YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Bought with the income of the ANN S. FARNAM FUND ADVERTISEMENT This series of ten volumes, each complete in itself, is designed to constitute a connected treat ment of the entire range of Catholic Doctrine. > I. Introduction. (1907) ,- IT. Authority, Ecclesiastical and Biblical. (1908) 5.111., The Being and Attributes or God. (1909) --IV. The Trinity. (1910) »rt :L ^V. Creation and 'Man. (1912) ,-VI. The Incarnation. (1915) .^VII. The Passion and Exaltation of Christ. (1918) -JeTH. The Church and the Sacramental System. (1920) IX. The Sacraments. X. Eschatology: Indexes. It is hoped that the remaining volumes will be published at intervals of about eighteen months. THE CHURCH AND THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM 3Sp the Same author Introduction to Dogmatic Theology: crown 8vo. Authority, Ecclesiastical and Biblical: crown 8vo. The Being and Attributes of God: crown 8vo. The Trinity: crown 8vo. Creation and Man: crown 8vo. The Incarnation: crown 8vo. The Passion and Exaltation of Christ: crown 8 vo. The Kenotic Theory : Considered with particular refer ence to its Anglican forms and arguments; crown Svo. Evolution and the Fall: Bishop Paddock Lectures, 1909-1010; crown 8vo. Theological Outlines — Three Volumes, ismo. Vol. I. The Doctrine of God Vol. II. The Doctrine 01? Man and 01? the God-Man Vol. HI. The Doctrine of the Church and op Last Things The Historical Position of the Episcopal Church: i2mo, paper covers. The Bible and Modern Criticism: nmo, paper THE CHURCH AND THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM BY THE Rev. FRANCIS J. HALL, D.D. PROFESSOR OF DOGMATIC THEOLOGY IN THE GENERAL THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, NEW YORK CITY LONGMANS, GREEN AND CO. FOURTH AVENUE £sf 30ra STREET, NEW YORK 39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON BOMBAY, CALCUTTA AND MADRAS 1920 COPYRIGHT, IQ20, BY LONGMANS, GREEN AND CO. DeUtratrU TO THE BLESSED MEMORY OF WILLIAM PALMER TO WHOM ANGLICAN THEOLOGY OF THE CHURCH OWES MUCH PREFACE This volume deals with the temporal mission and work of the Holy Spirit; the Church and its minis try; the doctrine of grace and of justification; and the sacramental system at large — the theology of the several sacraments to be separately dealt with in the next volume. In the present divided state of Christendom these subjects bristle with controversies — especially such as owe their inception to the divisive movements of the sixteenth century. The writer has tried to transcend the confusing terms and arguments of that period, and to present catholic doctrine con cerning the Church and the sacraments afresh, in language as free as possible from invidious and misleading associations. His success in doing this cannot at this stage of denominational development be more than partial. But if he has to any degree helped on the interests of better mutual understand ing, and of the growth to a common mind which is the condition sine qua non of restoration of unity between Catholics and Protestants, he will be thankful. The titles of works most frequently referred to are given in bibliographies on pp. i, 38, 116, 248 and 281. In the chapters which follow these several lists, works referred to are usually designated simply by their authors' names. CONTENTS CHAPTER I THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPLRIT Part I. Previous to the Incarnation PAGE § i. His Person and its revelation i § 2. His economy 6 § 3. His work among the Gentiles 8 § 4. In Israel 11 Part II. After the Incarnation § 5. His work in Christ 13 § 6. In the Christian dispensation 15 § 7. In the Church 20 § 8. Special gifts and uncovenanted operations .... 23 Part HI. In Christian Souls § 9. Before Baptism 26 § 10. In Baptism 29 § 11. In other means of grace 31 § 12. Stages of the life in grace 33 CHAPTER II THE CHURCH IDEA Part I. In History § 1. In the Old Testament 38 § 2. In the New Testament 41 § 3. Subsequent developments 45 § 4. Modern departures 49 xii CONTENTS Part II. Some Modem Difficulties PAGE § 5. Caused by reformable abuses 52 § 6. Alleged unspirituality of external machinery ... 56 § 7. Sacerdotalism 59 § 8. Christian divisions no remedy 63 Part III. Grounds of Hope ] § 9. Demands of Christian consciences 66 § 10. Cooperative Christian scholarship 69 § 11. Increased influence of social conceptions .... 72 § 12. Assumptions here adopted 75 CHAPTER III THE NATURE OE THE CHURCH Part I. As Ecclesia § 1. Ecclesia and Christ's use of the term 78 § 2. Apostolic use 81 § 3. The ecclesia not an invisible Church 83 § 4. Christ founded the Church 87 Part II. As the Body of Christ § 5. This description not merely metaphorical .... 90 § 6. An organic extension of Christ's glorified Manhood 94 § 7. Determines the organized relations of the baptized. 96 § 8. Explains the Church's chronic vitality 99 Part III. As Machinery of the Kingdom § 9. Christ's use of the term "Kingdom" 101 § 10. The Kingdom's sacramental form 104 § 11. Spiritual limitation of jurisdiction 106 §12. And of proper ecclesiastical methods m CONTENTS xiii CHAPTER IV the christian ministry Part I. In the New Testament PAGE i. Catholic presuppositions 116 2. Christ's action and teaching 120 3. Apostolic developments 123 4. Apostolic teaching 128 Part n. In Post-Apostolic Times 5. Consensus of many centuries 132 6. The bearing of sub-apostolic data 136 7. Objections deduced from sub-apostolic data . . . 140 8. Recapitulation and conclusion 150 Part HI. Its Functions 9. Common to Christ and His Church 154 10. Prophetic function 157 11. Priestly function 160 12. Kingly function 164 CHAPTER V UNITY AND HOLINESS Part I. Notes of the Church 1. What they are 168 2. How identified 17° Part II. Unity 3. Definitive aspects 173 4. How obscured J76 5. Reasons for restoring visible unity 179 6. Conditions of such restoration 181 xiv CONTENTS Part III. Holiness PAGE § 7. Defined. Distinct from righteousness 186 § 8. Holy in vocation, function and destiny 189 § 9. How holiness is obscured 192 § 10. Remedies 195 CHAPTER VI CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICTTY Part I Catholicity § 1. Primary aspects 199 § 2. Incidental aspects 201 § 3. Misleading uses of "catholic" 205 § 4. Exclusive aspects of catholicity 210 Part II. Apostolkity § 5. Denned. The sendings involved 213 § 6. Organic and sacramental validity 216 § 7. Functional continuity involved . • 218 § 8. Static and changing aspects 221 CHAPTER VII THE ANGLICAN CHURCHES Part I. Constructive Factors § 1. Pre-reformation factors 225 § 2. Effects of the reformation 229 § 3. New sixteenth-century factors 232 § 4. Modern factors 235 Part II. Anglican Claim and Mission § 5. Bases of the Anglican claim 239 § 6. A catholic ministry retained 241 § 7. And catholic sacraments 242 § 8. And the catholic faith 244 CONTENTS xv CHAPTER VHI THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE Part I. Its Place and Bearing PAGE § i. The term grace 248 § 2. Pre-Christian dispensations 250 § 3. Aspects of Christian grace 253 § 4. Divisions of "actual" grace 255 Part II. Sanctifying Grace § 5. What it does 257 § 6. Justification and its context 259 § 7. Causes. Justifying faith 263 § 8. Actualized righteousness required 267 Part HI. Good Works § 9. Their relation to justification 270 § 10. How meritorious 273 § 11. The question of quantity 275 § 12. The baptized who die in infancy 278 CHAPTER IX THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM Part I. Introduction § 1. The sacramental principle 281 § 2. Matter useful for spirit 284 § 3. This true in religion 286 § 4. The social and ministerial principle 288 Part II. Historical § 5. Divine institution 290 § 6. Ecclesiastical development 294 § 7. Definition interpreted by sevenfold application . . 297 § 8. Protestant and Anglican doctrine 299 xvi CONTENTS Part III. Constructive Survey page § 9. Introductory 301 § 10. Baptism 302 § 11. Confirmation 304 § 12. Holy Eucharist 303 § 13. Penance 307 § 14. Holy Order 309 § 15. Holy Matrimony 310 § 16. Unction of the Sick , 311 CHAPTER X OUTWARD SIGNS Part I. In General § 1. Valid and invalid 313 § 2. Sacramentum, matter and form 316 § 3. Minister and intention 318 § 4. Recipients and their disposition 320 § 5. Causality, virtus, benefit and res 321 Part II. In Particular § 6. Baptism 323 § 7. Confirmation 327 § 8. Holy Eucharist 330 § 9. Penance 333 § 10. Holy Order 336 § n. Holy Matrimony 339 §12. Unction of the Sick 342 THE CHURCH AND THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM CHAPTER I THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT I. Previous to the Incarnation § i. In a previous volume the doctrine of the Person of the Holy Spirit has been set forth in rela tion to the more comprehensive doctrine of the Trinity.1 It has there been shown that the Holy 1 In The Trinity: Historical data, pp. 25-26, 47-48, 88-g6; biblical, pp. 120-121, 1313-134; theological detail, pp. 148-150, 217, 221-222, 230-237, 258-259, 262-263, 271-276. On the Holy Spirit and His work, see among earlier treatises, St. Athanasius, Epp. ad Serapion; St. Basil magn., de Spiritu Sancto; St. Didymus, Alex., de Spiritu Sancto; St. Thomas, Summa Theol., I. xxxvi-xliii et passim: Later treatises, H. B. Swete, The Holy Spirit in the N. Test., and The Holy Spirit in the Ancient Church; E. W. Winstanley, The Spirit in the New Test.; W. H. Hutchings, Person and Work of the Holy Ghost; A. C. Downer, Mission and Ministration of the Holy Spirit; E. B. Pusey, On the Clause "And the Son"; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual of Cath. Theol., §§ 94-98, et passim; Ad Tanquerey, Synopsis Theol. Dogm., de Deo Trino; Jos. Pohle, The Divine Trinity, pp. 96-112, 168-191; J. B. Franzelin, De Deo Trino, Th. xxv-xxvii, xxxii-xli, xlvi-xlviii. Cf . Cath. Encyc. and Die. of Christ. Biog., s. w. "Holy Ghost"; Hastings, Die. of Bib. and Die. of Christ, s. vv. "Holy Spirit." In refs. to these works, the author's name only will ordinarily be given. 2 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT Spirit is the1 third Person of the Trinity, proceeding eternally from (&) the Father through (dia, per) the Son, coessential (buoobcnos) , coeternal and coequal with both. By reason of His procession, He is third in the trinitarian order of Persons; but by reason of His coessentiality, He shares in the circumcession or the eternal existence of the divine Persons in each other. He is speculatively de scribed as the bond of love between the Father and the Son, and in Him the Trinity is completed, so to speak; for He proceeds from the other divine Persons, and in Him the divine processions have their term. On this account, and because He is the Pluminator, by whose assistance we attain to truth and grace in Christ, a special sanctity is as cribed to Him; and to blaspheme Him is the grav est of all sins against God. We cannot now give a more detailed theological exposition of the mysteries of His Person, but must pass on and consider His work. Yet a few remarks concerning the manner of the revelation of the Spirit as recorded in Scripture will afford a helpful introduction to our subject. The Holy Spirit was not known by Old Testa ment writers as a distinct Person in the Godhead; nor was it safe that an explicit revelation of His Person should be given before the primary truth of divine unity had become firmly and permanently established among the chosen people.1 Moreover, 1 St. Gregory Naz., Theol. Oral., V. xxv. PREVIOUS TO THE INCARNATION 3 the doctrine of the Spirit is part of the doctrine of the Trinity, and is dependent for our correct appre hension of it upon knowledge of the Father, from whom He proceeds as ultimate source, and of the Son, through whom He proceeds from the Father. Accordingly no clear description of the Spirit as a divine Person was given until the distinct self- manifestation in flesh of the Son had taken place. Yet Old Testament writers were inspired to pre pare the way for this revelation. They developed an impersonal terminology and description of the Spirit's work, which only needed the further revela tions contained in the New Testament to acquire higher and more determinate meaning, and to be understood as divine foreshadowings of the later trinitarian doctrine. Proof of this is found in the fact that Old Testament references to the Spirit and His work retain their truth and value when [ regarded from the standpoint of New Testament | teaching as to His Person. What was said of the j Spirit before He was known to be a distinct Person continues to be true and important as applied to the third Person of the Trinity and to His special work in this world. Thus the Spirit is described as operating in the creation of the world,1 as bestowing mental and illuminative gifts upon men,2 as the Spirit of holi- 1 Gen. i. 2; Psa. xxxiii. 6. Cf. Job xxxiii. 4; Psa. civ. 30. 2 Gen. ii. 7; xii. 38; Exod. xxviii. 3; xxxi. 3; xxxv. 31; Deut. xxxiv. 9. 4 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT ness and moral elevation,1 as inspiring the prophets,2 and as anointing and filling the promised Messiah.3 Moreover, it was promised that He would be poured forth upon the Israel of the Messiah's kingdom,4 and His operations were not to be limited to Israel, but were to be extended to the Gentiles.5 Since His work is divine and personal, He is sometimes personified,6 but not in terms that require literal interpretation, although examples occur which are strikingly Christian in form.7 All New Testament references to the Holy Spirit 8 are to be interpreted in the light of our Lord's teaching concerning Him; and this is most fully and clearly expressed in the discourse reported in the fourth Gospel as given in the evening of His betrayal.9 The Spirit is there described as "an- 1 Psa. li. io-ii; Isa. iv. 4; xxx. 1; lix. 21; briii. 10-11; Ezek. xxxvi. 27; Zech. xii. 10. 2 2 Sam. xxiii. 2; Ezek. ii. 2; iii. 12, 14; Mic. iii. 8. 8 Isa. xi. 2; xiii. 1; xlviii. 16; lxi. ±. Cf. St. Luke iv. 18-21. ^ Isa. xxxvii. 15; xliv. 3; lix. 21; Ezek. xxxvi. 26-27; Zech. xii. 10. 6 Joel ii. 28 (cf. Acts ii. 16-17). 6 Psa. cxxxix. 7; Isa. Ixiii. 10. 7 Psa. xxxiii. 6; Isa. xlviii. 16, "The Lord God hath sent Me, and His Spirit." On O. T. doctrine, see A. B. Davidson, Theol. of the O. Test., pp. 115-129; J. S. Gubelmann, Person and Work of the Holy Ghost in O. Test. Times; Hastings, Die. of Bib., s. -u. "Holy Spirit." For the apocryphal period, see Trinity, pp. 46-47; Hastings, Die. of Bib., extra vol. p. 308. 8 On New Test, teaching, see H. B. Swete; E. W. Winstanley Hastings, Die. of Christ, s. v. "Holy Spirit." 9 St. John xiv. 15-18, 26; xv. 26; xvi. 7-15. Earlier hints appear PREVIOUS TO THE INCARNATION 5 other Advocate," Hap&ickrjTos,1 who proceedeth from the Father and, because all things whatsoever the Father hath are Christ's, receiv.eth from the Son.2 He was to be sent by the Father in Christ's name, and by Christ from the Father,3 not so as to be apprehended by the world, but none the less to abide in the Church forever.4 As a necessary con dition of His coming, Christ had to go away; but the Spirit was not to displace Christ, who was also to come in the Spirit's coming.5 The Paraclete is the Spirit of truth. He was to bring Christ's words to remembrance, bearing witness of Him,6 and guiding the disciples into all the truth, including many things which they were not ready to bear while Christ was visibly with them. He was to convict the world in respect of sin, of righteousness and of judgment, and was to glorify Christ. As an incidental result of the Spirit's work the Apostles were to be enabled to obtain a larger knowledge of the Spirit Himself than Christ had given them.7 His teaching on the subject was completed when in St. Matt. x. 19-20; St. Mark iii. 18-20; xiii. 11; St. Luke xii. 10-12; St. John iii. 5-8. 1 St. John xiv. 16, 26; xv. 26; xvi. 7. 2 In xv. 26; xvi. 14-15. In apostolic writings He is called the Spirit of Christ as well as of the Father. Cf. Rom. viii. 9; Gal. iv. 6; 1 St. Pet. i. 11. St. Epiphanius describes Him as "proceeding from the Father and receiving from the Son." Haer., Ixii. 4; Ancor., 121. 8 St. John xiv. 26; xv. 26; xvi. 7. 4 xiv. 16-17. 6 xvi. 7; xiv. 18. B xiv. 16, 26; xv. 26. 7 xvi. 8-14. 6 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT He commissioned the Apostles to baptize "into the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost."1 Thus the Spirit was coordinated on equal terms with the Father and the Son, and was described as sharing with Them in possession of one Name of God. There could be no more undeniable intimation of His essential unity with the other divine Persons and of His veritable Godhead. Ac cordingly we find that the Apostles regarded the Spirit as divine, ascribing divine properties and operations to Him, and treating whatever was done in relation to Him as having relation to God. To give a notable illustration, St. Peter condemned the lying of Ananias to the Spirit as lying to God.2 § 2. The divine Persons act indivisibly together in all the operations which in Holy Scripture are ascribed to one or other of them in particular. As coessential They exist in each other and cohere in action as well as in essence.3 But the several re lations of these Persons to Their common opera tions are distinct; and the differences involved are SUCQ as to justify us in ascribing certain divine operations more especially to one or other of Them. H«ly Scripture affords precedents for this. Thus creation is ascribed primarily to the Father,4 re- "imption to the Son,5 and sanctification to the Spirit; 6 although the evidence that no one of these 1 St. Matt, xxviii. 19. 2 Acts v. 3-4. 8 Trinity, pp. 243-249. * Gen. i. 1. 6 St. John iii. 17; Gal. iv. 4-5. « 2 Thess. ii. 13; Tit. iii. 3. PREVIOUS TO THE INCARNATION 7 Persons is shut out from causal relation to any of these operations is clear.1 Speaking more generally, those operations in which eternal determination and origination are prominent are ascribed to the Father, those in which mediation and agency appear are referred to the Son, and those of efficiency, quickening and perfecting are attributed to the Spirit. The several groups of operations thus dis tributed to the divine Persons are called divine economies.2 The economy of the Holy Spirit grows out of His being the efficient, quickening, illuminating and perfecting cause of all that God worketh.3 This appears in the part which He is said to fulfil in creation. He brooded over the face of the waters, bringing order out of the primitive chaos and de veloping the complex cosmos in which we live. All the hosts of the heavens are declared to have been made by the Breath of God's mouth; and of living creatures the psalmist says, "Thou sendest forth Thy Spirit, they are created." 4 Of man's creation it is said, "The Spirit of God hath given me life." "The Lord God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."5 1 As to creation, cf. St. John i. 3; Gen. 1. 2; Psa. xxxiii. 6. As to redemption, Isa. briii. 16; Heb. ix. 14. As to sanctification, 1 Thess. v. 23; Heb. xiii. 12. 2 On economy and appropriation, see Trinity, pp. 250-258. 8 Idem, pp. 273-275. * Gen. i. 2; Psa. xxxiii. 6; civ. 30. s Job xxxiii. 4; Gen. ii. 7. On His life-giving function, cf. Job xxvii. 3; St. John vi. 63; 2 Cor. iii. 6. Also Nicene Creed. 8 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT It is significant of the effect of His brooding over the primitive waters that the first stage of subse quent developments is described as the production of light. The element of beauty in nature is also ascribed to the Spirit, by whom the heavens are said to be garnished.1 § 3. Being divine, the Spirit is in all things, and in them all He is efficient Cause of whatever forms of order, beauty, intelligence and holiness are de veloped in them. Accordingly, He is in every man, and no one can escape His presence and power. He is eternal, and time relations cannot interrupt His efficiency,2 whatever may be their effect upon the manner of its manifestation in nature and in human history. Through all the ages and from the beginning of human existence, the Spirit has operated in every member of our race, giving the breath of life, and ministering to each according to his needs and susceptibilities of spiritual develop ment. But the historical aspects of this mystery have been determined, and changed from time to time, by the laws of human development, and by the moral attitudes of men towards the things of the Spirit. Man has been created a free moral agent, and the will of God thus declared is necessarily eternal and inviolable; so that the Spirit cannot 1 Job xxvi. 13. On His part in creation, see Creation and Man, p. 68; W. H. Hutchings, pp. 47-49; St. Thomas, I. xiv. 6. 2 Psa. cxxxix. 7; Heb. ix. 14. PREVIOUS TO THE INCARNATION 9 override the barriers to His grace which men erect without being untrue to Himself — an impossi bility.1 Accordingly the history of the Holy Spirit's operations among men is marked by a series of dispensations. The first of these dispensations was one of inno cency on man's side, and of his endowment with grace, including a special supernatural gift to him of the Holy Spirit Himself. Thus equipped, our first parents were brought into an open covenant with God, and were able by the help of grace to develop sinlessly to their appointed end. By this same grace, had they retained it, they could have escaped the physical death to which men are by unassisted nature liable, and would, no doubt, have attained to heavenly incorruptibility by a painless translation and transfiguration.2 Sin was committed, and the effect of sin in the world, whether viewed as transmitted from Adam or as a contaminating factor in human society at large, is to make impossible those methods of divine grace which pertain to innocency. The Holy Spirit did not cease to operate within men. But the manner of His work in its historical aspects was changed and adjusted to the fallen state of man kind. The fall caused a setback in spiritual de- 1 On the limitations of divine power, see Being and Attrib. of God, pp. 148, 276-278. 2 On all which, see Creation and Man, pp. 249-270; Evolution, pp. 123-133 and Lee. v. 10 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT velopment, and it had to be remedied before this development could be renewed and carried on to its glorious end.1 A twofold dispensation was ushered in. On the one hand, a chosen race was gradually set apart to be developed by intensive training for a propa ganda and covenant of saving grace and truth, which in the fulness of time should be established in Jesus Christ for the redemption, salvation and sanctification of mankind. On the other hand, the gentilic races were not wholly abandoned to the working of evil agents and influences;2 but by providential although hidden operations the Spirit continued to exercise His gracious influence in the manners which human degradation still left open. We cannot understand the secrets of the Spirit's methods. But we are surely warranted in believ ing that every restraint upon savagery and wicked ness which has appeared in human history is due in last analysis to His work, and that all the com plex and toilsome progress of gentilic races towards mental and moral enlightenment, and towards capacity to receive the Gospel of salvation, has been made possible by His overruling of human history. Gentilic religions in particular, although they have not brought their disciples into authentic rela- 1 On the fall, see Creation and Man, pp. 270-323; Evolution pp. 133-149 and Lee. vi. 2 Cf. the case of Cornelius, Acts x. PREVIOUS TO THE INCARNATION n tions with the true God — in that sense are not true religions, — have been made to serve spiritual ends and to preserve and develop such elements of truth and righteousness as the Holy Spirit could teach under the circumstances. As some ancient Christian writers perceived, even pagan systems constitute a dispensation of the Spirit, preparatory to the higher and authentic dispensation of Christ.1 Catholic doctrine teaches that no one can turn to God and be saved without supernatural assist ance.2 But we shall make false inferences from this doctrine if we think that no manner of such assistance is extended except to those who have heard the Gospel message. By the eternal will of God Christ died for mankind, and God willeth that all men shall be saved. If the divine Word "lighteth every man coming into the world,"3 we may be sure that some measure of grace as well as of truth is afforded to mejn of every race and stage of spiritual enlightenment. The final loss of all the "non-elect" is nowhere taught in Scripture.4 § 4. The Holy Spirit's method of operation for the enlightenment of mankind has been adapted to the necessary laws of human propagandas. This consideration at once justifies the principle of 1 Creation and Man, pp. 213-235 (further refs. on pp. 223, 225). 2 Idem, pp. 217-218, 252-253, 282-283. 8 St. John i. 9; Rom. v. 18-19; Col. i. 20; 1 Tim. ii. 4. 4 The elect there means those who in this life are brought into 12 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT election, and excludes the repellent inference that Christ died only for the elect.1 Israel was separated from the rest of the nations, and subjected to a peculiar schooling, for the ultimate benefit of man kind. From the Jews was to be developed a spiritual inner circle which, in the fulness of time, could appropriate the Gospel revelation, and then be developed into a Catholic Church, a universal propaganda and vessel of salvation to the rest of mankind.2 The preparation of Israel, elsewhere described more fully than is here practicable,3 was under the guidance and inspiration of the Spirit, who was revealed to the Israelites both by name and opera tion,4 although His personal distinctness was not then made apparent. The statutes of the Israel ites were inspired by Him, and the judgments which came upon them were His method of enforc ing their meaning and authority. The divine and prophetic meaning of Old Testament ritual was His; and so also was the providential significance of Israel's history at large, and of the numerous types which the fuller revelation of Christ enables us to discover in this history. the covenant. See Creation and Man, pp. 21-26; Passion and Exaltation, pp. 158-163. 1 Creation and Man, pp. 32-33 and refs. there given. 2 Idem, pp. 330-331- Cf . Gen. xii. 1-3; Isa. xlix. 6; Ephes. iii. 2-6. 8 Idem, pp. 331-335; Passion and Exaltation, pp. 5-10. 4 Hag. ii. 5. A concordance shows many explicit allusions to His operations among the Israelites. AFTER THE INCARNATION 13 The Revealer was always the eternal Logos, but the inspirer of Old Testament prophets was the Holy Spirit 1 — not less so because even the prophets themselves could not fully understand the meaning of their prophecies before the revelation of the Gospel made it clear.2 Messianic prophe cies, and the rise of the messianic hope, were due to His inspiration and guidance, as was also the prophecy that, as a consequence of the Messiah's work, the Spirit Himself should be poured upon all flesh.3 II. After the Incarnation § 5. The advent of Jesus Christ, the promised Messiah, or the taking of human nature by the eternal Son of God, initiated a higher and more effectual dispensation, in which the Spirit more openly and determinately makes known and per fects His work. Since the Incarnation He has operated manifestly and abidingly as the Spirit of the Son. That is, His work is Christocentric. He operates in and from Jesus Christ, not displac ing Him, but through all ages continually effectuat ing and perfecting His work of redemption and 1 2 St. Pet. i. 21. Authority, Eccles. and Biblical, ch. vi. Cf. Incarnation, pp. 271-273; Wm. Lee, Inspiration of Holy Scrip., Lee. iii. 2 1 St. Pet. i. 10-12. 8 Joel ii. 28. Cf. Isa. xiii. 5-7; xlix. 6; Mal. i. 11. On the Spirit's old covenant work, see W. H. Hutchings, ch. ii; A. C. Downer, ch. ii. 14 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT salvation.1 There have been two principal stages in this mystery: the Spirit's work (a) in and upon our Lord's Manhood; (b) from and by means of that Manhood, upon the mystical Body of Christ, and from that Body as earthly centre upon man kind at large. We are now concerned with the first of these stages,2 in which there were several well marked moments of progress. (a) The Incarnation was accomplished by the Spirit. He sanctified the maiden chosen to be the Mother of the Lord; enabled her to conceive with out carnal intercourse; 3 imparted Himself to the sacred Manhood which the eternal Son took of her; filled it with all grace that a sanctified human nature can receive; 4 and thus enabled the Holy Child to increase humanly in wisdom as well as in stature, and in favor with God and man.5 (b) It was the Spirit who descended upon the Incarnate in the form of a dove after His Baptism, thereby formally anointing Him, and completing the equipment of His Manhood for the work which He came on earth to do.6 (c) By the Spirit Christ was put to the proof of 1 Passion and Exaltation, pp. 291-293. 2 On which, see Incarnation, pp. 74-75, 155-156; Kenotic Theory, pp. 123-126; H. B. Swete, Holy Spirit in the Anc. Church, pp. 23-62; W. H. Hutchings, pp. 72-82; A. C. Downer, ch. iii; Hastings, Diet, of Bib. s. v. "Holy Spirit," pp. 405-406. 8 St. Luke i. 28-35; St. Matt. i. 18-23. 1 St. John iii. 34; Incarnation, pp. 153-156. 6 St. Luke ii. 40, 52. 8 St. Matt. iii. 13-17, Incarnation, pp. 339-340. AFTER THE INCARNATION 15 human temptation, and was enabled as Man to achieve a perfect moral victory in the wilderness and throughout His earthly experience.1 (d) By the Spirit the human mind of Christ was guided in teaching the mysteries of His Kingdom, and He was enabled to cast out devils and to achieve the other works of power by which His Person and mission were declared.2 (e) The Spirit led the Redeemer to His death; inspired His preaching to the spirits in prison; 3 effected His resurrection and the exaltation of His Manhood in glory; and guided the apostolic Church to perceive the redemptive significance of these events, as well as their bearing upon the Person and claims of the Redeemer.4 (/) Finally, it is by the Spirit that the Redeemer offers Himself to God for us in the heavens, and in His glorified Manhood effectively achieves His ever- continuing priestly and saving work for mankind.5 § 6. Inasmuch as the Holy Spirit eternally pro ceeds from the Father and the Son, He is eco nomically described in Scripture as sent into the world by Them, His temporal "mission" agreeing with His eternal relation. This mission is described as external, in so far as it is revealed in visible 1 St. Matt. iv. 1-13; St. Luke iv. 1-2. 2 St. Luke iv. 14; St. Matt. xii. 18, 28. Cf. Acts i. 2. 3 1 St. Pet. iii. 18-19. 4 Rom. i. 4; 1 Tim. iii. 16. Cf. Rom. viii. 11; St. John xvi. 13-15- 6 Heb. ix. 14; Rev. iii. 1. Cf. Eph. ii. 18; iv. 4-7.- 16 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT effects, and internal in relation to the invisible working of His grace. But just as the sending of the Son into the world involved neither spatial movement nor change on the divine side, so the mission of the Holy Spirit does not cause any reduc tion of His divine omnipresence and power. The change described consists of a new dispensation and manner of revelation, and of new temporal effects connected therewith.1 The formal initiation of the Spirit's mission, and of the final dispensation of grace in this world, took place when He descended with the sound of mighty wind upon the disciples of Christ on the day of Pentecost, in tongues of fire distributed to each of them. The immediate result was that " they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utter ance"; and the preaching of St. Peter that followed brought an addition of three thousand to the Church, which was then given life. The Lord also "added to them day by day those that were being saved." 2 The new dispensation had grown out of the old, and the Christian Church was nourished for awhile in thewomb of the Jewish Church, which con tinued to receive the allegiance of the disciples in Jerusalem until the destruction of that city re vealed the final abolition for them of its insti- 1 On all which, see Trinity, pp. 230-237, 258-263. 2 Acts ii. See H. B. Swete, Holy Spirit in the N. Test., pp. 63- 80; A. C. Downer, ch. v. AFTER THE INCARNATION 17 tutions.1 Certain general features of the old covenant, however, were retained, because they are essential to any religion that can promote spiritual interests among human beings with permanent success, and can afford to them effective methods of expression of their relations to God. The Chris tian Church, like the Jewish, is still a visible society, having a determinate organization and authorita tive ministry and divinely appointed institutions and sacrificial ritual. The changes which took place can be summarized under the heads of (a) spiritual efficacy and (b) catholicity, and were determined by. the great facts of accomplished redemption and our Lord's heavenly priesthood. (a) The spiritual superiority of Christianity does not lie in any exclusion or disparagement of the externals of religion, for these are essential to its edifying embodiment, its successful appeal and its effective functioning; and the sacramental prin ciple cannot be disregarded in true religion. It lies rather in the spiritual efficacy with which the Holy Spirit can utilize Christian institutions and sacraments, because of accomplished redemption and in connection with the Saviour's present heavenly work. The beneficial effects of Chris tian instruments depend, of course, upon the manner in which Christians use them. But this is a branch of the principle that spiritual benefits 1 Cf. ch. iii. §4, below. 18 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT in any case depend upon spiritual receptivity — a principle which is independent of the methods which the Spirit may use in conveying them. And evidences are to be found in every sphere of human experience that men are most effectually acted upon and uplifted by lofty ideals when these are embodied in, or connected with, concrete symbols and institutions.1 (b) The Jewish Church was necessarily racial and provincial because of the peculiar vocation to which Israel had been called.2 The time had come, how ever, for extending the knowledge and benefits of salvation to mankind, and therefore the Chris tian Church is rightly called the Catholic Church. Its mission is universal; and its essential or divinely appointed ministry and institutions are freed from all limitations of race and time, being made sus ceptible of adaptation without subversive change to all races, all ages, and all conditions of men in every stage of human development.3 The fact of redemption, once for all accom plished, and the inauguration of the Saviour's heavenly priesthood, necessarily required impor tant changes in the earthly institutions of true religion. The ritual of the old covenant looked forward to and prefigured an effective sacrifice for 1 On the sacramental principle, see ch. ix, below and refs. there given. 2 See pp. 10, 12, above. 8 On catholicity, see ch. vi., §§ 1-4, below. AFTER THE INCARNATION i9 sin yet to be achieved; whereas the new ritual unites us with Christ in celebrating, offering, and applying the benefits of, His sacrifice for sin. The old ritual could not put away sin; although it brought to sincere participants ceremonial cleans ing and acceptance with God, being a covenant pledge that when the Messiah came they would receive the benefits of His redemptive work. But the Christian Eucharist is an immediate means of remission and sanctification of faithful penitents, because it affords the gift of Christ's Body and Blood, and both represents and applies the one effective sacrifice for sin.1 The ministry is also changed, inasmuch as it has become the ministry of Christ and is sent into all the world. It is no longer confined, therefore, to the seed of Aaron, but constitutes an organic differentiation in the Body of Christ, membership in which is open to every nation under heaven through baptismal new birth.2 This mystical Body of Christ was given life on the day of Pentecost by the permanent entrance of the Holy Spirit into the ecclesia which the Lord had already gathered around His apostolic foundation. And by this mystery was initiated the fulfilment of the promise that when the Messiah came the Spirit would be poured upon all flesh.3 It is such 1 This will be more fully handled in our next volume. But see ch. ix. § 12, below. 8 See ch. iv, below. 8 Joel ii. 28. 20 THE "WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT fulfilment because wherever the Catholic Church extends, and no human limitation can be imposed upon its mission, the Spirit is incorporating all who accept the Gospel into the Body of Christ, and is imparting Himself to them for their salvation and sanctification. § 7. The work of the Holy Spirit for the Church itself is one of life-giving, of organic development and functioning, of illumination, and of sanctifica tion.1 (a) By giving Himself to the apostolic company the Spirit transformed it and of it created a new thing — the mystical Body of the Lord of glory.2 The Church which He then quickened is one of human membership, but its chief member and Head is Christ, in whom all the rest are united in organic, vital and enduring relations. As Christ has life in Himself, so the Church has hfe in Him, and cannot be destroyed even from within. The Church is more than "the Church militant"; and the more that is in it 3 guarantees its revival, and the renewal of its saving work, after every period of seeming decay. Its members cannot destroy it; and after they have wrought mischief and have 1 See H. B. Swete, Holy Sp. in the N. Test., pp. 306-327; Holy Sp. in the Ancient Church, pp. 390-409; W. H. Hutchings, Lee. iv; A. C. Downer, chh. vi-viii. 2 See ch. iii. §§ 5-8, below. The Spirit is, life-giver. Cf. St. John iii. 5-6; Tit. iii. 5. 8 That is, Christ, the Holy Spirit, and the great majority beyond the grave but still within the mystical Body. AFTER THE INCARNATION 21 betrayed its cause to the world, it remains to them and to all as the home of saving grace when they repent. It is forever a thing of life, and is the immediate source of life to its members, whose incorporation into it is their entrance into the life of the Spirit. (&) By imparting life to the Church the Spirit lifts it out of the level of the merely social and humanly organized into that of the organic. Ex ternal organization is indeed utilized, and human wills become real factors therein. But the organism is a divine creation, and is controlled in its struc tural development by superhuman laws. Men can utilize these laws, and can adapt them to times and circumstances, but they cannot change them. The Church functions organically, and in this manner the Holy Spirit operates in it.1 And this means that its ministry is what the Spirit makes it to be, and is determined by the God-given struc ture of the mystical Body of Christ. Therefore this ministry is sacramental, and in its fundamentals pertains to the esse of the mystical Body.2 (c) The Holy Spirit illuminates the Church, and guides it into all the truth which Christ committed to it for the authoritative spiritual enlightenment of men.3 Its mind is therefore the mind of Christ and of the Holy Spirit. But the phrase "mind of 1 Cf. ch. iii. §§ 5-8, below. 2 Cf. ch. iv, passim, below. 8 St. John xiv. 26; xvi. 13-15; 1 Cor. ii. 10-11. Cf. F. C. Ewer, Operation of the Holy Spirit, pp. 51-72- 22 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT the Church" needs definition. If it is used for the ideas and opinions wliich at a given moment are thought to prevail in the Church militant, this mind is not invariably free from error, as the his tory of more than one General Council shows. Yet even this mind never really abandons itself to error, but is mysteriously controlled by a deeper factor which restores the control of truth. The mind of the Church here referred to is the deeper and larger organic mind of the Body of Christ; and this secures a recovery of the Church militant from every momentary confusion. It guarantees in every age and to all really loyal and devout disciples of the Church, a knowledge of truth sufficient at least for their salvation.1 The Spirit utilizes, sometimes by overruling, for the riper and more effective development of sound spiri tual knowledge within the Church, every manner of intellectual movement among men. (d) Finally, the Holy Spirit sanctifies the Church, consecrating it for its sacred functions, abiding in it as source of grace, operating in its sacramental ministrations, and guaranteeing their efficacy and sanctifying benefit to all who worthily use them.2 The sins of Churchmen, indeed, reduce these bene fits, but the Spirit continues to retain sinners within 1 In this sense the Church may be called infallible. Authority, Eccles, and Biblical, pp. 82-101. 2 1 Cor. vi. 11; iii. 16-17; Gal. v. 22-23; 2 Thess. ii. 13; 1 St. Pet. i. 2. Cf. St. John xx. 22-23. AFTER THE INCARNATION 23 the Church, in order that He may make the grace of repentance available to them, and thus provide for a renewal of His sanctifying work in their souls.1 Our Lord sums up the work of the Spirit in the Church by calling Him "another Advocate," TIapaKKriTov.2 The implication is that while Christ Himself is our Advocate,3 the. Spirit effectuates His work in the Church. § 8. In addition to the operations of the Spirit in the Church which we have described, there ought to be mentioned His special gifts, and His uncove nanted operations. (a) His special gifts, xaplo narra, are imparted to individuals, and are partly normal and partly ex traordinary.4 The former are special in that they are not given with the same measure and immediate design to all, but are distributed variously as the Spirit wills.5 They are normal because they never cease to be distributed, and are always needed for the edification of the Church. Some of them are official, pertaining to the office and work of the ministry; 6 and some of them are purely personal, 1 See ch. v. §§ 9-10, below. 2 St. John xiv. 16. 3 Cf. 1 St. John ii. 1. See H. B. Swete, Holy Spirit in the N. Test., pp. 148-149, 372-373; Hastings, Die. of Christ, s. v. "Para clete"; A. C. Downer, pp. 66-67. " Many confine the description to extraordinary gifts. On the gifts of the Spirit, see H. L. Goudge and M. F. Sadler, on 1 Cor. xii-xiv; W. H. Hutchings, pp. 162-169; A. C. Downer, pp. 202-221. 6 1 Cor. xii. 4-7, 11. 6 St. John xx. 21-23; 1 Tim- iv- *45 2 Tim- »¦ °- C£- I Cor* ^ 27-29. 24 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT their distinctiveness not being one of kind or genus so much as of varying proportions with which the ordinary sevenfold gifts of the Spirit 1 are distrib uted to the members of the Body. Not all have the same office, and within both official and private ranks the spiritual endowments of individuals ex hibit a variety which is analogous to that found in men's natural gifts.2 (b) The "extraordinary gifts" pertain to the par ticular and supernatural providence whereby the emergencies of the apostolic age were met. They were of a miraculous nature and abnormal,3 becom ing more and more rare as the Church became fully developed and established in the permanent lines of its organization and work. That they have ceased altogether and forever we cannot maintain, for we can neither foresee what extraordinary emer gencies the Church may have to meet, nor suffi ciently explore the mind and will of the Holy Spirit in this matter. But the principle of parsimony which is apparent in divine operations justifies the inference that the extraordinary gifts referred to are not given without extraordinary reason. They will always be exceptional — necessarily so if the normal life and discipline of the Church is not to be upset.4 1 Cf. § n, below. They are to be considered in treating of Con firmation in the next volume. 2 Rom. xii. 4-6. 8 1 Cor. xii-xiv; Rom. xii. 6-8; Eph. iv. 7-13. Cf. pp. 124-125, below. Refs. are given in p. 23, n. 4, above. 4 Cf. W. H. Hutchings, pp. 166-167; A. C. Downer, pp. 219-220. AFTER THE INCARNATION 25 (c) The Church and its divinely constituted arrangements are truly integral elements and con ditions of the Christian covenant, apart from the appointed use of which the specific benefits con veyed by their means are not pledged to men.1 We are not entitled, therefore, to count on the spiritual blessings of the Christian covenant unless we fulfil its conditions within the Church. The Holy Spirit has made the Church to be Christ's mystical Body; and His covenant work is, nor mally at least, carried on within it, and with the use of its ministry and sacraments. But, although the Spirit makes the Church the earthly centre and machinery of His operations, He is not limited as we are by its arrangements, with the obvious exception that He cannot stultify Him self by action that would obliterate the distinctive advantages of full observance of the covenant in the Church. Even where invincible ignorance of the Gospel prevails, we may believe the Spirit to be operating for men's ultimate salvation in ways lovingly and wisely adapted to their imperfect spir itual susceptibilities.2 (d) The same principles clearly hold good with regard to those who through impoverished tradi tions and inevitable prejudices misapprehend some 1 St. John iii. 5; St. Mark xvi. 16; Acts ii. 47; iv. 12. See W. Palmer, On the Church, Pt. I. ch. i. § iii; J. Pearson, Apos. Creed, fol. 340-350. Patristic testimonies are given by Palmer. 2 Passion and Exaltation, pp. 158-163. 26 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT elements of the Christian covenant, and do not fulfil all of its requirements. In so far as they are baptized, they undoubtedly share in the hfe of the Body of Christ into which Baptism incorporates them. And in so far as they sincerely seek to follow Christ, they cannot be said to be against Him.1 We may reasonably expect to find, therefore, and we do find, abundant evidence that the Spirit is savingly working among them and greatly blessing their sincere, efforts to serve the Lord. Yet we have no warrant for inferring that a merely partial fulfilment of the covenant, even though intended to be complete, can secure all the spiritual advan tages that are provided in the historic Church of Christ. If sincere effort could of itself do full duty for adequate fulfilment of covenant requirements, the covenant itself would be stultified and made inoperative. III. In Christian Souls 2 § 9. If the saving work of the Spirit were entirely confined to the Church, the Church could not be extended among men, for only by the Spirit's aid can men make the first beginnings of turning to God. Of those whom the Lord added day by day to the apostolic Church it is said that they "were 1 St. Mark ix. 38-41. Cf. St. Luke ix. 49. 2 On which, see W. H. Hutchings, chh. v-vi; F. C. Ewer, Oper ation of the Holy Ghost, conf. iii— iv; H. B. Swete, Holy Spirit in the N. Test., pp. 340-351; A. C. Downer, chh. ix-x. IN CHRISTIAN SOULS 27 being saved." x That is, their incorporation into the Body of Christ was not the first operation of the Spirit upon them. His work upon the unbaptized is sometimes called prevenient grace. In a sense it is this, for in Baptism Christ first comes in the Christian sense to us. But in technical use the phrase de scribes that stage of grace which precedes even the first movements of moral response on men's part.2 The Spirit by means of it lessens the blind ness to divine realities which characterizes unas sisted human minds, evokes spiritual affections and desires, and strengthens the will to accept and obey divine truth.3 Only when men are thus assisted can they profit by the means of spiritual enlightenment which divine providence brings to bear on them; and only when they yield their minds and hearts and wills to prevenient grace can they be persuaded, even though one come to them from the dead. Whether they are to be led on to a full knowledge of the Gospel depends upon circumstances, many of which are beyond the control of the human agents concerned in given cases. These circum stances often appear to be accidental, but they are relatively so only, and pertain to a larger providen- 1 Acts ii. 47. 2 Cf. p. 255, below; Creation and Man, p. 342. 8 That is, He remedies the "wounds" of the fall. See Creation and Man, p. 285. 28 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT tial system of things wliich is of divine ordering. It may seem accidental, for example, that a man is borrf and brought up in a pagan atmosphere, but the dispensation of things in which paganism finds place is not outside the providence of God,1 how ever difficult may be the problems involved. Not all are elected to baptismal life in this world; and although the Church's evangelical dragnet is cast by Christ's command into every sea, "into all the world," the Spirit does not guarantee that every fish shall be caught, that all men shall under- ( stand and be persuaded. Divine election is as truly operative as are human dispositions and mis sionary labors in determining the possibilities of the Spirit's work and the diverse methods of human probation. That the non-elect — those not elected to Christian privileges in this world — are pre destined to damnation is an inference which gains no support in Scripture and has been repudiated in a previous volume.2 It is a truism that men will be judged and rewarded in the light of their re spective God-given opportunities. Those who are called, however, are enabled by the Spirit to re ceive the Gospel message and be persuaded by it, to be converted so as to respond with heart and will, and to enjoy in the appointed manner the benefits of grace which the Spirit makes available in the mystical Body. 1 Cf. pp. io-ii, above. 8 Creation and Man, pp. 19-38 (with refs.) IN CHRISTIAN SOULS 29 § 10. The disposition which conversion produces is not the only antecedent stage and condition of the Spirit's work in the soul. Regeneration and the seven fold gifts of the Spirit are also to be reckoned with. Regeneration has often been confused by modern writers with conversion, but they are not the same. Conversion is a change of disposition and aim, and is moral; whereas regeneration is a change in level of being and capacity by the involution of a super natural vital principle, flowing from the Body of Christ. Described by physical analogies it is a biological change.1 For this reason it can be, and frequently is, accomplished once for all by the Spirit in unconscious infants, before they are able to make any moral response. This does not mean that infants thus regenerate are exempt from the necessity of moral response, and of making it pro gressively as increasing age and experience afford opportunity. It means that they come to the task of working out their salvation as having the vital capacity and status of members of Christ's Body and children of God by adoption and grace. The appointed means through which the Spirit thus regenerates the individual is Baptism, which also incorporates its subject into the Church and makes him a sharer in the Christian covenant.2 1 Cf. A. J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. ix. § 7; Darwell Stone, Holy Baptism, pp. 34, 51-52. Regeneration will be treated of in the next volume. 2 St. John iii. 5; 1 Cor. xii. 13; Gal. iii. 27-29; Tit. iii. 5-7. 30 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT For this reason Baptism is described as the instru mental cause of justification, for it places the soul in a state of sanctifying grace in which the soul is enabled to grow. This is perfectly consistent with the truth that we are justified by faith, for faith in the Pauline sense involves our yielding to Christ, and without such yielding the work of regeneration can only make us unfruitful branches of the vine — fit to be burned. Our justification is a work of the Spirit, the element of regeneration coming wholly from Him, and justifying faith being made possible for us to attain by His grace. He is the efficient cause.1 The mysteries of conversion and regeneration are closely interrelated, and each is dependent upon the other in bringing forth the fruits of grace. But their temporal order varies, and conversion is not necessarily an instantaneous and outstanding event which can be dated. To unbaptized adults a real turning to Christ and to the obedience of faith is plainly needed before they can prudently receive the sacrament of regeneration; although even those who have been baptized unworthily do sometimes profit subsequently by their regeneration, if and when they are converted to repentance by the merciful work of the Spirit. Infant Baptism modi fies this law in accidents although not in principle. In such Baptism an assumption vindicated by ages 1 On justification, see Creation and Man, pp. 343-347 (with refs.). Also ch. viii. § 7, below. IN CHRISTIAN SOULS 31 of experience is made, that when regeneration is received before actual sin has erected a barrier to grace, it assists the child under Christian training to grow into the disposition which conversion pro duces without the setback of an anti-Christian de velopment requiring entire reversal. In such cases, therefore, conversion is implicit in a long process, rather than recognizable as a sudden and radical reversal of life's aim. § 11. The Spirit not only works in individuals for their conversion and regeneration, but also affords to them by Confirmation the equipment of His sevenfold gifts. The bestowal of these gifts has a place in the regenerate Hfe somewhat analogous to that of weaning in the natural life, in that pre vious to weaning infants depend upon maternal nourishment, and cannot safely receive their food in the form which is required for adequate strength ening and mature development. So the endow ments bestowed through Confirmation give needed strength for spiritual growth and conflict, and for this reason constitute the proper and normal ante cedent of beginning to feed on the Body and Blood of Christ, and to take part in the fuller life of which the Eucharistic mystery is the central function. It is primarily for this reason that in all catholic communions reception of Confirmation is made the condition of admission to Communion.1 1 It is no mere accident of discipline which can be waived for the sake of interdenominational comity. Cf. p. 329, below. 32 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT There is evidently a close and complementary relation between spiritual new birth and the wean ing of God's child by his endowment with the seven fold gifts. Primitive usage made the laying on of hands an immediate sequel of Baptism.1 This practice continued generally even in the case of infants, and the mediaeval growth in the West of temporal separation between the two rites was an unwillingly accepted result of enlarged episcopal jurisdictions and consequent inability of bishops to make frequent visitations.2 The ratification of baptismal vows, an innovation of later date, was introduced in order to remind Confirmation can didates of the close connection between Confirma tion and Baptism.3 The sevenfold gifts include those of understanding and wisdom, pertaining to the discernment of truth and of its value; knowledge and, counsel, assisting in the apprehension and application of moral prin ciples and laws; true godliness, or reverent and lov ing piety; ghostly strength, for courageous spiritual warfare; and holy fear, or loving anxiety to please God. As has been shown, these gifts are distrib uted in varying proportions, and in their variety have a "special" aspect.4 1 Cf. Acts ii. 38; viii. 15-17; xix. 5-6; Heb. vi. 2. 2 The Easterns meet this difficulty by permitting priests to confirm. 8 See A. C. A. Hall, Confirmation, chh. iv, ix; A. T. Wirgman, Doctr. of Confirmation, pp. 372-383; C. S. Grueber, Rite of Canfitnor Hon, pp. 47_53- * See pp. 23-24, above. — IN CHRISTIAN SOULS 33 The mysteries of conversion, regeneration and sevenfold gifts bring to birth and equip the adopted children of grace, but they neither complete nor guarantee their ultimate salvation. Grace enlarges the spiritual capacity of sinful men, and both im pels and assists them to work out their salvation; but it neither displaces human powers nor exempts men from persevering self-discipline and effort. In order that the individual may be kept in vital and acceptable relation to God in the Body of Christ, and may lack no possible safeguard in his "state of salvation" and Godward growth, further sacramental instruments are provided by the Spirit in the Church. And by a sincere and dutiful use of them regenerate souls receive sanctifying grace through the Spirit for the various contingencies of their journey through this world.1 § 12. The Hfe in grace, the Spirit's provision for which has been briefly described, is, as we have seen, neither non-moral and magical nor inde pendent of determinate sacramental instruments and methods. We have now to notice its progres sive nature, and to indicate its goal and normal stages.2 The Spirit's work for Christians is to draw them heavenward and to perfect them for their chief end, 1 See chh. ix-x, below, and the next volume. 2 See W. J. Carey, Life. in Grace; Wm. Law, Christian Perfection; V. Staley, The Practical Religion; A. Devine, Manual of Ascetic Theol. and the numerous ascetic and mystical treatises. 34 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT which is "to glorify God and enjoy Him forever" in permanent fellowship with other children of God.1 While we are in this world, therefore, He initiates and pushes on the work of saving, sanctifying and perfecting us, this work being completed, we know not how, in the interval between death and our final consummation in glory. It is absolutely neces sary for the attainment of our chief end that we should outgrow every defect and become perfect after the divine likeness; for our enjoyment of God, and His pleasure in us as well, depend upon fulfil ment of the primary requirement of love, which is entire mutual congeniality.2 Apart from this, love cannot obtain permanent and unalloyed satisfac tion. Such congeniality depends in turn upon our assimilation in spiritual character to God; and the character thus developed is also a necessary condi tion of that full actualization of the joy of love between men which we are taught to expect in the communion of saints. Men are created in the image of God, so that development after His like ness is the law of their perfecting and of their per sonal self-realization.3 We are by nature social beings, and our destiny 1 Christian righteousness transforms natural righteousness by making the risen Christ its organizing principle. Cf. Passion and Exaltation, pp. 259-263. 2 That Love is spiritually exacting, see idem, ch. ii. §§ 9-1 1. On man's chief end, see Creation and Man, pp. 243-245 (cf. pp. 206- 208 and refs. there). 8 Creation and Mon, pp. 185-190 and refs. there. IN CHRISTIAN SOULS 35 is social. The conditions of our perfecting, there fore, are found in human society and in mutual service; and the dispensation of grace itself has received social form in the Christian Church.1 But the perfecting of individuals, as such, is essential to the maturing of a society in which entire con geniality, perfect mutual love and unalloyed joy shall prevail. For this reason the Church, which is such society in process of development, cannot reach its predestined perfection until it becomes the communion of perfected saints in the world to come. We conclude this section with a brief summary of the normal stages of Christian progress, made possible by the Holy Spirit and by our use of His grace with contrite faith, persevering obedience, loving service for God and man, and holy discipline. (a) Persuasion and repentance come first, for without belief, contrite response to God's call, and sincere resolution to advance by the help of the Spirit to perfection, divine grace cannot avail and all efforts will be in vain. And this persuasion re quires for its proper effect submission once for all to the terms of the Christian covenant in the Church and to the Spirit's guidance. (b) Sacramental grace follows, as creating and equipping the child of God, as sanctifying and assisting all his endeavors, and as keeping open the road to God over which he is to travel. 1 Idem, pp. 232-237. 36 THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT (c) Self-discipline, which has a twofold reference, namely purging out of sinful propensities by wise methods of mortifying the flesh,1 and cultivation of virtues by ascetic methods — that is, by well chosen rules of conduct conducive to spiritual cul ture.2 In the science of perfection these two lines of the disciplined life are called the "purgative" and "illuminative" ways. (d) The "unitive" way consists in direct culti vation of personal contact with God through the appointed means, and by the methods of the interior life. This way is available to all devout Christians, and progress in it does not have to be attended and proved by the marvellous experiences of mysticism. These experiences are special and extraordinary, being dependent upon the will of God and in part, perhaps, upon exceptional psychological con ditions.3 They are not to be sought for, as if they were essential signs of high sanctity and of success in obtaining the union with God which is possible in this life. (e) The fruits of the Spirit — love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, patience, modesty, temperance and chastity4 — whereby successful progress towards perfection de- 1 Rom. viii. 12-13; 1 Cor. ix. 27; Gal. v. 24; Col. iii. 5. 