on the as- 
 sumption, which few would refuse to con- 
 cede, that they would be analogous to those 
 of the other. And here, in strict justice, 
 we might be content to leave the question, 
 as regards those who, while they unhesitat- 
 ingly admit the genuineness and authen- 
 ticity of the Scriptures on such evidence 
 as the case admits of, and that evidence 
 furnished by the Church's historical records, 
 yet object to the very same kind of evi- 
 dence, though furnished by the same au- 
 thority, when applied to substantiate the 
 genuineness of Catholic doctrines. Nor, as 
 was observed before, if to any one the 
 result of this mode of argument should be, 
 to shake the evidence of Scripture rather 
 than confirm that of the doctrines, does 
 the responsibility rest with us, who merely 
 take up our opponents own argument, and 
 employ against them a weapon which they 
 had previously put in operation[against us. 
 We may, however, without incurring any 
 risk of this kind, or of unsettling the minds 
 of those who believe in the Christian Scrip- 
 
LECTURE VII. 283 
 
 tures, now take the argument entirely out 
 of the hands of the Sectarian, and proceed 
 to shew that the objections which might 
 be alleged against the evidence in either 
 case, lie with equal force against testimony 
 of every kind, in subjects not purely de- 
 monstrative. And even beyond this, that 
 the objections alleged are no more than 
 might have been expected antecedently, on 
 the assumption, either that the system pur- 
 sued in either case would be analogous to 
 that pursued in every other dependent on 
 moral evidence, or that it would be calcu- 
 lated to promote its own object in reference 
 to our moral trial, by suitable correspond- 
 ent means. 
 
 Without going very deeply or at any 
 length into the subject, it may be observed 
 that, putting miracles aside, facts, of what- 
 ever kind, can only be known in two ways, 
 by our senses, and by human testimony. 
 Past facts, antecedent to our own memory, 
 are of course excluded from the subjects of 
 sense, and are therefore, in the absence of 
 a miracle, referred to testimony alone. This 
 at once involves a new principle and ele- 
 
284 LECTURE VII. 
 
 ment of belief, comprehending confidence 
 in some other person towards whom there 
 exists a relation demanding that confidence, 
 and a state of mind willing to concede it, 
 but which may, under circumstances, be 
 induced to withhold it. The knowledge of 
 our own informant may have been the result 
 either of his own senses, or of a simi- 
 lar testimony from another, involving the 
 like confidence and like grounds for be- 
 lieving. In short, the instant the fact in 
 question is antecedent to the memory of 
 those from whom we receive it, the testi- 
 mony itself requires testimony ; and the 
 force of this testimony, supported by no 
 other, will obviously be diminished, at each 
 successive link in the chain. 
 
 Again, this testimony may be delivered 
 either orally, such as would seem to have 
 been the case with the knowledge possessed 
 by those who lived before Moses, of the 
 creation, the fall, the promise to Eve, the 
 deluge, the call of Abraham, the promises 
 made to his seed — in fact, of all the events 
 which had occurred, save those which they 
 had personally witnessed : or it might be 
 
LECTURE VII. 285 
 
 transmitted by some visible record, such as 
 a book, or a monument, or an institution 
 founded on it and designed to commemo- 
 rate it, such as an annual or other period- 
 ical festival ; or by one which, though inde- 
 pendent of it, might be associated with it, 
 and designed to transmit and perpetuate it. 
 
 Or again, the testimony might be trans- 
 mitted by a method combining both of 
 these, either successively or conjointly — e. g., 
 it might be transmitted orally for a certain 
 time, and subsequently committed to some 
 record of a more permanent character, 
 whether a book, monument, or institution ; 
 as is the case with the facts related by 
 any historian, as having occurred previous 
 to the period where he takes up the nar- 
 rative of events of which he has been per- 
 sonally a witness : or it might be trans- 
 mitted by a visible record or monument 
 from the beginning, the genuineness of 
 which is itself supported by an oral tra- 
 dition running parallel to it. 
 
 The permanent visible record we are 
 accustomed to regard, naturally, as more 
 satisfactory than mere oral transmission, 
 
286 LECTURE VII. 
 
 being necessarily more continuous, and less 
 likely to be changed; — and one made up 
 of both of these successively, we regard as 
 more satisfactory than the one, though less 
 so than the other. Strictly speaking, how- 
 ever, they will not be so distinct, nor so 
 widely different, nor so independent of 
 each other, as might at first appear. For 
 admitting that a fact has been committed 
 to writing, or any other record, either at 
 the time or subsequently, yet it is obvious 
 that the genuineness of this record itself 
 requires proof, which ultimately must be, 
 for the most part, oral testimony — the cir- 
 cumstance that it was always regarded as 
 such^ and as such handed down. Or if 
 substantiated by other permanent records, 
 these latter again become the subjects of 
 this oral traditional testimony. It is only 
 shifted from one to the other, and placed a 
 stage farther off in the chain of evidence. 
 The genuineness of the written record 
 must be supported by this traditional tes- 
 timony, or by that which is so supported. 
 Even a monument, lasting as the pyramids, 
 cannot authenticate, unsupported, its own 
 
LECTURE VII. 287 
 
 origin and history beyond the memory of 
 living witnesses : all prior to that, is a 
 matter of tradition in some shape. Even 
 the genuineness of the Law, preserved in 
 the Ark, would only have been known by 
 this testimony, in the absence of a miracle. 
 Not that there is any objection to this, — 
 it is the only testimony which can be pro- 
 vided of things past, except by a miracle ; 
 and it is precisely the kind of proof calcu- 
 lated for beings placed in a state of moral 
 probation. 
 
 It is not necessary now to enter into 
 the more subtle question how the per- 
 manent record and oral testimony support 
 each other, and appear to alternate and to 
 intertwine, as it were, so as to weave the 
 sufficiently compact body of moral evidence 
 which we have of things past ; because we 
 shall have occasion presently to refer it to 
 another principle, which forms an essential 
 element in determining a standard of truth. 
 Let it be observed, however, that we pos- 
 sess, for the different parts of the Christian 
 faith, each of the three kinds of testimony 
 just described. The transmission of the 
 
288 LECTURE VII. 
 
 facts themselves, on which our faith is 
 founded, rests on written record from the 
 very commencement, as contained in Holy 
 Scripture. Again, the genuineness of the 
 written record itself has been transmitted 
 by the other two. At first it was by oral 
 testimony : soon however it was committed 
 to writing in various ways. The genuine- 
 ness of this testimony is again the subject 
 of other testimony, now written — now un- 
 written — now running parallel — and toge- 
 ther forming that body of proof which is 
 best represented by the simple statement 
 of our Sixth Article, the force of which 
 will be at once felt and acknowledged by 
 every sincere and humble mind, such as 
 the Gospel requires. — " In the name of 
 " Holy Scripture, we do understand those 
 " canonical books of the Old and New 
 " Testament, of whose authority was never 
 " any doubt in the Church." 
 
 If then it be admitted that, in the absence 
 of miracles, all testimony of things prior to 
 our personal recollection must necessarily be 
 traditional, there can be nothing derogatory 
 to the sacred character of the Holy Scrip- 
 
LECTURE VII. 2H9 
 
 tures, and their sufficiency to salvation, to 
 say that, from the very nature of the case, we 
 are compelled to rest their genuineness on 
 this ground. The question for our con- 
 sideration would be, looking to the dif- 
 ferent degrees of probability and moral 
 certainty attributable to each kind of Tra- 
 dition respectively, whether that by which 
 we defend the genuineness of Scripture 
 and the Christian doctrines, is such as is 
 adapted to the nature of the subject, and 
 its relation to us in a state of probation ; 
 and whether it is calculated to exercise and 
 promote the kind of faith which it is the 
 aim and tendency of the Gospel to form 
 within us : or, which is stating nearly the 
 same thing in a different form, whether the 
 kind of faith by which we should receive 
 the Scriptures and the form of doctrine 
 upon such evidence, is in its nature a 
 saving faith. 
 
 Now it is here contended, that the degree 
 of moral proof that attaches to the tradi- 
 tionary evidence on which we receive the 
 Christian Scriptures, and tlie Church's 
 form of doctrines and ordinances, is not 
 
290 LECTURE VII. 
 
 only better than men are content to act 
 upon unhesitatingly in other matters, even 
 where they might by inquiry form at least 
 a more satisfactory estimate, whether for 
 the better or worse, of the evidence on 
 which they act; but that it is adapted to 
 the kind of faith which is peculiar to the 
 Gospel, analogous to all the moral features 
 of the Gospel itself, suited to the state of 
 trial in which we are placed, and ana- 
 logous to the proofs of moral obligation 
 antecedent to revelation, which constituted 
 the responsibility of the heathen world, 
 and to which we must, to this day, ulti- 
 mately refer the moral obligation to obey 
 the Gospel as a religion of motives, even 
 after the genuineness and authenticity of 
 the Scriptures themselves have been ad- 
 mitted. 
 
 Before pointing out this more fully, we 
 must connect this necessity of relying on 
 Tradition for proof of things past, with 
 another principle, now to be adverted to, 
 in determining a standard of truth. 
 
 It must be observed then, that whatever 
 may be the ground of our personal convic- 
 
LECTURE VII. 291 
 
 tions on any subject, or the process by which 
 we arrive at them, the standard to wliich we 
 are compelled to refer them, before w^e feel 
 satisfied with them or proceed to act upon 
 them, especially if it involves the compul- 
 sion of others, is the testimony, real or 
 assumed, of mankind generally. Until we 
 possess this, the stability for our own con- 
 victions is not to be depended upon, how- 
 ever strong they may appear for the mo- 
 ment. This appeal to the collective testi- 
 mony of men, is not to be confounded with 
 our personal perceptions. We feel that 
 these are, in their nature and origin, inde- 
 pendent of it, as shewn in a former Lec- 
 ture ; yet we feel that they are so far 
 dependent on the support of this testimony, 
 that unless we possess it, our convictions 
 will be exposed to continual misgivings. 
 This will be obvious at once in regard to 
 moral subjects, where our perceptions are 
 formed by a course of training under others 
 who derived theirs by a similar process, and 
 where we escape from the seeming fallacy 
 of reasoning in a circle, which such a pro- 
 cess involves, by falling back at once on the 
 
 u 2 
 
292 LECTURE VII. 
 
 concurrent testimony of mankind. Yet if 
 pressed further, the principles will be 
 found to hold also in demonstrative truth. 
 
 Here, our powers of perception, being 
 purely intellectual, and not dependent for 
 their origin on any course of moral training 
 or restraint, would seem, if any, to be inde- 
 pendent of every thing but themselves, and 
 the objects of which they are cognizant. 
 And yet, if we found that our convictions 
 were opposed to those of the rest of man- 
 kind, we should, if we did not abandon 
 them, at least be much staggered ; and 
 should either pause before we proceeded to 
 act upon them ; or, if we did proceed, should 
 do so with much restlessness and misgiving : 
 unless indeed it should chance to be that 
 we were much advanced beyond the rest of 
 mankind in the track in which they were 
 already proceeding, and felt that we had, 
 by such an advance, merely arrived at a 
 point at which we were sure they would 
 arrive by following the course they were now 
 in, and by carrying out the principles on 
 which they were this moment acting : but 
 without this reservation, we should never 
 
LECTURE VII. 293 
 
 be able to act upon, or permanently abide 
 by, even conclusions which would seem the 
 result of demonstration, if opposed to the 
 general voice of mankind. Nay, men have 
 even been known to abandon the testimony 
 of their own senses, when borne down by 
 the unanimous decision of others, and to 
 attribute their convictions to some delu- 
 sion : so essentially necessary to our con- 
 victions, is the concurrence of mankind; 
 and so completely are we compelled to 
 appeal to this as an ultimate standard. 
 So that, provided we are careful not to 
 confound the essentials of truth with its 
 accidents, or its substance with its proof; 
 provided we retain the distinction between 
 objective and subjective truth; we need not 
 hesitate to affirm, as a rule, that the stan- 
 dard to which all truth must be referred, is 
 the decision, directly or indirectly gathered, 
 of the majority of mankind — or, which 
 comes to the same point, of those to whom 
 the majority might be fairly assumed to 
 delegate their decisions, and who may be 
 said to represent their sentiments. 
 
 Without, however, urging the extension 
 u 8 
 
294 LECTURE VII. 
 
 of this principle to demonstrative truth, 
 which the argument does not require, let 
 us confine it at present to moral subjects, 
 where it is essentially necessary as regards 
 the standard prior to any practical applica- 
 tion of truth, though quite independent of 
 our perceptions of it. It is obvious that, 
 previously to obtaining the sanction of 
 revelation, the most important truths, even 
 the first principles of morals, must have 
 been referred for a standard to the testi- 
 mony of mankind as a whole; and we 
 have now to observe, which is most impor- 
 tant for the application to be made here- 
 after in regard to the Scriptures and the 
 Christian doctrines, by what process that 
 standard was determined, and that testi- 
 mony collected. It was not a very easy 
 task, because it required a comprehensive 
 view ; while there was the natural tempta- 
 tion to take a more narrow and cursory one, 
 further increased by the conflicting testi- 
 mony, offered by any survey which took a 
 somewhat wider range, and went further into 
 the subject, without going entirely through 
 with it, and grappling with it as a whole. 
 
