Full text of "Lectures on The Articles of the United Church of England and Ireland"

See other formats

BX 5137 .M23 1853
Macbride, J. D. 1778-1868.
Lectures on The Articles of
the United Church of

Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2015

https://archive.org/details/lecturesonarticlOOmacb

LECTURES

Logical stv^

THE ARTICLES

UNITED CHURCH

ENGLAND AND IRELAND.

JOHN DAVID MACBRIDE, D.C.L.

PRINCIPAL OF MAGDALENE HALL,

OXFORD,

JOHN HENRY PARKER ;
AND 377, STRAND, LONDON.
1853.

BAXTER, PRINTER, OXFORD-

TO THE

MEMBERS OF MAGDALENE HALL,
THESE LECTURES.
WRITTEN FOR THEIR INSTRUCTION,
ARE DEDICATED,
WITH AN EARNEST DESIRE AND FERVENT PRAYER
FOR THEIR ETERNAL WELFARE,

BY THEIR

FAITHFUL AND AFFECTIONATE FRIEND,

THE PRINCIPAL.

Oxford, June ], 1853.

LECTURES

UPON

THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES

OF THIS

CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE,

The Dissenter reproaches the Church of England with
retaining a portion of the alloy of Popery ; the Roman
Catholic condemns her as heretical ; while she appeals to
her Articles, approved by her Clergy and confirmed by the
authority of Parliament, as her reply to both. A knowledge
of them seems then indispensable to the members of her
communion, to enable them to answer the question, Why do
you not return to the ancient Church from which your
ancestors seceded ? or, if a Protestant, Why do you prefer
your own denomination to others, which profess to have
acted more in conformity with the principles of the Reform-
ation, by departing to a still greater distance from Rome ?
I have therefore thought it might be useful to persons, who
cannot, generally speaking, be supposed to be acquainted
with the controversies which divide Christians, or to have
read many theological works, to draw up for them an
elementary Course of Lectures upon this national Confession
of Faith.

In an undertaking of this description, I must be as
concise as is consistent with sufficient explanation and proof
of the tenets affirmed, since these Articles condense into a
few sentences propositions, many of which have been keenly
contested by disputants of ability and learning, and have
formed the subject of volumes of controversy. Take, as an

•2

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

instance of this, the simple assertion, that our Saviour is very
God. The main tamers of his divinity and of his simple hu-
manity alike appeal to Scripture, and the belief of the primitive
Church. The many texts brought forward on both sides have
been critically examined, and differently interpreted; and we
may say without exaggeration, that, independent of the re-
marks dispersed through Commentaries, and Sermons, and ar-
ranged in systems of Theology, a collection of the treatises
in which this doctrine has been defended or opposed would
almost form of itself a little library. In religion, however,
as in other branches of knowledge, there is much repetition ;
and in every age and country, arguments have been brought
forward which have appeared before in another form or
language, and have been urged already with equal or perhaps
greater force. Sometimes we find an ancient and almost
forgotten author very superior to a popular modern, and
again a modern will sometimes compress the remarks of his
predecessors so judiciously, and in a manner so much more
agreeable to us, as entirely to supersede them. It is also to
be remembered, that arguments are not to be numbered but
weighed ; and that one strong one is better than a thousand
weak ones : and here the Protestant, who appeals " to the
Law and to the Testimony," and who regards uninspired
writers only in as far as they adhere to this sole standard of
truth, has an incalculable advantage over the Roman Catholic,
who is weighed down by authorities, which he dares not set
aside, but which are often perplexing, not only from their
multitude, but from their contradictory character. The Pro-
testant, it is true, after making the most liberal deduction,
has remaining a number of volumes deserving of an entire
and attentive perusal, sufficiently alarming when we consider
how short life is, and how much is to be done in it as well
as learnt; not to speak of many more which ought to be
partially consulted. The study of them, however, is not
obligatory upon us, as that of the Fathers and the Decrees
of Councils are upon the Roman Catholic divine ; not that
we despise, as they reproach us, the writings of the early
Christians, most of whom we allow to be men of eminent
piety, some of learning and talents, and all competent to

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

report the opinions that prevailed in their own time. With
respect to the rites and practices of the primitive Church, we
believe that they cannot be mistaken : in all interpretations
that turn upon the meaning of words, those who, like Origen
and Chrvsostom, spoke the language in which the New Tes-
tament is written, have an undeniable advantage over us, but
still we are not enslaved to their authority ; we assume the
right of judging for ourselves, and of calling no man upon
earth master ; and we do not find that any of these Fathers
require the unhanded submission which the Romanist claims
for them. Certainly, it is an advantage not to be estimated
at a low rate, that we are not required to read through
the Decrees of Council after Council, and to examine the
voluminous works of the Fathers, that is to say, of Eccle-
siastical authors from the immediate successors of the
Apostles down to St. Bernard, not to speak of the School-
men, as Thomas Aquinas and his predecessor Peter Lombard,
the Master of the Sentences, a compilation from Augustine
and subsequent Latin authors, the great class book, from
which Theology was learnt in this and in other Universities,
till the Reformation. Whereas the Roman Catholic must
assent to whatever the Church believes, as handed down to
her by Tradition, and must take her interpretation of Scrip-
ture, whether agreeable or not to his own judgment, as the
true Catholic Faith, without the profession of which no one
can be saved. In a course of years there will be much of
human opinion to be rejected, even when that of honest well-
meaning minds; how much more must we discard not only as
frivolous but pernicious, if there have been ignorance, super-
stition, credulity, and interest to originate and sanction the
doctrine, and party zeal, ambition, and enthusiasm to nourish
and establish it. What disciple of St. Peter, unless endued
with the spirit of prophecy, could have imagined how in
subsequent ages essential Gospel truth could have been not
only concealed, but perverted, under the influence of a series
of Bishops, who claimed to be his successors, and who as
such, assumed the right of being the infallible Vicars, the
assumed right, which he never claimed, of being the Vicar and
representative of his Master upon earth. At the period of the

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

Reformation, it was high time to throw off the enormous
mass of traditions which, accumulating for ages, had en-
cumbered, and well nigh smothered, the truth ; and happily
we Protestants, taking for our guide the axiom embodied in
our Articles, that the Scripture is the only test of truth, are
free, without any bigotted deference to authority, to examine
and prove all doctrines by that, our only rule of faith. We
shall see hereafter, that there are some, as Purgatory, and
the Adoration of Relics, which even by the confession of their
advocates rest mainly upon Tradition.

Before I enter upon the explanation and proof of the Ar-
ticles, I wish to premise, that Truth itself may be unskilfully
defended. If therefore any statement I make shall be erro-
neous, or the arguments by which it is supported untenable, I
have to request that the doctrine may not be surrendered as de-
fenceless, because its advocate may have failed in defending it.

It is also my desire to impress upon your minds, that this
branch of knowledge is not a science discovered by man's
genius, and improved and enlarged by the experience and
observations of successive generations, but the revealed will
of God ; and though it must be shewn to be his will, and
requires to be vindicated and enforced, and admits of ex-
planation and illustration, it cannot from its nature be sus-
ceptible of alteration, or even of development. As proclaimed
by its inspired promulgators, it is perfect, and all that subse-
quent generations have to do is to endeavour to comprehend
in all particulars the Record which they have left us.
The use of other knowledge is limited to our abode upon
earth ; but when all the ties that bind us to our families,
our country, and mankind, are burst asunder by death, it
will be of incalculable importance to us to have understood
the character of the awful Being, to whom we shall be
responsible for our conduct here, and to know what conduct
will procure our admission into His joy, or banish us into
eternal punishment. And no reasonable person will deny,
that a right faith is required to produce right and acceptable
conduct. Some indeed of these Articles only concern us as
members of the Church militant upon earth ; but others
must be believed; or, to say the least, we have no scriptural

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

•3

warrant for believing that we shall be admitted into the
Church triumphant in Heaven. Belief in what God has
been pleased to reveal, and obedience to what He has
commanded, is our undeniable and indispensable duty ; but
unhappily upon these vital points, contradictory opinions
exist ; and it would be the height of folly, (a folly notwith-
standing to which some of the most gifted and eminent of
the men of this world must plead guilty,) either to reject
without examination, or to take upon trust, matters of
infinite importance, in which there are errors both on the
right hand and the left; several of them injurious, and some
which it may be feared will prove fatal. While Rome
demands implicit faith, and requires her members to declare
they believe whatever the Church believes, without enquir-
ing what that belief is, or knowing why she believes it,
let us never forget, that it is our boast and privilege, as
Protestants, to judge for ourselves ; and that in this respect
at least, we are hardly entitled to the appellation of rational
beings, if upon the most important topic that can occupy
the mind, we do not prepare ourselves to give a reason
of the faith, and, I would desire to add, of " the hope that
is in us."

Lastly, let me entreat you to remember, that we are now
treading on holy ground, and that the subjects which Theology
presents to our examination and belief, are not to be discussed
with the same indifference as the demonstrations of science.
Mathematical and physical truths convince the understanding
without affecting the heart ; but religious questions involve
the moral character and government of that awful Being,
who has not only brought us into existence and preserves
us here, but will dispose of us as He sees fit hereafter. It
seems impossible to approach truths which will affect us in
eternity, as well as in time, with indifference, much more
in a tone of levity ; yet unhappily, as upon other topics, so
even upon this, familiarity has a tendency to blunt our
feelings and extinguish our reverence. If any doubt the
danger, I would appeal to the mortifying fact, that a profane
application of scriptural phraseology, which almost irre-
sistibly provokes a smile, is often even more than tolerated

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

in circles, which would be shocked at being considered
irreligious.

There is also unhappily a method of proving even the
leading truths of our holy Faith ; such as the Divinity of
our blessed Lord, and that inestimable proof of his love, his
purchasing us with his most precious blood, which rather
shows the sturdy polemic, proud of the skill with which he
wields his weapons against a fellow-sinner, than the devoted
believer who feels with the Apostle, that he must live
unto the Saviour that died for him, denying all ungodliness,
and consecrating his talents and means unreservedly to his
glory. On the other hand, we must be on our guard
against the opposite fault, the hypocritical affectation of a
devotion which we do not feel : we shall best preserve the
happy medium, by encouraging the reality of devotion; and
this may be preserved or excited by studying these serious
truths, not as subjects of barren speculation, but by medi-
tating on them, so as to make them principles of conduct,
and sources of consolation. The enquiry, though not a
religious exercise, should be prosecuted in the spirit of
religion; and we should bear in mind, that Theology ought
to be studied not to show off our attainments in it, or to
advance our worldly interest, or gratify the love of distinction,
but that we may form correct and orthodox opinions ; and
orthodox opinions are not to be sought to gratify curiosity,
or obtain the credit of learning, but that as we thus better
know, wre may better fulfil our duty.

As man is not a solitary independent being, but born a
member of society, even religion itself is not merely a per-
sonal concern between himself and his Creator. That
connection, it is true, will continue after every other has been
dissolved : but much of practical religion in this world
consists in the performance of relative duties to man; and
even our duty to God requires, that we should honour Him
before our fellow-creatures; and without neglecting private
prayer, which becomes us as individuals, should in public unite
in offering supplications for future blessings, and thanksgiv-
ings for those received, with other believers, as members of
society. Reason suggests, that the whole human race is one

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

great family under the government of the common Parent of
all, and consequently brethren; and Revelation both confirms
this deduction, and exhibits to us the Deity in a still more
intimate relation, as Redeemer and Sanctifier. The Scrip-
tures represent our Lord Jesus Christ as the Head of a
peculiar, that is purchased, people, denominated the Church;
and the Apostle Paul shows the sympathy that ought to
prevail among them, by comparing it to the human body.
Brotherly love, meaning thereby love to those who are par-
takers of the same faith and the same hope, is enforced in
the New Testament, independently of, and in preference to,
charity, or love to men as our fellow-creatures, and is even
made the characteristic of Christianity. Whosoever believeth
that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God; and every one that
loveth him that begat, loveth him also that is begotten of him.
(1 John v. 1.) These things I command you, that ye love one
another. (John xv. 17.) The institution of the two Sacraments
proves the social nature of our religion, since they cannot be
administered in solitude; as therefore we are by nature
members of the State, so by baptism we become, and through
the Lord's Supper we continue, members of the Church.
Now the Church as well as the State must have officers and
regulations : and the acknowledgment of the same leading
truths, and agreement both in the object and mode of worship,
is indispensable not only to its welfare, but its existence.
Hence the origin of Creeds and Articles of Faith. Much has
been said in modern times of the liberty and rights of con-
science, and of the tyranny of requiring subscription to any
human formularies. The declamation is specious, and is apt
to delude the Protestant, who from experience of the Papal
yoke is naturally suspicious of whatever seems to interfere
with the right of private judgment; yet a calm investigation
will satisfy the reasonable enquirer that it is a fallacy. The
question before us is not of what Articles our Creed should
consist, but whether we should have any. There are no doubt
subordinate points on which we may agree to differ; but
reduce them ever so much, there must be fundamental tenets,
without assenting to which we cannot be members of the
same Society. For instance, unless we agree in the object

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

of our worship, we cannot unite with others in prayer. The
conscientious Anti-Trinitarian, who regards our blessed Lord
as a mere man, would feel himself guilty of idolatry in con-
forming to the Liturgy of the Church of England, in whose
Liturgy He is so often invoked as God \ while the Churchman
or orthodox Dissenter could not, without doing violence to
his conscience, join in prayers in which the Son was not
honoured as the Father. There must also be an agreement
in the mode of conducting religious services. The Roman
Catholic and we believe alike in the divinity and the efficacy
of the death of the Son of God, yet we cannot assemble
round our table or their altar to keep His dying command,
while one regards the elements as only indicating His
spiritual presence to the worthy communicant, and the other
worships what he eats, as the actual Deity. Every Society
must have a right to form its own rules, which its members are
bound either to keep or to withdraw ; for we protest against
that iniquitous dogma of Rome, which claims the allegiance
of all baptized persons, treating as rebels those who deny
her right to teach and govern. The Church is a voluntary
union ; we may be dismissed from it if we will not conform
to its discipline, or we may leave it of our own accord ; but
while we continue in it, we must submit to its rules.

Baptism, the rite appointed by our Lord for our admission
into the Church, significantly declares, that we renounce the
service of every other master, and represents the purification
required in persons who enter into his. Christ's last instruc-
tions to his Apostles was to make disciples of all nations,
baptizing them into the name of the Father, the Son, and
the Holy Spirit ; that is, into a religion, the characteristic
doctrine of which was a belief in the ever-blessed Trinity.
A declaration therefore to this effect was from the beginning
required from adult candidates for Baptism, and a belief in
these Three Divine Persons, necessarily included not only a
declaration of who they were, but what they had done for
the believer. It was, to use the language of our own Cate-
chism, a confession of faith "in God the Father, who hath
made all things ; in God the Son, who hath redeemed all
mankind ; and in God the Holy Ghost, who sanctifieth the

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

elect people of God." As errors concerning the nature and
offices of these Persons originated and spread, it became
necessary to enlarge these Confessions of Faith, in order to
exclude heretics. At first, each Bishop drew up a Creed for
his own diocese; but the Council of Nice, which was held
principally to suppress the Arian heresy, compiled one which
soon became that of the Eastern Church, superseding the
more ancient local ones. The Apostles' Creed, as it is com-
monly called, was that of the Apostolic Church of Rome, so
termed, because reputed to be founded by the Apostles
Peter and Paul; the Athanasian, which seems to have origin-
ated in France, was afterwards adopted into the Roman
Liturgy; and these three Creeds were the only Articles
of Faith, previous to the Reformation. The Council of
Ephesus, A.D. 431, aware of the evil of multiplying them,
had decreed, that the Nicene Creed, as enlarged at Con-
stantinople, should receive no additions; notwithstanding
it made decrees in points of faith as well as of discipline.
Succeeding Councils followed this example ; and though no
declaration of faith appears to have been required from
others, Bishops engaged to observe all the decrees and tra-
ditions of holy Councils and Fathers ; and when the Papal
power became predominant over Episcopacy, took an oath
of obedience to the Bishop of Rome, but it contained no
point of doctrine.

The Reformation necessarily required from those who had
embraced it, a more explicit declaration of faith than was
contained in the ancient Creeds, especially on the points
on which they differed from the received opinions. The
Churches which separated from the communion of Rome,
were bound to shew what were the errors against which
they protested, and what were the doctrines they retained.
Besides, at the period of the Reformation, as of every
revival of religion, tares sprang up together with the good
seed, and the pernicious tenets of the Anabaptists and
other Antinomians, who turned the grace of God into
licentiousness, were charged by Roman Catholic contro-
versialists upon all the Reformers. For their own credit,
therefore, and to preserve their less instructed members

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

from dangers of another description, it became desirable
that the world should know, that the errors of Rome were
not the only ones rejected. We see, therefore, that our
Articles, and the Confessions of the foreign Protestants, were
drawn up to exclude all, whether Romanists or others,
whom it was deemed unfit to admit within the pale of the
Church. They are not therefore to be regarded as a state-
ment of fundamental truths, an epitome, as it were, of
Theology, but as an abstract both of what is at all times to
be received, and of prevalent errors which it was then
especially desirable to condemn. Some seem to be such
obvious and undeniable propositions, that we wonder at
their being brought forward; while others treat of such
profound and, I may add, unfathomable mysteries, that we
are surprised at their admission into a formulary not de-
signed for Professors of Divinity, but for all the Clergy.
History explains the introduction of both. The order too
in which they are arranged appears, at first sight, objection-
able. It seems natural to settle the rule of faith first, and
then to proceed to a statement of the doctrines to be
believed ; that is, that as in some of the foreign Confessions,
and in that of the Westminster Assembly of Divines, the
Article on the Sufficiency of Scripture should stand first,
and that those upon doctrines should follow ; but our
Reformers preferred stating first the tenets which they held
in common with their opponents, before they came to the
points of difference. The first five Articles, accordingly,
which contain fundamental articles respecting the Deity,
are common to us with the Church of Rome. In the three
following, the rule of faith is established and explained ;
the next ten relate to Christians as individuals; the remain-
ing twenty affect them as members of the Church. The
Articles therefore may be arranged in four parts.

It is now more than three centuries since Martin Luther,
appointed by the Elector of Saxony Professor of Divinity
in his new University of Wittemberg, in the 36th year of
his age, boldly commenced the Reformation, by the overt act
of burning the Papal Bull, which had condemned him as an
obstinate heretic. Determined publicly to break off for

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

ever his connection with the Church of Rome, he had pre-
pared a pile of wood without the city walls, and in the
presence of the Professors and Students and the inhabitants,
committed to the flames the declaration of his excommu-
nication, together with the volumes of the Canon Law
respecting the Pontifical jurisdiction; and to shew that this
defiance of the ecclesiastical sovereign of Christendom was no
sudden ebullition of passion, he had selected several Articles
from the Papal Creed as samples of its iniquity, accompanying
them with concise remarks, which he printed, that the public
might judge of this proceeding. His indignation had been
roused by the sale of Indulgences ; and it is remarkable,
that they were issued for the completion of St. Peter's
Church at Rome, regarded as the noblest edifice of modern
art, which has thus become undesignedly a monument of the
Reformation. The sale had been delegated to John Tetzel,
a Dominican monk of licentious habits, yet of popular
eloquence, who executed his commission with effrontery, and
shocked even unthinking persons of the world by his scandalous
behaviour. A teacher then of the piety and zeal of Luther
could not continue a silent unmoved observer of such gross
abuses. He accordingly from the pulpit, in the great Church
of Wittemberg, inveighed against the vices of those who
published Indulgences, and pointed out the danger of relying
for salvation upon any other means than those appointed by
God. Roman Catholic authors, even moderate ones, such as
Guicciardini and Father Paul, ascribe his opposition to his
envy at the sale, being entrusted to monks of a rival order.
But this has been disproved by Dr. Robertson ; and his
appeal to Scripture, and his avowal of the doctrine of justifi-
cation by faith in his conference with Cardinal Cajetan, before
throwing off his allegiance to the Pope, show that he was
actuated by no worldly motives : and Erasmus expresses his
belief, that it was the erroneous preaching of the monks and
friars that put him on this dangerous work, and that his
greatest offence was his preference of the Gospel to the teach-
ing of the Schoolmen. He had already published his Com-
mentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, which was read with
avidity, and was a most powerful instrument in promoting the

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

Reformation, not by correcting the abuses of papal doctrine,
but by demolishing the foundation upon which the system
stood, in proving by numberless arguments, and particularly
by the marked opposition between law and grace, that in
justification before God all sorts of works, moral as well as
ceremonial, are excluded. He restores likewise, says Dean
Milnera, to the Christian world the true forensic sense of the
term, and rescues it from that in which it for many ages had
been misunderstood, as though it meant infused habits of
virtue, whence it had been usual to confound justification
with sanctification. Luther, he continues, was evidently
rather the instrument than the agent of the Reformation, for
he was led from step to step by a series of circumstances,
which far beyond his original intentions, and in a manner
which might evince the excellency of the power to be of God,
and not of man. The doctrine of Justification, in its explicit
form, had been lost for many ages. In whatever manner the
Papist might subtilize and divide, he was compelled by his
system to hold, that, by a compliance with the rules of the
Church, pardon was to be obtained, and that the satisfaction
of Christ was not sufficiently meritorious for this end. It
was evident that no Reformation could take place through
the medium of qualifying and correcting the abuses in the
sale of Indulgences. The system was wholly impious, and
the right knowledge of justification the only remedy; this
then was the object of the Reformation, and in the demolition
of one of the vilest perversions of superstition, there suddenly
revived in all its simplicity that Apostolical doctrine, in which
is contained the great mystery of the Scriptures. By this
doctrine rightly stated, with all its adjuncts and depend-
encies, a new light breaks in on the mind, and Christianity
appears singularly distinct not only from Popery, but also
from all other religions. The glory of the purchase of
pardon and peace belongs demonstrable to Christ alone, and
thus the self-righteous are rebuked, distressed consciences
are relieved, and believers are enabled to bring forth all the
fruits of righteousness. The Author had ploughed deep into
the human heart, and knew its nature and depravity ; he had
* History of the Church of Christ, vol. iv. ch. 6.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

long laboured to no purpose to gain peace of conscience by
legal observances and moral works ; and had been relieved
from the most pungent anxiety, by a discovery of the remedy.
He was appointed in the counsels of Providence, by no
means exclusively of the other Reformers, but in a manner
more extraordinary and much superior, to teach, after
upwards of a thousand years obscurity, this great evangelical
tenet, compared with which how little appears all other
objects of controversy ! Amidst the divisions arising out of
Luther's exposing the errors of the Church, the remedy
to which all looked, who wished to combine the present
system with the reformation of glaring abuses, was a General
Council ; and to this Luther himself had originally appealed.
The Court of Rome, though averse to a measure which might
end in the diminution of the Papal authority, could not with
decency reject the repeated applications made from the most
respectable and even from the highest quarters. Clement,
however, who had been not long delivered from his
imprisonment during the occupation of his capital by a
German army, and could not forget the deposal of his pre-
decessors by the Councils of Pisa and Constance, would
offer none but on terms which the Princes who favoured
Luther would reject. The Emperor Charles V. therefore, who
had just been crowned by him at Bologna, was determined
to try the effect of another Diet, which he summoned at
Augsburg ; the sixth before which the religious differences
of the empire had been brought. The first was that at
Worms, 1521, where Luther ventured to appear, and de-
fended himself in the presence of the Emperor and his feu-
datory Princes, but was proscribed as a heretic. In the
second held at Nuremberg, 1522, Pope Adrian VI. acknow-
ledged the need of Reformation ; and the German Princes
presented their list of a hundred grievances, which the
Empire suffered from the Court of Rome. The decree of
this Diet virtually abrogated the edict of Worms. The
fifth was held at Spire in 1549, after peace had been con-
cluded between the Emperor and the Pope. Here the
indulgence granted at the former Diet held in the same
place was rescinded ; for further innovations in religion were

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

prohibited, and the Mass was not to be abolished before the
meeting of a General Council. The Elector of Saxony, the
Marquis of Brandenburg, the Landgrave of Hesse, the
Dukes of Luneburg, the Prince of Anhalt, together with
the deputies of fourteen free cities, entered a solemn protest
against this decree as unjust and impious. On that account
they were distinguished, adds Dr. Robertson, by the name
Protestants, an appellation which hath since become better
known and more honourable, by its being applied indis-
criminately to all the sects, of whatever denomination, which
have revolted from the Roman See. An extraordinary
change, however, has come over the minds of many who have
been educated within the pale of our Church, but clearly
never trained up in its Homilies and Articles, who repudiate
with more or less disgust the title as a foreign appellation,
with which Anglican Churchmen ought to have no connec-
tion. For this novelty they plead, that it does not occur in
our Liturgy, and that Protestantism is a mere negation of
error. But to this it is a sufficient reply, that the use was
not to be expected in a book of prayers, which is not of a
controversial character, and that the Reformed Protestant
Church is in our Acts of Parliament the recognised legal
title of the branch of the Church Catholic, which is happily
established in England and Ireland. The abnegation of
error, it should be remembered, is equivalent to the affirm-
ation of the contrary truth, and the most cursory perusal
of the Augustan Confession, or of our Thirty-nine Articles,
agreeing with it in doctrine, and often in words, will convince
any one that they positively maintain the essential doctrines
of the Christian faith. It is desirable, especially in these
days of Papal aggression, that a term should be brought
prominently forward, that shews at once our substantial
agreement with the Reformed Congregations on the continent,
and may dispel a notion that some persons wish to encourage,
that our Church is an insulated one, and is to maintain itself
alone, instead of being one in the great confederacy of the
Churches of the Reformation, who have a common cause of
truth and liberty to support against the common enemy,
and whose extension, if not existence, depends so much

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

upon union. At this Diet, the Elector of Saxony and his
friends were called upon to present a summary of their
faith, and an account of the reformation of abuses which
they demanded. The Elector and his friends were pre-
pared ; the Confession or Apology, that is, Defence, as it
was at that time called, had been drawn up sometime;
Luther had furnished the materials, and it received its form
from the pen of Melancthon. It consists of twenty-one
chief Articles of Faith, to most of which are rejoined
rejections of the opposite errors, so that each topic may be
said to be explained both positively and negatively. It is
followed by seven others, on the Mass, Communion in both
kinds, Confession, and other abuses, and concludes with an
Epilogue, in which it is observed, that numerous others
might have been specified ; but that to avoid prolixity and
to promote conciliation, the writers had confined themselves
to such1' as were most essential. Upon this Confession, the
continuator of Milner's History remarks, that the Doctrine
of the Reformation is all one in the main ; and that the
slight differences in the formularies of the several Churches
are not worthy to be named in comparison with their general
agreement. He notices, that there is no Article answering to
our XVIIth; but that the XXth, on Faith and Good
Works declares that God's promises are to be received as
generally set forth in holy Scripture, and that as the
preaching of repentance is universal, so also is the promise of
grace. It would also seem not to admit final perseverance.
With all its zeal against justification by works, the Con-
fession is less scrupulous in the use of certain terms than
almost all have now learnt to be, for it hesitates not to
say of repentance, that it deserves [meretur] the remission
of sins. Further, like a few incidental passages in our
Homilies, it seems sometimes to approach too near to con-
founding faith with the assurance of personal acceptance; and
Mr. Scott judges the Confession most defective, as to the
work of the Holy Spirit in first preventing and afterwards
in working with us. But these are, he adds, only specks in
the sun, and that as a whole it is a noble monument of what
b Scott's Continuation, vol. i. eh. 1. p. 28, &c.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

the Reformers contended for, namely, Christian truth,
liberty, and spiritual worship. It is no cold dry doctrinal
statement, a sacred unction overspreads it; and it bears upon
its face to be the production of men, with whom religion is
a matter of deep and serious feeling, and it has a direct
reference to give relief to distressed consciences, and to
produce spiritual obedience.

The Reformation spread rapidly, but with the formation
of the order of Jesuits, a powerful reaction ensued. The Re-
formation had spread over the whole of Germany, but Protest-
antism gradually died away in the south, which has been long
regained by Rome. Happily it still predominates in the north ;
and is established in Scandinavia, Holland, and the British
empire. In Italy and Spain it was soon suppressed by per-
secution ; in France it has experienced a variety of fortunes.
Calvin, obliged to fly his native land, sought refuge in Geneva,
which had already embraced the new doctrines, and had ejected
its Bishop, who was also the temporal sovereign. His influ-
ence soon enabled him to establish there his own Presbyterian
platform of Church Government, which he had devised, not
in preference to Episcopacy, but as a substitute, because
circumstances rendered it impracticable to retain it; and
this scheme, which was adopted in Scotland, has had no
inconsiderable effect upon England. The French Reformed
Church was in its infancy formidable to the Establishment,
as reckoning among its supporters many of the nobility, and
some of the princes of the blood ; and King Henry the
IVth, though he renounced on his accession that faith in
which he had been educated, granted not merely toleration,
but equal civil and political privileges to his Protestant
subjects. This edict, which derived its name from Nantes,
the city in which it was issued in 1598, was revoked by his
grandson Louis XlVth, 1685. Their temples were in con-
sequence demolished, their worship was proscribed, the per-
secuting cruelty of the middle ages was revived, and many
thousand of his most industrious subjects fled to Germany,
Holland, and England, where they as manufacturers became
useful citizens, and enriched the countries which granted them
a home. Protestantism, however, continued to exist, by

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

degrees the authorities connived at it, but it was not legally
tolerated till the Revolution placed it on an equality with
the Roman Church, by granting pensions of equal value to
their ministers and the priests.

All Protestants agree in the common and distinguishing
principle, that Scripture is the sole source of religious know-
ledge, and they have in general come to the same conclusions
as to its meaning ; for although one of the most specious
arguments of the Romanists, which Bossuet has handled
with great adroitness, is the endless variety of the Protestant
opinions, against which he urges, that the only remedy is an
appeal to some infallible authority, examination will prove
that differences have been greatly exaggerated, and that in
leading essential Articles there is a substantial uniformity.
The Lord's Supper, which ought to be the closest bond of
union, we must allow to be an important and melancholy
exception. The Lutherans maintain Consubstantiation, that
is, the actual existence, after consecration, of Christ's body
and blood together with the material elements in the Eu-
charist; while the followers of Zwingli and of Calvin, the
reformers of Switzerland and Geneva, like our own Church,
acknowledge no more than a spiritual presence in the receiver.
This difference divides those who have separated from Rome
into two bodies, the Protestants and the Reformed, terms
which in England are commonly used as synonymous, but
correctly speaking the first is equivalent to the Lutheran
Church, or Evangelical, to use their own denomination of it,
the second to the French or Calvinistic.

