BV 659 .H5 1847 v.2
Hickes, George, 1642-1715.
Two treatises on the Christian priesthood and on
Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2009
httos://archive.org/details/twotreatisesonchO2hick
Le ἢ
ΝῊ
πο στ Ω. Ὧν ' ‘5
TWO TREATISES,
ON THE
CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD,
DIGNITY OF THE EPISCOPAL ORDER:
A PREFATORY DISCOURSE
IN ANSWER TO
A BOOK ENTITLED, THE RIGHTS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, ἃς,
AND AN APPENDIX.
BY GEORGE HICKES, D.D.,
SOMETIME FELLOW OF LINCOLN COLLEGE, AND DEAN OF WORCESTER.
THE FOURTH EDITION.
ΜΘ ΤΠ
OXFORD: JOHN HENRY PARKER.
MDCCCXLVII.
:
ee a ||
On a “..
VOLUME II.
CONTAINING
THE TWO TREATISES,
THE CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD ASSERTED,
THE DIGNITY OF THE EPISCOPAL ORDER.
ADVERTISEMENT.
Tue Editor cannot send out this volume without acknow- ledging his obligations to several friends who have relieved him from much of the most laborious part of his work. Without such assistance the publication of the volume must have been delayed much longer. If any apology is needed for the length of the notes, it may be found in the wish not only to present to the reader the originals of the passages quoted by the Author, but also to give the substance, and if possible the words, of the authorities referred to by him; a course which the peculiar character of the treatises seemed to make desirable.
The Author’s table of contents has been retained. It will be found to combine the objects of an index and an analysis of the work ; and its terms have been adopted in the headings of the pages and the marginal contents of the sections; which have been added in this as in the previous
volume.
Sept. 8, 1847.
ΟΥ̓ yyy y cn ae we ὡς, AULIN Be
CONTENTS
OF THE
CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD ASSERTED.
CHAP. I.
THE GRAND OBJECTION AGAINST THE CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD, FROM THE SILENCE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, CONSIDERED.
Page Sect. I.—THE OCCASION OF WRITING THIS TREATISE - = I The objection against the Christian priesthood proposed - - Spd, Which is taken from Chemnitius, p. 2; But originally started by the annotators on the Geneva Bible - 228, 236 And promoted by some late writers amongst us with a particular view - 2 The manner of their conduct in joining with these to degrade the priesthood, censured - - - - - 2, 3, 229 Their mistake of the current doctrine of that Church for which they pretend to be advocates - - - - - - 3
The author of the Regal Supremacy in Ecclesiastical Affairs Asserted re- flects upon our first reformers, as well as upon the ancient fathers ib., see note g, and pp. 91, 92
The advantage which he takes from a passage of Dr. Outram considered- 3
The character of Dr. Outram, and the weight of his single authority - 4 A proper caveat to all writers in characterizing the authors whom they
cite - - - - - - - - ib.
The modesty of Grotius in speaking of this subject - - - ib. The author's chief design both in his Propositions and in his Letter of the
Dignity of the Episcopal Office - - - - =D
They that deny bishops and presbyters to be priests, do yet carry the spiri- tual authority of the presbyters as high as he doth that of the bishops 7b. The author’s profession what he will herein stand by - - - 6
Srcr. II].—THE METHOD BY HIM TAKEN TO CLEAR THIS OBJECTION.
The parts of his design premised - - - - - Ξ 7G
Sect. [Π1.---(1.) Iv 1s No ARGUMENT THAT BISHOPS AND PRESBYTERS ARE NOT PRIESTS, BECAUSE THAT NAME IS NOT GIVEN TO THEM ΙΝ THE New TESTAMENT. This argument as good against 1. Original sin - = = - ἊΝ ᾿ ΞΡ
11 CONTEN'S,
Page 2. The Divine authority of the whole New Testament - - aq 3. Admission of women to the holy Eucharist - - - ib. 4. Baptism of infants (and) - il - - - - ib. 5. Some common principles of Christianity - - - - ie That Christian priests are proper ‘ hierophants’ and ‘ mystagogues,’ proved against Toland - - - - - - 9,10
Both mysteries and stewards of those mysteries supposed in the Christian religion by the New Testament writers, particularly by St. Paul” - ib. And testified to by St. Ignatius, Tertullian, Sozomen, Nazianzen, &c. 9, 10, and note b
St. Paul ἃ mystagogue of the Gospel - - - - - 10 The difference of the Christian from the Aaronical priesthood - - iM CHAP. ΤΙ.
THE POSITIVE PROOFS FOR THE CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD, UPON THE PRIN- CIPLES AND REASONINGS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
(11.) THAT THOUGH THE NAMES OF PRIEST AND PRIESTHOOD ARE NOT USED FORTHE MINISTERS OR MINISTRY OF CHRIST IN THE NEW TESTAMENT, YET THE THINGS SIGNIFIED BY THESE NAMES ARE, AND PROPERLY DO BELONG TO THEM - - - - - - - 18
Sect. I.—SrT. PAUL’s DESCRIPTION OF AN HIGH-PRIEST OR PRIEST 13, 14
Sect. II.—Tuar PRIESTS ARE GOD’s VICEGERENTS IN His CHURCH, AS
PRINCES AREIN THESTATE- - - = - = 14—18 This proved by comparing the New with the Old Testament - 13, sqq. Observations on the signification of the Hebrew word ‘cohen’ - 15, 23
Another critical remark to the same purpose, serving to illustrate St. Paul by Moses - - - - - - - 16
How the heathens also had the same common notion of priests and priest- hood - - - - - - - = ἢ
The notion of the pagan Goths: hence Gud, Gudin, Gudi, Gudinon, &c., transferred into the Gothic Gospels’ - - - - 18
Sect. I1].—THat ΙΝ THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH BISHOPS AND PRESBYTERS ARE AS PROPERLY PRIESTS AS AARON AND HIS SONS IN THE JEWISH
18—26 This proved from the nature of their office, and from the testimony of Scripture - - - - - - - - 19 Both the Jewish and Gentile notion of the priesthood exactly applicable to the Christian ministry - = = = = - 20
A collection of terms relating to the priestly office, extracted out of Pollux, Suidas, Dionysius Halicarnasseus, Plutarch, Hesychius, and Phavorinus - - - - - 20—22, and notes
That all these terms are in strict propriety no less applicable to the Christian ministry - - - - - 22, sqq.
CONTENTS. 11
Page St. Cyprian’s definition of the priesthood Ξ - - τ) ἢ
The dignity of the priesthood, and eminence of its ministry - - ib.
Ministers of the sanctuary, λειτουργοὶ - - - - - 24 What λειτουργία properly 5 - τς - - - 25, 37 Of liturgic acts - - - - - - - ib. That the bishops and presbyters of the Catholic Church are in a true
sense Christian liturgs = Seu he - - 24—26 Sect. [V.—Or THE SEVERAL SORTS OF PRIESTHOOD,
Bloody sacrifices not at all essential to the priesthood - - 20, 98 The Persian priests - - - - - - - id. These compared with the Grecian and Roman - - - - ib. Mahometan priests and sacrifices - - - 27, and note x
The end of all material offerings - - 27, 28, and notes y, z They are not necessarily tied to the priestly office - - 28, 29
Both bloody and unbloody sacrifices constantly supposed of an honorary
nature - - - - - Ξ = = MaBs
Spiritual sacrifices of the mind made by pagans and Jews, as well as Chris-
tians, the chief or only sacrifices - - - - 29, 30 The weakness of some in arguing hence against the Eucharistical sacrifice ib., note d
The Jewish priests proper priests in the captivity, without sacrifices and sacrificial rites - = Ξ a
- - - 30 Though without a priest there cen be no sacrificing, yet a man may without
sacrificing be a priest - - 4 & a ect]
Absurdities of the contrary opinion - = = Ξ 89, 88 Secr. V.mA PLEA FOR THE PRIESTHOOD OF THE TWO SUPERIOR ORDERS OF PRESBYTERS AND BISHOPS, EVEN FROM THE SHARE THEREOF WHICH
IS COMMUNICATED TO THE INFERIOR ORDER OF DEACONS - d3—42
The deacon’s office of a sacerdotal nature in the third or lowest degree - 84
A passage of Optatus Milevitanus hence set in a clear light - 34, 35 The Diaconica of Dionysius of Alexandria -
- - - 35 Some passages of St. Ignatius for farther illustration and confirmation
hereof - - - - - - - 35, 36
Two sorts of ministering or deaconship in all religions - - 36, 37
The office of a deacon, in what respect servile - - - 37—39
And in what respect sacerdotal - - - - Ξ BY
Deacons allowed to receive confessions and absolve penitents in some cases 40 Not anciently permitted to preach e cathedra, and why
- - - 41 An argument a fortiori from the sacerdotal acts of deacons for the priest- hood in the superior degrees - = = Ξ ἈΝ δ Sect. VI.—Or THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR, ANOTHER PLEA FOR THE SAME UPON THE PRINCIPLES OF THE NEw TesTAMENT - - 42—53 That the ministers of Christ are proper altar ministers
Not only priests but also sacrificing priests -
iv CONTENTS.
Page Gift, a sacrificial term, as used by Christ Himself - - - 42 And of a very comprehensive signification - - - ib., note x The precept of reconciliation, which relates to it, evidently a Gospel precept 42, 43 Many other precepts of Christ given by way of anticipation for the Gospel state - - - = = = = mr oleh This accordingly so understood of the Eucharistical oblation or sacrifice by the primitive Church - - - - - - 44 Which appears particularly, 1. By the Apostolical Constitutions - - - - Abs The most primitive order of the Eucharistical service - - 45 3. By St. Irenzeus - Ξ : = = - 46 4. By Tertullian - - - - - - - ib. Munus perficere, a sacrificial expression to offer the Eucharistical oblation - 47 Of τελεῖν and τελετὴ, and Christ’s last word on the cross, τετέλεσται, sacrificial terms = = = = = - ib., notes 4. By St. Cyprian - - - - - - 48 5. By Eusebius” - - - - - - - 49 6. By St. Cyril of Jerusalem - - - - - 60 The holy kiss of peace founded on this text 7. By St. Chrysostom - - - - - - id. Several Christian sacrifices distinguished - - - - 8. By St. Jerome - - - - - - 02 9. By St. Augustine - - - - - renee Sect. VIJ.—Tuis FARTHER CONFIRMED FROM THE WORDS OF THE INSTI- TUTION - - = - - - - 53—68 1, An ample and plain proof from the testimony of St. Cyprian, and of the whole Church of his time - - - - 54, 55 2. Another from the Eucharistical office in the Apostolical Constitutions - 56 3. From St. [renzus = - - - - - 56, 57 Dr. Grabe’s catalogue of testimonies for the Eucharistical oblation, from the prophecy in Malachi - - - 67, noter The signification of the word ποιεῖν and ἱεροποιεῖν, both in profane and sacred writers - - - - - - 58, sqq. More than forty instances in the Septuagint translation of this sacri- ficial sense - - - - - - 59—64 This [ποιεῖν | taken in the same sense by ecclesiastical writers - 64 1. By St. Clemens Romanus - - - - - ib. 2. By St. Justin Martyr = = = = Be, 3. By St. Cornelius bishop of Rome - - - - 65 4. By St. Chrysostom - - - - - - 66 5. By St. Irenzus - - - - - - ἐν. 6. By Tertullian - - - - - - 67 Mr. Poole’s mistake corrected - - - - - ib. 7. In the ancient Liturgies - - - - 67, 68
The proper determination of thé words of institution = = =) 468
CONTENTS. Vv
4
Page
Sect, VIII.—From THE PLACES ΟΡ THE NEw TESTAMENT WHICH IMPLY AND EXPRESS THAT THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION HAS AN ALTAR 69—81 1. 1 Cor. ix. 3. By the consentient interpretation of primitive writers - 69 2. Matt. v. 28. By the same so applied’ - - - - - 70 8. Heb. xiii. 10. The exposition of Tena commended - =) 1. note t The proper sense hereof vindicated against a late writer - - 1.12
Assisted by 1. The Apostle’s argument against the Jews, taken from their own law 73 2. The practice of the Syriac Churches - - - - 74 3. The testimony of ancient fathers - - - 74, 75 The Lord’s table a name given to the great altar at Jerusalem 76, and note m Altar and table the same in different respects 72, 73, note a; and 76, 77, 80 Some farther critical observations upon the use of the name altar
77, 566. The same [name altar] applied to tables - - - - - ib. To certain rocks in the Mediterranean δὰ - - - - 78 And to the rock of Manoah_ - - - - - Ξι 26: The communion-table so called from the very time of the Apostles down to the Reformation - - - - - 78, 5η4. Four times in the epistles of St. Ignatius - - - ib. The vanity of the objection against its being an altar from its being a table - - - - - - - - 80
Sect. [IX.—THE SACRIFICE OFFERED UPON THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR. THIS PROVED OUT OF THE WRITINGS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT = 81—93
[1.1 From the argument of St. Paul, taken from the feasts of the heathens upon their idol sacrifices - - - - - 81, 82 The common notion upon which all sacrificial feasts were founded ib., and pp. 85, 105
Sacrifices eaten at the place where they were offered - - 82, noteg The sacrificial feast of Cleobis and Biton - - - - ib. εἰδωλεῖον, ‘idoleum’ - - - Ξ - - 88 The remark of Drusius and Livelius upon those idol feasts - ib. Such sacrificial tables in the temples commonly referred to in the Greek and Latin poets - - - - - 84 The ceremony used at approaching them - - 84, 85 The exact parallel between the Lord’s table and the table of devils - ib. A paraphrase on 1 Cor. x. 20, 21. = - - - - ib. The Jewish and Gentile notion of communion with the Deity allowed by the Apostle - - - - - - 86 A parallelism betwixt altar-communion with the true God and that of devils in four particulars - - - - - ib. Whence bread and wine in the holy Eucharist were even in the age of the Apostles called gifts and offerings - - - 87
And ministers of the Gospel, offerers and sacrificers, as also waiters at the altar, &c. - - - - - - ib,
vl CONTENTS.
Page Some passages of St. Clement express for this - - 87, 88 St. Cyprian and the Cyprianic age bearing testimony to it - 89 The elements hence ordinarily called δῶρα and ἅγια δῶρα - ib. Modern vouchers for this 1. Mr. Mede in his Christian Sacrifice - = Β = 790 2. Dr. Grabe in his annotations on St. Irenzeus - - 9], note ἢ 3. Bishop Beveridge in his notes on the ancient canons (and) 90, note | 4, Bishop Bull in his answer to the bishop of Meaux - 91, 92, note p Both our old Saxon ancestors and first reformers believed it a real sacri- fice - - - - - - 91, note ο, and 92
Sect, X.—[ THE SACRIFICE OFFERED UPON THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR, ETC. ]
[2.1 From another argument of the same Apostle, clearly alluding to the ministration of the Christian sacrifice. As Ist. To the oblation of the elements - - - = - 93 His προσφορὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν being interpreted either of 1. The offering of the Gentiles, as understood by St. Justin, St. Irenzus,
St. Cyprian, &c. (or else of) - - - - 94—96
2. The offering up of the Gentiles, as understood of the Apostle’s sacerdotal power - = - - - - 96 As interpreted by Castalio - - Ξ - - 100, note m And so interpreted by Grotius* - - - - ἐδ., note 1
2ndly. To the sanctification of the elements by the descent of the Holy Ghost - - = - - - - - 96
The prayer of invocation for this descent of Apostolical authority, accord- ing te St. Basi] and St. Chrysostom - - 93, 94, note z
How the ancient Church thought the Holy Spirit to be the chief agent in the ministration of the Eucharist - - 96, sqq. And Christian priests His co-agents, σύνεργοι τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματορ - 98 St. Paul truly the priest of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles” - - - 100
This shewed, 1. From the use of the word λειτουργὸς, being the same with ‘cohen’ ib.
2. Of ἱερουργῶν, a sacrificing minister - - - - ib. 8. Of τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν, the subject of his priestly ministration - 101 4, Paraphrase on Rom. xv. 15, 16. - - - 99, 100
THE PRIMITIVE NOTION OF THE EUCHARIST’s BEING THE OBLATION OF
THE GENTILES - - = - = - - ἐδ. [a] An account of Justin Martyr concerning the institution of the holy Eucharist as a sacrifice - - - - - 101—104 Christian priests as proper priests as the priests of Mithra—- - 102 Oblation of bread and water in the mysteries of Mithra - 101, 102 The Eucharistical oblation properly τελετὴ, a solemn material sacrifice, and the ministers of it τέλεσται - - 5 Β Εν The same why called τελεῖον in the canons, and τελείωσις 103, see note z [6] The account of Irenzeus concerning it = = - - 104 [9] The testimonies of Eusebius (and Symmachus?) for it - - 105 a {In the contents to the third edition » [The addition of Symmachus seems an these words were wrongly put to the first — error.]
interpretation. |
CONTENTS. vil Page An appeal to the common sense of mankind concerning solemn sacrificial
entertainments - - - - - - - 105
The practice of the primitive Church, and of our Church at the Refor- mation, to mix water with the wine - - - 106, note ἢ The whole Eucharistical action a sacrificial mystery - - 106, 107 The notion of such a mystery stated - - - - 107 Every federal sacrifice a Sacrament also - - - - ib.
THE OFFERING OF BREAD AND WINE TAKEN IN A PROPER AND LITERAL SENSE BY THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIANS, AND BY ALL THE CHURCHES BEFORE THE REFORMATION - - - - 107---109
[a] Attestations hereof from 1. St. Chrysostom. 2. St. Basil. 3. Eulogius Alexandrinus. 4. St. Isidore. 5. Eusebius Czsa-
riensis - - - - - - ib., note k And from the Jewish doctors also - - - - ib.
But were it only a Sacrament, the ministers of it must nevertheless be proper priests - - - - - - - 109
This proved from the definition of a priest; from the usage of sacer- dotal terms; and from mystical rites and offices - - ib.
[Ὁ] Melchisedec a type of Christ and His priesthood, in bringing forth bread and wine as a type of the Eucharistical oblation, when he
blessed Abraham - - - - - 110, 119
A notion not scrupled at by the primitive Christians, who were yet as afraid of idolatry as any can now be - - - ib., note |
[0] Their common belief that this was the pure offering foretold by Malachi - - - - - 110, 111, note m [4] The faith and practice of the first council of Nice as to this matter - 111
What the Nicene fathers understood by ἀθύτως applied to the Eu- charistical sacrifice - - - - - ib., note o [6] How and why this came to be called the unbloody oblation - 111, 112 Which is confirmed by a passage of Constantine the Great - - 112 Also both by Christians and Jews - - - - - 118
Two texts of St. Peter concerning the priestly polity of the Church hereupon vindicated from acommon mistake - - - 118
The Jewish and Christian theocracy hence compared 113,114, and note t This theocratical constitution of the Church or a priestly kingdom the sentiment of primitive antiquity - - - - 114
THE OBLATION OF THE BREAD AND WINE, AS THE SYMBOL HEREOF, PROVED A CATHOLIC PRACTICE. |
(1.) This anciently thought so principal a part of the holy communion, as the whole was signified by it, and thence called in the Greek Church
προσφορὰ and θυσία - - - - - - 115
As in the ancient Latin Church ‘ oblatio’ - - - - 116 (2.) This oblation of the elements upon the altar plainly distinguished by
the ancient Christians from all other altar-offerings - =e iy 118 (3.) This admitted in the reasonings of the orthodox fathers of the second
council of Nice against the use of images in Divine worship - - 118
Vill CONTENTS.
Page Their medium between the Jewish and Gentile religion - - 119
(4.) This prefigured according to the ancients by the offering of Melchi- sedec - - - - = Ξ - - ib.
That this Melchisedec did (as a priest) really offer bread and wine, with which he made his entertainment, which was an Eucharistical
festival - - - - - - - - ib.
And that Christ did as really offer bread and wine to the Father when He instituted the Eucharist - = - - - - ib, (5.) Two oblations of the elements in the Eucharist plainly distinguished - 0. 1. By St. Justin Martyr - - - - - - 120 2. By the Apostolical Constitutions - - - - ib. 3. By St. Cyril of Jerusalem - - - - - 121] 4. By our present Liturgy - - - - - ib. Solemn rites attending our second Eucharistical oblation - 121, 122 This truly called a sacrifice of praise - - - 118, 122
(6) THIS DEMONSTRATED FROM THE PRIMITIVE MANNER OF THE ADMI-
NISTRATION OF IT, AS - - - - - - 120
1. The liturgical account of it in the Apostolical Constitutions - 122, sqq. Explained and confirmed by ancient fathers, Xe. 128, sqq., notes, p. 127
2. The Ethiopic Liturgy - - - - - 125, note n An observation upon it of moment respecting the Arian controversy - 7b.
3. The Liturgy of St. Chrysostom - = = = = 159 4, That of St. Basil - = = = g = = 434 5. That of the Church of Jerusalem - - - - - 133 6. That of the Church of Alexandria, called St. Mark’s - - 186 7. That of the Church of Rome, called St. Peter’s = - - 137 8. The Sacramentary of St. Gregory the Great - - - 142 9. The Codices Sacramentorum, published by J. M. Thomasius - 144 10. The ancient Gallican Liturgy - - - - - 146 The harmonious agreement of liturgies and fathers - - - ib.
Particulars in which all the ancient liturgies are agreed unanimously 146, 149 The Eucharistical office in the Apostolical Constitutions the true standard 149
Innovations and additions how to be discovered - - - 4b. These are of two sorts, viz., Ist, more ancient; as,
i. The use of incense - - Ξ - - 149, 151
A censure hence on Hip~ol. de Consummatione Mundi - 149, 150
ii. The Oratio Propositionis - - - - - 151
iii. The Oratio Velaminis = = = - - ἐδ.
2. More modern - - - - - - - - 153
And both these either 1. good, or 2. bad - - - - 151
[i.] Instances of alterations for the better - - - 151, 162
The ὁμοούσιος, the Nicene and-Constantinopolitan creed, ἧτο. - - δε
Upon what occasions introduced by the Church - - - ib.
Instances of alterations for the worse - - - - - 153
When and how introduced” - - - - - - tb.
The liturgies most abominably corrupted after the second council of Nice - - - - - - - - ib.
CONTENTS. 1X
Page
OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS NOTION OF THE CHRISTIAN SACRIFICE ΕΧ- AMINED - - - - - - - - 154 I. The objection from Dr. Outram’s definition of a sacrifice stated - ib.
Answered,
1. From the authority of such as must needs know the nature of sacrifices, both Jewish and Christian - - - - - - 7b.
And could see no inconsistence between the notion of a sacrifice, and that of the holy Eucharist - - - - - 155, 156
2. From the difference of a Jewish and Christian sacrifice, through the change of the priesthood - - - - - 156, 157
3. From the silence both of Scripture and tradition for the consumption of the elements in the Jewish manner - - - 157, 158
4, From the putative consumption thereof, or mutation, by virtue of the mystical union between the sacramental and natural Body of Christ,
158—160 This explained by what the Roman laws eall ‘ fictio’ - - - 159 Instances of such a sort of fiction in several cases - - - ib. Particularly, 1. In the civil polity of kingdoms, and ordinary administration of justice - - - - - - - ib. 2. In divinity; and God’s economy in the restoration of man, 159, 160 Exemplified, 1. In matrimony - - - - - - ib. 2. In the doctrine of justification: and - - - - ib. 3. In that of adoption - - - - - - ib. 5. From the definition not being general, but of one species only of Jewish sacrifices - - - - - - - - 160 For it excludes many Jewish oblations - - - - ib. As 1. The [first-fruits, called a] corban; (Vatablus, and the Jewish commentator) = = - » - - 161 2. The red heifer, (Abarbanel) - - - - 161, 162 3. The scape-goat, (Maimonides) - - - - 162, 163 With whom also agree St. Barnabas and Justin Martyr Soe se eS ICES And of moderns, Mr. Ainsworth, Bishop Patrick, Dr. Bright - 163 Sacrifices and oblations equivalent terms in the Old Testament - 165
THE AUTHOR’S OWN DESCRIPTION OF A SACRIFICE, AS TAKEN EITHER FOR
1. The administration or act. (Or else,) - - - - 167 2. The matter of the sacrifice or gift - - - - - ib. The several parts of it explained - - - - - 168
1. Its subject; a gift = - - - - =) 80s
The difference of gifts dedicated and offered - - 168, 169
Of corban, δῶρον, donum, and cherem: and ἀνάθημα, donarium 168, note r
Circumstances of time and place - - - - - 170 2. Its object; the God, to whom it is 1. Brought - - ae - - - - 109
2. Offered - - - - - - - ib.
Χ CONTENTS.
Page Ritual observations about it - - - - - - 170 3. Its efficient; the priest e - - - 168, 170 1. Ordinary - - - - - - - ib. 2. Extraordinary - - - - - - 191 4. Its end; the worship of the God - - - - 171 The chief end of burnt-offerings - - - 172, note m The excellent author of The Propitiatory Oblation in the Holy Eucharist referred to - - - - - - - - 178
II. THe OBJECTION FROM Dr. CUDWORTH’S NEW NOTION OF THE LORD’S SUPPER EXAMINED - - - - - 178, sqq.
His notion how far agreeable and disagreeable with the ancient notion of it 175
Of no authority, because itisnew - - - - 177, 182 Against the faith and practice of all Churches for 1500 years- 177, 178 And a perfect contradiction to Justin Martyr’s famous description of the holy Eucharist - - - - - - ib. As well as to the consentient testimony of Apostolical fathers ; such as 1. St. Clement - - - - - - ib. 2. St. Ignatius - - - - - - 180 Who most likely to understand St. Paul, a fellow-labourer of his, or a modern doctor - = - - - - ΞΟ
The Eucharistical office of prayer anciently called προσευχή 175, note Ὁ God’s meat, and the bread of God, whence applied to the Jewish
sacrifices, and to the Eucharistical bread 178, note m, and 180 The ground of his mistake that Christians have no altar considered 178, sqq. His assertion contrary to fact - - - - - 178 And without any concinnity to the nature of the thing - - 180 1. The singularity - = = 3 + Sitriy/ 2. Nicety - - - - - - - - 182 3. Uselessness, and - - - - - - ib. 4. Dangerous consequences of this notion taxed - - - ib.
Evidences from ancient fathers and ecclesiastical writers against this novel hypothesis - - - - 180, 181, notes Tertullian is a better expositor of himself than any modern author - 181 His Participatio Sacrificii interpreted in his own words - ib., notez Sacrificial phrases used by him - - - - ib., note ἃ
A fair challenge about sacrificial feasts and the notion of Epulum ex oblatis - a Oo es - - - 178, 180, 183
The whole matter decided by the rule of Vincentius Lirinensis 184, note g Yet the truth of this doctor’s notion even supposed Christian ministers
must be still proper priests - - - - 188, 184 A serious expostulation concerning the defect of administering the Eucha- rist only as a Sacrament = - = - - 184, 185
III. Dr. Forses’ pEscRIPTION OF THE HOLY ΕΘΗ ΛΕΙΒῚ CONSIDERED
186, sqq. ‘ It is a perfect description of a sacrifice in four particulars - - 186 His inconsistent reasoning upon it - - - - - 187
CONTENTS. xi
Page
Sect. XI.—AN ARGUMENT FROM THEIR BEING MINISTERS OF THE ARCHE- TYPAL MELCHISEDEC - - - - - 187—192
As Christ is a priest by commission from His Father, so Christian bishops and presbyters are priests by commission from Him 187, sqq.
No man but who is divinely authorized can exercise the office of a priest without sacrilege ~ - - = 192, 199, note i Of extraordinary commissions - - - - 191, 192 The law of an hour - - - - - - 191 How David and Solomon sacrificed as prophets - - - 192
But Saul and Uzziah being none, forfeited thereby the kingdom - ib.
Sect. XIJ.—F Rom THE NATURE OF THEIR OFFICE - - 192—207
[1.1 Priests by their office separated to mediate and make intercession for
the people - - - - - - - 192 This shewed from the consent of all nations - - - 193 The Persian priests in Herodotus - - - - 194 Chryses the priest of Apollo in Homer - - - - ἐδ. How Homer herein Hebraizes - - - - - 195
A passage of Alcuin to his scholar Eanbald, archbishop of York - ib. Two testimonies from St. Ambrose - > - - 195, 196 Priests whence called καθαρταί, or purgators - - - - 197 Allusions hereto both by St. John and St. Paul - - - ib. Evangelical ministers are proper purgators - - - - 198
The Levitical and evangelical priesthood as to this compared ib., note c, and pp. 204, 205, 227 The patriarchal priesthood a confirmation of this - - - 198 Instances hereof in Abraham, Melchisedec, Abel, &c. ib., sqq. See also notes f, ἢ, and pp. 199, 200, note i
Also in Noah, Job, and Moses - - - - - 200 Moses properly a sacerdotal prince - - - - εὖ: A hypercritical emendation of Grotius set hereupon to rights, out of Philo and Nazianzen - - - ἐδ., note | His commission to the family priests, the first-born, accounted for - - - - - - ib., noten Several instances besides of sacerdotal intercession in him 201, sqq. The atonement of the Aaronical priesthood - - - - 202 Samuel’s priestly mediation - - - - - 203
The intercessorial office of priests where described in Scripture 204, 544. St. Hierome’s application of Joel ii. 17 to Christian priests, as attested-
by miracle - - - - - - ib., notes
Descriptions of the Jewish priests = = ᾿ ie 2» 4B:
The author’s definition of a priest - - - - - ib.
Dr. Outram’s definition of the same - - - - 205
Another of his - - - - - - - 207 According to which, Christian liturgs must be as proper priests as
the Jewish - - - - - - - bd.
b
ΧΙ CONTENTS.
Page
Of sacerdotal benediction, and the great obstruction to it - - - 206
Intercession by prophets jure prophetico - - - 206, 207
Sect. XIII.—FrRom THE TRANSLATION OF THE PRIESTHOOD - 207—210 [2.1 Christian ministers by their office made by Christ mediators or inter-
cessors with God for the people - - - - - 207
This the most proper and distinguishing office of the priesthood - ib.
1. Which in the greatest propriety belongs to the ἀρχιερεὺς λόγος 207, 208 The Epistle to the Hebrews herein illustrated by two passages of
Philo - - - - - ib., notes ἃ, f
2. And is by him communicated to his ministering priests - - 208 Who are not inferior to the patriarchal and Jewish ministers, in the
essentials of the sacerdotal office - - - - 209
But rather superior to them - - - - 208, 215
The same common office, though not the same rites of atonement * 209, note g
Sect. XIV.—FrRom APoOSTOLICAL PRECEPT AND PRACTICE - 210—226
The first ministers of Christ in His Church, were in fact such advocates, &c. 210 This shewn,
1. By their baptizing for the remission of sins - - - ib. 2. By their solemn intercessions in the Eucharist - - - 211 The proper distinction between ‘ sacrificare’ and ‘ litare’ ib., note m
Extraordinary commissions, as in the Old so in the New Testament also, for prophetical priests - - - - - tb.
A place of St. Paul so interpreted by the ancient fathers with respect to the celebration of the Eucharist - - - 212) sqq:
Another to shew that in the beginning of Christianity it was the work of inspired ministers to make intercessions - 214, notes c, ἃ
A third of St. James, to shew the primitive practice of priestly inter- cession for the sick, by imposition of hands and unction - 215
The analogy hereof with the Jewish priesthood, and the dignity of the Christian above it, excellently set forth by St. Chrysostom
215—217
A fourth argument for the usage of this sacerdotal intercession, from the request of Simon Magus to St. Peter - - - 217
A fifth from other solemn sacerdotal acts of the Apostles, and first ministers of the Church - - - - - 218
A sixth, St. Paul’s exhortation to St. Timothy for sacerdotal supplica- tions, &c. in the Eucharistical office - - - - 218 As interpreted by St. Augustine - - - - «19 And as favoured by two learned moderns - - - - 220 A seventh, from the apostolical forms of benediction - -' 221,.sqq.
Of the priest’s actual and yirtual presence - - - - 225
CONTENTS. xiii
Page Sect. XV.—ConsEQUENCES FROM THE CONTRARY OPINION 226—229, and 234
If Christian ministers be not priests - - - - -
1. They are inferior in dignity and utility to the Jewish ministers - 227
2. They are guilty of sacrilege in arrogating to themselves the most proper part of the priest’s office - - - - “= ab.
3. The ancient prophecies concerning the evangelical priesthood are unfulfilled - - - - - - ib, and 228
The Geneva notes upon Isaiah Ixvi. 21, and Jer. xxx. 17, partial and absurd - - - - - - 228, 229, note v
Sect. XVI.—ADVANTAGES WHICH THE NOTION OF A METAPHORICAL
PRIESTHOOD AFFORDS TO THE DEISTS, &c. - - - 229-234
1, That metaphorical priests are not priests at all - - - 229 2. That the Apostolical and other primitive fathers must have been
enthusiasts for holding the real Christian Priesthood; or, - - 230
3. That they must be knaves; and that all is mere priestcraft ib., 544.
4. That ministers without priesthood can have no right to tithes - 234
5. Nor to stand before God as advocates through Christ forthe people - 230
6. Nor to bless them in His Name - - - - 221, 230 7. That as they are but mock priests, so He whose ministers they are, is
no true priest - - - - - - [ - 281
Compassionate reflections upon the practice of some of the clergy - 232, 5664.
Sect. XVII.—A RECAPITULATION OF THE GENUINE CONSEQUENCES OF. NOT ASSERTING THE SACERDOTAL DIGNITY BOTH OF BISHOPS AND
PRESBYTERS - - - - - - - 284 The author’s congratulatory address to his correspondent - - - ib. His Parenesis to quicken others of his order to stand up for the original
rights of the Christian priesthood - - - ie - ib.
Since the contrary notion tends to,
1, The dishonour and depravation of the clergy - - - ἐδ.
2. The secularizing their manners’ - - - - 232, 234
3. The debasing their ministry in the esteem of the people - - ib.
4, The decay of Christian piety and religion, and growth of deism and
infidelity ; and, = Ξ as = Ε ae abe
5. The total dissolution of the Church - - - - 235
ΧΙΥ CONTENTS.
CHAPS [iT
REASONS WHY THE WRITERS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT DID ABSTAIN FROM THE NAME, AND YET EXPRESS THE THING SIGNIFIED BY IT. Page (3.) Wuy, AND HOW, IT CAME TO PASS THAT THE MINISTERS OF CHRIST
BEING PROPER PRIESTS UNDER HIM, ARE NOT CALLED BY THAT NAME IN THE WRITINGS OF THE NEw TESTAMENT = - - 236
Sect. I.—How THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF THE MESSIAS WAS NOT TAUGHT EXPRESSLY BY ANY OF THE APOSTLES TILL ABOUT THIRTY YEARS
AFTER THE FOUNDATION OF HIS CHURCH - - - 237, sqq- How and why none of His Apostles or other ministers did during that time expressly call themselves priests, or their ministry a priesthood - 238
How and why they did also then forbear to use the proper words for temple, or house of God, in speaking of places set apart for Christian worship δῦ. How studiously this was-declined by St. Paul, when a proper occasion for
it was given - - - - - - - - ib. A probable reason for this long silence of our Saviour's priesthood, as well as of that which depended upon it - - - - - 239
Secr. [I].—THE FIRST REASON FOR THE FORBEARANCE OF THE APOSTLES
TO TAKE UPON THEM THE SACERDOTAL TITLE - - 240—245 Its not being mentioned in their commission - - - - 240 1. That Christ gave forth His first commission as to Apostles, not as to priests - - - = - - - ib. The great reasonableness of so doing - - - - ἐν. 2. That He did not alter their character after His resurrection, when their commission was enlarged - - - - - ib. What is included in the character of the Apostlesh ip - - 241 How the Apostles were vicars of Christ, no less in His sacerdotal . than in His prophetical office - = = =a The names of bishops and presbyters relate but to the regal and prophetical offices of Christ - - = Ξ Τῶν). A noble testimony of Origen for the are hetypal presbytership, priesthood, and episcopacy in Christ - Ε = ee Christ the αὐτοαρχιερεὺς according to the aticients - - 242 The Apostles hence must have had a ministerial priesthood and episcopacy under Him, as also their successors - 241, 242 According to Origen and Nazianzen - - - ib., note ἢ As also St. Ignatius - - - - = - 242 The testimony of Polycrates for the priesthood of St. John in particular 242, 243 An observation concerning his wearing the pontifical plate - - 244 A passage in Epiphanius concerning James the Just corrected by Petavius - - - - - - ἐῤ., note q
The just inference to be made hereupon — - - - 244, 248
CONTENTS. XV
Page Sect. III.—Tuer secoND REASON FOR THEIR FORBEARANCE TO TAKE UPON THEM THE SACERDOTAL TITLE - - - 245—249 The more easy conversion of the Jews - - - - - 245 The regard they were to have to the Jewish religion and temple economy for a season - - - - - - 345, 5644. For this reason they complied with the temple worship as far as they could with any safety - - - - - - - ib. The great reasonableness of this method shewed_ - - - 246, sqq.
But when the Jews rejected and blasphemed Christ, they then broke off communion with them, shaking off the dust of their feet against them 248
Secr. [V.—Tue THIRD REASON FOR THEIR FORBEARANCE MIGHT PROBABLY BE A PARTICULAR DIRECTION FROM THEIR LORD SO TODO - 249—254
The author’s ground for such a particular direction, viz., that all appear- ance of schism by two different altars at the same time among one
people was to be avoided - - - - - 249, 250
An observation of Baron Spanheim concerning the unity of the altar and worship of the heathen deities - - - - 260, note t Three arguments which shew this no precarious supposition - 250, 251
Sect. V.—THAT SUCH A FORBEARANCE IN THE APOSTLES, IF NOT BY EX- PRESS COMMAND, MUST AT LEAST HAVE BEEN BY ALLOWANCE 251—254
The difference between direction and permission in a supreme lawgiver but
small - - - - - - - - 29] The compliance in the Apostles with the Mosaical observances, does neces- sarily infer one or the other - - - - - 261, 252
The ground whereof is well expressed by St. Barnabas in his epistle - 252 Yet even during that period they are implicitly, and by intimation, called priests - - - - - - - - 264
Sect. ΥΙ.---ΤῊΛΤ AFTER THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM THE NAME PRIEST WAS MORE FAMILIARLY USED - - - - 254
How and why latter Church-writers use words and phrases not occurring in
the former - - - - - - - 254, sqq. Some instances hereof given - - - - - - ἐν. Why the name of priest and priesthood came to be more familiar with the Christians after the destruction of the temple - - - 255 Why yet St. John writing after that time mentions neither the name of priest or Christian - - - - - - - 257
Observations upon the analogy of the angelical and sacerdotal office 2688, 259 How Christian liturgs are hence to be considered as to their priesthood
260, sqq. And how as to their prelacy or spiritual superiority - - - 262 A very good account hereof out of Mr. Hill’s De Presbyteratu -- ὠἔῤ., note f
Which is cleared farther from Isidore’s Originals - - - ἐδ.
Xvi CONTENTS.
Page
That bishops, as such, are princes in Christ's” spiritual dominions on earth, according to St. John - - - - - - 265 And are regal priests - - - - - - ib., 544. An excursion hence concerning the apocalyptical angels and elders 263, 264 The affinity of πρεσβυτὴς and ἄγγελος observed - - - 259
Priests called angels, being sent εὐαγγελίζειν, ana one sort of sacrifices εὐαγγέλια - - - - ib., and p. 260, note ἃ
Though St. John doth not expressly call the bishops priests, yet he calls them so by other mystical names - ae - - - 270 And sets forth their ministry as a proper priesthood - - - ib.
He calls them priests in the same figurative way of writing as he calls Christians Jews - - - - - - fl
The author’s prayer and conclusion in the words of St. Ambrose - Ξ 97}
CONTENTS
OF THE
DIGNITY OF THE EPISCOPAL ORDER.
CHAP. I.
AN ANSWER TO THE FIRST CAPITAL OBJECTION AGAINST THE EPISCOPAL OFFICE BEING A FREE AND SPIRITUAL PRINCIPALITY FROM THE NOVELTY AND IMPROPRIETY OF THE EXPRESSION.
Page Sect. .—THE DIGNITY OF THE ARCHIERATICAL OFFICE AMONG CHRIS- TIANS ILLUSTRATED AND CONFIRMED BY THE COMMON NOTIONS BOTH OF JEWS AND HEATHENS CONCERNING THE DIGNITY AND AUTHORITY
OF THEIR SEVERAL PRIESTHOODS ~~ - - : - 273—277 1. The dignity of the Jewish priesthood and pontificate, according to Philo and Josephus - - - - - 274, 275 The declaration hereupon of King Agrippa to Caligula - - 275 2. The dignity of the heathen priesthood and pontificate, as set forth by Dr. Potter and Grotius - - - - - - 276 3. The comparison urged to give Christians a true light and notion of the dignity of their priesthood and episcopacy above the other - ib. 4, The harmonious practice herein of primitive Christianity - - 277 A passage of St. Ignatius referring to the three honourable orders in the Church, hence illustrated - - - - - ib,
Sect. II.—THE TRUE NOTIONS OF THE FREE ESTATE OF THE CHURCH, AND ITS REAL DISTINCTION AS A SOCIETY FROM THE STATE SETTLED 277—301
1. Of the independent nature of the Church, as an unworldly society - 277 2. Of the essential distinction between spiritual and temporal government 7b.
XVili CONTENTS.
Page 3. Some reasons why that distinction is so little understood or considered, V1Z., 1. The abuse of it by the Church of Rome; and - - - 278 2. By dissenters - - - - - - - ib. 3. The neglect of the clergy; δὰ - - - - - ib. 4. The prejudice of lawyers - - - - ib. 4, This proved to be the language of the Apostles and Apostolical writers - - - - - - - 279—282 [a] Bishops were called spiritual princes or prefects in Scripture A bishop called by St. Paul l. προιστάμενος, and - = - - - - 219 2. προεστὼς, being by the Greek and Latin fathers thus under- stood and applied; also’ - - - ib., and note y
8, ἡγούμενος, which is the very title given to Christ Himself; and by his disciple St. Clement directly applied to the Apo- stles and their successors 279, 280, see note i; and pp. 306—308
As by the Hellenistical Jews to their prince and high-priest - 281 ἡγεμονία used by St. Luke for the supreme authority - - 282
The title of 1. ἄρχων for the same reason, thus appropriated by ancient ecclesiastical writers - - - - - 282, 308 2. βασιλεὺς, in the Apostolical Constitutions - - - 806 8. δυνάστης - - - Ξ - - - ἐδ.
ὅ. The reason of these princely titles being given to Christian bishops
282—288
The nature, distinction, and extent of the spiritual empire committed to the bishops, both in general and particular - - - - 283 Casaubon de Libertate Ecclesiastica referred to for this - ib., see note v
Which is the ecclesiastical ἀρχὴ mentioned by the council of Laodicea, and corroborated by the Apostolical canons and
Constitutions = Ξ 288, 544. ; and 306 With the concurring evidence of the primitive fathers - - ib. Their ἡγεμονία - - = - ᾿ Ξ 80 The excellence of their principality - - - - 286 Their δυναστεία = = 4 = Ξ 588 Their βασιλεία - - - - - 806, sqq.
6. Wherein and how far the spiritual government excels the temporal 285 and 308
7, That the bishops’ chairs were anciently called thrones - 289, 292 The Apostolical throne - - - - - - 289 Inthronization - - - - Ξ - - 290 Catholic and cecumenical thrones - = = - 290, 291
ἱεραρχία an holy principality ; bishopric a bishop’s principality - 291
The chair of every bishop considered as the throne of Christ - - 292 Of St. James, first bishop of Jerusalem - - - - 291 The Greek ordinal ; Justinian’s code and novels; Dr. Lowth’s Subject
of Church power, &c. - - - - - - 292
Subscriptions in Christi nomine - - - - - 298
St. Jerome’s exposition of Isai. lx. 17. - - - - ib,
This proved to be most primitive by St. Clement, Ep. 1 ad Cor. cap. xiii, - - - - - - - 294
CONTENTS, ΧΙΧ
Page And agrees both with Irenzus and Tertullian - - 294, 295 8. That they have every thing iu their office that denominates ἃ prince
295—301
1. An authority to make laws for the society - - - 295
2. A right to challenge the obedience of all the members of it - ib. Of the fidelity hence required both of the people and clergy to their
bishop - - - - - - 296, sqq.
Nothing to be done without him in the society - 296, 298, 299
How he stands in God’s and Christ’s stead - 292, 298, 544.
Words which set forth the eminent spiritual power, authority, and dignity of bishops, used by the Apostles and Apostolical writers 285, 289, 293, 296, 305 9. That their authority to make laws and orders, and give directions for the society, is delegated to them from the invisible Bishop whom they represent - - - - - - - 299
Sect. III.—Tue spisHorps HAD ORIGINALLY POWER TO COERCE OR COM- PEL THEIR SUBJECTS OF THE CLERGY AND LAITY, WITHOUT DISTINC- TION OF PERSONS, TO OBEY THEM, BY SPIRITUAL CENSURES AND
PUNISHMENTS - - - - - - 3801—313
(1.) The practice herein of the Apostolical age - - - 301—308
The power of spiritual coercion, how and to whom derived - - 3801 How exercised,
(1.) By the Apostles - - - - - - 802
By St. Peter, St. Paul, and St. John - - - - 808
(2.) By their successors - - - - - - ib.
The difference of the Apostolical rod and sword or axe 303, 304, note n An instance where the Church punishes for a crime which the State
allows = 005) ἢ - - - - - - 3804 The rectoral power cannot subsist without a coercive of the same kind 305, 307 That in both these respects the episcopal office is a spiritual principality - ib. The comparison of the two offices, regal and episcopal - - 308, 309 A very ancient description of an episcopal consecration - - - 310 A Christian bishop held anciently equal to a Jewish high-priest - - 811 (IL) The abuse of this practice in the latter ages of the Church censured 311, 312 1. By the canonists - - - - - - ib. 2. By Calvinists - - - - - - - 377 The false and arrogant maxim of the canonists about the subjection of the temporal to the ecclesiastical power, how introduced - 311, 312 Confuted by the real difference between these two powers and jurisdic- tions - - - - - - - 312 As stated by Hugo Floriacensis, Du Pin, and Bishop Beveridge - ib. (III.) The practice of the ancient Greek Church = - 305—825
As the same appears by the testimonies of 1. Constantine the Great - - -, = = 305, 351
ΧΧ CONTENTS.
Page 2. The Apostolical Constitutions - - “ - 3805—309 3. St. Gregory Nazianzen - - - - - 310, 311 4, St. Chrysostom - - - . - - 915-24 5. Eusebius - = - - = - - - 305 6. Sozomen - - - - - - - - 325 This doctrine publicly taught in the imperial city, and never objected against by the emperors, even when there was both opportunity and inclination so to do - - - - - - 824 Sect. [V.—(IV.) THE PRACTICE OF THE ANCIENT LaTIN CuuRCH - 325 The opinion and practice of the fathers of the Latin Church, delivered concerning episcopacy and its power = - - 820, sqq. 1. Of St. Cyprian - - - - - - - 826 2. Of St. Ambrose - - - - - 326—336, 347 3. Of Facundus Hermianensis - - - - 330, 335 4. Of Paulinus - - - - - 331, 332, note ἢ 5. Of St. Hierome - - - - - - - 844 6. Of St. Augustine’ - - - - - - - ib. 7. Of Gelasius - - - - - - - 349 Sect. V.—THE OPINION AND PRACTICE OF THE CHRISTIAN EMPERORS FROM THE BEGINNING - - - Ξ - 336—344 They looked on themselves as laics, and in that respect subjects of the Church - - - = - - - 886, 337 The distinction of laity and clergy not only older than popery 338, 339 But as old even as the very first ages of Christianity 339, 355 And acknowledged by our constitution - - - - 338 And even by Henry VIII. and Edward VI. - - - ib The use of the word laity in Scripture - - = - 339, 340 And in Apostolical writers - - - - - 840, 841 Thence received by Tertullian and St. Cyprian = - - 342
Sect. VI.—(Or THE MUTUAL RELATIONS OF THE SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. |
An argument for the great dignity of the episcopal office, as prophesied of
in Ps, xlv. - - - - - - - - 844 And as in ver, 16, interpreted both by St. Hierome and St. Augustine ἐφ. And ver. 17 by Eusebius Cesariensis - - - 846, 346
And as confirmed by the decisions of emperors themselves, as well as of bishops in their letters to them, pursuant to sucha claim 347—353
ee
CONTENTS. ΧΕΙ Page The difference between Church and State, according to the bounds which Christ has set betwixt them : - - - 348, 351, 368 The different origins and mutual subordinations of the spiritual and tem- poral powers, fully set forth, 1. By St. Ambrose - - - = - - 847 2. By the emperor Justinian, and the civil law of the empire 347, note p, 348
3. By Hosius, in his letter to Constantius - - - 848
4. By Gelasius in his to Anastasius, &c. - - 049, sqq.
5. By Symmachus, in his to the same emperor - - 3651, 352 Casaubon, de Libertate Ecclesiastica, and Du Pin, de Antiqua Ecclesie
Disciplina, hereupon referred to - - - - 349, note w
The Catholic practice for the first five hundred years of the Church con- cerning the liberty and dignity of the episcopal order, how and by whom changed - - - - - - - 3651, sqq.
The mistake of our lawyers about the subjection of the ecclesiastical to the temporal power, how and when introduced - - - 338, 360
Considerations upon the act of supremacy: viz., that it ought to be taken in a sense,
1. Consistent with other acts of parliament, and with Magna Charta 355, 357 2. Which saves, and not which destroys the distinction of the sacerdotal
from the civil power - - - - - 2 Ap 3. Consistent with the spiritual power of the keys - - - ib. The confession hereupon of Sir Edward Coke - - - - 357 Sect. VII.—Tue OBJECTION FROM LAW CONSIDERED - - 860—368 How Henry the Eighth exercised his modern supremacy = - 360 An haughty preface of his to a Latin Bible - - - - 358 An observation on a medal of his, with an arrogant inscription in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew - - - - - - 361 On the ecclesiastical commission given by him to Cromwell = - 362 Ecclesiastical preferments and benefices given by Edward the Sixth to this Cromwell and other laymen’ - = - > - ib Reflections upon the conduct of the clergy in those two reigns - - 365 The judgment of lawyers concerning the ecclesiastical supremacy - - ib, Sir Edward Coke wherein faulty - - - - 960, 367 A learned answer to him recommended, but with two restrictions 367, 368
Exemption of persons and goods of the clergy from temporal tribunals - 368
Sect. VITI.—Tue opsecTION FROM SCRIPTURE CONSIDERED - 368—376
Our Lord’s injunction to His Apostles against assuming authority and titles [such] as did not belong to them looked carefully into, and retorted upon the objectors - - - = - = - 369
Xxil CONTENTS.
Page
The honourable titles of Apostle and Bishop Ξ = - 369, 370 The concurrent testimony of St. Chrysostom and St. Hierome with the
true state of the case - - - - - - ib.
The character and testimony of Hugo Floriacensis to the same purpose 9710
Titles of honour given of old to bishops - - - 371— 374 The difficulty from a canon of the African Church examined, and the
true sense of it and of the whole Catholic Church discovered - 375
That all bishops are principes sacerdotum, and summi sacerdotes ; but none of them principes episcoporum, shewn to be the sense of Tertullian and
Facundus Hermianensis, in consent with the African fathers - 4b. Also of the commentators Balsamon and Zonaras, together with St. Hierome - - - - - - - 376, note CHAPS iI:
AN ANSWER TO THE SECOND CAPITAL OBJECYION AGAINST THE DIGNITY AND AUTHORITY OF THIS OFFICE, FROM THE CHURCH'S INDEPENDENCY BEING A PRESBYTERIAN DOCTRINE.
Sect, I.—THE DISTINCTION OF THE POWER AND POLITY OF THE CHURCH FROM THAT OF THE STATE, BY DIVINE INSTITUTION, WHICH PreEs- BYTERIAN WRITERS SO MUCH INSIST ON, IS PROPERLY NO PRESBYTE- RIAN, BUT A CATHOLIC DOCTRINE~ - - 3 - > 377380
1. The doctrine of Church power and independency to be carefully dis- tinguished from the abuse of it = - - - = Security against invading the prince’s rights, and encroachments
in ordine ad spiritualia - - - - - - 378 Wherein the peace of the Church and a Christian State consists —- =) ib: 2. The abuse of this doctrine, whether by Presbyterians or Papists, no reflection upon the doctrine itself - - - ib., 382, 394 3. How it is founded on positive Divine institution, but misapplied by the Presbyterians - - = - - - 378, 381 Of Presbyterian mixtures and corruptions - 378, 386, 387
4. Several truths asserted by the Presbyterians, and excepted against by Spotswood, for having been by them misapplied, to which the author here declares his full assent - - = 3 - 379
Several passages in their confession of faith, and their books purposely written for the jus divinum of the ecclesiastical government and ministry, wherein he likewise joins with then - 5 - 380
CONTENTS. XXill
Page Secr. [].—Tue MISAPPLICATION AND ABUSE OF THIS POWER BY THE PRES- BYTPRIANS UTTERLY INCONSISTENT WITH ALL CIVIL ORDER, AND CON- TRARY TO THE GOSPEL - - - - - 93881—387
1. This distinction of the power and polity of the Church from that of the State how determined by the Gospel, and how calculated for the peace
of the latter = - - - - = - 381
2. Made and declared by Christ Himself = - = =) (Hd,
3. Nothing more visible than it for three hundred years together ey 4. Nosound doctrine to be rejected because held by the Church’s enemies
in other matters - = = = = = - 382
The author’s resolution herein the same as that of St. Ignatius = = lee
5. The sentiment of the Independents concerning Church power and inde- pendency considered, and compared with that of the Presbyterians
- 382, sqq. The independency of the Church on the State, gure divino, as laid down by Mr. Nye in his book about the oath of supremacy - ib.
Wherein he differs from the Presbyterian opinion, and how he qualifies that oath to make it consistent with his independent power of the Church by Divine right = => 384; sqq.
Sect. III.—NotTHine coNTRARY TO THE REGAL SUPREMACY, AS QUALI- FIED AND EXFLAINED BY OUR KINGS AND QUEENS, ADVANCED HERE
UPON BY THE AUTHOR - = - 387—392
How Bishop Bilson and Sanderson were approved for what they writ to the very same purpose, and never yet censured for derogating thereby from
the rights of the prince - = = = - 388, 389 Bishop Sanderson’s opinion of the episcopal order and office = - 388 How far it affects the regal supremacy - = 5 = - ib. His Episcopacy no ways prejudicial to Regal Power = - Ξὸ ἐδ. Excellently cleared by Dr. Lowth - Ξ = Ξ =) li
An extract out of Bishop Bilson concerning the Divine original of the epi- scopal office and the monarchical government of every Church 389—392 Which is also conformable to the sentiment of Dr. Isaac Barrow 391, note f
Sect. [V.—NoTwitTHsTANDING THAT SOME MAY HAVE INVADED THE REGAL SUPREMACY UNDER PRETENCE OF THIS DOCTRINE, YET IT IS FOR THAT NEVERTHELESS CATHOLIC AND PRIMITIVE - = - 392—396
1. The abuse of any power, or the possibility of its abuse, the weakest
argument in the world against the reality of it = Ξ - 393 2. The contrary opinion exposed to as great or greater difficulties = τὸ: 3. The argument of Erastians and super-Erastians most novel and dan-
gerous - - = = = - = PVE
XXIV CONTENTS.
Page 4. The true state of the Saxon Church - - = - 394
5. By whom the first invasion was made upon the rights and liberties of the English clergy - - - - - - ib.
6. It is remarkable that the English people lost also their rights and liberties by the same - - = - - - ib.
7. There is as much reason for holding the rectoral as the doctoral autho- rity of Christian bishops - - - = - - 395
These anciently recognised as Christ’s vicegerents in His kingdom, independent of the kingdoms of the world = - - ib,
And as such obeyed by all ranks of Christians, as well after as before the empire became Christian, emperors not excepted = - 396
CRITICAL AND MISCELLANEOUS REMARKS. Honourable titles and appellations anciently given to Christian bishops.
1. Προεστώς - Ξ - - - - 279, 306 2. Mpoorarns, and Antistes - = - - 279, note y; 349 3. Ἡγεμών and Ἡγούμενος - - - > - 280, note i 4. “Apxwy - - < - - - 282, 288, see note c 4. Κύριος, and Dominus Sanctus - - - - 871, 874 6. Δεσπότης - - - - Ξ - 371, 372 7. Papa, a general name for all bishops : Ξ = - 872
Words setting forth the eminent dignity and authority of the episcopal office. 1. ᾿Αρχή. 2. ‘lepapxia, hierarchy. 3. Ἡγεμονία. 4. ᾿Εξουσία. 5. Amo- στολή. 6. Ὑπατία. 7. Δυναστεία. 8. Βασιλεία. 9. Σκῆπτρον. 10.
Θρόνος - - = 279—292, 306—309, 316—318, 349
Words expressing the subjection and obedience due to them, both from clergy and laity.
1. Εἰδέναι, to value, esteem, and regard - - - 296, note i 2. Προσέχειν, to have a deference to - - - 298, note q 3. Δέχεσθαι, to recognise and submit to - - - 800, note c 4. “Ὑπακούειν, to obey - - - - - - ib. 5. ᾿Ακολουθεῖν, to adhere to with the highest fidelity - - 296, note g 6. Ὑποτάσσεσθαι, to be subordinate in their respective lots; and ᾽Αντι- τάσσεσθαι, to rebel, or go out of their order 298, note τ; 299, note t 7. ᾿Αναψύχειν. 8. Svyxwpeiv - - - - 800, note c Ἐπίσκοπος and Βασιλεύς, in Hesychius the same - = - - 809 Ἱερεύς and sacerdos used to signify a bishop, and Ἱερωσύνη for the episcopal dignity - - - - - 297, notem; 314, noteu Λαϊκὸς ἄνθρωπος in St. Clement, &c. Ξ - 840, sqq.; see note k And Λαός - - - - = = - - 842 FIA700s, a name given in Scripture to the laity Ξ τ 340, see note g
Πλήρωμα for the same - - - - > = - 342
CONTENTS. XXV ᾿ Page
Rules of the canon law concerning the sacerdotal rights 823, 324, notes k, m; 350, note z
Rules of the civil law concerning them - = - - 347, note p St. Ambrose’s treatment of the emperor Theodosius approved by the Church
of England - - - - = - - 331, notem The ancient custom of emperors bowing the head at receiving the bishop’s
blessing - - - = - - ~ 314, note s An apology for making use of the Apostolical Constitutions - - 309 Father, a solemn appellation of God with Jews and pagans 274, and note d The Abrahamical old Father a title given to Hosius - - - 348
The medal of King Henry VIII. = τ - - - 361
CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD
ASSERTED.
CHAP. 1.
THE GRAND OBJECTION AGAINST THE CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD, FROM THE SILENCE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, CONSIDERED,
REVEREND Sir,
I rHanxk you for putting me in mind of what you think The occa- will be objected against the fourth proposition in my first eee i letter*. You grant I have sufficiently proved from Scripture {i's trea- that the Christian Church, by its constitution, is a royal or regal priesthood, or sacerdotal kingdom? ; but that I have not proved from it that the ministers of the Church are priests, which you say will be brought as an objection by some men against the second reason which I give, why the Church is called a royal or regal priesthood, to wit, ‘‘ because the royal priest or sacerdotal king of it, Christ Jesus, hath com-
mitted the government and administration of His kingdom
to priests.”
a (This most probably is the first letter sent to Serjeant Geers: for the mention of this, and the circumstances of the composition of this discourse, see the Prefatory Discourse, vol. i. pp. 61, 62, and the notes there.
The fourth proposition (ibid., p. 66) is, ‘IV. That the Church, or incor- porate body of Christians, is by its con- stitution a holy, royal, or regal priest- hood, as it is called in the Scriptures. First, because Christ the head of it, is the antitype of Melchisedec, and as such, a sacerdotal sovereign, or regal priest. And secondly, because this sacerdotal Sovereign has committed the
HICKES,
You tell me those men will be sure to observe
government and administration of His kingdom to ministerial priests, who, as I must often put you in mind, are the vicars, substitutes, legates, represen- tatives, or vicegerents of their royal, sacerdotal Lord and Master, in His kingly, as well as His priestly office, throughout all the districts and domi- nions of His spiritual kingdom upon earth.’’ |
> [This proof is contained in the third proposition, and the passages of Scripture and of the fathers given in support of it. See Prefat. Disc., pp. 64—66, and the notes there: and be- low, note n, p. 5.]
2 Objection that Christian Ministers are never
cHRISTIAN against me, that the ministers of Christ in the whole New
PRIEST- HOOD.
Testament are not once called priests, nor their ministry priesthood; but that those names or titles grew into use among the ecclesiastical writers after the times in which the Scriptures were written. This, Sir, you say, is expressly affirmed by Chemnitius, in the following words*: “In the writings of the New Testament the name of priest and priesthood is never given to the ministry of the Gospel, but the custom of calling the ministry priesthood, and the minis- ters priests, came to prevail from the use of those names in ecclesiastical writers.” And that bishops are proper priests you say is affirmed by a late writer‘, to be “absolutely re- jected by the whole Protestant communion.” This writer seconds himself with great assurance in another book*, where he tells us, that when the author of the Second Defence of the Church of England denied bishops to be priests in the proper sense of the word, “he spake in the language that hath been current in this Church ever since the Reforma- tion. And for his own part, he saith, he cannot conceive why the author of the Regale and Pontificate asserted a proper priesthood, unless it were to make way for a proper sacrifice, and if that be the reason, (saith he, very igno- rantly as well as maliciously,) it is easy to guess what men would be at.” Indeed, it is easier to guess from whom he
© Examen Concil. Trident. [pars ii-] de Sacram. Ordin., cap. 1. [In Scrip- tura Novi Testamenti appellatio sacer- dotum et sacerdotii nusquam tribuitur ministerio Novi Testamenti. Sed ec- clesiasticorum scriptorum usu invaluit, ministerium vocare sacerdotium, et mi- nistros sacerdotes. p. 259. Franc. 1574. |
4 Second Defence of the Church of England, from the Charge of Schism and Heresy, [as laid against it by the Vindicator of the deprived Bishops, Lond. 1698; 1. 6. Dodwell, (in his Vin- dication of the deprived Bishops, 1692, and the Defence of it, 1695.) ‘He positively affirms our bishops to be properly priests, and that of a more noble order too than the Aaronical, even the order of Melchisedec. And what is it, | wonder, that makes him so readily admit that which, by his own confession, is so very difficultly admitted by many, (that which is ab- solutely rejected by the whole Pro-
testant communion, he should have said,) viz., that bishops are properly priests, and the Eucharist a proper sacrifice.’’] p. 8. [The author’s name is not known. Hickes afterwards says, ‘‘your late writer and his second.’’ ]
* In a book entituled, The Regal Supremacy in Ecclesiastical Affairs asserted; in a Discourse occasioned by the Case of the Regale and Pontificate. [London, 1701. The passage referred to is, ‘As for the author cited by the objector, &c., his words have been grossly misrepresented; for he doth not positively deny that there are any priests or priesthood in the Church; but only that there are any priests in the proper sense of the word. And he spake in the language that hath been current in the Church ever since the Reformation.”—p. 59. This work was answered by Leslie in a Defence, &c., in 1702. See his Theol. Works, vol. i. Ρ. 493. |
called Priests in the New Testament. 3
borrowed this phrase, and at his ill meaning in it, which doth not only reflect, as he intended, upon that learned writer, but on the ancient fathers and councils, who thought the holy Eucharist a proper sacrifice, and upon our first reformers, as may be seen in our first liturgy’, and upon those learned bishops’ in both kingdoms who compiled the liturgy of the Church of Scotland, and upon Bishop Andrews, Mr. Mede, and some other very learned men now living, mentioned in the following discourse. Nay, he is so very self-assured as to affirm, that “the priesthood in a proper sense is not to be proved";” and yet he brings no other argument for his assertion but the single authority of one man, Dr. Outram‘, to whom he sends the author of the Regale as a scholar to his master, to learn “the difference betwixt a proper priesthood and the evangelical ministry.” And that he might oblige that excellent writer to hearken to him with all deference and submission, as a disciple, he tells him that he was “as great a man as this Church ever had.”
f Commonly called the First Book of K. Edward VI. [See Appendix, No. i.; and for the Scottish Liturgy, Ap- pendix, No. ii. See also Prefatory Dis- course, vol. i. pp. 126, sqq. and p. 133. ]
& Archbishop Spottiswood and Arch- bishop Laud, Xc. [Spottiswood, arch- bishop of St. Andrew’s, Maxwell, bishop of Ross, and Wedderburne of Dumblane, were the most active in the work; with Whitford of Brechin, Guthrie of Mo- ray, and Lindsay of Glasgow. They requested Laud’s assistance, and the book being first prepared in Scotland, was submitted to the consideration of Laud, Juxon, and Wren; but from Juxon’s engagements as lord treasurer the burden of the work devolved on the other two.—Heylin’s Life of Laud, p. 504. | ἔν {The Regal Supremacy, &c., p.
i De Sacrificiis [libri duo; quorum altero explicantur omnia Judzorum, nonnulla gentium profanarum sacrifi- cia; altero sacrificium Christi ;] lib. i. cap. 19. ὃ 5. p. 222. [ Lond. 1677. ] Jam vero quamvis S. Paulus (Rom. xy. 16, 17.) tralatitio loquendi genere, &c. “And now, though St. Paul using a metaphorical kind of speech, assumes the person of a priest, and although all Christians, upon the account of
those spiritual sacrifices which they daily offer unto God, are sometimes called priests { Rev. i.6.]; yet it is to be noted, that no ministers of the Gospel, of what order soever, are upon the ac- count of their office called priests or high-priests. Which I therefore ob- serve, that you may understand the great difference betwixt the evangelical ministry, and the Aaronical priest- hood: which chiefly appears in this, that the former is ordained for God in things pertaining to men, but the latter for men in things pertaining to God. From whence we may learn this also, that that hath chiefly to do with men, but this to do with God: to this we may add, that the priesthood of Christ, and not the evangelical ministry, suc- ceeds the Jewish priesthood. So that now there is none but Christ Himself, who by authority derived from God, is a priest or high-priest, that is, an ad- vocate for men with God.’’
k [“ But now to shew this author, if he will vouchsafe to learn, not from me, but from as great a man as this Church ever had, wherein lies the difference between a proper priesthood and the evangelical ministry, I shall desire him to consider this passage of Dr. Out- ram’s,’’ &c.—The Regal Supremacy, &c. p.62. Dr. William Outram was a fellow of Christ’s College, Cambridge ;
B2
CHAP, L
SECT. I.
4 Value of Dr. Outram’s authority. Grotius.
curistian He was indeed a learned and a pious man, and an ornament
PRIEST- HOOD.
to the Church, and his learning and piety make me honour his memory. Particularly he was well versed in the Hebrew and rabbinical learning; but even in that, which was his chief study and talent, there were many eminent men of the Church, who flourished before him and in his time, whom he would have acknowledged his superiors, as Mr. Nic. Fuller, Dr. Pocock, Bp. Walton, Dr. Lightfoot, not to mention others. And as for the knowledge of the fathers and coun- cils, which is so requisite for a divine, I wish he had been as well versed in them as in Ben Maimon and Abarbanel, and then indeed he might have been as great a man as this au- thor, for his own purpose, describes him to have been, even a star of the first magnitude in the firmament of the Church. But, Sir, we injure the memories of such worthy men when we stretch their characters, and make them greater than they were; and therefore, as writers should take care not to lessen the just worth and greatness of authors when they give testimony against them, so ought they not to magnify and aggrandize them above what is meet, when they are on their side, especially when they reason only from their au- thority, as your late writer, in both his books, doth in a point wherein, against the voice of antiquity, it did not become him to be so dogmatical and assured.
But Grotius writes on this subject with more modesty than this gentleman; for he, when speaking of the Christian priesthood, writes thus!: ‘Truly it was a received custom
archdeacon of Leicester, 1669; after- make it sensible how great they were;
wards prebendary of Westminster, and rector of St. Margaret’s. He diedin 1679, aged 54. The only work published by himself was the one here mentioned. After his death a volume of twenty ser- mons was published by Dr. Gardiner, afterwards bishop of Lincoln ; who pre- fixed a preface to a second edition in 1697, in which he says, “ His extraor- dinary skill in rabbinical learning he hath made appear in his book De Sa- crificiis, wherein he hath also given a proof of his profound skill in the high- est points of Divine wisdom. But what his abilities were in other parts both of Divine and human knowledge, he had not leisure enough from his ministerial labours to let the world know: nor have I leisure enough to
or to represent the gravity, sobriety, simplicity, truth, and plainness of his conversation, his devotion to God, and his charity to the neighbourhood,” &c. His epitaph in Westminster Abbey says that by his great labours and application of mind in the study of the Holy Scriptures and the fathers, he contracted the disease of the stone, of which he died.—See Biogr. Britannica, 1760. |
{Ut autem precones Novi Testa- menti Sacerdotes speciatim appellen- tur, est quidem receptum antiqua ec- clesiz consuetudine, sed non de nihilo est quod ab eo loquendi genere et Christus ipse, et ejus Apostoli semper abstinuerunt. Idque satis esse debet ad nos admonendos ne passim atque
The question does not affect Hickes’ main argument. 5
in the ancient Church to call the preachers of the Gospel priests, but there was some reason why Christ and His Apo- stles abstained from that way of speaking, which is sufficient to admonish us, lest we lightly and inconsiderately draw an argument (about some things mentioned there) from the Levitical priests to the ministers of the Gospel, because there is a great difference of one from the other in the func- tion and the succession of the persons to it.” Before I pro- ceed to obviate that objection, I must observe that it makes no great difference as to my undertaking in the first letter™, whether bishops be, properly speaking, priests or not, or whether or no they be so much as priests in an improper sense; that is, whether they are priests at all or no. For my chief design there is to shew, that they are Christ’s stewards in His house; His vicegerents upon earth in the several principalities or dominions of His spiritual king- dom ; and that all Christians as such, kings and senates, as well as their people, are subjects to them as to His vice- gerents, or chief ministers over the Catholic Church". To prove this is my chief design in my propositions®, and this is true, whether they be admitted to be priests or no; or whe- ther or no they represent Christ the antitypal Melchisedec in His double capacity, and are servants and ministers under Him in the several dominions of His spiritual kingdom, both as High-Priest and King. You know, Sir, the presbyterians, who do not allow bishops and presbyters to be priests, yet assert the nature of Christ’s spiritual kingdom, and all the rights of it, to be independent of the kingdoms of the world ; and carry the spiritual power and authority of the presby-
promiscue a sacerdotibus Leviticis ad Evangelii ministros argumentum du- camus, cum et in ipso munere et in modo personas designandi latum sit discrimen.—De Imperio Summarum Potestatum circa Sacra, (opus posthu- mum,) cap. 11. ὃ 5. Grotii Opera, tom. iv. p. 210, a. Lond. 1679.]
m [See note, Ὁ. 1. That undertaking ultimately had reference to the non- juring question. See Pref. Discourse, vol. i. p. 62. note g. |
τί [He refers to Prop. III. ‘“ Christ the archetypal, eternal Melchisedec, is the King of this spiritual kingdom, Lord of this spiritual dominion, and supreme Head of this spiritual corpo-
ration; and the bishops, as successors to the Apostles, are under Him, by commission derived from Him, spiri- tual lords, chiefs, and princes, as well as priests in His spiritual kingdom ; to whom, in their respective spiritual dominions and jurisdictions, He re- quires obedience of all His subjects, of what temporal rank or condition soever, as to His stewards, vicegerents, or chief ministers over His Church.’’—Pref. Dise., vol. i. pp. 64—66. ]
° The first four of which are printed in the beginning of the Prefatory An- swer. [The whole number was first twenty-three, afterwards forty. See Pref. Disc., vol. i. p. 62. note g. |
6 The objection obviated by three considerations.
curistran tery, as His ministry, to as great a height as I have done ἤρου that of bishops, whom, agreeably to the consentient testi- ~ mony of ecclesiastical writers and councils, I assert to be priests, and their authority to be a sacerdotal authority, and their college in every Christian province, and in and through the whole world, to be a sacerdotal college. And I am nei- ther afraid nor ashamed to say, that I will adhere to this consentient authority and tradition of the ancient Church, in the best and purest ages of it; though it were rejected, as your late writer falsely asserts, “by the whole Protestant communion,” or as he should have said, by all the Protest- ant Churches; for they are many and different, and few of them, as the common adversary observes, are in communion
one with another.
sncr.._ IJ. Having premised this, I proceed, as you advised me, πὸ aoe to obviate the objection which these men will be apt to make amen against the second reason of my fourth proposition, not be-
lieving bishops and presbyters to be priests, or proper priests , because they are neither called priests, nor is their office or ministry called priesthood in the Scriptures of the New Testament, which hath been also observed by many learned men who yet never doubted but that they were priests. Wherefore, to set my answer to this objection in as clear a light as I can, I will shew first, that it is not a good argu- ment to prove that the ministers of the Christian Church are not priests or their office not a priesthood, because they are not so called in the New Testament. Secondly, I will shew, that though the names of priests and priesthood, as applied to the ministers and ministry of Christ, are not found in the New Testament, yet the thing signified by those names is there, and properly belongs to them. And thirdly, I will give you the reasons for which learned men conjecture they are not called by those names in the writings of the New Testament. secr.m. III. First, then, I will shew that it is no good argument to pene ae prove the bishops and presbyters of the Christian Church not ie New to be priests, or their respective offices a priesthood, because no objec- those names are not given them in the Scriptures of the New mon. Testament. For there are many things contained in the New Testament which have been taught for Gospel-truths
The doctrine may be in Scripture, though not the name. 7
and doctrines by the Catholic Church, though the names or terms by which they are expressed and taught are not to be found there. The word or term ‘ original sin, or birth-sinP,’ is not to be found in the whole Bible, and yet because the thing signified by it is there, very few divines or other Chris- tians doubt of the doctrine signified by it, as it was taught in the time of the Pelagian controversy, and is defined in the ninth article of our Church. The Divine authority of the New Testament, is and hath been a previous article of faith taught and believed in all Churches, and yet there is not one book in it which either saith of itself, or of the whole Testa- ment, that it is of Divine authority, or was written by Divine inspiration. So the admitting women as well as men to the holy Eucharist, hath been the universal custom and practice of the Church; and yet no one book of the New Testament saith in express words, that women were admitted to the holy Sacrament, indeed no more than that infants were bap- tized. ‘There are many more doctrines and practices, which have been taught and professed in all Churches and ages as common principles of Christianity%, of which we have no
» [X. Article of Religion. [of Origi- nal or Birth Sin.] Ministration of Public Baptism for Infants. ‘‘ Dearly beloved, forasmuch as all men are con- ceived and born in sin,’”’ ὅτ.
4 See Dr. William Beveridge’s Proce- mium before his Codex CanonumEccles. Primitive Vindicat. [§ 2. Lond. 1678. Multa autem sunt, que, licet in sacris Scripturis expresse ac definite non le- gantur, communi tamen omnium Chris- tianorum consensione ex iis eruuntur. Exempli gratia, tres distinctas in sacro sancta Trinitate personas venerandas esse, Patrem, Filium, et Spiritum Sanctum, eosque singulos verum esse Deum et tamen unum tantummodo esse Deum: Christum θεάνθρωπον esse, vere Deum, ac vere hominem in una eademque persona. Hee et similia, quamvis totidem verbis ac syllabis, nec in veteri nec in novo Instrumento tra- duntur, de iis tamen, ut utroque fun- datis, inter omnes semper convenit Christianos: demptis tantummodo pau- cis quibusdam heereticis, quorum in religione haud major habenda est ratio quam monstrorum in natura. Sic etiam infantes sacro baptismate ablu- endos esse, et sponsores ad illud Sa-
cramentum adhibendos: Dominicam sive primam per singulas septimanas feriam religiose observandam esse: Passionis, Resurrectionis, et Ascensionis Domini ad eccelum, necnon Spiritus Sancti adventus commemorationem per singulos annos peragendam: LEccle- siam ubique per episcopos a presby- teris distinctos iisque prelatos admi- nistrandum esse. Hee et alia hujus- modi nusquam in sacris Seripturis di- serte ac nominatim precipiuntur; sed nihilominus per mille et quadringentos ab Apostolis annos in publicum Eccle- siz usum ubique recepta fuerunt; nec ullam intra illud tempus invenire est Ecclesiam, in ea non consentientem. Adeo ut quasi communes sunt notiones omnium ab origine Christianorum ani- mis insite, non tam ex ullis particu- laribus Sacre Scripture locis, quam ex omnibus: ex generali totius Evan- gelii scopo et tenore; ex ipsa religionis in eo stabilitze natura et proposito; at- que ex constanti denique Apostolorum traditione, qui ecclesiasticos hujusmodi ritus, et generales, ut ita loquar, Evan- gelii interpretationes per universum terrarum orbem una cum fide propa- garunt. Alioguin enim non incredibile
CHAP. I.
SECT, IL.
8 Objection would hold against the chief Christian doctrines.
cuRIstiAN express mention in the New Testament, nor can find therem
PRIEST-
HOOD.
the name or terms in which they have been taught and defined by the Catholic Church. The words Person or Trinity, or Trinity in Unity are not there ; ὁμοούσιος or con- substantial, as the Arians objected, are not there to be found ; nor is θεάνθρωπος in all the Greek Testament; or is it any where expressly, or in terms therein taught, that Jesus Christ is very God and very man in one and the same person.’ The like is to be said of the Deity of the Holy Ghost, who, as the Unitarians object’, is not once expressly affirmed to be God in all the Scriptures of the New Testament. The same may be said of the doctrine of satisfaction’, which is there, though not under that name; and also of infant baptism ; the religious observation of the first day of the week, by Christians called the Lord’s day ; and of the polity or government of the Church by bishops superior to and distinct from presbyters, which yet was the form of government in all Churches and ages for almost sixteen hundred years from the time of the Apostles, though it is not in express words mentioned or described in the holy Scriptures. So the doctrine of the two Sacraments‘ is not expressly to be found there, nor of the Eucharist’s being a real, external, and material oblation, though the one,
imo vero impossibile prorsus esset, ut tam unanimi consensione, ubique, et semper, et ab omnibus reciperentur. ]
© Wolzogenii Comment. in Act. Apost., cap. v. ver. 3. Ut mentireris in Spiritum Sanctum. Bene hoc loco Piscator in Scholiis, ‘ Spiritum Sanc- tum, id est, nos Apostolos, in quibus agit Spiritus Sanctus, et quibus reve- lat, quz opus est ad edificationem Ecclesiz. Metonymia adjuncti.’ ver. 4. Non mentitus es hominibus, sed Deo. Simile huic dictum est, Exod. xvi.; ubi postquam (ver. 2.) scriptum est congregationem Israelitarum mur- murasse contra Mosen, et contra Aaro- nem; deinde (ver. 8.) dicitur: non contra nos murmurationes vestra, sed contra Dominum. Et Numb. xx.; post- quam dictum est (ver. 3.), jurgatum esse populum cum Mose; postea (ver. 13.) dicitur ibi tune jurgatos esse filios Israelis cum Domino, seu Jehovah. Vide etiam Matt. x. 40; xviii. 5; Mare. ix. 87; Luc. x. 16; 1 Cor. viii. 12. [ He proceeds, Non recte ergo hine qui- dam concludunt Spiritum Sanctum hoc
loco expresse vocari Deum.—Johannis Ludovici Wolzogenii Baronis Austriaci Op., tom. ii. p. 30. apud Bibliothecam Fratrum Polonorum., Irenopoli. 1656. Piscator however had said on ver. 4, Deo, τῷ @cg* nempe Spiritui Sancto, qui in nobis agit, et arcana quum opus est, nobis revelat.—Johannis Piscatoris Commentarii, tom. iii. in N. T. p. 392. Herbonz Nass. 1638. }
5 [ By ‘‘ satisfaction’? Hickes means the satisfaction made by the death of our Lord. }
t See the Preface to my Second Collection of Controversial Letters, pp. lv, lvi. [ Lond. 1710. See note ο, vol. i. p- 1. Hickes is there replying to Dr. Hancock’s demand for Scripture proof of the Eucharistic Sacrifice; ‘* I might challenge him in return,’’ he says, ‘‘ to prove from Scripture that the Lord’s Supper is a Sacrament, and to give me out of it one express proof for that.’ Again; ‘‘ There is not one place in the Greek Testament where the Lord's Supper is called a mystery (the Greek word for Sacrament)” &c. }
Terms transferred from Gentile to Christian uses. 9
as well as the other, hath been the constant and invariable tradition of the Church, this to the time of the Reformation, and that to this day. So to give an example of another kind, the word μυσταγωγεῖν, which signifies to teach religious mysteries and rites ; μυσταγωγία, teaching religious mysteries and rites; mystes", hieromystes, mystagoyus, hierotelestes, and hierophantes*, a teacher of religious mysteries and rites, are not any of them once used in the New Testament ; and yet the things signified by them are there, for which reason many Christian writers thought it fit and proper to translate the use of them from heathenism to Christianity, and from the priesthoods, and religious rites and mysteries of the Gentiles to the Christian Church. St. Ignatius in his epistle to the Ephesiansy, tells them they were the disciples of St. Paul, Παύλου συμμύσται τοῦ ἡγιασμένου, for μύστης“ signifies a scholar as well as a master, and a learner as well as a teacher of holy mysteries ; and Tertullian in his Apology? doth by allusion call the Christian bishop pater sacrorum, who had among the Latins the same office as the mystes, my- stagogus, or hierophantes had among the Greeks. It is well known how the author of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy”, under
ἱερὰ μυστήρια εἰση- Phavorinus adds,
ἃ Ἱερομύστης" γούμενος. Suidas. καὶ διδάσκων.
χ Ἱεροφάντης᾽ μυσταγωγὺσ, ἱερεύς. Suidas. 6 τὰ μυστήρια δεικνύων, is added by Hesychius.
y [S. Ignat. Epist. ad Eph. c. xi. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 14. ]
2 Μύστητ᾽ ὃ τὰ μυστήρια ἐπιστάμενος, ἢ διδάσκων. Suidas. Μύστης" τελού- μενος, σιωπηλὸς τά μυστήρια μαθὼν, μεμνημένος. Hesych.
2 At quin volentibus initiari moris est, opinor, prius patrem illum sacro- rum adire, que preparanda sunt de- scribere; tum ille, infans tibi neces- sarius, &c. [Apol.c. 8. Op., p. 9, A. Tertullian is contrasting heathen and Christian initiation. ]
b He calls the Apostles ἑερομύστας, [οἱ τῆς καθ᾽ ,ἡ μᾶς θεολογικῆς παραδό- σεως ἱερομύστα. | Pseudo-Dionysii Areopagite De Divinis Nominibus, cap. ii. § 4. Op., tom. i. p. 317, D Venet. 1755.] And de Ecclesiast. Hierarchia, [cap. i. ὃ 4.1 he calls the Apostles and writers of the New Testa- ment ἱεροτελεστὰς, [σεπτότατα δὲ Ad- για ταῦτά φαμεν, ὅσα πρὸς τῶν ἐνθέων
ἡμῶν ἱεροτελεστῶν ἐν ἁγιογράφοις ἡμῖν καὶ θεολογικαῖς δεδώρηται δέλτοι:.--- Ibid., p. 156, 1). and ὃ ὅ. p. 157. re- peatedly,] and Christ πρῶτον ἱεροτε- λεστὴν, according to Tertullian, who calls Him [ Adv. Mare. iv. ο. 35. p. 451, D.] authenticum Pontificem Dei Patris, eliminatorem humanarum macularum, ον et sacrificiorum zternum Antistitem. [The words πρῶτος ἱεροτελεστὴς do not occur in this passage of Dionysius, but thesentimentruns through the whole chapter. He also calls the catechetical institution into the Christian religion, μύησις: De Hierarch. Eccles. [μεμνυη- μένος occurs in this sense, 6. ii. § 2. p. 168, B. and μύησις, de Hierarch. Ce- lest. c. ii. § 5. p. 16, C. as often else- where.] And the bishops (whom the historian calls ‘the priests of Christ’) [τοὺς ἱερέας τοῦ Χριστοῦ.) who in- structed Constantine the Great in the Christian religion, made no difficulty in what they said to him, to call bap- tism μύησις, the baptized μεμνημενθε, and the unbaptized ἀμύητοι; . [εἶναι..
ἀφορμὴν σωτηρίας, καὶ κάθαρμον ἁμαρ- τημάτων' ἀμυήτοις μὲν, μύησιν κατὰ τὸν νόμον τῆς ἐκκλησίας" τοῖς δὲ μεμυημέ-
CHAP. I.
SECT. IIT.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Matt. 13. 28; Mark 11. 10;
Luke 7. 28; 9. 2.
[Col. 4. 3.]
10 Christian Ministers are Stewards of Mysteries.
the name of Dionysius Areopagita, affects the words. And Gre- gory Nazianzen saith’, that “Christ as a mystes taught His disciples the mysteries of the passover.” It would be tedious to shew how the fathers called the two Sacraments by the name of μυσταγωγία, nor need we wonder, when the word μυστήριον, ‘mystery,’ is so often used in the New Testament. The kingdom of heaven or the kingdom of God, as the Church is called by our Lord, had its institutions and mys- teries, and (1 Cor. iv. 1), the ministers of it are called the “stewards or dispensers of the mysteries of God ;” which ex- pression, whether Mr. Toland will or no‘, is a plain description or gloss of a mystagogue, even as plain and significant a de- scription of an hierophant or mystagogue as that of Hesy- chius‘, ‘a mystagogue is a priest who instructs, a learner of religious mysteries ;᾽ or that in Suidas®, “ἃ mystagogue is a priest, who is a teacher of mysteries.” Hence St. Paul, as an hierophant or mystagogue of the Gospel, desires the Colossians “to pray for him, that God would open unto him a door of ut- terance to speak the mystery of Christ.” If you desire to see more applicable to this purpose, you may consult 1 Cor. 1]. 4— 7; 1 Tim. in. 16; Rom. xvi. 25; Eph. ii. ὃ, 4; Coloss. 1.
vos, τὸ μὴ πάλιν ἁμαρτεῖν. |—Sozom. Hist. Eccl., lib. i. cap. 3. [ Hist. Eccl., tom. ii. p. 13. ]
© (Xpiorbs) μυσταγωγεῖ τοὺς μαθητὰς τὸ πάσχα.---ὃ. Greg. Naz. Orat. xl. [§ 30. Op., tom. i. p. 725, C.]
4 [See Suicer, Thesaurus, tom. ii. p- 380, who, after giving the authori- ties referred to by Hickes, says, He voces usurpantur de Sacramentis; 1. de Baptismo; 2. de S. Coena; giving instances of each. ]
e {Hickes refers to Toland’s work, entitled, Christianity not Mysterious: or a treatise shewing that there is no- thing in the Gospel contrary to reason, nor above it; and that no Christian doctrine can be properly called a mys- tery. London, 1698. He maintains, ch. i, sect. 3. § 6. p. 73, “that in the New Testament mystery is always used... for things naturally very in- telligible, but so covered by figurative words or rites, that reason could not discover them without special revela- tion; and that the vail is actually taken away; and that the doctrines so revealed cannot now be properly called myste- ries.’’ So ch. iii. sect. 8. § 30. p. 100,
he interprets the words of the text, 1 Cor. iv. 1, ‘‘the preachers of those doctrines which God was pleased to reveal;’’ and ch. v. sect. 8, after trac- ing, as he professes to do, the gradual introduction of ‘mystery’ into Chris- tianity from paganism, he says, § 84. p. 164, ‘‘their terms were exactly the same without any alteration; they both made use of the words ‘ initiating,’ μυεῖσθαι, and ‘perfecting,’ τελεῖσθαι. They both called their mysteries μυή- σεις, τελειώσεις, τελειωτικὰ, ἐποπτεῖαι, &e. They both looked upon initiation as a kind of deifying. And they both styled their priests mystagogues, mys- tes, hierotelestes, &c. |
Ε Μυσταγωγός᾽ ἱερεὺς 6 τοὺς μύστας &ywv.—Hesych.
§ Μυσταγωγόκ᾽ ἱερεὺς μυστηρίων δι- δάσκαλος. [Suidas. The words μυσ- τηρίων διδάσκαλος are enclosed in brackets in Gaisford’s edition.] Μυσ- ταγωγῶ. τὰ μυστήρια διδάσκω. [ Pha- vorinus. Μυσταγωγεῖ" αἰτιατικῇ. μυσ΄- τήρια ἐπιτελεῖ, ὡς μυστήρια ἄγει, ἢ ἐκδιδάσκει. Suidas. μυστήριον ἄγει.
Hesychius. }
“ὦ τὰν ΔΕ el cake
Distinction of Jewish and Christian Priesthood. 1k
25—27; 11.2. Which places being considered, I believe it will be impossible for Mr. Toland, that bold enemy to all revealed religion", to give a good reason why a Christian priest, or pater sacratus, may not as properly be called a mystes in one sense for a mystagogue, (whose office it is to initiate into the mysteries of the Christian sect,) as well as the learners whom he initiates and instructs, are so called in the other. St. Ignatius, as I have shewed, so calls the latter ; and why we may not so esteem and call the former, I can give no reason, though the word is not to be found in the writings of the New Testament, since the thing, in other words, is denoted there. In like manner the ministers of the Christian Church have been ever deemed, and spoken of as priests from the time of the Apostles by the Church and Church writers, who could not be ignorant of the common notion of priesthood among Jews and Gentiles, and of the nature of their own ministry; and who had more sanctity than to usurp the title of priests, when they first began to be so called, if they had not known and believed themselves to be such, and their office, in which they ministered unto God, to be as truly and properly sacerdotal under the new law, as that of Aaron and his sons was under the old. It was indeed a priesthood of a different kind and religion, nay of a more simple kind, because of a more simple religion; of a more simple, free, and easy kind, because in conformity to Christianity, which was but reformed Judaism ; it was stripped of much ceremonial pomp, and many carnal rites; and
OHAP. I.
SECT, III.
servile and burdensome observances “imposed upon them [Heb. 9. till the time of reformation ;” and particularly discharged of 1% 441
all the sacrifices by slaughter and blood, as of goats, bulls, and calves, to which Christ put an end by His one offering up of Himself once upon the cross for the sins of the whole world. But then, though it was a more simple priesthood than the Levitical, yet nevertheless they thought it had the nature and notion of priesthood, as much as that ministry, or else it is difficult to imagine that the successors to the Apostles, after the destruction of Jerusalem, should arrogate and assume to themselves a title which did not truly belong to them, as ministers of the New Testament. They un-
n [See vol. i. p. 51, note h.]
12 Universal consent of Christians to the doctrine.
curistian Goubtedly knew the reasons for which the Apostles and pres-
RS byters in the infancy of the Church did not call themselves priests ; but if they had thought their office and ministry was not a priesthood, they would also have abstained from the title of priests after their example; but since they did not, it is reasonable to presume that they thought their office to be truly sacerdotal, and that the great difference which Grotius saith was between them, consisted in circumstance as to their different succession and designation, and not in essence or substance; as will appear from the Scriptures of the New Testament, as expounded by the consentient opinion and practice of all Christians till of late years. “ Andi as Tully saith, that ‘the consent of all men is the voice of nature :’ so the consent of all Christians in opinion and practice for so many ages, ought to be received as the un- doubted sense of the Scriptures, and the voice of the Catholic Church ;” and particularly as to this thing, as well as others, which I have proved by several instances are in the Scrip- tures of the New Testament, and may be proved from thence, though they are not named therein.
i Dr. Beveridge’s Proemium [ὃ 2.7] 516 etiam in hujusmodi rebus consensus above cited, [note q, p. 7. Quemad- omnium Christianorum vox Evangelii modum enim omni in re ‘consensus merito habeatur. On this follows the omnium vox nature est,’ ut ait Cicero, passage quoted above. |
CHAPTER II.
THE POSITIVE FROOFS FOR THE CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD, UPON THE PRIN- CIPLES AND REASONINGS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
I. Wuererore I proceed to shew in the second place, that though the names of priest and priesthood, as applied to bishops and presbyters, and their office, are not to be found in the New Testament; yet the things signified by them are there, and properly belong to the ministers and ministry ordained by Christ under the dispensation of the Gospel, which is the very end, substance, and verity of the Mosaic economy, and the fulfilling of the Mosaic law.
To evince this, I begin with the description or definition st. Paul’s of an high-priest or priest, which the Apostle gives us in the pete: fifth chapter of his Epistle to the Hebrews, ver. 1. “ Every high-priest,” saith he, “taken from among men, is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins.” Or, “ Every high-priest is taken from among men, and ordained in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins : that is, every high-priest is taken from among men, and ordained for men, to preside* in holy matters relating to God, or the worship of God!; or as the Syriac version renders the place™, “every high-priest among men stands for men in things that are of God,” i. e. every high-priest on earth among men stands in the presence of God to perform Divine offices for them, and “ for their benefit and good", to reconcile them to
k Pro hominibus preest rebus divinis. —Castalio. [Biblia Sacra ex Sebast. Castalionis postrema recognitione cum annotationibus ejusdem, &c. Basilezx. 1573. ]
! Etabli pour les hommes en ce qui regarde le culte de Dieu.—Mons-Tes- tament. [Le nouveau Testament, tra- duit selon l’edition vulgate avec les differences des Grec (par le maistre de Sacy, Arnauld, Nicole, &c.) tom. 2. 8vo. ed. 2. Mons. 1699.] Etabli pour les hommes, en ce qui regarde Dieu. —LeClere. [Le nouveau Testament, traduit sur l’original Grec, avec de remarques, per Jean le Clerc; tom. 2. 4to, Amst. 1703.
Hickes has selected the classical ver- sion of Castalio; and the then most re- cent ones, by the Port Royalists, and Le Clere, the great critic of his day, and of views quite opposed to himself. ]
m [or pay [Peas ὦ; \\s 41.109 ον fon 41.159 eal [ax ταν UX fo
Omnis enim pontifea qui est ex homini- bus, pro hominibus stat super tis que Dei sunt.—Vers. Syr. Biblia Polyglotta, Waltoni. tom. v. p. 856. ]
" A cause des hommes, pour leur bien et leur utilité; afin de les recon- cilier ἃ Dieu, ou de leur obtenir quel-
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
SECT. II.
A priest
is a vice- gerent of God in His Church.
Exod. 7. 1.
14. Argument from Scripture descriptions of Priesthood.
God, and God to them, or to obtain graces and favours to them from Him, and as it were to interpose between Him and them.” So in the second chapter of the same Epistle, ver. 17, the Apostle, describing the priesthood of Christ from the nature of the priesthood or priestly office among the Jews, saith, “in all things it behoveth Him to be made lke unto His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful high-priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconcilia- tion for the sins of the people.”
II. Sir, you know the words in the original here and in the first verse of the fifth chapter are, τὰ πρὸς Tov Θεὸν, and perhaps you may also know, that the Apostle took them from the Greek translation of the Old Testament, Exod. xvii. 19, where Jethro saith unto Moses, πο πὶ Syn pyd ans an, γίνου σὺ τῷ λαῷ τὰ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν. In our translation, “ Be thou to the people to God-ward, that thou mayest bring the causes unto God.” In other versions®, “Be thou to the people before God,” or “in the presence of God,” or “ Be thou to the people, a parte Dei, on God’s part,” or as the vulgar Latin transla- tion?, “Be thou to the people in things pertaining to God.” Or4, “ Be thou for the people in things towards God,” or as Castalio, Tu populi rem apud Deum agito—<Do thou the people’s business with God.” So in Exod. iv. 16, where God told Moses that Aaron should be his prophet, and he should be Aaron’s prince, the Greek and Latin translations have it, “He shall speak for thee to the people, he shall be a mouth unto thee, and thou shalt be unto him in things’ pertain- ing to God*;” that is, thou shalt be unto him a king*.
ques graces, et bienfaits de lui, et ainsi s’interposer entre Dieu et eux. In the great French Bible [commonly known as the Geneva Bible] on the place, published with large notes, [ Geneva, &c.] by Samuel and Henry Des Ma- rets, Amsterdam, 1669.
9. {The Samaritan version of the
words is "4V 2, "XA OTH MMALZANX “24P Esto tu pro
populo ante Dominum. The Arabic,
aS Kh vy? οἷν Paar ἜΣ Sis tu populo a parte Dei.—Walton, Polyglott, tom. i. p. 305. Pagninus’ version, corrected by Montanus; Esto tu populo coram Deo; commonly known
as Montanus’ version, Antw. 1584. ]
P Esto tu populo in his que ad Deum pertinent.—[ Vers. Vulgata. |
4 Que tu sois pour Je peuple envers Dieu.— Great French Bible. [See note l.]
τ pbs, Lelohim.
5. [Vulg. Jpse loquetur pro te ad populum et erit os tuum; tu autem eris et in his que ad Deum pertinent. LXX. Καὶ αὐτός σοι λαλήσει πρὸς τὸν λαὸν καὶ αὐτὸς ἔσται σοι στόμα" συ δὲ αὐτῷ ἔσῃ τὰ Tpds τὸν Θεόν.)
* Grot. [Inter Criticos Sacros, tom. i, pars 1. Annot. in Exod. p. 88. Amst. 1698. Textus Hebreus habet,] Tu eris ipsi in Deum, id est, Jus gladii habebis in ipsum et alios.s Nunquam
Meaning of the Hebrew word for Priest. 15
From hence, Sir, I think it is plain, that the priest’s office is the same in sacred, as Moses’ was in civil affairs; when as king, or ruler of the twelve tribes in the beginning of the theocracy, he ministered in temporal matters betwixt God and the people. Hence Grotius thinks that the sixth verse of the ninety-ninth Psalm, ought not to be rendered “ Moses and Aaron among His priests,”’ but rather, ‘“‘ Moses and Aaron among His ministers" ;” that is, Moses among His ministers of state, and Aaron among His priests, or minis- ters of His Church. For the original word jn5, cohen sig- nifies in its general signification λευτουργὸς, ‘ minister ;? and though it is most commonly used in the Old Testament to denote a sacred minister or priest, yet sometimes it is used to denote a prince or great man in the state, as in 2 Sam. viii. 18, where it is said, that ““ Benaiah was over the Chere- thites and Pelethites,” there it is said of the sons of David, that they were p¥3n3, cohenim, which we render ‘ chief rulers,’ and the Greek translation, ‘ princes, or rulers of the court*.’ So in Gen. xh. 45, what our and other translations render ‘priest of Ony,’ the Chaldee version translates 34 san, rabba deon”, ‘prince of On,’ and some of the critics think it the better version*. So saith Buxtorf”, “n>, cohen, the Hebrew word, sometimes is used in a large sense for prefects, governors of cities and provinces, and civil governors, and then it is ren- dered in the Targum by xan, radbba, which signifies a prince.” Wherefore as Moses, in his regal capacity, was God’s minister over the people in the state; so Aaron, in his
enim hoe nomen hominibus datur, nisi ad significandum jus vite, ac necis. Fagius, [ibid., p. 67,] Et tu eris illivs Deus. Nam principes, judices et ma- gistratus dii vocantur in Scriptura, propterea quod Dei judicium in terris exercent, ut Hebrzi loquuntur. See also chap. vii. 1.
ἃ [Inter ministros ejus : nam vox }75 valde generalis est, etsi plerumque per ἀντονομασίαν (nominis adstrictionem) quandam de sacerdotibus usurpatur. Vid. 2 Sam. viii. 19—Grotius in Fs. xcix. 6. Crit. Sacr., ton. iii, p. 532. In his work de Imperio Summ. Po- test. quoted note 1, p. 5, he says, when speaking of the union of the regal and sacerdotal offices in patriarchal times ; ‘haud aliter Moses ad consecratum us-
que Aaronem, unde eum et regem et sacerdotem vocant sacre litere.’—Grot. Opera Theol., tom. iv. p. 208. ]
* avAdpxas, LXX.
Y 8 1732, Cohen On.
* [Paraph. Chald. apud Bibl. Poly- glott. Walton, tom. i. p. 185.]
4 [Vatablus in Gen. xli. 45. says; Doctiores hoe loco principem malunt transferre.—Apud Crit. Sacr., tom. i. p- 911.]
> Lexicon Rabbinicum; in Cohen. (}73, NIN, sacerdos, ut Hebrei j3. Hebrzum autem vocabulum ali- quando late accipitur pro prefectis, toparchis, gubernatoribus politicis, et tune in Targum redditur 83° prin-
ceps. |
CHAP, I.
SECT. Il.
16 A Priest is one who stands between God and man.
curistian sacerdotal, was His minister over them in the Church: as scone one, as a temporal prince, was His vicegerent to transact temporal matters between Him and the people; so the other, as a priest or spiritual prince, was His vicegerent to transact spiritual matters between God and them. They both acted as God’s ministers, though in different spheres, and there- fore saith Grotius of the priest®, Heb. ii. 17, Hrat ejus of- ficium Dei vice apud populum fungi, et populi vice apud Deum, “It was the priest’s office to be in God’s stead to the people, and the people’s stead to God.” I say from this comparison it is plain, that the common notion of a priest is to be a negotiator between God and man in sacred things, as Moses’ was in civil. Aaron was so, after God divided the sacerdotal from the regal office. He was chosen and ap- pointed chief minister in the Jewish Church, as Moses was in the Jewish state, to transact and mediate in all sacred offices betwixt Him and the people: I say he was chosen ; because, as the Apostle observes, no man can take this honour to himself, of standing, mediating, or interceding betwixt God and men in Divine matters, but he that is called of God, as Aaron and his sons were. So Christ our great archetypal High-Priest did not arrogate to Himself the honour of the priestly office, because He was called to it by Ble God, who said unto Him, “Thou art My Son, to-day have I begotten Thee ; Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.” This vicegerency, or mediatory office to transact and minister in sacred matters betwixt God and man, which belongs to the priestly character, as such, is em- phatically set forth by the Hebrew preposition Sip, which signifies, erga, adversus, ‘ towards,’ e regione, ‘over against’, ante, coram, ‘before, ‘in the presence of,’ and with e/ before it, ava μέσον, in terminis, or in medio duorum, ‘in the boun- daries,’ or ‘middle between two, nigh, near;’ and ad ‘to.’ And therefore by the import of onbyn Syn, of which the Apostle’s Greek is but the translation, the priest is the common manager, or minister of sacred affairs betwixt God © (Crit. Saer., tom. vii. Annot. in from among men, is set, or placed for Ep. ad Hebr., p. 932. ] men over against God.” Der werd d Hence in the German version by _ geset3t fiir bie Menschen gegen Gott. [Wit-
M. Luther, Heb. v. 1. is rendered thus: tenberg, 1555. ] “For every high-priest that is taken
σύν
»
This notion of a Priesthood common to Heathens. 17
and the people, over whom, by God’s appointment, he is priest. He is their procurator or proxy, to transact with Him, and His procurator to transact with them. He stands and acts as mediator between both parties, as it were in the middle line of conversation, and in the very centre of com- munication betwixt them. He limits and regulates the in- tercourse on both sides between them, as their common vice- gerent; and in this double relation to the two parties is con- ceived to be as it were posted ‘ between,’ or ‘in the middle’ of them, and ‘over against’ them both. When he speaks to, or acts with the people in God’s name, God is understood to draw nigh unto them; and when he speaks to Him, or for them in their name, and as their orator, they are understood to draw nigh unto Him. A priest, then, properly speaking, is oben by oy, legnam moul haeloim, and pyr Sip Ὁποῦ, leloim moul ha gnam, ‘a person ordained to act for the people God-ward, and for God to the people-ward ;’ i. 6. as learned men are wont to express it, pro hominibus constituitur in iis que erga Deum, pro Deo constituitur in iis que erga homines aguntur. Adstat propter populum coram Deo, et propter Deum coram populo. ‘To express myself about the proper notion of a priest in other words; he is an advocate, mediator, inter- cessor, negotiator, representative, vicegerent, mandatory, in- terpellant; or if there is any other name that will better ex- press the force of the Hebrew and Greek words, or better suit with the honourable character or office of a priest, who by Divine institution is to officiate between God and man, in their spiritual addresses to, and negotiations one with the other.
The heathens themselves had the same common notion of priests and priesthood. “They accounted them as mediators betwixt God and men, being obliged to offer the sacrifices of the people to their gods; and on the other side, ἑρμηνευταὶ mapa θεῶν ἀνθρώποις, deputed by the gods to be their in- terpreters to men, to instruct them how to pray for them- selves, what it was most expedient to ask, what sacrifices, [what vows,] what gifts would be most acceptable to the gods; and, in short, to teach them all the rites and cere- monies in Divine worship.” These are the words of a most learned antiquary®, in the beginning of the third chapter of
© Dr. Potter. [Antiquities of Greece, book ii. c. 3.] ’ HICKES. Cc
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
SECT. III. Christian _ bishops and pres- byters pro- per priests. Exod. 28.1; 29. 1.
18 Ancient Gothic terms for Priesthood.
the second book of his “ Archzeologia Greeca, or the Antiqui- ties of Greece.” Here I am invited to observe how the com- mon notion of priesthood, and the idea of a priest answering to it, were expressed by the pagan Goths, or rather Ger- mans, in words which are formed from their word Gup, which signifieth God, and in the plural is evprn‘, ‘gods.’ Those words are GUDINASSUS, and GUDI, or GuUDA, from whence also the verb cup1Non signifies ‘to do the office of a priest.’ These words were all transferred from the idolatrous use of them to the Christian religion, as may be seen in the Gothic Gospels? ; and according to their notation they sig- nify the ministers and ministry of any god, whatever he be, true or false. No doubt but their religious worship and rites were as various as their gods; but whoever was ap- pointed as a public minister, in the service of any of their gods, he was cunt, his office GupiINAssus, and he was said GUDINON, when he performed Divine service, of what nature soever it was, purely moral without signs or symbols, or mystical, or sacramental, with signs or symbols; both which sorts of Divine offices all religions ever had.
III. Now, Sir, to apply this general notion of a priest, or priesthood, I would fain ask your late writer, if it doth not properly belong to Christian bishops and priests. Are they not taken, or separated from men, as Aaron and his sons were, inob, lecahen, ἱερατεύειν, GUDINON, ministrare, fungi sacerdo- tio; or in the words of our translation, to “‘ minister unto the Lord” in the priestly office? Are they not omnbdsn dy oy, legnam moul haelohim, populo in his que ad Deum pertinent ? ‘ordained for men in things pertaing to God?’ Do they not stand in the presence of God to perform mystical as well as moral offices, and minister in His holy worship for the benefit of the people, and serve before Him, especially at the altar, to make reconciliation for their sms? Are” they not a parte Dei,
f [Rather Gupa. | tium, Lue. i. 9. rnaGl Gudji & [ Quatuor Evangeliorum versionem
sacerdos, Luc. i.
Gothicam (ex celeberrimo codice argen- teo), et Anglo-Saxonicam deprompsit Franciscus Junius. Dordrechti. 1665.
PQ Goth, Johnix. 31. Pad λ Guda, dii, John x. 3. rMna Gl- U jf 2 2 ai 2 Gudjinassus, sacerdo-
5. ΤΠΔΟΛ
Gudja, sacerdos, Mare. xiv. 61; John
xvii 19. PAAGIMRU Guaij-
non, sacerdotali officio fungi, Luc.i. 8. ] 4 Sacerdos in altari vice Christi fun- gitur, et sacrificilum verum et plenum
These Priestly characters in Christian Ministers. 19
‘on God’s part’ to the people? Do they not negotiate their busi- ness with Him? Are they not His vicegerents to them, and their vicegerents to Him; and act between God and them in sacred, as Moses did in civil things? Are they not mediators, intercessors, or procurators betwixt God and man, and, as such, transact and minister in sacred matters between them ? Are they not representatives of both parties, and placed by the nature of their office, as it were Sy Sy, el moul, in terminis, on the frontier of intercourse, or in the middle line of commu- nication between them? Do they not speak to, and act with the people in God’s name, and with God in the name of the people? Is it not their office to initiate them by the mystical washing of baptism, and to offer their sacrifices as well as prayers and praises, and thanksgivings to Him; and to bless them more especially in the more solemn benedictions of their public ministrations, sacramental or not sacramental : of which latter sort are their offices of mere prayer, as also those in and by which they consecrate things or persons to God? And on the other side, are they not deputed and ap- pointed by Him to be His interpreters, and the interpreters of His laws, and will, and pleasure in all things to them? I cannot think that your late writer, upon more mature thoughts, will deny this; and if he will not deny it then he must grant that bishops and presbyters are properly priests, and, like Aaron and his sons, properly ordained in things pertaining to God. I am persuaded, Sir, that no sober man or sound reasoner will deny this proposition, that considers the nature of the several holy offices, that ministers over the Christian Church are ordained to perform under and by the authority of our sovereign High-Priest, the Son of God. Though it would take up a great deal of time to shew this
Deo Patri in passionis Unigeniti sui offert recordationem.—Cyprian. Epist. Ixiii. [The passage is so quoted by Hickes, who appears to have copied it from Grabe’s note on Irenzus, lib. iv. ce. 34, where the same words are given, and the reference is erroneously made to Ep. Ixviii., which error was also copied by Hickes, and has been here cor- rected. The words of St. Cyprian are; 1116 sacerdos vice Christi vere fungitur qui id quod Christus fecit, imitatur; et sacrificium verum et plenum tunc offert
Deo Patri, si sic incipiat offerre, &c.— Epist. lxiii. ad Cecilium, p. 109. ed. Ben. In the same epistle, a few lines below, the words occur; Calicem in commemorationem Domini et passio- nis ejus offerimus; and in Epist. lviii. ad Lucium ; ut altari Dei assistat an- tistes, p. 96. ed. Ben. Grabe seems to have intended to give the substance of St. Cyprian’s statement, supplying words occurring elsewhere to make his meaning clearer. |
c2
CHAP, II.
SECT. ΠῚ.
CHKISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
20 Received definitions of Priests.
out of the more ancient and modern offices of the Church ; yet I would take the pains to prove it from them all, that bishops and presbyters are, truly and properly speaking, sacerdotal ministers of God, and their offices of a sacerdotal nature, but that I think it needless to go about to prove a thing, which will be evident to any man who will but read and consider the several offices of our own Church, and apply the common notion of a priest, and priesthood, as I have explained it out of the Scriptures, and in which, as in the notion of temple and sacrifice, both Jews and heathens did agree. In Julius Pollux! priests are called οἱ τῶν θεῶν θεραπευταὶ, ‘the ministers of the gods;’ and in Suidas ἱερα- τικὴ, ‘the priesthood,’ is according to the Egyptians said to be θεῶν θεραπεία", ‘the ministry, or service of the gods,’ and ‘to be conversant about the immortality of souls, and the things of the other state, and virtue, and vice.’ All which agree to the Christian ministry, and shew it to be a proper priesthood, and the ministers of it to be @eoupyol, ‘ ministers in things that relate to God,’ as Pollux! also calls priests. I hope it will not be much from the purpose, or give offence to any thinking man, if I here set down the expressions which Dionysius Halicarnassensis uses in the second book of his Roman Antiquities", in describing the priests and several sorts of priesthood instituted by King Numa, to see whether the common notion they had of priests, and the priestly office, is applicable to the ministers and ministry of the Christian Church : they are these ; ἱερᾶσθαι", sacerdotio fungi, ‘to execute the priest’s office,’ as in this; " διὰ παντὸς ἱερω- μένοι τοῦ Biov®,’—‘to exercise the priest’s office all their lives long;’ ἱερατεία peyiotns—‘the office of the chief pontiff,
! Julii Pollucis Onomasticon, lib. i. cap. 1. segm. 24. [ὀνόματα τῶν θεοὺς θεραπευόντων" of δὲ τῶν θεῶν θεραπευ-
περὶ ταῦτα πραγματεύεσθαι, περὶ ἀθα- νασίας ψυχῶν, ὅτι κατὰ τὰ αὐτὰ καὶ Αἰγυπτίοις φιλοσοφεῖται: τῶν δὲ ἐν
ταὶ, ἱερεῖς, θύται, τελεσταὶ ... ὑπηρέται, Geouvpyol.—tom. i. p. 6. ed. Dind. |
* [ἱερατικὴ is said by Suidas to be θεῶν θεραπεία, not “among the Egyp- tians,’’ but simply. ‘The passage is one in which ἱερατικὴ and φιλοσοφία are contrasted, as holding correspond- ing positions among the Greeks and the Egyptians. τὴν δὲ ἱερατικὴν, ἥ ἐστι θεῶν θεραπεία, ἐντεῦθέν ποθεν ἀπὸ τῶν περικοσμίων αἰτιῶν ἄρχεσθαι, καὶ
ἅδου μυρίων λήξεων παντοίων πρὸς ape- τὴν καὶ κακίαν ἀφωρισμένων, τῶν τε περὶ τὸν βίον μεταβολῶν μυρίων.
Αἰγύπτιοι δὲ ταῦτά εἰσιν οἱ πρῶτον φι- λοσοφοῦντες. Suidas in νοῦ. ἱερατική.)
! [See note ἃ.]
m [Dionys. Halic. Antiq. Roman., lib. ii, ο. 72. Op., tom. i. p. 389. Reiske. Lips. 1774. ]
ns Lbids;(c..72. p. 089.1]
° [Ibid., c. 73. p. 393.]
Descriptions of their office by Dionysius Halicarn. 21
or priest ; τελευταῖος 8 ἣν τῆς Nowa παρατάξεως μερισ- μὸς ὑπὲρ τῶν ἱερῶν, ὃν ἔλαχον οἱ τὴν μεγίστην [παρὰ ‘Pwo- μαίοις] ἱερατείαν καὶ ἐξουσίαν Eyovres—“ the last part of Numza’s institutions about sacred things, was that which was allotted to them who had the chief priesthood and power ;”— μία τῶν ἱερουργιῶν dSudta~vs?—“ the first order of the holy ministries ; --οὗτοι τεταγμένας τινὰς ἱερουργίας ἐπετέλουν —‘these performed certain appointed holy ministrations ;”— ὑπ᾽ ἀνδρὸς οὐκ ἀπείρου τῆς περὶ τὰ θεῖα copias'—“< from a man not ignorant of Divine matters,” ΟΥ̓“ mysteries ;” παρθένων τὰς θεραπείας κατεστήσατο τῇ Oes*—<he or- dained virgins to be ministers (or priestesses) to the god- dess ;’—ai δὲ θεραπεύουσαι τὴν θεὸν παρθένοι τέτταρες μεν ἦσαν κατ᾽ apxyast—the virgins, which at first were ministers (or priestesses) to the goddess, were but four ;”,— διὰ πλῆθος τῶν ἱερουργιῶν ἃς ἐπιτελοῦσιν — “through the multitude of the holy offices which they perform ;’— Ths οὐχ ὁσίως ὑπηρετούσης τοῖς ‘epois*—*< of the priestess who did not minister aright in holy things ;’—» περὶ ra θεῖα νομοθεσίαν .----““ an institution of things pertaining to God,” or “ Divine matters ;” ἱερὰς δίκας ἁπάσας ἰδιώταις τὲ καὶ ἄρχουσι καὶ NEeLTOUpyots θεῶν... τάς τε ἀρχὰς ἀπάσας- ὅσαις θυσία τε καὶ θεραπεία ἀνάκειται, καὶ τοὺς ἱερεῖς ἅπαντας ἐξετάζουσιν--““ the chief pontiffs have cognizance of all causes relating to holy matters, both among private men and magistrates and the ministers (or priests) of the gods....and they examine all magis- trates to whose care sacrifice and the worship of the gods is committed, and all priests whatsoever ;’—7roAdovs δὲ βω- μοὺς καὶ ναοὺς idpvopevos, ἑορτάς τε ἑκάστῳ αὐτῶν ἀπονέ-
\ \ / - \ καὶ yap δικάζουσιν οὗτοι Tas
μων, καὶ τοὺς ἐπιμελησομένους αὐτῶν ἱερεῖς καθιστάς"--- “he (Numa) built many altars and temples, and appointed several festival days for every one of them, and ordained priests, who were to take care of them ;᾽ --περιλαβὼν δὲ ἅπασαν τὴν περὶ τὰ θεῖα νομοθεσίαν γραφαῖς, διεῖλεν
P [Dionys. &c., c. 64. p. 371.] u [Tbid.]
a [Ibid., p. 372.] x [Ibid., p. 380.]
r [Ibid., c. 65. p. 374. ] Y [Ibid., c. 63. p. 371.]
s [Ibid., p. 375.] z ae c. 73. p. 394 ἢ
t [Ibid., c. 67. p. 378.] « [Ibid., c. 63. p. 369.]
CHAP. Il.
SECT. IIL.
22 All these descriptions apply to Christian Ministers.
CHRISTIAN εἰς ὀκτὼ wolpas*—“farthermore (Numa) having committed PRIEST- . . . . ee aD noop. his whole institution about matters of religion to writing,
he divided them into eight parts ;”—rols δὲ ἰδιώταις, ὁπόσοι
μὴ ἴσασι τοὺς περὶ τά θεῖα ἢ δαιμόνια ceBacpods, ἐξηγηταὶ γίνονται καὶ προφῆται" ----“ they are the expositors and inter- preters of matters of religion to the people who are ignorant of them‘;” περὶ οὖν τῶν ἱερέων τῶνδε, εἴτε βούλεταί τις αὐτοὺς ἱεροδιδασκάλους καλεῖν, εἴτε ἱερονόμους, εἴτε ἱεροφύ- λακας, εἴτε, ὡς ἡμεῖς ἀξιοῦμεν, ἱεροφάντας, ody’ ἁμαρτήσε- Tat τοῦ ἀληθοῦς"---““ wherefore as to these priests, (under- standing the chief pontiffs,) if a man will call them teachers of holy things, or administrators of holy things, or keepers and curators of holy things, or, as I think, the chief masters in teaching holy things, he will not err from the truth.”
Sir, I think I have omitted no word or expression by which my author describes the priestly office, but θυηπόλο-“, which Pollux reckons among the poetical names for a priest & ; and according to the notation of that word, it signifies one conversant or employed about offerings and sacrifices", as I shall hereafter shew the ministers of the Church are. But in the mean time let me ask your late writer, whether the terms of my author are not in propriety applicable to the Christian ministry? Is it not properly ἱερουργία and θερα- mela τοῦ Θεοῦ, or λειτουργία τοῦ Θεοῦ, and περὶ τὰ θεία νομοθεσία And are we not, properly speaking, ἱερωμένοι, who may properly be said, when we minister in our holy offices sacramental, or not sacramental, and with or without holy rites, ἱερᾶσθαι; or ἱερατεύειν ἢ Are we not ἱερουργοὶ, and θεραπεύοντες τῷ Θεῷ; in propriety of speech, and ὑπηρέται τοῦ Θεοῦ, or ὑπηρετοῦντες TO Oecd? Are we not τῶν ἱερῶν
> [Ibid.]
¢ [Ibid., c. 73. p. 394.]
4 So in Plutarch’s Life of Numa. ὃ δὲ μέγιστος τῶν ποντιφίκων, οἷον ἐξη- γητοῦ καὶ προφήτου, μᾶλλον δὲ ἱεροφάν- του τάξιν ἐπέχει, οὐ μόνον τῶν δημοσίᾳ δρωμένων ἐπιμελούμενος, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς ἱδίᾳ θύοντας ἐπισκοπῶν, καὶ κωλύων παρ- εκβαίνειν τὰ νενομισμένα, καὶ, διδάσκων ὅτου τις δέοιτο πρὸς Θεῶν τιμὴν ἢ παρ- αίτησιν.---ἰ ο. 9. Op., tom. i. p. 262. Lips. 1774. |
© (Ibid.]
' [Ibid., c. 67. p. 379. θυηπολούσας τε καὶ τὰ ἄλλα θρησκευούσας κατὰ νό-
μον.
& [Onomast., lib. i. cap. 1. segm. 14. (the continuation of the passage quoted in note i, p. 20.) ποιητικώτερον γὰρ τὸ OunwdéAos.—tom. i. p. 7. ]
2 θνηπόλος. ὃ ἱερεὺς, ὃ περὶ τὰς θυ- σίας πολῶν, καὶ ἀναστρεφόμενος. Pha- vorinus. 6 περὶ τὰς θυσίας ἀναστρε- φόμενος ἱερεύς. Hesychius. 6 θύων, 6 ἱερεύς. Suidas.
θυηπολοῦσι. περιπολοῦσι, διὰ θυσιῶν ὑπισχνούμενοι θεοὺς ἐξιλάσκεσθαι.--- Suidas and Phavorinus. [ Hickes quoted the passage as περὶ τὰ ἵερα πολοῦσαι.]}
If so, the name Priest properly belongs to them. 23
ἐπιμελοῦντες ? and in full propriety of speech τῶν ἱερῶν ἐξηγηταὶ καὶ προφῆται, “teachers, and interpreters of holy things?” Is not the episcopal office μεγίστη ἱερατεία ἢ and may it not be properly said of our bishops, that ὑπὲρ τῶν ἱερῶν ἔχουσι τὴν μεγίστην ἐξουσίαν; or that τὰς ἱερὰς δίκας ἁπάσας δικάζουσιν, or that they have power, τοὺς ἱερεῖς ἅπαντας ἐξετάζειν Ὁ are not they principally, and their pres- byters under them, ἱεροδιδάσκαλοι, ἱερονόμοι, ἱεροφύλακες. and ἱεροφάνται ὃ And is not their office περὶ τὰ ἱερὰ, or περὶ τὰ θεῖα πολεῖν, “ to be conversant about holy and Divine things?” Or is it not as St. Cyprian speaks', divinis rebus et spiritalibus occupari,—operationibus divinis insistere,— celestibus rebus et spiritalibus servire: “to be employed in Divine and spiritual matters,—to apply themselves wholly to Divine ministrations,—and to devote themselves to heavenly and spiritual things?” How like are my heathen author’s descriptions of priests and priesthood to those of this holy father; and if they are properly applicable to Christian ministers and their ministry, as I think they are, then, I hope, Sir, we have a good title to the priesthood, and without the help of a metaphor, may be dignified with the holy and honourable name of priests. If these descriptions belong to our holy office, the thing described by them must belong to us, according to this maxim in logic; Cui convenit definitio, et eidem convenit definitum. Your late writer may undervalue the name and character of priest, and put it as far as he will from himself, but I value it to the highest degree ; and I speak it to God’s honour, I had rather be the poor deprived priest that I am, with all the hatred, and con- tempt, and persecution that now attends the Christian priest- hood in this most irreligious age, than be premier, or pleni- potentiary to the greatest monarch, or the most victorious conqueror in the world. The Hebrew word j75, cohen, which, in relation to God, all translations render ‘priests,’ signifies primarily a ‘minister,’ ὑπηρέτης θεοῦ, as Pollux also calls a priest™, and it is a verbal noun derived from the verb ;n> cihen,
i S. Cypr., Epist. i, [ed. Oxon., k [Jul. Poll. Onomast., lib. i, cap. Epist. Ixvi. p. 114. ed. Ben. See the 1. segm. 14, among the titles of priests. passage quoted at length, Pref. Dise., See note i, p. 20. Dindorf reads iw 7- vol. i. p. 95, note y. | ρέται simply, others ὑπηρέται θεοῦ.
CHAP. II.
SECT, UI.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Heb. 8. 2. 1 Cor. 9. 13.
24 Argument from λειτουργὸς, λειτουργεῖν, λειτουργία;
which signifies λειτουργεῖν, ‘to minister';’ and as λειτουργὸς, when it relates to God and sacred matters, signifies a ‘priest,’ or minister of the Church, so when it relates to the king, as I observed before, it signifies a ‘ prince,’ or minister of state. From which notation of the word it follows, that bishops and presbyters, as ministers of God, and employed in His service, are cohens, or ‘priests; or as Philo describes the Jewish priests, they are οἱ ἀμφὶ τὸ ἱερὸν ὑπηρέται, Kal NecToupyol™, ‘servants and ministers of God, to perform holy offices in His temple ;’ or as the Apostle speaks, τῶν ἁγίων λειτουργοὶ; ‘ministers of the sanctuary, or holy things ;’ ἱερὰ ἐργαζόμενοι, ‘ministers about holy things ; τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ προσεδρεύον- τες, ‘waiters at the altar,’ or the same to the one true God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, what Plutarch saith that the priests of the Gentiles were to their idols, ἱερεῖς» θεῶν λειτουργοὶ; ‘priests are the ministers or liturgs of the gods"? So Acts xi. 2, Barnabas and Paul’s ministering to the Lord by fasting and prayer, is thus expressed, λευτουρ- γούντων αὐτῶν τῷ Κυρίῳ. In which place, as well as in Heb. vill. 2, [τῶν ἁγίων Nectoupyos, | had the holy writers written in Hebrew, I doubt not but they would have expressed themselves by jn cohen and 1Π5 cihen; for what is expressed ‘the priest’s office,’ Luke i. 8, 9, by ἐν τῷ ἱερατεύειν, and ἱερατεία, is ex- pressed by Xevtoupy/a, ‘ministry,’ in the twenty-third verse, and therefore the ministers of God and Christ, by all an- alogy, must be sacerdotal ministers, λειτουργοὶ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χρισ- Tov, cohens, or ‘ministers of Jesus Christ,’ as St. Paul calls himself, Rom. xv. 16. Hence the words, λειτουργεῖν. λει-
' [The verb 713, only found in Pi- hel, (LXX. λειτουργεῖν, ἱερατεύειν,) is never used, as Hickes’ words might seem to imply, in the simple sense of ‘ministering.’ It is however by Fiirst derived from the root })3, and so would mean ‘ parare, apparare, adornare, mi- nistrare.’ See his Concordant. Hebr., p. 544. For this connection there are analogies; see Gesenius, Lex. Hebr., ad lit. 9. Furst interprets the noun a3 “minister Dei, tanquam adpari- or; sacerdos ;” but considers the use of the word for ‘a prince,’ (see above, p- 15,) to be derived from the notion of dignity connected with the sacerdo- tal office, Gesenius and others derive
}75 from a root found in Arabic meaning ‘to divine,’’ and thence hay- ing the sense of intercession and me- diation. |
m [τοῖς ἀμφὶ τὸ ἵερον ὑπηρέταις καὶ λειτουργοῖς χαρίζεσθαι, x. τ. A.A—Philo. Jud. de Sacerdot. Premiis, Op., tom. ii. p. 236.]
« [The passage referred to seems to be, ἀλλ᾽, οἷς δίκαιόν ἐστι ταῦτα λειτουρ- γοῖς θεῶν ἀνατιθέντες, ὥσπερ ὑπηρέταις καὶ γραμματεῦσι, δαίμονας νομίζωμεν, ἐπισκόπους θεῶν ἱερῶν καὶ μυστηρίων opy:aords.—Plutarch. de Oraculerum Defectu, tom. vii. p. 641, Lips. 1774; but it is the δαίμονες who are spoken of as λειτουργοὶ θεῶν.
as applied in Scripture and Ecclesiastical writers. — 25
toupyla, λειτουργὸς, came in ecclesiastical writers to be ap- propriated to the service of God, and priestly ministration of holy things, as in Canon IV. Concil. Antioch.°, εἰ tis ἐπέσκο- mos, &c. ‘If any bishop deposed by the synod, or priest or deacon deprived by the bishop, presume to do any liturgical act, τολμήσειέν Te πρᾶξαι THs λειτουργίας, he shall not be restored.” Balsamon on the place paraphraseth the words in this expression, ἱερατικόν Tu ἐνεργήσασθαι, “to do any part of the priestly officeP;” and Zonaras upon the same canon saith that λευτουργία in this place does not only sig- nify τὴν ἱερουργίαν Kai τὴν τελετὴν τῆς ἀναιμάκτου θυσίας μόνην, “not only the performance of Divine services, and the celebration of the unbloody sacrifice” of the Eucharist, ἀλλ᾽ ἅπαν ἀρχιερατικὸν δίκαιον, “but all the functions of the chief-priest’.” The new covenant is better than the old, and the house of Christ much more excellent than that of Moses, inasmuch as the Christian is the full improvement and perfection of the Mosaic religion and worship, and there- fore it would be strange if either the liturgical ministrations of the Christian worship for men, should be less holy, or per- tain less to God for them than those of the Jewish Church ; or the Christian liturgs, or ministers, should either not at all be priests, or priests in a less proper sense than those of the Levitical order and institution, who were ministers by fire and immolation under the first testament. What is there in the notation of ἱερεὺς, or sacerdos', that doth not properly belong to the Christian ministers? they only denote holy ministers, or ministers of holy things; ministers of God for the people in holy offices, and employments, whatever those offices be, ministers of Divine rites and services for men, of
what kind soever those rights and services be.
° [The council was held A.D. 341. Canon iv. is, εἴ τις ἐπίσκοπος ὑπὸ συνό- δου καθαιρεθεὶς, ἢ πρεσβύτερος ἢ διάκο- νος ὑπὸ τοῦ ἰδίου ἐπισκόπου, τολμήσειέν τι πρᾶξαι τῆς λειτουργίας. . . μήκετι ἐξὸν εἶναι αὐτῷ, μήδ᾽ ἐν ἑτέρῳ συνόδῳ ἔλπιδα ἀποκαταστάσεως, μήτε ἄπολο- γίας χώραν éxew.—Concil., tom. ii. p. 588, C. et apud Beveregii Pandect., tom. i. p. 434, A, B.]
P [ἐνεργοῦντας, ἐνεργήσαντας iepa- Tikoy τι, repeatedly.— Balsamon, Schol.
For as there
apud Beveregii Pandect., ibid., C, D:]
4 [λειτουργίαν ἐνταῦθα ov τὴν tepoup- γίαν καὶ τὴν τελετὴν τῆς ἀναιμάκτου θυσίας φησὶ μόνην, GAN ἅπαν ἄρχιερα- τικὸν δίκαιον.---- Ζοπαταβ, ibid., F. |
r Sacer, cra, um; quicquid ad reli- gionem pertinet. Sacerdos; a sacer; qui sacris preest, et ea administrat, “ quasi sacra dans.’’—[The last words are quoted from the Origines of St. Isidore Hispalensis, lib. vii. cap. 12. § 17. Op., tom. iii. p. 341.]
CHAP, 11.
SECT. III.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
SECT. IV.
Of the se-
veral sorts of priest- hood.
26 Instances of Priesthood without Sacrifices ;
have been different Churches and religions, so there have been different rites and services in them, and yet the minis- ters of those different holy rites and services for the people to their God, have all been counted priests, as agreeing in the common notion of priesthood, which is the function or office of a person separated, or taken from men, and or- dained πρὸς τὸ ἱερουργεῖν, or, θεουργεῖν, as human authors speak, to minister for the people in holy services pertaining to God.
IV. Wherefore, as there are several sorts of religions, so there are several sorts of priesthood, as among the heathens‘, whose sacrifices and priests, or ministers of holy rites, were as different as the deities and rites themselves. Some were men, and some women; some of their services were more simple, and some more ceremonious; some sacrificed by blood, and slaughter, and burning, and some not; some used rites and ceremonies of this kind in sacrificing, and some of that: the ancient Persianst had no temples, nor statues, nor altars, and in sacrificing to their gods they never used fire or libations, or the mola salsa made of meal and salt, or music, or pontifical mitres, and yet the ministers of their gods were as proper priests as those of the Romans and Grecians, who used all these things. Nay, “the Ro- mans, for a hundred and seventy years after Numa, though they built temples, yet they had no sort of images to repre- sent their gods, being taught by that great king, lawgiver, and priest, that there could be no representation of God, who was invisible and incorruptible, but His idea in the mind of man.” In that period also their sacrifices were simple “ Pythagorean, and unbloody oblations,” as Plutarch tells us in the life of Numa", whither I refer you. The
5. Jam sacrorum ritus, statasque et solemnes caremonias non est quod a me quisquam expectet. Itaque nec que cuique Deo grate decoreque essent hostiz, nec cui maribus, cui fceminis, cui majoribus, cui lactentibus immolaretur, dicam. Nec farciminum, liborum, et pultium, vel vasorum, qui- bus in sacris locus erat, nomina, et genera recensebo, nec denique quo or- dine, rituque res divine fierent, expli- cabo.—Brisson. de Formul., lib. i. p. 32. See also Dr. Potter’s Antiquities
of Greece, book ii. cap. 3.
' [Πέρσας δὲ ofda νόμοισι τοῖσδε χρεωμένους᾽ ἀγάλματα μὲν καὶ νηοὺς καὶ βωμοὺς οὐκ ἐν νόμῳ ποιευμένους ἰδρύεσθαι ... οὔτε βωμοὺς ποιεῦνται, οὔτε πῦρ ἀνακαίουσι, μέλλοντες θυειν" ov σπονδῇ χρέωνται, οὐκὶ αὐλῷ, οὐ στεμ- μασι, οὐκὶ οὐλῇσι. |—Herodot., lib. i. cap. 180. 132.
u p. 65. edit. Lutetiz. 1624. [οὔτε γὰρ ἐκεῖνος αἰσθητὸν, ἢ παθητὸν, adpa- τον δὲ καὶ ἀκήρατον καὶ νοητὸν ὑπελάμ- βανεν εἶναι τὸ πρῶτον, καὶ οὗτος διεκώ-
among the Persians, ancient Romans, Mahometans. 27
Mahometans have no bloody sacrifices, or altars for them, cnav. τι.
but at Mecca*, and offer them but once in the year; yet they
look upon the ministers of their religion separated from the people in all other places, as proper priests as those of
Mecca.
For expiation, atonement, or propitiating an
offended deityy, or otherwise procuring his favour and
λυσεν ἀνθρωποειδῆ καὶ ζωόμορφον εἰκόνα θεοῦ Ῥωμαίους νομίζειν. οὐδ᾽ ἣν παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς οὔτε γραπτὸν, οὔτε πλαστὸν εἶδος θεοῦ πρότερον, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ἑκατὸν ἑβδομή- κοντα τοῖς πρώτοις ἔτεσι ναοὺς μὲν οἰκο- δομούμενοι, καὶ καλιάδας ἱερὰς ἱρῶντες, ἄγαλμα δ᾽ οὐδὲν ἔμμορφον ποιούμενοι διετέλουν᾽ ὡς οὔτε ὅσιον ἀφομοιοῦν τὰ βελτίονα τοῖς χείροσιν, οὔτ᾽ ἐφάπτεσθαι θεοῦ δύνατον ἄλλως ἢ νοήσει. κομιδῇ δὲ καὶ τὰ τῶν θυσιῶν ἔχεται τῆς Πυ- θαγορικῆς ἁγιστείας" ἀναίμακτοι γὰρ ἦσαν, αἵ γε πολλαὶ δι’ ἀλφίτου καὶ σπονδῆς καὶ τῶν εὐτελεστάτων πεποι- nuevar.—Plutarch. Vit. Nume, c. 8. Op., tom. i. pp. 258, 259. Lips. 1774. ]
* Herbelot’s Biblioth. Orientale, in the word ‘adhha.’ ‘‘‘ Adbha,’ a reli- gious feast of the Mussulmans, which they celebrate on the tenth day of the month, which they call ‘ dhoulheciat,’ which is the twelfth and last month of their year. This month being parti- cularly set apart for the ceremonies which the pilgrims observe at Mecca, takes its name from thence, for it sig- nifies the month of pilgrimage. They solemnly sacrifice on that day a sheep at Mecca, and no where else; and it is called by the name of the feast, which the Turks commonly call the grand Beiram, to distinguish it from the little feast of that name, with which they conclude their fast, and which the Christians of the Levant call the pasque, or Easter of the Turks. This feast is also called Jaum al Corban, that is, the day of sacrifices and vic- tims. For every pilgrim on that day may offer as many sheep as he will, and every one of these sacrifices hath the name of ‘dhahiat.’ The Mussul- mans go out of Mecca unto a valley called Mina or Muna, to solemnize this feast, and there sometimes they sacrifice a camel. The books which treat of the ceremonies of this sacrifice, which is the only one the Mahometans have, have the title of Manasseck.”’— {p. 62. Paris. 1697. ]
y Heb. ii. 17, ‘‘ That He might be a merciful and faithful High-Priest, to make reconciliation for the sins of the
people.”? Ch. vi. 1, “‘ Every high-priest, taken from among men, is ordained for men, in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacri- fices for sins.’’ 3rd verse, ‘‘ He ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins.’”’ Lev.i. 4, ‘‘ He shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt- offering, and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.’’ So” in chap. iv. 20, 26, ‘‘The priest shall make atonement for them.’’ And chap. v. 6, ‘‘ He shall bring his trespass-offer- ing unto the Lord, and the priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his sin.’’ So in the 10th, 13th, 16th, and 18th verses of the same chapter, and the 7th verse of the sixth, ‘‘ The priest shall make an atonement for him be- fore the Lord, and it shall be forgiven him.”? So Numb. xvi. 46, sqq., ‘‘ Moses said unto Aaron, Take a censer, and put fire therein from off the altar, and put on incense, and go quickly unto the congregation, and make an atonement for them. And Aaron took as Moses commanded, and ran into the midst of the congregation, and behold the plague was begun among the people, and he put on incense, and made atonement for the people, and he stood between the dead and the living, and the plague was stayed.”
Brisson. de Formul, p. 28. Litare enim Macrobius explicat, [Saturnal. ] lib. iii. cap. 5, ‘ Sacrificio facto placare numen.’ Unde et ‘litationem propitia- tionis’ idem dixit. In Somn. Scipion., lib. i. cap. 7. Nonius etiam Mar- cellus inter litare, et sacrificare hoc in- teresse tradit, quod ‘sacrificare sit ve- niam petere, litare vero propitiare, et votum impetrare.’ [De differentiis verborum, p. 424. Paris. 1614.] Virg. fEneid, lib. iv. 50.
Tu modo posce Deos veniam, sacris-
que litatis
Indulge hospitio—
Ubi Servius, ‘ diis litatis debuit dicere, non enim sacra, sed Deos sacris lita- mus, i. 6. placamus.’ [Servius’ words are, ‘nove dictum; nam Deos litamus, non sacra.’ |
SECT. IV.
28 Sacrifice not essential to Priesthood,
CHRISTIAN PRIEST~ HOOD.
good-will# being the end of all material offerings and sacri- fices in priestly ministrations, as you may see in the margin ; it must follow, that if the true God is pleased to supersede or take away the use of them, and be as effectually propi- tiated when He is offended, or otherwise made favourable by holy ministrations without them, as before with them, then I say it must follow that the liturgs or ministers, whose office it is to make expiation and atonement for their own sins, or for the sins of the people, or otherwise to procure the Divine favour, without gifts and sacrifices, must be as true and proper ministers of atonement and procuring the favour and blessings of God, as the priests who did the same thing with offerings and sacrifices, and, by consequence, be true priests; because in the same manner as priests they are “taken from the people, and ordained for them in things per- taining to God ;” that by prayers, supplications, intercessions, and praises, and thanks, which they offer up to Him, accord- ing to His own appointment, without sacrifice or sacrificial rites, they may reconcile God, and make atonement for their own and the people’s sins, or otherwise procure His favour and blessings to themselves and them. For gifts and sacri- fices, i. 6. ‘offerings of inanimate things and of animals?,’ or offerings without or with slaughter, were both of an hono- rary nature”; for as it was thought dishonourable to their
* Asin peace-offerings, whether they were sacrifices of thanksgiving or free- will offerings upon vows: all which in the Scripture phrase are also said to be ‘*a sweet savour unto the Lord,”’ [ Lev. i. 9, &c.,] or that He “ hath re- spect unto them,” [ Gen. iv. 4, 5,] aud that He “‘accepts them,” [Ps. xx. 3,] which are all terms to signify that God is pleased with them.
* Diodati upon Hebr. v. 1. Offerte. Questa parola, posta in differenza de’ sacrificii, significa l’offerte delle cose inanimate. [La Sacra Biblia tradotta in lingua Italica da Giovanni Diodati. Geneva, 1641.] Jac. Cappellus; ‘Con- stituitur Pontifex, ut offerat dona rerum inanimatarum pro peccatis, et sacri- ficia rerum animatarum.’ [Crit. Saer., tom. vii. p. 974.] Grotius; ἵνα προσ- φέρῃ δῶρά τε καὶ θυσίας ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν. Explicat generalitatem per species quasdam; [i. 6. by the addition of
ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν) δῶρα, (dona,) D933); (oblationes) est generale, sed eximie dicitur de holocaustis, ut videre est Lev. i. 2. θυσία (sacrificium) item satis generale. Comprehendit enim et AMID (oblationem e simila), sed cum hie ad- datur ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν (pro peccatis) in- telligendum DW delictum in commit- tendo; de quo Levit. iv. ὃ, sqq.’—Ibid., p- 979. Grotius, it seems, does not (as Hickes’ referring to him might imply) identify δῶρα and θυσίαι re- spectively with inanimate and animate sacrifices: but considers each a general term, including both kinds of offering. ]
» Brisson. de Formul., lib. i. pp. 29, 30. [Atque hujusmodi sacrificiis, et tam hostiarum cede, quam ture et vino dato, honor Diis haberi dicebatur. He then gives numerous instances of the use of ‘honor,’ ‘honorare,’ in this sense. ]
if the use of it is superseded. 29
kings to make solemn approaches to them without presents, especially when they were to ask or expect favour, so was it counted dishonourable to God to come empty handed to wait upon Him in solemn worship, as it is written, “none shall
ς 79
appear before Me empty‘°;
and therefore the true God, as
well as the false deities, was supposed to be appeased, pleased or gratified with the honour of gifts, when those who brought them were duly purified, especially with virtuous and holy minds, which the pagan, as well as Jews and Christians,
¢ Exod. xxiii. 15; Deut. xvi. 16. So Ecclesiasticus xxxv. 4, ‘* Thou shalt not appear empty before the Lord, for all these things are to be done because of the commandment. The offering of the righteous maketh the altar fat, and the sweet savour thereof is before the Most High. The sacrifice of a just man is acceptable, and the memorial thereof shall never be forgotten. Give the Lord His honour with a good eye, and diminish not the first-fruits of thine hands. In all thy gifts shew a cheer- ful countenance, and dedicate thy tithes with gladness.”
4 So commentators interpret these verses of Menander, εἶτ᾽ od’, &c., pre- served in Athenzus, lib. iv. p. 146. [Lugd. 1657.
εἶτ᾽ οὐχ ὕμοιας πράττομεν καὶ θύομεν ;
ὕπου γε τοῖς θεοῖς μὲν ἠἡγορασμένον
δραχμῶν ἄγω προβάτιον ἀγαπητὸν δέκα,
αὐλητρίδας δὲ καὶ μύρον καὶ ψαλτρίας
ταύτας, * Θάσιον, ἐγχέλεις, τυρὸν, μέλι"
μικροῦ ταλάντου γίγνεται τὸ κατὰ λόγον.
Atheneus ex recension. G. Dindorf., tom. li. p. 73. Lips. 1827.] See Per- sius, Satyr. 11. v. 63—75. [At vos Dicite, pontifices, in sacro quid facit aurum ? Nempe hoc quod Veneri donate ἃ virgine puppe. Quin damus id superis, de magno quod dare lance Non possit magni Messale lippa propago, Compositum jus fasque animo, sanc- tosque recessus Mentis et incoctum generoso pectus honesto. Hee cedo ut admoveam templis et farre litabo. | Tsaiah lvii. 15; Psalm li. 17; xxxiv. 18; exxxviii. 6; Isaiah 1. 10; lxvi. 2;
Jeremiah vii. 9, 21—23. Sacrificia omnia non dignitate rei oblate, sed offerentis animo estimantur. Grot. Consult. Cass., Art. xxiv. [The ex- tract is made from ‘ Georgii Cassandri de articulis Religionis inter Catholicos et Protestantes controversis Consultatio, Art. xxiv. De Missa.’ apud Grotii Opera, tom. iv. p. 607. Grotius’ comment on it is; De sacrificio corporis et sanguinis Christi. Recte dici in actione Eucharis- tica corpus et sanguinem Domini, sive ipsam Domini passionem a nobis offerri supra diximus ad Art. x.; unde et propi- tiatorium sacrificium recte dicitur, si- quidem Christi sanguis propitiatio est pro mundi peceatis. Accedit quod qui criminum sibi conscii sunt, non nisi per pcenitentiam piati accedunt, et sic ipsam suam peenitentiam et pcenitentiz opera, quz et ipsa, ex visacrificii gene- ralis, sacrificia sunt propitiatoria Novi Feederis, Deo offerunt.—Grotii anno- tata in Consult. Cass. ibid., p. 626. ] So in the Morals of Confucius we are told that ‘though the Chinese offered sacrifice, and worshipped God with extraordinary pomp and magnificence, yet they taught that all this external worship was not acceptable to the Divinity, if the soul was not inwardly adorned with piety or virtue.’ { Non aliis quam suprema majestate dignis honori- bus et sacrificiis, non alio magis quam virtutum et recti animi cultu colendum tam verbis docuerunt, quam factis et exemplis; ut nihil hic dicam de ex- terno quoque apparatu, gravitate, mo- destia, continentia, abstinentia, decore et ornatu; sic tamen ut negarent omnem hune cultum exteriorem placere ccelo posse, quando cultu animi virtuteque interna non esset imbutus.—Confucius Sinarum Philosophus, sive scientia Si- nensis Latine exposita. Procem. Declar. pp. Ixxxiii, Ixxxiv. fol. Paris. 1687. ] Which shews how weakly they argue against the Eucharistical sacrifice, who
CHAP, IL.
SECT. IV.
950. Jews in the Captivily had Priests without Sacrifices.
counted and called the chief or only sacrifices, without which no gifts or external material sacrifices could be acceptable to any God, true or false, and that those alone would be ac- cepted when these could not be had. Wherefore if we may suppose any deity to discharge his worshippers for any time, or altogether, of those offerings, and to order his priests to offer up prayers, and supplications, and thanksgivings, and praises without them, his priests would nevertheless remain proper priests still, and their ministrations, though stripped of all sacrificial solemnities, would yet be sacerdotal, that is to say, of as holy a nature, and as much pertaining to that god and his honour, and as acceptable to him, and of as much force to atone him, as when they were solemnized with gifts and sacrifices, and he was honoured and adored with them as holy rites. Thus in the seventy years of cap- tivity, when the Jews had neither temple nor altar, nor sacrifice of any sort, yet their priests remained proper priests, and their ministrations, by solemn prayers, and sup- plications, and confessions, were of the same sacerdotal, holy, and honorary atoning nature as when they minis- tered at the altar, and filled the courts of the temple with the nidors of their offerings, as it is in the apocryphal prayer of Azarias*: “O Lord, we ate become less than any nation, and are kept under this day in all the world, because of our sins. Neither is there at this time prince, or prophet, or leader, or burnt-offering, or sacrifice, or oblation, or incense, or place to sacrifice before Thee, and to find mercy. Never- theless, in a contrite heart and humble spirit let us be ac- cepted. Like as in the burnt-offering of rams and bullocks, and like as in ten thousand of fat lambs, so let our sacrifice” (of penitential prayer and confession, and deprecation) “be in Thy sight this day.” Thus if their captivity and line of priestly succession had continued to this day they would have been proper priests still, and their worship sacerdotal worship, though without sacrifice or altar, and acceptable
CHRISTIAN PRIEST= HOOD.
say that under the Gospel dispensation instead of an external material sacrifice the spiritual sacrifices of the mind are only to be offered to God, against the most express testimonies of the fathers for that sacrifice, because they prefer the living sacrifice of ourselves, and of
a contrite heart to it, as Jewish and heathen writers do, calling it the chief or only sacrifice which God requires. See the note in pp. 91, 92, of the Pre- fatory Answer; |[ vol. i. ]
e [The Song of the Three Holy Children, ν. 14—17.]
What is essential to a Priesthood. Si
to God without their sacrifices and sacrificial rites. In lke manner, upon supposition that the Christian religion hath neither altar nor sacrifice, as some few writers rashly main- tain, yet the ministers of it, as I have already shewed from the general notion of priesthood, are proper priests or sacerdotal ministers, and their solemn ministrations of as holy, hie- ratical, acceptable, and atoning a nature, as those of the Jews were, and as much pertaining to God, and as powerful to procure His favour and protection, and blessings of all sorts. Christ Himself, our eternal High-Priest in heaven, hath made intercession for His Church and the faithful mem- bers of it, ever since He entered into the holy place, without any sacrifice, only by presenting that before the Father which He offered up once for all upon the cross. This shews that the priest’s office doth not consist only in offering sa- crifices, but that it may be executed when and where there are no more oblations appointed to be offered; and so at all times and in all places where sacrifice is no part of the wor- ship or service of God. Wherefore it was not sacrifices, or power to offer them, which alone made the Jewish ministers priests, but other holy performances pertaining to God for which they were ordained, and the ministering in which, as well as sacrificing, belonged to their priestly office ; and there- fore, though it be certain there can be no sacrifice, or sacri- ficing, without priests ordinary or extraordinary, yet it is as certain there may be priests without offerings or sacrifices, as when God is pleased to suspend or abolish the use of them ; and therefore upon supposition that God hath abolished all sorts of offerings and sacrifices, as well as those by fire or im- molation, in the Christian religion; yet the Christian priest- hood, like the Jewish, being a separate order of men, severed and set apart from the community of the people, and, like them, ordained to act and administer for them in holy things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for sins, and to im- petrate His favour and blessings for them, they must be as proper priests as the Jewish cohens were in captivity, though not sacrificing priests. Sir, I have said thus much for the sake of such men as your late writer’, who thinks sacrificing essential to the office of a priest, and therefore denies bishops
f(isce ips 2el
CHAP. II.
SECT. IV.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Heb. 7. 8.
32 Jewish rites accidental to a Priesthood.
and presbyters to be proper priests; because, as he affirms, “they have no material sacrifices to offer ;’ whereas offering material sacrifices belongs only to priests of a sacrificing reli- gion, and is only a part of their holy ministerial office; as many things besides offering gifts and sacrifices for sims be- longed to the office of a Jewish priest. It belonged to them to judge of legal uncleannesses, and to bless the people. And as the high-priests were to enter once a year into the holy of holies ; so God, had He pleased, might have continued that ordinance as a part of the holy ministry of every Chris- tian bishop, to signify that Christ had entered with His own blood into heaven, there to appear for us in the presence of God. But as the common definition of a priest doth belong to a Christian bishop, though the Christian religion had not that ministration ; so, granting that it hath no material sacri- fice, yet its presbyters are priests, because they are taken from among men, and ordained for them in other things of as solemn and holy a nature as sacrifice, which pertain unto God. In truth, Sir, I think they may as well say that Chris- tian Churches are not proper temples, or that the definition of a temple doth not properly belong to them, because they are not built after the pattern of the Jewish temple, nor have an altar for burnt-offermgs in their courts or yards, nor an altar for incense, or tables for presence-bread in them, or a veil to distinguish the holy from the most holy place. Nay, Sir, in my opinion, by the same way of reasoning, your late writer may deny the Christian religion to be a proper religion, as well as its presbyters to be proper priests, because, as they assert, it hath no proper ‘sacrifice. Do they not know that the shew-bread belonged only to the priests or ministers of the Jewish temple ; and that they only had a right to eat it? And will they therefore deny Christian ministers to be proper priests, because the Christian religion hath no such holy bread to be always set for them in the presence of God? The ministers of God, as priests, received tithes before and under the Mosaic law; and St. Paul describes a Jewish priest by taking of tithes, as well as by offering of gifts and sacrifices ; and if these men think, as probably they do, that tithes are not due under the Christian religion by Divine right to its ministers, will they for that reason deny them to be proper
Intercession is a sacerdotal office. 33
priests? Nay, in religions which had sacrifices, the ministers cna. n. of it were thought to act as priests in other applications to ———~— their gods as well as in sacrificing. Thus the sovereign pon- tiff* among the Romans acted as much the priest in ‘walking at the head of that most solemn funeral sort of procession of a defiled vestal, and the secret prayers he made with hands lifted up to heaven, at the brink of the pit where she was to be buried alive,’ as when he offered sacrifice. And Jesus Christ, when as advocate with His Father, and by consequence as a priest", though not yet so declared, He made public and most solemn intercession unto His Father; the intercession, I mean, which He made not only for His Church at that time, John 17. 1, but for His future Church throughout the world, with His = eyes lifted up to heaven ; I say, when He then interceded with God in a most pathetic prayer for His little Church in Judea, and His Catholic Church, which was to be dispersed over the world, He offered no sacrifice, though He had all power given Him, and was Lord of the temple as well as of the sabbath; and might, had He pleased, have solemnized His prayer with burnt offering, and peace offering, either at the great altar of Jerusalem, or at any other which He had power to erect. This shews, Sir, though there can be no sacrificing without a priest, yet that a man may be a priest, and act as a priest, particularly by solemn sacerdotal prayers and intercession, without sacrifice or altar. V. And therefore, Sir, it is so far from being true, that _ skcr. v.
Christian bishops and presbyters are not priests for want of The dea-
con’s office in a mea- ede : sure sacer- 8 Plutarch. invita Nume. [7 δὲ τὴν » Qui rex erat semper; sacerdos au- Aotal παρθενίαν καταισχύνασα, ζῶσα κατορ- tem factus est quando carnem suscepit. ρύττεται.... ἐξίστανται δὲ πάντες ot- —S. Ambros. in Epist. ad Hebreos,
wn, καὶ παραπέμπουσιν ἄφθογγοι μετά [ad cap. 7. ver. 14. Op., tom. iii. p. 500. τινος δεινῆς κατηφείας᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἐστὶν €re- Rom. 1579. This is a spurious work, pov θέαμα φρικτότερον, ovd’ ἡμέραν 7 which is not printed in the Benedictine πόλις ἄλλην ἄγει στυγνότεραν ἐκείνη. edition. See S. Ambr. Op., tom. ii. ὅταν δὲ πρὸς τὸν τόπον κομισθῇ τὸ App. p. 26. ed. Ben. It is a compilation φορεῖον, of μὲν ὑπηρέται τοὺς δεσμοὺς from various authors, and is found in ἐξέλυσαν, 6 δὲ τῶν ἱερέων ἔξαρχος εὐχάς a fuller form in Rabanus Maurus, in τινας ἀπορρήτους ποιησάμενος, καὶ χεῖ- Ep. ad Hebr., Op., tom. iii. The ex- pas avaretvas θεοῖς πρὸ τῆς ἀνάγκης, tract here given occurs p. 554, B, ἐξάγει συγκεκαλυμμένην, καὶ καθίστη- where it is referred to Alcuin; see his ow ἐπὶ κλίμακος εἰς τὸ οἴκημα κάτω Works, tom. i. p. 687. It is originally gepovons εἶτ᾽ αὐτὸς μὲν ἀποτρέπεται the observation of St. Chrysostom; in μετὰ τῶν ἄλλων ἱερέων, THs δὲ κατα- Epist. ad Hebr., Hom. xiii. ὃ 1. βασι- βάση, ἥ τε κλίμαξ ἀναιρεῖται, καὶ κατα- λεὺς μὲν γὰρ ἦν del’ ἱερεὺς δὲ γέγονεν κρύπτεται τὸ olknua.—ec. 10. pp. 266---ὀ ὅτε τὴν σάρκα ἀνέλαβεν. Op., tom. xii. 268. Lips. 1774. ] p- 130, A. ]
HICKES. D
CHRISTIAN PRIEST-
HOOD.
34 Even the deacon’s office may be deemed in a degree
oblation or sacrifice, that it seems more consonant and rea- sonable to think the deacons who cannot offer, to be sharers of the priesthood in the third or lowest rank or order, be- cause by their office they have power and authority, with the leave of the bishop, to minister public prayers and praises, and to administer the mystical, or sacramental office of baptism ; in the former of which Divine services the of- ficiating deacon acts as the people’s orator, or spokesman, to offer up their devotions to God; and in the latter he is ap- pointed to act as God’s procurator, or representative, to stand in His stead to receive such candidates of heaven as offer themselves to be baptized into covenant with Him, and enrolled into the number of Christ’s Church. In the former he solemnly and in a sacerdotal manner offers up prayers, and supplications, and praises, and thanksgivings for the people, and makes intercessions to God for them; or what is equivalent, the people by him, or his mouth and ministry, offer up their prayers and other devotions to God; and in the latter he is the minister of God for remission of sins by spiritual regeneration, and His vicegerent to receive the bap- tized person’s profession of faith, and his most solemn vows and promises; and in God’s name to release him of his sins, and to promise him the kingdom of heaven, and everlasting life, and to write his name in the book of life. In these Divine and honourable ministrations the office and characters of priesthood, as above described, are visible, and by conse- quence it is not absurd to assert that the deacons, who are thus allowed to officiate and act in things of such weight and concern between God and the people, may be deemed priests, or sharers in the priests’ office in the largest sense of priesthood ; and that their ministration in things pertaining to God is truly and properly sacerdotal, though in the lowest degree. Of this opinion was Optatus, bishop of Milevi in Africa, the great mall of the Donatists, and equal to St. Au- gustine in piety and learning, with whom he was contem- porary’. “ What need I (saith he*) mention many of the mi-
i [St. Optatus was earlier than St. he is called ‘venerabilis memoriz’ by Augustine; he wrote this work about St. Augustine; and recognised as a A.D. 370; the time of his death is un- saint by the Latin Church: Dupin
certain. His testimony is alleged with calls him a person “magne eruditionis that of St. Ambrose and St. Augustine; et excellentis ingenii.’”’ See the Pre-
sacerdotal. Ancient indications of such a view. 35
nisters, either deacons in the third, or presbyters constituted in the second degree of priesthood? when in those times of persecution, some bishops, though the supreme and chief rulers of clergy and people, that they might save this short uncertain life by the loss of life eternal, delivered up their bibles to be burnt.” So in another place!; “The Church (saith he) hath several sorts of members; of the ministry, bishops, priests, and deacons, and the flock of the faithful people. Tell me then, what sort of men in our Church you charge with those things which you object.” Perhaps there were others before this father, who thought the deacon’s office of a sacerdotal nature in the lowest degree. For we read in Eusebius™ of an epistle of Dionysius bishop of Alexandria, sent by Hippolytus to the brethren at Rome, styled διακονικὴ, diaconica, which Valesius thinks was so called “ because it treated of the office of a deacon,” about which there might be different sentiments or disputes at that time™. If any then thought it a degree of the priesthood, they might be led into those sentiments by some passages in St. Ignatius’ Epistles ; who in that to the Trallesians speaks of deacons thus°®; “ It becomes the deacons as ministers of the mysteries of Jesus
face to his Works; ed. Dupin, Paris, 1700, and the Veterum Testimonia ap- pended to it. ]
* [Optatus is speaking of the Dio- clesian persecutions; his words are, Quid commemorem laicos qui tunc in Ecclesia nulla fuerant dignitate suffulti
quid ministros plurimos? quid diaconos in tertio? quid presbyteros in secundo sacerdotio constitutos? Ipsi apices et principes omnium, aliqui Episcopi illis temporibus, ut damno zterne vitz istius incerte lucis moras brevissimas compararent, instrumenta divine legis impie tradiderunt.—S. Optat. Milev. de Schismate Donatist., ἘΣ 19: pil. fol. Paris: 1700. On this use of the word ‘priesthood’ Dupin observes: Sacerdotii nomen hic usurpat generatim Optatus, pro jure ac potestate exercendi alicujus muneris ecclesiastici, quo sensu diaconi tertium in sacerdotio ordinem obtinere merito dici possunt.—Dupin. ibid., not. in lo- cum. |
1 (Certa membra sua habet Eccle- sia, episcopos, presbyteros, diaconos, ministros, et turbam fidelium; dicite cui generi hominum in Ecclesia nostra
hoe possit ascribi.—Ibid., lib. ii. c. 14. p. 35. In both instances ‘ ministros’ means a distinct class, lower than the deacons ; not, as Hickes translates it, the general class under which all the three orders come. See Bingham, book iii. chap. 1. sect. 6.]
m KEecl. Hist., lib. vi. cap. 46. [ἑτέρα τις ἐπιστολὴ τοῖς ἐν Ῥώμῃ τοῦ Διονυσίου φέρεται, διακονικὴ, διὰ Ἵππο- Avrov.—Hist. Eccl., tom. i. p. 319. Valesius’ words are; Ego Rufino as- sentior, qui epistolam Dionysii idcirco διακονικὴν dictam esse innuit quod de officio diaconi pertractaret. — Valesii annot. ad loc. ibid. ]
™ Concilii Niceni Can. xviii. below, note x, p. 37.]
° [δεῖ δὲ καὶ τοὺς διακόνους ὄντας μυστήριον (scribe μυστηρίων, Voss.) Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, κατὰ πάντα τρόπον πᾶσιν ἀρέσκειν. οὐ γὰρ βρωμάτων καὶ ποτῶν εἰσὶν διάκονοι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκκλησίας Θεοῦ ὑπηρέται: δέον οὖν αὐτοὺς φυλάσ- σεσθαι τὰ ἐγκλήματα ὡς πῦρ. ὁμοίως πάντες ἐντρεπέσθωσαν τοὺς διακόνους, k. τ. A. (see note q).—S. Ignat. Ep. ad Trall., Ὁ. 2, 3. Patr. Apost., tom. 11;
p. 22.]
[See
D2
CHAP. 11.
SECT. V.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD,
36 St. Ignatius on the importance of the Diaconate.
Christ, by all means to study to please all; for they are not the ministers of meats and drinks, but of the Church of God ; wherefore it behoves them to avoid all offences, as they would avoid fire. Accordingly, let all reverence the deacons,” &c. So in his Epistle to the Magnesians?; “ I exhort you, that you study to do all things in divine concord, your bishops pre- siding in the place of God, your presbyters in the place of the council of the Apostles, and your deacons most dear to me, as those to whom is committed the ministry of Jesus Christ.” And then a little after? he speaks of their order as essential to the Church, with those of the bishops and pres- byters; ‘In like manner (saith he) let all reverence the dea- cons, as Jesus Christ; and the bishop, as the Father™; and the presbyters, as the sanhedrim of God and college of the Apostles; without these there is no Church*.” For the clearer understanding of this matter, Sir, we must remember that in all religions, true or false, there have been two sorts of minis- tries, or ministers: one of the priests, who were ministers of the gods, and the other of those who were ministers, or ser- vants to the priests, who among the Latins were called mi- nistri, as Brissoniust hath shewed by many examples. Such were the pope, or succincti, who bound and slew the victims ; victimari, who prepared the beasts for sacrifice by holy rites ; the editui, or sacristans, who kept the holy vessels, and habits, and the temple, ὅθ. And for this reason the mi-
P [παραινῷ ἐν ὁμονοίᾳ Θεοῦ σπουδάζετε πάντα πράσσειν, προκαθημένου τοῦ ἐπι- σκόπου εἰς τόπον Θεοῦ, καὶ τῶν πρεσβυ- τέρων εἰς τόπον συνεδρίου τῶν ἀποστό- λων, καὶ τῶν διακόνων, τῶν ἐμοὶ γλυκυ- τάτων, πεπιστευμένων διακονίαν Ἰησοῦ Xpiorov.—Id. Ep. ad Magnes., c. 6. ibid., p. 18.]
4 [That is ‘a little after’ the passage from the Epistle to the Trallesians just quoted, which continues, ὁμοίως πάντες ἐντρεπέσθωσαν τοὺς διακόνους ὡς ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστόν" ὡς καὶ τὸν ἐπίσκο- πον, ὄντα υἱὸν τοῦ πατρός" τοὺς δὲ πρεσ- βυτέρους ὡς συνέδριον Θεοῦ, καὶ ὡς σύν- δεσμον ἀποστόλων" χώρις τούτων ἐκ- κλησία οὐ καλεῖται.----[ἃ. Ep. ad Trall., c. 8. ibid., p. 22.]
τ See Vossius in locum. [ὄντα υἱὸν τοῦ matpds’ etiam interpres, codicem corruptum secutus, ut puto. Antiochus autem nos hoc loco juvare potest, apud
quem est; καὶ τὸν ἐπίσκοπον, ὡς τὸν πατέρα. Ac similiter legisse Pseudo- Ignatius videtur.—Vossii annott. ibid. ]
8 St. Polycearp in his Epistle to the Philippians magnifies the deacons’ office almost in the same words, saying ‘they are not the servants of men but of God in Jesus Christ.’ [ὁμοίως διάκονοι ἄμεμπτοι κατενώπιον αὐτοῦ τῆς δικαιο- σύνης, ὡς θεοῦ ἐν Χριστῷ διάκονοι, καὶ οὐκ ἀνθρώπων. S. Polyearpi Epist., 6. 5. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 188. ]
t De Formul., lib: i. [pp. 1257135 where the ministri, popz, succincti, et victimarii are treated of.] See Rosini Antiquit. Rom., lib. iii, cap. 31. [ De ministris sacerdotum populi Ro- mani; he makes the statement given by Hickes respecting the Flaminii, quoting Festus on the point, and treats of the editui, popz, and victimarii. pp. 227, 228. Amst. 1685. ]
Two kinds of ministers in all religions. 37
nisters of the heathen priest called flamen dialis, were from him named flaminii. To the pope, victimarii, and editui among the Latins, answered, the κήρυκες, or (epoxjpuxes, the νεωκόροι, ΟΥ̓ ζάκοροι, and ναοφύλακες among the Greeks : and so among the Jews the Levites were set aside to serve and attend the priests, and do all the servile offices of the sacrifices about the tabernacle, and afterwards about the temple, in such manner as I need not describe. Hence came a twofold use of the verb XNectoupyetv, which signifies ‘to minister,’ and of all the words that come from it, in the Christian Church. For in the more noble" and usual signifi- cation they denote sacerdotal ministration, but sometimes by a catachresis they also denote the servile ministry of those inferior officers, who attended the bishop and priests, and the ministration of holy services, and kept the church. Ae- τουργική" κυρίως μὲν ἡ ἱερατικὴ, καταχρηστικῶς δὲ ἡ δου- λική" “* Liturgical’ (saith the gloss in Suidas) properly signi- fies ‘sacerdotal,’ but catachrestically ‘ servile.” According to which explication of the word, the office of deacon is of a double nature; first, servile*, with respect to the bishop
ἃ Λειτουργικάς. ἱερατικάς. Hesychius.
* Concil. Nicen. Can. xviii. ‘‘ Let the deacons contain themselves within their own bounds, and know that they are (τοῦ μεν ἐπισκόπου ὑπηρέται) the bishop’s servants, and inferior to the presbyters.” [ἦλθεν εἰς τὴν ἁγίαν καὶ μεγάλην σύνοδον, ὅτι ἔν τισι τόποις καὶ πόλεσι, τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις τὴν εὐχαρι- στίαν οἱ διακόνοι διδόασιν" ὅπερ οὔτε 6 κανὼν, οὔτε ἣ συνήθεια παρέδωκε, τοὺς ἐξουσίαν μὴ ἔχοντας προσφέρειν, τοῖς προσφέρουσι διδόναι τὸ σῶμα τοῦ Χρι- στοῦ. κἀκεῖνο δὲ ἐγνωρίσθη, ὅτι ἤδη τινὲς τῶν διακόνων καὶ πρὸ τῶν ἐπισκό- πων τῆς εὐχαριστίας ἅπτονται. ταῦτα μὲν οὖν ἅπαντα περιηρήσθω" καὶ ἐμμενέ- τωσαν οἱ διακόνοι τοῖς ἱδίοις μέτροις, εἰδότες ὅτι τοῦ μὲν ἐπισκόπου ὑπηρέται εἰσὶ, τῶν δὲ πρεσβυτέρων ἐλάττους τυγ- xdvovor’ λαμβανέτωσαν δὲ κατὰ τὴν τάξιν τὴν εὐχαριστίαν μετὰ τοὺς πρεσ- Butépous, τοῦ ἐπισκόπου διδόντος αὐτοῖς, ἢ τοῦ πρεσβυτέρου. ἀλλὰ μηδὲ καθῆ- σθαι ἐν μέσῳ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων ἐξέστω τοῖς διακόνοις" παρὰ κανόνα γὰρ καὶ παρὰ τάξιν ἐστὶ τὸ γινόμενον. εἰ δέ τις μὴ θέλοι πειθαρχεῖν καὶ μετὰ τούτους τοὺς ὅρους, πεπαύσθω τῆς διακονία. ---- (ΟΠ 61]. tom. ii. p. 42.] Const. Apost., lib. viii. cap. 27. ‘The deacon doth not ad-
minister the Eucharist, but when the bishop or presbyter administers [rather “has offered’’ |, he delivers it to the people, not as a priest, but as one who serves the priests.’””—[ ζδιάκονος ov προσ- φέρει: Tod δὲ ἐπισκόπου προσενεγκόν- τος ἢ τοῦ πρεσβυτέρου, αὐτὸς ἐπιδίδωσι τῷ λαῷ, οὐχ ws ἱερεὺς, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς διακονού- μενος ἱερεῦσι.---Τ Ὀ14., tom. i. p. 493, C.] So in the spurious but ancient Epistle of St. Ignatius to Heron the deacon: “ Do thou nothing without the bishops, for they are priests, but thou art the ser- vant of priests. They baptize, sacrifice, ordain, absolve; but thou dost minister to them, as St. Stephen did to James and the presbyters at Jerusalem.” [μηδὲν ἄνευ τῶν ἐπισκόπων πράττε" ἱερεῖς γάρ εἰσι’ σὺ δὲ διάκονος τῶν ἱερέων. ἐκεῖνοι βαπτίζουσιν, ἱερουργοῦσι, χειροτονοῦσι, χειροθετοῦσι᾽ σὺ δὲ αὐτοῖς διακονεῖς, ws Στέφανος 6 ἅγιος ἐν Ἵερο- σολύμοις Ιακώβῳ καὶ τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις. —S. Ignat. δάβου. Epist. δὰ Heronem diaconum, § iii. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 109. Of the spuriousness of this epi- stle Le Clere says; “ad ea accedunt manifest allusiones ad Constitutiones Apostolicas, aut potius verba inde ex- scripta, que hasce epistolas non minus spurias esse evincunt quam ipsum opus
38 Deacon’s proper office to minister under the priests.
curistian and presbyters to whom they were subservient’ in the
PRIEST~ HOOD.
performances of holy offices, and in other affairs of the Church. As such they were the bishop’s attendants? and sub- almoners® to look after the necessitous, as widows and orphans and sick persons, that they should be duly supplied out of the public stock of the Church; and his messengers to carry his pastoral letters and orders to his flock, and his communica- tory letters to other bishops and Churches”; and in Divine service to be the iepoxjpuxes®, or criers, to forbid those who bore any grudge to come to the holy Eucharist‘, to command silence and attention when the holy offices began, and parti- cularly, as often as they called upon them by the oremus, ‘let us pray;’ to dismiss the penitents, catechumens, and hearers, when the holy Eucharist was to begin; to prepare the altar for 1; to receive the offerings from the people, and carry them to the priest or bishop, who placed them upon the holy table; to carry the holy cup about, and, in cases of necessity, the bread to the faithful?; and when the communion was
unde desumpta sunt, ut Usserius et Dallezus multis ostenderunt.—Disser- tatio ii. de Epist. Ignat. § 26. ibid. p. 611.
y | rabert Pontificale Ecclesiz Grece [ad Partem ix. Liturg. Or- dinum] Observ. iii. [Diaconum non solius episcopi, sed etiam presbyteri ministrum esse.] p. 197. [ Paris. 1643. See Bingham, book ii. chap. 20. § 13.]
2 Tov μὲν ἐπισκόπου ὑπηρέται εἰσὶ, τῶν δὲ πρεσβυτέρων ἐλάττους. Conc. Nic. Can. xviii. [quoted above p. 39. note x. |
5 Habertus, [bid., Observ. iv. [De reliquis extra mysteria Diaconorum officiis. Primum est ministrare men- sis.] p. 200. [See Bingham, ibid., § 16, and the Apost. Const., lib. 11. ο. 31, 32, and lib, iii. c. 19. there referred to. |
b [See Bingham, ibid., ὃ 18.]
© Habertus, ibid., Observ. ii. pars altera, pp. 192,193. [De ministerio di- aconorum in tremendis mysteriis. .. . . Tertium (munus) erga populum; mo- nendo, excitando, imperando, precipue frequenti illa voce πρόσχωμεν, ‘atten- damus:’.... submovebant etiam eos qui mysteriis adeundis inepti erant. | See also Observ. v. p. 203.