LECTURE VII. 295 
 
 In determining the laws of the moral 
 nature of man, the process would naturally 
 be an inductive one, similar to that pur- 
 sued in determining the physical laws of 
 the species ; and, like that, would require 
 to be conducted on an extensive scale, to 
 afford any reasonable ground for believing 
 its correctness. In either case, a partial 
 view would be inefficient, or might even be 
 made to support a paradox, or establish a 
 theory utterly at variance with the truth. 
 If a man, e. g., who had lived in a moun- 
 tainous region, and another who had passed 
 his whole time in a tropical climate, should 
 proceed each to draw his conclusions re- 
 specting the human race as a whole, from 
 the physical peculiarities of the species 
 which had fallen under his own observation 
 alone, they would be found not only to 
 differ materially one from the other, but to 
 be also far removed from the truth itself. 
 The obvious reply to any such conclusions 
 would be, that they were founded in igno- 
 rance, and on a narrow and superficial view, 
 which a moderate share of knowledge would 
 serve to correct. Nor is it likely that any 
 
 u 4 
 
296 LECTURE VII. 
 
 extensive or permanent error could arise 
 from any such theory. The case is here 
 adduced rather for purposes of illustration, 
 and for its application to an analogous one 
 in regard to the moral peculiarities of the 
 species. For that a parallel error might 
 arise in determining the laws of the moral 
 nature of man, and arise too from a survey 
 analogous in regard to its narrow and 
 superficial character and its general igno- 
 rance of that moral nature, is not a case 
 which rests altogether on hypothesis. 
 Neither again is it merely hypothetical, that 
 a false theory, founded on such a super- 
 ficial view, should to a certain extent ob- 
 tain credence among men who either had 
 an interest in wishing it established, or had 
 not the opportunity, from instruction or 
 observation, of becoming acquainted with 
 its folly. For we have an instance in the 
 literature of our own country, of one who, 
 eminent and good in other respects, yet 
 actually did fall into an error of this de- 
 scription, in which he is followed by many 
 at this very day, and was led gravely and 
 seriously to deny the existence of a moral 
 
LECTURE VII. 297 
 
 sense, because he had observed cases where it 
 appeared to be extinct ; and this too, in the 
 face of the declarations, not only of Scrip- 
 ture, but of philosophy of every age, and also 
 of the circumstance, that the exceptions on 
 which he seems to have founded his observ- 
 ations, are specially provided for in the 
 economy of human nature itself, whether 
 viewed in regard to its structure and con- 
 stitution, as exhibited by philosophy, or in 
 its relation to God, as set forth in his re- 
 vealed word. We have also had abundant 
 evidence of the credulity with which, either 
 from ignorance or self-interest, such lament- 
 able errors will be received and acted upon, 
 both privately and publicly. The answer 
 to such fallacies is similar to that by which 
 we should reply to the supposed analogous 
 case, in regard to the physical nature of 
 man, as arising from a narrow and super- 
 ficial view, and being founded in ignorance 
 of our moral constitution. 
 
 It should be remarked, however, here, 
 that however painful may be the contem- 
 plation of a mind like Paley's, falling into 
 errors like this ; however shocking to be- 
 
298 LECTURE VII. 
 
 hold the popular readiness with which such 
 errors will be admitted and followed, — and 
 this too, obviously from the plea which 
 they afford for the removal of all moral 
 restraints, and the denial of any standard 
 of truth, but the will of the individual, or 
 the flickering caprice of each generation ; 
 they are not without their use to us, as 
 affording melancholy but valuable records 
 of what even good men may fall into, who 
 either delight in paradox, or are so far defi- 
 cient in humility, as to set their own crude 
 and shallow theories in opposition to the 
 collective and unanimous testimony of cen- 
 turies ; and as shewing also, the extent to 
 which popular fallacies may run, however 
 preposterous, when they coincide with the 
 passions of man ; and how little the readi- 
 ness with which such fallacies are received, 
 is to be regarded as any test of truth. 
 
 The greater value however to us of a 
 fallacy like this and of its grounds, and the 
 purpose to which I would now apply it, is 
 from the analogy which it bears to a similar 
 one, which has obtained in regard to the 
 Christian verities and the grounds on 
 
LECTURE VII. 299 
 
 which they rest. For this purpose, then, 
 let us proceed with the inquiry into the 
 mode by which, prior to revelation, the 
 standard of moral truth was necessarily 
 determined. This was said to be induc- 
 tion. And it is clear that the induction 
 must have been an extensive one, both as 
 to time and space, to avoid the fallacy we 
 have just been exposing. The Philosophers 
 felt that they had no standard but that of 
 the opinions of mankind. They observed, 
 however, that the popular opinions, on mo- 
 ral subjects, were opposed and fluctuating ; 
 each individual perhaps differing from his 
 neighbours, — one nation differing from 
 another, — one generation adopting a stan- 
 dard different from that which preceded it. 
 Without now adverting to the causes of 
 this diversity, (which does not form part of 
 the present subject,) it is clear, that if the 
 opinions of any one nation or generation had 
 been taken as the standard, no definite one 
 could have been obtained, inasmuch as 
 they would not have been found to agree 
 in many points with those of another ; nor 
 would it have been satisfactory as far as it 
 
300 LECTURE VII. 
 
 went, inasmuch as the popular opinion on 
 such subjects must have reflected, and have 
 been materially influenced by, the ruling 
 passion for the time being of the age or 
 country. It was obvious that a more ex- 
 tended range was required, which could 
 only be afforded by collecting the opinions 
 of men as diffused over a larger portion of 
 time and space. This was the problem — 
 and it appears to have been solved by the 
 following process. 
 
 They appear to have regarded the human 
 species as one ; and to have assumed, that 
 although particular generations or indivi- 
 duals might be in error, yet that mankind 
 as a whole, would, in the long run, be 
 right ; especially if time were allowed, and 
 they had the opportunity of finding out by 
 experience the practical evils of false prin- 
 ciples ; analogous, in some respects, to the 
 experience of individuals, — but with this 
 great difference, that while no individual's 
 life would suffice to go the whole cycle of 
 truth and error, and to see consequences 
 which often fell at a remote distance from 
 their causes, — to the race as a whole, time 
 
LECTURE VII. 301 
 
 would be no consideration. The process, 
 however, by which the testimony of tlie 
 race was collected, appears to have been 
 by taking the decisions of those whom 
 each age and country had pronounced to 
 be good men and competent judges. It 
 was observed, that however the individuals 
 forming a generation or society might dif- 
 fer, yet that they agreed in their opinions 
 generally of what constituted a good and 
 wise man. It was observed too, that how- 
 ever diiferent generations or nations might 
 vary in their decisions, as shewn by a more 
 cursory glance at the popular feeling of the 
 day, yet that they agreed one with another 
 in the character of those whom they de- 
 signated as good men, and who might con- 
 sequently be supposed to represent their 
 sentiments on moral truth. It was further 
 observed, that the several individuals who 
 might thus be assumed to represent the 
 opinions of each age or country, however 
 they might differ in some things, yet were 
 agreed in the foundations of morals '\ In 
 
 ^ The parallel which this bears to the agreement of 
 the Fathers, on essential points of doctrine, while differ- 
 ing on other and minor matters, will strike every one. 
 
302 LECTURE VII. 
 
 this way, making each age and nation send 
 its representatives as it were to the con- 
 gress or general council of opinions, they 
 collected together the testimony of the 
 whole race, — and finding, from the voices 
 thus collected, an agreement on what were 
 deemed essential points, and regarding this 
 as the voice of mankind as a whole, they 
 assumed this to be a determinate standard 
 of Morals— not only the best which could 
 be obtained, but a sufficient one, consider- 
 ing the nature of the subject, and the mo- 
 ral condition of man, with which it seemed 
 essentially connected. The difiiculties en- 
 countered in forming this standard, arose 
 out of the very nature of the case ; and its 
 seeming imperfect character when mea- 
 sured by the laws of demonstrative truth, 
 was only a necessary part of its nature as a 
 moral question, and one relating to beings 
 in their relation of moral agents. For the 
 testimony of mankind thus gathered would 
 not by itself be satisfactory, nor indeed of 
 any value as a proof, except to strengthen 
 and confirm the convictions of the indivi- 
 dual, as formed by the process, (described 
 in the fifth Lecture,) whereby our moral 
 
LECTURE VII. 303 
 
 perceptions are developed, and our moral 
 habits formed. When this had been done, 
 the testimony of mankind, thus gathered, 
 would come in to give to these moral con- 
 victions the support, which our convictions 
 on all subjects require, of the testimony of 
 others ; as though designed to confirm and 
 sanction moral habits when formed, not to 
 supersede them : the will and the affections 
 w^ere first required, in order to feel the 
 force of this moral evidence of the truth of 
 Morals. 
 
 This has its parallel in Christian doc- 
 trines. The will and the state of the heart 
 are first necessary, before the testimony of 
 the Church, here spoken of, will have any 
 effect; being designed to confirm and 
 strengthen the heart of belief, not to super- 
 sede it. The evidence is purely morale 
 and, as such, requires the moral prepara- 
 tion of the heart to render it effectual. 
 
 But, before applying this more fully by 
 way of parallel to the testimony of the 
 Church in favour of the genuineness of 
 Scripture and of the Christian doctrines, 
 and to the mode in which that testimony 
 
304 LECTURE VII, 
 
 is necessarily collected, let us note these 
 three brief propositions : 
 
 I. If, in collecting the testimony of men, 
 we may regard the human species as o/ze, 
 much more may we so regard the Church 
 of Christ, which is emphatically spoken of 
 by himself, and also by his Apostles, as one ; 
 of which imity was to be the great charac- 
 teristic ; and division most opposed to its 
 nature, and destructive of its interests and 
 existence. 
 
 II. That, viewed as a divine institution, 
 there was an antecedent probability of its 
 falling into error /or a time, above that to 
 which one of mere human origin w^ould be 
 liable, inasmuch as the latter would be 
 fenced by all the preservatives of which it 
 was capable, being limited only by the want 
 of control over circumstances on the part of 
 the founder ; whereas in divine institutions, 
 which are also framed with reference to 
 the moral probation of men for whom they 
 are designed, these preservatives we should 
 expect would be limited by the liability 
 to error, necessary to constitute the moral 
 trial and responsibility of men themselves. 
 
LECTURE VII. 805 
 
 III. Instead of the assumption^ which 
 in determining the standard of Morals we 
 are obliged to make, of the probability that 
 in the long run mankind will be right, we 
 have, in regard to the Church, the express 
 p?*07nise of our Lord, that he will abide 
 with it to the end : so that, viewing it as 
 one, in whatever country situate, or in 
 whatever age, from the beginning to the 
 present hour, we may regard its testimony, 
 assuming it to be properly collected and 
 correctly determined, as having the force 
 of something beyond a mere human witness. 
 
 Now putting these three propositions to- 
 gether, in connection with what has been 
 said above — that in the absence of a miracle, 
 we can?iot have any proof of things ante- 
 cedent to living witnesses, except Tradition 
 and human testimony — the result will be, 
 that viewing the Church, from its com- 
 mencement, as one undivided whole, no 
 matter at what period viewed or where 
 situated, we find that it has gone through 
 a considerable portion of a cycle of error ; 
 those into which it has hitherto fallen 
 being such as might have been expected 
 
 X 
 
306 LECTURE VII. 
 
 from the circumstances of each, and the 
 liability to err arising from the relation of 
 the Christian doctrines to Holy Scripture — 
 a relation which would seem to have been 
 framed with reference to our probation, 
 and one which, from that very circum- 
 stance, necessarily implies temptation and 
 risk. So that Popery, which was the first 
 rock on which the Church split, and Infi- 
 delity, on which the danger is that in our 
 day men make shipwreck of their faith, 
 through Rationalism and Heresy, would 
 seem but the natural result of the Gospel, 
 with the liability to err alluded to, coming 
 in contact with human nature, the one in a 
 rude and dark age, the other in a refined 
 and superficial one. 
 
 We find that the several branches of the 
 Church have in turn erred ; and that, 
 grievously. Our Article, as though ac- 
 knowledging this fact, and at the same 
 time guarding against the inferences which 
 some might be disposed to draw against 
 the Church, as a whole, from the errors of 
 particular branches, says, " As the Churches 
 " of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch 
 
LECTURE Vn. 307 
 
 " have erred, so also the Church of Rome 
 " hath erred, not only in their living and 
 " manner of ceremonies, but also in matters 
 " of faith." (Art. XIX.) 
 
 We find, however, that though particular 
 branches of the Church have thus griev- 
 ously erred, yet that the Church has never 
 been in error, as a whole, on any vital 
 point ; never, as a whole, denied any vital 
 truth or doctrine. We find, that as in 
 regard to the foundation of morals imthout 
 the covenant, the human race, notwith- 
 standing grievous exceptions in nations and 
 individuals, always retained a witness of 
 God speaking to them, and of his Spirit 
 pleading through the conscience — never, as 
 a whole, acknowledged sin as otherwise 
 than sin — never, as a whole, denied any 
 real virtue ; — so, in regard to the foundation 
 of Christian doctrine within the covenant, 
 the Church, viewed as a whole, has, from the 
 beginning, retained the signs of Christ's 
 abiding according to the promise ; has 
 never, as a whole, maintained any deadly 
 heresy ; never, as a whole, suppressed any 
 essential doctrine. It is not merely to the 
 
 X 2 
 
308 LECTURE VII. 
 
 decisions, true or false, of the Church of 
 Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch, or Rome 
 alone, to which we should look, if required, 
 for the testimony of the Church, whether 
 on the subject of the Godhead or any other 
 vital truth ; but to that which " the Holy 
 " Church throughout the luorld doth acknow- 
 " ledge him to he'' 
 
 The mode again in which, if necessary, 
 this testimony is to be collected, is ana- 
 logous to that by which was collected the 
 testimony of mankind to the truth of 
 morals. Analogous also are the errors into 
 which men have fallen from a partial ap- 
 peal or limited survey. Men, when desired 
 to refer to the testimony of the Church, for 
 example, instead of taking the testimony of 
 the Church as a ivhole, gathered up as it 
 were from the Church in every age and 
 country, will rather perversely turn to one 
 particular branch which we ackcowledge to 
 have been in error, and to that period 
 when it is acknowledged to have been most 
 in error; or will turn to the contradictions 
 between the several branches of the Church, 
 which doubtless exist, and which require 
 
LECTURE VII. 309 
 
 careful investigation and collation, in order 
 to trace the agreement on the point to be 
 proved, among so much confusion in other 
 respects. They will do this, and thence 
 argue to the impossibility of gathering any 
 satisfactory information from an appeal to 
 the Church, and deny the right of trusting 
 to any appeal so gathered. 
 