In Scotland and on the Continent the Reformation, with
few exceptions, ascended from the lower and middle to the
upper classes of society. It was generally opposed by the
Clergy, who, where they had not power or influence enough
to crush it, were swept away by it in its course, and their
revenues and episcopal succession were lost ; whereas in our
country it originated with a few leading men who held the
highest offices in Church and State, and had imbibed the
doctrines of Luther, and who instead of following gave an
impulse to the public mind. A reformation, commenced
and carried on by Prelates acquainted with ecclesiastical

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

antiquity as well as Scripture, and who anticipated their
countrymen, and communicated to them as they could bear
it, the light which had gradually broke in upon themselves,
was cautious and moderate. It was a reformation, not a
revolution. The nomination of Cranmer to the Archbishopric
of Canterbury providentially gave him the highest authority
in the Church, and the death of the overbearing Henry, and
the accession of his son, a child ten years of age, enabled him,
as far as circumstances would permit, to model our Church
both in doctrine and discipline according to his ideas of
primitive Christianity. Thus while all other Protestant
Churches, Sweden alone excepted, from necessity rather than
choice, have lost episcopal government, substituting as in the
Lutheran for Bishops superintendents, our own has retained
its Prelates in an unbroken succession, not a new but a revised
Liturgy, freed from mediaeval superstitious additions, and
rites and ceremonies which were in use in the early ages.
Henry himself seems to have been solely actuated by personal
and political motives, and appears from his Will to have died
a doctrinal Roman Catholic. He seems to have considered
supremacy and infallibility as inseparable, as if the Act of
Parliament which transferred the first could convey the
second. As he changed his own opinions, he expected that
his subjects should change theirs ; he opposed all who
differed from him, and sometimes there might be seen in the
same fires, Roman Catholics condemned for refusing to
acknowledge his supremacy, and Protestants for denying
the real presence of Christ in what was called the Sacrament
of the Altar. Cranmer, freed from his control, proceeded,
but by slow degrees, to establish Protestantism. The laity,
excepting those who profited by the spoliation of the
Church, seem in general to have been attached to the old
religion ; his making the German Bucer, and the Italian
refugee Peter Martyr, Professors of Divinity at Cambridge
and Oxford, shows that the Universities were popishly
inclined; and we know the latter was obliged to fly from his
residence in Christ Church, upon the arrival of the intelligence
of Edward's death, which was celebrated with bonfires and
other demonstrations of joy. The composing of the First

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

Book of Homilies, which was Cranmer's earliest undertaking,
seems to prove not only the ignorance of the parochial clergy,
but an unwillingness to let them preach their own Sermons.
Henry had abolished the greater monasteries, partly in order
to secure an ascendancy in the Upper House of Parliament,
in which the Spiritual Lords, while they included mitred
Abbots, in consequence of the extinction of titles by the civil
wars, and his father's reluctance to confer new ones, doubled
the number of Barons. For the same purpose of promoting
the Reformation, the Lower House was enlarged in Edward's
reign, by calling upon twenty-two Boroughs which were
under Crown influence, seven of them in Cornwall, to return
Representatives. In fact, the Reformation appears to have
been introduced into England before it was ripe for it, and
this opinion derives strength from the fact, of the readiness
with which, on Mary's accession, it relapsed into Popery.
" Many thought," says Burnet0, " that Cranmer should have
begun with the Articles, and he was much pressed about it
by Bucer ; but till the Bishoprics were generally filled with
persons favourable to the Reformation, it would have been
hardly practicable ; and the modes of worship by which men
in their addresses to the Deity were involved in unlawful
compliances, called for reformation more urgently than the
settlement of speculative points." Whoever wishes to trace
the gradual progress of our Reformation, should examine
the formularies that appeared in the preceding reign. These
have been printed at our University Press, and the following
report of their contents is taken from the present Bishop
of St. Asaph's 'Sketch of the History of the Church of
England d.' The works are three: 'Articles devised by the
King's Highnes Majestie to stablyshe Christen quietness and
unitie among us, 1536;' which were inserted nearly verbatim
into the two others. 2. 'The Institution of a Christian Man,
1537;' and, 3. 'A necessary doctrine and erudition for any
Christian Man, 1543.' The first, being dedicated by the
Bishops to the King, is called the Bishops' book. It had
been long supposed that the Reformers were mainly in-

e History of the Reformation, vol. ii. book i. p. 166.
d Vol. i. p. 225.

C 2

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

debted to Cranmer for this formulary of doctrine; and
the fact is now established beyond dispute, by the recent
publication of some letters to Cromwell from Latymer and
Fox. The second, by being addressed by the King to his
people, is called the King's book, and is a step back towards
Romanism. Even the former must not be taken as the
fixed and deliberate judgment of Cranmer, which will be
found in the Articles published in Edward's reign, sanctioned
and probably drawn up by him. These earlier formularies
exhibit a mixture of light and darkness, not day light, but
rather the dawn that precedes it.

It was not till 1551, that Cranmer received an order,
probably at his own request, to frame a book of Articles of
Religion. Another cause of delay may perhaps be found in
the hope which he long cherished of arranging by common
consent a general confession of faith for all the Protestant
Churches. The plan originated with Melancthon, but in
vain did Cranmer repeatedly invite him into England ; and
finding at length the impracticability of a project, which
however desirable is never likely in the present condition of
human imperfection to be achieved, he proceeded to draw
up a separate formulary for his own branch of the universal
Church. Negociations had been carried on as long back as
1538, between Henry and the German Protestants, for this
purpose, first abroad, and afterwards in London. It was
arranged according to the Augsburg scheme, that the
representatives of the two nations should first settle
the chief articles of faith, and should then proceed to
inquire into the abuses and corruptions alleged to have
crept into the Church. The first division of their consult-
ations they brought to an happy issue ; but when they came
to examine the abuses, the King differed so widely from the
Germans, as to cut off all hope of a satisfactory settlement.
There is every probability, that their Confession of faith has
been lately found among Cranmer's papers in the State Paper
Office. The document is manifestly founded on the Confession
of Augsburg, departing from it exactly in these instances
where a variation might have been expected. It is also in
Latin, which adds to the probability of its having been com-

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

posed in concert with foreigners ; for the formularies of
Henry's reign, designed for domestic use, are in English.
It appears that this was the groundwork of the forty-two
Articles of 1552, and that it was through this channel that
the language of the German Confession was introduced into
them. At least the inference is supported by the fact, that
the expressions in Edward's formulary, usually adduced to
prove its connection with that Confession, are also found in
this Book, while it contains others common to the two,
which will be sought for in vain in the Confession. And to
this Book, if it was the result of the Conferences of 1538,
the framers of Edward's Articles would be likely to have
recourse. They would naturally be anxious to meet the
views of their brethren on the Continent, as well as of their
countrymen ; and they could not pursue a surer method
of attaining this object, than by borrowing from a form of
doctrine already approved by bothe. These Articles, however,
do not servilely follow either; they are at once more compre-
hensive and more brief, containing judgments on a greater
variety of questions, but entering less into the grounds on
which these judgments rest. Their publication might also
have been delayed till the King was out of pupillage, that his
sanction might give them the more weight, which was obtained
only a few days before his death; and it is doubtful whether
they obtained any other. The Title, " Articles agreed to
in the Synod of London, in 1552, by the Bishops and other
godly and learned men," conveys the idea of having been
approved by Convocation ; but Cranmer when interrogated
replied, I was ignorant of the setting to of that Title, and as
soon as I had knowledge thereof, I did not like it; therefore,
when I complained thereof to the Council, it was answered
by them, that the Book wTas so entitled because it was set
forth in the time of the Convocation. This, however, is
unimportant; for their promulgation was rapidly followed
by their abrogation.

The accession of Mary was the signal for the overthrow
of all that had been accomplished, and the reestablishment

c These remarks are taken from Dr. Jenkyns's Preface to his edition of
Cranmer's Works, in which he has printed the Articles themselves.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

of the ancient superstition. Cranmer, Ridley, Hooper, and
Latymer, the chief instruments in effecting the changes
under her brother, testified the sincerity of their attach-
ment to Protestantism by martyrdom ; others who returned
to complete the work of reformation, of whom Grindal,
Coverdale, Fox, Nowell, and Jewel, still preserve their
celebrity, found an asylum in Geneva, Frankfort, and
Zurich ; and continued in exile until after an interval of
five years and a half. Elizabeth succeeded to the throne,
and the cruelties of her Sister, which seemed likely to
extinguish it, are said to have had more effect than all the
preaching or writing of the Reformers, to alienate the
nation from Popery. Dr. Parker was appointed Primate.
The fabric of error and superstition had been demolished by
Cranmer, but his improvements had also been levelled to
the ground ; and it was Parker's delicate task to rebuild
the national Church on the true foundation. He began
with procuring the reenaction of the Prayer Book; but
though Elizabeth succeeded in 1558, it was not till 1562
that he could get the Articles authorized. A Synod of
the Clergy of both Provinces was then assembled, and to
them the Archbishop submitted for examination a copy
which he had prepared, with considerable alterations,
of King Edward's Articles. There is no authentic copy of
the Thirty-nine Articles, for it perished with the other
records of Convocation in the fire of London. But the
Archbishop's own draft is preserved with his other Manu-
scripts, which he bequeathed to Corpus Christi College,
Cambridge ; of which Society he had been Master. Strype's
account, which used to be followed, is inaccurate ; and the
recent publication by Dr. Lamb, the late Master, enables
me to correct it. The Manuscript is in Latin, in a small
pale hand, not very correct, and several passages are marked
with a red pencil to be omitted, but not by the Archbishop
previously in private, as Strype supposed, but afterwards
by the Upper House of Convocation, where twenty Prelates,
including the Archbishops, testified their approbation of the
rest by their signatures. The other Manuscript is an English
copy of the Articles, as signed again in 1571.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

The Archbishop's scheme, as finally adopted by Convoca-
tion, has four entirely new Articles'"; omits four, and alters
seventeen, leaving only four untouched. Several of his alter-
ations are taken from the Wirtemberg Confession, 1551. The
meaning of the descent into Hell is left open to private
judgment, probably in consequence of the request of Alley,
Bishop of Exeter, as the subject had excited much discus-
sion in his Diocese. The books of Scripture are enumerated,
and an important point is gained by the distinction now
introduced between the Canon and the Apocrypha. A
sentence is dropped from the twenty-eighth Article, con-
tradictory of the real presence of Christ's body in the
Sacrament, and to Ubiquitinarianism. Burnet can hardly be
correct in his supposition, that this was done to conciliate
the Roman Catholics, because the sentence before, which
denies Transubstantiation, was not altered; and a new
sentence, declaring that the body was only eaten after a
heavenly and spiritual manner, was added. A Declaration
similar to the omitted sentence had been appended to
the Communion Service in King Edward's second book ; in
Elizabeth's, 1560, it was left out; but was restored at the
last revision, 1662, with some alterations. The twentieth
Article now commences with these words, " The Church hath
power to decree rites and ceremonies, and authority in con-
troversies of faith." It has been eagerly disputed, whether
they were omitted in some editions of the Articles, or
inserted in others without authority. Laud on his trial
cleared himself from the charge of having forged it, a
notary public testifying before the Starchamber, that the
clause did exist in the authoritative copies of the Acts of the
Convocation, then still remaining in St. Paul's. It does
not appear in the Archbishop's draft, submitted to the Upper
House, nor in the English copy, printed under his direction,
and which would be translated from his copy, nor afterwards
in the Latin, or in Jewel's English edition. It first appears
in Reginald Wolfe's, that is, the first edition of the Latin,
published under the immediate authority of the Queen, and

f 5, 12, 29, 30, new.— 10, 16, 10, 41, of King Edward's omitted.— 2, 0, 7, 9,
10, 11, 17, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 32, 34, 35, 30, 37, altered more or less.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

must therefore have been inserted either by the Lower
House of Convocation, or by those that copied their Records.
The Queen was then endeavouring to establish her pre-
rogative in Church affairs, and to be not only Protector but
Director of the faith of her subjects. It might be thought
that neither she nor her Council would take upon them-
selves to alter Articles approved of in Convocation; but we
know that the twenty -ninth, " The impious eat not Christ's
body," was omitted both in the English and Latin, printed
before 1571, in compliance with the wish of Cecil, probably
at the suggestion of his Sovereign.

The Articles were brought before the Convocation of 1572,
and subscribed, and it was ordered that they should be read
quarterly in every parish church, and the Ratification was
now added. For this purpose, Jewel, Bishop of Salisbury,
author of the celebrated Apology of the Church of England,
was commissioned to superintend the impression of them in
English, as well as in Latin. He adopted, with a few verbal
variations, the translation already before the public ; and we
shall find that words ambiguous in the one, are plain and un-
equivocal in the other. An Act of Parliament in the same year
made them a part of the law of the land. They were once
more solemnly acknowledged in Convocation, under Bancroft,
in 1604, and at the suggestion of Laud, an edition came forth
in 1628, with a declaration by Charles I. calling upon all to
submit to them in their plain and literal grammatical sense,
and not to draw the [that is the XVIIth] Article any way.
His object was to discourage any discussion of the Predesti-
narian Controversy. Before the Revolution, Dissent from the
Established Church was punishable as an offence against the
State ; but Toleration was granted to Protestant Dissenters
on the accession of William and Mary. Toleration, however,
was very different from the entire religious liberty now
enjoyed, for dissenting ministers were considered as pledged
to the doctrine of the Church, though allowed to reject its
discipline; and they were accordingly, till within the present
generation, required to sign the Articles, with the exception
of three and a half, that is, the 34th, 35th, 36th, and the
disputed clause in the 20th.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

The agreement of the different Protestant Confessions is
shown in a work printed at Geneva early in the seventeenth
century, entitled, Corpus et Syntagma Confessionum Fidei,
accompanied with Scripture proofs, and testimonies from the
Fathers ; and an examination of these, especially of that
presented in 1530 to the Diet at Augsburg, will throw con-
siderable light upon our own. The first and second of the
Thirty -nine are obviously taken from the first and third of
the Augustan Confession. The ninth, sixteenth, twenty-
fifth, and thirty-first, are principally derived from the
same source ; and others contain expressions, as ex opere
operato, common to both. The verbal correspondence is
more strongly marked, by comparing these coincidences
with those parts of the Helvetic Confession, in which the
same ideas are conveyed in very dissimilar language. There
are passages in the works of Luther and Melancthon, which
from the similarity of idea, and occasionally of expression,
leave little doubt that they were present to the mind of the
framer of the seventeenth Article e. We may conclude, that
the eleventh, on Justification, was drawn from no other
source than the investigations of Cranmer himself ; for in a
book of his own, wherein he had written out a large collection
of quotations from Scripture and different authors, he sums
up the argument in words corresponding in a great degree
with those of that Article ; and reference is made to the
Homily on Salvation, though under a false title, which is
generally supposed to be his composition11.

When Luther appealed from the Pope to the Church, as
represented in a General Council, his demand, supported as
it was by Princes and by public opinion, could not be
refused, though the Roman politicians delayed it as long as
they could. The long promised Council, the last ever
convened, assembled in 1547, one year after the death of
Luther, and in the same month with that of Henry VIII.
It began with settling the standard of appeal, and put

h Archbishop Laurence's Bampton Lectures, viii. notes 4. 0. see also
Luther's Treface to the Epistle to the Romans, translated by Justus Jonas,
s Bishop of St. Asaph's History.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

Tradition upon the same footing as the Scriptures, declared
the Apocryphal books to be as much the Word of God as
the canonical ones, the Latin Vulgate translation to be as
authentic as the original, and forbad all explanations of it
contrary to the decisions of Holy Mother Church, to whom
only, as it affirms, appertaineth to judge of its sense and
interpretation. A year and a half after, a fever broke out at
Trent, which afforded an excuse for removing the Council to
Bologna, in the Pope's dominions, but no business was
transacted there ; and in 1551, it resumed its Sessions at its
original station. In the following year it was dispersed on
the alarm of the approach of Protestant troops through the
Tyrol, and was not revived till the year in which our
Articles were finally settled. According to Hallam1,
the Council of Trent, especially in its later Sessions, dis-
played the antagonistic parties in the Roman Church, one
struggling for lucrative abuses, the later anxious to overthrow
them. They may be called the Italian and Spanish parties,
the first headed by the Pope's Legates, dreading above all
things the reforming spirit of Constance and Basle, and the
independence either of private or national Churches ; the
other actuated by much of the spirit of these Councils, and
tending to confirm that independence. The French and
German Prelates usually sided with the Spanish, and they
were together strong enough to establish as a rule, that in
every Session a decree for reformation should accompany a
declaration of doctrine. It closed in 1564, when the upright
members were compelled to let it close, after having effected
such a reformation of discipline as they could obtain. Upon
the whole, the result was favourable to the Church, for the
benefit of which it had been summoned. In the deter-
mination of doctrine, the Council was generally cautious to
avoid extremes, and left in important points, such as the
invocation of Saints, no small latitude for private opinion.
The rigid definition of Transubstantiation has been con-
demned as imprudent; but Hallam maintains that there was
no alternative, as it had been declared plainly by a Lateral!
1 History of Literature, ii. 2.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

Council. And he opposes the modern notion, that the Trent
Decrees made important innovations in the prevailing esta-
blished doctrines of the Western Church. " It will," he
continues, " appear, that these decrees were mostly conform-
able with the sense of the majority of those doctors who had
obtained the highest reputation ; and that upon Transub-
stantiation, Purgatory, and Invocation of Saints, they assert
nothing but what had been so ingrafted into the faith of this
part of Europe, as to have been rejected by no one without
suspicion or imputation of heresy." These decrees were not
formally promulgated till after the XXXIX Articles, but
must have been already known here, from the allusions con-
tained to them in that formulary. These rejected doctrines
are stated in the 14th, 22d, 25th, 28th, 30th, and 31st, of
our Articles. Other doctrines retained by name, are changed
in substance; as the 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, and 13th. By a
review of the doctrines discarded by our Church, on the
principle that they are not warranted by Scripture, and by
a comparison with the corresponding decrees of the Council
of Trent, we discover in these very decrees a confirmation
of the principles to which the Church of England appeals ;
for in none has the Council of Trent pretended to rest on
the sole authority of Scripture. Where appeal is made to
Scripture appeal is made also to Tradition. But in most,
the appeal is to Tradition alone, and in one to neitherk.
The result of the Council was a reformed Breviary or
Prayer-book, a Catechism, and a Creed called from the name
of the reigning Pontiff, that of Pius IV. which every beneficed
priest is required to subscribe ; and these supply the accre-
dited doctrines of the Church of Rome ; to which, instead of
searching the Acts of ancient Councils, or referring to a
variety of divines, whose opinions may, whenever it is con-
venient, be disallowed as those of unauthorized individuals,
controversialists have an undeniable right to appeal. It is
commonly asserted, that the Trent decrees are not received
in Germany or France; but it is only in respect to questions
of discipline, for its doctrinal decisions bind all Romanists,

k Bishop Marsh's C oniparative View of the Churches of England and
Rome, iii. p. 42 — 47.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

nor can they with any show of reason reject them ; for
though the respective rights of Popes and Councils are still
contested, these decrees, which emanated from the latter,
and have been ratified by the former, must be, however
reluctantly, admitted.

A reformation of the Ecclesiastical Law had been
projected as early as 1532, and commissioners clerical and
lay appointed to gather and put in order the materials ; but
the matter was wholly entrusted to Cranmer. It was not
finished in time to become Law under Edward VI.; and the
attempt to establish it under Elizabeth failed; so that in
Ecclesiastical questions our Courts are still governed in all
points not anti-protestant by the Papal Canon Law. The
Reformatio Legum was first printed in 1571h, but though
invested with no authority, it may be safely referred to as
an authentic record of Cranmer's opinions. My reason for
mentioning it here is, that it opens with a statement of
religious doctrines, in which the tenets of the Articles are
expressed in other words, and with more diffuseness.

Our Saviour's last command was to go into all the world,
and preach the Gospel to every creature; and in his discourse
with Nicodemus at the opening of his Ministry he had
declared, that God so loved the world, that He gave his only-
begotten Son, to the end that all who believed in Him should
not perish, but have everlasting life : for God sent not his Son
into the world to condemn the world, but that the world
through Him might be saved. Salvation therefore is offered
to all to whom the Gospel is preached; yet experience
teaches us, that in all countries and in all ages, while some
receive the truth in the love of it, others even under exactly
the same outward circumstances show, that if acknowledged
in words, it makes no impression on the heart, while some
even despise and reject it. Since all were alike dead in tres-
passes and sins, none could quicken their own souls ; those
who believe must have been chosen by God the Father in

h A corrected edition of this work has lately issued from the University
Press, under the careful superintendence of Dr. Cardwell, to whom the
world is greatly indebted both for editions of Greek Authors, and of the
Liturgies, Injunctions, and other documents of our ecclesiastical history.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

Christ before the foundation of the world, to be holy and
without blame before Him in love, being predestinated to the
adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to
the good pleasure of his will. The fact is undeniable ; still it
is not surprising, that the moving cause of this everlasting
purpose of God to deliver from damnation those whom He
hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, since his counsel is
secret to us, should have been and still is warmly contested
by disputants of different schools ; and not only in the
Churches that have emancipated themselves from the bondage
of Rome, but even within the pale of Rome itself, notwith-
standing the proud boast of unity and infallibility. There
have been Popes and their advisers inclined to the opposite
sides. " The doctrine, that every sinner is capable of seeking
the aid of the Holy Spirit, which will not be denied him,
and consequently of beginning the work of conversion by
his own will, is," says Mr. Hallamm, " commonly admitted to
have been held by the Greek Fathers ; but the authority of
Augustin and the decisions of the Western Church caused it
to assume the character of a heresy : it was generally held
by the Schoolmen, by most of the early Reformers, and
seems to be inculcated by the decrees of Trent, as much as
by our Articles, In a loose and modern acceptation of the
word, it often goes by the name of Calvinism ; but if it is
meant to imply a particular relation to Calvin, it is a mis-
statement of the historical part of the question." For these
mysterious doctrines, which are not revealed in Scripture
with the same clearness as the essential Articles of the Faith,
were keenly disputed long before the existence of Calvin
and Arminius, who among Protestants have given name to
their respective systems, of the divine sovereignty, and of
foreseen faith, and have since their time been carried on by
the Jansenists and Jesuits. Nor is this surprising, since the
dispute is not confined to Christianity, predestination and
free-will having been warmly agitated among Mahometans,
and even by those philosophers who deny any revelation ; for
the difficulty is one of natural religion, and will be felt by
all who acknowledge the omniscience and omnipotence of
History of Literature, vol. iii. 2.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

God, and the responsibility of man. Luther, in his treatise
on the bondage of the will, De servo Arbitrio, in reply to the
Diatribe of Erasmus on its freedom, and in other works, had
expressed himself quite as strongly, though not so systema-
tically, as Calvin did at a later period ; and the compilers of
our Articles thought, that in a summary of the faith they
could not pass over predestination. It is however evident,
that they were fully aware of the difficulties of the subject ;
and while they felt it their duty to affirm what they be-
lieved, their charity and liberality induced them to state the
doctrine in a manner as unobjectionable as possible to its
opponents. They express themselves with brevity and singular
discretion, confining themselves as closely as they could to
the very words of Scripture, wholly omitting reprobation, and
studiously as it seems forbearing to give needless offence
"to curious and carnal persons lacking the spirit of Christ,"
and adducing (in contradistinction to God's counsel secret to
us) his promises in such way as they are generally set
forth in holy Scripture." Under this saving clause,
persons who cannot digest the doctrine of Predestination,
feel themselves authorized to sign the XVIIth Article; and
they are supported by the opinion and practice of many
approved writers of our Church, since the introduction of
Arminianism through the influence of Archbishop Laud.
Before his time there was a general consent among our
Divines; for, as Bishop Carleton observes, though disputes
arose between the Bishops and the Puritans with respect to
Church government, they perfectly agreed in doctrine.
Anti-Calvinists have indeed endeavoured to force the Article
to speak their own sentiments ; yet they must confess, that
they would not have expressed them in those words ; and
a sufficient refutation of their statement is the fact, that
Rogers, the first expositor of the Articles, and Chaplain to
Archbishop Bancroft, to whom he dedicated his work, main-
tains, that it conveys a contrary meaning. Indeed such a
statement will not be credited by those who know, that the
notes of the Geneva Bible were highly approved by Arch-
bishops Parker and Grindall, and that those attached to
the Bishops' Bible are of the same character; and that

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

Calvin's Institutes was the book in which candidates for
Orders were chiefly examined. The first disturbers of
this Uniformity, says Bishop Carleton, were Barrett and
Baro in Cambridge, in 1595. The latter was the Lady
Margaret's Reader in Divinity; and Whitaker, his con-
temporary and opponent, who was the Regius Professor,
thus writes on occasion of the Sermon which led to this dis-
cussion. " The Church of England, ever since the Gospel
was restored, has always held and embraced the opinion of
election and reprobation. This Bucer in our University,
and Peter Martyr at Oxford, have professed ; two eminent
divines, who have most abundantly watered our Church with
their streams, in the days of King Edward. This opinion
their auditors in both our Universities, the Bishops, Deans,
and Divines, who upon the advancement of our famous
Queen Elizabeth to the Crown, either returned from exile,
or were released from the prisons into which they had been
thrust for the profession of the Gospel ; or saved from the
hands of persecuting Bishops ; those by whom our Church
was reformed, our religion established, Popery thrust out
and quite destroyed, (all which we may remember, though
few of this kind be yet living,) — this opinion, I say, them-
selves have held and commended to us ; in this faith have
they lived, and in this they died, and in this they always
wished that we should constantly continue." And in a Sermon
preached before the same University in 1625, a few years
after the Synod of Dort, Dr. Ward said, " This also I can
truly add, for a conclusion, that the Universal Church hath
always adhered to St. Austin, ever since his time till now.
The Church of England also from the beginning of the Re-
formation and this our famous University, with all those from
thence till now who have with us enjoyed the Divinity Chair,
if we except one foreign Frenchman, (Peter Baro,) have like-
wise constantly adhered to him." Barrett in his Sermon not
only preached against the received Calvinistic doctrines, but
even denounced by name Calvin and Beza. He was required
to make a public recantation, which he did in so unsatis-
factory a manner, that he was again summoned before the
authorities. He appealed to the Archbishop, but it was an

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

appeal to one who was disposed to go farther than these
Reformers at least thought expedient in a confession
of faith. Whitgift drew up nine propositions, in which the
highest supralapsarian Calvinism is embodied, and these
received, from his official residence, the title of the Lambeth
Articles. They were transmitted to Cambridge, in order to
be a directory to the preachers ; but Lord Burleigh, the
Chancellor, was too sagacious to approve of this attempt
to narrow the terms of communion; and the Queen, who
resented the presumption of the Archbishop as an in-
terference with her prerogative, reprimanded him, and
suppressed them. In England they hear no more of them,
except that a proposal for their adoption was made at the
Hampton Court Conference; but in Ireland they were
appended to the Thirty -nine in 1615, but afterwrards were
dropped, though never formally revoked.

This unsuccessful attempt to impress upon our Church
the most ultra Calvinism, induces me to mention, though
only indirectly concerning us, the formal acknowledgment of
this system, in the milder sublapsarian form, in 1618, by
the Synod of Dort, the only assembly of Protestant Divines
which bears any resemblance to a General Council, as it was
convened by the States General of the United Provinces,
and was attended by deputies from most of the Reformed
Churches. Its object was to decide the question between
the Calvinists and the Arminians, who were then heard of
for the first time, and derive their name from a Dutch
Professor, known in other countries by the Latinised form
Arminius. The fate of this Divine is extraordinary: for his
celebrity, like that of Jansenius, a Roman Catholic Bishop
in the Netherlands, who did not live to publish his volume
on the doctrines of Augustin, was posthumous ; and neither
could have imagined the influence they have since exer-
cised with respect to the profound subjects of their study,
even beyond their own contemporaries, and the pale of their
respective Churches. Arminius, though brought up in the
doctrines of Calvin, and in his University, originated a con-
trary system, popularly considered as equivalent with Anti-
Calvinism, though modern Arminians recede much farther

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

than lie did from the Reformer of Geneva. Accord-
ing to him, foreseen faith is the cause that moved God to
bestow salvation, and this he expanded into live Articles.
His position at Ley den as a Professor, gave him oppor-
tunity to propagate his system with considerable success,
and this he was enabled to do with impunity, as these
profound questions had not been settled by the Belgic
Confession. Arminius himself died nine years before the
Synod; and their leader there was Episcopius, who had been
his disciple, who was also a Leyden Professor, and was
celebrated for eloquence. But no other opportunity of
taking advantage of it was allowed him than an introductory
address, as his proposal of beginning their defence by
refuting the Calvinists was rejected ; for the Synod deter-
mined that they ought in the first instance to prove their
own opinions. They refused to submit to this dictation, and
withdrew; and after an examination of their writings in
their absence, their doctrines were proscribed, and their
meetings suppressed". The Deputies sent to the Synod by
James were Carleton Bishop of LlandafF, Hall afterwards
Bishop of Norwich, Davenant the Cambridge Margaret
Professor, afterwards Bishop of Salisbury, and Ward, Master
of Sidney College. Walter Balcanquall, Fellow of Pembroke
Hall, was afterwards added as a representative of the Church
of Scotland. The Bishop of LlandafF in the name of the
rest protested against the decree, maintaining the parity of
ministers0; but approved of all their doctrinal decisions;
and Bishop Hall thus decidedly states his assent ; ' I shall
live and die in the suffrage of the reverend Synod, and do
confidently avow, that those other opinions cannot stand with
the doctrines of the Church of England.'

