LIBRARY
11' Tin:
Theo. logical Seniinary
PRINCETON. N. J.
Cnsc Division
^helf ^3/ ( Section
Bonk /' T r-
/
LECTURES
I N
DIVINITY,
DELIVERED IN THE
UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE,
BY
JOHN HEY, D. D.
AS NORRISIAN PROFESSOR.
^=S5S3^55ss^
VOLUME THE FOURTH.
CAMBRIDGE,
PRINTED BY JOHN BURGES PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY I
AND SOLD BY J. DEIGHTON, CAMBRIDGE; LEIGH & SOTHEBY,
YORK-STREET, COVENT-GARDEN, RIVINGTONS, ST. PAUL's
CHURCH-YARD, PAYNE, MEWS-GATE, SHEPPERSON
& REYNOLDS, NO. 137, AND W. H. LUNN,
NO. 332, OXFORD-STREET, LONDON ; AND
COOKE, OXFORD.
M D C C X C V I I I .
LECTURES
I N
DIVINITY, &c.
BOOK IV
CONTINUATLON ©F ARTICLE XVIl. SECT. XVII.
QUEEN Mary's court does not feem to have intermeddled much with Predeftination j they had other matters to engage their attention j their chief view was, to bring the nation back to Popery; as we have given the decifion of the Council of ^rent^ we need take no more notice of the popilli part of our countrymen.
The reformed fell into difputes amongft them- felves even in prifon, where they were confined as Heretics, expefting, many of them, to be brought to the ftake; *• they wrote againft each other, and difperfed their writings abroad in the world*."— The dodtrine of Predeftination was even now gaining flrength amongft the generality of plain divines,
though » Neal, Vol i. 4to. page 69. Oxf. page 67. Heylin. VOL. IV. A
2 BOOK IV. ART. XVII, SECT. XVIII.
thongb it was cliecked by fome ofthe mofl. improved minds. Sonie/>;7;/j were drawn up ior the priloners tofign, in order to reduce them to amity; but they are not extant: it leenis probable, ihat though they did not run into the extreme of Calvinlfm, they ap- proached too near it to be encouraged by the prin- cipal'' Reformers. Bradford and Carlejs arc named on this occafion ; both mart}Ts ; as were many otiiers engaged in the difpute.
xvni. £//2tfi't7/^ came to the throne in 1558. In the beginning of her reign the more liberal and polite fort of divines wiflied to lower the dodtrine of Predeftination, or to avoid it. The Icfs liberal and refined pufhed it forward very (loutly i nay tyran- nirnily, fo as ro oblige (bme to fcek for flielter and proteftion. Both thcfe things appear, I think, from Strypes^ Anx\2\s. Bcfidcs, the Puritans^ who were Calvinifls, got confidcrable power in the Houfe of CommonSy and made the Queen (o jealous, that their propohng to ratify by acl of Parliament the Reformatio Le^uniy was realbn lulHcienf* with her to let it afide.
Much of the growth of Calvinifm has been afcribed to i\\z flight of the Proteflant divines from England during the reign of Q^ieen Mary : fome went to Geneva, others to Switzerland, &c. — But"
Jewel
>> Oxford Pamph. pnge 67, &c.
«: Annals 1559, page 116. 118, Vol. i. and page 294, (in fome editions I think page 331) : my old references to the/r/? Vol. of Strype's Annals, feem all wron<^: what Edit, did I ufe ? the reference in this Scdlion to the fccond Vol. is right, for Sid. Coll. Library.
^ Oxford, page 47, from Collier 2. t;3o.
« Some where I have mentioned the bad reception which thefe Refugees met with from the Lutherans, on account of their being what was called Saaamcntariatis, that is, denying the corporal prefcncc of Chrift in the Eucharift : the cruelty of the Lutherans made them take refuge with the Calviniils, who ufed
them
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XVIII. ^
Jewel went to Italy; and others to other places^, where they rather grew weaker than ftronger in the doftrine about the divine decrees. Much would depend upon th.e notions they found alibciated with kindnefs and hofpitality : but Calvinifm Teems to me to have been firovvino in England even be- fore, or during, the reign of Queen Mary,
I gave the Hiftory of the Lambeth Articles under the fixteenth Article°i I have now only to read fuch of them as belong to our prefent lubjed:* — The cordial aflent to them all, of that profelTed divine Matthew Hutton, Archbilliop of Tork^ may amufe the curious''. The remarks of the Bifhops and Divines, leem to be ingenious^ and to have drawn the JJing of fome of them very expertly, — I fuppofe Archbilliop Whitgift was at the head of thefe' remarkcrs. He is faid to have a6ted '•'-faci- litate'*- et metu." Though he encouraged Ibme eminent preachers againfh Reprobation, he might not think Profellbr Whitaker a man to be bluntly oppofed : but his condud' feems to prove what has been already obferved,
I. That men of Improved minds, were endea- vouring to foften the rigours of Predeftination.
2. That
them kindly : they were indeed of the fame opinion in regard to the Sacrament, — See Mofheiin, Vol. 4. 8vo. page 87, or Cent. 16. 3. 2. 2. 16.
^ Strype's Annals, 1562, Vol. Linage 294. (Sid.) or near that page; perhaps 293.
8 Art. XVI. Sed. viu. ^ Strype's Whitgift, p. 478.
' P. S. I cannot find, from Strype's Life of Whitgift, who thefe remarkers were; Strype contradifts this writer of the Lambeth Articles ; and reprefents Whitgift, more than that writer does, as favouring Whitaker and Calvinifm. Ytt I thought he did not quite prove what he undertook. Whitgift leemed to me, even from Stryi^e's account, to be guided much by prudence, and to diilike Whitaker 's zeal.
^ Hift. Art. Lamb. F- 1 <; - 1 8, Cambr,
^ Waterland's Suppl. to Arian Subfcr. page 44, Sec, A 2
4 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XIX.
2. That the Icfs refined were very flreniious in heightening the doftrine, and were very iiard to rcftrain.
One fentenceof iV^'^/™ may make fludents aware of the language of Puritans in whatever books they meet with it. ** Though the Pelagian doc- trine was efpoufcd by very few of tlic KngHfli Reformers'*—'* it revived the latter end of Queen Elizabeth's reign under the name of Armimamfm", and within the compafs of a few years funplanted the received doctrine of the Reformation."
Before we pafs to another reign, it may not be amifs to mention the idea of Predeftination enter- tained by the Fnmilifs". *' There are two, with their members, that are predcftined, or pre-or- dained ; the one unto prelervation, and the other unto condemnation, from the beginning : the one is Chrijly the man of God, predeftined unto pre- fcrvation, and with him, all his incorporated mem- bers : the other is the man of Sin, Antkhriji-y predeftinatcd unto condemnation; and in him all his incorporated members'*: as for any other pre- deftination than this (come it out of Turkey, or elfevvhcre) I know not of it."
XIX. In the reign of James I. there feems to have been an odd mixture of Calvinifm and Armi- nianifm. He was bred in the Kirk, and was, at one time, calviniflic; and he favoured Prince Maurice at the Synod of Dort, who favoured the Calvinifts : yet in the conference at Hampton Court, in the beginning of his reign, he dif- couraged them, and never chofe to prefer them in
the
•n Hlft. of Puritans, Vol. i.page 70, 410.
° Eliz. died in 1603. Arminius in 1609 (st, 49)— —it was early for the name ot ^irminianifm.
" Art. VII. Seft. iii.
P Stry[:>e's Annals, Vol. 2. page 378 This paflage is given bv Strype from an Afolo^y of the Familifls, but it ii not marked with inverted commas.
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XX. r
the Church. He preferred Arminians, yet kept up decency, and reftrained the Puritans in an artful manner. He gave his preferments to men of abilities and good lives. He forbade the Puri- tans to rail againft the Papifts; but then every one was forbidden to rail at the Puritans; this founded fair, but was really a great reftraint. The Jive points were too myfterious and nice for the ordinary Clergy to preach upon ; reafonable enough ; there- fore only Bi/Iiops and Deans muft preach upon them ^ but James made Arminians Bilhops and Deans I and lo the Puritans were filenced on thofe points which they wanted moft to propagate. — And fometimes laws appearing perfectly equal, were fo executed as to make the Puritans complain. It leem.s as if James, though a Pedant, confidered thmgs more as a ftatefman than as a divine; favoured thofe men whofe manners were the moft courtly, and checked, as imperceptibly as he could, thofe who were more rigid and uncomplying.
XX. In the reign of Charles I. Calviniim grew headllrong ; but ftill it was not in favour at Court : there Arminianifm flourilhed : indeed with too great opennefs to be confiftent with prudence. One charge againft Archbifliop Laud, when he was im- peached, was Arminianiiin ; the oppofition to that was ftronger than to anything d{t.
Mr. Hume'^ remarks, that perhaps the only thing m which all the Sedaries agreed, was the notion, that the docflrines of Fate and Deftiny were eflen- tial to all religion. Dr. Balgiiy^ fpeaks of their overturning the Monarchy, as being only ^ijiep to overturning the Church.— If we have time, I will
read
..? ^lP'}^H' Vol. 5. 4to. p. 371, near the bottom: Chap. vm.-Thefe are not the very words of Hume, but taken from
two lentences.
Page 6k a
3
O BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XXI.
read fome of Mr. Roufe's Speech in the Holi(c of Commons : and a Protejl of the Houfe aoauiil' Armlnianifm, in 1628.
In 1643 the ParHament, by ordinance, ap- pointed an Ajjembly of Divines who Ihould reform the Church of England, bring it nearer Calvinifm, and make a coahtion with the Church of Scot- land: we have their Catechijms^ and the Articles which they reformed ; but after debating ten weeks on the nrft fifteen, they flopped fliort, and dcfifled from' the taik.
XXI. The turn which rehgious opinions took in the rei^n of Charles 11. has been mentioned under the eleventh Article. — x'^nd the notions of Jntinomians with regard to Election, fufficiently, under the fixteenth. It has been hinted, that Methodijls"" are divided into Calviniftic and Ar- minian : and that the generality of the Englifli Clergy"" are reputed Arminians. The firft Earl of Chatham faid, in Parliament, that we have a Cal- viniftic Creed, and an Arminian Clergy''; I Ihould be more willing to acknowledge the latter than the former.— Dr. Jortin fays% " Our Diflenters, in the lafl Century, were generally ablolute Predcflina- rians ;" — they are now, I take it, moflly Sociuians \ — The ^takers are faid to profels Arminianifm : and fome Prefbyterians, 1 have been told, continue Calvinifls.
XXII. The
' See Ntal's Pur. Vol. i. 4to. page 530, 532, 534. from Rufliworth.
' Ncal 1643, \o\. 2. 48. 4to, The articles are in the Appendix.
" An. xvi.ScS.. X. " .^rt. xvi.Std vni.
y See Be'ftiam's Memoirs of the reign of George III, "\'o]. i. page 362. Ed. 1796.
* Second Diflcrtation, page 1 12.
" I do not perceive that t)r. Piieflley allows .nny decree at all. Famil. Illullr.
BO(yK IV. ART. XVI I. SECT. XXI I— XXI V. 7
XXII. The moil formidable Calvinift oi modei-n times I take to be Jonathan Edwards. He died in 1758; The modern Baptijis are reprefented by Wali, in his Hiftory of Infant- baptifm, (Part 2. Chap. 8. Sedl. 6. Subfe6t. 16), as more carneit about Predeftmation than any other people in England : As being anxious to know whether any^ one is a FreewUler or a Freegracer. They have alfo amongft them a divifion of perfons into General men^ and Partiadar men, from their holdino: a general or a partial Redemption.
XXIII. In Scotland ]o\\n Knox eftablifhed Cal- vinifmj and in 1643 ^^^^ affembly of Divines had in view the Reformation of the Church of England, but only the Prefer-vaiion of the Church of Scot- land; which fhews how calviniflic it was, — and puritanical in difcipline. The Confeffio Scotica feems to conceive the true Church '° of Chrift to be the ele5i^ and others reprobates. What are now the notions of the eftabliflied prefbyterian Kirk, or of the tolerated epifcopal Church, I have not' been well informed.
XXIV. The Irijlf Articles were drawn in 1615 ' by Archbifliop UJJier^ when Provofl of Dublin College ; the Lambeth Articles were incorporated into them. But in 1634 Archbifhop Laud got our XXXIX accepted ; Neal fays, in the room of the others ; but Waterland fays the Lambeth Articles were never formally laid afide. Uflier was then Primate : his Body of Divinity is very Calviniftic, but Waterland fays, " he renounced his Calvinian principles, as is well attefted by Three good Hands^"
Archbifhop
'' Syntagma, page 141. 148. Art. Eledio, et de Ecclefia. «= Neal 1.475. Waterland Suppl. Ar. Subfcr. p. 51. •• In a MS. note in the Library of Magdalen College, Cam- bridge, are mentioned Bryan Walton, Peter Gunning;, and
A 4 Herbert
8 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XXV XXlTTI.
Archbidiop King has left a very good dncourfc on Predellination.
XXV. Having in the tenth Article referv^d the
notion of God's caufing evil, I do the lame here.
»— He has been fuppoled to caule it either by in-
jiuence, or by decree ; the former belonged to the
tenth Article, the latter to this.
Vice is afcribed to Fate in Homer. Agamem- non excufes himfelf for robbing Achilles of his prize by laying*", Eyw <}''tf>c a,nt,o<; £»jU,t, AxAx Zcuj xai Mor^a — Agathias mentions it as a common notion, that wars and battles were imputed to the ftars and fate: fee Laidner's account of Simplicus in his Heathen teftimonies^
XXVI. With regard to the Jc-wj-, I know not that 1 ne.d add anything to what was faid under Sedion iii. — As Jewilh expreffions, arifing from Jewifh ideas, are the very things which caule our difficulties, they will appear of courfe in the folotion.
XXVII. Some early Chriftians have been faid to run into no'aons of fin being caufed by decrees of powers above i but the accounts feem fcarcely to be depended ^ upon. They are mentioned by Heylin at the opening of his Hiftory of the five Articles. Chap. i. Sect. 4 — 6. — But Colarbajus
feems,
Herbert Thorndike : with reference to Smith's Life of Ufher, and Collier's Ecclef. Hid. Vol. z. page 868. — And Neal owns thefadt, in a degree. Hill. Pur. Index. — All the Calvinilb ftill fpeak refpeftfuily (I am told) of Arcnbilhop Ufher.
= Iliadj Book 19 1. 86. Tliis exprcllion ib quoted by Heylin, p. 507 ; but a lc\. other expreffions miglitbi rcau : Agamemnon fays, what could he do ? a divine power made him offend.
^ This was mentioned before as an inftance of afcribiiig events in general to Fate, Sed. 11. but it ought alfo to appear as an inflance of afcribing evih to Fate. Natural evil may be diilinguifhcd from moral, but though war is natural evil, it is ufually caufed by moral.
P Art. XV. Seft. 11. and Art. XVI. Se>5l. n.
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XXVIII. XXIX. 9
feems, in Ang. dc Hcer. only to have believed in jEons. Of the PrifcillianiJIs Auguftin fays, *' Aftruunt etiam jatalibus ftellis homines colli- gatos," occ.
XXVIII. In Atigtidin's time the Monks o^ Adm^ metum are faid to have held, that God predeftinated- the wicked, not only to punifhment bur to ^/////, ' — And all thofe who came into this notion were called Predeflinarians. But difp^tes have irifen concerning this part ^ of Hifiory. What I have feen of Auguflin's writings to Valentinus and others of that Monafhery at Adrumetum, has not given me an' idea that they held fo ftrange a dodirine.
XXIX. Some have alloived 3. foreknozvkdge of Jin m God as a motive for reprobation, who would
not allow 2i foreknowledge ^ of merits, as a motive to Ele6tion. Peter Lc?nbard^ fays, " pr^edeftinavic eos quos elegit, reliquos vero reprobavir, id eft ad mortem et.rnam prasfj'.vit peccaturos." — Some have made Reprobation to confift merely in not eleding. — The Rhemifts on Rom. ix 14, ipeak of an illuftratioa of Auguftin's, v*^ho compares the eleft and reprobate to two debtors^ one of which is forgiven all, and the other made to pay all, by the fame creditor.
Some ftiong expreflions of Calvin may be found in the firft feventeen pages of the Oxford Dilfer- tation : but in thofe expreffions we fee that defire before-mentioned of making Reprobation, thouo-h
proceeding
'' Mofhelm, Vol. 2. page 90, odavo, orCenr 5,2. 5. 2-.
' Thefe Monks were for Grace excluding Free-will; which is rather a Jympio?n of their being for Predellination excluding Y\n\ie. — Jan/en felt as I did ; fee opening of Sirmond's Hiftoiia Predeftinatiana.— Voflius's Hift. PeJag. Lib. 7. is about Repro- bation : and I think he is of my mind: -See Index to Hiil. Pelag. " PnedejUnationem," kc.
^ Sed. vii. end. 1 Lib, 1. DiH. 40.
lO EOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XXIX.
proceeding from the good plcafure of God, an aA oi jiift puniflimcnt.
At Trent the Dominicans founded reprobation on the mere pleafure of God, alledging the initance of EJau reprobated before he was born.
There has been a diflinction between Supralap- y Jnrians and Sublapfarians, from Lapfus the Fall of Man. The former held, or have been charged with holding, that God decreed the Fall of Man, and all its fatal confequences ; the latter, that God's decree prefuppofed the Fall, or only per* mitted it, and determined tiie ftate of different men in confeqiience of it. — One Twife has l:>ecn reckoned a Supralapfarian" ; he was Prolocutor to the AlTembly of Divines in 164'?.
This gives an idea of all ManJiind taken col- ledively , with regard to a particular injlance, Mafter Ftdke fpeaks plainly in his aniwer to the Rhemifts on Rom. ix. 17.
*' The purpofe for which God fet up Pharao is manifeft in the text, that in him he might Jliew his power ^ &c. God made all things for him [elf ^ even the zvicked unto the evil day. Thertore was Pharao, a veffel of wrath ordained to dcflruftion, verf. 22. — His reprobation therefore was for the Glorie of God, his condemnation mofty//y?, for his obftinate contempt of God and his word."
In reading the Lambeth Articles it was not eafy to avoid reading the part about reprobation with that about eledtion : becaufe one wiihed not to leave a ientence unfmillied. As this remark may apply to leveral inllances, I will here doje the Htjlory of Reprobation, and of the Article,
XXX. We
■" Turretin, Locus 4 Qiieft. q. Sec^. 23.— Turretin wasa PrcdeftinaiiaH himfelf.— — ^Va/ gives a good charadcr of Twifle.
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XXX. XXXI. II
XXX. AVe come then to the Explanation.
The title is, " Of Predeftination and Eleclion." . — Predeftination is ibmetimes a generic term, in- cluding Ele6lion" and Reprobation; ibmetimes it fignifies only predeftination to happincfs, which is its fenfe here, as appears from its being joined with Eledion.^ — And aUb from the fir ft expref- « fion of the Article, " Predeftination to Life:' — Uooo^KxiJ-oc; is not in Scripture, but -zzr^oo^i^M is, and
xxxi. The fir ft paragraph of our Article ex- hibits nothing more than a Jeries of texts, with a word or two connedring them together. To make fuch a feries feems fair, yet it occafions fome im- ped hxient to that conception of the Article, wdiich I think the right one. The texts of fcripture, on which the doctrine of Predeftination has been built, feem to me chiefty expreffions o^ fentimenty or eloquence, or even oi formality and decontm. — Now to put fuch exprellions into a feries, muft give them more appearance of fyftem and theory than they would have if each was read, with a right feeling, in its place.
When fuch expreffions occur as, " O King° live for ever y' — "the mofi excellent Governor^ Felix," *' moft noble "^ Feftus," &c. how ftrange it would feem, if an Hiftorian was to hold, that Darius was immortal, or that Felix excelled all other men as a Governor; yet when fuch fayings are con- nected together, the connexion gives each more fpeculative meaning than it was intended to have. W '. — I would not be underftood to fay, that ^a// the.
texts
" UiTier's Body of Divinity under God's Kingciotn, page 73,
7th Edit. Arniinius's Works, Difp. 15. page 226. but Ar-
miniiis prefers our feufe.
° Dan. vi. 21. p A<5l3xxiii. 26.
9 Acrtsxxvi. 25.
12 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XXXII ^XXXV.
texts introduced have an indefinite meaning; but only, that when the things they mc^ntion, are re- ferred to the -preddtrmination of God, thci the meaning is indefinite.
Nor would 1 infinuate, that even then the mean- ing is as indefinite, as the meaning of the phrafes juft now mentioned, *•* O K.ing live for ever^^ &c. ; they are only mentioned to Ihew the nature of the inconvenience complained of, not to mark out the degree of it.
Still, however, it will be proper to fliew, that the Compilers of our Article did follow Script ure^
XXX II. " PredeJUnation to Life^ implies that there is fuch a thing fuppofed, at leaft, as Fredefli- nation to Z)t'rt///. — Which is not here denied^ but waveci, or omitted. — The Reformatio Legum fays, that wicked men ufed frequently to alledge Repro- hatiott, as an excufe for their wickednefs.
XXXIII. " Is the tverlajling fwpoje of God*'-' we have "eternal purpofe" Eph. iii. ii. — and fwrfofe, in this fenfe, occurs feveral times. Rom. viii. 28. — ix. 1 1. — And Eph. i. 1 1.— '* everlajling'* is to be taken \n 2. ncgafive'' (cnfe, as that which has continued during a time to which we can con- ceive no limit.
" Whereby^^ will be allowed as a conneding word, not fcriptural.
XXXIV. '* Before the fotindaiions of the world were laid-"-^Sec Matt. xxv. 34. — Eph. i. 4. — 2 Tim. i. 9. — This expreflion feems indefinite^ and meant to be fo taken.
xxxv. " He hath conflantly decreed y — " Co«- flantlyy* feems again a negative term, fignifying a de- cree 7iot interrupted \n any way alTignable by man : — decreed might be ufed as implied in predeftination
and
» See Oxf. page 20, he. and bottom of page 74. » Introd. to fecond Pait, Sed. v 1 1,
BOOK JV. ART. XVII. SECT. XXXVI— XL. 13
and purpofe; but it may be referred to Jer. v. 22.; in Lxx. Turpo^xyy-x sciccviov. God's decree is a fort of technical term in Theology.
XXXVI. " By his confenty^ ^mXri Acts ii. 23. — Rom. xi. 34. — Heb. vi. 17.
XXXVII. ^'Secret to us" Deut. xxix. 29.— Amos iii. 7.— The fecrecy is alio implied in Rom.
xi. 33' 34-
Secret feems to imply here that which belongs to Gods part, in the Government of the world: to be oppofed to revealed^ for the guidance of Man ; if what is called fecret ever appear, it is by the event'", or at moft by faint intimation.
xxxviii. ** To deliver from curfe'* — Gal. iii. 10, 13. with reference to Deut. xxi. 23. and xxvii. 26.
xxxix. *' Aiid darrmation" x«T«x^ijw.a Rom. v. 16. 18. — but of tliis enough under the nintii Article.
XL. '* Tkofe whom he hath c ho fen in Chrift^'* — we have " chfen' in him" Eph, i. 4. — the words " in Chrijl" were added to the Article in 1562, though they make what comes after ieem rather an harfli repetition ; in order, probably, to keep clofe to words'' of Scripture. — The terra ^'- chofen" is one of thofe which were originally ufed of the Jews, and applied to Chriftians in the way of com- parifon or '^ aliulion. — The expreffion, " thofe whom he hath chofen," or, whom he \i2i'A\ fine e chofen, feems to me to imply, that the fecret pur- pofe of God is only to be looked upon as opened by the event: the publication of Chriftianity is
an
^ "Made manifeft by the efFeas." " thea" (when a matter is come to pafs) " it is manifeft what luas God's will before concerning the matter." -This is Calviniftic Uilier-: Body of Divinity, page 41, j-th Edit.
» Oxi. page 20. * Taylor on Romaos, Key, Par. 9a.
14 KOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XLI. XLII.
an event which ought to be referred to the Divine Government, not limited bv time. Whoever en- tered fully into this remark, would allow me to fay, that prcdcfli nation of men to be Chriftians, ought not to be mentioned, or thought of, till they are become Chriftians : agreeably to what was' laid under the tenth Article of preventing Grace ; nay, that any heathen who pleafes, may to-morrow have'^ been " chofen^ from all eternity ; that is, who- ever becomes a Chriftian in the common way, may, when he does become one, afcribe his con- veriion to the goodn>:fs ot God, acting before all time that can be limited.
*' Out of mankind'^ — thefe words feem only for connexion. — They might have been omitted.
XLI. " And to brii!^ them by C'lnfi to ever la/ling Sah'atio/i.'' — Kph.'\. 7, 10, 1 r, fay the fame thing, only in a manner not fo fuitable to the courfe of expreffion in the Article : that true Chriilians are to be y^^r^ eternally, is not a thing likety to be queftioned by any let oi Chriilians. Salvation was one of the terms explained in the Appendix to the eleventh Article \ The word " ei'erlajiing,^ is not ufelefs, as men are fometimes laid to be faved when they are only admiHed into Chriili- anity.
XLI I. '-'■As vejjels -made to hoiiour'^ — Rom. ix. 21, 23. with reference to Jer. xviii. 1, &c. — Thefe texts defcribe only coniparati-ve privileges, or dif- tindions; and thofe diftindions muft be fuppofed to be acquired in the common t^tzv, by a diligent ufe of opportunities^ and then referred, indiilinctly,
to
y Art. X. Se6l. xxxv.
^ Rogers on this Article, mentions, as in error, thofe who iliy, " it it> is any man's power to be elcded," page 80. — l^'heophylad is one, I fee : whicli is a comfort.
* Seft. XVIII. and Art. XI. Seft. xxi.
BOOK IV. AP..T. XVII. SECT. XLIII — XLV. I^
to the Divine Providence : though the refer- ence to God will always be the ftronger when we fpeak of men collectively^ and of difpoling or governing them''.
We have now got what may be called a dcfi- niticn of our caufe ; of the caufe of Chrijlianity, as exifting in the Divine mind, in a manner unknown to us, from a time not to be limited by us. The efectSy that is the parts of Chriftianity, fall more within our comprehenfion. If they had been mentioned j?r/?, and then referred to their unfearck' able caufe, in indefinite language, our ideas would have been kept in better order j but it might be thought that an Article ought to keep to the
fynthetical method.
XLIII. *■'- Wherefore, they which be endued with
Jo excellent a benefit of God''"' — I fee nothing in thefe words but connexion. " T^hey 'which i^,'* feems to imply uncertainty about individuals-^ whofo- ever they may be, that are, in the fight of God, true Chrifiians.
xLJ.-v. " Be called according to Gods pirpofie^''-—* the expreflion is all taken from Rom. viii. 28. — See alfo 2 Tim. i. 9". — invited, offered eleciion\ Matt. XX. 16. — Taylor's Key, par. 97. — The in- vitation mufl have been primarily given to quit Idolatry and Paganifm.
XLV. " 5y his fpirit working in due feafon' — I Pet. i. 2. — the manner of referring converfion to God's fpirit, has been mentioned" under the tenth Article : it mud not interfere with endeavours, nor take place till the converfion is pafi. — " /;/ due
Jeafon" I do not feem to fee the whole purpofe
of
** Art. X. Seft. xlix.
*= I Cor. vii. 21. " called,'* is equivalent to becomin? a Chriftian. ^
** Art. X. Se£l. xxxvi.
l6 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XLVI L.
of inferring thefe words; they fill up the fentence to the e^y ; they occur feveral times in fcripture, but not with regard to the working o^ ihc/pirif,
XLVI. " T/jey through Grace obey the calling^''' — obey \s in Rom. vi. 17. and obedience 1 Pet. i. 2. — It would not have been regular to have omitted the divine affijiance.
X L V 1 1 . " ^hes be jujiified freely ;" — the expref- fion comes from Rom. iii. 24. but Rom. viii. 30. ihould be kept in mind. Of Jullitication we have treated under the eleventh Article.
XL VII I. '* They be made the Sons of God by adoption:'' — GdA. iv. 5, 6. — Rom. viii. 15. — Heb. ii. II. we were born m fin. But the principal paf- iage feems Eph. i. 5.
XLix. " Ihey be made like the image of his onl\~ begotten Son Jefus Chrifl : — this expreilion comes from Rom. viii. 29. — but if we look at the 30th verfe, we have after jiiftified^ " glorified ;" inllead of which our church takes a paflage out of the 29th verfe : from whence it feems probable, that they had the fame notion of the pallage, with Taylor ; namely, that the 29th verfe defcribes the firfi and Iqfl lleps of our fpiritual progrcffion ; and that the 30th enumerates the intermediate Heps : if this be right, it comes to the fame thing laying, we fliall be finallv glorified, and, we (hall be made finally like the image of Jelus Chrift. — See 2 Cor. iii. 18. — " begotten'' may be oppofed to adopted.
L. " They walk religioufiy in good zvorks :" — this feems implied in becoming Chrifiians ; but for the fame rcafon the twelfth Article was infcrtcd, a plain exprefiion feems ufetul here : — I conceive a reference to Titus ii. 14. and iii. 8. —Rut Eph. ii. 10. has the moft of Prcdcfti nation in it,
LI. ''And
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LI— LTV. 17
LI. '■^ And at length, by God's mercy i* — Tit, iii. 5.— I Pet. i. 3.
Lii. " They attain to e^erlajling felicity" — Matt. XXV. 34. rpeaks of the predeftinated as attaining to endlefs happinefs, therefore is here the proper authority.
Before we proceed, we fhould confider whether the diftino-uirhins; charafteriftics of Chriftians admit of various degrees. Salvation does ; jujlification has been faid to do, under the eleventh Article ; why may not Jdoption f good works allow of great variety.
LII I. We have now had a fcriptural delineation of Chriftianity^ and we have ktu. the fcriptural method of referring it to the divine foreknowledge and " everlafting purpofe." And what is the nfe of fuch referring ? that we are to fee next. It may be ufed fo as to do good, but it, or fome*- thing thought to be of the fame fort with it, may be ufed fo as to do great harm. Our Article pro- pofes to attain the good, and avoid the evil.— The unfearchable counfels and foreknowledge of God do fo far appear to man, as to become to him a mod interefting object of contemplation and re- flexion; and if rightly contemplated, they may improve Chrijlian piety ; if wrongly, they may pro- mote vice and mifery. But let us purfue the expref- fions of the Article.
Liv. ^^ As the godly confi deration of Fredefiina' tion, and our eletlion in Chriji" — the fort of con- templation allowed, mull be '-'^ godly " that is, it mull prefuppofe true piety in the mind : and it muft alfo prefuppole admijfwn into Chriftianity, -it muft be contem.plation of the Chrijiian fchemCy as re- ferred to the purpofe of God ; Che word " our** was infcrted in 1562, but it might as well perhaps have been omitted ; if it had been wanted to fhew VOL. IV. B that
l8 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LV— LIX.
that the meditation ought to be upon the Chrijlian plan, it would have been ufeful ; but there are other marks of that; at prefent, it muft cither be taken imperfonally, and To add little or nothing to the fenfe ; or it muft come too near affirming of individuals^ what is only intended to be affirmed of Chriftians in general.
LV. *' Is full of five ct., pleafanty and unfpeakahle comfort to godly perfons" — again, '' godly ;" joined to " perfons^'* as well as to " conf deration ;" in order to make the diftinftion as clear as pofTible.
Lvi. " j^nd fuch as feel in themf elves the working cf the fpir'it of Chrif —\vt here diftinguifh between feeling the fpirit, and feeling the workings vim^ of the fpirit; we mean, finding iuch difpofitions and principles as we pioully, though indiftindlly, afcribe to the ajliftance of the Holy Spirit, in the man- ner mentioned under the tenth Article : for fear of miftake, the effe^s of the fpirit, or the phaeno- mena which are to make us truft we are real Chriftians, in fome degree or other, are next fpecified.
Lvii. '■'■Mortifying the vcorks of the flefJiy and their earthly members ^^' — ih'is is from Rom. viii. 16. — Col. lii. 5.
Lvm ** And drawing up their minds to high and heavenly things ,'* — more phsenomena, from whence we may judge whether we are fuch Chriftians as may derive good from contemplating the Chriftian fcheme as fettled in the lecret counlels of God. — Here feems to be an allufion to John vi. 44. — ** except the Father draw him."
Lix. *' ^J zvell bec/iufe it doth greatly efiaUiJh
and confirm their faith of eternal Salvation to be enjoyed
through Chrifly' — fuppofe then a Chriftian, with
fuch difpofitions; would it really ftrengthen his
faith to refer the Chriftian fcheme back to God's
planning
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LX. LXI. I9
planning it before all time ? it muft ; the conflancy^ the duration of it, muft heighten his conceptions of lis Jhbility and importance: and the power, juftice, and wifdom of God muft appear in a ftrong and ftriking light.
LX. ** v^j hecauje it doth fervently kindle their love toivards God" — in like manner we may afk, would it really inflame the devout Love of fuch a Chriftian as is here fuppofed, to dwell on the fame contemplation ? unavoidably : for fuch a con- templation would fhew him God as engaged, for endlefs ages, in ads of kindnefs to him; and would make the connexion between a kind Deity and him feem much more intimate than it was before. — " We love him, becaufe he firjl loved'' us."
LXI. *' So for curious and carnal perfons, lacking the fpirit of Chrifl.'' — Now we come to the perfons who may make a pernicious ufe of the fecret coun- fels of God ; in the firft place, they are not Chrif- tians-y or if they have been baptized, they have not the internal qualifications of real Chriftians : " lack- ing the fpirit of Chrift," may be ftill farther cleared by comparing it with the fixteenth ^ Article, *' after we have received the Holy Ghoft," — " A Chrifti fpiritu prorsijs alieni^^ fays the Reformatio Legum.
And the perfons who would do harm by think- ing much on the fecret counfels of God, are not only no Chriftians, but they are weak or wicked men ; curious or carnal.
" Curious" feems to be ufed with much meaning; and to defcribe that kind of men, who are con- tinually entering into fuch abftrufe and fceptical fpeculations as are apt to make Atheijis ; fuch as
un fettle e I John iv. 19. f Art. xvi. Seil. xix.
£ %
20 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXII— LXVI.
unfettle all principle ; perplex, but never convince. — Re ipsa cunofi, the Reformatio Legum calls fuch perfons : (peculations of the fort here meant frequently engender melancholy and mifanthropy, as well as impious murmuring againft God.
" Ciinial^'' means men of debauched morals ; the Reformatio Legum informs us, that there were many fuch, who took, the turn of fatalifts at the time of the Reformation : ** differti luxu;" having recourfe to Predeflination as a covering, *' male- ficiis, et fceleribus, et omnis generis perverfitati."
LXII. "To have continually before their eyes the fentence of God's predejiination,^* — here the obje£l of contemplation is changed : it was before the ChriJ- tian religion in the divine mind ; here it is *' Gods -predeflination^^ in general ; Fate, Deftiny^. — For bad men to have fatality before their eyes, is cer- tainly what the following words exprefs.
LXII I. " Is a moji dangerous downfall^^ pra- cipitium; the nature of a precipice is, that it does not necelTarily deftroy, but puts one in immediate danger of being defbroyed j either by any one who chufes to pu(h one down^ or by a flip of one's own.
Liv. " IV hereby the Devil doth thriijt them^' about referring evil to malignant Spirits, I have faid fomerhing^ before. — " diice Diabolo^^ Reform. Legum.
Lxv. ** Either into dejperation^''—dit{i^2ivc is one natural confequence of a perfon's perfuading him- felf that there is a fatality againft him.
In deiperationem prasfentem abjiciuntur/)r^f//)//^j,
Reform. Legum.
LXVI. " Or
K Or, according to Bilhop Hooper, ** fatal dejlinj :" — See on the Commandinents ; or Heylin Quinq. page 557, *" Art. X. bedl. l.
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXVI LXVIII. 21
Lxvi. "Or into wretcJileJJiiefs of moji unclean living,"'— wretchlefs^ means carelefs, negligent; in the Rhemifh Teftament on Rom. ix. 14. it is fpelt retchlefs, which brings it nearer recklefs^ which occurs feveral times in Skakfpeare* : and a charader in one of his plays, fays, " I reck not" — for, I care not. At Sedbergh I have (above 40 years ago) heard often, " never reck,'' for *' never mind,'' (pro- nounced, neverack), do not give yourfelf any trouble, or concern. In the Latin, the word is fecuritatem :—" impuriffimce vitje." The Refor- matio Legum has, " ad folutam quandem et 7nollem vita; fecuritatem :" ht\n<^[ecure is, properly, being without apprehenfion of danger; whether really in danger or not.
Lxvii. « So Icfs perilous than defperation."^ perhaps more perilous : God may pity the defpair- ing fatalift ; he is more likely to be fincere than the fenfualift, who muft, on numberlefs occafions, ad contrary to thofe principles by which he excufes his faults.
Perhaps " defperation" may refer to " curious," and *' unclean living," to " carnal."
Some paflages from Latimer and Hooper might be read here, (quoted Heylin's Quinq. page 556, &c. ; alfo Oxf. page 54, &c. ; alfo Rhem. Teft. on Rom. ix. 14. marginal note.)
LXVIII. We come now to the third Paragraph. — So far we have been concerned with duly regu- lating a fublime and interefling meditation, into which men are very apt to run.
It feems proper not to conclude the Article, without laying down fomething relative to pra6tice.
In the Article of 1552 thebeginningof the third paragraph ftood thus;
" Furthermore"
* See Ayfcough*s Index, Stockdale's edition,
» 3
22 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXIX — LXXI.
" Furthermore'^ " [though the decrees of Pre- deftination be unknown to us,"] — it fecms a pity the words in hooks were omitted ; they tend to keep the thoughts in the right train : feme puri- tanical influence might throw them out.
LXix. '* JVe miijl receive God's promifes in fuch wife, as they be generally Jet forth to us in holy Scripture :"
Promifes are oppofed to decrees ; that which fup- pofes man at liberty, to that which fuppofes him fixed. Promifes feems to include threats : they are things to a6l from; decrees, while " fecret to us," or " unknown to us" are only to be con- templated.
" Generally fet forth ;" to all men, not to any fet of men particularly favoured. Eletling is partial, promifing extends even to thofe at prefent " lacking the Spirit of Chrill." Promifes any man may apply to himfclf: decrees, no man may, in any definite manner.
Lxx. *• And in our doings,'^ in our conduft, or practice, *' in i\d:\on\bus fufcipieh-dis,'" lays the Re- formatio Legum, more clearly.
LXXI. " That will of God is to be fnf/ozved'* — here
is a reference to iht Jcholajlic divilion of will into
different kinds ; which would not have been made
except, as in St. Paul's time, pcrverfe men faid,
" who hath refilled'' his ^^'///.^" — lo in the age of
the Reformation, men had urged the //7// of God
as an excufe for their vices: " in volnvtut.^m Dei
criminum fuorum culpam conferunt." (Ret. Leg.)
—'■'■they fay it is God's will." (Hooper'). — I will
not take you into all the diftindions of Arch-
bilhop Ufiier"' on the fubjecl: of will, much lefs
into
^ Rom. ix. ig.
' See Heylin, page 556.
»" Body of Divinity, page 40— 48. 7 th Edition,
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXII. LXXIII. 23
into thofe of 'Thomas'^ Jquinas ; but fome diftinc- tion Teems neceffary.— From what was faid in the elementary. introdu5lion to this lecond part of the Articles, it will be eafily allowed, that we may conceive a thing to be according to the will of God, or man, in two icnfes, as he permits it, and as he c/iufes it fliould be done ; wi/l, in the former fenfe, may be called y^rr^/ ° will, in God, as con- taining the rules of God's government, which muft be fecret to usj in the latter, revealed. The feeret will of God we can only contemplate^ in the man- ner now fettled ; the r£vealed will we muft endea- vour to execute. God wilhes us to do what is right, for our own good.
LXXII. " Which we have exprefsly declared unto us in the word of God.'' — " diferte revelatam :" this means God's revealed will. Diferte, Livy ufes for, named, mentioned by name; fo it may be that will of God which is plainly called fo, called his will, in fcripture. However, it is oppofed to God's will ^^ fecret to us ;" to " decrees'" " unknown to us:'
LXXIII. Having now gone through the feveral expreffions of our Article, I conclude the Expla- nation with obferving, that our Article does not deny either abfoliite or conditional^ Predeftination. And that it is filent about Reprobation, has been already obferved.
Ecclus. iii. 21 — 23, is like the general turn and fcope of the Article.
Lxxiv. According
" The Index to his works, under Voluntas, is really worth looking at as a matter of curiofity.
" Plaifere, page 34a. 398.-866 alfo Whitby on Five Points, Chap. 3. page 435; and compare John vi. 39. with Matt, xviii. 14. and i Tim. ii. 4.
P Waterland's Supplement to Arian Subfcription, page 60. with reference to Plaofere's Apello Evangelium.
»4
24 BOOK IV. ART. XVIT. SECT. LXX7 V LXXV.
Lxxiv. According to our common order, I fhould now come to Proof -^ but there is a difnculty in determinmg what is to be proved. Our Church can fcarce be faid to lay down'^ ans doEirine in this Article ; it only gives a feries of texts ^ and declares againft the abxije of them. I will, how- ever, lay down oyie propofition^ in order to have an opportunity of ofTeiing fome remarks, tending to give the right value of thofe texts which have occafioned the flrid: doctrine of Predcftination : my propofition may be,
God has predeftinated Chriftians^ as fncJi^ to Life. But as all our knowledge of God's lecret counfels is extremely indiftinft, and as therefore this pro- pofition, in its prefent form, feems to have more meaning than it really has ; and moreover, as in its prefent form it interferes with prafticaP exertions, I will put it into a form, better fuited to the real ftate of our knowledge, to the real fcnfe of fcrip- ture, and the adive performance of the duties of human life. In its new form, then, it may Hand thus ;
Lxxv. Whenever any thing important hap- pens, or is conceived to happen, of a tendency to bring Chriftians to heavenly happincfs, they may afcribe that to the purpofe of God ; not limiting the duration of his purpofej if they do it with due diffidence i and in circiimfiances fimilar to thole in which the fame is done in Icripture.
Still our afcribing is, from our ignorance of God's decrees and counfels, to be extremely in- diflin5f^ and in the hearty rather than the head\ but proving this, will juflify the generality of Churches in holding fomething about Prcdeftina- tion.
The
5 Sedl. XVI. ' Art. x. Seft. xxxv.
BOOK IV ART. XVII. SECT. LXXV I . LXXVII. 25
The only paflages where predeftination is men- tioned expre[sly, are Rom. viii. 29, 30. — And Eph. i» 5. 1 1. — Thele may therefore have a precedence; others may be mentioned in the order in which they He in the lacred volume.
Matt. XXV. 34. — John xvii. 11. — Acts ii. 23. and xiii. 48. — Rom. ix. 23. — Eph. i. 4. 9, or the whole, 4 — II. — I Thefl'. i. 4. and v. 9. (the latter quoted by U(her repeatedly.) — 2 Tim. i. 9. — Titus i. I. — I Pet. i. 2.
Thefe may anfvver our purpofe; and he who has a right notion of thefe, may apply it to all the reft.
Lxxvi. The remarks, by which I would endea- vour to give the right value of thefe expreffions of Scripture, are much the fame with thofe in the tenth Article; that is, applications of the elemen- tary remarks, which make the Introdudion to the fecond part of our xxxix Articles. . Lxxvii. The popular^ language of Scripture, does not lay down 3.ny Jyjiem of Ipeculative truth; but each expreffion defcribes {om^ feeling for fomc ufeful purpoje : we muft fee what this purpofe is, in each inftance, or we do not underftand the ex- preffion. ThtXQ \s rt2i.\\y no Theory of Predejiination in fcripture ; there are feparate pious references of important and happy events, to the unbounded forefight and fuperintendence of the Deity; and out of thefe, men have /orw^J theories; but fuch theories are merely human Each pafTage of fcrip- ture aims at producing Faith and Love; and we Jhave no right to ufe any paflage for any other purpofe.
If this is not the cafe, why are trifling events never referred in fcripture to Predeftination.? God /s as much the Author of trifling events as of
important; • Art. X. Seft. XXXIX,
26 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXVI I I. LXXIX.
important ; and it has in (Iridlnefs been as long ago determined, for anything we know, that a man fhall be y/x /w/ high^ as that he fhall be a ChriJIian; yet the former kind of event is not referred to the divine counfcls, the latter is : why, but becaiife it anfwers a good purpofe to the Chriftian, and not to the tall man. The fine reference of the privileges of a Chriftian to the divine counfels, in Rom. viii. 28 — 30, is not for the fake of truth, or fpeculation ; but for animating the converts to brave all the terrors of perfecution, rather than revolt from Chrift. ^And whoever fees the paffage for a moment without feeing it aim at the /lean, milles what was principally intended, and of courfe fees fomething which the writer never thought of. The fame may be faid of the openings of feveral Epiftles ; the heart is to be inflamed, by grand and affeding fentiments, however indefinite, in order that the work may htjl tidied with a proper intereft.
Lxxviii. In the texts on which Predeftination is founded, great ufe is made of pofitive terms with negative (ignifications ; as may appear from the beginning of the explanation. It would greatly tend to prevent mifconception, if we kept this conftantly in mind ; as alfo, that our meaning fre- quently is, when we refer to divine predetermina- tion, no more than that it would be impious to exclude* th^ Deity j or fix on any time when he did not forfee, or intend to confer, fuch or fuch a bleflihg. The expreffions concerning the " eternal purpofe" of God, have had a fenfe in the mind of the facred writer (as it appears to me) much nearer this, than any Theorijl imagines.
LXXIX. Events afcribed to the Predeftination of God, are not to exclude human agency , they will be afcribed to the one or the other, as the
occajion « Art. X. Seft, xt.
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXIX. 27
oicajion dlrefts; fometlmes to" both; and when only to one, the other muft be iinderftood to be implied.
Acts ii. 23. may afford us an inftance. *' Him being dehvered by the determinate counfel and fore- knowledge of God ye have taken, and by zvicked hands have taken and ilain." — The death of Chrift is fometimes afcribed to the will of God'', fbme- times to the wickednefs of the Jews, (in different fenles indeed;) here to both. Whatever happens may be referred to God, in one way or other. — But the part which God ad:sin the Government of the world, does not in the leaft af^eA the moral nature of man; that nature is God's imme- diate work ; and men, when free, aft under his government ; whenever any good purpofe is to be anfvvered by referring an event to the government of God, it may be lb referred, even though the adl be punijliable^ ; only in that indijiin^i way, which becomes our ignorance of the divine coun- fels : when any good purpofe is to be anfwered by referring ihefame event to the choice of man, that may be done ; and if it fhould happen that a good purpofe would be anfwered by referring one event at the fame time to both the government of God, arid the choice of man; the reafon ftili remains in force : this lall mode of referring muft intimate, that though man is ever fo free, he is ftill under the controul of God. By Ads ii. 23. the Jews
were
" Art. X, Seel. xli. referring to Introdudlion to fecond Part, Se6l. viu.
* Rom. V. 8. — viii. 32.
y Art. X. Sed. l. — Hecuba, (II. SI. 209, &c.) fays, that her fon Heftor was killed by Fate; yet (he defires to punijk Achilles on account of his death.
(Edipus is faid to have had aa Yid^vA/ate, but he is blamed juft as if that had not been faid : — See Batteux, Arillo't. Poet, page 358, Note.
28 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXX.
were given to underhand, that they had made a bad ule of their freedom, but that they depended on God J he was their Governor, and would be their Judge. — Does not Mr. Pope's expreffion, ** His /course the tyrant^'' mix divine and human ^\ agency equally ? ** tyrant'''' implies u-ickednefs, which implies choice, or human agency ; the Tyrant's being 2. jcourge in the hand of God, expreffes the government of God, or div'me agency.
LXXX. We have no right to ufe any text of {cripture without regard to the circumfiances in which it was ufed originally. Hdw much change of circumfiances will alter the y^;//^ of words, has been carefully^ (hewn. If then, in fcripture, we only find pajt events, or events fuppofed to have happened, or viewed as having come to pafs, re- ferred to the everlafting purpoie of God, we have no right to refer events to the fame, without attending to that circumftance.
This again, will prevent any theory^ any ahjlraEi propofitions, about predeftination, from being ad- mitted.— This would have been reafon enough for changing the form of our propofition^ : it was liable to be objevfted to thus ; ' 1 know of no fuch propo- fition in Scripture; give me a fa£i, and perhaps I may refer that facft to God's unbounded foreknow- ledge.'—Matt. XXV. 34". The kingdom of the blelfed was ^'■prepared'''' for them *' from the foun- dation of the world i" — but this is faid when you are fuppofed to look back from the Day of Judg- ment. We might now fay, to any man; be you goody and a kingdom zuill have been prepared for you from the foundation of the world ; but if you become wicked, and are fo finally, an " everlafting
fire''
* Book I. Chap. X. XI. Introd. to fecond Part, StSi. ix>
-^Art. X. Sefl. xm.
• Sedl. Lxxn', *• Compare i Cor. ii. g.
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXX. 2q
fire*'' will have been prepared for you. Both the paffages of fcripture which mention Predefti nation exprelsly, have a retrofpedive view ; and refer, in- diftindly, a prefent happy ftate of things, to the divine fecret counfels. And the fame may be obferved of thofe openings of the Epiftles, from which any thing relating to Predeftination has been taken.
I think fome of our Reformers and writers have
feen fomething of this notion. The Ne^eJJary
DoSlrine lays down% that a man ought not to
judge that he is ek^ed^ but by his good difpoii-
tion, " and by the tokens of good and virtuous
living." — When Latimer fays we fliould " begin
with Chriji" — he feems to mean we Ihould begin
with the effediy and reafon a pojleriori^. And Arch-
bilhop Bancroft meant fomething of the fame fort
at the Hampton-Court conference, by ^^ afcen-
dendo^:'" we afcend from effed to caufe. When
we reafon from a known effed: to a caufe imper-
fedly known, v^tfiniJJi with that which is above our
comprehenfion ; but when we begin from a caufe
not^ underftood, we are milled in things which
concern us immediately ; and which are, in reality,
level to our capacities.
Attention to circumftances would hinder us from referring any trivial^ events to God, or from making any references to his fecret decrees, with- out a view to exciting fome good Jentiment -, accord- ing to what has already been laid down: and
would
' Seft. XVI.
^ Ser. on Septuages, quoted by Heylin, page 557,.— Water- land, page 60. (Suppl. to Arian Subfcr.)
^ Oxf. page 36.
' Introd. tofecond Part, end of Sed, viii.
s Fanatics have referred trifling events to God*s decree or purpofe, though I have no inftance at hand : fomething Jimilar 10 this we have had, Art. x. Sed, xxxix.
3© BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXXI.
would make us aware how things are referred to the permijfion of God though contrar}' to what is moft commonly called his will.
The more a man ftudies the circumftances in which our texts were ufed, the fewer references to the eternal purpofe of God, will he be inclined to make.
LXXXI. I have feveral times faid, that I look upon the paflages of Scripture from which the dodtrine of Predeftination has been derived, as being of the nature of Eloquence^, and not of fpecu- lation. That will be the cafe if thofe paflages are always calculated to excite good fdntiments. And they will be, of courfe, rnuch lefs plain and per- fpicuous, becaufe more indefinite, than practical diredions ; and therefore ought to be interpreted lefs literally. Indeed to interpret an eloquent ex- prelTion, fo as to give it its true value, and neither more nor lefs, feems fcarce pradicable. — Rom, viii. 29, 30. is intended to have an efFe6t upon \\\t feelings of thofe to whom it is addrefTedi — part of Taylor's paraphrafe on the next verfe is, " and what effed Ihould they [" thefc things"] have upon our hearts^" and though Mr. Locke on the opening of the Epiille to the Ephefians^ gives predeftination the limited fenfe of God's purpofe to take the Heathens into the Chriftian Religion; yet he looks upon that whole epiftle as a piece Qf eloquence and fublimity.
He fays, in his Synopfis, that St. Paul difplays in it, '* the glorious ftate of that kingdom" (the kingdom of the MefTiah) *' not in the ordinary way of argumentation and formal realbning, which had no place in an Epiflle writ as this is, all as it were in a rapture^ and in a flile far above the plain Jida^iQal way ; he pretends not to teach them any
thing, •> Art. X. Sedl. XLii.— Art. xvr. Se6t. xxx.
BOOK IV. ART. XV. SECT. LXXXII. LXXXIII. 3I
thing, but couches all that he would drop into their minds, in Thankfgivings and Prayers; which affording a greater liberty and flight to his thoughts, he gives utterance to them in noble and fublime ex- preffions, fuitable to the unfearchable wifdom and goodnefs of God, Ihewn to the world in the work of Redemption." Mr. Locke himfelf makes one afraid of giving any very definite fenfe to any lofty expreffions in the opening of fuch an addrefs efpe- cially; though he may rightly point out what was to be a dijiingu'ijlied part of the fentiment excited.
Perhaps fome paflages may be made eafy by obferving the Jewi/Ii mode of referring all events to God. But this remark may be more ufeful when we fay anything about Reprobation.
Lxxxii. An obfervation made in the Intro- dudion to this fecond part of our Articles, may be of ufe here. Sometimes expreffions of Scrip- ture are not confidered with fufficient freedom, becaufe they are fuppofed to contain new truths^ communicated immediately from Heaven. — 1 do not perceive^ that any facred writer intended to teach any thing nezv with regard to the predeter- minations of God ; I mean, it does not flrike me that any facred writer has intended to give us any knowledge of the Nature of the divine decrees, which might not be derived from natural reli- gion. The facred writers refer new events to the everlafting purpofe of God ; but it does not follow that they taught new dodtrines about them.-
LXXXIII. I will now make a few remarks on the particular texts which I have produced in fup- port of my propofition. — Of Matt. xxv. 34. — . Ads ii. 23. and the opening of the Epiftle to the Ephefians, I have already faid fomething; Rom. ix.'i will come beft under Reprobation : and the open- ings
32 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXXIII.
ings of the firft Epiftle to the ThefTalonians, anci the Epiftle to Titus have nothing pecuhar in them : I will therefore confine mylelf to Jolin xvii. II. (and fimilar expreffions;) Acts xiii. 48 — 1 Theff. V, 9.-2 Tim. i. 9. and 1 Pet. i. 2.
In John xvii. 11, and other paflages, Chrift {peaks of Chriftians as given him by his heavenly Father; a very proper and pious acknowledge- ment ! efpecially in prayer^ or devout difcourle ; but containing no more do^rhie than would have arifen from our King's thanking God, on the day of his public thankfgiving, for giving him millions of affectionate fubjefts, rejoicing in his recovery.
A(5ts xiii. 48. has occafioned many difcuffions. I confefs it ieems to me to mean no more than that as many as chofe to become Chrillians, were allowed to become Chriftians ; or as many as it pleafed God to make fo : none duly qualified were refujed^ though they were Gentiles : that was the wonder; that Gentiles fhould be admitted to be God's people! "when the Gentiles heard this" (that they might be Chriftians) "they were glad;** it was new to them at " Antioch in Pifidiai"— *' they glorified the word of the Lord ! and as many as were ordained to eternal life, believed :" not one or two diftinguifhcd Heathens were admitted into Chriftianity, but Heathens were admitted jull as Jews would have been. Certainly the phralc " ordained to eternal Life,* to cxprcfs being in- clined to become Chriftians, is copious ; and it is very folemn and grand; but fo was the occafion ; nothing lefs was in agitation than what is called the rejedion of the Jews, and the adoption of all nations upon the face of the earth : the phrale might feem natural to Jews, in defcribing conver- fion to a religion, the charaderiftic of which was,
CO
feOOK IV. ART. XVI I. SECT LXXXIII. 33
to confer " eternal Life'' on its votaries; it muft needs feem highly decorous — " Believed^'' is put for, becoming believers.
Archbifliop Sharp ' and Mr. Parkhurft'' under-
ftand by oVo» wocv Ttrayif-ivoi a? ^wnv <Sj»wv<oy, as
many as were in a due dijpojition for eternal Life : a fenfe fupported in a very refpeftable manner'.
But if TiruyiJ.ivoi meant dejlinedy thfe expreflion might mean no more than that all fuch, of thofe prefent, as were deftined to be converted, were converted then t that is, the converiion of the Gentiles j as a folemn thing, might be referred, when it had adually happened, in the way already defcribed, to the divine purpofc. Being deftined to eternal Life, might be ufed for being deftinetl Co Chrifianity\ as Cliriftianity produces eternal life of courfe, all things going right; ho impediment arifing on the part of the convert; being admitted into Chriftianity is often exprefled by the word Salvation"" : which is generally equivalent to eternal Life. — As many as were deftined to hefaved, were admitted Chriftians. — Ads ii. 47".
I Theff. V. 9. is twice referred to by Arch- bilhop Ufier in one page": yet it is the conclufion of an exhortation to arm; therefore cannot, at leaft, exclude human agency. It, with what goes l^efore, conveys to me this idea. Remember the ftate you are in; a ftate of warfare •■, you are encom-
paflfed
' Sermons, Vol. 3. " Greek Lexicon.
* For Epidetus's fenfe of TJTwyptji'Of, fee afterwards, Seft. txxxix.
"» Art. IX. end of Seft, xxiv.— Art. xi. Se£l. xiv.— Append, to Art. xi. Se£l. vin. — Locke on Eph. ii. 8.— Taylor's Key.
" 0],e might fuppofe what efFed the phrafe would have had, which was uftd with regard to Zjv/<'<2'/ converfion, Afts xvi, 14.
« Page 73, 7th Edit. Body of Divinity,
VOL. IV. C
34 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXXIII.
paffed with enemies ; they may come upon you by furprize; put on " the whole armour of God ;'* if you are furprized, you wiJl incur di[grace and puniJJiment : yet, believe me, that was not the defign of your being placed in a (late of warfare ; it was, that you might attain to honour, viflory, reward. If this be right, there is a likenefs between this paiHige and James i. 2, 12. " My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;" that is trials^ difficult fituationsj " Blefled is the man that endureth temptation: for when lie is tried, he fhall receive the Crown of Life, which the Lord hath promifed to them that love him.'* But no doElrine of decrees do I perceive.
In 2 Tim. i. 9. and what immediately precedes it, St. Paul exerts ail his powers of eloquence to "j/?/r up'''' Timothy to exercife his minillerial func- tions : St. Paul himfelf was a prifoner when he wrote, and under affliBion on account of the Gofpel; his minifler feems to have been of a mild difpofition ••, we read of his " tears" of his drink- ing " no wine" of his being *' aJJiamedy'' of a *' fpirit o{ fear;'* fuch a fituation of things was alarming; the minifters of the Church which we are told of, feem to have been very few, confider- ing the number of countries in which Chriftianity was planted; 'Timothy was to be animated in the moft forcible manner; the Gojpel was to be fet in its higheft light; to be fliewn as exifting in the divine mind time without end. Let any one read our text with thefe ideas, and he will fee much noble vehemence in it, but no fpeculative teaching; nodiing didadic.
I Per.
P Compare the difpirited expoftulations of Elijah, 1 Kinga xlx, 4. 9, 10. 14.
BOOK IV. ART. XVI I. SECT. LXXXI V. LXXXV. 35
I Pet. i. 2. has been explained before^i with relation to our prefent fubject, we have only to oblerve, that it is a fine exordium of an interefting and afFecfling Epiille. The author inftead of ad- dreffing the converts by the bare appellation of *' Chnjlians,'* enumerates the moft ftriking cha- racierifiics oi Chriftians ; and in order to raife their minds the more, he direfts their views back to the foreknozvledge of the heavenly Father. But teaches nothing new j points to nothing which is not paji.
I conclude^ that to refer in an indefinite manner, the important things of religion, to the purpofe of God, may be highly proper and decorous^ on great occafions, as a part of devotion or exhortation ; but that no pra5iical rule, no fpeculative propojition, can be juftly deduced from thofe paflages of fcrip^ ture, which have given birth to the doflrine of • Predeflination.
Lxxxiv. J will now come to fome proof of the indireEi kind ; or to the anfwering of a few cbjeSiions : premifing, that what was faid in anfwer to objeflions under the preceding^ Article, migliE be of ufe here. The immutability of God ufed to be urged by the Predefhinarians at the time of the Reformation, in favour of their notions. — It may be proper to keep in mind the obje£lions in the tenth Article.
Lxxxv. Is not what has here been laid down, too intricate^ for common people to attend to ? It does not feem fo to me. Indeed, common people do in reality know as much of the fcbjeft, as the
karned j
'^ Art. xc. Se6l. xxn.
' Art. XVI. Seft. xxx.— In Heylin, 557th page,— Oxford, page 64.
* Art. X. Seft. xlv.
c z
36 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXXV.
learned ; if they would not frighten themfelves with fancies : and as all ranks may feel uneafinefs from what they hear of prcdefti nation, all Iliould be provided with the remedy. In our method, all diftiniftlons Ixitween abfolute and conditional Prc- dcftination are fet afide; all theory is difmitred ; nothing remains, but what is to be difpatched by common feeling and common fenfe. Nay, no man is required as matter of duty, to think any^ //////^ about predeftination; only it is a pity any one fliould lofe a fpecies of meditation, which " is full of fweet, pleafant and unfpeakable comfort," when rightly performed. Mr. IVhiteheacKcc^Sy that fages formed cwW focietics.
By hea.v en's per f^iiji on' y or by hQa.w^n.*s command -, and afterwards,
And men are hrn to trifle, or to reign. In thefe two lines are couched all the myfteries of God's different wZ/A, and of each man's defiinyy but they give no fort of trouble, fo long as men have no fuperftitious fear about them. If we would carry the feelings and fenfe with which we read thefe, to Scripture, that would occafion no greater perplexity. The plained things feem ab- llrufe whilft we are obliged to examine them minutely; but ufe foon makes examination un- neceflary.
In (hort we feem to have little to do in re- ferring
* See William Whitehead's Works, Vol. ii. Elegy iii. ad- drefied to the prefent Earl Harcourt, (1796.) — Marmontel puts thefe words into the mouth of one of his charadlers in his Tale of La Bergere des Alpes, (Contes Moraux, Tome 2. p. 50.) *' Puifquc je /uis Padeur" — " il faut bien que je fois ne pour I'etre." — Any common expreflions, of the fort here quoted, iifed without any idea of their being abftrufe, or of their having relation to religious difputes, are to our prefent pur- fofe.
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXXVI. LXXXVII. 37
ferring events to God's piirpofe ; but to let our feel- ings" ply freely to the cafe.
Lxxxv I . Is not the general language of fcrlp- ture as if men were" /rff/' yes; and fo is the language of our Article : " in our doings,'* we are to conceive ourfelves free; though looking backy we may acknowledge our dependence on God in every thing. Our moral and accountable nature is immediately ^ from God. The texts about pre- deftination are fezv, and fo are the occafions on which they ought to be ufed. It may not be jiecejfary to ufe them ever. Even thofe men who favour predeftination in the way of Theory, have fuch faint notions of it that they do not a5l from it. Cah'inijls a£i from free-will as much as other men : fometimes men may evade their duty, by pretending to aft from a belief of defliny, but I do not call this ading from a fuch belief; they ad; from the notion of their being free, in every thing t\(t.
Bifliop Butler^ proves, that the do6lrine of men's not being at liberty, if it could be true in Theory, mufl be falfe in praEiice : we muft a5i as free; therefore there muft be a fallacy fome- where.
Lxxxvii. Is not the doftrine of Predeftination hurtful to Virtue ^ No ; Virtue is, in our Article, pre/uppofed, before men are allowed to meddle with Predeftination : thofe who are to hope that God's purpole will prove favourable to them, muft " walk righteoujly in good works-^* thofe who may
meditate
" Hecuba does this, in the paflage mentioned Seft. lxxix. II. SI. 209, Sec. fhe ufes Fate to raife 2.fenthnetit of Confolation: refers an event back to fate, though flie has no precife idea what Fate means.
* Art. X. Seft. xLvi. y Seft. lxxix.
* Analogy i. 6.
c 3
^\
38 BOOK IV. ART. XVI I. SECT. LXXXVIII. LXXXIX.
meditate on the Chriftian difpeniation as having been planned in the divine counfcls, muft not be " carnal" but "-^ godly perfons" And even ihefc, according to our notions, ought only to dwell upon the decrees of God, as far as it will promote and flrcngthen their virtue. — Bcfides, thofc texts which mention predeftination, are fo linked with the mention of virtue and holincfs*, that no in- genuous man can take the former and leave the latter. If, on reading any text feeming to favour predeftination, we afk, ivhofe virtue could this hurt? we Ihall find that it could hurt no one's, without fome mifapplicauon.
Lxxxvii I. Does not the dodrine of Predefti- nation interfere with the duty of Prayer ' f No more than with any other exertion for attaining good : no more than with any Virtue : indeed, accord- ing to the reprefentation of our Article, referring important and facrcd events to the divine purpofe, is itfelf a fpecies of devotion.
Of Prophecy I have faid enough before^ Lxxxix. I would laftly propofe the fame quef- tion which I have propofed in fome preceding^ Articles; will not the doftrine before us, dijgujl thinking men ? I think it ought not; particularly if our obfervation be true, that the fcriptures give nothing nezv upon it. If, as a Chriftian, I were alked what I meant by Predeftination, I Ihould give an anfvVer which would fuit natural religion,
as
* Eph. i. 4. *' he hath chofen us in him before the founda- tion of the world, that we fhoiild be holy and without blame," Sec. — See alfo Eph. ii. 10. crentf^ wnto gvi(l -iiorks, *•' ordained that we (hould loalk in them :" and fo in other paffages.
" Art. X. Seft xLvii.
« Append. to Art. XI. Seft. XXVII.
^ Art. IX. Seft. XL. — Art. X Sed. XMX. — See the Heads of Ledures in each Article, and the AppemUx to Art. xi. Sedl. XXIX.
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XC. 39
as well as revealed. T fhould fay, I mean that, which, in the divine mind, is the caufe of order and regularity ; of fuch order and regularity, as, in man, would be afcribed to forefight and pre- determination. To this, events have been ever afcribed, in all ages of the world. EpiSietus ufes rira.yiA.i\>oq much like the Author of the Ads of the Apoftles': and certainly reafonable men could, in no age of the world, deny or limity the prede- terminations of God: If we can only turn re- flexions upon the divine decrees to a moral purpofe, we may be well fatisfied.
XC. But while I am upon the fubjed of natu- ral religion, I fhould take notice of the famous difficulty arifmg out of the Divine Prefcience. If "^^ God foreknows my adions, they are fixed, though feemingly voluntary; therefore I have no choice j I am no agent. But, according to our notions, repeatedly ^ ftated, we have no right to afcribe to God a certain knowledge of our voluntary adions, if we have no fuch thing ourfelves, nor any idea of fuch a thing : do we know that it is not an impojfihility? WthdiWQ analogies, by which we can conjeBurel with great probability, how men will ad;
and
e The paffage, to which I mean to refer, I find in Cap. ai. in a Glafffow Edit, with a Latin tranflation, page 30.— In Stan- hope's Edft. with Simplicius, about the 26th or 27th Chap,— Simplicius, in his comment, makes the paflage belong rather to the tenth Article : to which might perhaps be referred the
frayer, with which Simplicius concludes his Comment.
(Lardner's Teftimonies.)
Epid. Enchir. Cap. 22. Twv Ja !5i\rtrfv aoi <pxivo(^imv bTui £%a, «? vvo TB ©£« T4T«7fA£vo; El? rxvryiv rm Ta|iv.
Here the true end of referring adlions to God, feems to be difcerned: not fpeculative truth, but moral feelings; afliftipg A virtuous principles of human agency, and mixing it with divine.
f Art. XVI. beginning of Se£t. xxx. C 4
4© BOOK IV. ART, XVI r. SECT. XCl.
4nd God mufl liave fomething of the fame fort in an unbounded degree; hut thefe muft, by their nature, tall fliort of certain knowledge. This is a different thing from denying the Prelcience of God, as the Socinians are faid to do : God has certainly
\\ all pojiible knowledge; but if he has a certain fore^ knowledge of our voluntary actions, it is a thing of a kind* of which we know nothing; and there- fore if we admit it, and aft from it, we are anfwer- able for the coiifequences. We muft nor, through ?^ fear of detracting from the wifdom of God, en- danger our own morals ; they are the principal objects of tlie divine adminiftration.
xci. I would alfo recall '^ to your mind, that there may be two different trains of thought, feem-
\\ ingly inconfiftent v/ith each other, and yet in either you may go on without coming to an end. Study the regularity of God's government, the conftancy of the rules or laws of nature ; you come to no end : — Study the freedom of voluntary agents, and the interpofitions of God's pimculiv Providence ; again you come to no end; what remains, but that here, as in former inflances', we leave two things to exift together as they qiay, though we are un- able to make them fit and iuit each other ? alluring ourfelves, that there is fome way of reconciling them, though we m.ay not undcrftand it; now, or ever.
What we have faid of the Divine Prefcience and Immutability **, may put us into a right way of underftanding the Repentance^ of God, and
other
S It is one of t\\t fecret things which belong iinto the Loid pur God. Dsut xxix. 29.
*^ Book II ». Chap. XV. <^e5t. tx.
' Sedl. V. with references.
*' Art. XVI. beginning of Se(5>ion xxx.
' C.^mjjare Num. xxiii. 19. with Jer. xv.ii. 8, 10,
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XC I f. 4I
Other things afcribed to the Deity, which feem rather to belong to man. Each is, (as before, repeatedly) the caufe, in God, of thofe effeds, which, in man, would be afcribed to that quality: r.nd each quality is afcribed to God in any fitu- ation, as far as, in that fituation, it is a Per^ fe^lion.
We fpeak of Rules of the Divine Government; but, in ftridnels, we know no fuch : when any- thing goes on nniformly, we prefume and fuppofe a rule; but we know not the mind of the Lord; the unexpeded violation of that uniformity which we have obferved, may be as much from rule, as the uniforniiry irfclf.
I conclude this topic of natural religion, with obferving, that I do not fee how the divine prede- \^ termination makes any difference in the doctrine of Liberty and Nece[/jty, which was laid down " under the tenth Article; and therefore I do not fay anything here on that fubjed.
xcii. I now come to fay fonjething of the Dodrine of Reprobation. As in the tenth Artide I referved to the laft, the fubjed of referring m/ to God, fo I do in die prefent Article. — Evil has been referred to God as infpircd'' by him, or de- creed, the form.er part was treated in the tenth Article, the latter muft be mentioned here.
I fliould imagine, that as we have already (ttn. the manner of referring good to God, if we gave fome account of the etymology of reprobation, and Ihewed in what refpects referring evil to God is \x more complicated than referring good, (and there- fore how any fcriptural expreffion afcribing evil, ihould be conilrued lefs Jlriaiy than one afcribing good,) we fliould, with the help of what has been already laid, be prepared to examine any particular /tw/j of fcripture.
Probd '^ Art. X. Sea. xlix. " Art. x, Sed l.
42 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCIII.
Probo fignifies to try, and fo, in the common courfe of things, to approve : a tried friend is an approved friend. — Reprobo is, ^fter trial, to rhrow away, as refufe, that which has not anfvvcrcd the trial.
In the trial of metah, what is thrown awav, is in Englifh, called drofs, in Greek°, aSovAixo-j [a^y-cemv). — In any contefts, in rnmwig^ &c. the lofer was called ah-mu.oq; to this St. Paul feems to allude
when he fays, of himfelf, /ztiTrw? aXXcig xr,^v'^oc,(; auro?
a^omfjioq ytvuixai^ . Man is in a fhite of probation; if he does tolerably well, he is Soxiy.og, but if he is fo bad as to be deemed incorrigible, he is aaoxifxog, or reprobate'^. I do not fee why Locke and Taylor fhould run away from this fenfej there is nothing more frightful in it, than in the expref- lion, " he gave them kj)," when it is feen what they were given up to.
Reprobation feems generally to give more alarm, by the found, than condemnation; yet one had rather be neglefted as refufe, than adjudged to pofitive punifliment. A man may be comparatively repro- bated ; as when another who \s preferred to him, is faid to be eleded; reprobated, being the correla- tive.— Nay, one might conceive one who is re- probated in comparifon of one man, to be elected, in comparifon of another. As a thing thrown afide, may be ufed for fome other purpofe from that it was tried for; and in preference to fome- thing elfe.
xc 1 1 1 . The difference between referring good and evil to God, feems to confift in this ; God may have evil afcribed to him, becaufe none can
happen
° Prov. XXV. 4. — If. i, 22. according to the Lxx. P So that with us, a di^aticrdhoric, I'iViTeprobate hor/e. 1 In ovir Homily, re/troveai>Ie \s the woidioi reprobate. — On Faith, beginning ; from Titus i. 16.
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCIII. ^^
happen wliich he does not permit, and which, therefore, does nor, in fome fenfe, make a pan of his Gov ermvent ; (and every part of his Govern- ment is ^wJ;) or becaufe there is no evil which he does not conlroU, To as to prevent its operating be5'ond certain limits''. Evil may alfo be afcribed to God, when he ■punijlies it, and thereby produces good\ but more diredly, when the evil afcribed is ufed as a piinifiiment . It is alfo afcribed to him when he brings incidental good out of it. Langiiaoe muft, to be fure, be far from literal., which ai- cribcs evil to God in any fenfe; but it is ufually a fad which is afcribed, and that fact is good in fome refpe£is and evil in others. Jt bottom, it is only good w^hich is afcribed to God, or what is good to him who afcribes it ; and common fenfe lees this, though it may not be confcious of every ftep in the procefs. When God only permits eviJ, there is, no doubt, good, if it v.-ere only in the liberty, accountablenefs, &c. and in every other caie jufl now mentioned, the good appears more plainly.
But good is afcribed to God more fimply and directly; it is unmixed ; he not only permits it, but rewards and encourages it ; fo that both the liberty of conferring and attaining good, and the encouragements to ufe that liberty, are his.
Though language in which evil is afcribed to God, is more imperfect than language in which good is afcribed ; yet even the latter is capable of being perverted : — God is " the author of /)f'^<:d';" then what occalion, fays a man who wants to evade his duty, for me to be a Pti<r(f-;;;rt,('tr r'— perhaps
this
' Some '-eferer.ces might be n\ide from this Seftlon, and the next to the 50th Sedion of the tenth Article ; but the beft iv.ethod would be, to look at that before reading this part.
44 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCIV.
this evafion might be too grofs to pafsj but others do pafs, which are of the fame kind.
When one man is /)r^^;T^^ to another, we fome- times hear the comparative difadvantage called m/, injury, or even punijliment. Of fuch evil God may be the immediate author. He may prefer one of his creatures to another, or make them into differ- ent ranks, in any kind of life. (Rom. ix. 15.)
There feems to be Reprobation fpoken of a priori and a pojeriori.
XCIV. Some have had a notion, that God, by a direB a£l, ordains a number of men to mifcry ; but there is no warrant in fcripture for faying any fuch thing. Take an evil, a fnB, and you may refer it to the divine government, with that indif- tinclnefs which your ignorance demands, if you can anfwer a good piirpofe by fo referring it; if you can excite a pious or virtuous Jentiment; but not otherwife. An attention to drcumftances, is required in referring evil as well as in referring good*; nay, a greater degree of attention. But let us take fome ivflance.
Let us take firft the rejeflion of the Jezvs; as a great part of the doiftrine of reprobation has been taken from fcriptural expreiTions relating to that event. The plain fa5i, if told in common lan- guage, was, the Jews, or part of them, rejeded the Chriftian religion : but when this facl was taken in a religious light, and confidered as part of God's government, and referred to God, the expreflion then was, God rejected the Jcivs; whicli to the Jews ihemfelves would feem natural and ealy language.
The Jews, in this cafe, were reprobated-, and important good, no doubt, they loft; — but they*
might
* Confider Matt. xxv. 41. in this light, as before, Sedion l,xxx.
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCV. 4J
might any of them embrace Chriftianity when they pleafed ; and then, when their conveiTion was fpoken of in a religious light, and as part of divine government, they would be faid to have been eleci, predejlinated^ according to God's pur- pofe. In both cafes, of rejeding and embracing Chriftianity, \\\(^fa6i muft come jirft^ and then be referred back to the divine counfels; in fuch re- ference language implying divine agency would be rightly ufed.
XCV. Now let us take a few particular texts,
I will take them chiefly, or entirely, from Arch- bifhop UJIier's proof of Reprobation', which he favours. I do not perceive Jude 4, amongft his texts ; which I wonder at.
Frov. xvi. 4. gives me no other idea than this : God's government is univerfal ; what he crsatedho. always defigned to fuperintend : he created all things as fubjeds of his government ^ it extends to the punilhment of the wicked. Though God hates fin, yet the permilTion of it, and the punifli- ment of it when committed, is as much a part of his plan, as even the rewarding of goodnefs.
Let us now go to the ninth Chapter to the Romans^ and firft take the 13th verfe, *« Jacob have I loved, but Efau have I hated." This whole chapter is written to prove, that God might/f/ afide the Jews, or leave them out of the kingdom of the Meffiah, that is, reprobate them, notwithftanding his pro- mijes to their forefathers. Their notion fcems to me to have been this; — the Chriftian religion cannot be the true, or if it is, we need not be anxious about it, becaufe we muft be of- the true, in confequence of the promifes of God. No, fays St. Paul, that reafon is not valid ; you cannot depend upon defcent, becaufe you inherit from
-Jacobs * Body of Divinity, page 73, 74. yxh edition.
40 BOOK IV, ART. XVII. SECT. XCV.
Jacoby and lie vv:is not regularly defcended from Abraham; Efau was bis elder brother :~that in- flance of quitting the diredt line, St. Paul well knew, the Jews would not object to; the preference of the defcendants of Jacob, that i"^, of the liracl- ites, to thofe of Efau, or the Edomites^ was a favourite fubjed: : but, fay the Jews, Elau was dilinherited, bccaufe of his bad charaElcr -. that, replies the Apoftls, was not the realon; for the ilifmheritina; was announced before the birth of the twins; therefore God may make a fmiilar change when it fcems good to him. The exprcf- fion of the Apoftle, " Jacob have I loved, but Efau have I hatedy' is, very properly, borrowed from a Prophet''; and the language of the prophet, means, that the Ifraelites were a much more prof- perous /)c'6])/t? than the Edomites : — there is not the lead in the paflage of any vidividunlSy or of any punidiment in a future ftate.
The 17th verfe? is another fupport'' of Repro- bation : It contains another inftance, which the Jews v/ould readily adopt, the punilliment of the enemies 0I their forefathers, the punilhment of the yRoy-ptianSy and Pharaoh their King. — It is men- tioned in the Book of Exodm'^ . God rnifed up Pharaoh in order to fliew his power ; the plain faci was, while Pharaoh was under the rod, under any of the plagues, he was humble and fubmiifive ; when they were remitted, he exalted^ him{elj\ and grew arrogant again.
But though in plain language he exalied himjelfy yet when the tranfadions were confidered as a part of God's government, the cxprcffion was, God exalted him, or raijed him up ; by allowing him
that
" Mai. 1. 2, 3. Obadia^feems all on tliis fubjeft.
* Rhemifts oa the place.— Uflier, page 74.
y Exod. ix. 16. * Excxl. ix. 17.
book: IV. ARTv XVII. SECT. XCV. 47
that relaxation from punidiment, which occafioned his infoleiice. And this was very luitable to Jewifli phrafeology. The effect of Pharaoh's in- folence was, to make God's protection of the Ifraelites much more flriking, and much more celebrated than it v/ould othervvife have been ; which is, in hke manner, as a part of divine government, thus expreffed, " that my name may be declared throughout all the earth." — Now why might not God, in the fame fenfe, raife up the Jezvs P the more they exalted themfelves, and the more obftinate they grew in rejeding the Gofpel, the more would the fame of the Gofpel be declared throughout the world. Indeed the lituation of the Jews has been, and is, mod wonderful ; and has, in fad, greatly affifted in proving the divine authority of the Gofpel. But the paiTage before us is fo little to Reprobation, in the ufual fenfe of the word, that we have loft all idea of reprobation merely by examining it.
We mufl take one more paflage out of this famous chapter; the 2 2d verfe : " vejpis of wrath, fitted to deJlrnBion ;" but we muft look back, per- haps as far as our laft inftance, the 17th verfe. My idea of the whole paflage, is this; — a taunting Jew had faid; we make God's name^ to be glo- rious ? do we fo ? then God cannot be anory with liSy in truth, as yet, (continuing the farcafm) we have fufFered no great harm !— On this the Apoftle is indignant; Infolence! he exclaims. You know your cavil to be infolent, as well as Ibphiflical : but dare you infult God ! are not you, accord! no- to your ow^n prophets, in his hands, as clay in the hand of the Potter } may not you be appointed to a more or lefs noble office } He might dsjiroy you,
and
" Ezek. xviil. a Jew makes a taunting cavil j fee the ninth Art. Seft. XXXVIII.
48 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCV.
and he does not j is this your complaint ? forgive him this wrong : it may not continue ; He only knows how near your dcflru(5lion is ; He only knows liow loon you may weep over your "Jempley and find not one ftonc left upon another ! Bccaufe deilrudlion is not actually arrived, do you con- clu(ie that ChriRianity is not the kingdom of the true MelTjali 1 that would be a moft unwarrant- able conciufion. Remember how God acted with t\\Q j^gyptians; if, in the fame manner, he makes your refufal of the Gofpel, the means of promoting its honour^ you cannot, after praifmg the mealure in one cafe, blame it in another, exactly fimilar.
Thus we lee, that the naflage has no relation to indh'icluals^ or to Chrijlians, or to punilhment in a future life. There is fome appearance as if St. Paul had not been wholly without an idea of the deftrudion of Jerufalem ; but how flir he was in- formed of that event, docs not appear. One thing fecms evident, that St. Paul, by his reafon- ing was endeavouring to promote converfion to Chriftianitv ; and from thence we may conclude, that any individual Jew might have efcapcd troni any kind of deftruclion which was impending over the JewiHi people.
We have now only i Pet. ii. 8. and Jude4, re- maining : they are fo much alike, that 1 will take them together : indeed they icem fo little different from Prov. xvi. 4. that if that is explained, lb arc thefe. All three confift in referring evil to God, in order to fliew, that the mod daring offenders cannot exempt themlelves from the reftraints ot his Government. You will find learned^ and inge- nious folucions of them all j but I am mofl in- clined to folvc them from what has been laid down,
about
*> In Benfon, I.e Clerc, Whitby on the five points, &c.
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCV. 49
about the difference between referring" good and evil to the Supreme Being. When men run into great crimes, they are apt to triumph in their free- dom from thofe fetters, in which they fancy the good are confined : nothing tends more to humble them, and make them fober-minded, than to make them feel, that they are totally under the government of God; and that, though they are really guilty, yet their very crimes may be inftru- ments of good in the hands of God; this makes them feel impotent and defpicable ; and the more if they are made fenfible of the boimdlefs duration of the divine fchemes of Government.— Thefe are the ideas which feem to me to prevail in the minds of the facred writers when they throw our, *' appointed''' to this evil; " of old ordained to this condemnation."
And we fhould really eonfider what a world wC Ihould be in, if God was ignorant of man's wicked- nefs ; or if the profligate were really laivlefs ; or if evil was limply evil; if no good came out of evil; or if a fin was never made the punifliment of a fin. It frequently happens, that the good which fprings out of evil incidentally is fo great, that we dare not wifli the evil had not happened. To be fure when we exprefs God's permiffion, regulation, improvement of evil, by fpeaking as if he were the author of evil, our language is very imperfed; but fo indeed is the generality of our lan2;uao-e ; often, I apprehend, not lefs imperf?6l : cuftom re- conciles us to it; and praclifing upon it, ferves to define it : the cafe might foon be the fame w^ith language afcribing evil to God. It has been eafy and familiar to the Jews ; it might become fo to us.
xcvi. Ac *= Sect, xci ri, VOL. IV. D
^O BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCVI. XCVI I.
xcvi Al length we come to our Application. If what has been'' faid is juft, we may have here an Article of natural religion''.
* I have already^ returned thanks to Providence for making me a member of my religious ajfoci- ation : Its laws and regulations mufl improve me and bring me to happinefs ; but 1 cannot think that thofe laws exifled Jir^ when I firft knew them. — how long then may the plan have exifted in the divine mind ? — the heavenly planner only knows !
* When 1 refled on the bleffed Inftitution, as feltled by divine wiidom, before all time, 1 am filled with facred wonder : could I flatter myfelf that I was a worthy member of it, 1 (hould be happy; 1 try my principles and my conduB ; and in proportion as they lluisfy me, I feel a confidence in (jod as the protc(flor of it, and an affeSiionate gratitude towards him. — Yet I can fee, that if a had man was to ad from a notion that all things are fettled, it could only lead him to defpair, or licentiotifnefs.''
' No ; the decrees of God may be an intereding. fubjed of contemplation to a good mind ; but prac- tice mufl fpring from the endeavours of man, animated by the hopes of pleafing God, and being rezvarded by him.*
XCVI I. A Chrifllan might fay thus ;
' That I am a member of the Church of Chrifl, is matter of fincere rejoicing to me : what a pri- vilege ! to be ifivited into fuch a Ibciety, to be
conlidered
^ End of Se£l. lxxxii.
*^ Thefe forms proceed according to the hint at the end of Seft. xLii: firft comes they^^?, then the cau/e, in God's pur- pofe, formed before any aflignable time : then the good and ha.d u/e of contemplating God's purpofes, or decrees: then tlie nature oi practical rules.
* Art. XIII. Seft, xxvii.— Art. xii. Sed. xxvi. — Art. xi. Sedl. XXX.
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCVIII. 5I
confidered as free from any great faulty to be re- garded in the light df a brother to my Lord and Saviour ! to be led naturally to imitate his perfec- tions, and to be put into a way which leadeth to eternal life ! — The importance of the bleffing ftill grows upon me when I confider, that the Church of Chrift has been an objeft of attention in the Divine mind ever lince the Fall of our firft Parent. — So far i am exprefsly taught ; but had not the Chriftian difpenfation been concei';ed or planned before the Fall? I mud not fay Or think' it : I look back, and time keeps opening upon me : I can fix no period when it feems at all probable that the gracious defign had a beginning.'
* Chriftianity, exifting in the divine mind before the foundation of the world, and opening r^radu- ally upon mankind, is the moll au^u/i and afecii'dg object which an human being can contemplate. — And when an examination of my heart and actions gives me any reafon to think that t am really a member of it, my hpe is confirmed, and my de- vout affe5iions enlivened, by the conjiancy of the divine benevolence. Neverchelefs, it is intelligible how an opinion, that all things are fixed by the Deity, may lead a man into a ilate of defpondency, or into a negligent and diliblute courfe of lite.'
* Though therefore I am happy in having fuch a fubjeft of meditation, to raife my mind to piety and devotion 5 yet I (hall endeavour to ftrengthen and improve my prc5lical principles by attending to the promifes of God, and to the revealed defcrip- tions of that condu(fl:, which he wilhes man co purfue, for the improvement of human happinefs.*
XCVIII. With regard to mutual concefftons, I would not fay much ; — Dupin^ makes no objeftion to this Article : there is great room for candour in
debating c Mofhelin, Vol. 6. page 77, osflavo.
^2 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCIX.
debating about it. If divine agency does not ex- clude human, nor human'' divine, and both are indijlin^, different modes of referring events, to God and man, fliould be allowed j and different y^rrt/>^, according to mens different feelings and concep- tions. St. John feems to have been of an affec- tionate temper, and that influences his ftile. — And if you and your adverfary may get into two dif- ferent trains, of thought and expreffion, and both be' right, to what purpofe is difpute ? Our form of affent feems to be fuch (as we faid on a former occafion") as an Heathen would fubfcribe to, ex- cept in thofe particulars which mull be common to all Chrijlians ; and if it be fo, no denomination of Chriftians need diffent from it. But till it appear how our method would be accepted, one cannot tell what conceffions to propofe. — Even UJJier, fpeaking' of Reprobation, feems to have had lome ideas of referring evil to God, which might, with Ibme tempering, be made to coalefce with ours. Indeed our method has favoured Reprobation as much as Election ; and poffibly might be accept- able to fomc as fetting afide no texts of fcripturc, in order to favour commonly-received notions of hu- man'" Philolbpliv.
XCIX. We come, in the laft place, to Improve- ments. Shall we, in imitation of Melan^hon, Jlrike out this feventeenth Article ? I had much rather our method of explaining and defending it, were accepted. The mind wants fomething to lean upon with rec^ard to the divine Counfelsj and thofe paU fages of Scripture which fpeak of them. The dilquifitions and meditations on fuch paflages
mioht
*> Sefl. i-xxix. Lxxxvi.
« See Sett xci. referring to Book iii.Chap. xv. Sefl. ix.
^ Art. x. Scd. Liii.
• Page 74, Body of Divinity, 7th Edition.
» Dr. Powell's 3d Charge.
BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. C 53
might be called a fine fpecies of devotion : they are all lentiment and fublimity. — One would do a good deal to fuit weak brethren; but there is no fuffi- cient reafon why thofe who are not weak fhould lofe fuch fubiime devotion: efpecially as thofe who are perplexed by meditations on the benign purpofes and plans of the Supreme Being are under no fort oi obligation to dwell upon them. (SecV. lxxxvi.)
A tranfpofttion of the former and latter parts of the firft " paragraph, might prevent fome wrong conceptions.
It muft be tried, in Natural Theology, Heathen writings, the Scriptures, and common" difcourfe, whether the obfervations which have been hazarded are juft.
c. When Milton affigned to his fallen angels the employment of reafoning^ on our prefent fub- jeds, 1 hope he did not mean to deny, that, when rightly conceived and made the fubjedt of our con- templation, they are " full of fweet, pleafant, and imfpeakable"^ comfort,^*
" Se£t. XL II. 0 Art. x. Se£l. liv.
P Paradife Loft, Book ii. 557.
*i It may be a fatisfaftion to fome hearers of the Leflures, who took notes, to know, that the five laft Seftions of this 1 7th Article, were omitted April i, 1791, for want of time; even though the Lefture that day was fupernumerary.
ARTICLE
54 BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. I.
ARTICLE XVII!.
07 OBTAINING ETERNAL SALVATION ONLY BY THE NAME OF CHRIST.
THEY alfo are to be had accurfed, that pre- ilime to fay, That even' Man fliall be faved by the law or feet which he profcffeth, fo that he be dihcent to frame his hfe according to that Law, and the figlit of Nature. For holy Scripture doth fet out unto us only the Name of Jefus Chrift, whereby men muft be faved.
I. In treating of this Article we will proceed in our ufual method, though much of what was faid upon the thirteenth Article might be applied here The thirteenth feems to relate to indivi- duals^ and this to members of Society ; but yet as tliefe may be the fame perfons, their negleding Chriftianity in the capacity of individuals, mull be nearly connected with their neglecting it in their focial chara(5\er.
According to what was faid at the opening of the Introduction to the fecond part of our Articles, the THIRD PART bcgins here.
It has probably been the cuflom in many dif- ferent ages to fay,, that all honefl men will be faved, whatever religion they may be ofj but this fentimcnt muft be moft prevalent when men are
mod
BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. II. III. 55
mod divided into religious parties; then the dif- iiculcy of forming a judgment, is moft ftriking : —it muft, on this account, have been very pre- valent at the time of our Reformation, and that «ra is probably of the moft confequence to us at prefent ; neverthelefs, if we make hiflorical remarks, we may as well look back as far as we can.
II. Bifhop Burnet {^ys, that " The impiety that is condemned in this Article was firfl: taught by feme of the Heathen Orators and Philofophers in the fourth Century," who pleaded, that God was more honoured by various modes of worfliip, than if all men agreed in one mode. — I fliould rather' apprehend, that the compilers of our Article would have chiefly in view fome error held by Chrijlians^ or by fuch as might have the fcriptures propofed and urged to them; fcriptural authori- ties would only affedt perfons fo fituated.
Philajier does give an account of a Sefb called RhetorianSy Vv'ho held, that ail fe^s were right; and fome have imagined, that thefe were Rhetoricians^ or Orators of the fourth Century ; but Philafter lived in the^ fourth Century himfelf, and places this fedt much earlier. Our bufinefs does not feem to be to enter into nice qneftions on ecclefi- aftical Hiftory ; and therefore I (hall content myfelf with referring you to Lardner's account'' of Rhe- torians, and with obferving, that though Augujiin thinks it incredible that any i^oX. (hould juftify all feds ; it has often appeared to me, that each {^dijets. out on fome right principle, though it may after- wards go too far, or deviate from the right path.
III. We may now take notice of the fifth Century. One part of the Pelagian controverfy was
about
* A. D. 380, Lardner, '' Works, Vol. 9, page 333.
D 4
^6 BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. IV. V.
about the univerfality of Redemption-^ was intended to determine, whether all men were redeemed by the Death of Chrilt, and whether all men were called. I beheve difputes on luch matters referred chiefly to Predejiination ; and were intended to de- termine whether Chrift could be faid to have died for the reprcbate-y but yet perhaps they might have Jome relation to our prcfent Article j for if all men Avere fo redeemed by Chriit as to be upon one footings it would not fignity what religion any man was of. — It fecms, moreover, as if the Pelagians had held notions which were not approved by the orthodox", about the juftiiication and Salvation of •the holy men nientioned in the Old Teflament. Yet this Salvation was, in fome meafure, afcribed to Chrifti to their hzx'xngforefeen his coming.
IV. Mohammed lived partly in the fixih Cen- tury, and partly in the feventh, (571 — 633J. Bp. Burnet obferves. that the Koran reprefents " alj men in all religions" as " equally acceptable to God, if they ferve him faithfully in them." lit aho remarks, that this candour was intended as an inducement to embrace Mohammedanifm, and was followed by great feverity towards thofe w-ho v\cre defircus to apoftaiize. We may give a pafllige from the Koran to our purpofe; " Sciendum generalitcr, quoniam opnis reifte viycns, Judieus leu Chriftianus, Icu lege fua relida ad aliam tendcns, omnis fcilicet Dcum adoians, bonique geftor, indubitanter divinuni amorcm aflequctur''."
v. But, for the reafon already afligned, we are chielly concerned with the age ot the Reformation,
la
' See Auguftin's Works, Eci. Antv. Vol. ro. — Appendix, pap-e 7 c;, in a Pel.ii^ian Crred, or Confeflion of Faith.
^ Azoara 2d. page 10, Edit. Bibliandri. Zurich 1564, quoted by Forbes, Lib. 4. cap. 10.
BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. V. 57
In the Racovian^ Catechifm it is laid down, that fmce the coming of Chrift no one is juftified with- out faith in him,' but before his coming, good men were juftified by faith in^ God. — Erafmus not only fpeaks of Cicero as infpired^, but as probably 'i Javed.—Pmdus Jovitis died in the year 1552, when King Edward's Articles were publifhed ; in his lives of famous men, he gives an account of Galeottii^ Martins., who was perfecuted by fome monks (though accidentally proteded by Pope Chryftus, or Sixtus the Fourth, as an old acquaintance) for teaching, in a Book of facred and moral philo- iophy, *' omnibus gentibus, integre et puriter veluti ex jufta naturae lege viventibus, teternos coeleftis aurse frudus paratos :" &c. this perfon died in 1478. — We have already *" mentioned the decrees of the Council o^ Trent ; I do not fee any thing more to our purpofe than what was quoted under the thirteenth Article".
The Scotch confeflion feems very ftrenuous on the necelTity of being of the true Chriftian church in order to attain'' Salvation. " Extra quam'* (ecclefiam) '* nee eft vita nee eterna felicitas. — Itaque prorsus deteftamur illorum blafphemiam qui dicunt homines viventes fecundiim equitatem et juftitiam, quamcunque religionem profefli fuerint,
fervatos
« This quoted Art. XI II. Seft. VI.
^ De prophetico Jefu Chrifti munere; or page 212.
8 Mentioned Art. x. Sed. ii. Ep. ad Jo. Ulatt, in Cic. Tufc. Difp.
^ Art. XI 11. Sedl. v.
' To what was quoted Art. xiii. Se£t. v. from Hume's Hiftory, Ihould be added the latter part of Hume'sTentence ; which belongs to the i8th Article: *' Any one who prefumes to maintain, that an Heathen can poffibly be faved, is himfelf expofed to the penalty of eternal perdition." — Hume's Hift. 4to. Vol. 3, page 334, ift Edit, quoted by Gilpin in his Life of Cranmer, page 159.
^ iJea. 16. Deficclefia.
58 BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. VI.
fervatos iri." The Scotch might be the more zealous, as being inclined to Calvimfm : to fuch it mull be Ihocking to have any one fpeak as if there were no eleB.
The authors of the Reformatio Legxtm are aHo very warm; perhaps thinking the notion oppoled an affront to Chriftianity, *■*■ Horribilh^ eft et inanis illorum audacia, qui contendunt in omni religione vel fed a quam homines profefli fuerint falutem iliis effe fperandam," &c. — In the fame chapter is a declaration againft the notion that all men fhali be faved at Injl, after undergoing fome punifhment; which notion is the fubje6t of the laft of King Edward's Articles. Perhaps it might feem, that univerfal falvaiion, though after fome evil fuffered, was not agreeable to the fcriptural accounts of falvation by Chrift.
This Reformatio Legum profeffes to cenfure only hasrefies a6lually prevailing at that time : as appears from the Epilogus after the twenty-fecond chapter.
VI. We have fometimes carried our hiflori- cal remarks lower than the times when the Articles were compiled; if we do this in the prefent cafe, we may take notice of Milton^ Hohbes^ and Pope. V Milton may not at firft, feem a proper inftancc, as he did not, in the latter part of his life, adhere to any fed, but thought he might l)e faved though feparate from all feds; but if the fault condemned in the Article be that of not founding our hopes of Salvation on our being members of the Church of Chrift, and on our ading as fuch; the great Poet might run into that fault by depriving him- felf of opportunities of performing focia} a5ls of Chriftian worftiip. His Biographer, Dr. Johnfon, feems to difapprove of his condud in this refped.
Hobbes ' De Hierefibus, Cap. i r .
BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. VII. ^g
Holbes is menrioiied by Bifhop Burnet as requlrino- no man to take farther care what Religion he it of, than that it be the rehgion eftabhihed in his own country by law.-^l would mention Mr. Pope^ only in order to introduce thofe two lines of his, which may have contributed, perhaps more than he intended, to promote the notion con- demned in our Article ;
For modes of Faith let gracelefs Zealots fight. His can't be wrong whofe Life is in the right.
Near end of 3d Ep.— Effay on Man.
We might again" read the paffage where Dr. Prieftley affirms, that «' nothing is requifite to make men'* objed of God's favour, *' but fuch moral conduft as he has made them capable of j" —with what follows.
VII. After Hiftory we come to Ex-planation.
Ought this eighteenth to be confidered as be- longing to the/e'fo;?^" or third part of our thirty- nme Articles .? 1 think, rather to the //;/r^; it feems a kind of Introdiiaion; and the idea this; a man mufl not thmk that he may be fure of Salvation as a member of any fed, or religious Society, which he may happen to engage in : Salvation can only be hoped for, according to the Scriptures, from bemg a member of the trne Church of Chri/i, what- ever may be the right idea of that Church : and what It IS, IS fettled in the fubfequent Articles.— The Scotch confeffion introduces the error oppofed m our eighteenth Article, under the fubiedt hceJefia. ^
In
^7l''::ioritfj:: '''"' '"^^ ™- ^-•^«^- ''P^s«
60 BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. VIII.
In the Articles of 1552, indeed, there is an Article between" our eighteenth and nineteenth, againft evading the Moral Law, cither under pre- tence of its being Mojnical^ or of immediate mj-pi- ration ; and fo the connexion might be, though mere virtue cannot y^i^^ men, it is not to be neg- le5ied: — in 1562, the part about the moral law of Mofes was added to the feventk Article, (about the Old Tellament) and the part about Infpiration was omitted.
The title of our eighteenth Article fpeaks of obtaining Salvation " by the Name of Chrift :" in compliance with the text which is introduced into the Article. The force of that expreffion may therefore be noticed when we come to that text.
VIII. " Ihey ALSO arc to be had accursed," — to what does the word " ^//o" refer ? no perfons had been pronounced accurfed before?— but feveral fets of perfons had been condemned for holding dif- ferent errors, though not by the fame expreffion. In the fourteenth Article we have, " Works of Jxipererogation cannot be taught without arrogance and impiety;' — In the fixteenth, *' they are to be condemned which fay they can no more fin," &c. — In the feventeenth, a doctrine is faid to fet men on a precipice from, which they are liable to fall headlong into defpair, or llcentioufnefs : — in the eighteenth, " they aljo are to be had accurfed,'' &c. " damnandi" — et — " anathematizandi."
Indeed it might be proper to take notice of the meaning of the word " they :" the perfons fpoken of mud be fuppofed, at leaft, to know of Chrifti- anity, if not to be, in fome fenfe, Chri/iians : in
1552
" Why fliould Bifhop Sparrow, in his Articles of 1562, iiifert this Article of i 5 152 before our 1 8th? was he unwilling to inter- rupt the feiies oi Articles relating to tlie Church ?
BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. VIII. 6t
1552 the title was, '' IVe muft truft ro obtain eternal faJvation only by the name of Chrift:" and in the body of the Article we have, " holy Scripture doth fet out unto its only the name of Jefus Cliriil whereby men muft be laved." This cannot belong to thofe who know nothing of the Holy Scrip turesP : the peribns condemned lire fup- pofed to make a wrong choice, to reft their hopes of happinefs on a wrong foundation, when they migl/t reft them upon a right one.
Jf it be laid, that "y^^," and natural virtue, conildered m regard to a power of conferring fal- vation, are oppofed to Chriji, and therefore fea may mean a religion not Chriftian; I anfvver, there may be feds not Chriftian, which may be within reach of arguments for Chriftianity, though too carelefs m attendmg to iuch arguments : and there niay be Chriftian feds too carelefs about approach- ing as near to the 5>/^/// as poffible. (Art. xiii. Sed. I. near the end.) —Probably at the Refornm. tion many took up this mode of talking; it fignifies but litde whether you are Papift or Proteftant, or Puritan, or even a Jew, if you are a good mal.-^ And many might float about, as kind of nominal Chnftians, without paying much attention to any reafonmgs on religious fubjeds.-This might re- tard the Reformation, as well as feem aniiffronc to Chriftianity. One cannot conceive a perfon to be ftrongly imprefled with the idea, that he can only be laved by being a member of the Church of Chrift; and not anxious to know wherein o-enuine Chriftianity confifts. "^
" To be had accurfed;' in the Latin, <' anathemati- zandi fwit •;' -^-^XQ to be anathematized. Some- thing was faid of the meaning of this exprefljon,
in
P See opening to tlie thirteenth Article.
6z book: IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. viit.
in the third Book''. It has an harfli founcl, but ihould be, like all other expreflions, interpreted by cujiom. Now it has been very much the cliI- tom to condemn errors in fuch form as this ; if any one holds fuch an error, " anathema fit " let him be accurfcd : we may fee inftances in the afts of the Council of Trent, or of any other Council. — And in our readings on Bilhop Pearfon, we meet with"^ Cyri/Ps twelve anathematifmsj againft Nefto- rius, and thofe of the Council ol Sirmium and others, againft* Photinus. Indeed this has been the- eJiabliJJied language of the Church. Its general meaning feems to have been, that men who ran into fuch particular errors, did not deferve to be united to the holy Church of Chrift, did not ap- pear to be fo in the fight of God ; — but ought to be looked upon as Jeparated from it ; and as ana- themas accompanied excommunications, the ideas ot them became ' ajfociated. This account agrees with the exprcfiions in Bingham's Antiquities; where the exprefTion, " caft out of the Church," ufed by Pope Vigilius, feems equivalent to, *' anathema eftoy' ufed by the firft Council of Bracara. — And in JVaWs"^ tranflations from Auguftin, we find re- nounced and anathematized put as meaning the fame thing. — This anathematizing was not only the lan- guage of the high Orthodox party, but o'l Pelagius himlelf''. — It was indeed taken from the New Tef- taxiient, which often took its expreflions from the Old. Confult Rom. ix. 3.-1 Cor. xvi. 22.—
Gal.
1 Chap. IX. Seft. i. Vol. 2, page 97.
' Page 32;;, Fol. * Page 120, Fol.
^ See Du Frelne under Excommunicatio. The excommunicatitf major and Anathema are laid, I th.nk, to mean the fame thing.
" On Infant Baptifm, page 188, 4to. or i. 16.24.
* Sec his Creed, in AugulHn'b Works, Vol. lo. Prcf. Edit. Antv.— Voffms'sHift.Pel 1. i.— Wall i. 19. 29.
BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. VIII. 6l
Gal. i. 8. — Rev. xxii. 3. — In Rom. ix. 3. accurfed anfvvers to the wyxx^ViA feparated-, avxhfjix is from «vaTi9ri^t to feparate. Ai/aQf/xa amongft the Hea- ihens figiiified anything put afide, or feparated for the life of the Gods ; that is in effed, mod com- monly, for deJlruSiion. Sacer, means, fet apart, or devoted., in the fenfe of cur fed. In i Cor. xvi. 22. St. Paul ufes both the term of the lxx, xvx^sfAx, and the Hebrew maran-atha^^ curjed art thou; changing, according to cuftom, the final m of D"ino into ;/.— In Gal. i. 8. a.wM^x feems to im- ply feparation, devoting, curfe. - It is on Rev. xxii. 3. that Hammond gives his explanation of avaSsjUa, and makes it relate 10 excommunication.
In the Old Tejiament, Din generally, if not always, implies feparation for the purpofe of de- ftrudion. And with us, devoted, conveys the fame idea : yet Corban amongft the Jews, oblation^ from linp to approach, implied fomething confecrated and not to be deftroyedj but when anything was devoted to deftrudtion, there was a previous fepa- ration of it, either adtual, or fuppofed. The Heathen "" Idols were actually fet apart and de- voted;—the city' of Jericho, when devoted to the Lord, or accurfed, is fuppofed to be fet apart ; the befiegers are commanded to " keep'' themfelves *' from the accurfed thing." — Chrifi, by an igno- minious death, was " made a curfe'' for us," was devoted to dettrud:ion : '* curfe'' often means a devoted " perfon.
From hence we may conceive how the early Chriftians might come to ufe the word curfe., or
anathema.^
/ Parkhurft's Lexicon: this is Parkhurfl's etymology, but not the common one.
* Deut. vii. 25,26. ' Joihua vi. 17, i9,.
''Gal. iii. 13 Deut. xxi. 23.
"' See Hammond on Rev. xxii. 3-
64 BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. IX. X.
anathema^ and how they might efteem any cooler word, a fign of lukewarmnefs or difrepect. — Though we flioiild not omit to mention the t'.v- ample\\\-\\c\\ they had in Deut. xxvii. 14—26.
The exprcflion of the Article in ,1552 was, *' They ahb are to be had accurfed and abhorred" &c. which looks more like the " damnandi'^ of the lixteenth Article, than " accurfed'' alone.
IX. " That pre fume to fay that every man fliall be Javed" —^\\2X is here blamed, may not perhaps
appear, without fome attention : the words may lead fome to think, that it is called an accurfed thing to hope that virtuous Heathens may be faved : but they do really exprefs a different idea; they do not blame candor, but prefumption ; it would be prcfumption to acquit a culprit, or reus, without authority, as well as to condemn one ; we need not condemn, but we muft not acquit : to do either properly, we lliould be judges. It is neither our bufmefs to confine the mercy of God in its opera- tions, nor to difpenfe it according to our fancies.— Nay, fuppole that in particular cafes it were allowed us ftrongly to hope, that the divine good- nefs would be exerted, yet even that falls far fliort of the prefumption of affirming that '* every man (hall be" made eternally happy in a way pre- fcribed by ourfelves.
X. " -Sy the Lazv or Se5l which he prof effeth^' Src. Bilhop Burnet diflinguifhes between being faved by a law, and in a law ; — and with rcafon ; a man may be faved in an imperfect religion by the mercy of God, or even by the merits of Chrij}\ though not by virtue of the religion which he pro- feffes : it may be confidercd whether the word tsohereby, which comes afcerwards, docs not rather confirm this notion. — Indeed in the Latin Article the exprclTion is "/« lege," but we cannot fay that
the
BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. XI. gr
the Englifh is a wrong tranllation ; becaufe the Englifli and Lathi are equally authentic. *' In
feda" therefore means, as a member of a fetfl,
We have'', in Eph.iv. 32. £v X^^jry tranilated, "for Chrift's fake;" it may mean, as aiwrn^tr of Chrift; or of that fociety, or body of which he is the Head. It is fcarcely needful to obferve, that our bein^- faved by Chrifi, or /;/ Chrift, cannot exclude' Iiuman agency, (ev « is tranflated whereby.)
XI. " Only the Name:' &c.— fn order to fee the force of this expreffion, which is taken from Acls iv. 12. we mufl conceive different men to worlhip'" different deities, and invoke them and praile^ them, and fwear^ by them under, their different names. — The contention between Elijah and the Priefts of Baal, related in i Kings, Chap xviii, may give us an idea of the cafe; particu- larly ver. 24. & 26. — Through affociation and habit, fentiment and paffion are excited by the mere found of a name; io that enthufiafm might rage on founding the name of a much- honoured Deity, and the whole of his attributes might feem to be concentred in the appellation. We find iimilar effecTis from the names of political or other parties'; the very found of them excites animofity and virulence*".
And when men do not diftinguidi between the power of the perfon to whom the name belongs,
and
■' Art. xir. end of Sea. xi. « Art. x. Seft. xxxu.
^ Jofiiua xxiv. 15. g pfaim Ixviii. 4.
I" Pfalm Ixiii 12. 1 Sam. xvli. 43.
i The Chorus in the Oiatorio of Samfon, in which the Ifraelues and the Philiftines contend in Invocation, the one party mvokmgJeJwvah, ihtoxhav Dagon, mull tend to enliven our conceptions of what is related, i Kings xviii. 24, &cc.
"Nov. 1793, the French are changing names of Streets, Cards, Montlis, &c. .
VOL. IV. E
66 BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. XII. XIII.
and the combination of letters or founds which compofe the name, then the name itfelf comes to be regarded as endued with fome charm or fuper- natural influence.
XII. The lafl: thing which can come into our explanation, is the word "/^v-cy/," and we have before'' confidered its meaning. Here we may ob- lerve, that Salvation (and in like manner damna- tion) may admit of an endlefs variety of degrees: and it might be wrong to omit wholly, t\\SLX. Javing has in Acls iv. 12. a particular reference to deliverance from bodily evil. Peter and John had healed a lame man ; they are afked folemnly, " By what power, or by what name have ye done this ?" they anfwer, *' By the name of Jefus Chrift of Nazareth." — " Neither is ihtxt Jalvation in any other : for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby (eu u) we muft be faved ;" (cJTt o-wSjjvat r/xa?). Suppofe this meant merely that the lame could only be healed in the name of Chrifl:, yet the healing meant was miraculous ; and therefore that would be faying, that real miracles could only be performed in fupport of Chrillianity : but the Apoftle, with what he fays about the miraculous cure, mixes a great deal of realbning about the nature of the Chriftian Difpcnfation, and we*" know that mere admilfion into Chrillianity, vvas called beingy/7ivJ : what he fays, ver. 12. fcems to be delivered as an mni-erfal truth.
XIII. Having finiflied our explanation, we come to the Proof of wiiat is affirmed in our Article. And 1 do not fee that we need make more than one propofi'ion.
XIV. * The
' Appendu to Art. xi. Sed, xvii. — and feveral other places.
" Art, IX. Sei^. xiv.ati<l Appendix to Art, xi.Sefl. xvin.
BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. XIV— XVI. 67
XIV. * The Scriptures do not allow any one to confider it as an indifferent matter, whether he ads as a member of the true Church of Chrift, or not.'
We have already produced many texts which are really to this purpofe ", though they relate im- mediately to ads of individuals. There would be no propriety in our being reprefented as branches of a vine^ as xhQ flock of a fliepherd, as Mhtfponfe of Chrift, as ele£i, knit together, forming an edifice built upon the foundation of the Apofdes and Prophets, Jefus Chrift himfelf being the chief corner-ftone, if we were under no obligation to ad focially as Chriftians, or if we could attain to Chrif- tian Salvation without ading fo.
XV. As to indirect proof, or anfvvers to objec" tions, we have before given what is abundantly fufficient. No objedions of any force feem to occur, except thofe from Ads x. 34 and Rom. ii. 1 4 --2 7.; and thefe° texts have been already confidered.
XVI. We may therefore proceed to our Appli- cation.
We might, at this time, give our AJent to the Article before us in fome fuch form as the fol- lowing;
' Whatever degree of happinefs it may pleafe God, in his mercy, to confer on the virtuous Heathen or Jew^ who continues fuch to the end of his life without 2i.]\y fault of his own ; no man can voluntarily neglcSl the provilion which God has made for us under Chriftianity, or encourage others to negled it, or be carelefs about getting as near
truth
f* Art. XII. SeiEl, XXI.— Art. XIII. near theendof Sc£t. xvn. and near the end of Se£l. xxii.
*" Art xiu. Sections XXIII. & xxvi. E Z
68 BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. XVII.
truth and perfedion as pofliblcP, In Chriftianity, without meriting a fevere condemnation^ and render- ing \\\m(^\^ nnivorthy to continue in poiTeffion of the ineftimable privileges of that fociety of which Chrift in Heaven is the Head, and to'' purchafc which he filed his precious blood.'
XVII. With regard to mtitml concejfionsy little more feems wanting than for difpiitantsto acknow- ledge that, when they dilagree, they do not fuffi- ciently confider the different points of viezv in which they fee the fubject of contention. — When we approve fuch expreffions as that of Mr. Pope\ we fuppofe men to have done their beft, humanly fpeaking, to acquire right religious principles : when we difanprove men's notions, and call them horrible, blafphcmous, acciirfed, he. we fuppofe men not doing their beft; but ncglcding, with ab- furd prefumption, contemptuous ingratitude, and profligate infenfibility, every thing that has been done and fuffered for mankind, in order to give them a bleffcd religion, and bring them to the never-ending enjoyment ot lupreme felicity. — While men difpute without entering into each other's views, they are not likely to come to any end of dlfputlng; but there are perfons fo reafon- able as to allow of candour towards thofe who really do every thing in their power to be upon a right footing in refpeft of religion, and at the fame time to abhor, cfpeclallv in themfclve?, every de- gree of voluntary neglip^ence. — Not to aifl as Chriftians, may in fome be only a misfortune, in others a great fault; but yet in either caie it may be attended v;ith great and important' evil.
XVIII. I am
P Phil. i. 9.— iii. 1 '1, 14 — Conclufion of St. Peter's fecond Epillle.
q Aas XX. 23. ' Sea. VI.
» Dr. BalguV's Sermons, pa;',c 158, &c. to the end of the 9th Difcourfc.
BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. XVIII. 69
XVIII. I am not prepared to fuggeft any Im- provement relative to the prefent Article ; unlefs it might be exprejfed more preciiely than it is. Per- haps it might be fo exprelFed as to fliew for whom it is particularly intended, bow far it conceives thofe of whom it fpeaks, to be members of reli- gious Society; and how it fuppofes thofe whom it condemns, to be informed of the nature of Chrif- tianity.
ARTICLI
BOOK IV. ART, XIX. SECT. I.
ARTICLE XIX.
OF THE CHURCH.
THE vifible Church of Chrift is a congrega- tion of faithful men, in the which the pure Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly miniftered, according to Chrift's ordinance, in all thofe things that of neccfllty are requiiite to the fame.
As the Church of Hierufalem, Alexandria, and Antioch, have erred ; fo alfo the Church of Rome hath erred ; not only in their living and manner of Ceremonies, but alfo in matters of Faith.
I. Before I enter upon another Article, let me fay, that it is my intention, in this part of my undertaking, to make a change in my manner of treating the fubje£ls which may come under con- fideration. I mean to treat the remaining articles in a more fiimmary way than I have treated the preceding. For this change it may be natural to afk ibme reafons. The firft is, that without fome change, our fyftem would be too extenfive, if it be not fo already, confidering that, in order to obey the directions of our Founder, I have been obliged to make Bifliop Vearjon on the Creed occupy every third Lefture. It may indeed be faid, that if I had treated the preceding Articles more briefly, I might have treated the following more fully ; and without taking more time: that is true j but
yet
EOOKIV.ART.XIX.SECT.il. ^I
yet It Teems better to go the bottom of fome fub- jefts, and give a fummary account of others, thaq to treat all with an intermediate degree of fulnefs. This might be faid though there were no other reafons for the change I am about to make; but it may be added, that the remaining fubjecls have been already much better treated than thofe which we have gone through; and are therefoie much more eafy for the ftudent to confider by himfelf. Bifhop Biirnet writes better on the Articles which are to come, than on thofe which are paft: and the refutation of the Popi/Ii errors is now reduced into a fmall compafs, by Archbifliop Seeker and \\ Bifliop Porteiis. It feems to me likewife, that the firft eighteen of our xxxix Articles may be con- fidered as more important than the reft, as be- longing more to Mankind in general. Religious Society is indeed a fubjed of great importance to all^ men; but that was attentively confidered in the third Book of our Syftem.*
Neverthelefs, though I propofe to fpeak more briefly on each fubjedl than I have done hitherto, or at leaft than I have done fince I entered upon the Articles of our Church, I would keep the fame method in view; as that feems founded in reafon. What fads are mentioned, fliould be mentioned before we ufe the expreffions which allude to them : and the terms of propofitions fhould be explained before their truth be proved.
II. With regard then to the nineteenth Article, fome few Hijiorkal remarks may be made. The propagation of the Gofpel was treated in our firft Book. Here we may obferve, that before' the
Church
* The Hlftory of the beginnings of the Church of Rome is, I believe, too obfcure for us to dwel! much upon : I would not fpeak pofitively : the Billiop of Rome nuift be above neighbour-
E 4. -^ ,w
72 BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. II.
Church of Rome came to be famous in the weft, the Churches mentioned in the Article, had ex- ifted in great celebrity : fo I conceive. Tlie Church of Jerufalem mud of courfe be eminent, as It was planted where our Saviour and his Apodles refjded : it might be confidcred as the Jource of Chriftianity, where it was mod pure : the firft Bifliop of it is faid to have been St. James.
The Church of Alexandria was the capital of the Churches of Africa, and has been faid to be fjunded by St. Mark. In like manner the Church of Antioch was the capital of the Churches oi AJia, and has been faid to have had St. Peter for its firft Bilhop. Thefe became three Patriarchates^ \ and we have in Bingham s Antiquities'', three maps of them^
In what thefe three churches " have erred," feems but of little moment; becaufe the Article is only againd the Pomanifis^ and they would not deny the fallibility of the Eaftern Churches. Yet thefe three churches might have made as high ckims, of any kind, as the Church of Rome; having under them Primates and Metropolitans.
The
ing Bifliops; people would have to go to Rome about various concerns; when a precedence was wanted, it would naturally fall to the Eifhop of that Church which was in the Capital.— By the year 32^ the Biftiop of Rome muft have grown great : about the year 250 there were at Rome 1500 Widow sand other indigent perfons fupported or relieved by Chr.iHans ; fee Lard-
ner. Index, Rcmc. The Bifhop of Rome was not at Nice
in 325, only Prejhyters; why not Suffragan Bifhops, if he had any ?
^ Book ix.
' For the dignity of thefe Churches fee the Canons of the Co'.mcil of Nice; Canon 6 and 7. — Alio Billiop Hallifax on Prophecy, page 335. — Heylin, on Epifcopacy, mentions Saint James, Saint Mark and Saint Peter as having been the firft Bilhops.
BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. III. IV. 73
— The errors alluded to, however, fcem to have been, favouring Arianifm, and condemning'' Origen. Ads for diefe purpofes were paffcd in Councils ° at thefe cities ; and the decree of a Council at any citj' mufi include the opinion of the Church there. — (Councils occur again in the twenty-firll Article.)
Several fuhje^s relative to our prcfent Article, have been much difcuflcd; but it does not feeni nectflaiv for us to enter into them at prefent ; fuch are, the marks of a^ true Church, the power of tije Keys°, the naUire of binding^ and loojing. — The Romanifts, after we had fcparated from them at the Reformation, held, that we were no true churchy and the difputes which took place on that matter, Vv-ere probably one immediate occnjion^ of our prefent Article.
III. Let us next fee what may be wanted in the way of ExpIanatlcn.—OuY Article confifts of two Paragraphs J the firH; feems to be definition and theory, the fecond, fa«ft.
IV. The definition is, of " t/ie vif.hk church of Chrifi :" now previous to that, we fhould con- ceive, that Chrift formed all his Difciples into one fociety; the members therefore muft live in dif- ferent ages : it is not needful to confider the deceafed at prelcMit, therefore our vievv's are con- fined to the " vifible church," that is, to the fociety of all living Chriftians. But how, you hj, do thefe iorm a Jocidy P firfl, we may anfwer, as all men form a lociety ; God has made good to
follow
^ Socrates 6. 10.
" Bcni'b Compendium, Vol. 1, page ia6.
^ Hdlcs,G — 13 — 49, Cambr. s Matt. xvl. 18, '9.
^ Matt, xviii. 18.
' The Trent Creed is called by th- Romaaifi", that Faith " extra (iiiani nemo falviis efle potelL" quoted in Eennet's EfTay on the 39 Articles, page 42,6.
74 BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. V. VI.
follow from mens acting as a fociety, and evil from their not acling as a fociety ; this lliews them that they are a fociety. Secondly, we know, that all Chriftians conftitute one fociety, from the Scriptures ''.
V. " Congregation,^'' ccetus, rather feems to im- ply, as does £XJcAii(rj«, that all living Chriftians can affemhle at one time, in one place ; this is fuitable enough to Theory, and is Dr. Balgufs^ firil fup- pofition, when he is defcribing the nature of a Church : the contrivances which become nccef- fary when it is found that all cannot make one congregation, are only mechanical, as it were, and do not affeft the nature or effen^e of the thing which accidentally requires them.