 This impatience of inquiry, this super- 
 ficial survey, and judgment from imperfect 
 evidence, is but the parallel, in matters of 
 faith, to Paley's error in morals, v^^here, 
 finding contradictory testimony furnished 
 by different ages or countries — seeing that 
 what was held in abomination by some, was 
 deemed innocent by others, and even com- 
 mendable by another class, — came at once 
 to the conclusion that there could be no 
 definite standard whatever. If, however, 
 the rule of ancient philosophy, founded on 
 the deepest and most comprehensive views, 
 be deemed a better evidence on the subject 
 than the superficial view and shallow rea- 
 soning of Paley ; so may the principle of 
 the Church, which, relying on our Saviour's 
 promise of abiding to the end and of re- 
 
 x3 
 
310 LECTURE VII. 
 
 taining the spirit of truth, looks for the 
 fulfilment of that promise in the body of 
 Christ throughout the world, in every age 
 and every land, — be deemed a safer guide to 
 the knowledge of the Apostle's doctrine, than 
 the shallow superficial spirit of Sectarianism, 
 which, if it ever extend its view^ beyond its 
 own borders, it is but to see the spirit of evil 
 rather than of good, and to recognise error 
 in every disagreement with itself. 
 
 The result of the above investigation will 
 be to establish these principles ; 
 
 That for our proofs in this momentous 
 matter, we must, from the very nature of 
 the case, have had to depend, in the absence 
 of miracles, on human and traditional tes- 
 timony in some shape or other : — That the 
 mode in which we collect this, is analogous 
 to that by which we determine the standard 
 of truth on all moral subjects^ : — and that 
 
 ^ Although the case which has been here selected to 
 illustrate this, is that of pure ethics, yet it will be found 
 to exist in all subjects partaking in any degree of a moral 
 character — i. e. not purely demonstrative — all those, in 
 fact, where our perceptions require to be developed and 
 strengthened by a course of training under the direction 
 of others, as described in Lecture V. 
 
LECTURE VIL 311 
 
 the degree of certainty to which we attain, 
 is not only sufficient for the purpose, but is 
 probably the best we could have had, with- 
 out encroaching on that principle of moral 
 probation which pervades the whole of our 
 relations to God, and without interfering 
 with the need of the predisposition of the 
 will and the affections, and that moral pre- 
 paration of the heart generally, which forms 
 an essential element in the perception of 
 moral truth, and the power to receive 
 moral evidence. 
 
 The teaching and authority of the Church 
 afford a protection against the suggestion 
 of our own corrupt hearts and wild fancies, 
 without forming a rule, as it were a groove, 
 too exact to allow room for moral responsi- 
 bility. The Scripture, on the other hand, 
 in regard to its proofs of what the Church 
 teaches, is sufficiently indeterminate to re- 
 quire a moral preparation of the heart, so 
 as to afford room for moral probation ; yet 
 sufficiently determinate to save those who 
 read it in the way which God designed, 
 from being blown about by every wind of 
 doctrine. 
 
 X 4 
 
312 LECTURE VII. 
 
 If objections should be urged against 
 what has been said, grounded on the al- 
 leged difficulty of investigating the testi- 
 mony spoken of, and of determining by this 
 rule, requiring a degree of care and labour 
 for which the occupations of the majority 
 of mankind would afford little opportunity, 
 and an extent of time for w^hich to many 
 the longest life would seem barely to suffice; 
 we must repeat w^hat was before said in 
 regard to a similar objection, — that this does 
 not apply to members of our own com- 
 munion, who are content with the result 
 of all this as already collected and provided 
 for them by the Church to which we 
 belong, and brought home to their hands 
 in the Creed, Liturgy, and Articles; and 
 to whom the Scriptures are at the same 
 time given that they may prove what they 
 have been taught, and know the certainty 
 of the things in which they have been in- 
 structed. It applies rather to those with- 
 out, and to those who are disposed to re- 
 ject or dispute about what the Church 
 teaches. If Sectarians and Rationalists will 
 take upon themselves to question what the 
 
LECTURE VII. 313 
 
 Church has ever held, and to claim the 
 right, which is not denied them, of investi- 
 gation and inquiry, we have at least a right 
 to demand, on the other side, that they 
 investigate in the way and by the means 
 through which the subject itself professes 
 to be capable of investigation. Nor will we 
 concede to the Sectarian the right of judg- 
 ing by Scripture alone, in the face of the de- 
 claration of Scripture itself to the contrary; 
 nor allow him to represent our principle as 
 unscriptural, when it is supported by the 
 fullest and most satisfactory testimony of 
 Scripture ; nor will he abandon our ground 
 to the Rationalist, on his assertion that our 
 principle is irrational and unphilosophical 
 and unsuited to man's nature, when we find 
 by inquiry that reason and philosophy are on 
 our side, and that our principle has every 
 presumption in its favour which can be 
 furnished by analogy, and its adaptation to 
 our moral constitution. 
 
 To the humble-minded Apostolic Church- 
 man, however, there is furnished by the 
 grounds of his faith, as developed above, a 
 source of hope and comfort in the hour of 
 
314 LECTURE VII. 
 
 need, too important to be passed over, and 
 which must be briefly alluded to before 
 concluding this part of the subject. 
 
 There are periods in the life of all, when 
 our faith is liable to be assailed by doubts 
 and temptations to unbelief. It may please 
 God that our trial should be to question the 
 blessed verities directly, without any appa- 
 rent intermediate cause. It may be that 
 our faith in the doctrines shall be assailed 
 through the medium of personal trials, 
 whether of affliction or otherwise, in which 
 we can be sustained only through divine 
 grace, and by reliance on God's promises 
 made to us in his Son, our Lord Jesus 
 Christ. But our hope of this grace, our 
 trust in these promises, will depend much 
 on our behef in the doctrines, in the truth 
 of which we feel that they are involved : — 
 say? e. g., the hope of forgiveness depending 
 on the divine nature of our sacrifice, and the 
 consequent sufficiency of his atonement, 
 and the efficacy of his intercession ; or our 
 hope of sanctification, the need of which 
 we feel, depending on the divine nature of 
 the Sanctifier himself Our belief in these 
 
LECTURE VII. 315 
 
 is assailed; the evidences which once came 
 home to our hearts with such conviction, 
 seem to have lost their force ; the declara- 
 tions of Scripture, which once seemed so 
 clear and decisive, are powerless or ex- 
 plained away ; gloom and despondency seem 
 gathering around us ; God's Spirit seems to 
 be deserting us. Now in hours of dark- 
 ness, trying as these are, what have they to 
 rely on who have hitherto trusted to the 
 vaunted privilege of private judgment ; 
 even assuming their faith itself, without 
 regard to its grounds, to have been pure ? 
 That on which they have hitherto lean- 
 ed, has given way ; and what remains to 
 support and cheer them ? Not thus un- 
 supported, in the like fiery trial, is the 
 humble Apostolic Churchman. It is then 
 that he feels the value of his previous little- 
 ness in the spiritual world. It is then 
 that he feels the value of his membership 
 in the Church, and the blessedness of the 
 Communion of Saints. Instead of aban- 
 doning himself to despair or indifference, 
 he falls back on the Church as a whole, 
 and leans on the body of saints. And this, 
 
316 LECTURE VII. 
 
 not in blind confidence, as superseding his 
 personal faith, or absolving him from his 
 individual responsibility ; (that were Po- 
 pery ;) but as interposing a suspensive 
 power, a temporary refuge, to shield him 
 till the tyranny be overpast. As an insu- 
 lated being in the world of spirits, he 
 would fall : but he turns to the Church — to 
 the saints in the Church — and there sees 
 that every thing is against his present 
 doubts and fears, and they receive a check 
 which, if it does not restore confidence, at 
 least prevents despair and renews inquiry, 
 and encourages him to pray and to hope. 
 He looks to the Church, and there sees 
 that this^ of which he now doubts, has, 
 from the beginning, been regarded as sacred 
 truth ; that whatever he may now think, 
 whatever he has heard ungodly men avow, 
 that there at least, in the Church, the wise, 
 the good, the saints of every age, have held 
 it in unity of faith. That that Lord, 
 whom he is now perhaps tempted to deny, 
 the Holy Church throughout the world hath 
 ever acknowledged to be the Father of an 
 Infinite Majesty — the honourable, true, and 
 
LECTURE VII. 317 
 
 only Son — also the Holy Ghost the Com- 
 forter ; — hath ever confessed that Thou art 
 the King of Glory, O Christ ! — Thou art the 
 everlasting Son of the Father. 
 
 What a check must this afford to a 
 downward course of doubt and misgiving ! 
 what an encouraging array does it present 
 to cheer and animate him in resisting the 
 tempter ! what a cloud of witnesses must 
 he feel doth encompass about him ! I do not 
 say that it would of itself restore confidence; 
 but it stands forth to suspend his mis- 
 givings; it gives him time to rally and seek 
 for strength and light ; it suggests the 
 question whether, with so goodly a host 
 of testimony against him, he may not be 
 wrong in his doubts — whether there be not 
 that which, if he seek again, he may find as 
 they have found — whether, if he fight 
 again, he may not conquer as they have 
 conquered ; and thus, as to a fugitive Hy- 
 ing from the field of battle, they present 
 an array of power with ensigns of past vic- 
 tories, towards whom he may direct his 
 course, from whom he may gain counsel 
 and assistance while he rallies his strength, 
 
318 LECTURE VII. 
 
 and with whom he may find a refuge from 
 his pursuing foe, till one mightier than he 
 shall have disarmed him of the power to 
 hurt him. 
 
 In truth, to the really humble-minded 
 Christian — humble, that is, not only in re- 
 gard to the written word, but also to 
 the universal testimony of the Church ; 
 humble, not only in regard to God, but 
 also in regard to men, (for both of these 
 enter into the character of Christian hu- 
 mility ;) to such an one, in every doubt, 
 difficulty, or painful misgiving which may 
 beset him, questions like these will come to 
 his relief: is it likely that the holy Church, 
 from the beginning, should have been in 
 error on this point, built as it was on the 
 foundation of the Apostles themselves ? 
 Is it likely that good and wise men of 
 every age, should have been so grievously 
 deceived? Is it not more likely, that such 
 a host of witnesses, agreeing as they do in 
 one faith, and that from the beginning, 
 should be right, than my doubts, or the 
 opinions of those who would lead me to a 
 different faith ? Such questions will come 
 
LECTURE VII. 319 
 
 to his relief. Not that they will of them- 
 selves convince and satisfy him — nor ought 
 they : they are not meant to supersede 
 Scripture — that were Popery ; but to assist 
 and guide him in the interpretation of it — 
 that were Apostolical and Christian. They 
 have this effect— to arrest doubts which are 
 beginning, and to stop those which have 
 gained some head. In the one case they 
 prevent the commencement; in the other 
 they interpose and exercise a suspensive 
 power, leading him to distrust himself, and 
 thus to seek that enlightening power of the 
 Holy Spirit, which is not denied to the 
 bewildered wanderer who seeks it in spirit 
 and in truth — perseveringly and in faith. 
 
 How different is it with those who have 
 relied only on themselves and their own 
 private judgment in the interpretation of 
 Scripture! What have they to look to in 
 hours of darkness and difficulty ? Scripture 
 gives them no light — the promises bring 
 no comfort when doubt seizes them — 
 and that which should have been their 
 friend, seems an idle tale. They cannot 
 fall back and rest awhile on the bosom of 
 
320 LECTURE VII. 
 
 the Church, and see, in the uniformity of 
 faith there, the silent rebuke to their own 
 faithlessness, which makes them give up 
 because of a passing trial. They have 
 leaned on the boasted strength of private 
 judgment: it has now failed them, and 
 they know not whither to turn. 
 
 The Apostle Paul was no stranger to 
 this. He knew the doubts which would 
 assail members of the Church ; and bids 
 them, in their perplexities, find comfort in 
 following the steps of the Apostles, and in 
 deferring to the opinions of the Church : 
 " Be ye followers together of me, and mark 
 " them which walk so as ye have us for an 
 " ensample." He does not require us to 
 follow him individually as an inspired 
 Apostle merely, but those also who follow 
 him, the saints in the Church ; and mostly 
 do we require this guidance, and mostly 
 does it befriend us, when the holy light 
 of Scripture seems for a time to be hidden 
 from us. And such has been the rule of 
 Scripture in the Church in every age. — 
 " Tell me," says the Scripture, " tell me, O 
 " thou whom my soul loveth, where thou 
 
LECTURE VII. 321 
 
 " feedest, where thou makest thy flock to 
 " rest at noon : for why sliould I be as 
 '' one that turneth aside by the flocks of 
 " thy companions ? If thou know not, 
 " go thy way forth by tlie footsteps of the 
 " flock, and feed thy kids beside the shep- 
 " hercW tents'' And it is our duty, no less 
 than our privilege, thus to listen to and 
 lean on the advice and opinion of the 
 Church, at once an act of obedience and 
 a source of comfort. 
 