In 1643, the Parliament having suppressed the Established
Church, convened an Assembly of Divines, consisting of such
persons from the several counties as the Members chose
to summon to form a new settlement of religion. They
were 120, to whom ten Peers and twenty of the House of
Commons were added ; but the general attendance varied
from eighty to sixty. The Assembly was entirely dependent

n Mosheim, vol. v. sect. IG. ch. 2. 0 Fuller's Church Hist. v. x. s. 4.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

on the Parliament, and was in fact but a Committee to
prepare ecclesiastical matters for their consideration. Their
first undertaking was a revision of the Articles, which pro-
ceeded no further than the fifteenth, the work being suspended
by their examination of the " Solemn League and Covenant."
The alterations are few. The descent into hell is explained to
mean, being under the dominion of death. Neither the Creeds
nor the Apocrypha are mentioned. The imputation of
Christ's obedience and satisfaction to us is introduced, and
"works which have the nature of sin" is changed into sinful.
They then proceeded to draw up an independent confession
of faith, which is a body of divinity in rather striking con-
trast with the studied brevity of the Thirty -nine Articles.
Mr. Marsdenp, in his history of the later Puritans, cha-
racterises it as in many respects an admirable summary
of Christian faith and practice. " The style is pure and
good, the proofs selected with admirable skill, the argu-
ments are always clear, the subjects well distributed,
and sufficiently comprehensive to form at least the outline
of a perfect system of divinity." On the other hand, one
fault pervades the whole : it is cast in the most exact
and rigid mould of ultra-Calvinism, and treats the most
difficult questions of the divine decrees with an air of con-
fidence, which has a tendency to repel English Christians,
who will heartily agree in their concluding sentence.
" The doctrine of this high mystery of Predestination
is to be handled with especial prudence and care ; that
men attending the will of God, revealed in his word, and
yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of
their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal elec-
tion. So shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reve-
rence, and admiration of God, and of humility, diligence, and
abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the Gospel."
Their other works were a Directory for Public Worship,
and a larger and a shorter Catechism ; which are used
both in the Kirk of Scotland, and by the orthodox Dis-
senters in England. On the doctrine of the Sacraments,
we do not perceive a shade of difference from the teaching

p Chap. 2.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

•35

of the Church of England. It was determined that there
should be no proposition in the Catechism, that was not
contained in the Confession. On the Restoration, the Liturgy
and Articles recovered their legal authority ; but in Scot-
land, the Confession of these Westminster Divines became
the rule of faith of the Kirk, as it was established at the
Revolution.

Our estimation of the Articles will increase on comparison
with the formularies of other Churches, by which the pru-
dence and moderation of those who drew them up will
appear, who we shall be satisfied made them as compre-
hensive as they could, without opening the door to dangerous
error. Roman Catholics of course were to be excluded ;
but there were also serious differences among Protestants.
In Mary's reign, there had been discussions among those
who were in prison for religion respecting Predestination ;
but the 1 7th Article remained untouched, being very cau-
tiously worded, and little more than a transcript from
Scripture. Great moderation is also shown in the question
of Church government: for though a declaration is required,
that the form appointed for Ordination of Ministers con-
tains all things necessary to give it validity, and no thing-
superstitious or ungodly ; there is no condemnation of the
Presbyterian, or of any other method. An objection has
been made to the number of these Articles, yet the framers
of them, by reducing them from 42, showed that they
wished to have no more than they deemed necessary ; and if
in process of time any should become obsolete, its retention
is no grievance, it is but superfluous. There is also a
fallacy in objecting to their number, for none can object to
those that do not contradict their belief ; and therefore it is
indifferent to a Protestant how many of the Roman Catholic
peculiar tenets are condemned. Articles of faith, we should
remember, are the results of events, and are designed to
oppose existing errors. This distinguishes them from
systems of divinity, which explain and prove tenets, though
they may not be disputed. The foreign Confessions are
fuller, and support their assertions by proofs ; and the
Westminster Divines confirmed ours by texts. In an ex-

d 2

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

position it is desirable, but not in the actual formulary,
since the application may be erroneous, and, as far as it is so,
would commit us to a false interpretation of Scripture.

Their conciseness and reference to doctrines which they
condemn without confuting, as of the Pelagians and the
Schoolmen, assuming them to be known, seem, at least after
a lapse of time, to require a commentary. The earliest
exposition, that of Roberts, dedicated to the Archbishop,
appeared in 1607, little more than forty years after their
reception. It is very short, but specifies, like the foreign Con-
fessions, the parties against whom each Article is directed, and
supports the doctrine by citations from these Confessions,
from the Fathers, and from the Bible. He has been followed
by many expositors, of whom Bishops Burnet and Tomline
are the best known. The work of the former is full of
information, especially on the Roman Catholic controversy.
That of the latter is principally an abridgment of it, with
additions from Bishop Pearson's Exposition of the Creed.
I have made some use of the work of the pious Bishop
Beveridge, the appearance of which in a complete form, from
the University Press, we owe to the purchase of the manu-
script of the concluding volume by the learned and venerable
President of Magdalen College. But my chief obligation
is to Dr. Hey's Lectures on Divinity, which suggested to my
mind this compilation, and without the important assistance
of various kinds derived from it, I should never have com-
pleted it. I am indebted for the history of the Articles to his
text, or the authorities which he has quoted ; and for many
reflections, which I have often given in his own language, as
more expressive than any that I could commend. I therefore
greatly regret my inability to give his work unqualified praise.
He is the critic as well as the interpreter, and is of that lax
school, which would explain away or lower some vital
truths; so that I must often dissent from his conclusions, and
lament that his boldness, and the tone that pervades the work,
prevent my recommending it to the student, though on
subordinate points I have greatly profited by its perusal.

In an irreligious and latitudinarian age, an opinion was
started, that the Articles were only Articles of peace, that is,

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

that those who signed them only engaged not to contradict
their assertions. This appears to me to be no better than a
transparent fallacy, by which persons, whose worldly interest,
as tutors or incumbents, required their conformity to this
standard of doctrine, endeavoured to pacify their consciences.
Such when they preach must at best be silent on tenets, on
which they dissent from the judgment of the Church to
which they profess to adhere ; but what society would be
satisfied with neutrality ? Surely churchmen have a right to
demand, that the doctrines of their Church should not merely
be not opposed, but that they should be explained and
enforced. Many who favoured this view, petitioned Parlia-
ment to be relieved from subscription; and few, I apprehend,
who have no scruples in signing, will be convinced by them.
The advocates of this evasive scheme were mostly of doubt-
ful orthodoxy with respect to the cause of justification, and
of the proper Divinity of the Author of our redemption, and
found some favour in Cambridge. The supposition will
seem most unreasonable to an unbiassed mind ; and I appre-
hend never occurred, till Protestants began to doubt of the
doctrines of the Reformation. In our own days, a similar
attempt has been made in the opposite direction. A resident
Fellow of a College, following out the almost forgotten
work of Francis a Santa Clara, who, in the reign of
Charles the First, published a celebrated Tract, in which
he endeavoured to shew, by a strained non-natural inter-
pretation, how all these Articles could be honestly signed by.
a believer in the peculiar tenets of Rome ; and another
gloried in the liberty of professing within our Church the
whole circle of Roman doctrine. Some made a distinction
between holding and maintaining, between believing and
teaching ; but most of these have shown in the completest
maimer their conviction of their error, by conforming to the
Church to which they were already in judgment and feelings
attached. We may fairly conclude, that the Articles were
framed to exclude those who maintained what the framers
of them regarded as damnable heresies, for they condemn
not exploded but prevalent errors ; and the notion is re-
futed by the very title, "Articles agreed upon for the avoiding

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

of diversities of opinions, and for the establishment of
consent ;" and could never be honestly advocated by those
who are called upon to sign the 36th Canon, which includes
an acknowledgment that all and every Article, besides the
Ratification, are agreeable to the word of God. This is
positively asserted, as Dr. Wilson reminds us, in the Ordi-
nation Service, in the solemn injunction to the candidates, to
bring those committed to their care to such an agreement of
faith, that there be no place left for error in religion. His
comparison of the Articles with the more expanded state-
ment of doctrine in the Homilies, and their practical appli-
cation in the Liturgy, is a most elaborate work, which few
would have had the perseverance to complete, but which has
amply repaid his labour of love, by the perfect harmony
which it demonstrates to pervade all our authorized for-
mularies. He has extended his citations to Nowell's Cate-
chism, Jewel's Apology, and Bullinger's Decades of Sermons,
which though they do not formally demand our assent, speak,
we cannot doubt, the sentiments of our Reformers; for in the
same Convocation which directed the setting forth of the
Articles, it was ordered, that these two books should be
joined with them in one book, to be authorized as containing
true doctrine. In the Convocation of 1586, among other
" Orders for the better increase of learning in the inferior
Ministers, and more diligent preaching and catechizing ;"
the especial study of these Sermons was enjoined on Curates;
and whoever has read our ecclesiastical history, knows that
Bullinger was the personal friend of those who restored the
Reformation in England, and that they were ever ready, in
all questions of doctrine or discipline, to defer to his judg-
ment.

LECTURE I.

ARTICLE I.

There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without
body, parts, or passions ; of infinite power, ivisdom, and
goodness : the Maker and Preserver of all things, both
visible and invisible. And in the Unity of this Godhead
there be Three Persons, of one substance, power, and eternity,
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

The existence, unity, and perfection of the Deity, are
taught by Natural Religion : they can, therefore, occasion
no disputes among Christians ; yet it seems desirable, if not
indispensable, to open a Confession of Faith with an ac-
knowledgment of these fundamental truths, as introductory
to the assertion of a tenet, denied by some, and incorrectly
stated by more ; which reason, though it accepts, is incapable
of discerning — the Plurality of Persons in this Unity, which
Theologians for convenience call by one word, Trinity.

Taking as we do the word of God for our rule of faith,
we have no need curiously to search for a truth which lies on
the surface. For it was thus emphatically announced by
Moses a, Hear, 0 Israel, Jehovah thy God is one Jehovah,
accompanied with its proper consequences ; Thou shalt love
Jehovah thy God with all thy heart, and all thy soul,
and all thy might b ; and solemnly repeated under the new
Covenant by our Lord, who, when questioned by a Scribe,
replied, that it was the first and great commandment. Still
if there be any dispute respecting this foundation of all

a Deut. vi. 4, 5.

b In the original, with all that is thine, which may apply to energy of
mind or to property, in which latter sense it is taken by the Targum and the
Syriac version.

LECTURE I.

religion, it must be with the Atheist ; and therefore instead
of referring to the word of God, as we shall do with Chris-
tian disputants, it seems reasonable to deduce this doctrine
from what is called natural religion. But before we con-
sider the discoveries or rather the conjectures of unassisted
reason0, I would point out the distinction drawn by the late
Dr. Chalmers between unbelief and disbelief. "The former,"
writes that eloquent theologian and able metaphysician,
" we apprehend to be the farthest amount of the atheistical
verdict on the question. He does not positively affirm the
position that God is not, but he affirms the lack of evidence
for the position that God is. He is but an Atheist, not an
Antitheist." And there is one consideration which affords
the enquirer a singularly clear and commanding position at
the outset of this great question. It is this. We cannot,
without a glaring contravention to all the principles of
experimental philosophy, recede to a further distance from
the doctrine than simple Atheism. To be able to say that
there is a God, we have only to look abroad on some
definite territory, and to point to the vestiges of his power
and presence somewhere. For man not to know of a God,
he has only to sink beneath the level of our common nature;
but to deny Him, he must be a God himself. " The wonder,"
says Foster in one of his Essays, " turns on the great pro-
cess by which a man could grow to the immense intelligence
that can know there is no God. This intelligence involves
the very attributes of Divinity, while a God is denied; for
if he cannot assign with certainty the cause of all that he
perceives to exist, that cause may be a God. If he does not
know every thing that has been done, some things may have
been done by God. Thus, unless he knows all things, that is,
precludes another deity by being one himself, he cannot know
that the Being whose existence he rejects, does not exist."

There are two methods of proving the Divine existence.
We may by a train of subtle reasoning deduce this primary
truth from the nature of things, which is called the argu-
mentum a priori ; or instead of descending from meta-
physical abstraction, we may ascend from the contemplation

' I Bridgwater Treatise, chapter on the defects and uses of Natural Theology.

LECTURE I.

of effects, to the first Great Cause of all things, and rise
" through nature up to nature's God." One of the ablest
attempts of the first kind is the work of Dr. Samuel Clarke,
which he confidently calls a Demonstration of the Being and
Attributes of God. " I have confined myself," he observes,
" to one only method or continued thread of arguing, which
I have endeavoured should be as near to mathematical, as
the nature of such a discourse would allow." He proceeds
to state twelve Propositions, which grow out of one another;
but for them and his chain of reasoning, I must refer the
reader to the work. Let him, however, not be disheartened,
if he should find it difficult to follow, or if it fail to con-
vince him. Our great satirical poet, who viewed the con-
temporary metaphysician with no friendly eye, replies to
Dulness in the person of a gloomy clerk,
Sworn foe to mystery, yet divinely dark,
at once alluding to the name as well as to the profession
of this eminent author0.

Let others creep by timid steps and slow,

On plain experience lay foundations low,

By common sense to common knowledge bred,

And last to Nature's cause through Nature led.

All seeing in thy mists, we want no guide,

Mother of arrogance, and source of pride !

We nobly take the high Priori road,

And reason downward till we doubt of God.

Nor is this to be altogether set down to Pope's ill-nature,
for there are grave and unprejudiced authors who maintain
that such metaphysical reasonings should be discarded,
as endangering instead of maintaining natural religion.
This very demonstration they endeavour to shew us is
inconclusive. It is an attempt to demonstrate, that there is
a first cause, by shewing that an infinite series of causes and
effects makes the absurdity of an effect without a cause,
and yet the notion of a first cause necessarily implies exists
ence without a cause. The questions of natural religion
are facts, it must therefore like natural philosophy be an
inductive science. Our knowledge of the existence and
c Dunciad, iv. 405.

LECTURE I.

attributes of God, as far as that knowledge is traceable by
the light of nature, is acquired by the same intellectual
process as our knowledge of the laws of the physical world.
By this reasoning Newton discovered the true system of
the heavens, and it is only by this reasoning that the Theist
can ascertain from the light of nature the existence and
the attributes of Him who made the heavens. Newton
discovered by a complete induction, that the principle of
attraction extends throughout the universe. Experience
assures the Theist of the general fact, that in human affairs
intelligence produces regularity, order, and the aptitude of
means to ends ; and looking through nature, he every where
observes the same, though in a higher degree, and hence
infers, that intelligence pervades and governs the universe.
Whiston, pointing to a nettle while walking with Clarke,
told him, that it contained better evidence of the existence
of the Deity than all his metaphysics; to which he answered,
that as Theism had been metaphysically assailed, he was
anxious to show that it might be metaphysically defended ;
and indeed in this very discourse he allows, that the argu-
ment a posteriori is more satisfactory. " The substance of
Dr. Clarke's argument," says Dugald Stewart0, "is supposed
to have been suggested to him by a passage in Newton's
Principia, and is essentially the same, amounting to the
following proposition, ( that space and time are only abstract
conceptions of an immensity and eternity, which force them-
selves on our belief ; and as immensity and eternity are not
substances, they must be the attributes of a Being who is
necessarily immense and eternal.' " " These," says Dr. Reid,
"are the speculations of men of superior genius; but whether
they be as solid as they are sublime, or whether they be the
wanderings of imagination in a region beyond the limits of
human understanding, I am unable to determine." To this his
able and admired disciple, Stewart, adds, " After this candid
acknowledgment, I need not be ashamed to confess my
own doubts. But although the argument as stated by
Clarke does not carry complete conviction to my mind,
there is something peculiar and very wonderful in these
Philosophy of the Active and Moral Towers of Men, vol. i. p. 334, &c.

LECTURE I.

conceptions of immensity and eternity, which force them-
selves on our belief. Nay further, I think that they
furnish important lights in the study of natural religion.
For when once we have established the existence of an
intelligent and powerful Cause from the works of creation,
we are unavoidably led to apply to Him our conceptions of
immensity and eternity, and to conceive Him as filling the
infinite extent of both with his presence and his power.
Nor is this all. It is from our ideas of space and of time,
that the notion of infinity is originally derived, and it is
thence that we transfer the expression by a sort of metaphor
to other subjects. When we speak therefore of infinite power,
wisdom, and goodness, our notions if not wholly borrowed
from space and time, are at least wonderfully aided by this
analogy, so that the conceptions of immensity and eternity,
if they do not of themselves demonstrate the existence of
God, yet necessarily enter into the ideas we form of his
nature and attributes."

The existence of the Deity is not an intuitive truth, but
the process of reasoning consists only of a single step, and
the premises belong to that class of first principles, which
form an essential part of the human constitution. These
premises are two in number. The one, that every thing that
begins to exist must have a cause ; the other, that a com-
bination of means conspiring to a particular end implies
intelligence. It is interesting to hear Voltaire say, that he
doubts if there be any metaphysical proof which speaks
more forcibly to man than the admirable order that reigns
in the universe ; and if there has ever been a better argu-
ment than the verse, the heavens declare the glory of God ;
and you see that Newton produced no other at the end of
his Optics and the Principia. This argument from final
causes, it is observed by Reid, when reduced to a syllogism,
contains twro propositions ; the major, that design may be
traced from its effects ; the minor, that there are appearances
of design in the universe. The ancient sceptics granted
the first, but denied the second ; the moderns, as Hume, in
consequence of the discoveries in natural philosophy, have
been obliged to abandon the ground which their pre-

LECTURE I.

decessors maintained, and have disputed the major: and
Stewart agrees with Hume, that our belief of the existence
of a designing cause is not the result of reasoning ; but, he
adds, that it arises from the intuitive perception of the mind.
The authority of these truths are at least on a footing with
those that rest on demonstration, in as much as all demon-
stration is ultimately founded on them ; and it is incom-
parably superior to that of truths learnt from experience, in
as much as the contrary of these is always conceivable, and
never implies any absurdity or contradiction. As a further
proof that this principle is not demonstrable, we may
remark, that those authors wTho have been most successful in
exposing the doubts of sceptics on the subject, have had
recourse not to argument but to ridicule, and have rested
their cause chiefly on a view of the absurdity and incon-
sistencies, into which similar doubts would lead us, if they
were extended to the common concerns of life. Thus
Tillotsone declares, that as there is nothing before God, nor
any cause of his being, neither his attributes nor his exist-
ence can be proved by way of demonstration, but of conviction,
by shewing the absurdity of the contrary. Waterlandf has
taken an historical and a critical view of this argument a
priori, and the result of his examination is, that it has been
maturely considered by men of the brightest parts and
coolest judgments, by ancients and moderns, Pagans and
Christians, Fathers and Schoolmen, and by all as with one
voice condemned and exploded, though disposed, if it were
of any force, to accept it : for who would not prefer, if it
could be had, demonstration to the highest probability? Two
eminent men of our day, Chalmers and Lord Brougham,
have lately written upon Natural Theology, and both agree
in pronouncing Dr. Clarke's Demonstration inconclusive.
Lord Brougham shows that it has no existence, being no
more than a very imperfect process of induction ; and
Chalmers detects in it two fallacies. Dr. Brown observed
before them, that these reasonings a priori, if strictly analysed,
are found to proceed on some assumption of the very truth
for which they contend ; and that instead of throwing ad-
■ Sermon 100, vol. ii. ( Ch. i. p. 426.

LECTURE I*

ditional light on the argument for a Creator, they have only
served to darken it, by leading us to conceive, that there
must be some obscurity in Truths, which could give an
occasion to reasons so obscure. " God, and the world which
He has formed," says Chalmers, "are our great objects. Every
thing which we strive to place between them is nothing. We
see the universe, and seeing it, wre believe in its Maker.
It is the universe therefore which is our argument, and our
only argument; and these obscure and laborious a priori
reasons would rather lead us to doubt than to believe.
Surely if they had any weight, they would as demonstrations
convince even sceptics. We cannot perhaps without an
inspired teacher attain to a firm belief in the moral attri-
butes of God ; but an intelligent first cause of all things
seems to be a necessary conclusion, from the fact of our own
existence, and of that of the world we live in. Since the
world exists, it must have existed as it is for ever, or have
had a Creator. Now the possibility of our conceiving its
non-existence, or its existence under another form, con-
tradicts the first supposition. Effects imply a cause, and in
the animals that inhabit the earth, in the structure of that
earth itself, and in the heavenly bodies, we see with the
mind's eye, as if reflected in a mirror, Him who is in
Himself invisible. And it appears from St. Paul's delineation
of the natural man in his Epistle to the Romans, that the
eternal power and Godhead are so legibly impressed upon the
works of God, that they who open not their eyes to such
evidence, are without excuse. Conscience, the monitor
whom God has placed within us, above all, ought to
convince us of the existence of some Being to whom we
are accountable. Our belief then in this most important
truth need not depend upon abstruse metaphysical reasoning.
We have but to look around, and every where we shall see
evidence of an intelligent Creator, that is, of God. A closer
examination will strengthen the impression, and the better
we become acquainted with his creatures and with their
adaptation to promote their own happiness, and the general
good of the whole, the more deeply we shall be convinced,
that the world exhibits not the mere exertion of power, but

±6

LECTURE 1.

such an adjustment of means to an end, as we call wisdom ;
and that the end is the distribution of universal happiness,
which gives us the highest conception of goodness.

A foundation so deeply laid in the constitution of the
human mind for belief in a Deity, has produced in
every age an acknowledgment of his existence all but
universal. Accordingly, the few tribes who are said to have
no idea of God, are in a state little raised above the brute
creation, and seem to have few of the perceptions and
sentiments of men ; and some even of these may have vague
notions which they cannot express. The testimony of those
who have been left to their own surmises without the light
of Revelation on such a subject, are of the first importance.
I therefore introduce a passage from Cicero's dialogue on the
Nature of the Gods. (ii. 88.) "Whoever thinks that the won-
derful order and incredible constancy of the heavenly bodies
and their motions is not governed by an intelligent Being, is
himself void of all understanding ; for shall we, when we
see an artificial machine, a sphere or dial, acknowledge at
first sight that it is the work of art and understanding, and
make any doubt that the heavens are the work not only of
reason, but of an excellent and divine reason ?" Galen
indeed lived after the Christian asra, but it is not probable
that he condescended to learn from persons so despised as
Jews and Christians, and of whom he himself speaks con-
temptuously ; and therefore his testimony to the Divine
perfections may be taken as the testimony of genuine
natural religion, that is, not of Christians who lay aside
for the moment Revelation, but of heathen sages. In
concluding his treatise on the use of the parts of the human
body, he says, that " a work which may at first appear to be
of small acoount, is the beginning of accurate Theology, which
is more valuable than the whole practice of medicine."
Having expressed his opinion, that if any person from
ignorance of her works accused Nature of want of skill, a
study of anatomy would make him ashamed, and bring him
to a better state of mind ; being convinced by Hippocrates,
who in all his works is praising her justice and prudence
towards animals, he particularises some atheistical objec-

LECTURE I.

tions which had been brought against the human structure,
and then bursts into this magnificent encomium. " But if
I should make further mention of these cattle, persons of
sound mind would justly blame me, and say, that I polluted
this sacred discourse, which I put together as a genuine
hymn to our Creator ; and this I esteem real piety, not that
I should sacrifice thousands and thousands of hecatombs of
his bulls, and offer up cassia and ten thousand other odours
as incense ; but first, that I should myself understand Him,
and then explain to others what He is, as to wisdom, as to
power, and as to benignity. To will to adorn this whole
world, and to leave nothing destitute of his goodness, I lay
down as a proof of perfect benignity, and therefore He is to
be praised by us as good ; but to discover how this may be
best adorned is the height of wisdom, and to effect whatever
He hath chosen is evidence of power that cannot be with-
stood." Even Cicero with his imperfect knowledge could
find reason to say, that all "the parts of the world are so
constituted, that they could not be either better for use, nor
more beautiful for show." In his eloquent description of
man?, the idea of which was probably suggested by a dis-
course of Socrates recorded by Xenophonh, he speaks with
peculiar admiration of the hand, which Galen deemed was
alone sufficient to prove the wisdom of the Creator ; and it
might be a vague recollection of this that induced the Earl
of Bridgwater, in leaving his magnificent prize for a
Treatise on the power, wisdom, and goodness of God as
manifested in the creation, to specify the construction of this
instrument, which may be considered as the organ which
above all gives to man a superioity in his physical con-
struction to the animals, who approach him nearest in shape
or sagacity. " If," says Dr. Clarke, in the Discourse which
we have been considering, " Galen could perceive in the
human body such undeniable marks of design as to force
him, though originally inclined to atheism, to acknowledge
the wisdom of its Author, what would he have said if he had
known the late discoveries in anatomy, such as the circu-
lation of the blood ?" Had he lived in our age, he would
s De Nature, ii. GO. h Memorabilia.

LECTURE I.

have improved his hymn with the grateful recognition of
the Psalmist, " I will praise thee, 0 Lord, for I am fearfully
and wonderfully made!"

This evidence is of a growing kind, proportioned to the
advancement of knowledge ; and in no age is it so striking as
in our own, when every year is accumulating new facts in
natural history ; and chemistry and electricity are con-
tinually supplying us with new agents to decompose what our
ancestors thought were elementary substances, and to explain
the phaenomena of nature. The telescope and the microscope
have also opened to us two new worlds ; and philosophers have
been so astonished with the magnifying power of the latter,
that they have exclaimed, that the Creator is greatest in
most minute works. Our writers in natural philosophy
often pause to express their admiration of the laws to which
it has pleased the Creator to subject matter and organised
beings ; and several works have been written with the
purpose of deducing the wisdom and benevolence of the
Supreme Being, from a scientific examination of his works.
Of these the most popular is the Natural Theology of Paley,
who though a great borrower, has the happy art of giving to
what he selects an air of originality. The comparison, with
which it opens, of a stone and a watch, and the pointed terms
in which he explains how the parts of the latter are put
together for a purpose, contrasts favourably with the
tedious enumeration of Nieuentyt, from whose treatise the
idea of a watch is borrowed. It had been already in the
preceding century brought forward by Sir Matthew Hale,
and may be traced up to the passage which I have quoted
from Cicero. The inexhaustible marks of design in exist-
ing objects, which our increasing knowledge is continually
enlarging, has a tendency to weary ; and therefore it is
perhaps well to take Paley 's advice. " In all cases,
wherein the mind feels itself in danger of being confounded
by variety, it is sure to rest upon a few strong points, or
perhaps upon a single instance ; among a multitude of proofs,
it is one that does the business. For my part, I take my
stand in human anatomy. And then he draws out a few
examples of mechanism from the copious catalogue which it

LECTL'KE I.

supplies. Chalmers is of the same opinion, and shows, that
as in astronomy the independent elements are few and
simple, whereas in anatomy there is a crowded and com-
plex combination of them ; we find in the construction of
an eye, more intense evidence for a God, a more pregnant
and legible inscription of the Divinity, than can be gathered
from a broad and magnificent survey of the skies, lighted
up though they be, with the glories and wonders of
astronomy." He proceeds to observes, that it is not in
the laws of matter but in their collocation that the main
evidence for a Divinity lies, because of the utter inadequacy
of the existing laws to have originated the collocations
of the material world. " It is true, that we accredit the
author of natural mechanism with the creation, and laws
of matter, as well as with its dispositions ; but this does not
hinder its being in the latter, and not in the former, that
the manifestations of skill are most apparent." Newton,
towards the end of the third Book of the Optics, bears
this very distinct testimony upon this subject. " For it
became Him who created them to set them in order ; and
if He did so, it is unphilosophical to seek for any other
origin of the world, or to pretend that it might arise out of
a chaos by the mere laws of nature ; though being once
formed, it may continue by these laws for many ages." I
am myself more struck with the adaptation of independent
beings to one another, than with the relations of the parts
of any one animal to the whole. Take the instances suggested
by Paleyh; "Can it be doubted whether the wings of
birds bear a relation to air, and the fins of fishes to water ?
The organs of voice and respiration are indebted for the
success of their operation to the peculiar qualities of the
fluid in which the animal is immersed. And the element of
light and the organ of vision, however related in their
office and use, have no connexion whatever in their origin.
The animal eye does not emit light, and the sun might
shine for ever on other parts of the body without the
smallest approach towards producing the sense of sight.
Thus the sheep is evidently made for the clothing and food of
b Introduction. h Natural Theology, 17.

LECTURE I.

man, but it could not exist unless the earth had been
covered with herbage ; and He, whose tender mercies are over
all his works, has contrived this not only for the existence
but for the pleasurable life both of sheep and man. At the
termination of each day's creation it is said, God saw what
He had made, and it was good; but when the whole was com-
pleted, God pronounced it very good. And by this I under-
stand, that plants, fish, birds and beasts, and man, the
crowning work of creation, were all good in themselves ;
but that when the Creator viewed the creation as a whole,
and the bearing of one part upon the rest, He then pro-
nounced it to be very good.

This argument is as inexhaustible as creation, of which
every object is a wonder, and proclaims the incomprehensible
power, wisdom, and goodness of the Creator. Every star in
heaven, every beast upon earth, every plant, some in a
language very loud and express, others in a strain more
still and low, (yet sufficiently audible to an attentive ear,)
proclaim these glorious properties of God. There is neither
speech nor language, but their voices are heard among them;
their sound is gone out into all lands, and their words to the
ends of the world\

No man hath seen God at any time) ; his existence, there-
fore, is not known, but believed ; and this is the grand
obstacle to belief, but it is only an obstacle because we do
not form a proper estimate of our faculties. The Deity
is not the object of any of our senses, but even in this
world some animals possess senses of wThich others are
destitute; and a higher order of rational beings than our-
selves may have the capability of perceiving the presence of
spirits. The irrational powers of nature are known to us
only by their energies; thus gravitation, though pene-
trating all bodies, and exerting its influence every where, is
not cognizable by the senses, and is only known to exist
from its effects. It ought not, therefore, to surprise us,
that we cannot see the Divine Nature ; but we may be sure
that He is not the soul of the universe, or any portion of
it ; for organized substances include marks of contrivance,
' Natural Theology, 28. Fs. xix. 3, 4. i John i. 18.

LECTURE I.

but whatever shows contrivance carries us to something
beyond itself, as the contriver must have existed before
the contrivance. After all the schisms and struggles of a
reluctant philosophy, the necessary resort is to a Deity. The
marks of design are too strong to be got over. Design must
have had a designer. That designer must have been a person.
That person is God. But our feelings seem to reproach us
with endeavouring to ascertain by a process of reasoning,
what the heart admits at once as a self-evident proposition,
the existence of that great First Cause, in whom we live and
move and have our being; and indeed the conviction,
that we do not live " in a fatherless world," but under
the providential care of a benevolent God, which can alone
sustain us in the hour of affliction, once received, cannot
be renounced by the human mind, till it is blinded by
pride, hardened by corruption or discontent, or misled by
sophistry. Practical Atheists are too common, but specu-
lative rejection of this fundamental truth ever has been,
and we may venture to say ever will be, exceedingly rare.

The Psalmist k tells us, that it is the fool who says that
there is no God; and the world without us, and perhaps
our own mind, still more powerfully proclaims his existence.
M Therefore," says Bacon, " there was never miracle wrought
to convert an atheist, because the light of nature might have
led him to confess a God ; but miracles have been wrought
to convert the idolatrous and superstitious, because no light
of nature extendeth to declare the will of God. His works do
show the omnipotence and wisdom of the Maker, but not his
image1." This train of thought seems to have been antici-
pated in the nineteenth Psalm, where after pointing to the
heavens as declaring the glory of God, the Psalmist sends us
to the brighter revelation of the Law as alone capable of
converting the soul. The Scriptures accordingly, though
abounding in the grandest descriptions of the attributes of
the Holy One that inhabiteth eternity, never condescend to
argue his existence. This is in part to be ascribed to the
circumstances under which they were composed. A Mis-
sionary to the heathen may, like Paul at Lystra and Athens,
v Ps. jriv. 1. 1 Advancement of Learning, b. ii.