The compilers of our Article would be led to ufe the word '■'^congregation^* by the language of our Old Teftamentj the ivJwle body o{ Ifraelites, (the Church of God before Chrifiianity) being called the Congregation. See Numb. xvi. 3. — xxvii. 17. — Joili. xxli. 17. — I Chron. xxviii. 8. — Pfalm Ixxiv. 2. in all which places we have o-uvaj'wj'u in the Lxx ^ except i Chron. xxviii. 8. which is E)txAtia-ta. — In the hi ezv Teftament the whole Body of Chriftians is called the Chnrch of God; but the Greek is always E:ixX;iria : Taylor however looks upon this calling the whole body of Chriftians^ the Church, as an imitation of the language of the Old Teftament, in which the whole Body of Ifraelites was called the Congregation. — Taylor on Romans, Key, par. 52. 133.
yi. The word ^^ faithfid" feems technical j fidelcs ufed to be oppofed to Catechtimeni.
VII. "The
'' Art. XVII I. Se£l. xiv. Alfo Book iii. Chap. xi.
Seft. IV.
^ Vol. of Sermoni", page 89.
BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. VII. VIII. *j ^
VII. " The fAire word of God" — is alfo theory : it is that to which Chriftians may continually ap- proach, though they may never attain to perfedt purity of dodrine. — •* I'he facraments'' are intro- duced as ejfentials of a Chriftian Church; and it is at the fame time impHed, that though they are elfential, fome circimjlances about them are not fo : this is more clear in the Latin than in the Englifh. — A religious fociety under natural religion might perhaps have no effentials ; I mean, they might purfue the ends in view by fuch methods as their wifdom fhculd fuggeft ; but that is not the cafe in a Chrifbian fociety; they cannot teach any doc- trines but thofe of fcripture, nor (et afide the holy Sacraments. — y^t may obfcrve how very little was thought" neceffary, by our Englilh Reformers, to conftitute a Chriftian Church; prayer is not men- tioned, though it is in Ails ii. 41, 42. nor any kind of difcipline : this feems to imply, that no Chriftian church could be fuppofed to meet with- out prayer, or that prayer is included in pure doSirine^ and that no modes of adminiftering the Sacraments deilroy the effence of a Chriftian, Church.
VIII. In the fecond part there is a fort of ambiguity : a doubt is left, whether the three churches only erred in general, or erred, like the church of Rome, in morality, (agenda), ceremo- nies, and tenets (credenda) : but either fenfe may be taken by him who gives his affent.
In
*" P. S. See a paflkge quoted by Dean Tucker (Letter to Kippis, page 56) from the enlarged confeffion of Augfburg. ** Ad veraim unitatcm Ecclefije fatis eft confentire de Doilrina. Evangelii, et adminiftratione Sacramentorum." This does not mean a conlent about all particulars, as appears from what follows, which anfwers to the beginning of our 34.th Article : f" Nee necefTe eft ubique fimiles effe Traditiones humanas, feu r//«j ab honunibus inlUtutos." Syntagma; page 12.
76 BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. IX.
In the Enolifli, we have *' m thnr living" (Church of Rome), but in the Latin, " quoad agenda.'' The Juiglifli feems to regard condiiti^ the Latin, moral, pradicA principles taught^ or allowed. Hence, in examining the wickednels prevailing in Pcpiih countries, we ihould always keep in mind how far it is permitted, or encouraged.
The Church ot Rome is here allowed the ejj'ence of a true Church" j it aims at preaching fcriptural do(i:nincs, and it does not fet afide the Sacra- ments. Archbilhop Land., on his triaL" before the invcreratc enemies of the Roman church, main- tained ihis to be the truth, but did not, I think, refer to this Arriclc, to prove it : that the Church of Rome is here declired erronouSy as well as fal- lible, needs no remark. The Church of Chrifl; in theory is pnre; in praclice each part of it \'i falli- ble and imperfed>.
IX. Thus we have looked through the Article; but yet a fe^v things remain to be mentioned : if " the vifible Church of Chrifl" be the fociety of living Chriftians, what is oppofed to it ? or what Church of Chriil is invifihUf' the Romanifts do not allov\ P oi any. There may be, feemingly, tzvo notions
of
" The Puritans did not allow ihis. See Neal, i. 96. 410.
" Index to Neal's Hill. Pur. et alibi. When Proteftants fay, that a Chriftian may be faved in the Church of Rome, they mean, or ought to mean, fuppofing the Chriftian not to think
it ivicng to be of that Churcn fhcrefore Papiih cannot ufe
their famous argument to thofe who do think it wrong. — The argument is, all fides own, that a man may be faved in the Ciiurch of Rome; but all fides Ao net own that a man may be faved in a Proteftant Church ; therefore it is moll fafe to adhere to the Chuicli of Rome.
P " The pretenfcd invifible Church of the Heretikes."
Rhcmi.ls on Atfls ii. 47. the Romatiills fecm to mean, that the fcripuircs, when ihey fpeak of the Church of Chrift, do not mean to fpeak of thofe who are true Chriftians in the fight of God, but of Chrif^iaiK fu, h n.r. \vc find them.
BOOK iV. ART. XIX. SECT. X. yy
of It; one, that the imijibk church contains^// Chrifiians; the hving, and all -.vho have depart evl this Life in the Faith of Chriil : another, the cal- viniflic, and mofh common, that it conhfts of thofe v.'ho in the fight of God are confidered as Inie Chriftians; and Romanifls, I think, make a dif- ference between vera and viva membra oi the Church. Perhaps the term " vifibW' might be ufed in order to prevent Romaniils from objed:- ing; and to fatisfy Calvhifs that it was not intended to fpeak here of the elect or -predefinat^, as itm by God himfelf.
X. We often hear of the Catholic Church. — Lf .we go only by Etymology, it may fignify ihe vv'hole vifible church of CJirifl, or even invifiblc -, or all Chriflians of aJl agci. When I fay I be- lieve in the Catholic Church, I mean, I believe that Chrift intended to form all Chnflians into one fociety; though when I fpeak of the Chuich at large, I have only in mind the prcfent generation. (Art. VIII. Sec^. III.) — And the church of Chnft may be " therefore called catholic, or univerlai, becaufe it Cimfifts of ^// ;/^//5;/i ; whereas the Jew-
ilh Church" confifted'^ " only of one nation':"
As words are made for ufe, one may often oet the right feufe of a word by confidering tor what ufe it might be made; and this is geneiaily to mark out fotiie difin£tion y asjufi: now was tlie the calc. The church might be called Catholic, to didinguiai it from a church, or a particiikrr chui-ch ; tfiat is a fet of Chriftians whole m.inds cannot be fatisfied without joining in fome peculiar regulations for carrying on focial religion amongft themlelves, within certain limits. But perhaps the moft com- mon ufe of catholic is to dillmgu'fh, in an honour- able ir.anner, a large and i^fpedable bod)' of
Chriftians ^ Bilhop Porteus's brief confutation, page 14.
yS BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SLCT. XI. XII.
Chridlans from a fmall body who affedl fingularity in feme doctrine or ceremony : to call the large body the catholic church, or catholics, ieems to make the fmall one fink into nothings as if it only made an exception not worth mentioning.
XI. A particniar church may be a legitimate Chriftian Society, but IhoultJ always regard itfelf as a coPifi-ituent part of the catholic church'. In any nation, it may help to promote civil fubjeclion, and may itfelf receive fupport and protedVion or even honour. This has been more fully explained in the third ^ Book. — The definition of oar Ar- ticle feems not wholly unluitable to a particular church '.
XII. I know not that any other terms need be mentioned except militant'^, asoppofed to trium.ph- ant. This diftinclion iuppofes men pocly popu- larly fpeaking; then, while they are in this Life warring a good warfare, under the banner of the Captain of their Salvation, while they are fighting the gdod fight, they are called the church 7nilitant, and after death, when they'' receive their crown of Glory, the Church triumphant.
The Scotch church calls thofe whom we fuppofe good, the eieS; the church, ftrictly fpeaking, (in
their
* Dr. Powell, page 26, alludes to him, " who refufed to be made a citizen ot Alliens, becaule lie was already a citizen of the world.''
^ Cliap, xjv,
* Wheatly (page 394) obferves, that our Church Catechifm was {yi m.ide as to luit the Cutholn Church. Any youth in our /)^j77/fw/<ar Church, according to him, is catechized, or grounded, in no dodtrincs fecmiar to tliat Cliurch. Vet all Chriftians do not allow of water-baptifin ; nor that the Death of Chrift ib a f.icrifice, fpeaking without figure.
" Scotch Confefiion, 16. de Ecclefia— — Div. Leg. Vol. 4. Svo. page 470. calls the Church triumphant thofe who ac- company Chrift at his fecond coning.
' Sec 2 Tim. iv, 7. — a Cor. x. 4.— i Tim. i. iS.— i Pet. v. 4.
BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. XIII XVI. 79
their idea) hiv'ifible to the eye of man, but the imz church in the fight of God''.
XIII. We may now beft fee the connexion of this Article with the one preceding it. Salvation is not to be hoped for out of the Churchy by the eighteenth Article; agreed, fays the Romanifb, therefore continue Catholics ; no, fay the Prote- flants, we may, if we think we cannot lawfully communicate with yon, form another parfknlar church Rill conceiving our particular church to make a part of the catholic vifible church of Chrift : and what we afliime to ourfelves, we allow to others.
XIV. But let us come to our Proof. — We feem to have at leaft two propqfitions.
1. Chrill has formed his followers into one Society.
2. TheRornhh church " hath erred;" in prac- tical principles, or morality, ("agenda"}; in cere- monies; and alfo in doctrine or tenets, {" ere- denda.")
XV. The former propofition has been verv lately ^ proved. To what was faid we might add I Cor. xii. 5. 10. 12. 29. which fhew, that the miraculous powers given to the Apofties, &c. im- plied religious fociety : and our Saviour's various prophecies concerning the fortunes of the Church, imply the fame thing. He foretells its durabihty, &c. as one body.— -Matt. xvi. i8, 19.
XVI. That tlie RomiOi Church hath erred in morahty, or *' agenda," need fcarccly be proved,
not
^ Pet, Heylin, In his Dlvlnlty-A£l at Oxford, put up as a queftion, " An Ecclefia unquam fiierit invifibilis ?" and deter- mined in the negative. — He was an Arminian.
^ Art. XVIII. Sedl. xiv. See alfo Book iii. Chap, xu
Sea. iv. ^ .
So BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. XVI I.
not only becaiife the Popes and Clerg)-" have had amoiigfl them men remarkab!)' immoral and pro- fli crate ; but becaufc rliins:s have br.-n ^Z/oaV'-Zanrl forbidden v^rongly; this, as well as the Popilh errors in ceremonies and doctrine'', may be Ick to be proved by rhc lublequent Articles. — Pope Liberius favoured the Arinns\ ZozJtnus the Pela- i^niHSy and llonorins was condemned as a "^ Mono- ihelite.
This direfl: proof fecms eafy, but the Romanics quote fcriptv.re; the general anlwcr to all texts cx- prefTmg the perLclion of the Churcli, is the fame with that to all icriptural exprelfions of the per- fection of a ChrllVian ; thev defcribc ///cWvS not faB. — This has been already Miinted in explaining the word ''prireS'
XVII. The fubjeift before us lias b:cn made Lb intricate by controvcrlV with the Papifts, and by the Calvinillic notion, that the Church means the flecl and predellinated, that it may be wortl; our while, in the way of AppliccJ'wn, to conceive a form of ajfent to our Article.
'All Chrillians conftitute a Society, the end of which is to attain perfect purity of manners, and unerring religious truth : the means ol promoting this end are left to human prudence, fo long as the dodrines taught are found.d on Icripture, and the jacraments inllituted by Chrift, are held to be in- difpenfit^le — Could all Cliriflians agiee, tlnv might
ad
* See Sir Edwin fvandvs's Ruropn? Speculum, under Life and CuiVtrfjticri : ti,o;igh wiLkcdnei's dots not prove iiidiii>utably the inculcating ot b.id moral principles, yet when it is very ptevaleat it affords a ftrung pn-rumptiun: b-.-lides th;it " wicked- nefi is deftruflive of gocd principles ;" as Comber obferves, ih his traft againlt Popery, page 33, from Ariilotle, Eth. lib. 6.
'^ Maclainc'sMolheim, Vol. i. 4to. page 278, Note.
« Berti, Vol. i.page 123. '^ Fcrbes, B. 5. Chap. 10.
' .\a. XV. iJct^. XIX. ' Sed. VII.
BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. XVIII. XIX. ^I
ad under one ecclefiaftical authority ; but if any number are fully perfuaded that they cannot law- fully unite with the reft, they may form a feparate fociety, ftill conceiving that fociety to make part of the whole fociety of Chriftians, till fome general agreement can be effefted.'
' When we judge from experience, we muft con- clude, that unanimity is not at prefent to be ex- pedtedi and we muft allow, that every particular fociety of Chriftians falls far fhort of perfedion.*
XVIII. ^ The remarks and diftindions here made, might be the ground of fome mutual con- cejfions-, but Dr. Bu Pin, in his negociation with Archbidiop PVake\ about an union between the Englifti and Galilean Churches, gives up the nmt- ter m difpute. " Though all particular churches," he fays, " even that of Rome, may err, it is need- lejs to fay this in a Confeffion of Faith." — It is not more to our purpofe that this learned man gives up \\\t fallibility of the Roman Church, than that he fpeaksof it 2.% ?, particular Church.
XIX. In order to promote Improvement, I would recommend an attentive perufal of Dr. Balguy's two Confecration -Sermons, and his Charge" on ** Subfcription to Articles of Religion."
g Molheim, oaavo, Vol. 5. page 130. — It might be worth ■while to read Archbilhop Wake's compliment to Dr. Du Pin,
page 123. And what the Archbilhop thmks may be Du Pin's
own judgment about the Englifli Articles.
T')\t people amongft the Papifts are not taught, I fuppofe, ac- cording to Da Pin's candid notions ; he feems to make a great difFerence between the Peopk and the enlightened.
VOL. IV. F ARTICLE
82 BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. I.
ARTICLE XX.
OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH.
THE Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and authority in Controverfies of Faith : and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God's Word written, neither may it fo expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. Where- fore, although the Church be a witnefs and a keeper of holy Writ, yet as it ought not to decree any thing againft the fame; fo befides the fame ought it not to enforce any thing to be believed for neceffity of falvation.
I. We begin with Hijlory.
At the time of the Reformation, fome of our countrymen were defirous (as we have often oc- cafion to obferve) of departing farther from the Church of Rome than we have done, and others willied not to go fo far. The Reformers had, on this account, a difficult tafk to execute. The Puritans hated the Church of Rome, and every thing that fcemed to charaAerize it; but fome, though they faw the errors of Poper)^ retained their prejudices in favour of thofe things, which implied no error or impiety. The Reformers wilhed to comply with both, as far as they might lawfully. The difficulties arifing in this manner,
did
BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. I. 8;^
did not relate fo much to Important matters, as to things indifferent in their own nature, as cere- monies and habits, or what might be called ceremonies, in a large fenfe.
The averfion of the Puritans to appointed cere- monies. Sec. feems to have been on two grounds ; as PopiJIiy and as profaning worlhip by the intro- duftion of the fine'' arts. Indeed the application of mufic, painting, &c. to religious worfhip, is itfelf rather Popifli ; but independently of that, the Puritans were void of what we call tafte and elegance. The three ceremonies they chiefly ob- jeded to, were, the fign of the Crofs in Baptifm, the wearing oi furpUces, and bieeling at the Sacra- ment of the Lord's Supper. Thefe have been called the three'' nocent ctxtmomts ; only byway "^"^ of oppofition, I fuppofe, to innocent. Indeed all thefe favoured of Popery; the laft, as keeping up the idea of the Mafs. But the Puritans always petitioned againfl Organs", and were enemies, I think, to pictures and images. The rights of Toleration were not allowed till the Revolution''; and therefore Puritans, though enemies to the Church of England in many refpeds, were mem- bers of it, and Minifters : they were forced to complain and difpute; feparation was not a thing eafy to be accompliflied ; otherwife difputes would have been more rare.
One difpute related immediately to this twen- tieth Article : the queftion was, whether the Jirji
clatife
= Book in. Chap, xv. Se£l. x.
'' See John Burges, page 28. mentioned in Hampton Court Conference, Neal. Index.
<^ Convocation of 1562; in Neal, i. 119, &c. Strype, and others.
^ Book rii. Chap, xiv. Se«5l, xv.
F 2
84 BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. I.
claufe was genuine orfurreptitious' ? It Is a curious qucftion •. to read Neal's account, one would think. it muft be fpurious j yet Bennet, in his EJJav^ has arguments on the other fide, which appear to me the ftronger. In King Edward's anicles the claufe is not ; but in the fifth of thofe articles there is fomething relating to the fubjeft, which is omitted in our fixth ; (the correfponding Article). When the Bilhops in 1562 were to fign the Articles re- vifed, a copy feems to have been prepared for them to fign before they met, from King Edward's; but when they met, they feem to have made feveral alterations in it, and then to have figned it. Yet, though they figned it, they did not make it a Recordy becaufe after the fignature, they agreed upon the danfe in queftion : And as it was not a record, the Archbifhop kept it in his own private . cuflody, and left it to Benet College. — At lad a frelh paper was figned, which /lad the claufe in quellion; and this was lodged regularly, as a Record, in the Regifter's Court of Canterbury, from whence Archbifhop Laud had a copy ^ on his trial, in 1637.
The Bifhops alfo ordered the Articles with the Claufe to be prbited: yet there are fome printed copies which have not the claufe; but Bennet argues, that fuch are fpurious, if in Englifh, and that thofe in which it is found, are genuine : the
Records
= See Neal, 1. 1 18. and Bennet's Ej/ay, paffim.— Alfo " Prieft- cralt ill Perfedion," Canibr. Bb — 10 — 47. and Bennet's Anfwcr to it in his Preface to his EfTay : addrelTed to Anthony Collins, Efq. the Infidel.
From the Life of Peter Heylin it appears, that he kept his a£b for D. D. at Oxford on the claufe, taking its genuinenefs for granted. — Strype's Annals, Chap. a8.
^ Heyliti's Jhort account (page 19, Life of Laud) agrees, I think, witli tliis.
BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. I. 8^
Records were burnt in the ^ great Fire of London in 1666. — This queftlon is now merely hiftorical ; for by an Ad of Parhament made in 1662, all the Clergy are obliged to fign a copy, in which this claiife is contained.
The matter about the power of the Churchy with regard to ceremonies, got mixed with a difpute how far the CiviL Magijlrate^ could enjoin ob- fervances for religious focieties, in matters indif- ferent ; the Puritans always held, that the Church was independent of the ftate; and few faw, that when the Magiftrate ufed a coercive power in fpi- ritual matters he ufed it as the Ally of the Church, as far as he adled without any view of fecuring the State. However in this twentieth Article we have nothing about the Civil Magiftrate : nor has the thirty-leventh, " Of the Civil Magiftrates," any mention of rites and ceremonies.
In the time of King Edward VI. there was a great controverfy about the Habits of the Priefts and Bilhops. The Puritans found them Popifii and fine, others thought them recommendatory of religion; and coniidering the poverty of fome of the Clergy, almoft necellary for decency. Bifliop Hooper had lived at Zurich, and perhaps had there contrafted a love of plainnefs and fimplicity ; and Swifs ideas of Church -government. He refufed the Bifl-iopric of Gloucefter becaufe he could not be confecrated and appear at Court, and in his Diocefe, without wearing fome habits which he efteemed to be Popifli; but his refufal was not ad- mitted ; he was imprifoned fome months : either in his own Houfe or in the Fleet Prifon, and treated with great rigour; at laft a compromifc
was
s Vol. 2. page 209. — Introd. to Book i v. Sc<St. iv. *" Neal, 1. 95— 98. always quarto.
F3
86 BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. I.
was adopted, and he became a Prelate. He was a perfon of great worth, and very inftrii mental in completing the Reformation.
It is not to be concluded from what has been faid, that the Piuitans real!)' willied religious fociety to have WttlQ power ; their view was rather, to pre- vent thofe particular ceremonies from being en- joined, which they faw the Church of England •was, at the time, moft likely to adopt; and to make Scripture a guide in' every thing : though, 1 think, fcripture was, at bottom, rather a pre- text for refufing, than the ground of making re- gulations.
The Romanics, however, were for requiring an implicit obedience to the Church : fuch an obe- dience, as if the Church of Rome . was in faft, what the Church of Chrift is in Theory, "without fpot, or wrinkle, or any'' fuch thing." Dr. Alid- dleton, in the Preface' to his Letter from Rome, gives us a paflage from a Popilh writing called " the Catholic Chriftian," which may anfwer our purpofe : the fubjeft is Tranfubflantiation. '• The unerring authority of the Church has declared it to be true, and enjoined the belief of it ;" — after fuch a decifion — " it is the part of an Tnfidcl rather than a Chriflian, to afk, how can this be?" — The Papifts have faid, that the Church is even fuperior to™ Scripture : how ?— becaufe the Church judges what is fcripture; there have been many fpurious writings pretending to be Scripture; thele the Church rejedts, keeping only fuch as are ge- nuine and authentic : but have they any right to
fettle
* Warburton's Alliance, i. 4. page 46, Svo. Edit. 1766. Note.
'' Eph. V. 27. 'P. Ixxvli.
^ Gilpin's Life of Wickliff, page 61, 62.
BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. II. 87
fettle thofe as fcrlpture which are not genuine and authentic ? — and when they have accepted any thing as fcriptuie, does it govern them, or they it? — the moment any writing has an exiftence as fcripture, it is fuperior to them. — Here we clofe our Hijiory.
II. Our firft remark in the way of Explanation, is, tliat we fhould conceive our Article to be di- vided into two paragraphs^ the firft againft Puri- tans, the fecond againft Papijis. Puritans are oppofed as fetting afide all ufe of human prudence in providing the means of exercifing focial reli- gion ^ Papifts, as aiming to advance human au- tliority above the word of God. In this matter, our Church feems to fay, let us avoid both ex* tremes.
" "The Church^'* — how does this expreffion fuit what was faid under the preceding Article ? does it mean vifible, catholic, particular, church ? or what ? — that is left to bs decided by the ftate of things. \i all Chriftians are united, it means the Catholic church, of one generation j if not, it means any particular church, which can properly be called a church; it means any fociety of Chrif- tians, as far as they conftitute a legitimate church. — In what part of fuch fociety the government Ihould be lodged, whether it fliould be of a mo- narchical or democratical form, is left undeter- mined.
" Hath pozvery — Pozver here means rightful power; no uncommon ufe of the word ; what is more commonly called authority, and perhaps more accurately ; for a Tyrant may often have power to do that, which he has no right to do ; that is, no authority: but "authority" comes immediately afterwards in another fenfe.
F 4 "7b
SS BOOKIV.ART.XX.SECT.il.
" I'd decree rites and ceremonies^ and authorily in controverjies of faiths Here " authority" means only tveight or influence ; wliich is not a wrong ufe of the word.— This latter influence, here called authority, is much lefs than the former, here called power. It may be proper for you to refpeA a per- fon's judgment, when he has no right to infill on your obedience. The expreffion, " in controver- jies of /«////," — ! niplies, that you are not expcded to give up your judgment to the judgment of the Church, except in doubtful and difficult points.
But is the meaning, that your church is to com- mand you with regard to all ceremonies whatever ? — yes, it feems as if private judgment (hould com- ply, in matters indifferent : and if fo, you are not accountable while you think it right to continue a member. RefpeAful expoftulations might be made; and if at laft, much folly or fuperftition" remained, a feparation might be allowed : but the eifect of ceremonies depends upon unifor- mity" : — and you fliould be fure you can meet with better ceremonies than thofe you quit. Cere- monies might be taken in a large fenfe, including Liturgies^ &c. — Though the Governors of the church are not to fubmit to your judgment im- mediately, yet after you have obeyed, they are finally to be accountable to the ordinary members, for the ufe of: any difcretionary pov^er entruftcd to them. What follows, limits the power of ap- pointing ceremonies;
** And yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God's word written ;" — fome things that next occur in our Article ieem felf-evident; but they probably mean to guard againft abule, and againil excefs of that deference,
which
" See Powell, page 27. top.
• Book III. Chap. IV. Sc6i. 11.
BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. III. 8^
which ought to be paid to the Church in difficult do6lrines.
Indeed, if each private man is to judge whether an ordinance recommended by the Church is con- trary to icripture, or whether any dodtrine makes one part of fcripture to contradid: another, or is over and above fcripture, there is but Htde danger of abiife : — but the meaning feems to be, that the Church has no right, " ought'''' not to decree fuch things i though, if it does, it fliould be refpeded, and perhaps fometimes obeyed j flill the rules here laid down might be the ground of calling eccle- fiaflical governors to account, and, in the end, of propofing and effecting a Reformation.
" A keeper of Holy writ," refers to Rom. iii. 2. and ix. 4. — I conceive them to be ailufions; but the only thing of any moment is, that " bef.des''* the fcriptures, the Church ought *' not to enforce anything to be believed for necejfity of Salvation;^* ceremonies are generally fomething *' be fides''' the fcriptures, and the church can enforce them; but then they are not *' anything to be believed.^'' — Some notions too may be implied in ceremonies p, or forms, but then they are not to be enforced as neceflary'* to Salvation. Puritans Vv'ould have no- thing to be enforced, either to be believed or done, which is " be/ides'" the Scriptures. — It Ihould be recollected, that we had a great deal about Tradi- tions under the fixdi Article.
III. The next thing is the Proof.— V/c might have three propofitions,
I V. Each
P This feems the meaning of that part of the 5th Article of 1552, which is omitted in our 6th Article.
^ Kecejfiary to Salvation ; tl.e thing to which this was oppof<?d, fetm? to be, " received of the faithful as godly, and profitable for comclinefs." Article 5 of 1552.
<ja BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. IV. T.
IV. Each focicty muft provide meam of an- fwering the ends ot its inftitution. — In religious Society the general end is the promoting of xt\\- g\ousJ'e)Ui}ne>its\ In ChriJIian fociety fome means are prefcribed by divine authority ; namely, fcrip- tiiral doclrines and facraments : but means are to be devifed of ufing thefe means; fomething muft at laft be left to the wifdom of the Church. I can- not but confider this as felf-cvident. The puri- tanical idea, that a church is not like other Socie- ties, or that nothing is to be fettled and fixed tor a church but v.'hat is found in Scripture, feems totally impracticable; no meeting of Dillcnters' could ever be carried on without arranging feveral things not fpecified in Scripture. The diredions axe ^uieraly as i Cor. xiv. 40. — It is impofiible that this precept Ihould be obeyed without the inter- vention of many other obfervances not mentioned. Tell a fct of men to zvn'le themes for a prize; there muft be pens, ink and paper, &c. and the an of writing and fpelling muft have been learned. — If the jezc-s' had fome liberty, whole religion was confined to one people, and the ceremonials of which made lb eiiential a part of it, what liberty may not Chriftians expect, whofe religion is to be exercifed amidft all the variety of cuftoms of all Nations!
v. In do£Trinc5y to be believed, the Judgnicnt of the Church ought to have great weight, cfpe- cially with all its ordinary members. — This was infifted on in the fecond " book, where men were divided into Philofophers and People : and it feems
unavoidable.
" Book III. Chap. iii. * Tucker to Kippis, page 19.
« Burnet, Matt, xxiii. 23. the things not to be left undone, were not Mofaical : moftly, if not all, traditional. " Book. II. Chap. iv. iictl. 111, 1 v.
BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. VI. VII. 9I
unavoidable. Thofe who pretend to avoid it, do'' not, and cannot^.
VI. In dodrines, if anything is impofed by the Church as neceffary to falvation, it need not be received as fuch, if it be not contained in Scripture. — This was in the fixth Article.
VII. What remains muft be propofed as Ap- plication.
A new form of Jjjent feems nnneceflliry : — But mutual ccnccjfions may be worth confidering. — Some DilTenters have declared, that whilft the firft claufe of our twentieth Article continues in force, there is no poffibility of a reconciliation^: Yet, let not anything be neglefted which feems likely to weigh with a man of real candour. — Miftakes feem to have been made, both by thofe in power, and thofe out of power. The firll have taken for granted that things indifferent in their nature might be enforced without difficulty ^ the fecond, that becaufe an averlion was real, it was rational and invincible,-— But in the firft place men in power fhould be aware of the ftrength of prejudice; or of aiibciation of ideas : to lee its force, we need only afk any man whether he Ihould chufe to fee any of the veffels which com- monly receive the evacuations of the human Body, ulbd at a feaft to drink out of; or, if he be a man of piety, in the moft folemn rites of reli- gion ? Yet what more indifferent, as to right and wrong, than Ihape i* — And in the next place, thofe who are called to comply and obey, are not always v.'ithout blame : they are too apt to negleft the
refult
" Tucker to Kippis, page 43, 4.4.
y One chief reafon urged by a Fellow of a College, for turn- ing Papill, was, I have heard, that fo little refped was paid to the Church of England by its ordinary members.
* Tucker to Kippis, page 9.
/
C;2 BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. Vll.
refult of experience with regard to curing preju- dices which at firft feel incurable. To raiie a prejudice in favour of anything, allbciate it with fome good. I have hated a certain kind oi food; in very great hunger I eat of it ; my pain was relieved, and that kind of food got airociated in my mind with the pleafure of the relief;. I have relilhed it ever fmce. — Now mutual conceflions in cafe of ceremonies, &c. fliould confift in mutual compliances; thofe who have authority fhould be tender about enforcing; thofe who are to obey, fhould labour to leffen their averfions; fo might the contending parties meet in fome middle point.
This is applicable to Ji?ie arts : thofe who have a tafte for them, ought nor to a6t as if all men had the fame : and thofe who are infenfible to them, ought to be aware, that men may differ in imaginations as well as in fenfes or intelledls; and therefore ought in fome mcaiure to comply ; for the fake of others.
Bilhop Warburton, in his Alliance "" of Church and State, mentions the judgment of foreign divines in the queftion about habits. It was this. *' That the Puritans ought to conform, rather than make a fchifm : and that the Church-men ought to indulge the others' fcruples, rather than hazard one."—" A wife decifion," adds Warbur- ton, " and reaching much farther, in religious matters, than to the fmgle cafe to which it was applied." He means, probably, that the prin- ciples of mutual conccffions refpecting ceremonies, ought to make men candid in matters of faith.
With regard to matters of faith. Dr. Dtt Pin^' fays, that the Church certainly has not *' the
power
• Warburton's Alliance, pnge 314, oftavo, B. iii. Chap. 3. ** Appendix to MoTheinij as before.
BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. VII. 93
power of ordaining an}7thing that is contrary to the word of God^ but he fays, it muft be taken for granted that the Church will never do this in matters, qu^ fidei Subftantiam evertant."
I need not endeavour to fuggeft any Improve- ment y after what has been faid on the fubjedl of improving rehgious Societies in the lall chapter of ihe third Book^
« Book III. Chap. xv. Scft. xii.
ARTICLi;
94 BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. I,
ARTICLE XXI.
OF THE AUTHORITY OF GENERAL COUNCILS.
GENERAL Councils may not be gathered together without the commandment and will of Princes. And when they be gathered togetlier (forafmuch as they be an Affembly of men, whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and Word of God) they may err, and fometimes have erred, even in things pertaining unto God. Wherefore things ordained by them as neceflary to falvation, have neither flrength nor authority, unlefs it may be declared that tliey be taken out of holy Scrip- ture»
I. OiiY Hi/lory here might be very extenfive ; I will endeavour to confine it within bounds fuit- able to our prefent plan, without omitting anything very important — Nothing is more natural to men, than to confuk with each other when they are in difficulties. We arc led to confultatlon both by our reafon and our feelings. And we may con- ceive that, in teaching t!ie Chriflian Religion, and adapting it to the various cufloms of difTcrcnt nations, confultation muft be frequently defire- able. We have a memorable inftancc in the fifteenth chapter of the Ads of the Apoflle. Paul and Banuibas were at Antioch; it there appeared, that the Jews who favoured Chriflianity, or were admitted into it, could not bring themfclves to
cive
BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. I. g^
give up the religion of Mofes ; it was divine ; they had been brought up in it ; it had diflinguifhed them from idolatrous heathens; nay, they Vv^ere not contented with retaining it themfelves, they thought that even the Heathen converts ought to conform to k: Chriftianity, they feem to have thought a new and improved fpecies of Jiidaifm, — Now the Apoflle faw, that Chriftianity was in- tended to fuperfede Judaifm; and tliat it would be a very great hindrance to the converfion of tl>e Heathens, if they muft bear the troublefome bur- dens of the Law of Mofes, in favour of which they were by no means prejudiced. To manage fo as to lofe neither Jewifli nor Gentile converts, required much prudence: it required conjulta- tiott : Paul and Barnabas thought it worth while to travel from Antioch to Jerufalem, in order to con- fult the '' Apoftles and Elders, with the zvhok Ckird," in fo cridcal a jun<5lure. We have fome account of the meeting; J^/wfj, theBi(hop% feems to have given the final determination. — tlere was a genuine confultation ; the church was not only " affembled with one accord," but v/ith one accord they attended to their proper bufmefs : their minds pure from indlred: motives ; from pride, ambition, rivalOiip, and worldly intereft. This meeting has frequently been calkd the hx{k Council^.
As Chriftianity fpread, any affemblies, aiming to colled the fenfe of Chriftians at large, muft confift of members convened from a greater extei^t of country : but Mojlicim tells us, that till the middle of the fecond Century % Churches afted in- dependently of each other, and did not- meet together with any fuch view. He adds^ that there
* Art. VI. Sea. xxv.
^ Held A. D. 47, or near; Cave.
<^ Mofhdmj C«nt. 2. Part 2. Chap. 2, Se^. 3.
was
^6 BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. II.
was no general council till the fourth century*^: yet there was a Council held at Antioch in the year 270, againil: Paul of Saniofata, where were prefent, according to Cave, Bilhops innumerable.
In proceeding farther, I will fiifl: mention fome faBs^ Rich as a fcholar is fuppofcd to be informed of, and then make a few remarks. Councils, of one fort or other, have been very numerous; Baster, in his account, mentions particulars rela- tive to 480. — With regard to the number of genC' rtf/ councils, writers are not agreed ^ fome calling on\y /even or eight of the Councils general, others eighteen.
II. I will now mention fome of the principal councils; that at Nice^ was held in the year 325, ^ by order of Confhantine the Great, againtl the Arians; and is always called the jfr/? general Coun- cil : that at Coujlantinople was held in the year 381, by order of Theodofius the Great, againft the Macedonians:— the third of thofe, held at Ephefus^ was very eminent : it was afTembled in the year 431, by Theodofius Junior, againft Nejiorius:— We may add the Council held at Chalcedon in the year 451, by order of the Emf>eror Alarcian^ or, in effed perhaps, by the influence of his Emprefs Ptdcheria, on account of the adverfary or opponent of Neftorius, Ev.tyches. — Thefe four are called the jirjl four general Councils ; Gregory the Great com- pared them to the/o7<r Go [pels .—l!\\<i reformed are fpoken " of as having a very high reipeft for them. — I muft pafs from thefe to fome of much later date. The Council of Conjlancc, which began in 1 414, was called with the confent of the^ See of Rome, and by mean.> of the Emperor Sigifmund; to decide who Ihould be Pope, and againft the
Refoimers,
^ Cent. 4 2. 2. I. •-■ Rhemlfh Teft. on Ads xv. 28.
*" Baxter, page 430, or Chap. 13.
BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. III. g'J
Reformers, John WIckliffe and John Hufs, and Jerom of Prague. Wickcliffe indeed was dead, but the Council condemned his dodlrines, and ordered his bones to be dug up and burnt. — The Council of Bafil began in 1431 : it feems to have been agreed upon at the Council of Conftance, and to have been alTembled by the Emperor and Pope jointly, againfl the Reformers; particularly againft the Bohemians, who had Zifca for their head. But the Council were fo afraid of their adverfaries as to invite them to defend their notions ; a meafure which had as much fuccefs as might be expected. — The Council of Trent is not mentioned by Baxter or Cave : but we often refer to the A<fls of it. From thefe we fee, that it began Dec. 13, 1545; and from the 5«//<3 prefixed, it feems as if Pope Paul III. had relied chiefly on the Emperor Charles V. and Francis I. of France. Hiftory fays 2, that the Emperor was very defirous to have the Council continued after the death of Paul III. — The Council was held in order to check the Reformation ; its fufpenfions and interruptions cannot be entered into here.
Of the Synod of Dort I faid fomething in the Hiftory of the'' tenth Article.
III. It feems as if our ideas of the Councils now mentioned will be very indefinite and imper- fect, if we do not mention fomething of the num" bers of perfons who have been faid to be prefent at each J and the time of its continuance. Thefe are by no means agreed upon, but I Ihall fatisfy my- felt with delivering to you the report of any re- fpedlable author. — The Council of Nice is often called the Council of the 318; that is, of 318
Bifhops;
e Mofheim, Cent. i6. Sed. i. Chap. 4. Sedl. 3, *" Art. X. Se£l. xv. VOL. IV, G
98 BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. IV.
BIfliops; but Lardner (hews', that this number is not by any means to be depended upon. It probably became the favourite number, becaufe it was the number of Abrahatn's ^ fervants, by whom he con- quered his enemies. But befides Bifliops we are told, that there were at Nice an incredible num- ber of Prefbyters, &c. At Conjlantinople Cave fays, there were only about 150 Orthodox Bifhops, and 36 of thofe Bifliops who were followers of Mace- donius. — About 200 Bifliops are (aid to have been at Ephefiis^ and 600 at Chalcedon. — For the Council of Conjlance I refer to Fox's' entertaining account ; but the Cardinals and Bilhops were allowed to confult at their own homes. — Cave does not men- tion the numbers at Bajil"^, nor does Baxter; but there are many hifliories of that Council : it was a confufed affair; and the numbers muft have varied. — At Trent the introduction to the Ads of the Council tells us, that there were 5 Cardinals, befides Legates; 3 Patriarchs, 33 Archbifliops, Q^T)^ Bifliops, 7 Abbots, 7 Generals of Orders, and 146 Divines; and Orators from the Emperor Ferdinand (called Csefar) fuccellbr of Charles V. in 1558, and many European Princes: — but at what time thefe were prefent is not iliid, or whether at any one time.
1 V. The duration of the above-mentioned Coun- cils was very unequal. . The Nicene continued only about two months and a few days. That at CoU' Jlantinople was interrupted, and held at two dif- ferent
* Works, Vol. 4. page 18;. '' Gen. xiv. 14.
' AiHs and Monuments, Vol. i, page 785. quoted alfo by Gilpin in his Lives of Reformers.-— i/«//;f mentions a larger Council than this, at Placentia, A.D. 1096, called by Pope Martin II. in the time of William Rufus, in order to deter- mine upon the firll Crufade.
» Dupin's Compend. gives aftiort and intelligible accQuntof this Council.
BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. V. 99
ferent times". The Ephejine feems to have con- tinued from about the twentieth of June to the beginning of September. — The Council of Chalce- don feems to have begun the 1 5th of October, and to have ended very early in° November, if not the laft day of Oiliober. — The Council of Con/iance lafted between three and four years^; that of Bajil'^ . eleven, and the Council of T^renf eighteen : reckon- ing thefe two from the firfl Seflion to the laft; taking no notice of fufpenfions, interruptions, de- crees for removals, &c. &c.
General Councils have been of late difconthmed; probably from their appearing not to anfwer their purpofe.
v. Their Authority has been greatly extolled in words', chiefly by the Romanifts ; but when we enter into particular enquiries about them, they feem very diforderly, in fad, whatever they may be in theory; and they feem to have been fre- quently hoftile to the Papal power, and fome- times deftrudive' of it in particular Popes. —
And
" The firfl: meeting feems, from Cave, to have been in May, and to have continued till Auguft : the next, to have been in the next year, with rather fewer Bifhops. — Dupin's Compend. fays, we Ihould conceive a third Council to have been held.— Cave's Hift. Lit. may eafily be confulted on any Councils.
*• Cave: there are 16 Ads ; the firft on the Ides of Oflober, the 14th Prid. Kal. Nov. — I do not fee a date for the 15th and 1 6th Afts ; but the Hijlories of the Council feem volumi- nous.
9 Cave, as I underftand him: Fox fays 4 years. Vol. i. page
78a. It began Nov, 7, 1414, and ended April 22, 1418.
Dupin Compend.
^ It began 1431, and ended 1442. Baxter.
* The firft Seffion is dated Dec. 13, 1545, and the 25th is dated Dec. 4, 1563.
* See Rhemifts on Ads xv. 28.
* Baxter, page 431. 444. from Ads of the Council of Bajil. That Council depofed Pope Eugenius IV : and the Weftern
G a Church
lOO BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. VI. VII.
And Popes have alfo" made free with decrees oi Councils.
VI. After mentioning thefe /acfs^ I may make a few remarks : I mean fuch as are hiftorical.
The manner of carrying on difputes in the larger Councils, was fuch as promifed no decifion. To form, or change, a folid opinion in religion, much nicety of attention is requifite; much can- dour, and opennefs to conviftion; but no one came to a council to be convinced; every one took for granted that his own opinion was right, and aimed only at convincing others; or at at- tracting them by eloquence; every one took up every difficult fubjeft with, pajfi on; he was fhockcd at the profancnefs and impiety of his adverfary ; he felt more horror than doubt. Yet when he was oppofed, he was perplexed; but this only ferved to irritate, not to foften or conciliate. Inability to anfwer% and clear up a point, never fails to ex- afperate him who attempts'^ it. And thus would arife expreflions of indignation, and in the end furious perfecutions. " The beginning^ of ftrife is as when one letteth out water."
VII. It was a great fault in Councils, that the members of them fliould be all on one fide of a queftion : called, not fo much to argue as to over- power : confidering how abiurd this is, its fre- quency is aflonifhing : what a number of debates have been held, which were only apparent, or fort
of
Church was very adverfe to the Council of Conftantinople, as held in the Eaft; did not reckon it general, if at all valid.
" Baxter, page 261. 450.
't Some Jpecimefis of replies maybe feen in Baxter, page loi, &c. — 105.
y Baxter obfervcs, that the efFedt of Councils has been to exafperate; page 100.
» Prov. xvii, 14.
BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. VIII. IX. IQI
of fham debates ! expreffing uncertainty, whilft every thing was fixed !
VIII. And yet it feerns poffible, that, for a time, warm and paffionate debates, however un- reafonable, might be void of mahce, and corrupt defign : inexperience, and thoughtlefsnefs, with rehgious zeal, might be fufficient to produce them. Good Canons of controverfy muft be the refult of much calm obfervation. But after a few ao-es, pride, ambition, a defire of rule, or even intereft and felfiflinefs, might infinuate themfelves; and mixing with bigotry, or fuperllition, might gene- rate malice and corruption : then indired motives would operate, for maintaining a dodrine, or humbling a rival.— In fadl, at the laft, through the indulgence and admiration given to Religion by the ordinary people, thefe faults did certainly grow to an enormous height, and fome perfons, even in the moft eminent religious ftations, became, not wicked men, but monfters in human lliape.
Neverthelefs I am perfuaded, that though parti- cular fads may raife our abhorrence, if we take a comprehenfive view of all the larger councils to- gether, we muft acknowledge, that great abilities were often exerted in carrying them on, and great piety : and that many venerable Prelates and Di- vines muft have expofed themfeives to great hard- fliips merely with a view to promote a grand and folemn meeting for the purpofe of fettling religious uuth, and^ unanimity amongfl Chriftian brethren^ IX. I will dole this Hiftory with mentionino- a few writers on Councils. In the Council of Chal- cedon there is a book referred to called "Codex
canonum
* See Baxter's account of African Councils, page 73. •* A good panegyric on Councils may be feen in Warburton'a Alliance, 2. 3. 2, or page 198 ; from Hooker, i. 2.
G 1
102 BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. IX.
canonum" Ecclefise Univerfae," which muft have been a body of the decrees of only general Coun- cils, 1 fear we have no fuch book now, that is genuine, at lead ; but we have very good collec- tions of Councils : that by Labbe is an able work, but there is a finer publillied at Paris in 1644, in 37 volumes folio. This is the largeft I know; the fmalleft, is Berlins compendium''. — Bifhop Beveridge has written on the fubje6t a work in good elleem ; and I have often ufed a book in one volume folio, by Long. I think Baxter''s book, to which I have now referred, contains fome acute obfervations, and fome candid ones ; but allow- ance fhould be made for each man's particular views and principles.
I have fatisfadion in confulting Cave's Hiftoria Literaria, which gives Ihort accounts of Councils, and at the fame time refers to others much longer. Binnhis is an author in good repute , but the ori- ginal records of Councils were not io well pre- ierved, as to leave no uncertainties or contradic- tions in the accounts which v/e have of them at this time. — Some writers you will find, who, though ingenious, are too ludicrous and flippant upon the fubjecl of Councils, for my judgment; \\ as Voltaire and Dr. Jortin^ : thefe indulge a boyifh kind of pertnefs, which fhews, to me, a want of entering into the circumftances ot thofe whom they ridicule ; that is, in truth, a narrownefs of mind. And indeed not to diftinguifli between the nature of anything and the abufe of it, is always a fign of narrow views, or hafty reflexion; of an in- temperate <= Cave's Hift. Lit. 1 . page 386.
^ The writers on Ecclcf. Hiil. Bingham, Cave, ^'C. refer to a Book called Hill. Conciliorum, or nearly that. Hunie, in his Jiiftory of England, only quotes Concil. Tom. x. There are many accounts of Councils. '^ Art. IX. Seft. viii.
BOOK IV. AlvT. XXI. SECT. X. IO3
temperate love of wit, and a defire to be rather humorous than accurate.
X. , Let us nov/ come to the Explanation.
« General Councils:'— K council, in common language, may fignify any meeting of perfons who confult with each other; but in church-hiftory it feems always to imply fome reprefentation; and the term is never ufed for any lefs fignificant meet- ing than when delegates are fenc from the different churches in a^ Diocefe. A Diocefe was once a very fmall diftrid ; but of that another time. 'If all the Diocefes in a Province lend delegates, or reprefentatives, the Council is provincial; and the Prefident is a metropolitan; (for fome one muft prefide) : if all the Provinces in a Nation, it is National^ : and if all the Nations t:i? ot>:»^eyn?, it is cecnmenical, or general; and the Prefident mufh be eleded. Iri faft, delegates are never fent from all nations of the world ; and therefore, according to the ftriftnefs of this lad definition, there never is, nor has been, a general Council ; but people will talk big fometimes; as when a large body ot Chriftians call ihemfeives Catholics ; and we muft
fometimes
f The meeting at Jerufalem ( Aasxv.) may be called a Coun- cil or not, as we follow or not theie definitions. If all Chril- tendom, however fmall, appeared there, virtually, it might, in fome fenfe, be called ?. general council, if it was a council at all.
g I know no name for the head of a national church, taken independently of the ftate; our Convocations have had Prolo- cutfirs, anfwering to the fpeakers of the Houfes of Lords and Commons. Primate may he the name ; A h, our Archbifhop of Canterbury may be Primate as head of the Englijh Church, and Metropolitan as head of a Province. The Arch"bifhop of York is called Primate of England; the Archbifhop of Canter- bury Primate of all England. York was once a refidence of Roman Emperors: Union of Nations may (asin Aquitain, &c.) have left a title, which now feems too extenfive, though it did {ipt when hrft given.
e 4
104 BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. XI.
fometimes follow them when they quit plain lite« ral language. As we have no council between national and general, if a Council be compofed of delegates from feveral nations, and notice be given to others, who are likely to be interefted ; it may be called a general Council without much impropriety''. A general council would be the moft regularly formed, if each Church was to chufe a reprefentative for a meeting of the churches in a Diocefej if each Diocefe was to chufe, out of thofe reprefentatives, a reprefentative for a pro- vincial council ; each provincial coancil one for a l^Iational Council; each national council one (or more, according to its extent) for a general coun- cil : then, if all Chriftian nations fent reprefenta- tives fo elefted, one does not fee why fuch general council would not fairly rcprefent the Catholic church. — And if fome nations neglected to fend, fuppofing they had proper notice, it would be hard if their negligence could fruflrate the undertakings of the reft of the Chriftian world.
I do not know any difference between Council and Sy7iod, except that the latter is Greek, and the former Latin ; the Laws of councils Icem always to be called Canons^ thouohthat be Greek.
XI. ^'■Ilie Will of Princes^'' — fuppofed Chrif- tian Princes, oppofed probably to Popes : in a republic, &c. \ht Jovereign power. — Bccaufe gene- ral councils are compofed of national councils, and a prince is the head of a nation. It does not follow (whether true or not) that PrOTwr/W coun- cils may not be gathered together without confuk- mg Prmces : fome Chriftian councils were held before Conftantine became a Chriftian.
XII. " Ml
* Cave rcafons in order to fettle whether the Council of Conftantinopic agaiiifl ijuages, in 754, was a general ont: fo do other writers.
BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. XII. XIII. I05
XII. *' Jll he not governed with the fpirit and word of God;'' — that is, feme have fometinies zvorldly views j— the expreffions of our Article are directly oppofite to one in the RhemiJIi' Teftament ; — " Holy Counfels" " have ever the affiftance of God's 5/)/nV, and therefore cannot erre,'' &c. — And the Council of Chalcedon cry out, *' thefe are the words of the i7o/r''G//o/?."
XIII. " May c-rr,"— a priori j— and a pofterlori, " have erred" " even in things pertaining unto God:'' — it was, in 1552, *' not only in worldly matters, but alfo," &c. ; this comparifon makes our expreflion more intelligible ; and the change makes our affent more eafy: it was a needlefs trouble to prove that Councils had erred *' in worldly matters :" — worldly matters are riot ex- preffed in the Lathi of 1552.
Our cliurch refpeds Councils \ though it will found Salvation on the Scriptures : ■— It fays, " they" fometimes " have erred:" and *' things ordained by them as neceffary to Salvation," muft be tried by Scripture; but this implies, that in anything fliort of that. Councils ought to be reipedled. And accordingly, our Homily on fafting, fpeaks liand- fomely' of the Council of Chalcedon.
'* Unlefs it may be declared," &c. this feems rather obfcure; or however lefs clear than the Latin, " nifi oflendi poffint e facris literis efle defumpta," — But if Salvation is to be founded on Scripture, the Councils may feem to have nothing to do with our principles 5 yet they may fuggeft, argue, interpret ; and their opinion, when they do fo, may afibrd us light ; and is to be attended to,
and
^ Rhemifts on Aflsxv. 28. ^ Baxter, page loi.
^ Page 217, 8vo. — See alfo Reform. Legum de SummaTri- nitate, &c. Cap. 14. which is more clear and full than our Articles,
Io6 BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. XIV— XVI.
and treated with reverence : it may have weight, fometimes great weight, with thofe who are not qualified to judge.
XIV. We come to our Proof.
There feem but two propofitions to be noticed ;
XV. General Councils cannot be called without the confent of Princes.
General Councils are made up of Delegates from National Councils 5 and according to us, the Prince is the head of the national Church. Hov/ far the confent of the Sovereign is necelTary for a man's quitting his own countiy, is a matter of National Lazv ; but I think moralifts deem fuch confent neceffary; either exprefs or tacit \ at leaffc when fubjefts travel in any confiderable numbers ; or for ends affedling the State to which they belong.— The Chriftian religion leaves the political obligations of fubjects in their full force.— (See Matt. xxii. 15, &c — Rom. xlii. i, &c.) — If fome fpiritual Magiilrate could call a number of every nation out to a diftant region, it mufl greatly in- terrupt internal Government : and if people fo called out could make what rules they pleafed about Religion, including difcipline, morals, fpiri- tual Courts, &c. and the Magiilrate at home muft execute thoie rules, he would be thwarted and impeded in fome very important parts of his ad- miniftration.
XVI. General Councils have erred. — \{ s^'t give any farther proof of this than has already appeared, it will be for the fake of rellecting on the Hiftory of the Church. Indeed it would be fufficient if vvc proved that Romanifts muft own general Coun- cils to have erred, for our prefcnt Article is only againfh the Romanifts : and in this view, we might repeat what was"' before fiid about Councils
dcpohng «" Scdion V.
BOOK IV. ART. X.XI. SECT. XVI. 107
depofing Popes, and Popes negledting Councils. And we might add the inftance of Pope Honoriiis, who was depofed as a Monothehte by the general council of Conftantinople in the feventh Century". General Councils have contradi5ied° each other, in which cafe one mufl err; that at Rimini v^^s^ at laft Arian. And I fear, if we examined the firft four, we fhould not find them all free from error. Lardner does not find the Council of Nice fuch as he approves ; chiefly with regard to toleration. — As I remember, it orders people to Jiand during prayer J a fmall error perhaps: the P apiji s iTin^ think it fets the churches of Jerufalem, Alexandria and Antioch too high.
For the firft general Council of Conftantinople we may refer to Gregory '^ of Nazianzum, or to the expofhulations of the Bifhop of Rome : it was noify and diforderly, and ambitious to have all church-bufmefs done in the" Eaft. — I do not fcruple to fay, that the general council oi E-plieJus erred in treating Neflorius' with too great /^i^tT/Zy. —-The riot and warm oppofition of John of An- tioch; the calling in of a military force; fraud, prifon, banilhment, all thefe may be faid not to be chargeable upon the Council; they w^re not likely to make the Council free from error ; riots in any alTembly are always a difgrace to it, and a great hindrance to right decillons, though rioters
can " Art. II. Seel, x.
° Long's Councils, p3ge 266. — Baxter on Councils, page 99. 44,, or compare page 98. Sed 9, with page 100, Seft. 17 : and the Council at Conftantinople in 754, with- the fecond Nicene Council in 787, about images. — bee alfo Bifhop Por- teus's Brief Confutation, page 30. P Bennetonthe Article.
1 Baxter, page 67, 69. — Gibbon, Vol. 3. (contents.) "■ Baxter, page 70. Se£t. 11. * And lee Baxter, page 94. Seft. 30. and Art, 11. Se^l. viii.
lo8 BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. XVII.
can never be all on one fide. — The Council of Chalcedon was a fcene of contention, as far as con- cerned the Eutychians; the claims made at it are fcarcely intelligible ; and the Legates of the Po-pe protefled againft the eighteenth canon*. The Euty^ chian debate in that Council was curious enough i no one knew how to oppofe Eutyches without favouring Neftorius, who had been depofed at Ephefusi nor therefore without condemning the preceding general Council; this difficulty I can conceive to have been the occafion of irritating and exafperating the Fathers, and fo, of much riot and diforder, both before and at the Council of Chalcedon. The difference between Neftorius and Eutyches (if any% at bottom) was fo fubtle and refined, that no one cculd explain himfelf clearly upon it.
Here Billiop Porteus's chapter "^ might be intro- duced.
XVII. I will carry the Proof no farther, but fee what can be faid in the way o^ Application. — ^o new form of affent feems wanting.— And I doubt whether any propofals of mutual conceflions would be ef^eclual, (o bigotted is Du Pin^ in this matter. Except indeed he means, that fuppofing a general council fuch as \\. JJiotdd bcy it would be abfurd for a private man to i^ox up his own judgment againft it; if he means this, we might agree with him. And the chief part of what is faid in order to inculcate a veneration for general councils, is derived from
their
* Cave, I. 48(5. Its defign was, to make the Bifliop of Con- fiantinoplc equal to the Biihop of Rome, Conftantinople being- new Rome. The breach this occafioned between Enjl and Weji has never been healed to this day. Baxter, page 70.
" Baxter, pa^je 102.
* Biiif Confutation, Part i. Chap. 6. y y^ppeadix to Moiheim, as bcfoie.
BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. XVII. 109
their nature, and excludes all fuppofition of their being ahujed. — But if we fpeak of General Councils as what they have been in fad, it feems to me that Papijis have full as much reafon to declare them fallible, as Protefiants.
As to Improvement , the idea of improving general councils is quite fimple ; take away their faults^ and they are improved, and ufeful. A council of Chriftians literally general, feems Icarcely attainable in our age, becaufe the Greek Church mud be ad- mitted to it, as alfo Afiatic and African churches ; though anything might be done by carrying repre- fentation far enough, or, what means the fame, by reducing the number of reprefentatives.
Yet we can fcarce conceive, that mfaEl a fmall number of reprefentatives would be allowed to bind the univerfal Church, without havino- their ads ratified by their conflituents : and fuch ratifi- cation would confume fo much/Zw^, as, in many cafes, to render the Councils ufelefs. Indeed the time fpent merely in the journeys of very diitant reprefentatives to the place of meeting would make an infuperable difficulty, What would be the cafe if we fuppofed both America and Afia wholly Chriflian ?
No Council would be fo bad now asfome were when the Clergy were ignorant and profligate; but we are not yet arrived at a manner of dif- puting produdive of mutual convidion ; let con- troverly then be improved and humanized; by our writings let us (hew, that we 2iXQ Jit to meet : And then, let our councils at firft be iinall ; and let them be enlarged as we find them produce unanimity.
If we could thus proceed on till there was a probability of fome good from confulting.with
our
no BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. XVII.
our moft diftant brethren, it would be a cheer- ing profpecl ; it would fill our minds with hope, that the Church of Chrifl might, in fome finite time, become in fad, what it always was in theory, Univerfal,
:^
ARTICLE
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. I. II. m
ARTICLE XXII.
OF PURGATORY.
HE Romifh dodlrifie concerning Purgatory, Pardons, Worfhipping and Adoration, as well of Images as of Reliques, and alfo Invocation of Saints, is a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warrantry of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God.
I. Although this Article is intitled, " Of Pur- gatory," it contains feveral other fubje6ts. We will make fome hijlorical remarks on them in the order in which they occur; but it may be ob- ferved of every one of them, that it began in a time of Superftition j that it became popular be- caufe it flattered or interefled mens feelings and imaginations; that it got fixed in the dark ages-; that it became lucrative to the facred orders, or advanced their power ; and therefore, as well as becaufe it had become aflbciated with religious principles and fentiments, at the revival of learn- ing, it was not given up.
II. With regard to Purgatory in particular, though it may not be founded in either reafon or fcripturc, it is not unnatural: who can bear the thought of dwelling in everlajling torments^ ? yet who can fay, that a juft God will not inflict them?
the » If, xxxiii. 14,
112 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. II.
— the mind of man fecks fome rejource ; it finds one only in conceiving that fome temporary pu- nifhmcnt after death, may purify the foul from its moral pollutions, and make it at laft accept- able even to a Deity perfectly pure. Hence the notion of the foul's iranjmigration ; and hence it is, that the Epic'' Poets reprefent departed Spirits as uttering complaints at the continuance of their fufferings.— Yet fome make a difference between men profeiTedly zvicked, and fuch as only are com- pafled about with infirmtics ; the wicked they give up to punilhment eternal j but the weak they hope may be made perfect by temporary fufferings ; or, in other words, they conceive, that thofe who have committed mortal fins, and not repented of them, will be punilhed for ever in Hell ; but that thofe who have committed only*" venial fins, will only fuffer for a time in Purgatory. — We have already ^ mentioned the laft Article of 1552 concerning the final falvation of all men ; containing Dr. Hartlefs dodlrine; and that of Or/Vf;/'.*— but that relates to all kinds of fins, and to a termination of all kinds of punifliment.
Some have fixed upon the element of Fire as the inftrument by which men were to be purified from their venial fins. That element was little underftood, and is exceedingly powerful ; which is
enough
*> Homer, Virgil, mentioned by Burnet, who alfo mentions 3l platonic notion to the purpofe; but he refers to no pajfage. — Forbes, 13. 2, refers to Plato, Cicero, Virgil, &c. but not to Homer, that I fee.
<^ Art. XV. Sefl. xii. xxi. xxiii.
«* Art. xvui. Seft. v.
"^ Aug. Hxr. 43. "purgationem malorum," Sec. Reform. Legum. de Ha:r. cap. 11. See the end of Somnium Scipionis. In this 43d H:er. Aug. fays, that he has oppofed " diligcn- tiflime" Origen, and the thUoJophcis from whom he borrowed hisdodlrine; De Civitate Dei.
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. II. 11^
enough to occafion myftical and fuperftitious' opinions and feelings about k; and even to make its operations to be afcribed to perfonal caufes. — The foul has been thought to be itfelf ^ fire; and different'' nations have entertained conceptions of departed Spirits being affedled by fire; but we muft not go far into fuch matters at prefent.— There are expreflions of Scripture^ which may have helped forward the adoption of fuch an opinion into revealed religion; as Pf. civ, 4. — Mai. iii. 2. — Matt. iii. II.— Acls ii. 3. — See Cruden's Con- cordance, under Fire.
Some Chriftians feem to have had, in very early times, fome notions of a temporary punilhment after death, purifying the foul; Carpocrates'"^ and Montaniis are particularly mentioned. The oriental Chriftians were difpofed to believe the tranfmi- gration of fouls, from their belief of the impurity of matter. The Manicheans in particular, did profefs that doa:rine\ Yet the Greek Church, though eaftern, never held any purification after this life.
Angujlin was. In his youth, a Manlchean, though only an auditor, never one of the eled. He, in fome way or other, had acquired a notion of an ignis pur gat or im^ ; — but he made no article oi Faith about it ; he only went fo far as to fiy, " non /«- credibile"^ videtur," and on other occafions, he
exprelfed
^ Cic. de Nat. Deorum, i. 15. 2. 1 5. 3. 14.
8 Cic. Tufc. difp. I. 9. end, " W^o"— and Sefl. 11. "Si jgnis, extinguetur." (anima).
^ See Michaelis, Introd. Set^t. loi, page 245, quarto.
* SeeFulke on the Rhem. Teft. from Ireuseus and Tertullian. Matt. V. Sea. I. -He adds the Origenijls, Matt. xii. Sed. 6. — Forbes's Inllrt;<El. 13.2. 4.
^ Lardner, Vol. 3, page 476. — Vol. 9, page 421, 422.—— See alfo Append, to Book i. Sedl. iv. or Vol. i,page 351.
^ Enchiridion, Cap. 29. «" Ad Dulcitii Qiiccft. 1,'
VOL, IV. H
114 BOOKIV.ART.XXII.SECT.il.
exprcffcd great doubtfulnefs" ; and when he treated of the Llmbus infantum, in which children, dying iinbaptized, were fuppofed to exift, he proved, in general, that there was no third ftate befides heaven and° hell -.—at leaft, that of fuch ftate we are perfeftly ignorant, and that it is not mentioned in the Scriptures.
After the time of Auguftin the notion of pur- gatory kept growing in the church; but it was only fuppofed to purify men from flight'' faults ; as immoderate laughing, or inordinate domeftic cares, &c.
The Schoolmen^ as ufual, run into minute parti- culars ; Thomas Aquinas^ for inftance, mentions, that it is the fame fire which torments the damned in Hell, and the juft in Purgatory'' : and that the leaft punilhment in purgatory, exceeds the greateft in this life. — But I do not fee that he mentions from whence he derives his knowledge.
The Council of Trent rather feems to take for granted the doctrine of Purgatory, as fixed by Fathers, Councils, &c. than to define it. In the fixth Seffion, about Juftitication, it anathematizes all", who fay, that fins are remitted in Chrift, in fuch fenfe as to leave no temporal puniQiment due. And in the twenty-fifth Seflion', it decrees, that
the
" Veneer on this Article refers to paiTages; Enchir. 66. 68. Quaell. Dulc. i.— De Fide et operibas, cap. i6.
" De Verbis Apoll. Ser. 14. Hypognoft. Cont. Pclag. I. 5.
(reckoned fpurious). Fulke on Rhemifh Tell. Matt. xii.
beet. 6.
P Fulke, ibidem, from Gregory the Great, A. D, 590.— Veneer obferves, that the (;th Gen. Council, in condemning the Origenifts, did not mention any other Purgatory.
^ Quoted by Forbes, 13. 1.5. in 4 ^entent dift. 21. qusft. i. — P'arther fubtlcties are mentioned by Forbes in the fame place.
» Canon 30. » Opening.
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. III. tl^
t\\Q found doftrine of Purgatory fliall be preached, fetting afide all nice and fubde queftions ; but does not fay wherein that found dodrine confifts. — It mentions nothing of Fire; perhaps in order to avoid abllrufe fpeculations. — But in the Rhemifli Teftament, the notion of a fiery ' purgatory feems to be kept up. Du Pin, in his negotiation with Archbifliop Wake, " obferves, that fouls muft be purged-, that is, purified from all defilement of fin, before they are admitted to celeftial blifsj that the Church of Rome doth not affirm this to be done by fire ;" &c.
I here clofe the Hifiiory o^ Purgatory.
III. The next thing mentioned in the Ardcle is " Pardons;'* this means the fame as Indulgences^ the Latin being Indulgenti^ ; but from the Rhemifh Teftament it feems likely, that Pardons was the more common term at the time of the Reforma- tion". I have explained the nature of thefe under the fourteenth Article. We may add here a few inftances. Extravagant indulgences, or pardons, were granted to thole who would undertake to join in the Crufades"^. And in order to encourage men to appear at the Council of Trent, the Legates and Archbilhop of Trent, granted three years and one hundred and fixty days of deliverance from Pur- gatory, to any one, that fliould appear at that city at the opening of the Council. — As I am not con- fidering Hiftory with the moft fcrupulous nicety (though 1 would not willingly make any miftake,) I take the account of Mr. Voltaire, who adds, that indulgences are ftill fold very cheap at Rome, fo
as * On I Cor. Hi 15.
" In the Index, we find, *' Indulgences, fee Pardons.'* '^ In the Crufade of Richard I. the expedition was to anfwer
to Sinners inllead of all Penances. — Innocent III. was liberal of
indulgences. Cave.
H 2
Il6 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. IV.
as to be re-fold in the Swifs Cantons at four Joh apiece •■, but that the great profit made of them is in SpaniJJi America^ where people are more rich and more ignorant than in the fmall Swifs Cantons ^.
Jubilees were inflituted in order to grant in- dulgences. Bower, in his Life of Pope Boni- face'' VIII. fays, that, in the year 1300, on fome rumours of pardons having been granted at the end of the preceding century (year 1200,) the Pope appointed the firfl Chriflian Jubilee : and gave public notice, that every man, repenting, confefling, and fully abfolved, who fliould, during the lafl^ year of any Century, vifit the churches of St. Peter and St. Paul (at Rome) once a day, for thirty days, fliould have a full indulgence : the extent of which has not always been undcrftood in the fame'' fenfe. — It has been computed, that two hundred thoufand flrangers, have been at Rome in one jubilee-year; and that the mere brafs money, offered by the lower people, exclu- five of filver and gold offered by the more opulent, has amounted in one year to fifty thoufand florins of gold. Since the year 1300, the Jubilees have been made to return more frequently; there has now long been one every '^ twenty-five years.
IV. The Hiflory of Images might be long; bccaufe the ufe of them is calculated to produce difputes. To contemplate refemblances of per- fons whom we love or admire, is naturally pleafing
and
y Vol. I oth, quarto, page 151. 162.
» Bower's Lives of Popes, Vol. 6, page 354. — Chambers's Dia. Jubilee.
* Perhaps 99 is moft properly the laft year, but, if loi be called the firft year, 100 mull be the laft,
*» Art. xjv. Seft. i. — See alfo Fulke on 2 Cor. il. 10. (Rhem.Teft.)
* Chambers,
BOOKIV.ART.XXII.SECT.lv. ny
and interelling to the mind. And if perfons, who have gready promoted or fufFered for the caufe of Religion, are departed out of ]ife, ftill the D>;vout may be greatly affefted by a lively reprefentatioa of their appearance and manner. But when the perfon reprefented feems to have any claim to reli- gious adoration, the refemblance occafions fome danger. The Heathens had images of their Godsi but it is probable that at firft each image was only regarded as a mere refemblance ^ con- tinual aflbciadon of the ideas of the invifible original, and the vifible refemblance, united them in the mind, and took away the diflinftion be- tween them. Ere long the very fight of the Image raifed all thofe fentiments, thofe devout affedions, which at firll feemed appropriated to the original.
This tranfition of the feelings from the original to the Image, may take place, on different occa- fions, and in different degrees. Suppofe then Images in any place of worlhip j to remove them,~" is to take away a great deal of that on which the devout mind feeds, and by which it fupports itfelf: to leave them, is to draw the mind on, nearer and nearer, to Idolatry. What difputes and contentions might not arife on the propofal of fuch meafuresi- And difputes of this nature might be forwarded by a confiift between love and hatred for the'' polite arts.— We might give more or fewer examples of thefe things ; but they would fuggeft only this general obfervation.
As the early Chrijiians had occafion to contend againft Idolatry, it feems natural that xhtj ihould have an abhorrence of images. We may well therefore confider the accounts of the ftatue of
Chrift •• Art. XX. Sea. i. and vii.
Il8 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. IV.
Chriilfent to King Jb^arus, and the paintings' of St. Luke, as fabulous. The Emperor Theodofius forbade all incenfc, &c. to Idols, (fenfu carentibus fimulacris), under penalty of forfeiture of the houfes or lands where fuch ad of fuperftition was committed ^ — y^/<^f</?//7 feems uneafy ^ at the mul- tiplying^ of paintings and ftatues in his time, though the political and hiftorical ufe of them was not denied. In the fifth and fixth Centuries they multiplied ftill more ; no one had time to lay any rcftraints, fo bufy were the leaders of the church with other matters. About the year 600 Serenus Bifhop of Marfeilles began to attack them with violence ; Pope Gregory half commended him, but rather foothed mens defire for images upon the whole : however, it got fixed for fome time, as a compromife, that it was right to have images, but wrong to worjlup them'.
We may pafs on to the Emperor Leo III. called the Ifawian ; a man of an imperious and violent fpirit. Provoked by fomething of no very great confequencc, he publilhed an Edid againft Images in 726, and demolifned them in great numbers; and in 754 they were condemned at a Council at Conjlantinople called a general^ one : in 787 was held the fecond Niceiie council, on which the Roma- nifls found their worfliip of Images : they fpeak of
it
* See Forbes, 7. 8, and Dr. Middleton's Letter from Rome, page 173, &c.
^ Leg. 12, page 15, quoted by Middleton, page 15S.
6 The Jttthrofomcrphitcs might be mentioned here: hv.g. Hacr. 50. — Baxter's Councils, page 76, Scdl. 39.
^ Ep. 102, (al.49,) Tom. 1. page 212. Edit. Antv.
■ This fcems to be adopted by the NeceJJhry Do^rine; as mentioned Art. vii. Note at the endof Se»^. xni.
^ Cave argues for its being called a general one. — Compare, in Baxter's Councils, No. 228, with No. 232. — Partic. page 226, Seft. 55. — Some mention made of this Council, Art. xxi. Sea. X.
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. IV. I19
it as if it had been the unanimous a(5l of all Chriftians, and oppofed to' no other a.t\. Yet it was called by an abandoned Emprefs, Irene, who had caufed her hufband to be poifoned, and afterwards put out her fon's eyes. — 'The oppolition had now caufed much effufion of blood, as well as the revolt of the Exarchate of Italy (Ravenna the capital) from the eaftern Empire. In 794, Charlemagne held a Council at Frankfort^ intend- ing to moderate the fury of the contending parties; and he alfo publifhed fome writings. — In 814 there was another Council at Conftantinople againft images : and one at Paris in 825, but in that the adoration of the Crofs was encouraged.
In the fucceeding centuries, till the Reforma- tion, the paffion for Images grew Hill (Ironger; but men of fober minds grew to be offended : and that was one caufe of the Reformation.
The favourers of Images have been called Icono^ latra, and Iconodiili ; and their adverfaries, Icwio- machiy and Iconoclaftte. — Cave calls the eighth century Seculum Eiconoclafticum.
Jolin of Damafcus, called ufually Damafcene, whom Lardner and Cave place in 730, was a famous writer in favour of images; he was of a great family, and eminent for his learning; but on account of his credulity, which was the fault of his time, he is not always to be depended upon. — Pope Adrian I. wrote againft Charlemagne, but got no fame "".
After
' Rhem Ted. end of i John, — Trent, Seflion 25, page 202, duodecimo.
"* The Collyridians (Epiphan. Hsr. 79.) might be mentioned, as it was to the Image of the Virgin that they offered their Cake, («oAXt/^(y, its dim. KoWv^ic) — (See Fulke on Rhem. Heb. ix. Sedl. 4.) And what Forbes relates of Theodore QLliota (a new way of preferring facrifice to Mercy,) mighhc read in
H 4 Latin i
120 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. IV.
After the Reformation began, the demoHtion of Images was confidered as part of the deftruc- tion of Popery. The Puritans wilhed the demo- lition to be total.
Popidi countries abound with" Images ftill. — They have, or have had, Images of the Deity ° ; but what we hear mofl of, are thofe of Chrijl^ and his earthly Parent, and fome Angels, and many Saints. Some of thefe are very^ rich, others fo mean as to be ridiculous to any but the lowed people. — An image *' of Chrift upon the Crofs, with Mary ** and John {landing by," uled to be \\ called, in England, a Rood.
At Lijbon, as I have been told by one who fpoke of what he had feen, there is a flatue of the Virgin in a large full-bottomed wig, with Jefus, as a Boy, dreffed in a Sword and bag-wig, with a Violin in his Hand. — Sir Edwin Sandys fays, that *' Where one voweih to Chrift, ten vow unto her," (the Virgin), " and not fo much to herfelf, as to fome peculiar image," &c. — " for one miracle
reported
Latin ; if it is, the approbation of Adrian I. and the fecond Nicene Council, fhould not be forgotten. — Forbes 7. a. 30.—
7- "• 33- .
Here alfo might be mentioned " the Doftrine of School- authors'* (Art. of 1553) from Forbes 7. 2. 26, 27, 28. — And it might be feen, at the fame time, how " the Romijh Doctrine," (Art. of 1562) differs from the Scholaflic. — In the Article of 1552 the expreflion is, "The Dodlrine oi School ■ author s zou- cerning Purgatory," &c. — In ours, of 11562, "The Romijh dodrine concerning Purgatory," &c. in other things the Arti- cles are much the fame.
" Middleton's Letter from Rome.
* Rhem. Teft. on A<5ls xvii. 29. fhews how Images of God the Father were made from Dan. vii. 22. alfo with a Globe in his hand, from no fcripture ; and of the Trinity, from Gen, xviii. 2. and defends them.
P Our Lady of Loretto, &c. Midd. page 154, 155. Speculum fiuropjc, page 4.
% Ntalj HiA. Fur. i.page 10a. Holyrood Houfe,
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. V. 121
reported to be wrought bj^ the Crucifix, not lo few perhaps as an hundred are voiced upon thole other Images'." This traveller fpeaks from his own obfervation; and fo does 'Dy. Mid diet on in later times, when he tells us of feveral women whom he faw fitting before the Altar of a Saint, each a* child in her lap, " in expectation of his miraculous influence on the health of the In- fant."
The Council of Trent mention the Romanifts as kiffing images, and proflrating themfelves be- fore them ; as well as being uncovered in paying them refpeft : the images fpecified are thofe of Chrijl, the Virgin, and other Saints, to whom due honour is to be given. — Due honour fliould cer- tainly be given to every thing.
The alteration made by the Romanlfts in the fecond commandment was mentioned Art. vii. Sed. XIII.
v. There is a connexion or analogy between Images and Relics; both deriving their efficacy from aflbciation of ideas between the thing and an interefting perfon. What was faid of Images, v/ill, in great meafure apply to Relics. It is natural to be affeded by a relic of any one loved, admiredj, or venerated: the fight of it makes our regret, afFedion, &c. lively and flrong : and the |3ace where the remains of any departed friend are de- pofited, will come under the notion of a Relic. Virgil's Tomb has been vifited with a tender intereft. — Some perfons of our own country would, in the laft Century, have very highly va- lued, and paflionately contemplated, any relic of
Charles
' Sir Edward Sandys's Speculum Europe, page 4 and 5
See alfo Midd. page 152.
^ Letter from Home, page 167. if there be no I/;.' nge' nczr this Altar, the inftancc may belong to Sed. vi.
122 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. V.
Charles I. or a twig of the Royal Oak by means ot whicli his foil efcaped.
But religion, in this as in other things, heightens our feelings. \n Mr. Mafon's CaraElacm"- we find a fcntiment excited by Diuidical relics. I can conceive a degree of affcdion or enthufiafni to have arifcn from a relic of one of our venerable Martyrs in the time of Queen Mary.
It requires meditation and knowledge of Anti- quity rather than reafoning, to fee what the early Chriftians mull have felt on contemplating what they believed to be remains of Saints, Martyrs, Apoftles, their blcffed Lord himfeif! agitated by continual danger, haraffed by pallionate exertions to fpread the religion which they profefled ! — I do not mean, that the primitive Chriftians imagined themfeivcs to be really in poflelTion of remains of Chritl and the Apoftles ; for the primitive times are charged with no weaknefs of the kind ; but
. ...
when a pafTion for relics once began to prevail, it fpread more eafily becaufe of the habitual feelings of Chriftians, and, we may add, becaufe of the credulity of the times. A paffionate attention to the fate of Martyrs, and to every thing belonging to them, one cannot wonder at, in Chriftians of any age. Put yourfelf into the place of Chriftians in the fourth century, for inftance; conceive how hi2;hly they muft regard thofe whom they had feen futfering with conftancy to the laft extremity; imagine how they muft be united together, and how their union muft heighten their mutual fym- pathy; and you will not be furprized, that they ihould meet at the Tombs of the Martyrs, and there ctrtr up their prayers'" to God and their Lord,
as
' LIne2;6.
" See J'tinanf, in Lardncr's Works, Vol. 4, page 306. — Alfo a quotation from Tertullian de Corona Militis, C. i, 2, 3. in Wall's inf. Baptifm, page 460, quarto.
BOOK IV. ART. XXri. SECT. V. T23
as Chriftians, and confirm their refolulions of fol- lowing the noble example of the deceafed, in cafe they Ihould be called upon to fo fevere a trial. — But it is to be feared, that the fcene was fometimes too much for their fober reafon : they fancied things without juft foundation, they believed with- out fufficient proof; and fome, thinking the fpirit good, muft have tranfgrefled the bounds of truth in inventins; what mipiit nourifh and enflame it. — If this was the cafe, any number of falfe relics might be produced and circulated : any voices might be heard''.
Augujiin muft have been fenfible of a foolifli excels in this matter, by the terms in which he abufes the idle Monks ; fome of whom wandered about. " Alii membra Martyrum, fi tamen Mar- tyrum, venditant."-— (De Op. Monach. cap. 28.)
About the end of the fourth Century, the fond- nefs for relics was ridiculed by Vigilantius^ pollibly with too little caution : Jerom writes againft him, but not exaftly as one w^ould vvifh ; however, he is rather to be called over ferious and declamatory than extravagant^, or wrong in his fundamental opinions.
John Damafcene^ in reafoning on Images, takes |"elics as a ground^ or axiom.
In
* The word Memories is often made ufe of: Du Frefne gives /' feveral different fenfes of it, but I think not that of what we call Apparitions. — Menwria—z. fepulcre ; in pi. a cehbratiottt which items to have been paffionate, with fome geltures and falutations. — A receptacle of a corpfe. — A chapel — a box hold- ing relics. — Anything which had been ufed by the deceafed, as his 5/^, &c. — y«wr^/ rites -and Fejii-vals, fuch as we call Saints^ Days.
y See Fulke on Rhem. Tell. Argument to St. Luke's Gofpel ; ^nd on A£ts xix. Sed. 8.
"^ Forbes, 7. 2. 27. end. If I am to adore the original Crofs, the Spear, the Sponge, why not images of man's making, for the Glory of Chrill: &c. in thit ^vay.
114 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. VI.
In dark ages, the pafTion for relics probably grew ftrongcr, and tbe veneration paid to them more folemn; but I know of no great events which they produced.
The Council of Trent fays, that all thofe are to be condemned who affirm, that '* worJJiip''' (vene- rationem) and hcnour is not due to relics; or that it is paid unprofitably ; or that the Memories of Saints are celebrated in vain. It alfo prefcribes rules for the aelmiffion of new relics.
The lower ranks of Romanifis have carried their veneration for relics to fuch a childilh excefs, as to give occafion to numberlefs fors^eries; fuch as bring contempt and difgrace upon Chrillianity, and by being believed by the fupcrftitious, though incre- dible to any man of fenfe, promote infidelity in things of importance. Every traveller into Popilh countries recounts numberlefs ftories about them, and the miracles" which they perform.
VI. The laft thing to be mentioned, is the invocation of Saints : Saints are often invoked by a perfon prefent with \\\c\x Images^ or their rtf/zVi j but the ideas of their Images or relics, Ihould be kept diftind from that of Invocation. I hope no man is fooliih for being affe(5ted when he meditates on the manner of exiftence of his departed friends; or for indulging fome indiftinft hope of feeing them again : nor any Chrillian, for feeling an in- tereft in all tliofe, of all ages, who have departed this Life in the faith of Chrift ; as well as in thofe of his own generation; or far conceiving, that there fubfifts between them that degree of inter- courfe, fellow-feeling, fympathy, which their re- fpeftive natures are capable of: Such a fuppofed common intcrcil, is the communion of Saints.
Cicero^
» In the Decree of the Council of Trent, Se/T. 25, the word ♦' Uatficia" ib ulcd, not miracula.
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. VI. 125
Cicero^, fpeakingin the charader of Cato Major, defcribes every good man as warmly interefted, both in thofe who have departed this Hfe before him, and in thofe who are to Hve after him : his, " divinum conciliim catufqm animonim^^ makes one imagine, that the communion of Saints would have been to him a very pleafing Article of Faith, had he lived under Chriftianity. Infiying this, Cicero is feldom confidered as toolilli or culpable; but had he paid religious honours to any of his worthies; had he made Images of them, or pro- cured fome forged relics as belonging to them; and had he killed thefe, proftrated himfeif before them, invoked the worthies, and defired their in- terceffion with Jupiter or Pluto; we fliould now have different notions of his wifdom, from thofe which we do entertain. How weak then fliould we have thought him if he had done fuch things towards men of no value : or on account of per- fons whofe real charader was wholly unknown" to him 1
We are told, that, invocation of Saints was a thing unknown to Chriftians for at ieaft*^ three hundred years; and that none of the Fathers, in plain ferious writing faid, that Servitus was due to Saints, for fix hundred years.
How foon Chriftians ran into excefs in worfliip-. ping Saints, appears from the fecond African Council, held A. D. 401, (Cave). In this it is ordered, that the Jltars which are fet up every where in the fields, or in the ways, to Martyrs, be overthrown by the Bilhops, except the Body, or fome iindoiihted relics be there. It is aifo laid,
that
•» De Seneftute ad finem.
' Middleton's Letter, page 173, 174.
** JBifhop For teas. Part ii. Chap. r. and Forbes, 7. i. 17.
126 BOOK IV. ART. XXI I. SECT. VI.
that Altars had been fct up by " dreams and vairt revelations.'^
Invocation of Saints probably proceeded much in the fame manner with the other abufes men- tioned in this Article; it is lo intimately connected with them- What Vigilantius wrote againft iW^ir- /)rj, extends to Saints ; Martyrs were orten fainted: and his reafoning affeils the Invocation of Saints; as he affirms, that the fouls of Saints were not, as was ufually prefumed, prefent with their Bodies; or at their monuments; much lefs could they be prefent at every place where their relics happened to be preferved*.
The Council of Trent ]o\ns Invocation of Saints with Relics and Images. All men are to be con- demned (damnandi funt) v»ho do not own, that the Saints, reigning with Chrift, offer their prayers to God for men; and that it is ufeful to invoke them in order to get their affiliance ; in afking God for bleffings through Chrift.
Cardinal Bellarmin fays, as we find in Forbes, 7. I. 12. " Sanftis angelis et hominibus deberi cultum aliqucm reUgiofinn" (de Sand. Beat. cap. 13.) but then he explains religiofum by " majorem mere hnmanoy
BiOiop Portcus gives us ^ a colleftion of terms in which Papifts addrefs the Virgin Mary, and mentions alterations of the Pfalms, Te Deum, &c. made in order to fuit them to her. Forms may- be found in the PopiOi Liturgies, and in Forbes°; and in Rogers m\ this Article.
For
e On this and the preceding paragraph, fee Fulke on Rhem. Teft. Apoc. vi. Se»a. i.
f BKhop Porteus, Part ii. Chap. ii.
R Forbes, 7. 2. 19, -See alfo Fulke on Rhem. Tell.— John- xvi. fed. 3. and i Cor. ii. Teft. 4.
BOOK IV. A.RT. XXII. SECT. VII. llj
For other inftances of modern invocation of Saints, I will refer to Dr. MidcUeton's Letter from'' Rome J and to books of travels which are in every one's hands. lu may be as well not to omit the idea, which fome have encouraged, in order to obviate the difficulty arifing from the limited knowledge of the Siints; that J no els in- ^, form the Saints what is addreffed to them : Forbes mentions this notion', but he does not fay by whom it was held. — It may alfo be right to refer to the fame writer in order to fliew, that the Schoolmen held the fame with the Romanifts; as the Article of 1552 affirms of the Sclicolmen, what the Article of 1562 affirms of the Church of Rome^.
V 1 1. But I will not purfue this Hiftory farther; I will now proceed to fome Explanation.
Purgatory may be defined, a ftate, in which the fouls of men, popularly called good men, (accord- ing to what was faid under Art. xv.) though not wholly free from fatdts and infirmities, are con- fined, rill they are purified^ probably by lufFering, from all thole faults and infirmities, and fitted (or an entrance into heavenj and the more immediate prefence of a Deity of perfedl Holinefs.
Why the title of the Article fliould be " Of Turgatory" when it includes other Do6frines, might poffibly be in fome meafure explained. — All the things mentioned in the Body of the Ar- ticle, after Purgatory, have been chiefly ufcd as means of fliortening the duration of its pains'. Indulgences have that end chiefly and immediately in view. And adorations are offered to" Saints^
through
'' Dr. Middleton's Letter from Rome, page 176.— The paf- fage, quoted Seft. i v, might have been here.
» Forbefii Inftrudl 7. i. 20. ^ Forbefii Inftruft, 7. 2.4. ' The Couacll of Trent mixes thefe (do6lri.ues, SelT. 25.
128 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. VIII.
through the medium of Images or Relics^ chiefly in order to prevail upon them to affiil in deliver- ing fouls out of Purgatory. So that the Article might have been entitled, * Of Purgatory, and the mc:uis of abridging its Pains,' were it not that each fubjed may require fome feparate con- fidcration. — Indeed, as it is, the whole chain of fubjcdts is fpoken of as one do(5trinej what the Romanifts teach concerning them is called " a fond thing.''''
VIII. " The RomiJJi Doclrine:' — In the Article of 1552 it was, " The doctrine of the fchool- authors'* — " Scholajiicoriim doflrina;" — what that was, with regard to the leading fubjecl. Purga- tory, has been briefly mentioned in our"" Hiftory. If the old exprelTion had continued, the Roma- nifts might have faid, we do not defend the doftrines of the Schoolmen in every particular". The prefent expreflion confines all difpute to the doftrines which the Romanijls profefTed, whatever thofe were; and it denotes the degree of each dodtrine a^ually exi/ling-, fo that it would not avail for the Romanifts to defend /ow^ regard for facred painting or fculpture; fome refpecl for real relics; except they could defend what a^ftu- ally appeared in Popilh countries relating to one or the other, when the Ai'ticle was made.
IX. " WorJIiipping
^ Sea. 1 1 .
" Bellnrmin profefles to differ from the Schoolmen about Images; Ice Forbes, 7.2. 27, &c.— One might fay, in general, that the Romanifts have, fince the complaints of the Reformers, endeavoured to moderate the doftrines of the Schoolmtn, in exprellibii, explanation, theory ; but fo as to leave room for the fieoi'le to be as weak and credulous as their education inclines them to be. Yet from Forbes, 7. 1. 17. we fee, that even fome fchoolmcn did not like Dulia for worfliip of Saints ; becaufc men are their fellow-fervants. Biflwp Hard oppoles folemn forma of rituals, canon?, and councils, to the private writings of Romilli Divineb, On Prophecy, page 384.
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. IX— XI. 129
IX. *' Worfhipping and adoration-^'— m Latin, *' veneratione et adoratione;'' — thefe words have by- no^ means fo determinate a fenfe as to prevent all difputes, or even to fugged one invariable idea to the tnind of a thinking man. They may exprefs our regards to tlie Supreme Being, they would not be too ftrong for our attentions to a lacred human character. ** Worfhip" in modern Enghfli feems appropriated to the fupreme Being; but at the time the Articles were made, it fignified merely * refped, reverence, honour: as indeed appears by the Latin word of tlie Article, " Veneratione."— WorQiipping feems fometimes to be ufed in our EngliOi bibles for the eaftern profiration, and may therefore correfpOnd to the expreffi* ,n of the Coun- cil of Trent, '' procumbmms\'' Adorare feems to mean x.o addrefs any one with refped:, and with fome idea of obtaining a favour. Such addrefs feems to have been conceived to be attended with fome bodily geftures of a refpedful, fuppliant fort: as bowing, &c.— the word was fometimes'' ufed for addreffing an Heathen God, which would be called prayer; but Tacitus ufes^ adorare vulgum for^ to bow or cringe to the common people, as can- vaflers would do.
X. Invocation, feems to be defiring affiftance, interceffion; though, in fad, it has occafioned for- mal worfliip.
XI. The word ''fond;' is not modern, but the meaning of it appears fufEciently ' from the
Latin
® This will appear more fully in Art. xxv. Seft. vr. -
P Page 202. Edit. Antv. '1596, Sefl: 2 c, Decretum de
Invocatione, &c.
^ Cooper's Thefaurus. r Ainfvvorth's Didionary. '
= I cannot help comparing /o«^ with the French /oa falle »
they feem to have been ufed much in the fame way ; to expref? VOL. IV. , I .^van?
130 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XII. XIII.
Latin '■^ f utilise The word occurs in the Rhe- milh Teftament twice'. — *' A fond thing ;" — in the Jingular number : the fyftem of doctrines (as before) is reckoned as one finale doftrine.
*' Vainly invented," — " inaniter conficla." — foolifli and unfounded; in the eye of reafon; this feems contradiitinguilhed to " grounded upon no warrant of Scripture.''^
XII. "But rather repugnant" — immo, which we fhould now tranflate nay — nay " rather repug- nant to the word of God :" we had this word in the thirteenth" Article, in the fame fenfe. — In our Latin the expreffion is, — ** immo verbo Dei con- tradicit;" — in that of 1552,, " imo verbo Dei per- niciose contradicit j" though the Engli/h is the fame in both; which indeed might be the reafon why the Convocation of 1562 left out " perniciose :" or there misiht be other reafons.
XII I. We have now gone through the Article, in the way of explanation; but it feems proper to mention the Popilli diftinftion between Xxr^nxy and ^»^£Mt, and vire^SaXeix. — As alfo that between Image and Idol. — The Romanifls, wilhing to avoid the charge of Idolatry, have faid, that there are different lorts of adoration ; Xar^uoi is that which
is
want ofunderf.anding ; and want oi prudence, and being under the influence of paflion, not controlled by reafon : the Council of Trent blames thofe who hold, '' Jlnltum efle," to pray to Saints, ijefl'. 25, page 303, boaom. — As this seflion was in 1563, it might aim at the Article made iu 1552 : or at fome Confeffiou of Reformers to the fame purpofe.
' More ftriftly, the word fend occurs in Fulke on the Rhemifli Tertament, folio, 224. 1 i:\yfoUo, as only every other page is. numbered.
" Art. XIII. Seft. xv. — Bifhop Hallifax has exprefled the fame thing in his eleventh Sermon on Prophecy. " All the obfervances mentioned here are not only not commanded in fcriptuVe, but are in diicfl violation of it." Page 351.
.1
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XIII. J^i
IS due to God; ^vKhx that which is due to man; v-m^^^sXiicf. that which is due to Chrill in his human nature, or to his Mother, the bleffed Viroin.-— Auguilin has fomething of the diftinction between Kxr^nx and ^sAsta, and vXqs fervitus often ; but he does not mention vtrs^hxstXy nor is it in any Greek Author. Auguilin was a Latin FatJier, and might knjow but little of the Greek language. I do not (ee any foundation for the diftinflion between hxT^sia. and hxsKx,, except that Xxr^noe, is more frequently ufed for ferving God than ^tsXux. Axroi^ is a fervant, and AaAo? is a fervant. — I (hould guefs, that the Aar^i? was more ingenuous than the A«Ao?, but they, or their derivatives feem to be ufed interchangeably'': and fometimes in fcrip- ture AaT^jueiu is ufed for ferving'^ ?nen^ and ShXvjh^ for ferving^ God. But it is proper to mention in what fenfes the Romanifts ufe tbefe words, whether they be right or wrong.
With the fame view, of avoiding the charge of Idolatry, the Romanifts blame us for not making diftindion enough between Image and Idol; be- tween fjxwy, I fuppofe, or Jimulacriim^ (the word of the Vulgate,) and eJujAcv, It feems the Englifb Teftament had once, inftead of " Little children keep yourfdves fron-/ /a'o/j,"— little children keep yourfelves from Images^. — Eij'wAov in Greek feems
to
" Compare Rom. i. 2i;. with Gal. iv. 8 — Compare alfo the fayings of Tigranes and his wife, in the third Book of Xeno- phon's Cyropjedia, page 144.. 147, 8vo.— Forbes, 7. i. men- tions them, from Valla, and has more on the fubjed.
y Deut. xxvni,48. Lev. xxiii. 7, 8.^ Exod. xii. 16.- *
Epyov "KocT^^vi rev,
^ Matt. vi. 24.— Rom. vi. 22. — See particularly 1 ThefT i. g,' in the Greek.
* Conclulion of i John. ^ See Rhemiils on the paffage. I 2
13a BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XIII.
to be ufed for any refemblance" or effigy; but Idol, in Englifh, does icem to mean a vifible ob- ject, which has divine zvorJJiip paid to it : the authors of the Rhemifli Teftament fay** thus, *' neither every idol is an image ^ nor every image an Idol.'' That every iinaoe, or refemblance, is not an idol, that is, not worlhipped, is clear enough ; as well as that an image may be an Idol : the fecond commandment forbids making a graven image^ or the likenefs of any being% in order to bow dozen to it, or Jerve it. But 1 feel fome doubt whether all idols are not made for images, that is, refem- blances, even though they have no original really exifting; there is no fuch animal as a Dragon, yet thote who n-iade the Idol called by that^ name, might have fome rude belief that there was fuca an animal.
Peter Lombard (from Origen)^ feems to make an Idol the copy of fomething oxAy fancied ; an tmaze he underftands to be a refemblance of fomething real: according to this, no image could be called an Idol. — The lxx fays, » zrotrio-fK o-fauTM si^uXovyisSe TTxvro; ofj-oiufj-x — if here the ei^uXov is one thing, and the o[ji.oiui[Ax another, (which does not feem to me the meaning) then again a likenefs cannot be called an Idol. Yet, in cufhomary fpecch, any fubltance feems to be called an Idol, which is an objeft of religious zvor/Iiip^ : but in whatever fenfe w^e take the words, thefe ob- fervations will have the fame tendency to cut
off
c Or a Gholl: fee Greek Primitives under ulv.
^ On the fame plate, i John v. 2 1 .
e Exod. XX. 4, 5.
^ Apocrypha. « Lib. 3. dift. 37, B.
^ See alfo abridgment of H. Stephens, under 'Ei^uXon. In Stephens himlclf this is tlic Ecchfiafacol fenfe : there arc in- ftances of Ei^a/Xci- ami Eik<u» being ufed as fynonymous.
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XIV. XV. I33
off difputesj and to prevent the Romanifts from bJaming us.
XIV. We come now to Proof. — This might afford us a number of propoficions if we carried it to its utmoft length ; for we fliould then have to fliew, that the Syftem of Doftrines here men- tioned, is not founded on reafon ; that every text of Scripture produced in its fupport is invalid, and then, that fome texts of Scripture are repug- nant to it : and this we fliould have to fliew alfo of the five particulars; Purgatory, Indulgences, Worfliip of Images, Worfliip of Relics, and In- vocation of Saints. We will be as brief as poffible.
XV. Firft, concerning the Article in general, — ' Thtfet of doctrines condemned in it, are not, on 2. general view, founded in Reafon, or warranted by Scripture.'
When Religion poffefTes the mind, fo that the devout affeftions are ftrong, they are apt, if not very carefully regulated, to draw the mind im- perceptibly into folly and abfuidity. For a while fuch folly may be encouraged; but ere long, it will be lamented, by every wife and difmterefled perfon. A good man muft indeed venerate, in fome degree, every thing that fprings from Reli- gion, even to its very fliults ; he therefore will not reftrain even what he cannot approve ; nay, he is afraid to deftroy religious principles, though erro- neous. But when we may judge freely w^e fee, that fuch folly is a more important evil than fome men think it. When it confifts in taking pre- fumptions for fadts, and ailing upon them, we can fee, that it is nothing lefs than man's taking upon him to be the Author of Revelation ; which may produce any evils whatever. When it coji- fifts in forming ads of affedion into a fyftem of I 3 religious
1^4 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XV.
religious ordinances, we can fee, that the effufions of our bell paiTions, though not condemned at the moment, naturall)^ excite an ingermous iliame on a calm review, and are much too frivolous to be colledled into a Coddy and made Duties : though, in fome cafes, their frivoloufnefs can be better felt than dcmonftrateJ. — When relig-ious folly confifts in enlivening the affections towards invifible objects by the ufe of vilible reprefenta- tions of them, we can fee, that the attention gets more and more fixed on what meets the fenfes, and continually more detached from that which isinvifible; till the judgment is perverted, and the mind debafed. That Chriftians fhould be Anthropomorphitcs without fuch imitations, may furprife us; but we fee plainly, that all attempts to enliven devotion by their means, have a ftrong tendency to confound the ideas of God and Man in the human mind.
Laflly, When religious folly confifcs in unre- ferved dependence on the power of an intereRed Priefl to punilh or forgive, we can fee, that what might have been a reafonable ground of hope and confidence to a dejeded penitent, becomes a temp- tation to fin.
Thefe obfervations are calculated to fhew, that the jet of dodlrines before us, confidered in a general view, are not founded in reajon^ we are next to ilicw, that they are not warranted hvfaip' Hire. — We find fevcral paffages of Holy writ which Ihew a kind of jealoufy of what men might call mprovin^ upon Chrilfianity. — Asi Cor. iii. 12. — 2 Cor. xi. 3. — Gal. i. 8, Q.-Eph. iv. 14.— Col. ii. 8. — 2 Tim. i. 13. or Jude 3. — and Rev. xxii. 18, 19.
And I fecm to fee many paffages, which inti- mate, that human appointments may be carried fo
far
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XVI. I35
far as to difappoint their own purpofes. — As Matt. XV. I— -9.' — Jewilh ordinances feemcd, probably, mprovemenfs, at the time they were
made.
And particularly we find paflages which might guard us againft making our Chriftian wor/iip to be performed in any way by means of the fenfes.-- Johniv. 24. — Gal. iii.3.''
I fuppole, that if the Jews had made a ftatue' of Mofes, and, ufing folemn gedures before that, had invoked Mofes, and defired him once"" more to mediate between God and them, they would have broken the fecond commandment. It feems probable that they were forbidden to make to themfelvcs the likenefs of anything in Heaven or Earth, becaufe it would gradually have difpofed their minds to idolatry.
XVI. From thefe general proofs of the Article, we pafs en to fome more particular. — And firfl ot Purgatory. That there is fuch a ftate of purifica- tion, by fuffering, after death, appears inadmii- fible, becaufe it feems unreafonable that welhould be expe6led to allow what is wholly pafTed over when it was mofl likely to be noticed. In Matt. ;xxv. we have only two ftatcs mentioned, and they were both " prepared" without any hint of any
temporary
» Art. VII. Se£l. iv. one might alfo confider Art. xiv. ahoat whi-'worjhip. Bilhop Hurd, Proph. page 393, fpeaks of Will-worfliip as an opprobrious name : not fo Dr Hammond.
"^ Thofe who took Notes at Leaure fhould be informed, that fome texts in this Sedion were omitted for want of time; and the whole of Seel. 13 th by miftake.
1 The Melchlfedecians are faid to have had a ftatue o/Mofe?, in Arabia, and to have worlhipped it. Epiphan. Hsr. 55- — Rhem. Teft. on Heb. ix. Sea. 4. Fulke.
•" Exod. xxxii. 11. 32. — Numb. xvi. 22. 46, &-C. — See alloi Deut. v. 5. and Lev. xxvi. 46. though the tno laft relate only fo mediation concerning the law.
14
1^6 KOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XVI.
temporary fufferings to the " bleffed." — The fame might be obferve 1 of other paflTages.— If fuch a ftate as Purgatory is to be allowed by all men, is it not imaccountabie, that Chrifhians fhoukl have been fo long ignorant "? of it ? Its being admitted at lad may be accounted for, from the notions of the ancients, from its fuiting the wifhis and alle- viating the fears of the People, and from its being lucrative to the facrcd orders.
In order to prove that Purgatory is " grounded on no warrant of y?r//)//^;-f," one fhould examine all the texts alledgcd in fupport of it : this would be what we have called indirect proof. Thefe texts (out of the New Teftament) may be found in the Rheinijli Teftament, and all in Veneer°. on this Article. But they feem to me to have fo little weight, that I may fafely venture to omit them, referring to Bifhop Porteus^ for a fpeci- men. — Indeed fome of them have been explained, in our difcuffions, or in Billiop Pearfon on the Defcent into Hell.
The laft thing, with regard to Purgatory is to fhew, that the notion of it is " repugnant to the word of God.'"'— This we fhould call direct proof; the negative form of the Article makes here; a trifling difference.
Now under the tile twelfth Article it was fliew-n, that what are popularly called the good adions
of
" See a paflage from Bifhop 'Fiflier at the conclufion of this Article.
° Texts for Purgatory copied from Veneer, page 460. on this article; only the order changed; fome feem to be falfe
printb. Exod. i. 11;. — Numb. xiv. 32, 33. — i Sam. iii. —
2 Kings i. — Pfalmlxvi. 12. — Ifaiah ix. 18. — Mich. vii. 8,9.—
Zech. ix. 1 1. — Mai. iii. 3. — Matt. v. 22. v. 25, 26. — xii. 32.
Luke xxxii. 42. (qu." 22?) — A6^s ii. 24. — i Cor. iii. 15.— XV. 29. — Phil. ii. 10. — James ii. 25. (qu. 13?) — i Pet. iii 19. — I Jolin V. 16.
f Biihop Porteus, page 4R.
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XVII. 13^
oi" a Chriftian, though imperfed, are " pleafing and acceptable to God, in Chrift." If fo, there is no need of fnffi^ying. — That our forgivenefs through Chrift is immediate^ the fcriptures'^ declare; as is fhevvn by Bifliop Bnrnet on this Article. — I will therefore conclude my proof with i John i. 7. — *' the blood of Jefus Chrift" — " cleanfeth us from all fin."
XVII. In the next place we fliould prove, of the Doclrine of Pardons, or Indulgences, that it is unfounded in reafon, and has no warrant of fcrip- ture, but is even repugnant to it.
In the way of reafoning, it appears, that the doArine of Pardons is groundlefs, becaufe their bufinefs is to difpenfe the Treafures of merits amalTed by works of fupererogation ; whereas under the fourteenth Article it was fhewn, that there are no fuch works, and, of confequence, no fuch trea- fures to difpenfe. The effed; alfo of Indulgences is to relieve fouls out of Purgatory \ whereas we have jufl now fhewn, that the exiflence of fuch a itate is not admifTible.
This dodrine is not warranted by Scripture, becaufe the pafTages ailedged in its fupporf are only thofe, as I conceive, which appoint the Governors of the Church to be the Agents of Chrift : now all appointments of Agents muft be underflood with this hmitation, fo long as they adt in the CharaSfcr of Agents. If an Agent un- deniably and grofsly exceeds his Commifhon, his principal is never obliged to ratify his ads.-— Being the Agent of God for the fake of conduding religious fociety, does not make Man to be God ; any more than an EmbalTy makes an Embaflador to be a Sovereign.
This ^ Heb. ix. 27, * Matt. xvi. ig.— John xx. 23.
138 BOOK IV. ART. XXI I. SECT. XVIII.
This doctrine is repugnant to 2 Theff. ii. 4. without confidci;ng that paflage as predicflive of Popery. Whatever ftate it foretells, that (late is a wrong one.
XVII I. The next fubjecft which occurs, is the worlhipping of Images. And firft we (hould rea- fon on the fubjeft, in order to fee whether it has any foundation : But fomething has been already* laid on the effecft of Images on the mind : the ufe of them has been lhev\n to be aEtcnded with danger of debafing our religious fentimenrs and principles. Difputes relating to the \.\(t of them are kept up by the various degree of Adoration : but our Article takes the degree actually JuhJiJUyig at the time it was made; this was ciiltus religiofm ; to which our former obfervations are applicable. — The only forcible argument for the ufe of images feems to be, that which is contained in the favourite expreflion, ' Images and PiiVurcs are the Books ^ of the unlearned^ — And it is true, that de- lineations are iefs arbitrary than words, flrike more quickly, convey ideas to more pcrfons j more eafily feize a" reluctant attention. No one will hear me Ipcak anything but praife of Macklin's
Bible,
' Seft IV. and XIV.
* Rhem. Tell, on John v. 21. — Comber, in his advice to Ent^I. Papills, page 85, quotes this as a laying of " Porphyr. apiid Eufeb. Praepar. Evang. lib. 3."
" Mr. Collier, once High vSherifFof the Ifle of Ely, told me, that, in order to get the fail at Ely repaired, he had prefented to the Privy Council dra-vings of the Prifoners, loaded with more Irons, &c. than would have been needful to fecure them, liad the Jail been properly repaired; and expreffing th:ir feel- ings by their countcnaiKes and attitudes : without this mea- fiire he had defpaired of gaining the attention of the Privy Council at that time. It was doubtful whether, tha Bifhop of Ely was obliged to keep tlic Jail in repair. Tiie fcheme, I have imderllood, pro<iucefl an caily decifion from the Privy Councili^ to the great alleviation of the fufferings of thofe under confine- ment at that place.
BOOtC IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XVIII. i^^
Bible, or of the charming weft window at New College Chapel ; I am fure any reafonable Prote- flant may receive good Irom the contemplation of them : but then it is, becaufe they have not the leait connexion, in his mind, with WorJJiip. The PapifiS ufe refemblances as media in the very a5l of worlLipping. Tf I was called upon to gaze upon the beft ftatue or pifture in the world, as the means of heightening my devotion in prayer, i fliould turn afide from it : 2i'zveji window cannot well be intended for fuch a purpofe. — Take then the books of the unlearned into their proper place, and there they may be (ludied with profit, and without danger.
1 am happy to find Augujlin exprefling himfclf in the manner he does, on this fubjed. — " Et Idola quidem omni fenfu carere quis dubitet ? Verum tamen cum his locantur fedibus, honora- bili fublimitate, ut a precantibus atque immolan- ribus attendantur, ipsa fimilitudine animatorum membrorum atque fenfuum, quamvis infenfata et exanima, afficiunt infirmos animos, ut vivere et Ipirare videantur : accedente prsefertim veneratione multitudinis, qua tantus eis cultus impenditur\" This paflage -finely defcribes the bad tendency of Jmages when ufed as media in worfliip, and would be rm anhver to all that is urged by the Papifts about the people being taught that there is no Divinity y in them, nor any truft to be placed in thenii even luppoie no adoration paid them which could properly be called religious.
The
"^ Auguft. Ep. I02. al. 49.(Sid.y— 1— i.pagesii.) note i8. jfn anfwer to fix queftions from Pagans, this Is the third; about abolifhing rites.— It is commended by Lardner : Works, Vol. 8, page 239, note. -It gives one a good idea of the converfion of Pagans to Chriflianity ; I mean, that their converfion was piade on good grounds.
y Trent, Seff. 25,-SsealfoRhern. Teft. on Ads xvii. ag.
140 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XVIII,
The Romanifts betray a confcioufnefs of fome- thing wrong with refpedl to the worfliip of Images, by leaving the fecond commandment out of the Decalogue. This was mentioned under the feventh Article \
Nor is there any warrant in Scripture for wor- {hipping Images, in any fenfe : the only palTage urged which ieems at all worth mentioning, is that in the Book of Exodus", where God comimands Mofes to make fome forms called Cherubims on the Mercy- feat : but thefe were not (as far as is known to Man) Images, but Emblems'^: there was no danger of the People's worfhipping them, becaufe the people never came into the place where they were; and the High Pried only once a year. — Jehovah never bound hlmjelf to order nothing lenfible to be ufed in the Jewifh worfhip, he only faid, " Own ll:ialt not make unto thee any graven Image." — Even under Chiftianit}-, water, bread, wine, all objeds of the fenfes, are ufed in worlhip; all emblematically, but they are not objefts of wor- fhip; neither do they contain any llkenejs of any thing in heaven or in earth.
Thirdly, the worfliip of Images may be faid to be even repugnant to fcripture. It feems indeed as if the facred writers could not poffibly liave the precife cafe of Popifli Images before ihcm ; and therefore we can only reafon and infer from fcrip- turcs intended for calcs of like nature ; but Deut. xxvii. 15. and Pfalm xcvii. 7. fhould not be of lefs force under Chrillianity than under Judaifm. They do indeed fpeak of the Idols of Heathens, immediately ; bqt whether Romilh worfhip of
Images
^ Alt. VII. Seel. xiii. end.
» Exocl. XXV. 18.
*> Parkliurft, Hcbr. Lex, i*^3, may make the Cherubims to be thought emblems, even by thofe who do iiot come into every. idea of his.
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XIX. 141
Images be Idolatry or not, the progrefs of the mind from vvorihipping the invifible object, to \vor(hipping the vifible image, is fo much' the fame, whatever be the refemblance, or its ori- ginal, that every prohibition of worlhipping images, iTiouId be confiderq^ as reaching every cafe in which a refemblance has anything to do with re- ligious worfliip. If this be juft, worfliip of Imao-es is, at leaft, difcouraged, by a great number '^of palTages in the Old Teftament.
In Deut. iv. 12. 15. particularly ver. 16. [eho^ vah feems to let us into the grounds of his prohi- bitions; and they muft be always^of force: thofe who make a likenefs of anything, are faid ver. 16. to corrupt themfelves.
And with regard to the New tejiament, St. Paul's r^afoning with the Athenians^ feems to imply, that Ch rift ians ought not, now that times of ignorance are paft, to make ufe of any fenfible media in worfhip, though to an invifible or " unhwwii God;" that ufmg fuch is not doing all we can to worfhip God in Spirit : — we may alfo obferve, that whatever only^ tends to make us change " the Glory of the incorruptible God into an imaoe," or wcrfliip " the creature"^ more than the Cre- ator," is carefully to be avoided, even on fcrip- tural authority; nay, on the authority of the Ncw Teftament.
XIX. The next fubjeft is that of worfhipping Relics. In the degree in which it prevails its futility is palpable, and its tendency to promote infidelity has been mentioned^ Whatever affo- ciates Chriftianity with contempt, has fome effed in making Chriftianity contemptible. It feems
Calvin « Aasxvii. d Rom. i. 23, 3?.
142 BOOK IV. ART. XXir. SECT. XIX.
Calvin^ propofcd that an Inventory fliould be pub- liflied of Popifli relics : no propofal can be more fair: fuch inventory would be all the proof we could v;ant, that " the Romilh Dodrine" " is a fond thing."
The Romifh doftrine about Relics is not war- ranted by Scripture. — One text alledged is Matt. ix. 22. but the woman cured did not adore the hem of our Saviour's garment; fhe thought no- thing about it ; nor was fhe cured by virtue of any relic; her Faith made her whole.
Another text is Ads xix. 12. there is a great eagernefs dclcribed to get handkerchiefs, &c. from St. Paul; it fliewed Faith, or an high opinion of his fupernatural power. It might be weak, though natural; it might fucceed, on account of the dif- poficion which it implied; and yet fuch a flight might not be meant as the ground of a perpetual obfervance : to copy fuch things is filly and childifh.
That Paul fhould perform miracles on thole
who were at a diftance from him, rather furprizes us at firft : but if God thought fit that it Ihould be fo, diflance probably would occafion no additional difficulty; and we can conceive, that fuch diftance would ftrengthen the evidence in fome rcfpeds ; and then it fcems probable, from a comparifon with our Saviour's mode of performing miraculous cures, that the cure would be conneded with the perfon who performed it, hy fome vifible = tokens. At prefent we beheve that miracles have ccafed.— Another text is Heb. ix. 4. but the things laid up in that cafe were records; realon and divine autho- rity confpired in didating that they Ihould be
prefer ved.
f See Fulke on Rhem. Teft A£ts xix. 12. folio, 221, from «• Calvin's admonition concerning Reliques." t- Markvii. 33.
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECt. XX. 143
preferved. — And the genuinenefs of the relics is indiiputable. I do not fuppofe that the Jezvs pre- tend to any relics nozv. If they did, and vvor- fliipped them, the cafe would be a cafe in point. — The care fliewn in fcripture to give decent burial, to our Lord, St. Stephen, &c. will nor, I truft, convert any one to the Romifh doctrine oi Relics.
As to its being repugnant to fcripture, I will content niyfelf with faying, that the texts brought to prove the doftrine of Images fo, may be applied in fuch a manner as to be fufficient for any one's convidion. — Saint Paul would probably have faid of this error as he does of fome others, had he been witnefs of it; " refufe profane and old wives fables,'' and exercife " thyfelf rather' unto god- linefs.'*
XX. The laft part of our Proof relates to Invo- cation of Saints. That it is foolifli, in the degree in which we fpcak of it, (according to what was faid in the hiftorical part and explanation,) appears from the endeavours of the Romanifts to explain^ it away.
Saints cannot hear all who invoke them; this has been obferved before. As to the notion that the Angels' employ themfelves in informing the Saints of what good Catholics addrefs to them, I dare fay you will excufe me if I do not attempt to difprove it : it proves to me, that the doflrine of the Invocation of Saints, wants. fupport"".
Experience,
' I Tim. iv. 7.
^ Compare Midd. Preface, page 50, with page 156 of his Letter, and many other parts. — And fee BoJJ'uet, quoted by Bilhop Hurd, Proph. page 386.
' Endof Seft. VI. from Forbes, 7.1. 21.
™ I think Epiphanius's reafoning about the Virgin, is well worth mentioning : £» yx^ AfysXaj ■sr^as-xvvE^aOa* a ^Ae» ($65?),
144 B^OK IV, ART. XXII, SECT. XX,
Experience, I think, will fhcw, that the lcrv\'er the objects of our religious addrefl't^s are, the lower will be the turn of our religious fentiments : and the lefs will they be directed to the all-perfect Being. We may fay of the Invoca:ion of Saints as of Purgatory, that its being admitc^d, can be accounted for, without fuppofing it to be well founded.
In the next place, the Doctrine of the Invocation of Saints is not warranted by Scripture. Origen thought it poffible, that" " fome will be redeemed by the blood of Martyrs." This docs not cer- tainly imply the invocation of them; but it is contrary to an obfervation of our own in a pre- ceding" Article. — The texts in favour of our prefent doctrine are much of the fame fiamp with thofe for that of Purgatory; and I fliall beg leave to ufe the fame method ^ with them all, except thofe which direct men to intercede for each other, as I Their. V. 25.— 1 Tim. ii. i. and James v. 16. — Now it being allowed, from thefe, and others, that man ought to intercede for men ; and that one man may defire, or call upon another to do fo; is it not to be believed, that Saints in Heaven intercede for men, and that men may invoke them in order to beg their Inter ceffion.? Bifliop Hurd has thought this obje<5tion w'orthy of a very atten- tive confideration, and he has anlwered it at length in Lis eleventh Sermon'' on Prophecy. Bilhop
Porteus
>sroau /*a^^sl' T»}c awo A»v»)s yey£v>if*£»o»; Haer. 79. (CoUyrioians)
Seft. V. In Seft. vii. he fays, Ty,» M«g»a»r f^riSn; 'sx^oczvvutu:
and near the end of the Hser.ii M<ig»« iv tj^a, 0 Kf 510? ts^ov-
n Lardner's Works, Vol. 2, page 462.
• Appendix to Art. xi. Se;^. iv.
V A Ipecimen coUefted from Rhcm. Teft. Luke xvi. q.—
A6\s V. 15.— vii. 60.— 2 Cor. i. 11. — a Pet. i. 15 — i John ii. i i — .Apoc. V. 8.— vi. 10.
1 Hurd on Prophtcy, page 386, &c.
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XX. 14^
rorteus has anfwered it briefly'' according to his plan. I would wifli you to read thefe anfwers, and therefore I will only fay, if we may conclude, that Saints are incapable of hearing our Tnvoca- rions> the whole bufmefs is at an end : If that be not allowed, I then reafon thusj our not being told that we are to promote Interceffion among > j
Saints in Heaven, when we are repeatedly told I
that we are to promote it on' earth, feems a |
ftrong argument that no fuch thing is expeded of I
us, or proper for us. Still if men are determined )
to perfift, and fay that they can reafon by Analogy j
from earth to heaven, the proper analogy feems to me to be this ; as Chriilians are required to inter- cede for each other on. earth, fo it is probable that Saints and Angels intercede for each other in heaven : and this notion is confirmed by reafons of utility. It is certainly very uleful, in a moral light, that men fliould intercede for each' other : it improves the mind of each Interceffor, it pro- motes mutually beneficent principles, which effect the genera! good : befides that placing our bene- volence before God, viewing it in the light of his countenance, muft needs make it of a right fort. But the interceffion of one rank for another, has not the fame effedls : nor can frail ignorant men on earth give their attention to creatures in heaven, in a ftate quite out of the reach of their knowledge without great danger of a romantic, and fuperfti- *" , , tious religion.
I will now proceed to the laft thing in o^r Proof i to fliew, that the Romifh Dodrine of tlie Invocation of Saints, is even repugnant, in fome ^
degree,
"^ Biihop Porteus's Brief Confutation, p:;ge 23. .'
* Confider Matt, xviii. 19. in this view. f ' *
^ Dr. Ooileu on Prayer and JnrercelTion treats this fubjcil. / ^ VOL. IV. K . .'"
146 BOOK IV. AllT. XXII. SECT. XX.
degree, to the Scripture. It does not feem that the facred writers had, or could have, the dodrine immediately in their view, and therefore there may be no indiredV prohibition of it made in io many words ; but the filence being on both fides, is much in our favour : if nothing be faid, there is nothing to be done. Efpecially when we are told, that we may ourfelves" ufe importunity with our hea- venly Lord. The heavenly creatures are called our fellow-fervants, Rev. xix. 10. and xxii. 9. and elfewhere.
The Romanifls have indeed faid, that Diilia is neverthelefs due to them, from Gal. v. 13. but the A8A£t» there mentioned is clearly mutual; and indeed means only mutual kind offices j ^tarrc
Billiop Hurd "" confiders, after Mede, the Ro-
manifts as guilty of the D^emon-worlbip mentioned
I Tim. iv. I. — And BiQiop Hallifax^ after Mr.
Mede and Bifhop Newton, appHes to them Dan.
xi. 38. according to the marginal reading : Mahuz-
zim (D'ty ') being interpreted Proteclors, or
tutelary Deities, and confidcred as including Saints
and Angels. — The texts of the New Teftamcnt
w'ould have an immediate reference to the oriental
philofophy, and the fpiritual Beings which it fup-
pofed ; as was fliewn at the end of the firft Book:
but from thofe texts we may form a tolerable
judgment what the Apoftles would have faid about
the Popilb Saints. This feems the proper idea
with which we fliould read CoJ. ii. 18. 23. —
I Tim.
" Matt. vii. 7. Luke xi. 8, 9.
* On Prophecy, page 386. y On Prophecy, page 3C2.
* From,;j/**, or t|j?J Parkhurft's account is under ^J?. In Walton's Polyglott the word is not interpreted. Louth, on the place, prefers Medc's tranflation.
BOOK IV. ART. XXil. SECT. XXI. t^f
i Tim. i. 4. and iv. i, &c\— I conclude with I Tim. ii. 5. " There is one God, and one mediator between God and Man, the Man Jefus Chrift."
XXI. If we fay anj^thing in the way of Appli- cation, it fhali be concerning the mutual concejjions which might be conceived to take place, fuppofing the contending parties were perfeftly candid : in- deed from mutual conceffions mull of courfe arife improvements. I always wifh, whilft I am engaged in controverfy, that fome refpe(5lable advedary were prefent; in order that perfonal refpect might prevent anything illiberal from being thrown out.
It has not been fufficiently obferved in the con- troverfies on this Article, that he who refufes to admit a doftrine, does not of courfe deny it. It may be wrong, in fome cafes, either to adopt or reject a'' notion. A man fays, you will allow that the Planets are inhabited ; the proper anfwer is, I neither allow it nor deny it. It feems pro- bable from analogy that they may be; and I fliould think any man narrow-minded who made himfelf fure that they were not ; but the moment you build anything upon fuch a fuppofition, I de- clare your building to be without foundation. We fay indeed that Purgatory, &c. are repugnant to Scripture; but we do not mean, to any exprefs declaration belonging immediately to the doctrine. — This might poffibly have fome eifedt in recon- ciling: would Dupin have been content with fay- ing, it may be needful for our fouls to be purified after death ? and would our Church fay the fame? — Might it be laid, the Saints in Heaven may
poffibly
^ Col. ii. 23. H'lII occur again under Art. xxxii. — Indeed it has already occurred. *" Art. xvin. Seft. jx.