4 [ Bingham, ibid., § 10. See Const. Apost., quoted below, note c, p. 44. |
e (Habertus, ibid., p. 193, quoting Hugo de S. Victor, Diaconorum offi-
cium est... sacrificium in altari com- ponere, corpus et sanguinem Domini distribuere, licet non ubique hoc ob- servetur. |
f (Bingham, ibid., § 5.]
§ [It was so decided by the fourth council of Carthage, c. 38. (quoted by Bingham, book ii. chap. 20. § 7.) Diaconus, presente presbytero, eucha- ristiam corporis Christi populo, si necessitas cogat, jussus eroget. The earlier rule of the Church allowed them to administer both ‘the bread and the holy cup.’ Nonnulli qui- dem, qui de altera solum specie ag- noscendum velint, de calice nimi- rum; at de utraque censendum in veteri ecclesie disciplina, ex sequenti- bus plura declarabunt. Habertus, ibid., p- 194. He quotes St. Justin Martyr, (Apol. i. 6. 67. p. 83, E.) and St. Am- brose, De Officiis, lib. i. c. 41. (Op. tom. ii, p. 55, A.) See also the pas- sage of Hugo de S. Victor quoted above, and the passage from the Apo- stolical Constitutions, lib. viii. ο. 27. quoted above, note x, p. 37. Of the rule of the later Church, he says, (Ob- serv. ii. pars altera, p. 196;) Decretum vero postea apud nos, Diacono non li- cere przesente presbytero corpus Christi tradere. Bingham, as above, § 7, says the same. |
Allowed in some cases to act as priests. 39
done, like the Athenian κήρυκες" at the end of their sacrifices, cuar. 1. to dismiss the people. It was their office also to be directors ~“— and monitors to the bishop and presbyters in the performance
of Divine service’, and to attend upon the person of the bishop
at home and abroad; to make part of his holy retinue, and
in many things to minister to him’. But then, secondly, as
their office was servile in these respects, so it seems to have
been sacerdotal, as they were sharers in the lowest degree of
the priestly office, when in virtue of it they were appointed
and allowed, especially in the absence of the bishops and pres-
byters, to administer the most solemn and federal office of bap-
tism, and offer up praises and supplications and thanksgivings
and prayers in the public congregations*; inthe former of which
two offices, as I have observed, the deacon stands on God’s
part to admit the candidates of baptism into the Church ; and
in the latter on the people’s part, as their orator, to put up
their united prayers, and in both acts as a priest. For which
reason, perhaps, it was that St. Ignatius said, “that they
were not ministers of meats and drinks, but of the Church of God!';” that is, they are not only ministers of tables, to serve
at which they were first appointed, as St. Hierome observes™, Acts 6. 43. but also sacerdotal ministers, ‘“‘ ministers of God” and the 2 Cor. 6. 4. Church, “ ministers of the mysteries of Jesus Christ;” to whom, 1 Cor. 4. 1. saith he in another way of speaking", “is committed the mi- See 2 Cor. nistry of Jesus Christ.” So the council of Eliberis°, in the ὅν
4 Peractis vera solennibus religionis, populum dimittebant his verbis λαῶν ἄφεσις, ex templo, vel, ite, missa est.— Is. Casaub. Animady. in Athenzi Deipnos., lib. xiv. [c. 23. Annott. p- 939. fol. 1657. tom. vii. p. 668. Schweigh. 1805. ]
i Habertus, ibid., p. 192. [Diaco- nus celebrantem cum reverentia sub- monere debet. |
J Ibid., Observ. iii. Bingham, ibid., § 18. ]
κ { Habertus, ibid. Observ. iv. 3. Ter- tium (munus) baptizare, extra ordinem scilicet, abseute episcopo et presbytero si necessitas ingruat. Quarum ea pre- stare, absente episcopo et presbytero, quz ad pascendam et regendam ple- bem spectant, seclusa nimirum ordina- tione et sacrificio.—p. 202. See Bing- ham, ibid., ὃ 9. ‘‘ Deacons allowed to baptize in some places;” and § 10. ‘tin several prayers they repeated the words
[See note y,
before (the people) to teach them what they were to pray for.’ See Apost. Const. quoted below, pp. 44, 45. ]
' [note 0, p. 35. ]
m Viduarum et mensarum minis- tri; Epist. ad Evagrium Ixxxv. [ Quid patitur mensarum et viduarum minis- ter, ut supra (presbyteros) se efferat.— Epist. exlv. (al. Ixxxv.) ad Evangelum; (al. Evagrium) S. Hieron. Op., tom. i. col. 1075, A. Sciant quare diaconi con- stituti sint; legant Acta Apostolorum, recordentur conditionis suee.—Ibid., col. 1077, C. The object of the epistle is to shew the inferiority of deacons to presbyters. |
n [See note p, p. 36. ]
© Canon xxxii. [Apud presbyterum, siquis gravi ]apsu in ruinam mortis in- ciderit, placuit agere poenitentiam non debere, sed potius apud episcopum ; cogente tamen infirmitate necesse est presbyterum communionem prestare
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
40 These powers extraordinary, and by commission ;
year 362”, decreed that in case of necessity a deacon might absolve dying penitents or excommunicates, if the bishop commanded him. And this power of reconciling penitents in imminent danger of death, when a priest cannot be had, was granted to deacons by the Church in succeeding ages, as is shewed in many instances by a late learned writer and monk of the Benedictine order, to whom I refer the reader. And before this, in the Church of Africa", deacons were allowed to receive confessions and absolve penitents, when neither the bishop nor any presbyter could be present, as is plain from the place in the margin. Upon which Rigaltius, favouring the opinion of Optatus, saith’, Est enim etiam in
debere, et diaconum, si ei jusserit sacer- dos, (that is, the bishop, see the note of Albaspinzus, p. 1020;) but another reading, followed by Aguirre, (Cone. Hisp., tom. ii. p. 264,) is; non est pres- byterorum aut diaconorum, communi- onem talibus preestare debere, nisi eis jusserit episcopus.—Concil., tom. i. p. 996, A, B.]
P [This date is an oversight. The council is dated era 362, that is, of the era Hispanica, instituted B.C. 38, in honour of Augustus, when Spain was allotted to him in the second trium- virate. It was the first use of the word era, in this sense, which was a Spanish word for time. See Spelman’s Gloss., pp. 243—245. The date era 362 cor- responds to A.D. 324. This is the latest date assigned to the council; Harduin places it in 313, (Concil., tom. i. p. 247. ed. Paris. 1725); Baluz thinks it should be put later; Aguirre (Concil. Hisp., tom. 11. diss. 1. n. 18) places it in the latter part of 303; as does Colet, Concil., tom. i. p. 987. ]
4 Edm. Martene de Antiquis Ecclesiz Ritibus, lib. i. cap. 6.[art. vii, E. Diaconi olim urgente necessitate confessiones excipiebant.... Id muneris non raro diaconis concessum esse fidei est indu- biz. ... He then quotes the authorities given by Hickes, and afterwards other and still later ones, forbidding deacons to hear confessions, (as in the dioceses of London, Lincoln, and Worcester in the thirteenth century,) and concludes, His omnibus luce meridiana clarius constat, diaconos ad usque finem szculi xiii. confessiones poenitentium, absen- tibus presbyteris, urgenteque necessi- tate excepisse; immo citra necessi- tatem id attentasse.—tom. i. p. 273. Antw. 1763. The confessions which
deacons were allowed to receive, in cases of necessity, were the last acts of public humiliation before reconciliation ; (see Bp. Fell, quoted note t, and note L, p- 377 of the Oxford translation of Ter- tullian;) and the imposition of their hands gave only a readmission to com- munion, authorized by the bishop. See Petavius, not. ad Epiphanium, pp. 71, 233, 250, ed. Paris, 1622; and his Dia- tribe de Pcenitentia et reconciliatione, capp. i., ii., iv. Thesaurus Theologicus, tom. xii. Venet. 1763, as referred to in the notes to the place, p. 399. ed. Ben. |
ΤΟ Si incommodo aliquo et infirmi- tatis periculo occupati fuerint, non ex- pectata preesentia nostra, apud presby- terum quemcunque presentem, vel si presbyter repertus non fuerit, et urgere exitus cceperit, apud diaconum quoque exomologesin facere delicti sui possint, ut manu eis in pcenitentiam imposita veniant ad Dominum cum pace.—Cy- prian., Epist. xviii. ad Clerum de Lap- sis, ed. Oxon. p. 40. [Epist. xii. p. 22. ed. Ben. |
5. [Rigalt does but express the senti- ment of St. Cyprian (Epist. xiv. p. 24. ed. Ben.) which he quotes ; ‘Item pres- byteris et diaconibus non defuit sacer- dotii vigor.’ His note on the passage, Epist. xii. p. 25. Paris, 1666, quoted note r, continues; At diaconos peeni- tentibus manum imponere sola neces- sitatis ratio admittit; nempe si urgeat exitus, et presbyter repertus non fuerit. On the words quoted from Epist. xiv., he says, p. 27; Operz pretium fuerit semel observasse, vocabulis sacerdotii et sacramenti, in rebus Christianis, omnia significari que administrande disciplinze Christiane conveniunt, (in- stancing the giving of baptism and offering prayers.) Atque inde fit, ut
still they shew there may be Priesthood without Sacrifice. 41
diaconatu sacerdotium, “there is something of priesthood in the deacon’s office.” But as learned a man, the annotator in the Oxford edition‘, is of opinion that the deacons did not perform these sacerdotal acts as priests, in virtue of their office, or as sharers of the priesthood, but only as deputed by the authority of the bishops, in extraordimary cases of neces- sity, when there were no bishops or presbyters to perform them. Habertus, in his fifth observation on the Greek Pon- tifical, is of this opinion"; and there likewise shews that an- ciently deacons never were permitted to preach e cathedra, in a solemn and sacerdotal manner; that is, as messengers or “ambassadors of Christ,’ by whom God did instruct them, 2 Cor. 5. 20. and exhort them to repent, and who, in Christ’s stead, our great High-Priest in heaven, prayed them to be reconciled to God. Sir, my undertaking doth not oblige me to arbitrate between these opinions, but only to shew that it is more con- sonant to the notion of priesthood to think deacons to be priests of the lowest form who had not power to offer, than to deny the more noble orders of bishops and presbyters to be truly sacerdotal; because to administer baptism and officiate in public prayers, properly speaking, seem to be sacerdotal acts in them as well as in the presbyters, though they could not administer the holy Eucharist, and by consequence it is far from being true that bishops and presbyters are not pro- per priests, upon supposition that the Christian religion hath
CHAP, II. SECT. VI.
Cyprianus etiam in diaconibus sacer- diaconi et fratres laici in hane rem
dotii vigorem laudaverit. It is remark- able that Hickes does not refer to these words of St. Cyprian, which are more explicit than those of Optatus. |
t [Bishop Fell. Caute hic legendus est Rigaltius dum ait, ‘esse in Diaco- natu sacerdotium’...Quzecunque neces- Sitas cogit etiam illa defendit, sed tan- tisper dum incubuerit.... Dicitur porio apud Diaconum exomologesis facta, non quasi is solus esset ejusdem con- scius; pcenitentia enim vel egrotan- tium, quantum fieri potuit istis sz- culis, publica erat; sed quia absente presbytero, ad ‘quem munus_ illud imprimis spectabat, diaconi presentia habebatur prorsus necessaria, quot- cunque e plebe adesse contingeret, .. Forma a Cypriano episcopo data fuit: conditionem nimirum sub qua lapsi in ecclesiam reciperentur is preescripsit. ... Forme sive conditionis implete, Ecclesiz nomine testes et arbitri erant
accitiimAnnott. in S. Cypr. Epist., p. 40. ed. Oxon. |
u [The subject of the Observation is ; Munus predicandi ad diaconum, non nisi extra ordinem pertinere. Habertus says, Omnes autem inter theologos conyenit, diaconum baptismisolum ex- traordinarium ministrum esse; igitur et ipsius que baptizandi officium se- quitur, predicationis. Illius, inquam, predicationis publice et solennis, qua~ lis episcoporum et presbyterorum officio continetur. Privatz siquidem aut mi- nus solemnes adhortationes eis plerum- que commissz sunt, publice extra or- dinem, aut in necessitate, absente epi- scopo et presbytero, lege vero et more communi interdicte; and he shews that κηρύσσειν, when applied to deacons, means ‘bidding’ the people to prayer, &c.—Habertus, Pontif. ubi sup. Ob- serv. v. pp. 202, sqq- See Bingham, book ii. chap. 20. § 11.]
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
1 Cor. 9. 13.
words, speaking of the Christian altar.
42 The terms ‘ gift, and ‘altar, used by our Lord;
neither altar nor sacrifice of any sort, as the Jewish neither now hath, nor formerly in the captivity had.
I say, ‘upon supposition,’ which for argument sake I am willing to grant your late writer, though in reality it hath both, as I now proceed to shew from the writings of the New Testament; and thereby prove that the ministers of Christ are so far from not being proper priests, that they are proper altar ministers, or sacrificing priests, τὰ ἵερα ἐργαζόμενοι, as the Apostle calls the Jewish priests.
VI. I will begin with the twenty-third and twenty-fourth verses of the fifth chapter of St. Matthew’s Gospel: “If thou bring thy gift (ro δῶρόν cov) unto the altar, and there remem. berest that thy brother hath ought against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.” The original word for gift is a sacrificial term of a general signification, and de- notes a material sacrifice, or offering of any sort, as may be seen in the margin*, and therefore it is to be taken here in that sense in which it is to be understood in Matthew vii. 4; “‘Shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift (or oblation) that Moses commanded.” So in chapter xxiii. 18; “Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing, but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty.” In this sense of the word our Lord spake to the Jews in their common lan- guage. But then it is to be observed, that those Jews were His disciples, and that this precept of reconciliation was therefore intended by Him for an ordinance of the New Tes- tament, like many others which He gave His disciples, while He instructed them in the doctrines relating to the kingdom of God. Thus He spoke by way of anticipation of baptism and baptismal regeneration to Nicodemus’, John 11]. 3—5,
x Lev. i. 2, “If any of you bring an offering to the Lord, προσαγάγῃ δῶρα τῷ Κυρίῳ, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, of the herd, and of the flock, ἀπὸ τῶν κτηνῶν, καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν Body καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν προβάτων προσοίσετε τὰ δῶρα ὑμῶν. ver. 3, “1 his offering be a burnt-sacrifice, ἐὰν ὁλοκαύτωμα Td δῶρον αὐτοῦ." Chap. ii. 1, ‘‘ When any will offer a meat-oftering unto the Lord, his offering shall be of fine flour, ἐὰν δὲ ψυχὴ προσφέρῃ δῶρον θυσίαν τῷ Κυρίῳ σεμίδαλις ἔσται τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ. ver. 7, “ If thy oblation be a meat-offer-
ing baken ina pan, ἐὰν δὲ θυσία ἀπὸ ἐσχάρας τὸ δῶρόν cov.’ See also chap. i. 10, 14; ii. 4, 5,13; iii. 1. [δῶρον is used in each place, the corresponding Hebrew word is corban, j37p, ‘ what is brought, presented.’ ]
y S$. Cyprian. de Orat. Domin. Homo novus, renatus, et Deo per ejus gratiam restitutus, ‘ Pater,’ primo in loco dicit, quia filius esse jam ccepit. p. 206. ed. Ben.—See Epist. Ixxii. [ad Stephanum Papam. Tune enim demum esse filii Dei possuni si sacramento utroque nascantur, cum scriptum sit, ‘nisi quis
His teaching was in anticipation of the Gospel state. 48
and of the holy Eucharist’, John vi. 50—58. Many other doctrines and precepts of Christian perfection were given by way of anticipation for the Gospel state, which are to be found in His sermon on the mount, and other places of the evan-
CHAP. II.
SECT. VI.
gelists: as that wherein He told His disciples, that their Matt. 5. 20.
righteousness was to exceed the righteousness of the scribes
and pharisees ; that of not calling our brother fool; that of v
er. 22.
not looking upon a woman with a lustful eye; that whereby ver. 28. He forbid divorce in other places, as well as in His sermon ; ver. 22. (c. that of not resisting evil; of loving our enemies; and of for- ἴδ᾽ ΠῚ με giving others their offences and trespasses against us, as a ver. 39. condition without which God would not forgive us ours ver. 44; ο, against Him. To these we may add the special beatitudes Pees
promised to those who mourn; to the poor, meek, and humble ο. 5. 3—11,
in spirit; and to those who are reviled and persecuted for His sake. All which were given to them, as well as the pre- cept of being reconciled before they offered at the altar, as to His disciples, and for the future Christian Church, to renew the Divine likeness and image in us, and make us partakers of the Divine perfections, by conforming our lives and our whole selves to His instructions and will. And as the primi- tive Church conceived this precept of reconciliation to be in- tended, among those I have mentioned, for a Gospel precept, so they always applied it to the Eucharist, as the Gospel sa- crifice or oblation, ‘ not thinking (as Mr. Mede well observes?)
renatus fuerit ex aqua et Spiritu, non potest introire in regnum Dei.’ ]|—p. 128. ed. Ben. ]
Epist. lxxiii.[ad Tubaianum. Ut qui legitimo et vero, atque unico Sancte Ecclesiz baptismo ad regnum Dei re- generatione Divina preparantur, sacra- mento utroque nascantur, quia scrip- tum est, ‘nisi,’ &c. p. 136. ed. Ben. ]
Testimoniorum adversus Judzos, lib. i. c. 12. [p. 279. ed. Ben.] lib. iii. ¢. 25. [p. 814. ed. Ben.] Concil. Car- thag. [A.D. 256. apud S. Cypr. Op. p- 330. ed. Ben. 7
* Ibid., [de Orat. Dom. ] Ipso pre- dicante, et monente, ‘ego sum panis vitae, qui de ccelo descendi. Si quis ederit de meo pane, vivet in zternum. Panis autem quem ego dedero, caro mea est pro seculi vita,’ &c. [p. 209. ed. Ben.] See also Testimon. adversus Judzos, lib. i. ο. 22. [p. 228. ed. Ben. ]
lib. iii. c. 25. [p. 314. ed. Ben. ]
Tertull. de Orat. [c. 6. ] Panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie, spiritualiter potius intelligamus. Christus enim panis noster est, quia vita Christus, et vita panis, ‘Ego sum,’ inquit, ‘ panis vite.’ Et paulo supra; [Panis est sermo Dei vivi, qui descendit de ccelo. —Op., p. 131, Di]
a (“It is altogether improbable our Saviour would then annex a new rite to the legal sacrifices, when He was so soon after to abolish them by His sacri- fice upon the cross... . Ergo, He in- tended it for an ordinance of the king- dom of God, (as the Scripture speaks,) that is, for the Church of His Gospel.” —Of the name Altar, or θυσιαστήριον, anciently given to the Holy Table.— sect. ii) Mede’s Works, p. 390. See vol. i. p. 5, note s. |
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD,
44 Our Lord’s words (Matt. v. 23, 24) understood of the
that our Lord would make a new law,’ or, let me add, enforce an old one, ‘concerning legal sacrifices, which He was pre- sently to abolish, but that it had reference to that oblation which was to be instituted by Him for the Gospel dispensation,’ and to continue with and under it for ever. Thus, in the Apo- stolical Constitutions»; ἐὰν προσφέρῃς τὸ δῶρόν σου, κ.τ.λ. “ Tf thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest thy brother hath ought against thee, leave thy gift there, and go thy way first and be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift; δῶρον δέ ἐστιν Θεῷ ἡ ἑκάστου προσ- εὐχὴ καὶ εὐχαριστία, For the gift that is offered to God is every one’s prayer and thanksgiving.” What immediately fol- lows in chapter 54, shews that this relates to the Eucharist, διὰ τοῦτο ὦ ἐπίσκοποι, μελλόντων ὑμῶν εἰς προσευχὴν ἀπαν- τᾷν" «.T.r. “Wherefore, Ὁ bishops, when you proceed to prayer after the lesson and singing of psalms, and expounding the Scriptures, let the deacon standing near you proclaim with a loud voice, ‘ Let no man have ought against his brother, let no dissembler come hither,’ that if any persons are guilty of any thing for which they ought to ask forgiveness, they may pray unto God, and be reconciled to their brethren.” In this last citation, which continues the former, the very order of the liturgy, or Eucharistical service, is described as it is mentioned in Justin the Martyv’s first Apology“, and partly set forth in the same Const. Apost., lib. vii. cap. 12 and 13°. And I cannot but observe that it hath the air of a true and most genuine passage, worthy of that apostolical father, who, as I
> Const. Apost., lib. ii. cap. 53. [Con- cilia, tom. i. p. 289, H.'292; A. The concluding words would be more cor- rectly translated, ‘‘ Now the prayer and thanksgiving of each is a gift to God ;” and so our prayers come under the rule of being reconciled before offering our gifts, which properly belongs to literal oblations. |
© διὰ τοῦτο ὦ ἐπίσκοποι, μελλόντων ὑμῶν εἰς προσευχὴν ἀπαντᾷν, [ μετὰ τὴν ἀνάγνωσιν καὶ τὴν ψαλμῳδίαν, καὶ τὴν ἐπὶ ταῖς γραφαῖς διδασκαλίαν, ὃ διάκονος ἑστὼς πλήσιον ὑμῶν μετὰ ὑ- ψηλῆς φωνῆς λεγέτω" μή τις κατά τι- νὸς" μή τις ἐν ὑποκρίσει" iva ἐὰν ἐυρεθῇ ἐν τισὶν ἀντιλογία, συνειδήσει κρου- σθέντες δεηθῶσι τὸν Θεὸν, καὶ διαλλα- γῶσι τοῖς adeApots.—Ibid., c. 54. p. 292, Ὁ. This passage is not, as the
words following in the text would imply, immediately after the former. ]
ἃ τῇ τοῦ ἡλίου λεγομένῃ ἡμέρᾳ πάν- τῶν κατὰ πόλεις ἢ ἄγρους μενόντων ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ συνέλευσις γίνεται, καὶ τὰ ἀπο- μνημονεύματα τῶν ἀποστόλων ἢ τὰ συγ- γράμματα τῶν προφητῶν ἀναγινώσκεται μέχρις ἐγχωρέι. εἶτα παυσαμένου τοῦ ἀναγινώσκοντος, ὃ πρυεστὼς διὰ λόγου τὴν νουθεσίαν καὶ πρόκλησιν τῆς τῶν καλῶν τούτων μιμησέως ποιεῖται" ἔπειτα ἀνιστάμεθα πάντες, καὶ εὐχὰς πέμπομεν" καὶ ὡς προέφημεν, παυσαμένων ἡμῶν τῆς εὐχῆς ἄρτος προφέρεται, kK. T.A.—S.Jus- tin. M., Apol. i. [6. 67. Op., p. 83, D.] The quotation is continued (in refer- ring to ὁ. 65. p. 82, quoted below), sect. vii. |
© [Ibid., pp. 473—485, quoted be- low, sect. x. |
Christian Oblation, in the Apostolical Constitutions. 45
have more than once noted, in his first epistle to the Corin- thians, § xliv., calls bishops προσενέγκοντες τὰ δῶρα, “ offer- ers of the gifts’”” These gifts of bread and wine, which the people brought and the priests offered, they frequently called ἅγια δῶρα, to distinguish them from the other ob- lations, as of the first-fruits of corn and grapes, which were also presented to God upon the altar. But to return to St. Clement, he virtually applies this text to the Eucha- ristical sacrifice, Apost. Constit., lib. ii. cap. 57%, where the order of the liturgy is more fully described ‘ited in the fifty-third and fifty-fourth chapters; “ After prayer,”
saith he, “let some of the deacons attend only to the oblation of the Eucharist, ministering to the body of the Lord with fear: let others look after the people and make them keep silence ; but let the deacon that assists the bishop say, μή τις κατά τινος, ‘let no man have ought against his brother, let no dissembler come here.’ Then let the men salute the men, and the women the women with a holy kiss, but not treacherously, like Judas, who betrayed the Lord with akiss. After this, let the deacon pray for the universal Church and the whole world. Then let the bishop give the ‘ peace’ to the people, and bless them, as Moses commanded the priests
CHAP, II.
SECT. VI.
to bless the people in these words: ‘The Lord bless thee and — G.
keep thee, &c. Then let the bishop pray, and say, ‘O Lord, ἢ save Thy people, and bless Thine inheritance which Thou
f [S. Clem. R. Epist. ad Cor. i. c. xliv. Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 173. On the authorship of the Apostolical Con- stitutions, see Cotelerius, ibid., p. 195. ]
& [οἱ δὲ διάκονοι μετὰ τὴν προσευχὴν οἱ μὲν τῇ προσφορᾷ τῆς εὐχαριστίας σχολαζέτωσαν, ὑπηρετούμενοι τῷ τοῦ Κυρίου σώματι μετὰ φόβου" οἱ δὲ τοὺς ὕχλους διασκοπέτωσαν, καὶ ἡσυχίαν av- τοῖς ἐμποιέτωσαν᾽ λεγέτω δὲ 6 παρεστὼς τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ διάκονος τῷ λαῷ᾽ μή τις κατά Tivos’ μή τις ἐν ὑποκρίσει" εἶτα καὶ ἀσπαζέσθωσαν ἀλλήλους οἱ ἄνδρες, καὶ ἀλλήλας αἱ γύναικες, τὸ ἐν κυρίῳ φίλημα" ἀλλὰ μή τις δολίως, ὡς ᾿Ιούδας τὸν Κύριον φιλήματι παρέδωκε" καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο προσευχέσθω ὃ διάκονος ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἁπάσης καὶ παντὸς τοῦ κοσ- μου ... καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο 6 ἀρχιερεὺς ἐπευχόμενος τῷ λαῷ εἰρήνην, εὐλογείτω τοῦτον" ὡς καὶ Μωσῆς ἐνετείλατο ἱερεῦ- σιν εὐλογεῖν τὸν λαὸν, τούτοις τοῖς ῥή-
μασιν" εὐλογήσαι σε Κύριος καὶ φυλάξαι oe’ ἐπιφάναι Κύριος τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ ἐπί σε, καὶ δῷη σοι εἰρήνην" ἐπευχέσθω οὖν καὶ ὃ ἐπίσκοπος καὶ λεγέτω" σῶσον τὸν λαόν σου, Κύριε, καὶ εὐλόγησον τὴν κληρονομίαν σου, ἣν ἐκτήσω, καὶ πε- ριεποιήσω τῷ τιμίῳ αἵματι τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου" ἣν ἐκάλεσας βασίλειον ἱεράτευμα καὶ ἔθνος ἅγιον: μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα γινέσθω ἡ θυσία, ἐστῶτος παντὸς τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ προσευχομένου ἠσύχως" καὶ ὅταν ἄνεν- εχθῇ, μεταλαμβανέτω ἑκάστη τάξις καθ᾽ ἑαυτὴν τοῦ κυριακοῦ σώματος καὶ τοῦ τιμίου αἵματος ἐν τάξει, μετὰ αἰδοῦς καὶ εὐλαβείας, ὡς βασιλέως προσερχόμενοι σώματι" καὶ αἱ γυναῖκες κατακεκαλυμ- μέναι τὴν κεφαλὴν, ὡς ἁρμόζει γυναικῶν τάξει, προσερχέσθωσαν" φυλαττέσθω- σαν δὲ αἱ θύραι" μή τις ἄπιστος εἰσέλθοι καὶ &uvnros.—Const, Apost., lib. ii. c. 57. Concil., tom. i. p. 297, C, D, E.]
46 Matt. v.23 applied to the Eucharistic oblation
curisttan hast purchased, ἣν περιεποιήσω, as a peculiar people, with
PRIEST-
HOOD.
the precious blood of Thy Christ, and called a royal priest- hood and a holy nation.’ After this γενέσθω ἡ θυσία, let the sacrifice be done, the people standing, and praying si- lently ; καὶ ὁτὰν ἀνενεχθῇ, and when the oblation is finished, let every order by itself receive the Lord’s body and precious blood, orderly, with reverence and fear, as coming to the body of a king; and let the women come as it becomes them, with covered heads, (or veils,) and let the doors be kept, that no infidel or uninitiated person enter.”
To the same Eucharistical oblation is this text applied by Ireneus, lib. iv. cap. 34. Igitur ecclesie oblatio, quam Dominus docuit offerri in universo mundo", &c. “ Therefore this oblation of the Church, which the Lord (by His prophet Malachi’) commanded to be offered through all the world, is accounted a pure sacrifice with God, and is accepted by Him; not that He needs any sacrifice from us, but because he that offers is himself honoured in what he offers, if his offering is accepted : for honour and affection is shewed to a king by a gift (per munus) ; Which our Lord being willing that we should offer in all simplicity and imnocency, commanded, saying; ‘ when thou bringest thy gift unto the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee, leave thy gift before the altar, and go and be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.’”” This father also alludes to this text at the latter end of this chapter, in these words: sicut et ideo nos offerre vult munus ad altare frequenter sine intermissione*. And so much for the sense of this text, ac- cording to the disciple of St. John!.
The next father who useth this text, is Tertullian, de Pati- entia, cap. 12." Nemo convulsus animum in fratrem suum,
h [Ecclesiz oblatio, quam Dominus docuit offerri in universo mundo, pu- rum sacrificiim reputatum est apud Deum, et acceptum ei est: non quod indigeat a nobis sacrificium, sed quo- niam is qui oftert, glorificatur ipse in eo quod offert, si acceptetur munus ejus. Per munus enim erga regem, et honos, et affectio ostenditur: quod in omni simplicitate et innocentia Domi- nus volens vos offerre, pradicavit di- cens ‘cum igitur offers munus tuum ad altare,’ &c.—S. Iren. adv. Hereses, ec. 18. ὃ 1. p. 250. ed. Ben.]
i Id. ibid., cap. 33. [ed. Grab. cap. 17. p. 249. ed. Ben. The passage is quoted below, p. 57, see note r. |
k [The reading of the Benedictine edition is, sic et ideo nos quoque, &c. —Ibid., § 6. p. 252.]
'! [Hickes calls St. Irenzeus the dis- ciple of St. John elsewhere, probably as being the disciple of St. Polyearp, who was the disciple of St. John. See the Fragm. Epistole ad Florinum, S. Iren. Op., pp. 339, 340. ]
πὶ (Tertulliani De Prese. Her. c. 12. Op., p. 147, A. ]
by St. Ireneus and Tertullian. 47 munus apud altare perficiet, nisi prius reconciliando fratri re- versus ad patientiam fuerit. “No man who hath a rancorous mind against his brother, shall offer his gift at the altar, unless he returns to patience, and is first reconciled to his brother.” In this allusion to the text, the father must take the word gift, and altar, in the literal sense, for which I have produced it; [ mean, for the Eucharistical offering at the holy table, which was the sense of the Church in his time, as may be proved from his writings". But without citing any of them here, it is evident from his phrase munus perficere ; which is a sacrificial expression borrowed from the Greek writers, both sacred and profane, among whom ἱερὸν τελεῖν, θυσίαν τελεῖν. and τελεῖν put by itself, signifies rem sacram facere, ‘to offer sacrifice,’ and so munus perficere must sig-
Δ [See below, sect. vii. p. 57.]
° See Julius Pollux, lib. i. [cap. 1. segm. 35. tom. i. p. 18, D. περὶ μυστη- ρίων, τελούντων Kal τελουμένων" εἴη δὲ ἂν τῆς αὐτῆς ἰδέας καὶ τάδε, μυστήρια, τελεταὶ... μυσταγωγοὶ, TeAcoTal... μυεῖν... τελεῖν, 6 δὲ μυηθεὶς, τετε- λεσμένος, ὥσπερ ὃ ἐνάντιος. .. ἀτέλε- στος, ... τὰ δὲ μυστήρια τελεταὶ, καὶ τέλη μυστικὰ, κ. T.A-] Budeus’s Com- ment. Grecre Lingue. [p. 622. τελῶ ‘initio’ significat et ‘res divinas facio’ .-. Inde τελετὴ ‘expiatio,’ et ‘cexre- monia,’ et ‘sacerdotium’... Augustinus libro decimo de civitate Dei hoc verbo consecrationem significari dixit [ cap. ix. Op., tom. vii. p. 245, G.]... Synesius altaris sacrificium τελετὴν ἀπόρρητον vocare solet, quasi arcanam et mysti- cam ceremoniam ... τελεῖν agere et celebrare significat et rem sacram fa- cere. ] Constantini Lexicon in verb. [p. 749. τελῶ ‘initio’... ‘ago’ et ‘celebro,’ et ‘rem sacram facio,’ ἄγω, ut τελεῖν τὰ παναθήναια.) Hen. Steph. Thesaur. Grece Lingue. [p. 9236. τελέω, ago, perago, celebro, de rebus sacris potissi- mum: ut θυσίας τελέσαι, ap. Appian. | So S. Chrysost. Hom. Ixxxii. (al. Ixxxiii.) in cap. xxvi. S. Matth. εἰ yap μὴ ἀπέθανεν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, τίνος σύμβολα τὰ τελούμενα; [Op., tom. vii. p. 783, C.] si vero mortuus non est Christus, cujus symbola hz oblationes; ‘if Christ died not, of what (or whom) are the oblations, the symbols ΟΥ̓ signs?’ Which makes me think, that τετέ- λεσται, the last word which our Lord spake as He expired upon the cross, relates in its sacrificial sense to His
Passion ; as the grand sacrifice of our redemption, where it was finished, and our redemption thereby accomplished. The word is so used by Cabasilas of the holy Eucharist, { Nicolai Cabasilz Archiep. Thessalon. (A.D. 1850.) Li- turgie Expositio, cap. 27; where he is speaking of the words of consecra- tion, and the prayer for the conversion of the elements | τούτων δὲ εἰρημένων τὸ πᾶν τῆς ἱερουργίας ἥνυσται, καὶ τετέλε- σται.----ἰ Biblioth. Patr., tom. ii. p. 233, E. Paris. 1624.] And from this sig- nification of the verb τελεῖν, and the verbal noun τελετὴ for a sacrifice or oblation, the prayer of oblation is called τελεστικὴ εὐχή.---ἰ 1. ibid., B.] And the latter Greeks call the Holy Spirit, which the ancient Church in all places prayed unto God to send down upon oblations, τελεταρχικὸν, καὶ ἁγιαστικὸν πνεῦμα, as B. Samonas in his discep- tation with Achmed a Mahometan Saracen; in which, as all the latter Greeks after the second council of Nice, but more especially after the tenth century, he went most absurdly to prove, that the bread and wine by consecration was made the true and real body and blood of Christ. [The title of the work is, Beati Samone Gaze civitatis Archiepiscopi(cire. A.D. 1072) disceptatio cum Achmed Saraceno, perspicue docens, panem ac vinum utrumque per sacerdotem consecra- tum, verum esse et integrum corpus et sanguinem Domini nostri Jesu Christi. The words quoted occur, ὃ 3. Biblioth. Patr. Gallandii, tom. xiv. p. 226, E.]
CHAP. WU,
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
48 St. Cyprian understood Matt. v. 23 of the Eucharist.
nify to offer the Eucharistical gift, or oblation, as he calls it, de Prescript. Her. cap. 40? ; where speaking of Mithra, the Persian goddess, who aped the mysteries of the Christian reli- gion, “ ¢ingit, saith he, she baptizes, celebrat et panis oblatio- nem, and hath a sacrifice of bread.” So de Oratione, cap.104. Ne prius ascendamus ad Dei altare, quam si quid discordie vel offense cum fratribus contraxerimus, resolvamus. “ Let us not come unto God’s altar, before we have removed all differences, or offences we had contracted with our brethren.” What he calls altare Dei here, he, who uses ara and altare promis- cuously, which other Latin fathers distinguish, he, I say, calls aram Dei in cap. 14°. Similiter et stationum diebus, non putant plerique sacrificiorum orationibus interveniendum, quod statio solvenda sit accepto corpore Domini. Ergo devotum Deo obse- quum Eucharistia resolvit ? An magis Deo obligat ὃ Nonne solennior erit statio tua si et ad aram Dei steteris.
The next father, who applies this text to the Christian sacrifice, is St. Cyprian. Saith he in his tract of Church unity®, Ad sacrificium cum dissentione venientem revocat ab altari, et jubet prius concordare cum fratre, tune cum pace re- deuntem munus offerre, quia nec ad Cain munera respexit Deus. Neque enim pacatum Deum habere poterat, qui cum fratre pacem per zeli discordiam non habebat. ‘ Him that comes to the sacrifice with dissension (our Lord) repulses from the altar, and commands him first to agree with his brother, and then returning in peace to offer his gift, because God had no respect to the offering of Cain,” &c. After citing so many testimonies out of this father for the Eucharistical oblation'’, I conceive it needless to prove what he meant by sacrificiwm and munus offerre in this place, where he compares the of- fering of unreconciled Christians at the holy communion, and the offering of Cain together. There is more to the same purpose in his treatise of the Lord’s prayer on the fifth peti- tion", 816 nec sacrificium Deus recipit dissidentis, et ab altari re-
p [Tertull. de Presc. Her.c.40.Op. ara and altare, see Prefatory Discourse, p- 216, D. The passage is quoted at vol. i. p. 122, note a.]
length, sect. x. ] s [S. Cypr. de Unitate Ecclesiz, 4 (Id. de Orat. ο. 10. Op. p. 133, B. Op., p. 198. ed. Ben. ]
‘ascendimus,’ apparently a misprint, t [ Prefat. Disc., vol. i. pp. 94, sqq. ]
is the reading of the Paris edition of “ [S. Cypr. de Oratione Dominica,
1675. | Op., p. 211. ] :
r [Id.ibid., p.135, A. On the words
as did Eusebius and Constantine. 49
vertentem prius fratri reconciliari jubet, ut pacificis precibus et σπᾶν. τι. Deus possit esse pacatus. Sacrificium Deo majus est pax nostra, _“_ et fraterna concordia [et de unitate Patris et Filii et Spiritus
Sancti plebs adunata.| Neque enim in sacrifictis que Abel et
Cain primi obtulerunt, munera eorum Deus, sed corda intuebatur
[wt alle placeret in munere qui placebat in corde.| Abel paci-
ficus et justus dum Deo sacrificat innocenter, docuit et ceteros,
quando ad altare munus offerunt sic venire [cum Dei timore, cum simplice corde, cum lege justitie, cum concordie pace.| Here
again is a comparison of sacrifice to sacrifice, altar to altar,
and gift to gift; and Abel set forth as an example to us,
when we offer our gifts at the altar, venire cum Dei timore,
cum simplici corde, cum lege justitie, cum concordie pace. So
at the latter end of his tract De Zelo, et Livore*. Dimittentur
tibi debita, quando ipse dimiseris: accipientur sacrificia tua,
cum pacificus ad Deum veneris: “thy sins shall be forgiven,
when thou dost forgive, and thy sacrifices shall be accepted,
when thou comest to God in peace.”
Eusebius, de Vita Constantini, lib. iv. cap. 41, speaking of the great synod, which the emperor caused to assemble at Tyre for composing some dissensions which had arisen in the Church, “ He thought it not lawful,” saith hey, “for those who had dissensions in their minds against one another to come to the holy worship (of the Eucharist) μὴ ἐξεῖναι ἐπὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ παρεῖναι λατρείαν", because the law of God com- manded, that those who had differences should not offer the gifts, before they had returned to mutual friendship, and were united in peace.” And what Eusebius thought of the holy Eucharist may be seen in cap. 45. of the same book, and De Laudibus Constantini, cap. 16."
x [Id., de Zelo et Livore,Op., p. 261. ]
Υ [μὴ γὰρ ἐξεῖναι τὰς γνώμας διηρῃ- μένους ἐπὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ παρεῖναι λατρείαν" θείου νόμου διαγορεύοντος μὴ πρότερον τὰ δῶρα προσφέρειν τοὺς ἐν διαφορᾷ τυγχάνοντας, ἢ φιλίαν ἀσπασαμένους, καὶ τὰ πρὸς ἀλλήλους εἰρηνικῶς διαθέν- τας. --- Euseb. de Vita Const. iv. 41. Hist. Eccl., tom. i. p. 648. ]
2 Suicerus in Thesaur. Eccl. ‘‘Aa- τρεία stricte Eucharistie celebrationem denotat.”? [tom. ii. p. 218.]
8 [οἱ δὲ τοῦ Θεοῦ λειτουργοὶ, εὐχαῖς ἅμα καὶ διαλέξεσι τὴν ἑορτὴν κατεκόσ- μουν" οἱ μὲν... οἱ δὲ μὴ διὰ τού-
HICKES,
των χωρεῖν οἷοί Te, θυσίαις ἀναίμοις Kar μυστικαῖς ἱερουργίαις τὸ θεῖον ἱλάσκοντο, [ὑπὲρ τῆς κοινῆς εἰρήνης. ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐκ- κλησίας τοῦ Θεοῦ, οὐτοῦ τε βασιλέως ...lkeTyplous εὐχὰς τῷ Θεῷ προσανα- pépovres.—Id. ibid., ο. 45. p. 651.]
» ἀναίμους καὶ λογικὰς θυσίας τὰς 5? εὐχῶν καὶ ἀπορρήτου θεολογίας τοῖς αὐτοῦ θιασώταις, τίς ἐπιτελεῖν παρέδω- κεν ἄλλος, ἢ μόνος 6 ἡμέτερος σωτήρ; διὸ ἐπὶ τῆς καθ᾽ ὅλης ἀνθρώπων οἰκου- μένης, θυσιαστήρια συνέστη, ἐκκλησιῶν τε ἀφιερώματα, νοερῶν τε καὶ λογικῶν θυσιῶν ἱεροπρεπεῖς λειτουργίαι, μόνῳ τῷ παμβασιλεῖ Θεῷ πρὸς ἁπάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
{ Matt. 5. 23.]
[Rom. 16, 16.]
50 Matt. v. 23 understood of the Eucharist
To these testimonies I shall add that of Cyril of Jerusalem, as I have cited it in my preface to the Second Collection of Controversial Letters‘, p. liv. “The μή τις κατά Twos, and the holy kiss of peace were founded on this text, as requiring a new qualification for the sacrifice of the holy Eucharist, ac- cording to this holy father‘, εἶτα Bod ὁ διάκονος" ἀλλήλους ἀπο- λάβετε, Kal ἀλλήλους ἀσπαζώμεθα, K.T.r. “ Then the deacon cries aloud, ‘embrace one another, and let us kiss one another?’ but do not think this kiss to be like to those which are com- monly used in other salutations; for it is not such: but this kiss reconciles souls, and is a pledge of amnesty and forgive- ness, a sign that there is a commixture of souls, and a perfect obliterature of all injuries; and for this reason it was that Christ said, ‘if thou bringest thy gift unto the altar,’ &c. Wherefore this kiss is reconciliatory, and consequently holy, as St. Paul said, ‘Salute you one another with a holy kiss,’ ”
The next author who took the bread and wine to be the gifts or offerings of this text in a proper and literal sense, is St. Chrysostom, in his commentary upon the place®; διὰ yap τοῦτο οὐκ εἶπε μετὰ TO προσενεγκεῖν, ἢ πρὶν ἢ προσενεγκεῖν" ἀλλ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῦ δώρου κειμένου καὶ τὴς θυσίας ἀρχὴν ἐχούσης πέμπει διαλλαγησόμενον τῷ ἀδελφῷ : “For which reason He did not say, ‘after thou hast offered,’ or ‘before thou offerest,’ but ‘when the gift is laid (upon the altar), and the sacrifice ready to begin, then He sends the offerer to be reconciled to his brother.” . .. ὁ yap κελευσθεὶς μὴ πρότερον προσενεγ- κεῖν, ἕως ἂν KaTadrayh, κἂν μὴ διὰ THY πρὸς TOV πλησίον ἀγάπην; διὰ γοῦν τὸ μὴ κεῖσθαι ἀτέλεστον, ἐπειχθήσεται δραμεῖν πρὸς τὸν λελυπημένον;, καὶ καταλῦσαι τὴν ἔχθραν" ἢ
ἀναπεμπόμεναι" τὰς δὲ δι᾽ αἱμάτων καὶ λύθρων, καπνοῦ τε προσεπιτελουμένας θυσίας, τάς τε ὠμὰς ἐκείνας, καὶ μανιώ- δεις ἀνδροκτασίας τε, καὶ ἀνθρωποθυσίας, τίς ἀφανεῖ τε καὶ ἀοράτῳ δυνάμει, σβε- σθῆναι, καὶ μηκέτι ὑπάρχειν παρεσκεύα- σεν ; ὡς μαρτυρεῖσθαι πρὸς αὐτῆς γε τῆς Ἑλλήνων ioropias.—| Euseb. de Lau- dibus Constantini, ibid., p. 768. ]
ὁ [See Additions to Third Edition, vol. i. p. 1. note ec.
4 [εἶτα βοᾷ ὃ διάκονος" ἀλλήλους ἀπολάβετε καὶ ἀλλήλους ἀσπαζώμεθα" μὴ ὑπολάβῃς τὸ φίλημα ἐκεῖνο σύνηθες εἶναι τοῖς ἐπ᾿ ἀγορᾶς γενομένοις ὑπὸ τῶν κοινῶν φίλων" οὐκ ἔστι τοίνυν τοιοῦτο τὸ φίλημα" ἀνακίρνησι τὰς ψυχὰς ἀλ-
λήλαις, καὶ πᾶσαν ἀμνησικακίαν αὐταῖς μνηστεύεται: σημεῖον τοίνυν ἐστὶ τὸ φίλημα τοῦ ἀνακραθῆναι τὰς ψυχὰς, καὶ πᾶσαν ἐξορίζειν μνησικακίαν" διὰ τοῦτο ὁ Χριστὸς ἔλεγεν᾽ ἐὰν προσφέρῃ, k.T-A. οὐκοῦν τὸ φίλημα διαλλαγή ἐστι, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἅγιον ; ὥς που ὃ μακάριος Παῦ- Aos ἐβόα λέγων" ἀσπάζεσθε ἀλλήλους ἐν φιλήματι aylw.—S. Cyril. Hierosol. Catech. Mystag. v. § 3. p. 326, A, B.]
e §. Chrys. Hom. xvi. in S. Matth., cap. 5. § 9. [Op., tom. vii. p. 216, D. The Latin is from the version of Ani- anus, published in Erasmus’ and Mo- rell’s editions. |
f [Id. ibid., pp. 216, E. 217, A.]
by St. Cyril of Jerusalem, and St. Chrysostom. 51
“ For he that is commanded not to offer before he is recon- cmar. 1. ciled, though not to gain the love of his brother, yet at least —_ that his sacrifice may be rightly offered, he is enjoined to run to his offended brother, and put an end to the enmity which is between them”... οὕτω καὶ ὁ Χριστὸς οὐκ ἀφίησιν οὐδὲ μικρὸν ὑπερτίθεσθαι, ἵνα μὴ τῆς θυσίας πληρωθεί- σης ῥᾳθυμότερος ὁ τοιοῦτος γένηται, ἡμέραν ἐξ ἡμέρας ἀνα- βαλλόμενοςξ: “Sd Christ does not allow (the offerer) the least delay, lest the sacrifice being ended, he should become backward in his duty by putting it off from day to day.” εἰπὼν γάρ' ἄφες τὸ δῶρόν cov, οὐκ ἔστη μέχρι τούτου; ἀλλ᾽ ἐπήγαγεν" ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου, καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ τόπου πάλιν εἰς φρίκην αὐτὸν ἐμβαλών" καὶ, ἄπελθε" καὶ οὐκ ἁπλῶς εἶπε, ἄπελθε, ἀλλὰ προσέθηκε, πρῶ- Tov, καὶ τότε ἐλθὼν πρόσφερε τὸ δῶρόν σου; διὰ πάντων τούτων δηλῶν, ὅτι οὐ δέχεται τοὺς ἀπεχθῶς πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἔχοντας αὕτη ἡ τράπεζα" ἀκουέτωσαν οἱ μεμυημένοι, ὅσοι μετὰ ἔχθρας προσέρχονται" ἀκουέτωσαν καὶ οἱ ἀμύητοι" καὶ γὰρ καὶ πρὸς τούτοις ἔχει τι κοινὸν ὁ λόγος᾽' προσάγουσι γὰρ καὶ αὐτοὶ δῶρον καὶ θυσίαν, εὐχὴν λέγω καὶ ἐλεημοσύνην" ὅτι yap καὶ τοῦτο θυσία (quia enim et hec sacrificii instar obti- neant), ἄκουσον Ti φησιν ὁ προφήτης" θυσία αἰνέσεως δοξά- ce pe’ καὶ πάλιν" θύσον τῷ θεῷ θυσίαν αἰνέσεως" ἔπαρ- σις τῶν χειρῶν μου θυσία ἑσπερινή: ὥστε κἂν εὐχὴν μετὰ τοιαύτης γνώμης προσάγῃς βέλτιον ἀφεῖναι τὴν εὐχὴν, καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν καταλλαγὴν ἐλθεῖν τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ, καὶ τότε τὴν εὐχὴν προσφέρειν" : For having said, ‘ leave thy gift,’ He did not stop there, but added, ‘before the altar,’ giving him an im- pression of horror from the place, ‘and go thy way;’ nor does He only say, ‘go thy way,’ but adds, ‘ first, and then come and offer thy gift ; giving us to understand by all this, that this table does not receive such as are at enmity with each other. Let those hear this, who being initiated into (these) holy mysteries approach (the altar) with enmity, and let those also hear who are not yet initiated; for this text has some re- lation also to them: for they also bring a gift, and a sacri- fice, I mean prayer and alms; for these are a sacrifice also; hear what the Prophet saith; ‘the sacrifice of praise honoureth Me;’ and again; ‘offer unto God the sacrifice of 5. [Td. ibid., § 10. p. 218, A.] b [Id. ibid., § 10. p. 217, A, B.] E2
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Ps, 142. 2.
_ him may be imposed upon thee.
52 Matt. v. 23 understood of the Eucharist
praise ; and, ‘the lifting up of my hands as the evening sacrifice.’ ” Here the father distinguishes between the sacri- fice of the baptized and unbaptized Christians ; between the sacrifice of the altar, and the sacrifice of those who were not yet qualified to come to the altar; between the mere oral sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, and the real sacrifice or oblation of the bread and wine, with praise and thanks- giving; between sacrifice in the most eminent proper sense, for an external material sacrifice presented unto God at the altar, and sacrifice only in the less proper and analogical sense, for praise, and thanksgiving, and alms, as it is in our, and all other translations of the last place cited by the father: “Let my prayer be set forth before Thee as the incense, and the lifting up of the hands as the evening sacrifice.” These words were spoken by King David, when he was in exile from Jerusalem and the temple, where morning and evening sacrifices were offered, instead of which he begs of God, that He would be pleased to accept of his prayers, that like the daily sacrifices, they might come up for a me- morial unto Him.
To these let me add the testimonies of Hierome and Augus- tine, the former of whom in his commentary of Matt. v. writes thusi: Non divit, si tu, &c. “He doth not say, if thou hast any- thing against thy brother, but if thy brother hath any thing against thee, that a greater necessity of being reconciled to For as long as we are not able to pacify him, I know not if we can warrautably offer our gifts to God.” The latter in his sixteenth Sermon De Verbis Domini writes thus*; Si obtuleris munus tuum ad altare, &e. “ God is not angry with thee for deferring to present thy gift, for He desireth thee more than thy gift; for if having an evil mind against thy brother, thou shalt come with thy gift to God, He will answer thee; What hast thou brought:
i [Non dixit, si tu habes aliquid ad- versus fratrem tuum, sed si frater tuus habet aliquid adversum te, ut durior reconciliationis tibi imponatur necessi- tas. Quamdiu illum placare non pos- suinus, nescio an consequenter munera nostra offeramus Deo,—S. Hieron. Comm. in Matt., lib. i. cap. 5. Op., tom, vil. col. 27, B, C.]
k [Si obtuleris munus tuum ad al- tare, et ibi recordatus fueris, quia fra- ter tuus habet aliquid adversum te; relinque ibi munus tuum ante altare. Non irascitur Deus, quia differs im- ponere munus tuum: te querit Deus magis quam munus tuum. Nam si malum animum gerens adversus fra- trem tuum, adveneris cum munere ad
by St. Jerome and St. Augustine. 53
CHAP. 11. SECT. VI.
to Me to thy own destruction? Thou offerest thy gift when thou thyself art not a fit offerimg to God. Christ values thee more, whom He hath redeemed with His blood, than what thou foundest in thy storehouse. Therefore leave thy gift before the altar, and go, and be first reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. See how soon the danger of hell is taken away: not reconciled, thou art in danger of hell, but when thou art reconciled thou securely offerest thy gift at the altar.” Here St. Augustine takes the text in the literal sense. So likewise De Sermone Domini in Monte, he understands it literally!; ‘‘if the offended brother be present; but if he be absent, as perhaps beyond the sea,” then he thinks in that case it may be taken in a spiritual sense for any spiritual gift, as prayer, or praise, and for the spiritual altar of the heart, which is in the inner temple of the body, as it is written, “The temple of God is holy, which temple ye are,” and “that Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith.”
VII. The next scriptural proof which I shall produce in szcr. vn. order for the Eucharistical oblation of the bread and wine, ΔΤΕΒΡΙΡΗΣ is taken from the words of the institution, Matt. xxvi. 26, ues ee i Mark xiv. 22, Luke xxi. 19, recited by the Apostle in these words: “The Lord Jesus in the same night that He was be- [1 Cor. 11. trayed, took bread, and when He had given thanks He brake ἜΤΣΙ it, and said, Take, eat, this is My body which is broken for you; this do inremembrance of Me. After the same manner also He took the cup, when He [had] supped, saying, This
ante altare jubearis] si ergo de ab- sente, et, quod fieri potest, etiam trans mare constituto aliquid tale veniat in mentem, absurdum est cre-
Deum tuum, respondet tibi, tu peristi, mihi quid adtulisti? offers munus tuum, et tu non es munus Dei. Plus querit Christus quem redemit sanguine suo,
quam quod tu invenisti in horreo tuo. Ergo relinque ibi munus tuum ante al- tare, et vade, prius reconciliari fratri tuo, et sic veniens offeres munus tuum. Ecce illo reatus gehenne quam cito solutus est. Nondum reconciliatus, eras gehenne reus: reconciliatus, se- curus offers munus tuum ad altare.— S. Aug. Serm. Ixxxii. (al. de Verb. Domini, xvi.) Op., tom. v. pp. 441, G. 442, A, B.]
! (St. Augustine’s words are; Si ac- cipiatur ad literam fortassis aliquis credat ita fieri oportere, si prasens frater sit: non enim diutius differri potest, cum munus tuum relinquere
dere ante altare munus relinquendum, quod post terras et maria pererrata offeras Deo. [Et ideo prorsus intro ad spiritalia refugere cogimur, ut hoc quod dictum est sine absurditate possit in- telligi. Altari itaque spiritaliter in in- teriore Dei templo ipsam fidem accipere possumus.... cum tale aliquid oblaturi sumus in corde nostro, id est, in inte- riore Dei templo; ‘templum enim Dei sanctum est,’ inquit, ‘quod estis vos’ (1 Cor. iii. 17): et, in interiore homine habitare Christum per fidem in cordibus vestris (Eph. iii. 17.)—S. Aug. De Serm. Dom. in Monte, lib. i. ὃ 27. Op., tom. iii. pars 11. p. 176, A, B, D.]
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
54: That our Lord instituted an oblation of the
cup is the New Testament in My blood; this do ye, as oft as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” ‘That the ancients believed that our Lord made an oblation of the bread and wine at His institution of this Sacrament, “and commanded His disciples so to do,” is past all doubt from the sixty- third epistle of St. Cyprian to Cecilius, against an evil custom introduced in some places to offer nothing but water, without wine, at the holy Eucharist. Quanquam sciam frater charis- sime™, &c., “ Although, most dear brother, (saith he,) I know that most of the bishops set over the Churches of the Lord, by Divine mercy through the whole world, do keep the rule of evangelical truth, and of our Lord’s command, nor do swerve at all by a mere human and new institution, from what Christ our Master commanded to be done, and did Him- self: nevertheless, because some through ignorance or sim- plicity, in consecrating the cup of our Lord, and distributing it to the people, do not do what Jesus Christ our Lord and God, the author and institutor of this sacrifice, did and com- manded to be done, I thought it necessary to write unto you of this matter, that if any is withheld in this error, he may by the light of truth return unto the original tradition of our Lord.” Admonitos autem nos scias, &c., “ But know that we are commanded in offering the cup to observe the ordinance of our Lord, and to do no other thing than what He first did, (that is to say,) that the cup, which is offered in remembrance of Him, be a mixture of water and wine.” Nam quis magis sacerdos Dei summi, &c., ‘For who is more a priest of the Most High God, than our Lord Jesus Christ? who offered a sacrifice to God the Father, and the very same sacrifice that Melchi-
m [Quanquam sciam, frater caris- sime, episcopos plurimos, Ecclesiis Do- minicis in toto mundo divina dignatione prepositos, evangelice veritatis ac do- minice traditionis tenere rationem, nec ab eo quod Christus magister et praece- pit et gessit humana et novella insti- tutione decedere, tamen quoniam qui- dam vel ignoranter vel simpliciter in ealice dominico sanctificando et plebi ministrando, non hoe faciunt quod Jesus Christus, Dominus et Deus nos- ter, sacrificii hujus auctor et doctor fecit et docuit, religiosum pariter ac necessarium duxi has ad vos literas facere, ut si quis in isto errore adhuc
tenetur, veritatis luce perspecta ad radicem atque originem traditionis do- minice revertatur.... Admonitos au- tem nos scias ut in ealice offerendo dominica traditio servetur, neque aliud fiat a nobis quam quod pro nobis Do- minus prior fecerit, ut calix qui in commemorationem ejus offertur mix- tus vino offeratur.—p. 104. ed. Ben. ... Nam quis magis sacerdos Dei sumini quam Dominus noster Jesus Christus, qui sacrificium Deo Patri obtulit, et obtulit hoc idem quod Mel- chisedech obtulerat, id est, panem et vinum, suum scilicet corpus et san- guinem. ... Ut ergo in Genesi per
bread and cup, taught by St. Cyprian. 55
sedec offered, that is, bread and wine.” Ut ergo in Genesi, &c., “Therefore [that jin Genesis the high-priest Melchisedec might duly bless Abraham, the representation of the sacrifice of Christ by bread and wine was to precede, which our Lord verified and fulfilled when He offered bread and a cup of wine and water, which was the plenitude and verity of that prefigura- tion.” Sed et per Solomonem, &c., “ Nay, the Holy Ghost, by Solomon, did not only foreshew the figure of the sacrifice of our Lord, to wit, immolate hostie et panis et vini, the obla- tion of bread and wine, but also made mention of the altar and of the Apostles. ‘ Wisdom, saith he, hath builded her house; she hath hewn out her seven pillars, she hath killed her beasts, she hath mingled her wine, she hath also fur- nished her table.” Qua in parte, &c., “where we find that it was a mixed cup which our Lord offered, and that it was wine which He called His blood.” Nam si in sacrificio, quod Christus obtulerit, &c., “ For if none but Christ is to be fol- lowed in administering the sacrifice which Christ offered, then it is our duty to obey and do what Christ did and com- manded to be done.” Nam si Jesus Christus, Dominus et Deus noster, ipse est summus sacerdos, &c., “For if Jesus Christ, our Lord and God, is the High-Priest of God the Father, and first offered Himself a sacrifice to the Father, and com- manded that this should be done in remembrance of Him, doth not he who doth as Christ did, truly act as a priest in the place of Christ, sacerdos vice Christi vere fungitur ; and then offer a true and perfect sacrifice in the Church to God the Father, when he offers in the same manner which he may Melchisedech sacerdotem benedictio circa Abraham posset rite celebrari,
precedit ante imago sacrificii Christi, in pane et vino scilicet constituta ;
parte invenimus calicem mixtum fuisse quem Dominus obtulit et vinum fuisse quod sanguinem suum dixit.—pp. 106, 107. ed. Ben... . Nam si in sacri-
quam rem perficiens et adimplens Do- minus, panem et calicem mixtum vino obtulit, et qui est plenitudo veritatis veritatem preefigurate imaginis adim- plevit. Sed et per Solomonem Spiritus Sanctus typum Dominici sacrificii ante premonstrans immolate hostiz et panis et vini, sed et altaris et Apostolorum faciens mentionem, ‘ sapientia,’ inquit, (Proy. ix. 1, 2.) ‘zdificavit 5101 do- mum, et subdidit columnas septem, mactavit suas hostias, miscuit in cra- tera vinum suum et paravit mensam suam.’—p. 105, ed. Ben.... Qua in
ficio quod Christus obtulit non nisi Christus sequendus est, utique id nos obaudire et facere oportet quod Chris- tus fecit, et quod faciendum esse mandavit.—p. 108. ed. Ben... Nam si Jesus Christus Dominus et Deus noster ipse est summus sacerdos Dei Patris, et sacrificium Patri se ipsum primus obtulit, et hoc fieri in sui com- memorationem precepit: utique ille sacerdos vice Christi vere fungitur, qui id quod Christus fecit imitatur, et sacrificium verum et plenum tunc of- fert in ecclesia Deo Patri, si sic in-
CHAP. 11.
SECT. VII.
cnristiAN perceive Christ Himself offered ?”
PRIEST- HOOD.
56 That our Lord instituted an oblation of the bread and cup
Post cenam mixtum cali- cem obtulit Dominus ; “after supper our Lord offered a mixed cup.” ΕἸ quia passionis ejus mentionem, &c., “ And because we commemorate His passion in all our sacrifices (passio est enim Domini, for the passion of our Lord is the sacrifice we offer") we ought to do nothing but what He did.” Religiont agitur nostre congruit, &c., “ Wherefore, dear brother, it is very agreeable to our religion, and to the fear we have of God, and to our order and priestly function, that in mixing and offering the cup we strictly observe the ordmance of our Lord, and by His authority correct the errors of others; that when He shall come in His glorious majesty from heaven, He may find us holding what He taught, observing what He commanded, and domg what He did.” Here is a noble, ample, and plain literal proof from the testimony of this father, and of the whole Church of his time, that our Lord, at the institution of the holy Eucharist, offered up the bread and cup to His Father, and commanded His disciples in the ministration of the same Sacrament to do as He had done. So in the Eucharistical office, Const. Apost., lib. vii. cap. 12°, μεμνημένοι τοίνυν, K.T.r., “ Being mindful, therefore, of His passion,” &c. προσφέρομεν, k.T.r., “ We offer unto Thee, our King and God, according to His commandment, this bread and this cup.” The same may be proved from the testimony of Irenzeus, who flourished in the second century, above four- score years before St. Cyprian. This father, speaking of the holy Eucharist, lib, iv. cap. 32, writes thus?: Sed et suis
cipiat offerre, secundum quod ipsum Christum videat obtulisse. . . Post cce- nam mixtum calicem obtulit Dominus
. et quia passionis ejus mentionem in sacrificiis omnibus facimus (passio est enim Domini sacrificium quod offerimus) nihil aliud quam quod ille fecit facere debemus.—p. 109. ed. Ben. Religioni igitur nostre congruit et timori et ipsi loco atque officio sacer- dotii nostri, frater carissime, in domi- nico calice miscendo et offerendo cus- todire traditionis Dominic veritatem, et quod prius apud quosdam videtur erratum Domino monente corrigere ; ut cum in claritate sua et majestate coelesti venire coeperit, inveniat nos te- nere quod monuit, observare quod do- cuit, facere quod fecit.—S. Cyprian. Epist. Lxiii. ad Ceecilium, p. 110. ed.
Ben. ]
n T}lius ἀνάμνησις. Luce. xxii. 91; 1 Cor. xi. 24, 25. [ Fell’s note in locum, p- 156. ed. Oxon. |
ο [μεμνημένοι τοίνυν τοῦ πάθους av- τοῦ καὶ τοῦ θανάτου καὶ τῆς ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστάσεως καὶ τῆς εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἐπα- νόδου καὶ τῆς μελλούσης αὐτοῦ δευτέρας παρουσίας, ἐν ἣ ἔρχεται μετὰ δόξης καὶ δυνάμεως κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκροὺς“, καὶ ἀποδοῦναι ἑκάστῳ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ, προσφέρομέν σοι, τῷ βασιλεῖ καὶ Θεῷ, κατὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ διάταξιν, τὸν ἄρτον τοῦ- τον καὶ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο, K.T.A.—Con- cil., tom, i. p. 481, A.]
P Sed et suis discipulis dans con- silium primitias Deo offerre [ex suis creaturis, non quasi indigenti, sed ut ipsi nee infructuosi nee ingrati sint, eum qui ex creatura panis est accepit
asserted by the Apost. Const. and St. Ireneus. 57
discipulis dans consilium’ primitias Deo offerre, &c., “ But also authorizing His disciples to offer to God the first-fruits of His creatures, He took the creature of bread, and gave thanks, saying, This is My body. And in hke manner He delivered the creature of wine in the cup to be His blood; e¢ Novi Testamenti novam docuit oblationem, &c., and instituted the new sacrifice of the New Testament, which the Church receiving from the Apostles, offers to God throughout the whole world; which offering was foretold by the prophet Malachi", Non est mihi voluntas in vobis, &c., “1 have no plea- sure in you, saith the Lord of Hosts,’” &c. So chap. 34. Igitur ecclesia oblatio, quam Dominus docuit offerri in universo mundo | purum sacrificium reputatur apud Deum, et est accep- tum ei’.| “Therefore this oblation of the Church, which the
et gratias egit, dicens, hoc est meum corpus. Et calicem similiter, qui est ex ea creatura que est secundum nos, suum sanguinem confessus est,] et Novi Testamenti novam docuit obla- tionem, [quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens in universo mundo offert Deo; de quo in duodecim Prophetis Mala- chias sic prwsignavit;] ‘non est mihi voluntas in vobis, [dicit Dominus om- nipotens, et sacrificium non accipiam de manibus vestris. Quoniam ab ortu solis usque ad occasum nomen meum clarificatur inter gentes, et in omni loco incensum offertur nomini meo et sacri- ficium purum.’—S. Iren., cont. Her., ec. 17. (32. ed. Oxon.) ὃ 5. p. 249. ed. Ben. |
4 The phrase occurs in the Latin version, [Vulgate] 1 Cor. vii. 25. Con- silium autem do, tanquam misericor- diam consecutus a Domino; in the Greek γνώμην δὲ δίδωμι. So 2 Cor. vill. 10; et consilium in hoc do; in the Greek, καὶ γνώμην ἐν τούτῳ δίδωμι.
* Οδρ.1.10,11. Dr. Grabe, not. ad loc. p- 823. (ed. Oxon.) ‘ Locum hunce pro- phetz de sacrificio corporis et sanguinis Christi in Eucharistia, ante Irenzeum interpretati sunt Clemens Romanus, c. 81. [Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 431, C.] Const. Apost., lib. vil. cap. 31. [apud Concil., tom. i. p. 432, C.] Martialis Epist.ad Burdegalenses, cap. 3. [S. Mar- tialis apostoli, confessoris et episcopi Lemovicensis ad Burdegalenses Epist., cap. ὃ. Biblioth. Vett. Patrnm, tom. ii. Ρ. 106, B. Lugd. 1677.] Justin. M. in Dialogo. [§ 28. p. 126, D. § 41. pp. 137, E. 138, A. § 117. p. 210, A, B.] (sed priores duo [scil. Const. Apost. et
Mart. Epist. ] supposititiisunt). Postea vero Tertullianus, lib. iii. contra Mar- cionem, [c. 22. p. 410.] Cyprianus, lib, i. [Testimoniorum] ady. Judzos. cap. 10. [p. 280.] Chrysos. Ps. χουν. [opus spurium; tom. v. p. 630, C, Ὁ. vid. autem adv. Judzos, v. tom. i. ὃ 12. pp. 647, Ὁ, C. 648, A.] Au- gust. de Civ. Dei, lib. xviii, ὁ. 36. [tom. vii. p. 517, F. ibid.,] lib. xix. c. 23. [p. 569, F.] contra adversarium Legis, lib. i. οἱ 20. [tom. viii. p. 571, A, B.] Euseb., lib. i. de Dem. Evang. cap. ult. [p. 40, A.] S. Joan. Damascen. [de Fide Orthodoxa, lib. iv. ο. 13. Op., tom. i. p. 272. Paris. 1712.] Petrus cognomento Venerabilis, lib. i. contra Petrobusianos [ Biblioth. Patr., tom. xii. pars il, p. 221, C, D. Colon. 1618.] et lib. ii. contra Judzos, cap. 3. [ibid., p. 171, F.] Imo et qui Christo nomen non dederat, Rabbi Samuel, Parastasi veri Messiz ad Rabbi Isaac magistrum synagogze Subiulmete in Regno Marrochiano, cap. 20. et 22. [Rabbi Samuelis Marrochiani de ad- ventu Messiz, quem Judzi tamen ex- pectant. Biblioth. Patr., tom. iv. pp. 267, 270. Paris. 1589.] ut impietas sit plus- quam Judaica huic interpretationi re- pugnare.’ [Feuard. Horum et aliorum auctorum verba recitavit Coccius The- sauri Catholici lib. vi. Artic. 6. ac przcipua etiam Medus in ante laudato Tractatu (on the Christian Sacrifice, ch. iii. Works, p. 358.) tanquam com- mentario in hune Malachie locum scripto. Mede’s Treatise is a discourse on this text of Malachi. | * [Id., Ὁ. 18. § 1. p. 250. ed. Ben. ]
CHAP. II.
SECT, VII.
CILRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
58 ποιεῖν and similar words mean ‘to offer’
Lord appointed to be offered throughout the whole world, is looked upon by God as a pure sacrifice, and is accepted by Him.” Non quod indigeat a nobis sacrificium' ; “ Not that He needs any sacrifice from us, but because he that offers it is honoured in that which he offers, if his gift be accepted: for by gifts we shew the affection and honour we have for the emperor ; and our Lord, commanding us to offer in all sim- plicity and innocence, charged us, saying, ‘ When thou bring- est thy gift to the altar,’” &c. So at the latter end of the same chapter, Sicut igitur non his indigens" ; ‘ Therefore as He does not need these oblations, but would have them per- formed by us for our own sakes, that we might not be with- out fruit; so the Word Himself hath given His people this command for making these oblations, though He has no need of them, but that they should learn to serve God; and therefore He would have us offer our gifts at His altar fre- quently, and without ceasing. Therefore there is an altar and temple in heaven whither our prayers and oblations are di- rected, as St. John says in the Apocalypse, ‘and the temple and tabernacle of God was opened*;’ for saith he, chap. xxi. 8, ‘Behold the tabernacle of God, in which He dwells with men, 7
It is plain from these testimonies how the primitive Church understood the words of the institution of the Lord’s Sup- per, and what was their sense of them, which is very agree- able to the signification of the word ποιεῖν, which in profane, as well as sacred writers, signifies ‘to offer ;? as in that phrase of Herodotus concerning the Persians’, ἄνευ yap δὴ μάγου οὔ σφι νόμος ἐστὶ θυσίας ποιέεσθαι" “ without one of the Magi it is not lawful for them to offer sacrifice.” In the precedent chapter’ he uses θυσίας ἕρδειν in the same sense: of δὲ vo-
Ὁ [See above p. 46, note h. ]
ἃ Sicut igitur non his indigens {vult tamen a nobis propter nos fieri, ne simus infructuosi : ita id ipsum Ver- bum dedit populo przceptum facien- darum oblationum, quamvis non indi- geret eis, ut discerent Deo servire. Sic et ideo nos quoque offerre vult munus ad altare frequenter sine inter- missione. Est ergo altare in ceelis; (illuc enim preces nostre et oblationes diriguntur), et templum; quemadino- dum Joannes in Apocalypsi ait; ‘et
apertum est templum Dei;’ et taberna- culum; ‘ecce enim, inquit, taberna- eulum Dei, in quo habitabit cum homi- nibus.’—Id. ibid., c. 17; ὃ 6. p. 252. ed. Ben. |
x [| Rather, ‘‘ and the temple of God was opened, and a tabernacle; for,’ &c. |
Y Herod., lib. i. ο. 132. [See lib. ix. c. 19. ποιήσαντες δὲ καὶ ἐνθαῦτα ipa, k.7.A. These instances however do not establish Hickes’ assertion. ]
2 ΠΗ. 011. 6 13. :
in Classical writers and the Septuagint. 59
μίζουσι Ait μὲν, ἐπὶ τὰ ὑψηλότατα τῶν οὐρέων ἀναβαίνοντες, pape θυσίας ἕρδειν" “they have a custom to offer sacrifices to Jove —— we upon the tops of the highest mountains.” From whence it is evident, even from human writers, that ποιεῖν, as well as ἕρδειν, is a sacrificial term*. But more especially it is so used in the Septuagint translation, which all learned men know is followed by the writers of the New Testament, even where they recite the words and speeches of our blessed Saviour. In that translation of the Old Testament ποιεῖν signifies the same as ἱεροποιεῖν or ἱερουργεῖν, ‘to offer or sacrifice,’ as Ὁ» does in the Hebrew, and facere in the vulgar translation. So Exod. xxix. 36; καὶ τὸ μοσχάριον [τῆς ἁμαρτίας] ποιή- σεις, x. τ. Δ. “ And thou shalt offer every day a bullock for a sin-offering ;” Et vitulum pro peccato offeres. Ver. 38. καὶ ταῦτά ἐστιν, ἅ ποιήσεις ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου" ‘ Now this is that which thou shalt offer upon the altar;” Hoe est quod facies in altari®, And ver. 39; τὸν ἀμνὸν τὸν Eva ποιήσεις TO
a [Itdoes not appear that the use of ποιεῖν absolutely, as that of €pdew and ῥέζειν, is classical: its use in this sense by the LXX, as representing literally the Hebrew FWY, is uniform. ]
+ [“Jo. Saubertus de Sacrificiis Ve- terum Collectanea; cap. 1. pp. 10, 11. (Lugd. Bat. 1699.) Facere autem sim- pliciter hoc loco significat ποιεῖν sive πράσσειν, agere, peragere: quanquam apud veteres nuda hee vox sepe etiam pro sacrificare sumitur. Plautus in Rud. 3. iv. 4. ‘Tun’ legirupionem hic nobiscum dis facere postulas?’ Stro- bilus apud eundem: ‘ Mulsi congialem plenam faciam tibi fideliam. Id adeo tibi faciam?’ ΑἸ]. 4. ii. 15. Leonida apud eundem; ‘Jam nunc secunda mihi facis.’ Asin 2. iv. 89. Varro, de Re Rust., lib. i. c. 1. proverbium adducit: ‘Dii facientes adjuvant.’ Laberius, (Fragm. 1. 40. ap. Corpus Vett. Poet. Lat, p. 1518. Lond. 1713.) “ Bidentes propter viam facere.’ A. Gellius (quot- ing a sacred formula from Fabius Pictor), ‘Vestalem facere pro populo Romano.’ Lib. i. c. 12. Virg. ‘Cum faciam vitula pro frugibus.’ Eel. iii. 77. Juven. ‘Pro populo faciens.’ Sat. ix. 117. Ovidius,
Nos faciamus ad annum Pastorum domine grandia liba Pali. Jib. iv. Fast. 775. Atque ita facere vel idem erit quod red- dere, sive que Deus postulavit, sive χαριστήρια, i.e. pro benefactis gratum
animum, sive pro peccatis piaculares, quo sensu extat faciendi 175. ff de V. 5. (Andr. Alciati de Verb. Sign. lex 175. p. 515. France. 1582.) vel idem, quod dare, aut solvere.—Id., ]. 218. ff eod. (lex 218. ibid., p. 593.) Confer etiam Alciatum Lex. Plaut. voc. Fa- cere, et Brissonium in Form., lib. i. p- 18. Inde quidem pontificis nomen deducere laborant a posse et facere, i.e. sacrificare. Apud Grecos similia verba sunt ἔρδειν ac ῥέζειν, i.e. et facere et sacrificare. Hom. Odyss., ix. 553. Theocr. Idyll., xvi. 26, xxvii. 63. Scholiasta Theocriti doctissimus Za- charias Calliergus ad Idyl. 8. quod inscribitur φαρμακεύτρια, (1. 3.) τὸ ἕρδειν καὶ τὸ ῥέζειν ἔλεγον ἐπὶ τῶν σφα- γίων: λέγεται δὲ καὶ ἀντὶ τοῦ καίειν ἁπλῶς, καὶ ἐν πυρὶ τιθέναι τε, κάθο λέγεται ἐνταῦθα. Eodem intellectu tam apud sacros quam profanos auc- tores aliquando reperiri voces ποιεῖν kal δρᾶν aliquot exemplis evincit mag- nus Bosius preceptor atque patronus meus. Exercit. de Pont. Max., c. 1. ὃ 6.’ (apud Grevii Thes. Antiq. Rom., tom. v. p. 234. He asserts that ποιεῖν and δρᾶν are so used by profane writers, but does not give any instances. )—Ad- ditional note from the Supplement of 1715, No. xi. p. 10, corrected from Hickes’ MS. ; see advertisement to vol. i. ; the words in parentheses have been added by the editor. j
CHRISTIAN
PRIEST- HOOD,
60 Instances of ποιεῖν and facere meaning ‘ to offer’
mpwl, καὶ τὸν ἀμνὸν τὸν δεύτερον ποιήσεις τὸ δειλινόν" “The one lamb thou shalt offer in the morning, and the other lamb thou shalt offer at even.” And ver. 41; καὶ τὸν ἀμνὸν τὸν δεύτερον ποιήσεις TO δειλινόν: “ And the other lamb thou shalt offer at even ;᾽ Alterum vero agnum offeres ad vesperam. So Exod. x. 25; καὶ εἶπε Motions, ἀλλὰ καὶ σὺ δώσεις ἡμῖν ὁλοκαυτώματα Kal θυσίας, ἃ ποιήσομεν Κυρίῳ τῷ Θεῷ ἡμῶν" “And Moses said, thou must give us also sacrifices and burnt-offerings, which we may sacrifice unto the Lord our God;” Ait Moyses, hostias quoque et holocausta dabis nobis, que offeramus Domino Deo nostro. So Levit. iv. 20; καὶ ποιήσει τὸν μόσχον, ὃν τρόπον ἐποίησε τὸν μόσχον τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας; οὕτω ποιηθήσεται: et faciet vitulum quemadmodum fecerat vitulum qui peccati: sic Ποέ 5, In English thus: “And he shall offer the bullock as he offered the bullock for a sin-offering ; so shall it be offered.” Where our English translation uses the word ‘ do’ in a sacri- ficial sense’. Castalio in his classical Latin renders it thus: Tauro facito item uti faciet tauro piaculart. Levit. vi. 22; ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ χριστὸς ὁ ἀντ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῶν υἱῶν αὐτοῦ ποιήσει αὐτήν" “ And the priest of his sons that is anointed in his stead shall offer it ;” Offeret autem eam, &c. Levit. ix. 7; καὶ εἶπε Μωῦσῆς τῷ Aapwv, πρόσελθε πρὸς τὸ θυσιαστήριον; καὶ ποίησον τὸ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας σου, καὶ τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμά σου» καὶ ἐξίλασαι περὶ σεαυτοῦ, καὶ τοῦ οἴκου σου; καὶ ποίησον τὰ δῶρα τοῦ λαοῦ, καὶ ἐξίλασαι περὶ αὐτῶν, καθάπερ ἐνε- τείλατο Κύριος τῷ Μωῦσῇ ““Διᾶ Moses said unto Aaron, Go unto the altar, and offer thy sin-offering, and thy burnt- offermg, and make an atonement for thyself and for the people: and offer the offermg of the people, and make an atonement for them, as the Lord commanded :” Ht dixit ad Aaron, accede ad aliare, et immola pro peccato tuo, offer holo- caustum, et deprecare pro te et pro populo ; cumque mactaveris hostiam populi, ora pro eo, sicut precepit Dominus. So verse 16; Kat προσήνεγκε τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμα, καὶ ἐποίησεν αὐτὸ, ὡς καθήκει: “ And he brought the burnt-offering, and offered it according to the manner.” And verse 22; καὶ κατέβη
¢ [The Latin given here is the trans- quomodo fecit et prius. Eng. Vers., lation of the LXX in Walton’s Poly- “ And he shall do with the bullock as glott, tom. i. p. 418. he did with the bullock for a sin offer- 4 [Vulg. Ste faciens et de hoc vitulo, ing.’ |
in the Septuagint and the Vulgate. 61
ποιήσας TO περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, kK. τ. Δ.» “ And came down from offering the sin-offering ;” Completis hostiis pro peccato, &e., descendit. So chapter xiv. 19; καὶ ποιήσει 6 ἱερεὺς τὸ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, x. τ. Δ.» “And the priest shall offer the sin-offering ;” Εἰ faciet sacrificium pro peccato. And ver. 30; καὶ ποιήσει μίαν ἀπὸ τῶν τρυγόνων, κ. τ. r., “ And he shall offer the one of the turtle doves;” Ht turturem offeret. Chap. xvii. 4; ὥστε ποιῆσαι αὐτὸ εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα; K. τ. Δ.» “to offer an offering,” &c., obtulerit oblationem. And ver. 9 ; μὴ ἐνέγκῃ ποιῆσαι αὐτὸ τῷ Κυρίῳ" “and brings it not, &c., ... to offer it unto the Lord ;” non adduxerit eam, ut offeratur Domino. Chap. xxiii. 12; καὶ ποιήσετε... πρόβατον ἄμωμον ἐνιαύσιον; kK. τ. d., “ And ye shall offer . .. an he lamb with- out blemish of the first year,” &c.; Caedetur agnus immacu- latus anniculus, &c. Deut. xvi. 1; φύλαξαι τὸν μῆνα τῶν νέων; καὶ ποιήσεις τὸ πάσχα Κυρίῳ τῷ Θεῷ σου “ Observe the month of Abib, and keep the passover unto the Lord thy God,” that is, “sacrifice the passover,” as in the next verse. So the Latin; Odserva mensem novarum frugum, ut fa- cias phase Domino tuo. Which place Mr. Aimsworth glosses thus: “Thou shalt do or make,’ that is, ‘celebrate’ the feast of the passover, or ‘sacrifice’ the passover®.” 501 Kings Vili. 63; ἐποίησεν ἔκει τὴν ὁλοκαύτωσιν, K. T. r., “There he offered burnt-offerings ;”” Fecit quippe holocaustum ἐδ. And chap. xvili. 23; καὶ ἐγὼ ποιήσω τὸν βοῦν τὸν ἄλλον : in our language; “And I will offer the other bullock ;” as in the Latin; Et ego faciam bovem alterum ; or as Castalio; Alterum ego immolabo. So ver. 25; ἐκλέξασθε ἑαυτοῖς τὸν μόσχον Tov ἕνα, καὶ ποιήσατε πρῶτοι, K.T.r.; in English; “Choose you one bullock for yourselves, and offer it first ; as in the Latin ; Eligite vobis bovem unum et facite primi. And ver. 26; καὶ ἔλαβον τὸν μόσχον καὶ ἐποίησαν, Kal ἐπεκαλοῦντο, κ-τολ.; in English; “ And they took the bullock, and offered it, and called upon the name of Baal ;” as the Latin; Qui cum tulissent bovem .. . fecerunt et invocabant nomen Baal. Though our translation in these three places renders it by the word ‘dress,’ that is, ‘ prepare’ the sacrifice. So ver. 29; μετώστητε
¢ [Annotations upon the five bookes Ainsworth. London, 1639. Annota- of Moses, the booke of the Psalmes, tions on Deuteronomy, p. 61. ] and the Song of Songs; by Henry
CHAP. Il.
SECT. VII.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
62 Instances of ποιεῖν and facere meaning ‘to offer’
ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν; Kal ἐγὼ ποιήσω TO ὁλοκαύτωμά μου" Discedite a modo, et ego faciam holocaustum meum. Which passage is wanting in the Hebrew, and therefore in ours and the vulgar translations. So 2 Kings x. 21; καὶ ἀπέστειλεν ᾿Ιοὺ, “ and Jehu sent through all Israel,” λέγων, ... ὅτι θυσίαν μεγάλην ποιῶ, “for I have a great sacrifice to offer.” Which expression is also wanting both in the original and in our translation, and in the vulgar. So ver. 24; καὶ εἰσῆλθε τοῦ ποιῆσαι τὰ θύματα Kal Ta ὁλοκαυτώματα" “And when they went in to offer sacrifices and burnt-offerings ;” Ingressi sunt igitur ut facerent victimas et holocausta. So ver. 25; καὶ ἐγένετο ws συνετέλεσε ποιῶν τὴν ὁλοκαύτωσιν" “And it came to pass as soon as he had made an end of offering the burnt- offerings ;” Factum est autem cum completum esset holo- caustum. So 2 Chron. xxx. 1; καὶ ἀπέστειλεν “Efexias, Ke τ. Δ... .. ἐλθεῖν εἰς οἴκον Κυρίου eis “Ἱερουσαλὴμ; ποιῆσαι τὸ φασὲκ τῷ Κυρίῳ Θεῷ ᾿Ισραήλ' “And Hezekiah sent, &c., that they should come to the house of the Lord at Jerusalem to keep (that is to offer) the passover unto the Lord God of Israel :” as in the Latin, Ut venirent . . . et fa- cerent phase Domino Deo Israel. And ver. 2; καὶ ἐβουλεύ- σατο ὁ βασιλεὺς, ... ποιῆσαι TO φασὲκ τῷ μηνὶ τῷ δευ- τέρῳ" “For the king had taken counsel (or decreed) to keep (or offer) the passover in the second month;” Decreverunt ut facerent phase mense secundo. Chap. xxxv. 1; καὶ ἐποίησεν ᾿Ιοσίας τὸ φασὲκ τῷ Κυρίῳ: “ Moreover Josiah kept (or offered) a passover unto the Lord;’’ Fecit autem Josias... phase Domino. And Ezra vi. 19; [Εσδρὰς B. LXX.] καὶ ἐποίησαν οἱ viol τῆς ἐποικεσίας TO πάσχα “ And the chil- dren of the captivity kept the passover;” Fecerunt autem Μιὰ Israel transmigrationis pascha, ἕο. So Numb. ix. 2; καὶ ποιείτωσαν οἱ viol ᾿Ισραὴλ τὸ πάσχα Kal ὥραν αὐτοῦ" “Τοῦ the children of Israel also keep the passover at its ap- pointed season ;” Faciant filii Israel phase in tempore suo. So Joshua v. 10. [ver. 9, LXX.] καὶ ἐποίησαν οἱ υἱοὶ ᾿Ισραὴλ τὸ πάσχα. “And the children of Israel kept the passover ; Filit Israel . . . fecerunt phase. So 2 Kings xxiii. 21; καὶ ἐνετείλατο ὁ βασιλεὺς... λέγων, ποιήσατε πάσχα τῷ Κυρίῳ Θεῷ ἡμῶν: “And the king commanded, ... saying, Keep the passover unto the Lord your God:” Et precepit ...
»““ τυ νυν“ CU OO Άβξ!
in the Septuagint and the Vulgate. 63
dicens, facife phase Domino Deo vestro. See the same phrase concerning the sacrifice of the passover, 2 Chron. xxxv. 17 —19, and in 1 Esdras i. 6; καὶ ποιήσατε τὸ πάσχα κατὰ τὸ πρόσταγμα τοῦ Κυρίου" “ Keep (offer) the passover accord- ing to the commandment of the Lord.” Here I must not omit Psalm lxvi. 15, where “I will offer unto Thee burnt- offerings,” is in the Hebrew, “I will do;” which the LX XII render by ἀνοίσω, just as in Exod. xxix. 36, above cited, what is in our translation, “Thou shalt offer every day a bullock for a sin offering,” is in the Hebrew nwyn, in the Greek ποιήσεις, and in the Latin facies‘, “Thou shalt do every day a bullock,” &. And Mr. Ainsworth writes thus upon the place; “‘ Make,’ to wit, ready for sacrifice, that is, kill, sprinkle the blood, offer,’ ἕο. So on ver. 38", wx An naron-by nyn, καὶ ταῦτά ἐστιν ἃ ποιήσεις ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστη- ptouv' Hoc est quod facies in altari; ‘This is that which thou shalt offer upon the altar.” So on Exod. x. 25, cited also above, saith he; ‘‘‘Do’ sacrifice,”’ or ‘ offer.’ The word sacri- fice here understood, is elsewhere expressed, as in 1 Kings ΧΙ. 27. And when the word ‘do,’ or ‘ make’ is joined with sacrifices, as in this place, it signifies to ‘ offer ;’ as Levit. ix. 7, 22, and xvi. 9; Exod. xxix. 36, 39, 41, 42.'”
To these testimonies out of the Old Testament, to shew that ‘do’ signifies ‘ offer,’ I think fit to add one more out of a Jewish Hellenistical writer, Baruch i. 10; ἀπεστείλαμεν πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἀργύριον .. . Kal ποιήσατε μάννα,
Ν Φ 3 \ καὶ εἶπαν, ἰδοὺ
καὶ ἀνοίσατε ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον Κυρίου τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν" “And they said, Behold we have sent you money... and prepare, (i. 6. offer) ye manna*, and offer upon the altar of the Lord our God;” Kcce misimus ad vos pecunias ... et
f [ Facies occurs in Munster’s ver- sion (Biblia Hebraica, Latina planeque nova Sebast. Munsteri Versione. Ba-
legendum esse Mincha. [ab Hebreo Mod, aut AMID, quod sacrificium mu- nus oblationemque significat.—Critici
silez, 1534—1546.) and in Montanus’ ; the Vulgate has offeres. |
8 [Ainsworth’s Annotations, &. on Exod. ibid., p. 124. ]
» [* Make or do, that is, offer unto God.’’—Ainsworth, ibid. ]
(bid, p- 82. |
k “*Corruptly for mincha, that is, a meat-offering,’”’ [Marg. Eng. Vers. ]
Badvellus. Omnia exemplaria Greca legunt manna, sed puto cum Beza
Sacri, tom. v. pars ii. in Baruch, p- 1.]
Grotius. Legendum in Greco non manna sed manaa, ita enim 773 (de qua Lev. ii.) vertunt veteris Testa- menti interpretes. Idem error et alibi in libros irrepsit, ut diximus ad Mare. ix. 49. [ibid., p. 4. The places he there refers to are Jerem. xvii. 26; xlviii. 5: and hence the word μάννα is found in this sense in Suidas, tom. ii. p. 97. ]
CHAP. 11.
SECT. VII.
64 ποιεῖν meaning ‘to offer, used by the Fathers ;
curisttan facite manna, et offerte pro peccato ad aram Domini nostri.
PRIEST- HOOD.
The verb ποιεῖν, as I have elsewhere observed!', is used for ‘to offer’ in the New Testament, as Heb. xi. 28; πίστει πε- ποίηκε TO πάσχα, Kal THY πρόσχυσιν τοῦ αἵματος" “Through faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of blood,” other- wise, “through faith he offered the passover, and the blood of sprinkling,” sanguinem effusum. For in the Hellenistical style, the “sprinkling of blood,” and the ‘blood of sprink- ling,’ or ‘effusion,’ is the same thing. Fide celebravit pascha et sanguinis effusionem, Vulg., that is, sanguinem effusum. So 1 Tim. ii. 1, ποιεῖσθαι may very well be rendered ‘ offered.’ “T exhort therefore that first of all prayers, &c., be offered for all men ;” as it is in the Syriac version™
The verb ποιεῖν is also used in the Hellenistical sense, to signify ‘offer, in the Greek writers of the Church, par- ticularly where they have occasion to speak of the holy Eu- charist. We find it so used in St. Clement’s first Epistle to the Corinthians, ὃ xl."; οἱ τοῖς προστεταγμένοις καιροῖς πού- obvtes τὰς προσφορὰς αὐτῶν, “those who offer their obla- tions in the appointed times, are accepted and blessed.” In the same sense Justin Martyr useth the word in his first Apology®; ἔπειτα προσφέρεται TH προεστῶτι τῶν ἀδελφῶν ἄρτος, καὶ ποτήριον ὕδατος καὶ κράματος; καὶ οὗτος λαβὼν, αἷνον καὶ δόξαν τῷ πατρὶ τῶν ὅλων, διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματος τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ ἁγίου, ἀναπέμπει" καὶ εὐχαριστίαν ὑπὲρ τοῦ κατηξιῶσθαι τούτων παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ πολὺ ποιεῖται; κ. τ. Δ., Then the bread and the cup of water and wine is brought to the bishop, who receiving them, sends up praise and glory to the Father of all things through the name of the Son and Holy Spirit, and offers up a very large thanks- giving to God for deeming us worthy of these His creatures,” &e. So in his Dialogue with Trypho?; καὶ ἡ τῆς σεμιδάλεως δὲ προσφορὰ, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἔλεγον; ἡ ὑπὲρ τῶν καθαριζομένων ἀπὸ τῆς λέπρας προσφέρεσθαι παραδοθεῖσα, τύπος ἣν τοῦ
1 [In the Preface to the second edi- ν. p. 822.]
tion of Controversial Letters, pp. Ixxvii, Ixxvili. Tondon, 1710. |
"ote? yto Nanci la] Lx lonZ [Zora yo,od5 %,0
Obsecro te igitur, ut JaXu poko ante omnia deprecationem orleras Veo, &c.—Biblia Polyglotta, Walton, tom.
n [S.Clem. R. Epist. i. c. 40. Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 170. ]
ο [S. Justin. M. Apol. i. ο. 65. Op., p- 82, D.]
Ρ Td. [ Dial. cum Tryph. Jud., Ὁ 41. ibid., p. 137, Ὁ. Hickes read δὴ in- stead of kal: hence his translation. ]
St. Clement R., St. Justin Martyr, and Cornelius. 65
ἄρτου τῆς εὐχαριστίας, ὃν εἰς ἀνάμνησιν τοῦ πάθους οὗ
ἔπαθεν ὑπὸ τῶν καθαιρομένων τὰς ψυχὰς ἀπὸ πάσης πονη- , ἋΣ a Χ ΝΣ He ΄ ΓΑΕ “ὃ a “ Si
plas, Incovs Χριστὸς ὁ Κύριος ἡμῶν παρέδωκε ποιεῖν. Irs,
CHAP.If.
SECT. VII.
truly, I said, that the oblation of the flour commanded to be Lev. 14. 10.
offered for those who are cleansed from the leprosy, was a type of the Eucharistical bread, which Jesus Christ our Lord commanded us to offer in remembrance of His passion, which He suffered for those whose souls are cleansed from all iniquity.” So afterwards in the same Dialogue? : ὅτι μὲν οὖν καὶ εὐχαὶ καὶ εὐχαριστίαι ὑπὸ τῶν ἀξίων γινόμεναι; τέ- λείαι μόναι καὶ εὐαρεστοί εἰσι τῷ Θεῷ θυσίαι, καὶ αὐτός φημι. ταῦτα γὰρ μόνα καὶ Χριστιανοὶ παρέλαβον ποιεῖν, καὶ ἐπ᾽ ἀναμνήσει δὲ τῆς τροφῆς αὐτῶν ξηρᾶς τε καὶ ὑγρᾶς, ἐν ἧ καὶ τοῦ πάθους ὃ πέπονθε δι’ αὐτοῦ ὁ Θεὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ 4 μέμνη- ται: “And indeed, that prayers and thanksgivings made by those that are worthy, are the only perfect and accept- able sacrifices to God, I also affirm. But these only the Christians have been taught to offer, in the thankful remem- brance we make to God for our dry and wet food, in which also a commemoration is made of the passion, which God (the Son) of God suffered by Himself.” So in the epistle which Cornelius, bishop of Rome, wrote to Fabius, bishop of Antioch, concerning the wicked practice of Novatian, who, when he administered the Sacrament to his followers, made them swear’ by the body and blood of Christ that they would never forsake him, nor return to Cornelius, he begins the narrative in these words; ποιήσας yap τὰς προσφορὰς, Kal διανέμων ἑκάστῳ τὸ μέρος; καὶ ἐπιδιδοὺς τοῦτο, ὀμνύειν ἀντὶ τοῦ εὐλογεῖν τοὺς ταλαυπώρους ἀνθρώπους ἀναγκάζει.... “The oblation being offered, he, dividing to every communi-
Baidabid. cc 117}. 210, Bs] tinues, (- 315,) κατέχων ἀμφοτέραις
4 Forsan legendum 6 vids, vel 6 Θεὸς ταῖς χέρσι τὰς τοῦ λαβόντος καὶ μὴ vids. [Manifesti librariorum errores fa- ἀφεὶς ἔστ᾽ ἂν ὀμνύοντες εἴπωσι ταῦτα" eile tolluntur; in promptu est enim τοῖς yap ἐκείνου χρήσομαι λόγοις" ὄμο- legendum ἐν 7 καὶ τοῦ πάθους ὃ πεπονθε σόν μοι κατὰ τοῦ σώματος καὶ τοῦ δι αὐτοὺς 6 υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ μέμνηται. αἵματος τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χρι- Retinendum μέμνηται existimat Cl. στοῦ, μηδέποτέ με καταλιπεῖν, καὶ ἐπι- Thirlbeius. Annott. ad locum ap. ed. στρέψαι πρὸς Κορνήλιον. καὶ 6 ἄθλιος Ben. | ἄνθρωπος ov πρότερον γέυεται, εἰ μὴ
τ [The letter is given by Eusebius, πρότερον αὐτῷ καταράσαιτο" καὶ] ἀντὶ Eccl. Hist., lib. vi. ο. 43. (See Eccl. τοῦ εἰπεῖν λαμβάνοντα τὸν ἄρτον ἑκεῖ- Hist., tom. i. p. 310.) The narrative νον τὸ duty, οὐκέτι ἀνήξω πρὸς Κορνή- of this particular enormity begins with Aco λέγει. the words in the text; the passage con-
HICKES. ¥
66 ποιεῖν and facere used for ‘to offer’ by St. Chrysostom,
cursrax cant his part, at the delivery thereof compels the wretched
PRIEST- HOOD.
people to swear, instead of blessing and praising God, (viz. by saying Amen.)” So St. Chrysostom upon the words of the institution’, St. Matt. xxvi. Hom. Ixxxil. (al. Ixxxin.) $1; καὶ πάλιν λέγει τοῦ θανάτου τὴν αἰτίαν, TO ὑπὲρ πολλῶν ἐκχυνόμενον εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν" καί φησι, τοῦτο ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν: εἶδες πῶς ἐξάγει τῶν ᾿Ιουδαϊκῶν ἐθῶν καὶ ἀφίστησι; καθάπερ γὰρ ἐκεῖνο ἐποιεῖτέ, φησιν, εἰς ἀν- άμνησιν τῶν ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ θαυμάτων" οὕτω καὶ τοῦτο εἰς ἐμήν" ἐκεῖνο ἐξεχύθη εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν πρωτοτόκων" τοῦτο εἰς ἄφε- σιν ἁμαρτιῶν τῆς οἰκουμένης ἁπάσης : “ And afterwards He declares the cause of His death; ‘which is shed for many for the remission of sins,’ and saith, τοῦτο ποιεῖτε, ‘do’ (or offer) ‘this in remembrance of Me.’ You see how He weans and draws them from the Jewish rites: for, says He, as ἐκεῖνο ἐποιεῖτε, ye offered that in remembrance of the miraculous deliverance from Egypt, so offer this in remem- brance of Me: that (blood) was shed for the preservation of the first-born, this for the remission of the sins of the whole world.” I think I may justify this translation, because this father does afterwards bring in our Saviour speaking thus': “ For this reason I have greatly desired to eat this passover (τὸ πάσχα τοῦτο) with you, that is, to deliver unto you new rites, and a new passover (τὰ καινὰ πράγματα Kal πάσχα δοῦναι,) whereby to render you spiritual.” And this trans- lation also agrees very well with what the same father says on the words of the institution, Hom. xxvii. in 1 Cor. xi.%, where he twice calls the Eucharist a sacrifice, as he called it the passover before.
From this sacrificial use of the verb ποιεῖν in the Hebrew, or Hellenistical sense ‘to offer,’ we have in Irenzus* this expression, dedit preceptum faciendarum oblationum, which in all likelihood was ἐντολὴν τοῦ ποιῆσαι θυσίας παρέδωκεν,
5 [S. Chrysost. Hom. in S. Matt.
lxxxii. ὃ 2. Op., tom. vil. p. 782, D, E.]
t [διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἐπιθυμίᾳ ἐπεθύμησά, φησι, τὸ πάσχα τοῦτο φαγεῖν, τουτέστι παραδοῦναι ὑμῖν τὰ καινὰ πράγματα καὶ πάσχα δοῦναι καθ᾽ ὅ μέλλω πνευματικοὺς movetv.—Ibid., p. 783, A. |
" [καὶ em αὐτῆς κειμένοι τῆς στιβάδος, καὶ map’ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Χριστοῦ λαμβάνον-
τες τὴν θυσίαν ταύτην, κ. τ. Δ. «+. τὶ δέ ποτε; ὅτι ἐξέχεεν αὐτὸ, καὶ σφαγὴν τὸ πρᾶγμα ἀπέφηνεν, οὐκέτι θυσίαν..---- Id. Hom. xxvii. in 1 Cor. xi. ὃ 4. Op., tom. x. p. 247, A, B.]
x §. Iren. adv. Her., lib. iv. cap. 84. [ed. Oxon. c. 18. ὃ 6. p. 251. ed. Ben. See the whole passage quoted above, p. 58 note u. |
St. Ireneus, Tertullian, and the Liturgies. 67
or ἐνετείλατο ποιεῖν θυσίας : and in Tertullian, who Grecised much in his writings, we find odlationes facimus, in that fa- mous passage’, so egregiously abused and perverted by the writers of the Church of Rome, to justify their way of pray- ing and offering for the dead, oblationes pro defunctis, pro natalitiis annua die facimus. Mr. Poole, on the words hoc facite, Luke xxii. 19%, acknowledges that the Hebrew verb nwy signifies to ‘offer,’ but by a gross mistake denies that the LXX ever rendered it by ποιεῖν, or that facere with an accusative case is so used in the Latin: which I have shewed is not true of the vulgar Latin Bible, nor by consequence of the writers of the Latin Church, who cite that translation, or otherwise Hellenize in their writings. He might have remembered missam facere, which is a phrase of the Latin Church for offering the Eucharist, at least as old as the lat- ter end of the fourth century*.
In this sacrificial signification of ποιεῖν, προσκομιδὴν ποι- εῖν in St. Gregory’s Liturgy signifies ‘to offer the oblations”,’ and in St. Chrysostom’s office of the holy Sacrament, where the deacon saith to the priest® καιρὸς τοῦ ποιῆσαι τῷ Κυρίῳ, “it is time to offer, or sacrifice to the Lord.” Upon which the learned editor hath this note*. Diaconus tribus digitis stolam tenens, et altare indicans, divinum et tremendum sacrificii mi- nisterium ut sacerdos aggrediatur admonet : et Domini verbis, &e.... Preterea faciendi verbum ad sacrificia pertinet. Hine Varro, lb. vi. de Lingua Latina, [c. 11. § 16.] ‘agnam® Jovi
Υ Tertull., de Corona, cap. 3. [Op., p. 102, A.]
2 [Poole’s words are; Quis unquam legit apud Grecos σῶμα ποιεῖν, pro ‘corpus sacrificare ;’ nec Latini dicunt, facere victimam, sed facere victima, subaudi sacra. Heb. AY quidem in- terdum valet, ‘ offerre ;’ quod tamen LXX nunquam per ποιεῖν, sed ἀνα- φέρειν vertunt.—Synopsis Criticorum, tom. iv. p. 1102. Ultraj. 1684. The statement as respects the LXX is manifestly incorrect: the first clause was probably intended to refer to the classical usage. |
4 [As in the quotation from St. Am- brose, in the next page. For other in- stances see Card. Bona de Rebus Li- turgicis, lib. i. iii. § 1. pp. 17, sqq. ]
8 [εἶτα ποιεῖ τὴν προσκομιδήν. 5. Gregorii Missa, Bibl. Patrum, tom. ii.
p. 127, A. Paris, 1624. This Liturgy is a translation of that of St. Gregory II. into Greek, by Georgius Codinus, the Byzantine writer, towards the close of the fifteenth century, first published by Morell, Paris, 1595. ]
ὁ [S. Chrysost. Liturg. Euchologium, Goar, p. 64.] In the Liturgy extant in the fourth vol. of his works, [ed. Morell. Paris, 1636.] it is θύσον. [Of this edition, which is from a copy of late date and little value, see below, p- 128, note b. ]
4 [Goar. Annott. in Miss. 8. Joan. Chrys. n. 58. ibid., p. 122.)
e Thisis an error: for itis, ‘ Flamen Dialis agna Jovi ἴδοις. And so in Virgil ‘ facere vitula,’ and the places are so cited by Brisson. de Formulis, p. 18. But the Latins say, ‘facere rem divi- nam,’ and, ‘ sacra facere,’
F2
CHAP, II.
SECT. VII.
CHRISTIAN “PRIEST- HOOD.
Ps, 50. 14.
68 The words ‘ τοῦτο ποιεῖτε᾽ are an institution of a sacrifice.
facere, et similiter Virgilius', ‘facere vitulum pro frugibus :? rursusque idem Varro®, pontificis nomen tradit ex eo deductum, quod potens sit facere, id est sacrificare. Nec ignota est He- breis, addit Pineda in Job", hec loquendi ratio: ubi enim in Psalm. lxvi.' legimus, ‘ offeram tibi boves cum hircis, Hebrea litera habet ‘faciam tibi boves cum hircis’ Et pariter Exod. xxix.J ubi habemus, ‘vitulum pro peccato offeres, legit iterum Hebrea ‘facies: et eodem faciendi verbo utitur Christus in hujus sacrificii institutione, dicens, ‘hoc facite in mei memo- riam;? et de altaris sacro ministerio loquens Ambrosius*, ‘missam,’ inquit (Epist. xxxiii.) ‘facere cepi” Καιρὸς ergo τοῦ ποιῆσαι τῷ Κυρίῳ... .. et pari ratione admonet diaconus Latinus sacerdotem ; ‘Immola Deo sacrificitum laudis’ According to this sacrificial signification of the verb ποιεῖν facere, and in particular from the signification of it, ‘ to offer,’ in the Paschal service, we may justly observe, that the words τοῦτο ποιεῖτε, hoc facite, either relate to the whole action and ministration of the holy Eucharist, as sin in the Hebrew, and τοῦτο in the Greek, relate to the whole service of the passover, Exod. xii. 27!, and then it proves the celebration of the Lord’s Supper (in which the oblation of the bread and cup to God the Father was a principal part) to be ἱεροποιΐα, or ἱερουργία, ‘a sacrificial service:’ or else they relate more especially to the bread and wine; and then by a natural and easy interpretation they may be translated thus: “Take, eat, this is My body; offer this in remembrance of Me:” and ‘This is My blood .... offer this as oft as ye shall drink it in remembrance of Me.” Either of these senses of τοῦτο ποιεῖτε, hoc facite, gives us a good account of the rea- son why the ancient fathers, treating of this mystery, affirm it to be “the oblation of the Church, which Christ appointed to be offered,” as I have already shewed, particularly out of Treneeus, lib. iv. cap. 34™, whither I refer the reader.
f [ Virgil. Bucol. iii. 77.]
* [ Pontifices, ut Scevola Quintus Pont. Max. dicebat, a posse et facere, ut potifices; ego a ponte arbitror, Xe. —Varro, lib. y. c. 15. § 83.]
h [Joannis de Pineda Comment. in Job libri xiii. in cap. i. ver. 5. num. 27. tom, i. p. 51. Colon. 1600. Pineda’s words are, Sacris Scriptoribus fami- liaris etiam siguificatio. }
i [v. 15. Vulg. Ixv. 14.]
J [v. 86. See above, p. 59. ]
k [S. Ambros. Epist. xx. (al. xxxiii.) ad Marcellinam, § 4. Op., tom. ii. p. 853, B.]
1 [“ It is the sacrifice of the Lord’s Passover.’ Hebr. ΠῚ S17 ADDY LXX. θυσία τὸ πάσχα τοῦτο Kuple. |
πὶ [0 18. p. 250. ed. Ben. See p. 46.]
They that wait at the altar’ implies a Christian Altar. 69
VIII. The next places of the New Testament from which cmap. n. I shall prove that the Christian religion hath a sacrifice are πα those which imply or express that it hath an altar. For if it Cee hath a sacrifice, or oblation, as I have shewed, then it must Testament have an altar at which to offer that oblation; and if it have ply [ΠῈῸ ane an altar, as I am going to shew, then it must have an obla- religion tion to be offered at or upon it, and then by consequence the jin.” ministers of the Gospel must be altar-ministers, as well as offering priests. I will begin with that text, 1 Cor. ix. 13, ‘Do ye not know that they who minister about holy things live of the things of the temple, and they who wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?” The words in the ori- ginal for “ minister about holy things” are ἱερὰ ἐργαζόμενοι, “those who exercise the priestly offices,” saith the Arabic", or “the offerers of sacrifices,” as the Aithiopic® version hath it ; and for “those who wait at the altar,” οἱ τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ Tpo- cedpevorTes, literally, gui assident altari, “those whose office is to attend at the altar.” In the Latin version?, nescitis guoniam qui ™ sacrario operantur que de sacrario sunt edunt, et qui altari deserviunt cum altari participant. “Know you not that they who minister in the temple eat of the things of the temple, and they who serve at the altar partake with the altar.” This text is applied by Irenzeus to the Christian ministers in these words’: Sacerdotes autem sunt omnes Domini apostoli, qui neque agros neque domos hereditant hic, sed semper altart et Deo serviunt ; where I doubt not the original words were οἱ τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ καὶ θεῷ προσεδρεύοντες, and the learned Dr. Grabe puts this note of Feuardentius™ upon the place: “Tt is easy to see from hence, that from the times of Christ His apostles and martyrs, and thereafter, the Christians had
τ [Feuardentius’ note, as quoted by
7 [ Ses yl Cyphers oI
qui exercent munera sacer- KaS gh
dotalia. Vers. Arab. Bibl. Sacr. Poly- glott. Walton, tom. ν. p. 701... London, 1657.]
* (PAVPOTL : WOE: literally ‘ sacrificing sacritices ;’ but in Walton’s translation, sacrificium offe- rentes. Vers. Aithiop. ibid. }
> [The Vulgate is here meant. }
4 §. Iven. adv. Heres., lib. iv. c. 20. [ed. Grabe; c. viii. ὃ 3. p. 237. ed. Ben. ]
Grabe, p. 336, is; Vel hine profecto apertum est videre Christianos a tem- poribus Christi, Apostolorum, mar- tyrum, et deinceps, sua in templis altaria servasse, quibus Deo sacrifi- cium incruentum corporis et sanguinis Christi in perpetuam mortis ejus re- cordationem offerrent: quod etiam hu- jus libri cap. 34. (c. 18. ed. Ben. see above, p. 46, note h.) confirmat noster Irenzus in his Christi verbis: ‘cum offers munus tuum ad altare,’ &e. Feuard. |
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
70 Ireneus and Cyprian on the clergy ‘waiting at the altar?
altars in their temples, at which they offered the unbloody sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ, in perpetual memory of His death. Which Irenzus also confirms in the thirty- fourth chapter of the same book, by these words of Christ : ‘When thou bringest thy gift unto the altar.’” This place is also applied by St.Cyprians in the first epistle to the priests and deacons, and the people of Furni, a city of Africa so called, in this passage: [Cum] jampridem in concilio episcoporum sta- tutum sit, ne quis de clericis et Dei ministris tutorem vel cu- ratorem testamento suo constituat, quando singuli Divino sa- cerdotio honorati et in clerico ministerio constituti, non nisi altart et sacrificiis deservire, et precibus atque orationibus va- care debeant: ‘It was long since decreed in a council of bi- shops, that no man should appoint a clergyman and minister of God for tutor or curator of his last will and testament, be- cause all that are dignified with the Divine priesthood (that is all priests), and (deacons) constituted in the clerical ministra- tion, ought not to wait but at the altar and oblations, and de- vote themselves to prayer.” Here this holy father plainly alludes to altari deserviunt in the text, as he also alludes to Ta ἱερὰ ἐργαζόμενοι; they who minister about holy things, in the other expressions which follow; gui divinis rebus et spi- ritalibus occupati ; qui operationibus divinis insistunt ; ab altari et sacrificiis non recedant. ΑἸ] which shew that he thought evangelical priests to be as proper ministers about holy things, and waiters at God’s altar in a proper sense, as the Levitical clergy under the law.
I should from hence return to Matt. v. 23; “When thou bringest thy gift to the altar,” &c.; but having said enough upon that place, I proceed to Heb. xiii. 10, where the Apostle saith expressly, “We have an altar whereof they have no right to eat who serve the tabernacle.” In the original whereof is ἐξ οὗ, which may be rendered in a literal and proper sense ex
8 [S. Cypr. Ep. Ixvi. (Ep. i. ed. Oxon.) ad Clerum et Plebem Fur- nis consistentem, p. 114. ed. Ben. The passages next referred to are; Molestiis et laqueis szcularibus obli- gari non debent, qui divinis rebus et spiritalibus occupati, ab ecclesia rece- dere, et ad terrenos et seeculares actus vacare non possunt..... Again, speak- ing of the provision for the Levites in
the Mosaic law: quod totum fiebat de auctoritate et dispositione Divina, ut qui operationibus Divinis insistebant, in nulla re avocarentur, nec cogitare aut agere secularia cogerentur. Que nunc ratio et forma in clero tenetur, ut qui in Ecclesia Domini ordinatione clerica promoventur ... ab altari non recedant, sed die ac nocte celestibus rebus et spiritalibus serviant.—Ibid. ]
The word ‘altar, Heb, xii. 10, to be understood literally. 71
quo or de quot, ‘of which,’ or ‘from which they have no right to eat;’ as the excellent author of The Propitiatory Oblation in the Holy Eucharist hath rightly observed". But because the generality of learned men have taken altar here in the meto- nymical sense for the altar-offering, as the Latin translation and ours take “temple,” 1 Cor. ix. 13, for the holy provision of the templex, I am therefore content to take it in the same sense, which will not in the least abate the force of my argu- ment from the place, because if altar there be put for the sa- crifice or oblation of the altar, that metonymical use of the word proves the first and proper sense of it as much as the use of τράπεζα in Greek, and mensa in the Latin tongue, for the meat or entertainment upon the table, proves it to be a table in the primary, proper, literal sense.
But perhaps, Sir, your late writer will say, the Apostle doth not mean a proper material altar, upon which offerings were made, and then eaten, but an improper metaphorical
* Tena in locum. Quare inepte Lu- therani, et Beza [ut fugiant hunc lo- cum quo probatur Christianos habere sacrificium miss, quod supra altare celebratur (de quo edere possunt boni Christiani) | fingunt Paulum hic agere de sacrificio orationum, laudum vel gratiarum actionum: quia, preterquam quod ad hee non necessario altare eri- gitur, cum possint sine illo fieri, hic Paulus agit de sacrificio manducabili, quod supra altaris mensa Christianis ponitur ... Sacrificium vero orationum et laudum non est manducabile; [ex quo fit neque de altari crucis hic loqui Paulum, quia Christus ibi se obtulit cruenta et propria specie, non realiter comedendus, sed spiritualiter:] cum ergo hic de altari et mensa realis et propriz manducationis sit sermo, ut Judaicis escis nostra esca contrapone- retur, consequens est de altari Eucha- ristize loqui, que est vera esca realiter et sacramentaliter manducabilis.—[ Com- mentaria et Disputationes in Epistolam D. Pauli ad Hebrzos, auctore Ludo- vico Tena, cap. 13. Diff. vii. p. 708. .Lond. 1661.] His whole exposition of the place is most excellent, and worthy to be read, excepting that he misapplies the Eucharistical sacrifices to the popish sacrifice of the mass.
u [In this work (The Propitiatory Ob- Jation in the Holy Eucharist truly stated and defended, &c. London, 1710,) which
is a defence of Hickes against Dr. Han- cock, the author (John Johnson, see vol. i, p. 2. note p) maintains (p. 48), that “by the altar here mentioned (Heb. xiii. 10) the Apostle means the communion-table.” ‘And in this (he proceeds) I differ from Dr. Hickes, as well as Dr. Hancock, for I can see no reason for what they here assert, that the altar is put for the sacrifice. The preposition ἐξ or ék may signify ‘at,’ or ‘ off from ;’ it does not necessarily imply that the altar was the thing eaten, or that the altar was that which they used as a table or trencher in eating; it is sufficient, that what they ate was brought or taken from the altar; and therefore it is an ellipsis, rather than a metonymy, and may thus be supplied, ‘ We have an altar, from which they have no right to (take or) eat the sacrifice, who serve the taber- nacle.... To eat ‘of’ or ‘from’ the altar is to be a guest at the altar; so they who minister about holy things are said to eat from the temple, 1 Cor. ix. 13, (Gr. ἐκ τοῦ ἱεροῦ ἐσθίουσιν,) that is, the provision and gifts which they have from the temple.” |
x [Our version, ‘live of the things of the temple,’ and the Vulgate, que de sacrario sunt edunt,’”’ supply these explanatory words to the original ἐκ τοῦ ἱεροῦ ζῶσιν.
CHAP. It. SECT. VIII.
72 ‘We have an altar, δὸ. Heb. xii. 10. implies a
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
altar, by way of allusion and similitude; and so, Sir, if he pleases he may say the Apostle meant only an improper meta- phorical high-priest, where he says in the same Epistle, “we ee 4,14, have a great High-Priest that is passed into the heavens ;”
; “we have not an High-Priest who cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities;” “we have such an High-Priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the majesty in the heavens.” The phrase is the same’, ἔχομεν θυσιαστήριον, and τοιοῦτον ἔχομεν ἀρχιερέα; and ov yap ἔχομεν ἀρχιερέα μὴ δυνάμενον συμπαθῆσαι, ὅτο. ‘Habemus altare, ‘talem habe- mus pontificem, ‘non enim habemus pontificem, qui non possit compati infirmitatibus nostris’ And since the High-Priest we have, is a more proper High-Priest than the Jewish high-priest, who was but His shadow’, it would be very arbi- trary in him to assert that the altar we are said to have is not a proper altar, especially considering that the Jerusalem altar?, for the reason hereafter given, is several times called
[chap. 8. 1
Υ Heb. xiii. 10. Habemus altare ex quo edendi non habent potestatem, qui tabernaculo deserviunt. Extra Judzorum itaque templum in ecclesia
So among the Gentiles, as well as among the Jews, consecrated or dedi- cated tables were used for altars, as Macrobius shews upon this verse of
erat θυσιαστήριον, altare, et per conse- quens etiam θυσία, sacrificium, non solum rationale laudis et precum, sed et materiale panis et vini, quod verbo edendi clare significat Apostolus.—Dr. Ernest. Grabe on Iren. lib. iv. cap. 84. [p. 324. ed. Oxon. 1702. ]
* [‘*Which serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things.’’—Heb. vill. 5. ‘The law having a shadow of good things to come.’’—Ibid., x. 1.]
* “There is no more difference be- tween atable and an altar, than between another cup and a chalice, or an house and a church, or a feast and a sacrifice.” —Mede of the name Altar, sect. ii. [Mede’s words are, ‘‘ An altar is not every table, or a table for a common feast, but an holy table; and an holy table is an altar. . .. For in times past (when men perhaps were as wise as we are now) it was thought fit and decent that things set apart unto God and sacred should be distinguished not only in use but in name also from things common. For what is a temple or church but an house? yet distinguished in name from other houses. What is a sacrifice but a feast? yet distin- guished in name from other feasts.’’— Works, p. 387. |
Virgil,
In mensam leti libant divosque pre-
cantur.—[ Ain. viii. 279. }
in answer to this objection of Evan- gelus, ‘Cum non in mensam, sed in aram secundum morem libare debu- erint.’... Ego autem, quod mihi ma- gistra lectione compertum est, publi- cabo. In Papiriano enim jure, eviden- ter relatum est ara vicem prestare posse mensam dicatam. ‘ Ut in templo,’ inquit, ‘Junonis Populoniz augusta mensa est. Namque in fanis alia va- sorum sunt, et sacree supellectilis, alia ornamentorum. Qu vasorum sunt, instrumenti instar habent, quibus sacri- Ποῖα conficiuntur. Quarum rerum principem locum obtinet mensa, in qua epulz, libationes, et stipes reponuntur. Ornamenta vero sunt clypei, corone, et ejusmodi donaria. Neque enim do- naria dedicantur eo tempore, quo delu- bra sacrantur. At vero mensa, aru- leeque eodem die quo zdes ipse dedi- cari solent. Unde mensa hoc ritu dedicata in templo are usum, et reli- gionem obtinet pulvinaris.’ Ergo apud Evandrum quidem fit justa libatio ; quippe apud eam mensain, que cum ara maxima, more utique religionis, fuerat dedicata, et in luco sacrato, et
literal altar from which we may eat. 73 the table of the Lord; in Malach. i. 7, 12; and Ezekiel xli. 22; xliv. 16”; as the offerings upon it are called His foods, which He consumed by fire. And that the altar we are said to have is such an altar, of which‘, that is, of the sacrifices of which, neither the priests, who were ministers of the taber- nacle, nor their people had any right to eat, but the Christian ministers and people have, the Apostle proves by an argu- ment taken from their own law. For if they could not eat of the sacrifices of atonement ® and expiation, which prefigured the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross, how could they partake at the Christian altar of the Christian sacrifice, which was the mystical flesh and blood of Christ, by which the sacrifice of Himself upon the cross was represented according to His own institution under the new law, as it was under the old by the sacrifices of expiation, whose bodies were burnt without the camp? “ We have an altar,” saith he, “ that is, an altar-sacri- fice, whereof they have no right to eat who serve the tabernacle. For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high-priest for sin, are burnt without
inter ipsa sacra, in quibus epulabantur. —Lib. iii. cap. 11. p. 289.
To this let me add what Servius saith on this verse; Queritur sane, cur in mensam, et non in aram libaverint? Sed apud antiquos inter vasorum sup- pellectilem, etiam mensam cum aris mos erat consecrari, quo die templum consecrabatur: unde bene ait ‘in men- sam leti libant,’ quam constabat cum ara maxima dedicatam. So De la Cerda, “‘‘ In mensum leti libant,’ vide- licet, effusa aliqua parte vini e patera in mensam. Ex eodem more in Ain. i. 736, dixit, ‘in mensam laticum libavit honorem.’ Et Silius Italicus, xi. 301.
Ante omnes ductor honori Nominis Augusto libat carchesia ritu. Cetera quem sequitur, Bacchique ex more liquorem Irrorat mensis turba.
Sed que ratio hujus moris? Quia veteribus mensa pro ara fuit [et sacrum quiddam]... Vid. Scaliger. in Festum [De Verb. Sign., lib. xi. ‘ Mense in zdibus sacris ararum vicem obtine- bant.’ ] et Lipsium (lib. iii. Antiq. Lect. c. 6.) Oppugnat posterior, imo ridet Macrobium (Sat., lib. iii. cap. 11), inter- pretantem Virgilium, secus ac par est.”’
[ Virgil. Op., cum notis J. L. De la Cerda, tom. ii. p. 192. Lugd. 1612. Lipsius said the table was not regarded as an altar, and that the libation was made on any thing, pro re nata. ]
b [The texts are quoted p. 76. note m. |
© Lev. iii. 11, 16. [“It is the food of the offering made by fire.’’] In the ori- ginal AWS pnd, and nybai-by. Vulg. In pabulum ignis, et oblationis Do- mini; in alimoniam ignis et suavis- simi odoris. Vide Munsterum, Fagi- um, et Clarium in locum.—[ Crit. Sacr. tom. 11. pp. 30—32. Munster’s words are, Id quod supra vocatur sacrificium ignitum in odorem suavitatis, hie vo- catur panis et cibus suavis, igne de- coctus, et quo Deus delectatur. Fagius and Clarius use almost the same ex-~ pressions.] Castalio; Jove dapem rei divine.
4 Tena. Nomine enim altaris per figuram metonymiam intelligitur sacri- ficium super altare positum. [ubi su- pra, p. 707. ]
© Ley. vi. 30. [‘‘ And no sin offering whereof any of the blood is brought into the tabernacle of the congregation to reconcile withal in the holy place, shall be eaten; it shall be burnt in the fire.” ] iv. 7—12; xvi. 27.
CHAP. II.
SECT. VILL
74. ‘We have an altar,’ §c. understood literally by St. Chrysost.,
curisttan the camp; wherefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the
PRIEST- HOOD.
people with His own blood, suffered without the city gate ; and His suffering there signifies the exclusion of all legal eaters from partaking of Him, who, as a sin-offering, was carried without the camp.” Here is altar answering to altar, and sacrifice to sacrifice; the sacrifice, which was a figure of Christ’s sacrifice upon the cross before His suffering, to that which is the figure of it after. And therefore the Syrian Churches read this place as proper in the ordination of their priests’. And what St. Chrysostom saith upon the place can relate to nothing but the Eucharistical oblation of the ele- ments, and the participation of them, as will appear from this version of them, οὐχ οἷα τὰ ᾿Ιουδαϊκὰ, x.7.r. “ The rites, or religious observances among us,” saith he, “ are not such as the Jewish were, insomuch that it is not lawful for the high- priest to partake of them. Wherefore, because he had said do not observe μὴ παρατηρεῖτε, like one who overthrows his own sayings, he turns about in this manner: What, and do not we observe (meats), saith he? Yes, we observe them more exactly, not communicating of them to the priests themselves.” If this commentary on the text, “ we have an altar,” &c., relates not to the communion-table, and literal and oral eating of the Eucharistical bread at it, I must confess I do not rightly understand it: the original words μετέχειν αὐτῶν and pera- διδόντες αὐτῶν are communion phrases. But upon supposi- tion that they relate not at all to the oral eating at the com- munion-board, it is no argument against that sense of the text, because this father speaks of it in the common sense of the Church as ofthe Christian altar, and of the oblation and
f [Hickes’ statement seems to be Asseman says, (notes, p. 45,) Iisdem
derived from Tena, (ubi supra, p. 708,) who speaks of the ‘ consuetudo ecclesi- arum Syriz, que in ordinatione sacer- dotum hoc loco utuntur.’ Tena appears to refer to the use of these words in the prayer at the imposition of hands in the ordination of priests by the Nesto- rian Syrians: Elige illos ad sacerdo- tium Domine, Deus fortis, ut ... corde puro conscientiaque bona inserviant altari tuo sancto, offerentes tibi obla- tiones orationum et sacrificia confes- sionum in Ecclesia tua sancta, &e.— Asseman. Codex Lit. Eccl. Univ., lib. Vill. pars vi. p. 39. Of this prayer
fere verbis precatur pontifex in Eucho- logio Greecorum, Maronitarum, Jacobi- tarum et Coptarum. |
% [οὔκ οἷα τὰ ᾿Ιουδαϊκά, φησι, τοιαῦτα τὰ Tap ἡμῖν, ws μηδὲ ἀρχιερεῖ θέμις εἶναι μετέχειν αὐτῶν᾽ ὥστε ἐπειδὴ εἶπε, μὴ παρατηρεῖτε, ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο κατα- βάλλοντος εἶναι τὰ ἴδια, πάλιν αὐτὸ περιστρέφει" μὴ γὰρ καὶ ἡμεῖς οὐ παρα- τηροῦμέν, φησι; καὶ παρατηροῦμεν, καὶ σφοδρότερον, οὐδὲ αὐτοῖς τοῖς ἱερεῦσι μεταδιδόντες αὐτῶν. ---, Chrysost. in Epist. ad Hebrazeos, Hom. xxxiii. ὃ 2. Op., tom. xii. p. 304, A, B. ]
Theodoret, Theophylact, and Oecumenius. 75
participation of the bread and wine as of a sacrifice, in nu- merous places of his works; as I have shewed in this book, and might shew it from many more; as that in Hom. viii. de Penit. et Hom. xxviii.in 1 Cor., μετὰ καθαροῦ συνειδότος τῆς ἱερᾶς ἄπτου τραπέζας καὶ τῆς ἁγίας μέτεχε θυσίας". Theo- doret, Theophylacti, and Oecumenius*, all understand it in ἃ literal sense of a proper altar, and the summary of all their commentaries upon the place amounts to thus much; that “after the Apostle had told the Hebrews that they had been fed with meats of carnal sacrifices and offerings, which had not profited them, then, lest they should think the Christian worship contemptible for want of such observances, he tells them that the Christians have an altar, and a sacrifice, but of another kind, of which their priests were not worthy to
h [Id. de Poenit. Hom. vi. (viii. ed. Morell.) § 5. tom. ii. p.326,B. The other passage referred to is; δεῖ τὸν προσι- ὄντα, πάντα ἐξαντλήσαντα ταῦτα, οὕτω τῆς καθαρᾶς ἐκείνης ἅπτεσθαι θυσίας. —Id. ἴῃ 1 Ep. ad Cor. Hom. xxviii. ὃ 1. tom. x. p. 250, D.]
i [The words of Theophylact are; on v. 9; κάλον γὰρ χάριτι βεβαιοῦσθαι τὴν καρδίαν, οὐ βρώμασιν ἐν οἷς οὐκ ὠφελήθησαν οἱ περιπατήσαντες. .. τῇ χάριτι, τουτέστι τῇ πίστει βεβαιοῦσθαι δεῖ ἡμᾶς, καὶ πληροφορεῖσθαι ὅτι οὐδὲν ἀκάθαρτον, ἀλλὰ πάντα τῷ πιστεύοντι καθαρά" πίστεως οὖν δεῖ, οὐ βρωμάτων παρατηρήσεως" οἱ γὰρ ἐν τοῖς βρώμασι περιπατήσαντες, τουτέστι, τῇ τῶν βρω- μάτων παρατηρήσει στοιχήσαντες δια- παντὺς, οὐδὲν εἰς ψυχὴν ὠφελήθησαν, ὡς τῆς πίστεως ἔξω ὄντες, καὶ τῷ νόμῳ τῷ ἀνωφελεῖ δουλεύοντες" καὶ ἄλλοις δὲ, τὶ ὠφελοῦντο ἀπὸ τῆς παρατηρήσεώς, φησιν, ὅπου γε οὔτως ἦσαν μιαροὶ, ὥστε μὴ δύνασθαι μετέχειν τῶν θυσιῶν ; ν. 10. ἔχομεν θυσιαστήριον, κ. τ. Δ... ἐπειδὴ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐ δεῖ παρατηρεῖσθαι βρώματα, ἵνα μὴ δόξῃ εὐκαταφρόνητα εἶναι τὰ
ἡμέτερα διὰ τὸ ἀπαρατήρητον᾽ φησὶν, ὅτι καὶ ἡμεῖς ἔχομεν παρατήρησιν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἐπὶ βρώμασι τοιούτοις, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ, ἤτοι τῇ ἀναιμάκτῳ θυσίᾳ τοῦ ζωοποιοῦ σώματοϑ᾽ ταύτης γὰρ οὐδὲ τοῖς νομικοῖς ἀρχιερεῦσι μεταλαβεῖν ἔξε- στιν, ἔως ἄν λατρεύωσι τῇ σκηνῇ, του- τέστι, τοῖς νομικοῖς τύποις, τοῖς παροδι- κοῖς, τοῖς καταλυομένοις (τοιοῦτον γὰρ ἣ σκηνὴ) ἢ τῷ κόσμῳ τούτῳ, ὥσπερ τῶν νομικῶν θυσιῶν οὗ μετεῖχον οἱ λαοὶ, ὡς évdttot.—Theophylact. Comm, in Ep.
ad Hebr., cap. xiii. Op., tom. ii. pp. 758, C. 759, A.]
* [Gicumenius says; ἐν τῇ πίστει οὖν τῇ διὰ χάριτος Θεοῦ ἐνεργουμένῃ δεῖ βεβαιοῦσθαι τὴν καρδίαν, οὐ μὴν βεβαιοῦσθαι. πρὸς παρατήρησιν βρωμά- των οἱ γὰρ εἰς τὰς παρατηρήσεις ταύτας περιπατοῦντες, τουτέστιν, οἷ ταῦτα φυλάττοντες, οὐδὲν ἐξ αὐτῶν ὠφελήθησαν" αἰνίττεται δέ τινας παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς ἔθει ᾿Ιουδαικῷ παρατηρουμένους τὰ βρώματα. ἔχομεν θυσιαστήριον. ἐπειδὴ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐ χρὴ παρατηρεῖσθαι βρώ- ματα, va μὴ νομίσωσιν εὐκαταφρόνητα εἶναι τὰ ἡμέτερα τῷ εἶναι ἀπαρατήρητα, φησὶ, μὴ γὰρ καὶ ἡμεῖς οὐκ ἔχομεν παρατηρήσεις ; ἀλλ᾽ οὐ βρωμάτων, ἀλλὰ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου ἡμῶν" τῶν γὰρ ἐκεῖ κειμένων οὐδὲ αὐτοῖς τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίων ἀρ- χιερεῦσιν ἔξεστι μετασχεῖν" οὗτοι γὰρ οἱ τῇ “σκηνῇ, οἷον τῷ τύπῳ καὶ τῇ σκιᾷ, καὶ οὐκ ἀληθείᾳ δουλεύοντες. ἐξ οὗ φα- γεῖν οὐκ ἔχουσιν ἐξουσίαν. οὐχ οἷά, φησι, τὰ ᾿Ιουδαικὰ, τοιαῦτα καὶ τὰ ἡμέτερα, ὡς μηδὲ τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ θέμις εἶναι μετασχεῖν αὐτῶν... .. Then after speaking of our Lord suffering without the camp, and His blood being shed to purge the sins of the world, he adds, that as the priests took in the blood of the sin-offerings to the altar, τοῦτυ δὴ οὖν τὸ αἷμα διὰ τοῦ ἀρχιερέως εἰσφέρεται παρ᾽ ἡμῖν εἰς τὸ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν θυσιαστήριον. διὸ οὐκ ἔξεστι τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίων ἀρχιερεῦσιν ἐξ αὐτοῦ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου φαγεῖν. ---- Cicumenii in Epist. ad Hebr. cap. xxi. Comment. in Nov. Test., tom. ii. pp. 431, D. 432, A, sqq.]
CHAP. IIL.»
SECT. VIII.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST-
HOOD.
76 ΑΨ dase.
partake, because they served the tabernacle, and not the truth, of which that was the type and shadow.” Particu- larly, saith Theodoret!, “we have an altar much more excellent than that old one under the law, for that was but the shadow of this. That was an altar for sacrifices void of reason, but this is an altar for a spiritual and Divine sacrifice, of which none of the Jewish priests could partake, unless they were first converted to faith in our Lord.” For the farther expli- cation of which it is to be observed, that as the great altar at the temple of Jerusalem was so called with respect to the sacrifices which were offered there, but, with respect to the consumption of them upon it by fire, was called also the Lord’s table™ 50 the Lord’s table in Christian Churches was considered in a double respect, first with relation to the offering of the bread and wine upon it, and secondly with relation to the consumption, or participation of them in the sacrificial feast at it; and as in the latter respect the Apostle called it the Lord’s table, so in the former it is an altar, and therefore the Apostle, by a usual metonymy of the altar for the sacrifice of the altar, said, ‘we have an altar whereof they have no right to eat, who serve at the tabernacle.” So in different respects it was called by both names in ecclesias-
tical writers”.
pillars which support Thy sacred table, . So Gregory Nyssen?P ;
altar.”
! [ἔχομεν θυσιαστήριον, κ. τ. A. τοῦτό, φησι, τοῦ παλαιοῦ πολλῷ τιμιώτερον. ἐκεῖνο γὰρ τούτου σκιά. ἐκεῖνο δέχεται τὰς ἀλόγους θυσίας" τοῦτο δὲ τὴν λογι- κήν τε καὶ θείαν" οὗ δὴ χάριν οὐδεὶς ἐκεί- νων τῶν ἱερέων ταύτης μεταλαγχάνει, εἰ μὴ πρότερον τὴν εἰς τὸν Κύριον δέξηται atoriw.—Theodoret. in Epist. ad Hebr. cap. xiii. ver. 10. Opera, tom. iii. p. 460, ΒΟΥ
™ Ezek. xli. 22. ‘‘ The altar of wood was three cubits high... and He said unto me, This is the table that is before the Lord.” xliv. 16. “ They shall enter into My sanctuary, and they shall come near to My table to minister unto Me, and they shall keep My charge.”’ Mal. i. 7. ‘* Ye say the table of the Lord is contemptible.” Ver. 12.‘ The table of the Lord is polluted, and the fruits thereof, even His meat, is contempt- ible.”
As in Synesius®; “I will cleave to the holy
... the unbloody θυσιαστήριον τοῦτο TO ἅγιον,
n [Many other instances will be found in Bingham, book viii. chap. vi. § 11, 12.]
° In Catastasi. προσφύσομαι τῶν κι- ὄνων τῶν ἱερῶν, [ai τὴ" ἄσυλον ἀπὸ γῆς ἄνεχουσι τράπεζαν" ἐκεῖ καὶ ζῶν καθε- δοῦμαι καὶ ἀποθανὼν κείσομαι. λειτουρ- γὸς εἰμι τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ τὴν ψυχὴν ἴσως ἀπολειτουργῆσαί με δεῖ" οὐ μὴν ὅγε Θεὸς περιόψεται τὸν βωμὸν τὸν ἀναίμακτον ἱερέως αἵματι μιαινόμενον. ---- Synesii Episcopi Cyrenensis. Op., p. 303, B, C. Paris. 1631. These are the concluding words of the Catastasis, an address de- livered by Synesius on the occasion of the expected irruption of the barba- rians into the Pentapolis, A.D. 431. |
P Oratio de Baptismo Christi. [ἐπεὶ kal τὸ θυσιαστήριον τοῦτο τὸ ἅγιον, ὦ παρεστήκαμεν, λίθος ἐστὶ κατὰ τὴν φύ- σιν κοινὺς, οὐδὲν διαφέρων τῶν ἄλλων πλακῶν, at τοὺς τοίχους ἡμῶν οἰκοδο-
Instances of both names in the Fathers. 77 κι το r. “This holy altar at which we stand is by nature a common stone, but after it is consecrated to the worship of God, and receives the blessing, it becomes an holy table, an unpollutable altar, not to be touched by every one, but only by the priests, and such priests as fear God.” So Socrates, lib. 1. cap. 37, telling how Alexander, bishop of Constantino- ple, retired into the church of St. Irene to pray4, saith, “ that having made himself to be locked up alone in the church of Irene, he went to the altar and prostrating himself under the holy table, he continued many nights and days together, praying unto God with tears.” So in the Disputatio contra Arium in Concilio Niceno, ascribed to Athanasius’, p. 122. ed. Par. 1627; προτεθεικὼς τράπεζαν, τοῦτ᾽ ἐστὶ τὸ ἅγιον θυσιαστήριον, καὶ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ ἄρτον οὐράνιον, καὶ ἄφθαρτον, “having set forth the table, that is the holy altar, and the heavenly and incorruptible bread thereupon.” An altar therefore it is according to the ancients, as well as a table; an altar with respect to the oblations, and a table with re- spect to the eating or participation of them, as among the heathens, who according to the verse of Virgil, and Macro- bius’ comment on it in the margin before, not only ate their altar-offerings at their holy tables, but often offered upon them ; especially their meat and drink-offerings, upon which they feasted with their priests in honour of their gods. Indeed they used them so often as altars to offer on, as well as tables to eat at, that learned men are of opinion they looked upon them as altars, as is to be seen in the margin‘.
μοῦσι, καὶ καλλωπίζουσι τὰ ἐδάφη" ἐπειδὴ δὲ καθιερώθη τῇ τοῦ Θεοῦ θερα- πείᾳ, καὶ τὴν εὐλογίαν ἐδέξατο, ἐστὶ τράπεζα ἅγια, θυσιαστήριον ἄχραντον, οὐκέτι παρὰ πάντων ψηλαφώμενον, ἀλλὰ μόνον τῶν ἱερέων, καὶ τούτων εὐλαβου- μένων.---ϑ. Greg. Nyss. Op., tom. iii. pp. 369, Ὁ. 370, A. The last words seem rather to mean ‘only by the priests, and by them with reverence.’’ ]
4 [Socrates is speaking of the course taken by Alexander when pressed to receive Arius to communion. ἐν ταυτῇ τοίνυν τῇ aywvia καθεστὼς, χαίρειν πολλὰ φράσας τῇ διαλεκτικῇ, προσφεύ- γει Θεῷ, καὶ νηστείαις μὲν συνεχέσιν ἐσχόλαζε" καὶ τοῦ προσεύχεσθαι οὐδένα τρόπον παρέλειπε" Kal.... ἐν τῇ ἐκ- κλησίᾳ ἣ ἐπώνυμον Εἰρήνη, μόνον ἑαντὸν
κατακλειστὸν ποιήσας, καὶ εἰς τὸ θυσι- αστήριον εἰσελθὼν, ὑπὸ τὴν ἱερὰν τράπε- Cay ἑαυτὸν ἐπὶ στόμα ἐκτείνας, εὔχεται δᾶκρύων..----οογαῖ, Eccl, Hist., tom. ii. p- 73. |
τ [Opus spurium; ap. S. Athanas. Op., tom. iii. p. 213, B. ed. Ben. |
S Martini Lexicon in /ibo. Turnebus [Adversaria], lib. xi. 7. illud Plauti, ‘de poculo paululum hoe tibi dabo [haud} lubenter’ explicans ait; ‘de poculo pleno, quod erat potatura, pau- lulum Veneri libat, i. e. in honorem Veneris effundit ; Sic enim libare sole- bant, quod vel in aram faciebant, vel in mensam, que loco are erat,’ &c. et lib. xxiv. c. 40. ‘Quid est in mensam libare? nempe religionis causa, de pa- tera, priusquam bibas, in mensam, que
CHAP, IT.
SECT. VIII.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST=-
HOOD.
I
78 An altar is ‘a place of offering ;’ the name
I have observed this to shew that the same thing in different respects may be both a table and an altar. For as a table is that at which we eat; so an altar is that at, or upon which we offer, and therefore an altar in the old Teutonic language is called $unsel-staths', ‘ the place of offering.’ So the rocks in the Mediterranean sea between Sardinia and Africa, upon which the Romans and Carthaginians sacrificed, when they solemnized their mutual league", were ever after called altars by the Latins, as Virgil tells us im these verses :
Tres Notus abreptas in saxa latentia torquet :
Saxa vocant Itali mediis que in fluctibus aras,
Dorsum immane mari summo*— And so the rock upon which Manoah offered unto the Lord, Judges xiii. 19, is called the altar in ver. 20, τὸ θυσιαστήριονν in the Greek version, which I have observed to shew with what propriety of speech the holy communion table hath been called the altar from the Apostles’ time to the Reforma- tion. It is so called four times in the epistles of the holy martyr St. Ignatius, who was St. John’s disciple’, first in his Epistle to the Ephesians, where he saith*, μηδεὶς trAavacbw, ἐὰν μή τις ἢ ἐντὸς τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου; ὑστερεῖται τοῦ ἄρτου τοῦ Θεοῦ: “ Let no man deceive himself, unless a man be within the altar he is deprived of the bread of God.” From whence it is plain, that by the altar> he meant the Lord’s table upon which the bread was offered. So in his Epistle to the Magne- sians®; “ Being come together into the same place, have one common-prayer, one supplication, one hope in charity, and
opinione veterum sacra erat, et tan- quam quedam ara, aliquid de vino
effundere,’ &c. hnusa-
“Ati Phe word
AST AWS utare, Evang. Gothic.,
Matt. v.23; Luc.i.11.is compounded of
h nu ὃλε hn U2 A victima, sacrificium ; and 2@T AWS locus;
Lye’s Dictionarium Saxon. et Gotho- Latin. See note g,p.18. and note 0,p.91. u [So Servius and Hortensius in lo- cum; and Turnebus, Adversaria, lib. XXVvi. c. 23.] x Virg. Ain., lib. i. 107—110. Υ ἐπάνω τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου. LXX. Jud. xiii. 19.] * [See above, note ], p. 46.]
[Vers.
a [S. Ignat. Ep. ad Eph.,c.5. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 13. ]
υ «These words of Ignatius,” saith Mr. Mede, ‘‘ directly imply, that the altar was the place, as of the bread of God, so of the public prayers of the Church. So that he that was not within the altar, (that is, who should be divided therefrom,) had no benefit of either.””— Christian Sacrifice, book ii. cap. y. [ Works, p. 364. ]
© [ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ μία προσευχὴ, μία δέησις, εἷς νοῦς, μία ἐλπὶς, ἐν ἀγά- TH, ἐν τῇ χαρᾷ τῇ ἀμώμῳ" ... εἷς ἐστὶν Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς, οὗ ἄμεινον οὐδέν ἐστιν" πάντες οὖν ὡς εἰς (ἕνα) ναὺν συντρέχετε Θεοῦ, ὡς ἐπὶ ἕν θυσιαστήριον, ὡς ἐπὶ ἕνα Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν τὸν ἀφ᾽ ἑνὸς πατρὸς προελθόντα.--- ὃ. Ignat. Ep. ad Magn., c. 7. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 19.]
used literally of the Holy Table by St. Ignatius. 79
in pure joy. (For) there is one (that is, but one) Lord Jesus Christ, than whom nothing is more excellent. Wherefore come ye all together (ws εἰς ναὸν) as unto one temple of God, as to one altar, as to one Jesus Christ, who proceeded from the Father.” Here as ναὸς, ‘temple,’ is taken literally, so θυσιαστήριον, ‘altar,’ is to be understood. So in his Epistle to the Philadelphians‘, “‘ Wherefore let it be your study to partake all of the same Eucharist. For there is but one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup for the unity of His blood; one altar, as also there is one bishop (i. e. but one bishop) with his presbyters and deacons, my fellow servants, that whatsoever you do, you may do it according to the will of God.” From this place we may learn first what is the sacrifice of this one altar, viz., the holy Eucharist; and who are the priests that offer up this sacrifice; the bishops and presbyters, as sacerdotal ministers, and the deacons as sub- servient inferior ministers, according to their office before described®. So in his Epistle to the Trallesians‘, “ Continue inseparable from Jesus Christ our God, and from your bishop, and from the commands of the Apostles. For he that is within the altar is pure; but he that is without, that is, who doth any thing without the bishop and presbyters and deacons, is not pure in his conscience.” Indeed this phrase of being within, and without the altar, is a figure or me- tonymy, by which altar is put for the communion of the altar. But then, as the Eucharistical cup, when it is so used for the wine in the cup, supposes the cup to be a real material cup: so the Christian altar, when it is put for the communion of the altar, where the priests and the faithful people partake together of the holy feast, it signifies a real material altar, at which they ministered, and these received. I need not say more to shew how the ancient Christians took the Lord’s table to be a proper material altar, and that it is implied to
4 [omovdafere οὖν μιᾷ εὐχαριστίᾳ
χρῆσθαι" μία γὰρ σὰρξ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ ἕν ποτήριον εἰς ἕνω- σιν τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ" ἕν θυσιαστήριον, ὡς εἷς ἐπίσκοπος, ἅμα τῷ πρεσβυτερίῳ, καὶ διακόνοις τοῖς συνδούλοις μου ἵνα ὕ ἐὰν πράσσητε, κατὰ Θεὸν πράσσητε.--- Id. Ep. ad Philadelph., c. 4. ibid,, p- 30.] © [See above, sect. v. pp. 37, 38.]
f [τοῦτο δὲ ἔσται ὑμῖν .. . οὖσιν ἄχω- ρίστοις Θεοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου, καὶ τῶν διαταγμάτων τῶν ἀποστόλων. 6 ἐντὸς τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου ὧν, καθαρός ἐστιν᾽ τοῦτ᾽ ἔστιν ὃ χωρὶς ἐπισκόπου καὶ πρεσβυτερίου καὶ διακό- νου πράσσοντι, οὗτος οὐ καθαρός ἐστιν τῇ συνειδήσει.---1ά., Ep. ad Trall., ο. 7. ibid., p. 23.]
CHAP, 11.
SECT, VIII.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
80 The same thing may be an altar and a table.
be such in those words of our Lord, “If thou bringest thy gift unto the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee, leave thy gift before the altar, and go, first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.” “The ancient Christians (saith Mr. Mede Ε) took this to be an evangelical constitution, wherein our Saviour implied, by way of anticipation, that He would leave some rite to His Church ® instead of, and after the manner of the sacrifices of the law, which should begin with an oblation, as they didi; and that to require this proper and peculiar qualification in the offerer, to be at peace, and without enmity with his brother.” ... “ Hence also they may seem to have learned to call bread and wine (in respect of this oblation) ἅγια δῶρα, ‘the holy gifts,’ from the word our Saviour here useth,” &c.
I hope I have now made it appear in this paragraph that the communion-table, in respect of its different uses, is an altar as well as a table: an altar upon which the elements are presented, and offered up by the minister to God the Father, and a table at which after they are consecrated into the symbols of Christ’s dead body and blood, they are con- sumed by the offerers in the holy sacrificial banquet. This I have done to obviate a common modern objection* that the holy table cannot be an altar, because it is a table; an ob- jection which will as well prove that the same man cannot be a preceptor, as well as a father to his child; or that the same machine, as among the Nomades, Scythians, old Ger- mans, and other Hamaxobians, cannot be both a waggon for carriage, and a dwelling-house; or lastly, to give a scrip- tural, and more reverential instance, that our Saviour could not be both sacrifice and priest: and that the communion- table was not a mere table, but an altar too, is also plain from
& Mede, Of the name Altar, sect. ii. [ Works, p. 390. |
h S. Cypr. Epist. Ixiii. ad Czcilium, Christus hujus sacrificii auctor, et doc- tor [p. 104. ed. Ben.|—Irenzus, lib. iv. cap. 34. Imgitur Ecclesie oblatio, quam Dominus docuit offerri in uni- verso mundo, purum sacrificium, et acceptum est ei.—[c. 18. ὃ 1. p. 250. ed. Ben. See the whole passage above, p- 46.]
i Non genus oblationum reprobatum est; oblationes enim et illic, oblationes autem et hic. Sacrificia in populo, sacrificia et in ecclesia, sed species im- mutata est tantum [quippe cum jam non a servo, sed a liberis offeratur.— Id. ibid., § 2. p. 250. This and the pre- ceding note are added by Hickes.
k [Dr. Hancock is particularly refer- red to. See below, note u, p. 83.]
Argument from the parallel of eating the sacrifices of idols. 81
the distinction in the Greek Church, between the πρόθεσις cnar. τι. and the θυσιαστήριον), the former of which they accounted ὁπ ὅπ only as a table, to which the offerings were brought, but the latter they esteemed as an altar, because the bread and wine were there presented to God the Father, and then conse- crated into the body and blood of Christ.
IX. Having shewed from one place of the New Testament, that the ministers of Christ are proper altar-ministers, because ΤΠ act, they minister at a proper altar; I now proceed to shew from προ ἐπε another place, 1 Cor. x. 20, 21, that they offer sacrifice, and Altar; from by consequence that they are proper offering or sacrificing the parallel
in 1 Cor, x. priests. These are the words;
SECT. IX.
“ But the things which the 7% 7! Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God, and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils ; ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and the table of devils.” For the devils had their tables for their sacrificial feasts, as well as the true God, as is plain from the testimony of St. Chrysostom in his Homily on St. Lucian the Martyr, whom they tempted by famishing of him to eat of the things offered to the idol-gods. ‘ But, (saith he™,) in that extremity of hunger, the fear of God withheld the martyr’s hands, and made him forget nature: for while he beheld that polluted and execrable table, he remembered the other tremendous table, which was full of the Spirit, and was so inflamed that he chose to endure and suffer all things, rather than taste of those unhallowed meats.” So in his twenty-fourth Homily on 1 Cor. x. the same father expressly takes notice of the tables at which the heathens ate of their idol-sacrifices®:
' [See Prefatory Discourse, pp. 129, 130, and notes.] Goar in his notes in Ordines sacri Ministerii; Eucholo- gium, p. 16; πρόθεσις, quam _ perpe- ram Genebrardus altare interpretatur, cum rectius propositio, seu proposi- tionis mensa dici queat, que non sa- crificio, sed pani tantum offerendo dicata sit... τράπεζα itaque solum- modo est πρόδεαις, non θυσιαστήριον. In Miss. S. Chrysost., ibid., p. 116. Illud certum est, πρόθεσιν esse men- sam, In qua sacra dona προτίθενται, primo immolanda proponuntur.
™ [kal τοῦ λιμοῦ μέγα ἔνδοθεν ἐμ- βοῶντος καὶ τῶν προκειμένων κελεύον- Tos ἐφάπτεσθαι, ὃ τοῦ Θεοῦ φόβος τὰς
HICKES, α
χεῖρας ἀνέστελλε, καὶ τῆς φύσεως αὐὖ- τῆς ἐπιλαθέσθαι παρεσκεύαζε" καὶ τρά- πεΐαν ὁρῶν μιαρὰν καὶ ἐναγῆ, τραπέζης ἐμνήσθη ἑτέρας τῆς φρικώδους καὶ πνεύ- ματος γεμούσης, καὶ οὕτως ἐπυροῦτο. ws ἑλέσθαι πάντα ὑποστῆναι καὶ παθεῖν, ἢ τῶν μιαρῶν ἐκείνων ἀπογεύσασθαι ἑδεσ- μάτων.---ἃ. Chrysost. Hom. in 5. Lu- cian. Martyr., § 2. Op., tom. ii. p. 527, 1.}
n [πῶς οὖν οὐκ ἐναντία ποιεῖτέ, φη- σιν, ὦ Κορίνθιοι, εὐλογοῦντες μὲν τὸν Θεὸν, ὅτι τῶν εἰδώλων ὑμᾶς ἀπήλλαξε, πάλιν δὲ ἐπὶ τὰς ἐκείνων τρέχοντες tpaméCas.—Id., in Epist. i. ad Cor. Hom. xxiv. ὃ 1. Op., tom. x. p. 212, E.]
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HoobD,
[ Marg. of Eng. Ver.]
See Exod. ἘΣ ἢ; Ὁ»
1 Sam. 9. 1155 Gen. 91. 84.
82 Sacrifices were eaten in the temples ;
“ How then ye Corinthians can ye do such contrary things, as to bless God, who hath delivered you from idols, and yet run again unto their tables?” And again® ; “Art thou not then ashamed, when these damned and slavish people prepare a table, to run and partake of what is set thereon?” So Tsaiah ἰχν. 11, 12, the idolatrous part of the Jews are charged with preparing two tables, one to Gad, and the other to Meni: « But ye are they that forsake the Lord, that forget My holy mountain, that prepare a table for Gad, and that furnish a drink-offering unto Meni.” It is, in the LXX, ἐτοιμάζοντες τῷ δαιμονίῳ τράπεζαν, “that prepare a table to the devil,” and is so cited by Justin Martyr Dialog. cum Tryphone?. It is plain from Scripture, that the sacrifices were eaten at the place where they were offered. Thus Numb. xxv. 2; the Amorites called the Israelites unto the.“ sacrifices of their gods, and the people did eat, and bowed down to their gods.” So Exod. xviii. 12, “Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, took a burnt- offering and sacrifices for God, and Aaron and all the elders of Israel came to eat bread with Moses’ father-in-law before God.” So in 1 Sam. xvi.; Jesse and his sons were called by Samuel to the sacrifice, ver. 5 ; and in the eleventh verse, when Jesse told him his youngest son was not there, he said, “ Send and fetch him, for we will not sit down? till he come hither.” Now at what were they to sit down, or according to the ori- ginal, “ about” what were they to sit? I suppose at, or about a table. It is also plain from the story of Cleobis and Biton in Herodotus’, that sacrifices among the heathens were eaten before the idol, or at the place where they were offered to him; for it was in the temple of Juno, where her image was, that the mother of those two brethren, and the rest of the Argives, “sacrificed and feasted.”” Which occasioned Drusius to write on these words, “and they lay themselves down by
ο [πῶς οὖν οὐκ αἰσχύνῃ... ὅταν θῶσι proprie Hebraismus circwmdabimus,
τράπεζαν οἱ κατάδικοι οὕτοι, τρέχων ἐκεῖ καὶ μετέχων τῶν προκειμένων.--- Ibid., § 3. p. 215, B.]
P [ἑτοιμάζοντες τοῖς δαιμονίοις τρά- πεζαν.---8ὃ. Just. M. Dial. cum Tryph., c. 135. p. 227, D.]
4 Munster in locum. Discumbemus. Hoe dicitur, quod post sacrificia paci- ficorum edebantur consecrata. Habet
quoniam sedebant in corona ad men- sam.—[ Crit. Sacr., tom. ii. p. 899. ]
τ [ἀπίκοντο ἐς τὸ ἱρόν"... στᾶσα ἄντιον τοῦ ἀγάλματος εὔχετο... μετὰ ταύτην δὲ τὴν εὐχὴν, ὧς ἔθυσάν τε καὶ εὐωχήθησαν, κατακοιμηθέντες ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ ἱερῷ, x. τ. A.—Herodot., lib. i. ec. 31.]
where there were tables for feasting on the sacrifices. 83
every altar,” as followeth’; Veteres intra ipsum templum solebant solennia sacrificiorum convivia agitare, ut apparet ex historia, quam refert Herodotus de Cleobe, et Bitone, et ex Aristophane in Pluto (660, sqq.] 1 Cor. viii. 10, εἰδωλεῖον quibusdam est idolorum templum, aliis ipsa mensa in qua epule celebrabantur ; so Livelius upon the place*, Inclinant se ; | Allu- dit ad veterem discumbendi morem, quo epulantes ad mensam non ut nos hodie sederunt, sed accubuerunt, reclinata supera parte corporis in cubitum sinistrum, &c..... Juxta omnia altaria in domo deorum suorum ;| Idololatre in idoleis suis coram idolis conviventes accumbebant ; 1 Cor. viii. 10, ‘ Si quis te viderit in idoleo accumbere, conscientia infirmi instruetur ad comedendum ea que sunt idolis mactata.” Ibid. x. 21,‘ Non potestis poculum Domini bibere, et poculum demoniorum.’ THorat. Od. xxxvii. lib. i.
Nure est bibendu, nunc pede libero
Pulsanda tellus: Nune Saliaribus
Ornare pulvinar deorum
Tempus erat dapibus, sodales.
So certain it is, as a late writer may observe", that the heathens had tables at which they ate of the sacrifices of their gods, that the learned translator* of Homer’s Iliads into Latin verse renders
Z 7 / TETUKOVTO TE δαίτα
δαίνυντ᾽---
in the sacrifices which the Grecians offered at the altars of ApolloY and Jupiter’ ;
* [Drusii Annot. in Amos ii. 18. apud Crit. Sacr., tom. iv. p. 247.]
t [Livelii Annot., ibid., pp. 252, 253. |
" Dr. Hancock. [In his Answer to some things contained in Dr. Hickes’ Christian Priesthood asserted. London, 1709. See Account of Additions, &c. vol. i. p. 2. noteg. Dr. Hancock, p. 12, sqq. opposes Hickes’ view (see above, p- 72, note a), as if he had said that ‘there is no difference between a table and an altar ;” for his words are (p.13), **So no doubt there is a considerable difference between an altar and an holy table; the altar was the place whereon
sacrifices were solemnly offered up to God, and the holy tables were the places whereon the sacrificial feasts were made. Nor has the Doctor proved, nor ever can prove, that the altars were places to eat at, nor the tables places to offer upon.” |
x Helius Eobanus Hessus. [The work referred to is a translation of the Iliad into Latin hexameters, with this title, Homeri Iliados libri xxiv, nuper Latino carmine elegantissimo redditi, Helio Eobano Hesso interprete. Basi- lex, 1540. ]
Υ Iliad., lib. i. 467.
z Ibid., lib. ii. 430.
G2
CHAP, IL.
SECT. IX.
84 Instances of tables and sacrificial feasts in the temples.
CHRISTIAN ——Mensas dapibus prestantibus augent*.
PRIEST- . . ooh ὁ . HOOD. Lautisque agitant convivia mensis”.
a> And their custom of eating their sacrificial feast in their temples, or in places so called from their sacrifices, is plaim from such passages in the prince of poets as these which
follow :
Hoc illis curia templum, He sacris sedes epulis: hic ariete ceso Perpetuis soliti patres considere mensis°.
Nune pateras libate Jovi, precibusque vocate Anchisen genitorem, et vina reponite mensis®.
——— Ocyus omnes In mensam leti libant, divosque precantur®.
These tables, on which they ate their sacrificial banquets, were in the same place where they offered them, at or near the images or altars of their gods, as appears from the sa- crifice just now mentioned which the Grecians offered to Apollo ; ἑκατόμβην βῆσαν ἐκηβόλῳ ᾿Απόλλωνι. τὴν μὲν ἐπεῖτ᾽ ἐπὶ βωμὸν ἄγων".
To which let me add these verses in Virgil speaking of Tarbas :
Dicitur ante aras media inter numina divum Multa Jovem manibus supplex orasse supinis. ‘ Jupiter omnipotens, cui nunc Maurusia pictis Gens epulata toris Leneum® libat honorem™,
Jamque dies epulata novem gens omnis, et aris Factus. honos'\——
Brissonius* shews that as they were wont in their prayers to touch or embrace the altars and images of their gods: so they used in their addresses to them to touch the tables:
« [Hessus, p. 23. ] h fin., iv. 204.
> [Ibid., p. 50. | i fin. v. 762,
ς /En. vil. 174—6. k De Form., lib. i. p. 40. [eos qui 4 Thid., v. 133. orabant, aras tangere et amplecti soli- © Ibid., viii. 278. tos, Macrob. Sat. lib. iii. ο. 2. tradit, et f [Tliad, i. 438, 440.] adductis Virgilii lib. iv. 219 et xii. 201
* Lenzeum libare honorem, est vini ®neidos versibus confirmat. Vide primitias in mensam sive aram Jovis Plaut. Rud. iii. 3. 83. Hor., lib. iii. infundere. Οἀ, 28. 17.)
Parallel of Christians partaking of the Lord’s table. 8
Similiterque in mensa, in qua bene precari moris fuit Livius car. 1. 5 . . + SECT, IX. ait, precantes mensam tangebant. Ovid. lib. 1. Amor. Eleg. ————
iv. 27.
Tange manu mensam, tangunt quo more precantes.
_ Lastly, that the Greeks had tables in their temples appears from what Tully saith of the Sicilian tyrant and great derider of the gods, Dionysius!: Jam mensas argenteas de omnibus delubris jussit auferri, in quibus quod more veteris Grecie in- scriptum esset ‘ Bonorum Deorum, uti se eorum bonitati velle dicebat.
I have observed all this of tables in the temples, or places of idol-worship, to shew how exact the analogy or parallel of the Apostle is between eating at the Lord’s table and the 1Cor.10. 21. table of devils; and I need not observe, that to drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons or devils, and to be partakers of the Lord’s table and the table of devils, are me- tonymical expressions, which properly signify to drink of the wine offered to the Lord, and of the wine offered to devils, and to be partakers of the sacrifices of the Lord’s table or altar, and of the sacrifices of the tables or of the altars of devils. Such is the phrase in the preceding chapter, “ They 1 Cor. 9. 13. who wait at the altar are partakers with the altar,” 1. 6. 15. Ἔν 10: They who wait at the altar are partakers of the sacrifices with the altar. According to this observation, the words of the Apostle may be paraphrased thus: “ But in answer to the ob- ch. 10. 19, jection that an idol is nothing, you ought to understand, that τ the things which the Gentiles sacrifice to idols they indeed sacrifice to devils, and not to God, and they who eat of the things sacrificed to them have communion with those devils, and I would not, my brethren, that you should have fellow- ship with devils; for by the common notion of communion, in which the worshippers of demons in images and the wor- shippers of God agree, ye cannot with consistency drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of devils, ye cannot be partakers or communicants at the Lord’s table and at the tables of devils, i.e. ye cannot hold communion, ye cannot be in co- venant with them both.” The argument which the Apostle here uses against the Christians’ eating of the sacrifices at the
' De Natura Deorum, lib. iii. c. 34.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
86 A Christian sacrifice and priests implied in the parallel,
tables or at the altars of devils, is founded on this common principle, received by the Jewish and Gentile world, that the eating or partaking at the table, or from the altar of any re- puted god, of the things sacrificed to him, was in its nature and common construction an act of communion with that god, and therefore by this common notion of religious fellow- ship or communion, Christians could not consistently with their religion eat at the Lord’s table and at the table of devils, or communicate with devils and with Him who came to de- stroy the works of the devil, and all the religious worship of devils in the Gentile world. This observation helps to set the parallel which the Apostle draws betwixt altar-communion with God and devils in a clear light. For first, oblations or sacrifices were offered to both: to the former, only upon the holy-table-altar, but to the latter both upon their altars and their tables™; secondly, it is plain those oblations to both were eaten by the offerers at tables; and thirdly, that the cup was offered at the Lord’s table, as well as at the table of devils ; and by consequence in the fourth place, that they were θῦται, or ‘sacrificing ministers,’ as Pollux calls priests", who
‘offered upon the Lord’s table, as idolatrous priests did upon
the altars or tables of the devils, and thence and there feasted their people in the name of their false gods. I say, the whole parallel between eating and drinking at the table of the Lord and the table of devils, supposes that they ate and drank of things which had been offered, and by consequence, that the ministers of the Lord’s table, upon which the bread and wine were first solemnly offered and then consumed in the sacri- ficial banquet, are sacrificing priests: such as in the ninth chapter and thirteenth verse of this Epistle, the Apostle speaking of Jewish priests, calls ta ἱερὰ ἐργαζόμενοι, τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ tpocedpevovtes* sacra operantes®, or sacra pro- curantes?, altart deservientes%, or altari operam dantes*, ‘mi- nisters about holy things’ pertaining to God, ‘ waiters at the
™ Brissonius de Form., lib. i. p. 82. n Lib. 1. cap. 1. segm. 14. [See Illud compertum habeo, in mensa et note i, p. 20.] inter scyphos et pocula, ubi libare diis ° [Qui sacra operantur.—Erasmus, dapes, et bene precari moris fuisse Crit. Sacr., tom. vii. p. 1067. ] Livius, lib. xix., scribit, jactari con- P [Qui sacra procurant.—Castalio. ] snevisse vocem hanc bene. ... Hoc 4 [Qui altari deserviunt.—Vulg. ] certe ita perspicue demonstrat Plau- τ [Qui are operam dant.—Castalio. |
tus, [Persa, y. 1. 22.]
Sacrificial terms used of the Eucharist τη, the Apostles’ days. 87
altar, without whom there could have been no sacrifice or offerings, or any partaking of the offerings at the holy table, in which the act of communion doth consist.
Hence as I have shewed, and shall shew again, in the time of the Apostles the bread and wine in the holy Eucharist came to be called δῶρα and προσφοραὶ, ‘ gifts’ and “ offer- ings, and the ministers of the Gospel προσεδρεύοντες τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ, ‘waiters at the altar, and προσενέγκοντες τὰ δῶρα, ‘offerers,’ or ‘sacrificers;’ their ministration at the Lord’s table being the most special and excellent part of their priestly function, in which making the bread and wine an holy and acceptable sacrifice to God by solemn oblation and prayer’, they thereby make intercession and atonement for their own sins and the sins of the people, as by a most solemn rite of supplication, according to the nature and use of sacrifices, by which God is atoned and His mercy and favour procured.
I say, according to this parallel of the Apostle between the communion with the true God and that of devils, bread and wine, the holy Eucharist, were called gifts and offerings,
and the ministers of the Gospel offerers and sacrificers, in’
the age of the Apostles, as appears from two or three pas- sages in St. Clement’s epistle to the Corinthians, who was fellow-labourer with the Apostles, and must have understood their meaning. Saith he, cap. 40‘, “ Seeing then these things are very evident, it is our duty, who have looked into the depths of Divine knowledge, to do all things in order, what- soever our Lord hath commanded us to do. Especially that we perform our offerings and ministrations (προσφορὰς καὶ Aevtoupyias) to God at the times appointed for them; for these He hath commanded to be done, not unseasonably and disorderly, but at certain appointed times and hours. Wherefore He hath ordained, by His sovereign authority,
5. See the prayer of consecration in the Apostolical Constitutions, lib. viii. cap. 12. [apud Concil., tom. i. pp. 481, 483, quoted below, p. 123, sqq.] and in the Communion-Office of the Scot- tish Common-Pxrayer Book. [Appen- dix, No. ii. ]
t [προδήλων οὖν ἡμῖν ὄντων τούτων, καὶ ἐγκεκυφότες εἰς τὰ βάθη τῆς θείας
γνωσέως, πάντα τάξει ποιεῖν ὀφείλομεν, ὕσα 6 δεσπότης ἐπιτελεῖν ἐκέλευσεν. κατὰ καίρους τεταγμένους τάς τε προσ- φορὰς καὶ λειτουργίας ἐπιτελεῖσθαι, καὶ οὐκ εἰκῇ ἢ ἀτάκτως (ἐκέλευσεν) γίνε- σθαι, ἄλλ᾽ ὡρισμένοις καιροῖς καὶ ὥραις. Tov τε καὶ διὰ τίνων ἐπιτελεῖσθαι θέλει, αὐτὸς ὥρισεν τῇ ὑπερτάτῃ αὐτοῦ βουλή- ce iv ὁσίως πάντα γινόμενα ἐν evda-
CHAP. II.
SECT. IX.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
88 ‘ Oblations, and ‘ offering gifts’ used by St.Clem. Rom. ;
both where and by whom they are to be performed, that so all things being done without fault, to all well-pleasing, they may be acceptable to His will. They therefore who make their offerings (οὗ ποιοῦντες τὰς προσφορὰς αὐτῶν) at the appointed seasons, they are blessed and accepted, for being obedient to the orders of the Lord, they offend not.” The same order is to be observed by those who minister unto Him in Divine service". “For the chief priest hath proper offices assigned to him, and to the priests is their proper station appointed, and to the Levites belong their proper ministrations, and the layman is confined within the bounds of what is commanded to laymen.” So chapter 44. saith he* ; “We cannot think that those may be justly thrown out of their ministry who were either appointed by the Apo- stles, or afterwards by emiment men, with the testimony and approbation of the whole Church, and have with all humility and innocency ministered to the flock of Christ in peace and without self-interest, and for a long time have been approved by all: such, we think, cannot be justly thrown out of their ministry. For it would be an heinous sin in us if we should cast out those from their episcopal charge, τοὺς ἀμέμπτως Kal ὁσίως προσενέγκοντας Ta O@pa’, who without blame or
κήσει, εὐπρόσδεκτα εἴη τῷ θελήματι αὐτοῦ" οἱ οὖν τοῖς προστεταγμένοις και- ροῖς ποιοῦντες τὰς προσφορὰς αὐτῶν, εὐπρόσδεκτοί τε καὶ μακάριοι" τοῖς yap νομίμοις τοῦ δεσπότου ἀκολοθοῦντες οὐ διαμαρτάνουσιν.---ὃι Clem. R., Epist. ic. 40. Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 170.]
υ [τῷ γὰρ ἀρχιερεῖ ἱδίαι λειτουργίαι δεδομέναι εἰσὶ, καὶ τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν ἵδιος ὃ τόπος προστέτακται, καὶ λευίτας ἱδίαι διακονίαι ἐπίκεινται" 6 λαικὺὸς ἄνθρωπος τοῖς λαικοῖς προστάγμασιν δέδεται.---- Ibid. ]
* [τοῦς οὖν κατασταθέντας ὑπ᾽ ἐκεί- νων, ἢ μεταξὺ ὑφ᾽ ἑτέρων ἐλλογίμων ἀνδρῶν, συνευδοκησάσης τῆς ἐκκλησίας πάσης, καὶ λειτουργήσαντας ἀμέμπτως τῷ ποιμνίῳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ ταπεινο- φροσύνης, ἡσύχως καὶ ἀβαναύσως, με- μαρτυρημένους τε πολλοῖς χρόνοις ὑπὸ πάντων, τούτους οὐ δικαίως νομίζομεν ἀποβαλέσθαι τῆς λειτουργίας" ἁμαρτία γὰρ οὐ μικρὰ ἡμῖν ἔσται, ἐὰν τοὺς ἀμέμπ- τως καὶ dolws προσενέγκοντας τὰ δῶρα ἐς ἐπισκοπῆς amroBdAwuev.—lIbid., c.
p- 173.]
᾿ ἴδω Cotelerius’ note on the place.