E 2

LECTURE U

find it necessary to commence with this elementary truth ;
for it is a knowledge that ignorance may lose, and false
philosophy may explode ; but the Israelites had been
favoured with a visible manifestation of the Deity, and had
been accustomed to a series of miraculous interferences,
before Moses committed their history and the Law to
writing. It would have been superfluous to have announced
the existence of the Deity to a people who had heard his
voice, and been delivered from their enemies by his out-
stretched arm, and maintained in the wilderness by his
special Providence.

The descendants of Noah, however far they might wander,
would carry with them a traditionary knowledge of the
existence of God ; and it would be more correct to say that
this truth was discoverable, than that it had been discovered
by reason : for man, even in the original unimpaired perfection
of his intellectual and moral powers, was not left to ascer-
tain this truth either by the a priori or by the a posteriori
method. His Creator revealed Himself to him at his creation,
and made known his will ; and even after his disobedience,
continued his intercourse with him. God was pleased to
renew his covenant with Noah, who may be regarded as the
second parent of the human race; and such was the longevity
of man, even after his age had been shortened at the deluge,
that Shem was contemporary with Abraham, and might
communicate to the men of that generation the traditionary
knowledge of the Antediluvians. Truth, notwithstanding,
was soon intermixed with error ; the heavenly bodies and
deceased benefactors were gradually introduced to share
the worship due to the Creator alone, till they engrossed
the devotion of the nations ; and the only real God would
have been forgotten, had He not called Abraham out of a
land of idolaters, to make him the parent of a people who
were to be separated from the rest, in order to keep up in
the world a belief in this fundamental truth. It was
Polytheism, not Atheism, that was the error of ancient
times; "for there was no nation," says Cicero"1, " so barba-
rous as not to acknowledge God ; the idea is born with and

De Natura, ii. 4.

LECTURE I.

as it were engraved on the minds of all, that there are gods;
their existence none denies, but they differ much as to
what they are ;" and from a superstitious fear of offending
any by neglect, they seem to have been continually increas-
ing their number. It was in a later age that the absurdities
of the popular belief and the vicious character of their deities,
disgusted thinking men, and drove them into the opposite
extreme of renouncing all religion as the invention of inte-
rested priests.

Paley11 affirms, that the argument for the Divine Unity
goes no farther than to an unity of counsel ; yet his own
remarks upon the uniformity of plan observable in the
universe, seem to compel us to refer the whole to one
simple, indivisible, eternal, unlimited cause, and he ends with
saying, "One Being has been concerned in all." One Being,
possessed of all the attributes which we ascribe to Deity,
is sufficient to produce and regulate the effects which we
behold, and to advance what it is unnecessary to admit, is
contrary to the rules of philosophizing. Self-existence and
infinity exclude the supposition of plurality. If another
could partake of them, the first would be deficient and
limited. Two such beings of different nature could not
coexist, being equal and every where ; meeting they would
destroy each other; if of the same, their existence would
coincide, that is, they would be but one0. Let it be con-
sidered also, that the unity of the Supreme Being is even
admitted by Polytheists. We may therefore conclude, that
it is a doctrine congenial to the human mind, since those
who maintained a plurality of Gods, agreed in their sub-
ordination to one, the King and Father of them all. "So
speak," I quote Maximus TyriusD, "the Greek and the
Barbarian, the islander and the inhabitant of the continent,
the wise and the unwise:" and Tertulliani writes, "The
greater part of mankind, even when idolatry obscured the
sense of the Divine Sovereignty, appropriated the name of
God more especially to One, being accustomed to say, if
God grant, and, I commend it to God." Thus Jupiter is

n Natural Theology, 25. • Wollaston's Religion of Nature, v. vii.

I Diss. i. q Apol. adv. Gentes.

LECTURE I.

called continually by Homer, the Father of gods and men.
Plato refers the creation to one Being, whom he calls the
Father and Maker of the universe : and Aristotle and the
Stoics usually mention God in the singular number. Seneca
says, " As often as you please you may variously name the
Author of things; there may be as many appellations of Him
as He has offices and operations : our people fancy Him to
be Bacchus, and Hercules, and Mercury ; they call Him also
Nature, Fate, Fortune : all these are but names of the same
God, variously using his power1." These philosophers seem
to waver between Theism and Polytheism ; but though they
deify the powers of Nature, and raise his creatures to be
the companions of the Creator, the existence of one Supreme
Being, which is all I contend for, seems to have been generally
allowed.

The existence of the Deity involves a proper eternity,
that is, that He never began and never will cease to be ; for
since He never depended upon another, He cannot be anni-
hilated; as He cannot but love Himself as the best and chiefest
good, He cannot give up his being. There is nothing in
his nature that can introduce decay, there is nothing beyond
that can control or affect one whose power and wisdom are
infinite. The question which Zophar put to Jobs carries
with it its own proof ; Canst thou by searching find out
God ? canst thou find out the Almighty to perfection ? The
only notion we can form of this awful Being, however
inadequate, is by ascribing to Him all perfection, and ab-
stracting from Him all imperfection ; for as the first cause
He must not only include in Himself all the excellence He
hath communicated, but every perfection possible in itself
will be actually in Him*. Thus, when we say that He is
a substance, having no proper denomination for his essence,
we separate our idea of Him from matter, and conceive of
Him as a pure and simple Spirit; when we attribute activity
to Him, we view Him as an indefatigable agent, exempt
from the labour, pains, and care which it occasions to other
beings ; and when we ascribe to Him knowledge, we must

r Do Benef. iv. 7. * Job xi. 7.

1 Scott's Christian Life, ii. vol. i.

LECTURE I.

exclude the reasoning by which inferior intellects arrive at
conclusions from his infinite mind, which intuitively beholds
at once premises and conclusions, and all things and events,
past, present, and future. Above all, we must be careful
that no moral imperfection should connect itself with our
conception of this all-perfect Being, and we must endeavour
to comprehend his excellence, not in parts, but as a whole ;
for his attributes are, correctly speaking, though exerting
themselves in different ways, and admitting accordingly of
different names, but one simple principle of action, whose
acts of wisdom are infinitely good, whose acts of goodness
are infinitely wise. We have found it necessary to refer to
general consent, and to the evidence afforded by ourselves
and the world we live in, for the proof of the existence of
the Deity; for to appeal to the Word of God would be of no
avail to those who question his existence. We must first
satisfy them, that God is, and that He is a diligent rewarder of
them that seek Himu. Instead therefore of disparaging, as
some are prone to do, the deductions of our unassisted reason,
I would say with the pious philosopher Boyle, that natural
religion is the stock upon which Christianity must be en-
grafted. But when it is conceded that He not only exists,
but has made a revelation of his will, and that the Bible is
that revelation, then we open that volume for a brighter
manifestation of this glorious and gracious Being, whom
reason can but dimly discern ; and not only obtain more
distinct views of the attributes which the light of nature
discovers, but others also which more nearly concerns
us, justice, holiness, mercy, which it can scarcely even
conjecture.

These attributes divide into two classes. 1. Those peculiar
to Him, as immutability and omnipresence ; and, 2. those,
such as wisdom and benevolence, which are in a degree
communicable to man. We may then well act upon the
striking prayer of the great author of the inductive phi-
losophy ; " Thy creatures have been my books, but thy
Scriptures much more : I have sought Thee in the courts,
fields, and gardens, but I have found Thee in thy temples."
u Heb. xi. 6.

5(5

LECTURE I.

The title of the Article shows, that its main object is to
affirm the doctrine of the Trinity; and this explains why
the statement of the Divine character is so incomplete ; for,
unlike the Helvetic Confession, which describes God as
" merciful, just, and true," and that of Westminster, which
more largely supplies the deficiency, it names no other moral
attribute than goodness; yet holiness is one that the Deity
continually claims for Himself, and the atonement was
required to preserve his justice unimpaired, that He might
be just, and the justifier of him who believeth in Jesus*.
Like many other of our Articles, it closely resembles
that in the Confession of Augsburg, but it omits the
explanation of the term Person, which might have put an
end to some verbal disputation, and the condemnation of
the heretics that deny the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity.

It affirms, that there is one true and living God, one as
opposed to many, true as opposed to false ones ; living as
opposed to idols, the work of men's hands, who have mouths
but speak not? ; and not only Himself living, but the Author
of life, in whom all live7-.

Without body. Bodies are visible, and may be touched, but
the invisible Deity is imperceptible ; and He must be distinct
from matter, which is not Himself, nor an emanation from
Him, but his work; for if he were material and omnipresent,
there could be no motion, and He must be liable to change,
a supposition inconsistent with his necessary and immutable
existence ; and to suffering, incompatible both with his power
and happiness. If material, He would be limited as to place,
and affected by external causes. Whatever arguments are
advanced against the materiality of the human soul, applies
more forcibly against that of the Deity. God, says He, who
alone perfectly knows Him, and came forth from Him, is
a Spirit ; and the wisest of the Heathen were led by their
reasoning to this truth. "God," says Plutarch, "is an
abstract Being, pure from all matter, and distinguished from
whatever is capable of suffering :" and according to Cicero,
we can only conceive of Him as " of a pure mind entirely
free from mortal mixture."

* Rom. iii. 26. > Ps. cxv. 5. * Acts xvii. 28.

LECTURE I.

Without parts, the necessary consequence of his imma-
teriality. Without passions, which would be incompatible
with his perfection. Both parts and passions, however, are
continually ascribed to God in the Bible, but this arises
from the necessary imperfection of language. Words, from
the nature of the case, primarily denote objects which fall
under the cognizance of the senses, and the operations
effected by them or on them. When we wish to speak of
our mind and our reasonings, and feelings, and of God, and
of the spiritual world, we can only make ourselves intelli-
gible, while we are in the body, by transferring the words in
a figure from matter. Thus, eyes in every place beholding
the evil and the good*, represent God's omniscience and pro-
vidence ; and a mightyh hand and a stretched out armc, are such
significant symbols of irresistible power, that they do not
mislead the least cultivated understanding. All perceive
that they are used in accommodation to our capacity, espe-
cially as it is declared in other passages of Scripture, that
God is a Spirit6-, whom no man hath seen or can seee / and
Moses f emphatically reminded the Israelites, that they had
seen no similitude of the Lord, to whom nothing in
heaven or earth can be likened, when He spake unto them
out of the midst of the fire. So also of the passions,
when the Bible ascribes to Him anger and repentance,
they are to be understood not to indicate such perturb-
ations as are incompatible with his perfection, but to
mark out in a manner intelligible to us, the conduct which
in man would be the result of these passions. To prevent
the taking such phrases in a literal sense, there are contra-
dictory texts. Thus, the Lord repented that He had made
mans, is corrected by, God is not a son of man that He should
repenth: I am the Lord, I change not1; and, ivith God there is
no variableness or shadow of turning*-. When we say that God
is without passions, we must beware of falling into the error
of heathen philosophers, who universally maintained, that
the gods neither will or can hurt any one, as what is

a Prov. xiv. 3. b Exodus xxii. 11. « Dent. iv. 34. d John iv. 24.
■ 1 Tim. vi. 10. f Deut. iv. 12. * Gen. vi. (5. h Numb, xxiii. 10.
' Mai. iii. 6. k James i. 17. ,

LECTURE I.

capable of hurting is capable of being hurt. Thus Tully in
the Offices1, speaking of the oath of Regulus, considers that it
ought to have been kept out of respect to justice and fidelity,
but not out of fear or anger of the gods, for there is no such
thing. This pernicious error, which destroys the moral cha-
racter of the Deity, led Lactantius to write on the wrath of
God, and drove him into the opposite extreme, so difficult is
it to preserve the mean on such topics. We should always
recollect, that it is metaphorically, and as it were by anthro-
popathy, that anger and its contrary are predicated of the
immutable Divinity ; for there are no sudden and violent
perturbations in Him, as in man, rising and falling as occa-
sion serves, but fixed, tranquil, and eternal inclinations of the
will, according to the different nature of things, either
contrary or agreeable to it. There are in man some habitual
and perpetual affections, as love and hatred ; much more
hath the eternal will of God eternal affections, while it
moves itself to objects without alteration, impression, or
passion ; so God hates evil and loves good, both in the
abstract and universal idea, and also in the concrete or
particular, as far as it agrees with the general. The Latin
term Impassibilis, translated without passions, is to be taken
also passively, meaning that God is not acted upon, is not
capable of sustaining pain or injury. Those who confound
the Persons of the Father and the Son are called Patri-
passionists, because they make the Father to suffer; and
when we speak of the Son's sufferings, we must restrict them
to his human nature.

Of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness, means what the
etymology of the epithet teaches, that we can set no limits
to these attributes. The arguments that prove the existence
of God, prove these qualities, which are inherent in his
nature; and the Scriptures, especially Job and the Prophets,
who delight in contrasting his majesty with the vanities
and abominations of the Heathen, as they justly called
their Gods, abound in magnificent declarations of his power,
wisdom, and goodness. But from Omnipotence we must
exclude the power of doing what would imply a physical or
> De Offic. iii. 28.

LECTURE I.

mora] contradiction. Even God cannot recall the past, or
cause a thing to be in more places than one at the same time.
He cannot lie, make wrong right, or falsehood truth. Creation
and Providence proclaim to all, who do not wilfully shut their
eyes that they may not see, the wisdom and goodness of
God: and our perception of these will ever become more
distinct and influential, in proportion as we study his works
and his ways. Goodness is a comprehensive term, including
many particulars. " The inexhaustible fountain of Divine
beneficence, as it terminates upon different objects, is dis-
tinguished by different names. When it confers happiness
without merit, it is grace ; when against merit, it is mercy ;
when conferred according to promise, it is truth ; when it
commiserates the distressed, it is pity ; when it supplies the
indigent, bounty ; when it succours the innocent, righteous-
ness ; when it pardons the penitent, forgiveness ; when it
bears with the criminal, patience or long-suffering™."

This wise, and benevolent, and mighty Being is declared
to be the Maker and Preserver of all things. Creation, in
the proper meaning of the term, that is, to use Scripture
language, the making of things seen out of things that do not
appear*, was a stumblingblock to the ancient philosophers.
That nothing could proceed from nothing, was with them an
established maxim ; and they therefore, probably without
exception, fell into one of two errors, derogatory from the
honour of God. They either maintained, that matter was
eternal, not made, only brought into shape and form by
God, who like a workman does not make, but uses
materials existing; the former being, according to Cicero0,
an absurdity, that had never been affirmed by any phi-
losopher who had studied nature; or that the world itself
was an animated being, " whose body nature is, and God the
soul," as it is expressed by our poet, who thus advocates, we
hope unknowingly, Pantheism, or the Deification of all things;
which though in his beautiful Essay on Man, and in many
ancient writings bearing the semblance of a sublime Deism,
is no better than Atheism. " Jupiter est quodcunque vides
quocumque moveris," is the sentiment which the Stoic Lucan
m Charnock on the Attributes of God. n Heb. xi. 3. 0 Timseo.

LECTURE I.

puts into the mouth of Cato ; and it is revealed to Eneas by the
shade of his father; but the inward spirit of Virgil, which
feeds the heaven and earth, the moon and stars, and the mind
that agitates the mass, differs but in name from the secret
unknown power of the atheist Lucretius. According to
this scheme, the soul of man is no better than that of the
brutes, not created, but emanating from the soul of the
world, being therefore a particle of Divinity detached from
it to be united to a body, and to be absorbed into it at
death but without consciousness ; just as the contents of a
bottle floating on the sea, on its fracture mix again with the
waves. Such an immortality is but nominal ; but the Bible
teaches us, that God breathed into man the breath of life;
and that after death it will again animate the body, and
ever retain an independent existence either in happiness or
misery.

It is a melancholy reflection, that Buddhaism, the religion
of Ceylon and Tartary, and professed by a large proportion
of the Chinese, which reckons more adherents than its success-
ful rival Brahminism or Mahometanism, is no better than
Atheism, under a specious disguise. How much more melan-
choly, that Pantheism, which is in spirit the same, should have
fascinated so many of the philosophical literati of Germany,
and that such visible darkness should be preferred by men,
who boast of their intellect, as superior to the bright and
warming beams of evangelical light. One cannot but fear
that these vain writers, who, while they are the slaves of
their own imagination, despise the truth which would guide
them into peace, and usefulness, and sobriety of judgment,
must have been given over to a reprobate mind.

This Pantheism was generally received among the Pagan
philosophers; and Lactantius justly says, that under the
name of Nature they comprehended things entirely different
from one another ; God and the world, the workman and his
workmanship ; and say that the one can do nothing without
the other ; as if nature were God and the world mixed
together; for sometimes they so confounded them, as to
make God to be the soul of the world, and the world to be
his body. This gave occasion to those extravagant flights

LECTURE I.

of the Stoics, as being themselves a portion of the Deity ;
and even after Christianity had shed its light upon this
thick darkness, the philosophers abused this doctrine to the
justification of Polytheism, as worshipping the several parts
of the world, not as being themselves so many gods, but as
making up one God in the whole, which yet might be wor-
shipped in its several parts. That vaunting sage Marcus Anto-
ninusp, who despised the Christians, actually addresses pra)rer to
the world ; and so much was the heathen possessed with the
notion, that Strabo supposes, because the Jews had no images,
and in prayer lifted up their hands and eyes to heaven, that
Moses affirmed the universe which contains us all to be God.
(xvi.) Galen, however, a much later writer, knew better,
for he acknowledges, that the opinion of Moses, who ascribed
the production of all things to God, is far more agreeable
to reason than that of Epicurus, who attributed it to a
fortuitous concussion of atoms; yet even he asserts the
preexistence of matter, and that the power of God could
not extend itself beyond the capacity of matter which it
wrought upon.

The Bible opens with a declaration, that in the beginning God
created the heavens and the earth; and the peasant who reads
and believes this, is wiser than all the sages of antiquity. The
fact is repeatedly announced or implied in the sacred volume,
and is urged as an argument against idolatry, as a ground
of confidence, and as a reason for prayer and adoration ; for
He who is our Maker can dispose of what He has made as
seemeth Him best. Thus, Tell it out among the heathen
that Jehovah is King, and that it is He who hath made the
round world so fast that it cannot be moved\ For among
the gods who is like unto Thee, 0 Lord, neither are there any
works like unto Thy works. Happy is he, whose hope is in the
Lord his God, who made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that
therein isT. The sea is His, and He made it, and His hands
formed the dry land, O come, let us bow down, and worship*.

p iv. 23. On Pantheism and the whole of the religion of the Greeks and
Romans ; much valuable instruction may be found in Dr. Leland's Advantage
and Necesssity of the Christian Revelation.

i Ps. xcvi. 10. r ps. xxviii. 8. » Ps. xcv. 5.

LECTURE I.

The Gnostic heretics, however, were deeply imbued with the
oriental notion of the inherent evil of matter, and therefore
independently of the objection of the philosophers to a proper
creation, they could not reconcile with their prepossessions
the idea of its even being brought into form by a benevolent
Being. Their various sects differed among themselves as to
the agent, some ascribing the creation to an aeon, or ema-
nation of God, of higher or lower rank, and others even to the
evil principle, whom they acknowledged as an independent
self-existing being. This system, which has obtained much
celebrity under the name of Manicheism, was borrowed by
Manes from the Persian Theology, which thus endeavoured
to account for the origin of evil, and vindicated the goodness
of God at the expense of Ylis power ; but God Himself long
before, in refutation of this error, had said by the mouth of
Isaiah to Cyrus, the future sovereign of that country,
/ am the Lord, and there is none else : I form the light, and
create darkness; I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do
all these things*. It was expedient, therefore, since even
some who professed themselves Christians denied this tenet,
to make it an Article of the Creed ; and that nothing might be
excluded, the words" all things visible and invisible" are added
in that of Nice. Moses in his description of the creation,
does not mention the angels, but the Psalmist calls them
the ministers of Jehovah, that do his pleasure*. St. Paul
expressly declares1, that by Christ (without whom we know
from St. Johny, that not a single thing was made) were all
things created, visible and invisible, thrones and dominions,
principalities and powers. And the opening of the epistle
to the Hebrews contrasts the dignity of the Son with the
inferiority of angels as creatures. The preservation of all
things naturally follows their creation, and is a prominent
doctrine of the Scriptures. Thus in the passages just cited,
it is added, by Him all things consist; and, upholding all
things by the word of his power. Still there are many who
while they allow a general reject a particular Providence ;
yet how can it be inculcated in stronger terms than by our
Lord, not az sparrow falleth to the ground without your Father :
1 Isa. xlv. 6. u Psalm ciii. 21. x Col. i. 16. y John i. 3. 1 Matt. x. 29—31.

LECTURE I.

ye are of more value than many sparrows : even the very
hairs of your head are all numbered. Reason teaches, that
what God hath brought out of nothing, can only be pre-
served in existence by the same Omnipotence that produced
it; and it is impossible to conceive how the care of the
whole is compatible with overlooking the individuals of
which that whole consists ; or how the greater events of our
lives can have been directed by Providence, if it extends
not to those apparent trifles which often originate the
former. The notion that such a minute superintendence
is beneath the dignity of God, only betrays the con-
tracted mind of him who makes the observation. Perfect
goodness will care for whatever it creates ; omnipotence
will not find the government of the universe and of all
that it contains difficult or oppressive.

How powerfully the speculations of philosophers on this
subject have been influenced by prejudices suggested by the
analogy of human nature, appears from various passages,
in Pagan and even Christian authors. In the Treatise
concerning the world ascribed to Aristotle, but written
according to Dr. Parr after the Christian sera, we read, that
"if it were not suitable to the majesty of Xerxes, the great
king, to condescend to do the meanest offices himself, much
less can this be imagined in respect of God." Pliny*, who
seems to have been acquainted with the whole of Greek
philosophy, regards the notion of the Supreme Being
interfering in human affairs as ridiculous, considering that
He would be polluted by so sad and so diversified an
office : and Minucius Felix introduces a Roman lawyer
Caecilius as a type of the educated heathen of his day,
urging as an objection against Christians, that their
God, whom they could neither hear nor see, inspects
not only their actions and words, but even their thoughts ;
and that He is impertinently curious and busy, since He
interests Himself in all things, whereas He cannot attend to
every particular while employed about the whole, nor take
care of the whole while busied about particulars. Sim-
plicius, a commentator upon Aristotle, more wisely observes,
a Hist. Nat. ii. 7.

LECTURE it

that it cannot be beneath the dignity of the Deity to take
care of whatever he has condescended to make : and Platob, in
his Laws, says expressly, that providence extends to small
things as well as to great; justly remarking that He who
sees and knows all things, cannot be subject to negligence or
sloth, and that great things cannot be rightly taken care of
if small ones are neglected. He adds, that the more perfect
an artist becomes, the more will his skill be shewn in both :
and let us consider the Deity as not inferior to mortal
artists. The notions of the Epicureans concerning the
happiness of the Deity, which they thought could not fail
to be impaired by the incessant cares and unremitted ex-
ertions of a superintending Providence, plainly took their
rise from the same source. Plutarch blames Plato for his view
of the Providence of God, making him thereby a wrretched
being subjecting himself like a workman or a mechanic to
heavy burdens, and anxious cares in the composition and
government of the world0. A wiser philosophy teaches, that
the conservation as well as the creation of things is his
delight. Every active intellect even among us knows and
feels that it is a high enjoyment to exert its intelligent
capacity, it is the misery not happiness of a thinking being
to have nothing to do. We may therefore be satisfied, that
the Divine Mind, possessing such energies of omnipotence,
and having exerted them so multifariously as the universe
with its hosts of beings testify to us that He has done, can
never be inactive. Every individual of the human race has
been always living under the unceasing superintendence and
control of his Creator ; and let it be our ever comforting
recollection, that we are all partaking of that care, which
only becomes general because applied to every one of usd."
Judging from ourselves, we are apt to think this minute
superintendence if not impossible, wearisome and intolerable ;
and the notion gave birth to Materialism, to the mechanical
theories proposed by Descartes and Leibnitz, and to various
other schemes equally gratuitous. According to the first,
the phenomena of nature are the result of certain active
powers essentially inherent in matter, and the language of
b v. x. c Plauta i. 7. d Turner's Sacred History, vol. ii. p. 72.

LECTURE I.

the Newtonian Philosophy is somewhat apt to encourage in
superficial thinkers, prejudices which lead to Materialism ;
but it must not be forgotten, that Sir Isaac himself employed
the words attraction and gravitation, merely to express a
fact ; and that he was at pains to guard his readers against
that very misapprehension of his meaning, which has been
so often imputed to his Philosophy. According to Derham,
it hath pleased the Author of all things to imprint by his
fiat certain active powers on matter on its creation ; while
Cudworth supposes a plastic or formative nature, which he
defines as " a vital and spiritual, but unintelligent and
necessary agent created by the Deity for the execution of
his purposes." Dissatisfied with these theories, others have
revived the ancient hypothesis of mind, and supposed every
elementary particle of matter to be endued, not only with
a power of motion, but with intelligence. Even the devout
Boyle observes, " that as it more recommends the skill of an
engineer to contrive an elaborate engine, so that there need
nothing to reach his ends in it, but the contrivance of parts
void of understanding, that if it were necessary ever and
anon a discreet servant should be employed to concur
notably to the operations of this or that part ; so it more
sets off the wisdom of God in the fabric of the universe,
that He can make so vast a machine perform all these many
things which He designed it should, by the mere contrivance
of brute matter managed by certain laws of motion, and
upheld it by his ordinary and general concourse, than if he
employed from time to time a diligent overseer to regulate
and control the motions of the parts." "And this argument,"
says Lord Karnes, " is to me perfectly conclusive." Dugald
Stewart prefers the simple and sublime doctrine, which con-
ceives the order of the universe to be not only at first established,
but every moment maintained by the incessant agency of one
Supreme Mind ; a doctrine against which no objection can
be stated, but what is founded on prejudices resulting from
our own imperfections ; and he quotes from Clarke. " All
things that are done in the world are done either imme-
diately by God Himself, or by created intelligent beings.
Matter is evidently incapable of any laws or powers, so

LECTURE I.

that all the things which we commonly say are the effects
of the natural powers of matter and laws of motion, are
indeed (if we speak strictly and properly) the effects of God's
acting upon matter, continually and every moment, either
immediately or mediately, so that there is no such thing
as what we commonly call the course of nature." This
appears to be most consonant to Scripture, and is a
position which broadly stated no one, I presume, will
deny. But how this is effected is a great question. The
common sense view takes it literally, and here I believe
common sense and genuine philosophy will coincide.
But if the Deity be allowed not only to preserve, but to
govern his whole creation, moral and rational beings as well
as the material world and brutes, it matters little whether
we suppose He effects it immediately or by general laws,
having before provided for such exceptions from them
as He foreknew would be required. The great question
is, whether his Providence be general or particular. Cer-
tainly, the latter is strongly expressed in Scripture, and
confirmed I conceive by reason ; for how can the whole be
taken care of, and not the parts of which that whole consists?
nay, that whole itself is only a philosophical abstraction ;
individuals alone having a real existence. One use of the Bible,
consisting in great part of a narrative of events, is to teach from
authority the doctrine of a particular Providence. We cannot
doubt this in the life of Joseph, and we are not to suppose
that his history is an exception from the general rule.
The only difference is, that the Jewish annals apprise us
of God's designs, and hence we conjecture the same in
profane history. It may be beyond our capacity in all cases
to write confidently, but it is plain that many events,
sucli as the dispersing of the Spanish Armada, and the
discovery of the Gunpowder plot, were providential.
T specify the history of Joseph, because he lived before the
descendants of Abraham had been placed under their pe-
culiar economy: and it has had its counterpart in the history
of slaves in modern Egypt, who have risen to be its masters.

I have also selected it, because, extraordinary as it is, it is
not miraculous ; and the wonderful concatenation of events

LECTURE I.

to produce some great and unexpected result, has been ac-
knowledged even by those who had no belief in a first cause.
Thus Pliny remarks, that the most trifling facts have led to
the greatest consequences, mentioning as an instance, that it
was not the Roman battles, but Cato's showing African
figs to the senate, that occasioned the destruction of Car-
thage ; and thoughtful individuals, however insignificant
they may comparatively be, who meditate on the occurrences
of their own lives, must acknowledge, that an apparent
accident, such as turning down one street instead of another,
has been the first of a train of circumstances which have
given a colour to their future existence. The conclusion
of the whole matter will be found to be, that we must
see God in all things or in nothing ; for else, while we talk
of his Providence, we shall, as too many do, banish from
his own creation Him " in whom we live and move and
have our being."" The doctrine is unpopular, because it is
thought to be incompatible to the free agency of men. This
I believe can be shown to be an error, though I do not
deny the plausibility of the objection ; but we must submit
to be ignorant in this as in other high points of theology.
The believer in a particular Providence may be said to be
liable to become superstitious or enthusiastic ; he who
denies it, is exposed to the more serious danger of becoming
a practical atheist. It is clear that the reasonableness of
prayer depends upon this doctrine ; for unless we believe
that God can be moved to grant our petitions, they will
not extend beyond general terms, and whatever is not
specific will be cold, and what is cold will be ineffectual.

Dr. Price, an author whom none will charge with en-
thusiasm or superstition, refers us to the religion of nature,
as showing how it may be consistent with the laws imposed
upon matter and the liberty of man, by secret influences and
by other ways, so to direct all occurrences, that nothing
unsuitable to any case shall come to pass. And he adds,
that it is self-evident, that if there be one event of which all
the care is not taken that is right to be taken, the ad-
ministration of the world is so far defective. It follows
therefore, that no one who believes a perfect Deity can

f 2

LECTURE I.

deny a Providence, or doubt if it be particular. Towards
the close of his Dissertation, he observes, that the sove-
reign Arbiter of nature is in every breath we draw, and
in every thought wre think, and for the very reason that
He is every thing to us, he becomes nothing to us. His
power is really put forth as much in common as in
extraordinary events : but what happens out of the usual
course we are never backward to ascribe to Him, what
is done constantly wTe are readier to consider as coming to
pass of itself. My limits will not permit me to insert the
pious conclusions he draws from this consolatory and cheering
doctrine ; but I cannot resist adding, that he regards the
account which the Scriptures give of Divine Providence as an
argument for their heavenly origin, considering the whole
history they contain to be one uniform display of the divine
superintendence of human affairs. It is, he continues, a
remark as true as common, that whereas other histories
seldom go higher than the passions of men for the sources of
events, this always directs us to God as the guide and governor
of whatever happens e. And the Bible allowed to be God's
word, it furnishes in turn an argument for Providence,
especially in its numerous prophecies ; and as several, such
as the destruction of Babylon, and of the dispersion of the
Jews, are universally agreed to have been accomplished, we
must allow them to have been dictated by the Author of
Nature, who can employ moral agents without their know-
ledge in the fulfilment of his purposes, as the scourges or
deliverers of nations f.