 Surely then we may say and acknowledge 
 with thankfulness, that He who knew what 
 was in man, has consulted merciftdly for us 
 in the mode in which he has ordained that 
 the witness of the truth should be left, 
 though it should not be found to be such 
 that he may run that readeth. If it be 
 mercy and wisdom combined, to promote 
 our probation and spiritual warfare, yet to 
 have compassion on our weakness; to prove 
 us, to exercise our faith through temptation, 
 yet to leave us a w^ay to escape which all 
 who seek may find; to fit us for our end 
 by training us, in childlike dependance, 
 through the different stages of the spiritual 
 
 Y 
 
322 LECTURE VII. 
 
 life to Christian manhood ; to provide for 
 us, in our darkest hours of spiritual trial, a 
 guide and refuge which, while it protects, 
 serves to exercise our faith and dependance 
 on Him, nor allows us to wax cold ; — all 
 these have been provided for us in the con- 
 stitution of the Apostolic Church, and in 
 the relation in which it has pleased Him 
 to place the Christian verities to Holy 
 Scripture. 
 
 That these should prove an offence to 
 the proud and self-willed, is not to be 
 wondered at. That sometimes they should 
 even be a snare to weaker brethren, is no 
 more than might be expected from the 
 general analogy of God's works. As differ- 
 ent insects are said to extract honey and 
 poison from the same plant, even so may it 
 be with the mightier dispensations of the 
 spiritual world, as well as in things of lesser 
 magnitude, which may prove blessings or 
 curses, according to the way in which we 
 use them. It is in our power, with the 
 means which God has given us, to choose 
 the good and avoid the evil. But as an 
 essential part of our probation here, as 
 
LECTURE VII. 323 
 
 inseparable from a state of trial, it is im- 
 possible to be free from danger — "it must 
 " needs be that offences come." 
 
 That it should be thus in regard to the 
 Christian faith, and its relation to Holy 
 Scripture, is but what the greatest re- 
 vealed blessing has ever been liable to. 
 And herein we see but a continuation of the 
 same principle, by which in Christ crucified, 
 which unto them that were called was 
 Christ the power of God and the wisdom 
 of God, the Jew could find but a stumbling- 
 block, nor the Greek see ought but foolish- 
 ness; and by which the same message of 
 grace was declared to be a sweet savour of 
 Christ in them that were saved, and in 
 them that perish : to the one the savour 
 of death unto death, — to the other, the 
 savour of life unto life. 
 
 Y 2 
 
LECTURE VIII. 
 
 ARGUMENT IN FAVOUR OF THE CHURCH'S PRINCIPLE 
 DRAVTN FROM THE LANGUAGE OF ST. PAUL— FROM 
 THE CONSEQUENCES OF ITS VIOLATION— THE ANA- 
 LOGY OF CIVIL GOVERNMENT— THE ORIGINAL QUES- 
 TION REVERTED TO— CONCLUSION. 
 
 Matthew vi. 10. 
 Thy kingdom come. 
 
 THE main features to be observed in 
 the Church's principle of instructing 
 in the Christian faith, as set forth and 
 defended in the foregoing Lectures, will 
 be found to be humility, submissiveness, 
 faith, docility, — a willingness to learn and 
 believe according to the direction into 
 which the mind is turned and trained ; not 
 receiving things with suspicion and a feel- 
 
LECTURE VIII. 325 
 
 ing of contentious disputation, regarding 
 them as false, or even doubtful, till proved 
 to be true ; but with the feeling of child- 
 like docility and affectionate obedience, 
 w^ishing and hoping that they are true, till 
 found to be false. And this, not so much 
 from particular views furnished by the sub- 
 ject itself, as from a predisposition to rely 
 on the persons from whom the instruction 
 is derived; the latter being those towards 
 whom there previously exists a relation 
 involving a moral obligation to obey and 
 confide in them ; the first impressions and 
 the first impulses towards belief being 
 derived from the teacher rather than the 
 thing taught — from persons, rather than 
 from things. 
 
 This feature in the Church's principle 
 was shewn to be that observable in all moral 
 instruction, and in conveying knowledge 
 on all subjects not purely demonstrative 
 and abstract — partaking in any degree of a 
 moral character. In these it was shewn 
 that, besides the mere communication of 
 knowledge, the sense or faculty of perceiv- 
 ing moral truth, corresponding to the in- 
 
 y8 
 
326 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 tellect in the perception of demonstrative 
 truth, required first to be developed by a 
 course of training under the guidance and 
 authority of others, and gradually formed 
 into a habit by which the disciple becomes 
 possessed of the faculty of seeing and judg- 
 ing for himself : the principle adopted by 
 our Lord in the constitution of the Apo- 
 stolic Church, existed previously in the 
 constitution of human nature. Of this 
 principle, the leading features, as regards 
 the disciple, may, for the sake of brevity, 
 be comprised in one term — docility. 
 
 This statement v\^ould be further strength- 
 ened by referring to the term uniformly 
 adopted by St. Paul in reference to the 
 first instruction in Christian doctrine, as 
 contrasted with its opposite, the term heresy^ 
 considered in regard to its meaning as well 
 as its etymology, and the assumed liberty 
 of choosing for one's self, which would seem 
 to be denoted by it^. 
 
 The Apostle, on the contrary, in allu- 
 
 <^ The want of the concrete verb of heresy/ in Enghsh, 
 and of the abstract noun, as well as of the verbal denoting 
 the agent, of irapaka^ilSdvia, in both languages, must have 
 
LECTURE VIII. 327 
 
 sion to the doctrines which the several 
 Churches had learned, speaks of them as 
 that which they had 7'eceived'^ from him; 
 as though he, with the credentials which 
 he exhibited, were sufficient authority for 
 demanding their acceptance of it. And the 
 same term is uniformly applied, indicating 
 at once the truth received, the relation of 
 the parties, and the obligations arising out 
 of it ; comprising on his part the right to 
 be heard, and on theirs the duty to obey. 
 But in no case does he adopt a term whicli 
 would seem at variance with this relation. 
 In no case does he admit, directly or by 
 implication, the right of choosing for them- 
 selves; nor does he speak of it, save to con- 
 demn it, or to point out its moral tenden- 
 cies, and to advert to the moral deteri- 
 oration which seems to form its natural 
 and necessary consequence. Not that the 
 Church would demand, any more than 
 morals, a coiitinued blind faith and irre- 
 
 been frequently experienced by the theological student, 
 in reference to the principles which they respectively 
 denote. 
 
 ^ See in particular 1 Cor. iv. 7; xv. 1. 2 Cor. xi. 4. 
 Phil. iv. 9. Col. ii. 6. 1 Thess. i. 6 ; ii. 13 ; iv. 1. 
 
 V 4 
 
328 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 sponsible reliance on others, as is often 
 unjustly charged against the principles of 
 the Church Catholic ; but for learning, for 
 the formation of opinions, for the establish- 
 ment of belief, the Church does, like reason 
 and morals, require for a time an implicit 
 reliance on the guidance of those under 
 whom, as regards the subject to be learned, 
 we are placed, either by the positive pre- 
 cepts of the revealed covenant, or by the 
 moral obligations involved in relations pre- 
 viously existing in the natural constitution 
 of things. 
 
 This demand for implicit reliance and 
 submission to others, which has been shewn 
 to be necessary for the developement of our 
 perceptions in all cases of moral truth, and 
 which is adopted into the constitution of 
 the Church, and carried into effect by the 
 various instruments through which the 
 Church imbues the minds of her disciple 
 with her own views, and engages his will 
 in their favour before giving him the 
 Scriptures to read, — is not to be confounded 
 with a blind belief, resting solely on the 
 word of others, at a time of life when the 
 
LECTURE VIII. 329 
 
 disciple ought to be sufficiently advanced 
 in Christian manhood and knowledge of the 
 doctrine of Christ, to be able to see witli 
 his own eyes, to read and understand for 
 himself, and, from the study of the Holy 
 Scriptures, so to read, that he might know 
 the certainty of the things in which he has 
 been instructed. For though it is true? 
 both in morals and religion, that one thus 
 trained will agree with those by whom he 
 has been trained ; and though, by the 
 appointments both of nature and of revela- 
 tion, this agreement is in one sense the 
 result of the course he has gone through, 
 and perhaps he would not have thought 
 thus without this, yet the course of training 
 is the accidental not the essential cause of 
 the agreement. For when he comes to 
 examine his convictions and the grounds of 
 them, he does not refer them to his course 
 of education, but feels that they dej)end on 
 grounds independent of his training, and on 
 evidences external to himself ; that his 
 education has been the occasion rather than 
 the cause of his thinking thus ; and that 
 what he has really derived from his edu- 
 
330 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 cation, is the moral vision whereby he is 
 enabled to perceive these grounds and this 
 evidence, and the moral capacity to feel its 
 force. 
 
 The essential connection of this principle 
 of submission and docility vs^ith our moral 
 constitution, and the provision for our 
 v^ants exhibited by its adoption into the 
 leading features of the Gospel, should be 
 viewed in reference to another argument 
 — that drawn from the consequences of 
 its violation. 
 
 If instruction in Christian doctrine, by 
 means of the Church under the Gospel, 
 be analogous to that pursued in moral 
 subjects generally, in respect of moral 
 submissiveness on the part of the dis- 
 ciple, and a course of moral preparation 
 before the mind is able to receive the 
 truth ; and if this submissiveness, prepara- 
 tory to the perception of truth, be an 
 essential part in the economy of our moral 
 constitution, essentially belonging to man 
 as man ; we might expect, antecedently, 
 that the violation of the conditions on 
 which the efficacy of the instruction de- 
 
LECTURE VIII. 331 
 
 pends, would not only be destructive of it, 
 but be productive of pernicious effects on 
 the moral character generally. How far 
 this is realized in practice, how far the 
 violation of this principle of submissiveness 
 and docility does affect the character gene- 
 rally, it needs not an extended observation 
 to tell, whether viewed in regard to its 
 influence on political, social, and domestic 
 relations, or its effects on personal character 
 alone. No one who views in these rela- 
 tions the conduct of those who adopt the 
 heretical principle, and who thereby throw 
 off the docility which belongs to them as 
 men, can fail to observe its effect on the 
 whole character, when fairly carried out. 
 It seems to derange the whole moral sys- 
 tem ; to remove as it were the keystone of 
 the moral fabric ; to take away from man's 
 nature the barrier which protects it from 
 what is most hostile to it — to subvert the 
 whole man. Let any one read with an 
 ordinary degree of attention the Epistle of 
 St. Jude, and the second chapter of the 
 General Epistle of St. Peter, and contem- 
 plate the character therein so vividly and 
 
332 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 forcibly described. He cannot but be 
 struck with the intimate connection of the 
 character with the Socinian and Sectarian 
 principle, and with the principle of resist- 
 ance to constituted authority generally, 
 from which it seems to flow, even had it 
 not been specifically connected with it, 
 and with the sin of Korah, by the Apostle 
 himself 
 
 " But chiefly them that walk after the 
 " flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and 
 " despise government. Presumptuous are 
 " they, selfimlled^ they are not afraid to 
 " speak evil of dignities. Whereas angels, 
 " which are greater in power and might, 
 " bring not railing accusation against them 
 " before the Lord. But these, as natural 
 " brute beasts, made to be taken and de- 
 " stroyed, speak evil of the things that they 
 " understand not'' . . . . " For when they 
 " speak great swelling words of vanity, 
 " they allure through the lusts of the 
 " flesh, through much wantonness, those 
 " that were clean escaped from them that 
 " live in error. While they promise them 
 " liberty, they themselves are the servants 
 
LECjTURE VIII. 333 
 
 " of corruption." Thus St. Peter. To the 
 same effect writes St. Jude. 
 
 " For there are certain men crept in 
 " unawares, who were before of old ordain- 
 " ed to this condemnation, ungodly men 
 " turning the grace of God into lascivious- 
 " ness, and denying the only Lord God, 
 
 " and our Lord Jesus Christ Like- 
 
 " wise these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, 
 '' despise dominio7i^ and speak evil of dig?ii- 
 
 " ties But these speak evil of things 
 
 " which they know not Woe unto 
 
 " them ! for they have gone in the way of 
 " Cain, and ran greedily after the error of 
 " Balaam for reward, and perished in the 
 " gainsaying of Core'' 
 
 Now without making a closer application 
 than Christian charity will allow, of this 
 description of the two Apostles, to the 
 enemies of the Church and the Church's 
 principle in our own day, it would be 
 impossible not to be struck by the close 
 resemblance. And when the same Apostles 
 so closely connect the general depravity of 
 character with the contempt of dominion, 
 the speaking evil of dignities, and the sin 
 
334 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 of Korah cited by name, can we do other- 
 wise than feel, that the fulfilment of the 
 Apostles' description, brought to pass as it 
 were at our very doors, conveys to us a 
 warning involving a deep responsibility, to 
 guard against the first approaches of that 
 spirit of Antichrist here so visibly depict- 
 ed, and to resist, at its commencement, the 
 spirit of pride and contempt for authority, 
 which, if unrestrained, we behold at a later 
 stage leading to the fatal results which the 
 Apostle has so forcibly described to us e ? 
 
 Now that this principle of submissive- 
 ness and need of wholesome restraint in 
 the formation of character, which is so 
 suited to our nature in the proper sense of 
 the word, should be offensive to the na- 
 tural man, and to the pride of the human 
 heart, is in no way surprising. It is not to 
 be expected that men will approve it, much 
 
 ^ In fact, the Heretical and Schismatic spirit, is the 
 violation of a moral as well as of a positive obligation. 
 Even were there no rule on the subject in Scripture 
 itself, it would still have been a sin, from its very nature. 
 The consequences to which it leads in practice denote 
 and illustrate its character, rather than constitute it. 
 