[Sacerdotes dona seu munera Deo offe-
runt, preces fidelium, sacrificia incru- enta, sanctam Eucharistiam.—Tertull. cont. Marc., iv. 9. (Op., p. ee - Sic apud Maximum ad cap. . Coelestis Hierarchiz, ‘ Sacerdotum ee τὸ δῶρον προσκομίζειν.᾽---(8.. Dion. Areop. Op., tom, ii. p. 13, A.) Vide hic in Const. Apost. ii. 59. (Cone., tom. i. p. 301, A.) viii. 5. 12, 18. (ibid., pp. 461, Ὁ. 481, A. 484, B.) et in Ignatio ad Smyrn. ec. 7. (Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 86.) Origenes, Hom. xiii. in Exo- dum, (Op., tom. ii. p. 176, F.) ‘Cum suscipitis corpus Domini cum omni cautela et veneratione, servatis, ne ex eo parum quid decidat, ne consecrati muneris aliquid dilabatur.’— Dionysius de Eccl. Hierarch., iii. 3. τὰς δωρεὰς τῶν θεουργιῶν.---(Ο., tom. i. p. 188, B.) Greg. Nyssen. sub finem Orationis xi. contra Eunomium, τὴν μυστικὴν Swpo- φορίαν, &e.—(Op., tom. ii. p. 704, A.) ] Bishop Fell on cap. 40. “ Hine szpius in hae epistola τῆς προσφορᾶς mentio ; ubi etiam episcopi describuntur hoe charactere et elogio, quod sint προσε- νέγκοντες τὰ S@pa.’—S. Clem. R. Epist. Annott, in p. 92. Oxon. 1669. The
89
default offer up the holy gifts.’ We find the like passage in the Apostolical Constitutions’, in the prayer of consecration of a bishop: δὸς... ἐπὶ τὸν δοῦλόν σου τόνδε, K.T.Xr., “ give unto this Thy servant chosen by Thee to be a bishop to feed Thy holy flock, and to do the part of an high-priest in mi- nistering night and day to Thee, (ἀμέμπτως,) without blame ; and making atonement in Thy presence .... καὶ προσφέ- pew σοι τὰ δώρα τῆς ἁγίας σου ἐκκλησίας, and to offer up unto Thee [the] gifts (or oblations) of Thy holy Church ;” and St. Cyprian hath the same phrase in the next marginal note, which I desire the reader to observe. In translating τὰ δῶρα, I have added the word ‘holy,’ because the bread and wine in the Eucharist were called not only édépa*, but ἅγια δῶρα by the ancients; and I must also observe, that as [Heb. 7. 8.] the Apostle describes the priests under the law by one of
their properties, which was to take tithes, so St. Clement
here, whose name the Apostle tells us was written in the [pnil.4.3.] book of life, calls the presbyters of Corinth ‘ offerers of the
gifts’ in the holy Eucharist, because it was part of their
proper office, and the most solemn part of it”, to offer them
up to God, as is evident from the authorities cited in the
as in the Apostolical Constitutions and St. Cyprian.
CHAP. I. SECT, IX.
note is also given in Cotelerius’ Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 170.]
z Lib. viii. cap. v. [δὸς ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί σου, καρδιογνώστα Θεὲ, ἐπὶ τὸν δοῦλόν σου τόνδε, ὃν ἐξελέξω εἰς ἐπίσκοπον, ποιμαίνειν τὴν ἁγίαν σου ποίμνην, καὶ ἀρχιερατεύειν σοι, ἀμέμπτως λειτουρ- γοῦντα νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας" καὶ ἐξιλα- σκόμενόν σου τὸ πρόσωπον, ἐπισυναγα- γεῖν τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν σωζομένων, καὶ προσφέρειν σοι τὰ δῶρα τῆς ἁγίας σου exkAnolas.—Apud Concil., tom. i. p. 462, D.]
Ὁ Tsaac Casaubon, Exercitationes Se- decim ad Annales Baronii Exercit. xvi. sect. li. [p. 507. Genev. 1655.] In Liturgiis antiquis, et apud patres τὰ δῶρα, vel τὰ ἅγια δῶρα appellantur ob- lationes panis, et vini ad sacram com- munionem in Ecclesia veteri solite offerri. ... Propterea in Greecorum Mmonumentis τὰ ἅγια δῶρα, vel τὰ mpo- κείμενα δῶρα, aut simpliciter τὰ δῶρα vel τὰ ἅγια pro ipso Christi corpore mystico accipiuntur; vel propter jam factam consecrationem, vel propter fu- turam, &c.
> S. Cyprian Epist. [iv. (v.ed. Oxon. )
ad Presbyteros et Diaconos, p. 9. ed. Ben. | ita ut presbyteri, qui illic apud confessores offerunt &ec. Epist. [lxviii. (Ixvii. ed.Oxon.) ad Clerum et Plebem in Hispania, p. 118, ed. Ben.] Quee ante oculos habentes, et sollicite ac re- ligiose considerantes, in ordinationibus sacerdotum non nisi immaculatos et integros antistites eligere debemus, qui sancte, et digne sacrificia Deo offe- rentes, audiri in precibus possint, quas faciunt pro plebis dominicz incolumi- tate.
In Homilia Pontificis consecrantis in ordinatione Episcopi apud Haber. tum, p. 867. εἶτα τὰς χεῖρας [ἀνατεί- νεις τῷ Θεῷ ; εἶτα δῶρα προσάξεις ; εἶτα ὑπερεύξῃ τοῦ λαοῦ ;) “ Then shall you hold up your hands unto God? after that shall you offer the gifts? and then pray for the people?’’ [This homily is a part of that of St. Gregory Nazian- zen, in consecratione Eulalii, Orat. xii. (ali xxx.) Op., tom. i. p. 254,,C2 The words just given, with those preceding them, are quoted in the Prefatory Dis- course, vol. i. p. 89, note u. ]
CHRISTIAN Margin.
PRIEST- HOOD.
90 ‘Offering gifts’ used by St. Paul of the Levitical priesthood,
I must also observe, that the phrase προσφέρειν Ta δῶρα, ‘to offer up gifts,’ is a sacrificial expression used by St. Paul of the Levitical priesthood, Heb. viii. 3, 4; “ For every high-priest is ordained, εἰς τὸ προσφέρειν δῶρά τε Kal θυσίας, to offer gifts and sacrifices. For if He were on earth He should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests, ὄντων TOV ἱερέων προσφερόντων κατὰ τὸν νόμον τὰ δώρα;, that offer gifts according to the law.” See also Heb. x. 11, 12; ix. 9; x1. 4. And therefore since St. Clement not only calls the holy Eucharist ‘an offering,’ but the ministers of it ‘offerers of the holy gifts,’ which is a proper sacrificial phrase, it must needs follow that the Lord’s table hath its proper sacrifice or oblation, of which the faithful Christians are par- takers; and that they who are appointed to minister at it, the bishops and presbyters, are proper sacrificing priests. Sir, I am discharged from proceeding any farther here by the labours of the learned Mede‘, in his Christian Sacrifice4, where, after explaining and defining the nature of the Chris- tian sacrifice*, he first shews, “that the holy Eucharist is an oblation’:” secondly, “that it is an oblation of thanksgiving and prayer’:”’ thirdly, “that it is an oblation through Jesus Christ, commemorated in the creatures of bread and wine?;” fourthly, “that the commemoration of Christ, according to the style of the ancient Church, is also a sacrifice‘:” fifthly,
© See also Bishop Beveridge’s Codex Canon. Eccles. Prim., lib. 11. cap. 10. in his excellent notes, sect. 3, 4. [pp. 206—298. Beveridge is engaged in meeting an objection to the antiquity of the Apostolical canons, grounded on their use of the words θυσιαστήριον for the Lord’s table, and θυσία and προσ- φορὰ for the holy Eucharist. He says, Hee et hujusmodi nomina de istis rebus usitata in antiquissimis Ecclesiz monumentis passim inveni- mus; and after quoting Cyprian, Tertul- lian, and Ignatius, adds; Constat itaque mysticam mensam ab istis A postolorum temporibus vocatam fuisse θυσιαστή- ριον, non autem βωμόν. He then ex- plains how the primitive Christians came to say they had no βωμοὶ, or ‘ are.’ Again; Hee ipsa sacra actio sive Eu- charistize celebratio θυσία et προσφορὰ,
‘sacrificium’ et ‘oblatio’ sepeappellatur. _
He instances Tertullian and Irenzus, and proceeds; Sacra Eucharistia est con-
vivium quoddam federale (qualia etiam antiqua fuerunt sacrificia) inter Deum et homines. Homines enim primo offe- runt panem et vinum Deo, quas crea- turas sibi oblatas et in symbola magni perChristum sacrificii consecratas, Deus iterum hominibus impertit ; quo pacto ipsi per fidem de magno Christi sacri- ficio revera participant. Ac proinde magnum hoe mysterium nullo alio vocabulo aptius pleniusve exprimi potest, quam istis θυσία, προσφορὰ, ‘sacrificium,’ ‘ oblatio,’ et similibus. He adds instances of the usage from Justin Martyr and St. Clement of Rome. |
4 [The Christian Sacrifice, a dis- course on Mal. i. 11, published after Mede’s death ; in 1648. ]
e [c. 2. Works, p. 356; c. ὃ. p. 857. ]
f [Ibid., c. 4. p. 360. ]
s [Ibid, c. 5. p. 362.]
h [Ibid., c. 6. p. 365. |
i [Ibid., c. 7. p. 369. ]
Mede, Grabe, and Bp. Bull on the Christian Sacrifice. 91
“that the body and blood of Christ in this mystical service was made of bread and wine, which had been first offered to God to acknowledge* Him the Lord of the creature! :” sixthly, “‘that this sacrifice was placed in commemoration only of Christ’s sacrifice upon the cross, and not in a real offering of His body and blood anew™.” ‘To him, Sir, and to Dr. Grabe, in his learned Annotations on the thirty-third and thirty-fourth chapters of the fourth book of Irenzeus", at present I refer your late writer for proof that the holy Eu- charist is a real sacrifice, as our ancestors called 105, and by consequence, that bishops and presbyters are proper sacrific- ing priests. Nay, for his present satisfaction, before I pro- ceed to farther authorities, I refer him to the learned Bishop Bull, in his answer to the bishop of Meaux, from p. 246 to p- 252”; and to the authority of our first Reformers in the
k [ Hickes has substituted ‘ acknow- ledge’ for ‘agnize,’ the word used by Mede. }
ilbids, ὅν 8: Ὁ. 372.)
m { Mede’s words are, “ That Christ is offered in the Eucharist commemo- ratively only, and not otherwise... In this sacrifice [Christ is] no otherwise offered than by way of commemoration only of His sacrifice once offered upon the cross . .. not hypostatically... (for so He was but once offered), but com- memoratively only.’”’-—Ibid., c. 9. p. 376. |
n [The notes referred to are on the words, per Jesum Christum offert Ec- clesia, &c. (ec. 17. § 6. p. 249. ed. Ben.) and, Igitur Ecclesiz oblatio, &c. (c. 18: δ ole 250, ed. Ben.) quoted p. 46; parts of these notes are quoted p- 57, note r, 72, note y. Grabe here brings together numerous passages from the fathers, expressing the doctrine. He explains ‘ purum sacrificium’ (Mal, i, 11) after Mede; respectu Christi, cujus immaculatum corpus et mundis- simus sanguis mystice in sacro altari representantur; andinterpreting Matt. v. 23, 24. of the Eucharist, he says, altare et sacrificium Ecclesie jamjam instituendum precipue respexisse vi- detur; and Heb. xiii. 10, In Ecclesia erat θυσία sacrificium, non solum ra- tionale laudis et precum, sed et mate- riale panis et vini, quod verbo ‘edendi’ clare significat Apostolus. On the words, ‘ sacrificia in populo, sacrificia et in Ecclesia,’ quoted p.80. notei, he says,
(Feuardentius) bene observat Irenzeum hoe loco non loqui de sacrificiis spiri- tualibus cordis contriti, orationis, lau- dis, gratiarum actione, et beneficentiz, quz omni etate et legi communia fuerunt; sed de nova Novi Testamenti eaque externa oblatione, quam legalibus externis opponit Irenzeus. |
© The word by which our Saxon ancestors called the holy Eucharist, in conformity to the doctrine of the Catho- lic Church, was hurel, or huyl, ‘ husel,’ which came from the ancient Gothic, or rather old German word Sungef or Hungl, which signifies ‘a sacrifice,’ by leaving out n, as in the Saxon words mud, ‘mouth,’ cud, ‘known,’ and ἰδ, ‘tooth, from the old Teutonic munths, funths, tunths, or tunthus. [So Lye, Dictionar. Saxonicum et Go- thico- Latinum, ed. 2, 1772.] See the eighth page of the preface to my Saxon Grammar, in the first of the two books entituled, Antique Litera- ture Septentrionalis Libri duo, &c. [Oxon. 1705; that is, his Linguarum Veterum Septentrionalium Thesau- rus; where there is a discussion on the language of Ulphila’s Gospels, (see above, note g, p. 18), which Hickes maintains to be the old German lan- guage. N.B. The pages of the preface are not numbered. }
P [ The work referred to is “ The Cor- ruptions of the Church of Rome, in relation to Ecclesiastical Government, and the Rule of Faith and Form of Divine Worship; in answer to the
CHAP, II,
SECT. IX.
92 Testimonies of our first Reformers and the Scottish Liturgy.
curist1an liturgy printed in the second year of King Edward VI.4,
PRIEST- HOOD.
which is in Sion College Library ; or what is to this purpose in Hammond I|’Estrange’s Alliance of Divine Offices", where, not to mention the Scottish Liturgy’, he will find that our Reformers called the Lord’s table “the altar‘,” and the holy Eucharist “a sacrifice,” as well as the minister a “priest.” Sir, I hope your late writer will admit the composers of the litur- gies above mentioned, as well as the other writers I have cited, to be a part of the Protestant communion; and there- fore he spoke too liberally, when he said that ‘the whole Protestant communion deny” bishops to be proper priests¥, and that he was mistaken when he said that he “ spoke in the language of the Church” in denying them to be priests in the proper sense. I may also add, that this text in 1 Cor. x. 20, 21, may also allude to the custom the Gentiles had of sacri- ficing to their gods of hospitality at their own feasts upon their own tables, as may be seen in Virgil’s description of Queen Dido’s entertainment of Aineas and his Trojans, Ain. lib. i. 700—736.
Dixit, et in mensam laticum libavit honorem.
By such offerings they used their tables as altars, and
Bishop of Meaux’s (Bossuet’s) que- ries,’ (sent to Mr. Nelson on the pub- lication of Bull’s Judicium Ecclesiz Catholicz.)London,1705. See Nelson’s Life of Bull, p. 829, ὅς. Bull’s words are; “It is true the Eucharist is fre- quently called by the ancient fathers προσφορὰ, θυσία, ‘an oblation,’ “ ἃ sa- crifice.’ But it is to be remembered that they say also it is θυσία λογικὴ καὶ ἀναίμακτος, ‘a reasonable sacrifice,’ ‘a sacrifice without blood.’’”’ (See Const. Apost., vi. 23. Conc., tom.i. p. 404, A.) .... “They held the Eucharist to be a commemorative sacrifice, and so do we. This is the constant language of the ancient Liturgies. ‘ We offer by way of commemoration,’ (μεμνημένοι προσ-- φέρομεν), according to our Saviour’s words, when He ordained this holy rite, ‘Do this in commemoration of Me.’ In the Eucharist then, Christ is offered, . . . . but commemoratively only: and this commemoration is made to God the Father, and is not a bare remembering, or putting ourselves in mind of Him. For every sacrifice is directed to God, and the. oblation
therein made, whatsoever it be, hath Him for its object, and not man. In the holy Eucharist therefore, we set before God the bread and wine, as ‘figures or images of the precious blood of Christ shed for us, and of His pre- cious body,’ [τοῦ τιμίου αἵματος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ ἐκχυθέντος ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, καὶ τοῦ τιμίου σώματος τὰ ἀντίτυπα], (they are the very words of the Clementine Liturgy, [Const. Apost., vii. 26. p. 428, D]) and plead to God the merit of His Son’s sacrifice once offered on the cross for us sinners, and in this sacrament represented, beseeching Him for the sake thereof to bestow His heavenly blessings on us.’’—Bull’s Works, vol. ii. pp. 251, 252. Oxford, 1827.]
4 [Appendix, No. i. See note f, Ρ. ὃ.
τ [Chapter 5. p. 155, Oxford, 1840.1
s [ Appendix, No. ii, See above,
3
t [See Prefatory Discourse, vol. i. pp. 126, sqq. | u [See above, p. 2. }
Argument from the allusions in Rom, χν. 15, 10. 93
made them the tables of devils, and it was as unlawful for
CHAP, II.
Christians to go to such feasts, when invited to them, as to *°"™ the sacrificial feasts in their delubra or εἰδωλεῖα, upon moun- tains, in groves, or in temples*, where I have shewed they had consecrated tables to eat their idolatrous offerings upon.
X. From this I proceed to another place of the New Tes- «που. x.
tament, to shew that it is a sacrifice, viz., Rom. xv. 15, 16%; From the —
: or : ae ; Minne where, alluding to the ministration of the Christian sacrifice, st",
in which at the oblation of the bread and wine the priest’, Christian alluded to Rom. xv.
* Macrob. Saturn., lib. iii. cap. 11. [See above, note a, p. 72. ]
Y Dy. Grabe in his notes on Justin Martyr, p. 127. [Grabe is commenting on the prayers mentioned by Justin M.,Apol. i. ο. 67. ed. Ben. He says that a prayer for the descent of the Holy Spi- rit to sanctify the elements was uni- versal in the most ancient Liturgies; and is reckoned by St. Basil (de Spi- ritu Sancto, c. 27, quoted in the note following) among the unwritten apo- stolic traditions. Tune vero ad hee ipsa Apostolus allusisse omnino mihi videtur, quando Rom. xv. 16, trans- latis ad sacrificium improprie dictum verbis Liturgicis scribit; εἰς τὸ εἶναί με, Kk. T.A. |
2 S. Basil. de Spiritu S., cap. 27. **Some of the ordinances and institu- tions observed in the Church we have taught us in express words of Scrip- ture, and some we have received as delivered in secret by tradition from
‘the Apostles: both which are of like
~ use unto godliness ; nor doth any man
speak against these, who is the least conversant in ecclesiastical constitu- tions. For if we attempt to lay aside the unwritten customs and usages of the Church, as not being of great mo- ment, we do not know what harm we shall all do the Gospel by our impru- dence: inall probability we shall there- by reduce the preaching of it to an empty name. Of this sort of unwritten usages (that I may instance first in the chief and most common of them) let me ask, who taught us in writing to sign those with the sign of the cross who believe in the name of Christ our Lord? What Scripture hath taught us, when we pray, to turn towards the east? Or which of the holy penmen left us in writing the words of invoca- tion in the consecration of the Eucha- ristical bread and cup of blessing?” [τῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησία πεΦφυλαγωένων
δογμάτων καὶ κηρυγμάτων, τὰ μὲν ἐκ τῆς ἐγγράφου διδασκαλίας ἔχομεν, τὰ δ᾽ ἔκ τε τῶν ἀποστόλων παραδόσεως διαδοθέντα ἡμῖν ἐν μυστηρίῳ παρεδεξά- μεθα: ἅπερ ἀμφότερα τὴν αὐτὴν ἰσχῦν ἔχει πρὸς τὴν εὐσέβειαν. καὶ τούτοις οὐδεὶς ἀντερεῖ, οὐκοῦν ὅς τίς γε κατὰ μικρὸν γοῦν θεσμῶν ἐκκλησιαστικῶν πε- πείραται. εἰ γὰρ ἐπιχειρήσαιμεν τὰ ἄγραφα τῶν ἐθῶν ὡς μὴ μεγάλην ἔχοντα τὴν δύναμιν παραιτεῖσθαι, λάθοιμεν ἂν εἰς αὐτὸ τὰ καίρια ζημιοῦντες τὸ εὐαγ- γέλιον᾽ μᾶλλον δὲ εἰς ὄνομα ψιλὸν περιΐ- στῶντες τὸ κήρυγμα. οἷον (ἵνα τοῦ πρώτου καὶ κοινοτάτου πρῶτον μνησθῶ) τῷ τύπῳ τοῦ σταυροῦ τοὺς εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἢλπι- κότας κατασημαίνεσθαι, τίς ὃ διὰ γράμ- ματος διδάξας; τὸ πρὸς ἀνατολὰς τε- τράφθαι κατὰ τὴν προσευχὴν, ποῖον ἐδί- δαξεν ἡμᾶς γράμμα; τὰ T ἐπικλήσεως ῥήματα ἐπὶ τῇ ἀναδείξει τοῦ ἄρτου τῆς εὐχαριστίας καὶ τοῦ ποτηρίου τῆς εὐλο- γίας, τίς τῶν ἁγίων ἐγγράφως ἡμῖν κα- ταλέλοιπεν.---ὃ. Basil. Op., tom. iii. pp. 54, Ὁ, E. 55, A.] So St. Chry- sost., lib. vi. de Sacerdotio. ‘‘ It behoves the priest to excel those for whom he makes intercession, in all things, as much as a governor should excel those who are subject to him. And tell me, I beseech you, in what rank shall we place him, and what degree of purity and piety we may expect from him, whose office it is to invocate the Holy Ghost, and offer up the tremendous sacrifice, and frequently to take in his hands the common Lord of all? What kind of hands ought those to be, which administer such things, and what tongue ought that to be, which utters such words? And whose soul ought to be more pure, and holy, than his, who receives so great a Spirit? At that time the angels stand round about the priest, and the whole order of the heavenly powers make their acclamations, and the place about the altar is filled with
10.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
94 The Eucharist commonly called ‘the offering of the Gentiles;
as I shall shew, prayed unto God to send down His Holy Spirit upon them, he said, ver. 15, 16, “‘ Nevertheless, bre- thren, I have written the more boldly to you in some sort, as putting you in mind of the grace that is given to me of God, that I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the Gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.” The words in the original for “the offer- ing up of the Gentiles” are προσφορὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν, “ the offer- ing of the Gentiles,” as the Eucharist is called by Justin Mar- tyr in his Dialogue with Trypho, in these words, p. 260°; περὶ δὲ τῶν ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ bp ἡμῶν τῶν ἐθνῶν προσφερομένων αὐτῷ θυσιῶν, τουτέστι τοῦ ἄρτου τῆς εὐχαριστίας καὶ τοῦ ποτηρίου ὁμοίως τῆς εὐχαριστίας", κι τι. ‘But as to the sacri-
a choir of angels ἴῃ honour of Him who lies thereupon.” [δεῖ δὲ πάντων αὐτὸν ὑπὲρ ὧν δεῖται, τοσοῦτο διαφέρειν ἐν ἅπασιν, ὅσον τὸν προεστῶτα τῶν προ- στατευομένων εἰκός. Or ἂν δὲ καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καλῇ, καὶ τὴν φρικω- δεστάτην ἐπιτελῇ θυσίαν, καὶ τοῦ κοινοῦ πάντων συνεχῶς ἐφάπτηται δεσπότου, ποῦ τάξομεν αὐτὸν, εἰπέ μοι; πόσην δὲ αὐτὸν ἀπαιτήσομεν καθαρότητα καὶ πό- ony εὐλάβειαν; ἐννόησον γὰρ, ὁποίας τὰς ταῦτα διακονουμένας χεῖρας εἶναι χρὴ, ὁποίαν τὴν γλῶτταν τὴν ἐκεῖνα προχέουσαν τὰ ῥήματα, τίνος δὲ οὐ καθα- ρωτέραν καὶ ἁγιωτέραν τὴν τοσοῦτο πνεῦμα ὑποδεξαμένην ψυχήν; τότε καὶ ἄγγελοι παρεστήκασι τῷ ἱερεῖ, καὶ οὐ- ρανίων δυνάμεων ἅπαν τάγμα Boa καὶ ὃ περὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον πληροῦται τόπος“, εἰς τιμὴν τοῦ κειμένου. ----ὃ., Chrysost. Op., tom. i. p. 424, Β. C.] So in his third book of the Priesthood: “ Pass then from the Jewish sacrifices to ours, and you shall see them not only won- derful, but surpassing all admiration ; for here is the priest, who doth not bring down fire, but the Holy Spirit from heaven, making earnest supplica- tion, not that a flame should fall down from heaven, and consume the offering, but that the Spirit (ἡ xdpis) may de- scend upon the sacrifice, and by it in- flame the souls of all (who partake thereof) and make them purer than silver refined in the fire. And there- fore who but a very madman, and out of his wits, can despise this most tre- mendous mystery.” [mer dn τοίνυν ἐκεῖθεν ἐπὶ τὰ νῦν τελούμενα, καὶ οὐ θαυμαστὰ ὄψει μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ πᾶσαν ἔκπληξιν ὑπερβαίνοντα. ἕστηκε γὰρ ὃ
ἱερεὺς, οὐ πῦρ καταφέρων, ἀλλὰ τὸ Πνεῦ- μα τὺ 6 ἅγιον" καὶ τὴν ἱ ἱκετηρίαν ἐπὶ πολὺ ποιεῖται, οὐχ ἵνα τις λαμπὰς ἄνωθεν ἀφθεῖσα καταναλώσῃ τὰ προκείμενα, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα ἣ χάρις ἐπιπεσοῦσα τῇ θυσίᾳ, δι᾽ ἐκείνης τὰς ἁπάντων ἀνάψῃ ψυχὰς, καὶ ἀργυρίου λαμπροτέρας ἀποδείξῃ πε- πυρωμένου. ταύτης οὖν τῆς φρικωδε- στάτης τελετῆς, τίς μὴ σφόδρα μαινό- μενος μηδὲ ἐξεστηκὼς, ὑπερφρονῆσαι δυνήσεται. Id. ibid., p. 383, A.] So Isidor. Origines, lib. vi. Sacrificium dictum quasi sacrum factum: [quia prece mystica consecratur in memoriam pro nobis Dominice passionis; unde hoc eo jubente corpus Christi, et san- guinem dicimus, quod dum sit ex fruc- tibus terre, sanctificatur et fit sacra- mentum, operante invisibiliter Spiritu Dei.—S. Isidori Hispalensis Etymolo- giarum, lib. vi. c. 19. ὃ 88, Op., tom. 111. p. 285.] “ The sacrifice is so called, as a sacred fact, because it is conse- crated in the memory of our Lord’s passion; from whence, by His com- mand, we call it the body and blood of Christ, because though it is made of the fruits of the earth, it is sancti- fied and made a sacrament by the invi- sible operation of the Spirit of God.”
8. [The pages in the text are those of the Paris edition of St. Justin Martyr, 1636. |
9 [The passage continues, προλέγει τότε, εἰπὼν καὶ τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ δοξάζειν
ἡμᾶς, ὑμᾶς δὲ βεβηλοῦν. He had
quoted the words of Malachi imme- diately before the extract in the text. —S. Just. M., Dial. cum Tryph., ο. 41. Op., p. 188, A.]
from the prophecy of Malachi, ch, i. 10, 11. 95
fice offered up by us Gentiles in every place, that is, of the cmar.c.
Eucharistical bread and cup, the prophet Malachi foretold it —
Mal. 1. 10, So Irenzeus, in the margin’, speaks of the it,’
in this place.” Eucharist as that sacrifice by which the same prophet fore- told God “should be glorified among the Gentiles.” The same place of the prophet is cited to the same purpose by St. Cyprian against the Jews ; and by his master Tertullian, adversus Marcion., lib. iii. cap. 22%; and by Justin Martyr a second time, in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, p. 344, ἀρχιερατικὸν TO ἀληθινὸν γένος ἐσμὲν, K. τ. Δ.» “We are the true royal priesthood of God, as God Himself testifieth, say- ing, ‘that we, in every place among the Gentiles, offer up unto Him acceptable and pure sacrifices.” So p. 3455, «There is no part of mankind, either of the barbarians or Greeks, among whom prayers and thanksgivings® are not made to the Father and Creator of all things.” By these prayers and thanksgivings he means the Eucharist, as is evident from the citation in the margin, and the preceding words, ταῦτα yap pova'i,x.t. X., “ But these perfect and ac- ceptable sacrifices to God the Christians only are taught thankfully to make, especially in the remembrance of their dry and wet food, wherein also is commemorated the pas-
sion, which the God of God suffered by Himself *.” So Const. Apost., lib. vii. cap. 31; τὴν ἀναστάσιμον τοῦ Κύ-
« S. Iren. adv. Heeres., lib. iv. cap. 32. Manifestissime significans per hee [the words of Mal. i. 10, 11.] quoniam prior quidem populus ces- sabit offerre Deo: omni autem loco sacrificium offeretur Deo, et hoc pu- rum; nomen autem ejus glorificatur in gentibus. [c. 17. § 5. p. 249. ed. Ben. |
4 §. Cypr. Testimoniorum Adversus Judzos, lib. 1. c. 16. [Op., p. 280. ed. Ben. |
€ | Tertulliani Op., p. 410, D. j
2 ἰἀρχιερατικὸν τὸ ἀλήθινον γένος ἐσ- μὲν τοῦ Θεοῦ, ws καὶ αὐτὸς 6 Θεὸς μαρ- τυρεῖ, εἰπὼν ὁτὶ ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσι θυσίας εὐαρέστας αὐτῷ καὶ καθα- pas προσφέροντε-.---ὃ. Just. M., ibid., § 116. p. 209, D.]
& [οὔδε ἕν yap ὅλως ἐστὶ τὸ γένος ἀνθρώπων, εἴτε βαρβάρων, εἴτε Ἑλλή- νων, ... ἐν οἷς μὴ διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματος τοῦ σταυρωθέντος ᾿Ιησοῦ εὐχαὶ καὶ εὐ-
χαριστίαι τῷ Πατρὶ καὶ ποιητῇ τῶν ὅλων ylvovrat.—ld. ibid., pp. 210, E. 211. aha
h ‘These are the words he uses in his description of the Eucharist, Apol. i. Ιχχχν. of Dr. Grabe’s edition. [6. 67. ed. Ben. καὶ ὃ προεστὼς εὐχὰς ὁμοίως καὶ εὐχαριστίας, ὅση δύναμις αὐτῷ, ava- πέμπει.---Ὁ. 88, 1), E.]
ῖ [ταῦτα γὰρ aaa καὶ Χριστιανοὶ παρέλαβον ποιεῖν, καὶ ἐπ᾽ ἀναμνήσει δὲ τῆς. τροφῆς αὐτῶν ξηρᾶς τε καὶ ὑγρᾶς, ἐν ἣ καὶ τοῦ πάθους ὃ πέπονθε δι᾽ αὐτοῦ 6 Θεὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ μέμνηται.----Τἃ. ibid., p- 210, Β.}
ἐν ἧ καὶ τοῦ πάθους ὃ πέπονθε δι αὐτοῦ 6 θεὸς τοῦ θεοῦ μέμνηται, in the Latin, Led. Paris, 1636, ] ‘in qua et pas- sionis quam pertulit per ipsum Deus Deum, meminit;’ otherwise; ‘‘in which also is ‘commemorated the passion, which God suffered by God Himself.” [See above, note q, p. 69. |
SECT. Xe
906 <The offering up of the Gentiles’ explained ; like that
CHRISTIAN poy ἡμέραν, K.T. r.,! “ Cease not to meet on the Lord’s day,
PRIEST- HOOD,
Mal. 1. 11, 14,
the day of our Lord’s resurrection, giving thanks to God for the benefits which He through Christ hath bestowed upon us, ὅπως ἄμεμπτος 7 ἡ θυσία, that your sacrifice may be un- blameable, and acceptable to God, who said of His cecu- menical Church (dispersed through the world), ‘In every place incense shall be offered up to Me, and a pure offering : for I am a great King, saith the Lord Almighty, and My name shall be great among the Gentiles.’” Now if according to this primitive notion of the Eucharist’s being the sacrifice of the Gentiles in all places, προσφορὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν signified their offering or sacrifice, not as offered, but as offerers, this text would be a direct and express proof. But although the ancients always spoke of the Eucharist as the sacrifice, or oblation of the Gentiles, in opposition to those of the Jews, when they argued against them from the prophecy of Malachi, yet because they understood the words of the Apostle for ‘ the offering up of the Gentiles,’ I think we ought to take them in that sense. But then I think that in mentioning that offer- ing of his as being sanctified by the Holy Ghost, he plainly alludes to the ministration of the Christian sacrifice, in which they solemnly prayed unto God “to send down His Holy Spirit upon the oblations ;’ without whom being specially present St. Cyprian thought the bread and wine could not be sanctified into the body and blood of Christ™. ‘This solemn prayer to the Holy Spirit may be seen in the ancient form of ministering the holy Sacrament hereafter set down", as we find it in the Apostolical Constitutions, as well as in the cita- tions of the margin®, to which I shall add these that follow ; St. Chrysostom in his panegyrical Homily on Lucian the Martyr, speaks of the communion-table as full of the Holy
1 [τὴν ἀναστάσιμον τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμέ- ραν, τὴν κυριακήν φαμεν, συνέρχεσθε ἀδιαλείπτως εὐχαριστοῦντες τῷ Θεῷ καὶ ἐξομολογούμενοι ἐφ᾽ οἷς εὐεργέτησεν ὑμᾶς 6 Θεὸς διὰ Χριστοῦ ῥυσάμενος ἀγνοίας, πλάνης, δεσμῶν, ὕπως ἄμεμπτος ἢ ἡἣ θυσία ὑμῶν καὶ εὐανάφορος Θεῷ, τῷ εἰπόντι περὶ τῆς οἰκουμενικῆς αὐτοῦ ἐκ- κλησίας, ὅτι ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ μοι προσε- νεχθήσεται θυμίαμα καὶ θυσία καθαρά" bri βασιλεὺς μέγας ἐγώ εἰμι, λέγει κύ-
ριος παντοκράτωρ, καὶ τὸ ὄνομά μου θαυμαστὺν ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσι.----(οηϑί. Αροϑί., lib. vii. c. 31. Concil., tom. i. p. 431, Β,6.
m Epist. Ιχν. ad Epictetum. Quando nec oblatio sanctificari illic potest ubi Spiritus Sanctus non sit.—[S. Cypr., Epist. lxiv. p. 112. ed. Ben. ]
" [See below, pp. 123, sqq.]
© [See below, pp. 123, sqq. notes ἢ, &c. |
in the Eucharist, ‘ sanctified by the Holy Ghost. 97
Ghost’; St. Cyprian calls it, spiritalem mensam%; and Gre- gory τ κα ξοης and Chrysostom’, τράπεζαν ΤΣ Ν “the table of the Holy Spirit.” In the ancient Liturgies nothing is more common than the prayers of the priest to God, to send down His Holy Spirit upon himself, and the communicants, and the oblations. So in the Liturgy of St. Chrysostom, of Goar’s edition, p.72', cal ἱκάνωσον, k.T.X., “ And make me fit, by the power of the Holy Ghost, . to officiate at this holy table, and consecrate Thy holy and im- maculate body, and Thy precious blood.” And p. 77%, ἐτὲ προσφέρομεν, κ. τ. r., “ We also offer up unto Thee this rea- sonable and unbloody sacrifice [service ἢ], and pray, and be- seech, and supplicate Thee to send Thy Holy Spirit upon us, and upon these gifts.” Soin the Liturgy of St. Basil, p. 162*; σὺ ἱκάνωσον, κ. τ. r., “Thou, O Lord, by the power of the Holy Ghost make me fit for this ministration.” So p. 1639, “Strengthen me with the power of So p. 164%, σὺ εἶ ὁ
σὺ ἐνίσχυσον, ΚΟ: δ... Thy Holy Spirit in this ministration.” θέμενος: x. T.r., “Thou art He, who hast placed us in this ministration by the power of Thy Holy Spirit.” So p. 1693, δεόμεθα, κ. τ. λ., “ We who minister at Thy altar, pray, and beseech Thee, that Thy Holy Spirit may come upon us, and upon these gifts which lie before Thee, to bless and sanctify
Ρ ἱτραπέξης ἐμνήσθη é ἑτέρας, THs φρικώ- δους καὶ πνεύματος γεμούση».---5. Chry- sost. Hom. in S. Lucian. M. § 2. Op., tom. ii. p. 527, D. quoted above, p- 81, note m. }
4 [The editor has not found this ex- pression in St. Cyprian. |
τ (St. Gregory is applying the words of Ps. xxiii. 5. to Christians; he says, ἔχω καὶ τράπεζαν, τὴν πνευματικὴν ταύ- τὴν καὶ ἔνθεον, ἣν ἡτοίμασέ μοι Κύριος, κ΄ τ. A.—Orat. ν. ὃ 35. Op., tom. i. p. 71. .]
8 [werd παρρησίας τῇ φρικτῇ καὶ πνευματικῇ τραπέζῃ προσελθεῖν. --- ὃ. Chrysost. Hom. i. in Gen. Op., tom. iv. p. 7, A.]
τ [καὶ ἱκάνωσόν με τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ ἁγίου σου πνεύματος gc παραστῆναι τῇ ἁγίᾳ σου ταύτῃ τραπέζα, καὶ i ἱερουρ- γῆσαι τὸ ὃ ἅγιον καὶ ἄχραντόν σου σῶμα, καὶ τὸ τίμιον afua.—Missa S. Joan. Chrys. Goar, Eucholog., p: 72.)
u [ἐτὶ προσφέρομέν σοι τὴν λογικὴν ταύτην καὶ ἀναίμακτον λατρείαν, καὶ
HICKES,
παρακαλοῦμεν, καὶ δεόμεθα, καὶ ἱκετεύ- ομεν, κατάπεμψον τὸ πνεῦμά σου τὸ ἅγιον ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς, καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα ταῦτα.---ΤΌ1ά., p. 77.]
x [σὺ ἱκάνωσον ἡμᾶς τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος εἰς τὴν διακονίαν ταύ- thv.—Miss. S. Basilii, ibid., p. 162. }
Υ [σὺ ἐνίσχυσον ἡμᾶς τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ ἁγίου σου πνεύματος εἰς τὴν διακονίαν ταύτην .---Τ Ὀ]4., p. 163. }
2 [σὺ εἶ ὁ θέμενος ἡμᾶς εἰς τὴν δια- κονίαν ταύτην ἐν τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ πνεύ- ματός σου τοῦ aylov.—lbid., p. 164. ]
a [ἡμεῖς .. of καταξιωθέντες λειτουρ- γεῖν τῷ ἁγίῳ σου θυσιαστηρίῳ... δεό- μεθα, καί σε παρακαλοῦμεν. .. ἐλθεῖν τὸ πνεῦμά σου τὸ ἅγιον ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς, καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα ταῦτα καὶ εὐλο- γῆσαι αὐτὰ, καὶ ἁγιάσαι, καὶ ἀναδεῖξαι
: τὸν μὲν. ἄρτον τοῦτον ποίησον αὐτὸ τὸ τίμιον σῶμα τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ Θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. . τὸ δὲ ποτήριον τοῦτο αὐτὸ τὸ τίμιον ohia τοῦ
Κυρίου, κ. τ. A.— Ibid., p. 169. ]
CHAP, 11.
SECT. X,
98 The operation of the Holy Spirit in the consecration ;
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
them, and (ἀναδεῖξαι) make them the body and blood of Christ.”
Those who desire to have more authorities of this kind may find many more in Habertus’ Greek Pontifical, Odservat. iv. ad parlem x. Liturgie Ordinum*’. From all which it will appear, that the ancient Church thought the Holy Spirit to be most especially present at the Eucharistical sacrifice, and to be the chief agent in the ministration of it; who as Maximus@ and Cabasilas® both express themselves, “sanctifies the gifts by the hand and tongue of the priest.””’, The Holy Ghost then is the principal, and the priests but the instrumental minis- ters in the ministration of the Eucharistical oblation, σύνεργοι τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος, co-agents or workers together with the Holy Spirit in the ministration of it, even as St. Paul saith that he, and the other Apostles were in preaching the Gospel, and planting Churches in the world. This part which the Holy Spirit hath in the ministration of the Encharistical sacrifice, (Heb.9.14.]inclines me to think, that where it is written that “ Christ
> ἀναδεῖξαι. See Is. Casaubon. Ex- ercit. in Baron. xvi. cap. 33. [ Casau-
Baronii Prolegomenain Annales, &e.— pp. 458, 459. Geneve, 1655. }
bon says that three senses have been given to this word. 1. The exhibiting of the sacrament to the people. 2. The manifesting it to be the body of our Lord by its effects, ostendere aliquo effectu prasentiam suam, as Bellar- mine understands it, (De Sacram. Euch., lib. iv. c. 14. Op., tom. iii, p- 135, D.) 3. That which he considers it to mean, from comparing its use here with that of ἀνάδειξις in St. Basil de Spi- ritu Sancto, c. 27. (quoted note z, p. 93,)viz.what the Latin fathers express by ‘conficere’ or ‘efficere’ corpus Domini. . Dubitari, mea quidem sententia, non potest, quin ἀναδεῖξαι in Liturgia Basi- lii id sit quod Hieronymus, Augusti- nus, et alii patres Latini dicunt ‘ confi- cere corpus Christi,’ sive ‘ sacramen- tum corporis Christi,’ ... docent enim patres, ad sacerdotis invocationem, per Spiritus Sancti operationem, elementa sanctificari, sic ut que prius erant tan- tum panis et vinum, jam incipiunt dici et esse in mysterio corpus et sanguis Christi: propterea dicunt iidem, Chris- tum apparere in Eucharistia et videri: nempe oculis fidei. Hence, he says, ἀναδεικνύειν here means ‘conficere’ ‘creare.’ De rebus sacris et Ecclesi- asticis Exercitationes xvi. ad Card.
Tov κοσμοπολίτην ἄνθρωπον | ev αὐτῷ ἐποίησας} κόσμου κόσμον [ αὐτὸν) ava- δείξας.---Οοηδι. Apost., lib. viii. cap. 12. [Concil., tom. i. p. 475, C.]
¢ [ Habertus observes that the con- secration is in a peculiar way attributed to the operation of the Holy Spirit ; he notices the analogy of the mysteries of the Incarnation and the Eucharist ; alleges many testimonies from Greek and Latin fathers, and particularly one on that analogy from S. Joan. Damase. de Fide Orthod., lib. iv. ὁ. 14 (Op., tom. i. p. 270, B.) which concludes with the words, 6 τῆς προθέσεως ἄρτος οἶνός τε καὶ ὕδωρ διὰ τῆς ἐπικλήσεως καὶ ἐπιφοιτήσεως τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος ὑπερφυῶς μεταποιοῦνται εἰς τὸ σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ aiua.—Haberti Pontif., pp. 251---250.]
4 [Hickes may have referred to S. Maxim. Mystagogia, c. 24, Bibl. Patr., tom. ii. p. 189, E. Paris. 1624, but the editor has not found these words. ]
© [τοῦτο (τὸ πνεῦμα) διὰ τῆς χειρὸς καὶ τῆς γλώσσης τῶν ἱερέων τὰ μυστή- pia TeAeoovpye.—Nicolai Cabasilz, Liturgiz Expositio, cap. 28. Bibl. Pa- trum, tom. ii. p.234. Paris. 1624]
£ | Cor. iii. 9. Θεοῦ γάρ ἐσμεν σύνερ- you. 2 Cor. vi. 1. συνεργοῦντες δὲ, Kk. τ. A.
applied to the interpretation of Heb. ix. 11 ; Rom. xv. 16. 99
offered up Himself by the Eternal Spirit,” the place is not to be understood impellente Spiritu, ‘by the impulse of the Holy Spirit,’ as some expound 108, nor ‘by His own Divinity, or Godhead,’ as others", but ‘by the presence and com-minis- tration of the Holy Spirit,’ who was assisting to Him in that oblation of Himself for the sins of the world. But this I submit to the judgment of learned meni.
From all that Ihave said, or cited out of the solemn prayers which were made to God in the administration of the Eu- charist to send down His Holy Spirit upon the priest, the sacrifice, and the people, and from His mighty most special assistance, and chief ministration in the holy action, parti- cularly in the sanctifying the oblations, I say, I cannot from considering all this but think it very probable, that the Apostle alluded to the common notion the Christians had of the Eucharistical oblations being sanctified by the Holy Ghost, in saying that the oblation he made of the Gentiles was acceptable to God, being (like the Eucharistical bread and wine) sanctified by the Holy Ghost.
After all this I take the liberty to paraphrase the text thus: * Nevertheless, brethren, I have written more boldly to you in some sort, desiring to put you in mind of the things you know, because of the honour of the apostolical office which is given me of God, that, according to the prophecy of Isaiah), I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, to
5. [‘Impellente spiritu’ are the words of Vatablus, in loc., (Crit. Sac., tom. vii. p. 1039.) “ Et sic plerique apud Estium,”’ is said by Poole, (Synopsis, ) in locum. Estius says that expositors were agreed in understanding ‘the eternal Spirit’ of the third Person of the Holy Trinity, (except Ribeira, who suggested that it might mean the soul and human will of our Lord,) and that it means ‘ movente et incitante Spiritu Sancto.’—Estii Comment. in Epist., pp. 1002, 1003, ed. Par. 1640. ]
h [This is the interpretation of Go- marus; he is followed by Cappellus, (Crit. Sacr., ibid., p. 1052,) Junius, and others of the foreign Protestants. See Poole’s Synopsis in loc. ]
i [St. Chrysostom’s words might suggest an interpretation such as Hickes’, τὸ δὲ, διὰ πνεύματος ἁγίου, δηλοῖ ὁτὶ οὐ διὰ πυρὸς προσήνεκται, οὐδὲ
Η
δι’ ἄλλων τινῶν.--- τη. xv. in Ep. ad Hebr., Op., xii. pp. 152, D. 153, A. See also de Sacerdotio, lib. iii.Op., tom. 1. p. 424, B, C, quoted note z, pp. 93, 94.]
2 Ainsworth, Annot. on Levit. 1]. [p. 10.] Secondly, it (the mincha) figured the persons of Christians, who through Him are cleansed and sancti- fied to be pure oblations unto God ; as it was prophesied, ‘“‘ They shall all bring your brethren for a minchah (a meat- offering) unto the Lord, out of all the Gentiles, &c. as the sons of Israel bring a meat-offering (79D, minchah) in a clean vessel, into the house of the Lord,” Isa. xlvi. 20. The accomplish- ment whereof the Apostle sheweth to have been by his ministration of the Gospel of God unto the Gentiles, that the oblation (προσφορὰ) of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost, Rom. xv. 16.”
6}
ἔν
CHAP, It. _ SECT. X.
15. 66. 20.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
100 λειτουργὸς ἱερουργῶν (Rom. xv. 16) a sacrificial metaphor ;
bring your brethren out of all nations for an offering unto the Lord, ministering the Gospel of God as in my priestly office*, that the offering up, or sacrifice of the converted Gen- tiles by me as an evangelical priest to God, might be accept- able to Him!, being not like the legal sacrifices of beasts seasoned with salt, but like the evangelical offering of the holy Eucharist, sanctified by the Holy Ghost™.” The word here, ‘minister’ of Jesus Christ, is Nectovpyds, which, as I ob- served above", is the word by which the Greek version often renders the Hebrew cohen, which at other times they trans- late by ἱερεὺς, ‘priest ; and had the Apostle written this epi- stle in Hebrew, I am of opinion that the translation would have been, “That I should be the priest of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles.” But ἱερουργοῦντα being added to λειτουργὸν makes it signify a priest; for a priest (ἱερεὺς, sacerdos) can- not be better defined, than that he is λευτουργὸς ἱερουργῶν, sacrorum publicus minister°, minister rem sacram operans, mi- nister fungens administratione sacrorum? ; ‘a minister of holy things,’ or ‘a minister about holy things,’ the same with ὁ τὰ ἱερὰ ἐργαζόμενος, res sacras faciens, 1. 6. ἃ priest, 1 Cor. ix. 18. “Do you not know,” saiththe Apostle, “that they who minister about holy things, live of the things of the temple,” 1. e. do you not know that the priests live, or are maintained, of the things of the temple? So ἱερουργοῦντα in Hesychius is glossed by προσφέροντα θυσίαν, ‘a sacrificing minister ;’ and the Apostle continuing his metaphor in terms belonging to
mate that he thought that προσφορὰ
Pisa ell cyan ΟἿ. KMS Kyling Ligh oo 35 3
Ue sim Jesu Christo minister uber gen- tes, sacerdotali munere exercens evange- lium Dei, Vers. Arab. [Biblia Sacra Polyglotta, Walton., tom. v. p. 677. ]
' So Grotius on the place, Rom. xv. 16. Ut factis probem me ministrum esse Christi ad gentes missum, .. . dum obeo sacerdotium non Leviticum sed Christianum ex vaticinio Isaiez Ixvi. 20....non pecudes Deo offerens, sed homines multos per me ad Deum con- versos. Persistit in similitudine vic- time: ideo dicit εὐπρόσδεκτος, Xe. [Crit. Sacr., tom. vii. p. 921. ]
™ Castalio. Ut extraneorum libatio accepta sit per Sanctum consecrata Spi- rilum. Which words seem to inti-
τῶν ἐθνῶν, signifies not ‘the offering up of the Gentiles,’ but ‘the offering of the Gentiles,’ as the holy Eucharist is called in opposition to the Jewish offerings ; but the words are to be understood in the allusive senses, as the Church always understood them. [In the mar- gin there is the gloss ‘qua Deo libantur’ added, which determines this to be Cas- talio’s view of the meaning of thewords. ]
n [See above, p. 15. ]
° {Ut sim Jesu Christi publicus minister ad extraneos. Castalio. |
P See Erasmus on the place. [ie- ρουργοῦντα, quasi rem sacram operans, ut respondeat ad λειτουργὸν, qui pro- prie sacrorum aut rei publice minister est: et fepoupyeiy ‘fungi administra- tione sacrorum.’— Crit. Sacr., tom. vii. p. 909. }
implies the reality of the Christian Priesthood and Sacrifice. 101
the priesthood, he saith, ἔχω οὖν καύχησιν ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν, “I have therefore whereof I may glory through Christ Jesus,” as to my priestly ministration, ‘‘inthings pertaining to God.” Wherefore as the Apostle’s allusion to the Christian offering, which was sanctified or made holy by the descent of the Holy Ghost, obliged him to call his offer- ing up of the converted Gentiles an offering or sacrifice, and himself λειτουργὸν ἱερουργοῦντα τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, ‘a priest of the gospel’ in that respect; so it proves the holy Eucharist, to which that allusion was made, to be a proper sacrifice, and the ministers who offer it to be proper sacrificing priests. Justin Martyr, in his first Apology 4, having related how Jesus Christ commanded the Apostles, after His example, to take the bread, and when they had solemnly given thanks, to say, ‘This is My body, this doin remembrance of Me;’ and in like manner to take the cup, and when they had solemnly given thanks, to say, ‘This is My blood,’ he observes to the Gen- tiles that the wicked demons had, by way of imitation, com- manded the same to be done in the sacraments of Mithra'; “ For,” saith he, “ you either know, or may know for certain, that a loaf and a cup of water, with a form of words, was used ἐν ταῖς τοῦ μεμυημένου τελεταῖς, in the solemn sacrifices for him who was initiated in that religion ;” meaning, as he had shewn‘, that the holy Eucharist was administered im- mediately upon the baptism or initiation of men into the Christian religion; and his parallel between the two mys- teries and initiation implies, that the oblation of the Eucha- ristical bread and wine' was τελετὴ", a solemn material sacri-
4 [St. Justin’s words are, of yap ἀπο- στόλοι ἐν τοῖς γινομένοις ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν ἀπομνημονεύμασιν, ἃ καλεῖται εὐαγγέ- λια, οὕτως παρέδωκαν ἐντετάλθαι αὐτοῖς τὸν Ἰησοῦν" λαβόντα ἄρτον εὐχαριστή- σαντα εἰπεῖν, τοῦτο ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἀνάμ- νησίν μου" τουτέστι τὸ σῶμά μου" καὶ τὸ ποτήριον ὁμοίως λαβόντα καὶ εὐχαριστή- σαντα εἰπεῖν, τοῦτό ἐστι αἷμα μου" καὶ μόνοις αὐτοῖς μεταδοῦναι. ὅπερ καὶ ἐν τοῖς τοῦ Μίθρα μυστηρίοις παρέδωκαν γίνε- σθαι μιμησαμένοι οἱ πονηροὶ δαίμονες" ὅτι γὰρ ἄρτος καὶ ποτήριον ὕδατος τί- θεται ἐν ταῖς τοῦ μυουμένου τελεταῖς per ἐπιλόγων τινῶν ἢ ἐπίστασθε ἢ μα- θεῖν δύνασθε.----ΑῬο]. 1. ο. 66. p. 88, B.]
τ So Tertullian de Prezscript., ο. x]. A diabolo scilicet, cujus sunt partes
intervertendi veritatem, qui ipsas quo- que res sacramentorum divinorum ido- lorum mysteriis emulatur. Tingit et ipse quosdam, utique credentes et fide- les suos: expositionem delictorum de lavacro repromittit; et, si adhuc me- mini, Mithra signat illic in frontibus milites suos; celebrat et panis oblatio- nem, et imaginem resurrectienis in- ducit, et sub gladio redimit coronam.— [Op.; ps 216,.C; D.]
5. [S. Justin M., Apol. i. c. 65. p. 82, C.]
τ Habert. Pontif. p. 335, &e. [For the use of τελετὴ see the extract in note ο, p. 47. ]
ἃ τελετή" θυσία μυστηριώδης. ἣ με- stern, καὶ τιμιωτέρα. Telete; sacri-
CHAP, II.
SECT, Χ,
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
102 Parallel of the rites of Christian and Natural Religion.
fice in the opinion of the Christians, as the oblation of the other diabolical bread and water was in the mysteries of Mithra; and by consequence that their bishops and presby- ters, who were ministers of baptism and the holy Eucharist, were τελεσταὶ, as Pollux” calls priests, even as proper priests* as the priests of Mithra or the sun were esteemed by his worshippers to be. The degrees or introduction to any religion were threeY, κάθαρσις, ‘ purgation,’ μύησις, “ initia- tion,’ and τελείωσις, ‘consummation,’ which was by sacri- fice; and therefore sacrifice was called τελετὴ. because it was the ‘consummation’ and perfection of all the rites by which men were initiated into the worship and religion of any god; and likewise because it was the last rite by which excommunicates were reconciled to their gods upon their re- pentance. Hence the sacrifice of the holy Eucharist came to be called τὸ τέλειον, ‘ perfection,’ as that which finisheth the initiation of a Christian, and the reconciliation of a
ficium mysteriorum plenum; maxi- mum, honoratissimum.—Suidas.
Vv Lib.i. cap. 1. segm. 14. [See note i, p. 20. ]
x Haberti Pontificale, p. 125. [ Obs. iii. ad Part. viii. Liturg. Ordin. De sacerdotali munere offerendi et sacrifi- candi... Sacerdotis est solius offerre sacrificia vere ac proprie dicta, quale sacrificium verum ac plenum a sacer- dote quod Chiistus fecit faciente, of- ferri dixit S. Cyprianus Ep. Ixiil. (see above, p. 19, note h.)] p. 140. [ Obsery. viii. De nomine ἀναφορᾶς... Non dnbium est hoe sensu (sacrificii) nomen ἀναφορᾶς adorando Liturgiz sa- crificio impositum esse... Hesychius avapopa, δέησις... Rem pene attigit, voce siquidem δεήσεως, apud Paulum (Epist.i. ad Tim. cap. ii. 1.) sacrosane- tum Eucharistiz mysterium et sacrifi- cium significari docuit S. Augustinus Epistola ad Paulinum.] p. 145. [Ob- serv. ix. περὶ τῆς θείας ἱερουργίας, κ-τ.λ.] p. 162. [Obsery. iv. ad Part. x.] p. 283. [Obsery. ii. ad Part. xi. Ab Apostolo, quem ἱερουργὸν τῆς ἐκκλησίας vocat S. Cyrillus.] Cyprian de Orat. Dom., pp. 149, 150.[ ed Oxon. nec sacrificium Deus recipit dissidentis..... Abel pacificus et justus, dum Deo sacrificat inno- center docuit et czteros quando ad altare munus offerunt, ὅσο. p. 211. ed. Ben. | Sursum Cord. Cyprian de Orat. Dom., p. 152. [ed. Oxon. Ideo et sacer-
dos ante orationem prefatione praemissa parat fratrum mentes dicendo ‘ Sursum corda,’ p. 213. ed. Ben. ]
y Haberti Pontif., p. 335. [The passage referred to is an extract from the Pseudo-Dionysius, who connects these three degrees of initiation with Christian baptism, the holy Kucha- rist, and ordination, administered re- spectively by the three orders of the clergy. ἡ μὲν οὖν ἁγιωτότη τῶν τελετῶν ἱερουργία, πρώτην μὲν ἔχει θεοειδῇ δύναμιν, τὴν ἱερὰν τῶν ἀτελέ- στων κάθαρσιν" μέσην δὲ, τὴν τῶν καθαρ- θέντων φωτιστικὴν μύησιν" ἑσχάτην δὲ, τῶν προτέρων συγκεφαλαιωτικὴν τὴν μυηθέντων ἐν ἐπιστήμῃ τῶν οἰκείων μυ- hoewy τελείωσιν. ἣ δὲ τῶν ἱερουργῶν διακόσμησις ἐν μὲν τῇ δυνάμει τῇ πρώτῃ διὰ τῶν τελετῶν ἀποκαθαίρει τοὺς ἄτε- λέστους᾽ ἐν τῇ μέσῃ δὲ, φωταγωγεῖ τοὺς καθαρθέντα ἐν ἐσχάτῃ δὲ καὶ ἀκροτάτῃ τῶν ἱερουργῶν δυνάμεων, ἄπο- τελειοῖ τοὺς τῷ θείῳ φωτὶ κεκοινωνηκό- τας, ἐν ταῖς τῶν θεωρηθεισῶν ἐλλάμ- ψεων ἐπιστημονικαῖς τελειώσεσιν" 7 δὲ τῶν τελουμένων δύναμις, ἣ πρώτη μέν ἐστιν ἣ καθαιρομένη" μέση δὲ, μετὰ τὴν κάθαρσιν ἣ φωτιζομένη καὶ τινῶν ἱερῶν θεωρητική" τελευταία δὲ καὶ θειότερα τῶν ἄλλων, ἣ τῶν ἱερῶν φωτισμῶν, ὧν ἐγεγόνει θεωρὸς, ἐλλαμπομένη THY TCH λεστικὴν ἐπιστήμην.----. Dionys.Areop. de Eeclesiastica Hierarchia, c. 3. ΟΡ.» tom. i. p. 233, C, D.]
ὙΥῸΝ
St. Justin Martyr on the Eucharistic sacrifice.
Christian penitent.
103
It is so called in six several canons cur. πο of the council of Ancyra’, relating to the readmission o
penitents, lapsers, adulterers, and murderers, to the peace and perfect communion of the Church. But to return to St. Justin, he speaks to the same purpose in his Dialogue
with Trypho the Jew, p. 259, 260°: “And the meat-offer- Lev. 14. 10.
ing of fine flour, which was appointed to be offered for those who were cleansed from the leprosy, was a type of the Eucharistical bread, which Jesus Christ our Lord commanded to be offered in remembrance of His passion, which He suf- fered for those whose souls are purged from all sins, that we might give thanks to God for creating the world and all things therein for man, and for delivering us from all the wickedness of which we were guilty, and for conquering the principalities and powers with a complete victory. And there- fore God by Malachi, who was one of the twelve prophets,
speaks of the sacrifices which you then offered, thus: ‘I have Mal. 1. 10,
no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of Hosts, neither will I τ accept an offering at your hand; for from the rising of the
2 Can.4, 5, 6,9, 22,23. [The coun- cil of Ancyra (Concil., tom. i. p. 1485, sqq.) was held A.D. 314, after the per- secutions ceased at the death of Max- imus. The canons are chiefly on the sub- ject of the restoration of the lapsed. The places referred to are Can. iv. (p. 1488, D.) τότε ἐλθεῖν ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον : Can. v. (ibid. E.) ἵνα τὸ τέλειον τῇ τετραετίᾳ λάβωσι: Can. vi. (p. 1489, B.) καὶ οὕτως ἐλθεῖν ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον : Can. ix. (ibid., D.) τοῦ τελείου μετάσχωσιν : Can. xxii. (p. 1423, C.) τοῦ δὲ τελείου ἐν τῷ τέλει τοῦ βίου καταξιούσθωσαν : Can. xxiii. (ibid.) τοῦ τελείου μετα- σχεῖν.] Isaac Casaubon. in Exercit. xvi. ad Annal. Baron. xlviii. Quare 7d τέλειον, ‘ perfectio’ et ‘consummatio,’ est ipsa Eucharistia, que etiam a Dio- nysio dicitur τελείωσις, [. . . quia con- junctionis nostre cum Christo, cujus instrumenta sunt verbum Dei et sacra- menta, velut colophonem imponit parti- cipatio corporis et sanguinis Christi in) Ceena Dominica: nullus enim restat alius modus quo in terris versantes arctius cum Christo capite nostro con- jungamur.—p. 505.
ἃ [καὶ 7 τῆς σεμιδάλεως δὲ προσφορὰ, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἔλεγον, ἣ ὑπὲρ τῶν καθαρι- ζομένων ἀπὸ τῆς λέπρας προσφέρεσθαι παραδοθεῖσα, τύπος ἦν τοῦ ἄρτου τῆς εὐ-
χαριστίας, ὃν εἰς ἀνάμνησιν τοῦ πάθους οὗ ἔπαθεν ὑπὲρ τῶν καθαιρομένων τὰς ψύχας ἀπὸ πάσης πονηρίας ἀνθρώπων, ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστὸς ὃ Κύριος ἡμῶν παρέδωκε ποιεῖν, ἵνα ἅμα τε εὐχαριστῶμεν τῷ Θεῷ ὑπὲρ τε τοῦ τὸν κόσμον ἐκτικέναι σὺν πᾶσι τοῖς ἐν αὐτῷ διὰ τὸν ἄνθρωπον, καὶ ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἀπὸ τῆς κακίας ἐν ἣ γεγόναμεν ἐλευ- θερωκέναι ἡμᾶς, καὶ τὰς ἄρχας καὶ τὰς ἐξουσίας καταλελυκέναι τελείαν κατά- λυσιν διὰ τοῦ παθητοῦ γενομένου κατὰ τὴν βουλὴν αὐτοῦ. ὅθεν περὶ μὲν τῶν ip’ ὑμῶν τότε προσφερομένων θυσιῶν λέγει 6 Θεὸς, ὧς προέφην, διὰ Μαλαχίου ἑνὸς τῶν δώδεκα: οὐκ ἔστι θέλημά μου ἐν ὑμῖν, λέγει Κύριος, καὶ τὰς θυσίας ὑμῶν οὗ προσδέξομαι ἐκ τῶν χειρῶν ὑμῶν, διότι ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς ἡλίου ἕως δυσμῶν τὸ ὄνο- μά μου δεδόξασται ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσι, καὶ ἐν πάντι τόπῳ θυμίαμα προσφέρεται τῷ ὀνόματί μου καὶ θυσία καθαρά᾽ ὅτι μέγα τὸ ὄνομά μου ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσι, λέγει Κύ- ριος, ὑμεῖς δὲ βεβηλοῦτε αὐτό. περὶ δὲ τῶν ἐν πάντι τόπῳ ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν τῶν ἐθνῶν προσφερομένων αὐτῷ θυσιῶν, τουτέστι τοῦ ἄρτου τῆς εὐχαριστίας, καὶ τοῦ πο- τηρίου ὁμοίως τῆς εὐχαριστίας, προλέγει τότε, εἰπὼν καὶ τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ δοξάζειν ἡμᾶς, ὑμᾶς δὲ βεβηλοῦν.---ϑ. Just. M. Dial. cum Tryph., 6. 41. pp. 137, D, E. 138, A.]
f SECT, X.
10. δὲ. Ireneus on the Institution of the Euch. Sacrifice.
sun unto the going down of the same, My name shall be
CHRISTIAN PRIEST~ . . . ποον. great among the Gentiles, and in every place incense shall
be offered unto My name, and a pure offering, for My name shall be great among the heathen, saith the Lord, but you have profaned it.’ But of the sacrifice of the Gentiles offered by us in every place, that is to say, of the bread of the Eu- charist and cup of the Eucharist, He then spoke beforehand, saying, that we glorified His name, and you profaned it.” To the same purpose speaks Irenzeus”: “ Our Lord appoint- ing His disciples to offer unto God the first-fruits of His creatures, not as if He had need of them, but that they might not be unfruitful and ungrateful, took the creature of bread and gave thanks, saying, ‘This is My body.’ In like manner, taking the cup (of wine), which is one of the creatures among us, He called it His blood, and imstituted* the new oblation of the New Testament, which the Church receiving from the Apostles, offers to God throughout the whole world, to that God who gives us food, (as being) the first-fruits of His gifts
> Lib. iv. cap. 32. (Dominus) suis discipulis dans consilium primitias Deo offerre ex suis creaturis, non quasi in- digenti, sed ut ipsi nec infructuosi, nec ingrati sint, eum qui ex creatura panis est, accepit, et gratias egit, dicens: hoc est corpus meum. Et calicem simili- Ler qui est ex ea creatura, que est se- cundum nos, suum sanguinem confes- sus est, et Novi Testamenti novam docuit oblationem, quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens, in universo mundo offert Deo, ei qui alimenta nobis pre- stat, primitias suorum munerum in Novo Testamento, de quo in duodecim Prophetis Malachias sic presignifica- vit; ‘Non est mihi voluntas in vobis, dicit Dominus, &c.’ manifestissime sig- nificans per hc, quoniam prior qui- dem populus cessabit offerre Deo, omni autem loco sacrificium offeretur Deo, et hoc purum, nomen autem ejus glo- rificatur in gentibus. [c. 17. § 5. p. 249.1 See Dr. Grabe’s notes, p. 118.
[Grabe’s note on the prophecy of Malachi has been quoted note r, p. 57. His words on the former part of this quotation are; Certum est Ireneum ac omnes, quorum scripta habemus pa- tres, Apostolis sive cozvos, sive prox- ime suceedentes, S. Eucharistiam pro nove Legis sacrificio habuisse, et pa- nem atque vinum tanquam sacra mu- nera in altari Dei Patris obtulisse; ante
consecrationem quidem, velut primitias creaturarum in recognitionem supremi ejus super universa dominii; post con- secrationem vero, ut mysticum corpus et sanguinem Christi, ad reprasentan- dum cruentam personalis ejus corporis ac sanguinis in cruce oblationem, et beneficia mortis ejus omnibus pro qui- bus offerretur, impetranda, Atque hance non privatam particularis Ecclesia vel doctoris, sed publicam universalis Ee- clesiz doctrinam atque praxim fuisse, quam illa ab Apostolis, A postoli ab ipso Christo edocti acceperunt, &c. And again, after giving several authorities, particularly from St. Clement R., he proceeds; Atqui cum hujus epistole auctor ille ipse Clemens fuisse videtur, cujus nomen in libro vite scriptum Philippensibus scripsit Paulus cap. iv. vers. 3. cumque is modo citata duobus vel tribus post Petri et Pauli Aposto- lorum martyrium, et viginti ante S. Joannis obitum annis scripserit, vix ullus dubitandi locus relictus est, ab ipsis SS. Apostolis hane de sacrificio Eucharistie doctrinam promanasse, ac proinde omnino tenendam esse, licet nullum pro ea dictum ex ipsis Prophe- tarum vel Apostolorum scriptis adduci possit. ]
* Docuit, ἐδίδαξε : “ διδάσκειν de prae- cipiente dicitur.”’ Budeus in Comm. Ling. Grece, p. 762.
Eusebius on allusions to it in the Psalms and Prophets. 105
in the New Testament, of which Malachi, one of the twelve (minor) prophets prophesied in these words, ‘I have no pleasure in you,’ &c., manifestly signifying by these words that His former people should cease to offer any more to God, but that sacrifice should be offered to Him in every place ; and this pure one (of which the prophet spake) that His name might be glorified among the Gentiles.” To the same purpose also speaks Eusebius, in his commentary on Psalm li. and the last verse’: ‘ But Symmachus saith, ‘thou shalt re- ceive,’ instead of ‘thou shalt accept,’ an offering and holocausts, to wit, of ‘righteousness ;’ and moreover adds ‘ calves.’ For all are offerings of righteousness, according to the spiritual sacri- fices without blood, which are offered through the whole world. In another of the Jewish prophets it is also said, ‘I have no pleasure ;? and, ‘in every place incense and a pure sacri- fice shall be offered to My name.’ This is now called the ‘ sacrifice of righteousness,’ and also ‘ of praise,’ as he called it in the foregoing psalm, saying, ‘ offer up to God the sacrifice of praise.’”? See also his comment on Isaiah xviii. 7.°
I believe no man in the world, that was of any religion where sacrifice was used, and that by chance should see the Sacrament of the holy Eucharist administered among Chris- tians, as it was administered in the primitive times‘, or as it is administered according to the order and usage of the Church of England, but would take the bread and wine for
4 [προσδέξῃ δὲ εἶπεν, ἀντὶ τοῦ εὐδο- Khoets, 6 Σύμμαχος. καὶ τὴν ἀναφορὰν δὲ, καὶ τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα, δικαιοσύνης νοητέον, καὶ προσέτι τοὺς μόσχους. πάν- τα γὰρ δικαιοσύνης ἐκτελεῖται, κατὰ τὰς ἀναίμους καὶ πνευματικὰς θυσίας, τὰς ἐν τῇ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐκκλησίᾳ καθ᾽ ὕλης τῆς οἰκουμένης προσφερομένας᾽ καὶ ἐν ἄλλῳ γὰρ εἴρηται πρὸς ᾿Ιουδαίους προ- φήτῃ" οὐκ ἔστι μου θέλημα ἐν ὑμῖν, λέ- yet κύριος παντοκράτωρ,. .. καὶ ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ θυμίαμα προσφέρεται τῷ ὀνόματί μου, καὶ θυσία καθαρά" αὐτὴ νῦν λέγε- ται, θυσία δικαιοσύνης᾽ ἔστι δὲ καὶ αἰνέσεως καθὰ πρόσθεν ἔλεγε: θύσον τῷ Θεῴ θυσίαν aivecews.—Eusebii Cxsa- riensis Comment. in Psalmos (Ps. 1.) apud Collectionem Novam Script. (Montfaucon), tom. i. p. 212, C, D.]
© [ἐν τῷ καιρῷ ἐκείνῳ ἀνενεχθήσεται δῶρα Κυρίῳ σαβαὼθ, ἐκ λαοῦ τεθλιμμέ- νου καὶ τετιλμένου, καὶ ἀπὸ λαοῦ μεγά- λου, ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν καὶ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα χρό- νον. εἴη δ᾽ ἂν οὗτος 6 τὴν στενὴν καὶ
τεθλιμμένην ὁδεύων, τὴν ἀπαγούσαν εἰς τὴν ζωὴν, 6 αὐτὸς καὶ ἐκτετιλμένος ὑπάρχει, ὡς ἂν τῆς κοινῆς τῶν ἀνθρώ- πων ζωῆς ἠλλυτριώμενος, καὶ μέγας δέ ἐστι παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ καὶ πολὺ», διὸ λέλεκ- ται, ἀπὸ λαοῦ μεγάλου. καὶ γὰρ ἐν τῷ παρόντι βίῳ, καὶ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι δὲ αἰῶνι τὰ λογικὰ δῶρα καὶ τὰς ἀναιμάκ- τους τῷ Θεῷ θυσίας ἀναπέμπων οὐ δια- λιμπάνει ὃ δηλωθεὶς λαός.--- Eusebii Cesariens. Comm. in Hesaiam, ibid., tom. ii. p. 429, B, C.]
' παυσαμένων ἡμῶν τῆς εὐχῆς, ἄρ- τος προσφέρεται [ καὶ οἷνος καὶ ὑδωρ᾽ καὶ ὁ προεστὼς εὐχὰς ὁμοίως καὶ εὐχαρι- στίας, ὅση δύναμις αὐτῷ, (totis viribus, id est, magna animi intentione) ἄνα- πέμπει, Kal ὃ λαὸς ἐπευφημεῖ, λέγων Td ἀμήν" καὶ ἡ διάδοσις καὶ ἡ μετάληψις ἀπὸ τῶν εὐχαριστηθέντων ἑκάστῳ γίνεται, καὶ tots οὐ παροῦσι διὰ τῶν διακόνων πέμπεται.---ὅ. Just. Mart. Apol. i. ¢. 67. p. 88, Ὁ, E.]
CHAP. II.
SECT. Χ,
100 76 Form of administering the Holy Eucharist
onrstiaN an offering or sacrifice, and the whole action for a sacrificial
PRIEST- HOOD.
ministration; and the eating and drinking of the holy ele- ments for a sacrificial entertainment of the congregation at the table of their God. Τὸ see bread and wine mixed with water’ so solemnly brought to the table, and then a loaf of that bread and a cup of that wine brought by the deacon in manner of an offering to the liturg, or minister, which he also taking in his hands, as an offering, sets them with all reverence on the table ; and then after solemn prayers of obla- tion and consecration to see him take up the bread, and say, in a most solemn manner, “This is My body,” &c., and then the cup, saying, as solemnly, “This is My blood,” &c., and then to hear him, with all the powers of his soul, offer up praises, and glory, and thanksgiving, and prayers to God, the Father of all things, through the name of the Son, and
| πόλυ ποιεῖται.
& ἔπειτα προσφέρεται τῷ προεστῶτι τῶν ἀδελφῶν ἄρτος, καὶ ποτήριον ὕδατος καὶ κράματος. [καὶ οὗτος λαβὼν, αἶνον καὶ δόξαν τῷ πατρὶ τῶν ὅλων διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματος τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ ἁγίου ἀναπέμπει" καὶ εὐχαριστίαν ὑπὲρ τοῦ κατηξιῶσθαι τούτων παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ οὗ συντελέσαντος τὰς εὐχὰς καὶ τὴν εὐχαριστίαν, πᾶς ὃ πα- ρὼν λαὸς ἐπευφημεῖ λέγων, ἀμήν" τὸ δὲ ἀμὴν, τῇ “EBpatd: φωνῇ, τὸ γένοιτο σημαίνει. εὐχαριστήσαντος δὲ τοῦ προε- OTOTOS, καὶ ἐπευφημήσαντος πάντος τοῦ λαοῦ, οἱ καλουμένοι παρ᾽ ἡμῖν διάκονοι διδόασιν ἑκάστῳ τῶν παρόντων μετα- λαβεῖν ἀπὸ τοῦ εὐχαριστηθέντος ἄρ- Tov καὶ οἴνου καὶ ὕδατος, καὶ τοῖς οὐ πα- ροῦσιν ἀποφέρουσι.----1ἃ. 1014., c. 65. pp- 82, D, E. 83, A.]
h This was the practice of ourChurch at the Reformation, as may be seen in the Rubric of the communion office of the first Common Prayer-Book of Edward VI. [Rubric after the offer- tory. ‘Then shall the minister take so much bread and wine as shall suffice for the persons appointed to receive the holy communion . . . putting the wine into the chalice, or else into some fair or convenient cup prepared for that use, (if the chalice will uot serve,) put- ting thereto a little pure and clean water, and setting both bread and wine upon the altar.”” See Appendix, No. 1. ]
See also Dr. Grabe’s notes on 7d κεκραμένον ποτήριον, in Irenzus, lib. v, cap. 2. p. 897. ed. Oxon. [The words of St. Irenzeus are, ὅπότε οὖν καὶ Td
κεκραμένον ποτήριον, καὶ 6 γεγονὼς ἄρ- τος ἐπιδέχεται τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ γίνεται ἡ εὐχαριστία σῶμα Χριστου, Kk. τ. A. (p. 294. ed. Ben.) Grabe’s note is to this effect; Sicuti supra, lib: 15 τὸ. 9 (618: 5 ΡΞ
Ben.) Mareum hereticum ποτήρια κεκραμένα οἴνῳ consecrasse refert;
ita hoe loco Catholicis quoeque κρᾶμα istud in usu fuisse insinuat, quod et ex Justini Martyris Apologia (i. e. 65, c. 67. quoted above) aliisque scripto- ribus constat. Fecerunt id exemplo ipsius Salvatoris, qui in prima S. Ceena ‘temperamentum calicis suum sangui- nem confirmavit,’ ut Irenzus supra libsiv. οἱ "57. (δ: 332 § 2p; 27ONeds Ben.) scribit, et ‘mixtionem calicis no- vam in Regno cum discipulis habitu- rum se pollicitus est,’ prout inferius lib. v. ο. 86. (§ ὃ. p. 887. ed. Ben.) lo- quitur. Neque hae de re dubitabit qui istum ritum inter Judzos adeo recep- tum fuisse consideraverit, ut Paschale epulum haud rite mero vino sine aqua se celebrare putaverint. ... Atqui hee Judzorum ante Christum et Christi- anorum post eum continua praxis ac doctrina, sicut idem ab ipso Christo factum indicat, ita et omnibus facien- dum injungit. He quotes and argues from St. Cyprian’s epistle to Czcilius, Ixiii, against those who used only water, (see above, note m, p-d4.) and the canon of the council in Trullo, A.D. 692. against those who used only wine. (Canon 52, Concilia, tom. vii. p. 1362,
B.) ]
shews it to be a Sacrificial Service and Mystery. 107
Holy Spirit, which they beseech Him to send down upon the bread and cup, and the people with the greatest harmony and acclamation saying aloud, Amen. After which also to see the liturg first eat of the bread, and drink of the cup, and then the deacon to carry about the blessed bread and wine, to be eaten and drunk by the people, as in a sacrificial feast ; and lastly, to see and hear all concluded with psalms and hymns of praise, and prayers of intercession to God with the highest pomp-hke' celebrity of words. I say, to see and hear all this, would make an uninitiated heathen conclude that the bread and wine were an offering, the whole Eucharistical action a sacrificial mystery, the eating and drinking the sanctified elements a sacrificial banquet, and the liturg who administered, a priest. I have here used the term sacrificial mystery, because there was no federal sacrifice but what was a religious mystery, exhibiting one thing to the sense, and another to the understanding of the votist ; or what was not an outward sign of an invisible inward grace of the God, true, or believed to be true, to whom the sacrifice was offered: I say, every federal sacrifice is an outward sign of an invisible grace, and by consequence is a mystery, or Sacrament; for Sacrament in the Latin Church, from which we borrowed the word, signifies the same as mystery in the Greek, and there- fore the Eucharistical sacrifice is also a Sacrament, or to speak more properly of it, it is a Christian Sacrament or mystery, as a federal commemorative sacrifice, in which as Christ re- presents unto God His passion, and the merits of it, as our High-Priest in heaven, so in this sacrifice the priests upon earth in conjunction with it, present, and commemorate the same unto Him, by setting before Him the symbols of His dead body and blood effused for our sins.
I speak this to let the reformed world see, that they need not be afraid of believing the holy Eucharist to be a proper sacrifice * or offering, in which the bread and wine are offered
i [μόνην ἀξίαν αὐτοῦ τιμὴν ταύτην παραλαβόντες, τὸ τὰ bm ἐκείνου εἰς διατροφὴν γενόμενα, οὐ πυρὶ δαπανᾶν ἀλλ᾽ ἑαυτοῖς καὶ τοῖς δεομένοις προσφέ- pew, ἐκείνῳ δὲ εὐχαρίστους ὄντας] διὰ λόγου πομπὰς, καὶ ὕμνους πέμπειν.---8. Justin. Mart. Apol. i. p. 28. ed. Oxon. [e. 31. Op., p. 51, A. ed. Ben. ]
k §. Chrysost. de Sacerdotio, lib. iii. ὅταν yap ἴδῃς, “ When thou shalt see the Lord sacrificed, and the priest standing over the sacrifice, and pouring out prayers, and the people dyed red with His blood, canst thou think thou art among men or upon the earth, or that thou art translated into heaven?”
CHAP, IT.
SECT. Χ,
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD,
108 Ifthe Eucharist is a Sacrifice, the Ministers of it are Priests.
in a proper and literal sense, and that by consequence the ministers of it are properly, and literally speaking, offermg
[ὅταν γὰρ ἴδῃς τὸν κύριον τεθυμένον, καὶ κείμενον, καὶ τὸν ἱερέα ἐφεστῶτα τῷ θύματι, καὶ ἐπευχόμενον᾽ καὶ πάντας ἐκείνῳ τῷ τιμίῳ φοινισσομένους αἵματι" ἄρα ἔτι μετὰ ἀνθρώπων εἶναι νομίζεις, καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἑστάναι; ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ εὐ- θέως ἐπὶ τοὺς οὐρανοὺς μετανίστασα .---- S. Joan. Chrys. de Sacerdot., lib. iii. ὃ 4. Op., tom. i. p. 382, D.] S. Basil. de Baptismo, lib. ii. quest. 2. ‘‘ But when the Lord said, ‘a greater than Solomon is here,’ He thereby taught us how much more wicked he is, who being impure, dares offer up the body of our Lord, ‘who gave Himself for us an offering and sacrifice to God.’”’ [6 δὲ κύριος λέγων, μεῖζον τοῦ ἱεροῦ ὧδε, παι- δεύει ἡμᾶς, ὅτι τοσοῦτον ἀσεβέστερός ἐστιν 6 τολμῶν ἱερατεύειν τὸ σῶμα τοῦ κυρίου τοῦ δόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν προσφορὰν καὶ θυσίαν τῷ θεῷ εἰς ὀσμὴν evwdias.—De Baptismo, lib. ii. quest. 2. (opus spurium) S. Basilii Opera, tom. ii. App. p. 653, D, E. | Eulogius Alexan- drinus Patriarcha apud Photii Biblio- thecam. ‘‘ Here the Apostle (Heb. x. 46) doth not forbid all sacrifice, but the legal sacrifices, nor doth he absolutely dis- charge all sacrifice, but threatens the last judgment to those, who after they had acknowledged the truth, and been partakers of the mystical sacrifice, re- turned to the legal sacrifices by calves and bulls... . Wherefore as he forbids them ihe legal baptism, so he forbids them the bloody sacrifices of the law, for the tremendous sacrifice of the body of our Lord, which is offered among us, is not an institution of different sacrifices, but a commemoration of the sacrifice once offered for us. For, saith He, ‘Do this in remembrance of Me,’ and therefore as often as we do it, we do shew forth the death of our Lord.” [καί φησι 67) ἐνταῦθα οὐχ ἁπλῶς θυσίαν ἀποτρέπει, ἀλλὰ νομικὴν θυσίαν, καὶ οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἀπαγορεύει, ἀλλὰ καὶ κρίσιν ἐσχάτην ἀπειλεῖ τοῖς μετὰ τὴν ἐπίγνω- σιν τῆς ἀληθείας καὶ τῆς μυστικῆς θυ- σίας τὴν ἀπόλαυσιν εἰς ἐκείνην τὴν νο- μικὴν, τὴν διὰ μόσχων καὶ ταύρων τε- λουμένην, ἐπανιοῦσι.... ὥσπερ οὖν τὰ νομικὰ βαπτίσματα κωλύει τούτους ἐπι- τελεῖν, οὕτω καὶ τὰς ἐναίμους θυσίας ... καὶ γὰρ καὶ ἣ map’ ἡμῶν ἐπιτελου- μένη, τοῦ σώματος τοῦ Κυρίου φρικτὴ τελετὴ, οὐ θυσιῶν ἐστὶ διαφόρων προσ- αγωγὴ, ἀλλὰ τῆς ἅπαξ προσενηνεγ- μένης θυσίας ἀνάμνησις, τοῦτο γάρ, φησι, ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν.---
Photii Biblioth. cod. 280. p. 540, b. Berlin. 1824.] S. Isidor. Orig., lib. vi. duo autem sunt, que offeruntur, [do- num et sacrificium. Donum dicitur, quidquid auro argentoque, aut qua- libet alia specie efficitur. Sacrificium autem est victima, et quecunque cre- mantur in ara seu ponuntur.... Im- molatio ab antiquis dicta, eo quod in mole altaris posita victima cederetur: unde et mactatio post immolationem est. Nunc autem immolatio pani et calici convenit, libatio autem tantum- modo calicis oblatio est.—S. Isidor. Hispalensis, Op., tom. 111. pp. 283, 284.] ‘There are two things which are offered to God, gifts and sacrifices. Gifts consist in gold or silver, or any other species, which is offered. But sacrifices are victims, and whatsoever is burnt or placed upon the altar..... Immolation was so called by the an- cients, because the victim to be slain was brought to the mole (or bulk) of the altar, and there slain, and there- fore mactation was after immolation. But now immolation is agreeably said of the bread and the cup, but libation is properly the oblation of the cup only.” Eusebius Cesariensis in Psalm. xev. 9, 10. ‘‘ He means the rational and spiri- tual sacrifices, which we see are daily offered up by the priests for the faith- ful.” [θυσίας μὲν λέγων τὰς λογικὰς καὶ πνευματικὰς, ἃς ὁρῶμεν διηνεκῶς ὑπὲρ τῶν εὐσεβῶν προσφερομένας, καὶ ἱερουρ- γουμένας ὑπὸ τῶν iepéwy.—apud Col- lect. Nov. Montfaucon, tom. i. p. 636, C.] To these may be added the Jewish doctors, who taught, “that under the Messias all sacrifices should cease, but that of bread and wine,’’ cited in the most excellent tract of The Great Duty of Frequenting the Christian Sacrifice, lately written and published by Mr. Nelson. [pp. 21, 22. London, 1706. He quotes from the Bereschit Rabba, ‘that is the larger commentary of the Jews upon Genesis,’ Rabbi Pinehas on Numb. xxviii., “Tempore Messiz om- nia sacrificia cessabunt, sed sacrificium panis et vini non cessabit, sicuti dic- tum est, (Gen. xiv.) ‘Et Melchizedek, &c. ;? Et Melchisedecum rex Messias excipiet a cessatione sacrificiorum, si- cuti dicitur, (Ps. ex.) ‘Tu es sacerdos,’ &c.;” and Rabbi Johai on the same chapter of Numbers, “Tempore Messiz omnia sacrificia desinent; sacrificium vero panis et vini nunquam desinet.”’ ]
They would be so, were it only a Sacrament. 109
priests, as the primitive Christians and all Churches before the Reformation taught and believed. But then, I must say again, upon supposition that like baptism it is only a Sacra- ment or religious mystery, and not a sacrifice, that, according to the notion of priest and priesthood, as I have before ex- plained it out of profane and holy writers, the ministers of it must be priests. For to be taken from among men to per- form all the most holy solemnities above-mentioned, pertain- ing unto God, to have authority from Him to represent before Him the passion of His Son, and the merits of it on earth, as He doth in heaven, and in virtue of it to intercede unto Him for the people, for whom He performs the holy mystery, and to admit them in His name to feast at His table, and to deliver unto them the bread and wine, as pledges of His love and seals of pardon—to minister in this manner in the most intimate act of communion that can be betwixt God and man, as fully answers the notion and character of a priest, as to offer sacrifice; and the signification of τῶν ἁγίων λειτουρ- ros, ἱερουργεῖν. ἱερὰ ἐργάζεσθαι in the Divine Writings, and of δρᾶν, ῥέζειν, and ἔρδειν in profane authors, which by special usage were applied to the action of sacrificing, as properly belong to any other ministerial action as holy and solemn as sacrificing, which the public liturg performs by God’s appointment; but more especially to ministerial actions, in which there are religious mysteries, external signs, mys- tical rites, and manual operations, as taking and breaking of bread, and taking and pouring out wine, and feasting upon them as God’s entertainment, and concluding all with most solemn acts of intercession. These are τὰ θεῖα, most holy performances, as holy and solemn as any sacrifice, and per- taining as much to God; and therefore he that by God’s appointment administers in such holy and mystical rites and offices, cannot but be λειτουργὸς ἱερουργῶν, which I said before was the definition of a priest. I have said this upon mere supposition, by granting more than I should, for the more effectual conviction of your late author. For the holy Eu- charist is so very like a sacrifice, or sacrificial mystery, in all its rites and manner of ministration, that if it be not a sacrifice, no man can well tell what the common notion of a sacrifice is, or easily distinguish it from the nature of any
CHAP. IT. SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
110 ThePrimitive Christians saw it figured in the Old Testament.
sacrifice, upon which the votists used to feast in the temple
and at the altar of their God.
The primitive Christians,
who were as afraid of idolatry as any of the Protestants, were so far from not having this notion of it, or being afraid to own it as such, that as they believed Melchisedec was a type of Christ!, so they believed the bread and wine, which he brought forth to Abraham when he blessed him, to have been a type of this commemorative sacrifice by bread and wine, which Christ instituted for His Church. They believed it
1 Et Melchisedech rex Salem pro- tulit panem et vinum. Fuit autem sacerdos Dei summi, et benedixit Abra- ham. Quod autem Melchisedech ty- pum Christi portaret declarat in Psalmis Spiritus Sanctus [ex persona Patris ad Filium dicens: ante luciferum ge- nuite; Tu es sacerdos in zternum | se- cundum ordinem Melchisedech. Qui ordo utique hie est de sacrificio illo veniens et inde descendens, quod Mel- chisedech sacerdos Dei summi fuit, quod panem, et vinum obtulit, quod Abraham benedixit. Nam quis magis sacerdos Dei summi, quam Dominus noster Jesus Christus, qui sacrificium Deo Patri obtulit, et obtulit hoc idem, quod Melchisedech obtulerat, i.e. pa- nem et vinum, suum scilicet corpus et sanguinem. Et circa Abraham bene- dictio illa precedens, ad nostrum popu- lum pertinebat,&c. S.Cyprian. Ep. Ixiii. [ad Cecilium, p. 105. ed. Ben.] See Grotius upon the place. [Alimenta de- dit (Melchisedech) Abrahamo exerci- tuique ejus... neque tamen improbabi- lis sententia, factum hoc sacrificio prae- cedente: ἐπινίκια ἔθυε (sacra fecit vic- toriz ergo) ait Philo (de Abrahamo. Op., tom. ii. p. 34.) Nam et 6 simila oblatio Hebrzis AID (sacrificium) Grecis θυσία (hostia) dicitur, Lev. ii. ... et vinum ante mensam eo libare mos omnium gentium. Grotii Annott. in Gen. xiv. 18. Crit. Sacr., tom. i. p. 388. The quotations which follow were in the third edition included, apparently by a mistake, in note m.] Μελχισεδὲκ, βασιλεὺς Σαλὴμ, 6 ἱερεὺς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ὑψίστου, ὃ τὸν οἶνον καὶ τὸν ἄρτον τὴν ἡγιασμένην διδοὺς τροφὴν εἰς τύπον εὐχαριστία. ----ὃ. Clemen. Alex. Strom., lib. iv. p. 539. [ Paris, 1629. p. 637. ed. Oxon.] So St. Ambrose in Epist. ad Hebr., cap. 5. Hujus ordinem sacrificii per mysticam similitudinem Melchise- dech justissimus rex instituit, quando Domino panis et vini fructus obtulit.
Constat enim pecudum victimas peri- isse, que fuerunt ordinis Aaron, non Melchisedech: sed hoe manere potius institutum, quod toto orbe in sacra- mentorum erogatione celebratur. — [Op., tom. iii. p. 492, Ὁ). Rom. 1579. see note h, p. 33; from Rabanus M. Op., tom. v. p. 548, A., and ultimately from Alcuin, Op., tom. i. pp. 679, 680. ] Cap. 7. Neque carnis, et sanguinis victimas immolaverit et brutorum san- guinem animalium dextra susceperit, sed pane et vino simplici puroque sacrificio Christi dedicaverit sacerdo- tium.—[Pseudo-Amb. ibid. p. 498, D., Rabanus M. ibid. p. 552, D., Aleuinus, ibid., p. 686.] Which per- haps should be read ‘sacramentum,’ as in the words of St. Hierome, cited below out of his epistle to Evagrius, tom, iii. of the Basil edition; Sacerdos in eternum secundum ordinem Melchi- sedech ; Ordinem autem ejus multis modis interpretantur, quod solus et rex fuerit et sacerdos, et ante circum- cisionem functus sacerdotio, ut non gentes ex Judzis, sed Judi e Genti- bus sacerdotium acceperint; neque unctus oleo sacerdotali, ut Moysis prae- cepta constituunt, sed oleo exultationis et fidei puritate; neque carnis et san- guinis victimas immolaverit, et brutg- rum (sanguinem, eorum) animalium exta, (id est, quicquid super escam est,) susceperit, sed pane et vino, sim- plici pureque sacrificio, Christi dedi- caverit sacramentum.—[S. Hieron. Epist. 78. ad Evangelum (al. 126. ad Evagrium) ὃ 3. Op., tom. i. col. 449), A, B. The words in parentheses are omitted in Vallarsius’ edition, Verona, 1734.] Petrus de Marea de Sacrificio Misse ... Hoc esse Melchisedechi sa- crificium, qui panis et vini species Deo prius ab se oblatas, ut decebat sacer- dotem Altissimi, ad agendas de Abra- hami victoria gratias, ipsi dein atque commilitonibus edendas bibendasque
The Council of Nice speaks of it as ‘ the unbloody sacrifice’ 111
to be that mincha purum™, that “ pure offering” foretold by the prophet Malachi, which should be “offered in every place,” and not in one, as among the Jews, “unto the name of God among the Gentiles, from the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same.” Hence they called it, to distinguish it from the Jewish sacrifices, θυσίαν λογικὴν Kal ἀναίμακτον, sacrificium rationale et incruentum, ‘ the spiritual and unbloody sacrifice, or offering without slaughter and blood” And accordingly the fathers" in the first council of Nice, speaking of the mystery or Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, express themselves in this manner; ‘‘ When we are at the Lord’s table let us not with low thoughts attend to the bread and cup set thereupon, but exalting our minds, let us by faith conceive that the Lamb of God°, which taketh away the
prebuit, ut sacrificii participes omnes faceret.... Cujus exemplo Christus, pane et vino prolatis in ultima mensa Deo gyratias egit.... Quare frugum illarum sacrificium a Melchisedecho ad Dei venerationem adhibitum, typus fuit veri sacrificii a Christo instituti.—[ Pe- tri de Marea Archiepiscopi Parisiensis Dissertationes Posthume, p.94. Baluz. Paris, 1669.] See also St. Hierome in Matth. de Consecr. dist. 2. Assumit panem, qui confortat cor hominis, et ad verum pasche transgreditur sacra- mentum, ut quomodo in prefiguratione ejus Melchisedech [summi Dei sacer- dos] panem et vinum offerens fecerat, ipse quoque in veritate sui corporis, et sanguinis representaret, —[Comm. in Metiba libs tv. ὁ; 26: Op:,, tom. vil. col. 216, C. Hickes’ reference is to the Decretum (ap. Corpus Juris Ca- nonici, tom. i.) Pars iii. Dist. ii. § 88. where this passage is quoted. ]
m Cur itaque postea per Prophetas predicat Spiritus futurum, ut in omni terra, aut in omni loco offerantur sacri- ficia Deo, sicut per Malachiam an- gelum unum ex duodecim prophetis: ‘non recipiam sacrificium de manibus vestris, quoniam ab oriente sole usque ad occidentem nomen meum clarifica- tum est in omnibus gentibus, dicit Do- minus omnipotens, et in omni loco of- feruntur sacrificia munda nomini meo.’ —Tertull. Adversus Judzos, c. 5. [Op., Ρ. 187, D.] So contra Marcion., lib. lil. c. 22. (ibid. Ρ- 410, 1):
Z [ ἐπὶ τῆς θείας τραπέζης πάλιν κἀν-
ταῦθα, μὴ τῷ προκειμένῳ, ἄρτῳ, καὶ τῷ ποτηρίῳ ταπεινῶς προσέχωμεν" ἀλλ᾽ ὑψώσαντες ἡμῶν τὴν διάνοιαν, πίστει
νοήσωμεν κεῖσθαι ἐπὶ τῆς ἱερᾶς ἐκείνης τραπέζης τὸν ἀμνὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, τὸν at- ροντα τὴν ἁμαρτίαν τοῦ κόσμου, ἀθύτως ὑπὺ τῶν ἱερίων θυόμενον" καὶ τὸ τίμιον αὐτοῦ σῶμα καὶ αἷμα ἀληθῶς λαμβά- νοντας ἡμᾶς, πιστεύειν ταῦτα εἶναι τὰ τῆς ἡμετέρας ἀναστάσεως σύμβολα.--- Gelasii Cyziceni Commentarius Acto- rum Niczni Concilii. (Interprete Rob. Balforeo) c. 31. Concilia, tom. ii. p. 241. |
ο τὸν ἀμνὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ ... ἀθύτως ὑπὸ τῶν ἱερέων θυόμενον : ‘ Agnum 1]- lum Dei... incruente ἃ sacerdotibus immolatum.’ So the words are trans- lated truly and properly by Rob. Bal- fore, who first published Gelasius’ History of the First Council of Nice at Paris, 1600. [This translation is re- printed in the Councils, see the note on it, Concilia, tom. ii. p. 112.j Foras θύω in the primary sense signifies to kill or slay, Matth. xxii. 4; Luke xv,.22, 23; John x. 10; Acts x. 13, so ἄθυτος, from whence ἀθύτως, in its primary sense signifies ‘non mactatus,’ ‘not killed or slain.’ But as θύω in its secondary sense signifies to sacrifice, or offer animals by slaughter, or mactation, and thence again to offer, or sacrifice in the most general sense; so the holy fathers said, that in the holy Eucha- rist the Lamb of God was offered or sacrificed ἀθύτως, ‘ incruente,’ without blood, or being slain. Indeed ἄθυτος also signifies ‘non sacrificatus,’ not offered, or sacrificed, and that both in a literal and figurative sense. First in a literal sense, as in that passage of Athenzus, lib. iv. [p. 79. ed. Lugd.] where he saith of Epicurus, ἄθυτα δ᾽ ἱερὰ
CHAP. II. SECT. X.
Mal. 1. 11, 12.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD,
112 The Eucharist called a Sacrifice by Constantine.
sin of the world, is placed upon the holy table, and offered or sacrificed by the priests in an unbloody oblation, and that we receiving His precious body and blood, believe them to be the symbols (or pledges) of our resurrection.” For the same rea- son they called the holy Eucharist, ἁγνὴν θυσίαν, hostiam mun- dam, puram, a pure offering, because pure from violence and blood, as in the words of Constantine the Great, in the twelfth chapter of his oration to the Church of the saints, where speaking of the commemoration of martyrs in the holy Eucharist, he saith’, ‘Such Eucharistical sacrifice is per- formed in commemoration of these men, as is pure from blood and all violence, in which also there is no need of the odour of incense, or of fire, but only of as much pure light
[ ipa, Dind., tom. i. p. 409] πολλάκις κα- τεσθίει, ‘that he frequently eats flesh whereof he offered uo part to the gods.’ To the right understanding of which I must transcribe the words of Is. Casau- bon, in his notes on lib.i. cap. 11 of Atheneus, [p. 35. Lugd. 1621.] Ob- servamus Grecos scriptores ἱερεῖα ap- pellare non solum victimas, quz vere ἱερεύονται, et in sacrificiorum usum mactantur: verum omnia quzecunque ad comedendum jugulantur animalia. Satis constat tam ex sacris quam ex aliis literis, primis temporibus ignota hominibus carnium manducatione, tan- tum in honorem numinis mactari soli- tas hostias. Piguit postea mortales olerum, et τῆς ἀπύρου τροφῆς: itaque coepere etiam ipsi carnibus vesci: sed parce initio... Nunquam autem ullum animal in proprios usus mactabant, quin ejus aliquam partem Deo conse- crarent adolendam. Qui secus face- rent, proverbio notati ἄθυτα ἱερὰ κατε- σθίει. Quod de homine impio impro- boque solitum dici. So in Suidas, [tom. i. col. 129, ] ἀθύτους" ἄνευ θυσιῶν, καὶ γήμας ἀθυτούς τε καὶ ἀγάμους γά- μους ἐκείνους (ἐκεῖνος, Gaisf.) ‘ Having solemnized marriage without sacrifice.’ And in the same word, ἐδεῖτο μὲν of τὸ σῶμα κρεοφαγίας-, ἀθύτου δὲ οὐκ ἠνέσχετο μεταλαβεῖν" ‘ His body required eating of flesh, but he never eat of it, before some part was offered in sacrifice to the gods.’ Secondly, &@uros signifies ‘not sacrificed’ in a figurative sense, when the sacrifice or offering is not accepted by reason of some defect in the offerer or offering, and is therefore deemed as no sacrifice. So Philo de vita Mosis, lib. iii. [Op.,] p. 669, [E.
Paris, 1640,] saith the sacrifices of the wicked are ἄθυτοι θυσίαι, καὶ ἀνιεροὶ ἱερουργίαι, ‘sacrifices not sacrificed, and unholy oblations.’ And elsewhere in the same book, [p. 677, C.] θυσίας ἀθύτους ἀνήγαγον, ‘They offered pro- fane unhallowed abominable sacrifices ;’ that is, profane polluted sacrifices, in the same sense as the Greeks called null marriages γάμους ἀγάμους, [ Soph. (id. T., 1214.]; and a gift of an enemy δῶρον ἄδωρον, [ Id. Aj. 665,] as being a gift, which in effect was no gift. Now in the literal sense of ἄθυτος, the Lamb of God cannot be said not to be offered at all in the Eucharist, because His re- presentative body and blood were lite- rally offered, and presented to God upon the holy table, as is plainer from all antiquity than to need proof. Nor se- condly, could it be the intention of the Nicene fathers to say that Christ in the holy Eucharist was not offered in this figurative sense, for that had been to assert that the propitiatory oblation of the Eucharist for the remission of sins, and the resurrection unto life eter- nal, had been a profane, polluted, and vain oblation; and therefore ἀθύτως θυόμενος, in the passage here cited, can only signify ‘offered, but not slain,’ offered or sacrificed without mactation or blood.
P [καὶ τοιαύτη τις εὐχαριστίας θυσία τοῖς ἀνδράσιν ἀποτελεῖται: ἁγνὴ μὲν αἵματος, ἁγνὴ δὲ πάσης Blas’ οὐδὲ μὴν ὀσμὴ λιβάνων ἐπιποθεῖται, οὐδὲ πυρκαϊά" καθαρὸν δὲ φῶς, ὅσον ἐξαρκέσαι πρὸς ἔκλαμψιν τοῖς evxouevors.—Constantini Imp. Oratio que inscribitur ‘ad Ce- tum Sanctorum;’ ad cale. Euseb. Vit. Const. ap. Hist. Ecel., tom. i. p. 692. ]
Spiritual Sacrifices and Priesthood 1 Pet. ii. δ. 118
CHAP. If.
as is sufficient to give light to the worshippers.” So St. SECT. X.
Chrysostom in his Homily on St. Eustathius saith4, “the ini- tiated knew” ἐστὶ θυσία καὶ χώρις αἵματος, “that there is a sacrifice without blood.” They also called it, θυσίαν αἰνέσεως, ‘a sacrifice of praise,’ according to what Buxtorf’ tells us some Rabbins said, “ that the sacrifice of praise should never cease ;” and agreeably to what St. Peter the Apostle of the 1 Pet. 2. circumcision saith, to the whole house or family of Christians P. converted from Judaism, “ Ye also as lively stones are built
up a spiritual house*, into an holy priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices” (of which the holy Eucharist is the chief) “acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” This spiritual house,
built up of converted Jews and Gentiles into an holy priest-
hood, was a political house, or society, of which Jesus Christ,
whom He calls the “ living precious corner-stone,”’ was the vers. 4, 6. supreme head and governor. For as the head and governor
of every political house is what the corner-stone is to a building, the strength and support of it, and as this spiri-
tual house must be taken for the political house of God’s
Church, as it is taken, Heb. iii. 5, 6, in these words, “ whose
house we are :” so the holy priesthood mentioned here, is not
to be taken for the priestly function or office, as if all Chris-
tians were priests, but for the priestly polity, and govern-
ment of the Church, “ which is the house of God.”’ It is also 1 Tim. 3. 5. taken in the same sense in the ninth verse, where the whole
body of Christians, like the Jewish people, Exod. xix. Θ᾽, is
said to be “a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy
4
1 [ἀλλ᾽ ἔστι θυσία καὶ χωρὶς aluaros’ quod ex opibus et armis, sed quod ex
ἴσασιν of μεμυημένοι τὸ Aeyouevov.—S. Chrys. Hom. in S. Eustathium, § 2. Op., tom. ii. p. 606, C.]
τ Lexicon Rabbin. in 132. [p. 2122. Basil. 1639, apud Rabbinos mtn yap) odor natn 55
nbyys abp3 43°, omnia sacrificia ces- sabunt, sed sacrificium laudis non ces- sat in eternum.—Medr. Psal. 100. ]
5. eis prefigunt Steph. 8. 1. Alex. N.1. Barb. 5, cov. 4. Genev. ASthiop. Dr. Mills’ Greek Testament. [ Novum Testamentum cum Lect. Var. Oxon. 1707. |
* Fagius upon the place. [In He- bro est,] regnum sacerdotale, vel sa- cerdotum, h. e. regnum non profanum,
HICKES.
sacerdotibus, rebus sacris et divinis constat: q.d. Sacrum et divinum erit hoc regnum. Nemo dubitet Spiritum Sanctum hic potissimum respexisse ad Christum, qui est verus ille rex et sacerdos, qui tandem ex populo Judaico secundum promissiones Dei proditurus erat. Quandoquidem autem una est Judzorum et Gentium fides, unus Deus, unaque Ecclesia, cum ad vite innocentiam et puritatem Christianum populum hortaretur Petrus, his verbis commodissime est usus; ‘ Vos, inquit, genus electum, regale sacerdotium.’— [ Crit. Sacr., tom. i. pars 1, Annott. in Exod., p. 388. ]
CHRISTIAN PRIEST-
HOOD.
114 The Christian Church has a Fegal Priesthood.
nation, and a peculiar people,” which was as true in the proper political sense of the Christians, as it was of the Jews, because the Church as one spiritual body politic hath Jesus Christ for its supreme governor, who is both king and priest. This polity. of His kingdom is properly expressed by a royal or kingly priesthood, in which the Christians are governed, as the Jews in their theocracy were, by a priest, who was a secular as well as a sacerdotal minister, and a type of Christ, who is both king and priest of His Church. To this purpose speaks St. Clement in his Epistle to the Corinthians, chap. lviii.": “ Now God (saith he) the seer of all things, the Father and ruler of all spirits, and Lord of all flesh, who hath elected* our Lord Jesus Christ, and us by Him, to be His peculiar people, grant to every soul that calleth upon His glorious holy Name, faith, fear, peace, patience, long-suffering, continence, purity, and wisdom, unto all well-pleasing of Him, through our High-Priest and pre- fect, Jesus Christ, to whom be glory, majesty, dominion, and honour, now and for ever. Amen.” Wherefore the Church by its theocratical constitution having such a governor, to whom glory, and majesty, and dominion, and honour be- longeth, that is, who is a king as well as an High-Priest, the government of it must be a kingly priesthood, or a priestly kingdom under His administration, of whom it is written, “Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec.” So saith St. Hierome’, Et ipse rex, et sacerdos nobis utrumque donaverit, ut simus genus regale et sacerdotale, et quasi angu- laris lapis parietem utrumque conjunxerit, et de duobus gregibus bonus pastor unum effecerit gregem: “ He also,” (speaking of Christ as the antitype of Melchisedec) “being king and priest, gave us both (honours), that we should be a regal and sacerdotal sort (of people), and He as the corner-stone hath
" [ὁ παντεπόπτης Θεὺς, καὶ δεσπότης ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ" δὲ οὗ αὐτῷ δόξα
τῶν πνευμάτων καὶ κύριος πάσης σαρκὺς, ὁ ἐκλεξάμενος τὸν κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χρι- στὸν, καὶ ἡμᾶς δι᾽ αὐτοῦ εἰς λαὸν περι- ούσιον, δῴη πάσῃ ψυχῇ ἐπικεκλημένῃ τὸ μεγαλοπρεπὲς καὶ ἅγιον ὄνομα αὐτοῦ, πίστιν, φόβον, εἰρήνην, ὑπομονὴν, μα- κροθυμίαν, ἐγκράτειαν, ἁγνείαν καὶ σω- φροσύνην, εἰς εὐαρέστησιν τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ, διὰ τοῦ ἀρχιερέως, καὶ προστάτου
καὶ μεγαλωσύνη, κράτος, τιμὴ καὶ νῦν καὶ εἰς πάντας τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων" ἀμήν.---. Clem, Ep. ad Cor. i. ο. 58. Patr. Apost., tom. i. pp. 180, 181.]
x παρὰ Θεῷ ἔκλεκτον, 1 Pet. ii. 4. Al- θον ἀκρογωναῖον ἔκλεκτον, ibid., ver. 6.
y [S. Hieron. Epist. 73 ad Evange- lum (al. 126 ad Evagrium) Op., tom. i. fol. 444, A. ]
The Euch. anciently called the Oblation, and the Sacrifice. 115
united both the walls, and as the good Shepherd of two flocks cuar. u. hath made one.” = But to return to the Christian oblation or sacrifice in the holy Eucharist, I cannot but observe that the offering of the bread and wine was of old esteemed so special a part of that most holy service, that the administration of the holy Com- munion and the Communion itself was signified by προσφέ- ρειν and προσφορὰ in the Greek, and by offerre and odlatio in the Latin Church. So Can. Apost., viii.*: “If any bishop, or presbyter, or deacon, doth not receive, προσφορᾶς yevo- μένης, at the Communion, let him give a reason for it; but if he will not tell his reason, let him be excommunicated, as one who gives offence to the people and brings a scandal κατὰ τοῦ προσενέγκαντος, upon him that administers, as if he did not rightly administer 10. So Constit. Apost., lib. viii. cap. 28%: “The bishop blesseth, lays on hands, ordains, and προσφέρει, administers the Communion. But the deacon ov προσφέρει, doth not administer the Communion, τοῦ δὲ ἐπισκόπου προσενεγκόντος ἢ TOU πρεσβυτέρου, but when the bishop or presbyter administers the Communion, he delivers (the cup) to the people.” So Can. 18. Concil. Nicen.”, the council forbids deacons to “deliver the Eucharist to priests, because they who have no power προσφέρειν, to administer the Communion, cannot give the body of Christ τοῖς προσφέ- ρουσι, to those who minister it.” It is also called θυσία" : and by Justin the Martyr’, τῶν ἐθνῶν θυσία; the sacrifice of the (converted) Gentiles, to distinguish it from the sacrifices of the Jews. But those who desire to see more authorities of this sort, may consult the citations in the margin®, and for the
2 [el τις ἐπίσκοπος, ἢ πρεσβύτερος, ἢ διάκονος, ἢ ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τοῦ ἱερατικοῦ προσφορᾶς γενομένης μὴ με- ταλάβοι, τὴν αἰτίαν εἰπάτω: καὶ ἐὰν εὔλογος ἢ, συγγνώμης τυγχανέτω" εἰ δὲ μὴ λέγει, ἀφοριζέσθω, ὡς αἴτιος βλά- Bns γενόμενᾳς τῷ λαῷ, καὶ ὑπόνοιαν ποιῆσας κατὰ τοῦ προσενέγκαντος (alii addunt ὡς μὴ ὑγιῶς ἀνενεγκόντος, et ita Dionysius. )—Concil., tom. i. p. 26, D.]
@ [Concil., tom. i. p. 493, C. See above, p. 37, note x. ]
® [Ibid., tom. ii. p. 42. p- 37, note x. |
ὁ Canon. Apost. χὶν. [ἐπίσκοπον, ἢ πρεσβύτερον αἱρετικῶν δεξάμενον βάπ-
See above,
τισμα, ἢ θυσίαν, καθαιρεῖσθαι προστάσ- couev.—Concil., tom. i. p. 36, Β.]
4 (S. Justin. M. Dial. cum Tryph. ce. 41. p. 138, A. quoted above, p. 94. ]
€ Concilii Niceni, Can. xi, [δύο δὲ ἔτη χώρις προσφορᾶς κοινωνήσουσι τῷ λαῷ τῶν Tpoocvx@v.—Concil., tom. 11. p. 87, D.] Can. xiii. [καὶ κοινωνίας τυ- χὼν καὶ προσφορᾶς μετασχών, and με- ταδιδότω τῆς προσφορᾶς, are the clauses referred to by Hickes; they are now con- sidered spurious. See Labbe and Cois- sart, ibid., p. 40, B. marg. The second clause is given as genuine in Beve- ridge’s Pandecte, tom. i. p. 74, A.] Concil. Ancyrani, [A.D. 314] Can.
ΠΣ;
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
116‘ Oblatio’ and ’ offerre’ used of the Eucharist.
authorities of single fathers of the Greek Church I forbear to cite them, because they are so numerous, and I have already cited enough. As for the writers of the Latin Church, who use oblatio and offerre for the Eucharist, and for to administer the same, it is sufficient for my purpose to send the reader back to the testimonies of St. Cyprian, cited in the Preface‘, and to his master Tertullian, particularly to that famous pas- sage which hath exercised the pens of so many learned men®, et offers, et tinguis, et sacerdos es tibi solus. So de Cultu Fe- minarum, lib. 11. cap. 11": aut imbecillus aliquis ex fratribus visitatur, aut sacrificium offertur, aut Dei sermo administratur. So de Corona, cap. 3': oblationes pro defunctis, pro natalitiis annua die facimus, which is to be understood of the Eucha- ristical oblations, as is evident from the like passage de Kx- hortatione Castitatis,cap.11): Pro cujus spiritu postulas, pro qua oblationes reddis? et offeres pro duabus? et commenda- bis illas duas per sacerdotem? Upon which place saith Ri- galtius*’, Recte autem dicitur ‘offerre per sacerdotem, quia solius sacerdotis, non vero laicorum est offerre sacrificium. To which let me add what he saith of the devils applying the Christian sacraments and ceremonies; de Prescriptione He- reticorum, cap. 40': Diabolus res sacramentorum divinorum emulatur. Tingit et ipse quosdam... Mithra signat in fronti- bus milites suos, celebrat et panis oblationem ; “The devil imi- tates the Divine sacraments or mysteries, &c. he baptizes some, and Mithra signs his worshippers in their foreheads, and is solemnly worshipped with an oblation of bread ;”” which,
xvi. [τότε καὶ τῆς προσφορᾶς ἐφαπτέσ- θωσαν.---ΤὉ14., tom. i. p. 1492, C.] Concil. Neoczsar. [A.D. 314.) Can. ix. [πρεσβύτερος.... μὴ προσφερέτω. -- p. 1512, D, E.] Can. xiii. Lem xwpior πρεσβύτεροι ἐν τῷ κυριακῷ τῆ" πόλεως προσφέρειν οὐ δύνανται, παρόντος ἐπι- σκόπου, kK. τ. A.—Ibid., p. 1518, B.] Concil. Gangrensis, [A.D. 824 Can. iv. [εἴ τις διακρίνοιτο παρὰ πρεσβυτέρου γεγαμηκότος, ὡς μὴ χρῆναι λειτυυργή- σαντο αὐτοῦ 'προσφορᾶς μεταλαμβάνειν, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.---ΤὈϊά., tom. ii. p. 427, C.] Concil. Laodiceni, A.D. 364 2] Can. xix. [καὶ οὕτω τὴν ἁγίαν προσφο- ρὰν ἐπιτελεῖσθαι.----ΤὈ14., tom. i. p. 1533, D.] Can. lviii. [ὅτε οὐ δεῖ ἐν τοῖν ateots προσφορὰς γίνεσθαι παρὰ ἐπισκόπων ἢ mpeoBurépwy.—ibid., p. 1540, D.]
f [See vol. i. of this edition, pp.
94—98. ]
Β Tert. de Exhort. Castit., cap. 7. [Op., p. 522, A. See Pref. Disc., vol. i. p. 238, note a. |
h [Tertull. Op., p. 159, C.]
i [Ibid., p. 102 AL]
ὁ [Ibid., p. 523, D. Tertullian is addressing one supposed to have mar- ried a second time. }
k [The note is not one of Rigalt’s but of Pamelius’, who published a vo- lume of annotations appended to Ri- galt’s text and notes, forming the se- cond volume of the edition of Tertul- lian’s works, called Rigalt’s, tom, ii. p. 587. Paris, 1635. |
1 [Tertull. Ops p. 216; Des seenp: 101, note r, and p. 48, where Hickes incorrectly speaks of Mithra (the sun) as a goddess. |
The oblation of the bread and wine distinct from any other. 117
as I observed on the like passage of Justin the Martyr™, shews cmap. u. that the bread was literally offered in the Eucharist, because ~~ it was offered in the sacrifices of the idol Mithra, in imitation of the Christian sacrifice. From these testimonies, I think it is plain that the oblation of the elements was a principal rite or ritual part of the Eucharistical service, and that from thence it came to be emphatically denoted by ‘ oblation’ and ‘sacrifice ;) and the administration of it by προσφέρειν and offerre in the writers of the ancient Greek and Latin Church. in the second place, I cannot but observe that the ancient Church made a plain and accurate distinction between the oblation of bread and wine upon the altar in the Eucharist, and the oblation of other things thereupon. So in the third Apostolical Canon"; “If any bishop or presbyter offers any thing upon the altar besides what the Lord has ordained (to be offered) ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ, in the holy Communion, . . . he shall be deposed, excepting the first-fruits of corn and grapes in their proper season.” So the council in Trullo®; “ Understand- ing that the ministers of some Churches used (θυσίᾳ) at the Communion to join the oblation of grapes (which were only to be blessed as first-fruits) with the unbloody oblation, and to distribute both together to the people, they forbid any priest to do so for the time to come, but to deliver to the people only the oblation, for the resurrection after death unto eternal life, and the remission of sins.” The great council of Carthage in like manner ordained, “ That in the Eucharist nothing should be offered but bread, and wine mixed with water; but when the first-fruits of corn or grapes were offered, or honey and milk on the accustomed day for infants, that they should be offered by themselves upon the altar
m [See above, p. 101, q.]
n [εἴ tis ἐπίσκοπος, ἢ πρεσβύτερος παρὰ τὴν τοῦ κυρίου διάταξιν τὴν ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ, προσενέγκῃ ἕτερά τινα ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον. ἢ μέλι, ἢ γάλα, ἢ ἀντὶ οἴνου σίκερα ... καθαιρείσθω, πλὴν νέων χίδρων, ἢ σταφυλῆς τῷ καιρῷ τῷ δέοντι. —Canon. Apost. iii. Concil., tom. i. p. 25. Hickes has misapprehended the force of ἐπί.
° { Concilii Constantinopolitani dicti Quinisexti sive Trullani, (A.D. 692.) Canon xxviii. ἐπειδὴ ἐν διαφόροις ἐκ- κλησίαις μεμαθήκαμεν, σταφυλῆς ἐν τῷ
θυσιαστηρίῳ προσφερομένης κατά τι κρα- τῆσαν ἔθος, τοὺς λειτουργοὺς ταύτην τῇ ἀναιμάκτῳ τῆς προσφορᾶς θυσίᾳ συνάπ- τοντας, οὕτως ἅμα τῷ λαῷ διανέμειν ἀμφότερα᾽ συνείδομεν, ὧς μηκέτι τοῦτό τινα τῶν ἱερωμένων ποιεῖν: ἀλλ᾽ εἰς ζωοποίησιν καὶ ἁμαρτιῶν ἄφεσιν τῷ λαῷ τῆς προσφορᾶς μόνης μεταδιδόναι" ὡς ἀπαρχήν δὲ τὴν τῆς σταφυλῆς λογιζο- μένους προσένεξιν, ἰδικῶς τοὺς ἱερεῖς εὐλογοῦντας τοῖς αἰτοῦσι ταύτης μετα- διδόναι πρὸς τὴν τοῦ δοτῆρος τῶν καρπῶν evxapicriav.—Concilia, tom. vil. p. 1360, C, D.]
118 The second Council of Nice on the Euch. Sacrifice.
curistiAN apart, that they might be distinguished from the Sacrament
PRIEST- HOOD,
of the body and blood of the Lord”.”
This distinction of the bread and wine from other altar- offerings is also expressed in the prayer for the communi- cants, Const. Apost., lib. viii. c. 10%; καὶ ὑπὲρ τῶν τὰς Ovcias καὶ Tas ἀπαρχὰς προσφερόντων Κυρίῳ τῷ Θεῷ ἡμῶν δεηθώῶ- μεν: “ Let us also pray for those who offer sacrifices and first-fruits to the Lord our God.” And it is ἃ demonstra- tion that they were offered in the Sacrament, and that the oblation of them was the practice of the Catholic Church.
But thirdly, it is evident from one argument which the orthodox fathers used in the second council of Nice against the worship of images, that the bread and wine were solemnly offered in the Eucharist, and that the oblation of them was esteemed a sacrifice of Divine institution. That argument was to this purpose, viz.", “That the Catholic Church of us Christians agreed with the Jewish and Gentile religion, being a medium between both, as having a new mystical sacrifice instituted by God, but without the rites and ceremonies of either, not admitting the bloody sacrifices and burnt-offerings of Judaism, and abhorring the idols and idol-worship in the sacrifices of Gentilism, which was the author and inventor of that abominable art (of making and worshipping idols.) For the Gentiles having no hope of a resurrection, invented this mockery of religion, worthy of themselves, ridiculously to re- present what was not present as present. Wherefore let us
P (Concilii Carthag. tertii nomine [... ἐπείπερ ἣ καθολικὴ ἡμῶν τῶν Χρισ-
vere secundi, (A.D. 397.) Canon xxiy. Hoe caput in vetustis codicibus ita hibetur: Ut in sacramentis corporis et sanguinis Domini nihil amplius offe- ratur quam ipse Dominus tradidit, hoc est, panis et vinum aqua mixtum. Primitiz vero, seu mel et lac, quod uno die solemnissimo pro infantis mys- terio solet offerri, quamvis in altari offeratur, suam tamen habent propriam benedictionem, ut a sacramento domi- nici corporis aut sanguinis distinguan- tur; nec amplius de primitiis offeratur, quain de uvis et frumentis. The pas- sage from ‘ Primitiz’ to ‘ distinguan- tur’ is not given as genuine by Labbe. —Concil., tom. ii. p. 1403, A, B.] 4 [Concil., tom. i. p. 470, D.]
_* Concil. Niczn. ii. (A.D. 787.) Ac- tio Sexta. Tpnydpios ἐπίσκοπος ἀνέγνω.
τιανῶν ἐκκλήσια ᾿Ιουδαϊσμοῦ καὶ ἑλλη- νισμοῦ τυγχάνουσα, οὐδ᾽ ὁποτέρας αὐτῶν συνήθους τελετῆς μετέχει, ἀλλὰ καινὴν εὐσεβείας καὶ μυσταγωγίας θεοπαραδό- του τρίβον ὁδεύει, τοῦ μὲν ᾿Ιουδαϊσ μοῦ τὰς ἐναίμους θυσίας καὶ ὁλοκαυτώσεις μὴ παραδεχομένη, τοῦ δὲ ἑλληνισμοῦ πρὸς ταῖς θυσίαις καὶ πᾶσαν εἰδωλοποιΐαν τε καὶ εἰδωλολατρείαν βδελυσσομένη, ὃς ἀρχηγὸς καὶ ἐφευρετὴς τῆς βδελυρᾶς ταύτης τέχνης γεγένηται. ἐλπίδα γὰρ ἀναστάσεως μὴ ἔχων, ἄξιον ἑαυτοῦ παίγ- νιον συνεσκόπησεν, ἵνα τὰ μὴ παρόντα διὰ τῆς χλεύης παραστήσῃ. οἱ οὖν οὐδὲν τῶν ξένων ἐστὶν ἐν αὐτῇ. ἄρα ὡς ἀλλό- τριον τοῦτο καὶ δαιμονιοφόρων ἀνδρῶν εὔρημα ἀποτραπέσθω τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ éxkAnotas.—Concilia, tom. viii. p. 1107, ΒΟ
Melchisedec’s offering a type of the Eucharist. 119
reject this foreign invention of men inspired by the devil, from the Church of Christ.” From this way of reasoning against the use of images in Divine worship, it is plain that these holy fathers thought the Christians had a sacrifice of Divine institution, though not a bloody sacrifice as the Jews had, nor polluted with image worship after the manner of the Gentiles, but a pure unbloody sacrifice in the holy Eucharist, which was a medium of negation from both, as being neither a bloody nor an idolatrical oblation.
In the fourth place, the ancients asserted that Melchise- dec, who was the type of Christ, offered bread and wine; and that the bread and wine which he offered prefigured the oblation of it in the Eucharist. That he offered the bread and wine mentioned Gen. xiv. 18, appears from the version of the LXX.° καὶ Μελχισεδὲκ βασιλεὺς Σαλὴμ ἐξηνέγκεν ap- τους καὶ οἶνον. So Tertullian adversus Jude@os, lib. i. cap. 3: Melchisedech, qui ipsi Abraham jam incircumeiso revertenti de prelio, panem et vinum obtulit incircumcisus. And cap, 2: Unde Melchisedech sacerdos Dei summi nuncupatus, si non ante Levitice legis sacerdotium Levite fuerunt, qui sacrificia Deo offerebant 2 And as they believed that Melchisedec first offered the bread and wine with which he entertained Abra- ham, so they taught, as I have already shewed from many authorities, that Christ, the antitypal Melchisedec, as really offered bread and wine to the Father at the institution of the holy Eucharist. From those and other authorities cited in this letter, it is plain that the bread and wine were really offered in the Eucharist, and were, in the opinion of the ancient Church, as properly an external material oblation in that pure unbloody sacrifice, as any other thing could be that was offered by any priest upon the altar of any god.
Indeed there were two oblations' of the elements in the
5. [This statement seems to have arisen from some mistake. |
t See Irenzus, as cited before, lib. iv. cap. 32, and Dr. Grabe’s notes upon the place. [On the subject of the two oblations see Johnson’s Unbloody Sacri- fice, Prefatory Epistle, vol. i. p. 33, ed. 1847. Hickes in writing to Johnson April 21, 1713, seemed disposed to modify his opinion. He says, “I fore- see I shall come entirely into your notion of the one sacrifice, but as to the
oblation of the elements 1 have still a notion that they were first offered up in common with the first fruits, when they were set upon the altar, and again for a sacrament or sacrifice in the prayer of consecration ; but I think it is not material to the controversy, whether they were once or twice offered ... but when I have read your papers, I expect I shall alter my opinion for yours.”’—Appendix to Johnson’s Post- humous Works, p. 394, Lond, 1748. And
CHAP. Il.
SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST « HOOD.
120 = =Two oblations of the elements in the Eucharist,
Eucharist ; one before the consecration, in which they were presented to God the Father upon the altar, as the first- fruits of His creatures, to acknowledge Him for our sovereign Lord and benefactor; the other at the consecration, when they were offered to Him as the symbols of Christ’s body and blood, or as the mystical body and blood of Christ, to represent that oblation He made of both upon the cross, and to obtain the benefits of His death and passion ; “ who, by the oblation of Himself once so offered, made a full and perfect satisfaction for the sins of the whole world.” These two obla- tions are distinguishable in Justin Martyr’s short account of the celebration of the Eucharist"; the first at the offering of the bread and the cup of water and wine, “ which, saith he, the bishop (or priest) receiving, offers up αἶνον καὶ δόξαν, praise and glory to God the Father of all things, through the name of His Son and the Holy Spirit; and also offers up thanksgiving for deeming us worthy of these His creatures.” This long action of praise and thanksgiving, καὶ εὐχαρισ- tlav....€ml πολὺ ποιεῖται; may be seen at large in the Apostolical Constitutions, lib. viii. cap. 12%; where it be- gins after these words, ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς εἰπάτω" ἄξιον ὡς ἀλη- θώς καὶ δίκαιον" and ends in these, καὶ ἐκαθέσθη ἐκ δεξιῶν σου τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Πατρὸς αὐτοῦ. Then after a short in- troduction, in which are the words of the institution, fol- lows the second oblation of the elements, beginning at μεμ- νημένοι οὖν ὧν δι’ ἡμᾶς ὑπέμεινενῦ, κ. τ. r., which I shall hereafter transcribe. This second Eucharistical oblation, in which the elements were offered as the mystical body and blood of Christ, and wherein they prayed God the Father graciously to accept them, is implied by Justin’ in the word
kal δόξαν τῷ πατρὶ τῶν ὅλων διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματος τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος
in another letter without date, written before May 15, 1713, he says, “ By
the first oblation of the holy elements I never meant any other than what they had in being presented to God upon the altar with the first fruits.”’ On the out- side of the letter Johnson had written, “Ἢρ comes into my notion of the ob- lation.’’ Hickes, however, did not alter any thing which he had here said, either in the Supplement of 1715, orinhis MS, notes. |
ἃ ἔπειτα προσφέρεται TH προεστῶτι τῶν ἀδελφῶν ἄρτος, καὶ ποτήριον ὕδατος καὶ κράματος [καὶ οὗτος λαβὼν, αἶνον
τοῦ ἁγίου ἀναπέμπει" καὶ εὐχαριστίαν ὑπὲρ τοῦ κατηξιῶσθαι τούτων παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ πολὺ ποιεῖται. ---. Just. Mart. Apol. i. c. #5. p. 82, D. quoted note g, p. 106.]
τ [Concil., tom. i. p. 473, C. ]
x [Ibid., p. 480, D.]
y [Ibid. This is a mistake. The words in the text precede the words of institution. The second oblation be- gins at μεμνημένοι Toivuy.—p. 482, A. }
z [S. Just. Mart. Apol. i. ο. 65. p. 82, E. note g, p. 106.]
in the ancient, and in our present Liturgy. 121
εὐχὰς in the sentence next to that which 1 have cited, viz., οὗ συντελέσαντος τὰς εὐχὰς καὶ τὴν εὐχαριστίαν; πᾶς ὁ Ta- ρὼν λαὸς ἐπευφημεῖ, ἀμήν" which I cannot better translate than in the words of Mr. Reeves*, ‘When the bishop (or priest) hath finished the prayers, all the people present con- clude with an audible voice, saying, Amen.” ‘These two forms of oblation of the bread and wine, though then in one continued prayer, are plainly distinguished by St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechesis Mystagogica v.», where the first is de- scribed § v. vi., and the latter in § vii. ix., and the descrip- tion of them in both places exactly agrees with the large account of ministering the holy Sacrament in the Apo- stolical Constitutions, cited above; and they are also to be found in all the ancient liturgies. In our present liturgy the first oblation is made in the beginning of the prayer for the whole state of Christ’s Church, immediately after the priest hath placed the bread and wine upon the table, in these words, “ Almighty and everlasting God...
>... . we humbly beseech Thee ..... to accept [these] our alms and oblations.” And the latter is made in substance, and according to the intention of the Church in the prayer of consecration to God the Father, where, after the comme- moration of Christ’s offerimg Himself upon the cross, and His institution of the perpetual memorial of His precious death, God the Father is implored to hear us, while, “ac- cording to the same institution, we receive His creatures of bread and wine in remembrance of His Son our Saviour’s death and passion.”’ And then, while the priest recites the words of the institution, he is to take the bread into his hands and break it; and at the words ‘ This is My body,’ to lay his hand upon all the bread; and at the words, ‘ He took the cup,’ he is to take the chalice into his hand; and at these
a [The Apologies of Justin Martyr, Tertullian, &c., translated by the Rev. William Reeves, pp. 118,119. London, 1709. ]
b [The fifth Catechesis Mystagogica is an explanation of the Eucharistic service, to prepare the catechumens for admission to it; ὃ v. ison the words ev- χαριστῶμεν τῷ κυρίῳ, and the response ἄξιον καὶ δίκαιον. ὃ vi. he says, μετὰ ταῦτα μνημονεύομεν οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς,
καὶ θαλάσσης, K.T.A. Then after men- tioning the consecration, ὃ vii. he speaks, ὃ viii., of the proper oblation, εἶτα μετὰ τὸ ἀπαρτισθῆναι τὴν πνευμα- τικὴν θυσίαν, τὴν ἀναίμακτον λατρείαν ἐπὶ τῆς θυσίας ἐκείνης τοῦ ἱλασμοῦ πα- ρακαλοῦμεν τὸν Θεὸν, ὑπὲρ κοινῆς τῆς ἐκκλησιῶν εἰρήνης, kK. TA. The account of these intercessions continues through the following section. ὃ. Cyril Hieros. Op., pp. 326, 328. ]
CUAP, 11. SECT. X.
192 The primitive form for the administration of the Lord’s
curistian words, ‘This is My blood of the New Testament,’ &c., he is
PRIEST - HOOD,
to lay his hand upon every vessel in which there is wine to be consecrated. These are the solemn rites which attend ‘our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving,’ (as it is truly called in the prayer of the post-communion,) at the conse- cration, as the placing the bread and wine upon the table by the priest, in order to be so consecrated by him, is also to be observed. And therefore those bishops and priests who can satisfy their consciences in the total neglect of this rite, may as well satisfy them in the total omission of the other; and then take upon them to say, as some lately have done‘, “ That the general neglect of the clergy to observe them vacates them ;” a way of arguing, which were it true might vacate all the other rules and rubrics of the Church.
But to return to the Christian oblation or sacrifice: the next argument I shall produce to prove that the bread and wine were really offered in the holy Communion is taken from the primitive manner of the administration of it, as set forth in the eighth book of the Apostolical Constitu- tions, cited in the last paragraph*. In this liturgical ac- count of the holy Sacrament we read that the catechu- mens, and audients, &c., being gone out of the church, the deacon began the office of the holy Eucharist with that general admonition®; μή Tus κατά Tivos’ μή Tis ἐν ὑποκρίσει" “ Let none that is not in charity, let no hypo- crite come hither.” After pronouncing these admonitions he said; ὀρθοὶ πρὸς Κύριον μετὰ φόβου καὶ τρόμου ἐστῶτες ὦμεν προσφέρειν: “ΤῊ sincerity towards our Lord let us standing offer with fear and trembling.” ‘“ Which being
done (saith the rubric, for so I call the direction) of διάκο- ¢ (Dr. Hancock. See vol. i. p. 323,
πάντας, εἰπάτω, ἡ χάρις τοῦ παντοκρά-
note Z. |
4 (Const. Apost., lib. viii. cap. 12. Concilia, pp. 473, &c. |
© [μή τις κατά Tivos’ μή τις ἐν ὗπο- κρίσει" ὀρθοὶ πρὸς κύριον μετὰ φόβου καὶ τρόμου ἐστῶτες ὦμεν προσφέρειν" ὧν γενομένων οἱ διάκονοι προσαγέτωσαν τὰ δῶρα τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ πρὸς τὸ θυσιαστή- plov ... εὐξάμενος οὖν καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς ἅμα τοῖς ἱερεῦσι, καὶ λαμπρὰν ἐσθῆτα μετενδοὺς, καὶ στὰς πρὸς τῷ θυσι- αστηρίῳ τὸ τρόπαιον τοῦ σταυροῦ κατὰ τοῦ μετώπου τῇ χειρὶ ποιησάμενος εἰς
τορος Θεοῦ καὶ ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἣ κοινωνία τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος ἔστω μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν" καὶ πάντες συμφώνως λεγέτωσαν" ὅτι καὶ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματός σου" καὶ ὃ ἀρχιε- ρεύς' ἄνω τὸν νοῦν' καὶ πάντες" ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν κύριον' καὶ 6 ἀρχιερεύς" εὖχα- ριστήσωμεν τῷ κυρίῳ" καὶ πάντες" ἄξιον καὶ δίκαιον: καὶ 6 ἀρχιερεὺς εἰπάτω, ἄξιον ὡς ἀληθῶς καὶ δίκαιον πρὸ πάντων ἀνυμνεῖν σε, τὸν ὄντως ὄντα Θεὸν, K.T.A.
—Ibid., A, B, C.]
Supper, as set forth in the Apostolical Constitutions. 123
νοὶ προσαγέτωσαν τὰ δῶρα τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ πρὸς TO θυσιαστή- ρίον; let the deacons bring the offerings unto the altar to the bishop.”. . . . Then the bishop, standing in his priestly robes before the altar, στὰς πρὸς τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ, began the sa- cramental office with this blessing: “The grace of Almighty God, and the love of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the com- munication of the Holy Spirit be with you all.” To which the people answered, “ And with thy spirit.” Then the bishop, “ Lift up your hearts ;” to which the people, “ We lift them up unto the Lord.” Then the bishop, ‘ Let us give thanks unto our Lord.” To which the people, ἄξιον καὶ δίκαιον: “It is meet and right.” Then the bishop, “Tt is truly meet and right,” &c. And then after a long and noble hymn of praise and glory to God the Father, and the Son, abbreviated in after ages‘, in which is the hymn® Tersanctus, and after an introduction, in which the words of the institution are recited, he proceeds to the consecration, the most special part of the sacrificial action, beginning with the prayer of oblation, in the words which follow: μεμνημέ- νοι τοίνυν τοῦ πάθους αὐτοῦ Kal TOD θανάτου, καὶ τῆς EK VEK- ρῶν ἀναστάσεως, καὶ τῆς εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἐπανόδου, καὶ τῆς μελλούσης αὐτοῦ δευτέρας παρουσίας; ἐν ἣ ἔρχεται μετὰ δόξης καὶ δυνάμεως κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκροὺς, καὶ ἀποδοῦναι ἑκάστῳ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ, προσφέρομέν σοι τῷ βασιλεῖ καὶ Θεῷ, κατὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ διάταξιν. τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον, καὶ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο, εὐχαριστοῦντές σοι δι’ αὐτοῦ, ἐφ᾽ οἷς κατηξίω- σας ἡμᾶς ἑστάναι ἐνώπιόν σου καὶ ἱερατεύειν σοι" καὶ ἀξιοῦ- μέν σε ὅπως εὐμενῶς ἐπιβλέψῃς ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα" ταῦτα ἐνώπιόν σου, συ ὁ ἀνενδεὴς Θεὸς, καὶ εὐδοκήσῃς ἐπ᾽
f [The prayer continues from p. 473,
C, to 480, D. Mr. Palmer conceives that this prayer, as it stands in the Apo-
ἅγιος ἅγιος ἅγιος κύριος σαβαὼθ, πλή- pns ὃ οὐρανὸς καὶ ἣ γῆ τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ" εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν" Kal 6
stolical Constitutions, contains addi- tions to the Liturgies actually used. ** The author,” he says, ‘‘has evidently permitted his learning and devotion to enrich the common formularies with numerous ideas full of piety and beauty.”—Orig. Liturg., Dissertation, sect. 1. vol. i. p. 39. ]
& [τὰ Χερουβὶμ καὶ τὰ ἑξαπτέρυγα Sepaplu... λέγοντα, ἅμα χιλίαις χιλί- ασιν ἀρχαγγέλων, καὶ μυρίαις μυρίασιν ἀγγέλων ἀκαταπαύστως καὶ ἀσιγήτως βοώσαιΞς" καὶ πᾶς ὃ λαὸς ἅμα εἰπάτω"
ἀρχιερεὺς ἑξῆς λεγέτω, κ. τ. A.—p. 477, E. 480, A.]
h §. Cyril. Hieros. Catech. Myst., [v. § 8.] εἶτα μετὰ τὸ ἀπαρτισθῆναι Thy πνευματικὴν θυσίαν, τὴν ἀναίμακτον λα- τρείαν ἐπὶ τῆς θυσίας ἐκείνης τοῦ thac- μοῦ, [παρακαλοῦμεν τὸν Θεὸν ὑπὲρ κοι- νῆς τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν εἰρήνης, ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου εὐσταθείας, κ. τ. A.—p. 327, C, D.
: See Irenzus, lib. iv. cap. 32. [¢e.17. § 5. ed. Ben.] Sed et suis discipulis dans concilium primitias offerre ex suis
CHAP, 11,
SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST-
HOOD.
124 The primitive form for the administration of the Lord’s
αὐτοῖς εἰς τιμὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου, καὶ καταπέμψῃς τὸ “Αγιόν σου Πνεῦμα" ἐπὶ τὴν θυσίαν ταύτην, τὸν μάρτυρα τῶν παθη- μάτων τοῦ Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ, ὅπως ἀποφήνῃ! τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου, καὶ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο αἷμα τοῦ Χρι- στοῦ σου; ἵνα οἱ μεταλαβόντες αὐτοῦ βεβαιωθῶσι πρὸς εὐσέ- βειαν, ἀφέσεως ἁμαρτημάτων τύχωσι, τοῦ διαβόλου καὶ τῆς πλάνης αὐτοῦ ῥυσθῶσι, Πνεύματος ‘Ayiov πληρωθῶσιν, ἄξιοι τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου γενῶνται, ζωῆς αἰωνίου τύχωσι: σοῦ καταλ- λαγέντος αὐτοῖς, δέσποτα παντοκράτορ. ἔτι δεόμεθά σου, Κύ- ple, καὶ ὑπὲρ τῆς ἁγίας σου ᾿Εκκλησίας τῆς ἀπὸ περάτων ἕως περάτων, ἣν περιεποιήσω τῷ τιμίῳ αἵματι τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου, ὅπως αὐτὴν διαφυλάξης ἄσειστον καὶ ἀκλυδώνιστον; ἄχρι τῆς συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος. καὶ ὑπὲρ πάσης ἐπισκοπῆς τῆς ὁρθοτομούσης τὸν λόγον τῆς ἀληθείας. ἔτι παρακαλοῦμέν σε καὶ ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐμῆς τοῦ προσφέροντός σοι οὐδενίας, καὶ ὑπὲρ παντὸς τοῦ πρεσβυτερίου; ὑπὲρ τῶν διακόνων καὶ παντὸς τοῦ κλήρου, ἵνα πάντας σοφίσας, Πνεύματος Ayiov πληρώσῃς. ἔτι παρακαλοῦμέν σε, Κύριε, ὑπὲρ τοῦ βασιλέως", x.T-r. “ Where- fore remembering His passion and death, and resurrection from the dead, and His return (ascension) into heaven, and His second appearance, in which He will come in glory and power to judge the living and the dead, and to reward every one according to their works: we offer this bread and this cup to Thee (our) King and God, according to His institu- tion; giving thanks to Thee through Him, that Thou hast thought us worthy to stand in Thy presence, and execute the priest’s office to Thee; and we beseech Thee, that Thou
creaturis non quasi indigenti [&c. See he concludes; Hee igitur est Basilii
above, p. 104, note b. }
k §. Cyril. [Hieros. ibid., § 19.] μετὰ ταῆτα λέγει 6 ἱερεὺς, τὰ ἅγια τοῖς ἁγίοις, ἅγια τὰ προκείμενα ἐπιφοίτησιν δεξάμενα ἁγίου mvevuaros.—[Ibid., p. 331, A. |
1 “ Ostendat sive efficiat corpus Christi.’” See Isaac Casaubon in Exer- eit. xvi. Ad Annales Baronii, ὃ xxxiii. ubi de ἀναδεῖξαι, et ἀναφανῆναι. [See above, note Ὁ, p. 98. Of ἀναφανῆναι he says, (p. 459,) Observabimus non dissimile in eadem re apud alios patres ἀναφαίνεσθαι, quasi dicat, repente ex- istere et conspiciendum se dare. Then after the passage quoted above, note b, p- 98, of the body of Christ appearing in the Sacrament to the eye of faith,
ἀνάδειξις, hoc aliorum patrum ἄναφα- viva. Hippolytus Martyr in libro de Consummatione Mundi, c. 34. (Op., App., p. 21. see below, note 1, p. 149.) τὸ τίμιον σῶμα Kal αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις οὐκ ἀναφανήσεται, NON ex- istet in diebus illis pretiosum corpus et sanguis Christi. ]
S. Cyril. Hier. ibid., [ὃ 7.1 παρακα- λοῦμεν τὸν φιλάνθρωπον θεὸν τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα ἐξαποστεῖλαι ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα, ἵνα ποιήσῃ τὸν μὲν ἄρτον, σῶμα Χριστοῦ, τὸν δὲ οἶνον, αἷμα Xpiotov.—[p. 327, ΟἿ ™ Tertull. [ad Scapulam, c. 2.1 Sa- crificamus pro salute imperatoris, sed Deo nostro, et ipsius. [ Op., p. 69, C.]
Supper, as set forth in the Apostolical Constitutions.
125
wouldst look with complacency on these offerings lying before Thee, O God who standest in need of nothing, that Thou wouldst accept them for the honour of Thy Christ, and" send Thy Holy Spirit®, the witness of the sufferings of our Lord Jesus Christ upon this sacrifice, that HeP may (make) shew forth this bread to be the body of Thy Christ, and this cup to be Thy Christ’s blood, that the partakers thereof may be confirmed in godliness; obtain the remission of their sins; be delivered from the devil, and his wiles; be filled with the Holy Ghost; made worthy of Thy Christ ; (and) obtain eternal life, Thou, O Lord Almighty, being reconciled to them. Farthermore we pray unto Thee for Thy holy Church dispersed from one end of the world to the
n So in the Ethiopic Liturgy, as translated by Ludolf; {Constitutiones seu Statuta lviii. Habesinis dicta Apo- stolorum, Statutum xxi. de ritu Eucha- ristiz. Jobi Ludolfi ad suam Histo- riam /Ethiopicam ante hac editam (Francof. 1681.) Commentarius, Fran- cof. 1691.] p. 325. Recordantes igitur mortis ejus, et resurrectionis ejus, offe- rimus tibi hune panem et calicem, gra- tias agentes tibi, quod nos reddidisti dignos ut stemus coram te et sacer- dotio tibi fungamur. Suppliciter ora- mus te, ut mittas Spiritum tuum Sanc- tum super oblationes hujus Ecclesiz ; pariterque largiaris omnibus, qui su- munt de iis, (ut prosit eis ad) sanctita- tem; ut repleantur Spiritu Sancto, &c. {The words in parentheses are inserted by Ludolf; see his note on the place. The latter part of this passage, as given in Renaudot’s translation, Li- turg. Orient. Coll., tom. i. p. 517, stands thus; Rogamus te, Domine, et deprecamur te, ut mittas Sanctum Spi- ritum et virtutem super hune panem, et super hune calicem, faciatque utrum- que corpus et sanguinem Domini et salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi, in secula seculorum, Amen... . Da ut omnibus illa sumentibus fiant ad sanctificatio- nem, et plenitudinem Spiritus Sancti, &c. In his Observations on this Li- turgy, Obs. i. pp. 523, 524, Renaudot accuses Ludolf of unfairness, and want of acquaintance with ecclesiastical cus- toms and language, saying that he has suppressed some things, and translated others in unusual terms. |
This is the form of consecration in their general Liturgy ; but besides that
they have particular Liturgies to be used on particular days, one of which is entituled, Oratio Eucharistica Do- mini, et Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi; not that they pretend it was made by our Lord, but that it is used on those special holydays in which His nativity, resurrection, and ascension were cele- brated. In this administration the con- secration is as follows, (ibid., pp. 343, 344): Nune igitur, O Domine, me- mores sumus mortis et resurrectionis tuz, confidimus tibi, et offerimus tibi pinem et calicem, gratias agentes tibi ; tibi soli, quia a seculo (es) Salvator Deus. Quoniam tu jussisti nos, ut stemus coram te, et tibi instar sacer- dotum ministremus; propter hoc nos quoque servi tui, [ Domine, ] rogamus te, Domine, et supplicamus tibi, ut mittas Spiritum Sanctum, et virtutem super hunc panem, et super hune cali- cem, (ut) efficiat corpus, et sanguinem Domini, et salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi in secula seculorum. Porro offerimus tibi hance gratiarum actionem, O eterna Trinitas, Domine Pater Jesu Christi, quem omnis creatura et anima vene- ratur. This office was undoubtedly made after the first general council of Nice to the honour of Christ as God, ‘equal to the Father as touching His Godhead,’ and therefore the oblation is made unto Him. [See below, p. 153. |
ο Heb. ix. 14: ‘“* How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered up Himself,” &c.
P Alias, ‘ that it,’ if understood of the sacrifice.
CHAP. II.
SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
126 The Apostolical Constitulions shew that the bread
other, which Thou hast purchased with the precious blood of Thy Christ, that Thou wouldst preserve it unshaken, and unmolested to the end of the world. (We pray) likewise for the whole episcopate, rightly dividing the word of truth. We pray also for my worthless self, who am making this oblation, and for all the presbyters, for the deacons, and the clergy, that Thou wouldst instruct them, and fill them with the Holy Spirit. Farthermore, O Lord, we offer unto Thee for the emperor,” &c.
This is as plain a description of a sacrifice, and a sacrificial action, as is in any author sacred or profane; and mutatis mutandis may be said of any sacrifice offered upon any altar, or to any god. And we find the bishop in the thirteenth chapter saying’: “Let us also pray unto God through His Christ (ὑπὲρ τοῦ δώρου τοῦ προσκομισθέντος) for the offer- ing which has been offered to the Lord God, that our merci- ful God through the mediation of His Christ would receive it up unto His holy heavenly altar for a sweet-smelling savour.” In the same chapter the rubric calls the consecrated bread to be distributed, ‘the offering’.’ Answerably to all which in the fifty-seventh chapter of the second book, in a short account of the manner of administering the holy Sacrament*, the adminis- tration of it is called ‘the oblation of the Eucharist.’ “ Let some of the deacons attend to the oblation of the Eucharist, (οἱ μὲν TH προσφορᾷ THs εὐχαριστίας σχολαζέτωσαν,) minis- tering to the body of the Lord with fear, and let others look after the congregation, and enjoin them silence. Then let the deacon who assists the bishop say, ‘ Let none come here who hath injured another; let no hypocrite come hither.’ Then let the men mutually salute the men, and the women the women, with the holy kiss. But let none salute another treacherously, as Judas did, who betrayed our Lord with a kiss. After this let the deacon pray for the universal Church, &c. Then let the bishop, having given the peace of God to the people, bless them as Moses commanded the
4 [ἔτι καὶ ἔτι δεηθῶμεν τοῦ Θεοῦ διὰ edwd{as.—Ibid., Concil., tom. i. p. 484, τοῦ Χριστοῦ αὐτοῦ, ὑπὲρ τοῦ δώρου τοῦ 8Ἐ.]
προσκομισθέντος κυρίῳ τῷ Θεῷ᾽ ὅπως 6 ‘Kal ὃ μὲν ἐπίσκοπος διδότω τὴν ἀγαθὺς Θεὸς προσδέξηται αὐτὸ διὰ τῆς προσφορὰν.---ἰ Const. Apost., ibid. E. } μεσιτείας τοῦ Χριστοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸ " [Ibid., p. 297, C. See above, p.
ἐπουράνιον αὐτοῦ θυσιαστήριον εἰς ὀσμὴν 405, note g. |
and wine are oblations in a proper literal sense. 127
priests, and praying, say: ‘The Lord bless thee and keep thee,’ &c. μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα γενέσθω ἡ θυσία : after this let the sacrifice be done (offered), all the people standing and pray- ing in silence; καὶ ὅταν ἀνενέχθῃ, and when it is offered up, let every order by itself orderly partake of the Lord’s body and precious blood with reverence and fear.”
This account of the Eucharistical service is, as I have before observed, most agreeable to the accounts we have of it, and of the administration thereof, both in the first Apology of Justin Martyr’, and also to the doctrine of it in his Dialogue with Trypho", and I do not doubt, but it is most conformable to the primitive and apostolical form. And now let any candid reader judge, whether the bread and wine are not the δῶρα, ‘offerings,’ in a proper literal sense, which were brought by the deacons to the altar unto the bishop, that he might place them on the holy table to be consecrated in the service of the holy Eucharist ; the προκεί- μενα δῶρα, ‘proper material offerings,’ that lay upon the altar, and upon which the bishop prayed God to look down in mercy ; the offerings, of which the bishop or priest only was the offerer (ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐμῆς τοῦ προσφέροντος ovdevias) ; the offerings, which he took in his hands, and offered in the name of the people (προσφέρομέν σοι); the offerings, of which God has no need; the offerings, or the sacrifice (θυσίαν), upon which he prays God “ to send down His Holy Spirit, that it might shew forth the bread to be the body, and the cup the blood, to the receivers.” Lastly, the offerings of which the oblation and consecration was called the sacrifice, and of which they said in the ancient offices, sancta sanctis, and tibi ex tuis offerimus*. And if all this be true, then let the reader also judge, whether the celebration of the holy Eu- charist was not a sacrificial action, or administration, and the bread and wine the materials of that sacrifice, which were first presented, and then by solemn consecration offered up unto God, and last of all distributed to the faithful’ for the
t [S. Just. M. Apol. i. capp. 65, 67. See above, pp. 105, 106, notes f, g.
ἃ (ce. 117. p. 210, B. quoted above, p- 103. ]
* [The words ἅγια τοῖς ἁγίοις occur in all the Greek Liturgies, (see p. 147, r, and for St. Cyril, p. 124, k); and ἐκ
τῶν σῶν προσφέρομέν cor in those of St. Chrysostom (see p. 130, k), St. Basil (see Goar, p. 118), and St. Mark (see below p. 137, m); as the corre- sponding Latin does in the Western Liturgies, (sce pp. 143, ο; 145, g.)]
Y Constit. Apost., lib. viii. cap. 14,
CHAP, Il.
SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
128 A proper Sacrifice, literally and sacramentally.
favour of God, “ the remission of their sins, the benefit both of their bodies and souls, the confirmation and increase of their faith, and preserving of them in all godliness, and unto the life of the world to come.” In a word it is evident, that according to the ancient Church the bread and wine were the matter which the people brought, and the bishop re- ceived, to be spent or consumed in the celebration of the Eucharist ; the matter which the bishop solemnly offered up to God by consecration for the heavenly banquet of the Lord’s Supper, and which as they were in the literal sense a proper, external, material offering or sacrifice, which suc- ceeded in the place of the legal sacrifices; so in the sacra- mental or mystical, they were the body and blood of Christ, of which they were the representatives, and whereof the one was broken with wounds, and the other shed upon the cross. To this liturgical testimony in the Apostolical Constitutions, I shall, as I promised in another place’, produce the testi- monies of the ancient liturgies, which suppose the Eucharist to be a sacrifice, in which the bread and wine were solemnly offered in a proper literal sense by prayer and thanksgiving to God.
I begin with the liturgy of St. Chrysostom, of which there are two editions, one in the fourth vol. of his works®, the other by Goar in his Euchologion®, both which begin with
[15. cap. 14. μεταλαβόντες τοῦ τιμίου σώματος Kal τοῦ τιμίου αἵματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ εὐχαριστήσωμεν τῷ καταξιώ- σαντι ἡμᾶς μεταλαβεῖν τῶν ἁγίων αὐτοῦ μυστηρίων, καὶ παρακαλέσωμεν, μὴ εἰς κρίμα ἀλλ᾽ εἰς σωτηρίαν ἡμῖν γένεσθαι, εἰς ὠφέλειαν ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος, εἰς φυλακὴν εὐσεβείας, εἰς ἄφεσιν ἅμαρ- τιῶν, εἰς ζωὴν τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος, κι τ. λ. ο. 15. δέσποτα ὃ Θεὸς 6 παντο- κράτορ,.... εὐχαριστοῦμέν σοι, ὕτι κατη- ξίωσας ἡμᾶς μεταλαβεῖν τῶν ἁγίων σου μυστηρίων, ἃ παρέσχου ἡμῖν εἰς πληρο- φορίαν τῶν καλῶς ἐγνωσμένων, εἰς φυ- λακὴν τῆς εὐσεβείας, εἰς ἄφεσιν πλημ- μελημάτων᾽ κ. τ. A.—Ibid., p. 485, A, B, C.]
z Preface to a second Collection of Controversial Letters, &c. [p. xlviii. ] Printed for Rich. Sare, at Gray’s-Inn- Gate, Holborn, 1710.
a Paris, 1636. ᾿
> Lutetiz Parisiorum, 1647.
[There are five texts of the Liturgy
of St. Chrysostom in the Euchologium, besides the various readings of other MSS. Of these texts the first (Goar, p- 58) is the one referred to by Hickes, and is the same as that in Savile’s and in the Benedictine edition of his works. It had been previously printed at Rome. The last of those given by Goar (p. 104) is the one which Hickes refers to as being in Morell’s editions of his works; it is from a much more modern MS., and the least valuable of those which are given. The text of Goar is used in the following notes, references being made also to the Benedictine edi- tion of St. Chrysostom’s works. Mr. Palmer observes that learned men have represented the text of this Liturgy as very uncertain, the copies differing “toto ccelo’ from each other. He shews however that this is not the case. Some differences arise from the insertion or omission of rubrics. Others are in the introductory portion of the Liturgy,
The Liturgy of St. Chrysostom. 129
this secret prayer of the priests in the beginning of the ministration’; “Send down, O Lord, Thy assistance (τὴν χεῖρά cov) from Thy holy habitation, and strengthen me in Thy service which I am going to perform, that I may stand without blame before Thy tremendous altar, and minister the unbloody sacrifice,” ἕο. So in the prayer at the πρό- θεσις, or table where the people’s oblations of bread and wine were set, before they were brought to the altar*; “Of Thy goodness and love for mankind, remember those who have offered, and those for whom they have offered.” So in the prayer for the communicants®; “O Lord, the God of powers, we give thanks to Thee, who hast deemed us worthy to ap- pear at Thy altar to supplicate Thy mercy for our sins, and the errors of Thy people: O God, receive our prayer, and make us worthy to offer up to Thee prayers and supplica- tions, and unbloody sacrifices for all Thy people,” ἕο. So in the Cherubic hymn, or prayer!; “Who out of Thy ineffable and immense love of mankind wast made man, not by con- version or confusion (of substance), and hast been declared our High-Priest by God, and as Lord of all hast instituted the ministration of this unbloody sacrifice, &c. ... to Thee do 1 come,...and beseech Thee not to turn Thy face from me, nor
which was not of the same solemn cha- τελέσω, κ. τ. A—S. Chrysost. Liturg. racter as the canon. Again,newritesand Goar. Euchol. p. 58.—Op., tom. xii. p. prayers were added, differing in dif- 778, B.] ferent Churches, as time wenton. The 1 [μνημόνευσον, ws ἀγαθὸς καὶ φιλάν- variations however do but confirm the θρωπος, τῶν προσενεγκάντων καὶ δι obs antiquity of the text in the parts which mpoofyyayov.—Goar, p. 68. Op., ibid., agree; so that in the two texts which p. 780, A.] seem to differ most, it will be found © [εὐχὴ πιστῶν πρώτη μετὰ τὸ ἅπλω- that ‘the main body of the Liturgy θῆναι τὸ εἰλητὸν (postyuam expansum is exactly the same in both; the rites est corporale,) ἣν 6 ἱερεὺς μυστικῶς identical, the ancient prayers the same, (secreto) λέγει. εὐχαριστοῦμέν σοι, κύ- word for word.””—Palmer’s Orig. Li- pie 6 θεὸς τῶν δυναμέων, τῷ καταξιώ- turgice, vol. i. Dissertation, sect. 3. σαντι ἡμᾶς παραστῆναι καὶ viv τῷ ἁγίῳ pp- 7ὅ, 77. ed. 3. 1899. cov θυσιαστηρίῳ, Kal προσπεσεῖν τοῖς The Liturgy of St. Chrysostom ἰδ οἰκτιρμοῖς σου ὑπὲρ τῶν ἡμετέρων ἅμαρ- that of the Church of Constantinople, τημάτων καὶ τῶν τοῦ λαοῦ ἀγνοημάτων. and ‘‘it appears to have been used in πρόσδεξαι ὃ θεὺς τὴν δέησιν ἡμῶν, ποίη- Thrace from the fourth century, and in coy ἡμᾶς ἀξίους γένεσθαι προσφέρειν σοι Macedonia and Greece from time im- δεήσεις, καὶ ἱκεσίας, καὶ θυσίας ἀναιμάκ-
memorial.’’—Ibid., p. 80. ] Tous ὑπὲρ παντὸς τοῦ λαοῦ cov.—Goar, © [ὅτε δὲ προσκυνοῦσι λέγουσι τὴν εὐς pp. 70. Op., p. 786, C, D.]
χὴν ταύτην μυστικῶς᾽ κύριε ὃ θεὸς ἡμῶν ἴ [εὐχὴ ἣν λέγει 6 ἱερεὺς μυστικῶς
ἐξαπόστειλον τὴν χεῖρά σου ἐξ ἁγίουκα- τοῦ χερουβικοῦ ἀδομένου. . ... ἀλλ᾽
τοικητηρίου σου, καὶ ἐνίσχυσόν με εἰς ὅμως, διὰ τὴν ἄφατον καὶ ἀμέτρητόν σου
τὴν προκειμένην διακονίαν σου, ἵνα φιλανθρωπίαν, ἀτρέπτως καὶ ἀναλλοι-
ἀκατακρίτως παραστὰς τῷ φοβερῷ σοῦ τως γέγονας ἄνθρωπος, καὶ ἀρχιερεὺς
Η n “ “
βήματι, Thr ἀναίμακτον ἱερουργίαν ἐπι- ἡμῶν ἐχρημάτισας, καὶ τῆς λειτουργικῆ5 HICKES, K
CHAP. II.
SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Heb. 9. 7.
130 Evidence of the Euch. Sacr. from the Primitive Liturgies.
to reject me from among Thy children, but graciously per- mit that these gifts may be offered up by me a sinner.” So in the prayer after the oblations are placed upon the altar$ ; “OQ Lord God Almighty, who only art holy, and who re- ceivest the sacrifice of praise from those who call upon Thee with their whole heart, receive the prayer of us sinners, and bring it to Thy holy altar, and make us worthy to offer up these gifts and spiritual sacrifices for our sins, and the errors of the people, and grant we may find grace in Thy sight to have this our sacrifice made acceptable to Thee.” Then after the Sursum Corda, and the prayer of thanksgiving mentioned by Justin Martyr", and the words of the institution, the priest saith, as in the consecration before cited out of the Aposto- lical Constitutions: ; “ Wherefore remembering* this salutary commandment, and all the things that are done for us, His death, burial, resurrection on the third day, His ascension into heaven, His sitting at Thy right hand, and His second and glorious coming, we offer Thy own (gifts, or creatures) unto Thee. .... We also offer up unto Thee this reasonable and unbloody sacrifice, and we pray and beseech Thee to send down Thy Holy Spirit upon us, and upon these gifts. Amen.”
“Make this bread the precious (mystical) body of Thy
ταύτης, Kal ἀναιμάκτου θυσίας τὴν μενα Sapa ταῦτα, καὶ ἐπὶ πάντα τὸν ἱερουργίαν se ἡμῖν, ὡς δεσπότης λαόν cov.—Goar, p. 74. Op., p. 789,
τῶν ἁπάντων... .. σοὶ γὰρ προσεύχομαι
B,C.)
κλίνας Thy ἐμαυτοῦ αὐχένα, καὶ δέομαί σου μὴ ἀποστρέψῃς τὸ πρόσωπόν σου ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ, μηδὲ ἀποδοκιμάσῃς με ἐκ παίδων σου, ἀλλ᾽ ἀξίωσον προσενεχθῆναί σοι ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ τοῦ ἁμαρτωλοῦ, καὶ ἀναξίου δούλου σου τὰ δῶρα tatra.—Goar, Euch., p. ΠΣ Op Ρ᾽ 187; Ὁ; ἘΠ᾿ Ὁ. 788, A.]
& [εὐχὴ προσκομιδῆς, μετὰ τὴν ἐν τῇ ἁγίᾳ τραπέζῃ τῶν θείων δώρων. ἀπόθεσιν, ἣν λέγει ὃ ἱ ἱερεὺς μυστικῶς. κύριε ὃ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ, ὃ μόνος ἅγιος, ὃ δεχόμε- νος θυσίαν αἰνέσεως παρὰ τῶν ἐπικαλου- μένων σε ἐν ὅλῃ καρδίᾳ, πρόσδεξαι καὶ ἡμῶν τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν τὴν δέησιν, καὶ προσάγαγε τῷ ἁγίῳ σου θυσιαστηρίῳ, καὶ ἱκάνωσον ἡμᾶς προσενεγκεῖν σοι δῶ- ρά τε καὶ θυσίας πνευματικὰς ὑπὲρ τῶν ἡμετέρων ἁμαρτημάτων καὶ τῶν τοῦ λαοῦ ἀγνοημάτων, καὶ καταξίωσον ἡμᾶς εὑρεῖν χάριν ἐνωπίον σου, τοῦ “γενέσθαι σοι εὐπρόσδεκτον τὴν θυσίαν ἡμῶν, καὶ ἐπισκηνῶσαι τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς χάριτός σου Td ἀγαθὸν ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς, καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκεί-
4 [See notes f, g, pp. 105, 106.]
i [See p. 123. ]
x06 ἱερεὺς κλίνας κεφαλὴν ἐπεύχεται μυστικῶς" μεμνημένοι τοίνυν τῆς σωτη- ρίου ταύτης ἐντολῆς, καὶ πάντων τῶν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν γεγενημένων, τοῦ σταυροῦ, τοῦ τάφου, τῆς τριημέρου ἀναστάσεως, τῆς εἰς οὐρανοὺς, ἀναβάσεως, τῆς ἐκ δε- ξιῶν καθέδρας, τῆς δευτέρας καὶ ἐνδόξου πάλιν παρουσίας. ἐκφώνως" (alta voce) τὰ σὰ ἐκ τῶν σῶν σοι προσφέρομεν κατὰ πάντα καὶ διὰ πάντα... μυστικῶς" ἐτὶ προσφέρομέν σοι τὴν Nine ταύ- τὴν καὶ ἀναίμακτον λατρείαν, καὶ παρα- καλοῦμεν, καὶ δεόμεθα, καὶ ἱκετεύομεν, κατάπεμψον τὸ πνεῦμά σου τὸ ἅγιον ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς, καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα ταῦτα. eee ποίησον τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦτον τίμιον σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου. ἀμήν... τὸ δὲ ἐν ποτηρίῳ τούτῳ τίμιον αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου. . μεταβαλὼν τῷ πνεύ- ματί σου τῷ ΒΡ δι —Goar, pit (Opps 700. De 8... 792. Bel)
a
The Liturgy of St. Basil. 131
Christ. Amen... And what is in this cup the precious blood of Thy Christ,... changing (them) by Thy Holy Spirit.” Then in a prayer after the Lord’s Prayer’; “‘ Thou therefore, O Lord, bless these gifts which are set before Thee (τὰ προκείμενα dépa), to us all, according to every one’s necessity,” &c.
So in the Liturgy of St. Basil™, in the prayer at the pro- thesis, upon which the oblations were set; εὐλόγησον τὴν πρόθεσιν ταύτην, kK. τ. dr. “ Bless this table, and the oblations thereupon, and receive them up unto Thy altar in the highest heavens; and of Thy goodness and love towards men remem- ber the offerers, and those for whom they have offered, and preserve us free from all sin in the administration of these holy mysteries",’ &c. So in the prayer of the priest after the offerings are set on the holy table, or altar®; “ May it please Thee, O Lord, as we are ministers (διακόνους) of the New Testament, and liturgs (λειτουργοὺς) of Thy holy mys-
! [σὺ οὖν, δέσποτα, τὰ προκείμενα πᾶσιν ἡμῖν εἰς ἄγαθον ἐξομάλισον κατὰ τὴν ἑκάστου ἰδίαν xpelav.—Goar, p. 81. Op., p. 794, E. ]
™ [The Liturgy of St. Basil was anciently used throughout the patri- archate of Czsarea, which included (with the exception of proconsular Asia, Phrygia, and some maritime pro- vinces) the whole of Asia Minor. Of the Liturgies which bear St. Basil’s name there are many varying texts, which are however reduced by Mr. Palmer to three; the Constantinopo- litan, which has been used, in Greek, from time immemorial throughout the patriarchates of Constantinople and Cesarea; the Alexandrian, which has been long used in that of Alexandria, and is found in Coptic, Greek, and Arabic ; the Syriac, which is only ex- tant in the Syriac language.
Mr. Palmer considers the Constan- tinopolitan text to be the genuine one. It is found on the whole alike in all MSS. which profess to represent that Liturgy; the interpolations and mo- dern additions, he says, are easily de- tected, and the variations naturally accounted for. This text is found in the best form in Goar’s Euchologium, (p. 158,) which Hickes used; but it is printed from a modern copy; and to ascertain it critically the Varie Lec- tiones given by him must be consulted. The copies in the Benedictine edition
of St. Basil, tom. ii. App. pp. 674, sqq., are the Alexandrian Greek, and a trans- lation of the Coptic. Goar’s text is used in this edition; no collation of any other text has been given, as it was found that the variations were many, and, as respects the doctrine for which the extracts are alleged, immaterial. Of the Alexandrian texts, the Arabic (of which there is a Latin version in the Bibl. Patrum, tom. vi. col. 75. Par. 1654) is translated from the Coptic; a Latin translation of the Coptic is given by Renaudot, Lit. Orient., tom. i. p. 1; and the Alexan- drian Greek is printed in the same volume, p.57. The Syriac text is a translation from the Greek of the Con- stantinopolitan one, with additions; a Latin version of it by Masius is given by Renaudot, Lit. Orient., tom. ii. p. 548. ]
Ὁ [εὐλόγησον τὴν πρόθεσιν ταύτην, καὶ πρόσδεξαι αὐτὴν εἰς τὸ ὑπερουράνιόν σου θυσιαστήριον, μνημόνευσον, ὡς aya- θὸς καὶ φιλάνθρωπος, τῶν προσενεγκάν- των, καὶ δι᾽ οὕς προσήγαγον, καὶ ἡμᾶς ἀκατακρίτους διαφύλαξον ἐν τῇ ἱερουρ- γίᾳ τῶν θείων σου μυστηρίων᾽ κ. τ. Ἁ.---- 5. Basilii. Liturg., Goar Euch., p. 168.]
° [εὐχὴ προσκομιδῆς, μετὰ τὴν ἐν TH ἁγίᾳ τραπέζᾳ τῶν θείων δώρων ἀπό- θεσιν, ἣν ὃ ἱερεὺς λέγει μυστικῶς ..... εὐδόκησον δὴ, κύριε, τοῦ γενέσθαι ἡμᾶς διακόνους τῆς καινῆς σου διαθήκης, λει- τουργοὺς τῶν ἁγίων σου μυστηρίων"
K 2
CHAP. 11.
SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST-
HOOD.
132 Evidence of the Euch. Sacr. from the Primitive Liturgies.
teries?, according to the multitude of Thy mercies, to re- ceive us who are approaching to Thy holy altar, that we may be worthy to offer unto Thee this reasonable and unbloody sacrifice for our sins and the errors of the people; which Thou having received up for a sweet savour to Thy holy and intellectual altar, send down for it the grace of Thy Holy Spirit upon us, (ἀντικατάπεμψον ἡμῖν τὴν χάριν, K. τ. dr.) Look upon us, O Lord, and upon this our sacrifice (λατρεί- av), and receive it, as Thou didst receive the oblations of Abel; the sacrifices of Noah; the holocausts of Abraham ; the consecration-offerings of Moses and Aaron; the peace- offerings of Samuel; even as Thou didst receive this Eucha- ristical oblation, the verity of them (τὴν ἀληθινὴν ταύτην λατρείαν) from Thy holy Apostles” .... “Let us stand" as
~ s+ κατὰ τὸ πλῆθος τοῦ ἐλέους σου" ἵνα γενώμεθα ἄξιοι τοῦ προσφέρειν σοι τὴν λογικὴν ταύτην καὶ ἀναίμακτον θυ- σίαν, ὑπὲρ τῶν ἡμετέρων ἁμαρτημάτων καὶ τῶν τοῦ λαοῦ ἀγνοημάτων᾽ ἣν προσ- δεξάμενος εἰς τὸ ἅγιον καὶ νοερόν σου θυσιαστήριυν, εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας, ἀντικα- τάπεμψον ἡμῖν τὴν χάριν τοῦ ἁγίου σου πνεύματος" ἐπίβλεψον ep ἡμᾶς, 6 θεὺς, καὶ ἔπιδε ἐπὶ τὴν λατρείαν ἡμῶν ταύτην, καὶ πρόσδεξαι αὐτὴν, ὧς προσεδέξω ᾿Αβὲλ τὰ δῶρα, Νῶε τὰς θυσίας, ᾿Αβραὰμ τὰς ὁλοκαρπώσεις, Μωσέως καὶ ᾿Ααρὼν τὰς ἱερωσύνας, Σαμουὴλ τὰς εἰρηνικάς᾽ ws προσεδέξω ἐκ τῶν ἁγίων σου ἀποστόλων τὴν ἀληθινὴν ταύτην Aarpetav.—Goar, Euchol., p. 164. ]
P Or Sacraments; meaning the Sa- crament or Mystery of the bread, and the Sacrament of the cup: for so the ancients used to speak of the holy Eu- charist, as of one Sacrament or mys- tery made up of two. So Gregory the Great called his Eucharistical office, Liber Sacramentorum. See the Bene- dictines’ note on the title of the book, and Menardus’ note on the same. [The Benedictines’ note is (Op. S. Greg., tom. iii. Ὁ. 1); Per Sacramenta intelliguntur vel omnia nove legis Sa- cramenta; vel tria potissimum Sacra- menta, que simul accipiebantur olim, scilicet Baptismus, Confirmatio, et Eu- charistia; ... vel solum Eucharistic Sacramentum, quod plurali numero in singulis fere missis designatur, tum propter duplicem panis et vini mate- riam, tum propter corpus et sanguinem Christi que continet. Vide notam 2.