" When we peruse the instructive page of history, we behold
empires successively rising and falling, and we adore the Pro-
vidence of Him who ruleth in the kingdoms of men ; and putteth
down one and setteth up another, ordering all things according
to the counsel of his own will. From the sacred Scriptures we
leari>what that will is, and how gracious an aspect it always
bears towards the servants of God. We see the most
untractable of persons unconsciously working together for
good to them who fear and worship the Creator and Governor

" Isaiah xiv. 7. Amos iii. 0. Psalm cxlviii. Prov. xvi. 33.
f Dissertation on Providence, p. li — 17. 171. Sec.

LECTURE I.

of the universe. We perceive the potentates of the earth
becoming subservient to the kingdom of the Messiah, and
carrying on the dispensations of mercy and judgment to-
wards his people, as their obedience from time to time leads
for the one, or their transgressions call for the other. The
fate of empires being interwoven with that of religion, it
pleased God to communicate to his servants, the prophets,
the secrets of his administration with regard to them. And
having done so in these cases, He thereby showeth us how
He acts in others, and enables us to form a competent
idea of our own situation and circumstances. It is therefore
no less curious than useful in reading history, to mark the
dispositions and characters of nations, and of the men who
are the instruments working under the direction of Pro-
vidence, for the fulfilment of its designs, without any
infringement of their free will g.

Divine Providence is a theme upon which a devout mind,
accustomed to trace up causes and events to the great first
cause, will delight to dwell ; but my limits forbid my
expatiating upon a doctrine so full of comfort, as I must
proceed to those that are more prominently brought forward
in these Articles. I will therefore dismiss the topic with a
fine passage from Bacon, in which the highest philosophy is
expressed in the language of poetry. " It is an assured
truth and a conclusion of experience, that a little or super-
ficial knowledge of philosophy may incline the mind to
atheism, but a further proceeding therein doth bring it back
again to religion ; for in the entrance of philosophy, when
the second causes, which are next to the senses, do offer
themselves to the mind, if it stay there, it may induce some
oblivion of the highest cause ; but when a man passeth on
further, and seeth the dependence of causes and the works of
Providence, then according to the allegory of the poets, he
will easily believe, that the highest link of nature's chain
must needs be tied to the feet of Jupiter's chair." The
self-existence and the governing power of the Supreme
Being is at once expressed in the Bible in the title so often
repeated, but I fear too seldom duly weighed, Jehovah
s Bishop Home's Discourses, xxxiii.

LECTURE I.

Sabaoth. The Septuagint translator renders the first '0*£lv,
the one who exists [that is, preeminently] ; and this St. John,
deeming it an inadequate rendering translates, 6 w xu) >jv xa» 6
egxapevog, meaning in the language of another inspired writer,
the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever. He is also the God
of Sabaoth, that is, of hosts or armies, not merely of heavenly
spirits, but of all his creatures marshalled or arranged in
order, and all but man, knowingly or by instinct, fulfilling
his behests.

Thus far, that is in the acknowledgment of one supreme
Creator and Governor of the world, the Deist will go along with
us. But this is a most imperfect view of the Divine Being,
for in his Unity there is a Trinity of Persons. We allow
that Revelation alone makes known to us the existence
and offices of the Son and the Holy Spirit; yet this we
consider as no presumption against the doctrine, for a
moment's reflection must convince us, that we who know
nothing of the essences of things, and do not comprehend even
our own compound nature, while we cannot deny its existence,
have no right to declare this doctrine to be impossible ; and
our incompetence to discern it is a reason why God should
please to declare it, if we at the same time bear in mind,
that it is not, as unbelievers misrepresent or misconceive, a
mere speculative knowledge for the information of the
understanding, but is one designed to promote our moral
improvement. Whoever attentively reads the Bible will
allow, that the object of it is the revelation of truth in order
to influence the conduct. It was necessary that we should
be informed of our fallen state, and of the plan of our
recovery from sin and punishment : but how could this
have been made known to us, or the obligations that flow
from it, without a revelation of the Trinity ? Remove this
doctrine, and how does Christianity differ from Deism ? It
would only differ by the attestation of the resurrection of
Jesus to a state of future rewards and punishments; and the
system of the modern Unitarian seems to be nothing more.
Christianity is a manifestation of the Three Divine Persons,
as engaged in the great work of man's redemption, in
their several relations of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,

LECTURE I.

Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier. If there be no Son of
God, where is our redemption ; if there be no Holy Spirit,
where is our sanctification ; and without both, where is
salvation ? The dereliction of this faith then would leave us
under the guilt of our sins and the curse of the Law.
The opposers of this doctrine in modem times have
assumed the appellation of Unitarians, as if the Trinitarians
denied the Unity of the Supreme Being ; but this we main-
tain as strongly as themselves. Reason teaches us this fun-
damental truth, which is j;>roclaimed in every part of the
Bible. The law of Moses, which separated the Jews from
the worship of the gods of the nations, asserts the unity in
the plainest terms. Our Saviour adopted this unity as the
principle of the first and great commandment ; and an
Apostle announces11, that there is one God and Father of
all, who is above all, and through all, and in all. There
cannot therefore be three Gods, but there must be a sense
in which these three Persons are one God. Our oppo-
nents seem to think that the doctrine is formed in an
arbitrary and presumptuous manner, by going beyond what
is revealed : but we in fact proceed as we should do in
solving any phenomenon of nature. Many texts at first
sight seem contradictory : some supposition is to be formed
which shall make them consistent, and the supposition
wrhich answers this end is to be received as truth. Class all
the expressions in Scripture relating to the Deity according
to the catholic doctrine, and they are interpreted in the
most natural manner, according to the soundest principles
of grammar and criticism, so as they would be interpreted
separately, taking each text with its context, if no par-
ticular end were in view. The force of this induction has
been felt in all ages. The earliest Christian writers, who
paid the same honours to the Son and to the Holy Ghost as
to the Father, declared their abhorrence of Polytheism, and
considered themselves as worshippers of the one true God.

The Divinity of the Father is questioned by no one ; I have
to treat on that of the Son and of the Spirit in the fol-
lowing Articles ; I have only at present then to consider

L Eph. iv. o.

LECTURE I.

the scriptural manner of putting them together. Dr. Clarke
has forty-eight texts, in which the three Persons are
mentioned together, and it appears that precedence is
sometimes given to the Son, or to the Spirit, as the
occasion may require, Of these the form of baptism is
the most decisive, for it is the solemn act of worship by
which converts were to renounce their false gods, and to be
initiated into the true faith. They could not therefore fail
to believe that Christ designed to teach them, that each of
these persons was God ; and it is worthy of notice, that he
uses not names but name ; the meaning of which seems to be,
that they are to be admitted into a religion, of which the
Trinity should be the characteristic doctrine. Since we are
baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Ghost, we acknowledge that "their Godhead is all one, their
glory equal, their majesty co-eternal," for it cannot be sup-
posed that God would suffer two creatures to be joined with
Him in so solemn an act, nor would the meek and lowly-
Jesus, if he had been no more than a man, have joined his
own name so familiarly to that of his Lord and Maker in so
solemn a commission. As it was given as the form by
which the apostles should baptize, it was undoubtedly in-
tended as the summary of the doctrine which they should
preach, and which their converts should profess. In
answer to this it has been pleaded, that in the Acts we
read of persons baptized only in the name of Jesus; but
we maintain, that this Trinitarian formula is implied where i
St. Paul asks the Ephesians, Have ye received the Holy Ghost
since you believed? for when they answered, We have not so
much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost, he imme-
diately replies, Unto what then were you baptized? Their
first baptism, that of John, he declares to be insufficient, by
baptizing them again in the name of the Lord Jesus. We
cannot suppose, that by omitting the name of the Holy
Spirit in this new baptism, that great defect in their previous
faith, which this very baptism was intended to remove, should
be still permitted to remain. We may therefore conclude,
that the entire form of baptism prescribed by our Lord was
1 Acts xix. 2 — 5.

LECTURE I.

here observed, though it is only thus briefly noticed. In
truth, if we were at this day speaking of the reception
of a heathen into the Church, we should express it by
saying he was baptized in the name of Christ, without
thereby implying that the names of the Father and the
Holy Ghost were omitted at the administration of this
sacrament. The narrative of the devout Cornelius and his
friends thus concludes, While Pete?' yet spake, the Holy
Ghost fell on all them which heard the word, and they spake
with tongues, and magnified God. Can it be supposed that
in this baptism the name of that Holy Ghost should be
omitted, whose gifts were at that instant poured out on the
converts ; or the name of the Father, whom the influence of
that Spirit impelled them to magnify ? It is obvious then,
that to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus is merely
an abridged formula, taken from its chief characteristic ; for
in the case of Cornelius and the Eunuch, they had already
acknowledged the Father. And in the account of our Lord's
own baptism, there was a manifestation to the senses of the
three, the Holy Spirit visibly descending, the Son coming
up from the water, and the Father who is not visible was
yet distinctly heard, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in
whom I am well pleased^. The blessing with which our
Morning and Evening Service concludes, being that of an
inspired Apostle1, is scarcely less decisive, for it cannot be a
prayer to God, a man and attribute, as it must be on the
Socinian hypothesis. Other passages may be cited, in which
the three Persons are mentioned together.

Through Him (Christ) we both have access by one Spirit unto
the Father. Eph. ii. 18.

The Lord (Holy Ghost) direct your hearts into the love of
God, and into the patient waiting for Christ. 2 Thess. iii. 5.

Christ through the eternal Spirit offered Himself to God.
Heb. ix. 14.

Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father
through the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood
of Jesus Christ. 1 Pet. i. 2.

There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit; there
k Matt. iii. 16. Luke iii. 21. ' 2 Cor. xiii. 11.

LECTURE I.

are differences of administrations ; but the same Lord; and
there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God.
1 Cor. xii. 4 — 6.

Now God Himself, even our Father, and our Lord Jesus
Christ, direct our way unto you, and the Lord (the Holy
Ghost) make you to increase and abound in love one towards
another. 1 Thess. iii. 11, 12.

In the Old Testament, the references are less numerous
and more obscure. I specify the plural noun for God,
Elohim, in construction with the verb in the singular, and
still more the consultation, Let us make man, which is not
likely to have been said to Angels. Nor is it satisfactorily
explained by the European use of the plural by kings, which
has never been proved to have been customary in ancient
times, and does not occur in the Bible.

I cite a passage from Isaiah, xlviii. 16. / have not spoken
in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was
there am I : and now the Lord God and his Spirit hath sent
me. And I conclude with the triple benediction appointed
for the priests, Numbers vi. 24 — 26. The Lord bless thee and
keep thee, the Lord make His face shine upon thee, and be
gracious unto thee, the Lord lift up His countenance upon
thee, and give thee peace.

Divine teaching is ascribed to all the Persons of the
Godhead.

John vi. 45. They shall be all taught of God.
Gal. i. 12. Neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of
Jesus Christ.

John xiv. 26. He (the Holy Ghost) shall teach you all
things.

The divine law is the law of the Trinity.

Rom. vii. 25. The law of God.

Gal. vi. 2. The law of Christ.

Rom. viii. 2. The law of the Spirit of life.
Sin is an olfence against the Trinity.

Deut. vi. 16. Ye shall not tempt the Lord your God.

1 Cor. x. 9. Neither let us tempt Christ.

Acts v. 9. Ye have agreed to tempt the Spirit of the
Lord.

LECTURE I.

The three Persons have fellowship with the faithful.

1 John i. S. Our fellowship is with the Father, and with his

Son Jesus Christ.

2 Cor. xiii. 14. The fellowship of the Holy Ghost.
And they are spiritually present in the souls of believers.

1 Cor. xiv. 25. God is in you.

2 Cor. xiii. 5. Jesus Christ is in you.

John xiv. 17. He (the Spirit of truth) dwelleth with you
and shall be in you.

It is a frequent cavil, that the term Triad, or Trinity, was
introduced into theology from the Platonic philosophy by
Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, in the second century. But
this is a frivolous objection, since if Scripture contains the
doctrine, it is convenient to be able to express it not by a
circumlocution, but by a single word. Hypostasis indeed,
which our version renders person™, is scriptural; but the re-
mark applies to many other of these consecrated terms ; and
Triad must have soon become familiar, for it was used
in the successive disputes about the doctrine by Praxeas,
Noetus, and Sabellius, and is ridiculed by the heathen
author of Philopatris". Metaphysics were not called in to
guard the faith, till heretics had shown the way, and forced
the orthodox to encounter them with their own weapons.
We find, according to Justin Martyr, Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost not nominally, but really distinct. Yet the
distinction was not marked by person, 7rg6(roo7rov, nor the
union by moaraa-is, which soon acquired the meaning of
substance. Sabellius took the former in its theatrical
sense, and sheltered under it his heresy. After a lapse

m Heb. i. 3. Exj)ress image of his person.

° This tract, which is very interesting from its description of St. Taul, in
which a resemblance to the Socrates of Aristophanes is insinuated, is pub-
lished among the works of Lucian, but is now supposed to be of later date.
To the question, By whom shall I swear ? it is answered,

'Ti|/i/xe5ovTa Qebv fxzyav, &jx^poTOV ovpaviu>va,

Tlbv Tlarpbs, Hvzvfxa e/c Tlarpbs eK.Tropzv6iJ.zvov,

*Ev 4k Tpiwv teal e| evos rpla.

Immortal, heavenly, great, wide-ruling God,

Son of the Father, Spirit from the Father proceeding,

One fiom three and three from one,

These regard as Jove, these take for God.

LECTURE I.

of centuries, this sophistry was revived in the Roman
Church by Laurentius Valla, who applied it to the
Latin persona, and by Servetus, who was burnt alive
chiefly as an anti-Trinitarian at Geneva, 1553, whose death
has in modern times drawn a veil over the memory of
Calvin, though few of his contemporaries did not approve
of his conduct on that occasion. The fanatic Servetus,
writes Melancthon, plays upon the equivocal sense of this
word, maintaining that anciently it signified no more than
the distinction of an office ; as speaking of an actor we say,
Rescius supports the person, sometimes of Achilles, some-
times of Ulysses ; and in like manner Cicero says, I sustain
three persons [parts], that is, of myself, my opponent, and
my judge. But, continues Melancthon, let us avoid and
execrate these impious evasions, and let us know that the
language of the Church is different, which defines a person
to be an intelligent and incommunicable individual sub-
stance. It was thought necessary by the framers of the
Augsburg Confession, of which he was the chief, to define
person as used by ecclesiastical writers, to signify neither
part nor quality, but that which has a proper subsistence.
Sabellius's abuse of the term 7T£ocra>7rov, that is, person, in-
duced the orthodox to substitute for it hypostasis, which
it was determined in a Synod at Alexandria, where Athanasius
presided, might be taken indifferently for person or sub-
stance, so long as they agreed in the common faith. Even
homoousion, of the same substance, says Waterland, might
have been spared, at least out of the Creed, had not a frau-
dulent abuse of good words endangered the Catholic faith
under Catholic language.

A doctrine so clearly revealed in the holy Scriptures,
cannot consistently be rejected by any who bow to their
authority. Accordingly we find, that with the exception
of a party exceedingly small, both in ancient and modern
times, and which in our days is more distinguished by in-
tellectual attainments than by piety, this doctrine, as Bishop
Burnet observes, " has been universally received over the
whole Christian Church, long before there was either a
Christian Prince to support it by his authority, or a Council

LECTURE I.

to establish it by consent." In fact, he might have said,
from the preaching of the Apostles. Heresies we know
sprung up even in their time, but the disputes that harassed
the primitive Church arose not from a denial of this great
truth, but from injudicious endeavours to explain it. The
nature of the Son and the Holy Spirit were the subjects
in debate in the first four General Councils, but their
divinity was then acknowledged by all. The modern Uni-
tarians however assume, that the doctrine is contradictory,
consequently incredible; they therefore maintain, that all the
passages that seem to declare it are mistranslated or misinter-
preted. This is not the place to enter upon a critical
discussion of texts ; but I will only state what no one,
looking into the so called " new and improved version,"
published under their patronage, can doubt that it is so
forced and unnatural, that it is more reasonable, allowing
their assertion to be true, to deny the authority of the New
Testament, than to question the received translation which
believers and infidels allow to be correct. Their assertion,
however, we do not allow ; for it proceeds upon a fallacy.
They say we confess that God is both three and one; we reply,
that we use the words in two senses, three in person one in
essence; the charge of contradiction therefore falls to the
ground. It is a just remark, that there is an essential differ-
ence between a tenet being above reason, and contrary to it,
and that it may be the former without being the latter. We
may go a step further, and affirm, that the very fact of its
being the former precludes the possibility of proving it
to be the latter ; for unless we comprehend in part
the subject, on what principle can we make out that
an opinion is contradictory ? The truth is, we are
completely lost, whenever we begin, in any view of it
whatever, to think about the Divine Essence; yet we may
easily conceive, that the Godhead is not like other beings
even in its manner of subsistence. Created beings subsist
singly, but it is the transcendent property of the Divine
Nature to dwell in more persons than one, and these we
learn from revelation are neither more nor less than three.
The following is an attempt to illustrate this high and

LECTURE I.

mysterious doctrine. We feel in ourselves that every mind
has its word and spirit, and cannot be conceived without
them ; it may therefore be presumed, that the eternal Mind
has also its eternal Word and Spirit: in us they are the perish-
ing creatures of the mind, which vanish as soon as they are
produced ; but in the eternal Mind they are permanent and
subsisting, and can never be separated from it. Such essential
processions are not only coeval and con substantial with the
nature from which they flow, but whatever distinction
there is between them, they are one individual nature, since
whatever is essential to a being, must be of the same nature
with it. We are apt to run into a gross notion, that the
Son and Holy Spirit are distinct in being, because we can
only conceive from ourselves, of such distinctions by division
and separation ; but unity is the essential attribute of the
divine nature, and therefore we use the word communication,
and understand thereby that the Father from all eternity
gave his divine nature to the Son and to the Holy Ghost, and
yet continues to have it in Himself undiminished and unim-
paired. If then the Father communicate his whole nature
without division or separation to his Son, and the Father
and the Son together, communicate the same whole nature
to the Holy Ghost, they continue in the most perfect
notion one, since there is one and the whole entire and perfect
Divinity in the three.

As we all agree that we cannot comprehend the Divine
nature, it might have been wiser to have left the doctrine of
the Trinity in the same general terms in which we find it in
Scripture, than to attempt to define it. This is a charge often
brought, and more especially against the statement in the Atha-
nasian Creed, in which the catholic doctrine is so clearly and
briefly stated, that even Baxter, though a dissenter, accounts
it the best explication of it he ever read. But, in truth, the
fault is not in the orthodox but in the early heretics. The
opposers of the faith first innovated in the language ; the
maintainers of it therefore were compelled to reply in terms
opposite, and by propositions contrary to theirs. If the former
invent explications and distinctions, the latter must obviate
and answer them. The definition in our Article, Three

LECTURE I.

7<>

Persons of one substance, power, and eternity ; according
with the language of the ancient Church, \l\ol ov<rlu rgslg
u7ro<rTcc(reis, is not open to a reasonable objection.

It is difficult to attempt to reconcile the Unity and
Trinity, without either " confounding the persons or dividing
the substance." There are four schemes, the Sabellian,
the Catholic, the Arian, and the Socinian. The first is
perfectly clear of any imputation of the last : the Catholic
is only apparently: the others really, so chargeable. We
do not with the Marcionites maintain, that there are three
absolute, original, co-ordinate Divinities : we do not separate
the Persons, with the Arians ; we hold not a specific Unity,
but we acknowledge with the holy Scriptures one Head
and Fountain of the Divine Persons being one in nature ;
never separated, never asunder, distinct without division ;
united without confusion. The first scheme, that of Sabel-
lius, originated in the second century with Praxeas, and
was supported in the middle of the third by him, from
whom it has received its name, though perhaps with some
modifications. According to this system, God is one
Person, who, as he is considered as performing the office
of Creator, Redeemer, or Sanctifier, assumes the name of
Father, Son, or Holy Ghost. Sabellianism preserves in
the most perfect manner the divine Unity: it is specious, and
appears at first to solve all difficulties. The ordinary use of
the word persona in Latin, is also favourable to this hypothesis ;
but the very completeness of the solution is the strongest
objection ; for if by person no more is meant than an official
distinction, and this could have been shown, the question
would have been settled, as soon as the explanation had
been discovered, and the doctrine would have been mysterious
only on the first view. The most cursory examination will
show that Sabellianism is not tenable. Why upon any other
than the orthodox scheme should this distinction be made :
if only a nominal one, it is calculated to mislead, by con-
founding our ideas in representing the Deity under opposite
relations which cannot meet in the same person ; for a
father cannot be father to himself, a son be his own son,
or a spirit proceed from itself. The remark applies equally

LECTURE I.

to their offices ; for how can we conceive the Saviour
speaking of the Holy Spirit which he will send, or of his
own intercession with his Father, without admitting of
more than a nominal distinction ?

The opposite error to this is Tritheism, which has been
unjustly charged upon the Athanasian or orthodox scheme.
Still the history of our own Church has shown how difficult
it is in combating one error to avoid its opposite, The
Sabellian scheme is really Unitarianism, under the disguise
of orthodox phrases, and will be accepted by none who can
discriminate between a trinity of persons, and one merely of
names and offices. The opposite error, the doctrine of
three distinct infinite Minds constituting one Deity, is in
reality tritheism, or the belief in three gods; and so diffi-
cult is it to expound the Catholic scheme, that its sup-
porters, unless remarkably cautious, are charged with main-
taining one of these opposite opinions. In our own country,
the celebrated Defence of the Nicene Faith by Bull, against
foreign authors of an Arian or Socinian tendency, had
revived the trinitarian controversy. His object was to
take an historical view of the doctrine ; and upon an accurate
investigation of the opinions of the Nicene and Ante-Nicene
Fathers, to establish a convincing argument, that what they
maintained were Articles of the primitive faith, handed
down from the Apostles, from which no important deviation
could be reasonably supposed to have gained admittance into
the church ; and he entered no farther into metaphysical
distinctions than the support of his argument required.
Occasion was however given, however carefully he had main-
tained the Son's preexistence, consubstantiality with and
subordination to the Father, to call the truth into question ;
and some, desirous of vindicating the established Creed,
were induced to attempt explanations and illustrations of
the doctrine itself, grounded upon hypothesis rather than
proof, and hardly admitting of demonstrative evidence
either from reason or from Scripture. In their anxiety to
repel the charges of absurdity and contradiction, they were
tempted to push their inquiries into the dark recesses of
metaphysical speculation, where their opponents gladly

LECTURE 1.

followed them, and where the main points at issue could
never be decided by a victory on either side. Dr. Sherlock,
father of the Bishop, engaged strenuously in this hazardous
warfare, but his elaborate vindication of the doctrine of the
Trinity, drew upon him some very strong animadversions
even from his friends Dr. Wallis and Dr. South, and his
book was publicly censured and prohibited by the University
of Oxford. They were in turn charged with Sabellianism ;
and such was the acrimony with which the controversy was
conducted, that the authority of King William was at last
exercised in restraining each party from introducing novel
opinions respecting this mysterious article of faith, and
requiring them to adhere to such explanations as had already
received the sanction of the Church0.

The language employed by some of the ancients in
condemning Sabellianism, encouraged Arius to avoid every
appearance of confounding the divine persons by a system of
his own. He maintained that the Son was a creature who
had had no existence till he was made by God out of nothing,
and that the term begotten is applied to him, because he
was made before all other creatures, to be the instrument
employed in creating them. According to this view, the
Father alone is God in the proper sense of the word, so that
Arius might be more properly called Unitarian, or rather
Socinian, for with Socinus he considered Christ as called God
not from his nature, but on account of the offices in which
He is employed; and he also inconsistently regarded Him as
a proper object of worship. The Council of Nice, which was
convened chiefly to condemn his opinion, knowing the sense
in which he applied the words God and only-begotten Son
of God to Christ, wished to frame a creed which could not
be honestly repeated by his followers. Accordingly, they
annexed a clause condemning those who maintained, that
" there ever was a time when the Son was not : that He
was made out of nothing, or of another substance ova-la. y
v7ro<TTx<nc, or was a creature or changeable and added
to the creed, that he was " real God of God, begotten
not made, and of the same substance with the Father.
0 Bishop Van Mildert's Life of Waterland, ch. iii.
G

LECTURE I.

The expressions, God of God, Light of Light, which
appear in early creeds, though susceptible of an orthodox
sense, and shown by Bishop Bull to have that meaning in
the Ante-Nicene writings, were used by the Arians ; but, a
letter was publicly read in the council, in which their patron
Eusebius of Nicomedia, the friend and biographer of the Em-
peror Constantine, ingenuously confessed, that the admission
of the word consubstantial, that is, of the same substance*
was incompatible with their theological system. This word
therefore, which cannot honestly be used by those who adopt
any modification of Arianism, was introduced into the Creed;
and, according to the expression of Ambrose p, the Bishops
used the sword which heresy itself had drawn from the
scabbard, to cut off its hated head; and this essentially
contributed to maintain and perpetuate the uniformity of
Faith. The Semi-Arians distinguished their doctrine by
substituting " of a like nature," and, as Gibbon observes,
" their word 6poK)6<nov bears so close an affinity to the orthodox
symbol 6[xoo6<riov, that the profane of every age have derided
the contest which the difference of a diphthong excited."
But it is only the profane and the silly ; for, as he himself
continues, " it frequently happens, that the sounds and
characters which approach the nearest to each other, may
represent the most opposite ideas q."

The economy, as it is technically termed, is explained
by Bull, so as to clear the early fathers from the impu-
tation of Arianism, which had been strengthened, though it
might be undesignedly, by the learned work of Petavius. Bull
lays down three theses : 1. The Nicene declaration, that the
Son is God of God, approved by the catholic doctors, both
before and after that council ; for they all with one consent
have taught, that the Son hath the same nature as the Father,
but hath it communicated from Him, who alone has it in
Himself, and consequently is the fountain of the Divinity
which is in the Son. 2. These divines have unanimously
declared the Father to be greater than the Son, not by any
essential perfection, but only by his paternity. 3. This
doctrine the ancients thought necessary to be believed,
P De Fide, iii. ci Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, eh. xxi.

LECTURE I.

that the godhead of the Son might be so asserted, as
that the unity of God and the divine monarchy might
be preserved inviolate. Forasmuch as notwithstanding
the name and nature are common to the two, yet because
the first is the origin of the second, who is described
as a stream from a spring, a ray from the sun, it follows
that the Deity may be correctly said to be but one God.
They also believed, that the same reason held as to the
godhead of the Holy Ghost, and that neither were separate
or separable from the Father. This as far as I can judge is
the true view of the Trinity, and affords an orthodox inter-
pretation of such texts as seem to express the superiority of
the Father. It has not however been universally received ;
for Dr. Edwards1 of Cambridge, while allowing that such
was the doctrine of the fathers, even of Athanasius himself,
who argued so powerfully for the consubstantiality and the
natural equality of Father and Son, condemns their state-
ment as the rise and ground of the dangerous error of the
Son's inferiority to the Father ; and infers that Pearson and
Bull, with other modern divines, have lowered the doctrine of
the Trinity by their deference to these writers ; so that in
consequence, Whiston and Clarke have laid hold of their
concessions to make the Son a dependent being, not worthy
to be styled God. In modern divinity this subordination
has generally been disregarded : and Calvin s rejects the
distinction, arguing that the Son must be God of Himself
if he is to be God at all, because the notion of God supposes
self-existence. I think, however, that it will appear on a
candid examination, that these divines never so asserted
subordination as to deny the supremacy of the Father : but
on the contrary taught, that the notion of supremacy is
necessarily included in that of paternity, and that there is
one godhead in the three persons neither increased nor dimi-
nished, notwithstanding that diversity of dispensation and of
order. It is subordination (as far as I can pretend to judge
of so profound a mystery) which renders the Trinity con-
sistent with Unity, and secures the truth from the two errors

r Animadversions on Dr. Clarke's Scripture Doctrine.
1 Institutes, b. i. ch. iii. 19.

G 2

LECTURE I.

against which we protest ; nor need we fear that this is in-
consistent with the declaration in the Athanasian Creed, for,
according to that statement of the Trinity, " afore or after"
relates to the duration and essential dignity, " greater or less"
to co-equality in nature and perfections of the three persons.
In the very name of father, says Bishop Pearson, there is
something of eminence which is not in that of son, and some
kind of priority we must ascribe to him whom we call the
first, with reference to the second. The Father is the original
cause of all things through the Son, but not as a mere
instrument but as an efficient cause ; according to St. Paul,
To us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all
things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things t.
" The Sonu has received by filial derivation an essence
from the Father which is substantially divine, because it is
the Father's. And God has selected these very appellations
to shadow out to us the relation between the first and
second persons in the godhead. They mark at once sub-
ordination and equality." " It is no diminution of the Son's
glory to say he is from another, for his very name imports
as much ; but it would be diminution from the Father's, to
speak so of Him, and there must be preeminence where
there is place for derogation." Such affirmations of the
Son's inferiority, as, I can of Myself do nothing ; and styling
the Father his God even after his ascension x ; and Christ
is God's? ; and the head of Christ is God7-; probably refer to
Him in his divine as well as in his human nature. A due
attention to this subordination will solve the apparent incon-
sistency of certain passages. The 17th chapter of St. John's
Gospel affords an instance. When Christ prays in the
character of a man sent to teach, he speaks as if the Father
were the only God, and he himself a man ; but in
circumstances which imply the expiration of his earthly
office, he makes himself equal with God. Thus, This
is life eternal, that they may know Thee the only true God,
and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent ; but when ho
lias said, / have finished the work that Thou gavest Me to

1 1 Cor. viii. 6. u Whittaker, Origin of Arianism. x Rev. iii. 5.

v 1 Cor. iii. 23. z 1 Cor. xi. 3.

LECTURE I.

do, then a new scene opens upon our view ; the man of
sorrows is considered as the high priest who is set on the right
hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, and if we
realise this contrast, we shall rightly understand and feel
what follows. And now, 0 Father, glorify Me in thy own
presence with the glory which I had with Thee before the
world was.