2 Gal. vi. 7-10; Phil. iv. 8; 1 Tim. iv. 7. "Ascetic" means after the method of exercise or practice. 8 Much suggestion on this last can be gained from Wm. James. Varieties of Religious Experience. 4 Chiefly mentioned in Gal. v. 22-23. Cf. Ephes. v. 9. IN CHRISTIAN SOULS 37 clares itself. To those who display these fruits come the earthly beatitudes pronounced by Christ,1 these being preliminary to the joys that are set before us in the world, to come. St. Matt, v, 2-12; St. Luke vi, 20-23, CHAPTER II THE CHURCH IDEA I. In History § i. The idea connoted by the word ecclesia, Church, is not wholly to be determined by etymo logical considerations, for it refers to an mstitution having manifold aspects and connections, the na ture of which cannot be correctly understood apart from its supernatural origin and history. Postpon ing fuller definition, we start with a provisional description of our subject-matter — as the divinely constituted society wliich in each successive dis pensation has been the immediate human party in divine covenants and the sphere within which God has revealed and established His kingdom on earth.1 1 On the Church in general, Anglican standpoint, see Richard Hooker, Eccles. Polity, esp. Bk. Ill; Richard Field, Of the Church; John Pearson, Apos. Creed, art. IX; Wm. Palmer, On the Church; Darwell Stone, Christian Church; E. T. Green, Church of Christ; Jos. Hammond, Christian Church: What is It?; H. B. Swete, Holy Catholic Church; F. J. A. Hort, Christian Ecclesia; R. W. Church, in Oxford House Papers, No. xvii; H. S. Holland, In Behalf of Belief, pp. 102-186; Thos. B. Strong, Manual of Theol., pp. 332-, 369; Hastings, Encyc. of Religion, s.v. "Church, Doctrine of the (Anglican)"; and Die. of Bible, s. v. "Church"; W. J. S. Simpson, Catholic Conception of the Church; J. G. Simpson, Conception of the IN HISTORY 39 In the Old Testament it is to be identified with the elect seed of Abraham or chosen people Israel, in the New Testament with the apostolic hiKkqo-ia. These two are closely interrelated in sacred history, the latter being developed from a spiritual remnant of the former, and the promises to Israel being fulfilled in the Christian Church. Therefore the Christian Church is a catholicized and spiritualized continuation of the Church of Israel, and is a more developed form of the promised seed and of the chosen people. Moreover, the Church of Israel, according to the Old Testament, grew out of still earlier dispensations, reaching back through the patriarchs even to Adam; and it was pledged an everlasting continuance. This continuance was wrapped up in prophecy with the coming of the Messiah, and with the final extension and triumph of His kingdom among the Gentiles.1 Church; Henry Cotterill, Genesis of the Church; F. J. Hall, Doctrine of the Church and of Last Things. Roman, J. A. Moehler, Symbolism, §§ 36-51; Wilhelm and Scan nell, Manual of Cath. Theol., Bk. VH; J. B. Franzelin, De Ecclesia; Ad Tanquerey, De Ecclesia; Cath. Encyc, q. v. Protestant, H. Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, §§ 190-199; A. H. Strong, Syst. Theol., pp. 887 et seq.; R. F. Weidner, Eccle- siologia; Schaff-Herzog Encyc, s.v. "Church, the Christian." References to these works in chh. ii--vii will ordinarily give the author's names only. Additional titles for the Ministry are given on p. 116. 1 On various aspects of this continuity, cf. Gen. xxii. 18 (with Gal. iii. 16, 19, 29; Rom. ix. 7-8); 2 Sam. vii. 10-16; Isa. xxvii. 32; Joel ii. 32 (with St. Luke xxii. 29-30; Acts xxviii. 20; Rom. xi. 1-5); Gen. xlix. 10; Psa. Ixxii; Isa. ii. 2-3 (with St. John x. 16; 40 THE CHURCH IDEA Fundamentally speaking, therefore, there has been only one Church of God in all the ages, al though this Church has had several stages of evo lution through spiritual involution, variation and survival. The ecclesiastical drama of sacred his tory exhibits a conspicuous spiritual continuity; although its spiritual plot first became clearly apparent in the Christian kuKktjaia and mystical Body of Christ. Institutional aspects are prominent in the Church of the Old Testament. Only by the rite of circum cision could an Israelite become a participant in the divine covenant; and his enjoyment of an acceptable status before God and the congregation depended upon his conformity to the sacrificial ritual and purificatory ceremonial of the law. The administration of these rites and ceremonies per tained to the threefold Aaronic ministry of high priest, priests and Levites; and both this ministry and the institutions committed to its control were regarded by the Jews as divinely appointed. They were also so treated by the Lord Himself.1 That St. Matt. xix. 28; Acts xv. 13-17; Rom. xv. 9-12; Eph. iii. 4-16); Psa. ex. 4 and Jerem. xxxiii. 17-22 (with Heb. ix. 9-12, 15; 1 St. Pet. ii. 5. Cf. Mal. i. 11; iii. 2-4). See H. F. Hamilton, The People of God, vol. I. ch. viii; Darwell Stone, pp. 19-22; Jos. Hammond, chh. iii-vi; A. P. Forbes, Thirty-Nine Articles, pp. 113-123. The subject is resumed in ch. iii. § 4, below. See also p. 119. 1 St. Matt. v. 17-19; xxiii. 2-3. Cf. St. Mark i. 44; St. Luke xvi. 31. Jos. Hammond, English Nonconformity and Christ's Chris- chh. v-viii. IN HISTORY 41 they were to be modified in the messianic dispensa tion was indicated in prophecy; x but that the institutional side of religion was to be continued was also implied in prophetic descriptions of the future kingdom. In brief, the Old Testament idea of the Church is that of a chosen people with which God enters into a covenant, one involving a ministry and institutional arrangements of His own appoint ment and unalterable except by Himself. Closely connected with this idea was the doctrine of divine election and of the separation of Israel from all other races as a peculiar people.2 But this racial exclusiveness was not, according to prophecy, to be permanent. In the messianic dispensation all families of the earth were to be blessed in Abra ham's seed, and the Gentiles were to be gathered in.3 § 2. Christ came, according to His own teaching, as the promised Messiah,4 and for the final estab lishment of the kingdom of God in an everlasting covenant of salvation, based upon His own death 1 Jerem. iii. 16; Dan. ix. 27. Cf. St. John i. 17; iv. 20-23; Heb. viii. 4-13; x. 1-9. 2 Deut. vii. 6; 1 Sam. xii. 22; Psa. cxxxv. 4; etc. In the New Test, the Christian Church is regarded in the same light. Cf . Rom. i. 6; Ephes. i. 4-5; 1 St. Pet. ii. 9; etc. 8 Gen. xxii. 18. On the 0. T. doctrine of the Church, see Darwell Stone, ch. ii; Hastings, Die of Bib., s. v. "Kingdom of God." On the prophetic outlook, see Cath. Encyc, s. v. "Church," H. 4 St. Matt. xi. 3-6; xvi. 16-17; xxvi. 63-64; St. John iv. 25-26. 42 THE CHURCH IDEA and redemptive victory over the powers of death and darkness.1 Our Lord taught the people by enunciating fundamental principles of His king dom and of the righteousness to be practised in it, rather than by formal expositions of its external organization.2 But in the light of His institutional appointments it is not difficult to discover in His words sufficient evidence that He intended to give to His kingdom an ecclesiastical organization, of which His Apos tles were being trained to become the foundation and nucleus, and to wliich was to be committed a continuing propaganda, a permanent stewardship, and disciplinary functions. To this Church, as implicit in the twelve, He imparted the deeper mysteries of His kingdom. Furthermore He insti tuted the external rite of Baptism, by which men were to be admitted to its membership, and that of the Holy Eucharist, which was to be the abiding memorial of His death and the central corporate function in the working system of the new cove nant. In the light of these facts — and they are such — the contention that Christ did not plan any ecclesiastical organization and permanent minis try for His kingdom is futile.3 1 St. Matt, xxvii. n and parallels; i Cor. xi. 25; Heb. viii. 6-13. 2 H. Cotterill, pp. 52 et seq. 8 On Christ's action and teaching with regard to the Church, see Darwell Stone, ch. hi; Chas. Gore, The Church and the Minis try, pp. 30-38; Hastings, Diet, of Christ, s.v. "Church," pp. 324- 326; W. J. S. Simpson, chh. i— ii. IN HISTORY 43 The Apostles plainly regarded their corporation from the first as a thing to be maintained and re newed. This can be seen in the appointment of Matthias.1 The company of disciples upon which the promised Spirit descended when the day of Pentecost had come obviously regarded itself as under apostolic authority, and the Church thus established not only "continued stedfastly in the Apostles' teaching and fellowship," but interpreted subsequent additions to their company as indi cating those who were being saved 2 — an unintel ligible supposition apart from the premise that the Church was intended by Christ to be an integral and determinative element of the new covenant. Moreover, when circumstances led to the develop ment of the Church's ministry by apostolic delega tion, this enlarged ministry was treated as having been appointed by the Holy Spirit.3 Finally, postponing for the present all problems of detail in the transition, the continuance of the normal functions of the apostolic ministry by a succession of men duly ordained by apostolic authority was begun to be provided for before the Apostles had passed away. And this continuance of the Chris tian ecclesia in a permanently organized form was clearly a Spirit-prompted sequel of the original apostolic arrangements.4 1 Acts. i. 15-26. 2 Acts ii. 42, 47. 8 Acts xiii. 2; xx. 28; 1 Cor. xii. 28; Eph. iv. 11. * See ch. iv., below. 44 THE CHURCH IDEA We ought not to look for anything like a formal theology of the Church in apostolic literature. The time had not come for that. But sufficient prem ises for the later cathohc doctrine concerning the Church are discoverable in this literature,1 espe cially in St. Paul's Epistles. Of these premises the more determinative are the following. (a) The Church of the baptized is the assembly of the saints, that is of those who are divinely elected to receive eternal Hfe, and with it the bene fits and privileges of the covenant and of sanctify ing grace, in this world.2 (&) The Church is the Body of Christ, this de scription being no doubt symbolical but plainly not a mere metaphor. It can be seen to signify that the Church is not only a visible society of men, but also a Spirit-filled organism in which is fulfilled the teaching of Christ that He is the Vine of which His disciples are branches. To be baptized into the Church is to become members of Christ's Body.3 (c) Being an organism, the Church's organiza tion is sacramental. That is, its ministry is not only appointed by the Spirit, but pertains to the vital structure of the Body of Christ, and constitutes "joints and bands" through which the Body at 1 On which, see Darwell Stone, chh. iv-v; W. J. S. Simpson, chh. iH, v-vi. 2 Cf. St. Paul's form of opening address in various Epistles, e.g. Eph. i. i-6. ' Cf. ch. iii. §§ 5-8, below. IN HISTORY 45 large receives nourishment and performs its corpo rate functions.1 (d) It was this Church that God purchased with His own blood;2 and to it is the promise made that, when it shall have completed its earthly and sanc tifying work — a work now involving the presence in it of sinners and therefore of many corruptions, — it will be presented to Christ as a glorious and spotless bride.3 (e) In the meantime to it is committed under Christ, and with overruling guidance of the Spirit, the authoritative maintenance of the interests of the kingdom of God on earth; 4 and schismatic action, whatever its occasion, is treated as neces sarily opposed to the divine purpose, and as inter fering with the full functioning of the Body of Christ.5 §3. The subsequent development of catholic doctrine concerning the Church has been controlled in every age by these premises. But the propor tions of emphasis upon them have varied, and the history of the Church idea has been most promi nently identified with that of the ministry.6 1 Ch. iii. § 7, below. 2 Acts xx. 28. 8 Eph. v. 25-27. Cf. Revel, xix. 7-8. 4 Ch. iii. §§ 9-10, below. 6 Ch. v. §4, below. • On the history of the Church idea see, W. J. S. Simpson, chh. vii-xix; Darwell Stone, chh. vi-viii, xv; Die of Christ. Biog., s.v. "Church"; Chas. Gore, op. cit., pp. n-20. The Ministry is more fully discussed in ch. iv, below. 46 THE CHURCH IDEA During the sub-apostolic period the threefold ministry was completely developed and crystalhzed under the descriptive names of bishops, priests and deacons. The details of this process are obscure; but there emerged a broad stream of tradition that these orders were of apostolic origin and divine prescription, that they were essential to the integ rity of the Church in its corporate aspects and sacramental functioning, and that their continu ance was dependent upon episcopal ordination or consecration. A series of circumstances from the start con strained ecclesiastical leaders to emphasize unity and the external aspects of the Church's organiza tion. St. Clement of Rome, as early as 96 a.d., was led by troubles in the Church at Corinth to emphasize ministerial authority, and testified to apostolic provision for the continuance of the office of oversight.1 About no a.d., St. Ignatius of Antioch described the ministry of bishops, presbyters and deacons as essential to the Church, and declared that it exercised the authority of Christ and His Apostles.2 Incidentally he main tained that a valid Eucharist is contingent upon episcopal sanction.3 These positions were accepted in the Church at large. The rise of Montanism, with its claim of ex- 1 Ad Cor., xli-xliv. 2 Ad Trail., 2-3; Ad Ephes., 5-6. 8 Ad. Smyrn., 8. IN HISTORY 47 traordinary prophetic gifts, crystallized once for all the distinction between normal and extraordinary gifts and the doctrine that the sacramental life and the teaching and discipline of the Church are permanently committed by Christ to the ministry and oversight of the Church's regularly appointed hierarchy. The rise of heresy turned attention to the importance of apostolic tradition, and the bishops were declared to be the appointed guardians and expositors of this tradition.1 That rival bishops in the same jurisdiction could not be allowed if unity was to be preserved was brought into general recognition by the Novatian and Donatist schisms, and the need of effective coordination of episcopal government led to the gradual development of prov inces, councils and metropolitan sees, this being followed by the creation of patriarchates and, under state establishment, of exarchies. The theory that the episcopate constitutes a college, requiring co ordinate arrangements, but that each bishop within his recognized jurisdiction possesses the authority of the whole episcopate, was formulated by St. Cyprian; who also set forth in terms diversely interpreted the idea that the unity of the episcopate receives its origin from Peter.2 1 St. Irenaeus, C. Haer., m. iii. i; IV. xxvi. 2, xxiii. 8; Tertul- lian, De Praesc. Haer., 32. 2 De Unitate, 4. On his position and alleged interpolations, see J. H. Bernard, in Essays on the Early Hist, of the Church and the Ministry, Edited by H. B. Swete, pp. 242-255; W. J. S. Simpson, pp. 136-140; J. B. Lightfoot, Dissertations on the Apostolic Age, 48 THE CHURCH IDEA I The relation of the Church to the Roman Empire became a source of much worldliness, and the in fluence of mediaeval feudahsm tended in the same direction. Bishops acquired secular or coercive jurisdiction from the state, and the gigantic evils which moderns stigmatize under the word "prel acy" grew apace. , These evils came to be centred in the papal system — the climax of ecclesiastical feudalism. It developed naturally, and was overruled to become the providential means of carrying the Church through the exigencies of European barbarism and of the mediaeval clashes of Christian states. We cannot trace its development here.1 We can only indicate its relation to the Church idea, and its finally disruptive consequences. In the New Tes tament, as has been indicated, the ministry ofthe Church is a sacramental and structural feature of the Body of Christ. That the Roman See is not this is implied in the fact that its supporters have not ventured to describe it as one of the "sacred orders" of the Church's sacramental ministry; and their failure thus to describe it is-best explained by acknowledging that it is extraneous to the Church's original organism and is a human accretion. pp. 204-209; E. W. Benson, Cyprian, His Life, etc. It was St. Cyp rian who crystallized the propositions, "He cannot have God for his Father who has not the Church for his Mother" (Ep. lxxiv. 7); "He is not a Christian who is not in the Church of Christ" (Ep. Iv. 24); and "There is no salvation outside the Church" (Ep. Ixxiii. 21). 1 See Authority, Eccles. and Biblical, pp. 150-156 (with refs.). IN HISTORY 49 But the evil of it does not he in its being of human development. Human arrangements are inevita ble, if the Church's ministrations are to be adapted to changing conditions and exigencies; and some form of centralization of the external polity of the Church militant seems to be imperative, if catholic unity and efficiency are to be visibly maintained. The evil lies rather in an ambitious autocracy, claiming divine appointment and an unalterable magisterium. It lies in what amounts to displace ment of the God-given rule of the episcopate by the unwarranted claim of the Roman See to abso lute control over all ecclesiastical discipline and doctrine, independently of the Church's free ratifi cation of its decrees and definitions. By means of this overthrow of freedom in the Church the papacy has provoked revolution and schism. Resisting needed reforms, it has created among those who have gone out a mass of prej udice which has become traditional, and which has made the New Testament Church idea largely uninteUigible to millions of earnest Christian be lievers.1 § 4. The visible Church of God is most readily identified by its ministry and sacraments.2 The rejection of the ancient hierarchy, therefore, at once weakened belief in the visible Church; and the changes in sacramental doctrine and usage 1 Idem, ch. v. §§ 12-20 (with refs.). 2 But cf. ch. v. §§ 1-2, on the "notes" of the Church. So THE CHURCH IDEA which accompanied this rejection made New Tes tament teachings concerning the mystical Body appear purely metaphorical and remote. These teachings were transferred in application to the invisible company of those who are to attain to final glory; and to this invisible ecclesia alone the glorious scriptural descriptions of, and promises to, the Church came to be referred.1 The visible Church came to be identified by many with a con geries of denominational Churches, which were apt to be regarded one and all as volunteer human organizations, and were often governed' on puritan lines, as rightly excluding those who fail fully to conform to current ideals of Christian conduct. These developments were natural enough, in spite of their revolutionary and anti-scriptural nature, and responsibility for them does not lie wholly with sixteenth century Protestants. There have emerged two new types of ecclesiasti cal polity, the presbyterial and the congregational, and two corresponding theories of the ministry. Many Presbyterians ostensibly retain the doctrine of apostolic succession, but claim that this succes sion is presbyterial. The more dominant theory among Protestants is congregational, that the con- 1 On the visibility of the Church, see ch. iii. § 3, below. The invisible Church idea appears to have had Wycliffe for its author (Trialogues, Suppl. cap. ii). It was taken over by Huss (De Unitate Ecclesiae, cc. 2-6). ZwingU adopted it, and it infected the minds of many Anglicans in the reformation period. See Darwell Stone, pp. 221-222, 425-436. IN HISTORY Si gregation is the source of ministerial authority, there being no fixed form of the ministry entitled to claim divine appointment.1 The result of these developments is that the organized form of Christendom to-day is denomina tional — broken up into "the Churches," which differ generically from each other in their organiza tion and in their doctrine of the Church. The con trast between this and the New Testament situation is patent. "The Churches" of the New Testament were not denominations, but local congregations in one Church, wliich was at visible unity with itseK and was controlled by a ministry of apostolic appointment. Denominationalism is radically in consistent with the organic unity upon wliich St. Paul insisted as essential to the due functioning of the Church.2 The problem of restoring Chris tian unity, therefore, is one with that of abolish ing denominations. There must be a coming together of Christians in corporate relations that will be world-wide in scope, and everywhere effective in securing sacramental ministrations that will be generally accepted as valid and will be devoutly taken advantage of by all genuine types of Chris tians. The divergences in articles of faith which have also followed upon the protestant revolution 1 On sixteenth-century and later conceptions of the Church, see J. Kostlin, in Schaff-Herzog Encyc, s.v. "Church, the Christian," IV; R. F. Weidner, pp. 42 el seq.; Darwell Stone, ch. xv. 2 Cf . T. A. Lacey, Unity and Schism, Lees. v-vi. 52 THE CHURCH IDEA complicate this problem; and a restoration of fun damental agreement in what Christians believe -to be necessary elements of Christian doctrine has become an essential condition of its solution. Obvi ously a special outpouring of the Spirit is needed to overcome human pride and inertia, and to guide our efforts in this direction. But we have no right to doubt His sufficient aid, if we humbly and ear nestly pray for it, and are not impatient for quick results.1 II. Some Modem Difficulties § 5. It is a fundamental and at the same time inspiring aspect of the doctrine that the visible Church was made by the Holy Spirit to be the mystical Body of Christ2 that the baptismal rela tions between its members are interior and vital, because truly organic. As members of one organism baptized Christians are also members one of another; and because they are interiorly related to its Head, Jesus Christ, they are interiorly related also to each other. In the natural order, Christians also have external relations wliich they can wilfully develop in ways that are inconsistent with their deeper interior relations. But no human actions or con ditions can reverse these interior relations; and no Christian requirement is more strongly emphasized in the New Testament than this, that they are to 1 Cf . ch. v. §§ 3-6, below, on unity. 2 On which, see ch. iii. §§ 5-8, below. SOME MODERN DIFFICULTIES 53 be treated as primary, and as permanently regula tive of all external relations between Christians.1 And the New Testament applies this principle to the relations between the ministers of Christ and the faithful at large. These relations also are fundamentally organic and interior. They are so because the ministry which Christ appointed was not merely an external arrangement, subject to alteration, but was a structural and abiding feature of the organism which the Holy Spirit quickened and made to be Christ's mystical Body.2- As de veloped by the same Spirit this ministry furnished to the Body its permanent organs of sacramental functioning. Those who are ordained to this minis try, therefore, are not external to the Body, as sub stitutionary agents for its members. They are organically one with the baptized, and in their appointed ministry act not only as agents commis sioned by Christ but also, and in spite of anything they can do, as organs through which the faithful at large function as well as they. In view of this permanent and determinative con stitution of Christ's Church, and of the interior relations between ministers and laymen which neces sarily inhere in it, there cannot, rightly speaking, be any real coming of the Church's ministers be tween Christian souls and God. It is true that Christian ministers are human, and that in the 1 Cf. 1 Cor. xii; Ephes. iv. 2 Eph. iv. 11-16. Cf. Col. ii. 19. 54 THE CHURCH IDEA sphere of external and passing relations evil de velopments may occur. And these tend to over shadow and obscure the more fundamental relations which determine the true meaning and value of ministerial functions. But this meaning cannot be altered by human wilfulness; and whatever causes may externalize a Christian minister's atti tude towards those for whom he acts, the fact always remains that in his divinely appointed func tions he acts as an organ of the mystical Body. All the faithful function in what he is appointed to do, as well as he. He acts ministerially and the laity participatively, but the action is corporate and organic. If I greet my neighbor by shaking hands, my hand does not, properly speaking, come between me and my neighbor, or between my members and him. Similarly when the Church functions in relation to God by the divinely ap pointed ministerial method, if the catholic doctrine of the mystical Body is true, its minister does not and cannot come between its members and God.1 The unworthiness of ministers can neither invali date, nor alter the meaning of, their sacramental functions. But we have to reckon, none the less, with the development through human wilfulness of acci dental external relations between the clergy and laity — relations which, although they cannot nullify 1 Geo. Moberly, Administration of the Holy Spirit, Lee. ii; R. C. Moberly, Ministerial Priesthood, ch. ii. SOME MODERN DIFFICULTIES 55 the truth of what has been said above, can and do obscure it, and hinder men from making full and profitable use of divine ordinances in the Church. Unhappily such a development has taken place. The relations between Church and state, initiated in the time of Constantine and perpetuated in later state establishments, have tended to secularize episcopal and pastoral functions. Coercive juris diction has driven spiritual relations into the back ground, and a monarchical development has seemed to place the clergy apart as a separate caste inter vening between Christian souls and God. We may not be over censorious, therefore, in judging those who in the sixteenth century repudiated the Church's hierarchy and adopted substitutes for the organic and sacramental ministrations of the mystical Body. Yet this repudiation, however well intended, was in fact a rejection of divine arrangements, arrange ments which never cease to afford their appointed benefits when devoutly employed. Moreover, the evils which had obscured their meaning and value were accidents, susceptible of amendment; and in the trying period of waiting for their reformation they were not fatal to the spiritual hfe of really loyal souls. This last mentioned fact is especially significant. Christians under the cathohc hierarchy have always been able, even under the worst con ditions, to draw near to God in the appointed way; and whatever may be the superficial appearances, no priesthood either does or can separate devout souls 56 THE CHURCH IDEA from God. In saying this we are not minimizing the real hindrances to religion which are created by human corruptions within the Church. They demand reformation; but a subversion of divinely appointed arrangements is not required for such reformation, nor can it be justified on other grounds. § 6. The unhappy obscuration within the Church of the interior relations between ministers and people above described is no doubt responsible for the origin and plausibility of the objection that the cathohc idea of the Church substitutes a fallible and external machinery for spiritual methods, and magical instruments for morally effective devotion. But a clear apprehension of New Testament doc trine concerning the mystical Body will surely re duce, and probably remove, this difficulty. And by going back of Christian arrangements to the gen eral method of God in dealing with human beings, we shall find sufficient positive reason for the ecclesias tical dispensation of things wliich we are defending. In covenant dealing with men/ God has always adapted His methods to human nature. In par ticular, He has employed social and sacramental methods, in each covenant appointing human agents in a society established by Himself, and using external media and ritual, the fundamental forms and values of which are also of His own mak ing. The sacramental method and principle will be considered in a subsequent chapter,1 but we 1 In ch. ix. SOME MODERN DIFFICULTIES 57 make two anticipatory remarks concerning it. In the first place, the Church's sacramental machinery is not correctly described as magical; for in eccle siastical teaching its beneficial effects are plainly asserted to depend upon moral conditions of faith and repentance in those who receive them, whereas the distinctive mark of magic is that it works auto matically and regardless of moral conditions. In the second place, the spiritual value of relig ious institutions is not at all dependent upon the absence from them of external media, but upon the spiritual effects which they have when rightly used. Moreover their effects in the Church's system pro ceed, according to cathohc doctrine, from the opera tion of the Holy Spirit in them, and not from any intrinsic virtue which the media themselves are supposed to possess. That is, the external instru ments are not substitutes for the Spirit's work, but signs and instruments adopted by the Spirit in condescension to the law that men, by reason of their composite nature, can neither effectively profit by spiritual things nor sufficiently express spiritual attitudes independently of external media. The fact that these media are liable to abuse, so as to displace what they are intended to subserve, is a branch of the wider fact that no method or instru ment utilized by men is free from this liability. In any case the abuse of things appointed of God for spiritual ends cannot justify their, abolition by creatures. 58 THE CHURCH IDEA The same principle applies to the social and ministerial elements of the Christian covenant. It is their divine sanction, rather than the use which wilful men make of them, that determines their abiding place and authority in the Church. But the point which we here emphasize is this, that some kind of permanent and divinely approved ecclesiastical system and ministry is necessary, if the Christian religion is to be effectively adapted to the requirements and limitations of human nature. Men are by nature social beings; and in every stage of human progress — even in the most modern and intelligent — every form of personal development and advantage which is not momen tary and illusory is absolutely dependent upon abiding social relations and upon normally estab lished and recognized ministrations of other human agents. Even the relations between two persons cannot be reduced to an entirely private affair between themselves without endangering the full development of personahty in those who practise such exclusiveness. It is through that which is most adequately social that individual persons most fully develop and actualize themselves. And the dangers which attend individualistic develop ments are so grave, and so pleasantly disguised, that the social side of human life has to be protected and developed by authoritative social institutions such as the family and the state. If this is true in earthly concerns it is also true, SOME MODERN DIFFICULTIES 59 and of pecuhar importance, in heavenly; for in the proportion that the personal development re quired for enjoyment of divine relations is higher than that needed for earthly advantages, just in that proportion do the social conditions that de termine personal growth become especially vital and, in conventional phrase, "generally necessary for salvation." Our relations to God are not pri vate affairs. They do indeed have private aspects for each individual; but these neither are the most determinative, nor do they obtain their intended de velopment and value for the individual except un der the conditions of the larger social institutions and ministrations by which historical Christianity has been maintained from the beginning. The Church and its ministry are as essential to men's spiritual development as are the family and the state to their earthly welfare. A churchless Chris tianity is necessarily moribund, and is incapable of effective Godward functioning.1 § 7. The difficulties above described are caused by human misuse of the Church's ministry and sacraments, the only proper remedy for which is a reformation of this misuse. They are not neces sary consequences of the things themselves, which pertain to the full integrity of the Christian dispen sation, and therefore may not be abolished or es sentially altered except by their divine Author. In our day those who reject the traditional cathohc 1 Cf. Creation and Man, pp. 232-237; H. B. Swete, pp. 119-126. 60 THE CHURCH IDEA system because of these difficulties direct then- opposition very sharply against "sacerdotalism." It has already been pointed out that the offensive aspects of priesthood thus stigmatized are due to human accidents, and are susceptible of reforma tion without the necessity of abandoning ministerial priesthood itself. "Sacerdotalism," in the invidious sense of po lemical use, denotes an externalizing of the relations between pastor and people, and the inference apt to be made therefrom that the priest comes between the soul and God. In reality the appointed func tions of priests are organic, and due allowance for the doctrine of the mystical Body makes it clear that no external substitution of priest for laity, or extraneous intervention of the kind justly con demned, is involved in ministerial priesthood rightly understood. But we seem to perceive a close connection between the sixteenth century protestant theory of substitutionary punishment endured by Christ, and the mental process which constrains Protes tants to reject priesthood as substitutionary. For if Christ's priestly sacrifice is regarded as abidingly external to those for whom He died, and for whom He now intercedes, then the derivative and minis terial priesthood of the Church will naturally be regarded in the same light; and those who are ready to acknowledge the divine Redeemer as substitute inevitably shrink from accepting other substitutes. SOME MODERN DIFFICULTIES 61 The sole mediation of Christ is a Christian truism. But we have tried to show in the last previous volume that Christ's priesthood is not substitu tionary, at all events not so in its continuing as pects.1 Among other reasons, it is because Christ is in us as members of His Body that He is our effective representative and Priest before the Father, and the dispenser of saving grace to us.2 Protestants have usually been constrained by New Testament teaching to accept the doctrine of ecclesiastical priesthood in principle, even while repudiating ministerial priesthood. It is admitted by many of them that the continuing office of Christ as our Saviour is truly priestly. How any one can intelligently avoid such admission without rejecting the Epistle to the Hebrews is hard to understand. It is also urged by them, as if it were inconsistent with official priesthood, that every Christian is a possessor of priesthood by virtue of his Chris tian status; and St. Peter's words, "Ye also, as hving stones, are built up a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood ... a royal priesthood," 3 are quoted in support of what is described as "the priesthood of the laity." Now of course, and Catholics agree with Protestants here, if Chris tians share in priesthood, it is because of some kind of participation in Christ's priesthood, for there is 1 The substitutionary theory of atonement is stated and dis cussed in Passion and Exaltation, ch. i. § 8; ch. ii. § 2; ch. iv. § 4. 2 Idem, ch. x. § 8. 8 1 St. Pet. ii. 5, 9. 62 THE CHURCH IDEA no other true priesthood. Furthermore, St. Peter does not teach that Christians are so many separate priests, but that they share in the one priesthood of Christ. And all Christians share in it because they are all members of His Body. It is this organic aspect of things that at once protects from displacement the sole mediatorship of Christ, and explains the consistency therewith of ministerial priesthood in the Church on earth. The ministerial priest has no other priesthood than that of the laity, and to set lay priesthood and minis terial priesthood in sharp antithesis is misleading. There is but one priesthood; and the participa tion in it of ministers and laymen is equally real, is equally grounded in membership of Christ's Body, and is unalterably conditioned by interior organic relations which preclude external substitu tion or intervention by ministers between the laity and Christ. The difference between those to whom the name "priest" is technically applied — the technical limitation must not be overlooked — and laymen is not one of kind of priesthood, for all have the same priesthood, fundamentally speaking. It lies in the offices fulfilled in this priesthood. Not all have the same office therein.1 The "priest" technically so called has an official or ministerial part in it, whereas the rest participate in his priestly ministrations unofficially and personally. He is their leader and organ, but the function is as truly 1 Cf. Rom. xii. 4-7. SOME MODERN DIFFICULTIES 63 theirs as it is his. This function is organic, an act of the Body of Christ, and the ministerial organs are organs of the Body. They are also ministra tions of Christ, but only because their ministrants are organs of His mystical Body — not less so because the relation involved is of Christ's appoint ment and of the Holy Spirit's effecting.1 History shows that the ministrations of the Church on earth are hable to sad abuses, and that grave hindrances to the Church's spiritual work are thereby created. But we surely show lack of faith in the work of the Holy Spirit and in His appointed methods when we are betrayed by our legitimate resentment against human misuse of them into abandoning them, whether wholly or in part. The evils requiring reformation pertain to human perversity. They do not inhere in the institutions of the Christian covenant, which retain their spiritual value for earnest souls in the most corrupt ages of Church history. § 8. Out of these evils have grown the mutually related disasters of loss of the Church's visible unity and of a very serious reduction of ecclesias tical efficiency. The result is that the Church is widely declared to be on trial before the bar of enlightened Christian judgment, and is said to be 1 On ministerial and lay priesthood, see R. C. Moberly, op. cit., ch. iii; Geo. Moberly, op. cit., Lee. viii; T. T. Carter, Doctrine of the Priesthood, ch. xiv; Chas. Gore, The Church and the Ministry, PP- 75-77, note. 64 THE CHURCH IDEA found wanting.1 In Christian lands millions have ceased to take the Church seriously, and that ab normal and truly functionless thing called "church- less Christianity" is extending its sway far and wide. An alarming proportion of those who retain an ostensible allegiance to one or other of "the Churches" do so without vital reason, and without noticeable effects upon their lives and characters. If they go to Church, they do so either because of traditional but undefined sentiment that it is "the thing to do," because of social considerations, or at best because they hope to derive some inspiration from pulpit oratory. A divided Christendom causes much overlapping of ecclesiastical ministrations, with consequent weak ening of the unduly multiplied congregational organ izations through which the Church must carry on its normal work. Bitter rivalry ensues, obscur ing the proper ecclesiastical aspect of things in a thick garb of satanic displays of malice — not less satanic because euphemistically described in terms of emulative zeal. An incidental consequence is that a large proportion of the clergy are given wages that would quickly cause day-laborers to go on a strike. Naturally the temptation to pay pecuhar deference to the well-to-do, and to neglect the poor, 1 On the evils caused by disunion, and its wrongfulness, see Jos. Hammond, English Nonconformity and Christ's Christianity; New man Smyth, Passing Protestantism and Coming Catholicism, I; Frank Spence, Christian Reunion, ch. x. SOME MODERN DIFFICULTDZS 65 is often well-nigh irresistible to them. Yet these helpless servants of the pew are expected to show a masterful leadership in human affairs that is, humanly speaking, impossible except for those whose livelihood will not be hopelessly jeopardized by their exercising spiritual fearlessness. When they succumb under such difficulties to humdrum inepitude, the Seminaries in which they are trained are made responsible, and the Church as well, be cause it does not bring about reformation. With this loss of spiritual efficiency there de velops a secularized conception of the Church's mission. It is expected to agitate in all questions of public concern, to rectify sociological evils, and to be "a ruler and divider" between the classes, — due watchfulness being exercised in the meantime lest the Church's saving doctrines should be im pertinently obtruded upon men's attention outside the cloisterlike seclusion of sectarian houses of worship. Thus is the Church's appointed propa ganda hushed or driven into obscurity. How can it be otherwise in a divided Christen dom, in wliich every really public description of the way of life is taken as a challenge to be met by contrary utterances from other Christian sources? A babel of inconsistent doctrines bewilders plain men. They can learn neither what to believe nor what to do in order to enter into life, and in the grace thereof to work out their salvation in the unity of the Body of Christ. The interior relations 66 THE CHURCH IDEA between Christians which are fundamental to growth in Christ are beyond reach in a congeries of denominations. This is, of course, quite the most fatal result of disunity. The spiritual life is impoverished, and earnest zeal, so long as it is dis tributed in mutually disparate denominations, can not from the nature of things wholly make good the loss. Yet the Church of God is full of truth and grace, if human prejudices and schisms will not conceal it from the people. In other words, it is not the Church in its God-given nature and organic form that hinders men from coming to God. It is the human developments of worldliness, ambition and disunity — disunity as chmax — that stand in the way. The problem of Christian unity — of abolish ing denominationalism, and of restoring open en joyment by all Christians of those relations which are constituted in the Body of Christ — this is the paramount problem today for all who would pro mote the interests of the Kingdom of God on earth. It is not less paramount because very troublesome questions of faith and order have to be faced before its solution can be reached, and because any at tempt at solution which disregards the God-given nature and organism of Christ's Church is certain to fail. III. Grounds of Hope § 9. Men are beginning to hear a stirring of tree-tops by the wind of God's Holy Spirit. Chris- GROUNDS OF HOPE 67 tian consciences in many lands, and in both catholic and protestant communions, are condemning the present situation in Christendom — the loss of a common spiritual life, the dominance of secular ized and utilitarian ideals of Christian endeavor, the partial suppression and emasculation of the Church's divinely appointed propaganda, the loss of charity between Christians, and the two con crete demonstrations to which these evils are obvi ously related as either cause or effect, that is, Christian disunity and churchless Christianity. It is being increasingly realized that the true Church idea must be recovered, and once more control the relations between Christian believers, if the Kingdom of God is to triumph in human affairs. Hearts are being stirred, and contrition is being felt for the sins and shortcomings that either have caused or now perpetuate the partial shipwreck of the Church and the loss of agreement concerning its nature, organization and proper functions. As a' consequence, demands are being imperatively made — not always intelligently nor with the patient humility that is to be desired, but — with abundant indications that the acquiescence of really sincere Christians in the present futilities of denominationalism is drawing to its end. (a) The abandonment of sectarian bitterness is being called for. Mutual courtesy, comity and charity are being urged, and the transparent right eousness of this demand is enlisting for it increasing 68 THE CHURCH IDEA assent and widening reiteration. Christians who not long since were looking askance at each other are now cultivating kindly relations, and are striv ing — with imperfect tempers as yet no doubt, but with earnest purpose — to understand each other and to remove, if possible, the causes of mutual estrangement. (b) Organized forms of cooperation between dif ferent denominations are being advocated and pro moted. Serious difficulties are here encountered, for the range of possible cooperation is seriously limited so long as denominational integrity is main tained, as indeed it has to be until Christians out grow certain fundamental disagreements concerning Christian faith and order. Effective federation in religious concerns is now neither practicable nor in harmony with Christian consciences, except be tween denominations whose differences are rela tively superficial. Yet the demand for, and the actual progress in, cooperation between Christians of different Communions in matters that do not involve these scruples, are facts which give encour aging evidence of earnest desire to grapple with the evils caused by Christian disunity. (c) Federation, or any form of cooperation be tween denominations, is at best a provisional expedi ent; for so long as denominationalism continues, it will necessarily dethrone the organic and visible unity of the Church universal. The full recovery of the Church's spiritual efficiency depends upon GROUNDS OF HOPE 69 the restoration of organic unity; and such unity alone measures up to the mind of Christ and to apostolic teaching. Happily, Christians of many names are coming to realize this; and the increasing demand for organic unity is not less truly for the good, because of the numerous difficulties to be faced, and the painful waiting for their removal, which must sorely try the patience of zealous Chris tians for some time to come. These three demands — for the abandonment of controversial bitterness, for mutual cooperation in Christian endeavor, and for organic unity — unin- telhgently, censoriously and impatiently as they are frequently urged, are prompted by the Holy Spirit, and reveal workings in Christian hearts and consciences that ought to encourage all who love the Church of God. § 10. Another hopeful sign is the gradual dis placement of denominational formulae, and of eccles iastical traditions of sixteenth century fixing, by a cosmopohtan scholarship which enlists the coopera tion and attentive consideration of all types of Christian students and thinkers, regardless of de nominational affiliations. We ought not to be deterred from perceiving the encouraging significance of this development by the limitations and confusions which now quahfy its results, and which probably will continue to do so for some time to come. Scholarship does not become infallible by becoming cosmopohtan and inter- 70 THE CHURCH IDEA denominational; and the genius of liberalism is as fatal to a proper understanding of Christian truth when disguised by the methods of laborious critical research as it is when exploited by unscholarly agitators. Moreover, denominational prejudices have not yet wholly ceased to hamper the outlook even of those who have begun to perceive the im portance of other types of Christian thinking than their own. But there are several considerations which more than offset these difficulties. (a) In the first place denominational outlooks are gradually losing their power to check the influence of increasing knowledge and reconsideration of sectarian premises; and liberalism also must gradu ally cease to be formidable in Christian circles, be cause its outlook is as demonstrably inconsistent with true openness of mind as is a sectarian outlook. It erects private judgment in an acutely individual istic form against catholic consent, and is controlled by presuppositions which preclude any fruitful reck oning with the supernatural elements of Christianity. Therefore it will not permanently maintain itself in the field of consistently Christian inquiry and thought. The cosmopolitan aspects of modern scholarship will remain after liberalism has ceased to limit its success in spiritual truthseeking. (b) This cosmopolitan development is bringing about a world-wide comparison of notes between Christians, and is enabling devout students of every type, both catholic and protestant, to gain the GROUNDS OF HOPE 71 thoughtful attention of Christian behevers in every Communion. Thus all competent Christian think ers, the world over, are brought to mutual confer ence, so to speak; and the closest approximation to an Ecumenical Council that the present state of Christendom permits is commencing its sessions. Such a description is somewhat euphemistic, of course; and not only must there be much delay before determinative results can emerge, but more formal methods of giving effect to Christian consent concerning the Church must finally be adopted. But if, as the writer beheves, the Spirit is drawing Christians back to the unity of faith and order from which they have departed, what more effec tive human instrument could He overrule to that end than this world-wide interchange of Christian studies which we are considering? (c) Finally, there is the prevailing power of truth, when it once secures a wide hearing. No matter how deeply intrenched in traditional prejudices and vested interests an error in religion may be, it can not permanently retain its power when by the whole Christian world it is contemplated side by side with the truth which it caricatures or contradicts. The true idea of the Church, under such conditions, will gradually resume its sway among really sincere Christians, and this means that the evils which have reduced the Church's spiritual efficiency, and have dissipated Christian efforts, will be put in the way of cure. 72 THE CHURCH IDEA § n. We have also to reckon with the increasing influence of social conceptions, and with the grow ing appreciation and use of comprehensive organi zation in all matters that are of general concern. It is coming to be realized that true efficiency de pends in every department of activity upon co ordinate methods, and upon thorough unification of the efforts and labors of all who are interested. The progress of "big business" affords an example of what is modifying men's attitudes and concep tions in every matter of vital and common con cern. In brief, both theoretically and practically the social nature of mankind, and the limitations of partial, provincial and exclusive unifications of human activity, are being more and more widely understood. "The classes" are no longer regarded by thoughtful men as other than hindrances to human welfare, if they stand in the way of general and efficiently organized cooperation in common aims. A striking aspect of this development is the grow ing suspicion that nationalism has serious limita tions, and may easily become an obstacle to human welfare. The great world-war was obviously the result of nationalism in its selfish form, promoted at the cost of the larger rights and interests of mankind. Some form of pohtical unification of the human race is being dreamed of as a desirable goal of future diplomacy — one that will conserve true freedom for all, but which will so control the GROUNDS OF HOPE 73 relations of the peoples now mutually isolated and provincialized by national barriers that the world's business and the world's life and thought will broaden out in free interaction and harmonious efficiency. If a universal repubhc is as yet a dream, it is at least coming to be regarded as a noble one. It is perceived to embody the principles of human efficiency and common welfare in a form the essen tial elements of which will determine the future growth of civilization. Internationalism is in the air. Now in all this social movement there is to be found an increasing realization that no common interest among men can be promoted with full success until all who have to do with its promotion are somehow unified and sufficiently organized to gether to function coordinately after the manner of an organism. And an organism rather than a mere machine is needed, because coordination does not obtain self-repairing and rejuvenating power and permanence, until internal relations of gen erally acknowledged validity are developed which can overcome the inevitable breakings out of indi vidualism and selfishness among men. Human nature does not cease to be a determina tive factor when men function in religion; and, therefore, we find that, in spite of the hindrances which inveterate prejudices offer, the great social movement of our age is socializing men's thoughts of religious hfe and action. It is enlarging the social 74 THE CHURCH IDEA conception of Christianity itself on lines which are destined to transcend the limitations of sects, na tions and continents, and of times as well. If man is a religious being, his rehgious interests are com mon to the race, and cannot be promoted adequately1 until all function together in open relationship, as members of one great organism. And this organ ism must be both large enough and strong enough to guarantee free scope, and at the same time self-conserving and effective unity, to the spiritual hfe and functioning of each and every Christian throughout the world. Various special causes hamper men in realizing this — the prejudices already mentioned, the sins and lack of charity of men, and the fact that multi tudes are as yet to be won to the Christian faith. But the vision of a catholic unity among Christians is dawning upon men, and the pressure of the evils of disunity is driving earnest believers on to a recon sideration of unifying possibilities. The incredi- bles in this direction are coming to be looked upon as practicables — at least as leaving open the road to the joyous and abounding grace of one com munion and fellowship. The Church idea is slowly coming to its proper emphasis. Even such a de tached secular philosopher as the late Josiah Royce caught the vision of a world-wide "beloved society," which should be the dearest thing on earth, because the effective solution of all rehgious difficulties.1 1 See his Problem of Christianity. GROUNDS OF HOPE 75 The day is coming when the New Testament doctrine of the mystical Body will be seen by Chris tians everywhere to describe God's loving adapta tion of His blessings to the requirements of human nature. It will be reahzed that no other organism for the coordination of human religion in effective unity can succeed except that which was given life in the upper room on the day of Pentecost, and which in its subsequent development is known to history as the Cathohc Church. Its human cor ruptions must be reformed, but it will be seen, in God's good time, that these corruptions are super ficial accidents, and that in a restoration of world wide loyalty to its gracious sway the future spiritual interests of mankind are involved. § 12. In discussing the human grounds of hope we have made several assumptions, upon the val idity of which depends the value of what we have written. (a) We have taken it for granted that the restora tion of visible Christian unity is the only means of recovery of the true idea of the Church; and that this unity is not attainable — is indeed the mere shadow of an abstraction — apart from world-wide ecclesiastical unity. The disruptive forces of human self-will and wrong are too mighty to be effectively met except on the basis of generally accepted and externally recognizable organic relations. (b) We have also assumed that truth is para mount and that we can do nothing permanent 76 THE CHURCH DDEA against it. Beneath all sincere Christian conten tions is the premise that their truth alone justifies them. If the catholic idea of the Church, set forth in this volume, is not true, no arguments for it can justify men in holding it. The same is true of the Christian religion itself. And if either the cathohc idea or the Christian religion is erroneous, we should thank God with all our hearts when its error is made manifest. Catholic behevers employ their rule of faith — the Church to teach and define, the Bible to confirm and illustrate — on the assump tion that by its devout use truth can be reached. Any real opposition between ecclesiastical doctrine and truth must end in the modification or rejection of ecclesiastical doctrine. All this is elementary in cathohc theology; and it is because we accept the truth of the idea of the Church maintained in this volume that we interpret certain signs of our time in the manner above indicated. (c) A third assumption is that the triumph of the Church and, as indispensable to this, its visible unity in all the world, are integral elements of the will of God and of Christ. The Lord prayed that all His followers might be one in a manner that would enable men to perceive the source of His mission — that is, visibly one; and such unity is a matter of grave emphasis in St. Paul's Epistles.1 With this premise it is natural to believe that the conditions of our age which are favorable to the 1 St. John xvii. n, 20-23; 1 Cor. xii; Ephes. iv. GROUNDS OF HOPE 77 restoration of unity are means which God is em ploying to that end. (¦i) Finally, we have assumed that the Holy Spirit, without whose illuminating, impelling and assisting operations nothing worthy of the Chris tian profession can be achieved, is in the Church and is today overruling human conditions and movements for the restoration of Christian unity, and for making the Church more manifestly the home of truth and grace, and the ark of safety, for all who respond to the call of Jesus Christ. It is this assumption that enables us to take an optimis tic view of the modern situation, and to discern in current movements the potentiality and promise of a gloriously united and triumphant Catholic Church.1 1 On the problem of Christian unity, see Chas. Briggs, Church Unity; A. C. A. Hall, Sevenfold Unity of the Christian Church; A. J. Mason, Principles of Eccles. Unity; Chas. Gore, Orders and Unity; and many others. CHAPTER III THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH I. ..4 s Ecclesia § i. The ordinary Greek word for the Church in the New Testament is tKKkino-la, and its meaning needs carefully to be reckoned with in inquiring into the doctrine of the Church.1 It is also neces sary, of course, in such inquiry to have regard for contexts, and not wholly to determine the New Testament conception of the Church by the mean ing of the name given to it. The word eni<\rjcrLa,2 so far as the New Testa ment use of it is concerned, was derived from the Greek Septuagint version of the Old Testament and from its current use among the Jews when our Lord came. In the Septuagint it most frequently trans lates the Hebrew "?np, usually meaning assembly; and the root verb in both Hebrew and Greek means to call or summon to an assembly. The Hebrew word came in the later books to refer sometimes to 1 For bibliog. on the Church, see p. 38, above. 2 On this word, see H. B. Swete, pp. 3-6; F. J. A. Hort, I, Vn; J. H. Thayer, Greek-Eng. Lex. of the New Test., q. v.; Hastings, Dk. of Christ, vol. I, p. 330; Cath. Encyc, s. v. "Church," I; Hastings, Die of Bib., s. v. "Congregation" (Esp. O. T. terms). AS ECCLESIA 79 the whole congregation of Israel, whether in actual assembly or not; but nowhere does it appear to connote the doctrine, otherwise symbolized in the Old Testament, that Israel had been divinely called out from mankind to be a peculiar people. The word kiacKricrla continued in Jewish use during the apocryphal period with variations of meaning not susceptible of exact retracing; but in the time of Christ the fundamental idea denoted by it was still that of an assembly of some kind, whether local or of Israel at large, in particular an assembly having rehgious purpose and meaning — an assem bly before God. Our Lord is recorded in the first Gospel as using the word on two occasions,1 in both instances in significant connection with the Kingdom of God which He came to establish. In answer to Peter's acknowledgment of His messiahship, He said, "Thou art Peter (TJerpos) and upon this rock (irerpp) I will build My Church (oiKoSofi^croo jjlov t^v kKKkqcriav) ; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. I will give unto thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven," 2 etc. In these words Christ describes His kutdvqo-ia or assembly as built, that is as having a structural aspect and therefore as an organized society, Himself being its builder 1 The genuineness of these passages has been assailed, but with no atom of evidence against them. See F. J. A. Hort, p. 9. 