Menardi. (S. Gregorii Lib. Sacramen- torum, ed. Hugo Menardus, Paris, 1642, note, pp. 1, 2.) Menard, after quoting authorities for the title, ‘ Li- ber Sacramentorum,’ says that the fathers anciently called the Eucharist Sacramenta; and gives instances from St. Optatus, St. Ambrose, and St. Au- gustine Epist. 149, ad Paulinum, § 16. Op., tom. ii. p. 509, C ; and the follow- ing passage from his tract de Dono Perseverantiz, c. 13. ὃ 33. Op., tom. x. p- 839, B. Quod ergo in Sacramentis fidelium dicitur, ut sursum corda ha- beamus ad Dominum, munus est Do- mini, ut precationes accipiamus dictas, quas facimus in celebratione Sacra- mentorum, antequam illud quod est in Domini mensa, incipiat benedici. Me- nard’s notes are given entire in” the Benedictine edition of St. Gregory’s works. (Op. S. Greg., tom. iii. col. 274, B, D.)] See also Suicerus in μυστήριον. Sacra ccena vocatur μυσ- τήριον [idque ἃ. ἑνικῶς, singulariter ; b. | πληθυντικῶς, pluraliter. [He gives many instances of the plural use of μυστήρια, adding, et alibi frequentis- sime.—Thes. Eccl., tom. ii. p. 383.
9 λατρείαν : which word in the Eu- charistical offices is used in the most strict sense for the’ celebration of the Eucharistical or Christian sacrifice. See Suicer’s Thesaurus, in the word λατρεία [ quoted above, note z, p. 49. ]
τ [στῶμεν καλῶς, στῶμεν μετὰ φό- βου, πρόσχωμεν τὴν ἁγίαν ἀναφορὰν ἐν εἰρήνῃ προσφέρειν.---. Basilii Lit. Goar, p. 165.]
δ. ss ... ὦ
The Liturgy of St. James. 133
becomes us with reverence, and take heed that we offer this holy offering (τὴν ἁγίαν ἀναφορὰν) in peace.”
“ Wherefore most holy Lord’ . . . we approach to Thy holy altar, and having set (thereupon) the figures (or symbols) of the holy body and blood of Thy Christ, we pray and beseech Thee, O most Holy, by the pleasure of Thy goodness, that Thy Holy Spirit may come upon us, and upon these gifts lying before Thee, to bless them, and sanctify them, and make (ἀναδεῖξαι) them the body and blood of Christ.”
“Thou, O our God, who hast received these giftst, cleanse us from all filthiness of flesh and spirit,” &c.
I could add more such passages out of this Eucharistical office, but because they are the same with those in that of St. Chrysostom, or almost the same, I thought fit to pass over them, and proceed to the other Greek Liturgies, as I find them in the second volume of the Bibliotheca Patrum Veterum, published at Paris, 1624. I shall begin with the Liturgy of St. James, 1. 6. of the Church of Jerusalem", of which he was the first bishop*. There in the beginning of
5. [6 ἱερεὺς κλίνας τὴν κεφαλὴν εὔχε- ται μυστικῶς. διὰ τοῦτο, δέσποτα πανά- TOS Coe προσεγγίζομεν τῷ ἁγίῳ σου θυσιαστηρίῳ, καὶ προσθέντες τὰ ἀντίτυπα τοῦ ἁγίου σώματος καὶ αἵματος τοῦ Χρι- στοῦ σου, δεόμεθα, καὶ σὲ παρακαλοῦ- μεν, ἅγιε ἁγίων, εὐδοκίᾳ τῆς σῆς ἀγαθό- τητος, ἐλθεῖν τὸ πνεῦμά σου τὸ ἅγιον ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς, καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα ταῦτα, καὶ εὐλογῆσαι αὐτὰ, καὶ ἁγιάσαι, καὶ ἄναδεῖξαι" . . .. τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦ- τον, ποίησον αὐτὸ τὸ τίμιον σῶμα τοῦ κυρίου, καὶ θεοῦ, καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. . .. τὸ δὲ ποτήριον τοῦτο, αὐτὸ τὸ τίμιον αἷμα τοῦ κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Xpictod.—Goar, Euchol., p. 169. |
τ [σὺ ὃ θεὸς ἡμῶν 6 προσδεξάμενος τὰ δῶρα ταῦτα, καθάρισον ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ παντὸς μολυσμοῦ σαρκὸς καὶ πνεύματος, κ. τ. A. Goar, Euchol., p. 137. |
« [The Liturgy of St. James is that of the patriarchate of Antioch, origi- nally including Judza, Mesopotamia, Syria, and some provinces of the south- ern part of Asia Minor. Itis still used by the Monophysites in Syriac ; by the orthodox only on the feast of St. James, and then in Greek. Two forms of the Syriac Liturgy of the Monophysites are translated in Renaudot’s Liturgiarum
Orientalium Collectio, tom. ii. pp. 1, 12, 29, differing considerably in the in- troductions, but agreeing in the ana- phora or most solemn part.- The first edition of the Greek was published at Rome by Demetrius Ducas, A.D. 1526, whence it was copied into the Bibli- otheca Patrum (tom. ii. p. 1. Paris, 1624) ; it is found also in Fabricius’ Codex Apocryphus Nov. Test., tom. iii.; and in Asseman’s Codex Liturg., tom. v. p. 1. With the last of these, which is the text used by Mr. Palmer, the pas- sages quoted by Hickes have been col- lated and corrected. Another text from a MS. of the tenth century, and various readings of one of the twelfth, are pub- lished by Asseman, ibid., pp. 68, 400. These copies, though they frequently differ apparently in order, yet on ex- amination appear to exhibit very nearly the same text. Mr. Palmer considers it to be the ancient Liturgy of the ortho- dox of Jerusalem and Palestine, which before the tenth century had received several additions and alterations to adapt it to the formularies of the Church of Constantinople. See Pal- mer’s Orig. Liturg., vol. i. p. 15, sqq. |
x This Liturgy, corrupted as we have it, agrees in many things with what
CHAP. IL SECT. Χ,
CHRISTIAN PRIEST-
HOOD.
134 Evidence of the Euch. Sacr. from the Primitive Liturgies.
the sacramental office the priest prays’, δέσποτα Κύριε *In- σοῦ, κιτιλ. “O Lord Jesu Christ... purge us from all sin, and grant that we may present ourselves pure before Thy altar, that we may offer unto Thee the sacrifice of praise,” &c. Ὃ Θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ, x.T.r. “Ὁ Almighty God, who givest
us access to the holy of holies, .
. . fearing and trembling to
approach Thy holy altar we implore Thy goodness: sénd down Thy grace upon us, and sanctify our souls, bodies, and spirits . . . that we may offer these gifts*, presents, and sacri- fices with a pure conscience,” ἕο. Ὃ ἱερεὺς εἰσάγων Ta ἅγια
δῶρα [λέγει τὴν εὐχὴν ταύτην".]
Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, mentions in his fifth Catechesis Mystagogica. [See above, pp. 121, 544. note "ἢ. That discourse is probably of the date A.D. 330 or 340. The points of agreement noticed by Hickes are traced by Mr. Pal- mer in further confirmation of the an- tiquity of the Liturgy of St. James; “‘Cyril (he says) begins by speaking of the ceremony of the bishop or priest’s washing his hands, as denoting the purity which at this time should be in the mind. (Catech. Myst. ν. ὃ 2. p. 325, B, C.) He then mentions the kiss of peace, (εἶτα βοᾷ 6 διάκονος" ἀλλήλους ἀπολάβετε καὶ ἀλλήλους ἀσπαζώμεθα, 326, A.) Then the form of the Sursum Corda, (ibid., C, D, E. μετὰ τοῦτο βοᾷ ὃ ἱερεὺς" ἄνω τὰς Kapdlas... εἶτα ἀπο- κρίνεσθε' ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν κύριον . .. εἶτα 6 ἱερεὺς λέγει᾽ εὐχαριστήσωμεν τῷ Κυρίῳ... εἶτα λέγετε" ἄξιον καὶ δίκαιον. And then most minutely describes the thanksgiving down to the hymn Ter Sanctus. (See above, note g, p. 123. λέγοντα, ἅγιος, ἅγιος, ἅγιος, Κύριος Σαβαώθ.---"». 327, A, B.) Of this, the order, sentiments, and expressions will be found the same as in the orthodox and Monophysite Liturgies of St. James,” ‘* Cyril does not allude to the words of our Lord, but he plainly refers to the solemn oblation of the gifts.’’—(Ibid., C, D. See above, noteh, p. 123.) He then proceeds to speak of the invoca- tion and prayer for the Holy Ghost to make the bread and wine the body and blood of Christ, (ibid., C. See above, note 1], p. 124.) He next notices the general prayers for all men and things, (ibid., D.) the commemora- tion of the living and dead; and the heads of petitions which he mentions are all found in the corresponding part of the Liturgies. Then he speaks of
“The priest who brings
the Lord’s Prayer, (ὃ xi. sqq- pp. 328 —330.) Then of the ἅγια τοῖς ἁγίοις, (§ 19. p. 331, A. See above, note k, p- 124,) and the response of the peo- ple; all which occur in the Liturgies. ‘All this,”? he concludes, “ critically agrees with the order, the substance, and the expressions of the anaphora which may be deduced from a com- parison of the orthodox and Mono- physite Liturgies of St. James.’ The same confirmation is found on ex- amining the writings of Theodoret, St. Jerome, St. Ephrem Syrus, and St. Chrysostom, who all lived within this patriarchate. — Palmer’s Orig. Liturg., vol. i. p. 37. ed. 3. ]
y [εὐχὴ τοῦ θυμιάματος τῆς εἰσόδου τῆς ἐνάρξεως. δέσποτα κύριε ᾿ΙΤησοῦ Χριστὲ... καθάρισον ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης κηλῖδος, καὶ παράστησον ἡμᾶς ayvous τῷ ἁγίῳ σου θυσιαστηρίῳ τοῦ προσενέγ- και σοι θυσίαν αἰνέσεως, κ. τ. A.—S. Jacobi Missa, Bibl. Vett. Patrum, De la Bigne, tom. ii. p. 2, A. Paris, 1624. Asseman. Cod. Liturg., lib. iv. pars 2. p. 3.]
2 [ὃ δοὺς ἡμῖν εἴσοδον εἰς τὰ ἅγια τῶν ἁγίων... ἐπειδὴ ἔμφοβοι καὶ ἔν- τρομοί ἐσμεν, μέλλοντες παρεστάναι τῷ ἁγίῳ σου θυσιαστηρίῳ: ἐξαπόστειλον ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς, ὁ θεὸς, τὴν χάριν σου τὴν ἀγαθὴν, καὶ ἁγίασον ἡμῶν τὰς ψύχας καὶ τὰ σώματα, καὶ τὰ πνεύματα, ... ἵνα ἐν καθαρῷ συνειδότι προσφέρωμέν σοι δῶρα, δόματα, καρπώματα, κ. τ. λ.--- Bibl. Patr., p. 8, C. Asseman, p. 7.}
* δῶρα, δόματα, καρπώματα. In the Missale of Gregory the Great, dona, munera, sacrificia [hee dona, hee munera, hee sancta sacrificia illibata. —Op. S. Greg., tom. 111. col. 2, B. See below, note z, p. 142.]
> [Bib]. Patr., p. 7, A. Asseman, p- 17.]
a
The Liturgy of St. James. 135
in the ΓΟ gifts shall say this prayer.”
κ.τ.λ,
Ὃ ἐπισκεψάμενος", “Ὁ Lord, who hast visited us in mercy and pity, and given us poor sinners and Thine unworthy servants, leave to come unto Thy holy altar, and offer this tremendous and un- bloody sacrifice (τὴν φοβερὰν ταύτην Kai ἀναίμακτον θυσίαν) for our sins, &c.... And of Thy goodness receive me, who approach Thy holy altar; and grant that these gifts offered by my hands may be made acceptable to Thee,” &c.: ... καὶ τὰ περικείμενα TH ἱερᾷ ταύτῃ τελετῇ“, K.T-r. “ And uncovering the secret meaning,-which is symbolically veiled in this holy sacrifice, shew it clearly to us,” &c. And then in the prayer of consecration, μεμνημένοι οὖν“, x. τ. Χ. “ We sinners there- fore, being mindful of His sufferings, &c. . . offer unto Thee, O Lord, this tremendous and unbloody sacrifice ; have mercy upon us, O Lord, and send down Thy most Holy Spirit upon [us, and upon] these gifts which are set before Thee . . . that descending upon them He may by His holy, gracious, and glorious presence, make this bread the holy body of Christ, and this cup His precious blood.” Ὑπὲρ τῶν προσκομισ- θέντων, κ. τ. Δ. “Let us pray unto God for these sanctified, precious, heavenly, ineffable, pure, glorious, tremendous, dreadful, and Divine oblations, that our Lord would receive them into His holy, heavenly, intellectual, and spiritual altar,
for a sweet-smelling savour,” &c.:.... ὁ Θεὸς καὶ πάτηρ τοῦ
© [6 ἐπισκεψάμενος ἡμᾶς ἐν ἐλέοις των, K.T.A..-.- προσφέρομέν σοι, δέσ-
καὶ οἰκτιρμοῖς, δέσποτα κύριε, καὶ χα- ρισάμενος παῤῥησίαν ἡμῖν τοῖς ταπεινοῖς καὶ ἁμαρτωλοῖς καὶ ἀναξίοις δούλοις σου, παρεστάναι τῷ ἁγίῳ σου θυσιαστηρίῳ, καὶ προσφέρειν σοὶ τὴν φοβερὰν ταύτην καὶ ἀναίμακτον θυσίαν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἡμετέ- pov ἁμαρτημάτων καὶ τῶν τοῦ λαυῦ ἀγ- νοημάτων, ... πρόσδεξαί με διὰ τὴν ἀγαθότητά σου προσεγγίζοντα τῷ ἁγίῳ σου θυσιαστηρίῳ" καὶ εὐδόκησον, κύριε, δεκτὰ γενέσθαι. τὰ προσαγόμενα ταῦτα δῶρα διὰ τῶν ἡμετέρων χειρῶν, κ. τ. λ. —Bibl. Patr., p. 10, Β, C. Asseman, pp. 25, 26. | [καὶ τὰ περικείμενα TH ἱερᾷ ταύτῃ τελετῇ συμβολικῶς ἀμφιάσματα τῶν αἰνιγμάτων ἡμῖν ἀνακαλύψας, τηλαυγῶς ἡμῖν ἀνάδειξον.----Β10]. Patr., p. 12, B. Asseman, p. 32. This is the prayer used at taking the veil from off the elements. See below, note c, p. 151. ] © [μεμνημένοι οὖν καὶ ἡμεῖς of ἅμαρ- τωλοὶ τῶν ζωοποιῶν αὐτοῦ παθημά-
ποτα, τήν φοβερὰν ταύτην καὶ ἀναίμακ- tov θυσίαν, ... ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς, 6 θεὸς
ον καὶ ἐξαπόστειλον ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα ταῦτα, τὸ πνεῦμά σου τὸ πανάγιον ᾿ς ἧνα ἐπιφοιτῆσαν τῇ ἁγίᾳ καὶ ἀγαθῇ, Γ ἐνδόξῳ αὐτοῦ παρουσίᾳ ἁγιάσῃ, καὶ ποιήσῃ τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦτον, σῶμα ἅγιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ gov... καὶ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο, αἷμα τίμιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ cov.—Bibl. Patr., p- 14, B, C, E; p.15, A, B. Asseman, BE: 37, sqq.]
[imp TOV προσκομισθέντων, καὶ ἁγιασθέντων τιμίων, ἐπουρανίων, ἀῤῥή- των, ἀχράντων, ἐνδόξων, φοβερῶν, φρικ- τῶν, θείων δώρων κυρίῳ τῷ θεῷ δεηθῶ- μεν" ὕπως κύριος 6 Beds ἡμῶν ὃ προσδε- ξάμενος αὐτὰ εἰς τὸ ἅγιον, καὶ ὑπερουρά- Ψιον, νοερὸν, καὶ πνευματικὸν αὐτοῦ θυ- σιαστήριον, εἰς ὑσμὴν εὐωδίας πνευματι-
κῇ5.---Β10]. Patr., p. 17, E. Asseman, p- 48. ]
CHAP, I.
SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
136 Evidence of the Euch. Sacr. from the Primitive Liturgies.
Kupiov®, x.t.r. “0 God, the Father of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ..... who hast received the gifts, presents, and sacrifices offered unto Thee for a sweet-smelling savour, and hast vouchsafed to sanctify and consecrate them by the grace of Thy Christ, and the descent of Thy most Holy Spirit: O sanctify also our souls, bodies, and spirits,” &c.
So in the Liturgy of St. Mark4, or the Church of Alex- andria, at the beginning of the oblationi: “O Lord our God, who art our sovereign Lord ... who hast made all things by Thy Wisdom, the true Light, Thy only-begotten Son, our Lord and God, and only Saviour Jesus Christ, through whom giving thanks to Thee, [with Him] and with Thy Holy Spirit, we offer this reasonable and unbloody sacrifice, which all na- tions offer up unto Thee from the rising of the sun unto the setting thereof, from the north to the south; because! great is Thy name among all people, and incense, and sacrifice, and oblation is offered unto Thee in every place. Kal δὸς"
& [ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ τοῦ κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ
. τὰ μὲν προσενεχθέντα σοι δῶρα, δόματα, καρπώματα, εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας πνευματικῆς προσεδέξω, καὶ ἁγιάσαι καὶ τελειῶσαι κατηξίωσας, ἀγαθὲ, τῇ χάριτι τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου, καὶ τῇ ἐπιφοιτήσει τοῦ παναγίου σου πνεύματος" ἁγίασον, δέσ- ποτα, καὶ τὰς ἡμετέρας ψυχὰς καὶ σώ- ματα, καὶ τὰ πνεύματα, K.T.A.—Bibl. Patr., p. 18, A, B. Asseman, p. 49. ]
h [The Liturgy of St. Mark was that of the patriarchate of Alexandria. Mr. Palmer shews from the agreement be- tween this Liturgy, which continued to be used by the orthodox, and that called St. Cyril’s, which is in use among the Monophysites, that it is in substance earlier than the council of Chalcedon, (A.D.451,) when the two bodies ceased to hold communion with each other. This Liturgy was first published at Paris in 1583, from a MS. of the tenth or eleventh century. It is found in the Bibliotheca Patrum, which Hickes used; in Asseman, lib. iv. pars 4; in Fabricius, Cod. Apocryph. Noy. Test. tom. iii. ; and in Renaudot, tom. i. p. 131. The last is the text used by Mr. Palmer; the extracts here given have been collated by it. |
i [6 ὧν, δέσποτα, κύριε θεὲ, ἜΝ πάντα δὲ ἐποίησας διὰ τῆς σῆς σοφίας, τοῦ φωτὸς τοῦ ἀληθινοῦ, τοῦ μονογενοῦς
σου υἱοῦ, τοῦ κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆ- ρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ" δι᾽ οὗ σοι σὺν αὐτῷ καὶ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι εὐχαριστοῦν- TES, προσφέρομεν τὴν λογικὴν καὶ ἀναί- μακτον λατρείαν ταύτην, ἣν προσφέρει σοι, κύριε, πάντα τὰ ἔθνη ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν ἡλίου καὶ μέχρι δυσμῶν, ἀπὸ ἄρκτου καὶ μεσημβρίας, ὅτι μέγα τὸ ὄνομά σου ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι, καὶ ἐν πάντι τόπῳ θυ- μίαμα προσφέρεται τῷ ὀνόματι τῷ ἁγίῳ σου, καὶ θυσία, καὶ προσφορά.---ὃ. Marci Liturgia, pp. 82, C, E. 33, A. Bibl. Vett. Patrum, De la Bigne, Paris, 1624. Renaudot, Liturg. Orient. Coll., tom. i. pp. 144, 145. In Renaudot there is a point after 6 ὧν, which is not in the Bibl. Patr., giving it the meaning of ‘the living God.’ ]
j These words allude to Malachi i. Lh 11.
κ [καὶ δὸς ἡμῖν μερίδα καὶ κλῆρον ἔχειν μετὰ πάντων τῶν ἁγίων σου τῶν προσφέροντων τῆς θυσίας τὰς προσφοράς" τὰ εὐχαριστήρια πρόσδεξαι ὃ θεὸς εἰς τὸ ἅγιον καὶ ἐπουράνιον καὶ νοερόν σου θυσιαστήριον. ---- Β10]. Patr., p. 35, B. Renaudot, pp. 150, 151. In Renaudot the passage runs, τὰς θυσίας, καὶ τὰς προσφορὰς, and the point 15 after τῶν ἁγίων cov, not after προσφοράς ; so as to have the sense ; “‘ with all Thy saints. And, O God, receive the Eucharistical gifts of those who bring unto Thee sacrifices and oblations,’’ &c. ]
The Liturgy of St. Mark. 137
ἡμῖν μερίδα, x.7.r. “And grant that we may have our part and lot with all Thy saints, who bring unto Thee sacrificial oblations (τῆς θυσίας tas προσφορὰς), and, O God, receive up these Eucharistical gifts (τὰ εὐχαριστήρια) into Thy heavenly and intellectual altar.” Κύριε 6 Θεὸς ἡμῶν τὰ oa ἐκ TOV σῶν δώρων, K.T.r.' “0 Lord our God, we have set what are Thine of Thy own gifts before Thee; and we pray and beseech Thee, O bountiful lover of mankind, to send down from the height of Thy holy place, from Thy prepared tabernacle, from Thy infinite bosoms (of love), (ἐξ ἑτοίμου κατοικητηρίου σου; ἐκ τῶν ἀπεριγράπτων κόλπων σου,) the Paraclete Himself, the Spirit of truth, the holy, quickening Lord (ζωοποιὸν), who spake in the Law, and the Prophets, and Apostles, who is every where present, and fills all things, and worketh not ministerially, but by His own power (ἐνεργοῦν τε avteEouciws, οὐ διακονικῶς), holiness according to Thy good pleasure, in whom He will; who is simple by nature, but manifold in His operations; who is the fountain of Divine gifts and graces, consubstantial to Thee, and proceeding from Thee, and sits with Thee and Thy only-begotten Son, and our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ in the throne of Thy kingdom: O send down this Holy Spirit upon us, and upon these loaves and these cups; that as God omnipotent He may sanctify and con- secrate them, and make this bread the body, and the cup the blood of the New Testament of our Lord and God and Saviour, and King of kings, Jesus Christ.” So in the Liturgy of St. Peter, that is, of the Latin Liturgy
anyhv' τὸ σοὶ ὁμοούσιον, τὸ ἐκ σοῦ
'[ool, κύριε ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν, τὰ σὰ ἐκ ch ἐκπορευόμενον, τὸ σύνθρονον τῆς βα-
τῶν σῶν δώρων προεθήκαμεν ἐνώπιόν
σου" καὶ δεόμεθα καὶ παρακαλοῦμέν σε, φιλάνθρωπε, ἀγαθὲ, ἐξαπόστειλον ἐξ ὕψους τοῦ ἁγίου σου, ἐξ ἑτοίμου κατοι- κητηρίου σου, ἐκ τῶν ἀπεριγράπτων κόλπων (σου,) αὐτὸν τὸν παράκλητον, τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας, τὸν ἅγιον, τὸν κύριον, τὸ ζωοποὶον, τὸ ἐν νόμῳ καὶ προφήταις καὶ ἀποστόλοις λαλῆσαν, τὸ πανταχοῦ παρὸν καὶ τὰ πάντα πληροῦν, ἐνεργοῦν τε αὐτεξουσίως, οὐ διακονικῶς, ἐφ᾽ ods βούλεται, τὸν ἁγιασμὸν εὐδοκίᾳ τῇ σῇ, τὸ ἁπλοῦν τὴν φύσιν ‘Kar πολυ- μερὲς᾽ [τὸ πλημερὲς, Renaudot] τὴν ἐνέργειαν, τὴν τῶν θείων χαρισμάτων
σιλείας σου καὶ τοῦ μονογενοῦς σου υἱοῦ, τοῦ κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. ἔτι δὲ ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἄρτους τούτους καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ ποτήρια ταῦτα τὸ πνεῦμά σου τὸ ἅγιον, ἵνα αὐτὰ ἁγιάσῃ καὶ τελειώσῃ ὡς παν- τοδύναμος θεὸς, . . . καὶ ποιήσῃ τὸν μὲν ἄρτον σῶμα, Ἐς αὐ ιδὲ “ποτήριον, αἷμα THS καινῆς διαθήκης αὐτοῦ τοῦ κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος καὶ παμβασιλέως ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Xpiorod.—Ibid., pp. 37, E. 38, B. Bibl. Patr., pp. 156, 157, Renaudot. The cov in parentheses is not in Re- naudot. |
CHAP. It. SECT. X,
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
138
The Liturgy of St. Peter.
of the Church of Rome, translated into Greek™, θυσίαν Κύριε, cot, K.T.AX." “QO Lord, sanctify this sacrifice, which is to be offered to Thee, and receive us graciously,” &c.... σὲ τοίνυν, x. τ᾿ λ.5 “ We therefore pray, and beseech Thee, most mer-
ciful Father,
through our Lord Jesus Christ, that Thou wouldst please to accept and bless these gifts’, this obla-
tion, this holy and pure sacrifice, which we offer up to Thee, in the first place for Thy holy Catholic Apostolical Church.”... ταύτην τοίνυν THY προσφορὰν, K.T- 4 “40 Lord, we beseech Thee mercifully to receive this offering of our (bounden duty and) service which we offer to Thee, .. . which we beseech Thee that Thou wouldst vouchsafe to make blessed" (ἀπερίγραπο
m [This Liturgy was first published, from a MS. at Paris, by Morell, in 1595. It is the work of some later Greek, who compiled it from a translation of the Canon of the Mass of the Latin Church, and the Liturgy of St.Chrysos- tom. See Renaudot. Lit. Oriens., tom. ii. Ρ. 168.]
" [θυσίαν, κύριέ, σοι προορισθεῖσαν προσφορὰν ἁγίασον, καὶ δ αὐτῆς ἡμᾶς ἀσμένως πρόσδεξαι.---8. Petri Liturgia, Biblioth. Patr. ibid., p. 118, E.]
° [σὲ τοίνυν ἐπιεικέστατε πάτερ, διὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἱκετεύ- οντες παρακαλοῦμέν σε καὶ δεόμεθα, ἵνα προσδεκταῖα σχῇ καὶ εὐλογήσῃς ταῦτα τὰ δῶρα, ταύτην τὴν προσφορὰν, ταύτην τὴν ἁγίαν θυσίαν, τὴν ἀμώμητον, ἐν πρώτοις ἅπερ σοι προσφέρομεν ὑπὲρ τῆς ἁγίας σου καθολικῆς καὶ ἀποστολικῆς ἐκκλησίας, κιτ.λ.---Τ014., p.119, C, D.]
P ταῦτα τὰ δῶρα, mainte ah προσ- φορὰν, ταύτην τὴν ἁγίαν θυσίαν τὴν ἀμώ- μητον ; in the Roman Missal, ‘hee dona, hee munera, hee sancta sacri- ficia illibata.’
4 [ταύτην τοίνυν τὴν προσφορὰν τῆς δουλείας ἡμῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ παντὸς τοῦ λαοῦ σου, ἥν σοι προσφέρομεν, δέομεθα κύριε ἀσμένως πρόσδεξαι eae εὐλογη- μένην, ἀπερίγραπτον, ἐράσμιον, εὐαπο- λόγητον, προσδεκταίαν τε ποιῆσαι κα- ταξιώσῃ», ἵνα ἡμῖν. σῶμα καὶ αἷμα γέ- νηται τοῦ ἀγαπητοῦ σου υἱοῦ, κυρίου δὲ ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Xpiotod.—Ibid., p. 120, (AIDS |
τ δεόμεθα εὐλογημένην, ἀπερίγραπ- τον, ἐράσμιον, εὐαπολόγητον, προσδεκ- ταίαν τε ποιῆσαι καταξιώσῃς. In St. Gregory’s Sacramentary, [and the Ca- non of the Mass of which the Greek is a translation]: Quam oblationem tu Deus in omnibus quesumus bene- dictam, adscriptam, ratam, rationabi-
lem, acceptabilemque facere digneris. -ἰ 5. Greg. M. Op., tom. iii. col. 3, C.] All which terms are explained by Me- nardus, not. 46—49. The Greek trans- lator did not rightly understand the Latin terms, and therefore he absurdly rendered ‘adscriptam’ by ameplypar- tov, Which in the theological] sense al- ways signifies ‘ incomprehensible,’ ‘un- conceivable.’ ‘As in Hesychius, [ἀπε- pwoéntoy |; Phavorinus, [ἀπεριόριστον" . ἡ ἅγια ἐκκλήσια τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις ἀπεριγράπτως ὁμολογεῖ: καὶ ἀπερίσκο- πον]; Suicer, [non circumscriptus, in- comprehensibilis, qui mente compre- hendi non potest; frequenter de Deo usurpatur; he adds several instances of this.—Thes. Eccl.,tom.i. col. 432. | Ste- phani Thesaurus, [περίγραπτος, qui cir- cumscribi potest et finiri, unde ἀπερί- ypanros huic contrarium, ut Damascen. de Deo; ἀκατάληπτος, ἀπερίγραπτος : | in Liturgia que S. Petri esse creditur, non ita recte legitur ἀπερίγραπτον, id est incircumscriptam, incomprehensibi- lem.—[ tom. iii.col.3056. | Hesych.dazepi- γραπτον, ἀπερινόητον, id est, incompre- hensibilem. Menard. in not.47. [The translator seems to have read ‘ gratam’ for ‘ratam,’ for which he uses ἐράσμιον. Menard’s notes are given S. Greg. M. Op., tom. ili. col. 275, 276. He ex- plains benedictam, consecratam; as- criptam ; id est, in numerum benepla- citorum tuorum receptam; ratam; id est, immobili firmitate perpetuam, in versione Codini (see above, note b, p. 67) βεβαίαν ; rationabilem, in versione Codini λογικὴν, i. 6. rationalem, which is variously explained by cum ratione actam; justa ratione plenam; cum ratione oblatam; the Greek word by which it is mistranslated, εὐαπολόγητον, Menard translates, excusabilis. ]
The Liturgia Ante-Consecratorum. 139
τον), amiable, grateful, and acceptable, that it may be unto us the body and blood of Thy beloved Son Jesus Christ our Lord.” ....tTa σὰ ἐκ τῶν σῶν προσφέρομέν, K. τ. λ." “Thy own of Thy own; this pure sacrifice, this holy sacrifice, this spotless sacrifice, this holy bread of eternal life, and cup of everlasting salvation we offer, of Thy gifts and benefits, unto Thee, upon which we beseech Thee that Thou wouldst look with a propitious and serene countenance, and accept as Thou wast pleased to accept the gifts of Thy righteous child Abel; and command that it be carried up by the hand of Thy ministering angel unto Thy altar above, before Thy Divine majesty; that whosoever of us shall receive any holy part of the body of Thy Son, or of His blood, may be filled with Thy heavenly benediction and grace, through our Lord Jesus Christ.”
So in the Lent-office of administering the Eucharist, ex presanctificatis', translated by Genebrard ; ὑπὲρ τῶν προτε- θέντων, Kal προαγιασθέντων τιμίων δώρων τοῦ Κυρίου δεη- θῶμεν": “Let us pray for the precious gifts, or oblations, which have before been presented and sanctified.” appytov’, x.T.r. “O God of ineffable and invisible myste- ries, with whom are hid the treasures of wisdom and know- ledge, and who of Thy great love towards men hast ap-
νον. ὁ TOV
8 [τὰ σὰ ἐκ τῶν σῶν προσφέρομεν TH (ΟΟΠΟΙ]1α, tom. i. col. 1540, A.) they do
Tyla μεγαλωσύνῃ gov, ἐκ τῶν σῶν δω- ρεῶν καὶ χαρισμάτων, θυσίαν καθαρὰν, θυσίαν ἁγίαν, θυσίαν ἄμωμον, ἄρτον ἅγιον ζωῆς αἰωνίου, καὶ ποτήριον σωτη- ρίας ἀεννάου" ὑπὲρ ὧν ἵλεῳ καὶ εὐϊλάτῳ προσώπῳ ἐπισκέψαι καταξιώσῃς, καὶ προσδεκτὰ σχεῖν, καθὰ κατηξίωσας τὰ δῶρα τοῦ παιδός σου τοῦ δικαίου ᾿Αβέλ ες κέλευσον τοῦτο διακονηθῆναι διὰ χει- pos ἁγίου ἀγγέλου σου εἰς τὸ ὑψηλόν σου θυσιαστήριον, ἐνώπιον τῆς θείας μεγα- λειότητός σου, ἵνα οἵαν δήποτε ἐκ τού- του τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου μερίδα ἁγίαν τοῦ σώματος τοῦ υἱοῦ σου ἢ καὶ τοῦ αἵματος ληψώμεθα, πάσης ἐπουρανίου εὐλογίας καὶ χάριτος ἐμπλησθῶμεν, διὰ τοῦ κυ- ρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ ae —S. Petri ini bids. 191. BoC, Ds] bois is a service used in the Greek churches during Lent. In that season in conformity with Canon xlix. of the council of Laodicea, A.D. 364? (ὅτι ov δεῖ TH τεσσαρακοστῇ ἄρτον προσφε- ρειν, εἰ μὴ ἐν σαββάτῳ καὶ κυριακῇ μόνον.
not consecrate the Eucharist except on Sundays and Saturdays ; on other days they partake of the previously conse- crated elements, with this service, as enjoined by the council i in Trullo, A.D. 692. ἐν πάσαις τῆς ἁγίας τεσσερακοστῆς τῶν νηστειῶν ἡμέραις, παρεκτὸς σαβ- βάτου καὶ κυριακῆς, καὶ τῆς ἁγίας τοῦ εὐαγγελισμοῦ ἡμέρας, γινέσθω ἣ τῶν προηγισμένων ἱερὰ Aertoupyia.—Con- cilia, tom. vii. col. 1372, D. See Ge- nebrard’s note, Biblioth. Patr., tom. ii. p- 10]. 1624.1]
ἃ [Liturgia Ante-Consecrat., Biblioth. Patr., tom. ii. Ρ. 98, A. 1624. ]
Vv [6 τῶν ἀβῥήτων ead aBedrooy μυστη- ρίων Θεὸς, παρ᾽ ᾧ οἱ θησαυροὶ τῆς σοφίας καὶ τῆς γνώσεως ἀπόκρυφοι, ὁ ὃ τὴν διακο- νίαν τῆς “λειτουργίας ταύτης ἀποκαλύψας ἡμῖν, καὶ θέμενος ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἁμαρτωλοὺς διὰ πολλήν σου φιλανθρωπίαν εἰς τὸ προσ- φέρειν σοι δῶρα. καὶ θυσίας ὑπὲρ τῶν ἧμε- τέρων ἁμαρτημάτων, K.T.A.—ibid. C.]
CHAP, 11. SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
140 Further authorities for the Eucharistic Oblation, from
pointed us sinners to offer gifts and sacrifices for our own
sins,” &c.
I might, Sir, from the Greek Liturgies as now extant, return to the ancient Greek writers, and cite many more authorities out of them for the Eucharistical oblation, espe- cially that in the margin’, to which I refer my reader: but
Y In the prayer of consecration of a bishop, Apost. Const., lib. viii. ec. 5. δὸς ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί cov, καρδιογνώστα θεὲ, ἐπὶ τὸν δοῦλον σου τόνδε, ὃν ἐξελέξω εἰς ἐπίσκοπον, ποιμαίνειν τὴν ἁγίαν σου ποίμνην, καὶ ἀρχιερατεύειν σοι ἀμέμπ- τως, λειτουργοῦντα νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας, καὶ ἐξιλασκόμενόν σου πρόσωπον, ἐπι- συναγαγεῖν τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν σωζομένων, καὶ προσφέρειν σοι τὰ δῶρα τῆς ἁγίας σου ἐκκλησίας" δὸς αὐτῷ, δέσποτα παν- τοκράτορ, διὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου, τὴν μετου- σίαν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος, ὥστε ἔχειν ἐξουσίαν ἀφιέναι ἁμαρτίας κατὰ τὴν ἐντο- λήν σου" διδόναι κλήρους κατὰ τὸ πρόσ- ταγμά σου, λύειν δὲ πάντα σύνδεσμον κατὰ τὴν ἐξουσίαν ἣν ἔδωκας τοῖς ἀποστό- λοις εὐαρεστεῖν δέ σοι ἐν πραότητι καὶ καθαρᾷ καρδίᾳ, ἀτρέπτως, ἀμέμπτως, ἂνε- γκλήτως προσφέροντά σοι καθαρὰν καὶ ἀναίμακτον θυσίαν, ἣν διὰ Χριστοῦ διε- τάξω, τὸ μυστήριον τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης, εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας διὰ τοῦ ἁγίου παιδός σου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ [τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆ- ρος ἡμῶν} δι᾽ οὗ σοι δόξα, τιμὴ καὶ σέβας, ἐν ἁγίῳ πνεύματι, νῦν καὶ ἀεὶ καὶ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων.--- Concil., tom.i. p.461,D. [The words τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν were omitted in the third edition ; they are inserted in Hickes’ copy. See vol. i. p. 36, notef. ] “Ὁ God, who knowest the heart, give for Thy own name to this Thy servant, whom Thou hast chosen to be a bishop, grace to feed Thy holy flock, and to execute before Thee the office of an high-priest, ministering by night and by day unblameably, to make atone- ment before Thee, (and) to assemble the number of those who are saved, and to offer the gifts of Thy holy Church. Give him, O Lord Almighty, through Thy Christ, the communica- tion of the Holy Ghost, that he may have power to remit sins according to Thy command; to give holy orders; to loose every bond according to the power Thou gavest to Thy Apostles; to please Thee in all meekness, and with a clean heart to offer unto Thee constantly, unblameably, and without fault the pure and unbloody sacrifice which Thou hast ordained by Christ to
be the Sacrament of the New Testa- ment, for a sweet savour through Thy holy Child Jesus Christ our God and Saviour, through whom in the Holy Spirit be unto Thee glory, honour, and worship now, and always, and for ever and ever.” In the commentary of Jobus Ludolphus, ad suam Historiam fEthiopicam, p. 324, [see above, note n, p. 125,] this passage is rendered as follows: Da, O gnare cordium Pater, ut servus tuus, quem elegisti ad epi- scopatum, pascat gregem tuum, et sa- cerdotio fungatur coram te absque re- prehensione, ut ministrans noctu die- que suppliciter oret, videatque faciem tuam, ut digne offerat oblationem sanc- te Ecclesie tuz, et in Spiritu sacer- dotii sancto habens facultatem remit- tendi peccata secundum mandatum tuum, et dandi ordines (secundum) institutionem tuam, atque solvendi omne vinculum iniquitatis secundum potestatem, quam dedisti A postolis tuis, ut acceptus tibi sit in sinceritate, et puro corde offerendo tibi odorem sua- vem, per filium tuum Jesum Christum, in quo tibi (sit) laus et potentia: gloria Patri, et Filio, et Spiritui Sancto in sancta Ecclesia nunc et semper, et in secula seculorum. Amen.
In the Baroccian MS. at Oxford, 26 fol. 151, Ὁ, entituled διατάξεις τῶν av- τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων περὶ χειροτονιῶν, διὰ Ἱππολύτου, the same passage is to be read in these words: [fol. 153, line 14.1 καὶ νῦν ἐπίχεε τὴν παρά σου δύναμιν τοῦ ἡγεμονικοῦ πνεύματος, ὅπερ διὰ τοῦ ἠγαπημένου σου παιδὸς Ἰησοῦ
Χριστοῦ δεδώρησαι τοῖς ἁγίοις σου ἀποστόλοις, οἵ καθίδρυσαν τὴν ἐκ-
κλησίαν κατὰ τόπον ἁγιάσματός σου > >. > / ~ (εἰς δόξαν καὶ αἶνον ἀδιάλειπτον τοῦ ὀνόματός cov) καρδιογνώστα πάντων, } | ~ a > / ἐπὶ τὸν δοῦλόν σου τοῦτον, ὃν ἐξελέξω εἰς ἐπισκοπὴν cov τὴν ἁγίαν, καὶ ἀρχιερατεύειν σοι ἀμέμπτως λειτουρ- γοῦντα νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας, ἀδιαλείπ- τως τε ἱλάσκεσθαι τὸ πρόσωπόν σου, καὶ προσφέρειν σοι τὰ δῶρα τῆς ἁγίας σου ἐκκλησίας, καὶ τῷ πνεύματι τῷ ἀρχιε- ρατικῷ ἔχειν ἐξουσίαν ἀφιέναι ἁμαρτίας κατὰ τὴν ἐντολήν σου, διδόναι κλήρους
the ancient Prayers at the Consecration of Bishops. 141
from the Liturgies of the Greek Churches it is time to lead cmap. π. you to those of the Latin, among whom I shall begin with ae
κατὰ τὸ πρόσταγμά σου, λύειν Te πάντα copy, or some other place. [The
σύνδεσμον κατὰ Thy ἐξουσίαν ἣν δέδωκας τοῖς ἀποστόλοις, εὐαρεστεῖν τε σοι ἐν πραότητι καὶ καθαρᾷ καρδίᾳ" προσφέ- ροντά σοι ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας διὰ τοῦ παιδός σου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν, μεθ᾽ οὗ σοι δόξα, κράτος, τιμὴ σὺν ἁγίῳ πνεύματι νῦν καὶ ἀεὶ, καὶ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων. ἀμήν.
[The first of the works to which Hickes refers is a collection of thirty- eight Constitutions, which exist in Ethiopic, and are received in the Abys- sinian Church as Apostolical Constitu- tions. Twenty-three of them are printed in Ludolf’s Comment. in suam Hist. /Ethiop., pp. 314, but he admits (p. 329) that they were carelessly trans- cribed, and that he had to correct and supply passages. The other isa similar collection of twenty-eight Constitutions existing in Greek, which in two MSS., one at Vienna the other at Oxford, are attributed to St. Hippolytus, the dis- ciple of Ireneus, (fl. A.D. 220, Cave); they are printed, together with a Latin translation by Grabe, in the collected edition of the works of Hippolytus by Fabricius, p. 248, Hamb. 1716. They correspond with much of the eighth book of the Apostolical Constitutions. Hickes refers to a MS. in the Bodleian Library, among the collection made by Giacomo Barocci, a Venetian noble- man; and given to the University by the earl of Pembroke, when chancel- lor; with which the copy edited by Fabricius was collated. ]
Though there is a verbal difference between these two Greek copies of the ancient prayer of consecration, and of the Abyssen-Ethiopic version, from them both, yet as to sense and sub- stance they are really the same. And the difference of words and expressions, and of the order of them, shews that what they all agree in must be genuine and true; and particularly that the holy Eucharist is, and was anciently esteemed to be the sacrifice of the Christian Church. I must also adver- tise my reader, that the words in the Baroccian copy included within the hooks, though they are written in the same hand and same ink with the rest of the manuscript, yet they have points made over against them at the left hand in the margin: which seems to denote that the copyist who so distinguishes them, suspected them not to be genuine, but inserted from the margin of some
words included in the parentheses are themselves written in the margin of the MS., but not in the same ink or hand, though in one nearly cotemporaneous ; the points mentioned by Hickes seem immaterial. The genuineness of the words does not seem suspected ; in fact a later hand has supplied what was omitted by the copyist.] The like sacrificial phrase for the Eucharist as προσφέρειν δῶρα, used by St. Clement in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, [c. 44. Patr. Apost., tom. i, p. 173; see above, p. 88, note x,] and in this prayer of consecration, is also used by Gregory Nazianzen in his oration at the consecration of Eulalius bishop of Doara in Cappadocia, [Orat. 13. ὃ 4. p. 254, C ; see vol. i. p. 89, notes t, u, | “Ὁ son of Dathan and Abiram (saith he in an apostrophe to some factious bishop) who durst rise up against Moses, and laid thy hands upon us, as they did their tongues upon him, the great servant of God; how hadst thou no horror? Wast thou not confounded ? And did not thy countenance fall to the ground, when thou thoughtest of these things? Durst thou after this hold up these hands to God? εἶτα δῶρα προσάξεις; Durst thou after this offer the gifts? Durst thou after this pray for the people?’’ With this ancient consecration prayer agree those in the modern Greek rituals, as may be seen in Goar’s Euchologium, pp. 302, 303, and Habertus, Lib. Pontif. Ecclesiz Greece, pp. 317, 318: δέσποτα κύριε [6 θεὺς ἡμῶν, 6 νομοθετήσας ἡμῖν διὰ τοῦ πανευφήμου σου ἀποστόλου Παύλου βαθ- μῶν καὶ ταγμάτων τάξιν, εἰς τὸ ἐξυπη- ρετεῖσθαι καὶ λειτουργεῖν τοῖς σεπτοῖς καὶ ἀχράντοις σου μυστηρίοις ἐν τῷ ἁγίῳ σου θυσιαστηρίῳ᾽ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους, k.T.A.—Ex ordine qui observari solet in ordinatione Episcopi. | “Ὁ Lord our God, who by Thy glorious Apostle St. Paul hast given a rule for degrees and orders to serve in the ministration of Thy venerable and immaculate mys- teries of Thy holy altar: as first Apo- stles,” ὅς. So; κύριε 6 θεὸς ἡμῶν, [6 διὰ τὸ μὴ δύνασθαι τὴν ἀνθρώπου φύσιν τὴν τῆς θεότητος ὑπενεγκεῖν οὐσίαν, τῆ σῇ οἰκονομίᾳ ὁμοιοπαθεῖς ἡμῖν διδασκά- λους καταστήσας, τὸν σὸν ἐπέχοντας θρόνον, εἰς τὸ ἀναφέρειν σοι θυσίαν καὶ προσφορὰν ὑπὲρ παντὸς τοῦ λαοῦ σου, σύ, κύριε, τοῦτον τὸν ἀναδειχθέντα oiKO- νόμον τῆς ἀρχιερατικῆς χάριτος ποιήσον
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- WOOD.
142
The Liturgies of the Latin Churches.
the Sacramentary of Gregory the Great*, where the Canon of the Mass (for mass of old, as well as pope, was a word of good and harmless signification) begins with this prayer: “ Wherefore, O most merciful Father, we humbly pray and beseech Thee, through Jesus Christ Thy Son our Lord, that Thou wouldst accept and bless these gifts, these presents, these holy pure sacrifices’, which we offer up to Thee for
Thy holy Catholic Church. .
.. . Wherefore, we beseech
Thee, that Thou wouldst graciously receive this oblation of our service, oblationem servitutis nostre, and of Thy whole family; quam oblationem, quesumus, benedictam, ad- scriptam, ratam, rationabilem, acceptabilemque facere digneris,
γενέσθαι μιμητήν σου, τοῦ ἀληθινοῦ ποι- μένος, τιθέντα τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ὑπὲρ τῶν προβάτων σου, ὁδηγὸν τυφλῶν, φῶς τῶν ἐν σκότει, παιδεύτην ἀφρόνων, διδά- σκαλον νηπίων, φωστῆρα ἐν κόσμῳ, ἵνα καταρτίσας τὰς ψυχὰς τὰς ἐμπιστευθεί- σας αὐτῷ ἐπὶ τῆς παρούσης ζωῆς, πα- ραστῇ τῷ βήματί σου ἀκαταισχύντως“, καὶ τὸν μέγαν μίσθον λήψηται ὃν ἡτοί- μασας τοῖς ἀθλήσασιν ὑπὲρ τοῦ κηρύγμα- τος τοῦ εὐαγγελίου cov.—lbid., pp. 318, 819.1 “0 Lord our God, who because the nature of man cannot bear Thy Di- vine presence, hast by Thy economy ap- pointed doctors of like infirmities with us (τὸν σὸν ἐπέχοντες θρόνον) to sit on Thy throne, and to ofter up unto Thee (θυσίαν καὶ προσφορὰν) a sacrifice and oblation for all Thy people: do Thou, O Lord, make this elected steward of the episcopal grace a follower of Thy true Shepherd, in laying down His life for Thy sheep; a guide to the blind; a light to those who live in darkness ; a preceptor of the ignorant; a teacher of babes; a luminary to the world, that when he hath reformed the souls com- mitted to his charge in this life, he may without shame present himself before Thy tribunal, and receive the great reward which Thou hast prepared for those champions who endure much contention in preaching the Gospel.” The same prayers are given in the place referred to in Goar. |
* [Sacramentary, or book of Sacra- ments, was the old name for the missal, which besides the canon of the mass contained a number of prayers and offices for particular days. These prayers St. Gregory (cire. A.D. 595) collected, arranged, remodelled, and added to. He inserted a short pas- sage into the canon, and joined the
Lord’s prayer to the canon, from which it had before been separated by the breaking of the bread. The canon itself, that is, the essential portion of the ser- vice, which is here quoted, remained unchanged. Hence the Sacramentary bore hisname. The Sacramentary ofSt. Gelasius, previously in use in the Latin Church, is referred to, pp. 144. There is a still earlier one, the Sacramentary of St. Leo, given in Muratori, Liturgia Romana Vetus, tom. i. pp. 294, sqq. Venet. 1748. The portion of the Li- turgy which bears on Hickes’ argument is, as will be seen, invariably the same. ]
Y [Te igitur, clementissime ac mise- ricors Pater, per Jesum Christum Filium tuum Dominum nostrum, sup- plices rogamus et petimus, uti accepta habeas et benedicas hee dona, hee munera, hee sancta sacrificia illibata, imprimis que tibi offerimus pro tua Ecclesia tua sancta Catholica, pacifi- care &c.... Hane igitur oblationem servitutis nostra, sed et cunctze familiz tue, quesumus, Domine ut placatus accipias, ... Quam oblationem tu Deus in omnibus quzsumus, benedictam, ad- scriptam, ratam, rationabilem, accepta- bilemque facere digneris: ut nobis cor- pus et sanguis fiat dilectissimi filii tui Domini Dei nostri Jesu Christi.—S. Gregorii Sacram. Op., tom. iii. col. 2, Β΄. ὮΙ 8. Coll
z Heec dona, hee munera, hee sane- ta sacrificia illibata——Menard. in lo- cum. Dona sunt, que voluntarie do- nantur: munera sunt, que pro aliquo munere vel mercede offeruntur, sicut nos offerimus Deo ut peccata nostra dimittantur: sacrificia sunt, que cum orationibus consecrantur. —[ Menard. not. 26, Op., S. Greg., tom. iii. col. 283, B.]
The Sacramentary of St. Gregory the Great. 143
ut nobis corpus, §c., which oblation we beseech Thee that it may please Thee to make blessed, appropriated, approved, rational, and acceptable, that it may be unto us the body and blood of 'Thy most beloved Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.” In the treatise de Sacramentis, falsely ascribed to St. Ambrose, but written by some orthodox author of the ninth century, the words of this prayer are these which fol- low*: Vis scire quia verbis celestibus consecratur? Accipe que sunt verba. Dicit sacerdos: fac nobis hanc oblationem adscriptam, {ratam, ed. Ben.] rationabilem, acceptabilem, quod sit in figuram” corporis, et sanguinis Domini nostri Jesu Christi. In this prayer to God to appropriate, ratify, and accept the elements to be offered, and thereby to become the figurative or mystical body and blood of Christ, the words benedictam and ratam are omitted; but in the present canon of the Roman Mass they are as in the Sacramentary of Gre- gory I.; “ Wherefore, O Lord, we Thy servants, and Thy holy people, being mindful of Thy Son our God, and of His blessed passion, also of His resurrection from the dead, and His glorious ascension into heaven, offer unto Thy glorious majesty’, hostiam puram, hostiam sanctam, hostiam immacula-
a S. Ambros. de Sacramentis, lib. iv. cap. 5. [Op., tom. ii. p. 371, B. This treatise is given as genuine by the Benedictine editors. Τὺ is however more generally rejected, and that by some Roman Catholic as well as Pro- testant writers. See Card. Bona de Rebus Liturg., lib. i. cap. 7. ὃ 4, who was first led to doubt its genuineness from its style differimg from that of St. Ambrose. He conceives however that it was cited as St. Ambrose’s in the eighth and ninth centuries ; in the controversy to which Hickes refers in the following note. ]
b This seems to shew that the author lived in the time of the controversy be- tween Paschasius Radbertus and Ber- tramus; the former of whom, as Bel- larminus de Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis confesses, was the first, ‘qui serio et copiose scripsit de veritate corporis et sanguinis Domini in Eucharistia.’
{ But Bellarmine adds, ‘ contra Ber- tramum presbyterum, qui fuit ex pri- mis qui eam in dubium revocarunt.’— Bellarmini Op., tom. vii. p. 288, A. Paschasius, monk and afterwards abbot of Corbey, composed his work, De cor-
pore et sanguine Domini, (Marten. Amplissima Collectio Veterum Scerip- torum, tom. ix. p. 378,) A.D. 831, and sent out a second edition A.D. 848, which was opposed by Bertram, in a work under the same title. It is to be observed that the Roman editions of St. Ambrose’s works read ‘quod sit in figuram corporis,’ the true reading is ‘ quod figura est corporis,’ and the Roman editors are accused of having introduced this reading, from which Hickes infers the late date of the trea- tise, without any MS. authority, to avoid the doctrine apparently implied in St. Ambrose’s words, The Bened. editors (notea, ad locum) say, ‘ communis lec- tio legitima est, nec vel transversam unguem a pio et catholico sensu ab- horrens.’ |
© [ Unde etmemores sumus, Domine, nos tui servi, sed et plebs tua sancta, Christi filii tui Dei nostri, tam beate passionis, necnon et ab inferis resur- rectionis, sed et in ccelos gloriosz as- censionis; offerimus majestati tuz, de tuis donis ac datis, hostiam puram, hostiam sanctam, hostiam immacu- latam, panem sanctum yite zterne,
CHAP, IL.
SECT. X.
144 Evidence from the ancient Latin Liturgies.
curistan tam, a pure, holy, and spotless sacrifice of Thy own gifts*
PRIEST- HOOD.
and benefits, the holy bread of eternal life, and the cup of everlasting salvation. Upon which, we beseech Thee, look with a propitious and serene countenance, and vouchsafe to accept them, as Thou didst receive the oblations of Thy righteous servant Abel, and the sacrifice of our patriarch Abraham, and the holy sacrifice, that immaculate host which Melchisedec Thy high-priest offered to Thee. And we humbly beseech Thee, Almighty God, command that these® (oblations) be carried up by the hands of angels unto Thy heavenly altar in Thy sight; that as many of us as have partaken of the body and blood of Thy Son at this altar may be filled with Thy benediction and grace, through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
So in the Codices Sacramentorum, published at Rome by Joseph Maria Thomasius, 1680, which are ancient offices, written about the latter end of the eighth century‘, in which, omitting all the prayers of the priest, I shall only cite the words in the Canon® of the celebration of the Eucharist, where, after Sursum Corda, &c. “ Lift up your hearts.” R. “ We lift them up untothe Lord.” “ Let us give thanks unto our Lord God.” R. “It is meet and right so to do;”’ then
et calicem salutis perpetuz; supra quz propitio ac sereno vultu respicere digneris, et accepta habere, sicut mu- nera pueri tui justi Abel, et sacrificium patriarche nostri Abrahz, et quod tibi obtulit summus sacerdos tuus Melchi- sedech: sanctum sacrificium, immacu- latam hostiam. Supplices te rogamus omnipotens Deus, jube hee perferri per manus sancti angeli tui in super- cceleste altare tuum, in conspectu di- vine majestatis tue, ut quotquot ex hac altaris participatione sacrosanctum filii tui corpus et sanguinem sumpse- rimus, omni benedictione ccelesti et gratia repleamur; per Christum Do- minum nostrum.—S. Greg. Op., tom. iii. col. 8, E. 4, A, B.]
d De tuis donis ac datis. See Me- nardus on the place, [note 62, Op., S. Greg., tom. iii. col. 288, D. Menard refers to the words in the Liturgies of St. Chrysostom and St. Basil quoted above, note k, p. 130. ἐκ τῶν σῶν σοι προσφέρομεν, and the adoption of the words in an inscription by the Emperor Justinian. |
e Jube hee perferri, viz. the bread
and wine, which therefore could not be the very body and blood of Christ, who is always in heaven.
f [The Liturgy from which Hickes now proceeds to quote was printed by Thomasius from a MS. from the queen of Sweden’s library, of a date earlier than the year 800. It has been proved by many arguments, and is now allowed to be the Sacramentary of St. Gelasius, bishop of Rome A.D. 492, which he is known to have arranged, and which continued in use till the time of St. Gregory the Great. See the preface of Thomasius; Muratori, Liturg. Rom. Diss., cap. v. p. 51; Cave, Hist. Lit., tom. i. p. 464; referred to by Palmer, Orig. Lit., vol. i. p. 116. It does not contain the words filioque in the Ni- cene Creed, and the Creed itself is given in Greek words, written in Latin characters, p. 55. |
& Lib. ili. p. 196. [Incipit canon actionis. Sursum corda, . Habemus ad Dominum. Gratias agamus Do- mino Deo nostro. ΒΚ. Dignum et justum est.
Et justum est, equum et salutare
The Sacramentary of St. Gelasius. 145
it follows, Ht justum est, equum, et salutare, &c. “It is meet, right, and for our comfort, that we should always, and in all places give thanks unto Thee, O Lord, Holy Father, Almighty and eternal God,” &c. Te igitur, clementissime pater, ber Jesum Christum filium tuum, &c. “ We therefore, most merciful Father, humbly pray and beseech Thee, through Jesus Christ Thy Son our Lord,” wtt accepta habeas, et benedicas hec dona, hec munera, hec sancta sa- crificia illibata, &c. “that Thou wouldst accept and bless these oblations, these gifts, these holy unspotted sacrifices, which in the first place we offer unto Thee for Thy Holy Catholic Church,’ &c. Hane igitur oblationem servitutis nostre, &c. “ We therefore pray Thee, O Lord, that it may please Thee to accept this oblation of our bounden duty and service, and of Thy whole family,” &c. Quam oblationem tu Deus in omnibus quesumus benedictam, ascriptam, &c. “Which oblation, we beseech Thee, O God, being blessed, appropriated, &c., Thou wouldst vouchsafe to make ac- ceptable, that it may be unto us the body and blood of Thy Son, our Lord and God, Jesus Christ.””’, And then, after the words of the Institution, Unde et memores, &c. ‘“ Wherefore, O Lord, we Thy servants, and also Thy holy people, being mindful of the blessed passion of Thy Son our Lord God,” &e. Offerimus preclare majestati tue de tuis donis ac datis hostiam puram, hostiam sanctam, hostiam immaculatam, &c. “ We offer unto Thy glorious Majesty of Thy own gifts and
nos tibi semper et ubique gratias agere, Domine sancte, Pater omnipotens, zterne Deus, &c. Te igitur clemen- tissime Pater,’ per Jesum Christum Filium tuum Dominum nostrum sup- plices rogamus et petimus: uti accepta habeas et benedicas hee dona, hee mu- nera, hee sancta sacrificia inlibata. In primis que tibi offerimus pro Ecclesia tua sancta Catholica: quam pacificare, custodire, adunare, et regere digneris toto orbe terrarum una cum famulotuo papa nostro illo, et antistite nostro illo episcopo. Memento Domine famulo- rum famularumque tuarum et omni- um circumadstantium ; quorum [10] fides cognita est, et nota devotio; qui tibi offerunt hoe sacrificium laudis pro se, Suisque omnibus, pro redemptione animarum suarum, pro spe salutis et incolumitatis suze; tibi reddunt yota
HICKES,
sua zterno Deo vivo et vero. ... Hane igitur oblationem servitutis nostra sed et cuncte familiz tue, quesumus Do- mine ut placatus accipias.... Quam oblationem tu Deus in omnibus que- sumus benedictam, ascriptam, ratam, rationabilem, acceptabilemque facere digneris: ut nobis corpus et sanguis fiat dilectissimi Filii tui Domini Dei nostri Jesu Christi. ... Unde et me- mores sumus, Domine, nos tui servi sed et plebs tua sancta, Christi Filii tui Domini Dei nostri tam beate passionis, necnon et ab inferis resur- rectionis, sed et in czlos gloriose as- censionis: offerimus preclare majes- tati tuze de tuis donis ac datis hostiam puram, hostiam sanctum, hostiam im- maculatam, panem sanctum vite eter- nz, et calicem salutis perpetuz. Supra que propitio ac sereno vultu respicere
CHAP. Ii.
SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRLIEST- HOOD.
140 Those things in which the ancient Liturgies do all har-
benefits, a pure, holy, immaculate sacrifice, the bread of eternal life, and the cup of everlasting salvation, upon which we beseech Thee to look with a propitious countenance, and to accept them as Thou didst the gifts of Thy righteous ser- vant Abel,” &c. To this I might add the Canon of fhe Eu- charistical action in the ancient Gallican Liturgy, published by Mabillon®, but because it is almost of the same with the former I omit it. Many collections and observations of the same kind might also be extracted out of the elaborate and useful volumes of the learned Benedictine, Edmund Mar- tene, de Antiquis Ecclesie Ritibus'. But having produced enough out of the ancient Liturgies to prove the sacrifice of the holy Eucharist from the harmonious agreement of them all in that point, I forbear to collect any more. Sir, I say the harmonious agreement of them all, to prevent cavil from such men as your late writer: for in whatsoever they all agree among themselves, and every one of them with the account we have of the Eucharist in Justin Martyr’s Apo- logy*, and in the twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth chap- ters of the Apostolical Constitutions', (which answer so ex- actly to the celebration of it, as described by Justin,) that must needs be primitive and apostolical, and the consenting suffrage, 1. 6. the consentient doctrine and practice of the ancient Catholic Church.
Of this sort were the salutation of the bishop or priest at the altar™, “The peace of God be with you all: and the people’s answer, “ And with thy spirit ;” the kiss of peace” ;
digneris, et accepta habere, sicuti ac-
πνεύματός σου. S. Marci, Renaudot, cepta habere dignatus es munera pueri
tom. i. p. 145. See also S. Chrysost.
tui justi Abel, &c.; as in the Canon quoted from St. Gregory’s Sacramen- tary, p. 144, note c.—Thomasius, pp. 196—198. Hickes’ translation “being blessed,”’ &c., seems incorrect. ]
4 [De Liturgia Gallicana libri iii. opera et studio Johannis Mabillon. ] Par. 1685. [See Palmer’s Orig. Lit. Dissert., sect. ix. vol. i. pp. 143, sqq. ]
1 [See lib. i. 6. 4. Art.12. De Singu- laribus Sacre Liturgiz Ritibus; where a large collection of Liturgies is given; tom. i. pp. 166, sqq. Antw. 1763. ]
k [See above, pp. 105,106, notes f,¢. |
' [See above, pp. 120—127. ]
™ [S. Jacobi Lit. Asseman., p. 8, ὁ κύριος μετὰ πάντων. καὶ μετὰ τοῦ
Lit. Goar, p. 80. 5. Basilii ibid., p. 165; the references are made to the above editions in the notes which fol- low.—Dominus vobiscum. Rx. Et cum spiritu tuo. S. Greg. Sacram. Op., tom. ili. col. 1, B. The Gelasian Sacramen- tary begins at the words Sursum Corda. See above, p. 144, g, For the corre- sponding passages in the Apostolical Constitutions, see above, pp. 122, sqq. ; and in St. Cyril, note x, p. 134. ]
" [ἀγαπήσωμεν ἀλλήλους ἐν φιλήματι ἁγίῳ. S. Jacobi, p. 20. See S. Marci, Ρ. 142. S. Chrysost., p. 75. S. Ba- silii, p. 165. This practice is not found in the Latin Liturgies. Ducange says of its disuse, Abrogatus osculorum pa-
moniously agree must needs be primitive and apostolical. 147
the priest’s washing his hands°® before he began the ministra-
tion; the μή τις κατά τινος, or monition”? of the deacon to -
the people, “that none should presume to communicate who had injured his brother’ and was not reconciled to him; the stemus cum timore4, or, charge to the communicants to “stand with fear and trembling before the Lord;” to offer the sancta sanctis’, “holy things to holy men;” the apostolical benediction of the bishop standing in his robes at the altar’: “The grace of Almighty God, the love of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all ;” to which the people answered, “ And with thy spirit ;’” then the Sursum Cordat, “ Lift wp your hearts ;” and the people’s answer, “ We lift them up unto the Lord ;” then, “ Let us give thanks unto the Lord ;” and the answer, “It is meet and right so to do:” to which the priest, “It is truly meet and
cis in ecclesia usus, inductusque alius, ut dum sacerdos verba hee profert, ‘ pax Domini sit semper vobiscum,’ diaconi vel subdiaconi imaginem quandam ad- stantibus clericis et plebi osculandum porrigaut, quam vulgari vocabulo pa- cem appellamus.—Ducange, Glossa- rium, tom. iv. p. 1404, Par. 1733. ]
° [εἶτα ἀπελθόντες εἰς Thy πρόθεσιν νίπτουσι τὰς χεῖρας, λέγοντες, νίψομαι ἐν ἀθώοις. (Ps. xxvi. 6, sqq.) 5. Chry- sost., p. 60. This occurs in the pre- paration for the Liturgy, which is not given in any of the other Greek Li- turgies; that of St. Basil refers to St. Chrysostom’s for this portion. Neither is this portion in the Sacramentary of St. Gregory or of St. Gelasius. In the Ordinarium Misse; ‘Sacerdos lavat manus, dicens; Lavabo inter inno- centes, &c.’ (Ps. xxvi. 6, sqq.) It may be added that besides the Prepa- ration the Liturgies themselves are di- vided into two parts; the Introduction, and the Anaphora or solemn prayer, containing the Preface, Consecration, &c.—Palmer, Orig. Lit., vol. i. p. 20.]
P [ Const. Apost., lib. 11. ο. 57. Conci- lia, tom. i. p. 297, and lib. viii. ο. 12, quoted above, p. 122, e. Corresponding monitions are found, S. Jacobi, p. 15; S. Marc., p. 141; S. Chrys., p. 70; S. Basilii, p. 162. This and the following portions are not found in the Liturgies of the Latin Church. ]
4 [στῶμεν καλῶς, στῶμεν μετὰ φό- βου: πρόσχωμεν τὴν ἁγίαν ἀναφορὰν ἐν
εἰρήνῃ προσφέρειν.----. Chrysost., p. 75.
S. Basilii, p. 165. στῶμεν καλῶς, or d- μεν εὐλαβῶς, στῶμεν μετὰ φόβου Θεοῦ καὶ καταύξεως-.--- ὃ. Jacobi, pp. 19, 31. ]
τ [τὰ ἅγια τοῖς aytows.—S. Jacobi, p. 53. 5. Marci, p. 161. 5. Basilii, p. 175. S. Chrysostomi, p. 81. ]
S [See above, p.122, note e. ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ 7 ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὺς, καὶ 7 κοινω- νία τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος εἴη μετὰ πάν- των ὑμῶν. ὃ χόρος. καὶ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύ- ματός cov.—S. Chrysost., p. 175. S. Basilii, p. 165. 5. Jacobi, p. 82. In the Liturgy of St. Mark the Sursum Corda is immediately preceded by the versicles, 6 κύριος μετὰ πάντων. καὶ μετὰ τοῦ πνεὐματός σου: the benedic- tion is reserved for the dismissal of the people, and occurs in an expanded form, p. 164. tom. i. ed. Renaudot. ]
t [6 ἱερεύς. ἀνὼ ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας. ὁ λαός. ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν κύριον. ὃ ἱερεύς. εὐχαριστῶμεν τῷ κυρίῳ. ὃ λαός. ἄξιον καὶ δίκαιον. 6 ἱερεὺς ἄρχεται τῆς ἄνα- φορᾶς. ἀληθῶς γὰρ ἄξιόν ἐστι καὶ δί- καιον, κ. τ. λ.---. Marci, p. 144. 5. Chrysost., p. 75. 8. Basilii, p. 165. S. Jacobi, p. 33.—Sursum corda. k. Habemus ad Dominum. Gratias aga- mus Domino Deo nostro. . Dignum et justum est. Vere dignum et justum est, &c, 8. Gelasii Sacra. Thomasius, p- 196. S. Gregorii, Op. tom. iii. col. 1, B.2, A,|—-S.Cyprian. de Orat. Dom. [Ideo et sacerdos ante orationem pre- fatione premissa parat fratram mentes dicendo,] Sursum corda, ut dum re- spondet plebs, Habemus ad Dominum,
iy!
CHAP, TI. _ SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD,
148 Points in which the Ancient Liturgies agree.
right,” &c. To these I must add the Hymnus Tersanctus", or, “ Holy, holy, holy,” &c., with. which they concluded their prayer of thanksgiving; the κρᾶμα, or mixture of water with the Sacramental wine, which with the bread they offered up, as hath been shewn’, to God the Father; the words of the Institution? ; the expressions of “ these gifts here set before Thee’, these gifts of which Thou standest not in need,” in the prayer of oblation; and after it, the prayer of the congregation to God, through Christ, for the offering?, “that of His goodness, through the mediation of Jesus Christ, He would please to receive it unto His heavenly altar for a sweet smelling savour.” To these again I must not forget to add the prayer in the consecration unto God the Father‘, “ to send down His Holy Spirit upon the sacrifice, to make the bread the (mystical) body, and the cup the (mystical) blood of Christ4.” This prayer is expressly in all the Greek Li- turgies, and virtually in the Latin®, where they pray to God
admoneatur nihil aliud se quam Do- minum cogitare debere.—p. 213. ed. Ben. |
u [S. Chrysost., p. 76. 5. Basilii, p. 166. S. Jacobi, p. 84. 5. Marci, p. 154. S, Gelasii, ubi supra. S. Grego- rii, ubi supra. |
x [S. Chrysost., p. 61. See note ἢ, p- 106. In the Latin Liturgy, Deinde ... Ministrat diaconus vinum, subdia- conus vero aquam in calice; vel si privata est missa utrumque infundit sacerdos, et aquam miscendam in ca- lice benedicit, dicens, &c. Ordinarium Missz. ]
y [See pp. 120, 129, sqq. ]
* [S. Chrysost., p.76. S. Basilii, p.
168. S. Jacobi, p. 36. S. Marci, p. 155. S. Gelasii, p. 197. S. Gregorii, col. 8, D.]
Ὁ [See above, notes, pp. 130, k; 133, s; 185, 6; and p. 128, 1.1
> [See above, pp. 126, q; 144, c; and S. Chrys. Lit., p. 79. 5. Basil, p. 164, (see above, p. 131, 0); S. Mark, p. 151; S. Jacobi, p. 29. In these three Liturgies this prayer precedes the consecration. }
¢ [See above, p. 97. S. Jacobi, p. 40. S. Marci, p. 157. S. Chrysost., p. 77. 8. Basilii, p. 166.]
ἃ See Dr. Grabe’s learned notes on cap. 11. lib. v. of Irenzeus, pp. 399, 400. {ed. Oxon. 1702. The first of the notes is on the words, ἥτις καὶ ἐκ τοῦ ποτη-
ρίου αὐτοῦ, ὅ ἐστι τὸ αἷμα αὐτοῦ, τρέ- φεται, καὶ ἐκ τοῦ ἄρτου, ὅ ἐστι τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ, αὔξεται: in which Grabe shews, by many references, in what sense the fathers held that the bread and wine were made the body and blood of Christ. The second is on the words προσλαμβανόμενος τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ, εὐχαριστία γίνεται. He explains τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ, not of the words of institution, but of the invocation of the Holy Spirit, whose power he maintains to be the principal cause in the conse- eration. |
6 [The words which “ virtually” con- tain the invocation of the Holy Spirit, in the Latin Liturgies, are those which have been quoted above, note y, p. 142; Quam oblationem tu Domine in om- nibus quaesumus benedictam, ascrip- tam, ratam, rationabilem, acceptabi- lemque facere digneris, ut nobis cor- pus et sanguis fiat dilectissimi Filii tui Domini Dei nostri Jesu Christi. They are found in the Sacramentary of St. Gelasius, Thomasius, Cod. Saer., p- 197, as they are still used, and that they imply an invocation appears from the doctrine that the consecration is effected by the operation of the Holy Spirit, (see above, pp. 96—98 and notes,) which is expressed in the fol- lowing words of St. Gelasius, (if the tract be really his, which is so much disputed) ‘In hane, scilicet in Divi-
Additions to the Liturgies ; the earliest ones. 149
to sanctify the gifts. The ancient Liturgies, how different
soever among themselves, agree in all these things with -
Justin Martyr’s account of the Eucharist’, and the Eucha- ristical office in the Apostolical Constitutions, which is the standard and test by which all the others are to be tried. And by comparing those with this, the innovations and ad- ditions in after times, be they good or bad, will appear. Among the innovations, Sir, some are more ancient than others; one of the ancientest of them I take to be the use of incense", mentioned in the third of the Apostolical Canons’, and in Hippolytus* de Consummatione Mundi et de Antichristo, in these words': πενθοῦσι δὲ καὶ ai ἐκκλησίαι, K.T.r. “ And there shall be great lamentations among the Churches, because there is no oblation or incense offered, nor any service acceptable to God.” But whoever this Hippolytus was, I think he could not be that Hippolytus Martyr, in the third century, mentioned by Eusebius™, who was the friend
nam, transeunt, Spiritu Sancto perfi- ciente, substantiam, permanente tamen in sue proprietate nature.’ S. Gelasii Tractatus contra Nestorium et Euty- chem. Biblioth. Patrum, tom. viii. p. 703, F. Lugd. 1677. ]
t [See above, pp. 105, 106. notes f,
g. ]
& [See above, pp. 122, sqq. That this Liturgy is not that of St. Clement of Rome, under whose name, as a part of the Apostolical Constitutions, it passed, is admitted; Mr. Palmer ob- serves that it is not of the family of the Latin Liturgies, but agrees most nearly with that of St. James, or the Liturgy of Antioch: he conceives that it was not the Liturgy of any particular Church; and as it was not in actual use it is without the addi- tions which were gradually introduced into the other Liturgies, and conse- quently, except such points as are mentioned note f, p. 123, it preserves to us the Liturgy as it existed at least in the fourth century. See the Origines Liturgice, vol. i. pp. 388—41. ]
4 (S. Chrysost., pp. 62, 68. 5. Ba- silii. S. Jacobi, pp. 3, 5, 16. S. Marci, pp- 137, 143.—In missa solenni cele- brans incensat altare, &c. Ordinarium Misse. ]
i [In this Canon incense at the time of the oblation is excepted from the general rule of not offering any thing but the bread and wine. μὴ ἐξὸν δὲ
ἔστω προσάγεσθαί τι ἕτερον εἰς τὸ θυ- σιαστήριον, ἢ ἔλαιον εἰς τὴν λυχνίαν καὶ θυμίαμα τῷ καιρῷ τῆς ἁγίας προσφορᾶς. —Canon. Apost. 38. Concila, tom. i. col. 25, B.]
k Bibl. Patrum, vol. ii. p. 357. Parisiis, 1624. [The references below are made to the edition of St. Hippoly- tus’ works by Fabricius. ]
1 [πενθοῦσι δὲ καὶ ai ἐκκλησίαι πένθος μέγα, διότι οὔτε προσφορὰ οὔτε θυμί- apa ἐκτελεῖται, οὔτε λατρεία θεάρεστοΞ" ἀλλὰ τὰ ἱερὰ τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν ὡς ὀπω- ροφυλάκιον γενήσονται" καὶ τὸ τίμιον σῶμα καὶ αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέ- pais ἐκείναις οὐκ ἀναφανήσεται. --- ὅ. Hippolyto tributus liber de consum- matione mundi et de antichristo, &c. c. 84. Op., App., p-21. There is another treatise of St. Hippolytus, de Christo et Antichristo, which is held to be genuine. |
™ [ἤκμαζον δὲ κατὰ τοῦτο πλείους λόγιοι καὶ ἐκκλησιαστικοὶ ἄνδρε" - - - Ἵππόλυτος, ἑτέρας που καὶ αὐτὸς προε- στὼς ἐκκλησίας. The period Eusebius is speaking of is about A.D. 280. Eu- seb. Hist. Ecel., lib. vi. ο. 20. tom. i. p. 284. τότε δῆτα καὶ Ἱππόλυτος συντάτ- των, μετὰ πλείστων ἄλλων ὑπομνημάτων, καὶ τὸ περὶ τὸ πάσχα πεποίηται σύγ- Ὑραμμα" after enumerating several of his works, not including the one here in question, he adds; πλείστά τε Kal ἄλλα καὶ παρὰ πολλοῖς εὕροις ἂν σωζό- peva.—Ibid., ο. 22. p. 286.]
CHAP. II. SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
150 St. Hippolytus de Consummatione Mundi not genuine.
of Origen": for who can believe that a father of that century could write in such a manner as this Hippolytus doth, viz., that Antichrist should be a devil really born of a strumpet, and yet not have a real body, but only in show and appear- ance°®; that among his other false miracles, he should remove. πα πεαΐπ, and whirl the sun about whither he pleased?; that those who suffered martrydom under his tyranny, should be more blessed and illustrious martyrs than those who suffered in ancient persecutions, because they overcame the devil him- self4: that St. John did not die’, and other false and vain conjectures and opinions, observed and censured by Dupin’ and Tillemondt. To which I might add some expressions, which do not savour of that age in which Hippolytus lived. As iepdpyat" for bishops, a word perhaps not used before the Pseudo-Dionysius, who wrote at the latter end of the fourth century*: such are the words in that address to Christ, od εἶ ὁ cuvdvapyos’, κ. τ. Δ. “ Thou art without beginning with the Father, and co-eternal (cvvaidvos) to the Holy Spirit.” Of the
n [λέγεται δὲ οὗτος Ἱππόλυτος καὶ élevé... Il γ᾽ a beaucoup de vaines con-
προσομιλεῖν τῷ λαῷ κατὰ μίμησιν ’Opr- γένους, οὗ καὶ συνήθης μάλιστα καὶ ἐρα- στὴς τῶν λόγων ὑπῆρχεν.--- Ρ]ιοίϊπι5, Biblioth. Cod. 121. p. 94. ed. Berolini, 1824. ]
ο [ὁ διάβολος ek pace γυναικὸς ἐξελεύσεται ἐπὶ τῆς vais” el Kar σάρκα ἀναλάβοι, ἀλλὰ ταῦτα ἐν δοκήσεί
. φανταστικὴν τῆς σάρκος αὐτοῦ οὐ- olay ἀναλήψεται dpyavov.—De Consum- matione Mundi, ο. 22. ib., p. 15.]
P [μεταστήσει Opn ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς τῶν θεωρούντων . .. τὸν ἥλιον μεταστρέψει ὕπου BovAerat.—Ibid., τς 26. p- 18. ]
4 [μακάριοι οἱ τότε νικήσαντες τὸν τύραννον, OTL παρὰ τοὺς πρώτους “μάρτυ- ρας ἐνδοξότεροι καὶ ὑψηλότεροι ἔ ἔχουσιν ἀναδειχθῆναι" οἱ γὰρ μάρτυρες πρῴην τοὺς αὐτοῦ ὑπασπιστὰς ἐνίκησαν" οὗτοι δὲ αὐτὸν τὸν διάβολον.---ἸὈϊά., c. 30. p. 20.1
r (That St. John did not die is not expressly said, but that he with Enoch and Elijah would be the precursors of our Lord’s second coming, ibid., c. 22. p. 14.]
5. Les livres d’Hippolite étoient in- titulez, De la Resurrection et de ]’An- tichrist, suivant le rapport d’Eusebe, et de S. Jerome: celui-ci est intitulé, de la Consummation du Monde, &c. Le stile est basse, et puerile, au lieu que celui d’Hippolite étoit grave, et
jectures sur la naissance, et sur la vie de l’ Antechrist. I] croit qu’il sera un démon; il dit que S. Jean n’est point mort, se qui est contraire a ]’ancienne tradition; il cite l’Apocalypse pour Daniel; il tient que les ames des hom- mes on esté de tout tems, ce qui revi- ent a l’opinion d’Origenes. Enfin ce traite est de tres peu d’utilité. [ Dupin, Bibliotheque des Auteurs Ecclesiasti- que, tom. i. p. 849. ed. 2. 1688. The passage quoted here is a note on the words; I] est fort incertain, si c’est le traité de l’Antechrist qui est attribué presentement a Hippolite, dont Eusebe fait mention.—Ibid., p. 345. ]
τ Tillemont’s Memoires, tom. iil. partie 2. notes sur S. Hippolyte, [note vi. p. 678. ed. 2. Paris, 1701. ]
υ [δεῦτε of ἱεράρχαι of λειτουργήῆσαν- τές μοι Gumuws.— De Consumm. Mund., c. 41. p. 25.
* {The Pseudo-Dionysius is placed by Cave about A.D. 362. (Hist. Lit., tom. i. p.225.) He and 5. Maximus who commented on his writings, are the only ecclesiastical writers quoted by Suicer on the word ἱεράρχης, tom 1. col. 1439. ]
Υ [σὺ ef ὁ συνάναρχος τῷ πατρὶ καὶ συναΐδιος τῷ πνεύματι.---Ἴ)6 Consumm.
Mundi, ο. 43. p. 26.]
Additions to the Liturgies ; some of them good. 101
same nature is that”: ““Come to the kingdom prepared for you, and enjoy it for ever from My Father which is in heaven, καὶ τοῦ Tavayiov καὶ ζωοποιοῦ πνεύματος, and the most holy quickening Spirit;” which shews that he must have lived after the second general council, which met at Constan- tinople to condemn Macedonius. And as for the third of the Apostolical Canons, that collection being of canons and customs of different ages, it is of no authority to prove that incense was offered, much less that it was offered up with prayer in the Eucharist, at least in the three first centuries, in the writers whereof there is no mention of it*. Another innovation is the oratio propositionis», or prayer at the pro- thesis, or table upon which the bread and wine was set and prepared for the holy altar. To which I may add the oratio velaminis*, or prayer upon removing the covering from off the mysteries: none of which are in the office of the Apostolical Constitutions.
Among the additions some are good, and some bad. And any man who is conversant in the history of the councils, may see how and when both the sorts were introduced into the Liturgies of the Church. Of the first sort is the word ὁμοούσιος“, in acknowledging the Son to be of the same sub- stance with the Father, which likely was not brought into the Liturgies before the first council of Nice®; the Constan- tinopolitan, commonly called the Nicene creed‘, which could not be introduced before the second general council, of Con-
z [δεῦτε εἰς Thy ἡτοιμασμένην ὑμῖν βασιλείαν ἀπὸ καταβυλῆς κόσμου" ἄπο- λαύσατε εἰς αἰῶνα αἰῶνος παρὰ τοῦ πα- τρός μου τοῦ ἐν οὐρανοῖς, καὶ τοῦ πανα- γίου καὶ ζωοποιοῦ mvevuatros.—lbid., ο. 44, p. 27.]
a [See a work entitled A Discourse concerning the use of Incense in Divine Offices, &c., by Henry Dodwell, Lond. 1711.)
Ὁ [ἡ εὐχὴ τῆς mpodécews.—S, Chry- sost., p. 63. S. Basilii, p. 158. S. Marci, p. 143. ]
© [ἢ εὐχὴ τοῦ καταπετάσματος. S. Jacobi, p. 80. See S. Chrysost., pp. 62, 63, where this prayer immediately precedes the one last mentioned, with which St. Basil’s Liturgy begins. |
a [S. Jacobi, p. 53. 5. Marc., p. 161. None of the following additions are found in the Roman Liturgy, except
the Nicene creed, the late introduction of which is ascertained. See Palmer, Orig. Lit., vol. ii. p. 55. ]
e [A.D. 325. ]}
f [πιστεύω εἰς ἕνα θεὸν, k.T.A.—S. Chrysost., p. 75. 85. Basilii, p. 165. S. Marci, p. 143. The first clauses only of the creed are given in the Liturgies: in the Liturgy of St. James, p- 18, the words ‘‘and of all things visible and invisible’ do not occur. “Tt is said that Peter Fullo, patriarch of Antioch, (excerpta ex Eccl. Hist. Theodori Lectoris, lib. ii. § 48. ap. Hist. Eccl., tom. iii. p. 582,) was the first who inserted the creed in the Liturgy, about A.D. 471. About the year 511 it was received into the Liturgy of Con- stantin ple by Timotheus, patriareh of that Chureh.’’—(Ibid., ὃ 32. p. 578.) Palmer, Orig. Lit., vol. ii. p. 54. ]
CHAP. IT,
SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
152 Alterations for the better ; their respective dates.
stantinople ; the benediction£ in the name of the “ holy, con- substantial, and adorable Trinity,” which must have come in after one of those two councils. The epithets added to the Holy Spirit in the prayer of oblation, in which they did not only call Him τὸν παράκλητον, τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας", “the Paraclete, the Spirit of truth,’ but τὸν Κύριον, τὸν ζωοποιὸν, “the Lord, the giver of life, who spake in the law, the prophets, and Apostles, and who worketh sanctifying grace in all, αὐτεξουσίως, οὐ Svaxovixds, by His own power, not as a minister, ἐκπορεύομενος ὁμοούσιος, avvOpovos, proceeding from the Father, being consubstantial to the Father, and sitting upon the same throne with Him, and His Son Jesus Christ.” This must have been added after the second general council of Constantinople, KATA TOV πνευματομάχων. In the same Liturgy is this invocation of Christ’ of the same date, Κύριος ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν, ἀκατάληπτε Θεοῦ oye, τῷ πατρὶ καὶ τῷ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι ὁμοούσιε, συναΐδιε, καὶ σὐναναρχε: “0 Lord our God, the incomprehensible Word of God, so one substance with, and co-eternal to the Father and the Holy Spirit, and without beginning, accept our hymn,” &c. So the expression), ἀτρέπτως ἐνανθρωπήσας, “who was made man not by conversion” (of the Godhead into flesh), must have been added after the fourth general council of Chalcedon*, against Dioscorus and Eutyches. So wheresoever we find the blessed Virgin called ἅγια Geotéxos'!, we may presume it was an addition brought in after the third general council at Ephesus™, against Nestorius, who not believing Christ to be
8 [καὶ ἔσται ἣ χάρις, Kal τὰ ἐλέη τῆς ἁγίας, καὶ ὁμοουσίου, καὶ ἀκτίστου, καὶ προσκυνητῆς τριάδος μετὰ πάντων ἡμῶν. —S. Jacobi, p. 52.]
h [See above, p 137, note τη. αὐτὸν τὸν παράκλητον, τὺ πνεῦμα τῆς ἄλη- θείας, τὸν ἅγιον, τὸν κύριον, τὸ ζωοποιὸν, τὸ ἐν νόμῳ καὶ προφήταις καὶ ἀποστό- λοις λαλῆσαν, τὸ πανταχοῦ παρὸν καὶ τὰ πάντα πληροῦν, ἐνεργοῦν τε αὐτεξου- σίως, οὐ διακονικῶς, ἐφ᾽ οὺς βούλεται τὸν ἁγιασμὸν εὐδοκίᾳ τῇ σῇ" τὸ ἁπλοῦν τὴν φύσιν, τὸ πλημερὲς τὴν ἐνέργειαν, τὴν τῶν θείων χαρισμάτων πηγήν᾽ τό σοι ὁμοούσιον" τὸ ἐκ σοῦ ἐκπορευόμενον, τὸ σύνθρονον τῆς βασιλείας σου, καὶ τοῦ μονογενοῦς σου υἱοῦ, τοῦ κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. -- S. Marci, p. 157; S.Jacobi, p. 39.]
i {S. Marci, p. 161; and with some slight variations in that of St. James, p- 53. The passage continues πρόσ- δεξαι τὸν ἀκήρατον ὕμνον, K.T.A. |
J [ὃ μονογενὴς υἱὸς καὶ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ ἀθάνατος ὑπάρχων, καταδεξάμενος διὰ τὴν ἡμετέρων σωτηρίαν σαρκωθῆναι ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας θεοτόκου καὶ ἀειπαρθένου Μαρίας, ἀτρέπτως ἐνανθρωπήσας, σταυ- ρωθείς τε, Χριστὲ ὃ θεὺς, θανάτῳ θάνατον πατήσας, εἷς ὧν τῆς ἁγίας τριάδος, συν- δοξαζόμενος τῷ πατρὶ καὶ τῷ ἁγίῳ πνεύ- ματι, σῶσον juas.—S, Jacobi, p. 6.]
ΕΑ). 4.61.7
1 [5. Chrysost., pp. 58, 61, 63. 8. Basilii, p. 167. S. Jacobi, pp. 6, 24. S. Marci, p. 150. ]
m (A.D. 431. |
Later alterations ; some for the worse. 109
God, would only call her χριστοτόκος, “the mother of Christ,” though, as the fathers of that council shewed®, she was called θεοτόκος by the writers of the Church in the ages before. And with these additions I may take notice of the alteration from the ancient form of oblation of the elements to God the Father, to the oblation of them to God the Son, as an acknowledgment of His Godhead, in the proper offices (as I have observed before? upon the Ethiopic Liturgy) for Christ- mas, Easter, and Ascension-day, which could not come, I think, into use till after the first council of Nice.
But then after the second council of Nice were introduced additions of the latter sort, [by some of which?] the Liturgies were most abominably corrupted, by commemorations‘, salu- tations", gratulations of the holy Virgin, and desiring to be heard through her intercessions’, and the intercessions of other saints. Among these additions I may also reckon their superstitious practices, as putting warm water‘ to the sacra- mental wine, saying prayers" at putting on every vestment in the robing of the priest, [impressing the sign of the cross” upon the bread*], and the late addition’ of σταυροθεοτόκος,
n [See Concilii Ephesini actio pri- ma; Concil., tom. 111. p. 1052, C. sqq. ; particularly the testimony of St. Atha- nasius, p. 1053, B. and St. Gregory Nazianzen, p. 1060, A. ]
© [See above, note n, p. 125.]
P [The words in brackets are substi- tuted for ‘‘whereby,”’ the reading of the third edition, from the MS. correc- tions in Hickes’ copy. See below, note ΧΗ]
4 [τῆς παναγίας, ἀχράντου, ὑπερευ- λογημένης, ἐνδόξου δεσποίνης ἡμῶν, θεοτόκου καὶ ἀειπαρθένου Μαρίας, μετὰ πάντων τῶν ἁγίων μνημονεύσαντες, Eav- τοὺς καὶ ἀλλήλους καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν ζωὴν ἡμῶν Χριστῷ τῷ θεῷ παραθώμεθα.--- S. Chrysost., pp. 65, 74. 5. Basilii, p. 159. S. Jacobi, pp. 13, 24, 61.]
τ [χαῖρε κεχαριτωμένη Μαρία, ὃ κύ- plos μετὰ σοῦ" εὐλογημένη σὺ ἐν γυναιξὶ, καὶ εὐλογημένος ὃ καρπὸς τῆς κοιλίας σου, ὅτι σωτῆρα ἔτεκες τῶν ψυχῶν ἡμῶν. This salutation is followed by a long address; S. Jacobi, pp. 44, 46. See also S. Chrysost., p. 78. }
5. [Χριστὸς 6 ἀληθινὸς θεὸς ἡμῶν ταῖς πρεσβείαις τῆς παναγίας, ἀχράντου, ὑπερευλυγημένης, ἐνδόξου δεσποίνης ἡμῶν, θεοτόκου καὶ ἀειπαρθένου Μαρίας, τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ τιμίον καὶ ζωοποιοῦ
σταυροῦ, καὶ πάντων τῶν ἁγίων, ἐλεήσαι ἡμᾶς ds ἀγαθὸς θεὸς, καὶ prrdvOpwros.— S. Chrysost., pp. 63, 68, 78, 88, 84, 85. S. Basilii, p. 170.]
τ [S. Chrysost., p. 82. notes, p. 148. ]
u [S. Chrysost., p. 59. This occurs in the preparatory portion of the ser- vice, which is adopted in the Liturgy of St. Basil from that of St. Chrysos- tom; but not printed in the copies of St. Basil’s or the other Liturgies.]
Υ [εἶτα σφραγίζει τὰ Sapa.—sS. Ja- cobi, p. 24. See also S. Chrysost., p. 76. 5. Basilii, p. 166. S. Jacobi, p. 34, 85. Marci, p. 154. ]
x [The words in brackets are substi- tuted for the reading of the third edi- tion, which was “‘making the sign of the cross upon the δῶρα, according to the correction in the Supplement of 1715, No. 12. For the reason of this altera- tion, and that noticed note p, see A letter from the Rev. Mr. J. M—n to Dr. G. Hickes, concerning some passages in his Christian Priesthood; with Dr. Hickes’ answer; published in the Sup- plement of 1715, and now reprinted at the end of the Appendix. ]
y Liturgia Ante-Consecratorum. Bibl. Patr., vol. ii. Paris. 1624. [See
See Goar’s
CHAP. 1.
SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HMOovD.
154 Catholic testimony to the Eucharist being a sacrifice.
“the mother of the crucified God,” to θεοτόκος, “the mother of God.” Thus, Sir, by animadverting upon the innovations, additions, and corruptions which have crept into the ancient Liturgies, I have thereby shewed you the Apostolical anti- quity, simplicity, and purity of the ancient Eucharistical office in the Apostolic Constitutions, and by consequence whatever the other Liturgies’ have in common with it and with one another, must be primitive and pure. In particular the harmonious testimony of them all with it, and with one another, and with the fathers, and councils, for the Eucha- ristical oblation, is such a proof for the truth of it, that he that will not submit to such concurrent evidence, may bring into controversy (not to mention other things received by the Church in all ages) the Divine authority of the inspired writings, infant baptism, episcopacy, the Lord’s day, and even the divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and so at once blow up the Catholic faith and Church. I wish, Sir, your late author, and such men would consider this, and not give such advantage to deists and sceptics, by standing out against such a noble tradition, as is supported by anti- quity, universality, and consent.
Thus, Sir, I have gone through the fathers, and councils, and ancient Liturgies to prove the Eucharist to be a real oblation or sacrifice, and by consequence that the ministers of it are proper priests, as the bishops and presbyters of the ancient Catholic Church thought, and taught themselves to be, according to that of St. Cyprian de Oratione Dominica’, Quando in unum cum fratribus convenimus, et sacrificia divina cum Dei sacerdote celebramus. But as men biassed by precon- ceptions are apt to object, so such men as your late writer taking the notion of a sacrifice from Dr. Outram, who is a great author with them, object his definition of a sacrifice to
above, note t, p. 139. The word oravpo- @cordxos does not occur in this Liturgy ; nor, it is believed, any where else. Hickes inferred its existence from the word σταυροθεοτόκιον, which occurs with θεοτόκιον in arubriec of the Liturgy referred to, (p. 89, C.) which enjoins the recitation of θεοτόιειον καὶ σταυρο- θεοτόκιον. These are addresses to the Blessed Virgin, the latter being a θεο- τοκίον, or commemoration of St. Mary,
in connection with the cross; like the Stabat Mater of the Latin Church. See the Menzum, Februar., p. 113. Venet. 1843. Suicer explains the word thus; σταυροθεοτόκιον vocatur, ubi non tan- tum beate Virginis, sed et passionis Christi mentio est; multa σταυροθεοτό- kia occurrunt in Menologiis.—Thesaur. Kecl., in voe, tom. ii. col. 1001. ]
5. [S. Cypr. de Orat. Dom., Op., p. 205, ed. Ben. ]
Objection derived from Outram’s definition of a Sacrifice. 155
the sacrificial notion of the holy Eucharist, which they truly say do not agree together; and therefore I must acknow- ledge, that either he is mistaken in his definition, or that the ancient Church hath erred in the sacrificial conception they had of the holy Eucharist, which must be false, if the Doctor’s definition or description of a sacrifice be strictly true. Where- fore, Sir, before I proceed to my other proofs of the Christian priesthood, you must give me leave to examine Dr. Outram’s definition of a sacrifice, which they oppose to the sacrificial idea the ancients had of the holy mystery, and I here give it you in his own words, which you will find in the eighty- second page of his book. A sacrifice, saith he, may be thus defined, ut sit προσφορὰ rite consumpta. Seu ut paulo explicatius dicam, sacrificium apud populum Hebreum ejus- modi sacrum erat, quod cum Deo oblatum erat, tum rite con- fectum et consumptum; that is in English, ‘‘A sacrifice is an oblation rightly* consumed. Or that I may speak more plainly, a sacrifice among the Hebrews was such a holy thing, as was both offered to God, and rightly destroyed and con- sumed.” Now, say they, this definition of a Jewish sacrifice is not applicable to the holy Eucharist, in which there is nothing consumed, nor poured out either upon the Lord’s table or at the bottom of it, as was usual for the blood to be poured upon the altar, in order to make an atonement for sin, or to be sprinkled round about upon the altar; nor is there any wine poured out on the Lord’s table, or upon the bread, as it was formerly upon the sacrifice; nor are there any re- mainders of our blessed Lord’s natural body, who was sacri- ficed, to be taken by the communicants: how therefore the Sacrament, wanting these sacrificial rites, should come un- der the notion of a sacrifice (saith the objector) I cannot conceive.
Sir, I have given you the words of the objection, as I re- ceived them, and 1 shall lay several answers to it before you, and leave you to judge whether they are satisfactory or not. First, then, I pray you to consider, that the ancient writers of the Church knew the nature of sacrifices, both Jewish and Gentile, as well as any Christian writers since the Reforma- tion; and yet, as I have often observed, and sufficiently
a Or ‘ritely,’ i. e. according to the holy rites appointed by God.
CHAP. II, SECT, X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
156 The Early Christians understood the nature of a sacrifice.
shewed, they were so far from apprehending any incon- sistency between the notion of a sacrifice, and the nature of the holy Eucharist, that they believed» and thought it to be a pure commemorative sacrifice, foretold by the prophets, and instituted by Christ, and solemnly offered it as such. Secondly, I must intreat you to consider, that Dr. Outram’s definition of a sacrifice, is, as he confesseth, of a Jewish or Levitical sacrifice, and doth it follow, from his definition, that every thing that belongs to a Jewish sacrifice, or the defini- tion of it, must belong to the Christian oblation of bread and wine, which was appointed instead of all the Levitical sacri- fices, or else that it cannot be such? ‘The law is changed, and the priesthood is changed, as the Apostle observes in his Epistle to the Hebrews; and with them the altar and sacrifice is changed too, as St. Ireneeus saith m the words I cited before in the margin’; “ God hath not rejected oblations, but as they had oblations, so have we ; there were sacrifices among that people, and there are sacrifices in the Church, the species (or kind) of sacrifices being only changed.” Wherefore since the Christian religion is another sort of religion, different in so many things from the Jewish, is it reasonable to try and examine the one external sacrifice of that religion so nicely and strictly by that definition of a Jewish sacrifice? or to reject it as a sacrifice, because it doth not in every point agree with that test? Wherefore supposing the formal reason of a sacrifice in the Jewish Church consisted in the destruc- tion and consumption of the oblation, or some part of it, upon the altar, or at the bottom of it, must it of necessity be so in the Christian religion, which hath changed the rites, and re- duced the number of sacrifices to one, and altered the whole frame of the Jewish or Levitical worship, which Dr. Outram hath described? For the same reason, as I observed upon another occasion‘, they may deny our Churches, where the Christian sacrifice is offered, to be temples, because Ben. Maimon’s, or the Doctor’s description of the Jewish temple is
» Petrus de Marca de Sacrificio renda erat, a Malachia pranuntiata Misse: Hoe est novum Christianze testantur.—[ Petri de Marea Disserta- - legis externum sacrificium, ut summo ___tiones Posthume, pp. 94, 95. ] consensu docent omnes antiqui Patres, © [See above, p. 80, note i. } nemine dempto, qui hane esse obla- d [See above, p. 32. ] tionem mundam, que toto orbe offe-
Jewish rites accidental, and changed with the religion. 157
not applicable to them; or that the true notion of Divine worship belongs to the Christian way of worshipping God, because it is so different from that of the Jews. There were many other rites belonging to Jewish sacrifices, besides destruction and consumption, in whole or in part, at the altar, as heaving and waving in the therumahs and thenu- phas®, and eating or participation of the things sacrificed, either by the priests alone, as in the sin-offerings and trespass-offerings, or by the offerers as well as the priests, as in the peace-offerings, which of all Levitical sacrifices the Eucharist most resembles; and by consequence, from this objection brought against the Christian sacrifice, the ob- jectors may also, if they please, say that the holy Eucharist cannot be such, because it is not held up to heaven, or waved towards the four corners of it, as well as because it is not in whole or in part consumed upon the altar. But though it hath not these, it hath many other sacrificial rites belonging to it ; for the bread and wine are brought to the Christian temple and altar, and delivered to the Christian cohen, or minister, who stands on God’s part to receive them of the people, and on the people’s part to offer them up for them to God; and when the oblation is finished, both priest and people together participate of the offerings at God’s table, which signifies, as it did in the Jewish religion, that the communicants are in a state of favour and friendship with God. I would fain ask these gentlemen, if these three holy rites, without others, and especially without destruction and consumption in the Jewish manner, are not by God’s appointment, who is the arbiter of religious rites and ceremonies, sufficient to make a sacrifice? If they will say they are not sufficient, let them give their reasons for it. But if they will acknowledge they are, then let them no more deny the holy Eucharist to be a true and proper sacrifice, because Dr. Outram’s definition of a Jewish sacrifice is not applicable to it.
But, Sir, in the third place a good reason may be given from the Jewish. law of sacrifices, why neither the bread nor wine of the holy Eucharist, nor any part of them, is so con- sumed; and that is, because the Christian Church hath no
€ [ADIN and AHN, therumah for the heave-offering, and the wave- and thenupha, are the Hebrew words offering. See Lev. vii. 34. |
CHAP, IL.
SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST=- HOOD.
158 Mode of consumption different in the Christian Church.
Scripture or tradition for such consumption of any part of them, and by consequence hath no such altars, nor stands in need of any such altars as the Jewish had, for the consump- tion of her offerings. Those altars were the great brazen altar without the house of the temple, in the inner court thereof, and the golden altar of incense in the holy place. And therefore the Christians, having no such Levitical rites for consumption of the elements in the Jewish manner and after the Jewish forms, they have no occasion for such altars to consume them at, or upon. The same fabric serves them both for altar and table, and as I have shewed in different respects was, and was deemed, both the one and the other, as the Jewish altar was’.
I might add in the fourth place, in answer to this ob- jection, that by reason of the straight mystical union and conjunction between the sacramental and natural body and blood of Christ, or between the represented and represen- tative sacrifice, the wine of the holy Sacrament, which is the mystical and putative blood of sprinkling’, was, and always is in full effect poured out and sprinkled, as that was upon the cross, by virtue of the Divine institution whereby the bread and wine are substituted, and deputed" in the Lord’s Supper for His body and blood, and in virtue of that deputation are to be deemed, taken and esteemed as His natural body and
f [See above, pp. 72, sqq. ]
8 De Marca de Sacrificio misse. Necesse non est, ut rationem cujusque sacrificii in victimz mactatione vel interitu hostiz constituamus; cum sufficiat sola rei sensibilis ad honorem Divini Numinis ex ipsius decreto dicate oblatio, que illi a ministro publico nuncupatur, ut sacrificium dicatur. Quamvis in sacrificio Eucharistico non desit quoque suo modo mysticus vic- time interitus, si quis hane quoque conditionem in sacrificii veri ratione desideret.—[ Dissertationes Posthume, p- 96. ]
h Mr. Thorndike of Religious As- semblies, pp. 357, 858. Camb. 1642. “The creatures of bread and wine are deputed to the effect of becoming the body and blood of Christ..... It seem- eth unquestionable that the thanks- giving, [wherewith our Lord in the Gospel is said to have celebrated this Sacrament at His last Supper], con- tained also prayer to God for the effect
to which the elements, when they ke- came this Sacrament, are deputed... In the true sense of the Church they are consecrated, that is, deputed to be this Sacrament. . . . Let me suppose in the first place, that the elements by be- ing deputed,” &e. [| Thorndike’s Works, vol. i. pp. 842, 848. Oxford, 1844. ]
' Poynet’s Diallacticon, p. 33. Hoe corpus, hune sanguinem [et carnem, hane substantiam corporis, ] non com- muni more, nee ut humana ratio dic- tat, accipi oportere, sed ita nominari, existimari, credi, propter eximios quos- dam effectus, virtutes, [et proprietates conjunctas, quz corpori et sanguini Christi natura insunt, nempe quod pascat animas nostras, &c.—Diallac- ticon viri boni et literati de veritate nature atque substantiz corporis et sanguinis Christi in Eucharistia. This tract was published in 1557, and sup- posed to be written by John Poynet, Bishop of Winchester; it was reprinted in 1688. }
Mystical and putative character of the Sacrifice. 159
blood. This power in legislators of making and supposing car. n. things to be to all intents and purposes and effects in law ----- what in reality they are not, is called by the civil law ‘ fiction ;? but it is such fiction as is invented to produce real and true effects for the benefit of those for whose sake it is by au- thority devised. Thus many of the Roman laws imagine a child in the womb to be born*, and a man who lives or dies in captivity, to have lived or died at home’, and therefore the maxims of fiction are such as these™: fictio imitatur naturam ; fictio inducitur, ut suppleat id in quo desideratur facti veritas, ut ex ea producantur veri juris effectus ; and, fictio juris tantum operatur, quantum veritas, or, fictio tantum valet in re ficta, quantum veritas in re vera. There is no law or government without such fictions; ours hath many of them, as when it supposes and imagines our captive or exiled kings, to whom it allows jus postlimind, to be all the time of their absence in possession of their thrones. So it is in the case of the king’s putative or virtual presence, the law supposing him at the same time to be present, not only in every room of his palace, but in all his courts of judicature, and im all the places of his dominions, though his real person can be but in one at a time. So, in virtue of legal substitution, the procurator or attorney is his principal, the ambassador his king, and the sentence of the judge the king’s sentence. In like manner, Sir, there are fictions in divinity, which infinite wisdom and goodness hath devised for our benefit and advantage. Thus Gen, 2. 24. man and wife are supposed to be, and therefore are, made one flesh, as the law makes them one person. Thus Christ is supposed to be the Lamb slain from the foundation of the Rev. 13.8. world; thus Abraham’s believing of God was imputed unto Rom.3, 12. him for righteousness, and by this putative, or imputative righteousness, he was as righteous in God’s account as if he had never sinned. Thus also are the faithful still justified by
k [ Digest., lib. l. tit. 17. De diver- sis regulis juris antiqui. ὃ 187. Si- quis pregnantem uxorem reliquerit, non videtur sine liberis decessisse. Justin Instit., lib. i. tit. 13. § 4. Post- humi pro jam natis habeantur.’’ This note is added from the Supplement of 1715, No. 13.]
1 [ Instit., lib. i. tit. 12. § 5. Post- liminium fingit eum qui ab hostibus
captus fuerit, in civitate semper fuisse. So by the ancient Roman laws parents emancipated their children by imagi- nary venditions, which Justinian calls fictionem pristinam. Instit., lib. i. tit. 12. ὃ 6. De emancipatione.”’ From the Supplement of 1715, No. 13.]
m [See Tuschi, Practice Conclu- siones Juris, tom. iii. pp. 441, sqq. Lugd. 1634. ]
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- noop.
Rom. 8. 84,
Rom. 8. 17.
160 Union of the Eucharistic Sacrifice with that of the Cross.
Divine imputation, as it is written, “It is God that justi- fieth, who is he that condemneth?”’ Thus also the doctrine of adoption is a Divine fiction in the Gospel, as it was a human fiction in the Roman civil law, and in both cases hath all the effects of real and legitimate sonship. And therefore in answer to these men’s objections, I hope it is no great or dangerous paradox to say, that by Divine fiction, or substitu- tion, the bread is made the body, and the wine the blood of Christ in the holy mystery, and that by virtue of this sub- stitution and mystical union between them, His body is supposed and deemed to be broken, and His blood shed and sprinkled in the holy Sacrament, as it was upon the cross; or in other words, that the offering and breaking of the bread is supposed to be the offering and breaking of His body, and the pouring out of the wine, the effusion and sprinkling of His blood; and in this mystical union and relation be- tween them, and real identity as to all spiritual virtues and effects, the mystery of the holy Eucharist doth consist.
Sir, I have said allthis upon supposition that Dr. Outram’s definition of a Jewish sacrifice, as these objectors suppose, is general, adequate, and just. But they are much mistaken in arguing from it, as such; because it is not a definition of a Jewish sacrifice in general, but of one sort and species of it”, as any man will be convinced who will peruse Dr. Bright’s accurate tables of Jewish sacrifices or oblations, in which he will find sacrifices distinguished into those which were con- sumed, and those of which nothing was consumed®. Dr.
" [There is considerable obscurity in the argument of the following passage, and a seeming want of accuracy in Hickes’ use of authorities. In this fifth answer to the objection, the question be- tween Hickes and Outram is, whether consumption (partial or entire) is neces- sary to constitute a Jewish sacrifice. This leads to the further question, to what offerings was the term sacrifice pro- perly applicable. Outram distinguished between an oblation, the general term, and sacrifice, the specific name, ac- cording to his view, for consumed obla- tions. Hickes held sacrifice and obla- tion to be synonymous. The difficulty as respects his references is, that he al- leges against Outram, and as agreeing with himself, authorities who call par-
ticular offerings corbans, for which he substitutes the term sacrifices, which he himself held to be equivalent to it, which Outram denied, thus assuming the point in dispute. It ought to be added that jap in the Rabbinical writers is very frequently translated sacrificium, as by Buxtorf, (see below, p- 169,) and by Outram, as observed p- 162, note u. |
° [ What Hickes here refers to are very large broad sheets, containing tables of the laws of Moses and of the Jewish sacrifices, published in London in 1680, under the title, Tabula Mosaice due, quarum altera precepta legis Mosaice commoda methodo disposita; altera oblationum omnium ex efficiente, ma- teria, consumptione, personis, signifi-
Outram’s definition of Jewish sacrifices too narrow. 161
Outram therefore gives us too narrow a definition ; a defini- CHAE ἘΣ tion of the species, and not of the genus, and by consequence ———— in their way of arguing, excludes not only the holy Eucharist,
but many Jewish oblations from the nature and notion of sacrifice, as the offering of the first-fruits, of which it is said,
Levit. ii. 12, “ As for the oblation of the first-fruits, ye shall
offer them unto the Lord, but they shall not be burnt? on the
altar for a sweet savour.” This oblation is called cordan in the
text, the general word among the Hebrews for an oblation
or sacrifices, and is used in speaking of offerings by blood
and slaughter, as well as other things. And Maimonides’ reckons it among the sacrifices which were neither in whole
nor in part consumed. It also excludes the red heifer out
of the number of proper sacrifices (Numb. xix.) though it was brought to Eleazar, chief of the priests, and slain before his ver. 5. face, and he took of her blood with his finger, and sprinkled
it directly before the tabernacle seven times, and had the ver. 6. whole essence of a piacular and expiatory sacrifice, as the
Jews observe’; in a word, though it was one of the most Heb. 13.11. eminent types of the expiatory sacrifice of Christ upon the
cross, yet Dr. Outram by the restrictions of his own defini-
tion, excludes it out of the number of sacrifices, because it is
not called coréan, and slain at the altar as other sacrifices
were. The learned Bishop Patrick, in his commentary*t upon
catu, tempore, distributiones varias con- _first-fruits to be a corban, or oblation, tinet. Authore Georgio Bright, S.T.P. but nota sacrifice; defining a sacrifice Cantabrigiensi. The passage referred (asabove)asa species of corban, namely to is, Tabula ii. p. 1. Divisio iii, Ex “προσφορὰ rite consumpta.’—De Sacri- adjuncto absumptionis ; in quibusdam ficiis, lib. 1. cap. 8. ὃ 1, 2. p. 82, and enim, 1. Partes omnes penitus con- § 10, p. 92; where he says, primitie
sumpte... 2. Tota caro etexta... ille, προσφοραὶ seu ferta recte dici posse 3. Interiora tantum quedam... 4. Ni- videntur; utpote que ante aram sta- hil, uti in pane facierum p55 On tuende erant. On this whole subject appellato... It should be added that see the extracts made by Bp. Cosin, Bright speaks of oblationes: he rarely vol. i. pp. 108, 111—113.]
uses the word sacrificia, and he uses τ De cultu Divino, v. Tract. ο. 13. oblationes as equivalent to corbans. ] [There is not any reference to this sub-
P Vatablus, in Lev. ii. 12, Nonim- ject in Tract. v. cap. 13, but in Tract. ponentur altari, ut incendantur exspi- ν΄. cap. 2. ὃ 13, Maimonides says, Liba- rature nidorem Domino; quia debent mina non sumebantur nisi de commu- quidem offerri Deo primitiz, sed non nibus; non igitur sumebantur nec de debent adoleri, quod cedant in cibum oblatione, nec de decimis, nec de pri- sacerdotum.| Crit. Sacr., tom. ii. col.20.] —_mitiis.]
7 (Lev. 11. 12. Hebr. ΟΝ Ἢ jap 5. [See note τι, p. 162.]
ya pn. + For instances of corban used τ [Patrick’s words on the sprink- generally for things offered, see above, ling of her blood, Numb. xix. 4, are, note x, p. 42. Outram admitted the ‘‘Though this was not a sacrifice, yet
HICKES. M
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Ley. 16.17.
ver. 5.
162 Outram’s definition excludes the red heifer, and the
the place, favours this opinion of Dr. Outram", against Abar- banel, who calls the red heifer an offering for sin. And as the testimony of that Rabbi, as to the nature and notion of sacrifices is great, so Dr. Bright, who is of the same opinion, reckons it among the animal sacrifices, and with a respectful correction of Dr. Outram’s opinion, thinks it ought to be called a corban, or sacrifice, as you may see by his words in the margin’. It likewise excludes the scape-goat out of the number of sacrifices, because it was not slain and consumed by fire like the other goat, although they were both alike presented before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle, and both alike were presented for the same use and for the same end, to make atonement*. Nay, though the scape-goat, after
it had something of that nature in it, and may be called a piaculum, an expiatory thing: though nothing was called corban, a sacrifice, but what was offered at the altar, as our Dr. Outram hath most justly observed against Abarbanel, who calls this red cow an offering for sin.’””—A Commentary on the Historical Books of the Old Testa-
‘ment, vol. i. p. 632. Lond. 1809. |
ἃ [Outram’s words are ‘ Erat,’ inquit Abarbanel (ad Numb. xix.),‘ Vacca rufa
ΓΝ Π 2D IYI NNN 12 Ρ sacrificium piaculare totius ccetus.’ Et paulo post ‘erat, mea sententia, vacca rufa sacri- ficium pro toto ccetu filiorum Israelis,
sw 52 ΠῚ $5 sya yaqp) quo mundarentur a funeris pollutione, ne- quando forte sanctuarium, ejusve sacra inquinarent.’ Cujus ego sententiam ita probo, ut vaccam illam piaculum, aut sacrum piaculare, recte quidem dici posse, at 1), ex sacre Scripture usu minime dici posse judicem. Neque enim jp dici solet nisi quod Deo pro ara ejus ritu solemni offerebatur.— De Sacrificiis, lib. i. ο. 14. pp. 152, 153. It will be observed that Hickes wrongly represents Outram as saying “ because it is not slain at the altar;’’ Outram denied it to be a corban, because it was not “offered ” at the altar. It will also be observed that he admits it to be a “sacrum piaculare,’’ as he says also ὁ. 8. ὃ 2. p. 83; classing with it the bird killed in the purification of the leper, Lev. xiv. 5. Abarbanel calls it 12.» corban, which Outram himself translates sacrificium. ]
* Hane enim et 12 ‘ oblationem’
dici posse puto; aliter ac doctissimo Outramo et in istis scriptori diligen- tissimo visum est, (Libro de Sacrifi- clis, 1. cap. 14.) quippe cujus sanguinis coram tentorio conventus aspersio Deo offerendi aliquid ritus haberi debeat, etiamsi ea ipsa nunquam are admota fuerit: Id quod in agno paschali mani- festum; is etenim, etiamsi nunquam pro ara sisteretur, sed aspersum dun- taxat super altare sanguinem haberet, et quidem juxta Judeorum nonnullos evaporatum adipem, oblatio tamen Dei, MM JI dicitur, Num. ix. 7, 13. [Bright, Tabule Mosaice, Tabula ii. γ. 1. Diveniel
x Fagius in Ley. xvi. 8. Hircus super quem ascendit sors pro Sosery
Azazel, statuatur vivus coram Domino, ut per eum expiationem faciat...Grzcus
interpres pro voce Hebraica Srey Azazel posuit ἀποπομπαῖον, quo nomine Greci vocant malorum depulsorem. Hine et Deos, quos coluerunt ad depel- lenda mala, vocarunt ἀποπομπαίους, ἢ ἀποτροπαίους, aut etiam ἀλεξικάκους. Respexerunt ergo Greci eo, quod iste caper peccata populi, causam omnium malorum, in desertum auferret. Ponti- fex enim imprecabatur confessione sua capiti hujus capri omnia peccata Is- raelitarum, et emittebat eum postea in desertum, ut esset pro omnibus pecca- tis totius Israelitici populi expiatio. Hoe recte dicitur ἀποπομπαῖον esse ad auferenda, et expianda peccata populi. —([Crit. Sacr., tom. ii. pars ii. col. 251. ]
scape-goat from the number of proper sacrifices.
163
the lot fell upon him to be sent away, was presented alive before the Lord a second time, and so was twice consecrated and devoted to God, to remove the sins of the congregation far from Him, and as it were to carry them out of His sight ; yet for all this Dr. Outram will not allow it to be a proper sacrifice, because it was not consumed’ according to his narrow definition, which is perfectly contrary to the opinion of Maimonides’, and I believe of all other Jewish writers, who reckon both goats alike among the number of sacrifices, as do also our own writers, Mr. Ainsworth?, Bishop Patrick”, and Dr. Bright*, who also reckons both goats among the public sacrifices of the Jewish Church.
y [Outram says that the scape-goat was a corban; and in his division of corbans or oblations he puts this first ; Eorum autem que Deo pro ara offere- bantur, alia dimissa et ablegata, ut hireus in deserta ductus; (De Sacrif., lib. i. c. 8. § 1. p. 81.) And again, after mentioning several things which were offered and consecrated but not con- sumed, and therefore, according to his definition, not sacrificed, he concludes, quod idem quoque statuendum de hir- co isto qui Deo ante aram oblatus in deserta vivus abducebatur.—Ibid., p. 82. After this he proceeds; Jam vero quz Deo ante aram, vel in mensa sacra in adyto exteriori posita, ita quidem of- ferrebantur ut rite consumenda essent, ea Judei in numerum sacrificiorum censum referunt.— 3. ibid. Outram, it seenis, admitted the first-fruits and scape-goat to be oblations, but not sacrifices; and the red heifer to be in one sense a sacrifice but not an obla- tion, (corban). Hickes’ authorities only shew that these were all corbans. ]
2 [Maimonides,] de Cultu Divino, Tract. viii. [de solemni die Expiati- onis, cap. i. ὃ 1.7 Preeterea autem de publico offerebantur hirci duo [quorum alter, immolatus in hostiam pro pec- cato cremabatur, alter vivus emitte- batur in solitudinem.] Itaque ad diem illum sacrificabantur bestiz quinde- cim: jugia sacrificia duo, juvencus, [duo arietes, agni septem, et hi omnes in holocausta.] Przeterea hirci duo in hostiam pro peccato: [ quorum alterius sanguis respergebatur altari exteriori ..+ alterius autem sanguis resperge- batur intus in sancto p.330. The two goats, ‘hirci duo,’ then, do not refer to
the two goats on which the lots were cast, as Hickes seems to have supposed, and as the portions of the passage as it was printed by him would imply. The former is the goat for a sin-offering, mentioned Numb. xxix. 11, which Mai- monides mentioned some lines before ; the latter the fellow of the scape-goat. Maimonides does not therefore reckon the scape-goat among the number which were sacrificed, but rather excludes it ; offerebantur probably means brought near, implying that it is an oblation, as Dr. Bright calls it. ]
a [Ainsworth on Lev. xvi. 5, com- menting on the words which speak of both as a sin-offering, says, “ figuring Christ, who should be a sin-offering for His Church, ... and these goats, the one was killed, the other sent away.’” Ainsworth does not call the scape-goat a sacrifice more explicitly than in these words: on Numb. xxix. 2, however, he enumerates the sacrifices of the day of expiation, and mentions the two goats, as Maimonides does in the words quoted in the Jast note. Hickes may have understood them, as he did when men- tioned by Maimonides, of the two on which the lots were cast. ]
» [Patrick on Lev. xvi. 10, says, ‘*For this was a sin-offering, though not slain, no less than the other, as appears from ver. 5, which shews these two goats together made but one sin- offering, which was partly slain at the altar, and partly let go.’””—Commen- tary, vol. i. p. 447. ed. 1809.]
© In hune porro publicarum obla- tionum censum reponimus ... in die expiationis hircos duos. Quorum unus erat piacularis czsus, alter emissarius
M 2
CHAP. IT. SECT. X.
ver. 10; ver. 22.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Lev. 16, 8, 10.
Lev. 16. 10.
164 The scape-goat was a sacrifice ; authorities.
I have said that I believe all Jewish writers reckon both goats alike amongst the number of sacrifices. For so I doubt not but the LXX did, who called the scape-goat ἀποπομπαῖος, that is, the piacular goat, because he was offered to be a piacle, and as such sent away into the wilderness laden with all the sins of the people. So St. Barnabas, who was a Jew, for this reason calls him κατάρατος, ‘ the ac- cursed’ goat, and as such saith that he was a type of Christ ; “Hear,” saith he’, “the appointment of Christ ; ‘Take two goats unblemished and alike, and offer them, and let the high- priest take one of them for a burnt-offering.’?, And what must be done with the other? ‘ Let it,’ saith he, ‘be accursed.’ ” And afterwards®: “ One was offered upon the altar, and the other to be accursed.” Both then were offered ; the one to be a sin-offering, the other for a piacle, to bear all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and the curses due unto them, in the type, as Christ our piacle in the antitype bore the sins of the whole world in His body upon the tree. If therefore a goat solemnly offered before the altar to be a piacle, and to make atonement and expiation for the transgressions of the people be a proper sacrifice, such was the scape-goat, though he was not slain, nor any of his blood put upon the horns of the altar, or poured out at the bottom thereof, nor his fat and kidneys consumed upon the altar by fire.
So Justin Martyr; after he had said‘ that one of the goats was to be ἀποπομπαῖος, and the other to be slain εἰς προσφορὰν, speaks of the oblation of both of them in these words®: καὶ ὅτι καὶ ἡ τῶν δύο τράγων τῶν νηστείᾳ κελευσ- θέντων προσφέρεσθαι, προσφορὰ οὐδαμοῦ ὁμοίως συγκε- χώρηται γίνεσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν ἱΙεροσολύμοις, ἐπίστασθε. So far was he from thinking the consumption of an offering, or any part of it upon the altar necessary to make it a sacrifice.
Sir, I hope I have now made it appear with what little
SINID pro expiatione sanctuarii, altaris, totiusque ccetus,—[ Bright, Tabule Mosaice, tab. 11, p. 3.]
ἃ [πῶς οὖν ἐνετείλατο; προσέχετε" λάβετε δύο τράγους καλοὺς καὶ ὁμοίους, καὶ προσενέγκατε" καὶ λαβέτω ὃ ἱερεὺς τὸν ἕνα εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα" τὸν δὲ ἕνα τί ποιήσουσιν ; ἐπικατάρατος, φησὶν, ὁ εἷς" προσέχετε πῶς ὃ τύπος τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ φανε-
ροῦται.---ϑι. Barnab. Epist., c. vii. Patr. Apost., tom. i, pp. 21, 24, ]
© [τὸν μὲν Eva ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, τὸν δὲ ἕνα ἐπικατάρατον .---ΤὈ]4., p. 24. |
f [ὧν ὁ εἷς ἀποπομπαῖος ἐγίνετο, ὁ δὲ ἕτερος εἰς mpoopopdv.—S. Just. Mart. Dial. cum Tryph., c. 4. p. 137, B.]
* [Id. ibid., D. ]
Sacrifice and oblation the same. 165
reason the holy Eucharist is denied to be a sacrifice, because cuar. πὶ Dr. Outram’s narrow definition of a Jewish sacrifice is not ~——~ applicable to the institution of it, nor the institution of it to that definition, which is neither so general as to answer the notion of a sacrifice common to all religions, or to take in all the sorts of Jewish sacrifices or oblations. I say of Jewish sacrifices, or oblations, because sacrifice and oblation are equivalent terms in the Old Testament, which I premise for the sake of those who, according to the more common use of the words in our language, make a distinction between them, restraining the word sacrifice to victims, or animal oblations, and oblation to the sacrifices of inanimate things, contrary to the usage of other languages and authors, and particularly of Dr. Outram himself, who makes sacrifice a genus to animal and inanimate sacrifices in these words? : nos omnia sacrificia, que ex animantibus lecta erant, victimas, aut hostias appellabimus, reliqua autem ferta', aut dapes ; “1 shall call all sacrifices of animals, victims, or hosts, and the rest meat- offerings, or feasts.”
Sir, this observation, and the remarks I have made upon Dr. Outram’s definition of a sacrifice, will perhaps make you think it incumbent upon me to give another definition of it, so general as may take in not only all sorts of Jewish, but Gentile sacrifices, and which, if it be a good definition, may also prove the holy Sacrament to be such. But if you expect such a definition of a sacrifice or oblation, as a genus to all sorts of sacrifices or oblations, from me, you expect a most difficult thing. For generical terms come so near to the nature of transcendentals, that they are seldom capable of a strict, proper, and exact definition, though the nature of the things signified by them may be clearly conceived. Such terms are usually described, rather than defined), and learned
h [De Sacrificiis, lib. i. c. 8. ὃ 8. p. 146. See Grotiusin Gen. xiv. 18, p- 84.] quoted p. 110, note 1.1
i Fertum, Hebraice 43%) minchah; i [Descriptionum usus, cum alias quod vocabulum [et generatim quod- utilis, tum etiam sepe est necessarius. vis donum et munus sonat, et] speci- Quoties scilicet aut res explicandz oc- atim sumitur [in scriptura] pro libi currunt, que non sunt capaces per- quodam genere, quod Deo sacrifica- fectarum definitionum, qualia sunt batur. Hoc vulgatus interpres sim- transcendentalia, genera generalissima, pliciter sacrificium nominat.—Compi-_ entia rationis, &c.—Sanderson, Artis egne de Veil, in annot. in Maimon., Logic Compendium, lib. i. cap. 17, {de cultu Divino, Tract. vii.c. 2. § 1. 8.6. i
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD,
106 An exact definition of Sacrifice not to be expected.
men content themselves with the unaccurate descriptions of them, because they can have no better. So the schools ac- quiesce in this definition of substance, substantia est quod per se subsistit, or substantia est ens per se subsistens*, that is, “sub- stance is what subsists by itself,” or, “substance is a thing that subsists by itself,’ which is no more than, substance is substance, and so is rather a description than a definition, and a description rather of the name than the thing; and yet though we can have no better a definition of it, every illi- terate as well as every learned man conceives what is meant by substance, and hath a clear notion of it, though he never heard it defined. The like may be said of ens, a being, or thing, defined to be quod habet essentiam, which is but a nominal definition, or explication of the term, though every vulgar understanding knows what a being or thing means, and would have a right idea thereof, though it had never been defined. .
Sir, I have observed this to let you know you are not to expect an exact definition of a sacrifice from me, which contains under it so many and various species, and divisions, and subdivisions, as in examining Dr. Outram’s too narrow definition of a sacrifice hath appeared. But then, Sir, though I cannot give you such a definition of a sacrifice in general as perhaps you expect; nay though I should give you none at all, yet I must profess I have a clear generical notion of it, as I have of time, though it is very hard to find terms to express it in. I instance in time, because all men alike have a clear notion of it, though the philosopher’s de- finition of it in his Physics! is imperfect, and liable to excep- tions, and short of the.common notion thereof. Wherefore, Sir, I hope you will be content with any tolerable description of a sacrifice in general, because it is not capable of a perfect definition, and that you will consider the cases, in which the schools tell us we must take up with descriptions, particu- larly in the cases expressed in the margin™. Thus far, Sir, to
« (Sanderson, ibid., lib. i. c. 9. ὃ 1.7 | verarum differentiarum, aut verborum, 1 [τοῦτο γάρ ἐστιν ὃ χρόνος, ἀριθμὸς quibus eas exprimamus: quorum κινήσεως κατὰ τὸ πρότερον καὶ ὕστερον. utrumque ex eo swpissime contingit, —Aristotelis (Physica) Nat. Ausec., quod et rerum nature atque essentiz jib, 10. ὍΣ Π͵Π ΒΤ Ἢ sunt nobis plerumque parum satis cog- ™ Quoties ipsi inopia laboramus aut nite, neque suppetunt usque dictiones
Sacrifice used in two senses. Definitions of it. 167
bespeak your candour in censuring and examining the de- scription I shall give of a sacrifice in general, which if I should describe but nominally, by the mere notation or ety- mology of the word, I think I might be excused. For there are some consecrated things that have a near alliance and resemblance with sacrifices, and yet are not sacrifices, though it is not so easy, for want of words, to express the difference between them.
But before I can define a sacrifice or oblation in general, you must give me leave to distinguish the words into their several acceptations. For they are sometimes used for the whole sacrificial administration, and sometimes for the res oblata, or ‘ thing sacrificed.’ And therefore the administration of the holy Sacrament being called a sacrifice as well as the bread and wine, I shall give you two descriptions of a sacri- fice, one, as it is taken for the ‘epovpyia, or holy adminis- tration, and the other as it is taken for the matter of the sacrifice, the holy gift. But before I proceed to my two descriptions, or if you please you may call them explications of the word, I must beg leave to put in this previous caveat, that if they do not rightly answer the general conceptions we have of sacrifice in both senses, it is not for want of a true notion of them, but rather of words significant enough in our language to express them in.
In the first sense I define a sacrifice thus": “ A sacrifice is a religious action (or operation) of a priest, ordinary or extraor- dinary, by which a gift brought is solemnly offered according to the rites and observances of any religion in, before, at, or upon any place, unto any god, to honour and worship him, and thereby acknowledge him to be god and lord.”
Sir, you will now easily imagine, that in the second sense I shall define a sacrifice in this manner: “ A sacrifice is a gift brought, and solemnly offered by a priest, ordinary or extraordinary, according to the rites and observances of any religion in, before, at, or upon any place, unto any god, to
exprimendis animi conceptionibus satis idonee, &c.—Sanderson, [ibid., lib. i. .17.8 6:1]
" [To the same purpose J. Sau- bertus de Sacrificiis, ο. 1. p. 13, (see note Ὁ, p. 59.) Sie definio sacrificium,
sacram et externam actionem qua res quepiam externa a certis personis, loco ritibusque certis, ad finem certum, dis aut deorum loco habitis consecrabatur et offerebatur.’’—Additional note from the Supplement of 1715, No. 14. ]
CHAP, Il.
SECT. Χ,
168 Hickes’ definition of Sacrifice explained.
peed honour and worship him, and thereby acknowledge him to _noov. be god and lord.”
If my first definition be good, the second must be so, and therefore let me observe to you, first, that it agrees to the notation of sacrificium, and answers to the terms of sacri- ficing, δρᾶν, ἔρδειν, ῥέζειν, ποιεῖν in Greek, nwy in Hebrew, and facere in Latin, as above explained®. The summum genus therefore of sacrifice, for sacrificing, must be action, and actions, as the schools tell usP, must be defined by their subject, object, efficient, and end: all which I have endea- voured to comprise in the first definition, as well as the thing defined and the want of more proper words would bear. The subject of this holy action is ‘a gift brought ;’ the object to whom it is brought is ‘any god ;’ the efficient, who offers the gift brought, is ‘a priest ;? and the end of offering that gift is ‘to worship that god to whom it is offered, and acknow- ledge him to be god and lord.’ I have said ‘a priest, or- dinary or extraordinary,’ to comprehend the holy adminis- tration of those who sacrifice, or offer jure prophetico upon particular occasions. As in the first definition I have made ‘gift’ the subject of offering or sacrificing, so in the second I have put it forthe genus proximum of sacrifice according to the Hebrews, Greeks, and Latins, who call it in the proper, sacrificial signification, 130, δῶρον, donum4, as distinguished from other gifts', which were upon any account hanged up in
° [See above, pp. 58, sqq. ]
P [Definiende sunt... actiones per subjectum, objectum, efficientem et finem.—Sanderson, lib. i. c. 17. ὃ 5.]
4 Brisson. de formulis, p. 30. [ Quae- cunque autem deorum placandorum causa aris inferebantur, ea dona appel- labant; of which he gives numerous instances. |
© Martinii Lexicon Philologicum in Donarium. [The passage occurs under the word donum: Gloss. Donum, δῶ- ρον, χάρισμα, &c. Lue. xxi. 5. templum quod bonis lapidibus et donis ornatum dicitur; pro donis est in Greco ava- θήμασι ... ἀναθήματα autem proprie donaria ;| Macrob. Saturn., lib. iii. cap. 11. [see note a, p. 72. |] Ornamenta vero sunt clypei, coronz, et ejusmodi dona- ria. Julii Pollucis Onomasticon, [lib. i. cap. 1. segm. 28.]. περὶ ἀναθημά- τῶν Kal λοιπῶν προσφερομένων. [περὶ
ἀναθημάτων" τὰ δὲ ἀναθήματα ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολὺ στέφανοι, φιάλαι, ἐκπώματα, θυμιαματήρια, χρυσίδες, ἀργυρίδες, οἶνο- χόαι, ἀμφορίσκοι.] Phavorini Glossa- rium in ἀνάθημα" [ἄγαλμα, κόσμος" ἄνα- θήματα ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πόλυ λέγονται στέ- φανοι, φιάλαι, ἐκπώματα, θυμιατήρια, χρυσίδες, οἰνοχόαι, ἀργυρίδες, ἀμφό- ρισκοι. καὶ ἀναθήματα δαιτὸς, 7 n μολπὴ, καὶ 7 ὀρχηστρίς" ὥσπερ γὰρ ναοῖς ἀνα- θήματα, οὕτω καὶ αὐτὰ κόσμος τις ἄνα- κείμενος τῇ δαιτί.)ῦ See the word in Suiceri Thesaurus, tom. i. col. 272. Andin Budi Comment. Ling. Greece, pp. 502, 503. [ἀναθήματα, aprepduara, id est, donaria. Macrobius ornamenta, inquit, fanorum sunt clypei, corone et hujuscemodi donaria; neque enim do- naria dedicantur eo tempore quo delu- bra sacrantur.—Herod., lib. i. cap. 14. Γύγης δὲ τυραννεύσας ἀπέπεμψε ἀναθή- ματα εἰς Δελφοὺς οὐκ ὄλιγα.]
Its parts considered separately. 169
temples, or fastened to altars, which they called on, ἀνα-
θήματα", donaria, though among the Latins donum is some--
times used for donarium, asin that of Virgil, Ain., lib. xii. 768.
Servati ex undis ubi figere dona solebant'.
So ἀνάθημα is rendered by donum, 2 Macc. ix. 16%, but in chap. 11. 18, it is rendered by donarium’, and again by donum, as in our translation, Luke xxi.5*. But in 2 Mace. ii. 18, we render ἀναθημάτων by ‘ holy gifts ; for both sacrifices, and gifts signified by ἀναθήματα and donaria agreed in this, that they were consecrated, but then the latter were said to be dedicated, and not offered, as sacrifices or oblations are always said to be. Before the word ‘gift’? I have put the word ‘ brought,’ as it is written, Gen. iv. 3, 4, “ Cain brought of the fruit of the ground, and Abel brought of the firstlings of his flock an offering unto the Lord.” Hence these scrip- tural words in HebrewY yan, apn, nyn, for bringing to the priest and altar. This the Greeks express by προσάγειν, ἀναβαίνειν [avabeivar|, the Latins by ducere, and admovere, of which in the proper sacrificial sense see Brissonius at large ; De formulis, pp. 15, 165,
I need say nothing of the word ‘ offered,’ but that I mean by it ‘actually offered, and that joined with ‘ brought,’ it denotes a sacrifice or oblation offered, or to be offered, as Buxtorf > saith 13, corban, est oblatio, sacrificium quod offertur aut offerri debet. But what is actually offered is most properly called a sacrifice or oblation: for as Gregory Nyssen some-
8 [ Hickes has been misled in trans- lating 0°97N donaria, by the inter- change in the LXX of ἀναθέματα and ἀναθήματα. OD 7M are ‘things devoted’ or ‘accursed ;’ generally rendered in the LXX ἀναθέματα, e. g. Josh. vi. 17, 18; but in Ley. xxvii. 28, 29, erroneously by ἀναθήματα; as, on the contrary, in 2 Mace. ii. 13, (quoted below, note v,) and in Judith xvi. 17, ἀνάθεμα is used for ἀνάθημα.
Ὁ [See also Martinius, quoted above, note r, p. 168. ]
ἃ [καλλίστοις ἀναθήμασι κοσμήσειν. Vers. LXX. 2 Mace. ix. 16; optimis donis ornaturum. Vulg. |
Y [ἐπιστολὰς βασιλέων περὶ ἄναθε- μάτων, Vers. LXX. 2 Mace. ii. 13; et epistolas regum et de donariis, Vulg. ; ‘and the holy gifts,’’ Eng. Vers. |
* [ὅτι λίθοις καλοῖς καὶ ἀναθήμασι Ke- κόσμηται. Luc. xxi. 5; quod bonis la- pidibus et donis ornatum esset, Vulg. ; “ sifts,’’? Eng. Vers. }
y [NIM, Gen. iv. 4, ‘he brought;’ 3pn, ‘to bring near:’ of sacrifice, Lev. iii. 1, 7,8; DPT, ‘to cause to stand, to present’ before the Lord, Lev. xiv. 11; and passively, Lev. xvi. 10, ‘ presented.’ |
2. Jul. Pollucis Onomast., lib. i. cap. 1. segm. 29. περὶ τῶν προσαγομένων ἱερείων. [ἱερεία προσάγειν, and at the end ἀναθεῖναι εἰς τὸν νεών ; for which ava- βαίνειν in the text appears to be ἃ mistake. |
4 {Numerous instances are given by Brissonius at this place. }
> Lexic. Talm. [in voc. 12, p. 2122. }
CHAP. IL. SECT. X._
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Num. 19.
170 Hickes’ definition ; its parts considered.
where speaks’, “a sheep before it is offered is but a sheep, but being offered it becomes what it was not before, a sacri- fice to God.”
I have also said offered ‘in, before, at, or upon’ any place to distinguish sacrifices from temples and altars, which are also said to be consecrated® and dedicated, upon which account they become holy, but are never said to be offered. I have used the word ‘ before,’ because in religious ritualities it is all one as to the nature of a sacrifice, whether it be offered ‘before,’ or ‘towards’ the place of the special presence or residence of any deity, or ‘in’ it, if the pontifical laws and usages so direct or permit. So as I have shewed before, the red heifer which was slain before Eleazar the priest, who sprinkled her blood seven times directly before the tabernacle, was as ritual and perfect a sacrifice of expiation, as if she had been slain at the altar, and the priest had sprinkled her blood thereupon. Temples therefore and altars, properly speaking, are not gifts, or offerings, but only holy places in and at which gifts are offered ; places, I say, for so Julius Pollux calls them, lib. i. segm. 6: ὁ τόπος ἐν ᾧ θεραπεύονται : of “the place in which the gods are worshipped,” καὶ τὸ μὲν χώριον, x.T.d.f “and the place in which we worship the gods is ἵερον and veds.” So segm. 78, speaking of the altar, saith he, “the place upon which we sacrifice and burn the fire is βωμὸς, θυσιαστήριον, ἑστία, κιτιλ. And in segm. 84, he calls the ἐσχάρα, or grate of the altar, ὁ δεκτὸς τόπος τῶν θυσιῶν, “‘the place which receives the sacrifices.”
I have also added, ‘according to the rites and customs of any religion,’ because as there never was any religion with-
23. Hane ego aram, inquit, Pudicitiz Plebeiz dedico. Ovid. Fast., lib. i. 609.
¢ [These words do not occur in St. Gregory Nyssen. For several similar
analogies see his Oratio de Baptismo Christi, Op., tom. iii. pp. 369, 370; quoted above, p. 76, note p. |
“ So Thomas Aquinas, Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod sacrificia offerri oportebat et in aliquibus locis, et per aliquos homines. [Summez Theol. Pri- ma Secunde, Queest. ci. Art. 4. ]
ὁ Brisson. de Form., pp. 113—115. [ Brissonius among other authorities for the consecration of temples, quotes Varro de Ling. Lat., lib. ii. § 54. Hine fana nominata, quod pontifices in sa- crando fati sunt finem ; Liy., lib. x. ec.
Sacra vocant Augusta patres; Augusta vocantur templa, sacerdotum rite di- cata manu. |
f (Jul. Poll. Onomast., lib. i. cap. 1. segm. 6. 6 τόπος ἐν ᾧ θεραπεύονται" καὶ τὸ μὲν χωρίον ἐν ᾧ θεραπεύομεν τοὺς θεοὺς, ἱερὸν, καὶ veds. |
Κ [{Ibid., segm. 7. περὶ θυσιαστηρίου" ἐφ᾽ ὧν δὲ θύομεν, ἢ πῦρ ἀνακαίομεν, Bw- μὸς, θυμιαματήριον, ἑστία : no edition reads θυσιαστήριον.)
h [Ibid., segm. 8. ὁ δεκτὸς τόπος τῶν θυσιῶν" ἐσχάρα δ᾽ ἰδικῷς δοκεῖ μὲν ὧδε ὠνομάσθαι, K.T.A. |
The end of sacrifices is to honour God; so Aquinas. 171
out priests and some sacrifice, so every religion has its ritual, or pontifical observations, not to be omitted or transgressed.
The end which I have assigned of sacrifices or oblations in general, is ‘to honour or worship the god to whom they are offered, and to acknowledge him for god and lord” To this purpose also speaks Thomas Aquinas', Secundum enim quod sacrificia ordinabantur ad cultum Dei, causa sacrificiorum dupliciter accipi potest, &c. “ For as sacrifices were appointed for the worship of God, the cause of them may be conceived two ways. In one, as we conceive that the disposition of the offerer’s mind towards God was represented by them. But this is requisite to the right disposition of a man’s mind towards God, that he acknowledge that all he hath comes from God, as the first principle, and ought to be referred to Him, as the ultimate end. And both these were set forth in oblations and sacrifices, because a man was understood to offer those things by way of acknowledgment to God from whom he had them. According to what David speaks, 1 Chron. xxix. 14, ‘ All things come of Thee, and of Thine own have we given Thee.’ And therefore in offering sacri- fices a man protested that God was the first principle of all things, and the ultimate end to which all things ought to be referred. And because it belongs to the right disposition of a man’s mind towards God, that he acknowledge no other but God to be the first cause of all things, and the ultimate end to which they are to be referred, and had no other end but Him: therefore in the law it was forbid to offer sacrifice to any other but to God, according to what is written,
i [Secundum enim quod sacrificia ordinabantur ad cultum Dei, causa sa- crificiorum dupliciter accipi potest. Uno modo secundum quod per sacri- ficia reprasentabatur ordinatio mentis in Deum, ad quam excitabatur sacri- ficium offerens. Ad rectam autem or- dinationem mentis in Deum pertinet, quod omnia que homo habet recog- noscat a Deo tanquam a primo prin- cipio, et ordinet in Deum tanquam in ultimum finem; et hoc representa- batur in oblationibus et sacrificiis, secundum quod homo ex rebus suis quasi in recognitionem, quod haberet ea a Deo, in honorem Dei ea offerebat: secundum quod dixit David, 1 Paralip.
xxix. ‘Tua sunt omnia, et que de manu tua accepimus, dedimus tibi;’ et ideo in oblatione sacrificiorum protestabatur homo, quod Deus esset primum prin- cipium creationis rerum, et ultimus finis, ad quem essent omnia referenda. Et quia pertinet ad rectam ordina- tionem mentis in Deum, ut mens hu- mana non recognoscat alium primum auctorem rerum, nisi solum Deum, neque in aliquo alio finem suum con- stituat: propter hoc prohibebatur in lege, offerri sacrificium alicui alteri, nisi Deo, secundum illud Exod. xxii. ‘Qui immolat diis occidetur, preter- quam Domino soli’—Summa Theol. Prima Secunde, Qu. cii. Art. 3. ]
CHAP, 11.
SECT, X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
172 Hickes’ definition includes all Sacrifices ;
Exod. xxii. 20, ‘He that sacrificeth to any God save unto the Lord* only, he shall be utterly destroyed.’ ”
This shews that the common end of all sacrifices was ‘to honour and worship and do homage to the god to whom they were offered, and acknowledge him to be lord,’ as Brisson! also shews at large out of human authors. And indeed the bare act of offering in itself, without speaking a word, is an act of religious homage, and of honour, worship, and recognition of the god to whom the offering is made. And therefore to honour, worship, and recognise Jehovah as the only true God, and supreme Lord, being if not the only, yet the chief end of burnt-offerings™, the Jews permitted the Gentiles to bring or send such offerings, but of no other sort, to be offered unto God.
Having now explained the terms used in my definitions of sacrifice or oblation in general, I hope, the difficulties above- mentioned ‘being considered, they may pass for sufficient definitions. I believe they are as good as many hundred definitions among the schoolmen and writers of civil law, among whom, considering how hard it is to find proper terms to define many notions in, they are fain to excuse themselves by that common saying in the margin", which shews how difficult and nice things general definitions are, and that allowances ought to be made for them in many cases upon that account. Wherefore if mine are sufficient definitions of sacrifice in general, they must comprehend all sorts of sacrifices howsoever distinguished in sacred or pro- fane writers, especially in the sacred code: voluntary or com- manded; animate or inanimate, the oblation of the Levites in Numb. viii. not excepted; consumed in whole or in part upon the altar, or not to be so consumed; public or private;
k In the original, ‘except unto Je- hovah.”
1 De Formulis, lib. i. pp. 29, 30. [See above, note b, p. 28. }
™ Thomas Aquinas. [ Holocaustum offerebatur Deo specialiter ad reve- rentiam majestatis ejus ; ‘et ideo totum comburebatur, ut sicut totum animal resolutum in vaporem, sursum ascendebat, ita etiam significaretur to- tum hominem et omnia que ipsius sunt, Dei dominio esse subjecta, et ei
esse offerenda ... totum comburebatur in honorem Dei: et nihil ex eo come- debatur.—Summa Theol. Prima Se- cunde, Quest. cii. Art. 3.]
. Definitiones rerum sunt omnium periculosissime.
® [See Num. viii. 11. ‘ And Aaron shall offer the Levites before the Lord for an offering of the children of Israel, that they may execute the service of the Lord.” }
even that of our Lord upon the Cross. 173
daily, weekly, monthly, or anniversary sacrifices ; principal or annexed ; more holy, or less holy sacrifices ; burnt-offerings, sin-offerings, trespass-offerings, and peace-offerings, and that which succeeded in the room of them all under the New Testament, the propitiatory oblation of the Eucharist as treated of in the learned and judicious discourse whose title is set down in the margin’. Nay, I do not doubt but it is fairly applicable to the grand expiatory sacrifice upon the altar of the cross, the sacrifice of our Lord, of which the legal sacrifices were types, and the Eucharistical a repre- sentative commemoration, as I have proved by many testi- monies: for He being a priest after the order and similitude
CHAP. Il. SECT. X.
of Melchisedec, “there was a necessity that he should have Heb. 8. 3.
something also to offer,’ which was the sacrifice of Himself, that one sacrifice for sin, the one offering which He offered but once, and by which He hath perfectly cleansed us from the guilt of sin. And as there was a necessity that He should have something to offer, so there was a necessity that He should have something to offer Himself upon, which by the determinate counsel of God was the cross; and therefore I make no difficulty to call it an altar, being the appointed fabric or place upon which (ἐφ᾽ οὗ, as Julius Pollux speaks?) He was to offer Himself “an offering, and a sacrifice to God, for a sweet-smelling savour.” |
But, Sir, there yet remains another objection to be answered, taken also from the opinion of another of our learned divines, Dr. Cudworth, who in “A Discourse concerning the true notion of the Lord’s Supper’,” asserts, that “it is not a sacri- fice, but evulum ew oblatis*, ‘a feast upon a sacrifice,’ or else
This was Cudworth’s
? The Propitiatory Oblation in the Holy Eucharist truly stated and de- fended from Scripture, Antiquity, and the Communion-Service of the Church of England, in which some notice is taken of Dr. Hancock’s Answer to Dr. Hickes. London, printed 1710. [See above, note τι, p. 71, and vol. i. p. 2, note h. ]
4 [See note g, p. 170. ]
r [A Discourse concerning the true notion of the Lord’s Supper, by R. C. (Ralph Cudworth, then M.A. of Ema- nuel College, Cambridge, and rector of North Cadbury, Somersetshire. ) Cam-
bridge, 1642. first publication. In 1644 he was made master of Clare Hall by the Parlia- mentary Commissioners. ]
5. Cudworth, ibid., chap. 5. pp. 54, 55. [Cudworth’s words, at the begin- ning of ch. 5, are, ‘‘ Thus having de- clared and demonstrated the true no- tion of the Lord’s Supper, we see how that theological controversy, which hath cost so many disputes, whether the Lord’s Supper be a sacrifice, is already decided; for it is not sacrificium, but epulum ek τῆς θυσίας; not a sacrifice, buta feast upon sacrifice; or else,”’ &c. |
Eph. 5. 2.
174 Cudworth’s objection, That the Eucharist is only a feast
curist1AN in Other words, not oblatio sacrificii, but as Tertullian’ excel-
PRIEST-
HOOD.
lently speaks, (saith he,) participatio sacrificii, not the offering of something up to God upon an altar, but the eating of something which comes from God’s altar, and is set upon our tables.” And then in contradiction to all antiquity, he asserts, that the notion of a Sacrament’s being a sacrifice is “‘ a mis- take"” for what is the true notion, of its being a feast upon a sacrifice, and that it grew up “by the degeneration of this truth,” as he expresseth himself; adding, ‘‘ There is a sacrifice in the Lord’s Supper symbolically, but not as there offered up to God, but feasted on by us, and so not a sacrifice, but a sacri- ficial feast, which began too soon to be misunderstood.” In another place he expresseth himself in this manner: “ The* eating of sacrifices was a due and proper appendix unto all sacrifices one way or other, either by the priests” (whom he owns to be the owners’ “ mediators unto God, and as their proxiesy”’) “or (by) themselves, when the person that offered was capable thereof;” that is, “when he had no unclean- ness upon him, and was perfectly reconciled to God?,” as he also expresseth himself. In a word, from analogy to this ancient rite of feasting upon things sacrificed, and eating of those things in person or proxy which they had offered up to God, he takes his new notion of the Lord’s Supper being a feast upon a sacrifice, and not a sacrifice itself. To this purpose he speaks in another place*: “the very concinnity and harmony of the thing itself leads me to conceive, that that Christian feast under the Gospel, called the Lord’s Supper, is the very same thing, and bears the same notion in respect of the true Christian sacrifice of Christ upon the cross, that those did to the Jewish and heathenish sacrifices, and so is epulum sacrificiale, a sacrificial feast, I mean a feast upon sacrifice, or epulum ex oblatis, a feast upon things offered up to God. Only this difference arising in the parallel, that because those legal sacrifices were but types and shadows of the true Christian sacrifice, they were often repeated and re-
‘ [Tertull, De Oratione, cap. 14. that mistake grew up, and that by the Op., p. 186; quoted below, p. 181, note degeneration of this truth.’’] Z. * Ibid., chap. 1. p. 5. “ Cudworth, ibid., p. 56. [ Cudworth’s y [Ibid., p. 4] words are, “‘ Having thus discovered 4 [Ibid., paulo supr. ] the true notion of the Lord’s Supper, " [bid., p. 15. we may from hence discern also, how
upon a sacrifice, not itself a sacrifice ; answered. 175
newed, as well as the feasts which were made upon them; but now the true Christian sacrifice being come, and offered up once for all, never to be repeated, we have therefore no more typical sacrifices left among us, but only the feast upon the true sacrifice, still symbolically continued and often re- peated in reference to that one great sacrifice, which is always as present in God’s sight and efficacious, as if it were but now offered for us.”
Now, Sir, in answer to the objection taken from this learned man’s new notion of the Lord’s Supper, it will be convenient to distinguish in this sacrificial feast of Christians between the matter, or entertainment of it, and the eating and participation thereof in the holy feast, that it may appear in what this opinion agrees, and how it differs from the ancient and common notion which the Church had of it in the primitive and purest times. First, then, as to the matter of it, the bread and wine ; it must be granted that by Christ’s own institution, they are symbols of His natural body and blood, and by His appointment are to be deemed, reputed, and received as His natural flesh and blood in the holy feast. And, secondly, it must be granted that the participa- tion of them is a federal rite, and hath all the moral effects between God and the faithful communicants, as if they did eat and drink of His natural body and blood, which was sacrificed for us upon the cross. Those moral effects are the solemn and comfortable commemoration of His all-sufficient sacrifice upon the cross, and representing it before God on earth, as He represents it before Him in heaven, together with a confirmation and ratification of the covenant between God and the communicants ; and the signification and assurance of God’s pardon, and of peace, reconciliation, and fellowship between God and the worthy partakers, who eat and drink the mystical and vicarious body and blood of Christ, accord- ing to what St. Ignatius” said of the heretics, who asserted that Christ was not a real man, but only in appearance: “They abstain (saith he) from the Eucharist, and (the Eu-
» εὐχαριστίας καὶ προσευχῆς ἀπέχον. Hyepev.—S. Ignat. Epist. ad Smyrn., ται, [διὰ τὸ μὴ ὁμολογεῖν τὴν εὔχαρισ- § 7. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 36.] τίαν σάκρα εἶναι TOU σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰη- Multa et gravia peccat ad hune lo- σοῦ Χριστοῦ, τὴν ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν cum oppugnator epistolarum nostra- παθοῦσαν, ἣν τῇ χρηστότητι ὃ πατὴρ rum. 1. Perperam accipit vocem προσ-
CHAP. Il,
SECY. X,
CHRISTIAN PRIEST-
HOOD.
176 The Sacrifice on the Cross ; in what sense the only one.
charistical office of) prayer, because they do not confess the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father of His goodness
raised again.”
The true sense of which passage is explained
by Tertullian’ in the fortieth chapter of his fourth book against Marcion, to which I refer you. Thirdly, it must be acknowledged that the one great sacrifice of Christ upon the cross is the only true and proper sacrifice of the Chris- tian religion, as by one true sacrifice is understood the one great sacrifice of propitiation for sin, which was the truth and completion of all the typical sacrifices ; but then his opinion
εὐχῆς latissimo modo pro omni pror- sus oratione: cum Ignatius aut loqua- tur de prece mystica, aut oratione so- lemni, qua corpus Christi conficitur. S. Hieronym. Epist. 85. [Ad quorum preces Christi corpus et sanguis con- ficitur.—Epist. 146, ad Evangelum, Op., tom. i. col. 1075, A. ed. Vallars. ;] et Sophoniz, cap. 3. [Sacerdotes impie aguut in legem Christi, putantes εὐχα- ριστίαν imprecantis facere verba, non vitam, et necessariam esse tantum solennem orationem et non sacerdotum merita.—S. Hieron. Comment.in Soph., cap. 3. Op., tom. vi. col. 718, C.] ΒΚ. Aug. de Trinitate, lib. 111. cap. 4. [I]lud quod ex fructibus terre acceptum, et prece mystica consecratum rite sumi- mus.—Op., tom. viii. col. 798, B, C.] εὐχὴ appellatur a Justino Mart. Apol. 2. [Apol. 1. c. 65 and 67, pp. 82, E. 83, D. quoted above, pp. 105, 106, notes f, g], et Origene, tum contra Celsum, lib. viii. [ο. 33. robs μετ᾽ εὐχα- piotias καὶ εὐχῆς τῆς ἐπὶ τοῖς δοθεῖσι προσαγομένους ἄρτους ἐσθίομεν, σῶμα γενομένους διὰ τὴν εὐχὴν ἁγιόν τι καὶ ayiafov τοὺς μετὰ ὑγιοῦς προθέσεως αὐτῷ χρωμένου-.---Ορ., tom. i. p. 766, D, E.], tum ad Matt. xv. 17. [τὸ ἁγιαζόμενον βρῶμα διὰ λόγου θεοῦ καὶ évreviews.—Ibid., tom. iii. p. 499, C.] προσευχὴ ab Augustino, Epist. 59. [‘Sed eligo in his verbis (1 Tim. ii. 1) hoe intelligere, quod omnis vel pene omnis frequentat ecclesia, ut precationes (δεήσει5) accipiamus dictas, quas faci- mus in celebratione Sacramentorum, antequam illud quod est in Dominimen- sa incipiat benedici; orationes (mpoc- εὐχὰς) cum benedicitur, et sanctifi- catur, et ad distribuendum comminui- tur, quam totam petitionem fere omnis Ecclesia Dominica oratione concludit.’
—S. Aug. Epist. 149. ad Paulinum, § 16. Op., tom. ii. col. 509, C. ed. Ben. ] Aut potius intelligat preces liturgicas [sive missam] juxta constitutiones Apostolicas, lib. ii. c. 54. [See above, note c, p. 44.] Cyrillum Hierosolym. Catechesi Mystagog. 5. [§ viii. sqq. pp- 327, D, sqq. See above, notes Ὁ, 121, and x. p. 134.] Zonaram ad ca- nones Apostolicas ii. [τὸ συνεύξασθαι ἀντὶ συνιερουργῆσαι παραληφθήσεται. —ap. Bevereg. Pandect., tom. i. p. 7, E.] et Neoczsariensem 13. [οὔτε ἄρτον ἢ ποτήριον δοῦναι ἐν εὐχῇ, τουτέστιν οὐδὲ τῶν ἁγίων δώρων ἔξεστιν αὐτοῖς μεταδιδόναι τῷ λαῷ ἐν εὐχῇ, ἤτοι ἐν ἱερουργίας καιρῷ.---ΤΌ14., p. 413, C.] Sacrificiorwm orationes in Tertulliano lib. de Oratione, cap. extremo; [‘ similiter stationum diebus non putant plerique sacrificiorum orationibus intervenien- dum.’—c. 14. Op., p. 135.] ‘In ora- tione quando offerimus sacrificia Deo.’ —S. Epiphanii Joanni Hierosolymitano [ Episcopo Epistola; extat tantum La- tine, S. Hieronymo interprete.—S. Epi- phanii Op., tom. ii. p. 313, B.] Recta itaque etiam allegatio Theodoriti Dia- log. 3, sed ex sensu magis, quam ad verbum, εὐχαριστίας καὶ προσφορὰς οὐκ amrodéxovrat.—| Theodoret. Op., tom. iv. p- 154, D, where this passage of Igna- tius is thus quoted. Cotelerius, Annott. in locum, ibid. ]
© [Acceptum panem et distributum discipulis, corpus illum suum fecit, ‘ Hoc est corpus meum’ dicendo, id est, figura corporis mei. Figura autem non fuisset, nisi veritatis esset corpus. Ca- terum vacua res, quod est phantasma, figuram capere non posset.—Tertull. adv. Mare., lib. iv. c. 40. Op., p. 448, A.]
Cudworth opposes the uniform teaching of the Church. 177
that there is no other external material oblation in the Chris- car. π' tian religion, no “offering at God’s altar, but only eating = something that comes from it,” and that the mystical or sacramental body and blood of Christ, of which we partake at the Lord’s table, “are not there offered up unto God,” if there were no other reason, is to be rejected as of no au- thority, because it is new, and contrary to the consentient belief and practice of all Churches for above fifteen hundred years. Of what weight, Sir, can the opinion of a modern single man, though never so learned, be, if put into the scale against such a tradition? But why do I say against such a tradition ? when it is of no weight against the single testi- mony of St. Clement, who in his Epistle to the Corinthians, as I have often observed‘, calls the ministers of the Church προσενέγκοντες Ta δῶρα, ‘ offerers of gifts,’ or ‘sacrifices®:’ as it was said by our Lord, “ If thou bring thy gift (τὸ δῶρόν cov) Matt. 5. 28. to thealtar,and there rememberest that thy brother hathought against thee, leave there thy gift,and go thy way, first be recon- ciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.” In the same Hpistle, as I have also noted, he exhorts the Corinthians to “perform their oblations and public ministrations at the appointed times’.” This holy apostolical author laboured in the Gospel with St. Paul, and it is no reflection to say that he understood the Apostle’s writings, and the mind of God in them, better than Dr. Cudworth, or your late writer. And, Sir, I dare appeal to you, or any other divine who is as well versed in the fathers and councils as you, which of the two it is most reasonable to believe. Indeed, Sir, I cannot but think if Dr. Cudworth had been as well acquainted with the ancient Christian writers as he was with the Rabbinical and Platonic, and as well skilled in the primitive customs and practices of the Church, as in other theories, that he would not have vented an opinion, which, to repeat but one instance more, is a perfect contradiction to Justin Martyr’s description of the holy Eucharist, as administered in those early timess ; and if these holy men’s notion and description of it as a a [S. Clem. R. Ep. i. ad Cor. and ec. £ [S. Clem. Rom. ibid., ο. 40. p. 170, 44, Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 173. See quoted above p. 87, note t.] above, pp. 64, 88, note x, 141, note. ] & [See above, pp. 105, 106, notes ἔν € See Bishop Fell’s learned notes ong. ]
the place, [see above, p. 88, note y. } HICKES, N
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD,
1 Cor. 10. 18.
178 The Sacrifice feasted on cannot be that of the Cross.
sacrifice be, as he affirms, a mistake, it is as ancient as the time of the Apostles, and stood uncorrected for almost six- teen hundred years. I cannot also but believe that St. Clement in particular understood the tenth chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians, and the parallel which the Apostle there makes between Jewish and Gentile sacrifices and the Lord’s Supper, where the very analogy requires that the bread and wine with which we are entertained at the Lord’s table, must be, as he calls it, “an oblation,” and the priest who administers, “the offerer” thereof. This I could not but observe again, because he turns the Apostle’s parallel to another meaning, making" the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross, and not the offering of bread and wine, (which, con- trary to fact, he asserts was not offered at the Lord’s Supper’,) to be the only sacrifice of which the Christians were partakers at the Lord’s table. But I may challenge him and all the world, to shew me that any priests or people of what religion soever, ever feasted of any sacrifices which they did not offer before; and therefore he, granting that the Lord’s Supper was a feast upon a sacrifice, it was a singularity of his own, without any concinnity to the nature of sacrificial feasts, or the practice of eating of them, to assert, against fact, that the mystical body and blood of Christ, of which we are partakers at the Lord’s table, were not first solemnly offered up.
To confirm his opinion, he asserts that we have no altar to offer upon*: “It was never known, saith he, among the Jews or heathens, that the tables upon which they ate their sacri- fices were called altars.” But I have shewed at large before’, that holy tables in the heathen temples were used as altars, especially in meat and drink-offerings ; and therefore it is no wonder that the Christians called the Lord’s table an altar,
» Cudworth, pp. 52—54, 70. [Cud- worth is here discussing the parallel in 1 Cor. x. 14—21. He says, “ Which he (the Apostle) doth illustrate from a parallel rite in Christian religion: where the eating and drinking of the body and blood δῇ Christ, offered up to God upon the cross for us, is a real communica- tion in His death and sacrifice.””—p. 53. And again, “To eat the body and blood of Christ in the Lord’s Supper, is to be made partakers of His sacrifice
offered up to God for us.’”,—Ibid. And again, “To eat of the sacrifice of Christ, once offered up to God, in the Lord’s Supper, is to have federal communion with Him,’’—Ibid., p. 70. }
i [Cudworth, chap. 5. p. ὅδ. See above, “not the offering of something up to God,”’ &c. p. 174. ]
k Cudworth, chap. 5. p. 55.
1 [See above, p. 72, note a, and pp.
77, sqq, |
Cudworth’s assertion that we have no Altars; answered. 179
which they used as an altar in offering up the bread and wine upon it, it being very common for things to have several names, according to the several uses in which they are em- ployed. Thus he himself grants, that the “altar” at Jeru- salem “was a table,” and so called, “ because it was a table upon which God Himself did eat in consuming the sacrifices™ with His holy fire".” And if that altar was a table, and is so called, not in Scripture only, but by the Talmudical writers°, because the sacrifices were eaten upon it; why should not the holy tableP of the Lord be called an altar, because the meat and drink of the holy feast are solemnly offered upon it, before the priest and people participate thereof? He farther saith4, that “ St. Paul, speaking of the feasts upon idol sacri- fices, calls the places on which they were eaten the tables of devils, because the devils’ meat was eaten upon them, not the altars of devils; and yet doubtless (saith he) he spake according to the true propriety of speech, and in those technical words which were then in use among them. And therefore keeping the same analogy, he must needs call the communion-table by the name of the Lord’s table; i. e. the table upon which God’s meat is eaten, not His altar upon which it is offered.”” To which I answer, that St. Paul spake indeed properly when he called the places upon which the idol sacrifices were eaten the “ tables of devils,” and with the same propriety he called the place upon which the bread of God was eaten “the Lord’s table ;” but then as the prophets Ezekiel and Malachi calling the Jerusalem altar the “ table of
™ Therefore the sacrifices which God so ate in whole or in part, are called His ‘‘ meat,’’ Malachii. 12; and His ‘*bread,’’ i. 6. His food, Isa. 111. 7.—Lev. iii. 11, [‘* the food of the offering made by fire unto the Lord.’’ See] xxi. 6, 8, 17, 21, 22; xxii. 25, (“the bread of their God.’’ ]
® [Cudworth’s words are, “ An altar is nothing but a table, but it is a table upon which God Himself eats, con- suming the sacrifices by His holy fire.” —lIbid., c. 5. p. 55, ]
° Joh. Lightfoot, in 1 Cor. xi. 21. { Hebrew and Talmudical exercitations upon the first Epistle to the Corin- thians. Works, vol. ii. p. 769. fol. 1684. Lightfoot merely states the fact that “ΤῊ. table of the Most High’ is a phrase not unusual in the Talmudists
for the altar.’’ |
Ρ As it was indifferently called by both names in the ancient Catholic Church, (see above, pp. 76, 77,) and is called by both in the Rubric of the holy Communion of the first Liturgy of King Edward VI. [In the second Rubric before the Communion Service in this Book, there are the words, ‘ not to presume to the Lord’s table;”’ in the third, “‘to be partakers of the Lord’s table;’’ in the Rubric after the Kyrie Eleison, and before the prayer, “* We do not presume,” &c., “Then the priest, stauding at God’s board,’”’ and “ turn- ing him to God’s board ;’’ excepting in these places the word “altar’”’ is used in the Rubrics. See Appendix, No. 1.]
4 [Cudworth, ibid., c. 5. p. 55. ]
N 2
CHAP, II. SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD,
Heb. 13. 10.
180 = There must be a Sacrifice before a Sacrificial Feast.
the Lord',” did not imply that it was not an altar, so the Apostles calling the place upon which the bread of God was eaten in the Christian temples “the Lord’s table,” did not imply that it was not an altar, upon which it was offered before it was eaten and consumed. He owns it was God’s meat that was eaten upon it; and, I profess, I cannot well understand how the materials of that holy feast came to be God’s meat, without being first offered unto Him, and there- by made His meat in the most special sense; as St. Ignatius* calls the Eucharistical bread the “ bread of God,’ not in the common sense as all bread is, but as all material things by being offered to Him, became His. He talks much of “analogy,” and “concinnity,” and if that must be the rule by which to judge in this late controversy, which was none for sixteen hundred years, then I am sure, whether we consider the sacrificial feasts of Jews or Gentiles, it will prove that the external materials of the holy Christian com- munion must be a sacrifice or oblation, before they could be a sacrificial feast. Wherefore the primitive Christians, as 1 must often inculcate, solemnly offered up the bread and wine upon the Lord’s table, and as in offering them up they used it as an altar, so they esteemed and called it an altar, as I have shewed' St. Paul did in saying “‘we have an altar,” that is, we have an altar-offering, “of which they have no right to eat who serve the tabernacle.” Wherefore not to recite the testimonies of St. Ignatius and other writers, who so often call the Lord’s table an altar", and many others which might be brought*, the holy Eucharist is an altar-offering, before it
τ [See above, note m, p. 76.]
- [S. Ignat. Epist. ad Ephes., c. 7. ὑστερεῖται τοῦ ἄρτου τοῦ @cov.—Patr. Apost., tom. 11. p. 18. See above, p. 78. |
t [See above, pp. 70, sqq. ]
® [See above, pp. 78, sqq. ]
x As that in Euseb. Hist. Eccl., lib. x, cap. 4. versus finem, in his descrip-
βλέμματι καὶ ὑπτίαις ὑποδεχόμενος χερ- ol, τῷ κατ᾽ οὐρανὸν πατρὶ καὶ θεῷ τῶν ὅλων Tapaméumerai.—Hist. Eccl., tom. i, p. 479.] ‘‘ But the august, great, and one altar, what can it signify but the most pure and most holy soul of the common Priest of all: at whose right hand stands the great High- Priest of the whole world, Jesus Him-
tion of all the parts of the altar, σεμνὸν δὲ καὶ μέγα καὶ μονογενὲς θυσι- αστήριον, [ποῖον ἂν εἴη, ἢ τῆς τοῦ κοινοῦ πάντων ἱερέως τῆς ψυχῆς τὸ εἰλικρινὲς καὶ ἁγίων ἅγιον" ᾧ παρεστὼς ἐπὶ δεξιᾷ ὁ μέγας τῶν ὅλων ἀρχιερεὺς, adds’ Ἰησοῦς 6 μονογενὴς τοῦ θεοῦ, τὸ παρὰ πάντων εὐῶδες θυμίαμα, καὶ τὰς δι᾽ εὐχῶν ἀναί- uous καὶ ἀὔλους θυσίας, φαιδρῷ τῷ
self, the only begotten Son of God, who with a cheerful look and hands stretched out, receiveth from all that sweet-smell- ing incense, and unbloody and immate- rial sacrifices by prayers, and transmits them to His heavenly Father, the su- preme God.’’ [The passage appears to be wrongly translated. |
Cudworth’s view unsupported by any authority. 181
is the Lord’s Supper; and the holy table, like the altar at Jerusalem, is used in every communion as an altar for sacrifice, before it is employed as a table for the sacrificial feast. St. Hierome, in the forecited place, calls it by both names’; “we pollute,” saith he, “the bread of God, i. 6. the body of Christ, when we come unworthily to the altar, and we declare the table of the Lord to be contemptible, when being impure we drink His pure blood.” I must farther observe, that Dr. Cudworth hath not one testimony, divine or human, for his new opinion; participatio sacrificii, which he cites with an eulogy out of Tertullian, being to be under- stood of the participation of the bread and wine offered as sacrifice upon the Lord’s table, as is plain from the place cited in the margin’, and from many others, collected out of his other tracts by Rigaltius in his first note upon his tract Of Prayer, some of which I have also put in the margin®.