LECTURE VIII. 335 
 
 less voluntarily place themselves under it, 
 unless trained to do so from childhood. 
 To say that it is for their good — that their 
 moral constitution requires it — that it is 
 necessary in order to fit them for the pro- 
 per end of their being as moral and respon- 
 sible agents, — all this would be of no avail 
 towards reconciling them to it ; nay, it 
 would but further excite their hostility. 
 Humanly speaking, such arguments would 
 be utterly useless ; and it would be unrea- 
 sonable, and contrary to analogy and expe- 
 rience, to expect that any success would 
 attend them — that is, when addressed to 
 those who have not been brought up (or 
 under the Gospel led by the Holy Ghost) 
 to see and feel their force. With what 
 prospect of success could any one advocate 
 such principles to those who have not been 
 trained to understand them? One who 
 should so advocate them, against one who 
 defended unrestricted liberty of thought, 
 and maintained the unlimited right of 
 private judgment, would labour under a 
 similar disadvantage with one who should 
 recommend the duty of submission to con- 
 
336 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 stituted authority in secular matters, and 
 denounce the sin of rebellion, before an 
 audience who had just returned from lis- 
 tening to a demagogue enlarging on the 
 evils of tyranny and the vices of kings, and 
 expatiating on liberty and the abstract 
 rights of man. Under such circumstances, 
 and before such an audience, what chance 
 of success could the advocate of submis- 
 sion to legitimate government have against 
 the assertor of unlimited freedom ? How 
 easy would it be to denounce the one as 
 the abettor of tyranny, and the enemy of 
 liberty ; and to uphold the other as the 
 protector of the poor, and the defender of 
 liberty and the rights of man. Such would 
 be the natural result. Similar to this, is 
 the position in which those are placed who, 
 either in morals or religion, insist on the 
 duty of submission to the judgment of 
 others — nay, the necessity of doing so, 
 preparatory to the full developement of 
 our moral perceptions, and the formation 
 of our moral habits. And the more will 
 this be felt, if men have been suffering 
 under the abuse and undue exercise of the 
 
LECTURE VIII. 337 
 
 principle, as exhibited in popery; or if 
 they fear, whether with reason or not, that 
 they are in danger of so suffering. Wliat 
 chance of success, humanly speaking, would 
 such an one have over the man who advo- 
 cated the unlimited right of private judg- 
 ment, denounced all interference with it as 
 a violation of a sacred birthright, and pro- 
 fessed to stand forward as the champion of 
 Holy Scripture ? How easy to represent 
 the one as an enslaver of men's consciences, 
 the extinguisher of human liberty, the 
 defender of popery, and the suppressor 
 of the word of God ! How easy to uphold 
 the other as the assertor of the rights 
 of conscience, the friend of liberty of 
 thought, the champion of Protestantism, 
 and the defender of the word of God '' ! 
 
 a It is a matter of common observation, that, in civil 
 matters, many, while in their hearts abhorring the spirit 
 of democracy, and in nothing more than the tyranny and 
 oppression which are its usual characteristics ; and anx- 
 ious to strengthen the hands of government, if for no 
 other reason, at least for the security thereby afforded 
 to the exercise of rational liberty, — are yet often deterred 
 from expressing their sentiments as freely as they could 
 wish, partly from false shame, partly from real fear — in 
 
 z 
 
338 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 Such must be the result of the two prin- 
 ciples respectively, when advocated before 
 men who, from habits and education, or from 
 
 either case, from the unwiUingness to be inckided in the 
 sweeping charge made against all such by the inso- 
 lence of the democratic party, and to be denounced and 
 held up as abettors of tyranny and enemies of public 
 liberty. 
 
 In like manner, in religious matters, from the arro-^ 
 gant assumption of the exclusive championship of Holy 
 Scripture and of religious liberty, on the part of the 
 advocates of ultra-Protestantism and the Sectarian prin- 
 ciple generally, many, while condemning that principle — 
 among other reasons, on account of the tyranny over 
 men's minds, especially in the interpretation of Scrip- 
 ture, of which it is made the instrument, — and uphold- 
 ing the Catholic principle and the authority of the 
 Church, from the protection and liberty thereby afforded 
 in the perusal of Scripture, and the legitimate exercise 
 of conscience, — yet are deterred from expressing their 
 convictions openly, or resisting as they ought the oppo- 
 site principle, by a dread of encountering the charge, 
 so freely dealt out against them, of being abettors of 
 popery, and enemies of Scripture and the rights of 
 conscience. 
 
 In either of these two parallel cases, it requires no 
 ordinary share of moral courage to stand up fearlessly 
 for truth. But as regards the religious part of the 
 question, those who are deterred from defending the 
 truth against its assailants, through fear of the imputa- 
 tions to which it may expose them, would do well to 
 consider our Lord's words, Markviii. 3 — 8. Luke x, 16 
 
LECTURE VIII. .339 
 
 vitiation by false teachers, are utterly incom- 
 petent to form an opinion on such subjects. 
 But whether the decisions of men so situ^ 
 ated are to be regarded as any test of truths 
 may be best answered by reflecting, in re- 
 gard to the parallel case in civil matters, how 
 far the voice of an ignorant and misguided 
 populace, excited by the misrepresentations 
 of a designing demagoguCj and incensed 
 perhaps by an imaginary sense of oppres- 
 sion, is to be regarded as decisive on the 
 complicated questions of government and of 
 laws, and the necessity, even on the lowest 
 utilitarian principle, of surrendering in the 
 social compact some portion of our natural 
 liberty or acquired property, for the pur- 
 pose of securing the remainder. Or to 
 refer both of these to a third case to which 
 they are strictly analogous, let us ask how 
 far children are the best judges of the 
 degree of restraint and discipline, bodily or 
 moral, necessary for their future health 
 and moral improvement ; and how far we 
 should, as their responsible guardians, stop 
 to regard their objections, or consider the 
 pleasure or pain attendant on the course* 
 
 z 2 
 
340 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 we thought it our duty to pursue, any rule 
 of its fitness to attain our object, for their 
 best interests and future happiness. The 
 general analogy of nature, and the whole 
 constitution of things as appointed by God, 
 Qpmbine in declaring to us, if we will but 
 open our eyes to see it, that the beginnings 
 of all things conducive to our real good, 
 must be attended with a temporary personal 
 sacrifice ; and a surrender of our judgment, 
 for a time, to those who, from age and ex- 
 perience, from settled habits and opinions 
 of their own, are competent to form ours. 
 The object of such moral education is to 
 lead us, by early impressions, by habits 
 early formed and tastes early excited, to 
 take pleasure in proper objects^. Our 
 natural disposition is averse to such things ; 
 and our natural distaste for them, and the 
 reluctance to encounter the course by 
 which that distaste may be removed, varies, 
 not only according to the different consti- 
 tution and temperament of each, but also 
 
 ^ Aio Set rJxOcLi ttcos evOvs €k viidV, ws 6 YlXaT(av (j^rjalv, 
 axTTe yaip^iv re koX kvir^ladai oh 6et* rj yap 6p6ri naihua 
 avTi] lariv. — Arist. Eth. II. 3. 
 
LECTURE VIII. 341 
 
 according to the period at which this course 
 of training begins. 
 
 To this statement of our moral nature, as 
 drawn out by the science of Morals, Scrip- 
 ture adds not only its own testimony, but 
 beyond this, full revelations respecting 
 our natural condition — the cause of it — 
 our utter inability of ourselves to think 
 or do any think acceptable to God without 
 him — the need of a new birth, and the 
 infusion into our nature of an entirely new 
 principle of action : and following up, as it 
 were, the voice of God speaking through 
 the philosophy of former days, places the 
 beginning of this new birth at a period 
 earlier still than that which reason would 
 prescribe for the work of renovation, be- 
 cause, acting through a divine power and 
 under a divine promise, she is not circum- 
 scribed within those limits by which the 
 powers of reason were necessarily bounded. 
 And although, both in Morals and in the 
 Gospel, the difficulties are greatly over- 
 come by an early commencement, yet to 
 the end, the nature of man remains the 
 same. What is his best interest, must 
 
 z 3 
 
342 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 ever, to a certain extent, be distasteful to 
 him. Though under grace — though his 
 condition is changed, his nature remains 
 the same, and will be ever tempted to 
 break through the barriers which have been 
 placed before it. There is ever need of 
 vigilance, mortification, self-denial, humili- 
 ation, deference to an authority and reli- 
 ance on a power external to himself, — all 
 those things, in fact, which may be said to 
 militate most against what is popularly 
 termed liberty of thought and the rights of 
 conscience. 
 
 The heart of man ever requires a protec- 
 tion agai?ist itself; and in nothing does it 
 require it more, in nothing is it likely to 
 suffer more from the absence of it, than in 
 the glorious privilege which God has given 
 us of reading his will, and in tracing ra- 
 diations of his heavenly glory, as revealed in 
 Holy Scripture. This protection he has 
 himself given us, in the constitution of the 
 Apostolic Church, and in the relation in 
 which he has made the teaching of that 
 Church stand to Holy Scripture. And it is 
 from violating this relation, as adverted to at 
 
LECTURE VIII. :i43 
 
 the commencement of these Lectures, that 
 the evils have arisen which have liitlierto 
 defaced the fair body of Christ's Clmrcli ; 
 nor is it otherwise than by preserving tliis 
 relation, assigning to the Church and the 
 Scripture respectively their office in the 
 formation of a true faith, that we can ever 
 hope to retain, in its primitive purity, the 
 truth as it is in Jesus. 
 
 It is not necessary, at this stage of 
 the subject, to revert, at any length, to 
 the corruptions which have arisen from 
 violating this relation and the harmony 
 which ought to subsist between the Church 
 and Holy Scripture — first, in the erection 
 of Popery, from the suppression of Scrip- 
 ture; next, in the reign of Sectarianism, 
 with those which follow in its train — 
 Heresy, Rationalism, Socinianism, Infide- 
 lity — arising from the suppression of the 
 other divinely-appointed instrument, the 
 teaching of the Church : but it would 
 contribute to enable us to see this more 
 clearly, if we advert briefly to the analogy 
 in this respect between civil and ecclesi- 
 astical matters: for there is, in respect 
 
 z 4 
 
SU LECTURE VIII. 
 
 of the points under consideration, a close 
 analogy. 
 
 It was observed, that the heart of man 
 requires protection against itself in moral 
 and spiritual matters, as man requires pro- 
 tection against man in secular matters, and 
 in the maintenance of civil rights. In civil 
 matters, we are aware that unlimited liberty 
 is utterly at variance with due security of 
 life and property. The object of good 
 government, and the result of the due 
 observance of our social relations, with the 
 duties involved in them, is to provide the 
 greatest degree of liberty compatible with 
 order, and the greatest security of life and 
 property consistent with rational liberty. 
 Without entering into political discussions, 
 we are aware that, in human society, these 
 objects are best attained by such relations 
 being established between the executive 
 and the governed, whether by popular re- 
 presentation or any other kind of charter, 
 as may enable them to serve as a check 
 one upon the other. What extent of power 
 should be vested in each, is a separate 
 question, depending on the advance each 
 
LECTURE VIII. 345 
 
 state may have made in the capacity to 
 bear civil liberty ; but one not affecting 
 the present argument^, nor at all entering 
 into the analogy, now under consideration, 
 as regards the Church \ 
 
 Whenever, from the circumstances of a 
 people, both of these are required, it is 
 obvious that the suppression of either, or 
 even the disturbing the balance and rela- 
 tive influence of each which the genius of 
 the nation requires, would be attended w ith 
 evil consequences either to order or to 
 liberty : that the suppression of the charter 
 must lead to despotism ; that the suppres- 
 sion of the government must lead to licen- 
 tiousness, and thence, by a different road, 
 to tyranny. 
 
 To these two, in secular matters, will 
 correspond, in spiritual and ecclesiastical 
 ones, the Church and the Scripture, — not 
 
 c There is nothing, in the relation of the Churcli to 
 Holy Scripture, corresponding to the principle which, in 
 civil government, regulates the relative influence of the 
 crown and popular control according to the circumstances 
 of each state, and its capacity to bear civil liberty: 
 a caution to be carefully observed in tracing analogies 
 of this nature. The analogy does not extend to this. 
 
346 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 as regards any general analogy, but as re- 
 gards the questions of government, protec- 
 tion, and the principle of mutual check. 
 The Church is the depository and trustee 
 of Christian doctrine, the appointed instru- 
 ment for the conversion of the world and the 
 instruction of sinners in the way of life — 
 the executive ^ so to say, of Christ's king- 
 dom on earth, as well for other acts of 
 government and protection, as also for ex- 
 cluding by spiritual outlawry, and depriving 
 
 d It must not be forgotten that, in another sense, the 
 Church is also legislative Sbud judicial ; and likewise that, 
 as an independent society, it has its own executive, legis- 
 lative, and judicial branches, distinct one from the other. 
 
 Viewed, however, as executive or legislative in relation 
 to Holy Scripture, Scripture will assume to it the rela- 
 tion — in the one case, of a charter of liberty — in the 
 other, of a coordinate branch of legislature. 
 
 This is better expressed in the words of our Church : — - 
 " 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 ex- 
 " pound 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 
 " it not to enforce any thing to be believed for necessity 
 ^' of salvation.'' Art, XX. 
 
LECTURE VIII. 347 
 
 of the privileges and benefits of its com- 
 munity, (which is the limit of its penal 
 powers, as such,) those who will not observe 
 its laws and obey its rulers. It is but a 
 delegated power indeed, as Christ's vice- 
 gerent, yet having full power from him, 
 with the promise that whatsoever it should 
 bind on earth he would bind in heaven. 
 This power, however, has a limit and a 
 check, in another instrument, also appointed 
 by our Lord, to which the acts and decrees 
 of the Church must be referred, before 
 they are deemed essential to the salvation 
 of its members. That instrument is Holy 
 Scripture. To this have the members of 
 the Church the liberty of appeal ; and 
 beyond this the Church cannot go. 
 