2 St. Matt. xvi. 18. See Alfred Plummer, M.F. Sadler and W. C. iVllen, in he; F. J. A. Hort, pp. 10-17. 80 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH or organizer. The fact that He was to build it on Peter and, as the most closely related passage shows, on him as the leading member of the apostolic band, confirms this interpretation. The further fact that Christ immediately couples with this announcement a promise to Peter of the keys of the Kingdom, a promise given later to the apostolic society at large, appears to imply that the Church was to constitute the disciplinary machinery at least of the Kingdom. It is clear that the kuKkiqaia referred to is not a mere local assembly of disciples, but the whole spiritual society of which the Apostles were to con stitute the original and organizing nucleus. In His second recorded use of e/c/cX^trta, our Lord treats the Church as exercising corporate judicial functions, as court of last resort for any disciple who has a grievance against another. He says, "Tell it unto the Church: and if he refuse to hear the Church also, let him be unto thee as the Gentile and the publican." Then He proceeds to renew the promise of the power of the keys in the King dom to the disciples at large, that is, the power of binding and loosing on earth with consequent effect in Heaven.1 It cannot rightly be maintained that Christ means here by enKknaia one of the existing synagogic assembhes among the Jews.2 In the context He is plainly giving instructions pertaining to the Kingdom to those who are to be governed by its machinery, with which He never connects the 1 St. Matt, xviii. 17. * So Plummer, in he. AS ECCLESIA 81 Jewish synagogues. His outlook is to the future. The words "Gentile" and "pubhcan" do indeed imply the Jewish standpoint, but their use is merely illustrative, and their selection is naturally deter mined by existing analogies, as most famihar to His listeners. The sum of the matter is that in the recorded instances of our Lord's use of the term, CKAcXijaio designates an indestructible society, which Christ was to build, of which Peter and the apostolic company were to be organizers, and to wliich were to be given judicial and disciplinary powers pertaining to His Kingdom. § 2. Taught by the visible continuity of the post- pentecostal Christian society with the apostolic association estabhshed by Christ, and also by the descent upon it of the Holy Spirit, New Testament writers used the term iKKkqaia. to denote this so ciety of Christians as a whole.1 They identified its membership as consisting of those who were baptized into Christ,2 and treated its organized and corporate life as determined by "the Apostles' teach ing and fellowship." 3 Its members are described as "built on the foundation of the Apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner-stone." 4 1 E.g. Ephes. i. 22; Col. 1. 18, 24. Cf. Ephes. iv. 4, and the in stances in which a local Church is referred to as representative or in terms of the whole, e.g. Acts xx. 28; 1 Cor. x. 32; xi. 22; xii. 27-28. 2 Acts ii. 37-38; viii. 9-13; 1 Cor.. xii. 12-13; Gal. iii. 26-27; Ephes. v. 25-26; Col. ii. 11-12. 8 Acts ii. 42. * Eph. ii. 20. Cf. 1 Cor. iii. 9-10. 82 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH No doubt we find other uses of the term in the New Testament, although all are related to this one, which is determinative so far as the doctrine of the Church is concerned, (a) It is applied to the several Christian bodies in various cities, such as the Church of Antioch and of Caesarea, and the seven Churches in Asia.1 (b) Even the Christians of particular households are described as constitut ing Churches.2 (c) As coordinating these uses, "Churches" are referred to, in the plural.3 (d) The congregation of Israelites in the wilderness is by analogy so called,4 in which use the recognized con tinuity of the Christian Church with the chosen people is perhaps a sub-conscious factor, (e) The company of those who either are or will be made perfect and gathered in the heavenly Zion is thus designated.5 It is clear that the local, congregational and plural uses above given do not at all correspond or agree with the modern use of "Churches," referring to denominations of diverse and wholly independent organization and institutions. When St. Paul says, "We have no such custom, neither the Churches of God," 6 he plainly implies that common customs have authority in these local Churches; and in the 1 Acts xiv. 27; xviii. 22; Revel, i. 4. Cf. 1 Cor. 1. 2. 2 Rom. xvi. 5; Col. iv. 15; Philem. 2. 3 Acts ix. 31; xv. 41; Rom. xvi. 4; 1 Cor. vii. 17, etc. 1 Acts vii. 38. 6 Heb. xii. 22-23. Cf. Gal. iv. 26; Ephes. v. 27; Phil. iii. 20-21; Revel, xxi. 9-10. 8 1 Cor. xi. 16. Cf. vii. 17. AS ECCLESIA 83 exposition of spiritual gifts which follows,1 he plainly sets forth the conception of the Church at large as consisting of one Body of Christ, having the unity of an organic constitution, and having divinely set in it a common ministry of Apostles, prophets and teachers. The denominational idea of Churches is alien to this. In the New Testament " the Churches " designates assemblies which are so called in a rela tive sense as being local embodiments of the Church universal or Body of Christ.2 The organic unity of this larger body is here and there insisted upon, and is everywhere taken for granted as fundamental to the Christian dispensation. § 3. The application of the term eKKXrjcria to the assembly enrolled in Heaven, and certain texts bearing on the future destiny of the elect, have been used as a basis for distinguishing between the visible and an invisible Church, and for referring the more glorious New Testament descriptions of, and promises to, the Church to this invisible Church.3 There is abundant reason for thinking, however, 1 In xii. 12-30. Cf. Ephes. iv. 3-16. 2 Cf. 1 Cor. x. 32; xi. 22; xii. 27-28. The universal Church con sists, organically speaking, of baptized individuals, whose organic relations to the whole and to each other are distinct from local juris dictional relations. The branch theory is misleading. See A. J. Mason, in H. B. Swete's Essays on the Early Hist, of the Church, etc., pp. 19-24; H. B. Swete, Holy Catholic Church, pp. 127-128; F. J. A. Hort, pp. 168-169. 3 On its origin, see p. 50, above. On the whole subject, see Darwell Stone, pp. 99-105, 425-436; H. B. Swete, pp. 50-55; Wm. Palmer, Pt. I. ch. iii; A. J. Mason, in H. B. Swete's Essays cited, 84 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH that no such antithesis and inference would have gained the support which it did if the break with the Church's hierarchy and sacramental system in the sixteenth century, and the emphasis on ab solute predestinarian doctrine, had not occurred. Both events tended towards a lowering of doctrine concerning the visible Church, and drove Protes tants and Reformers to find some substitute for that Church as object of the New Testament de scriptions and promises in question. No such antithetic contrast between the visible Church and an invisible one made up of the elect can be found in the New Testament. The elect are there repeatedly identified with the baptized mem bers of the visible Church,1 and the application of the term Church to those who attain to the heavenly Jerusalem 2 plainly does not denote another Church, separable from the visible Church; but, like the local apphcations above mentioned, is a relative and analogical designation of an assembly yonder that is a true part and embodiment of the universal Church. That not all those who now belong to the visible Church will enter the heavenly Jerusalem is plainly set forth in Scripture; 3 but the explana- pp. 9-19; Rich. Hooker, IH. i. 3 et seq. The invisible Church idea is thought by some to be ventilated by St. Augustine; but see W. Bright, Lessons from the Lives of Three Great Fathers, pp. 280-285. 1 See Ephes. i. 4-6; Col. iii. 12; 1 Thess. i. 4; 1 St. Pet. i. 2; ii. 9; v. 13. 2 Heb. xii. 22-23. 3 E.g. Heb. vi. 4-6. Cf. St. Matt. xiii. 24-30, 41-42; St. John xv. 6; 1 Cor. ix. 27; Phil. ii. 12; 1 St. Pet. iv. 17-18. AS ECCLESIA 85 tion hes in their being cut off from the Church because of their incurable wickedness, not in there being a separate £iac\r]o-ia, with other than baptis mal conditions of admission. In later parlance, the Church militant, expectant and triumphant is one iitKkino-ia, into which entrance is obtained by Bap tism, from which obstinate sinners will be finally cut off, and the perfection of which is realized in its triumphant part and stage in Heaven.1 No doubt if "the elect" designates in Scripture those who are absolutely predestined to glory, the identification of such with the baptized appears incongruous. But the New Testament teaches neither that all the elect are necessarily to be glori fied nor that any individual is absolutely and un conditionally predestined to glory.2 Election in the New Testament has for its reference baptismal life;3 and while future glory is the destiny which Baptism brings within human reach, the baptized, that is the elect, still have to make their calling and election sure.4 Their glorification is contin gent, and not absolutely predetermined in each case. Only the Church corporate is absolutely predestined to glory;5 and no other Church is described in the New Testament as built by Christ, purchased by 1 Ephes. v. 25-27; Revel, xix. 7-9. 2 On this whole subject, see Creation and Man, pp. 19-38. 8 St. Matt. xx. 1-16; xxii. 2-14; St. John xvii. 6, 12; Rom. i. 6-7; 1 Cor. i. 2; Ephes. i. 1-14; 2 Tim. i. 9. 4 2 St. Pet. i. 10. Cf. St. Matt. xxii. 14. s St. Matt. xvi. 18; Rom. xi. 1-7, 25-27; Ephes. v. 25-27. 86 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH His blood, and quickened by the Holy Spirit, except the Church of the baptized who were united in "the Apostles' teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and the prayers." The visible nature of this Church is patent, not less so because a majority of its members are now in the invisible world. And this visibility appears in the foUowing facts: (a) Its membership is con stituted by the visible rite of Baptism; * (b) Its Head is still visible by virtue of His Manhood to all those who attain to glory, although out of sight to those on earth; (c) Its ministerial organization is visible on earth; (d) The central Eucharistic function which Christ instituted for it is visible, and constitutes the sacrament of its unity; 2 (e) It has, and that by Christ's will and provision,3 a judicial and disciplinary office wliich cannot be exercised otherwise than by visible methods. It is a gross error, however, to limit our idea of the Church to its visible aspects. It is the Body of Christ, the meaning of which description will be considered in subsequent sections. This means that its nature is sacramental, and that the external is the sign and machinery of an internal and super human power and grace.4 The Incarnation, or union of the divine and human natures in its Head, 1 For refs. see p. 81, note 2. 2 1 Cor. x. 17. 3 St. Matt, xviii. 17-18. * Cf. ch. ix. §§ it-4, below, and ch. ii. § 6, above. AS ECCLESIA 87 Jesus Christ, is the germinal antecedent, and fur nishes the pattern, of what the Church is as being His fulness.1 § 4. That Christ 'founded the Christian ecclesia of which we are speaking2 cannot be seriously questioned by those who accept in substance the narratives of the Gospels and their reports of His language concerning it. For (a) the apostolate, which was the nucleus around wliich it grew, and by which its organization was determined, was es tablished by Christ; and He trained and com missioned the Apostles for functions that would obviously require some such society as the Chris tian ecclesia for their performance; (6) He expressly declared His purpose of building an indestructible ecclesia and of giving to it, as represented by His Apostles, the keys of the Kingdom; (c) He insti tuted the baptismal rite by which men become members of it; and its most central and determina tive corporate function, the Holy Eucharist, was also created by Him. The very important conclusion follows that the ecclesia is integral to the new covenant which He estabhshed upon the historical basis of His redemp tive death and victory over death.3 In order to fulfil the terms of this covenant, and to gain the 1 Ephes. i. 23. 8 On which fact, see H. B. Swete, pp. 6-9; Chas. Gore, op. cit., ch. i; A. J. Mason, in H. B. Swete's Essays cited, pp. 3-5; W. J. S. Simpson, ch. ii. * Darwell Stone, pp. 7-13; Jos. Hammond, chh. vii-xi. 88 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH assurance which it is designed to convey, we have to accept the Redeemer's arrangements for it. Loyalty to the covenant in its formal aspects con sists of loyalty to the ecclesia, which by Christ's arrangement is its institutional embodiment. The New Testament everywhere bears either direct or indirect witness to this.1 To say that Christ founded the Christian ecclesia should not, however, be taken to mean that the Church of God was for the first time created and organized by what He did, and made effectual by His Holy Spirit, in the first century of our era. What He then did was to reconstitute and per manently rehabihtate the Church of the old cove nant.2 Out of that Church He called the spiritual remnant of Israel, giving it, as had been prophesied of old, catholic instead of racial institutions, endow ing it with His own Spirit, and through that same Spirit making it His own Body and fulness — the home of truth and grace, and ark of safety for all in every nation under heaven who accept His Gospel message and acknowledge Him as their Redeemer and Saviour. The Christian Church is an evolu tion from the Church of Israel by segregation of its promised seed, by involution of Christ's life-giving Body of glory, and by the consequent emergence of a spiritual Israel and of the messianic kingdom. That the Apostles thus understood the connection 1 Cf. Acts ii. 47; Ephes. i. 23. 2 Cf. pp. 39-40, above, where refs. are given. AS ECCLESIA 89 between the Christian ecclesia and the Church of Israel is made certain by the fact that they claimed for the newly constituted ecclesia the promises to Abraham's seed,1 and the prophecies concerned with the final triumph of the kingdom of Israel and of David.2 They also applied the descriptions of Israel in the Old Testament to the Christian Church with a freedom that presupposes their belief that the later ecclesia is the continuance in a revised and higher covenant of the chosen people.3 The new organization was conceived by the Holy Ghost in the womb of the old, and for awhile continued at its breast, the weaning being completed by the fall of Jerusalem, which also signahzed the final aboli tion of the old. This continuity between the old and the new grows out of the divine authority of both, and from the unbroken sequence and unity which evermore marks the open deahngs of God with men. The Founder of the new was also the Founder of the old. The Person who revealed Himself to the patri archs and to Israel of old was the eternal Logos,4 — the same who subsequently took our nature and, on the basis of accomplished redemption, estabhshed the Christian ecclesia. This is not less certainly a fact, because the time had not come before the 1 Rom. iv. 16-18; ix. 23-29; Gal. iii-iv. Cf. 1 St. Pet. ii. 3-10; Ephes. iii. 6. 1 Acts xiii. 22-23, 32-34- 8 Heb. viii. 6-13; x. 5-14. 1 St. John i. 1, 14; with viii. 56. Cf. 1 Cor. x. 4. 90 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH Incarnation in which the Logos could make known to His people the trinitarian mystery and His per sonal distinctness from the Father and the Holy Spirit. No deceit was involved in delaying this clearer self -manifesta tion; for the Father is eter nally in the Son, and He that receives the Son also receives the Father,1 whatever may be his igno rance of the personal distinctions involved. AU this affords an illuminating context to the doctrine that Christ established the Christian ecclesia. In so doing He simply advanced to a higher stage the mystery of which He was the true Author when He established the Mosaic dispensation and the older chosen people,2 not stultifying the old but fulfilling it.3 II. .4s the Body of Christ § 5. In establishing the ecclesia as an integral ele ment and formal embodiment of the new covenant, our Lord clearly retained the method of using exter nal institutions and rites in dealing with His people. This was indeed necessary, if the new covenant was to be adapted to certain permanent requirements of human nature. The sacramental principle is valid in ah ages, and in every stage of human de- 1 St. John xiii. 20; xiv. 8-10. 2 See P. G. Medd, One Mediator, §§ 85-88; Geo. Bull, Defense oj the Nicene Faith, I. i; E. W. Hengstenberg, Christol. of the Old Test., App. Ill, who refers to Justin M., Apol. I. 63; Dial. w. Trypho, 59-61. Cf. ch. ii. § 1, above. 8 Cf. Col. ii. 17; Heb. ix. 9; x. 1. AS THE BODY OF CHRIST 91 velopment.1 What Christ did was twofold. He modified the externals so as to adapt them to the changed situation which was created by redemption and by the new relations constituted between Him self and us; and He made the new institutions more spiritually effective than the old through the work of His Holy Spirit. In order that we may realize the greater effec tiveness of Christian institutions, and may be saved from the errors and difficulties involved in too exclusive emphasis upon the ecclesia, that is upon the external and visible aspects of the Church, it is necessary to reckon with deeper aspects of ]the Church's nature. These are scripturally symbolized in the descriptive phrase, "the Body of Christ." 2 Until we seriously reckon with the significance of this description, and with the organic relation to wliich it refers as subsisting between Christ and His Church, we shall be handicapped to a degree in understanding and appreciating the value of New Testament doctrine concerning the Church's ministry and sacraments. That the sense in which the Church is called the Body of Christ is not merely metaphorical becomes apparent when we connect it with our Lord's own teaching concerning the true vine and its branches,3 1 On the sacramental principle, see ch. ix. §§ 1-4, below. 2 On the Church as Christ's Body, see Darwell Stone, pp. 83-86; A. J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. vii. § 9; W. J. S. Simpson, pp. 34 et seq.; F. J. A. Hort, pp. 144-149. 161-163; Rich. Hooker, I. xv. 2. 8 St. John xv. 1-8. 92 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH and reckon with the important use made of the description in question as formal premise of Pauhne arguments concerning our relations to Christ and to each other in the Church, and concerning the several offices to be fulfilled by Christians in the economy of grace. This description occupies too central a place in St. Paul's expositions to be reduced to a mere figure of speech. He says to the Romans, "For even as we have many members in one body, and all the members have not the same office: so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and severally members one of another." x To the Corinthians he says that we "are one bread, one body: for we all partake of the one bread." Again, "For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of the body, being many, are one body; so also is Christ. For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body." 2 He makes this the justifying premise of a considerable exposition of the diversity of gifts distributed by the Spirit, the thought being that this diversity is grounded in the organic nature and constitution of the Church into wliich we gain entrance by Baptism. This is a deeper and more abiding ground than can be afforded by men's dis positions or by merely human organization. The relations are internal and Christocentric, and are constituted by the Spirit Himself. "Now are ye the Body of Christ, and severally members thereof." ' 1 Rom. xii. 4-5. * 1 Cor. x. 17; xii. 12-13. * 1 Cor. xii. 27. AS THE BODY OF CHRIST 93 It is in this kind of an ecclesia that St. Paul goes right on to say that "God hath set some in the Church, first Apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers," 1 etc., obviously in organic relation to the Body. To the Ephesians he writes that God gave Christ "to be Head over all things to the Church, which is His Body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all." 2 The unity of the Body is emphasized in the same Epistle, and the gift of Apostles, prophets and evan gelists, etc., is described as for "the building up of the Body of Christ, that we may grow up in all things into Him, which is the Head, even Christ; from whom all the Body fitly framed and knit to gether through that which every joint supplieth, according to the working in due measure of each several part, maketh the increase of the Body unto the building up of itself in love." 3 Here we see the spiritual growth of Christians itself made to depend upon organic relations within the Body, relations which cannot wholly be described in terms of personal attitudes and dispositions towards Christ. Similar language is addressed to the Colossians. Christ "is the Head of the Body, the Church." And he admonishes them against "not holding fast to the Head, from whom ah the Body, being sup plied and knit together through joints and bands, increaseth with the increase of God." 4 1 Verse 28. 3 Ch. iv. 15-16. 2 Ephes. i. 22-23. * Col. i. 18, 24; ii. 17. 94 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH § 6. It is perfectly clear that St. Paul is speak ing in the above quoted passages of the visible ecclesia, of the Church into which men enter by Baptism.1 He does not, of course, mean that this Church is Christ's Body in the physical sense. If it were, its essential unity would be uninterruptedly visible to all. His language is analogical and is to that extent figurative. But the figure is made to do duty for stereotyped description, as being the best available "form of sound words" by which to de clare the inner nature of the ecclesia. It indicates a mystery for the definition of which no equally adequate formula could be found. It is a symbol in the creedal sense — not to be reduced to the level of a metaphor, but to be accepted and used as truly and formally definitive in spite of its patent hmitations. It defines, so far as terms borrowed from human experience can define, what the Church is in relation to Christ; and the definition is suffi ciently illuminative, when reasonably taken, to become a safe basis of inferential doctrine. St. Paul himself thus uses it. The relations to Christ which it describes are not physical, as we have already acknowledged; but neither are they merely external, personal, social or moral. They do, indeed, imply the obligation of certain moral and loving attitudes towards Christ and towards each other on the part of the baptized, but they indicate a relationship which is 1 Cf. i Cor. xii. 12-13. AS THE BODY OF CHRIST 95 distinct from such attitudes and, in present con tinuance, is independent of them — an objective, organic and static relationship. Borrowing from physical analogies, the relationship is biological rather than either moral or forensic. It is one which moral changes in us, our faith in Christ, and His pleasure in these, do not of themselves bring about, but is due to a distinct and objective mys tery, growing out of the Incarnation, consummated by the Holy Spirit, and affecting individuals through their baptismal incorporation into the Church. This mystery transcends the physical, and pertains to the spiritual order; and therefore theologians fre quently expand St. Paul's symbol and call the Church the "mystical" Body of Christ. But the mystery is not less truly objective on that account. The symbol in question determines the organic nature of the Church, as opposed to what is merely organized. The Church is indeed a society, but it is an organism, and both in unity and functioning is enabled and determined by inner factors and rela tions in which there is life, the hfe which resides in and flows from the immortalized Manhood of Christ in glory. For the mystical Body is what it is because of an inner and vital connection and union which the Holy Spirit established between it and the glorified Body of Christ. It is, so to speak, a mystical extension of that Body; and for this reason it is boldly described as "the fulness" of Christ.1 He is its Head, therefore, not only as 96 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH its legitimate Ruler, but organically, and therefore interiorly and vitally. The only other historical union that equals in closeness and vital significance the union between Christ and His Church is the union of which it is a sequel, that between God head and Manhood in the Person of Christ. Out of the Godhead the fulness of hfe and grace flows into our Lord's Manhood, and out of this Manhood the stream flows on into the mystical Body, and through it into the baptized — all by the operation of the Holy Spirit, the Life-giver. § 7. The Church as ecclesia is, of course, deter mined in form and corporate functioning by its inner nature as the Body of Christ. In the acci dents of adjustment to passing conditions of human society, its external polity may seem to approxi mate either the monarchical or the repubhcan form. But in any case there is a deeper factor which hmits this adjustment. The appointed ministry of Christ is not merely a feature of the Church's external polity, not something extraneous and added to the organism, but is a functional differentiation within the organism, within the Body of Christ. In se, and in its fundamental order, the ministry is neither monarchical nor republican, but sacramental and organic 1 — the functional condition within the Body under which, from Christ, "all the Body, being supplied and knit together through the joints and bands, increaseth with the increase of God." Ad- 1 Cf. pp. 165-166, below. AS THE BODY OF CHRIST 97 justment to extraneous conditions in the world there must be, but as an organic feature of the mystical Body, the Christian ministry is a divine creation, and in its fundamental order is unalter able by man. The status, privileges, laws of growth and rela tions of individual members of the ecclesia, sus ceptible as they are of adjustment in accidents of humanly administered polity and discipline, are also determined fundamentally, and limited in possibilities of adjustment, by the nature of the organism. Its members neither created this organ ism, nor can they change it. Their entrance into it recreates or regenerates them, and places them in mutual relations which they can disregard and abuse to their own spiritual injury, but which, even when abused, determine their part in the Church's corporate life, and the particular spiritual benefits or contrary which they severally can re ceive therefrom. God uses human wills in sustain ing the organic hfe and order of the Church, and men's response to vocation enters into the deter mination of their parts and privileges. But the controlling law is still organic, and any violation of this law, whether of wilful or of innocent causa tion, reduces, and in extreme instances nullifies, for its violators the benefits which they would other wise receive from their relation to the mystical Body. The laws of its functioning are inviolable, whatever special mercies God may and plainly does 98 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH provide for those who unwittingly, and therefore unblamably, disregard them. Finally, the organic nature of the Church unites its whole membership interiorly in all its corporate functions. Ground has been broken on this subject already.1 The prophetic, priestly and kingly offices of the Church are offices of the Body of Christ. That is, they are His offices, participated in with equal reahty by all the members of His Body, each in his organic place and relation to the Body and through the Body to Himself. There can be no real substitution of one member for another, or of minister for layman, in this regard, but only a func tional relation wliich unites all interiorly in what the minister does. No doubt ministers have in many cases magnified their office hypocritically, that is for their self -magnifying; and they have thereby seemed to come between souls and Christ, with deplorable effect upon the devotion and spiri tual growth of the people. But such developments conceal rather than nullify the truth that no con ditions debar the faithful from being interior par ticipants in the corporate functions of the ministry. The difficulty hes neither in priesthood nor in the ministerial method of it, but in widespread forget- f ulness by sacerdotahst and anti-sacerdotalist alike of the organic, and therefore interior, relationship of minister and layman in the Body of Christ.2 2 Cf. R. C. Moberly, Ministerial Priesthood, ch. iii; H. P. Liddon, Univ. Sermons, 2nd Series, pp. 198-199; Geo. Moberly, Admin, of the Holy Spirit, Lee. ii. 1 In Ch. ii. §§ 5, 7. AS. THE BODY OF CHRIST 99 § 8. Grave abuses arise in the Church, because its work is necessarily carried on by and among fallible and sinful men; and they will continue to arise as long as this world lasts, that is until the enlightening and perfecting work of Christ's Body has reached its term, and the incurably wicked have been finally cut off. But the truth that the Church is the Body of Christ, and therefore is possessed of a source of hfe, of illumination, and of grace, which is neither created nor susceptible of destruction by men, this truth should save us from mistaken infer ences from ecclesiastical evils. That they are evils, and ought to be reformed whenever and wherever they arise, is of course true; but that they are fatal to the Church of Christ, or that they justify separation from it, cannot be proved, if the Church is the Body of Christ in the sense maintained by St. Paul. In so far as the Church contains fallible and sin ful members, and they must be gathered in if they are to be saved, it can never in this world be wholly free from corruption; but in so far as it is the Body of Christ, and as such is animated and illumined by the Spirit, it can never become fatally corrupt, so as no longer to be the home of truth and grace and the ark of safety to its faithful members. Dis eases continually disturb the Body and hamper its functioning — heresies, seditious movements, schisms, moral corruptions, simony, monarchical am bition, secularization, and so on. No sooner does ioo THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH one disease yield to treatment than another troubles the Body; and impatient reformers are often driven to despair, and from despair to violent measures, equally contrary to the health of the Body. But the Body lives on; and from its Head and quicken ing Spirit go forth healing and rejuvenating streams, which renew its life and sanctifying functions when human measures are futile. And the recovery is never through the exclusion of sinners, for they are the appointed subjects of its grace; but is caused by the welling up of hidden fountains of life and light, and by the reemergence of forgotten truths and ideals. Nothing is more marvellous than the chronic vitality of the Church, and its recoveries after periods of seeming deadness. The world repeat edly raises paeans of victory over it, and then as repeatedly it reasserts its immortal and sanctifying power in the face of its enemies. "The gates of Hades shall not prevail against it," although every evil and corruption wliich devils can inspire men to contrive is exploited within by its unfaithful members. To-day the external divisions and dis cordant shibboleths of its miscalled leaders *¦ have seemed to place the Church on trial before the civ ilized world. But the fundamental unity of the 1 "Miscalled" because their several exploitings are futile against the leadership of Christ, and quickly disappear; and because, even for the moment, they represent ephemeral and superficial agitations, rather than the abiding principles by which the faithful at large are ultimately controlled. AS MACHINERY OF THE KINGDOM 101 organism is forcing itself once more upon the atten tion of Christians; and the Holy Spirit is, as of old, working in the Body for the restoration of its orderly spiritual functioning. To those who can look beneath the surface, these renewals of the Church's vital power are manifest effects of the relation between it and Christ which is symbolized when we describe it as His Body. They are also clear evidences of the fact that the description is fundamentally true, and that in a recovery of general realization of this truth lies the hope of reconciliation between the two great sections of Christians which are now arrayed against each other. III. As Machinery of the Kingdom § 9. In order to understand the relation of the Christian Church to the Kingdom of God,1 we should reckon with our Lord's teaching concerning the Kingdom. In His use, the "Kingdom of God" and the "Kingdom of Heaven" are one; although the first description identifies its Sovereign, and the second describes its regionary centre and the spiritual nature of its controlhng principles. But the word "Kingdom" may be used either in the 1 On the Kingdom of God, see Darwell Stone, pp. 29-54, 70-74; W. J. S. Simpson, chh. i— ii; Jos. Hammond, ch. xviii; V. Stanton, The Jewish and Christian Messiah; Jas. Denney, Studies in Theol., ch. viii; Cath. Encyc and Hastings' Die of Bib. and Die of Christ, q. v. A history of the conception in Christian thought appears in Schaff-Herzog Encyc, q. v. 102 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH concrete, as describing an organized society and polity, or in the abstract, as referring to governing principles and to their effective and triumphant actualization among men. Our Lord uses the term in all these ways, sometimes fusing the several applications together; and it is not always possible to define His meaning by a clear cut and exclusive proposition. There is a patent unity and close inter relation between all the uses which He makes of the word; but His particular meaning in each case is determined by the connection in which He is em ploying it. (a) In announcing the nearness of the Kingdom,1 He plainly referred to the Kingdom which the prophets had declared would be set up on earth, with the promised Messiah as its ruler.2 And al though He insisted, as against the carnal ideas of the Jews, that this Kingdom was to be spiritual, and was to rest for its triumph upon persuasion and voluntary submission by men to its sway, He undoubtedly referred, as did the prophets, to a concrete and visible social order, in which right eousness should be the governing principle. (b) He claimed to be the promised Messiah, and as such avowedly came to found the messianic Kingdom;3 and what that Kingdom is in the con- 1 St. Matt. iv. 17, etc. 2 That the Jews were expecting such a Kingdom, see St. Luke xix. 37-38. 3 St. Matt. xvi. 15-17; xxvi. 63-64 and parallels; xxviii. 18; St. John iv. 25-26. AS MACHINERY OF THE KINGDOM 103 crete has to be determined by identifying the visible society and government which He in fact estab lished. The only society of the kind founded by Him is the Christian ecclesia,1 and its rite of ad mission is declared to be necessary for entrance into the Kingdom.2 To it He gave the judicial and disciphnary powers of the Kingdom; and to its apostohc ministry He promised the office of judg ing the tribes of Israel 3 — that is, of course, the spiritual remnant of Israel which was to enjoy the fruition of Israel's hope in the messianic Kingdom.4 This ecclesia answers to prophetic descriptions by its cathohc victories, by the principles of its exten sion and government, and by the personal identity of its Head. (c) But our Lord easily and naturally employed the term Kingdom in abstract or semi-abstract senses, to denote the governing principles of the messianic Kingdom. In various parables, for ex ample, the Kingdom of God is likened to figures plainly intended to illustrate not a visible society or pohty, but principles of righteousness and of allegiance to God which pertain to the society of which Christ is King.5 (d) The victorious actualization of these prin- 1 That which He said He was to build, St. Matt. xvi. 18. 2 St. John iii. 3, 5. 8 St. Matt, xviii. 17-18; xix. 28; St. Luke xxii, 29-30. 4 Isa. xi. 10-16; xxxvii. 31-32; Mic. ii. 12-13; v- 8. 6 E.g. in St. Matt. xiii. and parallels. Cf. St. Luke xvii. 20-21; St. John xviii. 36. 104 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH ciples in human hearts, and among men in their social relations on earth, is also described as the presence or the coming of the Kingdom; 1 and men who approximate in their ideals the conduct and virtues pertaining to loyalty to God are declared to be not far from the Kingdom.2 (e) In eschatoiogical reference, the term is used in the concrete, as denoting what was to come with power when, on the day of Pentecost, the Spirit should descend upon the ecclesia which Christ had established.3 But it is also employed abstractly, to indicate the entire triumph of everything per taining to divine rule at the end of the world.4 In this last sense the Kingdom is still coming; and the prayer which Christ left for the use of the Church contains the petition, "Thy Kingdom come," with the partly exphcatory addition, "Thy will be done on earth, as it is in Heaven." 5 § 10. The concrete and determinative entity which unifies all of our Lord's references to the Kingdom, is the messianic Kingdom; and the external form and machinery which He established for it is the ecclesia. Of this Church He made the twelve to be the first chief overseers, under His own commission and authority, and in the organic relations which 1 Seeking the Kingdom of God is identified with seeking His righteousness, St. Matt. vi. 33. 2 St. Mark xii. 32-34. 3 St. Mark ix. 1. Cf. Acts i. 8. * St. Matt. xxv. 34. 6 St. Matt. vi. 10; St. Luke xi. 2 AS MACHINERY OF THE KINGDOM 105 were created when it was made to be His Body.1 We see, therefore, that the Kingdom signifies both an outward and an inward reality. Unless it did this, it would not be adapted to human limitations, and could not effectively actuahze itself among men. It has a sacramental nature, and the instituted form of the sacrament is the visible Cathohc Church. This is what we mean by describing the Church as "the machinery of the Kingdom." It is the organ ized and organic instrument and agency for extend ing the Kingdom; for regulating the lives of its members; for ministering the saving and sanctify ing grace with which itself is filled as Christ's Body; and for the development and unified expression of the social and corporate relations of members of the Kingdom to their God and heavenly Father. These relations are mediated in the Church through Jesus Christ, its Head, and are effected in it by the indwelling Holy Spirit. And because the Church is more than an external society, being also the Body of Christ, it effectively unites what men readily can lay hold of and employ with the hfe, the hght and the grace wliich come from God. But even such machinery can be, and has been, misused; and the consequent corruptions and divis- 1 Of germane apostolic teaching, note Col. i. 12-14; iv. 11; Revel. i. 6; v. 8-10. Cf. Darwell Stone, pp. 70-74; W. J. S. Simpson, pp. 17-18. 106 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH ions very seriously hamper and delay the present progress and final victory of the Kingdom. Yet the Spirit can always find a remedy, and by His working the beginnings of moral reaction, and of efforts to renew the progress of God's Kingdom, may seem to spring from extraneous sources. The fact is, however, that in such movements the Church reaps what it has sown, and profits by an enlightened public sentiment the origin and grow ing power of which is due to the leavening effects of the Church's propaganda in previous days. In any case, success in these efforts, and all genuine advance of Christ's Kingdom, depend upon recov ery of the Church and upon men's loyal use of its agencies, instruments and discipline. The reason is that God has established the Church as His per manent machinery for extending and governing His Kingdom on earth, and no humanly devised ma chinery can avail except as a divinely overruled adjunct. The Church hves on and renews its vigor; and in its feeblest hours fulfils its appointed functions for those who are sincerely and devoutly loyal to its propaganda and to its sacramental institutions.1 The Kingdom and the Church are inseparably united, for they are the inner concave and outer convex of the circle of which Jesus Christ is the centre and invincible Controller. 1 It is to such that the promises of God are made in any case, so that insincere and disloyal Christians have no standing ground for complaint. AS MACHINERY OF THE KINGDOM 107 § 11. We should not forget, in thus insisting upon the impregnable and fruitful power of the eccles iastical machinery of the Kingdom, that both the sphere and methods of this machinery have deter minate limitations. The fact is that such forget- fulness is the most prominent historical cause of the evils that have corrupted the Church militant and have brought discredit upon it. The sphere of the Church's functioning is spirit ual, having reference exclusively to things divine and to the saving, guiding and sanctifying of souls in a Kingdom which its King has declared to be not of this world.1 The cause of His saying this was the prevailing idea of Jewish leaders that the Messiah's rule was to be pohtical, and was to dis place the Roman Empire and all other civil govern ments on earth. The whole undercurrent of our Lord's teaching shows that the jurisdiction of His Kingdom, its privileges and prerogatives, were to be confined within the rehgious sphere. He exempli fied this by His own methods while on earth. He went about doing good, for this was an inevitable fruit and manifestation of His personal character. But in doing so He claimed no civil or humanly official authority, always confining His prerogatives in these regards to those of a private citizen and 1 On the general subject of this section, see Darwell Stone, pp. I3-iS. 40-44, 49-51; Wm. Temple, Church and Nation, Lee. i— ii; T. A. Lacey, Handbook of Church Law, ch. viii; J. H. Blunt, Die of Theol., s.v. "Jurisdiction, Spiritual"; J. N. Figgis, Churches in the Modern State, passim. 108 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH volunteer worker. He sought no political alliance and privilege, but rendered to Caesar the things belonging to Caesar. And the limitations which He accepted for Himself, He intended should be observed by His Church. (a) The Church qua' Church has not one particle of "coercive" jurisdiction;1 for God has deter- minately given all such jurisdiction to the state and, within a narrower sphere, to parental au thority. AU other forms of coercion derive their legitimacy from state and parental delegation; and the peculiar function of the Church is apt to be prejudiced when coercive jurisdiction is conferred by the state upon its ministers. Such conferring began with the real "donation of Constantine" — with the enactments by which he and his succes sors authorized the bishops of the Church to exer cise civil prerogatives, and to enlist the arm of the state in enforcement of their decisions. Arguments have been advanced in seeming vindication of "established" Churches.2 They are said to Chris tianize and consecrate civil government, and to afford a prestige to the Church which is favorable to its extension and influence. 1 Coercive jurisdiction means authority to enforce obedience by civil, or physical and temporal, penalties. 2 On established Churches, see Oxford House Papers, Nos. 2 and 3; Schaff-Herzog Encyc s. v. "Church and State"; J. N. Figgis op. cit.; W. D. Abraham, Church and State in England; W. E. Glad stone, The State in Us Relations with the Church; J. W. Joyce, The Civil Power in its Relation to the Church. AS MACHINERY OF THE KINGDOM 109 But the only effective method of Christianizing civil government is to Christianize, or truly convert to Christian ideals, the persons to whom govern ment is committed. And the only manner in which this can be done with abiding result is to convert the people, one by one, whose ideals ultimately de termine the spirit of their civil government. His tory clearly proves that the Church invariably suffers in the long run by state alliance and by the exercise of coercive jurisdiction. The prestige and influence thus obtained comes to be mixed in prac tice with worldly interests, secular motives, Eras- tian time-serving and prelatic assertion, whoUy contrary to the kind of prestige and infiuence which God wills His Church to have. The common people are hindered from finding in the Church the purely spiritual aims and resources for which they rightly look; and the Church becomes a synonym for the clergy, who are regarded as a self-centred and largely secularized caste. The only form of ecclesiastical influence which is truly efficient in spiritual things is that which comes from an obviously sincere dependence of the Church upon the powers given to it by God. The prac tical truth of these considerations is clinched by considering the direct restrictions which the state imposes upon the self-government of an established Church, and the evils which attend control of ecclesiastical appointments by civil rather than by ecclesiastical and spiritual considerations. no THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH (&) The same spiritual limitation determines the relation of the Church to all secular movements and agitations, sociological and other. The Church has not the least jurisdiction over them; and this means that its true relation to them is wholly un official, volunteer and persuasive. A minister of the Church is not a minister, that is, not clothed with the slightest prerogative as such, outside the sphere of religion. It is true that his professional identification with moral interests gives him atten tive listeners in pressing them when involved in the movements of the day. But neither he nor the Church behind him is authorized to act as "ruler and divider" in public affairs. The Church is set to persuade men in things pertaining to God; and it is by accentuating this business that it most effectively promotes the best available settlement of the ever-recurring problems by which society and the economic world is beset. (c) The Church utilizes parochial and institu tional corporations, and these corporations as such have vested rights under the law in all civilized commonwealths. But these rights do not inhere in the Church qua Church. They grow out of the laws of volunteer associations, and are neither greater nor less than the rights of other such asso ciations legally recognized. They are legitimate instruments of the Church, but are human in crea tion, secular in legitimacy and dependent upon recognition by the state. They may become sources AS MACHINERY OF THE KINGDOM in of danger, and "vested interests" have to be very carefully used indeed if they are not to exercise a secularizing influence and positively hinder the real work of the Church. (d) Like its Master, the Church manifests its proper character in good works, and it employs institutional methods in fostering them. But these are not less incidental adjuncts of the Church's appointed functions because they are inevitable accompaniments of faithfulness to these functions. They constitute in New Testament language " table- serving," and can never become the primary works or specialty of the Church without subvert ing the business for which it was created — the effective ministry of the word and sacraments.1 The Lord never utilized opportunities of "doing good" as a reason for giving a secondary place to His distinctly rehgious work. In brief, the appointed functions and prerogatives of the Church are purely religious; and whenever these are confusingly mingled with prerogatives and activities of human creation and non-religious nature, the Church is in danger of grasping the shadow instead of the substance of what is given it to obtain. § 12. Not only the sphere but also the method of the Church's work is spiritual, for the progress of the Kingdom is not otherwise to be advanced, and such advancement is the appointed business of 1 Cf. Acts vi. 1-4. 112 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH the Church. This does not mean that the Church should, or even can, dispense with the use of visible organization and instruments, for these come to it from God and pertain to the divinely appointed laws of its ministration. It means that these ex ternals should be ordered and administered in obedience to the divine purpose, and by methods calculated to secure internal and willing loyalty of souls to the Kingdom of God. The Church must magnify itself, but this means that it is to magnify its one proper function of bringing souls through Christ to God. (a) Christ teaches in the parable of the sower that the preached word, sown in human hearts, is the means by which the Kingdom is extended among men; and because the Church is the Kingdom in its external aspect, the inference is clear that the means of its extension is the same. The propaganda which Christ committed to the Church when He commis sioned its ministers to make disciples in all the world is essentially persuasive in method and in tended effect. The conditions under which re sponsible agents are admitted by Baptism into the Church consist of faith, or persuasion that the Gospel is true, and repentance, or a voluntary and contrite turning to God, also the result of persua sion. Even when infants are baptized, the Church recognizes in her discipline that precautions must be taken that they may grow up in a state of per suasion agreeing with their baptismal profession. AS MACHINERY OF THE KINGDOM 113 Whenever this principle has been forgotten or dis regarded, as in careless reliance upon social environ ment and traditional family affihations, and as in the wholesale and often forcible incorporation of barbaric peoples in the dark ages, the external growth of the Church is promoted at the cost of secularization and of hindering instead of ad vancing the progress of the Kingdom. The habit of increasing Church membership by strenuous methods, and of measuring its success in mathe matical terms, is inconsistent with the laws of the Kingdom, wliich is not advanced by increasing its professed adherents, so much as by persuading men to believe and repent and to bring forth fruits worthy of repentance. (b) So it is with the internal discipline of the Church, wliich is neither coercive nor indeterminate. No coercion can do duty for persuasion, either in correcting the evil fives and opinions of Church members or in saving the faithful at large from corrupting influences. So that, unless evil doers can be persuaded sincerely to repent, no form of dis cipline can avail except the extreme measures of excommunication, and in the case of ministers of deposition from office; and these usually avail only for the protection of the Church's system and of the faithful in general. Impatient haste and rigid severity are alike foreign to the spiritual method of the Kingdom. Yet the Church may not imperil either her propaganda or the interests of the faith- 114 THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH fui by continuing to extend to obstinate propagan dists of error and to notorious evil doers the enjoy ment of her spiritual offices and privileges. When toleration becomes careless laxity and connivance, it also becomes a corruption in need of reformation. To deprive members of the Church for spiritual reasons of privileges which they hold only on spirit ual grounds is neither an exercise of coercive juris diction nor a tyrannical policy. It is a spiritual method of removing barriers to the progress of the Kingdom, and against this no personal considera tions can justly be pleaded. (c) To do its work the Church must withhold its privileges from those who do not and will not accept its authority and discipline. Otherwise it cannot continue to be the somewhat which God has made it to be.1 Accordingly, it may not rightly admit either to its communion, or to participation in its ministerial functions, those who refuse to fulfil the conditions under which the Church confers these privileges. Yet even here it is the persuasive rather than the exclusive temper which has to be exhibited. Those who through no personal fault inherit de nominational standpoints which keep them aloof from the catholic discipline are to be reasoned with and if possible persuaded, even while the Church's discipline is in last issue protected from subversion. To persuade men to obey the Kingdom of God in 1 See M. Creighton, Persecution and Tolerance (a valuable study), pp. 126-127. AS MACHINERY OF THE KINGDOM 115 the appointed way in the Church is the Church's mission; and this at once determines the protective form of its discipline and the sympathetic meth ods to be employed by those who administer this discipline. CHAPTER IV THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY I. In the New Testament § i. The catholic doctrine of the Church's or ganization or ministry l has suffered in modern days 1 On the Christian ministry, see Chas. Gore, The Church and the Ministry (New Edit, revised by C. H. Turner); and Orders and Unity; R. C. Moberly, Ministerial Priesthood; Darwell Stone, Episcopacy and Valid Orders (gives patristic passages in originals and in Eng.)-; and Christian Church, chh. x-xii; J. B. Lightfoot, The Christian Ministry (as edited with corrections of protestant misinterpretations thereof, in Dissertations of the Apostolic Age); John Wordsworth, The Ministry of Grace, chh. i— ii; Chas. Bigg, The Origins of Christianity; H. F. Hamilton, The People of God; W. J. S. Simpson, Cath. Conception of the Church, ch. xi; C. H. Turner, Studies in Early Church History; H. B. Swete (Editor), Essays on the Early History of the Church and the Ministry (of great importance); E. H. Day, The Ministry of the Church. Of works defending more or less anti-traditional views, are Edwin Hatch, Organization of the Early Christian Churches; F. J. A. Hort, op. cit., passim; Rudolf Sohm, Wesen und Ursprung des Katholizis- mus; whose argument is given and supported by Walter Lowrie, The Church and its Organization in Primitive and Catholic Times; Adolf Harnack, The Constitution and Law of the Church in ihe First Two Centuries; and in Schaff-Herzog Encyc, s. v. "Organization of the Early Church"; T. M. Lindsay, The Church and the Ministry in the Early Centuries. In refs. to these works in this chapter the authors' names only will usually be given. IN THE NEW TESTAMENT 117 from two principal causes: the corruptions and abuses of ministerial authority which provoked the protestant revolution; and the standpomt created by this revolution. This standpoint has given seeming validity to certain a priori presuppositions that have to a degree forestalled the results of critical investigations undertaken by Protestants; and it has done this in spite of great efforts on then- part to do justice to all relevant facts and argu ments. Cathohc scholars also have a standpoint, and are influenced by presuppositions. The fact is that without a standpomt, and its appropriate assumptions, there can be no really intelligent critical inquiry of any kind.1 The point which we would make is this, that when two groups of Christian scholars, investigat ing the same problem and reckoning with the same data, are found invariably to arrive at contrary results, the result being in each case congenial to the inquirer's previous standpoint, this opposition must be regarded as really due to the diversity of standpoints and presuppositions. For one of the two groups to claim that it alone exercises scholarly freedom of inquiry, and that its results are entitled to hold the field as the generally accepted conclu sions of "modern scholars," is to mistake the situa tion altogether. It betrays obliviousness of the real causes of disagreement between the results of cathohc and protestant investigations. The facts 1 Cf. Introduction, pp. 151-159. 118 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY require us to acknowledge that genuine scholarly acumen and earnest desire for truth can be found in both directions; and that final results in the controversy under consideration depend upon the truth or falsity of the standpoints and presupposi tions by which the catholic and protestant con clusions respectively have been determined. The constructive purpose of this series of volumes precludes any detailed criticism of protestant pre suppositions and arguments. We have to confine ourselves in the main to an exhibition of cathohc doctrine concerning the ministry, and of the rea sons for accepting its truth. But lest we fall into the error above described, of overlooking the influ ence of assumptions on our arguments, we begin with a definition of our presuppositions. Upon their validity depends to a degree the value of the argu ments of catholic scholars. If they are valid, the catholic argument concerning the ministry is seem ingly conclusive. If they are invalid, cathohc scholars apparently have need to readjust their standpoint, and to revise their arguments. We state our presuppositions in terse form, referring our readers elsewhere for the considerations by which they are justified. (a) The fundamental institutions of a divine covenant are necessarily of divine ordering; and the mysteries which these institutions are intended to conserve are so easily overlooked and sacrificed in human arrangements for their ministration, that IN THE NEW TESTAMENT 119 these ministrations are also committed by God to ministries of His own appointment and ordering.1 (b) In so far as the Christian covenant is a sequel to the old, having unbroken continuity with it,2 and is adapted to human limitations which are permanent, there is a generic likeness between these covenants. And the adjustment which the redemp tion of Christ caused to be made affords no warrant for the supposition that the ministry of the Chris tian covenant is less definitely provided for than the precedents of previous covenant arrangements lead us to infer. It is here postulated, of course, that the Levitic ministry had divine appointment, a doctrine not really affected by the recognized results of Old Testament criticism. (c) Christ willed to build upon Peter and the rest of the Apostles a Church to which should be committed the business of proclaiming the Gospel, of ordering the lives of believers, and of saving and sanctifying them by the power and grace of His Holy Spirit — these functions making the Church to be the permanent machinery of His Kingdom on earth.3 (d) The organic nature of the Church, declared to be the Body of Christ, constrains us to reject any amorphous conception of its fundamental con stitution. We infer that the Church should be ex- 1 Exod. xxviii. 1; Numb. iii. 5; 1 Cor. xii. 28; Ephes. iv. n. Cf. St. John xv. 16; Heb. v. 4. * Cf. pp. 39-40, 88-90, above. 3 Cf. ch. iii. §§ o-io, above. 120 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY pected to exhibit differentiated functional organs, and that their nature, being necessarily determined by the nature of the organism, is permanent and comes from the divine Creator of the organism.1 § 2. With such presuppositions, each one of wliich has scriptural warrant, we proceed to reckon with the determinative historical data. So far as the creative period is concerned, they fall readily under three heads : Christ's action and teaching; 2 apos tolic developments; and apostolic doctrine. In this section we consider the first head, the chief data under which are clear enough to be free from dispute among those who accept the credibility of the Gospels. (a) In the first place our Lord chose twelve to be with Him, to be the primary witnesses of His self- manifestation and teaching, and to be sent forth for the proclamation of the Gospel and the establish ment of His Church.3 [ (6) He gave to the twelve a special training, one which is most readily explained by the purpose of committing to them a responsible and authorita tive ministry for which pecuhar preparation was needed. His sending them forth to preach in the cities of Israel was a part of this training, the in structions in connection therewith reflecting both 1 Ch. iii. §§ 5-7, above. 