The orthodox system is distinguished from Sabellianism
by admitting three persons ; hypostases : and here let it
be remarked, that this word, the same in meaning as ova la,
substance, in the earlier ecclesiastical writings, and even
in the Nicene Creed, was afterwards taken in its present
sense; and wrested from Arianism, by ascribing to the
three persons one substance, pix ouo-loc. Indeed the
sameness of substance and perfect equality seem necessary
to our idea of the Trinity. Accordingly the Athanasian
Creed declares, " None is afore or after other, none is
greater or less than another. The godhead of the Father,
of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one, the glory
equal, the majesty coeternal." And if this was not true,
how could it be called one godhead. Still though there is
no inferiority, there is such a subordination as is implied in
the Father's being AvroQiog, God in Himself that is, the
source of Deity. The Son is called in the Nicene Creed,
God of God, 0£O£ kx. 0:ou, that is, God out of God. In one
sense, therefore, he may, even with respect to his divine
nature, say, My Father is greater than me, because He hath
received that nature from Him ; and in this way it is
explained by Athanasius, and most of the fathers. This
preeminence does not admit of any act, as it is called, of
condescension, such as being sent; whereas there is a
congruity in the Son's being employed to exert the per-
fections of the godhead, in the accomplishment of a par-
ticular purpose. The name of God therefore, taken
absolutely, is usually ascribed to the Father, and He is
frequently styled in Scripture, the one God, the true God,
the God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; language
which those who do not understand the reason for it,
catch at as favourable to the anti-trinitarian scheme. Thus

LECTURE i.

the primitive writers, though they often call the Son, and
sometimes the Holy Ghost, God, yet when they make
mention of the Father and of the Son together, generally
call the first God, and the second either Lord, or God
of God. In some passages, the Son, and sometimes
the Spirit, are named first, yet where, as in the form of
Baptism, this doctrine is delivered as the rule of faith,
precedence is given to the Father. For the same reason,
though we occasionally address our petitions to the Son,
and even to the Holy Spirit, the Father is the principal
object of adoration ; but as in the Greek Church the proper
divinity of the Son had been denied, he is more often
addressed in their Liturgies, than in those of the west.
A Council of Carthage ordered all prayers offered at the
altar to be addressed to the Father only ; because there
we view the Son in the light of a victim, the Lamb of God,
sacrificed for the sins of the world.

This fundamental doctrine has been retained till modern
times in every branch of the church, even when the true
notion of the way of salvation had been nearly lost through-
out Christendom. It it well then that one Sunday in the year
should be consecrated to the more special meditation on
this mysterious but highly practical doctrine; and the season
is well chosen, after we have celebrated the birth into this
world of the incarnate Son of God, his death, resurrection,
and ascension, and the descent of the third person, the Holy
Spirit, on the believers, the result of his exaltation. And
let us carefully remember, that the doctrine is revealed that
we may honour as we ought the Three, by gratefully ac-
knowledging our obligations to the first, for devising before
the fall of man his recovery ; to the second, for assuming
our nature in order to accomplish the design ; and to the
third, for applying to us the benefit of this redemption ;
and ascribe to this holy, glorious, ever-blessed and adorable
Trinity, in one undivided Godhead, all honour and glory,
praise, worship, majesty, and dominion, for ever and ever.
A mystery so deep the most powerful intellect would
in vain attempt to fathom. The human eye cannot gaze
with impunity upon the noon-day sun : it would be pre-

LECTURE I.

sumptuous, unprofitable, perhaps dangerous, for man who
does not comprehend the nature of any thing, to speculate
on the Divine essence. How that essence can exist in
three persons, we shall study in vain to discover ; but the
fact of that existence has been revealed to us, not for the
instruction of the intellect, but for the amelioration of
the heart. It is a revelation which reconciles the divine
attributes of holiness and benevolence, and renders the
happiness of man compatible with the glory of his Maker,
by showing that God can be just as well as merciful in
justifying the ungodly who believeth in Jesus. A meditation
on the stupendous act wThich redeemed our ruined race, and
could only be accomplished by the cooperation of Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost, must increase our reverence and
gratitude to the Three, and promote our growth in humility,
holiness, and love.

LECTURE II,

ARTICLE II.

OF THE WORD OR SON OF GOD, WHICH WAS MADE VERY MAN.

The Son, ivhich is the Word of the Father, [begotten from
everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God,'] and
of one substance with the Father, took Mans nature in the
womb of the blessed Virgin, of her substance : so that two
whole and perfect Natures, that is to say, the Godhead and
Manhood, were joined together in one Person, never to be
divided, whereof is one Christ, very God, and very Man;
who truly suffered, was crucified, dead and buried, to
reconcile his Father to us, and to be a sacrifice, not only
for original guilt, but also for actual sins of rn.en*.

The threefold nature of the Divine Being having been
established, we proceed to consider separately the persons
of this ever-blessed Trinity. Concerning the Father there
are no disputes, except as to his connection with the others.
We pass on therefore to the second and the third ; the Son,
by whom the remedy offered in the Gospel was brought
into the world, and the Spirit, by whom it is applied. The
Revelation concerning the former is from the nature of the
case, from his assuming flesh, and dwelling among us,
more full than that concerning the latter, and has therefore
given rise to a greater variety of opinions. After the
disputes concerning the Trinity, the dogmas which were

a The Article is translated from the Augsburg Confession, with the
exception of the passage in brackets, which was added in 1002, from that of
Wurtemburg.

LECTURE II.

affirmed in respect to the Son first divided the Christian
Church, and from its comprehensiveness the subject branched
out into many subordinate ones ; for the double nature of
our Lord as God and Man being once admitted, curious,
and we may add, presumptuous enquirers, aspiring to
be wise above what is written, engaged in unsatisfactory
metaphysical speculations, which led to disputes in
which they lost their temper, without throwing any real
light upon mysteries beyond the capability of our finite in-
tellect to comprehend. Such discussions, which soon de-
generate into logomachies, are eagerly caught at by infidels
and sceptics, as means of turning both disputants and the
points in dispute into ridicule, and their subtilties afford a
popular topic of declamation ; while the persecuting and
unchristian spirit, which is too often generated, enables
them to question the beneficial tendency of a religion which
involves believers in endless and angry and bitter con-
troversies. They argue, that it is inconceivable that a wise
and benevolent Being should make our salvation dependent
upon our knowledge of abstruse propositions, the truth or
falsehood of which, even supposing our capability of ascer-
taining them, can have no effect upon our conduct. But
in this statement there is a misconception arising from
ignorance, if not an artful misrepresentation. In religion
as in science there is a most important distinction between
the assertion and proof of a fact, and the explanation of it.
The divinity and humanity of our blessed Lord, and the
union of them in his person, with all the consequences that
flow from this union, is the sum and substance of our faith,
the foundation of all our hopes for eternity. This the
Scriptures abundantly reveal, and this is so essential, that I
cannot conceive that those who deny it are entitled to the
appellation of Christian. Why this union exists, we know
from this authentic and sole source of divine knowledge ; how
it has been effected is of no importance to us ; but the fact
and the reason for it are so clearly revealed, that it is difficult
to imagine that any who, abstracting themselves from pre-
judices will study the sacred volume, should not find them
there written as with a sunbeam. The mode in which

LECTURE II.

this union exists, as it concerns us not to know, is not
declared, and it would have been better that Christians had
abstained from such enquiries ; but, as in the article of the
Trinity, it was the heretics who gave rise to these discussions,
and forced the orthodox to confute, to explain, and to
define, till one error being rejected after another, the
whole truth wTas at length ascertained. There is some
danger lest, from the representations of opponents, and the
faults of the disputants, a prejudice should be excited
against the doctrine itself: let us remember then, that the
denial of Christ's divinity strips him of the offices, though
we may still ascribe to him the names of Mediator, Saviour,
and Intercessor; for what is Christianity but the scheme
devised by the Father, and accomplished by the Son, to
restore man to the divine favour, and this is achieved by his
offering himself as a sacrifice for sin. Now his divinity is
necessary to give an adequate value to his sacrifice ; none of
our guilty race, who requires each for himself atonement to
be made, none of the created intelligences, though innocent,
since their obedience is already due upon their own account,
can satisfy the claims of God's holiness and justice. If
Christ therefore were not the co-equal Son of the Father,
he must have died in vain, and we should be still in the
fallen state into which we were plunged by the transgression
of our progenitors. Dr. Priestley maintains, that the value
of the Gospel does not in any degree depend upon the idea
which we may entertain concerning the person of Christ,
because all that concerns us are the object and the authority
of his mission. This language is inconsistent with the natural
propensity, by which every one is led to connect the im-
portance of a message with the dignity of the messenger ; it
is inconsistent also with the general sentiments of Christians
who have canvassed the subject with diligence and interest ;
and inconsistent with the general strain of the New Testa-
ment, a great part of which is occupied with this subject.

The person of our Saviour and his history occupy three
Articles, and the dogmas here only stated have given rise
to innumerable works in which they are defended and op-
posed. The nature of my design prevents my entering into

LECTURE II.

<)1

long details ; I shall therefore refer to errors and sects only,
when it is required for the understanding of the Article :
and our scriptural proofs must be left to speak for themselves,
the meaning of several is disputed, for they are so decidedly in
our favour, that they can only be got rid of by rejecting them
as interpolations, or giving to them a new interpretation.
This I have no hesitation in saying is a forced and unnatural
one ; but I have no time to examine them on the present
occasion ; it must be taken for granted, that they are to be
understood in the plain and obvious sense which the Church
has always attached to them.

The opinions respecting the nature of the Son of
God, which have been in one age exploded, and in
another revived, are reducible to these three systems.
The simplest is the assertion, that Christ was a mere man,
who had no existence before he was born into this world,
and who was distinguished from the former messengers of
heaven only by his superior virtue, and by the extraordinary
powers with which he was endowed, upon account of the
peculiar importance of his commission. For the performing
of this he was rewarded by being raised from the dead, and
exalted to the highest honour, being constituted on his
resurrection, Lord of the creation, and entering upon a
kingdom which is to continue to the end of the world ; the
administration of which entitles him to the reverence of
the human race. Some of these consider him as a fit object
of adoration, which others confine to the Father ; but this
difference, though great in practice, does not affect the
general principle ; for if he is adored by any of them, as
he was by the original Socinians, it is on account
not of his nature, but of the dominion given to him
by the Father. The system rests on the general strain of
the prophecies, in which Jesus is foretold as the seed of the
woman, and the son of David ; the general strain of the
New Testament narrative, in which our Lord is spoken of
as a man ; and the manner in which the Scriptures represent
his glory, as the recompense of his obedience unto death.
The argument is supported by general reasonings concerning
the fitness of employing a man, whose life is a pattern which

LECTURE II.

we may be supposed capable of imitating, and whose resur-
rection and exaltation furnish an encouragement suitable
to the condition of those who encounter hardships and are
exposed to temptations, the same in kind, though inferior in
strength, to those which he overcame. And this argument is
defended by attempts to explain away such passages as
seem to contradict the system, and particularly by referring
whatever is said of the glory of Christ to the power given to
him upon earth of working miracles, and the state of exalt-
ation which he since his ascension enjoys in heaven. Such
is said to have been the doctrine of the Ebionites, a small
and obscure sect of Jewish converts in the first century ; but
the scantiness of their canon of Scripture shows, that the
general tenor of it was against them, for they received only
the gospel of Matthew, and that with the rejection of the
first two chapters. It originated with Theodotus at the
end of the second century, but it never prevailed ; a strong
presumption against its truth ; and seems to have been
exploded by the Council of Nice ; for we hear no more of
it till it was revived by Socinus, and propagated by his
followers in Poland.

The second system advances a step higher, by allowing
the pre-existence of Christ, and his consequent superiority
to men, and was first publicly taught by Arius, an Egyptian
presbyter, whatever traces of it may be discovered in more
ancient writers. According to his view, the one eternal God,
the source of being and power, did in the beginning, before
any thing was made, produce by his own will a perfect
creature, through whom he made all things, so that he alone
proceeded immediately from God ; while all other creatures
not only existed after him, but were called into being by
his instrumentality, and placed under his administration.
Having been the Creator of the first man, he was the
medium of all divine communication with the human race.
Thus it was he showed Himself to the patriarchs, who
spake by the prophets ; and in the fulness of time he was
made man, and had a real body like his brethren ; but that
body was animated not by a human soul, but by this
superangelical spirit. Arius maintained, that this first crea-

LECTURE II.

ture, upon account of his supereminent glory and power,
might without impropriety be called the only-begotten Son
of God, and even God ; and he admitted that he was in one
sense eternal, because his creation preceded those measures
of time which arise from the motion and succession of
created objects. According to this system, the Son, though
endowed with all possible perfection, is only a creature, and
there was a time when he was not. This system was so
popular, that the Emperor Constantius favoured it, and its
eminent opposer Athanasius, in his resistance to it, is said to
have stood against the world. It even penetrated beyond
the pale of the empire, for the missionaries among the
barbarians were infected with this heresy ; and of all their con-
verted sovereigns, Clovis, the founder of the French monarchy,
was the first who was baptized into the orthodox faith, and
was in consequence designated the eldest son of the Church,
and the French sovereigns retained, till my time, the epithet
of Most Christian King. The Athanasian or orthodox
system, before the division of the empire, recovered posses-
sion of the church : and the secession of the Reformers from
Rome has introduced no variation into this fundamental
Article. Arianism was therefore merely a topic in eccle-
siastical history, till revived in our own Church by Whiston,
at Cambridge, in the seventeenth century, when it was con-
futed with learning and acuteness by Waterland, and
maintained with some qualifications by the celebrated
Dr. Clarke.

The third system is essentially distinguished from both,
by maintaining the proper divinity of Christ ; for we have
seen that the term in a lower sense has been applied to him,
both by Arians and Socinians. We affirm then the doctrine
of the Church of England to be, that the second person of
the Trinity, the coequal Son of God, of the same substance
with the Father, assumed at the incarnation our complete
nature, that is, that the body of Christ was animated by a
human soul, and that this soul was so united with the
godhead, that the two natures formed one person.

The proofs of the human nature are obvious, and are
now allowed by all. Although Jesus upon some occasions

LECTURE II.

assumes the exalted title, Son of God, he generally
calls himself by a name most significant of humanity, the
son of Man. We read of the same Jesus, that he was
wearied with his journey h ; that he was hungry0 ; that he ate
and drank, that he gave up the ghost, that he was buried,
and that he rose from the grave. The inference thus
clearly drawn from laying different texts together, is con-
firmed by an examination of those passages which present
in one view his divine and human nature. I refer to three
leading ones. The introduction to St. John's Gospel d: the
recommendation to the Philippians of humility from the ex-
ample of Christ in voluntarily emptying himself of his original
glory; and that which assigns a reason to the Hebrews f,
why the captain of our salvation took part of flesh and
blood, whence it appears that he was preexisting in a state in
which he could make a choice. Had Christians been content
to rest in this inference of the union of two natures, there
could not have been much variety of opinion ; but when they
began to speculate concerning the manner of this union, they
soon went far beyond the measure of information which
the Scriptures afford. But the Gnostics could not bring
themselves to believe in our Lord's humanity. As the
inherent and incorrigible depravity of matter was the
fundamental principle of their fanciful philosophy, they
deemed it impossible that so exalted a spirit as the Christ
could be truly and permanently united to a gross material
substance. Some of them therefore supposed that Jesus,
although made in the likeness of men, was not really a
man : but that the body which the Jews saw, was either
a phantom that deluded their senses, or if it had a
real existence, was a spiritual substance, not formed of the
same corruptible materials as our bodies, not standing in
need of the food which it only seemed to receive, and
incapable of the sufferings which it but seemed to endure.
Other Gnostics, who found it difficult to reconcile the mere
phantom of a body with the Gospel narrative, followed
the scheme of Cerinthus, that Jesus was born like other

b John iv. 0. « Mark xi. 12. d John i. 14. « Phil. ii. 0, &c.

f Heh. ii. 14.

LECTURE II.

men, and not distinguished from his countrymen, till he
was thirty years of age, in any other way than by the in-
nocence of his life. He held, that when he as man came to
John to be baptized, that exalted iEon called the Christ
descended upon him, and continued to inhabit his body
during his ministry, and to direct his actions; but
when he was delivered up, the Christ returned to
that pleroma, i. e. the space inhabited by the spirits, who
had emanated from the divine mind, and Jesus was left
to suffer and to die. Apollinarius conceived, that the
most natural way of explaining the incarnation of the
Son of God, was to consider the godhead as supplying
the place of the vou?, the rational soul ; but to this theory
we answer, that Christ was not truly a man, unless he
assumed the soul as well as the body, and that there is no
analogy between the transient appearances of angels
recorded in Scripture, and the permanent complete
humanity manifested in his actions and sufferings. The
Council of Constantinople which condemned Apollinarius
declared, that they considered Christ as truly incarnate ; the
Church soon began to speculate concerning the manner in
which this complete human nature is united with the God-
head, and from these speculations arose sects whose peculiar
tenets are still retained by some of the Eastern Churches.

Many things are predicated in Scripture of Christ, which
can only be predicated of God, while there are others that
are only applicable to man, and yet to both predicates he
is the only subject. From the imperfection of language and
of our own conceptions, it is our wisdom to rest in the
enunciation of the simple fact, that the divine and human
nature are united in one person. But Nestorius, patriarch
of Constantinople, A. D. 429, who had learnt to discriminate
between the humanity of his master Aso-7t6ty}S, and the
divinity of his lord Kvpioe, was offended with language
contradictory to this distinction, especially with Qeoroxog,
mother of God, a term which had been insensibly adopted
since the rise of the Arian controversy, and he preached
against it as unknown to the Apostles, and as unauthorized
by the Church. He was exasperated by contradiction to

LECTURE II.

draw inadequate similies from the conjugal and civil part-
nerships of life, and to describe the manhood of Christ as
the robe, or the instrument, or the tabernacle of his god-
head. His doctrine was condemned as heresy in the third
General Council held at Ephesus, A.D. 441 : yet it is doubtful,
if he had been allowed to explain his meaning, whether it
would have been found inconsistent with the decision of
that assembly, that Christ is one person in whom two
natures are most clearly united. His object was to avoid
any appearance of ascribing the weakness of humanity to
the divinity of Christ, and therefore he distinguished
between Christ and God, who dwelt in Christ, as in a temple.
The union he allowed to be indissoluble ; still it was an
union not of nature, but of will ; such in kind, but much
closer in degree, as subsists between two friends. Opposite
to the Nestorian scheme is that of Eutyches, the friend of
its great opponent Cyril of Alexandria, and archimandrite
or superior of three hundred monks at Constantinople. In
his zeal to abjure Nestorianism, he fell into the contrary
heresy of Christ's single nature, for he seemed to teach
that the human was absorbed in the divine. His doc-
trine was condemned in the fourth General Council held
at Chalcedon, A.D. 451, which declared that there was
no change, mixture, or confusion of the two natures,
but that each retained its distinguishing properties. The
successors of Eutyches, wishing to avoid this absurdity,
and also to preserve the unity which Nestorius divided,
declared their belief, that in Christ there was one
nature two-fold, and in consequence they have been called
Monophysites. In the Western Church these subtle dis-
tinctions are only known to the readers of ecclesiastical
history ; in the East, they still characterize two denominations
of Christians. Nestorius, after much persecution, died in
upper Egypt before the meeting of the Council of Chalcedon,
to which he had been invited. Within the Roman Empire
his doctrine had died away, so that in the reign of Justinian,
A.D. 564, it was difficult to find a Nestorian church; but be-
yond these limits, his followers had discovered, and partially
occupied, a new world. In Persia, notwithstanding the

LECTURE II.

powerful opposition of the Magi, Christianity had struck
deep root ; and as the Gospel had been introduced by
Syrian missionaries, their language and discipline were
interwoven with its original frame, and the study of the
works of Theodore, Nestorius's master, prepared them to
revere the memory of his disciple. The Nestorians followed
the hordes that roved over Tartary : the credulity of Europe,
according to Gibbon, was shown by a belief in the
tradition, that one of their Khans had been even ordained,
who was in consequence known by the name of Prester,
that is, Presbyter John ; but he considers it probable that
even in the twelfth century there was a horde that professed
Nestorian Christianity. They even penetrated China by
sea and land, but made little impression. In the Indian
peninsula they were more successful, for they founded
there a flourishing church, which the Portuguese invaders
instead of hailing as brethren in that heathen land, cruelly
persecuted as soon as its clergy refused to submit to the
Pope, of wdiose jurisdiction they then heard for the first
time. Under the government of the East India Company*
they have recovered their independence, and are allowed to
keep up their intercourse with Antioch, from which they
receive a patriarch : but both they and the church, whose
supremacy they acknowledge, seem to have forgotten the
characteristics of Nestorianism.

The history of the Eutychians is less copious and less
romantic. They too had endured much persecution, and
seemed likely to be extinguished, when revived by the preach-
ing in the following century of Jacob Baradasus, from whom
they derive the name of Jacobites. There was a time when
their patriarch presided over a hundred and fifty archbishops
and bishops: but in Asia they are now chiefly to be found on
the banks of the Euphrates and the Tigris, and are reckoned
at from fifty to eighty thousand souls. Their faith however
had been diffused over the mass of the Egyptian nation, who
almost unanimously, rejected the decrees of Chalcedon, and
their dissent from the predominant orthodoxy of the
empire, made them not unwilling to yield to the troops of
the Khalifs : and thus religious differences and consequent

LECTURE II.

alienation of feeling, facilitated the triumph of Islam
over their common Christianity. Abyssinia, that outpost
of the faith and civilization, though both are much debased,
against the rude tribes of southern Africa, still acknowledges
its dependence upon the Church which converted it, by
receiving from it the patriarch ; and retains therefore, we
may presume, this tenet, its characteristic error. The system
is retained in greater purity by that remarkable people the
Armenians, who like the Jews are scattered over the East,
and like them grow rich as traders and bankers?.

These are the four capital errors which distracted the
early church on the point of the Incarnation, in opposition
to which the first four Councils were called ; whatever was by
them decreed, either in the declaration of Christian belief
or refutation of heresy, may all be comprised, as judicious
Hooker11 well noteth, in four words, truly, perfectly, indivisibly,
distinctly, ScX^oog, rsXsoog, ahalgsTcog, aauyyuTUi^ that is, truly
God, perfectly man, indivisibly one person, distinctly two
natures ; within the compass of which four heads, all heresies
that touch the person of Christ may be with great facility
brought to confine themselves1. The orthodox doctrine is
completed by the miraculous conception, which means that
Christ's human nature was formed, not in the ordinary
method, but out of the substance of the Virgin Mary, by
the immediate operation of the Holy Ghost. Some sects
of early Christians, whose principles would not allow
them to admit it, got rid of this article of the Christian
faith, which is justly thought so important as to be spe-
cified in the creeds, by rejecting the first two chapters of
Matthew's Gospel, the only one which they received. In
the "new and improved Version," as the Unitarians call it, the
chapters of both the Evangelists who record it are printed in
italics, as if of doubtful authority, though biblical students
know that they are extant in all the manuscripts and ancient
versions, and that the doctrine is implied in the narratives
that follow. We know from inspiration that the prophecy,
A virgin shall conceive and bear a son, designates Jesus,
called therefore Emmanuel ; and the early writers have
v> Gibbon, chapter xlvii. h Book v. .r)4. 1 Pearson.

LECTURE II.

so interpreted Jeremiah's prophecy1, Jehovah hath created
a new thing in the earth; a woman shall compass a man;
and as in the former instance, the context is favour-
able, to this interpretation. An allusion to his peculiar
birth occurs in Isaiah ; " Listen, 0 isles, unto me, and
hearken, ye people, from far ; Jehovah hath called me from
the womb, from the bowels of my mother liath he made
mention of my namei." But the passage of Micah is most
decisive; for having first spoken of the antecedent generation,
from everlasting, of the future ruler of Israel, who is to be
born into this life at Bethlehem, he says, that God ivill give
up the nation until she who travaileth hath brought forth*.
It is implied in the excessive honour, too early paid to our
Lord's Virgin Mother, (notwithstanding what I cannot but
regard as a designed lowering of her in the Gospels ;)
which in the Church of Rome, has degenerated into
idolatry. The conception of Jesus is the point from which
wre date the union between his two natures ; and this being
miraculous, the existence of the person in whom they are
united was not physically derived from Adam. Even then
as the son of man, Jesus is exalted above his brethren, and
preserved from the contamination of original corruption,
adhering to the race whose nature he assumed ; and is
peculiarly, as foretold to Eve, the seed of the woman. Since
Jesus the Christ is both God and man, it follows that each
nature in him is complete ; and the connection between soul
and body is a very inadequate representation of this personal
or hypostatical union, as it is called by theologians. The
soul without the body has no instrument of its operations,
the body without the soul is destitute of the principle of
life, and the two are only different parts of one complex
nature. But Jesus the Christ was God before he became
man ; and there was nothing deficient in his manhood ; so
that he united in himself two distinct natures, each of
which is perfect.

This union is the key which opens to us a great part
of the phraseology of Scripture. He is sometimes spoken
of as God, and sometimes as man, and things peculiar to
1 Jer. xxxi. 22. j Is. xlix. 1. k Micah viii.

H 2

100

LECTURE II.

each nature are affirmed of him, not as if he possessed one
nature to the exclusion of the other, but because possessing
both, the characteristics of each of which may equally be
applied to him ; the properties of the one nature are sometimes
in consequence, though not in strict accuracy, referred to the
other ; as, the Son of man hath power to forgive sins ; the
Lord of glory was crucified. It is this distinction between
the divine and human natures which enables us to explain
the humiliation and exaltation of the Son of God, and the
termination of his mediatorial kingdom. This union is the
corner stone of our religion ; and if in our meditations we
never lose sight of it, we shall perceive in the nature of the
Messiah a completeness and a suitableness to the design of
his coming, which of themselves create a strong presumption
that we have rightly interpreted the Scriptures ; and the
different modes in which he is spoken of, as either nature
was in the mind of the writers, can only be reconciled upon
this the orthodox hypothesis.

The Article begins with saying, that the Son is the Word
of the Father, and this must be granted by all who receive
St. John's Gospel. The Greek term is an ambiguous one,
for it means reason, whether existing in the mind as thought,
or as communicated to others as speech ; and those who wish
it to be considered only as a divine attribute, not as a person,
translate it by the first. But the corresponding terms
in Hebrew, Chaldee, and Syriac, do not convey the first
meaning : and though the description of that wisdom which
Jehovah possessed in the beginning of his way1, might justify
its application in that sense to the second person of the
Trinity ; still the context shows that the latter was intended
by the Evangelist. A man's word or thought is not called
man ; nor would the word or wisdom of God be called God, if
a mere attribute or operation was intended. Allowing then
the Logos to be a person, the Evangelist says, that he was
with God, and it cannot be supposed that he was the self-
same person with whom he was, that is the Father, nor is it
said that he was in God, which would be the proper mode of
expressing an attribute. The Apostle observes also, that
1 Proverbs viii.

LECTURE If.

101

the Baptist was not that Light, intimating that it was of a
person that he had been speaking ; and concludes with
declaring that this Logos, the only-begotten of the Father, and
therefore not the same, became incarnate01. This personality,
so strongly insisted upon and enforced by St. John, appears
also in the voluminous works of the contemporary Jew Philo,
in the Chaldee Targums or paraphrases of Scripture, and
in some remarkable passages in the apocryphal Wisdom of
Solomon : and none who acknowledge this will deny the
application of the term Word to the Son. Various conjectures
have been formed of its origin. To me the most satisfactory
is, that it had become familiar to the hellenizing Jews as
the Septuagint rendering of the Word of the Lord; and this
at the same time explains its occurrence in Philo and the
Apocrypha, anterior to Gnosticism. I conceive the best ex-
planation of its use is the substitution of the abstract for the
concrete. Salvation is put for Saviour in the Gospels, ac-
cording to the genius of the Hebrew tongue : and Word for
the speaker of words is a most appropriate title for him, who
has declared or explained h^zyr^uTO to mean his God. Probably
this introduction to the Gospel of St. John would never have
been written, if the author had not lived in an age and place
infected with that philosophical and in reality unchristian
system, which assumed the proud title of Knowledge yvoutng ;
for after referring to it as he does to Light and Life, terms
likewise desecrated by the Gnostics, he uses it no more
throughout his narrative. He had previously employed it in
the opening of his Epistle ; and gives the title in the Reve-
lation to the triumphant Redeemer ; but it clearly never
became a popular word among the orthodox : though I pre-
sume it was in use among the heretics, at least those of Arabia,
for it has been perpetuated as a title of our Lord in the
Koran. The Moslem, however, ignorant of Gnosticism, take
it in a literal sense, and interpret it to mean, that the son of
Mary was not generated, but created by a word n. The Logos
is called the Son, and the Son of God, in so emphatic a manner,
or under such circumstances, as to be applicable to him only
in his preexistent state. As when the Father's voice from
" Wuterlaud, Lady Mover's Lectures. " Maracci's Koran, iii. and the notes.

102

LECTURE II.

heaven proclaimed him his beloved son in whom he was well
pleased, for he was then only about to enter upon his office
as Messiah, and this love prior to amy act of his on earth,
infers a higher and antecedent filiation. No man knoweth
the Son but the Father, neither knoweth any man the Father
save the Son, implies that the knowledge of the two is reci-
procal"; and all men should honour the son as they honour the
Father0, is equivalent. St. Paul's description of our Lordp
as the seed of David after the flesh, and the son of God declared
with power according to the Spirit of holiness, contrasts his
divine and human natures; and even the passage i, Thou art
my Son, this day I have begotten thee, (though at first sight it
might seem to refer to his birth into this world,) is brought
forward to show his superiority to Angels. This eternal
filiation is supported by St. Johnr; and as Jesus is thus em-
phatically called the Son, so is the first person of the Trinity
called his Father in a peculiar sense ; as when the Apostle
says% with one mind and with one mouth glorify God, even
the Father of our Lord Jesus Christx. The demons them-
selves acknowledged Jesus to be the Son of Godu, which
the Jews understand as equivalent to Deity; for when Peter
replied not only, Thou art the Christ, but also the Son of
the living Godx, Jesus declared him blessed for the acknow-
ledgment of a faith which God had revealed to him ; and it
is incontrovertible, that our Lord suffered death for making
himself the Son of God, which (on this very account) they
accounted blasphemy y. And this mystery is probably inti-
mated in the metaphors which designate him as the Branch
of Jehovahz, the brightness of the Fathers glory, and the
express image of his person3-.

Everlasting seems to be added, to show that he is not so
called merely because of his conception by the Holy Ghost,
but that before his birth he had been a Son, and that " there
had never been a time when he was not."

n Matt. xi. 27. o John v. 23. P Rom. i. 3, 4. i Heb. i. 5.