 The Scripture, on the other hand, while 
 providing this appeal, and furnishing as it 
 were this charter of our Christian liberties, 
 does not profess to originate measures ; does 
 not undertake to teach, as doctrine, what- 
 ever the wildness or caprice of individual 
 fancy may suggest; but to prove to the 
 disciple of Christ what the Church has 
 already taught him — to shew to him the 
 
348 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 certainty of the things in which he has 
 been instructed; — to stand forth as the 
 jealous guardian of his liberties on that side, 
 as the Church is on the other. The union 
 of these two sacred instruments in their 
 due proportion, where each retains its rela- 
 tive influence, is like those happily mixed 
 constitutions in civil matters, which com- 
 bine, as far as human corruption and way- 
 wardness will allow, protection and liberty. 
 It gives protection against the human heart, 
 with the exercise of such liberty as our 
 nature can bear ; and by its appeal to 
 Scripture, under certain limitations, it affords 
 liberty, without the licentiousness and law- 
 lessness arising from the undue indulgence 
 of the right of private judgment. Now 
 of these two instruments, the suppression 
 or weakening of either, is most prejudicial 
 to the whole fabric of the Christian faith. 
 The suppression of Scripture leads to cor- 
 ruption and tyranny like Popery : the sup- 
 pression of the authority of the Church leads 
 no less certainly to licentiousness, proceed- 
 ing through the various grades of heresy, to 
 rationalism and infidelity; and thence back, 
 
LECTURE VIII. 3M) 
 
 perhaps, by a different road, to Popery. 
 These will correspond respectively to de- 
 spotism and democracy, caused by the sup- 
 pression, — in the one case of the charter, 
 — in the other of the government. 
 
 Popery is despotism in religion, effected 
 by the suppression of our charter, Holy 
 Scripture. 
 
 Sectarianism is democracy and republi- 
 canism in religion, brought about by the 
 suppression of the Church. 
 
 Of the one, we have the exemplification 
 and the proof in the whole history of the 
 Papacy, from which the protecting mercy 
 of God, in his own good time, gave us 
 deliverance. 
 
 Of the other, if the history of our own 
 times does not afford the like exemplifica- 
 tion, it is because we are in progress to it, 
 rather than have as yet fully arrived at it. 
 May God, of his infinite mercy, grant 
 that our eyes may yet be opened, to see 
 the path into which the judicial blindness, 
 which our sins have brought down, is fast 
 leading us. 
 
 The connection, however, between the 
 
S50 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 two, is not merely one of mialogy, but alsd 
 of p7nnciple. 
 
 The principle of Popery is the despotic 
 and servile principle on the part of the 
 ruler and governed respectively : the prin- 
 ciple of Sectarianism, is the democratic and 
 republican principle, equally despotic and 
 servile in another shape e. Hence arises that 
 union of the two characters, which almost 
 universally presents itself to our notice in 
 individuals, and frequently in nations also. 
 It is not mere accident that unites Popery 
 with despotism and arbitrary government ; 
 sectarianism and infidelity with republic- 
 anism ; and true Apostolic principles with a 
 mixed constitution like our own. And it 
 requires but a moderate acquaintance with 
 the history of our own country to see, that as 
 
 e From this approximation of extremes to each other, 
 it will not be difficult to trace likewise the parallel, as 
 well as the identity of principle, between the spirit which, 
 in secular matters, has associated nominal republics with 
 despotic governments in their attacks on the liberties of 
 free states ; and that which, in religion, has exhibited 
 the corresponding apparent paradox, in our own times 
 and in our own country, of the union of sectarianism 
 with Popery for the overthrow of the Church in these 
 realms. 
 
LECTURE VIII. .i51 
 
 popular influence has increased and gained 
 strength, so has the authority of Scrii)ture 
 had more influence in determining points 
 of faith. This, to a certain point, was just, 
 and restoring a balance unduly violated 
 previously. But the same history also in- 
 forms us, that at the time when the spirit of 
 rebellion was at the highest, and the demo- 
 cratic influence most paramount, the au- 
 thority of the Church in spiritual matters 
 sank with that of the government in secular 
 ones ; and that Scripture and the name of 
 God on the one hand, and liberty and the 
 name of the people on the other, w^ere used 
 as pretexts for some of the foulest deeds 
 which pollute the annals of our country. 
 
 And to those who are disposed to follow 
 out the analogy further than the time 
 would now^ allow me to do here, many strik- 
 ing points of resemblance, or rather of 
 identity, will present themselves, of the 
 principle of democracy with that of secta- 
 rianism and dissent. Both profess to abide 
 by, while they abuse, the sacred name of 
 liberty. As the one professes to be the 
 sole champion of public liberty, so does 
 
352 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 the other profess to be, of the rights of 
 conscience. As the one arrogates to itself 
 the sole claim to the title of friend of the 
 people, so does the other that of the advo- 
 cate of Holy Scripture, and the honour of 
 God as involved in that. As the one de- 
 nounces its political opponents as the abet- 
 tors of tyranny, so does the other charge 
 those who oppose it v^ith favouring Popery. 
 As the one uses the name of liberty and 
 the people, to establish its own power on the 
 ruins of that which it would overthrow, 
 so does the other use the name of Scripture, 
 the plea of conscience, and the right of 
 private judgment, to establish a spiritual 
 despotism, more oppressive, if possible, than 
 the tyranny of Rome ^. 
 
 f Unhappily, our own times and country furnish us 
 daily with too many instances of this, to render it neces- 
 sary to do more than merely allude to them for the pur- 
 pose of proof and illustration. This will be obvious to 
 any one who has observed with an ordinary degree of 
 attention the Jesuitical attempts of sectarians to advance 
 from toleration, through equality, to supremacy and uni- 
 versal dominion ; as also the tyranny and oppression 
 exercised over their own members, which, to those enjoy- 
 ing the liberty afforded in the Apostolic Church, seem 
 scarcely credible. To shew how far the same was real- 
 
LECTURE Vlll. ,iy,i 
 
 This is the last point of analogy to wliicl) 
 the time would now allow us to advert. 
 
 ized in past times, when, for once, sectarians did nl.taiii 
 supremacy, would be but to transcribe tlio histoiy of tlic 
 Rebellion and the Commonwealth. For a sunnnary, how- 
 ever, of the events of those timos, exhibitin^^ in its tru(^ 
 colours the persecuting spirit of sectarianism, the reader 
 is referred to the chapter on the " Sufferings of the 
 Clergy,'' in the Life of Hammond, by the Rev. W. llon(>, 
 in his interesting work on the Licesof Embient Chri!<tians^ 
 in which the subject is forcibly and feelingly treated. 
 
 The faithfulness of the following portrait, in its main 
 features, will be readily recognised even in our own day. 
 
 " In truth, the furious outcry raised by the Calvinistic 
 " faction of that age against Archbishop Laud, as a 
 " Popish persecutor, furnishes us with a singular illus- 
 *' tration of the deceitfulness of the human heart, or of 
 " the hardness of the human forehead. For, of all the 
 '• repulsive peculiarities of the holy discipline, as it ex- 
 " hibited itself in his time, there was none perhaps so 
 " remarkable, as its coarse, hard-featured resemblance to 
 " that very Popery which was the object of its professed 
 " abhorrence. The Presbyterian system was, in its 
 " original principles, as sternly and avowedly intolerant 
 " as the pontifical chair. It extended no hope of salva- 
 " tion beyond the pale of its own connnunion. It affect- 
 " ed a dominion paramount to all earthly magistracy. 
 "It proclaimed a war of extermination against heresy. 
 " It was ready to compass earth and sea for proselytes. 
 " Violence and terror were employed to establisli its 
 " claim to infallibility. And if Popery had its Council 
 "of Trent, Calvinism had its Synod of Dort. Tf it 
 '' abjured the idolatry of the mass, it may fairly be 
 
 A a 
 
354 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 And here, as in others, it will be seen, from 
 the protection which the constitution of 
 the Apostolic Church affords us, both 
 against ourselves and against the tyranny 
 of self-appointed teachers, how mercifully 
 it has been framed with reference to our 
 wants. 
 
 In reverting, in conclusion, to what was 
 advanced at the commencement of these 
 
 " said to have found a substitute in the ordinance of 
 " preaching ; for, to the Presbyterian, the sermon was 
 ^' almost as much the Hfe and soul of public worship, as 
 " the sacrifice of the Eucharist was io the Romanist. If 
 '' it renounced the merit of ritual observances, it seemed 
 " to indemnify itself by setting up instead the merit of 
 " neglecting them. If the Pope claimed power to hurl 
 " monarchs from their thrones, the Presbytery, in like 
 " manner, held itself commissioned to denounce them as 
 " traitors to the majesty of the people, and enemies to 
 " God. If the Pope could proclaim, that to keep faith 
 " with heretics was to be false to the Church, the Pres- 
 " bytery could declare, precisely in the same spirit, that 
 " oaths were nullities whenever they tended to the detri- 
 " ment of the holy cause. Nay, if the Pontiff grasped 
 " the keys of St. Peter, the Presbytery wielded the 
 " sceptre of Christ himself. And, lastly, to complete 
 " the similitude, if the Romish discipline transferred the 
 " care of his own conscience from the sinner to the 
 " priest, very similar to this was the effect of the system 
 " of Geneva."' — Life of Archbishop Laud^ hy 0. W. Le Bas, 
 M.A. 
 
LECTURE VIIJ. :i5r, 
 
 Lectures, respecting the subject of them, 
 and the circumstances which rendered it 
 important to be considered at the present 
 time, a few remarks remain to be offered 
 both for our encouragement and caution, 
 and with reference to the bearing of such 
 discussions on the present and future pro- 
 spects of the Church. 
 
 It was observed, that the circumstances 
 in which the Church is now placed, call 
 upon us to take some decisive measures 
 with reference to the laxity of the princi- 
 ples of the day on ecclesiastical subjects, 
 and to arrest the rapidly increasing corrup- 
 tion of pure doctrine, and the no less rapid 
 increase of heresy and heretical principles 
 generally, as well as of Socinianism and 
 Socinian principles in particular ; that we 
 are placed in a situation analogous to that 
 in which the Church was placed previous to 
 the Reformation, in respect of departure 
 from true principles; (practically, at least, 
 for we still profess to hold them ;) but 
 with this difference in our time, that where- 
 as the evils then arose from the suppression 
 of Scripture, those of our day arise from 
 Aa 2 
 
S56 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 the virtual suppression of the teaching of 
 the Church, and the denial of the Church's 
 authority. The helps which formerly avail- 
 ed against the corruptions of Popery, now, 
 from change of circumstance, no longer avail 
 us against the spirit of heresy and rational- 
 ism. In former times, when there were 
 few who were not Catholics, and the claims 
 of the Church were admitted, there was 
 little need, while asserting the authority of 
 Scripture, to contend much for that of the 
 Church. Not that the English Reformers 
 lost sight of the latter, as is obvious from 
 their own declarations on the subject ; nor, 
 had they said less on that subject than they 
 did, would it have affected the question, 
 considering the circumstances under which 
 they were placed. But that they fully 
 admitted and acted upon those principles, 
 is clear, not only from their own declara- 
 tions, but from the circumstance, that while 
 asserting the sufficiency of Holy Scripture, 
 and the right of appealing to it for the 
 proof of the things to be believed, they 
 were content with proofs in Scripture, in- 
 direct and by implication, against which 
 
LECTURE VIII. 357 
 
 objections are 7iow urged, both as being in- 
 sufficient in themselves, and as liavinir, 
 moreover, against them the antecedent im- 
 probability of being designed so to teach 
 and prove, on the assumption that Scripture 
 was designed to be the teaclier as well as 
 the proof of Christian doctrine. The bar- 
 rier which they thus erected of Scripture 
 was, on their principle, sufficient for tlic 
 purpose of purifying the faith of the cor- 
 ruptions which had defiled it. It served 
 to throw off whatever would not pass its 
 ordeal, though it allowed to pass, on proofs 
 indirect and by implication, such articles 
 of faith as could exhibit the stamp of 
 Catholic antiquity, and might be assumed 
 to have been sufficiently familiar to the 
 sacred writer and those whom he addressed, 
 to account for those indirect and apparently 
 faint allusions, which would not be allowed 
 the same force of proof, if the first uitima- 
 tio)i, as well as the proof, was to be gathered 
 from Scripture alone. In this way, wliile 
 the anti-catholic and anti-scriptural corrup- 
 tions of Popery were discarded, there were 
 allowed to pass the test, Infant Baptism, 
 A a 3 
 
358 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 Baptismal Regeneration, the sacramental 
 efficacy of the Eucharist, Episcopal author- 
 ity, and Apostolical succession. To which 
 we might add^, in the judgment of many, 
 the divinity of the Word and of the Spirit, 
 and the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity. 
 
 Things however are now changed. The 
 Sixth Article no longer serves to protect 
 us ; since all will admit it, even while 
 denying the points of faith which the 
 Church receives on its authority. They 
 will not allow the Church to read her own 
 Article, and interpret her own declarations, 
 in her own sense s. First, there are those, 
 
 s In a note appended to a former Lecture, (p. 150.) 
 allusion was made to the inconsistency and unfairness of 
 those who, while professing to abide by the Sixth Article 
 of our Church, yet always overlook or disregard the clause 
 " In the name of the Holy Scripture we do understand 
 " those canonical books of the Old and New Testament, 
 " of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church^** 
 — which involves an admission of their entire dependence 
 on the Traditional testimony of the Church for the 
 genuineness of the Scriptures themselves. 
 