2 On which, see Chas. Gore, Church and Ministry, ch. iv; W. J. S. Simpson, ch. ii; E. H. Day, ch. i. 8 St. Mark iii. 13-19 and parallels; St. John xv. 16. IN THE NEW TESTAMENT 121 the limitations of their immediate mission and the larger responsibihties and duties for which this mission was preparatory. Thus they were sent exclusively to fleshly Israel, but were told, in terms necessarily obscure to them at the moment, that the cities of the Israel of His Kingdom would not all have been visited until His second coming.1 (c) Seventy others were also sent forth to preach, although they were not admitted to the apostolate; and thus the way appears to have been prepared for the development of a differentiated ministry in the Church. If the facts were fully known, we should perhaps find that the first presbyters of the apos tolic Church were taken from these seventy. At all events, Christ here set an authoritative prece dent for the ordination of ministers of secondary rank by the Apostles.2 (d) Before His final departure, Christ formally commissioned the Apostles, imparting to them a plenary authority in the Church as primary recipi ents of His own ministerial office on earth. "All authority hath been given unto Me in Heaven and on earth. Go ye, therefore, and make disciples of all nations . . . and lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." "As the Father hath sent Me, even so send I you. And when He had 1 St. Matt. x. 5-23 and parallels. On the training of the twelve, see Hastings, Die of Christ, s. v. "Apostles," 4; A. B. Bruce, Train ing of the Twelve; H. Latham, Pastor Pastorum. 2 St. Luke x. 1-2. Cf. H. Cotterill, pp. 119-121. 122 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY said this, He breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost," 1 etc. It is quite possible that our Lord's commission was addressed to a larger gathering than that of the Apostles. This would be fitting, for the authority and function which He delegated was plainly in tended to be corporate or ecclesiastical. The Apos tles were not to be independent of the Church.2 In any case, therefore, our Lord must have spoken to whomsoever He did speak as being the nucleus of His ecclesia; and for its official ministrations He had undoubtedly trained the Apostles. The commis sion was to an organized society, and presupposed the organization which He had appointed for it. (e) Christ not only appointed His Apostles for the initial work of organizing and establishing His Church, but also defined their ministry in terms of normal and permanent ecclesiastical office.3 They were to be stewards of what He gave to them until He should come again in the clouds of heaven. His invisible presence with them was in the meantime to be enduring and effective.4 When we reckon 1 St. Matt, xxviii. 18-20; St. John xx. 21-22. Cf. St. Mark xvi. IS- 2 Cf. ch. iii. § 7, above. 3 The most important denial of this is by F. J. A. Hort, Lee. ii. He is answered by Chas. Gore, op. cit., pp. 379-382; Darwell Stone, Christ. Church, pp. 256-259; W. Bright, Some Aspects of Primitive Church Life, pp. 12-26. 1 St. Luke xii. 41-42 (cf. 1 Cor. iv. 1); xxii. 28-30; St. Matt xvi. 18; xxviii. 20. IN THE NEW TESTAMENT 123 with His Person and prophetic outlook, we are driven to infer that the apostohc ministry was to continue in the Church after the death of its first recipients, and was to retain the functions and the authority which He once for all imparted to it. Speaking summarily, these functions consist in the official ministration of whatever the Church corpo rate was intended to minister in Christ's name, a subject to be dealt with in the concluding sections of this chapter. § 3. We now come to apostolic developments.1 Many of the details are unknown to us, but the determinative lines of development are sufficiently clear for us to draw assured conclusions as to all that is really necessary for us to learn. We assume that the development of the ministry into a differ entiated form was conditioned by occasioning cir cumstances; but that the results attained were determined by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and therefore were divinely instituted in accordance with the mind of Christ.2 We have no evidence, however, that Christ anticipated this guidance of the Spirit by giving His Apostles exact information in advance as to how the ministry was finally to be differentiated. 1 On apostolic developments and teaching, see Chas. Gore, op. cit., ch. v; Darwell Stone, op. cit., pp. 266-280; J. B. Lightfoot, pp. 141-160; J. A. Robinson, in H. B. Swete's Essays, II. 2 The Apostolic Church did not feel the need of distinguishing between what was appointed by Christ and by the Spirit. Cf. A. J. Mason, in H. B. Swete's Essays, pp. 3-5. 124 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY The development took place under apostolic con trol. The Apostles, indeed, consulted the rest at every stage, thus recognizing their own organic and representative status in the Church at large. But when the people had been consulted, it was the Apostles who determined, appointed and ordained; 1 and their authority to do so was accepted by all, as derived from the Lord's commission. The mod ern notion that the Apostles derived their authority from the congregation, or were dependent for its possession upon the congregation's consent, is not warranted by the slightest trace of New Testament evidence. Its origin had been brought about, and its nature determined, once for all by Christ Himself. The facts already mentioned and apostohc teaching alike establish this conclusion. We should carefully distinguish between the be ginnings of the Church's permanent ministry and the prophetic or charismatic phenomena of the first age.2 The former alone are determinative as to the subject matter of our inquiry, the latter represent ing demonstrations of the Spirit and of power ap propriate to a creative stage, but destined gradually to give way to the normal functioning of the Church's appointed ministry. The Church is said to be founded upon the Apostles and prophets, for both had to do by the Spirit with the development of the Church in its initial stage; but the normative factor, by which the Church's permanent ministry 1 For an example, see Acts vi. 2-6. 2 Cf. p. 24 (b), above. IN THE NEW TESTAMENT 125 was determined, was apostohc. The prophetic fac tor reenforced the apostohc, and ministered to its success. It is quite possible that, for the moment, and because of the extraordinary exigencies of that creative stage, prophetic gifts and special intima tions of the Spirit did duty in some instances for apostohc ordination to the ministry. St. Paul's case is in important respects unique; but that others may have been recognized by the Church as possessed of ministerial status on analogous grounds is not impossible.1 But the evidence of the Spirit's intervention in such cases must have been of a conspicuous and miraculous nature, and the situa tion was extraordinary and passing. As the Church developed, the normal became self-sufficient for the Church's needs, and apostohc arrangements once for all occupied the field. They came to represent the mind of Christ and of the Spirit for the future government and functioning of the Church.2 These arrangements were naturally completed most rapidly in Jerusalem; and the local organiza tion of the Church in that city became the norm 1 Cf. Chas. Gore, op. cit., pp. 233-235. 2 Rudolf Sohm's theory is that the primitive ministry was wholly charismatic, election being simply a recognition of Spiritual gifts. He is expounded and supported by Walter Lowrie, and criticised adversely in large measure by Adolf Hamack. J. A. Robinson, in H. B. Swete's Essays, pp. 60-79, combats the theory conclusively. Cf . H. J. Wotherspoon, Ministry of the Church in Relation to Prophecy and Spiritual Gifts; T. H. May, Place and Work of the Prophets in the Catholic Church. 126 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY to which outlying Churches were conformed as rapidly as their several circumstances justified.1 Whatever may have been the precise sequence of apostolic appointments, the mother Church was soon provided with deacons and presbyters,2 and its organization was completed by the appointment of James as overseer.3 Thus within a short period after the descent of the Holy Spirit this Church was furnished with a ministry similar in constitution to that which is found everywhere in the Cathohc Church to-day. This fact is really determinative, for the arrangements of this Church were adopted under the immediate supervision of the Apostles, and they would inevitably be accepted as authori tative precedents for ecclesiastical arrangements elsewhere. But although the apostohc missionaries appointed presbyters4 and deacons5 in the Churches wliich they planted, many of these Churches did not at once obtain rulers like James, having apostohc powers. In some cases, in fact, they continued 1 C. H. Turner, pp. 13-15; J. A. Robinson, in op. cit., pp. 85-86. 2 The seven deacons of Acts vi apparently constituted the begin ning of the Order subsequently designated by that name. See J. B. Lightfoot, pp. 144-149. The origin of Presbyters is not described. They emerge as an established Order in Acts xi. 30; xv. 2; etc. The analogy of the Synagogue explains their origin. See J. B. Lightfoot, pp. 149-153; Chas. Gore, op. cit., p. 239. 3 His oversight is implied in Acts xii. 17; xv. 13, 19. 1 Acts xiv. 23; Tit. i. 5. 6 They are mentioned with the presbyters (bishops) of Philippi (Phil. i. 1), and separately in 1 Tim. iii. 8-13. IN THE NEW TESTAMENT 127 after the death of the Apostles to have only presby ters and deacons. Ordinations for such Churches, so far as New Testament evidence shows, were per formed by visitors having the necessary apostohc powers. Thus St. Paul ordained ministers in the Churches which he established and visited, and similar work was done by Timothy in Ephesus and by Titus in Crete.1 This was no doubt due partly to the itinerant methods characteristic of a mis sionary apostolate, and partly to caution lest Churches which had become self-sufficient at an immature stage should drift apart from the unity of the Church at large. Thus many of the Churches did not at once become completely autonomous but continued for awhile to depend upon a general and non-resident body of itinerant missionaries, having the apostohc power of ordination but without settled residence or local limitations of jurisdiction. Whatever may be hypothecated by those who reject the catholic doctrine of the episcopate, no proof is available that either what we should call presbyterial or dinations, or the elevation of presbyters to the episcocate without what is now called episcopal consecration, was permitted in the apostohc age.2 Accordingly, the presumption is very strong that the completion of episcopal organization in a given local 1 Acts xiv. 23; 1 Tim. v. 22; Tit. i. 5. 2 An alleged presbyterial ordination, in 1 Tim. iv. 14, must be interpreted by 2 Tim. i. 6. 128 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY Church was accomplished either by localization of one of the men of apostolic powers above mentioned or by consecration at such hands of a local bishop in the final sense of that title. This inference is most in accord with the known facts concerning ordination in that age; and, in the absence of fuller information, it ought to determine our conclusions. § 4. Our argument in the previous section has been determined by the facts known to us; and when we consider that the conclusions to which they point are in line with, and seem to account for, the controlling stream of relevant tradition which emerges in the Church during the second century, we are led to the conviction that nothing short of demonstrative evidence to the contrary can justify their rejection. Such evidence is obviously not to be discovered in the second-century data usually depended upon by modern opponents of the tradi tional view, for the double reason that these data are obscure, and are susceptible of other explana tions than those which such opponents advocate. We shall reckon with them in later sections. There appears to have been no serious contro versy in New Testament days as to the nature and authority of the Christian ministry, and therefore the apostolic writers had no occasion to give any comprehensive statements on the subject. Their allusions, some of them very significant, are inciden tal to other subjects and to practical admonitions. They all harmonize with the cathohc doctrine, IN THE NEW TESTAMENT 129 and in various instances corroborate one or other of its particulars with determinative effect. (a) That the Church's ministry is of divine order ing and appointment is clearly set forth, although no formal hst of its several grades is given. After admonishing the Corinthians for their disorders con nected with charismatic gifts, St. Paul reminds them that Apostles, prophets and teachers have been set in the Church by God Himself, and that they are first, second and third, all of them being prior to the extraordinary gifts of which he is writ ing. To the Ephesians he writes that Christ "gave some to be Apostles, and some prophets, and some evangehsts; and some pastors and teachers." x In neither of these passages does he appear to aim at technical enumeration of ministerial orders;2 but in both he certainly indicates their divine source and, in the contexts, their importance for unity. Addressing the presbyters of Ephesus, St. Paul is reported as saying, "Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, eiriaKoiroi, to feed the Church of God, which He purchased with His own blood." 3 (6) The organic status and relation of the minis try to the ecclesia at large seems to be implied in 1 1 Cor. xii. 28; Ephes. iv. n. 2 F. J. A. Hort, pp. 156-161; J. B. Lightfoot, pp. 141-142; H. B. Swete, Holy Spirit in the New Test., pp. 320-322; J. A. Robinson, in H. B. Swete's Essays, pp. 64-70. . 8 Acts xx. 28. 130 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY the sequel of the passage quoted above from the Epistle to the Ephesians. In this He says that "all the Body," as "fitly framed" from Christ "and knit together through that wliich every joint suppheth, according to the working in due measure of each several part, maketh the increase of the Body unto the building up of itself in love." x The general doctrine of St. Paul concerning the mystical Body at all events confirms this conception of the ministry. (c) To the Corinthians St. Paul describes him self and his partners in the ministry as "ambassa dors ... on behalf of Christ," 2 plainly implying that their authority was derived from Christ rather than from the congregation. The same thought is involved in his precept "Let a man so account of us, as of ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God," responsible not to "man's judgment" but to "the Lord." 3 (d) The duty of all to be controlled in the Church by the apostolic ministry appears to be recognized in the recorded fact that the believers "continued stedfastly in the Apostles' teaching and fellowship." 4 The Epistle to the Hebrews gives the exhortation, "Obey them that have the rule over you, and sub mit to them : for they watch in behalf of your souls, as they that shall give account." 5 St. Paul implies 1 Ephes. iv. 16. Cf. Col. ii. 19. 2 2 Cor. v. 20. 4 Acts ii. 42. 8 1 Cor. iv. 1-4. 5 Heb. xiii. 17. Cf. verse 7. IN THE NEW TESTAMENT 131 a ruling function for the ministry when he asks, "If a man knoweth not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of ¦ the Church of God?"1 And the undercurrent of all his exhortations both to Timothy and to Titus is that their office is one of rule. (e) But the ministers of Christ are not merely rulers. They are "stewards of the mysteries of God," 2 an ample reason for God's own institution and arrangement of their ministry. This ministry, just because it is an organic differentiation in the functioning of the whole Church, is sacerdotal, for all the members of the Church constitute "a holy priesthood";3 and it stands for the earthly minis tration of Christ, who is still "a Priest forever after the order of Melchizedech." 4 The earthly minis ter speaks and acts "in behalf of Christ," not in deed as substitute, but as His ambassador, and as given "the ministry of reconciliation," an essentially priestly office.5 It seems to be an echo of the sacerdotal conception that St. Paul describes him self as being a "Xeirovpyov of Jesus Christ, minis tering (lepovpyovvTa) the Gospel of God, that the offering (irpoo-opa) of the Gentiles might be ac ceptable." 6 To the objection that Christian minis ters are nowhere called priests (tepeivs), the answer is that so long as the Jewish Temple remained and 1 1 Tim. iii. 5. * Heb. v. 6, 9 et passim: 2 1 Cor. iv. 1. 6 2 Cor. v. 18-20. 3 1 St. Pet. ii. 5. 6 Rom. xv. 16. 132 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY "a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith," 1 their title could not be appropriated by Christian ministers without needless confusion. (f) The only recorded external method of ordina tion was a laying on of hands by one having apos tohc powers, this being treated as conveying the gift of God for the ministry. St. Paul in one pas sage, indeed, describes Timothy's ordination as "with the laying on of hands of the presbytery," but elsewhere he describes it more closely as "through the laying on of my hands." 2 It is possi ble that presbyters signified their concurrence by laying on their hands along with St. Paul, but the term presbytery (irpeafivreptov) had not yet ac quired a restrictive technical use which would make such an inference necessary. Even the chief of the Apostles calls himself a fellow-presbyter (o-UjU7rpe Col. i. 18; ii. 19. 2 Cf. ch. ii. § 5 and ch. iii. § 7, above. 156 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY not determinative in this mystery, for the persons who are members of the Body of Christ are more than individuals; and their functional relations to God in the Body are not less truly and interiorly possessed by each individually because they are also social, organic and unified in the Mediator, whose Body they constitute as members one of another. It is an impoverishing error to reduce the organic aspects of the Church to a figuratively represented ideal, actualized only in Heaven. They he at the root of the appointed method of the dis pensation of grace; and it is by reckoning with them that Christians wUl be able by divine help to return to one mind and to bring about a restora tion of the visible unity of Christ's Church. No Christian priest comes externally between souls and God, or between Christ and His members, for the functions of Christian priesthood, in funda mental aspects, are organic actions of one universal Body of Christ, and involve effective participation of each and every faithful Christian, on the one side, and of God in Christ, on the other side. The earthly ministry of Christ was, and ever continues to be, threefold — prophetic, priestly and kingly.1 And, therefore, the functions which He exercises through His Church and ministry are thus to be described. They are His functions; but, be cause of the relations created between Himself and the Church, they are functions of the Church as 1 See Incarnation, ch. ix, for full exposition. ITS FUNCTIONS 157 well. The difference is that, whereas they inhere in His Person, they are derivative for the Church; and obtain their validity in the Church entirely from its relation to Him and from His appointment. Sinnlarly, because the functions of the Church, thus derivatively possessed, are prophetic, priestly and kingly, the functions of its ministry are of this threefold nature. And this is so because the minis try is the functional apparatus of the Body, not because of any status or power that the ministry has received independently of the Church at large.1 If the ministry derives its authority solely from Christ, and cannot be nullified or revolutionized by earthly authority, this derivation and appointment is a branch of the mystery of the mystical Body, and of the fact that its organs of corporate func tioning are of Christ's own creation. § 10. The prophetic office of the Church and of its ministry 2 emerges clearly in the terms of Christ's commission. "Make disciples of aU the nations . . . teaching them to observe aU things whatso ever I commanded you." 3 " Go ye into aU the world, and preach the Gospel to the whole crea tion." To make -disciples is obviously an authorita tive mission, although one to be fulfilled wholly in His name; and this is confirmed by the words, "He 1 Cf. ch. iii. § 7 and pp. 122-123, above. 2 On the Church's prophetic and dogmatic office, see Authority, Eccles. and Biblical, chh. iii-v, viii. 8 St. Matt, xxviii. 19-20. 158 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that disbelieveth shall be condemned." 1 Again, "He that receiveth you receiveth Me, and he that receiveth Me receiveth Him that sent Me." 2 And the commission is a permanent one, therefore con tinuing beyond the life-time of His individual listen ers. "And lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." 3 Finally there is the pledge of increased enlightenment and guidance. "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth is come, He shall guide you into all the truth."4 As the result of these charges and assurances, the Church has ever since considered itself to be in trusted with a permanent and authoritative propa ganda of the Gospel, and of aU saving truths in the light of wliich men have to hve and grow in the Kingdom of God. The hberal conception of the Church, as an organization of truth-seekers, a sort of university in wliich scholarly methods and the results of individual inquiry are determinative, is wholly subversive of the Church's mission, in spite of the undoubted place which scholarly inquiry has in fortifying the Church's teaching, and in dis tinguishing from it all later accretions of human speculation. The Church's message is from God, 1 Suppl. St. Mark xvi. 15-16. 2 St. Matt. x. 40. Cf. verses 14-15. 3 St. Matt, xxviii. 20. 4 St. John xvi. 12-13. Cf. xiv. 26. ITS FUNCTIONS 159 and has been once for all delivered.1 It is also a message wliich the unlearned can receive, and its faithful proclamation, as distinguished from seek ing for it, rests upon the Church and its ministry as an abiding responsibility. The duty of all who are not yet assured of having found saving truth to seek it until they find it is patent. The point here made is that the Church has found it, and its propa ganda is God's authoritative provision for enabling others to find it. The commission to teach obviously carries with it the obhgation to do whatever is necessary for effec tive teaching, including authoritative definition, when the rise of error requires such definition, of any part of the teaching that may otherwise be obscured and perverted.2 The resulting dogmas, when sanctioned by the universal Church, have the authority, neither more nor less, which per tains to the divinely given office of the Church to teach in Christ's name. All objections to this teaching authority which are based upon the estab lished habflity to error of the Church's official minis ters, and upon the frequent prevalence of error within the Church, are aside from the real issue. They are met by the historically verifiable assur ance that, in spite of these limitations, the Church is always enabled, by the promised guidance and overruling providence of the Spirit, to afford to 1 St. Jude 3. 2 Fully considered in Authority, Eccles. and Biblical, ch. iv. 160 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY the faithful — to those who are sincerely and duti- fuUy loyal to its accredited doctrine and sacra mental hfe — sufficient knowledge of saving truth for their souls' health.1 The Church's prophetic function is of the Body as a whole, although officially performed through the sacred ministry. The members of this ministry, therefore, can exercise their prophetic office only as organs of the Church at large. If they exercise it inconsistently with the declared mind of the Church, they are false to trust, and are exploiting a hcense which the fundamental conditions and explicit terms of their office alike forbid. Their right and duty of being faithful to personal convic tions is of course inalienable; but the Church is obviously entitled, and in final issue under obhga tion, to displace dissentient teachers from the office which they can no longer fulfil on its appointed lines.2 § n. The priestly office of Christ, and there fore derivatively of His Church and its ministry,3 is to effect the transactional matters upon which obtaining, maintaining and developing acceptable relations between God and His human chUdren 1 This is the proper meaning of what is called ecclesiastical infalli bility. See op. cit., pp. 82 et seq. There is no promise that the Church can always command the machinery for fresh and accurate definitions of doctrine. This is not essential. 2 Op. cit., pp. 164-167. 8 On the Church's priestly office, see H. B. Swete, op. cit., pp. 85- 92; R. C. Moberly, ch. vii; Darwell Stone, Christian Church, ch. x. ITS FUNCTIONS 161 depend. It has two principal branches, the bestowal of God's sanctifying grace upon men, and the effect ing of men's acceptable approach to God. The two corresponding Christian institutions are the sacra mental system and the Eucharistic oblation. As ground has been broken in the previous volume,1 and the Christian institutions referred to are to be treated syntheticaUy in the last two chapters Of this volume and severaUy in the next volume, we here confine ourselves to fundamental propositions. (a) The Lord's commission to the Church was comprehensive in terms, "As My Father hath sent Me even so send I you"; and specific as to a lead ing aspect of the priestly office, "Whose soever sins ye forgive, they are forgiven unto them; whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained." 2 His instruction with regard to the Eucharist supphes the sacrificial aspect. This rite He instituted to occupy the place of the bloody elements of the old covenant. "This is the new covenant in My blood," blood which could achieve effectively what the blood of animal victims could merely prefigure; and the Church was to "do this" as His memorial, avd.p,vrjais, for, as St. Paul explains, "As often as ye eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord's death till He come." 3 Thus the mem bers of His Church were to constitute "a holy priest- 1 Passion and Exaltation, ch. x. Cf. Incarnation, pp. 281-284. 2 St. John xx. 21-23. 8 St. Luke xxii. 20; 1 Cor. xi. 25-26 1 62 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY hood " as St. Peter says, to offer up effective because "spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ."1 (b) Three limitations determine the meaning and manner of the priestly office in the Church. In the first place it is Christ's priesthood that is partici pated in by the Church, and no other priesthood or priestly function than His has the shghtest validity in the Kingdom of God. If His sacrifice has often to be represented before God and applied to sin ners seeking to approach Him, no different sacri fice can be pleaded in the Church from that which was made on the Cross and hves on in Heaven. Secondly, the Church's priesthood is corporate; and this means that it is exercised by and for the entire Body of Christ, so that no exclusive or separ ate priesthood exists which is not either officiaUy or unofficially participated in by aU the faithful. The official minister is an organ of the whole Body. Finally, the manner of the Church's priesthood, since it is derivative, is wholly determined by the ap pointments of Christ, from whom it is derived, and in whom, as well as through whom, it is exercised. (c) The method of this priesthood may be summarily described as social or ministerial and sacramental. It is social or ministerial because appointed to be exercised by an organized society and in the manner of a society's functioning, that is through properly constituted official agents who 1 i St. Pet. ii. 5. ITS FUNCTIONS 163 act representatively in the midst of and for all the members of the ecclesia. It is sacramental because, in obedience to the requirements of human recep tivity and expression, it is performed transaction- aUy in external rites divinely appointed. (d) The spiritual benefits of the Christian priest hood redound to its participants under subjective and moral conditions, especially those of faith and repentance; because under no other conditions can human beings succeed in appropriating such bene fits. Accordingly, the external and transactional elements of priestly ministration, charged though they are with efficacy ex opere operato, in the fact of their serious performance, are not magically and automaticaUy saving or sanctifying in effect. Un worthy participation in them brings spiritual damage — as inevitably as the properly salutary element of water will throw a hydrophobia pa tient into convulsions.1 (•?) The abuses stigmatized as priestcraft un doubtedly reduce the value of priesthood in vari ous ways. The same is to be said of abuses of the prophetic office, and so long as the Church's minis trations have to be committed to human agents, and they have to be in any case, these abuses are certain to appear. But the Lord's appointments, seriously conformed to, have their vahdity and 1 Efficacy ex opere operato does not mean that a sacrament seri ously administered is invariably beneficial. Cf. pp. 57, above, and 321-322, below. 1 64 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY value in divine guarantees; and cannot be nulli fied or made ineffective for those who receive them with contrite faith. To say otherwise is to impugn divine wisdom and justice.1 § 12. The Church's kingly office pertains to it as the earthly machinery appointed by Christ for His Kingdom; 2 and in all its royal ministrations Christ is the fountain of authority and the real executive Head. This office is involved in the Church's commission to make disciples,3 for dis ciples are not only listeners but dutiful foUowers, although the name signifies persuaded and wiUing followers, and the Church's jurisdiction is not coercive. It is more directly implied in the dis ciplinary power of the keys to bind and loose, and in the judicial authority to treat those who reject its determinations as heathen and publicans.4 Moreover its chief ministers were assured by Christ that they would sit on thrones, judging the tribes of Israel 5 — i.e. of the spiritual remnant of Israel, wliich was to constitute the Christian Church. Like the prophetic and priestly offices, the kingly office of the Church is a corporate office of the whole Body. If its official execution is committed to a 1 Cf. ch. ii. §§ 5, 7, above. 2 See ch. iii. §§ 9-12, above. On the Church's kingly office, see H. B. Swete, Holy Catholic Church, pp. 111-118; Darwell Stone, op. cit., ch. xiii; E. T. Green, ch. xii. 3 St. Matt, xxviii. 19 (R. V.). 4 St. Matt. xvi. 19; xviii. 17-18. 5 St. Matt. xix. 28; St. Luke xxii. 30. ITS FUNCTIONS 165 duly appointed ministry, the spiritual government thereby constitutionahzed is truly a government of the faithful, by the faithful and for the faithful, to borrow with slight adaptation the language of a great statesman. The Apostles emphasized this by taking counsel with the rest before any important action; and in subsequent history the counsel of the laity has been secured by various constitu- tionaUy denned procedures. TheoreticaUy, although not in later times at least with the ostensibly in tended result, the machinery of state establishment has been employed to this end. More effectually, and in a manner less hable to secular and alien inter ference, legislative bodies in which the clergy and the laity have to concur, are employed. In any case the ecclesiastical government which has Christ's sanction involves some manner of concurrence or acquiescence by the whole Church, as weU as an unsubvertible control by the official ministry of His institution. On its divine side the Church is a monarchy, for Christ is „its King, and His Kingship cannot be modified. It is of divine right. On the human side the Church's organization is fundamentaUy organic, since it is the Body of Christ; and its hierarchy of government is fixed by the nature of the organism, which is of divine and unalterable constitution. But in the less fundamental aspects of administra tive adaptation to times and conditions, the Church's pohty is determined by legislation in which the 166 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY laity are intended of God to have at least concur rent share, such share, that is, as is consistent with the Church's permanent and divinely instituted constitution. It is a patent error to define the human aspects of ecclesiastical government in secular terms as either democratic or monarchical, that is, if the analogy of secular government is intended to be pressed. The reason is that the human side of ecclesiastical polity is not complete. It really repre sents a comparatively superficial adaptation of a divinely appointed constitution, and this is organic and sacramental.1 There is, indeed, a democratic aspect; for human allegiance, however obhgatory when spiritually regarded, is moral and therefore voluntary. There is no coercive jurisdiction in the Church, and the power of exclusion from its spiritual privileges is not rightly regarded as coercive. Then too, the ministry is open to every male Christian who can establish his vocation thereto, and no one may be compelled to enter it. The ministry does not constitute an order based upon physically in herited privilege. It is not a caste, but a differ entiation in the organism, in which the part of individuals is not less free because constitution- aUy regulated. The scope and purpose of the Church's kingly office are spiritual and pastoral.2 They are of Christ's determination, and are exclusively related 1 Cf. p. 96, above. 2 Cf. ch. iii. §§ 11-12, above. ITS FUNCTIONS 167 to the salvation and sanctification of souls, and to their being brought to God. All prescriptions con cerning doctrines to be accepted, precepts to be observed, jurisdictions to be delimited, rituals and ceremonies to be performed, and disciplinary meas- sures to be carried out, all of them are determined as to fitness, and, if need be, are to be amended, in the light of this scope and of this purpose — care ful conformity to the positive requirements of Christ and of His Spirit-guided Apostles being also observed. Men have abused administrative and pastoral functions in the interest of secular ambi tion, untU "prelacy" has become an invidious term. The remedy hes in reformation, and not in revolt from Christ's appointed ministry. And such reform causes the sway of the Church again to be, as God designed it, a loving pastorate, deeply entrenched in the affections of multitudes of the redeemed. CHAPTER V UNITY AND HOLINESS I. Notes of the Church § i. In its full form, the Nicene Creed describes the Church as "one, holy, catholic and apostolic"; and these attributes are called the Church's "notes." They constitute distinctive marks, which help the faithful to identify the Church in general and to perceive the family likeness which is repeated with varying clearness in all its genuine portions, that is in all true provincial Churches, whether their external relations to each other are what they ought to be or not.1 The Creed attributes them to the Christian Church as a whole, and in their fuU sense this is their proper reference. "The Churches" possess them derivatively and in a secondary form only, reflecting them after the manner of parts of the one great organism, and not as separately complete 1 On the Church's "notes," see H. B. Swete, pp. 11-50; Darwell Stone, ch. vi (patristic teaching); Wm. Palmer, Pt. I. chh. ii, iv-viii; E. T. Green, chh. iii— vii. For titles of works designated by authors' names only, in this and the next two chh., see bibliog. on p. 38, above. NOTES OF THE CHURCH 169 embodiments of them. For example the unity, holiness, catholicity and apostolicity of the Anglican Churches describe these Churches relatively, as being recognizable localizations of the universal Church, which was built in the beginning upon the Apostles and prophets, with Jesus Christ as its chief comer stone. The Church is more than its visible elements and conditions, being the mystical Body of Christ. It is a sacramental entity, and its notes are of a sacra mental nature. They are therefore to be defined and interpreted in the hght of a conception of the Church which only the faithful can correctly reckon with, and they may easily be confused by others with surface conditions which can disappear with out fatal results. They are really inherent and indelible, but may be hidden from the observation of the world by passing conditions and abuses. They can be truly recognized only by spiritual dis cernment, and on the basis of sound doctrine con cerning the Church. To give a critical illustration, particular Churches may fail to afford to the world proper evidences of mutual harmony, and of strict accord amongst their own members; and yet they may stiU retain genuine share in the note of unity which pertains to the Church as a whole. This unity is an organic attribute, and may coexist with unfortunate external disharmony. That these notes ought to be made clearly appar ent to aU recipients of the Gospel is indisputable, 170 UNITY AND HOLINESS both for the persuasiveness of the Church's propa ganda and for the full development of spiritual life among its members. Their obscuration is a fruit and sign of abuses that need reformation. But the chronic vitality of the Church has to be reckoned with, and the promise that the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it is a pledge that these abuses, and this consequent obscuration of the Church's notes, are passing evUs, over which the Church will ulti mately triumph. § 2. In view of these general considerations, how shall we proceed in order to determine whether a particular Church has retained a proper or rela tive possession of the notes of the Church of Christ, and by virtue of such possession is a true portion of this Church? Before undertaking direct search for these notes in a particular Church, we may per haps save ourselves in advance from vain labor, by remembering that from the nature of the case no particular Church can possess them wliich has not retained the original or apostohc ministry and the sacramental system of the universal Church. These, along with the catholic faith, constitute the most ready means of identifying the Churches that can with any show of reason claim to possess, as Churches, the necessary notes of the Church which was established by Christ and His Apostles. (a) First of all we must look for sacramental values in the notes of a true Church. That is, we must go beneath the surface, and discover whether NOTES OF THE CHURCH 171 the apparent indications are signs of the deeper relations and properties which distinguish the Body of Christ wherever found, or are superficial proper ties, such as might appear in any rehgious body organized by those who seek, whether in the right way or not, to serve Christ. (b) Growing out of this is the more specific rule that the notes in question, if genuine, will have an organic quality, for the Church of Christ is essen- tiaUy an organism — not a series of denominational societies independently complete, and taken to gether only in a coUective sense. It is true that on sacramental principles, each validly baptized Christian is a member of the one organism, and is such regardless of his denominational affiliation. But whether his denomination, in its ecclesiastical status, is an extension of this organism is the ques tion to be answered. And its answer hes in the organic or structural relation of the Church under scrutiny to the Church universal. Is the particu lar Church one, holy, catholic and apostohc as sharing in this organic relationship? (c) And this relationship extends to those who have gone before, as well as to the hving. The Church militant, expectant and triumphant is one Body of Christ, the "great majority" of whose members are in the unseen world. To possess the notes of the Church, therefore, a particular ecclesia must possess them in forms identifiable by this majority; and evidences of antiquity, or of con- 172 UNITY AND HOLINESS tinuous identity with the primitive notes of the Church, are to be required. (d) Sectarian exclusiveness is not necessarily a proof that the particular Church does not possess the notes of the universal Church, for it may repre sent a remediable abuse only, one which obscures, but is not necessarily fatal to such possession. But exclusive claim to be the whole Church, and all forms of sectarian self-sufficiency, are out of har mony with the nature of Christ's Church; and they should be offset by evidence that they are super ficial, and do not in the given case preclude a reten tion of the notes under consideration. A man-made society of Christians differing in kind from the Churches of New Testament desig nation may consist of earnest although misguided believers in Christ, and may therefore exhibit marks somewhat similar to the notes of the Church; but when put to the test of organic considerations involved in the New Testament doctrine of Christ's Body, they can be seen to differ from genuine notes of the Church. The members of such a Church, in so far as they are unaware of its defects, and are sincerely Christian in their aims, wiU of course receive precious blessings from God; although it is unreasonable to suppose that those who fail in fact to conform to the arrangements of the Kingdom of God embodied in the organism of Christ's Church can avoid incurring serious spiritual disadvantages. UNITY 173 II. Unity § 3. If all the members of the Church walked worthUy of their calling, the note of unity would be especially visible. Love and peace would reign, and aU Christians would be able to commune with out scruple or suspicion of vahdity at the same altars, and with that measure of conformity to a common mind and worship upon which full enjoy ment of Christian fellowship depends. But the note of unity under consideration is deeper than such manifestations of it, and pertains to Christ's universal Church, as such, regardless of the abuses and sins of Christians by which it is obscured and made less profitable to them.1 We therefore have to distinguish between what is called visible unity, or the manifestation of unity in those open relations which are its proper fruits, and the nature of unity itself, as it inheres in the organism of Christ's Church and constitutes one of its notes. There are various unities — the unity of a state, of a famUy, and of a denomination. Each of them is determined in nature by the nature of that to wliich it belongs. Similarly the unity of 1 On the note of unity, see Jos. Hammond, chh. xix-xx and pp. 240-243 (biblical data); and his English Nonconformity etc.; and Church or Chapel, pp. 7-58; Darwell Stone, pp. 90-93 (N. T. data), 1 18-130 (patristic); A. C. A. Hall, Sevenfold Unity of the Christian Church; H. B. Swete, pp. 11-23; Wm- Palmer, Pt. I. chh. iv-v(; T. A. Lacey, Unity and Schism. Ground has been broken in ch. ii. §§4-8, above. 174 UNITY AND HOLINESS Christ's Church is what it is by virtue of what that Church is; and the Church's "visible unity" should mean the dominance among its earthly members of the visible conditions and open relations that agree with and flow from the intrinsic unity of the Church as such. (a) The note of unity is first of aU numerical. Christ established only one Church for His redeemed, and no duplication of it is possible among men. It is unique. When the New Testament speaks of Churches in the plural number, it designates local extensions of one Church, interconnected in ways the closeness of which is not even approximated in the cooperative arrangements of modern days be tween denominational Churches. Only one Church can be truly described as "the Body of Christ" and as His "Bride." (b) The unity of the Church is also organic, for it is Christ's Body, and the least meaning which we can attribute to such a description makes the Church to be an organism, unified in its Head Jesus Christ, and vitalized by the perpetual and life- giving indwelling of the Holy Spirit.1 The Church, then, is far more than the total of its redeemed membership, and more than the agglomeration of the "Churches" of its local distribution. It is these plus mysterious interior and complementary relations, by which the nature of the Church as such is determined and differentiated from every society 1 Cf. ch. iii. §§ 5-8, above. UNITY 175 or combination of societies of human organization. Its organic nature is not an unrealized ideal, but a fact mhering in the visible ecclesia estabhshed by the divine Redeemer and made into His Body by the Spirit. This unity binds "the Churches" of New Testament terminology by relations that can be neither created nor altered by human arrange ments. The most that men can do is to bring about the apostacy of particular Churches, and thus to sever them as Churches from the organism, wliich continues none the less to hve on. (c) This last consideration means that the unity of the Church includes its indivisibility. Whenever external disharmony develops between its local and organized embodiments, only two alternative consequences are possible: — either the obscuration of unity in an organism that cannot die or cease to be one, or a sloughing off of the diseased congrega tion from the organism and destruction of its vital connection therewith. In the latter case, if the schismatic Church continues, it sinks to the level of a man-made ecclesia. (d) In this event, it ceases to preserve the generic likeness which characterizes true portions of the Church's organism, and which constitutes another essential element in the note of unity. All true portions of Christ's Church necessarily possess its faith, its apostohc ministry, its sacraments, its manner of worship, its fundamental precepts, and its typical ethos or spiritual atmosphere. And 176 UNITY AND HOLINESS they retain them in recognizable forms, amid all the superficial variations which are involved in adapting them to times, places and varying con ditions among men.1 § 4. How the Church's essential unity can be obscured, and how a Church can be lacking in par ticipation therein, are questions the answers to wliich are implied in what has been said above; but a separate and more specific formulation of these answers seems to be desirable. The note of unity is obscured by any abuses, sins and shortcomings among Christians that are inconsistent with the proper fruit and manifesta tion thereof. Discordance, whether of doctrine, of practice or of official ministration, invariably ob scures and reduces the fruitfulness of the Church's organic unity; and it may, and if not restrained will, lead on to the extreme form of obscuration wliich is called schism. But schism is of two kinds, internal and external, or schism within and schism from the Church. It is internal schism, or open rupture of communion between provincial portions of the Church, which is here meant. Examples are the schisms between the Eastern and Western Churches and between the Roman and Anglican Communions. These obscure the unity of the Catholic Church so seriously that many thoughtful men either deny its continued existence or limit the 1 See V. Staley, Plain Words on the Holy Catholic Church, Pt. II. Lee. iv. UNITY 177 validity of ecclesiastical claims to one or other of these Communions. Both conclusions are mistaken. All of them retain the generic marks which estabhsh their participation in the essential or organic unity of the Church, and the continued existence of this unity is thereby proved. The Church is indeed seriously wounded, and the fulness of spiritual fruits among its members is reduced. But the Church hves on, and its quarrelling Communions are still organically related in the one Body of Christ. A Church may utterly lack participation in the note of unity of Christ's Church through either one of two chief causes, both forms of external schism, or schism from the true Church of Christ. In the first place, a true portion of the Church may become so apostate in matters essential to the Church's integrity as to be cut off from the organism and cease to be an extension of the Body in which the note of unity inheres. It will then, if it continues to exist at all, be a new thing in the world; and it cannot, of course, possess the notes of that from which it is utterly severed. In the second place, individual Christians, whether clerical or lay, may abandon allegiance to the an cient Church, and create new Churches or denomina tions, differing in visible regards from the original Church, especially in the determinative fact of their purely human origin. Such Churches may have the aUegiance of men with earnest Christian aims, misguided in ecclesiastical aspects though they may 178 UNITY AND HOLINESS be. And as individual members of Christ's Body by Baptism they may continue, because of their igno rance of wrong, to derive important graces from their membership in the one Body. But the organized societies or Churches which they have created, or with which they affiliate, are extraneous entities, and do not at all share in the note of the essential unity of the Church of Christ. We realize the controversy-provoking nature of such a conclusion; but its truth stands, if the doc trine of the Church which has the consensus of an overwhelming majority of Christians both past and present is valid. And if it is true, it constitutes part of the doctrine which the Church through its ministers and theologians should proclaim and justify — among other reasons, in the interest of a restoration of visible Christian unity. The promo tion of such an interest is intrinsically a work of love, although the tempers of those who seek to promote it are unhappily subject to human fraflty. If the writer betrays such frailty, he asks to be forgiven. In any event visible unity, with all its priceless blessings, depends for consummation upon the general triumph of a true conception of the Church and of its unity; and this in turn depends upon really frank, although friendly, comparison between Christians of such of their convictions as seem to them to be determinative in the problem. To suppose that those who continue to differ con cerning the Church in particulars which they deem UNITY 179 to be vital can come together in the manner which visible unity requires, seems to the writer to be a most Ulusory notion. A removal, as distinguished from concealment or compromise, of such differ ences is needed; and this can be achieved, humanly speaking, only by candid discussion, dominated by desire to reach united acceptance of the truth. § 5. If the contentions of this chapter are not wholly wrong, wrong in foundation principles as weU as in their particulars, the restoration of visible Christian unity is of the supremest importance, and should enhst the most earnest efforts) of all believers in Jesus Christ.1 But it is well to set forth in sum mary form the chief specific reasons for such a con clusion. (a) The first reason is the declared will of Christ, expressed in the prayer which He offered in the night of His betrayal, "that they all may be one; even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in Us." 2 And this will is echoed by apostohc teaching. St. Paul urges the Ephesians to give diligence "to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one Body, and one Spirit, even as also ye were caUed in one hope of your calling." He again tells them, "speaking truth in love," to "grow up in aU things into Him, wliich is the Head, even Christ; from 1 On present conditions and factors which appear to make for future reunion, see ch. ii. §§ 9-1 1, above. 2 St. John xvii. n, 20-23. 180 UNITY AND HOLINESS whom all the Body fitly framed and knit together through that which every joint suppheth, according to the working in due measure of each several part, maketh the increase of the Body unto the building up of itself in love." 1 (b) A second reason is given by Christ in the prayer above referred to, "that the world may believe that Thou didst send Me, and lovedst them, even as Thou lovedst Me." 2 The force of this reason is obvious, for there can be no more persuasive element in the Church's propaganda con cerning Christ than a visible catholic consent in its maintenance and a world-wide harmony in the form of loyalty to Him which it produces and preserves. Open disunity gives an uncertain tone and signifi cance to the Church's voice and makes men indif ferent to its message. (c) The external efficiency of the Church is every where reduced in a denominationally divided Chris tendom by rival and overlapping organizations and plants. Resources are fearfully wasted, and workers are gravely discouraged by isolation, mutual oppo sition and controversy, as well as by diminutive congregations and inadequate financial support. These evUs must continue, in spite of federal and other partial makeshifts, until Christian efforts, official and other, are fused into unified machinery by an abolition of denominationalism. Every other form of treatment is but a "flickering expedient," 1 Ephes. iv. 3-4, 15-16. 2 St. John xvii. 23. UNITY 181 leaving us with the "hope deferred that maketh the heart sick." (d) The internal efficiency of the Church also depends for actualization of its higher possibilities upon harmonious enjoyment of the all-embracing corporate relations in the Body of Christ. De nominational barriers are under the most favor able conditions fatal to such enjoyment. Unless all can feed on the one bread at the same table of the Lord, and can participate fully and openly in one spiritual life and discipline, the mutual rela tions of the members of Christ's Body will be im poverished, as indeed they are at present, and mutual helpfulness in the higher elements of regen^ erate hfe wUl be shortened at the cost of much spiritual loss. (e) In particular the fuU development of mutual love among Christians depends upon the relations in the Body by which they are all united in a com mon faith, a common hfe and common privileges of grace, enjoyed in the closest possible brotherhood and feUowship. That these conditions can be suf ficiently afforded by a denominational Christendom is absolutely incredible. The intensity of feeling which sometimes unites the members of a sect, obtains its intensity at the cost of exclusiveness, and love dies, or at least loses its compelling power, at the threshold of the sect. § 6. And how can the visible unity of Christians in the one Body of Christ be restored? If the answer 182 UNITY AND HOLINESS asked for is a definition of procedures, legislative and other, which will secure the blessed consumma tion, we have no such answer. The procedures will depend upon the circumstances that prevail when the Christian world is ready for action, and upon the guidance which the Holy Spirit is certain then to afford. But Christendom is not now ready, and all schemes for immediate action are certain to be abortive. They may easily delay matters.1 The only answer to our question which can safely be given is a definition on broad fines of the conditions which most obviously need to be fulfiUed before formal steps towards the visible unification of Christendom2 can be wisely or successfully under taken. (a) Spiritual forces should be enlisted and directed to the development of the convictions, attitudes, purposes and tempers which must control Christian leadership everywhere before visible unification can become a practical question. This development cannot be successfuUy promoted without abundant help from the Holy Spirit — such help as can be secured in full measure only by the united and persistent prayers of multitudes. Upon this de- 1 T. A. Lacey's op. cit., has for its burden the futility of the differ ent schematic bases of unity apart from an adequate apprehension of the baptismal brotherhood. 2 Christendom at large is meant. There may and ought to be unifications of certain Christian Communions that possess strong affinities and no vital divergences in either faith or order. But the greater problem is not solved without world-wide unification. UNITY 183 pends, in particular, the measure of mutual love between separated Christians which can be de veloped prior to a full restoration of visible unity. Herein hes a peculiar difficulty, that this the most fundamental subjective factor and motive must continue to be defective as long as Christian unity is only an unactualized ideal. (b) Substantial agreement must be attained be tween leaders of every genuine Christian type in those matters of faith and order which appear to be essential to the integrity and spiritual working of the Christian system. And this means that truth must triumph in these directions. A getting to gether on the basis either of error or of evasive com promise of convictions is not only certain to result in subsequent renewal of disunion, but is an inde fensible form of treason to the Kingdom of God. There must, therefore, be many frank and friendly conferences between those who now disagree, and a long campaign of mutual education, initiated by efforts to remove mutual misapprehensions and misunderstandings.1 (c) The abuses and unspiritual developments within the Church which explain the odious sig nificance that such terms as "prelacy" and "sacer dotalism" have acquired in modern days2 must be 1 The proposed World Conference on questions of Faith and Order has for its motive a breaking through of the crust of mutual suspicion which now hinders such conferences, and is essentially for mutual education. Its range of business is explicitly limited to this. Schematic resolutions are excluded. 2 Cf. pp. 48-49, 55, above. 184 UNITY AND HOLINESS more fully reformed than they have been. Entire removal of evil from the Church militant is out of question, human nature being what it is; but the conditions referred to must be sufficiently amended to become tolerable, that is to be recognized as not preventing a spiritually effective administration of the Christian system of truth and grace. The pas toral office must be victorious over secular ambition and monarchical methods, and the spiritual cure of souls must visibly dethrone external lordship. (cf) On the other hand the denominational con ception, with its defence of mutually independent and genetically diverse ministerial polities, must be abandoned entirely; for the organic unity of the Body of Christ cannot effectively manifest itself in a denominational Christendom. Moreover, it must be realized that organic Christian unity can not be created by an agglomeration of denomina tions, but rests in the divine constitution of Christ's Church. (e) Although any attempt to enforce rigid uni formity of ceremonial usage and discipline can suc ceed only at the cost of interfering with the Church's catholic adaptation of its ministrations to times, places, circumstances and conditions, there must be developed a readiness to submit to such world-wide conformity in fundamental ritual and practice as will enable all Christians to practise their religion in its corporate aspects intelligently and without scruple or doubtfulness wherever they go. Not UNITY 185 otherwise can the development of divisive influence be prevented. To this end, the notion that tem peramental differences among men either require radically different rituals for spiritual profit or can safely be accentuated by such divergence of treat ment must be outgrown. The fundamental unity of human nature and of its needs must be realized, and that sensitiveness wliich is shown by mutually isolating divergences of practice must be seen to be a disease rather than a proper development. (j) FinaUy, the Christian world must be willing to accept some kind of constitutional polity that will visibly unify Christian forces throughout the world, without subverting a reasonable local autonomy and freedom. The interrelations and common in terests of local and national Churches need to be provided for and safeguarded, and this cannot be effectively accomphshed apparently, unless some kind of ecumenical machinery for the coordination of ecclesiastical affairs is created. That this central authority must be kept within constitutional limits, consistent with the supreme authority of the Church at large, is obvious. For example, if the papal system is to be accepted as affording the needed machinery of unification,1 the Vatican theory by which it is now controUed must be abandoned, and so effectually outgrown as to cease to be in danger of revival. The curial coUege, if it continues, must 1 The writer is not assuming this as established. It is only a convenient hypothesis for illustrating the thesis advanced. 