I could say more to refute this learned man’s opinion, were it needful or convenient to enter into a theory of the Jewish sacrifices, but I think it is time to dismiss this cause, and therefore to conclude, as this notion of the Lord’s Sup- per being only a feast upon the sacrifice of Christ is new and
¥ [*Polluimus panem,’ id est, corpus Christi, quando indigni accedimus ad altare, et sordidi mundum sanguinem bibimus; et dicimus, ‘mensa Domini despecta est,’ non quod hoe aliquis audeat dicere, ... sed opera pecca- torum despiciunt mensam Dei, — S. Hieron. Comm. in Malach. cap. 1. Op., tom. vi. col. 949, A. ]
* Que oratio cum divortio sancti osculi integra, quem Domino officium facientem impedit pax? Quale saeri- ficium est, a quo sine pace receditur ἢ ... Similiter et stationum diebus, non putant plerique sacrificiorum orationi- bus interveniendum, quod statio sol- venda sit accepto corpore Domini. Ergo devotum Deo obsequium Eucha- ristia resolvit? An magis Deo obligat? Nonne solennior erit statio tua, si et ad aram Dei steteris? Accepto corpore Domini, et reservato, utrumque salyum est, et participatio sacrificii, et executio officii.—{ Tertullian. de Oratione, c. 14. Op., p. 1385, A, B.]
® [This note is one of Pamelius’, (see above, note |, p. 116.) It is on the title of the tract, De Oratione ; and
begins, Etsi initio orationis vox a Ter- tulliano accipiatur in genere, post ni- hilominus explicationem Orationis Do- minice fere usurpatur pro oratione mystica, seu sacrificio Christiano, ut illi sint idem oratio et sacrificium. After treating further on this prayer and the word Missa, he gives, among others, the instances quoted by Hickes.] Obla- tiones reddere, offerre, et commemorare per sacerdotem [ Exhort. Castit. c. 11. p 523, D. Pamelius reads comme- morabis for commendabis.— Tertull. Op., p. 567. ed. Pamelii Franc. 1597. ] Sacrificium offerri [De Cultu Foemi- narum, lib ii. c. 11. p.159, C.] Offerri calicem [Incerti auctoris adv. Mare. libri v. carmine conscripti, lib. 1. Tert. Op., p. 631. col. 1.] Ne prius ascen- damus ad altare [ De Oratione, c. 10. p. 133, B.] Quo modo audebit orationem ducere ad altare [Exhort. Cast., ο. 10, so read by Pamelius, p. 567; the reading of Rigalt’s text, p. 523, C, is ducere ab illa. He conjectures, deducere ad altare.| Celebrat et panis oblationem [De Presc. Her., c, 40. Ρ. 216, D.]
CHAP. I. SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HooD.
182 Dangerous consequences from opposing received doctrines.
singular, and as I have shewed, contrary to Catholic tradi- tion both in belief and practice; so is it a nice notion, and of no use or service that I know of to religion. First, it is a very nice notion and vain imagination thus to separate the table from the altar, the sacrament from the sacrifice, and the outward offering of the one from the federal feast of the other, in the Lord’s Supper. This is to put asunder what God hath joined together, and in effect to declare, that if the bread and wine be first made an oblation to God they cannot become the mystical flesh and blood of His Son. Secondly, as this is a nice and new notion, so is it of no use or service to the Church. On the contrary, it disserves reli- gion, and is of dangerous consequence to this holy Sacrament itself; for by the same liberty this author, I am sure with- out any ill intention, hath taken away the solemn offering of the bread and wine from the holy mystery, others, after his example, have presumed to take away the solemn consecra- tion of them, and so have reduced it, in their blasphemous language, to nothing but “a health.” So dangerous it is for learned, though never so good men, to remove the old landmarks, and advance new notions destructive or tending to the destruction of the old. I believe this author might really intend by this notion to secure the holy Eucharist from the popish notion of it; for if it is not a real sacrifice at all, most certainly it cannot be such a sacrifice as the papal Church defines it to be‘, to wit, “‘a proper propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead, in which the body and blood of Christ, with His soul and Divine Nature, is in truth, reality, and substance, offered up for the living and the dead, the whole substance of the bread being converted into the body, and the whole substance of the wine into the blood of Christ.” But this is running from one extreme to the other without any reason, because the ancient notion of this holy
» [See above, vol. i. p. 212, note Υ; sanctissimo Eucharistie sacramento
and the Rights of the Christian Church, &c., p. 105. ]
¢ {This is an extract from what is commonly called the Creed of Pope Pius IV. The original words are; Pro- fiteor pariter in missa offerri Deo ve- rum, proprium et propitiatorium sacri- ficium pro vivis et defunctis; atque in
esse vere, realiter, et substantialiter corpus et sanguinem, una cum anima et divinitate Domini nostri Jesu Christi; fierique conversionem totius substantia panis in corpus, et totius substantize vini in sanguinem, &c.—Professio Fi- dei apud bullam Pape Pii ITV. Con- cilia, tomy xx. col, 221, D.]
The Eucharist’s being a Sacrifice implies proper Priests. 183
Sacrament’s being a commemorative sacrifice, in which we represent before God the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross, perfectly secures the holy mystery from that corrupt and absurd notion, it being impossible that a solemn commemo- ration of a fact or thing should be the fact or thing itself ; or to speak otherwise with respect to the holy symbols by which we make the commemoration, that what represents should be the thing represented, the figure the verity itself, or the sign that which is signified thereby 4.
Sir, I have said all this in defence of the old against the Doctor’s new notion of the holy Eucharist, much more out of love to that old truth than to prove Christian ministers to be proper priests. For as it will follow from that that they are in the literal sense θῦται, true “ sacrificing priests,” as Gregory Nazianzen® calls bishops; so it will follow even from this that they must be proper priests, because, as none but a priest can offer a sacrifice, so none but a priest can preside and minister in such a sacrificial feast as he allows the holy Sacrament to be. Who but a priest can receive the elements from the people, set them upon the holy table, and offer up to God such solemn prayers, praises, and thanksgivings for the congregation, and make such solemn intercessions for them, as are now and ever were offered and made in this holy Sa- crament? Who but a priest can consecrate the elements by solemn prayer, and make them the mystical body and blood of Christ? Who but a priest can stand in God’s stead at His table, and in His name receive His guests? Who but a
4 [For the fuller statement of the Christus continetur, et incruente im-
doctrine by the council of Trent, see Concil. Trident. Sessio xxii. cap. 1. Dominus noster... ut... relinqueret sacrificium, quo cruentum illud semel in cruce peragendum representaretur, ejusque memoria in finem usque szculi permaneret, atque illius salutaris virtus in remissionem eorum, que a nobis quotidie committuntur peccata appli- caretur, corpus et sanguinem suum sub speciebus panis et vini Deo Patri obtulit, ac sub earundem rerum sym- bolis apostolis... ut offerrent prece- pit... Novum instituit pascha, seip- sum ab ecclesia per sacerdotes sub sig- nis visibilibus immolandum.—cap. 2. In divino hoe sacrificio... idem ille
molatur, quiin ara crucis semel seipsum cruente obtulit... una enim eademque est hostia, idemque nunc offerens sacer- dotum ministerio, qui seipsum tune in cruce obtulit, sola offerendi ratione di- versa; Cujus quidem oblationis, cruen- te inquam, fructus per hance incruentam uberrime percipiuntur; tantum abest ut illi per hance quovis modo derogatur. See further the words of Maldonatus on this subject, transcribed by Bishop Cosin, vol. i. note s, pp. 108, sqq. ]
© οὐδὲ θύτας καθαροὺς, ἀλλὰ προστά- τας ἰσχυροὺς ζητοῦσιν.---[8. Greg. Naz. Orat. xlii. (al. xxxii.) ὃ 24, Op., tom. i. p. 765, E. ]
CHAP, II,
SECT. X.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST-
HOOD.
184 Whether Priests, who do not believe the Eucharist
priest hath power to break the bread, and bless the cup, and make a solemn memorial before God of His Son’s sufferings, and then deliver His sacramental body and blood to the faithful communicants, as tokens of His meritorious suffer- ings and pledges of their salvation? A man authorized thus to act “for men in things pertaining to God,” and for God in things pertaining to men, must needs be a priest, and such holy ministrations must needs be sacerdotal, whether the holy table be an altar, and the Sacrament a sacrifice, or not. This, Sir, I have proved‘, and therefore now shall content myself only to say so much upon the subject of priesthood as is sufficient to put you in remembrance of what I said before.
Having now, Sir, got over the objections taken from the writings of these two learned men against the Eucharist’s being a sacrifice, I desire your late writer, and such gentle- men as he, who have been led into their errors by these and other writers since the Reformation, to consider, that if the holy Eucharist be a sacrifice, as the Catholic Church believed in all ages before that time, how far the defect, in adminis- tering of it only as a Sacrament, may affect the holy office and the ministration of it; and whether the communion admi- nistered by a priest, who neither believes himself to be such, nor the Sacrament to be an oblation or sacrifice, can be a communion in or with the Catholic Church? 1 say, I leave it to themselves to consider these things, and I think they
preferant partis corruptioni universita-
f [See above, sect. ii. pp. 14, sqq. | i tis integritatem, &c.—[Ibid., 6. 27. p.
& Vincent. Lirin., cap. 3. In ipsa
Catholica Ecclesia magnopere curan- dum est, ut id teneamus quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est, hoc est enim vere proprieque Catho- licum.—[Commonitorium, c. 2. Bibl. Patr., tom. x. p. 103. col. ii. C.] Cap. 88. Hoc facere magnopere curabunt... ut divinum canonem secundum univer- salis Ecclesiz traditiones, et juxta Ca- tholici dogmatis regulas interpretentur ; in qua item Catholica Apostolicaque Ecclesia sequantur necesse est univer- sitatem, antiquitatem, consensionem. Et si quando pars contra uniyersitatem, novitas contra vetustatem, unius vel paucorum errantium dissensio, contra omnium vel certo multo plurium Ca- tholicorum consensionem rebellaverit,
114. col.i. 1), E.] Cap. 39. Quiequid vel omnes, vel plures uno eodemque sensu manifeste, frequenter, perseveranter, velut quodam consentiente sibi magis- trorum concilio, accipiendo, tenendo, tradendo firmayverint, id pro indubitato, certo, ratoque habeatur.—[Ibid., c. 28, ibid., col. ii. D.] Cap. 41. Quiequid uno sensu atque consensu tenuisse in- venirentur, id Eecclesiz verum et Ca- tholicum absque ullo scrupulo judica- retur.—[Ibid., c. 29. p. 115. col. ii. A; ] see also cap. 42. pp. 140-—142. [Ibid., 6. 31. p. 116. col. 1. B—E. Hickes’ re- ferences are made to an edition of the Commonitorium, published at Oxford, impensis Gul. Webb. 1631. ]
to be a Sacrifice, can rightly and duly administer it. 185
deserve their consideration, and hope they will seriously CHAP. πὶ.
and impartially ruminate upon them, lest they should not ~~
“rightly and duly administer that holy Sacrament.” The best of the Jewish writers tells us», that it was a profanation of a sacrifice, if the priest thought when he offered up one sacrifice that it was another; as if when he offered a burnt- offering he thought it was a peace-offering, or if when he offered a peace-offering he thought it was a burnt-offering. Whether that obliquity of thought, when it happened, had such an effect or no, I shall not now enquire; but this I dare say, if a Jewish priest, who did not believe himself to be a proper priest, nor the Jewish altar a proper altar, nor the sacrifices of the law true and proper sacrifices, had pre- sumed to offer while he was in this unhappy error, that he had profaned the sacrifice as far as he was concerned in it, and not offered it up ὁσίως καὶ ἀμέμπττω-ἷ, according to the will of God, though according to all the appointed rites, nor in unity of communion and conjunction with the Jewish Church. For the Jewish Church would not have suffered such priests, if known, to minister among the sons of Aaron and Zadok; nor would the ancient Catholic Church have endured bishops and presbyters without censure, who durst have taught that the Christian ministry was not a proper priesthood, the holy Eucharist not a proper sacrifice, or that Christian ministers were not proper priests.
But to finish this part of my discourse about the holy Eu- charist, and to prevent, as much as in me lies, the sinister censures and constructions of suspicious or ill-minded men, I conclude it with the words of Dr. John Forbes in his Jre- nicumk, where he treats of the Lord’s Supper.
h Maimonides de Cultu divino, Tract. vii. cap. 13. art. 1. [Tria cogi- tationum erant genera, quibus teme- rabantur victimz: hoc erant, si cogi- tando mutaretur nomen: si cogitando ‘routaretur locus; si cogitando muta- retur tempus. Jam cogitando muta- batur nomen si victima non immola- retur suo nomine; ut si quis immo-
p- 800. Par. 1678. ]
i [S. Clem. Rom. Ep. i. ad Cor. ec. 44, quoted note x, p. 88. ]
k [The title of this work is, Ireni- cum amatoribus veritatis et pacis in Ecclesia Scoticana. Prece et studio Joannis Forbesii, $.S. Theol. Doct. et ejusdem Profess. in Acad. Aberdoni- ensi; it was first printed at Aberdeen,
lando holocausto cogitaret immolare victimam pacificam, si primo aditu victimam immolaret nomine holocausti, et nomine hostiz pacifice, contrave.—
4to. 1631, and reprinted in the first volume of the edition of his collected works, fol. Amsterdam, 1703, to which last the references are made. ]
ECT. X.
186 Forbes’ Irenicum ; exact description of the Sacrifice.
a The holy fathers', who used the words sacrifice, priest-
noop. hood, altar, oblation, and mass, were far from the error of
those _mass-mongers, who blasphemously boast that they
properly and truly offer unto God Christ Himself, included
under the species of bread and wine, as a truly propitiatory
sacrifice. But nothing of this nature is found among the fathers.”
To which let me add what he saith by way of introduction to what he writes of the Lord’s Supper, immediately after the words above cited.
“T will not speak™ of the oblation of the elements, which was made by the people, and how the pastors, taking the oblations from their hands, placed them upon the Lord’s table, and with humble prayers offered them to God, that they might be sanctified and consecrated into a Sacrament of salvation to the communicants. Nor will I mention the Kucharistical sacrifice of praise which the faithful offered to God in the commemoration of the death of our Lord,’’ τα.
Here is as perfect a description of a sacrifice as can be made. First, the people’s offerings in bringing the gifts: secondly, the priest’s receiving them from their hands, and setting them upon the Lord’s table: thirdly, his offering them to God by prayer, to be sanctified into a Sacrament for the people; and, lastly, the solemnization of the action with a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, which the people by the minister’s mouth offered up to God. And if this be not a description of a most solemn oblation or sacrifice, I must confess I am not able to know what is. It exactly agrees with the order of administration of the Lord’s Supper in the Scottish Liturgy, which was framed according to this ‘description of the holy Eucharist, and that of Justin Martyr ; and I have often wondered how this writer came to make
! [Sancti illi patres, qui vocabulis torum a populo factam, et quod res a sacrificii, sacerdotii, altaris, oblationis, populo oblatas acceperint ex ofleren- miss, usi sunt, procul erant ab errore — tium manibus pastores, easque in mensa istorum missificorum, qui blasphe- Dominica collocarint, et prece supplice mantes jactant se proprie et vere of- eas Deo obtulerint sanctificandas et con- ferre Deo ipsum Christum, speciebus secrandasin sacramentum salutare po- panis et vini inclusum, in sacrificium pulo, Ut etiam omittam Eucharisti- vere propitiatorium. Nihil hujusmodi cum sacrificium Jaudis, quod pii, in illa invenitur apud patres.—Forbesii Ire- commemoratione mortis Domini, Do- nicum § 20. p. 441. col. ii. | mino offerrebant, &c.—Ibid., § 21. p. ' ™ [Ut omittam oblationem elemen- 441], col. ii.]
Inconsistent in asserting only a metaphorical Sacrifice. 187
such an introduction to a discourse, wherein he endeavoured CHP. τι. as much as he could to prove that the holy Sacrament of the a Lord’s Supper was only an improper metonymical sacrifice, and the Lord’s table an altar only in a metaphorical sense. But in that discourse he hath more such inconsistencies ; as where he saith®, “ The third consideration of a spiritual sacri- fice and oblation in the holy Eucharist, is obvious in the oblation, by which the faithful did not only offer up to God the symbols to be consecrated, but themselves also, coming to the table of the Lord, and there professing themselves to be His servants, and vowing all holy obedience to Him by right of redemption, as being redeemed by His blood.” But were not the symbols, which the faithful so solemnly offered up to God with themselves, by the ministration of the bishop or presbyter, an external material oblation? And was not the table to which they approached, and upon which their obla- tions were offered up in most solemn manner, used as an altar? and from that constant use of it, to which it was set apart, did it not, as things are denominated from their use, properly deserve that name? But indeed this learned man in that discourse confounds the notions of a real, or proper, and propitiatory sacrifice, one with the other, as likewise the notions of a truly proper and spiritual oblation, as if the Lord’s Supper could not be the one, because it is some- times called the other. XI. From hence, Sir, I proceed to my last argument, which sect. xt. I shall produce out of the writings of the New Testament, to Christian
Ministers
prove bishops and presbyters, but more especially bishops, Priests, as represent-
to be proper priests, because they are ministers of the arche- ing the true typal Melchisedec in His priestly kingdom upon earth, who jo" S* was made priest with an oath by His Father, who sware unto
Him, “ Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchi- Ps. 110. 4. sedec.” Being therefore ministers under Him, who is a priest
after the order and similitude of Melchisedec, who was both
king and priest, they must represent Him in His priestly as
well as His kingly capacity, and by consequence be invested
n [Tertia consideratio sacrificii, et ad mensam Dominicam, seque Domini oblationis spiritualis in Eucharistia, sanguine redemptos, et redemptionis occurrit in ea oblatione, qua fideles, jure servos Domini profitendo, et fidele non solum symbola consecranda, sed servitium yovendo.—Ib., ὃ 27. p. 445. etiam seipsos Deo offerunt: accedendo col. i. |
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD,
188 Christian Ministers are Priests, as
by Him with sacerdotal as well as regal power. As His ministers, or stewards, or ambassadors, or lieutenants in His kingdom upon earth, they must be His vicegerents in all His three offices, as priest, prophet, and king. I believe, Sir, your late writer will not deny that they represent Him in His prophetical office, as prophet is taken for a teacher, or that by their office they are proper prophets or teachers, whom He hath appointed to instruct His people in the mysteries of His kingdom unto the end of the world. For the same reason, unless the unhappy subject upon which he writes oblige him to deny it, I believe he will grant that they re- present Him also in His regal office, in virtue of which He is supreme rector or governor of His kingdom; and that as His vicegerents in it, they are proper governors of His Church. For what reason then should he deny them to be proper priests, who represent Him as really in His priestly as in His kingly and prophetical offices, and, like the Jewish priests, are His vicegerents in that, as truly and properly as they are in these. To illustrate this truth as much as I can, let us suppose that the typical Meichisedec, the sacerdotal king of Salem, like the Lord in the Gospel, had gone a long journey into a far country, and had called one of his subjects unto him, and given him authority in his absence to admi- nistrate his kingdom for him, with a particular power to perform all Divine worship duly, and more especially to offer sacrifice in the appointed times and place; upon such a supposition, Sir, I would ask your late writer whether such a minister of Melchisedec would not have been his vicegerent in both offices, and really invested with the sacerdotal, as well as the regal power? Would he not have been a vice- high-priest as well as a viceroy? and would not the people of Salem, when he prayed and sacrificed for them, have looked upon him as a true and proper, though a deputed high- priest? Sir, it is not without ground that I make this familiar comparison, because the antitypal Melchisedec so often com- pares Himself in the Gospel to a man taking a far journey, or travelling into a far country, who leaving his house gave authority to his servants, as He did to His Apostles and their successors, before He was parted from them and carried up into heaven. He committed the government of His sacer-
representing Christ, the true Melchisedec. 189
dotal kingdom in whole, and in part, jointly and severally to cuar. πὶ them. “As My Father sent Me (saith He) even so I send Pee, you; and when He had said this He breathed on them, and —23. said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost ; whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted, and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are re- tained.” Or as their commission is expressed, Matt. xxviii. 18—20, “ And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto Me both in heaven and earth. Go ye therefore and make all nations My disciples, baptizing them in the name of the Father, &c., and teaching them to observe whatsoever I have commanded you, and I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” This commission He gave them upon the mount, when He was ready to ascend, as it is also written, “ When He ascended up on high, He led in Ps. 68. 18. triumph a great multitude of captives, and gave gifts unto eee = men, that some might be Apostles, some prophets, &c., for perfecting the body of the saints, or Christians, made up of Jews and Gentiles, for the work of the ministry in doctrine, worship, and discipline, for the edifying the whole body of Christ, till we all, both Jews and Gentiles, come in the unity of the faith and knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect manhood, unto the full measure of the stature of Christ.”
Wherefore, Sir, this eternal archetypal and antitypal Melchisedec going up into the Heaven of Heavens, as it were into a far country, and leaving His Apostles and their successors as His stewards and vicegerents, invested with full power and authority to administrate His sacerdotal kingdom, is it not reasonable to believe that their ministry is truly and properly sacerdotal as well as regal, and a communication, or commission of the sacerdotal powers to mediate and make intercession for the people by prayers and sacrifices, as well as by their prophetical to teach, or by their rectoral® or ruling authority, which they derive from Him as a spiritual king, to govern His kingdom? which in the second place is therefore called a royal priesthood, as I have already observed, because
ο S. Ambros. de Dignitate Sacerdo- Unde quia regendz sacerdotibus con- tali; Quas oves, et quem gregem non traduntur, merito rectoribus suis subdi solum tune beatus suscepit Apostolus dicuntur——[S. Ambros. Op., tom. ii. Petrus, sed et [nobiscum eas accepit, App., p. 359, C. opus spurium. See et} cum illo eos nos accepimus omnes. above, vol. i. p. 195, notes p, 4.]
192 Unauthorized exercise of the Priest’s office, sinful.
given. So prophets by special command, or prophetical inspiration from God, often sacrificed and prayed, as others also did by special direction from them; thus King David built an altar in the threshing-floor of Araunah by the direc- tion of the Prophet Gad, ‘‘and offered burnt-offerings, and peace-offerings,” so that “the Lord was entreated for the land, and the plague was stayed from [5186]. So King Solomon who was a prophet, and as a prophet had secret intercourse with God, who appeared several times to him in dreams, dedicated the temple, and hallowed the court, and kneeling before the altar blessed the people, and made sup- plication forthem. But other kings, who were not prophets, and had no such prophetical directions or commands as David and Solomon had, could not execute any part of the priest’s office without sacrilege, nor could they presume to do it without sin at any other times but when they were authorized by God. Of this we have two remarkable ex- amples, one of King Saul, who having not patience to stay until Samuel the priest came, presumed to sacrifice and make supplication to the Lord, by which transgression he provoked God to seek out another man after His own heart to be king. The other is of King Uzziah, who presumed to go into the temple of the Lord, and offer incense upon the altar; but while he held the censer in his hand, the high-priests and the priests withstood him, and told him, it did not belong to him to burn incense upon the altar, but to the priests the sons of Aaron, who were consecrated to burn incense; and while they spoke thus, the leprosy rose in his forehead in the house of the Lord, for which they thrust him out thence, and con- tinuing a leper to the day of his death, he was cut off from the house of the Lord, so that the kingdom was administered by Jotham his son.
XII. Having premised this, I proceed to enquire what it is in which the exercise of the priest’s office doth more eminently consist, to prove more abundantly thereby that Christian ministers are proper priests. I have in part shewed
nature of before’, that one of the most noble, divine, and proper acts of their office. the priest’s office, is to mediatet, and make intercessions for
* [See above, sect. ii. p. 16, sqq.] ac Redemptore, [ad id1 Tim. ii. ‘unus Ὁ Claud. Espenceus de Mediatore, Mediator Dei et hominum’]; cap. 1.—
The common belief of all nations respecting Priesthood. 198
the people. And when I have shewed this more fully, and that it is part of the office of Christian liturgs or ministers to be mediators and intercessors with God; then I hope your late writer will see reason enough to think as you and I do, that they are proper priests.
As to the first, he cannot doubt of it; but however, because it is a truth which is now turned into ridicule among us, and by the sinful silence of our priests upon this subject is not understood by some, and worn out of the minds of others, I think I shall do God and His Church service, by shewing from the consent of all nations, and the common notion and belief of all mankind who were not perfectly barbarous, that priests by their office were ever taken to be mediators and advocates, or intercessors with the god whose priests they were. This I shall shew with as much brevity as I can, from
Christus solus verus, ac perfectus Me- 119 in Basilium, 1. 24, Op., tom, ii. diator. Nihil tamen prohibet medi- p. 1157.] Nec dubito quin plerique atores tum angelos, tum homines suo alii, qui nunc non occurrunt, non ve- quoque modo, et esse et dici, quatenus _rentur sacerdotes appellare pro universo ad hominum salutem, hoe est cum Deo _ terrarum orbe, Deique et hominum, seu unionem, Deo et Mediatori cooperantur inter hos et illum, mediatores, medios, et ministrant. ;Illos, [inquam, inter sequestres, legatos, deprecatores, inter- Deum et hominem medios... quivir- _cessores. [Claudii Espencei, Doctoris tutes subyehendo, superiorainferioribus Parisiensis, Opera; pp. 267. col. ii. C. ; jungant et hominibus ministrent]; hos 268. col. i. A.; and col. ii, C. D. fol. Par. autem utriusque testamenti ministros, 1619.] I desire the reader to observe, veteris quidem, quod verum Mediato- that Espenczus here speaks of angels rem figurant et prenunciant; noviau- as mediators for men with God, accord- ‘tem, quatenus ejusdem Christi salu- ing to the corrupt doctrines and prac- taria ipsius tum verba, tum Sacra- [166 of the Roman Church, in praying menta hominibus exhibent, atque dis- unto angels.
pensant. Si sic aiebat Moses fnisse So in St. Hierome, adversus Luci- se ac stetisse sequestrum, ac medium ferianos; [ὃ 5.] ‘Sacerdos quippe pro inter Deum et Israel, &c..... Quid laico offert oblationem suam, imponit
multa? Prophetarum Apostolorumque manum subjecto, reditum Sancti Spi- singuli mediatores fuerunt. Sic ad _ ritus invocat, atque ita eum, qui tradi- Fabiolam de veste sacerdotali Hierony- tus fuerat Satanz in interitum carnis, mus [Epist. 64. § 5. Op., tom. i. col. ut spiritus salvus fieret, indicta in 365, C.] et ad Malach. cap.ii. [Comm. populum oratione, altario reconciliat.’ in Malach., Op., tom. vi. col. 960, A.; [S. Hieron. Op., tom. ii. col. 17, see below.] Pontifices, episcopos, sa- A.] So on Malachi ii. 7; ‘ Exponit cerdotes, Dei et hominum sequestres;) nomen suum Esdras sacerdos Dei, hoe Theophylactus ad Joan. cap. 111. [Op., est Malachi, quod angelus Dei inter- tom. i. p. 548, E.].... Chrysostomus pretatur. Angelus autem, id est, nun- Homil. de verbis Isaiz [Hom. ν. ὃ 1. cius, sacerdos Dei verissime dicitur, Op., tom. vi. p. 132, C.]; Lib. vi. de quia Dei et hominum sequester est, Sacerdotio. [Id. Op., tom. i. p. 424, A.] | ejusque ad populum nunciat volunta- —Ambrosius, Oratione priore prepa- tem, et idcirco in sacerdotis pectore ratoria ad Missam [ὃ 5. apud Op., S. rationale, [et in rationali doctrina et Ambr., tom.ii. App., p.491,C.opusspu- veritas ponitur,] ut discamus sacer- rium. |—Nazianzenus in Apologetico dotem doctum esse debere, et praco- [S. Greg. Naz. Orat. ii. § 91. Op., tom. nem Dominice veritatis——[Id., Op., i, p. 55, B.], et Monodia in Basilium, tom. vi. col. 960, A.]
[Id. Carm., lib. ii, sect. ii, Epitaph.
HICKES, ra)
SECT, XII.
CHAP. II.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST~ HOOD.
Judg. 5. 30.
194 Priests universally believed to be Mediators and
the agreeing practice of heathens, and of the Church of God under the patriarchal, Jewish, and Christian dispensations ; among whom the priests ever acted, and were ever esteemed, as mediators between God and men.
I shall give but two examples, though I might give more from heathen authors. The first is that of the Persian priests", who at their sacrifices put up prayers not only for them- selves, but for all the Persians, and especially for the king. The second is that of Apollo’s priest in the first book of Homer’s Iliads. The story in short, you know, Siz, is this ; the Grecians among other captives had carried away the daughter of Chryses the priest of Apollo, whom King Aga- memnon took for his prey, as the custom of war was in ancient times, according to the song of Deborah and Barak, “ Have they not divided the prey, to every man a damsel or two?” Upon this, the priest arrayed in all his pontificals, and holding a golden sceptre, the ensign of his god, in his hand, goes to the Grecian camp, supplicating, and offering ransom for his daughter. But King Agamemnon treated him very roughly, and without any respect shewed to his cha- racter, sent him away without her. Chryses upon the re- pulse and affronts he received, prayed to his god to revenge him on the Grecians, upon which Apollo shot his arrows’ of pestilence among them, which first brought a murrain among their cattle, and then a grievous mortality among the men. This obliged them to consult Calchas the augur, to know what was the cause of Apollo’s anger, who upon security and protection promised by Achilles, told them, it was not
> ἊΝ »,
ἃ [It does not appear to be the Αὐτὰρ ἔπειτ᾽ αὐτοῖσι βέλος ἐχεπευκὲς
priests, but the person who gives the ἀφιεὶς sacrifice, who is meant. τῶν δὲ ὡς ἑκάσ- Βάλλ᾽. τῳ θύειν θέλει. ... ἑωυτῷ μὲν δὴ τῷ 110.
θύοντι: ἰδίῃ μούνῳ οὔ οἱ ἐγγίνεται ἀρᾶ- σθαι ἀγαθά: ὃ δὲ πᾶσι τοῖσι Πέρσῃσι κα- τεύχεται εὖ “νίνεσθαι, καὶ τῷ βασιλεῖ. ἐν γὰρ δὴ τοῖσι ἅπασι Πέρσῃσι καὶ αὐ- τὸς ylverat.—Herod., lib. i. cap. 182.7 v Tl. i. 42—52. τίσειαν Δαναοὶ ἐμὰ δάκρυα σοῖσι βέ- λεσσιν. “Exdayiay δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὀϊστοὶ ἐπ᾿ ὥμων χωο- μένοιο. Μετὰ δ᾽ ἰὸν ἔηκεν Δεινὴ δὲ κλαγγὴ γένετ᾽ ἀργυρέοιο βιοιο.
‘Qs δὴ τοῦδ᾽ ἐνεκά σφιν Ἑ κηβόλος
ἄλγεα τεύχει.
So Psalm xci. 5. οὐ φοβηθήσῃ ἀπὸ φόβου νυκτερινοῦ, ἀπὸ βέλους πετομέ- νου ἡμέρας. vers. LXX.
Οὐδὲ μεθημέριον πταμένου ῥοιξηδὸν éicrod.—Apollinarii Episc. Laod. In- terpretatio Psalmorum | versibus heroi- cis, Ps. xe. 1. 11. Biblioth. Patr., tom. v. p- 417, E. It is uncertain whether this translation was made by Apol- linarius the father, of Alexandria, who flourished A.D. 362, or by the son, fl. 370. See Cave, tom. i. p. 225.]-
Intercessors ; instances from Herodotus and Homer. 195
for any want of supplication or sacrifice, that his deity was angry at them, but that he was provoked by King Aga- memnon’s ill usage of his priest, and refusing to restore his daughter, and farther assured them, that the plague would not stop till they had freely restored to Chryses his daughter, and sent him an hecatomb to offer to his god. With great unwillingness and difficulty King Agamemnon was brought to part with his beloved captive Chryseis, for so was she called; but at last his majesty sent her back very honourably to her father, with an hecatomb for Apollo, to pacify* his wrath, both which Ulysses with all respect and humble language presented to the priest. Having received his daughter with great joy, he proceeded to offer the sacrifice which the Grecians sent to Apollo, whose deputies joined their pans of praise with his intércessions, and so the plague was stayed in the Grecian camp.
Sir, one cannot but observe here how Homer Hebraizes, and how the plague is described by him to have been stayed by the mediation of Chryses, from wasting the Grecian army, as that which arose in the congregation of Israel upon the rebellion of Korah, was stayed by the atonement which
CHAP. IL
SECT. XII.
Aaron madey, after it had destroyed fourteen thousand and Numb. 16.
seven hundred men. This brings to my remembrance that passage of our learned countryman Alcuin, proper to this subject, in his epistle to his scholar Eanbald’, when he was archbishop of York. Ut omnia fiant acceptabilia Domino Deo, qui te elegit sibi sacerdotem, ..... “That all things (saith he) may be acceptable to the Lord God, who hath
chosen thee to be His priest.
* Φοίβῳ θ᾽ ἱερὴν ἑκατόμβην
Ῥέξαι ὑπὲρ Δαναῶν, bpp’ ἰλασόμεθ᾽ ἄνακτα.---ἰ I]. i. 443, 444. |
y S. Ambros.in Hebr. cap. vii; Tanta quippe erat sacerdotii excellentia, ut etiam qui similis essent honoris proge- nitoribus, et eundem haberent proge- nitorem, tamen ut multo amplius me- liores essent fratribus suis, quo sacer- dotio digni efficerentur, velut Aaron inter vivos et mortuos, ut Dei iram placaret que exarserat, stare legitur: quod propterea unus ex populo facere poterat (licet omnes unum haberent progenitorem) quod sacerdos esset.— {S. Ambros. Op., tom. iii. p. 499, A. ed. Rom. 1579; (see above, note h, p.
‘For every high-priest taken
33.) See Rabanus M. Op., tom. ν. p. 553, E. Alcuin. Op., tom. i. p. 686. S. Chrysost. Op., tom. xii. p. 123, A. τοσαύτη, φησὶ, τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἣ ὑὕπερ- βολὴ, ὥστε τοὺς ὁμοτίμους ἀπὸ προγό- νων, καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν ἔχοντας προπάτορα, πολλῷ βελτίους εἶναι τῶν ἄλλων.
2 [Β. Flacci Albini seu Alcuini Ab- batis, Epist. 50. (scr. A.D. 796.) ad Eanbaldum Episcopum. Dilectissimo in Christo filio Eanbaldo Archiepiscopo devotus per omnia pater Albinus salu- tem. (Hic Eanbaldus idem fortassis est, quem Epist. 6. vocat Presbyterum ac paulo post electus est episcopus Ebo- racensis Ecclesiz. Annott. in locum.) Ut omnia acceptabilia fiant Domino
0 2
47—49,
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOP.
196 The heathen retained the true notions of Priesthood, &e.
from among men, is ordained for men in things pertaining to God.’ Aaron stood with the censer of his office between the living and the dead, that the anger of God should not burn longer against the people. For the priest of God ought to be the preacher of His will to the people, and an inter- cessor for the people to God, as a mediator between God and men.” So saith St. Ambrose, in EHpist. ad Hebr., cap. v.4 Pontificis officium est, inter Deum stare et populum, et Deum deprecari pro populi delictis. Hoc enim Christus fecit, seipsum offerens pro peccatis nostris, semper vivus ad interpellandum pro nobis: “It is the office of a priest to stand between God and the people, and to pray unto Him for the forgiveness of their sins, which Christ did who ever lives to make inter- cession for us, when He offered Himself upon the cross.” According to this common notion that all religions had of priests, he saith in his words cited in the page foregoing”, “that the priests were more excellent than their brethren, upon the account of the priesthood, and that Aaron made atonement for the people, standing between the living and the dead, because he was a priest.” Indeed it is difficult not to observe, how the very heathens, though so bewildered in polytheism by the delusions of devils, yet with the original no- tions of temple, altars, and sacrifices, retained that of priests, and believed that their intercessions as such were most powerful to remove Divine judgments, and impetrate Divine blessings and favours, and that the anger of heaven was more easily atoned by their prayers, than those of other men. They also esteemed priests as holy persons, and the affronts and indignities which men put upon them, they. understood to be put upon their gods. These first notions of religion, and some others, as of blasphemy and sacrilege, they held in common with the Church of God, and therefore they offered all their sacrifices for the public safety by the priests only, and to them they had recourse when any public calamity was Deo, qui te elegit 5101 sacerdotem. pradicator debet esse in populum, et Omnis namque pontifex ab hominibus intercessor ad Deum pro populo, quasi assumptus pro hominibus constituitur mediator inter Deum et homines.— in his que sunt ad Deum. Aaron B. Alcuini Op., tom. i. pp. 63, 64. ]
stabat cum turribulo dignitatis suze * [S. Ambros. Op., tom. iii. p. 491, inter vivos ac mortuos, ut ira Dei non D.ed. Rom. 1579. Rabanus M., tom.
ardesceret plus in populo. Sacerdos ν. p. 548, E. Alcuin., tom. i. p. 678.] vero Dei (verbi) et voluntatis illius Ὁ [See note y, p. 195.]
The office of a Priest to cleanse and expiate, ministerially. 197
to be averted, or any great and public blessing was to be cmar.u. obtained, accounting them as the immediate ministers of “~~ the gods, by whom they dispensed their favours to men. For
this reason they called them καθαρταὶς, i. 6. ‘ purgators,’ or ‘cleansers,’ because by their sacrifices and intercessions they thought they were cleansed and purified from their sins, and delivered from the punishments due untothem. That Greek
word comes from καθαίρω, which in common acceptation literally signifies to ‘ purge, cleanse, or purify,’ as John xv. 2,
but in its religious and tropical sense it signifies to ‘ expiate,’
Heb. x. 1, 2, “The law can never with those sacrifices which
they offered year by year continually make the comers there-
unto perfect; for then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should
have no more conscience of sins.” This is otherwise expressed
by καθάρισμον ποιεῖν, Heb. i. 3, “ Who when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.” It is likewise expressed by καθαρίζω,
chap. ix. 13, 14, “For if the blood of bulls and goats sancti-
fieth to the purifying of the flesh; how much more shall the
blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered up Himself without spot to God, purge your consciences from
dead works?” He, as our sovereign pontiff, who put away
sin by the sacrifice of Himself, is our great purgator in the primary and most principal sense of the word, as it is written
1 John 1. 7, “The blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth
us from all sin.” But then according to His holy will and ordinance, and in virtue of His all-powerful expiation, His priests are also καθαρταὶ, ‘purgators,’ and in a secondary ministerial sense expiate the sins of the people. This was
true of the Levitical priests, who had power not only -to
purify the flesh, as in case of the leprosy, but to expiate the
sins of a ruler, of any one of the common people, nay of Lev. 4. 22, the whole congregation, as it is written, “The priest shall oo 2076.7. make atonement‘,” or “the priest shall make atonement be-
¢ Jul. Poll. Onomasticon, lib. i. c. 1. segm. 14. [ καθαρταὶ follows ἱερουργοὶ in the passage, part of which was quoted note i, p. 20. ]
4 The Hebrew δον, which we ren- der ‘to make atoneinent,’ and other ver- sions ‘ to make expiation,’ or ‘to pro-
pitiate,’ ‘expiate,’ ‘ pacify,’ or ‘recon- cile,’ [so the Vulgate, see below, note g, p- 209,] the Spanish translation of the Jews renders by such expressions, perdonar, por perdonar sobre, [{ Ley. i. 4,] para perdonar sobre, [ Exod. xxx. 16 ;] and by perdonangas, as de sangre
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Acts 22. 6.
John 20. 23.
198 Christian Priesthood instituted for the remission of sins.
fore the Lord, and it shall be forgiven him.” So the evan- gelical ministers are all ‘purgators,’ or ‘atoning ministers®,’ all their offices being instituted for the “ pardon or remission of sins.” Their baptism is for the washing away of sins, as it was said by Ananias to Saul, “ Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” The office of the holy Eucharist is all of an atoning nature; for it is a commemorative sacrifice of that which Christ offered upon the cross, and the priest delivers it to the faithful com- municants, as a pledge of their salvation, and a seal of the pardon of their sins. The office of absolution in His name and by Tis authority, as well as in the virtue of His all- sufficient merits, is also for the purging and putting away of sin, as it was spoken by His own blessed lips, ‘‘ Whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained, and whosesoever sins ye re- mit, they are remitted unto them;” and let us glorify God, who hath given such ministerial power of pardoning unto men. But this by the way of the Jewish and Christian ministry or priesthood, of which my undertaking will oblige me to speak again. And therefore to proceed from heathenism to the patriarchal religion; in the times of the patriarchs, the priests, and prophets empowered to act as priests, were also ‘purgators’ by God’s appointment to expiate sins.
So when Abimelech king of Gerar had taken Sarah Abra- ham’s wife, God said unto him in a dream, “ Restore the
man his wife, for he is a prophet, and he shall pray for thee,
and thou shalt live ;”
de limpieza de las pardonangas, [ Exod. xxx. 10,] plata de las perdonangas, [ibid., ver. 16,] &c., that is to say, ‘to procure pardon or forgiveness,’ ‘the sin-offering of pardon or forgiveness,’ ‘the pardon or forgiveness-money,’ or ‘atonement money.’—[ The translation referred to is entitled, Biblia en lengua Espanola; traduzida palabra por pala- bra de la verdad Hebrayca, por muy excelentes letrados. ed. 2. Amsterd. Anno 5471. (A.D. 1661.) ]
€ Const. Apost., lib. vill. cap. 5. δὸς .., ἐπὶ τὸν δοῦλόν σου τόνδε, ὃν ἐξελέξω εἰς ἐπίσκοπον, ποιμαίνειν τὴν ἁγίαν σου ποίμνην, . . -. καὶ ἐξιλασκόμε- voy σου τὸ πρόσωπον, κ.τ.λ. “Give unto this Thy servant, who is chosen by Thee to be a bishop, grace to feed Thy holy flock, ... and by making atonement in
aud so Abraham, who was a priest’,
Thy presence,’’ &e.—[{ Concil.,tom.1. p. 461, quoted at length, note y, p. 140.]
f [ταῦτα μὲν οὖν ὑμῖν] ὃ σεμνὸς ᾿Αβρα- ἃμ οὗτος, 6 πατριάρχης .. . 6 τῆς ἀρετῆς κανὼν, ἣ τῆς ἱερωσύνης τελείωσις, 6 τὴν ἑκούσιον θυσίαν προσάγων τῷ κυρίῳ σή- μερον, τὸν μονογενῆ.---. Greg. Nazianz. { Orat.i. (al. xli.)§ 7. Op., tom. i. p.6, Α.] This he spake of his father in allusion to Abraham, of whose sacrifice he speaks properly; μέγας 6 ᾿Αβραὰμ, [καὶ πα- τριάρχης, καὶ θύτης καινῆς θυσίας, τὸν ἐκ τῆς ἐπαγγελίας τῷ δεδωκότι προσα- γαγὼν, ἱερεῖον ἕτοιμον καὶ πρὸς τὴν σφαγὴν ἐπειγόμενον.-- Orat.xliii.(al.xx.) § 71. ibid., p. 825, C.] καὶ τὴν ᾿Αβραὰμ θυσίαν [πάντως ἀκήκοας. --- Orat. xvii. (al. xiii.) § 10. ibid., p. 828, E. In the third edition the last reference was re- peated, perhaps instead of ᾿Αβραὰμ...
Patriarchal Priesthood intercessory and expiatory. 199
as well as a patriarch and prophet, prayed unto God for him, and God healed him and his house. So Cosmas Indico- pleustes describes Melchisedec as an intercessor by virtue of his priestly office, in these words: οὗτος ὁ βασιλεὺς, k.7.r.2 “This is the king who instructed the people committed to him to be conversant in these things, and by ministering in holy things in this order (of the priesthood) made atonement for his own people. And this man, first as a priest having blessed Abraham, and offered up thanks to God, took tithes of all that Abraham had.” Nay, I might have begun with Abel*, Enoch, and Noah, who were all priests as well as patriarchs'; and as such offered up sacrifices of atonement
OM. θυσίαν ξένην, καὶ τῆς μεγάλης ἀντί- τυπον.---ΟΥαῖ. xxvii. §18.ibid., p.509,B. ] & τῆς ᾿Αβραμιαίου θυσίας | ἐκείνης εἰ μή τι τολμητέον καὶ μεῖζον.---ΟΥαῖ. xxv. § 4. ibid., p. 288, E. The offering mentioned in the first extract was St. Gregory him- self, who that day was entering on the exercise of the priesthood, being given to God by his father; he was not lite- rally μονογενή».] ’
“ [οὗτος 6 βασιλεὺς πάντως καὶ τὸν ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ διοικούμενον λαὺν, ἐν τούτοις ἀναστρέφεσθαι νουθετῶν διετέλει, αὐτῇ τῇ τάξει ἱερουργῶν καὶ ἐξιλεούμενος περὶ τοῦ ἰδίου λαοῦ... οὗτος πρῶτος ὡς ἱερεὺς τὸν ᾿Αβραὰμ εὐλογήσας, καὶ τῷ θεῷ εὐχαριστήσας δεκάτας ἐλάμβανεν ἀπὸ πάντων ὧν εἶχεν ABpadu.—Cosme monachi Agyptii Topographia Chris- tiana, seu Christianorum opinio de Mundo,] lib. v. p. 217, B., published with Eusebius Czsariensis’ Comment on the Psalms, We. in folio, at Paris, by D. Bernard Montfaucon, a Benedictine monk. [ Nova Collectio Patrum, tom. ii. published 1706. |
ἃ [Quum] Abel quoque, et Enoch, et Noe placuerint Deo, et victimas ob- tulerint.—[S. Hieron. Epist. 73. (al. 126,) ad Evangelum, (al. Evagrium,) § 2. Op., tom. i. col. 439, C.] Simul et hoc tradunt, quod usque ad sacerdo- tium Aaron omnes primogeniti ex stirpe Noe, cujus series et ordo describitur, fuerint sacerdotes, et Deo victimas im- molarint.—[Tbid., § 6. col. 442, D.]
i In the prayer of consecration of a bishop, Const. Apost., lib. viii. cap. 5. 6 προορίσας ἐξ ἀρχῆς, K.T.A. ‘Thou who from the beginning appointedst priests to preside over Thy people, Abel at first, Seth, and Enos, and Enoch, and Noah, and Melchisedec, and Job: who didst constitute Abraham, and
the rest of the patriarchs, with Thy holy servants Moses, Aaron, Eleazar, and Phineas; who didst of them elect princes and priests (ἄρχοντας καὶ ἱερεῖς) to serve in the tabernacle of the testi- mony ; who chosedst Samuel to be a priest and a prophet; who never didst leave Thy sanctuary without ministers,’’ &c. [6 mpoopicas ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἱερεῖς εἰς ἐπιστασίαν λαοῦ σου" ᾿Αβὲλ ἐν πρώτοις, Σὴθ, καὶ ᾿Ενὼς, καὶ Ἐνὼχ, καὶ Νῶε, καὶ Μελχισεδὲκ, καὶ ᾿Ιώβ' ὁ ἀναδείξας ᾿Αβραὰμ, καὶ τοὺς λοιποὺς πατριάρχας σὺν τοῖς πιστοῖς σου θεράπυυσιν Μωῦσεῖϊ καὶ ᾿Ααρὼν, καὶ ᾿Ελεαζάρῳ καὶ Φινεές" ὃ ἐξ αὐτῶν προχειρισάμενος ἄρχοντας καὶ ἱερεῖς ἐν τῇ σκηνῇ τοῦ μαρτυρίου" ὃ τὸν Σαμουὴλ ἐκλεξάμενος εἰς ἱερέα καὶ προφήτην" ὃ τῷ ἁγιάσματί (f. τὸ ἁγίασ- μά) σου ἀλειτούργητον μὴ ἐγκαταλιπών" κ. τ. A.—Concil., tom, i. p. 461, C.] So St. Chrysostom, Hom. in Genesin xxxv. (Μελχισεδὲκ) . . . ἱερεὺς δὲ ἦν ἴσως ad- τοχειροτόνητοΞ᾽ ἷ οὕτω γὰρ ἦσαν τότε οἱ ἱερεῖς" ἤτοι οὖν διὰ τὸ τῇ ἡλικίᾳ προ- βῆναι of προσήκοντες αὐτῷ ἀπονενεμή- κασι τὴν τιμήν" ἤ καὶ αὐτὸς ἱερατεύειν ἐπετήδευσε, καθάπερ ὃ Νῶε, καθάπερ 6 ᾿Αβὲλ, καθάπερ 6 ᾿Αβραὰμ, ἥνικα τὰς θυσίας mpoonyov.—Op., tom. iv. p. 356, E.] ‘‘ Melchisedee was a priest per- haps ordained by himself, (for such were priests then,) either because his people attributed that honour to him for his seniority, or that he devoted himself to the priesthood, as Noah, as Abel, as Abraham, when they offered sacrifices.” But I do not doubt they were also called and approved by God at least by signs, as this father saith that Aaron was, (ἐχειροτον θη), by the fire that fell from heaven upon Corah and his crew, and by the blossoming rod, Numb. xvi. and xvii. [6 yap ’Aa-
CHAP. 11. SECT. XIL
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Gen. 8. 20, Pail
Job 42. 8, 9
chap. 1. 8.
Deut. 33. 5.
Exod. 26. A, 8.
200 Noah and Job were Priests as well as Princes.
for themselves and their people. When Noah went out of the ark he built an altar unto the Lord, and offered burnt- offerings upon it of every clean beast and fowl, and the Lord smelled a sweet savour, and was so pleased with his priestly administration, that He “said in His heart, I will not curse the ground any more for man’s sake, neither will I again
smite every living thing, as I have done.”’ But to proceed ;
-so God bid Job’s friends, when His anger was kindled
against them, go to him with a burnt-offering, “and he (saith He) shall pray for you, and him will I accept.” For Job* was a priest as well as a prince, or a sacerdotal patri- arch, who, according to the practice of those times, when princes of tribes and countries were priests, offered as many burnt-offerings as he had sons to make atonement for, if perhaps they had sinned against God in the time of their feasting with one another. So Moses was a priest! as well as a prophet and a king; priest in such an eminent man- ner, that Grotius, whom I cited before™, had no occasion to mend the versions of the sixth verse in the ninety-ninth Psalm, which all translations, as well as ours, render ‘‘ Moses and Aaron among His priests,” For as priest, or sacerdotal prince, he builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars according to the twelve tribes of Israel, and offered" one of
ρὼν ἐχειροτονήθη πόλλακις, ὡς ἐπὶ τοῦ ῥάβρου, καὶ ὅτε τὸ πῦρ κατῆλθε, καὶ Hpa- νισε τοὺς ἐπιπηδῶντας τῇ ἱερωσύνῃ.--- S. Chrys. Hom. in Hebr. viii. Op., tom. xii. p. 82, C.] Thus it is written of Abel, that ‘“‘God had respect to him and his offering,’’ [Gen. iv. 4,7 and as the Apostle speaks, Heb. xi. 4, ‘‘ bore testimony to his gifts’’ or oblations, ‘“‘nempe igne czlitus misso super ea dona,’”’ as learned men generally ex- pound the place. [Grotius in locum; after the words just quoted, he adds, ‘*et ita hic Grzeci interpretes omnes.’’— Crit. Sacr., tom. vii. col. 1134.] And so, Gen. vill. 21, God is said to have ‘*smelled a sweet savour’’ from the sacrifice of Noah, who doubtless was a priest as well as a prophet before the flood.
« In Job volumine legimus, quod et ipse oblator munerum fuerit, et sacer- dos, et quotidie pro filiis suis hostias immolarit.—S. Hieron. [ Epist. 73. (al. 126,) ad Evangelum, § 2. Op., tom. i. col, 439, C.] Quid Job in operibus
promptius, [in tentationibus fortius, in dolore patientius, in timore submissius, in fide verius, nec his tamen si roga- rent concessurum se Deus dixit. ]|—S. Cyprianus de Lapsis, [Op., p. 187. ed. Ben. ]
1 ἱερεῖς δὲ ὁμοίως ἀμφότεροι" Μωσῆς γάρ, φησι, καὶ ᾿Ααρὼν | ἐν τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν αὐτοῦ" ὃ μὲν ἄρχων ἀρχόντων καὶ ἱερεὺς ἱερέων, K. T.A.—S. Greg. Naz. Orat. xi. (al. vi.) § 2. Op., tom. i. p. 242, C.] “Both were equally priests, for He saith, ‘Moses and Aaron among His priests.’ ’—[Ps. xcix. 6. }
καὶ ἐπιδεδειχὼς Μωῦσῆν ἄριστον βασιλέα καὶ νομοθέτην καὶ ἀρχιερέα, τὸ τελευταῖον ἔρχομαι δηλώσων, ὅτι καὶ προφητῶν γέγονε δοκιμώτατος“.--ἘὮΠ]Ο, de Vita Mosis, lib. iii. [Op., tom. ii, p. 163. }
m [See above, p. 15, note u. |
π It is said, [ver. 5,] “ Moses sent young men of the children of Israel, who offered burnt-offerings, and sacri- ficed peace-offerings unto the Lord.” These young men were the first-born,
Moses as a Priest atoned and interceded. 201
the most solemn sacrifices of burnt-offerings and peace-offer- cmar. 1. ings unto the Lord that ever was offered to Him, even that — holy federal sacrifice, of which he took half the blood and
put it in basins, and half of it he sprinkled on the altar; and
when he had read the book of the covenant in the audience
of all the people, he sprinkled the blood upon them, and
said, “ Behold the blood of the covenant, which the Lord
hath made with you.” Asa priest he offered another most Exod. 29. solemn sacrifice to God, when he consecrated Aaron and his aa sons to minister to Him in the priest’s office, at which time
he took of the blood of the ram of consecration, and sprinkled ver. 20, 21. it upon the altar, and put it upon the tips of their right
ears, the thumbs of their right hands, and the great toes
of their right feet, and also sprinkled it with the holy oil
upon them and their garments ; by which, as the text saith,
« Aaron and his garments were hallowed, and his sons and
their garments with him.” As a priest he had power to go
into the tabernacle to speak with God, whose voice he heard Numb.7.89. from the mercy-seat from between the two cherubims, and
to bless the people with Aaron; and to hasten to my sub- Lev. 9. 23. ject, as a priest he cried unto the Lord for Miriam, and the Numb. 12. Lord healed her; as a priest he interceded with God after ΤΣ 532. the sin of the golden calf, when the Lord said, “ Let Me 10. saa. alone, that I may consume them.” But he made atonement te ane for their sin by his intercession, and upon the continuance τ 88.
y 1
or priests of every family, who were afterwards redeemed, when the children of Israel solemnly offered up the tribe of Levi to God for His service. Numb. viii. 6, 13; so chap. 111. from ver. 5 to
= τ τ --— misit primogenitos, ha-
ss} CRIs bet (ibid.) sed etiam
Tawasii Persica, qua quod ipsum so-
ver. 14. The young men then were such priests as these, and therefore the Chaldee paraphrase reads it, ‘‘ Moses sent the first-born.”
To which agree the Arabic and Per- sian translation, as Mr. Selden observed, De successione in Pontificatum Hebre- orum, c. 1. [Qui 4) seu juvenes hic dicti sunt, pro primogenitis, utpote qui jure suo tune sacerdotes fuere, (Tal- mudici) sumunt. Unde etiam eodem in loco Chaldzus Paraphrastes Onkelos expressim pro misit juvenes substituit receptissime sententiz satis callens 22 MN) Mow, misit primogenitos.— (Bibl. Polyg!. Walton., tom. i. p. 329.) Adstipulatur non solum R, Saadize versio Arabica, que hoc in _ loco
nat, legitur, Cn 0 Helin 5 Pers. Taw. (iv. p. 147.)—Seldeni Op., vol. ii. col. 83, 84. Lond. 1726.] and De Successionibus ad leges Hebre- orum, cap. 5. [Ibid., col. 16, 17. The sacerdotal privileges of the first- born are treated of in that place; but this text is not referred to.] And Dr. Cudworth, in his True Notion of the Lord’s Supper, [p. 31, only quoting Selden as above, ] London, 1642, six- teen years before the Polyglot Bible was printed. See also Martinii Lex- icon Philologicum in the word sacri- ficium. [Persone offerentium due sunt, anima scilicet et synagoga. Animarum alia sacerdos, alia princeps, alia pri- vata persona. |
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Numb. 11. PR
5.81: 5:19.
Numb. 16. 47, 48,
ver. 33.
ver. 12—19,
202 The Aaronical Priesthood instituted for mediation and
of his mediation by earnest prayers and supplications, God also promised to let His Presence go with them, and to give them rest. His prayers as a priest obtained the victory over Amalek, according to that of Gregory Nazianzen®, “God, by the secret and mystical figure of Moses’ hands, discom- fited Amalek ; so powerful were the hands of a priest held up upon the mountain, and put in the posture of prayer to obtain a victory, which many myriads of men could not have obtained.” At Taberah also, when the Lord was provoked to consume the people with fire, he prayed unto the Lord as a priest, and the fire was quenched. And to conclude; as a sacerdotal prince he mediated between God and the people at Horeb, when as he speaks, Deut. v. 5?, “I stood between the Lord and you at that time; and with respect to which the law that God then gave them, is said by the Apostle to have been “ ordained by angels in the hands of a mediator.” So after Aaron and his sons were consecrated to the priest’s office, and the priesthood was as it were entailed upon them, they became, by virtue of their office, the great mediators betwixt God and men in the Jewish Church. I have already more than once mentioned Aaron’s staying the plague by offering imcense in the Jewish camp; and in the thirtieth chapter of Exodus, verse 10, it is said of the altar of incense, “That Aaron shall make atonement upon the horns of it once in a year, with the blood of the sin-offerimg of atone- ments, as being most holy unto the Lord.” This was done on the tenth day of September4, the great day of expiation, which is particularly described in Levit. xvi., where we read how the high-priest on that day of every year made atone- ment for himself, for his house, and for all the congregation of Israel, by sacrifices there mentioned, and by entering into the most holy place within the veil, with a censer full of
burning coals of fire from off the altar, and his hands full of
© [οὗτος (sc. 6 Oeds) κατεπολέμησε Versio Vulg. Cum quidem ego tune
τὸν ᾿Αμαλὴκ, χειρῶν ἀποῤῥήτῳ καὶ μυ- στικῷ σχήματι: τοῦτο γὰρ ἴσχυσὰν ἱερέως χεῖρες ἐπὶ τοῦ ὄρους αἰρόμεναι, καὶ εἰς εὐχὴν τυπούμεναι, ὃ πυλλαὶ μυ- ριάδες οὐκ ἴσχυσαν.---. Greg. Nazianz., Orat. xiii. (al. xxx.) Op., tom. i. p. 258, Ὁ, D.]
Ego sequester et medius fui inter Dominum et vos in illo tempore.—
inter Jovam et vos enunciandorum ijlius dictorum sequester essem.—Cas- talio. Nam [et] Moyses pro peccatis [populi petiit, nec tamen peccantibus veniam cum petiisset accepit. |—S. Cy- prianus de Lapsis, [Op., p. 187. ed. Ben. |
4 [Rather, “the tenth day of the seventh month,” Ley. xvi. 29. ]
atonement. The sacrifice and intercession of Samuel. 203
sweet incense, the cloud of which was to cover the mercy- cuar. u. seat, and with his finger to sprinkle the mercy-seat eastward a seven times with the blood of the sin-offerings, as the Apo-
stle observes, Heb. ix. 7, where he saith, “ But mto the se-
cond went the high-priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people.” To this let me add the example of Samuel’s me- diation and intercession for the people, 1 Sam. vu. There ver. 8. “the children of Israel said unto Samuel, Cease not to cry
unto the Lord our God for us. And Samuel said, Gather all ver. 5. Israel together at Mizpeh, and I will pray for you unto the Lord. And Samuel took a sucking lamb, and offered it for ver. 9. a burnt-offering wholly to the Lord for Israel, and the Lord heard him.” So in chapter xii. the people said again unto ver. 19. him; “ Pray for thy servants unto the Lord thy God, that
we die not, for we have added unto all our sins this evil to
ask us a king.” To whom he answered; “God forbid that ver. 23. I should sin against they Lord in ceasing to pray for you.”
For to intercede with God for the people was the common office of all priests, as we read in Psalm xcix. 6; ‘“ Moses
and Aaron among His priests, and Samuel among them that
call upon His name; they called upon the Lord, and He answered them.” [This is observed by the son of Sirach in Ecclesiasticus, chap. xlv. 6, 7,15, 16. “ He exalted Aaron
an holy man like unto him, even his brother, of the tribe of Levi. An everlasting covenant He made with him, and gave
him the priesthood among the people . . .. Moses consecrated
him with holy oil. This was appointed unto him by an ever- lasting covenant, and to his seed so long as the heavens should remain; that they should minister unto Him, and execute the office of the priesthood and bless the people
in His name. He chose him out of all men living to offer sacrifices unto the Lord, imcense and a sweet savour,
for a memorial, to make reconciliation for His people’.”’]
As for the atonement which the priests of the second order made for the people, they are at large and in order
set down in the seven first chapters of Leviticus, where nothing can be plainer than that it was the priest’s office,
as their orator, to confess the sins of the people, and to
τ [This addition is taken from the Supplement of 1715, No. 14, p. 11.]
204 Priests, the ministers of the Lord. The Definitions
curistiAN make supplications and intercessions for them by sacrifice, PRIEST- . . . . . noop. OF without it, as is evident from the ninth and tenth chapters
of Ezra, and the ninth of Nehemiah, to which I refer you, and from the second of Joel, from the twelfth to the eight- eeuth verse, where the prophet saith, “ Rend your heart, and not your garments..... blow the trumpet in Sion..... gather the people, sanctify the congregation..... Let the priests’, the ministers of the Lord, weep between the porch and the altar, and let them say, Spare Thy people, O Lord ..... Then will the Lord be jealous for His land, and pity His people.” Here, Sir, for the sake of your late writer, let me descant a little on the prophet’s definition of a priest: “‘the priests, the ministers of the Lord ;” myn ‘nwp, me- sherte Jehovah; in the Greek version, of λειτουργοῦντες τῷ Κυρίῳ, “those who minister to the Lord ;᾽ in the Chal- dee paraphrase‘, “those who minister before the Lord ;᾽ and you may see in the margin how aptly St. Hierome applies the place to the Christian priests. To these let me add two more descriptions of the Jewish priests out of Philo, in his Life of Moses, the first of which is this; οἷς [μὲν] ἐπυτέ- τρᾶπται τὰ περὶ Tas εὐχὰς Kal θυσίας, Kal Tas ἄλλας ἱε- ρουργίας", “to whom [to some] the care of prayers, and sacri- fices, and all other (holy) ministrations is committed.” The other is this; διὰ δὲ τῆς ἱερωσύνης, μὴ μόνον τὰ ἀνθρώπεια, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ θεῖα διέπη", Moses, “as a priest, did not only administer (or preside over) human, but Divine affairs.” Sir, all these descriptions of a priest, with that of the Apostle in his Epistle to the Hebrews, come to no more than this; that a priest of any religion is “a minister of his God over the people, to take care of His worship, whatever that is, and its rites, and all other holy ministrations, in his rank and order ;”
S St. Hierome upon the place : Post- quam sacerdotes pro populo deprecati sunt, et dixerunt, Parce, Domine, po- pulo tuo,[fecitque populus quod precep- tum est,] zelatus est Dominus terram suam, quam prius quasi alienam con- temserat, et passus fuerat locusta vas- tante populari.—[S. Hieron. Comm. in Joel. cap. ii. Op., tom. vi. col. 194, C,D.] Etiam nostris temporibus vi- dimus agmina locustarum terram tex- isse Judawam, que postea misericordia Domini, inter vestibulum et altare, hoc
est, inter crucis et resurrectionis locum, sacerdotibus et populis Deum depre- cantibus atque dicentibus, Parce populo tuo, vento surgente, in mare primum et novissimum precipitate sunt.— [Ibid., col. 195, B, C.]}
* (9 DIP ΣΟΦΟῚ N13, sacer- dotes qui ministrant coram Domino.— Chald. Paraph., Bibl. Polyg]. Walton., tom. iv. p. 30. ]
a [Phil. Jud. Op., tom. ii. p. 161.]
x [Id., ibid., p. 163. Hickes’ third edi- tion had λειτουργίας for ἱερουργίας. ]
of Jewish Priests apply to Christian ones. 205
and if this be a good definition of a proper priest, and ade- SRA quate to the thing defined, I appeal to you, Sir, whether ———— bishops and presbyters are not proper priests. Other modern writers define a priest’ by his office thus: “ A person whose office it is to perform Divine services to God, and in His name to bless the people ;” which, I think, cannot be denied to belong to a bishop or presbyters of the Church. “ The Deut. 21. 5. Lord thy God (saith Moses) hath chosen the priests the sons of Levi to come near to Him, and minister to Him, and to bless in the name of the Lord.’ And so hath He chosen the orders of bishops and presbyters to approach Him and minister to Him, and bless the people also in His name. So in 1 Chron. xxiii. 18, it is likewise written; “ Aaron was separated, that he should sanctify the most holy things, he and his sons for ever, to burn incense before the Lord, to minister unto Him, and bless in His name for ever.” This is a description of the priests under the Jewish law and sanc- tuary; but then, Sir, you ‘know, as I have already observed, that “the priesthood being changed, there was a necessity Heb. 7. 12. that a change should also be made of the law;” and there- fore excepting the burning of incense, which was an ap- pointed rite of the Jewish priesthood and worship, and abo- lished by the change of the law, every word of this descrip- tion of the Jewish priests belongs properly to the Christian liturgs or ministers, and by consequence they must be pro- per priests. So saith St. Hierome on Isaiah Ixvi. 21, 227; Quando dicit, ‘assumam ex iis in sacerdotes, et Levitas, osten- dit vetus sacerdotium pretermissum, &c. “ When He saith, ‘1 will take of them for priests and Levites,’ He shews that the old Levitical priesthood is laid aside, which descended not by election, but by natural order and family succession ; ‘ for the priesthood being changed, it was necessary there should be an alteration of the law,’ and that they should be made priests by election upon whom the priesthood was to be conferred, not by right of blood, but according to merit and
¥Y Outram de Sacrificiis, [lib. i. ce. sacerdotium pretermissum, quod tribui 4. p. 47.... propria erant sacerdotii Leviticee debebatur, ubi non est electio, munera, ut Deo rem divinam facerent, sed ordo nature, et series est familiz ejusque nomine populo benedicerent. per posteros descendens. ‘Translato z [Quando dicit, ‘assumam ex eis in enim sacerdotio, necesse est, ut et legis sacerdotes et Levitas,’ ostendit vetus translatio fiat, et electio ad eos perti-
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD,
206 St. Jerome of the Priesthood as foretold in the Prophets.
virtue ; who should come from the nations of the Gentiles, and declare the glory of the Lord, and be brought upon horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and upon mules.” So on Ezek. xliv. 304, “‘ The first of all that we eat (saith he) is also offered to the priests, that we may taste nothing of our new fruits till the priest hath first tasted of them. And this we do, that he laying up our blessings and offerings in his house, God may bless our houses when he prays for us.”” So on those words of Malachi to the priests, ch. 11. 2, “O ye priests, if you will not hear, if you will not lay it to heart, and give glory to My name... . I will curse your blessings.” “This (saith he”) is properly said to the priests, that if they will not hear, &c., but on the contrary, cause His name to be ill spoken of among the Gentiles, He would send among them a want of all good things, and turn their very blessings into curses. For those priests who abuse their health in lust, and convert their riches into luxury, and disgrace their honour- able character with sordid conversation, they change the blessings of God into a curse. Or otherwise this word is truly directed to priests, who when they do not bless the people of God with true affection of heart, as Isaac blessed Jacob, Jacob the patriarchs, and Moses the twelve tribes, their blessings are turned into curses.”
But to return from this digression to the priestly media- tion, 1 need not farther insist on the priestly acts of prayer and intercession performed by prophets jure prophetico, upon
neat, quibus nequaquam juxta san- guinem, sed juxta merita atque vir- tutes sacerdotium defertur, ‘qui venient de insulis gentium, et gloriam Domini nuntiabunt. Et adducentur in equis, et in quadrigis, et in lecticis, et in mulis, et in carrucis..—S. Hieron. Comm, in Isaiam, lib. xviii. cap. 66. Op., tom. iv. col. 825, D, E.]
ἃ {Primitiz quoque ciborum nostro- rum sacerdotibus offeruntur, ut nihil gustemus novarum frugum, nisi sacer- dos ante gustaverit. Hoc autem faci- mus, ut reponat sacerdos benedictio- nem et oblationem nostram in domo sua: sive ut ad imprecationem suam Dominus benedicat domibus nostris.— Id., Comm. in Ezek., lib. xiii. cap. 45. tom. v. col. 555, E. }
» {Unde proprie sacerdotibus dicitur,
quod ‘si audire noluerint et corde reti- nere, ut dent gloriam nomini Domini’ per bonam conversationem ; sed e con- trario ‘nomen illius propter eos maledi- catur in gentibus,’ mittat in illos eges- tatem bonorum omnium, et ‘ benedic- tiones eorum vertat in maledictionem.’ Qui sanitate abutuntur in libidinem, et divitias vertunt in luxuriam, bonam- que famam sordida conversatione de- turpant, hi benedictiones Dei mutant in maledictionem. Vel certe, quia ad sacerdotes proprie mandatum est, ver- tuntur benedictiones eorum in maledic- tionem, quando non benedicunt sanctis ex vero cordis affectu, sicut Isaac Jacob, et Jacob patriarchis, et Moyses duodecjm tribubus.—Id., Comm. in Malach. ec. ii. tom. vi. col. $55, E. 956, A, B.]
Intercession the most proper office of Priesthood. 9207
extraordinary occasions. So Elijah built an altar to the Lord cnar. τι.
J ; SECT. XII. on Mount Carmel, and sacrificed and “ prayed, saying, Hear ——
me, O Lord, hear me, that this people may know that Thou Ἔρις τ art the Lord God. Then the fire of the Lord fell and con- ver. 8. 8. sumed the burnt-sacrifice, and the wood, and the stones, and
the dust, and licked up the water which was in the trench.”
After which he proceeded to intercede with God for rain
after the drought of three years. “ He prayed earnestly Pamede 10, (saith St. James) and the heaven gave rain, and the earth ~ brought forth her fruit.”
XIII. Such were the public intercessions of other prophets, srcr. xm. which I pass over, hastening to my main point, which is to Cas shew in the second place, that Christian liturgs or ministers, are, under by their office are mediators or intercessors with God for the ee a people, to make atonement for their sins, and impetrate fa- nen vours and blessings for them, and by consequence that they are proper priests. For though other offices are joined with the priest’s office, and by consequence belong in common to priests of all religions, yet nothing is more essential to the character of priests than to be advocates or intercessors for men with God. For the office of teaching and preaching belongs to them as doctors or prophets, and that of govern- ing the sacred economy belongs to them as rectors or stew- ards appointed by the God whose priests they are, and both have the people for their objects, or relate to them; but to make intercession belongs to a priest as a priest, and hath the God with whom he intercedes for its object, and there- fore with regard to this most proper office of priesthood, some have defined a priest to be patronus hominum apud Deum®, “an advocate or orator for men with God.”~ Which belongs in the greatest propriety and fulness of perfection to Christ, whom the Apostle, in his Epistle to the Hebrews, calls ten times an High-Priest, and seven times a Priest. He
is the ἀρχιερεὺς λόγος, the λόγος High-Priest, who was as a
© Outram de Sacrificiis, lib. ii.cap.1. voluntary sins.’’ [There is not any
[§ 1. p. 287.]
4 Philo de Pont. Max. λέγομεν γὰρ, τὸν ἀρχιερέα οὐκ ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλὰ λόγον θεῖον εἶναι, πάντων οὐχ ἑκουσίων μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀκουσίων ἀδικημάτων ἀμέτο- χον. “1 speak of an High-Priest, who is not a man but the Word of God, not only free from all voluntary but in-
treatise of Philo de Pont. Max.; the passage occurs in his tract De Pro- fugis, where he interprets the laws re- specting the high-priest as designed to shadow the sinless and eternal High- Priest.—De Profugis, Op., tom. i. p. 562. |
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD,
1 John 2. 2. Rom. 8. 34.
Heb. 7. 24, 25.
Heb. 9. 24.
Heb. 2. 17; 18.
Heb. 4. 16. 1 Tim. 2. 5.
208 Our Lord’s Priesthood intercessory ; so that of His ministers.
Priest with His Father before the beginning of the world®, and in virtue‘ of whose meritorious sacrifice, to be offered at the appointed time, the Jewish priests, though they knew it not, made atonement for the sins of the people. But now more eminently as High-Priest of His Church, He is “ our advocate with the Father, and makes intercession for us at the right hand of God.” And because “ He continued for ever, and hath an unchangeable priesthood, He is able to save them to the uttermost who come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them.” “He entered into the Holy of Holies on purpose to appear as an advocate in the presence of God for us,” and was therefore “made like unto His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High-Priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.” And be- cause this mediation with His Father, as our High-Priest, is so powerful and prevalent, therefore are we bid to “ come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy through Him who is the one mediator between God and man.” And as He intercedes for us, as our supreme adyo- cate and orator in heaven, and presents our prayers to His Father, in virtue of His own merits; so do His ministers upon earth intercede for us in His name, and therefore they must be priests in this respect, as with respect to teaching and governing the people they are prophets and spiritual rulers over them in their several ranks.
They must be priests in this respect as much as the minis- ters or liturgs of the patriarchal and Jewish Churches were, who made atonement for the people by sacrifice and prayer, and often by prayer without sacrifice; for what belonged in common to God’s ministers under both these dispensations, must needs belong to His ministers of the most perfect and excellent evangelical economy, unless it can be imagined it was His pleasure that the most noble Church and institu-
€ [On the doctrine contained in this statement see the Additions to the
ἀγαθῶν. --- 110. iii, Op., tom. ii. p. 155.] “It is necessary for him who
Third Edition, vol. i. p. 20, note p. |
f Philo de Vita Mosis: ἀναγκαῖον ἦν τὸν ἱερωμένον τῷ τοῦ κόσμου πατρὶ παρακλήτῳ χρῆσθαι τελειοτάτῳ τὴν ἀρέτην υἱῷ, πρός τε ἀμνηστείαν ἅμαρ- τημάτων, καὶ χορηγίας ἀφθονωτάτων
sacrifices to the Father of the world to use the Son, who is most perfect in a] virtue, as mediator or advocate, both to obtain pardon of sins and the grant of those gracious blessings which he desires,”
Jewish and Patriarchal Priests imply Christian ones. 209
tion should have the meanest and least noble ministry, with- cue. πὶ
SECT. XIIL
out the sacerdotal power of making intercession for the - people, which the ministers of His Church before and under the law had. But why do I say, unless it can be imagined ? 1 ought rather to say, unless it can be proved. For as those who have written in defence of infant baptism argue for it from the right that infants had to be admitted into the cove- nant of grace in the Jewish Church, and tell the adversaries of it, that the condition of children would be worse under the Gospel than it was under the law, if they might not be baptized under the one as well as circumcised under the other; and when the Antipzedobaptists require a precept for it, tell them it lies upon them to bring a precept against it ; so it is an excellent argument to prove the ministers over the Christian Church to be proper priests, and as such to have the power and dignity of making solemn intercession for the people, because the ministers of God over His Church in the patriarchal and Jewish dispensations were such priests. The sacerdotal power which was common to the ministerial or liturgical office in such different dispensations must there- fore belong to it now, unless something to the contrary can be shewn in the Gospel; but, Sir, until that is shewn, we ought to presume that Christian liturgs are proper priests, who are not inferior to the patriarchal and Jewish ministers in the essentials of the sacerdotal office and power. For they are “taken from among men” as they were, and like them are ‘ordained for men to minister for them in things pertaining to God,” and so have the same common office and ministry, though not the same ceremonies, rites, and forms of ‘ pray- ing, and ‘entreating,’ and ‘propitiating, and-‘expiating’ God’s anger, and ‘ deprecating’ His judgments, and ‘making reconciliation’ for sinners ; which are the several terms in the Latin£ translation for what we render ‘atonement,’ and ‘mak- ing atonement,’ and aptly express the office of an advocate,
& Exod. xxix. 36, Ad expiandum. Cap. xxx. 10, Deprecabitur Aaron... et placabit. Ver. 16, Propitietur anima- bus eorum. Cap. xxxii. 30, Si quo modo quivero eum deprecari pro sce- lere vestro. Ley. i. 4, In expiationem ejus. Cap. iv. 20, Rogante pro eis sacer- dote, “the priest praying for them ;’’ so ver. 26, Rogabit pro eo sacerdos. Cap.
HICKEs,
P
ν. 6, Orabit pro ea sacerdos, et pro peccato ejus. Cap. vi. 7, [Cap. v. ver. 26. Hebr.} Rogabit pro eo coram Do- mino. Numb. xxv. 25, Rogabit sacer- dos pro omni multitudine filiorum Israel. Lev. xvi. 10, Statuet eum (ca- prum emissarium) vivum coram Do- mino, ut fundat preces super eo, ‘ta make an atonement with him.”
CURISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Jer. 7. 16.
SECT. XIV.
From Apo- stolical pre- cept and practice.
Acts 2. 38; 22. 16.
210 Evidence from the New Testament that the Christian
which is to pray, and entreat, and plead for his criminal client, whose orator he is; to propitiate the king or judge, in whose presence he stauds for him, and to procure pardon for his offences. ‘Pray not thou for this people (saith God to the priest and prophet Jeremiah) nor lift up cry or prayer for them, neither make intercession» to Me, for I will not hear thee.” That is, do not thou be their advocate, to in- tercede, and pray, and plead for them, ‘“‘do not come to Me about them',” for I will not hear thee.
XIV. In like manner it belonged to the Apostles and presbyters, by virtue of their sacerdotal office and ministry, to be advocates and intercessors with God, and as such to pray and entreat God for the people, and by prayer to obtain pardon or make atonement for their sins, and propitiate Him, and to procure favours and blessigs of Him for them. There are instances to prove this in the New Testament, as short a memorial as it is of the practice of the first ministers
of the Church.
I need not insist upon their power of bap-
tizing for the remission of sins with fasting and prayer*, which was a most solemn act of expiation for washing away‘
4 [The word in the original is 455, as also in the passages in the note pre- vious. |
i μὴ προσέλθῃς μοι περὶ αὐτῶν, LXX. The same phrase is used of the priests, Deut. xxi. 5, and I cannot but observe that phrases of that kind are specially applied by the Gentiles to their priests, to set forth the intercessions they be- lieved they had power to make with their gods. So Jul. Pollux, lib. i. cap. 1. seom. 25. περὶ τῶν προσίοντων θεοῖς.
ος προσιέναι θεοῖς, πρόσοδον ποιεῖσθαι πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς, εὔχεσθαι θεοῖς, ἀνατεί- νειν τὰς χεῖρας, ἐντυγχάνειν θεοῖς, προ- τρέπεσθαι θεοὺς, κατακαλεῖν θεοὺς, ἀνα- καλεῖν θεοὺς, αἰτεῖν παρὰ τῶν θεῶν τὰ ἀγαθὰ, προσφεύγειν θεοῖς, ποτνιᾶσθαι, ἐπαντιβολεῖν καὶ ἀντιβολεῖν, καθικε- τεύειν, θύειν θεοῖς, ἱερουργεῖν, ἱεροποιεῖν, «.7.A. “Οἵ those who have access to the gods... to go unto the gods; to pray to the gods; to stretch out hands unto the gods; to intercede with the gods; to atone the gods; to ask bles- sings of the gods; to fly to the gods; to obsecrate the gods; to meet, or con- front, and supplicate the gods ; to per- form holy offices in things pertaining to the gods.’’ All which phrases are
most proper to the office of Christian ministers, changing gods into God, and by consequence prove them to be priests. So segm, 29; θυσία... κατά- κλησις θεῶν, ἀνάκλησις, ἔντευξις, πρόσο- δος, ἱερουργία, ἱεροποιία,.. . σπονδή. “Sa- crifice, calling upon the gods, erying unto the gods, intercession, coming to the gods, performing holy offices, sa- crificing, libation.’’ See Herodotus, lib. i. p. 37. [cap. 182; quoted above, p. 194, note u. |
k S. Just. Mart. Apol. i. ed. Oxon. [Grabe, 8°. 1700] ο. 79, 80. [ὅσοι ἂν πεισθῶσι Kal πιστεύωσιν ἀληθῆ ταῦτα τὰ ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν διδασκόμενα καὶ λεγόμενα εἶναι, καὶ βιοῦν οὕτω δύνασθαι ὑπισχνῶν- ται, εὔχεσθαί τε καὶ αἰτεῖν νηστεύοντες παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ τῶν προημαρτημένων ἄφεσιν διδάσκονται, ἡμῶν συνευχομένων καὶ συννηστευόντων αὐτοῖς. ἔπειτα ἄγον- ται ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν ἔνθα ὕδωρ ἐστὶ, κ. τ. λ.-τττι 6. 61. Op., p. 79, D. ed. Ben.]
1 ἀφορμὴν σωτηρίας καὶ κάθαρμον ἁμαρτημάτων. So the bishops that in- structed Constantine the Great called baptism.—Sozomen. Hist. Eccl., lib. i. cap. 3. [ Hist. Eccl., tom, ii. p. 12. See above, note b, p. 9. ]
ministry is one of Intercession and Propitiation. 211
all the past sins of the baptized. Nor need I spend much time to prove that it was their office to administer the holy Eucharist, in which more especially they exercised the priest’s office in making prayers and intercessions at the holy altar upon the account and in virtue of the same sacrifice™, that Christ makes continual intercession in the presence of God for us. And to these solemn prayers and intercessions which the priests make in the holy Eucharist, the people, with all
CHAP, 11.
SECT, XIV.
the powers of their souls, are to say Amen. “The cup of 1 Cor. 10. blessing which we bless (saith the Apostle) is it not the com- es
munion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?” [Ὁ is their office then to make atonement most especially in this sacri- fice, which consists of the celebration of the sacrifice which Christ made upon the cross, when they make a most solemn memorial and representation of it unto God upon earth, cor- respondent to that which He daily makes of it before Him in heaven. It was they only who administered this pure com- memorative sacrifice of propitiation: bishops, or presbyters licensed by their bishops, as St. Ignatius speaks in his Epi- stle to the Church of Smyrna®, “look upon that Eucharist as lawful and valid which is either offered by the bishop, or one whom he shall appoint.” Hence we read of the three thousand baptized persons who “ were added to the Church, that they continued stedfastly in the doctrine which the Apostles taught them, and in fellowship with them,” as the principle of unity, “and in breaking of bread, and prayer,” as the Eucharist is there described, of which they were the ministers. And when I consider that prophets sometimes sacrificed under the Old Testament by extraordinary com- mission from God, and that the first ministers of Christ were generally prophets, I cannot but think that place in 1 Cor.
i.e. impetratis. Plaut. in Peenulo, ii. 42. Si Hercle istue unquam factum est, tum me Jupiter faciat, ut semper sacrificem, neque unquam litem.—
πῃ Non. Marcel. Sacrificare est veniam petere, litare est propitiare et votum impetrare. Virg. ποῖα, lib. iv. 50. Auctores Linguze Latine Gothofred.,
p- 1336. [Genev. 1622.] So more at _ large. Inter sacrificare, et litare hoc interest ; sacrificare est veniam petere, litare est propitiare, et votum impe-
trare. Tu modo posce Deos veniam, sacris- que litatis.—Virg. Aineid. iv. 50.
Ῥ
Ibid., p. 723.
n ἐκείνη βεβαία εὐχαριστία ἡγεί- σθω, ἡ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου οὖσα, ἢ ἂν αὐτὸς ἐπιτρέψῃ.---ὃ. Ignat. Epist. ad Smyrn., 6. 8. [Patr. Apost., tom. ii, p- 36.]
2
Acts 2. 41, 42.
212 1 Cor. xiv. 16 (uniting ‘blessing’ and ‘giving thanks’) to be
curistiAN xiv. 16°, is to be understood of the holy Eucharist’s being administered by those prophetical priests, because both the solemn words which our Saviour used at the institution of it
PRIEST- HOOD.
are likewise used by the Apostle in that place. and ‘give thanks.’
are ‘bless,’
The words
« Jesus,” saith St. Matthew
and St. Mark?, “took bread and blessed it ;᾽ or as St. Luke4,
* Jesus took bread, and gave thanks.”
And of the cup they
say’, “ He took the cup, and blessed it ;” but St. Luke saith’,
“He took the cup, and gave thanks.”
For as learned men
have observed, those words in Scripture signify the same
thingt, and are indifferently used for one another.
And
from them the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper came to be called Eucharistia and Euloyia", though more generally by
° [ἐπεὶ ἐὰν εὐλογήσῃς τῷ πνεύματι, 6 ἀναπληρῶν τὸν τόπον τοῦ ἰδιώτου πῶς ἐρεῖ τὸ ἀμὴν ἐπὶ τῇ σῇ εὐχαριστίᾳ, ἐπειδὴ τί λέγεις οὐκ οἷδε; 1 Cor. xiv. 16.1
P [λαβὼν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς τὸν ἄρτον, καὶ εὐλογήσας ekAace.—Matt. xxvi. 26. λαβὼν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἄρτον, εὐλογήσας ἔκ- Aaoe.— Mark xiv. 22. ]
4 [λαβὼν ἄρτον εὐχαριστήσας ἔκ- Aace.—Lue. xxii, 19.]
τ [λαβὼν τὸ ποτήριον, καὶ εὐχαριστή- σας ἔδωκεν, K.T.A.—Matt. xxvi. 27. λαβὼν τὸ ποτήριον, εὐχαριστήσας ἔδω- κεν, K.T.A.— Mark xiv. 23. ]
5 [δεξάμενος ποτήριον, εὐχαριστήσας εἶπε, K.T.A.—Luce. xxii. 17. ]
‘ De Marca de Sacramento Eucha- ristiz, pp. 7—9. Cameron and Grotius on Matt. xxvi. 26. [De Marca ob- serves that the Jews offered up thanks- giving with prayer before partaking of their food, and that the food being regarded as thereby sanctified, the terms to ‘sanctify’ or ‘bless’ were used to express this thanksgiving; and that hence when the blessing of bread is spoken of, the words ‘ give thanks’ and ‘bless’ are used indiscriminately. He alleges the parallel passages in the narratives of our Lord’s feeding the multitudes, and those given in the text from the narrative of the institution; and afterwards says, Veteres Christiani hac in re secuti sunt Dominum, con- jungentes in peragende Eucharistie formulis gratiarum actiones, &e.
Cameron in locum; εὐλογήσας, h.e. εὐχαριστήσας. Kodem enim hec re- deunt: id quod non solum ex consensu Evangelistarum, qui indiscriminatim
his verbis usi sunt, sed etiam ex usu et consuetudine Judzorum constat: etenim heee εὐλογία nihil aliud illis fuit quam εὐχαριστία: nempe bene- dicere Deo et gratias agere eadem sunt. —Critici Sacr., tom. vi. col. $81. ;
So Grotius: Moris semper Judzis fuit...cibum nullum aut vinum su- mere nisi prins Deo tanquam conditori donatorique laudes et gratias egissent, addita precatione .. . ipsam precationem wy ap, id est, ἁγίασμον, sanctificationem, wana aut ΠΣ Δ, id est, εὐλογίαν, be- nedictionem. He then goes through the instances of the use of the words in the parallel passages of the New Testa- ment, and in the early Christian wri- ters.—Crit. Sacr. ibid., col. 898. ]
ἃ Suiceri Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus in εὐλογία. [ὃ iv. Illud precipue dili- genter observandum, hane vocem de S. Coena frequenter usurpari. Of this use he gives several instances, e. g. S. Cyril. Alex., lib. iv. cap. 2. in Joan. (cap. vi. 54.) Op., tom. iv. p. 361, A. and ibid., p. 364, D. kat σῶμα καὶ μέλη Χριστοῦ χρηματίξομεν, ὡς διὰ τῆς εὐλογίας αὐτὸν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς δεχό- μενοι τὸν υἱόν᾽ and accounts for the use of the word by adducing τὸ πο- Thpiov τῆς εὐλογίας, 1 Cor. x. 16; quoting Theophylact on the passage, (Op., tom. ii. Ρ. 180, C, D.) 7d ποτή- ριον τῆς εὐλογίας, τουτέστι τῆς εὐχα- ριστίας. ἐπὶ γὰρ χεῖρας αὐτὸ ἔχοντες, εὐλογοῦμεν καὶ εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ τὸ αἷμα αὐτοῦ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἐκχέαντι: and * St. Chrysostom (in Ep. 1 ad Cor. Hom. xxiv. Op., tom. x. p. 213, A.) more fully to the same effect. He afterwards treats of the Jewish custom
understood of the Euch. So St. Chrys. Theophyl. & Aicumen, 218
the former than the latter name. Hence St. Chrysostom’, Theophylact*, and GicumeniusY expound this place of the ad- ministration of the Lord’s Supper according to the following paraphrase : “‘ Else when thou shalt bless the bread and wine at the Lord’s Supper in an unknown tongue, how shall the unlearned people say Amen at thy blessing or giving of thanks, seeing they understand not what thou sayest?” “When thou shalt bless,’ you know, Sir, answers to the Eucharistical phrase, “the cup of blessing which we bless,” just now cited; and to that in Matt. xxvi. 26, “ Jesus took bread, and blessed it ;” and the other term, εὐχαριστία, translated by “giving of thanks,’ most probably is the
and terms of thanksgiving, and the use of the word among Christians. The- saur. Eccl., tom. i. col. 1249, sqq. |
Vv [ἰδιώτην δὲ τὸν Aaikdy λέγει, καὶ δείκνυσι καὶ αὐτὸν οὐ μικρὰν ὑπομένοντα τὴν ζημίαν, ὅταν τὸ ἀμὴν εἰπεῖν μὴ δύνηται. ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν᾽ ἂν εὐ- λογήσῃς τῇ τῶν βαρβάρων φωνῇ, οὐκ εἰδὼς τί λέγεις, οὐδὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι δυνά- μενος, οὐ δύναται ὑποφωνῆσαι τὸ ἀμὴν ὃ λαϊκός. οὐ γὰρ ἀκούων τὸ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων, ὕπερ ἐστὶ τέλος, οὐ λέγει τὸ Gunv.—s. Chrys. in 1 Cor. Hom. xxxv. Op., p. 325, Ὁ, E.]
x (Theophylact connects εὐλογήσῃς with the ψάλλει of the preceding verse. He says; ὅταν, φησὶ, ψάλλῃς, ἐὰν εὐ- λογήσῃς τῷ πνεύματι, τουτέστι, τῷ πνευματικῷ χαρίσματι διὰ τῆς γλώσσης, 6 ἀναπληρῶν τὸν τόπον τοῦ ἰδιώτου, του- τέστιν, ὃ λαϊκὸς, πῶς ἐρεῖ τὸ ἀμὴν ἐπὶ τῇ σῇ εὐχῇ ; σοῦ γὰρ εἰπόντος τὸ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀσαφῶς καὶ ἐν γλώσσῃ, οὐκ ἤκουσεν᾽ ὥστε οὔτε ὠφε- Aetroat.—Theophylact. Comment. in 1 Cor. xiv. Op., tom. ii. p. 209, D.]
Υ [ἐὰν yap μόνον σὺ ἐπίστασαι, φησὶ, τί εὐλογεῖς, ἤγουν τί εὔχεσαι, καὶ ἣ σὴ ψυχὴ τοῦτο λέγει τῷ πνεύματι, οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ἀγνοοῦσι τῷ σε μὴ εἰδέναι ἑρμη- νεῦσαι, ἤγουν μὴ εἰδότα τὴν δύναμιν τῶν λεγομένων, 6 δὲ εἰς ἰδιώτην τελῶν, οὐκ ἂν εἴπῃ τὸ ἀμὴν ἐπὶ τῇ σῇ εὐχῇ. μὴ εἰδὼς γὰρ τὶ λαλεῖς, οὐδὲ γινώσκει πότε δεῖ σοι τὸ Guhvy ὑπακοῦσαι.--- Cicumenii Comment. 1 Cor. xiv. Op., tom, i. p. 560, C, Ὁ.
In a note on the words of St. Chry- sostom on this text, quoted above, note v, Mr. Palmer says, ‘‘ Chrysostom obviously understood the Apostle to speak of the Liturgy by alluding to
the words εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων,
which he says ἐστὶ τέλος, that is, the end of the Liturgy. And accordingly if we look to the Liturgies of Antioch, where he preached these homilies, we find these words terminating the Li- turgy.’’ (See Liturgia S. Jacobi Gree. Assem.,tom. v. p. 67.)—Orig. Lit., chap. 4. sect. xv. vol. ii. p. 116. And of the meaning of St. Paul’s words he says, “In the Liturgy of Constantinople or Greece, which has probably been al- ways used at Corinth, the bishop or priest takes bread, and ‘blesses’ it in the course of a very long ‘ thanksgiv- ing,’ at the end of which all the people answer, ‘Amen.’ (SeeS.Chrys. Liturg. Goar, pp. 75—79.) The same may be said of the Liturgies of Antioch and Cesarea, and of all the countries of the East and Greece, through which St. Paul bare rule or founded Churches. It may be added that there is I believe no instance in the writings of the most primitive fathers in which the ‘ Amen’ is ever said to have been repeated at the end of an office containing both blessing and thanksgiving, except in the Liturgy of the Eucharist.’’—Ibid., p. 117. It will be observed that Mr. Palmer considers the words εὐλογεῖν and εὐχαριστεῖν to be distinct in sense, the former meaning the invoking the Divine blessing on the elements, (see above, pp. 131, sqq.,) the latter simply giving thanks. That they are distinct, notwithstanding the authorities and ar- guments alleged by Hickes, would ap- pear from both words being used in the commemoration of our Lord’s actions in the institution of the Eucharist in all the Liturgies, and the very definite sense of εὐλογεῖν in the passages quoted by himself, pp. 311, sqq. ]
CHAP. 11.
SECT. XIV. a
214 Intercession a gift of the Spirit in the Apostolic age ;
enristAN Church’s name for the Lord’s Supper here, as in St. Igna-
PRIEST- HOOD.
tius’; for the people then saying Amen, answers exactly to that passage in Justin Martyr’s first Apology’, οὗ συντελέ- σαντος Tas εὐχὰς, Kal THY εὐχαριστίαν, Tas ὁ παρὼν λαὸς ἐπευφημεῖ λέγων, ᾿Α μήν: “The bishop having finished the prayers and offering, all the people say aloud, Amen.” But however that place is to be interpreted, it was the work of the inspired or gifted ministers in the beginning of Christi- anity to make intercessions, as is plain from Rom. viii. 26, which according to Origen” and St. Chrysostom¢ upon the place, I shall paraphrase in these words: “ Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities, for as yet we know not in what manner, or for what we should pray as we ought, but the inspired minister, by the help of the Spirit which moves and directs him, maketh® intercessions in most eminent manner
* [See above, p. 211, note ἢ.
5. ΤΆ, Just. M. Apol. i. c. 65. Op., p. 82, E. See above, p. 106, note g. |
> [Origen’s words are, ὃ γὰρ δεῖπροσ- εὐχεσθαί, φησι, καθὸ δεῖ, οὐκ οἴδαμεν. ἀναγκαῖον δὲ οὐ τὸ προσεύχεσθαι μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ προσεύχεσθαι καθὸ δεῖ, καὶ προσεύχεσθαι ὃ δεῖ, k.T.A.... οὐ τοῖς τυχοῦσι στεναγΎμοϊς χρώμενον ὕπερεν- τυχάνει τῷ θεῷ, ἀλλά τισιν ἀλαλήτοις, ἐχομένοις τῶν ἀρρήτων λόγων ὧν οὐκ ἔστιν ἀνθρώπῳ λαλεῖν. τοῦτο δὲ τὸ πνεῦμα, οὐκ ἀρκούμενον τῷ ἐντυγχάνειν τῷ θεῷ, ἐπιτεῖνον τὴν ἔντευξιν ὑὕπερ- evTuyxavet.—Origen, περὶ εὐχῆς, ὃ 2. Op., tom. i. pp. 197, E. 199, C.]
ο [St. Chrysostom begins by speak- ing of the different gifts bestowed on the baptized in the Apostolic age, one of which was that of prayer: τίς οὖν ἡ τότε κατάστασις ἦν; διάφορα πᾶσι τοῖς τότε βαπτιζομένοις ἐδίδου χαρίσματα 6 θεὸς, & δὴ καὶ πνεύματα ἐκαλεῖτο... μετὰ δὲ τούτων ἁπάντων ἦν καὶ εὐχῆς χάρισμα, ὃ καὶ αὐτὸ πνεῦμα ἐλέγετο. καὶ 6 τοῦτο ἔχων, ὑπὲρ τοῦ πλήθους παντὸς εὔχετο. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ πολλὰ τῶν συμφερόντων ἡμῖν ἀγνοοῦντες, τὰ μὴ συμφέροντα αἰτοῦμεν, ἤρχετο χάρισμα εὐχῆς εἰς ἕνα τινὰ τῶν τότε, καὶ τὸ κοινῇ σύμφερον τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἅπάσης αὐτός τε ὑπὲρ ἁπάντων ἵστατο αἰτῶν, καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους ἐπαίδευε. πνεῦμα τοίνυν ἐνταῦθα καλεῖ τό τε χάρισμα τὸ τοιοῦ- τον, καὶ τὴν ψυχὴν τὴν δεχομένην τὸ χάρισμα, καὶ ἐντυγχάνουσαν τῷ θεῷ, καὶ στενάζουσαν. 6 γὰρ τοιαύτης κατα- ξιωθεὶς χάριτος, ἑστὼς μετὰ πολλῆς τῆς
κατανύξεως, μετὰ πολλῶν τῶν στεναγ- μῶν τῶν κατὰ διάνοιαν, τῷ θεῷ προσπίπ- των, τὰ συμφέροντα πᾶσιν αἱτεῖ. οὗ καὶ νῦν σὐμβολόν ἐστιν ὃ διάκονος τὰς ὑπὲρ τοῦ δήμου ἀναφέρων evxds.—S. Chrys. Hom. in Ep. ad Rom. xiv. Op., tom. ix. Ῥ- 586, A, B.]
4 ὑπερεντυγχάνει ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν. Pro nobis postulat. Vulg. Pro nobis sup- plicat.—Castal. See also Claud. Es- penceus de Christo Mediatore, cap. 11. Hi ergo (Grvci interpretes) Spiritum, ...non Spiritus hoc loco substantiam intelligunt, sed ex divinis ejus charis- matibus unum; precationis nimirum donum in Apostolica ecclesia, quod in communem totius ecclesiz usum, qui divinitus accipiebat, pro tota qui- dem ecclesia, sed pro simplicibus pre- sertim orandi nesciis, stans orabat, magna tum compunctione, tum alacri- tate, [et alios idem facere docebat. ] [Ὁ]. Espene. Opera, p. 291, col. ii, C. fol. Paris. 1610.] 1). Ambrosius re- spondet [De Spiritu Sancto, lib. iii. 6. 2. § 70: Op:, tom. i. 60] 6797 5 Spiritum plerumque poni pro spiritali gratia [sicut hie dicitur postulare. Que Hieronymo, Sedulio, Primasio in Paulum.... Commentaria inscri- buntur] hic utroque modo exponunt, et Spiritum, Spiritus gratiam nominari [qui docet nos Domino postulare]... Ita hic, ‘Spiritus postulat,’ i.e. pos- tulare nos facit.... Quid est ‘inter- pellat,’ nisi quod nos interpellare facit. —[Ibid., p. 292, col. i. D.]
the office of Christian Priests, as shewn in the New Test. 215
for us, with sighs and groans which cannot be expressed.” What is expressed here by the inspired liturg’s “ making in- tercession for us,” in the next verse is ‘‘ making intercession for the saints,” that is, for the Church; so that from the be- ginning it was the office of Christ’s ministers, as advocates, or priests of the Gospel, to pray and supplicate for the peo- ple, even for the whole state of His Catholic Church. any man sick among you? (saith St. James) let him call for the presbyters of the Church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and if he have committed sins they shall be forgiven him.” “ Let them pray over him,” that is, by imposition of hands, according to what is written Mark xvi. 18°, and “anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.” To this purpose speaks St. Chrysostom‘: ‘“ The Jewish priests had power to cleanse the leprosy of the body, or rather not at all to cleanse it, but to pronounce when the lepers were clean of it... .. But our priests have received power not to cleanse the leprosy of the body, but the un- cleanness of the soul, and not only to judge when we are clean, but to put away our uncleanness; so that they who despise them are much wickeder, and worthy of greater punishment, than Dathan and his company. For these hav- ing the priesthood in admiration, desired and endeavoured to get a dignity which did not belong to them;.... but the others, though the excellency and honour of the priest-
e [They shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.”,—Mark xvi. 18.]
£ De Sacerdotio, lib. iii. [ὃ 6. λέ- πραν δώματος ἀπαλλάττειν, μᾶλλον δὲ ἀπαλλάττειν μὲν οὐδαμῶς, τοὺς δὲ ἀπαλ- λαγέντας δοκιμάζειν μόνον, εἶχον ἐξου- σίαν οἱ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων ἱερεῖς" καὶ οἶσθα πῶς περιμάχητον ἦν τὸ τῶν ἱερέων τότε. οὗτοι δὲ οὐ λέπραν σώματος, ἀλλ᾽ ἀκα- θαρσίαν ψυχῆς, οὐκ ἀπαλλαγεῖσαν δοκι- μάζειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπαλλάττειν παντελῶς ἔλαβον ἐξουσίαν. ὧστε οἱ τούτων ὑπερ- ορῶντες πολὺ καὶ τῶν περὶ Δαθὰν εἶεν ἐναγέστεροι καὶ μείζονος ἄξιοι τιμωρίας. οἱ “μὲν γὰρ εἰ καὶ μὴ προσηκούσης αὐ- τοῖς ἀντεποιοῦντο τῆς ἀρχῆς, ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως θαυμαστήν τινα περὶ αὐτῆς εἶχον δόξαν, (καὶ τοῦτο τῷ μετὰ πολλῆς ἐφίεσθαι σπουδῆς ἔδειξαν") οὗτο: δὲ ὅτε ἐπὶ τὸ κρεῖττον διεκοσμήθη, καὶ τοσαύτην ἔλα-
βεν ἐπίδοσιν τὸ πρᾶγμα, τότε ἐξ ἐναν- τίας μὲν ἐκείνοις, πολλῷ δὲ ἐκείνων μεί- ζονα τετολμήκασιν. οὐδὲ γὰρ ἴσον εἰς καταφρονήσεως λόγον, ἐφίεσθαι μὴ προσ- ἡκούσης τιμῆς καὶ ὑπερορᾶν τοσούτων ἀγαθῶν: ἀλλὰ τοσούτῳ μεῖζον ἐκείνου τοῦτο, ὕσῳ τοῦ διαπτύειν καὶ θαυμάζειν τὸ μέσον ἐστί. τίς οὖν οὕτως ἀθλία ψυχὴ, ὡς τοσούτων ὑπεριδεῖν ἀγαθῶν, οὐκ ἄν ποτε φαίην ἐγώγε, πλὴν εἰ μή τις οἷστρον ὑπομείνειε δαιμονικόν. GARG γὰρ ἐπάνειμι πάλιν, ὕθεν ἐξέβην. οὐ γὰρ ἐν τῷ κολάζειν μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τῷ ποιεῖν εὖ, μείζονα τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν ἔδωκε δύναμιν τῶν φυσικῶν γονέων ὃ θεός" καὶ τοσοῦτον ἀμφοτέρων τὸ διάφορον, ὅσον τῆς παρούσης καὶ τῆς μελλούσης ζωῆς. οἱ μὲν γὰρ εἰς “ταύτην, οἱ δὲ εἰς ἐκείνην γεννῶσι" κἀκεῖνοι μὲν οὐδὲ τὸν σωματικὸν αὐτοῖς δύναιντ᾽ ἂν ἀμῦναι θάνατον, οὔτε νόσον ἐπενεχθεῖσον ἂπο-
CHAP, Il.
SECT. XIV.
“€ Ts James 5.
14, 15.
216 St. Chrysostom on the Intercession of Christian Priests.
curistran hood is increased, in a way contrary to them presume to
PRIEST- HOOD.
commit a greater sin. For to aspire to an undue honour is not so great a crime as to have contempt for it; and there is as great a difference in the account of this sin from that, as between admiration and contempt. Who, therefore, can have so wretched a soul as to despise so excellent a thing? I think I may say no man can be so wicked but who is acted by the furies. But to return from this digression; God hath given the priests a greater power, not only of punishing, but of doing good, than He hath given to our parents by nature, between whom and priests there is as much difference as between this life and that which is to come. Our parents begat us into this life, but priests beget us into life eternal. Those cannot deliver us from the death of the body, or repel any approaching disease, but these have often saved sick souls which were going to destruction, inflicting upon some a milder punishment, and not permitting others to fall; and this not only by doctrine and instruction, but by the help of their prayers; for they do not only regenerate us, but have power to remit sins. ‘Is any sick among you (saith he) let him call for the presbyters of the Church,’ &e. Now our parents by nature, if any of their children offend the su- preme powers and potentates, they cannot help them, but priests, though they cannot reconcile kings and princes to us, yet they often propitiate God when He is angry at us.” So in his sixth book Of the Priesthood’: “ But if any man will exactly consider what a bishop doth in things pertaining to God (τὰ πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν,) he will find nothing will require greater or more exact care and study, than they. For what manner of person ought he to be who makes intercession for
κρούσασθαι" οὗτοι δὲ καὶ κάμνουσαν καὶ ἀπόλλυσθαι μέλλουσαν τὴν ψυχὴν πολ- Adicts ἔσωσαν, τοῖς μὲν πραοτέραν τὴν κόλασιν ἐργασάμενοι, τοὺς δὲ οὐδὲ παρὰ τὴν ἀρχὴν ἀφέντες ἐμπεσεῖν, οὐ τῷ διδάσκειν μόνον καὶ νουθετεῖν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῷ δι᾽ εὐχῶν βοηθεῖν. ov γὰρ br ἂν ἡμᾶς ἀναγεννῶσι μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ μετὰ ταῦτα συγχωρεῖν ἔχουσιν ἐξουσίαν ἁμαρτήματα. ἄσθενεῖ γάρ τις, φησὶν, ἐν ὑμῖν" προσκαλεσάσθω τοὺς πρεσβυτέ- ρους τῆς ἐκκλησίας, καὶ προσευξάσθω- σαν ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν ἀλείψαντες αὐτὸν ἐλαίῳ, ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ κυρίου. καὶ ἣ εὐχὴ τῇς πίστεως σώσει TOY κάμνοντα, καὶ
> ~ > t Ζ τ = ἐγερεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ κύριος" κἂν ἁμαρτίας ἢ πεποιηκὼς, ἀφεθήσονται αὐτῷ. ἔπειτα οἱ μὲν φυσικοὶ γονεῖς, εἴ μέν τισι τῶν ὑπερεχόντων καὶ μεγάλα ὧδε δυναμένων προσκρούσαιεν οἱ παῖδες, οὐδὲν αὐτοὺς wv > De ον a > ἔχουσιν ὠφελεῖν" ot δὲ ἱερεῖς οὐκ ἄρχον- 5 A ~ > > > > ~ τας, οὐδὲ βασιλεῖς, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὸν αὐτοῖς πολλάκις δργισθέντα κατήλλαξαν τὸν θεόν.---Ορ., tom. i. pp. 384, B. 385, A.] % [εἰ δέ τις τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἐξετά- σειεν, οὐδὲν ὄντα εὑρήσει ταῦτα, οὕτω μείζονος καὶ ἀκριβεστέρας ἐκεῖνα δεῖται τῆς σπουδῆς. τὸν γὰρ ὑπὲρ ὅλης τῆς πόλεως, καὶ τί λέγω ; πόλεως, πάσης" μὲν οὖν τῆς οἰκουμένης πρεσβεύοντα, καὶ
_ Simon Magus sought the intercession of the Apostles. 217
the whole city? (but why do I say the whole city, and not rather the whole world?) and prays God to be propitious to the sins of all men, not only of the living, but of those who are departed this life? I truly never thought the great liberty (παῤῥησίαν) of interceding by Moses and Elias to have been sufficient for such supplication. For in truth, as the whole world is committed to his trust®, he comes unto God, as the Father of all, beseeching Him to put an end to wars in all the world, and to make tumults cease every where ; and that peace and happiness may succeed in their place, and that all manner of private or public calamities may be speedily removed. Wherefore how ought he to excel those in all things for whom he makes intercession to God?” Thus this great and holy Christian, perhaps before he was a priesti, wrote of sacerdotal intercession. So Acts viii., when Peter said to Simon Magus, “‘ Repent of thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thy heart may be forgiven thee ;’ Simon, who knew what belonged to the office of an Apostle, as a priest, answered, “ Pray ye for me to the Lord, that none of these things which ye have spoken come upon me.” He had seen the new converts of Samaria receive the Holy Ghost by the prayer of Peter and John, and imposi- tion of their hands, and therefore he looked upon them as men who had special power of intercession for sinners with God, and said, “ Pray ye,” that is, make ye atonement for me to the Lord, and expiate my sin, “that none of these things come upon me.” And that they, and the presbyters under them, were the Church’s liturgs and orators in all
δεόμενον ταῖς ἁπάντων ἁμαρτίαις ἵλεων γενέσθαι τὸν θεὸν, οὐ τῶν ζώντων μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ἀπελθόντων, ὅποϊόν τινα εἶναι χρή; ἔγὼ μὲν γὰρ καὶ τὴν Μωσέως καὶ τὴν ᾿Ηλιοὺ παῤῥησίαν, οὐδέπω πρὸς τὴν τοσαύτην ἱκετηρίαν ἀρκεῖν ἡγοῦμαι. καὶ γὰρ ὥσπερ τὸν ἅπαντα κόσμον πε- πιστευμένος, καὶ αὐτὸς ὧν ἁπάντων πα- τὴρ, οὕτω πρόσεισι τῷ θεῷ, δεόμενος τοὺς ἅπανταχοῦ πολέμους σβεσθῆναι, λυθῆναι τὰς ταραχάς εἰρήνην, εὐετη- ρίαν, πάντων τῶν ἑκάστῳ κακῶν ἐπι- κειμένων, καὶ ἰδίᾳ καὶ δημοσίᾳ, ταχεῖαν αἰτῶν ἀπαλλαγήν. δεῖ δὲ πάντων αὐτὸν, ὑπὲρ ὧν δεῖται, τοσοῦτο διαφέρειν ἐν ἅπασιν, ὕσον τὸν προεστῶτα τῶν προ- στατευομένων eixds.—Id., ibid., lib. vi.
§ 4. p. 424, A.]
h Note, that it was the common doc- trine of Christianity, that the care of the Catholic Church was committed jointly as well as severally, and in whole as well as in part, to the Apo- stles and their successors the bishops. In which the government of the Church differs from the government of the world.
i [See Socrates, Eccl. Hist., lib. vi. c. 3. τῆς τοῦ διακόνου ἀξίας παρὰ Μελε- τίου τυχὼν, τοὺς περὶ ἱερωσύνης λόγους συνέταξε (Eccl. Hist., tom. ii. p. 512): that is, shortly after A.D. 381. See Monitum in libros de Sacerdotio, S. Chrysost. Op, tom. i. p, 861. ed. Ben.]
CHAP, IL SECT. XIV.
Acts 8. 22,
ver. 24,
CHRISTIAN PRIEST-
HOOD.
218 Instances and precepts for Priestly intercession in N. T.
public assemblies, and upon all occasions, and officiated for them in things pertaining to God, is also evident from the writings of the New Testament, though they give but a
‘short, and that far from a full and perfect account, of what
Acts 1. 24. chap. 4. 31. chap. 13. 2. chap. 21. 36.
1 Tim. 2. 1, 2,
was done in the Church. They prayed, as I observed before, at the confirmation of the disciples of Samaria, and were the advocates or orators upon whose supplications they received the Holy Ghost. They prayed in a congregation of about a hundred and twenty, at the election by lot of Matthias, to be ordained in the place of Judas. Peter and John prayed in that assembly where the place was shaken in which they met together. The Apostles prayed at the ordination of the seven deacons, when they laid their hands upon them. Other public liturgs or ministers at Antioch, called prophets from their prophetical vocation, ministered to the Lord when the Holy Ghost said unto them, ‘Separate unto me Barnabas and Saul, unto the work whereunto I have called them.” So in the solemn meeting of the elders at Ephesus, Paul kneeled down and prayed with them after he had made his exhorta- tion to them. ‘To conclude, St. Paul in his first Epistle to Timothy, exhorts him in the first place that he), and all ministers under him, as the people’s orators, should have constant public offices of devotion, consisting of supplica- tions (δεήσει5), or deprecations for averting hurtful things, sins, and dangers. Secondly, of prayers (προσευχὰς), or obsecrations for obtaining mercies and blessings, and good things of which they stood in need. Thirdly, of interces- sions (€vrev&ecs), or interpellations for others. And lastly, of thanksgivings (εὐχαριστίας) for mercies received; and all these in the greatest extent of charity for men of all con- ditions and ranks. “ First of all, therefore, I exhort that” (in your Eucharistical devotions) “ supplications, prayers, in- tercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men.” Which shews, that as Christian ministers, like the Jewish, “are taken from among men,” so also that like them too they are advocates and orators at the throne of grace, or that ‘“‘they are ordained for men in things pertaining to God.”
i Sicut imperatores Romani man- — scopis.—[Grotius, Annot. ad 1 Tim. ii. data dare presidibus solebant, ita 1, Crit. Sacr., tom. vii. col. 447. ] Paulus in Timotheo mandata dat epi-
“»ΌΞΟΟῬΟ
1 Tim. ii. 1, 2, understood of the Euch. Serv. by St. dug. 219
I have said ‘ Eucharistical devotions’ upon the authority of St. Augustine, who so interprets the place*: Sed eligo in his verbis hoc intelligere, quod omnis, vel pene omnis frequentat ecclesia, το. “1 choose to understand in these words what the whole, or almost the whole Church declares [practises ἢ], that we take precationes for the prayers which are made in celebra- tion of the mysteries before that which is on the Lord’s table is blessed ; orationes for the prayers when it is blessed and sanctified, and broken to be distributed; both which almost
_ the whole Church concludes with the Lord’s Prayer.” Then
he proceeds to shew the difference between εὐχὴν and προσ- εὐχὴν, and shews that the former is generally used im the Scriptures for votum, and the latter for oratio, and that in this text oratio is to be understood of prayer which attends a vow; “For all things are devoted,” saith he, “which are offered to God, especially the holy oblation of the altar, in which Sacrament we openly make the greatest vows, by which we vow to remain in Christ, that is, in the union of His body. Inéerpellationes, or as your books have it, postula- tiones, are then made, when the people are blessed by the priest; for then the bishops, as advocates, offer the people whom they receive, by imposition of hands, to the most mer- ciful potentate; which being done, and so great a Sacra- ment received, all is concluded with giving of thanks (gratia- rum actio.)”
I am not the only or first writer that hath taken notice of St. Augustine’s understanding 1 Tim. ii. 1, 2. of the sacer-
Voventur autem omnia que offeruntur
k [Sed eligo in his verbis hoc intel- Deo, maxime sancti altaris oblatio, quo
ligere, quod omnis vel pene omnis fre-
quentat Ecclesia, ut precationes acci- piamus dictas, quas facimus in cele- bratione sacramentorum, antequam il- lud quod est in Domini mensa incipiat benedici: orationes cum benedicitur et sanctificatur, et ad distribuendum comminuitur, quam totam petitionem fere omnis Ecclesia Dominica oratione concludit. At quam intellectum etiam verbi Greci origo nos adjuvat. Nam eain quam dicunt εὐχὴν raro ita Scrip- tura ponit ut intelligatur oratio, sed Scriptura plerumque et multo usita- tius ... votum appellat εὐχὴν, προσευ- χὴν vero... semper orationem vocat.. -. Ka proprie intelligenda est oratio quam facimus ad votum, id est πρὸς εὐχήν.
Sacramento predicatur nostrum illud yotum maximum, quo nos vovimus in Christo esse mansuros, utique in com- page corporis Christi... . Inéerpella- tiones autem, sive, ut vestri codices habent, postulationes, fiunt cum popu- lus benedicitur. Tunc enim antistites, velut advocati, susceptos suos per ma- nus impositionem misericordissimz offerunt potestati. Quibus peractis, et participato tanto sacramento, © grati- arum actio cuncta coneludit, quam in his etiam verbis ultimam commendavit Apostolus.—S. Augustini Epist. exlix. ad Paulinum, cap. 2. ὃ 16. Op., tom. ii. p. 509 C—F. |
CHAP. II. SECT. XIV.
220 Benedictions at the Eucharist and other times ;
curisttan (otal supplications, prayers, and intercessions at the holy
PRIEST- HOOD.
Eucharist, or as he expresses it, at the “ holy oblation of the altar.” I find it observed by our learned countryman Mr. Thorndike, in his Book of Religious Assemblies, pp. 376, 377', 383™; and by Habertus in his Pontifical, p. 283", where he also understands what Tertullian saith in cap. 30 of his Apology®, of the Eucharistical service, (and so that passage ad Scapulam, cap. 2, may also be understood, viz., Sacrifica- mus pro imperatore”) in which at the blessing, or prayer of the bishop or celebrating priest for the people, they were wont to bow their heads to receive it, the bishop holding his hands over them, as a sign that God’s hand was stretched out over them to bless them; and at the same time, as we find it in some of the ancient Liturgies4, to say this prayer; “ Extend, O Lord, Thy invisible hand, and bless Thy servants and handmaidens, and cleanse them from all stain of flesh and
1 Printed at Cambridge in 1642. [ Thorndike after speaking of the prayer for the whole Church found in the an- cient Liturgies, (The Service of God in Religious Assemblies, chap. x. § 59. Works, vol. i. pp. 351, 544. ed. 1844) proceeds, (ὃ 63. p. 355,) “ It is hard for me to give account of this general practice of the ancient Church, other- wise than by conjecture. Thus much may be affirmed with confidence, that the practice of this prayer was the effect of the Apostle’s instruction, whereof our service speaketh; ‘ who by Thy holy Apostle hast taught us to make prayers and supplications, and to give thanks for all men,’ the words of the Apostle, 1 Tim. ii. 1,2.’’ He then quotes St. Ambrose on this text, (Pseudo-Ambrose in 1 Tim. ii. 1. Op., tom. ii. App., col. 292, C.) and adds, (ἢ 64. p. 356,) ** when he calls it the rule of that service which their priests ministered (regula ecclesiastica qua utuntur sacerdotes nostri), it is plain he understandeth the words of the Apostle concerning the prayers which were made at the Lord’s board, at celebrating the Eucharist.”
m [§ 72. p. 860. ed. 1844. Thorn- dike here quotes the words of St. Augustine given above, interpreting 1 Tim. ii. 1,2, of the prayers to be used at the Communion. |
» (Habert. Pontif. Observ. ii. ad partem xi. Liturg. Ordin. De oratione in mysteriis pro pace, eeclesiis, sacer-
dotibus et principibus. ... Precipua hujus pro regibus instituta: orationis, immo unica, causa, ab Apostolo.... commemorata est; (1 Tim. ii. 1.) Pax. He quotes St. Augustine, Epist. ad Paulinum, as above note k, and (p. 284.) Tertullian ; see the next note. |
ο [the passage in Tertullian is, (Apol. i. 6. 30, 31.) Nos enim pro salute imperatorum Deum invocamus eter- num, manibus expansis, quiainnocuis.. oramus pro omnibus imperatoribus, vitam illis prolixam, imperium secu- rum, domum tutam, exercitus fortes, senatum fidelem, populum probum, or- bem quietum et quecunque hominis et Cesaris vota sunt... Scitote.. . pra- ceptum esse nobis... . ‘ Orate, inquit, pro regibus, et pro principibus, et po- testatibus, ut omnia tranquilla sint vo- bis.’—Tertull. Op., p. 27, A—D.]
P [Itaque et sacrificamus pro salute imperatoris...... quomodo przcepit Deus, pura prece.—Id. ad Scapulam, δ. Ὁ. ΟΡ: 8. 591]
a [Hickes seems to have combined two passages; ἐξαπόστειλον τὴν adpa- τόν σου δεξιὰν, καὶ πάντας Tuas εὐλό- γησον .. -. περίελε ἀφ᾽ ἡμῶν σαρκιικῆς ἐπιθυμίας épyaciayv.—S. Mare. Lit. Re- naudot., tom. ii. p. 164; and τοὺς ὗπο- κεκλικότας σοι τὰς ἑαυτῶν κεφαλὰς εὐ- λόγησον καὶ καταξίωσον ἀκατακρίτως μετασχεῖν τῶν ἀχράντων σου τούτων καὶ ζωοποιῶν μυστηρίων. --- ὃ. Basil. Lit. Goar., p. 174.}
instances in New Test.; imply superiority, as of a Priest. 221
spirit, and account them worthy to be partakers of the body cnar. πὶ. and blood of Thy only-begotten Son.” So at other times, ao and upon other occasions, they used, like the Jewish priests,
to bless or pray for the people, as is evident from the many apostolical prayers and benedictions in the New Testament,
in which they blessed the people as Melchisedec blessed Abraham. Such are these salutations: ‘Grace be to you, Rom. 1. 7. and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ ;” “Grace, mercy, and peace from God our Father, and Jesus 1 Tim. 1. 2. Christ our Lord ;” “Grace to you, and peace from God our Philem. 3. Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ ;” “Grace and peace be 2 Pet. 1. 2. multiplied unto you, through the knowledge of God, and of
Jesus Christ our Lord;” “Grace be with you, mercy, and peace 2 John 3. from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the
Son of the Father, in truth and love;” ‘And the grace of 2 Cor. 13. our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship (or ὡς communion) of the Holy Ghost be with you all; Amen.”
You know, Sir, that the less is blessed by the greater, and Heb. 7. 7. that a blessing, therefore, is but an authoritative prayer' of a superior for an inferior, as of a priest for the people, or any
single person among them, though, like Abraham, he may
be a temporal prince. And when the superior in any rela-
tion blesses the inferior, he blesses him in God’s name, and
as one who had power with God to obtain a blessing for him,
as in those other benedictions of the Apostle, ‘The peace of Phil. 4. 7. God, which passeth (or surpasseth) all understanding, keep
τ Haberti Pontif. [Observ. iv. ad eximie sacerdotale, adducing Heb. vii.
partem xi. Liturg. Ord., ] pp. 291—293. [De Benedictione Pontificis.... Bene- dictio est actio intelligentie simul et affectus, mentis et voluntatis, potentis ad bonum et efficacis; unde ad Deum precipue benedicere attinet. .. . Quis- quis igitur benedictionem impertit, Deum exhibet atque reprzsentat, tan- quam auctorem boni illius quod bene- dictio pollicetur et confert: Deus enim tanquam primarius ac supremus bene- dictionis auctor in pontifice cogitandus est... . Tria illa hominum genera pe- euliari quodam jure in Scripture his- toria benedicunt: Patres, Reges, Sacer- dotes ... Ratio clarissima, quia tres hi pre ceteris, Patres, Reges, Sacer- dotes, Deum peculiari quodam titulo reprzesentant, illiusque, si fas esset dici, personam sustinent, vices agunt. He speaks of benediction as munus vere ac
1,6,7. Again, | pp. 298—296. [ Observ. v. De Benedictione Episcoporuin. Epi- scopi proprium est, ut Christum sacer- dotem et episcopum animarum nostra- rum, inter presbyteros velut inter Apo- stolos, peculiari quadam ratione re- presentet, &c.] p. 296. [He instances the Apostolical benediction, 7 χάρις, K.T.A. as given by the bishop on his being enthroned, Apost. Const., lib. viii. c. 5. p. 464, A.] p. 297. [Observ. vi. de Benedictione Presbyterorum Sa- cerdos in ecclesia benedicit.—Vetus ordo Romanus et pontificale, ‘ Sacer- dotem oportet offerre, benedicere,’ Be- nedictio ‘est enim opus sacerdotale,’ εὐλογία ἱερατικὸν ἔργον, ait collector Constitutionum Apostolicarum, &c.— Lib. iii. c. 10. p. 317, C.] Martene de Antiquis Ritibus, [lib. 11. de Sacris Benedictionibus, tom. ii. p. 145. ]
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HLOOD.
2 Cor. 13. 14
222 Blessing the office of a Priest ; as from God.
your hearts and minds through Jesus Christ ;” and “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the com- munion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all; Amen.” Such- like is the salutation or blessing of the clergy of Rome to the Church of Corinth, in the beginning of St. Clement’s Epistle*; “Grace be to you, and peace from the Almighty God by Jesus Christ be multiplied ;’” and in the endt: “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you, and with all others who are called by God through Him.” So in the salutation of St. Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians": “ Mercy unto you, and peace from God Almighty and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour be multiplied.” So in St. Ignatius’ Epistles, as in that to the Church of Smyrna’: “ All joy (to you), through the immaculate Spirit, and through the Word of God.” As in their absence they blessed their own and other people when they wrote to them, so when they were present they orally blessed them, and the people were wont to receive their blessings with all veneration, as from the oracles of God. Hence St. Ambrose observes how indecent it is for a bishop to curse, whose office it is to bless; and compares the mouth of such a bishop to “a fountain* that sends out bitter waters and sweet.” In parti- cular they looked upon them as intercessors between them and God, and that their prayers, and intercessions, and blessings were very powerful with Him to avert judgments and obtain mercies; so the great Emperor Jovian in his letter to St. Athanasiusy: “Our majesty calls you back, and wills that you return to preach the saving faith. Go back then to your holy Churches, and feed the people of God, and put up hearty prayers for our clemency unto God. For I Smyrn. init., ibid., p. 33. ]
x [Non decet de ore episcopi bene- dictionem simul et maledictionem
S [χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ παντο- κράτορος θεοῦ διὰ ᾿Τησοῦ πληθυνθείη.--- S. Clem. Ep. i. init., Patr. Apost., tom.
i. p. 146.]
t [ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν καὶ μετὰ πάντων παν- ταχῇ τῶν κεκλημένων ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ δι᾿ avrov.—Ibid., ο. 59. p. 181. ]
α [ἔλεος ὑμῖν, καὶ εἰρήνη mapa θεοῦ παντοκράτορος, καὶ κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ Χρισ- τοῦ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν πληθυνθείη.--- S. Polycarp. Kp. ad Phil. init., ibid., tom. 11. p. 186.]
Y [ἐν ἀμώμῳ πνεύματι, (καὶ) λόγῳ θεοῦ πλεῖστα xalpew.—S, Ignat. Ep. ad
egredi... quia non potest de uno fonte dulcem et amaram producere aquam. —Pseudo-Ambros. de Dignitate Sacer- dotali, c. 4. ap. 5. Ambros. Op., tom. ii. App., p. 861, C. See vol. 1. p. 195, notes p, q. |
Υ [ἀνακτᾶταί σε τοίνυν ἣ ἡμετέρα βασιλεία, καὶ ἐπανελθεῖν βούλεται πρὸς τὴν τῆς σωτηρίας διδασκαλίαν. ἐπάνιθι τοίνυν εἰς τὰς ἁγίας ἐκκλησίας, καὶ ποί- μαινε τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λαὸν, καὶ τὰς ὑπὲρ τῆς ἡμετέρας πρᾳότητος προθύμως εὐχὰς
The People revered and sought the Blessing of Priests. 223
know that by your supplication I, and all orthodox Chris- tians who believe as I do, shall obtain great favour and pro- tection from God.” So the bishops of Africa, in their Epi- stle to the Spanish Christians in the cause of Basilides and Martialis?: “Setting these things before our eyes, and care- fully and religiously considering them, we ought to elect men of unblemished and upright lives for bishops, who holily and worthily offering sacrifices of the holy Eucharist to God, may be heard in the prayers which they make for the safety of the Lord’s people.” And according to this received opi- nion of the sacerdotal prayers, the Emperor Valentinian the First*, in his letter to the Arian bishops, who had perse- cuted the orthodox that met in council in Illyricum, writes thus; “ Do not,” saith he, “ persecute those who minister to God with all care and diligence, by whose prayers wars are made to cease in all the world, and the assaults of apostate angels are repelled. And as by prayer they endeavour to drive away the destroying demons, so they introduce the public ministration according to law.” Afterwards he calls them “the stewards or procurators of the great King” (τοὺς διοικητὰς τοῦ μεγάλου βασιλέως) ; “ For so,” saith he”, “our imperial majesty always commanded that the labourers in the field of Christ, and the stewards of the great King should not be persecuted, or oppressed, or vexed, or driven from their flocks.” The Empress Eudoxia, seeing the Egyptian monks in the street, as they came up to her stopped her royal chariot, and “ bowing her head‘, she desired them to
ἀναπέμπετε εἰς θεόν. οἴδαμεν γὰρ ὅτι τῇ σῇ ἱκεσίᾳ ἡμεῖς τε καὶ οἱ σὺν ἡμῖν τὰ Χριστιανῶν φρονοῦντες, μεγάλην ἀντίληψιν σχοίημεν παρὰ τοῦ ὑπερέχον- τος Qeov.—Joviani Imp. Epist. ap. S. Athanasii Op., tom. i. pars ii. p. 779, Β, 6.1
2 [Que ante oculos habentes et sol- licite ae religiose considerantes, in or- dinationibus sacerdotum non nisi im- maculatos et integros antistites eligere debemus, qui sanete et digne sacrificia Deo offerentes audiri in precibus pos- sint, quas faciunt pro plebis Dominice incolumitate, cum scriptum sit: ‘Deus peccatorem non audit.—S. Cyprian. Epist. 68. (67. ed. Oxon.) p. 118. ed. Ben. |
® Theodoret, Eccl. Hist., lib. iv. cap. 8. [ἐπιστολὴ τοῦ βασιλέως Οὐαλεντίνου, κι τ. Δ... .. μὴ διώκετε τοὺς ἀκριβῶς τῷ θεῷ λειτουργοῦντας, ὧν ταῖς εὐχαῖς καὶ πόλεμοι καταπαύονται ἐπὶ τῆς γῆ», καὶ ἀγγέλων ἀποστατῶν ἐπιβάσεις ἀποστρέ- φονται" καὶ πάντας δαίμονας φθοριμαίους ἀποστρέφειν διὰ δεήσεως σπουδάζοντες, καὶ τὰ δημόσια κατὰ νόμους εἰσκομίζειν Yoaou—Hist. Eecl., tom. iii. pp. 154, 155. ]
Ὁ [οὕτως καὶ τὸ ἡμέτερον κράτος διὰ παντὸς ἐνετείλατο, μὴ διώκειν, μήδε ἐπικλύζειν, μήτε ζηλοῦν τοὺς ἐργαζομέν-- ous τὸ χώριον τοῦ Χριστοῦ, μήτε τοὺς διοικητὰς ἀπελαύνειν τοῦ μεγάλου βασι- Aéws.—Id. ibid., p. 166.1
© Sozom., lib, viii. cap. 13. [ἡ δὲ (ἡ
CHAP. IL
SECT. XIV.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
224 The Blessings of Priests, to be valued greatly;
bless and pray for the emperor, and herself, and their chi.- dren, and for the empire.” This the empress did to them, not as monks but as priests, as it is plain from the preceding chapter to that cited in the margin the chief of them, Dios- corus, Isidorus, and Petrus, were*. The people of Constan- tinople, at the return of St. John Chrysostom from his banish- ment, carried him by force into his church®, though he told them they who condemned him should first revoke their sentence against him, and compelled him to bless them, or “‘ give them the peace of God” in his throne. And also out of the church were the bishops wont to bless the people’, wheresoever they met them, and both in and out of the church they received their benedictions bowing, or upon their knees. And the sacerdotal power and privilege of blessing the people, common both to bishops and priests, brings to remembrance what Cosmas Indico-Pleustes$ saith of the Levitical law and priesthood, which was the ministry of the law, that they were “the guards and fortresses of the Jewish nation ;” and of what St. Ambrose writes in his short golden tract of the Sacerdotal Dignity to the college of bishops". “It is fit,” saith he, “that the sacerdotal dignity should be understood by you, that you may the better main- tain and preserve it, and that the words of the Psalmist may not be applied to you, ‘Man being in honour doth not un- derstand, but is like the beasts that perish.’ For the episco- pal honour, and sublime dignity, my brethren, cannot be equalled by any comparison. If you should compare it to the glory of kings, and the diadems of princes, your com-
βασιλέως γαμετὴ) ἐπιβουλευθέντας av- τοὺς ἤσθετο, καὶ τιμῶσα ἔστη" καὶ προ- κύψασα τοῦ βασιλικοῦ ὀχήματος, ἐπέ- vevoe τῇ κεφαλῇ" καὶ εὐλογεῖτε, ἔφη, καὶ εὔχεσθε ὑπὲρ βασιλέως καὶ ἐμοῦ, καὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων παίδων, καὶ τῆς apxis. —Ibid., tom. ii. p. 849.]
4 [ Dioscorus was bishop of Hermo- polis, Isidore had been designed for that of Constantinople, and Peter was arch-presbyter.—Ibid., ec. 12. pp. 340, 341.]
© [ἄγουσιν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν. παραιτούμενόν τε, καὶ πολλάκις ἰσχυ- ριζόμενον χρῆναι πρότερον τοὺς κατα- ψηφισαμένους αὐτοῦ πάλιν ἀποψηφί- σασθαι, ws ἱερεῦσι θέμις, ἠνάγκασαν τὴν εἰρήνην τῷ λαῷ προσειπεῖν, καὶ εἰς τὸν
ἐπισκοπικὸν καθίσαι Opdvov.—ld. ibid., c. 18. p. 849.]
f [See Kingham’s Antiquities, vol. ii. chap. 9. § 1.]
& Geographia Christiana, lib. ν. διὰ τοῦτο ὃ νόμος προσετέθη, ἵνα φυλαχθῇ δι αὐτοῦ καὶ τῆς ἱερατείας φρουρούμενον τὸ ἔθνος [τὸ τὰς ἐπαγγελίας λαβὸν καὶ μὴ μίξις τις γένηται αὐτοῦ μετὰ ἕτερου €0vovs.—Apud Novam Collect. Scriptt. Montfaucon, tom. ii. p. 206. ]
h [Dignum est enim ut dignitas sacerdotalis prius noscatur a nobis et sic deinde servetur a nobis; ut psalmo- graphi sententia queat repelli a nobis; ‘homo cum in honore esset non intel- lexit, comparatus est jumentis insipi- entibus, et similis factus est illis:’
their efficacy, as made in the name of Christ. 225
parison would debase it as much as if you compared the glit- tering and splendour of gold to that of lead. For kings and princes humble themselves at the knees of bishops, and kiss their hands, because they believe they are defended by their prayers.” Thus, Sir, all Christian kings and princes, as well as the common laity or people, believed that the prayer or blessing of a priest was more effectual than the prayer of a private person, because, as St. Chrysostom observesi, he prays not barely as a single person, but as a liturg or public minister of God, and the mouth of the whole congregation, yea of the whole Catholic Church, as being a member of that priesthood which is but one through the whole world. Wherefore as the prayer of a congregation of saints, or faith- ful Christians, though consisting but of two or three, is of more force than that of a single person, so must the prayer of a priest be, because he represents the Church, being sup- posed to be always present among his flock in person, or in spirit, actually or virtually by the authority of Christ com- mitted to him, as it is written by the Apostle, “In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, aud my spirit;” and, “ To whom you forgive anything I forgive also (ἐν προσώπῳ Χριστοῦ) in the person of Christ,” 1. 6. by the authority which I have from Christ, in and over His Church. Indeed these two places relate to the power of binding and loosing, or excommunicating and absolving by solemn prayer in the Church. But their authority to pray and intercede, and the efficacy of their prayers and inter- cessions, specially called blessings, was the same upon all other occasions ; which was the reason why in the purest and most holy times the people crowded after the bishops to have their benedictions, though now to ask the sacerdotal blessing is grown into too much contempt among too many of those
honor igitur, fratres, et sublimitas epi- scopalis nullis poterit comparationibus adequari. Si regum fulgori compares et principum diademati, longe erit in- ferius, tanquam si plumbi metallum ad auri fulgorem compares; quippe cum videas regum colla et principum sub- mitti genibus sacerdotum, et exosculata eorum dextra, orationibus eorum cre- dant se communiri.—De dignitate Sa- cerdotali opus spurium, c. 2. inter Op.,
HICKES,
S. Ambrosii, tom. ii. p. 359, A, B. See vol. i. p. 195, notes p, q. ]
i [See above, note g, p. 217. ]
k Injunctions by King Edw. VL, 1547. [ὃ 20.] ““ Forasmuch as priests be public ministers of the Church, and upon the holy days ought to apply themselves to the common administra- tion of the whole parish,’ &c.—[In- junctions, &c., Wilkins’ Concilia, tom.
Mea (ed
CHAP. II. SECT, XIV-
1 Cor. 5. 4.
2 Cor. 2.10.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
SECT. XV.
Conse- quences of the view that Chris-
226 Recapitulation. If Christian Ministers are not Priests,
whose duty it is to desire it; but I presume not, as is re- ported, among any of them who should give it in most solemn manner, ἐν προσώπῳ Χριστοῦ, in the name of their Master and great High-Priest, Jesus Christ. Certainly if mm the patriarchal Churches the prayers (whether in blessings or curses) of priests, who were heads of tribes and families, were thought to be of such force as to be confirmed and ratified in heaven, it is reasonable to believe now, that the blessings and intercessions of faithful priests, who are heads of national, provincial, or parochial Churches, have the same force. And I am so convinced of the powerfulness of sacerdotal inter- cession, as such, at the throne of grace, that I had rather have the benefit of priestly supplication and intercession for me in any time of need, especially in time of sickness, and at the hour of death, than thousands of their gold and silver who hate or but despise and ridicule priests.
XV. I have now, Sir, shewed by many arguments taken from the New Testament, that the ministers of Christ are proper priests, and that their sacred office hath all the essen-
tian Minis- tials of priesthood, though they are not once called priests,
ters are not
Priests.
nor that priesthood in any of those sacred writings. I have shewed that, like the Jewish priests, they are taken or set apart from the people, and, like them, ordained to minister for men in things pertaining to God’. I have shewed that it is their office to transact and negotiate between them, as between two parties, to stand on the people’s part before God, and on God’s part before the people™; that they are His messengers or ambassadors, and their orators, to pray and supplicate in their name; that they are Christ’s stewards in His house, His ministers in His Church or kmgdom upon earth, who represent Him in His sacerdotal as well as in His regal and prophetical office, by a coalition and union of all the three offices in one. I have shewed that as they are governors under Him as King, and messengers and teachers under Him as a Prophet, so are they priests under Him as our High-Priest, and in virtue of the priestly office advocates to intercede for men, and as priestly superiors to bless them, and that they have a real altar", which is the holy table, and
1 [Sect. 3. p. 18.] n [Sectt. 6, 8. pp. 42, sqq. 63, sqq. ] m [Thid., p. 19.]
they are inferior to the Jewish Ministers. 227
areal external sacrifice of bread and wine®, or upon suppo- sition that they have not, that yet they cannot but be priests? ; which I have shewed from the nature of priesthood, as it is described in the Scriptures, and other both Christian and heathen authors‘, all which descriptions 1 have applied to the Christian ministry and ministers, to prove them to be proper priests. As the house of Christ is more noble than the house of Moses, and the religion of it much more excellent than that of the Jews, so the ministry of it must be more noble, and excellent too, which yet, as I observed before, cannot be, if it wants the sacerdotal honour and holiness which the Jew- ish ministry had. In the coalescence of the three offices into one in our Saviour’s ministers, as well as in His own person, the character of priest is the most noble of the three, and of most concern and comfort to His people: but if they are only teaching and ruling ministers under Him, and not priests, you must give me leave to say it again, they are much inferior in dignity and utility to the Jewish ministers, who had power to bless the people, and to make atonement for their sins, as well as to teach and govern them. Priests therefore they must be, otherwise the ministers of the Gospel are of a rank and order much meaner in many respects than that of the cohens or ministers of the law; nay priests they must be, or else your late writer, and such ministers of the Church as he, must be involved in a dangerous consequence of their own opinion, which is to be guilty of sacrilege in arrogating to themselves the most proper part of the priest’s office, which is to stand for them before God, and as their orators to pray for them, and to supplicate and intercede for them, as their advocates at the throne of mercy, and likewise to bless them in God’s name, and yet not believe themselves to be proper priests. But priests they are in the most proper sense, and so 1 think they are called by God Himself in the
CHAP. 11.
SECT. XV.
Old Testament, where foretelling by the Prophet Isaiah that Is. 66. 21.
the “ Gentiles should become an holy Church,” which are the words in the contents of the chapter, then it follows, “and I will also take of them for priests, and for Levites, saith the Lord.” Saith Eusebius Czsariensis, in his com- °, [Sectt..7, 9, 10. 1 (Sect. 1, 2, 3, pp. 12, sqq. j ? [Sectt. 4, 5. pp. 26, sqq.] Q 2
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
228 Proper Christian Priests foretold in Isaiah and Jeremiah.
ment on the twenty-second verse of this chapter’: “If there is anew heaven and a new earth, and a new Jerusalem, by consequence there must be new priests and Levites.” To this place of the Prophet Isaiah answers that of Jeremiah, chap. xxxilil. 17, 18, “ For thus saith the Lord, David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel; neither shall the priests and Levites want a man be- fore Me to offer burnt-offerings, and to kindle meat-offerings, and to do sacrifice continually.” It is plaim from the con- tents of the chapter’, that our Church understands this place of the kingdom of Christ, which is His Church. So most commentators take it in a spiritual evangelical sense, and think that it relates to the times of the Gospel, and the state of the Christian Church. The commentators on the great French Bible are positive that the place sets forth “ the firm- ness and immutability of the kingdom and priesthood of ΟΠ βου", but then they render priests and Levites in both places, “‘ Docteurs de ’Eglise, ministres du Saint Evangile",” “teachers of the Church, or ministers of the Gospel.” But according to that translation, what is become of the two orders, priests and Levites? for the ministers of the Gospel, according to them, are equal, and make but one order. Nay, in their own sense of ministers without priesthood, they will scarce allow the ministers of the Gospel to be meant here, for they say’ it is rather to be understood of the whole house- hold of the faithful, who make one spiritual priesthood ; “ It
τ [εἰ yap οὐρανὸς καινός ἐστι, καὶ 4 γῆ καινὴ, καὶ Ἱερουσαλὴμ καινὴ, ἀκό- λουθον ἂν εἴη καὶ τοὺς ἱερεῖς καὶ λευίτας καινοὺς €oeo0a1.—Euseb. Cesar. Com- ment. in Hesaiam, ap. Noy. Collect. Montfaucon, tom. ii. p. 593, A.]
* [God promiseth , Christ the branch of righteousness, a con- tinuance of kingdom and priesthood.” —Contents of Jerem. chap. xxxiii. in the English Bible. }
t [See below, note v. ]
ἃ (Hickes refers to the folio French Bible printed by L. and D. Elzevir, under the title, Le Sainte Bible, edition nouvelle faite sur Ja Version de Genéye, enrichie, outre Jes anciennes notes, de toutes celles de la Bible Flamande, &c. Par S. et H. Des Marets, Amst. 1669. The version in the textis ‘ Sacrificateurs
eee 9 δ᾽ ὦ
et Levites,’ the words given by Hickes are a marginal gloss. |
v Isaiah Ixvi. 2]. Si mieux nous n’aimons étendre ceci 4 tous les fideles éleus d’entre les Gentils, honorés de Dieu d’un Sacerdoce Spirituel en sa maison, selon le privilege de la nouvelle alliance: étant d’ailleurs fort certain, que nulle part au Nouveau Testament les Ministres d’ ]’Eglise ne sont ap- pellés Sacrificateurs ou Levites. So on Jer. xxxiil. 17. Par ces paroles et les suivantes ... est ici montré...la fermeté et l’immutabilité de la Royaute et du Sacerdoce de notre Seigneur J. Christ... lequel a en outre sous soi non seulement Jes Pasteurs, et les Doc- teurs de son Eglise, mais aussi tous les membres delle, qu’il a tous faits Rois et Sacrificateurs.
The Geneva Commentators upon these passages. 229
being certain,” say they, “that the ministers of the Church 8 y the}
are not called priests or Levites in any part of the New Tes- —
tament.” Sir, I suppose your late writer had his eye upon these notes, commonly called the Geneva notes, when he said that the notion of “bishops being properly priests was absolutely rejected by the whole Protestant communion.” But if that place of the prophet is to be understood of all the faithful, who make one spiritual priesthood, then women (not to mention children) are a part of it; women who never had any share in the priesthood of the true God: and if so, then I must ask again, what is there left to answer to the Levites in the text? For the faithful, and every one of them, whether men or women, are equal in this privilege of priest- hood without any such disparity or subordination as the Le- vites had to the priests. But in the proper priesthood, by which I explain the place with the ancient Church*, the deacons properly answer to Levites, and bishops and _pres- byters to priests.
XVI. To conclude, Sir, I must tell your late writer that to say the ministers of Christ are not proper priests, or their ministry a proper priesthood, is to affirm with the deists and other enemies of the Christian priesthood, to the disbasement and disparagement of the Gospel dispensation, that they are not priests at all. Whereas of the two the evangelical cohens or ministers are the more proper and excellent priests, who perform that in substance and truth which the Jewish did in the shadow and letter. But if they are not proper or properly priests, then they are only metaphorical priests, priests in mere likeness but not in truth and reality, as love is fire and knowledge light, or a crafty fellow a fox, but are not indeed what they are called. In lke manner according to this, and such late writers, the Christian ministers are not truly and really priests, but only so called because they have some resemblance with priests, upon the account whereof
they came to have the name.
x [See St. Jerome on Isaiah xvi. 21. Quomodo enim in abscondito Judzeus est . .. sic et Sacerdotes et Levitz in abscondito sunt, qui non seriem ge- ueris sequuntur sed ordinem fidei.— Comment. in Esaiam, lib. xviii. Op., tom. iv. col. 825, A. And Theodoret on
But so a painted man and
Jerem. xxxiii. 17. ἅπασα yap γῆ καὶ θά- λαττα πλήρεις ἀρχιερέων, καὶ τῶν Thy Λευιτικὴν λειτουργίαν πληρούντων δια- Kévwv.—Op., tom. ii. pp. 234, Ὁ. 235, A. The deacons were commonly called Levites in the ancient Church. See Bingham, book ii. ch. 20. ὃ 2.]
CHAP. II, SECT. XV.
SECT. XVI.
Advautages to the Deists, and other evil effects of denving a proper Christian Priesthood.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- I 100 dD,
230 The Clergy’s denying these doctrines destroys the people’s
star hath the name of a man and star; that is, they have a name, but not the things signified by those names. And therefore these men, who deny Christian ministers, truly and lawfully called and ordained, to be proper priests, do as effectually deny the verity and reality of the Christian priest- hood, as the greatest enemies of revealed religion, and, like them, by consequence make our Clements, Ireneus’, Ter- tullians, and Cyprians, who were not fools, notwithstanding all their sanctity and sufferings, to have been enthusiasts or knaves, and the Christian priesthood, which they taught to be such in truth, to be in truth nothing but what is now most impudently and impiously called priestcraft. Nay, they debase our office as much as our enemies do, and though not designedly, yet, I fear, with more success, because their tes- timony will sooner be believed against themselves by the people, before whom they will soon become contemptible and base, by the just judgment of God, as well as by the con- sequences of their own doctrine, by which in a manner they degrade themselves? But what do I say? will soon become con- temptible? They are in a great degree so already, and have almost made their whole order despicable by this false doc- trine, which hath helped so much to render the whole clergy vile in the sight of the people. Did they themselves only feel the effect of their doctrine it would not be matter of such complaint; but being thus false to their own profes- sion, and sapping the ground upon which both it and the honour due unto it stands, they serve the design of their and their Lord’s greatest enemies, in exposing their office to the scorn and hatred of the people as a mock-priesthood, and themselves to their contempt as mock-priests. As long as the people are taught the true nature of the Christian mi- nistry to be, as really it is, a true and proper priesthood, and that their ministers are true and proper priests ordained by God, to stand before Him as advocates for them, and before them as His oracles to bless them in His name, so long they will honour and reverence them as priests; but when they are pleased to strip themselves of that part of their character and relation to God, to which those powers belong, and which above any other makes their ministry and them, as Church-ministers, venerable and holy, then they will soon
reverence, & their own sense of the holiness of their office. 231
find the veneration of the people begin to decay, and by degrees wear off into utter contempt, when they have once laid aside the notion of their being orators and advocates ordained by God to intercede with Him for them; which, Sir, their flocks can no longer retain than they believe them to be proper priests. Nay, what must they think of such men who presume to act as their orators and advocates with God, in presenting their prayers to Him, and making solemn intercessions for them in a proper sacerdotal manner, and yet deny themselves to be proper priests? I wish your and other such late writers among the clergy would well consider this and the consequences of it, and then they would find themselves obliged to quit their ministry, or own and assert themselves to be truly and properly sacerdotal ministers, taken from among men to minister in things pertaining to God. But neither are these, Sir, all the ill consequences of this doctrine, which must also tempt clergymen themselves who believe it to have a lower and meaner idea of their ministry, and not to think their order to be of that dignity and holiness, and so separate from the world, as it is, and the ancient Christians believed it to be. They cannot have that honour and reverence for it as they themselves ought to have, if they do not believe it to be a true priesthood, nor will they distinguish themselves so carefully, as it becomes ministers of Christ, from other men, by the singular piety of their lives, and the gravity of their garb and behaviour, if they do not believe themselves to be priests. I doubt not, Sir, but that latitude of opinion among the clergy in this point is one of the reasons why so many ministers of late are more than ever secularized in their conversation, and with- out reverence to themselves, conform themselves and families to the sinful fashions and vanities of the world, against which they ought to preach with one mouth, and with the zeal of a Cyprian, a Basil, a Gregory, an Ambrose, or Chrysostom, lift wp their voices like trumpets, and not spare the greatest of men. This secularity of the clergy in complying with the excessive vanities and lux of the age is so common in some places, that it is become a common subject of discourse, but, as men are affected, of a different kind. The sober among the laity of both sexes who love the clergy deplore it, and
CHAP. Il.
SECT. XVI. SESE
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Ὁ ΤΠ πη. 2. 20.
232 Secularity of the Clergy, from not believing, and the
the vain themselves ridicule it, and despise and expose the clergy for it. ‘Do you know, Sir,’ said one of the latter sort to one of the former, ‘that beau clergyman there with the long powdered wig and the sparkling ring?’ ‘No, Sir,’ answered the other, ‘nor do I desire to know any such who forget how they are separated and stand related to God and their flocks.’ Thus some with grief lament, and many more deride the clergy for the sinful airs they give themselves in modish vanities, even in the Church as well as without. Is it not grievous to hear it said in scorn that we have a well- powdered clergy? not to mention other deserved reproaches of them for the secularity of their families as well as of themselves, to such a degree of vanity as can hardly proceed from any other cause but their not believing or forgetting themselves to be priests, and their relation to God and the people as such. Alas! Sir, do these men think to convert souls? or can they imagine that the people think that they themselves really believe what they preach, when their com- pliance with the sinful fashions of the world, both in them- selves and in their nearest relations is so great, that they look more like the vainest of laymen than priests? But did they believe them to be priests, and seriously reflect on their characters as such, they would soon live up more answerably to it; they would soon retrieve the ancient reverence to the priesthood, and recover that religious respect which of old used to be paid to Christian ministers as priests, and (pardon the severity of the expression, because it is the Apostle’s) “recover themselves out of the snare of the devil.” To these gentlemen, for so I now call them, because they affect the genteel airs more than the gravity of priests, let me recom- mend that rule of St. Augustine’, Non sit notabilis habitus vester, nec affectetis vestibus placere, sed moribus ...... In incessu, statu, habitu, in omnibus motibus vestris, nil fiat, quod cujusguam offendat adspectum, sed quod vestram deceat sancti- tatem.
To this cause also it is chiefly to be ascribed that clergy- men so much neglect to teach the people what we are, or acquaint them with our relative holiness, and with the powers we have as priests, and how beneficial our priestly
Y Regula ad servos Dei. ὃ 6. | Op., tom. i. p. 791, B, C.]
other ill consequences of not enforcing, these doctrines. 233
office, above all others, is to mankind, and what subjection and reverence is due to us and our authority upon those accounts. Indeed this omission is not so bad (though bad enough), as to deny their function to be a priesthood, and themselves priests, as your late writer doth. But as it plainly proceeds from a sinful latitude, scepticism, and neu- trality, so is it of very ill consequence to the souls of the people, and the Church of God. Fathers take care to pre- serve the reverence due to them as fathers, and kings are never wanting in their care to keep the people in a constant sense of the sacredness of majesty, and the obedience which is due to them as kings; only we priests, who are of greatest concern to the world, are not careful to let the people know the holiness of our office as sacerdotal, and the honour that is due to it, and that the honour and obedience which is paid to it, as well as the contempt of it, terminates in God. From this cause also it proceeds that clergymen so often value themselves more upon some other character or account than as the ministers of God, and by their own example teach the laity to do so too. But did they believe themselves to be priests, and to minister in the priestly office under the eter- nal antitypal Melchisedec, who is our High-Priest and Advo- cate in heaven, standing continually before His Father for men; did they believe that they are His ministers in this as well as His other offices, and consider that it is really more honourable to be His minister than the minister of the great- est king, they would value themselves more upon their priestly character, and thereby teach their flocks to do so too. And believe me, Sir, the people would soon learn to do it, when they saw them reverence themselves, and pay due regard to their own character; they would most cer- tainly follow their good example, in giving them the same respect they give themselves; and when they learnt from them what was due to the priestly character, they would reverence all priests of the same order alike; the poorest as much as the richest, those who were not dignitaries of the Church as much as those who are; there being really no greater dignity imaginable than to be a priest. All other differences between priests of the same order are extrinsecal to the honour and essence of the priesthood, as to be lord
CHAP. If.
SECT. XVI,
CHRISTIAN PRIEST-
SECT. XVII. Recapitu- lation of the conse- quences of not assert- ing the dig- nity of the Priesthood.
234 Spiritual dignity greater than any temporal distinctions.
of a manor, or a lord of the realm, or a favourite at court, or
curiously learned, or a writer of many books, or to be very
rich, or of noble extraction, upon which scores the world is apt enough to pay respect to the man, when they despise him as a clergyman, because they understand not his dignity as a priest.
XVII. Sir, I have enlarged more than at first I thought upon this subject, to shew the danger of this doctrine, which denies bishops and presbyters to be proper priests, and the very ill consequences and tendencies thereof. It tends, as you see, to the dishonour and depravation of the clergy, the secularizing of their manners, the debasing of them and their ministry in the esteem of the people, and every way to their utter contempt, the decay of Christian piety and reli- gion, and the dissolution of the Church. In a word, it gra- tifies all her enemies and the enemies of the priesthood, and gives them infinite advantage over the clergy, particularly as to their Divine right to tithes (which I presume your late writer, who doth not think himself a priest, must deny,) and the most odious charge which is laid upon them of priest- craft. But, Sir, you are none of those clergymen who are false to their profession, though you have given me this occasion to consider the doctrine of those who unhappily are their own enemies, and the ill tendencies and effects thereof. On the contrary, as you believe yourself to be a proper priest, so have you lived up to your sacred character in the exemplary piety of your life, the gravity of your garb and conversation, without disgracing or betraying your order or the Church: which would have been now in much better condition, and more like the Church in the best and purest ages, were all the clergy as true to it and its rights as you are: I mean, the original rights which belong to it by the laws of its High-Priest and founder, and the constitution of the evangelical theocracy, which is the Catholic Church. These rights, Sir, which many have no notion of, and which all those who understand them do not value as they ought, are nevertheless of highest moment to the well-being of the Church, and much to be preferred before all the revenues and temporal liberties with which pious princes have en- dowed her. But were all the clergy, or the generality of us,
Good effects which would result from teaching these truths. 235
of your mind, whatsoever is taken from her would be re- stored, whatsoever is amiss would soon be reformed, and every thing wanting in her supplied. Were the majority of us so affected as you are to her spiritual interests, the su- preme interests of the Christian world, and preferred them before the little interests of this life, as not only the priests, but the people ought to do, she would then indeed look like a theocracy or royal priesthood, like a new Sion indeed, like Jerusalem which came from above, and is free, and not like the Jewish Jerusalem, which was in bondage with her chil- dren. But, Sir, alas! the whole Catholic Church in all places groaneth together, and waiteth for the time when she shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
CHAP. II. SECT. XVI¥.
CHAPTER III.
REASONS WHY THE WRITERS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT ABSTAINED FROM THE NAME [or PRIESTS, | AND YET EXPRESSED THE THING SIGNIFIED BY IT.
I. Havine now, Sir, shewed that it is not a good argu- ment to prove that the ministers or liturgs of the Church Christian are not priests, or their sacred office or ministry is not a priesthood, “ because they are not so called in the New Testament ;” and having also shewed that though the names of priest and priesthood are not used for the ministers or ministry of Christ therein, yet the things signified by those names are there, and properly belong to them; I now, Sir, proceed in the last place to give you some reasons for which it may, without presumption, be conjectured why or how it came to pass that they are not called by those names in the writings of the New Testament, as Messieurs de Geneve object. Certainly, as Grotius saith’, “It was not without some reason that Christ and His Apostles” forbore to call themselves so; or as he expresseth it, “ abstained from that way of speaking,” to which they had a right, though for some reasons not expressed in the New Testament, they forbore to use it. That Christ might have called Himself ἀρχιερεὺς or ἱερεὺς, High-Priest or Priest, before His ascen- sion, or ordered His Apostles to have given Him that title immediately after it, your late writer and his second* cannot deny ; but we do not read He ever took that title upon Him, or preached the doctrine of His priesthood, when He taught publicly in the temple, or instructed His disciples in private, or that He commanded His Apostles to preach of Him by that title, whom as we find in their sermons to the people in the book of their Acts, they set forth as a King or Lord,
z De imperio Summ. Potest., cap. 2. quod ab eo loquendi genere, et Christus 5. Ut autem precones Novi Testa- ipse, et apostoli semper abstinuerunt. menti sacerdotes speciatim appellentur, _[ See above, note ], p. 5. ] est quidem receptum antiqua ecclesiz a [See notes ἃ, e, p. 2.] consuetudine, sed non de nihilo est,
Our Lord’s Priesthood not publicly preached at first. 237
and Prophet, and Messiah, but never as a Priest. “'There- cuar. ut fore,” saith St. Peter at the end of his sermon on the day of nie os Pentecost, “let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that a God hath made that same Jesus, whom you crucified, both
Lord and Christ.” And so in his next sermon, which he preached openly in the temple to the people, who ran toge-
ther unto him and John, greatly wondering at the healing of
the lame man, “‘ You have killed the Prince of Life,” saith ch. 3. 15. he, “whom God hath raised from the dead.” And again,
“For Moses truly said unto the fathers, a Prophet shall the ver. 22. Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren like unto
me, Him shall ye hear in all things.” ‘And every soul that ver. 24. shall not hear that Prophet, shall be cut off from among the people.” So in the sermon which he preached before the council, “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you ch. 5. 30. slew, and hanged on a tree ; Him hath God exalted with His
own right hand to be a Prince, and a Saviour, to give re- pentance to Israel and remission of sins.” Thus they preached
up His authority as King and Messias, as the unbelieving
Jews said of Paul and Silas: “These do all contrary to the ch. 17. 7. decrees of Cesar, saying there is another King, one Jesus.”
Yet we never read that they said one word to them of His priesthood, though He was the High-Priest of our profession, Heb. 3. 1; an High-Priest of good things to come, our merciful and πὸ. us, faithful High-Priest, who offered up Himself by the eternal
Spirit, whereby He obtained eternal redemption for us, and afterwards once for all entered with His own blood into the
holy place, to stand in the presence of God for us, and make reconciliation for the sins of the people. But we do not find
that this priestly office of the Messias was taught expressly
by any of the Apostles till St. Paul taught it to the Jewish Christians of Jerusalem and Judea, in his Epistle to the Hebrews, about twenty years after his conversion, and thirty
after the ascension of Christ». In like manner though His ministers were really and truly priests under Him, and their ministry a most true and proper ministerial priesthood after
His ascension, from whence we date the beginning of His
υ [The Epistle to the Hebrews was years earlier.—Lardner, History of the written, according tomost chronologers, Apostles and Evangelists, c. 2. ὃ in the year 63, according to some two Works. |
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
238 The Apostles abstained from calling Churches temples.
Church, yet, as is objected, we read not in the New Testa- ment that any of the writers of it ever called them priests, or that a priesthood, or that they called themselves or it by those names which “ non de nihilo erat, was not without some reason,” as Grotius, no zealot for the Christian priesthood, observes. Likely for the very same reason, or reasons, whatever they were, we do not find that any of the houses where they met together for religious worship, is called ναὸς, or in the Hellenistical style ἱερὸν, ‘a temple‘, or οἶκος τοῦ Θεοῦ, ‘the house of God;’ for which we may also presume there was some reason why they abstained from that way of speaking, though in those days God was wont to signify His presence in the places which they set apart for His worship, by as sensible manifestations of His presence as ever He did in the Jewish temple, as by shaking the place where they were assembled, and the miraculous effusions of the Holy Ghost. St.Paul when he had a fair occasion for the use of one of those words seems studiously to decline it, as in 1 Cor, xl, 18—22. There saith he to the profane and irreverent Corinthians, “ First of all when ye come together ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ, in the Church, I hear there are divisions among you.... when you come together therefore into one place” with such dissensions among you, “it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper” in that reverent manner as you ought to do; “ but in your eating there every one as he cometh taketh before others his own supper, and so one” who is poor and comes later, “is hungry,” getting nothing, “and another” with his own provision “is drunken,” i.e. eats and drinks to excess.
to drink in ?’
ὁ [τὸ ἵερον is the term more gene- rally used for the temple in the New Testament, the LXX, and Josephus. |
4 See Mr. Mede’s Works, book ii. on 1 Cor. xi. 22. [This is a discourse en- titled, “‘ Churches, that is, appropriate places for Christian Worship, both in and ever since the Apostles’ times. —A Discourse at first more briefly de- liveredina College Chapel, and since en- larged.”’ At the opening he says, “Here I take the word ἐκκλησία, or church, to note, not the assembly, but the place appointed for sacred duties; and that from the opposition thereof to οἰκίαι, ‘their own houses,’ μὴ γὰρ οἰκίας οὐκ ἔχετε; ‘ Have ye not houses to eat and
... Thus (Works, book ii. p. 319.) most of the fathers took ἐκκλησία in this passage.’’ He adduces several passages in proof of this state- ment, Works, pp. 319, sqq.] Card. Bona rerum Liturg., lib. i. cap. 19. [This chapter is on Churches; in § 1. he says; A temporibus Apostolorum loca fuisse Deo dicata que a quibus- dam oratoria, ab aliis ecclesiz dice- bantur, in quibus populus orare, verbum Dei audire, synaxim agere, et corpus Christi sumere consueverat, Paulus Apostolus ad Corinthios seribens, Ep. i. cap. 11. testis est locupletissimus, &c.—Card. Bona, Opera Liturgica, lib. i. pars 2. p. 25.]
This was done out of respect to the Jewish Religion. 239
“ What, have you not houses of your own to eat and drink in” in this disorderly manner; “or, τῆς ἐκκλησίας Θεοῦ καταφρονεῖτε, despise ye the Church of God?”
This forbearance in the holy penmen to use the Greek word for ‘temple’ when they spoke of the places appropri- ated to Christian worship, as well as their long silence of our Saviour’s priesthood, and omitting in Greek to call His ministers priests, seems to proceed from one common cause, I mean from some regard they had to the Jewish religion, which principally consisted in the temple economy and priesthood that was in being not only when our Lord the founder of the new Sion and new Jerusalem was upon earth, but was also to continue for some time after His ascension, till the destruction of the old temple and the old Jerusalem, which happened about seventy-two years after His birth, and thirty-nine after His ascension, Every one who well con- siders this, will grant that there are apparent reasons why during that part of this period in which our Lord was con- versant upon earth he would not declare Himself to the Jews to be the antitype of their High-Priest, that is, to be a Priest as well as a King and Prophet. For first, as a Jew He was to observe the law and the temple worship, and live in com- munion with the Jews, which though He could do as a King and a Prophet, yet could He not do it with congruity had He declared Himself to be their sovereign Pontiff, that very High-Priest of which Aaron himself was but a type and shadow. Secondly, they were willing to hearken to Him as a Prophet, and as one that set Himself up to be their King or Messias, whom they had long waited for, and under whom they expected not only that the temple and temple-worship should continue, but that it should be in greater glory than in the time of King Solomon. But had He taught them that He was or was to be the mystical Melchisedec, Priest as well as King, the prejudice of the people would have been too great to let them hearken to Him. That doctrine would have forthwith made them shut their ears against His preach- ing as much as the high-priest and priests themselves did, and their eyes against all His miracles as the Pharisees did, when they maliciously told Him that He cast out devils by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. In like manner, when
CHAP. 11.
SECT. I.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Matt. 10. 6, 7; Luke 6. 13.
First reason for not call- ing them- selves Priests ; Priesthood not men- tioned in their com- mission. Mark 16. 15.
Heb. 9. 11, 12.
240 Prejudices of the Jews respected by our Lord.
He first chose His twelve disciples, and sent them out to preach the kingdom of heaven to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, if instead of calling them His Apostles or mission- aries*, He had called them His priests, they had indeed been sent forth as sheep among wolves, who would have torn them in pieces, notwithstanding all their precautions of being wise as serpents and innocent as doves. No town or country of the Jews would have received them under that character and with that doctrine, the preaching of which, and by conse- quence, of another more spiritual priesthood, and new Jeru- salem to come, would have made them rise up against them as one man; nor when they were persecuted in any one city would they have found another into which they could flee. This would have been their lot with their character of priests, and the doctrine of their Master’s high-priesthood, unless it had pleased God, by the almighty power of His grace, in a miraculous manner to take off the veil from their hard hearts, and of those stones to raise up seed unto Abraham. 11. And as He styled them Apostles and not priests when He sent them forth to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, so neither did He alter their character after His resurrec- tion; no not at the time of His ascension, when He solemnly sent them forth the second time into all the world “ to preach the Gospel to every creature ;” though as many learned men think’, He had made them priests at the institution of the holy Eucharist, and had performed part of His priestly office in offering up Himself upon the cross for us, and was ready to perform the whole in ascending up to heaven, to “enter by His own blood once into the holy place not made with hands,
e Tertull. de Prescript. Heret., c. 20. Statim igitur Apostoli (quos hee appellatio Missos interpretatur) as- sumpto per sortem duodecimo Matthia &c.—[Op., p. 208, C.]
f [So Hill, in his work entitled, de Presbyteratu Dissertatio, quoted below, note e, p. 262, as ‘‘a learned divine of our own country,’’ in speak- ing of what was implied in the words of the institution of the Lord’s Supper, 1 Cor. xi. 24, 25, says of our Lord; In actu tertio pontificem egit sacerdotes sacrantem et authorizantem; quasi dixerat, Jd autem quod ego coram Deo, vobis et pro vobis ut discipulis et
filiis meis przstiti, ita ut pontifex vos in hoe sacerdotii devoveo, ut idem mys- terlum sacerdotii vestri, hujus aucto- ritate, ecclesiz filiis et discipulis in futurum distribuendum consecratis.— Lib. iv. ο. 3. ὃ 4. p. 187. Lond. 1691. So the Council of Trent; Hoc ‘autem (novum in ecclesia sacerdotium) ab eodem Domino Salvatore nostro insti- tutum esse, (Matt. xxvi.; Mace. xiy.; Luc. xxii.) atque Apostolis eorumque successoribus in sacerdotio potestatem traditam consecrandi, oflerendi, et mi- nistrandi corpus et sanguinem ejus.— Cone. Trid. Sess. xxii. cap. 1. Concilia, tom. xx. col. 138, B.]
As Apostles they represented Christ in all His offices. 241
having obtained eternal redemption for us.” Nevertheless as
there is not one word of His priesthood in this period of time, or in any book of the New Testament written in it but in the Epistle to the Hebrews, so is there not one word therein of their being priests, but they were still called Apo- stles, a character indeed of greatest honour and authority, by which Christ gave them all the spiritual power upon earth which He had received from the Father, as King, Pro- phet, and Priest. For as He was His Father’s Apostle and plenipotentiary upon earth, so they were His, as it is writ- ten, John xx. 21, καθὼς ἀπέσταλκέ pe ὁ πατὴρ, Kal ἐγὼ πέμπω ὑμᾶς, which may be rendered, “as the Father hath made Me His Apostle, so I make you Mine;” for what is here expressed by πέμπω ὑμᾶς, is ἀποστέλλω ὑμᾶς. Matt. x. 16. Yet, as I must observe again, though the sacerdotal power was one part of that power which was given Him both in heaven and earth, and though the Apostles were His vicars and vicegerents in His sacerdotal as well as in His kingly and prophetical office, nevertheless they themselves conti- nued in the old title of Apostles after His ascension, and in like manner gave to the different orders of ministers, whom they ordained for the service of the Church, the names of bishops and presbyters, which were names of power to govern and teach, and related to the regal and prophetical office of Christ, but in their signification did not directly connote Him as priest. Saith Origen in his sixteenth Homily upon Joshua, or Jesus the son of Nun: “ But® because I am resolved to refer the things which I shall say of Jesus (or Joshua) to our Lord and Saviour, who is understood to be an elder, and full of years as He who is the first-born of every creature ; wherefore He alone, before whom none was, is truly and en-
5. [Verum quoniam instituimus que de Jesu dicuntur etiam et ad Dominum et salvatorem nostrum referre, quis ita presbyter et senior provectus dierum intelligitur, sicut ipse qui est princi- pium, primogenitus omnis creature ? Ideo fortasse ipse solus vere et integre presbyter dicitur, ante quem nemo est. Igitur tametsi sunt qui dicantur in Scripturis presbyteri vel seniores, vel pontifices, tamen Dominus Jesus sicut in pontificibus pontificum princeps est, et sicut in pastoribus princeps pasto-
HICKES.
rum est, ita et in presbyteris vel seni- oribus princeps presbyterorum putan- dus est, et in episcopis princeps epi- scoporum, et omne quod honorabile nomen est, primum in hoc, et princi- pem esse credendum est salvatorem, quia ipse est omnium caput.—Origen. in lib. Jesu, Hom. xvi. § 2. Op., tom. ii. p. 346. col. i. E, F. col. ii, A. The words, ‘‘I am resolved to refer the things which I shall say,” should rather be, ‘‘I have begun to refer the things which are said.”’ |
CHAP. II,
SECT, 11,
CHRISTIAN PRIEST-
HOOD.
John 3. 2.