K 2
148 BOOK IV. ART. XXI 1. SECT. XXI.
poflibly know fomething of our adions ? this would have effeft. — What elfe do we fay of particular judgments of God ? — How do I know but this event may be a judgment? Such a queftion is enough to make us think; and to learn righteouf- nefs; more would be prefumption and fuper- flition.
It feems, at firft, a fhrange thing to have the rituals, canons, councils % of a Church, fo dif- ferent from " the private writings of her Divines," as we find them in the Church of Rome : but this may perhaps be nothing more than that fome Ro- manills are more improved than others : that the ignorant people go on in the old track, which was firft made in times of darknefs and fuper- flition, and that the enlightened, though they- dare not difturb the minds of the lower people, endeavour, in their own perfons, to make the old dotflrines as little abfurd as poflible ; and endea- vour to dwell on what is right, and foften what is wrong.
In our church many a Parifli Clerk has readings and cuftoms which we cannot juftify, though we let him go on : and the common people have fuperftitions which are not the Doctrine of our Church : our church was formed by the beft and ableft of men, at the revival of learning; and confiftcd of reformations of abufes, as far as it differed from all others : and all its members who are tolerably educated, muft be upon much the lame footing.
Now if this be the cafe, many popifh errors will difappear as the people improve; and ;Jie Fire of Purgatory will gradually go out. Even Coun- cils, Canons and Rituals, may grow obfolete, and
at <■ Hurd on Prophecy, page 348.
BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XXI. I49
at Jaft " vanifli^ away.''— We may hope to fee this improvement take place firftin our Countrymen of the RomiOi perfuafion.
A change might, in cafe of improvement^ take place particularly in what is called Adoration, The ceremonies of bowing, kilTing things animate and inanimate, and even of kneeling% are arbitrary, in a great degree. At this time, or at any other, I fuppofe Englifli Papifts might not ufe all the fame geftures with Italians, though equally fuperftitious, before Images andpi^flures.
It has been^ faid, that no reconciliation need be attempted between Papifts and Proteftants in thofe docfirines which are the occafions of accumulating wealth : but the Clergy are by no means fo corrupt as they ufed to be; and the Pope raifes much lefs from his followers than formerly. — I do not think that the God of this world has fo blinded the minds (2 Cor. iv. 4.) of Englifhmen, Proteftants, or Catholics, as to make them perfift long in errors m'^rely becaufe they are lucrative.
As Billiop Fiflier confirms, in an artlefs way, feveral things which we have had occafion to ob- ferve, I will tranfcribe a paffage from his refutation of Luther s.
" Multos fortafle movet Indidgentiis iftis non ufque adeo fidere, quod eorum ufus in Ecclefia videatur recenlior, et admodum fero apud Chrifti- anos repertus : quibus ego refpondeo, non certo conftare a quo primum tradi coeperint : fuit tamen noHHullns earum ufus, ut aiunt, apud Romanes vetuftiffimus, quod ex ftationibus*" intelligipoteft:"
And
^ Hcb viii. 13,
« One of the Canons of the Council of Nice forbids, I think, kneeling at Prayer.
^ Art. XIV. Se<5l. vii.
8 Art. XV III. (page 496.) in Forbes 12, 8. 31.
*> There is fomething about y?«//o«j in Bingham, 13.9,3. and Forbes 12. 8. 14. K 3
I^O BOOK IV. ART. XXII, SECT. XXI.
And he adds, " Nemo certe dubitat orthodoxus an Pur gat or mm fit, de quo tamen apud prifcos nulla, vel quam rarijjima^ fiehat mcntio : led et Gracis ad hunc ufque Diem non eft creditum ejje : quamdiii enim nulla fuerat de Purgatorio cura, nemo quielivit Lididgentias ', nam ex illo pendet omnis indulgen- tiarum exiftimatio : Ji tollas Purgatorhim quorsiim indnlgentiis opus crii ^ cseperunt igitur indulgentise poftquam ad Purgatorii Cfuciatus aliquamdiu tre- pidatum eft."
Blfliop FiOier was Chancellor of this Univerfitj'', Preceptor to Henr}" VIII. a principal writer againft Luther, a Cardinal, and Biihop of Rochefter : he chofe rather to fufFer death, than to permit any one but the Pope, to make him Archbilhop of Canterbury.
ARTICLE
BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. I. 15I
ARTICLE XXIII.
OF MINISTERING IN THE CONGREGATION.
IT is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of publick preaching, or minillering the Sacraments in the congregation, before he be lawfully called, and fent to execute the fame. And thofe we ought to judge lawfully called and fent, which be chofen and called to this work by Men who have publick authority given unto them in the congregation, to call and lend minifters into the Lord's vineyard.
1. It feems needful even for the purpofe of offering our hiftorical reflexions, to confider firft, in what " minlftering" confifts. In *' preaching," baptizing, prefiding at the Lord's fupper : thefe are all particulars mentioned in our Article; but yet we ufually include reading prayers, or praying, marrying, and burying. — So that to mention any of thefe occafionally, will not be thought beyond our purpofe. Indeed the Sacraments are treated of in the following Articles ; therefore we muft en- deavour to fay nothing of them here, which may with more propriety be introduced hereafter.
Our fubjccl is, the obligation which Cliriftians are under to take Orders before they perform any public acl of an eccleliaftical Minifter; or, as it is fomewhere cxprcfTed, not to do any fuch adt '-'felf-orJeredr
K 4 la
1^2 BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. II.
In reviewing hijlorical fafts, we muft pafs over the conduft of the Apoftles and other infpired men; bccaufe that will make part of our Froof.
II. The Apojlolic Father sX^^zk. conftantly as if thofe who miniftered had received a regular com- miffion to miniilcr. Clemerd of Rome, in his firft Epiftle to the Corinthians, a work alwaysvheld genuine, is what I Oioiild call copious on the fub- ject of Minifters ; not proving anything formally about their commiffion, but taking it for granted. — One fees from this work, that the Corinthian Church had eji^icd fome minifters; for Which he blames them. — Polycarp fpeaks of the qualifications of good Minifters : he mentions alfo Valens's having been difmiffed irom the Prefbytery. He writes to the Vhilippians. — Ignatius^ writing to the Church at Ephejus^ fpeaks of that Church as very well governed -^ and fays a good deal on the fubject of Epijcopal authority. And to the Church of Smyrna he fays,
Ex£4V»i ^i^xia. E'j^x^ig-ix r.ync-^u, % xjno rov £7r»(rxo7roy tcra, »' w ay cchTog £7nT^s]/'/i.
To which we may add, that the dlftinflion between Clergy and Laitv {KXr,^og and AaVxot) was known in the time of Clemens'' Romanus, and exprellcd in the fame words in which it has been expreflcd ever fince.
The continuance of a regularly appointed Clergy appears undeniably from the Roman Lazes con- cerning tlicm. Concerning their Revenues^ arifmg from various fucceffions, contributions, &c. —their peculiar /-«>/7/2'/;/('///J, and the modes of hfe and em- ploymcnts which were permitted them ; of all thefe Bingham gives an account, in the fifth, Gxth, and fcventeenth Books of his Antiquities,
III. Things
» Bingham's Antiquities Ciem. ad Cor. r. 5. end of Sed.
BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. III. 15*
III. Things feem to have gone on in much the fame train, with fome exceptions which need not be mentioned, till the twelfth Century. Then the corruptions prevailing in the Church, began to let fome men of good minds and fimple man- ners, upon feparating from the main body of their Chriftian Brethren. Thefe were called Wal- denfes : they lived in the Mountainous country of Piedmont, bordering upon France; in the Vait- // dois^; and feem to have had chiefly in view to bring back the Church of Chrift to its primitive fimplicity. In order to do that they would have a great deal of church power to prune away ; and fo it is faid that they held, that any man might, in fome degree, exhort and expound. Yet it is alfo faid, that they had fomething in the way of our three ranks ; I mean of Bilhop^, Priefts and Deacons. In truth, the age in which they lived, and their own obfcurity, though they were very numerous, have left many doubts concerning them. Their defcendants ilill remain in the fame country, and Protcftants have been called upon, not many years ago, to relieve them when under perfecution.
IV. At
*> See Maclalne's Note on Mofheim's Ecclef. Hlft. Cent. 12. %. 5. I r, 12. Tiiefe vallies were called Vaudois, on account of // the Waldenfes, or Vaudois coining to inhabit them. Their head, Petrus Waldus, or Vaud: Cave fays, Petrus Waldius, that is, of Waldi. Moflieiin fays, we mull dijlinguifh care- fully between Waldenfes and Vaudois ; but Machine oppofes this.
The Waldenfes are fometimes called Albigenfes', but Molhcim makes Albigenfes to mean (oi^xz Pau'iciar.s, on Manicheaiis, in the 1 ith Century, from Albigia, or Albyin France; lee Mofh. Cent. xi. Part ii. Ch;;p. v. Seel, ii, iii. with the Notes of Mac- hine, who differs from Molheim. When differences arife, re- lative to matters not eflential, between perfons of charafter, who have ftudied thofe matters ; we generally content ourfelves with flaiing b.iefiy the different opinions maintained.
154 BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. IV. V.
IV. At the time of the Reformation^ the ufual appointments of Minifters continued in the Church of Rome, and in the Church of England; but in fome countries abroad, on Bifhops'' refufmg to ordain thofe who were fcparating from the RomiQi Church, they had recourfe to ordination by ElderSy or Prefbyters, which kind of ordination has con- tinued ever fmce in thofe countries ; and was transferred from thence ^ into Scotland by John Knox.
In the Church of Rome, Ordo being made a Sacrament, it will occur under the twenty-fifth Article. The Romanifts boafl of a regular fuc- ceflion of Bilhops, from St. Peter down to the prefent time , but fome Proteftants have conceived themfclvcs able to prove % that they had full as good a claim to fuch an honour. The fubjed is much too complicated for iis to meddle with : and may belong to t'iie thirty-fixth Article rather than this; or perhaps not be at ail neceirary.
V. Sochius found a difficulty arifing from the Reformation: Some of his friends'" urged, that by that event, the Church (confidered externalises as a vifible Society) was cnllapjcd, or fallen to ruins; and that no lefs power could rebuild it, than had
built
« Heylln'sTraiSls, page 228.
•^ Baxter pleads tor the legality of Ordination by Prelbyters; but, in ftriflnefs, he does not Teem to bring an inftance of it, except in cafes of neceiuty. On Councils, page 485. Bifhop //o;;/^ declares againlt Ordination by Prefbyters; and maintains the ncceliity of a/wrf^/Fow of ordaining Minifters. Charge 17QI, page 23.
« Baxter on Councils, page 471, Se£l. viii. and page 484, Prop, vi. — Burn-t on the validity of Englifh Ordinations. — Neal I. page 502, bottom, quarto. — Hcyliii's Hiftory of Epif- copacv. — Archbilbop Br^m/uiII has a work on this fuhjefl, which may be good : fee the account in b.is Lr/c, Biogr. Britan. note (u) ; or his ivorks in folio.
^ Socinus's third Epiftle to Matt. Radecius; Works, Vol. i. foi. page 380, &c (or Fraties Poloni) page 383, 384.
BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. VI. 155
bulk it originally :— that is, a fupernatural mira- culous^ power muft again be difplayed on earth, otherwife no man could ever have the fatisfa(5lion of thinking, that he was a member of the true Church of Chrift.
This was not a notion to be born by one who was juft eftablilhing a new religion, or Seift ; So- cinus therefore combats it ftrenuouily : — any affembly, he holds, may form themfelves into a Church ; as to fucceflion, and election after any particular mode, they are nothing. Even in the time of the Apoflles, men not admitted into Chriftianity, and no way commiffioned, might preach the word of their'' own accord ^ much more may a Chriftian expound now, when Chrif- tianity is eftabliOied : general content is all that is wanted.
As to the Lord's Supper^ any fet of Chriftians may meet and break ir^'^^ together : — and Baptifmy may be changed into any other mode of admitting one's name into the lift of Chriftians ; or even being brought up by Chriftian Parents, is fufficient of itlelf. Bat Socinus does not inform his Friend Radecius^ how all this is to be carried into execu- tion with decency and order j — how competition and confufion are to be avoided ; or prefumptuous folly prevented from ftopping the mouth of modeft fenfe. The fame defedt is obfervable in the Raco- vian Catechifm : there, innocence of life, and fitnefs to teach, are' mentioned as qualifications; but it is not faid who is to be judge whether any particular man poffeiles them.
VI. The
s Oneohje£lion toMinirters which Baxter anfwers, is '* You work no Miracles^ — On Councils, page 472.
•> Socinus refers here to A6ls viii. 4. and xi. 19, &c.' * De Ecclefia Chrifti, cap 2, page 241,
136 BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. VI.
VI. The Popifli yoke removed, men found more liberry than they ufed to any good purpole^ Fanatic teachers fprung up, and alTumed a variety of ftrange forms. It is not worth while to men- tion every fliort lived freak; but, taking all the time between the Reformation and the beginning of this eighteenth Century, there feem to be three leading ideas, befides our own, with regard to the niinifterial office:
One, that the authority to execute it was to come immediately from heaven. Another, that it was to be given by a Senate, or Council of Elders, or Prefbyters; both thefe allowed it to extend to feveral congregations; but the third idea waSy that church authority was of a confined nature, and belonged only to one fujgle cougrega- tion, the members of which conferred it by EleElion. — The firft was the idea of all forts of My/iics; of the Families, or Family^ of Love, in Queen Elizabeth's time; and afterwards of thofe My (lies who were called Seckers\ and of the fakers in the time of Oliver Cromwell. — The fecond was the idea of the Prefbyterians, before™ briefly men- tioned ; the third was the idea of the Independents, who looked upon each feparate Congregation as a feparate Church. The BroivnilW^, in the time of Queen Elizabeth, did not make a° church more extenfive; but thofe commonly called Indepen- dents
^ See .Art. vii. Szd.. j 11. but the Rcfonnatio Legum de Hasre- fibiis, Cap. 16. fhould heie be read. — borne held, that any who had a fmatteriiig of the fcriptures, (" qui facris literisutcunque funt afpeifi,") and laid they had the Spirit, miglit teach ai:y where, and j^ive Sutiaments, and oovern the Church ; no minif- ters being fettled in any fixed places: rriight minifter without any votarion, in>pofition of liaiids, or any acl of tliC Church.
' Baxter on Councils, page 471, Seft. x. — Alfo page 460,
•" ^cd. IV. " Art. vu.Scft. VI.
• Neal, \'oI. I. page 2 53.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. VI. I^y
dents made no figure till the time of our civil wars^ in the feventeenth Century. We are told, that they do not iniill upon Ordination, except for adminiftring the Sacraments^. — Impofttion of hands Teems to have been ufed by moft or all feds of Chriftians who praclifed Ordination ^ The Pref- byterians have two hay-elders for each preach- ing Minifter, in the impofition of hands, and in Synods: the Lutherans have Super hit endants (not unlike Bifhops) who perform that Office',
Sometimes Fanaticifm may confound or fufpend the obfervance of Rules : in the armies of Crom- well, both General and Soldiers' prayed and preached; but in every thing like a regular fo- ciety, 1 apprehend there is at bottom fome coni' mijjion for performing every minifterial office. — .Wherever I fee Order ^ I afcribe it to Rnle\ and order in a Society, to Authority. — If this be ri?-hr, thofe who pretend to have no rule, muft liave fome way of deceiving themfelves"; in common civilities people do things by Rule, which they can fancy are from the mere choice of the moment.
The Methodifts, I am told, reckon no Ordi- nation valid except that of our Bilhops ; thofe amongfl: them who have not been ordained and yet fometimes harangue, are faid only to give a
" word ? Veneer, page 523, kc. ^ Dr. Prieftley, Hilt. Corr. Vol. 2, page 64. ^ See Dr. Zach. Grey's Preface to Hudibras. Originally the liidependents do not ieem to have ordair.ed ; after their uniting with the FreiLyterians, they fometimes did, and'then they ufed Impofition of Hands.
^ Heylin's Preface, Seel. 23. ^ Neal 2, page 252.
■'' The Cluakers are mentioned Mofheim, Cent. 17. Sed. 2. Parti. Chap. 4, end, (or 8vo. Vol. ;;, page 44.) and their iilent meetings accounted for. -See alfo Book Jii, Chap. xiv. Sed. .XII. of this wonk,
158 BOOK IV. ART. XXIir. SECT. VII IX.
"word'' of Exhortation:" yet they feem to be diftinguilhcd in Tome way; and appearances are as if they were maintained.
VII. The rertlbn why uninterrupted fnccejfion'xs {o much valued, is, becaufe the incapacity of any one perfon who ordains, might be fuppofed, in ftridnefs, to invalidate, or vitiate, all fubfeqnent Ordinations. — On this principle fome American Bilhops have been confccrated in England, and their Confecration regulated by an Aft of Par- liament.
VIII. Dr. Priejiiey, in his addrcfs to the Methodifts, lately'' publifhed, prefixed to Mr. Wefley's Letters, advifes the Methodifts to form feparate Societies with whatever rules they think proper : and adds, *' Let any perfon whom you think qualilicd, teach and exhort others, whether he be in holy orders , as it is called, or not; and if they^ be qualified to teach, tlicy arc certainly qua- lified to adminifter all the ordinances of the Gof- pel, Baptifm and the Lord's Supper. I know of no exclufive right that any men, or body of men, have to this prlvilcoc^"
IX. It feems worth while, before we clofe our Hiftory, to obfervc, that in events which have relation to the doclrine of our prefent Article, there have happened many cafes of Neceffity.— Vv'hen people have been fick, or out of the reach of a place of Chriftian worlhip, or under perfecu- tion, or without tolerably good laws; inluch cafes,
things
^ Ads xiii. 15.— Heb. xiii. 22.
> Tiiis was written in 1 791.
^ The word " they"' fcems to mean the fame as " any per/on;''^ fometimes perhaps they is ufcd concerning a /ii^gle perfon when tJiey;^.v is not fpecj/ied. Whctlier Dr. PrielUey meant, by plural foliowijig finf^ular, to include, or i-.ot exclude, _/T'>w/z/^ Minillors, I will nut take upcm me to fay. The word "/-f" occurs jull before " //vfy." ' . -
* Paurxxix.
BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. X. XI. 159
things could not take their regular courfe j prac- tice could not correfpond to Theory. All that could be aimed at, muft have been, to come as near the Theory as poffible. — This kind of irregu- larity has happened fometimes with refpedt to Preaching, fometimes with refpedl to Baptifm, and the Lord's Supper : it has alfo affeded Ordination ., and Marriages.
Of a cafe of neceffity in preaching we have a remarkable inftance in the Converfion of Iberia to Chriliianity''. A female captive converted the King and Queen, who preached to their People, and converted them ; but then they fent to Con- ilantine for a Bifhop and Clergy as foon as they were able. — Or, not to go fo far for an inftance, I have known Chapels in the Diocefe of Chefter, ferved by perfons not ordained; fometimes, 1 think, ferving them before Ordination, was a con- dition of poffeffing them afterwards.
Origen, while a Layman, taught Divinity in the Catechetical Chair of Alexandria^ even in the prefence of his Bifhop , the thing was blamed, but not the preacher.
X. The cafes of neceffity in regard to Bap- tifm, may beft come under the twentv-feventh Axrticle : fuch as Baptifm by women, clinic Bap- tifm, &c.
And thofe relating to the Lord's Supper, under the twenty-eighth ; as facrament without the ufual elements; family-facraments, &c.
XI. We have already'' mentioned, that at the Retormation, foreign Divines, not being able to
get
^ Socrates, Hifi:. Ecclef. Theodoret, i. 24, &c.-» Forbes, 16. 6. SI . — Burnet on the Article, page 322, 8vo.
= Eufeb. Eccl. Hid. 6. 13. — Forbes, 16. 6. 22.—— Ileylin'r* Tradts, page 294.
•» Sea. IV.
l6o BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XII.
get ordained by Bifhops, applied to Prefbyteries. — It happened t'hac fome Englilh Divines were abroad at the time, and were obHged to have re- courfe to the fame expedient. Their ordinations were allo'.ved as vaiid% in King Edward's time; but in the latter end of Queen Elizabeth's reign legal difputes arofe whether they could claim tithes. Sec; and in the reign of James the Firil the vali- dity of fuch ordinations was denied^ — In 1644, when the Bithops declined ordaining any but thofe who were well inclined to King Charles the Firfl, the Aflembly of Divines^, took feveral fteps to have ordination performed without their afliftance; but it was only pro tempore^ ; there were then no Pref- byteries in England.
XII. Bingham fays', that Marriages were fo- Icmnized by the Chriftian Clergy for 300 years; but that the mixture of Heathens and Chriftians made many extraordinary cafes. The facerdotal Benediction got evaded, when the laws became Chrillian; becaufe they contained no injunftions to fupport it; polTibly Chriftians, before that time, wilhed rather, of themfelvcs, to have Chriftian than Heathen marriage.— But in the eighth and ninth Centuries, the original Chriftian marriages, by the Prieft, were revived. — Sir William Black- ftone" obferves, that the Intervention of the Prieft in the marriage-contra6t *' is merely juris pofitivi, and noi juris naturalis atit divirJ." " In the times of the grand rebellion, all marriages were per- \\ formed by the Juftices of the Peace; and tlicfe
marriages
« Neal I. 55. ^ Ncal r. 503, top.
8 Sec an account of tliis, Grey's Pref. to Hiidibras, page xxviii. *
*• Neal, Vol. 2, Index, Ordination.
* Antiquities 22. 4. 2, 3.
•' Vol. I. fee Index, Marriage. Marriage mScothvd is fiid. to be a civil contrad.
BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XIII. i6l
marriages were declared valid^^ by Aft of Parlia- ment after the Reftoration.
Our Church is againft* re- baptizing and re-or- daining. At Lavjanne a perfon who appears to be a Layman, reads the ten commandments, in the pulpit; as appears from the letter of a friend of mine written at Laufanne. Laymen have ufually read Lejjom in Cathedrals, and other places of worfliip.
XI 1 1 . Let us now proceed to our 'Explanation'^.
The title of this twenty-third Article, differs fomething from that of the correfponding one in 1552 : ours is, '* Of miniftering in the Cotigrega- tion^" that of 1552 is, " No man may minifter in the Congregation except he be called'' — The word " called" does occur in the body of our Article^ but it feems befl not to have a propojition in a Title, when it can be eafily avoided.
What is to be underflood by "miniftering,'' we were obliged to mention before we entered upon our Hiftory.
" In the Congregation,'' — of the word Congregation we fpoke under the nineteenth Article": here it
may
> Puller's Moderation of the Church of England, page 307.— At Iflington, I am told, a Popifh prieft, turned Proteffant, does duty, without any re-ordination. Confult Biogr. Britan.— Lifi
of Eramhall, Note (R), for an inftance of re-ofdination. in
my Parifh a woman, who had been baptized as a DifTenter, wanted me to re-baptize her in the Church, as an adult : I declined.
^ I fliould have thought it would have been better if the 2ad Art. had come after this, rather than before it: the order of the Cubjefts would then have been, 19. A Church. —20. Its Authority.— 21. A number of Churches ading together.—
22. Who hnsa right to miniller in a Church. 23. Of Popifh
Doflrines.— 24. Continuation of Popifli doftrines; of having public devotions in a language not known to the unlearned. There was^ probably fome good reafon for the prefent order, though i: does not occur to me.
" Art. xix.Sed. v.
VOL. IV. L ■
l62 BOOK IV. ART. XXTII. SECT. XIV.
may perhaps only have its moll iifual fenfe, of an JJfembly ; or it may be thus interpreted ; an whole Church', that is, as large a Ibciety of Chriftians as, in any fituation, aft together by a common under- flanding: or a feparate ^;;zi'/)', confidered as p^/Y of an whole church. But if Congregation betaken i;i tlie fame fenfe with E>t>cX»)(rt», that fenfe was alfo mentioned.— E>ty.A»fl-j« does indeed, in fcripture, though if fevcral times ftands for the whole church of Chrift, fometimes mean merely an Alfembly ; fomciimes a fmall one, fuch as would be contained in the houfe of a new" Convert. — Perhaps this ufe of the word 'E.n.xktQ^x^ might give rife to the congregational Churches of the Independents.
At the Hampton-Court conference before King James the Firft, in 1603, the Puritans defired that thefe words " in the Congregation^^* might bs omitted in this Article, *' as implying a liberty for men to preach out of the Congregation without a lawful call'P,"
XIV. " Public'" ("preaching/' &c.) — this mufc be oppofed to private (preaching, &c.)— fuch as reading a fermon to a family : or prefiding in family devotions.— Mai. iii. 16. — I apprehend, that teaching would be private in any aflembly not under ecclefiaftical authority ; though there might be o^ood reafons for not encouracrins; relisiious harangues to numerous companies who were not under fuch authority. What is ufually called private Bnptifm^ as oppofed to that which is per- formed in Churches publicly, is, properly, ad- minillered 'in a congregation'^, as is alfo the com- munion
° I Cor. xlv. 24.. — Rom. xvi. 5. — Col. iv. 15.— Veneer men- tions the Athenian Ex).'Xy;o-i«i, page 526.
P Neal's Hift. Puritans, Vol. 1^410. page 415.
"5 " Regard, we befeech thee, the ruppiications of thy Con- gregation." The prayer containinji thefc words muft, I
^ niouid
Book iv. art. xxiii. sect. xv. 163
munion of the fick; according to Matt, xvlii. 20. and TertuUian's maxim, " Ubi tres, Ecclefia'' eft."
XV. *' Called"^'' fenr—'' chofen and calledr " Called^'' — this is a word frequently ufed in Scripture-, it feems to be the old Enghih for in- vited: and it is ufed chiefly of mens being invited into the Chriftian religion. Such invitation, or calling, is often faid to come from God : but the meaning only is, that fo important an event as a man's being made a Chriftian, ought to be re- ferred to Divine Providence, though we cannot refer it with diftind ideas of the divine agency — Of this referring events to God, we fpake largely under the tenth and feventeenth Articles. — One called^ is fometimes only a name for a Chriftian ; as I Cor. vii. 17 — 21. and in the Parable (or Parables) of the marriage-fupper, the invitation denotes mens becoming Chriftians, when referred to the divine Government of the world. God may call by man, or by human authority. Here, called means, more particularly, invited into the Minijiry ; and in this fenfe it is ufed by St. Paul at the beginning of his Epiftle to the Romans, and of his firft to the Corinthians.
" Sent'' — is generally appropriated to Minijiers. Our Saviour is not fent but unto the loft Iheep of the houfe of Ifraei : (our Saviour's being fent, occurs a great number of times) — the Apojiles take the name of their office from being fent : and other minifters are diftinguiftied by their being faid to have a mijfion. — See Matt. x. 16.— xxiii. 37.—
Luke
fhould think, be one of die Collefts ufed at private Baptifm; as fandifying the water.
' Quoted by Veneer, page 527, ♦* from Tertullian's Exhor- tation to Challity," page 457.
L %
104 BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XVl.
Luke iv. 26.— xxli. 35. — John xx. 21. — A6ls xllf. 4. — Rom. x. 15.— I Cor. i. 17.— Some notice alfo (hoLild be taken of the pafTages which com- pare minifters to labourers^ Matt. ix. 38. and xxi. 34. Thefc paffages were all in the minds of our reformers when they iifed the word '■^ fenty
Chofen and' called" — when fpoken of together, in fcripture, ufually feem to mean different Jlcps in admifilon to Chriftianity : Calling is the firil propofal, and chufmg the final appointment : fome begin the negotiation, but do not complete it : or, m.ore begin it than complete it ; or, in the fcripture flile of comparifon j ^^ many are called, but/>w are chofen."
The word chofen, as well as called, is fometimcs tjfed with relation to the Miniftry : — lee Ads i. 24. — ix. 15. — xxii. 1 4. — 2 Tim. ii. 4 — but there is a variety of exprcffions for the lame thing; ordained, r.ppointed, feparated, &c. it might be ufcful to fee the marginal references. Acts ix. 15.— When chofen relates to the Miniftry, it feems to be Ibmething prior to called ; but more commonly /)(3/?d'r/(?;- ; one old edition of the Articles h3.sfent, called, chofen: (lee Bennet's Collation, page 87).
From this interpretation of the expreflions of Scripture it appears, that being called to the Minillry, does not imply anything of fuch im- mediate comnnunication with heaven that we muft be lenfible of it at the time : does not imply any luch thing as the Infpiration of the myftics; who feem to miftake the meaning of fuch expreflions.
XVI. lean fee one difficulty ; it may perhaps be afked how thole who propofe themfelves for orders, can be faid to be called^ When a man propofes himfelf, he only declares, that if he is
appointed,
^ Called, Art. xvii. Se^t. xnv. — Cliofcn, Art, xvii.
SC(^. XL.
BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XVI. l6^
appointed, he will accept the appointment : and the nature of human affairs make this mode necef- far3\ Though it might be the moft perfedt method, if perfons in authorit)^ did keep fo exa(5l an account of the charadlers of all men, that they could adtually invite to the Miniftry all thofe who vyere likely to do the moft good in it ; yet if we fpeak with relation to the prefent imperfed ftate of things, we muft fay, that no ecclefiaftical mao;if- trate can know of all who would accept the office of minifter J and this method is as inconfiftent with felf-ordering, as any * other.
Calling means inviting; now inviting ones felf to the houfe of a friend, does not deftroy the elFence of his invitation; though the form may be a little changed. But, what is moft to the purpofe, thofe of whom it is faid in fcripture that they were called, did generally, no doubt, propofe tliemfelves for Baptifm. At leaft, any one who had propofed himfelf, and had been baptized, would have been fpoken of, on looking back upon
the
' The Puritans, In Synods, determined, that no one Ihould ofFer himfelf for Orders; every one {hould be really calledhy feme Congregation.
Neal I , page 2.3 r.— — See alfo Latimer's Sermon on St. An- drew ; Vol. I, page 160, 8vo. where there are feme good things on Patrons calling proper Minifters; but his advice to men not to become Minillers except they be called, might perplex a modeft man, or encourage an enthufiaft. Yet he does not feem to mean more than that no one Ihould take orders from views of mere worldly advantage; or from pride, vanity, &c. for he fpeaks of that as a man's vocation to which he has been regularly ♦' brought up." If therefore a young man were to fix upon the Miniltry as his Profeffion, and go througli a courfe of Education fuited to make him fit for it; or was to be invited into the Church by a pious patron, he would, I (hould imagine, come under Bifhop Latimer's notion of one called. •^Korah, See. Numb. xvi. were uncalled ; or impious xA' {riders.
l66 BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XVII — XIX.
the whole of the tranfadlion, as called-^ that is, called by the Providence of God, ufing what means icemcd bed to his infinite vvifdom.
Baxter, at the end of his Hiftory of Councils, enumerates fome particular adls of the Government of God in calling Minifters.
XVII. " By meji" — that is by men immediately, the call may be referred to God, as has been feen. A minifter is lawfully appointed, though without fupernatural powers ; without being injpiredy (o that he can be immediately fenfible of the infpiration ; without having a power of working Miracles ; — and yet fo called, he may be called of God"".
I fuppofe the minifters of our Church have had it objedled to them, that they are not true minif- ters, becaufe they have not the Spirit : and becaufe they work no miracles.
XVII T. '"^ V/ho have public authority given unto them in the congregation'''' — this feems to leave the manner of giving the power of ordaining, quite free : it feems as if any religious fociety might, confiftently with this Article, appoint officers, with power of ordination, by eledion, reprefentation, or lot ; as if, therefore, the right tO ordain did not depend upon any uninterruptedyr^^r^o;;''.
XIX. " T^he Lord's Vineyard''^ — this expreffion does not feem to be ufed merely for ornament ; but becaufe the Church of God is fo frequently called the Lord's vineyard in fcripture; indeed the fimilitude is fo much dwelt upon, that there feems ground for reajoning from it, and even deriving
rules
" Not feeing this has occafioned a wrong notion of the whole aftair of Church-authority, amongft the Prelbyterians : its that notion defcribed by Dr. Balguy, Ser. 7, page 114 and 116. retcning to page 15, bottom. — See alfo before, .Art. xx. end of Sed. ii.— And Baxter on Councils, page 471, 472. Objedion 10. ^ 12.
' ticc I'oibcs, 16. 6.— Eilhop Home as before, Se6t. iv.
BQOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XX— XXII. 167
ndes for pra6tice. The Jews were once the Church of God; and Chriftians are'' fo now. — Coniblt Pfalm Jxxx. 8—16. — Cant. viii. 12. — If. v. 1—7.
— Matt. XX. I — t6. — Matr. xxi. 33—41. — The Pfahn may relate properly to the Jewifli Church; the Prophecy to the Jewhli Church pri- marily, or perhaps to the Church of God in general : Matt. xx. to both Jewilh and Chriftian.
— Matr. xxi. to Chriftian only.
XX. This Article is not to be fuppofed to make any rules or laws, or any provifion for cafes of necejfity. They make provifion for themielves \ Neceffity has no Law.
XXI. We now come to our Vroof.
I do not fee that there need be more than one propofition.
XXII. * It is not right to minifter in any re- ligious fociety, without an appointment from tliat fociety^.'
This muft be proved from Scripture, though really fcripture only fpeaks, as it were, incidentally; taking for granted that religious fociety cannot be carried on in any rational or cffedual way, without an appointment of minifters.
With regard to the old Teftament, there can be no doubt but Priefts and Levites, and prophets were diftinguiflied from other men : and ievere punifliment inflided when this diftindion was invaded: fee Numb. xvi. Punifliments were of
courfe
y Taylor on Romans, Key, No. i^^. 133.
* There might be another proporuion, affirming, that ordi- ;iatIon may be valid, without the intervention (as fai- as wa can difcern) of any thing fupernatiiral. But as ideas of fuperna- tural powers being given to Minifters, have arifen from a wrong interpretation of thofe texts, which fpeak of the Agency of God, and of referring events to his Agency, and as the meaning of thofe pa/Tage; has been explained, a fecond propo« fjtion feems needlefs.
L 4
100 BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXII.
coLirfe fupernatural where the Government was fo. I will therefore only bring paffagcs from the new teflamcnt, and that in the order ia which they now (land.
The tenth chapter of St. Matdiew fliould be read entire, and ftudied by every one, who c'/ciicr propofes to be a minifter, or is called upon to appoint others.
See next, Matt. xxiv. 45. — xxviii. 18, &c.
Johniii. 27. — x. 16.— xxi. 15, &c.
Ads i. 22.— viii. 17. — x. 3 — 5. — But Afts xiii. ?. the folemn^ feparation of St. Paul, muft ftrike as fomething extraordinary, after his miraculous converfion before related, namely, in Chap. ix. A.ny one properly attentive, fixing his thoughts on this, Vkould naturally exclaim, ' it was not enough, then, to authorize Paul to go and preach the word, that he had been ftruck blind by the immediate and fupernatural power of God ! that the general defign of divine Providence, in teaching men a new religion, had been exprefsly communicated to him by a voice from Heaven ! that Ananias had been fent to him, as to a chofen veffel unto God, to bear his " name before the Gentiles, and Kings, ^nd the children of Ifrael," to deliver him from a blindnefs of three days ! — this chofen veflel muft ftill be confecrated '-'■by men\'' men muft faft and pray over him, and lay their hands upon him, before he could be a legitimate preacher of the holy Gofpel! — nay, that very perfon muft be thus commiffioned by the inftrumentality of qien, vvho could fay of himfelf with more propriety than any other minifter of the Gofpel, that he was "an Apoftle not of men, neither by man." (Gal. i. i.)'
We
' IIow inconfiftent is all this with Socinus's notion and Dr. Prieftley's that any man may minifter! This inconfiftcncy ftiould be mark'-d new and then, in going through thefe texts.
BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXII. 169
We fliould alfo confuk Ads xiv. 23. and xx. 28, 29. where thofe meafures muft be fuppofed to be enjoined, which are neceffary to defend the flock from wolves : an end not to be anrwered without authority.
Rom. X. 13, &c. has been mentioned in the explanation : as have feveral texts which are to our prefent purpole.
1 Cor. iv. I, 2. Stewards are not felf-appointed. Chap. xii. 16. 19. 27. 29, 30. — Chap. xiv. in
general, but the laft verfe feems of itfelf fuffi- eient.
2 Cor. V. 20. — Eph. vi. 20. (" in bonds'*^) — A-n- hajfadors are not felf-appointed.
Eph. iv. II. — 1 Tim. iii. i. — 2 Tim. ii. 2. — Titus i. 5. — Heb. v. 4, 5, &c. and 12.— -Heb. xiii. 17. compare with ver. 7.
One might alfo venture to bring as Proof, fome conliderations from the nature of cultivating a 'vineyard. AH cannot prefide, and dired: ; all can- not do the nicer parts of the work ; fome mufl dig, and do the more ordinary offices, and follow the inftruftions of others. — This muft be the cafe even if the Lord was prefent; but when he is away, he muft neceifarily have officers to reprefent him, and enforce his authority''.
With regard to reajoning on this (ubjed, Dr. Balguy's two Confecration Sermons are fo perfedt, without any fuperfluity, that I need only recom- mend them to your perufal. If you chufe a fpe- cimen, I v^ill take one from the" latter fermon. — Certainly, if minifters be felf- ordained, modeft merit will never be called forth ; prelumptuous vanity will be ever ready to obtrude itfelf ; noify ignorance will overpower diffident wifdom : and
what
•» Matt. xxlv. 45.
«= Dr. Balguy, Ser. 7, page 122. *• On the other hand," &c»
lyO BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXIII. XXIV.
what will hinder vicious men from rifing into power ; efpecially if any confiderahlc emoluments are annexed to the Miniftry r — Nay, what can hinder dodtrines oppofite to each other from being taught ; to the utter extirpation of all religious principle ? What can hinder different men from officiating in fuch different ways, as to produce difturbance and confiifion, and put to flight all religious affedion? And how can it be brought about, that certain appearances, modes of drefs and behaviour, fhall be fo aflbciated with piety and virtue, as inftantly to produce good feelings'* in the mind? — Befides, the learning requifite to make a man a good miniftercf Religion, requires, that the Miniftry ihould be made a fcparate Pro- feffion. How much the opinions of that profeflion fhould weigh with the People has been fliewn in the Jecond Book.
xxiii. I will here reft my direct proof : fome little indireSi (cems proper under this Article.
XXIV. Sodnus" produces JcJs viii. 4. and xi. 19. as proofs, that men could preach in the time of the Apoftles without being ordained ; nay, preach with fuccefs. But thofe who, in thofe paffiges, are mentioned as being difperfed by perfecution, and as going into foreign countries, might be only on the footing of the captive^ in Iberia, or of the Ifraelitifli niaid, that attended^ on the wife of 'Naaman : — they being themfelves members of re- vealed religion, could not but recount, in conver-, fation, (xaX«yT£?'', Ads xi. 19.) the wonders be^
longing
„ ^ No ft.ige-pla\'ers ufed to be allowed to become minifters ; Bingham, 4. 4. 7.
*= Opera, Vol. i, page 3S3. — See Se£l. v, of this Art.
*" Seft. V, i z Kings v, 2.
•* The word Ads viii. 4. and A£ls xi. 20. is ivxfyi>^i^u, to \d\ the good news of j iva[-/0.i^i\v ihi-j'^t-^ix^, viKr.i, SiC. to teH
the
BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXV. iy|
longing to it; and might very well be fuppofed to make converts. — Not but Tome of the difperfed might have received a regular commijjion to preach; the paflages contain nothing to the contrary : at all tin:ie5 there have been many converts made by private conference ; fom'etimes by minifters, fome- times by private perfons : this cafe of fpreading the tidings of Chriftianity during difperlion, occa- iioned by perfecution, does not feem to come up to that of publk preaching in a regular Chriftian congregation.
XXV. Afecond objeftion may be this;
Many of the texts quoted in the Proof jufl now given, relate to the appointments of the Jirji teachers of the Gofpel, who had miraculous powers committed to them. Such teachers muft be li- mited, as to their number, and commiffion.
I fhould anfvver, that no texts of fcripture are proofs, but after fome kind of parity of reafoning; as was mentioned feveral times under the twenty- fecond Article, and proved in the eleventh Chapter of the firflBook: difference of circumfiiancesmxull be attended to. Let then the texts be read over with this view ; let a reafonable man fee how many things there are in them not peculiar to teachers endued with miraculous powers. How' many things, which would have been faid had it pleafed God to truft the reception of Chriftianity to rea- foning only ; or to prophecies, and fuch proofs as we now poflefs.
Baxter (on Councils, page 465) fpeaks of tzvo forts of Minifters— i . to teach men new doclrine, and
2. fianding
the good news of Liberty, Viftory, &c. (fee Parkhurll's Lexi- con).—Hence an Evangelijl (2 Tim.iv. 5.) may beany perfon, Biftop, Deacon, or Layman, employed to ad; as a Mijponary, where Chriftianity was yet iinkmzvn; ivafyeXi^etv Xoyov, or Xgjfov, to tell t/ie good news, of the fFord, ovot Chrilt; any one might do that.
lyZ BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXVI.
z.Jianding do6lrine : but there are as many texts as ieein natural, circum (lances confidered, implying a fuccclTion of minitlcrs having no miraculous powers. I Tim. v. 22. — Tit. i. 5.— i Pet. v. 2. — Heb. xiii. as before : nor can we conceive Matt, xxviii. 18. or John xxi. 15, he. to be temporary; or Afts XX. 28.— Paul's reparation Ads xiii. 2. feems a precedent for after times ; his miraculous powers, and immediate revelation might have fuf- ficed for him. — John x. 16. looks to after times. ■ — Rom. X. 13, &c. is not reftrained in its fenfe by times. — Nor is i Cor. xiv. 40. — The Fathers rea- ibncci on fcripture thus. — See Heylin, page 242. SeA. 13. .
XXVI. I will next take fome notice;, of what has been quoted from Dr. rriefiley. To m\it feems confufed, and inconfiftent with itfelf. — Confufed^ as not fhewing in what charader the Methodifls are addreiTcd. Are they addrefled as DifTentcrs, or as members of the eflablifhed Church ? if as Dlffenters, and they will acknowledge themfelves to be fuch, I fee no great difficulty ; let them follow his advice; let them appoint perfons to preach and give the Sacraments, in the way they think beft; and may fuccefs attend them! may virtue and piety be the refult ! they do nothing inconfiftent with our a^rticle : fuch perfons are not felf-ordered. Who knows too but in appointing they may ufc prayer, and impolition of hands ? — But if they infifl that they are members of the Eftablifhed Church of England, then they perhaps may be addrefled as fuch by Dr. Prieftley :-— and can members of any fociety be rightly perfuaded to violate the Laivs of that fociety ? for " the lef^al defignation of particular perfons to thefe offices" (the facred offices of religion) " cannot but
piean^^
BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXVI. ij^
mean, if it means anything, tliat all who are not appointed, are' excluded."
Perhaps the main purport of Dr. Prieflley's advice may be to induce the Methodifts to carry the matter o'l exhortation farther than they do; or fhall thofe who exhort, Zidm\m?itv facraments ? this mioht occafion a greater diflindion or diftance between the Methodifts and the Church of Eng- land than at prefent fubfifts; but that end we muft not fuppofe to be the end particularly defired : and I fee no good purpofe which it could anfwer to religion in general. The Methodifts in Eng- land do not feem to be any way reftrained in their exhorting; and they are not, that I ever heard, in want of a greater number of Minifters than they already poffefs, for the adminiftration of the Sacraments.
The paflage before us appears to me not only to be exceptionable on account of its confounding fituations, but on account of the inconjijlency of its different parts; as I underftand them. Dr. Prieftley firft fays, " let any perfon whom you think qualified, teach, exhort, and adminifter Sacraments :" and afterwards declares (as I under- ftand, for the expreffion is not totally free from ambiguity) that no fet of men have an '* exclu- live right" to teach, exhort and adminifter lacra- ment; but if certain men were appointed by the methodifts, in preference to others, to perform thefc offices, would not they have an excluf.ve right to perform them? — furely it cannot be faid, that Dr. Prieftley does not advife the Methodifts to appoint : the word appoint is ,not ufed, but Ibme perfons are fpoken of as " qualified" in fuch a manner as to imply that others are dij quali- fied j and who are qualified or difqualified,. the
Methodifts * Dr. Balguy, page 122.-
174 KOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXVII. XXVIII,
Methodifts are to determine; is not this, in fub- fiance, appointing? Nor will it, I hope, be urged, that minifters fo appointed have no exclufive right to preach, &c. becaufe they cannot exclude other minifters; thej'- exclude all thofe from whom they are diftinguifhed and feparatcd ; which is all that can be meant. No Papift would fay, that ordi- nation, even in his Church, gives fuch an exclufive light of miniftering, that no one can lawfully minifter in aTurkilh mofque. — But enough.
XXVII. I here put an end to our Proof, direft and indircd; and proceed to the Application.
It may not perhaps be amifs here to take a lliort form of alFent.
' It is contrary to fcripture, and to reafon, that any man ihould act as a Minifter in an ecclefiafti- cal fociety, merely from his own choice : he ought to be appointed. And though it may become him devoutly to refer his appointment to the Provi- dence of Gody he is to a5l upon it as an ordinance of Man-y and to conlider himfelf as receiving it immediately from thofe, who are vefted with autho- rity for conferring it, by the religious Society to which he belongs.'
XXV III. There feems alfo room for a few words on the fub]e6t of mutual conccjjions.
Though what has been laid down about the ap- pointment of Minifters, is very tnie^ yet it has not an invariable force in all cafes. Let us take two extremes. In a large monarchy, with various ranks of men, if there be a church eftabliftied, felf-ordering, in fuch a church, would be greatly inconvenient and hurtful ; for the Church would be a large body as well as the State; and every large body requires a great number of fubordina- tions to reduce it to unity in action ; and when there arc many ranks of citizens, nice rules are
wanted
BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXVIII, lytf
wanted in order that each rank may feel die in- fluence of Religion, by means of the Miniftry. Ambition and intereft too, in the cafe fuppofed, offer flrong temptations to worldly men to pufli themfelves into the facred orders.
But take the other extreme, and much fewer rules and appointments are wanted. As in fmall feled companies, and focieties, you fometimes fee every one know his place, the moll accomplifhed take the lead, and things rightly conduded, by a mere feeling of propriety; fo can one almoll con- ceive it poffible for a fmall religious fociety to pro- ceed, if compofed of men unafFededly pious, and aiming at the general good. Perhaps a ftate of perfecution is moil likely to occafion fuch a fociety, efpecially if the people perfecuted, are, like the Wddenfes, of great limplicity of manners. Yet this, I fear, is rather too Utopian : Religious af- fedions want much regulation; and that is not always fufpeded ; fo that men are run away with, before they are aware : the pride of teaching reli- gion, fets fome men upon teaching it before they are duly qualified; while the habitually modeft want drawing out, and compelling to fliew them- felves, by a judgment fuperior to their own. Or- dinarily then, in pradice, no religious fociety ought perhaps to be left without fome regulations deter- mining who (hall teach and prefide in it; but yet the nearer any fociety approaches to this extreme, the fewer rules it need be reftrained by. In all intermediate cafes, more rules will be neceflary than in this extreme, and fewer than in the other; and as you approach to the other, before-m.en- tioned, regulations, fuch as are really wanted, will continually be found more numerous and com- plicated.
As to thofe who- infill upon it, that all teaching
ought
I^S BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXIX.
ought to be giiided by immediate and fenfible in- fpiration, we can only leave them to their own" feelings, if what has been faid is ineffeiftual.
XXIX. If we conclude with any hint refpecling Improvement^ we may fay, that a right agreement, and a ready perception about the nature of cafes of Necejfity, and the duties arifing from them, might be of confiderable ufe, in a fubjecl where they fo often occur. When men ad irregularly through neceflity, we excufe the paft, but expect regularity in future; the return to regularity is to be with as little delay as poffible; and reftitution and com- penfation are to be made as far as ability reaches.
It would alfo be very ufeful for men to know habitually, and feel familiarly, as it were, how in- ftitutions may be afcribed to the Providence of God, without their being lefs conlidered as the or- dinances of man on that account.
^ See Dr. Balgiiy, page il6; referred to before. Art. xv. near cndt
ARTICLE
BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. I. l']^
ARTICLE XXIV.
OF SPEAKING IN THE CONGREGATION IN SUCH A TONGUE AS THE PEOPLE UNDERSTANDETH.
IT is a thing plainly repugnant to the Word of God, and 'the cuftom of the Primitive Church, tohavepublick Prayer in the Church, or to minifter the Sacraments in a tongue not underftanded of the people.
1 . The principal part of the HiJIory of this Article, comes into a fmall compafs. The Church of Chrift got divided, as to the part which we are mod concerned with, into Eqftern and fVeJierUi or into Greek and Latin : Conjlantinople being the capital of the Eaftern empire, became the capital of the Greek Church : and fo Rome of the Latin Church. Liturgies muft of courfe be made in Greek for one country, and in Latin for the other. In both parts of the world, fuch Liturgies would fpreadi they would alfo become venerated and facred; on that account they would be continued, and perfifled in, even when they became unintel- ligible to the common people. To change them would have been to alter *' the univerfal* order of God's Church." The ignorance of the people, and their fuperftition, made barbarous devotions
not * Rhemifts on i Cor. xiv.
VOL. IV. M
1^8 BOOK IV. ART. XXIV, SECT. I,
not unacceptable to them j the abufe was carried on till it was checked, in the weftern church, by the Reformation''.
This is the chief part of our Hiftory; but it may be proper to mention a few more fads which have fome relation to the fubjed of forms of devo- tion in words not commonly underftood.
There feem to have been myftical cannina in many ages. — Magicum carmen: — Magorum Carmina. — Clemens Alexandrinus, Strom, i. mentions fome Heathens, " who thought thofe prayers mod effedual, which were uttered in a barbarous language." (Comber's Advice, page 82,
One Elxaij a leader ot a Chrlftian (cdi in early times, is faid to have ordered liis followers to ufe an unintelligible prayer. We have the words in Epiphanius's nineteenth Hcrefy : as Epiphanius did not underftand them, xve may conceive it pof- fible, that they were not underllood by thofe who ufcd' them.
The Jews fpoke Syriac and Greek, in common converfation, when they ufcd pure Hebrew in their Synagogues'^. It has been thought, that the ear- lieft Chriftian Liturgies were in Hebrew. (See Brerewood, chap. 26. page 185.)
The Copts^ or Chriftians in ^gypt, have fer- vice in the old Egyptian, or Coptic^ though even the Pricfts themfclves underftand very imperfedly what they pronounce. Arabic is, as I liave been
informed,
•> By what degrees t)ie Latin ceafed to be a vulgar tongue in Italy, Gaul, &:c. how far by incurfions of barbarous nations, how far by other caufes, is a difHcult fiibjt-d. Sonietliing upon it may be found in Brere-.oooH^s Enquiry, Chap. 2. 4. ^. — And in U/iitr, ca.p. 4. — .'ind Wharton's addition, c;ip. .<.
' See Lardner's woiks. Vol. 9. page 514.
^ See Locke's Note on i Cor, xiv. 4, page 129, quarto.
BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT I. 179-
informed, the language commonly ' ufed in ^gypt fince thefixteenth Century.
Many Greek Chriftians do not pray in the Greek which they commonly talk, but in pure Greek ^: and this, in all their Monafteries, though in Africa. The Romani/is allow the propriety ^ of pure Greek when ufed; and they do not objedl to Hebrew\
The Rujfians are did to ufe the Sdavonian^ (which is fpoken of as an extenfive or general lan- guage) in their places of worfhip\ — And the Mohammedans Arabic; where it is not the verna- cular tongue.
Notwithftanding thefe inftances, it does not appear, that in the Chriftian Church there was any notion of prayers in an unknown tongue, as a thing fettled and defended, for 600 or 800, or perhaps 900 years. Bingham fays' 1000 ; but mufh not Latin, &c. have ceafed to be vernacular in lefs than 1000 years?
There is a famous pafTage in Origen's work againft Celfus*', in which he replies to an objeclion
made
■^ Book I. Chap. ix. SeiSl. v. But Brerewood thinks, that the Coptic prayers are in Syriac, or in a fecond fort of Chaldee.
^ So, I think, Ricaut fays. See Veneer, page 634, and
Brerewood, page 196, bottom.
s Fulke on Khem. Teft. fol. 294.
'^ The Engliih Chaplain at St. Peterfburgh informed a friend of mine in 1790, that the common people underftand this Sclavonian, but imperfedly.
Brerewood fpeaks of Ruffian, as a dialed of Sclavonian, page 200 : he fays too, that i;ciavonian is the vulgar tongue of more than one third of Europe; that fixty nations fpeak it. .
* See Fulke on i Cor. xiv. in Rhem. Teft. Seft. 8. and 15. — Brerewood, Chap. 26, page 185. and Bingham, Book 13. Chap 4. Se6l. i .
^ Orig. contra Cel. Lib. 8. 13. The God of all languages hears men pray in all languages, as with one voice. — Ben/ieton this Article has this paffage : (that i?, in his DireBions^ &c.J For Valentinians fee Appeadix to the firft Book, bed. x v i n.
M 2
l8o BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. I.
made to the Chriftians, as if they addrelTed Angels hy barbarous names, and thought their prayers would have no effect if they did not : this might be true of Valentinians, &c. but in clearing Chrif- tians in general, he fays, ' O TO-a<r»if SixhtKTH xuciof tuv
Here I will read a paflage from our Homily on Common Prayer and Sacraments, (page 279, 280, oflavo.)
In Jeroni's^ works we have an account of the funeral of his Difciple Paulay a Roman Macron : multitudes from the cities of Palefline attended it : In order that every one might have a clear under- ftanding of fome part at leaft of the Service, Pfalms were fung in four different languages; Hebrew, Syriac, Greek, Latin''-'. Dr. Fuike gives a pretty tranflation of a paffage in the Epitaphium iSIepotiani, ending with, " the favage nature ot the ^^j"," " have now broken their harfli language into the fwcet fong of Chrift."
It appears, that Latin was fpoken by ordinary people in Africa, in the time of Augufiin-y he fayb» that he learnt it by hearing his Nurfes" talk it; and that he fometimcs uled expreffions, as did other perfons, which were rather vulgar, in order to fuit himfelf to the more ordinary people'' : thefe expreffions muff Ix- ia J^aiin.
Pope
' T. 4. Ed. Ben. Epitaphium, ad Eultochiuri); Eudochium was the daughter of Pau!;i : fee Fulke 011 Rhem. Teil. i Cor. xiv. Seft. 8. The Roman Paula, of noble birth, had left Rome, and travelled into Palelline, kc. where (he had founded Monafteries, I've, there (he died
"» The word Hehre^i) is not in all the MSS.
" Ad Heliodorum, Tom. 4. Edit. Bened. Heliodorus was
the Uncle, I think, of Neporianus. — Bejji, in Thrace; to the S. of the moH foutliern part of the Danube.
° ConfeflT. 1. 14. mentioned by Fulke on i Cor. .\iv. Se^. 14. Rhem. Teft.
f A\:ig. in Pfal. 123. 128. Et de Doft. Chrill. 2. n-— -
Fulkr
BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. I. l8l
Pope Leo III. however, as alfo a Pope Bene- dicts ordered, that the Nicene Creed Ihould be ufed in Greek, even in the Latin Church £ during public worihip : left to revov rrf <J'i«AejcT» fliould crive occafion to fome blafpkemy. — To rtvov, &c. is tranllated (by Unier% 1 luppo'fe,) " idiomatis an- giijlia ;" the Greek account of this matter is from a fragment of Phoim. — M all times, probably, one great reafon for not ufing the Vulgar Tongue, has been the fear of Profanation.
Cave' mentions that Pope John VIIL whom he places in 872, did, in the year 880, when the Moravians were converted, allow them " facra peragere lingua vernacula;" that is, in the Scia- von i an.
Innocent III. (the depofer of King John of England) held a Council of Lateran, (that is, in a Church dedicated to St. John at Rom-e, and called Lateran, from the Palace' on whofe fcite it (lands) in 1215. Apart of Chap, ninth of the Afts of this Council, is translated by Dr. Fiilke";
in
Fulke ibidem. Here might be mentioned Jujiinian ; placed by Gave A D. 527; (but the Ncvellce conititutiones after 535.) who ordered "Priefts to fpeak fo as to be heard and underftood, Novell, 137, cap. 6. (page 682 of Corpus^, 8vo. Tom. 2.) this mentioned by Fox, page 9. Martyrology (or Afls and Monu- ments,) and in our Hornily on Common Prayer and Sacraments; and in Bingham.
1 Benedia the third, I fuppofe; though there were feveral fhort- lived Popes between Leo and him.
' See Ulher, de Symbolis, page 25.
' Hift. Lit. T. 2. page 61, or Index, Joannes VIII. Papa. But Dr. Fulke gives this to Pope Nicholas I. (him Cave places in 858,) Rhem. Teft. on 1 Cor. xiv. Seft. 8. — -He does not fay Moravuiyis, but Scahonians. Burnet alio mentions the fad.
' Chambers fays, in his Diftionary, Lateran w^s firft the name of a Man, then of the Palace where he lived ; then of the Church, Sec. built from that Palace.
" On Rhem. TeA. on 1 Cor. xiv. Sed. 8.
^^ 3
l82 BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. I.
in which it is ordered, that in thofe places where men of different nations mix, proper perfons fliould be provided to celebrate divine fervice in their (.Wi- {event /anguages, and according to their '^ different ceremonies. Yet this fame Pppe oppofed the people of Metz (Metenfes) about their having the Scriptures in their Vulgar Tongue ; but not in any Council : In this Council of Lateran, Cave fays, there were many Orators from foreign Courts.
It feems as if the Schoolmen might be reckoned amongft the adverfaries to Prayers in an unknown tongue. Archbifliop Ufher (de Scrip, et Sacris vernaculis, page 235,) has fomeching to the pur- .pofe. Thomas Aquinas owns, that, prayers were in the vulgar tongue in the time of Chrift. I fee alfo, he fays, that though Chrifl could have Ipokcn different languages, he (poke only one; becaufe he fpoke only to one nation. Dr. Comber tells us, that Gabriel Biel pleads {Irongly for having prayers in a known tongue. (Advice, &c. page 84.)
The authors of the Rhemilh Teftament fliew no referve in defending the ufe of prayers, &c. in Latin ; I mean, by thofe who do not underlland it : they ufe many arguments in favour of their opinion ; fuch of thofe arguments as feem to have any weight, may be examined by and by. — We have in the margin, " The Peoples'' devotion nothing the leffe for praying in Latinc."— And, *' It is not neceffarie tounderftand ourprayers^"
The Council of Trent is more guarded; it orders frequent explanations'' to be made by the Paftors, of what is ii\id at Mais ; thefe arc to be made
on
'^ Brcrewood mentions this, page 1 S9.
y On I Cor. xiv. Fulke's Sett. 1 3 and 1 4.
* Here one might read Sir Edwin Sandys's Speculum Europe, page 7. » SefT. 22. Cap. 8. — Alfo Canon 9.
BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. I, 183
on Sundays and Holidays : — And that, left the Jfieep of Chrift fhould be hungr}', and the babei want bread. — Yet thofe are anathematized who fay, that Mafs ought to be celebrated only in the vulgar tongue.
Duphi " allows that divine fervice may be per- formed in the vulgar tongue, where that is cufto- mary'':" yet he " excufes the Latin and Greek Churches for pieferving their ancient language;" — <■ and " alledges, that great care has been taken that every thing be underflood by tranjlatmis.*"
We may laftly mention colledtively fome emi- nent Romanifts who favoured our opinion :
Cardinal Cajetan, who died 1534, and Nicholas of Lyra, who died 1340, go fb far as to prefer prayers in the vulgar tongue, as Comber men- tions'. Gabriel Biel was fpoken of juft now as being of the fame way of thinking. More may be feen \^ U(her de Scripturis et Sacris vernaculis, cap. 10^.
Brerewood alfo would furniih more inftances of different languages amongft Chriflians ; but thefe may be fufficient ; fo here I clofe my Hiflory.
1 1 . The Explanation need not be long.
The difference between our prefent Article and
the
•* Mofheim, Appendix, as before.
' Comber's Advice, page 84. See alfo Veneer, page 63^,
•who mentions Mercer the lamous HebvailL In the prelent age the celebrated Financier Necker wifties his Church would give up the ufe of unknown tongues in public Devotions.
«* By Wharton, '690, 4to. this feems to contain a great deal of learning, but more about the people's reading the Scriptures, than about Sacra being vernacula, in ancient times. Cap. 8.
Se(5l. 4. page 235. is the paffage lately referred to Bingham,
13. 4. gives the title of this Book more fully; Hiftoria Dog-
matica, &c. He has alfo, I perceive, feveral of the faine
inftances^ which have been here made ufe of.
M 4
184 BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. II.
the correfponding one of 1552, is fo didinflly marked out by Bilhop Burnet, that I refer to him.
The word " Speaking," in the title, is explained in the body of the Article, to mean praying and adminiftering Sacraments; preaching is not men- tioned, becaufe, I fnppofe, Sermons are every where in the vernacular language : they are fo in France^ and, I doubt not, the cafe is the fame in other" catholic countries.
" Piiblic prayer"— fo that here is nothing of private prayer; — this however is fpokcn of as being fometimes in an unknown tongue, (unknown to him who prays) as well as public : by the Rhemiftc', and in our Homily^ ** Of common-prayer and facraments." — Private prayer in any tongue under- flood by him who prays, is allowed in the fecond Preface to our Prayer-books.
Topics of reafon and utility are omitted in our Article, but they are ufed in our Homily : — and rightly : efpecially as fcripture could not treat the precife queftion before us.
" A tongue not underftanded of the people," includes, in the reafon of the thing, a voice that is not audible. — I believe it is common in the Roman fervice for the Priefts to perform Maflcs in fuch a voice : thefe may be what are called private Maffes : — the French Diftionary of the Academy calls this fort " bajfc mefle\"
I know
' SirF.dw. Sandys, fpeaking of the Roman religion in gene- ral, oiipofes the Sermons to the Service, when he calls the
latter '^ -xLampe put oa/," &:c. page 8. S',)eculiim Europa*
And it is implied in the direAions to Pallors given by the Council of Trent, jiift now mentioned, that the explanations which they arc to give, muft be in the vulgar tongue.
f I Cor.xiv. Sedl 13. (Fulke). e Page 277, 8vo.
•^ In the 9th Canon, lately mentioned, of the 22d Seflion of the Council of Trent, thofe arc .inathematizeJ, whocond-nm the rite of the Romifli Church, quo fummilTa voce pars canoras et verba confecrationis proferuntiir.
BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. II 1S5
I know not whether the meaning of the words *' primithe Church" is quite agreed upon. Ben- net, in his direftions, gives the above-mentioned paffage of Origen as a proof, that the primitive church allowed the ufe of different languages : but, literally and properly, the primitive church fliould mean the firji church ; or the Church of Chrift in the A-poftoUc age. Indeed Bennet might reafon, as' Wall does, thus;
Origen was born about 80 years after St. John died'': confider when his grandfather might live; — he might know from his grandfather if the praftice of the primitive Church ftri(^Hy fo called, favoured fuch a fcheme as worfliipping in lan- guages not imderftood : — thus the writings of the Fathers of the three hrft Centuries afford good probable proofs of cuftoms in the Apofto- lic age. — But yet the Church of England, at the Reformation, was jealous about allowing any au- thority but Icriptural; therefore the bcft expla- nation of " the cuftom of the primitive church," feems to be, the cuftoms mentioned in fcripture. — And confequently, " the word of God and the cuftom of the primitive church," together, ihould mean, the direftions and practices recorded in the fcriptures.
But thole who wifh to go farther down, may confult Bingham's Antiquities, Book 13. Chap. 4. — And Uflier's " Hiftoria Dogmatica controverfias intra Orihodoxos et Pontificios de Scripturis ec Sacfis Vernaculis." — Efpecially the fourth and fifth -Sections of his eighth Chapter. The title of the fourth Section is, " In Ecclefia Primitiva, com- mune officium vulgari lingua celebratum fuit."— But his authorities are only the Apoftolic Conftitu-
tions,
» On Infant-Baptifm, Preface.
^ Origen is placed by Lardner in 230; he was born in 185.
l86 BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT, III.
tions, which though ancient, are not now eflcemed genuine : and a Liturgy called St, James's, but probably not to be depended upon as compofed by an Apoftle. Thefe feem to be his only autho- rities that pretend to belong to the ApofloJic age : he quotes from Jcrom, Clemens Alcxandrinus, Auguftin and oihcrsj and ufes the Liturgies ot Bafil and Chryfottom; but if thefe give us the cuftom of the primitive Church, ftridiy fo called, we can only believe, that they do fo on fuch pro- bable grounds as have been lately explained.
III. \Vc now proceed to Pro^.
According to what was laft explained, we need but make one propofition. — * It is contrary to di- redions recorded in Scripture, to have Liturgies in any language which is not generally intelligible where they are ufed.*
This matter could not be diredly difcufled in Scripture, as has been^ oblerved of feveral others; but the fault mentioned i Cor. xiv. of ufing the gift of tongues through ofhcntation, when it would perplex inftcad of informing, is open to the fame arguments and expoftulations with that of which we are fpeaking, having Liturgies in unknown languages". We may therefore apply, almoft im- mediately, the paffagcs of that chapter to our pre- ftnt purpofe. The whole chapter might be read, but we may diftinguifli fome verfes as particularly appofite; 2, 5. 6. 9. II. 16. 17. 19. 20. 23. 26. 31. — From thele and feveral other paflages, it is very clear, that thofe who had authority in conducing
religious
' Art. XXII.
»" See Warburton on the Spirit, page 21. See alfo Locke
on the 4th verfe, where he mentions, tliat Lightfoot looks upon the unlnoivn tongue to mca.T\ Jleire^.n. Now if any Jew, turned Chriftian, iifed Hebrew in Chnftian AfTemblies becaiile it w.ns a Jaertd language, that cafe comes nearer our prcfcnt one than Ipeaking with tongues, in general.
BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. III. 187
religious aflemblies, were to adapt their rules and laws to the moral and religious improvement of the generalit}^ as alfo to their comfort.
The unlearned are mentioned repeatedly ; and all are enjoined to a6t like men ot mature under- Jlanding. — Ont can fcarcely read this chapter to any purpofe, or even attend to its meaning uninr terruptedly, without Ibme idea of v/hat was meant by the gift of Prophecying. Mr. Locke" iinder- llands it to include three things : predicting fome events, finging infpired hymns, and interpreting myftical and difficult parts of fcripture by infpi- ration : — this interpreting is diftinguilhable from interpreting what was faid in an affembly by thole who had the gift of Tongues. — Prophecying was carried on in the vulgar tongue; St. Paul magnifies its worth, in comparifon of i'peaking with tongues; but then he meant in aflemblies where no foreigners required information.
That the fcriptures look upon the lower ranks of men as important, appears from many places both of the Old and New Teftament. The para- ble of Lazarus might be mentioned in particular. Conned that with John xxi. 15, &c. and with Ads XX. 28, 29. and negled in edifying the poor and unlearned, will fecm no trifling matter. — And if St. Paul infifts lb ftrongly on our attending to principles of Utility, it may be confidered as a fcriptural argument to urge, that the better prayers are underflood, the more good they do; elpecially if well compofed, fo as to comprehend brief and plain exprelTions of the mod important doclrines; and that it is in vain to compole them well, if, at lafl, they are unintelligible.
But we fliould fay a word or two of fcriptural practice. — Chn?i fpoke no unknown tongue: St.
Paul ° Locke on i Cor. xii. 10.
l88 BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. IV.
Paul avoided it, and only permitted "* it, as it were, at home. The office of Interpreter was appointed in order to prevent anything from being finally \inintelligiblc.— The Church of Chrift fometimes prayed collectively, as related in Ads iv. 24. and clfewhere. We may add, that no Liturgy was ever originally compofed in any language not familiar to tlie people by whom it was to be uled.
IV, So inucli for direft proof; fomc arguments of our adverfaries may fecm perhaps to require an anfwer, or proof of the indireft fort. — Their ar- guments in favour of their opinion, are fo many objedions toours.
1. It has been urged, that the chapter on which we*" build, docs not relate to public wor- Ihip, but only to private conferences. But it feema to me to relite to my meetings whatfoever, which could tempt men to difplay their powers by way of gaining admiration : " when ye come together*^ whercfoever it may be; to fing, pray, give thanks, prophecy, hear revealed interpretations of Scrip- ture; where the people may be required, or in- duced, to fay Amen.
The word church occurs five times in the chap- fer, and is bppofed to ^'- heme \' the larger the Airembly, the greater the abfurdity of puzzling them : the Romilh argument feems to fuppofe the contrary.
2. It has been faid, tliat a general language is moft convenient for Jlrangers. The number of learned flrangcrs is very Imall, in comparilbn of that of unlearned natives : belldes, as each ftranger is at home fometimes, he receives moll benefit •upon the whole, from the rule of having Liturgies in the vukar toniiuc : I ihould have thouoht it a
" I Cor xiv. I, (with Locke's note) and 59, ' I Cor. xiv.
great
BOOK IV ART. XXIV. SECT. IV. 189
great pity, when I was at Church in Holland, that a Dutch congregation fhouid lofe the edification of a Dutch Liturgy, for any good I (hould have got from their ufing a Latin one.
3. The Romaniils are ready to fay, that their Latin Liturgy is made intelligible by tranflations, explanationSy ceremonies^ : but translations are not uled in church j I mean, by the Minifters; the mind does not go with the words by means of a
tranflation only publilhed, not publicly read.
Thofe who cannot read, are as much at a lofs in that cafe as without tranllation. Explanations may give a general idea; but that is very imper- fed work : ceremonies make but little impre/Tion on thofe who do nor underftand the words which accompany them. An unconneded word may be explained, fuch as Amen, Hallelujah, Hofatma; or fuch fhort fayings as Ku^je eXsTxrov, Dominus vobif- cumi but a fentence is quite a different thing; what mull a feries of fentences be 1
4. We are told, that we might fubmit to unin- telligible prayers, becaufe, in any vulgar tongue, many things occur, which are not underftoodt in the Pfalms, for inftance, and Prophecies. It inav be fo; our knowledge is imperfed, and lb are our underftandings; we muft labour to improve our- felves j but that is not to be done by purpofely making things obfcure, where obfcuricy can be avoided.
To impofe ignorance by choice, in matters of revealed religion, is to counterad revelation ; wliick mud be a good, however men may have -it in their pov/er to pervert or mifreprefent it. — The faculty of fpecch is a good, though the imperfedions in language are great : no one would be willing to lofe the faculty on that account ; yet to pray in
« Dupm as above.^ — Rhem, Teft. &c.
190 BOOK IV. ART.S'xrV. SECT. IV.
an unknown tongue is to deprive many human beings of one important ufe of it. But when Pfahns, Prophecies, &:c. are the moft difficult, all people receive fome benefit from them ; fome reh- gious ideas, fome pious feelings.
5. Sometimes difpute has been carried fo far, that it has been faid, there is good m the common people's not underftanding Liturgies. If Chrift bad thought fo, he would have only given us the Lord's prayer in Phoenician, or in Hebrew : and would have forbidden its being ufed in any other language. The people may doubtlefs want inftruc- tion, and, deprived of it, may attach wrong ideas to religious expreffions ; but every day's teaching may leifen this evil, and, at the fame time, mend the heart, as well as the underftanding, of both thofe who receive inftruftion and thofe who give it.
6. Laftly, It has been held, that men are more devout for being ignorant : or, according to the proverbial exprcffion, ' Ignorance is the Mother of Devotion.^ — That ignorance may occafion fome kind of rude, barbarous emotions in the mind, when attending to fuperior beings, will fcarccly be denied ; hut what kind of devotion is that 1 the favage trembles at an Eclipfe, the ignorant attributes the effects of eledlric fire to the imme- diate agency of Satan"; but this is very diftbrenc from the devotion arifmg from religious " truth and foberncfs'.'* Fanatical terrors have very little effedf in giving the minti fteady and rational prin- ciples of adioii : Ignorance may be the Modier of Superftition or Enthullafm ; it may even con- ceive and biing forth Hypocrifyj but it will
never
' Art. x.Sc(^. L. where is a paragraph from Doomfday-book of St Julian's Shrewfbury. * Afts xxvi. 25.
SOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT, V. IpTt
never give birth to that Love of God and man ; which, the better informed it is, has the greater tendency to make the Chriflian uniformly and ef- fedually virtuous, '^ fteadfaft, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord."
I will mention no more arguments, or objec- tions; you may think I have already mentioned too many, in fo plain a cafe; but it has fome- times feemed, that objedlions might lead to pro- fitable oblervations, when they are not formidable to any important truth.
V. What little I (hall fay, in the way of Jp- plication^ may be placed either to the head of mutual conciliation, or to that of Improvements: in the prefent cafe what conciliates, improves.
An ancient dead language, it mull be con- feffed, has, by being fixed, fome advantages for religious worfliip . it is venerable, free from vul- garity, nay it is fometimes, as we find from our Latin Articles, even more perfpicuous than an ob- folete vernacular tongue. If fuch language be general^ it has ftill more advantages; as Latin is amongft learned Europeans, French amongft the polite; and the lingua Franca amongft the mer- cantile that have any connexion with any fliore of the Mediterranean. The Helleniftic Greek ufed to ^y be very general in our' Saviour's time. — If there could be fuch a thing as a facred language, that would have llrong efFeds; in the fame manner as a facred edifice; fet apart entirely for purpofes of re- ligion. And if fuch facred language could ht fixed and geiieral^ it might be worth while to hav£ Litur- gies compofed in it, for the ufe of the more im- proved in all different nations of the Globe. The intercourfe of Nations with each other increafes daily, and will increafe as the world improves".-— I
do ' Book I. Chap. vi. page 77. " If. xL 9.— Hab.ii. 14.
192 BOOK IV. AP.T. XXIV. SECT. V.
do not fee any impropriety in ufing Latin Prayers in Univerfitics; Dr. Heylin fpeaks of their being uied at Cliiift Church, Oxford, at early fervice, when only members of the - Univerfity are fup- pofed to be prefcnt : and he fays, he does not underftand that, at the Reformation, it was " meant but that the morning and evening fervice might be uled, in Colleges and Halls of either Univerfity, in the Latine Tongue, where all may be fuppofed to undcrftand it." — Private prayers are exprefsly al- lowed to be '* in any Language that they them- felves" (the perfons who pray) " do underfl:and\" — Whatever may be permitted or contrived, of this fort, lliould be calculated, not to promote pedantry or oftentation, but fpiritual improvement. *' Let all things be done'' unto edifying'^ This muft be the univerfal principle j and, in any flate of which we can have the leaft conception, it cannot fail to lead us to provide, in every nation, a Liturgy in the vernacular tongue. However, it is one thing to fay, that a thing ought to be done, and another to fay, that people have always been unpardonable for not doing it: — there have been times of fuch grofs darkncls, that, when we look back upon them, we feci almod in a (late of indifference about the language in which the people prayed ; it occurs to us, at the monienr, tliat they might have been improved ; but then again we recoUect that the Clergy were little more enlightened than the peo- ple : and we apply to the church the words of our Saviour J " it therefore the light that is in thee be darknefs, how great is that darkncfs!" — Now, how- ever, better profpedU begin to dawn upon us :
thouiih
CD
» " Corcertiing the fervice of the Church.'* Prefixed to
Prayer-l onks, inSp.irrow's collcv^ion, pagesoi. Q^EIiz. men- tions, that the colleges had petitioned for leave to ulc L^itia Pray errs.
y 1 Cor. xlv. j6.
BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. V. 193
though feme PopKh countries may be flow and flnggifh in advancing towards civilization, yet that which, is neareft to us, has, of late, taken ample ftrides ; and it is firmly to be expected, that, if the rage of philofopkizing leaves any fubftance of re- vealed Religion, any Chriftian Church, of magni- tude and importance, there will not, ere long, be any objecflion to making the forms of public wor- fhip intelligible to the people^.
^ I 797, 1 leave this as it was written at the end of 1 791, to take its chance of feeming groundlefs and chimerical.
VOL. IV. N ARTICLE
194 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. I.
ARTICLE XXV.
OF THE SACRAMENTS.
SACRAMENTS ordained of Chrift, be not only badges or tokens of Chriftian men's pro- feffion ; but rather, they be certain fiire witnelles, and efFedual figns of grace, and God's will towards us, by the which he doth work invifibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but alfo ftrengthen and confirm our Faith in him.
There are two Sacraments ordained of Chrift our Lord in the Gofpel •, that is to fay, Baptifm, and the Supper of the Lord.
Thofe five, commonly called Sacraments, that is to fay. Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matri- mony, and Extreme Undlion, are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gofpel, being fuch as have grow^n, partly of the corrupt following of the Apoftles, partly 'are ftates of life allowed in the Scriptures : but yet have nor like nature of Sacraments with Baptifm, and the Lord's Supper, for that they have not any vifible fign or ceremony ordained of God.
The Sacraments were not ordained of Chrift to be gazed upon, or to be carried about ; but that we (hould duly ufe them. And in fuch only as worthily receive the fame, they have a wholefome effeA or operation : but they that receive them unworthily, purchafe to themfelves damnation, as Saint Paul faith.
I. Wc
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. 1. tl. I95
I. We have now before us fcvQn Articles upon the fubjedt of Sacraments; this twenty-fifth treats of Sacraments in general, and of thofe which we tejed. It is always dirHcuk to make general ob* fervations before thofe particular ones of which, they confifl ; in the analytical method the parti- culars would come firft, but it is moft ufual to give reafonings to the world in a fynthetic form. — The confequence, however, of treating firft of Sacraments in general will be, that feveral parts of our prefent Article may be paffed over, without either hiftory, explanation, or proof; I mean thofe which, though exprefled in general terms, relate only to Baptifm, or the Lord's Supper.
II. Our Hijlory, according to this, need only be of the /even Romifli Sacraments, colledively, and of the/i.v, taken feparately, which we rejed.
I feem to have a general idea of the manner in which the feven Romifli Sacraments might acquire and lofe their celebrity. Men of religious cha- rafters begin with obeying the injundions of Chrift, and following the example of his Apoftles and their immediate fuccelibrs ; a facred regard for every obfervance grows ftronger and (tronger ; new particulars fliew themfelves, in which zeal may be manifefted and exerted; one pious man tries to go a ftep beyond another; a third is determined to furpals them both j ordinances, at firft fimple, get to be clogged with a multitude of ceremonies, and adorned with fplendor'' and magnificence. — Reafon makes no oppofition, or when it makes any is difregarded, or contemned ;— and thus, what was originally rational and plain, runs into excefs and folly. —Some at length fee this with the eyes
of
* Something of tjiis fort is defcrlbed in Mofheira, Cent.ij. Part a. Chap. 4. Sefl. i. page 107, 8vo, Vol. 3.
N Z
196 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II.
of common fenfe, and labour to impofe reflraints and contrive regulations; others encourage them- felves in difguft and love of novelty, and, either through palFion or afFcclation, throw the whole afide.
But to be more particular.
We are told, that Juftin Martyr and Tertullian fpeak of no more*" facraments than two. — The fame is faid of Ambrofe^ who wrote concerning Sacraments.— Theodoret fpeaks of fome Chriftians who were** called Enchitcc, becaufe they were for Praj^er without Sacraments : and of fome, who conceived fo highly of i\-\Q fpiritual nature of Chrif- tianity, that they would allow of no matter or element whatfoever. They had the name of Afco- druta, A<n(.oS^>iTO(,i, and they are the more worthy of our notice, as their notion fcems to be the fame vi'ith that of our modern §luakers; though the Quakers are faid, by Mofheim, to have had their rife about the middle of the feventecnch Century. The etymology of Afcodrutie is not well under- ftood : even Theodoret (H^ret. Fab. lib. i. cap. 10.) feems at a lofs about them ; and I have con-
fulted
^ Veneer on the Article, page 64 t.
*^ By Bp. Bramhall ; quoted by Puller, page 274.
"^ See Rogers on the Art. he refers to no part of Theodoret's viorks. — Euchitce (Ei;;i(;tTai) occur Hceret. Fab. Lib. 4. cap. 11. — They were fometimes called MelTaliani, ME<7-<ra7iiavoi, and fometimes Ev68cr«as-oj : they faid, that Bapti/m was no more ufeful than a Razor; it cut of^m, but did not extirpate '\X.\ Sin grew again ; fo they were for Frayer : I fee nothing about the Eucharijl, in the account of them; they were great Enthujiafis : They were tried, and, I think, banifhed, by Flavian Biihop of Antioch; and written againft chiefly, by Amphilochius. — Onc Hekrtic ConfeCiion, Chap. 19. refers to thefe if/(^//fl«/, under Sacraments in general : and wc fee from that paflage, that the ideas of our (Quakers were in !ieing at the time of the Reforma- tion. Syntagma, page 67, of Part i. The Reformers feem to have liked to refer recent errors to old times — See Synt. part 2, page 13. Donatijls.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II. I97
fulted a number of books about the name, without obtaining any fatisfadion. They feem to have made this their fundamental principle, that invijible things are not to be completed by vifible. Of courfe they baptized not; but moreover they had no ^Hx f^vrv^ioiy no divine myjleries. This I under- ftood as a general expreffion, though the Sacra- ment of the Lord's Supper has fometimes the name of the myfteries. Theodoret next fpeaks of fome called Archontici^ A^^ovTmoi, with whom a knowledge of God, of the myftic fort, feems to have been all in all : thefe went fo far as to anathe- matize To A«T^ov, x«» mu Twv y.vfnoiuv jU,5TaA7)v|/ty :— BaptiJ'm, and the receiving of the holy M)JIeries. — The word a.iroXvT^ua-ig, which is tranflated re- demptio, means only, a mode of Baptizing; and fo Wall feems to have underflood it. — On Infant Baptifm, 2. 5. i.
Auguftin is faid, by the Rhemlfts on Gal.iv. 3. to have fpoken of the /even facraments which are held by the Roman ids -, and palfages are quoted from different parts of his works in order to fhew this; but Fulke feems to me to anfwer the Rhe- mifts completely.— The opening for difpute in this matter, is, that we find Sacramentum ufed in different fenfes. It feems to be ufed for any em- blematical adion of a facred import ; or, according to the expreffion of our Homily% for ■=' anything whereby an holy thing is fignified."— /^^/w^ of feet has been accounted a facrament; and in the Greek Church there was a Feflival called Njttti,^ ^ (and probably is at this day) in which the'Patri- arch, or AbtDot, or whoever was the head perfon at the place, perfonated our Saviour, and waflied
the
« On Common Prayer and Sacraments, page 276, 8vo. * See Cave's Lit. DiiT. N.TrT,,^. N 3
T98 ROOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II.
the feet of twelve poor perfons, who perfonated the twelve Apofllcs : in Monafteries thefe were poor Monks; and the Steward, or Burfar, took the part of St. Peter, and aded his reluciance; and the Porter was Judas Ifcariot, and underwent much ridicule and many infults.
In ancient times there was alfo a Sacramen:° of Catechumens, in which fait was given them as an emblem of purity and incorruption, with reference, probably, to Matt. v. 13. and Mark ix. 50. — In this extended fenfe, all the typical a'^s of i\\tjews were facraments ; and accordingly, circumcifton^ eat- ing the pafchal Lawby &c. have been called Sacra- ments of the old Law. In this extended fenfe of the word facran:icnt,it has been difputed, amongft Chrif- tians, whether there were vioi thirteen^' Sacraments; and, as Images, of Chrift, Virgin Mary, &c. mean fomething beyond the vifible figure, it has been afked whether they might not be confidered as* Sacraments.
I will give you the paflage of Auguflin's Letter to Januarius\ as it is made the beginning of King Edward's Article. It is tranflated in our Homily, and in Fulke's anfvvcr to the Rhcmifts on Gal. iv. 3.
Archbifliop
8 Bingham, 10. z, i6. ^ Forbes, 9. 3. 2.
» See Forbes, 9. i. 26. The Trent Catechifm, Part 2. Sec^. X proves that fuch 2 queilion has been afked, by anfwering it in the negative.
'' Ep. 54. or, in a different way of reckoning, Ep. 118,
Primo itaquetencre te volo, quod eft hiijus difputationis caput, Dominum Noftrum Jefiim Cl.rifliim, ficut ipfe in Evangelic lofiuitur, lejii jugo fuo nos fubdidifTe, ct Gircinx levi : undc facramentis niimero pauciflimis, ohfcrvatione fhcillimis, fignifi- catione pra-ftantifliniis, focictatem ncv: pcpuli coUigavit, iicuti eft Baptifitius Trinitatis nomine confecratus, commiinicatio cor- poris et fanguiiiis ipiius, et fi quid aliud in fcripturis canoiiicis commendatur, &:c.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II. I99
ArchbifhopBramhall fays ' concifely, " Our church receives not the feptenary number of Sacraments, being never fo much as mentioned in any Scrip- ture, or Council, or Creed, or Father, or ancient author; firft divided by Peter Lombard in 1439 ; iirft decreed by Eugenius the Fourth 1528; firll confirmed in the Provincial Council of Senes 1457; and after in the Council of Trent," Here the number mentioning the time of Peter Lombard, muft be wrongly printed ; Cave places him ia 1141 ; — 1 fuppofe the number belonging to Euge- nius is put to Peter" Lombard ; and fo on.
Forbes'' fays, that Hugo de Sando Vidore, (Hugh of St. Vi(flor) whom he places in 11 30, and Cave in 1120, feems to him to have firft mentioned {t\tn. facraments, though Peter Lom- bard agrees with him. —The Abbot of St. Viftor at Paris probably knew Peter Lombard, who lived there, though not as Bifhop of Paris till after Hugo's death. However, it is flill more pro- bable that Peter knew the perfon and writings of Hugo. — At the Council of Flormce^ in 1438-9, it feems to have been debated between the Greek and Latin Churches whether the feven Sacraments were to be obferved " fecundum° ufitatam in Eccie- fia Romana formam." Whoever firft fixed on the
number
' Qiioted by Puller, page 275. A Counfellor to the French King, Mr. de la Militiere, wrote to Charles II. King of Eng- land, before the Reftoration, inviting him to profefs Popery, as a likely means to get reftored : Bramhall anfwers him, in the Addrefs from which this paflage is taken : Bramhall was then abroad, 1 think, as well as King Charles ; but fee his Life; the Life of Archbifhop Bramhall, in the Biographia Britannica.
*" This conjefture is right; in Bramhall's Letter the three years are put in the margin, all together.
" Forbes, 9. 3. i,
* Cave Hill, Lit. Tom. 2. page 233, N 4
200 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II.
number feven, was probably an happy man ; To powerful and myflical a number'' as it is! — The Trent Catechifm dwells upon'' it.
The number feven was not one of the things firfl changed at the Reformation-y indeed the five ordinances which the Romanills call Sacraments and we do nor, are fairly to be dijUngulflied from all others which have been called facraments in the extended fenfe, in refpecft of their importance, if we take extreme unftion for vifitation of the fick. — fVickliffe did not rejed them; but then his defi- nition of a facrament was only, *' a vifible token of fomething invifible ^" In the NeceJJ'ary Do^rine, he. which bears fo hard upon fome Romifli abufes, feven facraments are explained, calmly and prac- tically ; not in any way of controverfy*. In the time of Edward VI. *' If fick perfons defired to ht anoint edy there was a provifion ' for compliance in fome degree." — Heylin tells" us, that four of the five facraments which we now rejed, were " re- tained under the name of Sacramentals in our pub- lick Liturgie ," extreme undion being changed into vifitation of the fick. But not rejecting the five, might, with our Reformers, amount to little more than not making a feparate clafs of our two.
The Romanijls are very tenacious of the number feven. In the feventh SefTion of the Council of Trent, Canon the firfl, we are anathematized if we make either more or fewer than feven : We muft not make thirteen any more ; nor take in the NiTrrn^ of
the
P See Cruden's Concordance under the word /even-
1 Part 2. Seft. xviii. about bacraments in general, page 137.
' WicklifFe's Dodrines may be found in Collier's Ecclef. Hift. but I am not fure where I faw this definition.
' Yet many things in thefe explanations, differ from the Romifh doftrine.
* Ncal, I, page 3 7. in 1548.
" Life of Laud, Introd, 6tCt. xii.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II, 201
the Greeks, or fome which the Fathers took in, when they ufed the word Sacrament in its large fenfe : neither muft we fay, that the five are Sacra- ments in iome lower fenfe than the other twoj they are all feven to be allowed vere et proprie Sacra- menta. — We muft not fay, that facraments are only conftituted to *' confirm" our Faith j" this may aim at our Article. — We muft not deny, that facraments give grace " ex opere^ operato-^'' tranf- lated in the Articles of 1552, " of the work 'Wrought^ — John Fox blames the Romanifts for faying, that Sacraments *'^iv^ Grace," — and not only dio ftgnifie^ but alfo " containe and exhibite that which they lignifie, to wit, Grace and Salvation"".'* — The Trent Catechifm fays, *' they have in them an admirable and fure virtue to cure our' fouls."
The Romanifts fay, that three facraments, Bap- tifm. Confirmation and Orders, imprefs a mark or chora£ier {^a^ecKTYi^) upon iht foul, and alio give an oiitivar d diiiin&.'\on; that this marker impreffion, or fealing, external and internal, \s indelible; and therefore, thefe (acraments cannot be reiterated: — ' (See Trent Catech. Part 2. on Sacraments in gene- ral, Sedt. 29, &c.)
This feems only to mean, that a perfon once baptized, confirmed, ordained, is ahuays baptized, confirmed, ordained : — which is againft r^-bap- tizing, re-confirming, and re-ordaining : that is, iuppofing a man really once baptized, &c.— but re-baptizmg, &c. have always proceeded on the
fuppofition,
* Canon 5.— John Fox fays. Sacraments are *' to excite our Faith :" Vol. i. page 36. excitare is the word of our Arricle.
y Canon 8. — This will be mentioned under Art. xxix.
* Vol. I . page 36. Aftsand Monuments, or Martyrologie.
* Page 145. or lafl Seft. 32. of Part 2, on Sacraments in general. — Seil. 10. is mentioned in the ninth Sedion of this Article.
202 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II.
fiippofition, that a man's firft baptifm, &c. were improperly called fuch. — (Like our Divorces a vinculo matrimonii).
If prieflhood be indelible, a Church can never withdraw its Commiffion from a Prieft : can never degrade him.
The Rhemifts foften nothlnsr, but*" maintain the feven facraments in the fulled and flrictefl manner. I have already referred to Gal. iv. 3. where, I think, the arguments on both fides are fufficiently difplayed, by them and their anfwerer Dr. Fulke; but other places may eafily be found.
Even Dr. Dupin ' *' infifts, that ihe^ve Romifli facraments be acknowledged as fuch, whether in- llituted immediately by Chrijl, or not." — In the A6ls of the Council of Trent, Canon firft of SefT. 7. we are told, that it is wrong to fay,— " non fuiffe omnia a Jefu Chrijlo Domino noftro inftituta."
The author of " Principles and Practices of Methodifts^," mentions as a popifh dodlrine, " that the u(e of facraments, accompanied only with an imperfeft forrow, fo finifhes and completes thefe religious a6ls, that they will be fufficient to juftify M%r —Sacramental jujllfi cation is the term ufed by Divines. — The Trent Catechifm mentions this\
Thofe whom we call the Sedaries have, feveral of them run into an oppofite extreme to that of the Romanifts. The Reformatio Legum, in the part de Hserefibus, fpeaks againft the fame perfons
with
* This queftion aboat the efficacy of Sacraments, was much agitated between the Romanifts and tlie Reformers. Limborch calls it ylcris quajiio, Theol. 5. 66, 21 & 22, page 604.
' Mofheim's Aj)pendix, page 131, 8vo. Vol. 6.
«" Firft Letter from Academicus, to Mr. Berridge, page 73. — This author is fuppofed to have been Biihop Green, Regiui Profeflbr of Divinity at Cambridge.
« Page 142. or beft. 16. Part 2. on Sacraments in general.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II. 203
with our Article, who would have the Sacraments to be taken " pro nndis Jignis, et externis tantuni indiciis," — *' quibus, tanquam notis, hominuni Chriftianorum religio poffit a*^ ceteris internojci:'" ^ But in a leparate 7///^, De Sacramentis^ we have firft a definition of Sacraments, and an account of their efficacy; then the marks of a Sacrament, and a declaration, that thofe marks are only found in Baptifm and the Eucharift. After an account of thefe two, we have fomething concerning Ordina- nation. Matrimony, Confirmation, and vifiting the Sick. In other titles we have fomething con- cerning ecclefiaftical puniQiments, and excommu- nication.—But I fee no names of any Se5ls men- tioned.
Abroad, the followers of Szvenhfeldt are faid to have fet afide all external ordinances, in favour^ of internal revelations; which is like what the ^la- kers have done lince the time of Oliver Crom- well'' : the pretext ufed was, that Sacraments are Jiidaical.
Mr. Glofter Ridley, in his Life of Bifliop Ridley', tells us fomething of the Seels alluded to. The Anabapti/Is and others, through abhor- rence of the Romilh worfliip ot the HoJIia, and the Lutheran high notions of the Sacrament, ran fo far into the oppofite extreme, as to ufe low and fcurrilous expreffions concerning it; and to fix up Bills, or papers, againft the door of St. Paul's Cathedral, containing fuch expreffions.
We
^ Reform. Leg. de H?erefibiis, cap. 17. — See alfo in Syn- tagma confeffionum, the Confeflions, or Articles, of Augfbui-g, and Scot'and, and Switzerland, page 6i. 96. 1^3. And in the fecond Part, page 15.
g See Rogers on the Article, page 153.
'' Moflieim, Index, ^<<7ifrj-.—Bennet's Confutation of Qua- kerifm. — Barclay's Apology, Prop. 11. Se*^. 2.
' Life of Biiliop Ridley, page 216.
204 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. III.
We have, in Strype's'' Life of Archbifhop Whitgift, a paper figned by one Anthony Randall ^ Minifter of Lydford, of the Family of Love, dated May 31, 1581, containing the alfertion for which he was deprived by the Biihop of Exeter : amongft other things it is faid, '* He never thought the Lord's Supper and Baptifm to be Sacraments, be- caufe he had not read the word Sacrament in the Holy Scripture. He alloweth the Adminiftration of Sacraments becaufe the Magiftrate hath efta- bliihed it."
I will conclude this Hiftory of Sacraments in general with mentioning, that the 5o««/^«j allow ^ but one ceremonial priEceptum of Chrift, to break bread :— how this is to be obeyed, will beft appear hereafter.
III. Having finifhed our Hiftory of the Sacra- ments taken colledively, we come to make fome hiftorical remarks on thofe Jive, taken feparately, which we rejedt. Thefe five ftill remain intereft- ing to us, though we reje6t them as Sacraments, becaufe they are changed into offices which we efteem to be of great importance. Confirmation, Jbfohttion. Ordination, Matrimony, and Vifitation of the Sick : a right knowledge of thefe has a great tendency to make the pafioral duties ufeful to the public, as well as comfortable, or pleafing, to the PaRor himfelf.
Firft of Confirmation. In the primitive age of Chriftianity it appeared to the generality of thinking Chriftians, that Baptifm included ideas both of ijcater and the ""i/o/y Spirit. John iii. 5.— Titus iii. 5. of which more hereafter. Perfons of inferior
rank
^ Strype's Whitgift, Appendix, page 93, 1 Racov Catechiim, page 143.
«" Cave's Hift. Lit. T. 1. page 131. 2. Anon, de Eaptifmo non iterando, A, D. 253.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. III. 20'
rank in the miniftry, were competent to baptize with water, but it was obferv-able that thofe of the higheji ° rank made ufe of prayer and impofitton of hands for the obtaining of the Holy Ghoji-, and it was granted to their petitions. It lliewed itfelf at firft in ioiiit fiipernatwal effeds, otherwife the grant might have been incredible; but the Comforter was to be fent to Chriftians in all ages; to guide them into all truth, to reprove" and infpire them, to work in them both to will ^ and to do : yet he Vv^as to be afKed*! for; what more natural mode of call- ing down the Holy Spirit could be adopted, when his gifts became ordinary, than one which was fome imitation of the mode ufed by authority when they were extraordinary' P — It fuits this account, when Jerom calls what has now the name of confirmation, by the terms imprecatio, and invocatio fpiritus fancti. — " Non abnuo hanc efle Ecclefiarum confuetu- dinem, ut ad eos qui longe in minoribus urbibus per prefbyteros et Diaconos baptizati funt, Epifcopus, ad invocationem fanfti Spiritus manum impofiturus, excurrat." Dial, contra Lucifer, cap. 4. — And a little after, " Alioquin, fi Epifcopi tantiim impre- catione, Spiritus Sandus defluit, lugendi funt qui in villulis, aut in Caftellis, aut in remotioribus iocis, per Prefbyteros aut Diaconos baptizati, ante
dormierunt
" The authorities feem well colleaed in Wheatly on Common
Prayer, Confirmation -beginning, page 397, 39b'. In Cor-
jieliufs cafe, Afts x. 47._ The Holy Ghoft precedes Baptifm, and is the caufe of baptizino-.
" John xvi. 8. 13. ° p Phil. ii. 13. ,
1 Lnke xi. 13. — See alfo 2 Cor. i. 21. and parallels. — And I John ii. 27. might be confidered.
' Whatever is in Scripture mail be in an age of Miracles ; but according to our reafoning about the difFerence between a firft miniftry and an eftabliihed one, we might conclude with regard to any particular ordinance. -See Art. xxiii. Sed. xxr.
206 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. 111.
dormierunt, qviam ab Epifcopis iny'iCcvcmuT." The latter paflagc refers to cales of necejfity^
When Churches increafed, a ceremony would be wanted. Uutiion would readily occur, as fuited to notions of Jews', and Gentiles, and to many cli- mates where Chriftianity was profeflcd. How foon it was ufed in what we call Confirmation^ is not agreed: iome learned men think very foon; but Bingham" does not allow any proof of it before the time of TertuUian : however, we may look upon this ceremony as arbitrary, arifing from par- ticular circumftances, and therefore as one, which may be omitted^ though enjoined by the Council of Laodicea, in the year 367.
Some fcholaflic writers own, that confirmation as a Sacrament, v/as not inftitutcd by Chrift, or ufed by the Apoftles; but that it was made a Sacrament at the concilium Meldenfc" : Cave mentions two; one in S45, the other in 1201;— but he fays nothing of Confirmation in his account of either.
One of the Scholaflic writers was the famous; Alexander Hales, the Dodor Irrefragabilis of our own country; called in Latin Alexander^ Alenfts. — The matter :ind form were diftinftly exprelTed by Pope Eugenius IV. in the Council of Florence, in the year 1438.
It would feem very doubtful how foon Con- firmation fliould folloiv Baptifm. In the Baptifm
of
» Thefc pafTages are quoted by Bingham, 12. i. I.
* Exod. XXX. 22. — Pfalm cxxxiii. 2. — i John ii. 20. 27. See alfo Pearfon on Creed, Art. 2. beginning, &c. page 80.93. And for Gentiles, page 99, folio.
" Bingham's Antiquities, 12. 3. 2.
" Confilium Meldenfe was the Council of ilffawjr.— -See Bingham's Index of Councils. Ant. Vol. 2. page 519.
y Forbes, 9. 4. 4, and Cave calls him Alexander dc Hales.
EOOX IV. ART. XXV. SECT. III. 207
of Adults the fooner the better; delay would only be owing to the neceffary avocations of thofe fupe- rior miniilers, who were to confirm; that is of Bifliops^. — In cafe of Infant-baptifm there would be more difficulty; thofe who thought that the Eucharifl: (hould be adminiftered to Infants, would be for having Confirmation follow Baptifm imme- diately; but others would wiOi to have Confirma- tion deferred till any one was fit to have been baptized as an Adult. This diftiniflion between adults and infants, is not marked out fo plainly as might be wiflied\ In cafes of infant-baptifm it is probable, that the necefTity of confirmation muft have appeared particularly ftrong, as obviating ob- jedions incident to a contrad, in which a con- trading party had not perfeft underftanding''.
The 7iame of confirmation was not common in ancient times. Cyprian*" ufes confummation, or the verb conjiimmate^ but not as a technical term. The Greeks had different names ; but I will fpeak of the Greeks feparately.
The Greek Chriflians ufe unflion in confirming: the ointment is made by the Patriarch or Bifhop alone, on the Thurfday in Paflion-week, of pre- cious ingredients, and with a facred apparatus; it is ufed for fome other purpofes, but chiefly for confirmation; which always, in the Greek Church, follows Baptiim immediately. It has the names ofX^Kr|t*a, unclion ; Xft^oOEtrta, impofition of hands; and tr(pfayi?, the fign or feal of the Lord. In the Eu;5^oAo>'tov, or Greek ritual, there is an Office, called the Office of the Holy ointment, or-AxoAb9»a5
* See authorities from the Ancients, Bingham, 12. i, i.
* However, fee Bingham, 12. i. 2.
'' This is confirmed by Limborch, q. 77. 3. ' Cave's DifTertation under ftv^o* fays, that Cyprian ufes the word Confummation nonfemel.
208 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. III.
Tsaj'iif /tAu^K, where arc the ceremonies and prayers, and the mode of preparation. The vellel in which this ointment is contained, lias the name of aV»ov T» ^£>/«Aa [/.u^n. But the Greeks do not call confir- mation a facrament ordained by Chrill''.
The Romijli notion of Confirmation is eafily collected from the acts of the Council of Trent, and the Catcchifm compofed by order of that Council. In the feventh SelTion of the Council there feem only to be three Canons on the fubjedt, without any argumentation : the firft declares Con- firmation to be a proper Sacrament, and not a mere ceremony, or catechetical examination. The fecond condemns thofe who allow no virtue to the Chrifm. The third fays, that not every Prieft, but only a Bilhop, can confirm ; ordinarily. In addition, v.'e find in the Catechifm, the form of words made ufe of; *' I fign thee with the fign of the Crofs, and confirm thee with the Chrijm of Salvation. In the name of," &;c. It is ah^b affirmed, contrary to the Schoolmen here mentioned, that Chrifl: was " the author'' of this Sacrament, and " appointed the Rite of Chifni, and the word^ which the Holy Church ufes," &c. The autho- rity for this aflertion is not Scripturcy but the iecond Epiflle of S. Fabian", Bifhop of Rome : which is fufficient to thofe that believe Confirmation to be a Sacrament, becaufe all facraments are myiteries, " above the reach of human nature, nor can they be inilituted by any but by God hlmfelf." As curious an indance of reafoning in a circle, as you fhall meet with. This Catechifm proceeds to in- form us, that the w^//^rof this facrament is Chrifm;
the
^ This IS chiefly from Cave's DifTertation, under Mt/f on fee alfo Bingham, 12. i. i.
' Cave mentions no fuch Ecclef. writer. — Ladvocat places him in 236.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. III. 2O9
the Form was given before; that one confirmed ought to have a Godfather, as a '' Monitor,'' a " Captain,'* a ^^ fencing-majler;" for he has now put on the whole armour of God ; but that there muft be no marriage with this fencing-mafler : that confirmation is not to be given till young perfons have " the ufe of Reajon," and therefore it muft be deferred till they are eleven years old, or however till they are* fix: that Confirmation gives fpiri- {ud[frength, as appeared from the conduft of St. Peter, who deferred his caufe before the defcent of the Holy Ghoft on the great day of Pentecoft, but after it fuffered with conftancy.
The Catechifm lays down, that Confirmation is one of thofe Sacraments which imprint a y^ot^a-arvi^, as before-mentioned, and concludes v/ith explaining the parts of the Romifli ceremony; the undion why on the forehead; the fign of the Crofs, the blow ftruck by the Bithop on the breaft=, the giving of the Pax^. The taking of fVhit- funtide for a feftival or feafon of Confirmation, may be underftood from what was jufl now faid of St. Peter.
I fhould imagine that Prejbyterians have no con- firmation, (though they have Penance, Ordina- tion, Matrimony, and Vifitation of the fick) as I fee nothing relating to it in their DireEtory^ or in
their
^ The Bifliop of Lincoln, at his Vifitation, 1791, defired that none might be brought to be confirm;;d under fourteea years of age; which, I think, agrees with Archbilliop Seeker, See his Sermon at the end of his Leilures on the Catechifm.
s Wheatly fays, on the cheek, page 410.— Limborch calls \i jalapa.
*> A Paten which ferves for the top of a Chalice, which is given by the adminiftering Prieft to the affillant Prieft to kifs, juft before the offering j fo I underfland the French Ditftionary of the Academy.
VOL. IV. O
210 BOOIC IV. ART. XXV. SECT. III.
their Form of Churcli-Government'; and as it is rejefted in the Helvetic confeflion : — yet the ob- jections made by the Puritans, as defcribed by Neal", do not feem fufficient to juftify a total aboHtion ; being only, that children might come too young to the Eucharift, and that an expref- lion in our Bilhop's Prayer has an appearance of afcribing a Jacramental o.'^zcX. to the Inftitution.— Yei Puritans ufed infant-baptifm.
Thofe who fet afide Confirmation, mud con- ceive both water and fpirit to have their full elfecc in Baptifm. The Helvetic confefTion fays, Cnn- firmat'to et extrema tm5lio inventa funt hominum, quibus nullo cum damno carere poteR Ecclefia. Neque ilia nos in noftris Ecclefiis habemus ; nam habent ilia qua^dam quce minime probare pof- fumus.
The Church of Enzland retains the office of Confirmation; and confines it to the BiJJiop; ic clofely imitates the Apoftles in ufing no Chrifm, only prayer and impofition of hands. — It defers the ordinance till young perfons are arrived at years of difcretion, that they may themfelves ratify their baptifmal covenants. It docs not confider con- firmation as a Sacrament; the reafon will befl come into our Proof. In Theory it ufes a Godfather, as a witnefs ; but not in praSlice.
The Baptijis are faid to be much divided on the ufe of Confirmation' : Infomuch that thofe who have held confirmation to be a nccelfary qualifica- tion for the Lord's Supper, have feparatcd them- felves,
' Publifhed In Append, to Neal's Hiflory of Puritans.
^ Vol. I. page 159, quarto.
1 Wlieatly fpeaks on this fubjeft; fee his Work on the Com- mon Prayer, page 406. Alfo Wall on InJant Baptifm, page 4.47, quarto; or 2. 8. 6. 15. I do not perceive that the Con- fcfnonof Auglburg declares anything concerning it.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. III. 211
felves, in celebrating that ordinance, from thofe who have held the oppofite opinion.
An incident mentioned in the accounts of the Hampton-Court conference, may lead us to what may, in fa<5t:, have been the principal difficulty relating to Confirmation. — That difficulty might be thus expreffed ; * If confirmation be necelTary, is not Baptifm imperfeSf P* King James the Firil, v/ho might be prejudiced^ as a Scotchman, in favour of the Scotch Church, expreffed a fcruple of this fort, but Archbifliop Baicroft, " on his knees replied, that the Church did not hold Bap- tifm imperfeA without Confirmation j'^ that " it was of Apoftolical inllitution, Heb. vi. 2. where it is called the doftrine of the laying'^ on of hands.'* —Indeed in that place (ta'dng in the preceding verfe) it feems defcribed as one of the fundamental principles of Chriftianity, and as following Baptifm. - — With regard to the difficulty, it is of a fore which often occurs amidft the imperfections of human tranfactions. King James might have re- collefted, that the acceffionof a King is completed by Coronation : I fuppofe that if a King purpofejy negleded or refufed to take the coronation-oaths, his negled might fliake his title to the Crown ; but it, without any culpable negled, it happened, that he was not crowned till he had begotten a fon, and was to die, fuch pcfthumous fon would pro- bably inherit as if the acceffion was complete.
Baptifm then may be complete without con- firmation, if confirmation is not to be had ; and yet confirmation may be requifite when it can be had. — This feems to agree with the two fentences lately quoted from Jerom.
IV. But
•" Neal,VoI. i. quatto, page 41a,
ai2 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV.
IV. But we muft now proceed to the feconA Romifli Sacrament which we reject, viz. Penance. —A good deal was faid on the efficacy of Repent- ance under the fixteenth Article" ; I will endeavour not to run into repetition. It feems as if we could not flir a ftep without diftinguilhing private repentance from penance confidered as a part of ecclefiaftical difcipline; though the Latin word panitentia may {land for both. Peter Lombard fpeaks, as do others, of pccnitcntia exterior as op- pofed° to interior. His idea might be the fame with ours : private repentance is vifible only to- God ; whereas penance is vifible to the Church, and may be confidered as fome evil undercrone in order to avoid excommunication : yet though thefe two ought to be kept didind in the mind, they fometimes run into one another. A private man may be guided in his repentance by a minifter of the Church, as it might, without fome regulation, be too light or too dcfperate; and a perfon under ecclefiaftical ccnfure, or penance, may inwardly repent; and his penance may be, and is meant to be, the occafion of his repentance. Alfo a private penitent may impole penance upon himfelf, or even apply to the Church to impofe it upon him; independent of any rellitution or compen- fation w4iich he may think it right to make.
Whatever relates to Penance, properly fo called, fiiould be deferred till we treat of the thirty-third Article : the Romifli Sacrament feems to me to relate to private repentance, as conducted and re- gulated by a Minifter of the Church; but let us proceed in order.
Before we come to the RomiQi Church, let us juft take notice of the Greek Mfravota. It was a
part
" Art. XVI. Sefl. i. ii. ui. xviii, xxxii. xxxiii. • Sec Forbes, 9. 5. 19.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV. tl^
part of the Evx^oXoyiov before mentioned, and Itfelf confifled of man)^ parts ; amongft others we find the following mentioned in^ Cave.
1. Eyp^»] £7r» j«€-ravo»vTwu, a prayer over the peni- tents ;
2. AxoXsOja Tuv s^o(y.oXo'y>i[ji.zvm, an Office for thofe who confefs.
3. Eii;;^>i £7n rm ETrjrtjwtwy xvo[x£vm^ a prayer over thole who are abfolved from Penance.
4. Axop5*a £i? Autrtv cc(po^iTfAis h^iu;, a fervice for ^ diffolving the excommunication ot the Prieft^ con- taining, as I iinderftand, many prayers.
From the Greek Church we*^ are told, that the firft penitentiary formularies were brought into the Latin, by one of the name of 'T'heodorus^ who was of T'arfiis, a Monk, and afterwards, in the year 668, an inhabitant of England, and Archbiihop of Canterbury.
Thai the Romilh Sacrament of Penance is moft properly an authoritative regulation of private re- pentance, will appear from dividing it into its conftituent parts. Thefe are Conirition^ Confejfion^ Salisfadion, Ahjohition. — But the whole is fometimes called by the name of a part. Our Homily " on Common Prayer and Sacraments, feems to mean the whole by the v;ord Abfolutiou', and that word is iifed in the fame fenfe in the Neceflary Dodrine% and in the works of Duns Scotus^— And the Farm of the Sacrament is, according to the Trent Cate- chifm, " / abfohe thee" — though indeed the matter is faid to be Contrition and Confeffion, and Satisfadion ".
*' Contrition
P Hift. Lit. Dlffert. page 31. ^ Cave, i. 593.
•■ Homilies, 8vo. page 276.
= Nee. Dodr. is not paged: near the begin, of Penance.
* See Forbes, 9. 5. 26.
t? Trent Catech. on Penance, Seft. 17. ig. page 245, Engl»
<^3
214 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV.
" Contrition is the grief of the foul, and a detef- tation of fin committed, with a purpole to fin no more for the time* to come." — Its place is fome- times fupplied by what is called Attrition^ which is fometimcs defined imperfccl contrition j the dif- ference feems to be, that Contrition is grief for fin as fin ; or moral forrow and abhorrence : attri- tion is grief for fin as producing bad confequeuces ; one might call i: prudential forrow and abhorrence: however, if this latter turns the wi// from fin, i: is deemed efficacious.
Attrition is called by its name in the fourteenth SeflTion of the Council of Trent, Chap. 4. but the naming of it feems fometimes to be avoided; it is well and artfully defcribed in the fifth Canon of the fame Seffion, but not named; neither do I fee it named in the Trent Catechlfm, though it is de- fcribed in Sed:. 37.
The next part of the Romilh Sacrament of Penance, is Confejjion : the word auricular is gene- rally added to Confeffion, in order to diflinguifh it from public and general confeffion, fuch as we open our Service with (after a fhort fentence or two and an Exhortation to confefs ;) and becaufe it is made in the ear of an invifible Pried''.
Bifliop
^ Ibid. Seft, 30, or page 2>;o.
y The French Diftionaiy of the Academy fays, the confcf- fional is commonly y^a/ ; and that two penitents kneel atone time on different fides ; thefe penitents cannot be fuppofed to communicate with each other: and I have underftood, that the Prieft is net feen during Confeffion : or not always. To con- fefs, in French, often means to confefs a Penitcut; that is, to receive his confefiion ; conftquently the Priell, who confcfTcs penitents, is a Conftflbr : but in Englifh to confefs, always means to confefsy/W; fo that the penitent would be the con- feffor in Englifh, keeping up the analogy ; but we rightly com- ply with Popifh expreffions in Popilh bufinefs.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV. 21^
Bllhop Porteus'' fays, as to " private confeffion in all cai'es, it was never thought of as a command of God, for 900 jrears after Chrift ; nor determined to be fuch till after 1200 :" whereas the Council of Trent " fay, " a fandifTimis et antiqtnjjimis Patribus, magno uuanimique confenfu, fecreia Confeffio facra- mentalis, qua ab imiio Ecclefia fandta ufa eft, et modo etiam utitur, [fuerit] femper commendata."
The oppofition here feems ftrong; yet Bingham does'* affood deal towards reconcilino; the contend- ing parties, by obferving, that though there were, m ancient times, feverai forts of confeffion in fome fenfe private, and though there was fuch an Office as that of penitentiary Prieft, yet private negotia- tions had always relation to public difcipline, and made a part of itj notwithftanding fome things might be occafionally concealed, . for fear of fcan- dalizing weak brethren.
I have already obferved, that the private peni- tent might be delirous to fubmit his offence to the Church, in order that he fhould be properly punillied, in this life ; neither too llightiy nor too fever ely : and this feems no unwife plan to gain iatisfa<5lion and peace of mind : now this was the very bufmefs in which Penitentiary Priefts were employed. And we may fee, that fuch a plan would make private penitence and church-difci- phne coincide ; or at leaft would form an intimate connexion between them. In the whole affair of penitence, the great difference between ancient and piodern times feems to lie in this 3 that in ancient
times
* Brief Confutation, page 47. — See alfo Comber's Advice, page 16.
^ SqK» 14. Cap 5.
*" Bingham, 18. 3. 11, — See alfo Wheatly on the Common
Prayer, p.ge 459.
P 4
2l6 BOOKIV.ART.XXV.SECT.lv.
times private repentance was more intimately con-.- ne(5led with churci.-diicipline, than in modern.
The i^ouoXoyria-ig of the ancients (taken from James V. lO.) Bingham fhews to mean the whole of public confefiion and Penance, confidefed as ecclefiaflical difcipline.
Dai/U has written a very good Book on auri- cular Confjffion; the contents of which may be found in Bingham, i8. 3. 4. which arc well worth reading; but I would wifh any one not by any means to excufe himfelf, if he is fcrioufly fludy- ing the fubjeft of Confeffion, from reading the iconclufion of the third chapter of Bingham's eighteenth Book.
In the Romifh church, young perfons are called upon to confefs. The Trent Catechifm mentions this, and defcribes the very humble *" pofture in which Confeffion is made ; it alfo mentions, that confeffion muft be nnreferved; of evil thoughts, words and a6lions; or of offences againft the tenth commandment, as well as againft the other nine. It fets forth the provifions which are made for the fecurity of the Penitent who opens'^ his heart : yet Comber fhews, that ' fome cafes have difpcnfation for divulging fecrets : as when a fault concerns the Church : this mufl give great latitude.
It icems flrange that fo much ftrefs fliould be laid upon confeffion, and yet that it fhould be in- ^, fifted on by the Church only once^ a year : could any one make a confeffion of all the fins, in thought, word and deed, which he had committed during a whole year.?
Whatever
•^ P;ige 261, Sea. 56.— See alfo Dia. Acad. Confefllonal. •^ Setl. 64, and 74. •= Advice, p:iae 37.
* Trent Catechifm, Se(5l. 59. — French Prayei-boJK„ page 16^ " I.cs commandemens de 1' Eglife."
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT, IV. 21^
Whatever good fome kinds of private confef- fion might do, yet the Romilh is faid to have been in faft productive of much evil. This is defcribed by Sir Edwin Sandys^ : Comber'' and Eenfon' fpeak of the evil refulting from the Clergy knowing the thoughts of men's hearts. — Indeed if we confider, that among fuch a numerous body as the Clergy fome may be expected to be vicious and corrupt, we fliail be fliocked at the thoughts of their being intruded with fecrets capable of being turned to bad purpofes. — Yet the Romanifts feeni ilill to value private confeffion as much as any part of their religion ''.
To me it feems, that private confeffion, under ecclefiaftical Laws, is bad even in theory ; that is, mifchievous not through mere abufe; at leaft not through any abufe but fuch as muft be expeded. . — Why not confefs to God himfelf ? to lean on inferior confidences, to be tried by narrow-minded judges, muft tend to lower and debafe the religious fentiments ; as was faid of worfliipping Saints and Angels ; and muft hinder a man from looking up to his heavenly Judge. And what can be expeded from reducing indeterminate duties to determi- nate laws, but a mechanical religion, coldnefs and cvafion ? What man pays with generous fervour what he is obliged to pay by law ? What can be expedled from requiring towards ftrangers, or per- fons of bad character, that confidence^ thofe efFu- fions of fincerity and contrition, which every delicate mind referves for a few intimate friends, but hypo-
crif}''
8 Speculum Europse, page lo.
•» Advice, page 37. » On James v. 16.
^ I colledl this from what I heard an eminent Englilh Lawyer of the Romifh Church fay, when he was folliciting an Aft of Parliament for thofe, who have fince been called protejiing Catholics,
2l8 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT, IV.
crlfy or felf-deceit ! — but our prefent bufinefs is Hijiory.
The church of England may fecm, from fome things, to approach towards Romifh ConfcfTion : *' Repentance," fays Bifhop Sparrozv\ "confiils of three parts, as the Church teaches in the Commi- nation ; i. Contrition^ or lamenting of our finful lives ; 2. Knowledging or con/eJ/i;ig our fins; 3. An endeavour to bring forth fruits worthy of Penance, which the ancients call fatisf action :'' thus Bifhop Sparrow ; and, of the fourth thing abfolution, the Church of England affords feveral inftances.
CoufeJJion^ in fome fort private, is often com- mended ^ by our Divines, and even in our Liturgy : we may inftance in the firft Exhortation to the Communion, and in the Vifitation of the" Sick. — But, in the firft place, let me obfervc, that I look upon it as always a mark of good fenfe, when men are avoiding anything, not to do it rafhly, and through mere difgufl; but to take every good they can find, though mixed with evil which they diiapprove: — In avoiding one extreme, it fhews rational moderation, not to run precipitately into another. — And with regard to particular regula- tions, there is a sreat difference between reauiring a conflant, ordinary confeflion of all fins: and re- commending it to an unhappy man, who wants much to unburthen his mind, in one or two ex- traordinary fituations, and to have his difficulties folved; to apply to one, who muft of courfe be better informed than himfelf, and may be fuppoied free from religious melancholy. The ordinary lan- guage of our Church is, " confefs yourfelves to Almighty God," and it is found even in our
firft
' Rationale, page 1 7.
•" Bingham, 18. 3.-~Biniop Porteus, page 46,
° See Wheatly, page 460.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV. 219
firft exhortation to the Communion; but when the mind is tormented with fcruples, or debilitated by iicknefs, advice is wanted : and the weak Qiould be " ;77(?iW to get over their referve, and folicit (pirituai " comfort or counfel."
The real purpofe of our Church, In quitting die laws of auricular confeffion, and at the fame time recommending Ibme confidential intercourfe between a Minifter and thofe troubled in con- fclence, was, probably, to throw off a yoke hard to be born ; to give liberty w^here the fenfible and delicate mind moft longs for it; to fubftitute affectionate exhortation in the room of per.al laws, and mechanical obfervances; and thereby prevent hypocrify and evafion ; without difTolving the paf- toral connexion and relation, or weakening the mutual confidence and mutual kindnefs between Minifter and people.
The next part of the Romifh Sacrament of Penance, after confeffion, is SatisfaSiion. The Church of Rome feems defirous to have the Peni- tent fuffer fomethlng in confequence of his offences; feeing, probably, that fome fuffering would be good for him, and might be made profitable to the Church : But how to manage, is the difficulty; for the fyflem gives complete forgivenefs to the penitent, even of mortal fins, without fuch fuffer- ing. It is therefore faid, that God is fometimes fpoken of as forgiving fins, when thofe who are forgiven, have fome partial, tempoTa.Ty puni/Iiment continued y and that, in a Chriil:ian, even after penance and abfolution, there are fome Embers^ as it were of fin, fome remains of vicious Jiabits, from wliich. danger is to be apprehended : both, then, for the continuance of fome punifhment, and for the counterading of thefe remains of evil in the mind, it is judged proper to fet iomt kind of tajks to
the
220 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV.
the Penitent, to be performed after his Abfolution. — To this it is added, that when tlie Church has been witnefs to a man's offending, it Iliould be able, for its latisfaction, to fee fome fiifferings fub- niitted to as marks of amendment : and that fuch marks will ferve as a warning to others, and make them cautious of offending. Laftly, it is laid down, that fuch adions as are prefcribed as fatis- fadions, ought never to be intermitted.— The latisfadions enjoined by the ConfelTors, arc to be Prayer^ Jims, and Fafiing; thcfe having a refpect to God, our neighbour, and oorfelves. But it is alfo held, that if God is pleafed to inflift punifli- ment hinifelf, thofe will be the fame in ef!ect as fatisfadions enjoined by the Prieft. — The quantum of Alms, &c. is to depend on circumflances ; as on the fortune of the ofiender, &c. like damages given by a Jury : this is trufting a good deal to Confeffors.