186 UNITY AND HOLINESS be constitutionahzed, so as to be truly elective and thus representative; and the power of the Church at large to overrule Italian provincialism, and to control all developments and adjustments, must be constitutionally safeguarded. It ought to be clear to thoughtful workers in this great cause that the end in view wUl require much time as well as patient wisdom for its attainment. Such is the condition of every large achievement, and no achievement is larger than this. In par ticular, it is needful to avoid aU forcing methods, and to be content with the more deliberate cam paign of mutual education that has first to be carried through. It is not the prerogative of one generation to complete the work. On the other hand, relaxation of effort because of the remote ness of its fruition, and by reason of disillusionment as to immediate results, is quite unwarranted, and is contrary to the divine will. To be led by the for- midableness of the undertaking to deny the utility of our own seemingly insignificant contributions to its progress is to show lack of faith in the power and will of God to answer the prayer of His beloved Son. If God wills it, He will bring it to pass. But He never hurries. III. Holiness § 7. The holiness of the Church lies in its separa tion to God and supernatural endowments, in its HOLINESS 187 characteristic function of bringing men to God, and in its destiny with God.1 To enter into the correct meaning of such a defi nition we have to distinguish carefully between the mutuaUy related, but really different, concepts of holiness and righteousness. The latter is involved in the former, but is not at aU equivalent to it. Righteousness is a quality of moral conduct and moral character, and a righteous man is one who does what is moraUy right and has the right kind of moral character. Assuming for argument's sake that one could become morally perfect without divine help, such righteousness would neither con stitute nor of itself produce holiness. To be holy is to be consecrated and assimilated to God; and whUe, because of God's own righteousness, such consecration and assimilation cannot be completed unless we become morally righteous, none the less holiness is a distinct thing. It describes a special and supernatural relation to our Creator, a rela tion in which righteousness attains transfigured glory, but which conceivably might be lacking to a righteous man. Negatively it means separation from what is alien to God, and positively consecra tion to God and divine things.2 Both righteousness and holiness are in final out- 1 On the note of holiness, see Darwell Stone, pp. 86-89 (New Test.), 130-135 (patristic); E. T. Green, ch. v; H. B. Swete, pp. 23-335 Jos. Hammond, ch. xvii, and pp. 243-246; Wm. Palmer, Pt. I. ch. vi; A. J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. viii. § 3. 2 See Hastings, Die of Bible, q. v. 1 88 UNITY AND HOLINESS come essential to the realization of Christian beati tude; but a real incipient holiness may exist in one who is as yet conspicuously unrighteous. That is, he may have come into accepted, because contritely believing, relation to God in Christ, although not yet emancipated from the power of sinful habits. He is at once holy and unrighteous, although this is a passing stage in a growth which, if it continues, wUl make him perfectly righteous. This accounts in part for our Lord's attitude towards notorious but penitent sinners, as contrasted with that to wards the comparatively righteous Pharisees.1 A gross sinner who is devoutly consecrated to God is higher up the scale of spiritual values than a com paratively righteous man who is not thus conse crated. In such comparison, the paradox is true that the sinner is holy and the righteous one is unholy. In the issue, of course, such a sinner must become righteous, and is in the way of so becoming; and the righteous man must come into effective relation to God through Christ before his moral righteousness can avail. Without the estabUshment of such relation, that is without holiness, not even a perfectly righteous man, morally speaking, can see the Lord. This is not to disparage the ethical. Indeed the morally good constitutes one of the three things in this world that we are to seek without reserve, if we seek them in mutually harmonious relationship. 1 Cf. St. Matt. xxi. 31-32. HOLINESS 189 These three are the good, the true and the beauti ful. But neither one of them alone nor the com bination of them aU constitutes the final goal of human progress; and the only reason for an unre served pursuit of them is that they all Ue within the pathway that leads to the goal. That goal is to live with God in the communion of saints. Such a destiny requires for its enjoyment our assimilation of the good, the true and the beautiful; but it re quires also certain spiritual relations, supernatural virtues and aptitudes, which transfigure these things and complete in us the capacity to enjoy God and to please Him. Holiness here comes in, and describes the quality of these special relations and virtues in so far as they consecrate their subjects to God. They are embodied and made effective in super natural religion, that is, in the working system by means of which we get into authentic touch with God, and are enabled to grow in the joy of heavenly relations. § 8. The Church is holy, therefore, because it is the appointed machinery of supernatural religion, holy in vocation and endowment, in function and in"? the destiny to wliich it ministers and which it is to enjoy hereafter. (a) It is holy in vocation and in spiritual endow ments pertaining thereto. It is the Israel of God, a peculiar people, gathered around and built upon the spiritual remnant of fleshly Israel, and united once for all at Pentecost with the divine Redeemer. 190 UNITY AND HOLINESS And this union creates a vital and inseparable rela tion between it and Christ which makes it to be His Body — in the world but not of it, because differing genericaUy and in vital regards from anything which any powers of the world can originate. From this relationship to Christ flow supernatural endowments of immortal hfe, of Godward aspect, of grace-im parting and sanctifying power, and of a spiritual mind that organically enhances the intelhgence of its members in things pertaining to God. This holiness is participated in by all of its members, although with unequal results. The baptized are the elect.1 They have been caUed out of the world into the sphere of regenerate life, wherein aU spirit ual graces and final glory are potential, although their effective actuahzation depends upon due moral response on the part of the subjects of grace. For this reason the baptized are caUed "the saints" in the New Testament,2 because, whatever may be their moral progress or want of it, they have been consecrated to vocations which have God for their distinctive goal and determining reference. (b) The Church is holy in function. To it per tains by unalterable divine arrangement the official promotion of God's Kingdom in the world. By its agency men are drawn into the Kingdom and are 1 Cf. p. 85, above. 2 St. Paul habitually addresses the baptized as saints, even when writing to rebuke them for their unrighteousness. See J. B. Light foot, PhiMppians, p. 81. HOLINESS 191 endowed with aU manner of spiritual gifts and graces pertaining thereto; and by it the relations to God for wliich men were created are actualized in Christ, and brought to their due expression in Eucharistic oblation. Moreover, the Church is the ministrant in these things not merely as appointed to this business, but by virtue of its being and nature. What the Church is and what it is appointed to do hang together in such an intimate relation that it has no organic function whatever that is not neces sarily divine and holy in reference. If unholy dem onstrations emerge among its members, they have extraneous source and cannot rightly be traced to the Body of Christ, which the Church is. They come from sinful men, from self-corrupting mem bers and extraneous fungous growths. The holiness of the Church's members develops in proportion to their assimilation to it, for its holiness is inher ent, and is the immediate organic source of theirs. (c) The Church is holy in destiny. "The gates of Hades shaU not prevail against it," but, in per sonified terms of Scripture, she is to be the Bride of Christ hereafter, aU glorious within and having "no spot or wrinkle or any such thing." 1 Many of her children may fall away and be cut off, but her glory is the one subject-matter of absolute predestination.2 The glorification of her members hes in their relation to her, for, apart from her, the 1 St. Matt. xvi. 18; Revel, xxi. 2, 9-10. Cf. Psa. xiv. 13-16. 2 Creation and Man, p. 22 (a). 192 UNITY AND HOLINESS organic basis of the covenant is wanting, and apart from faithfulness to her the continuance of this basis for them is impossible. In her the Messiah shall see His seed.1 She is the mother of souls, at whose breast they suck the milk wherein is the earnest of holy things and holy places. § 9. The Church cannot wear its holiness in this world on its sleeve, but reveals it to its faithful dis ciples. This is not only a mystery of protection against desecration, but flows from the fact that the discernment of holy things is conditioned by spirit ual judgment, possessed only by contrite believers. Such behevers perceive not only that the visible Church, in spite of extraneous evUs in its midst, is holy, but also that its holiness is inherent and inextinguishable. But there are evils in the Church mihtant which increase the intrinsic difficulty of discovering its holiness by secular methods of investigation. (a) These evils spring from, and are most gen erally observable in, the sins and moral short comings of individual Christians. Not every sin is fatal to holiness, or to the relation to the Body of Christ wherein individual holiness has its organic basis. But righteousness is an obhgatory external fruit and sign of personal holiness, and all unright eousness of the baptized obscures the Church's holi ness, except to the spiritually discerning faithful. Yet it is a paradox of the Church's sanctifying func- , ' Isa. liii. 10. HOLINESS 193 tion that the presence of much sinfulness in its midst is part of its note of holiness. Its function is to assimilate sinners to the righteousness that holi ness involves, and this function requires that the Church shaU welcome, and to a degree cherish, the sinners whom it is appointed to save and sanctify. If the Church had no sin in its midst, this could mean only that it had forsaken its function, unless indeed the opportunity of saving more souls had forever passed away. If there were no Churchmen in jail, this would be an ominous sign. A hospital with no sick inmates is an abnormality. (b) Coming to more specific categories, careless laxity of spiritual discipline, or the secularization of spiritual ideals which is thereby indicated, is pecul iarly opposed to a manifestation of the Church's holiness, and is calculated to deceive many who can recognize holiness when they see it. In the secu larized atmosphere thus developed, earnest Chris tians convert the external good works that should flow from holiness into substitutes for it. So it comes to pass that strenuous external endeavour appropriates Christian zeal at the cost of reduc ing serious consideration of the Godward vocation and holiness which the Church is given chiefly to promote. "By their fruits ye shaU know them" becomes a dangerous heresy, through failure to perceive that the fruits in question are such as minister to the distinctively Godward, or to true rehgion. A non-religious phUanthropy, when prac- 194 UNITY AND HOLINESS tised by Churchmen, obscures instead of mani festing the note of holiness; for this can reveal itself only in open relations with God. (c) The neglect of sacramental privileges obscures the note of hohness both directly and indirectly. It does so directly, because the sacramental life is the appointed visible form of holy life in this world. It is the sign apart from which holiness cannot properly declare itself in the Church, whatever may be the appearances of moral exceUence in those who neglect the sacraments. As we have seen, moral excellence cannot do duty for the God ward relations wherein holiness consists, and wliich the sacramental hfe embodies. This neglect also obscures the Church's holiness indirectly, or in effect; because upon abundant measures of sacra mental grace depends the development of the prac tice of that hfe with God wherein holiness reveals itself. (d) The Church's holiness is also obscured by the habit among Christian teachers of limiting the caU to perfection in holiness to a few choice souls, and of sanctioning in effect an intrinsicaUy lower stand ard and aim for the faithful at large. This error — a serious one — is based upon the specious ground that individual vocations differ, and the spiritual gifts and types of holiness set before Chris tians differ correspondingly. This premise is true, but the deduction and application in question are both faUacious and dangerous. The differences of HOLINESS 195 vocations, gifts and types of holiness referred to are extrinsic and relative. They do not look to different degrees of sanctity, but to varieties of the highest or perfect degree. Entire sanctification is the goal set before aU; and no Christian vocation can be fulfilled until that goal is won. To permit average Christians to suppose that their progress can be rightly measured by any standard short of perfect holiness is to secularize the Church's atmo sphere.1 § 10. Two methods of remedying the obscuration of the Church's holiness are both futile and disas trous. These are revolt from the Church and puri- tanism. To forsake the Church is to cut oneself off from the life appointed for the saints, and either to resort to the futilities of individualism or to accept humanitarian ideals as adequate. These ideals are good as far as they go, but are not holy unless related to the ideal to which the Church alone can effectively relate them. Puritanism, or the rigid exclusion of open sinners from the Church, has the double result of shortening the appointed sanctifying work of the Church and of legahstic emphasis upon external righteousness at the cost of the interior life of grace. And this legalism always has the effect of imposing artificial and purely human standards of conduct — standards which in turn bring about reaction and revolt from 1 On the universality of the obligation to aim at Christian perfec tion, see Wm. Law, Serious Call, ch. i. 196 UNITY AND HOLINESS the authorities that impose them. American "churchless Christianity" is largely of such causa tion. True remedies consist of reformations of the evils by which the Church's holiness is obscured. These reformations can never be complete in this world; but they ought to be promoted to the degree that the imperfections of human nature on this side of the grave permit. (a) Sinners cannot be banished from the Church; but there should be an effective setting forth of the guilt and consequences of sin, accompanied by repeated and insistent caUs to repentance and to fuU use of the aids for penitents afforded in the Church, in particular of the tribunal of Penance. Comfort for genuine penitents is, of course, desir able; but when the Church neglects to set forth in due measure "the terror of the Lord," it en courages easy consciences and substitutes anodynes for needed surgery. And untU Christian souls are induced to grapple seriously with the problem of their sins and to cultivate the habit of earnest repentance, the note of sanctity in the Church will seem remote. (b) Spiritual discipline, or rules of exercise by which the perfection involved in holiness is ad vanced, should be generaUy inculcated; and the guidance in their adoption and development which pastors are ordained to give should be much more abundantly afforded. This is, of course, impossible unless these pastors themselves practice spiritual HOLINESS 197 discipline and cultivate the interior life to a higher degree than is now customary. Spiritual experi ence is a sine qua non of wisdom in spiritual leader ship. And sufficient book-learning in the science of the spiritual life is also of great importance, if individuahsm is not to displace the weU-tried rules of spiritual progress, and perhaps to side-track their real aim of bringing men into effective and assimi lative touch with God. (c) A wide sacramental revival is also needed; for the sacraments are the Holy Spirit's primary instruments for both developing and expressing holy growth in grace. The Eucharist should every where be the obvious and vital centre of Christian hfe; and in their several places and relations, the other means of grace should be in pubhc evidence in the Church, if its holiness is to be manifested and made fruitful. To think otherwise is to impugn the laws of grace which come from God. (d) Finally, the vocation of sainthood should be pressed upon aU the baptized. All are caUed to perfection, and no one can be fully sanctified who does not make perfection his goal of endeavor. In application, this means a due regard for indi vidual vocations and gifts, and discriminating judg ment as to the particular line of progress which each soul has to pursue. But whatever be the line in question, the fact that it is intended of God to lead the soul to Himself, and to make it whoUy per fect in the spiritual gifts with which it is endowed, 198 UNITY AND HOLINESS this fact should be uncompromisingly set forth and applied. That many have to be dealt with patiently, and led on to high ideals gradually, un doubtedly may determine methods of pastoral teaching; but to permit any soul to rest finaUy in an aim which does not bring perfection into prac tical contemplation is to obscure the holiness wliich aU Christians are caUed upon to cultivate. CHAPTER VI CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICITY I. Catholicity § i. The term catholic, Kadohuai, appears first to have been apphed to the Church at large by St. Ignatius of Antioch, about no a.d.,1 to distinguish it from local Churches. Later in the second cen tury, and after the appearance of schismatic and heretical Churches, it came also to be applied to the Church established by the Apostles, as distinguished from these later bodies, and to designate genuine local portions of that Church. Both of these uses are primarily titular, although descriptive in im plication; and it is only when the descriptive im plication of the word came to be reflected on that it acquired the meaning or meanings involved in treating cathohcity as a "note" of the Church, in the sense here under consideration.2 In the Apostles' Creed the titular use of cathohc appears, while in the Nicene Creed the term seems to be used de- 1 Smyrn., 8. 2 On the note of catholicity, see Darwell Stone, pp. 135-139 (patristic); H. B. Swete, pp. 33-41; E. T. Green, ch. vi; Wm. Palmer, Pt. I. ch. vii; W. J. S. Simpson, pp. 105-107; Bishop Pear son, Apostles' Creed, fol. 145-150. 200 CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICITY scriptively and as a note of the Church. We are concerned with the latter use, in which several in terrelated ideas emerge, all deduced from the ety mological meaning of the word — universal. (a) The true Church is catholic because its mis sion is universal. "Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to the whole creation." "Go ye . . . and make disciples of all the nations."1 In this the Christian Church is sharply to be con trasted with the Church of the old covenant. Yet no breach of continuity is involved, for it was God's original purpose that in the promised seed of Abra ham, which the Church of Christ is, "all the families of the earth should be blessed." 2 No race, no nation, neither sex and no class or civUization of men lies beyond the sphere within which the Church is appointed of God to do its work, and to gather in such as are being saved, that they may become disciples of Christ. (b) The Church is catholic, again, because it comprehends in its membership all Christians, that is, all who are truly baptized, whatever may be their external attitude to its authority and appointed ministrations.3 A society that is determined in membership by conditions which exclude any of the baptized lacks the note of cathohcity; and par ticular portions of the Cathohc Church reveal this 1 Suppl. St. Mark xvi. 15; St. Matt, xxviii. 19. 2 Gen. xviii. 18, etc. Cf. pp. 39-40, above. 3 Cf. pp. 85-186, above. CATHOLICITY 201 note to the degree that they successfuUy minister to every class of Christians within their respec tive provincial spheres. This does not mean that a truly cathoUc Church must unconditionally afford all sacramental privileges to every baptized Chris tian, for this would nulhfy the discipline given to the Church to exercise. It means that no other barrier to fuU communion will be erected than that which is made necessary by human wilfulness and by the maintenance of catholic principles and dis cipline. (c) The note of catholicity is also seen in the comprehensiveness of doctrine, precept and spiritual instruments of grace wliich the true Church sets forth and employs. This comprehensiveness ex tends to everything that has been revealed as integral to saving faith and practice, to aU the appointed orders of the apostohc ministry, and to the whole system of sacramental grace. Wherever any of these are put aside, or even carelessly re garded, the note of cathohcity is obscured; and where vital portions of them are formally repudi ated, it is nullified. So it is that a truly cathohc Church may not have any distinctive doctrine or practice, exclusively favoured, but should teach and minister all that has been placed in the Church's stewardship, in due proportion, and without either provincial or partisan onesidedness and caricature. § 2. In addition to these primary elements of cathohcity there are certain incidental marks that 202 CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICITY we expect to discern in the Catholic Church, and derivatively in any true portion of it, which mani fest its cathohcity and the blurring of which ob scures this note. (a) One of these is adaptability; for if the Church is sent by God to aU men, we have reason to expect that its equipment and methods will be found to be capable of adjustment without subversion to all conditions among men, whether racial, geographical, political, inteUectual, moral or temperamental. A cathohc propaganda should appeal successfully to every grade of intelligence and civUization, to every class of human beings. Invariable success is not a necessary consequence and mark of this adaptability, for no propaganda can persuade the unwiUing and obdurate. The limitations of the Church's propaganda should not arise, however, from any intrinsic lack of adapta bility in the Church's essential system, but wholly from those humanly erected obstacles which no propaganda that is true to itself can overpass. These obstacles sometimes emerge within the Church itself, created by the abuses which are more or less inevitable among human minis trants; and these abuses are a chief cause of obscuration of the Church's cathohcity. Yet this cathohcity is in herent; and the Church's adaptability renews its manifestation in proportion to the degree of refor mation of these abuses that is from time to time accomplished. When the Church is most true to CATHOLICITY 203 itself, its adaptability and its resourcefulness be come most apparent; and by this persistent law of its being its cathoUcity is exhibited. There are various lines along which the Church adapts itself to diverse conditions. The ministry, for example, although permanently fixed in constitution, method of perpetuation and laws of sacramental functioning, has passed through several phases of adjustment of external polity and jurisdictional methods. The so-called monarchical episcopate is an adaptation, and one wliich can be modified radicaUy without subversion of the episcopal order.1 An itinerant episcopate, and presbyterate as well, and racial delimitations of spiritual jurisdiction within the same territory, these and other adjustments, whatever their re spective values may prove to be, are well within the adaptabilities of the catholic hierarchy. And the test of them aU is their pastoral value for the cure of souls and the dispensation of grace in visible Christian unity. The worship of the Church is also highly adaptable, not only to the conditions within given territories, but also to human temperaments every- 1 In Celtic Christianity during early ages the rule of Abbots largely displaced episcopal government. See Chas. Gore, Church and Ministry, pp. 149-150 (note). The modern demand that the episcopate be constit utionalized — to protect the liberties of the faith ful — can be responded to without change in the sacramental status of the episcopal order. It is constitutionahzed to a degree in the American Episcopal Church. 204 CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICITY where. The central function of the Eucharist has indeed to be maintained in a hturgical form that shaU duly conserve the sacramental and sacrificial mystery enacted therein. And unless the hturgy everywhere is conformed in fundamental outline to a type susceptible of recognition by all Christians, the unity of the Church cannot be visibly mani fested. But the hturgy is essentiaUy an action, and one which every human being can sufficiently under stand and devoutly participate in, unless hindered by misconceptions and prejudices which are to be removed rather than to be cherished. The Eu charist being thus safeguarded, the other forms of prayer and praise, by which Christians express and quicken in social and public ways their devotional hfe, can be made as various as any human condi tions may demand or suggest. The Breviary Offices, Morning and Evening Prayer, Extem porary forms, Experience Meetings, and other devotional exercises, all come within the hmits of adaptation which the Church can practise with out being untrue to itself. (b) Closely related to adaptability is the char acteristic temper of the Cathohc Church. Its cathohcity is exhibited in a combination of cos mopohtan outlook and ecumenical faithfulness to the mysteries of truth and grace with patient toler ance towards racial, provincial and temperamental limitations, prejudices and shortcomings. An im patient and martinet discipline is not properly char- CATHOLICITY 205 acteristic of cathohcity, but tends to obscure this note whenever human abuse causes it to appear in the Church. Only by overlooking much, and by depending confidently upon the leavening, power of its supernatural working system and upon the persistent operation of the Holy Spirit, does the Church exhibit itself as a truly cathohc mother of souls. The dividing line between this element of cathohcity and laxity of discipline is, of course, easUy passed; and when it is passed much evil foUows. But the risk has to be run, and the chronic power of recovery with which the Church is en dowed limits the evils that may ensue, and guaran tees a reformation in due season. (c) The cathohcity of a particular Churcji is reflected in its orthodoxy, or its retention and maintenance of the entire faith and order of the universal Church of which it is a part. Wherever such orthodoxy is obscured cathohcity also is ob scured, and this explains a common use of the term cathohc as equivalent to orthodox. In this sense it is apphed not only to Churches, but also to doc trines and practices, which are called catholic in so far as they are in harmony with the ecumenical teaching and discipline of the Cathohc Church throughout the world. § 3. A term obtains its meaning or meanings from the actual use which men make of it, and new uses and meanings inevitably develop when the term in question is widely employed and has rich asso- 206 CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICITY ciations. The fact that it has been technicalized does not prevent this development; and no word that has once gained currency can be copyrighted in such wise as to limit its use wholly by authori tative conditions. The word catholic has been particularly liable to variation in meaning. Its precious associations have made it a favorite watch word, and its etymology facilitates a large variety of applications. The uses which have been thus far examined have this in common, however, that they reflect in several ways the implications of its creedal meaning as a distinctive "note" of the true Church of Christ. We now come to a series of uses which may be called false in this respect, that they em body untrue or misleading conceptions of the tech nical use with which we have been concerned. Their falseness lies in the incidental errors which are sheltered under them; and the undoubted right of men to apply current terms in new ways does not at all remove this falseness of implication. (a) Modern ' ' liberal ' ' theologians employ ' ' catho lic" to describe their own readiness to find a le gitimate place in the Church for free exploiting of personal opinions and practices, regardless of their agreement or disagreement with authoritative stand ards and requirements. Elasticity of interpreta tion of ecclesiastical language is enlisted for the protection of this "catholic-mindedness," the catho licity of which is made to mean sympathetic readi ness to ascribe legitimacy within the Church to CATHOLICITY 207 every phase of religious conviction and development that is professedly Christian.1 The implication is that there is no determinate propaganda which the Church is appointed of God to maintain and pro tect from perversion, and no definitions of its truths which have permanent and ascertainable meaning and are regulative of teaching allowable in the Church. This imphcation is inconsistent with the existence of what has always been meant by the cathohc faith — a faith comprehending all that the Church has received as necessary to be accepted for guidance in the way of eternal hfe, and therefore excluding from ecclesiastical con nivance every position and practice inconsistent therewith. If the Cathohc Church is tolerant in the sense of patient towards personal limitations and vagaries, this does not mean that it can show cathohcity in the historic sense by treating such vagaries as legitimate for its members and teachers. Orthodoxy is an essential element in the Church's note of catholicity, and laxity or indeterminateness of teaching is foreign thereto. (b) A second pseudo use of the term catholic applies it to describe the coUective totaUty of Chris tian denominations throughout the world — that is, the entire body of professing Christians who affiliate with any organized body calling itself a Christian Church. The imphcation is that there is no definite organism with wliich the Cathohc 1 Cf. Introduction, etc., pp. 150-17°; on liberalism. 208 CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICITY Church is to be identified, but that the name stands for an adding up of a congeries of diverse societies. The Cathohc Church, in the historical use of that title, signifies "the great society which embraces all the baptized" in its individual membership, and "exists through all the ages of the world," but "maintains the whole sum of revealed truth and inherited order. Churches are catholic which ad here to the doctrine and discipline of Catholic Christianity." x And this Christianity is identified by its "inherited order" as well as by its faith. The pseudo quahty which belongs to the use we are criticising belongs even more patently to its appli cation to the totality of all professing Christians, whether affiliated with any organized body of be lievers or not, and whether baptized or not. (c) A third pseudo use identifies the Cathohc Church with the papal obedience. This use is obvi ously misleading, for the Catholic Church has his- toricaUy denoted an institution which ante-dates the papal obedience, and which has never acquiesced, except in certain of its provincial jurisdictions, in the claims of the Papal See. That See, its own lan guage concerning itself being witness, is extraneous to the sacramental orders of the Church's sacred ministry; and this ministry is the structural aspect of the Cathohc Church by which it is most obviously to be identified. The Roman Church is only a provincial part of the Catholic Church, and the 1 H. B. Swete, p. 40. CATHOLICITY 209 large number of its individual adherents does not justify a more comprehensive claim.1 (d) FinaUy, it is a pseudo use of the term catholic to denote by it a particular party or school of Church men in the Anglican Communion. This use arose very naturally from the fact that the party in ques tion has made for its aim a revival of loyalty to the whole cathoUc system. The aim is admirable, and the revival in question has constituted a great and fruitful reformation, fundamentally in harmony with, and a legitimate sequel of, the Anglican reformation of the sixteenth century. Certain in dividualistic vagaries have been exploited by mem bers of this party. But this does not nullify the value of the so-called cathoUc movement. The pseudo quahty of the phrase "cathohc party" hes in its false imphcation that Churchmen who are not in sympathy with this party are not "Catho lics." A Cathohc, in the traditional use of that name, means a member of the Catholic Church, just as a Christian means one who has been bap tized into Christ. The two terms apply to the 1 On papal claims, see Authority, etc., pp. 150-171. It is natural for continental Protestants to use the phrase "CathoUc Church" as denoting the Roman Church, for they come in direct contact with no other representative of the Catholic Church, and the Eastern Churches are known more frequently to call themselves "Orthodox" Churches, although daiming to be catholic. Of the Anglican Churches and their catholic claim the continentals as a rule have no knowledge. The official description of the Roman Church in the Creed of Pius IV is "Sanctam catholicam et apostolicam Romanam ecclesiam." 210 CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICITY same vast assembly of men. A Christian is a Catholic, and vice versa. There may be defective Christians and defective Catholics, but to call them non-Christians and non-Cathohcs is not only to give partisan hmitation to terms of a universal application, but is to nullify a powerful motive of reformation — the realization that loyalty to catho lic principles is the proper ideal of all Christians, of all Churchmen, as such. We cannot afford to lose the power of the appeal to members of the Catholic Church to be true to their proper name, Catholic. Nor is it safe even seemingly to limit the application of the phrase "cathoUc principles" to those principles which are artificially distinctive of a party in the Church.1 § 4. The term catholic has a largeness of applica tion which is very attractive and inspiring, but this largeness does not imply vagueness. The catholicity of the Church is a determinate and therefore a dehmiting note, having exclusive aspects. (a) It excludes from being catholic every rival Church or denomination, for catholicity implies universal mission and spiritual jurisdiction over aU 1 Even partisan usages of language gain a prevalence which de termines the phraseology of those who are not partisans in the evil sense of that term. So we find large and royal hearted Church men speaking of "the catholic party," and of particular principles as constituting " the catholic position," simply because they cannot wholly avoid common parlance. But this does not make such usage unobjectionable. CATHOLICITY 211 who accept the Gospel and are baptized into Christ. Provincial parts of this Church, indeed, have their "actual" jurisdiction limited to provincial spheres, but this is a necessary element in the orderly ful filment of the Church's mission — not a restric tion of, or substitute for, it. The Church cannot be catholic without claiming the whole field. It may and ought to be very cautious about condemn ing and discouragmg the earnest work of Christians and Churches that have no part in its appointed ministry; for those who seek to serve Christ are not against Him.1 But it cannot consistently divide territories with other forces, or accept other ministrations as doing permanent duty for its own God-given mission to all the world. No doubt this universal claim causes offence, but so did the primi tive claim of Christianity to be the only true rehgion; and the duty of fulfilling a truly cathohc mission can no more rightly be waived than that of assert ing the exclusive claim of Christianity to divine authority. The problem of Christian unity is con cerned with the unification of all Christian propa gandas in the one Catholic Church. (b) Again, catholicity carries with it a loyal main tenance of the entire range of doctrines, principles and institutions which the Church has received from its Head, and has been guided to articulate and define by the Holy Spirit. Therefore catholicity excludes from approval every phase of partisan 1 St. Mark ix. 38-40 is relevant. 212 CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICITY onesidedness, consequent heresy and disloyalty to its teachings, prescriptions and ministrations. The Church is tolerant in the sense of being patient and gentle in discipline, because it is catholic; but this same catholicity makes it intolerant whenever toler ance reaches the point of accepting the legitimacy of defective loyalty to, or repudiation of, any part of its sacred deposit. Its tolerance and intolerance are alike determined in reference by the divinely imposed mission of successfully propagating the truths and principles committed to it. This mis sion is necessarily regarded as paramount because of its accredited source. (c) If this mission is cathohc in having all the world within its scope, it explains the awful nature of the charge, "What things soever ye shaU bind on earth shaU be bound in Heaven." x The dis cipline of the CathoUc Church applies to aU Christians; and since it proceeds from the last ec clesiastical court of resort, it admits of no ecclesi astical appeal. It represents the judgment of the whole of that Church to which Christ gave the power of binding and loosing. Therefore catholic discipline constitutes a binding which no earthly authority can overrule, and which is ratified in Heaven as well. It is true that the scope of this binding is limited, and in no wise determines the future judg ment of souls. It has to do with spiritual privfleges in this life. But the authority to deprive the sub- 1 St. Matt, xviii. 18 APOSTOLICITY 213 jects of salvation whUe in this world of appointed means of saving and sanctifying grace, and that with heavenly ratification, is of tremendous import. It means that an individual's earthly enjoyment of the fuU benefits of the Christian covenant is de pendent upon his being at peace with the Catholic Church. Human frailties in the Church may cause its discipline to work injustice, and the reformation of ecclesiastical discipline is often imperatively needed. But while the Judge of all the earth will do justice to aU souls in the last day, the finality of catholic discipline, qua disciphne, is part of God's method of ruling His Kingdom on earth. No method could be devised that would be exempt from liability to abuse and its consequent evils; but an overruling Spirit prevents these evUs from defeating the divine purpose, and no one can be finaUy lost except through personal obstinacy in susceptible of cure. II. Apostolicity § 5. The apostohcity of the Church means its continued retention of apostleship or mission from God.1 The word is derived from the verb airoariWoi, to send. In the sending referred to there are three 1 On the note of apostohcity, see Darwell Stone, pp. 93-94 (N. Test.), 139-144 (patristic); H. B. Swete, pp. 41-50; E. T. Green, ch. vii; Wm. Palmer, Pt. I. ch. viii; A. W. Haddan, Apost. Succes sion in the Church of England, ch. iii; Chas. Gore, op. cit., ch. ii. Cf. ch. iv., above, passim. 214 CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICITY stages. In the first place, Christ was sent. "God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, that He might redeem them which were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons." Accordingly Christ is called "the Apostle ... of our confession." His sending carried with it His being given "ah authority ... in heaven and on earth." 1 The second stage was Christ's devolution of His mission on the apostolic Church. "As My Father hath sent Me, even so send I you." That this mission was to be a permanent one, continuing after the earthly life-time of its original personal recipi ents, appears in His promise to be with their apos tolate "always, even until the end of the world," and in His symbolic declaration, "Ye shaU not have gone through the cities of Israel, till the Son of Man be come." 2 For the protection of their mission from the consequences of human falli bility and frailty, Christ promised to them the Holy Spirit, by whom they should be guided into aU the truth, and should receive power.3 The third stage, set forth in its formal aspect in the doctrine of apostolic succession and stiU in effect, is the continued devolution of the apostolic ministry on men of each succeeding generation in perpetuity and without break. The necessity of 1 Gal. iv. 4-5; Heb. iii. 1; St. Matt, xxviii. 18. 2 St. John xx. 21; St. Matt, xxviii. 20; x. 23. ' St. John xvi. 13, etc.; St. Luke xxiv. 49; Acts i. 8. APOSTOLICITY 215 this devolution grows out of the permanent nature of the apostohc mission and the shortness of human fives in this world; and unbroken continuity of transmission is mvolved in due authentication of the claim of men in later generations to have re ceived from Christ the authority and powers of this mission. "No man taketh the honour unto himself, but when he is caUed of God as was Aaron"; x and such caU cannot be authenticated in the Church except in one of two ways — by miraculous inter position from above, confined to the creative stages of God's covenants; and by appointed methods of transmission accepted by the Church as of divine sanction. The apostolicity of the Church, then, is its pos session of the mission, authority and power con ferred by Christ whUe He was on earth, by virtue of the historical identity and unbroken continuity of its existing ministry with that then appointed by Him. A particular Church shares in this note under the same condition of retaining the original apostohc ministry. The formal method of this retention is described as apostohc succession, the channel of which is the historic episcopate. But what has been disparagingly called "tactual" suc cession, formally vital as it is, does not avaU for apostoUcity, unless the ministry thus transmitted preserves materially the original nature and func tions with which it was constituted in the beginning. 1 Heb. v. 4. 216 CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICITY There must be not only an authentic formal trans mission, but what is transmitted must remain materially the same. And since the material same ness of a ministry is an unsubverted continuance of its appointed functions, apostohcity includes such continuance. An ambassador who revolutionizes the appointed functions of his office cannot justly claim official authority for the novel procedures which he substitutes. § 6. The formal aspect of apostohcity has been sufficiently dealt with in the fourth chapter; but. certain matters connected therewith demand at tention at this point. In the first place the organic nature of the Church forbids any externalizing con ception of apostohc succession. The episcopate, through which this succession is formaUy main tained, is an organ of the Body; and its functioning pertains to the Body in an internal relationship which, because it is organic, can be neither altered nor disregarded. It is the Church at large that functions through the episcopate; and if organic necessity lies behind this method of functioning, the episcopate is . not a self-sufficient machinery external to the faithful. To put this in another way, the episcopate does not impose its ministry and the laws of its continuance upon the Body; but the nature of the Body determines the epis copal office and imposes upon it the conditions of its perpetuity. We do not mean that the Church can change the episcopal office. It is the nature of APOSTOLICITY 217 the organism, of which the apostoUc ministry is a structural element, that is determinative; and this organism was not created by the Church but by Christ and His Holy Spirit.1 The recognized method of devolution is that of episcopal laying on of hands2 with prayer. The laying on of hands is an external act, the claimed effect of which in this case is disproportionate to its nature. Upon this disproportion, and upon the mechanical nature of the act, is based much modern incredulity as to its effect. This is merely a branch of the objection against the sacramental system in general. At least no one who believes that a sacra mental action of any kind is instrumental in con veying divine grace can consistently deny the possibihty of the conveyance of the grace of Holy Order by the laying on of hands, if this method of ordination has the sanction claimed for it. The effect of sacramental actions does not Ue in their natural potency externaUy considered, but in the will of the Holy Spirit to condition certain of His operations by their appointed ministerial perform ance. Much has been made by some writers of the aUeged possibility that the conditions of valid con secration to the episcopal order have faUen short of fulfilment in individual cases, with consequent ir reparable interruptions of apostohc succession. To 1 Cf. ch. iii. § 7, above. 2 See Chas. Gore, op. cit., pp. 168-170, 340-349. 218 CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICITY demonstrate the absence of such interruptions is said to be a hopeless undertaking. No doubt it is, but it also is an unnecessary one. We know that from the earliest days great care has been exercised in this matter in all parts of the Catholic Church. If defective ordinations have occurred, they have obviously been very rare, and their results have necessarily been limited in range and duration. The reason is that, because of the ancient custom of several bishops uniting in the consecration of new bishops, the lines of succession interlace in complex and reenforcing ramifications. An indi vidual case of invalid consecration can have no lasting significance. An altogether incredible num ber of such accidents would have to be found to throw doubt on the continuity of the general stream of succession, for the constant intermingling of different lines of succession soon repairs any indi vidual break that may occur.1 § 7. Legitimate birth, although securing the rights of legal inheritance, can avafi little if the chUd is irrational and does not function humanly, for its lack of reason invalidates its status and abihty to transact its affairs lawfuUy. Somewhat analogously a ministry that is perfectly valid so far as formal succession is concerned may 'cease to be possessed of validity if it becomes degenerate in the material aspects which identify the apostohc ministry in its functional nature. In brief, if it 1 Idem, pp. 93-94. APOSTOLICITY 219 becomes another kind of ministry than that from which its descent is traced, its apostohcity dis appears. So it is that the Church's apostohcity requires a functional as well as a tactual continuity in its ministry; and this can be illustrated by three principal particulars: the apostolic propaganda of the faith, sacramental functions and Eucharistic worship. (a) The ministry was commissioned first of all to teach the doctrines of hfe committed to it by the Lord and more fully imparted by the Holy Spirit. The Church's faith, thus received, constitutes a sacred deposit, which is to be handed on in a con servative tradition and is to be proclaimed for the guidance of hfe to every succeeding generation. Inasmuch as the Christian way of hfe is determined in vital ways by the apostohc faith, this tradition of apostohc doctrine is an essential element in the continued maintenance of the Church's apostohc ity. A clear consciousness of this fact is observable in the ancient Church; and the task of guarding the apostolic tradition was recognized to pertain es- peciaUy to the bishops. When CouncUs began to be summoned to deal with heretical perversions of doctrine, the method of determination was osten sibly a comparison, synthesis and definition of the consensus of apostolic traditions in various por tions of the Church.1 In all this we find evidence that the Church's apostohcity depends upon its 1 Cf. Authority, etc., ch. iv. § 5. 220 CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICITY retaining and teaching the apostolic faith without change or reduction of its substantial content. (b) The Church is commissioned to dispense grace as well as truth; and its sacraments were divinely instituted in apostolic days to be the instruments of this part of its ministration. Unless the Church continues duly to administer them in unmutilated forms, it is not justified in claiming that it dispenses the grace which it was commissioned to dispense by their means. To the degree that in any particular Church the sacramental system suffers neglect or disparagement as a whole or in particular parts, to this degree the apostohcity of that Church is ob scured. And a repudiation of the sacramental in heritance would be fatal to apostohcity. (c) Finally, the function of Eucharistic worship is a vital element in apostohcity, because it was vital to the Church in its apostolic beginning. For this reason the Church has always guarded this function with peculiar care; and has demonstrated its success in preserving Eucharistic worship from subversive change by continuing to employ litur gies everywhere which in their fundamental out lines are essentially alike.1 Many variations of incidental ceremonial and verbiage have developed; and this fact accentuates the significance of the common elements in the Eucharistic worship of all parts of the Catholic Church, retained under con- 1 Shown by Archd. Wilberforce, in Doctrine of the Holy Euch., pp. 32-41. APOSTOLICITY 221 ditions that might be expected to produce radical divergence. Apostohcity and antiquity are for the Church closely related terms. The appeal to antiquity or primitiveness, so frequently resorted to by catholic writers, is in effect an appeal to apostohcity; and upon success in vindicating the antiquity of what a Church of today is in ministry and functioning depends success in proving its apostohcity. Simi larly, to confirm cathohc doctrines and institutions by Scripture is in final analysis to vindicate them by showing their apostohcity.1 § 8. The limitations of post-apostolic develop ment in the Church should be considered. What forms and degrees of such development are con sistent with the preservation of apostohcity? The Church is cathohc as weU as apostolic, and its cathohcity, as we have seen, includes adaptability to the conditions of many lands and of every suc ceeding age. And the Church is not a mechanical thing, insusceptible of change. It is a living organ ism, which must correspond with its- environment in order to Uve and fulfil its proper functions; and its en vironment is a continually changing human society. The static elements in the Church are those which constitute it to be what it is among organic 1 Scripture is not rightly put in antithesis to tradition, since it is one of the vehicles of tradition — registering what the Church was teaching in apostolic days, and thus serving to test the har mony of modern ecclesiastical teaching therewith. See Authority etc., pp. 119-121, esp. note 1, pp. 120-121. 222 CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICITY things, and the functions, genetically regarded, which account for its creation and. for its perma nent place in the world. In the retention of these lies the Church's apostohcity, and any adjustments and developments that are consistent with retain ing them are consistent with the Church's apos tohcity. (a) As has been seen, the Church's ministry is determined in fundamental form and functions by the nature of the Body of Christ, and this cannot be changed except by its Creator. It wfil not be changed as long as the world lasts. But it has also been shown that, in accidents of polity pertaining to effective fulfilment of the Church's mission, many developments have occurred and wiU con tinue to arise, as part of the law that an organism must adjust its activity to changing conditions, if it is to work successfully and even to survive. We need not recapitulate these adjustments.1 (b) The same necessity of development pertains to the Church's doctrine.2 Its faith is, indeed, "once for all delivered," and must be handed down without substantial change, if the propaganda wliich God has commissioned it to fulfil to the end of the world is not to be abandoned. But the faith is subject to an ever deepening analysis, by which things new as well as old are articulated for edifica tion. Changes in forms of intelligence and language 1 Cf. pp. 202-204, above. 2 On which, see Authority etc., ch. ix. APOSTOLICITY 223 necessitate developments of terminology and the utihzation of new thought in its definition and exposition. New conditions and circumstances caU for new interpretations — new, not in the sense of substantial change in the content of doctrine, but, in bringing out the bearing of the old faith on new conditions and problems. This line of development is especially pronounced in apologetical theology, which is effective in proportion to its adjustment of exposition to the successive phases of unbehef. So it is that even Dogmatic Theology cannot continue in one stay, for the related human knowledge with which this science has to coordinate revealed truth is constantly developing and widening. But as long as the apostohc doctrine continues to be sub- stantiaUy conserved, none of these developments are prejudicial to apostohcity. (c) The sacramental institutions of the Church necessarUy undergo many changes in the accidents of their ministration; and the same is true of Eucharistic worship.1 As having divine institu tion and determined in vahdity by fundamental requirements, these things must always be kept true to their several types and purposes. But the ceremonial usages and accompanying prayers per taining to them do, and must, undergo adapta tion to times and conditions. 1 Developments of the Ordinal also afford a conspicuous example, one that came sharply to notice in the discussions of the Bull on Anglican Orders of Leo XIII. 224 CATHOLICITY AND APOSTOLICITY Speaking in general, the preservation of apos tohcity requires two things; that whatever was essential to the integrity of the Church's system according to apostolic teaching shall be retained and safeguarded; and that no developments shall have the practical effect of either enlarging neces sary doctrines and practices or of subverting their apostohc meaning and purpose. CHAPTER VII THE ANGLICAN CHURCHES I. Constructive Factors § i. By the Anglican Churches we mean those Churches which are in communion with the See of Canterbury, the primatial See of the Church of England. They include the Church of England; the Episcopal Church of Scotland; the Church of Ireland; the American Episcopal Church; colonial Churches in the British Empire; Churches recently organized in Japan and China; and various mis sionary establishments and chaplaincies in foreign lands which have no autonomous ecclesiastical gov ernment, but are under the oversight of one of the above mentioned Churches. The question arises, Have these Churches re tained the notes of the historic Church of Christ? In view of the constructive purpose of these volumes, we shaU deal with this question historically and positively rather than controversially. First of aU we have to indicate briefly the his toric factors which through thirteen centuries have operated constructively to make Anglicanism, as it 226 THE ANGLICAN CHURCHES is called, what it is today.1 Some knowledge of these factors, and of their several parts in the de velopment of the Anglican position, is required in order to do justice -to its positive elements and to avoid mistaken inferences from its limitations. The Church of England, Ecclesia Anglicana, of wliich the other Anghcan Churches are extensions, began its properly organized existence in the seventh century, under Archbishop Theodore; and three leading factors controlled its mediaeval develop ment. (a) The first of these was the catholic factor. The English Church was founded as an extension of the Catholic Church, in communion with the ancient portions of that Church, both East and West, accepting the catholic hierarchy, sacramental regi men, creeds and ecumenical councUs, and regard ing itself as under obligation so to do. Through all subsequent developments, and in spite of the schisms that have occurred, the Anglican Com munion has continued to accept these things theo- reticaUy at least, whatever doubts may be felt by others as to its practical success in maintaining their observance. (b) The papal factor was also working from the start, although its fuU power and effects were not felt for several centuries. Previous to the reforma tion, in common with the rest of Western Christen- 1 Cf. the writer's art., "The Anglican Position Constructively Stated," in Constructive Qly., Sept., 1913; and Introduction, ch. vii. CONSTRUCTIVE FACTORS 227 dom, the Enghsh took for granted the supremacy of the Petrine See. But the nature and practical imphcations of this supremacy were not denned in their minds; and they felt no sense of wrong-doing in disregarding or resisting papal requirements when these seemed unjust and inconsistent with national liberties. (c) The third factor was that of the English Crown, or the national factor. The fortunes and pohcy of the Enghsh Church have always been closely connected with, and affected by, the Eng hsh State,1 the more so on account of the geographi cal isolation of England. At the outset it was a united Enghsh Church that brought about the union of the Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms in one English nation. Its prelates were the most intelhgent and capable men of their age, and by natural force of circumstances became influential statesmen. An indeterminate alliance between Church and State resulted, which in the natural course of events gave to the State an undefined but real coercive juris diction over ecclesiastical affairs. The distinction between temporal and spiritual jurisdiction was indeed apprehended, and the Crown was never acknowledged to have spiritual jurisdiction. But in that simple age this distinction was not accu- 1 On the relations of Church and State in England, cf. ch. iii. §§ 11-12 and refs. on p. 108, n. 2, above; to which add an important note in H. O. Wakeman, Introd. h the Hist, of the Church of England, PP- 315-324. 228 THE ANGLICAN CHURCHES rately defined and applied. The King was viewed as the eldest son of the Church, whose proper func tion it was to guard ecclesiastical interests while at the same time protecting the realm from damage. It is to be remembered that Nonconformity did not then exist, and it could be assumed that all the King's subjects were also members of the national Church. The King could be thought to represent the laity and to be the legitimate protector of lay interests in the Church. This nationalism profoundly modified the working of papal supremacy in the English Church, and revealed itself in the resistance frequently shown to papal demands when they were prejudicial to Eng lish welfare. The mutual relations between the English Church, the Enghsh Crown and the Papal See never reached exact adjustment during the mid dle ages, and the success of each in maintaining effective power varied according to circumstances. The Ecclesia Anglicana asserted itself against both Pope and Crown in Magna Carta; and the State did so against papal encroachments in the Con stitutions of Clarendon and in certain statutes of the fourteenth century. But the policy of the Papal See was the most self-coherent and persist ent, and gained the advantage in the fifteenth cen tury. When Henry VIII came to the throne in 1509, the Anglican position was that of the medi aeval Catholic Church in the West, modified to an undefined extent by a nationahsm which was then CONSTRUCTIVE FACTORS 229 somewhat reduced in effectiveness. Much of the Roman canon law prevailed, and continued in force even after Henry's break with the Papal See, except so far as modified by later English canons and statutes. § 2. That the English Church would ultimately have thrown off the papal supremacy seems clear to historical students. But it was Henry's private quarrel and despotic methods that precipitated the breach and, somewhat in advance of popular senti ment, forced Convocation to face the question of papal claims as it had not previously been faced in England. But that body's declaration in 1534, that "the bishop of Rome hath not by Scripture any greater authority in England than any other foreign bishop," rapidly came to represent a convic tion wliich has permanently controlled the Anghcan mind. This breach with Rome and the changes of the reformation period, extending in England from 1530 to 1662, modified without eradicating the pre-reformation factors above described.1 (a) The Church of England continued to main tain its cathohc status. It retained the catholic hierarchy and the requirement of episcopal ordina tion for its ministers, reaffirmed the catholic faith and the authority of catholic creeds and councUs, and preserved in simplified forms the sacramental 1 The nature and Jesuits of the Anglican reformation are well presented in R. W. Dixon, Hist, of the Church of Eng.; A. Moore, Hist, of the Reformation; J. H. Blunt, Reformation of the Church of Eng.; M. MacColl, Reformation Settlement. 