' John iii. JG, L7. xvii. 24. Mark xii. 6. Heb. i. 0. I John iv. 9. Col. i. 13—17.
Rev. viii. 3, 32. 1 John i. 3. ■ Rom. xv. G. 1 2 Cor. i. 3 ; xi. 81. Eph. i. 3.
1 Pet. i. & ' Matt, x iii. 29. Mark i. 21; iii. U. Lnkc iv. 34; viii. 28.

* Matt. xvi. 15—17. 1 Matt. xxvi. G3. e Isaiah iv. 2. Zech. iii. 8 ; vi. 22.
» 2 Cor. iv. 4. Col. i. I Heb. i.

LECTURE II.

103

Of the Father, makes this generation still more definite.
The term begotten is implied whenever Father or Son is
mentioned; and only-begotten, used by St. Johnb, and by
our Lord himself in his discourse with Nicodemusc, evi-
dently declares that he was his son in a higher sense than
any other being: and for this we have the authority of the
Evangelist ; for upon our Lord saying, My Father ivorketh
hitherto, and I work, he observes, therefore the Jews sought
the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the
sabbath, but said also that God was his [own or peculiar TStov]
Father, making himself equal with Codd. Bishop Pearson
has shown that the Deity of Christ is comprehended in the
phrase only Son : and were it not, the Creed would have been
insufficient, and could be rehearsed with propriety by the
modern Unitarian. " The Socinians take only-begotten to
be nothing more than most beloved of all sons, because
Isaac was called the only son of Abraham, when we know
that he had Ishmael beside ; but the terms are not
synonymous, for a son is beloved because he is an only one,
not an only one because beloved. Beside, Isaac was so
called for another reason, for he was the only son of the
free-woman, the only son of the promise made to Abraham e.
We must therefore, avoiding this exposition as far short of
the true notion of the only-begotten, look upon it in the
most proper, full, and significant sense, as signifying a son so
begotten as none ever is, was, or can be. Others we acknow-
ledge are frequently called the sons of God ; and wre call
the same God our Father, whom Christ called his, and he is
not ashamed to call us brethren ; but the sonship into which
we come is but that of adoption, showing the generation
by which we are begotten to be but metaphorical; whereas
Christ is so properly, and by nature, the son of God, that
even in his humanity he refuseth the name of an adopted
son ; for when the fulness of time icas come, God sent
forth his son made of a woman, made under the law, to
redeem them that were under the law, (not that he, but)
we might receive the adoption of sons. He then whose

b John i. U— 18. and 1 John iv. ]9. « John iii. 16, 18. d John v. 18.
e Gen. xviii. 14; xxi. 12. Heb. xi. 17.

104

LECTURE II.

generation is totally different from ours, is truly the only-
begotten ; notwithstanding the same God hath begotten
us by his word; and the reason is, because the divine essence
was communicated to him in his natural and eternal gene-
ration, whereas only the divine grace is conveyed unto us in
our adoption f."

The very and eternal God asserts our Lord's divinity in
its proper and strict sense ; a sense to which Arians cannot
subscribe: nor those who like Socinus consider him as con-
stituted on his resurrection the object of adoration, as
the reward of his obedience and sufferings; a position, we
may observe, so extraordinary, that nothing can account for
his invention of it but the fact, that the Testament so decidedly
proclaims his divinity, that he was obliged in a qualified
sense to admit it. The student of ecclesiastical antiquity
may easily satisfy himself, from the testimony both of
Christians and of the Heathen, that it has ever been the
received doctrine of the Church, not merely as a speculative
opinion, but followed out into its proper consequence,
divine worship. Pliny, the earliest of the latter, whose
description of the worship of the Christians has reached
us, informs the Emperor Trajan, in an official Letter
as Governor of the province to the believers in which
St. Peter had written, that they met on stated days to
sing hymns to Christ as to God ; and they were com-
monly reproached with the absurdity of worshipping one
that had been executed as a malefactor. Celsus objects
against us, says Origene, I know not how often respecting
Jesus, that we consider him as God with a mortal body.
Indeed, his principal objection seems to have been the union
of the two natures in the person of Christ. He saysh, that
the place is shown where he who is worshipped by Christians
was born ; and ridicules their inconsistency in blaming the
worshippers of Jupiter, whose tomb was shown in Crete,
while they worship as God the sophist who was crucified in
Palestine. Such a testimony from a professed enemy of

f Pearson, on the Creed, p. 130. e Orig. iii.

11 1'hv (xt ya yuvi/ t-Ktivov fri atfiuvoiv 6.vQpu)nov, thv eV rfj Ua\aioTivii avacrno-
huiTiotvTa. Peregrine Proteus.

LECTURE II.

105

the Gospel in the second century, allowed to be true by the
Christian writer who confutes him in the third, is decisive
of the fact. Lucian, the contemporary of the former, shows
that this was no novelty, for he saysh, that they still
worship that great man who had been crucified ;
and we learn from the ecclesiastical historian Socrates,
that the orator Libanius praised Porphyry and the
Emperor Julian for confuting the folly of a sect, which
styled a dead man of Palestine God, and the son of
God. The Deity of Christ is expressly asserted by Igna-
tius1, Justin, and Irenaeus, the earliest Fathers; and the
testimony of their successors, down to the Council of Nice,
may be seen in Bishop Bull's celebrated work, or more
conveniently in the English volume of Dr. Burton, who
has translated and arranged in order the passages which
bear upon this controversy. Eusebiusk relates, that it was
expressly declared in hymns and psalms of the earliest date ;
and that Theodotus a tanner, in the second century, was the
first who ventured to maintain, what he emphatically stig-

11 5E7ret8ay 07ra| Tra.paf5a.VTts, deovs fxkv rods 'EWtjvikovs anapau^acoyTai, rbv 5e
aveaxo'Koitio'ix^vov, 4k€?uoi/ <ro(pio-TT)v irpoo-nvvovcri. Peregrine Proteus.

' Thus the first writes to the Romans, 'Eirirptyare /ioi \xi\xt\tt\v elvanrdQovs
rov 06oO i*ov, suffer me to be an imitator of the sufferings of my God : and
to the Ephesians, There is one carnal and spiritual Physician, made and not
made, eV aapKi yev6/j.evos Oebs, the incarnate God both of Mary and of God.

k The passage is so interesting, that I insert a translation of tho whole. "All
our predecessors and the Apostles themselves have taught the doctrine which
these now teach ; and the truth which had been preserved to the time of
Victor, thirteenth Bishop of Rome ; in that of his successor Zephyrinus, was
adulterated. What has been said might have been credited, did not first
the divine Scriptures oppose it, and secondly the writings of certain brethren
older than Victor, written against the heathen in behalf of the truth, and
against heresies of their days. I speak of Justin, Miltiades, Tatiau, Clement,
and many others, in all of which is Christ represented as God; for who is igno-
rant of the books of Irenseus, of Melito, and of the rest, setting forth Christ
as God and man? And how many psalms and hymns [<j;8as] of the bre-
thren, composed from the beginning by the faithful, celebrate Christ, the
Word of God, as God ? How then when for so many years the ecclesiastical
opinion has been announced, is it possible that those who were before
Victor could proclaim as these say ? how comes it that they are not ashamed
thus to falsify Victor's sentiments, accurately knowing that he solemnly
excommunicated Theodotus the tanner, the leader and father of this God-
denying, apwyialdtov, apostasy f* Euseb. v. 28.

106

LECTURE II.

matises as the God-denying apostasy, for which he was ex-
communicated by Victor Bishop of Rome. The earliest
heresies that prevailed in the Church, and which begun even
in the lifetime of the Apostles, show the deep impression
that had been made that our Lord was more than man, and
even drove some who originated or imbibed them into the
contrary extreme ; for they could not bear the notion that
the Logos had been in any manner united to a material
body ; to evade which presumed degradation, they imagined,
contrary to his own declaration to his Apostles, that he was
an immaterial phantom, and had only seemed to be crucified.
But happily we are not left to tradition as our authority,
for this vital doctrine; this Sun, as it has been called, round
which as the center, revolves the sure word of God. The
whole system in all its glory and harmony, has come down
to us ; and when we appeal to that volume, the proofs are so
numerous, that our only perplexity is to make a judicious
selection. This I shall attempt to do: but first I would
observe, that this leading truth is indirectly implied in various
ways : and this is no other than we might expect, for it is
pregnant with the most serious consequences, and involves
the deepest responsibility. If Christ be not God, we who
offer to him the homage due to the Deity alone, are guilty
of idolatry ; nor is it on the other hand a trivial offence, to
withhold divine honour, if it ought to be paid, and to
equalize with ourselves one, whom angels and archangels
adore as over all, God blessed for ever. Its importance is
also manifest from the inseparable connection of this doc-
trine with the purpose of his appearance on earth ; and the
relation in which man stands to God. Dr. Priestley would
fain persuade us, that the doctrine of immortality, which
is, he says, the great object of the whole revealed will of
God, is just as acceptable from the mouth of the son of
Joseph and Mary, as from the mouth of a man created
for the purpose, from the mouth of an angel, or from the
voice of God Himself speaking from heaven. This, however,
is expressly contradictory of the opinion of the writer
of the Epistle to the Hebrews, who opens it with a
declaration of the glory of Christ as the superior of prophets

LECTURE II.

107

and angels, the equal of the Father, and the Creator of all
things ; and deduces from his dignity the obvious inference,
that the importance of the message, and the danger of re-
jecting it, must bear some proportion to the rank of the
messenger ; therefore we ought to give more earnest heed to
the things which we have heard ; for if the word spoken by
angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience
received a just recompense of reward, how shall we escape
if we neglect so great salvation, which at the first began to
be spoken by the Lord1. If Jesus was not superior to
prophets and angels, there is no force in this conclusion; and,
on the other hand, the higher his superiority, the more
imperative is the duty. But his business was not merely or
mainly, as the same writer states, to deliver a message from
God, and to confirm it by miracles : for we distinctly and
entirely deny the justice of this representation. We assert,
that he came in the character not only of a Prophet, but of a
Priest ; not merely to teach, but to redeem ; not only to set
an example of obedience, but to atone for transgression, and
to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself ; not only by his
own resurrection to demonstrate the certainty of our's, but
to entitle those, who by faith appropriate to themselves the
justification that he has accomplished, to a happy eternity.
The accomplishment of such a work, as it was infinitely
beyond the reach of any created being, required the inter-
position of the co-equal son of God; and we shall find his
divinity so clearly declared in so many various ways, that if
we did not know the power of prejudice to bias the under-
standing, we should think it impossible to deny that it is
the doctrine of the New Testament, which infidels both of
ancient and modern times acknowledge, and on that account
reject its authority. It is clearly implied in the doctrine
of atonement, which the modern Unitarian therefore, con-
sistently with his preconceived theory, rejects ; yet so inter-
woven are both with the whole texture, that they cannot be
explained away without stultifying the arguments in the
Epistles, and depriving a large portion of the sacred text of
its obvious meaning. Dr. Priestly indeed confesses, that a

l Heb. ii. 1.

108

LECTURE II.

plain ordinary reader would take the expressions in the
ancient and usual sense, but that on examination they will
bear his ; such an admission, especially when we consider
the honest simplicity of the authors, is itself fatal to his
system, for he confesses, that the Scriptures which were de-
signed to convey to us true notions of religion, have been so
written, as to lead in every age the great body of believers
into the worst of errors, which they themselves denounce in
the strongest terms, idolatry. Take as an instance of this,
St. Paul's exhortation to the Philippians to humility,
grounded upon our Lord's example, Let this mind be in
you which was also in Christ Jesusm\ which is a very striking
one, if we consider the Apostle to mean, that though equal
to God, he condescended to divest himself for a season of
his glory, and to assume human nature, and die an igno-
minious death; but can have no meaning on the supposition
of a simple humanity, for what humility would there be in
the best and greatest of human beings not claiming equality
with the Deity, and receiving for such condescension so
high an exaltation as to be placed at the head of the
universe ? Many declarations are only intelligible upon
our supposition. Thus the love of God, as displayed in the
mission of Christ, is uniformly spoken of in terms which
intimate its astonishing and unparalleled greatness"; but if
the latter was merely a man commissioned to teach the will
of God, if his life was no more than an example, his death
but a confirmation of his testimony, in what shall we dis-
cover this unparalleled peculiarity of love ; and whence
derive that incomparably superior obligation, which the
passages referred to so strongly express ? The will of God
was more fully developed by the Apostles after the day of
Pentecost, than it had been by Jesus himself during his life.
Why then is Jesus characterised as God's unspeakable gift?
why is the love displayed in this gift the pledge and
assurance of every other blessing, a pledge so precious, an
assurance so decisive, as to convert into a contradiction in
terms, the very supposition that any other possible should
ever be withheld? The same remark applies to the scriptural
■ PhiL ii. 5. n John iii. 16. BflHL v. 8 ; viii. 81, 82. 1 John iv. 8.

LECTURE II.

109

statements of the astonishing condescension and love of the
Lord Jesus Christ himself: Ye know the grace of the Lord
Jesus Christ0, that though he was rich, (which could only have
been in a preexistent state,) yet for your sakes he became
poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich. With this
is closely connected the depth of interest, and the warmth
of adoring gratitude, with which the contemplation of the
subject inspired the hearts of the New Testament writers.
Even an incidental allusion to it carries them away
from the topic before them, and fills them with the loftiest
emotions p. He that spared not his own son, how will he not
with him freely give us all things*? whence these glowing
transports ? Take away the view of Christ's condescension
in assuming our nature, to suffer and to die for the re-
demption of those who were lost, and such transports
become mere passion without reason ; but admit this view,
and all is natural, the cause is adequate to the effect. The
same conclusion follows from the high claims of Jesus
himself on the love and obedience of his followers. He
requires from them such a love as can be due to God alone,
a preference to their nearest earthly relatives, and even to
their own lives ; and yet his claims were owned and felt to
be just, and love to Him became the grand moving principle
of their conduct. The love of Christ constraineth usr. Love
to him is declared to be the characteristic of believers.
Grace be with all them who love the Lord Jesus Christ with
sincerity s, and the absence of this feeling is sufficient to
bring down a curse. If any one love not the Lord Jesus
Christ, let him be anathema*-. The obligations to such
supreme love, we find we cannot feel, on the supposition of
his simple humanity, either on account of what he is, or
what he has done ; but view him as Emmanuel, God with us,
the atoning Redeemer of a lost world, and all is as it ought
to be. This is indeed the only ground of consistency
in the scheme of redemption: without it, our Lord could
not be entitled, in its full acceptation, to his appropriate title
of Saviour, nor be, as he is affirmed to be, the Light of the

2 Cor. viii. 9. p Rom. v. q Phil. iii. 7. * 2 Cor. v. ]4.

s Eph. vi. 24. 1 1 Cor. xvi. 22.

110

LECTURE II.

world, as revealing the will of God to mankind. No one
hath seen God at any time; the only -begotten Son of God, ivho
is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. No one,
saith our Saviour himself, knoweth the Father but the Son,
and he to whom the Son will reveal him. He saith also, that
the holy Spirit that is to guide them into all the truth shall
not communicate to them any new revelation, but shall
receive of his, and show it to his disciples ; and accordingly
St. Paul, speaking of the inspiration of himself, and the
other Apostles, says, we have the mind of Christ. And this
knowledge thus revealed by Christ was not revealed to him,
but possessed by him intuitively, because he dwells in the
bosom of the Father, and has dwelt there from eternity,
being daily his deligJd, and rejoicing always before Himu.
Upon the Unitarian hypothesis, I cannot see how the
Jews can be charged with guilt in putting Jesus to death.
The law of Moses required the blasphemer to be stoned,
and the construction they put upon his words upon one
occasion was, because thou being a man makest thyself
God. When brought before the Sanhedrim, after several
vain attempts to convict him of any crime, he was put
upon his oath. In answer to the question thus solemnly
put, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the blessed God ?
he answered in the affirmative, and upon this the high
priest rent his clothes, and pronounced him guilty of
blasphemy for the saying, in consequence of which the
council condemned him to death. The sense in which he
was understood, and for which he suffered, cannot be doubted;
if it were not the true one, and he was misunderstood, it is
for the Unitarians to show why he did not correct their
mistake, and thus save his own life, and them from the
guilt of his condemnation. According to this doctrine, he
suffered them to rest in a pernicious system, " a mischievous
compound," as Belsham terms it, "of impiety and idolatry;"
and the Apostles wherever they went spread the same
system v. We now proceed to the direct proofs of our
u Proverbs viii.

v These reflections are condensed from Dr. Wardlaw's able and edifying
Discourses on the Socinian controversy.

LECTURE II.

Ill

Lord's divine nature, by showing that they ascribe to
him,

1. The attributes ; 2. the operations ; and 3. the titles of the
Deity; and 4. that they set him forth as the object of
supreme religious worship, and justify and recommend it by
their own example.

These attributes are, 1. eternity ; 2. immutability ; 3. om-
niscience ; 4. omnipresence ; 5. almighty power.

Christ, when he appeared to John in Patmos, in glory
too bright to be sustained by mortal vision, declared
himself to be the first and the last ; the very description
given in the Old Testament of the eternity of the God of
Israel. Thus saith Jehovah king of Israel, and his Redeemer
Jehovah of hosts, I am the first and I am the last, and beside
me there is no God". The Jews of old, and the Christian
church from the beginning, have understood the Wisdom
described by Solomon x of a person, and this is said to have
been with the Lord before his works of old, consequently
from all eternity. It is probable in reference to this
text, that Paul calls Christ the wisdom of God ; and the
famous passage in Micah speaks of two goings forth of the
Ruler of Israel ; the one when he was born in Bethlehem,
the other from of old and of everlasting ; two Hebrew
terms, either of which doth sometimes denote eternity in
the strict sense y. He is before all things, Col. i. 17. Thy
name, O God, is for ever, is in the Epistle to the Hebrews
referred to the Son ; and the author describes him after-
wards as abiding a priest continually without beginning of
days or end of life2.

Immutability. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews
opposes the immutability of Christ to the fading and perishing
nature of the heavens and the earth, by applying to him the
hundred and second Psalm, the force of which was well under-
stood by Athanasius, and triumphantly urged by him against
the Arians. In the same Epistle, Jesus Christ is said to be

w Isaiah xliv. 6. and xlviii. 12. % Proverbs viii.

y For the first, see Ps. iv. 19. Hab. i. 12. for the second, Ps. xc. 2 ; xciii 2.

1 Heb. i. 8 ; vii. 3.

112

LECTURE II.

the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever*; which may be
explained by a parallel text in the Revelations, who is, who
was, and who is to comeh, words which undeniably denote
eternal, unchangeable existence.

Omniscience may justly be predicated of him in whom
are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. It was
ascribed to him while on earth by his disciples, Lord, thou
knowest all things*: He knew what is in mand; and he him-
self claims this peculiar and distinguishing attribute of the
one true Gode, i" am he that searcheth the reins and
heart1 : and the prayer of the Apostles, Thou, Lord, who
knowest the hearts of all men", was probably addressed to
him, to whom they had declared before his death, now we
are sure that thou knowest all things^.

Omnipresence, which may be said to be comprehended in
omniscience, is in these texts plainly declared. Where two
or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the
midst of them '1 ; in substance the same as the assurance given
by Jehovah to Moses, in all places where I record my name,
I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee*. Lo, I am with
you always unto the end of the world1. By him all things
consist"1, which is a most emphatical description of the
omnipresence of God.

Almighty power. The title of mighty God is assigned to
him among those peculiar to Deity, in the prediction of
Isaiah, Unto us a Child is born. He calls Himself, the
Almighty n, and the Apostle ascribes to him an energy
whereby he is able to subdue even all things unto himself'^.
And all these inherent attributes are shown to be in him,
because they are put forth in the divine operations of

1. Creation, which is affirmed in the strongest terms con-
ceivable by St. John ; By him all things were made, and
without him was not even one thing made that was madev; and
by St. Paulq, who also adds, that {key were created for him1.

» Heb. xiii. 8. b Rev. t 8. c John xxi. 1? ; xvi. 30. d John ii. 25.
« Jer. xvii. 10. 1 Kings viii. 39. Rev. ii. 23. & Acts i. 24.

h John xvi. 30. ' Matt, xviii. 20. k Exod. xv. 24. 1 Matt, xxviii. 20.
>« Col. i. 17. » Rev. i. 8. 0 Phil. iii. 21. p John i. 3. q Col. i. 10.
r 1 Cor. viii. 0. Heb. i. 2.

LECTURE II.

2. The preservation of what he originally made. Up-
holding all things by the word of his power*.

3. The government of all things, asserted in the second and
seventy -second Psalms. Christ who is over all things*; gave
him to be head over all things unto the churchu ; at the name
of Jesus every knee shall bow, of beings in heaven, earth, and
under the earthv : and he strengthened the Apostles for their
great work of converting the world by the assurance, that all
power had been given unto him. As Christ governs the
world now, he will judge it hereafter, ivhen he shall come in
the glory of his Father, with his angels; and then shall he
reward every man according to his works™ : for the Father
judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment to the Sonx;
who is ordained to be judge of quick and dead, when all that
are in the graves shall hear his voice, and he will give to his
sheep eternal life?.

4. His working miracles, in his incarnate state, not like
the prophets and his apostles by previous prayer to God,
but by his own authority. Thus to the leper, / will, be
thou clean a ; to the sea, Peace, be still, and the winds and the
sea obey himh; and by that undoubted prerogative of Deity,
forgiveness of sins; Who can forgive sins, but God alone; a
power denied to him by the scribes, but asserted by himself,
which he proved he possessed by the miraculous cure of the
paralytic ; that ye may knoiv that the Son of man hath power
to forgive sins, he said to the sick of the palsy, Arise, take up
thy bed, and walk0.

5. Redemption is also ascribed to the Son, not as his Father's
instrument, but as his own voluntary act. Being made
perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation to all them
that obey himd : Christ gave himself for us, that he might
redeem us from all iniquity e.

The idea that redemption conveys to the English reader,
is the recovery of a slave from bondage by purchase, or
by the superior power of a conqueror ; and the latter well

s Heb. i. 2. 1 Rom. ix. 5. u Eph. i. 20. » Phil. ii. 9—11.

w Matt. xvii. x John v. 22. y John v. 28. * John x. 28.

* Matt. viii. 3. b Matt. viii. 27. Mark iv. 39. « Matt. ix. 27.
d Heb. v. 9. ■ Titus ii. 14.

114

LECTURE II.

expresses the deliverance of the captives of Satan. But
in Hebrew there are two words for Redeemer, and the most
important of these, Goel, is of a much higher significance,
since it declares the nature as well as the work of the
redeemer, and the reason for his redeeming ; and affords a
proof, overlooked by or unknown to many, of the divinity of
our deliverer. I recommend the perusal of the chapter on
the Goel in Michaelis' Mosaic Law, translated by Smith,
in which it appears, that the office, though adopted by the
Hebrew legislature, was anterior to the Law, is still existing
under another name among the Arabs, and with some modifi-
cation prevails in most countries in an early stage of society.
The Goel is the nearest kinsman, and undertakes all
the duties of consanguinity. The idea being unknown
to modern times, translators have endeavoured to explain
it, by rendering it next of kin, when the Goel is called
on, as in the tale of Ruth, to marry, and blood avenger,
when it is his duty to slay the murderer of his nearest
relation. Such a redeemer must be, of necessity, a kins-
man : and if our Saviour be also in this sense our Re-
deemer, he must be a partaker of our flesh and blood, to
entitle him to undertake the office. But flesh and blood
we know, however willing, could never have achieved his
triumph ; our Goel therefore must be also divine ; and for
the strong consolation of the intelligent student of the
sacred language it is written, thy Redeemer is the Holy One of
Israel, that Lord of Hosts, whom we know from other texts
to be the second person of the Trinity. In the early book
of Job, the patriarch declares his trust in his Redeemer,
and expresses his fervent desire that a speech so weighty
should be graven on a rock in characters which should last
for ever. I believe with the ancient interpreters, that he
looked forward to no restoration to health and property : and
that with Schultens he meant it to be an epitaph on his tomb,
(probably an excavation in a rock,) in evidence of his dying
in the full assurance of hope. There seems to me no doubt,
that he believed after his body had apparently perished, he
should on his resurrection see in the flesh his near kinsman*,
f Ik, xliv. G ; liv. b.

LECTURE II.

115

and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth to
claim him from the grave ; and wished to record his con-
viction, that he was not a temporal deliverer, but that his
Redeemer was the Living onee, the God whom he should then
see in the flesh.

It may however be asked, why are we left to deduce his
divinity from the attributes and offices assigned to him ;
why is he not expressly declared to be God ? and we reply,
that his divinity is affirmed in several passages, and in none
with more effect and solemnity than in the Gospel of
St. John, which opens with the positive declaration, that the
Logos, whose history in his incarnate state he was about to
give, was God ; and not limiting himself to the mere
ascription of the name, he describes him in such terms as
show that he intended no nominal or inferior Deity, but
God in the true, strict, and proper sense, eternal and im-
mutable, of the same power and perfections and nature as
the Father. And as he began his Gospel with observing,
that the Son as well as the Father is God, so it is re-
markable that he ends his Epistle with the same doctrine.
This is the true God and eternal life : and in the Revelation
Christ not only appears with all the divine attributes,
but declares, / will be a God to him that overcomethh.
Of whom (the Israelites) as concerning the flesh the Christ
came, who is over all, God blessed for ever, is the climax
with which Paul closes his enumeration of the privileges of
his countrymen, which Unitarians have in vain endeavoured
to force ungrammatically, to bear another sense, which
would deprive of meaning the clause as concerning the flesh '1.
The same Apostle furnishes other passages. Thus in the
first Epistle to Timothy, God manifested in the flesh, which
even if we adopt the readings who or which, may be shown
from the context still to assert the Saviour's divinity.
And in that to Titus, looking for the appearance of our
great God and Saviour Jesus Christ, not so rendered in our
present, though it was in our former version, and which
the genius of the language and the express declaration of
the Greek Father Chrysostoin prove, can only be applied
* Job xix. 23—37. h Rev. xxi. 7. 1 Rom. ix. 5.

I 2

116

LECTUHE II.

to the Son; which the sense also shows, since there will be no
manifestation or epiphany of the Father, whom no man hath
seen or can see'h

This rule of interpretation gives us St. Peter's testi-
monyk, through the righteousness of our God and Saviour
Jesus Christ, which is also borne out by the meaning. The
application of the forty-fifth Psalm to him by the author of
the Epistle to the Hebrews is equivalent to calling him
God; Unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, 0 God, is for ever
and ever; and the mighty God, the title which is given to
the one supreme God of Israel1, is among those that are
assigned to the child, whose birth is announced by Isaiah,
and who he says shall be called Emmanuel, or God with us.
This evidence had been almost altogether overlooked by
modern critics. The philanthropist Granville Sharp had
the merit of reviving it ; and Dr. Wordsworth, the late
Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, proved by a variety
of passages in prose and verse, that the same idiom pre-
vailed in classical Greek. It was however no discovery,
though its importance was not generally understood till the
publication of Bishop Middleton's work on the Greek
Article. It is maintained without the least hesitation by
Beza, in his note on the celebrated passage in Titus, and it
may be proved by the exposition of the Greek Fathers on
some of these texts. It is allowed by Jerome; but seems
to have been lost sight of in the Western Church, the
language cf which is destitute of the article. The rule is,
that when two or more personal nouns of the same gender,
number, and case are connected by the copulative, if the
first has the article and the others not, they all relate
to the same person ; or, as Beza long ago expressed it,
in a note to his Greek Testament, Postulat Grasci ser-
monis constructio ut ad unum idem que subjectum re-
feratur utrumque prasdicatum nec magis probabiliter rou
fjAycttov 0=o'j xa\ (tmtt^oc, r^oov ad duos distinctos personas re-
ferri quam 6 Osog y.cti I7«t^ 'Irjcroy XqivTOu itaque sic concludo

i Clement of Alexandria agrees with Chrysostom, and the translation is
approved alike hy Whitby and the Roman Catholic commentator Calmet.
k 2 Pet. i. 1. 1 Isaiah x. 21.

LECTURE II.

117

Christum Jesum hie aperte magnum Deum dici, qui et
beata ilia Spes nostra metonymice vocatur. Illi igitur ut
vero magno et aeterna Deo bpoovcricp xa) <ruvoii$M sit gloria
et laus omnis in sascula saeculorum. Finally it may be
shown, that Jehovah, the incommunicable name of Deity,
is continually applied to God the Son : and it is affirmed
by the Evangelist, when he declares that the Messiah
was the Jehovah of hosts, whom Isaiah saw upon his
throne. It is undeniable that Kvgio$ is the translation
of this aweful and holy name, both in the Septuagint and
the New Testament ; and from this we learn the ancient
date of the superstition of the Jews, who read Adon, answer-
ing to Kupiog and Lord, for Jehovah, which they deem too
sacred to pronounce. This word Lord being also addressed
as a term of respect to human superiors, it will be difficult
always to distinguish when it is meant to signify more : for,
like 7T£oo-p£uv=»v, to worship, or to do homage, being am-
biguous, the context of the passage must decide its import ;
but there can be no doubt when it is used in citations from
the Old Testament. Thus, when we read of John the
Baptist saying, This is he who was spoken of by Esaias the
prophet, crying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness,
Prepare ye the way of the Lord ; a reference to the original
will satisfy us that this Lord is Jehovah, the same who
saith, Behold, I will send my messenger before my face, and
he will prepare the way before me1. This once admitted,
and how can it be denied, we shall find in the Old Testa-
ment abundant declarations of the divinity of the Son of
God ; and we shall adopt the conclusion of the primitive
Church, as stated as early as Justin Martyr, that all the
appearances of Deity therein recorded, are manifestations
of the second Person in the Divine Essence. In many of
these passages this is made plainer by the addition of angel,
or messenger, not the angel of the Lord, as it is rendered,
but the angel Lord, two substantives in apposition, that
is, the Jehovah that is sent, the one indicating his nature,
the other his office. This was the angel, for the contexts
show that he was no created being who wrestled with Jacob,
who appeared to Manoah and his wifem, and announced

1 Malachi iii. m Judges xiii. 18.

118

LECTURE 11.

his name to be Pelah, wonderful, (one of the titles given by
Isaiah to Immanuel ;) and to Moses in the burning bush,
he declares himself to be Jehovah, and the God of Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob. As such he must unquestionably be the
object of supreme adoration, and to him the Apostle applies
the ninety-seventh Psalm, confounded be all they who worship
graven images; worship him, all ye gods ; as if he had said,
worship no more idols of any kind, worship the Messiah,
not only ye sons of Adam, but ye angels also, to whom this
worship is often foolishly rendered. This worship is re-
quired from both, for we are told, that at the name of Jesus
every knee should bown; a fact foretold by Isaiah, Look
unto me, and be ye saved, all ye ends of the earth, for I am
God, and there is none else ; surely to me shall every knee
bow, shall every tongue swear, saying, Only to Jehovah
belong eth salvation and power0. This has been accom-
plished as far as the reign of Christ has extended, and if
any doubt of the propriety of this adoration could be enter-
tained, it ought to be removed by his own declaration, that
the final judgment hath been committed to him ; that all men
might honour the Son, even as they honour the Father?. In
conformity with this St. Paul prays, that grace, mercy, and
peace might be communicated to those to whom he wrote,
from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ; and to
this effect he writes in all his Epistles, except in that to the
Hebrews, which does not commence with any benediction.
He often prays to Christ directly: Now God himself , even our
Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, direct our way unto you.
And the Lord make you to increase and abound in loveq, &c.
The first prayer is equally offered up to the Father and to
the Son; the second to the Son alone; and he entreats both,
our Lord Jesus Christ himself', and God even our Father, to
comfort the hearts of the Thessalonians, and to stablish them
in every good word and work1. Christ was the Lord, when
Paul besought thrice, and who comforted him with the assur-
ance that His strength was made perfect in weakness*. And
there can be no doubt that he was the Lord whom the dying
Stephen invoked when he committed his soul to his care,

I rhil. ii. • Is. zhr, 22. J' John v. 22. I 1 Thess. iii. II, 12.
' 2 Thess. ii. 16, 17. ■ 2 Cor. xii. 8.