It is held alfo, that '' one can fatisfy/or another,'^ —on account of the communion of Saints; with fome /imitation, which I do not underftand" : indeed the whole of this fatisfying by proxy is to me obfcure; — it anfwers fome purpofe, no doubt : indeed one can fee that it tends to promote a circulation of wealth in the Church : but the moral good of it does not flrike me at prefent. Afts of mortifica- tion and iclf-denial, undertaken in order to break and extirpate vicious habits, are right and rcafon- able ; but here they appear to difadvantage by being cramped up in a bad fyflcm.
The lafl part of the Romifli Sacrament of Penance, is abfolution. — In order to have an idea even of the hiflorical part of the fubjeil:, one mufl attend to the diftindtion between miniferial and
judicial:
® It means, I believe, that if a perfon fatlifies for another, the benefit arifing ufually to the mind of the penitent, is loll,
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV. 221
judicial:- a perfon gives miniflerial 2h(o\ut\on^ Vv'hen he afts as a MiniJIer or Agent, under God as a principal J yW/V/^/, when he adls in the capacity of a Judge, from whom Hes no appeal. — Nor can we proceed rightly without remarking here, that all judicial abfolution muft confift in releafmg offenders from puniQiments infiicled by religious fociety amongft ?nsn, or from Church cenfures : and that all anticipation of the day of Judgment, in abfolving, muft be miniftcriali its end, to warm and comfort; though every decifion of a minifter or agent will undoubtedly be ratified, if the Agent ads in his proper p charader, and is rightly informed; which he cannot be, except the repentance, in any cafe before him, be fmcere : and as he can only pro- nounce abfolution on fuppofition of fincerity in his penitent, his abfolution muft be, in fome forr> conditional. This premifed, we proceed with our Hijiory.
All Abfolution given in the Chriftian Church to Chriftians as individuals was at firft minifterial'^ : there was not for many centuries any mention of the Church claiming to forgive as God. — Though, in cafes of judicial abfolution from church cen- fures, prayers were offered that God would forgive the offender, as the Church had done. The forms of abfolution which have been in ufe, are four : the precatory, the optative, the indicative, and the decla- rative ; they differ as do the following expreffions — *0 God forgive this penitent;' — '■^ may God pardon and deliver you from all your fins;" — " I abfolve thee from all thy fins ;" — ' God pardoneth all them that truly repent; wherefor-e, as I pre- fume, your repentance is fincere, I advife you to be
of
P Art. XXII. Se£l. xvii.
'1 See Bingham, 19. i. i. &c, and Wheatlyon tlier Common Prayer, page 465, &c.
222 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV.
of good comfort, and not to diftruft the divine mercy.* The moil ancieiic of thcfe forms was, I believe, the precatory j the optative is precatory as to its meaning: the indicative was not ufed till about the middle of the twelfth Century'; within a Century after that, the Prieft's indicative abfo- lution was looked upon as equivalent to the for- givenefs of God.
There is one exception to ancient forms being precatory, which comes fo near the ca(e of our abfolution in the Vifitation of the Sick, that it feems worth mentioning. Even in the primitive Church, we are told that the clinical abfolution % or abfolution given to perfons on a fick-bed^ was in the indicative form : only certain religious exer- cifes were enjoined in cafe of recovery, which, when the ablolution was given, it was taken for granted would be faithfully performed. Perhaps it might be thought, that as perfons on a lick-bed are apt to be dejecled, and their dejcclion is apt to increafe their diforder, that form fuited them beft, which was calculated to infpire the greateft confidence'.
The Romifh notions of abfolution are to be found, as before, in the Acls of the Council of Trent, and in the Trent Catechifm. The Rhe- mifli Teftament might carry us into too great length. — It was in the fourteenth Seffion, that the fubjeft was treated : we find it mentioned in the fixth chapter and the ninth Canon : the wilh of the Council feems to be, to declare even pri- vate abfolution judicial; but the difficulties are fo
flrikingy
' Whc?.tly, pr.j»e 467.
» See Dr. MarfhaU's Pcnitenlial Difciplinc, page 104, quoted by Wheativ, page 468.
' On this fubjefl we fiiul recommended, Archbilhop VPi£r\ Anfwer to the Jefuit's challenge ; and Dr. MarJhaWi t'enittntiai Difciplinc,
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV. 22^
flrlking, that they are obliged to fofcen the ex- preffions. However, in the Canon the matter ftands thus; any one is to be anathematized if he fays, *' Ahio\ntionen\ facramentalem facerdotis, non efle adum Judidalem, fed nudum mini/lerium pro- nunciandi et dedarandi remiffa effe peccata," &c. — Where I can conceive fome evajion to be de- rivable from the word Jacramentalem ; for any man who beheves there is fuch a thing 2iS facramental ab- fokuion, will believe it to ht judicial; and what is affirmed is affirmed of no other. — But in the Chapter, we have ftill greater caution ; the abfo- lution of the Prieft is owned to be, alieni beneficii difpenfatio; it is called, ad injiar aftus judiciaHs. ^In the" Catechifm, made for the inftrudlion of the People, we find, that when the Priefb ufes the words, Egote ahfolvo, he pronounces that the finner has obtained from God the Pardon of his Sins. — Nay this is faid of a penitent who has not con- felfed, but only has had the wi/h of Confeffion;, though by the ninth canon any one is anathema- tized who fhall fay, non reqiiiri Confeffionem Peni- tentis, ut Sacerdos eum abfolvere poffit. — In fome cafes, ftill farther relaxation is allowed : for the Prieft is direifled to abfolve his penitents, if he only finds, that diligence in reckoning up fins, and grief in detefting them, have not been " alio- get/ier zvanling,"
We come, in the laft place, to Abfolution as it is pradtifed ill the Church of England. — Our Church ufes three of the four forms already men- tioned ; the declaratory near the beginning of the fervice; the optative, which is in fenfe precatory,, in the communion; and the indicative in the visi- tation of the fick. But Biifiop Sparrow rightly
obferves, " On Penance, Se6l. xix. page 346,
224 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV/
obferves^ that '•' thefe feveial Forms, in fence and virtue are the fame;" and illuflrates his obfer- vation by the inilance of a Prince commiflTianing an Officer to fet at liberty all well-difpofed Pri- foners : it feems immaterial which form of words he ufes. The indicative form was once, by the Kubric in the office of vifiting the fick, direfted to be ufed in all^ private confelfions when men had fcruples of conlciencej but now, in the firft ex- hortation to the Communion, though abfolution ispromifed to thefcrupulous, the form of it feems to be left to the Prieft, only it is (hewn to be minif- terial; and to be built, not fo much on private judgment, as on " God's holy word."
I will clofe this account of Abfolution, with obfervlng, that though our expreffion in abfolvinff the fick, " I abfolve thee from all thy fins," founds as if the abfolution were purely indicative; yet, if we take all the expreflions of the form at once into our minds, we muft perceive, that the abfo- lut.on is exprefsly called minillerial; and that it is alfo declarative, and optative; and therefore, that the concluding expreffion cannot Be rightly un- derftood but as confiflcnt with thofe forms to which no member of the Church of England obje£ts.
Having now gone through the four parts, we may conclude by taking notice, that m the Ro- milh Sacrament of Penance, the matter is, the part of the Penite-nt, (Contrition, Confeffion, Sdtis- fadlion'; the Form is, the part of tlie PridJ; Ego le abfolvo.
In the Directory of the Prefbyterians I do not ; fee Abfolution mentioned; but the Minifter is to
comfort
* Rationale, p?.ge 19.
y bee King Edward's f.ifl Liturgy, Rubric in the Vlfitatlon of the Sick. Or Wheatly on Common Prayer, page 469.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV, SECT. V. 225
comfort the fick, to declare God's mercy to peni- tents, to hinder the indifpofed from being too much cafl down, &c.~and in cafe oi fcruple, " in- ftrudions and refolutions fhall be given to fatisfy and fettle him."
V. The next Romifh Sacrament, after Penance, which we reject, is Orders : but on this we need not dwell very long. Indeed our principal con- cern is with the Romifh Church, as we have already, under the twenty-third Article, given fome account of church-minifters in general; and as we (hall have occafion to fpeak of the Englifli Ordinations in particular under the thirty-fixth Article. — However, if any particulars occur, which have not been mentioned before, and which t^ow any light upon the Romifli Orders, they may be admitted .
Bingham gives* an account of feveral forts of Ministers in the ancient churches, which in our church are not ufed. As Deaconejfes^ that is, elderly widows, attending on Baptilm and other offices relating to females. Subdeacons, Cwvi^iTxi, afliilants to Deacons, &c. in the ceremonies of the Church; a fort of agents or meffengers, and at the fame time Pupils, to the Bifhops* — Acolythifis, (or Acolyths, or Acolytes) attend- ants for lighting candles, and providing wine for the Eucharifts. — Exorcijis., whofe bufinefs it was to attend the En^yv^ivoi, or Demoniacs, or pofleffed, and pray with them. This ofRce of Exorcifts feems flrange to us, nor do 1 perfedly know the nature of the diforders under which the Energumens laboured, and were conceived to labour: religious fervours have frequently difordered the intelleds, efpecially in a new religion, when oppofed by
friends
? Bingham, 3. 3. VOL. IV. P
226 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. V.
friends who could raife the affcdtions, and occafion great agitation in the mind : in the plans of ancient churches we lee, that two fides of the cloyilers of the outward court were occupied by thefe ener- gumens^ — As to the Exorcifl's driving away the unclean fpirit at Baptifniy that might be partly em- blematical; and partly owing to the notions of men not free from fuperflitious weaknefs, concern- ing the nature and end of that Inftitution.
There were alfo, in the ancient churches, Rea- derSy who read the fcriptures aloud in fome ele- vated place or reading deik : all tliefe were probably in training for higher offices. Even the OJtiariiy or doorkeepers, had a kind of ordination from the Bifhop, as far as that name could be applied to a ceremony of folemnly delivering to them the K«^s of all the facred things with which they were to be entrufted''. — Befides thefe, there were Catechijls, and feveral inferior clerical Officers; but I need not defcribe any more : indeed there is no end of the different modes in which men may worfliip God; and fcarcely any of the different officers who may be employed in very large religious alfemblies, where the ceremonies are complicated and con-. du6led with a magnificence calculated to ftrike the eye and warm the imagination.
Cave, in the alphabetical Diflertation before- mentioned, has an article Xfiforovta, or office for ordaining different clerical minifters. He informs us, that the OJiiariuSy Exordji^y and Acolythijl^ are
not
* Frontifpiece to Wheatly on the Common Prayer. I have, been concerned with fevenil perfens who would have occupied a place in one of thefe Cloyftcrs, While the Gofpel was fpread- ing, mod, or many mad people would take a religious turn. . '' Tlic OJiiarii were not confidered as Laymen.
^ When the difordered in mind were not fuppofed to want fryer, &'C. one who had the care of them would only be like
a keeper
ISOOfc IV. ART. XXV. SECT. V. 227
not now held clerical in the Greek Church : but that there are rituals in the Euchologion for ordain- ing Bilhop, Priefl, Deacon, Subdeacon, Reader, &Ci He mentions Morinus as a learned writer on fuch fubjeds.
The Romifh church try to keep up a connec- tion between the ideas of Priefthood and Sacrifice, with a view to their mafs. They have five orders below that of Deacons ; which are enumerated in the twenty-third Seflion of the Council'' of Trent; Subdeacons, Acolythifts, Exorcifts, Readers, and Door-keepers. Thefe are the fame names which we have found in ancient churches ; but we are informed, even by Cardinal Bona, that, in reality, the ancient offices had ceafed in his time ; and that the perfons called by thefe names, were chiefly boys, and men hired, but initiated by no^ kind of Ordination,
In the atfts of the fame Council, Order is de- clared to be a proper Sacrament, inftituted by Chriji; but the unElion, though declared requifite, does not feem to be exprefsly called the matter of the Sacrament : impolition of hands is mentioned, and the Grace of Godj but only from the Epiftle to Timothy : and no fcriptural Form of words is produced.— Order is faid to be one of thofeiacra- ments*^ which imprefs an indelible 'xx^o.v.t^^.
In the Trent Catechijm the proof tliat Order is a proper facramenc, feems^ very iame : it informs us, however, that by the JJiaving of the crown, ant entrance is opened into the Sacrament of Order,
and
a keeper of a mad-houfe : he need not have any fpiritual or clerical chara£ler.
** Cap. %.
' I. 25. 18. Bona, Rer. Liturg.— Quoted by Bingham, 3. 3, end.
f Sedl. XI. E Sea. xx.
P 2
228 BOOK IV. ART, XXV. SECT. VI.
and that the fhaven circle grows with ecclefiaftical dignity. It alio fets forth " the dignity of door- keepers'";" gives us the ufual forms, by which they and other inferior Clerks are ordained, or ap- pointed : and mentions, that Baftarch and perfons deformed^ are difqualified for Ordination.
It feems reafonable that there Ihould be a num- ber of ecclefiaftical officers in any place, propor- tioned to the greatnefs of the congregations in that place, and to the number and grandeur of the ceremonies. In our Cathedrals we have Precentors, &c. which we have not in our inferior churches j not to mention Vergers.
VI. We now come to the Romifli Sacrament of Matrimony; but of this fome Hiftory has already been given ' under the twenty-third Article : We need only fpeak of Romifh Matrimony and our own.
The Council of Trent declares" Matrimony to be a facrament inllituted by Chrift himfelf, but mentions neither matter nor form ; nor ufes any argument, that I Ihould call fuch, befides that paflage' of the Vulgate, erunt duo in carne una. Sacramentmn hoc magnum eft. — It feems"" there have been great difputes amongft the Romanifts whether all marriages could come under the notion of a Sacrament.-— The Church of Rome is not only againft Polygamy but Divorces. As Matri- mony is with them a Sacrament, it is indiffoluble; not that it is one of thofe which ftamp a x*? '*'*'''*'?» becaufe, though indiffoluble for life, it may be difTolved by death : nor i:? it inconfiftent with fepa-
ratioH^
^ Se£l xxxl. Marglh. ' Art. xxui. Seft, xii.
^ Seflion 24.
' Eph. V. 31, 3a. See Seel. 11. of this Article, about Sacra- mentum.
■• See Limborch's Theolog;)', 5-77. end.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VI. 229
ration^ a mensa et toro; but only with divorces ftriclly fo called ; a vinculo matrimonii. Yet any marriage not confummated, is diflbluble by one of the parties going into a Convent or Monaftery, or entering into any religious order. The prohibi- tions and difqualifications, from confanguinity, &c. are numerous ; more fo than thofe in Leviticus ; and the Romilh Church claims a power of adding j but eafe is to be procured by means of Difpenfa- tions. Now the greater ftridnefs there is, the more frequently mud difpenfations be fued for.— I will only obferve farther, on Romilh Matrimony, a leeming Angularity j I mean, that an inllitution fhould be deemed a facrament only by thofe, who '/ mbft commend abftaining from it!— to commend abflinence from a facrament, would appear to us (omewhat ftrange.
It is natural here to take fome notice of our own cuftoms concerning the inftitution of Matri- mony.
We feem to go on this principle, that a fociety formed in order to bring up youdi in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, ought to be formed with fome folemnities of a religious fort. And whatever infpires religious fentiments, will refine the fexual appetites, and hinder them from dege- nerating into grofs brutality : will tend to melio- rate love by a mixture with friendfhipj andfenfual defire, by efteem of moral perfections.
It is of courfe that we rejed: unhmired inter- courfe of the fexes^ but moreover, we reject cgu- cubinage ; not only in the modern fenfe of the word, but that kind of unequal marriage between mafter and Have, or fervant, which ufed to be called concubinage in very ancient times. We place the hufband and wife in one rank, and make their reciprocal claims on each other's perfdn and P 3 property
230 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VI.
property to be equal — We reject alfo Polygamy entirely.
We adopt the prohibitions and impediments, in refpeft of confanguinity, &c. which are mentioned in the Mofaic law : but, it may be, they are fuch as would refult from the moral principles of Incefl, applied to the prevailing culloms of the part of the world which we inhabit".
We look upon Adultery" as diffolving the mar- riage contraft, and therefore, on proof of it, allow of divorce y but we take all methods to encourage honouring the wife as the weaker velfel; and we inculcate not only gentlenefs and courtefy, but patience : of which our Homily is a refpeciable proof: the compofition of fome one who well knew, not only fcripture, but human life.
In our Service, the Union between Chrift and his Church, is fet in the right light; and becomes, inftead of a foolifh argument for a Sacrament., a rational and affecting inducement, both to Chriftian piety, and conjugal love.
One objedlion to this account, with refpeA to the equality of hufband and wife, is flriking ; the wife contracts to obey, which the hufband does not. And it is true, that no fociety can be carried on without authority lodged fomewhere; but fuch
authority
" See Wheatly, page 425. Lev. xviii — The table was drawn up by Archb.fhop Parker ; who infers from one fcx to the other. The Romanills liacl tov many impedimenrs from coufanguinity, &c. we w anted to leflen tiieir number ; what wav more unex- ceptionable, or lefs likely to be excepted to, than for us to take the Levitical impediments ? Extcncin j thjin to both fexes made them feem more numerous ; and therefore nearer to the Popifh ; but the lews niufl have extended them in like manner, by parity of reafoning.
° This do£s not mean the Law of England, as it ftands ; that allows no divorce, (fee Blackftone, Index, Divorce); we mean thofc prir.ciples on which anew Law may at any time be madcj and on which new Statutes are framed occafionally.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VI. 23I
authority as is lodged with the hufband, is only for the fake of unity ; in order that education, &c. may not abfolutely flop: conjugal authority would be abufed, according to our principles of marriage, if it gave any honour, privileges, accommoda- tions, to the hufband, above the wife : the wife of a Duhe is a Dnchefs, of a Peer a Peerefs^ and fo on ; though in ancient times fome forts of wives were httle better than flaves; having little or no claim on the perfon or property of the hufband.
It may be faid, why could not conjugal au- thoCT:y be divided^ and given to the hufband in fome things, to the wite in others ? It feems probable, that if that had been done, the wife would not have had an influence fo great, or fo fuited to her powers, as llie now has: the conjugal fociety is formed fo much upon fenti- ment, that the exercife of its authority may be left more indeterminate than that of other focie- ties. The Magiftrate ought indeed to have a power of proteding a wife from perfonal danger, or from what, in her rank, would be called indi- gence; but to make general laws that the wife in all families (and only general laws could be made) lljculd have fo much conjugal authority, and no more, might be probably, in effect, preventing the hufband and wife from governing tacitly ac- cording to their refpcdlive powers of governing to good purpofe.
The American Liturgy omits our exprellion, *' ivitk my Body I thee worJJiip;" the omifTion makes the form appear to me very blank : zvorjMp is an old word for honour ^ or rcfped ; and by the formu- lary uled in oiy Liturgy upon putting on the ring, the hufband engages to treat his wife as an eqiiah,
ja P Art. XXII. Se£t. ix, P 4
1^1 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VII.
in perfon and property^ that is, not as a concubine^ fuch as Hagar was to Abraham. Now to change a form whicli does this, {o as to make it only engage for refpedful and honourable treatment in regard to property., is furely to cut off a material part; cfpe- cially if we confider what St. Paul fays, i Cor. vii. 4. I do not fay that American hufbands do not treat their wives with perfonal refpecft; I fpeak only of the propriety of a verbal Form. Yet I think the Englifh Liturgy was formed by a wifdom fuperior to that which dilated the American.
The Prejbyterians feem only to fimplify the rite of Marriage; whether with good efted:, I fhould much doubt. The account of the marriao;e- ceremony ordained in the DireSiory., as given in the preface to Grey's Hudibras, might not be too long for me to read to you.
VI r. We come, laftly, to the Hiftory of the Romiflrfacrament of Extreme UnSlion.
The primitive anointing of the fick has been generally accounted the gift of healings though Papifts muft m.aintain alfo a facramental und:ion. — In the fevcnth Century, we are told, Chrilbans praAifed un6lion with a view of curing their bodily difeafes. This was not merely a medicinal appli- cation of oil ; it was religious, or rather fuperlli- tous : fuperftitious people, in different ages and countries, have run into a kind of religious'* quackery. — But in the twelfth Century the bodily cures failed fo often, that it was thought bell to hold the anointing to be b^fneficial to the 5ow/, rather than the Body; and to the Body, onlv when bodily health would do the Joul no harm. — When
this
1 See iiijiindllons of King Edward Vf. in Sparrow's Col- le£lion, page 9. — Fiilke on the Rhcmitls, fol. 433, mentions a cuftom of carrying home wattr, after it had been ufed for bap- tizing, in order to apply it to bodily fores.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VII. 233
this came to be the notion, thofe parts of the body were anointed which are confidered as inftruments of>^
Cave gives' us an account of an Office or ritual ufed in the Greek Church, and called Evx^xaiev, or prayers for the ceremony of extreme unction; it is part of the Euc/wiogion, and is titled more fully. The Service of the Holy Oil, to be Ring by /even Priefts, coUeded in the Church or Houfe : that is, the fick man was to be brought to Church to be anointed if he was flrong enough to bear it; but if he was very weak indeed, ** graviter affliftus et projlratus,'^ the /even Prieds were then to hng this iervice at his houfe: many myflical reafons are given why the number lliould be feven; and there- fore we may fuppoie that it was never lefs. — Extreme undion, though praftifed in the Greek Church, is not there reckoned a Sacrament: nor was it of old, by Chryfoftom; or indeed in the Latin Church by the venerable' Bede.
In the fourteenth SeiTion of the Council of Trent, we find three chapters and four Canons upon extreme unction. It is called, in the chap- ters, a proper Sacrament, intimated [irijinuatum'^) by Chrill: in St. Mark's Gofpel, and recommended and publilhcd by St. James. From a tradition concerning the pallage of St. James, Chap. v. 14, &c. the Church has learnt what that Apoftle teaches ; namely, that the matter of this Sacra- ment is 0/7, the Form, thefe words, " Per ijiam un£lionem, he. — the efeci, to ivipe off fins, and to
promote
' This from Wheatly, page 475, See.
» l^ilt. Lit. Diff. page 28.
' See Fulke againft the Rhemifts on James v.
" Tliis word injinuatum was a corre^tcn in the council : — a thing might be intimated in one place, and inftituted in another; but, in that cafe, the Inrdtution would be the thing men- tioned.
234 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VII.
promote the health of the Body, when that is ex- pedient for the Soul. — Tlic Elders mentioned by St. James, mean Priejls. This Sacrament is to be adminiftered to perfons who feem to be " in exitu vitj:\' — from which it is fometimes called *' Sacra- vientum exeunthim.'" — The Canons are not content with faying, that this Sacrament was ^^ injinuatum'* a Chrifto; they fay it was a Chrifto Domino " noflro injiitutiim'* ]n other things they only repeat what was faid in the Chapters, annexing Anathemas.
The Trent Catechifm tells us moreover at length what is the Form of this Sacrament; " God in- dulge" (or pardon) "thee by this holy undion, whatever offence thou haft done through the fault of thy eyes, or nojirils, or touch :" — And fays, that the Inftitution " came from Chrift,*' and after- wards was pitblijlied by St. James : it was rather to heal the Soul than the Body. This Sacrament is to be adminiftered to fuch as are ^^ grievoujly fick,'* but before they lofe their fenfes, — Befides the parts of the Body mentioned in the Form, fome others are to be anointed : the ears, the mouth, the hartd, i\\Q feety and laftly the reins, (only in men, not in"* zvomen^) ** being the leat, as it were, of plea- fure and luft." — And the facramcnts of Penance and the Eucharift, are to be received as a prepa- ration for that extreme undion. — This Sacrament is faid to require great 'Triijl, and to be fometimes lets cffcftual than it might be, through want of Faith m him who receives it.
The NeceJJary Do£lrine fays, that extreme unction (which it calls a Sacrament) is to be miniftered to
fuch
* I do not fee this diftinftion in the Catechifm, but it is mentioned in Z,//A^5;v^, 5. 77. 21. where the account of thts Romilh notions is concife, and feems accurate.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VII. 23^
fnch as require it; that it is called extreme, or lajl^ becaufe it comes after other un5iions : it may be ad- miniftered more than once, and ought to be, *' in the entrie of ficknefsj" and the Eucharift ought to be received after it.
King Edward VI, retained ^ the cuftom of anointing for fome time, as a temporary indulgence to the prejudices of thofe, who had been brought up m Popery : but in h\s Jecond^ Liturgy it was omitted. Wheatly gives us the form, out of King Edward's firft Liturgy, in which the Priefl addrefled the fick perfon, when he anointed him, "upon the forehead and breafl only." He ajfo obferves, that this unftion might be ccnfidered as the remains, not of the primitive, but partly of the ancient, and partly of the Popifli unftion.
In our Liturgy, as it has ftood ever iince the publication of the fecond Book of Edward VI. we have no unftion; but we have a Vifitation cf the Sick. Of this I may be expeded to fay fome- thingj but my obfervations have been anticipated, either under the fubjed of Confc[fion, or under that of Abfohition. I feem now only to have to read to you the lixty-feventh Canon, which leaves the whole method of inftrudling and comforting the fick to the dijcretion of the Minifter, if he be a licenced preacher : it he be not one, he is then " /£> infiru5i and comfort'''' the fick *' in their dif- trefs, according to the order of the Communion' book\''
P. S. In
y Mentioned Scft. 11.
* See Neal, page 37, Vol, i. 4to. and Wheatly on Common Prayer, page 471. 477.
* See the Canons of 1603 ; and Wheatly, Jntrod. to Vifit Sick. — He fays, it may be quejiioned whether " by the Aft for Uniformity of publick prayers, we be not reftrained ^Koxapri-vate Forms.**
23^ BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VIII.
P. S. In Wall's Infant Baptifm it is ^aid^ that the Englilh Baptijls ufe extreme unftion, though rarely, and in hopes of recovery.
viii. At length we have finifhed the Hijlory of this twenty- fifth Article, and we come now, in courie, to the Explanation.
Our prefent Article has that for the firft para- graph which was the laft in the Article of 1552; and has that for the lafl, which was the firft, aftejf a fentence'' from an Epiftle of Augullin to Janu- arius : in the middle it has a rejection of five popilh facraments, which in King Edward's Article were not mentioned. — It has omitted one fentence of the former Article, concerning the effed of the Sacraments being '* ex opere operato" -^in the Englifh, " of the work wrought :" retaining the Jenj'e^ in the reft, but dropping the phraje^ with the remark upon it.
The firil paragraph of our Article contains a definition or a Sacrament; which it is no very eafy matter to give : we have one in our fhort Cate- chilm; to thofe who find one of thefe intelli- gible, the other will be fo too. — It fcems to me a good way to get at the meaning of our Church, to confider what opinions Ihe wiihes to avoid.—' With regard to the nature of a facrament, flie wifnes firil to avoid the notion, that it is a mere hadge^ by which Chriftians are diftinguilhed from Heathens; and next the notion, that it acts mechanically upon the Soul, as a powerful medicine does upon the Body. Jf the inquirer finds any fpace between thefe two notions, the Church of England feems willing that he lliould range in it freely. We mufl fuppofe fome outward y7^;/, and fomc inward meaning; this meaning mull imply
fome
•> Part 2. Chap. viii. Sedl. 11. page 446, quarto, « Seft. Ji.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VIII. 237
fome ^00^ affeding our minds, and the/tt/«r^ hap- pinefs of our Souls; and appropriated to ourfelves by our own voluntary adts; and then other parti- culars, if any there be, may be left unafcertained. —My own idea of a Sacrament is, a ceremony, which exprefles by vifible words (as Auguftin"* calls them) fome great Benefit bellowed by God on Man; which may be fome beneficial _;?«/(? or con- dition, leading to great good : a ceremony imme- diately injoined by divine authority : — It is called an outward '* fign of an inward and yp/n/z/^/^r^c*?," 01 favour; but inward, is only oppofed to outward-, tind means, the benefit fhadowed out by the cere- mony : and any benefit (or grace, or favour) may be C3.\\edfpiritual, which relates to the future hap- pinefs of our Soul or Spirit, or to the im.provement of the ?nind : fpiritual is oppofed to the material fign; and its fenfe beft got by taking it fo. — If it appears to any Chriftian, that God's Holy Spirit muft be concerned in a facrament, he may fatisfy himfelf thus. When we come to confider attentively how great and w^onderful a thing it is, that God fliould inftitute a ceremony for us-, and how grate- ful we ought to be for the benefit which it fhadows out, and how diligent we ought to be in fecuring and rightly applying that benefit, we muft feel very great moral improvement'' : and all fuch im- provement it is our duty to refer to the affiftance of the Holy Spirit. The nature and manner of fuch refejence belongs to the tenth Article. — This moral improvement, this difpelling of our weaknefies, this warming of our fentiments, and confirming of our good principles, is called, with refpeft to the Lord's Supper, " \\itflrengthe71ing and refrefJiing
of
«* Contra Fauftum, 19. )6. cited by Forbes, 9. i.'32. « P. S. I think our Reformers had much the fame idea: Sec Reform. Legum, de Hserefibus, cap. 1 7.
Z^S BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VIII.
of our fouls."— I fhould think, that this might ferve as an Explanation of the firft paragraph : ta me it makes that paragraph intelligible.
The fecond paragraph needs no explanation.
In the third fome expreffions may be noticed.
" Thofe five commonly called facraments" — v»'c fliould not exprefs oarlelves fo notu, but the five were very commonly called facraments when the Articles were made.—'* Sacraments of the Go/pel;^* — this is oppofed to ^acr amenta in the large fenfe, as meaning any emblematical aftions of a facred nature.
In the remaining part of the Article we have feveral inftances of the plural number being ufed when only one fingle thing is meant. — The Pnri- tans^ objeded to this, at the Hampton Court Con- ference ; making confirmation to be included in both exprcffions " corrupt following" — and, " al- lowed"— at leaft that is the bell fenfe that 1 can make of the objedion. Corrupt imitation" of the Apoftles, may relate to confirmation, orders, and extreme unciion, or it may mean only the lad ; but '"'' Jiates of Life allowed in the Scriptures," fcems to mean Matrimony alone : our Homily '' fays, ^^ godly Jlates of life," meaning the fame thing. — Afterwards, '* Sacraments" are not *' to htgazed upon,'' &c. is applicable to the Lord's fupper only: *' duly life them" may indeed include Baptifm, be- caufe confecrated water ufed to be carried home and given to the difeaj'ed\ But St. Paul's" pafiagc
about
*" SeeNeal, Vol. i, quarto, page 41;;.
' Art. IX. " folltmiing oi Adam." Seft. xvii.
^ Pnge 277, oftavo.
* Fulke on Rhemifls, fol. 433, top; As in Sed. v 1 1 .
'' I Cor. xi. 29. — Yet Auguftin treats of the efficacy of
Baptifm as depending on the worthinefa of the receiver.
Forbes, 10. i. 20. — 10. a. 14;.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV, SECT. IX. 239
about unworthy receiving, relates to no Sacrament but the Lord's Supper.
In excufe for this ufing plural where only one thing is meant*, we may fay, let any one try to ufe the lingular number, and yet keep to the fub- jed of Sacraments in general. Several other little things may be faid, — " Ihey*^ is fometimes ufed, wdien the meaning only is, to keep the expreffion general, and not determine whether He or She or feveral^ be meant. * They whom I fhall employ in this bufinefs, will do it well. You may depend upon it :' a perfon who faid this might employ 0//^ man, or ont woman; as well as feveral. — We affirm concerning anything in the plural when we are fpeaking of it as being fome /pedes, or clafs, — Your Voltaires are dangerous people.- — Forbes"^ fays, " Patres aliquando, de uno Sacramento lo- quentes, utuntur vocabulo numeri pluralis." — And in the Epifde to the Hebrews we find fomething which feemsto be of the fame nature"; " fubdued kingdoms," &c. &c. predicated of a few parti- cular men ; Gedeon, Barach, &c. every one of whom did not perform all the exploits there mentioned; though they were performed by the perfons named.
We cannot well fay more in the way of Ex- planation without incroaching on fom.e of the fub- lequent Articles.
IX. Our Proof m.uft be direded folely againft ih^five Popifh facraments which we rejed ; all the reft belongs to other places. — In difputing whether different things can be called by the {lime name, we are apt to run into trifling propofitions, by uling that name in different fenfes; but here we
feem
^ Archbifhop Uiher keeps this mode of expreffion in-his Irifli Articles.
"= Forbes, 9. 5, 6. ^ Heb.
XI. 33.
£40 BCOK IV. A-kT. XXV. SECT. IX.
feem fecure from that fnarcj for the Romira Church defines a Sacrament much as ours does; . and without that, it would be enough if we proved, that the Romifh five, are not facraments in the fame fenfe with Baptifm and the Lord's Supper.
In the Trent" Catechifm a facrament is defined, " a thing fubjed lo fenfe which, by God's appoint- ment, has vertue both X.0 fjgnifie and to work holi- nefs and righteoufnefs." — " God's appointment" cannot fignify the courfe of nature or providence, for all Sacraments are held by the RomaniflsP to be appointed by Chr'ijt. In this definition there 2s^four parts correfponding to the four parts of ours. — I. An external pare — 2. An appointment of Chrift.— 3. A fignify ing, or fign, or pledge. — 4. An invifible efficacy.— This fettled, we may briefly remark on the ^Qn\\^\five.
Conf.rmntion feems fufficiently authorized as an holy ceremony, but it has no external rite ap- pointed by Chrift. Irapofition of hands is not peculiar to it, and Chrifm is of human invention.
PcnancBj or penitence, public or private, is an important thing; but it has no tolerable preten- fions to inftitution of Chrift as a vifible cere- mony. The confcflion mentioned Janies v. 16^ is, in fome way, mutual. And the effeds of Popilh penance may be expected to prove fuch as are de- icribcd, Ezck. xiii. 10.
Ordination^ or Orders, is very well authorized; but Chrift never ordained with any vifible fign, nor ever inftituted any for his Apoftles : they ufed im- pofition of hands, but not for ordaining only.
Matrimony was not inftituted by Chrift, in any fenfe ; he confirmed it as a contrad, but not even as a [acred contract : nor did he appoint anv rite
for
•» Page 131, or Seft. x. of Sacraments in general. P Trent Scff. vii. Canon i .
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT.X. 24I
for the execution of the contraft. And It is one in which the Supreme Being is no Party. As to Eph. V. 32. — the marriage of Chrift and his Church is certainly a my fiery, ^xur>if«ou, which in Latin is rendered [acr amentum; but the meaning only is, that Chrift is not literally married to his Church, but only meta-phorlcally, or myftically.— This is only an argument in one language; tranflate it, and it vanifhes into nothing.
Extreme imEiion, if enjoined at all, was enjoined not by Chrift, but after his Death. — Mark vi. 13. relates cures merely of a bodily fort ; and even in bodily cures oil was not always ufed by Chrift. — James v. 14, &c. feems to me to mean nothing beyond the compafs of ordinary practical piety and benevolence; as I will endeavour to ftiew more at large.
• Our Homily'^ on Common Prayer and Sacra- ments (hews thefe five to be no Sacraments in about one page.
How different are they from thofe two which we retain ! inftituted for the moft important fitu- ations; for a change of life on entrance into the Chriftian covenant ; for a profpe<5t of eternal hap- pinefs, to be attained by the Chriftian facrifice ; confined to no rank or order of Chriftians ; in- ftituted, both as to their external rites and their influence on the heart, with a plainnefs wholly in- controvertible ^ !
X. As the Romifli Sacrament of Extreme Unclion is founded on one fingle paflage of Scrip- . ture, James v. 14, 15. I think our end will be beft anfwered if I give you my idea of that paflage.
I found
^ Page 276, 277, oftavo.
^ St, Paul feems to me to make quite a feparate clafs of Ordi- na|\ces, of our two Sacraments, in 1 Cor. xii. 13. — See icc/fc'^" Paraphrafe. — The Rhemifts take no notice of it. VOL. IV. Q^
24- BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. X.
I found I had not a fatisfaflory notion of it, and therefore I fet myk-lf to confidtr it withoirt coa- fuliin;^; commentators. It appeared to me to have the following meaning. — ' I am giving vou (St. Jmncs is fnppofed to fpeak, or write) mifcellane- cuG moral and religious diredion?, as is ulual at the dole of an I'^pillle ; let me direft what is to be done in cales of fuknefs : Is any one indifpofed amongfb you? he will of courle take all human'' means of recovery : that need not be advifed; but let him not neglccl religion : ficknefs is favourable to piety, and fhould always be confidered, though with due modefty and diffidence, as the vijitation ot God. And it is He who muft give a hleffing to tht heft judged mcdiJne, betore it can be effectual, (Pikhn cxxvii.) Let then the fick man act as is moft hkcjy to promote pi-.^ty in himfclf, and to draw down the Liclling of Almiglity God upon his endeavours. — I^vlan was not made to be alone; as little in fickncls, and as little in Religion, as in any thing el e; let the Tick man (hen invite iome grave elderly Chiiftians, amongft wliom will naturally be fome ot lacred characters; and let them form a little dcniejlic religious Jociety, As a focictv cannot p;oceed without Iome ceremon\'\ let fome one of ihcfe reiptctable perions, as by conimiiTion from them all, make Iome application o\ lomeching ufually eftcemed mild and lenient^ t(3 tV.Q Body of the indifpofed: tliis is to be done religicu/Iv, or ^' in the name ot the Lord :" and the ceremony will dilpofe the company properly tor what is the frin:!pal thing, doincjiic prayer^ and Intcnejion. — " O how amiable" mull fuch devotion be! how improving to the minds of all! how likely to d:aw
<\o\\\\
• See in Spanow's Rtuioruilc, pape ^oo, a decree, that Phyficiaiis Ihall diicd their patients to fend lor Divines. Tlic f.uiic in WiiLMtlv.
BOOK IV. ART XXV. SECT. X. 243
down the blejfing of " the Lord !" Surely he will hear the prayers of his faithful fervants; fnrely there is ground for confidence, that he will raife up the dejected! — and as our Lord jomtdforgwenefs of lins with bodily healing; the whole of one of his bleffed cures will be accompliilied ! — Perhaps the indifpofed may be troubled mmind; O, let mutual confidence, in all fuch cafes, open the heart, to Co venerable a fraternity ! that muft needs give new flrength to interceilion. Think not that I direct you thus without reafon and example; I have juft now mentioned the ''patience of Job " let me, in like manner, fuggeft to you the fuccefsful Inter- ceffions of Elijah.*
As this interpretation is not the fame with that given by Commentators, they generally taking St. James's unftion either for a facrament, or for an exercife of the miraculous gift' of healing, it may be proper to ofFer fome reafons for my own opinion.
1 . The word aSsm does not feem to denote any grievous or dangerous'' ficknefs ; nothing which could give occaiion to the name oC extreme un<5lion, or re- quire the help of a miracle : the fick man is fuppofed well enough to invite the Elders.
2. It feemed to me, that Elders might mean elderly Chrifiians, whether in orders or not : the Apoftles ordain Elders; but that does not feem to prove that elderly Laymen, or elderly men as fuch, were never called ts-^?aSuT£^ot. — In Ftdke's anfwer to the Rhemiils on James v. I fince find, that Bede"", rendered •sr^fo-SuTEcot, " the elder fort :" and I find other remarks in fupport of the' interpre- tation.— Dr. Powell fays'', that it is not known
exadly,
' I Cor. xii. 9.28. 30. " Lex. Steph. quotes Cyrop. Lib. 8. ^ A. D. 701; Lardner. f Page 364. Thefis.
0^2
244 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. X.
exaiflly, what was the nature of the Prefbyters in the Apoftolic age.
3. The life of Oil feems to prove nothing, as to any cure being miraculous : it is ufed Mark vi. 13. in miraculous cures ; but it was only -as the clay and fpittle which Chriil ufed in curing the Wind. Sometimes impofition of hands was ufed, and fometimes all externals were omitted. Oil may be ufed in any emblematical ceremony, as well as impofition of hands in Ordination; it was fo ufed in early times of the Chriftian Church, as we favv under Confirmation*.
4. It is not the Oil, but the Prayer wliich is faid to fave (a-u^eiv) him who labours under infir- mity, (jca/xvovra.)
5. The expreffion ^'■Jball fave the fick," looks at firftasif a miraculous cure was meant ; but '■'■/fuill fave,* cannot be taken literally ; becaufe fomething is fpoken of which i$ to be done to all fick Chrif- tians, and if '■'■ Jhall fave,'^ was to be taken lite- rally, or the cure was miraculous, none would ciie. — Why, in that cafe, Ihould the example of FJias be brought as an argument, or as a perfualive? Bcfides, is prayer never unluccefsful.^ the inllance could only prove that prayer may fave.
6. I'he Lord's raifing up the fick man, implies nothing miraculous; in the language of Piet)', the Lord raifes up every one who recovers.
7. As to forgivenejs ot fin, it is in fo many places joined with healing, fome of which have nothing^ miraculous in them, that 1 look upon it
as » Sea. III.
» See Pfalm ciii 3. with Bi(hop Lowth's note on Ifaiah xxxiii. 24. and liii. 4. — Sec alfo Matt. ix. 5. (with proverb ii\ Whitby's note) and its parallels, Mark ii. 9.— Luke v. 23.— Matt. viii. 17, — Hammond cltts more texts, and mentions the cafe of Heztkiah. — In the OKI Italic verfion la^jjrs is even trattflaicd ut revtittatur vobis. (Michaclis, Introd, Left quarto^
ijea.
Book IV. ART. XXV. SECt. 3C. 245
as a kind of Jewifli phrafe to exprefs a cure.^^ tJnder the tenth and feventeenth Articles we men- tioned, that the phrafeology of the Jews refers all forts of events to God.— And on a footing of natu- ral religion we may fay, that all evil is piiniJJiment ; though God may in this life punifh men collec* lively : fnfferings may fail upon mankind for the faults or negligence of mankind. Were it eaiily ad- mitted that ail evil is punilhment, it rtiuft follow, that the removal of evil, is forgivenefs.
8. In order to have the example of Elias, we muft fee that the fifteenth and fixteenth verfes are on the fame fubject. This appears fufficiently from the word »«9>iTf : but in two'' good MSS. the word 81* fhews alfo a connexion. — aAA^Aot?, and utts^ osAAiiAwp, may mean, in turns-, that is, when any one is fick, let him open his mind, and let his pious friends intercede for him. If this was made a cuftom, each Chriftian, (in cafe of recovery) would be fometimes the vifited, fometimes the comforter and interceffor. Firft it is faid, if any one is lick, the Elders fliould, if invited, pray by him. The inference is more extenfive; ' open ///^/^ your hearts to one another, when by turns you labour under ficknefs ; and ^ray mutually for fick neighbours.'
All thefe remarks occur in reading the pafTage itfelf; others arife from fome extraneous eircum- ftances.
I. There is no probability, that a cuftom of miraculous healing, or a facrament of perpetual obligation, fhould be inftituted at the conclufion
of
Sefl. 62.) Our church, tn the Office for the Vifitation of the Sick, fpeaks of ficknefs as certainly God's vifitation; and as what may be fent to correal and amend what is oiFenfive to God.
" Firft New Coll. and firil Steph,
0^3
246 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. X.
of an Epiftle, in the midd of moral dircdfons, with ever}' thing ordinary and natural, with nothing fimilar before or after it. I (hould imagine, there might not be found an inftance of anything but moral diredions at the clofc of an I'^pifHe. Nor can we conceive, that anything fupernatural could be inftituted in {o few words^ without any mention having been made of it by Chri/i; or by St. Paul when treating of miraculous gifts. Had Bnptifm and the Loi'd's Supper been founded on only one text each, I iliould think they refted on weak foundations.
2. Thofe who have attended to the condud of St. Jatnes, will not think it like his ufual pru- dence to inftitute fupernatural obfcrvances in the flight and fudden manner here fuppofed. — I refer chiefly to what is called the Council" of Jeful'a- lem. — Ads XV. 13.
3. The ceremony fuppofed in my interpretation, docs not feem an unlikely one to take place, nor contrary to the cuftoms of early Chriflians. Their throwing aJJies on the head of a Chriftian on Afli- Wednefday, was of a fimilar nature''.
4. We mull not be underftood to fay, that no Elder, when St. James wrote, hnd that Gift of healings which is repeatedly mentioned by St. Paul. In the cafe before us, whatever might be the efficacy of the religious ad, it lliould be afcribed to prayer.
5. Without determining the nature of St. James's injundion, we might inquire, how tar it admitted of change in after times. — It fcems as if the Oily on any iuppoftion, mull be change- able; for miraculous cures were not always per- formed with Oil; and in mere ceremonies, oil was
accidental,
^ Art. xxi.Scdl. I. — Seealfo -Art. vj. Seft. XXIV. ** Bifliop Bramhall, cited by Puller, page 275.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. XI. 247
atcidenta), depending upon local cuftoms or the produce of the earth. Oil feenis to have been an eftablirhed', mild remedy in furgery; as appears from the application ot it by the good Samaritan ; and therefore anv other eftabiilTied mild remedy might be^ fubftituted for it. Nor does the opinion, that St. James's unftion was miraculous, make much difference ; fmce a natural practice of an ordinary fort, has been fhewn, in feveral inftances^ to follow a fitiiilar extraordinary fupernatural one, without interruption.
XI. Such is our diredl proof; if we aimed at any indireft, we might anfwer the weak. ohje£lion of Anthony Randall.^ that Sacrament is not a^' fcrip- tural term: it is in the Latin, and in the Latin only; it could not be in the original. — But it is not necefTary that when Scripture inititutes a tliingy it fhould alfo give it an authentic /mot^; and yet when Chrirtians have occafion to fpeak frequently of that thing, they muft give it fome narne^ as they do to other things : and they are moll ftrongly induced to do fo when there aie feveral obfervances which want a common name.
The word [/.vrn^iov is more confined in its mean- ing than Sacramentum. Every emblematical action has an outward meaning and an inward one ; Sacramentum includes both ; but /Aur^if »oi/ exprelies only the inward meaning. — Hence Sacramentum is not a good tranllation of jw-urnfiov; more efpe- cially as jtAurJi^Jow never ', in Scripture, is uied about
external
= What fay Hippocrates and Galen, of Oil?
*" The Oil would be called a Tradition , in Art. xjCxiv.
s In Ordination, Art. xxiii. Sedl. xxv. in' Confirmation, Se£l. J n . of this Article,
^ The Quakers think this argument worth adopting: fee Bar- clay's Apology, Prop. 12. ledt. 2. beginning.
' Limborcn, 5. 66. 10. For myfteries in the Church, (et Bing- ham, Index, mentioned beginning of Sed. ix. of this Article,
0^4
248 BOOK IV. ART. XXV, SECT. XI I.
external rites. I'he Church got to call leveral things myftcrics.
XII. In the way ot /ippUcation much need not be {aid.
If Dr. Dupin would not give up the five as Sacra- ments, would he (or his fuccefTors) agree to make two clajfes of Sacraments ; and let ns ufe Sacra- vientwn for any facred emblematical adl, as the ancient Fathers did, without determining whether ic was of di-vine or hiwmn appointment? — the Romanifts themfelves make a difference between their Sacraments in point of rank. — Still extreme undion would remain unfettled. Might we adopt fome ceremony, in the vifitation of the fick, ana- logous to that mentioned by St. James, according 10 the idea of it here given*'?
For my own part, I know not whether fuch an alteration would not feem to me an Improve- ment, A fomentation, or fomething of that fort, might be fubftituted for unflion: fome tafks, penances, exercifes, might be impofed in cafe of recovery, after the manner of the ancient cli- nic' abfolutionj any good refolutions recorded in the prefence of refpedable witnelTes", would be the more likely to be kept on that ac- count. Surely a meeting of pious, difcreet, el- derly neighbours, fome clergy amongft them, forming a domeftic religious affembly, praying together, under due regulation, in the houfe of a fick man, if it became generally cuftomary, and was held at different houfes interchangeably, misht be the micans of promotinii mutual bene-
volence;
^ Seft. X. beginning and end. ' Wheatly, page 468.
"> Wlieatly feems to favour the idea of WitiieJJes, pa^e 468.
BOOK IV. ART. XXV, SECT. XII. 249
volence ; and might in time produce a great increafe oi Piety and Virtue''.
" For the reafons mentioned in former inftances, I again mention, that thofe who took notes during the Leftures, will not find every thing in their notes, which they find here. Want of time obliged me to omit the tenth Section entirely, and the greateft part of the eleventh.
ARTICLE
2 CO BOOK IV. ART. XXVI SECT. I,
ARTICLE XXVI.
OF THE UNWORTHINESS OF THE MINISTERS, WHICH HINDERS NOT THE EFFECT OF THE SACRAMENTS.
ALTHOUGH in the vifiblc Church the evil be ever mingled with the good, and lometimes the evil have chief authority in the Miniftration of the Word and Sacraments ; yet forafmuch as they do not the fame in their own Name, but in Chrift's, and do miniller by his commifTion and authority, we may ufe their MiniRry, both in hearing the Word of God, and in receiving of the Sacraments. Neither is the efFed of Chriit's ordinance taken away by their wickednefs, nor the grace of God's gifts dimi- nifhed from fuch, as by faith, and rightly do re- ceive the Sacraments miniftered un;o them; which be effeftual, becaufe of Chrift's inftitution and pro- mii'e, although they be miniftered by evil men.
Neverthelefs, it appcnaineth to the diicipline of the Church, that enquiry be made of evil Minif- ters, and that they be accufed by thole that have knowledge of their ollcnces ; and finally, being found guilty, by juft judgment be depoled.
I. The Hijlory of this Article fecms to lie chiefly in the age of the Reformation; when thofe who were heightening every evil of Popery, and
painting
BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. I. 2 i^ I
painting it, to themfelves and ethers, in the ckrkell coK)urs, amongft other things, fuggefted and main- taintained, that Tuch wicked minillers as the Popidi Priefts v/ere, muft fliock every feiious man by their preaching, inftead of amending his heart ; and murh vitiate even the Sacraments tiiemfelves. — Our Church (hewed its moderation and good (enie in not running the lengths of fuch reformer?, being foon aware of the difficulties to which their notion muft lead. — But before we refer to any authorities, let us look to early times, and fee whether anything liiTiilar appears.
The idea that facraments adminiftered by Priefts. of immoral character, debauched, drunken, " lovers of pleafure more^ than lovers of God," fliould be fomething different from what they ought to be, and were intended to be, feems not unnatural. — A facrament muft appear to the mind, an holy ordinance, adminiftered to devout Chriftians, by a facred officer ftiU more devout : whatever de- ranged this conception muft feem, at firft, to deftroy the vital fpirit of the whole ordinance. — And though reajon might fuggeft what is urged in our Article, yet tht feelings and prejudices would fcarce ever be reconciled to a Sacrament given by a , bad man : nay difficulties would arife on all fides, and would continue to harafs the mind. Is this, (a communicant would always aik himfelf) the reprefentative of God? ofChrift? or even of the Church } Noj they muft all difclaim him ! can the wicked be attended to by Him who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity } by him who knew no lin? or can any man be confidered as bearing the commiffion of that Religious Society, whole iandity he profanes ? Such arguing, I fay, is not unnatural : it has, in truth, occafioned the
difficulties ' 2 Tim. iii. 4-
252 BOOK IV. ART. :^XVI. SECT. T^
difliculiies which have made it worth while to compofe an Article on our prefcnt Uihiecl:. — But our immediate bulinefs is with the Hiftory of early times.
Cxprian^ who is placed in 248, Bp. of Carthage, a man of an excellent charader, tell into difputes with other Chriftian leaders, about re-baptizing thofe, who had been baptized in any Se^^ out of the main body of Chriftians, or according to the language of the times, out of the communion of the Crt/W/V Church. Thefe difputes muft be about the cffecl of Sacraments beins. hindered bv fome •imperfedion or iinworthinejs in thofe who adminif- tered them ; for there feems nothing peculiar to Baptifm in the qucftion. Cyprian was of opinion, that the facramcnts, in this cafe, were ineffeBualy or, in other words, he was for the re-baptizing of thofe, who had been baptized by Heretics. His chief opponent, was Stephen Bilhop of Rome, whofe opinion, in all its particulars, is not exadly**' known.
The Dcnatijls are placed by Lardner in 312. Their feparation from the Church was owing to no- difference about dodrine, but at firft to a contefb about the appointnient of a Bilhop of Carthage. This appointment was made by fome Africans (the inhabitants" of Africa Proconlularis) without con- iulting the churches of Numidia: thefe laiter,- thinking themfelves ill ufed, made all poffible ex- ceptions to the appointment, and then difputes arcfe about tlie reafonabienefs of fuch exceptions. The Numidians, amongil; whom were one or two-
l.adinii
o
'' Lard. Cred. Cyprian : or Works, Vol. 3, page 137.
'^ In .'Ulrica theie were fix Roman Provinces one of which- was Jfr'.ca Procoti/ularis, another Kuuiidia : Bingham, .^nt. 9. 2. 5.— Carthage was the Metropolis of Africa Procon- fularis
BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. I. 253
leading men of the name of Donatiis^ excepted particularly to the new Bifihop (whofe name was C^cilianus) as a man of immoral charafter, in fome refpecis ; and they excepted to his confe- cration, as having been performed by a Traitor, or I'raditor, that is, one who had through fear de^ jlivered up the fcriptures, in the times of perfecu- tion, to thofe who meant to deftroy them. A church governed by fuch perfons, they faid, could be no true church; all its ordinances, even the facraments themfelves, muft lofe their proper efFedt under fuch adminiftration. Nay, when heated with difpute, they went fo far as to re-baptize thofe Africans, who came over to their party, if not Europeans who had communicated with them; which was profeffing, in the moft open manner, the invaHdity of the facramental forms when ufed by their adverfaries. The Donatifts were very nu» merous, fo as to be governed by 400 BKhops. (Mofheim.)
They had alfo a very formidable force amongft them; a large band of Fanatics, called Circiimcel- Hones, who ufed violence, and were guilty of ex- tenfive and numerous majjhcres : thele were alfo fo wild as to fancy, that they fuifered martyrdom if they dcftroyed themfelves, or compelled others to deftroy them.
The writings of Augufiiin and Optatus feem to have had great. efFeft on the Donatifts ; which Qiews, that they had fome good principles.
This affair of the Donatifts being fimilar to that in which Cyprian was engaged, and both happen- ing in Africa (in the larger fenfe) the latter re- newed the idea of the former; and the writers in the controverfy with the Donatifts, become expo- fttors of Cyprian and Stephen. — The chief writers on the fide of the Donatifts were Parmenianus,
Petilianus,
254 BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. II.
Petilianus, Crelconiup, &c. Their adverfaries were Auguiliii and Optauis, whofe wriiinos muft be fludicd by any one tliat wilhes to be fullv informed on the iubjecl:. He would find them rational and fpirited, and agreeing with our'^ church.
Now it does not appear to me, that thefe two celebrated cafes are exadly parallel to ours ; be- caufe in both, the Minifters are fuppofcd difqua- lifted ab initio, whereas our Miniilers, in thepreient Article, are luppoled to be regularly ordained. — But yet theie cales would produce arguments which would arledl the lubjed now before us ; efpecially as CaiCiliarius was acculed of immora- lities, though perhaps unjuftly. It would thence come to be argued generally, whether vice, in a minifter, hinders the effect of his miniilerial ads.
II. But not to detain you longer from the age of the Reformation. I have not the works of Wickliffe at hand, but J fuipedt, that, inveighing againft the wickednels of the Romilh Priefts, he \.\{t6y as one topic, the notion, that their profli- gacy mull vitiate the Sacraments; or he laid fome- thiug which his enemies might reprelent as mean- ing that. The council of Conftance made decrees againft him, and determined to dig up his bones on account of certain propofitions : — One of them was, ** If a Bifliop or Prieft live in mortal lln, he'' ordaincth not, baptizeth not, confecrateth not." — Another propofition faid to be taken out of Wickliffe, as to the _/«;«', is, " The ill Lite of
a Prelate
•* Take a fpecimen in Forbes, lo. i. 8. from Aug. de Unico Baptifnio contra Petilianurn.
'^ Thefe are the words in B;;.Yter's Hi.1. of Councils, page 431. — Thofe in page 438, are there faid to be " charged on John ///</}," but in page 439, " ta!:en out of Wickliffe."
^ Page 438 ; fee alfo page 439.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. II. 2^;;
a Prclite fubtrafteth the fubicils acceptation of orders, and other lacraments;" — "and yet in cafe of neceffity," &c. But the Council of Conftance mi-:;ht miireprefent the fayingsol the Reformers.
in x\\Q N dcelj'ary Dodriney &c. we have a pafll^ge to our purpoie, on the fubject of the Romilh Sacrament of Orders^, in which mention is made of the Donatifts, and the opinions of fome ancients introduced, as Chryfoftom, Ambrofe, and Gregory of Nazianzum. This work agr.es with the doc- trine of our Church.
The Anabaptilb, at the time of the Reforma- tion, ran into this error, that the vices of JVIinifters mud annull the force of Sacraments; as might be expedled from their unthinking feverity and mo- rofenefs. Luther fays of them\ ( Anabaptifl:^) " propter hommum vitia vel indignitatem (" im- wort/iinefsy" the exprefiion of our Article) damnant verum Baptiliiia." And Forbes\ in his tenth Book and fecond Chapter, fpeaks of the old controverfy, ^' de fide et probitate baptizantis," being renewed by the Anabaptifts at the Reformation; whofe fundamental principle I judge (from Mojheim^s account of them) to be, that the vifible church of Chrift, mufl be -perfect \\-\ faEl as well as in 'Theory. In the Reformatio Le glim (de H^refibus, Cap. 15.) the Anabaptifts are charged with feceding from the Church, and Sacraynents^ faying, that they are kept away, '* vcl miniftrormn improbitate, vel aliorum f rat rum.
The Council of "Trent anathematizes thofe who fay, that a Prieil living in mortal fin, cannot confer a Sacrament. The Catechifm is exp relied not
unlike
g About three pages from the beginning of the fubjeft.
^ Works, Vol.2, fol. ijoj.
' Forbes, 10. 2. i. and 10.4. 11.
2^6 BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. II.
unlike our own'' Article. — Thofe who follow the confeflion of AiiiJburg, " damnant Donatiftas et fimiles, qui negabant licere populo uti minifterio in Ecclefia, et fentiebant minifterium malorum inutile et inefficax' t^t.^' — The Helvetic fays'", that the perfeftion of Sacraments does not depend on the worihinefs or unworthinefs of thofe who give them. And the Scotch, that for the right ufe of Sacraments, it is requifite that their end and defign fhould be rightly underftood by Minifter and people. The prefbyteriansdo not feem to condemn the error heartily.
Heylin, in his introduction to his Life of Arch- bifhop Laud", fays, that the Church of England joins with the Church of Rome in fevcral points, in oppofition to SeSiariesoi various kinds; amongft other Articles, he mentions that " of hindering the effect of the Sacraments by unworthy JVlinif- ters." — And Dii Pin, in his commonitorium", makes no objection to our twenty- lixth Article.
Barclay, in his Apology for the fakers, treats the diftinclion ufed in our Article between the Man and the Minijler, as frivolous ; and feemingly runs into the notion lately mentioned as held by the fiift Anabaptills, that becaufe the Church of Chrift is perfect in Theory, it mud be fo in fa£i ;
that
^ See alfo Catech. on the Eucharljl : Seifl. lxxi v. page 232. — Afts of the Council, Seflion vii. Canon 12; on Sacraments in general.
' Syntagma, Aug. Conf. Art. viii. or page 13. of fecond part.
■" The Helvetic Churches were founded by Zuinglius ; the Dutch have much of Calvin's notion in their dodrine : the French Proteftants are called Calvinijis in France. (Voltaire, Louis XIV. Cal'vinif/>!c).—QA\\\n, Intl. 17. 16. agrees with us : See a paflage in Bingham's Works, Vol. 2, page 565, from Archbifliop Whitgift, exprefling the opinion of Calvin.
^' Page 37, ° Append, to Moflicim.
BOOK IV. ART XXVI. SECT. III. 257
that 15, no imperfed church muft be allowed to be a true Church. One fees what the fcope of the reafoning is; to depreciate all facraments, by heightening the defedls to which they may be liable in fome particular cafes, in the prefent faulty flate of things ; in order to draw men from ex- ternals, and bring them to trufi: only to the in- ternal //^/;/.— -The idea was not new in Barclay's time. In the Helvetic Confeffion are thefe words; Neque eos probamus, qui propter invifibilia^ afper- nantur in facramentis •vijibiliay &c. quaies MeJ/a- liani^ fuiife dicuntur.
III. But though we may agree with the Church of Rome as to the perfection of facraments admi- niftered by imperfed men; yet there is another thing, very nearly allied to this, in which we oppofe them : that is, the effecl of the Intention, of a Pried when he adminifters Sacraments.
Inteniion is not the fame with Probity; becaufe a man of a general good charader, might not intend to give a iacrament, asfuch, on a particular occa- sion, or he might be abfent in mind, &c. — and a bad man might intend it. But yet thcl'e are con- ceded'* : ordinarily, a good man will have the pureft intention in all offices of religion. The Romanifts mention worthinefs and intention to- gether ^ And they defcribe their meaning by laying, that a Miniiler muft intend, in order to have his ads effedual, what the Church^ intends; the Church, I fuppofe, from which he receives
his
P For Meflaliani, or Euchits, fee Art. xxv, Se»5t. 11. where there is mention of the Quakers, and of this pafrao;e : forfomc half converted Quakers, fee the fixth Sedion of this Article.
*i Forbes, 10. 1 . 18.
' See Council of Trent, SeJT. 7. Can. 11, 12. — And Cate- cbifm. Part. 2. Seift.2;, of Sacraments in general.
* Council and Catechifm, ibid. VOL. IV. R
^5^ BOOK IV. ART.XXVI. SECT. III.
his commiflion : but the Romanics conceive only One true church. — Tliis idea of what the Minifter is to intend, was dehvered by Pope Eugenius' in the Council of Florence, in the year 1438. — And, though tlie Council of Trent adopted it, yet Caterini" argued, in that Council, as a Protcflant would now argue".
We nuift not, Iiowever, think that the queftlon about the intention of the Minifter, was firfl ftarted even in the Council of Florence. vSo long ago as the time of Athanafms, it was dlfcufled. — Athanafius, when a Boy, at Alexandria, bap- tized'' fome Boys, in the way of boyifh imitation; by way of playing^ as we fhould fay, at chriflening. But Bifhop Alexander, by the advice of his Clerg}', held the Baptifm to ht valid: and would not have the boys rc-baptized. — Amongft the Schoolmen, our countryman Dtms^ fpeaks of a diflinftion be- tween acltial^ and habitual intention, as eftablifhed, and propofes an intermediate fort, which he calls •y/r/Ktf/.— Cardinal Bona, in his Book on the Mafs**, fays, of the Prieft's intention, *■'■ habitualis fuffi- ciens non eft; a5Jualis optima atque laudabilis ; fed non neccffaria : fufficit eiiim viriualis, ilia nimirum quae ab afluali proveniens et non revocata adhuc remanet fecundum fuam virtutem." — I give this fentence at length in order to flicw what nice- ties the fubjedt of Intention admits of. Indeed it is fo far from being limited to three forts, that it
contains
' Forbes, 10. i. 14. " Forbes, 10. 1.27.
* See Trent, Seff. 14. Chap. 6. about a Confefor woX. hvcw'vag a due Intention.
y Forbes, 10. i. 15. from Ruffinus, Sozomen, &c.
* Duns Scotiis. — Sec Forbes, 10. 1.22.
* Locke's dirtindtion between aftual and habitual knowledge, is fimilarto this; on the underftanding, 4. i. 8.
" Card. Bona died 16 74, iEt. 65 :— De Mifia, cap. 1. Sea. 5. page 180, col. 2,
BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. IV. 259
contains an infinity of degrees, and an endlefs variety of mixtures.
If all the Romanifts faid no more than that _a Prieft ought to intend what the Church intends, ic might be^taken as meaning only, that whoever ads by commijjiony ouglit to follow the intention of his -principal; but in forae writings compofed for the People y the bufinefs of Intention is much abufed. We need not a ftronger inftance than the Rubric produced by Bifhop Burnet, on the Article. — Bilhop Porteus's account alfo is worthy to be read^ —And in the year 1788, a French Proteftant Clergyman told a friend of mine, that the then ArchbiQiop of Paris "had given great offence tq the generality of his Clergy by reviving, m a note on one of his MandemenSy the dodrine, that _ the efficacious Grace of the Sacrament was divided into three Portions; one of which was for the offi- ciating Prieft, one for his affiftants, the third for him who received : but that the Prieft might, if he thought proper, by his Intentio, and the private ad of his mind, take the laft portion to himfelf, and cheat the communicant of it."
IV. I will trouble you with no more Hiftory.
Let us now fee what may be wanted in the way of Explanation.
In this twenty-fixth Article we muft conceive the fubjed of Saciaments in general, to be coa- tinued. Though what has now beeii faid may feem to relate to one or the other Sacrament ift particular, yet if ought to relate to on? only as a Sacrament: if it does tJiat, it may b? afiirme^ ©f facraments in general.
The title is exprelTed in terms which were ufual at the time: the paffsige? cite4 may fjiev/
that;
Brief Confutation, page 70. R 2
z6o BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. IV.
that; particularly the margin of the Trent Cate- chifm.
In this Article it is fuppnfedy that the Minifters fpoken of, are though real, yet unworthy Minif- ters; and that thofe who receive a Sacrament, are worthy receivers : whereas in the twenty-ninth Article, we fliall find the Minifters are fuppofed worthy, the receivers unworthy.
For " vifible church," fee the nineteenth Article, Sed:. IV. " Have chief authority"— in Latin it is only "pr^;//," which might feemingly have been tranflatcd preftde. The Englilh, as it ftands at prefent, dire<5ls our views to the higheft Prelates^ but the Latin, to any Miniftcr who happens to prefide in giving Sacraments.
The latter paragraph fecms intended to obviate an objeftion which might be made to the former. Men might fay, you efleem the wickednefs of Minifters too lightly : no, fays the latter para- graph (in effef^), the evil of wicked Minifiiers is very great and important; but if you apply a wrong remedy to ir, you make it ftill greater. — Punifli the guilty, not the innocent. Proceed againft the Minifters, but do not prevent the people from benefiting bv thofe inftitutions, which are intended for then- Benefit. Let no man be hindered from doing his part; whatever ftumbling- blocks may lie in his way, every man will be lure to get good if he does his beft to proceed in the paths of duty.
The idea of the efHcacy of minifterlal afts, has been confounded with that of the duty of Minif- ters; certainly it is wrong lor M millers to be vicious, but if they continue to ail by com- mlrtion.from Heaven, bcnefiLs may be received
through
BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. V. 261
through their agency'. It is zvrong for any Magif- irate to be 'vicious, but yet the people may re- ceive redrefs and protedion from warrants ligned by him.
When we fpeak of " the effect of the facra- ments," we (hould diftinguifh between their effedls as fuch, and their accidental effeds j a facrament given by a good Minifter, will have more effedt in raifing pious aife6tions, than given by a bad one; but this I call accidental: its effed as a facrament, that efFeft which no facrament can fail to produce when intire and regular, will be pro- duced, though the Minifter be not a good man. This diftindion, between accidental good effeds, and fuch as may be called effential, Auguflin feems . to have been mafter of ^
V. It does not feem as if our Proof need run into any great length.
* Sacraments are not to be negleded by the People, becaufe they think Minifters blameable.'
We may look at Matt. vii. 22.— Ads iii. 13.— 1 Cor. iii. 5. — or we may, with Bilhop Burnet, ufe the redudio ad abiurdum, and fay, if faults of Minifters vitiate facraments, a man can never know whether he has been baptized or not, or whether he has received the facrament of the Lord's Supper; he cannot even know whether he be a Chriltian.— We may add, that as all men are faulty, there, can be no true Church of Chiift. But the Article itielf contains fufhcient Proof of what it aflerts. If an Article contains only pro - politions which are allertions, our bufinefs is to
give
^ Trent, Sefl". 7. Can. 11. we have, " /j'^'KiWintentionem :" now Intention may be required as Dutj, or in order Co eff^ia:y\ does the Council mean at all to leave fuch an ambiguity ?
« Sjee paflages quoted in Forbes, 10. a. \\, and 10. 3. 6.
R 3
262 BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. VT.
give proofs ; but when the propofitions which an Article contains, are themfelves arjunients, or proofs, all additional arguments are kiperfluous.
Bifhop Burnet alfo reafons, in the fame form, on the other point, of the Int'^nticn of the Pried being neceiTary towards the complete effect of a Sacrament. If the fecret afts of the PrielVs mind can prevent admiffion into the ChriOiian Covenanr, no one can tell whether he be a Chriflian or not. Nay, who can tell v;hether 1^ who ads as a Prieft; be a Chriflian ? — Salvation at the difcretion of Priefts, not only good but wicked, is not con- ceivable.—More need fcarce be added on fuch a notion.
VI . We come then to our Application.
A form of Affent does not feem neceflary ; but fomething may be faid on the fubjcd of mutual concejfions. — If we take in the fubjeil of Intention^ \vhich does not properly belong to our Article (if it did Du Pin would fcarccly be filent,) we have two adverfarics; on the iub'ed of unworthi- Jiefs, fome Diffenters; on that of Intention, the Romanids.
I. To fuch Diflenters, or Sedaries, we might grant, that they have good motives for afcribing great evil to the unworthincfs of Miniftcrs ; and that, in one fenfe, the good effects of Sacraments are really hindered by vicious Clergy; that is, facramcnts ill adminiftered, make a weaker im- prelTion on the heart than when well adminiftered. And their *' fpiritiial Grace" does partly confill in their good cfl'ects on the mind according to the natural courfe of things^
But then we muft expecl to have it granted, on the other hand, that no man is to chjent himfolf from any facramental inftitutions under pretence
of * Art. XXV. Se^. 11.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. VI. 2.6^
of the wickednefs or unworthinefs of Minlfters. — That every man is to do his own part in the bed manner pofTible.— And that a perfon, as an Agents or under a commiffion, may do valid Si£ts, though he be of an immoral private ^ character.
2. To Romanijls, with regard to Intention, vvc may grant, that a mere cafual, jocular fprinkling, thougii with a facred form of words, does not conrtitute a Bapiifm. That the receivers of Sacra- ments ihould have reafon to think, that thofe who adminifter, ad under commiffion from God, or Chrift, or from a religious Society. Whence we are led to call the boyiih fprinkling of AthanaJiuSy no Baptifm, becaufe he could not, whilft a boy, have any commiffion foadminifter Sacraments.
But w^e muft expedl the Romanifts to grant, in return, that the people have reafon to think a man regularly commiffioned, who appears in a facred place, habited for facred purpofes, under autho- rity.— We muft expeft to have it allowed, that Salvation, laboured for by Chriftian obedience, cannot be capricioully put out of the reach of the pious and virtuous, the faithful and dihgent, by thofe, who are perhaps more frail than themfelves.
Laftiy, as to Improvement, it feems as if fome might be drawn from obferving cafes in human hie, in which men ad: by commiffion, where the
fame
s Charles Lefiie has a difcourfe intitled, " who they are that .-ire now qualified to adminifter Baptii'm and the Lord's Supper." (Works, Vol. a. fol. page 719). — He fays Ibme Quakers, after reading on Baptifm, " ftand chiefly upon \.\\z perfon al hoUn'efi of rhe adminillrator:" he means /r/i;<?/^ virtue; for he fays, th.it befides pcrfonal holinefs, facerdoial is required: — thefe half- converted Quakers thought, " that the fpiiitual efFe^ls of Bap- tifm cannot be conveyed by means of an unfandlified inftivi- mcnt."— This is to our purpofe, but the Difcourfe is chiefly to prove, that Miniflers ordained by Bi'hp:, are the pcrfons duly iiiialified. The fifth Sei^ion, however, page 735, is upon our qacllicn. * 4
264 BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. VI.
fame difficulties occur, but occahon no difputc. — An Am bajj'a dor acts for his Sovcreion; if he be a vvordilefs man his vices do harm, but his a£ls are lalid.^ThQy are not vahd without fome kind of inientioH', and he muft intend what his Sovereign in- tends; yet he may be abfent in mind while he is figning a treaty; neverthclefs his inattention will not make his fignature of no force.
Improvement tTiight alfo arife from reflc(51:ing how very praEiical fubjects are, which are treated as fpeculative. Who maintains any docfbrine about imworthinefs or intention of Minlfters, but with fbme farther view ? — Let then Pradice be pro- feffed, and then we can urge, doyourbeft; en- deavour to prevent unworthinefs of every kind; to prevent men from depending on mere external adls, done without any intention or meaning of virtue or piety. But judge no man.— Indeed it muft not be denied, that when men do u(e their beft endeavours to attain the higheft good, they are liable to great obflrudions and hindrances from others, even in things of a moral and fpiritual nature : but yet if they acl with honcfky and dili- gence, they may aflure themfelvcs that nothing which they do, will be loft on him to whom thev look up for a reward.
ARTICLE
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. 1. II. 265
ARTICLE XXVII.
OF BAPTISM.
APTISM is not only a fign of profefllon, and
mark of difference, whereby Chriftian men
are difcerned from others that be not chriftened ; but it is aifo a fign of Regeneration, or New Birth, whereby, as by an inftrument, they that receive Baptifm rightly, are grafted into the Church; the promifes of the forgivcnefs of fm, and of our adoption to be the fons of God by the Holy Ghoft, are vifibly figned and fealed; Faith is con- firmed, and Grace increafed by virtue of prayer unto God. The Baptifm of young Children is in any wife to be retained in the Church, as moil agreeable with the inftitution of Chrift,
I. The HiJIoyy of this Article might be very long, and might draw us into a number of Con- troverfies; I will endeavour to icled what is mofh material, and bed fovmded. We fhould never- thelefs divide our HiPiory '\ulo two parts; the firfl relating to Baptifm without any regard to the Jge of the perfon baptized : the fecond relating to the Baptifm of Infants.
I I . Firft of Baptifm without regard to Age. — BasTTTM fignifies to tinge, or wafh ; |3a7rT»^w much the fame ; j3a7rT»^o/x«t, in the middle voice, is re- fledtive, and implies wafhing one's /^^. Wafliing,
as
^66 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. 11.
as a religious rite, is not confined to Chriftlanity; it has been practifed both by Heathens and Jezvs ; and probablytakes its rife from the ;w//^r^/ prin- ciples of tlK human conftitution. I kno.v not that the natural principles of cleanlinefs, purity, delicacy, and their oppofites, nailincrs, filthinels, &c. have ever been philofophically analyzed ; but men acl upon them continually, and recognize the Icntiments which they are adapted to produce. — Mr. Hume, in his Effays, (Principles of Morals, Sect. 8.) fpcaks of cleanlinefs as a quality agree- able to others^ but he fays nothing of its effeds on one's Jelf; which neverthelefs feem to be very powerful. Every one makes cleanlinefs a part of merit and excellence: but there is certainly a great connexion between bodily cleanlinefs, and purity of Heart. No one ever thought that purit}' was not acceptable to fuperior Beings; and thofe who have worfhipped different janks of Deities, have always been the more exadt in their Puyific/2lio>is, the more noble they conceived the Deities to be, to whom they had occafion to addrefs them- felves.
Perhaps acls of Purification have generally, or always, been emblematical \ they have been per- formed as fjons of internal clcanfmg from vice : but yet the natural connexion between external and internal purity, makes the reprefeniation to ope- rate as a reality : whatever exprellcs purity, pro- motes it.— Hence it appears natural, that different fcts of men, in different ages and countries, fliould have agreed in the practice of ablutions and puri- fications \
Any one who wiflies to fee a fliort account of
the
* Some rcafonlng of this fort was made ufc of in the Ap- pendix to the firll Book, Seil. v — i .\.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. III. 267
the Luftrations oi the Greeks, may confuk Potter's Antiquities^
The diftinftion between clean and unclean, was very ftrongly marked in the Law of Mofes. And the Jewifli traditions carried it Hill farther. The fixth Order, or great divifion, of the lalmud, or Mifna, is tlie Order of Purifications; in which t!ie rules are very numerous" and complicated. But we are moft concerned with the Jewidi manner of admitting Profelytes into their Religion; they ufed circumcihon, if it had not been uled before, but always'' Baptifm.
It is worth while to obferve, that when a Pro- felyte was baptized and admitted into the JewiOi Religion, he was faid to ht born again', his Bap- tifm was regeneration^ , — And there was fomething of the fame fort amongft the Heathens; a perfoii who had been confidered as dead, on account of long abfence, &c. went through an emblematical new-birth^ before he recovered his rights, or was admitted to certain holy ordinances^ — Nay, Ter- tullian fays, Perfons were baptized in the myfteries of Apollo and Ceres, with a view to regeneration and impunity. — (Idque fe in regenerationem et im- punitatem perjiiriorum fuorum agere przefumunt. — -Ter. de Baptifmo, C. 5)^.
III. In the Chriftian religion, Baptifm was
ufed
•* Vol. I. page 219. — Juftm Martyr tries to account for the Lutlrations of the Heathens by fome notion relating to true
Chriftian Baptifm. Apol. i. page 9 1 .^-Tiiirlb. quoted by
Middleton, in Letter from Rome, page 139. •
^ See Wotton on the Mifna, Vol. i. page 160.
** Introd. to Wall on Infant Baptifm. — Wotton'on the Mifna, Chap. S. — But fee alfo Lardner's Works, Vol. 11. page 320.
^ See Authorities in Introd. to Wall, Sedl. 6.
^ See Potter, Vol. i, page 223; Aeute^owot/xoi, or tV-'fOTror- .^51. The Authors of the Greek Primitives make the latter to mean, one whofe funeral pile was built in his life- time.
K Wall, page 25, quarto.
268 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. Ill,
tifcd from the beginning. *' The Law «ind the Prophets were until John^." When John began to preach and baptize, the Chriftian religion began to be publiihed; but the Baptifm of John fecnis cnly to have been preparatory : he preaclied, in a very awakening manner. Repentance-^ and he made -his difciples go through a ceremony of purilica- tion, exprclTivc of Repentance; but all by way of preparing them to acknowledge the great Per- ibnage who fliould come after him. He did not pretend to confer the gifts of the Holy Ghoft'.
Chrift himfell followed. There are fcveral places of Scripture, in which it is faid, that Chrift ^ baptized j but John iv. 2. Ihews that, in fome way, it might be faid, and at fome time, that " Jefus himfclf bap- tized not, but his difciples^" Whoever performed the office, converts were admitted into Chrifti- anity by Bapiifm, and fuch Baptiim may be called the IBaptifm of Chrift. — As far as we can judge, it was wife to adopt a cuftom generally received; and one filling in with the natural feelings of all mankind. The Baptifm of Chrift differed from that of the Heathens as being the Seal of a con- tract; for whatever admits any one into a Society, muft imply conditions and contrading. Nay, this contradl was to mankind, of boundlels extent, and of endlefs duration. — Chrift is repeatedly faid to bapize ivith the Holy"" G/wJiy pofiibly we may not fee the full force of the exprcflion -, it might be,
that
^ Luke xvi. 16. — Lardner, in the phce above-mentioned, thinks, that Baptifm was JrJ? ufed as an initiation rite, in the Chriftian Religion, Works, Vol. 2. page 320.
' Afts xix. I — 6.
^ See Matt. iii. ii- — John i. 33.-111. 22, 26. — iv. i.
' This expreflion might perhaps bear to be interpreted as a cc?nparative phrafe; like Matt. ix. 13. and parallels. If fo, it would mean, that Jefus baptized lefs frequently than his difciples.
"» Matt. iii. 11.— John i. 33. — Ads i. 5.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. III. 269
that the Baptifm of Chrift was immediately at- tended with fpiritual gifts; as diftinguiflied from that of Johiy which was only an emblem of Re- pentance; or from that of fucceeding Chrillians, which feems to have been followed by gitts of the Holy" Ghoft, but not always immediately.
Under the fubje6t of Confirmation"*, we faw foniething of the manner in which the gifts of the Holy Ghoft followed Baptifm at a diftance, as defcribed in the Ads of the Apoftles. — St. Paul has been thought ^ rather to difclaim the office of baptizing ; he does not feem to me to do that ; he only mentions that preaching was his depart- ment; and fpeaks of baptizing in fuch an eafy way, as if he had always baptized when he had had leifure, and occafion had ferved, and as if he had never taken any exad account of thofe whom he baptized. But yet the number of thofe he had baptized at Corhilh when he wrote his firfl Epiftle, feems to us very fmall ; and puts us upon thinkincr how, from the nature of preaching and baptizin^^, they muft interfere much more with each other according to primitive, than according to modern cuftoms : certainly many could baptize, who could not preach, or govern.
The Baptifm by Fire^ Matt. iii. 1 1 "J. does not
feem to mean any particular kind of Baptifm to be
defcribed by an Hiftorian, or Antiquarian. The
expreflion, " He fhall baptize you with the Holy
Ghoft and with Fire'"' feems of the prophetical
kind, and not intended to be underftood at the
time of fpeaking it. It would excite a fentimenc
of dread, immediately after — *' hewn down and
€aft into the fire-^" — but it might predid the
fiery
" Aasu.38. o Art. XXV. Seft. m.
f I Cor. i. 14. 17.
^ K«( crt^i is omitted in feveral Manufcripts,
270 BOOK TV. ART. XXVII. SECT. IV.
fiery tongues which Tate upon the Apoftles : com- pare Ads i. 5'. -
The Baptifin of Chrift, and that of his fol- lowers, feem dill emblematical. — This is well de- fcribed by C\prian\ where he fays, there is no need of " foap and other helps, and a large pool," &c,
IV. The early Fathers feem to fpeak as if Bap- tifm had been always, that is, in all ordinary cafes, in ancient times, performed by hmnerftonoi the whole body; performed any where, at any Pond or River; till Baths were made for the purpofe, in buildings on the outfide of churches, which were called Baptijieries. — If we confidcr how very Ihort and general ihe directions of fcripture are with regard to Baptifm, and how few circumftances are related in the narrations, we fliall not wonder if we find very great variety in the ancient rites of baptilrn before Churches were regulated by civil Laws. — Iren2EUS*s account of the Valentinians is tranf- lated by Wall'; but, without repeating their ex- travagances, we may m?ntion, that frequently Baptifm ufed, amongft fobcr Chriftians, to ht pre- ceded by Prayer and i^7y?%":— that the Head of the Ferfon in the water, was put under water three times, in which cafe writers ufe the expreflion, trine immerjion : it feems, at firft, as if this cere- mony had arifen from the Form of baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and oi the Holy Ghoft; but yet, for fome reafan or other, a cuflom of immergmg three times, has
prevailed,
^ Thofe who are mofl converfant in oriental idiom might inform us, whether Holy Glioft rt/.v/ fire, could mean the fame as the Holy Ghoft alfuming a /":/;> appearance?
- Wall page 464, qu-.iio, from Ep. 69. — This ij applicable to the fubjed oi fpnnklir,^, Seft. x.
' Part 2. Chap. v. bcit i.
^ Wall, Pan 2. Chap, ix.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. V. 27I
prevailed, both amongft the Heathens'' and the Jews''. The trine immerfion afterwards got into difrepute, on account of fome Heretics who nfed it, and was ordered to be left off, by a Council held at Toledo ^ — After Baptifm, a mixture of milk and honey ufed to be given, and a white gar^ ment put on ; all thefe w^ere emblematical. Some wi£tion ufed to be praftifed : and the ceremony was never performed without an abrenunciation of the Devil, and fome profeffion of Faith. — I men- tioned Exorcifm under a former Article, and how foon Baptifm was fometimes followed by Con- firmation.
It ufed to be reckoned, that Martyrdom fupplied the place of Baptifm ; that is, that if a convert, who had not been baptized, fuffered Martyrdom for the Chriftian religion, his martyrdom would complete his admiffion into the Church of Chriil, as much as Baptifm would have done : and parti- cular reafons and analogies were urged in favour of the notion. — As the perfon baptized is wetted with water, fo is the Martyr with his own blood":
&c.
V. The rites of Baptifm ufed in the Greek Church, may be found in Sir Paul Ri cant' s^ pre- fent State, &c. and an account of their grand annual Purification may be feen in Cave's Ap- pendix, before referred to, under the v/ord ayiao-^wo? :
and
t Potter's Antiquities, Vol. i. page 221. 223. Idem ier focios pura circumtulit unda, -^n. 6. azg.—Terque fenem flamma, ter aqua, ter fulphure lullrat. Ovid Metam. lib. 7. cap, ».— In the latter paflage the word^amma reminds one of the fcriptural baptizing with Jire; though no way probably conne6led with it.
y See Wall's Introd. page Ixi. and page 488.
* See Sparrow's Rationale, page z6o.
a Wall, Part 2. Chap. 9. Stft. z. page 466. quarto. .
•» Chap. 7.
272 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII, SECT. VI. VIT.
.iiid one chapter in Bingham's Hiftory of Lay- baptilm, is about the Greek. Church.
VI. The Romanijis profefs, tliat pure water is the only proper ** maiter of Baphfrni yet by rules built on tradition, they ufe holy Chrijm : they alio ufe Exorcifm, Salt, Spittle, the white Garment, and burning the wax-light : and fign eight parts of the body (reckoning the eyes two^) with the fign of the' Crofs. — They confidcr Baptifm as valid by whomfoever^ performed. Layman, Jew, Infidel, Woman, &c. but only in cafes of neceffity ; that is, they had rather have a perfon baptized irregu- larly than not at all. Heretics who adminifter baptilm in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, and who intend what the Church intends, are held to baptize effecftually, without any confi- cleratlon of necelTity^.
VI I. The Reformed z)ii\\xz[-\(t^ fliew their abhor- rence for Popery by departing more or lefs from the Romifli cufloms. Thole who think that the Church of England has not carried Reformation far enough, fpeak with a kind of horror of any Baptifm whatever performed bv^ Women. And dired the ceremony not to be performed where Popifli Fonts' ufed to be fupcrftitioufly placed; they alfo omit ihc fign of tlie crojs^ and are much fcandalized by it in others. ^1 he Lutherans are faid, on the other hand, to ute exorcifm; the EngliJJi^ according to their ulual moderation, drop- ped moft popilh ceremonies by degrees^ (fee Widl, pnge 470. — Puller, page 281.) and probably fooncr
than
^ Trent Catech. Seft. x r. or 7,
* Ibid. Sea. 61, &c. ' Ibid. Sed. 22.
2 Council ot Trent, Seflion 7, 4th Canon on Baptifm.
^ Scotch Confeflion, Cliap. 22. ino, quod magis ell //jnrv- dum, focininis baptizare pennitiunt. t<yi!tngma, page i ^4, fcconJ paging.
^ Dircwiory.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. VIII. IX. 273
than they would have done, had all their Divines ftaid at home, or none of them gone to Genevay &c. but they flili ufe Fonts, with the fign of the Crofs.
VIII. Charles Lejlie, a celebrated writer againft the Quakers, fays, that no one fpoke againft water- baptifm before George Fox, whom he places in the year 1650"^. — And Archbifhop Seeker^ ^diys, that a " Sedt (meaning the Quakers) fprung up amongft us within a little more than 100 years, deny" the facred appointment of water : But it feems to me, that fome of the ancient heretics had the fame turn of thought with our modern Quakers ; the fame way of underftanding, or rather, of feeling, the Scriptures'". For there is a fort of temper, which, in any age, if not corrected, will bring men to aim -at being all fpirit. ^intilla feems to have had this quakerifli turn ; and was a felf-commif- fioned female teacher": a great rarity, I fancy, in ancient times. —The Council of Trent has a Canon againft the denyers of Water-baptifm ; fuch therefore exifted°.
IX. The 5o^/W<2;/j have been mentioned before as allowing but one ceremonial pr^eceptum of Chrift, an injundion to break bread p.— They con-
lider
^ On Water-Eaptifm, end of Se6t. 11.— Works, Vol. 2, page 679. Charles Leflie was a proteftant adherent to the Pietender in 1 7 1 4 ; and would have converted him from Popery.
* Ledure 35. page 222.
*" Compare Barclay's Apology, page 386, Edit. Birm. with
what was faid in Art. xxv. of the Afcodruta;, &c. See
alfo Aug. Haer. 59. Wall, 2. 7. 7. — But with regard to the
Manichean Baptifm, Wall, 2. 5. 3. and Lardner, Vol. 3. page 490, are of contrary opinions*
n See Wall, Part 2. Chap. 5. Seft. a.
" Canon a. of SefT. 7. (de Baptifmo.)
P Art.xxv.Seil.il. from Racovian Catechifm, page 143, —And Ep. to Radedus in Socinus's Works, fci. Vol. i. page 380, 383, 384,
VOL. IV. S
274 BOOK IV. ART. XXVll. SECT. X.
fider Baptifm as a vifible ceremony, admitting men into Chriftianity, when they have been Jews, or Pagans ; but not to be uled in a Family already CJiriJlian. — Fauflus Socinus has written a treatile on Baptifm ''.
The Jews had a notion like this of the Soci- ■nians'.
X. I will only mention one thing more before 1 proceed to the Hiflory of Infant- Baptifm; and that is, the cuftom oi Jprinkling or pouring water on the perfon baptized ; or the cuftom of partial immerfion, as iupplanting, in fome countries, that of total immerfion. The Baptifts do diftin- guidi between fprinkling and pouring, but to no end that I can perceive. Indeed more attention lias been paid to the diftinftion between dipping and fprinkling, than it appears to me to defer ve : two moaes of performing an emblematical acl, may be equally good, if they be equally adapted to circumftances.
Wail fays, that Mr. Walker has fludied this fubjedt of afpcrfion, affufion, &c. more diligently than any other perfon*.
In early times of Chriftianity, Baptifm was per- formed by immerfion, ordinarily, but cliniL Bap- tifm was always, probably, performed by atfufion, or pouring : tiiough it was reckoned to leave a man in fome refped:s lefs quahfied for fome public offices. — Wall quotes a good' inftance out of Cvpricvi : he alfo mentions the cafe of a Prifotter.
But
*i See VolTius de Baptifmo.
' See Wall on fntant-Baptlfm, Introd. Sefl 3. and $. or the laft chapter of the Book, page 524, quarto. Introd. pagel.
' boe Wall, page 470, quarto, the title of Walker's Book is, *' Do£lrine of Baptlfms,"
« Part 2. Chap. 9. Seft. 2. page 464, quarto : quoted Se£l. X. — It is fcarcely needful to fay, tlut c/inic Baptifm is Baptifm of thofe Who keep their beds.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XT. ly ^
But Co far, aflfufion was only allowed in clinic bap- tilrn, or in cafes of neceflity.
Near the end of the fifth Century, Gennadius of Marfeilles " fpeaks as if it was an indifferent matter whether a man were wetted with water, or plunged into it; but he is the firft who does fo. Indeed the cuftom of immerfion was firft left off in France, and laft in England ; in the time of Queen Eliza- beth.—But ftill it is faid, that all Countries con- tinue the praftice of immerfion, except the Wel^ tern or Latin Church ; except thoie, who are, or have been, under the Government of the Pope,— It is natural that the cuftom of fprinkling fhould gain ground, as being more commodious than im- merfion, efpecially in cold'' Countries : fome very eminent men of our own country, have however been defirous to reftore the practice of immer- fion, in ordinary cafes''. It is favoured by our Rubric.
XI. We come now to the Hiftory of Infant- baptifm.
As the cuftom of baptizing in general, fo that of baptizing Infants in particular, feems to have had fome foundation in the Nature of man.— - Parents are anxious that their offspring fhall be fccured from dangers, and put in a way to obtain advantages, as foon as poffible. And the fame motives which impel parents to admit their chil- dren into the Family of a Mafter, in the way of Apprenticefiiip, or into any literary Society for the purpofe of education, impel them to make their children members of Chrift, in order that they
may
" De ecclef. dogm. cap. 74.
" In Ruflla, it is faid. Children are bathed in cold water ; yet, generally fpeaking, Immerfion may fuit the warmell cli- rnates beft.
y Wall, Part 3, Chap. 9. Se(5V. a. page 474, quarto. S 2
^76 BOOK IV. ART. XXVU. SECT. XI.
may be inheritors of the Kingdom of Heaven. — By the Law of Nature, a Parent makes any en- gagement for his Son, during minority, which his Son would make for himfelf, if fully informed of the benefits refuking from it : and if any bond or fecurity is to be given, it mud be given by the parent. Would then a youth, if for the moment enlii^htened, and informed of all the benefits re- fulting from Chriftianity, and of the hazards of neo-leSing it, be baptized or not? on the anfwer depends the redicude of baptizing a youth during his minority^ - But thcfe mora) remarks mufl not here be purfued farther than is requifite to fet the Hijlory of Infant-Baptifm in a right point of view".
Amongft HeatlwiSy there was fuch a thing as Luftration'' of Infants : which was accompanied, both amongft Greeks and Romans, with the giving of a name.
Amongft the Jews^ circumcifion was performed on the eighth day after the birth, and a 7iame was oiven'' at that time — And what was before men- tioned, from Wall's Introduction, about their baptizing Profelytes, may be extended to Chil- dren; as Wall proves from Jewirii writings'*: the Jews had moreover, a reference to our moral prin- ciple, the good of the child*; and they expeded
Jezijs
* Minority, In any one affair, if not fixed by Civil Laws, muft mean the time, from birth, during which a perfon is unable to judge for himfelf, in that particular afFair.
* This was farther explained in my Ledlures on Dr. Balguy's Moral Syllabus, Part a. Chap. 3. Seifl. 1. Subfefl. i. 35. and
Subfe£t. 2. 3. But both the Syllabus and the Explanation are
in MS.
^ See Wheatly on the Common Prayer.— —Office of Baptifm, page 360.
= Gen. xxi. 3, 4. Luke i. 59, 60. — il. 21.
•1 See Introd. Sedl. 3. 5. and Sedl. 1 1. of this Art. <= Wall's Introd. Seft, 3.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XII. XIII. 277
Jews to be baptized on the coming of Elias or Chriji'.
XII. But the moft difficult matter to fettle is, how the Chrijiians afted, in early times, with regard to the baptizing of infants. Wall's Hiftory of Infant-Baptifm feems to me ati excellent book ; clear, learned, rational, candid, unaffected ; and I Ihould add, foeaking from my own experience, lively : I iincerely recommend it ; not only on account of the information it gives with regard to infant-baptifm, but as laying open Chriftian Anti- quity in general, and treating, in a mafterly way, many ful^efts ufeful to a Divine 2. Neverthelefs I do not pretend that it removes all doubts what- foever, even on its principal fubjeft.— -With regard to the ScriptnreSy what can be deduced from theni lies in a fmall compafs. On the one hand, they mtniiQTi no injiance oi infant-baptifm; on the other, they afford no inflance of baptifm being delayed. Some Famirtes are fpoken of colleftively, as being baptized, but the children^ are not mentioned par- ticularly ^
XIII. How foon any accounts of infant-bap- tifm, appear in reputable writers, is a matter in difpute. Some Pzedobaptifts have, in their can- dour, allowed a longer time before any appear,
than
f This is affirmed at the conclufion of Wall's Introduaion, but I fee no proofs : they may be in Selden, Lightfoot, &:c. however, the notion makes the meifage of the Jtws, John i. 19—25, intelligible. Who art thou that baptized Jeixis?-^ Jews need'aax. be baptized till Ch rift, or at leait Elias, come : art thou then the Chrift ? or art thou Elias f or who art thou?
s This Book was before recommended, at the opening of the Pelagian Controverfy.- Art. ix. Sedl. viu.
*> Afts X. 48. andxvi. ii;. 33. and 1 Cor. i. 16.— -See more- over A dls ii. 41. and viii. 12, or 16; where numbers are baptized in which muft probably be fome children.
S 3
2)8 BOOK IV. ART XXVII. SECT. XIV.
than others have approved of. — Bingham' begins his evidences from the earheft times; fo indeed does Wall; but the firft proofs are only by impli- cation". To thefe writers I mufh refer you: the fubftance of the proofs is well collected in a fliort popular dialogue done by Wall from his larger work, and intitled, *' A Conference between two Men that had doubts about Infant-Baptlfm."— • From this I may read a few words about thj firfl centuries^ — What I fhall attempt is to give you fome of the moft remarkable things in the Hiftory, and fuch as have had the moft influence on mens Opinions.
XIV. I. No difpute or controverfy was ever held in ancient times concerning our fubjeft ; all the palTages produced in evidence, are incidental".
2. Several perfons are fpoken of in Hiftory as having been baptized late in life: now when it appears, on examination, that fuch perfons were themfelves converts from Paganifm, there is no great difficulty; but when they appear to havebeer^ born of Chrifiian Parents, it is not fo eafy to account for the delay : however, there is another thing to be inquired into j whether the parents were bap- tized before the children were born ; if not, one may fee, that fuch as were unbaptized themfelves, would fcarcely baptize their children in infancy, if
they
1 Book nth.
^ The manner in which Wall invejiigatcs the praflices of the Apoftolic Age, has been already mentioned under Art. xxiv.
' Conference, page 72.
"" AuguHinfays, that the Do(E^rines of the Trinity and Re- pentance, and Baptifm, and Unity of the Church, were never fully opened till they were controverted ; (fee Art. i. Sed. iv.) ue may obferve, that the reafon why the praftice of Infant- Baptifm was never fully opened, was, becaufe it was never controverted : — And we call every mention of Inlant-Baptiim incidental, which occurs when that fubjedl is not the point iu difpute.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIV. 279
they could avoid it. That fome converts did delay their Baptifm, is clear from^ Martyrdom" being thought equivalent to Baptifm ; and from Gregory of Nazianzum preaching againfl fuch de- lay:— but it feems as if our adverfaries fpoke of fome inftances without fufficient proof".
3. One thing which makes paffages in ancients feem lefs to our purpofe than they really are, is the variety of names by which Baptifm is called ; as, Regeneration, Renezval, SanSiification, llhimina' tion, the Seal, the Grace, &c. and the originals of thefe words are fometimes tranflated by other Eng- lifh words :— thefe are mentioned in Wall's Pre- face ; in Theodoret I find aTroAur^&jo-jjP : Wall quotes it from Irenaeus**.
4. Juftin Martyr, who lived about forty years after the death of St. John, difcourfes " of baptifm being to us inftead of ciramcifion' :-lxtn-^\i'=, near forty years later, mentions infants as " by Chrift born again unto God." — Origen, about 'fifty years later ilill, ** does, in feveral places, fpeak of infant- baptifm as a known and undoubted pra61:ice : and (in one of them) as having been, according to a tradition, ordered by the Apoftles'."
5. The greatefl difficulty arifes from TertvMian^ who is placed about loo years after St. John's death, and therefore before Origen. He, in hjs Book de Baptifmo, cap. i8. dilfuades (and he is the only Father who does diffuade) from early bap- tifm, though he feems as much afraid of any one's
dying
" Sea. IV. '
« The notion refults from reading Wall's Book. Gregory
of Nazianzum preaches againfl: delaying Baptifm, Orat. 40. or, de Baptifmo, for which fee V^all, Part 1. Chap. 11.
P Hseret. Fab. i. 10. "i Part 2. Chap. 5. Seft. i.
' Conference, page 72.
• Wall, page 27, quarto, or Part i.Chap. 5. Se£l. 3.
S 4
iBo BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIV.
dying unha-puzed, as any writer: that is, he advifes putting off Baptifm till the age ot Rea/on; but only on this fuppofition, that there is no danger of death. By diffuading he acknowledges the praSlice, however difficult it may be to account for his diffuading i and the opinion of a fingle man, who in feveral things was excentric, is not of fo much confequence as the pradice. But it feems odd he fhould not know, as well as Origen, of the Tradition, that infant-baptifm had been ordered by the Apoffles. — Many things are faid, with great good fenfe as it appears to me, to ac- count for this fingular phenomenon ; and it is iTiewn how much better opportunies Origen had of learning what the Apoftles had fiid, than Ter- tullian; but what occurs to me does not feem to have been mentioned by others, and therefore 1 am diffident about it. — He feems to me to be, when he advifes putting off Baptifm to the age of rea-: fon, growing a Montanift-, the followers of Mon- tanus " did not allow the Church the power to forgive great Sins after ^ Baptifm;'' — Tertullian himfelf held machia to be " immundabile vitium." Now the only reafon for which he diffuades from early Baptifm, feems to me to be an horror of fm after baptifm ; and he particularly diffuades fingle perfons, and young widows, as being moft likely to yeild to carnal luft. The auftere temper of a Montanift feems likely alfo to make a man dread any one's dying without baptifm, at the fame time that it makes him dread baptizing : fuch incon- fiflencies are apt to attend exceffive paffionsj not lefs thofe of a moiofe kind than any others.
We may here mention Fidus's application to Cyprian, (who is placed in the year 248,) though
It
• Art. XVI. Scft. 11.— —From Lardner's Works, Vol. g. page 489.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIV. 2S1
it is only the mifreprefentation of it which has oc- cafioned any difficulty. Fidus defired to be in- formed whether he might, in any cafe, baptize a child ifefore the eighth day ; the anfvver w^as, yes, if it be in danger; if there be necejjity.' This is re- prefented as if no infant, even after the eighth day, was to be baptized except in cafes of necejfUy. — Whereas Fidus had had no difficulty after the eighth day; he had baptized commonly ; but the rite of circumcifion, correfponding to Baptifm, having been delayed till the eighth day, together with the objeftion or difguft which fome might have to giving a very young child the Kifs of Peace, and other reafons, not very forcible, made him doubt, whether, even fuppofmg there was fome danger, he fhould baptize. Children though in danger, had not been circumcifed, that he knew of, fooner than the eighth day.
6. Augnjiin lived about 200 years after Ter- tullian ; he vtxy frequently (peaks of infant-baptifm, though incidentally. And fays, that he never heard of any " Chriftian, Catholic or Sectary, who taught any other dodrine but that Infants are to be baptized" [for pardon of fin]." — The Pela- gians (incidentally) allow the fame''. — It feems flrange, that neither they nor Auguftin fliould ever have feen TertuUian's Book de Baptifmo. I do not fee that Wall folves this difficulty. I can conceive, that TertuUian might not ocatr to Au- guftin when he made his alfertion ; and for this reafon ; becaufe the ruling idea in Auguftin's min4 was not infant-baptifm, but the danger of fufferino- from original fmj about which danger TertuUian was no adverfary.
7. The cafe of Gregory of Nazianzum is not free from difficulty. He lays, in an Oratioa about
Baptilm, " Conference, page 48. « lb. page 48, 49.
282 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIV.
Baptlfin, that if infants arc out of all danger of dying, his czvn opinion is, that they fliould be baptized when they are about three years old. An opinion, as Wall remarks, " which would pleafe neither the P^dobaptift nor AntipjEdobaptift." — The P^dobaptift however fees, that the cuftom of baptizing infants, is here allowed, as 2. fa£i i and urges, that a child is no more capable of contraft- ing when he is three years old, than when three weeks old. All objedlions of any force are againft a child's being baptized during what may be called its minority in religious matters. This is what oc- curs if we confider Gregory's fentence by itfelf : but it fliould be confidered with the context.
There is certainly fomething extraordinary in this private opinion of Gregory's ; fomething which has a /b/uiio>i, if one could but find it out. — The Oration is a forcible harangue ao-ainft /Je^ /erring baptifm; the pretences for deferring it, are anlwered; and with regard to children, the preacher
urges, Nn-H-Jov fo coj •, ^y\ AaSsrw y.xioo\) ti xaxia, tK P^i(pisg ay»a(r9>]Tco, i^ ovv^uv xa6iEfiw6iiTW tw zrviVfjLXTi : —
and then he propofes to Mothers the example of Hannah, who made Sanmel holy immediately, as ibon as he was born, ('yivvr]9svTot Uoov euGo? in-ojfi): and immediately after delivering his notion about three years, he fpeaks of the ludden dangers to which an human being is fubjed, and advifes fecurlng infants againft them by means of Baptifm. —How is it then that this peculiar notion comes jn amidfl direClions which leem inconfiftent with it ? Wall confiders it as a compliment to the preacher's Father ^j which, from certain circum- ilances, feems no groundlefs conjedure. — We know fo little of the minutiae of Gregory's Hif- tory, that we feem urjikely to go farther than to
fee
y Wall about CctfariuSi page 306, quarto.
ROOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIV. 283
{be an hmnfifiencr, from whfch one may venture to conclude, that the notion of three years had feme extraordinary origin : that it was not a natural conception, agreeable to the fcope of the dii- courfe, not the genuine off^prmg of Gregory s un- biaffed underftanding^
To dwell on more particulars, would exceed our limts^ I have laid before you every thmg (as far as I know) that feems agmnji the cultom ot baptizing infants ; the hiftorical authorities> that cuftom are too numerous and extenhve to be given : for them I muft refer to Wall ; I behrv.: you may conclude all the numerous authorities which I have not mentioned, to be in favour ot Infant- Baptifm. In general, it may be mentioned that infant-baptifm was never ordered or enjoined by any a^/^//; was never inierted in any Creed-, and that all eftabliOied national Churches have prac- ticed it —Peter Brtih (perhaps Bruce), a French- man whofe followers were called Petrolruffians, is thou'o-ht by Wall to have been (with one Henry) the firft Antip^dobaptift teacher who formed a Church about A. D. 1030. The German Ana- baptifts are placed in A. D. about 1420: theie were mentioned formerly : it there was any con- tinuation of doftrine from the Petrobruffians to them, it was obfcure, and held by a few men. _ The aim of both was to reform: to improve religion, and make the Church of Chrift perfeft in pradice as well as in theory.— The Anabaptifts were flow in eettin*^ footing in England: Neal places their ^ ° full
» Rohivfon favs, this Oration was delivered to an aidlence in which were many perfons unbapti^cd: that muft be trae; at leaft there muft have been enow to make it worth while to per- fuade to Baptifm : but yet by far the greateft part of tho.e Parents who were themfeives bai)tized, might baptiz- thtrir children in infancy. If Infant- Baptifm was unufual among{^, fuch Gregory coaid not have ufed the Ian-liaise he does.
284 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIV.
firft congregation or Church, in England, in the year 1640. Probably Cromwell found them of life, and encouraged them. Mr. Tombs is reckoned their beft writer.
Serveius, who fuffered death at Geneva in I553» on the profecution of Calvin, cenfured infant- baptifm " with the utmoft feverity." (Mofh. Cent. 16. ^. 2. 4. 5.)
Here it may be proper to mention the fubjefl of Sponfors. Sufceptores, or Sponfors, have been ufed in Baptifm for a great length of time ; Bingham (11. 8. I.) divides them into three forts.
1. Thofe who anfwered for Infants.
2. Thofe who anfwered for infirm perfons, un- able to anfwer for themfelves.
3. Thofe who attended at the Baptifm of Adults, as witnejjes, and thereby received a commiffion to remind them of their baptifmal vow.
In the Baptifm of Adults, the Sponfors with us are ufed as witneffes only ; and as perfons autho- rized to remind the newly-baptized of his bap- tifmal vow. — It does indeed feem improper that fuch a folemn act as Baptifm, making fuch a change in a man's condition, fliould go unatteded, or be left to cafual teftimony : and as reproof or advice to adults, though they conftantly want it, is impertinent from thofe who have no authority to give it, there is an evident utility in the Church's commiiTioning fome friend to fugged occafionally a friendly admonition, in fpiritual affairs.
Wall lliews that Sponfors were in ufe amongffc the Jt^ws, when they baptized Profelyies. — (See Part 2. 10. 17.)
I do not recolleft whether the Puritans had any Sponfors: — In the Comedy called the Puritan^ amongft Shakfpeare's \vork.<, they are called *' Un- zodmothered varlets."
And
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIV. 285
And now, what is the refult of the fa<5ls here ftated?
1 . Could they have happened on a fiippofition that Chriftians always baptized infants ? or, that there never was a time, lince Chrifl-ianity was pub- lirhed, when fome infants were not baptized ? yes, they niight: — the filence of Scripture, confidering how very fmail its ^ records are, is confident with the pradice : thoufands mud have been baptized at one age or other, whofe baptifm is never men- tioned : more important events demanded the pen of the Hiftorian, than the Baptifm of the infant- children of thofe converts who had been thera- felves baptized.
2. Could the fa<fts have been as we find them, fuppofing all Chriftians had been plainly and pofi- tively commanded, by written edid, to baptize their children in infancy ? I think not. Neither TertuUian nor Gregory of Nazianzum would, in that cafe, have prefumed to occafion any delay.
3. Are the fads confident with the fuppofition, that all Chriftians might baptize infants if they pleafed ? 5'^es ; I fee no marks of any prohibition, or difcouragement.
4. Laftly, could the fads have been as we find them, fuppofing that as many Chriftians left in- fants unbaptized, as baptized them? I think not; the evidence ftiews the majority of thofe who bap- tized infants, to be very great.
On the whole, it is probable, that many parents, &c. baptized children, in all ages of the church ; ver}' many, in fome : but that none were (Compelled to baptize them in any age.
In fpeaking of infant-baptifm we have paid no
attention
* InPaley*s Hois Paulinae, we find feveral inftances ofevents relating to the Apoftles, which are not recorded in the Ads of the Apoftles.
286 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XV.
attention to the difference between immerfion and fprinkling; but as what was H^id before on {prinkhng related to Baptifm in general, or with- out regard to age, it muft relate to all particular forts of baptifm. — Therefore we may content our- felves with obfcrving, that there has been a trine fprinkling^ as well as a trine immerfion; and that fprinkling may be more eafily juftified in baptizing Infants, than Adults; becaufe immerfion has an efFe(ft upon the feelings and fentiments of adults, but no mental effeifV upon Infants.
XV. I will here inlert an obfervation or two on what may be called irregular Baptifm ; fuch as oc- cafions a doiibt whether a perfon fhall be re- bap- tized.— We faid fomcthing allied to this, under the twenty-third Article: and under the prefent, when defcribing the notions of Romilh Church and the reformed churches. The fubjed is very copious, as any one finds, who reads Bingham's Hiftory of Lay-bapti!iii.
Some ancient Chriftians ufed to re-baptize thofc perfons, more than once, whofe firft baptifm they themfelves accounted valid; thefe were the molt ftridly Anabaprills : the Chrillians whom we call Anabaptifts in modern times, baptize thole over again who were baptized in infancy ; but it is becaufe they look upon infant -baptifm as nut valid. Hence they ciiuie to be called not Ana- baptifts, but Bciplijls. — liht follcn\ers of Ivlarcion ufed to baptize, in their own way, more than once : and we now fee old people who wifli to be confirmed repeatedly. — Wall fays, he knows of no other ancient Chriftians belides the Marcionites vvlio reiterated their own Baptifm. — (Part 2. Chap. 5. Sedl. 5.)
Irregularities " Wall, page 468, quano.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XV. 287
Irregularities may arife from place, time, matter, &c. but thofe Teem moil attended to, which arile from the want of due qualifications in the perfons who baptize. Thefe may be inferior orders of Miniftcrs, as Deacons; or the affiftant Minifters mentioned Article xxv. Sed:. v. Subdeacons, Rea- ders, Acolythiils, &c. — or degraded Priefts, be- come Laymen; or confelTed Laymen, or Women. The validity of Baptifm may alfo become doubtful from its being adminiftered by heretical Minifters, though that is becaufe fuch are deemed no minif- ters at all ^ — In our own country, Midwives have been allowed to baptize, in cafes of neceffity : Neal^ gives us a Form of a Licence for that pur- pofe, and fays, with fome furprize, that notwith- flanding fuch licences were given, Bilhop Whitgift affirmed, " that Baptifm by Women and Lay-per- fons was not allowed by the Church." The cafe was, that an ambiguous Rubric had divided the learned % and Whitgift probably fpoke his real opinion.
As a full Hiftory of irregular Baptifm would de- tain us too long, I muft content myfelf with a few general remarks ; the refult, as it were, of Hiftory.
But we muft diftinguiOi between authorizincr certain perfons beforehand to perform any ficred atl in certain extraordinary cafes, and confirming ads on looking back upon them, which have not only been irregular, but have been performed with- out any previous authority. Acfs authorized muft
be
« Marcionites and Pepuzians are mentioned by Rogers, page 141, with reference to Epipiian. Hasr. 52, in regard to Baptifm by non-minifters.
** See Hampton Court Conference in 1603.
^ See an account of this Rubric in Bingham's Hiflory of Lay- Baptifm, Chap. 3. Seel. 5. — Works, Vol 2, page 567.
288 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XV.
be confirmed, however irregular ; but doubt may arife about a perfon having gone beyond what he was authorized to do. The greateft difficulty, however mud arife in debating, i. Whether any ad is to be authorized j 2. When an unauthorized ad is to be confirmed.
1. When we debate about authorizing certain .perfons to baptize in extraordinary cales, our in- quiry mud turn on this; which is xho. leaji evil ; to let a man infi'inge the rights, and intrude into the province of the facred miniflry; or to let men die unbaptized, in original fin. — The Scotch Church is fliocked at the idea of Women bap- tizing ; the Diredory forbids all private Baptifm^; if they feel no fnock at the thoughts of an human being not becoming a Chriftian when he might, they ad confidently ; but ought they not to allow, that others may be as much (hocked at the latter evil as they are at the former? if a cafe is really one of neceflTity, there is no alternative but irregular baptifm, or djang in a ftate of Heathenifni chofen voluntarily.
2. When facred ads have been performed with- out authority, people are apt to reafon as if they could lay down rules for neceflity; but neceffity knows no law. Whoever ads in cafes of neceflity, according to the bed of his judgment and with an honed intention, mud ad rightly; and what he does, ought to be confirmed. Men may difpute hidorically about Baptilm in cafes of neceflity, in order to determine what hiis been done : but if
. men
f Puller fays, " the Dire£lory did forbid very uncliaritably all private Baptifm : notwithflanding moll of its followers now- adays admit only private Baptifms."- — Moderation of the Church
of England, London 1679, P^g^ *^^* The Direftory was
approved by the Affembly of Divines in 1645.— For '^^ Scotch Church, fee Syntagma, page 1 54, cap. aa.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XVI. 289
men under neceflity ad: bona fide for the beft; if they return to rule as foon as they are able, and make what compenfation they are able for damage arifing from their a6ts; it fignifies nothino; to them what the Romanifts, or what the Calvinifts have fettled; they are right; and thofe who annul their a6ts, are wrong.
3. But as difputes may arlfe about the effects of Baptifm in cafes of neceffity, would it not be beft to have fome ordinance for admitting thofe, who have been irregularly baptized, to regular Baptifm.? fuch ordinance need not alTert that the former baptifm is invalid; but only fay, that if it be fo in any degree, there is now a completion given to it ; we have fuch a Form in the Church of Eng- land when it is not fufHciently proved that private Baptifm has been performed. Indeed the whole reception of one privately baptized into the Church, may be confidered as a completion of an irregular baptifm. And in our civil government, when a meafure has been taken during a recefs of Parlia- ment, enjoined only by Proclamation, hz. I be- lieve it is always confirmed by parliamentary au- thority at the enfuing Seilion=.
XVI. If I have feemed too prolix on this Hif- tory of Baptifm, it muft be confidered that Hiftory
here
e Dr. Burn, under Baptifm, fays, from BIfhop Fleetwood, that there has been no law in England to forbid, or invalidate Lay-Baptifm in cafes of neceffity : he fuppofes it good, and underilands that a perfon fo baptized is not to be re-baptized.— After the Reftoration he fuppoi'eb there might be in Wales two or three hundred thoufand perlbns who had received only Lay- baptifm. .
Nealgives (1661), as one of the things fettled by the Com- miffioners for reviewing the Common Prayer, (page 612, quarto) — " 10. Private Baptifm is not to be adminillered but by a lawful Minifter." -^ — Hiflory of Puritans, quarto. Vol. 2. page 614.
VOL. IV. T
290 BOOK IV, ART. X7CVII. SF.CT. XVI.
here anfvvcrs two purpofcs ; it not only relates fa(f\s, but it contains argument?. Befides, the Hiftory of Baptifm has been, of late, in my opi- nion, much mifreprelented; and in a manner likely to do harm. I mean by the late Mr. Robin- fouy Baptift teacher'' at Cambridge. Ic came in my way, on a former' occahon, to flievv how he mifreprefented Auguftin; fomething of the fame fort may be expected now. But, in truth. Wall has already anfvvcred him; and to fee his mifrc- prefentations, nothing more is needful than to look into a book to which he himfelf refers. — I have mentioned the cafes of thofe who were baptized ^ late in life, that of Cyprian' with Fidus, of TertuUian", Aupuftin's" ignorance of TertuUian's advice; and the cafe of Gregory of Nazianzum° ; thefe are the ftroneeil things againft Infant-Baptiim that I know of in Antiquity, and thefe are fpecimens fufficient. Let any one then who wifhes to ftudy the Hiftory of Baptifm, compare Robinfon's account of thefe, with Wall's ; I defire nothing more. But what are we to think of a perfon who propofes, in an earneft way, arguments to which he himfelf has read complete anfwers.? — I fpeak only to thofe who, with myfelf, think them undeniably fuch ; — we muft: accufe no one of Vv'ilful fallhood : — mif- reprefentation is indeed falQiood .; but there may be
things
^ In the Hidory of Baptifm, quarto, London, 1790.
' Book If I. Ch:ip. \iv. Seft. xiv.
^ Robinfon, page 218. 250.— Wall, 2. 3. — See alfo Bingham, 1 1. 4. 12.
' Robinfon, page 184. 193. partic. 195. — Mentioned page 319. — Wall, I. 6. I.
•" Robinfon, Chap. 2!.— Wall, 1.4,5.
" Robinfon, page 218.— Wall, i. 19. 17, page 174, quarto.
° Robinfon, i)ai^e 249. — Wall, 1 1 i. i. kc. One might
compare what Wall a:ul Robinfon fay about Pelagius: Wall, pifgc 2 io. 2 1 8. - Or wliat they fay about the Council of Milcvis, in 316; V/uU, page 197. 220. — Robinfon, page 2:6.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVll. SECT. XVII. 2gt
things to make men think differently from our- felves, of which we have no conception : this however I may be permitted to fay j that it is totally above my comprehenfion how any honeft candid lover of truth, could ufe the arguments which Robinfon has ufed, after reading what Wall has written. This is by no means denying Robin-* fon the charader of an honeft man ; for many conclufions of reafon, and didates of wifdom, may be above my comprehenfion. — I myfelf have a poor opinion of Robinfon's reafoning powers > whether his underftanding or his education may have been the caufe, I know not; or a purfuit of eloquence ; or an indignation at the profperity of his adverfaries; or any thing elfe. I fuppofe his verbiage, and his quotation, will keep him from contempt; but thofe who are able to fee no far- ther than I am, if they allow him to be a man of good abilities, muft read his great work, his ela- borate Hiftory of Baptifm, if a love of Trui^ be uppermoft in their minds, with difguft and abhorrence^
You may fay, I am prejudiced; T fhould certainly be more upon my guard againft pre- judice than I am, if I had ever had the leaft diflike, either to the man, or to his dodlrines^ i never heard the leaft harm of the man ; and ^ though I prefer the pradice of our Church, yet I think I could live upon terms of the moft intimate friendlhip with one, who preferred the cuftom of delaying baptifm to the age of maturity^
xVii. Our Hiftory then being finllhed, we come to Explanation.
" Baptifm is not only a fign of profeffion," &c. this is affirming the fame of Baptifm in particular,
which
f See the conclolion of Wall's laft Chapter but one, T 2
igZ BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT XVII.
which in Art. xxv. was r.ffirmed of Sacraments in general. Saying it is ** not only" a fign, implies that it is a fign ; or that there ought to be fome- ihing external in Baptifm; contrary to the notion' of the Quakers.
Our Church holds as " eflential parts of Bap- tifm," Water, and the form given in Matt, xxviii. 19, — See Rubric, end of Private Baptilm, or of receiving into the Church.
*' It is alio a fign of regeneration " — the term regeneration occurred in the ninth Article, and was there explained'. From what has been faid under the prefent Article, it appears to be a term bor- rowed, or adopted, from the Jews (if not ufed by Heathens,) denoting what we call Baptilm : Now a name of a thing confifling ol Parts, is often taken from one part; fo Baptilm denotes the whole facrament, though flriclly it be only the name of the external walbing; and in like inanner i^t"^^- neration, amongft the ancients efpecially, denotes the vvhole facrament, though ftridly it be only the name of the internal benefit ^ or improvement; the *•' fpiritual grace/' that is the favour, or bene- jtit accruing to the mifid or Jpirii; in this life or the next; which benefit may always be aicribed, with humble gratitude, in an indefinite manner, to God's Holy Spirit. — Nor is it inconfiiient with this, to v.nderftand the Spirit, in the Sacrament of Bap- tilm, as the meaning'' of the outward fign, and as explained by being oppofed, or contradiflinguillied to the vifible fign —The meaning of the fign is
the
1 Art. IX. Sedt. XXIV.
r An inltance of the general obfervation here made, was ex- plained Art. ni. Seft. III.
• Sec Dr. Balguy's Lill charge, p.ige 302. Alio Art. xxv.
Sea. II.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII, SECT. XVII. 293
the fpiritual benefit annexed to it: all the expref- (ions feem to come to the fame thino".
" Whereby" — per quod, by which fign, the promifes of God are fealed, &c. or, in one word, regeneration is en?cled, executed, lealcd.
" As by an mjirument'''' — I know not, that any explanation of this word inftrument is wanted : ic fignifies means, or a deed : here it is the means of grafting and of figning and fealing.