230 THE ANGLICAN CHURCHES ministrations which it had cherished in mediaeval days. The fact is that the Anghcan reformation was conspicuously conservative; and the Articles of Religion — constituting a political eirenicon, de signed to secure religious peace for the realm — carefully limited their repudiations of mediaeval doctrines and practices to things demonstrably unsupported by ancient catholic teaching and pre scription. In brief, there was considerable purging of mediaeval accretions, and the process tended to drive some elements of catholicity into the back ground. But the appeal to cathoUc antiquity be came the determinative formal principle of the Anglican reformation, and prevented the distinc tively Lutheran and Calvinistic views of certain Eng lish leaders from obtaining the definite confessional status wliich these leaders wished them to receive.1 (b) The papal factor has continued to operate both positively and negatively. Positively, the Roman canon law, so far as it had effect in medi aeval England, retains its force in the Church of England to the present day, except where it has been modified by later English canons and stat utes.2 Negatively, the breach with Rome, and the subsequent policy of the Papal See towards the English Church, have created an undiscriminating 1 See §§ 6-8, below. 2 It had no effect as a whole, but in many particulars was recog nized along with provincial enactments. Whatever of Canon Law had force in England when the reformation came remained and remains in force "so far as it did not contravene the laws of the land CONSTRUCTIVE FACTORS 231 anti-papal attitude on the part of the many Angli cans; and this has incidentaUy produced some undesirable results. Thus the fear of being con taminated with Romish doctrines and practices has engendered prejudices on the part of many against important cathohc principles, and has accentuated the provincial insularity of the Anghcan Churches. This insularity is being slowly outgrown. (c) The national factor was now more fully con stitutionahzed and fortified. And this has operated to obscure in practice the vital distinction between temporal or coercive and spiritual jurisdiction. The principle of conformity to the Church's external ritual and working system, of wliich something will be said in the next section, became odious because of its attempted enforcement on the whole realm by coercive methods; and the Church of England, identified in popular feehng with a hated dynasty, was driven into temporary exUe. The Church came back, but its continued alliance with the State has to a degree hampered its spiritual liberties, and has prevented many from rightly understanding and estimating its claim to the spiritual aUegiance of English Christians. This last result has per sisted even in other lands, and has hampered those Anghcan Churches which are free from the tram mels of the establishment. The traditional prej- or the King's prerogative." See Eccles. Courts Commission Report of 1883, vol. I. pp. xxxvi, 45; A. Moore, Hist, of the Reformation, pp. 103-106, 189-190, 257-262. 232 THE ANGLICAN CHURCHES udices against the established Church do not at once die out among those who leave their mother country, but come to be directed against the Churches in communion with the Church of England. § 3. The reformation period gave birth to, or brought clearly to the surface, certain ecclesiastical factors which have not yet been discussed. (a) The first may be called conservative oppor tunism, a characteristic trait of the English people in every age, but one that especially obtruded itself in ecclesiastical affairs during the reformation. The English people are capable of perceiving the logic of their convictions, but they are apt to go slow in pressing that logic when it points to revolution; and when revolutions do occur in England, a deeply ingrained conservative instinct puts a limit to the changes that result. The history of English developments describes a long series of half-way measures or opportunist adjustments, rather than of thoroughgoing reconstructions. The continuity of things is rarely broken, and then only in partial measure. It was this conservative opportunism, humanly speaking, that prevented the Anglican reformation from following the revolutionary hnes of continental movements, and from destroying the continuity of the reformed Church of England with the ancient Catholic Church of that country.1 The 1 On the preservation of this continuity, see A. Moore, op. cit., note on pp. 24-25; A. J. Mason, Church of Eng. and Episcopacy, ch. i; A. P. Forbes, Thirty-Nine Arts., pp. xxxiv-xxxix. CONSTRUCTIVE FACTORS 233 same factor has continued to operate as a steady ing influence through aU subsequent vicissitudes; and the dominance at given moments of onesided movements has not in any instance upset the deli cately adjusted combination of principles which the Anghcan position represents. The Anghcan Churches pass through many crises, but the logic of onesided tendencies invariably fails to be actualized, and the Anghcan position remains es- sentiaUy unchanged through all opportunist ad justments. (b) The significance of this is seen when we con sider the factor of ecclesiastical parties. The tem peramental tendencies which gain expression in what are caUed the "high," "low" and "broad" Church parties have always existed in Christendom, but nowhere have they issued in such abidingly distinctive and coherent types of churchmanship as they have done in the Anghcan Communion. Elsewhere such developments are either kept down by ecclesiastical discipline or result in schism. The Anghcan Churches alone appear to have been able to hold together aU these types of Church men in visible unity without resort to severely re pressive measures, and this unity has served in the long run to moderate and ultimately to ter minate disloyal developments in one or other direction. (c) The principle of conformity to the prescribed ritual and working system of the Book of Common 234 THE ANGLICAN CHURCHES Prayer has had much to do with maintaining the unifying power of the Anglican Churches — the power, that is, of retaining in visible communion the several types of behevers caUed "high," "low" and "broad," without undue restriction of intefiec- tual liberty. It is true that at first the principle of conformity did not work with the success expected of it; but two special causes explain this. In the first place, the impulses which lay behind the Eng lish nonconformist movement had gained great power before the English Church had finally crys tallized its working system. Apparently no suc cessful method could then have been devised for reconciling the more radical reformers to the limita tions of the Anglican reformation as embodied in the so-called EUzabethan settlement. In the second place, the political and coercive aspects of con formity as then enforced were very offensive indeed to those who were contending against the Crown for civil hberty. But the principle of conformity can be separated from political associations and from the state methods of enforcement. It has been separated from them since toleration has gained the day, and is entirely dissociated from them in the disestab lished Anglican Churches. The principle is this, that if moral obedience to the prescribed ritual and working system of the Church is emphasized as a primary test of ecclesiastical loyalty, those theological divergences which do not involve any CONSTRUCTIVE FACTORS 235 formal break with the ancient catholic creeds will in the long run either settle themselves or lose their vitality. No subversion of the Church's official position and sacramental ministrations wUl result. The teaching value and unifying power of the Prayer Book system is confidently depended upon, and this induces an official sense of security that goes far to explain the readiness with which room is found in the Church for Chris tians of very diverse types and theological con ceptions. This pohcy has very real dangers — no pohcy can escape them, — and the elasticity of Anghcan disci pline in certain cases becomes a perUous laxity. Yet the principle of conformity has worked fairly well, both in conserving the fundamentals of the catholic system and in combining the opposite ideals of visi ble unity and hberty. Neither this nor any other principle would have worked well, however, had it not been for the evident presence and operation of the Holy Spirit; and belief in His overruling guidance has never died out in the Anglican Churches. § 4. Cathohcity, anti-papalism, nationalism (with cosmopohtan modifications yet to be indicated), conservative opportunism, party movements and the principle of conformity have all operated since the reformation to make the Anghcan position a complex mystery to those who do not inteUigently reckon with them; and its complexity has not been 236 THE ANGLICAN CHURCHES lessened by certain modern factors now to be considered. (a) There is the unhappy factor of denomination alism, a result of nonconformity and of the organi zation by Englishmen of independent ecclesiastical bodies having non-episcopal ministries.1 Anglicans today realize that the responsibihty for this schis matic development was by no means confined to Nonconformists. But schism is a grave evil, es pecially grave when dividing Christians of the same country. It sets free impulses making for diver gence by destroying the common religious hfe and environment, designed of God to restrain onesided and exaggerated developments. And the narrow ing influence of this rupture has been felt within as weU as without the mother Church and its branches. It has served to impart a certain un sympathetic hardness of temper to "high" Church men, and to weaken the attachment to sacramental principles of "low" Churchmen — confessedly most akin to Nonconformists in their temperament and outlook. Other factors have operated of late, along with the rising demand for reunion, to diminish these evUs to some degree; but protestant denomi- nationahsm at close range has combined with the breach with Rome to impart a pecuhar and con troversial quality to Anghcan theology, which has been conspicuously lacking in positively construc- 1 On denominationalism, see T. A. Lacey, Unity and Schism, Lect. v. CONSTRUCTIVE FACTORS 237 tive and systematic expositions of Christian doc trine and practice.1 (b) Working in an opposite direction the cos mopolitan factor has helped in recent days to deprovincialize the Anghcan outlook. The migra tions of Anglicans into many lands, and the conse quent extensions of the Anglican Communion, have involved contact with new conditions and with many races and types of rehgious development. The excessive nationahsm which characterizes an estabhshed Church is being reduced by the reflex influence of the American and colonial Churches and of missionaries abroad. This cosmopohtan development has, of course, been greatly promoted by the immense increase of international intercourse which modern facilities of travel and commercial developments have brought about. It is increasingly realized that foreigners are not necessarily barbarians and pagans, and rehgious scholarship has also become both cos mopolitan and interdenominational. Many forms of Christian thought have secured serious atten tion from Anghcan scholars and thinkers, with striking results. There is a real difference between a cosmopolitan and an ecumenical mind, but the former certainly affords favorable conditions for the triumph among provincial Churches of the latter. (c) Finally there is the modern mind, a very easily 1 Cf. Introduction, pp. igi-192. 238 THE ANGLICAN CHURCHES recognized factor although not capable of expressing, itself in terms which are either coherent or perma nent. It is the outcome of scientific advances, and of critical and biblical criticism, neither of which have attained their goal.1 It is as changeable in its con clusions as the color of a chamelion, but is char acterized by refusal to be bound by traditional ideas, whether catholic or denominational, and by determination to examine everything afresh. It has no vahd authority, for it is professedly a truth- seeking factor, rather than the propaganda of estab hshed doctrines. It is characteristically "liberal"; and the Catholic Church can never come to terms with genuine liberalism, where saving doctrine is involved. But even in its liberal aims the modern mind is doing a great work for the Church. It can never overthrow the catholic faith and system in its integral elements, but is rapidly discrediting the accretions and provincial limitations which charac terize sectarian Christendom of to-day. It is gradu ally compelling earnest Christians of every name to concentrate upon fundamentals, and to slough off provincial and denominational conceptions. 1 Its genesis is described in A. C. McGiffert's Rise of Modern Re ligious Ideas. Roman Catholic Modernism appears in the works of A. Loisy and the late Fr. Tyrrell. Protestant liberalism is ex pounded by J. RiSville's Liberal Christianity. The issues involved appear in Form and Content in the Christian Tradition by W. Sanday and N. P. Williams. See also E. J. Bicknell. Thirty-Nine Articles, PP- 326-33S- THE ANGLICAN CLAIM AND MISSION 239 Thus it is facilitating the emergence of an ecumeni cal mind — the unifying mind of the great Head of the Church. Anglicans have felt its influence in many ways. Even those who most abhor liberalism have been compelled to distinguish more clearly between the essentials and the accidents of their standpoint; and a process of clarifying and fortifying the fun damentals of the Anghcan Churches is making irresistible advance. Anglicanism of today is pass ing through much that is controversial and momen tarily confusing to a stronger, more adequate and more truly ecumenical conception of the catholic faith and religion, and of its own particular and provincial part in the cathohc propaganda. II. The Anglican Claim and Mission § 5. If the Anghcan position is defensible, this must be primarily because the Anghcan Churches are true although provincial extensions of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, with the consideration of which this volume is mainly con cerned. In other words, these Churches depend for justification of their existence and jurisdiction upon their possessing the ecclesiastical notes of unity, holiness, catholicity and apostohcity. We shall not deal with this subject controver- siaUy, but shall confine ourselves to a positive exhibition of the reasons at large for our confident 240 THE ANGLICAN CHURCHES conviction that the Anghcan Churches are true and vahd extensions of Christ's universal Church, and justly entitled to the aUegiance of the people to whom they minister. We are not maintaining that these Churches are free from objectionable limita tions and blemishes, or that they stand in no need of reformation. An ideal Church militant has never existed, and never will exist so long as the militant stage continues — that is, until the Church's work on earth and among sinful men is completed. No invidious comparisons are needed; for the duty of personal allegiance to a particular Church is not determined by its superiority to other particular Churches, but by its being the legitimate repre sentative of the Catholic Church to the persons concerned. It is neither necessary nor practicable in our limited space to prove that each of the four eccles iastical notes, severally considered, is possessed by the Anglican Churches. If these Churches have preserved the catholic ministry and sacramental ministrations, and the doctrines wliich constitute the cathohc faith, the presumption that they have retained these notes is overwhelming. We shall content ourselves, therefore, with showing how they have preserved them, and in forms essentially valid and orthodox.1 1 For vindicative descriptions of the Anglican position see Intro duction, ch. vii; Authority, Eccles. and Biblical, ch. v. §§ 7-11. Also Chas. Gore, Roman Catholic Claims; Darwell Stone, Christ. Church, THE ANGLICAN CLAIM AND MISSION 241 § 6. The external working system of the Anglican Churches, conformity to which is of canonical obli gation, is set forth in the Book of Common Prayer. The Ordinal is mcluded in this Book, and its Preface defines officially the Anghcan intention to continue and reverently to use and esteem the Orders of bishops, priests and deacons, which are there de clared to have existed in the Church "from the Apostles' time." That this intention may be ful- fiUed, every AngUcan minister is required to have "episcopal consecration or ordination." Before the Enghsh civil war there appear to have been a few cases — they can be counted on one's fingers — in which men without episcopal ordina tion were permitted to hold English benefices.1 But these were exceptional and passing, irregulari ties, recognized as such, and do not affect the gen eral and settled practice of requiring episcopal ordination of non-episcopal ministers before their admission to the Anghcan ministry. On the other hand, applicants who can show that they have re ceived genuine episcopal ordination in some other part of the Cathohc Church are not reordained. In aU this is clearly declared the official intention of perpetuating without alteration or neglect the ch. ix; Geo. S. Holden, The Special Bases of the Anglican Claim; F. W. Puller, Continuity of the English Church; Our Place in Chris tendom (Pref. by Bishop of London); the writer's Historical Position of the Episcopal Church. 1 Carefully examined by A. J. Mason in The Church of England and Episcopacy, App. A. 242 THE ANGLICAN CHURCHES threefold catholic hierarchy of ancient days. AU attempts to prove an interruption of episcopal suc cession in the English Church have broken down; and the form of the Edwardine Ordinal, em ployed for about a century and alleged by Leo XIII to be defective, is as expUcit as that of the Roman Church itself in early centuries.1 § 7. Not one of the sacraments of the ancient and mediaeval Cathohc Church has been repudiated by the Anghcan Churches, which continue to pro vide forms for the administration of all of them except Unction, of the Sick. And this is today gaining in frequency of use, the form being taken from the first Prayer Book of Edward VI. Unless it can be shown, as it cannot, that the forms thus used nullify the cathohc meanmg and effect of these sacraments, their use is conclusive as to the continued loyalty of the Anghcan Communion to the catholic system of grace. No evidence in conflict with this conclusion can be drawn from the Anglican habit, official or other, of confining the formal application of the term sacrament to Baptism and the Lord's Supper, unless this can be shown to signify an official aban- 1 On Anghcan orders, see Edward Denny, Anglican Orders and Jurisdiction; A. W. Haddan, Aposhlical Succession; A. J. Mason, Church of Eng. and Episcopacy; Answer of the Archbishops of England to the Apostolic Letter of Pope Leo XIII on English Ordinations; J. P. Whitney, The Episcopate and the Reformation. For present Roman CathoUc contrary arguments, see Cath. Encyc, s. w. "Angli can Orders" and "Apostolicse Cur*." THE ANGLICAN CLAIM AND MISSION 243 donment of the catholic doctrine that the other commonly caUed sacraments are also divine instru ments of grace. The most that can be shown is that a certain unofficial school of Anghcans rejects such doctrine, and that many who believe the rites in question to be divine instruments of grace prefer to avoid applying the term sacrament to them.1 The fact that the administration of four of them is officiaUy provided for, and the further fact that the prescribed method of such administration con forms in all essential regards to sacramental usage in the Catholic Church at large, determine how we should interpret certain vague official language con cerning sacraments. This apphes, for example, to the ambiguous language of the twenty-fifth Article of Religion. This article declares that "those commonly caUed sacraments, that is to say, Con firmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and Ex treme Unction are not to be counted for sacraments of the Gospel, being such as have grown partly of the corrupt foUowing of the Apostles, partly are states of life aUowed in the Scriptures; but yet have not like nature of sacraments with Baptism, and the Lord's Supper, for that they have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God." It is to be admitted that this language was intended to be as pleasing to Protestants as possible. The Articles had an eirenic aim in that direction. But 1 Cf. ch. ix. §§ 6-8, below. 244 THE ANGLICAN CHURCHES this makes the faUure definitely to repudiate the doctrine that the rites mentioned are means of grace the more significant. AU that is demonstra- tably asserted is that these commonly called sacra ments did not have any visible sign or ceremony instituted by Christ in the Gospel, and that they have suffered in the Church from corrupt following of the Apostles, from whom they have impliedly come.1 The Church Catechism does not, as is sometimes asserted, say without qualification that there are only two sacraments, but that Christ hath ordained in His Church " two only as generally necessary for salvation." And it proceeds to explain its use of the term as confined to "an outward and visible sign . . . ordained by Christ Himself." 2 Such sacra ments are two only. The fact that the other com monly called sacraments continue to be administered in the Anglican Church with the use of prescribed forms plainly designed for the bestowal of grace, reduces the whole matter to a question of terms. The catholic sacramental system is prescribed in fact and effect, and this is determinative. § 8. The Anglican Bishops in their first Lambeth Conference of 1867 represented themselves as com- ' E. B. Pusey, Is Healthful Reunion Impossible? pp. 91-93; M. Dix, Sacramental System, Lee. iii; A. P. Forbes, art. xxv; E. C. S. Gibson, ditto. Cf. pp. 299-301, below; Introduction, pp. 183-189; Authority, pp. 145-148. 2 Note the distinction between His instituting the sacraments in genere (seven) and in specie (two), ch. ix. § 5, below. THE ANGLICAN CLAIM AND MISSION 245 mitted to "maintaining the Faith in its purity and integrity — as taught in the Holy Scriptures, held by the primitive Church, summed up in the Creeds, and affirmed by the undisputed General Councils." 1 That such a position is equivalent to an unquahfied acceptance of the catholic faith of Christ's uni versal Church is too evident to be disputed seriously. And it is warranted by the canonically prescribed formularies of the Anglican Churches. The formal principle, or rule of faith, of these Churches is embodied in the affirmations of the Thirty-Nine Articles: — that "Holy Scripture con- taineth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be beheved as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation"; and that "the Church, hath . . . authority in contro versies of Faith." 2 This has been widely inter preted to mean that the Church teaches and defines what is necessary to be beheved, subject to the proviso that her teaching will be susceptible of confirmation and Ulustration by Holy Scripture. That this agrees with the rule of faith everywhere employed in the Cathohc Church can be shown most conclusively. Even the Roman Church, with its pecuhar stress on the dogmatic authority of the Church, retains in theory and practice the rule of 1 R. T. Davidson (Editor), The Lambeth Conferences, p. 97. 2 Articles vi and xx. 246 THE ANGLICAN CHURCHES proving, or attempting to prove, its teachings by Scripture.1 The material principle, or characteristic doc trinal position of the Anglican Churches, is marked by its comprehensive and impartial quality. These Churches have no favorite or leading doctrme, de terminative of a distinctive system, as is the case with Protestantism. On the contrary they stress acceptance of the faith of the primitive Cathohc Church, relegating special systems of doctrine to the level of unofficial and passing developments in theological science.2 The Anglican Churches have never given sanction to any one of the various dis tinctive positions of parties in their midst, but continue to require a recitation of the ancient cathohc creeds, and the performance of pubhc services and sacramental functions in which every indisputable article of the catholic faith obtains witness. This constitutes their official and "hving voice," always susceptible of identification in sub stantial meaning with the unvarying mind of the ancient Catholic Church. These Churches have carefully avoided the pro vincial presumption of imposing dogmatic defini tions of things not taught by the universal Church as necessary to be beheved for salvation; and even when seeking most earnestly, as in the Thirty-Nine Articles, to win Protestants by eirenic pronounce- 1 Cf. Authority, Eccles. and Biblical, ch. viii, esp. §§ 1-4. 2 Idem, pp. 147-148. THE ANGLICAN CLAIM AND MISSION 247 ments, they have stopped short of accepting or affirming propositions contrary to the cathohc faith. The significance of this the only official position of Anghcan Churches cannot be nulhfied by setting against it the vagaries of individuals and partisans, and the freedom from disciplinary consequences with which they are exploited. These vagaries usuaUy receive patient tolerance from those in authority, but they do not on this account secure legitimate status, as against the official and cathohc doctrine contained in the Prayer Book; and any reaUy subversive revision of this book is not within the range of credible possibilities. The comparative laxity of Anghcan discipline, with aU its occasional evil results, does not in the long run have the conse quences which impatient minds assume that it will have. The Holy Spirit has to be reckoned with; and revivals of loyalty to the Church's working system recur, with the invariable result of fortify ing cathohc doctrine and practice. The conclusion to which aU the facts taken to gether lead us is that the Anglican Churches have retained, and show no signs of ceasing to retain, the catholic ministry, sacraments and faith, and thereby show themselves to be true and valid ex tensions of the One, Holy, Cathohc and Apostohc Church of Jesus Christ. CHAPTER Vin THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE I. Its Place and Bearing § i. We ought not to regard the New Testament data pertaining to the doctrine of grace 1 as confined to those passages in which the word grace, x^P's, is employed. The reason is that the dispensation of which that word is the symbol is revealed as a con crete mystery of quickening and sanctifying life, £"w#, flowing from God, through Christ, by the operation of His Holy Spirit, and by the instrumen tality of His mystical Body, and fructifying in our 1 On the doctrine of grace, see Creation and Man, pp. 339-353; Cath. Encyc and Blunt, Die of Theol., q. w.; A. P. Forbes, Thirty- Nine Art., pp. ' 156-160; St. Thomas, I, II. cix-cxiv; Wilhelm and Scannell, vol. II, pp. 227 et seq.; J. Pohle, Grace, Actual and Habitual. For history, see W. A. Copinger, Treatise on Predestination, etc., Introd.; J. B. Mozley, Augustinian Doctr. of Predestination; J. A. Moehler, Symbolism, §§x-xxvii; Canones et Decreta . . . Concilii Tridentini, Sess. VI; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, ch. xiii; Hastings, Encyc. of Relig,. q. v.; Cath. Encyc, s. v. "Grace, Contro versies on"; J. MacCaffrey, Hist, of the Cath. Church, vol. I, pp. 276- 29i> 331-339; B. J. Otten, Manual of the Hist, of Dogmas, vol. I, pp. 360-386, 466-467; vol. II, pp. 234-252, 470-472, 492-497, 5°4- 511. For biblical data, Hastings, Die of Bib. and Die of Christ, q. v. In this chapter these works will usually be designated by their authors' names only. ITS PLACE AND BEARING 249 moral response and spiritual assimilation to God in Christ. None the less the use of the term x^pis by St. Paul throws determinative hght upon the doc trine of grace, and may not be neglected. j* In classical Greek the term had meant that which gives dehght and, derivatively, goodwill or favor. This is its usual meaning in St. Luke, the only Synoptist who employs it.1 But St. Paul elevates the word to a new level, surcharging it with meaning derived from his contemplation of Jesus Christ as revealing the favor of God in a dispensation the mystery of which becomes the normal subject of reference in his use of the term. The ideas which in such connection St. Paul accentuates in using the word are chiefly (a) the loving self-sacrifice of Christ for sinners; (b) the spontaneous freeness of His blessings, bestowed without the price of antecedent good works on our part; and (c) the regenerative and sin-conquering power of Christ's grace. But the use or aspect of it which has afforded the basis of subsequent theological use and defini tion is that which refers broadly to the supernatural, sanctifying and assisting work of Christ through His Spirit in human souls and the spiritual endow ments bestowed in connection therewith.2 Theology defines grace as a "free and super natural gift of God, bestowed upon rational crea- 1 St. Luke ii. 40. ' 2 On St. Paul's doctrine of grace, see Sanday and Headlam, Ep. to the Romans, on i. 5; Hastings, Die of Christ, s. v. "Grace." 250 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE tures and pertaining in some manner to everlasting life." It is the factor without which man's progress towards his supernatural destiny cannot be achieved. It is not a concrete substance, but a special and invisible method of divine operation in the soul. It is not a force in the physical sense, but belongs to the moral and spiritual order. It does not change human nature in se, but elevates its spiritual con dition, assists its spiritual powers, and perfects it after its kind. It is not a "resident force," nor transmissible to children, but is a supplementary and conditional gift, which may be ahenated or nullified in its designed effect by human perversity. Its bestowal cannot be earned by us, although a proper use of it enables us to advance from grace to grace.1 § 2. The dispensation of grace in general is a branch of the working out of God's eternal purpose in creation. Man is made for divine communion and feUowship — a destiny which is plainly super natural and beyond creaturely power of enjoyment without a previous spiritual development that depends for achievement upon divine assist ance. Man's need of grace is therefore original and universal, and in the first instance is not due to the complicating fact of human sin. The natural man ^s an unfinished product. God wills to enlist the creature's own efforts in the completion of his making; but from the nature of the case these 1 Creation and Man, pp. 139-141. ITS PLACE AND BEARING 251 efforts have to be divinely enabled and assisted efforts, and are conditioned by the endowments which theology signifies by the phrase habitual and sanctifying grace. (a) Accordingly, in his primitive state man re ceived the gift of the Holy Spirit, and was endowed with spiritual hfe. This made him capable of sin less development and, if he avoided sin, of triumph over the seeds of physical death contained in his animal nature. His state is described as original righteousness, wliich means freedom from sin and possession of grace to grow after the holy and right eous likeness of His divine Creator. He was not impeccable, for grace does not override the laws of moral growth; and until this growth reaches its perfect consummation, the element of contingency in avoidance of sin remains as an inevitable aspect of incomplete actualization of a righteous disposi tion.1 (b) Sin was committed, and its commission not only raised a barrier to grace in the soul of primi tive man, but upset the conditions under which his descendants could enjoy the advantages of inno cency. A world into which sin has entered is not one in which the grace of innocency can avail. In whatever way we may formulate the doctrine of original sin,2 the twofold universal need which it 1 Creation and Man, ch. viii; Evolution and the Fall, pp. 123-133 and Lee. v. 2 Creation and Man, pp. 270-323. 252 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE describes is that of redemption and of a modified dispensation of grace, having for its purpose to promote men's salvation from sin as weU as their originaUy intended growth in the positive right eousness of God. Moreover, redemption could not be historically accomplished without protracted preparation of mankind for its achievement and inteUigible procla mation.1 The sinfulness of sin had to be made clear by a dispensation of law, and a chosen seed had to be educated that it might be equipped for initiating the propaganda of saving truth and grace. We are not to think, however, that during this preparatory period the grace of God was wholly suspended. The redemption of Christ has an eternal aspect, and afforded a basis for anticipatory as well as for subsequent mercies of God. But the fulness of saving grace could hot be revealed until redemption had been historically actualized. (c) Redemption was accomplished, formally speak ing, by the meritorious death of Christ and His victory over death in our behalf. The reasons for the need of such a method of redemption, so far as we understand them, have been indicated in the previous volume. It is sufficient here to remind the reader that the remedy of sin includes expiatory and regenerative elements wliich appear to have demanded such a method, and to have made its fulfilment the historical sine qua non of establish- 1 Idem, pp. 327-33S (with refs. given on p. 328). ITS PLACE AND BEARING 253 ment of an effective dispensation of saving and sanc tifying grace for individual sinners. At all events, we have to distinguish between redemption, once for aU achieved in Judea, and salvation, based thereupon and worked out through aU generations.1 (d) It is being worked out in the existing Chris tian dispensation of grace, § 3. The Christian dispensation, to recapitulate what has been said in various connections in this and in previous volumes, is preeminently a dispen sation of grace. This grace is both saving and sanctifying. As afforded to sinners, it is first of aU for the remedy of sin, being the application to individual souls of the benefits procured by our Lord's death and resurrection, in accordance with the terms of the new covenant thereby perma nently estabhshed. But the grace of this dispen sation is also positively sanctifying; for by means of it the purpose of God for men, interrupted in its fulfilment by sin, is resumed and accomphshed by positive consecration to God of those who are being saved, and by their progressive assimilation in character to Him with whom they are destined to hve forever. FinaUy, this dispensation estab lishes, authenticates and develops even in this world the relations with God and with each other wherein our life hereafter consists and obtains satisfying fruition.2 For Christian grace not only 1 Passion and Exaltation, pp. 103-107. 2 Creation and Man, pp. 206-208. 254 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE saves and elevates its recipients; it also enables them to offer themselves effectively to God in Holy Eucharist, and to enjoy Him in ever increasing degree in a developing communion of saints. Christian grace is divine. Its source is the eter nal Godhead, the ever Blessed Trinity. It flows from the Father's bounty, and is mediated to us through His eternal Son, who has been consecrated by His death to be the Priest and true Minister of the new covenant. It is made effective by the operation of the Holy Spirit, who is the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, and who has come into the world in order to regenerate and save, to sanctify and transform, and to bring to perfect fruition all that God worketh in the souls of men.1 In the sphere and method of its dispensing, Chris tian grace is corporate, ministerial and sacramental. A corporate society, the Church of God, has been buUt out of the spiritual remnant of Israel, endowed with hfe by the Spirit who dwells and operates in it, converted into the Body of Christ, and thus made to be the corporate and social instrument and sphere of Christ's priesthood. It is ministerial not only in having Christ for its Priest and Mediator, but also in being administered by Christ through earthly agents, commissioned by Him and equipped for priestly functions by the Holy Spirit bestowed upon them. It is sacramental in that the immediate 1 Ch. i, esp. §§ 5 et seq., above. ITS PLACE AND BEARING 255 method of this ministration is accommodated to the receptive limitations of our composite nature.1 § 4. We are not here concerned with the external helps that are caUed "external" grace, which do not change our internal state and capacity, but with internal grace wliich has such effect, and to which the name grace is apphed in the strict tech nical sense.2 Internal grace is distinguished as actual, assisting us in salutary acts, and habitual, changing our condition and status before God. In this section we are concerned with actual grace. The Church teaches that our first turning to God is an effect of such grace,3 which in its initial stage, and prior to our response, is caUed prevenient. When we . do respond to it by salutary action, it is caUed concomitant or cooperating grace. Pre venient grace is caUed sufficient, in that it makes salutary action on our part possible; and concomi tant grace is caUed efficacious to the degree of our free use of its assistance. The theory that it is irresistible is to be rejected as inconsistent with human freedom and responsibihty — not less so 1 Chh. ii— iii, passim, above. 2 Creation and Man, pp. 341-343, on the divisions of grace. 8 This was determined, as the result of the Pelagian and Semi- pelagian controversies, by the Council of Orange, 529 a.d. See J. F. Bethune-Baker, Early Hist, of Christ. Doctr., pp. 321-325; W. A. Copinger, pp. 13-20. On the necessity of grace, see treatises on Thirty-Nine Arts., x; St. Thomas, I, H. cix; J. Pohle, pp. 82-130. Cf. St. John vi. 44; xv. 5; 2 Cor. iii. 5. 256 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE because the divine determination hypothecated is from within and involves no external compulsion.1 The operations of grace cannot be scrutinized except in their effects, for they lie beneath the threshold of consciousness, at the hidden centre of personality. In their effects, however, they reveal themselves as affecting our intellects, our affections and our wfils. That is, grace enlightens our spirit ual perceptions and judgments; incites or impels our affections and desires towards the spiritual and divine; and, having thus developed within us heavenly motives, assists the wiU in determining and acting in accordance with them. There is a natural law, however, that the deter minative effects of the factors and motives, whether good or evU, which operate within our souls, are conditioned by the relative degrees of our atten tion to them; and attention is in a large measure under the control of our wills.2 This law is not nullified by grace, which never subverts human nature; and it explains in part the dependence of actual grace for wholesome effect upon free coopera tion by our wills. This cooperation cannot be irresistibly predetermined without nullifying human probation.3 We are not, however, to infer that the practical value of grace is small compared with that 1 On irresistible grace, see Creation and Man, pp. 29-31; J. Pohle, pp. 223-230; W. A. Copinger, ch. xi; J. B. Mozley, chh. vi-xi, passim. Cf. Concil. Trid., Sess. VI. can. 23. 2 On attention, see Hastings, Encyc. of Religion, q. v. * Cf. Creation and Man, pp. 24-26. ' SANCTIFYING GRACE 257 of our own volitions, and that we, rather than God, are the effective workers in salutary action. Our wills can do nothing salutary of themselves, but depend ab initio and at every stage upon the pre venient and assisting grace of God. Yet if they were not truly free, and if as secondary causes they did not determine the effects of grace upon our lives, we could not act as moral agents or have moral responsibility in any defensible sense of such terms.1 II. Sanctifying Grace § 5. Habitual grace is defined as having for its proper effect a change in the status and spiritual quahty of soul, whereby it is consecrated to God and assimilated to Him in character. It is subse quent to what has been described as actual grace, but is itself actual as weU as habitual, in enlarging and fortifying the effects of purely actual grace in the sphere of salutary action. Thus the regenerate soul has higher capacity for such action than the unregenerate, even when the latter is assisted by actual grace. Habitual grace looks to sanctification, and is therefore usually called sanctifying grace. It minis ters to the two principal elements or stages of sanctification, consecration and assimilation.2 Con- 1 The two sides of the truth are given together in Phil. ii. 12-13. Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 10. 2 On Holiness, see Being and Attrib. of God, ch. xii. § 7; Creation and Man, pp. 347-348; St. Thomas, I. II. lxxxi. 8; J. H. Thayer, 258 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE secration or separation to God is accomplished by baptismal incorporation into the Body of Christ and the complementary gift of the Holy Spirit in Confirmation. This incorporation regenerates the soul by imparting to it a share in the supernatural vitahty of Christ's Body, and makes it a partici pant by adoption and grace in the supernatural sonship of God which the Incarnation and redemp tion of His eternal Son has brought within our reach. The bestowal of the Holy Spirit completes our equipment as chUdren of God by endowing us with His sevenfold gifts. These complementary mysteries elevate us to a supernatural level and status, and stamp our souls indelibly with the mark of Christ and of His Holy Spirit. Thus we are placed among the elect and are thereafter described as saints — not only as caUed to a holy vocation, but as endowed with the potentiahties of spiritual assimUation to God. In this last sense we are made righteous and so accounted ab initio, al though the actualization of righteousness in our conduct and moral character is a subsequent work of grace and persevering human effort, begun in faith and repentance. This actualization of righteousness in us is the second stage of sanctifying grace, the stage of our progressive moral and spiritual assimilation to God Greek-Eng. Lex. of the N. T., s. v. 4710s; and the various encylo- psedias, q. v. The original idea was that of separation. Cf . pp. 186- 189, above. SANCTIFYING GRACE 259 in Christ by the patient operation of the Holy Spirit. To this assimUation the Christian sacra ments are instituted to minister, these being so named because they are divinely utilized instru ments of sanctifying grace. The assimUative work of sanctification is twofold; negative in purging out sinful concupiscence, and positive in developing the heavenly virtues and dispositions wliich make us pleasing to God and enable us to enjoy Him. As in the earher stage of merely actual grace, so in sanctifying grace human cooperation is neces sary; and this cooperation reveals itself in works worthy of repentance. These "good works," as they are caUed, constitute our response to grace; and they not only minister to our becoming actually righteous, but also reveal the degrees of righteous ness wliich by grace we have attained. There fore they are meritorious in making us fit for, and worthy of, God's favor and of the heavenly reward which God has pledged Himself to give. But their meritorious value is relative to the righteous char acter wliich they produce in us and attest, and is qualitative rather than quantitative. The gift of eternal hfe remains a gift, because it greatly ex ceeds in value anything that we can earn even when sinless, and because at every stage our abihty to perform meritorious works is entirely due to the free and unmerited grace of God. § 6. It is in the hght of the above summarized doctrine of sanctifying grace in general that we shaU 260 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE best avoid the side issues which have made the doctrine of justification1 so confusing to the ma jority of students. As St. Paul used the word, to justify means to account righteous, not to make righteous.2 But we are not to infer that accounting us righteous because of our faith represents the sum of St. Paul's doctrine concerning the condi tions of salvation. He uses the language referred to in a rich context, and with verifiable presupposi tions which have to be reckoned with in interpret ing the phrase in question. In other words, if we use justification in theology as meaning simply the imputation of our faith to us for righteousness3 we must not, St. Paul being witness in the im mediate context and elsewhere, treat this imputa tion as an unconditional pledge of final salvation, regardless of our actual growth in righteousness. It is also true, of course, that when Roman theology 1 On justification at large, see Creation and Man, ch. x. §§ 9-11; Passion and Exaltation, pp. 107-109, 257-259; A. P. Forbes, Arts. xi-xii; Wm. Forbes, Considerationes Modestae, vol. I; M. F. Sadler, Justif. of Life; J. H. Newman, Lees, on Justif.; E. B. Pusey, Eireni con, Pt. III. pp. 57-69; St. Thomas, I. II. cxiii; J. A. Moehler, Symbolism, I. I. ch. iii; Wilhelm and Scannell, Bk. VL ch. ii; J. Pohle, pp. 271-436; and the Encyclopaedias, q. v. 2 J. H. Thayer, op. cit., s. v. Suctudu. On St. Paul's teaching, see Sanday and Headlam, Ep. to the Romans, esp. pp. 147-153; W. P. DuBose, Gospel in St. Paul, passim. H. P. Liddon and M. F. Sadler give a true representation of St. Paul's fundamental mind, but are not always critically exact in their commentaries on the Ep. to the Romans. Cf. Creation and Man, pp. 344-345. 3 Rom. iv. 5. SANCTIFYING GRACE 261 makes justification to mean making righteous, it is using the term in a more comprehensive sense than that of St. Paul, and we ought to aUow for this important verbal divergence in appealing to his testimony. But, putting technicalities aside, when not only Roman but aU truly cathohc theology insists that our salvation requires our being made righteous, it faithfuUy echoes the teaching of St. Paul. He cer tainly never even hinted that we can be saved in our sins, or that the righteousness of Christ exempts behevers from the necessity of becoming personally righteous in order to be saved.1 Salvation is from sin, although its process is initiated while we are stiU sinful. Our faith is imputed to us for righteousness, and we are accounted righteous because of our faith; but this does not mean that we have no need of subsequent progress in righteousness. It means simply that justifying faith is the initiation of this growth in righteousness, and that we are valued in the hght of what by the grace of Christ we have begun to become.2 There is no unreal imputation of Christ's merits to sinners; but the children of grace are estimated at the value which they wiU actuaUy have when, and if, they become fullgrown. 1 Rom. v. 17, 19, 21; vi; viii. 5-6, 12-13; x- ro; Phil. ii. 12; etc. 2 God "calleth the things that are not as though they were," Rom. iv. 17 — not in actuality but in potentiality or germ. St. Au gustine says somewhere that God regards us non quotes sumus, sed quotes futuri sumus. 262 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE If they fail to grow in righteousness, they wiU necessarily cease to be accounted righteous. The accounting is a wiping off of old scores,1 and the ini tiating of a new hfe of grace; 2 but in no sense does it exempt us from responsibility for the future de velopment of the righteousness of which our faith is the inceptive germ. The large use which theology has to make of St. Paul's testimony in treating of justification makes it expedient to adhere to his use of that term, rather than to employ it comprehensively as meaning the whole process of our being made righteous. By justification, therefore, we mean the initial mys tery 3 in salvation by virtue of which we are ac counted righteous. On the divine side this mystery signifies forgiveness of past sins, and is accompanied by an imparting of renovating and sanctifying grace which enables us to grow in righteousness. On the human side the mystery is that of our faith. Post poning fuUer definition, justifying faith is such a faith as can truly be imputed to us for righteousness 1 2 Cor. v. 17-19; Col. ii. 14. 2 Rom. v. 21-vi. 4; x. 10. Cf. G. B. Stevens, Christ. Doctr. of Salvation, pp. 457 et seq. 3 St. James, on the other hand, speaks of "second justification" — our being declared righteous in our subsequent course or works, accord ing to which we are to be judged in the last day. St. James ii. 14-26. In brief, the initial justification of which St. Paul speaks postulates, and depends for continuing value upon, the righteousness of our sub sequent lives — dictated by faith and made possible by grace. Cf. Geo. Bull, Harmonia AposMica; R. W. Dale, Atonement,ap. 185-187; L. Pullan, Atonement, pp. 182-185. SANCTD7YING GRACE 263 — a faith which makes for righteousness, being its incipient stage. Thus technicaUy delimited, justification means our being accounted righteous, rather than our being made so; but in its Pauline context it postulates our being made righteous, and implies a real incep tion of this making by an imparting to us of regen erating and sanctifying grace wliich enables us to grow in the righteousness of Christ. § 7. Various factors or causes of justification need mention, most of them too clearly involved to re quire separate discussion. The moving cause is the love of God,1 or His wUl that we should be His friends, and therefore should attain to the right eousness which wiU fit us to participate in and enjoy His friendship. The sole meritorious cause is the death of Christ,2 it being impossible for sinful creatures to merit justification by reason of any work of which they are capable. The efficient cause is God, who by His Holy Spirit regenerates us,3 and makes possible not only the faith which is imputed to us for righteousness but also our subse quent progress in the necessary actualization of this righteousness. The instrumental cause is Baptism,4 whereby through the Spirit we are born anew and become susceptible subjects of the further opera- 1 St. John iv. 16; Rom. v. 8; Ephes. ii. 4-6; v. 1-2; Col. ii. 16. 2 Jerem. xxiii. 6; Rom. iii. 24; v. 19; 2 Cor. v. 10-21; Heb. x. 10, 14. 3 Rom. viii. 30, 33; 1 Cor. vi. n; Ephes. i. 13-14; Tit. iii. 5, 7. 1 Col. ii. 12; Tit. iii. 5. Cf. St. John iii. 5. Cf. 30, above. 264 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE tions of sanctifying grace. The subjective cause, itseh a fruit of grace, is faith; x and justifying faith2 requires careful consideration, if we are to avoid mistaken ideas of it. We have already stated what appears to be an obvious truism, that "justifying faith is such a faith as can truly be imputed to us for righteous ness — a faith which makes for righteousness, being its incipient stage." The aspect of faith which gives it this name is belief; and the faith which justifies is belief that the saving doctrines revealed by God are true. But the inteUectual aspect of faith, definitive though it be, does not constitute aU that it is. Faith is not merely intellectual acceptance of truth. The fact is that a purely inteUectual act is a psy chological impossibility. The intellect, the emo tions and the wUl invariably function together. Indeed they are not separate or separable faculties and functions, but mutually conditioning aspects of all conscious functioning. An inteUectual act means one of wliich the intellectual aspect is promi nent and pecuUarly definitive; but even so the emotional and volitional aspects are invariably 1 Rom. iii. 26-iv. 25; Gal. ii. 16; iii. 8-9; Phil. iii. 9. 2 On the nature of justifying faith, see Rom. x. 10; Gal. v. 6; St. James ii. 14-26; Heb. xi. 6. Geo. Bull, op. cit., I. ch. iv., II. ch. v; M. F. Sadler, op. cit., chh. ii— iii; J. H. Newman, op. cit., Lees, i., x; E. J. Bicknell, Thirty-Nine Arts., pp. 254-264; Sanday and Head- lam, op. cit., on Rom. iii. 26 et seq.; H. P. Liddon, ditto; J. Pohle, pp. 272-284; A. J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. x. §§ 6-10. SANCTIFYING GRACE 265 present, as conditions and qualifying elements in intellectual functioning. Therefore they are thus present in faith; and the law which determines their presence is an inviolable law of human nature.1 Moreover, if justifying faith were purely intel lectual it could hardly be regarded as justifying. The moral quahty which -affectional dispositions and volitions afford would be lacking, and a non- moral faith cannot, without resort to a species of fiction unworthy of ascription to God, be imputed to any one for righteousness. The fact that it is thus imputed by Him who is truth constrains us to describe justifying faith as a moral and righteous act and habit, and one which makes for righteous ness. This does not mean that it is the meritorious cause of justification. It cannot be this for two reasons. In the first place it is a fruit of grace,2 of the grace merited for us by Christ's death. In the second place it is incipient rather than full formed righteousness, and cannot avaU except as the inception of actual and complete growth in sanctifying grace. The justifying quahty of faith, then, is twofold: that it is a moral response to grace, and that it is fruitful in the righteousness of which it is the initial stage. It is necessarily the initial stage, because 1 Introduction, pp. 94-97. 2 St. John vi. 44; Acts xviii. 27; Rom. xii. 3; Ephes. ii. 8; vi. 23; Heb. xii. 2. 266 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE untU we believe we cannot please God.1 The only righteousness that is properly so caUed, and wliich pleases God, is that which is fulfilled in the light of our acceptance of His revealed truth and precepts. Faith therefore comes first. But it must be a fruitful faith, which means that it must include as justifying elements the subjective disposition and the moral attitude which make for righteousness.2 In brief, justifying faith includes or involves as characteristic elements and conditions loving self- surrender to God and righteous purpose. That is, we must repent and be converted, if our faith is to be imputed to us for righteousness; a and we cannot fulfil these conditions except by grace. Nor can we advance on the lines thus laid down, unless we are born anew of water and of the Holy Ghost. Conversion and regeneration are distinct conditions of righteousness.4 The righteousness to which justification looks, and for wliich justifying faith is imputed to us, is described as the formal cause of justification.5 Another section needs to be given to its considera tion. 1 Heb. xi. 6. 2 St. Matt. vii. 16-27; Rom. vi; x. 10; St. James ii. 14-26, 3 St. Luke xxiv. 47; Actsii. 38; iii. 19; xx. 21; xxvi. 20. 4 Their difference will be discussed in the next volume, ch. i. But cf. pp. 302-303, fin, below. " Rom. iii. 21-22. Cf. St. Matt. v. 48; Ephes. v. 1. On this, see A. P. Forbes, pp. 176 et seq.; M..F. Sadler, Second Adam, pp. 211- 218; J. Pohle, pp. 322-326. SANCTIFYING GRACE 267 § 8. This righteousness is the righteousness of God, in the form that men can be enabled to par ticipate in it by His grace. The friendship with God for which man was created cannot be either enjoyable by us or pleasing to Him except upon the basis of a certain mutual congeniality of char acter.1 And the disparity in rank of being between the Infinite and finite creatures neither removes this necessity nor precludes our attainment by God's grace of the character by which such con geniality is conditioned. Ethical qualities do not depend for their possibility and essential nature upon the rank in being of those who possess them; although disparity of such rank, especiaUy as be tween God and His creatures, does significantly differentiate the manners in which such qualities can be possessed and exhibited in action. Righteousness in essential regards is the same in both God and man. If it were not so, the right eousness of God would not be recognizable by us, for we can apprehend righteousness only in the terms of our own experience. True righteousness in man is akin to divine righteousness; and not only is righteousness an immutable condition of divine blessedness, but it vitaUy determines what is pleasing to its possessor, whether divine or human. Accordingly a common possession of right eousness is the condition of mutual congeniality and of reciprocal love between God and ourselves. The 1 Creation and Man, pp. 243-245. 268 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE love of God for us exacts for its satisfaction the development of perfect righteousness in us — that form of righteousness whereby we participate on creaturely lines in His righteousness. So it is that salvation means the entire displace ment of sin in us by perfect righteousness of char acter and conduct, patterned in ethical quahty after divine righteousness. "Be ye imitators of God as dear children" — "perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect." x For this Christ redeemed us, and for this the dispensation of saving and sanctify ing grace was established. Christ did not die in order that His righteousness might be accepted as a substitute for ours, in an unreal scheme of purely forensic imputation, but that by His grace, and from the starting point of faith, we might become truly righteous after His likeness.2 No moral requirement of God is repealed. If we are not under law but under grace, this means that the righteousness required by the law, which we could not fulfil on the legal basis, has become by grace an interior impulse and motive. The law is written on our hearts; 3 and what even now we cannot do by way of immediate obedience to its letter, we are progressively inspired and enabled finaUy to achieve by sanctifying grace, on the lines of contrite self-discipline and holy practice. Moral 1 Ephes. v. i; St. Matt. v. 48. 2 Cf. Passion and Exaltation, pp. 45-48. 8 Heb. viii. 10; x. 16. Cf. St. Luke vi. 45; Rom. x. 9-10. SANCTIFYING GRACE 269 and spiritual perfection is the subjective goal which justifying grace places before us and enables us to attain, either here or hereafter. This perfection is essentiaUy personal, and per sonal salvation and sanctification is set before each of us to attain. But it is not individuahstic, for man is a social being. He can become perfect only in social relations, and under the conditions of reciprocal service and mutual dependence. These relations, initiated in this world, are designed of God to be elevated by grace, and to be centralized in Him in a communion of saints. For this reason our religion is socialized, so to speak, by being focused in the Church militant, which is the earthly beginning and training school of the communion of saints.1 The virtues which in their fuU growth and to gether constitute perfect righteousness are partly natural, and susceptible of a certain degree of de velopment apart from sanctifying grace. These are usuaUy summed up as the cardinal virtues of pru dence, temperance, fortitude and justice. But by themselves they do not perfect us for the divine relations for wliich we were created. Therefore baptismal regeneration plants in us the potentiali ties of the supernatural or heavenly virtues of faith, hope and love; and in their development these transform our natural virtues, and impart to them rehgious values and heavenly reference. 1 Cf. Creation and Mm, pp. 232-235; and above, ch. ii § 11. 