 A similar instance of unfairness and inconsistency 
 occurs in the case now under consideration, in which they 
 take upon themselves to interpret the clause, " Holy 
 " Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation,'' 
 as predicating of the Scripture, that it is the guide as well 
 
LECTURE VIII. 859 
 
 even within the communion of our Church, 
 to our shame and sorrow be it said, who will 
 deny that Baptismal regeneration will ])ass 
 the test of the Sixth Article, or episcoi)acy, 
 or the sacramental efficacy of the Eucharist. 
 Well then — the erroneous princi])le of con- 
 ciliating by conceding points of difference 
 leads to the abandonment of these. I'hen, 
 following up the principle, others will com- 
 plain that we allow the divinity of the Son 
 and Holy Spirit to pass the test, and will 
 deny that it can do so ; as was stated in the 
 passages from Milton and the modern Soci- 
 nians, quoted in the second Lecture : and 
 how these latter are to be replied to, if the 
 argument of the former class be admitted, it 
 
 as the standard of faith : wliereas, wouhl they but go on 
 to the remaining clause of the sentence, viz., " so that 
 " whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved 
 " thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should 
 " be believed as an article of the faith, or be thought re- 
 " quisite or necessary to salvation " — which assigns to the 
 former its proper force as declaratory of the sufficiency 
 of the Holy Scriptures for salvation — they would see the 
 meaning and intention of the framers of the artirl«\ m 
 erecting this, as it were, the barrier on the side of 
 Popery, as the testimony of the Church is on the side of 
 Heresy and Sectarianism. The first clause enunciates the 
 decision of the Reformers; the second defines its mivming. 
 
 A a 4 
 
360 LECTURE yill. 
 
 is not easy to say. After these follow others, 
 protesting against allowing the doctrine of 
 the Trinity in Unity to pass the barrier, 
 and denying that it can do so. In the 
 train of these follow others, each denying 
 the sufficiency of proof in Scripture, for 
 such articles of faith, as his fears or interests 
 lead him to wish to be untrue. Thus the 
 body of Christ, in its passage through the 
 Sectarian band, is torn limb from limb, de- 
 prived of its vitality, the residue, afte]; these 
 successive mutilations, being but a dead 
 unmeaning nothing, to which all or any 
 may lay claim, without indeed involving 
 any difference or dispute, inasmuch as 
 there is nothing of shape or substance on 
 which a difference of opinion could arise. 
 Yet all these, the while, call themselves 
 Christians ! Their faith they term a belief 
 in Christianity ! They all profess to concur 
 in the Sixth Article of our Church ! 
 
 And what has occurred to produce this ? 
 The virtual suppression of the Church's 
 teaching; the denial of the Church's au- 
 thority in matters of faith ; the losing sight 
 of the circumstance that the Christian. 
 
LECTURE VIII. 3()1 
 
 Scriptures are written for Christians, and 
 addressed to Christians, and that they pre- 
 suppose, in the reader, at least elementary 
 instruction in the doctrines of which they 
 speak, and therefore speak in the way of 
 allusion, as to things so far known and 
 familiar; and that, on this principle, we are 
 content with allusions and proofs by impli- 
 cation, where, on the supposition that Scrip- 
 ture was our first instructor and only guide, 
 we should, with the Sectarian, and on his 
 principle, not feel satisfied without more full 
 and direct statements. 
 
 These evils then having arisen from the 
 suppression of the Church's authority and 
 teaching, and the undue relative preponder- 
 ance assigned to Scripture, as the teacher of 
 doctrine, distinguished from its authority as 
 proof subsequently, our object must be to 
 restore the balance between the two sacred 
 instruments, and to assign to eacb its due 
 office in the formation of a pure faitli. This 
 is no easy task, because we have arrayed 
 arainst us the Sectarian and the Ration- 
 alist, as well as many adopting their re- 
 spective principles within tlie i)ale of tlie 
 
362 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 Church — the one maintaining that our prin- 
 ciple is unscriptural, and derogatory to the 
 sufficiency of the Holy Scripture ; the 
 other, objecting to it as irrational, unphilo- 
 sophical, unfavourable to the progress of 
 truth and free inquiry, opposed to the 
 nature of man, and hostile to the develope- 
 ment and full exercise of his moral and 
 mental powers. In reply to these, it has 
 been attempted to be shewn, in these Lec- 
 tures, that the Church's principle of bias- 
 sing the mind before giving the Bible to 
 read, is perfectly Scriptural, conformable 
 to the general analogy of things, adapted 
 to the moral nature of man, and conform- 
 able with the principle observed in all 
 moral instruction ; while the identity of 
 the views, in favour of which the Church 
 now prejudices the minds of her children, 
 with those asserted to have been taught by 
 the Apostles themselves, and with reference 
 to which their writings were penned, was 
 alleged to be proved by that on which we 
 are compelled to rest the genuineness of 
 Scripture itself, viz. the universal testi- 
 mony of the Church : that the objections 
 
LECTURE VIII. 363 
 
 urged against the one, lie against the other 
 also; and that the seeming objections against 
 both, only served to denote in both their ana- 
 logy and conformity to the laws of moral evi- 
 dence, and to mark their adaptation to our 
 moral nature, and their suitableness to our 
 condition as moral and responsible beings. 
 
 Nor need it be thought an objection, 
 that the Church be deemed the object of 
 defence, rather than Christianity itself. It 
 is upon the Church, and not upon Chris- 
 tianity generally, that the attacks are made 
 by the Rationalist and Sectarian : and this, 
 for a very obvious reason. In former times, 
 Christianity and the Church were nearly 
 synonymous terms ; and in attacking the 
 Church, Christianity itself was also assailed. 
 Now, however, from the multiplicity and 
 daily increasing number of Sects, all of 
 whom, no matter how far removed from 
 the Apostles' doctrine, still call themselves 
 Christians, it happens that those to whom 
 the main or any doctrines of the Gospel 
 are a stumblingblock, have no need to ob- 
 ject to Christianity itself, or renounce it in 
 name, there being always some Sect to 
 
364 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 which they can profess to belong, and in 
 which they can retain the name of Chris- 
 tian, however virtually they may have for- 
 feited their claim to it : and generally 
 speaking, men are not disposed to go the 
 whole length of opposing the opinions of 
 the generality, if it can be avoided. But 
 in the midst of this apostasy, the Church, 
 continuing to hold the primitive Catholic 
 faith, in all its purity and entireness, re- 
 ceives the brunt of the assaults, which 
 were formerly directed against Christianity 
 itself. And since Scripture alone, from 
 the nature of the case, will not defend her 
 faith against those who conceive they have 
 formed theirs by that rule, and since she 
 therefore professes to have another guide, 
 which, together with Scripture, forms her 
 rule of faith, — this other guide becomes the 
 object of attack on the part of her enemies ; 
 which it has been my object to vindicate in 
 these Lectures. It does not therefore rest 
 with ourselves, whether the attention of 
 men shall be called to what are termed 
 Church principles ; that being already done 
 by the attacks made on our faith, which 
 
LECTURE VIII. 365 
 
 can only be replied to, against tlie Sectarian 
 and Rationalist's argument, by a declaration 
 of the principle on whicli we defend it, 
 and which forms the specific feature wliicli 
 distinguishes us from them. We are com- 
 pelled, therefore, to call the attention of 
 men to these principles, even thougli the 
 only object to be attained by it were our 
 own defence. We may, however, hope tliat 
 other benefits, and those of the greatest 
 moment to the progress of evangelical 
 truth, may flow from the discussion of 
 them, which the last few years have wit- 
 nessed. Tw^o of these in particular should 
 be mentioned. 
 
 I. As regards many nominally in our 
 communion, as well as many without, there 
 can be no question that, for a long period 
 prior to the close of the last century, real 
 evangelical preaching was at a very low ebb 
 in the Church in this country. Without 
 entering into the causes w^iich led to n 
 revival of spiritual religion, it is well known 
 that attention was much called to it by 
 those who had separated from the connnu- 
 nion of the Church. From this, it was not 
 
366 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 unnatural that spiritual religion should by 
 the unreflecting and ignorant be identified 
 with dissent. When further taken up by 
 men, not indeed out of our communion, but 
 men whose principles approximated materi- 
 ally to those of Sectarians, it was not un- 
 natural that spirituality even in the Church, 
 should be associated with the idea of laxity 
 on the subject of Church discipline and 
 Apostolic authority ; and that orthodoxy 
 and Church principles should, by those 
 ignorant of their nature, be deemed life- 
 less and devoid of spirituality, as political 
 rather than ecclesiastical or spiritual : and 
 this impression has, from various causes, too 
 long prevailed. Those, however, who have 
 given their attention to orthodoxy and 
 Church principles, are aware that they are 
 the most inspiring, invigorating, — the most 
 spiritual and evangelical ; not robbing men 
 of those spiritual views which dissent and 
 latitudinarianism profess to open to them, 
 but giving these views, only more spiritual, 
 offering in a purer form, that which the 
 other could but offer in a spurious one. 
 Without passing any judgment on those 
 
LECTURE VIII. 367 
 
 whose efforts first seemed to lead the way 
 to more active Christianity, or deieiidin^ 
 those whose lifeless professed orthodoxy is 
 said to have been the cause which called 
 them into being, we may ask, what will l)e 
 the probable effect of the revival among us, 
 of pure Church principles in the true and 
 Apostolic sense of the word ? Nay, what 
 does not experience begin to suggest, in 
 addition to the antecedent probability of it ? 
 That it will purify the Church, — that it 
 will try the spirits of men, — that those 
 who, either wholly or in part, departed 
 from Catholic principles under the im- 
 pression that they were lifeless, uns])irit- 
 ual, political rather than religious, — that 
 these, when they find that true Church 
 principles, fairly carried out, are more spirit- 
 ual, more evangelical, more supporting in 
 the hour of need, than the spurious excite- 
 ment produced by dissent and Sectarian 
 principles, will come back with heart and 
 soul to the bosom of the Church, and tliat 
 much zeal and piety now lost to the 
 Church, may, under grace, be won back 
 to it. While on the other hand, those who 
 
368 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 adopted Sectarian views from motives of 
 pride, as is frequently the case — first, as 
 involving the assumed right of judging and 
 choosing for themselves, so acceptable to the 
 pride of the natural man ; next, as affording 
 the means, which in the Church they could 
 not have possessed, of acquiring notoriety 
 and influence as the leaders of a party, the 
 little popes as it were of a little circle, — 
 these will naturally be exasperated at the 
 establishment of principles, which would 
 extinguish their undue importance by merg- 
 ing them in the great body of the Church 
 catholic, and put an end to their spurious 
 influence, by removing that on which it 
 rests; like the pohtical demagogue, who, 
 while inveighing against bad government, 
 is still more afraid of good government, 
 which, by correcting abuses, removes, with 
 them, the foundation of his influence. 
 
 Another important result, to which we 
 may not unreasonably look forward, from 
 the revival and re-establishment of true 
 Church principles, is one which regards the 
 members of the Roman Catholic Church, 
 and its probable influence in recalling 
 
LECTURE VIII. .SO!) 
 
 them to a purer faith. To this must every 
 sincere Christian look with deep interest. 
 As yet, little has been done towards tlieir 
 reformation ; to which manv causes have 
 contributed, over which we may have had 
 no control. But may it not be owing, in a 
 great degree, to the manner in which their 
 creed is spoken of by many, and which, 
 indirectly at least, receives our sanction '^ 
 Let us not palliate what is really sinful 
 and opposed to God's word ; but let us re- 
 gard the matter impartially, and place our- 
 selves in imagination in their position : — 
 convinced that they hold much that is 
 true ; that we ourselves allow it to be so : 
 that we admit their orders and succession, 
 while we repudiate those of Sectarians: that, 
 as to Israel, however they may have abused 
 the privilege, to them were committed the 
 oracles of God: that our own Reformers, 
 by whom we profess to stand, held much 
 in common with them, which we profess to 
 hold, but which in practice we virtually 
 renounce : that they are assailed by every 
 violence of language, having things im- 
 puted which they disown ; having charged 
 
 Bb 
 
370 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 upon them, as sinful errors, things which 
 even we nominally hold : that many things 
 which we hold in common with them, yet 
 if we avow openly, are, from popular igno- 
 rance, charged on us as sin also : and that 
 many, far more removed from us than they 
 are, in corruptions of the faith, are yet re- 
 ceived by us as brethren, though joined to 
 us by hardly any other bond than the 
 negative one of difference with them ; 
 nay, that we reckon among these, many of 
 whom the Apostle would have said Ana- 
 thema maranatha. Let us consider all 
 this calmly and dispassionately ; and can 
 we wonder that they should look with 
 coldness and suspicion on those who place 
 themselves in such a relation to them ? 
 