The particulars which follow, feem to be com- ponent parts of regeneration: if fo, we have, in this Article, the notion of the Church of England, of Regeneration, given by itfelf: which, to the members of our Church, is an authentic defini* tion. The firft part, or ingredient, of Regene- ration, is being admitted into the Society of Chriftians, or *' grafted into the Church,^* — the Catholic church. — The fecond is, remiflion of fins committed before baptifm, or afterwards, upon repentance: or a promile " Of i\\Q forgivenefs of Sin." — The third is, adoption as *' Sons of God, by the Holy Ghoft." — The fourth is a confirma- tion of Faith ; the fifth an increafe of Grace, or of fuch holy, pious, virtuous difpofitions and princi- ples, as are moll: particularly to be afcribed to the divine afiillance. — Indeed Faith was (liewn, under* the tenth Article, to be rightly afcribed to God's Holy Spirit.
VVe might here afk, whether John Wefley's conception of Regeneration is the fame with that fet forth by the Church of which he profelfed himfelf to be a Member, the Church of England? — His Regeneration is iubfequent to Baptifm; which makes his Brother fay, that with him *' Baptifm
was * Art, X. xxxvi. T 3
294 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XVIII.
was nothing"." — If it was not more than a mere " fign of profeflion" his idea of Baptifm mud be contrary to that of our Church.
Adoption ** by the Holy Ghofl^'' — is a reference \.o Scripture. — See Rom. viii. 14. 16. but that may occur better in our Proof.
*' By virtue of prayer'"— \.\{\% is true, bur is it not making Prayer efiential to Baptifm .'' In the Refor- matio Legum there is the fame idea" ; — Verbo Dei quod intercedit, &c. — erudiuntur fideles, Sec.
" Toiin^ chlldreUy^ parvulorum : this feems defi- nite enough : but the age of the Infants here fpoken of, feems ftill farther defined by the Ru- brics of our Office for baptizing Adults. From them it appears, that a perlon may be baptized as a child, who happens not to have been " baptized in his Infancy." Indeed this Office for Adults is comparatively modern, having been made in the year 1661, after the Reftoration, in order that any who had been brought up Qiiakers or Baptifts, might, if they pleafed, be received into the efta- bliflied Church: and with a view^ to Miffionaries : But the divines who compofed it muft be con- fidered as very able expofitors of the Church's meaning and intention.
"In any wife," rather obfoletej the Latin, however, is Omnino.
XV m. " To be retained in the Church i" — that is, not given up. This exprcffion teems free from aufterity and precifenefs. A rite may be retained in a Church, even though every one be not com- pelled
" Samuel Wefley, after Mr. Hutton ; fee Wefley's Letters, page 72. — See alfo page 116. 65. 70.-^ Wall contends, that tl-e word Regeneration is •' never ufed by the Ancients but ;\hen tliey fi>eak of Baptifm," page 3^4. 520.
* Dc Haerefibus, cap. 17.
^ See Preface to the Common Prayer-book made in i66i.— Alfo Wlicatly on ihc Common Prayer, odlavo, page 31.
BOOK IV. ALT. XXVII. SECT. XVIII. 295
pelled to life ir. And the declaration is eafy and liberal with regard to the particular circumftances of Infant-baptifm, as age, kc. — Our office for public Baptifm of Infants fpeaks the fame liberal language ; the Sponlors are exhorted to believe that God favourably ^^Z/owt-/// Infant-baptifn:i ; which plainly acknowledges an iinperiedion in it : it is called a " charitable work," and lo diftinguilhed from an indifpenfible duty of a kind perfedly de- terminate. The next exprcflion of the Article is in the fame fpirit.
*' As moft agreeable with the Inftitution of Chrift :" there is more latitude in doing anything as fuitable to an inftitution, than as injoined by pofitive command: in the former cafe, you may reafon from analogy, follow your common fenfe, and feelings; in the latter cafe, you only obey orders ; you do not think for yourfelf.
Dr. PrieJIley (Hill. Corr. Vol. 2, page 93.) feems to think our Church not very candid; at leaft, he reprefents it as faying in its public forms, *' that Baptifm is ■neceffary for Salvation." — Per- haps the office to which he alludes, may be that for the Baptifm of Adults; in which, the Exhor- tation, after the Gofpel, does fay fomething very like it : yet it clearly excepts extraordinary cafes, by the words, " where it may be had-'' (o our cate- chifm ; ^''generally neceffary to Salvation."
Our Church is certainly againft all negle6l of Baptifm; the exhortation to Adults confifts chiefly of praftical fcrptural exhortations to Baptifm, and fcriptural reafons for them, it does not enter into fpeculations— Moreover, our Church takes no part in the queftion about Infants dying unbap- tized, (except fo as not to bury : Wall, page 377,} though it pronounces (Rubric, end of Private Bap- tifm) thofe to be ♦* undoubtedly faved" which
T 4 die
296 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIX.
, die baptized: a fentence in which ancient Chrii- tians were unanimous. In fuch a calc, what can hinder Salvation? The truth is, that we hold the neceffit}' of Baptifm as Agents, but not as Judges. — We think, that we do not do our part if we neglecl what feems ordinarily a means of Salvation j and we think it the preferable meaiure to procure good for children, as tar as lies in our power; in things Ipiritual as well as temporal : But we judge no one. Three heads of our Church have pub- lifhed this opinion.— Archblfliop Whltgift, Arch- bifliop Laud, and Archbilhop Seeker : [See Wall, 2. 6. 8, page 377. — And Seeker's thnty- fifth Lec- ture, near the end. J
XIX. Let us now come to our Proof.
There feem to be feven propofitions in our Article, and one more feems wanted, in order to juflify the modern pradice of partial immerfion, or fprinkling, or pouring, which prevails in our Wef- tern Church.
1. Baptilm Implies an f.v/tTw^/ ceremony.
2. It is the inftrument by which men AXt grafted into the Church of Chrift.
3. It marks God's promife oi forgivenefs of fins.
4. It marks God's promife of adopting us for Sons.
5. It confirms our FaiiJi.
6. It increales Grace.
7. Sprinkling, or pouring, is not unlawful, when ufed inflead of immerfion ; (elpecially in Infant- baptifm.)
8. Baptizing infants, is to be preferred to leaving them unbaptizcd till they are able to anfwer for themfelves.
We need only undertake here to give fufficient proofs, not fuch as might be given by thole who made the fubjedt of Baptifhi a feparate ftudy.
XX. Baptilm
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XX — XXIII. 297
XX. Baptifm has an external part, or contains an external ceremony, in which water is uied.
This feems llifficiently clear from the word ^xtt- T/^w, which fignifies to zvaJh.— Wt may confult Matt, xxviii. 19. — John iv. i.— When a perfon is faid to do a thing njore than another, the thing muft be of the fame nature in both cafes. Now^ John's Baptifm was confeffedly by w^ater. — The Minifler of the ^thiopian^ Queen waits for Bap- tifm till fome water appears. — Corneliuses Baptifm depends on water ; *' can any man forbid water," fays the Apoftle, " that thefe fhould not be^ baptized?'* — The Quaker's Baptifm, by the Holy Ghoft, was iuft over.— More paffages will occur under the foU lowing propofitions.
XXI. Baptifm is the Inflrument by which men are grafted into the Church of Chrift. — This may appear from the texts already quoted, as they all fliew, that the end of baptizing, was to make men Difciples. MaO»]T£U(raTe -nxxvrx thn, means make Difciples [i^o(.^Yirct<;)'° of all nations; the two cafes above-mentioned are plain. We may add i Cor« xii. 13. — Gal. iii. 27.
It will follow from this propofition, that all benefits which arife on any man's becoming a Chriftian, may be fpoken of as accompanying Baptifm.
XXII. Baptifm marks the divine promifes of Forgiveyiefs of Sins.— A6ts ii. 38.— xiii. 38.— xxii. 16. — Epii. i. 7.— Col. i. 14.
xxiii. Baptifm marks the divine promifes of adopting us as his Sons. — Rom. viii. 14, 15, 16, 17. (here the Holy Spirit is mentioned.) — Gal. iii. 26, 27. — Gal. iv. 5. — Eph. i. 5.
XXIV. By
^ Adlsviii. 36. ^ A£ls X. 47.
■^ See Wall, Introd. Se<5l. 5. and page 13, quarto, or 1.2. 6« —Alfopage 519. — Conference, page 15. 28.
298 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXIV. XXV.
XXIV. By Baptifm our Faith is confirmed. —It muii be fo, in the natural courfe of things. You cannot take a meafure propoled for your good, by thofe who have a power of promoting it, wittiout feehng your confidence ftrengthened. Whatever feals promifcs, muft confirm faith. Any perfon, by enhfting himfelf in the fervice of Chrifty and receiving promifcs made on his account, mud feel a greater Faith in Chrift. — It has been jufi now ob- ferved, that fuch Faith may, on icriptural autho- rity, be referred to the agency of God's Holy Spirit; according to Gal. v. 22. — if therefore we receive the Holy Spirit through Baptifm, we flrengthen Faith.
XXV. By Baptifm our Grace is increafed.— This, in the language of our Church, means, good difpofitions and principles; as in 2 l^et. end. — It is inconceivable that good difpofitions (hould not be increafed by any worthy receiver of Bap- tifm. A folemn ad of felf-dedication to a reli- gious fociety ; to a fociety carried on under the immediate protedion of Heaven itfclf; for the in- ftiiution of which all mankind had been in a courfe of preparation from the beginning of the world; for which the greateft things had been done, the greateft evils fufFered; fuch a folemn act muft corredt, regulate, meliorate, the heart and principles, if anything can. Conceive the amend- ment of the heart and aftions to be afcribed to the Holy Spirit, and then ftudy the expreffions of Scripture. — John iii. 5. — Rom. vi. 4.. — i Cor vi. II. — Eph. iv. 22, 23, 24. — Eph. V. 26, 27.— Col. ii. fo, II, 12. — Titus iii. 5. — Heb. x. 22. — I Pet. iii. 21. — The proof of this propofition fhews, that Baptifm is " not only a fign of Profef- fion," &c. but a fign of a i'piritual good aifo.
The
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXVI. 299
The metaphor of putting on, iifed in the texts, arifcs from drefang after Baptifm ; it feems con- neded with the ceremony of the white garment' i na)^ was probably the caufe of that ceremony. — The metaphor of being buried, was probably the effed: of the cuftom of immerfion. — Men were as it were buried in the water, and rofe again to newnels of lite: or new birth. — Ail renewing is fuppofed to take place on the change made at Bap- tifm; the idea is that of new birth, varied a little in the expreffion. And Col. ii. ii. fhould be re- marked, as juftifying our reafoning by Analogy from Circumcifion to Baptifm. — Whence we may apply Rom. ii. 28, 29. — Thefe metaphors muft not be confounded; but each may be ufed. And being aware of theni is a great help to underfland- ing fome paffages of fcripture.
We have now gone through the feyeral parts of Baptifm, external and internal; only two propo- fitions remain, which regard the manner of it, and the circumftances which fometimes attend it.
XXVI. Though Baptifm was at firft adminif- tered by total immerfion, its validity is not de- ftroyed, if fafety or great convenience, requires its being adminiftered by affujion. — The mode of , performing an emblematical ceremony, as was before obferved, cannot well be a thing of the laft im- portance.—The word paTTTt^w does not imply total immerfion'^ only ; and if it did, we feem in fuch a cafe, to be at liberty to confult om fafety, from Matt. ix. 13. and xii, 7. — or even our great con- venience : it fignifies to wajli : (ix(pn fignifies a fpot : a fpot is partial : conceive firfl that the Jews ufed to wafh their hands by having water poured upon them, and then read, in the Greek, Luke xi. 33. read alfo Mark vii. 4.— Heb. ix. 10. — Befides
whac = Seil. IV, T, ** Wall, page 433, quarto.
'lOO BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXVI.
J
what V e call bap'izing, is not alwavs exprefTed by jSaiTTi^cj, buc fomc[iines by Xau, wliich is cerrainly u(ec1 it.r ordinary' walhing; generally of tlie whole body; but not always: Ads xvi. 33. could not be total immcrfion:-— See Eph. v. 26. — Titus iii. 5. in the Greek.
Archbifnop Sih'ker introduces Ifaiah lil. ic;. — Ezek. xxxsi. 25. and fome other paflages which mention fprinkhng^; but tjie word iprinkiing in Heb. X. 22. docs not Iceni to me to mean the external p.'irt ot biptim, but the internal, meta- phoricall} 2; the external being expreflcd by the following words i "and our Bodies waflied with pure itater.*'
In general, I have felt fome relutftance to admit the palfages cited by Arciiilhop Seeker in fup- port of iprinkling in Baptilm. There are various Iprinhlings enjoined in the Law of Mofes, as thofe with afhes, water, oil, blood j and with fome mix- tures, fuch as allies and water ; blood and hylfop, he. — and fome of thefe are alluded to in the Nevy Tcftament; but I feel unwilling to apply to the external part ot Baptifm any allufions to the fprink- ling of Blood; they feem more applicable either to purifying the Heart, or to the death of Chrift, and the Dodrine of Atonement. If there were, in the ISleiu Tcflanient, allufions to the Iprinklings with watery 1 lliould be willing to adopt them; and I
think
« Properly, utttw figniiiesto wa(h /;«//</Jr; (fomctimes to wa(h feet) : — arXivw — to wa(h cloaths ; >.>iu — x.o wa(h the wliole body. — — BaTTTt' does not, I fancy, make one feel, fo llrongly as the others, the idea of aiming at cleannels ; only as cleannels comes oi courjc iwm'imxnaiion: but it feans applicuble to a greater number of things than tlie others.
^ 35th L.efiuic onCatechlfm, pa<re 226.
8 The fprinkling corrcfponds to thofe fprinklings which were intended io pur if u (ft-'C Lev. viii. 15. — Hcb. ix. 18 — 22)- thefe were made with /;!ncd.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXVII. 3OI
think the Prophecies, If. lii. 15. and Fzek.xxxvi.25, may be applicable; but 1 do not recoiled any allufions to Iprinkiings with water: hlAi. x. 22. may Teem to be one, as blood is not mentioned; but of that I have Ipnken. — Neverthflefs there cer- tainly are, in the c/d Tcriament etnblematical puri- fications by w .ter, bo;h in the way of bathing and fprinklini^'' ; and as that is the caie, there feems foiiie degree of fcriptural authority for our ufing both methods in our iacramental cleanfings : the cafe is fuch as to admit of all kinds of arguments and authorities : efpecially as it is not eafy to underlland how fome baptifms mentioned in the New Teftament, could be performed by total immerfion^
XXVI I. Baptizing Infants is preferable to leaving them unbaptized till they are ot age to anfwer for themfelves.
I. This feems. to follow from reafon, and from the principles of natural law'' already mentioned: if an Infant was enabled to judge for himfelf, a Chriftian, (and it is of Chriftians we fpeak), muft conclude, that he would chufeto be admitted into Chriftianity. — One good elfeft of Infant-baptifm is, that it precludes the painful queftion, * when fhall r be baptized?' and prevents that procraliination v;lnch Gregory ot Nazianzum laboured fo much to prevent One may conceive a young perfon to delay bapnfm, fometimes through fear and fcruple, fometimes deferring it to a *' convenient feafon" with a view 01 enjoying an illicit gratification a
little
*• Numb. xlx. 19 — 31. and " diverfe wafhings/'Heb. ix. 10. {}ia,yopoii /3a7rTJ?(xoK.) feem to include beta forts : will not our ,'5^7rTi7^a therefore allow of both forts, bathing and fprinkling?
'■ seeker's Left. 35, page 227.
^ Se£t. XI. beginning.
502 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XX'VII.
little and a little longer. — And why fliould not infiints enjoy the benefits of Chriftian focicty, as well as worldly rank and property? Thofe who refufe them the privilege, mean well; but they aft like a formal and precife, though well-meaning fervant, who would ftand ftill and be ulelefs, though much wanted, rather than do any thing which his Mafter had not ordered him to do.
2. The Religion of Mo/f J obviates the great x>b- jeftion to our plan, which is, that an Infant can- not enter into a Covenant. Whereas circumcifion admitted children into the Old Covenant by Divine Appointment'.
3. The pradice of the firfl teachers of Chrifti- anity feems to me, upon the whole, to be much in favour of Infant-baptifm. I fliould imagine with the learned Lightfoof", that as the Jews ufually baptized the children of Profelytes, they would, when they went out to be baptized by John, take their young children to be baptized with them. This is not mentioned, but the baptifm of chil- dren feems to be taken for granted in fcripture, as are moral" duties of the greateft importance.— When we have not words to judge by, we muft judge by adions or cufloms. As the children of converts to Judaifm were always baptized, the order to convert and baptize all nations, would, of courfe, be underftood" to include children. — Sup- pofe the order had been, * go ye and circiimcije all nations ;' — would not the circumcifion of children have been included ? — If one of our Baptifi con- gregations was to fend out a Minifler, with the
commiflion,
' Deut.xxix. 10, II, 12. with Gen. xvii. 12, 13. and Lev. xii. 3.
•^ Horse Hebr. on Matt, iii.— See WaU'sIntrod page Ivi.
" Dr. Balguy, page 87, beginning of 6th Dtfcourfe.
° Wall's hurod. page xlviii. and Ivi. —Conference, page a8, 2y.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIl. SECT. XXVIl. 303
commiffion, ' Go and baptize the Indians or Gen- toos,' I (hould think he grofsly perverted his com- miflion if he baptized children. But if one was Tent from the Church of England wkh the fame commiffion, * Go and bapdze the Gentoos,* I lliould think he grofsly negleded his commiffion if he did noi bapiize children. When a cuftom was once fettled, which the follicitude of parents would flrongiy impel them to continue, not to check fuch a cuftom was, in a manner, to encourage it, and give it a fanftion. — And fuch a cuftom pre- vailing, it is difficult to conceive that HoufeJioldi would be baptized, and the children omitted,
4. Befides the pradice of the firft publilhers of Chriftianity, thus gathered, there is a particular paffage, or perhaps two, of the New Teftament worth confidering.
I Cor. vii. 14. lliews, that If either parent of a child was a Chriftian, the child might be brought up a Chriftian, and called //o/y, or of the pecu- liarP people of God : Chriftians have often in Scripture the name of Saints, or SanSii. Now Wall contends, that holy, aV»o?, means, or implies bap" tized ; and this he feems to fupport*^ with great force of argument.
Mr.
P Locke on the place.
H Wall, quarto, page 67. gg. 175. — Conference, page 40,
&c. — 46, &c. The idealeems to be this: — ' I (Paul) am now
giving you prudential advice of my o-xvn (ver. 12.); — do not leave your huiband (or wife) becaufe he is an Heathen ; for the fad is, it hath often happened, tliat the Chriftian wife hath converted her Heiicheu hufband, fo that the map. hath been baptized {xymra-t), ox fanaijied (a word often uled for Bap- tized) through his wife; and vice versa. — Befides, if you leave your hufband, what will become of your children f live to- gether, and thvjugh he continue a Heathen, you may prevail upon him to let your children be brought up Chrillians: (or inadey«/K//, fancti).' Now no one, fays Wall, is called ^^/w/".
j04 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXVII.
Mr. Locke's expreflion is as if the child mud be a Chriftian "■ if born of Chriftian parents; but he only takes the Baptifni for granted : he only compares Chriftians with Jews; (fee his Note) and though a child might, in fome fenfe, be faid to be a Jew born, all things being fuppofed to go on regularly in their ordinary courle; yet circumci- fion, was, in ftrictnefs, neceflary to make a Jew; and fo Baptifm, to make a Chriilian. i\s Mr. Locke took the Baptifm for granted, {o might St. Paul.
I will only farther mention, Mark x. 14. or the the four verfes which make the Gojpel in our office for the Baptifm of Infants. — " They brought young children to Chrifi" - perhaps an Antipasdo- baptiil would iay, why did he not baptize them? Becaufe their parents did not bring them for that purpofe; the parents were not yet Chriftians; Jefus was not a profeifed Baptijl; perhaps his Difciples might afterwards baptize fome ot thefe. What- ever argument this fcripture may be lor the Bap- tifm of Infants, it fhews plainly how eager parents were, at the time, to gain every fpiritual benefit for their young children. They cleiired that their children might be' touched \y^ d^ii Holy Man; not thinking he would take them up in his arms. —
From
or holy> who was not baptised. — How can we conceive that 3 tjiild, \\hofe Father was an Heathen, and mother a ChrilHan, could be made a Chriilian any other way but by being baptized? — Gal. iii. 27. — Auguftiii fays, (fee Wall, page 171;.) that whatever is meant by the text, no one can be made a Chriilian without the Sacraments.
' This may be the ground of the Socinian notion : fee Seifl. IX. but if our reafoning here is juft, that notion is not to be admitted; it is to be confidered as unfcriptural, if not dangerous: and as probably arifing from prejudice againll the doftrine ot" the Trinity.
* Compare touching for the King's evil. — Woman teaching the hem of Clnill's {iarmeut.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXVIII. ^O^
It appears from the accounts of the other Evange- lifls, that Chrifl took a child in his arms as an emblem of innocence, in order to teach his Difciples how fimple and free from guile they ought to be; chil- dren in malice\ though men in underftanding: but St. Mark's account gives more idea of our Saviour's attending to the children them/elves : why might not our Lord both feel a kind concern for the children, and take occafion from them to in- culcate godly fmcerity and fimplicity ? if his feel- ings were lively, his moral would be ftrong. — He admitted them to no covenant, but he blejjed them afFe6tionateIy; holding them in his arms: his bene- dicStion, furely, muft be (omt fpirittml good. — My reafon dare fcarcely make an argument from this intereiling ^cene; but, when I contemplate it, I always wifli myfelf a painter, that I might give a lading reprefentation of it. What an attitude might not that of Jefus be! what a countenance ! looking down, with a mild and gracious benevo- lence, on the Infant in his Arms 1 expreffing a deep knowledge of what was in man ! other chil- dren of diiferent ages and characters, grouped in various employments ; the officious Difciples, with ill-grounded apprehen lions, and needlels import- ance, endeavouring to difperle them ; the mother of the child in our Saviour's arms, near him, ex- preffing, as one principal figure, in her face and gefture, fufpenfe and hope, not without feme de- gree of fear; joy, refined and meliorated with parental affeftion and piety: other parents; fome mildly triumphing in the benediftion already re- ceived, others gently preffing forward to attain it. - Though reafon may fcruple to draw an argu- ment from this fcene, yet who that performs
the
' 1 Cor. xiv. 30. VOL. IV. U
306 BOOK IV. AKT. XXVII. SECT. XXVIII. XXIX.
the ceremony of Baptifm, does not feel its effi- cacy? the Infant in one's arms excites a fentiment of tendernefs; the Gofpcl has been juft read; the ceremony becomes, to the Imagination, an Imita- tion of the" benevolence of him who appointed it : and then this Scripture pleads to the hdart^ more forcibly than any coarfe audible eloquence; it even ' convinces more intimately than the logic of any precife reafoners, who, by too great ftiffnefs in ad- hering to what is minutely right, are often found fubftantially in the wrong.
XXVIII. We here clofe our dired proof : let us fee whether any objedions occur, of weight enough to induce us to dwell upon them.
Objedions may come from §liiakers (ancient or modern), or from Baptifts.
With regard to IVater -baptifm, we have only fuch objeftions as are made by thofe whom I call ancient Quakers, the Afcodrutas, &c. and by the Quakers of modern times.
The ancient Heretics would have our religion to be intirely^/;7///(7/; but can we throw off our earthly tabernacle in this life? are not our minds affefted by means of our fenfes ? are not the gene- rality of men affccled chiefly by their means? nay, amongfl: thofe who reflect, are not ideas of re- flexion allowed to have their firfl: origin in fcn- fation"? — And can Chriftians fet afidc matter, one of whofe peculiar articles ol Faith, is, the Refur- reclion of the Body ?
XXIX The modern Quakers produce pafl^ages of Scripture in fupport of their fpiritual notions; but without a lound interpretation: when they have feemed to follow Scripture, it has been
becaufe
" " This charitable wovV. of ours."
" Locke on t'le Human Underilanding.'-Book 3. Chap. 6. unci Chap, i. Sedt. 3. 24.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII SECT. XXIX. 307
becaufe they took it in a literal fenfe; which is apt to ftrike the people, though often grofsly wrong; fo wrong as to be univerfally thought lb, in a little time. Wall, apologizing ^ for Iren-^us's book againft early Herefies, and for writers who were obliged to confute *' fuch idle and enthufiailic ftuff as feems to us not to deferve three words ;'* adds, " So any book written now in anfwer to the reafonings of the ^takers, &c. will, in the next age, feem to be the work of a man that had little to do\" Such books however have been written, by Bennet and Charles Lejlie: and to them I will refer you : contenting myfelf with a fliort fpeci- men. St. Paul, exhorting to unity, fays% " there is one Lord, one Faith, one Baptifm^ :" how then, hys Barclay, can there be /wo Baptifms?— one by water, another fpiritual ? — This argurnent is not mentioned by Barclay in paffing, but it is infilled on'' : yet to fay, there is only one Baptifm, there- fore it has no water; feems the fame thing as to fay, one thing is never compofed of Parts; the King of England is but one man, therefore he has no Body, or he has no Sonl. That is but one iree^ therefore it has no root, or it has no branches.
Several
y Page 43, quarto. , . /-
z I would not be thought fo far to adopt the oDiervation of Wall as to fay, that any one may at firft fight, perceive the fallacy of all the arguments of the Quakers; they have by fome been thought perplexing, even when not convincing.— Mr. E. told me on^e, coming from one of my ledures, that he had been in more danger from Barclay's Apology, than from any Book written againtl our Religion. -And Rev. John Norris, of Bemerton near ialifbury, who died in lyn, faid,/' that he would rather encounter ten Cardinal Bellarmines, than one David Barclay." -So the Newfpaper fays; but without refi^r- ring to the part of Mr. Norris's works where the faying is to be found.
a Eph. iv. 5.
»> Barclay's Apology, Prop. ta. Seft. 3. U 2
3o8 BOOK IV. ART.XXVII. SECT. XXX.
Several arguments of the Quakers turning upon one form of exprcffion, it may be mentioned; — 1 mean the fcriptural negative form of comparijon : fuch as we find i Cor. i. 17. and i Pet.iii. 21. — " Chrift fent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gofpel Baptifm" — " not tlie putting away of the filth- of the fleOi, I^ut the anfwer of a good con- fcichce," &c. — But there are a multitude of fuch comparifons; fee Matt. ix. 13. and Col. iii. 2. — One might add, Matt. vi. 19, 20. and xxv. ^^. and I Tim. ii. 9, 10. according to Fordyce. — And, according to Archbidiop Sharp, Matt. xii. 31^ — Who will make all theie to be abfolute negatives ? —if not all, why the two firft.?
XXX. But, to drop the enemies to Water-bap- tifm, as our Church holds'^ it eflential to Baptifm, that a perfon be baptized " in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghofl," it may be proper to mention an objec^tion of the BaptiJIs ; that, in the Acts of the Apoftles, con- verts are fometimes' faid to be baptized in the name, or into the fiame of Chriji^ or ot tf:e Lord. — But this feems to mean only admiffion into ChriJ- tianity, by Baptifm; it might be, in the ufual form. Baptifm in the name of Chrift, feems contradif- tinguiflied to the Baptifm oijohn-, or of the Jews ; or to Hcathenifm : ilich an expreffion would not preclude the farther inquiry, by what Form was luch a perfon baptized into the name of Chrift ? probably, by the ufual form^ For the expreffion,
the
<= Art. XVI. Sefl. iv.
^ Rubric to private Baptifm, at tlie end ; already mentioned, SeiSt. XVII.
<= See A£ls ii. 38.-vlii, 16.— x. 48.— xix. 5. — ?. S. See Wall, page 431;, quarto.
♦" This may be right reafoning, though fome ancient Chrif- tians clic) fometiincs bal;ti^e in'the name of Chriji mftead of baptizing in the form prcfcribcd. Matt, -\x\iii. 19. they might
mlfunderliand
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXXI. 3O9
the name of Chrift, we fliould read A6ts iv. 12. which was introduced into our eighteenth Article. - — There is no other name under Heaven whereby men may be faved, but that of Chrifl; the names of Moloch^ Remphan, &c. are infufficient and impotent. — When we were accuftomed to this language, being baptized into the name oi C\\n% would only convey the idea oi becoming Chn^iins, without implying any particular form^.
With regard to Infant -baptifm, feveral objedions have already occurred : I will therefore now men- tion only two.
XXXI. If infants are to receive one facrament, why not bothf—\t ufed to be a cuftom, for many centuries, to give Infants the Lord's fupperj nay, it is now with the Greeks, and with " near halt the Chriftians in the world''."— But to make theni Members of Chrift, was more neceflary on account of original fm, than to make them go through a ceremony in commemoration of his death. — Thofe who receive the Lord's Supper, renew their bap- tifmal vow, broken by actual fin; but Infants have committed none, and it may be doubted whether,
regularly,
mifunderftand A£ls xix. 5, — See Art. i. Sed. xviii. Vol. 2. page 273.
5 Gal. iii. 27. " For as many or you as have been baptized into Chrift, have put on Chrift."
A£ls xix. 2. — Some perfons at Ephefus told St. Paul, that they had not heard of the Holy Ghoji ; he immediately afked, " unto what were ye then baptized ?^^ does not this feem to imply, that if they had been baptised as Chriftians, they mull have heard of the Holy Ghoft.'' that is, they muft have been baptized according to Matt, xxviii. 19.
^ Wall, page 517, 410. or 2. 9. 17. He adds, that pro- bably the Weftern Church would have continued the pradtice, had it not been for the Doflrine of Tranfubftantiation: this may bejuft, though tir Edwin Sandys fays, that the Greeks hold Tranfubftantiation. — Speculum Europsc, page 233. — But -fee farther Art. xxx. Seft. m.
U 3
3IO BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXXU.
regularly, Confirmation fliould not precede a par- taking of the Lord's Supper. \Vc have rcafoned Irom the Jewilh to the Chridian law : amongft the Jews, children were initiated by circumcifion, but did not partake of the Pafchal fuppcr, which is analogous to the Lord's fupper with us; fo at lead it is fuppofed'. — Infants cannot receive in remembrance of Chrift. — But if any church is, at laft, of opinion, that Infants ought lo have the Lord's Supper; let fuch give it them: our rea- foning in favour of Infant-bapiifm remains un- affcded.
XXXII. Baptifm confifls of two parts, externa! and internal; perfons baptized are accordingly faid to be born again of water and the fpirit''.— Chil- dren may be born of water, but how of the Spirit? how can their Faith be confirmed, or their grace increafed ? It does not fecm neceliary that all the benefits of Baptifm Ihould belong to every perfon baptized; it is enough if the Sacrament has both an external and an internal part. An infant cannot have faith', or good principles; but it may be '-^grafted into the Church" and adopted-^ and it may even have forgivenefs, though not of adual lin ; it may have remifllon of the penalties in- flicted on the human"" race. Our Saviour was baptized; but he who knew no fin, of any kintl, could have no forgivenefs. He who was, from the tiril the Son of God, could not receive adoption.
XXXIII. Here
' Exod. xii. 26. does not prove this: — Bingham quotes it,
15. 4. '/. end, and gives fome reafcns. Wall, at the end ot
Chap. 9. (Part 2.) mentions tJie Paflbver twice; as underftood not to be for children : but quotes no text,
^ John iii. 5.
' The Lrtherans allow thtm Faith ; and the Pelagians ufcd to afcribe to them aftual Sin, in order to avoid original.
"" This may fecm lefs ftrange or harfh to thofe who have confider^d what was faid under the nintli Article.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXXIII — XXXV. 3II
XXXIII. Here we put an end to our Proof, dired and indirecfl ; and therefore proceed to our Application. I have been in doubt whether a new Form of Aflent is wanted, and have tried one; but on the whole, 1 do not tliink it worth while to detain you by giving it here.— We come there- fore to mutual conceffions.
XXXIV. Here, again, we have to deal with ^takers and Baptifts.
Conceffions to Quakers, of the ancient or modern fort, we have none to make. — Nor to the Soci- nians : fome Baptifm we think clearly appointed in the fcriptures; but, at the fame time we difclaim all judging of our Brother ^ ''* to his own" Mailer he ftandeth or falleth."
XXXV. As to Baptijis, they differ from us, both with regard to fpr inklings and to baptizing Infants, But if they agree with us in other things, there feems nothing in thefe, which need hinder us from uniting. — At fome° times the Baptifts have pro- fefled to think, on moft fubjeds, with the Church of England : but feds are apt to veer about " with every wind of Dodrine^" (preventing which, is one great good of an eftablifhed church) : — the Socinians are now labouring to unite** all feds of Dilfenters againft our National Church : an union which could anfwer no religious purpofe. It is indeed ridiculoujj to think of the Baptifts and Socinians favouring each other, merely becaufe they both oppofe Infant-Baptifm, when they do it from principles fo different, that they fliould rather diipute than unite ; one holding Baptiiiii to
be
" Seeker's Lectures, Led. 35. near the end. — Rom. xlv. 4. ° Wall, page 551. p Eph. iv. 14.
1 See Dr. Prieftley's Addrefs to the Methodifts, prefixed to Wefley's Letters,
U 4
-12 BOOK IV. ART. XXVI 1. SECT. XXXV.
be necelTary, the other to be unneceflarv. — But as to immerfion and fprinkling, a Baptift need not quit the Church of England ; bccaufc ac- cording to our Rubrics, I do not lee how a Pried could refute immerfion if it were required. Our Fonts have indeed grown lets and lefs fuited to dipping, but that furely is not to be mentioned in aro-uino; about Dodrines.
Nay our baptizing Infants does not feem to lay the Baptift under an abfolute neceflity of fepa- rating from us. Suppofe a Baptift was to try the experiment : would he be compelled to bring his children to Baptifm'? does not our Church pro- vide for baptizing at any age? — But if a Baptift was called upon to fubfcribc to our xxxix Articles, could he fubfcribe to our prefent Article ? — to every part of it, except the laft claufe, Baptifts kave^ fubfcribed.— But the" claufe, ** the Eaptifm of young children is to be retained in the Church;" — could he fubfcribe to that ?— if he could not, it might be altered ; * the Baptifm of young children is to be per mitt dd to thofe who prefer it,' would do as well for our church.-— But fome might be contented with this fenfe; * I defire and wilh that the Baptifm of young children may be " retained in the church^' and I think it ought to be, in order that thofe who think it their duty to bring their children to Baptilm, may not be deprived of an opportunity:' but on the other hand, 'as I think it right to afford my Chriftian brethren, who ditier from me, an opportunity of baptizing in their
own
' Ido not fee that he woukl, by the Canons. Burn mentions
an Aft of 3 Jac. ordering the children of Pcpijh Recufants to be baptized within a month.
* ^^'^all, page 551.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXXV. 313
0^'n wa}'-, I hope they will grant me the fame Liberty.'
Limborch is of opinion, probably after Grotiu^y that all Chriftiaris might, confidently with the Scriptures, follow their own notions with regard to the manner and circumftances of Baptifm ; in- cluding in thefe, the age of the perfon baptized \ — But he thinks, of courfe, that Infant-baptifm ought to be deemed valid, and therefore he blames the Anabaptifts for re-baptizing. And he thinks infant-baptifm valid, not only becaufe every one Ihould have liberty, in fuch a cafe, to ad as he pleafes ; but becaufe it is agreeable to the Genius of the Doftrine of Jefus Chrift. — An expref- fion not unlike the concluding one of our Articled
Dr. Priellley'' concludes nis Hiftory of Bap- tifm with giving his opinion, that thofe who are called rational Dijfenters baptize children more from the influence of fettled cujlom, and through a defire of avoiding all difturbance, than from any fixed perfuaiion that they are under an obligation to baptize them.
Even Mr. Tombs'^, the beft, as well as the moft candid, of the Baptift-writers, who con- tinued an Antip^edobaptift all his Life, wrote againft feparation from the Church, and " con- tinued in communion with the Church, till he died."
\Vhat
* Limtorch, Theol. Chrlfl, 5. 68. 25.— Wall fomewhere fays, that Grotius was the firft who reprefented it as a matter of indifference whether a man was baptized in infancy, or his Bap- tifm delayed. — He blames Grotius as difingenuous.
"^ Limborch, Theol. 5. 69. 9. — " Doftrinae Jefu Chriftigenio optime convenire."
* Hift. Corr. 2. page 94. There is afterwards an Appendix, to both Sacraments.
> Wall, page 454.— Alfo429, 430. 528.-.Seealfo 2. 2. 15.
314 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXXVI.
What greater encouragements to Unity can be had ?
XXXVI. I have frequently finiflicd my Apph- cation with Ibme hints of Improvemeni ; but none occur to me itprefent, except fuch as the preceding remarks cannot fail to fuggeit.
0^<^^
ARTICLE
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. I. 3x5
ARTICLE XXVIII.
OF THE lord's SUPPER.
THE Supper of the Lord is not only a fign of the love that Chriftians ought to have among themfelves one to another ; but rather is a Sacra- ment of our Redemption by Chrift's death : info- much that to fuch as rightly, worthily, and with faith receive the fame, the Bread which we break is a partaking of the Body of Chriil, and likewife the Cup of bleffing is a partaking of the Blood of Chrift.
Tranfubftantiation, (or the change of the fub- ilance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by holy Writ j but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, oyer- throweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occafion to many fuperftitions.
The Body of Chrift is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper, only after an heavenly and fpiritual manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Chrift is received and eaten in the fupper, is faith.
The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Chrift's ordinance referved, carried about, lifted up, or worftiipped.
I. The Hiftory of this Arricle might be made very extenfive, but I will endeavour to confine myfelf to fuch incidents as feem likely to be moft yfeful. — As all incidents are built upon thefcrip-
tural
3l6 BOOK IV. ART, XXVIII. SECT. I.
rural account of the Intlitution of the Lord':' Supper, it will be proper to give that, before we proceed; in full, or in fubftance. All the paflages of Scripture which mention it, might be foon read ; but that account which is contained in our Prayer of Coniecraiion, and makes a kind of har- mony, feems fufficient. — *' In the fame night that he was betrayed," &c. — The things principally to be noticed are the metaphorical cxpreflions : But we Ihould not fufier ourfelves to be hindered by the familiarity and commonnefs of the founds, from obferving, how ftrangc a thing it is to be commanded to eat the flelh of our teacher and Lord^; and how much more ftrange to be com- manded to drink his Blood : though it were onlv in an emblematical way : efpecially confidering, that the perfons who firft received the command, were Jews, to whom tafting blood was prohibited. — This ftrangenefs will naturally make us go back to the Old Teftament in order to fee the nature of the Je'wlfli Sacrifices, to which allufion is made : fm~ offerings^, peace-cffcrings, Pajfover. . The JIn-offerwg ; blood, Jliedy fprinkled, called the blood of the Covenant. — Loaf broken, pan given to God (or his Pried) ; Animal broken, or divided into pieces. — The Peare- offering; for benefits pad, or future; " in remembnuice" of Mercies.— Ani- mal partly given, partly made into a feq/ly eaten
with
" This command does appear (take, eaf, this is mj Bcdy) in- dependently of John vi. — tliough when I read that Chapter as prophetical, and coniider what Bifliop Cleaver fays of the Ana- Jocry between John iii. and John vi. I am of opinion it does relate to the Eucliarilt. — It is not lb plain as a narration ; and it contains obfciire intimations in the way of reproof, like John iii. but I feel fati^fied with tliat Interpretation, which refers it to the Sacrament.
•» Thefe were mentioned, Append, to Art. xi. Sed. u. and XX V n.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. II. 317
with friends. Drink-offering, implying Cup. — The Pajfover — a Lamb llain, eaten " in remembrance" of redemption. He vv'ho reads thefe things will be aware alfo (Hammond on Matt. xxvi. 26.) of the Jevvilli cuftom of breaking and diftributing Bread, as an ad of kindnefs, and of putting round a Grace- cup, or cup of blejfing or Salvation : And will know, that the Heathens had facrifices and feajls upon them, with libations, or cups of blefling. — (Cup of Salvation, Pfalm cxvi. 13.) ^ ^^^^^^ things confi- dered, we fliall perceive, that our Saviour's com- mands would appear natural and intelligible to Jews; unlefs they fhould think, that, in the new Jnftitu- tion, the different fort of facrifices were oddly mixed and confounded together.
II. No fuch notion, nor any other, hindered the inflitution from being univerfally adopted by Chriftian converts. They might lee, that the Death of Chrift, taken as a facrifice, refembled, in different points, different forts of offerings; and therefore, that they all had prefigured his Death.— (Appendix to Art,, xi. Seft. xxvii.) At firft the ordinance was probably ^^;^/)/^i but afterv/ards it became more varied and complex ; as well as more animated, or pajfionait; and more adorned and magnificent, - When perfons had great dangers to encounter in the proieffion of Lhriftianity, it naturally heated their imagination and paffions; and led them to do every thing with earneftnefs and fervour".
The idea of the AJcodruta:, and others of the fame turn, would have place here"", as well as in Baptifm,
We
«= This was faid of Srxraments in ger.era!, but the remark is wanted here. ^ Art, XXV, II. and xxvii. vui.
3l8 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. III.
We meet with the expreffions, Mijfa Catechu^ menorum^ and MiJfa" Fideliim, to denote certain parts of divine lervice, in ancient times, — The fideles were mature, complete Chriftians, who (laid in the place of vvorfhip, and received the Com- munion, after the Catechumens were difmijfed^. — I do not think, that our knowledge is perfectly clear about all the particulars of thefe matters; but it is probable, that Mifla Catechumenorum meant the fervlce before the Communion, and Miffa Fide- lium, the Communion-Service : and that the word Mafs, with its connexions, mijjal, he. had this origin; (Meffa, Mefle) : Mafs continued to be the name for the Lord's Supper^ in England during part of the reign of Edward VI. but was probably odious.
III. Whoever came to the Communion (and all the faithful, except penitents, communicated at firft) brought fome offerings, proportioned to their refpedive fortunes; chiefly of i^r^^^ and wine; out of thefe the Priells took as much as it was necef- f.iry to confecrate. The bread was common leavened bread, fuch as was ordinarily ufcd. The RomiOi Wafers, which are unleavened, and very thin, and lound, like a coin, and fo fmall that each perlbn can take an whole one in his mouth without danger of letting any of it drop, did not come into ufe till the eleventh or twelfth Century. — Some chofe to ufe unleavened bread, as what had been ufed at the Jewifh PaJJover, the t}'pe of the Lord's Supper ; and that occafioncd a long dif- pute between the Greeks and the. learned of the Weftern Church \ Attempts were made at dif- ferent
« Bingham, Book 15. Wheatly, page 328.
^ Catechumens are called, in our Homily, " Learners m Religion," page 3^6, 8vo Horn. 27th on the Sacrament.
E And the Augfburg Confcflioa (faid to be like ours) will not allow, that it abolilhes the Mafs. — Syntagma, page 30.
^ Jn the nth Cent. rrielUcy's Hilt. Corr. z, page 56,
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. IV. V. 319
ferent times, to introduce zvater inftead of wine, and water mixed with wine ; and milk, and honey : Grapes alfo, and even Cheefe, had their Advocates. — Thofe who avoided wine were called Encratita, as avoiding it on principles of abftemioufnefs : if they were for pure water, they were called Aqiia- rians; and thofe who ufed bread and cheefe, were
called aoTOTXJoirxi,
Mixing fome water with the wine, feems to have been a prevaihng cuftom amongft rational Chrif- tians for a great length of timcj it arofe from a notion, that the Jews ufed to mix water with their pafchal cup, on account of their wine being ftrongj and it defcended even to the time after our Refor- mation in England. — See Wheatly on the Common Prayer, page 2 89. 292.
IV. In the earlier part of tlie Ceremony, it was thought a proper thing (as in Baptifm) to follow the advice of the Apoftle literally, " falute one another' with an holy kifsj" but the different fexes did not falute each other.
The ancient Chriftians rofe gradually in their devotion, till they came to the mofl: folemn and animated giving of thanks: that was called Eu;)^a- ^tr<«, and thence the folemnity got its'" name of F.HchariJi. In this part was the I'rifagium, a Ihort Hymn fo called from its having the word dyioq^ Holy, repeated thrice : it was much the fame with ours, " Therefore with Angels," &c'.
V. After the communion, part of the conle- crated elements, was fometimes preferred in the Church, for fuch as had not been able to attend :
and
' Rom. xvi. 16 and parallel places.
'' See Wheatly's account, page jo2. — Blnq;liam, Book i 5.
^ For the Greeks fee Cave's fecond Appendix. They feem to haye been quite enihuriafts about this Hymn. Allix- has written an Hiftory of it.
320 BOOK IV. ART. XXTIII. SECT. VI.
and part was fometimes allowed to be carried to theHoufes oi thtjick; but this laft cuftom got abufed, and was left off: children had a part : and fometimes apart was burnt; (Lev. viii. 32.)
A good deal, I fuppofe, of the offerings re- mained unconfecrated. The Priefts had a portion of them, and the reft furnifhed the repaft called Ayxnyt, or Lcve-fcqft -y an entertainment ^ origi- nally of a truly Chriftian fort, at which the rich and poor met together. Pity that any Jcandal ihould ever occafion its being left off!
Thefe things, or moft of them, may be found in Bingham's Antiquities. He mentions fuch a thmg as a Fi3W//>'-Commi]nion".
VI. For many hundred years after the publi- cation of the Chriftian Religion, though "due now iind it the more rational the more we confider ir, Rcafon was on the decline. Paffion had, on that account, the freer fcope; and religious paffion, when not regulated by reafon, becomes fuperfti- tion, myfticiim, emhufiafm. In the dark ages, men ran into all thefe. — Though no form of fpeech is more natural than Metaphor when an emblema- tical rite is intended to exprefs a fact of great im- portance, yet nothing is more obvious to fanaticifm, than to feize upon a metaphorical expreffion, in things grand and awful, and raife its fenfc to every height that it will bear; indeed the moft extra- vagant fenfe of a metaphorical expreffion may be its literal fenfe. Thus we may conceive that, when
high
" See Lardner's account of Pliny's Ep, to Trajan; where he mentions i/«//f// 33 treating on the rubjed^.— Lardner's Works,
Vol. 7, page 311. ^ee alio Lardner, Vol. 8. page 71. — -
Luclan's account of Peregrinus, and the Chrillians having a good flipper together ; and bcijig bretliren,
" J>ingham> 1 5. 4. 3.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. VI. 32I
high and lofty things had been faid, for a long" time, in a declamatory way, of the necefllty of eating the jleJJi and drinking the blood of Chrifl, and men kept trying to furpafs each other in flights of devotion, they might at laft come to profefs, as a Doclrine^ that the coniecrated bread and wine were really^ without a figure, turned into the body and blood of Jefus Chrift ! — This Dodlrine is ufually called the Dodrine of Tranfubjlaviiation-y becaufe thofe who hold it, fay that, on the confe- cration, the bread and wine lofe their own fubJlancCy and are changed or tranfmuted into the iubftance of the Body of Chrifb. — Yet as the bread and wine appear to be flill the fame, this Hypothefis is helped out by another; that though \\\t Juhjtance be changed, the accidents remain unchanged ; ac- cidents are hardnejSy colour, and in fhort all the qualities by which we know one fubftance from another. — The difcovery of this dodrine of Tran- fubftantiation, is afcribed to one Pafchaife, in Latin Radberhis Pafchafnis^, a French Monk, who had afterwards the magnificent German Abbey of Corbey, with the Sovereignty annexed. But the
term,
*> Chryfoficm is faid to have written and fpoken fome very de- clamatory expreffions on this fubje<5l : as, that the Lips were tinged \s\\\y\)[i^ hloo J of oar Lord, Sec. but Collier, (Eccles. Hift. Vol. 2. page 369, or near it,) diftinguiflies between the Orafo- rical works of Chryfodom and his reafoning works. Of the reafoning fort is the Letter to Cafariu:, which the Papifts are unwilling to allow genuine. — By the way, Collier takes the tinging. Sec. in an higher fenfe than I do : when we drini the blood of Chrift, our lips muftbe tinged withk: it is only fixing the attention on t}\tfa7ne metaphor.
P Cave, Hift. Lit. Pafchafius, or Vol. 2, page 2. opening of the Qth Century: that it was not known during the Neftorian and Eutychian Controverfies, appears from a paflage quoted by Bi(hop Pearfon ; on Creed, page 328. ift Edit, or page i6z, foL — from Gelafius (Bifhop of Rome in 400) de duabus Na'turi? Chrifti.
VOL. IV. X
SECT. VII. VII I.
term, or name^ was not given till the thirteenth Century j and in the fame Century the Doftrine firfl received the lupport and authority of a Coun- cil'^. Lanfranc (Archbifliop of Canterbury at laft) was the perfon who lirtl brought the Doctrine into England \ about the middle ot the eleventh Cen- tury.—(See Fox's Mart. Vol. 2, page 457.) — ■ Strange as this Dodrine fcenis, it has been found to feize and atfect the mind, lb that even improved nations have been unwilling to give it up : a cru- cified Deity prcfent to the fenfcs ! not through Incarnation, but Impanation ! what an idea! enough to fill the mind with facred horror, (no doubt intervening) and to make every ordinary fentiment appear infipid \
VII. It mud not be concluded, from what has been faid, that all thofe who profellcd what is commonly called the Dodtrine of Tranfubftantia- tion, explained the particulars exaftly in the fame way : where there was fo much room for fuppo- tion, it would have been a wonder if feveral hypo- thefes had not appeared; they may, however, all come under the general notion of corporal orefence^ And fo may the hypothefis of Conjiibjlantiation^ of which by and by.
VII I. Oppofition was foon made to the doctrine of Tranfubftantiation ; particularly by Bertram, or Ratram, a ISlonkof Corbey', and John Scot, called Erigenay becaufe he was a native of Erin, or Irin,
that
"* In 121;, at the third Lateran Council ; See Cave's Hill. Lit. under Innocent the Third.
' See the Difputation at Oxford in 1554, before Latimer, A:c. fufFered: Collier, Vol. 2, page 368, or Fox's Martyrol. (by the date), or Syntagma, p. 120. Angl. Confeflio, from Jewel's works. — immutari, &c. fomniarimt; neque adliuc potutrunt unqiiam fatis inter fe de fuo Ibmnio convenire.
^ Cave's Hill. Lit. Vol. 2. page 2. confpeftus, or opening of 9th Century, (for Bereuger, fee Sedl. x.)
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. IX. 323
that is, oi Ireland. Scot's book is loft, but Bertram's remains.
IX. This Doclrine comes under the general oblervation made on ail the Popilli Doiftrines con- tained in the opening of the twenty-fecond Article. And we fhould now fee in what way it has " given occafion to many JuperjUt ions ^
Somt fnperji it ions ^ to which the Doclrine of Tran- fubftantiation gave occallon, will be the fubjedis of fome of the following Articles ; a few others may be mentioned. — It occafioned the cuftom of Jopping the bread in the wine ; — of referving the wafer with a view to performing cures, and flopping public calamities ; — of burning the elements to allies J — of r[\-d\d\-\^ procejjions in the ftreets, during which every one prefent is to kneel :-^o^ elevating the Hoftia, that every one may fee and adore his God. — This Doclrine has alfo occafioned the mul- tiplying of Altars in churches ; and has drawn the attention of the Romanifts from every part of public worlhip which we look upon as valuable. — The Romiiii cafuifts very gravely determine what' punilhments are to be inflicted on a monfe, that is lb unfortunate as to gnaw the confecrated elements: and how things are to be conduced in cafe a lick Prieft Iliould vomit them up.
On the other hand, the dp6lrine of Tranfub- flantiation is thought to have put a"" ftop to the cuftom of giving the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper to Infants in the Weftern Church, They ufed to have it given by the Prieft, who dipped his finger in the chalice, and then put it into the
child's
* See the original pafTages in Bennet's Direflions, under this
sgth Article. Ste alio Mofheim, Cent. 1 3. 2. 4. 2.— And the
thing is mentioned briefly in Fulke's Rhemifh Tellament on. I Cor. xi. 29. oppofite to folio 288.
" Wall, page 5 1 6, 4:0. or 2. 9 16. X 2
324 BOOK IV. \RT. XXVI II. SECT. X.
child's mouth. But the moderns mix the bread with the wine, " r.nd put to the child's Hps a drop or two of that mixture quickly after his Baptifm ; alter which he receives no more till the age of dircrction\"
X. But let us come to the age of the Reforma- t'lon. The do6lrine of wliiqh we are fpcakino^, was one of thofe which were objefted to by the IVal- deufes^ : But yet it was not decidedly oppofed for lome time : even Luther only changed trinfub- flantiation into conjuhjlantiation^. IVickliffe had, in fome parts of his works, expreff.d himlelf (trongly againft this abufe, but MelmiElhoit' complained, that, on comparing different parts, he found him confufed in the quellioii about the Holy Sacrament. Of the forty propofitions of Wickliffe's which the Council of Conjlnnce condemned, the three firft re- late to our prefent fubjed ; (fee Baxter on Coun- cils, page 431, or Chap. 13. Seft. 2.) And the third is againft the Bcdily Prefence in general ; and therefore againft what Luther afterwards called Con- fubftantiation. I think John HufSy and Jerome of Prague did not differ from Wickliffe in this, materially, if at all.
ConfuhJIantiation meant, that the fubftanre of Chrifi's Body and Blood were prefent in the Holy Sacrament with the fubftance of the bread and wine. Luther's perfifting in this notion cauled an
unhappy
^ Wall, page 515. 517.
y Wall, 2. 7. 3. page 386,
* This may jull be mentioned here, as Luther is faid to have borrowed his Confubllantiation from Berenger, in 1035 : fee his Recantation in Cave's Hill. Lit. Confpeitus oxc. xi.— But Berenger made feverai Recantations ; tliey are not to be de- pended on. What F"o\ gives as his (Berenger's) real fentlments, out of a Book of Lanfranc's, feems moft worthy of notice. (Mart. Vol. 2. page 458). — Berenger, from that, feenis to have thought n.uch as we do now.
'* Gilpin's Live> of Reformers, page 65.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII, SECT. X. 325
unhappy divifion amongft the reformed Churches, which, i beheve, continues to this day.
Luther explained his confubftantiation by faying, that in red-hot iron^ two fubltances are united, heat^ and^re : he fupported it, by what was called Ubiquity^ by affirming, that the Son of God w^as every where, ubique i—oi' thus; God is every where; Chrift fits at the right hand of God; therefore Chrift is every where ". — Yet Luther was, in gene- ral, a good and forcible reafoner : but when a man is determined to maintain by reafoning a dodrine totally unintelligible to rcafon, he muft take the appearance of argument for the reality. What led him, probably, to change tranfubftantiation for confubAantiation, was, what is urged in our Article, that Tranfubftantiation takes away the elfence of a Sacrament^.
The Romaiiijis make the ordinance of which we are fpeaking, very complicated and gaudy ; and they profefs the dodrine of Tranfubftantiation without referve ^ I may ufe the prefent tenfe, as they have made no material changes, that I know of, lince the age with which we are now con- cerned, the Age of the Reformation. The ads of the Council of Trent, and the Catechifm made by its direction, will fupply us with any particulars of which we may want to take notice.
The
'' Maclulne's Mofheim;, Cent. 16. 1.7. 21. and note (2). •^ Luther is faid to have given up this ubiquity as a proof of Chrill's corporal prefence in the Eucharift ; but rigid Lutherans were ftill Ubiquitai-ians.
^ " Neceflitas ipfa verltatis facramenti exigere videtur," &:c. — Confeflio Wittemb. de EucharilUa, Syntagma, page 159, 160. ^ See Art. i. Sedl. xvui. VoL 2. page 275, Note (c), where is an expreflion from a French Prayer-book : after Communioa the communicant is directed to fay, " Seigneur, &-c. jc vous al reju avec joic," This order is alfo given ; Ton Createur tu recevrar. Au moins aPaques, &c> X 3
326 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. X.
The thirteenth Scflion of the Council, is upon the Eucharift. The firft chapter declares, that there is no contradiction between Chrift's body l:)eing always naturally at the right hand of God, 2,w(\ facr anient ally in other places: where ideas are wanting, how ufeful are words! Yet I'uch manner of exiftence, we are told, is not expreffible by words, but is pofTible to God. Afrerwards we are told, that, in the facrament, the real Body of Chrift exifts fub fpecie panis, &c. — Nay, that the zvhole body of Chrift exifls in every parlicleoi the bread, and in every particle of the wine : and there is a converjion of fubftance, which is aptly (proprie) called Tranfiil^Jaiitiaiion. — That the fame worlhip of Lairia is due to the coniecrated elements, which is due to the true God. That procejjions are proper, as a triumph over Herely, and to make it pine away, or be alhamed. That the cuftom of refervingy is ancient, and that of carrying the Sacrament to the Jick, nccellkry. That the proper .prepara- tion for receiving is facramenral Confcfiion. — The Anathemas are eleven, the fecond againft Con- fubftantiation.
The Catechijm has the fame things j with rea- fons; and fome things more minute. The Sacra- ment is to be taken fajling. The bread ought to be wheat -y it ought to be unleavened^ but may be leavened. — " The Church of God alzuays mingled ivater \v\i\\ the wine j" for feveral "weighty" rea- fonsj fo that fuch mixture *' may not be ncgle^fled \jnder mortal Jin^ The Eucharift is to be judged of *' by Faitky not by fcnlc." Our fenfes tell us " nothing at all but the Species of bread and wine.'* '* Ihey will judge that there is only bread and wine in the Sacrament." " One may fee indeed all the accidents of bread and wine, which yet are inherent in no fubftance'* — (what would Mr. Locke fay to
this.?)
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. X. 327
this?) " but they confift of themielves."— " We are not too narrowly to inquire into Tranfubftan- tiation." — If the Romanifts had been " feen to eat" their " Lord under his own Species," they could not eafily have avoided the " reproach of Infidels," as feeding upon human flelh and blood, " the moft horrid thing in the world!"
Though thele things were fetded by the Coun- cil, yet we muft not conceive that they were fettled without debate or diffenfion : The Cordeliers and the Jacobins were oppofed in their methods of fclving the bodily ^ prefence.
The Feftival of Corpus Chrifti or the Holy ^ Sacra- ment is faid to have been founded on a Revelation, which one Jidiana, a devout woman of Leige, de- clared Ihe had received. Her pretenfions v^ere fupported by the Bifliop, (in 1264) and afterwards by Pope Urban IV. and, in 13 11, by Clement V. —The Feftival is to be looked upon as /;/ faci, the caufe of Tranfubftantiation, as a fettled and popular Do£lrine. It feems to be held the Thurf- day after Trinity-Sunday :— It is fometimes called Fete de Dieu.
Dupin"" is willing to give up the word tran- fubftantiation; but ftill it muft be profefled, " that the Bread and wine are really changed into the body and blood of Chrift," &c. The word fub- Jiance is dropped.
After the Romanifts, let us look at the Re- formed' churches.— Z?////^r'j opinion of the prefence
of
*■ Voltaire, Vol. 10, 4to. page 156.— Du Conciie de Trente. Probably from Fra. Paolo, (alias Sarpi).
g Molheim, Cent. 13. Part 2. Chap. 4. Seft. 2. oftavo. Vol. 3. page 108.
*> Append, to Moflieim.
* I mean here all thofe Churches which feparated from Rme. Abroad, thofe Churches are called reformed, which feparated
X 4 ' froin
^28 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. X.
of Chrift in the Eucharift was mentioned juftnovvj as well as the feparation occafioncd by his perfill- ing in it. This reparation confills of a number of particulars; but it may fuffice for us to be aware, that the great opponent to Luther, was Ziiingle^ who formed the Churches in Switzerland ; and afterwards, Calvin. Zuingle looked upon the Sacramental Bread and Wine as only Jlgns and lymbols^y but it does not appear to me, that he did not look upon the facrament as a comniemoration of a facrtjice. — The greateft difficulty arifes fiom the Hiftory of MdanElhon^ about whom we are interefted as the divine on whofe judgment very great reliance was placed in the forming of our own Articles. The truth may be, that, as he was of a very mild temper, and a fingular lover of peace, and as he had fenfe enough to fee, that the prefence of Chriil in the Eucharift, is a thing in- tirely above human comprehenfion, and one that does not immediately affect practice, or virtue, he miglit fpeak undecidedly, and endeavour to pacify each of the contending parties, as much as pof- fible, by refpeclful attention and candour. — He Was connected with Luther, and in conterence' appeared as one of his company ; and he is fome- timts faid to have been of his opinion ; but fome- rimes he is laid to have thought ditferendy from him : I mean on the fubjecl now before us"'. — It is
certain,
from the Lutherans, under Zuingle, Cali'in, SiQ. — SeeMolheini, Index, or Vol 4, 8vo. page 54. 62. — And, if I miftakc not, they are fometimes all together called Calvinijls.
^ Mofheim, Cent. xvi. Seft. 3. part 2. 2. 4. — Alfo Cent. xvi. Sed. I. Chap. a. Sedt, 21. — And compare the Helvetic Confef- fion, page 71, with that of Wictembcrg, page 159,
' At Marpurg, in « 129. — Moflicini, Cent. i6. i. 2. 28.— Alfo Cent, 16. Seft. 3. Part 2. 2. 4. note (y).
■" Compare Mofheim, Cent. 16. 3. 2. i. 27. with Mac- laine's Note (r).
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XI. ^It)
certain, that the confefiion of Aiigjburg^ which, was drawn by him, favours Conlubftantlation".; but in that Confeffion he is thought to have com- plied too much for the fake of peace. From what has been faid, we know what to expeA in the Confcfiions of the Reformed, Corporal prefence is the moft fully profelled in that of Wittemberg% and the moft avoided in that of the Helvetic Churches. — The opprobrious name given to thofe who denied the corporal prefence of Chrift in the Eucharift, was that of Sacrametitarians^^ or Sacramoitayics.
XI. Let us now come to our own Country. — In the reign of Henry VII f. very great ftrcfs was laid upon the corporal prefence; nay, feveral people fufiered death for oppoiing it. Cramner was, at that time, a Lutheran'', and the King himfelf raged againft Sacramentaries. In 1539 the act was paffed which made a kind of regrefs of the Reformation ; it was called, '^lie Statute of tJieJix Articles, the firft Article affirmed the corporal ''•pre- fence; and if any perlons preached or wrote againil it, they were to be burnt, and their eflates for- feited. In 1543 the ^^ Necejfary Do^irine" &c. was publilhed; it maintains, in conformity to the ftatute, the Law of the Land, that in the " moft high facrament of the Altar," the bread and wine are " turned to the \'q.X'^ fubftance of the body and blood of our Saviour Jefu Chrift." Yet when we
have
" Syntagma, page 14. x.
" Syntagma, page 159. {ox Helvetic, \>zgc 71. 73.
P Neal's Hifl. Pur. Vol. i. page 20. 410. A. D. 1538.
Mofheim, Vol. 4. 8vo. page 87. Maclaine's Note.
1 Cranmer's prcgreirion was the natural one; giving up Tran- fubftaniiation he kept fome belief of corporal prefence: giving up that, as untenable, he became a Sacramentarian. — He was famous for refilling, in Parliamentj the Uatute of the_/£v Articlec fee his Life by Strype.
' Neal, A. P. 1539.
35° BOOK IV. ART. XXVI II. SECT. XI.
have taken it, ic " is not turned into cur fub- fame ;" there are feveral other things mentioned, but they are only popilh; and therefore they have occiirred already : As, that the facramcnt is to be received fajling, ^c— But when a church, which had been trying to reform, could accept or retain the Doftrine of TranfitbJIantiation^ we need not wonder at its retaining an}ahingelfe'.
In the beginning of the reign of Edv/ard VI. it is not fo ealy to give an account of the doctrine of the Englifli Church. In his Firji Book, (that is, of Comm.on Prayer) the irafcr is continued*, only it is to be fo large that it may be broken ; but " men mull: not think lefs to be received in part than in the whole; but in each of them the whole body of our Saviour Jefus Chrift."
Afterwards both Tranfuhjlantiation and all ways of bodily prefence, feem to have been decidedly reje^ed: this appears from our Article of 1552, and from the Refornhatio Leeum.
Iq the Reformaiio hegum we iind a pretty long chapter'' againft both Tranfubftantiation and Con- iubifantiation, and againil corporal prefence in general. The exprcffions arc much the fame with thofe of the Article of 1552. We alfo find a Chapter'' againfl: ubiquity^ faying, that drift, in his divine naiurc, might be every where {ubique) even after his refurredion; but that in \i\s human nature he could not : his body, if human, muft be in fome one place at one time : this chapter alfo agrees exactly with our Article of 1552.
Latimer,
" The profanencfsof the Anabaptijls^ mentioned in Ait. xxv. Se£l. II. might be here rccollcdied. Indeed it would have fuitcd our preient Article full as well as that about Sacraments in general.
* Whcatly, page 332. A. D. 1548. the fecond Book was in 1 5 152.
" JDe Ha^rcfibus, cap. 19. ^ De Summa Trmitate, cap. 4.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XI. 331
Lathner, in the Dlfputation at Oxford in 15.54, (or in the Paper which he gave in,) faid, that he maintained the real prefence of Chrift in the Eucharift, but not the i:or/)or^/ prelence. (See Fox, or Collier, A. D. 1554). Avchbilhop Seeker, (Lect. Vol. 2. page 251.) fays, the Church has alvva)'s acknowledged the real prefence. Yet Wheatiy, (page 320.) fays, it (real, eliential pre- fence of Chrift's natural ftefli and blood,) was not allowed at firfl, in the time of Edward VI. it fecmed to approach fo near Tranfubftantiation. — Fulke on Heb. i. 6. denies reality of Chrifl's corporal prefence.
Queen Elizabeth fecms to have been willing to ccmprckend as many as poffible in the new Englifh Church ; and with that view to have endeavoured to ufe a language, which all might adopt, who did not profefs Tranfubftandation^ in the ftrlcteft fenfe, and which might neverthelefs be ufed by thofe who did not admit any prefence of Chrift in the Eucharift perfectly corporal. Such language v^^ould comprehend all Lutherans, and {orwt Papifts^. I think this remark will be fuliicient to account for the change of the expreflions in the twenty-eighth of our prefent Articles; (on which Biiliop Burnet fpeaks judicioufly) and for the language in the fecond Book of Homilies; both as to the word " Incorporation^^'' and the infifhing on Faith and Jpiritual eating of the Sacrament.
There
y See Wheatiy, end of Commimion-ofHce. — Mofhelm, Vol, 4. 8vo. page 37 or. Cent. 16. 3. 2. i. 27.
^ See Seft. xi. — See alfo Mofiieim, Cent. 16. 3. 2.2, 6. or page 70, 71, 8vo. Vol. 4.
'' Homily : on worthy receiving of the Sacrament, page 3 50, Svo. and35i. The language now is very like Calvin' s\ ft-s Jnftitutes, 4. 17. -^i^.-^^'JncoTjiorate" occurs in the next prayer
before
232 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XI.
There was publifl-jed, in Latin, in the year 1560, a very Ihorc office for a Communion at Funerals^ if the friends and neighbours of the deceafed^ chofe to attend. The Collect is the lafl Prayer in our burial-fervice; *' O merciful God,'* &c. — And there is an Epillle, and a choice of two Gofpels. I fuppofe the reft would be taken from the Communion-fcrvice; beginning, probably, at the Lord's Prayer. — Indeed if the Prieft began there, fome Colled:, Epiftle and Gofpel would be wanting.
Of the Familijisy we faid enough under the twenty-fifth Article i and fo of the 5(7r/;//^7;/j : and in general of thofe, who, near the time of the Reformation, fpoke of the facraments m general as mereftgni of unity amongft Chriftians — 1 doubt how near thofe moderns come to them, who make the Lord's Supper a mere Conimemoraiion.
The chief part of the Dodrine of the irjhiahersy with regard to the Lord's Supper, feems to be this; they look upon what was done by Clirift in the inftitution, as ^.JJiadow^ intended to vanifh, or ceafe ; i[-\cJiibJlauLehQ:'\ngintei'?ial''y and intended to remain. — Col. ii. 16, 17. applied to the Lord's Supper, might exprefs their mind.— This dodtrine is generally, I believe, coniidered as invented in the lall century; but thofe PetrobruJfianSy who were juft mentioned before ^ feem to have been PopiJJi Qiiakers, as it were, in the eleventh Cen- tury, when Tranlubftantiation was taken for granted. Their preachers faid, that the Clergy deceived the People " notorioully; for the Bodv
of
before Gloria In excelils. Alluding to I Cor. xxi. 27, an4 parallfls.
*> Sparrow's colleftion, page 200.
' Barclay's Apology, prop. 13,
** Art. xxvm.Scd, xiv.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XIT. 533
of Chrlft was only cnce fnade, by himfelf, at the iupper before bis Paflion^ : and was once only, viz. at that time, given to his Difciples. Since that time It was never made by any one, nor given to any one."
In IFeJlefs^ Letters we have an account of the notions of the myftics\ they need not " the Lord's Supper, for they never ceafe to remember Chrifl in the moft acceptable manner." — " Love is your end." " Different men are led in different ways" (to Love) : " You muft judge for yourfelf. Per- haps fading may help you for a time, and -perhaps the holy Communion."
XII. Thole whom we commonly call DiJJe?!- ters^ in England, fit at the table on which the Lord's Supper is celebrated. The Minifter pre- fides, according to the DireHorj^, breaks the bread, with prayer and benediction, and gives it to fome one, but not to every one : and fo of the Cup. — The ceremony may be grave, decent, and edifying, for anything I fee. — Dr. Priefhley men- tions'" a Mr. Henry, whofe treatife on the Sacra- ment is much read, and he refers to a chapter, incitled, *' Si^/jts to be feen at the Lord's Tabled — This Title has a myftical found, and Dr. Prieftley fays, that experiences are fometimes examined into before admiflion to the Sacrament.
The Baptijis alfo receive the Sacrament syT/Z/V/^ " at a common table," " and handing the Ele- ments' one to another."
XIII. Early
* Wall, end of Chap. 7. Part 2.
^ Page 60. 62. 13th Letter.
e See Directory ; and Preface to Grey's Hudibras. I have been told, that one kind of DifTenters will receive a Teacher or Paftor, from another kind ; but will not Jtt doion with him : that is, will not receive the ^acr^.ment with him.
^ Free Addrefs, page 55.
' See Wall,, Part 2. Chap. 8. page 446, 4to,
334 EOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XIII XV.
XIII. Eailj' in this eighteenth Century Bifhop }IoadIc\ contended, that the Lord's Supper is a bare viemorial of the Death of Chrift. Bilhop « Warburton, that it is ^ feajl on a facrijice. This laft feeras the moft approved opinion, and is ably defended" by BiJJiop Cleaver. Dr. Balguys feventh Charge amounts to the fame thing. — But if Bilhop Hoadley looked upon the Death of Chrift as a facriiice, a memorial of his death, confidered iit that li^ht, would not perhaps differ materially from a Feaft on a facrifice ; where no real facrifice is performed' : and would agree with the exprelTions of our"" Cateehi/m. — Naj, when the mod-^rn Soci- nians make the Sacrament a bare memorial of Chrill's death, and throw out all notion of a {licrifice, I do not regard the diifefence as one be- longing to the ^^frrtwc";// ; but to the nature and elScacy ot the Death of Chrift, or the docfrine of Atonement. Each party commemorates the Death of Chrift as what he imao-ines it be.
xi V. We next come to the Explanation.
The Title is taken from i Cor. xi. 20. The Article confifts of four Paragraphs.
XV. The firft thing it does is, 10 aiTirm, of the Lord's Supper in particular, what was before affirmed of Sacraments in general, that it is not a mere badge. Yet it is a Badge ; and the Vv'ay in which it is a badge, is by denoting Chriftian focial kindneis, fuch as would be ihewn by an Agape^ or fcaft of Charity, which meant only to brmg
thofe
^ Two Sermons, Oxford, 1789.— Warburtor/s Sermon is called a ^«//o««/ account, &c.— Iloadley'sa /'/«/« nccount, &:c.
^ Maclaiiie thinks, that Bp. Hoadley 's notion is the fame with that of Zuingle. Moflieim, Vol. 5. 8vo. pao;e 3^1. or Cent. 16. I. 2. 21. Note (a). ~ Had they the lame notion of the deatli of Chrift as a fiCiilke?
•" " For the continual rcmtnibr:\nce (memorial) of the Sacri- jice of the Death of Chrift," 6.c.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XVI XVIII. 335
thofe of the fame comtnunity together, in a way likely to produce chearfulaefs, good humour, and benevolence. The Lord's Supper ufed to be called the Sacrament of Peace and Charity: (Trent Cat. page 159. bottom.)
XVI. " But rather"— verum potius — this does not exclude the notion of a Badge, but only de- clares the Lord's Supper to be fomething rnore; to have, as a Sacrament, not only an external, but an internal part.
XVII. "A Sacrament of our Redemption by Chrifl's Death." In Art. xxix. thofe who take the Lord's Supper, are faid to " eat and drink the
Jign or Sacrament of fo great a thing" (as the body and blood of Chrift.) — From this comparifon it appears, that " Sacrament^'' in our Article, means much the fame as '■'-fign^^ \n\\\q\\ agrees with tlie account before" given of the mod literal or proper lignification of the word Sacrament. Redemption was explained in the Appendix to the eleventh Article". — The Lord's Supper then is an emble- matical reprefen ration of our being redeemed from fpiritual evil, or bondage, by the Death of Chrift : but ill what way has the Death of Chrift any efficacy to free us from fpiritual evil? by being a facrificc : (that it was a facrifice, has been proved I^efore ^ : ) therefore the Lord's Supper is a facrifice- feaft-, or a feaft upn a facrifice : in fome relpeds a ■pafchal fupper.
XVI II . If this be underftood, all the reft follows naturally; as is implied by, " Info-much that:''* In all fuch Feafts there was a Communion^ ,that is, a Commuyiication^ or a -partaking in common^, [in common with the guefis; in common, in fome fort, with
the
" Art. XXV. Se6l. 11. « App. to Art. xi. Seft. xvn.
P Append, to Art. xi. Seft. xiv, xxi\, xxvii. xxvii i, ■2 Dr. Balguy, page 312.
33"^ BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XVIII.
the Biin^ to whom the facrlfice was offered') of all the benefits at which facrifice aimed; as pardon, favour, thankfgiving. — Siiould not this be fatisfac- tory, the remainder of our paragraph is a proof of it, from fcrlpture; expreffing indeed, at the fame time, what might always be a tacit condition, the ivorthinefs of the receiver : that he who partakes, muft not be wholly unworthy, is fo plain, that the Scripture, may, at any time, rake it for granted; we fhall have occafion to fpeak of it under the next Article. The pafTage introduced, in proof or confirmation, is i Cor. x. i6. the word in the Englidi Article is partakings but in the Latia Article it Is commnnicatio ; which is Latin for either partaking, or " communion -y^ that is, partaking in common: Communion is the word in our Eng-Ihli Bible. In the Vulgate there is firft communicatio and then pariicipatio ; thefc muft have the fame meaning, the Greek to them both being xoiva;v<a\ — To be lure, a fmgle, unconnccfted fcntcncc of Scripture in an Article, would make a kind of identical propofition ; for in every Article we mean only, that each thing affirmed can be proved by fcripturc ; and therefore when the thing ailirmed is itfelf fcripture, we (^iyy in effect, fcripture may be proved by fcripture : — However, in difficult fub- lefts, we had perhaps moft of us rather fubfcribe to a fentence of fcripture than to an human inter- pretation of it. And a fentence of Scripture may realbnably be introduced, to confirm fomcthing elfe which Is not Scripture. But let us now come to the fccond paragraph.
XIX. " Tranfub-
' Damafcere has both thcfe connexions, Trent. Cat. Sedl. f . or page 195.
'^ 1 am not fure that tho fcope of this re;ironln<T will be im- mecllatcly perceived, except the reader find?, that the con- cluding e.vprellions of the firfl paragraph of the article, might, ■without it, give too little feeling of ayoaWpartaidng.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIir. SECT. XIX. XX. 337
XIX. *' Tranfubflantiation" was explained in the Hiflory. It " cannot be proved by Holy- writ;" — this expreffion will occafion what may be called indireSi proof; that is, anfwenng the arguments of the Romanifts, which to our doc- trines, are objedions. But that ' which follows will bring on dire6t proof; it " is repugnant to the plain words of fcripture," — '* plain words^* —all fides talk o^ plain words : we will only obferve, that fome words are more plain when ufed meta- phorically, than literally : as, a Plagiary, in Eng- lifh; pravus^ in Latin; Saijijjement\ in Ffench.
*' Overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament" — by confoundmg the outward and vifible fign, with the "inward and fpiritual Grace:" — the figure, with the thing figured". Tranfubflantiation makes the bread (the fign) to be aifo the Body of Chrifl, (the thing fignified). — Explanation here, is proof.
The " fuperftitions" to which this dodrine hath given occafion, were mentioned in the Hif- toi'y''; and no farther proof can be wanting, that the Dodrine " hath given occafion to many fuper- ftitions."
XX. The third paragraph is not more eafy to ex- plain than that in whofe room it was lubllituted. — It mentions only the Body of Chrifl; but that is for the fake of fimplicity and perfpicuity. What is
faid
' Did. Acad. f;iys of falfifrement " il n'eft pas en ufage au propre, mais feulment au figure. There are many fuch words. Candor is never ufed for whiteaefs. I never knew any fenfe of univarrantable but the figurative, till a Keeper in a Kin'g's Foreft I, told me, certam Venifon was unwarrantable; that is, could not be fent in return to the Warrants ifiued by the Officers of the Crown
« Fulke on Rhem. Teft. Luke xxii. Sed. 7.— Heb. i, Se6l. i.
" i^eft. ix.
VOL. IV. Y
338 BOOK IV. ART. XXVllI. SECT. XX.
faid of the Body may be extended to the Bloody by parity of reafoning. — Let us, in order to explaia it, read, in addition to what was read before^, John vi. 48 — 58. — And compare Heb. x. 5 — 10. From thefe two fcriptures, one may get fome idea, how, by eating the facramental Bread, or Bread in a facrifice-feaft, one may be faid to eat the Body of Chrift. Whether John vi. relate to the Lord's fupper, has been dilputed ; I think Billiop Cleaver proves, that it does as a/)^!?/)^^//^ intimadon; but we are fure that many people have fo underftood it; and fo probably did they who compiled our Article^. In that chapter lomething is meant, which is not intended to be cxprell^d with perfeift clearnefs. It may, as a prophetic intimation, be interpreted by the Inftitution of the Sacrament, as an e^Jent ; and by a comparifon of Chrift's reafon- ing in the fixth Chapter, about the Lord's Supper, with his reafoning to Nicodemus in the third, about Baptifm. The difficulty lies in giving a meaning to fuch expreffions as that in our Cate- chifm, *' verily and indeed taken" w^hen ufed by thofe who reject both Tranfubftantiation and Con- fubftantianon ; and deny, in general, the corporal prefence of Chrift in the Eucharift. It is a dif- ficulty which feems to have occafioned fome un- fteadincfs of language, fome expreflions feemingly inconfiftent in thofe, who have departed both from the RomiQi and the Lutheran Church*. My own
idea
X Sea. I.
^ Bifliop Cleaver fays, that the Reformers were aga'mji apply- ing John vi. to the Sacrament. He excepts (in lome degree) Cranmer. Two i'ermons, page 2 5 .
* Barclay obfervts this in his Apology, Prop. 13. Sedl. 3 & 4. Reality (ot Chrift's prefence) lecms to be the moft unfteadily ufed; fomctirr.es with Body, fometimes without — See Sed. xi. about Latimer, &c. We eat Chrift's body r^a/^' ; we cannot
eat
BOOK IV. ART. XXVI II. SECT. XX. 339
idea is this; when T fay, that, in the Lord's Supper, the inward parr, or thing fignified, is, " The Body and blood of Chrift, which are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful in the Lord's Supper;" J mean, that, though I may not know precisely what may be intended in Scripture by our eating Chrift's Body and drinking his blood, yet I believe, that whatever is meant, a worthy receiver comes up to that meaning : he performs that acrion which is prefcribed ; he obtains that good which is annexed to it.
If this be admitted, great latitude is allowed, when fcripture fpeaks of eating the Flelli of Chrift and drinking his blood, to diiTerent notion?, and conceptions, or imaginations about particular wt'^;/^; or intermediate fteps : and in things above reafon why Ihouid latitude be denied? One man thinks, that eating Chrift's flefti and drinking his blood, means only a bare commemoration of his death : another thinks, it is emblematically accepting the benefits of the Chriftian facrifice : a third thinks, that it is eating, in fdme inexplicable way, the fubjiance of Chrift's Body, into which the Bread has been changed: a fourth, that it is eating the fubjiance ot Chrift's body along with the facramental bread. Thefe are but citierent fancies or conjec- tures of men about the particular means of bringing about what is called in Scripture'' eating the fiejh of Chrifl : ftili therefore 1 fay, whichever of thefe is
rights
eat that really which is wet prefent; thus men feem to have been led to acknowledge the real piefence, even of Chrift's body; thougt) tney dei\y the fcr/K^ra/prelence.
•* The Romanifts and Lutnerdns would not deny, either that eatinf( Chrift's Body is a commemoration, or a partaking of the benefits or 2i Sacrifice ; nor fhould we Cfl/w«//^j; but ftill, every thin^ Between t;:e precept " take eat," and the obedience to it (incluaing the reivard, or benefit), is human.
Y 2
340 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XX.
right, or if none of them be right, the zvorthy communicant, does that which is really meant in fcripture b)'^ eating the flefli of Chrifl;, and drink- ing his blood ; and he gains all the benefit which God intended fliould arife from fuch eating and
drinkins. He does that which God hath corn- er
mandedj and he obtains that whicli God doth promife.
I could wilh an}'^ one, who enters into what I have faid, to try whether the paragraph before us, would exclude the Lutheran^ or even the Romanijl. The Romanift, who profelfed Tranfubftantiation in the ftricfteft fenfe, could not fubfcribe to the ■preceding paragraph; but would he not own that even Jm eating the Body of Chrifl is a fpiritual" eating? he does not mean to fatisfy his hunger; and he profefl'es, that what he eats does not mix^ with his bodily fubftance. And as to Faith, he profefles that " we mulljudge of the Eucharift by' Faith;" nay, in the form of conlecration he calls it *' the myjiery of Faith.'* And as all muft own, that the eating of the flefli of Chrift is a fpiritual and not a carnal ^eating, all muft likewife own, that Faith is more properly the inftrument, than the Jaw is. The Trent Catechifm fays, " what food is to the Body, that the Eucharift is to thc^ Spirit'' Roma- nifts fpeak of Faith chiefly with a view to their
incredible
«= It is called " o\xt fpiritual mea/," Trent Catech. Secfl. 5.
or page 196 Spiritual eating isdiftiiigiiifhed from facramental
eating, and both are required. Council, Scfl". 13. Cap. 7. and Canon 8. but facramental eating is not ordinary eating.
•^ Trent Catechifm, Sedl. 49, or page 220, bottom.— Seft. xi. of this Article. This might be held, in order to obviate the charge of Stercoriatii/m. (Molheim, Index).
'^ Trent Catech. Sedl. 23, 24 or page 206, 207.
^ Panis cibus nieiitiselt, nou cibus ventris. — Cypr. See Synt. page 121.
s Scft 49. page 220.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT XX. 34I
incredible converfion of bread into Flefh j we, of Chriftian Faith in general ; yet tiiey fometimes ufe it in our fenfe.
When I think in this train, and confider how. tranfccndent and aftonidiiDg a thing the Eucha- rift muft, on any fiippofirion, appear to one who fixes his thoughts fairly upon it ; how folemn and afFeclingthe firft Inftitution, efpecially when open- ing the fenfe of the prophetic intimation recorded by St. John ; how ftrong the declarations of the neceffity of eating the Fiefh of Chrift and drink- ing his blood: I feeni to be in the place of thofe perfons of our"" perfuafion, who have fcarcely known how to exprefs themfelves, fo as to deny the corporal prefence of Chrift, and yet not let down the Ordinance, nor give the Romanifts and Lutherans a pretence for charging them with want of veneration for it. I feel inclined to ufe the fame expreffions, though fenfible of the fame dif- ficulties. Though their expreffions feem to vary, yet they always fpeak fo as to be confident with my idea juft now ftated : they may always mean, by receiving really the Body and Blood of Chrift, receiving the Sacrament according to the real mean- ing of Scripture, be that what it will : in oppofttioii to, mere bread, vain ceremonies, empty figns, un- feeling formality. Tliey are all words explaining by oppofidon, or attempting to give the force of fcripture.
As I doubt not but the high and ftrong ex- preffions which thofe of our perfuafion ufe, have given offence or difguft, or caufed perplexitj'-, to many, and made them prefer Popery, Socinianifm,
or
'' I include, in this cafe, the Calvinifls, and all who have departed from the Romifh and Lutheran churches; (except Socinians and Quakers, &c,)
Y 3
342. BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXI.
or QuakerUm ; I will refer to feme places where they are ufed ; in hopes that, in the li-:;ht in which I have placed their., they may be thought natural, and fuch as arife from right notions and leelings. I will, at the fame time, refer to feme palfages :n which our id. a of the Lord's Supper is illuilrared by oppofition and' contradiftinclion. Dr. Balgny defends " verily andindeed" by the context.
XXI. The pra^lices mentioned in the fourth paragraph have been explained in the Hiftory.— The expreffion " By ChrifCs ordinance^'' may be obferved, becaufe by the ordinance of fome ancient churches^ fome elements werc"^ referved. Bilhop Burnet accounts for their bemg fo' : circumftr.nces, at fome times required it ; but ancient churches did not referve their God in any facrarium, nor expofe him to the inroads of mice 3 for they did not believe in Tranfubftantiation. Nor does it feem as if they had encouraged fupcrilitions. — Generally fpeaking, they confidered ciicumflances; they left off carrying the facram.ent to the iick, becaufe of fome abufes, and lo of the Agapze : and I doubt not but anything, not quite eflential,
would
' See the prayer preceding the prayer of Con fee rati Ofi.
And Reformatio Legum, de Hasrefibus, cap. 19. — Maclaiiic's Note, or Mofheim, Cent. 16. 3. 2. 2. 12. (and 6.) — Calvin's Infritutes, 4. 17. 32. and Barclay's mention oJ it, Apol. 13. 3, 4. — Fox's Afls and Monuments (or Marty rologx ), Vol. 3. page
82. col. 2. difp. in April 1554, at Oxford. Syntagma i^age
120, part of the Englifh Confcfiion, from BilTiop Jewell — Fulke on the Rhemifh Teftamcit, fol. i;2. (comp on Heb. i. 6 ) — Homily on the worti.y receiving of the Sacrament, Part I ft. (t very word rnuft be attended 10, in fome places:) ** incorporatmi"' occurs twice (John vi. (;6 ) the hitter time near the end. The fcriptural Metaphors of Head and Menibers (" incorporation") vine and branches, &c. are wtll introciuced. This is the 1 15th Homiiy ot the 2d book, or tlie .-7th of the whole number. — Dr Ba/guy's 7th charge would illullrale the Article, if the expreffions were curefully compared.
•» Set\. Y. I Page 429. 8vo.
BOOK IV. ART.XXVni. SECT. XXII — XXI V. 343
would have been left off, if it had given occafion to fuperfliitions or fcandals. But we are only ex- plainvig^ theexpreffion, " by ChriiVs Ordinance."
XXII. Come we now to our Proof.
The Article feems to contain7?.v propofitions.
1. The Lord's Supper has an external part, or Sign.
2. It has an /«/fn/^/ part, or " fpiritual Gratri?i" that is, it denotes or reprcfents our redemption by the death of Chrift.
3. Tranfubftantiation cannot be proved by Holy Writ.
4. It is repui^nant to Scripture.
5. The Body of Chrift is, in the Lord's Supper, ea.ien Jpirittial/y -y hy Faith.
6. Chrift has not ordained that the Sacrament under confideration, fliould be referved^ carried about i elevated^ or adored.
XXIII. That the Sacrament of the Lord's fupper has an external part, is fufficiently proved by the inJiitution. — Nlsin. xxvi. 26. — Mark xiv. 22. — Luke xxii. 19. — i Cor, xi. 23. with the prac- tice mentioned i Cor. x. 16. made perpetual, 1 Cor. xi. 26. — What better proof could be re- quired ?
This external part of the Ordinance being vifi- ble, and peculiar to Chriftians, muft be a Badge. And whatever is a badge of Chriftians muft be a lign of mutual affection: fee John xiii. ^^. — I Cor. X. 1 7. —mutual love muft alfo refult from what is urged i Cor. xii. 13.
XXIV. The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, denotes, or reprefents, our Redemptiori. by the Death of Chrift: and fo has an internal part, or " fpiritual Grace."
If it be intended to commemorate Chrift*s
Death, and his death be a Sacrifice for the Sins
¥4 of
34-1 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXIV.
of the world, it mull be an application to one's
felf of the benefits of fuch facrifice. — That it is
intended to commemorate Chrift's Death, appears
from the Body broken, the blood (bed, and from
I Cor. xi. 26. — And alfo from i Cor. x. 16. In
the inflitution alfo we are told, that CiirilVs blood
was filed for us, and for the remiflion of Sins :
thefe things are there connedled with the Lord's
Supper ; and we are told of a (JjaOriKi}, fometimes
tranflated tejlanient"', fometimes covenant, in the
blood of Chrift ; which being the word ufed for
the Old Covenant, (Deut. iv. 13. — Exod.xxiv. 8.)
implies, at Icaft, fo.me great bcncfir, arifing from
the fliedding of the blood of Chrift. Which is
confirmed by Heb. viii. 8, &c. — And it is faid,
that J't«6»)t»i, and the Hebrew nnil, are con-
nedled with facrificing : becaufe, it is thought,
folemn leagues and contracts ufed to be fcaled, as
it were, by facrifices. — But I fee nothing about
facrificing in Henry Stephens's accout of Aja6»>cn,
or J'jariGrjiut, &c. for this, confult Parkhurft under
"li and §ix^mr\. Potter (Antiq. Vol. i. page 252.)
mentions facrifices at folemn covenants. If we
allow that John vi. relates to the Lord's Supper,
the benefits of it muft be endlels. And all virtues
naturally
•" AtaTie£f/,«» is to difpofe ; in various ways; hy Will ; Chrift might be conceived as both Teftator (or Difpenfer, author of a Dilpenfalion,) and Vi8im : different charadcrs, as well as different types meet in him: perhaps we do not fee the _/«// J'crce of oiaC'^x*) and ^ia££|U,£>«, Heb. ix. i6. if we have not thefe diffcr.nt ideas in mind.
But what led our Tranflatois to ufe Tefiament for Ji«6»)x»)? perhaps Jia9£f*£ia : — A»aO»ixrj is claffical for a Will, (as a mode oi iiifpofctl); but the Lxx always ufe it for H^'^i* ^^f'tJus* Aquila puts^ttQrjxr, a compaft. — Chrillians ufe Teftament and Cov emwt proini/cnoujly; fo that Tejla?ne}:tum in fcripture often means padum 'viventium (Stephens Greek Lex. ). God covenants with thofe who are called his ;«//f/7VflHa ; yet God's covenants are gifts, difpenfations.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXV -XXVII. 345
naturally refulting from a worthy receiving, make ^ part of the "y/)/r//zW" Grace,''''
XXV. Tranlubftantiation cannot be proved by Holy Writ. This mud be deferred to the in- direct proof, for the reafon mentioned in the Explanation.
XXVI. Tranfubftantiation is repugnant to fcrip- tuve. The Jews did not ufe blood ior any fort of victuals; and the fcriptures have made fome fup- pofe, that Chriflians o\2^i\i not. It is not therefore likely that Chrift (hould mean drinking his blood in a literal fenfe. Chrill calls the wine the fruit of the "vine after confecration, Matt. xxvi. 29. In Johnvi. Chrift afcribes the fame effects to eating Bread oi Life, and to eating his FlefJi: and the Papifts own John vi. to belong" to the Sacrament: Chrift's body may therefore as properly be breads ViSjleJJiy but eating the bread of Life^ and eating Chrift' sfeJJi, muft be both proper, or both figura- tive exprefTions : they cannot be both literal, there- fore they are both figurative. Acts iii. 2 1 . excludes any corporal preience of Chrift in the Eucharift, which can properly be called fuch. i Cor. xi. 26. ** //// he come," fhews, that Chrift is not come in the Sacrament : this laft was Biihop Ridley's argu- ment in the day of his trial : more may be found in Fox's account of the Dijputation at Oxford in 1 5 154, and that at Cambridge in ~i 549.
XXVII. The Body of Chrift is, in the Lord's Supper, eaten Jpiritually^ by Faith. The argu- ments juft now ufed muft tend to prove this; the
Body
" See of Sacraments in general. Art. xxv. Se£l. 11. Our Homily calls thefe virtues Graces, and defcribes them well : if graces, they muft be fpijitual graces, (page 350, bottom, and 351, top) they cannot be corporeal,
" Rhemifts on John vi. 53.
346 BOOK IV. ART XXVIII. SECT. XXVI II.
Body of Chrift, in the Eucharift, is eaten \nfome fenfe; if not really^ it mufl htfpiritually.
After what was faid in the Explanation, about the paragraph from which this propofiiion is taken, it fcems almoft needlefs to give a proof of it.— Every emLlcmatical ordinance (orSacranient) miift be executed by Faith. — John vi, 35. is a Key to the whole difcourfe. — And the grofs, carnal notion of the inhabitants of Capernaum in ver. 52. with the reception of it by Chrift, (hews, that carnal eating could not be meant.
XXVIII. Chrift has not ordained that the Sacrament called the Lord's Supper (hould be referved^ carried about, elevated, c^r adored. — It refts vipon our adverfaries to prove that Chrift has ordained thefe things; if they offer any atguments worthy of your confideration, they muft appear under our indired proof.— The words " take, eat\* — " as often as ye eat this bread," &c. — feem to prove the Romifli fuperftitions here mentioned, to be even repugnant to Scripture : as they feem to prove the delign of Scripture to be, that the facred Bread (liould be eaten : eating it would cut off the reft. — Befides, all tlie four pradlices here men- tioned are grounded on 'Traiifubjlantiation; that being difproved, thefe are difproved by con^ iequence.
I may clofe this direfl proof with a paflage from Dr. Middleton's Preface to his Letter from Rome; page Ixxv. &c. — He fays, that it was too ahftird a thing even for Heathens, to worfiiip that which they ^ eat. Yet in fad, the elevation of the Hojl is fo ftriking a ceremony, and fo affeding to the devout, through the help of fympathy ; befides pomp, fhewj mufic, fometimes military exerciies,
and
P Reftmng to Cic. de Nat. Deor. Lib. 3. 16.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXIX. 34^
and " a prefenf^ Deity" that calm reafoii fcems unable to abolifli it,
XXIX. Having finiflied our direft proof, we miift fee what indired may be wanted : Or what ■obje^ions there are, which it may be worth our while to confider.
Thofe of the ^takers come nrfl in our way. — The chief of what they urge feems to turn upon thisi if we make a perpetual Sacrament of break- ing bread, why do we not make a perpetual Pedi- lavium, or waihingof feet? one is as much inioined as the other. — This was mentioned in the eleventh Chapter of our firft Book^— Pedilavium is a cere- mony in the Greek^ Church; and the Pope, I think, goes through the ceremony of wafliing fbme peo- ple's feet. But let any one compare the inftitution of the Lord's Supper, with John xiii. 14. and the general importance ot the Lord's Supper, with that of the other ceremony, only mentioned by one Evan- gelift ; let him compare the cuftoms in Judea, of travelling, &c. with thofe in our own counrry; let him compare the pradice upon the on€ ceremony, with that upon the other; and he will find many rea- fons for eflablifliing the rite of the Lord's Supper, which will not apply to the wafliing of feet. — This was once a Sacrament, and may now be called fo by the Greek Chriflians, in the extenfive fenfe of the word ; but the five Popijh Sacraments which we rejed, feem more important than this, and more adapted to general ufe; yet they fall much below our two Sacraments. Our Saviour's wafhing his Difciples, was probably only emblematical teachings it was indeed followed by a verbal precept, (John xiii. 14.) but that might be only the explanation of the adion ; or the moral of the Parable. — After
all,
"? Dryden's Ode on St. Cecilia's Day.
' Book X. Chap. xi. Sedl. vi. The Lord's Supper is Sedl. vii.
^ Cave, Di/r. 1, Nitttij^.
34S BOOK IV. ART.^XXVIII. SECT. XXX.
all, if our rcafons fcem to any one infufficient, let him imitate our Lord j he will do no barm. IF the ceremonies muft be adopted or rejected to- gether, it is a much lefs evil to adopt the NtTrr^ov, than to reject the Eucharift.
XXX. It may be objefted, that the Gofpel- Inftitutions are not to be made complicated and abftrufe unncceffarily. Is not the " SimpHcitv that is' in Chrift," bed obferved, by taking; the Sacra- ment of the Lord's Supper as a i}iere commemora- iion^ Bifhop Cleaver aniwers this objc6lion in his firft difcourfe; and Dr. Balguy 3.n{\\ers it, in effect, in his feventh Charge. If you make the Lord's Supper, as it was inftituted by Chrift, a mere commemoration, you make it a ftrange and unin- telligible rite : for what can be more " ftrange than eating the flcfh and drinking the blood of one, who is to be regarded only as an inftrudor and bene- faftor .f* if we had been ordered, in the Sacrament, to kill an animal, and fhed its blood j or only to break bread, and pour out wine; the rite would have been intelligible, as a fimple memorial ; it would have reprefented Chrift's Deaths merely as a death; but it would have been a different rite from ours. Now conceive it as a feaft on ?,Jacri- > fice^ and all is eafy and fimple. We indeed arc not in the habit of facrificing; but what is that t who could not underftand, that when facrifices were in ufe, part of the vi<5tim was ferved up at a religious /t'(7y? ; and all who partook" of the material
feaft
• z Cor. xi. 3.— See Dr. Prieftley's expreffion before. " Before, Sed. 1. — Dr. Balguy, page 309.
* See Potter's Antiquities, Vol. i. page 145. which though about Heathens, is worth our notice. Heathens, deliberating about Chrillianity, muft have had their minds full of ideas of heathen facrifices. And thefe ideas mull have affected both their converfion, and their Religion after converfion ; befides mak- ing it eaficr to tlicm to conceive and celebrate the Chriftiim Sacrifice.
BOOK IV. ART XXVI r I. SECT. XXXI. 349
fcaft were underftood to partake of the fpiritual benefits of the facrifice^. Chrift was our viciim ; on his body we do not feaft Hterally, becaufe it is in Heaven J but he appointed bread to reprefent it; on that we can feaft, and fo partake of his Body; that is, feaft upon the 'y/^T/wz. Such bread is '•'■ tJie Bread of Life^' becaufe, by his own ap- pointment, it reprefents his FleJIi. This appears to me plain ^.ndjimple.
XXXI. We muft now take fome notice how the Romanifts prove Tranfiibflantiation from fcripture. They have feveral weak arguments which, as I faid in the cafe of Purgatory and Invocation of Saints, it would be no Improvement to conlider. Such as John ii. 9. the tranfubftantiating of water into wine ; (it did not, after the change, appear to be water) ; and i Cor. xi. 29. not dijcerning the Lord's Body; by which St. Paul means, not making a religious meal of the Lord's Suppsr, but a profane one ; and that with excefs and intemperance, with violation of the rules oi^ Johriety.—^\\t\x chief ar- gument lies in the words, '■'■this is my'' body;^* plain words, as they contend : Archdeacon Sharp rightly replies, yes, they are plain words, for they are a very plain figure^ . Many exceptions may be
taken
y 1 Cor. X. 18. •' Are not they which eat of the Sacrifices, partakers of the ^//^r.?" — Lardner, fpeaking of food, fays, (Works, Vol. 11. page 332.) "The Worfhipper, as well as the Prieft, partook of the Altar, excepting in the cafe of whole burnt-ofFerings."
^ Suppofea large room, many Chriftians met; the rich making feparate little parties, having a good fupper and good wiiies ; (a fcaft on an Heathen ficrifice was a jovial thing) : the poor obliged tomefsas they could; feeling mortified and iniulted by thofe, who ought to be as i^zvc. brethren, and make with them one company, one party. — Small feleft parties of great perfons in the midft of numbers, generally mortify, if not made by fome ufeful Rule.
^ Matt, xxvi. 26.
•» Sermon on the Sacrament, preached at York Cathedral,— Sed. XIX. of this Article.
^50 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXXII.
taken to their being ufed in a literal fenfe; but I fhall content myfelr with the context. If the bread, in the hand of Chrift, was literally his Body, what was the Cup? " This cup is the New' Tef- tament in my blood " — Was the Cup a Tefta- ment? was the Cup in Chrifl's blood .? And if we may not take words figuratively, was Chrifl really and literally a Fine^ and a Doorf' — It feems odd, that the Papifts ihould infift upon fetting afide metaphor here, and yet underfland Bread meta- phorically in John vi. 48. and 51. — For they do not allow that Bread is ever eaten in the Sacranient\
xxxii. Our Article affirms, that " the Sacra- ment of the Lord's Supper was not, by Chrift's Ordinance, rejerved^ carried about , lifted up, or wor/Iiipped.'" — We might therefore have arguments to examine on thefe four points. But (befides that they muft all be built upon Tranfubftantiation) I do not fee any which are likely to detain us. —
Something
«: Luke xxii. 20.
^ See ppend. toAit. XI. Seft.xxvii.
« If 1 was a Papift I would fay thus ; — The paflages in which Chriftians are ordered to eat the Flefh of Chrift, are very ftrong; they ftrike, amaze, almoft terrify ; I cannot wonder when devout people think, that, in feme way or other, they ought to eat Chr iVs Flefh ; they have no way of doing it but in the Sacrament, God muit therefore contrive fome way that they fhall do it there: but how?— all things are poflible with God : ha could change the bread which we eat into LhrilVs Body; finely then he iloes: he would not command things impoflible. Thus I niight argue it I was a Papilt : as a canJid Proteftant I add, — This hypothecs might go down in an ignorant age ; It might get affoclated with religion in general ; it might influ- ence the whole praxi of Religion, and therefore mi" ht become very difficult to extirpate There might be an appearance that it could n t be removed witiicnt a total overthrow of a great relipious e !abli(hment; one fplendid and opulent, nay, with, out tot:il deiiiudion of Chiifann principles in thofe who pro- feffed it.
BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXXIII. 3^1
Something Is faid by the Rhemtfts\ of paying dif- tinguifhed /w/wwrj to Chrift's Body, and of doing officious things limilar io /pre ading garments in our Saviour's way, when he entered Jerufalem in tri- umph : They alfo would make an application of thofe pafTages in which Chriji is faid to have been 2 adored, to the adoration of the Hofi : But I fee nothing urged by Romanifts from Scripture^ which relates to the peculiar nature of the ele- ments in the Lord's Supper, after confecration. Here ends our Proof, dire6t and indireft. XXXIII. In regard to ^application, I will only obferve, that, on this Article, there feems great room for mutual concejjions. But we have been already led to enter into thefe, in what was faid of Queen Elizabeth, and in the explanation of the third paragraph. Queen Elizabeth feems to have followed a right plan, and Melan^thon} feems to have had the fame idea with her Minifters.
What can' feem more defperate, at firft, than Dupin's infilling on its being ftill profelTed, " that the bread and wine are really changed into the Body and Blood of Chrifl?" Yet if that had been faid by a proteftant, and perhaps put in a ftiape a little different, we iTiould have made no objedion to it. Might not a Proteftant Preacher, addreffing that part of his congregation, who would attend the Communion, and exhorting them to pay due reverence to the facred elements, fay, that he who ftiould eat of them now, would eat only
fimplc
' Rhemifts on Matt. xxi. 8. Mark xi. 8. — i Cor. xi. 29.
s Rhemifts on Matt. ii. 11. viii 8. Heb. i. 6.
^ Moftieim, 8vo. Vol. 4. page 37. or Cent. 16.3. 2. i. 27.
* Bifliop Cleaver obferves, that there are three notions of the Lord's Supper, all allowing to it " what our Church confidejs as efTential to a Sacrament, an outward vifible fign and an inward fpiritual Grace."
^^2 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXXIII.
fimple hetid and zvine\ but that he who received theni properly after confecration, would " verih and indeed^" receive " the Body and Blood of Chrift ?"
Ambrofe has a fimilar expreOion, which the Papills would have us take in their fenfe, but I fully believe that it was meant in ours. 1 take it as I find it in the Trent' Catechifm— " There is bread before the confecration, but after the con- fecration, the Body of Chrift." Now, how could this be, if the Bread were not chamed into Chrift's Body ? But fuppofe it was propofed to Dr. Dupin to fay thus? ' The Bread, after confecration, is changed into what is meant in Scripture by, the Body of Chrift:' who could refufe his affent? and whofe purpofe would not this anfwer ? — Some- thing of this fort might effect an agreement; but it is idle to ufe words, and, by limitations to take away their cuftomary meaning. As words are arbitrary ligns, they depend for their meaning on cuftom wholly. What fignifies talking of a Bod\y not prefent as to Place"^^ — That which is not prefent in fuch a fenfe as to occupy a place, is not Body, in human language. And fo that which is without the qualities, or accidents", of fubftances, is no fubftance : Man has no idea of
fuch
*= Catechifm, of Church of England.
' Trent Cat. page 210; orSeit. 27.
P. S. I have looked into Ambrofe, Edit. Paris 1603. The
pafllige appears page 366. torn 2. in his 4th Book and 4th Chapter De Sacramcntis. The Books and Chapters are very
fliort, and the llile very declamatory. The fiibjedl of the
Chapter h, Chiillus eft AinRor Sacramentoriim; the paflage is, Tu forte dicis : Meus panis ell n/itatus. Sed panis ifte panis eft ante verba ^acramentorum : ubi accefltrit confecratio, de ptine fit Caro Chrijii.
"^ Trent Catech. page 218. or Se6l. 43. Locke, Hum.
Unci. 2 13. 1 1.
° See Locke, Hum. Und. Book 2. Chap. 23. Seifl. 2. & 4.
^OOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXXIII. 353
fuch a thing: nor could the notion have been admitted in any but an ignorant age°.
° The Rorhanifts are very tender about this, as one fees by their care to exclude fenfc from judging of tranfubftantiation ; and their cautions about explaining it, and inquiring into it. (Trent Cat. Seft. 39. 41 .— alfo 24. ) What right has ?ny humaa being to fet afide the judgment of they^«/Ji ?-
VOL. IV. Z ARTICLE
354 BOOK IV. ART. XXIX. SECT. I.
ARTICLE XXIX.
OF THE WICKED, WHICH DO NOT EAT THE BODY OF CHRIST IN THE USE OF THE LORD's
SUPPER.
TH E Wicked, and fuch as be void o( a lively faith, although they do carnally and vifibly prefs with their teeth, (as Saint Augufline faith,) the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Chrift; yet in no wife are they partakers of Chrift ; but rather, to their condemnation, do eat and drink the fign or facrament of fo great a thing.
I . In the way of Hiftory\ we may obferve, that people have always been much inclined to provide themfelves with Charms, Amulets, &c. in order to drive away evils. Often, to ufe a thing which was ordinarily efficacious, if rightly managed, as mechanically efficacious. Sometimes indeed things uled as Charms, may feem to be no way naturally efficacious; but to ufe fuch is the extreme of fuperftition ; and fuch things may originally have been eileemed natural medicines. We have already mentioned, that people have taken home the water ufed in Baptifm, and applied it to bodily fores; in like manner, confecrated bread^ and wine
have
* See Fulke in anfwering Rhcmifts on }ohn vi. jS. where he mentions from TertuUian a I'liperllitioiis uoman keepiag the ^acrainent in a cheft, to eat i'.ilUng. — Alfo .\x\., xxv. Seil. vii.
BOOK IV. ART. XXIX. SECT. I. ^55
have been given to Infants, have been kept for medical purpofes, and even buried with the dead\ Heathens and Jews have " run into finiiliar fuper- llitions. Such folly ought to be oppofed ; bat our prefent Article was aimed chiefly at the Roma- nifts; who are accufed of faying, that the mere receiving of the Lord's Supper, merits remijfion of fins, ex opere operato^ (tranflated in the Article of 1552, anfwering to our twenty-fifth, ''^ Of the work wrought i'') that is, mechanically'^-, without any good difpolition of the communicant^ — What was faid of Sacraments in general, at the clofe of the twenty-fifth Article, is applied here to the Lord's Supper in particular. This Article is not in the fet of 1552^ from whence one may prefume, that the early Reformers did not think fuch particular application neceflary.
What the Romanifls fay of the efHcacy of Sacra- ments in general, was ftated under the twenty- fifth Article J what they fay of the efficacy of the Eucharift in particular, muft be mentioned here. The Rhemifh annotators fay, " 111 men receive the Body and Blood of Chrifi, be they infidels or ill livers :" their anfwerer Fulke fays, " Wicked men receive not the body and blood ^ of Chrift."— But the Romanifls have three ways of receiving. The fir ft, jacramental, the fecond Jpiritual, and a
third
•> Bingham, 15. 4. 19. It appears from 11. 5. 8. and 16,
5, 6. that care was taken to prevent fuch follies.
= Potter fpeaks of (paf/«.axa awTJj^ia, Book 2. Chap. 18, or Vol. I. page 353. Amulets, page 35;.— The Jews had Phy- lafteries. Thefe are mentioned together in the Saxon Coii- ffffion. Syntagma, page 104. — Heathen and Chriftian Holj/m ivater; Middleton's Letter from Rome, page 136.
'' Some author iz-^i, magic ally ; but I do not recolleft who.
^ Saxon Confeffion, page 103, Synt.
f See Rhemiftson i Cor. xi. 27. and Fulke's anfwers on the fame; and on John vi. 27.
z a
35^ BOOK IV. ART. XXIX. SECT. II.
third made up of thcfe two coujomed^. — They who receive only facramentall)', only eat the confecrated wafer, without due preparation or difpofition.— They who only receive after the fecond manner, fpiritually, do nothing but what we fhould call hearing Mafs, or in the words of the Trent Cate- chifm, cat the " heavenly bread in dejiresind zvi//i;" that is, as I underftand, they do not cat it at all. But they who both eat the wafer, and eat it with a good difpofition, afttr facramental confcflion, receive in the third way.
It is poffibie that our church, by infer ting this Article here, might intend it as an argument againft Tranfiibfiantiation, in the way of a reductio adabfurdum; for if all who eat the confecrated wafer eat Chrifl's Body, then mice and flies, any animals or infeds, eat Chrift's Body, as much as the moft pious Chriftian.
Our Article might be aimed alfo at the Lutlic* rans; becaufc according to the Doftrine of Con^ fubjlantiation, all receivers of the Lord's Supper, receive the Body of Chrift : and Dr. Bennet** argues, that Archbilliop Parker could not be a Lutheran, becaufe he fubfcribed this Article; and that the rcafon why other Prelates did }iot fign it, was, probably, becaufc they w^re Lutherans. — I do not, however, perceive anything in the Luthe- ran Confcffions, which our Church would \vi(h to oppofc, as bringing on the fame evils with the Romifli Dodrine of Tranfubftantiation ; indeed I fee nothing allied to the Romifh Dodrine, either in the ConfeiTion of Wittembcrg, or in that of Augfburg. The Saxon Confcifion calls it *' por-
tentofuiii
5 Trent CatechifiT), page 224., or Seel. 77. of Eucharifl.
The Council, SefT. 13. Cap. 8. Canon 8.
•" EfTay on the Articles, page 187.— Eiihops Geft and Cheney did not fign.
BOOK IV. ART. XXIX. SECT. II. III. 3^7
tentofum errorem MonachorLim." — Thefe are all the hiftorical remarks which it feems neceflary to make.
II. Nor need the Explanation be long.
The title founds more like French phrafeology than EngliHi. Le voila qui vient, fee he is coming. We fliould commonly exprefs the meaning of the Title thus ; * Of the Wicked not really eating the Body of Chrift.' The Latin is, De Manduca- tione Corporis Chrifti, et impios illud non man- ducare. The Wine is not mentioned ; probably for the fake of fimplicity and perfpicuity'.
The chief part of the Article is exprefled in the words of Augujlin, as a Father much vene- rated by the Romanifts. The paflage is in his twenty- fixth Trad on Sr. John. — It is quoted at length by Bennet'^and Welchman.
As all men are "wicked" in fome degree, it may be proper to obferve, that worthinejs is here oppofed to the opv.s operatiim, or the fuppofed mechanical efFed of the Lord's Supper. — " The Wicked" who eat " to their condemnation,"— are the decidedly wicked, the abandoned, " fuch as be void of a lively Faith." The meaning is, to o-ppoje the notion, that a man eats the Body of Chrift how wicked Joever he be. — A lively, or living Faith was explained under the twelfth Article'.
III. We have here but one propojition. * Chrif- tians do not get the benefits annexed to what in Scripture, is called eating the Body of Chrift, merely by partaking of the Lord's Supper.'
For
* Art. xxviii.Seft. XX. the fame.
^ 1794. Mr. Porfon, page 229, calls this paffige of Auguftm fpurious ; that fiiould be inquired into. — It is in the Catholicus confenfus prefixed to Syntagma, page 207.
* Art. XII. bed. XIV. xxi.v.
z 3
358 BOOK IV. ART. XXIX. SECT. IV.
For Proof, I will only cite Hab. ii. 4. with the New Teftament applications of it"'; John vi. 3v 54. and 1 Cor. xi. 29. which hft is alluded to in the Article; and i Johni. 7. which intimates, that we muft walk in the Light, before the Blood of Chrift cleanles us from Sin.
IV. Our Application may be confined to mutual concejjions. And for thefe I think there is greater room in this Article than in any other. The dif- pute between the Romanifts and the Reformed is merely " verbal; I mean about the prefent Article as feparated from all others. They fay, the Bread after confecration, is the Body of Chrift, even in fubjlance; it follows, fuppofing this true, that wJio- ever eats that fubftance, eats the Body of Chrift; that is, it is not dejecrated by one mouth more than by another. We fay, that the bread continues bread after confecration, and therefore, that every receiver eats bread ; but that he who does what the fcripture requires, may be faid, in the pro- phetic, ftrong, figurative language of Scripture, to eat the Body of Chrift ; as he eats what is appointed to reprefent that Body, and what the Scripture calls briefly that Body itfelf. — The Romanifts, therefore, and we ufe a phrafe, eating the Body of Chrift, in two different fenfes ; and we ufe this propofition, ' 'The wicked eat Chrijl's Body,* in two different fenfes : confequently to difpute about its truth, is idle and childifh. They too ufe it as a corollary from a propofition which we think falfe, though we own the corollary to be rightly deduced. Now it muft always be trifling to dif- pute about fuch a corollary, as if it were an inde- pendent propofition. — ^V"e both xcc^ut preparation
for
"> Art. XI n. end of SeSlion 11.
" Myyht this be the rcafon why Cranmer made no Article on this fubjedb ?
BOOK IV. ART. XXIX. SECT. IV. 359
for the Sacrament, indeed Roman ids more than wei we both fay, that unworthy receivers may draw piiniJJiment upon themfelves ; we both quote the paflage of Augujlin ° which is in our Article. In flrort, we both mean; that the confecrated Bread is not defecrated by the unworthinefs of the Receiver; and that worthinefs is required in order to obtain benefit.
Dupin fays% that the Body and blood of Chrift " are truly and really received by all, though none but thQ faithful partake of any benefit from them.'* What can we difpute here ? The former part of his affirmation is true, upon his fuppofition, of Tranfubftantiation ; but that we think falfe; yet we might ufe the fame words, with a different idea. The latter part agrees with our opinions. The former is the fame thing as if he had faid, ' Siippofing Tranfubftantiation, the Body and Blood of Chrift are received by all communicants.' This could not be difputed ; why then fhould not the Roma- nifts now exprefs themfelves fo, if it comes to the fame thing ? why fiiould we difcufs a dodrine an hundred times over, in an hundred confequences deduced from it ?
I am apt to think, we take the Romanifts too ftridly about the Sacrament producing Plrtues"^ or Graces : that which is to be expeSied of courfe, is fpoken of, in human language, as a confequence, jmd no uncertainty is expreifed about it. — Luke xvii. I.— I Cor. xi. 19- — What Proteftant teacher would fcruple to tell his hearers that attending the Sacrament would make them better men ? Our Homily 'defcribes the Graces and Virtues ^^ wrought
(operatic)
o Trent Catech. Seft. 57. -See alfo Sea. 58, 59. P Third Append, to Moflieim.
q " An admirable and>r^ virtue to cure our fouls." From Trent Cat. page 145.
» On worthy receiving, page 350, 8vo, Z 4
560 BOOK IV. ART. XXIX. SECT. V.
(operatse) by the Sacrament ; and I have done the fame in explaining* the expreffion, *' fpiritual grace."— If the Romanifts held what they are charged with, they mufthold, that all perfons re- ceive the fame benefit from the fame Sacrament. — But this is contrary to many paffages of the Trent Catechifm'.
V. I (hall conclude what I have to obferve on this Article, by reading Dr. Balgufs"^ account of pur obligation to prepare ourfelves for the worthy receiving of the Holy Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. And may that fcripture comfort the feeble-minded, which fays, that we may truft we have a good confcience if we are in all things wilHng to live honeftly.— Heb. xiii. 18.
» Art. XXV. Se6t. 11.
' On theEuch. Seft. 51, &c. And 57, 58, 59.
" Charge 7th, page 315.
ARTICLE
BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. I. 361
ARTICLE XXX.
OF BOTH KINDS,
THE Cup of the Lord is not to be denied to the lay-people : for both the parts of the Lord's Sacrament, by Chrift's ordinance and com- mandment, ought to be piiniftered to all Chriftiaa men ahke.
I. The principal part of the Hiftory of this Article conlifts in (hewing, how the Romifh cuftom of not giving the cup to the Congregation arofe from the Docftrine' of TranJiibJlanUation. When the facraniental wine came to be confidered as the blood of Chrifl in a literal fenfe, and that in an age of weaknefs and fuperftition, though reverence for the elements feems to have been exceflive before^ men became feized with an horrour at the thoughts of any of it being profaned, loft, dropped by the trembling hand, or even lodged upon the Beard. 1 think there are ftories of [ome judgments coming upon individuals on account of fuch profanatbn. — How to apply a remedy ? At firft the defperate expedient of wholly withholding the Cup, did not occur; the bread was fopped in the wine; the wine was conveyed into the mouth by means of t.'^bes ; ftill, probably, accidents did not ceafe ; at length, the ordinance of Chrift was maimed, through an exceffive fear of (polling a falfe Ihape,
into * Micldleton's Letter from Rome, Pref. page Ixxix.
562, BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. II. III.
into which it had been tortured : — the Cup was denied to the People; including fuch Priejls as, at any particular communion, made a part of the congregation. For a time, the authority of the ruling Ecclefiaftics might be fufficient to prevent the people from murmuring ; but the pradice was afterwards fettled by the authority of a Council : the Council of Conjlance, begun fo late as the year 1414: a very numerous one, as we have fhewn"* before.
II. That the ancient Fathers, and all before the twelfth Century, had no notion of fuch a thing as preventing the people from receiving the Cup, appears fufficiently from the gradual manner in which the ancient pradice was left off. But their expreffions are alfo plain, as taking for granted, and fuppofing that every man received both bread and wine^^i and reprimanding thofe who wanted to make a change. — The Manicheans, indeed, avoided all wine, on principle, and therefore avoided the Cupy when the liquor in the Cup was wine : at Rome, when they wifhed to be concealed, they fometimes were difcovereJ by this declining of the cup**.
III. The Greek Church has no cuftom of re- fufing the cup to the people" : the Roman cuflom arofe from the doctrine of Tranfubftantiation ;
which
* Art. XXI. Sefl. 11. from Fox 1. 785. SelT. 13.— See Labbe's Councils, col. 100. — Baxter on Councils, page 437, has the Decree. As alfo has Biftiop Burnet on the Article.— See Com- ber's Advice, page 12. 17.
* See Burnet on the Article — Bingham, 15. 5. i.
^ Leo I. in his Serm. 4. de Quadragefim.^, quoted by Lardner,
Works, Vol. 3. page 491. Buract mentions this, page 438.
odavo.
« " The Laity, as well as the Priefts, communicate in both kinds, taking the Bread and the Wine together in a fpoon from the hand of the Priell." Paul Ricuut, page 187.
BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. IV. 2>^^
which I do not conceive to be properly a doctrine of the Greek Church : for although Sir Edwin Sandys fliys*^, the Greek Chriftians do hold Tran- fubflantiation; yet that feems by no means a fettled thing. From Sir Paul Ricaut's account I judge, that only thofe Greek Chriftians who have refided in Italy have favoured it. The Patriarch Cyrill agreed wholly with the reformed Churches in this particular °.
IV. As we might be fufpefled of exaggera- tion if we gave our own account of the Romanifts, we will let them fpeak for themfelves.
The twenty-firft Seflion of the Council of Trent was upon the bufinefs of communion in one kind, fomething being annexed about giving any kind of communion to Infants. The members of the Council do not fay, that it is wrong for Chriftians to receive in both kinds, only that it is 7iot necef- fary : — they hold, that though tht primitive manner was to receive in both kinds, the Church has power to alter it, as to anything but the fubftance of the inftitution ; making allowances for circum- ftances, of time and place, &c. — and that the alteration in queftion was made for weighty and ji'Ji caitfes y but thofe caufes are not fpecified. — It is however faid, in the way of argument, that Chrift is received whole and intire under one kind; and therefore, that they to whom only one kind is adminiftered, are defrauded of no faving grace y no beneficial effects. — But in the Council, two quel- tions occurred,
I. Whether
^ Speculum EurOj^re, page 23^.
s Paul Ricaut, page 182. — There was however, fuch a term in the Greek Church as f^iraaiuicric, coined on purpofe to exprefs the notion which had been brought from Italy. Which might be ufed by fome to exprefs the change made in the bread and wine by confecration.