270 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE III. Good Works § 9. Good works 1 are plainly involved in human righteousness, and for this reason they are inevi table fruits and criteria of justifying faith, so that their entire absence under circumstances caUing for them reveals the absence of justifying faith. But in considering whether they have any causal rela tion to justification, we need to shun any technical use of the phrase "good works" that wiU make our vindication of their necessity seem to commit us to unreal propositions, contrary to the lessons of everyday moral experience. Good works are commonly understood to mean works which are in accord with righteousness and are performed with righteous motives, whatever may be said of their relation to justification, to their meritoriousness and to their sufficiency for obtaining the reward of eternal hfe. That men do good works in this ordinary sense before justification cannot be denied without resort to arguments which set the moral judgments of men at large in opposition to Christian doctrine; and such opposition, if real, must be fatal to the 1 On good works, see treatises on Thirty-Nine Arts, of A. P. Forbes, E. C. S. Gibson, and E. J. Bicknell, arts, xii-xiii; J. H. Newman, Lee. xii; Geo. Bull, op. cit., passim; Herbert Thorndike, Covenant of Grace, esp. ch. ix, giving patristic views. Schaff-Herzog Encyc, q.v. (Protestant view and bibliog.); J. A. Moehler, §§xxi- GOOD WORKS 271 Christian doctrine involved.1 But this doctrine hmits itself to the teaching that salutary good works — works that pertain somehow to salvation — require for their performance the assistance of supernatural grace, both prevenient and cooperat ing. Inasmuch as actual grace is given before justification, and some measure of it probably to aU responsible agents, we need not hesitate on theological grounds to acknowledge the goodness, and even the salutary quahty, of many works done before justification. But the question as to whether the unassisted natural man is capable of good works or not is purely academic, for it is doubtful whether the hypothecated natural man ever existed. AU men appear to be either sub jects of grace, in at least its prevenient stage, or wUful despisers of it.2 The works of the latter are necessarily defective; and the grace enjoyed by the former is not earned by them, but is a free gift of God. Salutary good works might be thought to have a causal relation to justification in two ways; as 1 On works before justification, see E. J. Bicknell, op. cit., pp. 265-266; M. F. Sadler, Justification of Life, ch. iv; A. P. Forbes, on art. XHI. 2 M. F. Sadler, op. cit., pp. 131-134; J. Pohle, pp. 152-221; Cath. Encyc, s. v. "Grace," pp. 699-701. For patristic catena, Passaglia, de Partitione voluntatis Divinae in Primum et Secundum. Cf. 1 Tim. ii. 4-6; St. John i. 29; Rom. ii. 11-16; the texts on universal re demption; and St. James i. 18. Cf. Passion and Exaltation, pp. 66- 69, 158-163 (with refs. on p. 158, n. 3), on the salvation of the heathen. 272 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE meriting it beforehand, and as conditioning its continuance. The Church and Scripture alike for bid the supposition that we can merit justification in advance, and treat the death of Christ as the sole meritorious cause. The reason is clear. UntU we receive the sanctifying grace of regeneration, an event which coincides with and is part of the mys tery of justification, our salutary works, so called, are sufficient only as predisposing us for the recep tion of this grace as a free gift.1 The works that can in any true sense merit the blessing involved in justification derive their merit from the Christian covenant; and our justification for the first time enables us to plead this covenant. Such merit is therefore ex post facto, and cannot be an antecedent cause of justification. But as conditions of our continuance in the state of justification, good works may be said to have a causal relation to justification. That is, God will not continue to impute our faith to us for right eousness if this faith dies; and its living continu ance is contingent upon its bringing forth the fruit of good works. "By their fruits ye shall know them " — that is, as justified and accepted friends of God. It is this important truth that hes behind the teaching of St. James, that we are justified by our works.2 Without works faith is dead, and un less they are performed, we cease to be accounted 1 Cf. the case of Cornelius, Acts x, esp. 4, 34-35. 2 St. Matt. vii. 16-20; St. James ii. 14-26. GOOD WORKS 273 righteous. The actual righteousness of good works, to be fulfiUed in due season by us, is the imphed condition of our being accounted righteous before their performance; and this reheves the mystery from the objection that it is an unreal make-beheve, having no ethical value. § 10. We have seen that good works are essential to continuance in a state of justification. We have alluded also to the meritoriousness of such works — that is of the works which follow justification, which are made possible by sanctifying grace, and which are fruits of justifying faith. In what sense can they be caUed meritorious and deserving of eternal life? x Clearly not in the sense of earning it, as such language is commonly understood. To earn means to render service wliich originally we have had a right to withhold, and which has a service-value that entitles us to demand a wage. But, under any circumstances, we are unable to do for God anything which we do not owe ab initio. Nothing that we can do, therefore, puts God in any debt to us. Again, we can do nothing in rela tion to eternal hfe, except by God working in us to do His good pleasure. This does not mean that we are not true agents in our good works, but it does proclude our pleading them as putting God 1 On merit, see A. P. Forbes, pp. 197-201; J. Pohle, pp. 397-436; E. J. Bicknell, op. cit., pp. 266-277; St. Thomas, I. II. cxiv; Hast ings, Encyc. of Religion, s.v. "Merit (Christian)"; Concil. Trid., Sess. VI. ch. xvi. 274 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE in debt. Finally, there is an immeasurable dis parity between the good works of which we are capable even by grace and the reward which God wills to give us for them. Death may be described as the wages of sin, but eternal life, while it is in a real sense a reward, is not wages but a gift. It is a reward because our works make us fit to receive it; but it is not wages, because it exceeds the in trinsic earning value of our works.1 The only adequate motive of good works is love, and it is a Christian truism that until we serve God regardless of reward, our service falls short of the highest ideal. But in our weakness we cannot rise at once to the Christian ideal, and God accom modates His dealing with us to this limitation. In the Sermon on the Mount our Lord again and again describes the future blessedness of the righteous in terms of reward, and St. Paul employs the same description.2 But all such language presupposes the 1 Rom. vi. 23. Roman Catholic theologians recognize this dis parity. They distinguish between meritum adaequatum sive de condigno (which supposes just claim to the reward) and meritum inadaequatum sive de congruo (which because of disproportion be tween the work and its reward, bases the reward upon relative or dis tributive justice, the reward being fitting but not of debt). They say that God's promises are based upon a gratuitous covenant and not at all upon human merit. This covenant of grace being presup posed, they ascribe condign merit to good works done in grace, but in relation to the covenant — not in relation to the intrinsic value of the works. See Cath. Encyc, s.v. "Merit," I. (a); J. Pohle, PP- 397-496; St. Thomas, I. II. cxiv. 3. 2 St. Matt. v. 12; vi. 1, 4, 6, 18; xxv. 34-40; 1 Cor. iii. 8; Col. ii. 18. Cf. Revel, xxii. 12. GOOD WORKS 275 Christian covenant and the meritorious redemp tion upon wliich this covenant is based. The only claim to the heavenly reward for good works which we can legitimately plead is God's own generous pledge thus to reward them because of Christ's death. There is indeed a certain congruity between the good works of a sanctified Christian and the reward wliich is promised for them. That is, these works, in so far as they represent our own agency and a dutiful response to sanctifying grace, develop in us a spiritual worthiness of character, which makes us fit to receive the gift of eternal hfe and to be wel comed hereafter by God as His friends. If no such congruity were developed, there could be no moral possibUity of the reward. To say this is to repeat what we have already maintained, that our future joy in God and His abiding pleasure in us — or the fruition of love — is conditioned by the develop ment of a certain mutual congeniality of moral and spiritual character between God and ourselves. Our good works, therefore, are meritorious in last analysis because they make us morally and per- sonaUy suitable subjects of God's bounty in the gift of eternal life.1 § 11. Good works are not meritorious in terms of quantity of service and of results, so much as in terms of their effects upon our moral worth before the bar of God's judgment. We do not mean that 1 Cf. Creation and Man, pp. 348-351. 276 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE their quantity has no place in our responsibility for them, for we owe as large a quantity of them as God affords opportunity for us to perform. But it is not their quantity in se so much as our response to grace in doing all we can that makes them meritorious. In one of our Lord's parables the owner of a vine yard gives the penny a day — eternal hfe — even to those who labor but one hour, if this represents all that He gives them the chance of doing.1 And there is no hint that the eleventh hour laborers are credited with a surplus earned by those who bear the burden and heat of the day. No one earns more than the vineyard owner contracts to give. Else where our Lord teaches plainly that when we have done all we can, we are still to regard ourselves as unprofitable servants2 — as having done nothing the merit of which is not derived from divine mercy and grace, and the quantitative value of which is not inadequate to the reward which God bounte ously gives. In the accepted meaning of the phrase, works of supererogation cannot be performed by Christians.3 That is, the grace of Christ does not enable them to do more for God than they are under obligation 1 St. Matt. xx. 1-16 and parallels. 2 St. Luke xvii. 10. 3 On works of supererogation, see A. P. Forbes, on art. XIV; E. J. Bicknell, op. cit., pp. 266-277; J. H. Blunt, Die. of Theol., s. v. "Supererogation"; Schaff-Herzog Encyc, s.v. "Supererogation, Works of." GOOD WORKS 277 to do. There is, of course, a significant difference between works of obedience to specific commands and laws of God, and works which spring from love of God and desire to show this love in every manner of good work possible. But we do not fulfil the spirit of the law itself until we love God with aU our heart and soul and mind, and do all for Him that such love moves us to do. In other words, love and its abounding fruit of spontaneous good works con stitute a real part of what we owe to God of bounden duty and service, and we cannot surpass the meas ure or quantity of service to which this part of Christian duty extends. Smallness of God-given opportunity excuses those who can do but little, if they do what they can; but no extension of opportunity enables any Chris tian to exceed what is required of him in order to enter into the joy of his Lord. AU that he can do is required of him, and if he falls short of this, the fact that he has done more, quantitatively speaking, than others does not exempt him from the need of repentance for his shortcomings and of divine mercy. To hold otherwise is to disregard the plain teaching Scripture and to lower the meanmg of divine service. An abounding service of love is peculiarly accepta ble to God. It does accomphsh much for others, not only by the contagion of glorious example, but also by greatly enhancing the power of saints in intercessory prayer. Those who approximate most closely to what is expected of the friends of God 278 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE gain the largest measures of power which such friends have with God. The intercessions of per fected saints constitute a vital factor in helping sinners on earth. But the effect of these interces sions is not any exemption of others from obliga tions or from the due consequences of sin. Rather it is an abounding of grace to those on earth, whereby they are enabled more successfully to abandon sin and thus to reduce the penal consequences involved. Two Christian truisms are of the utmost impor tance in this connection. The first is that God never reduces for any individual the moral requirements which He imposes upon him. Each one must attain to actual and perfect righteousness before he can fully enjoy God; and he must either fulfil the good works given him to do or contritely endure whatever is necessary to do penance and to make such satisfaction as divine justice requires for his shortcomings. God is very patient, and will afford sufficient grace; but "indulgence" is a misleading description of His love. The second truism is that no merits can be transferred from one person to another, except in the remote sense of the help wliich one can give to, or secure for, the other by example and by intercessory prayer.1 § 12. Something needs to be said with regard to 1 On indulgences, etc. (defensive), see Cath. Encyc, q. v. Per contra, Schaff-Herzog Encyc, q. v. Cf. J. H. Blunt, Die of Theol., q. v.; A. Boudinhon, in Hastings, Encyc. of Religion, q. v. There is an analogy between the protestant doctrine of imputation and that of indulgences. Cf. Passion and Exaltation, pp. 45-48, 96, 107-109. GOOD WORKS 279 baptized Christians dying in infancy — incapable in this hfe of personal faith and of good works. That they are truly justified is catholic doctrine; but their case is an exception to the rule that per sonal faith and its fruitfulness in good works are necessary. Yet the essential principles of justifica tion are sufficiently provided for. Negatively they have committed no actual sin requiring repentance, and have no disbehef re quiring reversal. They need no conversion, for their moral and spiritual dispositions have not been actualized. Baptism removes what is symbolically caUed the "guUt" of original sin. Therefore no barrier in them obstructs the operation of sanctify ing grace. They are innocent, and the fomes peccati has no opportunity to flame up in them. They escape the probation involved in contending with carnal concupiscence. Positively they have become members of Christ's Body, and share in its regenera tive and sanctifying hfe through the operation of the Spirit in their souls, and are holy chUdren of God. They are accounted righteous as having the grace of righteousness, and as wholly unresisting to its influence. In this blameless and sanctified state God has taken them to Himself without sub jecting them to the trials of earthly temptation — trials that do not foUow them beyond the grave. So far as we can judge, they miss the oppor tunity of developing in that type of perfection wliich is acquired by successful battle with sin. Their 280 THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE perfection is of another kind; but it would be presumptuous to deny its value in God's sight, and in relation to the conditions and vocations assigned to them in the heavenly realm. Our Lord's attitude towards chUdren teaches us that God has a special place in His heart for innocence, and there seems to be a vacant place in the Kingdom of God here after for those in whom it has been secured and protected from sophistication. Children play in the streets of the heavenly city, and their presence apparently is a needed element in its joyous life. Beyond this we cannot explore the mystery of their beatification. CHAPTER IX THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM 2 I. Introduction § i. It is a large and outstanding fact that in every stage and dispensation of true religion, in cluding the Christian, external and visible things and institutions have been united with, and have served as media of, the spiritual and invisible things of grace and truth. This fact we have everywhere had to reckon with in producing these volumes; and in various connections we have had to set forth certain of its aspects and bearings.2 The principle involved is caUed sacramental;3 and this chapter 1 The following works, cited in the rest of this volume, will usually be indicated by their author's names only: — Catechism of Nicholas Bulgaris, trans, by Daniel; P. B. Bull, The Sacramental Principle; Morgan Dix, The Sacramental System; J. J. Elmendorf, Elements of Moral Theohgy; E. C. S. Gibson, Thirty-Nine Articles; A. C. A. Hall, Confirmation; J. A. Moehler, Symbolism; B. J. Otten, Manual cf the Hist, of Dogmas; J. Pohle, The Sacraments, vol. I.; P. Pour- rat, Theology of the Sacraments; O. D. Watkins, Holy Matrimony; A. R. Whitham, Holy Orders; Archdeacon Wilberforce, The Doctrine of the Holy Eucharist. 2 Cf. Incarnation, pp. 78, 128-130, 164-166; Passion and Exalta tion, pp. 227-230, 252-253, 312-314; and this volume, pp. 17-18, 40-41, 5°~57, 94-96, etc. 3 On which, see P. B. Bull; Morgan Dix, Lees, i-ii; J. R. Illingworth, Divine Immanence, ch. vi; A. J. Mason, Faith of the 282 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM is concerned with a recapitulatory exposition of it, and with a historical and synthetic description of the Christian sacramental system. Another chap ter wiU be given to technical definitions of the external conditions upon which depends the validity of the several sacraments. By treating of these things in the present volume, we shaU gain space in our next volume for a fuUer theological exposi tion of each sacrament. The sacramental principle is this, that in the dispensation of grace and truth to men God accommodates His method in general to human limitations — to the natural and constitutional incapacity of men either to receive or to express spiritual things independently of external media or instruments. This incapacity is natural in that it necessarily belongs to human nature as such, and cannot be transcended by us so long as our nature continues to be truly human. It is constitutional because human nature is constituted by an intimate union of mind and body, by reason of which the mind in all its functioning is dependent upon physiological or bodily conditions. When this union is broken, and this method of functioning is ended, the man dies; and even a partial disturbance of certain por tions of the bodily organism brings with it a corre lated disturbance of mental activity. Gospel, ch. ix. § 3; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V. lvii; St. Thomas, III, lx. 4-5, lxi. INTRODUCTION 283 The conscious operations of the mind afford the sphere in which the effects of grace, and of all factors acting upon the mind, become apparent to us. But the manner in which these factors operate and produce their effects upon us escapes our scrutiny, for they operate beneath the threshold of consciousness. There is, however, no reason to think that the subliminal nature of these operations enables them to override the law above set forth, that our minds cannot receive any endowment, influence or enlightenment except as conditioned by the bodily organism and its states. Telepathy, for example, seems to depend upon certain condi tions of the nervous system.1 We gain perceptive knowledge of external things through the senses or, to speak more comprehen sively, the bodily sensorium; and the things wliich we perceive appear to us under phenomenal forms. Whether we accept a reahstic or an idealistic in terpretation of this fact, it is a fact and a law from wliich we cannot escape. Moreover, the higher mental processes of memory, imagination, analysis, abstraction and generalization — that is, all that is meant by thinking — presuppose sensible experi ence and are immediately conditioned by use of the brain. To sum up our thesis, in this hfe at least, and in the dispensation of grace with which these chapters are concerned, all mental and spirit- 1 On telepathy, see Cath. Encyc. and Baldwin, Die. of Philos., q.vv. 284 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM ual receptivity on men's part is conditioned by the use of external media and organs.1 § 2. The difficulty that in us the flesh lusteth always contrary to the spirit is very real and ought to be faced, but this lusting does not arise from an intrinsic opposition between flesh and spirit. Our bodies are not evU. The very Son of God made flesh 2 His own, and our bodies are made by Bap tism to be temples of the Holy Spirit3 — another indication that grace operates upon our minds under bodUy conditions. The insubordination of flesh to the spirit is due to the sinful weakness and blindness of our spirits. The remedy hes not in abandoning the use of the body and of material things for spiritual ends, but in completion of the work of grace in our hearts, and in the development of our spirits in that mastery which they were created to exercise.4 The impression that the flesh is by its very nature anti-spiritual, and the related behef that spiritual ends are attained only in proportion to our abandonment of external means and ad juncts in rehgion, are survivals of Manichasism. And they agree neither with the mystery of the Incarnation and our Lord's institution of Baptism 1 Creation and Man, pp. 191-192; Passion and Exaltation, pp. 170-173, 227-230; R. C- Moberly, Ministerial Priesthood, pp. 39- 40; W. J. S. Simpson, Resurrection and Modern Thought, pp. 411- 412. 2 SApJ ky'&ero: St. John i. 14. a 1 Cor. vi. 19. 4 Cf. Rom. viii. 20-23; 1 Cor. xv. 51-54. INTRODUCTION 285 and the Holy Eucharist, nor with nature's teach ing as to the place and meaning of matter in the universe. That matter and its functions have meaning is the impUcit postulate of all the physical sciences, for the hope which sustains natural scientists in their arduous investigations is that they may en large men's understanding of the meaning of what they examine, and thus facilitate the use of natural things and forces for human ends. But this mean ing cannot rightly be ascribed to matter and its forces in se, for meaning presupposes a mind, and the purely physical has no such thing. Mind reveals its superphysical nature by the obvious inadequacy of physical terms for its description. The meaning of matter and of the material uni verse is necessarily to be referred to a personal mind, the mind of nature's divine Creator. To the degree, therefore, that we truly enter into the meaning of the physical, to this degree we think God's thought after Him. This meaning of matter and its forces is necessa rily a great and worthy meaning, a truly spiritual meaning, for no unworthy and unspiritual meaning can rightly be ascribed to such an one as God. But the terms which define the meaning of nature are utilitarian. Matter is useful; and the progress of mankind is conditioned in important ways by dis covery and application of its many lines of utility. Usefulness, however, has no meaning except in 286 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM relation to persons and to their purposes. Nothing can be useful to matter, because matter is imper sonal and has no use for anything. Matter is useful, therefore, not to itself but to the persons who employ it, and that it is useful to mankind seems largely to explain its creation and meaning — the meaning or purpose of God in creating it.1 The conclusion of this line of thought is that matter is, and was created to be, useful to human ';, spirits and for spiritual purposes. Therefore it cannot be intrinsically anti-spiritual; although spirit can misuse it, and by such action upset its divinely intended utihty. This utility is determined by the constitution of nature at large and of human nature in particular, for nature is God's handiwork — the machine-shop in which He has placed us to fulfil the task imposed upon us, with the actual tools provided by Him. These tools are made imme diately available to our spirits through our own bodUy organisms, but the entire method and the environment of our spiritual vocation and appointed achievement are unalterably sacramental — mediat ing the invisible and spiritual through the visible and physical. § 3. The sacramental principle is not less promi nent in supernatural rehgion than in the natural realm. Both the old and new covenants have been embodied by their divine Author in external institu- 1 Cf. Evolution and the Fall, pp. 113-115; J. R. Illingworth, op. cit., chh. i— ii; J. H. Masterman, / Believe in the Holy Ghost, pp. 7-10. INTRODUCTION 287 tions and rites, designed in each dispensation to exhibit and make effectual in human hearts and understandings the mysteries of God, so far as His Church has been prepared to receive them. This use of visible symbols has been confined in neither covenant to the purpose of external and dramatic edification; but in both of them certain of such symbols have been appointed of God to be covenant instruments for bringing souls into acceptable rela tions to Himself, and for producing certain spiritual results in them. The difference between the institutions of the old law and those of the new does not lie in an abandonment of the use of externals in the new covenant, but in the greater spiritual power of Christian sacramental ministrations, due to the fact of accomphshed redemption and to the more effectual work of the Spirit in the Church thereby made possible. It is this greater spiritual effective ness of Christian rites which justifies our calling the Christian dispensation more spiritual than the Mosaic, coupled with the fuller spiritual knowledge which Christianity affords to its disciples. The contrast referred to is sometimes expressed by the saying that, whereas the rites of the old law pre figure and pledge the benefits of redemption, those of the new law "effect what they figure" and in- strumentally apply these benefits 1 — not magically, 1 St. Thomas, HI. Ixii. 6; C. S. Grueber, Seven Sacraments, PP- 57-63; I- Pohle, pp. 15-29. Cf. pp. 17. 40-41, above. 288 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM of course, but not less really under proper subjec tive conditions. These facts and considerations teach us that the sacramental principle and method, being of divine recognition and use, should be accepted by us with hearty loyalty to the sacramental system of the Christian Church. The only legitimate controversy among professing Christians on this subject has reference to the question whether a given sacra mental rite has the sanction and, when worthily received, the specific effect which catholic theologi ans ascribe to it. This question has to be deter mined for cathohc behevers by their rule of faith — the Church to teach and define, the Bible to con firm and Ulustrate. § 4. VitaUy connected with the sacramental system is the social or corporate and ministerial method of its employment.1 The Church is a divinely created society; and both it and its apostolic ministry are integral and fundamental elements in the Christian sacramental regimen. They are essentially sacramental, be cause they constitute external media or agencies by which the Holy Spirit operates in the Christian dispensation of grace. The reason why the Church is not in technical description coordinated with the sacraments and given their name is easy to under stand. As the Body of Christ, the Church is the 1 On which, see pp. 58-59, 72-75, above; Creation and Man, pp. 232-236, 337-338; H. B. Swete, Holy Cath. Church, pp. 119-126. INTRODUCTION 289 antecedent medium through and from which the Holy Spirit causes all sacramental grace to flow. It is a sacramental root from which the several sacraments technically so called convey to its members the spiritual sap of regenerative, cleansing and sanctifying grace. This social method of grace is a central element in God's plan to accommodate His dispensation to human nature. Men are by nature social beings, and no reaUy vital human interest can be effec tively cultivated and developed on an individualistic basis. Religion is not a private affair, although the spiritual interests of individuals are effectively pro moted by it. Our relations to God are determined by our social nature, and the relation of each individual man to his Maker is determined by his place in the social order to which he naturaUy belongs. This law holds good in the order of grace, and when men are elevated to the supernatural level, this event coincides with, and is made effective by, their incorporation into the special society which God has created for that purpose. Whatever a Christian is in status and function he is by virtue of his place and part in the ecclesia of God, the mystical Body of Christ. For him to attempt inde pendent or individualistic Christian functioning and development is to pervert the social law by which such functioning and growth are spiritually con ditioned and controlled.1 The results at their best 1 Cf. 1 Cor. xii. 12-27. 290 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM cannot adequately correspond to the will of God for His redeemed. The churchless type of spiritual character is not that wliich the Spirit came at Pentecost to make attainable by believers. It is a consequence of the social principle that at every turn and in aU vital concerns men are de pendent upon the ministry of other human beings; and this law is not annuUed by their entrance into the sphere of grace. Moreover civilization depends upon organized and authoritative methods of minis tration in affairs affecting men at large. Without pubhc government of some recognized kind there can be no civilization. This also holds good in spiritual society, and the ecclesiastical hierarchy represents God's gracious provision for spiritual civilization. As has been elsewhere shown,1 no caste is thereby created; and no separation of spiritual interest between priest and laymen agrees with the catholic conception of God's Church. II. Historical 2 § 5. If we beheve sacraments to be effective signs and instruments of divine grace, we shall naturaUy be led to accept their divine institution.3 But whether Christ instituted them immediately and 1 In ch. ii. §§ 5, 7, above. 2 On the history of the sacramental system, see P. Pourrat; B. J. Otten, passim; Hastings, Encyc. of Relig., s. v. "Sacraments." 3 On which, see J. Pohle, pp. 97-120; B. J. Otten, vol. II., pp. 295-297; P. Pourrat, ch. vi, and the N. T. refs. below. HISTORICAL 291 in specie, Himself fixing their outward signs, is a further question. The ancients were not so con cerned as we are to distinguish between our Lord's immediate appointments and those of the Holy Spirit in the apostolic Church; and they did not hesitate to refer to Christ's institution things that were estabhshed by the Apostles under the Spirit's guidance. Modern Roman theologians take the position that Christ instituted all the seven sacra ments in genere, that is, that He revealed and prom ised the grace of each, but left the fixing of their signs, except for Baptism and the Eucharist, to the Church acting under the guidance of the Spirit. Our Articles of Religion and Catechism both limit the sacraments instituted in specie by Christ to Baptism and the Eucharist. This hmitation is not open to serious dispute. In fact only Baptism can be shown indisputably to have both its matter and form prescribed by Christ, for the question whether the so-called words of institution constitute the appointed form of the Eucharist is still in dispute. The Archbishops of England in their Answer to Pope Leo XIII say, "It is clear enough that we cannot everywhere insist very strictly on that doc trine about a fixed form and matter; inasmuch as all sacraments of the Church, except Baptism, would in that way be rendered uncertain." 1 What is here maintained is that Christ and His Holy Spirit revealed, pledged and established a *In §x 292 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM sacramental dispensation of grace which, in its apostolic unfolding and subsequent acceptance and administration by the Church, inevitably developed into the seven sacraments of catholic theology, both East and West. It is on such grounds and with such meaning that we assert these sacraments to have been severally instituted at least in genere by Christ and His Holy Spirit.1 Baptism 2 and the Holy Eucharist 3 are generaUy acknowledged to have been instituted by Christ, and to have been treated by the Apostles as integral elements of the new covenant. Our Lord promised to give His Holy Spirit to His disciples, and the Apostles administered this gift by a distinctive ritual, the laying on of hands,4 the effect of which was authenticated by miraculous demonstrations — these demonstrations gradually disappearing when their evidential purpose had been sufficiently ful filled. No fixed ritual of Penance appears in the New Testament; but our Lord gave to His Church the power of remitting sins, and this power was treated 1 That there are seven sacraments, see A. P. Forbes, op. cit., pp. 446-453; Darwell Stone, Holy Baptism, pp. 88-93; St. Thomas, III. lxv; J. Pohle, pp. 32-57; P- Pourrat, ch. v. (historical). Cf. E. C. S. Gibson, vol. II. pp. 593-602. 2 St. John iii. 5; St. Matt, xxviii. 19. Cf. Acts ii. 37-38. 3 St. John vi. 30-59; 1 Cor. xi. 23-26; St. Mark xiv. 22-25; St. Luke xxii. 19-20; St. Matt. xxvi. 26-28. Cf. Acts ii. 42. 4 St. John xiv. 16-17; Acts viii. 14-19; xix. 1-6. Cf. St. Matt. iii. 16, etc. HISTORICAL 293 by the Apostles as properly exercised by them and by the Church's presbyters.1 The sacrament of Order grew out of the Lord's commission and His bestowal of the Spirit on His Apostles; and it gradu ally received settled forms, as the apostoUc ministry was developed.2 Our Lord in effect reconstituted Matrimony, and described the union in which it results as one of divine making — presumably therefore of divine sanctifying. St. Paul discovers in it an earthly type of the great mystery of Christ's union with His Church.3 Anointing with oil con stituted the method by which our Lord's Apostles fulfilled a commission from Him to heal the sick, and St. James prescribed this method in what has been caUed "an inspired rubric." i We have not presented the above described cir cumstances for demonstrative purposes, or as of themselves affording complete formal proof of the cathohc doctrine concerning each and every one of the seven sacraments. Our purpose is his- 1 St. John xx. 22-23; 2 Cor. ii. 10 (with 1 Cor. v. 4-5). Cf. St. Matt. ix. 2-8; xvi. 19; xviii. 18. 2 St. Matt, xxviii. 18-20; St. Mark suppl. xvi. 15-16; St. Luke xii. 43-44; St. John xx. 21-22; Acts vi. 6; 1 Tim. iv. 14; 2 Tim. i. 6. Cf. ch. iv. § 2, above. * St. Mark x. 2-13; Ephes. v. 22-32. The Vulgate designates the mystery in Ephes. v. 32 as a sacramentum, following correctly an early Christian use of this word as equivalent to iiixrrlipiov. See Art. on "Mysterium and Sacramentum," in Amer. Journ. of Theol., July, 1915, by T. B. Foster. To use the word as proof that Holy Matrimony is a sacrament in the later sense is of course wrong. * St. Mark vi. 13; St. James v. 15. 294 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM torical — to indicate that in the apostoUc Church each of these sacraments had come into officiaUy recognized use, apparently being regarded as normal elements of a dispensation of grace which was attrib uted as a whole to the authority of Christ and of the Holy Spirit. The later catholic theology con cerning them has this notable circumstance in its favour, however, that it alone reckons adequately with the data of the apostoUc age. Protestant theories, by excluding the majority of the rites under discussion from the Church's working system, plainly set aside certain apostolic precepts and practices. § 6. AU the seven sacraments were used in the ancient Church; and the earhest relevant evidence seems to show that in the case of each one, sepa rately considered, the substance of the later cathohc doctrine concerning its spiritual effects was already in possession of the field.1 But the technical de velopment of sacramental theology came slowly. In particular, the enumeration of the sacraments, and their clear differentiation from other Christian instruments and rites, could not be accomplished untU the term sacramentum itself had received precise definition. Such definition was not crys tallized until the twelfth century. Sacramentum,2 etymologically considered, means 1 Cf. P. Pourrat, pp. 259-263 and passim. 2 On its early use, cf. p. 293, note 3, above; and see P. Pourrat, ch. i; J. Pohle, pp. 1-17. HISTORICAL 295 a sacred thing, and this meaning underhes its vari ous historical apphcations. It was first applied to moneys deposited in a sacred place by parties to a suit, then to any civil suit or process, and later to the oath taken by newly enhsted soldiers. In the Old Latin and Vulgate versions of the New Testament, and by Tertulhan, it was used as equiv alent to a mystery, mysterium, ixvarrtpiov. Ter tuUian first appUed it to Baptism and the Eucharist. Others foUowed his example in this usage, which was extended loosely to include in its reference almost any external Christian instrument or ritual. i St. Augustine first undertook to define the term as meaning a sacred sign, sacrum signum1 but failed to include in the definition the thought that it is an efficacious sign and instrument of grace. Yet he speaks of grace as the virtue of sacraments, gratia, quae sacramentorum virtus est,2 and clearly teaches the imphed doctrine that the sacraments convey grace. As against the Donatists, he maintained that a sacrament derives its efficacy from God, and this independently of the minister's worthiness.3 But along with this restricted use of the word, we find looser usage in his writings. Thus he caUs the tradition of the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and ex orcisms sacraments. The dark ages saw no determinative progress, but 1 De Civ. Dei, x. 5. 2 Enarr. in Psa. Ixxvii. 2. 3 Cf. P. Pourrat, pp. 130-150. 296 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM in the twelfth century the idea of efficacy for con veying sanctifying grace was brought forward, and this was crystallized by Peter Lombard. Sacra mentum enim proprie dicitur quod ita signum est gratiae Dei, et invisibilis gratiae forma, ut ipsius imaginem gerat et causa existat.1 In brief, sacra ments are signs of grace and causes of the grace which they signify. The acceptance of his defini tion carried with it acceptance of his enumeration of the sacraments as seven; for each of the rites thus enumerated had been traditionally regarded as a sign of grace, and as an efficacious means of its conveyance. No new teaching was introduced, but seven ancient and related doctrines concerning the Church's means of grace were for the first time explicitly coordinated in one scientific category and technical terminology. This development was completed after the schism between the Eastern and Western Churches had occurred. It is significant, therefore, that, in spite of violent prejudice against everything Latin, the Easterns adopted the same enumeration, using the Greek term pvarripiov instead of the Latin sacramentum.2 There can be required no stronger evidence than this of the catholic authority of the doctrines wliich are coordinated by means of this 1 Sent., IV. 1-2. The Council of Trent, Sess. VII. Can. 1, fixed this enumeration. 2 See P. Pourrat, pp. 284-286, 289-294; Catechism of Nicholas Bulgaris, pp. 2-25; Hastings, Encyc. of Relig., s.v. "Sacraments (Christian, Eastern)." HISTORICAL 297 enumeration of seven sacraments or mysteries of sanctifying grace. § 7. But the enumeration of sacraments and the definition of the term in question go together in the consensus referred to.. The definition should there fore be taken neither so narrowly as to exclude any of these seven, nor so loosely as to include other rites. There is reason for this caution in reckoning with the sacraments of Matrimony and Unction of the Sick. Holy Matrimony differs from other sacraments in requiring no fixed rite and no official minister. Its grace pertains to a state of hfe which God has sanctioned and blessed rather than to a formal sign ecclesiasticaUy defined and officiaUy performed. For this reason some have refused to caU it a sacrament. But the consent of both East and West in reckon ing it among the sacraments indicates that a fixed rite is not invariably essential. That Matrimony has a determinate and recognizable sign, in spite of the variations in its fulfilment, appears in the fact that determinate external evidence can be appealed to in ascertaining its performance. Verifiable things are done wliich by general consent constitute the sign that the lawful union of a Christian man and a Christian woman in Matrimony has been accom plished. These things — the Baptism of both parties, as required for their sacramental capacity, and lawful 298 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM marriage — constitute the sign.1 And the teaching of Christ that their being joined together is a divine act,2 irreversible by man, is naturally taken by the Church to imply that sanctifying grace is attached to the union and conveyed to its participants.3 The circumstance that these participants are the only ministers should afford no difficulty, in view of the fact that their actions vahdly accomplish the appointed sign. In brief, there is in Matrimony a recognizable sign to wliich sanctifying grace is attached, and nothing more is required to consti tute a sacrament in the technical sense of that term. In the case of Unction of the Sick the objection has been made that it has been instituted for a purely physical effect, the healing of bodily disease, and therefore does not answer to the definition of a sacrament, not being a sign or instrument of sanctifying grace.4 Those who raise this objection maintain that when St. James says with reference to one who is anointed, "And if he have committed sins, it shall be forgiven him," s he is not describing an effect of Unction, but a supplementary adminis tration of Penance. 1 Cf. ch. x. § n, below. 2 St. Mark x. 6-9 and parallels. 3 Cf. § 15 of this chapter. 4 So F. W. Puller, The Anointing of the Sick in Scripture and Tradition. Per contra, C. S. Grueber, Anointing the Sick, pp. 10-16; A. P. Forbes, pp. 465-474. 6 St. James v. 15. HISTORICAL 299 Granting the possibility that such exegesis is correct, although it cannot be demonstrated to be so, the principle remains that we may not separate sanctifying grace from divine acts of healing the sick. St. James says, "And the Lord shaU raise him up," and the presumption that a divinely appointed instrument of mercy to the sick is sanc tifying is very strong indeed. In this connection the description of the divine act of healing as "sav ing" the sick appears significant of a union of spiritual effects with the physical, especiaUy as the healings in question are conditioned by faith. In any case, the ecclesiastical judgment that Unction of the Sick is spiritually sanctifying as well as physicaUy healing in its appointed effect outweighs the negative exegesis of individual scholars, that is, in the estimation of those who beheve that the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit. § 8. The Protestants and Reformers who broke away from the cathohc hierarchy in the sixteenth century naturaUy lost much of their hold upon the Church's teaching. The sacramental views adopted by them were distinctly novel, revolutionary and in important regards mutuaUy inconsistent. Our purpose does not require us to describe them here.1 In .rejecting mediaeval abuses and the papal juris diction that interfered with reformation, Anglican 1 But see J. A. Moehler, §§ 28-31; P. Pourrat, pp. 177-181, 286- 288; Schaff-Herzog Encyc, s.v. "Sacraments"; Hastings, Encyc. of Relig., s.v. "Sacraments (Lutheran: Reformed)." 300 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM leaders came deeply to sympathize with the Lu therans and Reformers; and they were unques tionably infected to a degree with negative views concerning the minor sacraments. Some of them clearly maintained that the divinely sanctioned means of sanctifying grace are two only, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord. But this does not of itself prove that the English Church gave official sanction to such a position. The premise has to be reckoned with that the previously accepted doc trines of this Church retained their authority ex cept so far as repudiated by official action, that is, by the formularies of doctrine adopted during the reformation period. The question is, not what the Anghcan leaders of the sixteenth century personaUy believed concern ing the sacraments, but what they succeeded in getting the Enghsh Church to set forth in binding language. Moreover, the language of a Church still claiming to be catholic should be interpreted consistently with cathohc doctrines, unless such interpretation is demonstrably excluded by the grammatical meaning of the official phrases under consideration. Neither in the Articles of Religion nor in the Church Catechism — the formularies which treat of the sacraments — is there any repu diation of the doctrine previously received by the Anglican Church that the "five commonly called sacraments" other than Baptism and the Lord's Supper are divinely effective means of sanctifying CONSTRUCTIVE SURVEY 301 grace. Four of them continue to be administered or solemnized with prescribed forms that imply con veyance of grace; and the other one, Unction of the Sick, has never been forbidden. It could not be forbidden consistently with "foUowing of the Apostles." 1 III. Constructive Survey § 9. In order that these chapters may be form- aUy complete, we proceed to give a rapid construc tive survey of the sacramental system, indicating the functional place and effects of each of the seven sacraments in the dispensation of grace. The fuller theological treatment of this subject wUl be taken up in our next volume, which will be wholly devoted to it.2 Three of the sacraments have to do with making Christians what they become in the Church of Christ, Baptism and Confirmation effecting their new birth and spiritual equipment as Christians, and Holy Order constituting those of them who are called to such vocation to be ministers of Christ and official organs of the mystical Body. Each of these has permanent effect and imparts indelible 1 On the Anglican doctrine, see pp. 242-244, above, and refs. there given. 2 References will there be more fully supplied. For brief Anghcan surveys of the sacramental system, see D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, chh. xi-xii; A. P. Forbes, on art. xxv; and Morgan Dix, Sacramental System. Orthodox Eastern, Holy Catechism of Nicholas Bulgaris, pp. 2-25. Roman, Cath. Encyc, s. v. "Sacraments." 302 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM "character" to the souls of its recipients.1 The Holy Eucharist is the working centre and primary corporate function of the Church, in which regener ate souls are nourished and sanctified by the Body and Blood of Christ, and in. which these same souls unite in corporate and sacrificial approach to God. For the remedy respectively of the spiritual and physical ills which emerge in the baptismal hfe — evils which in ultimate analysis are vitally inter related and alike reveal the working of sin — Penance and Unction of the Sick have been insti tuted, being specialized applications of the grace of hfe of the Body of Christ. Finally the grace of Holy Matrimony is for the sanctification of social and sexual relations between the baptized and their elevation to typical significance in relation to the union between Christ and His Church. The beneficial effects of these sacraments, even where character is conferred ex opere operato, are always morally conditioned. § 10. Baptism is the sacrament of initiation into the sphere of regenerate hfe and sanctifying grace, upon the reception of which depends capacity to receive the grace of all other sacraments.2 (a) It effects first of aU the recipient's incor- 1 On "character," see A. J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. ix. §4; St. Thomas, HI. briii; G. Pierse, "Origin of the Doctrine of Sacramental Character," in Irish Theol. Q., Apr., 1911; P. Pourrat, ch. iv; J. Pohle, pp. 76-84. ¦' On Baptism, see D. Stone, Holy Baptism; M. F. Sadler, Second Adam and New Birth; St. Thomas, III. Ixvi-lxx. , CONSTRUCTIVE SURVEY 303 poration into the Body of Christ, and the conse quent inflow of the supernatural hfe which resides in that Body. In other words, its subject is re generate, born anew of water and of the Holy Spirit, and made participant of a higher vital principle, one which carries with it the pledge of heavenly immortality. Conversion, or change of personal disposition towards God and towards His wiU, when it has not already taken place, is a proper sequel of regeneration, but is quite dis tinct from that mystery. (b) Baptism is also an instrument of remission, both of the guilt so caUed of original sin and of previous personal or actual sin. It washes away sin, places the penitent or infant on a new footing, makes him partaker of the grace of righteousness, and thus becomes the instrumental cause of his justification. This means that it places him in a state of potential or incipient righteousness, the warrant for his being accounted righteous in antic ipation of the actualization of Christian perfection in him. (c) Baptism signalizes and achieves the subject's adoption as chUd of God through incorporation into Christ, and as sharer in the sonship which is in herent in Christ. In other words, he becomes the chUd of grace, possessed of the means of growth in the likeness of Christ, and of inheriting the privileges of sonship in everlasting hfe. (d) This sonship is indelibly stamped upon, or 304 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM sealed in, the soul, this seal constituting a character which forever distinguishes spirituaUy the regener ate from the unregenerate. It is a badge, so to speak, of honour to those who carry it worthily, and of shame to those who fall from grace. (e) Baptism confers sacramental capacity, and none who have not by this sacrament been elevated to the supernatural order are capable of receiving the grace of the other sacraments. § n. In Baptism we receive the Holy Spirit in this sense that we are thereby taken into the Body of Christ, which is the centre of the Spirit's opera tions, and become the permanent subjects of His work. But it is in Confirmation1 that the. Holy Spirit becomes a formal gift to the soul. This gift completes the normal spiritual equipment of the soul, conferring an indelible character that is complementary to that of Baptism. < As severally distinguished, the gifts of the Holy Spirit which are received in Confirmation are under standing and wisdom, knowledge and counsel, true godhness, ghostly strength and holy fear. These gifts supematurally elevate the natural faculties of inteUigence, affections and wiU, and facilitate the development of the virtues, already latent in baptized souls, of faith, hope and love. By this equipment the baptized child of God is more completely fitted for his further sacramental 1 On Confirmation, see A. C. A. Hall, Confirmation; St. Thomas, III. lxxii. CONSTRUCTIVE SURVEY 305 privUeges, is made fuU sharer in the royal priest hood of Christians, and is armed for the battle wliich he has to wage against the powers of evU. It can be seen that, however useful and edifying is the practice of ratifying baptismal vows at Con firmation, the essence of Confirmation lies in its being an instrument of sanctifying grace. The ratifying of vows is a modern adjunct, introduced to reassert the close connection between Baptism and Confirmation which their separation in times of administration had obscured. § 12. The Holy Eucharist 1 is the corporate working centre of the Christian system; and be cause of its centrality and comprehensive values it is honoured with the distinctive description "the Blessed Sacrament." Unlike other sacraments its effects flow not from the rite at large, so much as from an inward res sacramenti or the Body and Blood of Christ, into which by consecration the bread and wine are converted, although without any physical change of the elements employed. This res sacramenti becomes not only the immediate source of grace to its recipients, but also the "holy gifts" offered up to God as the appointed memorial before Him of Christ's blessed passion and precious death. (a) As a sacrament or instrument of grace, the 1 On the Holy Eucharist, see D. Stone, Holy Communion; Archd. Wilberforce, Holy Eucharist; M. F. Sadler, One Offering; A. P. Forbes, on arts, xxviii-xxxi; St. Thomas, III. lxxii-lxxxii. 306 JTHE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM Euchanst has for its primary effect the nourish ment of the regenerate with the Body of Christ, subjectively assimUated by contrite faith. For this reason it is called the food of immortality, for it nourishes that supernatural thing that was given birth in us by Baptism and which is the pledge of our future resurrection and glorification. But such food is also cleansing and sanctifying to the soul, in a manner that may be compared to the cleans ing effect upon the body of physical nourishment healthfuUy appropriated. (b) On its Godward side the Eucharist is the "bounden duty and service" of both personal and corporate homage and sacrifice. This appears in the double action of the Liturgy, caUed the minor and greater oblations. In the minor oblation we offer to God the unconsecrated elements of bread and wine, signifying thereby the oblation of our selves to God as His creatures and as able to attain the end for which we are made only through sur render to Him — this being an elementary and obligatory act of homage due from us as creatures, independently of sin. But since we cannot, because of sin, make this oblation acceptable and effective except by identifying it with the sacrifice for sin wliich Christ achieved once for all on Calvary, we resort to the instituted mystery in which the Holy Spirit consecrates our symbolic oblation and con verts it into the sacramental Body and Blood of Christ. Thus we identify our oblation with the CONSTRUCTIVE SURVEY 307 acceptable sacrifice of Christ, and renew our offer ing in a greater oblation of Christ's Body and Blood. In this way our sacrifice becomes accept able with the acceptability of Christ's sacrifice, and is made effective as a reasonable, holy and hving sacrifice of ourselves through our sacramental feed ing on what we offer. (c) In sitting at God's Holy Table and feeding on that which has been taken into God, we enter into communion first with God, and as consequence secondly with the great host of God's chUdren in the mystical Body of Christ. By this communion with God we enjoy, so far as is possible under earthly conditions, the life with God for which we were made and which has its inception in Baptism. The communion with the rest of the Church is the earthly stage in the perfected communion of saints hereafter, and constitutes that social aspect of the Eucharist which makes it the working centre of the Church's spiritual hfe and the sacrament of unity between Christians. § 13. The sacrament of Penance,1 rhetoricaUy described as the second plank in shipwreck, is the means by wliich the Church exercises in a formal and specific way the power given to its priesthood to remit sins in the name of Christ — in particular post-baptismal sins for which from the nature of the case Baptism itself cannot be employed. Just 1 On Penance, see T. T. Carter, Doctr. of Confession in the Ch. of England; St. Thomas, III. lxxxiv et seq. 308 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM as Peter did not need again to be washed all over by His Lord at the last supper, but did require, if he was to have any part in Christ, to have his feet cleansed of stains of the journey, so one who has been cleansed entirely by the waters of regenera tion, needs only, but may sorely need, to have moral stains of later incurring removed by a special application of sanctifying grace. God's pardon is pledged, because of Christ's death, to all His members who truly repent of their sins; but in three ways Penance effects needed functions which the working of this law does not always of itself successfully fulfil. (a) In the case of grave or chronic sins the peni tent is often in nee"d of special grace in order to develop the adequate contrition wliich is the sub jective sine qua non of genuine repentance. The Church's experience confirms what antecedent like lihoods suggest, that to many a sinner the sacra ment of Penance proves to be the means of completing his contrition and thus of his obtain ing forgiveness. (&) Sin is an offense against the Church as weU as against God; and the power of remitting or retaining is given to the Church for more adequate maintenance of its discipline and for protection of the Christian society against spiritual individualism. When men make their reconciliation with God a purely private affair, they injure the Church and imperil the reconcUiation which they seek. CONSTRUCTIVE SURVEY 309 (c) In working, the sacrament of Penance accom plishes more for penitents than mere pardon. It conveys to the soul a special sanctifying and as sisting grace, adapted by the Holy Spirit, we may well beheve, to the particular needs of each peni tent who contritely receives it. § 14. Holy Order 1 is the sacrament by means of which members of Christ's Body are given official organic status and function in the Body, and are admitted to the ministry which Christ and His Holy Spirit have appointed for the Church. In it can be seen to operate the structural differentia tion of Christ's Body into its organs of corporate functioning. It has three degrees, effecting succes sively the advancement of its recipients into the ministerial grades of deacon, priest and bishop. Its effects are threefold. (a) Like Baptism and Confirmation, to which it is a special sequel, Holy Order conveys indelible character to its recipient, stamping him with a spiritual mark and status wliich can neither be effaced nor iterated. (b) Gratia gratis data is the proper or primary grace of Order, whereby its subject is endowed with the official power and authority pertaining to the particular order to which he is ordained. Thus the subject receives mission, as participant in the apostohc ministry wliich Christ sent forth, and 1 On Holy Order, see A. R. Whitham, Holy Orders; C. S. Grue ber, Holy Order; St. Thomas, IH. Suppl. xxxiv-xl. 310 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM jurisdiction — this last in "actual" form being dependent upon canonical assignments and termi nated by canonical deposition. (c) Gratia gratum faciens, grace making accept able, is for the minister's personal sanctification and protection against the pecuhar temptations of his order. The beneficial effects of this grace depend upon subjective moral conditions, and pertain to an externaUy edifying exercise of his ministry, as well as to his personal journey Godward. § 15. The grace of Holy Matrimony x elevates the marriage union to a supernatural level, sanc tifying it for religious ends, and constituting it to be a type of the abiding mystical union between Christ and His Church. The ends for the fulfil ment of which Holy Matrimony is sanctified are (a) the begetting of future subjects of baptismal regeneration; (6) a rehgious union in which the social aspects of human nature are consecrated and are to be lovingly cultivated in the unity of true Christian faith and practice; (c) the preservation of chastity. As its being a type of the union between Christ and His Church shows, and as the interests both of a pure social order and of the holy upbringing of children require, Holy Matrimony cannot be dis- 1 On Holy Matrimony, see O. D. Watkins, Holy Matrimony; T. A. Lacey, Marriage in Church and State; J. J. Elmendorf, pp. 620-643; St. Thomas, III. Suppl. xli-xlvi; Cath. Encyc, s. v. "Mar riage." CONSTRUCTIVE SURVEY 311 solved except by the death of one of its participants. The only form of divorce permissible, therefore, is a toro et mensa, from bed and board; and such di vorce does not Christianize another marriage by either party while both parties live. A proper decree of nullity, to the effect that the original mar riage has not been legally consummated, stands on a different footing, for a subsequent marriage in such a case is not remarriage. It can easUy be seen that there is a vital rela tion between the sacramental union of Holy Matri mony and that of the baptized in the Body of Christ. Christian homes are a main resource of the Church in guarding itself, God's society, from contamina tion, and in securing the spiritual upbringing of its members. Rightly, therefore, the marriage union has been given a sacramental place in the order of grace; and rightly too the Church seeks by every canonical means avaUable to protect this union from reversion to the natural, secular and carnal level. § 16. The saving of the sick is the specific end for which Unction of the Sick x was instituted. In primary form it is prescribed in Holy Scripture for physical recovery; but divine heahng is never ade quately described as purely physical. No doubt the tendency to utilize it exclusively for the dying, as 1 On Unction of the Sick, see C. S. Grueber, Anointing the Sick; A. P. Forbes, pp. 465-474; P. Dearmer, Body and Soul; St. Thomas, III. Suppl. xxix-xxxiii; F. W. Puller, The Anointing of the Sick in Scripture and Tradition. 