242 They were Priests under the One High-Priest ; soon
tirely [called] a presbyter. Though therefore there are in the Scriptures who are called presbyters or priests, (presbyteri vel pontifices,) yet as the Lord Jesus among priests is chief priest, and as among pastors He is chief pastor, so among presby- ters He is chief of presbyters, and among bishops chief of bishops.” They were therefore under Him, the chief priest®, subordinate ministerial priests, as well as subordinate minis- terial presbyters and bishops, under Him as chief presbyter and bishop. And let me add, they were subordinate Apo- stles, under Him as the chief apostle; subordinate pastors, under Him as chief pastor or shepherd of our souls; and subordinate prophets, and teachers, and evangelists, under Him as chief prophet, teacher, and evangelist, as Nicode- mus said unto Him, “ Rabbi, we know Thou art a teacher come from God.” In like manner St. Ignatius, whom I cited before', calls Him “the invisible Bishop,” and the bishops upon earth “ visible bishops.” So in the same way of reason- ing, though they are not called priests in the New Testa- ment, yet they must have been visible priests under Him, the αὐτοαρχιερεὺς, their invisible archetypal High-Priest ; and soon began to be so called by the Church of God after the destruction of Jerusalem, at least within that period of time after it in which St. John outlived all the other Apo- stles, and wrote his Revelation and Gospel. Polycerates, bishop of Ephesus, famous for his learning, piety, and zeal as a Christian, who flourished towards the latter end of the second century, in an epistle* which he wrote in the sixty-
4 S.Greg. Naz. Apol.Orat. i.pp. 37, 39. Epist. p. 800. vol. i. [ed. 1638, ψυχῶν προστασίαν δέξασθαι, ἢ μεσιτείανθεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων (τοῦτο γὰρ ἴσως ὃ ἱερεὺς) οὐκ ἀσφαλὲς εἶναι γινώσκω... afterwards among the titles of our Lord, τοῦ ποιμένος, τοῦ ἀμνοῦ, TOD ἀρχιερέως, τοῦ θύματος, κι τ.λ.---8. Greg. Naz. Hom. ii. Op., tom. i. pp. 55, A, B. 58, A. ed. Ben. ἐπαινεῖς τὸν ἅγιον καὶ τὸν κοινὸν ἡμῶν πατέρα, ... τὸν πιστὸν θεράποντα, καὶ μέγαν ἀρχιερέα, τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώ- πων μεσίτην, K.T.A.—Id., Epist. Ἰχχῖχ. ad Simpliciam, de S. Basilio, Op., tom. ii. p. 70, A. ed. 1840. ]
i [The passage referred to is, ἐπεὶ οὐχ ὅτι Toy ἐπίσκοπον τοῦτον τὸν βλε- πόμενον πλανᾷ τις, ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀόρατον παραλογίζεται.----ὃ. Ignat. Epist. ad Magn.,c. 3. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 18,
quoted above, p. 190, note q.]
k Euseb. Eccl. Hist., lib. v. cap. 24. [TloAvkpdrns* ds καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν ἣ πρὸς Βίκτορα καὶ τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἐκκλησίαν διετυπώσατο γραφῇ, τὴν εἰς αὐτὸν ἐλ- θοῦσαν παράδοσιν ἐκτίθεται διὰ τού- Tov’... ἔτι δὲ καὶ Ἰωάννης 6 ἐπὶ τὸ στῆθος τοῦ κυρίου ἀναπεσών" ὃς ἐγενήθη ἱερεὺς τὸ πέταλον πεφορεκὼς, καὶ μάρ- Tus καὶ διδάσκαλος" οὗτος ἐν ᾿Εφέσῳ Kekolunta.—pp. 243, 244. For the other circumstances mentioned by Hickes, see cap. 22. δεκάτῳ ye μὴν τοῦ Κομόδου βασιλείας ἔτει... διαδέχεται Βίκτωρ ... κατὰ τοὺς αὐτοὺς χρόνους ἐπίσκοπος... τῆς ἐν ᾿ΕἘφέσῳ παροικίας Πολυκράτης.---». 241. ἐγὼ οὖν ἀδελφοὶ, ἑξήκοντα πέντε ἔτη ἔχων ἐν κυρίῳ... --
Ibid., cap. 24. p, 244. ]
called so; as by Polycrates Bp. of Ephesus after St. John, 948
fifth year of his age to the bishop and Church of Rome, cuar. m. coming to mention St. John among the Asian worthies and =" luminaries of the Church: ‘ Moreover,” saith he, “John,
who lay in the bosom of our Lord, who was a priest, and
wore” upon the front of his mitre ‘the holy golden plate,” Exoa. 98, upon which was engraven Holiness to the Lord, ‘ John, who ad θθιοίς was also a martyr and doctor, this John died in Ephesus.”
Sir, I have rendered the Greek word ἱερεὺς ‘ priest,’ which is
the literal signification of it, though here it should be trans-
lated an high-priest ; for you know, Sir, ἱερεὺς is often used goo Heb.10. for ἀρχιερεὺς in the Epistle to the Hebrews, as priest is often ay and put for high-priest in the Old Testament'; and accordingly
St. Hierome translates the place thus™: Qui supra pectus Domini recubuit, et pontifexr ejus fuit, auream laminam in
Ffronte gestans, “who lay in our Lord’s bosom, and was His high-priest, and wore the golden plate on his forehead.” Rufinus translates it thus": Qui fuit summus sacerdos, et pon-
tificale (πέταλον) gessit, ‘who was high-priest, and wore the pontifical golden plate.” And as for this testimony of Poly-
crates, there is no reason to doubt of the truth of it, because
he lived so near the time of St. John, who died in or about
the hundred and fourth year of the Christian account ; or, as
St. Chrysostom® thinks, in the hundred and twentieth, for Polycrates wrote that epistle in 196, which was the sixty-
fifth of his age, and by consequence he was born in 1381,
which was but twenty-seven years after St. John’s death, according to the first account of it, and but eleven according
to the latter; and being also his successor in that see, after
many others of his family, he had advantages and opportu-
nities of informing himself of the truth of this matter; and
as he could not well be deceived, so neither would he de-
ceive. You know, Sir, Valesius in his notes on the place
) fe. Ὁ. Exod. xxxv. 19; xxxviii. 21.] ™ [De Viris Illustribus (al. de Scrip- toribus Ecclesiasticis,) cap. 45. Op., tom. ii, col. 871. See Valesius’ note below. ]
= {Ecclesiastice Historie Eusebii, Ruffino presbytero interprete, fol. Ar- gent. 1514. ]
o [This statement occurs in a spu- rious sermon, de S. Joanne Apostolo,
published as St. Chrysostom’s by Mo- rell, Op., tom. vi. pp. 603, sqq. εἶτα ἐπανελθὼν τῆς ἐξορίας καταλαμβάνει τὴν Ἔφεσον, κἀκεῖσε διατρίβων συντάτ- τει τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὧν ἐτῶν ἕκατον, διαρ- κέσας ἕως ὕλων ἑκατὸν elkoow.—S. Chrysost. Op., tom. viii. inter Spuria, p- 131, C.ed. Ben. The same statement is made by Suidas in voc. Ἰωάννης, tom. i. col. 1786, but by no other writer. See note ed. Ben. ad loc. S. Chrysost. |
R 2
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
244. They were Priests before, though not so called.
makes this remark?P, viz. “That Polycrates observes three things in the praise of St. John; 1. That he was high-priest. 2. That he was a martyr; and 3. That he was a doctor or evangelist ; and therefore as he was the martyr and evange- list of Christ, so must he be understood to have been His priest. And as for wearing the golden plate” on the front of his mitre, as a badge of his pontifical office, “ Epiphanius writes the same thing of St. James, the brother of our Lord, and first bishop of Jerusalem ; but by mistake, as Peta- vius thinks’. But were it true, it would give a good account why the high-priest* of that time, with the scribes and pha- risees, taking advantage of the death of Festus the Roman governor, before the arrival of Albinus his successor, when there was an anarchy in Jerusalem, full of rage, and more like a rabble than a council, hurried him without trial to the top of the temple, from whence they threw him down; and because he did not die upon the spot, one of them, as he was praying for them, brained him with a fuller’s club. But to return from this digression about James the Just to what Polycrates saith of St. John. As our blessed Lord could not have been a priest to His Father at the writing of the Epistle to the Hebrews, unless He had been so before, so neithey
Ρ [“ Hieronymus in lib. de Scriptori- resi Nazarzeorum, et in Heresi lxxviii.”’
bus Ecclesiasticis hee Polycratis verba sic vertit: ‘qui supra pectus Domini recubuit et pontifex ejus fuit, auream laminam in fronte portans.’ Rufinus vero ita interpretatus ; ‘ quifuit summus sacerdos, et pontificale (πέταλον) gessit.’ De pontificatu Judzorum hee non esse accipienda, satis apparet. Neque enim Joannes pontifex fuit Judzorum, aut ex genere sacerdotali. Itaque recte Hieronymus vocem addidit ‘ pontifex ejus,’ id est Christi. Tria enim in Jo- anne notat Polycrates, que ad com- mendationem ejus faciebant; Primum quod sacerdos fuerit, deinde quod mar- tyr, tertio quod doctor seu evangelista. Proinde ut martyr Christi et evange- lista Christi fuit, sic etiam sacerdos Christi intelligatur necesse est. Quod autem de lamina dicit Polycrates, cre- dibile est primos illos Christianorum pontifices, exemplo Judzorum ponti- ficum, hoc honoris insigne gestasse. Certe et Jacobum fratrem Domini qui primus Hierosolymis episcopus est or- dinatus, pontificalem laminam in fronte gestasse auctor est Epiphanius in Has-
—Valesii adnott. ad Hist. Eccl. Euseb., lib. v. c. 24. p. 243. ]
4 Quod de Johanne Evangelista tes- tatum reliquit Polycrates apud Euse- bium, lib. v. cap. 24. ds ἐγενήθη ἱερεὺς τὸ πέταλον πεφορεκὼς, de Jacobo haud scio an quisquam prodiderit. Nam quos hevresi xxix. citat (Eusebium, Clementem) Epiphanius. de Johanne, non Jacobo ista scripserunt.’’ Petavius ad Heres. Ixxviii. vol. ii. p. 333. [The words of Epiphanius, Heres. ]xxviii. § 14, are οὗτος ὁ ᾿Ιάκωβος καὶ πέταλον ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς ἐφόρεσε.---Ορ., tom. 1. p. 1046. A.; and Heer. xxix. ὃ 4 (Naza- reorum) speaking of St. James’ being admitted into the holy place, he says ; οὕτω yap ἱστόρησαν πολλοὶ mpd ἡμῶν περὶ αὐτοῦ, Εὐσέβιός τε καὶ Κλήμης, καὶ ἄλλοι. ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ πέταλον ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς ἐξῆν αὐτῷ φέρειν, καθὼς οἱ προειρημένοι ἀξιόπιστοι ἀνδρὲς ἐν τοῖς ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ ὑπομνηματισμοῖς ἐμαρτύρη- cav.—Ibid., p. 119, B, C.]
τ Euseb. Hist. Eccl., lib. ii. ec. 28. [ Hist. Eccl., tom. i. pp. 77—82. ]
The Mosaic Institutions reverenced by the Apostles. 245
could St. John have been His ministerial priest when he was car. m. bishop of Ephesus, unless he had been so before, even from ὅπ. the beginning of the Christian Church, though he is not so
called either in his own or any other writings of the New Testament.
[111.1 This forbearance in the Apostles, bishops, and pres-_ secr. τι. byters, to take upon them the sacerdotal title, or to style Second rea- themselves priests in their writings after our Lord’s ascen- τς κα sion, is secondly to be referred to the regard they had, and (fine Jews. were to have to the Jewish religion, which, as I said before, principally consisted in the temple economy and priesthood, with which none of their doctrines were so inconsistent as that of their being priests. They knew the temple-worship was to continue to the destruction of Jerusalem; and that in the meantime it was to be decently treated by them; and as they had still a right to the temple, and owned the God of the temple, so they were obliged by the will of their Lord, and all the rules of religious prudence, to comply, as far as they could, consistently with preaching up Jesus, with the temple-worship and the law of Moses, that thereby they might more easily convert the Jews, and when they were converted, keep them firm in their communion from relaps- ing to Judaism again. For the Jewish Christians were wont to continue zealots of the law after their conversion, as you may see in Acts xxi., where James the Apostle, and Acts 21.10. bishop of Jerusalem, told Paul, that of the many thousands of Jews who believed, they were all zealous of the law. This,
Sir, was twenty-five years after the ascension of Christ; in which time if St. James, for instance, had preached up him- self to be the ministerial high-priest of Jerusalem under Jesus our High-Priest in heaven over the house of God, it would have been a much greater offence both to the believ- ing and unbelieving Jews, than it was in St. Paul to teach the convert Gentiles not to circumcise their children, or ver. 21. walk after their rites and customs, but to forsake the law of Moses. As long, therefore, as it was necessary for them to comply with the temple-worship and the Mosaical observ- ances, so long it was inconsistent for them to own them- selves for priests, because their ministerial priesthood upon earth, as well as the priesthood of Jesus in heaven upon
246 The Apostles avoided causing offences to the Jews.
curisttAN Which it depended, was a priesthood opposite to that of the ge temple, and could not at the first preaching of it but be so pet understood by the believing as well as the unbelieving Jews, and have equally enraged them both against the Apostles, as
men who had a design to set up another altar, and another priesthood, and another temple economy against Moses and
the law. To what degree this would have offended them,
and what the effects of that offence would without a miracle
have been, may be seen in the 22nd chapter of Joshua, from Josh.22.10. the history of the great altar of witness, which the children of Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh built by
Jordan, which the children of Israel thinking was erected in opposition to the altar of the sanctuary at Shiloh, gathered themselves together there to go up to war against them, that
they might destroy them. So they presently destroyed St. Stephen upon the evidence of false witnesses, whom, because
Acts 6.10, they could not resist the spirit of wisdom by which he spake, they suborned false witnesses to testify that they heard him
speak blasphemous words against God and Moses, and
against the temple and the law. It therefore highly con-
cerned the Apostles to conceal the doctrine of their own
and their Lord’s priesthood, as a mystery which yet neither believing or unbelieving Jews were prepared to receive. On
the contrary, they were obliged to all prudential compliances
and condescensions to their weakness, and to Judaize as
much as lawfully they could, that they might gain the Jews.
Acts 2. 46, Thus the Apostles, and their first proselytes whom St. Peter converted on the day of Pentecost, “continued daily with one
accord in the temple praising God, and having favour with
all the people,” which they could not have had without such compliances, by which they made such additional conver-
sions to the Church as they could not have made had they pretended to be priests. We read in the fifth chapter of the
Acts5. 14, Acts, that out of Jerusalem and the countries round about it ‘believers were more and more added to the Lord, multitudes
Acts 6.7. both of men and women ;” and in the sixth chapter, that “ the word of God still increased, and that the number of believers
was greatly multiplied in Jerusalem, and that a great num-
ber of the priests were also obedient to the faith.” 1 believe,
Sir, you will grant that these in all appearances would not
They conformed to the Law and Temple worship. “247
easily have come over to the Church, had the Apostles de- cur. πὶ. clared themselves to be priests, which they could not well —_«“_«_. have done without preaching up Jesus, whom the Jews were
content to believe in as King and Messias, to be their High-
Priest. Indeed we do not read in the Acts that St. James,
or any of the Apostles, preached or prayed in the temple
after the persecution in which St. Stephen the first martyr suffered, till we come to the twenty-first chapter, where he
and the elders persuaded St. Paul to comply with the Jewish Christians in going up to the temple with some brethren Acts 21. 23. who had a Nazarite’s vow upon them, to purify themselves,
that is, to offer all the sacrifices, and perform all the other
rites of the Jewish religion, which are described in the sixth
chapter of Numbers, from the thirteenth to the twenty-first
verse. But it is not probable that they would have per-
suaded St. Paul to Judaize in this solemn piece of temple- worship, had they not in the meantime gone themselves
thither. Their forbearance so long, for about two or three
and twenty years, would have made the Jewish brethren
jealous of St. James their bishop, and suspect that he also,
as well as St. Paul, was a forsaker of Moses and his law. It
is much more reasonable to believe they continued their compliances in going up to worship at the temple, as far as
they could do it with safety, in times free from persecution,
as in that interval of quiet after the martyrdom of St. Ste-
phen, when “the Churches had rest throughout all Judea, Acts 9. 3¢. and Samaria, and Galilee, and were edified in walking in
the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost
were multiplied.” So had it peace again after the death of
Herod Agrippa, who, to gratify the Jews, persecuted the Apo-
stles at Jerusalem, and killed James the brother of John Acts12.1— with the sword; for after he was smitten by the angel of 8:
the Lord, it is said that “the word of God grew and mul- tiplied,” Acts xii. 24.° After this we have no farther account
of matters relating to the Church of Jerusalem, but of the
council of the Apostles and elders, who met there to deter- Acts 15. mine how far the Gentile Christians were obliged to keep
the law of Moses, and of St. Paul’s going thither from Czsa-
rea in the twenty-first chapter, which I mentioned before,
and which happened in the twenty-fifth year after Christ’s
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Acts 13. 14, 15.
ver. 21.
248 This continued till the Jews quite rejected the Gospel.
ascension, and about two or three years before the martyr- dom of St. James, who frequented the temple to the last, into which he, of all the Christians, was, for his most emi- nent and superlative sanctity of life, permitted to enter and pray, as Hegesippus in Eusebius‘ writes, and “there was he found when he was apprehended, interceding with God for the sins of the people upon his knees; which, by long and frequent kneeling on the ground in prayer, were become as hard as those of a camel.” The same regard they were to shew to the Jewish religion at Jerusalem obliged them also, in all other cities and countries where the Jews had syna- gogues, to Judaize as much as it was lawful for men to do who preached Jesus to be the Messias, that they might the more easily convert the Jews and Jewish proselytes, as at Antioch in Pisidia, in which place Barnabas and Paul went into the synagogue, where, after the reading of the law and the prophets, the rulers of the synagogue sent to them to tell them if they pleased they might preach to the people. I cannot think they would have invited them to preach un- less they had joined with them in their synagogue-worship, as looking upon their brethren the Jews wherever they came as one people of God with themselves, and within the same covenant of grace, till they rejected and blasphemed Jesus, whom they preached; and then, as our Lord commanded them, when He first sent them forth to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, they broke off communion with them, and shook off the dust of their feet against them, as St. Paul and Barnabas did against the contradicting and blaspheming part of that synagogue, as a sign of the destruction which should overtake them. But many of them, Jews and Jewish proselytes, followed Paul and Barnabas, which there is no
S τούτῳ μόνῳ ἐξῆν εἰς τὰ ἅγια εἰσίε- hanius (Her. Ἰχχν. tom. i. p. 1045, ῳ μόνῳ Ύ Ρ
vat... καὶ μόνος εἰσήρχετο εἰς τὸν vady" [ηὑρίσκετό τε κείμενος ἐπὶ τοῖς γόνασι, καὶ αἰτούμενος ὑπὲρ τοῦ λαοῦ ἄφεσιν" ὡς ἀπεσκληκέναι τὰ γόνατα αὐτοῦ δίκην καμήλου, διὰ τὸ ἀεὶ κάμπτειν ἐπὶ γόνυ προσκυνοῦντα τῷ θεῷ, καὶ αἰτεῖσθαι ἄφεσιν τῷ AaG.—Hegesippus ap. Eu- seb. Hist. Eccl., lib. 11. ο. 23. tom. i. p- 78.] See also the animadver- sions of Petavius against Scaliger, in his notes on Heres. lIxxviii. of Epiphanius, tom. ii. p. 332. [Epi-
D.) had substituted εἰς τὰ ἅγια τῶν ἁγίων for εἐς τὰ ἅγια : Scaliger objected to the credibility of the history on the ground of the improbability that one who was not even a Levite should be allowed to enter the holy of holies. Petavius shews that the holy place was intended ; that the Apostle’s being admitted there was a remarkable dis- tinction, but that the fact was to be believed on the testimony we have for
it.]
They were probably directed to act so by our Lord. 249
reason to believe they would have done had they preached a truth so inconsistent with their religion as that there was an evangelical altar and priesthood among the Christians, which was to succeed to the altar and priesthood of the tem- ple, and that Moses was to give place to Christ. The like success they had in the synagogue at Iconium, where, saith
CHAP. Il. SECT. IIT.
the text, “they so spake, that a great multitude both of the Acts 14.1.
Jews and also of the Greeks believed.” What I. have said here of the compliance of the Apostles with the Jews is plain from the words of St. Paul, 1 Cor. ix. 20, ““ Unto the Jews I became as a Jew (in observing the Jewish rites and ceremo- nies); to them who are under the law, as (if I also were) under the law.”” And what he did, no doubt but the rest of the Apostles aud Evangelists likewise did.
IV. But in the third place, as the Apostles out of regard _ Third rea- son; pro- bably by our Lord’s
to the Jews, whom they considered as one peculiar people of God with themselves till they resisted their doctrine and
SECT. IV.
miracles, did Judaize in the temple and synagogues, and for- command.
bear in great compassion to their weakness to acquaint them with the great mystery of the evangelical altar and priest- hood, that they might more easily convert them: so it is very probable they also concealed it from them by our Lord’s direction, it being very agreeable to the wisdom of God to conceive that He would not have two priesthoods openly set up in the same place, or as I may say in the same Church, at one time. , The Jewish priesthood was of Divine institution as well as the Christian, and as it became the infinite wisdom of our Lord to bid His Apostles tarry at Jerusalem, and
wait there for the promise of the Father before they entered Acts 1. 4.
upon their Apostolical office, so might it become Him to for- bid them to preach, or set up the latter, till the former was put down; because two opposite priesthoods and two opposite altars appearing among one people, would have wrought great distraction and confusion, when it could be truly affirmed
by both sides that both were from God. “God,” saith the 1 Cor. 14. Apostle, “is not the author of tumult and confusion, but of a
peace and order ;” and therefore we may without presumption believe that it was His will that the new priesthood should not be promulged, nor its new altar erected publicly in every place, till the appointed time came when the old priest-
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
John 20. 30. 1. 21. 90.
250 Many things done and said by our Lord not recorded.
hood with the temple and its altar were to be destroyed. The new Jerusalem was not to be complete till old Jerusalem was laid waste. Before that it was only in fieri, but after it was in facto esse, and then the Christian priesthood and altar became the only priesthood and altar in the world of Divine erection, when they were left alone, and were no longer opposite to the Jewish priesthood and altar, which were then no more. But had the Christian priesthood and altar been set up publicly and in form before this period, there had been in appearance altar against altar, and priesthood against priesthood in public view, and one Divine institution plead- able agaist the other, which would have distracted the worshippers of the one true God, the God of the Jews, and brought forth strife, envying, and distraction, and every evil work. This was so detestable in the eyes of the heathens that they could never endure two different altars, or the appearance of two different altars to one god*, and therefore all colonies were wont to build their temples and altars after the same form, and make the images of their gods after the same likeness that they were built and made in the mother cities, lest they should seem to set up opposite temples and altars. It was therefore very agreeable to the wisdom of our Lord and lawgiver, to command His Apostles to abstain from all appearance of schism by two priesthoods, till this time, or the times near it, when there were no more hopes of convert- ing the obdurate and blasphemous Jews now ripe for destruc- tion. If it be objected that this is all precarious, because it is nowhere written in the New Testament that our Lord gave any such order, I answer, first, that as He did many miracles in the presence of His disciples which are not written, so He spoke and did many other things which likewise are nowhere written, and which if they had been written every one, would
t Doctiss. et Nobiliss. Ezech. Span- hemii Dissertatio nona de prestantia et usu Numismatum, pp. 572, &c. [Illa equidem fuit conditarum olim urbium, aut deductarum in eas coloniarum ratio, ut preter alia que obiter supra adtigi- mus, sacra in primis patria (quod mo- nuit jam ad Polybium et qua de re ante doctissimus Valesius) quaque ad eorum cultum ac czremonias adtinent, in novas illas urbes vel colonias trans-
’
portarent cives illi advenz et coloni. Hine primo loco hic commemorandi presides ac tutelares conditorum suo- rum Dei; quorum nempe simulacra, nomina ac cultum, eandem etiam dica- tarum iis edium formam, iidem coloni constanter ac religiose conservabant.— (§ 3. Eorundem numinum et sacro- rum, qu antiquz patriz conspectus in nummis,) pp. 572, 544. Lond. 1706. }
Not assuming this name at least permitted by our Lord. 251
have made a world of books, St. Paul cites one of His say- cmap. τι. ings, which is nowhere else recorded, that ‘it is more blessed”? ~ τας. . pati : A Acts 20. 35. or heroical for a Christian “to give than to receive.” But secondly, considering the fact is plain that the Christian priesthood was kept so long secret, it is not precarious or presuming to ascribe it to a direction or order of our Lord, for the reasons given, till a better cause can be assigned. V. Thirdly, considering the Apostles, who never called _ scr. v._ themselves or other ministers priests, could not but under- Fourth rea-
son; at stand the will of their Lord, we may presume they forbore es
that title for the prudential reasons above given, -by His nade allowance or permission, if not by His direction, and then the difference between permission and direction in a supreme lawgiver being not very great, it is not so precarious to re- solve their practice into the latter rather than the former, since doing or forbearing to do a thing by the direction or permission of a superior are both according to his will. The Jewish proselytes, at their first coming over to Christianity, and some time after, thought of nothing less than a dissolu- tion of the temple-priesthood and altar. On the contrary, they thought that the house of Christ was but a superstruc- ture upon the house of Moses, but never imagined it was to be the destruction thereof. Hence they expected that the Gentile proselytes to the Messias should be circumcised and observe the law, as becoming members of the Jewish Church, in which they still reputed themselves to be, and to be ob- liged, while the temple stood, to observe the Jewish rites. This, not to mention the epistle of St. Barnabas", is so plain from the fifteenth chapter of the Acts, and the epistles of the Apostle to the Romans and Galatians, that I need not insist upon the proof of it. And St. Paul so far complied with their opinion as to circumcise Timothy, that he might not offend the Jews at Derbe, Lystra, and Iconium, who Acts 16. 8. knew him to be the son of a Greek. This was done about seventeen years after Christ’s ascension, and I mention it to shew that these and such like compliances of the Apostles with the believing Jews are, in like manner as I have said of their forbearance to call themselves priests, to be ascribed
u [See the extracts from St. Bar- andcap.2.(Latine.) Patr. Apost., tom, nabas’ Epistle, in the following notes, i. p. 57. ]
CHRISTIAN PRIEST-
HOOD.
Acts 13. 46.
252 The Jewish converts were the true people of God :
to the direction, or at least to the permission of our Lord, which I suppose, Sir, your late writer will not think fit to deny. I am so much of this opinion, that I believe they suffered the convert priests to minister in their priestly office when they could do it with safety to themselves, and without having fellowship with their unbelieving brethren, who rejected Christ. For after their conversion the Jews had the same right as before to have communion with the God of the temple, and to be partakers of His altar, where they might still offer and eat as Jews, so they did not do it in society with their disobedient brethren; who, as St. Paul and Barnabas said unto those at Antioch in Pisidia, “ put the word of God from them, and made themselves unworthy of everlasting life.’ The completion of the covenant was not in the unconverted, but in the converted Jews; they, as Christians, were the true heirs of the promise among that people with the converted Gentiles, and the covenant which God made with their father Abraham was with them, and them only of all the Jewish nation; and as His believing children they more especially had a right to the temple and altar of God, as long as they were in being. To this purpose speaks St. Barnabas in his epistle*: “ Be not like to them, who heaping up their sins, say that their covenant is ours; whereas it is ours only, for they (by their unbelief ) have for ever lost that which Moses received.” So chapter x :¥ “Let us see then whether this (unbelieving) people or the former be heirs according to the promise, and the covenant be with us or them.” So in the same chapter’; “‘And Jacob said unto Joseph, I know it, my son, I know it;’ but the elder shall serve the younger, though he shall also be blessed. You see then whom He hath appointed that they should be the first people and heirs of the covenant. And what also if God hath mentioned this by Abraham? Then we have the perfection of knowledge. What then saith He
* [c. 4. (extant only in Latin.) Non similatis eis, qui peccata sua congerunt et dicunt; quia testamentum illorum et nostrum est.—S. Barnab. Epist. Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 59. |
Υ [ἀλλ᾽ ἴδωμεν" εἰ οὗτος ὃ λαὸς κλη- ρονόμος, ἢ ὃ πρῶτος, καὶ εἰ ἡ διαθήκη εἰς ἡμᾶς, ἢ εἰς éxelvovs.—Ibid., c. 13. Ρ. 41.]
* [καὶ εἶπεν ᾿Ιακὼβ πρὸς Ἰωσὴφ, οἶδα, τέκνον, οἶδα" ἄλλ᾽ 6 μείζων δουλεύσει τῷ ἐλάσσονι, καὶ οὗτος δὲ εὐλογηθήσε- ται βλέπετε ἐπὶ τίνων τέθεικε, τὸν λαὸν εἶναι τοῦτον πρῶτον, καὶ THs δια- θήκης κληρόνομον᾽ εἰ οὖν ἔτι καὶ διὰ τοῦ ᾿Αβραὰμ ἐμνήσθη, ἀπείχομεν τὸ τέλειον τῆς γνώσεως ἡμῶν" τί οὖν λέγει τῷ ᾿Αβραὰμ, ὁτὶ ἐπίστευσας ἐτέθη εἰς δι-
they thought the Law obligatory on them at first. 09
to Abraham? ‘Because thou hast believed it is imputed unto thee for righteousness ;’ behold I have set thee for a father of the nations which by uncircumcision believe in the Lord. Let us therefore enquire whether God hath fulfilled the covenant which He swore to our fathers that He would give this people. Truly He gave it, but they were not worthy to receive it for their sins:” and a little after®, ‘“ Moses there- fore received them, but they were not worthy; now then learn how we have received them; [Moses received them as a servant,|] but the Lord Himself hath given them unto us, that we might be the people of His inheritance.” All this he said to bring the Christian Jews to a right understanding of the Gospel, for till this time and after ", they were zealous of the law, thinking not only themselves but the Christian Gentiles obliged to observe it, as is plain from what follows; “In¢ this therefore, brethren, God was foreseeing and merciful to us, because the people whom He hath purchased by His beloved was to believe in simplicity, and therefore He shews things to us that we should not run as proselytes to their law.” But to return from this short digression: such was the weakness of the Christian Jews, which obliged the Apostles to so much compliance and forbearance with them, and more particularly, as I hope I have made it appear very probable, in not taking their titles from the temple, I mean the title of priests, upon them, or giving it to others whom they made bishops and presbyters, while the temple and temple-priesthood were
in being. But though during that period they are not ex-
καιοσύνην ; ἰδοὺ τέθεικά σε πατέρα ἐθ- νῶν τῶν πιστευόντων διὰ ἀκροβυστίας τῷ κυρίῳ. ναὶ ἀλλὰ τὴν διαθήκην ἣν ὥμοσε τοῖς πατράσιν δοῦναι τῷ λαῷ, εἰ δέδωκε, ζητοῦμεν" δέδωκεν" αὐτοὶ δὲ οὐκ ἐγένοντο ἄξιοι λαβεῖν διὰ τὰς ἅμαρ- τίας avra@v.—lbid., ο. 18, 14. p. 42.}
* (Ibid. c. 14. Μωσῆς μὲν γὰρ ἔλα- Bev, αὐτοὶ δὲ οὐκ ἐγένοντο ἄξιοι" πῶς ἡμεῖς ἐλάβομεν, μάθετε: Μωσῆς θερά- mov ὧν ἔλαβεν" αὐτὸς δὲ 6 κύριος ἡμῖν ἔδωκεν, εἰς λαὸν κληρονομίας, δι’ ἡμᾶς broueivas.—Ibid., p. 48.1
» See S. Ignatius, Epist. ad Magnes. [c. 8. et sqq. μὴ πλανᾶσθε ταῖς ἕτερο- δοξίαις, μήδε μυθεύμασιν τοῖς παλαίοις
ἀνωφέλεσιν οὖσιν" εἰ γὰρ μέχρι νῦν κατὰ νόμον ᾿Ιουδαϊσμὸν ζῶμεν, ὁμολογοῦμεν χάριν μὴ εἰληφέναι' x. τ. A.—S. Ignat. Ep. ad Magn., tom. ii. pp. 19, 20. The editors of St. Ignatius would either omit νόμον or read Ἰουδαϊσμοῦ.
© [ς. 8. (extant only in the Latin version.) In hoc ergo, fratres, provi- dens est et misericors Dominus, quia in simplicitate crediturus esset popu- lus, quem comparavit dilecto suo, at- que ante ostendit omnibus nobis, ut non incurramus, tanquam proselyti ad illorum legem.—S. Barnab., Epist. Vet. Int. c. 3. Ibid., tom. i. p. 58. ]
CHAP If. SECT. V.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
1 Pet. 2. 9.
Heb. 13. 10,
SECT. VI.
The name Priest
used after the destruc- tion of Jerusalem. John 1. 1, 14.
254 Even then Christian Ministers called Priests implicitly ;
pressly called priests, yet they are called so implicitly and by intimation, as by St. Peter, who told the Christian Jews of the Asian dispersion that in their Christian state they were “a royal priesthood,” or “kingdom of priests.” So, as is shewed above, St. Paul told those of Judea and Jerusalem, that the Christians “had an altar,” or altar-sacrifice offered by priests, “ whereof unbelievers who served at the tabernacle had no right to eat.” So I have shewed how St. Clement, in his epistle to the Corinthians, using the definition for the definitum, called their ministers προσενέγκοντας Ta δῶρα", ‘offerers of gifts or sacrifices,’ that is sacerdoti, as the Italian and Spanish, or ‘ sacrificers’ or ‘ pontiffs,’ as all the French versions translate the Greek and Hebrew words for priest®. I have also shewed it from many other fathers, and from the most ancient form of consecration of a bishop, which is in The Apostolical Constitutions, hb. viii. cap. 5, and in the Baroccian MS. of Hippolytus, entitled διατάξεις τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων περὶ χειροτονιῶν᾽, both which agree in their testimony as to this point.
VI. Wherefore in the next place let me farther observe, that later Church-writers use words and phrases which do not occur in the former. So Dionysius Alexandrinus observes in Eusebius? that St. John uses many peculiar words and ex- pressions that were not in use before, as “in the beginning was the logos,” &c.; and “the logos was made flesh,” &e. ; and “that which we have seen, heard, and handled of the logos of life ;” to which he adds his use of τὴν ζωὴν; τὸ φῶς, ἀποτροπὴν τοῦ σκότους, THY ἀλήθειαν, and some others,
4 ΓΚ, Clem., Epist. i. c. 44. Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 173.] See Cotelerius’ note on the place, [quoted above, note y, p. 88.
€ [Sacerdote is uniformly used for ἱερεὺς or $795, in Diodati’s version; (see above, note a, p. 58;) and in Cas- siodore de Reynal’s Spanish version, Basle, 1569. The Geneva Bible and Le Clere (see above, notes 1, ἢ, pp. 13, 14,) translate ἱερεὺς and }D by ‘sa- crificateur,’ ἀρχιερεὺς by ‘le souverain sacrificateur,’ and in the plural by ‘ les principaux sacrificateurs.’ The Mons Testament (see above ibid.) translates ἀρχιερεὺς by ‘pontife,’ ἱερεὺς uniformly by ‘ prestre.’ |
f [See above; p. 140, note vy. ]
& [St. Dionysius is pointing out the similarity of style and expression which pervades the Gospel and Epistle of St. John, and indicates the same author ; and arguing that the Apocalypse was written by another person of the name of John, from its differing in these re- spects from those writings of the Apo- stle. Thus he says; συνάδουσι μὲν yap ἀλλήλοις τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καὶ ἣ ἐπιστο- λὴ, ὁμοίως τε ἄρχονται" τὸ μέν φησιν, ἐν ἀρχῇ ἣν 6 λόγος" ἡ δὲ, ὃ ἦν ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς». τὸ μέν φησιν, καὶ ὃ λόγος σάρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν, καὶ ἐθεασάμεθα τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, δόξαν ὡς μονογενοῦς παρὰ πατρός᾽ ἡἣ δὲ τὰ αὐτὰ σμικρῷ παρ- ἡλλαγμένα' ὃ ἀκηκόαμεν" ὃ ἐωράκαμεν καὶ αἱ χεῖρες ἡμῶν ἐφηλάφησαν περὶ τοῦ
more familiarly after the destruction of Jerusalem. 255
which he saith he used against the heretics of his time, who denied that Christ was come in the flesh. These he called Antichrists and Antichrist, words which we do not find in the writings of the other Apostles ; by which we may see that the Church might have occasion to use terms in after-times which she did not use before, and particularly when she was arrived to a perfect and settled economy ; in facto esse, she might think fit to give names to her ministers from which she abstained before.
Thus after the destruction of Jerusalem, or when it was near, she might begin to use the word priest, or use it more familiarly than before. before St. John died, the ἁγία καὶ μεγάλη κυριακὴ ', the anniversary festival of our Lord’s resurrection was called the pascha or ‘‘ passover” by the ancient Christians, though it is not so called in the writings of the New Testament. And from Ignatius *, that the Church of Christ dispersed through the world was called the ‘‘Catholic” Church, and the oblations of bread and wine in the holy Eucharist “the mysteries!,”’
λόγου τῆς ζωῆς" καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἐφανερώθη. ταῦτα γὰρ προανακρούεται, διατεινόμε- νος ὡς ἐν τοῖς ἑξῆς ἐδήλωσε πρὸς τοὺς οὐκ ἐν σάρκι φάσκοντας ἐληλυθέναι τὸν κύριον... διὰ γὰρ τῶν αὐτῶν κεφαλαίων καὶ ὀνομάτων πάντα διεξέρχεται, ὧν τινὰ μὲν ἡμεῖς συντόμως ὑπομνήσομεν᾽ ὃ δὲ προσεχῶς εὐτυγχάνων εὐρήσει ἐν ἑκα- τέρῳ πολλὴν τὴν ζωήν: πολὺ τὸ φῶς" ἀποτροπὴν τοῦ σκότους" συνεχῆ τὴν ἀλήθειαν... 6 ἔλεγχος τοῦ κόσμου τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου ... καὶ ὅλως διὰ πάντων χαρακτηρίζοντας, ἑνὰ καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν συ- νορᾶν καὶ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου καὶ τῆς ἐπι- στολῆς χρῶτα πρόκειται.---- 560. Hist. Ecel., lib. vii. cap. 25. tom. i. pp. 354, 355.]
h Td. ibid., lib. v. cap. 24. [οὗτοι πάντες (St. Philip, St. John, St. Poly- carp, and others) ἐτήρησαν τὴν ἡμέραν τῆς τέσσαρας καὶ δεκάτης τοῦ πάσχα κατὰ τὸ evayyeAwov.—lbid., p. 248. These words are an extract from the letter of Polycrates, who was speaking of the practices of the Apostolic age, and himself lived in the following one. See above, pp. 242, 243, note 1. ]
1 [Easter day is so called in the Ty- picon Sabe, or Ordo recitandi officium per totum annum ex prezscripto Sabe, me. col. ii. ap. Liturg. Gree. Venet. 1615. ]
k Epist. ad Smyrn. [c. 8. ὅπου ἂν φανῇ ὁ ἐπίσκοπος, ἐκεῖ τὸ πλῆθος ἔστω" ὥσπερ ὕπου ἂν ἢ Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς, ἐκεῖ ἡ καθολικὴ exkAnota.—Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 36. It is more probable, however, that Hickes had in his mind the epistle of the Church of Smyrna respecting the martyrdom of St. Poly- carp, where there occurs, 6. 8, speaking of his prayers, μνημονεύσας ἁπάντων καὶ τῶν ποτὲ συμβεβηκότων αὐτῷ, μι- κρῶν τε καὶ μεγάλων, ἐνδόξων τε καὶ ἀδόξων, καὶ ἁπάσης τῆς κατὰ τὴν οἰκου- μένην καθολικῆς exxAnoias.—Ep. Eccl. Smyrn. de Mart. S. Polycarp., ibid., p. 197. See also c. 16 of the same epistle, where St. Polycarp is called ἐπίσκοπος τῆς ἐν Σμύρνῃ καθολικῆς ἐκκλησία.---- Ibid., p. 201: and c. 19, ποιμένα τῆς κατὰ τὴν οἰκουμένην καθολικῆς ἐκκλη- olas.—Ibid., p. 208.
! δεῖ δὲ καὶ τοὺς διακόνους ὄντας μυστηρίων ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, κ.τ.λ..---- Epist. ad Trall., c. 2. Usser. [ Appendix Ignatiana, p. 17. Lond. 1647. So Ja~ cobson. Cotelerius gives μυστήριον, the MS. reading, in the text, but with Vossius considers μυστηρίων the true reading. Arndt and Hefele retain μυστήριον, and understand it, simili- tudo, imago Christi]; or else μυστη- ρίων may here signify both the mys-
CHAP. IIL. SECT. VI.
1 John 1.3.
chap. 2. 18, 21,
So we are sure from Eusebius?, that ©
CHRISTIAN PRIEST- HOOD.
Rev. 1. 10. Acts 20. 7; 1 Cor. 16.1. Acts 24. 6. Ib. 11. 26.
256 Other new terms introduced, as ‘ Lord’s Day, ‘ Christians.’
though the Church is not once called Catholic, nor the Lord’s Supper a sacrament or mystery, in the whole book of the New Testament. So κυριακὴ ἡμέρα, ‘the Lord’s day,’ is used for the weekly festival of our Lord’s resurrection in the Revelation of St. John, but is not found in any other writ- ings of the New Testament, where it is only called the first day of the week. So though in Antioch the followers of’ Christ, who before were called Nazarites and Galileans, came, after the Greek fashion, to be first called Christians, from the name of their master Christ; yet neither any of the writers of the New Testament, or any other of the Apo- stolical age, call them by that name, or our religion Chris- tianity, or the Christian religion. St. Luke, in his history of the Acts, tells us that King Agrippa said unto Paul, “ Al- most thou persuadest me to be a Christian;’’ but St. Paul seems to decline the name in his answer, saying, “I would to God that not only thou, but also all who hear me this day, were both almost and altogether such as I am, except these bonds.” In his epistles he never saith “ Paul an Apostle to the Christians, or Christian Church” at such a place, but to “the beloved of God, the Church of God, the saints,” and “the faithful brethren ;” which*are all common Jewish ex- pressions, that did not distinguish the Christians by name as a sect. St. James, when he wrote to the converted Jews of the dispersion, inscribes his epistle not ‘to the Christian Jews” or Jewish Christians, “ but to the twelve tribes scattered abroad.” And St. Peter inscribes his first epistle to them, “to the strangers or sojourners scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia,” &c. And the second is addressed to them in this circumlocution, “to them who have obtained like precious faith with us;”’ as if it then were a private rule of the Church not to call themselves by a characteristical name, which would have distinguished them, and offended the other Jews. St. Ignatius, St. John’s disciple™, bishop of Antioch, is the first ecclesiastical writer in whom we find those names, who in his epistle to the Magnesians hath
teries or Sacraments of the Church, m [ Ἰγνάτιος, ὃ τοῦ ἀποστόλου Ἴω- Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, neither ἄννου μαθητής.--- Martyrium S. Ignatii, of which is called a mystery or Sacra~ ο. 1. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 177.] ment in the New Testament.
Objection, St. John does not call Christian Ministers Priests. 257
these words, πρέπον οὖν ἐστὶν μὴ μόνον καλεῖσθαι Χριστια- νοὺς, ἀλλὰ καὶ εἵναι", “it is therefore fitting that we should not only be called Christians, but be so indeed;” and διὰ τοῦτο μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ γενόμενοι μάθωμεν κατὰ Χριστιανισμὸν ζῇν, “wherefore being His disciples, let us learn to live ac- cording to the Christian religion ;” and again, ὁ yap Χριστια- vio mos οὐκ εἰς ᾿Ιουδαϊσμὸν ἐπίστευσεν», κ.τ.λ. “for the Chris- tian religion was not converted to the Jewish, but the Jewish to the Christian religion.” Wherefore if it be asked why St. John, who lived long after the destruction of Jerusalem, neither called himself, nor the bishops and presbyters of the Churches to whom he wrote, priests; I answer first, it may as well be asked why he did not call the people of those Churches Christians, or their profession of Christianity by name, as his scholar Ignatius did? He wrote his book of Revelation about twenty-six years after the fatal period of the old Jerusalem and the temple-worship, and his Gospel about eight years after it, and yet in neither of them doth he call the disciples of Christ Christians; nor, what is yet more observable, doth he say one word in either of them, or in his epistles, of the priesthood of Christ, though in his book of Revelations he again and again describes Him in a most majestical style as King. And as the doctrine of His priesthood was then undoubtedly the doctrine of the Church, though he makes no mention of it, so His disciples were then Christians, though he doth not call them so. In like manner the bishops and presbyters of the Church were then, without doubt, esteemed priests, though he omits the name. And so no doubt before he died, in the beginning of the second century, the names of bishops and presbyters, which before had been used in common and indifferently‘, were then used differently, in distinct senses, to signify the two holy orders, as in all the epistles of his disciple’; so weak
" [S. Ignat. ad Magnes., c. 4. Patr. Epist. ad Magn., ὃ 2. Cotelerius is Apost., tom. ii. p. 18.] answering the objection to the genuine-
° [Ibid., c. 10. p. 20.]
P [The passage continues, ἀλλὰ Ἰου- δαϊσμὸς εἰς Xpioriavicudy.—lbid. ]
4 [See Acts xx. 17, 28. Tit. i. 5, 7. See below, Second Discourse, ch. ii. § 3.
τ See Cotelerius upon the place. [The note referred to is on S. Ignat.
HICKES.
ness of the epistles of St. Ignatius, drawn from their distinguishing ἐπί- σκοπος and πρεσβύτερος, whereas in the New Testament those words are inter- changed; Ex eo quod primis ecclesiz temporibus nomina episcopus et pres- byter communia erant primo et secundo
CHAP. IT,
SECT. VI.
CHRISTIAN PRIEST-
HOOD.
258 They are called Priests figuratively in the Revelations.
an argument is this negative argument against any thing which was the general belief and practice of the ancient Catholic Church, and by consequence against the true Christian ministers being proper priests, because they are not expressly so called in the writings of the New Testa- ment.
But secondly, as to this objection from St. John’s not calling them priests in the books which he wrote after the destruction of Jerusalem, I answer, that in his Gospel, which he wrote last of all, but a little before his death, he had no occasion to call the Apostles priests, because he doth not con- tinue his history of Jesus till the time when they began to gather and form Churches, which was not till after Christ’s ascension. But in his book of Revelations, which is a pro- phetical book, he calls the ministers of the Church priests in such figures and similitudes and allusions as are proper to the prophetical style, and in such representations of one thing for another, as belong to that sublime way of writing in which visions use to be expressed. Thus because Chris- . tians were the mystical Israel, in whom the covenant and all the promises were accomplished, he calls them Jews, chap. 11. 9, and 111. 9, where he saith’, “I know the blas- phemy of them who say they are Jews, and are not.” In the same place he calls the false heretical Christians, and their Churches, the synagogues of Satan, often using prophetical and Jewish words and ways of speaking, in things relating to Christians and the Christian Church. So by the name of heavent is often signified the Christian Church, and by the temple-worship and ceremonies, the devotions of Christians, and to come to my point, by angels are often denoted priests, because of the likeness of their offices. For as angels are all
ordini sacerdotum, in epistolis autem
Ignatianis semper episcopi appellantur qui sunt sacerdotes summi, presbyteri vero, qui sunt minores sacerdotes, ar- gumentum palmarium contra earum epistolarum veritatem et antiquitatem ducere se putant; quod tamen ne qui- dem argumentum, meo sane judicio, dici meretur, adeo infirmum est et in- validum. Constat enim, id de quo du- bitare nos non sinunt sacre scripture et sancti patres, apostolico seculo duos extitisse sacerdotii gradus, superiorem
et inferiorem, re diversos, quanquam nomine communi. Nonne fas fuit Ig- natio de utroque sacerdotio simul loqui? Nemo negabit, ni fallor ... Necesse igitur habuit, episcopos vocare supremos antistites, presbyteros anti- stites subjectz dignitatis, quemadmo- dum fecit.—Cotelerii Annott. ap. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 17. ]
* [Cf. App. No. 12, where this in- terpretation is discussed. ]
t [See below, pp. 260, 261. ]
Correspondence of the offices of Priests and Angels. 259
CHAP. Ill. SECT. VI.
spirits who minister unto God in heaven, so His priests minister unto Him upon earth". And as angels were wont to be sent with messages, and on embassies from God to men, so His priests are His angels, or rather evayyedou, His good angels or messengers, who are sent to preach in His name the Gospel unto men; and as the Apostle speaks, to be “the ambassadors of Christ, to beseech them in His 2Cor.5. 20. stead to be reconciled unto God.” The words in the original are ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ πρεσβεύομεν, and so in Eph. vi. 20, ὑπὲρ οὗ πρεσβεύω, “ for which (saith he, speaking of the mystery of the Gospel) I am an ambassador in bonds.” An ambas- sador, i. e. a messenger, an angel, a preacher; for you know, Sir, how πρέσβυς and πρεσβυτὴς in the Greek tongue is glossed by ἄγγελος", and how near akin it is in its signifi- cation to «jpvE¥, a ‘preacher,’ ‘ publisher,’ or ‘ promulger ;’ so that it is not without great agreement in their respective offices that. priests are called angels, who are sent from God κηρύσσειν καὶ εὐαγγελίξειν, to publish the best doctrine, and most happy joyful news that men ever heard or received. The sacrifices which the Greeks offered upon receiving good news were called εὐαγγέλιαξ, and the gifts and presents which they gave to messengers of good news they also called εὐαγγέλιαϑ, the very word by which the Holy Ghost hath chosen to express the Gospel, the joyful tidings of salvation as it is called by the Apostle, saying, “ How shall they preach, except they be first sent? as it is written, (of us) How beautiful are the feet, (or coming) of them who preach the Gospel of
ἃ Κ΄, Chrysost. de Sacerd., lib. iii. [ὃ 4. ἢ γὰρ ἱερωσύνη τελεῖται μὲν ἐπὶ γῆς, τάξιν δὲ ἐπουρανίων ἔχει πραγμάτων. καὶ μάλα γε εἰκότως" οὐ γὰρ ἄνθρωπος, οὖις ἄγγελος, οὐκ ἀρχάγγελος, οὐκ ἄλλη τις κτιστὴ δύναμις, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὸς ὃ παρά- κλητος ταύτην διετάξατο τὴν ἀκολου- θίαν, καὶ ἔτι μένοντας ἐν σαρκὶ τὴν ay- γέλων ἔπεισε φαντάζεσθαι διακονίαν. διὸ χρὴ τὸν ἱερώμενον ὥσπερ ἐν αὐτοῖς ἑστῶ- τα τοῖς οὐρανοῖς μεταξὺ τῶν δυνάμεων ἐκείνων οὕτως εἶναι καθαρόν. | priesthood indeed is administered upon earth, but is of the order of things in heaven. For it is neither man, nor angel, nor archangel, nor any created power that ordained this hierarchy, (or retinue,) but the Holy Ghost, who
SETHE. =
hath taught mortal men to imagine they have the ministry (ἀκολουθίαν) of angels. And therefore it behoves a priest to be as pure as if he were among those potentates in heaven.’’—[S. Chrysost., Op., tom. i. p. 382, B. ]
x ὃ δὲ πρεσβευτὴς εἴη ἄν καὶ ἄγγε- Aos.—Jul. Pollux, Onomasticon, lib. viii. cap. 11. [segm. 137. ]
Υ ὅθεν εἴρηται, τῷ κήρυκι καὶ mpeo~ Bela xpnuarifev.—lbid., segm. 138.
2 [περὶ τοῦ συγχαίρειν ... ἣ μέντοι ἐπὶ τῷ συνήδεσθαι θυσία, εὐαγγέλια. |— Ibid., lib. v. cap. 25. segm. 129.
ἃ [περὶ δωρεᾶς... ἀγγέλῳ, εὐαγγέ- Awa. |—Ibid., lib. vi. cap. 11. segm. 187.
s2
200 The Church on earth is representea
curistran peace, (τῶν εὐαγγελιζομένων εἰρήνην,) and bring glad tidings
PRIEST- HOOD.
of good things, (τῶν εὐαγγελιζομένων Ta ἀγαθά.) The office then of Christian priests is the very same with that of the angel which first preached the Gospel to the shepherds, say-
Luke 2,10 ing, “ Behold I bring you good tidings of great joy, which
—l10.
shall be to all people, for unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord.” Upon which that angel, and many others, even “a multitude of the heavenly host praised God, saying, Glory be to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will towards men.” Such congruity there is in the office of angels and Christian priests. They are both God’s liturgs or ministers” ; they are both His ambassadors, messengers, and preachers sent forth to men, and to minister among men for them who are heirs of salvation. And upon the account of this excellent angelical sort of ministry I may suppose it was that this title was given in special manner to the chief priest, and under him to the priests, who ministered to God in the temple under the Old Testament, as in Malachi 11, 7: “The priest’s lips should preserve knowledge, for he is the messenger (or angel) of the Lord of Hosts.” So our Christian prophet, in the begin- ning of the eighth chapter, representing the things of the Church on earth by things in heaven: “There was silence (saith he) m heaven about the space of half an hour, and I saw seven angels who stood before God, and to them were given seven trumpets ;” and another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer, and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of the saints upon the golden altar, which was before the throne, and the smoke of the incense, which came with the
> 6 ποιῶν τοὺς ἀγγέλους αὐτοῦ πνεύ- ματα, καὶ τοὺς λειτουργοὺς αὐτοῦ πυρὸς φλόγα. Heb. i. 7. Sacerdotes dona seu munera Deo offerunt, preces fide- lium, sacrificia ineruenta, sanctam Eucharistiam, &c.—Cotelerius in S. Clem, Epist. 1. ad Cor. c. 44. [Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 173. See above, note y, p. 88.] Grotius on Malach. ii. 7. Quia angelus Domini, &c., Angeli preces hominum ad Deum, Dei mandata ad homines deferunt. Idem aciebat in lege summus sacerdos [qui semel in anno expiationem faciebat
populi,] Levit. xvi. 1. [et qui in con- troversiis de sensu legis ortis consule- batur,] Deut. xvii. 9; ejus locum implet in Christiana ecclesia episcopus, angelus ob id ipsum dictus in Apoca- lypsi. Diodorus Siculus de Judzis apud Photium; [Biblioth. cod. 244. p- 380. col. 2. ed. Berolin. 1824. ] ἀρχιερέα τοῦτον προσαγορεύουσι,. Kat νομίζουσιν αὐτοῖς ἄγγελον γενέσθαι τῶν τοῦ θεοῦ πρυσταγμάτων.---ἰ Grotii An- nott. in Mal. ii. 7. Crit. Sacr., tom. iv. col. 813.] '
under the figure of the Church in heaven. 261
prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the cmap. om angel’s hand. By the prayers of the saints all interpreters — here agree is signified the prayers of all faithful Christians, as in chap. v. 8, where it is said; “The four living creatures and twenty-four presbyters fell down before the Lamb, hav- ing every one of them harps, and golden phials full of (in- cense or) odours, which are the prayers of the (Christian) saints.” So by the angel is represented the chief minister- ing priest or bishop in every Church, who offered up their prayers, all in allusion to the Jewish temple and the service thereof; where, as may be seen Luke i. 10, all the people went to their private prayers and devotions in the court of the temple, while the priest continued at the golden altar in the temple to offer up incense. In this vision, therefore, is a metalepsis, or comprehension of two allusions or figures ; for first by heaven is meant the Catholic Church of that prophetical period, by the angels are signified the Chris- tian high-priests, and by incense their offering up the peo- ple’s prayers in all Churches of the saints, and all again under another figurative representation of the Jewish temple, priesthood, and worship. So in the seventh chapter, where under the type of the twelve tribes of Israel is mystically represented the Church of Christ, after the sealing of the faithful out of every tribe or Church it is said; “ After this I beheld, and lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations... . stood before the throne and the Lamb .. . and they cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation unto our God, who sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb ; and all the angels stood about the threne, and about the elders, and the four living creatures, and fell before the throne with their faces, and worshipped God, saying, Amen, blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, be unto God for ever and ever; Amen.” Here again, as we have the faithful Chris- tians of all Churches praising God, so under the representa- tion of angels we have all their bishops, with their presby- ters, at their priestly work of blessing and praising God. At their priestly work I say, and exercising their priestly office throughout all the mystical Israel, signified by the four living creatures, which were the four symbols or ensigns of
curisttan the four camps of Israel.
PRIEST-
HOOD.
262
Christian Ministers may be regarded as Rulers,
I say at their priestly office; for
the ministers of the Church may be considered as to their priesthood’, or as to their prelacy or spiritual superiority
over the people.
As prelates, or spiritual superiors over the
people, they are called bishops and presbyters, of the reason of which titles you know, Sir, we have a very good account in Mr. Hill’s book®, cited in the margin, and in Dr. Ham-
¢ L’Ancienne police de l’Eglise sur Vadministration de l’Euchariste, par M. Gabriel] de l’Aubespine, Evesque d’Orleans, livre ii. ch. viii. Premiere- ment i] y a deux qualités dans l’epi- scopat, la prelature, et le sacerdoce. La premiere est, le pouvoir, l’autho- rité, et la jurisdiction ecclesiastique... l’autre est le pouvoir du caractere, et de l’ordination. Les anciens ont con- nus ces deux puissances, [aussi claire- ment et aussi distinctement que nous, et ont exprimé la premiere par ces termes, president, prevost, et prelat: et lautre, par ceux cy, sacrificateur, sacerdot, recteur de l’autel—Op. Gab. Albaspinzi, p. 250, ad caleem S. Op- tati Op., Par. 1679.] So a learned divine of our own country, Mr. Sam. Hill, in the third chapter of his book de Presbyteratu. [The passage referred to is the continuation of that quoted above, note g, p. 240. Ubi notari velim, sacerdotum a pontifice peractam ordi- nationem a duplici fluere principio: sacerdotali, in eo quod ordinati in ordi- natione Deo sacrantur: et regio, eo quod authoritas obeundi sacerdotii in ipsa ordinatione donatur, a regio Dei jure primo defluens, et pontifici, quasi sacerdotum omnium principi et rectori divinitus constituto concessa.— Lib. iv. c. 3. § 4. pp. 187, 188.]
ἃ De Presbyteratu Dissert., lib. iv. cap. 3. [§ 1. De Sacerdotii Christiani origine.| Quandoquidem sapientiam, et senioritatem animi internam ad pub- licum senioritatis didacticze ordinem et officium praviam probavimus, ejus- demque senioritatis virtutes et officia ad veram et intrinsecam_ sacerdotii dignitatem necessario prerequirantur ; exinde patet sacerdotium aliquid am- plius senioritati additum apertissime complecti. Commune igitur sit seniori et sacerdoti, ut religionis θεοπαραδότου sancteque sapientiz traditionem ex officio divinitus concesso et sacro uter- que propaget. Quod vero sacerdotii proprium est, et mero senioris ordini extrinsecum, et superius, hie loci op-
portune discutiendum videatur. [ὃ 2.] Omne ergo sacerdotium publicum, quantum rimari liceat, ab ipsis mundi primordiis duplicia exequitur pietatis officia, moralia scilicet, et mystica, sive symbolica, vel sacramentalia. Mys- tica autem sacerdotii Levitici in his tribus potissimum constiterant, in lo- tionibus, sacrificiis, et dapibus, eorum- que propriis ceremoniis. Moralia au- tem in sacris benedictionibus, Deut. xxi. 5. liturgiis precum, et laudis, et personarum et rerum piis usibus devotarum consecrationibus celebran- dis, versabantur. [ὃ 8.1 Notari igitur velim, et in veteri et in nostro sacer- dotio eadem omnino esse moralia, mys- tica vero diversa, nostra vero prioribus ἀντίτυπα. Siquidem lotionibus Leyiti- cis nostrum lavacrum, istorum sacri- ficiis Christi victima, veterum dapibus Ccena Domini ex adverso respondent: ex quibus unicum, i.e. Christi sacri- ficium ab ipso solo Christo pontifice offerri potuit, semelque ideo offereba- tur. Lavacrum, et sanctam Coenam selectis ad hee sacerdotii Christiani munera discipulis Christus consecranda tradidit.
To which let me add out of Isi- dore’s Original, { Etymologiarum, | lib. vii. cap. 12. ὃ 11. Episcopatus autem vocabulum inde dictum, quod ille qui
superefficitur, superintendat, curam scilicet subditorum gerens: σκοπεῖν
enim Grece, Latine ‘intendere’ dicitur. Episcopi autem Greece, Latine ‘ specu- latores’ interpretantur. ...§ 13. Pon- tifex princeps sacerdotum est, quasi via sequentium. Ipse et summus sacerdos, ipse et pontifex maximus nuncupatur: ipse enim efficit sacerdotes, atque Le- vitas: ipse omnes ordines ecclesiasti- cos disponit: ipse quid unusquisque facere debeat, ostendit....§ 16. An- tistes sacerdos dictus ab eo, quod an- testat. Primus est enim in ordine ec- clesiz et supra se nullum habet. § 17. Sacerdos autem... quasi sacrum dans: sicut enim rex a regendo, ita sacerdos a sanctificando vocatus est: consecrat
Pastors, and Priests; their offices in each character. 263
mond’s note J on Acts xi.°; and as bishops and presbyters cmr. m. they have authority to govern and teach the people the ae revelations and institutions of God; and because their doc- trine is to the people’s souls as food is to their bodies, they are said to be their pastors, who feed as well as govern their flocks. Also as bishops and presbyters, that is, as chief and subordinate rulers appointed by God, they receive their peni- tential acknowledgments and confessions, and absolve or re- fuse to absolve them of their offences, in His name; and in 1 Car τι ; this relation they stand before the people for God. But 885. ὁ priests they stand before God for the people, to pray for them, that is, to bless them, and to offer up their prayers, and praises, and sacrifices; and to perform the mystical rites and offices of our religion in the Holy Supper and Baptism, which answer to the mystical lavations, sacrifices, and fede- ral sacrificial feasts, both of the Jewish and Gentile world, whereof the latter, as any man may plainly see from the most ancient heathen authors‘, was a depravation and corrup- tion of the former. As priests also they consecrate places to the service, and persons to the ministry of God, by solemn separation of the one from common use, and of the other from common employments, to Divine uses and employ- ments. But to return from this short excursion to the holy apoca- lyptical angels; the seven bishops of the seven Asian Churches are called the seven angels, chap. i. 20, “The mystery of the seven stars, which thou sawest in My right hand, and
enim, et sanctificat.... § 20. Pres- byter Greece, Latine ‘ senior’ interpre- tatur: non modo pro etate... sed propter honorem, et dignitatem, quam acceperunt, presbyteri nominantur. ... § 21. Ideo autem et presbyteri sacer- dotes vocantur, quia sacrum dant, sicut et episcopi, qui licet sint sacerdotes, tamen pontificatus apicem non habent, quia nec chrismate frontem signant, nec Paracletum Spiritum dant, quod solum deberi episcopis lectio Actuum Apostolorum demonstrat. § 22. Levitz . .. Grece ‘ diaconi,’ Latine ‘ ministri’ dicuntur, quia sicut in sacerdote conse- cratio, ita in diacono ministerii dis- pensatio habetur.—| S. Isidori Hispal. Op., tom, iii, pp. 341, 342. ]
¢ [In the note here referred to Ham-
mond traces the Scripture use of the word πρεσβύτερος from the derived sense of ruler; which according to Dionys. Halic. it had in Greek, as the corresponding words have in modern languages, and D°3pt most commonly in Hebrew. Hence he thinks bishops were called the elders of their respec- tive Churches, and conceives that in the New Testament this word is con- fined to bishops, that there is no evi- dence that the order of priests was then instituted, and that when πρεσβύτεροι is used in the plural in the New Testa- ment, it means the several bishops of a district Hammond’s Works, vol. 11]. pp. 380, sqq. |
f [See Prefatory Discourse, vol. i. p. 123, and-the notes there. |
264 Christian Ministers are represented under the figures of
curisttAN the seven golden candlesticks; the seven stars are the
PRIEST- HOOD.
Reyz2. 1.
angels of the seven Churches, and the seven golden candle- sticks which thou sawest are the seven Churches.” And as they are called so in general, so every one of them in par- ticular is mystically so called in the second chapter of this prophetical book; as for instance, “To the angel of the Church of Ephesus,” that is, to the chief priest or bishop of the Church of Ephesus, write these things. I say to the chief priest or bishop, for as these mystical angels are some- times described as priests by this evangelical prophet, so under the name of presbyters, 1. e. of ruling or presiding® presbyters, they are described as spiritual chiefs or princes, chap. iv. 4, according to what, Sir, you know I have written of them in my second letter" to Mr. S[ergeant] Geers]. The text with the context is as follows: “ Immediately I was in the Spirit, and behold a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.....And round about the throne were four and twenty seats (or other thrones), and upon the seats I saw four and twenty presbyters sitting, clothed in white raiment, and they had on their heads crowns of gold. .... And they fell down before Him who sat on the throne, and worshipped Him who liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying, Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory, and honour,” &c. Here, Sir, I must observe that as to the golden crowns‘, this prophetical de- scription answers to the golden crown which was made for Joshua the high-priest, Zech. vi. 11; and that by golden crowns here are signified golden mitres, such as the high- priests had under the law, whose mitres were also called crowns. This shews, Sir, that by presbyters cannot be un-
representation,’’ says, ... “it is said of
& προεστῶτες πρεσβύτεροι, 1 Tim. v. every one of these that he had ‘on his
17. ἡγούμενοι, Heb. xiii. 7, 17. προι-
στάμενοι, Rom. xii. 8.
h [On the Dignity of the Episcofral Order, chap. i. sect. 2. ]
i [See the opening of the Prefatory Discourse, vol. i. pp. 59, 544. and p. 61, note e. |
k See Dr. Hammond on the place. { Hammond after interpreting the four- and-twenty elders of the bishops of Judea, and Him that sat on the throne, as ‘‘ God in the thing signified, but the bishop of Jerusalem in the
head a golden crown,’ parallel to that of Joshua the high-priest, Zech. vi. 11, that is,a golden mitre such as the high- priest had under the law, called indif- ferently a crown and a mitre, which cannot belong to inferior presbyters, but doth fitly represent the power of rulers, i. e. bishops in the church, with- out attributing anything of regality to them.’’—Hammond’s Annotations on Rev. iv. 4, note d. Works, vol. iii. p. 884. |
Angels, Elders wearing crowns, Kings, and Priests. 265
derstood the inferior presbyters, but the chief ruling presby- ters, the bishops, who are here represented as chief, or princes!, in the spiritual dominions of Christ upon earth. They are also said to be twenty-four, in allusion to the chiefs of the twenty-four lots of the priests, 1 Chron. xxiv. And, in allusion to the presbyters sitting about the throne of the bishop™, they are represented to sit round the throne of God; and they are said to be clothed in white garments, to set forth their sanctity and great dignity, as Christ’s chief ministers in the Church. Here then let me observe, the bishops are described by their regal character, as Christ’s vicegerents, to govern His Church in their respective dis- tricts. But in the first chapter, ver. 6, they are represented in their double capacities, both as kings and priests, in these words: “ Unto Him who loved us, and washed us from our sins in His own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God, to Him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.” This place, as that in 1 Pet. ii. 9, relates to Exod. xix. 6, where God promised the Jews, that “if they would obey His voice, and keep His covenant, they should be unto Him a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation, and a pecu-
1 Viginti quatuor seniores qui ad declarandam omnipotentis Dei gloriam in circuitu throni ejus considere dicun- tur, ecclesiz rectores et episcopos de- signant: atque hi, quia tam sacerdotes sunt quam reges, juxta illud, c. i. 6. ‘Fecit nos reges, et sacerdotes,’ idcirco * candidis vestimentis induti, et coronas aureas’ ferentes cernuntur; per que mystice illorum decor et gloria ex- presse intelliguntur. Ideo autem vi- ginti quatuor-seniores, vel potius pres- byteri (nam dignitatem hic πρεσβύτερος declarare arbitror potius quam ztatem) cernuntur, ut respondeant viginti qua- tuor sortibus sacerdotum, quas David ex duabus familiis Eleazar et Ithamar filiorum Aaron constituit 1 Par. 24. ut quemadmodum sub illis viginti quatuor sortibus, i. e. sedecim ex filiis Eleazar, et octo ex filiis Ithamar, universa sa- cerdotum ac Levitarum turba contine- batur, ita in his viginti quatuor pres- byteris omnes totius ecclesia przefecti designentur.— Zeger. Annot. in Rev. iv. 4, [Crit. Sacr., tom. viii. col. 380. |
αἱ προκαθημένου τοῦ ἐπισκόπου εἰς τό- mov θεοῦ καὶ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων εἰς τό-͵ mov συνεδρίου τῶν amootéAwy.—I gnat.
ad Magnes, [c.6. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p- 19.] So in Epist. ad Trall. [e. 3. ibid., p. 22.] ἐντρεπέσθωσαν .. . τὸν ἐπίσκοπον ὡς byTa τύπον τοῦ πατρὸς (as Cotelerius, or as Vossius corrects the place, ὧς τὸν πατέρα) τοὺς δὲ πρεσ- βυτέρους ὡς συνέδριον θεοῦ. [The MS. reading is ὁμοίως πάντες ἐντρεπέσθω- σαν τοὺς διακόνους ὡς ᾿Ιησοῦν ριστόν" ὡς καὶ τὸν ἐπίσκοπον, ὄντα υἱὸν τοῦ matpos, k.T.A. Cotelerius conjectures ὡς ἐντολὴν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ ἐπίσκο- mov ὡς ὄντα τύπον τοῦ πατρὸς. For Vossius’ note see above, note r, p. 36. ] See H. Hammondi Dissert. contra 2 sen- tentiam Blondel., [c. 25. § 35. Works, vol. ii. p. 768. Hammond’s conjecture is; ὦ Ἰησοῦς Χριστοῦ, ὡς καὶ τὸν ἐπίσκο- mov (inserenda sunt ex veteri Latino interprete ὡς Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν) ὄντα υἱὸν τοῦ πατρός. (He also, Diss. 4. ὁ. 20. ὃ 10. p. 815, understands the passage in the Apocalypse in the same way as Hickes in the text.) Hefele reads, τοὺς διακόνους ὧς ἐντολὴν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ τὸν ἐπίσκοπον ὡς Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν, ὄντα υἱὸν τοῦ matpds.—Patr.
Apost., p. 190. Tub. 1847.]
CHAP. IL SECT. IV.
curisttaAN liar treasure above all other people.”
PRIRST- HOOD.
266 The Christian Church is described as ‘a priestly kingdom’?
This promise of God, which was made to the whole collective body of the Jews, is to be understood of that theocratical form of government under the high-priest and priests", in which, as a nation or people, they were to be thoroughly settled; and this honour- able promise was made but a very short time before it was performed. Hence the Greek interpreters aptly translate a “kingdom of priests” a “regal priesthood,” because Aaron and his successors were the chief magistrates of that people as well as their high-priests. St. Peter useth the same ex- pression, 1 Epist. 1. 9, where, after he had told the Christian Jews that as a Christian people they, “as lively stones, were built up into a spiritual house®,” or economy of an “ holy priesthood” upon Christ as the chief corner-stone, to offer up spiritual sacrifices to God by Him; then farther, to ex- plain the form of this spiritual economy, he proceeds to tell them that they were still, as in the time of their theocracy, “a chosen generation, an holy nation, a peculiar people” formed into the government of “a regal priesthood” or “kingdom of priests,” under Jesus the High- Priest of our profession and His ministers, to make them again the people of God. So in this place the apostolical prophet gives glory and domi- nion to Christ, for purchasing a Church with His blood, and making the economy of it a “kingdom of priests?.” St. Paul means the same thing in his second epistle to the Corin- thians, chap. vi. 16: “ What agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God, as God hath said, I will dwell in them, (or among them,) and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.” Here, as in all places where the Church is called an house, there is a metalepsis of tropes; for first the temple signifies a holy house dedicated to God; and secondly, that holy house sig-
ἢ So Vatablus thinks it is in the place, see above, note t, p. 113. |
primary sense to be understood; Reg- num sacerdotale| ad verbum regnum sacerdotum, h. e. regnum non profanum, quod ex opibus et armis, sed quod ex sacerdotibus, rebus sacris ac divinis constat, 4. d. sacrum ac divinum erit hoe regnum.—([Crit. Sacr., tom. i. pars 1. Annott. in Exod. p, 389. The same words are used by Fagius on the
© See the allegory of building the tower of the church in Hermas’ Pastor, lib. i. visio 3. [Ecce non vides contra te turrim magnam, que edificatur super aquas, lapidibus quadris splen- didis? &c.—Patr. Apost., tom. i. Ὁ. 79.Ἷ
» See Zeger, a little above cited in the margin, [ p. 265, note n. ]
or ‘kingdom of Priests, that is, ruled by Priests. 267
nifies the family or economy of that holy house4 which 15 built on Christ as its foundation, and in which the priests, as superiors, are to govern, teach, and minister in holy offices, and the people, as inferiors, are to be governed, and taught, and perform holy offices by the priests, and which therefore make a holy theocracy unto God. So 1 Cor. iii., after the Apostle had told them that there was no foundation of the Church but Christ, and that He had laid no other founda- tion; “Know ye not (saith he) that you,” as a building erected upon Christ, “are the temples of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you,” as in His sanctuary? “if any man,” therefore, by bad materials dare “ defile,” or destroy “the temple of God, him shall God destroy, for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.” The economy, there- fore, of the Church in general, and of every particular Church, is a temple or spiritual economy, where the priests have the whole administration, and the high-priest, as Christ’s vicegerent’, is chief rector as well as chief priest. Such similitudes as these do the writers of the New Testa- ment use to make Christians, as Christians, understand that the Church is a holy spiritual kingdom, a theocracy in the most proper sense, in which the priests are the sanhedrim or senate, and the high-priests as princes or presidents thereof. And for this St. John gives glory to Christ, who “hath made
@ 1 Cor. iii. 11, 12; Ephes. ii. 20. Sacerdotes templi spiritualis, id est ecclesie.—Tertull. adversus Judzos, cap. 14. [Op., p. 201, C.]
τ Cum te judicem Dei constituas, ac Christi, qui dicit ad apostolos, ac per hoe ad omnes przpositos, qui apo- stolis vicaria ordinatione succedunt, ‘qui vos audit me audit.’-—[S. Cypr., Epist. lxix. (Ixvi. ed. Oxon.) ad Floren- tium Pupianum, p. 122. ed. Ben.] So, Neque enim aliunde hezreses oborte sunt, aut nata sunt schismata, quam inde quod sacerdoti Dei non obtempe- ratur, nec unus in ecclesia ad tempus sacerdos, et ad tempus judex vice Christi cogitatur.—[Id., Epist. lv. (lix. ed. Oxon.) ad Cornelium, p. 82. ed. Ben.] Potestas ergo peccatorum re- mittendorum apostolis data est, et ec- clesiis quas illi a Christo missi consti- tuerunt, et episcopis, qui eis ordina- tione vicaria successerunt.—[ Firmili- ani Epist. ap. 5. Cypr., Epist. Ixxv. p.
148. ed. Ben.] Tertullian de Prescript. Her., c. 32. [Op., p.213, Β.} 5. Clem. Ep. ad Cor.i.c. 42. [ Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 171. The last two passages are quoted in the Prefatory Discourse, on Prop. III. vol. i. p. 65, note u.] St. Ignatius’ Epistles. [See above, p. 36, notes p, q, r, and the Discourse on the Dignity of the Episcopal Order, chap. i. sect. 2, |—1 Cor. iv.1. And Erasmus, in his Latin prayer for the peace of the Chureh: Da pastoribus, quibus tuas vices delegare dignatus es, prophetiz donum, ut arcanas scripturas non ex humano sensu, sed ex tuo afflatu inter- pretentur. [Precatio ad Dominum Jesum pro pace Ecclesie, written March 5, 1532; it was printed with the tract entitled, Πόλεμος sive Belli De- testatio, per Erasmum_ Roterdamum (E. 5.) s. a. Colonize. It is contained in his collected Works, tom. iv col. 656, A. fol. Ludg. Bat. 1703—1706. |
CHAP, III.
SECT. VI.
1 Cor. 3. 16.
268 The words ‘a royal priesthood, or ‘ Kings and Priests,’
curistiAN us kings” (or as many copies have it’, who “hath made
PRIEST-
us a kingdom).and priests unto God.”
So Arethas* upon
the place also reads it; so the vulgar Latin", Syriac*, Ara- bic’, and Ethiopic” versions translate it; as also Tertullian Eixhort. ad Castit., ο. 7.2 To be “a kingdom of priests,” or “ a royal priesthood,” or ‘‘ a kingdom and priests,” or “ kings and priests,” are but different expressions for the same thing, for the second is the Greek translation, and the third the Chal- dee version of ona nabne, mamlecheth cohenim; “a king- dom of priests,” in Exod. xix. 6, which Miles Coverdale in his English Bible (supposed to be printed at Zurich*) 1550, renders “a priesterly kingdom‘.” And if it is the true read-
S βασιλείαν Steph. a. re. Alex. Baroc. Cov. 2. Sin. M. Hunt. 1. [Vulg. Syr. Arab. AEthiop. Tertull. Ex. ad Cast., ce. 7. Arethas, Victorinus.] Dr. Mills on the place. [Novum Testamentum, p- 766. Oxon. 1707. βασιλείαν is re- ceived as the true reading by Gries- bach, Scholz, and most critical editors. |
t [καὶ ἐποίησεν ἡμᾶς βασιλείαν, ἱερεῖς τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρὶ αὐτοῦ.---(οι- menii Comment. in N. Τὶ and Arethz Explanationes in Apocalypsim, tom. ii. p- 650, 1). Paris. 1631. ]
u [Et fecit nos regnum et sacer- dotes Deo et patri suo. Apoe. i. 6. Ed, Vule.!
* [ [Asses (Zea St ἢ τὸ Jad Et fecit nobis regnum, sacer- dotate Deo.—Ibid., Vers. Syriac. Bibl. Sacr. Polygl., tom. v. p. 932. ]
xh Wh. W δ. 9..."
—Fecitque nobis regnum sacerdotii. εν et fecit nobis regnum ac sacerdotes Deo—Vers. Arab. ibid., p. 933.,]
“ “O2nPnag;: σι: συ AU ET: PEAT: ANU: ATMLANACL: — Et constituit
vos in regno sancto patris ejus Dei. —Vers. AXthiop. ibid. ]
a [Nonne et laici sacerdotes sumus ? scriptum est, ‘regnum quoque nos et sacerdotes Deo et patri suo fecit.’— Tertull. Op., p. 522, A. See below, note ἢ, p. 270. ]
» [The original Hebrew nabyp ('5n5, Exod. xix. 6, is rendered in the LXX βασίλειον ἱεράτευμα : and in,the Chaldee Paraph. wp DY) pons yobn,
ore
(Vers. Lat.) reges et sacerdotes, et popu- lus sanctus.—Bibl. Sacr. Polyg. Wal- ton., tom. i. pp. 306, 307. ]
© [This is a mistake of Hickes. The edition of 1550 is the second edition of Coverdale’s Bible. It was the first edition of 1535 which was sup- posed (by Mr. Humphrey Wanley, who was a friend of Hickes,) to have been printed at Zurich, from the pecu- liar character of the type. See Lewis, History of English Translations, &c., p- 91. Ed. 1739. Wanley assisted Hickes in his Thesaurus; he is re- ferred to in the Discourse on the Epis- copal order as a possessor of a rare Bible; and it appears from a Letter published in the Philosophical Trans- actions for June 1705, that he attended particularly to this subject. The type of the edition of 1535 is peculiarly sharp, that of 1550 is the common English one of that time. This Bible has on the title-page “The whole Bible, that is, the Holy Scripture of the Olde and Newe Testament, faith- fully translated into English by Myles Coverdale, and newly over sene and corrected.... MDL. Printed for An- drew Hester, dwelling at the sign of the Whyte Horse, and are there to be sold; set forth with the king’s most gracious license.’’ In the first edition the words are ‘ presterly kingdom.’ ]
ἃ “Tf ye will hearken now unto My voice, and keep My covenant, ye shall be Mine own before all people; for the whole earth is Mine, and ye shall be unto Me a priesterly kingdom, and a holy people.” In 1 Pet. ii. 9 thus, Βαϊ ye are that chosen generation, that kingly priesthood, that holy nation, that peculiar people.”
—
express the Church governed by sacerdotal princes. 269
ing of this place, St. John makes use of it, as St. Peter doth of a royal priesthood, to let us understand what reason we have to glorify Christ, who hath made us members of this holy theocracy, which in every part of it is governed under Him by sacerdotal princes or priests. This expression of “making us kings and priests unto God,” is also used by this Christian prophet in the tenth verse of the fifth chapter : “Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by Thy blood, out of every kindred, tongue, people, and nation, and hast made us unto our God kings and priests, and we shall reign on earth.” He also speaks much after the same man- ner in the sixth verse of the twentieth chapter, where it is said that those who have part in the first resurrection “ shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.” And in the twenty-second chapter, ver. 5, that in the holy city, the new Jerusalem, the servants of God “shall reign for ever and ever.” But because these places relate to a future, and far more glorious, and different state of the Church, I pass them over, only desiring liberty to tell my own opinion, that if they are not to be understood of Christians severally, as Tertullian takes them in a meta- phorical sense to denote Christian purity*®, but as in 1 Pet. i. 9, of the whole collected body of Jewish Christians as a spiritual building, an holy nation, a peculiar polity, people incorporated into the Church; then also they must relate to the Christian theocracy, and the administration of it Ina royal priesthood under Christ, though in a much more happy, triumphant, and glorious state, than this.
But, Sir, whatever the sense of these passages or that in the first chapter be, whether they are spoken of Christians severally or collectively, of single Christians or of Christians formed into a society, or polity of a royal priesthood‘, I have
© [Tertullian uses the argument that every Christian is a priest against second marriage. De Exhort. Cast., ec. 7. p. 522, A, quoted above, note c, and de Monogamia, c. 7, 8. Nos autem Jesus summus sacerdos et magnus patris, de suo vestiens (quia qui in Christo tinguuntur, Christum indu- erunt) ‘sacerdotes Deo patri suo fecit,’ secundum Joannem.—p. 529, B, C.]
f (Illi sunt] ecclesia plebs sacerdoti
adunata, et pastori suo grex adherens. Unde scire debes episcopum in ecclesia esse; et ecclesiam in episcopo; et si qui cum episcopo non sint, in ecclesia non esse; et frustra sibi blandiri eos, qui pacem cum sacerdotibus Dei non habentes obrepunt, et latenter apud quosdam communicare se credunt; quando ecclesia que catholica una est, scissa non sit, neque divisa; sed sit utique connexa, et coherentium sibi in-
SECT, V1.
270 = The Jewish Church, Rites, and Priesthood were
cnrisman SUfficiently shewed from other places of the Revelation, that
PRIEST-
HOOD.
though St. John doth not expressly call the bishops of the Church priests, yet he calls them so by other mystical names, and sets forth their ministry as a proper priesthood, which offered up the mystical incense, the prayers of all saints, that is of the Church, more especially in the service of the holy Eucharist, when, according to the prophecy of Malachi, the most solemn prayers and praises were offered unto God by a holy priesthood on the mystical golden altar in every Chris- tian Church. Christians then are a kingdom of priests as well as the Jews were; a congregation or multitude of people formed like them into a priestly government, and by the ministration of priests to serve and worship God, and by their hands to offer their external sacrifices of bread and wine, and by their mouths to offer up Eucharistical’ prayers, and praises, and intercessions to Him, which God, through Christ our High-Priest, will accept, as He did the sacrifices and prayers of the Jews. This is very agreeable doctrine to what I have shewed was taught in the early and pure ages of the Church. ᾿Αρχιερατικὸν τὸ ἀληθινὸν γένος ἐσμὲν Tod θεοῦ, κ-. τ. Δ. (saith Justin in his Dialogue with the Jew";) “ We are the true sacerdotal people of God, as God Himself testifies, saying, that ‘in every place among the Gentiles pure
vicem sacerdotum glutino copulata.— S. Cyprian. [ Epist. lxix. (Ep. Ixvi. ed. Oxon.) ad Florentium Pupianum, pp. 122, 123. ed. Ben.] See also the ex- cellent annotations on Tertull. lib. de Exhortatione Castitatis, cap. 7, note 39, 40. [The notes are those of Pame- lius, mentioned above, note k, p. 116. Note 39 is on the words, Nonne et laici sacerdotes sumus, ὅσ. quoted above, note ὁ, p. 268, which after quoting Rey. i. 6, there referred to, says; Mi- nime istud favere potest Lutheri hzresi, qui omnes laicos facit sacerdotes; sed ita intelligi debet ; quod reges et sacer- dotes spiritales fideles omnes censean- tur utpote qui sacrificia spiritalia offe- runt ; alioqui eodem argumento posset quis concludere omnes reges esse. Quam suam sententiam satis indicat verbis sequentibus auctor: this is then shewn at length. Note 40 is on the words, Sed ubi tres, ecclesia est, licet laici; discussed in the Prefatory Dis- course, vol. i. p. 238, note a, on which Pamelius observes; Hie alludere vide-
tur, ‘ubi enim sunt duo vel tres, con- gregati in nomine meo, ibi sum in medio eorum;’ verum ad hzresim Montani videtur pertinere, quod addat ‘licet laici,’ utpote in cujus sectatores potissimum competat illud lib. de Prescript. Her., c. 41. (Op., p. 217, C.) ‘ Hodie presbyter qui cras Jaicus; nam et laicis sacerdotalia muneri injungunt.’ Ex contrario B. Cypr. teste Epist. 69. ad Florentium Pupianum; ‘Ecclesia plebs est sacerdoti adunata,’ &c.] Ter- tull., tom. ii. pp. 684, 685. Par. 1635.
8 [otros yap ἐξαίρετος ἱερεὺς καὶ ai- évios βασιλεὺς, 6 Χριστὸς, ὡς υἱὸς θεοῦ. οὗ ἐν τῇ πάλιν παρουσίᾳ μὴ δόξητε λέ- yew Ἦσαΐαν ἢ τοὺς ἄλλους προφήτας θυσίας ἀφ᾽ αἱμάτων ἢ σπονδῶν ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον ἀναφέρεσθαι, ἀλλὰ ἀλη- θινοὺς καὶ πνευματικοὺ5», αἴνους καὶ εὖ- χαριστίας.---ὃ. Just. M. Dial. cum Tryph., c. 118. Op., p. 211, C.]
h [ἀρχιερατικὸν τὸ ἀλήθινον γένος ἐσμὲν τοῦ θεοῦ, ws καὶ αὐτὸς 6 θεὸς μαρτυρεῖ, εἰπὼν bri ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσι θυσίας εὐαρέστας αὐτῷ καὶ
Jfigurative of the Christian; so Justin Martyr. 271
and acceptable sacrifices should be brought unto Him.’ But God accepts sacrifices from none but by His priests. God therefore testifies before the time that all sacrifices should be acceptable to Him in this name (of Jesus) which Jesus appointed to be done, I mean in the Eucharist of the bread and the cup, and which are offered up by Christians in all places of the earth; but your sacrifices offered up by your priests He utterly rejects, saying, ‘I will not receive your sacrifices from your hands; because from the rising of the sun unto the setting thereof My name shall be glorified among the Gentiles; but you have profaned it.’” He speaks to the same purpose, citing the prophet Malachi, more per- fectly, as I have transcribed the passage before’. Thus much, Sir, as to the prophetical book of the New Testament, in which I hope I have shewed that, setting aside the texts, in which we are said to be kings and priests, St. John hath called Christian bishops priests in the same figurative way of writing that he calls Christians Jews*. To which I have but one observation more to add, which relates to his description of the four and twenty elders, who had crowns or mitres of gold on their heads, and the tradition of his wearing the golden crown or mitre, in the front of which there was en- graven HOLINESS To THE Lorn. Sir, you cannot but remark that this story, which is so well attested, and his description of the Christian priests, agree very well together. But it is time to put an end to my letter, and the exercise of your patience in reading of it, which I shall here do with an hearty prayer that all Christian presbyters and bishops would, as it becomes them, assert the truth of their priestly character with all boldness, and adorn it with all sanctity of life and manners, to the honour of Him who is our King’,
καθαρὰς προσφέροντες. ov δέχεται δὲ παρ᾽ οὐδενὸς θυσίας 6 θεὺς, εἰ μὴ διὰ τῶν ἱερέων αὐτοῦ..... πάντας οὖν οἱ διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματος τούτου θυσίας ἃς παρέδωκεν ᾿Ιησοῆς ὃ Χριστὸς γίνεσθαι, τουτέστιν ἐπὶ τῇ εὐχαριστίᾳ τοῦ ἄρτου καὶ τοῦ ποτηρίου, τὰς ἐν πάντι τόπῳ τῆς γῆς γενομένας ὑπὸ τῶν Χριστιανῶν, προλάβων 6 θεὸς, μαρτυρεῖ εὐαρέστους ὑπάρχειν αὐτῷ" τὰς δὲ ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν καὶ δι᾽ ἐκείνων ὑμῶν τῶν ἱερέων γενομένας ἀπα- ναίνεται, λέγων, καὶ τὰς θυσίας ὑμῶν οὐ
προσδέξομαι ἐκ τῶν χειρῶν ὑμῶν" διότι ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς ἡλίου ἕως δυσμῶν τὸ ὄνομά μου δεδόξασται, λέγει, ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσι" ὑμεῖς δὲ βεβηλοῦτε αὐτὺ.----Τα. ibid., ο. 116, 117. p. 209, D.]
i (Id. ibid., § 41. pp. 187, D, E. 138, A; quoted above, p. 103, note a. |
k [See above, p. 258. |
1 §. Justin. M. Apol. dict. 11. [καὶ ἄγγελος δὲ καλεῖται καὶ ἀπόστολος, αὐτὸς γὰρ ἀπαγγέλλει ὅσα δεῖ γνωσθῆ- ναι.--- ΑῬο]. i. (ii. vett. edd.) ο. 63. Op.,
CHAP. Il. SECT. VI.
Malia Ll.
272 Conclusion.
curisttan Prophet, and High-Priest, the Angel and Apostle of God,
PRIEST- HOOD,
from whom we derive our priestly powers and authority, and to whom, with the Father and the Holy Ghost, be all honour and glory in all the Churches of the saints now and for ever. Amen. With this prayer, and part of that with which St. Ambrose ended his book of the Sacerdotal Dignity™, I conclude this Discourse of the Christian Priesthood : Quanquam sciam pro hoc libello plurimos mihi sacerdotes, gui que loquimur agere nolunt, infideliter esse detracturos ; credo tamen plurimos, qui hec agunt, vel agere obnituntur, fideliter pro nobis oraturos. Sed sicut lacerationibus obtrecta- torum minime pregravamur, sic demum probatorum et sancto- rum virorum orationibus adjuvamur. Age jam nunc, sanctifi- cus spiritus, gui nos in hoc opere divinis inspirationibus adju- visti, cunctos sacerdotes adjuva, et presta, ut faciant que in hoc opusculo ipse eloqui inspirasti [ut eis una mecum tribuas
celorum regna qué sanctis in fine seculorum dare promisisti perpetua".| Amen.
p- 81, B.] Dial.cum Tryph.[kal αὐτὸς dotali, cap. 7. S. Ambr. Op., tom. ii.
amd Tov πατρὸς ἔλαβε τὸ βασιλεὺς, Kal App., p. 364, E. |
Χριστὸς, καὶ ἱερεὺς, καὶ ἄγγελος-.---Ο. " [The editor has presumed to add
86. Op., p. 184, A.] the concluding words from the ori- ™{Pseudo-Ambr.de Dignitate Sacer- _ ginal. ]
THE
DIGNITY
OF THE
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
CHAPTER I.
SIR, I. I am glad to find by your answer to my letter, that you srcr.1._ object so little to my propositions, and that the objections me
you make against them affect neither the truth, nor order, Jews and Gentiles
nor connection of them. First, you object, that my way of as to the speaking of bishops as “spiritual princes,” and of their dienty Fe dioceses as “ spiritual principalities,” seems to you novel and 14 uncouth, and will be apt to give offence to some good Church-
men, who do not think so loftily, as I write, of the episcopal
office; but that the terms of princes, and lords, and princi- palities, and lordships, are fitter for temporal sovereigns and
lords, according to what our Saviour saith to His Apostles,
* [The person to whom this letter was addressed was Mr. Serjeant Geers, the brother of Mrs. Susanna Hopton. It was for his satisfaction that Hickes had drawn out the Propositions which gave rise to the composition of these two Discourses. See the opening of the Prefatory Discourse, vol. i. pp. 59—62, and notes, particularly note g, p- 62. ]
> [The serjeant made several objec- tions to Hickes’ propositions. The first two are treated here. They were made to Hickes’ third proposition ; viz., that “ Christ the archetypal, eternal Mel- chisedec, is the King of this spiritual kingdom, Lord of this spiritual domi- nion, and supreme Head of this spiri- tual corporation, and the bishops, as
HICKES.
successors to the Apostles, are under Him, by commission derived from Him, spiritual lords, chiefs, and princes, as well as priests in His spiritual king- dom; to whom, in their respective spiritual dominions and jurisdictions, He requires obedience of all His sub- jects, of what temporal rank or con- dition soever, as to His stewards, vice- gerents, or chief ministers over His Church.’’—See vol. i. pp. 64—66. The first objection is answered in this chap- ter; the second in the next. The re- maining ones, and the replies to them, are printed in the posthumous work, entitled, the Constitution of the Catho- lic Church, &c., by George Hickes, D.D. 1716. ]
DIGNITY OF EPISCOPAL ORDER.
Matt. 20. 26, 27.
274 Low notions of the Episcopal authority now prevailing.
“Whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister, and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant.” Indeed, Sir, I grant, that in a Church and age wherein the episcopal office and its authority has been 80 many ways depressed, some good people may be choked at those expressions; but when they shall have the same idea of it and of the Church, which I hope this letter will help to raise in you, they will be no longer offended at them, but think them just and proper, and such as the nature of that high spiritual trust and office requires. It is the un- happiness of our times, that men have too mean and low notions of the episcopal authority, and those who by succes- sion and ordination are advanced to it. But, Sir, if you had the same notion of the dignity and honour of the priesthood that the Jews had of it, I believe you would not think I had spoken too loftily of the archieratical or episcopal office, or that the terms of “princes, and spiritual sovereigns,” were so improper, or too high for it. Philo in his first book περὶ μοναρχίας, saith® that “God rewarded Phineas for his zeal with the honour of the priesthood, or service of the Father*,” i.e. of God, ‘ whose service was not only freedom, but more excellent than the kingly office,” (ᾧ τὸ δουλεύειν οὐκ ἐλευθερίας μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ βασιλείας ἄμεινον,) and that it was the inten- tion of the Jewish law®, “that the priests should have equal honour and veneration with their kings.” In his book περὶ Γιγάντων, he saith‘, that “ priests and prophets are the men of God, who are of greater dignity, than that they should be im- mersed in mundane affairs, and become citizens of the world,
© [τῇ δ᾽, ὅτι γέρας εὐσεβοῦς ἀνδρὸς οἰκείοτατον ἱερωσύνη, θεραπείαν ἐπαγ- γελλομένου τοῦ πατρὸς, ᾧ τὸ δουλεύειν οὐκ ἐλευθερίας μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ βασι- λείας Guewov.—Philo περὶ μοναρχίας, ΠΡ. 1. Op., tom. ii. p. 220. .The ἀνὴρ εὐσεβὴς is Phinehas, of whom Philo is speaking. }
4 Father was a solemn appellation of a heathen deity among the Greeks and Romans, as is observed by Bris- sonius de Formul., lib. i. pp. 48, 49, &c. in the edit. in folio, Paris, 1583. [Certum ‘inter sollemnes ritus et pre- cationes generaliter deos omnes patres nuncupatos,’ Lactantius (Institut. Di- vin., lib. iv. ¢. 3.) tradit, ‘non tantum ho- noris gratia, verum etiam rationis. Ita-
que,’ addit, ‘ Jupiter a precantibus voca- tur Pater, et Saturnus et Liber et ezteri deinceps dei;’ quod his Lucilii versibus confirmat; ‘ Ut nemo sit nostrum quin pater optimw’ divum ; Ut Neptunw’ pa- ter, Liber, Saturnw’ pater, Mars, Janu’, Quirinw’ pater, nomen dicaturad unum,’ —(Bib]. Patr., tom. iv. p. 288. E.) Barn. Brissonius, De Formul., lib. 1. pp. 43, 44. 4to. Francof. 1592. ]
© [ἐξ ὧν ἁπάντων ἐστὶ δῆλον bri βασιλέων σεμνότητα καὶ τιμήν περι- ἅπτει τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν ὃ vduos.—Philo de Premiis Sacerdotum, Op., tom. ii. p. 234. ]
f [θευῦ δὲ ἄνθρωποι ἱερεῖς καὶ mpo- φῆται, οἵ τινες οὐκ ἠξίωσαν πολιτείας τῆς παρὰ τῷ κόσμῳ τυχεῖν, καὶ κοσμο-
—
Dignity of the Priesthood among the Jews. 275
but that soaring above all sensible things, they removed to the intellectual world, and dwelt there, being registered in the - society of the incorruptible and incorporeal ideas.” And King Agrippa’ in the supplicatory letter he sent to Caligula, in favour of his countrymen the Jews, writes after this manner: “1 was born a Jew, as your majesty knows, and Jerusalem is the place of my birth, in which is the temple of the most high God. I have had kings for my progenitors, some of whom have been high-priests, who thought the regal dignity inferior to the sacerdotal, supposing, that as much as God was more excellent than men, so much the high-priest- hood was more excellent than the kingly office, the service of God being committed to that, but to this the care of men.” And Josephus in the beginning of his life, written by himself, to set forth his illustrious and most honourable original, tells us “he descended of a priestly race,”’ which he saith was “a proof of the splendor of his family,” and then lets us know that his descent was also “of the first rank, or order of priests,” and in the last place saith, that he “was also of the royal Asmonzean family, by the mother’s side.” I hope, Sir, you will allow the Christian priesthood and priests, to be at least as honourable and venerable as the Jewish. I am sure they are ministers of a better covenant, and a more perfect and excellent religion, and as nearly related to the Father, and His Son, the θεῖος λόγος ἀρχιερεὺς, as Philo calls Himi, as the Jewish priests were, and perform as holy ministrations under the new law as they did under the old.
And how great and honourable the priesthood was among
πολῖται γενέσθαι: τὸ δὲ αἰσθητὸν πᾶν ὑπερκύψαντες, εἰς τὸν νοητὸν κόσμον μετανέστησαν κἀκεῖθι ᾧκησαν, ἔγγρα- Petes ἀφθάρτων ἀσωμάτων ἰδεῶν πολι- τείᾳ.---Τὰ. de Gigantibus, Op., tom. i. p- 271.]
5. [γεγένημαι μὲν ws oldas ᾿Ιουδαῖος. ἔστι δέ μοι Ἱεροσόλυμα πατρὶς, ἐν ἣ 6 τοῦ ὑψίστου θεοῦ νεὼς ἅγιος ἵδρος. πάπ- πων καὶ προγόνων βασιλέων ἔλαχον, ὧν οἱ πλείους ἐλέγοντο ἀρχιερεῖς, τὴν βασιλείαν τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἐν δευτέρᾳ τάξει τιθέμενοι.---[4. de Virtutibus et Legatione ad Caium, Op., tom. ii. p- 586. ]
h [ἐμοὶ δὲ γένος ἐστὶν οὐκ ἄσημον, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ ἱερέων ἄνωθεν καταβεβηκὺς,
a
ὥσπερ δὴ map’ ἑκάστοις ἄλλη τίς ἐστιν εὐγενείας ὑπόθεσις, οὕτως παρ᾽ ἡμῖν ἡ τῆς ἱερωσύνης μετουσία τεκμήριόν ἐστι γένους λαμπρότητος᾽ ἐμοὶ δ᾽ οὐ μόνον ἐξ ἱερέων ἐστὶ τὸ γένος, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐκ τῆς πρώτης ἐφημέριδος τῶν εἰκοσιτεσσά- ρων. πολλὴ δὲ κἂν τούτῳ διαφορά. ὑπάρ- χω δὲ καὶ τοῦ βασιλικοῦ γένους ἀπὸ τῆς μητρός. of yap’ Acapwvatov παῖδες, ὧν ἔκγονος ἐκείνη, τοῦ ἔθνους ἡμῶν ἐπὶ μήκιστον χρόνον ἠρχιεράτευσαν καὶ éBactAevoay.—Flavii Josephi Vita, ὃ 1. Op., tom. ii. p. 1.]
i [Philo de Profugis, Op., tom. i. p. 562. See the context quoted above, note ἃ, p. 207. |
2
CHAP. I. SECT I.
276 The Priesthood honoured among the heathen ;
pienity or the heathens many have observed ; particularly a late author*,
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
whose words I shall transcribe for your use.
“On this account the priests were honoured with the next places to their kings and chief magistrates, and in many places wore the same habit. ‘In most of the Grecian cities, and particularly at Athens,’ as we are informed by Plato! and several others, ‘the care of Divine worship was com- mitted to the chief magistrates, who were often consecrated to the priesthood.’ Thus Anius in Virgil, was king of Delos, and priest of Apollo.
Riex Anius, rex idem hominum, Pheebique sacerdos™.”
He also observes after Clemens Alexandrinus”, that “ ‘in Egypt the kings were all priests, and if any one who was not of the royal family usurped the kingdom, he was obliged to be con- secrated to the priesthood, before he was permitted to govern,’ and we are assured by Plutarch®, ‘that the dignity of priests was equal to that of kings.’ At Sparta? ‘the kings imme- diately after their promotion took upon them the two priest- hoods of the heavenly and the Lacedzemonian Jupiter, which was rather esteemed an accession to their honour, than any diminution from it:’” with more to the same purpose. So Grotius in Genesis, cap. xiv. ver. 18%. Hrat enim sacerdos Dei
altissimz. |
k Dr. Potter in his Archzologia Grzeca, or Antiquities of Greece, book ii. ch. 8. [Hickes gives the substance of Potter’s statement, whose werk had then been very recently published. ] See also Sir John Hayward of Supremacy in Affairs of Religion, p. 22, &c. [ London, 1624, The work was dedicated to King Charles I. The passage referred to contains a large collection of instances of the union of the regal and sacerdotal offices in the same persons. ]
1 [ἔτι δὲ καὶ τῶν Ἑλλήνων πολλαχοῦ ταῖς μεγίσταις ἀρχαῖς τὰ μέγιστα τῶν περὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα θύματα εὕροι τις ἂν προσταττόμενα θύειν. καὶ δὴ καὶ παρ᾽ ὑμῖν οὐχ ἥκιστα δῆλον ὃ λέγω" τῷ γὰρ λαχόντι βασιλεῖ φασὶ τῇδε τὰ σεμνό- τατα καὶ μάλιστα πάτρια τῶν ἀρχαίων θυσιῶν ἀποδεδόσθαι.---Ῥ]αἴοπὶΒ Politi- cus, c. 30. Op., Pars 2. tom. ii. p. 319, ed. Bekker. |
™ (Virgil. Aneid. iii. 80.]
" [ὥστε περὶ μὲν Αἴγυπτον οὐδ᾽ ἔξεστι
βασιλέα χωρὶς ἱ ἱερατικῆς ἄρχειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐὰν ἄρα καὶ τύχῃ πρότερον ἐὲ ἄλλου γένους βιασάμενος, t ὕστερον ἀναγκαῖον εἰς τοῦτο εἰστελεῖσθαι αὐτὸν τὸ yévos.—Platonis Politicus, ibid. This passage imme- diately precedes the one quoted in note 1. Hickes has put Clemens Alexan- drinus for Plato, apparently by mistak- ing one of the references in Potter for another. |
9 [ὡς ἐνιαχοῦ τῆς Ἑλλάδος ἀντίῤῥο- mov ἣν τὸ τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἀξίωμα πρὸς τὸ τῆς Baotvctas.—Plutarch. Questiones Romane, tom. vii. p. 169. ]
p [Reges Spartanorum quum pri- mum in eam assumpti sunt digni- tatem, privilegio honoris precipui, Jo- vis ccelestis et Lacedzmonii sacerdotio funguntur.— Alexander ab Alexandro, Gen. Dier., lib. ii. c. 8. (tom. i. Ὁ. 317. Lugd. Bat. 1673,) is the authority re- referred to by Potter. ]
4 {Grotius Annott. in Gen. xiv. 18. Crit. Sacr., tom. i. col. 388. ]
ee
as also by Christians in the purest ages of Christianity. 277
Rex Anius, rex idem hominum Pheebique sacerdos'.
Ubi Servius, esset sacerdos, vel pontifex.’ Hine ‘domus, in qua pontifex habitabat regia dicebatur, docente eodem Servio ad Atneid. viii. [362.| qui et sepe notat a Virgilio omnia jura sacerdota- lia tribui Ainee.
In the first and purest ages of Christianity, all the orders of clergy were counted so honourable, that the most noble of the laity thought it an honour to be a priest or deacon, and therefore the governors of the Church, to discourage such and such blameable practices, incapacitated those who were guilty of them, to be priests. And it was in reference to the three honourable orders in that Church, St. Ignatius said’, τόπος μηδένα φυσιούτω, “let no man’s place puff him up.”
II. I have set these things before you, dear Sir, to raise "your conceptions to the full and just height of the sacerdotal dignity, which the council of Sardica‘ calls “ Divine, and most venerable,’ and of that pre-eminent unworldly power and authority, which the spiritual governors and magistrates have over their spiritual subjects in the kingdom of Christ. I thought it proper for me to speak of them in such a style, and such expressions, as I conceived was fittest for my ‘purpose in framing those propositions in my former letter, and useful at all times, especially in ours, to help Christian men, of all ranks and professions, to the right apprehension of that spiritual superiority to which God hath made them subject without exception; and, that being once rightly ap- prehended, to give them thereby a true notion of the free estate, or independent nature of the Church, and its real distinction", as a society, from the State. This indeed by a concurrence of unhappy causes, among which I reckon the great liberty of writing against the Church, especially by
‘sane majorum erat consuetudo, ut rex etiam ~~
r Virgil. Aneid. iii. 80.
s §. Ignat. Epist.ad Smyrn., [ce. 6. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 36. ]
' Can. xx. [ἴσμεν yap καὶ αὐτοὶ] πλεονάκις διὰ Thy ὁλίγων ἀναισχυντίαν, τὸ θεῖον καὶ σεβασμιώτατον ὄνομα τῆς ἱερωσύνης εἰς κατάγνωσιν ἐληλυθέναι.---- [Concilii Sardicensis, (A.D. 347.) Ca- non xx. Concil., tom. ii. col. 672, B.]
ἃ [Postremo in rebus mere divinis
sacerdotes plenariam potestatem obti- nentes, princeps ovis erit; at in rebus civilibus, sacerdos communi jure cum ceteris e populo censebitur, nisi bene- ficio principis prerogativa honoris et privilegia illi fuerunt inducta.—De Libertate Ecclesiastica, inter Episto- las Casauboni ed. Almeloveenii, tom. ii. p. 177. Roterodami. 1709. See Appendix, No. 6.]
CHAP, IL. SECT, I.
SECT, If.
A distinct — d inde- ἘΠΕ spiritual authority in the Bishops of the Church.
DIGNITY OF EPISCOPAL ORD1 R,
278 Causes why the Independence of the Church is lost sight of.
the deists, is become a hard and almost unintelligible doc- trine to many of the Church of England, even to some of that order, whose dignity I am defending; though it is a very familiar notion, and clearly understood not only by the most ignorant of the clergy and laity of the Church of Rome, but by the ministry and people among dissenters of all sorts, whose practice 1 know it is to speak with contempt of the Church of England, for being, as they conceive and object, so dependent upon the State, and against the clergy, whom they love to blame without distinction, for subjecting the rights and authority of the kingdom of Christ to the kings and kingdoms of the world. One of the causes why the doctrine of the Church’s being a society distinct from the State, and independent of it, is so little known and un- derstood among us, is and hath been, the great modesty of many of the clergy, who have forborne to preach it lest they should seem thereby to preach up themselves. Others of them have forborne to preach it purely because they did not understand it: for employing themselves too much in the study of other sorts of learning external to their profession, they have unhappily neglected the study of ecclesiastical antiquity, which was more necessary for them to know. Others of them, who studied it, and made themselves masters of it, have been silent, because they had little or no provo-
cation for many years to preach it. Others again, when
there hath been occasion enough to preach it, have for fear of offending those by whom they expected to be preferred, either been wholly silent, or shewed it only by half lights. And some, Sir, have wrote of it in such a dilute manner, as is hard to tell whether they wrote for or against it. This, Sir, was your own expression to me, when we discoursed last together on this melancholy subject, before the good lady*. Then I put you in mind of the notions and doctrines, which some of the gentlemen of your robe have taught of the king’s supremacy, which you allowed to be another cause why the doctrine of the Church’s independency, as a society really distinct from the State, was so great a stranger in our Israel; but because we then fully discoursed that point together, I shall here say nothing more of it, than that men
* [This lady was Mrs. Hopton. See vol. i. pp. 59, sqq.]
Names of authority applied to Bps., Primitive & Scriptural. 279
who have imbibed those later notions and doctrines from these writers, will be more apt than others to think the ex- pressions, in which [ call bishops princes, and their dioceses principalities, to be novel and uncouth, though in truth they are not. On the contrary, Sir, as they are very ancient, so are they the common language of primitive Christianity, as you may see by the following authorities. St. Paul calls
CHAP. I.
SECT. II.
them προισταμένους ἐν Κυρίῳν, “ presidents, prefects, rulers, 1 Thess. 5. or governors in the Lord,’ and προεστῶτας πρεσβυτέρους, ἜΑ 5
‘ruling, or governing presbyters.’ they are frequently called προεστῶτες, ‘ presidents’; and by Gregory Nyssen*, πνευματικοὶ προεστῶτες, ‘spiritual presi- dents,’ and by St. Basil in Psalm xxviil.”, of τῆς ποίμνης τοῦ Χριστοῦ προεστῶτες, ‘ prefects, or presidents of the flock of Christ.’ So St. Cyprian, Epist. lix. ad Cornelium, calls the bishop Ecclesia prepositum:, and prepositum (Christi) servum*, and the bishops those, gui in Ecclesia Catholica fratribus presunt®. So in Epist. Ixix.!, gui se schismaticis contra pre- positos et sacerdotes miscuerint. Epist. lxxiii.® unde intelligimus non nisi in Ecclesia prepositis.....licere boptizare. St. Paul in Heb. xii. 7, 17, 24, calls the bishops ἡγουμένους, a word used to set forth our Lord’s spiritual dominion. Matt. i. 6, ἐκ cod yap ἐξελεύσεται ἡγούμενος, “for out of thee shall come a governor (or prince) who shall rule My people Israel.” It is also used of the Apostles to whom Christ committed all His power, and the administration of His king- dom; Luke xxii. 26. “ But ye shall not be so, but he that
Y προιστάμενος, προεστὼς, of the same signification with προστάτης, ‘ prefec- tus, preeses, qui alicui rei preeest, eam- que administrat,’ all from προΐσταμι, “antesto, presum, prefectus sum.’ See Budzi Commentar., p. 487, and Ste- phani Thesaur. in προΐσταμαι, [tom. iv. col. 4610, D.] προστασία, [ibid., col. 4611, D.] προστάτης, [ibid., col. 4612, C.,] the words by which Greg. Na- zianzen expresseth himself, in his first apologetical oration, when he speaks of bishops and the episcopal office.—[S. Greg. Naz. Orat. ii. (al. i.) Apologetica, § 1]. τοῦ προεστῶτος. Op., tom. ii. p. 17, C. τὴν mpooractay.—Ibid., ὃ 16. p- 20, A. τὸν mpoordrny.—Ibid., ὃ 44. p. 34, A.; et alibi spins. ]
4 [See S. Just. M. Apol. i. c.65, 67.
Op., pp. 82, 83, quoted above, pp. 105, 106, notes f, g. The word προεστὼς occurs repeatedly in the context of the passages there extracted. ]
a[S. Greg. Nyssen., de Scopo Chris- tiano, Op., tom. iii. p. 306, B. The word προεστὼς occurs frequently in the context. ]
> [S. Basilii Hom. in Psalm. xxviii. § 2. Op., tom. i. p. 115, A.]
ο [S. Cypr. Epist. lv. (lix. ed. Oxon.) pp. 82, 88. ed. Ben. ]
a [Id. ibid., p. 82. ed. Ben. ]
e [Id. ibid., pp. 83, 84]
f (Id. Epist. Ixxvi. (Jxix. ed. Oxon.) ad Magnun, ibid., p. 15d. ]
s ({Id., Epist. Ixxiii. ad Jubaianum, ibid., p. 131. ]
So in Justin Martyr 17.
280 Bishops called ἡγούμενοι, in Scripture ;
piexiry oF 1s greatest among you let him be as the younger, καὶ 6 ἡγού- voRpEen, μένος, and he that is chief (or prince) as he that doth serve.” Clemens Romanus useth the same word to distinguish the Apostles and their Apostolic successors from presbyters in the Church of Corinth, cap. 1". ‘ You did all things without respect of persons, you walked in the laws of God, being sub- ject τοῖς ἡγουμένοις ὑμῶν, to your chief governors, or princes, and giving due honour τοῖς παρ᾽ ὑμῖν πρεσβυτέροις, to the presbyters among you.” He also useth the same word, cap. 21, for the successors of the Apostles in the Church; “ Let us,” saith he*, “worship our Lord Jesus Christ, whose blood was offered for us, let us reverence our chiefs, [zponyoupévovs, | let us honour our presbyters, and instruct the new disciples in the fear of God.” I call it the same word though in composition, because it hath the same signification, and I have rendered νέους ‘ new disciples,’ as it certainly signifies also in cap. 1, 3!; and as νεώτερος doth, Acts v. 6, and 1 Pet. v.5. But to proceed, so Origen on Matt. xx. 20™, ὁ δὲ ἡγού- μενος" ovTws δὲ οἶμαι ὀνομάζειν τὸν καλούμενον ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλη- σίαις ἐπίσκοπον, “the prince, for so I think fit to call him that is called a bishop in the Churches.” So contra Celsum, lib. vii.", where, speaking of bishops as Archons® of the Church, he saith, καὶ ἀναγκαίως ἅμα καὶ δικαίως ἡγούμενοι, καὶ πάντων πεφροντικότες, K.T-r. “Our rulers, who are made so by constraint, as well as for merit, have the care of all; of
» [ἀπροσωπολήπτως yap πάντα ἐποι- εἴτε, καὶ τοῖς νόμοις τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπορεύ- εσθε, ὑποτασσόμενοι τοῖς ἡγουμένοις ὑμῶν, καὶ τιμὴν τὴν καθήκουσαν ὑπονέ- μοντες τοῖς παρ᾽ ὑμῖν πρεσβυτέροι-.--- S. Clem. R. Ep. i. ad Cor. § 1. Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 147.]
i ἡγούμενος, signifies as ἡγεμών. See the use of the word in the civil signifi- cation, by profane authors in ἡγέομαι, ovmal, ἡγεμὼν, ἡγεμονία, in Stephani Thesaur. [ἡγεόμαι pro dux sum, i. 6. imperator, ducto, presum in generali- ter pro presum. Xen. (Am. i. 7.5.) ὡς ἱκανὸς εἴη τῆς πόλεως ἡγεῖσθαι. Item, ἡγούμενος τῆς Γερμανίας, 6 Plut. ut Lat. dicitur ‘ preesse’ provincia. Steph. Thes., tom. iv. col. 4076, D. ἡγεμὼν, princeps; sicut Lat. quoque ducem et principem interdum copulant.—Ibid., col. 4078, B. ... ἡγεμονία imperium, generaliter pro imperio, principatu.— Tbid., D, and col. 4079, A.]
Κ τὸν κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν, οὗ τὸ αἷμα ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἐδόθη, ἐντραπῶμεν. τοὺς προηγουμένους ἡμῶν αἰδεσθῶμεν. τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους ἡμῶν τιμήσωμεν. τοὺς νέους παιδεύσωμεν τὴν παιδείαν τοῦ φόβου τοῦ θεοῦ.--ἰ 8. Clem. R. Epist. i. c. 21. Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 160.]
1 [τιμὴν τὴν καθήκουσαν ἀπονέμοντες τοῖς Tap ὑμῖν πρεσβυτέροις" νέοις τε μέτρια καὶ σέμνα νοεῖν ἐπιτρέπετε.---Ἰὰ. ibid., c. 1. p. 147. ἐπηγέρθησαν.. .. οἱ νέοι ἐπὶ τοὺς πρεσβυτέρου-.----Ἰ ὈΪ4., c. 3. pp. 148, 149. }
m [6 δὲ ἡγούμενος" οὕτω δὲ οἶμαι dvo- μάζειν τὸν καλούμενον ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλη- σίαις ἐπίσκοπον, ὡς ὃ τοῖς ὑπηρετουμέ- νοις Siakovovmevos.—Origenes Comm. in Matt., tom. xvi. Op., tom. iii. p. 728, C. The right translation seems rather to be ‘‘ for so I think He calls him who is called a bishop,” &c. ]
" [kal ἀναγκαίως ἅμα καὶ δικαίως
a
by St. Clement R. and Origen. Force of the term. 281
CHAP, 1. SECT. IL
those within, that they may live better and better every day ; and of those without, that they may bring them to know- ledge of true piety and religion in words and works, and to the worship of the true God... and be united to God, who is Lord over all, by His Son God the Word, the Wisdom, the Truth, and the Justice, who unites all converts to Him, who live in all things according to the Divine will.”
And that this word imports greatness in its signification, even principality, or chief rule and authority in all commu- nities, is evident from 1 Mace. xiv. 41, καὶ ὅτι εὐδόκησαν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι καὶ οἱ ἱερεῖς τοῦ εἶναι Σίμωνα ἡγούμενον καὶ ἀρχιερέα: “ΑἸδο that the Jews were well pleased that Simon should be their governor (or prince) and high-priest.” I have observed this, because the word ἡγούμενος, like the
ἡγούμενοι, Kal πάντων πεφροντίκοτες, τῶν μὲν ἔνδον, ἵν’ ὁσημέραι βέλτιον Bidar τῶν δὲ δοκούντων ἔξω, ἵνα yévwv- ται ἐν τοῖς σεμνοῖς τῆς θεοσεβείας λό- yous καὶ epyots* καὶ οὕτω θεὸν ἀληθῶς σέβοντες, καὶ πολλοὺς, ὅση δύναμις, παιδέυοντες ἀνακραθῶσι τῷ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου, καὶ τῷ θείῳ νόμῳ καὶ οὕτως ἕνω- θῶσι τῷ ἐπὶ πᾶσι θεῷ, διὰ τοῦ ἑνοῦντος αὐτῷ υἱοῦ θεοῦ λόγου, καὶ σοφίας, καὶ ἀληθείας, καὶ δικαιοσυνης, πάντα τὸν προτετραμμένον ἐπὶ τὸ κατὰ θεὸν ἐν πᾶσι Cyv.—ld. contr. Celsum, lib. viii. c. 75. Op., tom. i. p. 798, D—F.]
° Ussher, Vett. Testimonia de Igna- tio, p. 4. [ Ussher quotes a passage from St. Chrysostom, Hom. in S. Ignat. M., ὃ 2. (Op., tom. 11. p. 593, D.) where, after speaking of St. Ignatius’ living with the Apostles, he says; καὶ τοσαύ- Ts εἶναι δόξαντα αὐτοῖς ἀρχῆς ἄξιον : and on this observes, Episcopatus autem dignitatem hic intelligit, quam ab Apo- stolis Ignatium accepisse in sequenti- bus ita ostendit; οὐ yap μόνον, ὅτι τοσαύτης ἀρχῆς ἄξιος εἶναι ἔδοξε, θαυ- μάζω τὸν ἄνδρα ἐγὼ, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι καὶ παρὰ τῶν ἁγίων ἐκείνων τὴν ἀρχὴν ταύτην ἐνεχειρίσθη, καὶ αἱ τῶν μακαρίων ἀπο- στόλων χεῖρες τῆς ἱερὰς ἐκείνης ἥψαντο κεφαλῆς.---ἰ( 5. Chrys. ibid., p. 594, A.) Ignatii &c. Epistole, ed. Usser. Oxon. 1643. ]
P See Dr. Hammond and Grotius on Heb. xiii. 7. [Hammond observes that the word ἡγούμενος is a common word to signify all kind of authority or rule, instancing Ecclus. ix. 22; x. 2, 24; xiii, 54; 1 Mace. xiii, 8, 42: and that
the Hebrew N°, by, and ‘7°39, which are ordinarily rendered ἄρχων, are often rendered ἡγούμενος. He quotes the instances given above, and others from the New Testament; par- ticularly Acts xv. 22, where he under- stands the word to be used of Judas and Silas, as being bishops in Judea, follow- ing St. Chrysostom and others; and lastly, he shews that the persons spoken of in Heb. xiii. were bishops, in that they, ver. 7, had ‘‘spoken to them the word of God ;”’ ver. 17, ‘‘ watched over their souls ;’’ and with the saints, ver. 24, (‘‘ Salute all the rulers and all the saints,’’) made up the whole Church. —Hammond, Annotations on Heb. xiii. Works, vol. iii. p. 768.
μνημονέυετε τῶν ἡγουμένων ὑμῶν. Me- mentote prepositorum vestrorum; 7- γούμενοι, Qypyby in Veteri Testamento, sunt populorum aut exercituum duces atque principes, quod nomen hic optimo jure aptatur eis qui apud Christianos kat’ ἐξοχὴν (per excellentiam) tum προεστῶτες (presides) tum ἐπίσκοποι (episcopi) dicuntur, quorum munus est non tantum preesse presbyterio, sed et κοπιᾷν ἐν τῷ λόγῳ (laborare in verbo) 1 Tim. v. 17. quale apud Judzos fuit et nunc est munus τῶν ἀρχισυναγώγων (principum synagogz). Sic et in Epi- stola Clementis ad Corinthios bis po- nuntur ἡγούμενοι (prepositi), deinde πρεσβύτεροι (seniores). Loquitur au- tem de iis qui jam obierant, ut osten- dunt sequentia.—Grotius in Ep. ad Hebr., cap. xiii. 7. Crit. Sacr., tom. vii. col. 1187. }
DIGNITY OF EPISCOPAL ORDER.
282 Bishops called Princes or Rulers, and their office ἀρχή :
Hebrew cohen, carries so much greatness and excellency of power in its signification; for ἡγεμονία, the noun, sig- nifies supreme authority both in sacred and profane writers, as Luke ii. 1. τῆς ἡγεμονίας Τιβερίου Καίσαρος, ‘in the fifteenth year of the reign, or empire of Tiberius Cesar.” And therefore Chrysostom in Hom. xxxiv. on the Epistle to the Hebrews", compares them to what is chief, and pre- eminent in every kind, as to “the precentor and governor of a chorus, the general of an army, the captain of a ship, and the shepherd of a flock.” He calls them ἄρχοντας, which in Latin and English too is familiarly translated ‘princes. It is so translated in both languages, Matt. xx. 25; Mark in. 22; John xii. 31; and in many other places, as 1 Cor. 1. 8; Eph. 11. 2; and is also so rendered throughout the ancient Latin version of the Epistles of St. Ignatius‘, and almost where- soever the LXX translate by ἄρχοντες, where we use the word princes, as 1 Chron. xxviii. 1, and 21. According to this observation the same father speaks of tod ἀξιώματος τὸ μέγεθος", “the greatness of their dignity,” and upon those words, “salute those who have the rule over you” (τοὺς ἡγου- μένους ὑμῶν, 1. e. your rulers, or princes) “ and all the saints.” “See (saith he) how he honoured them, in writing to these for the sake of them.”
But before I proceed further, let me, Sir, observe to you, that it 15 no wonder such titles are given to bishops and their
4 [See above, the Christian Priest- hood, chap. li. sect. 2. p. 16. ]
τ [κακὸν μὲν ἣ ἀναρχία πανταχοῦ, καὶ πολλῶν ὑπόθεσις συμφορῶν, καὶ ἀρχὴ ἀταξίας καὶ συγχύσεως μάλιστα δὲ ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τυσοῦτον ἐπισφαλεστέρα ἐστὶν ὅσον καὶ τὸ τῆς ἀρχῆς μεῖζον καὶ ὑψηλότερον. ὥσπερ γὰρ ἄν χοροῦ τὸν κορυφαῖον ἀνέλῃς, οὐχὶ κατὰ μέλος καὶ κατὰ τάξιν ὁ χορὸς ἔσται, καὶ φάλαγγοξ στρατοπέδου τὸν στρατηγὸν ἂν ἀπο- στήσῃς, οὐκ ἔτι ῥυθμῷ καὶ τάξει τὰ τῆς παρατάξεως ἔσται, καὶ πλοίου τὸν κυ- βερνήτην ἐὰν περιέλῃς, καταδύσεις τὸ σκάφος" οὕτω καὶ ποιμνίου τὸν ποιμένα ἐὰν ἀποστήσῃς, πάντα ἀἄνέτρεψας καὶ ἠφανίσα-.----ὃ. Chrysost. in Hebr., Hom. xxxiv. ὃ 1. cap. 13. Op., tom. xii. Ὁ: $14, A, Bul
5 Edit. Voss., pp. 5, 27, 31, 42, 49, 60. [The ancient Latin version is printed parallel with the Greek in Vossius’ edition of St.Ignatius’ Epistles.
Epistole genuine S. Ignatii M. que nune primum lucem vident ex bibli- otheca Florentina. Amst. 1646. It is given in Cotelerius’ Patr. Apost., tom. il. pp. 124, sqq. The passages referred to are; ad Smyrn., c. 6. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 85. Vers. Lat. p. 130; ad Ephesios, ὁ. 19. ibid., pp. 16, 125; ad Magnes., c. 1. ibid. pp. 17, 126; ad Philadelph., c. 6. pp. 32, 129; ad Trall., c. 4. pp. 22, 127; ad Rom., c. 7. pp. 29, 128. In all these places except the first the words are 6 ἄρχων τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου, translated, ‘ princeps sxeuli hujus.’ ]
τ [φεύγειν μὲν προορῶντας τοῦ ἀξιώ- ματος τὸ μέγεθο-.---. Chrys., ibid., p. 313, C.]
u [ipa πῶς αὐτοὺς ἐτίμησεν, εἴγε ἐκείνοις ἐπέστειλεν ἀντ᾽ ἐκείνων. --- 8. Chrys. ibid., ὃ 2, p. 816, A. Hickes seems to have misapprehended the meaning of ἀντὶ.]
as governing the Church under Christ. 283
office, because to them is committed the government of the whole Church throughout the world, even the kingdom of Jesus Christ, which, as it is of greater extent than any worldly empire was or ever will be, so it is of greater dig- nity than all the kingdoms of the earth. This vast spiritual empire, which reaches from the rising to the setting sun, is committed by God to the bishops in general, as well as par- ticular, in whole, as well as in part’, which is a prerogative, that no temporal prince can challenge, whose authority is confined and limited to his dominions. And, Sir, if you rightly consider this, you will see the reason of the princely titles which I shall shew the fathers give them and their power. The council of Laodicea* calls their power ἐκκλησιυ- ἀστικὴν ἀρχήν. And by the fifty-fourth Apostolical canon’, a clergyman who unjustly calumniates a bishop is to be deposed, because it is written, “Thou shalt not speak evil of the Archon’, the ruler of thy people.” So Origen, whom I cited before, calls them* βουλευτών" καὶ ἀρχόν- των" ἐκκλησίας θεοῦ, “senators and princes of the Church of God.” And in another place‘, “ We,” saith he, “ know- ing that there is another frame of government in every city, ordained by the word of God, exhort those who are fitted by sound doctrine and holy lives, ἐπὶ τὸ ἄρχειν ἐκ-
V See this most learnedly set forth by Isaac Casaubon, de Libertate Ec- clesiastica, in the late edition of his epistles by Almeloveen, pp. 206, &c. {The part of Casaubon’s treatise here referred to is chap. ili. sect. 4, of which the heading is; A sententiis synoda- libus appellabatur illis temporibus ad majorem svnodum vel ad principem. In this he first shews that each bishop shared in the government of the whole Church. See the translation of the treatise in the Appendix, No. 6.]
* [περὶ τοῦ τοὺς ἐπισκόπους κρίσει τῶν μητροπολιτῶν, καὶ τῶν πέριξ ἐπι- σκόπων καθίστασθαι εἰς τὴν ἐκκλησιασ- τικὴν ἀρχὴν, kK. τ. AA—Concil. Laodicen. (cire. A.D. 364?) Canon xii. Concil., tom. i. col. 1533, A.]
Υ [εἴ τις κληρικὸς ὑβρίζει τὸν ἐπί- σκοπον, καθαιρείσθω" ἄρχοντα γὰρ τοῦ λαοῦ σου οὐκ ἐρεῖς κακῶς. --- Canon. Apost. liv. (lv. Bevereg. Pandect., p. 37.) ibid., col. 37, A. In the third edition the reference in the text, appa- rently by mistake, was to the 47th Apostolical canon. }
Z Principem populi tui non male- dices.
ἃ [ἵνα karavonons, ὅτι καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν σφόδρα ἀποτυγχανομένων βουλευτῶν καὶ ἀρχόντων ἐκκλησίας θεοῦ. --- Origen. cont, Celsum, lib. iii. ce. 30. Op., tom. i. p..466, F. ]
>’ The Areopagites are called βού- Aevrat by Lucian, [Anacharsis, c. 19. Op., tom. iii. p. 144. Lips. 1839 ;] and in profane writers βουλευτικὸς always relates to the courts of legislation, or supreme judicature.
© ἄρχων, from ἄρχω, ‘I am chief,’ in profane authors signifies the chief com- mander in any society, as in that of Aristotle, οἷον στρατιᾶς ἄρχοντι, ἢ πό- Aews, ἢ otxov.—| De Mundo, c. 6. ὃ 8. ] See Budzi Commentar., pp. 130, 152. [ἄρχειν est presse et imperium ha- bere, &c.—p. 130. The other passage (p. 152) is respecting the Athenian Archons, |
4 [ἡμεῖς δὲ ἐν ἑκάστῃ πόλει ἄλλο σύστημα πατρίδος, κτισθὲν λόγῳ θεοῦ, ἐπιστάμενοι, τοὺς δυνατοὺς λόγῳ καὶ βίῳ ὑγιεῖ χρωμένους ἄρχειν ἐπὶ τὸ ἄρ-
CHAP. I.
SECT. H,
DIGNITY OF EPISCOPAL ORDER.
284 Terms expressive of ruling used of Bishops, by
κλησιῶν, to govern, to reign over, or, be rulers of the Churches.” For the same word is used Mark x. 42, to signify the princes of the Gentiles, of δοκοῦντες ἄρχειν TOV ἐθνῶν “they who are accounted to rule over the Gentiles.” And what is more observable, it is used to signify the power and greatness of our Lord Himself, Rom. xv. 12; “There shall be a root of Jesse, and in Him who shall rise, ἄρχειν ἐθνῶν, to reign over the Gentiles, shall the Gentiles trust.” Then he proceeds, “and our good princes, or magistrates, οἱ καλῶς ἄρχοντες ἡμῶν, are forced to take upon them the care of the Churches, by the command of the great King, whom we believe to be the Son of God.” So Church power and authority is called by Gregory Nazianz., Hpist. xlvi. p. 807°, ἀναίμακτος ἀρχὴ; “an unbloody dignity, or power,” because it hath not the power of the sword; τοῦτο yap ὁ ἄρχων εἷναι μοι φαίνεται; βοηθὸς ἀρετῆς καὶ ἀνταγωνιστὴς κακίας" κἄν τὴν ἀναίμακτον ἄρχη ἀρχὴν, καθάπερ ἡμεῖς, κἄν τὴν μετὰ ξίφους. καὶ τελαμῶνος : “ For an Archon, or magis- trate, seems to me to be nothing else than an encourager of virtue and an enemy of vice, whether he have an unbloody power and jurisdiction, as we (bishops) have, or the power of the sword and chains.” So in his first apologetical oration, speaking of refusing a bishopric‘, saith hes’, ὡς εἴ ye πάν- Tes φεύγοιεν ταύτην, τὴν εἴτε λειτουργίαν χρὴ λέγειν, εἴτε ἡγεμονίαν" which Billius renders thus, Si omnes hoc, sive ministerium dicere oportet sive imperium, defugiant. And then describing the anarchy and confusion of the Church without a bishop, saith he, οὐκ ὄντος βασιλέως, οὐδὲ ὄντος ἄρχον- Tos', οὐδὲ ἱερατείας, οὐδὲ θυσίας. sic nec rex, nec archon esset, nec sacerdotium, nec sacrificium. And then, speaking
xew ἐκκλησιῶν παρακαλοῦμεν... καὶ οἱ καλῶς ἄρχοντες ἡμῶν βιασθέντες ὑπάρχουσι, τοῦ μεγάλου βασιλέως ἀναγ- κάζοντος" ὃν πεπείσμεθα εἶναι υἱὸν θεοῦ, λόγον @eov.—Orig., ibid., lib. vii. ο. 75. Op., tom. i. p. 798, B, C.]
¢ [S. Greg. Naz., Epist. eexxiv. p. 187, B. ed. Paris. 1840. Hickes’ refe- rence is to the Paris edition of 1630. ]
f [The oration was an apology for avoiding the office of a priest. See above, vol. i. p. 90, note z. |
® (Id., Orat. ii. § 4. Op., tom. i. p. 13, A. ed. Ben.; for the Latin see his
Orationes, Jacobo Billio Interprete, tom. 1. p. ὃ, A. ed. Par. 1630. ]
4 (Id. ibid., B. ed. Ben.; Lat. ibid., B. ed. Par. 1630. ]
i Haberti Pontificale, p. 586. [Ex- archi nomen primariam quandam cum imperio et dignitatem et principatum significat. Lexicon vetus Steph. ἔξαρ- χοι, principes, proceres, &c.—Observat. 1, ad edicta patriarchee que ad archi- mandritas exarchos et prafectos mo- nachorum spectant. Pars altera. De Exarchis. ]
St. Greg. Naz., the Apost. Const., and St. Chrysost. 285
against promoting unqualified persons to the episcopal office, “Tt would be strange, (saith he*,) ἐπὶ τὸ ἄρχειν ἀναβαίνειν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἄρχεσθαι, e subditorum classe, ac ordine ad imperium evehere.”’ You see then, Sir, by what princely names the rulers of the Church were then called. So St. Ignatius is introduced speaking in that pretended epistle of his to the Antiochians!. “O ye presbyters, feed the flock among you, ἕως ἀναδειξῇ ὁ θεὸς τὸν μέλλοντα ἄρχειν ὑμῶν, until God shall shew whom He will have to rule over you.” In the Apostolical Constitution™ for electing bishops we find these words: ὁ δὲ πρόκριτος τῶν λοιπῶν ἐρωτάτω πρεσβυτέριον καὶ λαὸν; εἰ αὐτός ἐστιν; ὃν αἰτοῦνται εἰς ἄρχοντα' καὶ ἐπι- νευσάντων, προσεπερωτάτω εἰ μαρτυρεῖται ὑπὸ πάντων ἄξιος εἶναι τῆς μεγάλης ταύτης καὶ λαμπρᾶς ἡγεμονίας: “The chief of the rest (that is, of the bishops presiding in the election) shall ask the priests and the people if that be the person whom they desire to have for their ruler (or prince); and they signifying their consent, he shall ask them again if they all testify that he is worthy of this great and glorious principality.” And so St. Chrysostom, in his fifteenth homily on the second Epistle to the Corinthians, calls it ἀρχὴν πνευματικὴν ", a “spiritual principality,” of which he speaks in this manner®: “If the civil empire or government is an art or science better than all others, how much more is this of ours? which truly is so much more excellent than that as that is more excellent than others, yea, and much more excellent®..... For there are two sorts? of empire or government; one relating to civil life, by which men govern people and cities, of which St. Paul speaks, when he said, ‘Let every soul be subject to the
k [ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ ξένον τι καὶ ἀπὸ τρόπου τοῖς πολλοῖς τὰ θεῖα φιλοσοφοῦσιν, ἐπὶ τὸ ἄρχειν, K.T.A. Hickes has over- looked the negative particle—S. Greg. ibid.,C.ed. Ben. ; ibid.,C. ed. Par. 1630. |
1 [οἱ πρεσβύτεροι, ποιμήνατε τὸ ἐν ὑμῖν ποίμνιον, ἔως ἀναδείξῃ ὃ θεὸς τὸν μέλλοντα ἄρχειν ὑμῶν.---8. Ignat. ad- script. Epist. ad Antioch., c. 8. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 106. ]
™ Constit. Apost., lib. viii. cap. 4. [Concilia, tom. i. col. 460, E.]
® [ἀλλ᾽ οὔτε ὁ Thy πολιτικὴν ἀρχὴν μετιὼν, οὔτε ὃ τὴν πνευματικὴν, K.T.A.
. καὶ πάλιν κἀνταῦθα ἀμείνων τῆς
πολιτικῆς ἡ πνευματικὴ, ὥσπερ 6 λόγος ἀπέδειξεν. S. Chrysost, ad 2 Cor. Hom. xv. § 4. Op., tom. x. p. 548, C, D. These clauses are a part of the passage quoted below note p, following the words πλάττοντες τούς avOparous. |
ο [εἰ yap ἣ τῶν ἔξωθεν ἀρχὴ, τέχνη καὶ ἐπιστήμη πασῶν βελτίων ἐστὶ, πολ- AG μᾶλλον αὕτη καὶ γὰρ τοσούτῳ ἀμείνων ἐκείνης αὕτη ἢ ἀρχὴ, ὅσῳ τῶν ἄλλων ἐκείνη" μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ πολλῷ mdéov.—Ibid., § 3. p. 546, E. |
P [ἔστι γὰρ ἀρχῆς εἴδη" ἕν μὲν καθ᾽ ὃ δήμων καὶ πόλεων ἄρχουσιν ἄνθρωποι, τὸν πολιτικὸν τοῦτον διορθοῦντες βίον.
CHAP. I. SECT. II.
286 St. Chrysostom on the contrast between
pienity or higher powers’... . . and another more sublime than that, I
EPISCOPAL ORDER,
mean that of the Church, of which St. Paul speaks, saying, ‘Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit your- selves, because they watch for your souls, as those that must give an account.’ This government is as much more excel- lent than the civil as heaven is than the earth; yea, and much more, for it takes care chiefly that crimes may not be committed, rather than punish them when they are com- mitted; and when they are committed, it doth not destroy the criminal, but takes care that his crimes be taken away. And it hath little regard to the things of this life, but all its concerns are for heavenly things. ‘ For our conversation is in heaven,’ and ‘our life is there hid with Christ, in God’ Moreover, there are the rewards for our labours, and here we run for the crowns that are there; for this life is not extinguished by death, but then shines with greater lustre. Wherefore those to whom this empire is entrusted have a greater honour committed to them, not only than the gover- nors of provinces, but [than] those who are encircled with the imperial diadem, as being ordained to form and fit men for greater and more excellent things... Farthermore, those who are governors in this life are as much inferior to them who have the ecclesiastical government, as it is more excellent to have the authority over the willing more than the unwilling ; for the former is a natural empire, but the latter is full of fear and force; this is the effect of compulsion, but that
of election and free-will. Again, that empire is more excel-
ὅπερ ὁ Παῦλος δηλῶν ἔλεγε" πᾶσα ψυχὴ vols πραγμάτων χρηματίζει: ἡμῶν γὰρ
ἐξουσίαις ὑπερεχούσαις ὑποτασσέσθω... ἐνταῦθα δέ ἐστι καὶ ἑτέρα ἀρχὴ τῆς πο- λιτικῆς ἀρχῆς ἀνωτέρα. τίς οὖν ἐστιν αὕτη, ἣ ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ" hs καὶ αὐτῆς ὃ Παῦλος μεμνήται λέγων, πείθεσθε τοῖς ἡγουμένοις ὑμῶν, καὶ ὑπείκετε" ὅτι αὐτοὶ ἀγρυπνοῦσιν ὑπὲρ τῶν ψυχῶν ὑμῶν, ὡς λόγον ἀποδώσοντες. αὕτη γὰρ ἡ ἀρχὴ τοσοῦτον τῆς πολιτικῆς ἀμείνων, ὅσον Tis yns 6 οὐρανός" μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ πολλῷ πλέον. πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ οὐχ ὕπως γενό- μενα κολάσειεν ἁμαρτήματα σκοπεῖ προ- ηγουμένως, ἀλλ᾽ Baws μὴ γένοιτο τὴν ἀρχήν: ἐπεῖτα γενόμενα, οὐκ ὕπως ἀπενέγκοι τὸν κάμνοντα, ἀλλ᾽ ὅπως ἀφανισθείη. καὶ βιωτικῶν μὲν οὐ πολὺς αὐτῇ λόγος" πάντα δὲ ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐν οὐρα-
τὸ πολίτευμα ἐν οὐρανοῖς ὑπάρχει, καὶ ἣ ζωὴ ἡμῶν ἐκεῖ. κέκρυπται γάρ, φησι, σὺν τῷ Χριστῷ ἐν τῷ θεῷ. καὶ τὰ ἔπαθλα ἐκεῖ, καὶ οἱ δρόμοι περὶ τῶν ἐκεῖ στεφάνων. οὐδὲ γὰρ καταλύεται μετὰ τὴν τελευτὴν αὕτη ἢ ζωὴ, ἀλλὰ τότε διαλάμπει μειζόνως" διὰ δὴ τοῦτο, οὐκ ὑπάρχων μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτῶν τῶν τὰ διαδήματα περικειμένων μείζονά εἰσιν ἐγκεχειρισμένοι τιμὴν οἱ ταύτην ἔχοντες τὴν ἀρχὴν, ἅτε ἐν μείζοσι καὶ ἐπὶ μεί- foot πλάττοντες τοὺς ἀνθρώπους... οἱ δὲ τοῦ βίου τοῦ παρόντος ἄρχοντες, το- σοῦτον αὐτῆς ἐλάττους πάλιν, ὅσον τὸ ἑκόντος τοῦ ἄκοντος κρατεῖν, βέλτιον. αὕτη γάρ ἐστι καὶ ἣ φύσει ἀρχή. ἐκει μὲν γὰρ τὸ πᾶν τῷ φόβῳ γίνεται καὶ τῇ
civil and ecclesiastical government. 287
lent than this, because it is not only an empire but a pater- nity, as having all the gentleness and sweetness of a pater- nal government, commanding greater things than the civil government, and at the same time persuades. For the civil magistrate saith, if thou committest adultery thou shalt die ; but the ecclesiastical threatens the greatest punishment that can be to him who looks on a woman with a wanton eye. This then is a venerable tribunal, which arraigns the body and reacheth the soul; and therefore there is as much dif- ference between this empire and the other as between the body and the sou]. Moreover, he that is a judge in the one can only sit in judgment upon open crimes; and not of all open crimes neither, but only of such as are proved. But on the contrary, our court informs all who appear in it that He who sits judge with us will lay open all things, and mani- fest them upon the stage of the whole world, and that it will be impossible for any man to hide himself from Him.” And in his homily on Acts xv. he commends St. James, bishop of Jerusalem, that he let Peter and Paul speak before him in the council’, “seeing he was placed in the supreme power, (τὴν ἀρχὴν eyKexerpicpévos). For it becomes those who were in great power or principality (ἐν μεγάλῃ δυναστείᾳ), to be more humble and gentle,” &c. So then the Church hath an empire and is a principality, as well as the state, of which the bishops are Archons or princes under Christ Jesus, as the Apostles were. So Isidorus Pelusiota, in the case of
ἀνάγκῃ" ἐνταῦθα δὲ τῆς προαιρέσεως καὶ τῆς γνώμης ἐστὶ κατόρθωμα. καὶ οὐ ταύτῃ μόνον αὕτη βελτίων ἐκείνης GAN ὅτι οὐκ ἀρχὴ μόνον ἐστὶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ πα- τρότης, ὡς ἄν τις εἴποι. καὶ γὰρ πατρὸς ἔχει τὸ ἥμερον, καὶ μείζονα. ἐπιτάττουσα πείθει. ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἔξωθεν ἄρχων φησὶν, ἐὰν μοιχεύσῃς, ἀπέθανες" οὗτος δὲ κἂν ἀκολάστοις ὀφθαλμοῖς ἴδῃς, τὰ μέγιστα ἀπειλεῖ. καὶ γὰρ σεμνὸν τοῦτο δικαστή- ριον, καὶ ψυχῆς, οὐχὶ σώματος μόνον διορθωτικόν. ὅσον οὖν ψυχῆς καὶ σώ- ματος τὸ μέσον, τοσοῦτον πάλιν αὕτη διέστηκεν ἐκείνης ἡ ἀρχή. κακεῖνος μὲν τὸν φανερῶν κάθηται κριτὴς, μᾶλλον δὲ οὐδὲ τούτων ἁπάντων, ἀλλὰ τῶν ἐλεγ- χομένων. πολλάκις δὲ καὶ τούτων προ- δότης γίνεται τὸ δὲ κριτήριον τοῦτο παι- δεύει τοὺς εἰσιόντας, ὅτι 6 παρ᾽ ἡμῖν δι- κάζων, πάντα γυμνὰ καὶ τετραχηλισμένα
εἰς μέσον ἄξει ἐπὶ τοῦ κοινοῦ τῆς οἰκου- μένης θεάτρου, καὶ λαθεῖν ἀμήχανον. ---- Ibid., pp. 547, E.; 548, A—550, Α.]
4 [μετὰ Πέτρον Παῦλος φθέγγεται, καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐπιστομίζει" Ἰάκωβος ἀνέχε- ται καὶ οὐκ ἀποπηδᾷ. ἐκεῖνος γὰρ ἣν τὴν ἀρχὴν ἐγκεχειρισμένος ... ἐξ ἀρχῆς σφοδρότερον μὲν ὃ Πέτρος διελέγετο" οὗτος δὲ ἡμερώτερον. οὕτως del χρὴ τὸν ἐν μεγάλῃ δυναστείᾳ ποιεῖν: τὰ μὲν φορτικὰ ἑτέροις παραχωρεῖν, αὐτὸν δὲ ἀπὸ ἡμερωτέρων διαλέγεσθαι.----ὸ. Chrys. in Act. Apost., Hom. xxxili. ὃ 2. Op., tom. viii. p. 255, A, B.]
τ A word often used in his book de Sacerdotio. [e.g. οὐ τοῦ ἔργου, τῆς δὲ αὐθεντίας καὶ δυναστείας ἐπιθυμεῖν.--- S. Chrys. de Sac., lib. iii 6.. 10. Op., tom. i. p. 388, B. ἑερατικῆς δυναστείας
mérpov.—Ibid., ο. 17. p. 400, A.]
CHAP. 1.
SECT. Il.
288 The Church in a special sense the kingdom of Christ.
pienity or Zosimus, Maro, and Eustathius: “There is this difference ee Εν (saith he*) betwixt ἀρχὰς κοσμικὰς and ἀρχὰς tvevpartixas*, the ecclesiastical ministers or magistrates, and ministers or magistrates of state; if these offend, the whole world can distinguish betwixt their persons and their functions; no disparagement falleth upon any but the offenders. But if ecclesiastical persons become obnoxious, then they confound their persons and their functions, and transfer the shame of the faults of some even upon all, yea upon the whole order itself.” We who live in these latter times, wherein Church authority and the spiritual power of Church governors is so little understood, and so much despised and depressed, must not wonder that the ancient writers styled the Church a spiritual principality, and the bishops the spiritual princes thereof. For they taught that the Church, as the Scriptures represent it, was the kingdom or empire of Jesus Christ, whose vicegerents they were, to govern it, as I have before observed, jointly as well as severally, in part as well as in whole. Thus St. Clement, in his epistle to the Corinthians, calls Christ τὸ σκῆπτρον τῆς μεγαλωσύνης τοῦ θεοῦ, “the sceptre of God’s majesty,” proposing Him as an example of humility to those who with pride and haughtiness “ exalted themselves over His flock".” And St. Ignatius, in his epistle
to the Ephesians, saith, that “He received a perfect ἀρχὴν» principality or empire from God* ;” which principality is the Church, called in the Scripture phrase by St. Barnabasy His βασιλεία, “ kingdom or empire,” of which He is the supreme head and governor, and the bishops the subordinate gover-
‘ [The passage referred to seems to be, εἰ γὰρ ἐπὶ τῶν κοσμικῶν ἀρχῶν, ἄλλο μέν τοί ἐστι TH πρᾶγμα, ἄλλος δὲ 6 οὐ δεόντως αὐτὸ μετιών" καὶ τῆς ἀρχῆς τὴν οἰκείαν ἐχούσης τάξιν τε καὶ ἀξίαν, 6 παροινῆσας εἰς αὐτὴν, δίκην δίδωσι τὴν ἑσχάτην, δι᾿ ἣν αἰτίαν ἐπὶ τῆς ἱερωσύνης συγχέουτι τὰ πράγματα, καὶ τὰ τῶν οὐ δεόντως αὐτὴν μεταχειριζομένων ἅμαρ- τήματα εἰς αὐτὴν ἀναφέρειν πειρῶνται. παυέσθωσαν οὖν οἱ δι’ Εὐσέβιον (fors. Εὐστάθιον) καὶ Ζώσιμον, Παλλαδίον τε, καὶ Μάρωνα τὴν ἱερωσύνην ἐξευτελίζον- τες, K.T.A.—S. Isidori Pelusiotz Epist., lib. ii. Ep. 52. ad Theodosium Episco- pum, p. 144, C, Ὁ. The words ἀρχαὶ πνευματικαὶ do not occur in the epistle. |
* S. Chrysost. de Sacerdotio, hath
the same distinction. [e. g. lib. iii. e. 5. p- 383, C. quoted below, Sect. iv. ]
ἃ [ταπεινοφρονούντων γάρ ἐστιν ὃ Χριστὸς, οὐκ ἐπαιρομένων ἐπὶ τὸ ποίμ- νιον αὐτοῦ. τὸ σκῆπτρον τῆς μεγαλωσύ- yns τοῦ θεοῦ, ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς, οὐκ ἦλθεν ἐν κόμπῳ ἀλαζονείας, οὔδε ὑπερηφανίας, καίπερ δυνάμενος, K.T.A.—S. Clem. R. Ep. i. ad Cor. c. 16. Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 16.]
x [ἀρχὴν δὲ ἐλάμβανε τὸ παρὰ θεῷ ἀπηρτισμένον.---ὃ. lenat. Ep. ad Ephes. ο. 19, Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 16. |
Y [οὕτω, φησὶν (ὃ Xpiords), of θέλον- τές με ἰδεῖν, καὶ ἅψασθαί μου τῆς βασι- λείας, ὀφείλουσι θλιβέντες καὶ παθόντες λαβεῖν we.—S. Barnab. Ep. c. 1. Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 24. ]
The Bishops rule under Him ; seated on thrones. 289
nors of it under Him, as the worldly emperors and kings are also under God. I suppose that this sceptre or principality did not cease when the imperial sceptre and civil empire submitted to it, and owned the Church as a spiritual society, of which Christ Jesus was the head. And according to this great spiritual authority and dignity of the Church, and its rulers under Christ, Eusebius setting down the successions of these archons, the bishops in the several Churches, accord- ing to the common appellation then in use calls their chairs thrones. So he saith of Simeon, bishop of Jerusalem’, that “he was worthy of his throne;” and of Justus his succes- sor*, that he succeeded him “in the throne of the bishopric of Jerusalem.” And lib. vii. cap. 32°, he calls the see of Jerusalem θρόνον ἀποστολικὸν, “ the apostolic throne.” And lib. vii. cap. 14, he saith’, that “after the death of Mazaban, bishop of Jerusalem, Hymeneus obtained the episcopal throne.” This way of speaking is taken from the words of our Lord, who said unto His Apostles ; you, that ye who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” Among the false accusations of St. Athanasius in the synod of Tyre this was one, that‘ ἐπισκοπικὸν καθεῖλε θρόνον, “he pulled down the bishop’s throne.” And that father speaking of an Arian, who in pulling down the bishop’s throne was killed by it, saith®, καὶ μᾶλλον ὁ θρόνος, «.T.r. “the throne rather destroyed him than he the throne.” St. Gregory Nazianzen, in his valedictory oration, speaks thus’:
Μαζαβάνου, τὸν θρόνον . διεδέξατο.----ΤὈ1ἃ., ο. 35.
παυσσμένου Ὑμέναιος, ..
5 [καὶ δὴ ἀπὸ μιᾶς γνώμης τοὺς πάν- τας Suueava Thy τοῦ Κλωπᾶ, οὗ καὶ ἣ
τοῦ εὐαγγελίου μνημονεύει γραφὴ, τοῦ τῆς αὐτόθι παροικίας θρόνου ἄξιον εἶναι δοκιμάσαι ἀνεψιόν γε, ὡς φασὶ, γεγονότα τοῦ owrT7jpos.—Euseb. Eccl. Hist., lib. iii. ὁ. 1]. tom. i. p. 105. ]
* [ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῦ Συμεῶνος τὸν δηλω- θέντα τελειωθέντος τρόπον, τῆς ἐν Ἵερο- σολύμοις ἐπισκοπῆς τὸν θρόνον ᾿Ιουδαῖός τις ὄνομα ᾿Ιοῦστος, μυρίων ὅσων ἐκ περι- τομῆς εἰς τὸν Χριστὸν τηνικαῦτα πεπι- στευκότων εἷς καὶ αὐτὸς ὧν, διαδέχεται. —Ibid., lib. iii. ο. 35. Ρ- 129.}
bale Ἕρμων. . τὸν εἰσέτι νῦν ἐκεῖσε πεφυλαγμένον dmarroAuchy διαδέχεται O@povov.—Ibid., lib. vii. ο. 32. p. 372.]
© [ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις, ava-
HICKES.
p. 340.]
t! [κατηγόρουν δὲ αὐτοῦ, τοῦ μέρους Ἰωάννου, Καλλίνικος ἐπίσκοπος, καὶ Ἴσ- χυρίων τις, ὕτι μυστικὸν ποτήριον συν- έτριψε, καὶ ἐπισκοπικὸν καθεῖλε θρόνον. —Sozom. Eccl. Hist., see 1. οὐ» 35. Hist. Eccl., tom. ii. p.
® [εἶτα ἀναστὰς Ὁ τὸν eae ἀποσπᾶν, καὶ πρὸς ἑαυτὸν ἕλκειν. : καὶ ὕπερ εἷλκεν, εἰς ἑαυτὸν ἐπεσπάσατο,
. καὶ μᾶλλον ὃ θρόνος ἐκείνου τὸ ζῇν ἀπέσπασεν, ἢ αὐτὸς ἀπεσπάσθη πρὸς éxefvov.—S. Athan. Hist. Arian. ad Monachos, § 57. Op., tom. i. pp. 378, E. ; 379, A.)
{ [οὐ yap καὶ τὸν θεὸν ἀπολοῦσιν οἱ
CHAP. I. SECT. Il.
“ Verily I say unto Matt. 19. 28.
290 The Bishop’s seat called a throne, as a Viceroy’s ;
piswity or “ Farewell, O my chair, for they do not lose God who cede from
EPISCOPAL ~ ORDER.
their thrones, but shall have more sublime and stable chairs above.” St. Chrysostom saith, in Hom. Ixxxvi. on St. John’s gospel’, Christ did invest His Apostles with power, καθάπερ τὶς βασιλεὺς ἄρχοντας ἀποστέλλων, “as a king sends forth his archons,” i.e. princes and governors with power imme- diately from himself. And accordingly as a viceroy sits upon the king’s throne, he saith that the first action of a new bishop is τὸν θρόνον ἀναβαίνειν", “to mount into his throne,” or as we say, to be thronized. And in the beginning of his third homily to the Antiochians, saith he’, ὅταν eis τὸν θρόνον τοῦ- τον, κι τ. λ. “when I look upon this empty throne I both rejoice and weep.” This was said in the absence of the bishop upon a sad occasion, when he was gone to the empe- ror to intercede for mercy in behalf of the people of Antioch. And in the packed synod, ad Quercum, it was one article of accusation against him‘, “ that he robed and unrobed himself in his throne.” So Nilus, archbishop of Thessalonica, tran- scribes these words out of the acts and subscriptions of the sixth general council'; “Peter, presbyter and vicar of the
apostolical throne of the metropolis of Alexandria.”
And
so the five patriarchal sees™ were called καθολικοὶ;, καὶ οἰκου-
τῶν θρόνων παραχωρήσαντες, ἀλλ᾽ ἕξουσι τὴν ἄνω καθέδραν, ἣ πολὺ τούτων ἐστὶν ὑψηλότερά τε καὶ ἀσφαλέστερα.---85. Greg. Naz. Orat. xlii. (al. xxxii.) Su- premum vale coram centum quinqua- ginta episcopis.—Op., tom.i. p. 768, A. The words “ Farewell O my chair”’ are not in the original. |
& [καθάπερ γάρ τις βασιλεὺς ἄρχον- τας ἀποστέλλων, καὶ ἐξουσίαν εἰς δεσμω- τήριον καὶ ἐμβαλεῖν καὶ ἀφίεναι δίδωσιν" οὕτω, kK. T.A.—S. Chrys. Hom. ᾿Ἰχχχνυῖ. (al. Ixxxv.) in S. Joan. (cap. xx. 21— 23.) Op., tom. viii. p. 516, ἢ).
h [ὃ yap φιλάνθρωπος beds... τα- χέως ἡμῖν ἕτερον ποιμένα ἀνέδειξε. ὃς ἐπὶ τὸν θρόνον ἀναβὰς, κ.τ. A.—Id. Orat. de S. Meletio Antioch., ὃ 3. Op., tom. ii. p. 521, C.]
i [ὅταν eis τὸν θρόνον ἀπίδω τοῦτον ἔρημον ὄντα καὶ κενὸν τοῦ διδασκάλου, χαίρω τε ὁμοῦ καὶ daxpiw.—Id. Hom. ad Pop. Antioch. iii. ὃ 1. ibid., p. 85, A.]
kK [εἰκοστὸν ὄγδοον" ὅτι ἐν θρόνῳ ἀπο- δύεται καὶ ἐνδύεται καὶ πάστιλον τρώγει. —Synodus in Quereu, ap. Photii Bib- lioth. Cod. 59. p. 18. Berolini. 1824. The above is part of an enumeration of
the charges against St. Chrysostom. ]
1 [Πέτρος πρεσβύτερος καὶ τοπο- τηρητὴ5 τοῦ ἀποστολικοῦ θρόνου τῆς ᾿Αλεξανδρέων μητροπόλεως (ὑπέγραψα.) Concilii Constantinop. III. (A.D. 680.), Subscriptiones.—Concilia, tom. vii. col. 1064, 1) ; quoted by Nilus de primatu pape, ad calcem Salmasii de primatu pape, p. 49. Lugd. Bat. 1645. (See above, vol. i. p. 309, note r.) ]
m Theophan. in Chronographia, et in vita Constantini Copronymi. [τοὺς ἀρ- χιερεῖς τῶν μεγάλων καὶ οἰκουμενικῶν θρόνων, Ῥώμης τε, φημὶ, καὶ Κωνσταν- τινοπόλεως“, ᾿Αλεξανδρείας τε, καὶ ᾽Αντι- οχείας, καὶ ‘LepocoAdvuwy.—S. Theopha- nis Chronographia, Procemium, p. 1. apud Corpus Histor. Byzant. Venet. 1729. οἱ καθ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς τὰ δόξαντα δογ- ματίσαντες μηδενὸς παρόντος τῶν καθο- λικῶν θρόνων, Ῥώμης φημὶ, ᾿Αλεξαν- δρείας, καὶ ᾿Αντιοχείας, καὶ Ἱεροσολύ- pov.—Ibid., p. 285, D. (p. 359. ed. Par.) Theophanes is speaking of the Iconoclast council at Constantinople (A.D. 754) in that portion of the his- tory which treats of the times of Con- stantine Copronymus. |
His diocese a principality. 29]
μενικοὶ θρόνοι, ‘the catholic and cecumenical thrones.” Here I cannot but put you in mind, that hierarchy from the Greek ἱεραρχία signifies “an holy government,” and the word bishopric, which is the word for a diocese in our mother tongue, signifies a bishop’s principality”; a word which Ire- neeus used of the Church of Rome, which being the most powerful of all Churches when he wrote, he speaks thus®; dd hanc enim ecclesiam propter potentiorem principalitatem, &c. ; “Unto this Church, upon the account of its more power- ful principality, every Church must resort.” Every Church then was a principality’, though this then was the greatest. But to return to the ancient writers, who called the bishops’ chairs thrones: they are so called by Epiphanius, Heeres. Ixxviii. 7, who speaking of St. James our Lord’s brother, who
was first bishop of Jerusalem, saith‘;
n (Bishopric; bipeoppice, Saxon; literally, as Mr. Malone also observes, the kingdom of a bishop; the Saxon pice signifying a kingdom. The ap- purtenances of a bishop are all of princely denomination; his diocese is his kingdom; his mansion his palace ; his seat his throne; and he has also his chancellor.’’—Todd’s additions to John- son’s Dictionary, ed. 1818. But pice primarily is ‘‘ ‘regio ;’ ΕΑ] ΡΒ pice,‘ Om- nia ἰδία regio,’ Matt. 111. 5; Iuddeire pice, ‘Judaica regio,’ Mar. i. 5. Item, Regnum, imperium, ditio, jurisdictio.’ Rice, ‘ terminatio plurium substantivo- rum muuus et dominium significan- tium; ut Lyn-pic, ‘regnum;’ Bip- ceop-pic, ‘Episcopatus.’’’—Lye’s Dict. Anglo-Saxon. et Goth. ad verb. Rice. ]
© Lib. iii. cap. 3. Cum Johannis Ernesti Grabe notis in-locum. [Ad hane igitur eeclesiam, propter potio- rem (potentiorem, ed. Oxon. ut omnes editt. et MSS. codices preter unum Clarom.) principalitatem, necesse est omnem conyenire ecclesiam, hoc est, eos qui sunt undique fideles, in qua semper ab his qui sunt undique conser- vata est ea que est ab Apostolis tra- ditio.—S. Iven. adv. Her.,, lib. iii. ο. 3. pp: 175, 176. ed. Ben. Grabe, after stating and examining the more obvious interpretations of these words, says; per conventum omnis ecclesiz, id est, eorum qui sunt undique fidelium, ad ecclesiam Romanam propter poten- tiorem principalitatem, intelligo con- fluxum eorum qui ab omni ecclesia Romam mittebantur, ut causam Chris-
U
Kal πρῶτος οὗτος εἴ-
tianorum agerent apud imperatores, quorum potentior erat principalitas, id est suprema potestas.—Grab. not. in loc. p. 201. ‘This interpretation, how- ever, which understands principalitas of the imperial power, is inconsistent with Hickes’ application of the passage. He might possibly refer to Grabe’s observation, that Irenzeus did not hold it to be absolutely necessary to agree and hold communion with the Church of Rome, because when Pope Victor had excommunicated the Churches of Asia Minor for holding to their pecu- liar tradition as to the observance of Easter, Irenzus reproved him for so doing.—See S. Iren. adv. Her. ed, Grabe, pp. 201, 202.]
Ρ See Archbishop Laud’s Conference with Fisher the Jesuit, p. 110. [ed. 3. 1673. “ΝΟΥ is the word principatus so great, nor were the bishops of those times so little, as that principes and principatus are not commonly given them both by the Greek and the Latin fathers of this great and learnedest age of the Church, made up of the fourth and fifth hundred years: always under- standing principatus of their spiritual power, and within the limits of their respective jurisdictions.” This state- ment is supported in a note by in- stances in part the same as those given above by Hickes.—Laud’s Conference, &e. sect. 25. ὃ 10. p. 139. Oxford, 1839. }
a(S. Epiphanii adv. Heer., lib. 11], tom. 2. Op., tom, i. p. 10389, B.]
2
CHAP. 1.
SECT, II.
292 Bishops are placed on the throne of Christ ;
an na - ψ' Ν pianity or Ande τὴν καθέδραν τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς, ᾧ πεπίστευκε Κύριος τὸν
EPISCOPAL
ORDER.
θρόνον αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς πρώτῳ ; “ He first received the epi- scopal chair, being the person to whom Christ first commu- cated His throne upon earth.” So in the prayer at the con- secration of a bishop in the Greek ordinal, set forth by Habertus": “Ο Lord our God, who because human nature cannot bear the presence of Thy Godhead, in compassion to it hast in Thy dispensation constituted doctors for us to sit upon Thy throne, (τὸν σὸν ἐπέχοντας θρόνον,) and to offer sacri- fice and oblations for all Thy people. Do Thou, O Lord,” ἕο. The chair of every bishop then is the throne of Christ, and therefore are the bishops’ chairs called thrones by the Empe- ror Justinian in the Code and Novels, as when he calls the see of Constantinople “ the throne of Epiphanius’.” Sir, you may see more to this purpose out of Justinian’s Code, in pp. 119, 120 of a most exact book, entitled, Of the subject of Church Power‘, written by the learned Dr. Simon Lowth, and printed in the year 1685, against the Erastians, Latitudinarians, and mongrel Churchmen of this age. And you need not won- der that their chairs are called thrones, since as Ignatius saith‘, “they preside εἰς τόπον Θεοῦ, in the place of God :” according to Acts xx. 28, “Take heed to yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you ἐπι- σκόπους, bishops.” In the Latin version", Attendite vobis et universo gregi, in quo vos Spiritus Sanctus posuit episcopos. So Gregory Nazianzen speaks to the bishops he had con- secrated*; “Come, O most excellent pastor, and with us
τ [Ex ordine qui observari solet in
ordinatione episcopi. Haberti Ponti- ficale, p. 318. The passage is quoted above, p. 141, note col. 2.]
5 [Lowth’s words are; “6 τῆς σῆς μακαρίοτητος θρόνος : so Justinian the emperor calls the see of Constanti- nople, the throne of Epiphanius, then patriarch there. (The passage is an extract from a rescript addressed by Justinian to Epiphanius, Codex Jus- tin., lib. i. tit. 4. 6. 34. § 4. ap. Corpus Jur. Civilis,) and he evidently distin- guishes between ἱερωσύνη and βασιλεία, betwixt the priesthood and the empire ; he assigns them two distinct offices and apart duties, ἣ μὲν τοῖς θεοῖς ὑπηρετου- μένη, ἣ δὲ ἀνθρωπικῶν ἐξάρχουσή τε καὶ émipedouuern.—(Authentic. Col-
lat., lib. i. tit. 6. Novell. 6. Przefat.) He calls the ecclesiastical power τῶν ἱερατικῶν Opdyvwy.—(Ibid., lib. iv. tit. 19. Novell. 42. Preefat.’’) He adds references to lib. vi. tit. 12. Novell. 83. and lib. ix. tit. 14. Novell. 131. cap. 1, which recognise the distinet authority of the ecclesiastical powers. }
t [προκαθημένου τοῦ ἐπισκόπου eis τόπον θεοῦ, καὶ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων εἰς τόπον συνεδρίου τῶν ἀποστόλων, καὶ τῶν διακόνων, τῶν ἐμοὶ γλυκυτάτων, πεπιστευμένων διακονίαν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. —S. Ignat. Epist. ad Magnes., ὁ. 6. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 19. ]
“ [Acts xx. 28. ed. Vulg. ]
X [νῦν δὲ, ὦ ποιμένων ἄριστε καὶ τε- λεώτατε, δεῦρό μοι καὶ τὸν ody ἀπολάμ- βανε λαὺν, σὺν ἡμῖν τε καὶ πρὸ ἡμῶν,
They are called Princes in Prophecy. 293
and before us, receive thy people which the Holy Ghost hath committed to thee.” Hence, Sir, proceeded the ancient subscriptions of the bishops in council, 7 Christi nomine ; and that of St. Basil, Epist. 393, to Amphilochius, bishop of Iconium’: “ Quit thyself like a man, and be strong, and pre- cede before the people which God hath committed to thy trust.” But to return to these spiritual archons or princes who sit on our Lord’s throne, I must add what St. Hie- rome writes in his Commentary upon Isaiah, chap. lx. 17, as the words are in the Greek translation’; “I will give thy archons or princes (τοὺς ἄρχοντάς cov) in peace, and thy bishops in righteousness.” Upon which words saith that father*: In quo Scripture sancte admiranda majestas, quod principes futuros ecclesie episcopos nominavit, quorum omnis visitatio in pace est, et vocabulum dignitatis in justitia: “ In which the admirable majesty of the Scriptures appears in that he called the bishops who were to be in the Church princes, whose visitation is all in peace.” The version of the ancient Greek, and the sense in which St. Jerome ex- plains it, was followed in the primitive times, and so under- stood, as you will see by the following words out of St. Cle- ment’s epistle to the Corinthians, chap. xli.°; ‘The Apo- stles preached the Gospel from the Lord Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ from God. Christ therefore was sent from God, and the Apostles from Christ, and both their missions were in order from the will of God; wherefore having re- ceived the command, and being full of assurance by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and being confirmed by the
dv ἐνεχείρισέ σοι τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον.--- S. Greg. Naz. Orat. xiii. (al. xxx.) ὃ 4. Op., tom. i. p. 254, D.]
Υ [ἀνδρίζου τοίνυν καὶ ἴσχυε καὶ mpo- πορεύου τοῦ λαοῦ, ὃν ἐπίστευσε τῇ δεξιᾷ σου ὃ ὕψιστος.---. Basil. Epist. elxi. (al. ecexcili.) ὃ. 2. Op., tom. iii. p. 252, B.
2 [καὶ δώσω τοὺς ἄρχοντάς σου ἐν εἰρήνῃ, καὶ τοὺς ἐπισκόπους σου ἐν δι- Kaoovvn.—Is. lx. 17. vers. LXX.]
Ἀ {The passage begins; De auro et argento, quod significent in Scripturis sanctis, sepius diximus. Ponam, in- quit, principes tuos in pacem, et episcopos tuos in justitiam. Pro quo in Hebraico scriptum est: Ponam visitationem tuam pacem, et prepositos tuos in justitiam.
In quo Scripture sancte admiranda majestas, quod principes futuros eccle- siz, episcopos nominavit, quorum om- nis Visitatio in pace est, et vocabulum dignitatis in justitia.—S. Hieron. Com- ment. in Isaiam, lib. xvii. cap. lx. 17. Op., tom. iv. p. 728, E, F.]
> [οἱ ἀπόστολοι ἡμῖν εὐαγγελίσθησαν ἀπὸ τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ᾿Ιησοῦς ὁ Χριστὸς ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ. ἐξεπέμφθη ὃ Χριστὸς οὖν ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ οἱ ἀπό- στολοι ἀπὸ τοῦ Χριστοῖ" ἐγένοντο οὖν ἀμφότερα εὐτάκτως ἐκ θελήματος θεοῦ. παραγγελίας οὖν λαβόντες, καὶ πληρο- φορηθέντες διὰ τῆς ἀναστάσεως τοῦ κυ- ρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ πιστω- θέντες τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ θεοῦ, μετὰ πληρο- φορίας τοῦ πνεύματος aytov, ἐξῆλθον
CHAP, I,
SECT. Il,
DIGNITY OF EPISCOPAL ORDER,
294. Bishops are Successors of the Apostles, and in
will of God, and the full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went out to publish the good news of the kingdom of God which was to come. Therefore preaching in all countries and cities, they ordained their first converts bishops and deacons of those who were believers, trying and proving them by the Holy Ghost. And this not without authority, for bishops and deacons were written of many ages before, for the Scripture somewhere saith, ‘I will constitute your bishops in righteousness, and your deacons in faith.’” The Scripture which this father citeth is the Scripture of the Old Testament; for he is the same St. Clement whom St. Paul calls his fellow-labourer, and who, when he wrote this epistle, or shortly after, was bishop of Rome. But there is no place of the Old Testament but this of Isaiah, chap. lx. 17, to which his words can refer; which, as the annotators on this epistle rightly observe‘, he applied to the Church Christian, changing the order of the words, and reading the original word in the Hebrew and that in the Greek version which signifies ‘peace,’ not without reason, ‘faith.’ In the place above cited, you see St. Clement expressly saith that the Apostles ordained or constituted bishops; and so saith Ire- neus, Advers. Her., lib. iii. cap. 34: “The tradition of the Apostles is evident in every Church to those who desire to know the truth; for we can produce those who were or-
εὐαγγελιζόμενοι τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ μέλλειν ἔρχεσθαι. κατὰ χώρας οὖν καὶ πόλεις κηρύσσοντες, καθίστανον
σκοπὴ redditur, sed procurationem et officium omne significat, hie efferri per διακόνους, et piby quod per εἰρήνην
τὰς ἀπαρχὰς αὐτῶν, δοκιμάσαντες τῷ πνεύματι, εἰς ἐπισκόπους καὶ διακόνους τῶν μελλόντων πιστεύειν. καὶ τοῦτο οὐ καινῶς᾽ ἐκ γὰρ δὴ πολλῶν χρόνων ἐγέ- Ὑραπτο περὶ ἐπισκόπων καὶ διακόνων" οὕτως γάρ που λέγει ἣ γραφή" κατα- στήσω τοὺς ἐπισκόπους αὐτῶν ἐν δικαι- οσύνῃ, καὶ τοὺς διακόνους αὐτῶν ἐν πί- oret.—S.Clem. R. Ep, i. ad Cor. ο. 42. Fatr. Apost., tom. i. p. 171.]