364 BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. IV.
1 . Whether the Church's weighty and juft caufes, were fo ftrong, that the ufe of the cup was to be allowed to no perfons whatfoever ?
2. Suppofing it might be allowed to fome par- ticular ration, whether it fliould not be on condi- tions ; and what thofe conditions ihould be ? — thefe queftions were left undecided till the next Seffion i and then they were left by the Council, to^ the decifion of the Pope.
The Trent Catechifm' direds the People to be taught, " That by the Law of the Church it is prohibited that any one, without the Authority of the Church, (except confecrating Miniflers) fhould take the facred Eucharift in both kinds.'* Some authorities of ancient Fathers are quoted j and Jix reajons are fpecified.
1. The fear of fpilling.
2. The fear of wine growing four, when kept for the fick.
• 3. The difjke which fome perfons have for the lafte or fmell of wine.
4. The fear of hurting the health of the com- municants.
5. Th^ fcardiy ai wine in fome places.
6. Laftly and principally, the defn-e of oppofing thofe Heretics^ who dij/jonour Chrift by faying, that he cannot be received intire under one kind : that being to deny his Divinity. It is added, that fuch as have treated on this argument have affigned flill more reafons.
The Rhemijis, on^ John vi. 38. fl\y, that the Church has only regulated manner, order, and par- ticular points; (that is, has not hurt the fubftance or ejjence of the bacrament;) that fuch regulations
the
*■ See end of aid Seffion. Voltaire, Vol. 10. quarto,
page 160.
• Sea 70, ^c.
^ Fulke's Rhem. Teft. opp. fol. 152. on John vi. 58.
BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. V. VT. 365
the Clnirch has authority to make, according ta time and place, for the honour ol God, reverence to the Sacrament, and profit to the people: (edi- fying).— Then they mention fome of the fame Fathers which are referred to in the Catechifm : and fome of the fame reafons j affigning moreover the number of communicants ; a *' dreadful regard'* of *' Chrifl's own bloody* and the pradtice of fome centuries.— To their authorities from the Fathers, and indeed to their arguments, Dr. Fulke feems to me to have given a complete anfwer.
Though the language of the Council feems to imply an opening for variety and liberty^ yet the conftant praftice of the Church of Rome has been, for no one to receive the cup except the confecrating Prieft^
In later times, v^lth ^ view to agreement, Dupht'^ declares for mutual toleration in this point ; and for leaving it to be fettled by each Church for itfelf.
V. One would think, that the practice of ad- miniftering to the people in only one kind, might have been deduced from the Lutheran Confubfian- tiation ; but the Confcffion of Wittemberg^ (which I have prefumed to be the work of Luther,) ex- prefsly difclaims the dedudion. And all other reformed churches feem to oppofe it.
VI. The Neceflary Dodrine is not reformed with regard to the Sacrament of the Lord's Sup- per.— It fays, that the Cup is not necejjary to Salva- tion,' That receiving in one or both kinds, rather
concerns
^ Dr. Prieftley (Hift. Corr. Vol. 2. page 55, from Hifloire des Fapes, Vol. 4. page 679.) fays, that " Pius IV. granted tlie Communion in both kinds to thofe who fhould demand it, pro- vided they profefTed to believe as the Church did in other re- fpefts. The Bohemians alfo were allowed, with the Pope's confent, to make ufe of the Cup."
°> As before. — Third Appendix to Mofheim,
" Syntagma, page 160.
^66 BOOK IV. AliT. XXX. SECT. VII.
concerns the manner or fafliion of the Sacrament than the ejjence •, that the main thing is worthinefs : — ^by " ancient cuftom" I fuppofe it means the fame as the Rhemifts by, " fome" centuries. In a popular calculation a cuftom of fome hundred years ftanding, is an° ancient one. — It contends, that " by natural reafoUy' " the lively body cannot be without bloods
Archbifliop Cranmer is faid to have been the Author of this Neceflary Doftrine ^, &c.- — it muft have gone hard with him to exclude the Cup, in compofingit^ for in the firfl year of Edward VI. tlie adrniniflration in both kinds was voted, nullo reclamante, in a Convocation where he had pro- bably the chief weight ''. — This makes me wonder why our prefent Article was not amongft. thofe of 1552. Neither do I fee the fubjeft in the Reformatio Legum. — I cannot account for theie omlflions.
P. S. The Article of Edward VI. confirming his very recent Liturgy, made in 1552, takes in this particular ; — this was to be fubfcribed.
VII. I do not fee that this Article wants any explanation. " Is not to be denied''' — fecms to anfwer to the expreffion of the Council of Trent, " petentibiis ufum' calicis."
But if it was faid, that the Cup is not to be denied to thofe who ajk it, would not that imply,
that
<» Sterne's fimple and unfcholaftic Uncle has no idea of any event having happened above 100 years ago.
P Oxford Pamph. on 17th Art. page 32, from Burnet. — Hift. Ref Vol. 2. — Records, page 238. Where Henry \'III. call> it Cranmer's own Book.
1 Wheatly, page 25. from Strype's Cranmer, page 157, 158. It appears, page n;6, that Archbifliop Cranmer hitroduced the propofiil of having both kinds, at this Convocation, and that they were fupporied by Archdeacon Cranmer, his brother.
' Trent, page 1 52. or SefT. 22. at tlie end.
BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. VIII. IX. 367
that withholding the Cup from fuch as did ?iot afk it, is innocent ?
VIII. We may proceed therefore to fome Proof, I fee but one Propofition in the Article; namely,
* By the Ordinance of Chrift, both Bread and Wine are to be adminiftered, in the Lord's Supper.'
Matt. xxvi. 27. — " Drink ye all of it."
Matt. xxvi. 28. — All Chriftians are in the new Covenant', and all ftand in need of " remiffion of fms." — Thefe are afligned as reafons for all drink- ing of the Cup : " For this," &c.
I Cor. xi. 26 — 28. isaddreffed to all the Church of Corinth.
I Cor. xii. 13. puts Baptifm and the Lord^s Supper on one and the fame footing ; and for the Lord's Supper ufes thQ term" drinking : that part for the whole. If the Romanifts fay eitker part is, according to them, fufficient, yet all objections to the Cup in particular, are here done away. Dr. Middleton obferves, with a view to our prefent fubjedl, that the abfurdities into which the Doc- trine of Tranfubftantiation leads, fhould make it to be diftrufted'.
IX. The Romanifts offer fo many arguments, that we mud have fome indirect proof. — We may obferve of them, in general, that they prove too much', and therefore nothing at all. — Before we mention them, be it obferved, that our Saviour, in the Inflitution of the facrament of the Lord's Supper, makes no difference between the Bread and the Wine; of any kind, that I fee. — Alfo, that the Romifli dodlrine is this;— the Priefl who confe- crates, muft confecrate both bread and wine; and
muft
* Locke on i Cor. xii. 13.
* Pref, to Letter from Rome, page Ixxx.
368 lOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. X. XI.
muft veceive both himfelf ; though he mnft admi- niftcr only Bread.
X. Chrift at Emmaus" only broke bread-, now if he gave the Sacrament, and bread docs not imply wine, then the argument proves too much : it proves, that the Frieft ought to confecrate only bread. — And this applies to all arguments founded on the phrafe, breaking of bread.
Though a name of anything confifting of parts, may l^e taken from either part, and though St. Paul takes his name for the Sacrament, on one occafion, from drinking (i Cor. xii. i3.)» y^t who- ever paints to himfelf the nature of the Inftitution, mud think, that breaking ot bread is another ob- vious and natural name for the whole ceremony ; efpecially as it was a name for any repajl.
The ^lakers'' (and indeed many of our com- munion) hold, that breaking of bread does 7iot mean the Sacrament;— in feme cafes it may not, being the name for any meal, but in fome cafes I think, it does; as where it is joined with /io^r/;/*?'' ?lX\<^ prayer -y or mentioned as the employment /or whiih the Apoftlcs met on 2l Lord's Day"^. — Barclay argues againiT: this, from (f^//;;^ being joined with breaking^ of bread, and from the company con- tinuing till midnight^, or later; but why might not this eating be the Ayxirt^ which ufed to be (fome- timcs at leafl) held in the evening? I can con- ceive any conferences of Chriftian leaders in Sr. Paul's time, whether begun by an kyxirr,, or not, to continue for a part of the night or the whole night. — But to return.
XI. The Romanifts fay, the JpoJIIes indeed were to drink of the wine, but they were made
Prie/h, " Luke xxiv. 30. 35.
* See B.arclay's Apology, Prop. 13. Se(Sl. 8. y Aftsii. 42. ^ * Afts x.v. 7.
» Ads U..46. *> Aclsxx.;. u.
BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. XII XIV. 369
Priefts. This again proves /oo w«f/^.— For granting the argument, it follows, that wine ouoht to be adminiftered to all Priejls. And the Laity are under no obligation to receive the Bread; for there is no difference in our Saviour's appointment of bread and wine.
XII. It is urged, Chrift is received intifre in his body; every Body contains /^/W. We once fpoke againft inferences in unintelligible dodrines*". T^his goes to prove, that it was abfurd in Chrift to infti- tute the Cup; and that it is equally fo in the confe- crating Prieit to drink it — By the way, this argu- ment is a confequence of Tranfubftantiation; which we conHder ourfelvesas having dilproved.
xiii. But, fay the Romanifts, the PrieJ! receives the Cup in order to '* exprefs lively the pafuon of Chrift, and the feparation of his blood froni*^ his body, in the fame." But this goes to prove that all Chriftians ought to receive the cup ; as they are ail to ihevv the Lord's Death till he come.
XIV. But giving the people the cup, occafions dijlmiour to the blood of Chrift, occafions its being Jpilt^ &c. — another corollary from Tranfubftantia- tion : but moreover it proves too nmch. It proves, that Chrift could notforefee thefe great evils; he muft haveforborn to mftitute anything which true* wifdom would wholly remove in order to avoid them. Nay, thefe evils were not peculiar to diftant ages ; they muft be liable to happen every time the wine was confecrated, in every age. Perhaps an Heretic might be fo profane as to fay, what real harm could be done by a drop even of the real blood of Chrift falling to the ground ? or what real difhonour? his blood muft have fallen to the ground when he was alive. Chrift is honoured moft by a
faithful « Art. I. Sea. XVI II. ^ Rhemifts on John vi. 58.
VOL. IV. A A
37° BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. XV. XVI.
faithful and pious heart ; a man may have that with a trembling hand. And as to any corporeal pain, or fuffering, on account of what fell, that mud be out of the queftion : the falling of blood never occafions pain to the perfon by whom it is fhed.
XV. But giving the cup, or witholding it, is only manner y form, faOiion; not the fubftance or ejfaue of the Sacrament. This again proves too mitch. For as Chrift made no ditference, if the cup be not the effence, neither is the bread. — Therefore, again, the people are under no obliga- tion to receive the bread. - But indeed the manner of inftituting the cup has no appearance of mere variable mode and circumftance. And if any change is to be made in an ordinance on account of change of circumftances, it ihould be (hewn, that thofe new circumftances are not voluntary cor- ruptions and abufes.
XVI. But enough. I will trouble you with no wore arguments i neither does it feem ncceffary to make any Application of our realbnings on the pre- fent Article.— Bifliop Porteus's Chapter on this fubjed is well executed.
ARTICLE
BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. I. 37!
ARTICLE XXXT.
OF THE ONE OBLATION OF CHRIST FINISHED UPON THE CROSS.
THE Oifering of Chrift once made, is that perfe6t redemption, propitiation, and fatisfac- tion for all the fins of the whole world, both original and adtuali and there is none other fatisfadion for fin, but that alone. Wherefore the facrifice of Mafles, in the which it was commonly faid, that the Prieft did offer Chrift for the quick and the dead, to have remiffion of pain or guilt, were blaf- phemous fables, and dangerous deceits.
I. The fubje^t of this Article is the Romifh Mafs.
We will begin, as ufual, with a few hijiorical obfervations ; but as there may be fome who have not attended fo much to Romifh Doctrines as to have a clear idea of what is meant by the Romifh Mafs, it may be proper, previoufly, to give fome account of it.
The Proteftant notion of the Lord's Supper has been explained ; all that fome Proteftants da, is to commemorate the Death of Chrift; others join in a ceremony which may reprefent a Feaft on a facri- fice; that is, thofe who confider the Death of Chrift as a facrifice. The fartheft any Proteftant
A A 2 goes.
572. BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. I.
goes, is to offer a fymbolical commemorative* facri- fice. — But RomaniftSy by confecrating bread, make it, in their opinion, the real Body ot Chrift, and they ufe it in two different ways; they not only adminifter it as a Sacrament^ but they offer it up to \God the Father as a real Sacrifice : they have one Form for offering up the bread, another for offer- ing up the confecrated '' cup. — The facrifice here offered, is not faid to be fymbohcal, but a real, literal, propitiatory facrifice. — There is one form which requefls Chrifl to*^ deliver and affift the fup- pliant by />^^ jBo^ o/" ChriJi]\\?L received.
What was faid of fome Romilh Do6lrines at the opening of the twenty-fecond Article, and fince of others, feems fully applicable to the Dodrine of the Mafs.
The Romanifts have z. fxfiem of notions to fup-
port this of offering the confecrated bread as the
Body of Chrift; it feems int.'nded to obviate ob-
jeBions. But this will appear when we look into
their writings, by and by.
All thofe malfes in which the Con2:re<2i;ation are Spectators, and the Prieft^/o;/d' receives the elements, may be called folitary, in fome fenfe; but thofe, I think, are properly Iblitary malfes, at which no one but the Prieft ^ is prejent. Several of theie may be going on in the lame church, at different Altars, at the fame" time. Thefe are generally
intended
' See Heylin's Life of Laud, page ai. — Bifliop Cleaver's two Sermons, page 2. i8.
'' Prefent Spirituel, page 35. ' Ibid, page 55.
^ Card. Bcna feems to call hoth forts private. " Sive enim dicatur/>r/i;rt/^7 ex eo quod fohts Sacerdos in ea commjnicet; five quia vel unus duiitaxat vel pauci ei interfint" Sec. Bona Reriim liturgicariim, 1. 14. 1.
" There arc fome which are called t^ry Maffcs ; mere outward fiiew, without Confecration, ico., but thcfe and others being
blamed
BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. II. 373
intended to deliver departed Souls out of Purgatory : and are paid for; infomuch that fome Priefts are laid to get their living by offering np Chrift a great number of times in a day. — Indeed in public mafles there are fome parts which are not audible, called in French La^ Secrete, and in all, or moil, I fuppofe, there are fome prayers for the dead.
Thiscuflom of faying Mafs prevails fo much as to exclude^, in a manner, all other worjhip.
This is the Jiate of that Romifli pradice of which we fhould now attempt to give fome hif- torical accounr.
II. The only quejlions are, when did this prac- tice begin} and wliat variations has it been fiibjeft to ? It may be difficult to affign for its commence- ment any period with precifion. The M;ifs, in the ftriftefl: lenfe, could not begin before the Doc- trine of Tranfubftantiation ex)fled, becaufe it proceeds upon that doftrine. — But fomething which Joiindi like it, and approached to it, and would in cffed: bring it on, may be found be!oie. It is difficult to trace out fa6ts nicely m dark and and ignorant ages, but the name of Sacrifice for different parts of divine iiuorjhip, has been long in uic^
The
blamed by Bona, Sec. as abufes, T do not mention tliem. Nau- tical Mafles aie without wine, for fc;ar the motion of the fliip fhould fhake it fo much as to fpill it - See tncfe and others mentioned, Bingham, j 5. 4. 5.
^ Prefent bpir. page 38. — Oraifon fecrete, or fometimes La Secrete, as a fubftantive. Did. Acad.
s Rhemiftson Luke xxii. 20.
'' In fcripture. Beneficence is called a facrifice, Heb. xiii. 16, we have ailb the facrifice or praife, Heb xi.i 15 the Body of Man is to be a living (fometimes in cid Englilh called li'vely) facrifice, Rom. xii. i. — And when the captive Jews could offer no facrifices, their devotions weie called the Calves of their lips.
A A 3
374 BOaK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. ir.
The ancient Fathers expreffed themfelves warmly, and nobly J the fame feelings, which made them give dignity to every fucrcd ordinance by cere- monies and habits, made them cloath diuir expref- fions of things facred, with fplendid metaphors.— And if they called the Evening prayer their even- ing facrifice', no wonder they gave the name of facrifice to that ordinance", which they confidered as a reprefentation of the fublinie and affeding facrifice of Chrill himfelf. If one wanted to fee a number of inflances, one might confuJt the Rhemifh Teftament on i Cor. x. 21. and Dr. Fulke's anfvver : but I can feled no better fmgle pafTage than that which is attributed to Ambrofe, on Heb. X. II. though the fame' is found in Chryfo- flom. The phrafe, unbloody facrifice^ has alfo been ufed by the Fathers for the Lord's Supper, and adopted by the Romanifts for their facrifice of the Mafs. — MiiJa is itfelf an"" ancient word. Ohla- iiom, of one fort or other, are very ancient, and fo is the cuftom of dedicating or offering them up to God at the Altar. — ]so^ fuppofe a Prieft, in an age of ignorance and fuperftition, heated with zeal and piety, to get all things ftrongly into his mind, and to fancy he had Chrill in his hand ; may we not conceive, that he might begin the cuftom of offering him up to God the Father?
To carry our attempts farther, iq accounting for the Mafs, would not probably anfwer any good purpofc i — only we may add, that the idea of
profiting
» Pfalm pxli.2. Bingham, 1;. i. 5.
^ See Prieniey's Hift. Corr. Vol. z. p.ige 6. Bingham,
S. 20. 8. Sacnficii opus fine Prefbytero efle non potuitj from Hil. Fragm page 129. — See Heylin's Laud, page 21.
* Rhem. Tell, on Heb. x. 1 1. and Fiilke.
^ See An. xxviii. Sea. 11, -Fulke thinks, thut Mijfa \S, not fo ancient as the time of Ambrofe. — On Rhem, Tell, opp, j>age 2S0V —On i Cor. x. ai.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. il. 37^
profiting particular people (and the Prieft of courfe) by particular oiferings, made at the Lord's table, or akar, on their behalf, with the confe- cration ufed at the communion, feems to have been carried into execution before" the tenth Century, the sra of Tranfubftantiation : though iuch offerings were more properly faeraments than Sacrifices. — Ihey were accounted abufes^ and Laws were made againfl them. — Prayers for the dead were in ufe in the time of Chryfojioniy and were offered at the time " of celebrating the Lord's Sup- per.— A weaknefs not unnatural, but, as it now feems to us, injudicious ; yet there might be dif- ficulty in feeing, at that time, that it could be attended with much harm.
It may be proper to remark here, that though the Fathers fometimes ufed expreffions which founded like thofe of the later Romanifb, 3'et that fuch exprellions were declamatory, and are not to be underftood in a proper or literal fenfe. — The very ancient Fathers, having occafion to ipeak againft the heathen facrifices, and ipeaking lite- rally, declared, in their Apologies, that Chnftians had none. And in the mofh declamatory fentences, fomething always appears, from which it is evident, that the expreffions are not intended as plain or literal. — Gratian, who lived about the middle of the twelfth Century p, undertook to reconcile Canons, &c. and expreffions of Fathers feemingly difcordant ; on the words. Hoc eji, he obferves, " therefore as the Heavenly bread, which is the Flelh of Chnft, is called, after the proper manner thereof, \\\t Body of Chrift, when in deed and
truth
" Bingham, 15. 4. 4. Molheim, Cent. 8. 3. 4.
° Fulke on Rhem. Teft. opp. 279. or on i Cor. x. 21.
|*rie{Hey's Hift. Corr. Vol. 2. page 1 1. is near this purpofe, V Cave places him A . D. 1 1 3 1 .
A A 4
37^ BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. III.
truth it is the Sacrament of the Body of Chrift,'* &c. — and afterwards, " not in the truth of the things but in z.fignifyingm)](lery^^ h.z'^.
And the unbloody [acrifice of the ancients, was only figurative; it meant, the reprefenration of the real facrifice of Chrift, in which he flicd his blood for Mankind. — Indeed I do not fee how the facri- fice of the Romilh Mafs can be called unbloody, as the blood of Chnft, or what they call fo, is folemnly offered up.
III. When once the praclice of facrificing in the Mafs was fettled, I do not know that there was much variation in it. Some abafes crept in, from avarice, irreverence and iupcrllition. This we learn from the Council of Trent, which makes a Decree for reforming' them.
We may now fee what the Acts and the Cate- chilm of that Council tell us concerning our pre- fent fubjed. — The Council held their twenty- fecond Seffion September 22, 1562 ; ten years after King Edward's Articles were made, and there- fore may well be fuppofed acquainted with their contents. — They lay down, that Chrift fuperfeded the JeiJuiJJi Priefthood, which was to be temporary, by his own, which was to be perpetual. Yet though he was a Prieft for ever, he did not mean that earthly Priefthood Ihould ceafe : accordingly, the night before. he was betrayed, he offered up, to his heavenly Father, his Body and blood, under the jymboh of Bread and Wiiie, and ordained his dif- ciples Pr/i?/?J, that they (and their fucceffors) might afterwards o^er him up. Still there was to be but one Priejl, the Apoftles acling only for their Lord. — The appointed facrifice was to reprefent the
original
1 Gratian, Concord : difcord. Diftinfljon 2. C. Hoc eft.— For this Engiijh, fee Fulke on Rhem. Teft. 1 Cor. x. 20. ' ocfl". 22d. fiiit Decree. (p;ige 145, Latin.)
BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. IV. 377
original onej both being real, but the former bloody^ the latter unbloody : yet the appointed was to be accounted one and the fame with the original one, differing only in the mode of offering; ftridly propitiatory, capable of gaining remiffion of even great finsj and therefore to be offered for the dead as well as the living.
The Catechifm keeps pretty clofe to the Council : in defcribing the difference betv^een a Sacrament and a Sacrifice, it fays, " The facred Eucharift whilft it is kept in the Pyx\ or carried to the fick, has not the nature of a Sacrifice, but of a Sacra- ment :" but when it is bot/i, *' they that offer this facrifice, wherein they comm.unicate with us, do fatis/y and merit the fruits of our Lord's Paffion." —And afterwards it is' faid, " fVe facrifice," that is, all communicants. Maffes for the Dead axe" built on Tradition : — and no maffes are to be called private ; becaufe all pertain to the Salvation of all the faithful.
The Rhemifts have a great deal to fay, but nothing that I need trouble you with
IV. PVickliffe had not, probably, at onqe fet- tled his principles fo as to appear perfeclly uniform in his opinions, in all parts of his works-, but a propofition condemned as his in the Council of Conftance was the following"; — "The Gofpel faith not that Chrift inftituted the Mafs."
The Reformed Churches feem all againft the Romifli Mafs : the Confeffion of Augjburg Ijpeaks favourably of the term Mais, and exculpates itfelf from the charge of having aboUflied^ that rite. —
The
= Sea. 78. ' Sea. 85. " Sea. 86.
^ See Baxter on Councils, Chap. 13. or page 431. — See alfo Fox's Aas, &c. (or Martyrol.) InAzxJFicklife.
y Bifhop Andrews was candid alfo : lee He) lin*s Life of Laud, page 21.
378 BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. 17,
The Lutherans departed the lead from the Romifh Church.
One of xhtjix articles is, " That private Mafles ought to be continued, which as it is agreeable to God's Law, fo men receive great benefit from them."
The NecefTary Doftrine, gives inflru(5lions with regard to the Sacrament of the Altar, but I fee nothing about Sacrifice. It concludes with a fhort Ledlure en praying for the dead, in which it dif- courages every way of being particular, if I may fo fpeak. — It allows benevolent interceffions for departed Chriftians in general, on the principle of a " Communion of Saints," but oppofes MaiTes being faid at particular places (at Scala Call), &c. — and rejefts pnrgatory, blames all temerarious judgment, and would have all things in which we have not clear knowledge, left to the difpofal of God.
Perhaps Henry VIII. fufFered Cranmer to un- dermine the Mafs, becaufe the cuftom of faying MafTes had a tendency to fupport the power of the Fope.
In the beginning of the reign of Edward VI. Maifes were left much the fame as before, cnl)'- the communion was allowed to the people in bcih'^ kinds. But in 1550 the Mafs-books were called in, and the Altars removed and changed into "Tables: the principal Englifli Reformers judging, that the retaining of altars would give offence to the chief enemies of Popery, and tend to keep up amongll the people, the idea of a propitiatory ^ Mafs. — Some Bilhops refufed to part with their altars, and were deprived for contumacy ; the Lutherans did
retaia
^ Neal's Hift. Piir. Vol. i. quarto, page 36. * NeaJ,page 44. ibid.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. IV. 379
retain theirs \ There is a chapter againft Maffes in the Reformatio Legtim.— And Latimer, in his Ser- mons", fpeaks of them as theydeferve.
Of men's notions of the Mafs under Elizabeth^ we may judge from the fecond Book of Homihes; in which I do not recollect any laboured argu- ments, but only fome Ihort declamatory expref- fions. It is called *' dumb mailing," — " mnmmijJi maffing." We are cautioned to take heed left the Lord's fupper, *' of the me?nory" " be made a [acri- fice\^ " left applying it for the dead, we lofe the fruit that be alive." — We are told, that at it " every one of us rai.)ft be guefts and not gazers ; eaters and not lookers, feeding ourfelves, not hiring others to feed for us," &c. — The Mafs, I ftappole, was fo far unfettled by this time, that arguments were unneccffary, and eloquence furii- cient.— Yet it might be worth while for any curious perfon to compare fome of the exprefiions in our communion-office, about the Body and Blood of Chrift, about Chrift's being a facrifice, &c. with the Romifh Latin Forms; as he would the mors eafily conceive how the fan:e expreffions might fuit the different Religions when taken in a literal ^ and metaphorical fenfe.
Dtipn is^ unyielding as to our prefent Article: indeed he could change nothing without briny^ing ' the whole Fabric of Popilh Worlhip upon his head. He maintains " that the Sacrifice of Chrift is not only commemorated, but continued in the Eucharift, and that every communicant ofiers him along with the Prieft."
Cardinal
^ On this fubjeft, fee Wheatly on the Common Prayer, page 2,73. odavo. — Heylin's Life of Laud, page 20.
<= Vol. I. odavo, page 162 — See alio Index, Mafs.
'' Art. XXVIII. Sed. xxxiii. — Art, xxix. Sed. iv. — = Heylin's Life of Laud, page 21.
^ Mofhemi;, 3d Appendix.
380 BOOK IV. ART. XXXT. SECT. V.
Cardinal Bona' feems to be the moft able Romifh writer in defence of the Mais, that I have hap- pened CO confult.
V. We (hould fay fomething of thofe who think, that our Church did not recede far enough from the Church of Rome. We maj- call them col- lectively Puritans, or Dijj'enlers. But ue have alread}'^ mentioned the modem cuflom oi ftting at the Eucharifl unknown in the ancient Church : — To thele an Allar"^ mull: be ab/'mination, tfpe- cially the Romifli forr; o^ ftonc\ let againft a wall, Lardner^ fays, that near the prinjtive times, the Eucharift v.'as never laid to le upon an Altar, — One may ealily conceive the Crojs to be called an Altar. Some have thought ^ that the Apoflles would not be in the ufual familiar table-pollure, at the laft fupper, when they received the bread and wine. Whatever might be the cafe, our kneeling at the communion is juftified, by our being in a continued ad: of Devotion , and by our con- fidering the Ordinanae as totally en.biematical, or fymbolical. — Our church, by a Rubric, guards agamft any lufpicion of our adoring the confecrated elements: No Englifh communicant has now ever any lucn idea in his mind. And farther, we never infifl upon the pofture of kneeling as neceliary for all locieties of Chriflians. We are fatisfied with our common exprelTion, Altar-tahle, as it Teems to fuit our idea, that the Eucharift is moft properly u reprekntaiion of a Feajl upon a Sacrifice.
VI. We
' Rerum Liturgicarum Lib. and De Mifid.
8 Alt XXVIII. tedl. XII.
'■ Seeker's >ermon?. Vol. 6 pnge 2S8.
' Fiilke's Rhem. Tell Fol. 287. bottom.
^ Works, \'ol. 4 page 337.
■ See Seeker's Ledures, Le6l. 36. page 243. " ^ ferious and (itvout manner." More in Seeker's Sermons, Vol. 6. page 288.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. VI — VlII. 381
VI. We will now proceed to fome Explamt'wn. In the T'itle, Oblation means, I think, the fame
as facrifice : alt facriliGCs were oblations, and all oblations were fuppofed to be accepted as facrifices. Under the Law ot Mofes, the poorer fort of men brought offerings, -t^'ho could- not afford facrifices. In our prayer of confecration, facrifice and obla- tion come together, and feemingly as fynonymous. — One oblation is oppofc^d to ilie continued lacri- fices of the Romanifts '.—finijlisd is alfo oppofed to perpetuated: and on the Crofs, — to, on the Altar.
VII. "The Offering" — in the Latin Oblatio; fo the Englifh might have been again, Oblation: but the lirll: fentence of the Article is not our pre- fent concern : it is only introdud:ory, except indeed as it may fugg.ft proofs : but the fuhjed, of Chrifl's death being a Sacrifice, has been treated in the Appendix to the eleventh Article : 1 do not know that it was proved there that " there is none other," &:c. but it is agreed that there can be no other, except what is atterwards mentioned in this Article.
VIII . " The Sacrifice of Malfes," &c. '* were," &c. this does not feem good grammar; but the Latin has Sacrificia, and the Englifh, in Spar- row's colledion. Sacrifices. Bennet, however, mentions, Sacrifice, as one reading. *' Mafles"— Mijfa las occurred"' before: no diflinclion here between public and private maiies.— " It was com- monly faid," — that is, before the Reformation : — I think we have had a fimihir expreffion before.— " Pain,'' in Latin pa:na, which may ^}gx\\iY penalty, or punifhment. There is '-'penis'' in Trent Sef- fvon 22. Canon 3, relating io the fame thing.
*' Blajphcmoiis
^ Art. XXVIII. Sea, 11.— Art. xxxi. Se^. n.
382 BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. IX. X.
" Blafphemons fables y^ figmenta'' : — " dangerous deceits,' — perniciofce impojlura. Other Reformed Churches ufe exprefllons much the famej which are anathematizeci by the Council of Trent" -r- How the facrifices of Maflcs have been " blafphe- mous fables and dangerous deceits," will bell be mentioned under our Proof.
IX. In entering on our Froof, we muft fettle what Propofitions our Article gives us to prove. I fee only two.
1. Mafles, according to the Romlfli practice, are " blafphemous Fables," or figmenta.
2. They are '* dangerous deceits."
X. Being fables, figments, and deceits, feems to mean only one thing, namely, that tliey are contrary to jtripture, or, at leaft, unfupported by it.
This might fiifficlently appear from confidering, that the doctrine of the Romilh Mafs is founded upon tliat of Tranfubflantiatioit, which we fuppofe ourfelves to have removed out of the way. But there arc fome texts which are fo ftrikingly op- pofed to the Mafs, that it muft be wordi while to cite them.
Thofe which were cited in the Appendix to the eleventh Article, to prove Chrift's death a Sacri- fice, would Ihevv, that fuch facrifice was completed. But 1 will confine myfelf. Firft I will take Heb. ix. 24. and go to the end of that Chapter. Is it poffible to conceive, that the Apoflle could have rcafoned thus, and have given no hint about the millions of facrifices which the Romifh Pricfhs profefs to have performed ? or is it poflible to con- ceive, that any part of worlhip Ihould be meant to
fwallow
" Terence has, Fabulas ! for idle tales ! flufF ! Heauton: Afts. Seen. 3. V. 95.
« Sefl. 2 2 . Canons 4 and 5 .
BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. X. 383
fwaliow up all other parts, and yet no injundion be given about it? - Next read Heb. x. 2 6^.-1 do not fee how it is any argument if there is any facrifice after that of Chriit : as to all the facrifices of the Mafs, and the facrifice of Chrift malting but ofie^ that feems quite a gratis dictum, and no argument, — Heb. v. 3, compared with vii, 24 — 28, fliews, that no man can be a Pried in the room of Chrift, to offer up the Chriftian facri- fice.— Read i Pet. iii. 18. — Whatever completes types makesaconclufion; that therefore did Chrift. — On I Pet. i. 20. we obferve, that as Chriii; was the Lamb flain from the foundation of the world, he muft be the only propitiatory Sacrifice for the fins of all ?nattki)id. — According to Heb. X. 2, 3. whatever facrifice is repeated, cannot take away fin. — Either Chrift y//^^rj in the Sacrifice of the Mafs, or he does not; if he fuffers, he muft be everfuffering (againftPhil. ii. 9.— Heb. ix. 26.) if not, it is no real facrifice ; add Heb. ix. 22*". — I will not detain you with producing more autho- rities in fo plain a cafe. Private Mafles are againft I Cor. X. 17.— xii. 13. &c.
Maffes may be called blafphemous, as degradin<T Chrift, dragging him, as it were, down from Hea- ven for a icw foiis : — merely to defcribe the thing, feems a fort of blafphemy.— A poor Fne^ /ai?our- ing, with a wafer, in the occupation and craft of offering up our bleffed Lord ! treating a happy and glorious Being, *' crowned with glory and honour," (Heb. ii. 9.) as wretched and defpicabiel nay numberlefs Priefts doing this at the farne time ; and muttering at numberlefs Altars! — Books of
Travels,
P On this text the Rhemifts remark, *' Perilous reading cf Scriptures."
9 See Bifhop Cleaver, page 18.
384 BOOK IV, ART. XXXr. SECT. XI. XII.
Travels, which relate thcfe fa6ts, mud be fhocking to every ferious reader.
XI. Malfes may be called pernicious^ in regard to the evil conlequences which they tend ro pro- duce. They tend to make religion a mere civi- lity; to take Chriftians off from prayer, and preaching of the word of God ; and to give them an eafy method' of evading ail their duties, moral and religious. Moreover, by preienting a material objedt, they hinder men from worlhipping " /;; Spirit^ and in Truth." They tend to promote Infidelity amongft men of improved underfland- ings; and from fuch, inferior perfons foon catch the infedion.
XII. And now Ihall I offer any indired proof P the Romanics have urged many conliderations in their own favour, but fuch as feem to be for the moft part mere Hypothefis, unfounded in Reafon and Scripture. The doctrine of the Mais might do in the dark ages, but it vyill not bear the light. The Romanifts, where they arc improved, refemble a man, who becaufe he has planned fomethino; in a fit of melancholy, rage, or intoxication, det^Tmines to carry it into execution vX all hazards, when he is become perfeclly fober and in his right mind; and to juftify it the bell: he can. However, if any one chufcs to make a bufmcfs of examining tl e Popifli pleas in favour of the Mafs, he may con- fult the Rhemilh Tellament ' ; and if he reads
the
' At Reims, a reverend German Marquis (^n Abbe) told me,
U one Sunday evening, that he had been a la Me/Je at five o'clock
in the morning; after which he had gone a la LhaJ/e; (a rabbet-
fhooting;) and diat he was then ready to go a la ComeJie.
This he faid very innocently, as confcious of no fault. Indeed at the Play he was to make fome little change in his drefs, that every one might know he was incognito.
* John iv. 24.
' Particularly on Luke xxii. — i Cor. x. and xi. and on Hcb. ix. and x.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. XIII. 385
the anfwers of Dr. Fulke, I think he will be pleafed ; making an abatement for controverfiai language, which is feldom pleafing.
XIII. I fear it would not be to much purpofe to detain you long on an Application : a form of alTent does not feem wanting, and any plan for mutual conceffions, is defperate".— To the interejied we can only offer 2 Cor. iv. 4. and obferve, that it is as applicable to thofe who call themfelves Chrif- tians, as to " them which believe not." "• The God of this world may blind'' the minds of either.'* But to thofe who are not affeded by the immenfe fums which have been lavifhed away on the faying of Mafles, we may recommend the interefts of rational piety : let not any of them be afraid^ to embrace it, though it may fubvert, for a time, the whole fyftem of their national religion : neither let them be afraid that the common people, deprived of their prefent principles, may become wholly un- principled : the common people amongft. the Pro- teftants, have, many of them, much folid piety; of a better fort than the lower people in Popifh coun- tries: and as to men of letters andfcience, v/hile the Romanifls are chiefly Infidels, the Proteftants can reckon amongft true believers, thofe for whofe underfbandings they have the higheft efleem on other accounts; an Addifon, a Locke, and even a 'Newton, Thefe have all laboured in the caufe of revealed religion.
If the Romanifls will not liften to our brotherly exhortations, let them hear our threats : the rage of paying for Malics will not laft for ever ; as men
improve,
" Hallitax on Prophecy, page 361.
'*■ See Comber's Advice, page 39.
y P. S. What we find in the fecond Appendix to Mofheim, fuits this advice ; —I had not read it. Oclavo, Vol. 5, page no. Fenelon's notiOii.
VOL. IV. B B
386 BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. XTII.
improve, it will continually grow weaker, and weaker : As Philofophy rifes, Mafles will fink in price; and at length, fuperftition will pine away, becaufe no one will be interefted to maintain and fupport it. Even Inflitutions formed by Legacies^ will have their revenues transferred to other uies. — But then^ the minds of all ranks of men will be in a far worfe flate than if they had loft their fuper- ftition in any other manner : inftead of having a Religion which their reafon makes them efteem, at the fame time that it warms their hearts with devout affedion and Chriftian benevolence, they will have acquired an habit of defpifing all religion; and of thinking thofe moft degraded, who (hew the moft attention to religious^ truth,
* This LeSure was given Feb. 27, 179a ; uith the accidental Offljilion of Seft. x i. and the lafl: paragraph of Scft. x.
ARTICLE
BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. I. 387
ARTICLE XXXII.
OF THE MARRIAGE OF PRIESTS,
BISHOPS, Priefts, and Deacons, are not com- manded by God's Law, either to vow the eftate of fingle life, or to abftain from marriage : therefore it is lawful for them, as for all other Chriftian men, to marry at their own difcretion, as they fhall judge the fame to ferve better to godhneis.
I. If one could give the natural principles of any fubjed, they would connect all fafts, and make the bcft Key to the Hiftory of men's pradice. For all pradice is only the operation of natural principles in diiferent circumftances.— With a view to illufhrating fads after this manner, I have fome- times prefixed to my hiflorical obfervations, fome attempt at a defcription of Nature ; and the plan feems to fuit our prefent fubjeft.
In the Appendix to the Firfl Book, I have fpoken fomething of monaftic Life; have endea- voured to defcribe it, and account for it ; I now only obferve, that the contemplative abftemious Monk differs from the Man of the World, very materially; he differs, as to the refinement of his paffions, and particularly as to the more warm, rapturous, affedionate kind of Piety. At the fame time, he has his peculiar faults. — With regard to Marriage^ which on this Article is our chief con- B B 2 cern.
38S BOOK IV. ART. XXXI I. SECT. I.
cern, he is farther removed from it, than one ivho maintains a conftant intercourfe with mixed companies.
But amongft men of the worlds there may be a great difference in refpect of marriage, and of motives for engaging in it. One man may be fo (ituated, that it would be a defireable thins; for him to marry merely on prudentiaP motives; an alliance would enable him to accomplifli the ends which he has chiefly in view. Another is much attraded to marriage; he efleems it a great good; but he is afraid of loling what he efteems a ftill greater good; he is afraid of lofing a good fervice, a good Fellowfliip, &c. bcfides (for that miift always be fuppofcd, in order to make fmgle life rightly chofen") that he fliall be able to refift all temptations peculiar to celibacy.
Now fuppofe thcfe men all to fix their views folely on the good of promoting religion^ at the time they have marriage in view : the Monk would engage in fmgle life with readinefs, in order to promote it; would probably condemn marriage, or at lead highly applaud continence ; and would feel himfelf elated and purifit^d. The man of the worldy in the firft fituation, would perceive, that, in his own way, he could beft promote religion by alibciating with himlclf a certain female part- ner, and following a certain plan. The other, would tend forcibly towards a married ilate, but he would fee, that, in his cale, connexions and incumbrancer, would impede him fo much, that he could not freely exert himlelf ; could not, on the
whole,
* It 16 reckoned prudent fi r a Man-midwife to be a married roan; and a candidate for aL'h;i;,]aincy of a Society of Females: as Magdalens, Afylum, &;c. — Or prudence may be pleaded again]} marrying : Lc Manage eft une chofe tres ferieufe ; on ne peut pas ti'op y penfer; Heureux celui quiypenfe toute fi vie.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. II. 389
whole, do that good, in promoting religion, which he particularly meditated. We need proceed no farther in order to fee, how men might be fituated, in refpeft of marriage, upon the firll propagation of the Chriftian Religion,
It has been before obferved, that men could fcarcely, at firft, enter into Chriftianity, without being agitated : they muft be under continual alarms; their views muffc be fixed on heaveii'-^ objeds; their afFecftions fet on things above : where their treafure was, there would their heart be alfo. This is a difpolition very unfavourable to mar- riage; or to allowing it its due fliare of praife; and the prevalence of the oriental Philofophy would make it more unfavourable \ Such a temper would regard the marriage of Priefls, as a want of felf- government, as a degradation of the facred cha- rader. Now if we conceive this temper working forcibly through a number of ages, and always combated by the natural propenfity to marriage, and by the more ordinary feelings of common fenfe and acflive life, we fhall have a general flcetch of the Hiftory before us.
II. Though the facred writers themfelves (eem to me perfectly free from every thing flighty, yet in the Apojtolic Age Chriflians began to find, or fancy, that attentions to their Wives, prevented their being fuch good Chriftians as they might be. And, in Ibme cafes, both partners were of the fame mind : they feparated, at bed, though not at board; fo that the wife became a fort of Sijler, — Hernias^ at the beginning of his firfl /'"j/f<7;z, {peaks of a woman, whom he had begun to love as a
Sijler,
*> Mofheim fays, that viallgnant Spirits were thought to have jnoft iiifluence over married people, quarto. Vol. 1 . page 1 3 7. B B q
390 BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. II.
Sijler, and he is afterwards^ told that his Wife mufl be his Sifier.
Bafdides is placed by Cave in the ^ear 112; many ftrange things have been faid of him ; but in Lardner's Book of Herefies they are compared, and a fober judgment formed out of them. That judo-ment is**, that Bafilides valued continence, not on monaftic principles, abfolutely, in itfelf, but only with regard to the good effects it would produce in any particular jundlurc; on the ground of its utility in any particular circumiiances : — if it produced the greatcft good, in any cafe, in that cafe, it was to be commended and practifed ; otherwife it was not necclfary .or required. This fell fo far fhort of the high notions of fome feds of Chriftians, that it was accounted heretical.
The ManicJieans only tolerated marriage even in what they called their Jnditors^, in their elect, they did not even tolerate it. — The Manicheans are placed as firft flourifhing about the end of the third Century.
It fcems clear that, however fome might be admred for not marrying, fome of the Clergy did marry, or were married men, during the whole^ of the three firft centuries. Yet I fuppofe that attempts were continually on foot to prevent their marrying, or to make them fcparate thenifclves from their wives.
During thefe three firft Centuries, there arofe a cuftom tor men to have women conftantly with them, who were called fubintroduced women;
muUeres
^ Second Vifion. — See the Note at the beginning ofHermas's firft Vifion. Edit. Ruflell.
<* Her. Bafilides, Seft. 12. — Lardner's Works, Vol. 9. page 285.
" Vol. I. page 349. or Append, to Book i.Sedl. iv. ;.
' See Bingham, 4. 5. 5.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXn. SECT. III. 39I
mulhres fuhlntroduEla;; in the Greek Cliurclies, <r'jy£»(raKTo»: — their employments and charaders are not entirely agreed about : Lardner'^ lays, they "were not wives, nor concubines, but perfons maintained as objecls of Charity, or d^t for the fake of domeftic affairs." Biihops, and men of great eminence, entertained thefe women; fome very innocently, I do not doubt; but it feems probable, that the connexion would be a fnare for others, if any times of peace or quiet came on. — This Muiier fubintrodu6ta feems to have been a fort of continuation of the Sijier-zvife oi Hernias.
III. At the Council of Nice, in 325, it was propofed, that fuch Minifters as had wives, fliould put them away; the conduft of Papkmaius''\ an Egyptian Bilhop of fome eminence, on the occa- fion, was fpirited and liberal : — though bred up _a Monk himfelf, unmarried, and remarkable for his chafle conduct, he cried out in the Affembly, that he would not agree to the putting of fach " a yoke' upon the neck of the Difciples ;"— that co- habiting with a virtuous wife, was chaftity itfelf ; —and that he could by no means agree to anything more than that the unmarried Clergy iliouid con- tinue
g Lardner's Works, Vol. 3. page 82, Note.— The idea of maiTiage without cohabitation was not very uncommon in the times of which we are fpeaking. Nor was it wholly unknown to the Heathens. See the Life of Hypatia in Suidas ; or Lardner's
Works, Vol. 9. page 83. Some Chriftlans have run into the
folly of performing what may be called feats of chaftity or continence : that is, have expofed themftlves voluntarily to very great temptations in order to boaft of their power of overcom- ing them. Sec the accounts oi D'ArbriJJel, founder of the Abbey of Fonte^raud, who died in the year 1 1 17. Bayle's Dift. under Fontevraud. Gibbon's Hift. quarto. Vol. 1 . Chap. 1 5 . page 48 5 .
^ Suidas from Socrates, 1. ii.andSozom. i. 23. Bingham, 4. 5. 7. from the fame,
» Afts XV. 10.
B B 4
39^ BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. IV.
tinue fingle. He had weight to (lop the impofitlon of the reftraint propofcd.
Ac this fj.mous Council a Cown^ was made .againft the fubintroduced women, which f vvill read. The general tur?i of the Religious, was to celi- bacy; and fine eulogiums were written upon chaftity, and other Afcetic perfections, by Tertul- lian, Ambrofe, and mofl of the Fathers: though TertulJian did write two Books Ad Uxorcm; to his own wife.
IV. The firfl; check which this humour met with, was from Jovinian, a Monk of INlilan, in the fourth Century j we have mentioned his idea, that Satan has not power to feduce a true Chriflian, under the fixteenth Article'; but he w^as more famous for holding"", that wives may be as goo^ Chriftians as Virgins can be. Lardner conliders him as having been of the fame opinion with Bafilides; as already" dcfcribed. — VioUantiiis^ a Prefbyter of Gaul, in the fifth Century, is fpoken of with Jovinian; they both oppofed ieveral grow- ing cufhoms of Chriflians, which had arifcn from a too great luxuriance of Piety. --,7ctow is very in- dignant againil; Vigilantius, whom he defcribes as laying, that no Clergyman ought to remain un- married. This notion he amplifies and exag- gerates thus; et nifi (Epifcopi) prasgnantes uxores viderint Clericorum, infanteique de ulnis matruni vagientes, Chrifti Sacramenta non tribuunt" : — (will not or dam them).
The
'' Councils, by Labbe, or others. In EngliOi, Lardnei's Works, Vol. 3. page 82. Note.
' Art. XVI. Sedt. ix.
"' Bower's Life of Sirlcius.
" The opinion is Beaufobre's, but adopted by Lardne: ; Works, Vol. g. page 28 5.
° Jcrom adv. Vigilant. C. i. lad Vol. bi;t one, page a8i, 2d Tome.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. V. VI. 393
The Pope, by whom Jovlnian and his followers were condemned, was Siridus, who died in the year 398 : he is ufuaily faid to be the firft who forbade tlie marriage of his Clergy ; but 1 fnppofe many of them were married after his time.
The finigglc between lofty notions of religious purity, and ordinary ones of natural propenlities, feems neverP to have intermitted; but we mufb not attempt more than to mark its principal ap- pearances.
V. Gr^^wv VII. c?A\cd Hi/dehand, who died in 1085, is fpoken of as having the mofi: completely and univerfally effected the celibacy ■! of the Clergy. — Thofe before him are thought to have been fuperftitious in difcouraging marriage; he to have done it from motives of policy. — Yet it is owned, I fuppofe, diat he was a man of flrid purity in private life, and fmcerely zealous for the Reforma- tion of manners'.
vr. In England, according to Fox, Marriage of Friefhs was firft forbidden by Anfdm, Arch- bilhop of Canterbury, in a Council at London.— In another Council, held in the year 1104, five years' before his death, at Winchefter, there is a
reference
P Intermediate declfions were made in the fixth general Coun- cil, held at Conftantinople 580, called Quinifextum, or in Trullo, (or TruUa) : Cave, Vol. i. page 605.— Dupin's Com- pendium, Vol. 2. page 295.
1 Burnet on the Article.— Biftiop Hallifax on Prophecy, page 352—355. Comber's Advice, page 15. 43. Fox's Mar- tyro!. Vol. 2. page 463.
»■ The particular year when Priefis firft gave a promife of celi- bacy, and Bifhops took an oath to ordain no' married man, is laid by Fox to have been 1067; but Comber mentions 1074; both fpeak from ancient hiftorians.
* Fox, Vol. 2. page 463. 483. the date of the former Coun- cil I do not find in Fox : — Of which Henry Huntington fays, ^' \i\ qwQ prohibuit ::'acerdotibus Anglorum uxores antea non prohibitas." Prohibiting is not preventing. But Cave does ^ no£
394 BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. VII — IX.
feference to a former one held at London; but Henry I*, connived at the Prielts* marr}'ing; and there has been much connivance at this ofTcnce, at different times.
VII. St. Bernard^ called the lad of the Fathers, died 1 1 53; I was furprized to fee how flrongly he inveighs againft depriving the Priefts of the liberty of marrying". He was perfectly orthodoxy Head of one great Monaftcry (Clairvaux) and founder of 160 others.
VIII. The Marriage of Priefts was, about the time Vvc arc fpcaking of, very unpopular in Eng- land; it occafioncd no/j, in which the facred dements, confecrated by married Priefts, were thrown into the dirt, and irodcicn under foot. — The Priefts who had wives, were called by the opprobrious name of Nicolaitani^.
IX. Pope Pius II. called ^neas Sylvius before he came to the Popedom, died in 1464; he is famous^ for having faid, *' Marriage was for great rcafons forbidden Priefts, and for greater ^ is to be reftoied to them." — By greater^ intimating the danger not only of fuch incontinence as he himfelf had been guilty of, but alio of unnatural vices.
X. In
not clear up thefe matters, (o I leave them : He has no Council at Winchefter in \ j 34, — And it appears that Lavcfranc held a council againft the Marriage of Prielh in 1076.
Cave fays, that in 1 102 Anfelm held a Couftcil at London, but he does not mention marriage of Pritfts, in his account of it. There feems to have teen a great deal of bufmefs under- taken at tl-.is Council.
* See an original record to this purpofe in John Fox, Vol. i. page 253. — A proclamation of Aniclm's.
" See Fox, Vol. 2. page 483.— -Comber's Advice, page 43.
^ Fox, Vol. 2. page 465. 479. — Rev. ii. 6. 15.
y Burnet on the Article. — Ccmber, page 42. — Baxter ou Councils, page 448.— Fox, Vol. 2, p^ge 466. — Bower's Lives of the Popes.
* Baxter on Councils, page 448.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. X — XII. 39-
X. In the Greek Church we are informed, by Brerewood^ in one part of his book, that no mar- riage' is allowed after Ordination; and in another" paffage, that the Rujfians, in particular, ordain only thofe wlio are married. — Neither of thcie rules allows a Clergyman to marry a fecond time. \i\6.QC:di fecond marriages have been declared againft by many fets of Chriftians''; probably with a view to I Tim. iii. 2. " The hufband o^ one wife.'''*
XI. In the twenty-fourth Seffion of the Coun- cil of Trent, the Marriage of Priefls was difcufled, but there is only one Canon againft it (the ninth), which contains nothing remarkable. The next Canon anathematizes all thofe, who do not hold, that fmgle life is better and more happy (or more bleifed, melius et beatius), than married life. — In the Trent Catechifm I fee nothing on the fubjeft; perhaps becaufe the Catechifm was only for the people ; which reafon will extend to the Neceffary Doctrine.
XII. At the time of the Reformation^ men flood difpofed as is defcribed by BiOiop Burnet at the beginning of his Expofition of this Article; they were remarkably attentive to the mifchiefs which might arife, either from a continuance of the Clergy in that fingle ftate, to which many fcandalous irregularities feemed to be owing ; or from reduc- ing perfons of facred, characters to the level of ordinary men, and fetting them in the light of
flaves
* Brerewood on Languages, page 127.
^ Page 137.
•= See Dr. Redman's opinion in Strype's Cranmer, page 157. — John Fox, Vol. I. page 36. Dr. Thomas, Bilhop of Lin- coln in 1757, wasfaid to be married to his fourth wife, and to have, as a motto of a ring, " If Ifurvi-ve, Vllmake itji've," — The fame ftory has been told of others; it is onl,. -mentioned here as proving, that a fucceffion of marriages were not dilre- putable even to a Prelate.
396 BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. XII.
flaves to fenfual appetites. It will appear pro- bable, from what has been faid, that n\cn/fmtld fland (o affecled, in fuch a conjundure.
Amongft the propofiCfons of" JFkkliiJe and Hh/s condemned at the Council of Conftance'', I do nor fee any relating to the Marriage of Priefls.
The Reformed Churches declare" againft forbid- ding Priefts to marry. Some mix the marriage of Priefls with that of Laymen; but the ConfelTion of Av.^fburg has a fcparate chapter for the marriage of Priclfs : amongfl other evils of the prohibition, it mentions, that fome good men, by their con- flicls with the weaknefs of their nature, have been reduced to a flate of defperation. That writing of Bifhop Jewel's, which is called part of the EngliJJi ConfefTion, I will read ; as it contains much good matter in^a fmall compafs.— The firft page of that of Augfburg (on this fubjeft) is worth reading. — The Helvetic in one place, fays, that lingle men, fjppofing them virtuous and eafy, are more fit for taking care of facred things, than thofe who are diflraded by the cares of a ° Family : — and, a little after, condemns thofe who condemn fecond marriages.
One of the Six Articles is, " Priefls may not marry by the Law of God." — Jolni Fox in his Martyrology, (or Acls and Monuments\ he.) has given a particular Lliftory, and a great deal of
• argument,
<* Art. x'x-i. Scfl. II,
* In caftins; rnj eye over the Confeffions in the Syntagma, I did not fee the fuhjcCl in the French, Dutcli, or Scotch; nor in the Polifh ; but it may poffibly be in any of theni, though I believe it is not.
^ Syntagma, page 1 1 7.
P Synt. page %^. — ^tptiores auteni hi funt curandis rebus divinis, quam qui privatis famiiis; negotiis diftrahuntur.— This mull defiend upon drcumftav.ccs.
''Vol.2.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXir. SECT, XII. 397
argument, on this and every other of thefe fix Articles of Henry VIIL
King Edvv'ard VI. in 1552, ratified i\\t marriages of the Clergy, and made, by Ad of Parliament, their children legal inheritors.— knd in the Refor- matio Legum there is a chapter in favour of Matri- mony, which is warm in defence of the marriage of the Clergy- Archbilliop Cranmer was married; and in his Life by Strype we find fome good things on our prefent fubje(5l'.
In the reign of Queen Mary Popery was re- ftored, and the Queen gave injundions to the Eilliops, amongil other things, " to remove all married clergymen from their" wives." — And, in confequence, " all the married Clergy thioughoiit ihe kingdom were deprived.'*
Queen Elizabeth did reftore the Proteftant Reli- gion, but, in fome things, fhe was not fo forward about it as fome of her fubjecls.. It Teemed a thing of courfe that the Clergy fliould again be allowed to marry; but Elizabeth refufed ro au- thorize their marriage, openly, by Lazv, ilie was indeed willing to connive 2CL it, but that would not fecure legitimacy of children'. Her backward- nefs caufed the trouble oi particular afts, zs I underftand, of legitimation. How defirous £he was to clog and impede all clerical marriages, appears from her Injunclions in 1559"; in which flie orders, that no Prieft fhall marry any woman except he have the confent of his Bijliop^ two neighbouring Jii/Iices, and the woman's Parents. —
If
'"■ Strype's Life of Cranmer. See Dr. Redman's opinion,
page I 57. — Cranmer's, page i^r.
^ Neal, Vol. i. page 60. — John Fox, Vol. r. page 36. Strype's Annals, Vol. 1.' page 80.— I think. Archbifliop Pai-ker had a Son legitimated, by Aft of Parliament.— Neal, Vol. I. page 117.
"• Spsrrpw's Colleftion, page ;6. Cap. 29.
398 BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. XIII. XIV.
If no Parents, the confcnt of Relations; if no Relations, of Mafter or Miflrefs : befides Banns, &c. — Thefc impediments argue either a ftrong pre- judice in the Queen, or an opinion, that the mar- riage of the Clergy was ftill unpopular.
XIII. Dupin" is very tolerant about the mar- riage of Prieils : he allows " that Priefts may marry, where the Laws of the Church do not proh'ibit it."
Here ends our Hi/lory.
XIV. The Explanation will be much (horter.
In the '7i/le, the word " Priejrs" I confider as a generic term, including all orders of ecclefiaftical Minifters. In the Article, all thofe orders are Ipecified, which fublKl in our Church.
" Not commanded :" to fee the force of this, we fliould examine with what it is confijtent ; fuppofe any one fl"iould be of opinion that fingle life is better for Priefts than married life; (melius et beatius) that it is recommended in Scripture, that it will be rewarded^ &c. &c. ftill he might agree, that it is not " commanded.^^
" By God's Law,'* — this is the expreflion of one of tht Jix Articles of Henry VIII. and may allude to them: fuppofe any one thought celibacy of Priefts was commanded by the Canon Law, the Law of the Church, or the Law of England, or even the Law of Nature, ftill he might aflent to this Article, except he thought it was commanded by Scripture. Only it fliould be underftood, that if Scripture was found to refer to any other Law, or ratify it, then its being commanded by that Law, would be the fame as its being commanded by Scripture. Indeed the Law of Nature is God's Law ; but the fcripture feems here to be meant.
" Either ^ Third Append, to Mofhcim.
BOOK IV. AUT. XXXII. SECT. XV. 399,
*"^ Either to vovj the ePiiate of fingie life, or to ^Iftahi from marriage;*' — that is,^ either to abftaim in confequence of a vow, or without vowing, i fuppofe, that the Romifti Clergy do take a vow of celibacy upon Ordination j as our Clergy ufed to do in the time oi Anfelm", and ever fmcCj probabl}^ till the Reformation.
" As for all other Chriftian men,"— does this make it neceilary for iis to prove^ that it is lawful for Chriftians in general to marry? — the Title is only of PriejJsi but if Priefts may marry, Laymen may, a fortiori. And the fcriptural expreiSions are common to all forts and conditions of men. This ckufe beginning " therefore," was added m 1562, ib means fomething againil monaftic Life in general.
" As they fl-jall ;W^^,'* &c. this does not feera properly a part of our Article : however, it is a good moral direction, and tends to fliew the rea- fonablenefs of the liberty allowed; and that it is of an honourable, worthy fort: —and does it not imply, that our Church prefers neither fingie nor married life abfolutely? but either, which, in any particular cale, is befh for a main's morals^ in which he will be the beji Man?
XV. Next comes the Proof. — I fee but one pro- pofition.
*■ Priefts are allowed, by Scripture, to marry.*
Matt. viii. 14. Shews that St. Peter was married.
Ads xxi- 9. implies that St. Pliilip was aifo married.
Ads xviii. 2. Ihews the fame of Aquila'^, Alfo I Cor. xvi. 19.
I venture
o John Fox, Vol.2, page 483.
_P Aquila feems to have been accompanied by his .wife Prif-
cUla while employed in teaching Chriftiaiiity. He alfo feems,
from Ads xvjii. 26. to have been more than an ordinary
teacher;
400 BOOK IV. AR r. XXXir. SECT. XV,
I venture to add, for the prefent, 1 Cor, ix. 5. It does not ihew that Paul was mar- ried ; but, according to our verfion, that he claimed a right to marry ; and that thofe who were called our Lord's Brothers, were married; that is, James'', Simon, &c.— -So much for Precedents. Matt. xix. 12. at the end, implies, that fome are, in fome fenfe, unai^Ie to live fingle : therefore there can be no command to do fo. — Priefts are not excepted. I Cor. vii. 2. 9. implies, that to marry may fome- times be a diUy : and no exception is made. Eph. V. 32. and preceding, might be confidered ; I would fubmit, whether St. Paul would have ufed his Allegory about Chrift and the Church, his Spoufe, if it was unlawful for St. Paul, or any other minifbcr of the Church, to marry. In I Tim. iii. 2. 4. and Titus i. 6. it is plainly implied, that Minifters may be married. — And from 1 Tim. iv. 3. it appears, that '-^forbidding to marry ^'' was one of the marks of f vvV times.
Heb. xiii. 4. fliews, that " marriage is honour- able in «//:" who fhall prefume to make an ex- ception } compare i Cor. vii. 2. Shall not a minifter connect himfelf as thole were connected, who were fixed upon for Minifters.?
The Jt^wi/// Priefts did marry undoubtedly.
If
teacher ; efpecially confideiiiig that Jpollos, to whom he ex- pounded tlic way of God more perfeftly, was himfelf a teacher.
^ See Art. vi, Setfl. xxv.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. XVI. XVII. 4OI
If it fliould appear, from any part of Scripture, that we are made judges of the evils of continuing lingle, it then becomes fcriptural to apply every thing which Hiftory and experience have taught us.
XVI. This may fufiice for direft proof j on this Article we muft have fome indireft. Not but fome of the arguments of our adverfaries are again fri' volons ; I Iliall content myfelf without proving, that St. Peter did cohabit with his'' wifej or that there was fuch a thing in the Latin Church as a man's retaining a wife after his appointment to the Miniftry : — Yet there zx& fome difficulties which are worthy of a folution, if v/e can fugged one.
XVII. It is urged that a^iX(pnv yvvxixa, in i Cor. ix. :;. is not rightly tranflated, a Si/ler, a V/ife; it fliouId be a Chrijlian woman : — and lb indeed Mr. Locke underftands it; one to zvait upon an Apoftle, and provide thofe things for )iim, which in modern times are provided at Inns.— The context is not about a right to marry, but about a right to have accommodations provided. — Our marginal tranf- ]ation of yuvatxa;, is, zvomnn. — l feel diffident about two fubftantives put together; they ieem to make an uncommon, or finguiar, expreffion; yet ahxfpnv yvvxi-aa, fhould mean fomething more than ahxipnv iingly; why is yuvatna added .^ if the expreffion had been ufed by St. Peter, inftead of St. Paul, I fhould have underftood it of his wife; and I fliould have taken the meaning of aSsK(pr,i/ from what we faid about Hermas's^ Sifier-wife.
Peter
"^ Rhem. Ted. on Matt. vili. 14. and on 1 Tim. ill. 3.
= Seft. II. — Perhaps one fhould not omit obferving, that Bcmines Chiiftiani, means the fame as Chriftiani without homi- nes; let the obfervation appl^ as it may- — But Fulke on R.hem. Teft. I Cor. ix. 5. makes a ciifFcjrence between yv)ia\:<a. a.l\\(prit and a^£X(pj;v •yvva.ixa.. And fo, between midieretnfororem, which is the expreffion of the vulgate, and fororem uxcrem, which he thinks right.
VOL. IV. C C
402 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIT. SECT. XVIII.
Peter is faid to have done that which Paul claimed a right to do : whom could Peter lead about but his wife? Paul was fmgle', and did not do the thing which he claimed aright to do; certainly he might have led about a Chriflian Woman. — Is the meaning this? 'might I not, if I pleafed, put the Converts to the expence of maintaining not only me, but a female companion ? For if I had a IVife^ as Peter has, I might take her with me, as he does ; not for the fake of conjugal endearment, that would impede my proper bufmefs, but as a fort of Si/Ier.* — If it were quite fure that all the perfons of whom Paul fpeaks in this paflage, were married", I fliould be apt to conclude, that he meant by 'yvvonKK, a Hlfe.
However, if i Cor. ix. 5. fiiould not make for the marriage of Priefts, it can make nothing againfi it.
XVIII. But it may be urged, that Matt. xix. 11, 12. and I Cor. vii. feem to recommend celi- bacy as fomethingy///)fr/or to married life; as more pure and perfect. I anfwer, this has been'' thought, yet without reafon, as far as I can judge. But, though that were the meaning of thefe fcriptures,
yet
' I Cor. vii. 7.
" Some have faid that a// the A poftles were married, except Paul; but I fancy they ufe this verfe as proof: taking for granted that <yy»j here means -wife. —Clemens Alexandrinus fays, that the Apoftles who led about with them a Sifter, a Wife, might make them ufeful in teaching women religion in private. And fo, " the doftrine of the Lord might enter into the clofet of women," " without any reprehenfion or evil fufpicion." Fulke on Rhem. Tell. 1 Cor. Lx. 5. fiomClem. Alex. Strom, lib. 3.
P. S. The notion of Clemens Alex, feems like my own;
that the Apoftles led about wives, not "at Whes, but as
y- Sijlers'" as afliftants. Might not an Apoflle take with him
^omenmcs :i real SiJ}er? if particularly well qualified for in-
ftrufting females?
^ See John Fox, Vol. i, page 3.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. XVIII. 40^
yet the pafTages cannot be thought, by recom- mending, to command men to hve fmgle;— rather the contrary; a meafure is recommended becaufe it cannot be commanded j they make no difference between Clergy and Laity, and it is abfurd to think, that it is fo much as recommended to all men to live fingle. — But let us confider the fenfe of the two paflages.
Matt. xix. II, 12. and i Cor. vii. maybe taken together. — Difficulties and obftacles lie in the way to marriage; a man is alarmed with not being able to get a Divorce (Matt. xix. 9, 10.)— or he is afraid, that if he marries, he Ihall not be able (i Cor. vii.) to execute the trad committed to him, of promoting a new Religion of divine original. Or if he really, at bottom, wifhes to marry, he propofes his difficulties as if he was led by them to dejire a fingle life : perhaps under fome degree of felf-deceit. He afks-'' advice. His advifer re- plies, as fuppofing him fincere, Marriage is an affair about which I can give you no advice upon the whole ; at leaft upon the whole I dare not advife you againjl\i\ you vnw^ judge for yourfelf; the decifion depends in a great meafure upon your o^sn feelings ; and thofe it is impoffible for me to enter into with fuch exaftnefs as to dire(ft you properly : all that the bed advifer can do, is only to fuggeft particular conJideratio7iSy you mud after- wards complete the deliberation. — So far I can fuggeft; that you need not make yourfelf uneafy as if it were an indijpenfible duty to marry; ex- perience fhews that it is not; for it (hews, that Nature has ^ difqualified fome perfons, -in body, or in mind; and others, men of the b^ft characters,
have
y Matt. xix. 10. — I Cox*, vii. i.
'^ Lardner's Works, Vol. g. page 284. from Beaufobrs's opi- nion of Bafilides.
c c 2
404 BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. XVIII.
have found it the grcateft good to give themfelves up to promote the interefls of Religion : thefe, by fecting their alfeftions on things above, may be faid to have difquaHfied themfelves : you may therefore he perteAly cafy on that head; it is no more expeftcd that all men Qiould propagate their fpecies, than that all plants or animals fhould. — But perhaps you may zvi/Ii to marry, and may really be afraid left, by marrying, you fhould involve )'Ourfelf in difficulties inextricable^; or left you fhould encumber yourfelf, and divert your aft'edtions, fo that you cannot exert yourfelf freely, in performing the works of virtue or piety^, which you meditate. I repeat, I cannot, I dare not ad- vife you not to marrj% on the whole; but I will mention anything that occurs to me : were you to marry, you might fail into fome " prefent" dijlrefs-j'' I can fee that things are lb fituated, that you might " have trouble in"* t\\tfejli" if you had a family to conduit; I can alfo inform you, that I feel no diffiitisfaftion with my own" fituation as a fingle man; and as to the things of religion, certainly the fewer worldly and domeitic'^ cares you have, the lefs diftracled will be your attention; and fo I could go on fuggefting particular motives ; but after all, you muft determine : if )'ou afk, zvhyy I anfwer, becaufe you only can judge whether it IS fafe for your morals^ to live a fingle life : that is the principal thing to be confidered, and you can only judge of your fecurity by your habits and your feelings : every motive muft be fubfervient to motives of duty : were I to prels you to live a fingle hfe, and you fell \niofvi, I fliould never be
able
" Matt. xix. g. ^ x Cor. vii. 37. 34, 35.
« Verfe26. ^^ Verfe 28. = Verfe 7, 8.
^ Verfe 33. 3_<. s Mctk 2.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. XVIII. 405
able to confole myfelf for having '* caft a/z^r^'' upon you;" — for having given you advice when you was not *-^ able to receive^ it \' — able^ I mean, as every one muft conceive me to mean, without its ruining your principles. ~~l^o; whatever good there may be in avoiding marriage, in any circum- itances, whatever evils marriage might occafion, they are not to be compared to evils of being per- petually tormented hy finfiil padiotis-, it muft always l3e " better to marry than to burn\"— If you feel yourfelf weak, do not attempt arduous tafks : " marriage' is honourable in all," and yet men may in fome fituations rightly prefer a fingle ftate ; and whatever virtue any man praftices, in any ftate, he fhould confider it as the gift"" of God; (Matt. xix. II.— I Cor. vii. 7.) But God forbid that any principle of ambition^ though of the moft laudable fort, Ihould ever induce you to avoid marriage, if you cannot condudl yourfelf rightly in a iingle condition; if you cannot fully refolve to do the
duties
^ Verfe 35. * Matt. xix. 12.
^ I Cor. vii. 9. ' Heb. xiii. 4.
'" Why is virtue in fingle life here faid to be the Giji of God, and not virtue in married life ? becaufe that would not have been to the prefent pzirpofe. The queftion probably is, may I live fingky notwithltanding fome dangers of fingle life? the anfwer is, yes, if you thiiik you fliall have the 'virtues of fingle life; but every man has not thefe particular virtues; which, when referred to God, is, it is not ghen to every man to live in fingle life. — Suppofe the qiiefiion had been, may I marry ^ notwithftandir.g feme dangers of a married life? (thofe of immoderate anxiety, worldly-mindednefs, &:c.) the anfwer ^vould be juft the fame; yes. if you think you Ihall have the 'virtues of a married life; but every man has not thofe parti- cular virtues ; or, it is not gi'ven to every man to live well in a married life. — St. Paul feems to conceive, that one man may (from his temper, habits, &c.) be moll virtuous in a fmgle ilate, another in a married ftate. " Every man hath his proper (peculiar) gift of God ; one after this manner, and another afttr that." (ver. 7.)
C C 3
406 BOOK IV. ART. XXXU. SECT. XVIll.
duties of it, and keep youilelf unfpotted from its corruptions.
Such is the meaning which the two paiTages obje(5led (Matt. xix. ii, 12. and i Cor. vii.) con- vey to my mind. They do not feem to give any abfolute preference, or afcribe any general per- fe(5lion to a (ingle ftafe ; hut only to dire(5l men how to condv.El themfelve- in cafe they are thrown into any fituations which fecm to them to be favourable to celibacy : — that abflinence from mar- riage is defireable in fuch particular fituations, on fome particular accounts, is a thing taken for granted, oxjiippofed.
If any one examines i Cor. vii. on the ground here defcribed, let him take notice when St. Paul fpeaks from authority, and when fpeaks of himjelf. JHe fpeaks his private judgment in verfes 6. 10. 25. 40. — And it might be well to compare Loi. ii. 20 — 23. according to the explanation of it before" given. — And to confider, that when St. Paul fays, (ver. 1.) " It is good ior a man not to touch a woman j" he muft fay it with a view to fome par- ticular fituations; fiid umverfally, it could not be true; nor can it more be called univerfal than, " let every man have his own wife," ver. 2. — We may add, that recommending occafional abftinence after marriage", preluppofes marriage, and is no dif- couragement to marry; rather an encouragement to very pious people; as it fhews them, that conjugal duty and piety are not incompatible.
If my idea of Matt, xix, 11, 12 ^ and of i Cor. vii. bcjuft, deliberations on marriage, as ri^ht or
wrong,
" Art. XIV. Sed. iii. *" 1 Cor. vii. 1;.
P I might have made t-xo cafes of thefe, but the fame rcafons applying to both, there muft have been fome tautology. In both I can fancy fome fclf-deceit, though aiifwers are given on the fame footing as if the propofais to live fingle had been cjuitc
fine ere:
BOOK IV. ART. XXXI I. SECT. XVIII. 4^7
wrong, ought to turn upon principles of moral utility, in each perfon's particular cir cum/lances.-- We may therefore obferve, that it may be much eafier to " attend upon the Lord without dil- tradionV in married Life, «ow, than during the firft propagation of the Gofpd.— That times of danger differ greatly from times oi fecurity : that the former call generally for >^/^ Minifters, the latter for married; as danger leffens the ftrength ot the paffions now under confideration, and fecurity increales it. And that it may often happen, that tiftngk ftate may be bell adapted to the duties of Jiudy and contemplation, and a married Hate to the ordinary fojloral duties ; in which a wife or a daughter may perform fome of Offices of an ancient Deaconejs : Such obfervations as thefe may be made, and may be of fome ufe ; yet they aioul4 always be underllood as capable of variation and
modification
fincere : unlefs any OTie mould allow_ Wtliing of a refined raillery in the anfwer given by Chriil himfdf. ^
In the firft cafe, I can fancy a pee'v^A 7^^» (Art; ^']-jf' XIV or Vol. 3. page 78.) vexed that he cannot follow his caprce in ^/iri/; -d -ging. with feme petulance,^ one had better not marry at .// than be fettered in this way ! hmk- ingthisa fufficient objeclicn to our Saviour's ftrianefs,-yet Jai.ns, as a ^ifciple (Matt. xix. :o ), who ;«-l^^ ^e r..W to aive up all tor Chrift, and perfuading himfelf that he reaUy lould. His Lord anfwers, do not be uneafy; YO^^^^f obliged to marry, if you do not approve it; and fo on, as
^^In'the fecond cafe, I can fancy a convert, who would wil- iindyperfuadehimfelf thathe is very zealous for the caufe of
ChH^ftiLty, ftruck with the -^--PrK^'r^^'^ iTvt S" to his domljlic enjoyments if he devoted himfelf wholly to pro- moting it. He hopes, (though he is fcarce corrfcious of fuch Tn hope) that St. Paul will tell him to nurry -^ ^l/^^^^^'p^^ \^^exprenh his difficulty by propofing to live >^/^.- St. Faal S-eatthf propofal candidly, but ferioully : and takes the occafiou of givingVod advice, generally ufeful; but does not (as per- haps had been expeaed) wholly rejea the propofaL
9 Verfe 35.
c c 4
4.08 BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. XIX.
raodlfic9,tion from the circumftanccs and dlfponf tions of particular men.
In fliort, if fome fituations are bcft filled by minifters who are married, and others by the un- married; and if a fenfe of duty may rightly impel fome minifters to marrj^ and others to remain fmgle ; neither a ftate of celibacy nor of marriage fhoLild be forbidden. And if anything whatfocver makes reflraints pernicious, that is enough for the purpofe of our Article.
Let thofe marry, who judge it beft to do fo; as many may ftill remain fingie as find, that a fingle life will, in their peculiar circumftanccs, " ferve better to godlinefs," either in preventing moral evil, or in promoting fpiritual good,
X I X. Not to conclude without fome Application^ I will juft obferve, that Dupin is, on this Article, fo tolerant, as to leave no room for difpute, or for reconciliation.
One might conclude with the end of the Homily ' againft Adultery.
* Homilies, prge 104. oflavo.
ARTICLE
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII, SECT. I. 409
ARTICLE XXXIII.
OF EXCOMMUNICATE PERSONS, HOV/ THEY ARE TO BE AVOIDED.
THAT perfon, which by open denunciation of the Church is rightly cut off from the unity of the Church, and excommunicated, ought to be taken of the whole multitude of the faithful, as an Heathen and Publican, until he be openly recon- ciled by penance, and received into the Church by a Judge tliat hath authority thereunto.
I. When we were treating of the Romlfh^ Sacraments, we divided Penance into private and public. Public cenfure of a church, efpecially that ignominious excifion, which feemed to degrade a man from the fociety of Chriftians, to that of malignant fpirits, has been always interefting; from the infinite importance of fuch a degrada- tion, and its powerful influence on the mind.
This Article may be conceived as including the whole fubjeft of Church-Difcipline. As all penal- ties are fubmitted to, in a church properly ^o called, independent of all political 7?<s'/fj-, through the dread of excommunication. In the tv.'entieth Article we fpoke of ceremonies, &c. but nothino- of Difcipline.
1 1 . L71 pre cations, ^ Art. XXV, Seft, iv.
410 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. II.
II. Imprecations^ of a direful nature, were in ufe amongft'' the Heathens^ and excliifion from facred rites, was alfo p^adtifcd^ — What C^far fays of the religious difcipline of the ancient Druids^ bears a ftrong refemblance to that in later times''.
The 'jcivs had the puniQimcnt of excifion^ by the Law of Mofes : — they were for fome offences, *' cut off from the Congregation" .'''* And the Rab- bins have multiplied excifions greatly ^ Their method of fi'pplying the lofs of their criminal jurifdidtion, while they were in captivity at Baby- lony was curious. They inflidled imaginary punilh- ments, in the belief, that they would be realized by Jehovah i as, for inftance, if a man committed an offence which, by tlie Law was punifhcd by Jioning, they had a confidence, that vyhen he was fentenced, he would providentially be killed by a flone.
Ezra X. 8. and Nehemiah xiii. 28, 29. give Ibme notion of penal feparation; but the exclu- lions or feparations there fpoken of feem to have been calm and quier. Some of the feparations, or anathemas, denoted by CIPT, were attended with execrations^. — Avoiding an offender, under fentence, was lifuaL — Degrees of excommunication, or ex- cifion, are differently defcribed, but there feem to have been a greater and a lefs. — In the time of Chrift, fome were call out of the Jewiih*" Syna- gogue ^
* Potter*5 Antiquities, Vol. 1. page 245.
« Wilfon's ArchzEol. Dift. under Excommanication.
** Cjefar de Bello Gallico, Lib. 6. Cap. 13. (or page aog. Edit. Variorum 1651, Lugd. Bat.)
« Exod. xii. ig. There is a number of texts in the Concord- ance under cut-off.
^ See Wilfon's Archsol. Did. under exci-Jian. Wotton's
Mifna, page 155, Vol. ift. Seder Koda(hin3> Title 7.
Cerethoth.
8 Forbes, 12. 3. 14.— Limborch, 7. 8. 12.
* John Lx. 22. 34. — xii. 42. — xvi. a.— Lukevi. 22.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. III. 411
gogtie-, — the word s'^i^aKov, John ix. 34. is, in the margin, tranflated, " excommunicated^^ I do not dillinguiih between ecclefiatlical and civil expul- lion amongft the Jews, as they weie under a Theocracy.
III. The fird: Chriftians carried on the ex- preffions to which they had been accuftomed as Jews; and in forae degree, followed the Jewifli praAices. We had occalion to fay fomething of this in explaining the word " accurfed^" in the eighteenth Article. — But what is contained in fcripture muft not be enlarged upon here, as it belongs, properly, to our Proof.
The difcipline of the early churches was mild, without being remifs, or unequal : free from every idea of partiality, or intereft. No offender was allowed to offer money, or other prefents. And the dignity of religious fociety was not let down, when the greatefh perfonages*' flood in need of reproof, or correal ion.
A learned man' fays, that excommunications began with Vidlor and Zephyrinus Biiliops of Rome : and that private pique occafioned them. He was no friend to eccleliaftical puniihments. — Tertullian", mentions the exclufion of Valentine and Marcion. Cave places Valentine in 120, Marcion in 130, and Victor in 192.
From the Canons of the Council of Nice, in 325, we fee, that offenders were excluded, as peni- tents indeed, for a long term, (that of ten years is mentioned once); but that the Bifliops, on per- ceiving firong marks of genuine remorfe, had fome
'difcretionary
* Art. XVII I. Se£l. viii.
^ An inibnce or two might be read out of Bingham, (Vol 2. page 50. col. 2. being part of 16. 3, 5.) : — that of falentinlan, ^nd that of Theodofms the Great.
' Selden.— See Neal, 2. page 194.
^- See Bingham, 16,3. 13.
412 BOOK IV. ART XXXIII. SECT. III.
difcretionary power of fliortening'' the penitence. — One of cur excommunications is not fuppofed to continue fo long as one of thefe. About this time, the penitents, uled to come to the churches, and within them as far as they were permitted, fliedding tears, and fhewing other figns of great contrition*^.
The lauk mentioned in our Article, of encourag- hig tliofe who are under cenfure, is one which was always noticed. We find in Cyprian's time, that the encourager fliared the fame fate with the firil '^ offender.
Augufim feems to have had an idea* that a Chriltian who died obRinate, and refufed to be reconciled to the Church, was guilty of the fm W againft the Holy Ghoft; — that fm was fometimes thought to be final impenitence ''. — Dr. Fulke thinks, that fuch obflinale perfon mufl have died an Healherf. Yet the ancient Church ufed fome- times to let offenders die under its difpleafure, though it gave them hopes of forgivenefs from God, and prayedfor them. — (Bingham, i6. 2. 16. end.)
The diftindion between a lefs and a greater excommunication, feems to I'uit the difference of offences, and to have prevailed at' all limes : the lefs being exclufion from facraments, &c. as a tem- porary puniflnmcnt, intended to make an offender
lerious,
" Firft Council of Nice, Canon eleventh.
•» This is mentioned in Dr. Prieftley's Hift. Corr. Vol. s. page 169.
P See Forbes, 12. 3. 2. — The fime thing is faid by Thomas a Becket, as decreed by fome eighth Synod ; fee John Fox> Vol. 1. page 286.
•1 Art. XVI. Seft. IV. Note.
' On Rlxm. Teft. Matt. xii. 31. — Wheatly on Common Prayer, page 4.65.
' Forbes, 12. 3. 10.— Bingham, 16. z. 7. -■■ , 16. 5. o. Blackftone and Burn.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXITI. SECT. III. 413
ferious, humble, penitent, and alarmed about his eternal falvation; and at the fame time to prevent his corrupting the good; — the greater being an unlimited exclufion from all intercourfe with the regular and pious; the cutting off of one whofe reformation feenied quite dcfperate : and that m terrorem, meant fometimes, perhaps, as a fort of foretafte of future condemnation. So that the lefs excommunication feems to have had chiefly in view the good of the offender; the greater, the good of the community.
In order to get an idea of Chridian excommuni- cation in the fourth, lifth and fixth Centuries, it may be fufficient to keep in mind this diftindion ; and to read the Form by v/hich Synejtus'' pafles fentence of the greater excommunication on An- dronicus. From which it appears,
1. Thr.t when an offender was excommunicated in one church, public notice was given to other churches.
2. That one excommunicated by one churchy, was confidered as excommunicated by all.
3. That if any church received \\\t offender, it fhared in his cenfure, fo far as to be thought to dejerve excommunication, though that punifl-i- ment did not extend to Bodies Corporate''.
4. That the offender was not only excluded from the Sacrament, but from private, familiar, convivial intercourfe; from marriage and Chrifhian burial. Sometimes the pronouncing of fuc'i fen- tence feems to have been attended with execrations'^.
Yet this expulfion was not confidered as annul- ling Baptifm ; fo that a perfon, if received back
into
* See Synef. Ep. 58. _ page 199. tranflated in Bingham, j6. 2. 8. — Cave places him in 410.
" Bingham, ]6. 3. 7, — Burn's Ecclef. Law.
* Bingham, Vol. 2. page 44. col. s. part of 16. 2. 17.
414 BOOK VI. ART. XXXIII. SECT. IV.
inro the church, need be re-baptized. Nor as taking away natural and r/V/V rights. The of- fender was fomctimes prayed^ for. — His children were educated as Chriftians.
As ecclefiallical iociety has no coercive power, no power over perfon or property, when a fentence was pad, before any 'Nation was Chrijiian^ there was a difficulty in getting it inforced. Apphcation was made in tljis cale, to Heathen powers. The Emperor Aurelian^ is mentioned'' as having lent his civil power to enforce the fentence of a Chrif- tian community.
IV. In the following centuries, as reafon grew weaker, and fuperflition ftronger, excommunica- tion kept alTuming a very terrible appearance; and as it was religiouHy obeyed, its effedU were truly tremendous. But if men are too often threatened, though they may flirink for a while, they will begin to look -about for means of efcaping the florm; — and thofe who are to execute threats will grow re- mifs. When excommunications came to be often repeated, they began to lofe their terrors; and as it is human to run from one extreme to another, they at length came, perhaps, to be too little re- garded. But this obfervation includes fome length of time.
Excommunication rofe to a great height in the ninth Century % but ftill higher in the eleventh, twelfth and thirteenth. — Then it was reckoned a more terrible puniflmient, than death itfclf. It diflblved all thofe connexions and mutual obliga- tions, by which the world is generally kept from running into anarchy and diforder; the connexions of conlanguiniiy and affinity; the obligations of
civil
y Bingham, 16.2. 5. ^ Forbes, 12. 3.2.
* A. D. 270—275. •» Bingliaiii, 16. 2. 3.
« Chambers's Di^ilionary.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXII.I. SECT. IV. 4I5
civil authority and fubjeaion.— The pra6lice of iffuing national Interdi5is is faid to have begun .about'^the year 1160; but I will read to you Fox's account of the excommunication of the Emperor Henry IV. by Hildcbrand, (or Gregory VII.) in the year 1076 or 1077, as the firft inftance of the kind;— and Hume's account of the Excommuni- cation of King John of England, in the year 1206, as conneded with ourfelves^
Nor has there been greater extravagance in the efFeds of excommunication, than in the manner in which it has been been conduded. Ceremonies have been ufed, more fuitable to the orgies of the Furies, than to fupporting the kingdom of the Prince of Peace : torches, bells, trampUng under' foot, execrations compofed and recited in fet forms, have ferved to exprefs the rage of the fuper- llitious zealots, and to annoy the wretched de- linquents.— The Dead have not been fuffered to reft in quiet : and Brute animals, fuch as rats, flies, caterpillars, have had excommunication denounced againft them. — As thefe could not beejeded out of any Chriftian community, I Ihould rather have called it Imprecation : However, as a fentence was to be paft, it was right to give the rei fair play.— It is faid, that an Advocate v^as allowed thefe little intruding animals; an inftance, if true, of wonder- ful candour and fair dealing \
Indeed,
^ For the infrances here mentioned, fee Bingham, 16.3. 7. and 16. 2. 5— Fox's Afts and Monuments, Vol. i.page 231. 234._And Hume's Hiftory of England, A. D.,1206.
^Chambers's Dift. from Fevret, a Lawyer of Dijon, who died in 1661, and is faid to have written a good Treatife de Mufu. (Ladvocat). — Of infult to the dead, the inftance of Wickliffe has been mentioned, when we fpoke of the Council
ofConrtance, Seff. 8. Art. xxi. Sea 11, —Fox, ^515.
Bingham, 16. 3. i2.-^Burnet, page 460. oaavo.
4l6 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIir. SECT. V.
Indeed, in more ancient times, when it was the cuftom to recite aloud the names of all thofe de- parted Chriftians who had diflinguilhed themfelves, and who had been recorded in the Diptychs^ or folding books, it was fometimes found, or thought, necelTary to correB the^ Lifts : fometimes a name was to be inferie^, even though the peifon had been under cenfure, if unjuftly; and fo, fome- times, a name was to be erafecl^ if any unknown offence appeared : fuch erafing would be a kind of anathema. But if pofthumous praife be thought worth giving, it implies that pofthumous blame is to be given alfo, when deferved.
The meaning of curfing/^^' Bell^ booky and candle ^ may be gueffed at from what has been faid, but I will read Dr. Prieftley's^ fliort account of it.
The Schoolmen enter into nice queftions concern- ing excommunication; and it is a fubjedt not barren ! — They endeavour to inveftigate how far God will confirm an erroneous or oppreffive fen- tence:— how a p;ood man is to behave under fuch a'' fentencc ; what effe6t any fentence, juft or un- juft, is to have upon a man's friends or relations; with what limitations and rcftrictions he is to be avoided, &c. &c.
We are told by Burn, that the Synod held at London in 1126, agreed to receive no unknown communicants at any church, for fear of receiving fuch as had been excommunicated,
V. I imagine we may conceive Excommunica- tion as in confiderable force in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, but that force rather decaying. IPlckliffe was excommunicated by the Pope; and in the Council oi Conjlancc wc find fevcral propofitions
condemned,
*" Bingham, 16. 3. 12.
5 Hilt. CoiT. \'ol. 2. page 179. *> Forbes, jj. 4 41. &c.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. V. 417
condemned, in which he had afferted, that he ought to account' fuch Excommunication for nothing.
By the time of the twenty-fifth Seflion of the Council of Trent, the Romanijh began to adopt fome moderation and caution on this fubjedt : and even to alTign experience as the ground of their moderation : cum experientia doceat (i temere, aut Icvibus ex rebus incutiatur, magis contemni quam formidari, et perniciem potius parere quam falu- tem. — Still they retained the method of excom- munication, in both degrees. Excommunicatus veto quicunque, fi poft legitimas monitiones nori refipuerit, non folum ad facramenta et commu- nionem tidelium ac fnmiliaritatem non recipiatur, ?cc. but at laft he may be profecuted for Herejy\ which offence would be puniflied by death.
While on the fubjedt of the Romanifts, I will juft add, that their Sacrament of Penance, and particularly ConfeJJion^ fuperfedes\ in modern times, other kinds of difcipline:— and that Diipin^ makes no objedion to this Article.
Since the Romanifts appear to have been fb moderate at the time when the Reformed Churches compiled their Confeffions, we cannot expe6l to find in thofe Confeffions any great afperity againft the Church of Rome. That of Augjhurg'^ refers to paft grievances ; but I do not perceive that any other does ; except that of Wittemberg, in blaming the Romilh Theory. Several of them feem de- firous to reprefent the Church of Chrift as having more bufinefs with teaching, comforting; or kindly rebuking^ than with excommunicating. His king- dom,
' Baxter on Councils, page 432. ^ Burnet. ^ Third Append, to Mofheun.
"^ Sviitagma, page 59. VOL. IV. D D
4l8 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. V.
dom, fay they, is not of this world; the isroXjTeua» of Chriftians is in Heaven". But I will mention a few particular remarks, which I made in running over the confeflions of the reformed. — The Hel- 'vetic Confefiion is very wary: cautious of plucking up Corn with the Tares.—'Y\\t EngUjli (by Bifhop Jewel) is for removing Scandals^ for the fake of the good" : and underftands, by the Keys (as the ancients did) the true fenfe of Scripture. — The Scotch excludes from Sacraments by making ex- amination neccffary for admiffion. — The Dutch is for difcipline, and for rebukes from the Senate or Prejbytery. But gets off by faying, that all will go well when good Eledions are made.— The Con- fefiio Argentinenjis (Strafburg) declines fevcrity.- — That of Augjhurg enters fully into the difference between civil and ecclefiaftical power, and mixed ; is mild, but allows of expulfion, fine -lv humana, fed verbo : it is for warding off Herefy. — The Saxon holds the mild dodrine. — And that of /-f 7/- temberg is more intent on denying the recl:itude oi the Papal ecclefiaftical government, than on de- fining a more perfeft fchcme''.
The Socinians^ in their Racovlan Catechifm, fpcak as if they would avoid the company of an offender, and yet take fome opportunity of admo- niQiing him as a brother. Or if this does not reclaim him, then tbiey would ba}iijh him from the Church of Chrijl, and no longer own him for a brother, but count him fur an Alien'*.
I do not recollect anM.hin*i in the time of Henry Vlll. worth mentioning : private difcipline
Iccms
"John xviii. 36. — Phil. iii. 20. "Syntagma, page 63. 116.
P For thefl' pafiliges, fee SyntPigma, pnge 156. 179. 235.60. f;8. 1S3. (the paging begins a fecoiul timt). ^ De Ectlcfiu C'hrifti, Cap. 3, pji^e 346.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. VI, 4I9
feems to have confifhed in Confeflion ; and public, in burning Heretics.
In the reign of Edward VI. the Reformatio Legum takes very great notice of Excommunica- tion; and gives Forms' of great lengthy confidering the fize of the whole Code of Laws. And there are two' fhort chapters on the principal bufmefs of our Article, encouraging offenders under fentence of excommunication. — The puniihments feem very fevere.
In one of the Canons'- of James I. offenders are ordered to be denounced four times a year.
VI. When we come lower, we Ihould divide Englilh Chriftians into three forts ; EraJIians^ Puri- tans, d.nd Moderate Church of England men.
Some were called EraJiianSy from following the notions of one Erajlus, a German, who died in 1582. He was a Phyfician, but wrote fome trea- tifes on Church-government. On Excommuni- cation, and the power of the Keys. He reduces all Church power to perfuajion; no one, he holds, Ihould be kept from the Sacrament^ but only per- funded that he ought not to receive it unwortJiily. Chriftianity is offered to all. — As fome provifion muff be made for ecclefiaftical offences, he ranks them with ^/v'/7 ones; and holds, that all offences of every kind, are to be puniflied by the civil Magiftrate. — This idea was favoured, in the dif- putes in the time of our Charles the Firft, by fome men of great character and ability ; both in Parliament, and in the Affembly of Divines held in 1645.— ^^/r/^w, Whitlocky and Dr. Liglitfooty are mentioned" as favouring it.
Oppofite
•■ Page, or fol. 74. and 8c. * Cap. 6. II. oppofite pnge 77. 83. ' Canon 6;. " Neal, Vol. 2 page 97.
D D 2
420 BOOK IV. ART. XXXII I. SECT. VII.
Oppotite to tliefe were the Puritans, or Prejbytc- riauSy who held, that excommunication ought to be only of a Jpiriiunl nature, and deprive a man only of Tpiritual'' comforts; but that it was in- tirely in the hands of tiie Church, and wholly independent on the civil magiftrate; and ought not to be adminiftered by Laymen. A party of thelc, in 1645, made a ftrong attempt to eftablifh, as their right, a power of excluding any Chriftian from the Sacrament, fubject to no control from the ftate ; which they were to exercifey'wT divino ; the Alfembly and the Parliament faw the neceffity of preventing fuch an impcrium in imperio; and the Prefbyterians were dilappointcd.
The third, moderate fort of Knglifli Ciiriflians allowed, with the Eraflians, that a fociety merely ecclellattical had no power of touching perfon or property; and, with the Prclbyterians, that fuch a ibciety is, in its nature, independent on the Slate; but afErmed, that it is wholly i/;//>r^^/f(//'/t' for an ecclefiaftical iociety to be compofed of the fubjecls of any State, and to exill within that State, with- out connecting itfclf with the civil power; without borrowing from it llreng-th and torce, and affiilins: it with good ientiments and principles, productive of obedience for confcience fake-\
VII. He who keeps thefe three forts of Englifh Chriflians mi his mind, will want very little farther information. It may not however be amifs to mention the modern Baptifls. They feem' to follow our Saviour's directions given Matt, xviii. 15 — 17. exactly, and with very good etfedt : no wonder; it is an admirable* plan : it is applied to
differences
* Ncal, Vol I. page yi^.\. — ^^x alfo pa[?;e 158. y This Uibjcifl is treated Boc k. 111. Cluip. x 1 v .
* Wall, 4to. page 455.
■ D.-. Pricftley feems to fpeak ot it with plcafure. — Hid. Corr. Vol.2, page 167.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. VIII. 42I
differences l:)etween individuals ; and if any man is j^uilty of fcandalovis immorality, he is excluded from the Brotherhood. — The Diffenters complain of our want of flriftnefs in Church Difcipline, and with reafon : Dr. Wall laments it, yet makes as good an Apology as the Truth^ will allow.
VIII. There has been fomething greatly dif- trejfing in the cafe of thofe, who were excommuni- cated by a Church, merely becaufe they preached doctrines contrary to its own, when they thought themfelves obliged in Confcience to do fo. To have fuch people fufFer all the rigours of excom- munication, is to perpetuate every corruption, and to preclude all improvement.
It is as much the nature of religion to approach gradually towards pertection, as of anything elfe. This was the diltrefs of IVkkliffe^ in the fourteenth Century, and of the Puritans^ at the beginning of the feventeenth; and very cruel hardihips they fuffered. Some expedient fliould have been in- vented to make a difference between criminals and confcientious men. We now have oncj Tolera- tion^ : and nothing can fliew its excellence more clearly, than the diftrelfes now mentioned. The Scripture fays, *' come out^ of her;" quit a church which really appears elTentially corrupt : But there was no way to get out, with tolerable fafety, when there was no toleration : nor Vvfithouf making a party large enough to throw all things into confufion.
In
^ Wall, 4to. page 454. c Wickliffe died in j 384.
'1 In 1604. Neal i. page 429. — See Warb. Alliance, page yx." ^Book I. Chap. 5. Sed. 2.
« Book III. Chap. xiv. Se<El. xv. ^ Rev. xviii. 4, — 2 Cor. vi. 17.
422 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. IX.
In Bhxktlone'ss Commentaries, we find, that both the lefs and the greater excommunication iViU fubfift in our own country. The lefs excluding from facraments ; the greater from all Society. — The coercive power is lent by the common law ; which excludes the excommunicated from all acts of probiis et legalis homo ; from the acts of Jury- man, Witnefs, &c. — Burn gives us good infor- m .tio nB this matter.
I take Warburton's Alliance to be the Book which gives the beft idea of the Theory of civil, ecclcfiaftical, and mixed power, and confequently of Excommunication''.
IX. From Hiftory we deduce Explanation.
In the title^ " excommunicate perfons," may mean pcrfons under either fort of excommunication, the lefs or the greater : — the greater growing out of the lefs.
*' Open denunciation" — refers to the practice already mentioned; our fixty-fifth Canon was made' after our Article.
" Of the Church," — what is meant by the church, appeared under the nineteenth and twen- tieth Articles; any particular church, confidering itfelf as making a part of the univerfal church. — And the conduct of the ancient churches towards each other, fuits our former accounts very well, as given in thofe Articles.
" Rightly" — what we have to do, then, is built upon the fuppofition that a pcrion is rightly ex- communicated :— that may fave us trouble. It would be a great hardlhip to be obliged to avoid any one whom we thought injured. —
And
c Vol. 3. page loa. 410. '' See Imlex, and 2. 3. 3.
i The ninth Chapter of the Reformatio Legum, Dc Excom- municatione, is intitled, Excommunicatorum denunciatio.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. IX. 423
And who, according to our Article, is to he judge but ourfeJves^?
*' Cut off,'* is a fcriptural expreffion. — Rom. ix. 3.— Gal. V. 12. — It frequently occurs, as ap- pears from the Concordance. Excijion we have had before.
" The unity of the church" — if a particular church is a conftituent part of the univerfal Church, then cutting off from the part^ is cutting off from the zvJwle ; from whatever link an infecft is driven, it is driven from the chain. Cyprian wrote, De Unitate Ecclefia. Allufion is made to fuch texts as John xvii. ii. 21, 22.--Eph. iv. 3. and 13.
"The voliole multitude ol \\\q. faithful," — means all particular churches, conftituting together the miiverfcd church j the denunciation ufed to be made to all churches within reach : as we have feen.
*^ As an Heathen and Publican," — regarding any one as an Heathen^ is regarding him as a Man; which is leaving him all the rights of humanity. — Regarding any one as a 1-ublican, is not what we are obliged to in the literal fenfe? we cannot be obliged to look upon an excommunicated perfon, as a colleclor of taxes ; as an excifeniaUy or cuftom- houfe-oliicer: but only in that light, in which a Publican ufed to be regarded in our Saviour's time '. - Our Article is very indulgent in not faying,
that
^ Suppofe a man thought, with the EralHans, that no man was rightly cut off: — need he fcruple to afTent to,this Article? would it not, indeed, be to him a dead Letter? according to Book IT I. Chap. IX. Seft. IX.?
' It is only fair to take the meaning of the word Heathen m the fame way; in that light in which the Jetus confidered it : Hill from the ftory of the Good Samaritan, an Heathen i^ a man,
D D 4
424 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. X.
that we are to oi'DiJ'" an excommunicated perfon ; or refufe him our company on every occafion : or help to drive him from the Lord's table. — 'Our Saviour fate down at meat with l-'ublicans and Sinners, when his bufmefs was to endeavour to reform them".
*' Until," fhews that the excifion here fpoken of is nox. final, except the offender chufes to make it fo: — his continuance in his ftate of difgrace, muft be folcly owing to his refufing to undergo the punifhment, or penance, to which he is fentenced.
*' Openly" — implies notification^ fuch as was ufed when the fcntence had palled : — the Article fays, " by open denunciation." — The excommunicated are not to be fuftercd to infinuate themfclves gra- dually into the church •. as they were excluded, fo they are to be received, h\ judicial procefs.
x. Now proceed we to our Proof. — And what is to be proved ?— * Suppofe a perfon rightly fuf- pended from the uie of Chriflian ordinances, every Chriftian ou^ht to be cautious of fruftratine; fucli diicipline.' This mufl be clear enough in itlelf ; but ftill our bufmcfs feems to be, to take a view of what the Scripture fays on the fubjeclj either on the bufinefs of fetting afide thofe whole conti- nuance in Society is likely to do harm : or on the nature of our behaviour towards them, uhen they are fet afide. — I will take fome pali'ages in the order in which they lie, without dividing them into two heads. — Matt, xviii. 15—18. — Rom. xvi. 17. — I Cor. V. 4, 5. 7. 9. II. 13.— 1 Cor. xv. 33.— xvi. 22. — 2 Cor. ii. 10. — 2 Cor. vi. 17. —
2 Their.
" The title mentions ri-oirihr;^, but no precife degree of it ; and we do not fubfcribe to the iit/ts of the Articlei. " ivlatt. ix. IQ.— — — xi. ig.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XI. 42^
1 Their, iii. 6. 14. — 2 Tim. ii. 16 — 18. — Titus iii. 10, 1 1. — 2 John i. 10, 11.
XI. I flioiild think that theie texts muft fatisfy any man, that Chriftian Churches have good rca- fon for avoiding, in a confidcrable degree, thofs under fentence of excommunication, when there is no ground to fufped: the fentence to be itnjuji.^^ Some of the expreffions want confidering; but they are intelh'gible enough to be real proofs-, fome of them were very fparingly ufed by the ancients"; probably, becaufe their meaning was too indefinite for them to be ufed without feme comment, or doubt; and perhaps becaufe they feemed ioo terriblg to be ufed by Man.
I will fay frankly in what light fome of them llrike me.
As to Matt, xviii. 15 — 17. It feems at firft to relate only to private wrongs. Your Brother of- fends you ; you are firft to expqftulqte with him; if that does not fucceed, you are to delire a few friends, men of good character, to be witnejjes of your next expoftulation; fomething may have been mifunderftood : — they are not prejudiced againft the offender, as you may be fuppofed to be : nor he againft them : he may not be aJJiamed to fubmit to them^ though he may \Q) you. If this fail, ftatc the cafe to the Ex.xAyicri;*, to fome reputable focicty; perhaps to thole with whom you commonly alio- ciate in religious'"' worfliip; and defire their ^r/^i-
traticn,
" Bingham, 16. 2. 16.
P Selden lays, the Eccleji^ were " courts of Lnvv whkh then fate at Jerufalem ;"— (hefays this in the Houfe of Commons, in 1645;— Neal, Vol. 2. quarto, page 194) —But were thty yeivijh CoiM-ts} then i Cor. vi. i. or rather the {^me /riuci/i/e, would be againft referring to them ; and there could not he any C//;-//?/«;/ Courts of Law fofoon. — It does not feem likelv, that Chrlft fhould fend his new Difciiiles to Je-jytfti Courts of Lai'.\ —Yet it may be faid he had nO Difciples j or none formed
into
426 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XI.
tration. If they favour your opinion, you may have confidence in it : and having done every thing in your power towards a reconciliation, you may give it up as dejperate, except your adverfary makes fome fubmiffion. And you may avoid the Society of him who was once your Brother, in the fame manner in which the ftric^ Jews avoid the company of Idolaters, and of thofe difreputable pcrfons whom the Romans are com- pelled to employ in collecting their tribute.
I ufed to think this direftion belonged only to individuals ; but the words which immediately follow, give it a different appearance. " Verily I fay unto you, Whatfoever ye lliall bind on earth, Iliall be bound in Heaven; and whatfover ye fliall loofeon earth, fliall be loofed in Heaven.*' — Theie words mufl be a declaration to religious Society. They had indeed been before addrefTed''^ to Peter only; but with fome previous declarations; as, that the Church of Chrifl fliould be founded on a rock, that no powers (hould be able to " prevail againft it :" and that Chrill would give unto Peter *' the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven ;" all which things fliew, that Peter was to bind and to loofe as a ruler in the Church. — It now therefore feems to me, that, though no plan can be better calculated for deciciing diifeiences amongft indivi- duals than the one here propofcd, yet an offence, when transferred from the judgment of a few friends to a courminity^ might be changed irom a private into a public wrongs and tlierefore when
fentence
into a Body. But might not Chriftians, as loon as they af^ed focially, have fomtrthing cor refpor: ding to Jewilh Courts? — If they had, the term would be ufed for them. Comp.irc Matt. V. «i, 22. btill recourfe is to be liatt 10 arbitral. en, of men in fonie fon of public capacity. 1 Matt. xvi. 19.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XI. 427
lentence had been pronounced, all men might be equally obliged to treat the offender " as an Hea- then man and a Publican." Moreover, a good Chriftian may not only be offended by wrongs done to himfelf, but by any bad actions which will bring difgrace upon the Churchy or upon Religion. And the procefs laid dov/n Matt, xviii. 15 — 17. - — would Ix equally applicable to all kinds of offences.
The terms bindi;ig and loofing^ and " the Keys of the kingdom of Heaven," have occationed many differtations, and much controverfy. It leems to me as if it were no way neceliary to have a precife idea of their meaning. — For whom fhould it be wanted? not for the Governors of t lie Church; they can but do their befl: in ufing their authority for the good of mankind: — not for the governed -, enough is intelligible to convince them, that God will ratify the ads of thofe, who do every thing faithfully and modeftly as his Agents. A fliort and figurative commiffion, is not likely to define nicely the extent and nature of the authority which it confers; neither does fuch defining feem to fall in with the ufual methods of Scripture.— Having the Keys of the kingdom of Heaven ap- pears to me to mean, having a pov;cr to baptize and admit men into the Chrillian Religion, But the Chriftian Religion, though frequently called the Kingdom of Heaven, leads, of couife, all things going on regularly, to the kingdom of Heaven above. As to binding and loofi.n^^ let it fignify what it will, if God binds in Heaven what his Church binds on Earth, and looles in Heaven what his Church loofes on Earth, He confitrms the a£is of his Church ; which is our principal con- cern. Let binding mean tyingy or excommuni- cating, or obliging us to do a thing, or let it
mean
4ZS BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XII. XIII.
mean forbidding\ tlie whole fentence comes to the fame thing. God ratifies what his Minillers cnacl.
XII. Of Rom. xvi. 17. we may remark, that if a Church was well conllituted, it mioht with piopriety take cognizance of caufmg divifwis^ as an offence or crime ; and he who, by a Jury, or Council, or other Judges, Ihould be found guilty of caufmg divifions, might juftly be punilhed; and particularly, avoided'^.
XIII. The next part of Scripture to which we come, is the fifth Chapter of the firfl. Epiflle to the Corinthians. In this, the Apoftle repeatedly orders an offender to be (afi out of the Church : what kind of perfon he was, and what was the nature of his offence, Mr. Locke has fufficiently explained '. But I do not perceive that he has given any opinion with regard to the expreffion, delivering the Offender unto Satan. Here the whole church of Corinth, including St. Paul's vote by Proxy, as it were, are to deliver an offender to Satan, in the «^z/;it'and by the ^ow^r of Chrift. In i Tim. i. 20. St. Paul fays, that he himfelf delivered two offenders to Satan. The end and purpofe for which the Church of Corinth were to deliver over their offender, was, *' for the deftruction of the Flejl!^ that the Spirit [might] be ^^lW in the day of the Lord jefus." — The end for which St. Paul de- livered Hyracneus and , Alexander to Satan, was, that they might "learn not to blajpliemey — Now, how much evil fliould be referred to Satan, is arbitrary : to rejed the general belief of the agency
of
' Wotion's MJfna, Vol. 1. page 309, &c,
' It might be confidered how far this ofFence cf caufing divifions would refemble promoting Sedition; feduciiig military Jserfons from their allegiance, bringing a malicious profecution ; offering a fi ivolous petition to our Houfe of Commons, &c.
' Locke on i Lor. v.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XIII. 429
of rpirits, is narrow-minded, and philofophy falfely fo called ,— to refer to them particular events in a. literal fenfe, is fuoerftition; but the ufual inde- finite manner of referring evil to them, meanincr that they may caiife evil, you know not how, de- pends upon cuftom, education, fancy. The JezvSy religious at the fame time and ignorant, referred, in their language, niany" events to them; and the Apoftles had no reafon to change their expref- fions. Indeed, Wkkliffe refers as many things to the agency of Sathanas^ as any Jews ever did. — ThtfaJJiion now is, to take no notice of Spirits as the promoters of evil, or of good. Not that we differ from our predeccifors as to any facis^ but only as to modes of exprefTion, — St. Paul would Ipeak to thofe who were accuftomed to refer evil to Satan, and would therefore naturally ufe their language. Inftances are numerous. It would be natural for him to call depriving any one of Reli- gion, delivering him lo Satan^. This may be iliuf- trated by Acts xxvi. i8. and i Pet. v. 8. — As converting any one to the Chriflian Religion, was turning him *' from the power of Satan," fo fuf- pending him from the ufe and exercife of that Religion, was delivering him back to the fame power. And Satan, being always, in men's notions, like a fierce and hungry lion, prowling about, feeking whom he might devour, would be ready to feize upon the prey delivered to him. — Yet this language about Satan was not ufed as if every thing faid was known to be plain /^c?; but only in away of eloquence^ when (om^ feHtimental q^qOi was to be produced; fome good principle encouraged, Ibme bad one difcou raged-".
But
"^ Art. X. Sed. l. and other places tliere mentioned. ^ Sec Concordance, Satan.
y Our reafoning here is only an ex'emplificatlon of die ele- tnenti. laid down hx the tenth and fcventeeath Articles.
43'^ B-OOK IV. ART. XXXllI. SECT. XIII,
But why is fuch language uled, as that a man was to be dehvered to Satan " for the deftrudion of the FlefJir"'-^o\: that he mis-ht learn not to hlafpheme^ — "They?f//^'* is often ufed, \w Scrip- ture for [ht JieJJiiy^ appetites y and nothing could have a (Ironger tendency to break their force, than the mortification of being difgracefiilly banillicd from honourable fociety; from thofe who had lltewn conilant fidelity and affection j and configncd 10 ignominious folkude.
The offender of wMiom the expreffion is ufed, h called the Fornicator. — The fame kind of mortifi- cation, would lower a man's fpirits, lb as to take from him all inclination to blafpheme : abufive lan- guage proceeds trom an infolent and haughty fpirit. (2 Pet. ii. 18.) — Perhaps there is nothing which has a greater efFecl upon a feeling mind, than a confcioiifnefs of having loft the efteem of the wor- thy and benevolent ; than being an objedt of general averfion or contempt; even though foftened by gentlcncis and goodnel's. Few men are fo har- dened as to be able to bear being generally fliunned*
and
^ Rom. viii. I — 15. particularly ver. i; & 6. and fee Park-
hurlt's fifth fenfe of Sa^i. The lielh fometimes fignifies the
BcJy; and bodily ills are afcribed to Si.ita>i. Job i. and ii. 2.
2 Cor. .\ii. 7. (foie exes): — Ambrofe makes (/^eG^oit mean cajli- gatio; fee ForbtS, 12. 3. 3.
Being in the Jlcjti, is being in this Life Phil. i. 24. — • Col. ii. I. 5.— (All flofh, means all men) — fo i Cor. vii. cS. troubles /« //;^ Mv/;. Mr. Locke calls ivcrljly troubles. I flip- pofe melancholy or drfpair might be called troubles in the flefli : I do not tliink our interpretation of, delivering to Satan, would be materially hurt, by taking fli-Jh, in any of tliefe fenfes.— - Sumctiiing was faid of (Jsgcvr/xa o-agxocj Roin. viii. 6. under Art jx SolI XX r.
* Our familiar 1 mguage Ciys, bciiMT fliunned, i^c. is the Devil : fiippofe any one was to ftt on crliiciring ih.ii txprclhon grammatically, as a literal one! — Yet perhaps it would bear
criiicifm as well as, ttelivering to Sntan ? I'liis bring'; to
mind that other familiar phrafe, of fending to Coventry, the nioft fcvcre of puniflimcnts to fome difpofition«.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XIV. 43I
and avoided. — This mortification, if it took a riglu courfe, would put the Spirit in the bed way to " be faved in the day of the Lord Jefus."
XIV. On I Cor. xv. '2>Z' ■"■ ^^^^ make no re- marks ; it agrees with i Cor. v. 6, 7. which is part of St. Paul's argument for calling out the Corin- thian Fornicator.
And I Cor. xvi. 22. has been difcufled under the eighteenth Article.
2 Cor. ii- TO. is an argument in favour ofpunirti- ing in the name and by the authority of Chrift, becaufe it proves that forgivenefs may be in his name; and forgivenefs impHes previous punifli- ment.
2 Cor. vi. 17. is fometimes, I think, u fed for an argument; but it only orders Chriftians to fepa- rate themfelves from'' Idolaters, not from diforderly Chriftians.
2 ThefT. iii. 6. 14. feems intelligible, and may ferve as a comment on i Tim. i. 20.
2 Tim. ii. 16 — 18. is not fo much a proof in itfelf, as an auxiliary to i Tim. i. 20. Hymenem being mentioned in both.— The bad effeds of reli- gious error arc ftrongly exprefled.
Titus iii. 10, 11. ferves to (liew, that mere falfc do5irine may be a fufhcient reafon for feparation.— Unity of DoEirine was proved in the third Book, to be neceflary for obtaining the ends of religious Society.
2 John, verfes ic, ii. ihews, that the feparation for falfe doclrine, is to be extended to doniefiic familiarity : private conferences have perverted mam' : compare 2 Tim. iii. 6. Not that men are always
to
^ This ao^rees with Seidell's obfervatioii, Nea!, Vol.. 2. page 194: only he would make all the feparations enjoined, to be of this kind. — Selden's fpe^ch wp.s mca;ioned before; Seil. xi.
432 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XV.
to refufe their attention to religious argument; but men are not to liften to fuppofed Herefy Ivghtly, without caution and deliberation. — 1 mean not to make any caution for one religion more than another. The provifion here made, is for the People :- x.\\Qy were didinguiflied from P/'/76/o/)//c';-i in our fecond Book.
XV. As we have Ipen the authority on which Chriftian offenders are fufpended from the ufe of the ordinances of rehgion, and avoided by their brethren, we fhould take' fome notice of thoic texts of Scripture, which may difpofe us to rejlore him to his former ilate, in cafe of his fmcere re- pentance and humiliation ;— as the reftoratioa to tivour fcems to make an effential part of our Article.
Avoiding a perfon, with a right temper of mind, mud fall very far fliort of depriving him of the rigljts of humanity. It ought to exprcfs no bitter- nefs, or acrimony; but a kind concern^ a benevo- lent folicitude, an earneftnefs to rectify every thing wrong, an anxious wilh for the return of a truly Chrillian difpofition. The prayers of Cyprian "" would be, no doubt, exprcllive of all this. De- feflation of a crime, is always to be diftinguilhcd from hatred of the Criminal. — From i Cor. vii. 12, 13, it appears, that a Chriftian wife may live with an heathen hufband'. therefore taking a perloa as an Heathen^ does not extend to dillblving the feveral relations of human life — St. Paul, as before mentioned, ordered an offender to be excluded from the Church of Corinth; but in giving his Cider he faid no more than what he thought necefnry to make the Corinthians execute it. And when he found they /;(7(^/ executed it, nothing can exceed the tendernefs which he (hewed, left any
fnalei'jlcnt ' Forbes, 12. 3.2.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XVI. 4.^^
tnakvolent feverity fliould be iifed, or the offender " rwallowed*^ up with over-much forrowy He be- came diffident of his own upright judgment, and extremely cautious left he fhould be tempted [ttm\itQ A by Satan) to indulge his well-grounded indigna- tion fo as to delay his forgivenefs (as the minifter of Chrift) longer than neceflky required. It is with this idea that he introduces the words, " if I forgave anything, to whom I forgave it, for your fakes forgave I it, in the perfon of Chrift; left Satan Ihould get an advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices*."
After citin^ 2 Theft', iii. 14. in order to enable us to punifh, we Ihould read the next verfe, to prevent all needlefs feverity of punifliment; and all ufe of it on a wrong principle. — As a general plan of puniftiing Chriftian brethren, we may, laftly^ take Gal. vi. i.
So much for direct proof.
XVI. In the way of indired proof I will only propole one ohjeEiion. ■ Is it to be conceived, that when a man is cut off from the Church, he really becomes, in all refpects, an Heathen ? — that would be, according to what has been faid under the thirteenth and eighteenth Articles, a thing greatly to be dreaded. To this queftion I anfwer, God muft finally judge of that; there will be no wrong at his Tribunal; yet as it is taken for granted thai He confirms the acls of his Minifters when they admit men into Chriftianity, is it to be conceived, that he will make them void, when they exclude ? It feems a thing which offenders have great reafon tofear. Even fuppofing that they are excluded
for
*• 2 Cor. ii. 7.
* 1 Cor. ii. 10, II. No one can doubt the delicacy ^m J
kindnefs of St. Paul's fentiments, who reads Mr. Locke on this paflage.
VOL. IV. E E
434 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XVII.
tor what is in itfelf an indifferent adion, yet de- ftroying or weakening that authority^ which has been conftituted for the general good, is furely a fault, and one of great importance. Nay, I (hould fay, that if a man was bona fide excommunicated tor a right or good adion, performed for confcience fake, yet if he did not do all in his poucer (fo as not to violate duty) both to avoid offe}iding the facred Magiftrate, and to reconcile himfelf to thofe in authority, he would flill, though unfortunate in this life, be punilhable in the next.
XVII. In making an JpplicatioUj we may dif- penfe with a new form of affent, and alfo with mutual conceffions : but it is not eafy to quit the Article without one word concerning bnprovement. I fear it is wanting both in 'theory and PraBice. — Our ecclefuiilical Laws were formed at various times, and on various occafions: (o that fome of them cannot now be equitably enforced, in their full extent ; and to adjufh them to the prefcnt times, by a comparifon of circumilances, would require uncommon ability. This gives room for too mucli levcrity in thofc who vire inclined, or intcrefted, to be fevere ; and for too much lenity in the timid and indolent, Tlie mere attempt to make a new Code, would be attended with good ; as it^vould make our fpiritual inter efts to be better underllood than they arc at prefent, more worthily eftecmed, and more efftclually promoted.
With regard to p-aaice^ I bclieye every reli- gious man will allow, that the ecclefiaftical Magil- traies, whofe bufinefs it is to vifit and corred the Church, frequently do not do it effectually. And what is the reafon ? — Becaufe they have imperfect laws; and becaufe they have not the firm iupport of either the great or the fmall? What could Hildebratid himfelf do in llich a fituation ? The
Great
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XVII. 435
Creat are labouring to have all things work to- gether, either for a fecure majority in Parliament, or for perfonal influence, or command'. Eccle- fiaftics are not to make the Reformation of all men their fole purpofe, becaufe the Great are their Patrons ; they muft not be ungrateful to thofe who gave them the dignities they poirefs: — gave them ? is that a gift which is conferred by patronage P is not patronage a trji/}, a power ,of naming, for the fole end of promoting the public good ?
But as the Great mijiake the nature and confe- quences of their power, the inferior orders are carelefs and negligent about theirs ; they think not of their own real value and importance. Have they not the power of excommunication in them- felves, in a very great degree ? and will even the Great think it prudent to ad again ft the united fenfe, if plainly rational and virtuous, of the gene- rality of the people? It is not difficult to fee, how, in this way, one evil begets a number. — However, in like manner, one good might beget a number, if we could once fet the procreation a going. — Might not our ecclefiaftical Judges imitate our civil ones ? they have no appearance of any refped of perfons : They hang the wealthy^ Peer as a common felon. — But they are made, it will be urged, independent : by what power ? could not the fame give independence to judges eccle- fiaftical ? — but we muft not lofe ourfelves in Utopian {peculations.
-I conclude
f I fear there are too many inftances at prefent of Patrons
embezzling the property of tiie Church; by making bargains to
pay a ftipulated fum inftead of tithes; or by taking the Church
. Lands into their own occupation, and contouuding them with
their own ; or by other unjuftifiable meafures.
* Earl Ferrers.
E E 2
436 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XVII.
I conclude with the tcftimony of Sir WiHlam Blackflone in favour of the h'lghejl ecclefiaftical Judges, left what I have faid Ihould direct any one's attention towards them. He acknowledges*", " to the honour of the fplritual courts," that " juflice is in general" "ably and impartially ad- mini ftered in thofe tribunals, efpecially of the fuperior kind'."
•> Book 3. Chap. 7.
* This lad Seflion was omitted at Lefture; cliiefly for want of time. It did not afterwards feem proper for the beginning of a Lefture; and was not neceflary for Students.
ARTICLE
BOOK. IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. I. 437
ARTICLE XXXIV.
OF THE TRADITIONS OF THE CHURCH.