312 THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM a sort of viaticum only, is a "corrupt foUowing of the Apostles," since it displaces altogether its physicaUy curative function. Modern successes in mental healing show that the mind, even when unassisted by grace, has very real although limited power over the body in disease. And this seems to indicate in part the modus ope randi of Unction of the Sick. It is comparable to mental healing, but belongs to the supernatural order. That is, it elicits faith and supernaturaUy enhances the native power of the sick man's spirit, enabling it to overcome physical disease with a success not possible without such aid. To ehcit this faith, and to assist the sick man's spirit in its struggle with disease, is plainly a work of grace; and for this reason, if for no other, Unction of the Sick belongs to the sacramental order. Moreover, we cannot reasonably reject the Church's mind that the grace of Unction, in fortify ing the spirit for the banishment of disease, also fortifies it against the peculiar spiritual dangers which have to be encountered by the sick. Great as is the power of grace, it is not invariably effi cacious for bodily healing. In such event it is surely not useless. It becomes a sanctifying and assisting grace in the agony and peril of death — a true viaticum, vouchsafed by the pitiful Saviour of men. CHAPTER X OUTWARD SIGNS I. In General § i. The definition of a sacrament shows that it has two parts, the outward and visible sign and the inward and spiritual grace or operation of the Holy Spirit signified and effected thereby. The outward signs, which admit of comparatively brief treatment in Dogmatic Theology, are to be con sidered in this chapter. The next volume wiU be given to exposition of the inward parts — the effects of the several sacraments. Vahd, validus, means strong and secure; and a vahd sacrament means one the efficacy of which is divinely guaranteed because the instituted sign is duly performed by a competent minister, in accordance with covenant requirements. The di vine promise of grace which a sacrament conveys is conditioned by fulfilment on man's part of the sacramental stipulations of the covenant. Accord ingly, if these stipulations — or the things which make up the instituted sign and instrument of grace — are not certainly fulfiUed, the vahdity of the sacrament is uncertain; and, if they are cer- 314 OUTWARD SIGNS tainly not fulfilled, the sacrament is certainly invalid. An invalid sacrament means one in which its instituted requirements are not wholly fulfilled, and which, therefore, does not afford covenanted assurance of the effect which its ap pointed method of ministration is pledged to pro duce. Thus Baptism affords no divine pledge of its regenerative effect, if either the application of water or the invocation of the name of the Trinity is omitted.1 It is certain that wilful disregard of divine ap pointments involves forfeiture of grace, and that even innocent nonconformity to them carries with it a real reduction of the spiritual benefits obtained by full conformity to the divinely instituted sacra mental system of God's Church. None the less, we are assured both by our knowledge of God's abounding mercy and by the evidence of observa tion that the conditions attached to divine prom ises do not hinder God from extending important measures of grace to aU who are sincerely trying to conform to His will so far as they know what it is. Accordingly, we cannot rightly assume that in valid sacraments are necessarily deprived entirely of spiritual efficacy. To assume this is to disregard the abounding evidence of divine blessing bestowed upon the defective sacramental ministrations of 1 On sacramental validity, see pp. 25-26, above; Chas. Gore, Church and the Ministry, pp. 91-93, 304-307. IN GENERAL 315 modern Nonconformists. We readily believe that sincere Christians receive by means of their sacra ments, even when defectively administered, such spiritual benefits as they are conscious of receiving. But what these benefits are is to be ascertained by examining their confessional definitions concern ing the effects of the sacraments; and it is unde niable that the spiritual benefits ascribed to the sacraments in protestant Confessions are con spicuously less in range and degree than those set forth in cathohc doctrine. Protestants, therefore, are not themselves conscious of receiving as much from their sacraments as those who accept the fuUer sacramental ministrations of the Catholic Church are conscious of obtaining. The signifi cance of this difference can be nullified only by repudiating the trustworthiness of conscious experi ence in the sacramental life. The Church is necessarily under the most sacred obhgation to preserve the vahdity, as above defined, of its sacramental ministrations, and by every available means to prevent any sacramental instru ment of grace from faUing into abeyance or neglect. Not otherwise can the full benefits of the covenant be assured to men. The sense of this obligation, and of the consequences of its non-fulfilment, ex plains the care with which catholic theologians have defined the several requirements of valid sacra mental ministrations, and the somewhat technical nature of sacramental terminology. If we would 316 OUTWARD SIGNS understand the cathohc theology of the sacraments we should become famihar with this terminology. § 2. In its strictest theological sense, the term sacramentum denotes the outward part or sign, as distinguished from the inward part or grace of a sacrament. It is the visible instrument.1 To be vahd it must consist of the proper "matter" and "form," and must be administered with proper "intention" by a competent "minister" to a sus ceptible "subject" — one capable of receiving the grace of which it is the instrument or vehicle.2 When these conditions are rightly fulfiUed, the sacrament has a specific virtus or efficacy ex opere operato, by reason of God's appointment and promise. But the "benefit," or intended whole some effect of its working upon the subject, depends upon certain moral dispositions in him; for the sacraments are moral instruments, not less so because they are also external ones. The "matter" of a sacrament consists of the physical substances and actions which have to be employed. For example, in Baptism the necessary substance is water and the required action is its application to the subject, these together con- 1 On sacramentum, see pp. 294-297, above, where refs. are given. 2 On these sacramental terms and requirements at large, see the writer's Doctr. of the Church, etc., pp. 49-51; J. J. Elmendorf, pp. 557-564; C. S. Grueber, Seven Sacraments; Cath. Encyc, s. v. "Sac raments"; St. Thomas, III. Ix. 5-8; lxiv. 4-10; J. Pohle, pp. 59- 65 and ch. iv; P. Pourrat, ch. ii. (historical); and Moral Theology treatises generally IN GENERAL 317 stituting the matter. Needless to say, no sub stance or action can suffice for the matter of a valid sacrament except that wliich has been appointed either directly or indirectly by divine authority. The "form" of a sacrament consists of the appointed words or formula, used in connection with the matter in order to impart to it its sacra mental reference and virtue. The necessity of such form is clear, for the substances and actions em ployed in the sacraments do not have sacramental significance apart from the authoritative definition of their use which the form is appointed to furnish. The application of water to a human subject, for example, can have no sacramental meaning and value apart from use of the baptismal form, "I baptize thee in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." The matter and form of the sacraments are not in every case known to be of Christ's immediate institution in specie. In the minor sacraments, for example, their specific determination was left to the Church, acting under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. But even so, the grace which each sacra ment is appointed to convey was promised exphcitly or implicitly by Christ HimseK; and for this reason He is said to have instituted every sacrament in genere.1 And such institution by Him determines once for aU the law that controls the specific appointment 1 Cf . ch. ix. § 5, above. 318 OUTWARD SIGNS of the matter and form of any sacrament by the Church. Speaking generally, this law is that the ecclesiastically appointed matter and form of a sacrament must clearly signify its divinely insti tuted purpose and intended spiritual effect. Sub ject to this obvious limitation, there may be, and has been, some degree of variation in those sacra ments which have not been directly instituted in specie by Christ.1 The matter and form of Confirmation, for example, have undergone non significant changes, and are not entirely the same to-day in different parts of the Cathohc Church. But amid all variations the law of the sacrament, or the patent meaning or intention of its outward sign, has been carefully safeguarded. The same is true even of Holy Matrimony, in which any di vinely permitted and lawful marriage union between baptized Christians does duty for the sacramental matter and form. § 3. Jesus Christ, operating by His Holy Spirit, is the true and proper minister of every sacrament, and His mediatorial action alone explains their supernatural efficacy.2 This is a truism of cathohc theology. But He acts through a derivative minis try of His own instituting;3 and when we say that, in order to be valid, a sacrament must be ad- 1 See Answer of the Archbishops of England to the Apost. Letter of Pope Leo XIII, IX. 2 St. Thomas, III. bdv. 1, 3-4; J. Pohle, pp. 146, 161. Cf. Passion and Exaltation, pp. 312-314. 0 Cf. ch. iv. § 2, above. IN GENERAL 319 ministered by a competent minister, we mean by one who has been given authority and power from Christ through His Church to administer the sacra ment in question in His name. It is not in every sacrament essential that the minister shaU be in Holy Orders. But he must be one whom the Catholic Church recognizes to be 1 a competent agent for the particular sacramental ministration under consideration. Thus a layman can baptize in emergency, but a priest is indispensable for vahd consecration of the Holy Eucharist. The minister must have the intention of doing what the Church does in the sacrament which he performs.1 This does not mean either that he must correctly understand the Church's intention or that he must accept the Church's teaching con cerning its effect. A pagan physician can validly baptize a dying person, if he intends in general to perform the Christian rite of Baptism. Nor does it mean that a mental reservation on the part of the minister not to effect what the Church intends to effect in the sacrament wUl alone make the sacra ment invalid. If such were the case, we never could have fuU certainty as to the validity of sacramental ministrations, for we are unable to read the secret intentions of men. 1 On intention, see P. Pourrat, ch. vii; St. Thomas, III. bdv. 8-10; Concil. Trid., Sess. VH. Can. n (cf. Sess. XIV. Can. 9); Bull of Leo Xin, Aposhlicae Curae, § 9; T. A. Lacey, in Hastings, Encyc. of Relig., q. v. 320 OUTWARD SIGNS It is the ostensible intention of the minister that is meant. If the minister duly and seriously per forms one of the Church's sacraments as such, he thereby commits himself ministerially to the Church's intention in that sacrament, whatever it may be; and if he is a competent minister, the sacrament is valid. But if he acts in mockery or by way of stage-play, and with no serious pretence of sacramental ministration, the necessary intention is lacking and there is no valid sacrament. § 4. The subject or recipient of a sacrament must be a hving and rational human agent; and, with the obvious exception of Baptism itself, he must have been baptized. This is so because the sacra mental covenant is initiated for every individual by his Baptism, and an unbaptized person is incapable of receiving the grace of any other sacrament. It is also necessary that there be no fatal impediment to the reception of grace, such as compulsion in the case of one who has attained the age of discretion, and the impedimenta dirimentia or nulhfying im pediments of Holy Matrimony. A member of the female sex cannot be the subject of Holy Order; one who is free from actual sin not previously re mitted by Penance cannot be the subject of that sacrament; and one who is free from physical dis ease cannot be the subject of Unction of the Sick. The moral disposition of the subject does not affect the vahdity of a sacrament unless compul sion is exercised. In particular, the sacraments IN GENERAL 321 which confer "character," 1 Baptism, Confirmation and Holy Order, when vahdly administered confer it in any case, and for this reason are not to be administered again to unworthy recipients who have subsequently repented. But the subjective benefits of the sacraments, in the case of those who have reached the age of discretion, are dependent upon faith and penitence; and in unworthy recipi ents of sacraments which confer character they are suspended until these conditions are fulfiUed.2 § 5. The sacraments are moral instruments,3 and their efficacy flows not from any intrinsic virtue of the matter and form employed, nor from any personal power of the minister; but from the wUl of God in Christ who has seen fit to institute and employ them, and from the operation in them of the Holy Spirit. The fact, however, that God has instituted them as covenant pledges and instru ments of His grace, justifies the Church in teaching that their vahd administration carries with it the certainty of the gracious operation wliich God has promised to fulfil by their means. This is what is meant by saying that the sacra- 1 Cf. p. 303 (d), above. 2 On this suspension and subsequent enjoyment of sacramental benefits, called "reviviscence," see P. Pourrat, pp. 144-148, 201-203; Cath. Encyc, s.v. "Sacraments," p. 304 (c). The classic patristic passage is St. Augustine, De Bapt. c. Donat., i. 2, 18. 3 Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V. Ivii. 4; Archd. Wilberforce, pp. 14-17; J. Pohle, pp. 143-159. On various scholastic opinions as to sacramental causality, see P. Pourrat, pp. 165-176, 153-196. 322 OUTWARD SIGNS ments are possessed of efficacy ex opere operato? that is as the inevitable consequence of their vahd performance by those who are commissioned by Christ to administer them. The causahty is divine and moral; and it is not less so because mediated through human agents and by external instruments. And it is invariably efficacious. But an efficacious sacrament may vary in its effects, this variation being due to the conditions under which it is ad ministered. Nature affords many analogies. For example, water is efficacious ex opere operato when ever received by human beings, for no one can drink water without experiencing some effect upon himself. But whether this effect wiU be beneficial or injurious depends upon the previous physical condition of the drinker. The normal and provi- dentiaUy designed effect is beneficial, but, if the drinker is suffering from hydrophobia, he wiU be thrown into convulsions. These considerations enable us to distinguish correctly between the virtue, virtus, and the benefit of a sacrament.2 The virtus of a sacrament signifies its appointed efficacy, ex opere operato — its effi cient quahty when vahdly administered. Its bene fit, on the other hand, is the effect which it has upon those who receive it with proper moral dis- 1 On which, cf. p. 163 (d), above, and see A. P. Forbes, pp. 444- 446; E. C. S. Gibson, pp. 612-614; E. T. Green, Thirty-Nine Arts., pp. 175-176; P. Pourrat, pp. 162-165. 2 Usually treated as mutually equivalent terms, unfortunately. IN PARTICULAR 323 positions. The virtus or efficacy invariably resides in a vahd sacrament, independently of the worthi ness of its recipients; but the benefit is contingent upon worthy reception. This does not mean that the recipient must himself be worthy, for the sacra ments have_been instituted for sinners. But the manner of reception must be worthy, believing and penitent, if the designed benefit is to be obtained. Unworthy reception cannot nulhfy the efficacy of the sacrament; but, and for this reason, it does bring spiritual injury to the recipient. One more technical phrase requires notice. The res sacramenti 1 of the Holy Eucharist — the phrase is used only with reference to this sacrament — is the thing which the creaturely elements become by their consecration, or the sacramental Body and Blood of Christ. And the grace of the Eu charistic sacrament flows from reception of this res sacramenti; whereas in every other sacra ment it flows from the sacramental rite at large, which, unlike that of the Holy Eucharist, must be fuUy performed whenever the sacrament in question is administered II. In Particular § 6. In Baptism 2 the necessary matter is water, 1 On which, see Archd. Wilberforce, pp. 84, 123-125, 206-207; Morgan Dix, pp. 150-157. 2 The requirements for the several sacraments are given not only in all doctrinal treatises on them, but in compendiums of Moral 324 OUTWARD SIGNS apphed to the body of the subject either by immer sion or by pouring. The water must have its specific nature, that is must not be a chemical constituent of some other fluid like milk or wine; and it ought to be as free from impurities as possible. In any case water must constitute the predominant element in the fluid employed, and it should be used with - sufficient abundance to answer the scriptural de scription of washing. One application is probably vahd; but a threefold apphcation is of universal precept, and should invariably be employed. The water should be apphed to the head when possible, in any case to some principal and representative part of the organism. Immersion is preferable when practicable, but is not essential.1 The vahdity of mere sprinkling is very doubtful, and such irregu larity caUs for hypothetical iteration. If the water is successfully applied, the Baptism of an unborn chUd is probably valid, but may prudently be iterated hypothetically if the child is brought forth alive.2 Theology and of Ritual. Also under sacramental captions in theologi cal encyclopedias. On the requirements for Baptism (St. Matt. .xxviii. 19; St. John iii. 5), see D. Stone, Holy Baptism, chh. ii. ix-x; C. S. Grueber, Sacrament of Regeneration, pp. 8 et seq.; St. Thomas, IH. lxvi-lxviii; Cath. Encyc, s.v. "Baptism," VI-VHI, XIII-XTV. 1 Darwell Stone, Holy Baptism, pp. 133 et seq.; St. Thomas, IH. lxvi. 7; C. F. Rogers, Baptism and Christian Archaeol.; and his dis cussion of /SaxTjfa; in Guardian (London), Oct. 30, 1907, pp. 1791- 1792. 2 St. Thomas, III. lxviii. 11 (citing St. Augustine, c. Jutianum, vi. 5), rejects pre-natal Baptism unless the child's head is exposed. IN PARTICULAR 325 The required form is, "I baptize thee" (in the West) or "The servant of Christ is baptized" (in the East) "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." Even if it be a fact that in New Testament days the form "in the name of Jesus Christ" was occasionaUy used,1 this is not the form wliich has been instituted and transmitted to the post-apostohc Church, and the universal requirement of the Church is determinative in the question. The form "in the name of the Trinity" is not vahd; for it does not correspond to the language of institution, wliich requires articulate designation of the divine Persons. Inadvertent va riations that do not destroy the substantial integ rity and grammatical meaning of the form do not .make the sacrament invahd, but in case of doubt the Baptism should be repeated hypothetically. The naming of the subject is not necessary for validity, but is of precept, and is a most suitable method of clearly indicating the person who is baptized. The ordinary minister is a priest, and his minis try should be employed when available. But a deacon is authorized to baptize as extraordinary minister when*a priest cannot conveniently be had, and any rational human agent of either sex is per- J. P. Gury, Comp. Theol. Moralis, Pars. II. § 247, favors hypothet ical Baptism. 1 Acts ii. 38; viii. 16; xix. 5. F. H. Chase, Journ. Theol. Stud., July 1905, holds that St. Matt, xxviii. 19 does not prescribe the form but defines the effect of Baptism. Cf . D. Stone, op. cit., pp. 138-139, 272-275. 326 OUTWARD SIGNS mitted to act in 'extremis or when a sacred minister is permanently unavailable; x but no one can bap tize himself. Provided the proper matter and form is employed, and there is a serious and ostensible intention of administering Christian Baptism, neither heresy, schism, nor unbehef of the minister can invahdate the Baptism.2 But the fitting order of priority in selecting from avaUable agents is as follows: priest, deacon, member of a minor minis terial order, conforming layman, conforming woman, baptized Nonconformist, preferably orthodox, etc. A conforming layman is preferable to a nonconform ing minister. Private Baptism should be foUowed, if the subject hves, by solemn reception in the Church according to the form provided. But this is not essential to the vahdity of the Baptism. Any unbaptized and rational human being is a proper subject of Baptism, if he offers no obstacle to baptismal grace; and in view of its preeminent necessity for salvation, this sacrament should be administered at as early an age as is prudent — in early infancy if practicable.3 But Baptism cannot 1 On lay Baptism, see D. Stone, op. cit., ch. ix. and pp. 261-266; St. Thomas, III. lxvii. 3-5; Blunt, Diet, of Theol., s. v. "Lay Bap tism." For history, Church Q. Rev., Oct. 1887, art. I. For exhaustive contrary argument, W. Elwin, Minister of Baptism. 2 St. Cyprian's contrary view (cf. Epp. bdx-lxxv) occasioned the Church's settlement of this question. See P. Pourrat, pp. 117-150. 3 On infant Baptism, see D. Stone, op. cit., ch. vii and pp. 254- 258; M. F. Sadler, Second Adam, ch. iv.; St. Thomas, III. lxviii. 9; Wm. Wall, Hist, of Infant Baptism. IN PARTICULAR 327 prudently be administered, except in extremis, to chUdren whose parents or guardians refuse consent, or for whose Christian training no reasonably secure provision can be made. And those who have reached the years of discretion and of actual sin ought not to be baptized except on evidence of true faith and repentance and after proper instruction in the Christian religion. But a dying person who wishes to be baptized, and offers no immediate and self- evident barrier to grace, should be baptized as promptly as possible, with such instruction and preparation as the conditions permit. § 7. In Confirmation x the matter is either the laying of hands of the minister on the head of the subject (in the apostohc age and in Anghcan use) or an equivalent anointing by the minister of the forehead of the subject with oil previously blessed for the purpose by a bishop (in Roman and Oriental use since an early period). The equivalent sig nificance of these two methods is clear, for both conventionaUy and plainly signify the bestowal of the Holy Spirit; and in the anointing, as in the apostohc method, the minister's hand is virtually apphed to the subject's head. The universal use of anointing during the middle ages removes all reasonable doubt as to its validity, and those who 1 On the requirements for Confirmation (Acts viii. 17-18; xix. 6), see A. C. A. Hall, Confirmation, chh. iii— iv; A. T. Wirgman, Doctr. of Confirmation, ch. v; Hastings, Encyc. of Relig., q. v. (his torical and of different Churches); M. O'Dwyer, Confirmation (his torical). 328 OUTWARD SIGNS have been confirmed in the appointed manner in the Orthodox Eastern and Roman Churches should under no circumstances be re-confirmed. The precise form was not fixed by apostolic au thority. It has undergone changes, and is not the same to-day in all parts of the Church. It is suffi cient if in connection with the matter it signifies the bestowal of the Holy Spirit, and has been duly authorized by that part of the Cathohc Church under the jurisdiction of which it is employed. The apostohc use is vaguely described as prayer for the gift of the Holy Spirit.1 In Anghcan use it in cludes, perhaps consists of, the prayer for the sevenfold gifts which immediately precedes the laying on of hands and is obviously intended to indicate the significance of that action. The ac companying prayer, "Defend O Lord this Thy child" etc., individualizes the form, and should of course be repeated for every subject. The "ordinary" minister of Confirmation is a bishop, but a priest can act when authorized by competent ecclesiastical authority. Such delega tion is the rule in the Orthodox Eastern Churches, and is authorized in exceptional instances by the Roman See. No individual diocesan bishop can delegate this function unless permitted to do so by corporate ecclesiastical authority, and the Anglican Communion does not permit it. In no case can one who has not obtained the catholic priesthood 1 Acts viii. 15, 17. IN PARTICULAR 329 vahdly administer Confirmation; and Lutheran Confirmations have neither the true minister nor the ostensible intention of the Church's sacrament. The intention of Confirmation is the bestowal of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and the ratification of baptismal vows which accompanies Confirmation in the West is neither a necessary part of, nor a valid substitute for, that sacrament. It is merely an edifying provision introduced in modern times as a reminder of the close connection between Baptism and Confirmation, which had been obscured by the interval of time which in the middle ages began to separate the two sacraments, the cause of this being the gradual enlargement of episcopal jurisdictions.1 The subject of Confirmation is any baptized Chris tian possessed of reason and not already confirmed. Confirmation, since it confers indehble character, may not be iterated; but when previous Confirma tion is uncertain or of doubtful validity, it may and should be administered hypothetically. Con firmation is necessary in the case of every baptized Christian for due completion of the spiritual equip ment divinely appointed for him; and normally also for his prudent admission to Holy Communion, since the grace of Confirmation is an appointed part of his being spiritually fitted for that high privilege.2 Like Baptism, however, Confirmation 1 A. C. A. Hall, chh. iv, ix; A. T. Wirgman, op. cit, pp. 372-383- 2 This explains the rubric forbidding admission to Holy Com munion, "until such time as he be confirmed, or be ready and desir- 330 OUTWARD SIGNS cannot be administered prudently to one who has reached the age of discretion without his being previously instructed and manifesting true faith and penitence. Children should be confirmed so soon as they can be prepared therefor in the manner required by the Church; but, in the case of very young children, this cannot be done pru dently without reasonable safeguard for the com pletion of their religious training. § 8. In The Holy Eucharist1 the matter consists of genuine wheaten bread and fermented grape wine, physically present and designated by the minister's manual action when consecrated, and physically partaken of by the consecrating minister and sub sequently by aU recipients of the sacrament. The bread may be either leavened (Eastern usage) or unleavened (Roman usage). In the Anglican Com munion both are used.2 The wine must have at least begun to be fermented. The so-called un- fermented grape-juice, in which fermentation has been artificially prevented, is not a valid matter.3 ous to be confirmed" — a prohibition antedating the reformation, and not made subject to special exceptions by the rise of modern denominationalism. See A. C. A. Hall, ch. vi. 1 On the requirements for the Holy Eucharist, see Darwell Stone, Holy Communion, chh. xii-xiv; W. E. Scudamore, Notitia Eucharis- tica; St. Thomas, III. lxxiv, Ixxviii, Ixxxii; Cath. Encyc, s. v. "Eu charist," II; Blunt, Die of Theol., s. v. "Holy Eucharist," I-II. 2 On the medieval controversy over this divergence, see J. M. Neale, Hist, of the Holy Eastern Church, Gen. Introd., pp. 1051-1076. 8 So declared the American House of Bishops, Journ. of Gen. Convention of 1886, p. 102; and the Pan-Anglican Conference of IN PARTICULAR 331 The addition of a httle water is of cathohc precept but not essential for validity. Neither in this nor in any other admixture of foreign elements must the predominance of the species wheaten bread and fermented wine be destroyed. The Roman practice of withholding the conse crated wine from the laity deviates from Christ's institution, and is justifiable only in case of indi vidual necessity.1 The modern prejudice against reception from a common chalice, based upon alleged sanitary grounds, is unwarranted, for the communi cation of disease by this means is practically un known. The clergy, who are repeatedly and fully exposed to such contagion, are long-hved as a rule above the average. When the sacrament has once been consecrated it continues to be a vahd sacra ment for administration so long as the species have not been subverted by corruption. Upon this fact is based the cathohc custom of reservation for the sick and absent.2 The fuU form or Eucharistic blessing employed by Christ has not been handed down to us, but a 1888. Cf. Church Q. Review, Jan. 1883, "Can Unfermented Wine be used in the Holy Communion? " and Unfermented Wine, a Report Published at the Request of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 1 See treatises on The Thirty-Nine Arts., xxx. For history, see Cath. Encyc, s. v. " Communion under Both Kinds." Cf . St. Thomas, m. lxxx. 12; D. Stone, op. cit., pp. 212-221. 2 For historical data, see Cath. Encyc, and Smith and Cheatham, Die of Christ. Antiq., s. w. "Reservation." On the whole subject, Darwell Stone, Reserved Sacrament. 332 OUTWARD SIGNS valid form obviously includes the recorded words of institution, embodied in such solemn prayer to God the Father as is duly appointed by ecclesias tical authority. In the Eastern, Scottish and American liturgies this includes the epiclesis or explicit invocation of the Holy Spirit, and such invocation is thought by many to be imphed in other cathohc liturgies.1 The recitation of the words of institution, merely as an edifying lesson, does not constitute a vahd form, for there must be an ostensible intention of formally consecrating the species. The minister of consecration must be a priest, for the Eucharist constitutes a corporate function of the universal Church, which cannot be performed except by one who has been ordained to represent the faithful in sacerdotal ministration. In admin istering the consecrated sacrament, however, a deacon may lawfully assist. The vahdity of the sacrament is not destroyed if a layman administers; but such administration is not justifiable except in case of accident or other grave necessity. For vahd reception the subject must be a ra tional baptized Christian; but the sacrament can not prudently be administered regularly to those who are not confirmed, except in necessity to such 1 On this question see J. M. Neale, op. cit., pp. 492-506; E. S. Ffoulkes, Primitive Consec of the Euch. Oblation; Blunt, Die of Theol., and Hastings, Encyc. of Relig., s. w. "Invocation"; Darwell Stone, op. cit., pp. 221-232. IN PARTICULAR 333 as are ready and desirous to be confirmed. For safe and beneficial reception it is necessary that the recipient should be in a state of grace — not under prohibitory ecclesiastical discipline, free from unremitted mortal sin, possessed of true faith and penitence, and dutifuUy loyal to the Church's system of grace. It is of precept that he should, if possible, receive fasting; x and some devotional preparation is needed for worthy enjoyment of so high a privUege of grace. Under normal circum stances, and when not hindered by contrary pas toral counsel, a member of the faithful should aim to receive on every Lord's day, and is required by the Enghsh Church to receive at least three times in the year, of which Easter shaU be one.2 § 9. In the sacrament of Penance 3 the matter consists of repentance, including contrition, auric ular confession to the minister, and acceptance of any act of penance that may be stipulated by the minister as condition of absolution. Of contri tion more wiU be said below. Normally auricular confession is ma/de audibly, to the minister; but 1 On fasting communion, see D. Stone, op. cit., pp. 247-250, 304; F. W. Puller, Concerning the Fast before Communion; J. W. Legg, Papal Faculties Allowing Food before Communion, Ch. Hist. Soc. Publications, No. Ixxxvii. The chief contrary work is by Tully Kingdon, Fasting Communion. 2 Rubric at end of "Holy Communion." 3 On the requirements for Penance, see W. W. Webb, Cure of Souls, ch. ii; J. J. Elmendorf, Moral Theol., pp. 593-606; Cath. Encyc, q. v. 334 OUTWARD SIGNS when necessity requires other methods are vahd if virtually equivalent. Thus if the subject is dumb or unable to speak, writing or other methods of signifying the sins repented of may be employed; and this apphes if the minister is deaf or too far away to hear the subject, as when fire, flood or risk of contagion prevents near approach. But the spatial separation must not be such as to destroy every form of sensible presence and communica tion of the subject with the minister. The confes sion should particularize the subject's mortal and besetting sins; but in extremis and necessity a general confession of sinful life is sufficient. The form is such verbal indication of ministerial absolution as is duly sanctioned and permitted by ecclesiastical authority. In the East this is prec atory; in the Roman Church, and in the form prescribed by the English Church for use with the sick, it is indicative, "I absolve thee ... in the name," etc. Accidental variations, for example such as are caused by lapse of memory, do not make the sacrament invahd, if the Church's inten tion in the sacrament is sufficiently indicated. In emergency, as in a sinking ship, a plural form, ad dressed at once to a number of subjects is justi fiable, and is almost certainly valid; but the general absolutions which are incidental to the liturgy and other services are not sacramental. They may, indeed, have remitting effect upon true penitents, as part of the law that God invariably pardons IN PARTICULAR 335 without delay all Christians who truly repent. But their "intention" is liturgical, and the specific effects of Penance are not validly assured apart from the required matter and form of that sacra ment. The necessary minister is a priest, for he alone has received the power of absolving in Christ's name and of officiaUy administering the judicial power of reconciling penitents to the Church. The subject of Penance is one who has com mitted and repents of post-baptismal sin, and who seriously intends to fulfil any penance or satis faction that may be imposed upon him. The bene ficial effects of aU the sacraments depend, as has been indicated, upon there being no subjective barrier of either unbelief or impenitence; but the specific purpose of this sacrament gives peculiar force to the necessity of genuine repentance, which is a condition sine qua non of divine pardon. Con trition or sorrow for sin as such is an essential ele ment of repentance, and must be fulfilled in this sacrament, at least ultimately. But in practice its fulfilment is often made possible only by the sacra ment itself. That is, the subject may be moved to come to confession by imperfect contrition, called attrition, or fear of the consequences of sin rather than by true sorrow for sin as such. When hard ened by mortal sin he may indeed be quite unable to generate adequate contrition without the aid of the sacrament; and this wiU be a reason why the 336 OUTWARD SIGNS sacrament in his case is indispensable. For him it is the deepening of contrition in and by means of the sacrament which enables him to secure divine mercy.1 The sacrament of Penance is necessary for salva tion to aU who are unable truly to repent without its aid, as above indicated. The Anglican Com munion requires its use only in such cases — only when otherwise the sinner cannot quiet, wliich means clear, his conscience.2 In other Cathohc Churches confession once a year is required. It is obvious that no really earnest and unprejudiced Christian wUl be content with meeting the mini mum requirements of necessity; for as a means both of grace and of discipline this sacrament has great value for every Christian. § 10. In Holy Order 3 or Ordination, the matter is the laying on of hands by the minister. Because of this the sacrament was called x^podeala and XetpoTOvia by ancient writers.4 The delivery of instruments — of the Gospels to candidates for the diaconate, and of the chalice and paten to 1 On attrition and contrition, see Cath. Encyc, s.v. "Contri tion"; Blunt, Die of Theol. s.v. "Attrition"; J. P. Gury, op. cit. Pars II. §§ 441-444, 451-457- 2 See Prayer Book Exhortation as to preparation for Holy Com munion. 3 On the requirements for Holy Order, see C. S. Grueber, Holy Order; J. J. Elmendorf, pp. 610-619; Hastings, Encyc of Relig., s.v. "Ordination (Christian)," historical survey. Cf. Answer of the Archbishops . . . to Leo XIII, HI-IV, VHHX, etc. * Jos. Bingham, Antiquities of the Christ. Church, Bk. rV. ch. vi. IN PARTICULAR 337 candidates for the priesthood — or porrectio instru- mentorum, is a non-essential ceremony added for edification.1 The form is a prayer or indicative sentence, duly authorized by ecclesiastical authority, by which the matter, also used in other ways, is given reference to ordination. This form has varied in the Church, and has not invariably designated the particular grade of Order conferred; but this is clearly implied, of course, in the ritual at large.2 The minister has to be a bishop, because those who for many centuries have thus been designated have alone received the power of transmitting the Lord's ministerial commission.3 For fuUer security of episcopal succession, and for edification, the Church requires that at least three bishops shall take part in consecrating a bishop. But this is not essential for vahdity of the consecration. There are three Sacred Orders in the ministry, of bishops, priests, and deacons. For regularity they should be conferred in the ascending order. But if the lower grades, caUed interstitia, are omit ted, and the candidate is ordained at once to the 1 E. Denny, Anglican Orders, etc., ch. vii; Thos. Richey, Proper Gift of the Christ. Ministry, ch. i. Cardinal Van Rossum, De Essen tia Sacramenti Ordinis (recapitulated in Journ. Theol. Stud., July, 1917, pp. 325-335), is conclusive. 2 Cf. Answer of the Archbishops . . . to Leo XIII, XIH-XV; F. W. Puller, The Bull A pos. Curae and the Edwardine Ordinal (Church Hist. Soc. Pub. No. XVI), pp. 5-22. 3 Cf. p. 134, above. 338 OUTWARD SIGNS episcopate, per saltum, such ordination is vahd, al though irregular, because the character and powers of the highest grade include those of the lower ones.1 The minor orders are of human origin, and the ritual by which any one is admitted to one of them is not a sacrament.The subject of Holy Order must be of the male sex and baptized. No woman2 and no unbaptized person is capable of receiving Holy Order. Previ ous Confirmation is also necessary for regularity, but not for the vahdity of the sacrament of Holy Order, because the grace of Confirmation is con tained in that of Holy Order. Inasmuch as the character conferred in Holy Order is indelible, Ordination to any given grade should not be re peated, even in the case of restoration after de position.3 If previous Ordination is doubtful, hypothetical Ordination should be employed. In view of the serious consequences of invalid Ordi nation, peculiar care should be taken in verifying the validity of the subject's Baptism; and if this is hable to be doubted by scrupulous lay folk, for example in the case of schismatic Baptism, pru dence will dictate resort to hypothetical Baptism 1 On ordinations per saltum, see C. S. Grueber, op. cit., pp. 18-20; St. Thomas, in. Suppl. xxxv. 5. 2 Christ chose men only. Cf. 1 Cor. xiv. 34-35; 1 Tim. ii. 11-12. 3 Chas. Gore, Church and Ministry, pp. 170-174. Cf. Concil. Trid., Sess. VII. Can. 9, XXHI. Can. 4; Apost. Canons, 68; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual of Cath. Theol., vol. II. p. 503. Eastern prac tice has not wholly conformed to this principle. IN PARTICULAR 339 before Ordination. A ministry the vahdity of which is doubtful in the estimation of those who are placed under it is plainly fruitful of spiritual disaster. § 11. In Holy Matrimony1 as has already been indicated, the matter and form are not fixed. The outward sign includes factors that are not whoUy under spiritual jurisdiction, and which vary widely in different lands. But the sign is far from being indeterminate. It includes two requirements: (a) Baptism of its subjects, the man and the woman; (J) the consummation between them of a lawful marriage union. By a lawful union is here meant one that is vahd from the standpoint not only of secular society and its legal require ments, but also of the law of God as interpreted by the Cathohc Church. If either of the parties to the union is not baptized, the union is not sacramental; but it becomes so if and when the requirement of Baptism is subse quently fulfilled. The fact that a marriage between unbaptized persons is not sacramental does not, however, make it adulterous. Only an unlawful marriage is that. But it belongs whoUy to the natural and secular order, not having been ele vated to the order of grace and sanctified to the supernatural end of Holy Matrimony. 1 On the requirements for Matrimony, see J. J. Elmendorf, pp. 620-643; O. D. Watkins, chh. vi-x; T. A. Lacey, Marriage in Church and State. Geo. E. Howard's Hist, of Matrimonial Institu tions, 3 vols., gives much related information. 340 OUTWARD SIGNS It is not necessary for sacramental vahdity that a minister of the Church should solemnize the mar riage, except where such solemnization is required in any case to make the marriage a lawful one. On its legal side marriage is a contract, and the con tracting parties are themselves ministers as well as subjects of the union, in some states of society the only ministers that are necessary. Speaking summarily, whatever minister is needed for a valid marriage is necessary for the sacrament of Holy Matrimony, and no other. The fact remains, of course, that the faithful are under precept to have their marriages solemnized by the ministers of the Church, and when possible by priests. No other method is regular or fully harmonizes with the sacred dignity of Christian Matrimony. Two classes of impediments to marriage1 have to be distinguished: (a) those which make the union irregular but do not nulhfy it either as a legal contract or as a sacrament — for example, clandestinity, religious disagreement, religious vows, social disparity, and physical taint; (b) impedi menta dirimentia, which until lawfully removed nullify the union ab initio and make the sacrament invahd — for example, error as to personal identity, either consanguinity or affinity within prohibited degrees, insufficient age, antecedent and permanent impotency, a hving husband or wife whether di- 1 On which, see W. W. Webb, op. cit., ch. vii; 0. D. Watkins, passim; Blunt, Diet, of Theol., s. v. "Marriage," VI. IN PARTICULAR 341 vorced or not, compulsion not removed by subse quent consent, and insanity at the time of marriage such as makes legal consent impossible. When, however, these latter are discovered after formal marriage has taken place, a decree of nuUity is necessary before the parties involved are free to enter into other matrimonial unions. But such discovery at once makes the use of the carnal privilege of marriage formally sinful. The prohibited degrees include those which are specified in the civU and ecclesiastical law to which the parties are subject, and in aU cases those ex pressly or impliedly included in the law of God. These latter include the relationships both of blood and by marriage in direct line ascending and de scending and in coUateral lines as far as first cousins exclusive.1 Two forms of divorce are found in civU law: (a) a vinculo matrimonii, permitting the remarriage of either party; (b) a mensa et toro, nulhfying the obligations and privileges of cohabitation but leav ing neither party free to marry again while the other party hves. Cathohc doctrine teaches that the vinculum of sacramental marriage is indissolu ble, so that divorce a mensa et toro is alone effective in God's sight, and even such divorce is not per- 1 So the Table of Prohibited Degrees in the English Prayer Book — declared in 1808 by the American Bishops to be in force until other action is taken by the American Church. In Roman Catholic legislation the prohibited degrees are more extensive. See Cath. Encyc, s.v. "Impediments." 342 OUTWARD SIGNS missible except for the gravest reasons. Under the moral law of God no married person, whether the union is sacramental or only secular, can without grave sin remarry after divorce, so long as the other party hves. Violation of God's law cannot be made righteous by human legislation. Invincible ignorance of course modifies personal guilt in such cases. But a Christian minister is not morally free to solemnize the remarriage of any divorcee whUe the other party lives; and his doing so necessarUy weakens the spiritual discipline of the Church. The fact that much laxity in this matter has existed at different times within various parts of the Church cannot nuUify these principles.1 § 12. In Unction of the Sick,2 also called Extreme Unction as being normaUy the last of the series of unctions employed by the Church, the matter is an anointing of the subject with oU blessed for the purpose by a bishop or (allowed in the East) by seven priests. The form is an accompanying prayer, which varies in different parts of the Church. The Anglican form is given in the first Prayer Book of Edward VI. The minister must be a priest. The subject is a baptized person suffering from 1 On divorce, see H. J. Wilkins, Hist, of Divorce and Remarriage; O. D. Watkins, ch. vii; S. L. Tyson, Teaching of our Lord as h the Indissolubility of Marriage; Hastings, Die of Christ., and Blunt, Die of Theol. q. v. 2 On its requirements (St. James v. 14-15), see C. S. Grueber, Anointing the Sick; Cath. Encyc, s.v. "Extreme Unction," IV-X; Die of Christ. Antiq., s. v. "Unction," I. (5). IN PARTICULAR 343 grave physical illness, especially when in danger of death. The habit of confining its admimstration to those who are in extremis is a "corrupt follow ing of the Apostles" which puts out of sight the remedial aspect of the sacrament, and has led Ul- trained churchmen to resort to specious substitutes of Christian Science and other "faith cures" of modern development. The lawfulness and propriety of administration of this sacrament in the Anghcan Communion is clear. It is prescribed by what has been called an "inspired rubric," and such prescription cannot be nullified in the Church by provincial legislation. More over, the unfortunate omission from later Anglican Prayer Books of provision for its administration does not constitute prohibition, even if the Angh can Churches were competent to prohibit it.1 The sacrament may and ought to be repeated in recur ring dangerous illness and in the same illness, if it is prolonged and a new crisis occurs. 1 On its lawfulness, see A. P. Forbes, p. 474; F. W. Puller, Anointing of the Sick, pp. 299-307. THE -PLIMPTON -PRESS NORWOOD- MA SS-U-S-A By the Rev. Francis J. Hall, D.D., Professor of Dogmatic Theology in the General Theological Seminary, New York. THE LONG DESIRED ANGLICAN SUMMA OF DOCTRINE A series of ten volumes in Dogmatic Theology, crown 8vo., each complete in itself, designed to constitute a connected treatment of the entire range of Catholic Doctrine. Price, each volume, $2.00 net I. Introduction (published in 1907). II. Authority, Ecclesiastical and Biblical (pub lished in 1908). III. The Being and Attributes of God (published in 1909). IV. The Trinity (published in 1910). V. Creation and Man (published in 191 2). VI. The Incarnation (published in 1915). Vll. The Passion and Exaltation of Christ (published in 1918). VIII. The Church and the Sacramental System (published in 1920). IX. The Minor Sacraments. X. Eschatology and Indexes LONGMANS, GREEN AND CO. NEW YORK, LONDON, BOMBAY, CALCUTTA and MADRAS HALL'S DOGMATIC THEOLOGY Occupying a point of view which is Anglican and Catholic, the writer joyfully recognizes the value of modern advances in knowledge and thought, and seeks to coordinate the new with the old. Convinced that the ancient Catholic Faith cannot be imperilled by Truth from any quarter, he also believes that it needs to be exhibited in the terms of modern intelligence, if theology is to retain its place as the queen of sciences. The volumes which have thus far been published have secured a favorable and encouraging reception on both sides of the Atlantic. The learning, skill in argument and clearness of exposition shown in the work; the author's success in trans lating ancient doctrines into modern terms, and his sympa thetic understanding of new knowledge and contemporary thought, have been acknowledged by reviewers of every type — Roman Catholic, Anglican, and Protestant alike; — and his reverent adherence to Catholic doctrine has also been noticed. The following brief extracts are selected from a considerable number of generally favorable reviews. Volume I. INTRODUCTION Pp. xlii-273. Journal of Theological Studies, Oxford and Cambridge: "The author's learning and wide reading are as conspicuous throughout the book as is his fidelity to the point of view. ..." Church Union Gazette, London: . . . "is a compara tively small book into which an immense amount of valuable fact and criticism has been compressed . . . there breathes a spirit of large-mindedness, a refusal to be confined within any groove of prejudice." Church Times, London: "This admirable treatise should be found very useful on both sides of the Atlantic. . . .The book reaches a high level of excellence. ' ' HALL'S DOGMATIC THEOLOGY Volume II. AUTHORITY "Ecclesiastical and Biblical Pp. xvi-300. The Guardian, London: "The present volume, which forms a treatise complete in itself, is even abler than the first, ,ind most opportune. . . .The entire book is marked by caution, balance, and restraint, and deserves to be carefully read. A noticeable feature of the book is the immense inumber of modern writers referred to or discmssed." London Quarterly Review: "Dr. Hall uses ids space well. . .he writes with candor and ability." Church Times, London: "Everything that is said in this book about oecumenical authority, the authority of Councils, of National Churches, and so forth, is admirable. . .[Referring to the whole series.] That is a great enterprise, worthily begun." Record-Herald, Chicago: "It is refreshing to (meet such a book, simple and lucid in style, scholarly, thorough, con servative, but not bigoted, marshalling arguments and meet ing objections after the manner of the masters of theology." The Churchman, New York: "Of special value. . .is the chapter on the Dogmatic Office and Tradition. . . .There is a good analysis of the various theories of inspiration and a cautious discussion of the functions and legitimate scope of Biblical criticism." Scottish Chronicle: "This book. . .will be welcomed by many students of divinity. It is a well thought-out treatise on the meaning of authority in religion, in which are consid ered the three factors of spiritual knowledge. . .viz., eccle- siatical authority, biblical authority, and reason." HALL'S DOGMATIC THEOLOGY Volume III. THE BEING AND ATTRIBUTES OF GOD Pp. xvi-310. Expository Times: "It is the book of a student, the book of a thinker, the book of a believer. There is not a loose sen tence in it, and there is no trivial rhetoric. It is above all the book of a student. Professor Hall's knowledge of the subject is an amazement." Living Church, Milwaukee: "Dr. Hall has produced a noble book." Irish Theological Quarterly, Dublin: "We ... are glad to be able to praise the third still more unreservedly than its predecessors. It is an excellent manual of systematic theism, the very best of its kind by an Anghcan that we know of, and one of the absolutely best . . . the book has to be read in order to be appreciated." Journal of Theological Studies, London: "No argument for the existence of God has escaped his notice, and any one who reads his book must feel that Christian theists have no cause to be ashamed of the intellectual case they can present." The Guardian, London: "... the admirable second volume on Authority led us to expect much from the writer. . . . One of the best things between the covers is the discussion of the Ontological Argument. ... It should be needless to add that Professor Hall's work is marked throughout by the firm and reverential adherence to the Catholic religion which character izes all the products of the author's mind." Church Union Gazette, London: "An atmosphere of solid, hard work breathes through this book. The reaTder is made to feel that every sentence has been deeply weighed and more than once rewritten. The task . .. is of an intensely difficult nature, but the result . . . can be generally described as successful in the better sense of the word." HALL'S DOGMATIC THEOLOGY Volume IV. THE TRINITY Pp. xix-316. Guardian, London: "The most valuable part of this volume ... is the chapter on personality and related terms in modern thought ... we have again to thank him for a learned and useful exposition." Churchman, New York: "It must be reckoned the most important and valuable of the series so far; indeed, the most noteworthy theological treatise of the year . . . one may hope that many clergy and laity . . . will make themselves masters of this admirable volume. American and English Christianity owes a great debt to the learned and devout scholar." Church Times, London: "Professor Hall's excellent and worthy series. . . . But we refer the reader to Dr. Hall's volume, which will be indispensable to every student, elementary or advanced." Living Church, Milwaukee: "The marvel is how Dr. Hall can so exactly treat in such a brief way the many matters he handles. . . . We have said enough to show how valuable and masterly is this volume." Continent, Chicago: "It cannot be said that the able and learned author avoids any real difficulty, although dealing with a most difficult theme. . . . No one can deny that these lectures are able, clearly stated and imbued with the spirit of a true believer." Church of Ireland Gazette: "Professor Hall . . . has made a decidedly valuable contribution to Dogmatic Theology by his . . . book on the Trinity. . . . The chapter dealing with 'Difficulties' is exceedingly well written. This is a book which should find a place at an early date on every well ap pointed book-shelf. Its freshness, the straight, clear presenta tion of its matter, will appeal to everyone." HALL'S DOGMATIC THEOLOGY Volume V. CREATION AND MAN Pp. xviii-353 The Guardian, London : " We heartily commend this book as a very able introduction to the vast subject of which it treats. . . . The subject-matter is admirably arranged and the main arguments are lucid and satisfying. The references to modern literature are extensive and supply a very complete course of reading with Dr. Hall as a competent critic and guide." Living Church: "A large number of difficult problems falling within the domain not merely of the theologian, but also within the domain of the philosopher and metaphysician and scientist, are taken in hand by Dr. Hall in his wonted lucid, calm, and balanced way of treating his subjects. . . . We trust that many will procure and carefully read Dr. Hall's able treatise." Southern Churchman: "As a clear statement of the posi tion of the Cathohc faith, the young theologian can find no better help than this." Biblical World: "... The book should be found in all theo logical libraries. . . . The author has denned with great care his attitude toward the results of modern physical and biological? investigation. ..." Churchman: "The author shows in this, as in the previous volumes of the same series, a wide range of reading, logical thought, clear and convenient arrangement of material, and painstaking scholarship. Beside this, abundant and valuable references to many books and treatises, ancient and modern, may well stimulate the reader to a criticism and amplification of the author's own conclusions. Dr. Hall is a theologian of whom our Church may well be proud. Able, sincere, and scholarly theological work, such as this volume exhibits, is of real service to the Church, and is bound to be useful to serious students of all schools of thought." American Journal of Theology: "The style is simple, vigorous, eminently readable — one might almost add fascinating The book is supplied with abundant bibliographical notes. . . ." HALL'S DOGMATIC THEOLOGY Volume VI. THE INCARNATION Pp. xix-353. Church Times: "Each volume has increased our admiration for his scholarship, wide learning, and amazing industry." Living Church: "It must be said that no point of modern Christological speculation has escaped his notice, and that he endeavors throughout to preserve a sympathetic and open mind, quite as much as to state his own very positive convictions." Churchman, New York: "All of Dr. Hall's writing is impor tant, and it is gratifying to have such a work as his presented to the world as the characteristic product of the American Episcopal Church. He is one of our few really distinguished theologians." Expository Times: "Now Professor Hall is very capable, and even on such a subject as the Person of our Lord he is en titled to write. He is both ancient and modern." The Biblical World: "Dr. Hall's exposition of the tra ditional orthodox view of the incarnation is admirable. . . . Anyone who will study and not merely read his book will at least respect the traditional view and see that there is still some living thought in bygone controversies." Holy Cross Magazine: "It is . . . not only a spiritual but an intellectual treat, to find Dr. Hall moving with such complete ease amid the Incarnation data, yet appreciating at the same time the theologian's moral obligation at least to attempt to express the Faith in 'a language understanded of the people' . . . We commend the book for the clarity with which the Cathohc perspective is expressed, and for the reverent agnos ticism which is the inevitable corollary." Southern Churchman: "The result is a work of great value . . . Dr. Hall excels in accuracy of definition and in lucidity of expression, and the reader has no difficulty in grasping his mean ing nor in following the steps of his reasoning." HALL'S DOGMATIC THEOLOGY Volume VII. THE PASSION AND EXALTATION OF CHRIST Ppxix-323. The Churchman, New York: "It is especially fortunate that this volume should come from the pen of Dr. Hall, whose theo logical work is ever marked by both careful analysis and fruit ful synthesis. Even more important, in view of the recent clash of world ideas, is Dr. Hall's constant recognition of the vital connection between dogma and morality. It is hardly too much to say that Dr. Hall is one of the very few Anghcan theologians who displays awareness of the fact that no dogma whatever is of value in itself, but has reason and necessity only as it forms the backbone for the morally alert Christian life. . . . Altogether we most heartily commend this volume. ..." American Church Monthly (N. Y.) "The real qualifica tions of one who sets out to commend the faith in our day are sound theological erudition, the judicial temper and a genuine humility and faith. Possessing these indispensable qualifica tions Dr. Hall has produced works which have gained the praise even of hostile critics and the characteristics of his writing which have compelled such admiration appear anew and to advantage in the present volume. . . . But it was a distinct achievement to compress so much subject matter without reducing it to the tabloid form or throw ing some of it out of proportion to the whole and thus suggesting a false perspective. ... It is comprehensive without being diffuse, and scholarly without indulging in useless technicalities. IUuminative, sug gestive, and accurate in reaching the point, its argumentation is always forceful and candid yet never arrogant. The tone as well as the substance is that of _ profound reverence, which well befits the sacred themes of which it treats." Holy Cross Magazine. "What is needed is, first that the theology should be true, and vouched for by an authority that has a right to speak in the word of God, and, second, that the answer should be conveyed in the language and modes of thought which people use to-day. In these volumes both conditions are admirably fulfilled. Dr. Hall gives the teaching of the Catholic Church, 'the pillar and ground of the truth,' and he gives it in clear language that any intelligent layman can understand."