¢ [See Bishop Fell’s note, in loc. ap. Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 178. In Hebr. APTS PwWID Drew qNIp|a "ΓΟ", quod LXX Intt. vertunt, δώσω τοὺς ἄρχοντάς σου ἐν εἰρήνῃ, καὶ τοὺς ἐπι- σκόπους σου ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ. Fell then observes that the two portions of the verse are transposed by St. Clement, and that PH quod alibi spe ém-
explicari solet, sed bona quecunque denotat, hic πίστιν, nec id quidem in- commode, verti ... hee autem satis opportune a S. Clemente referri ad ecclesiz Christianz preefectos, non fa- cile diffitebitur quisquis locum Isaize inspexerit, atque totum hoc caput ad Messize tempora pertinere, Judzis ipsis caleulum apponentibus, meminerit. ]
“ [Traditionem itaque Apostolorum in toto mundo manifestatam, in omni ecclesia adest resp.cere omnibus qui vera velint videre; et habemus annu- merare eos qui ab Apostolis instituti sunt episcopi in ecclesiis, et succes- sores eorum usque ad nos, qui nihil tale docuerunt, neque cognoyverunt, quale ab his deliratur.—S. Tren. ad- versus, lib. iii. c. 3. p. 175. ]
the place of Christ ; their offices those of Princes, 99
dained bishops by the Apostles, and their successors to our own time, who neither taught nor knew any such thing.” And Tertullian, De Prescript. Hereticor., cap. 32, challenging heretics to appeal to the time of the Apostles, writes thus®: “Let them publish the original of their Churches, and un- fold the succession of their bishops in order from the begin- ning, so that it may appear that the first bishop had one of the Apostles, or apostolic men who lived with the Apostles, for his predecessor. For thus the apostolic Churches re- port, as that of Smyrna affirms Polycarp to be placed there by St. John, and that of Rome reports Clement to have been ordained by St. Peter. In like manner other Churches shew them, whom being made bishops by the Apostles, they had [as] propagators of the apostolic doctrine. And let the heretics shew the like.” And can you, Sir, when you consider that bishops are appointed to succeed the Apostles, and like them to stand in Christ’s place, and exercise His kingly, priestly, and prophetical office over their flocks, can you, when you consider this, think it novel, or improper, or uncouth, to call them spiritual princes, and their dioceses principalities, when they have every thing in their office that can denominate a chief or prince? For what is a prince but the principal or chief ruler of a society, that hath authority over the rest to make laws for it, to challenge the obedience of all the mem- bers and all ranks of men in it, and power to coerce them if they will not obey? And now, Sir, I pray you attend to what follows, and then tell me if the office of bishops con- tains not every thing that is in the definition of a chief or prince. St. Ignatius, who was St. John’s disciple, writes of them as such. So in his epistle to the people of Smyrna‘; “ All of you follow the bishop, (τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ἀκολουθεῖτεβ,)
© [Ceterum, si que audent inter- serere se xtati Apostolic, ut ideo videantur ab Apostolis tradita, quia sub Apostolis fuerunt, possumus dicere: Edant ergo origines ecclesiarum sua- rum: evolvant ordinem episcoporum suorum, ita per successiones ab initio decurrentem, ut primus ille episcopus aliquem ex Apostolis, vel Apostolicis viris, qui tamen cum Apostolis perse- veraverit, habuerit auctorem et ante- cessorem. Hoe enim modo ecclesiz Apostolic census suos deferunt; sicut
Smymeorum ecclesia Polycarpum ab Joanne conlocatum refert: sicut Ro- manorum, Clementem a Petro ordi- natum itidem. Perinde utique et cz- terze exhibent quos ab Apostolis in episcopatum constitutos Apostolici se- minis traduces habeant.— Tert. de Prescript. Hereticor., c. 32. Op., p. 213, B.]
f [πάντες τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ἀκολουθεῖτε, ὡς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς τῷ πατρί: καὶ τῷ πρεσβυτερίῳ, ὡς τοῖς ἀποστόλοις" τοὺς δὲ διακόνους ἐντρέπεσθε, ὡς θεοῦ ἐντο-
CHAP, I.
SECT. 11.
296 The authority of a Bishop that of a
ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or as Christ followed the Father, and the presbyters as the Apo-
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
stles, and reverence the deacons as the ordinance of God.” This regards the subjection and obedience of the laity to the bishop and presbyters, but what follows concerns the subjection of the clergy to the bishop; “Let no man do any thing in Church matters without the bishop, and let that be a valid Eucharist that is administered by the bishop, or by one licensed by him. For where the bishop is there let the Church be, as where Christ is there is the Catholic Church. Without the bishop (i. e. without the bishop’s license) it is neither lawful to baptize nor celebrate the love feast", but that which he approves that is pleasing . to God, that whatsoever is done may be secure and firm. ..... Again, it is good to have regard: to God and the bishop, and who honours the bishop (ὁ τιμῶν ἐπίσκοπον) * shall be honoured of God; but he that doth things clandes- tinely without the bishop doth service to the devil.” In the interpolated epistle of this martyr his precepts are para- phrased out of the Apostolical Constitutions in these words, according to the doctrine of the Catholic Church!: “ Honour God as the Creator and Lord of all things, and the bishop as the high-priest representing God; representing God as a prince, and Christ as a priest. After (or next to) God you are to honour the king, (βασιλέα, emperor.) For there is nothing
Anv' μηδεὶς χωρὶς τοῦ ἐπισκόπου τὶ πρασσέτω τῶν ἀνηκόντων εἰς τὴν ἐκκλη- clay: ἐκείνη βεβαία εὐχαριστία ἡγείσθω, ἢ ὑπὸ τὸν ἐπίσκοπον οὖσα, ἢ ᾧ ἄν αὐτὸς ἐπιτρέψῃ" ὅπου ἄν φανῇ ὁ ἐπίσκοπος, ἐκεῖ τὸ πλῆθος ἔστω" ὥσπερ ὕπου ἄν ἢ Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς. ἐκεῖ ἢ καθολικὴ ἐκκλη- σία" οὐκ ἐξόν ἐστιν χωρὶς τοῦ ἐπισκόπου, οὔτε βαπτίζειν, οὔτε ἀγάπην ποιεῖν" GAN ὅ ἄν ἐκεῖνος δοκιμάσῃ, τοῦτο καὶ τῷ θεῷ εὐάρεστον" ἵνα ἀσφαλὲς ἢ καὶ βέβαιον πᾶν ὅ πράσσεται... καλῶς ἔχει, θεὸν καὶ ἐπίσκοπον εἰδέναι: ὁ τιμῶν ἐπίσκοπον, ὑπὸ θεοῦ τετίμηται" ὁ λάθρα ἐπισκόπου τι πράσσων, τῷ διαβόλῳ λα- τρέυει.----. Ignat. Epist. ad Smyrn., ¢. 8, 9. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. pp. 36, 37. |
& Here it is to be observed that St. Ignatius, as the other Apostolic fathers, useth the words of the New Testament in the sense of the New Testament; so he here uses the word ἀκολουθεῦτε, Which denotes the highest fidelity and obedi- ence; asinJohn x. 27; xxi.22; Mark Vill. 34; x. 21; Luke ix, 23; xviii, 22;
John xii. 26; Luke xviii. 28; Rev. xiv. 4.
h 1. 6. the holy Eucharist, which was then administered at the conclusion of the love feasts, 1 Cor. xi. [20, sqq. ]
i θεὸν καὶ ἐπίσκοπον εἰδέναι: where εἰδέναι signifies to ‘acknowledge, value, esteem, and regard,’ as in 1 Thess. v. 12, “ We beseech you, brethren, εἰδέναι, to know them who labour among you, and are over you in the Lord.’’ See 1 Cor. ii. 2.
k ὃ τιμῶν ἐπίσκοπον : to ‘honour’ in the Scripture signifies all submission and obedience of an inferior to a supe- rior, as of a child to a father, Matt. xv. 4, 8; John viii. 49; a subject to his prince, 1 Pet. ii. 17, ‘Fear God; honour the king.”
1 [τίμα μὲν τὸν θεὸν, ὡς αἴτιον τῶν dAwy καὶ κύριον" ἐπίσκοπον δὲ, ὡς ἂρ- χιερέα, θεοῦ εἰκόνα φοροῦντα" κατὰ μὲν τὸ ἄρχειν, θεοῦ, κατὰ δὲ τὸ ἱερατεύειν, Χριστοῦ. καὶ μετὰ τοῦτον, τιμᾶν χρὴ καὶ βασιλέα. οὔτε γὰρ θεοῦ τις κρείτ-
Spiritual Prince ; as described by St. Ignatius. — 297
more excellent than God, or like unto Him in the whole creation; nor is there aay thing greater in the Church than a bishop, who is consecrated to God for the salvation of the world ; neither among princes (ἐν ἄρχουσιν) or magistrates, is any like to an emperor (or king), who administers and governs for the peace and happiness of his subjects. He that honours the bishop shall be honoured of God, in like manner as he that dishonours the bishop shall be punished by God. For if he that riseth up against emperors is justly thought worthy of punishment, as violating the good legal order and consti- tution, of how much more grievous punishment do you think him worthy who dares presume to do any thing without the bishop, breaking the unity and confounding the good order of the Church? For the episcopate™ is the top of all the honours among men, which whosoever doth furiously oppose he dishonours not man but God, and Christ Jesus the first- born, who alone by nature is the High-Priest of the Church to mediate for us with the Father. Let all things, therefore, be done by you in Christ, with orderly subordination. Let the laics be subject to the deacons, the deacons to the pres- byters, the presbyters to the bishop, the bishop to Christ, as Christ is to the Father.” So in the interpolated epistle to the Trallesians, his precept of the people’s obedience to the bishop, and presbyters, and deacons is also paraphrased out of the Apostolical Constitutions in these words": “ For what else is the bishop but one that hath all power and authority
τῶν, ἤ παραπλήσιος ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς οὖσιν" οὔτε δὲ ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ ἐπισκόπου τι μεῖζον, ἱερωμένου θεᾷ ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου παντὸς owrnpias’ οὔτε βασιλέως τις παραπλήσιος ἐν ἄρχουσιν, εἰρήνην καὶ εὐνομίαν τοῖς ἀρχομένοις πρυτανεύοντοϑ᾽ 6 τιμῶν ἐπίσκοπον, ὑπὸ θεοῦ τιμηθήσε- ται ὥσπερ οὖν ὃ ἀτιμάζων αὐτὸν, ὑπὸ θεοῦ κολασθήσεται. εἰ γὰρ ὃ βασιλεῦσιν ἐπεγειρόμενος, κολάσεως ἄξιος δικαίως γενήσεται, ὥς γε παραλύων τὴν κοινὴν εὐνομίαν" πόσῳ δοκεῖτε χείρονος ἀξιω- θήσεται τιμωρίας, ὃ ἄνευ ἐπισκόπου τι ποιεῖν προαιρούμενος, καὶ τὴν ὁμόνοιαν διασπῶν, καὶ τὴν εὐταξίαν συγχέων; ἱερωσύνη γάρ ἐστι, τὸ πάντων ἀγαθῶν ἐν ἀνθρώποις ἀναβεβηκός" fs 6 κατα- μανεὶς, οὐκ ἄνθρωπον ἀτιμάζει, ἀλλὰ θεὸν, καὶ Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν, τὸν πρωτό- τόκον, καὶ μόνον τῇ φύσει τοῦ πατρὸς
ἀρχιερέα. πάντα οὖν ὑμῖν μετ᾽ εὐταξίας ἐπιτελείσθω ἐν Χριστῷ. οἱ λαϊκοὶ, τοῖς διακόνοις ὑποτασσέσθωσαν. οἱ διάκονοι, τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις οἱ πρεσβύτεροι, τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ" ὃ ἐπίσκοπος, τῷ Χριστῷ, ws αὐτὸς τῷ πατρί. --- ὃ. Ignat. Interp. Epist. ad Smyrn., c. 9. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 87. See Const. Apost., lib. vi. ec. 2. Concilia, tom. i. col. 372, Εἰ. quoted below, p. 308, note c; and Ussher’s Dissertationes de Ignatii M. Epistolis, c. 10; ad calc. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. pp. 222, 223. ]
™ ἱερωσύνη, generally used κατ᾽ ἐξο- χὴν for the episcopal dignity, as sacer- dos in Latin for a bishop. [See in- stances in Suicer, Thes. Eccl. in voce. ἱερεύς. § 11. tom. i. col. 1441, 1442.)
n [τὶ γάρ ἐστιν ἐπίσκοπος; ἄλλ᾽ ἢ πάσης ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐξουσίας ἐπέκεινα πάν-
CHAP. I.
SECT. IL.
DIGNITY OF EPISCOPAL ORDER.
298 The Bishops and Priests to be regarded as
(πάσης ἀρχῆς, καὶ ἐξουσίας) above all men, as much as a man can have that represents the person of Jesus Christ ? and what is the presbytery but a holy meeting, in which the presbyters are the counsellors and assessors of the bishop ὃ And what are the deacons but representations of the ange- lical office, ministering a holy and unblameable ministry to the bishop, as St. Stephen to James the Blessed, and Timo- thy and Linus to Paul, and Anacletus and Clemens to Peter?” In his epistle to Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna’, saith he, “ Let nothing be done without thy will (or pleasure), nor do thou any thing but what is the will of God:’ and then to the people’; “Take heed4 to the bishop that God may regard you; my soul shall answer for theirs to God, who obey" the bishop, presbyters, and deacons, and let me have my part with them to enjoy God.” In his epistle to the Ephesians’; “ You ought to regard the Bishop Onesimus as the Lord. For we ought to receive every one whom the master of the house sends into his house for the government of it as him that sent him, and therefore we ought to regard the bishop as God. And God resisteth the proud; let it
τῶν κρατῶν, ws οἷόν τε ἄνθρωπον Kpa- τεῖν, μιμητὴν γινόμενον κατὰ δύναμιν Χριστοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ" τὶ δὲ πρεσβυτέριον ; ἀλλ᾽ ἢ σύστημα ἱερὸν, σύμβουλοι καὶ συνεδρευταὶ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου" τὶ δὲ διά- κονοι; ἀλλ᾽ ἢ μιμηταὶ τῶν ἀγγελικῶν δυνάμεων, λειτουργοῦντες αὐτῷ λειτουρ- γίαν καθαρὰν καὶ ἄμωμον, ὡς Στέφανος 6 ἅγιος ᾿Ιακώβῳ τῷ μακαρίῳ, καὶ Τιμό- θεος καὶ Λῖνος Παύλῳ, καὶ ᾿Ανέγκλητος καὶ Κλήμης Πέτρῳ.---ὔ. Ignat. Interp. Epist. ad Trall., ο. 7. Patr. Apost., tom. ii, p. 63. See Const. Apost., lib. ii c. 26. Concilia, tom. i. col. 264, B. see below, p. 306, note s, and Us- sher, ibid. }
ο [μηδὲν ἄνευ γνώμης σου γινέσθω, μηδὲ σὺ ἄνευ θεοῦ γνώμης τι πράσσε.---- S. Ignat. Epist. ad Polyearp.,c.4. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 40.]
P [τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ προσέχετε, ἵνα καὶ ὃ θεὸς ὑμῖν" ἀντίψυχον ἐγὼ τῶν ὕποτασ- σομένων τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ, πρεσβυτέροις, διακόνοις" καὶ μετ᾽ αὐτῶν μοι τὸ μέρος γένοιτο σχεῖν ἐν θεῷ.---Τ01]4., ο. 6. p. 41.]
4 τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ προσέχετε, Where the word προσέχειν signifies to have re- gard, or give heed to an eminent per- son, and of great authority, as in Acts
viii. 6, 10, 11.
τ τῶν ὑποτασσομένων τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ, which is the very word of the Apostle where he commands subjection to the higher powers, Rom. xiii. 1, πᾶσα ψυχὴ ἐξουσίαις ὑπερεχούσαις ὑποτασ- σέσθω, “ Let every soul be subject to the higher powers.’’ He uses the same word ad Magnes. [c. 13. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 21.] ὑποτάγητε τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ. So ad Tralles. [c. 13. ibid., p. 25.] ὑποτασσόμενοι τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ὡς TH ἐν- τολῇ, where ἐντολὴ also signifies the commandment of God, as in Matt. xix. 17; xxii. 38; Mark x.19; Luke xxiii, 56.
s [The passage runs thus; γέγραπ- ται γὰρ' ὑπερηφάνοις ὁ θεὸς ἀντιτάσ- σεται" σπουδάσωμεν οὖν μὴ ἀντιτάσ- σεσθαι τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ, ἵνα ὦμεν θεοῦ ὑπο- τασσόμενοι. καὶ ὅσῳ βλέπει τις σιγῶντα ἐπίσκοπον, πλειόνως αὐτὸν φοβείσθω" πάντα γὰρ ὃν πέμπει ὃ οἰκοδεσπότη5 εἰς ἰδίαν οἰκονομίαν, οὕτως δεῖ ἡμᾶς αὐτὸν δέχεσθαι, ὡς αὐτὸν τὸν πέμψαντα" τὸν οὖν ἐπίσκοπον δῆλον, ὅτι ὡς αὐτὸν τὸν κύριον δεϊ προσβλέπειν. ---- δ. Ignat. Epist. ad Ephes., ὃ 5, 6. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p- 18. Onesimus is mentioned as bi- shop in the following sentence. |
representing God and Christ ; so St. Ignatius. 299
therefore be our care and study not to resistt the bishop, that we may be subject unto God.” To the Magnesians" ; “You ought not to despise the age of your young bishop, but to give him reverence according to the ordinance of God, as I know the presbyters do... .. submitting to him, and not to him (only) but to the Bishop of all, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore for His honour it is our duty to obey without dissimulation, because no man deceives the visible bishop, but he goes about to put fallacies upon the invisible Bishop, who knows all secret things.” Again*; “T exhort you to do all things in Divine unity, the bishop presiding in God’s place, and the presbyters in the place of the apostolic college, and the deacons as those to whom is committed the service of Jesus Christ.” To the Philadel- phians’; “ As many as are of God and Christ they are with the bishop.” To the Trallesians?; “Being subject to the bishop as to Christ Jesus, (τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ὑποτάσσεσθε ws Inaod Χριστῷ) you seem to me not to live after the manner of men, but according to Jesus Christ, who died for us.” In another place, which I translate thus; “In like manner reverence the deacons as the order of Jesus Christ, who is the Son of the Father; and the presbyters as the senate of God and the constitution of the Apostles; for without these there can be
no Church.”
t μὴ ἀντιτάσσεσθαι τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ, ‘‘not to rebel against the bishop.’’ This is the very word the Apostle useth for not resisting the secular potentates, Rom. ΧΕΙ, 2, [ὁ ἀντιτασσόμενος τῇ ἐξουσίᾳ.
ἃ [καὶ ὑμῖν δὲ πρέπει μὴ συγχρᾶσθαι τῇ ἡλικίᾳ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου, ἄλλὰ κατὰ δύναμιν θεοῦ πατρὸς πᾶσαν ἐντροπὴν αὐτῷ ἀπονέμειν, καθὼς ἔγνων καὶ τοὺς ἁγίους πρεσβυτέρους, οὐ προσειληφότας τὴν φαινομένην νεωτερικὴν τάξιν, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς φρονίμους ἐν θεῷ συγχωροῦντας αὐὖ- τῷ" οὐκ αὐτῷ δὲ ἀλλὰ τῷ πατρὶ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τῷ πάντων ἐπισκόπῳ. εἰς τιμὴν οὖν ἐκείνου τοῦ θελήσαντος ἡμᾶς πρέ- πον ἐστὶν ἐπακούειν κατὰ μηδεμίαν ὑπό- κρισιν᾽ ἐπεὶ οὐχ ὅτι τὸν ἐπίσκοπον τοῦ- toy τὸν βλεπόμενον πλανᾷ τις, ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀόρατον παραλογίζεται, τὸ δὲ τοι- οῦὔτον, οὐ πρὸς σάρκα ὃ λόγος, ἀλλὰ πρὸς θεὸν τὸν τὰ κρύφια εἰδότα.--- 8. Ignat. Epist. ad Magnes., ο. 8, Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 18.]
* [παραινῷ ἐν ὁμονοίᾳ θεοῦ σπουδά-
Again?; “It behoves every one of you to re-
Gere πάντα πράσσειν, προκαθημένου Tod ἐπισκόπου εἰς τόπον θεοῦ, K.7.A.—Ibid., ce. θ. p. 19.. The rest of the passage is quoted above, p. 292, note t. |
Υ [ὅσοι yap θεοῦ εἰσὶν καὶ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, οὗτοι μετὰ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου εἰσίν. —lId. Epist. ad Philadelph., c. 8. 1014.» p- 31. ]
2 [ὅτ᾽ ἄν γὰρ τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ὑποτάσ- σεσθε ὡς Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ φαίνεσθέ μοι οὐ κατὰ ἀνθρώπινον ζῶντες, ἀλλὰ κατα Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν, τὸν δι᾽ ἡμᾶς ἀποθανόν- 7a.—Id.Epist.ad Trall.,§ 2.ibid., p. 22.
a [ὁμοίως πάντες ἐντρεπέσθωσαν τοὺς διακόνους ὡς Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν" ὡς Ka. τὸν ἐπίσκοπον, ὄντα υἱὸν τοῦ πατρός" τοὺς δὲ πρεσβυτέρους ὡς συνέδριον θεοῦ, καὶ ὡς σύνδεσμον ἀποστόλων. χωρὶς τούτων ἐκκλησία οὐ Kadetrat.—lbid., ο. 8, p. 22. Hickes read τοὺς διακόνους ὡς ἐντολὴν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. See above p- 265, note m. |
> [πρέπει yap ὑμῖν τοῖς καθ᾽ ἕνα, ἐξαιρέτως καὶ τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις, ava-
CHAP, I.
SECT, IL
900 The authority of Bishops that of Princes ;
ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or fresh the bishop’, to the honour of Jesus Christ and the
EPISCOPAL
ORDER.
Apostles.” Again’; “ Honour the bishop as Christ, accord- ing to the commandment of the Apostles.” Lastly®; “ Fare- well in Christ Jesus, being subject to the bishop as to the commandment of God; likewise to the college of presbyters,” or, as other copies have it, “to the presbyters,” who were governors of the Church under the bishop, as under their prince or chief.
You see, Sir, how this saint and martyr speaks of bishops and their office. ‘They stand in God’s and Christ’s stead over their flocks ; the clergy as well as the people are to be sub- ject to them, as to the vicegerents of our Lord. Nothing was to be done without them in the Church. But all laws and orders in their respective districts had their sanction from
ψύχειν τὸν ἐπίσκοπον, εἰς τιμὴν πατρὸς Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ τῶν ἀποστόλων.--- Ibid., ο. 12. p. 24.]
ἀναψύχειν τὸν ἐπίσκοπον. See 2 Tim. i. 16. [πολλάκις με ἀνέψυξε. But besides these there are many other em- phatical words in St. Ignatius’ epistles which emphatically set forth the duty of the people to the bishop and the clergy, as ἐπιτασσόμενοι τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ,
““commanded by the bishop,” ad Ephes. [ὁ. 2. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 12. ὕπο- Taco dmevorconj. Hefele |—draxovew τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ὡς χάριτι θεοῦ, “to obey the bishop, as the commission of God,” or “according to the commission given him from God,” ibid. [ὑπακούειν ὑμᾶς τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ occurs ad Eph. ath, 20}: 16. ὑποτάσσεται τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ws χάριτι θεοῦ, ad Magn., ο. 2. p. 18.] — ἐπακού- ev, [ad Magn., c. 3. p. 18. quoted above, note z.|—dayamay κατὰ ᾿ἸΙησοῦν Χριστὸν (τὸν ἐπίσκοπον,) ‘to love the bishop in Jesus Christ,’ ad Ephes. [e. 1, p. 12.]---δέχεσθαι: πάντα ὃν πέμπει 6 οἰκοδεσπότης εἰς ἱδίαν οἰκονομίαν οὕ- τως δεῖ ἡμᾶς αὐτὸν δέχεσθαι, ὡς αὐτὸν τὸν πέμψαντα, “ whomsoever the mas- ter of the house sends to be over His household, we ought to receive him in such manner as we would receive Him that sent him,’ [Ibid., c. 6. p. 13. |—ovyxwpeiv: ὡς φρονίμους ἐν θεῷ συγχωροῦντας αὐτῷ, οὐκ αὐτῷ δὲ ἀλ- λὰ τῷ πατρὶ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τῷ πάν- τῶν ἐπισκόπῳ, “submitting to him as those who have wisdom from God, or rather not to him, but to the Fa- ther of Jesus Christ, the Bishop of us all;” ad Magnes. [e. ὃ. p. 18. ]—Inood
Χριστοῦ γνώμη (see Rev. xvii. 17; Phi- lem. 14. γνώμη placitum, decretum, sententia) ms καὶ ἐπίσκοποι of κατὰ τὰ πέρατα ὀρισθέντες ἐν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ γνώμῃ εἰσίν, ‘for even as Jesus Christ is sent by the will of the Father, so the bishops are appointed unto the utmost parts of the earth by the will of Jesus Christ. Wherefore it will become you to concur according to the will of the bishop ;’”’ ad Ephes. [e. 3, 4, p. 12.]
All the words I have here observed to set forth the eminent spiritual power, authority, and dignity of bi- shops, and their office. are in the New Testament, except one [sc. ἐπακούειν, and I desire those to consider the em- phasis of them, and the expressions in which they are used, who object that T have carried the notion of the episco- pal dignity too high, and in too high expressions,
4 [The passage stands thus in the genuine epistle ; ;: φυλάττεσθε οὖν τοῖς τοιούτοις" τοῦτο δὲ ἔσται ὑμῖν μὴ φυσι- ουμένοις, καὶ οὖσιν ἀχωρίστοις θεοῦ, Ἰησοῦ Χριστουῦ, καὶ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου, καὶ τῶν διαταγμάτων τῶν ἀποστόλων.--- Ibid., ο. 7. p.23. But the quotation is evidently from the interpolated epistle, where the passage runs thus: αἰδεῖσθε δὲ καὶ τὸν ἐπίσκοπον ὑμῶν, ὡς Χριστὸν, καθ᾽ ὅ ὑμῖν of μακάριοι διετάξαντο ἀπό- oroAo.—S. Ignat. Interp. Epist. ad Trall., c. 7. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 63. ]
© [ἔῤῥωσθε ev Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, ὕπο- τασσόμενοι τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ὡς τῇ ἐντολῇ, ὁμοίως καὶ τῷ πρεσβυτερίῳ.---Ἰὰ, Epist. ad ΤῪΔ]]., c. 18. ibid., p. 25. ]
in giving laws ; in power of spiritual coercion. 301
them, they presiding in all meetings of the clergy as Christ ciar.1.
did among the Apostles. Several such precepts, orders, and κέν. δε τος directions occur in the epistles of St. Paul to the Churches
of his foundation; in this holy martyr’s epistles; in that of
St. Polycarp to the Philippians; and in that of St. Clement
~ to the Corinthians; all which express that authority with
which St. Paul spoke to the Corinthians in these words: ‘ If 1 Cor. 14.
any man among you think himself to be a prophet or spiri- i
tual, let him acknowledge that the things which I wrote to
you (as your Apostle) are the commandment of the Lord.”
III. And as they had power to make laws and orders, and sect. m1 give directions for the regulation of the Church, and all pos orders of men in it, so had they power to coerce or compel eae their subjects of the clergy and laity, without distinction of means of persons, to obey them, by spiritual censures and punish- ie ments, particularly by excommunication, which in the most ™¢" holy and pure times was ever accounted more dreadful than death itself. This power of spiritual coercion was promised by Christ to the Apostles in those most solemn words ; “Whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in πον heaven, and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be ® loosed in heaven.” This is the power which He promised to give St. Peter, Matt. xvi. 19; “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
Thus our Lord, who instituted the apostolical office, gave authority therewith not only to mstruct, command, and direct, but to punish and compel, yea to extirpate and cut off those who were rebellious and contumacious, and would not submit to their orders, and the censures of the Church.
They were actually invested with this coercive power after
His resurrection, when He said unto them, “ Peace be unto John 20, you; as My Father sent Me, so send I you: whosesoever poe. sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whoseso-
ever sins ye retain, they are retained.”
When He said, “ As My Father sent Me, so send I you,” according to the common import of the words, as well as the received sense of them in the Catholic Church, He was to be understood as if He had said, With the same power and au-
302 Power of Excommunication exercised by the Apostles.
pienity or thority that My Father sent Me into the world to constitute
EPISCOPAL ORDER,
Acts 10. 20, 21.
1 ‘Cor: 5. ὃ. 2 Thess. 3. 14,
i Cor: 5. 3—),
and govern My Church, I send you and your successors ; 1. 6. with all spiritual power and authority directive and coercive, which is necessary to your office and charge, in gathering, fixing, and governing Churches unto the end of the world. This power was exercised in various corrections and punishments by the Apostles, as by St. Peter on Simon Magus, when he said, “Thy money perish with thee..... Thou hast neither part nor Jot in this matter, for thy heart is not right in the sight of God.” By these words he was cut off from the Church, and all spiritual benefits belonging to it, which, as a father observed, was a more dreadful punish- ment than to be burned, or drowned, or pierced through with a temporal sword. It was variously exercised by St. Paul, as where he commanded the faithful “not to keep company with Christian fornicators ;’ and to ‘note those who behaved themselves disorderly, and would not obey his word, and to have no company with them that they might be ashamed.” So in the name of Christ, and his own apo- stolic authority, though absent, he ordered the incestuous Corinthian to be separated and cut off from the communion of the Church, and thereby delivered up to the power of the devil till he should repent. “1 have already judged, as though I were present, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and my spirit, to deliver such a one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of our Lord 6805. The same discipline he exer- cised on Hymenzeus and Philetus, 1 Tim. 1. 20, according to what he wrote, 2 Cor. x. 4—6: “The weapons of our war- fare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds, casting down imaginations, and every thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, &c. and having in readiness to revenge all disobedience.” So in 1 Cor. iv. 21, saith he, provoked by the disobedience of some that were puffed up with spiritual gifts, “What will you? that I come unto you with a rod, or in love, and in the spirit of meekness ?” By the rod is here to be meant some of the greater spiritual punishments, and in all appearance excommunication, of which he saith, 2 Cor. x. 8, “Though I should boast somewhat of our authority, which God hath
The exercise of the same authority by their Successors. 303
given us for edification, and not for destruction, I should not be ashamed.” It was with some of these spiritual censures, and likely with excommunication, that St. John threatened Diotrephes for “ prating against him with malicious words, and for not receiving the brethren himself, and forbidding others that would.”
And the successors of the Apostles, the bishops, like spiri- tual princes, exercised the same authority, the same coercive authority that they did‘, in inflicting spiritual censures upon their disobedient subjects. It would require a volume to shew you the various punishments with which they corrected their disobedience. They suspended and deprived clergymen, or degraded them from their order’; and as for the peo- ple, they put down those who were in the uppermost class of communion into the station of penitents, and prostrators ; others they forbid to come farther than the church doors; and those whom they did not so disgrace, they often sus- pended from the Sacrament, some for a longer, some for a shorter time, and some till their last hours. The contu- macious, both of the clergy and laity, they punished with excommunication; from which, after very long and very severe penances, as I have mentioned, they absolved some ; and others, who were enormous and very frequent lapsers, they would not absolve and reconcile to the peace of the Church, but at their last breath, or perhaps not at all’, leaving them to the mercy of God at His own tribunal. I need not tell you how much the ancient Christians stood in awe of the apostolic rod in the hands of their bishops, as well after as before the empire came to the Church, when she as a distinct society inflicted her censures upon the same Christian crimi- nals, and for the same crimes, which the empire punished by its laws*; as likewise upon others for crimes which the empire
f Disciplinam preceptorum nihilo- minus inculcationibus densamus. Ibi- dem etiam exhortationes, castigationes, et censura divina. Nam et judicatur magno cum pondere ut apud certos de Dei conspectu; summumque futuri judicii prejudicium est, si quis ita de- liquerit, ut a communicatione orationis, et conventus, et omnis sancti com- mercii relegetur.—Tertull. Apol. [cap. 39. p. 31, A.]
& [See Bingham’s Antiquities of the Christian Church, book xvii. ]
h [Ibid., c. 1.]
i [Ibid., c. 4. § 2-—4.]
k See the canons of St. Basil the Great, ad Amphilochium Iconii Epi- scopum. [e. g. Can. 7. φονεῖς, καὶ pap- μακοὶ καὶ μοιχοὶ, καὶ εἰδωλολάτραι τῆς αὐτῆς καταδίκης εἰσὶν ἠξιωμένοι. --- 8. Basilii Epist. ΟἸχχχνηϊ, Canonica i. ad Amphilochium. Op., tom. iii. p. 272,
CHAP, 1. SECT. III.
8 John 9. 0.
304 Hxcommunication regarded as more terrible than death.
pienity oF did not punish butallow, as in the Abyssinian Aithiopia ', where
EPISCOPAL
ORDER.
though the State allows polygamy, or having many wives at once, the Church punishes polygamists with deprivation of the holy Communion, which was looked upon as a great dis- honour, and grievous punishment in the pure ages of Chris- tianity, as to be repelled from their sacrifices was among the heathens ; and it was called the lesser excommunication to distinguish it from the greater ™, which the ancient Christians looked upon as the spiritual axe and sword” to the soul, and thought more terrible than death.
Sir, I have wrote all this to help you to a just idea of the episcopal office and power, and to shew you what reason I had in my letter to call them spiritual princes, and their dioceses principalities, which I did, not rashly or by chance, but upon thought, knowing how the ancients wrote of it, as
you shall see in a few more examples.
B. et apud Concilia, tom. ii. col. 1511,
! [De ritibus nuptialibus nune di- cere restat, cum et ilJi Christianis sacri habeantur; et conjugiorum jura e lege divina decisionem fere sumant. Id vero imprimis notabile est, polygamiam in ecclesia Habessinorum improbari: et tamen in republica civili tolerari. Non enim a magistratibus puniuntur qui plures simul uxores ducunt, et ta- men a sacra coena arcentur: tanquam ex eorum genere sit que rempublicam non Jedant, et tamen sanctitati Chris- tianorum adversentur; quasi sanetos et probos homines efficere, non regum et principum, sed episcoporum ecclesiz officium sit.] Jobi Ludolphi Hist. ZEthiopica, lib. iii. cap. 6. ὃ 99, 100. [| Matrimonia Christiano more contra- hunt Habessini cum singulis uxoribus. Plures ducere nulla quidem lege civili prohibentur, id tamen peenis ecclesias- ticis coercetur: quia Christianorum in- stitutis sacrisque canonibus adversatur. He then refers to what he had said as above. ]—Ibid., lib. iv. cap. 4. ὃ 1—3.
m [See Bingham, book xvi. chap. 2. § 7, 8.]
Cujus, ut gladium spiritalem, et venturum judicii diem unusquisque fratrum possit evadere omni consilio providere, et elaborare debemus. ... Interfici Deus jussit sacerdotibus suis non obtemperantes, et judicibus a se ad tempus constitutis non obaudientes,
et tune quidem gladio occidebantur, quando adhue et cirecumcisio carnalis manebat. Nune autem quia cireum- cisio spiritalis esse apud fideles servos Dei ccepit, spiritali gladio superbi et contumaces necantur, dum de ecclesia ejiciuntur.—S. Cypr. Epist., [lxii. (iv. ed. Oxon.) ad Pomponium, p. 103. ed. Ben.] εἶδες πῶς καὶ ξίφος ἔχουσιν οἱ ἀπόστολοι, κ. τ. λ. --- ὃ. Chrysost. Serm. de utilitate legendi Scripturas. [Op., tom. iii. p. 78, C. See the pas- sage quoted below, p. 319.] Phineas sacerdos adulteros simul inventos ferro ultore confixit. Quod utique degrada- tionibus, et excommunicationibus sig- nificatum est esse faciendum hoc tem- pore, cum in ecclesize disciplina visi- bilis fuerat gladius cessaturus.—S, Au- gust. De Fide et Operibus, cap. 2. [Op., tom. vi. p. 166, B.] Galat. v. 12, I would they were cut off that trouble you.” 1 Cor. iv. 21, “Shall I come unto you with a τοῦ See Is. Ca- saub. de Libert. Eccles., lib. 11. Thesis 4. [Quum non alias poenas vetus ecclesia noverit preter presbyterii censuras et anathematis vinculum, qui est gladius ille spiritualis: opinio magni "hujus pa- tris (S. Chrysostomi) fuit, dirum illud telum aut quam rarissime aut ne sic quidem, adversus fideles esse vibran- dum.—Apud Epistolas Is. Casaubon, tom, ii. p. 183. Amst. 1709. See Ap- pendix, No. 7. ]
Constantine and Eusebius on the authority of Bishops. 305
Constantine the Great, in his speech to the bishops of the Catholic Church assembled in the first general council, speaks to them in these words®; “God hath appointed you to be priests and princes, (ἱερεῖς τε καὶ dpyovtas,) to judge the people, and determine causes, and hath described you to be gods, as being more excellent than all other men; accord-
CHAP. I. SECT HL.
ing to what is written, ‘I have said ye are gods, and all the Ps. 82. 6. sons of the Most High: and again, ‘ God standeth in the νον. 1.
339)
congregation of gods. That this place was applicable to Christian bishops, as priests, is plainly to be proved from the exposition of it in the commentary of Eusebius Cesariensis, “1 have said ye are gods?,” &c. “God the Word, (ὁ Θεὸς Ao- yos,) judging the presidents of the people, to wit, the priests, and high-priests, τούς τε λοιποὺς ἄρχοντας, and the other rulers, or princes, declareth these things; and therefore it is said, ‘God standeth in the congregation of gods,’” ἕο.
In the eleventh chapter of the second book of the Apo- stolical Constitutions, which were of great authority in the Church’, the bishop is thus described™: ‘‘ Wherefore, O bishop, study to be pure, and to make known thy conversa- tion and dignity, as one that represents God among men (ὡς θεοῦ τύπον ἔχων ἐν ἀνθρώποις) in presiding over all men, (τῷ πάντων ἄρχειν ἀνθρώπων,) priests, kings, princes,
ο [rod θεοῦ ὑμᾶς προχειρισαμένου ἱερεῖς τε καὶ ἄρχοντας, κρίνειν τε καὶ διακρίνειν τὰ πλήθη, καὶ θεοὺς εἶναι, ἅτε δὴ ἀνθρώπων ἁπάντων ὑπερέχοντας, δρι- σαμένου, κατὰ τὸ εἰρημένον᾽ ἔγὼ εἶπα θεοί ἐστε, καὶ υἱοὶ ὑψίστου πάντες" καὶ τό ὃ θεὸς ἔστη ἐν συναγωγῇ θεῶν. |— Gelasii Cyziceni Hist. Cone. Nic., cap. 8. [The words are part of an address of Constantine to the bishops. Con- cilia, tom. ii. col. 176, A, B.]
P [τοὺς δὴ οὖν τοῦ λαοῦ προεστῶτα, ἱερέας δηλαδὴ καὶ ἀρχιερέας, τούς τε λοίπους ἄρχοντας ἀνακρίνων ὃ θεὸς λό- γος, τὰ μετὰ χεῖρας διέρχεται. διὸ εἴρη- ται" ὁ θεὸς ἔστη ἐν συναγώγῃ ἰσχυρῶν .--- Euseb. Cesar. Comm. in Psalm. |xxxi. ap. Montfaucon. Noy. Collect. Patrum, Par. 1706. tom. i. p. 506, A. The word ‘ gods,’ at the end of the transla- tion by Hickes, seems to be put in by mistake from the extract from Gela- sius. The Hebrew is πον. which the LXX translate literally θεῶν, as Constantine quoted it, but Eusebius ἰσχυρῶν.
HICKES.
4ᾳ See Canon. Apost. Ixxxv. [In this Canon the Apostolical Constitutions are enumerated among the sacred books. ἔστω πᾶσιν ὑμῖν κληρικοῖς καὶ λαικοῖς βιβλία σεβάσμια καὶ ἅγια, τῆς μὲν πα- λαιᾶς διαθήκης, Μωσέως πέντε, κ. τ. λ. ... ἡμέτερα δὲ, τοῦτ᾽ ἔστι, τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης, εὐαγγέλια τέσσαρα... Παύ- λου ἐπιστολαὶ δεκατέσσαρες, Πέτρου ἐπιστολαὶ δύο, ᾿Ιωάννου τρεῖς, Ἰακώβου μιὰ, Ἰούδα μιὰ, Κλήμεντος ἐπιστολαὶ δύο, καὶ αἱ διαταγαὶ ὑμῖν τοῖς ἐπισκόποις δι᾽ ἐμοῦ Κλήμεντος ἐν ὀκτὼ βιβλίοις προσ- πεφωνημέναι (ἃ οὐ δεῖ δημοσιεύειν ἐπὶ πάντων, διὰ τὰ ἐν αὐταῖς μυστικὰ) καὶ αἱ πράξεις ἡμῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων.---Οα- non. Apost., Ixxxiv. (al. Ixxxy.) Con- cilia, tom. i, col. 44, A—C; but see below, p. 309, note ἢ]
¥ [διὰ τοῦτο οὖν, ἐπίσκοπε, σπούδαζε καθαρὸς εἶναι τοῖς ἔργοις, γνωρίζων τὸν τρόπον σου καὶ τὴν ἀξίαν, ὡς θεοῦ τύπον ἔχων ἐν ἀνθρώποις, τῷ πάντων ἄρχειν ἀνθρώπων, ἱερέων, βασιλέων, ἀρχόντων, πατέρων, υἱῶν, διδασκάλων, καὶ πάντων ὁμοῦ τῶν ὑπηκόων, καὶ οὕτως ἐν ἐκκλη-
806 The Apostolical Constitutions on the offices
prenity or fathers, sons, doctors, and all who in like manner are thy
EPISCOPAL ORDER,
P5182. Ὁ. Ex, 22, 28.
subjects; and so preach from thy seat in the Church as one who hath power to judge offenders; for it is said to you bishops, “ Whatsoever you bind upon earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever you loose upon earth shall be loosed in heaven.” So in the [twenty-sixth] chapter of the same book’: “The bishop is the minister of the word, the keeper of knowledge, the mediator in the Divine worship betwixt you and God; the teacher of religion; the father in God, who regenerated you by water and the Spirit unto adoption; the prince (ἄρχων), aud governor (ἡγούμενος) ; the king (βασιλεὺς), and potentate (δυνάστης); under God the earthly god whom you ought to honour: for of him and those like him God saith, ‘I said ye are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High, and, ‘Thou shalt not speak evil of the gods‘.’ Therefore let the bishop so preside over you as honoured with authority from God, by which he governs the clergy and all the people.” So chap. 28, 29, 30": “ Honour God by those who preside over you (προεσ- τώτων), esteeming the bishops as the mouth, or oracles of God. For if Aaron was called a prophet for speaking the words of Moses to Pharaoh, and Moses was called the god of Pharaoh, as being king and high-priest, as it is
cia καθέζου τὸν λόγον ποιούμενος, ws ἐξουσίαν ἔχειν κρίνειν τοὺς ἡμαρτηκότας, ὕτι ὑμῖν τοῖς ἐπισκόποις εἴρηται, ὃ ἐὰν δήσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆ», ἔσται δεδεμένον ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ" καὶ ὃ ἐὰν Avonre ἐπὶ τῆς γῆ», ἔσται λελυμένον ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ.--- Const. Apost., lib. ii. cap. 11. Concilia, tom. i. Ρ. 234, D, E.]
5. [6 ἐπίσκοπος οὗτος λόγου διάκονος, γνώσεως φύλαξ, μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ὑμῶν, ἐν ταῖς πρὸς αὐτὸν λατρείαις" οὗτος δι- δάσκαλος εὐσεβεία-" οὗτος μετὰ θεὸν πατὴρ ὑμῶν, δι ὕδατος καὶ πνεύματος ἀναγεννήσας ὑμᾶς εἰς υἱοθεσίαν᾽ οὗτος ἄρχων καὶ ἡγούμενος ὑμῶν" οὗτος ὑμῶν βασιλεὺς καὶ δυνάστης. οὗτος ὑμῶν ἐπί- γειος θεὸς μετὰ θεὸν, ὃς ὀφείλει τῆς παρ᾽ ὑμῶν τιμῆς ἀπολαύειν. περὶ yap τούτου καὶ τῶν ὁμοίων αὐτῶν 5 θεὸς ἔλεγεν" ἐγὼ εἶπα, θεοί ἐστε, καὶ υἱοὶ ὑψίστου πάντες. καὶ θεοὺς οὐ καταλο- γήσει:" 6 γὰρ ἐπίσκοπος προκαθεζέσθω ὑμῶν ὡς θεοῦ ἀξίᾳ τετιμημένος" ἡ κρατεῖ τοῦ κλήρου καὶ τοῦ λαοῦ παντὺς ἄρχει.
—Ibid., cap. 26. col. 264, A, B. The editor has substituted in the text the word twenty-sixth for eleventh, the reading of the third edition. The eleventh chapter, which is on the treat- ment of penitents, does not contain any thing to this effect. |
t [6 δὲ ἐπίσκοπον ἢ λόγῳ ἢ ἔργῳ κα- κολογῶν, θεῷ προσπταίει, οὐκ ἀκούσας αὐτοῦ εἰπόντος, θεοὺς οὐ κακολογήσει5" οὐ γὰρ περὶ λίθων ἢ ξύλων προσοχθισ- μάτων ἐνομοθέτει, βδελυκτῶν ὄντων διὰ τὴν ψευδωνυμίαν, ἀλλὰ περὶ τῶν ἱερέων καὶ τῶν κριτῶν" οἷς καὶ εἶπεν, ὅτι θεοί ἐστε, καὶ υἱοὶ ὕψιστοι.----Τ Ὀ14., ¢. 31. col. 248, E.]
5 [τιμᾷν διὰ τῶν προεστώτων κύριον τὸν θεὸν, ἡγουμένους στόμα θεοῦ εἶναι τοὺς ἐπισκόπους. εἰ γὰρ ᾿Ααρὼν ἐπειδὴ ἤγγειλε τῷ Φαραὼ παρὰ Μωσέως τοὺς λόγους, προφήτης εἴρηται, Μωσῆς δὲ θεὸς τοῦ Φαραὼ, ὡς βασιλεὺς ὁμοῦ καὶ ἀρχιερεὺς, ὡς φησὶν ὁ θεὸς πρὸς αὐτὸν, θεὸν τέθεικά σε τῷ Φαραὼ, καὶ ᾿Δαρὼν 6
and the authority of Bishops. 307
written: ‘See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet,’ why then do you not esteem the messengers and ministers among you as pro- phets, and honour them as gods? For the deacon or minis- ter is as Aaron to you, and the bishop as Moses. If there- fore Moses was called a god by the Lord, let the bishops be honoured among you as God, and the deacon as His prophet. For as Christ doth nothing without the Father, so let not the minister do any thing without the bishop.” So chap. 33, 34*: “Tf you honour your fathers according to the flesh, how much more ought you to honour your spiritual fathers, as your benefactors and mediators unto God, who rege- nerated you by water and replenished you with the Holy Ghost, &c.? Wherefore fear and honour them who have received power of life and death from God in judging sin- ners, and condemning them to eternal fire, and absolving those who repent from their sins. Esteem them therefore as your Archons; esteem them as your kings or emperors, and offer tribute to them as kings, for they and their fami- lies ought to be maintained by you. For as Samuel or- dained that the people should maintain the king, and Moses that they should maintain the priestsy, so we command that
ἀδελφός σου ἔσται cov προφήτης, διατὶ μή καὶ ὑμεῖς τοὺς μεσίτας ὑμῶν τοῦ λόγου προφήτας εἶναι νομίσητε, καὶ ws θεοὺς σεβασθήσεσθε; νῦν γὰρ ὑμῖν μὲν 6 ᾿Ααρών ἐστιν 6 διάκονος, Μωυσῆς δὲ 6 ἐπίσκοπος" εἰ οὖν ἐῤῥέθη Μωυσῆς ὑπὸ κυρίου θεὸς, καὶ ὑμῖν ὃ ἐπίσκοπος εἰς θεὸν τετιμήσθω, καὶ 6 διάκονος ὧς προ- φήτης “αὐτοῦ: ὡς γὰρ ὃ Χριστὸς ἄνευ τοῦ πατρὸς οὐδὲν ποιεῖ, οὕτως οὐδὲ 6 διάκονος ἄνευ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου. ---Ἰ Ὀϊά., cap. 28—30. col. 267, A—D.]
x [εἰ yap περὶ τῶν κατὰ σάρκα γονέων φησὶ τὸ θεὸν λόγιον, τίμα τὸν πατέρα σου καὶ τὴν μητέρα σου, πόσῳ μᾶλλον περὶ τῶν πνευματικῶν γονέων ὑμῖν 6 Adyos παραινέσει τιμᾷν αὐτοὺς, καὶ στέρ- yew ὡς εὐεργέτας καὶ πρεσβευτὰς πρὸς θεὸν τοὺς δι’ ὕδατος ὑμᾶς ἀναγεννή- σανταΞ᾽ τοὺς τῷ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι πληρώ- σαντα, κιτιλ, . .. τούτους εὐλαβούμενοι τιμᾶτε παντοίαις τιμαῖς" οὗτοι γὰρ παρὰ θεῷ ζωῆς καὶ θανάτου ἐξουσίαν εἰλήφα- σιν ἐν τῷ δικάζειν τοὺς ἡμαρτηκότας, καὶ καταδικάζειν εἰς θάνατον πυρὸς aiw- νίου" καὶ λύειν ἁμαρτιῶν τοὺς ἐπιστρέ- govtas’ καὶ ζωογονεῖν αὐτούς. τούτους ἄρχοντας ὑμῶν καὶ βασιλεῖς ἡγεῖσθαι
νομίζετε, καὶ δασμοὺς ὡς βασιλεῦσι προσφέρετε, ἐξ ὑμῶν γὰρ αὐτούς τε καὶ συνοίκους αὐτῶν τρέφεσθαι χρή. ὡς Σαμουὴλ διετάξατο πρὸς τὸν λαὸν περὶ τοῦ βασιλέως ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ τῶν βα- σιλειῶν, καὶ Μωσῆς περὶ τῶν ἱερέων ἐν τῷ Λευιτικῷ, οὕτω καὶ ἡμεῖς ὑμῖν περὶ τῶν ἐπισκόπων διατασσόμεθα, ..... πλεῖον οὗτος λαμβανέτω, ἢ ἐκεῖνος τὸ παλαιόν. ὃ μὲν γὰρ στρατιωτικὰ μόνα διεῖπε, πόλεμον καὶ εἰρήνην ἀναδεδεγμέ- νος εἰς φυλακὴν σωμάτων, ὃ δὲ, τὴν εἰς θεὸν ἱερωσύνην, σῶμα καὶ ψυχὴν παραι- τούμενος κινδύνων ὅσῳ τοίνυν ψυχὴ σώματος κρείττων, τοσούτῳ ἱερωσύνη βασιλείας" δεσμεύει γὰρ αὐτὴ, καὶ λύει τοὺς τιμωρίας ἢ ἀφέσεως ἀξίους" διὸ τὸν ἐπίσκοπον στέργειν ὀφείλετε ὡς πατέρα, φοβεῖσθαι ὡς βασιλέα" τιμᾷν ὡς κύριον" τοὺς καρποὺς ὑμῶν, καὶ τὰ ἔργα τῶν χει- ρῶν ὑμῶν εἰς εὐλογίαν ὑμῶν προσφέρον- τες αὐτῷ, τὰς ἀπαρχὰς ὑμῶν, κ. T.A.—
Tbid., cap. 88, 84. col. 270, C, D, E, A
¥ Philo Jud. [de Premiis Sacerdo- tum, Op., tom. ii. p. 234, quoted vol. i. p- 188, note d. }
x2
CHAP. 1.
SECT. III.
ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or you should maintain the bishops, &c.
EPISCOPAL ORDER,
308 Terms of the highest dignity applied to Bishops
For if they adminis- tered in so many things to the king, who administered peace and war for bodily safety, how ought they not to administer more liberally to him, who administering the priesthood towards God, secures both body and soul from danger by his prayers? Wherefore, by how much the soul is more excellent than the body, by so much is the priest- hood more excellent than the kingly power; for he binds and also looses from punishment those who are worthy of absolution ; therefore ought you to love the bishop as a father ; to fear him as a king or emperor; to honour him as a lord; offering to him your fruits, and the works of your hands, and your first-fruits,’ &c. To these testimonies add what is said in the twenty-fifth and twenty-sixth chapters of this book’: ἐστὲ προφῆται, ἄρχοντες, Kal
ὦ ἐπίσκοποι... .. ὑμεῖς τοῖς ἐν ὑμῖν λαϊκοῖς
ἡμούμενοι, καὶ βασιλεῖς: “0 bishops, ye are to the laity or people, prophets, princes, rulers, and kings.” So in the twenty-sixth chapter?: “He that is a bishop is a minister of the word, the keeper of knowledge ... . after God your Father, who regenerated you into the adoption of sons by water and the Holy Spirit. οὗτος ἄρχων, καὶ ἡγούμενος ὑμῶν" οὗτος ὑμῶν βασιλεὺς, Kal δυνάστης" οὗτος ὑμῶν ἐπίγειος θεὸς μετὰ θεὸν: He is your prince and governor, he is your king and lord, he is under God your god upon earth, whom you ought to honour; for of him and such like God hath said, ‘I have said ye are gods, and the sons of the Most High,’ and ‘ Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people.” To these may also be added the thirty-fourth chapter’, and to the same purpose is the second chapter of the sixth book*: “ If any who rose up against kings deserved punishment, though a son or a friend, how much more he who rises up against the bishops? For as the priesthood is more excellent than the kingly office, as labouring for the soul’s health, so is he
: [Apost. Const., lib. ii. cap. 25, 26, ibid., col. 260, E. ]
® [This extract is a repetition of that given above, p. 306, note s. |
> [The thirty-fourth chapter has been quoted just before, p. 307, note x. The passage from the words “the twenty- fifth’? to “the same purpose is’ was added in the third edition; apparently
through some mistake. ]
ς [εἰ yap 6 βασιλεῦσιν ἐπεγειρόμενος κολασέως ἄξιος, κἂν υἱὸς ἢ, κἂν φίλος, πόσῳ μᾶλλον 6 ἱερεῦσι ἐπανιστάμενος ; ὕσῳ γὰρ ἱερωσύνη βασιλείας ἀμείνων, περὶ ψυχῆς ἔχουσα τὸν ἀγῶνα, τοσούτῳ καὶ βαρυτέραν ἔχει τὴν τιμωρίαν, 6 ταύτῃ τολμήσας a&vTOMmaTetv.—Const.
Apost., lib. vi. cap. 2. col. 872, E, A.]
the common language of ancient Christianity. 909
worthy of greater punishment who dares move his eye against it.” Sir, you ought not to wonder that the ancients equal bishops in their spiritual office to kings, for in the an- cient glossary of Hesychius ‘bishop’ is explained by ‘king’ (ἐπίσκοπος" βασιλεὺς 4,) because as kings are bishops of the State, so bishops are as kings in the Church. The com- parison between them, and their offices, is properly and ele- gantly expressed by St. Fulgentius in these words®: Quan- tum ergo pertinet ad hujus temporis vitam, constat quia in Ecclesia nemo pontifice potior, et in seculo nemo Christiano im- peratore celsior invenitur; and this comparison of the two offices in their several spheres, as it seems to be just, so it seems to be grounded in Scripture, not only in that of the Psalms, “I have said ye are gods;” but in Rev. v. 10, “Thou hast redeemed us unto God by Thy blood, and hast made us kings and priests.” Sir, all these terms, even that of king itself, were applied to bishops as spiritual princes, by the best Christian authors, as you may observe by other authorities cited in this letter; and as strange as this mag- nificent way of speaking of them may appear unto you, or others not conversant in the ancient ecclesiastical learning, yet you see it was the common language of ancient Chris- tianity, and therefore I have made no difficulty to lay it before you out of the Apostolical Constitutions so called, though I own they have suffered by imterpolations and cor- ruptions, as it was the lot of some primitive tracts to do, for which reason, but chiefly upon the account of some Arian expressions in them, they were censured by the sixth gene- ral council, Canon 2.£ But what I have cited out of them in
ὁ [Hesychii Lexicon, tom. i. col. 1885. |
¢ S. Fulgentius De Veritate Predes- tinationis et Gratia, lib. ii. cap. 22. [ap. Bibl. Vett. Patrum, tom. ix. p. 247, H.; Lugd. 1677. ]
f [The body of canons here referred to is that of the council in Trullo, held at Constantinople A.D. 692, called Quinisextum. There were not any canons made either by the fifth or sixth general councils. These are considered by the Greeks as supplemental to the acts of those councils, and called the canons of the sixth general council, and are so given by Beveridge, (Pan-
dect, tom. i. see pp. 151, sqq.) but are not received by the Latins. The pas- sage respecting the Apostolical consti- tutions, excepts from the reception of the Apostolical canons that which con- firms the Constitutions, (see above, p. 305, note g,) in these words; ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἐν τούτοις τοῖς κανόσιν ἐντέταλται δέ- χεσθαι ἡμᾶς τὰς τῶν αὐτῶν ἁγίων ἀπο- στόλων διὰ Κλήμεντος διατάξεις, αἷς τισὶ πάλαι ὑπὸ τῶν ἑτεροδόξων ἐπὶ λύμῃ τῆς ἐκκλησίας νόθα τινὰ καὶ ξένα τῆς εὐσεβείας παρενετέθησαν, τὸ εὐπρεπὲς κάλλος τῶν θείων δογμάτων ἡμῖν auav- ρώσαντα, τὴν τῶν τοιούτων διατάξεων προσφόρως ἀποβολὴν πεποιήμεθα πρὸς
CHAP. I.
SECT, III.
310 St. Gregory Nazianzen;
piexity or honour of the episcopal order and office, hath the air of pris
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
Ex. 29. 1, sqq.
Heb. 8. 2.
Ps, 45. 5,
mitive and Catholic; and as lofty as at first sight it may appear, perhaps you will not think it so when you rightly consider the holiness of their ministry, the greatness of their spiritual power, and by whom and whose authority they were made bishops, as St. Gregory Nazianzen sets it forth at the latter end of his fifth oration, in the following words8 : διὰ τοῦτο χρίεις TOV ἀρχιερέα, K.T.r. “Therefore you anoint me bishop, and put the robe of the ephod upon me, and the mitre upon my head, and bring me to the altar of the spiri- tual holocaust, and slay the bullock of consecration, and consecrate my hands to the Holy Ghost, and lead me to the sight of the Holy of Holies, and make me a minister of the true tabernacle, which the Lord hath pitched, and not man. But whether he whom you have anointed is worthy to be anointed by you, and for what he is anointed, and of Him to whom he is anointed, the Father of the true and proper (Son of God) Christ, whom He hath anointed with the oil of glad- ness above His fellows, knows, having anointed the manhood with the Godhead to make both one. And He that is God, our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have obtained reconcili- ation, knows it, and also the Holy Spirit, who hath appointed us to this holy ministry, on whom we stand, and rejoice in the hope of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory for ever. Amen.” It is evident from this mystical description of an episcopal consecration, in which this father
τὴν τοῦ Χριστιανικωτάτου ποιμνίου οἶκο- δομὴν καὶ ἀσφαλείαν" οὐδαμῶς ἐγκρί- vores τὰ τῆς. αἱρετικῆς, ψευδολογίας κυήματα, καὶ τῇ γνησίᾳ τῶν ἀποστόλων διδαχῇ mapevelpovres. —Concil. Qui- nisext. Can. ii. Concilia, tom. vii. col. 1344, E, 1345, A. See the Admo- nitio ad Lectorem, ibid., col. 1328, and Binius’ notes, col. 1416, 564. That
εἰσάγεις εἰς τὰ ἅγια τῶν ἁγίων ἐποπ- τεύσοντα, καὶ ποιεῖς λειτουργὸν τῆς σκη- νῆς τῆς ἀληθινῆς ἣν ἔπηξεν 6 κύριος καὶ οὐκ ἄνθρωπος" εἰ δὲ καὶ ἄξιον ὑμῶν τε τῶν χριόντων, καὶ ὑπὲρ οὗ, καὶ εἰς ὃν ἡ χρίσις, οἷδε τοῦτο ὃ πατὴρ τοῦ ἀλη- θινοῦ καὶ ὄντως Χριστοῦ, ὃν ἔχρισεν ἔλαιον ἀγαλλιάσεως παρὰ τοὺς μετόχους αὐτοῦ, χρίσας τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα τῇ θεό-
some of the interpretations were Arian is said by Photius, Biblioth. Cod. 112, 113, ai δέ ye διαταγαὶ τρισὶ μόνοις δος κοῦσιν ἐνέχεσθαι" κακοπλαστίαᾳ, κ. τ. A. . +. Καὶ er)’ ᾿Αρειανίσμῳ. -—p- 90.)
g [διὰ τοῦτο χρίεις ἀρχιερέα, καὶ πε- ριβάλλεις τὸν ποδήρη, καὶ } περιτίθης τὴν κίδαριν, καὶ προσάγεις τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ τῆς πνευματικῆς ὁλοκαυτωσέως, καὶ θύεις τὸν μόσχον τῆς τελειώσεως, καὶ τελειοῖς τὰς χεῖρας τῷ πνεύματι, καὶ
τητι, ὥστε ποιῆσαι τὰ ἀμφότερα ἕν" καὶ αὐτὸς ὃ θεὸς καὶ κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς Χριστὺς, δι᾿ οὗ τὴν καταλλαγὴν ἐσχή- καμεν, καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, ὃ ἔθετο ἡμᾶς εἰς τὴν διακονίαν ταύτην, ἐν ἣ καὶ ἑστήκαμεν καὶ καυχώμεθα ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι τῆς δόξης τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χρισ- τοῦ, ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώ- νων. aunv.—S. Greg. Naz., Orat. x. (al. v.) ὃ 4. Op., tom. i. p. 241, A—C.]
on the spiritual authority of Bishops. 311
alludes to the twenty-eighth and twenty-ninth chapters of cnar.1 -
Exodus, that he thought a Christian bishop equal in dignity to a Jewish high-priest. And so in his ninth oration he speaketh thus to Julian the apostate emperor®; “ What do you say to these things? or what will you write? O! you who were the greatest of our friends and contemporaries ? You who had the same preceptors that we had, and were instituted as we were, though God hath raised us to a more excellent, I am loth to say, a more troublesome station, to teach you, who are the higher powers.” And in the seven- teenth oration he speaketh thus of bishops and the episcopal poweri: “ And now, O ye potentates and prefects, I come to speak to you, lest I should seem partial in speaking what was meet for the people; but passing by your dignity or pre-eminence, for shame or fear, or to take care of them, and forget you, of whom I ought especially to take care. What say ye then? or how shall we treat one another? Allow me then liberty of speech, for the law of Christ hath subjected you to my power and tribunal. For we (bishops) have an empire or magistracy also, and that greater and more excellent than yours, except you will say the spirit is inferior to the flesh, and heavenly things to earthly : with more to this purpose. In the Decretum, pars i. dist. x. c. 6, this passage is translated thus: Suscipitisne libertatem verbi? Libenter accipitis, quod lex Christi sacerdotal vos subjicit potestati, atque istis tribunalibus subdit? Dedit enim et nobis potestatem, dedit et principatum multo perfectiorem principatibus vestris. Aut nunquid justum nobis videtur, st cedat spiritus carni, si terrenis ceelestia superentur, si divi- nis preferantur humana? Upon which the canonists have grounded this false and most arrogant maxim; 7ribunalia
h [τί πρὸς ταῦτα λέγεις ; τί γράφεις, ὦ φίλων ἄριστε καὶ ἡλίκων, καὶ παιδευ- τῶν ἡμῖν κοινωνὲ καὶ παιδευμάτων; εἰ καὶ νῦν ἡμᾶς εἰς τὴν κρείττω μοῖραν ὃ θεὸς ἔταξεν, ὑμᾶς ταῦτα παιδεύειν τοὺς ἐν etovotg.—tld., Orat. xix. (al. ix.) § 16. ibid., p. 373, D.]
i [τί δὲ ὑμεῖς of δυνάσται καὶ ἄρ- χοντες, ἤδη γὰρ πρὸς ὑμᾶς 6 λόγος μέτ- εἰσιν, ἵνα μὴ δόξωμεν πάντῃ τυγχάνειν ἄνισοι, καὶ τοῖς μὲν τὰ εἰκότα παραινεῖν, ὑμῶν δὲ τῇ δυναστείᾳ παραχωρεῖν, ὥσ- περ αἰδοῖ τὴν κατὰ Χριστὸν ἡμῶν ἐλευ-
θερίαν, ἢ δέει ἐκκλίνοντες" ἢ τῶν μὲν κήδεσθαι μᾶλλον, ὑμῶν δὲ ἀμελεῖν, ὧν καὶ μᾶλλον φροντίζειν ἄξιον"... τί οὖν φατέ; καὶ τί διομολογούμεθα πρὸς ἀλλή- λους; apa δέξεσθε συν παῤῥησίᾳ τὸν λόγον; καὶ ὃ τοῦ Χριστοῦ νόμος ὕὗπο- τίθησιν ὑμᾶς τῇ ἐμῇ δυναστείᾳ καὶ τῷ ἐμῷ βήματι. ἄρχομεν γὰρ καὶ αὐτοί" προσθήσω δὲ ὅτι καὶ τὴν μείζονα καὶ τελεωτέραν ἀρχήν" ἢ δεῖ τὸ πνεῦμα ὑπο- χωρῆσαι τῇ σαρκὶ, καὶ γηΐνοις τὰ ἐπου- ράνια.---14., Orat. xvii. § 8. ibid., pp. 322, Ὁ, E. 323, A.J
SECT. III. ἔτεκον... ΧΑ
312 Testimonies to the distinctness and relation of the civil and
pionity or regum sacerdotali sunt potestati subjecta*. EPISCOPAL _ ORDER. —
False I call it, because the ecclesiastical power and jurisdiction is distinct from the temporal or civil', which are ordained by God not to hurt, or invade, or destroy, but to aid, assist, and help one another. To this purpose writes a good author in bad and a learned author in dark times, Hugo Floriacensis, of whom more hereafter™: Regiam et sacerdotalem diynitatem Deus in terris ordinavit [sive disposuit| non absque magno, ac saluberrimo sacramento. Unde congruit, et valde conveniens est, ut he due potestates sibi invicem fraterna charitate sem- per adhereant, et ut se mutua solicitudine tueantur, το. Dupin in his Preloquium before the seventh dissertation of his book de Antiqua Ecclesia Disciplina", also shews that the regal or civil power is of a different and distinct nature from the sacerdotal or ecclesiastical, and the sacerdotal or ecclesiasti- cal of a different and distinct nature from that; and that these two powers and jurisdictions cannot be subject each to other, though the persons using these two different powers and jurisdictions are mutually subject to one another. And the learned Bishop Beveridge in the Prolegomena to his Συνοδικὸν, or Pandecte Canonum®, demonstrates the real
* [This is the canon grounded on the passage just quoted. Gratiani De- cretum, pars i. dist. x. c. 6. ap. Corpus Juris Canonici. |
1 24 Hen. VIII. cap. 12. Preamble. [ Where by divers sundry old authentic histories and chronicles it is manifestly declared that this realm of England is an empire ... governed by one su- preme head and king,] unto whom a body politic compact of all sorts and degrees of people divided in terms and by names of spirituaiity and tempora- lity, [being bounden, W&c.]... the body spiritual whereof having power when any cause of the law divine happened to come in question, or of spiritual learning, &c. [and the laws temporal
. was executed by sundry] judges and administers of the other part of the said body politic, called the temporality, and both their authorities and jurisdic- tions do conjoin together in the due administration of justice, the one to help the other, Xe.
™ [Hugo Floriacensis, (fl. A.D.1120) Tractatus de Regia Potestate et Sacer- dotali Dignitate; apud Baluzii Miscel- lanea, tom. ii. p. 193. col. i. ed. Mansi.
Luce. 1761. ]
n [Due sunt inter homines maxi- mz atque prestantissimz societates, civilis et ecclesiastica, que licet inter eosdem ineantur, ideoque spe vide- antur inter se confuse atque permixte, revera tamen, &c.—L. E. Dupin De antiqua Ecclesiez Disciplina Disser- tationes Historice, p. 433. Par. 1691. See Appendix, No. 5. |
ο [The passages referred to are at the beginning of Beveridge’s Prolego- mena; and the subject is continued through the first two sections. § 1. Eti- amsi Ecclesia in imperio sit, unumque cum eo in singulis reguis caput com- mune habeat, reapse nihilominus ab eo distinguitur non secus atque anima a corpore; hoc enim medici, illa theologi eure committitur: proinde homo ex duabus istis conflatus partibus, com- mune est utriusque regiminis subjec- tum, sub diverso tamen respectu, im- perio quidem quatenus ζῶον πολιτικὸν est, Ecclesia autem quatenus ζῶον ἀθά- vatov, sempiterne scilicet felicitatis, vel miseriz capax, ὅθ. ὃ 2. Vel me tacente, nemo non videat quare hac premissa sunt, et quid ex iis conse-
spiritual powers. St. Chrysostom on the same point. 313
difference between these two powers and jurisdictions, and their administrations, and how the Church and empire are not to hurt one another, but that each ought to give the other his due; and that every man in a Christian nation is in a different respect a member of both societies, and ought to be subject to the laws of both.
To the same purpose with Gregory doth St. John Chry- sostomP speak in his fourth Homily, de Verbis Esaie ; “Ozias being king would usurp the empire of the priest. I will, saith he, offer incense, because I am worthy. But remain, O king, within thy bounds, for there are other bounds of the regal and others of the priestly power. This is greater than that... . The king hath the administration of earthly things, but the law of the priesthood is from above; for ‘whatsoever they shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.’ To the emperor are committed things here, but heavenly things are committed to me .... And when I say to me, I speak of myself as a priest . .. . To the emperor are committed bodies, to the priest souls; he remits temporal mulcts, the priest remits sins; he useth fleshly weapons, the priest spiritual ; he makes war with the barbarians, I make war with the devils; greater is this principality, and there- fore the emperor submits his head to the hand of the priest, and every where in the Old Testament priests did anoint kings.” So in his third Homily, ad Populum Antioch., εἰ yap γυνὴ ὑπὲρ ᾿Ιουδαίων", «.7.rX. “For if a woman interceding quetur. Ut enim ad prescriptos im-
perii consequendos fines, leges ab eo ferantur necesse est, quibus singuli 3
v ie 0 τα γα ,
ἔλαχεν οἰκονομεῖν" ὃ δὲ τῆς ἱερωσύνης θεσμὸς ἄνω κάθηται: ὅσα ἂν δήσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ἔσται δεδεμένα ἐν τῷ οὐρα-
constringimur, et quarum servi omnes idcirco sumus, ut liberi vivere possi- mus: sic etiam Ecclesize prestitutos sibi fines nunquam assequetur, nisi suas habeat leges, quibus omnes tene- antur, qui in spiritualem istam societa- tem admissi sunt.—Zvvodiucdy sive Pan- dectze Canonum SS. Apostolorum et conciliorum ab Ecclesia Grea recep- torum Gul. Beveregius recensuit, &c. Prolegomena, Oxon. 1672.]
P [ὁ ᾿Οζίας otros ... βασιλεὺς dv ἱερωσύνης ἀρχὴν ἁρπάζει: βούλομαί, φησι, θυμίασαι, ἐπειδὴ δίκαιός εἰμι. ἀλλὰ μένε ἔσω τῶν δικαίων ὅρων" ἄλλοι ὅροι βασιλείας, καὶ ἄλλοι dpa ἱερωσύνης" ἀλλ᾽ αὕτη μείζων ἐκείνης... 6 βασι- λεὺς οὗτος μὲν γὰρ τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς
νῷ. ὃ βασιλεὺς τὰ ἐνταῦθα πεπίστευται, ἐγὼ τὰ οὐράνια. ἐγὼ ὅταν εἴπω, τὸν ἱερέα λέγω... .. ὃ βασιλεὺς σώματα ἐμ- πιστεύεται, 6 δὲ ἱερεὺς ψυχάς" ὁ βασι- λεὺς λοιπάδας χρημάτων ἀφιήσιν, ὃ δὲ ἱερεὺς λοιπάδας ἁμαρτημάτων. ἐκεῖνος ἀναγκάζει, οὗτος παρακαλεῖ" ἐκεῖνος ἀνάγκῃ, οὗτος γνώμῃ" ἐκεῖνος ὅπλα ἔχει αἰσθητὰ, οὗτος ὅπλα πνευματικά. ἐκεῖ- vos πολεμεῖ πρὸς βαρβάρους“, ἐμοὶ πόλε- μος πρὸς δαίμονας. μείζων 7 ἀρχὴ αὕτη. διὰ τοῦτο ὃ βασιλεὺς τὴν κεφαλὴν ὑπὸ χεῖρας τοῦ ἱερέως ἄγει, καὶ πανταχοῦ ἐν τῇ παλαιᾷ ἱερεῖς βασιλέας ἔχριον.--- S. Chrysost. Homil. in Oziam iv. ὃ 4. Op., tom. vi. p. 127, B, C, F.]
4 [εἰ yap γυνὴ ὑπὲρ ᾿Ιουδαίων παρα- καλοῦσα βαρβαρίκον ἴσχυσε καταστεῖλαι
CHAP. 1...
SECT. IIL.
DIGNITY OF EPISCOPAL ~ ORDER.
314 St. Chrysostom; on the
for the Jews could appease the anger of a barbarian, how much more shall our master™ (6sdacKaXos), supplicating for so great a city and so great a Church, be able to prevail with so indulgent and merciful an emperor. For if he have re- ceived power to remit sins committed against God, much more will he be able to remove and blot out crimes against men. For he is a prince, (ἄρχων ἐστὶ καὶ avtos,) and a prince more honourable than he (σεμνότερος) ; for the holy laws have subjected the emperor’s head to his hands*; and when any blessing is to be asked from above, the emperor is wont to come to the bishop, and not the bishop to the em- peror.” So in his second Homily, de Fide Anne, speaking of the great reverence David had for King Saul in the cave, considering his dignity as a king, and not his unworthiness as a wicked man; “ Let those hear this (saith he‘) who despise bishops"; let them observe how great reverence he shewed
to a king, whereas a bishop
θυμὸν, πολλῷ μᾶλλον 6 διδάσκαλος 6 ἡμέτερος ὑπὲρ τοσαύτης πόλεως, καὶ μετὰ τοσαύτης ἐκκλησίας δεόμενος, τὸν πραότατον καὶ ἡμερώτατον βασιλέα τοῦ- Tov πεῖσαι δυνήσεται. εἰ γὰρ τὰς εἰς θεὸν ἁμαρτίας λύειν ἔλαβεν ἐξουσίαν, πολλῷ μᾶλλον τὰς εἰς ἄνθρωπον γενο- μένας ἀνελεῖν καὶ ἀφανίσαι δυνήσεται. ἄρχων ἐστὶ καὶ αὐτὸς, καὶ ἄρχων ἐκείνου σεμνότερος" καὶ γὰρ αὐτὴν τὴν βασιλι- κὴν κεφαλὴν οἱ ἱεροὶ νόμοι ταῖς τούτου φέροντες χερσὶν ὑπέταξαν᾽ καὶ bray τι δέοι γενέσθαι χρηστὸν ἄνωθεν, ὃ βασι- λεὺς πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα, οὐκ ὁ ἱερεὺς πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα καταφεύγειν εἴωθεν.---. Chrys. Homil. ad Pop. Antioch. iii. Op., tom. i. p- 88, C, D.|
r Flavian bishop of Antioch, [who had gone to Constantinople to intercede with the emperor Theodosius for the people of Antioch, after the offence given by throwing down the statues of the emperor and empress, A.D. 387. |
§ This alludes to the ancient custom of emperors bowing their heads to re- ceive the bishop’s blessing.—[ See Bing- ham, book ii. chap. 9. § 1.]
t [ἀκουέτωσαν ὅσοι καταφρονοῦσι fe ρέων, μανθανέτωσαν bony εὐλάβειαν οὗ- τος περὶ βασιλέα ἐπεδείξατο' καίτοι πολὺ τιμιώτερος καὶ αἰδεσιμώτερος βα- σιλέως 6 ἱερεὺς, ὕσον καὶ ἐπὶ μείζονα ἀρχὴν κέκληται" μανθανέτωσαν μὴ κρί- νειν, μηδὲ εὐθύνας ἀπαιτεῖν, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπο-
is more to be honoured and
τάσσεσθαι καὶ εἴκειν. ob μὲν yap τὸν τοῦ ἱερέως βιὸν, κἂν φαῦλος ἢ τις καὶ ἠμελημένος, οὐκ oldas* οὗτος δὲ ἤδει μετ᾽ ἀκριβείας ἅπαντα, ὅσα ἐποίησεν 6 Σαούλ᾽ ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως καὶ οὕτως ἠδεῖτο τὴν παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ δοθεῖσαν ἀρχήν. ὅτι δὲ xa os\ ἣν - ~ > ΕΣ > κἂν εἰδὼς ἧἢς ἀκριβῶς, οὐκ ἔχεις ἄπολο- γίαν, οὐδὲ συγγνώμην, καταφρονῶν τῶν προεστώτων, καὶ παρακούων τῶν λεγο- μένων, ἄκουσον πῶς καὶ ταύτην ἡμῶν ἀνεῖλε τὴν πρόφασιν 6 Χριστὸς δι᾽ ὧν > > ΄ eS a i φησιν ἐν εὐαγγελίοις" ἐπὶ τῆς καθέδρας Μωὺῦσέως ἐκάθισαν οἱ γραμματεῖς καὶ of φαρισαῖοι" πάντα οὖν ὅσα ἂν εἴπωσιν ὑμῖν ποιεῖν ποιεῖτε, κατὰ δὲ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν μὴ ποιεῖτε. ὁρᾶς πῶς ὧν ὃ βίος οὕτω διε- φθαρμένος ἦν, ὡς ἄξιος εἶναι διαβολῆς τοῖς μαθητενομένοις, τούτων τὴν παραί- νεσιν οὐκ ἠτίμασεν, οὐδὲ τὴν διδαχὴν οΣ 7 δ a \ ΄ > ake ἐξέβαλε" ταῦτα δὲ λέγω, οὐχὶ τῶν ἱε- ρέων κατηγορεῖν βουλόμενος μὴ γέ- νοιτο᾽ καὶ γὰρ ὑμεῖς μάρτυρες ἦτε τῆς τὲ ἀναστροφῆς αὐτῶν καὶ τῆς εὐλαβείας > , > > ‘¢ > “ rol ἀπάσης᾽ ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα ἐκ πολλῆς τῆς περι- ουσίας πολλὴν αὐτοῖς τὴν αἰδὼ καὶ τὴν \ / τιμὴν mapexwmev.—lId., De Anna Ser- mo; Op., tom. iv. p. 717, E, B.]} u c cs « \ . ἱερέων, ἱερεὺς, and sacerdos, in the Latin and Greek fathers, are used to signify a bishop, and ἱερωσύνη, and sacerdotium, the order and office of a bishop. [See Suicer, in voc. ἱερεὺς, Thes. Eccl., tom. i. col. 1441, 1442. ]
reverence due to the Bishops. 315
reverenced than a king, by how much he is called to a more cmap. τ. noble empire*. aoe “Wherefore let them learn not to judge bishops, but to be subject and obedient to them. For thou likely dost not know the life of the bishop, though it is wicked and vile, but David knew very well all the evils Saul had done; but nevertheless he reverenced the supreme power which was given him by God. So though thou knewest the wicked- ness of their lives exactly thou hast no excuse or permission to despise bishops, (τῶν προεστώτων,) or disobey their com- mands. For hear (I pray thee) how Christ hath obviated this pretence by what He hath said in the Gospel; ‘The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’ chair; all therefore whatsoever they command you to observe, that observe and do, but do not ye after their works.’ Dost thou not see how He would not have them slight the exhortations or re- ject the doctrine of those whose lives were so corrupt that they deserved to be censured by their disciples? I speak this not with any reflection on the bishops, God forbid, (for you are witnesses of their conversation and godliness,) but that we should give them the more abundant reverence and honour.” So in his sermon, “Of the benefit of reading the Scrip- tures,” there are many things to the same purpose: o7- μερον avaykaiovy, κι τι. “ Now it is necessary to explain the rest of the inscription, and shew what the name of Apostle signifies. For it is not an empty name, but a name of principality!; of the noblest principality ; of the 1866 also
most spiritual ΠΡ e ; of a principality on high (τῆς Boe
ἀρχῆς προσηγορία, ἀρχῆς μεγίστης, ἀρχῆς τῆς πνευματι- ane -]
κωτάτης, ἀρχῆς τῆς ἄνω). Attend, I pray you, diligently ; for as in this world there are many governments (ἀρχαὶ πολλαὶ) or principalities, but not all of the same dignity, but some are greater and some less; as to begin with the
bo [9 ou
* ἐπὶ μείζονα ἀρχήν. From this ψιλόν ἐ ἐστι τὸ ὄνομα τοῦτο, ἀλλ᾽ ἀρχῆς passage itis plain that these two powers ἐστὶ προσηγορία, ἀρχῆς μεγίστη, ἀρχῆς or principalities of the emperor and τε πνευματικωτάτης, ἀρχῆς τε ἄνω. the bishop, were distinct andindepen- ἀλλὰ διανάστητε. καθάπερ γὰρ ἐν τοῖς dent of one another. βιωτικοῖς πράγμασίν εἰσι πολλαὶ ἀρχαὶ,
Υ [σήμερον ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τὸ ἐπί-. οὐ πᾶσαι δὲ τῆς αὐτῆς ἀξίας, ἀλλ᾽ αἱ λοιπὸν τῆς ἐπιγραφῆς, καὶ δεῖξαι τί ποτέ μὲν μείζους, ai δὲ ἑλάττους᾽ οἷον, ἵνα ἐστι τὸ ὄνομα τῶν ἀποστόλων" οὐδὲ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῆς κατωτέρας τὸν ἀριθμὸν ποιησώ-
316 St. Chrysostom ; on the spiritual
ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or inferior, a mayor of a city; the governor of a country is “orper. above him, over whom there is also a superior governor, and go in several other gradations, as the general, proconsul, and the power of the consuls, (τῶν ὑπάτων ἀρχὴν,) which is above them, and all these governments are not all of the same dig- nity: so are there many spiritual governments or magistra- cies, but not all of the same dignity, the dignity of the apostolate being greater than all. And as you are to be led by sensible to spiritual things . . . so coming to discourse of government (περὶ apxyfjs) I did not first speak of spiritual but temporal government, which is the object of sense, that from this I might lead you as it were by the hand to that. You have heard how many secular powers or dignities I have reckoned up, of which some are greater and some less, and how the power of the consul is the top and head of the rest. Now let us see what spiritual powers (ἀρχὰς mvevpatixas) or dignities there are; the power of a prophet is a spiritual power; the power of an evangelist is another spiritual power; so is the power of a pastor, of a doctor; of gifts and healings; of interpreting of tongues. These indeed are all names of gifts, but the things signified by them imply dignity and power. With us a prophet is a spiritual digni- tary (ἄρχων πνευματικὸς) or great officer; so is a caster out of devils; so is a pastor and a doctor; but the apostolical dignity is greater than them all. But how doth this appear that an Apostle is above the rest, and that as a consul among temporal powers so an Apostle among spiritual is the chief? Let us then hear Paul reckoning up the (spiritual)
μεθα, ἔστιν ὃ τῆς πόλεως ἔκδικος" ἔστιν ἀνώτερος ἐκείνου 6 τοῦ ἔθνους ἡγεμών. ἔστι μετ᾽ ἐκεῖνον ἕτερος ἄρχων μείζων. ἔστι πάλιν ὁ στρατηλάτης᾽ ἔστιν ὃ ὕπαρχος" ἔστιν ἀνωτέρα τούτων ἀρχὴ ἡ τῶν ὑπάτων ἀρχή" καὶ πᾶσαι μὲν αὗ- ται ἀρχαὶ, οὐ πᾶσαι δὲ τῆς αὐτῆς ἀξίας" οὕτω καὶ τῶν πνευματικῶν πολλαὶ μὲν ἀρχαὶ, οὐ πᾶσαι δὲ τῆς αὐτῆς ὀξίας, πασῶν δὲ μείζων ἣ τῆς ἀποστολῆς ἀξία. καὶ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν αἰσθητῶν ὑμᾶς ἐπὶ τὰ νοητὰ χειραγωγεῖν δεῖ... διὰ τοῦτο περὶ ἀρχῆς διαλεγόμενοι, οὐ πνευματικῆς ἐμνήσθημεν ἀρχῆς, ἀλλ᾽ αἰσθητῆς, ἵνα ἀπὸ ταύτης πρὸς ἐκείνην ὑμᾶς χειρα- γωγήσωμεν. ἠκούσατε πόσας ἠριθμήσα- μεν ἀρχὰς βιωτικὰς, καὶ πῶς αἱ μὲν μεί-
fous, αἱ δὲ ἐλάττους" καὶ πῶς ἡ τῶν ὑπάτων ἀρχὴ καθάπερ κορυφὴ καὶ κε- φαλὴ πᾶσιν ἐπίκειται" ἴδωμεν καὶ τὰς ἀρχὰς τὰς πνευματικάς. ἔστιν ἀρχή πνευματικὴ, προφητείας ἀρχή; ἔστιν ἕτερα ἀρχὴ εὐαγγελισμοῦ" ἔστι ποιμένος" ἔστι διδασκάλου" ἔστι χαρισμάτων" ἔσ- τιν ἰαμάτων, ἔστιν ἑρμηνείας γλωσσῶν. ταῦτα πάντα ὀνόματα μέν ἐστι χαρισμά- τῶν, πράγματα δὲ ἀρχῶν καὶ ἐξουσιῶν. ὁ προφήτης ἄρχων ἐστί" παρ᾽ ἡμῖν 6 δαίμονας ἐξελαύνων ἄρχων ἐστί" παρ᾽ ἡμῖν 6 ποιμὴν καὶ διδάσκαλος ἄρχων ἐστὶ πνευματικός ἀλλὰ τούτων ἅπάν- των μείζων ἐστὶν ἀρχὴ ἣ ἀποστολική. καὶ πόθεν τοῦτο δῆλυν ; OTL πρὸ πάντων ὁ ἀπόστολος τούτων ἐστί. καὶ καθάπερ
principalities of Bishops. 317
powers (ἀρχαὶ), and putting the apostolical dignity in the first and highest place. Saith he; ‘God hath set some in the Church ; first Apostles, secondarily prophets,’ &c. Here you see the top of spiritual dignities, the Apostle sitting on high, none before him, none higher than he; for he first names Apostles, &c. Neither is the office of an Apostle (ἡ ἀποστολὴ) only the chief of all other dignities, but the root and foundation of them. And as the head which is the highest is the supreme governor and ruler (ἀρχὴ καὶ ἐξου- σία) of the body, yea, and the root of it; forasmuch as out of the brain arise the nerves and spirits, which actuate and guide the whole animal, so the apostolical office is not only more excellent than all other gifts, as being the chief dig- nity and power, but it comprehends and unites in it the roots of them all. So that (for example) thouezh a prophet is not an Apostle and prophet too, yet an Apostle is a pro- phet in perfection, and hath the gifts of healing, and of diversity of tongues, and interpreting tongues, &c. Did you then heretofore think the name of Apostle a mere name? Now then understand what a depth of signification there is in that word, &c. Wherefore we had reason to call the apostolical dignity a spiritual consulship, (ὑπατίαν πνευ- ματικὴν,) because the Apostles were chosen or ordained ar- chons or magistrates by God, who had not only different cities and provinces severally, but the whole world in com- mon committed to their charge. I will now proceed to shew
ὁ ὕπατος“ ἐν ταῖς αἰσϑηταῖς ἀρχαῖς, οὕτως ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐν τοῖς πνευματικοῖς τὴν προεδρείαν ἔχει. αὐτοῦ τοῦ Παύλου ἀκού- σωμεν ἀριθμοῦντος τὰς ἀρχὰς, καὶ ἐν τῷ ὑψηλοτέρῳ χωρίῳ τὴν ἀπυστολικὴν κα- θίξζοντος᾽ τί οὖν οὗτός φησιν; οὕς μὲν ἔθετο ὁ θεὸς ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ, πρῶτον ἀποστόλους, δεύτερον προφήτας, κ.τ.λ. ον εἶδες ὑψηλὸν καθήμενον τὸν ἀπό- στολον, καὶ οὐδένα πρὸ ἐκείνου ὄντα, οὔτε ἀνώτερον; πρῶτον γὰρ ἀποστόλους φησί: K.T.A. ... οὐκ ἀρχὴ δὲ μόνον ἐστὶν ἣ ἀποστολὴ τῶν ἄλλων ἀρχῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ὑπόθεσις καὶ ῥίζα. καὶ καθάπερ ἡ κεφαλὴ ἐν τῷ ὑψηλυτέρῳ τοῦ παντὸς καθημένη, οὐ μόνον ἀρχὴ τοῦ σώματός ἐστι καὶ ἐξουσία, ἀλλὰ καὶ ῥίζα" τὰ γὰρ νεῦρα τὰ διοικοῦντα τὸ σῶμα ἐξ ἐκείνης τικτόμενα, καὶ ἐξ αὐτοῦ βλαστάνοντα τοῦ ἐγκεφάλου, καὶ τὴν τοῦ πνεύματος δεχόμενα xoonylay, οὕτως ἅπαν oiko-
νομεῖ τὸ ζῶον. οὕτω καὶ ἣ ἀποστολὴ οὐ μόνον ὡς ἀρχὴ καὶ ἐξουσία τοῖς λοιποῖς ἐπίκειται χαρίσμασιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰς ἁπάντων ῥίζας ἐν ἑαυτῇ συλλαβοῦσα κατέχει. καὶ ὃ μὲν προφήτης οὐ δύναται εἶναι καὶ ἀπόστολος καὶ προφήτης. 46 δὲ ἀπόστολος καὶ προφήτης ἐστὶ πάν- τως, καὶ χαρίσματα ἔχει ἰαμάτων, καὶ γένη γλωσσῶν, καὶ ἑρμηνείας γλωσσῶν, K.T-A...-Gp οὐ ψιλὸν ἐνομίζετε τοὔ- νομα τῶν ἀποστόλων πρὸ τούτου; ἰδοὺ νῦν ἔγνωτε πόσον βάθος ἔχει νοήματος τὸ ὄνομα, ... εἰκότως ἄρα ὑπατίαν πνευ- ματικὴν ἐκαλέσαμεν τὴν ἀποστολήν. ἄρχοντες γάρ εἰσι ὑπὸ θεοῦ χειροτο- νηθέντες of ἀπόστολοι" ἄρχοντες οὐκ ἔθνη καὶ πόλεις διαφόρους λαμβάνοντες, ἀλλὰ πάντες κοινῇ τὴν οἰκουμένην ἐμ- πιστευθέντες. καὶ ὅτι ἄρχοντές εἶσι πνευματικοὶ, καὶ τοῦτο ὑποδεῖξαι πειρά- σομαι, ἵνα μετὰ τὴν ὑπόδειξιν μάθητε,
CHAP. I.
SECT, IIL.
318 St. Chrysostom ; on the analogy of
ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or you that they are spiritual archons, that you may thereby
EPISCOPAL ORDER,
understand how much more excellent they are than tempo- ral archons, even as much more excellent as these are than boys who in play imitate their power, &c. ... We have respect for temporal magistrates from their ensigns of honour, as the girdle, the voice of the crier, their guards, their habits, and the sword. Let us now therefore see if the apostolical magistracy hath the like marks and signs of honour; indeed it hath, but much more excellent than those, by which you may understand that the one hath the name and shadow of which the other hath the truth, and that there is the like difference between the two powers as between little boys acting the parts of magistrates, and magistrates themselves.
_Let us, if you please, first compare the two powers as to
prisons ; for-as I said before, the magistrate hath power to bind and loose, and see I pray you how the Apostles have the same power. ‘ Whomsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whomsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.’ Thou seest the power of prison and prison, and indeed the name is the same to both, but the thing signified by it is not the same. Here is bonds and bonds; bonds on earth and bonds in heaven; for the Apostles bind in heaven. Learn therefore the greatness and extent of their jurisdiction; they being on earth pronounce sentence, and the force of it pierceth heaven. And as when emperors being in one city give judgment or make laws, the force thereof goes through the whole empire, so at the same time if the Apostles being resident in one place did decree
ὅτι τοσούτῳ βελτίους εἶσιν οἱ ἀπόστολοι τῶν ἀρχόντων τῶν βιωτικῶν ὅσῳ αὐτοὶ οἱ βιωτικοὶ ἄρχοντες τῶν παίδων τῶν παιζόντων ἀμείνους εἰσί ἀπὸ τῆς ζώνης δὲ πάλιν δοκιμάζομεν τὸν ἄρχοντα, ἀπὸ τῆς τοῦ κήρυκος φωνῆς, ἀπὸ τῶν ῥαβδούχων, ἀπὸ τοῦ ὀχήματος, ἀπὸ τοῦ ξίφους" ταῦτα γὰρ πάντα ἀρχῆς σύμ- Boda. ἴδωμεν τοίνυν καὶ τὴν τῶν ἀπο- στόλων ἀρχὴν, εἰ ταῦτα ἔχει τὰ σύμ- Boda ἔχει μὲν, οὐ τοιαῦτα δὲ, ἀλλὰ πολλῷ βελτιόνα. καὶ ἵνα μάθῃς ὅτι ταῦτα μὲν ὀνόματα πραγμάτων, ἐκεῖνα δὲ ἀλή- θεια πραγμάτων ἵνα μάθῃς τὸ μέσον τῶν παιδίων τῶν παιζόντων ἀρχὰς, καὶ τῶν ἀρχῶν τῶν ἐχόντων τάς ἀρχάς" καὶ εἰ βούλεσθε, ἀπὸ τοῦ δεσμωτηρίου πρῶτον ἀριθμήσομεν. καὶ γὰρ εἰρήκαμεν, ὅτι κύριος τοῦ δῆσαι καὶ λῦσαί ἐστιν ὁ ἄρ-
S018, (60
χων" ὅρα δὴ ταύτην τὴν ἀρχὴν τοὺς ἀποστόλους ἔχοντας. ὅσους γὰρ ἂν δή- onte ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, φησὶν, ἔσονται δεδε- μένοι ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, καὶ ὅσους ἂν λύσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔσονται λελυμένοι ἐν οὐρανοῖς. εἶδες δεσμωτήριον καὶ δεσ- μωτηρίου ἐξουσίαν" καὶ τὸ μὲν ὄνομα τὸ αὐτὸ, τὸ δὲ πρᾶγμα οὐ τὸ αὐτό. δεσμὰ καὶ δεσμά. ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, τὰ δὲ ἐν οὐρανῷ. οὐρανὸς γάρ ἐστιν αὐτοῖς τὸ δεσμωτήριον" μάθε τοίνυν τὸ μέγεθος τῆς ἀρχῆς. ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς καθήμενοι φέ- ρουσι τὴν ψῆφον καὶ τῆς ψήφου ἡ δύνα- μις διαβαίνει τοὺς οὐρανούς. καὶ καθάπερ οἱ μὲν βασιλεῖς καθήμενοι ἐν μιᾷ πόλει ψηφίζονται καὶ νομοθετοῦσιν, ἣ δὲ τῶν ψηφισμάτων καὶ τῶν νόμων δύναμις πᾶ- σαν διατρέχει τὴν οἰκουμένην" οὕτω καὶ τότε, οἱ μὲν ἀπόστολοι ἐν ἑνὶ τόπῳ καθή-
civil and spiritual magistracies. 319
, the force of their laws, and particularly the sen- Bi ari:
any thing tence of “Ghake bonds, did not only go through this habitable world, but mount up unto heaven. Here you see binding and binding; binding on earth, and binding in heaven, binding of bodies, and binding of souls, or rather both of souls and bodies, &c. .. . Would you also understand how it was in their power as lords to forgive debts? where there is also a great difference, for they did not forgive debts of money but debts of sins, according to what He said, ‘Whose- soever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them, and whosesoever sins you retain they are retained.’ ” After this he shews at large how as magistrates “ they had the power of the sword, the sword of the Spirit,’ and could “by a word kill as well as make alive again.” And that “they had their girdles also, not of leather but truth, that holy spi- ritual girdle with which they had their loins always girt*.” He also shews “how they had executioners” to chastise, punish, and torment, “not men but devils4,” as it is written, “To de- 1 Cor. 5. 5. liver such an one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh,” and “whom I have delivered to Satan that they may learn 1 Τίπι. 1 not to blaspheme.” I must also observe unto you, that he ἦν set forth in this manner the great dignity and excellency of
μενοι ταῦτα ἐνομοθέτουν" 7 δὲ τῶν νόμων δύναμις, καὶ τῶν δεσμῶν τούτων, οὐχὶ τὴν οἰκουμένην μόνον διέτρεχεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸ τὸ ὕψος τῶν οὐρανῶν ἀνέ- βαινεν. εἶδες δεσμωτήριον καὶ δεσμω- τήριον, τὸ μὲν ἐπὶ γῆς, τὸ δὲ ἐν οὐρανῷ" τὸ μὲν σωμάτων, τὸ δὲ ψυχῶν" μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ ψυχῶν καὶ σωμάτων" οὐ γὰρ σώ- ματα ἐδέσμουν μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ψυχάς. ἐν νιν βούλει μαθεῖν πῶς κύριοι ἦσαν καὶ ὀφλήματα ἀφεῖναι; καὶ γὰρ καὶ ἐνταῦθα πολὺ τὸ διάφορον" ὄψει. οὐ γὰρ ὀφλή- ματα χρημάτων, ἀλλὰ ὀφλήματα ἀμαρ- τημάτων ἀφίεσαν. ὧν γάρ, φησιν, ἀφῆτε τὰς ἁμαρτίας, ἀφέωνται αὐτοῖς" καὶ ὧν ἂν κρατῆτε, κεκράτηνται.---Τὰ. Homil. de Utilitate Legendi Scripturas in prin- cipio Actorum Apost. Op., tom. iii. p. % E—78, C.]
b [After speaking of St. Peter’s striking Ananias dead, he proceeds; εἶδες πῶς καὶ ξίφος ἔ ἐχουσιν οἱ i ἀπόστολοι. ὅταν & ἀκούσῃς Παύλου λέγοντος, ὅτι ἐπὶ πᾶσι τὴν μάχαιραν τοῦ πνεύματος, ὅ ἐστιν ῥῆμα θεοῦ, ἀναμνήσθητι τῆς ἂπο- φάσεως ταύτης" ὅτι οὐδαμοῦ ξίφος, καὶ τῷ ῥήματι πληγεὶς 6 ἱερόσυλος ἔπεσεν.
... τὰ ῥήματα ἀντὶ τῆς μαχαίρας ἐξε- νεγκοῦσα εὐϑέως ἐκεῖνον ἀπέσφαξεν. and then of his raising Tabitha; θανά- του καὶ ζωῆς ἐξούσιαν εἶχον... ἤκουσε γοῦν Tis φωνῆς 6 θάνατος καὶ οὐκ ἴσχυσε κατασχεῖν τὴν νεκράν.---[ἃ ibid., p. 78, Gs 79: 8.
© [βυύλει μαθεῖν οὖν καὶ τὴν ξώνην αὐτῶν; καὶ γὰρ ἐζωσμένους αὐτοὺς ὁ Χριστ τὸς ἔπεμψεν, οὐχὶ ἐν «δέρματι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ἀληθείᾳ" αὕτη ἡ ζώνη ἁγία καὶ πνευ- ματικὴ, καὶ διὰ τοῦτό φησιν, περιεζωσ- μένοι τὴν ὀσφὺν ὑμῶν ἐν ἀληθείᾳ.--- Id. ibid., p. 79, C.]
4 [ἀλλὰ τὶ βούλει; Kal τοὺς δημίους ἰδεῖν... οὐκ ἀνθρώπους ἔχουσιν ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὸν τὸν διάβολον, καὶ τοὺς δαίμονα.
. ἄκουσον γοῦν πῶς μετὰ αὐθεντίας ἐκείνοις ἐπέταττεν 6 Παῦλος᾽ περὶ γοῦν τοῦ πεπορνευκότος γράφων ἔλεγε" παρά- δοτε τὸν τοιοῦτον τῷ Σατανᾷ εἰς ὄλε- θρον τῆς σαρκός. πάλιν ἐφ᾽ ἑτέρων βλα- σφημούντων τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο πεποίηκε" παρέδωκα γὰρ αὐτούς, φησι, τῷ Σατανᾷ ἵνα παιδευθῶσι μὴ βλασφημεῖν.---1άὰ. ibid., p. 79, D.]
890 St. Chrysostom; on the power of binding and loosing.
ΡΙΟΝΙΤῪ or the apostolical office and authority, to revive in the people a
EPISCOPAL . ORDER.
just idea of the dignity and excellence of the episcopal order, it being a received principle in the Church that bishops suc- ceeded the Apostles in their spiritual magistracy and autho- rity, and were under Christ, as this father saith they were, “ spiritual archons and consuls of the Church*.”
In his fourth Homily on the second chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews, after he had threatened to excommunicate those who, after the idolatrous custom of the heathens, hired women to weep at funerals, he speaks thus‘: “ But if any one is so arrogant as to contemn the bonds wherewith we bind, let Christ again be his instructor, who saith, ‘ whatso- ever things ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever things ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.? For though we are miserable men, and despi- cable as indeed we are, yet it is not to avenge ourselves or wreak our anger (that we do this), but that we take care of your salvation, and therefore I exhort you to demean your- selves with modesty and reverence .... Neither say I these things to shew my authority, who do not desire to put it in practice, but out of grief and trouble for you. Pardon me therefore, let no man despise the bonds of the Church, for it is not man who binds, but Christ, who gave us this autho- rity, and invests men with this honour. For we would wil- hingly have none bound; but when we are compelled to bind you must not take it ill, for we never bind with pleasure and willingness, but grieving more than they who are bound. But if any despise what I say, let him know the day of judg- ment will come when he shall find it to be true.”
* [See above, pp. 316, 317.]
τῶν ἐκκλησιαστικῶν. ov γὰρ ἄνθρωπός a > / f [ei δέ τις ἀπαυθαδιαζόμενος κατα-
ἐστιν 6 δεσμῶν, ἀλλ᾽ 6 Χριστὸς ὃ τὴν
φρονεῖ, ἀκουέτω τοῦ Χριστοῦ λέγοντος καὶ νῦν... ὅσα ἂν δήσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔσται δεδεμένα ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ" εἰ γὰρ καὶ ἡμεῖς ταλαίπωροι καὶ οὐδαμινοὶ καὶ τοῦ καταφρονεῖσθαι ἄξιοι, ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ ἄξιοι, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἑαυτοὺς ἐκδικοῦμεν, οὐδὲ ὀργὴν ἀμυνόμεθα, ἀλλὰ τῆς ὑμετέρας σωτηρίας φροντίζομεν. αἰδέσθητε, παρα- καλῶ, καὶ ἐντράπητε. .. οὐ yap ἐξου- σίαν ἐπιδείξασθαι βουλόμενοι, ταῦτα λέγομεν. πῶς γὰρ οἱ μηδὲ εἰς πεῖραν αὐτῶν ἐλθεῖν εὐχόμενοι" σύγγνωτε δὴ, καὶ μηδεὶς καταφρονείτω τῶν δεσμῶν
ἐξουσίαν ταύτην ἡμῖν δεδωκὼς, καὶ κυ- ρίους ποῖων ἀνθρώπους τῆς τοσαύτης Tims... οὐδένα yap βουλόμεθα εἶναι δεσμώτην παρ᾽ ἡμῖν" ... εἰ δὲ ἀναγ- κασθείημεν, σύγγνωτε" οὐ γὰρ ἑκόντες, οὐδὲ βουλόμενοι, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον ὑμῶν τῶν δεδεμένων ἀλγυῦντες, τὰ δεσμὰ περι- βάλλομεν. εἰ δέτις καταφρονοίη τούτων, ἐπιστήσεται ὃ τῆς κρίσεως καιρὸς ὃ δι- δάσκων av’tév.ld. Hom. iv. in Epist. ad Hebrzos, cap. 2. pp. 48, D; 49, A, B, D.]
Extract from his work de Sacerdotio on the same point. 321
So in the fifth chapter of his third book de Sacerdotio, he thus compares the power of a king and a priest®: “It is true that earthly princes have a power to bind, but bodies only, but the binding of the priest toucheth the soul and reacheth unto heaven, so that what the priests do here below God ratifies above, and confirms the sentence of His servants. And what is this else but that God hath given all heavenly power unto them? for, saith He, ‘ whosesoever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them, and whosesoever sins ye re- tain they are retained... What power, I pray you, can be greater than this? God hath given all power of judgment unto the Son, and I see it all delivered from the Son to them, who, as if they were translated into heaven, made something above men, and exempt from human affections, are advanced to this princely power. ΤῸ be short, if a king gives power to any of his subjects to cast men into prison and set them free again, he is counted honourable and re- garded by all. But he that receives power from God, so much greater as heaven is more excellent than the earth, or the soul than the body, he seems to some but to have re- ceived a little honour, because he knows that some of those to whom this honour is committed despise the gift of God. Oh shame of this madness! For it is manifest madness to despise this so great princely power, without which we can neither obtain salvation, nor the blessings promised by God, &e.. .. Upon which account priests ought to be feared more than princes and kings, and had in more honour than our parents [, for they]! begat us of blood and of the will of the
& [ἔχουσι μὲν γὰρ καὶ of κρατοῦντες ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς τὴν τοῦ δεσμεῖν ἐξουσίαν, ἀλλὰ σωμάτων μόνον" οὗτος δὲ 6 δεσμὸς αὐτῆς ἅπτεται τῆς ψυχῆς, καὶ διαβαίνει τοὺς οὐρανοὺς, καὶ ἅπερ ἂν ἐργάσωνται κάτω οἱ ἱερεῖς, ταῦτα 6 θεὸς ἄνω κυροῖ, καὶ τὴν τῶν δούλων γνώμην ὃ δεσπότης βεβαιοῖ. καὶ τί γὰρ ἀλλ᾽ ἢ πᾶσαν αὐτοῖς τὴν οὐράνιαν ἔδωκεν ἐξουσίαν; ὧν γὰρ ἄν, φησιν, ἀφῆτε τὰς ἁμαρτίας, ἀφέωνται: καὶ ὧν ἂν κρατῆτε, κεκράτηνται. τίς ἂν γέ- νοιτὸ ταύτης ἐξουσία μείζων ; πᾶσαν τὴν κρίσιν ἔδωκεν ὃ πατὴρ τῷ υἱῷ" δρῶ δὲ πᾶσαν αὐτὴν τούτους ἐγχειρισθέντας ὑπὸ τοῦ υἱοῦ. ὥσπερ γὰρ εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἤδη μετατεθέντες, καὶ τὴν ἀνθρωπείαν ὑπερ- βάντες φύσιν, καὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων ἀπαλ-
HICKEs.
λαγέντες παθῶν, οὕτως εἰς ταύτην ἤχθη- σαν τὴν ἀρχήν. εἶτα ἂν μὲν βασιλεὺς τινὶ τῶν ὑπ᾽ αὐτὸν ὄντων ταύτης μεταδῷ τῆς τιμῆς, ὥστε ἐμβάλλειν εἰς δεσμωτή- ριον οὺς ἂν ἐθέλῃ, καὶ ἀφιέναι πάλιν, ζη- λωτὸς καὶ περίβλεπτος παρὰ πᾶσιν οὗ- Tos’ ὃ δὲ παρὰ θεοῦ τοσούτῳ μείζονα ἐξουσίαν λαβὼν, ὅσῳ γῆς τιμιώτερος ov- ρανὸς καὶ σωμάτων ψυχαὶ, οὔτω μικράν τισιν ἔδοξεν εἰληφέναι τιμὴν, ὡς δυνη- θῆναι κἂν ἐννοῆσαι, ὅτι τῶν ταῦτά τις πιστευθέντων καὶ ὑπερφρονήσει τῆς δω- peas; ἄπαγε τῆς μανίας. μανία γὰρ περι- φανὴς, ὑπερορᾶν τῆς τοσαύτης ἀρχῆς, ἧς ἄνευ οὔτε σωτηρίας ἡμῖν, οὔτε τῶν ἐπηγ- γελμένων τυχεῖν ἔστι ἀγαθῶν. ὥστε ἡμῖν οὐκ ἀρχόντων μόνον οὐδὲ βασιλέων φο-
CHAP. I. SECT. III.
18rd ed. “that”}
322 δέ. Chrysostom on the dignity of the Priesthood, pianity or flesh ; but to them we are beholden for our birth from God, EPISCOPAL . . orver. that blessed regeneration, and true liberty, and gracious - adoption, whereby we become the sons of God.” So in his fifth Homily de Verbis Isaie*: “ Wherefore it is a duty to restrain that unreasonable passion with religious reason, which Ozias not doing, transgressed against the supreme power of all. For the priesthood is a princely power, greater and more venerable than that of the empire. Do not tell me of the purple, or diadem, or golden apparel of kings, for these are all shadows, and more vain than spring flowers .... But if you would see the difference be- tween them, and how much the king is inferior to a priest, consider the measure of power delivered to them both, and you shall see the priest placed much higher than the empe- ror; for though the emperor’s throne seems glorious to us from the gems and gold with which it is adorned, yet he has only the administration of earthly things, nor hath he any other authority ; but the throne of the high-priest is placed in heaven, and he hath power to judge of things there. And who saith this? The King of Heaven Himself in these words: ‘ Verily, verily, I say unto you, whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.’ What honour is comparable to this? Heaven receives the power of judg- ing from earth, for the judge sits upon earth, and the Lord complies with His servant, and ratifies the sentences above
βερώτεροι, ἀλλὰ καὶ πατέρων τιμιώτεροι δικαίως ἂν εἶεν. οἱ μὲν γὰρ ἐξ αἱμάτων καὶ ἐκ θελήματος σαρκὸς ἐγέννησαν" οἱ δὲ τῆς ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ γεννήσεως ἡμῖν εἰσιν αἴτιοι, τῆς μακαρίας παλιγγενεσίας ἐκεί- νη5, THS ἐλευθερίας τῆς ἀληθοῦς, καὶ τῆς κατὰ χάριν viobectas.—S. Chrys. de Sacerd., lib. iii. c. 5. Op., tom. i. pp. 383, C; 384, A.]
" [διὸ χρὴ συνεχῶς αὐτὴν ἀνακρού- εσθαι, καὶ καθάπερ τινὶ χαλινῷ τῷ τῆς εὐσεβείας λογισμῷ, τὴν ἄλογον αὐτῆς αναχαιτίζειν ὁρμήν ὅπερ ὁ ’OCias οὐκ «ποίησεν, ἀλλ᾽ εἰς αὐτὴν τὴν ἀνωτάτω παντων ἀρχὴν παρηνόμησεν. ἱερωσύνη γὰρ καὶ αὐτῆς τῆς βασιλείας σεμνοτέρα, καὶ μείζων ἐστὶν ἀρχή" μὴ γάρ μοι τὴν ἁλουργίδα εἴπῃς, μηδὲ τὸ διάδημα, μηδὲ τὰ ἱμάτια τὰ χρυσᾶ: σκία πάντα ἐκεῖνα, καὶ τῶν ἐαρινῶν ἀνθῶν εὐτελέστερα.
ἀλλ᾽ εἰ βούλει ἱερέως πρὸς βασιλέα τὸ διάφορον ἰδεῖν, τὸ ἑκάστῳ διδομέης ἐξου- σίας τὸ μέτρον ἐξέτασον, καὶ πολλῷ τοῦ βασιλέως ὑψηλότερα ὄψει τὸν ἱ ἱερέα κα- θήμενον. εἰ γὰρ καὶ σεμνὸς ἢ ἡμῖν 6 θρόνος φαίνεται ὃ ὁ βασιλικὸς ἀπὸ τῶν προσπε- πηγότων αὐτῷ λίθων, καὶ τοῦ περισφίτ- τοντος αὐτὸν χρυσίου, GAN ὅμως τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔλαχεν οἰκονομεῖν, καὶ πλεῖον ἔχει τῆς ἐξουσίας ταύτης οὐδέν' ὁ δὲ τῆς ἱερωσύνης θρόνος ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς ἵδρυται, καὶ τὰ ἐκεῖ διέπειν ἐπιτέτραπται. τὶς ταῦ- τά φησιν; αὐτὸς ὁ τῶν οὐρανῶν βασι- λεὺς, ὅσα γὰρ ἂν δήσητέ, φησιν, ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ἔσται δεδεμένα ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς" καὶ ὅσα ἂν λύσητε ἐπὶ τῆς ys, ἔσται λελυ- μένα ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. τί ταύτης ἴσον γένοιτ᾽ ἂν τῆς τιμῆς; Gard τῆς γῆς τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς κρίσεως λάμβανει ὁ οὐρανός" ἐπειδὴ ὁ κριτὴς ἐν τῇ γῇ κάθηται, 6
ana the power of excommunication. 323
which he pronounceth below. Wherefore the priest stands mediator betwixt God and man, bringing down blessings from Him to us,.and conveying our petitions to Him, by which God hath put the emperor’s head under the hands of the priest, teaching us that he is a greater prince than he.” So in his eighty-third Homily on the twenty-sixth chapter of St. Matthew’s Gospel, shewing that the priest ought to deny the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist to profane persons, saith he', “ Let no Judas, no lover of money be present at this table. He that is not Christ’s disciple let him depart from it .... Let no inhuman, no cruel person, no uncom- passionate man, or who is impure, come thither. I speak this to you that administer as well as to you who partake; for it is necessary I speak these things to you, that you may take great care and use your utmost diligence to distribute these offerings aright; for your punishment will be great if knowingly you suffer any wicked person to partake of this table, for his blood shall be required at your hands. Where- fore if any general or governor, or the emperor himself be not worthy, repel him, for thou hast a greater power (or authority) than he*.” This reminds me of what the holy patriarch said in answer to the demand of the emperor, when he required him to leave his Church. Palladius tells us he refused to do it, saying', “I received this Church from
¥, ~ / ο a δεσπότης ἔπεται τῷ SovAw’ καὶ ἅπερ
μετασχεῖν, ταύτης τῆς τραπέζης᾽ τὸ ἂν οὗτος κάτω κρίνει, ταῦτα ἐκεῖνος ἄνω
αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῶν χειρῶν ἐκξητηθήσεται
κυροῖ. καὶ μέσος τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τῆς τῶν ἀνθρώπων φύσεως ἕστηκεν ὃ ἱερεὺς, τὰς ἐκεῖθεν τιμὰς κατάγων πρὸς ἡμᾶς, καὶ τὰς παρ᾽ ἡμῶν ἱκετηρίας ἀνάγων ἐκεῖ, ὀργιζόμενον αὐτὸν τῇ κοινῇ καταλλάτ- των φύσει. διὰ τοῦτο καὶ αὐτὴν τὴν βα- σιλικὴν κεφαλὴν ὑπὸ τὰς τοῦ ἱερέως χεῖρας φέρων τίθησιν 6 θεὸς, παιδεύων ἡμᾶς, ὅτι οὗτος ἐκείνου μείζων ὃ ἄρχων. —Id. Hom. vy. in Oziam, ὃ 1. Op., tom. vi. p. 182, B, D, E.]
i [μηδεὶς τοίνυν ᾿Ιούδας παρέστω" μη- δεὶς φιλάργυρος. εἴ τις μὴ μαθητὴς, πα- ραχωρείτω ... μηδεὶς ἀπάνθρωπος προ- σίτω, μηδεὶς iis καὶ ἀνελεὴς, μηδεὶς ὅλως ἀκάθαρτος" ταῦτα πρὸς ὑμᾶς τοὺς μεταλαμβάνοντας λέγω, καὶ πρὸς ὑμᾶς τοὺς διακονουμένους" καὶ γὰρ ἀναγκαῖον καὶ πρὸς ὑμᾶς διαλεχθῆναι, ὥστε μετὰ πολλῆς τῆς σπουδῆς διανέμειν ταῦτα τὰ δῶρα. οὐ μικρὰ κόλασις ὑμῖν ἐστιν, εἰ συνειδότες τινὶ πονηρίαν συγχωρήσητε
τῶν ὑμετέρων. κἂν στρατηγός TIS ἢ, κἂν ὕπαρχος, κἂν αὐτὸς 6 τὸ διάδημα περι- κείμενος, ἀναξίως δὲ προσίῃ, κώλυσον" μείζονα ἐκείνου τὴν ἐξουσίαν exe1s.— Id. Hom. in Matt. Ixxxii. (al. 1xxxiii.) § 5, 6. Op., tom. vii. p. 789, A—C. ]
k Hence these rules of canon law, Lex imperatorum non est supra legem Dei, sed subtus.—[ Decretum Gratiani; pars i. dist. 10. c. 1.§ 1.] Non licet imperatori ... aliquid contra divina mandata praesumere.—([Ibid., c. 2. See below, p. 327. note a.] Imperiali judicio non possunt ecclesiastica jura dissolvii—[Ibid., c. 1.] Imperium [vestrum suis publice rei quotidianis administrationibus debet esse conten- tus,] non usurpare, que sacerdotibus Domini solum conyeniunt.—[Ibid., ¢. 5.]
: [καὶ δηλοῖ τῷ ᾿Ιωάννῃ, ἔξελθε ἐκ τῆς ἐκκλησίας. ὃ δὲ ἀντιδηλοῖ, ἐγὼ
ὙΠῸ
CHAP, IL. SECT. III,
324 These doctrines acknowledged as the doctrines of the Church.
picnity or Christ, to take care of the souls thereunto belonging, and I
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
must not relinquish it™. But the care of the city is yours; and if I must be gone, force me hence by your authority, that I may have an excuse for quitting my post.”
Thus these two fathers, Gregory and John, who were bishops of Constantinople, spake and wrote of the dignity of the priesthood, or episcopal office and power, in the im- perial city where the emperors were resident: and yet was this doctrine never objected against either of them, because it was the doctrine of the Church. Had it been a new doc- trine, or injurious to the emperor, or against his prerogative or any part of it, it would certainly have been taken notice of, especially to prosecute the latter, against whom the court was ready to take any advantage, for the liberty he took in taxing the vices of the great, which procured him the empe- ror’s and empress’ displeasure, and [that of] some of the greatest of the clergy. This doctrine and these principles were answerable to his conduct, and the struggle he had with the court and his court enemies for his sacerdotal rights and the rights of the Church. In this contest a great part of his flock, called from his name Joannites", and almost all the bishops and Churches of the empire, adhered to him when he was proscribed and deposed by the imperial power.
παρὰ τοῦ σωτῆρος θεοῦ ὑποδέδεγμαι τὴν ἐκκλησίαν ταύτην εἰς ἐπιμελεῖσθαι τῆς τοῦ λαοῦ σωτηρίας, καὶ οὐ δύναμαι αὐτὴν καταλεῖψαι, εἰ δὲ τοῦτο βούλει, (ἡ γὰρ πόλις σοι διαφέρει) βιᾷ με ἐξέωσον, ἵνα ἔχω ἀπολογίαν τῆς λειποταξίας τὴν σὴν αὐθεντ είαν ---- Δ11Δ411 Episcopi Heleno- politani de vita S. Johannis Chrysos- tomi Dialogus, cap. 9. S. Chrys. Op., tom. xiii. p. 33, A.]
m So the rule of the canon law, [ Decretum ; pars ii. caus. 7, quest. 1, 6. 8.] Suo jure quis cedere non debet.— Quam periculosum sit autem in divinis rebus, ut quis cedat jure suo et potes- tate, scriptura sancta declarat, cum in Genesi Esau primatus suos inde perdi- derit, nec recipere id postmodum po- tuerit quod semel cessit.—S. Cypr. [ Epist. lxxiii.] ad Jubaianum, [p. 137. ed. Ben.] Quid ergo, quia et honorem cathedrz sacerdotalis Novatianus usur- pat, num idcireco nos cathedre renun- ciare debemus? Aut quia Novatianus altare collocare, et sacrificia offerre contra fas nititur, ab altari et sacrifi-
ciis cessare nos oportet, ne paria et similia cum illo celebrare videamur.— Id. ibid., [p. 130. ed. Ben.] Nam cum unanimitas et concordia nostra scindi omnino non debeat, quia nos ecclesia derelicta foras exire, et ad vos venire non possumus, ut vos magis ad ecclesiam matrem, et ad nostram fra- ternitatem revertamini, quibus possu- mus hortamentis, petimus et rogamus. —(Id. Epist. xliv. (xlvi. ed. Oxon.) ad Maximum et Nicostratum, p. 58. ed. Ben.] See Epist. xlvii. [ed. Oxon. Epist. xliii, ad Cornelium, p. 58. ed. Ben. |
® [See Socrates, Hist. Eccl., lib. vi. cap. 18, in speaking of St.John Chry- sostom, εὐθὺς οὖν πάντες of αὐτῷ προσ- κείμενοι, ἐκ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἀναχωρήσαν - τες, τὸ μὲν πάσχα ἐν τῷ δημοσίῳ λουτρῷ τῷ ἐν Κωνσταντιαναῖς ἐπετέλεσαν. σὺν αὐτοῖς δὲ πολλοὶ ἐπίσκοποι καὶ πρεσβύ- τεροι, καὶ ἄλλοι ἱερατικοῦ τάγματος. ἐξ ἐκείνου τε κατ᾽ ἰδίαν τὰς συναγώγαξ ἐν διαφόροις τόποις ποιούμενοι, ᾿Ιωαννῖται προσηγορεύθησαν. --- Ἐς]. Hist., tom. ii.
The testimony of the Latin Fathers to the same point. 325
CHAP. 1.
To the authorities of these two great and holy men give SECT, III.
me leave, Sir, to add what is said by Sozomen°® the ecclesias- tical historian, who was not of our but your profession’, who speaking of the interment of Constantine the Great in the Church of the Apostles, concludes thus: “ From this time it became the custom for the Christian emperors who died at Constantinople to be buried there, and likewise for the bishops; the sacerdotal office (or dignity) being of equal honour with the regal, and in holy places superior thereto.” IV. But from the bishops of the Greek Church let us go secr.tv._
to those of the Latin, and see how they speak of the episco- pies pal office and power. Cyprian, bishop and martyr, in his ef theres
fifty-ninth epistle to Cornelius, bishop of Rome, against the the Latin schismatics Felicissimus and Fortunatus, hath this expres- pee: sion’: ‘‘ There is an end of episcopacy, and of the supreme and Divine power of governing the Church, if the violence of wicked men becomes terrible to bishops,” &c. In another passage he applies to schismatics who reject their lawful bishops the words of God to Samuel’: “They have not re- jected thee, but they have rejected Me.” And the words of our Lord to the Apostles*: “He that heareth you heareth Me, and he that despiseth you despiseth Me, and he that despiseth Me despiseth Him that sent Me.” There he also equals the bishop in place and dignity to the high-priest among the Jews, applying to him the words of St. Paul, Acts xxii. 5: Principem populi tut non maledicest, in the Latin
1 Sam. 8. 7.
p- 337, and Sozomen., lib. viii. cap. 21. p. 353.]
° [Κωνστάντιος. .. βασιλικῶς κηδεύ- σας αὐτὸν, ἔθαψεν ἐν τῇ ἐπωνύμῳ τῶν ἀποστόλων ἐκκλησίᾳ, ἔνθα δὴ περιὼν αὐ- τὸς Κωνσταντῖνος ἑαυτῷ τάφον κατε- σκεύασεν. ἀπὸ τούτου δὲ, ὡς ἔκ τινος ἀρχῆς ἔθους γενομένου, καὶ of μετὰ ταῦτα τελευτήσαντες ἐν Κωνσταντίνου- πόλει βασιλεῖς Χριστιανοὶ κεῖνται. ov μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπίσκοποι, ὡς καὶ τῆς ἱερωσύνης ὁμοτίμου τῆς βασιλείας οὔ- ons, μᾶλλον μὲν οὖν ἐν τοῖς ἱεροῖς τό- ποις καὶ τὰ πρῶτα ἐχούση». |—Sozomen., lib. ii. 6. 84. [ibid. p. 93.]
P [See Photius, Biblioth. Cod. 30, speaking of Sozomen, οὖτος δὲ δίκας ἦν λέγων ἐν Κωνσταντινουπόλει.
a Actum est de episcopatus vigore, et de ecclesiz gubernande sublimi ac divina potestate, [nec Christiani ultra
aut durare aut esse jam possumus, si ad hoc ventum est ut perditorum minas atque insidias pertimescamus. — S. Cypr. Epist. lv. (lix. ed. Oxon.) ad Cornelium, p. 80. ed. Ben. ]
τ [Item ad Samuelem, cum a Judzis sperneretur, Deus dicit: ‘ Non te spreve- runt, sed me spreverunt.’— Ibid., p. 81.]
5. [Et Dominus quoque in evangelio: ‘Qui audit vos, inquit, me audit, et eum qui me misit; et qui rejicit vos, me rejicit, et qui me rejicit, rejicit eum qui me misit.’—Tbid. ]
t [Item in Actibus apostolorum post- modum beatus apostolus Paulus &c.... ‘nesciebam,’ inquit, fratres, quia pon- tifex est. Scriptum est enim; Prin- cipem populi &c.’...cum hee tanta ac talia et multa alia exempla, preecedant, quibus sacerdotalis auctoritas ..... firmatur &c.—lIbid. ]
826 St. Cyprian on the Priesthood. St. Ambrose ;
ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ oF translation of that Church, “Thou shalt not revile the prince
EPISCOPAL
ORDER.
of thy people.” In another passage he speaks of the bishop as “ the vicar of Christ",” and saith, that “ he who makes him- self judge of the bishop makes himself judge of God.” He also calls bishops “ the stewards of God’,” and saith, that “he who is the adversary of the lawful bishop is the adversary of God*,” with more to this purpose. I recommend the serious perusal of this epistle to you, to inform you better about the nature of those things which have been in dispute between you and me.
St. Ambrose saith the office of a bishop “is such an honour’, and a dignity so sublime, that it cannot be matched by any comparison; and that to liken it to the splendour and diadems of princes is a more inferior comparison than to compare lead to splendid gold.” In his epistle to the emperor Valentinian I., as a bishop he conjured him by the Christian faith not to hearken to the petition of his heathen subjects’, who desired leave to set up altars to their gods, upon which they might sacrifice to them; and said if he did
" [Neque enim aliunde hereses oborte sunt aut nata sunt schismata quam inde quod sacerdoti Dei non ob- temperatur, nec unus in ecclesia ad tempus sacerdos et ad tempus judex vice Christi cogitatur: cui si secun- dum magisteria divina obtemperaret fraternitas universa, nemo adversum sacerdotum collegium quicquam move- ret, nemo post divinum judicium, post populi suffragium, post cdepiscoporum consensum, judicem se jam non epi- scopi, sed Dei, faceret.—lId. ibid., p. 82. ed. Ben. |
v [Cum ille nec minima fieri sine voluntate Dei dicat, existimat aliquis summa et magna aut non sciente aut non permittente Deo in ecclesia Dei fieri, et sacerdotes id est dispensatores ejus, non de ejus sententia ordinari ?— Ibid. ]
x [Non... ideo adversarius et ini- micus major est Christo quia tantum sibi vindicat in seeculo.—Ibid., p. 80. Tile qui Christi adversarius et ecclesiz ejus inimicus ad hoc ecclesie przepo- situm sua infestatione prosequitur.— Ibid., p. 82. Qui adversarius Christi est.—Ibid., p. 89. ]
Y [ Honor igitur, fratres, et sublimitas episcopalis nullis poterit comparationi- bus adequari. Si regum fulgori com-
pares et principum diademati, longe erit inferius, tanquam si plumbi me- tallum ad auri fulgorem compares.— Pseudo-Ambr. jde Dignitate Sacerdo- tali, c. 2. ap. S. Ambr. Op., tom. ii. App. col. 359, B. See above, vol. i. p- 195, notes p, q. ]
z [Et ideo memor legationis prox- ime mandate mihi convenio iterum fidem tuam, convenio mentem tuam ; ne vel respondendum secundum hujus- modi petitionem gentilium censeas, vel in ejusmodi responsa sacrilegium sub- scriptionis adjungas. .. . Certe si aliud statuitur, episcopi hoc #quo animo pati et dissimulare non possumus; licebit tibi ad ecclesiam convenire: sed illic non invenies sacerdotem, aut invenies resistentem. Quid respondebis sacer- doti dicenti tibi: munera tua non que- rit ecclesia; quia templa gentilium muneribus adornasti? Ara Christi dona tua respuit, quoniam aram simulacris fecisti; vox enim tua, manus tua: et subscriptio tua, opus est tuum. Obse- quium tuum Dominus Jesus recusat et respuit, quoniam idolis obsequutus es; dixit enim tibi: non potestis duo- bus dominis servire.—S. Ambrosii Epist. xvii. (xi. ed. Rom.) ad Valenti- nianum, Op., tom. ii. col. 826, E; 827, B.]
his epistle to the emperor Valentinian I. 327
grant their petition, “the bishops would neither suffer nor connive at it, and that come to the church when he would he should either find no priest, or a priest to withstand him. What wilt thou answer the bishop when he shall say, ‘The Church desires none of thy offerings, who hast adorned the temples of the Gentiles with gifts? The altar of Christ refuseth thy offerings, who hast made an altar to idols. Thy speech, thy hand, thy subscriptions are evidence against thee: our Lord Jesus refuses and rejects thy worship, be- cause thou hast served idols, for He hath told you you can- not serve two masters.’” In another epistle to his sister Marcellina he shews what he did when the great officers of the court brought him that emperor’s decree to deliver up his church to the Arians’: “TI answered,” saith he, “as be- came my order, that a church of God ought not to be given up by a bishop... The next day,.being the Lord’s day, they
a Non licet imperatori, vel cuiquam pietatem custodienti aliquid contra di- vina presumere, nec quicquam, quod evangelicis, propheticis, aut apostolicis regulis obviet, agere.—| Decret., pars i. dist. x. cap. 2. ]
> Epist. xiv. [Convenerunt me pri- mo principes virtutum viri, comites consistoriani, ut et basilicam traderem, et procurarem ne quid populus turba- rum moveret. Respondi quod erat or- dinis, templum Dei a sacerdote tradi non posse. Acclamatum est sequenti die in ecclesia: etiam prefectus eo ve- nit; ccepit suadere vel ut basilica Por- tiana cederemus. Populus reclamavit. Ita tune discessum est, ut intimaturum se imperatori diceret. Sequenti die, erat autem Dominica (it will be ob- served that Hickes confuses these two days) . . - symbolum aliquibus compe- tentibus in baptisteriis tradebam basi- lice. Illic nuntiatum est, &c..... populum eo (se. in Portianam basili- cam) pergere. Ego tamen manui in munere ; missam facere ceepi. Dum offero, raptum cognoyi a populo Castnu- lum quendam, quem presbyterum di- cerent Arriani. Amarissime flere et orare in ipsa oblatione Deum cepi, ut subveniret, ne cujus sanguis in causa ecclesiz fieret: certe ut meus sanguis pro salute non solum populi, sed etiam pro ipsis impiis effunderetur. Conve- nior ipse a comitibus et tribunis ut ba- silice fieret matura traditio, dicentibus imperatorem jure suo uti; eo quod in
potestate ejus essent omnia. Respondi, si a me peteret, quod meum esset, non refragaturum ; verum ea que sunt di- vina, imperatoriz potestati non esse sub- jecta....His dictis, illi abierunt. ... Man- datur denique: Trade basilicam. Re- spondeo: Nec mihi fas est tradere, nec tibi accipere, imperator, expedit; do- mum privati nullo potes jure temerare, domum Dei existimas auferendum ἢ Allegatur imperatori licere omnia, ip- sius esse universa, Respondeo: Noli te gravare, imperator, ut putes te in ea que divina sunt, imperiale aliquod jus habere ; esto Deo subditus; scriptum est: que Dei Deo, que Cesaris Cx- sari.—Ibid., Epist. xx. (xiv. ed. Rom.) ad Marcellinam, § 2. Op., col. 853, A, 864. ὃ 10. col. 855, A. § 16. col. 857,
3
Paulinus in vita 5. Ambrosii, col. 81, 82. ap. Op.S. Ambr. ed. Par. 1614. tom. i. The passage referred to is an account of a similar instance of St. Am- brose’s firmness when Theodosius or- dered that a Jews’ synagogue should be rebuilt which had been burnt down by some monks, and that the monks should be punished. St. Ambrose first wrote to the emperor (Epist. xl. tom. ii. col. 946, sqq.); then preached on the subject in his presence; and refused to proceed with the service of the altar till the emperor had promised that the edict should be recalled.— Vita S. Ambr. a Paulino, § 22, 23. ap. S. Ambr. Op., tom. ii. App. col. vi. vii. ed. Ben. ]
CHAP. I. SECT. IV.
328 St. Ambrose’ refusal to give up the Churches to the emperor.
ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or came again, when I was officiating, and continuing in my
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
office, I began to administer the holy Eucharist, (missam facere cepi,) and while I was offering I understood that one Castulus, an Arian presbyter, was seized by the people. I began to weep bitterly, and beseech God in the very obla- tion that by His help no man’s blood might be shed in the cause of the Church, but that my blood rather might be shed, not only for the people, but for the wicked themselves. They told me the emperor did but use his own right, because all things were in his power, and that I should presently deliver up the church. I answered, that if they asked for any thing that was mine I would not refuse it, but things that were God’s were not subject to the emperor’s power. With these sayings they went away. It was peremptorily demanded, Deliver up the Church; I answered, It is nei- ther lawful for me, O emperor, to deliver it up, nor for thee to receive it. Thou that hast no right to invade a private man’s house, dost thou think to seize the house of God? To this it was replied, that all things were the emperor's. I answered, O emperor, do not hurt yourself so much as to think that you have any imperial right to the things that are God’s. Do not exalt yourself; if you would reign long, be subject to God; for it is written, ‘Render unto Cesar the things that are Cesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s:’” with much more to the same purpose.
When the young emperor cited him to dispute with Auxen- tius the Arian bishop, before him and his counsellors, he sent him a letter, in which he speaks thus®: “In answer to your summons, I think I may very fitly return what the emperor your father, of glorious memory, not only answered in word, but established by laws, that in a cause of faith, or relating to any ecclesiastical order, he ought to judge who is rightly qualified by his office,” (i. e., that priests should judge
¢ [Cui rei respondeo, ut arbitror, competenter. Nec quisquam contu- macem judicare me debet, cum hoc adferam, quod angustz memorize pater tuus non solum sermone respondit, sed etiam legibus suis sanxit: in causa fidei vel ecclesiastici cujus ordinis eum judicare debere, qui nec munere impar sit, nec jure dissimilis; hoc est, sacer- dotes de sacerdotibus voluit judicare.
Quinetiam si alias quoque argueretur episcopus, et morum esset examinanda causa, etiam hee voluit ad episcopale judicium pertinere. Quis igitur con- tumaciter respondit clementie tux? Ille qui te patris similem esse desi- derat, an qui vult esse dissimilem ? Quando audisti, clementissime impe- rator, in causa fidei laicos de episcopo judicasse? Ita ergo quadam adulatione
The emperor had no right to judge in ecclesiastical causes. 329
of priests ;) “ moreover, that if a bishop should be called in question for his manners, the judgment likewise should belong to bishops. Which then of us did answer perversely, he that would have you like your father, or he that would have you unlike him? And when did you hear, most gra- cious emperor, that laics judged of bishops in causes of faith ? Iam not so depraved with flattery that I should be unmindful of my sacerdotal right, and give up that to another, which God hath given to me. If a bishop must be taught by a layman, it will follow that a bishop must learn of a layman, and the layman dispute, and he hear. But if we will con- sider the Scriptures, or ancient times, no man can deny but that in matters of faith, I say, in matters of faith, bishops used to judge Christian emperors, and not emperors bishops. When by God’s blessing, you are older, you will be able to judge what a kind of bishop he is, that will subject the right of the priest to laymen. Your father, who by God’s blessing lived till riper years, said, It be- longs not to me to judge among bishops; but your grace now saith, 1 ought to be judge .. . The life of Ambrose is not of that moment*, that for it he should betray the priest- hood; one man’s life is not of that value as the dignity of all the bishops, by whose advice I have wrote all these things.”
To the same effect, but more at large, speaks another bishop, who had the spirit of St. Ambrose, to Justinian the emperor; I mean Facundus Hermianensis, in the three last
curvamur, ut sacerdotalis simus imme- mores, et quod Deus donavit mihi, hoc ipse aliis putem esse credendum? Si docendus est episcopus a laico, quid sequetur? Laicus ergo disputet, et epi- scopus audiat: episcopus discat a laico? Ut certe si vel scripturarum seriem divinarum, vel vetera tempora retrac- temus, quis est qui abnuat in causa fidei, in causa inquam fidei, episcopos solere de imperatoribus Christianis, non imperatores de episcopis judicare. Eris, Deo favente, etiam senectutis maturitate provectior, et tune de hoc censebis, qualis ille episcopus sit, qui laicis jus sacerdotale substernit. Pater tuus, Deo favente, vir maturioris vi, dicebat: non est meum judicare inter episcopos; tua nunc dicit clementia; ego debeo judicare... Non tanti est
Ambrosius, ut propter se dejiciat sacer- dotium; non tanti est unius vita, quanti est dignitas omnium sacerdo- tum, quorum de consilio ista dictavi.— S. Ambr., Epist. xxi. (xiii.ed. Rom.) ad Valentinianum, ὃ 2—5. col. 860, C. 544. § 13. col. 862, B.]
4 Paulinus in Vita Ambrosii. [ Hickes seems to refer to a parallel expression in St. Ambrose’s epistle to Theodosius, mentioned above, note b, p. 327, in which he said, as Paulinus relates it, paratum se esse pro tali negotio mor- tem subire, ne dissimulatione sui pre- varicatorem faceret imperatorem qui tam injusta contra ecclesiam precepis- set.—§ 22. ap. Op., S. Ambros., tom. ii. App. col. vi. See Epist, xl. ὃ 7. tom. ii. col. 948, C, D.]
CHAP. I.
SECT. IV. Sa
330 Facundus on the emperor’s interference in spiritual things.
piety or Chapters of his twelfth book*, in which he plainly distin-
EPISCOPAL
ORDER.
guishes between the office and authority of the bishop, and that of the emperor, shewing that it belongs not to the latter to determine in matters of faith. I wish you would read those chapters, out of which, till you have leisure, let me present you with two or three passages’: Cognovit ille (Mar- cianus imperator) quibus in causis uteretur principis potestate, et in quibus exhiberet obedientiam Christiani .... sicut qui meminerat exitus Ozie.... Οὐ hoc itaque vir temperans, et suo contentus officio, ecclesiarum canonum executor esse voluit, non conditor, non exactor.... Verum non solum Ozie regis exitu Marcianus imperator potuit tum moveri, sed Chore quoque, Dathan et Abiron; quorum Chore, licet de filtis esset Levi, qua ex omni populo Israel electi et sacro templi ministerio fuerant deputati ; tamen quoniam simul omnes usurparunt officium sacerdotum, ut immolare Deo auderent, quod multo minus est quam de fide Christiana decernere, terre dehiscentis absorpti voratu, novo et singulari suo exitio stupendum cunctis exemplum presumptoribus reliquerunt. Quomodo ergo sibi laico religiosus et sapiens imperator crederet impune cessurum, vel sanctorum patrum que de fide jam decreta fuerant retractare, vel nova ipse decernere ... . Idcirco igitur pie memoria Leo® (im- perator) quietem non perturbavit Ecclesiae, quia non suo arbitrio ac potestate presumsit doctrine Dominice decreta statuere, nee guicquam solis creditum sacerdotibus usurpavit .... Ea vero™ que postea Zeno imperator, calcata reverentia ordinis Dei, pro suo arbitrio ac potestate decrevit, quis accipiat ?
But to return to St. Ambrose; the same excellent bishop, resolving to animadvert upon the emperor Theodosius the Great by his spiritual authority, for delivering up the people of Thessalonica, without distinction, to the slaughter of the
© [The work of Facundus, to which Hickes refers, is his Defensio Trium Capitulorum, that is, of the three arti- cles, which had been allowed by the council of Chalcedon, and had been recently condemned by an edict of Justinian, A.D. 544. The work is rather a defence of the council of Chal- cedon, which Facundus conceived to be condemned; and is directed against the emperor’s interference in determi- nations of doctrine, It is the substance of the answer given by him in the name
of the bishops of Africa to the emperor at Constantinople, A.D. 547, which was afterwards enlarged and completed. The condemnation of the three articles was afterwards passed by the fifth general council, at Constantinople, A.D. 553.
f [Facundi Hermianensis, pro De- fensione Trium Capitulorum, lib. xii. e. 3. Bibl. Patr., tom. xi. p. 801. col. 1. A—D.]
s (Id. ibid., p. 803. col. 1. A.]
h [Id. ibid., c. 4. p. 804. col. 1. A.]
St. Ambrose repelling Theodosius from the Church. 331
soldiers, did it if this manner; first, he wrote him an excel- lent letter’, with great apostolical freedom, as it became a bishop, but with that submission and respect which was due to his prince. In his letter he vehemently exhorts him to repentance for the Thessalonian massacre, and plainly tells him*, if he did not, he could not administer the holy Eu- charist if he were present; nor should he himself be ad- mitted to offer, before his offering was acceptable to God. But the emperor! presuming to come to church before he had done penitence, the bishop met him at the porch, and after setting before him the greatness of his sin, thus ad- dressed himself to him: ‘“ Oemperor, there is one Lord, and Emperor of all, who made all things. With what eyes can you behold the temple of our common Lord? With what feet can you tread upon holy ground? Or how can you lift up your hand, dropping with the innocent blood of the slain? How can you receive with such hands the blessed body of our Lord? Or how can you bear His precious blood to your mouth, who shed so many men’s blood with the words of it, when you spoke in fury? Be gone therefore, and do not aggravate your crime with a new sin; but take upon you this band, which the Lord of all doth confirm above™.” “This command?,” saith the historian, “the emperor
vets, ἀποσταζούσας ἔτι τοῦ ἀδίκου φόνου
i Epist. [li. (lix. ed. Rom.) Op.,
tom. ii. col. 997, sqq. ed. Ben. ]
k [Offerre non audeo sacrificium si volueris adsistere.—§ 13. col. 1000, B. Tune offeras, cum sacrificandi acce- peris facultatem, quando hostia tua ac- cepta sit Deo.—§ 15. ibid. D. |
1 Theodoret. Eccles. Hist., lib. v. cap. 18; and Sozom. Eccles. Hist., lib. vii. cap. 25. [The passage of Sozomen (Eccl. Hist., tom. ii. pp. 315, sqq.) re- lates the same events as the narrative re- ferred to from Theodoret, which is trans- lated by Hickes in the text, and which is as follows; ᾿Αμβρόσιος ... . ἀφικο- μένον εἰς τὸν Μεδιόλανον τὸν βασιλέα, καὶ συνήθως εἰς τὸν θεῖον εἰσελθεῖν βου- ληθέντα νέων, ὑπαντήσας ἔξω τῶν προ- θύρων, ἐπιβῆναι τῶν ἱερῶν προπυλαίων Ἰοιάδε λέγων ἐκώλυσεν" εἷς... ἅπάν- των δεσπότης καὶ βασιλεὺς, ὃ τῶν ὅλων δημιουργός. ποίοις τοίνυν ὀφθαλ- μοῖς, ὄψει τὸν τοῦ κοινοῦ δεσπότου νεών ; ποίοις δὲ ποσὶ τὸ δάπεδον ἐκεῖνο πατή- σεις τὸ ἅγιον; πῶς δὲ τὰς χεῖρας ἐκτε-
τὸ αἷμα; πῶς δὲ τοιαύταις ὑποδέξῃ χερ- σὶ τοῦ δεσπότου τὸ πανάγιον σῶμα; πῶς δὲ τῷ σώματι προσοίσεις τὸ αἷμα τὸ τί- μιον, τοσοῦτον διὰ τὸν τοῦ θυμοῦ λόγον ἐκχέας παρανόμως“ αἷμα; ἄπιθι τοίνυν, καὶ μὴ πειρῶ τοῖς δευτέροις τὴν προτέραν αὔξειν παρανομίαν, καὶ δέχου τὸ δεσμὸν, ᾧ 6 θεὸς ὁ τῶν ὅλων δεσπότης ἄνωθεν γίγνεται σύμψηφος-.---Εἰοο]. Hist., tom. iii, pp. 215, 216. The extract below in note 0, p. 332, is the continuation of this passage. ]
m This reproof of the emperor Theo- dosius, and penance imposed upon him by St. Ambrose, is approved by our Church, in her Homily of the Right Use of the Church.—[Second Book of Homilies, Homily i. part ii. p. 162, Oxford, 1832, quoted above, vol. i. p. 160.]
n Per idem tempus causa Thessalo- nicensis Civitatis non minima successit tribulatio sacerdoti, cum civitatem pene deletam comperisset; promiserat enim
CHAP. I.
SECT. IV. ee
332 The contrition of Theodosius ;
ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or Obeyed®, for being well instructed in the Divine oracles, he
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
knew very well what was the duty of the bishop, and what was the emperor’s, and returned with sighs and tears to his palace. Eight months passed, and on the next Christmas- day, as the emperor sat in his palace all in tears, Rufinus, one of his great officers, who was familiar with him, came to him, and asked him why he wept so much? The emperor with bitter sighs and more tears answered Rufinus, ‘ You are not sensible of my misery; I sigh and lament considering my calamity, in that the Church of God is open to slaves and beggars, but its doors and heaven are shut up against me; for I well remember the words of our Lord, who plainly said, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven.’ ‘Sir,’ said Rufinus,. ‘I will run, if you please, to the bishop, and entreat him to loose the bands. The emperor replied, ‘ You will never persuade Ambrose to do it ; 1 acknowledge his sentence is just, nor will he ever trans- gress the law of God, for fear of the imperial power.’ But Rufinus pressing to go, the emperor gave him leave, hoping
1111 imperator se veniam daturum civi- bus supradictz civitatis: sed agentibus comitibus occulte cum imperatore, ig- norante sacerdote, usque in horam ter- tiam gladio civitas est donata, atque plurimi interemti innocentes. Quod factum ubi cognovit sacerdos, copiam imperatori ingrediendi ecclesiam dene- gavit; nec prius dignum judicavit ceetui ecclesia, vel sacramentorum communione, quam publicam ageret peenitentiam. Cui imperator contra asserebat, David adulterium simul et homicidium perpetrasse. Sed respon- sum illico est; Qui secutus es erran- tem, sequere corrigentem. Quod ubi audivit clementissimus imperator, ita suscepit animo, ut publicam pceniten- tiam non abhorreret.—Paulinus in vita S. Ambrosii, col. 82. [ὃ 24. ap. S. Ambr. Op., tom. ii. App. col. vii. ed. Ben. }
° [τούτοις εἴξας 6 βασιλεὺς τοῖς λό- yous* (τοῖς yap θείοις λογίοις ἐντεθραμ- μένος, ἤδει σαφῶς τίνα μὲν τῶν ἱερέων, τίνα δὲ τῶν βασιλέων ἴδια") στένων καὶ δακρύων ἐπανῆλθεν εἰς τὰ βασίλεια. χρόνου δὲ συχνοῦ διελθόντος, ὀκτὼ γὰρ ἀναλώθησαν μῆνες, κατέλαβεν ἣ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν γενέθλιος ἑορτή. ὁ δὲ βασιλεὺς ἐν τοῖς βασιλείοις ὀλοφυρό- μενος καθῆστο, τὴν τῶν δακρύων dva- λίσκων λιβάδα. τοῦτο θεασάμενος Ῥου-
φῖνος, μάγιστρος δὲ τηνικαῦτα ἦν, καὶ πολλῆς μετεῖχε παῤῥησίας, ἅτε δὴ συνη- θέστερος ὧν, προσέλθων ἤρετο τῶν δα- κρύων τὸ αἴτιον. 5 δὲ πικρῶς ἀνοιμώξας, καὶ σφοδρότερον mpoxéas τὸ δάκρυον, σὺ μὲν, ἔφη, Ῥουφῖνε, παίζεις τῶν γὰρ ἐμῶν οὐκ ἐπαισθάνῃ κακῶν. ἐγὼ δὲ στέ- vw καὶ ὀλοφύρομαι τὴν ἐμαυτοῦ συμφο- ρὰν λογιζόμενος, ὡς τοῖς μὲν οἰκέταις καὶ τοῖς προσαίταις ἄνετος 6 θεῖος νεὼς, καὶ εἰσιάσιν ἀδεῶς, καὶ τὸν οἰκεῖον ἂν- τιβολοῦσι δεσπότην" ἐμοὶ δὲ καὶ οὗτος ἄβατος, καὶ πρὸς τούτῳ μοι ὃ οὐρανὸς ἀποκέκλεισται. μέμνημαι γὰρ τῆς δεσπο- τικῆς φωνῆς ἢ διαῤῥήδην φησὶν, ὃν ἂν δήσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ἔσται δεδεμένος ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. ὃ δὲ, διαδραμοῦμαι, ἔφη, εἴ σοι δοκεῖ, καὶ τὸν ἀρχιερέα πείσω λι- παρήσας λῦσαί σοι τὰ δεσμά. οὐ πείσε- ται, ἔφη ὃ βασιλεύς. οἶδα yap eye τῆς ᾿Αμβροσίου ψήφου τὸ δίκαιον" οὐδὲ aide- σθεὶς τῆς βασιλείας τὴν ἐξουσίαν, τὸν θεῖον παραβήσεται νόμον. ἐπειδὴ δὲ πλείοσι χρησάμενος ὁ Ῥουφῖνος λόγοις πείθειν ὑπέσχετο τὸν ᾿Αμβρόσιον, ἀπελ- θεῖν αὐτὸν ὁ βασιλεὺς κατὰ τάχος ἐκέ- λευσεν. καὶ αὐτὸς δὲ ὑπὸ τῆς ἐλπίδος βουκοληθεὶς, ἠκολούθησε μετὰ βραχὺ, ταῖς ὑποσχέσεσι Ῥουφίνου πεισθείς. av- τίκα δὲ τὸν ‘Povdivoy ἰδὼν ὁ θεῖος ᾿Αμ- βρόσιος, τὴν τῶν κυνῶν ἀναίδειαν, ἔφη, “Ῥουφῖνε, ζηλοῖς. τοσαύτης γὰρ μιαιφο-
his submission to St. Ambrose. 333
he himself should follow. But as soon as the divine Am- brose, as the historian calls him, saw Rufinus, he severely rebuked him, as one of the authors of the massacre: but Rufinus continuing to supplicate, and telling him that the emperor was ready to come; the divine Ambrose being warmed with zeal said, ‘I tell you, Rufinus, before he comes, that I will hinder him from entering into the church: and if he turns his power into tyranny, I will receive my death with pleasure.’ Rufinus hearing this despatched a mes- senger to the emperor, to pray him to stay at home, but meeting him in the piazza, ‘I will go,’ saith his majesty, ‘and bear my just reproach.’ And coming to the bounds of the church, he did not offer to go into it, but coming to the bishop who was in the chapter-house, he prayed him to ab- solve him from his bands; Ambrose told him that his coming in that manner was tyrannical, and that he had been trans- ported with fury against God, and trodden His laws under foot. To whom the emperor replied, ‘I dare not transgress the (Church’s) laws, nor contrary to them do I desire to enter within the holy doors, but I come to beseech you to loose me from my bands, and to consider the mercy of our common Lord, nor to keep that door shut against me, which
our Lord hath opened to all that repent.’
To whom the
bishop thus replied; ‘What penitence will you then shew
vias γενόμενος σύμβουλος, Thy αἰδῶ τῶν / > i > \ Leu’ a μετώπων ametvoas. .. ἐπειδὴ δὲ ὁ Ῥουφῖ- νος ἠντιβόλει, καὶ τὸν βασιλέα ἔλεγεν ἥξειν, ὑπὸ τοῦ θείου ζήλου πυρποληθεὶς ᾿Αμβρόσιος 6 θεσπέσιος, ἐγὼ μὲν, ἔφη, & « ~ ΄ ε , ~ ε Poudive, προλέγω ὡς κωλύσω τῶν ἷε- ρῶν αὐτὸν προβῆναι προθύρων. εἰ δὲ εἰς τυραννίδα τὴν βασιλείαν μεθίστησι, δέ- foum κἀγὼ μεθ᾽’ ἡδονῆς τὴν σφαγήν. τούτων 6 “Poudivos ἀκούσας, ἐμήνυσε διά τινος τῷ βασιλεῖ τὸν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως σκο- mov’ καὶ μένειν εἴσω τῶν βασιλείων πα- ρήνεσεν" 6 δὲ βασιλεὺς, κατὰ μέσην τὴν ἀγορὰν ταῦτα μαθὼν, ἄπειμι, ἔφη, καὶ τὰς δικαίας δέξομαι παροινίας. ἐπειδὴ τοὺς c \ ta ’ \ ἱεροὺς περιβόλους κατέλαβεν, εἰς μεν τὸν θεῖον οὐκ εἰσελήλυθε νεὼν, πρὸς δὲ τὸν ἀρχιερέα προσγενόμενος, ἐν δὲ τῷ > ~ Ὁ co ἀσπαστικῷ οἴκῳ οὗτος καθῆστο, ἐλιπάρει λυθῆναι τῶν δεσμῶν. ὃ δὲ τυραννικὴν ἐκάλει τὴν παρουσίαν, καὶ κατὰ τοῦ θεοῦ / wv ‘ μεμῃνέναι τὸν Θεοδόσιον ἔλεγε, καὶ τοὺς ἐκείνου νόμους πατεῖν. ὃ δὲ βασιλεὺς, οὐ θρασύνομαι, ἔφη, κατὰ τῶν κειμένων νό-
μων, οὐδὲ παρανόμως ἐπιβῆναι τῶν ἱερῶν προθύρων ἐφίεμαι" ἀλλὰ σὲ λῦσαί μοι τῶν δεσμῶν ἀξιῶ, καὶ τὴν τοῦ κοινοῦ δεσπότου φιλανθρωπίαν λογίσασθαι, καὶ μὴ κλεῖσαί μοι θύραν, ἣν πᾶσι τοῖς μετα- μελείᾳ χρωμένοις 6 δεσπότης ἀνέῳξεν. 6 δὲ ἀρχιερεὺς ἔφη ποίαν οὖν μεταμέ- λειαν ἔδειξας μετὰ τοσαύτην παρανο- μίαν; ποίοις δὲ φαρμάκοις τὰ δυσίατα ἐθεράπευσας τραύματα; 6 δὲ βασιλεὺς, σὺν ἔργον, ἔφη, τὸ καὶ δεῖξαι καὶ κερά- σαι τὰ φάρμακα, καὶ τὰ δυσίατα θερα- πεῦσαι: ἐμὸν δὲ δέξασθαι τὰ προσ- φερόμενα. τότε 6 θεῖος ᾿Αμβρόσιος, ἐπει- δὴ τῷ θυμῷ, ἔφη, τὸ δικάζειν ἐπιτρέπεις, καὶ οὐκ ὃ λογισμὺς τὴν γνῶσιν, GAN 6 θυμὸς ἐκφέρει, γράψον νόμον τοῦ θυμοῦ τὰς ψήφους ἀργὰς ποιοῦντα καὶ περιττάς" καὶ τριάκοντα ἡμέρας αἱ φονευτικαὶ καὶ δημευτικαὶ μενέτωσαν γνώσεις ἐγγεγραμ- μέναι, τὴν τοῦ λογισμοῦ προσδεχόμεναι κρίσιν. διελθωσῶν δὲ τῶν ἡμερῶν, οἱ τὰ ἐγνωσμένα γεγραφότες τὰ προστεταλ- μέναδεικνύτωσαν .κκαὶ τηνικαῦτα τοῦ θυμοῦ
CHAP. I.
SECT. IV.
DIGNITY OF EPISCOPAL ORDER.
Ps. 119. 25.
1 Adhesit pavimento. —Vers.Lat.
334 The penitence and humility of Theodosius ;
for so great a crime? and by what medicines will you heal so great a wound?’ ‘It is your part,’ saith the emperor, ‘to prescribe that.’ ‘Then,’ saith the bishop, ‘make a law, that the execution of the imperial sentences should be de- ferred for thirty days, that the anger of the emperor may have time to cool, and that their passions being moderated by time, they may then consider whether orders are just or unjust.’ The emperor liking this proposal presently enacted it into a law, and signed it with his hand. When he had done this, Ambrose absolved his majesty from his bands; and he went into the church, and neither standing, nor kneeling, but prostrating his body to the earth, he spoke the words of David, ‘ My soul cleaveth to the dust', but quicken Thou me according to Thy word.’ Then tearing his hair, and beating his forehead, and weeping very much, he begged absolution. Then the time coming when the offermg was to be made upon the holy table, he got up, and went up weeping to the altar; and when he had offered, he stayed within the rails, as he was wont to do at Constantinople. But the great Ambrose sent his archdeacon to him, to know what he meant; and when he replied he only stayed there to receive the holy mysteries; he sent him word again, that the place within the rails was only for the priests, and none else; and therefore bid him go into the common station without the rails, and communicate with the rest, for the
πεπαυσμένου καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν δικάζων ὃ λο- γισμὸς ἐξετάσει τὰ ἐγνωσμένα, καὶ ὄψε- ται εἴτε ἄδικα, εἴτε δίκαια εἴη. ταύτην ὃ βασιλεὺς δεξάμενος τὴν εἰσήγησιν καὶ ἄριστα ἔχειν ὑπολαβὼν, εὐθὺς γραφῆναί τε τὸν νόμον ἐκέλευσε, καὶ τοῖς τῆς ol- κείας χειρὸς ἐβεβαίωσε γράμμασι. τού- του δὲ γενομένου, διέλυσε τὸν δεσμὸν 6 θεῖος ᾿Αμβρόσιος. οὕτως ὁ πιστότατος βασιλεὺς εἴσω γενέσθαι θαῤῥήσας τοῦ θείου νεὼ, οὐκ ἑστὼς τὸν δεσπότην ἱκέ- τευεν, οὐδὲ τὰ γόνατα κλίνας" ἀλλὰ πρηνὴς ἐπὶ τοῦ δαπέδου κείμενος, τὴν Δαυϊτικὴν ἀφῆκε φωνήν ἐκολλήθη τῷ ἐδάφει ἡ ψυχή μου, ζησόν με κατὰ τὸν λόγον σου" καὶ ταῖς χερσὶν ἀποτίλλων τὰς τρίχας“, καὶ τὸ μέτωπον, καὶ ταῖς τῶν δακρύων σταγόσι τοὔδαφος καταῤῥαίνων, συγγνώμης ἠντιβόλει τυχεῖν. ἐπειδὴ δὲ ὁ καιρὸς ἐκάλει τῇ ἱερᾷ τραπέζῃ τὰ δῶρα προσενεγκεῖν, ἀναστὰς μετὰ τῶν ἴσων δακρύων, τῶν ἀνακτόρων ἐπέβη" προσε-
νεγκὼν δὲ ὥσπερ εἰώθει, ἔνδον παρὰ τὰς κιγκλίδας μεμένηκεν. ἀλλὰ πάλιν 6 μέ- γας ᾿Αμβρόσιος οὐκ ἐσίγησεν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξε- παίδευσε τὴν τῶν τόπων διαφοράν. καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἤρετο εἴ τινος δέοιτο. τοῦ δὲ βασιλέως εἱρηκότος, ὡς προσμένει τὴν τῶν θείων μυστηρίων μετάληψιν, ἐδήλω- σεν, ὑπουργῷ τῷ τῶν διακόνων ἡγουμένῳ χρησάμενος, ὅτι, τὰ ἔνδον, ὦ βασιλεῦ, μό- νοις ἐστὶν ἱερεῦσι βατά" τοῖς δὲ ἄλλοις ἅπασιν ἀδύνατά τε καὶ ἄψαυστα. ἔξιθι τοίνυν, καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις κοινώνει τῆς στάσεως, ἁλουργὶς γὰρ βασιλέας, οὐχ ἱερέας, ποιεῖ. καὶ ταύτην δὲ ὃ πιστότατος βασιλεὺς ἀσμένως δεξάμενος τὴν εἰσή- ynow, ἀντεδήλωσεν, ws οὐ θρασύτητι χρώμενος ἔνδον τῶν κιγκλίκων μεμέ- νηκεν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν Κωνσταντινουπόλει τοῦτο εἶναι ἔθος μαθών: χάριν δὲ ὀφείλω, ἔφη, καὶ τῆσδε τῆς ἰατρείας. τοσαύτῃ καὶ τηλικαύτῃ καὶ 6 ἀρχιερὲυς καὶ ὃ βασιλεὺς διέλαμπον ἀρετῇ. ἀμφοτέρων
alleged by Facundus to the emperor Justinian. 335
purple made emperors but not priests. This most faithful emperor took this admonition with meekness, and bid the archdeacon tell the bishop that he stayed there not out of any presumption, but because he had been wont to do so at Constantinople. So much grace, saith the historian, shone both in the bishop, and the emperor, who told Nectarius afterwards, that of all the bishops of the empire, Ambrose alone was worthy of that name.” ‘This great example of Theodosius, Facundus bishop of Hermiane in Africa proposed to Justinian the emperor, as worthy of his imitation, with a courage like that of Ambrose, becoming a bishop of God and the Church. Si princeps quoque pro suis peccatis intercesso- rem vult habere sacerdotem” ... Quod metuens beate recorda- tionis major Theodosius imperator, cujus semper memorabilis erit in ecclesia Christi memoria, quanquam sepe de magnorum barbarorum preliis, et de maximorum tyrannorum triumphave- rit : non tamen ex hujuscemodi victoriarum frequentia, in quibus Trajano, filio gehenne, comparari non potest, veram meruit gloriam, sed de supplici et publica peccati sui penitentia, quam expugnato regali fastigio placide atque humiliter antistite Am- brosio castigante suscepit, et indictum sibi debite satisfactionis tempus ab ecclesie communione remotus implevit. Pie ad- modum credens, et sapienter intelligens, quod non ex temporali potestate qua fuerat etiam sacerdotibus Dei prepositus, sed ex eo pervenire posset ad vitam quod illis erat ise subjectus. Unde credendum est quia si nune Deus aliquem Ambrosium suscitaret Theodosius non deesset. “If the emperor,” saith he, “would have the bishop intercede to God for his sins, he must not disdain to let him chastise him for them; so that
γὰρ ἔγωγε ἄγαμαι. .... τοὺς δὲ δὴ τῆς εὐ. ret., Hist. Eccl., lib. v. cap. 18. pp.
σεβείας bpous, ods παρὰ τοῦ μεγάλου ἀρχιερέως μεμάθηκε, καὶ εἰς τὴν Κων- σταντινούπολιν ἐπανελθὼν διετήρησεν. ἑορτῆς γὰρ αὐτὸν πάλιν θείας εἰς τὸν θεῖον ἀγαγούσης νεὼν, τῇ ἱερᾷ τραπέζῃ τὰ δῶρα προσενεγκὼν εὐθὺς ἐξελήλυθεν. τοῦ δὲ τῆς ἐκκλησίας προέδρου, Νεκτά- ριος δὲ τηνικαῦτα ἦν, δεδηλωκότος, τί δή ποτε μὴ μεμένηκας ἔνδον ; στενάξας, μόγις, ἔφη, βασιλέως καὶ ἱερέως ἐδι- δάχθην διαφοράν" μόγις εὗρον ἀληθείας διδάσκαλον" ᾿Αμβρόσιον γὰρ οἶδα μόνον ἐπίσκοπον ἀξίως καλούμενον. τοσοῦτον ὀνίνησιν ἔλεγχος παρὰ ἀνδρὸς ἀρετῇ λάμποντος προσφερόμενος. --- Theodo-
216, sqq. }
P [The words of the original are; Si princeps quoque pro suis peccatis intercessorem yvult habere sacerdotem, etiam in suis peccatis castigatorem ferre non dedignetur, ut pro illo inter- cedens possit audiri, ne dicatur ei quod Hieremiz dictum est: ‘ Noli orare pro populo hoc, et ne postulaveris misereri illius, et non accesseris ad me pro eis, quia non exaudiam te?’ Quod metuens, &c. as in the text.—Facundi Hermia- nensis pro Defensione Trium Capitu- lorum, 110. xii. c. 5. Bibl. Patr., tom. xi. p. 806, col. 1. B, sqq.]
CHAP. I. "
SECT. IV.
896 Theodosius regarded himself as one of the people.
ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or when he makes intercession for his majesty, he may be
EPISCOPAL
ORDER.
SECT. V.
The dis- tinction of clergy and laity as old as the Christian religion.
heard, and that God may not say unto him as He did to the prophet Jeremiah, ‘Pray not thou for this people, neither lift up cry or prayer for them, neither make intercession to Me, for I will not hear thee.’ The emperor Theodosius the elder, of blessed remembrance, (whose memory will alway be celebrated in the Church,) although he triumphed over the greatest tyrants, and won many battles over great barbarous princes, yet deserved he true glory, not from the frequency of such great victories, in which he may not be compared to Trajan, the son of hell, but that dreading this, he did humble and public penitence for his sin, to which upon the censure of his bishop, Ambrose, he submitted his regal greatness, and in suspension from the communion of the Church fulfilled the time of due satisfaction that was imposed upon him; very piously believing and wisely understanding, that he was to attain life eternal, not by his temporal power, in which he was superior to the bishops, but by subjection to them. From whence it is reasonable to believe, that if it would please God now to raise up an Ambrose, we should not want a Theodosius.”
V. You see, Sir, by this story, that the great Theodosius looked upon himself as one of the laity or people, and by consequence as a subject of the Church as much as any other man, according to what I laid down in my former letters, and that St. Ambrose treated him and Valentinian 11. as such. Nay, Valentinian I. calls himself a layman when he refused to preside in conference between the Catholic bishops and the Arians: “For met,” saith he,
4 [The view referred to is expressed in the latter part of the third Proposi- tion, sent to Serjeant Geers in a pre- vious letter (see above, p. 273, note b.) It is in these words: ‘‘to whom (the bishops)... He requires obedience of all His subjects, of what temporal rank or condition soever.’”’ And more ex- plicitly in Prop. ix. “that all empe- rors and kings, whether absolute or limited in the exercise of their royal power, become members and subjects of (this sacerdotal kingdom) by bap- tism, in the same manner as other men do.’ ]
¥ Sozomen. Hist. Eccl., lib, vi. c. 7.
[ὑπολαβὼν Οὐαλεντινιανὸς, ἐμοὶ μὲν, ἔφη, μετὰ λαοῦ τεταγμένῳ, οὐ θέμις τοιαῦτα πολυπραγμονεῖν. οἱ δὲ ἱερεῖς οἷς τούτου μέλει καθ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς ban βού- λονται cvvitwoay.—Hist. Eccl., tom. ii. p. 227.) and Hist. Tripart., lib. vii. c. 12. { Historiz Ecclesiastice triparti- te, ex tribus Grecis auctoribus Sozo- meno, Socrate et Theodoreto, ab Epi- phanio Scholastico versis, per Cassio- dorum Senatorem in Epitomen redac- tis, libriduodecim ; apud Cassiodori Op., tom. i. p. 807. Rotomagi, 1679. The passage in the Historia Tripartita is simply a translation of that in Sozo- men. ‘The occasion was a request
Emperors treated simply as laymen, in the ancient Church. 837
“who am but one of the laity or people, it is not lawful to examine such things, but let priests, to whom the care of those things appertain, meet to determine them where they please.” So Facundus, the forecited bishop, spoke of Zeno the emperor as a layman, as you may see by the words in the margin‘, as well as by those above cited by me*. And the Church treated Philip the emperor’ in no other manner than as a common layman after he turned Christian, for Babylas the bishop of Antioch, afterwards martyr, “refused to let him come to church to pray with the rest of the people till he had made a solemn confession of his sins, and stood in the order of penitents, and the emperor obeyed.” So Constantine the Great*, mindful of his relation to the Church, sat as a layman in the great council of Nice, in a little throne below the bishops, in which he would not sit down till the synod desired him. He considered what kind of court and whose tribunal that was where he did appear, as it is evident from the speech he made to the bishops, upon receiving the accusations which many of them pre- sented to him against one another, in these words, part of
made by the orthodox bishops to the emperor to allow a council to be held. His answer led to the holding the sy- nod of Lampsacus, A.D. 365. |
* Qui si ea tanquam concilii de- creta susciperent, que unius laici es- sent composita voluntate, statueret om- nia cui de talibus causis judicare non competit, illi vero nihil decernerent, quibus competit judicare.—Facundus Hermianensis, ibid., lib. xii. cap. 3. [ Bibl. Patr., tom. xi. p. 803. col. 1, B.]
« [See above p. 320. ]
Υ [τοῦτον (τὸν Φίλιππον) κατέχει λόγος Χριστιανὸν ὄντα, ἐν ἡμέρᾳ τῆς ὑστάτης τοῦ πάσχα παννυχίδος, τῶν ἐπὶ τῆς ἐκκλησίας εὐχῶν τῷ πλήθει μετα- σχεῖν ἐθελῆσαι" οὐ πρότερον δὲ ὑπὸ τοῦ τηνικάδε προεστῶτος ἐπιτραπῆναι εἰσβα- λεῖν, ἢ ἐξομολογήσασθαι, καὶ τοῖς ἐν πα- ραπτώμασιν ἐξεταζομένοις, μετανοίας τε χώραν ἴσχουσιν, ἑαυτὸν καταλέξαι
. καὶ πειθαρχῆσαί γε προθύμως λέγε- ται, τὸ γνήσιον καὶ εὐλαβὲς τῆς περὶ τὸν θεῖον φόβον διαθέσεως ἔργοις ἐπι- δεδειγμένον. J—Euseb. Hist. Eccl., lib. vi. 6. 34, [tom. i. p. 298. This cir- cumstance is related in the Chronicon Paschale (Alexandrinum) ad Olymp. 257. (ap. Corp. Hist. Byzant., tom. iv.
HICKES.
p- 216. Venet. 1729) on the authority of Leontius, who was bishop of Antioch in the reign of Constantius; and a si- milar story is told by St.Chrysostom, in his Liber de S. Babyla et contra Juli- anum, § 5, 6. (Op., tom. ii. p. 545, B, sqq.,) but scarcely as an historical fact, and without mention of the emperor’s name. He begins (p. 542, D.) ἐγένε- τό τις βασιλεὺς ἐπὶ τῶν προγόνων τῶν ἡμετέρων, καὶ τὰ μὲν ἄλλα ὁποίος τις ἣν οὗτος 6 βασιλεὺς οὐκ ἔχω λέγειν, k.T.A. Pagi considers it to be men- tioned by Eusebius on insufficient au- thority, since Constantine is spoken of by so many writers as the first Chris- tian emperor. Philip was emperor A.D. 244—249, ]
* [θρόνου δὲ σμικροῦ ἐν μέσῳ τεθέν- τος κεκάθικεν, ἐπιτρέψαι τοῦτο τοὺς ἐπι- σκόπους αἰτήσας. |—Theodoret., Hist. Ecel., Aiba sy Ca), 7:5 LOM, ὙΠ; Ρ. 26. παρ et δὲ καὶ 6 βασιλεὺς μετ᾽ αὐτοὺς, καὶ ἐπεὶ παρῆλθεν, eis μέσον ἔστη, καὶ οὐ πρότερον καθίζειν ἡρεῖτο, πρὶν ἂν οἱ ἐπί- σκοποι ἐπινεύσειαν. τοιαύτη τις εὐλά- βεια καὶ αἰδὼς τῶν ἀνδρῶν τὸν βασιλέα κατεῖχε. |—Gelasii Cyziceni Hist. Conc. Nic., lib. ii. c. 6. [Concilia, tom. ii. col. 164, D.]
CHAP. I,
SECT. V.
DIGNITY OF EPISCOPAL ORDER.
338 Our kings regarded by the Church simply as laymen.
which I cited before’: “God hath appointed you, as priests and princes, (ἱερεῖς τε καὶ apyovras,) to judge and determine controversies ; and thought fit to style you gods, as being more excellent than other men, according to what is written, “1 have said, you are gods, and the sons of the Most High ;’ and ‘God standeth in the congregation of gods, He judgeth among the gods;’ wherefore it is your duty to pass by these common matters, and study Divine things.” Thus the ru- bric of our liturgy, which distinguisheth the priest from the people or laity”, supposes the king to be one of the latter, as much as any other man of the congregation. And in Sta- tute 87 Hen. VIII., cap. 172, after he was declared head of the Church of England, he is spoken of as a layman in the preamble of the act. So I take the king to be compre- hended among laymen in a parliament of Edw. I.: “ Lay- men have no authority to dispose of the goods of the Church, but (as the holy Scriptures do testify) they are committed only to the priests to be disposed of.”