IT Is not neceflary, that Traditions and Cere- monies be in all places one, or utterly like; for at all times they have been diverfe, and may be changed, according to the diverfities of countries, times, and men's manners, fo that nothing be ordained againft God's Word. Whofoever through his private judgment, willingly and purpofely doth openly break the traditions and ceremonies of the Church, which be not repugnant to the Word of God, and be ordained and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly (that other may fear to do the like) as he that offendeth againft the common Order of the Church, and hurteth the authority of the Magiftrate, and woundeth the confciences of the weak brethren.
Every particular or national Church hath au- thority to ordain, change, and aboliQi ceremonies or rites of the Church, ordained only by man's authority, fo that all things be done to edifying.
I. On examining this Article, it feems as if our beft plan would be, to join the Hijlory and the Explanation together. Efpecially confidering what has been already faid under the fixth and twentieth Articles.
E E 3 II. In
438 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV, SECT. II.
II. In the Title we find the word Tradition; — it means here, traditional praHice -^ in the fixth Article it meant, traditional doclrine. KJyftem of traditional proifticc, ibems to bear fome analogy to what is called common Lazv. In the Article, " Traditions and Ceremonies^* come together : thev mean fomething of the fame kind of thing; and are Joined here, as they arc frequently, in order to fliew what fort of Tradition is meant. — A ceremony enjoined by a written law, would not at tirft be called a Tradition, yet what are called Traditions, are fometimes, perhaps, after having been neglecled, enjoined by written Laws. Generally, they are of too little importance to be written, and from that, their name has come; yet their name might never- thelefs come to be the common name for rites and ceremonies, and cuftoms, and all human religious ordinances. The laft claufe of our Article has the expreffion, " ceremonies or r//t?j."— The term tra- dition comes from Jcripture\ as appears, not only from mention of J^w/y/^raditions, but from i Cor. xi. 2. and 2 ThefT. ii. 15. and iii. 6.
The Confeffion of AiiiJhirg conliders Traditions as loconim ac temf-onrm ciijcrimiiia : the Saxon calls them. Rites inflituted by human authority; the Bohemian mentions cujloms as well as rites".
But though traditions and ceremonies may be of the fame kind, yet the word ceremony docs not ufually convey fo extenfive an idea as tradition. If wc even take ceremony fo as to include Liturgies, Sic. it confines the attention to prefent times; and generally it fuggefis only things vifible : but the word tradition, carries the mind back to pall
times,
* J\i/cs Teem to come nearer Traditions, than ceremonies do. Rif us, i]i\:i{i, ratus r/ws ( Ainfworth, troni an old Grammarian),
may include any cujloms ; more than ceremcnv does. v-ee Lord
King's Primitive Church, jxirt 2. Chap. 10. or page 19S.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. II. 439
times, and fuggefts various inflitutions, v/hich many do not diftinguilli from fuch as are of divim authority. In order to fee how many of our re- ligious inftitutions come under the idea of tradi- tions, we fliould imagine ourfelves to aboIiQi, one after another, all religious obfervances, which are not exprefly commanded by divine law. Some would difappear only in part, but others totally. — The Confellions of the reformed Churches reckon the great FeJiivaU as traditions; fuch as Chriftmas, Eafter, &c. and even Sundays-, and morning and evening prayers. Fajl-days are alfo mentioned in the number, and Barclay fays, that Infant -Baptifm is " a mere human tradition." And all Pfalmody, and what we call Choir -Jervice, is inflanced in by the Confeffion of Augfburg''. — But 1 only men- tion here what is fufficient to enlarge our idea of traditions to its proper extent. Varieties will come by and by.
The reformed Confeffions lay down their doc- trine about Traditions, with great care and folem- nity. One may fee, that it muft be an important matter to them to fet afide a number of Romifli obfervances, and that without weakening the re- verence of the people for fuch as they thought it right to retain. They muft do it in the face of their enemy's batteries, who would be attacking them with the Canon-Law, decretals of Popes, and all the moft powerful artillery of human au- thority.—The Saxon Confeffion is fo ferious as to end with a folemn prayer.
III. " It
^ It is eafy to give injlances', but the difRcuIty is, hy defini- iion, tb dilliiiguifh univerfally a mutable from an immutable rite: — is the ivater in Baptilm a mutable rite, as Socinus fays? is the Cup a mutable rite, in the Lord's Supper, as the Romanifts fay? (Trent Cat. Sefl. 70. or rather Trent Council, SefT. 21. Cap. 2.) — Barclay's expreffion is in his Apology, page 355. Edit. Birm.
£ £ 4
440 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. HI. IV.
III. " It is not necefary that Traditions," &c. — this rather fecms to imply, that uniformity of Tn^ditions is defirable.) whenever it becomes prac- ticable: which lecms farther to appear from the words utterly alike : they imply, I think, the more like, the better. The uniformity of ceremonies was mentioned in the third Book^
*' In all places," — at any one time.
IV. " For at all times they liave been diverfe." The For implies, that experience of the diver-
fity ot Traditions, is an argument to prove, that iamcnefs is not necellary. — And the argument is Ib'ong enough for the purpofe ; efpecially if we take a time near the firft publication of Chrifhia- nity. 1 do not think we are intended to compare diftcreot times j but only different places at the fame time: indeed we may firft take any one time, and afterwards any other time; without limit. If this be a right idea, we cannot lay here, that the Tews had more Traditions than the Chriftians : though that obfcrvation may have weight in another argument.
'* They have been ili-verfe^* — Here a large field opens upon us. — Traditions, or human inflitution?, auxiliary to Divine, are congenial to human nature. A mere general principle of Piety would be rude and lluggiih : would want drawing out and exer- cifing; good fentiments die away, if not frequently brought into a(5lion :— human inflitutions are re- quired to furnllh occafions; fomc ibcial, lome fohtary, fomc compofed of both forrs.
Occafions mufl return periodically; mufl remind men of Ibme events, which will move them. — Social occafions of exerciiing religious fentiments, mufl be furnifhed and filled up with employments of body and mind, fuited to their end andpurpole:
all « Book Ml. Cl)ap V. Sfv!^. ii.
BOOKlV.ART.XXXIV.SECT.lv. 44*
all our bcft and fincft taftcs and feelings are to be fet in motion, and made fublervient to Religion j our love of Truth, our relifh of order; our tafte for beauty, fublimity, harmony, are to be foli- cited, engaged, intereiled : our paflions are to be thrown into a devout courfe, and to have objects prefented, which will excite and inflame them.
This will give fome idea of the end and deiign of human religious infticutions, as common to all men. — But in wliat a variety of ways may this end be accomplilhed! to trace them out in the Heathen, Jewi/Ii^ and Chvijiian religions, would be a work of time.
Heathens will be allowed, at any one time, to have had a great diveriity of religious rites and inftitutions.
The 'Jezvs had a great number of ordinances prefcribed by Jehovah, and by his Minifters; thefe are not to our purpofe ; but they had what they called 'Traditions ; not properly of divine au- thority; their Talmud exifted orally long before it was coiledled into a Book : and about thefe tra- ditions they had different and contending'' -parties.
Chrijiians had very few injunctions from divine authority, in comparifon of the number required for carrying on a focial, regular religion ; for teaching, praying, nouriQiing and animating reli- gious fentiments. They might have an outline, but each fet or fociety of Chriftians fupplied al! the internal (Irokes according to its ruling genius and turn. No wonder they differed ; the wonder would have been if they had not differed. Indeed it is impoffible to conceive, that tliey (hould not. Every difference of judgment, education, liabit, tafte, fituation, would produce a difference in what we call Traditions. Nay, there would be fo many
openings ^ Art. VI. Sea. in.
442 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. V.
openings for variation, that if there had but been one difpofition, the chances would have been infi- nite againft a perfect famenefs or uniformity.
But let us be more particular j I mean, with regard to Chriftians.
V. I might read you the opening of Tertul- lian's Book de Corona militis; but as his Latin is by no means perfpicuous, I prefer giving you the tranilation from Wall's Book onMnfant-Baptifm. —-'Eajler has been celebrated according to different rules; and thofe who wanted to have Eafter-day on the fourteenth day after the New Moon, whether Sunday or not, were called^ Quartodecimans.
The twentieth Canon of the Council of Nice orders Chriftians x.oJland during prayer. Though perhaps nniformity was rather the end in view, than any particular pofture ; it might be more eafy to make all ftand than all kneel. — There is fomething in the Canon like this, ut omnia 7F/?«7//ct fiant. — Socrates is quoted by the Helvetic Confeflion as fpeaking of the diverfity here meant, and Bifhop Jewel fays, that Auguftin complained of the too great number of ceremonies in his time. We have two Epiftlcs of Auguftin to Jtinuariiis on the fubject of variety of ordinances, ceremonies, tra- ditions, in which he ftiews his ufual ingenwoufncfs and liberality of fentiment.— Januarius had wilhed to know what he fliould do about feftivals and rites, in different fdaces where different cuftoms prevailed: Auguftin's anfwer fcems mvich to our purpofe^. " Alia vero quae per loca tcrrarun>
regionefque
•■ Wall, page 480, quarto, or Part 2. Chap. 9. Std. 4.
* See Epiphan, Hx-r. T£cro-a^£?xa»jE*aTiTa». Lardner's
Works, Vol. 2. page 243, 244. Lardner, Vol. 4. page 306.
Acriam did not keep Eafter at all, nor any other FelHvals, or Farts.
^ Auguftin. ad Janiiar. Epift. (feu Lib.) i. Cap. 2. Edit, Antv. 1700. Tom. 2. (in Vol. i.) page (orcolumji) 94.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. V. 443
regionefque variantur, ficuti eft quod alii jejunant Sabbato, alii non ; alii quotidie communicant cor- pori et fanguini Domini, alii certis diebus accipiunt. Alibi nullus dies prietermictitur quo non ofieratur'', alibi fabbato tantum et Dominico, alibi tantum Dominico. Et fi quid aliud hujufniodi animad- verti poteft, totum hoc genus rerum Hberas habet obfervationes : nee difciplina ulla eft in his melior, gvavi prudentique Chriftiano, quam ut eo modo agat, quo agere viderit Ecckfiam ad quam forte devenerit. Quod enim neque contT3.Jidem, neque contra bonos mores elie convincitur, indifferenter eft habendum ; et propter eorum inter quos vivicur Societatem, fervandum eft."
The Eajiern and IVeJiern Churches have always differed in many obfervances, though both under the fame Roman Emperor. Under the twenty- fourth Article we got a glimpfe of Afiatic and Atrican Chriftians : they differ much in rites and ceremonies, or in what our prcfent Article calls Traditions, from the Chriftians of Europe.
In later times more Canons have been made by Councils for inferior inftitutions, than ufed to be made anciently : but fome Romifti Canons have grown obfolete at Rome'i fome (of different ages) have been iufpedted as not genuine; and thofe which are, or have been, received, prove the diver fity for which we are contending. Nay, Rome itfelf allows of diverfity, fo that it be not againft the
Canon
* I fancy this is making ofFerings for t!ie (/ead. See Lardner under Acrius. A. D. 360. V\''orks, Vol. 4.. page 306. — M>) ouv,
^r;ai, ,t!T^O!X(pi^nv vTTiq lcr^oxiK'-iiXYif/,ivcJv. Tcrtulliail COnfiriTlS
this; fee the palTage jull now referred to. Wall, page 480.— " We give our oblations every year for the dead on the day of their martyrdom."
' The circuniftances here mentioned appear from the Con- feflions of the reformed Churches, particularly that of Augfburg. —See alfo Burnet on the Article.
444 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. VI. VII.
Canon Law. — Of diverfity of Traditions ^/ince the Reformation, I need fay nothing at prefent''. Some- thing was faid under the twentieth Article.
VI. "And may be changed"— it is not faid by whom 'y — there may be a competent authority; what it is, may be fpecified by and by : this is the Theory. With regard to pra^icCy Dr. Powell in- forms us, that *' nothing is plainly^ wrong but change;" but we mud interpret him by his con- text : he is fpeaking of an ordinary flate of things, in fome one place; whereas we are, in our minds, comparing different places ; and when change of traditions is recommended, or allowed, in any one place, it is fuppofed to be made on fome extraor- dinary occafion.
Indeed, if we attended only to the exprefTions which follow, we mull judge, that the Article has in view differing, at any one time, rather than changing, that is, more than differing at different times. However, if it is intended to juftify the changing of Rotvijh ceremonies, as I fuppofe it may, its chief meaning is, that traditions, or human modes of executing divine Laws, may, at the time when they are iujlituied, afiume different forms according to different circumftances.
VII. The different circumftances mentioned, are, "diverfities of CountrieSy times, and men's manners.^^
Countries,— regionum; we fliould perhaps now commonly exprefs the idea by Climates, though climate in ftrictnefs, according to its etymology,
makes
^ One might look at the end of Qiieen Elizabeth's Preface to her Advertifements (or Articles) of 1564: Sparrow's Col- ledlion, page 123.— " Temporal orders meer ecchftalUcal,^* means the fame with the ivaditicmi Ecclefiajiic^, in the Title to our thiity- fourth Anitle. — Indeed all the things enjoined in thefe Advertifemtnti are Traditions, in the fenfe of our Church.
' Sermons, page 3 1 .
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. VII. 445
makes only a difference of North and South.— The manner of baptizing may differ in hot and cold climates, or regions; immeriion fuits hot climates better, and fprinkling, cold. In the Greek church, a Fan is prefented to the Deacon in the ceremony of Ordination, becaufe the Deacon's bufinefs is to drive away from the Holy Elements, thofe infeds with which Eaftern countries are infefted. — Mon- tefquieu fays, to enjoin abftinence in general, is reafonable ; to enjoin particular forts of abftinence, is not fo, in an extenfive religion"^,
" Times" — this word is not in Bidiop Sparrow's copy, xhoM^ temporum is in his Latin. — Whereas Benner, in his Collation, has no inftance of times being wanting, but mentions a MS where temporiim is only in the margin, written with a red-lead pencil. — Here the Region is given, as we fay, and the times are fuppofed to vary. — Holland was once fubjeft to the Spanifli Government : fuppofe a fimple fmall republic to fucceed a fplendid monar- chy, the fame traditions would not fuit both.
" Manners ^^ may vary, in a given region, and in given times. Montefquieu" obferves, that there ought to be more Feftivals v.-here lefs labour is required to produce plenty. And that Conftantine ordered Sunday to be kept holy in Cities, and not in Villages ; becaufe though labour in cities is Ljfeful, in villages it is necelfary".
Hats
^ Efprit des Loi.v, Liv. 24. Chap. 26.
" Efprit des Loix, Liv. 24. Chap. 23.
° Codex, de Fe.nis, Leg. 3.-~Monterqniea fays, that this Law mull have been for the Pagans; but it i'eems to' me to .have been for Chriftians. The day indeed is called Dies Solis, and in other Laws Dies Dominicus, yet either name micht denote Chriltian Sunday. — The whole twelfth title feems addrefTed, a^ one body of Law, to Verinus, and i'everal 0;' its laws relate to Eajl-r, Chriflmas, Epiphany, &c. and aretiierefore undoubtedly for Chrillians. — Pagans might be obligtd not to interrupt or
diEurb
44^ BOOK IV. Art. xxxiv. sect. viii. ix.
Hats are off in Englifli Churches'', on, in Dutch.
VIII. "So that nothing be ordained agahiji God's word." The Puritans would not be con- tented with this ; they would have all ordinances derived from the word of God : — and fo would the Dutch Confeflion : the thing is impraclicable, as was obferved under the twentieth Article j fo they are obliged to allow little things, w^hich overthrow their own notion. In the Dutch confc/Tion they difclaim human ordinances thus; Nos itaque omnia humnna inventa, omnefque leges rejicimus qu^e ad Dei cultum funt introducls — ut iis confcicntix ullo modo illaqueentur, aut obftringantur; - And then they give the thing up by faying, that their Prefbyters muft maintain and appoint order, and preferve fociety : indeed they add, that even their Prefbyters muft not deviate from what Chrift once appointed; yet they admit of Z^Te;; when wanted for concord, or for retaining them in obedience to God. Who aims at more.^ — The ConfelTion of Strojhurg, and fome others, like our Article, allow any traditions which are not repugnant to the Word of God,
IX. But though there may be an authority competent to changing Traditions, yet the next thing laid down is, that a private individual hath not that authority. There is an authority, which may repeal a ci-vil law, but yet the Law muft be obeyed by a private fubiecl.
*' Whoiocver through his private judgment, willingly and privately," &c. A man may violate human ordinances involuntarily, or inadvertently,
or
diftuib Chrlllians. The Dies SoUs is, in this Law, calli.\l venero.hllis.
P Popifh ceremonies would not fuit our Pafbyterian^, wei* it for nothing clfe but diiFerencc of manners.
BOOK IV, ART. XXXIV. SECT. X. XI. 447
or through fome urgent bufinefs, as when watering*^ cattle on a Sunday; or through adefire of not loling an opportunity of doing' good ; in fuch cafes, our Article feems to excufe him. — Another thing feems required in order to make him liable to the cenfure afterwards mentioned, that he break traditions openly. If he be induced to make free with human rehgious obfervances, there is a difference between, tranfgreffing difcreetly, privately, with apologies to thofe who happen to know of his irregularity j and tranfgreffing in a public, (hamelefs manner, as if he gloried in it. The latter docs much more harm than the former,
X. *' Which be not repugnant to God's word;"" —who is iojud^e whether an human ordinance be, or not, repugnant to Scripture ?— it feems as if the man who breaks the ordinance was here under- ftood to judge; and as if it would be taken as a fufficient excufe if he declared, he could not obey fuch an ordinance without difobeying Scripture. — Indeed it feldom happens, that this excufe' is made; though it has been objeded to human or- dinances, that they were not taken from Scripture. — The only punifliment however, mentioned ia the Article, is Rel?uke. — One confeffion rejeds CeU- bacy ', as repugnant to God's word.
XI. " Ordained and approved" — it is not 0! the nature of a tradition, according to its etymo- logy, to be ordained, but yet that name extends to all human ordinances for the exercifmg of religiaus principles. — Approved feems more fuitable.
"By common authority" - common in Latin is piiblicd. Authority over all tliofe, who are called
upon
•1 Lukexiil. 15. T johnix. 14.
' Neal, A.D. 1566. Chap. $— Powell, page 30.^ John Bxjr- gcs's Anfwer rejoined, Pref. page 3, 4,
' Shorter Confeffion of Auglburg.
44S ROOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT, XII—- XV.
upon to comply r — not confined to a familj'-, of finall (iiftridt, but extending to the whole corn- mini ty.
XI I. " Ought to be rebuked openly," &c. — is quotation, or nearly fo, from i Tim. v. 20. the Greek word is iXi'y)(u}y and the Latin, argno.— Openly, coram omnibus.
XIII. 'T^hree grounds are mentioned, on which it is wrong for a private man to violate even the- human ordinances of religion.
XIV. He *' offendeth againft the common order of the Church." Every degree of difordcr mufh check the formation and growth of religious ienti- ments; and muft be hurtful to religious fociety. Order may particularly refer to religious afjemhlies : in them, every irregularity frustrates inftruclion, and checks devotion. Uniformity" of ceremonies was mentioned in the third Book, as well as the nature of religious ^^v/^/^/yi)'.
XV. *' Hurteth the authority of the M-igif- trate'^ y The authority of a magiflrate is not only maintained by fear of particular punilhmcnts, but by a general ienle of duty, which never quell;ions the foundations of Magiftracy, but takes it as a ihino- cilablilhed : indeed the dread of punifh- ment is alfo in the mind of obedient lubjecfs, general, fettled, and habitual : — Now, whatever un- let ties men's habitrial regard to the Magiftrate's authority, gives an opening to refradtorincfs in people, who never before had any idea of rcfifling, And that evil the condu(ft of him produces, who openly violates what the magillracc has ordained, or undertaken to enforce.
XVI. *'And
"• Book in. Chap, iv, Seil. 11. * Book 111. Chap. in.
y Civil or eccIeUallical Maoiftr.Ue? the argument holds as to either : the ir.t;aber oK tiie Church is under obligntion both to liis ccclefiaftical and his temporal Governors, to comply wit!^ human ordinances.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. XVI. XVII. 449
XVI. " And woundeth the confcieiices of the weak brethren^."— ^y weak brethren are meant, thofe Chriftians, who judge by general ruleSy and prejudices, without being able to fee the foundation of fuch rules. It often happens, that a rule may- be a very good one for common occafions, and yet breaking through it, in fome particular circum- fiances, may be no way wrong. If the weak brother cannot diflinguifh fuch circumftances, breaking the rule innocently, may do as much harm to his morals, as breaking it in a manner really wrong. And he who breaks a Tradition, may do nothing which has in it a moral turpi- tude, and yet his exa-mple may do as much harm as if he did. Suppofe a man was perfuaded, (which I am not) that travelling on a Sunday, and having cards or mufic in the evening, were not wicked in themfelves; yet he might abftain from them for fear of corrupting Servants.
St. Paul fpeaks of this mode of corrupting, with the greateft earneftnefs. As may be feen in the following pafll^ges; from which it will appear, that the expreflion wounding is fcriptural.— -Rom. xiv. 13. 15. 20. 21. — I Cor. viii. 9 — 13. — i Cor. ix. 19, &c. — Gal. V. 13.
XVII. This part about private men breaking Traditions, was aimed at the Puritans % I fancy, or fome brethren of their way of thinking; as the Dutch were. There was a perfon called Flacius Illyricns, who feems to have been very uncom- plying: Melandhon held a controverfy with him. —Indeed the German conteft about Adiaphorijis
was
^ There area great many expreffions in the Confeffions of the reformed, dhoMtScandal, or giving 0^'Hff.
^ John a Lafco, the fuperintendant of tlie foreign Prote- Hants in London, a Polifh Nobleman, feems to have been ii Puritan, in 1550.
VOL. IV. F F
450 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. XVIII.
was extended to merits, jullification, &c. — but with regard to Traditions, Flacius lllyricus feems to have laid, that it was better to give up any pre- ferments' than to comply. — We have before had an account of Bilhop Hooper'' s diftrelfes about Habits ; and have obferved, that the Puritans ex- cluded the civil Magiflrate from all authority in fpiritual matters: how was anything to be enforced? It was a pity they could not have formed ^.feparate body peaceably; but of that enough under the lall Article.
It may feem ftrange, that the Englidi did not contrive this, while they were feparating from the Church of Rome themfelves-, bur, I fuppofe, they never thought of fuch a thing. — They had ad- vanced fo far as to think, that the Pope had no riglit to domineer over all nations ; that any Nation might withdraw itfelf from his religious confedera- tion ; but that a fet of Chriftians in a Nation, could rightly and regularly, withdraw itfelf from the National Church, might never enter into their minds. — In the Saxon Heptarchy there might be feven different Churches. And Bilhop Burnet thought, that the different cufloms in our own Church, meaning thofe of Sarum, Lincoln, Bangor, Hereford, all reduced to one by the A6ts of Uni- formity, might have had their rife under the Saxon Government.
XVIII. The Familijis complied with all cere- monies, and cared for none ; as Rogers, on this Article, tells us from their Founder Henry Nicholas.
XIX. The
•> Melanfthon, Epift. Theol. page 455. quoted by Rogers, page 202 — Rogers alfo refers to Melan<^hon ad Paftores in Coniitatu Mansfield, for a proof of melancholy eiFedts from non-compliance. — And fee Neal, Vol. i. quarto, pageg;.— — And John Burgcs's Anfwer rejoined. Preface, page 2. — And Mofheim, ly Index,
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. XIX. XX. 451
XIX. The lafl paragraph is additional: per- haps it might be thought ufeful, in order to ftate precifely what is the authority by which Traditions may be changed. — The firft paragraph faid they may be changed, but not by whomj the fecond (as I fhould underftand it) that an individual cannot change them ; then the third fteps in, and fays, that a particular church can : that is, for itfelf. This was a more explicit account than the former, of departing trom the Church of Rome.
Before Toleration was allowed, there could not well be a particular church which was not a national Church, but now, I fliould think, there might.
" Man^s Authority,'^ — means the authority of Councils, Emperors, Fathers; Decretals of Popes, Injunftions of Princes and Prelates.
*' Edifying" is taken from Rom. xiv. 19, — !• This is a duty of imperfedt obligation ; as in Art. XXXI I. Seft. XIV.
XX. It belongs to the Hiftory and explanation of the laft paragraph, to mention fome of the reafons affigned for changing the Romilh Tradi- tions. Thofe reafons will Ihew us the faults into which men may run in fixing upon religious ordi- nances.— The Romifli Traditions then, we are^ told, were too numerous, fo as to over- burthen the mind ; fo intricate as to perplex, and fo nice, that the fear of not performing them all rightly, as not doing fo was efteemed mortal fin, has driven fome to defpair, and even*^ to J'uicide. They are not
fuited
'^ Confeffions in the Syntagma.
'' This is cited, in the Augfburg Confefuon, from Gerfrm, a Romaniil, who was at the Council of Conllance. ( Of a village in the Diocefe of Reims called Gerfon \ his name was really Jean Charlier: he died 1429, aged 66.)
f F 2
45* BOOK IT. Amr. XXXIT. sect. XXI. XXI I.
(b^d to the ttofiBciij of the ChnQJati rd^tm, which abolidied a peat number c4 ceremonies wnbaat iabftktitirig others in their nxxn. Thej b^ve y«a/V men prcCutoc oa their merits, aod io have foperfeded the oiofir impoitiut fnadfia of die ChrJoftiaa li^; as the flo^ of them has fiiper- ieded the fbadj of the Scnptcres.— They were fimeiftitioiB, chi]£ih% ridimiwis mnractfay a£ a Ibber man. Soppofing cadi inchficreat in kSdi, tber became finfiol by cxprcffing wraog ifntMiirts; as m the caie mentiooed i Cor. x. 27, z8.
XXI. Hence tbofe tiaditioDS may be looked upon as gead, which aie &w, fimple, plea£ng; vi bicb exfTcife withoat faiJigaaBg^ whidh call into acLiootbe beft pfindplesof human natme, apf^ them to Reh^oo, and are £ab6snnentt to them : which ytdtead to no merit, and reqoiie fiole or no fiudy; which are grave, rsdoojl^ mftrodive, be- comincr; and ckar hrom all fiiperftidao and f*m-
tidlrn -
xxii. We have now finifhfd Hiftory and £x- pbnadon: fomrfhing omft be £ad in the way
Tb-c: things n^ht be piopoCbd fcjr proof.
1. Tr^itioos need not be, in all places pre- d't.y the £uDe.
2. Each hsSvidjud oog^t to cmfmm to thofe ieakd b?^ that snthoricy to winch he is fubied:.
5. Eadi
e Third part cf Hoah' ob good Works- Bi&Dp Jcvd ia
STr22£i3a. ^KJsg EdwarcTi IsgnVtvug: Sparrow, pape 9
' Htrr, or at i^ ead c^ ihss Artick, aigix be reatl doe ** ' ' 't to oar Book of CoKnon Przjer ; a row^-minon vaack ^SD ociLncdly recosxrjesded.— Ia tUs pfaoe I read at j,td7'? 2 pa&gCv ■taca imrr.l nsoattBtstr^ c^ib a ciKyiTiOK of E£zTi c^fied JroeaU exarfims, bf ik Rer. lir. TmmJsI, p2g£ ::i~i£5. TUb GcackaBii B Aadwr cf dbe Aadqci- da c'f E^a^sm, tad of ievcnl ai^kal coapoidMi Ik tke |^ic£ £ik sf GoBfis a&d <
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. XXIII. XXIV. 4^3
3. Each particular or National Churchy hath authority to ordain its Ovvn rites.
XXXI 1 1. For the firft, a reafon is given in the Article, drawn from the experience ^ of all ages, — The Confeflion of Augfburg cites Matt. x\'. 3. 9. ii. — Rom. xiv. 17. — Col. ii. 16, &c.— i Tiai. iv. i, —Might not I Cor. viii. 8. be added.^*
XXIV. That an individual ought to conform, is proved from the reafon of the thing, and from Scripture; but to avoid miftakes, it Ihoald be again obfen'cd, that no fet of Chriftians is under* ftood to belong to that Church, though fubfifting in their ovvn Country, which they would quit, if tb.ey had a full and free Toleration.
Confining ovirfelves to thofe who are real, willing members of the Church, we need only aik, on a foot of reafon^ can any end be obligatory, and not the means neceffary for attaining that end } If ever)' one fays, he will ufe his own means of pro- moting Religion, that, from tiie nature of focial religion, is the fame thing as determining to ufe no means at all. All (who aflbciate) muft ufe the fame means, or the end cannot be anfwered; and there is no way for men to ufe the fiime means, but fubmitting to authority. — Suppofe a {ecretary is told to write a letter, (if I may acrain ufe the illuftration), he omits to write it; he is blamed; wQuld it not be thought very child ilh if he faid in his excufe, that he never was ordered to take pen, ink and paper ? all that he neglected was what he had never been ordered to do }
\{ fcriptural proof be wanted, in a cafe where fcripture might be fuppofed to be filent, we may alledge the condud of St. Paul as recorded in Acts xxi. 20, 21. 24. 26. and in Acts xxviii. 17.
on e Sea. jv. F F 3
454 EOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. XXV XXVII.
on which may be read Dr. Wotton's'' remark. — The firft fixteen verfes of i Cor. xi. relate to things of Inferior moment, which had been taught ver- hally. — The fecond verfe contains praife for keeping -sTx^xSoc-it^y tranllated in the text ordinances, in the margin, traditions. The fixteenth verfe founds the obfervance of them on cuJlom\ and the lad verfe of the fame Chapter fhews, that St. Paul intended to give more verbal direftionsj fuch, feemingl}'-, as he did not think it worth while to deliver in
writmg.
1 Cor. xiv. 40. fhews, that it is a fcriptural duty to provide means foranfwering any end propofed.
2 Thelr."*ii. 15. and iii. 6. are about 7ij-afa(^o(rs»?, which might relate to either doflrine or pradice.
XXV. Each particular or national church hath authority to ordain its own rites. — This was, in efFedl, proved of every religious Society before'. With regard to a national Church, as diftinguilhed from any other particular church, we might ob- ferve, that either it can fettle and unfettlc its own rites, or feme external power can oblige it to attend Councils ; the contrary to which was fhewn under the twenty-firft Article.
XXVI. As to zW/;Ti?7 proof, I do not recoiled any objection but one, which feems of any weight ; that is. Can a church oblige its members to obferve all ordinances whatfoever ? — and this was anfwered under the twentieth Article.
XXVII. Neither do 1 fee that I need detain you by an Ai^plication. A form of alien t is not wanted. — Mutual concefiions were confidered under the
twentieth
* Mifiia, Preface, pnge xlvi. See alfo Lardner's V^''ork?;,
Vol. II. page 346—353. In this DilTtitation of Lardner's
there is a good account ot St. Paul's Compliances.
i Art. xx. Sea. iv.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. XXVII. 455
twentieth Article. And improvements at the end of the third Book ^.
^ The fubjeft of eating BIooJ might come under this Article. — T did not enter into it farther than by giving the contents of Lardner's DiiTertation on Adls xv. and of his remarks on A fts xxi. 20 — 26. adding anything that occurred to my own mind. A comparifon of thefe two paflages of Scripture would be very ufeful to any Governors of Chriftian Societies, who were at a lofs for rules of conduft when they were defirous of fuiting man'i prejudices The Editor of Lardner's Works has given an Index of Texts explained, by which the tw o paiTages may be eafilv found.
F F 4
ARTICLE
45^
BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. I.
ARTICLE XXXV.
OF THE HOMILIES.
THE fecond Book of Homilies, the feveral titles whereof we have joined under this Article, doth contain a godly and wholfome Doctrine, and neceflary for thefe times, as doth the former Book, of Homilies, which were fet forth in the time of Edward the Sixth ; and therefore we judge them to be read in Churches by the Minifters, diligently and diflindly, that they may be underflanded of the people.
Of the Names of the Homilies.
1 1. Of Alms-doing.
12. Of the Nativity of Chrift.
13. OfthePafHonofChrift.
14. Of the Refurredion of Chrift.
15. Of the worthy receiv- ing of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Chrift.
16. Ofthe Gifts of the Holy Ghoft.
17. For the Rogation-days.
18. Of the ftate of Matri- mony.
19. Of Repentance.
20. Againlt Idlenefs.
2 1 . Againft Rebellion.
I . Here
1. Of the right Ufe of tlie Church.
2. Againft peril of Idolatry.
3. Ot repairing and keeping clean of Churches.
4. Of good Works ; firft of Fafting.
5. Againft Gluttony and Drunkennefs.
6. Againft Excefs of Apparel.
7. Of Prayer.
8. Of the Place and Time of Prayer.
9. That Common Prayer and Sacraments ought to be miniftercd in a known Tongue.
10. Of tlie reverend ellima- tion of God's Word.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. I. 457
I. Here again we begin with Hijlory,
The ancient Greek Fathers, Chryfoftom, Bafil, &c. ufed to preach plain difcourfes to the people; and the proper name for fuch a difcourfe was *0^\hi9.. Sermo anfwers to it in Latin. Neither word implies anything refined or elaborate: but each rather denotes familiar, and popular difcourfe. And fuch 2i\\Jermons ad Populum Ihould be.
In later times, the word Homily fignifies a popu- lar difcourfe, or Sermon, regularly compofed ; but it includes the additional idea, of being publicly read, and profeffedly, by one who was not the Author. Thofe of which we ufually fpeak, are fuppofed to have been publifhed by authority.
Sparrow, in his Rationale, page 223, fays, that by a Council at Vaifon (Cone. Vaf.) in France, in cafe of the Prieft's ficknefs, &c. the Deacon was ordered to read the Homilies of the Holy Fathers. — I fee, by Cave, that one Cone. Vaf. was in 442, another in 529. — I Qiould imagine the latter to be meant by Sparrow.
We are told, that in the ninth Century, fo large a number of what v/e Ihould now call Homilies as 209, were compofed by our Countryman Akuin, Preceptor to Charlemagne, and ufed as ours were intended to be \ — That Great Emperor fecms to have known how to improve mankind. — I feel re- gret that they are loft; probably they would be plain, fliort, inftrudive.
But though in the ninth Century Preachers might want helps, yet at the time of the Reforma- tion, the need of them was inconceivably great. — The country Priefts were extremely ignorant, if they had defired to inftruft the people ; but they were, a great many of them, given up to idlenefs
and
» Wheatly, page 283. from Sixtus Sinenfis.— Prieftley, Hift. Corr, Vol. 2. page 125.
45S BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. I.
and worlvlly plcafures. And from thofe who did employ themfelves at all in inftrucftion, little good was to be expected, either to individuals, or the community. — The Papift taught in one extreme, the Puritans in ^another; and the proper Englifli reformed Miniftcrs, in a mean between the two; but a mean, though the mofl reafonable, is leafl ■' likely to ftrike men, or to fucceed. — Nor were teachers only of thefe three forts; all mens minds were afloat, all running wild, being {ct free after a long and flavi(h confinement; one might fay, there were almoft as many feds as teachers What effects mufl this have on the minds of the people 1 how delUudive mufl it be of every good prin- ciple! — Dr. Balguy obferves, " That the fupport of oppofite religions tends to the deflrudlion of all religion ^" It happened moreover unfortu- nately, that the Puritans were more able as well as more diligent than thofe Teachers, who were moii fupported by authority; fo that thofe of the Englilh Lhurch, who uillied to do their bejl, were not able to contend with their adverfaries; nor . were they able, generally fpeaking, to give a fatis- • .fadory account of the doctrine of Jiijlification, on which the Reformation turned ; or to anfwer the long-eftabliilied arguments of the Ronmnijis in in favour of their Sacraments, celibacy, &c. — In Ihort, all was either neglect of religion, or con- fuf.on about it. — No wonder that preaching was frequently fcrliddm. — It was forbidden by Henry VIII. by Edward VI. by Queen Mary; and by CHietn Elizabeth ; nay, in the latter end of the reign of Elizabeth there were" ftill very few
preachers.
•• Dr. B;i!giiy, Charge v. pnge 256. and before and after this pailagc.
"^ la 1^7?. See Neal, Vol. i. page 114. ij6. — See alfo Nr.:I. I 2.;5. and John Burge?, Tref. page 3.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXV, SECT. I. 459
preachers. Neal fpeaks of eight thoufand parlfhes which had no preaching'^ Miniiters. — And in Bifhop Sparrow's coUedion we may find many authentic expreffions'' to confirm the account now given.
There was, in the time of Henry VIII. an intention^ of publifliing a coUeclion of Homilies, but it v;as never executed. — Our firft Book, which is mentioned in our Article, though the titles are not there given, v^-as prepared in the firfl; year of King Edward VI. in 1547, and copies of it were diftributed throughout the Nation. — It is faid to have been compofed, for the mofl part, by Arch- bilhop Cranmer, though fome think that thofe eminent men who had affifted in reforming the Liturgy, were joined with him in compiling the Homilies; Ridley, Thirlby, &c. and Heylin , fancies, he perceives in thofe compofitions, the popular ftile of Latimer. — The method of diftri- buting them was by a Royal vifitation :— a folemn affliir 1 fuperfeding all other vifitations, not only of Archdeacons, &c. but of BiOiops and Arch- biihops. Not that the King went into any diftrict in perfon; he was very young; but every thing was tranfaded in his name. The nation was divided into 7/.v circuits^ and a committee of five was appointed to vifit each; confiding of two Gentlemen, and one Civilian; with a Divine, or Chaplain, and Regiftrary : a copy of the firll Book of the Homilies was left, in this vifitation, for every parifh Prieft.
Oux fecond Book of Homilies, the titles of which are mentioned in our Article, was publifhed early
in ^ Neal, I. page 320.
<= Sparrow's CoUeftion, page Ji. 7^, 76. 123. 127.— See alio Heylln's Laud, page 8, and Rutherforth's Charges, pagei.
^ Strype's Cranmer, page 148. For the other thiirgs here mentioned, fee page 14.6. — Neal, i. page 31, 3a. and Hcylia'.- Hi(t. Qiiinqu, page 550.
460 BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. I.
in the reign of Queen Elizabeth ; in 1560. — They had been prepared, or nearly To, before the death of King Edward ; and they feem to be, in a manner, promifed in his Injundlions. — They were compofed, in a good meafure, by Bifhop Jewel, author of the famous Apology for the Refor- mation^-.
Fox fpeaks of fome Homilies in Queen Mary*s time.
After this, the Puritans were fo diligent and powerful in preaching, and at the fame time fo regular and decent in their manners, that fome of their adverfaries, in the Church of England, wifhed for more Homilies and lefs preaching : more homi- lies for the Churchmen, lefs preaching from the Puritans. This was the cafe of ArchbiOiop Ban- croft *" at the Hampton Court Conference in 1603, and afterwards of Heylin '. This looks as if the Homilies had incidentally contributed towards a remijjhefs about improvements in preaching : how- ever, the number is very fmall for one to be read every Sunday and Holiday. — Alcuin's 209 would Lave been a properer number.
The number of Sermons prefcribed by Law, was fmall, in the time of Elizabeth : and preach- ingr Minifters were diftin2;uinied from others, be- caufe none could preach without a licence from his BiQiop. — But James I. made a Canon ordering a Sermon to be preached every Sunday^; the
Puritans,
i See Sparrow's CoIleAion, page 11. — Neal, Vol. i. page
108. Compare Burnet on the Articles, Prefnce, page xii.
odtavo, with expofition of this Article, near the beginning.
Wheatly on the Common Prayer, page 283, fays, the fecond Book of Flomilies was publillied in i 563, the year of the Con- vocation.
^ Neal, I. 416. ' Heylin's Life of Laud, page 9.
'' Canon 4;;, that is, by a licenced preacher. — If any one was not licenced, he could only, by Canon 49, read an Homily.
BOOK. IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. I. 46 I
Puritans, always attentive to their bufinefs, con- trived to get Sunday afternoons to addrefs tlie people in : they would not call their difcourfes, Sermons-, they were LeSiures : and that was the origin of Lehtires; thefe Ledures would of courfe be in a degree hoftile to the Church at firft; now they are not fo in the leaft. — Puritans pleaded againft' any- thing but Scripture being read in Church; they were always enemies to the Apocrypha.
Dr. John Surges has been mentioned"" /?e/ore : — he refufed to fubfcribe the Articles, except his in- terpretation of fome paffages, might be accepted by thofe in authority. Not being at fiiil: attended to, he was deprived, in courfe. But afterwards, James I. Archbifliop Abbot, and his Diocefan accepted his fenfe as the rig//.t fenfe, and he was reflored.— One Ardcle on which he offered his interpretation, was this thirty-fifth. His Book, in which this appears, was publilhed by command of Charles 1".
Dr. Balguy° fays, " it feems, we are allowed, not required, to read the homilies of the church, inftead of our own private compofitions : efpecially as thofe homilies are recommended to us with a particular reference to the times in which they were written." Yet in many laws, &c. minifters are'' ordered to read the Homilies unlefs they be licenced to preach. — And the Rubric which fays, " then iliall follow the Sermon or one of the Homilies,'* &:c. muft mean a Sermon by a perfon authorized to preach : a fermon, if the officiating IMiniftcr
be
' Rogers on the Article.
^' Book Hi. Chap. vii. Sed. iv. — Bookiv, Introd. Se£t. VI. and in other pkices.
" X — 4 — 10, Sid. Coll. entitled, J.n anfivcr rejoined, &c. page 23—26 : — The Dedication is to Charles I.
" Dr. Balguy, Difcourie 7 page 1 iS.
9 See Burn's Ecclefiallical Law, under Public Worjhip.
462 BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. II.
be a liccnfcd preacher, and chufe to preach a fcrmon ; othcrwife an Homily. Neverthelefs, Dr. Rilguy^s opinion appears to me to be juft : for it is now the general p-n8ice to preach ; and not check- ing pradice, is ratifying it. Then the form of or- daining a Priefl is, " take thou authority to preach the word of God." And old Canons before the Reformation*^, enjoin preaching. — For a while there was a neceffity for putting a ftop to preaching without licence; that neceflity is acknowledged, in our Article, to be the ground of publilhing the Homilies; but in all cafes ofneceiTity, when the difficulty which prefles is over, things return into their former regular channel ; theretore, in this cafe, when preaching is no longer dangerous, the obligation to ufe the Homilies ceafes.
I conclude this Hiftory with mentioning, that /)///)/;/'' fufpends his judgment in regard to this Article, having never read the Homilies which are the fubjec'l of it. — Some things in them might pofTibly occafion difficulties.
II. Our next bufinefs is Explanation.
Godly^ — fometimes Euo-fSn? means pious, as op- pofcd to virtuous^; and fo, 1 think, it does here; though fometimes it means good, in a popular fenfe, without diftinclion of Religion and Virtue; as when it is oppofed to uSmog^ — All religious doc- trines are not Vv'orthy of this epithet. The dodrine of the Mais has been called blafplieinous.
" JPliolfumc'' doctrine, we had in Art. xi. lalu- tary, ulciul; — "full of mercy and good fruits," according to" St. James's expreffion; or what we
fliould
? Burn, ibidem; and Sparrow's Rationale, i2mo. page 219.
T Third Appendix to iVlolhcim.
• Tit. ii. 12. * sPet. xi. 9.
^ James ili. 17.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. II. 463
fhould more commonly call, of a good 'moral tendency; godly relates to Religion, and wholjome^ to Virtue.
" Doctrine'' — the Latin word Docirka conveys a more JLift idea than the EngliOi word Doclrine. The meaning feems to be, teaching, inftrudtion.
DoSirine is fometimes '"^ oppofed to argiinientSy illuftrations; figures of fpeech, &c.
Saying that the Homilies convey pious and moral inftrudion, or " good and wholfome doctrine," feems to me to be oppofed to any high preten- fions; feems to fay, they may not h^ perfccl^ they may not be above criticifm^ but they are good and ufeful. — And who that has read them attentively, unprejudiced by the language.being fomewhat an- tiquated, is fo perverfe as not to allow this? who indeed does not allow it of any Sermon he hears, if the fundamentals of it are not to him, heretical,'* That cannot be the cafe while we conceive our- felves members of the Church of England; becaufe the principles of the Homilies muft be the lame with thofe of the Articles. — Take the words literally, and it is enough if piety and virtue are inculcated in two pages, though all the reft be worthlefs and infipid ; or even foolifli. — But in all interpretation, we fhould aim at finding out the true intent and meaning of the Author : and any perfon means to fpcak, or exprefs himfelf, on any fubject, as it is tifually fpoken of.
Suppofe then you had been hearing a Sermon, might not you fay of it, naturally, ' Our Preacher gave us a very good Sermon to da)', in a fpirit of true piety and virtue; I hope his hearers will reflect upon it.— That reconciliation of St. Paul and St. James, though a fenfible one, was not the very befl in my judgment; but the Sermon was a very
' good ^ Bennet's DIredions; on the Article.
464 BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. II.
good and ufeful Sermon r'— Such fecms to be the meaning ot the account which our Article gives of our Homilies. It cannot poffibly mean that they are totally perfedy unexceptionable, fuch as can never be improved upon by the human underftand- ing. Indeed the charadler given of them (hews great moderation; efpecially confidering how very good they mud appear when new.
*' And neceJJ'ary for thefe times -^^ — that is, for the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's reign : as the Epiftle to the Galatians was for the times in which it was written: — but necejjary feems oppofed to godly and wholfome: — the difcourfes are godly and wholfome in themfelves, without confidering any particular flate of things, but for thefe times, they are necejpiry : for times when all would be confufion and diforder v/lthout them; when that tmi/y of do^rine, which is neceffary to the very being of religious fociety, is unattainable in the common method of preaching. — I would farther obferve, on the word necejjary, that it feems to imply what we ordinarily call a cafe of necejfity : the nature of which is, to occafion certain meafures for a time, and to have them left off when the neceffity ceafes ''.
" And
y I never was more furprifed by a piece of crlticifm than by one in ihe Mcnt/ily Revieiu fov September 1790, page no, per- filled in, page 360, of the fame Vol. in fpite of the remonftrance of E. P. — In which, the words, " //le/e tizzies," are fuppofed to
be iinderftood by each fubfcriber, of his oiv?i times. The
Critic ridicules the notion of any one's underrtanding them of the times of the Reformation ; and argues, by way of reduclio ad abfurdiini, thit, if fuch were the cafe, any one who fub- fcribed the Article, mufl underiland ////?o/;>S nay, he might go on to oi/icr articles, and take t/ia.'i as declarations to be conllrued by fome fort of reference to the times in which they were made. — How much Hiftory any one muft underftand for oar pre/'ent .\rt. has already appeared; with regard to ct/iers, I have endea- voured
BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. II. 465
*' And therefore we judge them," &c.— who is meant by the word we ? Queen Elizabeth, I ap- prehend.? not the Subfcriber. The words feem part of an injunftion; I do no remember any thing like them in the Articles ; except " we decree" in Article xxxvi.
" By the M in i Iters, " — feems to confirm this notion ; it would be an odd thing for a Candidate for Deacon's Orders to fay, I think it proper, that fuch a particular fet of Difcourfes (hould be read by '* the Minijlers''
" Minifters," are diftinguiflied from Ucenfed preachers.
" To be read," - thefe words want no explana- tion ; but yet they fuggefl the difference between preaching and reading. When a man reads any- thing he does not anfwer for its being true : a man may read what is ever fo filfe, without the lead impeachment of his veracity. In a Court of Juilice, if a Cryer reads a depofiiion, he has no concern with the truth of it. The honefh Chap- lain of Sir Roger ^ de Coverly, read to the Family a Sermon, firfh of one author, and then of another; he gave their illuftrations and arguments fairly ; they might differ from each other; that was no concern of his. If the Statute Lazv of the Land requires me to read feveral pages of a book in a
certain
voured in the third Book (Chap, ix.) to fhevv how far Hirtory is ufeful for afcertaining their fenfe : and on every Article I have thought it well worth while to make fome hiftorical obferva- tions. — T believe the fenfe of " thofe thnes" given by the Reviewers, is quite ne^-w. All other accounts which I have ever feen, make the expreffion relate to the times of the Reform ?fi at I on. — {Book ui. Chap. ix. Sedt. vi.)
There is an appearance, in the above Criticifm, of defpijing the fubjedl, {0 as not even to iKiiJh to feem tQ be reifonable upon it.
2 Speftator, No. io6. VOL. IV. G G
466 BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. II.
certain aflembly, it muft be very bad ir\deed, or very erroneous, idolarrous, &c. before I fhould think myfclf obliged in honour and confcience to refift : in fuch a cafe might not the reader be allowed to fufpcd his own judgment ?
Heylin wilhes there had *' been more reading of Homilies, in which the reader fpeaks the fenfe of the Church ; and not fo much of fermonizingy in which the Preacher many times fpeaks his own fadious and erroneous^ fenfe." — I have fometimes thought, that even a Preacher ought to preach the fenfe of the Church, and not his own fenfe; as I had once an occafion of mentioning before **.
Is then Bilhop Burnet's obfervation juft, that one fhould believe the Romanifts to be Idolaters, before one figns this Article ? The Reader need not form a judgment; he reads to the Congregation the pafTages which arc quoted in the Homily, from Romifli writers ; and the arguments which are there ufed; let every man judge tor himfelf.
The titles of the Homilies vary, in different places where they occur, more than might be wilhed: of the Homily of Juftification we fpoke under the eleventh Articled That called the tenth Homily in our prefent thirty-fifth Article, is entitled thus, " 10. Of the reverent eflimation of God's Word;" but in the Book of Homilies it is entitled, " An information for them which take offence at certain places of Scripture ;" and one ihould be aware of the fame irregularity in other inflances. - Sometimes a title is more full in one enumeration, fometimes in the other.
III. We
* Heylin's Laud, page 9.
'» Book III. Chap. v. Seft. v. — I am glad to fee a Confir- mation of this idea Irom authority : See Sparrow's Rationale, page 2ig, duodecimo.
«^ Art. XI, Ssft. xxK
BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. III. IV. 467
III. We (hould now proceed to Proof; but it ieems to me, that our Explanation has rendered proof unnecelTary : at lead dire A proof: perhaps it m;iy be thought, that we ought to mention fome objeEiions to the HomiHes.
IV. I. It has been faid, then, that when our HomiHes reprefent'' different Patriarchs as defirous to have the Meffiah for a defcendapt, they err; becaufe it was well known, that the Meffiah was to be of the Tribe of Judak. But the Homily is fpeakingof Abraham and Jacob; who both would entertain fuch a with before Judah was born.
2. It has been faid, that paflages of the Apocry^ pha are^ afcribed to the teaching of the Holy Ghojl. — But the compilers of the fixth Ardcle would fcarcely make an Homily to contradict that Article m fenfe : — on examination it appears, that forae paffages of the Apocrypha are mixed and incor- porated with otheTS from the Book of Proverbs; and they, all together^ are pioufly referred to the Holy Ghoft. And why may we not refer any ex- preffion, as well as any a6tion, which we think good, to divine influence ?
Such a fentiment as is exprefled in our Homily by words taken from the Apocrypha, if it occurred in a work of the Imagination, in polifhed lan- guage, would by fome be called an heavenly fenti- ment. Little more feems to have been meant, in former times, when fome mention was made of the Holy Ghoft : only the view of the fubjedl might be always religious when fuch an expreffion was ufed. For the ordinary manner of referring events to heaven, fee Art. x. Sed. xxxix.
Making
^ Homilies, 8vo. page 290.-— The objeftion is mentioned in Eingham, Vol. 2. page 742, folio.
^ Page 303, oitavo. — on Alms, feccadPart. G G 2
463 BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. IV.
Making fuch poor objc6lions as thefe does in reality rcfled: great praife upon our Homilies.— Some exceptions, I think, have been taken to the Homily on Rebellion^ The reconciling of St. Paul and St. James has been thought not fo good as fome more modern. I have owned that I could not quite come up to fome exprcflions about good° works. But if we even fubjcribed to the Homilies (which we do not) and many more improvements had been made fince they were written, than thefe, or than have been made, I Ihould think myfelf fafe, on the principles laid down in the third Book*". I have hitherto fpoken, fince 1 entered on this Article, as if our Homilies were only excufeable, and deferved no praife; but diat was only for the fake of thofe who have a lefs favourable idea of them than myfelf. — I have really a very high opi- nion of them, and I read them with much pleakire; they fecm to me to fhew ftrong intelleds and fine feelings ; a very great infight into the true mean- ing of fcripture, and a very nice and accurate knowledge of mankind. They abound with fine ilrokes of eloquence, and they contain fome in- ftances of the ridiculous, which may be imitations of ElijaJi's farcafms on the Prophets of Baal.
The authors of them have been alfo very con- verfant in the writings of the Fathers, and in Church- Hiftory.
To mention one or two in particular; I have already quoted palfages from the fecond, third, fourth, and fifth, fixteenth, twenty-firfi, and the twenty-feventh. I have alfo recommended that on Matrimony'. But I thought we received the molt important fervice from thofe on what may be
called, *" Bennet, on the Article, (D*ire£lions). K Art. xm.Seft. v. Homily, part ift. on Good Works. *■ Book n I. Chap. vi. and Chap. ix. Sed, x.xi. » Art. XX v.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. V. 469
called, in a, large fenfe, Jujlification. — Strype is of opinion \ that the Homily on Salvation was par- ticularly the compofition of Cranmer himfelf. And Billiop Horjley praifes the fet' which we now fpeak of, and recommends them ftrongly to the perufal of the Clergy" of his Diocefe,
When we were treating of fingle life, I had in- tended to read the conclufion of the eleventh, as fusgeftincr rules for makins; that ftate innocent.
If thefe compofitions contam fo many thmgs worthy of notice in the prefent times, how valu- able muft they have been in fuch a dearth of Dodrine as prevailed at the times when they were publifhed! — I before had occafion" to ob- ferve, that they throw great light upon our Articles J and therefore I will now only add, that I find them continually improve upon me; jhe more 1 read them, the more I find in them to approve and admire.
This opinion, being in reply to objcclions, is part of our indireft proof.
V. As the " times" are, in this Article, ex- prefsly taken into confideration, any Application, arifing from eftimating the difference of times, feems to be unneceflary.
To enter into a difcourfe on the nature and benefits of preaching, would carry us too i\x out of our way; yet I may juft obferve, that our approbation of the Homilies muft not be under- ftood as if they fuperfeded the compofition of Sermons at this time: I faid fomething of this before, in the third Book °.
^ Strype's Life of Cranmer, page 149.
1 See thefe fpoken of coUeflively, Art. xi. Sed. xxi.
>" Charge, 1790, page 36.
" Introduftion to Book iv. Se£t. iv.
" Book III. Chap. v. Seft. vi.and Chap. ix. Sed. vi.
G G q ARTICLE
470 BOOK IV. AUT. XXXVI. SECT. I.
ARTICLE XXXVI.
OF THE CONSECRATION OF BISHOPS AND
MINISTERS.
THE Book of Confccration of Archbifhops and Bilhops, and Ordering of Priefts and Deacons, lately fee forth in the time of Edward the Sixth, and confirmed at the fame time by authority of Parliament, doth contain all things neceflary to fuch Confccration and Ordering : neither hath it any thing that of itfelf is fupcrflitious or ungodly. And therefore whofoever are confecratcd or ordered according to the Rites of that Book, fince the fecond year of the forenamed King Edward, unto this time, or hereafter fhall be confecratcd or or- dered according to the fame Rites; we decree all fuch to be rightl)'-, orderly, and lawfully con- fecratcd and ordered.
I. The twenty-diird Article was about the fub- ]e6t of ordaining in general; this is about the EngliJIi mode in particular.' Jt will be difficult to avoid fome repetition; but I will endeavour to avoid it as far as may be, without maiming our prefent fubjefl.— I begin with Hijlory. And here, as in fome former Articles, it appears to be our beft plan to begin with what feems to be the general reafon of the fads before us.
A religious
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. I. 47I
A religious teacher, commiffioned immediately by Heaven, has a fyftem of religion to publifli throughout the world. He muft employ men under him as his inftrumcnts. — He fends a fmall number on the bufinefs, he travels about to fome places himfelf. He dies. His adherents are not difmayed; the fame fmall number take a leading part: they conceive themfelves encouraged from above : they fet themfelves upon fixing their new Religion in different towns and cities; they form focieties at each place, which may fubfifl and in- creafe, after they have left it.— That is, they leave fome perfons veiled with authority. Thefe mufl be fteady, fober-minded perfons, and of mature age and prudence. Sometimes they meet with one man much more fit for their purpofe than the refl; to him they give the more authority on that account ; fometimes they find feveral perfons, equally qualified, or nearly fo; they divide autho- rity amongft them, make them a Council or Senate. Yet, in order to proceed fmoothly, fome one mufl prefide even in a Council. — And when one man has the chief authority lodged in him, he muft alk advice, and confult with others : no fear of that, where a man has the good of fociety entirely at heart, and is unbiafTed by interefl, or ambinon, or other indired motives. Nor, in fuch a cafe, is there a necelTity for defining exadly each man's powers; or forming what is called a Conjlitutioni each man will know, or be taught, the place he is lit for, and in that he will ad. Syflems of rela- tive powers, or conflitutions, are only for thofe, who, without them, would fall into diflenfion and anarchy.
In different places, fomething is found to depend
upon men's habitual notions and feelings ; that is,
upon the kind of government to which they have
G G 4 been
4/2, BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. I.
been accuftomed, in civil, religions, or domeftic fociety. — But ihoie who want to eftablilh reli;:;ious focieties, mud not only have proper perfons to govern, but to perform the offices of religion. It leems a thing of courfe, that Ibme of thofe offices fhould be performed by thofe who prcfide, or govern; even the moft diflinguiflied offices; but perhaps there may be a want of fome perfons to give themfelves "doholly to performing offices of Religion, and therefore to have no part in tlie cares of government; if fuch want appear, fuch officers muft be appointed. — The things now men- tioned are capable of a great variety of combi- nations, fo as to produce a great variety of forms of religious fociety.
Now only ufe the common nama for the perfons here defcribed, and we have a general view of our lubject. — For the one m:in, and the prefid^nt, put Bi/Iiopy or overfeer : for the Council or Senate, put pre/bytery ; and for the Senators, Elders or Pre/- byters\ and for the officers ot Religion, put Ajjjhovoj, Minifters, Deacons; and it is cafy to conceive, that a Bifliop may be an Elder, that Elders may a6t as overfeers; that a Billiop may be a Ajaxoysj, and that a Ajaxovo? may be an Elder : and yet that a Bilhop may be a fuperior to Elders, and lupcrior lo LiccKovoi.—j^ldermen are Elders: a Alayor is an Alderman, and yet fuperior to Aldermen; Mayor and fome Aldermen may be Minifters (Aij^xoyoj) of Juflicc; and a Corporation may have fome Minif- ters of Julticc which are not Aldermen '.
II. Let
" See Rom. xili. 4. for Miniflers or Ben.cons of Jiiflice, if I may fo fpeak. The word Minijitrs is the Englilh for in:vtinoi\, Luke i. 2. and i Cor. iv. 1. Therefore I ufe the word .^ia«o»o« in Greek, becaufe il it is trar.flattd eitht:r Minilhr or Deacon, it fec-ms to exclude the other. Mi^ht it Jiot be al.vays tranf- lated Minijier? — For JUcrmatiy fee ijkixiner's Lexicon Ety- mologicon.
HOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. II. 473
II. Let us now turn to Hiftor\\ and as It does not appear to me, that the Scriptures lay down any form of carrying on Religious Society, which Is to be followed on fcriptural authority, in ail places, and at all times, I need not rcferve fcriptural fads for Proofs but may make them a part of the Hijlory. — Acls xi. 30. Elders arc mentioned (I mean Chrijlian elders, tb.e Jewilh were members of the Sanhedrim), but their appointment is only implied. Acts. xiv. 23. Elders are Iblemnly ap- pointed, and in every church : the fort of perfons and the numiber, no doubt, fuitable to each place. — Ads XV. and xvi. Apoftles and Elders are men- tioned together, and Acls xv. 23. Apoflles^ Elders and Brethren -y the Apoftlcs were moveable, the elders and brethren, or commonalty, fixed ; the Elders governing the Brethren (or commonalty) in the abfcnce of the Apoflies.— ■ Ads xx. 17. St. Paul at Miletus fends for the Elders of Ephefus to come to him. — i Tim. v. 17. Elders who ride well arc to have honour. — i Tim. I v. 14. com- pared with 2 Tim. i. 6. feen^.s to fliew, that the Elders joined in the ceremony of ordination; even of Timothy himfelf: in 1 Tim. v. 22. Timothy is mentioned alone, as ordaining, but as it Is in the way of exhortation or advice to Timothy, the Elders might not be mentioned though they did join. — Ads vi. 6. all the Apollles lay on hands. — Tit. i. 5. Titus is to ordain (xaSirw/z-t) Elders in every city:— an hundred cities in Crete^ and no Bilhopbut himfelf. — James v. 14. fpeaks of Elders as cuftomary. — i Pet. v. i. Peter calls himfelf a o-uiWTT^Eo-SuTE^o?, a fcllow-prcfby tcr, or Elder; and in the next verfe, fpeaks of Elders as untrxoTiivTiq, overlooking, and feeding the flock of Chrift, the A^;)^t7ro</x»iv.— St. John calls himfc'f, at the opening
of ^ Powell's Thefis, page 366.
^74 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. II.
of his fecond and third Epiftles, 'O Tsr^fo-^urf^o?, « the Elder." No Epiftle is addrefled to tlie Elders. That to the Philippians is addrefled to the Chriflians at large, with the Ettio-xottoi? and Ajaxoioij: it there were '■^ ciders \ri every city ^\\\\Q.'it muft be at PhiUppi : they might be included in tlie word nrKyy.oTron;, as e-mjy.onhvTit; : why che, for fuch a Church as Philippi, is E-mc-KOTroi in the plural number" ?
The name of Ettjc-xotto? has been thought to come from the lxx, If. Ix. 17. It fignifics Over- Jeer. In the Englilh Bible the word Bilhop occurs but three times, befides Phil. i. i. already men- tioned, and I Pet. ii. 25. which lad is figurative : the words are, " the fhepherd and billiop of your fouls." The idea of Shepherd is more common than that of Overfcer : but they are joined Afts xx. 28. as well as here: the Greek word in Ads xx. 28. for Overfeer^ is ETncxoTro?. — timothy may not be failed a Bilhop, but he confers honours on the Elders, proportioned to their dcf^rts. He receives accufations againil them : and Titus ordains them: thefe are ads of a Superior. At firft, Apollles directed Elders. — Ads XX. 17. Paul, as before, fends for the Elders from Ephetus to Miletus. — Peter exhorts Elders. And the exprelfion, " Apoftlesand Elders," occurs feveral times. -Whatever is fuperior to Prefbyters, we fliould call a Bifliop''.
The
* Lardner mentions a notion, not as his own, that there mio-ht be, early in the Iccond Century, /a-o Bilhops of Antiocli at one time, one over Jcwijh, the other over Gentile Chrif- tiam. Works, Vol 2. page 66 there might, at any time, be fome ETTiffxoTroi fuperior to the ordinary Elders.
^ For the ground of the oblervations here made, fee Afts
XV. 22. — I Tim. V. I. 17. 19. — Titus i. ?•— » P<^t. v. i
I Tim. V. I. feems at firll as if Timothy nad not a right to rduhe an Elderj but when we compare that paffage with the
otliers.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. III. 473
The word Deacons occurs but in one Chapter (except Phil. i. i. before-mentioned) namely, I Tim. iii. — Atav.ovo? ofcener; Minijlers about five times, but not as the name of an office; ServantSy or Injlmments would have ferved the purpofe as well, — It is commonly faid, that Deacons were appointed, Ails vi. — the peiibns ordained to an ceconominal office are not called fo : nay, thofe who were not appointed, are faid to perfevere in the Ataxovtft — T8 Xoyv^ as the others in the Ajaxovj* Tvi HaOiifxE^iv'*). — Patil was a Ataxovo?".
Such are the Scriptural Fafts with regard to our three ranks of perfons ETrto-jioTroj, rTcfc-fuTf^o?, and Ataxovo?. I have meant to make a complete enu- meration of them : they feem to confirm our notion, that anyone may be all three; though the ETTtfl-jtoTroj is fuperior to the two others, I have feen no mention of any authority in the ■nr^ta-^vTs^o? over the Aiaxovo?^: nor do I fee all three mentioned together, in Scripture.
III. We come next to the Apcftolic Fathers. Firfl premifing from Bingham^, that the Grecian
and
others, the meaning feems rather to be, that though in ftrifl- nefs he might rebuke an Elder, yet on account of" his youth, and the age of the Elder, it might be advifeable for him to faften his rebuke into an intreaty : nay, his youth might make it more becoming in him to ufe gentlenefs even towards younger Chriftians. — Rebuke not, but, fcems to have fomething of com- parifon in it ; or a preference of one mode to another ; both ia ftriftnefs allowable.
* I Cor. iii. 5. — aCor. xi. 23. — On this fubje6t one might read Lardner, Vol. a. of his works. Preface, page vii. ix.— - And one might afk, why St. Stephen and the perfons ordained with him (Ads vi.) have hetn czW^di Deacons . Even the accu- rate Dr. Powell, page 366, calls themfeptem Diaconos.
^ That the Aia^^o^/o? might be of dignified rank, appears from Bingham's account of Archdeacons, i. 21. 1. 3. — An Arch- deacon was the head of the Deacons, and was fometimes made a Bifhop. SeeaJfo Bingham, 2. 10. 5.
* Bingham, 9. i. i.
47^ BOOK VI. ART, XXXVI. SECT. III.
and Roman ciiflom in forming chil focietics in Towns and Cities, was not unlike what has been now mentioned. — Each Town or City was governed by a Senate, and by a chief Magiftratc, who was, at the fame rime a Senator, and above the Senate. The Council had the names of B«A», and Senatits^ Ordoy Curia; and the Magillrate was called Ditia- tor^ or Defenfor Civhatis: his authority extended to a little dijtance round the city''.
Now it fecms as if the Apofllcs and their (\k- ccflbrs, in planting Churches; had formed focietics fimilar to thefe, leaning a little more or Icfs to the Monarchical, or Democraiical forms, according to the abilities and difpofitions of the perfons, and the cujioyns of the place. So that, the combinations of power admitting of fo great a variety of forms, it might happen, that no two Chriftian Churches had precifely the fame form of Government.
Clemens Ronianus, wiiiing to, and therefore about, the Church of Corinth, fixed in a Grecian mer- cantile city, fpeaks as St. Paul does wTiting about the Church of Philippi : he mentions only Erjo-xoTre* and Aiaxovji '. — He laments a perfon's being de- pofed TYig ETTto-xoTTt)? — from the fuperintendence: and then adds, happy are (not the E-rrKyy.oTroi, but) the Eiders who cannot be depofed ; who are fixed immoveable in Heaven^. He alfo, according to Lord King, makes rtyn [j-tvci, wliich was a name for
BiJhopSy
^ The fettlcment now (1792) fixing at Surra Leof/e, is governed by a Superintendent and Council.
^ Clemens Rom. 1. Ep. ad Corinth' os. Edit. Rufiel, (Patres
Apoftol) Sed.. 43. compared with 44. Ewtic-xottoj in the
plural, in one church, mult, I Ihould think, imply fome kind of Council : even if Epifcopi were a few leaders, they would confult together.
'' Ibid page 170, i7r.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. III. 4/7
BiJJjops, equivalent to IT^fo-^uTE^o*'. He fpeahs of jiibjehion to Prefbyters.
Polycarp alfo writes to the Pliiiippians, and of conrfe, of the Church at Phihppi ; a town in Europe, of Grecian manners and cuftoms, pro- bably; I do not fee that he mentions BiJIiops; but he exhorts the Philippians to be fubmiffive to the Prcjhyters"" and Deacons. Yet he himfelf was Bifhop of Smyrna, and writes from thence ; in his own name, and the name of the Pre/byters who were" zvith him. — Compare his Prefbyters and Deacons^ with Paul's Bljliops and Deacons., when addreffincr thtfame Church, and they will fee m to mean the fame Officers. — I Ihould conjedure, that a monarchi- cal Form of church-government, had never place at Phillppi.
Ignatius was bifliop of Antioch in Syria : and from thence he was dragged, even to Rome, to be torn in pieces by wild beads : on his way,' he was fuffered to flop at Smyrna, with Polycarp,' the Bifliop there. From thence he wrote to the Romans; and to three Churches near him; to the Ephefians, Magnefians, and Trallians. And .afterwards, when he had proceeded farther on his journey, he wrote from Troas to Polycarp", and
alfo
» Lord King's Primitive Church, page 89.— Clem. Ep. Seft. 57. page aio, RulTel, and page 211, notei_Twv ^^^s^a^v ^
But I find one or two places where >;>a/'/,evo» feems to me to mean ci^vil Magiftrates, and ■B^sj^v-n^oi old men; the aged : fee Sea. _i. (pase 8.) and Seft. 21. (page 94.)— And docs not the lall lentence in Seft. 40. mean three orders of Chriiliau Mhiijlers? Le-vite w'^'i not uncommon amongfl Chrillians for a lower order of Church Minifters, or Clergymen : and the context here is about Chriltians. For fubjedion to Prelhyters fee Chap, or Seft. 57. '
ni Polycarp. ad Philipp. Se^fl. 5.
" In fcription. — Could o-fi/ avrJ tsr^saCvTe^o*, imply Syp-^.'sc-- «vT6^oi } Fello-iv Prefbvtersr ° Ad Pel. Cap. i:.'
478 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. III.
alfo to Polycarp's Church, the Church of Smyrna;
and to that of Philadelphia. In all the Epiftles,
except that to the Romans, which relates to him-
felf and the fufiferings which awaited him at Rome,
he mentions diftincliy our t/:ree orders, BiOiops,
Prefbyters, and Deacons: and fays very ftrong
things in favour of fubjeclion to the two former,
efpecially BiJIiops. — I may read to you, of the
Epitlle to the Church of Smyrna, Chap, or Seel.
8. 9. 12. — Of that to Polycarp, (which changes
from lingular to plural number). Chap. 6. — Of
that to the Ephefians, Chap. 6. and Chap. 2. where
fubjeclion isinjoincd, to Bi/Iiop and Prejbytery, as it
is in Chap. 4. — Of that to the Magnefians^ Chap. 2.
and 6. — The Bifhopat Magnefia wd^s young, which
gives Ignatius more opportunity of contending for
his epifcopal authority : he mentions the Bilhop
as being in the place of God ; and the Prefbytery
as being in the place or fituation o-uveJon* tm
AworoKoiv^ i and the Deacons as being intruded with
the Anzxovisc Ijjo-)* Xoirrs: adorning this part with
words; perhaps in order to make the want of
power and authority lefs perceivable. — Of the
Epiftle to the PJiiladclphians, I might read the
Inlcription. — Of that to Trallimn, Chap. 2. and 3.
and 7. and 12. where the Elders are to a.)ix\'oyivt
Tov Ettjctko^ou, refocillare Epifcopum; and 13, where
the Church is to be fubjed to the Bifliop and
Prefbytery '*.
From thefe paiTages I conclude, that the govern- ment of Chriftian Churches was more ttionarchical in /Ifia Minor than in Europe ; particularly than at Plulippiy and ihr\t mart of Commerce, Corinth.
And
P Compare Ign. ad Smyrnrcos, Cap. 8. ad Trail. 2.
'^ Dr. Powell would not have ohjedled to this plain enume- ration of Fm'is.— Scs his Thefis, in his Volume, p;ige 364 .— " Quis eaim, poft inimeufos," Sec.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. IV. 479
And if we fuppofe a greater difpofition towards Defpotirm in the Afiatics, and towards Repubii- caniim in the Europeans, allowing perhaps Tome- thing for the great perfonal weight of Pclycarp, Ignatius and others, tiie difference may be fuffi- ciendy accounted for.
if there was any Form of Church Government which was properly Chriftian, how can one account for Poly carp's iaculcating a kind of fub- jedion to the Philippians, different from that which his own Church (at Smyrna) was exhorted to pay, by Ignatius? Polycarp alfo fends to the Philippians thofe Epifties of Ignatius, which in- culcate fubjedion to ETrjo-noTrot ; not becanfe they do that, but becaufe they contain ntov «ajj 'UQii.Qnv HKi Tsrota-xv oiKo^o[Jt,riv^ &c. (Pol. ad Phil. Sedc. 13 ) However, the difference of language as to fub- jedion would thus be generally underftood : the exhortations to fubmit to Bifhops would be known to Churches of the moft republican form, and vice versa.
We muft not let our prejudices lead us to imagine, that a primitive Bifliop of Smyrna was anything like a modern BiOiop of Durham; any more than that Kifig Romulus was like Louis Qiia- torze, or a Perfian Monarch.
IV. We have now gone through the mofl fignificant part of our Hiftory. As Chriftianity fpread, it filled whole provinces; thefe were divided widi fome fort of analogy to the civil. divijions' found adually fubfifting. And it muft generally be moft convenient to have the place of public refort for_ civil affairs, to be the fame with that for ecclefiaftical bufinefs ; people can moft eafdy get to it; and the circumftances which made it moft convenient for the one, will generally make it moft
" Bingham, Book 9. Chap. r.
480 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. V.
fo for the otiicr. The more complex public wor- (hip grew, the more officers would be wanted, and orders would become more dijiant : Bifliop3 would become higher Officers, Deacons lower. — At the Council of Nice^ Paphnutius fpoke* of three orders as we fhould: and lb fpoke Auguftin'. — The Aeriam'' confidered Bilhops and Prefbyters as the fame ; but they leem to have been fingular in this ; at Icafl our notion was by far the moll common".
It has been before obkrved that the IValdenJes had fcm.ething like our three Orders. — Art. xxiii. Seel. IV.
V. I am not aware -' of anvthing farther worth mentioning till the time of the Reformation. Then that great change took place of ordaininp; wholly, in feme churches, by Elders — Anii at that time, there was an idea of contracting Diocefes^, or making many more, and thcretore many more Bidiops, in a given fpace.
We mentioned, under the twenty-third Article, Seel, vt, the Lutheran Superintendents, and the ideas of ordaining amongfl PrcPoyterians and the Ind -pendent Congregr.tions. But we did not
mention,
' See Council of Nice, in Socrates, lit. and Suidas.
' Ep 21. repeatedly. — Aug. is ar..\'iDus about not being_^/ to be a Pricft; he would ftudy, tcc. and writes for a BijQiop'i advice.
" ^ee I.cirdncr's Works, Vol. 4. page 306.
* See Brocter on Councils, page 81. the 22d Canon of the Council of Milevi.s A. D. 416. — And feveral inftances fronri Clem. Alex. — Origeii, and Tertu'lian, in Nicholls on Common Prayer, on the Preface to the forms of Oniination. And that expreflion of Apoftolic Canon 2. ' Let a Prefbyter be ordained by one Bifhop,' (hews, that Prefbyter and Bifhop could not always be fynonymous.
y Art. XXI! I. S-:(5l. iv— Neal fays, that Wickliffe held only two orders ; Bilhopi or Prefbyters, and Deacons, 1. page 3. — WicklifTc fecms to have had fome Puritanical authority.
* Bingham's Works, i. 409. folio.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. V. 481
mention, that the Enghfh Forms of ordaining Bidiops and Priefts were, at the time of the Re- formation, lefs plainl)' diftinft from each other than they are now. However, the a6l of Ujiifcrmity^ made tipon the Relloration, requires us to alFent to our prefent Article according to the Forms now in ule% which were only compofed in 1661, or 26621 — Bifhop Burnet mentions a fcruple in the time of Queen Elizabeth, which occafioned Par- liament, and the compilers of our Article to look back, and to declare all Ordinations valid iince the end of the fecond j'ear of Edward VI. which had been performed according to the Book compofed and publifhed, in the third year of King Edward, though riot ratified by Parliament till his fifth year.
Anciently, all Bifhops were appointed ^ by Elec- tion. But Eleiftions grew too tumultuous, and rhe appointment got into the hands of 2. fezv : it occafioned great difputes between the Popes and the Sovereigns of Europe 5 but our Henry VIII. fet- tled
* See the end of the A£l of Uniformity in the fourteenth
year of Charles II. And Beanet's Diredions. See alfo
Mofheim, 8\'o. Vol. 4. page 91. add Neal, i. page 43. 1 do
rot feem to underlland Neal in this pafTage; he feems to {peak as if in King Edward's tim^, in 11549, our forms of ordainina, or confecrating, had been the fa7>ie for BiQiops and Priells ; whereas they are only the fame in things common to both ranks: as about fludying the Scripture, and oppofmg Herefy. In other things they differ. — And the principal difference between Kincj- Edward's Forms and thofe made at the Reftoration of Charles II. confifts in this ; in the old ones words of Scripture were ufed, addrefTed to Timothy as Bifhop, (a Tim. i. 6, 7.) and in the new ones the nuord Bifhop was ufed; and fo of Priejl.
'• Bingliam, Book 4. Chap. z. — Stillingfleet, Unreaf. of Separ. part 3. — Clem. Rom. Ep. Seft. 44. page 168. Edit. Ri;flel. — For Ele^liosis growing tumultuous, fee Bingham, 4. 2. 6. — Baxter on Councils, page 66. (and, I think, page 99. roi.) — Nicholis on the words, " The elefted Bilhop," &c. and Dr. Powell's Thefis, in his Volume, page 365. vox. IV. H H
482 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. VI. VII.
tied the matter in England, as it now is; giving a Conge cCelire to a Chapter, but punifliing them if they did not eled" the perfon whom he nomi- nated. Bifliop Warburton confiders (lich patronage as a compenfation made by the"' Church to the ftate for protedion, and for the ufe ot a compul- five force.
VI. Mofheim' fays, that the Socinians (the early ones I fuppofe) have four facred orders ; to our three they add that of Widows ; why not DeaconeJJes alfo, like the Puritans? or thofe men- tioned I Cor. xii.? — I do not fee Widows men- tioned in the Racovian Catechifm.
VII. If we wifh to fee what the Council of Trent fays on our prefent fubje<5V, we may read the fourth, fifth, fixth, and feventh Canons of the twenty-third SefTion^ — With regard to uninter- rupted fucceffion of Bifliops, we have faid enough before; as well as upon the fubjeft of re-ordain- ing.— And upon the Puritanical notion, that all rules are to be derived from Scripture. In Strype's Annals, we have an account of a Puritan Profeflbr at Cambridge, Cartwright^ who v\as complained of to the Chancellor of the Univerfity for having held, that " Officia et nomma mpietatisy* are intro- duced into our Church; meaning Archbifhops, &c. — Cambridge was then " a Nell of Puritans," — According to the Article of 1532, people, in fub- fcribing to it, fubfcribed to the Liturgy \ but in 1562, alTent to the Liturgy became unneceflary :
how
e Blackftone, Index, Conge d' elire.
^ Warburton's Alliance.
« Molhcim, oftavo, Vol. 4. page 185, Note.
•' For the things mentioned in thefe fixth and feventh Setflions, fee Art. xxiu. iJedl. vii.xi. — John Burges, page 3. 26. 42. —Strype's Annals, Vol. i. page 583. A. D, 1570 — Neal, Vol. 1. i^age 190 428. where is our 7th Canon of 1604. — Dr. Powell, page 28.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT VII. 483
liow the Church was again driven into requiring it, Dr. John Burges (hews in very few words; and at the fame time that he accounts for our fubfcription to the Liturgy in general, he declares, that he only ali'ents to the ttfe of it, and the fame of the rites of our Church.
But it is time to put ah end to our Hiftory : I will only mention then one or two things briefly. - — Bingham exprefles, in 1726, a wi(h", that Z)/<?- cefes could be contraEied^ according to the idea of our Reformers. — Mr, Granville Sharfs notion of a right appointment of a Minifter, is, that he ihould be appointed as Matthias was*'; by /o/, out of two fixed upon by fuffrages of the Church.
Dr. Powell's Thefis is to be much recommended, in which he proves, that neither the Church- Government of England, nor that of Scotland, is repugnant to the Law of Nature, or to the Word of God. It contains all the Elements of Religious Society, expreffed in the beft manner.
Dr. John Burges' told King James, (&c. as be- fore), that with regard to our prefent fubjecft, he did not mean to exprefs approbation of every phrafe, &c. in the Ordinations, but only to declare, that our calling and ordination was, on the whole, fuch as not to be deemed unlawful, or contrary to the word of God.— His fenfe was accepted as the right one.
The Romanijls feem to make the fame three Orders which we make. See Council of Trent, the fixth Canon of the twenty-third SelTion.— As to Nicholls's faying, that they make Bilhop and
Prieft
s Bingham, i. page 409. folio.
^ Ads i. 26. — This is what Mr. Granville Sharp has men- tioned to me, in Converfation. I hope I have rightly under- flood him.
^ Burges, page 26.
H H 2
484 BOOK IV. ART, XXXVI. SECT. VlII.
Pried equal, becanfe the Priefl can make his God, and the Bifliop can do no more, that is charging cou' fequences of opinions, contrary to our fixth Canon of Controverly. Book 11. Chap. v. Se(fl. vi.
Dupin, difputes the validity of fome Englifh Ordinations in T/ieory, but would allow them in pradice, if an union took place''.
VIII. We now come to Explanation.
In the tide, " Minifters" includes Priefls and Deacons.
" In the time of Edward VI," there were two Reviews of the Liturgy j one in the fecond, and the other in the fifth of Edward VI. but only' one form of ordination : we have no concern with this matter now, as we fubfcribe to the Forms made at the Reftoration.
" Doth contain all things neceffary^^ — this is modeft : it is not faying, that our Forms are the mojl rational and fcriptural that ever were or could be made; nor even that they are not defective; but only, that they have no liich capital defedt as to deftroy the ejjence of an ordination.
Neither have our forms anything in them that " \s fuperjlitions and ungodly:'' they may be inele- gant, unbecoming, injudicious; but they cannot be called fuperftitious or impious,— in Latin, im- pium-, which reminds one of Cartwright's "officia et nomina impietatis." *' JVe decree,^* is the fame ftiie of Injun£iion that was remarked in Art. xxxv.
The expreflions amount only to this, that our Forms have no defedl or fault fo great as to annul our Ordinations.
IX. And
^ Appendix Third to Machine's Molheim.
' So I gather from Burnet on the Article; and Neal under Edward VI. — Yet Nicholls mentions fomething which was different in the firft and fecond books of Edward VI. —the Ordination Oath.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. IX. X. 485
IX. And now with regard to Proof, what fhall we fay .? all that we have to prove is, that * the Englifli Ordinations are valid j or not invalid.*— If every Church can fettle its own rites, the thing is proved; and that this is the truth, muft appear from the Hiftory now given, and from what has gone before, in the twenty-third Article. From thefe we are led to conclude, that it is our bufi- nefs, and our duty, to adopt that Form of Church- Government which falls in beft with our circum- ftances and habitual notions : that it would be wrong therefore to have a monarchical Church- Government in a fmall republic, or a republican one in a large monarchy.
Indeed we might go through our Forms, and defend the feveral expreffions we meet with ; but that would be unnecelTary labour; a better plan would be, to fee what ObjeBions have been made to them; or what difficulties they have occafioned; if thefe admit of folution, we may take for granted that the reft is unexceptionable.
X. Thus we are led to indired proof: — and the objedions are fuch, that we may propofe them together, and fo anfwer them without interruption. That Orders is no Sacrament, has been fliewn under the twenty-fifth Article ; and the word " called'^ has been explained at large. Nor need we take farther notice of the Romilh arguments againft our Ordinations.
I. Is it rioht to have officers in the Church whofe very names'^ are not found m Scripture ; as Archbi/Jiops, Archdeacons, &c. ?.
2. We
"o This was the notion of Profeflbr Cartwright before-men. doned ; fome of the other notions might be found in Strype's Annals, in the years 1570 and 1573, in the affairs of Cart- wright, Dering, &c. — Bering is mentioned. Vol. 2. page 27'. H H 3 He
486 BOOK IV. ART. \XX\'l. SECT. XI.
2. We meet \w\th t/iree names, indeed, ETrtTxoTror, Ilffo-SuTf^of, and A»«xoi/of, but we have no right to conclude from thence that there were three dif- tindl Ranks.
3. And fuppofing there were, BiJJiops ought not to be men of worldly dignity ;
4. Nor Prefbyters, now called Priejls, fo far inferior to BiQiops, as they are made in the Church of England.
5. Nor ought Deacons, appointed originally for purpofcs of (economy, to be fo much of fpiritual and clerical perfons as the Englifh make them.
6. Then, making ecclefiaftical ordinations, or trufts, to have any dependence on temporal powers, in the way of patronage, or otherwife, is contrary to the nature of Chrifl's fpiritual kingdom. Such ordinations mud want completing" by fcriptural Prejhyteries. — Thefe fix objections are all of the puritanical caft.
7. But it has alfo occafioned difficulty, that can- didates for Deacon's orders are afked whether they truft that they *' are inwardly moved by the Holy Gliojl to take upon" them the office of Deacon.
8. And, that the ordaining Minifters undertake to convey the Holy Ghojl to thofe whom they ordain. — Now in effeft we have already replied to mofl of thefe objections and difficulties; but a word or two direftly oppofed to them, may have its ufe.
XT. When Bilhops become numerous, they muft have fome Jubordination fettled amongft them, clfe they could not aft jointly, or with unity.—
That
He writes to Lord Burghley for relief. — I think Lord Burghley was both Minifter of i>tate and Chancellor of the Univerfity of Cambridge. — " Of collei^ors for the poor, or Deacons" -h a fynodical title of the Puritans, in i 576. Neal, i. 232.
" See Bingham, French Church, Book 4. Chap. 5. — Neal's Hift. Pur. Vol. I. page 23 3. — Qawton's Letter to the Bifhop of Norwich after deprivation.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. XII. 487
That fubordination might fometimes be tacit, through general refpeft to fome great and good Prelate; but ordinarily it muft be by means of authority exprefsly given. And fuch authority requires an official nojne" to denote it, and make it inftantly felt. There is nothing more in giving fuch names, than providing that all things *' be done decently and in order." — If there are many OverfeerSy how can order be maintained without an i/^<7^-overfeer? — But it muft not bethought that the names of Archbilliop and Archdeacon were invented by the Church of England : they have exifted ever fince they were wanted. Metropolitans and Arch- deacons have been known in the Church thefe fourteen hundred years. — Nay, we might have Jerom's authority for adding Arckprefbyters^.
XII. Suppofing it were allowed that there were only two orders in the Church of Philippic or, Corinth; though to me it feems probable that the ETrttTKOTTo; might be fuperfor to the ordinary Pref- byters ; yet there can be no doubt but the AJiatics had three orders^ and only one Bifhop in each church. Let then the Prefbyterians have a Council to govern them, I fee no harm ; but let as not be blamed {ox having Bilhops. If all are to go by Scripture, why do not feparatifts imitate the orders, or ranks, mentioned i Cor. xii. 28. and Eph. iv. II..'' Our opinion is, that we are to have what, in our circumftances, beft anfwers, according to our judgment, the ends of religious fociety. We conceive, that Chrift no more in- fifted on a Prefbytery without Bifhop; than on Aldermen without Mayor; or than on the newly
appointed
• See the reafon for giving the unfcriptural name Sacrament, Art. XXV. Sedt. xi. — Chrift is «^;i^iwoift»v, t Pet. v. 4. >* Bingham, Book 2. Chap. 16 and 21. H H 4
^88 BOOK iV. ART. XXXVl. SECT. XIU. XIV.
appointed Council of Sierra Leone without Super- intendent.
XIII. Why Bifliops fhould have worldly dig- nity, fome reafons have been given in tlie third? Book. *' Let no man defpife thee," fays St. Paul to Titus', fpeaking of the exertion of fpiritual authority : if the injunction be not for Titus, but his flock, flill it lays an obligation on them, and on all, to prevent the contempt cf the Clergy. — We have no good reafon to think, tiiat Chi ill had any objedion to Kings being nurjing-fathers to his Church, or that if St. Paul \vere now alive, he would fay, that Chriftian Biiliops lliould not '' fland' before Kings," and in luch a form as would help to promote the right fpirit of courtly afTeniblies. — At firft, Chriftians could only pray for Kings* and for all that were in authority; but other means of promoting the good ends of civil government, they never feem to have avoided, as things not belonging to them. The revenues of the Church have been fomctimes applied too much to purpofes of Luxury ; but fuppole a well-chofen Bilhop to confider them as a triijl, and to difpenfe them in promoting virtue, piety, and learning; in furnilliing libraries, &:c. <kc. (which is the only right idea of them), they would beof immenfe value to the public. The Gofpcl was to be preached to all nations : a nation, as fuch, might become Chrif- tian, of whatever ranks and Qrders it confifted.
XI v. Prejhytcrs'' or Priefts, may not be, in all refpecls, what they originally'' were; all things
mull
<i Book ni. Chap. xiv. Sedl, viii,
' Titus ii. 15.
' Prov. xxii. 29. ' 1 Tim. ii. 2.
" Prefby ter, Preftre, Pietre, Prieft. (Nicholls).
^ Lardner, who ftems to hold but two ranks, fays Prefbyters were 10 preach, reprove, rthukc, S;c. Works, Vol. 2. Introd. page ix.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. XV. XVI. 4S9
muft yield, muft dilate, contrad, and fuit them- felves to utility, in different circumftances. As the Church encreafed, and more nations came Into it, Bilhops grew higher. Deacons lower; Priefts were intermediate , though even then the three ranks were only fuch as Clemens defcribes. — The civil Magiftrate found himielf induced, and called ujpon, to interfere; this might take off from the ruling^ of the Prefbyters, and turn them more to teaching and minifterial offices. — Only let us not have two different ideas of the fame word, and difpute as if we had the fame. Such contention muft be endlefs.
XV. It feems right that we (hould have fuch inferior minijiers as we want; as to their official name being Deacon^ it is of no confequence. I do not know that, according to Scripture, Stephen was a Deacon more than St. Paiil^. Nor do 1 fee, that Eufehius^ calls Stephen a Deacon. But if he had been called Deacon, he certainly did fpiritual offices ; Fhilip baptized the -Ethiopian, Stephen worked miracles, and harangued the Jews. He would not have ht^n Jioned for ferving tables.
XVI. Unlefs civil power fupports religious fociety, the maintaining of it feems quite impra^ii- cable; as we have before obferved. Suppofe a company of Players chofe to profane the Lord's Day at Edinburgh, where it is kept with great liridnefs, how would the church of Scotland pre- vent the profanation by any power merely ecclefi- aftical ? — Thofe who maintain, that " Chrift was
the
y I Tim. V, 1 7.
'^ I Cor. iii. 5. as before, Seft. n.— -Rom. xv. 8. Chrift was
^ Beginning of his Ecclefiaftical Y^Aoxy.^ Ignatius feems to confider Deacons (that is, Aiaxonoi reckoned w/M Ettj^tkowo* and •ErfEo-^VTEfoi) in a_/^;V//7/«/ light. Ov yoi.^'B^u^a.Tui xon 'monrui nctv Jtaxofoj, a^^' ixx^rjtriaj ©sb »7r»}§£T«».— Ad Trail, Se(5l. 2.
490 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI, SECT. XVI I.
the only Lawgiver in his*' Church," muft give up m pra^ice ■wha.t they hold in theory"-. — But of this enough before. — The nature of Patronage was mentioned juft now.
After all, the general defigns of the Puritans, to ftrengthen religious difcipline^ to make it pervade every order of men, and notice every immoral ad:, feem to me very ^ laudable. Nay, it is no way neceflary, for our prefent bufinefs, even to deter- mine which mode of Church-government is beft, theirs or ours ; perhaps neither may be good abfo- lutely, in all circumftances; nor either bad in certain iituations : our Article only afferts, that ours is not radically faulty, fo as to have no effi- cacy; fo as not to retain the eflence of a Church''. — The remaining difficulties may be more amongft ourfelves.
XVII. As to the queflion, " do you truft that you are inwardly moved by the Holy Ghoji to take upon you this office," &c. it cannot occafion much difficulty to any one who has accuftomed himfelf to obferve the manner in which every good aflion or purpofe, is, in fcripture, referred to the Holy Spirit. This was our fiibjc5l in Art. x. and has been feveral times mentioned fince. — Phil, ii. 13. — James i. ly. might revive former ideas. Thefe things confidered, the queftion amounts to no more than this. Are you conjciom of good intentio>is in your prefent undertaking? are you " in all things' willing to live honeflly^'' in the fituation to which you aipire ?— Befides, a candidate is only afked whether he trufls that he is moved; this implies
uncertainty,
** Neal I. page 233, as before. ^ See Dr Powell's Thefis, page 369, top. *• Neal I. page 232. Clafles.
* See Archbifhop Wake to Pere Courrayer, July 9, 1724.— Mofli. Cent. 18. Sedl. 23. 8vo. Vol. 5. page 94. Note. ' Heb. xiii. 18.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. XVII. 49 I
\mcertalnty, and entirely excludes entluifiaftic pre- lumption : indeed as die Reformers were no enthu- fiafts, a man might affure himfelf beforehand, that they had no enthuliaftic meaning.
Similar enquiries might be made of one entering into any other profeffion, where he might poffibly have an end in view diftind: from the good of that profeffion. — Do you really mean to make a good Soldiery or only to wear a gay uniform ? are you infpiredhy a true martial _/p/r// .^ So, do you really mean to make a good minifter, or only a tithe- gatherer, or a lounger ? — But if this be the mean- ing, you will fay, why not remove all difficulties by afking the queftion in the words which now explain its meaning ? I fuppofe the reafon is, be- caufe the phrafe ufed, is mo(k fcriptural ; cfpecially for Deacons -y (indeed the queftion is not propofed to Priefts, or Bilhops;) to fee this, one need only read Adts vi. 3. 5. (which is transferred into our quef- tion,) and conlider circumftances. Se^;en men are chofen, to make a fair diftribution of what bounty has thrown into a common llock : a qua- lification for this temporary office was that aMfeven muft be "/?/// of the Holy Ghojiy'' as well as have a good charadler, and prudence; that is, knowledge of accounts, market-prices, &c. — We can imme- diately fee the propriety of fuch men having a good character, and being prudent ; being full of the Holy Ghoft is a phraie not now familiar; we muft confider with what it \% joined: it muft mean fome rcquifite for managing the temporal concerns of religious fociety : might it mean, full of an holy temper? interefted about Religion ? a good temper or intention is to be referred to the Holy Ghoft. — But there are many other texts which tend the fame way, and would ferve to confirm thofe who framed the queftion, in their purpofe —Luke i. 15.
AcT:s
492. BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. XVIII.
Ads vii. 55.— ix. 17. — xi. 24. — xiii. 52. — xx. 28. — 2 Pet. i. 2i.-There and others would ferve alfo to make the phrafe more familiar to us ; and thereby remove our greateft difficulty in the ufe of it.
XVIII. When our ordaining Minifter fays, " Receive the Holy^ Gholl for the office," &c. there can be no doubt of his ufing thofe words of Scripture, John xx. 22. — In the office for Priefts, he goes on to ver. 23. in that for Bifhops, he proceeds to 2 Tim. i. 6, 7. — John xx. 23. is an Ordination, or Confecration.
This might be of an higher kind at firft, than fince, in the ordinary ftate of the Church, as we ha,ve feen of fcveral things: but what could be a more proper way of givmg a commilTion to preach, abfolve, &c. than repeating the words which our Lord ufed v;hen he gave the fame commiffion; un- derftanding them in a lower fenfe f' Suppofe you had to compofe a Form for the purpofe : would you not fay. This muft not be expreffed like a jecular and civil appointment ; it fliould be ex- preffed in fome words, of Scripture. " We preach not ourfelves*", but Chrift Jefus the Lord:" we are not difciples of Paul, or of Apollos, but of Chrift : that commiffion which Chrift gave^ we hand down from generation to generation ; how can we more flrongly mark it for his, than by ex- preffing it in his words ? — As the Holy Ghoft is to guide us into all truth, and as Chrift is to be with his Church to the end of the world, it is
not
8 This is not the office of Deacon', he trujis he is mo-vedhy the Holy Ghoft, and does not receive it : Prieil and Bifhop think in their hearts that tliey arc truly called, and do receive the Holy Ghoft. Is anything particular meant by this ?
' 2 Cor. iv. 5.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. XIX. 493
not to be imagined that any appointment of a facred minifter can take place without fome bleffed heavenly influence \ but it is not mmi who caufes that influence, but Chrift himfelf. Man only- repeats a Form as Agent for him who inftituted it. If man could convey any fpiritual bleffing by his own power, he would ufe his own words; the words ufed by an Herald when he proclaims war or peace, may found prefumptuous, as if he pretended to give one or the other ; but they are not his own words; they are always underflood to be the words of his Sovereign ; and nothing but fome great ahufe, can prevent, their being efFedual.
This form feems to have been quite eftabliflied in the time of Auguflin', in the Latin Church: and in the Greek Church there has been in ordi- nations fome mention of the Holy Ghofl. Yet, in general, it is faid, that the Greek Forms have been more indicative, the Latin ones more opta- tive or precatory ''. As, « mayefi thou receive the Holy Ghoil.' Some have thought that our ex- preffions might bear that , fenfe ; like, * Every good attend yon: — < Be you happy, whatever be- comes of me^* &c.
XIX. As we do not feem to have occafion for an Application, in this Article, I will clofe my re- marks upon it by a fort of paraphrafe, of the words, " Receive the Holy Ghoji;' &c,
* As Jefus Chrift, when he fent his Apoftles to preach the Gofpel in all the world, gave them his comm.iffion, and promifed a ratificatian of their authority; and as it is his will that a Commiffion, in kind the fame, though of a lower Degree'
fhould
' Aug. deTnn. It;. 26. (NIcholls).
^ See a like diftinaion in the Form of Abfolution\ Art. x.vv. Seft. IV.
494 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. XIX.
fhould be perpetually conferred for the benefit of his Church ; I, heretofore regularly appointed, do confer the fame on You ; ufing the v/ords of our Lord, as beft conveying the nature of the Trnjh, and leaving it to his unbounded wifdoni to fulfil them in that degree which (hall feem to him, in any ftare of his Church, mod fuitable and ex- pedient.'
ARTICLE
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. I. 495
ARTICLE XXXVII.
OF THE CIVIL MAGISTRATES.
THE King's Majefty hath the chief power in this Reahn of England, and other his Domi- nions, unto whom the chief Government of all eftatesof this Realm, whether they be Ecclefiafti- cal or Civil, in all caufes doth appertain; and is not, nor ought to be fubjed to any foreign Jurif- didion.
Where we attribute to the King's Majefty the chief government, by which Titles we underftand the minds of fome flanderous folks to be offended; we give not to our Princes the miniftering either of God's Word, or of the Sacraments ; the which thing the Injuncftions alfo lately fet forth by Eliza- beth our Queen, do moft plainly teftify; But that only prerogative, which we fee to have been given always to all godly Princes in holy fcriptures by God himfelf; that is, that they fhould rule all eftates and degrees committed to their charge by God, whether they be Ecclefiaftical or Temporal, and reftrain with the civil fword the ftubborn and evil-doers.
The Bidiop of Rome hath no juril<di(5lion in this Realm of England.
The Laws of the Realm may punifli Chriftian men with death, for heinous and grievous offences.
It is lawtul for Chriftian men, at the command- ment of the Magiftrate, to wear weapons, and ferve in the wars.
I. The
496 BOOK IV.. ART. XXXVII. SECT. I. TT.
I. The Hifiory of this Article may confift of two fcparate Hiftorics: and the fecond of them may include the Miflory of the two following Articles, the thirty-eighth and the thirty-ninth.— The firft Hiftory Ihould be of the Pope's Supre- macy; the fecond, of the notions of thofc, who, aiming at perfenion^ reje(fl fome practices which arc ordinarily reckoned ufeful or neceflary in human Life : fuch as governing by Ch-ll Magif- trateSy inflifting capital puniJJimcnts^ carrying on war^ poffeffing property^ and taking oaths on folemn oc- cafions. That thefe may go together^ will appear hereafter.
II. Firfl, \\t i^kt iho. Pope's Supremacy : a great deal has been written on this fubject, but it is now Ids interefling than it was in the time of our Henry VIII.
Hiftorians tell us, that Chriftianity was planted in our liland fo foon as the' Apofbolic age; though it is not known what perfons lirft taught it to our Anceftors. At the great Council of Nice in 325, it was underftooci, that the Britifh Chriftians were not brought under any foreign Patriarch or Metro- politan, but were an independent Church ^ — The Ifiand was invaded by Saxons^ who were then Ido- laters; and Gregory the Firil:, (or the Great) fent a Monk called Aitgujlin, very early in the feventh Centuiy, to convert, them. He required the Britifh Chriftians to be in fome fubjeclion to the See of Rome, but they refufed. The Saxons Ihewed
more
* Collier's Ecclef. Illllory, from Glldas, kc. — Comber's Advice, page i t r.
'' Can. 6. Dionyf. Exig. refcncd to by Comber. This
Dionyfius, called the Little from his ftaturc, was a Scythian by birth, but rcfidcd at Rome; lived to near the midale of the fixth Ccntviry ; was famous for making a good colleftion of Canons, &c. and is fiid to have been the beginner of our cullom of reckoning time from the birth of Chrill. (Ladvocat.)
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. II. 497
more refpe'^ to thofe by whom they had been con- verted, but kept clear of fubjedion. At that time it appears, that the Bilhop of Rome, (who, like other Bidiops, was fometimes called Papa^ a refpeftful appellation,) was fubjed to the Emperor, and con'iidered the Emperor as governing" Jacred perfons. Indeed the Emperors had always, till the time of Gregory VII. in ibnie degree conferred the Popedom: he was the laft Pope whofe eledion was confirmed by the Emperor. The early Chrif- tian Emperors had always ordered Councils^ and prelided at them ; how much authority they exer- cifed over the Church, appears from a great many Roman Laws now extant in the Corpus Juris civilis.— Though the Popes, in the day of their greatnefs, affumed unbounded authority, yet in the early times of Chriflianity, they had only that 'precedence which naturally arofe from Rome being the feat of the Empire. Under the nineteenth Article we had occafion to compare the fee of Rome with thofe of Jerufalem, Alexandria, and Antioch"^, Pope Vidor, who died in 201, (hewed a good deal of arrogance in the difpute about Eafter, and excommunicated fome worthy^ men who differed from him ; but even thofe of the Latin Church did not think it a duty to fubmit. — The mild and good Irenaiis^ oppofed him, and wrote to him a a letter, from himfelf and the Brethren in Gaul, ftill extant in Eufebius. — About the year 372, VaUntinian'^ publiflied a law, by which, in order to
avoid
^ See Bower's Lives of Popes, Vol. z. page 500. where Gregory I. fays, that God gave the Em^Qvortiominari/acer' dotibus.
^ Art. XIX. Sea. 11.
« See Lardner under Polycrates; Works, Vol. 2. page 243.
^ Lanlner, Vol. 2. page 157. — Euieb. cap 34. BoW'^r's
Life of Vidlor.
8 Bifliop Hallifax on Prophecy, pag<9 336. from MoiheuB,
VOL. IV. I I
498 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. II
avoid going to profane Tribunals, Bifhops were obli(;ccl to refer their difputes to the fee of Rome : this might be one reafon why the papal pretenfions kept rifing till the Council of Chalcedony in 450. At that Council it was held, that, as there were two feats of Empire, the two Prelates who pre- fided at them, (hould be upon the fame rank. — This continued till 580, when Conftantinople claimed univerfal church-fupremacy. But Phocas, an Emperor of flagitious chara6);er, being rather checked for his enormities by the Patriarch of Conftantinople, and ftrongly flattered by the*" Pope, declared the latter the fupreme Governor of the Catholic Church.
In the ninth Century the Eaftern and Weflern Churches fcparated. The Pope became a fecular Prince, by the Revolt of the Exarchate of Italy, in the contentions about Images, which muft help the growth of his fpiritual dominion. He in- volved, at one time or other, moft European Nations in great troubles; of which there feemed likely to be no end, fo long as he could make re- ligious terror, and other paffions, operate on the minds o^ the ordinary fubjecfts, and maintain a llrong feeling for the fancftity of religious orders. — In England he gained an influence about the time of the Conqueft, by affifting the Conqueror ; and from that time to the reign of Henry VIII. it was a perpetual conflid between the See of Rome and the rational part of the EngliOi Nation.
The Law, in Theory, was againft the See of Rome, and during the reigns of Henry II. Ed- ward I. and III. and Richard II. feverai Statutes
were
'' Gregory!, fee his Life by Bower. Phocas died 610.— • See Nicholis on the Ordination-oath. — Gregory's Letters to Piiocas, are a "rcat dilj^ruce to him.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. II. 499
were made, declaring the rights of England, and enforcing them. The Statutes of the Parliament at Clarendon, thofe againft Provifors, and thofe decreeing what is called a pramiinire^ are fo well explained in Sir William Blackdone's Commen- taries, a Book to which every one has accefs, that I need not dwell upon them : it is enough to mention them to the Student.
Civil 'wars kept the nation, for a long time, from exerting itfelf unanimoufly to regain its rights, and the Popes were always ready to take advantaoe of all divifions. — Henry VIII. at firft a6ted and wrote in defence of Popery, againft Luther, from Vv'hence he got the Title of Defender of the Faith; but quarrelling with the Pope about a Divorce, he fet himfelf earneftly, with all the vehemence of a warm temper, and of princely loftinefs, to throw off the Papal Supremacy. — The occafion might not be equally creditable with a pure fenfe of reditude, and a love of law and liberty; but yet the manner of conducing the emancipation of our^ Church and State, feems to have been regular, legal, conftitutional ; and to have implied the re- covery or declaration of ^n old rights detained for a while by mere violence. — The Supremacy of the Pope was rejeded by Engliih Papifts : all the povvcrs of the Nation united in rejecting it.
The Necefary Dodrine^ on the Sacrament of Order, contains a good account of this matter^ plain and clear j as for the people : the work of Cranmer, moft probably, who was raifed to emi- nence by his efforts to redeem the kingdom. — Thus Henry VIII. alfumed the Title of Head of the Church, in fpite of Bulls difcharged againft
hiin
* Heylin, in his life of Archbifliop Laud, page 1. has a flibrt account of this. — Neal's account is not long-. I I 2
500 BOOK IV. ART- XXXVII. SECT. III.
him from Rome; and his fucceflbrs have retained the Title, though Elizabeth thought fit to give an Explanation of it in her Injun5iions mentioned in the Article, llmilar to the explanation in the paragraph which refers to them.
Several attempts have been made, (ince the time of Elizabeth, to reftore the Papal power; a fliort and clear account of which may be found in Bifiiop Gibfons Poftfcript to his fifth Paftoral Letter.
Of late years, the Pope's power over the Englidi Papifts feems to have been much weakened. We have had about feventeen hundred of them avow this by figning their names : they call themfelves Protefling Catholics. Parliament has paft an aft for their relief, taking place June 24, 1791. Yet even over thefe the Pope has fomeyp/n/yW autho- rity : their oath only imports, that they allow him ** no temporal or civil jurifdiftion" " within this Realm." — And even this Oath great numbers of Engli(h Papifts cannot take. - Indeed, I believe the notion, that there ought to be one Head of the Cluirch, and that the Bifiiop of i^ow^ has good prctenlions to that pre-eminence, is deeply rooted in the minds of many.— We are told, that even *' many men of Learning and Piety," in the church of Rome, are fenfible of its errors, but do not chufe to feparate themfelves from what they cdeemthe true Univerfal Church of Chrifi:".
III. Having finiflied our firfi: Hiftory, let us proceed to our fecond, — Declining, through fcruple, the ufe of thofe expedients which the generality of ordinary men have adopted for the purpolcs of human life, has arifen from a defire
of
^ See fecond .Appendix to Monieim's Hifiory. — About Dr. Courrayer, page i lo.—Comber too prefl'es thii point moll of any. Advice, Scd. 6. page 1 10 — 136.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. III. 50I
of attaining to Perfe6lion: fuch defire is fome- times a part of a mild, gentle, refined tem- per; fometimes of an harlh and auilere one. — The former, intent upon the good always likely to refult from improvement; the latter dwel- ling on the faults and failures which feem to obftrud it.
It muft be owned, that Magiflracy, capital ^ punifhments, war, property, and oaths, all imply ' great imperfection. If we were as we ought to be, and had amongfl us no *' ftubborn and evil-doers," we fliould have no need of Magifirates (much lefs of fflp//<7/ puniOiments and war) nor even of riches, which occafion fo many diffeniions, fo much anxiety, and fo many vicious acts. — If our veracity were to be relied on, oaths would be needlel's.— Tliefe are real m/f, though as they prevent greater evils, they are confidered as benefits. — Every fcruple pro- ceeds upon fomething in Scriptnre.
1. The prohibition of Magiflracy, on Matt. v. 5. — XX. 25. — Gal. V. I.
2. Of capital punifliments on Matt. v. 21. — vi. 15.
3. War, on Matt. V. 39—44.
4. Riches, on Matt. vi. 19. — xix. 21 — 24. — Lukexvi. 19, &c. i Tim. vi. 9, 10.
5. Oaths, on Matt. v. 34. and James v. 12.
It does not happen, that every one who declines one or two of the things we are fpeaking of, declines them all; feme do not allow of oaths, or of war, who do allow of property; but the titrn and temper feems to be much the fame in all who decline any; variations are moft likely to happen where there is the leaft folid reafoning and plain fenfc : a particular tafte, connexion, intereft, &c. may fet fome perlbns, though of this temper,
113 upon
_502 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. IV. V.
upon juftifyins; to themfelves fome^ one of tlie things in queftion; and, in fuch cafe, their argu- ings will rarelv fail of fuccefs.
IV. The Pythagoreans feem to liave had a dif- pofition to dccHne fome things, which common men make iife of: their leader perfuaded the Sici- lian Dames to ftrip off their more fplendid orna- ments, and make an offering of them to a local Deity. — He made his followers fell their patri- mony, lay the produce at his feet, and live in common, without property. — Ht held, that war was only lawful on five occafions, fuch as againft the paflions, and fo on j meaning, that it was never to be carried on with fire and fword. He would not kill even" Brute Animals.— The neceiTity of Laws he faw too clearly to be mifled. — He there- fore endeavoured to improve, not annihilate, Legiflation.
V. Some of the Chriftian Fathers may be next mentioned. LnEiantins feems to make the com- mandment, " thou fhalt not kill'' to be univerfal; to admit of no exception whatfover: he is even againft killing by word, as he calls it, that is, accufing of a capital crime. God wills man to be fandum" animal. He would not have a man fight, as a foldier, in the jullell caufe. What he fays againft fights of Gladiators, and the expofing of children, appears to me to be very good, what- ever the reft may feem.
The Mauitheans feem to have° been againft war : Angujlin^i in oppofmg them, is clearly for juft war;
and
' Fielding defcribes Col. Bath well, talking as a Chrijiian about Duelling.
"> Ladvocat ; collfcfled from various Lives.
" Laftantiusdc vero Cultu, cap. 20. — A. D. 306.
<• Lardner, Vol. 3. page 476.
P Au^. Contra Faullum, 22. 74.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. VI. 503
and argues well in excufe for ir, calling Soldiers non homicidas fed miniftros Legis, — falutis pub- llcze defenfores. — Fauftus had been arguing againft the Old Teflament, and had inflanced in the wars of Moles. Auguftin fays, quid culpatur in Bello?
The Pelanans were againft oaths.— And againft Riches'^: they held, that a man ought not tojwear at tf//;— and that rich converts muft give up their whole fubftance, or Baptifm would not profit, them. Auguftin oppofed them in both thefe points, though he himfelf had given up his pro- perty, and had perfuaded fome to do the fame : as appears from his Letter to Hilarins, who had written from Sicily to inform Auguftin of the. Pelagian notions fpreading there^ But feveral Fathers feem to have been againft Oaths, thinking them allowed to JewSy but wholly forbidden to Chriftians. As Bafil and Chryfoftom : Jerom alfo and Gregory of Nazianzum might lean that way. Cyprian however feems to have been on our fide ; but, in early times, fwearing was confounded with fwearing by Heathen Deities; that would be reckoned wrong by all. Fegetitis gives an account of the Oaths taken by Chrijlian Soldiers^ : fo that Chriftians did enlift, and had a San-amentum ; they alfo profefted to honour the Emperor next after God.
VI. The IFaldevfes feem to have been very likely to take the turn of which we are ipeaking,
Accordingl)'-,
"J See the pafTages in Voffius's Hift. Pelag. page 723. 727. — Wall on Bapt. page 179. 183.
' See Wail, i. 19. 21. page 182, quarto.— The Pelagians had fold their property, and condemned every one who did not.— Auguflin had fold his, and had perfuaded fome to fell theirs, but cenfured none who did not.
« Quoted by Voffius, ibid, page 727.— See alfo Lardner, end erf" 8th Volume,
I I 4
504 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. VI.
Accordingly, Mofheim informs' us, that — " Their Rules of pradice were extremely auftere; for they adopted as the model of their nioral difcipline, tl e St-rmon of Chrift on the Mount, wliich they interpreted and explained in the moft rigorous and literal manner; and, of confequence, prohibited and condemned in their Society, all ivars, and fuits of L^w, all attempts towards the acquifition of wealthy the infli6ting of capital punifliments, fe!f- d' fcince againlt unjuft violence, and Oaths of all knds."
Aladaine^ in his note on this pafTage, obferves, that thefe perfons only meant to revive Piety ^ and oppofe abufes.
fVickliffe had fuch a mafs of corruption to re- move, that he might not at once difccrn what was pradicable : he feems to have had a tendency to decline fome of the ufages of which we are fpeak- ing. At the Council of Conftance one of his condemned propofitions was, " Oaths made to flrengthen human contracts and civil commerce, are unlawful"." — And Gilpin tells us, he was againfl capital punilhmcnts, and thought war *' utterly unlawful''."
Vows of /JovcT/)' may be mentioned; efpecially as they are generally attended with meeknefs, and fet men at a diRance from war and bloodlhed.— In France, about twenty years ago. the Convents of Monks living in poverty filled very flowly ; they fell far fliort ot their complement.
The German Anabaptijis are mentioned in our
thirty-
* Moflieim, Cent. 12, 2. 1;. 12. 8vo. Vol. 2. page 454.
'^ Bavter on Councils, page 433.
" Gilpin's Reformers, tage 79, 80. — Collier's Ecclef. Hift. J. 631. mentions four Books of his on the Sermon on the Mount, and thtec Books of civil Government.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. VI. 505
thirty-eighth Article. — I gave an account ^ of them formerly. Luther^ who knew them well, defcribes them in few words, as far as concerns our prefent piirpofe: docentes Chriftiano'' nihil elTe poffiden- dtm, non jurandum, nullos magiftratus hab.endos, non exercenda judicia, neminem tuendum aut de- fendendum, uxores et liberos deferendos, atque id genus portenta quam plurima. — In Sleidan's^ Hil- tory, John Matthew orders all goods to be in com- mon, and people bring their goods to the common ftock; partly, perhaps, through fear of two pro- phejying Virgins, who difcovered all embezzling. — The Landgrave tells them, they mean to overturn all Government'". — Cheynell fays, "the Anabaptijls go to fea without any ordnance in their iliips" — travel without any *' fword,"— one of them does " not think it lawful to be a C////d'r^"
The firft ^ocinians have been thought to originate from the Anabaptifts ''. In a note on Mofheim's Ecclefiaftical Hiftory^ it is faid, *' there is this
peculiarity
y Art. VII. Seft. in. — There arefomeAfts of Henry VIII. and Edward VI. againft them. See Burn, under DiJJenters.
^ Pref. to Ennarations on Matt v, vi. vii fol. i. page 2. — Works, Vol. 7. fol aparaphrafe onChrift's Sermon on the mount.
* The Latin title is, Commentaria de Statu Religionis et Reipublicje, Carole V. Caefare. in 26 Books. It is tranflated into Englifh by Bohun. — See alfo Wall, page 414 419. 425.
*» The Anabaptilb refilled Government by virtue of their Chriftian Liberty. — Art. vii. Sett. 11 1. — And becaufe Magif- trates imply imperfe^imt; Rogers, page 224. — ConfelT. Augfb. i. Cap. 17. the Godly fhall rule and poffefs the Earth, at laji -^ ergo begin diredly.-^^Q& Molhcim, Cent. 16. 3. 2. 3. 16. 8vo. Vol. 4. page 153.
= Cheynell on Socinianifm, page 51. (inT — 5 — 38, Sid, Coll.)
^ Moiheim, 8\'0. Vol. 4. page 178. Cent. 16 3. 2. 4. 8.
' Ibid. Se£t. 10. page 185. Svo. fee alfo Cheynell on Soci- nianifm, page 51, 152.— for connexion between Anabaptifts and old Socinians. — He is fpeaking of fome fortofSocinians
when
506 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. VII. VIII.
peculiarity in their moral injuiKflions, that they" prohibit the taking of oaths and the repelHng of injuries.'* — The modern Socinians have not this peculiarity.
VII. The reformed Churches would be all earneft to clear themfelvcs of the imputation of being feditious, and of favouring the Anabaptifts. — The Helvetic Confeflion condemns them ex- prefsly. The French mentions the error, about a community of Goods, as then fubfifting. The Scotch allows the Magiftrates to purge Religion; — would it allow Tipopijh Magiftrate ? — The Dutch much the famej and it fpeaks of the Anabaptifts, like our thirt^'-eighth Article, as to holding a community of goods. The Bohemian is flrongly againft the Magiftrate's interfering^ in religious matters. The Auguflin condemns the Anabaptifts warmly; and mentions Magiftracy, War, Oaths; and the belief of the adtual iinai Dominion of the Saints.
VIII. I rather fufped our Article of aiming at the Fiiritans^ : blaming the Anabaptifts for any puritanical error, would be a way of throwing odium upon the Puritans. — In the P/ay called the Puritan^ one fays, " We (Puritans) muft not fzvear,
I can
when he fays, page i;2. " God hath not given his people any earthly goods or poiTeflioni under the Golpel;"— there is more of it: printed 1643.
' It might be inquired, whether thofe who were for the magiftrate's interfering in affairs of ReHgion, had rot the Magiilrale on their fide? and thofe who were againft tiie magif- trate's interfering, had not him for an adverfary ?
8 Rogers refers to a paffage in the Preface to Hooker's Ecc'efiallical Polity, in which it is faid, that Puritans made a pradlice ofdecYin'uv^oat/is in Courts of Law, when their brethren were under proj'ccution, and if they were fworn, they would then hc/ile7it. But this feems nothing to a Dodrine ot unhyj- fjilnefs of oaths; only as it would//// the Puritans upon making what objedions they could, in their own defence.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. IX. X. 507
I can tell you:"—*' We may lie, but we muft not fwear :" — and, " No rich thing fliall enter into Heaven, you know." — The character of Corporal Oath is probably intended to heighten the puritani- cal character, by contra{l^
IX. In or near 1573, there were a fet of Chrif- tians in the Ifle ot Ely\ who are faid to have mixed the notions of Gnoftics, Arians, and Ana- baptifts. — They deduced from Matt. v. that they ought not to take any oaths; from the command- ment, " thou fhalt not kill" that all capital punifh- ments are unlawful : and from A6ls ii. 44, 45. that riches are unchriftian. And they held other notions not conneded vi'ith our prefent fubjeft. They were thought worth denouncing to Govern- ment.
X. The Family of Love feem likely, from what has been already faid of them, to have run into the errors of which we are treating j and in the Proclamation of Elizabeth" againfh them, it is mentioned, that they would take an Oath before a INIagiftrate, and not fcruple to deceive him if he was not one of their own {^ck. However, Rogers on this Article refers to H. N.'s work, Spirit. Land. 6. 5, as railing at Magiftracy, and to another work as encouraging men to accomplilh the dominion of the Saints. And alfo to palfages condemning all wars, and prohibiting the ufe of all zveapons.
The ^lakers take up fome notions which the Anabaptifts' laid down ; they hold all war to be
unlawful;
' See the Play amongfl: Shalcfpeare's, A61 i. Scenes and 3. and A£l 3. Scene 6. " Peace has more hidden oppreffions, and violent heady fms (though looking of a gentle nature) than a profeiTed ctw." — This is laid with a miew to Puritans.
^ See Collier's Ecclef. Hift. Vol. 2: page 545.
^ BilTiop Sparrow's Colledlion, page 171.
* Burn, under DiJJeniers.
508 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XI.
unlawful i and all oaths; but they exprefsly allow of property, and difference of ranks. They fpeak feelingly of the Civil Magijlrate's interfering about Gpiniofis : but they feeni to take for granted the lawfulnefs of his temporal authority ""•; and indeed their addieifes to our King have been always loyal : — they ground their opinions on Scripture.— One might read an expreffion or two of Warburton, in'' his Alliance.
At the Refloration there" was a very fevere act againll the Quakers, the tendency ol which was, to compel th^m to take Oaihs; but at the Revolution their fcruples found relief : — and I hope a iblBcient one.
The Moravians, who flile themfelves " Uuitas Fratrtm^'' or " United Brethren" are called by Limborch^, Communijiay as having goods in com- mon j but I have known Perfons of Fortune mem- bers of that Community. Perhaps they might at firft have one common flock. In 22 of George II. ihey had an act of Parliament to relieve them from taking Oaths ; yet they make declarations ** in the prefence of Go^%"--confidering God as a '* Witnefs*' I obferve they are called a " proie- ftant Epijcopal' Church."
XI. We may now proceed to Explanation.
Some, I think, have fcrupled to fign our Articles, becaufe it was originally, in the Articles of 1562, " tlie ^teen's Majefty," and not, " the King's iVlajeily." Such a fcruple requires a conftant luc- cefiion of female fovereigns.
" The
« Barclny's Apol. prop. 14. " Page 91. 121.
«• Burn, under Diflcnters, 13 i^- 14. Chap. 2. c. i. f l,imborch on Adsii.