 Can we expect that they will forego 
 their chivalrous devotion to their own 
 Church, and renounce hereditary feelings 
 and prejudices for that cold selfish Sect- 
 arianism, from which every thing noble 
 and generous would seem to be excluded ? 
 Can we wonder that they should prefer 
 their own faith, with all its corruptions, 
 to that unmeaning ultra-protestantism, 
 
LECTURE VIII. 371 
 
 which, having little more in common with 
 us than with them, has no distinctive fea- 
 ture in itself, nor bond of union l)etween 
 its several members, but that of disiigree- 
 ment with them? that they should pre- 
 fer even the superstitions and vanities 
 of their own creed, where Christ is still 
 worshipped as God, and the sacraments 
 deemed channels and pledges of grace, to 
 that profane indifference to Apostolic doc- 
 trine, and disregard of Apostolic injunc- 
 tion, which, while denouncing them as 
 Antichrist, hails in bonds of Christian fel- 
 lowship those who deny the Lord that 
 bought them, and of whom they are told in 
 the Scripture, which we also profess to hold 
 in reverence as the word of God, that they 
 receive them not into their house, neither 
 bid them God speed ? When they behold 
 in US such inconsistency and contradiction 
 between profession and practice, may they 
 not find in this a plea to do the like, and 
 content themselves with the reflection, that 
 their profession, whether error or not, is, 
 like our own, not always in practice acted 
 upon ? Is it too much to believe that there 
 
 Bb 2 
 
372 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 is yet in the bosom of the Roman Church a 
 Fenelon or a Pascal; — that there is yet many 
 an one who, though aware, in a great de- 
 gree, of the errors of his Church, yet regards 
 them through the medium of filial rever- 
 ence, and with the leniency of filial affec- 
 tion ;- — that he sees whatever therein is fair 
 and good, and loves it too well to be aban- 
 doned for that of which he knows not the 
 value, or even the nature ; and will there- 
 fore wait for better times, and a better 
 spirit towards him than that he now expe- 
 riences ? Can we expect him to renounce 
 the faith in which he was born and edu- 
 cated, in which his fathers lived and died, 
 without offering what is to him a better 
 and purer one ? And it must be remem- 
 bered, that those principles are so absorb- 
 ing, whether right or not, that one who 
 holds them at all, will retain them in errorj 
 rather than embrace a system which em- 
 bodies them in no shape whatever. 
 
 Looking at the associations avowedly 
 formed for their conversion, and for pro- 
 moting what are erroneously termed the 
 principles of the Reformation, — the spirit 
 
LECTURE VIII. S7S 
 
 by which they are actuated, — the persons 
 of whom they are composed, — not even 
 necessarily baptized persons; — in other 
 societies, the official seat at their board, 
 and the official voice in the direction of 
 their operations, assigned to the authors 
 of heresy and schism, (from which we p7'o- 
 fess daily to pray for deliverance,) — could 
 we judge harshly of the Romanist, if he 
 recoiled, with feelings of something beyond 
 mere distrust, from such advances ? Could 
 we blame him if he experienced, in reference 
 to his Church and its self-styled reformers, 
 the feelings which elicited from the elo- 
 quent and patriotic statesman, in reference 
 to his country, the sentiment that " to 
 " avoid the evils of inconstancy and ver- 
 " satility, ten thousand times worse than 
 " those of obstinacy and the blindest pre- 
 "judice, we have consecrated the State, 
 " that no man should approach to look 
 " into its defects or corruptions, but with 
 " due caution ; that he should never dream 
 « of beginning its reformation by its sub- 
 " version ; that he should ai)proach to ihe 
 " faults of the State, as to the wounds of 
 Bb3 
 
374 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 " a father, with pious awe and trembling 
 " solicitude. By this wise prejudice, we 
 " are taught to look with horror on those 
 " children of their country, who are 
 " prompt, rashly to hack that aged parent 
 " in pieces, and to put him into the 
 " kettle of magicians, in hopes that, by 
 " their poisonous weeds and wild incan- 
 " tations, they may regenerate the paternal 
 " constitution, and renovate their father's 
 " life." ^ 
 
 But if we, without relaxing the great 
 principle of the Reformation — the right 
 of appeal to Holy Scripture — would but 
 carry out the principles which we profess 
 to hold, and which our Church did also in 
 practice hold, till puritanism, and the profli- 
 gate age which succeeded it, dealt such 
 deadly blows against them ; if we admit 
 the legitimate authority of the Church — 
 that with which Scripture itself records it 
 to have been invested — our limit being the 
 concurrence of the written word; if we 
 listen patiently to the presumptive claims 
 
 h Burke, on the French Revolution. 
 
LECTURE VIII. 375 
 
 of Antiquity, not as to he implicitly re- 
 ceived, but with respect due to the voice 
 of Antiquity, as such, still reservin^^ the 
 right of comparing it afterwards with Holy 
 Scripture; and if, in our differences with 
 the Romanist arising hence, we are content 
 to argue with him on his own ground, not 
 disputing the claims of his church, as such, 
 but questioning the grounds on which he 
 would here apply them ; proceeding in a 
 Christian spirit ; beginning, if he wishes, 
 with the claims which his church ought to 
 have on her children from her mere exist- 
 ence, till found to be false ; trying this, 
 and tracing with him the stream upwards, 
 shewing him how and when it became pol- 
 luted, — that his present error was not held 
 by those whose authority he professes to 
 take ; and thus, while removing his false 
 prop, giving, by gentle hand, a better, a 
 surer testimony of Antiquity, crowning it 
 by the testimony of Holy Scripture ; — is it 
 altogether visionary to hope that he may 
 be led to reconsider his errors, and that his 
 branch may yet be reabsorbed into the 
 purer portion of the one Holy Catholic 
 B b 4 
 
S76 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 Church ?§ If such a blessed result may 
 not be looked for, we shall at least have 
 done that which the word of God warrants, 
 and which Christian prudence would sug- 
 gest, as affording the greatest room for ex- 
 pecting to reclaim him. And, what is of 
 no less moment for us to consider, we shall 
 have done much towards removing from our 
 own souls the guilt, which there may be 
 too much ground to fear now lies against 
 them, of confirming him in error by our 
 treatment of him, and the exhibition of our 
 own inconsistency, and of making ourselves 
 thereby partakers of his sin. 
 
 Whether or no, however, any of these 
 beneficial results may flow from the revival, 
 in a pure form, of sound Church prinjciples, 
 our duty and course is independent of that 
 result. Let us do our best, and leave the 
 issue, however discouraging, in God's hands. 
 At the same time, the prospect of success 
 
 § The reformation of individual Romanists, to which 
 this refers, leaves alone the question whether the Roman 
 Church will ever be reformed as a Church, and as such 
 record its reformation by any formal decree or solemn act 
 of renunciation ; or whether, as a Church, it stands irre- 
 vocably committed, as some think, by its own decrees. 
 
LECTURE VIII. 377 
 
 should not be left out of the account in 
 shaping our views, were the time and mode 
 of acting left to our own discretion. But 
 here, as was observed, we have no choice : 
 the course is forced upon us by the circum- 
 stances in which we live. Still we may, as 
 we should, be cautious and wary, combining 
 the wisdom of the serpent with the sim- 
 plicity of the dove. There will ever be 
 those who either want the mind to under- 
 stand our principles, or the honesty not to 
 misrepresent them. By these we shall be 
 accused of leaning to Popery, and of weak- 
 ening the reverence for, and detracting from 
 the authority of Holy Scripture. That 
 they should do this, involves no objection 
 to the principles themselves, because, as 
 was observed, pride brooks no restraint ; 
 and to the lovers of license, any restriction 
 on their interpretation of Scripture is an 
 offence, as the restraint of civil powers is a 
 grievance to the turbulent and self-willed. 
 But if any sincere and humble minded 
 weak brother should be offended, let us 
 deal tenderly and charitably with him, 
 standino; fast indeed in our Christian liberty, 
 
378 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 but taking heed, lest, by any means, this 
 liberty of ours become a stumblingblock 
 to them that are weak. 
 
 But as to any charge of undervaluing 
 Scripture^ because the circumstances of our 
 day require us rather to advocate, in com- 
 parison^ the authority of the Church, — on 
 that principle St. Paul might be accused of 
 making light of good works, or St. James 
 of denying the doctrine of justification by 
 faith, because the circumstances in which 
 they respectively wrote, required them to 
 urge in particular the points they respect- 
 ively enforced. If we do not doubt that 
 the two Apostles agreed in that great 
 doctrine, and that each would have ex- 
 pressed himself as the other did, had their 
 circumstances been reversed, as little can 
 we doubt that those who, at the Reforma- 
 tion, advocated the authority and sufficiency 
 of Scripture, and those who now advo- 
 cate the authority of the Church and the 
 Church's teaching, had the same object in 
 view, and would have expressed themselves 
 each in the same way, had they been placed 
 in the same circumstances. 
 
LECTURE VIII. 379 
 
 Still we require caution, and every exer- 
 cise of Christian prudence, that we do not 
 defeat our object, nor eventually retard the 
 cause of truth by being too })recij)itate ; 
 lest, from haste or want of judgment, we 
 cause offence, and thence create a reaction 
 in favour of sectarianism, analogous to that 
 caused by the violence of Popery, from the 
 effects of which we are even yet suffering. 
 These liabilities to error we cannot utterly 
 avoid ; to the end it must be, while the 
 agents are human ; nor is it any objection 
 to a system, that it is liable to it. Our 
 duty is to guard against it as much as pos- 
 sible, both by checking our own personal 
 tendencies, and, which is no less important, 
 by taking heed lest we personally cause 
 offence — lest we create in the minds of 
 others, by our own temper or conduct, a 
 feeling which almost unavoidably in their 
 minds will transfer itself from us to the prin- 
 ciples we advocate. Our personal life and 
 conversation, our mode of advocating and 
 recommending our principles, will have an 
 influence in advancing or retarding tliem, 
 for which we shall be responsible. The tone 
 
380 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 and temper necessary for this, is only to be 
 obtained by cultivating Christian principles, 
 by holy living, by watchfulness and prayer, 
 by frequent study of Holy Scripture, and 
 imbibing from it its spirit. Herein is 
 one of the many blessed advantages of 
 reading Holy Scripture, beyond the mere 
 proof of doctrines. Against the heretic 
 and sectarian we are obliged to assert the 
 authority of the Church, and to guard with 
 some jealousy the relation in which, by our 
 Lord's appointment, as declared in Holy 
 Scripture, that Scripture stands to the 
 Christian doctrines. But to those truly in 
 communion with us, the war of controversy 
 may cease ; and we may turn to Holy 
 Scripture, not with a jealous fear, lest weak, 
 unstable, or proud, they should wrest it to 
 their own destruction — not merely to prove 
 a doctrine or refute error — but to trace out 
 its practical relation as exhibited in Holy 
 Scripture — to deepen the impression on our 
 hearts — to purify our souls — to imbibe its 
 spirit — and especially, in reference to the 
 present subject, that spirit of charity to- 
 wards the ignorance, prejudices, and way- 
 
LECTURE VIII. 381 
 
 wardness of others, which ^Ssufferetli U)ng 
 "and is kind; that vaunteth not itself, is 
 " not puffed up, doth not behave itself un- 
 " seemly, seeketh not its own, is not easily 
 " provoked, thinketh no evil, beareth all 
 "things, hopeth all things, endureth all 
 " things." 
 
 For, lastly, another consideration which 
 ought to v^eigh much with us in enforcing 
 the duty of patience and moderation in the 
 establishment of our principles is, that the 
 faults which led to the errors into which 
 men have fallen, are our own work, i. e. 
 that of the Church, of w4iich we, as mem- 
 bers, and communicating one with another, 
 are partakers : we must therefore bear with 
 much, as though we were bearing with our- 
 selves and our own sins. What if we think 
 ourselves less culpable than those w^io have 
 gone before us ? We know not if we are ; 
 and even were it so, it is but in harmony 
 with all God's dispensations, natural and 
 revealed, that we suffer without reference 
 to that. Judah was carried into ca])tivity 
 for sins which their fathers had connnitted, 
 but the penalty of which they seemed to 
 
382 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 suffer. Yet if they filled up the ini- 
 quity of their fathers, why should not we ? 
 Certainly, in the mysterious counsels of 
 God, the human race seems regarded as 
 one; and his object seems attained, if it 
 be fulfilled to one generation. It was thus 
 in reference to the flood, the captivity, 
 the filling up iniquity ; and thus also will 
 it be in the fulfilment of the prophecy, 
 that " the earth shall be filled with the 
 "knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as 
 " the waters cover the sea." 
 
 But be that as it may, we do partici- 
 pate, through this mysterious partnership, 
 in sins which we have apparently not com- 
 mitted, and in blessings which we certainly 
 have not earned. Others have laboured, 
 and we have entered into their labours ; 
 and, by the same appointment, we must 
 be content to labour, though others shall 
 enter into it and reap its fruits ? Let us 
 be satisfied that our Lord's kingdom does 
 come, content to receive the blessing through 
 faith, and enjoy it through the commu- 
 nion of saints. If time is no object in 
 God's counsels, why should we be impatient 
 
LECTURE VIII. 388 
 
 to see the termination of the work of our 
 own little span of life ? If four thousand 
 years were not deemed too much to pre- 
 pare the way for the fulness of time, before 
 the coming of the promised Deliverer ; 
 if four hundred years were not too much 
 for the fulfilment of the promise to tlie 
 Patriarch, that his seed should inherit the 
 land ; on what principle shall we justify 
 impatience, or think that God has forgotten 
 us, or that his promise has failed and 
 come to an end ? If the Patriarch could 
 look forward in faith to the period wlicn 
 in his seed the nations of the earth should 
 be blessed; if, through the vista of cen- 
 turies — in number even more than have 
 since witnessed its fulfilment — he could see 
 that day and be glad, — how does this not 
 rebuke the sluggishness of our faith ? Let 
 us rather reflect — and while we do so, it 
 may serve to nourish and increase our faith 
 in the ultimate triumph of the kingdom of 
 Christ, — that while, with those of former 
 years, it has been given to us to hear and 
 see those blessed things which ])rophets and 
 kings had in vain desired to hear and see, 
 
384 LECTURE VIII. 
 
 we have also a blessedness, which even 
 the Apostles shared not on earth, save 
 through faith — the experience of eighteen 
 centuries, attesting the faithfulness of the 
 promise, that He is with us always, even 
 to the end of the world. 
 
Theological Seminary-Speer Library 
 
 1 1012 01 
 
 30 9822