I remember, Sir, you were once a little choaked at my discourse in using these words “laity” and “layman,” and making such a distinction between the clergy and the people, though laity is but another word for people; and then you said you had heard that this distinction was first used in the Romish Church, in order to subject kings and enslave the people to the clergy. This, Sir, is a vulgar error, as I have found in conversation, especially among the sceptics, deists, and latitudinarians of all sorts, who commonly affirm it with malicious reflections upon the clergy, though this distinction is necessary in the order of Church government, and was in
Y Gelasius Cyzicenus, ibid., c. 8.[ col. 176, A, B. quoted above, note o, p. 305. The concluding words are, χρὴ τῶν μὲν κοινῶν ὀλιγωρεῖν πραγμάτων, πᾶσαν δὲ τὴν σπουδὴν περὶ τὰ θεῖα ποιεῖσθαι. Ἴ1--- Theodoret, lib. i. [c. 8. ταῦτα δὲ καὶ τὰ τούτοις παραπλήσια, οἷα δὴ παῖς φιλο- πάτωρ τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν ὡς πατράσιν προ- oépepe.—Hist. Eccel., tom, iii. p. 27. ]
7 (e.g. In the fourth Rubric before the Communion Service, ‘The priest standing, &c.... the people kneeling ;”’ before the confession ‘‘ both he and all the people kneeling ;’’ at the Com- munion; “ Then shall the minister first receive the Communion in both kinds
himself, and then proceed to deliver the same to the bishops, priests, and deacons in like manner, (if any be pre- sent,) and after that to the people.” ]
a {“ Where your most royal Majesty is and hath always justly been by the word of God supreme head in earth of the Church of England... neverthe- less the bishop of Rome and his adhe- rents ... have ordained that no lay or married man should... exercise... any jurisdiction ecclesiastical ... which
. did sound. . . to be directly repug- nant to your majestie of supreme head of the Church... your grace being a layman.” —37 Hen. VIII. ο. 17.]
Distinction of the laity from the clergy, scriptural. 389
CHAP, I. SECT. V.
use among the Jews, in whose writings the priests and peo- ple are distinguished both in the law and the prophets, and in the apocryphal writers. The writers of the New Testa- ment use the same distinction, calling the Jewish people by the name of λαὸς, from whence our word laity comes. To omit other places, the Apostle makes the distinction Heb. v. 3: “By reason hereof the high-priest ought as for the peo- ple (περὶ τοῦ Xaod), so for himself, to offer for sins.” So the people of the Jews were not only distinguished from the priests in the temple, but from their doctors and ministers in the synagogue, as in Acts xiii. 15: “ And after the read- ing the law and the prophets, the rulers of the synagogue said unto them, Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation πρὸς τὸν λαὸν, for the people, say on.” So John, as a prophet and minister of baptism to the people, is distinguished from them, Acts xix. 4: “Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance τῷ λαῷ λέγων, saying unto the people.” This distinction be- tween the ministry and the people is as necessary in the Christian as it was in the Jewish Church; and therefore in the New Testament the people or laity are distinguished from their presbyters by the name of flock, according to Acts 20.28; the notation of which word St. Cyprian defines a Church ἄν pe thus”: Ecclesia est plebs sacerdoti suo adunata, et pastori [suo]
grex adherens*. [Plebs in the Roman law signifies all ranks
of people, as distinguished from the senators; so Gaius, lib.
vi. ad Legg. XII Tabularum, 1. 238%. Plebs est ceteri cives sine
senatoribus. And in the legal sense I doubt not but the holy
fathers used the word for all ranks and conditions of people,
as distinguished from the clergy, whose diocesan assemblies
are called synedria by St. Ignatius®, i.e. in his Syrian phrase
Ὁ [St. Cyprian’s words are, I]li sunt ecclesia, plebs &e.—Epist. ]xix. (Ixvi. ed. Oxon.) p.123. ed. Ben. See vol. i. p. 1388. note m. ]
¢ [In the third edition the passage ran on, “‘ Wherefore if the enemies of priesthood please, they may as well in- veigh against us for calling our people our flocks. For ‘flock’ is a word which distinguishes their people from their spiritual pastors, as much as ‘people’ distinguishes them from their priests.’’ The alteration is made, and the portion
Z
of the text following in brackets in- serted, according to the Supplement of 1715, No. 15.]
4 [Digest., lib. 1. tit. xvi. de Verbo- rum significatione, 1. 238. ]
e {S. Ignat. Epist. ad Magnes., 6. 6. (Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 18;) ad Trall., c. 3. (ibid., p. 22,) quoted above, p- 36, notes p, q.; and Epist. Inter- polata ad Philadelph., c. 8. ἐὰν συδρά- μωσιν eis ἑνότητα Χριστοῦ, καὶ συνε- δρείαν τοῦ emicxdrov.—lIbid., p. 80.1
2
ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or sanhedrims, senates ;
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
340 Distinction of the clergy and laity, in Scripture,
so that in those times it was thought no arrogance to make the same distinction of them in the Church that was in the state, which Theophilus Ant. de jure Personarum expresses thus: Et circa personas cum dicimus, hic συγκλητικός senatorius est, aut ex plebe: ὁ δεῖνα συγκλη- TLKOS ἐστιν, ἢ ἰδιώτης. Besides, if the enemies of the priest- hood please, they may as well inveigh against us for calling our people our flocks, as the Apostle did; for ‘flock’ is a word which distinguishes the people from their spiritual pastors, as much as the word ‘people’ distinguishes them from their priests, or the word plebs from the clergy, their ecclesi- astical senators.] This distinction between the clergy and laity is plainly to be seen Acts iv. 32%, where the people are called τὸ πλῆθος: τοῦ δὲ πλήθους τῶν πιστευσάν- των, κιτιλ. “The multitude of those that believed (that is, the people which believed) were of one heart.” So St. Cle- ment calls the laity πλῆθος, 1 Epist. cap. 6; there speak- ing of the Apostles he saith", τούτοις τοῖς ἀνδράσιν... .. συνηθροίσθη πολὺ πλῆθος ἐκλεκτῶν, “To these men were joined a numerous elect people,” or “a numerous people of believers.” So in the same epistle he saithi: “The chief- priest hath his proper office, and to the priests their proper place is assigned, and to the Levites belongs their proper ministration, ὁ δὲ λαϊκὸς ἄνθρωπος, but the layman is con-
£ [καὶ περὶ πρόσωπα μὲν, ὅταν εἴπω- μεν, ὁ δεῖνα συγκλητικός ἐστιν, ἢ ἰδιώ- Ττη5. --- Theophilus Antecessor, Para- phrasis Greca Institutionum, de Jure
personarum, p. 43. Hage, 1751. ]| lib. i.
eee 3.
& So Acts vi. 5. καὶ ἤρεσεν ὃ λόγος ἐνώπιον παντὸς Tod πλήθους. Chap. xv. 12. ἐσίγησε δὲ πᾶν τὸ πλῆθος. Ver. 30. συναγαγόντες τὸ πλῆθος. Chap. xxi. 22. πάντως δεῖ τὸ πλῆθος συνελθεῖν. Chap. xxv. 24. τὸ πλῆθος τῶν ᾿ἸἸουδαίων. --- Henr. Stephan. Thesaur., πλῆθος, mul- titudo, i. e. multitudo popularis, seu turba, plebs, vulgus, (quam significa- tionem inter alias habet et dxAos,... item of πολλοὶ, quibus opponuntur of ὀλίγοι. .. .] Thucyd., lib.» v. .c. 84. πρὸς μὲν “πὸ πλῆθος ἘΠ ἤγαγον, ἐν δὲ ταῖς ἀ ἀρχαῖς, καὶ τοῖς ὁλίγοις λέγειν ἐκέ- λευον περὶ ὧν ἥκουσιν.---ἰ Steph. Thes., tom. vi. col. 7701.]
h [S. Clem. Rom. Ep. i. ad Cor. § 6.
Patr. Apost., tom. 1. Ῥ. 151. ]
[τῷ γὰρ ἀρχιερεῖ ἰδίαι λειτουργίαι δεδομέναι εἰσι, καὶ τοῖς ἰερεῦσιν ἴδιος ὁ τόπος προστέτακται, καὶ λευΐταις ἰδίαι διακονίαι ἐπίκεινται" ὃ λαϊκὸς ἄνθρωπος τοῖς λαϊκοῖς πρυστάγμασιν δέδεται.--- Ibid., § 40. p. 170. ]
Κ Tbid., cap. 40; where Dr. Fell writes most judiciously and learnedly on the place: λαϊκὸς ἄνθρωπος Nulla tam addicta, tam misera servitus est, quam δουλεύοντος τῇ ὑποθέσει. Alias viri doctissimi Salmasius et Seldenus, ut alios minorum gentium criticos pra- teream, Calvini aut Erasti placitis addictos, nunquam tam graviter in arte quam profitebantur lapsi essent, ut di- cere sustinerent ‘olim presbyteros fuisse laicos, et laici vocem, quatenus clero contradistinguitur, serius in ecclesia obtinuisse.' Ignatii loca non affero, siquidem novatores, quando ejus aucto- ritate premuntur, breviter se expediunt,
in the Apostolical Fathers, and the Constitutions. 541
fined to lay matters.” This distinction of laity and clergy, at which our enemies are so offended, descended from these early times to all other ages of the Church, as is plain from almost all the Epistles of St. Ignatius, where also the people of all ranks, in distinction from bishops, priests, and dea- cons, are called πλῆθος,, (which Hesychius glosses by δῆμος, “the people™,” as in Aristotle’s Politics, lib. vi. τέσσαρα δὲ μέρη τοῦ πλήθους, K.T-r." “ there are four sorts of the people.”) In his Epistle to the Ephesians®, where there were great num- bers of Christian people, he calls them πολυπληθίαν, “ the numerous laity.” He likewise calls them πλήρωμα, as the word signifies a body of people in a city, or of men in an army, for so the word is used by Aristotle, in the Politics, lib. iii. ἢ πλείους μὲν ἑνὸς, μὴ μέντοι δυνατοὶ πλήρωμα παρα- σχέσθαι πόλεως, “Though they are more, yet they are too few to make a just number of people for a city.” Thus in the prayer of intercession at the holy Eucharist extant in the twelfth chapter [of the eighth book] of the Apostolical Constitutions, after interceding for all the ecclesiastical orders’, as bishops, &c., then follows the intercession of the Church ὑπὲρ τῶν λαϊκῶν “ for the laics.” And at the latter
dicendo Wevderiypapoy eum, aut inter-
k.7.A. 5. Ignat. Epist. ad Ephes. ὃ 1. polatum.— Fell, Annot. ad loc. ibid.,
Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 12.]
p- 171.]
1S. Ignat. c. 8. Ep. ad Smyrn, [ Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 36.] ὅπου ἂν φανῇ 6 ἐπίσκοπος, ἐκεῖ τὸ πλῆθος ἔστω.--ἰ[ Ad Magnes., 6. 6. ibid., p. 18.] τὸ πᾶν πλῆ- θος ἐθεώρησα ἐν πίστει καὶ ἀγάπῃ.--- ad Trall. [c. 1. ibid., p. 22.] Πολύ- Bios ὃ ἐπίσκοπος ὑμῶν... ὥστε μὲ Td πᾶν πλῆθος ὑμῶν ἐν αὐτῷ θεωρῆσαι.--- Ibid., [c. 8. p. 23.] μὴ ἀφορμὰς δίδοτε τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, ἵνα μὴ δι’ ὁλίγους ἄφρονας τὸ ἐν θεῷ πλῆθος βλασφημῆται.
m [There is a slight inaccuracy in this statement. Hesychius says, πλῆ- os" ἀθροισμὸς, ὄχλος, but just below πληθύς" ὄχλος, Sijuos.—Hesychii Lexi- con in yoc., tom. ii. col. 978. ]
® [ἐπειδὴ τέτταρα μέν ἐστι μέρη μά- λιστα τοῦ πλήθους, γεωργικὸν, βάναυ- σον, ἀγοραῖον, θητικὸν, τέτταρα δὲ τὰ χρήσιμα πρὸς πόλεμον, K.T.A.—Arist. Pol., lib. vi. ο. 7. § 1. Op., tom. x. p. 177, Oxon. 1837. |
ο [ἐπεὶ οὖν Thy πολυπληθίαν ὑμῶν ἐν ὁνόματι θεοῦ ἀπείληφα ἐν ᾿Ονησίμῳ,
P [Ἰγνάτιος, 6 καὶ θεοφόρος, τῇ εὺ- λογημένῃ ἐν μεγέθει θεοῦ πατρὸς (καὶ) πληρώματι, τῇ προωρισμένῃ, κ. τ.λ. TH ἐκκλησίᾳ. |—Id. Epist. ad Eph. In- script. [ibid., p. 11.--- Ἰγνάτιος... ἐκ- κλησίᾳ ayia... ἣν ἀσπάζομαι ἐν τῷ πληρώματι, (cujus omnia saluto mem- bra.) |—Id. Epist. ad Trall. Inscript. (ibid, p. 21.]
4 [Arist. Polit., lib. iii. c. 13. § 13. p- 83. ]
τ [ert προσφέρομέν σοι καὶ ὑπὲρ πάν- τῶν τῶν ἀπ᾽ αἰῶνος εὐαρεστησάντων σοι ἁγίων" πατριαρχῶν" προφητῶν" δικαίων"
ἀποστόλων: μαρτύρων᾽ ὁμολογητῶν" ἐπισκόπων: πρεσβυτέρων διακόνων" ὑποδιακόνων᾽' ἀναγνωστῶν. ψαλτῶν"
παρθένων" χηρῶν" λαϊκῶν καὶ πάντων ὧν αὐτὸς ἐπίστασαι τὰ d6vdéuara.—Const. Apost., lib. viii. ec. 12. Concilia, tom. i. col. 481, C. It is to be observed that these are intercessions (with the offering of the Eucharistic sacrifice) for the departed. ]
CHAP, I.
SECT. VY.
342 Distinction of laity & clergy in St. Cypr., Tert., & Orig.
pienity or end of the [thirteenth]* chapter in the directions for the
EPISCOPAL ORDER,
orderly distribution of the holy mysteries, it is saidt, “ After this let the bishop receive, then the presbyters, &c., and then let mas ὁ λαὸς, all the laity, receive in order, with re- verence and devotion.” In this chapter also we find πλή- ρωμα used, as in Ignatius’ epistles for the people, as dis- tinguished from Church ministers, in this prayer"; “ Let us pray for this Church, and ὑπὲρ τοῦ λαοῦ, the people of it, for the universal episcopate and the whole presbytery, &c. ; and παντὸς Tov πληρώματος τῆς ἐκκλησίας, and for all the people of the Church.” But to give an example or two more, we read in St. Cyprian’s thirtieth Epistle’, Cum episco- pis, presbyteris, diaconis, confessoribus, pariter ac adstantibus laicis. So Epist. lix. p. 1385*, Viderint laici hoc quomodo cu- rent ; sacerdotibus major labor incumbit. In other epistles he calls the laity, as distinguished from the clergy, plebs and populus, as in Epist. lv.Y, Cum Trophimo pars maxima plebis abscesserat. So in Epist. xlix.2, Ceteros cum ingenti populi suffragio recepimus. So before him Tertullian, de Prescript. Heret. c. 41, Hodie presbyter, qui cras laicus, nam et laicis sacerdotalia munera injungunt. So de Fuga in Persecutione,
ο. 110,
Sed quum diaconi, presbyteri, et episcopi fuyiunt, quo-
modo laicus intelligere poterit, qua ratione dictum, ‘ Fugite de
civitate in civitatem ?’ disciplina precedit in laicis.
So de Monogamia, 11°. [This distinction is also to be
Si non hec
read in Origen’s fifth tract upon Matth. (of the Basil edit. 1571, p. 58°), Christum autem ecclesie caput esse, non ego, sed
8 [In the third edition ‘ twelfth” was printed by mistake. ]
t [καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο μεταλαμβανέτω ὃ ἐπίσκοπος" ἔπειτα οἱ πρεσβύτεροι, καὶ οἱ ψάλται, καὶ οἱ ἀσκηταὶ, καὶ ἐν ταῖς γυναιξὶν at διακόνισσαι, καὶ αἱ παρθένοι, καὶ αἱ χῆραι" εἶτα τὰ παιδία, καὶ τότε πᾶς ὃ λαὺς κατὰ τάξιν μετὰ αἰδοῦς καὶ evAaBelas,—Ibid., c. 13. col. 484, E.]
« [ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ταύτης καὶ παν- τὸς τοῦ λαοῦ δεηθῶμεν: ὑπὲρ πάσης ἐπισκοπῆς, παντὸς πρεσβυτερίου, πάσης τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ διακονίας καὶ ὑπηρεσίας, παντὸς τοῦ πληρώματος τῆς ἐκκλησίας. —Ibid., supra, B. |
¥ [Cleri Romani ad Cyprianum, ap. S. Cyprian. Epist. xxxi. (xxx. ed. Oxon.) p. 43, ed. Ben. |
* [The whole passage is; Viderint
laici hoc quomodo curent. Sacerdo- tibus labor major incumbit in asserenda et procuranda Dei majestate, ne quid videamur in hae parte negligere.—S. Cypr. Epist. lv. (lix. p. 135. ed. Oxon.) ad Cornelium, p. 86. ed. Ben. |
y [S. Cypr. Epist. lii. (lv. ed. Oxon. ) ad Antonianum, p. 69. ed. Ben.
z [Cornelii Epist. ad Cypr. ap. S. Cypr. Epist. xlvi. (xlix. ed. Oxon.) p. 61. ed. Ben. |
4 [Tertull. Op., p. 217, C.]
> [Ibid., p. 540, D.]
© [Ibid., p. 531, D.]
4 [Origenis Comment. in Matth., tomus xiii. ὃ 24. Op., tom. iii. p. 603. ed. Ben. This portion of the com- mentary is extant only in the old Latin version. |
No diminution of the dignity of sovereigns implied. 848
Apostolus intellexit: Sacerdotes autem rationabiliter possunt dici ecclesia oculus, quoniam et speculatores habentur ; diaconi autem ceterique ministri, manus. Populum autem esse pedes ecclesie, το. You may also find this distinction in the descriptions of the most ancient Christian Churches, where there were distinct places for the clergy and the people, and the throne in which the bishop sat in the midst of the clergy was esteemed the most sacred and honourable seat, and of greater dignity than that of the emperor, as you may see in Du Fresne’s Constantinopolis Christiana, lib. 111. cap. 42, 49°. Sir, I the rather observe this, because you, and I knew one of the twelve judges who took it ill that he was not placed in the bishop’s seat to hear sermon, as being the most honour- able in the body of the Church. And as this distinction hath been used in all the ages of Christianity, so it is just, and founded in the constitution of the Church, which, as I have shewed by a cloud of witnesses, is a spiritual society, m which, by Christ’s appointment, the clergy are superiors, and the laity or people of all degrees subjects. And as it is no diminution of the clergy and their spiritual dignity to be reckoned, as indeed they are, a part of the people, as the people are distinguished from the prince, so it is no diminu-
tion of the dignity of emperors, kings, and princes, and tem- ~
poral magistrates, to be reckoned among the laity or people, as the people are distinguished from the clergy, whom Christ hath set over them in His kingdom. If it were not to en- large too much upon this distinction, I could shew it abun- dantly out of the councils, as where they speak of the
e [This passage is inserted from the Supplement of 1715, No. 16.]
£ [Chap. 42. In the description of the church of St. Sophia, on the ‘Sedes Imperatoris ;’ after the account of St. Aibrose’s preventing Theodosius from remaining in the Sacrarium (see above, pp- 384, 335); it is said from Sozo- men, Imperatori in ecclesia locum as- signavit ante sacrarii cancellos, ita ut populum imperator, imperatorem or- dine sedis sacerdotes antecederent. . . addit Theophanes ab eo tempore mo- rem hunce inyaluisse, ut deinceps im- peratores extra Bema cum reliqua plebe consisterent: Du Fresne, Constantino- polis Christiana, p. 24, D, E. (p. 187. ed. Par.) ap. Corpus Hist. Byzant.,
tom. xxiv. Venet. 1727.—and cap. 49. In tres (partes) . .. templum dividitur, βῆμα scilicet, ναὸν... et narthecem ... Locum templi sanctissimum . . βῆμα nuncupant ... cumque Bema so- lis sacerdotibus ingredi vel in eo sedere fas esset, inde qui ei inserviebant dicti of ἀπὸ τοῦ βήματος, kK. T.A.—Ibid., p. 27, A. (p. 42. ed. Par.) ]
& Can. Apost. 10, 17, 40, 43, 49, 61, and so in the other canons which are not of equal authority, viz. 52, 75, 76. [The numbering of the Apostolical canon which Hickes follows in these references, is that of Cotelerius, (Patr. Apost., tom. i. pp. 442, sqq.) followed by Johnson in the Clergyman’s Vade Mecum, (vol. 11. p. 2, sqq. See his
CHAP. I.
SECT. V.
DIGNITY OF EPISCOPAL ORDER,
SECT. VI. Of the
mutual relations of the spiri- tual ‘and temporal authorities.
344 Ps. xlv. 16. to be understood of the Apostles and bishops,
clergy and people together, or reducing the former to lay communion; but I hope I have said what is sufficient to convince you of the reason and antiquity of it, and then I have said enough.
VI. I might, to justify myself, proceed to examine St. Hierome and St. Augustine as particularly as I have done St. Ambrose; but hoping I have said enough in my vindication, I will only tell you that they both interpret the sixteenth verse of the forty-fifth Psalm, of the Apostles, and their successors the bishops: “Instead of thy fathers thou shalt have children whom thou mayest make princes in all the earth.” Pro patribus tuis nati sunt tibi filii, constitues eos principes super omnem terram. Upon which words saith the former’; “O Church! the Apostles were thy fathers because they begat thee, but now because they are departed this world thou hast in their place thy sons the bishops, whom thou hast constituted, and these are also thy fathers because thou art governed by them. And they are princes of the Church in all parts of the earth, whithersoever the
Gospel is come.”
‘instead of thy fathers thou shalt have sons’?
Preface, p. 2.) The passages are, εἴ τις κληρικὸς, ἢ λαϊκὸς, ἀφωρισμένος, ἤτοι ἄδεκτος, x. T.A.—Canon Apost., xii. (x. Cotel.) Concil., tom. i. col. 28, B. εἴ Tis κληρικὸς by" k.7.A.,.. . καθαιρείσθω - «- λαϊκὸς ἄφοριξζέσθω ἔτη Tpla.—Can. XXii. xxiii. (xvii. Cotel.) ibid., col. 29, B. εἴ tis λαικὸς. k.7.A.—Can. xvii. (xl. Cotel.) ibid., col. 36, B. εἴ τις ἐπίσκοπος, ἢ πρεσβύτερος, ἢ διάκονος, ἢ bAws τοῦ καταλόγου τοῦ ἱερατικοῦ, K.T.A.... καθαιρείσθω, καὶ τῆς ἐκκλη- σίας ἀποβαλλέσθω, ὡσαύτως καὶ λαϊκός. —Can. 1. (xliii. Cotel.) ibid., col. 36, D. εἴ τις κληρικὸς, k.T.A... « ἄφορι- ζέσθω. ὡσαύτως καὶ Aaikds.—Can. lvi. (xlix. Cotel.) ibid., col. 37, Β. εἴ τις ἐπίσκοπος, ἢ πρεσβύτερος, ἢ διάκονος ἢ ἀναγνώστης, ἢ ψάλτης τὴν ἁγίαν τεσ- σερακοστὴν (τοῦ πάσχα) οὐ νηστεύει, ἢ τετράδα, ἢ παρασκευὴν, καθαιρείσθω" ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ δι’ ἀσθενείαν σωματικὴν ἐμ- ποδίζοιτο" εἰ δὲ λαϊκὸς εἴη, ἀφοριζέσθω. —Can. Ixviii. (Ixi. Cotel.) ibid., col. 40, B. ef τις τὰ ψευδεπίγραφα τῶν ἀσεβῶν βιβλία, ὡς ἅγια, ἐπὶ τῆς ἐκκλη- σίας δημοσιεύει... καθαιρείσθω.---ΟΔῃ. lix. (111. Cotel.) ibid., col. 87, C. εἰ μὲν κληρικὸς, καθαιρείσθω" εἰ δὲ λαϊκὸς,
So the latter’: “ What doth this mean,
The Apo-
apopiSéoOw.—Can. Ixxxiii. (Ixxv. Co- tel.) ibid., col. 44, A. ἔστω δὲ ὑμῖν πᾶσι κληρικοῖς καὶ λαικοῖς βιβλία σε- βάσμια καὶ ἅγια, x.7.A.—Can. ᾿χχχὶν. (Ixxvi. Cotel.) ibid. ]
h [Fuerunt, o ecclesia, apostoli pa- tres tui: quia ipsite genuerunt. Nune autem quia illi recesserunt a mundo, habes pro his episcopos filios qui a te creati sunt. Sunt enim et hi patres tui: quia ab ipsis regeris, ... Consti- tuit Christus sanctos suos super omnes populos. In nomine enim Domini dilatatum est Evangelium in omnibus finibus mundi: in quibus principes ecclesiz, id est, episcopi, constituti sunt.—Breviarium in Psalterium, S. Hieronymo falso ascriptum, in Ps. xliy. 17. S. Hieron. Op., tom. vii. App. col. 123. ]
i [Quid est, ‘Pro patribus tuis nati sunt tibi filii?” Patres missi sunt Apo- stoli, pro Apostoli filii nati sunt tibi, constituti sunt episcopi ... Hee est Catholica Ecclesia: filii ejus constituti sunt principes super omnem terram, &e.—S. Aug. Enarr. in Psalm, xliy. 17. Op., tom, iy. col. 398, A, C.]
as by St. Jerome, St. Augustine, and Eusebius. 345
stles were sent as fathers unto thee, and instead of the Apostles sons are born to thee, who are made bishops. This is the Catholic Church, whose sons are made princes in all the earth.” Optatus Milevitanus calls bishops api- ces et principes of the ecclesiastical economy, lib. 1. p. 15*. And so Simeon Thessalonicensis de Grecorum Ordinationi- bus, which is in Morinus de sacris Ecclesie ordinationibus, pars ii. p. 106]: καὶ οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς δὲ, x.7.d. “and bishops, (or chief priests) upon the account of their power and principalities, are anointed with the grace of the Holy Spi- rit: saith the Scripture, ‘Thou shalt make them princes over all the earth.” And he (the archbishop) sanctifies him (the consecrated bishop) as the ancient chief-priests, Melchisedec, Aaron, and Samuel, and as those hierarchs of grace,’ &c. But to carry this spiritual sense of this place unto a much higher original, Eusebius Czsariensis in his commentary on Ps. xly. 17, saith™, “ Aquila renders it thus: ‘Instead of thy fathers thou shalt have sons ;? but Sym- machus thus: ‘Instead of thy fathers thou hast had sons.’ But this is the meaning of the place: thy sons, who are born in thee, and from thee, shall be to thee for fathers, for thou shalt have those for thy fathers, whom thou thyself hast ‘begotten. But you will understand how this was fulfilled, if you consider how the Gentile strangers coming to the Church, and regenerated in her, become her sons, and grow- ing great proficients, are constituted her fathers, being pro- moted to places of government in her, and chosen to the
The
k [S. Optati Milev. de Schism. Do- natist, lib. 1. c. 13. p. 11. ed. Par. 1700; quoted above, p. 35, note k. Hickes’ reference is to an edition of the works of Optatus and Facundus Hermianen- sis, Priorii. Par. 1679. ] ie: | [καὶ of ἀρχιερεῖς δὲ διὰ τὴν ἐξου- σίαν καὶ τὴν ἀρχὴν τοῦ πνεύματος τῇ χάριτι χριόμενοι, καταστήσεις γὰρ αὐ- τούς, φησιν, ἄρχοντας ἐπὶ πᾶσαν τὴν γήν᾽ ἁγιάζει δὲ τοῦτον ὡς οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς" καὶ τοὺς πάλαι μὲν ἐκείνους τὸν Μελ- χισεδὲκ, τὸν ᾿Ααρών τε καὶ Σαμουὴλ, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς ἀποστόλους καὶ ἱεράρχας τῆς χάριτος, k.7.A.—Symeonis Thess. Archiep. de Sacris Ordination., cap. 7. Ritus omnes ordinationis et consecra- tionis episcopatis, &c.—ap. Morini de Sacris Ecclesiz Ordinationibus, pars
ii. p. 130, Ὁ. ed. 2. Antw. 1685. first edition, to which Hickes’ reference is made, was published at Paris, 1655. Symeon’s work is also contained in the Bibl. Patr., tom. iii. Par. 1624. ]
m [ἀντὶ τῶν πατέρων σου ἐγεννήθη- σάν σοι υἱοί. τούτων τὴν διάνοιαν σα- φέστερον ἀποδεδώκασιν οἱ λοιποί. ὃ μὲν ᾿Ακύλας εἰπὼν, ἀντὶ τῶν πατέρων σου ἔσονταί σοι υἱοί: 6 δὲ Svupaxos, ἂντὶ πατέρων ἐγένοντο viol σου. ἣ δὲ ἑρμη- νεία τοῦ λόγου ταύτην ἔχει τὴν διάνοιαν" οἱ viot σου οἱ ἐν σοὶ καὶ ὑπὸ σου γὙεγε- νημένοι, ἀντὶ πατέρων γενήσονταί σοι. ἕξεις yap αὐτοὺς πατέρας ods αὐτὴ γε- γέννηκας. νοήσεις δὲ τοῦ λόγου τὸ ἀπο- τέλεσμα, ἐπιστήσας ὕπως οἱ ἐξ ἐθνῶν ἀλλόφυλοι προσέλθοντες τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἀναγεννηθέντες ἐν αὐτῇ,
CHAP. I.
pienity or sacerdotal office.
EPISCOPAL ORDER,
346 To speak of bishops as princes not strange or novel.
And in what sense thou art to have them for fathers is more plainly expressed in these words": ‘Whom thou shalt make princes in all the earth. In which words the prophet speaks to the Church upon the earth, which reaches from one end of it to the other, and which makes her own sons her fathers and princes.” I was willing, Sir, to add this more ancient testimony of Eusebius to that of St. Hierome, and Augustine in the Latin, to shew you that this sense of those words in Psalm xlv. was in all appearance the sense of the Catholic Church. And the parliament in Queen Elizabeth’s time seems to have been no stranger to these notions, which, 8 Eliz. [c. 1.°] in the preamble to the act, declares the state of the clergy to “be one of the greatest states of this realm.” And before the Conquest every one knows the bishop sat with the count in the county court to administer ecclesiastical law and justice, according to the canons, as he did the secular, according to the customs and laws.
Sir, I hope I have now said enough to shew you that my speaking of bishops as princes is not novel, or uncouth to any but such as are not conversant in the ancient records of the Church, and if there be any good Churchmen, as you say, among your friends, who think I have written too loftily of the episcopal office in my former letter to youP, I pray you to shew them this for my vindication. Many of them who
viol αὐτῆς γίγνονται" κἄπειτα ἐπιδιδόν - τες τῇ προσκοπῇ, πατέρες αὐτῆς καθί- στανται, προαγόμενοι εἰς τὴν αὐτῆς προ- στασίαν, καὶ τῆς ἱερατικῆς λειτουργίας καταξιούμενοι. πῶς δ᾽ ἕξεις αὐτοὺς ἀντὶ πατέρων διερμηνεύει, σαφέστερον λέγων" καταστήσεις αὐτοὺς ἄρχοντας ἐπὶ πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν. λέγει δὲ ταῦτα πρὸς τὴν ἐπὶ γῆς ἐκκλησίαν 6 λόγος, τὴν ἀπὸ περά- τῶν ἕως περάτων διήκουσαν. ἐφ᾽ ἣν ἄρχοντας καὶ πατέρας τοὺς ἰδίους υἱοὺς αὑτὴ ἡ ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ καθίστησιν.--- Eusebii Cesariensis Comment. in Psalm. xliv. 17. ap. Montfaucon. Noy. Collect., tom. ii. p. 192, C—E. ]
ἃ The place is thus paraphrased by Apollinarius :
᾿Αντὶ τεῶν πατέρων viol σέθεν ἡβω-
οὔσι" Τοὺς δὲ καταστήσειας ὅλης χθονὸς ἡγεμονῆας.
[Apollinarii Epise. Laodicensis Meta-
.
phrasis Psalmorum, Ps. xliv. 17. Bibl. Patr., tom. v. p. 886, A. ]
° [An act declaring the manner of making and consecrating of the arch- bishops and bishops of this realm to be good, lawful, and perfect. Forasmuch as divers questions,. .. . have lately grown upon the making and conse- crating of archbishops ard bishops within this realm, whether the same were and be duly and orderly done according to the law-or not, which is much tending to the slander of all the state of the clergy, being one of the greatest states of this realm, &c.—8 Eliz. 6. 1, A.D. 1566. ]
P [This was the letter containing the forty Propositions; it is printed in the Constitution of the Catholic Church, &c. p. 61. See Prefatory Discourse, vol, i. p. 62, note g. |
Mutual subordination of the temporal and spiritual powers. 347
are true to their own order, and never betrayed the Church in their sermons or writings, yet with great numbers of the people have been set wrong in their apprehensions of the Church and Church power by some gentlemen of your pro- fession, who have written otherwise of the Church than as of a society founded by Christ Jesus in a manner independent on the powers of the world: and have so explained and mag- nified the ecclesiastical supremacy of kings, as is not con- sistent with it in reality or in the conceptions of men. You cannot but call to mind what I told you some said upon occasion. Really, Sir, one would wonder that men born and bred Christians should say things so reproachful to the priesthood, so dishonourable to Christ our High-Priest in heaven, so derogatory and opprobrious to the power of the keys, which He hath committed to His priests, and so repug- nant to the constitution of the Catholic Church. Certainly, Sir, these men had no right idea of the two powers, spiritual and temporal, ecclesiastical and regal, nor of their different origins, and mutual subordination of the one to the other. Solvimus que sunt Cesaris Cesari, saith St. Ambrose?, “ We pay unto the emperor the things which belong to the emperor, and we give unto God the things which are God’s. Is it the emperor’s tribute that is demanded? We deny it not. 15 it the Church of God? That ought not to be given up to the emperor, for the temple of God cannot be his right; which no man can deny to be spoken to the emperor’s honour ; for what is more honourable for him, than that he should be a son of the Church? For a good emperor is within the Church,
P Concio de Basilicis non tradendis hereticis, aut gentilibus, ad Mediola- nensem populum. [Solvimus que sunt Cesaris Ceesari, et que sunt Dei Deo. Tributum Cesaris est, non negatur: ecclesia Dei est, Ceesaris utique non debet addici; quia jus Cwsaris esse non potest Dei templum. Quod cum honorificentia imperatoris dictum nemo potest negare. Quid enim honorifi- centius, quam ut imperator ecclesiz filius esse dicatur? Quod cum dicitur, sine peccato dicitur, cum gratia dicitur. Imperator enim (bonus, editt. vett. om- nes; omnes MSS. omittunt) intra ec- clesiam, non supra ecclesiam est, bonus enim imperator quzrit auxilium eccle- size, non refutat. Hee ut humiliter
dicimus, ita constanter exponimus. Sed incendia aliqui, gladium, depor- tationem minantur. Didicimus Christi servuli non timere. Non timentibus nunquam est gravis terror.—S. Am- bros. Sermo contra Auxentium de Ba- silicis tradendis; Op., tom. ii. col. 873, D, E.]
So the civil law of the empire. [ὃ 7. Nullius sunt res sacre, et religiose, et sanctz: quod enim divini juris est nullius in bonis est. § 8. Sacre res sunt, que rite per pontifices Deo con- secrate sunt.—Just. Instit., lib. ii. tit. i. de rerum divisione, § 7, 8. Res sacra non recipit zstimationem.—Ul- pian., lib. lxviii. ad edictum. Digest., lib, i. tit. viii. c. 9. § 5.]
CHAP. I.
SECT. VI.
348 Mutual subordination of the temporal and spiritual powers,
pienity or but not above it, and seeketh help of the Church, and doth
EPISCOPAL
ORDER.
not refuse it. This, as we speak with humility, so with con- stancy we declare it ; and though some threaten us with fire, and sword, and deportation, yet we being Christ’s servants have learned not to fear, and no terrors are formidable to those who do not fear.” Justinian the emperor confesseth4, “That the greatest honours God of His mercy hath conferred upon men are sacerdotium et imperium, the priesthood and the regal office, the former to administer in Divine things, and the latter to preside in human affairs.” And long before his time, ὁ ᾿ΑΙ βραμιαῖος γέρων, ὁ ἀληθῶς “Οσιοςῦ, “ The Abra- hamical old father, the truly holy Hosius,” put the emperor Constantius in remembrance of the distinction of these two powers, and the independency of the one on the other, in these words’: ‘“ Do not you meddle in ecclesiastical affairs, nor command us (bishops) what to do in them, but rather learn of us what ye are to do therein. God hath delivered the empire to you, and the care of the Church to us, and as he who secretly invades your authority, resists the ordinance of God, so be you afraid lest by drawing the affairs of the Church upon you, you make yourself guilty of a grievous sin. For it is written, ‘Give unto Cesar the things that are Ceesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.’ Therefore neither is it lawful for us to take upon us to command in civil matters; neither, O emperor, have you authority over the incense’. And truly out of the care I have of your salva- tion, I write these things.” This great bishop and confessor for the rights of the Catholic Church, as well as for the
4 [Maxima quidem in hominibus κελεύου ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον παρ᾽ ἡμῶν σὺ
sunt dona Dei a superna collata cle- mentia sacerdotium et imperium, et illud quidem divinis ministrans, hoc autem humanis przsidens ac diligen- tiam exhibens.—Imp. Justinianus Au- gust. Epiphanio archiepiscopo et pa- triarchze Constantinopolitano. Authent. Collat. i. tit. 6. Quomodo oporteat epi- scopos. Novell. Const. 6. Preefatio ap. Corpus Juris Canonici. The same passage was quoted in the Greek, p. 292, note s. |
τ (S. Athanasii Historia Arianorum ad Monachos, ὃ 45. Op., tom. i. p. 371,
8 [μὴ τίθει σεαυτὸν εἰς τὰ ἐκκλησι- αστικὰ, μηδὲ σὺ περὶ τούτων ἡμῖν παρα-
μάνθανε ταῦτα. σοὶ βασιλείαν 6 θεὸς ἐνεχείρισεν, ἡμῖν τὰ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐπίστευσε. καὶ ὥσπερ ὁ τὴν σὴν ἀρχὴν ὑποκλέπτων ἀντιλέγει τῷ διαταξαμένῳ θεῷ" οὕτω φοβήθητι μὴ καὶ σὺ τὰ τῆς ἐκκλησίας εἰς ἑαυτὸν ἕλκων, ὑπεύθυνος ἐγκλήματι μεγάλῳ γένῃ" ἀπόδοτε, γέ- γραπται, τὰ Καίσαρος, Καίσαρι, καὶ τὰ τοῦ θεοῦ, τῷ θεῷ. οὔτε τοίνυν ἡμῖν ἄρ- xew ἐπὶ τῆς vis, ἔξεστιν, οὔτε σὺ τοῦ θυμιᾷν ἐξουσίαν ἔχεις, βασιλεῦ. ταῦτα μὲν οὖν κηδόμενος τῆς σῆς σωτηρίας γράφω..---Τὰ δῖ. Hosii ad Constantium, apud S. Athanas., ibid., A, B. ]
t The holy father here alludes to the story of King Uzziah, 2 Chron. xxvi. 16—18.
as stated by Justinian, Hosius, and St. Gelasius. 849
Catholic faith, by “power or authority over the incense,” figuratively meant the sacerdotal office, as distinguished from the regal; the powers of the Church, which could not belong to the empire, and the administration of matters spiritual, which belonged to the bishops, the delegates or vicegerents of Christ in His kingdom upon earth. So Pope Gelasius, who was advanced to the see of Rome in the year of our Lord 492, in his eighth Epistle to Anastasius the emperor, writes thus: Duo quippe sunt,imperator Auguste", &c. “For there are two things, great emperor, by which principally this world is governed, the holy pontifical authority and the regal power. Of which the sacerdotal charge is much the greater, because the bishops at the day of judgment must give an account to our Lord of kings. For you know, most gracious son, (fili clementissime,) that although you are set in dignity above all men, yet you are devoutly subject to those who preside over spiritual affairs, (religionis antislites,) and desire those things from them by which you expect to be saved; and in receiving the holy mysteries, and ordering them as is meet, you know that by the rank you hold in religion you are to obey rather than command. Therefore in things of this nature, you know that you are to submit to their judgment, and that they are not to be governed by your will. For if the rulers of the Church, knowing that the empire is given to you by God’s appoint- ment, obey your laws*; with what affection, I beseech you,
« [Duo quippe sunt, imperator Au- guste, quibus principaliter mundus hic regitur, auctoritas sacra pontificum, et regalis potestas. In quibus tanto gra- vius est pondus sacerdotum, quanto etiam pro ipsis regibus Domino in divino reddituri sunt examine rationem. Nosti etiam, fili clementissime, quod licet presideas humano generi dignitate, rerum tamen presulibus divinarum devotus colla submittis, atque ab eis causas tue salutis expetis, inque su- mendis ccelestibus sacramentis, eisque (ut competit) disponendis, subdi te de- bere cognoscis religionis ordine potius quam preesse. Nostiitaque inter hee, ex illorum te pendere judicio, non illos ad tuam velle redigi voluntatem. Si enim, quantum ad ordinem pertinet publice discipline, cognoscentes im- perium tibi superna dispositione colla-
tum, legibus tuis ipsi quoque parent religionis antistites, ne vel in rebus mundanis exclusz videantur obviare sententiz ; quo (rogo) te decet affectu eis obedire, qui pro erogandis venera- bilibus sunt attributi mysteriis? ... Et si cunctis generaliter sacerdotibus, recte divina tractantibus, fidelium convenit corda submitti; quanti potius sedis illius preesuli consensus est adhiben- dus, quem cunctis sacerdotibus, et divi- nitas summa voluit preeminere, et sub- sequens ecclesie generalis jugiter pietas celebravit?— Gelasii Pape I. Epist. viii. ad Anastasium Imperatorem.— Concilia, tom. v. col. 308, C—E. ]
= Du Pin de antiqua Ecclesiz dis- ciplina, Dissert. vii. § 4. [ Principibus in rebus civilibus et temporalibus om- nes esse subjectos; where this passage is quoted, p. 474. Par. 1685. ]
CHAP. I.
SECT. VI.
350 St. Gelasius on the relation of bishops and emperors.
piexity or Ought you to obey them who are appointed to dispense the
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
venerable mysteries? .... And if the faithful ought to be obedient to all bishops, who rightly manage holy things, how much must it be your duty to comply with the bishop of that see, whom it has pleased God to advance in dignity above all bishops, and the piety of the Catholic Church hath in all times honoured and esteemed?” So in his tome de Anathematis vinculoY: “But if they are afraid to attempt these things, which they know come not within the measure of your power to whom it is permitted only to judge of human affairs, and not to preside over the Divine, how dare they presume to judge of them who administer Divine things? These things were so before the coming of Christ, as some say by way of figure, though kings and priest were both ap- pointed in the administration of secular affairs ; but after the coming of Christ, who was in one person the true King and Priest, neither the emperor assumed the title of priest, nor the priest pretended to his royal dignity .... Christ”, know-
Y [Quod si hee tentare formidant, nec ad suz pertinere cognoscunt mo- dulum potestatis, cui tantum de hu- manis rebus judicare permissum est, non etiam presse divinis, quomodo de his, per quos divina ministrantur, judi- care presumunt? Fuerint hee ante adventum Christi, ut quidam figura- liter, adhue tamen in carnalibus actio- nibus constituti, pariter reges extiterint, et pariter sacerdotes...sed cum ad verum ventum est eumdem regem at- que pontificem, ultra sibi nec impera- tor pontificis nomen imposuit, nec pon-
tifex regale fastigium vindicavit.—lId.
Tomus de anathematis vinculo, ibid., col. 357, Ὁ, E; 358, A.]
+ [Christus memor fragilitatis huma- ne quod suorum saluti congrueret dis- pensatione magnifica temperans, sic ac- tionibus propriis, dignitatibusque dis- tinctis officia potestatis utriusque dis- crevit, suos volens medicinali humili- tate salvari, non humana superbia rur- sus intercipi; ut et Christiani impe- ratores pro eterna vita pontificibus in- digerent, et pontifices pro temporalium cursu rerum imperialibus dispositioni- bus uterentur, quatenus spiritualis actio a carnalibus distaret incursibus; et ideo militans Deo, minime se negotiis se- cularibus implicaret: ac vicissim non 1116 rebus divinis presidere videretur, qui esset negotiis secularibus impli-
catus, ut et modestia utriusque ordinis curaretur, ne extolleretur utroque suf- fultus, et competens qualitatibus acti- onum specialiter professio aptaretur.— Id. ibid., col. 358, A, B.
Hickes here gives the passage as it is quoted in the canon law. ] Quoniam idem mediator Dei et hominum homo Chris- tus Jesus, sic actibus propriis, et dig- nitatibus distinctis officia potestatis utriusque discrevit propria, volens me- dicinali humilitate hominum corda rursus in inferna demergi: ut sur- sum efferri, non humana superbia et Christiani imperatores pro eterna vita pontificibus indigerent, et ponti- fices pro cursu temporalium tantum- modo rerum imperialibus legibus ute- rentur, quatenus spiritalis actio a car- nalibus distaret incursibus; et ideo militans Deo minime se negotiis sx- cularibus implicaret: ac vicissim non ille rebus divinis praesidere videretur, qui esset negotiis swcularibus impli- catus.—Decretum, pars i. dist. x. ¢. 8. [ap. Corpus Juris Canonici. |
See also dist. xevi. c.6,where the same words are cited, without any difference, but in the beginning, which in the latter is thus: Cum ad verum ventum est, ultra sibi nec imperator jura pontifica- tus arripuit, nec pontifex nomen impe- ratorium usurpayit, quoniam, &c. See more authorities in the same place to
Emperors (as Constantine) reverenced bishops as fathers. 351
ing the frailty of human nature, and ordering things by His royal dispensation as most conduced to the salvation of His people, He separated the offices of both powers by their proper actions and distinct duties, willing to save His people by a medicinal humility, znd not to beset them with human pride ; so that Christian emperors (and kings) should have need of bishops, in order to obtain eternal life; and bishops, according to the nature of temporal affairs, should make use of the imperial (or regal) administration, as far as the dif- ference between spiritual and carnal actions will permit. So that on the one hand the soldier of Christ should not meddle in secular business; and on the other, he to whom secular businesses belong should not pretend to authority in Divine affairs, but he that both orders should modestly and carefully observe their bounds,” &c.
Here you see the difference between Church and State, and the bounds which Christ hath set between them; and that bishops are in that, what kings and emperors are in this, and that both are mutually subject to one another. Religious emperors of old made no difficulty to own bishops for their ecclesiastical fathers and superiors, and pay all reverence and submission to them as such. Eusebius tells us how Constantine the Great “personally* sent for them to himself, and vouchsafed them the highest veneration and honour, as persons consecrated to his God, aud was pleased to behold God honoured in each person, though their out- ward garb and dress was contemptible, and that he took them along with him in all his journeys, being fully per- suaded that God for this very reason would be propitious to him.” He would hear them speak, though never so long, “in a standing posture, though they supplicated his majesty to sit in his throne’.” He gave his sons in charge, “ before
prove the independency of the Church upon the State, and the difference be- twixt the ecclesiastical and civil power.
a [βασιλεὺς δὲ αὐτὸς τοῦ θεοῦ λει- τουργοὺς συγκαλῶν θεραπείας καὶ τιμῆς τῆς ἀνωτάτω ἠξίου" ἔργοις καὶ λόγοις τοὺς ἄνδρας ὡσανεὶ τῷ αὐτοῦ θεῷ κα- θιερωμένους, φιλοφρονούμενος. ὁμοτρά- πεζοι δῆτα συνῆσαν αὐτῷ, ἄνδρες εὐτε- λεῖς μὲν τῇ τοῦ χρήματος ὀφθῆναι περι- βολῇ, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ τοιοῦτοι καὶ αὐτῷ νενο-
μισμένοι. ὅτι μὴ τὸν ὁρώμενον τοῖς πολ- λοῖς ἄνθρωπον, τὸν θεὸν δὲ ἐποπτεύειν ἐδόκει. ἐπήγετο δὲ αὐτοὺς καὶ ὅποι ποτε στέλλοιτο πορεΐαν. κἂν τούτῳ τὸν θερα- πευόμενον πρὸς αὐτῶν δεξιὸν αὐτῷ πα- ρεῖναι πειθόμενος. ]-- Εα860. de vita Constantini, lib. i. cap. 42. [ap. Keel. Hist., tom. i. p. 522. ]
υ [ἐπειδὴ γάρ ποτε θάρσει τῆς αὐτοῦ περὶ Td θεῖον εὐλαβείας, ἀμφὶ τοῦ σωτη- ρίου μνήματος λόγον παρασχεῖν εἰς ἐπή-
CHAP. I.
SECT. VI.
352 The emperors defenders, not governors of the Church.
pienry or all things, that they should take particular charge of God’s
EPISCOPAL
ORDER.
Church*.” When he resolved on his expedition into Persia, “he prepared a tabernacle in the form of a church, in which most richly furnished, he resolved with the bishops, who accompanied him, to offer up supplications to God, the giver of victory*.” And therefore it is no wonder that following Christian emperors looked upon the Church as a society distinct from the empire, of which Christ was founder, and the bishops the rectors, who presided in it under Christ, and that they themselves were not the governors, but the defenders of the Church. So Pope Symmachus, who was made bishop of Rome in the year of our Lord 498, in his apologetical epistle to the same emperor who was involved in the excommunication® of the Eutychians‘ in the cause of Acacius& : “ Let us compare the honour of the emperor with the honour of the bishop, between whom there is as great a difference as there is between him who hath the charge of human, and him who hath the charge of Divine affairs. Thou, O emperor, receivest baptism, takest the Sacrament from the bishop, entreats him to pray for thee, hopes for his benediction, and begs him to absolve thee after repent- ance. Lastly, thou administerest human things, and he dis- penses Divine things to thee. Wherefore, if I may not say his honour is greater, it is certainly equal to thine. Do not
Kooy αὐτοῦ δεδεήμεθα, πλήθους δ᾽ akpoa- τῶν περιεστῶτος, ἔνδον ἐν αὐτοῖς βασι- λείοις ὄρθιος ἑστὼς ἅμα τοῖς λοιποῖς ἐπηκροᾶτο. ἡμῶν δ᾽ ἀντιβολούντων ἐπὶ παρακειμένῳ τῷ βασιλικῷ θρόνῳ διανα- παύεσθαι, ἐπείθετο μὲν οὐδαμῶς. --- Ibid., lib. iv. cap. 33. [p. 643.]
¢ [Eusebius, speaking of Constan- tine’s advice to his sons, says, καὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν δὲ τοῦ θεοῦ διὰ φροντίδος ἄγειν ἐν πρώτοις παρήνει, αὐτοῖς δὲ διαῤῥήδην Χριστιανοῖς εἶναι παρεκελεύ- ero.}—Ibid., lib. iv. cap. 52. [p. 655.]
4 [ἔπειτα καὶ τὴν σκηνὴν τῷ τῆς ἐκ- κλησίας χρήματι mpos τὴν ἐκείνου τοῦ πολέμου παράταξιν σὺν πολλῇ φιλοτιμίᾳ κατειργάζετο. ἐν ἣ τῷ θεῷ τῆς νίκης δοτῆρι, τὰς ἱκετηρίας ἅμα τοῖς ἐπισκό- ποις ποιεῖσθαι ἐπενόει. |—Ibid., lib. iv. cap. 56. [p. 658. ]
e Nos non te excommunicavimus, sed Acacium: tu recede ab Acacio, et ab illius excommunicatione recedis.
Tu te noli miscere excommunicationi ejus, et non es excommunicatus a no- bis. Si te misces, non a nobis, sed a te ipso excommunicatus es. Ita sit ut in utroque, sive discedas, non es ex- communicatus a nobis, sive non dis- cedas, non es excommunicatus a nobis. -—Symmachi Pape Epistola vi. Apo- logetica adversus Anastasii Imperato- ris libellum famosum.—[ Concilia, tom. v. col. 428, D.]
f An benefactus essem, si Eutychi- anis faverem? si Acacii nomini com- municarem.—[ Ibid., col. 427, E.]
& [Conferamus autem honorem im- peratoris cum honore pontificis: inter quos tantum distat, quantum ille rerum humanarum curam gerit, iste divina- rum. ‘Tu, imperator, a pontifice bap- tismum accipis, sacramenta suis, orationem poscis, benedictionem spe- ras, peenitentiam rogas. Postremo tu humana administras, ille tibi divina dispensat. Itaque ut non dicam supe-
Pope Symmachus to Anastasius. Sir Thomas More. 353 think the better of yourself, because you excel in worldly pomp and splendour; for the weakness of God is stronger than men. ...I beg leave to remind you that you are but a man, that you may use the power that God hath given you, well... . But perhaps you will say, ‘let every soul be subject to the higher powers.’ Truly we acknowledge the human powers in their bounds, till they set up their will against the will of God. But if all power is of God, that is more especially so, which presides over Divine affairs. Do you submit to us for God’s sake, as for God’s sake we submit to you. But if you will not submit for God’s sake, you can have no favour from Him whose laws you despise.” One of the greatest men and lawyers that England ever bred (whom I believe his good sense and integrity, had he not been cut off, would have engaged in a reformation), understanding this doc- trine®, bore his testimony, like a faithful confessor, to the dis- tinction and independency of the two powers, unto death, in the reign, which you know some writers call the tyranny, of Hen. VIII., who first to the astonishment of Christendom‘,
rior, certe zqualis honor est. Nec te putes mundi pompa precellere, quia quod infirmum est Dei, fortius est ho- minibus... Precor, imperator, pace tua dixerim, memento te hominem, ut pos- sis uti concessa tibi divinitus potestate. Fortassis dicturus es, scriptum esse, omni potestati nos subditos esse de- bere. Nos quidem potestates humanas suo loco suscipimus, donec contra Deum suas erigunt voluntates. Cete- rum si omnis potestas a Deo est, magis ergo que rebus est prestituta divinis. Defer Deo in nobis, et nos deferemus Deo in te. Ceterum si tu Deo non deferas, non potes ejus uti privilegio, cujus jura contemnis. This is thesame emperor (Anastasius) whom Gelasius addressed, above p. 349.—[Ibid., col. 427, E.—428, C.]
h [“ Rich pressed him (Sir T. More) that since the parliament had enacted that the king was supreme head, the subjects ought to agree to it; and, said Rich, what if the parliament should declare me king, would you not acknowledge me? I would, said More, ‘ Quia’ (as it is in the indictment) ‘rex per parliamentum fieri potest, et per parliamentum deprivari;’ but More turned the argument on Rich, and said, what if the parliament made
HICKES.
an act that God was not God; Rich acknowledged it would not bind, but replied to More that since he would acknowledge him king, if he were made so by act of parliament, why would he not acknowledge the king supreme head, since it was enacted by the par- liament. To that More answered that the parliament had power to make a king, and the people were bound to acknowledge him whom they made, but for the supremacy, though the par- liament had enacted it, yet those in foreign parts had never assented to it.’’ ..-‘‘More being on his trial, pleaded against the statute that made it treason to deny the supremacy, and argued strongly that the king could not be supreme head of the Church,”’ &c. |— Burnet’s History of the Reformation, part i. Ὁ. iii. pp. 354, 355.
i Martini Chemnitii Epist. ad Elec- tor. Brandenburg. [Thisisa dedication prefixed to the first part of Chemnitius’ Examen Concilii Tridentini, A. D.1565. In ecclesia vero Filii Dei, Spiritus Sanc- tus vult principes terre non tantum ad politicas et bellicas virtutes formari, sed preecipue vult ipsos erudiri ut serviant Domino in timore, et Filium ipsius, Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum a tenera ztate osculari discant (Ps. ii.)
Aa
CHAP. I.
SECT. VI.
354 «οἰ of Supremacy to be interpreted in a sound
ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or took upon him the title of “the only supreme head upon vonnen earth of the Church of England.”
“ Albeit (saith the statute*) the king’s majesty justly, and rightfully is, and ought to be the supreme head of the Church of England, and so is recognised by the clergy of this realm in their convocations ; yet nevertheless for corroboration and confirmation thereof, and for increase of virtue in Christ’s religion within this realm of England, and to repress and extirpate all errors, heresies, and other enormities and abuses heretofore used in the same, be it enacted by authority of this present parliament, that the king our sovereign lord, his heirs and successors, kings of this realm, shall be taken, accepted, and reputed the only supreme head in earth of the Church of England, called Anglicana Ecclesia, and shall have and enjoy, annexed, and united to the imperial crown of this realm, as well the title and style thereof, as all honours, dignities, preeminences, jurisdictions, privileges, authorities, immunities, profits, and commodities to the said dignity of supreme head of the same Church belonging and appertain- ing; and that our said sovereign lord, his heirs and succes- sors, kings of this realm, shall have full power and authority, from time to time, to visit, repress, redress, reform, order, correct, restrain, and amend, all such errors, heresies, abuses, offences, contempts, and enormities, whatsoever they be, which by any manner of spiritual authority or jurisdiction ought, or may lawfully be reformed, repressed, ordered, redressed,
utque sint benefici miserz et exulantis ecclesiz nutrices (Is. xlix.) &c.
Calvin in Amos, cap. vii. [Qui initio tantopere extulerunt Henricum regem Anglize, certe fuerunt inconsi- derati homines; dederunt illi summam rerum omnium potestatem: et hoc me semper graviter vulneravit ; erant enim blasphemi quum vocarent ipsum sum- mum caput ecclesiz sub Christo. Hoe certe fuit nimium, Sed tamen sepul- tum hoe maneat, quia peccarunt in- considerato zelo.—Calvini Przelect. in Amos vii. 18, Op. Theolog., tom. iii. pars ll. p. 282. Geneva, 1617] et in Epist. ad Mycon.
[ Mundus hoc habet solenne, quod pro libidine regnare cupit, Christo autem imperium resignare non sustinet. Sed utcunque, &c... . forti et invicto zelo pugnemus pro sacra illa potestate, quam
inviolabilem esse decet... Mosem al- legant et Davidem. Quasi vero non aliud muneris habuerint illi duo, quam ut populum civili potestate regerent. Dent igitur nobis insani isti similes magistratus, hoc est, singulari prophe- tice spiritu excellentes .. . nos talibus id quod postulant libenter largiemur. .. Pii alii reges constitutum ordinem tu- entur sua potestate, ut decet: ecclesiz tamen suam jurisdictionem, et sacer- dotibus partes illis a Domino attributas relinquunt.—Id, Epist. ad Myconium, (March 14, 1544.) Epist. et Respons., col. 59, 60. Gen. 1617. ]
k 26 Hen. viii. cap. 1. [An act con- cerning the king’s highness to be su- preme head of the Church of England, and to have authority to reform and re- dress all errors, heresies, and abuses in the same, A.D. 15384.
Christian sense ; must be consistent with the Prayer-Book; 355
corrected, restrained, or amended, most to the pleasure of Almighty God, the increase of virtue in Christ’s religion, and for the conservation of the peace, unity, and tranquillity of this realm, any usage, custom, foreign laws, foreign au- thority, prescription, or any thing or things to the contrary hereof notwithstanding.”
Sir, I do not doubt, but you are of the same opinion you were of when we discoursed together, viz., that the latter part of this act is exegetical of the former, and that the words of it restrict and limit the sense and intention of it to such a sound Christian sense, as is consistent with the original inherent rights of the Church, which she derives from Christ and His Apostles; and that it was chiefly intended to secure the rights both of Church and State, agaist the usurped jurisdiction, both temporal and spiritual, which the popes took upon them to exercise in this, as in other king- doms. I doubt not also but it is your opinion, that this act and all others relating to the king’s ecclesiastical supre- macy, are to be interpreted in a sense consistent with those other acts of parliament, which confirm the Book of Common Prayer! and administration of the Sacraments, and other rights and ceremonies of the Church, according to the Church of England ; and the form and manner of making, ordaining and consecrating of bishops, priests, and deacons. In those offices the sacerdotal power, as distinct from the civil, and derived from Christ, is clearly expressed aad asserted. We baptize, and admit into the body of Christ’s Church, as our Lord authorized us to do, not in the name of the king, or in the name of king and parliament, but “in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” And by the authority of our Lord committed to us, we have power to absolve penitent sinners after this sort™: “ Our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath left power to His Church to absolve sinners who truly repent and believe in Him, of His great mercy forgive thee thine offences, and by His authority committed to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Iam sure
1 [18 and 14 Car. 11. ο. 4. sect. 2. αἰ [The Order for the Visitation of 30, 31, quoted above, vol. 1. p. 246, the Sick. ] note h. |
Aad
CHAP. I.
SECT. VI.
356 to be understood consistently with the Ordination
ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or you will acknowledge, that all the kings and senates upon
EPISCOPAL
ORDER,
earth cannot give such a power, or take upon them, without sacrilege, to say", “ Take thou authority to execute the office of a deacon in the Church of God, committed unto thee in the name of the Father,” ἕο. Οὐ, “ Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a priest in the Church of God, now committed to thee by the imposition of our hands; whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven, and whose sins thou dost retain, they are retained. And be thou a faithful dispenser of the word of God, and of His holy Sacraments, in the name of the Father,” &c. ΟΥΡ, “ Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a bishop in the Church of God, now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands, in the name of the Father,’ &c. To these I might add the epistles and gospels of these offices, and some of the prayers, and the preface to them; in consistency and agreement with which the very oath of supremacy, which every person or- dained to any of those holy offices is to take, and by conse- quence every other act relating to the king’s ecclesiastical supremacy, I humbly conceive ought to be interpreted; I mean in a sense which saves, and not which destroys the distinction and difference of the sacerdotal from the civil power, and the spiritual rights and powers which belong to the priesthood of the Christian Church. I may also I hope without offence say, that they are to be explained in a sense agreeable to the injunctions of Edw. VI., 1547, where it is said, that4 “the office and function of the ministers of the Church is appointed by God ;” to the Articuli per archiepi- scopum, episcopos, &c. Cantuariensis provincie ; 1584": and
n [The Form and Manner of mak- ing of Deacons. }
© {The Form and Manner of order- ing of Priests. ]
P {The Form of ordaining or conse- crating of an Archbishop or Bishop. |
4 [‘* Also, whereas many indiscreet persons do at this day uncharitably con- temn and abuse priests and ministers of the Church, because some of them (having small learning) have of long time favoured phantasies rather than God’s truth; yet forasmuch as their office and function is appointed of God,’ &c.—Injunctions given by the most excellent prince Edward VI., to all
and singular his loving subjects, as well of the clergy as of the laity, &c. (A.D. 1547.) art. 33. Wilkins’ Concilia, vol. iv. p. 3. ]
τ [ Hickes seems to refer to the arti- cles framed in the convocation which commenced its sittings in 1584. The articles themselves were published March 381, 1585, under the title, Arti- culi per archiepiscopum, episcopos, et reliquum clerum Cantuarensis pro- vinciw stabiliti, &c. In the articles the bishops are throughout spoken of as alone possessing the power of ordi- nation and ecclesiastical jurisdiction.— Wilkins, ibid., p. 315. Hickes refers
Services, and with other Statutes and Injunctions. 957
to Queen Elizabeth’s Injunction, 1559, Art. 28°, where it is likewise declared that “the office and function of the mi- nisters of the Church is appointed by God.” All which agrees exactly to the prayers to be said in the ember weeks: “ Almighty God, the giver of all good gifts, who of Thy Divine providence hast appoimted divers orders in Thy Church, give Thy grace, we humbly beseech Thee, to all those who are to be called to any office and adminis- tration in the same.” And who they are that have power to admit those who are so called to serve in the sacred minis- try, is evident from the other prayer: “ Almighty God, our heavenly Father, who hast purchased to Thyself an universal Church by the precious blood of Thy dear Son, mercifully look upon the same, and at this time so guide and govern the minds of Thy servants the bishops and pastors of Thy flock, that they may lay hands suddenly on no man, but faithfully and wisely make choice of fit persons to serve in the sacred ministry of Thy Church; and to those who shall be ordained,” &c. Perhaps, Sir, I might also say that they are to be interpreted in a sense consistent with the first article of Charta Magna‘; for in the books written for the Church during the time of the Great Rebellion, that article was produced, as well as other laws, in her defence. To speak plainly, I believe you think as I do, that the act of supremacy, which was made by Henry VIII.", ought to be taken in a sense consistent with the spiritual power of the keys, as it was exercised by the Apostles and their successors in the most pure and primitive times; and with the preamble of 24 Hen. VIII. [c. 12.]¥, which was made against appeals to Rome, and as I observed before, distinguishes between the spi- ritual and temporal jurisdiction, and secures their respective rights unto both, against the papal usurpations. This lawas I have heard, was not long ago pleaded in court. And Sir Edw. Coke, Instit. part 4. cap. Ixxiv., asserts the distinction in to and argues from these articles in the Wilkins, ibid., p. 185. } Prefatory Discourse. See above, vol. t [See vol. i. p. 139, note o. ] 1. p. 288. note h. ] u [26 Hen. VIII. c. 1, quoted above, s [Injunctions given by the queen’s Ρ. 354, and Prefatory Discourse, vol. i. Majesty, &c. A.D. 1559, art. 28. The p. 226, note k. See the subject dis- injunction simply repeats that of Ed- cussed in that and the following pages. |
ward VI., quoted note q, except that it v [See above, note I, p. 312.] adds the word ‘‘ fond” before fancies.
CHAP. I.
SECT. VI.
358 Henry’s claims to Supremacy exceeded these bounds ;
ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or these words* ; “ Of what things the clergy hath spiritual juris-
EPISCOPAL ORDER
Is. 14. 13, 14,
{Thom. ]
(Quadru. Ecclesi. |
diction is evident in our books, and particularly in Cawdrey’s case, whereof there is no question. And certain it is, that this kingdom hath been best governed, and peace and quiet preserved, when both parties, that is, when the justices of the temporal courts and the ecclesiastical judges, have kept themselves within their proper jurisdictions, without en- croaching or usurping one upon another.”
But King Hen. VIII. went beyond all these measures, as if after the act of supremacy this distinction had been swal- lowed up, and an end put to the difference between spiritual and temporal persons and power. For not long after that act was made, he set forth a Latin BibleY with this title, Sacre Biblia tomus primus, in quo continentur quingue Libri Moysis, Libri Josue et Judicum, Liber Psalmorum, Proverbia Salo- monis, Liber Sapientia, et Novum Testamentum Jesu Christi. At the end of the book are these words: | Londini.| Excudebat Thomas Bertheletus Regius Impressor, Anno MDXXXV. Mense Jul. In the king’s preface, which is inscribed Pio Lectori in general, are these following words, the like whereof were never used by any Christian king before’, and which sound some- thing like those in which the king of Assyria said in his heart, “I will exalt my throne above the stars of God.”
Nos itaque considerantes id erga Deum officit nostri, quo suscepisse cognoscimur, ut in regno simus sicut anima in cor- pore, et sol in mundo*, utque loco Dei judicium exerceamus in regno nostro, et omnia in potestate habentes quoad jurisdic- tionem, ipsam etiam Kcclesiam vice Dei sedulo regamus ac
* [The fourth part of the Institutes Bible in the library of the British Mu-
of the Laws of England: concerning the jurisdiction of courts. Authore Edwardo Coke, milite. J.C. p.321, 1644. The chapter is, Of ecclesiastical courts, and begins thus: “‘ Where some may doubt, how we that profess the common law should write of ecclesiastical courts which proceed not by the rules of the common laws. To this we answer by good authority in our books that the king’s laws of this realm do bound the jurisdiction of ecclesiastical courts,’’ &c. For Cawdrey’s case see below, p. 366, note p. |
¥ This Bible is in the possession of Mr. Humphry Wanley. [See above, note e, p. 268. There is a copy of this
seum, 465, a 1, with which this extract has been collated. |
* [Hickes had either not seen the original of this passage, or had over- looked the marginal references, which have been added in the present edition from the Bible of 1535. They will be found to be authorities for applying some of the expressions against which he objects to Christian princes. |
a [The expression is still stronger in St. Thomas: ‘ Hoe igitur officium rex se suscepisse cognoscat, ut sit sicut in corpore anima, et sicut Deus in mundo.” S. Thom, Aquin. Opuscul. xx. De regimine Principum, e. xii. Op., tom. x. fol. 165, H. Venet., 1593. ]
as did the Act 1 Edw. VI. on election of Bishops. 359
tueamur, et disciplina ejus sive augeatur aut solvatur, nos δὲ σπλν. τ. rationem reddituri simus, qui nobis eam credidit”, et in eo Det «πὴ vicem agentes, Deique habentes imaginem® : quid aliud vel co- (Ambrosi, gitare vel in animam [tam] inducere potuimus, quam ut eodem Ren.) af confugeremus, ubi certo discendum esset, ne quid aliud vel ipst faceremus vel faciendum aliis prescriberemus, quam quod ab hac ipsa Dei lege ne vel tranversum quidem digitum aberrare convinci queat.
But before I proceed farther to observe in what manner this prince exercised his modern supremacy, let me recite what was afterwards enacted by statute 1 Edw. VI., chap. 2. There, Sir, it is enacted and declared, [ᾧ 1.1 that the elec- tion of archbishops and bishops by congé-d’-élire to the dean and chapter should be taken away, as “derogatory and pre- judicial to the king’s prerogative’;” that [ὁ 11.1 “all au- thority of jurisdiction, spiritual and temporal, is derived and deducted from the king’s majesty as supreme head of the Churches and realms of England and Ireland, and so justly acknowledged by the clergy of the said realms,” and accord- ingly it is enacted, “that all summons, citations or other pro- cess ecclesiastical, within the said two realms in all suits, &c. should be made in the name, and with the style of the king, as it is in writs original or judicial at the common law,
b [These expressions are from a work entitled Quadruvium Ecclesiz, quatuor prelatorum officium quibus omnis ani- ma subjicitur, by Joannes Hugo de Sletstat, vicarius parochie Sancti Ste- phani Argentin. Par. 1509.—Omnia sunt in potestate imperatoris; quoad jurisdictionem et defensionem. fol. xlii. 2.—Ipsis namque principibus a Christo ecclesia Dei est commissa, ut eam tu- eantur et defendant, et sive augeatur pax et disciplina ecclesie per fideles principes, sive solvatur, ille ab eis rati- onem exigit qui eorum potestati suam ecclesiam credidit committendam. Cog- noscant ergo principes seculi Deo se debere rationem esse reddituros prop~ ter ecclesiam, &c.—Ibid., fol. Ixxv. 2. The first passage is an extract from the gloss on the Decretum, Pars 2. Causa xxiii. Questio viii. ο. 21; it refers only to jurisdiction in temporal things.
¢ [Principi. . . qui vicem Dei agit . .- Pseudo- Ambros. Comment. in Epist. ad Rom. xiii. 6... Principes. .. Dei
habentes imaginem... Id. in ver. 3: Op. S. Ambros., tom. ii. App. col. 99. c, A.
4 [The words of the act are, ‘‘ Foras- much as the elections of the arch- bishops and bishops by the deans and chapters within the king’s majesty’s realms of England and Ireland at this present time be as well to the long de- lay as to the great costs and charges of such persons as the king’s majesty giveth any archbishoprick or bishop- rick unto: and whereas the said elec- tions be in very deed no elections, but only by a writ of congé-d’-élire have colours, shadows, or pretences of elec- tions, serving nevertheless to no pur- pose, and seeming also derogatory and prejudicial to the king’s. prerogative royal, to whom only appertaineth the collation and gift of all archbishopricks and bishopricks and suffragan bishops within his highness’ said realms,” &c. —Preamble of the Act, 1 Edw. VI. δ:.2.]
360 Henry claimed to be the source of all spiritual power ;
pieniry or and that the teste thereof be in the name of the archbishop,
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
SECT. VII.
Henry’s exercise of the supre- macy; the objection from law considered.
or bishop, or other having ecclesiastical jurisdiction, who hath the commission or grant of the authority ecclesiastical imme- diately from the king’s highness, and that his commissary, &c. shall put his name in the citation or process after the teste.” And § IV., it is also enacted, that all ecclesiastical persons, “ who have the exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, shall have [in their seal of office] the king’s highness’ arms decently set, with certain characters under the arms, for the knowledge of the diocese, and shall use no other seal of juris- diction, but wherein his majesty’s arms be engraven.” But then again there is a proviso in § VI., by which certain cases are excepted, wherein the archbishop and bishop may use their own seals*, which had this good effect, to help to keep up the distinction between the spiritual and temporal authority or jurisdiction, though that as well as this was declared to be deducted and derived from the king as supreme head of the Church.
VII. Sir, this derivation of the original of spiritual power from kings is a new discovery, not known or understood by former ages; and I presume you will grant there is nothing like it in what I have produced in this letter out of ancient Christian writers. But however, without any retrospection to old principles, the king’s ecclesiastical supremacy in virtue of these laws was put in ure, and exercised to such a height, and in such a degree, as many then thought, and some think at this day is not to be reconciled with the spiritual supre- macy of Christ in His kingdom upon earth, and the most solemn commission He gave to His Apostles, and in them to their successors, in His last words a little before He as- cended into heaven.
King Henry VIII. was so fond of it that he caused a golden medal to be struck “ with his effigies half faced in his usual bonnet, furred gown, and invaluable collar of rubies,
¢ [The exceptions are as follows: own names under their own seals... .
““ Provided always, &c., that the arch- bishop of Canterbury, W&e., shall use his own seal and in his own name in all faculties and dispensations.....and that the said archbishop and bishops shall make, admit, order, and reform the chancellor’s officials, &c., and com- missions to suffragan bishops in their
and shall certify to the court of tenths their certificates under their own name and seals .... and likewise shall make collations, presentations, gifts, institu- tions, and inductions of benefices, let- ters of orders, or dimissories under their own names and seals as they have here- tufore accustomed,’’—ILbid. § 6. |
had a gold medal struck with his new titles inscribed. 361
which was since sold abroad, to give the royal family bread?.” I have caused it to be engraven in the Appendix, Number 3, as it is done according to Dr. Sloane’s original® in the eighty-eighth page of Mr. Evelyn’s Numismata, printed in folio, London, 1697. The legenda take up a double circle. In the outward circle HENRICUS OCTA. ANGLIZ. FRANCI. ET HIB. REX. [FIDEI . DEFENSOR . ET.] within the inner, IN
TERR. ECCLE. ANGLI. ET HIBE. SUB.
MUM. harp, are crowned.
CHRIST. CAPUT. SUPRE-
In these circles the rose, portcluse, fleur-de-lis, and On the reverse,
ἘΠ ῊΣ
WDA mea ΡΟ 3 ΣΡ ῸΦ IN NID I"
mw nnn won
oy wx
ENPIKOS O ΟΓΔΟΟΣ TPIS BASIAETS. ΠΙΣΤΕΩΣ ΠΡΟ- ΣΤΑΤΗΣ. EN TH ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑ ΤΗΣ ΑΓΓΛΙΑΣ ΚΑΙ IBEPNI- Az. THO ΧΡΙΣΤΩ. AKPH * H. KE@AAH. *
Londoni. 1545.
Thus, Sir, triumphed this king in his new style and title,
f [This passage is extracted from Evelyn’s work entitled, Numismata; A Discourse of Medals, ὅσο. by J. Eve- lyn, Esq., F.R.S., London, 1697, p. 88. Ina collection of letters from Sir Edward Nicholas to King Charles L., with the king’s answers written in the margin, which were in Evelyn’s pos- session, is one dated Sept. 10, 1641, on the opposite page of which is the re- ply in the king’s handwriting, dated Eden. 16, (Edinburgh, Sept. 16,) in these words: “I co’mand you to draw up anie such warrant, as my Wyfe shall direct you for the disposing of the Great Collar of Rubies that is in Holland, and tell her how I have di- rected you to wait her co’mands in this: and that I am confident of your secrecie in this, and anie thing else, that I shall trust you with. C. R.” See the Correspondence appended to Evelyn’s Memoirs, vol. ii. p 19, marg., 1819. Henrietta Maria was then in
land; it may be conjectured that rubies had been conveyed by her
mother, who had just left England for Holland. See Evelyn’s Memoirs, vol. i. p. 20. She herself went over to Hol- land, Feb. 16. in the next year with jewels on which she borrowed large sums of money; in the account of mo- nies so raised, (see Memoirs of Hen- rietta Maria, London, 1671,) the item occurs, To Weltster six rubies 40,000 gilders. The jewels at this time were disposed of not “to give the royal family bread,’’ but to raise money for the wars in Scotland and Ireland in 1641, and in England in 1642. ]
s [This medal is now in the collec- tion at the British Museum. ]
h [The letters on the medal appear to be these, as on the fac-simile in the Appendix (Number 3) of the third edi- tion, and in Evelyn’s work; perhaps the word intended was 1), protecting ;” in the third edition the word 13), ‘a governor,’ was substituted in this place, unless it were a misprint for 12, ‘a shield.’ ]
CHAP. L SECT. VIL.
DIGNITY OF EPISCOPAL ORDER.
362 Henry’s exercise of his supremacy ; Cromwell’s offices ;
from whence he derived his ecclesiastical supremacy, making an inscription of it in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, as Pilate did that over our Lord upon the Cross, Tus Is THE Kine or tur Jews. I never yet heard any man talk of this medal but who made this observation, viz., that King Henry crucified the Church, as Pilate did her Saviour, with the solemnity of three superscriptions; and I have so much re- spect for his memory, because he delivered us from the Pope’s supremacy, as to wish he had given less occasion for such a severe but obvious reflection, by exercising his eccle- siastical supremacy with more moderation to the pleasure and honour of God, and the conservation and benefit of the Church. But he presently proceeded to excess; for “the first exercise of his supremacy,” as supreme head of the Church, “was naming Cromwell his vicar-general, and general visitor of all the monasteries and other privileged placesi,” longing to get their treasures and lands, which by the just judgment of God did not prosper with him, who of a member would be the head of the Church.
The next was his making him “lord vicegerent in ecclesi- astical matters), by which he had authority over the bishops, and precedence next the royal family, being clothed with a complete delegation of all the king’s new power in ecclesias- tical affairs.” From this supremacy it also proceeded that Cromwell was made dean of Wells*, and that “ other secu- lar men had prebendaries and benefices without cure con- ferred upon them” in the reign of Edward VI.’ From this
i Bishop Burnet’s History of the Reformation, part i. book iii. p. 181. {fol. ed. 1679. ‘The first act of the king’s supremacy was his naming Cromwell his vicar-general,’’ &c. }
J {The passage quoted in the last paragraph continues thus; ‘This is commonly confounded with his follow- ing dignity of lord vicegerent in eccle- siastical matters; but they were two different places, and held by different commissions. By the one he had no authority over the bishops, nor had he any precedence; but the other, as it gave him precedence next the royal family, so it clothed him with a com- plete delegation of the king’s whole power in ecclesiastical affairs. For two years he was only vicar-general. But the tenor of his commissions and the
nature of the power devolved on him by them, cannot be fully known, for neither the one nor the other are in the Rolls,’ &c.—Burnet, ibid. ]
k History of the Reformation, part ii. book i. pp. 7, 8. [See further on this point the act of Cromwell’s attainder. ‘* Provided alwaysand be it enacted by the authority aforesaid, that this act of attainder, ne any offence, ne anything therein contained, extend not unto the deanery of Wells in the county of Somerset, nor to any manors, lands, tenements, or hereditaments thereunto belonging.’’—The Attainder of Thomas Cromwell. Burnet, ibid., part i. book ili. Records, No. 16, p. 192. |
1 [At the beginning of his history of Edward's reign, Burnet says; ‘‘ Henry VIII, having at the suit of Sir Edward
Bishops forced to take out commissions from the King. 368
rigorously exercised supremacy, which our princes have since explained into a sounder sense, it also proceeded that bishops were forced to take out commissions for their bishoprics from the king to hold them only during his pleasure, and to exercise their episcopal office as his delegates, in his name and by his authority™. In these commissions “all jurisdic- tion, as well ecclesiastical as secular, is said to flow from the king, as supreme head, and that the bishops were his com- missioners and vicegerents, and licensed by him to ordain priests, and to admit them to spiritual cures, to keep their courts, visit, inflict spiritual censures, and finally, do all things that any way belonged to the episcopal authority and jurisdiction.” Sir, pray consider as you read the following words, if they are for the honour or “ pleasure of Almighty God,” or well consistent with the original rights of the Church: Quandoquidem omnis jurisdicendi authoritas, atque etiam jurisdictio omnimoda, tam illa que ecclesiastica dicitur
North promised to give the earl of Hertford six of the best prebends that should fall in any cathedral, except deaneries and treasurerships; at his suit he agreed that a deanery and trea- surership should be instead of two of the six prebendaries’’... afterwards... “ΤῈ may perhaps seem strange that the earl of Hertford had six good prebends promised him ; two of these being after- wards converted into a deanery and trea- surership. But it was ordinary at that time ; Lord Cromwell had been dean of Wells, and many other secular nen had these ecclesiastical benefices without cure conferred upon them.’’—Burnet, ibid. The observation refers to Henry’s reign rather than Edward’s. ]
™ [Burnet says, “ Bonner took a strange commission from the king on the 12th of November this year (1539)
- whether the other bishops took such commissions from the king I know not. But I am certain there is none such in Cranmer’s Register; and it is not likely, if any such had been taken out by him, that ever it would have been razed. The commission itself will be found in the collection of papers at the end. The substance of it is, * That, since all jurisdiction both eccle- siastical and civil, flowed from the king as supreme head, and he was the foun- dation of all power; . . therefore the king, upon Bonner’s petition, did em- power him in_his own stead, to ordain
such as he found worthy, to present and give institution, with all the other parts of episcopal authority, for which he is duly commissioned: and this to last during the king’s pleasure only.’ ... After he had taken this commis- sion, Bonner might well have been called one of the king’s bishops.’’ ] History of the Reformation, part i. book iii. p. 267. [The commission itself is printed, under the title Li- centia regis concessa Domino Epi- scopo ad exercendam jurisdictionem episcopalem; with the reference Re- gist. Bonner. fol. primo.] Collection of Records, No. 14, p. 184. [Burnet again, in speaking of the beginning of the reign of Edward VI., says, “ The bishops were required to take out new commissions of the same form with those they had taken out in King Henry’s time, (for which see p. 267 of the former part,) only with this differ- ence, that there is no mention of a vicar-general in these commissions as there was in the former, there being none after Cromwell advanced to that dignity. Two of these commissions are yet extant, one taken out by Cran- mer, the other by Bonner. But this was only done by reason of the present juncture, &c, ... Cranmer set an ex- ample to the rest, and took out his commission, which is in the collection.” —See Collection of Records, ibid., No. 2. p. 90.]
CHAP. I.
SECT. VII.
364 Supremacy as claimed by Henry and Edward ;
ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or guam secularis, a regia potestate velut a supremo capite, [et
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
omnium infra regnum nostrum magistratuum fonte et scaturi- gine] .. . primitus emanavit ... [Quum itaque] nos perdilectum commissarium nostrum Thomam Cromwell, &c. ... . nostrum- que, ad quascunque causas ecclesiasticas nostra authoritate, ult supremi capitis dicte Ecclesie Anglicane, quomodolibet trac- tandas sive ventilandas, vicemgerentem, vicarium generalem [. - - constituerimus et prefecerimus. Quia tamen ipse Thomas Cromwell nostris et hujus reyni Anglie tot et tam arduis nego- tiis adeo prepeditus extitit, quod ad omnem jurisdictionem nobis uti supremo capiti hujusmodi competentem, ubique loco- rum infra hoc regnum nostrum prefatum, in his que moram commode non patiuntur, aut sine nostrorum subditorum injuria differri non possunt, in sua persona expediendis non sufficiet, | Nos tibi (episcopo) vices nostras sub modo et forma inferius descriptis committendas fore, teque licentiandum esse decerni- mus, ad ordinandum [igitur quoscunque infra Dioc. tuam Lon- don. ubicunque oriundos, &c....ad omnes etiam sacros et pres- byteratus ordines promovendos, &c.| et alia quecumque autho- ritatem et jurisdictionem episcopalem quovismodo respicienda et concernenda, preter et ultra ea que tibi ex sacris literis com- missa esse dignoscantur, vice, nomine et authoritate nostra exe- quendum tibi tenore presentium committimus [ac liberam facul- tatem concedimus|. In this form of commission the two kings successively took upon them almost the whole power of the keys, and the power of licensing bishops to ordain priests, and instituting and inducting them to their spiritual cures, and that clause preter et ultra ea, &c., which seems to except some spiritual power, it may be that of absolving penitents and administering the holy Sacraments, yet in effect excepts nothing if you consult the whole tenor of the commission, especially those words of it wherein it is declared that those bishops", “who had formerly exercised their power preca- riously ought thankfully to acknowledge that they had it only from the king’s bounty, and to declare that they would
» [After the words, primitus ema- navit, in the commission quoted above, follows the clause, Sane illos qui juris- dictionem hujusmodi antehac non nisi precario fungebantur, beneficium hujus- modi sic eis ex liberalitate regia indul-
tum gratis animis agnoscere, idque re- giz munificentiz solummodo acceptum referre, eique, quotiens ejus majestati videbitur, libenter concedere convenit. —Burnet, part i. book iii. Collection of Records, No. 14, p. 184. ]
as understood by Lawyers ; evil consequences of it. 365
cheerfully surrender it to him again whensoever he should require them to do it.”” Thus did two of our kings, without example, the one out of pride and ambition, the other in nonage and ignorantly, set themselves in the throne of our Lord. And the bishops of the Church of England in those two reigns before and after the Reformation, overawed through human weakness by terrible penalties, gave up the cause of Christ and the Church, for which they ought to have died martyrs, and by their compliance have left a blot upon their memories which no apology can wipe off, unless it be that humble one of father Paul, who with sorrow said, “God has not given me Luther’s spirit.” Their compliance brought a blemish upon the Church, which our adversaries, making no allowance for human frailty, seldom fail to put us in mind of, with insoleuce enough, as often as they have oc- casion, without any reflection, and sometimes when they have none at all. And from that rigid practice of this new eccle- siastical supremacy in those reigns it hath also proceeded in great part that the true notion of the Church, as of a society distinct from the world, and all the temporal kingdoms of it, and of her spiritual power and authority invested by Christ in His ministers, hath been too much forgotten and neg- lected among us, to the great dishonour of God, the un- speakable damage of religion, and contempt of the Church and clergy, which are every day more and more insulted by every vile mescroyant, and every blaspheming tongue and pen. I must here beg leave again to tell you, without offence, that the opinions, judgments, and cases written by some gentlemen of your profession, have not a little contri- buted to the perplexing of that plain primitive notion of the Church and the ecclesiastical power. You will easily ima- gine I have Sir Edward Coke’s Fifth Part of Reports in my eye, from whom I have heard you and some other excellent lawyers assert that by the statute made in the first year of Queen Elizabeth, whereby there is given to her and her suc- cessors° “all power and jurisdiction ecclesiastical, as by any spiritual and ecclesiastical power hath heretofore been, or may lawfully be executed, with full power and authority to assign, name, or authorize any person or persons, being ο [Coke’s Reports, part v. fol. 1, 1605, vol. iii. p. 16. London, 1826. ]
CHAP, I. SECT. VII.
366 Spiritual power not inherent in the Crown ; consequences
pienity or natural born subjects, to exercise and execute any manner
EPISCOPAL ORDER,
of spiritual or ecclesiastical power, authority, and jurisdic- tion.” I say I have heard you and other lawyers affirm that this statute “was not introductory of a new law, but only declaratory of an old one; so that if that act had never been made, yet the queen had had that authority, and might have given it to whom she thought fit.’ But, Sir, I leave it to your second thoughts to consider if this late doctrine, which affirms that the spiritual or ecclesiastical power belongs to our kings and queens as such, and by consequence is inhe- rent in the crown, be agreeable to the preamble before men- tioned of 24 Hen. VIII. cap. 124, or to the favourable sense and intendment of 26 Hen. VIII. cap. 1, as restricted by the words at the latter end of it", or to the king’s ecclesias- tical supremacy as it hath been explained by our kings and queens since that time, or by other persons by their con- sent or permission, as I have hereafter observed’, in a sense not contrary to the original and inherent power of the Church. Nay, I beseech you to consider if it is reconcile- able to the sense and language of former ages of Christian- ity, and the doctrines, reasonings, and authorities which I have produced out of the best Christian writers. For if it be inherent in the crown, then, as I conceive, it must be- long to it, whether it be Christian or not Christian; and when it is Christian, it also matters not in what sense it is so, or of what sort or kind of Christians, kings and queens, and let me add, sovereign states shall be; for according to your opinion, if I mistake not, they may execute all ecclesi- astical power and jurisdiction without any new law; but if it be not so inherent in the crown, then I pray you to consider
P [Coke, ibid., fol. 8. (pp. 26, 27, ed. 1826,) “declaratory of the old,” are the words of Coke. This was a part of the decision of the judges in Caw- drey’s case, with which the fifth part of Coke’s reports De jure regis ecclesias- tico, (of the king’s ecclesiastical law,) begins. Term. Hil. Eliz. 33. Robert Cawdrey, clerk, brought an action for a trespass on the rectorial property at Northlaffenham against George Alton. It was denied that Cawdrey was parson, as having been deprived by ecclesias- tical commissioners appointed by the queen, and so arose the question on
which the judgment above was given unanimously by the judges. Coke, (fol. 9,) after some other arguments, gives instances of the exercise of such a power by our kings, from Kenulph, A.D. 755, downwards. |
4 [See above, note ], p. 312. ]
τ [The words referred to are, ‘which
. may lawfully be reformed, &c. most to the pleasure of Almighty God,” &c. See above, p. 355. ]
8 [See below, chap. 2, sectt. 2, 3, and the Prefatory Discourse, yol. i. pp. 228, sqq. |
of such a doctrine. Coke’s assertions refuted by Parsons. 367
how much wrong the Church of God may come to suffer by that doctrine, when it is taught and received in a Christian kingdom or state.
This, and other assertions of Sir Edward Coke are in my humble opinion thoroughly refuted in a book entitled, “ An Answer to the Fifth Part of Reports lately set forth by Sir Edward Coke, knight,” printed 1606. Sir Edward, then attorney-general, never made any reply to it, but only in a preface before the Sixth Part of his Reports, which I believe you will think scarce deserves the name of a reply", or that it is worthy of Sir Edward’s mighty name. His adversary did not fail to return him, I think, a full and solid answer to what he hath said in that preface, in the eighth chapter of his answer to Mr. Thomas Moreton, entituled, “A quiet and sober reckoning with Mr. Thomas Moreton*,” which was
Ὁ [On the title-page of this book was added ‘‘by a Catholic Divine.’”? The author was Robert Parsons, the Jesuit. On the back of the title- page the ques- tion is thus stated: “ The state of the controversy discussed throughout this work... The question is, whether this authority and spiritual jurisdiction were conform to the ancient laws of England in former times, or not; and whether it were a statute not introductory of a new law, but declaratory only of an old, so as if the said act had never been made, yet the queen had had that authority, and might have given it to others, as she did? M. Attorney hold- eth the affirmative part, and the Ca- tholie divine the negative.” ]
ἃ [This reply is in an address “to the reader.’’ Coke declines to reply to Parsons’ book, first, because of the temper in which it is written; secondly, that he himself “dealt only with the municipal laws of England,” in which he found Parsons “ utterly ignorant,’’ &e. ‘For his divinity, and histories cited by him, (he says,) I will not answer, for then I should follow him in his error, and depart from the state of the question, whose only object is the municipal laws of this realm.” There is an allusion to the controversy in the preface to part viii. vol. iv. (p. vi. ed. 1826,) but only intimating that the defenders of the opposite views ran the risk of involving themselves in a pre- munire. }
x [The chapter here referred to is
headed, “A piece of reckoning with Sir Edward Coke.” It is introduced by the way into this book, which was a reply to Morton, afterwards bishop of Durham. Morton had, in 1606, sent out an ‘‘exact Discovery of Romish doctrine in the case of conspiracy and Rebellion, by pregnant observation.’’ It was replied to in a work entitled, ‘* A just and moderate answer to the Discovery, &c.,’’ without place or date. Morton rejoined in a book called A Full satisfaction concerning a double Romish iniquity, heinous rebellion, and more than heathenish equivoca- tion. Lond. 1606.” To this Parsons’ work, published in 1607, entitled, ‘A Treatise tending to mitigation towards Catholic subjects in England against the seditious writings of Thomas Mor- ton and others, by P. R., was a reply. Morton in answer sent out ‘‘ A pream- ble unto an encounter with P. R., the author of the deceitful treatise of mitiga- tion, &c. 1608;”’ and Parsons rejoined in the work referred to in the text, of which the full title is ‘‘ A quiet and sober reckoning with Mr. Thomas Morton concerning imputations of wil- ful falsities objected to the said T. M. in a treatise of P. R. entituled of Miti- gation :’’ at the bottom of the title-page of which is added, ‘‘ There is also ad- joined a piece of a reckoning with Sir Edward Coke, now lord chief justice of the common pleas, &c. Permissu su- periorum. Lond. 1609.’’]
CHAP, 1.
SECT. VIL.
368 Two points in which Hickes differs from Parsons.
ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or printed in 1609. Nor hath any lawyer that I have heard of,
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
SECT. VUr.
The objec- tion from Scripture considered,
since replied to either of those answers in the defence of that great man. And, if it were not presumption in a man of my profession, I would recommend them to your reading, for better information in this controversy, which however it hath been long laid asleep, I take to be of greater moment and importance to Christianity, than most men seem to think it is. I must acknowledge there are two great errors in them, whereof one is, that the author bemg a Roman Catholic, makes the pope and papal hierarchy, exclusive of all others, the governing Church, contrary to all sound doc- trine and tradition; and the other is, that he endeavours to exempt the persons and goods of the clergy from the tem- poral powers and your tribunals, asserting that when they offend against temporal laws, they are first to be judged and condemned by the ecclesiastical judges, and not before to be delivered up to the secular power to inflict upon them the punishment of the temporal laws; which are intolerable usurpations of the Church in any Christian State, and con- trary to that code of canons which Pope Adrian I. sent to Charles the Great under the name of Codex Canonum Ecele- sie Romane).
VIII. I have now I think, fully answered the first objec- tion, except that I have not yet said any thing to the text Matt. xx. 25—27, which you thought did not favour the calling bishops lords. But that text and the whole context, only shews the differences that were to be between spiritual
Y [The body of canons referred to by Hickes is a collection of the canons of the Eastern and African councils, given by Adrian I. to Charlemagne, A.D. 773, as the canons received by the Western Church. They were printed at May- ence in 1525, and again at Paris in 1609, under the title Codex Canonum Vetus Ecclesiae Romane. An epitome is given in the collections of councils. (Concilia, tom. viii. col. 565, sqq.) Hickes’ statement does not seem quite accurate. The following passage from Thorndike’s work “Of the Forbear- ance or Penalties which a due Refor- mation requires,’ may have been his authority. Thorndike says, (c. 23, p- 119,) “If it be said that it is not visible when those usurpations took
place, I shall allow all the time which that code of the canons contains, which Pope Adrian sent to Charles the Great; in whose time there can be no pretence of usurpations upon the temporalties of princes by the see of Rome. That code is yet read, under the name of Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Romane.’’ The observation refers not to the spe- cial instance of usurpation referred to by Hickes, but to ‘‘usurpations upon the temporalties of princes by the see of Rome”’ generally; and they are not so correctly said to be “contrary to that code,’’ as not to be contemplated by it. The Canons do not appear to have been sent by Pope Adrian under this name; it is that with which they were printed in the sixteenth century. ]
Dignity of the Apostolical office, not temporal. 369
and temporal princes: “ But it shall not be so among you, as among the princes of the Gentiles, but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister, and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant ;” after My example, who, though I am a King, and have a kingdom, and am exalted above all principalities and powers, and even King of kings, and Lord of lords, yet “I came not to be ministered ver. 28. unto, but to minister, and give My life a ransom for many.” Wherefore as this place supposes Christ to be a King, though
not of such a nature as temporal kings are: so it supposes
the Apostles to be princes under Him, though princes of ano-
ther intention and very unlike the princes of the earth. The
very name of an Apostle is a name of grandeur, and honour,
and princely trust, as I shewed before out of St. Chrysostom’.
For what can be more great and honourable upon earth, than
to be legate and vicegerent of our Lord in heaven, who sits
at God’s right hand, who “hath given Him a name above
every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should
bow,” and of whom He hath said by the prophet David, “ Thy Ps. 45. 6. throne, O God, is for ever and ever, a sceptre of righteous-
ness is the sceptre of Thy kingdom?” As His Father sent
Him, so sent He them, and by virtue of their mission they
acted and transacted with men in His name, which made St. . Hierome write on these words’, “ Paul an Apostle of Jesus
Christ :’” “On this manner he begins with the authority of
that name and office for your sakes, to whom he was to
write ;” and upon Titus 1, saith he», “Styling himself the Apostle of Jesus Christ, it seems such a way of speaking as Prefectus Pretorio Augusti Cesaris, Magister exercitus Tiberii Imperatoris. For as the judges of this world, that they may
seem the more noble, take names from the kings they serve,
and from the dignity of the office unto which they are ex-
CHAP. I. SECT. VIL.
2 [See above, pp. 315, sqq.]
a [Paulus Apostolus Jesu Christi. Auctoritas et nominis et officii preno- tatur, propter eos quibus erat respon- surus.—Pseudo-Hierom. Comment. in 1 Ep. ad Tim. i. 1. ap. S. Hieronym. Op., tom, xi. col. 1043, A.]
» [Porro quod ait: Apostolus autem Jesu Christi, tale mihi videtur, quale si dixisset, Prefectus Pretorio Augusti Cesaris, Magister Exercitus Tiberii Imperatoris. Ut enim judices seculi
HICKES.
hujus quo nobiliores esse videantur, ex regibus quibus serviunt, et ex dignitate qua intumescunt, vocabula sortiuntur : ita et Apostolus grandem inter Chris- tianos sibi vindicans dignitatem, Apo- stolum se Christi titulo przenotavit, ut ex ipsa lecturos nominis auctoritate terreret: indicans omnes qui in Christo crederent, debere sibi esse subjectos.— S. Hieron. Comment. in Epist. ad Titum i. 1. Op., tom. vii. col. 688, C, D; 682,
Bb
370 Dignity of Bishops as representing Christ.
pianity or alted; so the Apostle, challenging to himself great autho-
EPISCOPAL ORDER,
rity among Christians, did signify beforehand that he was the Apostle of Christ, that by the authority of the name he might create reverence in his readers, and thereby shew that all believers in Christ ought to be subject to him.” And as Apostle, so is Bishop a name of no less honour and dignity, for Christ under God is the Shepherd and Bishop of our souls, and as He deputed that trust and office to the Apostles, so they, and He by them, committed it to their successors. He is our High-Priest in heaven, and they under Him our high-priests upon earth. Nay, they represent Him both as king and priest ; in both these capacities they preside over us, and in the former they are no less than His viceroys in the several principalities of His kingdom. To this purpose speaks an author who lived in the time of King Henry I. or King Henry IT., (who both had differences with the archbishops of Canterbury, Anselm and Becket,) and as it were arbitrates the difference between both parties in a book intituled as in the margin’, which he dedicates Henrico Regi Anglorum gloriosissimo, and as far as he then could, favours the king’s side. He shews himself to have been a learned man for those dark times, and well versed in the Latin fathers, and thus he writes: Nam et regalem dignitatem habere sancte scripture testimonio videtur episcopus. Ait enim Dominus Jesus Christus Apostolis suis eorumque sequacibus: ‘ Ego dis- pono vobis, sicut disposuit mihi Pater meus regnum. Et Apo- stolus: ‘Vos estis genus electum, regale sacerdotium,.... Vices enim Christi filii Dei summi in terra videtur obtinere
. . unde inter nos et Deum mediator debet existere. Ipse est sanctus sanctorum, clericorum scilicet ac presbyterorum, quibus omnibus eminet, ac precellit. Hic est ecclesie sponsus, hic Christi vicarius. .. Honorandi igitur sunt omnes episcopi, sicut regni celestis clavicularii, το. [lib. i.] cap. 9. p. 34°.—Nune autem sanctorum prophetarum vicem in ecclesia Christi retinent sacerdotes. Sic enim Dominus ad ipsam loquitur [ per Isaiam Prophetam] : ‘ Ecce constituam principes tuos sicut antea, et
° Hugonis Floriacensis Tractatus de Henry the First that the tract was ad- Regia Potestate, et Sacerdotali Digni- dressed. See vol. i. p. 332, note s. ] tate. In Miscellaneorum Steph. Ba- 4 [Hugon. Floriac. &c., p. 189. col. luzii libro quarto. Parisiis, 1683. [tom. ii. ed. 1761. ]
ii. ed. Luce. 1761. It was to King
Titles of honour given them, in primitive times. 371
consiliarios tuos sicut ab initio” Ht Psalmista: ‘ Pro patribus tuis nati sunt tibi filit; constitues eos principes super omnem terram” Igitur regiam et sacerdotalem dignitatem Deus in terra ordinavit, &c.*
This indeed is an author of popish times ; but long before the beginning of popery they spoke of bishops in this manner, as of spiritual lords. Not to repeat what was cited above, out of the twentieth chapter of the second book of the Apos- tolical Constitutions‘, the title of which is this, ὅπως χρὴ τοὺς ἀρχομένους πειθαρχεῖν τοῖς ἄρχουσιν ἐπισκόποις, “ How the subjects (of the Church) ought to obey their governors the bishops :” in that chapter we read thus®: “ Let the layman honour, love, and fear a good shepherd as his lord, and despot, and the high-priest of his God, and his preceptor in religion. For he that hears him, hears Christ; and he that doth not obey him doth not obey Christ, and he that doth not receive Christ, doth not receive His Father, as it is written, ‘He that heareth you heareth Me, and he that de- spiseth you despiseth Me, and he that despiseth Me, despiseth Him that sent Me.’” The first of those titles, κύριος, is a title of great dignity, both in its secular and sacred signifi- cation. In its secular signification, it is used to denote the emperor"; and in its sacred signification, it is given to God and to Christ, whose legates and vicegerents the bishops are, and to the Holy Ghosti, whose dispensers they are. In like
CHAP, I.
SECT. VI.
manner δεσπότης is a title of God, and the emperor, and his Jude 4.
regal relations, and the great princes, and magistrates under the emperor in the Greek writers ; and upon the principles I have laid down, they were given to the bishops upon the score of their great spiritual dignity and pre-eminence in the kingdom of God and Christ, who is King of kings, and Lord of lords. Thus Arius begins his letter to Eusebius
€ [Ibid., p. 193. col. i. ]
f [See above, pp. 305, sqq. This chapter, however, is not quoted there. ]
& [τὸν μέντοι ποιμένα τὸν ἀγαθὸν ὃ λαϊκὸς τιμάτω, ἄγαπάτω, φοβείσθω ὡς κύριον, ὧς δεσπότην, ὡς ἀρχιερέα θεοῦ, ὡς διδάσκαλον εὐσεβείας. ὃ γὰρ αὐτοῦ ἀκούων Χριστοῦ ἀκούει, καὶ 6 αὐτὸν ἀθε- τῶν Χριστὸν ἀθετεῖ, καὶ 6 τὸν Χριστὸν μὴ δεχόμενος οὐ δέχεται τὸν αὐτοῦ θεὸν
καὶ πατέρα' ὃ ὑμῶν γάρ, φησιν, ἀκούων, ἐμοῦ ἀκούει, καὶ ὁ ὑμᾶς ἀθετῶν, ἐμὲ ἀθε- τεῖ, καὶ ὃ ἐμὲ ἀθετῶν, ἀθετεῖ τὸν ἀπο- στείλαντά me.—Const. Apost., lib. ii. c. 20. Concilia, tom. i. col. 248, A, B.]
h [See Acts xxv. 26. περὶ οὗ ἀσφαλές τι γράψαι τῷ κυρίῳ οὐκ ἔχω. |
i [See 2 Cor. iii, 18. καθάπερ ἀπὸ κυρίου πνεύματος.
Bb 2
372 Instances of Bishops being called
ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or bishop of Nicomedia/: “Arius unjustly persecuted by Alex- “onpan, ander my bishop, to my most desired lord Eusebius.”
The same Eusebius, writing to Paulinus bishop of Tyre, begins thus*: ‘ Eusebius sendeth greeting in Christ, τῷ δεσπότῃ μου, to my lord (or despot) Paulinus ;” this shews what the custom was before the council of Nice. Not long after which the bishops who came out of Egypt with Atha- nasius, inscribed a letter to the bishops assembled at Tyre’, “To our most honourable lords.” The synod of Jerusalem in their letter to the clergy of Egypt and Lybia, tell them™, “they could never be thankful enough to God, who had restored unto them their pastor and lord, Athanasius.” So Valens and Ursacius, writing to Julius bishop of Rome in their own vindication, thus address to him”, “To the most blessed lord Pope Julius.” Where I must observe to you, that Papa was then a title common to all bishops. Gregory Nazianzen, in a letter to Gregory Nyssen, hath these words®, “Let no man speak untruth of me, nor of my lords the bishops.” And St. Chrysostom superscribes his letter to Pope Innocent ?, τῷ δεσπότῃ μου ᾿Ιννοκεντίῳ, “To my lord (or despot) Inno- cent, peace in the Lord.” Palladii Dialog., p.10. In the same
epistle mentioning several bishops, he calls them4 τοὺς κυρίους
μου TLt@TaTovs, “my most honourable lords.” And a letter of George, bishop of Laodicea, hath this superscription’, “To
J Γ Αρείου ἐπιστολὴ πρὸς Εὐσέβιον τὸν Νικομηδείας ἐπίσκοπον. κυρίω πο- θεινοτάτῳ, ἀνθρώπῳ θεοῦ, πιστῷ, ὀρθο- δόξῳ Εὐσεβίῳ, ΓΑρειος ὃ διωκόμενος ἀπὸ ᾿Αλεξάνδρου τοῦ πάπα ἀδίκως διὰ τὴν πάντα νικῶσαν ἀλήθειαν. --- Theodoret. Hist. Eccl., lib. i. cap. 5. tom. iii. p. 22, |
k [Εὐσεβίου ἐπισκόπου Νικομηδείας ἐπιστολὴ πρὸς Παυλῖνον ἐπίσκοπον Τύ- ρου. τῷ δεσπότῃ μου Παυλίνῳ, Εὐσέβιος ἐν κυρίῳ χαίρειν.---Τὰ. ibid.; cap. 6. p- 23. |
1 [rots ἐν Τύρῳ συνελθοῦσιν ἐπισκό- ποις, κυρίοις τιμιωτάτοις, οἱ am’ Αἰγύπ- του σὺν ᾿Αθανασίῳ ἐλθόντες τῆς καθο- λικῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐν κυρίῳ χαίρειν.--- ap. S. Athanas. Apolog. contra Aria- nos, ὃ ii. ΟΡ.» tom. 1. pars i. p. 193, D.]
m [ἡ ἅγια σύνοδος ἣ ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις συναχθεῖσα, τοῖς ἐν Αἴγυπτῳ καὶ Λιβύῃ, καὶ τοῖς ἐν ᾿Αλεξανδρείᾳ πρεσβυτέροις, K.T.A. κατ᾽ ἀξίαν τῷ τῶν ὅλων θεῷ εὐχαριστεῖν ovK ἀρκοῦμεν ἀγαπητοὶ, ἐφ᾽ οἷς θαυμασίοις ἐποίησε πάντοτε, ἐποίησε
δὲ καὶ νῦν μετὰ τῆς ὑμετέρας ἐκκλησίας, τὸν ποιμένα ὑμῶν καὶ κύριον καὶ συλ- λειτουργὴὺν ἡμῶν ᾿Αθανάσιον ἀποδοὺς buiv.|—Sozomen. Eccl. Hist., lib. iii. cap. 22. [ Hist. Eccl., tom. ii. p. 127. ]
ἢ [ὁμολογία Οὐάλεντος καὶ Οὐρσακίου τῶν τὰ ᾿Αρείου φρονούντων, πρὸς τὸν Ῥώμης, ὡς ψευδῆ κατεῖπον ᾿Αθανασίου νος τῷ κυρίῳ μακαριωτάτῳ πάπα ᾿Ιουλίῳ, Οὐρσάκιος καὶ Οὐάλη».---ΤὈϊά., ο. 23. p. 128.]
© [ἡμῶν δὲ μηδεὶς καταψευδέσθω, πα- ρακαλῶῷ, μηδὲ τῶν κυρίων τῶν ἐπισκό- mwv.—S. Greg. Naz. Epist. elxxxit. ad S. Greg. Nyssen. Op, tom. ii, p. 149, A.]
P [τῷ δεσπότῃ μου αἰδεσίμῳ καὶ ὅσι- ὠὡτάτῳ ἐπισκόπῳ ᾿Ιννοκεντίῳ ᾿Ιωάννης ἐν κυρίῳ xalpev.—Palladii vita 5. Chry- sost. Op., tom. xii. p. 5, A. ]
4 [ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι ἐνομίσαμεν τοὺς κυρίους μυυ τιμιωτάτους καὶ εὐλαβεστά- Tous ἐπισκόπους Δημήτριον, K.T.A. πεῖ- oat.—Id. ibid., B.]
r , , /
[κυρίοις τιμιωτάτοις, Μακεδονίῳ,
Lords in the ancient Church. 373
my most honourable lords Macedonius, Basilius, Cecropius, Eugenius, George sendeth greeting in the Lord.” The bishops of the second general council’, “To the most honourable lords Damasus, Ambrose,” &c. In a synodical epistle sent by the bishops who met in a council in Illyricum, to the bishops of Asia, Phrygia, Cataphrygia, and Pacatiana'‘, they style Elpi- dius bishop of Illyricum, by whom they sent the letter, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Kal συλλείτουργον, “ Elpidius our lord and fellow minister ; so they also style Eustathius bishop of Sebastia. And the same Eustathius, Silvanus bishop of Tarsus, and Theophilus bishop of Castabala, in the inscription of their letter to Pope Liberius write thus": “ Eustathius, &c. send greeting in the Lord, to our lord, and brother, and fellow mi- nister Liberius.” So St. Ambrose, holding asynod with other bishops, wrote a synodical epistle to Siricius bishop of Rome, which Aper, a presbyter, subscribed for his bishop in these words*; “At the commandment of my lord bishop Geminia- nus.” In the third tome of Bibliotheca Patrum, edit. 4Y, may be seen abundance of letters inscribed to bishops with the title of lord, which were written towards the end of the fifth century ; which they who have not those volumes, may see collected, lib. xvi. cap. 1. of Dr. John Forbes’ Instructiones
Historico- Theologica.
Βασιλείῳ, Κεκροπίῳ, Evyeviw, Γεώργιος ἐν κυρίῳ xalpew.|—Sozomen. Hist. Kccl., lib. iv. 6. 18. [tom. ii. p. 147.]
5. [κυρίοις τιμιωτάτοις καὶ εὐλαβεστά- τοις ἀδελφοῖς καὶ συλλειτουργοῖς, Δα- μάσῳ, ᾿Αμβροσίῳ, K.T.A. ... ἡ ἅγια σύνοδος τῶν ὀρθοδόξων ἐπισκόπων, τῶν συνεληλυθότων ἐν τῇ μεγαλῇ Κωνσταν- τινουπόλει, ἐν κυρίῳ xalpew.—Theodo- ret., lib. v. c. 9. Hist. Eccl., tom. iii. p. 203.]
t [συνοδικὸν τῆς ἐν ᾿Ιλλυρικῷ συνα- χθείσης συνόδου περὶ τῆς πίστεως. οἱ ἐπίσκοποι τοῦ ᾿Ιλλυρικοῦ ταῖς ἐκκλησί- ais τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ ἐπισκόποις διοικήσεως ᾿Ασιανῆς, Φρυγίας, Καροφρυγίας, Πακα- τιανῆς ἐν κυρίῳ χαίρειν. ἀναγκὴν οὖν ἔχομεν, πέμψαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν καὶ συλλειτουργὺν ᾿Ἐλπίδιον ἀπὸ τῆς βασιλευούσης Ῥωμαίων ἀρχῆς. And so again twice in the following page. | —Id. ibid., lib. iv. ο. 9. [p. 157. εἴγε οὕτως ἔχει ὥσπερ ἀκηκόαμεν παρὰ Tod κυρίου ἡμῶν τοῦ συλλειτουργοῦ Εὐστα- θίου.- Τὰ. ibid., p. 158.]
ἃ [κυρίῳ ἀδελφῷ καὶ συλλειτουργῷ
Clodoveus, king of France, so in-
AiBepiw, ἙΕὐστάθιος, Σιλβανὸς, Θεόφι- λος, ἐν κυρίῳ χαίρειν. |—Sozom.,, lib. vi. cap. 11. [p. 282. ]
x [Domino dilectissimo fratri Siricio pape Ambrosius, Sabinus, Bassianus et ceteri.... ex jussu domini episcopi Geminiani, ipso presente, Aper pres- byter subscripsi.m—Rescriptum Episco- porum Ambrosii, &c. ad Siricium pa- pam. Concilia, tom. ii. col. 1220, B. 1222, E.]
y [The third volume of the Biblio- theca Patrum, de la Bigne, in tomis viii. edit. 4. Par. 1624, consists entirely of letters .. Epistole quas de Deo et re- bus divinis ecclesie patres conscripse- runt. |
2 [The subject of lib. xvi. is De suc- cessoribus Petri et aliorum episcopo- rum, and cap. 1. is against a difference of grade among bishops; at § 28. he gives the extracts from the Epistles in the Bibl. Patrum, beginning with the instances which Hickes has copied, thus, Veterum quorundum episcopo- rum Gallorum, qui sub finem quinti
CHAP. I.
SECT, VIII.
374 Bishops called Lords from their spiritual pre-eminence.
ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ oF scribed his letter to the bishops met in council at Orange®,
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
Dominis sanctis, &c., “To my holy lords the bishops,” and in the end of his letter (saith he) Orate pro me domini sancti, &c., “Pray for me my holy lords.” They were his lords in spiri- tuals, as he was theirs in temporals; his superiors under God the Son, as he was theirs under God the Father. Lastly, this was the usual style of priests, when they subscribed councils for their bishops. Thus were bishops styled lords‘ and despots upon the account of their great dignity, power, and pre- eminence, to which they were advanced by our Lord in His kingdom ; and therefore, Sir, my way of speaking of them in my Propositions, was not new or insolent; and it will never be well with Christianity, till men think of bishops as I have written of them, till they reverence them more for their spiri- tual, than any temporal dignity, and be as afraid to assail their thrones as the thrones of kings. Sir, I protest to you as a divine, I know nothing that can be objected against my lofty way, (for so you call it,) of speaking of bishops as princes, but the thirty-ninth canon in the book of the canons of the African Church, which forbids the metropolitan or primate of any province to be called prince of the bishops, or
seculi claruerunt, leguntur quedam epistole, tom. iii. Bibl. Patr. edit. 4. cum his inscriptionibus, &c.—Instruc- tiones Historico-Theologice . . . prece et studio Ioannis Forbesii a Corse, pp. 759, 760. fol. Amst. 1645. ]
a [Et Clovodeus Francie rex epis- tolam suam ad episcopos, quos ad concilium Aurelianense venire jusserat (A.D. 507) sic imscribit, ‘ Dominis sanctis, et apostolica sede dignissimis episcopis Clovodeus rex.’ Eundemque sic claudit; ‘Orate pro me, domini sancti, et apostolica sede pape dig- nissimi.’—Ibid., § 39. p. 760.
Ὁ Dr. Downame’s Defence, b. iii. cap. 6. pp. 148, 149. [In 1608, Downame (or Downham, afterwards bishop of Derry), published a sermon preached at the consecration of James Moun- tague as bishop of Bath and Wells, ‘‘in defence of the honourable function of bishops,” on Rev. i. 20. To this an answer was sent out, and in 1611 Dow- name published a reply, with the title, A Defence of the Sermon preached at the consecration of the bishop of Bath and Wells, against a confutation thereof by a nameless author: divided into four
books ... the third defending the supe- riority of bishops over other ministers, and proving that bishops always had a priority not only in order, but also in degree, and a majority of power both for ordination and jurisdiction ... by George Downame, D.D. London, 1611. The subject of chapter 6. is “ Titles of honour given to bishops; of § 1. ‘Whether bishops may be called lords.”” He gives the same instances as Hickes has done, and adds (p. 149) after the word Geminianus (see above, notex); ‘and this was the usual style of presbyters when they did subscribe to councils instead of their bishop whose place they supplied.” He refers to several instances. ]
© See more instances, Habert. Pon- tif. Gree., p. 539. [Observat. viii. Ad Edictum Metropolite ordinato. Qualis episcopi dominatus. He adds, how- ever, after quoting several of the in- stances given by Hickes and others ; Neque mirum episcopos . . . dominos vocari; cum ipsi quoque presbyteri domini vocarentur etiam ab episcopis ; of this he gives instances. ]
Canon of the African Church considered. 375
supreme bishop. The words are these’; Ut prime sedis epis- copus non appelletur princeps sacerdotum, aut summus sacerdos, aut aliquod hujusmodi, sed tantum prime sedis episcopus, i. e. “That the bishop of the prime see be not called prince of the bishops, or supreme bishop, or by any such name, but only bishop of the prime see.” But this canon hath no relation to bishops, either severally considered as spiritual chiefs or princes in their proper districts over the clergy and laity, or as collegiate princes over the whole Church of God, but only to metropolitans, primates, or patriarchs ; and particularly, to the metropolitans or primates of Rome, who began betimes to behave themselves like episcopi episcoporum®, contrary to the collegiate equality of bishops; and therefore to prevent that this fast and arrogance, which began to appear in the oriental and occidental Churches, should not come among the African primates, they would not have them called princes of the bishops, lest they should think themselves as much superior to their fellows and colleagues in the episcopal office, as bishops were to presbyters, or the first to the second order of priests. For this reason they would have them only called primates, or bishops of the prime see: though as supe- riors to presbyters, bishops were called principes sacerdotum, and summi sacerdotes, according to that of Tertullian de Bap- tismo', Dandi quidem baptismi jus habet supremus sacerdos, qui est episcopus ; and that of Facundus Hermianensis®, Quid com- memorem laicos... quid ministros plurimos ? Quid diaconos in tertio? quid presbyteros in secundo sacerdotio constitutos ὃ Ipsi apices, et principes omnium episcopt, &c. Bishops therefore are princes of the clergy and laity, princes of the Church in its several districts, as a spiritual society, though primates,
ἃ [Codex Canon. Eccles. Africane, Canon xxxix. Concilia, tom. ii. col. 1281, C. This codex is a collection of canons of different African councils. This is Canon 26 of the third council of Carthage, (A.D. 397.) Concilia, ibid., col. 1403, C. The Greek trans- lation is, ὥστε τὸν THs πρώτης καθέδρας ἐπίσκοπον μὴ λέγεσθαι ἔξαρχον τῶν ἱερέων, ἢ ἄκρον ἱερέα, ἢ τοιουτοτρόπον τί ποτε ἄλλα μόνον ἐπίσκοπον τῆς πρώτης Kadedpus. |
€ Neque enim quisquam nostrum episcopum se esse episcoporum consti- tuit, aut tyrannico terrore δα obse-
quendi necessitatem collegas suos adi- git; [quando habeat omnis episcopus pro licentia libertatis et potestatis suze arbitrium proprium; tamque judi- cari ab alio non possit, quam nec ipse potest alterum judicare.—Conce. Carth. de Bapt. Heret. apud Cyprianum. [S. oypt Op., pp. 329, 330. ed. Ben. ]
[Tert. de Bapt. cap. 17. Op., p. 230, C. ]
s [This seems a mistake for Optatus Milevitanus (lib. de Schism. Donatist. cont. Parmenian., lib. i. 6. 13. p. 11. quoted above, p. 35. note k.) ]
CHAP. 1.
SECT, VIII.
376 Bishops, as such, equal to each other.
pienity or and metropolitans, and patriarchs are not princes of the EPISCOPAL . . ἢ - bishops, who are of the same order with them", and their
ORDER. brethren and colleagues.
h Hieronymus in Epist. ad Eva- grium. Ubicunque fuerit episcopus, sive Rome, sive Eugubii, sive Constan- tinopoli, sive Rhegii, sive Alexandriez, sive Tanis, ejusdem meriti, ejusdem est et sacerdotii. Potentia divitiarum, et paupertatis humilitas, vel sublimiorem velinferiorem episcopum non facit. Cz- terum omnes Apostolorum successores sunt. [S. Hier. Epist. exlvi. ad Evan- gelum (al. Ixxxv. ad Evagrium) Op., tom. i. p. 1076, D. 1077, A.] See also Balsamon, and Zonaras on canon xlii. Concil. Carth. [This is the canon quoted above, p. 374, as the thirty- ninth of the canons of the African
Church, see note d. Balsamon and Zo- naras observe that in the sixth and seventh canons of the council of Sar- dica, and the ninth and seventeenth of the general council of Chalcedon, Me- tropolitans are called ‘exarchs;’ that the latter council therefore approved the decision of the council of Sardica in this point rather than that of Car- thage; in which the primates’ not having titles of distinction given is to be attributed only to the desire of re- pressing ambition. See their words in Beveridge, Pandecta Canonum, tom. i. p. 567, A—C. |
CHAPTER II.
AN ANSWER TO THE SECOND CAPITAL OBJECTION AGAINST THE DIGNITY AND AUTHORITY OF THIS OFFICE, FROM THE CHURCH INDEPENDENCY BEING A PRESBYTERIAN DOCTRINE.
Your next objection against my Propositions is for con- _ 8507. 1.
taining a doctrine so like that of the presbyterians concern- The dis- tinct power ing Church power and independency, by which they have aad polity endeavoured to enslave the State to the Church. Pei nnik To which I answer, that there are few sects that do not ἃ 7esby" retain some truths, one of which is the distinction of eccle- rented siastical and civil power, and the independency of the Church on the State, and as far as the presbyterians have abused and misapplied this doctrine to the wrong or disturbance of the secular potentates, and invading their rights, so far it is to be condemned and abhorred by every good Christian, in the presbytery as well as in the pope. But then that abuse of the doctrine, which is catholic and primitive, is purely the fault of the men. But as I have taught and explained it in my letter’, it can never hurt the State, or secular sovereigns and those put in authority under them, otherwise than by their own fault, when they bring the judgments of God upon themselves and the people for acting contrary to it, and their duty to Christ and His Church. According to my Propositions the Church hath no sword, but the spiritual one of excommunication, nor any arms to defend itself against the oppression of the State, but spiritual censures, prayers,
[The letter referred to is the fuller one containing the forty Propo- sitions, published under the title of the Constitution of the Catholic Church, and the nature and consequences of Schism, in a Letter to a Sergeant at Law, in the posthumous volume bear- ing the same title sent out in 1716. See Proposition 24. (pp. 78, 79.) “That the union or interweaving of the civil with the ecclesiastical laws and govern- ment gives the State no more right or
pretence of right to usurp it over the Church or invade its spiritual rights which it derives from Christ, than it gives the Church to usurp it over the State, or invade its temporal rights which it derives from God.’? So Prop. 28. (p. 81.) ‘*(Men) are bound under the relation of faithful temporal sub- jects to defend the rights of the State, which are their own civil rights, against the Church, when she invades them.” ]
378 The doctrine stated by Hickes guarded from abuse.
ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or and tears. Its rights, as a society founded by Christ Jesus,
EPISCOPAL
orper. are no otherwise to be maintained, than its faith and wor-
ship, by patience and suffering, commonly called passive obe- dience; and so far am I from enslaving the laity to the clergy, or the Church to the State, that in my Propositions I make them subordinate, and subject to one another; the Church to the State in all temporal matters, and the State to the Church in purely spiritual matters: and in this divine har- mony doth the peace of the Church and a Christian State consist. My doctrine condemns the Church’s going beyond its bounds, and invading the rights of princes in ordine ad spiritualia, as much as the State’s transgressing its bounds, and violating the rights of the Church in ordine ad temporalia ; but more especially if Church magistrates go beyond their bounds in disturbing the peace, order, frame, or government of the State, I would have them undergo more severe and exemplary punishments than other men.
Thus, Sir, you see the doctrine of Church power and independency is to be distinguished from the abuse of it ; and the abuse of it, whether by presbyterians, or the clergy of the Church of Rome, is no reflection upon the pure and innocent doctrine, but upon them who make so ill use of it, contrary to the intention of our blessed Lord, and the ends for which He gave it tothe Church. Wherefore I say of this
Rom. 7. 12, doctrine, as St. Paul said of the law, it is “ spiritual, holy, just
14,
and good;” though like the law, it hath been much abused with mixtures, as other doctrines have been. But in my Propositions, you know it is delivered in its primitive original purity, without presbyterian or popish mixtures, and secured as much as it can be in writing, from being perverted and abused. If you would see how much it is corrupted with presbyterian mixtures, you need but consult the sixth book of Spotswood’s Church History, from p. 289 to p. 302. But nevertheless there are many truths asserted there con- cerning the Church and Church government, to which I give my full assent. They are such as these*: [chap. 1. 8.1 “The
k [The following passages are ex- Church; and first of the policy thereof tracted from ‘‘a form of Church policy,” in general, wherein it differeth from presented to the Scottish parliament the civil.’’ Hickes’ reference is to the by the Presbyterian body in 1578, and fourth edition of The History of the entitled; ‘‘ Heads and conclusions ofthe Church and State of Scotland, &c. by
Correct views of Presbyterians respecting Church power. 379
Church, (as it is taken for them who exercise the spiritual function,)” i. 6. for the Church governors, “hath a certain power granted by God, according to which it useth a proper jurisdiction, or government..... [4.] This power ecclesi- astical is an authority granted by God the Father, through the mediation of Jesus Christ [unto the Church gathered and having the ground in the word of God,] to be put in execution by them unto whom the spiritual government of the Church by lawful calling is committed.
[8.] This power and polity is different and distinct in its own nature from that power and polity which is called the civil power. ... [9.] For this power ecclesiastical floweth [from God] immediately [and] (from) the Mediator Jesus Christ, and is spiritual, not having a temporal head in the earth, but only Christ, the only spiritual King and Governor of the (universal) Church.
[13.] As the ministers and others of the ecclesiastical State are subject to the magistrate civilly; so ought the person of the magistrate to be subject to the Church spiri- tually [and in ecclesiastical government. |
[15.] The civil power is called the power of the sword; (and) the other power the power of the keys.
[19.] The civil magistrate getteth obedience by the sword and [other] external means; but the minister by the spiri- tual sword and spiritual means. [22.] As ministers are subject to the judgment and punishment of magistrates in external things, if they offend; so ought the magistrates to submit themselves to the discipline of the Church, if they transgress in matters of conscience and religion.
[Chap. x. Art. 2.] It pertains to the office of a Christian magistrate to fortify and assist the godly proceedings of the Church;... [4.] to assist and maintain the discipline of (it) .... without confounding the one jurisdiction with the other; ... [7.] or usurping any thing that pertains not to the civil sword, but belongs to the offices merely ecclesias-
J. Spotswood, archbishop of St. An- drew’s. London, 1077. The first pas- sage extracted is the third article of chapter 1, which runs thus in the ori- ginal; ‘‘ The Church in this last sense hath a power,” &c.... referring to art. 2.‘*(The Church is taken)sometimes for them that exercise the spiritual func-
tions amongst the congregation of them that profess the truth.’”’ The words in parentheses in the text are added by Hickes, (who also substitutes ‘ polity’ for ‘ policy’); those in brackets are in- serted by the editor, from the original of Spottiswood. }
CHAP. Il.
SECT. I.
DIGNITY OF tical ;
EPISCOPAL ORDER,
380 The Westminster Confession, Se., state the same doctrines.
as the ministry of the word or Sacraments, using ecclesiastical discipline, and [spiritual] execution thereof, or any part of the spiritual keys, which the Lord Jesus gave to the Apostles, and their true successors.”
So in the Westminster Confession, chap. xxv. § 3!: “Christ hath given to the Catholic visible Church the ministry, as well as the oracles, and ordinances of God.”’ So chap. xxx. § 1: “The Lord Jesus, as King and Head of His Charch, hath therein appointed a government in the hand of Church officers, distinct from the civil magistrate.” § 2: “To these oflicers the keys of the kingdom of heaven are committed,” &c., not to transcribe many other passages out of that Con- fession, and two or three presbyterian books more, viz., Jus Divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici™, and Jus Divinum Ministerii Evangelici ; Jus Divinum Ministerii Anglicani® ; which assert “Church power to be seated in Christ the head of the Church, and from Him committed to the Apostles, and from them to Church officers, and that they alone who received it from the Apostles” (which I have shewed were bishops superior to, and distinct from presbyters), “can derive and transmit it to others ;” and that this transmission, and derivation of Church power by continued lineal succession, as well as the power it- self, was founded on positive Divine institution. For the proof of all which, they cite such texts of Scripture as I made use of in the former letter you gave me leave to write to you.
11. This distinction of the power and polity of the Church Divi-
1 [The Confession of Faith and Catechisms agreed upon by the assem- bly of Divines at Westminster, to be a part of uniformity in religion between the Churches of Christ in the three Kingdoms. London, 1650. Chap. 26. Of the Church. ὃ 3. “Unto this Catholic visible Church, Christ hath given the ministry, oracles, and ordinances of God,” &c. Chap. 30, § 1, is Of Church Censures; from which Hickes’ quota- tions are made verbatim. |
m [The first work referred to is, “Jus Divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici; or the Divine Right of Church Govern- ment asserted and evidenced by the Holy Scriptures, &c., by sundry Minis- ters of Christ within the city of Lon- don.” ed. 8, 1654. See chap. xi. sect. 2. pp. 178—202. ]
n [The two last mentioned works are two parts of the same book; of
the first the title is, “Jus num, or the Divine Right of the Gos- pel ministry. The first part.” Lon- don, 1654. Of the other, ‘‘ The second part, containing a justification of the present ministers of England, both such who were ordained during the prevalency of episcopacy from the foul aspersion of Antichristianism, and those who have been ordained since its abolition from the unjust imputation of novelty; that a Bishop and Pres- byter are all one in Scripture, and that ordination by Presbyters is most agree- able to the Scripture pattern.’’? London, 1654, The heading of the pages is “Jus Divinum ministerii Anglicani, or the Divine Right of the ministry in England.”’ The work is directed against the independents as well as the Church. ]
Real distinctness of the two powers. 381
from that of the State by Divine institution, which the pres- cnar. πὶ byterian writers insist so much upon, is indeed not only like — to what I laid down in my former letter to you, but the very of this same, and the doctrine is never the worse, no more than other eae sound doctrines, for being taught in the Kirk ; though, as they pad have misapplied and abused it, it is to be abhorred and de- the Inde- tested by all good Christians, as contrary to the holy Gospels, ee and the doctrine and practice of the holy Catholic Church,
and utterly inconsistent with the civil order and peace of kingdoms and sovereign states. The peace and quiet ofa
nation, where there is such a Church or Churches, is not to be preserved without a standing army; but the distinction be-
tween the two powers, jurisdictions, and governments, which
1 have taught, as it was ordained by the wisdom from above ;
so is it “ pure, peaceable, and gentle, without hypocrisy, and
full of the fruits of righteousness and good works.” It isa distinction “not of man, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ,
and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead.” It isa
real distinction and difference, not invented by priests, but ordained by Jesus Christ, to distinguish His kingdom from
the kingdoms of the world, and the things which belong to
God from those which belong to Cesar, or betwixt the things
which belong to the empire, and those that belong to the Church. A real distinction, I say it is, by all the rules of Logic,
which teacheth us°, “that different subjects and the accidents of different subjects, are really different from one another ;” and
“that those things are really distinct, of which one can exist without the other.” Thus the Church subsisted without the
State for three hundred years together; there was then nothing
more visible than the distinction or rather opposition between
it and the empire, or between the kingdom of Christ and that
of Cesar. The two societies and governments were all that
time as distinguishable as light from darkness to every vulgar
eye, while the Apostles and their successors preached against
the Jewish and Gentile religions, planted and formed Chris-
tian societies or Churches, in the greatest cities of the world,
and thereby turned it upside down, “ doing all things contrary Acts 17. 6, to the decrees of Czesar” and the laws of the empire, and ἡ
ὁ [Differunt vero realiter, quorum subjectis vel diversa subjecta.—San- unum potest esse sine alio absque con- _—_derson, Logie, lib. i. c. 19, § 5.] tradictione ; vel que sunt in diversis
382 Doctrine of the Independents. P. Nye on the
prenity or vouching all they did by the authority of ‘‘ another King, one
EPISCOPAL ORDER,
Jesus,” “who was dead, but whom they affirmed to be alive.” Sir, “ He that liveth and was dead, but is alive for evermore,” is the founder of the Church. ‘He who hath the keys of hell and death” gave the power of the keys to commission ministers of His own to govern His kingdom unto the end of the world, to admit in and to exclude out of it, to bind and to loose, to chastise and correct with spiritual censures, to humble and exalt, to suspend, deprive, degrade, and restore, and finally to cut off the incorrigible with the spiritual sword. If this be presbyterian, or popish doctrine, I own myself to be so unhappy as to believe both, and bound in conscience to maintain them in behalf of the Church against the world. Here, Sir, my conscience saith unto me, as St. Ignatius said to Polycarp®, στῆθι ἑδραῖος ὧς ἄκμων τυπτόμενος, “stand steady, and fast, like a beaten anvil.” Indeed, Sir, the insti- tutions of Christ, without making comparison between them, are dear and sacred to me, as well as His revelations, and I have no more power to do any thing against the doctrines which I think relate to the being and government or disci- pline of the Church, as a society, than against those which relate unto it as a sect. Ι
Τῇ you had pleased, you might have objected as well against my Propositions about the distinction of the Church from the State, for containing a doctrine so like that of the independ- ents. For there is not a little of that doctrine in P. Nye’s posthumous book entitled, “Of the oath of Supremacy, and power of the King in ecclesiastical affairs,” printed at London, 1683”. In that book you will find the author, in the words of other writers, asserting’ that “ government or discipline” (as well as doctrine) “is intrinsic (to) and inseparable from the [very] essence of a Church, ... and not the grant and con- stitution of any secular prince and State; that ‘the Church is endued’ with a judicature immediately derived from Christ,
° {S. Ignat. Epist. ad S. Polycarp. c. 3. Patr, Apost., tom. ii. p. 40. ]
» [From the address of the publisher to the reader at the beginning of this work it would seem to be a reprint. It begins; “The reprinting of this judicious and learned treatise of Mr. Nye’s, is occasioned by the reimposing of the oaths of allegiance and supre- macy on the city of London at this
juncture for election of common council men,’ &c. Its design is to shew that “the principles of dissenters are not inconsistent with the king’s supremacy in ecclesiastical affairs.’’ |
4 [The following extracts are from Nye, chap. 5. Obj. 1. § 2. p. 38.]
r [This is an extract from Dr. Thomas Jackson’s Treatise of the holy Catholic Faith and Church, first pub-
independent power of the Church, quoting authorities. 383
and independent upon any earthly power, or any power what- soever upon earth, whether spiritual (1. e. papal) or tempo- ral;’” that “‘the things comprised in the Church*, and by God Himself commanded to the Church,’ as ‘the word, Sacra- ments, and use of the keys, or ecclesiastical power, and cure of souls,’” (of which let me add the episcopal certainly is the greatest,) “‘are subject to no mortal creature, pope, or prince;”” that “‘the Church hath the keys from Christ‘ equally inde- pendent upon any mortal man, in discipline asin doctrine ;’” that “all grant there is a government jure Divino and by the appointment of Jesus Christ ;” that “it is denied by none but Erastus and his followers, who may as well deny praying, preaching, or Sacraments to be jure Divino ;” that “it is as expressly ordained, that discipline be exercised in the name of Christ, as to preach, pray, or baptize in His name; that there are certainly things of God” (among which give me leave to reckon the episcopal cure and jurisdiction, as well as you reckon the order) “that are not things of Cesar.” And p. 24 he observes", that ‘“ Churches were planted, esta- blished, and kept up where there was no assistance from the princes of the earth, but opposition ;” that is, as I have shewed in my first letter*, “ against the laws and consent of secular powers.” In p. 23 he shews the difference between Church power and government, and the temporal, and of that he saith, that it is “spiritual, and hath all particulars for
lished in 1627, cap. 8. ὃ 5. The words of Nye, p. 38, are: “Churches are endued (saith Dr. Jackson),”’&c. Jack- son’s are: ‘‘It is probable that there were as many several distinct visible Churches as there were Apostles or other ambassadors of Christ, immedi- ately endued,’ &c.—See his collected Works, vol. 111. p. 834. ed. 1673.]
* [This is an extract from Bp. Bil- son’s work, The true difference between Christian Subjection and Unchristian Rebellion, p. 171. Oxford, 1685. Nye’s words (p. 38) are, ‘by God Himself commanded to the Church, (these things are specified in p. 227, to be the word, &c.)’’ |
ὁ [This extract is from Rutherford (a presbyterian )’s work, entitled, ‘“‘ The due right of Presbyteries, or a peace- able plea for the Government of the Church of Scotland, by Samuel Ru- therford, professor of Divinity at St.
Andrews, London, 1644.’ |
" [Nye’s words are: ‘‘It is not to be denied that souls were converted and Churches established and kept up,”’ &e. |
x [**They (the Apostles) challenged maintenance, and levied contributions of their spiritual subjects, and erected tribunals of spiritual judicature, and inflicted spiritual punishments by their own authority, in a way wholly inde- pendent of the secular powers, and con- trary to their established customs and laws.”’ This positionis very fully drawn out in the context of the passage in the letter referred to, ‘‘ Of the Consti- tution of the Catholic Church, and the nature and consequences of Schism, in a letter sent toa Sergeant at Law.’’— See Hickes’ posthumous work pub- lished under that title, pp. 110, sqq. London, 1716, and above vol. i. p. 62, note g. |
884 The oath of supremacy consistent with these doctrines.
pienity or Substance, both in respect of persons and administrations, “onver, for matter and manner appointed by Jesus Christ, and in all nations to be the same.” And p. 21°, “that Church power architectonically considered, is the jurisdiction and authority of Christ, and seated in Him as head of the Church, and in the Church it is διακονία, and seated in her only ministe- rially, because the Church acts all in the name, and by the authority of Christ ;” p. 18 he saith that “Christ is ap- pointed by His Father to be King and Law-giver of the Churches, who hath left rules and laws for managing the affairs of those spiritual corporations.” But then he differs from the presbyterians in this, that he endeavours to recon- cile the power and authority spiritual with the king’s su- premacy; shewing the true scope and sense of the oath of supremacy, as it hath been altered and interpreted by our kings, not to be contrary to the power and jurisdiction of the Church’. He cites the letter of King Hen. VIII. to the clergy of the province of York in 15334, who were offended at his
Y [Nye’s words are; ‘And truly ἀρχιτεκτονικὴ Church power, is not properly jurisdiction or authority as in the Church, but as in Christ, the head of the Church ; as seated in the Church, or ‘ccetus fidelium,’ it is only διακονία, ‘ministerium’ not ‘dominium,’ and acts all in the name or authority of Christ.’ ]
z See Mr. Thorndyke’s Forbearance of Christian Penalties. [The proper title of Thorndyke’s work is, “a Dis- course of the Forbearance or the Penalties which a due Reformation requires. London, 1670.” It treats of the questions of the reforming the Church itself, and of the treatment due to recusants. Chap. xxiii. is what Hickes refers to; its subject is, “ Of restoring and reforming the Jurisdic- tion of the Crown and of the Church in Ecclesiastical causes,’’ pp. 118, sqq. ]
Dr. Simon Lowth of the Subject of Church Power, chap. vi. [The portion of this chapter which is referred to is sect. 4, where the subject of the king’s supremacy is very fully treated, pp. 431, 544. Lond. 1685. ]
The Discourse concerning the Ille- gality of the Ecclesiastical Commis- sion. London, 1689, pp. 13, 14. [This work was published anonymously. It was written by Stillingfleet, who, on being summoned before the Ecclesi-
astica] Commission appointed by James II., drew up the substance of it; which he afterwards completed and published after the king had left the country. He refers to the act, 5 Eliz. ec. 1. ὃ 14, and the admonition attached to the queen’s injunctions, to the thirty- seventh article, and the testimonies given in the text, and to others from our divines: the position he maintains is that “as in temporal matters the king’s supreme authority is exercised in his ordinary courts, so likewise in ecclesiastical, but as to extraordinary jurisdiction, that depends on the legis- lative power.”’ |
* [ Nye, when speaking of the oath of supremacy as it stood in the time of Henry VIII. and Edward, (according to the act 85 Hen. VIII, ο. 1, in which the king was acknowledged to be the supreme head of the Church,) says, that “Henry by his letter written to the clergy of York province well defends it.’ The letter was written in 1533, when the convocation of the province of York hesitated to acknowledge the king’s supremacy as that of Canter- bury had done; see above, vol. i. p. 225, note. The letter is printed in Wilkins’ Concilia, tom. iii. pp. 762, sqq- |
Authoritative explanations of the oath.
385
title of being head of the Church; and secretary Walsing- ham’s letter to Monsieur Critoy, in which he tells him how “the oath of supremacy was altered into a more grateful form, the hardness of the name and appellation of supreme
head being removed.”
He cites the sense and interpretation
by which Queen Elizabeth explained it in the form it now stands, in the admonition annexed to the injunctions’; the confirmation of that sense by way of proviso in Stat. 5. Eliz. 1¢; the 37th article in the Articles of Religion concluded in the year 1562°, King James the First’s explication of it, in his Apology‘, p. 76, 1604; Bp. Bilson’s’, Dr. Morton’s", and Mr.
> [This letter of Walsingham, ex- plaining the seeming inconsistency of the queen in persecuting both papists and puritans, was first printed in 1654, in a collection of letters entitled, ‘‘ Ca- bala sive Scrinia sacra, Mysteries of State and Government, in Letters of illustrious persons, and great agents in the reign of Hen, VIIT., Queen Eliza- beth, King James, and the late King Charles,” part ii. p. 89. The date of the letter is uncertain. It is also printed in Collier’s Eccl. Hist., vol. ii. p. 607; referred to by Nye, p. 10. }
¢ (“The queen’s majesty being in- formed that in certain places of the realm, sundry of her native subjects, being called to ecclesiastical ministry of the Church, be by sinister persua- sion, and perverse construction per- suaded to find some scruple in the form of an oath, &c.... her majesty neither doth nor will challenge any authority than that was challenged and lately used by... king Henry VIII. and king Edward VI., which is, and was of ancient time due to the imperial crown of this realm; that is, under God to have the sovereignty and rule over all manner of persons born within these her realms, dominions, and coun- tries, of what estate, either ecclesiasti- cal or temporal soever they be, so as no other foreign power shall or ought to have any superiority over them.’’—An admonition to simple men deceived by malicious, appended to injunctions given by the queen’s majesty, We. A.D. 1559.—Wilkins’ Concilia, tom. iv. p. 188; referred to by Nye, ibid. ]
4 [“ Provided also, that the oath ex- pressed in the said act, made in the said first year, shall be taken and ex- pounded in such form as is set forth in an admonition annexed to the queen’s
HICKES,
injunctions, published in the first year
of her majesty’s reign,’’? &e.—Act 5 -
Eliz. 1, § 14.]
e [Nye, p. 10. The words of the article are, “* The queen’s majesty hath the chief power in this realm of Eng- land, and all other her dominions, under whom the chief government of all estates of this realm whether they be ecclesiastical or civil, in all causes doth appertain, and is not, nor ought to be subject to any foreign jurisdic- tion.
Where we attribute to the queen’s majesty the chief government, by which titles we understand the minds of some slanderous folk to be offended, we give not to our princes the minis- tering either of God’s Word or of the Sacraments; the which thing the in- junctions also lately set forth by Eliza- beth our queen do most plainly testify ; but that only prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly princes in Holy Scriptures by God Himself, that is, That they should rule all estates and degrees committed to their charge by God, whether they be ecclesiastical or temporal, and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil doers.’’ See vol. i. p. 230, note u. |
f {In that oath is contained only the king’s absolute power over all per- sons, as well civil as ecclesiastical, ex- cluding all foreign powers and poten- tates to be judges within his domi- nions.’”’-—An Apology for the Oath of Allegiance ; first sent forth without a name: but now acknowledged by the author, the right high and mighty prince James, &c. p. 47. Lond. 1609; quoted by Nye, p. 11.]
& [‘ Bishop Bilson, a great searcher into the doctrine of the supremacy of kings, gives this as the sense of the
cc
CHAP. It.
SECT. II.
886 Rightly understood not prejudicial to Church power.
pienity or Mason’s! sense of it; and lastly, he also cites the preface to
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
Statute 24 Hen. VIII. cap. 12, wherein the temporal and spiritual bodies of this realm, and their respective authorities and jurisdictions are distinguished, and the king’s supremacy, as head over both united into one body politic, is declared in such manner as is no ways prejudicial to the Church, as a spiritual society immediately instituted by Christ, and com- mitted to the administration and government of the Apostles and their successors, independently on the secular powers. But to return to the presbyterians: I could pick up more gold out of the dross and rubbish with which this unhappy sect have debased and depraved the pure doctrine of Church power, and the distinction of the independency of the Church from the State. They have rejected the supreme order and authority to which Christ hath committed the administration of His kingdom, and declared it to be an antichristian usurp-
oath. ‘The oath,’ saith he, ‘ex- presseth not kings’ duty to God, but ours to them; as they must be obeyed when they join with truth, so must they be endured when they fall into error. Which side soever they take, either obedience to their wills, or sub- mission to their swords, is their due by God’s law, and that is all which our oath exacteth.’? And a few lines fol- lowing he interprets what is meant by supremacy. ‘We do not,’ saith he, ‘ give to princes power to do what they list, in the matters appertaining to God and His service. Indeed we say the pope may not depose them, nor pull the crown off their heads. In this only sense we defend them to be supreme, that.is, not at liberty to do what they list without regard of truth or right, but without superior on earth.’ (Bil- son’s True Difference, &c. p. 218.) Nye; p. 12.]
» (Dr. Morton against the pope’s supremacy, out of an epistle of Leo to the emperor, speaking thus: ‘ You must not be ignorant that your princely power is given unto you, not only in worldly regiment, but also (spiritual) for the preservation of the Church.’ As if he had said, not only in cases temporal, but also in spiritual, so far as it belongeth to the outward preserva- tion, not to the personal administration of them. And this is the substance of our English oath: and further, neither do our kings of England challenge,
nor subjects condescend unto,’—p. 26.”’ (The reference is to the third part of Morton’s work, entitled ‘* A full satis- faction concerning a double Romish iniquity, &c.”’ part iii., ‘which is a con- futation of the principles of Romish doctrine in two points;’’ “1. The su- preme head of rebellion,’’ the pages of which are headed ‘‘a confutation of the pope’s supremacy over kings.’’ chap. 9. p. 26. Lond. 1606,) quoted by Nye, p- 12. See above p. 807, note x. ]
i [‘*Mr. Mason in his Vindicie Ee- clesiz Angliz, speaking of Calvin’s being offended, ‘verum si intellexisset nihil aliud sibi valuisse hunc titulum,’ &c. ‘Calvin would never have dis- allowed this oath if he had understood by the title of supreme governor in ecclesiastical things, that nothing else had been claimed, but an exclusion of popish tyranny, and a lawful power in the king over his subjects ; which stands not in coining new articles of faith or forms of religion, such as were Jeroboam’s calves; but in defending and propagating that faith and religion of which God in the Scriptures is the undoubted author. In this sense and no other that ever we have heard of is the title of supreme governor given to and accepted by the king.’ (Vindicize KEcclesie Anglican, sive de legitimo ejusdem ministerio, &c., lib. iii. c. 5. p. 319. Lond. 1625; p. 270 of the translation, Lond. 1628.) Nye, p. 13. ]
k [Nye, see above, p. 312, note 1.]
The abuse of these doctrines by the Presbyterians. 587
ation, and contrary to the word of God. They have most sacrilegiously taken the administration to themselves, even the whole power of the keys, which Christ gave to His Apos- tles and their successors the bishops, together with the power of ordination, and by consequence have altered the polity of His kingdom, and subverted the constitution of the Catholic Church. They have also extended! their pretended ecclesi- astical powers from matters of faith and pure spiritual disci- pline, to secular business, and matters of temporal govern- ment, to the great prejudice of the royal authority, as to abrogate acts of parliament, and discharge people from obe- dience to them, making Church power to signify any thing in ordine ad ecclesiastica, and spiritualia, by extending it to whatsoever they think conducible to God’s glory, the ad- vancement of Christ’s kingdom, or the good of the Church. Furthermore, these usurpers of the spiritual power, add the temporal to the spiritual sword, and contrary to the doctrines of the Gospel, fight against the temporal sovereign, for King Jesus, as often as they think it needful to defend His sceptre, and the rights of His kingdom, of which they are the greatest invaders, having rebelled against their lawful bishops, and opposed as much as they can the whole order; and for want of succession and ordination having none but groundless and impudent pretensions to the ministry, and by consequence no right to administer spiritual authority, or take upon them the government of the Church.
CHAP. I.
SECT. 11.
III. All this, Sir, you know as well as 1; I have heard szcr. m. you often speak of ΠΝ upon principle, as the scandal and Nothing
ere ad-
reproach of the reformed name, and declare that they were vanced con-
no Church; which made me a little wonder that you should think the primitive doctrine in my propositions concerning
trary to the Regal Su-
premacy as rightly un-
the power and independency of the Church like that of derstood.
theirs, who indeed have endeavoured to enslave the State to the Church. To conclude, Sir, in all my letter there is
' The king’s large declaration, foul acts and writings: by which it
printed at London 1639, from p. 402 to the end. [A large declaration con- cerning the late tumults in Scotland, from their first originals: together with a particular deduction of the sedi- tious practices of the prime leaders of the covenant, taken out of their own
doth appear that religion was only pre- tended by those leaders, but nothing less intended by them. By the King. London, 1639.’’ The part referred to by Hickes is the narrative of the re- bellious proceedings of the presbyte- rians. |
ὅ88 Hlickes’ views not more apparently opposed to the
ῬΙΟΝΊΤΥ or nothing contrary to the regal supremacy, as it hath been EPISCOPAL *
ORDER.
Acts 10. 37, 38
Luke 3. 22.
John 20.21.
Matt. 28. —20.
qualified and explained by our kings and queens, nor to any other part of the law. And that you may not censure what I have written, or rather collected as such, pray read Bishop Sanderson’s opinion of episcopacy, delivered in these words™ : “My opinion is, that episcopal government is not to be de- rived merely from apostolical practice or institution, but that it is originally founded in the person and office of the Messias, our blessed Lord Jesus Christ, who being sent by His Father to be the great Apostle, Bishop, and Pastor of His Church, and anointed to that office immediately after His baptism by John, ‘with power and the Holy Ghost’ de- scending then upon Him ‘in a bodily shape,’ did after- wards, before His ascension into heaven, send and empower His Apostles (giving them the Holy Ghost likewise, as His Father had given Him) in like manner as His Father had before sent Him, to execute the same apostolical, episcopal, pastoral office, for the ordering and governing of His Church until His coming again; and so the same office to continue in them and their successors ‘unto the end of the world.’ This I take to be so clear from these and other like texts of Scripture, that if they shall be diligently compared together, both between themselves and [with] the following practice of all the Churches of Christ, as well in the Apostles’ time as in the purest and primitive times nearest thereto, there will be left little cause why any man should doubt thereof.” Nothing that I have said affects the regal supremacy more than this opinion of that great casuist and the consequences of it, which you can infer as well as I. I could produce more passages of the same tendency out of his book enti- tuled “Episcopacy not prejudicial to Regal Power,” which you may see in the sixth chapter of the learned Dr. Lowth’s excellent book “Of the subject of Church Power,” a book
m [These extracts are made from a Postscript to the Reader, appended to the posthumous treatise of Sanderson entitled “ Episcopacy, as it is esta- blished in England, not prejudicial to regal power, written in the time of the long parliament, by the special com- mand of the late king,”’ p. 101. Lon- don, 1678. |
» Printed at London by Ben. Tooke,
1685. [The portion of Lowth’s work referred to is that in which he makes the following quotation from San- derson’s Episcopacy, p. 121, ‘* That there is a supreme ecclesiastical power, which by the law of the land is esta- blished, and by the doctrine of our Church acknowledged to be inherent in the Church,” with other long ex- tracts from the same work. |
Regal Supremacy than those of Sanderson and Bilson. 889
you may remember which upon my recommendation you promised me to read. In the same chapter® you will also find some places of the same nature taken out of Bishop Bilson’s “True Difference betwixt Christian Subjection and Unchristian Rebellion?,’” which was allowed by public au- thority, and dedicated to Queen Elizabeth, a princess jealous enough of her prerogative and supremacy. I refer you to them, and when you have read them you will find yourself obliged to censure those great men Bilson and Sanderson, who were approved for what they wrote, or to acquit me. I could also produce abundance of places to the same pur- pose out of the former’s excellent book entituled “ The Per- petual Government of Christ’s Church,” printed in English at London 15934. Indeed, Sir, it is difficult to write as one should of the constitution and rights of the Catholic Church, and of the episcopal order and office, without writing what may in some kind or degree seem to thwart the laws and government of some or other kingdoms or sovereign states, which have taken the liberty to make laws contrary to the consentient doctrine and practice of the ancient Catholic Church. The whole title of the book which Bishop Bilson, then Warden of Winchester College, wrote Of the Perpetual governing of Christ’s Church, as well as the book itself, was opposite and cross to many new-modelled Churches then set up by the civil power in divers places, though, praised be God, it was not so much as thought contrary to the regal power and supremacy established by the laws of this realm. I will take the pains to transcribe part of two or three pages out of the thirteenth chapter of it’, which if I had written now 1 am afraid you would have thought in the consequences of it to have looked obliquely upon the regal supremacy and civil power. ‘Cyprian (saith he) hath written a whole book to prove ‘that the unity of each Church resteth on the
° [See Lowth On the Subject of Church Power, sect. 19. pp. 472, sqq. ]
P [Ibid., sect. 18, pp. 459, sqq. ]
4 [A Latin translation of this work was sent out by Bilson in 1611. ]
rp. 245. [The subject of chapter 13 is: ‘that some chief pastors, in and ever since the Apostles’ times, have been distinguished from the rest of the
presbyters by the power of ordination and right of succession, and placed in every city, to preserve the external unity and perpetuity of the Church, whom the ancient fathers did, and we after them do call by the name of bishops.” The extracts have been corrected according to the original of Bilson. }
CHAP. 11.
SECT. 11.
890 Extracts from Bilson quoting ancient authorities
ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or singularity of the pastor’,’ whither I remit him that is de-
EPISCOPAL ORDER.
sirous to read more at large; as also to his first book and third epistle, entreating of the same matter, and written to Cornelius. The effect of all is contained in these wordst: ‘Who is so wicked and perfidious, who so mad with the fury of discord, that believeth the unity of God, the Lord’s ves- ture, the Church of Christ, may be torn in pieces, or dare tear it? Himself in His Gospel warneth and teacheth (us) saying, There shall be one flock and one shepherd. And doth any man think there may be in one place either many shepherds or many flocks?’ In the aforesaid epistle . .. . he saith", ‘Heresies have sprung and schisms risen from none other fountain than this, that God’s priest is not obeyed, nor one priest in the Church acknowledged for the time to be judge in Christ’s stead; to whom, if all the brethren would be subject, according to the Divine directions, no man would after the Divine judgments, after the suffrages of the people, after the consent of other bishops, make himself judge now, not of the bishop, but of God.’ .... And therefore is the conclusion general, both with councils and fathers, that there could be but one bishop in one city, where the presbyters were many. Cornelius, bishop and martyr, long before the council of Nice, reporting to Fabius, bishop of Antioch, the original of Novatian’s* schism, saith’, ‘This jolly imquisitor of the Gospel understandeth not that there ought to be but one bishop in (that) Catholic Church in which he knoweth
5. De Unitate Ecclesiz, vel de Sim-
plicitate Prelatorum. [De Simplici- tate Prelatorum is the title of this
tempus sacerdos et ad tempus judex vice Christi cogitatur: cui si secun- dum magisteria divina obtemperaret
tract in Erasmus’ edition, p. 246. Ant. 1541; de Unitate Ecclesiz, that in later editions. }
t [Quis ergo sic est sceleratus et perfidus, quis sic discordiz furore ve- sanus, ut aut credat scindi posse aut audeat scindere unitatem Dei, vestem Domini, Ecclesiam Christi? Monet ipse in Evangelio suo et docet dicens; ‘et erit unus grex et unus pastor;’ et esse posse uno in loco aliquis existimet aut multos pastores aut plures greges? —S. Cypr. de Unitate Ecclesiz, Op., p. 196. ed. Ben. |
u [Neque enim aliunde hareses obortz sunt, aut nata sunt schismata, quam inde quod sacerdoti Dei non ob- temperatur, nec unus in ecclesia ad
fraternitas universa, nemo adyversus sacerdotum collegium quicquam mo- veret, nemo post divinum judicium, post populi suffragium, post coepisco- porum consensum, judicem se jam non episcopi, sed Dei, faceret.—Id. Epist. lv. (lib. i. Ep. 3. ed. Erasm. Ant. 1541.) ad Cornelium, p. 82. ed. Ben. ]
x [* Novatius,’ Bilson. ]
Υ [6 ἐκδικητὴς οὖν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου οὐκ ἠπίστατο ἕνα ἐπίσκοπον δεῖν εἶναι ἐν καθολικῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ" ἐν ἣ οὐκ ἠγνόει (πῶς γάρ ;) πρεσβυτέρους“ εἶναι τεσσερά- κοντα ἕξ.----Τὰ δέ. Cornelii Episc. Rom. ad Fabium Epise. Antioch. ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccl., lib. vi. cap. 43, H. E. tom. i, p. 812,1
for the Unity of the Episcopate. 391
there are forty-six presbyters.? The great Nicene council took special care......‘that* there should not be two bishops in one city.’ Chrysostom, when Paul writeth to ‘the bishops and deacons’ of Philippi, asketh this question? : ‘What meaneth this? were there many bishops of one city ?’ and answereth, ‘ By no means, but by this title he designeth the presbyters, for then the name was common.’.. .. Theo- doret (in 1 cap. ad Phil”) ‘In no case many bishops could not be pastors of one city.’. . . . Gicumenius*; ‘The presby- ters he calleth bishops, for as yet the words were common to both.’ Optatus (contra Parmenianum, lib. 11.)4 ‘ He is a schis- matic and a sinner that against one episcopal chair erecteth another.’ Hierome (in 1 cap. ad Philip.*) ‘ Bishops here we understand to be presbyters, for in one city there could not be many bishops.’. .. . This is a certain rule to distinguish bishops from presbyters: the presbyters were many in every Church, of whom the presbytery consisted. Bishops were always singular, that is, one in a city and no more‘, except another intruded, (which the Church of Christ counted a schism, and would never communicate with any such,) or else an hclper was given in [respect of] extreme and feeble
2 [Concil. Nicen. Canon viii. The council was providing for the reception of bishops returning from schism to the Catholic communion; the canon concludes: εἰ δὲ τοῦτο αὐτῷ μὴ ἀρέσκοι, ἐπινοήσει τόπον ἢ χωρεπισκόπου ἢ πρεσ- βυτέρου, ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἐν τῷ κλήρῳ ὅλως δοκεῖν εἶναι, ἵνα μὴ ἐν τῇ πόλει δύο ἐπίσκοποι @ow.—Concil., tom. ii. col. 37, B.]
a [τί τοῦτο; μιᾶς πόλεως πολλοὶ ἐπίσκοποι ἦσαν; οὐδαμῶς" ἀλλὰ τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους οὕτως ἐκάλεσε, τότε γὰρ τέως ἐκοινώνουν τοῖς ὀνόμασι.---ὃ. Chrys. Hom. i. in Epist. ad Phil. Op., tom. xi. p. 194, Εἰ; 195, A.]
Ὁ [ἄλλως τε οὐδὲ οἷόν τε ἣν πολλοὺς ἐπισκόπους μιὰν πόλιν ποιμαίνειν.-τ-- Theodoret. in Epist. ad Phil., cap. 1. Op., tom. iii. p. 828, D.]
© [οὐκ ἔπειδαν ἐν μιᾷ πόλει πολλοὶ ἦσαν ἐπίσκοποι, GAN ἐπισκόπους τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους καλεῖ. τότε γὰρ ἔτι ἐκοι- νώνουν τοῖς ὀνόμασι.--- (ξουτη 1 et Arethe Comment., tom, ii. p. 65, C,D.]
4 [The whole passage is as follows: Igitur negare non potes scire te in urbe Roma Petro primo cathedram
episcopalem esse collatam, in qua se- derit omnium Apostolorum caput Pe- trus; unde et Cephas appellatus est, in qua una cathedra unitas ab omni- bus servaretur, ne ceteri Apostoli sin- gulas 5101 quisque defenderent, ut jam schismaticus et peccator esset, qui contra singularem cathedram alteram collocaret.—S. Optati contra Parmen. sive de Schism. Donatist., lib. ii, ο, 2. p- 28. ]
© [Hic episcopos presbyteros intelli- gimus: non enim in una urbe plures episcopi esse potuissent.— Pseudo- Hieron. in Epist. ad Philip.,c.1. S. Hieron., Op., tom. xi. col. 1011, D.]}
f “Tt is a fundamental rule of the Church, necessary for preserving peace and unity therein, that but one bishop should be in one Church.” Dr. Isaac Barrow in a Discourse of the Unity of the Church, c. 7. [ Barrow’s words are, ‘‘When some confessors had abetted Novatianus against Cornelius, (thereby against a fundamental rule of the Church, necessary for preserving of peace and order therein, that but one bishop should be in one Church.”)— Works, vol. vii. p. 652. Oxford, 1830. ]
CHAP. Il.
SECT, ΠῚ,
392 Powers of Government and Ordination in Bishops.
prenity oF age, in which case the power of the latter ceased in the pre- EPISCOPAL . . 5 - orver. sence of the former. And this singularity of one pastor in each place descended from the Apostles and their scholars in all [the famous] Churches of the world, by a perpetual chair of succession, and doth to this day continue but where abo- mination or desolation, I mean heresy or violence, interrupt it. Of this there is so perfect record im all the histories and fathers of the Church, that I much muse with what face men that have any taste of learning can deny the vocation of bishops came from the Apostles. For if their succession be apostolic, their function cannot choose but be likewise apo- stolic; and that they succeeded the Apostles and Evangelists in their Churches and chairs may inevitably be proved, if any Christian persons or Churches deserve to be credited. The second assured sign of episcopal power is imposition of hands to ordain presbyters and bishops. For as pastors were to have some to assist them in their charge, which were pres- byters ; so were they to have others to succeed them in their places, which were bishops. And this right by imposing hands to ordain presbyters and bishops in the Church of Christ, was at first derived from the Apostles unto bishops, and not unto presbyters ; and hath for these fifteen hundred years, without example or instance to the contrary, till this our age, remained in bishops, and not in presbyters.” secriv. IV. Sir, these Catholic doctrines relating to the Divine eee. original of the episcopal office, and the single or monarchical ete government of every Church, or spiritual district in the king- been dom of Christ, have been often abused to the hurt of the abused. State, as well as the doctrine relating in my Propositions to the power of the keys, which you say is so like that of the presbyterians, by which they indeed endeavoured to enslave the State to the Kirk. But though all these doctrines have been too often abused by proud and turbulent prelates, especially by the bishop of Rome, yet they are true and Catholic doctrines, and ought to be so received in all the parts of the Christian world. We have had our Anselms, and Beckets, and in many other kingdoms the mitres have sometimes most insolently and unrighteously justled with the crown, and the spiritual lords over the flocks of Christ
8 [Hickes, ed. 3. “ chain.’’ ]
The powers of the State abused against the Church. 393
have sometimes been most undutiful to their temporal lord ;
but notwithstanding you know, Sir, there is nothing more -
unreasonable, than to argue against the truth, or right, or use of a thing from the abuse of it, especially against power and authority, whether spiritual or temporal, which through the corruption and infirmities of human nature is most easily abused. If men will be always jea'ous of power, and arguing continually against it, because it may be abused, there can be no entire peace in any societies, not in families, senates, republics, and kingdoms, as well as in Churches, whose governors our Lord supposed might, and sometimes would abuse their power, as well as the governors of the world. It were easy to shew how these have abused their power in all forms of civil government, and particularly in the oppres- sions, and persecutions, and vexations of the Churches in their dominions, though their power was of God, and they the ministers of God; and if you should make a scheme of civil government in propositions after the same manner as 1 have done of the ecclesiastical, I might with as much reason say after your example that the doctrine of your proposi- tions, though never so true, looked something hke that of Erastus, or perhaps of the Super-Erastians, Hobbes, Selden, and other such writers, who have endeavoured to destroy the being and constitution of the Church, as a society, by argu- ments not at all known to the Jewish Church, nor to the Christian, till these latter ages, in which scepticism, and un- belief, by the just judgment of God, have increased from small beginnings, to as full and perfect a stature as the en- vious powers of hell can wish.
Wherefore, Sir, we must neither argue against Church or State, from the abuses of their respective powers. For God, who ordained them, hath set bounds between them, and if either of the two go beyond those bounds, it is not the fault of the powers, but of the potentates, who may easily live in perfect amity and peace together by mutual agreement with, and subjection to one another, as, not to instance in foreign kingdoms and empires, our Christian ancestors of the Eng- lish-Saxon Church and State did for many hundred years, when they made their respective laws, and ministered their
respective justice together in such perfect concord, that I _ HICKES. pd
CHEAP. IT. SECT. IV.
DIGNITY OF IVPISCOPAL ORDER,
394 Lnvasion of the rights of our Church by William I.
may challenge you to shew me any one Saxon law, that is against any one canon of the Church. It was William the Conqueror, who first invaded the rights and liberties of the English people, that first broke in upon the rights and liberties of the English Church. “ He would not suffer the primate" in a general council of the kingdom to enact any canon which he did not first approve. He would not suffer any bishop to censure any of his ministers or courtiers, or inflict any rigorous ecclesiastical penances upon them, though they were guilty of adultery or incest.” And what is very remarkable, though he pretended to be a true and zealous son of the Church of Rome, which then was esteemed the Catholic Church, yet “he would let none! in his dominions acknowledge any, who was constituted bishop of Rome, for pope, without his order, or admit any of his letters as such, unless they were first shewn to him.” Thus, saith the his- torian *, “all Divine, as well as human affairs, were governed by his beck.” So easy a thing is it, Sir, to abuse power. That bright archangel and heavenly potentate Lucifer, who kept not his first station, transgressed the Rubicon of his power, and thereby became a devil, and therefore we need not wonder that among the angels of the Church, some of Luciferian tempers have done the like, and thereby became tyrants in the Church, and rebels to God and their kings. But still, I say, the abuse of the ecclesiastical power must not always make us jealous of it, or those who defend it, as the ordinance of God, especially in such dregs of time as these, when to the great decay of Christian piety, it is become precarious, and oppressed to such a degree in so
h Eadmeri Historia Rerum Nova- rum, lib. i, p. 6. ed. Lond. 1623. [ Pri- matem quceque regni sui, archiepi- scopum dico Cantuariensem (seu Do. robernensem), si coacto generali epi- scoporum concilio prasideret, non sine- bat quicquam statuere aut prohibere nisi que suze voluntati accommoda, et a se primo essent ordinata. Nulli nihilominus episcoporum suorum con- cessuin iri permittebat, ut aliquem de baronibus suis seu ministris, sive in- cesto, sive adultero, sive aliquo capi- tali crimine denotatum, publice nisi ejus praecepto implacitaret aut excom- muinicaret, aut ulla ecclesiastici rigoris
poena constringeret.—pp. 29, E; 30, A. ad cal. S. Anselmi Op., Par. 1721; where the words enclosed in paren- theses are omitted. |
i [Non ergo pati volebat quemquam in omni dominatione suze constitutum Romane urbis pontificem pro apo- stolico, nisi se jubente, recipere, aut ejus literas, si primitus sibi ostensee non fuissent, ullo pacto suscipere.—Id. ibid. This sentence immediately precedes the one last quoted. |
k [Cuneta ergo Divina simul hu- mana ejus nutum expectabant.—Id, ibid., paulo supra. |
Bishops’ power of ruling given by Christ. 395
many protestant countries, that it is almost brought to its last gasp. As you love the Church, and believe its govern- ment by bishops to be of Divine institution: so methinks you should be for giving them all the powers that belong to their spiritual office. You own their authority by which they preach, and administer the holy Sacraments, and ordain pres- byters and bishops, to be originally and immediately given by Christ to the Apostles, and that it was conveyed by them to their successors, and so to be transmitted from successors to successors unto the end of the world. Why then are you so shy in owning their rectoral power; since the same bles- sed Saviour, who bid the Apostles teach and baptize all na- tions, and “‘ Do this in remembrance of Me,” said also to them, “ Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth,” &c., and ‘‘ Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained.” And as they exercised the power of preaching, and administering the Sacraments, and ordaining, by the one commission, so by the other they exercised spiritual jurisdiction, and equally gave both powers to their successors; and their pretensions to the one power was never called in question, more than to the other, in former times, no not when it was most abused. You are willing in the full latitude of their delegation to hear them, as teachers in chief under Christ, as He is a prophet, and to acknowledge them as chief-priests under Him, who is High- Priest of His Church. But you are loath in virtue of their delegation, to own and obey them im the vicegerency of His regal office, and to be subject to them as your spiritual lords. You admit them as shepherds under Him the chief Shepherd of our souls, to feed, but not to govern His flock ; but according to the Scriptures, and Catholic tradition, which is the best expositor of them, you must take them for pastors in both senses; for they have authority for the one, as well as the other from Christ, and therefore without choosing you ought to own or reject both. But, Sir, why should you make a doubt or difficulty of their authority, as masters under our Lord in His house, vicegerents under lim in His kingdom, governors under Him in His cities, or if you please, as senators of His own appointment to govern His commonwealth. They were acknowledged and obeyed
CHAP. IL. SECT. IV.
Matt. 18.
J J
ὃ, ohn 20. 28.
DIGNITY OF
EPISCOPAL ORDER,
396 Conclusion.
as such without scruple, by Christians of all ranks, as well after as before the empire turned Christian, when emperors, as well as their subjects, submitted themselves to them, as their spiritual superiors ; emperors, who knew very well what they did, and who had too much courage to fear any thing but God, and too much wisdom to be imposed upon by the craft of priests.
I hope I have shewed this fully in my answer to your letter; and when you have well considered what I have written, I desire you to send your second thoughts and reflections upon it to
Your most faithful,
and humble servant,
[GEORGE HICKES.]
OXFORD:
PRINTED BY 1. SHRIMPTON,
aoe
es adie sais bp) eo υ ὅδ ἐν Δ Π τῶν εἰν: b
ἀνῇ
op! very
᾿ ἜΝ, ay fe eos bj
Ma
Princeton Theological
ini
1 1012 01196
is : 4 i ἢ en ἣ ἐν ‘a Ἢ vat it) te : il me an ἣ
ἡ ae es, ks ee ae bs |
ὴ ee; ᾿ ΝΥ 7 ἡ Ne yin ἵ af
Poa wig mm) Cath, f ΔῊΝ bas ὧδ Ἑ, ire 1 ἢ. ὃ Ἷ ἢ ᾿ ; ἣν ty ei ἢ ᾿ ‘ ᾿
ce
αν, παρε φως ἐπ ace
ii ak eee pie Pee nee ern Meh Seas - συγ τὴ he ᾽ serine peed
ἈΜ ταν τ Ασα τ πο eens Sees sae
cour
Ὁ eet Reh Oo |
eee