1 Aiiguftin would tell them that they do not know what iwcaringis. See Wall, 4to. page 185. Aug. ad liilariura. ■ ' Burn, under Difienlcis, 4to. page 525.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XI. 509
" The chief power" — in Latin, fummam liabet poteftatem : which is fometimes called the /«j5r <?;»£- or fovereign power.
" Foreign jurifdiftion," can only allude to the fee of Rome : however, the general terms convey fomething of reafoning. — The tirfl; paragraph is againft the Papijls, the i'econd againft the } uritans.
'* By which titles^'' — fapreme in ecclefiaftical caufes, fupreme in civil caufes : this feems to be the meaning; but the grammar feems fcarcely ac- curate. This Article is made out of one of i ^^^\ and there is more grammatical danger in alterations than in original CGmpolition\
*' Slanderous folks," are in Latin, calnmniatores : the Puritans are meant. — The Injun^iions Ipoken of are in Sparrow's Collection' : we may look at them, " Lately"^ — in 1559.
*' To all godly Princes in Holy Scriptures" — the aft of a wicked pagan Prince, might not have made a good precedent. — But fome fcriptural pre- cedents {hould be mentioned. — Exod. xxxii. 22, Aaron fubmits to the Lay-lawgiver, Mofes. — Deut. xiii. 5. A prophet inticing to Idolatry, is to be put to death. — i Kings iii. 26. Solomon judge> Abiathar. — 2 Chron. xix. 5 — 9. Jehofiiaphat give^
judicial powers to facred perfons. — xxix. 4, &c.
Hezekiah gives orders to the Leviies.— See alfo ver. 1 1 . — ver. 2 1 . he commands tlie Sons of Aaron': fee alfo ver. 31. — 2 Chron. xxx. i. Hezekiah orders a Pxiffover. — xxxi. 2. He orders the courfes of Levites. — David, and Jofiah are alfo mentioned as ioftances".
' Thefe
^ I fhould like to know, if it were pofTible, whether theQueefe herfelf had any hand in tranfplanting her injunction into -this Article. One can coriceive, that her Majelly's grarnnatical inaccuracy might remain unconeded.
' Sparrow's Colledion, page oi.
" Scotch Confeffion. -Syntagma, page i^^.
510 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XII. XIII
Thefe things are mentioned in the Explanation^ left the precedents of tlie Old Teftament fliould not be now thought fufficiently binding upon us Chriftians, to make a part of our Proof.
The " civil Jword^' &c. feems an allufion to Rom. xiii. 4. " no jurildicftion," — temporal or fpirituai.
The words '■'■ Chrijlian men'''' occur both in the paragraph about capital puniQiments, and in that about war, which fhews that our authorities are to come from the fcriptures of the New Teftament. — ■ *' Wear zveapons^'' is the expreffion, probably, of Anabaptifts, and the Family of Love.
XII. Let us now go on to our Proof.
1. The King of our Realm, and not the Pope, is the Head of our Church.
2. The King is not a Mimjler of the church.
3. Chriftians owe obedience to the Civil Magif- trate.
4. Capital punifliments arc not always unlawful in a Chriftian country.
5. It is not always unlawful for a Chriftian to
engasfe in war
Though we have now had the Hijiory relating to Property and Oaths, yet the lawfuinefs of them had beft be proved under the fubfequent Articles.
XIII. The King of our Realm, and not the Pope, is the Head of our Church. In the third Book the principles of Alliance"^ between Church and State, were briefly laid down and defended. There it appeared, that when a Church is com- pofed of the fubjeds of a ftate, there muft be one Head of both, in order to elfefl unity of Govern- ment; and that it is much more ufeful to both that the King (or civil maglftrate) fhould prcfide, under regulations arifing from the nature of the
Alliance, * Book HI. Chap. xiv. Se£t. v.
EOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XIII. rii
Alliance, than the fpirltual Head of the eccle- fiaftical fociety. So far all lies within the nation.
As to any foreign fpiritual power interferino-, there feems no good foundation for it, either in the Law of Nature, or in the'' Gofpel. And till the middle of the fecond Century we are told, thac all Chriftian Churches were independent of each other, and'' without any common Head. — But is not the Church Univerfal ? — Chrift did mean to form all his Difciples into one Body, but never obliged a fmali part of his Difciples to continue in communion with a large body, contrary^ to all the didates of Reafon and Confcience. Each particular church, as has been frequently obferved, ought to confider itfelf as part of the Catholic Church J and treat the Members of all the other Churches as Brethren, from whom, human weak- nefs caufes a prefent feparation. This is the moil likely method of forming finally a folid union.
But if it were allowed, that the Catholic Church of Chrift ought to have one vifible head, what pretenfions has the Bifhop of Rome to be that Head? none which can be conlldered as eftablifhed by general content. E.ome was once a feat of Empire; if Chriftian churches, in or near that Empire, had then occafion to confult too-ethcr, fome precedence would be proper and convenient. for the lake of maintaining order, and unity of aflion; — reafons of convenience, and analogy, might make a determination to fall, when a de- termination miifl be made, on the Bi(hop of Rome. — But fuch reafons are now all againjl a Bifhop of Rome.
Befidcs,
y Powell, page 35^.
=^ See An. xxi. — Bingham hath fomething on the fubie-a. Book 2. Chap. 4. & 6.
^ Rev. xviii. 4- — Art. xix.
512 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XIIT.
Befides, if the whole Church of Chrift is to have one head, would it not now be btft to fix upon one in fome other fituation? America muft now be confidered, and the (late of Chridi- anity in Africa, and in Afia : in the Eaft Indies pofiibly Chriftianity may make fome progrefs; nay, would it not be right to have an Head of the Church, if one be neceflliry, in different pi ices, at different times, according to the aftual flate of the Chrillian world? we muft not for a moment fuppofe worldly ambition or intereft to throw any difficulties in the way : certainly the Bifliop of Rome never was in the office, if fuch an office there be, of head of the univerfal Church of Chrift.
It may however be faid, that the Bilhop of Rome has exercifed fpiritual Power in England. He has; but it was one founded in no right, nor tscx fiibmitted io, more than as the plundering of a robber is fubmitted to vvhilft his piftol is at your breaft. Whenever this nation has been free enough to be capable of making a contracf, it has declared againft. papal ufurpations A contract ought always, in order to be valid, to promote the mutual benefit of the contrading parties; the fpiritual power of Rome has been exercifed merely for the iDenefit of Rome.
All Chriftians ought, no doubt, to aft for the good of Chriftianity; but nothing would be more contrary to the general interefts of Chriftianity, than for the Pope to have authority over the Church of England :— we have left the Church of Rome from the tulleft convidlion of its errors and corruptions : in what way could the head of that Church now excrcile authority over us, but in the way of controverfy and perfecution? wc fhould rejijiy and the event muft be, that Roman and Englilh Churches would hurt each others re- ligious principles materially.
No
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XIV. 51^
No; if a Courayer, or if other learned and pious nien, anxioufly vvifli to have a Catholic church in jaEl, as well as in Theory, let them encourage general toleration, and quiet feparation of thofe, who cannot confcientioully hold communion to- gether. Let the BiQiops of Rome give up all ambitious and lucrative projefts, let the Romifli Clergy enlighten \\\€\x people, as much as they are themielves enlightened : — this done, the Church of Rome is no longer atl objeft of our jealoufy; we have no longer occafion to be upon our guard. Intercourfe will generate confidence and mutual good opinion ; thefe will generate benevolence ; mutual benevolence is mutual attraction: attrac- tion produces Unity. So that the firfh approach to Unity, is complete independence,, and fepara- tion.
Should fuch unity prevail as to give a reafonable profpeCL of benefit from Councils, fome 'Precedence may again be wanted. In that cafe let him pre- iide, who fhall appear to be the beft fituated and . qualified for prefiding. Our Ifland will fcarcely afpire to the honour. But whoever prelides, let him be aware of arrogance and oppreffion 1
I iliouid hope our firft propofition may now be confidered as proved.
XIV. The King is not a Minijfer of the Church.
The reafons given why the King Ihould be Head of the Church, his compulfive and pro- te(fling power, his ability to maintain the Minifters, fliew, that, in the Alliance of Church and State, there is no view of his having any employ that is not of a temporal nature. For prieftly offices he is unqualified, and his time is occupied in others. Our reafoning on this head in the third Book was general; and there is nothing in the Engliih Church or State to be the ground of an exception :
VOL. IV. K K But
514 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XV~XVII,
But all parties being of one mind on this propofi- tion, an elaborate proof of it, is unnecefTary.
XV. Chriftians owe obedience to the Civil MagiJIrate.
Here we quit the Billiop of Rome, and come to thofe fcruples or prohibitions, the Hiftory of which we have given colleftively. Let us obferve of them all together, that the error of them turns upon not diftinguifliing between what is defirabk, and what is praElicahk. However defirable any end may be, if we adopt any impracticable mea- fures, we only get farther from it ; whereas if we begin with pradlical meafures, we make fome pro- grefs, however fmall; and we may, by perfeve- rance, attain our end at lafl: : to content ourfelves with what is pradicable, is the mod likely way to attain what is ultimately defirable.
For proof that Chriftians owe obedience to civil Magiftrates, we may refer to Matt. xxii. 21.-- Rom. xiii. i — 7. — Titus iii. 1. — i Pet. ii. 13. — But the cogency of thefe proofs will be beft under- ftood by reading Bifhop Sherlock's Difcourfe'' on Rom. xiii. i. which I would earneftly recommend.
XVI. Capital pnniJJiments are not always unlaw- ful in a Chriftian country. — In the Gofpel it is taken ior granted, not ordered, that an offender may be punillicd with death. —Ads xxv. ir. — Rom. xiii. 4.
The Jewijli capital punifliments prove, that fuch
■ punifliments are not fo eflentially wrong, as never
to be right in any cafe. And nothing of the Jew-
i(h Law, relating to punifliment, is repealed under
the Gofpel.
XVII. IVar is not always unlawful to Chrif- tians.
Here again we fay. In the Gofpel, war is not
ordered, but taken tor granted. — See Matt. viii. 9.
Luke *> Bilhop Sherlock's Difcourfes, Vol. 4. Difc. xiii.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XVIII. 51^
Luke iii. 14. — A6ls x. i, 2. — 2 Tim. ii. 4. Each of which texts (liould be confidered with this queflion, what would have been faid, had war been univerfaliy to be prohibited? — Would not our Saviour, or St. John'' Baptift, have thrown in fome exhortations to quit tiie mihtary profeffion ?
Under the Old Law we find manv wars ; and the Pfalmift bleffes God for teaching ^ his hands to war, and his fingers to fight. To which no blame is annexed in the Gofpel *".
XV III. We have given a dired: proof of our propofitions, but fome indirect feems wanting; efpecially for the two^ laft.
It may be afked, in the firft place, are not capital punifhments inconfiftent with the benevo- lent fpirit of the Gofpel? I would anfwer, firll, that every right punifliraent is a fpecies of benevo- lence : and is inlli6ted fimply with adefire of doing good. A man by punifhing may fometimes do inore good than by forgiving.
But ^^ thou //lalt not kill :^'—l would here borrow the words of St. Paul ; *' it is manifeit that he
is
*= I was glad to find Auguftin putting a fpeech into the
mouth of John Baptift, in the way here mentioned. Contra
Fauftum, 22. 74. quoted in Seil. v.
■^ Pfalm cxliv. 1.
^ Would Chrift have been called the Captain of our Salva- tion if all military offices liad been held in utter abomination?
* The Papills are apt to urge, that the Pope has a right to Supremacy, as fucceflbr of St. Peter. The claim feems to me fo weak, that I am unwilling to detain you upon it. Limborch, in his Syftem of Theology, (L. 7. c. 9 Sc 10,) enters into the fubjefl. — And Macknight takes notice, (Sed. 70'. end; on Matt, xvi, 17 — 23.) of the worldly turn of St. Peter's mind, at the time when he is faid to have received his Commiffion.— Limborch {hews, both that St, Peter was not the Head of the Difciples, {o as to have any authority over them, and that the Biihop of Rome was not fucccfTor to St. Peter. — See aifo J. Hales's Tradis, page 251.
K K 2^
5l6 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XVIII.
is excepted" who docs not conimit murder \ and the Jevvilh praFlice (for this was part of the Jewilh Law), makes this ftill more evident. — This is a fliort command, but if it were as long as a modcrrr Ad of Parhament, it would ftill be liable to limi- tations taken from its true intent and meaning. For inftance, if a man attacks my life, I am furely to prevent him from taking it, though by taking hisi — one life muft be lolt either way : — and if he attacks my property, I may defend that, otherwife my right is nothing : and if I cannot defend it but by taking his life, then I Ihould fay, he deftroys himfelf; 'tis the fame thing as if I hold out my fword, and he runs upon it.
A Nation^ however, you will fay, is fafe, they may Jecure the offender, and therefore need not kiU him. This may not be pradlicable in all cafes : luppofe, in any cafe, it is; yet, in ftriclnefs, what right has the criminal to force the community to maintain and watch him ? if they are not obliged to maintain and watch him, then'they have a right to defend themfelves againft fuch attacks as he may be expeded to make if they do not maintain and watch him. — Yet it muft be owned, that, though fome may perhaps, everi by man, be given over to a^ reprobate mind, it is a rational exer- cife of mercy and benevolence, to fecure others, even fuch as had no ftricl right to be fpared. — The poflibility of repentance is worth attending to : Reformation would be fo great a good, that a light evil mi<2;ht be born for the chance of it.
But we are only concerned with Scripture. — Scripture might not ' reveal moral phiioibphy fupernaturally, any more than natural phiioibphy. A time may come when capital punilhmcnts may
be
5 Ron. i. 28.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XIX. 517
be rpared; and yet they might not ht forbidden^ in Scripture; which is all our concern.
XIX. In the next place it may be aficed, with regard to war, is it not contrary to Matt. v. 38 — 41'. P-Bifliop Burnet fays, this is "a very great difficulty." — Suppofe there was a feni'G in which this paffage prohibited all war, (as it cer- tainly does all forwardnefs in going to war) ; that fenfe could not be right, becaufe one part of fcrip- ture is to be interpreted fo as to be conftfient with other parts.
The Sermon on the Mount is to be interpreted as being in fome meafure the language of reproof; the language of reproof is a part of Eloquence : what is intended to mortify and correft felf-fuffi- cicncy, is not to be interpreted exadly in the fame manner as what is delivered to the ingenu- ous and modefl enquirer. In what our Saviour delivers, each Chriftian precept is contrafted to fome fault prevailing amongft the reputable part of the Jews : fo that one iliould keep the felf- fufficiency and the malevolence of luch Jews, con- ■ tinually before one's eyes : the Jewiih character feems to have been malevolent, the Chriftian bene- volent.— The Chriftian precept now in queftion, is oppofed to the pracftice of Retaliation: to male- volent rancour, flying inftantly, on the receipt of an imagined injury, to feize eye for eye and tooth for tooth. — This muft not be Chrijlian condu(ft5 fays our Saviour j it is not r/V/// conduct, nay, it
was
., ^ I think I faid here, in giving this L edliire, that fome nations might be fo barbarous, or fo circumftanced, after the publica- tion of the Gofpel, that rights could not be fafe, if no crimi- nals were put to death : and therefore, that fcripture could not well prohibit generally capital puniihments, whatever it might have done if publifhed in times very much improved. * Barclay's Apology, Prop. 11;.
K K Q
5l3 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XIX.
was never intended to be JevviOi. — But why is it not right /* becaufe it is not the mod efFeftual way to banifl-i all injuries from the world, and to perfect human happinefs : — it is a natural movement, on the receipt of an injury, to fly to revenge; but this muft be checked: it fliould be a Rule, to yield, to bear, to give way a liule, as we do to a bodily Jiroke, Vk'hen it would otherwife be painful : great good would arife from the pra6lice of this rule; we fhould find the imagined injury no real one; or wc fhould foften the offender, or we (hould bind to us by ties of gratitude, one of an hafty but generous temper. It is not, however, to be iinderflood, that this rule is invariable, or univer- fal, any more than another ; when punilliment will clearly anfvv'er a better end, and can be infli(fted in the genuine fpirit of benevolence^ it muft be ap- plied ; elfe there is a voluntary negleft of t.\\t greater good. But, commoydy, men want much more per- fuading to yield, than to puniOi. The miftake Vv'ith which we are now concerned, is this; if a Ride is given, it is taken as an only, or ////^/d" Rule; whereas, though each rule is given fingly, it is not meant to exclude other Rules. One rule is, to let our light Ihine before men; another, not to let our left hand know what our right doeth ; both excellent Rules! on different'^ occafions : but nei- ther of them can be followed fmgly, on all occa- fions. Thefe limit each other ; but every rule, if not limited exprefsly, is to be underftood to be fo tacitly, by confiderations of the greatefl good. The very next words to our diflicuk paifage, are, " Give to him that afketh thee; and from him
that
^ Matt. xii. 37. irakes our final fentence to depend upon owx I'ocrdi. Rom. ii 6, &c. on omt ailions. — I r.eed fcarce fay, that refennccis here made to Matt. v. 16. and vi. 3.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XX. 519
fhat would bprrow of thee, turn not thou away." — Another excellent Rule, in its place :— no one has ever followed this without limitation ; and yet it would be difficult to aflign any reafon why it is more variable, or liable to limitations, than that which immediately precedes it.
This may fuffice to folve our difficulty ; but I cannot quit it without obferving, how irkfome it is to be obliged to urge anything, which can have any tendency to lelTen the force of that divine rule, yield to evil, '* give place unto wrath j" — a rule didated by that wifdom, which is from above, delivered from the mouth of him who knew what v^^as in man : a rule fo much wanted, and fo replete with good, that one would not foon find one's fclf weary of expatiating on its complicated' benefits to mankind.
This is all the indireft proof I will give.— Any one might confult Grotius de Jure, &c. I, 2. 6, &c.
XX. If any application were wanted, we might obferve, with a view to mutual concejjion, that war is generally, or always, owing to fome defect in Wifdom or in Virtue; to miftaking rights, to am- bitious reftlellnefs : though we cannot own, as a confequence, that no Nation can lawfully defend itfelf. To give up felf-defence is impracticable. —I have wilhed to imprefs the diftindion be- tween what is defirable, and what is pradicable : and therefore I will conclude with the following incident: we are told, th3.t zhe Penjj-hajiians, 3.he£ high profeffions of fuffering anythmg rather than fight, determined to retake by force,' a Hoop from a Pirate.
The
' Reference is here made to John ii. 25.—— Rom. xii. 19. and James iii. 17.
K K 4
520 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVlI. SECT. XX.
The excufe they made was "", that they did it as MagifirateSy not as ^iahrs. The account is taken from a printed Book of Trials -y of George Keith, and others.
«" Leflie's Snake in the Grafs, Sed, 18.
ARTICLE
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. I. II. ^21
ARTICLE XXXVIII.
OF CHRISTIAN MEn's GOODS, WHICH ARE NOT COMMON.
THE Riches and Goods of Chrlftians are not common, as touching the right, title, and pof- feffion of the fame, as certain Anabaptifts do falfly boaft. Notvvithftanding, every man ought, of fuch things as he poffefleth, liberally to give alms to the poor, according to his ability.
I. Having taken the Hiflory of this Article into the Hiftory of the preceding, we may begin with Explanation.
II. The Title is in the hmt form with thofe of the twenty-fixth and twenty-ninth, on which we have had fome remarks.
The Latin title feems obfcure; De illicita bono- rum communicatione; may it be tranllated, Of the unlawfulnefs of ading as if all goods were common? — that feems likely to be the meaning.
*' Chriflians," — this word fliews, as before, that our concern is only with the Scriptures of the New I'eftament, the true meaning of which we fuppofe fome of our Chriftian Brethren to have miftaken.
Our Article confifts of two fentences; the firll of which exprefles rights and duties of perfeB obhgationj the fecond, thofe oi imperfea obliga- tion.—At firft fight it feems odd to infer t in lin
Article,
522 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. 111.
Article, a duty, of the pradice of which the Agent is to be the fole judges fuch a duty feems only matter of exhortation : yet we have had fimilar inftances in the thirty-fccond and thirty- fourth Articles. And where the miftake of our brethren, who differ from us, depends very much upon taking indeterminate duties of Scripture for determinate, there it is immediately neceflary to mark out the difference. But it is proper alfo to do it, when a ftricl duty of perfed obligation would feem harlfi, and* contrary to Chriftian bene^ volence, if its defcds w^ere not fupplied by a free voluntary duty. In Article xxxii. it feemed proper to fet marriage in an honourable light, by ob-^ ferving, that to fome perfons it might be the ftate productive of the greateft virtue : lo here, it feems proper to fet ftrid Juftice in an honourable light> by fhewing, that it is the ground, of all that volun- tary Benevolence, which is contrafted with it, and which cannot be reduced to deteiminate rules with- out more harm than good. — The inftitution of property thus appears in its true light, and is feen as greatly beneficial to mankind.
III. 1 fee nothing more for explanation.
And for Proof, I fee but one propofition.
' The inftitution of Property is not contrary to the Gofpel.'
For as to beneficence, that is not mentioned as a matter in difpute, but only as completing the idea of moral and Chriflian duty, with regard to pro- perty i and as fliewing property to be ufeful.
The dired proofs of our propofition, to he found in Scripture, are very numerous : I will only aim at mentioning a number which may be fuffi- cient. — In Matt. v. 42. gi'i'ing and lendingy both imply property: fo in Matt. vi. 3. do alms.—^ I'holc of whofe miftake we are now treating,
ground
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. IV. 523
ground their notions very much on our Saviour's Sermon on the Mount. — From John xix. 27. it appears, that St. John had an home, which af- forded a refidence to the bleffed Virgin Mary.— We may read alfo Rom. xii. 13. as marking, (Uke the texts from St. Matthew,) both the duties mentioned in our Article, determinate and inde- terminate.—2 Cor. viii. anfvvers the fame purpofe, and fiiews (ver. 13.) that Chriftians had in St. Paul's time, unequal fliares of property. Eph. iv. 28. iovhids Jiealing, and advifes induftry for the purpofe of raifmg a fund for beneficence — i Tim. V. 8. fliews an ufe of property prior even to bene- ficence itfelf. I Tim. vi. 1 7. prefuppoles not only property, but even riches. James iv. 13. pre- fuppofes traffick, or Commerce. — And particular perfons who were poffeffed of property, are fpoken of with commendation : Cornelius, Philemon, Gaius. Not to mention Zachseus^ or Jofeph of Arimathea.
IV. This direft proof muft be furely fufficient; but the indirect feeras to require the greater atten- tion on the prefent Article. — Yet it may be here obferved of every text which is brought againft the inftitution of property, that no fenfe of it can be admitted, which is not confident ^ with fome fenfe of the texts already quoted. I imagine we need not examine, as feeming to favour our ad- verfaries, more palTages of Scripture than Matt. vi. 19. — Matt. xix. 16, &c. about the wealthy young man to whom Chrift propofed felling all he had. — Luke xvi. 19, &c. about the rich man and Lazarus. — Afts ii. 44, 45. about the firft Chrif- tians having all things in common j and i Tim. vi,
9, 10 ^ Luke xix. a, &c. ^ As before, Art. xxxvii. Seft. xix.
^2^ BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. V. VI.
9, 10. or feme paflage of like import, exprefling the mifchiefs attending riches.
V. Matt. vi. 19. is only a comparative cxpvcC- fion, though it has, no doubt, been fomctimcs underftood abfolutely. Its meaning only is, that men ought to />?Y/tT heavenly treafures to earthly. We have had inftances of this negative mode of comparifon" before.
VI. With regard to Matt. xix. 16, &c. the propofal made by Chrift to the wealthy young man, is certainly one intended for extraordinary emergencies. [t cannot be made a ground of adtion in ordinary life, without the kind of pro- portion mentioned in the eleventh Chapter of the firft Book. If the rich young man was, in his circumftances, to ad in fuch a manner, how am I to a6t in my circumftances?
This might fuffice; but even take the tranfaction as it was in our Saviour's time, and it is no an- nulling of the inftitution of property. A very great adl: of beneficence is held forth, or propofed, on a very great occafion y fuch as might be pro- pofed on fome few other great occafion^; fuch as the captivity of a parent, an invaiion of one's country, a flrugglc for civil liberty, he. but I fee no hint of any difapprobation of the inftitution of Property. — It does not appear that the refufal was blamed ; it does not appear to niey that the donar lion would have been accepted.
This might fufficc as an anfwer to our objcdion, but it may be ufeful to rcfleifl a little more on a cafe which has had very impoj-tant** effefts.
When the young man began to confer with our Lord, no one prefent had any idea of riches; nor
indeed
« Objeftionsto Art. XXVI I.
* Aug. ad Kilarium. Wall, page 183, quarto.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. VI. 525
indeed till the very end of the conference j and then the mention of them was incidental. A worthy and amiable youth, of a wealthy family, had an ambition, turned, as I hope many others have, towards religious perfedion : he feem.s to have been perfuaded, that he had pretty nearly attained his end. Jeius having become known and <:el€brated, this young man comes to confer with him. He hopes to be told, that he is very near perfedion : " what lack I yet ?" — " Jelus beholding him, loved him." He loved this worthy youth how fangidne foever he might be; and loved him too well to flatter him. Perfe<5Vion? alas! man hsii not attained to that; it may be an objedl of pur^ fidt, a mark to look forward to; but that man is very imperfe<5t^ indeed, who thinks he has already attained perfedion: *' what lack I yet?" you fay; fee here my difciples ; is there nothing for you to aim at ? what think you of becoming one of them? we have a religion to publilh, which will be as great a bleffmg to mankind as they chute to let it be : the religion of the Mejfiah. Is there now nothing to do for one who aims at religious per- fedion?— He who publilhes.this religion muft be my difciple : and I have not where to lay my head ! he muft call the poor his brethren: he himfeif muft be poor in fpirit : — you are alarmed; and well you may ; for being my difciple might be the ruin of your fortune; nay, it might coft you more than fortune; you might have to take up your Crofs, if you followed me.— The young man's fanguine hopes are all blafted. He had been flattered into an expedation of better things: he retires^ morti- fied, and dejected. — Our Lord, without blaming him, takes occafion to obferve, that the rich will with difficulty (J'uitxoAwj) be made ufeful in .Ipreading
■ See Phil. iji. 12.
^26 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. VII.
his religion : though there is no natural impoffi- bihty of their becoming converts, it is not to be expected. On fome accounts the poor^ will be more eligible, at firft ; yet whoever does facrifice worldly advantages for the fake of Chriftianity, fliall be amply rewarded.
This is the idea which the palTage conveys to me. Yet it is not to be expedted that we lliould fee all the reafons which our Saviour had for any meafure that he took^. And it is poflible he might, on many occafions,-efpecially at firft, avoid a language perfectly clear and explicit ; and intend only to fet men on thinking for themfelves. I can conceive it polTible, that he had no thoughts of engaging the young man to be his difciple : why fliould he have ?i youth to follow him? why fhould '^ he incur the fcandal of inveigling pious young men of fortune from their parents?
As to the cxpreffions, " go and fell that thou hafl" — " come and follow me" — they feem to amount to no more than a propofal; they make that propofal in a clear and lively wayj but only to the purpoie which we have mentioned. — We may consider the cafe of this young man as an inftance of what is delivered Luke xiv. 26 — 33; and that paflage as illufbrating this. — On the wholo, the account of the rich young man, fliews no abfolute perfedion in parting with one's fortune -. great occafions may happen, when we may be called upon to make great facrifices. Ordinarily, per- fediion may be Tp^im\fnigcility.
VII. The parable ot th.? rich man and Lazarus, Luke xvi. 19, &c. is calculated to have a ^vcry good effed in producing a right ufe of riches, but
does
^ I Cor. i. 26. 28 James ii. 5.
8 Art. XIV. this cafe was mentioned ; Seft. iv. in the way of objedlion; to which the anfwer was given, Seft. v.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. VII. 1527
does not feem to have been intended to terrify tnen out of the pofleffion of them. — It reprefents two extremes in human life, fplendor and indigence : death intervenes, and then there is a reverie ; he who had been high in this world, is in a ftate of torment J he who had been low and wretched, is in a ftate of blifs : the rich man intreats him who had been poor, to adminifter fome reliefj but all intercourfe is cut off.
It is not to be inferred that every rich man muft be in fuch a ftate of inferiority to him on whom he had looked down in this world -, but only that he may be ; that is, if he be v/icked, and the poor virtuous and good. — How little do the generality of rich men attend to what fo plainly follows from the belief of a future ftate of rewards and punifti- ments ! How do they fufFer imagination and habit to reprefent to them the fcenes of this life as con- tinued into another !
That reprefentation, then, which will awaken men from fuch dreams of prejudice, wants nothing more to make it of the utmoft importance. It prompts every rich man to fay, of every poor wretch with whom he has had any intercourfe; * great and luxurious as I am, and mean and deftitute as this milerable creature is, it may hao- pen, through my folly and his goodnefs, that he may be exalted to rejoice in the fociety of Ano-els, whilft 1 am abafed to undergo the torments of Hell, and the taunts and infults of Devils; nay, I may one day be glad to be a fuppliant for re- lief and afliftance, to him, who now intreats my help in vain.*
This being the thing particularly wanted, we may allow it to be the thing particularly meant. — And therefore we need not trouble ourfelves to inveftigate what the crime of the rich man was ;
he
528 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. VIII.
he was condemned, ///fr^/br^ he had been wicked ; the poor man was rewarded, therefore he had been good : though certainly a rich man may be good, and a poor man wicked. — That the good in every ftation, will be happy, and the bad miferable, is proved in all parts of fcripture : fo that when we are told, that a man is happy after death, we may take his goodnefs for granted; as we may the wickednefs of the damned. — The end oi the para- ble then was, to imprefs upon the minds of the rich, that thofe wliom they now defpifed, or op- prefled, might hereafter, whilfh they were cafl down beneath all earthly meannefs, be foaring far above all earthly grandeur. — Sappofe a rich man, by meditation on this parable, to acquire an habit of feeling this, and of reprefenting it to himfelf whenever he has any bufinefs or convcrfation with any poor perfon; though it need not make him throw his wealth into the fea; yet what an hea- venly difpofition it muft generate in him ! what mildnefs and humility! what condefcenfion, huma- nity, and even reJpeEliox the poor and needy!
VIII. Much has been faid of Acts ii. 44, 45. (and iv. 32. 34.) but it does not appear to me, that property amongft Chriftians was ever abolilLed. They were called upon, by the exigencies of the limes, to offer large contributions for the fupporc of the poorer converts; to large, that they were obliged to fell fome polfeflions in order to make them. But all was voluntary beneficence. Indeed afler the fales were made, and the produce thrown into a common flock, that flock was * poiieil'ed by Chriftians in common. And popularly fpeaking, before fuch ialcs, the generolity ot the richer con- verts was fo great, that all might be faid to be welcome to every thing that any poflcffed. But
the
BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. IX. 529
the expoftulation in Ads v. 4. dearly implies the continuance of p-operty, and A6ts ii. 46. {hews, that Difciples kept their honfes. — Nay, if Chriilians had, llridly fpeaking, given np their property at firft, we could only infer any rule for ourfelves by that proportion, or compariibn of circumftances, of which we juft now fpoke. — Lucian mentions Chriftians as havino; thingfs in common, and in the lame popular fenfe, m which I underftand the two palTages in the Ads of the Apoftles ^
IX. Such paffages as i Tim. vi. 9, 10. only exprefs/^^j, not any general doEirine^ or Theory. — Many evils, no doubt, arife from the abufe of riches j and the defcription of an abufe is fome- times apt to make well-meaning men fo eager to avoid it, that they go much farther than was in- tended. Breaking a bad habit requires fometimes, at firft, almoft as much refolution as parting with a Limb ; and therefore the Scripture tells us, we muft be read}' to part with a limb if it offend us, or be the occalion of our fmning:— but advice to correct an abufe^ is not to be miilaken for advice to throw away the v.fe of anything'; we are ad- vifed to reform the abufe of anything in order that we may afterwards have all the advantages from it,, which it is capable of producing. Spiritual power has been abufed by the Bidiops of Rome; that is a good reafon for a reform, but not for laying afide all Ordinations.
Here we clofe our proof, direct, and indirect.
X. An
'' See Lardner's Works, Vol. 8. page 71, bottom; or Luciaii's Peren-iuiis.
i See Matt. v. 29, 30. — Origan's mutilation was remedying an abuic by taking away the ufe; and that by parting with a Limb. Matt, xix, 12.
VOL. IV. I^ L
530 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. X.
X. An Application might lead us to confider the rules of voluntary beneficence ; and to inquire, whether any reftraints might be laid on the ac- cumulation of property ? — But thefe things not being our immediate concern, I forbear to enter upon them.
ARTICLE
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIX. SECT. I. II. 53I
ARTICLE XXXIX.
OF A CHRISTIAN MANS OATH.
AS we confefs, that vain and rafli Swearing is forbidden Chriftian men by our Lord Jefus Chrift, and James his Apoftle^ fo we judge, that Chriftian Religion doth not prohibit, but that a man may fwear when the Magi ft rate requireth, in a caufe of faith and charity, fo it be done ac- cording to the Prophet's teaching, in juftice, judgement, and truth.
I. The Hijlory of this as well as of the fore- going Article having been given under the thirty- leventh, we immediately look whether we have anything before us, which requires Explanation.
II. " Vain and rajlz fwearing," is oppofed to that which is important ^ and deliberate^ or done upon principle : it arifes from habit, and is intro- duced for no good purpofe ; it muft have fome motives, but they are fome kind of wrong fenti- ments; often parts and kinds of vanity.
*' Forbidden Chrijiian men," here again our concern is only with Chriftian Scripture : die paf- fages referred to, when Chrift and St. James are mentioned, are Matt. v. 34, &c. and James v. 12.
*' fP'^e Judge" — cenfemus — this is not dogmatical.
*' Doth not ^ro////'//"— fuppofe a man thougl>t,
that Scripture difcouraged {\vG2inngy even in evidence,
L L 2 and
:;32 BOOK IV. ART. XjCXlX. SECT. II.
and that it was mod fafe to avoid it; ftill he might allow, that Scripture did not prohibit it.
*' When a Magiftrate requiretji," — this is op- pofed to the vain and raQi fwearingi— therefore, though a man might ufe vain and ra(h i\vearing before a Magiftrate, yet that is not the thing meant here. The vain and ra(h fwearing here meant, the Magiftrate is fuppofed to have no concern with ; it is fuppofed to be in private life.
" In a caufe of faith and charity^'' in causa fidei tx. chdritatis y — that is, from motives of afcer- taining the truths that Juftice may be done ; and of doing good. — Fidem facere is to create confidence, or make one's felf believed:— cauja feems to be ufed by Cicero where we fliould now ufe the word cafe\, — in a caufe of faith and charity, may therefore mean, in a cafe which requires credit to be eftablifhed for the fake of knowing the real ftate of it, as a ftep to doing Juftice : or in a cafe, in which, by taking an oath, you may do an a6t of charity or benevo- lence.— Dr. Ogden feems to have had our expref- fion in his mind, when he ufes the expreffions, " in caufes of importance, for the fake of Truth, in fupport of Juftice, at the call' of Charity;" — Luther^ fays, v/e may fwear if commanded by the Magiftrate, or if not commanded, yet from motives of charity., as we may do other things not quite regular : — But in our Article, fcemingly, both in the caufe of Faith and the caufe of charity, the Magiftrate commands our evidence. — If fo, it may be faid, we cannot make ourielves pcrfedl judges what kind of caufe or cafe it is. It Items as if we could not ; but an Article is not for pradice\
it
" Fifth Sermon on the Commandments, Vol. 2. page 63. 12 mo.
'» Works, Vol. 7. Enarrations on the Sermon on the Mount, —On Matt. V. 34.. or thereabouts.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIX. SECT. III. . 533
it only lays down what is right : every man mufl avoid oaths, in cafes not ot faith and charity, as much as he can*". — The concluding part of our Article does alfo point out what is right ; adopt- ing the words of the Prophet Jeremiah^ ; which feemalfo to be ufed in other places; and to denote fwearing honellly and fincerely.
III. We will now come to Proof.
* Solemn oaths, taken in obedience to authority, and from benevolent motives, are not forbidden by theGofpel.'
Firft we will take fome diredt proofs of this propofition.
Under the old Law, fwearing by Jehovah was confidered as a mode of profeffing to ferve him; in preference to Idols. As Goliak curfed David by his Gods, fo a Jew fwore by Jehovah. In this light we are to fee Deut. vi. 13. — Pfalm ixiii. i r. — Did this idea want confirming, any one might confult Ifaiah Ixv. 16. And the paffages referred to in the margin of that text, which is introduced into our Article.
In the New Tefiament, v/e may look at Matt. xxvi. 63. obferving, that v/hatever was faid in anfwer to adjiiratmi^ was faid upon Oath. And we (hould read Mark viii. 12. for the {ake of the :«t, (in Englilh verily) which is fometimes a particle of fwearing, anfwering^ to CiS in Hebrew. — The Helvetic Confeffion fays, " Chriiluset Apoftoli^ jura- runt;
= After all, the exprefiion, " in a cauft of faith and charity " may allude to fomething which I have not leen. Or it may be taken from Luther, and made lefs clear by alteration. Lather gives, to my mind, a more diilinft conception than our Article. But Dr. Ogden is perfeflly clear.
** Jer. iv. 2.
^ See Parkhurft's Greek Lexicon under E.. Si je I'aime ! is not an oath ; but a pretty powerful e.v-clamation. Diderot.
^ Con fcfT. Helvet, ad finera.
534 I^OOK IV. ART. XXXIX. SECT. IV.
runtj" the inftances of Chrift we have juft men- tioned: St. Paul feveral times ufes exprcflions, which may with propriety be called Oaths. As in Rom. i. 9. — I Cor. xv. 31. where the particle vn denotes an Oath. — 2 Cor. i. 23. is too ftrong to need any remark; and the fame may be faid of 2 Cor. xi. 31. — Gal. i, 20. is very plain; as well as Phil. i. 8. — In the Epiftle to the Hebrews the Deity is mentioned as fwearing. Heb. iii. 11. (where u again occurs), and Heb. vi. 16, 17.
IV. But, as in the preceding Article fo here, it is the indirect proof which requires the greateft atten- tion.—The ^tnkers^ are very peremptory in objefl- ing the two paffages already mentioned. Matt. v. 33 — 37. and James v. 12. but they do not, that I perceive, ule Matt, xxiii. 16 — 22. thele t/ireg paffages fliould be in view together. And from them, taken together, 1 think the truth of our proportion cannot be difprovcd.
I do not perceive that the Quakers, or others, have made their fuppofed prohibition of folemn oaths conjijleut with our direct proof: till they do that, they cannot be allowed to have the true fenfe of Scripture.
The paffages on which the objedion is founded, have no relation to the a6ls of the Magi/irate^ as Luther obferves : oaths taken in obedience to autko' rity^ are not affefted by them. Neither do they prohibit fwearing by the Deity himfelf : people may indeed fwear in private by the Deity himfelf, pro- fanely and blameably; but that was not, fecmingly, a cvjiom amongft thofe who are reproved in the New Tcftament ; indeed the reafoning in both the paffages of Sr. Matthew, (lievvs, that it was care- fully o'voided; and on that avoiding, all exatfes were built.
All
8 Barclay's Apology, Prop. 15. Sedt. 10.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIX. SECT. IV. ^^^
All the oaths fpecified by Chrlft, were vain and cldldijli, though connected with the Jewi(h religion', for the people who ufed them, were nor, as in our days, diflblute and licentious; but formal and pre- cife. We have not, that I know of, any fet of people amongft us, who have the '* form^ of God- liftefs" and yet accuftom themfelves to a fet of pious oaths, excufing themfelves by faying, that fuch as they take, are no oaths. Yet this feems to have been the cafe amongft the Jews ; the very Scribes and Pharifees' ran into the moft frivolous and un- meaning diftinclions, between thofe fayings v.'hich were real oatAas, and thofe like fayings which were no oaths. Now fayings like oaths, yet accounted no oaths, would produce two faults; one, hypo- critical profanenefs, the other, deceit and fraud. — Matt. v. 33 — 37. feems to turn more upon the former, and Matt, xxiii. 16 — 22. more upon the latter. — If it fhould be thought, that o'pi'.Xn, " htj is a debtor," Matt, xxiii. 16 18. means only, as oppofed to »J"£u £o, " it is nothing," to denote a real oath; ftill the two faults, protancnefs and falf- hood, would, in fa6V, arife; and would both deferve levere reprchenfion.
I remember to have heard very young and very ignorant people, ufe words like oaths, and then excufe themfelves, by faying, that they had not fworn; but grave, religious people have nor, I think, amongft us, any fuch fyftem of hypocritical profanenefs. — That our Saviour f})oke of common converfation^ appears from the word Aoyo<;^ fermo, difcourfe : and (Luther thinks) from the terms *' yea, yea; nay, nay"."
We
^ 2 Tim. in. 5. * Matt, xxiii. i 5, r6.
^ April 2 1, 1792. The accounts given nie this day, by a Captaiuiii the Navy, of oaths in trials in the Admiralty-couit, are curious. He fays, that people of different Nations and
Relio-ions,
530 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIX. SECT. V.
We can conceive, that it might be worthy of our Lord to check fuch folly. It was profane and impious; and fo had a tendency to debafe and bring contempt upon religion : it muft alfo greatly weaken and loofen mens principles of veracity. — But why might not the evil moft immediately in view, be, its hurting the dignity and the obliga- tion oi folenm oaths P and fo occafioning perjury ? at leaft, flopping fuch foolifh oaths as the Jews made ufe of, is rather fupporting folemn oaths, than dif- couraging them. And is perfeftly confident with fuch as St. Paul ufed.
V. With regard to St. James, he feem.s to have had the fame view of the fubjedl with our Saviour when on the Mount. He mentions tzvo of the lame frivolous oaths, but goes no farthi^r : inftead of going on, he fays, as a kind of et ceteray *' neither by any other oath;*' — which muft mean, any other fuch oath; we cannot conceive his thoughts to leap from fuch a train of tiifling pro- fanenefs, to a Iblemn, devout, deliberate oaih by the Supreme Deity himfelf. — " Let your yea be
yea,'*
Religions, will fwear anything, and flatter themfelves they are not perjured, if only the form of taking the oath differs, in any thing, from that to which they have been accuftomed. And metliods are ufed, by thofe belonging to the Court, to hit off thcii' modes of fwearing : one man, while a foreigner is taking an oath, will hold up one finger, another tno fingers, a third prefents a Crucifix ; and fo on ; meaning to ufe that form, which the witnefs vi'ill deem binding.
The chief cafe in which thefe oaths are taken, feems to be, when enemy's property has been taken under neutral colours ; then the neutral Captain fwears the property to be neutral : there are always papers concealed fomewhere, fhewing the real cafe: and others, counterfeits, to produce to Captors. The real papers, had, in one cafe, been found, and the Captain, not knowing that, fwore to the counterfeits: on the real papers being produced, he dropped down dead. — One could not hear fuch an account, fiom rcfpedable authority, without recoUefling the death of Ananias, — Afls v. 5.
BOOK IV. ART. XXXIX. SECT. VI. ^37
yea," has been underftood to mean, ' fpeak the Truth i^ and therefore to imply^ that the Jews had run Into falQiood. He concludes with, " left ye fall into condemnation," uVo x^»(r»y'.
Our Lord had marked the origin of fuch folly, *>« T» 'STovrj^s'" j St. James points out the confequence. But fuch oaths as are defcribed in our Article^ would fcarcely be faid to proceed from evil^ at leaft, in the ipeaker : though, as before, oaths, in general ^ may imply, fome prefumed imperfeiflion in mens general veracity °.
As the §luakers will allow of nothing but literal conftrudion, one might afk them, in the way of argumentum ad hominem, how they underftand* Matt. V. 40.
I will here clofe my indirect proof, prefuming that objedions to our propofition are now removed.
VI. If we had time^ I might make fome Appli- cation, by offering a few remarks on Perjury, and on profane Jwearingy fuch as fhocks our ears in modern times; but this is at prefent imprafticable : — per- jury I have treated in a Syftem of Morality; and profane fwearing is attacked in a very mafterly manner, in Dr. Ogden's Sermons on the Com- mandments.
' For uVo xfHTiv, the MSS. Steph. ift. and Velef. read ek uTox^tcTji', which Grotius adopts: how fuch hypocritical oaths may make men fall into hypocrijy, is intelligible enough.
"^ The Firft Bodleian MS. has fx t» s'laf o^y.
" Alt. XXXVII. Sed. III.
*• P. ?. When I appealed to this Text I believe I was not aware of Dr. Ogden's appeal to the fame (Serm. v. on the Commandments, Vol. 2. page 57. duodecimo.) — He fays, "It is written. If any man iMill/ue thee at the La-tv, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak alfo. — Are they willing to deliver up their property ahvays to the firft invader \ of thefe rights they are fometimes, and with reafon, a little more tenacious."
Vol. IV. / M m INDEX.
INDEX.
THIS Index is not intended to fuperfcde the life of the printed Heads of I^eftures, vvhicli the Author imagines would be very ferviceable in giving the Reader the true fcope and purpofe of each part of the work ; but only to enable him to find what the printed Heads would not readily point out. The figures are meant to correfpond to the running title, placed at the top of each page, and therefore they mark Book, Chapter, and SeBion. In fome few places a fourth number marks Sub- fe^ion. And fometimes when a Sedion is long, x.\iQ. page is mentioned.
In the fourth Book each Article of the Church of England is confidered as a Chapter. The In- trodiiEliom and Appendixes will be cafily underftood from the Heads of Ledures.
If reference is made, in the Index, to more
Sections than one in the fame Chapter, they are
feparated only by commas. If to feveral in fiiccef-
jion, only the firil and laft are mentioned, and a
line is put between them : as in the running Title.
Where the fame fubjed occurs repeatedly, it is fometimes mentioned both in the Index and Heads of Ledures.
Tlrus, iii-xiii-r. means the third Book, the thirteenth Chapter, and the firft Sedion.
1V-XVI-3. means the fourth Book, the fixteenth Article, and the third Sedion.
111-X-15-4. means the third Book, tenth Chap- ter,'fifteenth Sedion, and fourth Subfedion.
M M 2 III-
540 I N D E X.
iii-xv-ii, p. 192. means that Seftion 11. is fo long, that it is worth while to note the page.
II -II 1-4, t;, 6. means the fecond Book, third Chapter, and Secftions fourth, fifth and fixth.
ii-iv-i — 6. means fecond Book, fourth Chap- ter, and thefirft fix Seftions.
I may here obferve, that it feemed better to refer to texts of Scripture than to quote them ; becaufe not quoting mull make the work much fliorter, and may engage the Reader's attention to the Context. Thefe reafons extend to other pafiTages, which might have been quoted, befides thofe of Scripture.
I beg permifiTion to mention, that whenever I have been induced to give any part of this work a fecond readi/ig, in what might be called one perufal, I have feen its force and meaning more clearly than at firfl. — A confequence, probably, of its having been written merely as a preparation for fpeaking. Which has alio occafioned a word to be ufed here and there, not thoroughly adopted into the Englifh Language.
ABBli
INDEX.
541
A
j^BBE Paris. i-xvi-10,14. Abgarus. i-xii-5.
— xvii-6.
IV-XXII-4. Absolution. iv-xvi-i8.
— xxv-4. Accommodation, i-xvii-19. Accursed, iii-ix-i.
IV-XVIII-5.
— xxxiii~3. Acontius. IV-VII-4. Acrimony in dispute.
i-xii-14. I
11-11-14. iii-x-15-4.. Adam, i-xvi-8.
iv-ix introd. 16. — ix-i, 2,4,6, 14,
15, 19, 21, 29. — x-24,37. Addison, i-xviii-19. 11-IV-13. iv-xxxi-13. Adults. IV-XXV11-14, (see
Sponsors) 17. Agape. IV-XXVIII-5, 21. Agency, divine and human opposed. IV-IX introd. i. — X-41.
— xvii-9,79,98. Agent, (see Minister.) iv-xxii-17. — xxv-4. — XXV 1-4, 6.
— XXXIII-II.
— XXXV1-18, 19. Agriculture, ii-iv-4.
iv-ix-44, 45. Albigenses. iv-xxiii-3. Alderman, iv-xxxvi-i, 12.
Allegorists. i-xvi-7.
1-XV11-19. IV-1V-5. and page 417. IV-VI-3. — VI1-3. — IX-4. Allix. I-XVII-19, I. App. 21. IV-I-2, 6, 16. — ii-i.
— VI-3, 10, II, 12. — XXV111-4. Altar, iv-xxxi-1,2,4, 5, 6. Ambrose, iv-vi-12.
America, iii-v-i, 4,
IV-III-2.
— VI11-12. — XX111-7. — xxv-4. ^ — XXXVII-13. Anabaptists, iv-vii-3. — IX-12. — X-12.
— XI-II.
~xiii-5. • — xv-4. — XV1-3.
XXVI-2.
— XXVIII-II.
— xxxvii-6. Anatomist, ii-iv-7. Angels. I. App. 8, 9, 18, 26.
IV-XXV-4. Antilegomena. i-xii-4.
IV-V1-14. Antinomians— see Crispe.
IV-V11-3.
— xv-6. -
— XVI-9.
Apocrypha
;42
INDEX.
Apocrypha, i-xii-2.
IV-VI-IO,II,0^.
— xxxv-4. Apollonius. 1-XII-17. Apology, iv-viii-8, 12. Aquinas, iv-xni-4, 14. — xvii-8, 71.
XXII-2.
— XXIV-I.
Archontici. iv-xxv-2. Argumentum ad Hominem.
1-XV11-19.
11-11-13, 14.
iv-ix-Introd. 16. Aristides. i-xiv-4, Aristophanes, ii-iv-io. Aristotle. 11-111-15. Arminius, and followers.
iv-x-15.
— xvi-8.
— XVI1-4, II, 12, 19, 20, 30. Arthur, Prince, iv-vii-5. Articles, iii-i-i, 5, 6.
— v-i, &c. — also
Chap. IX, &c.
iv-Introd. entire.
iv-xvii-20, 23, 24. (see Lam- beth).
iv-xviii-i, 7.
XIX-I.
Ascodrutas, iv-xxv-2.
— xxvn-28. — yxviii-2. Asscman. iv-ii-j). Assembly of Divines.
IV-XVII-20, 23. — xxiii-12. — xxxiii-6. Association. 111-111-6,8,10. IV-XX-7. —XXI 1-4,5, 19. — xxiii-22.
Assurance, iv-xvi-io, 25,
3I' 37- Athanasian Creed.
111-IV-4. — IX-9. IV-11-9. — 11-42. — IV-4. — viii-8, &c. Review of Sermon on it, iv-viii-12. end. Athanasius. iv-i-ioend.
— 1-17, p.271.
— 11-21.
VIII-2, 8.
— XVI-4.
— XXVI-3, C. Attrition, iv-xxv-4. Augustin. 1-1-6.
I. App. 4-10.
II-V-II.
ni-x-15-end.
iv-i-i, 4, 6, 17.
—11-45.
— ix-,5,7,9, ^4.
— x-6, 20, 26.
XIII-2.
XIV-3.
—XV 1-5, 10, 30. — XVII-5, 28.
XVIII-2.
XXII-2, 4, 5,
18.
XXIV-I.
XXV-2.
XXVI-I.
XXVII-J4.
XXIX-2.
XXXIII-3.
XXXIV-5.
XXXVI-4, 18.
XXXVII-5,
Authority.
INDEX
Authority, iii-xiv-12.
IV-XXXVI-I.
B
Balguy, Mr. John.
iv-xi-App. 9. Balguy, Dr. Thomas.
i-xix-ii, 14.
ii-v-1,3.
111-IV-3, 4,6, 9.
— V-2.
— vi-6.
— ix-6.
— X-14.
— XI-4, 6, II.
— xiii-8.
— XIV-12, 13.
— xv-4, 9.
iv-Intiod. 2, 3.
— 11-42.
— vii-6, 13.
— VIII-II.
— ix-20, 32. — xi-App. 9. — xiii-1,4, 17, 22,
24. 30- — xv-23. — xvii-20, — XIX-19. — xxiii-17,22,26. — XXV111-13, 20,
SO- — XXIX-5.
— XXXV-I.
Baptism, iv-i-18. — ix-32.
■ — XIII-IO.
—XV 1-5, 19. — XXI11-5, ^4- — xxv-2,3,5,7,8. — xxvi-6. — XXVII passim, (see Heads.)
543 Baptism, iv-xxxiii-3.
— xxxiv-2, 7. Baptist, iv-viii-ii, p. 110. — xvii-22. — xxv-3, 7. —XXV 11-15,30,35. — XXVI11-12. — XXXI11-7. Baptistery, iv-xxvii-4. Barbeyrac. iv-xii-14.
— XIV-5. Barclay, i-xi-6.
see Quakers. iv-xxvn-29. — xxviii-20. — xxx-io.
— XXXIV-2.
. — XXXVI1-19. Barnabas. iv-xi-App. i. Baxter, iii-iv-i.
IV-X-4.
—XI 1-25.
— XI11-5.
— XIV-7.
— XV-23.
—xvi-5,10, 15,29, SO. SI-
XXI-I,
— XX II 1-4, 16, 25.
— XXXVI-4. Bclsham. i-xvi-8.
IV-XVI1-21. Bennet. iv Introd. 6.
— xx-i.
XXV-2.
XXVII-29.
XXIX-I.
— xxxvi'-5. Bentley. i-ix-8.
iv-i-Append. Berquin. ii-iv-13. Berriman, John, iv-11-^7. Bcza. 1-VII-5.
iv-xvii-15,
Bible
Bullet.
Burn.
544 INDEX,
Bible, our present.
I-IX-II. III-IX-I.
iv-iii-6'. Bigotry. 11-11-8.
in-xv-6, Bilson, Bishop. Hi-iv-3. Bingham, passim.
IlI-XI-IO.
— xiii-i, 8. iv-Introd. 3, 6. —1-4. p. 232. — IV- 17.
— V-I.
— VI-I6.
XXIII-1.
XXIV-2.
■ — XXV-4.
— XXVII-5, 15-
XXVIII-5.
— xxxvi-passim. Bishop, iv-xxxvi-i, 2, 3,
5,11, 12, 13. Blasphemy, iv-v-ii.
— xvi-11,34.
— xxxi-8, 10.
Blood. iv-xi-App. 2, 27.
iv-xxxiv-27, Bshmcn, Jacob, iii-xv-ii
p. 188, &c. Bona, Cardinal, iii-xv-ii p. 192, &c. IV-XXV-5. — XXVI-3. ' — xxxi-i, 4. Boys, on the Articles.
IV-XI11-14. Bradford, iv-xvii-17. Bramhall, Archbishop.
III-XIII-I.
lv-xxin-4, 12. — xxv-2. Brerewood. iv-xxiv-i.
XXXII -10.
Blown, Dr. John.
ii-iii-io, 15.
— IV-14. Brownists. iv-vii-t). — XVI-3. ^
XXIII-(J.
I-XIV-I2. I-XVI-IO. I-XVIII-II.
et passim. Burges, Dr. John.
II-V-II.
111-VII-4.
iv-Introd. 6.
— xix-i.
— xxxv-i.
— x::xvi-7. IV-XV1-3. — XXVI 1-15. — xxxiii-8.
XXXV-I.
— xxxvii-6, 10. Burnet, Bishop. 111-IV-5.
— XII-I.
— xiii-8. iv-Introd. i, 2, 6. —1-4, p. 230. — 1-18. ~i-App. — ii-i. — iii-i, 6. ~iv-7.
~vii-3, 5- •^xiii-14.
— XIV-4.
— xvii-io, 14.
XVIII-2, IQ.
XIX-I.
XXIV-2.
XXVI-5.
— xxviii-ii, 20.
XXX-I, 2.
XXXIV-I7.
Burnet,
INDEX.
545
Burnet, Bishop.
lV-XXXV-2.
— XXXVI-5. — XXXVII-I9. Butler, Joseph, Bishop.
I-XII-I.
— xv-6.
— XVI-12.
— xix-r, 15, 19.
iv-ix-34.
— xi-App. 9, 29.
P- 3H- — XV1-31.
— xvii-86.
Butler, Samuel, ii-iv-13.
Cajetan, Cardinal. IV-XII1-5.
— XXIV-I.
Called, iv-xvii-44.
— XXIII-15, 16. — XXXVI-18. Calmet. i-ix-6, 10. — x-8. IV-X-9. Calvin, and followers, (see Predestination). iv-Introd.4. — 111-2. — VI 1-4. — IX-13. — X-15, 20, 39. — xvi-7, 8, 37. —XV 1 1-9, 11,12,15,
17, 18, 86. ■ — ^xix-9. — xxii-19.
— XXVI-II.
Campbell, i-ix-il.
IV-II-I.
Candid disquisitions.
iv-viii-ii, 12. Vol. IV,
Candor. 1-1-5.
— App. 30. 111-V-3. Canonical, i-xii-2,
iv-vi-ii, 14. Carless. iv-xvii-17. Catalogues, iv-vi-ii:, 19. Catechism, (see Racovian, and Trent).
III-X-II.
iv-ii-42.
— VI 1-7.
■ XVII-20.
XIX-II.
— xxv-4, 8. — XXVI11-3. tDathari. i-App. 4, 12.
IV-VI-2.
Catholicus consensus.
iv-xi-App. 2.
— XXlX-2.
Cave, iv-xxv-2, 4, 5, 7.
— XXVI1-5. Ceremonies, iii-iv-2.
— xv-12.
iv-xx-i, 2, 7.
— xxv-3,5,id.
— XXVI11-4.
— XXXI11-4.
XXXIV-2, 3J
14. Cerinthus. i-App. 22, 25; 28. lv-ii-5, 15.
— IV-I.
Cervantes, ii-iv-13. Chambers, i-xv-22. Chances, calculatio'n of.
i-xvi-6. Chandler, Bishop.
i-xvn-9, 15,18,19.
IV-VI-12. Chara6ter, indelible.
iv-xxv-2, 3, 5, 6. N N Gharlemagns.
|
546 |
1 N D |
E X. |
|
Cliajlem |
agne, iv-xiii-4. |
Cicero, iv-xvii-5. |
|
— XXI1-4. |
— XX 1 1-2, 6. |
|
|
— yxxv-i. |
Circumcelhones. |
|
|
Cliarms. |
rv-xxv-7, 8. |
IV-XXVI-I. |
|
XXIK-I. |
Circumstances, as helping |
|
|
Chatham, Earl of. |
interpretation. |
|
|
iv-xvii-21. |
I-X-J. |
|
|
Cheynel |
. iv-iv-App. |
111-1-7. |
|
— vn-3. |
— VII-5. |
|
|
— xxxvii-6. |
iv-Introd. 7. |
|
|
Chillingworth. iv-vii-y. | |
—x-42. |
|
|
Chivahy |
. iv-xiii-22. |
Clarke. 1-111-3. |
|
Chosen. |
(see Elea). |
— XIX-19. |
|
Chrism. |
IV-XXV-3. |
IV-1-4, p. 22C. |
|
— xxvii-6. |
—1-8, 18. |
|
|
Churcli. |
111-VI1-4. |
— i-Appendix. |
|
— XI-4. |
— iii-G. |
|
|
iv-in-6. |
— viii-il. |
|
|
— XVI11-7, 14. |
Cleaver, Bishop. |
|
|
— XIX-2, 4, 3, 7, |
iv-xi, App. 27. |
|
|
I5» 17- |
— xxviii-1,13, 20, |
|
|
— xxi-i, 17. |
30> 33- |
|
|
— XXIII-I3, 14, |
XXXI-IO. |
|
|
17- |
Clemens Romanus. |
|
|
— xxx-4. |
IV-XXIII-2, |
|
|
— xxxiv-19. |
— XXXVI-3. |
|
|
Church, |
attendance on. |
Clinical, iv-xxv-4, 12. |
|
11-IV-3, 7. |
XXVII-IO. |
|
|
Church; |
eastern & western. |
Cole. 11-111-4, II. |
|
.IV-V-3. |
— IV-II, |
|
|
— vi-23. |
Colleges, iii-viii-2. |
|
|
— xxiv-i, 4. |
IV-XXIV-5. |
|
|
— XXVII-10. |
Collins, i-xvii-io, 14. |
|
|
— XXXIV-5, |
iv-Introd. 0". |
|
|
XXXVIl-2. |
— VI-9. |
|
|
Cicero. |
I-XIV-5, 7. |
Collyridians. iv.xxii-4. |
|
XIX- 1 2, 19. |
Comber, iv-xxiv-i. |
|
|
II-III-3, 12. |
— xxv-4. . |
|
|
III-VII-2. |
Commination. iv-viii-ii. |
|
|
— X-2, 4. |
p. 112. |
|
|
IV-I-I. |
Communion, for families. |
|
|
— 1II-8. |
IV-XXV111-5. |
|
|
— IX-3. |
for funerals. |
|
|
— x-2. |
— xxviii-i I. Conununion |
|
I N D |
EX. 547 |
|
Communion of Saints. IV-VI11-4. |
Councils including Nicene ; but see Trent. |
|
— xxii-G. |
IV-XXII-4. |
|
— xxv-4.. |
XXV-2, 3. |
|
— XXXI-4. |
— XXX-I. |
|
Comprehension, iii-xiv-15. |
— XXXII-3, 4. |
|
Concubinage, iv-xxv-6. |
— XXXII1-3. |
|
Concupiscence, iv-ix-2, ^, 12, 26, 32. Confession, iv-xxv-4. |
XXXVII-2, 13. Cranmer. i-xviii-13. iv-Introd. 4. |
|
— XXXI11-5. Confirmation, iv-xxv-3, 9. |
— XIII-5. ' — XVII-16. |
|
Constantine. i-xviii-15. |
XXVIII-II. |
|
111-V-3. |
■ — xxx-6. |
|
IV-1-15. |
— XXX 1-4. |
|
XVI-2. |
— XXXI1-12. |
|
XXXIV-7. Constitution. iv-ix-i8, 28. XXXVI-I. Consubstantiation . |
— xxxv-i, 4. XXXVII-2. Crellius, Paul, iv-vii-3. Crispe. iv-xi-io. |
|
IV-XXVIII-IO. Contrition, iv-xxv-4. Conversion, iv-x-26, 50. |
—XI, App. .9. — XII1-5. Criticism and taste. |
|
— xii-8. |
1-XII-13. |
|
—XVI 1-45. Convocation, iii-vii-4. Cooke, Dr. William, Dean of Ely. i-xvii-10, (P-239)>i5'20. i-xix-12. jpopts. 1-V-7. — IX-5. |
Cromwell, iv-xvi-8. Cupid and Psyche. 111-X-15. Ciistoms. IV-VI-5. (see Habits). iv-xxxiv-2, 17, 24. XXXVI-I. |
|
iii-x-8. |
Cyrus, iv-xiii-17. |
|
IV-XXIV-I. Corpus Christi. IV-XXVIII-IO. Corpus et Syntagma, (see Syntagma). |
D Dacier. iv-i-1,3. ' |
|
^Councils, including Nicene; but see Trent. IV-1-4. |
X-2. Daille. 1-XII-16. |
|
— VII 1-5. — xxi-i, 2,3,4, 10. |
IV-XXV-4. D'Alembert. iv-x-13. Damascene, iv-xxii-4, k. |
^48 INDEX.
Deacon, iv-xxxvi-1-2, 3,
15. 17.
Deaconess, iv-xxv-5.
— XXXII-19. Death, iv-ix-14, 29. Deceased Christians. iv-xxii-6. Defender of the Faith.
III-IX-I. IV-XXXVII-2.
Deformity. 11-111-7. Deluge, i-xvi-8, (see de
Luc). Demoniacs, i-xiii-io.
iv-ix-Introd. .
16. — xxv-5. Dickinson, iv-xv-6. Diderot, iv-xiii-22. Digby, Lord, in-xiv-io.
— xv-6. Dionysius. in-x-9. IV-IV-5. — viii-6.
— XXXVII-2.
Diptychs. — XXXIII-4. Direftory. ■ — xxv-3, 4, 6.
— xxvn-15.
— xxviii-12. Discipline, iii-xv-12.
iv-xxxin-i, 7.
— xxxvi-16. Dissenter, iii-iv-4, 5.
— xiv-2, 8, 15.
— xv-6.
IV-1-3, p. 224.
— 1-15.
— n-43.
— viii-i I, page 109.
~xvi-3.
— XV11-21.
— xx-4, 7.
• — xxiii-26.
Dissenter, iv-xxv-?. — xxvi-6. — xxviii-12. — XXXI-5. — XXXI11-7. (see Puritans and Presbyte- rians). Dissertation on the 17th Article, Oxf 1772. 111-IV-9. — ix-i. iv-Introd. 4. — XVI1-7, 9, 16, 29. Divorce, iv-vii-13, — XXV- 2, 6.
XXXVII-2.
Docetae. i-App. 19, 20, 24. iv-ii-z(, 15. — vi-29. — xi-App. 2. Do6lrina, &c. Ecclesi^e Anglicanae. iv-Introd. 4 —1 1-3. — VII-3. Donatists. iv-viii-4.
— XVI-2. — XXV-2. — XXVI-I.
Dort, Synod of. iv-x-15.
— XVII-II,
19- Doxologies. iv-1-4. — v-i. Duelling, iv-xiii-22. — XXXVI1-3.
E
Eachard. ii-jv-13. Easter, iv-xxxiv-5.
— XXXVIl-2.
Ebionites. iv-11-5.
Edwardsj
Edwards, Jonathan.
II-V-IO.
iv-x-19, S3- — XI, A pp. a- — xii-25. — X111-5. ~xvi-8. — xvii-22. Ele6lion. iv-xvi-5, 20.
— XVI1-5, 14, 30,
44, 6g, 92. — XIX-12. — XXI11-15. (see Chosen). Enthusiasm, iii-xv-ii, p. 181. iv-intiod. 3. — X-19, 49. — xvi-31, page
470. — XV 11-56.
' — XXV-2. XXXVI-I7.
Epi6letus, including Carter. IV-111-4. — xvii-89. Epiphanius. iv-i-i. • — IV-17. — iv-App, Episcopius. iv-ii-42.
— X-15. Erasmus. iv-Introd. 4. —1-4. — i-App.
■ X-2.
XVII-16.
XVIII-5.
Erastus. —XXXII 1-6. Evangelist, iv-xxi 11-24. Eucharist. — xxviii-4. E'-ichitae. iv-xxv-2. Evil, referred to God.
iv-x-50.
— xvii-92,93.
INDEX. ^4c>
Evil, referred to God.
iv-xxv-io. Excision, iv-xxxiii-2, 9. Excommunication.
III-XIV-I. ,
IV-XXV-4. — XXXIII, passim. Execrations, iv-xxxiii-2.
Exorcism, fsee Demoniacs), IV-XXV11-4, 7.
Faith, iv-x-29.
— xi-2. and passim. — XI-17. — XI1-12, 14, 25. — XVI-3. Fall, i-xvi-8. (see Adam). iv-ix-19, 20. — xvi-22. Famihsts. iv-vii-g, 7. — xv-5. — XVI1-18.
XXII 1-6.
XXV-2.
XXVIII-II.
XXXIV-I7.
XXXVII-IO.
Fanaticism. II i-xv- 1 i,p.i8r.
IV-VII-2.
— xxiii-6. — xxvi-i. Fate. IV-IV-4.
— ix-Introd. 8. — x-9.
— XVI 1-2, 20, 25, 62. Fenelon. i-xvii-14.
II-V-IO, II.
iii-xv-ii, p. 187, &c.
(see Maxims of the Saints).
Fielding.
55^
Fielding, r-xiii-7.
11-111-4, ^4- — IV-14. IV-XXXVII-3. Filioque, iv-v-3. Fisher, Bishop, iv-xxii-21 Fitzjames, Duke of.
iv-ix-36. Five points, iv-x-15, 26.
—XVII -5, 19. Flesh, iv-xxxin-13. (see
Docetae. ) Foote. ii-iii-i. — iv-13.
V-IO.
Forbes, passim.
IV-1-4, p. 228, — x-5.
— xxii-passim ; partic. Se6l. 6.
— XXV-2. — XXVI-2.
pox, John. iv-Introd. 4.
— VII-2.
XXV-2.
XXVIII-26.
XXXII-6, 12.
Fulke. IV-XVI-3, 8, 10. — XVII-9, 29.
XXII-2, 6.
XXIV-I.
—XXV-2, 7.
XXVIII-II.
XXIX-I.
— xxx-4.
XXXI-2, 12.
XXXIl-17.
XXXIII-3.
Fuller. iv-Introd. 4.
— vn-3. 5- Fulness of time.
1-XV1-7, p. 191. — xix-18. Furpr,3cdestinatus.iv-xv-i2.
INDEX.
Fur praedestinatus. iv-xvr-8. — xvii-15,
G
Galileo, ii-v-i i. Geneva, (see Switzerland). Genlis. ii-iv-13. Gerizim. i-v-4. Gibbon, iv-i-i, 3, 4, 6, 17, end.
i-App.
— V II 1-8. Gibson, Bishop.
i-xvii-18.
i-xix-i, 7,9.
111-XIV-15.
— xv-ii. p. 183,
195- iv-vi-22, 26. — IX-3.
XXXVII-2.
Gift of God. iv-xvi-30-5. — xvii-83,
p. 32. — XXXII-18. God, his Nature how con- ceived, i-iii-i, 3.
iv-i-io, p. 247. Golden Age. iv-ix-20, 41. Good, hereditary, iv-i x-36. Gordon, Lord George. i-xvii-16. iii-vi-S. Gospellers, iv-x-12.
— XII-I.
Gotescalc. iv-x-i r.
— XV11-7. Grace. iv-X-i8, (end), 42,
43^ 45y 49- — XI-4. — xii-8. -^xiii-9.
Grace.
I N r>
Crrace. iv-xvi-/;, 20, 21. Gratian. iv-xxxi-2. Greeks, passim, (see in Heads of Le6lures.)
iv-xxv-2,3,4,5, 7.
— XXVII-5.
— xxviir-4.
— xxx-3.
XXXII-IO.
— XXXIV-7. ~xxxvi-i8. Green, Bishop, iv-xi-8.
— XXV-2.
(see Me- thodist). Grey, on Hudibras.
IV. Introd. 6. — xxiii-6, II. — xxv-6. — xxviii-12. Grotius. i-xvi-13. — xvii-8. IV-VI-9, 10, 13,27. — VII-14. — X-1./5, 41. — xi-App. 8. — XIV-5. —XV 1-5. — xxvii-35. Gulliver's Travels. 111-11-4. Gurtler. iv-xvi-5. Guy Faux, iv-ix-30, p. 172.
H
Habits (customs).
iv-x-50, p. 250. — xvi-33-7.
— XXXVI-I.
Habits (dresses), iv-xx-i, 7. Hales. IV-XV1-4.
— xxv-iii.
— xxxvii-iS.
55^
E X;
Hallifax, Bishop. 1-X11-9.
— XVI-II, XVII-IO.
— App.5. III-II-5. IV-VI-3I, 32.
— viii-8. — xxii-20. Hampton-Court Conference. 11-1-9. iv-xvi-8. — xvii-19, 80.
— XIX-I.
— XX111-13. — xxv-3, 8. — xxvii-15.
— XXXV-I.
Hardouin. i-xii-16. Hartley, ii-iii-i^ 9.
III-XV-II.
IV-IV-4.
—^-^9, 49- — XV111-5.
XXII-2.
Heads of Le6lures. Vol. r. Advertisement. 11-IV-12. IV-VI1-9. — VI11-9. Healing, bodily and spiri- tual joined.
IV-XVIII-II.
— xxv-io, Heatliens. iv-viii-ii, page 107. — xiii-i,s,5,8,
I7,2'l,24,29.
— XV111-9. Hebrew. 1-1-4.
— v-8.
— XV11-9.
iv-xxiv-3. Hell. IV-111-3.
Hell.
552- INDEX.
Hell. IV-1V-4,
XXII-I.
Helmstadt. 11-11-5. — v-10. Herbert, Lord of Clierbury. 1-XIX-19.
IV-X-2.
Hervey. i-iv-end. IV-XI-15. ^i-App. 9, 20. Hey, William, his Short Defences, iv-i-18.
—11-16, 37. — V-13.
— x-37. 41- — xi-App. 22,
30. — xiii-6. Hey, Samuel, iv-xvi-33. Hey, Richard. — x-22. Heylin. iv-Introd. 4. — vn-13. — X-15, 16, 20. — XVI1-16, 27. — XIX-12. — xx-i. — XXIV-5.
XXV-2.
XXVI-2.
XXXV-I, 2.
Hierocles. i-xii-17. Hints, &c. a pamphlet.
iv-viii-8, II, 12. Hoadley, Bishop.
IV-XXVII1-13. Hobbes. iv-xviii-6. Holmes. 1-VI-3. Holy Ghost, iv-v-passim. — x-39. — XV 1-4, 17,
34. 37. end. — XX XII 1-3. — xxxv-4. — XXXVI-I7,
18, 19.
Homer. 11-11-14.
IV-X-2.
—XVI 1-2,25,79,85. Homilies, iii-v-3, 6. — ix-6". iv-Introd. 4. — ix-34.
— xi-17, 19, 21,
23. — xi-App. 2. — X11-12, 20. — XI11-5.
XIV- 1.
~xv-i5.
— XVI-3, 8, 10,
27- — xvii-92. — XXI-13.
— XXIV-I, 2.
— XXV-2, 4, 6, 8, 9-
XXVIII-I 1,20,
24.
XXXI-4.
XXXII-I9.
— xxxv-passint. Honorius. iv-ii-io. Hooper. iv-Introd. 4.
— XV 1 1- 16, 62,67, 71-
— XX- I.
— XXXIV-17. Horace, iii-ix-i. IV-IX-3. — XV-21. Horsley, Bishop. 1-XI-3. —XV 1 1-3.
IV-I-I.
— i-App.
— xxxv-4. Hospitality, i-x-io.
— XI-7.
Huet.
Huet. i-xii-i.
iv-iv-App. Hume. 1-IV-3, 4.
— xiii-8.
— XV- and
— xvi-passim.
XVIil-II.
• — xix-19. 11-1-3-
— IV-II. V-IO, II.
IJI-III-4. — vi-6.
XI V-IO.
XV-II.
IV-I-I7, p. 268.
VII- 1 4.
— X-I9. — XI1I-5.
XVII-2, 20.
— XVIII-5.
Hurd, Bishop.
I-XIII-I3. — XV 1-7. — xvii-passim. iv-Introd. 2, 3. 4 — xxii-8, 20. Hypothesis. 11-111-4. iv-ii-46. — XI.-34. — xxviii-6 Hypsistarii. iv-i-13.
I
James, iv-vi-25. — xi-27. Jansen. iii-x-5. IV— X-17. — xvii-28. Iconoclastae. iv-xxii-4 Idol, iv-xxn-13, 18. Vol. IV.
I N D E X. 553
Idolatry, its attra6lions.
i-xviii-6, 21.
IV-VI1-14. Ignatius, iv-xxiii-2.
— XXXV1-3. Jerom. iv-vi-io, 13.
XIII-2.
— XV-3, 12.
—XV 1-9.
— XXII-5.
XXIV- 1.
— xxv-3. — XXXII-4. Jews, modern.
1-XV11-9, 1^- iv-vn-13, 14. — xvii-95. — XXI1-19. Jewel, Bishop, i-xii-16.
iv-Introd 4. — xvii-18. • — XXXI1-12. — xxxv-i. Immersion, iv-xxvii-4, 26. Impossibility, iv-x-25. — xv-3, 4, 18, 23. Imprecations.
iv-xxxiii-2, 4. Imputation, iv-xi-15.
XI-App. £0.
Independents.
iv-xxni-6, 13. Indifferent, iv-xx-7.
— xxxiv-r7. Indulgences, iv-xiv-i. Infants, iv-ix-37. — xvii-6. — xKV-3. • — xxvii-ii, 18,
27,31- — XXVI11-9.
~xxx-4.
O o Infinity.
K
Kennicott. i-viii-2. King, Lord, iv-1-4, p. 23G. —II 1-3, 6.
' — IV-4.
554 INDEX.
Infinity, iv-r-io, p. 246.
—1-17.
— 11-21.
— v-ii. Injunftions. iii-iv-9. — VI1-5.
— IX-I.
iv-Introd. 5. Insanity, iv-x-28, 44. Inspiration, i-xii-3. — XVI-9.
IV-XIII-IO.
— xxiii-i5,'i7. Intention, iv-xxvi-3, &c.
— xxvii-6". Interest of Money. IV-VII-14. Jortin. 1-XV1-7.
II-V-IO.
iv-ix-8.
~x-5, 39, 54. — XV 1 1-2 1.
— XXI-9.
Josephus. i-vi-i.
— xiv-ii, 12. IV-VI-9, 12. Judgment, general. iv-xi-28. — xii-25. Julian. 1-XII-16.
— XVI11-15. Juliana, iv-xxvm-io. Justification, iv-xi-14, 21. — xii-8. — xiii-7- — XV 1-8, 19. Justinian, iv-xxiv-i.
King, Lord. iv-iv-App.
— VIII-I.
— xvi-2, 4, 27. King, Archbishop.
iv-ix-22.
— xvii-24. King's College Chapel.
III-XV-IO.
Kneeling, iv-xxxi-5. Knowledge, yyua-ic, and Wis- dom, a-o(pix. I-XI-3, 7.
— A pp. 20, 24. Knox, John, iv-xvii-23. — XXII1-4.
Labour, iv-ix-14, 44. La6lantius. i-xix-5. iv-1-4. — XXXVII-5. Lambeth Articles.
iv-xvi-8, 10, 31.
— xvii-18,24, 29. Lancaster, i-xvii-6'. Language, popular.
I-X-2, &c.
iv-i-17.
— ix-Introd. 3.
— ix-34.
—x-39, 41, 42, 48.
— XI1-13, 23.
— xvi-30, p. 469.
— xvii-77. Lardner. passim.
1-XII-4, 9.
— xvi-3, 7.
— XVI11-12, 14.
iii-xv-6.
iv-ii-6, 22.
— vi-12, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26.
— VII-II,
Lardner.
INDEX,
Lardner. passim. iv-xvr-2. — xvii-2, 25. — XXXI-5.
— XXXII-2.
— xxxiv-24, 27.
XXXVI-2.
Latimer. iv-Introd. 4.
— xvii-16,67,80. — xxiii-iO\
XXVIII-II.
XX XV- 1.
Latitudinarian. iv-xi-12. Laud, Archbishop.
iv-xvii-20, 24.
— xix-8.
XX- 1.
• — xxvii-18. Law, Edmund, Bishop.
i-xix-18.
111-11-5.
— vi-6.
— xiii-8.
iv-Introd. 2, 3. Law, William, iv-xvi-io. Leclerc. iv-x-39. Le6lures, things incidental to them, i-xviii-12.
III-V-2.
IV-XVI-4.
XVII-IOO.
■ — XIX-1.
• — XXII-I5.
XXV-I2.
■ — xxxf, end. — xxxiii, end. — xxxv-i. Legends, iv-vi-2. Leland. i-xii-4.
— XV- 1, 6.
— xvi-io, 1 1, 16.
— XV 1 1 1-27.
— xix-13, 19.
ii-iii-i.
IV-V1-15.
555
Leporius. iv-xv-3, 7. Leslie, iv-xxvi-6.
— XXV 1 1-8, 29. — xxxvii-20. Liberty, or Freedom. iii-iv-6. — VI-5.
— XII-I.
IV-V11-3. — ix-Introd. 5. — IX-5.
— x-9, 19, 22, 42, 46, 49.
— XII-I.
— xvii-i, 86, 91. Limborch. iv-xvii-ii.
— xxv-7.
— xxvii-35.
— xxxvii-18. Liturgy, iv-x-39.
XX-2.
XXIV-I — 5.
XXV-7.
XXXIV-2.
— XXXV1-7, 8. Locke, i-xii-13, end. — XV-15. — XVII-19. ii-n-13. — IV-5. 111-111-6. — xii-5, 6. IV-1-17, p. 268, — VI 1-4, end. — vii-i2, end^ — ix-Introd. 7. — IX -40. — x-29.
—xi-App. 9, 25. — xvi-si. — xvii-81, 92. — XXIV-3. — xxvii-27. — XXXI- 13. 0 0 2 Locke.
55^
INDEX.
Locke, iv-xxxii-17. Logos. i-App. 25.
JI1-IV-5.
iv-i-6, p. 240.
— ii-i, 15.
— iii-i.
VI-IO.
Longinus. 111-111-2. Lord's Supper, i-xi-7.
IV-XX111-5.
— XXV-2. XXVIII-
II. De Luc. i-xvi-8-subs.5. Lucian. i-xii-16. —XV 1-3.
II-IV-IO, I*^.
iv-xxxviii-8. Ludlam. i-iv,end. iv-ix-28. — x-5, 37. — XI-15. — xi-App. 7, 9, 16, 20.
• — XIII-2, 22, 27.
Luther, and followers- 1-XII-7. iv-i-App,.
Vl-2(j.
— vH-3, 4, 7, 14.
IX-J2.
X-16.
— xi-6. — X111-5. ~xv-3. — XVI1-12. — xxiii-G. — XXVI1-7.
— XXVIII-IO. XXIX-I.
— xxx-5.
— XXX 1-4.
XXXVII-2, G.
r — XXXlX-2j 4.
M
Macedonius. iv-v-2.
— V111-5. Macknight. i-xiii-ii.
IV-XV1-4, and elsewhere. Maclaurin, John, iv-vii-3. Magistrate, iii-xiv, accord- ing to Heads of Lectures.
IV-XX-I.
— XXXIV-I5, 17. — XXXVI-I4, 16. — xxxvii-passim. part. Sc(5t. 3, 15. Maimonides. i-xvii-19.
IV-VI-3, end.
• — IX-4.
— x-3.
— XVII-3. Manicheans. i-xii-7.
— App. 3, 4.
IV-1-4, 10.
—1 1-4.
■ — IV -4.
— IX-5, 7.
— x-20.
— XXI 1-2.
XXX-2.
XXXII-2.
— XX XV 1 1-5. Marcellinus. — xv-3. Mannontel. — xvii-85. Marriage, iv-xxiii-12. — xxv-6, 9. — XXX 1 1, accord- ing to Heads of Le flu res. — XXXII1-3. Marsh. i-:;vi-8,
— App. 26, iv-i-App. end. Mass. iv-xxiv-2.
including ^Tissa. Mass.
Mass. lv-xxviii-2.
— XXXI according to Heads of Le6t. Matlicmatics. 11-1-4. Matthew, i-vi-i.
— XI 11-9. Maty. 1V-V-4. Maxims of tlie Saints.
ni-xv-j I, p. 187, &c.
(see Fenelon.) Mede. 1-XVII-15. iv-vi-32. Melan6lhon. iv-Introd. 4. — x-16. — XV1-15. —XVI 1-9, 16,
99- • — xxviii-io,
32.
— XXXIV-17. Memories, iv-xxii-5. Merit. iv-ix-Introd. 8.
— xi-i6".
— XIV-4. Messaliani. iv-xxv-2.
— XXVI-2.
Metaphor, i-xvii-b, 18. iv-v-6.
■ — ix-Introd. 6. ■ — xi-App. 27. — xxviii-6, 19, 20, 26, 31.
— XXXI-2, 4.
Metropohtan. iv-xxi-io. Methodism, i-xvi 11-27.
iii-vin-4.
■ — XV- 10, page 191.
iv-x-39.
---XI-IO.
— xi-A]5p. 9. — XI1-3, ^• ,' — XVI- 10, 31.
INDEX. 557
Methodism, iv-xvii-21.
— xxiii-6, 8, 26. Michaelis. i-App. 26. and otten elsewhere- 111-IV-5. iv-i-App, — xi-App. 9. (see Marsh.) Middleton. i-ix-8.
— xii-o, 16.
• — XIII-IO.
— xxii-passim,
and Se6t. 6. — xxviii-28.
— XXIX-I.
— xxx-1,8. Mill, i-viii-2. Millenarians. i-xi-2.
111-IX-7. iv-rv-5, 12. Milton, iv-xvii-2, 100.
— xviir-^. Ministers, religious. iii-i-C, — v~6. — IX-12. iv-xxni-i, 15,16.
XXV -4.
XXVI-I, 2, 6.
— xxvn-8. (see Priests. )
— XXXV-2.
— xxxvi-i, 8. Miracles, i-xiii-io.
-^xv. and xvi. according to Heads of Le6t. — xviii-25. iv-xxiii-5, 17. Misna, ot Talmud. 1-V-3. — VII 1-9. — n-iv-5.
Misna.
5iS
Misna, or Talmud. IV-VI-3.
XXVII-2.
XXXIV-4, 24.
Moderation, iv-xxxv-i.
(see Puller ) Monk. i-App. 5— 9.
IV-XXXII-I.
Monophysitcs. iv-11-9. Montague, Bishop.
iv-xvi-22. Montanus. iv-v-2.
— XVI-2. — XXII-2.
— XXV11-14. IMontesquiep. iii-vi-3.
XV-II-2.
iv-ix-28, — XXXIV-7. Montfaucon. i-vi-7. Morality, i-xii-i.
— XV11-18. — XIX-3, 4. ii-rv-4. 111-1-4.
— IX-IO, XI-II,
— xv-4.
iv-Introd. 3.
— VI-5. i3> end. —vii-y, 13, 14. — xii-23. — XIV-4. — XV1-15, 3O' — xvii-i, 79.
— XIX-4, 7.
— XXI-I5. — XXIl-20. — xxv-6, 10.
XXVII-2, I I.
— xxxii-i, 14. — xxxvi-i. — XXXVII-18, 19. — xxxix-6.
INDEX.
Moravians
Mosh
eim.
iii-xv-ii, page
188, &c. — xv-12. iv-i- 6, end. — V11-13. — xi-App. 9. — xv-6. — xxiv-i.
XXXVII-IO.
I-XII-15. i-App. iv-subs. 12.
II-II-IO.
— v-io.
IV-XIV-I.
— XV 1-4. passim. — xxxvi-6. — xxxvii-6.
— XVII-2.
-XV- 10. xx-i.
IV-XXV-2,IO, II.
. III-XV-II, p. 187. IV-VI-3.
— VII-3.
— xv-5.
— XVI-9.
— xxiii-6, 15.
XXVIII-I I.
N Names, their effefts.
IV-XVIII-II.
Nares. i-xii-16.
Nature. iv-ix-Introd. 8, 9.
— IX-18, 26, 30. Neal. (see Puritans.)
iii-iv-6.
— XIV-15.
iv-xvi-8.
— XVI1-18.
— xxv-3.
— XXVII-15.
Nc;il.
Musgrave. Music. Ill
IV-
Mysteries. Mysticism
INDEX
Neal. (see Puritans.)
IV-XXXVI-5. Necker. iv-xxiv-i. Necessary Do6lrine. passim. iv-Introd. 4. — v-4. — VI11-4.
IX-2.
X-II.
— xi-8.
— XI 1-6, 25,
— XIII-5.
XIV-I.
— XVI-3,8, 10, 14 — XVII-I6, 80. • — xxn-4.
— XXV-2, 4, 7.
XXVI-2.
XXVIII-II.
— xxx-6. — XXXI-4.
XXXVII-2.
Necessity, (see Liberty.)
iv-ix-Introd. 5.
— X-19, 49.
— XVII-5. Necessity, cases of.
IV-XXI11-9, 20,
29- — xxv-3.
— xxvii-6, 10,
XXXV-I, 2.
Nestorius. iv-i-18.
—1 1-8, 9.
— XXI-16. Newton, Sir Isaac.
I-VI-I.
— XVII-15. 11-IV-5. 111-IV-7. iv-i-App. — XXX1-13. Nicholls. iv-Introd. 6.
Nicholls. 1V-X-4.
— xi-App. 2, 6. —XII 1-2.
JNorns. iv-lntrod. i, — x XV 1 1-29. Not at home. 111-11-4.
— VIII-I.
Novatians. iv-1-4, p. 227.
— xvi-2, 27' Numenius. iv-1-3.
o
Oaths, iv-xxxvii-o, g^ 5. &c. — XXXIX passim- Ogden. iv-viii-ii. — ix-36. — xi-App.9, 27. — xxii-20.
XXXIX-2, 5, 6.
Offering. iv-xi-App. 14. Old Maids, Essay on,
iv-ix-30. Omissions, in each S}'stem.
i-xvii-i.
iv-ii-i. Onkelos. i-vi-7.
- — ix-3- Opinions, seeming incon- sistent, to be retained till reconciled, iv-xvi-5.
Oracles, i-xvii-12. Ordinances, ordinary bulk upon extraordinary. iv-xxiii-25. — xxv-3, 10, end. — xxxvi-18, 19. Ordination, iv-xxiii-4, 6, II, 22. — xxv-5, 9. — xxvi-6. Ordination.
^6o INDEX.
Ordination, iv-xxxiv-y. — XXXVI, according ta Heads of Le6lures ; particularly Seft. 2, 5. Origen. i-viii-6, p. 50. — XI1-17.
— XV1-7. — XIX-5. — App. I. ii-iv-10. IV- 1 -4. — IV-4, 17, and
Appendix,
— V-2.
—VI-21, 23,25,^8 — XV 1-4.
— XXU-2. ■ — XXI 1 1-9.
XXIY-I, 2.
XXVH-I4.
Ormerod. i-xii-3.
iv-iii-6, 8. — v-5. Orobio. i-viii-i. Overal, Bishop, iv-xv-12. — xvi-8,22 — xvii-f;.
Painting, iii-xv-io.
IV-XX-T.
— xxvii-27. Paley. iv-xiii-i, 2. — XXVII-14. Paphnutius. iv-xxxii-3. — XXXV 1-4. Paraclete, iv-v-i. Parkliurst. i-xv-16.
— App. 24. II-IV-I5.
lV-I-2.
— 1 1 1-6. — x-2,30.
Parklmrst. iv-xi-App. 12. — xni-17. — xvii-2, 83.
XXVHI-24.
and elsewhere. Parturition, iv-ix-44. Pascal, ii-iii-j. ■ — v-io. Patronage. iv-xxiii-iO'. — XX XI 11- 1 7.
Paulus Jovius. IV-XVI11-5. Pax. IV-XXV-3 Pearson, John, Bishop. 1-V1-3, 6.
— V111-3.
— xvii-15. IV-1-4, p. 238. ■ — 1-12, 17, 18. — 11-4, 8,28.
— II 1-6.
— VI I- 10.
— xi-App. 22.
— XIX-I.
Pearson, Edward.
IV-VIII-i2.
Pedantry. 1-1-5.
IV-XXIV-5. Pelagius, and followers.
iv-viii-y, li, p. 110.
— ix-6, 7.
— x-5. — xiit-3. — xv-3, 18.
— xvi-6.
— XV11-5, S3.
— XV 1 1 1-3.
— XXXVI 1-5. Perfe6lion iv-xi-i.
— xv-5. — XV1-9. — XV 1 1-9 1. — XX XV 1 1-3. Perfection.
INDEX.
56.
Perfeaion. vi-xxxviii-6. I Pleasure, in studying reli Perseverance, iii-iv-i. | gion, 1-1-9
IV-X-15. — xvi-5,8,9, 22, 29, 30,
. 37- Peter Lombard, iv-v-r. — x-26. — XI I 1-4. ■ — xvii-29. — XXII-13. — xxv-2, 4. Pews, iii-iv-2. Pharaoh, i-x-9.
iv-ix-Introd. 16. — x-3.
— x-50, p. 254. ~xvii-29, 95. Pharisees. iv-iv-App. page 415. Philo. I -VI- 1.
iv-i-i, 2, 3. Philosophers, opposed to People, ii-iv-passim. 111-XV-5. IV-VI-5. — XIX, end. — xx-5. — xxxiii-14. Phllostratus. i-xii-17.
■ — XI11-13. Pilate, i-xiii-ir. Pindar, iv-x-2. Pious frauds, i-viii-9. — XII-15.
XV-I.
Plaifere. iv-x-5, 15, 19. — xvii-71,73. Platonists. i-xii-15.
— App- 12.
iv-i-i, 3.
—I x-3, 5-
Vol. IV.
Phny. 1-XII-16, 17.
— XVI-II.
— xviii-13, 19.
IV-11-4T. Plutarch, i-xii-16. Polycarp. iv-xxiii-2. — XXXVI-3. Pope, Alexander.
iv-xvii-79.
■ — xviii-6, 17. Popes, of Rome.
111-XIV-7.
IV-XXXVII-2, 13, 18.
Porson. IV- 1 -App.
— XXIX-2.
Porteus, Bishop, i-x-ii. — XI-5. — XVII-15, 18. 111-11-5. iv-iii-8. ■ — iv-App. — xiv-i.
XX 1 1-6, 2Q.
XXV-4.
— XXX- 1 6. Postlethwaite.
i-xvii-8,i2, 14,19. Potter, (in various places). iv-xi-App. 2. — xxvii-2, 4. — xxvi 11-24, 30. — xxix-i. Powell. 1-XI1-5, 8. — XVI-9. — XV11-16, 19. — XVI11-4, 7, 10,
XIX-I, ID.
— App.xi-subs.-6. n-i-2.
P p Powell
562
Powell
INDEX.
II-II-IO. — IV -2. III-IV-4.
V-2.
— VI-4. — IX-5. XI-IO.
iv-xi-App. g. —XX XV 1-5, 7. Pra6tice, aimed at in Spe- culation. iv-ix-Introd. 4 — x-39. — XVI 1-77. — xxvi-6. Preaching, (see Homilies) 1-XII-12. 111-V-5. — ix-6.
IV-XXII1-9, 524. — XXV 1 1-3. — XXXV-), 2,5. Precepts and Counsels. iv-xiv-2, 4, 5. Predestinarians.
iv-xvii-28. Predestination.
III-IX-I.
• — xv-9. iv-Introd. 4. — 11-42.
— ix-Introd. 11. — x-26.
— XV 1 1-5, et passim. That it is no Dodrine of the Church of Eng- land. iv-xvii-16. See also iv-xvii- 30. 62, 73, 74,
Presbyters, or Elders, and Presbyterians.
iv-xxni-4,6,11,17.
Presbyters, or Elders, and Presbyterians.
IV-XXV-3, 6, 10. — xxxvi-i, 2, 3, 5, 12, 14. Prescience. iv-ix-Introd. 8. — xvi-3i,p.47i. —XV 11-7,14, 29, 90. Priest. IV-XXV-4.
-*-XXX-I, 9, II.
— XXXI-3, 10. — xxxii-i, 14. — xxxv-i. Priestley, Do6tor. 1-XII-3. — App. 5. 11-IV-7. — v-io. IV-1-4, 14, 16. —I I- 1, 6, 12, 42y
46. — x-18, 24. — xi-App. 1,2,11, 24> 25, 26", 27,
29. 30- — xii-24. • — XV 1 1-2 1. — xxiii-8, 22, 26. — xxvii-18, 35. — xxviii-12. Primate, iv-xxi-io. Priscillianists. iv-1-4. — v-2. Promises, opposed to
Decrees, iv-xvii-69, 97. Prophesying, the Gift of.
IV-XXIV-3. Protesting Catholics.
IV-XXXVII-2.
Proselytes, i-xvi-3. Prudence, iii-xv-8. Puller. iv-Introd. 3. — XXIII-12.
Puller.
INDEX.
5^3
Puller, iv-xxv-2. f'unishment. iv-xxxvii-i8,
and elsewhere. Puritan. iv-Introd. 2.
— 11-21.
— vi-io.
XI-I2.
— xvi-2, 3, 8.
— xvii-iB, 19,
— xx-i, 2, 4, 7.
— xxni-i6.
■ — xxv-3, 8.
— xxvn-14.
— XXX1-5.
— xxxiii-6, 8.
— xxxiv-8, 17.
— xxxv-i.
• — XXXVI-4, 7, 16.
— xxxvii-8, II. Purity, iv-xxvii-2. Pythagoras. i-App. 12. IV-IX-3.
— X-2.
— XXXVII-4.
Q.
Quakers, iii-iii-io. — XI-9.
XIV-IO,
— xv-ii, p. 191. IV-II-46.
— VII,^.
XVII-2I.
— xxiii-6.
XXV-2, II.
XXVI- 2, 6.
— XXVII-8,17,29,
34- — xxviii-ii, 29.
XXX-IO.
— XXXVII-IO,
20. — XXXIX-4, 5. Quietism, (see Mysticism).
R
Racovian Catechism, passim, iv-x-20.
— xi-App.8, 24.
— XIH-6.
— XVII-14. — rXviii-5. — XXI II -5.
XXV-2.
— XXXIII-5. Randall, iv-xxv-2, lo. Ransom. iv-xi-App. 2. Re-baptizing, re-ordaining,
&c. (see Repeating). Redemption. iv-xi-App. 2, 17. 29, p. 324.
IV-XVI1-13, 22.
— XVIII-3. Redman, iv-xxxii-io. Redu6tio ad absurdum.
11-11-13.
— v-6.
IV-X-5.
— XXVI-5.
XXIX-I.
Reformatio Legum.
iv-Introd. 4. — vn-3. — IX-12, 17. — x-ii, 15. — xi-8. ~xiii-5. —XV 1-3, 8. • — XV11-16, 18,32,
61, 66. — XVI11-5. — xxi-r3. — xxiii-6,
XXV-2, 8.
XXVI-2.
— XXV11-17. - ■ — xxviii-ii, 20. — XXXI-4. p p 2 Reformatio
564 INDEX.
Reformatio Legum.
iv-xxxni-5. Reformed Churches, (see Syntagma).
IV-XXVIIl-IO.
— XXXI-4, 8. — xxxii-12. — XXX 1 1 1-5.
XXXIV-2,
— XXXV11-7. Reformers, iii-xv-5.
iv-Introd. 2, 3, 4-
— XII-I.
— xvii-9,16, 17
XX-l.
• — XXI-2.
XXII-2I.
XXV-2, 8.
XXXVI-I7.
Regeneration, iv-ix-24. — xii-8. — XV 1-20.
XXVII-2,
14, 17. Reland. i-v-8. Relics, i-xiii-io.
iv-xxii-5, 19. Remonstrants. iii-v»-i. iv-x-15. Repeating, Baptism, &c. iv-v-i. — xxin-i2. — xxv-2, 3, — xxvi-i, 3. — xxvn-15, — XXXH1-3. Repentance, i-xix-8, 13. iv-xvi-2,5,18,
34- — xvii-91.
— xxv-4.
— XXV11-3.
Repentance. iv-x XX 1 1 1- 1, 5,
including Penance. Reprobation, iv-x-50.
— XV 11-29,30,
32, 73>92. Republication of the Law
of Nature, iv-xi-12. Retracing. 1-1-6.
111-11-5.
IV-I-I.
Revelation, Book of.
I-XVII-I5.
111-X-9.
IV-IV-5.
—VI- 1.5, 31. Review, Monthly.
IV-XXXV-2.
Reynolds, Sir Joshua.
IV-XV-19. Rhemish Testament.
iv-xi-App. 6.
— XI11-5.
XIV-l.
— XVI-3, 4, 8. — xvii-7, 9, 29,
66. — XIX-9. — xxi-12.
— XXII-2, 3, 4.
XXIV-I.
XXV-2.
XXVIII-32.
XXIX-I.
—xxx-4, 13.
— XXXI-2, 3, 10, 12.
Rheforians. iv-xviii-2. Ricaut. iv-xxiv-i.
— XXVII-5,
— xxx-3. Ridley. iv-Introd. 4.
— xn-i.
— XIU-5. — XVI1-16.
Ridley.
>/
Ridley, iv-xxv-e.
— XXV 1 11-26. Rimius. (see Moravians). Rite, iv-xxxiv-3, 25. Robinson, iii-xiv-14.
iv-xxvii-16. Rogers. iv-Intiod. 6.
— XXV-2.
— XXXIV-17.
— XXXVII-IO.
Rome, (see, in the Heads of LecHires, Romanists — and. Age of the Refor- mation.) iv-xix-2, 8.
XX- I.
— XXII-13.
XXIX- I.
— XXXI-12, 13. Rosenberg, Countess of.
I-VI-2.
Rutherforth. i-ix-ii.
II-V-IO.
iv-ii-42. • — iv-App. — V111-5. — X-41.
Sabbatli. i-xi-5.
IV-V11-5, 7, 13.
— XX XIV -2, 7, 15. Sacramental Justification.
iv-xi-6.
— XXV-2.
Sacramentarian.
IV-XVII-18.
XXVIII-IO.
Sacraments, iv-xxv-passim.
Definition, iv-xxv-8, 9.
iv-xxvi-i, 2,
4> 6. — xxviii-17
INDEX. 56^
I Sacramentum. iv-xxv-2. and Sacrament, p. 204. iv-xxv-6', II. — XXXVII-5- Sacred Language.
IV-XXIV-5. Sacrifice. iv-xi-App. i, 2, 14' 27.
—XXV -5.
XXVIII-I, TO,
13, 17, 20, 24,
30.
— xxxi-2,3,G,io. Sadducees. iv-iv-App.
p. 415. Salvation. iv-xi-App. 17.
— xviii-12. Salvian. i-xii-4. Samaritan, i-ix-2,
XIII-II.
Sandys, Sir Edwin. iii-xv-12.
IV-XXIV-2.
— xxv-4.
— xxx-3. Satan, events referred to.
iv-x-50.
— XV 11-64.
— XXXII1-13. Satisfa6lion. iv-xxv-4. Schism. 111-IV-4.
— XI-2. — XII-I.
Schoolmaster, how the Law of Moses was one. IV-VI1-14. Sclioolmen. iv-xiii-4.
— XXII-4, ^»
end. also Se6l. 8.
IV-XXIV-I.
— xxv-3. — XXVI-3. — XXXI11-4.
Schwenkfeld.
^bo r N D
Schwenkfeld. iv-vr-i, 17.
— XXV-2.
Sclavonian. iv-xxiv-i. Seeker, Archbishop.
IV-XIV-I.
— XV 1-4.
XIX- 1.
— xxv-3.
— xxvii-8, 18, 2G.
— XXVIII-II,
— XXXI-5. Seftaries. (see Dissenters). Selt-deceit. iv-xvi-31,
p. 471. Seminaries, ii-iv-7. Sent. IV-XXIII-15. Sephiroths. i-App. 15, 20,
24, 26 Sermo de Tempore.
iv-i-io, p. 250.
— 1 1-6, 19. Sermon on the Mount.
IV-XXXVII-3, 6, 19.
— VI-4.
— xxxvni-3. Servant, in forms of civility.
III-VIII-2.
Servetus. iv-i-6. — 11-14. — xxvii-r4. Shaftesbury, ri-iv-15. Shakspcare, iv-ix-3, 30,37. — X-41. — XV 1 1-66. — XXVII-14. Sharp, Archbisliop. 11-V-4, b. 111-IV-4. — xi-10. — XV 1-4. — xvii-83. Sliarp, Granville.
IV-XXXVI-7. Sheridan, ii-iv-13.
E X.
Sherlock, Bishop;
iv-iv-13, 16. — iv-App. — x-32.
— XI-2.
— XXXVII-I5.
Siam, King of. i-xv-15, 16. Sick. IV-XXV-4, 7, 10- — xxviii-10, 21. Simeon Stilites. iv-xiv-4. Sins, mortal, venial, &c. iv-xvi-2, 13, 15. Sleidan. iv-vn-3. — XVI-3. — xxxvii-6. Society, for propagating t!)e
GospcL i-xix-18. Society, religious.
l-xix-15 — 17. IV-XXXVI-7. Socinus, and followers, (see Dr. Priestley).
iv-Introd. 2. — 1-14, 16. — 11-12, 21.
— IV-2.
— v-4.
— IX-14.
— x-18.
— xi-App. 1,8,33.
— xvii-14, 21.
— XX111-5, 22, 24.
XXV-2.
—XXV 1 1-9, 27, 35.
XXVIII-I3.
XXXIII-5.
— xxxvi-6. Soul, iv-iii-8.
— ix-Introd. 6, 7. Socrates, i-xii-16.
ii-iv-io, 13, 14. iv-xiii-24. Sparrow, Bishop.
III-IV-I.
Sparro^v^
|
I N D |
EX. 567 |
|
Sparrow, Bishop. |
Swift. 11-IV-13. |
|
IV-XXIV-5. |
Switzerland, i-viii-i. |
|
— -xxv-4. |
iii-vi-6. |
|
— xxxiv-5, 7. |
— v^ii-6. |
|
— xxxv-i. |
iv-iii-i, 2. |
|
Spirits, i-i-g. |
— xvii-15,18. |
|
— App. 8. |
XX- 1. |
|
Sponsors. IV-XXV-3. |
XXIII-I2. |
|
— XXVI1-14. |
Synesius. iv-iv-i. |
|
Sprinkling, iv-xxvii-io. |
— XXXI11-3. |
|
Sterne. i-App. 14. |
Synod, iv-xxi-io. |
|
11-1-9. |
Syntagma, or Corpus et |
|
--IV-13. |
Syntagma, (see Reformed |
|
III-IV-I. |
Churches.) |
|
iv-xxx-6. |
iv-xi-App. 2, 5. — xvi-19. |
|
Stillingfleet. iv-vir-14. |
|
|
— XX XV 1-5. |
— xvii-14. — XIX-7. |
|
Stoics. IV-XVI-5. |
|
|
XVII-2. |
XXV-2. |
|
Strype. iv-Introd. 4. |
XXVI-2. |
|
— 111-2. |
XXVIII-IO. |
|
— VI 1-7. |
XXXIV-20. |
|
■ — IX-12. |
|
|
— XVI-3. |
T |
|
— XVII-18. |
|
|
XXV-2. |
iTareum. i-ix-9. |
— xxxv-4. Suarez. iv-xiii-4. Subintroduced women.
IV-XXXII-2.
Succession of Bishops.
IV-XXII1-4, 7, 18.
— XXXVI-7. Supererogation, iv-xiv-2. Superstition. 1-1-9.
III-XV-II.
iv-Introd. 3. Supralapsarians and Sublap-
sarians. iv-xvii-29. Swedenborg. i-xvi-7.
III-XV-II, p.
187, &c. iv-i-6,p.24i. Swift, ii-iii-i, 4.
Taylor, Jeremy, iii-iv-8, — vi-6. Taylor, John, iv-ix-13, i^,
29, SO, 34. 35, 3^' iv-x-i8, 19. — XI-14, 27, 28. — XT-App. 9, 12,22,
2.9, p- 3H- — xii-20. — xin-io. — xvii-8,r, 92. Temptations.
iv-ix-Introd.i2, 16, ■— x-3. TertuUian. iv-1-4, P- 227, — V11-5. ' — XI- App. 2.
■ — XV-2.
TertuUian.
ct6-8:
INDEX.
Tcrtullian. iv-xxvii-2, 14
— XXXIV-5. Test and Corporation A6ls
111-XIV-15. Testament, iv-xxviii-24. Testament, Old.
i-v.
— VI-3.
— vni-i.
— ix-i, 2.
— xii-Introd.
—XV 1-8.
—XV 1 1- I, &c.
— A pp. 4-sub8. 8. iv-iv-6 — 9.
VII-2.
— XI- A pp. 24.
— xxiii-22. Theodoret. iv-xxv-2.
— xxvii-14. Thomas, Bishop.
IV-XXXII-IO.
Tillotson. 1-XVI-14. iv-i-9, 16. — ii-i. Tindal. iv-xi-12.
— XXXIV-21. Toland. 1-XII-4.
IV-VI-15. Toleration, iii-xiv-4, 15. — xv-5. iv-xix-r. ■ — xxxm-8. — xxxiv-17,19,
24. — xxxvii-13. Tombs. IV-XXVII-14, 35. Tradition, iv-vi-2, tec. • — xxxiv-i, 4, and accordinc; to Heads of Leflurcs. Traitor, iv-xxvi-i.
Transubstantiatiorj.
i-xvi-14.
iv-xxviit, accord- ing to Heads of Le^ures.
— xxix and xxx.
— xxxr-2, 10. Travis, ni-xv-6.
iv-i-Appendix. Trent Catechism.
iv-xxv-2, 3,4,5,7.9.
— xxvr-2, 3.
— xxvii-6.
— XXVI 11-10,20,33.
— xxix-i, 4.
— xxx-4.
—XX XI-?.
Trent, Council of.
iv-vi-2, 10.
• — IX-12.
— x-20.
— xr-7.
— xi-App. 6.
— xiii-6.
— xiv-i.
■ XV -4.
— XVI-3.
-— XVI 1-9, 29. (Sec, in Heads of Lec- tures, Romanists, and Age of the Reformation.)
— XXI- 2 — 4.
■ — XXII-2 — 6.
— xxiv-i, 2.
XXV-2 — 7.
XXVI-2, 3.
— XXVII-6.
XXVIII-IO, 20.
XXIX-I.
— xxx-4. — XXX1-3, 8.
— XXXIl-II.
Treat,
Trent, Council of. 1V-XXXI11-5. • — XXXV1-7. Trent .Creed, iv-xix-2. Tribes, i-ix-i. Trinity, i-xii-12. — XVI-7. 111-XV-9. iv-Introd. i. — I- 1, 8.'c. accord- ing to Heads of Le6tures. ^ — ix-6. Trisagium. iv-xxviii-4. Tucker, iv-x-15. — XIX-7. Turretin. iv-x-50.
— xvii-29. Twining. iv-iv-Appendix.
. — x-44.
Twisse. iv-xvii-29.
U & V
Ubiquity, iv-iv-3.
• — XXVIII-IO, II.
Veneer. iv-Introd. 6.
■ — XIII-2.
XXI 1-2.
XXIV-I.
Vespasian, i-xvi-io. Ugolino. i-x-8. Vigilantius. iv-xxii-5, 6.
— xxxn-4. Virgin Mary.
IV-XV-4, 24. — XXII-4, 6, 13, 20. Virtue, iv-xi-28, .29. ~xii-23, 25. — xvii-87. Virtue, what may be called
original, iv-ix-36. Visitation, iv-xxxv-i.
INDEX. 569
Unaion. iv-xxv-3, 5, 7, 9, 10, includinor Extreme unc- tion. — XXVII-4. Uniformity, Aft ot." 111-XIV-15. IV-XXXIV-17, — XX XV 1-5. Unitarians, iv-1-5, 13. Vocation. (See Called.) IV-XVI1-14. — XXI11-16. Voltaire. i-App. 26.
II-V-IO, 11.
111-IV-5, 9. — xv-ii, p. 187, IV-1-4, p. 241. — i-Appendix. — iv-Appendix,
end. — IX-4, 40. — -x-9, 17, 19. — XXI-9. — XXI1-3. — xxx-4. IV-X-4, 5, 9. — XII-3. — XVI-5, • — xvii-28. Usher, IV-VI11-5. — x-9.
—XVII- 24, so, 37, 7 1.- 75. 95. 98.
XXIV-I, 2.
Vossius.
Vol.
IV.
w ^
Wafer, iv-xxviii-3, ir, Wakefield, i-ix-ii, page 62. — xvii-6. Waldenses. iv-xxiii-3.
Qs
Waldenses.
570 I N D
Wal.denses. iv-xxviii-io. — XXXV1-4. — xxxvii-6. Wall, iv-ix-8.
— xi-App. 2. — xv-3.
XXV-2.
— XXVII-4, 12, 13, 14, 27.
Walton, i-ix-3, 10. IV -XV 11-24. — xxii-20. Warburton. 1-XI-3. — XI1-3, 15. —XV 1 1-3, 7, 10, 14,
15, p. 246, 18.
ii-iii-i, 6, 14.
— IV-I3, 16.
— v-io.
111-XIV-5.
iv-vii-8.
— IX-21, 34, 38.
— xi-App.9, 19,21.
— XII-2, IQ.
XX-7.
XXVIII-I3,
— xxxiii-8. Washing of feet. i-xi-6.
lV-XXV-2. XXVIII-29.
Wateiland. iv-i-12.
— 1,-App.
— VII 1-8, 9, 12.
— XI11-4, end.
— xvi-8.
— xvii-24. Wesley, ii-iv-16. 111-V111-4. — xv-ii, p. 191. iv-x-39. ~xi-App. 9.
E X.
Wesley, rv-xv-5.
— :Xvi-io. (See Methodism. ) — xxiii-8. — XXV11-17. — xxviii-ii. Wheatly. passim. IV-XXV-3.
— XXVIII-I I.
Whiston. IV- 1-6.
— 11-14. Whitby. 1-XVU-19.
iv-vi-32.
— X-15.
— XVI-5.
— xvii-5, 71. Whitehead, Wilham.
iv-xvii-85. Whitfield, iv-x-39.
— xvi-io. Whitgift, iv-iii-2.
— XV11-18. "
— XXV-2.
— XXV11-15, 18. Wicklift'e. IV-XVI1-9.
— XXl-2.
XXV-2.
XXVI-2.
XXVIII-IO.
• — XXXI-4.
— XXXIII-5, ^}
13-
— XX XV 1-5. — xxxvii-G. Will-worship, iv-xiv-3.
— XXII-15. Wisdom. (See Know-
ledg«. ) Witches, i-xiii-io.
iii-vi-G. Woolston. 1-XVI-7.
iv-iv-i, 7, 13. — VII-3.
Works.
INDEX.
Works. iv-xr-i8, 27, 28. — XI 1-6, 23. — xiii-8. "Worship. iv-ii-i6. — XX 1 1-9. — xxv-6\ Wotton. (SeeMisna.) IV-VI-3, — XXXIV-4, 24.
Sli
Ximenes. i-rx-io.
z
Zuingle, and followers.
IV-XVI-7, lo-
— XV11-9, io«
XXVIII-IO.
S Q
INDEX
INDEX
OF PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE.
GENESIS xxxvii. lo. Exodus vii. 13. Deuteronomy iv. 2.
xii. 32.
I Sam. xiii. 14. Proverbs xvi. 4. Isaiah vii. 14 — 16.
ix. 6.
— — xi. 6.
liii. —
Ezekiel xviii. Daniel v. 'i8. Joel i. 7, &c.
ii. I — 10.
Matthew ii. 15.
23.
iii. 2.
. V. and vi.
■ V. 29, 30.
V- 33—37- V. 38—41.
i-xvii-6. — x-9. IV-V1-4. Ibidem.
I-X-IO.
iv-xvii-g5. 1-XVII-14.
XVII-IO.
Ibidem. 1-XVII-15, iv-ix-38. 1-XVI1-19.
?I-XVII-IC.
i-x\ii-i9.
Ibidem.
IV-XXV11-3.
— V 1-4.
— xxxviii-g.
— XXXIX-4.
— XXXVI1-19.
— ix-Introd. 12.
— XXXII1-7, 9, II.
— xxxii-iS.
— xxxviii-6.
— xv-iO".
— XIV-5.
1-XVI1-19.
IV-XXXIX-4.
I-XVII-JO.
Matthew
I N D E
573
Matthew xxiv. 24.
XXV. 34.
Markx. 14.
. xii. 29. 32.
. xiii. 24 — 26.
xvi. 16.
■ 17.
Aas
I Cor. i. 8,
30.
V.
iv-xvi-30, — XV 11-80. — XXVII-27.
—1-17.
I-XVII-IO.
iv-viii-ii, 12,32. I-XVI-I3.
IV-XV-I7.
I-XVI-I I.
Ibidem. Ibidem.
I-X-IO.
IV-XXXVIII-7. — ix-Introd. 12. — XIV-5. iv-u-37.
XXVII-II.
— XVII-83.
— 1-17. — xvi-30. — xvii-79. — xxxvni-8. Ibidem. iv-xxiii-24.
I-X-II.
IV-XXIII-24. — xxiii-22. — xvii-83. — xxi-i. — 1-18. — xiii-24. — ix-29. — xv-20. — ix-18, 25. — xvii-49,77. — xv-20. —x VI 1-95. — XVI-30.
XXXIII-I3.
XVI-30.
XV-20.
XXXIII-I^.
Cor.
574
1 Cor, vii.
viii. 6.
ix. 5.
xi. 2.
XV. 10.
— 24.
2 Cor. i. 22.
ii. 10.
xiii. 14.
Gal. iv. 5. Eph. i. 13.
iv. 30.
. V. 27.
Phil. i. I— 10.
— — ' ii. 5 — II.
— 12, 13.
Col. i. 16 — 20. ii. 20 — 23.
1 Thess. V. 9.
2 Thess. ii. 15. ; — iii. 3.
I Tim. vi. 20. iii. 16.
INDEX.
2 Tim. i. 9.
ii. 19.
iii. 14, 15, .&c.
Hebrews i.
VI. 1 — 9. — II. X. 22. — 2G.
James ii. 10.
V. 12.
14, 15.
1 Peter i. 5.
10 — 12.
ii.8.
iv. 8.
2 Peter i. 20.
1-XII-3.
IV-XXVII-27,
— XXXII-I7.
— XXXIn-15. IV-I-I7. — XXXII-I7. •
— VI-5.
— X-4I.
— IV-20.
— xvi-30.
— XXXIII-14, 15.
— I-I7.
— XVI-30.
Ibidem.
Ibidem.
iv-xv-20. — xiii-30. — XVI-30. — 11-31. — x-41. —n-3Jy 25- — XV1-3. — xvii-83. — V1-5. — xvi-30. i-App. 24. liv-ii-37. — xvii-83. |— XV 1-30. — v 1-4,
— II-3I.
—XV 1-33. — XVI-3I. Ibidem. iv-xvi-03. Ibidem. IV-XXXIX-5. — xxv-io. — XVI-30. 1-XVII-13. jiv-xvii-95. — xiv-6.
I-XVII-I^.
I Jolm
INDEX.
1 John iii. 9.
V. 16,
2 John 10, II. Jude 4.
Revelation xxii. 18, 19.
r IV-XV-19, I— XV 1-33.
iv-xvi-33.
— XXXII1-14.
— xvii-95.
— VI-4.
575
END OF THE FOURTH VOLUME.
ERRATA.
Page
3. 1. 32. for " this writer of"
r. the luriter on, 8. I. 13. for Simplicus, r. Sim-
plicius, 13. 1. 4. for confent, x.counfel. 14. 1. 3 from bottom, dele is. 18. 1 23. r. Rom. viii. 13.
20. 1. 25. for LI V, r. Lxi V.
21. I. 12. r. quandam. 26. I. 29. r. forefee.
27. 1. 7. for talccn, r. crucified.
35. 1. 20. before iw/Zinfert /^'i-.
37. 1. 18. for a fitch, r. finch a.
59. 1. 20. for knoivUcige, r.fiore- knouvledge.
51.1. II. for it, r. ///«/ // had not,
59. I. 1^1. for objea, r. cbjeSls.
96. running title, for xx,r. xxi.
1 13. 1. 13, r. to have.
136. 1.27. dele ///If.
138. I. 13. for degree, r. de- grees.
146. I. 4. for indirefl, r. dire^.
181. 1. 5 from bottom, r. bcla- vonians.
jgg. 1. 5. for divided, r. dcvificd.
213, I. 10. r. AxoXa^iot.
Page
227. lowefl line, for xr, r. ii.
243. 1. 21. r, cca-^ivu.
280. 1. 28. r. yield.
286. 1. 17. r. the Romifh
Church. 305. running title, r. Sefl.
XXVIl.
3 1 7. 1. 14. for fort, r.fiorts. 322. 1. 20 & 2 1 . r. fuppofition. 327. 1. 15. r. Liege. 341;. 1. 15. r. the Bread. 358. 1. 26. r. and we alfio ufe.
1. 33. r. Corollary.
363. 1. 30. r. effefts.
373. 1. 23. dele^/;^.
422. ]. 9. r. information on.
432. 1. 13. ior him z.nd.his, r.
them and their. 433. 1. 32. for It, r. Their e.x-
clufion. 446. 1.32. for privately, r.
purpofiely.
458. 1. 4. for Papift, r. Papifis. 465. 1. 6 from bottom, for thafe
times, r. thefie times. 497. 1. 27. dele a. 523. 1. 19. r, Zacchaeus. 532. 1. 3. for ^, r. the.
Some names and words are fpelt differently in different places, according to the authors fi-om which they were taken, or the cufloms of different writers.
'r^ik
■/ '4 '^1? '*^ ':^r :f ,
«j «'R «.i f; '■■;. « •-, ^v J
=?.. ri »;> W "'
?) »■( ?J <t. «vj *•.• ■**» <*» '*' *■
fi «? -;
:^. C. *V «> *» *'.' ^ ^-'
U ::^ r^ ir»; 0 ^» V t) ,? r^ ** ,'^' ^ '
'i* f4 '4 )h -^ '^> '*^ '^ ''<^ *' '^> *** ^ *r v it -^- "^ /
,, ^s r,, ^^i, »i if
k. .*• ^ --i--
^r t^ »■■ t
'^: ^?i- # ji- f 7%' ^' ^' :^'' .^ ^^ >^> si- pi' 'i y^' ^-^ -"-■
1^ i*: "li- P' ^ J»- V -,
■,«.. *• "s^- l|. .,
■js S'. "rf- '*s- .if' »*• &.' «■' «•■ .*'
.., ..^ #. * .ft^ '■*' 5k. *'• ''«' *■ "'''■, S'. -i^ 'ifc.^ ,«; '■'' '^'
i.> i. 4' '•4- «' ^' '«•' ^' "
^ 3f. «
A 4 « '*:
^ '^ %■:. t- t:
S^ %• *•
i^-. *^ .^.' ••*•
■ ' ' i' if- .*»..• '*' :*^' *• .*' ^^'^^ ^'
^ 'si. «• «; ,«' 'i« ^*^- )^> ^
' - ■-4' i ^/ ^^- '^^ '■
"ii A^ «f.
*.. ,^. ?^-
.|; 'ft^ 'i».. ?*-'- 4' '^'-dr
^^ ^ #? ^ '^
'k 'h «- -i^ ^•' '"'i^' **= ^ »? -a^J ^