LECTURE II.

119

being as we are told at the time full of the Holy Ghost.
After his resurrection, Thomas addresses him not only
as his Master, but as his God ; and so general was the prac-
tice, that from this very custom believers received as their
distinguishing appellation, ' Those who called on the name
of Christ.' Of Paul upon his conversion it was said, Is
not this he who destroyed them that called upon this name in
Jerusalem *? And the same Paul, in writing to the Corinthians,
wishing to mark that he meant his Epistle for the use of
other Christians also, denominates them as those that in
every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord".
I close this variety of evidence, by fixing your attention
on the glorious vision which cheered the beloved disciple
when an exile in Patmos, for the word of God, and for the
testimony of Jesus Christ. The Deity appeared to him on a
throne in heaven, and he saw also a Lamb as it had been
slain, surrounded by multitudes redeemed by his blood, out of
every kindred and tongue, and encircled beyond by myriads
of angels, both uniting in the new song of praise, saying,
Blessing, and glory, and honour, and power, be unto him that
sitteth upon the throne, and to the Lamb for ever and ever.

Such being the overpowering evidence for the divine
nature of our Redeemer, Prophet, Priest, and King, it was
to be expected that he should receive the adoration of his
people. We find accordingly, that in the Greek Liturgies,
(interpolated, yet substantially of remote antiquity,) though
as in our own Book of Common Prayer, and the Breviary
from which it is in great part derived, the Father is generally
addressed through the Son, yet the Son himself is fre-
quently the object of worship. The prayer taken from the
Liturgy of Constantinople, which bears the name of Chry-
sostom, must be familiar to you all; but such is our tendency
to repeat words without thinking of their meaning, that some
of you may be surprised to learn, that this worship is not
limited to Collects, but that the Te Deum and the Litany,
the first, with the exception of three verses, which have the
air of an insertion, and the latter, omitting the introductory
invocations, are addressed exclusively to the Lamb of God,
1 Acts ix. 21. " 1 Cor. i. 2.

120

LECTURE II,

the good Lord, an epithet by which in France the Son is still
commonly distinguished from the Father. The appropriation
of Te Deum may not be so generally allowed, as the wor-
shipper is likely to be misled by " Father everlasting." He
will, however, find it among the exalted titles assigned in
Isaiah to the incarnate Deity ; which the Septuagint has
well rendered, "Father of the coming age;" and on referring
to Isaiah's vision, he will perceive, that it suggested this com-
position ; and that the Jehovah Sabaoth, whom the prophet
describes upon his throne as adored by the seraphim, is, as 1
have just observed, declared by St. John to be the Messiah.
This application of the hymn will hardly be disputed by those
who understand the original ; for Te Deum laudamus is, We
praise thee [not O God, but] as God; and this is confirmed by
the following parallelism, " We acknowledge thee to be the
Lord." The Name of Jesus has in every age sounded " as music
in the believer's ear;" nor would he willingly his praise "from
his Father's praise disjoin." Still it has from the beginning, I
apprehend, been more common to address to him thanksgivings,
than petitions; and we have read in Eusebius*, how the
primitive Christians, who called upon his name, acted upon
Paul's advice to the Ephesians and Colossians, to make melody
in their hearts to the Lord, in psalms and hymns and spiritual
songs. This singing was evidently not limited to divine
service, but enlivened their hours of recreation, and in
solitude " made the wounded spirit whole, and calmed the
troubled breast." Several devout addresses of Gregory
Nazianzen to Christ on a journey and in illness, and on
other occasions, have been preserved : and many Latin
hymns to the Saviour in the Breviary are justly admired
for their piety ; yet as far as my knowledge reaches
he appears in them rather as the sovereign and the
judge, than the gracious friend of repentant sinners; and
I believe it is only in Protestant collections of hymns, and
especially in the multitude provided for English congre-
gations; from Watts, our earliest and most abundant author,
both in quality and quantity, down to the beautiful com-
positions of the still living poet of the United Brethren,
* Evang. xix. c. iii 16.

LECTURE II.

that Jesus is magnified as Emmanuel, and as " our great high
priest above ;" and if so, the Anglo-Saxon race is privileged
above the other families of man at home, and beyond the
Atlantic, and in its settlements in Australia, to " celebrate
his Lord's constant care and sympathetic love."

Slight and imperfect as this statement is, I am confident
that it must confirm you in your belief that the Scriptures
to the hearing ear proclaim the divinity of our Lord.
At the same time we are as desirous as our opponents
can be, of maintaining his humanity ; for though as God we
might acknowledge and worship him, it is as man that he
suffered and died for us. The Article accordingly proceeds to
say, that " he took man's nature in the womb of the blessed
Virgin, of her substance." There is one mediator between
God and man, the man Christ Jesus : and since by man came
death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. As sure
then as the first Adam and we who are redeemed are men,
so is the second Adam, the Lord from heaven, also man. He
accordingly acknowledges this by his own appellation of
himself, the Son of Man, and in that nature he was promised
first to Eve as the Seed of Woman, and then to Abraham and
to David ; and as he was their son, so are we his brethren ;
and therefore it behoved him to be made like unto his
brethren, for he laid not hold on the angels, but on the seed
of Abraham^ , and so became not an angel, but a man. The
Apostle to the Hebrews argues, that in order to accomplish
the work for which lie came into the world, he must be
a partaker of flesh and blood ; and that to be a merciful
and faithful high priest, lie must in all tilings be made like
unto his brethren ; and St. John, in opposition to Gnostic
fancies already beginning to prevail, declares, that every
spirit that confesseth not Jesus Christ come in the flesh, is not
of God. Our Lord himself on his resurrection was careful
to prove by his eating before his disciples, and inviting
them to handle him, that he had resumed his body ; and the
whole Gospel history shows, that he had one before, which
none of those among whom he lived seem to have ever
doubted. And certainly, to use Bishop Pearson's words, if
the Son of God would vouchsafe to take the frailty of our
» Heb. ii. 14. 17.

122

LECTURE II.

flesh, he would not omit the nobler part the soul, without
which indeed he could not be really a man. Jesus, we are
told2, increased in wisdom and stature , one in respect of his
body, the other of his soul ; wisdom belongeth not to the flesh,
nor can the knowledge of God which is infinite increase. He
then whose knowledge did increase together with his years,
must have had a subject proper for it which is no other than
a human soul. This was the seat of his finite understanding,
and of his human will, which appears distinct from that of
his Father, from his prayer, Not my will but thine be done.
This soul was the object of his affections and passions, and
was exceeding sorrowful even unto death; the spirit which on
the cross he commended unto his Father ; and as his death
was nothing but the separation of soul and body, his life as
man consisted in their union ; so that he who was very God,
was also " very man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh
subsisting." The godhead and the manhood, two whole and
perfect natures, were joined together in one person. The
word is well chosen, for it shows that the two are still
distinct, not confounded by any process, blended as it were
into one, and neither was converted or transubstantiated
into the other; for on either supposition we should be so far
from acknowledging him to be both God and man, that we
should thereby profess him to be, correctly speaking, neither.

This union also was not for a temporary purpose, but
"never to be divided ;" for it is as man that our Lord ascended,
and now sits at the right hand of God, performing continually
for us the intercessory part of his sacerdotal office. St. John
in his vision beheld his triumphant Lord as the sun shineth
in its strength ; and we are assured, that on the resurrection
the bodies of believers will by his almighty energy be
made to resemble his glorified body. His mediatorial
reign indeed will terminate, St. Paul informs us, at the
judgment-day, when he will resign it to his Father, the object
of it being attained : yet his personal glory as Christ will
never cease ; and if every saint shall enjoy in the body an
everlasting inheritance, much more shall he retain his glory
who has earned for them this reward, and bestowed it on them.

That "he truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried,"
* Luke ii. 52.

LECTURE II.

123

follows, if it be proved that he had a proper human body.
I need not say that these facts are recorded in the Gospels,
and argued from in the Acts and the Epistles, and were denied
only by those early heretics, the Docetse, who maintained
that his body was not real but apparent. Gnosticism in all
varieties has been so long extinct, that it is known only to
the students of ecclesiastical history. I should not therefore
have alluded to this strange sect, which of necessity re-
jected the crucifixion, had it not been perpetuated in the
Koran, which tells us that the Jews were mistaken when
they supposed they had crucified Jesus, for God substituted
for him, whom he raised to the seventh heaven, a mere
resemblance of him, which seems to be the phantom of these
Gnostics, though according to Mahometan commentators it
was a disciple who willingly took his place, and will be
rewarded hereafter by a place near his master*.

Having thus defined the nature of our Lord, the Article
concludes with stating the cause for which he united in one
person his two natures ; "to reconcile his Father unto us,
and to be a sacrifice not only for original guilt, but also for
actual sins of men." We may easily believe, that it was for
no inferior purpose which a mere man could accomplish,
that he who was God over all blessed for ever, should
divest himself of his glory, and take upon him the likeness of
men : and accordingly those who deny the great object for
which he came into the world, consistently deny his divinity,
for the two doctrines must stand or fall together. They
argue, that the only reconciliation required was that of man
to God, and that as God was too kind to be angry with man,
no reconciliation was needed on his part. This opinion
however can only be entertained by those who consider God
as exclusively love, forgetting that this description only
belongs to him in his conduct towards those who are in
covenant with him ; with reference to those who reject the
method of salvation he has devised, and disobey him, he is,
as another Apostle tells usb, a consuming fire. They forget
that "a God" all mercy, is a God unjust, "and in endeavours
to magnify his goodness, they overlook his wisdom and his
a Koran, iii. in Maracei's edition, b Heb. xii. 29.

LECTURE II.

holiness." As a righteous lawgiver and ruler, God must be
considered as displeased with his guilty creatures on account
of their violation of his authority, while at the same time,
from the infinite benignity of his nature, he is inclined to
forgiveness. But if his government be righteous, its claims
in their full extent must of necessity be preserved inviolate;
for the commands of God once admitted to be right, can
never undergo a change, his claims can never be mitigated
or lowered, because we are unwilling or have become in-
capable of keeping them. The question then is, not how
may God be rendered kindly disposed towards the human
race ; but how he may extend forgiveness without injury
to his other attributes. The answer is given by Christianity
alone. In the cross we behold at once, in a manner un-
utterably awful and affecting, the holy purity of God, and
his immutable justice. Thus he can be not only merciful,
hut just, in justifying those who believe in Jesus; and that
God required to be reconciled, and himself devised the
mode of reconciliation, is thus plainly asserted, God was
inc [or by] Christ reconciling the world unto himself, which
the Apostle immediately explains, by not imputing their tres-
passes unto them. He then proceeds to say, Be ye reconciled
to God, (a work from the corruption of our nature no less
required, and which can only be accomplished by the Holy
Spirit,) for he hath made him who knew no sin to be sin for
usd ; and, If when we were enemies, we were reconciled to
God by the death of his son. This reconciliation the reasoning
shows must be of God ; but as Unitarians cavil at the word,
I add, that the same doctrine is conveyed by all those
passages that speak of God's being pacified, propitiated,
and having his anger turned away. This reconciliation is
called atonement in the only place in which it occurs e in
the New Testament xaraAAayq, and reconcile, and be re-
conciled, is the translation of the corresponding verb ; and
this is the orignal meaning of that term which is to make at
onef those who were at variance, and are sometimes collo-

« 2 Cor. v. 18. d Rom. v. 10 c- Rom. v. 11.

r He seeks to make atonement

Between the Duke of Gloucester and your brother.

Richard III. act i. sc. 3.

LECTURE II.

12.5

quially said to be two. It is common in the Old Testament,
where it is rendered in Greek efy)Jtaourfa$. Atonement properly
means this reconciliation : but is often in theological works
taken for the satisfaction rendered to God by Christ. In
the Old Testament it answers to propitiation. It is to be con-
sidered then as a fixed principle, that sin must be punished;
and that if the sinner be pardoned, it must be in a way that
marks and proclaims the evil of the offence ; this is effected
by substitution of one partaking of the same nature, and
himself innocent, which as far as we can judge could not be
effected in any other way. There are divines firmly per-
suaded of the doctrine, who regard it presumptuous to go
so far, and who think it more becoming to say that God
hath chosen this way ; yet the Apostle, who argues, that it
was impossible that the blood of bulls and of goats, could take
away sin, shows the necessity of this; and declares that it
became God to make the Captain of our salvation perfect
through sufferings : nor is it easy to conceive how it could
become God to purchase our redemption at this price, if
any lower one could be availing. Under the Mosaic system,
not devised by man but revealed by God, we know that
without shedding of blood there is no remission. The
Deity was worshipped on the mercy seat, or propitiatory,
which was to be sprinkled with blood by the High Priest :
and all the offerings it prescribed, in themselves utterly
worthless, derived their value from being figures of the only
real sacrifice, which was in the fulness of time to be offered
up by him, who was at once the victim and the priest.
Thus God's method of justifying was witnessed by the Law*,
which in this, as in other respects, was a Schoolmaster ;
and is implied, and sometimes clearly announced by the
Prophets, especially in Isaiah's memorable description of the
Man of sorrows*. This is the only rational mode of account-
ing for the origin of animal sacrifice, and the prevalence of so
extraordinary a mode of worship in all false religions, the
characteristic of which, in contradiction of the Unitarian fancy
that God requires no reconciliation, seems to have ever been
the necessity of appeasing an offended Deity. Certainly
I Rom. v. 20. h Isaiah liii.

126

LECTURE II.

the doctrine pervades the New Testament. He who was
appointed to prepare the way of our Lord, pointing him out
to his own disciples in sacrificial language as the Lamb of
God that taketh away the sins of the world; and the fact
announced before by Christ himself, is most emphatically
made an essential part of the commemoration he has in-
stituted of his death ; this is my blood of the new Covenant
which is shed for many for the remission of sins. There is
scarcely a book of the New Testament in which it may not
be found; and the Epistle to the Hebrews may be considered
as an inspired exposition of his priestly character, which unless
he had had something to offer could never have been sustained.
We may therefore rest satisfied, that the death of Christ was
a real sacrifice ; and a propitiation not only for original sin,
that of Adam ; but also for actual, that is, the personal trans-
gressions of his descendants. He is the propitiation for our sins,
and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
This language certainly seems favourable to the doctrine of
universal as opposed to particular redemption, and the
wording of the Article, t( [all] actual sins of men," and still
more the 31st Article, " the offering of Christ once made is
that perfect redemption, propitiation, and satisfaction for all
the sins of the whole world, both original and actual," seem
to assert that doctrine. It is argued, however, that though
sufficient for all, it will be effectual only to some ; and that
this will be found true in fact, (whether we adopt the Cal-
vinistic or Arminian mode of explaining it, that is, whether
we ascribe it to a divine decree, or the fault of men,) cannot
be questioned by any who believe in the eternity of future
punishment, which is too plainly revealed to be explained
away ; but a more convenient opportunity will be afforded
in the ninth and following Articles, of considering the
extent and application of the remedy.

In almost every country and subject, versification has been
employed to fix upon the memory facts and precepts, which
it is important to retain. Thus in latin and arabic, the rules
of grammar have been arranged in familiar metre; and I will
close this Lecture on this fundamental and vital doctrine,
the nature of our blessed Lord, with a sacred poem from the

LECTURE II.

127

Olney hymns, which though inferior as a composition to
many by that experienced believer the Editor, and still
more to the poetical strains of his more highly gifted
associate, will be highly valued as a sound epitome of the
doctrine of salvation, to all who love the truth as it is in
Jesus.

What think you of Christ? is the test
To try both your state and your scheme :
You cannot he right in the rest,
Unless you think rightly of Him.

Some take him a creature to he,

A man — or an angel at most ;

Sure these have not feelings like me,

Nor know themselves wretched and lost.

So guilty, so helpless am I,

I durst not confide in his blood,

Nor on his protection rely,

Unless I were sure he was God.

Some call him a Saviour, in word,
But mix their own works with his plan,
And hope, he his help will afford,
When they have done all that they can :
If doings prove rather too light,
A little they own they may fail,
They purpose to make up full weight,
By casting his name in the scale.

Some style him the pearl of great price,
And say he's the fountain of joys,
Yet feed upon folly and vice,
And cleave to the world and its toys :
Like Judas, the Saviour they kiss,
And while they salute him, betray;
Ah ! what will profession like this
Avail in the terrible day ?

If asked, what of Jesus I think,
Though still my best thoughts are but poor,
I say, he's my meat, and my drink,
My life, and my strength, and my store ;
My Shepherd, my Husband, my Friend,
My Saviour from sin and from thrall,
My hope from beginning to end,
My portion, my Lord, and my All.

LECTURE III.

ARTICLE III.

OF THE GOING DOWN OF CHRIST INTO HELL.

As Christ died for us, and was buried, so also is it to be
believed that he went down into hell.

It appears extraordinary, that we should have an Article
upon the descent into hell ; and certainly it is superfluous,
for it only affirms the fact maintained in the Apostles'
creed, which another Article declares ought to be received
and believed. It might partly be introduced to render
complete our declarations concerning our Saviour ; for in
the preceding Article we have the leading doctrines enu-
merated, from his eternal generation to his burial ; and in
the following, his resurrection and ascension. As it now
stands it only asserts the fact, and we are at liberty to affix
our own meaning upon the words. In the original Article
it could only have been conscientiously subscribed by those
who believed both that the Spirit of Christ, between his death
and resurrection, preached to the spirits in prison, and also
that the doctrine was affirmed by St. Peter a, for it originally
continued thus : " For his body lay in the grave till his
resurrection, but his soul being separate from his body
remained with the spirits which were detained in prison,
that is to say, in hell, and there preached unto them." The
passage is confessedly obscure, and many modern commenta-
tors refer it altogether to the antediluvian world. This
interpretation Bishop Pearson pronounces evident, because

• 1 Pet. iii. 19.

LECTURE III.

129

Christ is said to have preached by the same spirit by which
he was himself raised from the dead, which therefore must
have been one of more power than his human soul. He
adds, that his preaching was to those who had been dis-
obedient, and before the flood, and that he preached not in
person, but through the ministry of Noah. Augustin, he
tells us, was staggered by the difficulties of the old inter-
pretation : notwithstanding it has been the received opinion,
and consequently this portion of Scripture was selected for
the epistle of Easter Eve. And it seems to me to be the
true one, for I understand that it was at the suggestion of
the Holy Spirit, that our Lord himself went and preached
immediately after his death, to the spirits of the deceased,
then in the prison of Hades. The Bishop's interpretation
appears to me to be confuted by went, which directs us to
a personal agency, and it is less in harmony with the fol-
lowing passage ; For, for this cause the Gospel was preached
also to them that are deadh.

The original Article shows plainly the sense in which this
descent was understood at the time ; and it is thus explained
in the short Catechism, put forth by the King's authority the
following year. " Then he truly died, and was truly buried,
that by his most sweet sacrifice he might pacify his Father's
wrath against mankind, and subdue him by his death who
had the authority of death, which was the Devil ; foras-
much not only the living but the dead, were they in hell
or elsewhere, they all felt the power and force of his death,
to whom lying in prison, (as Peter saith,) Christ preached,
though dead in body, yet relived in spirit." Archbishop
Parker was probably induced to omit the concluding clause,
which fixed its meaning, by a paper prepared for the Synod
of 1562, by the Bishop of Exeter, in which he says that
there have been great invectives in his diocese between
preachers on this Article, some holding that the going down
of Christ to hell was nothing else but that the virtue and
strength of his death should be made known to them that
were dead before ; others maintaining that it only means, he
sustained upon the cross the infernal pains of hell, when he

'> 1 Pet. iv. ft.
K

130

LECTURE III.

cried out, Why hast thou forsaken me ? Finally, there are
persons who preach, that this Article is not contained in
other symbols : and all these sayings they ground upon
Erasmus, and the Germans, especially Calvin and Bullinger;
the contrary side bringing forward in their support the
universal consent of the Fathers of both Churches0.

It was certainly judicious to omit the reference to Peter's
Epistle, which would commit the Church to a doubtful
sense of a text, and it is contrary to the principle of
Articles which ought to be dogmatical, leaving the proofs to
commentators who do not write with authority. For the
doctrine may be true, and its supporters mistaken in the
texts which they bring forward to prove it. The fact
itself cannot be denied by any who believe the Scriptures.
Voltaire says it is not mentioned in the Gospels or in the
Acts. In the first, it could hardly have been expected ;
but it is mentioned in the latter, not it is true in the
narrative, yet by St. Peter as the authoritative application
of a prophecy ; Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither
tvilt thou suffer thy holy one to see corruption^ ; and it is
upon this text that the doctrine chiefly rests. It has
been so universally received, that Augustin exclaims,
" Who but an infidel ever denied that Christ had been in
helle;" and all men, observes Bellarmine, agree, that Christ
descended into hell, though they differ as to the meaning.
The subject in England has been much discussed soon after
the first Articles wrere agreed upon in 1566, and afterwards
in 1597, when Bilson Bishop of Winchester maintained, in a
sermon preached at Paul's Cross, that Christ descended to
the lowest hell, there to triumph over Satan in his own
dominions. " But why," says Bishop Pearson, " should he
descend to hell to triumph there over them over whom he had
already triumphed on the cross ? why should he go to lead
captive those, which he wras to captivate when he ascended
into heaven ? and as to the testimonies of the Fathers, they

c Strype's Annals, i. c. 31. and Life of Parker, i. 5 J 3. In 1567, Lord
Burleigh thanks tbe Archbishop for his care in appeasing the unprofitable
controversy then newly raised upon the descent of Christ into hell.

d Acts ii. 24—31. • De Cbristo, iv. 6.

LECTURE 111.

131

will appear of small validity to conlirm the triumphant
descent, as it is distinguished from the two effects which we
have seen fit not to admit, the removal of the saints to
heaven, and the delivering the damned from the torments of
hell." Archbishop Whitgift, till convinced by Broughton,
had been of Calvin's opinion, that it was to be taken meta-
phorically for Christ's enduring in his soul the pains of hell upon
the cross, when forsaken of his Father. Some even, among
whom was Latimer, maintained, that he endured them in hell
itself, literally undergoing them as the substitute of sinners,
that he might pay the whole penalty of sin ; an opinion not
held by his original editor, who adds a marginal note to one
of his sermons, " bear with Father Latimer in this." We
know the moderation of the other revisers of the Articles,
and their wish for as comprehensive union as practicable :
and therefore we may readily conceive why they struck out
the quotation from St. Peter, and left this subordinate
question open to private judgment. Those who used it in
this sense had influence enough to procure the omission of
the conclusion of the Article, which has a tendency, sometimes
an unconscious one, to wrest Scripture from its obvious
meaning to another more in harmony with our preconceived
notions. Augustine, notwithstanding his remark, probably
had not this Article in his own creed, since he omits it
when explaining the others ; and it does not occur in the
most ancient we have, those of Irenaeus and Tertullian.
St. Paul when rehearsing f the chief articles of the Gospel
which he had preached to the Corinthians, and which he de-
clared would suffice to their salvation, passes over this tenet,
though he enumerates the death, burial, and resurrection. The
words are ambiguous, for strange as it may seem to the un-
learned, Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, has, and may be
translated, Thou wilt not leave my body in the grave: 4>v^y}
properly means the animal soul as distinguished from srveSjxa,
the spirit, but is applied to a dead body in the Septuagints;
and "ASyis, Hades, is the habitation of men after death.
That of the body is the grave; unhappily in modern
English the habitation of a soul has no name; for hell,
f 1 Cor. xv. % Lev. xx. 1, 11. Nunib. v. 2. vi. 6.

K 2

132

LECTURE III.

which had that meaning originally, is now taken exclusively
for Gehenna, the place of future punishment. In our version
it answers to both ; thus we have hell for Gehenna, God is
able to destroy body and soul in hellh; and for Hades, hell
delivered up her dead, and that is the hell in which the rich
man suffered in the parable1. Hell is derived from the
Saxon word, to hide, or cover; and Hades has a similar
meaning, being contracted from 'Athog, invisible. This is
properly the abode of all departed spirits, whether good or
bad, who have their respective mansions, in which they remain
in a state of consciousness till the day of judgment, which
they may be said already to anticipate ; for though the
wicked will not be cast into Gehenna till then, when they
shall be reunited to their bodies, they now suffer being in
torments, as we are taught by the parable k. Hell in the
modern sense of the word it could not be into which our
Lord descended, since it is Hades, in the earliest Creed
in which the doctrine occurs, quoted by Eusebius, who
translated it from the Syriac, as that by Thaddaeus at
Edessa; and in Cyril of Jerusalem's Creed, it is xarij>.0ev
gig t« xaTa%0o'vja, to which the Latin ad inferna cor-
responds. This opinion is also overturned by our Saviour's
reply to the penitent thief, This day shalt thou be with
me in Paradise, a term by which, as well as by Abra-
hams bosom, the Jews distinguished the division of Hades
which was the abode of the blessed spirits. And Calvin's
notion, that our Lord might be said figuratively to de-
scend into hell, because he suffered the pains of hell in
his soul, is not only a harsh and forced interpretation, but
is confuted by St. Peter in the passage on which the

h Luke xii. 5. 5 Rev. xx. 13.

Our translators have increased the perplexity, by their uncertainty ; thus
they translate, 1 Cor. xv. 55. O grave, where is thy victory, placing hell
in the margin. The gates of hell shall not prevail, is our version in the
New Testament, Matt. xvi. 18. whereas in Isaiah, xxxviii. 10. the same words
are rendered the gates of the grave. In Psalm lxxxix. 48. we have grave in the
Bible, and hell in tbe Prayer Book version. We may also compare Prov. xxx.
]0, where one of the four things never satisfied is the grave, with Prov. xxvii.
30. Sell and destruction are never full. And this strongly shows the want of
critical accuracy in the same translator.

LECTURE III.

133

doctrine mainly rests ; for when he says that God would not
leave his soul in hell, he evidently speaks of what happened
after our Lord's death and burial. The opinion, that it
means no more than that his body was buried, is more
plausible, for we have seen that the words will bear this
translation ; and it is urged, that when one article is in-
serted in a Creed, the other is omitted ; thus our Nicene
has the burial and not the descent, and the Athanasian
the descent and not the burial. Rufinus mentions it
as in that of his own Church Aquileia, but not then in the
Roman, into which it seems afterwards to have been
introduced from the Athanasian. Burnet speaks as if
Rufinus himself confounded these two articles : he however
expressly tells us, that he considered them as distinct events,
only he thought, that when any Church which had the
descent omitted the burial, it was because that Church
confounded the two. The Bishop mentions three senses.
1. Going to preach to the spirits in prison; 2. burial; 3. and
the descent into the place of departed spirits ; and thinks a
person may subscribe in any of them ; yet surely he could
not in the second, as that would annihilate the Article which
says, as Christ was buried, so also he went down into hell.
This Article was omitted by the American Episcopal Clergy
on their revision of the Prayer Book.

Much of the perplexity on the subject is occasioned by
the ambiguity of language. Infernum in the Latin Church
came gradually to mean the place of torment. But this mis-
conception could not prevail where the Greek language was
in use, for Hades still retains the sense it bears alike in the
Septuagint, and in classical authors. The gates of hell
used by our Lord in speaking of the permanence of his
Church, is an expression put long before by Homer into the
mouth of Achilles^ ; and the Hades both of the poet and of
the parable includes in different divisions the good and the

1 Tlv\ai"A5ov ov naTMTxvo'ovo'iv avTrjs. Matt. xvi. 18.
'Exfy>bs yap poi kzIvos 6/xcDs 'Ai'Sao nv\T](riv,

"Os x tTcpov pikv KevOr] eVl (ppcalv, aWo 8e efrrr/. Iliad, ix. 815}..
Who dares think one thing and another tell,
My soul abhors him as the gates of hell.

134

LECTURE III.

wicked. In the Revelation, when our Lord declares' that
he has the keys of hell and of death, he refers to places that
are in due time to be opened ; and at the close of the book"
we read, that death and hell delivered up the dead which
were in them, and were themselves cast into the lake of
fire; that is, henceforward after the judgment, all will be
translated into an eternal unchangeable stage of bliss or
woe. Irenseus tells us1, that as our Master did not ascend
to heaven immediately, but waited the time appointed by
his Father, so must we also wait the time of our resurrection ;
and the opinion now so prevalent among Protestants, if we
may judge from their ordinary language, that those who die
in the Lord go at once to heaven, was regarded as so serious
an error by Justin Martyr, that he will not allow to those
who believed it the title of Christians. Tertullian holds
the same language, for it was Ambrose11 who first in-
troduced into the west Origen's opinion, that the souls
of the patriarchs and other saints went to Hades on their
decease, where they remained in a state of imperfect
happiness till the arrival of our Saviour's separated soul,
when he brake their bonds, and triumphantly at his re-
surrection took them with himself to heaven, into which the
souls of all who are saved now immediately go. The Roman
Catholic doctrine, which sends even those who depart in the
faith into purgatory, is more modern ; yet even their divines
make an exception in favour of infants dying after baptism
before they can commit sin, of martyrs, and of saints. To me
the doctrine of those early writers Justin Martyr and Irenseus
appears to be that of the Scriptures ; and if it be, it de-
molishes at once the propriety of prayer to those who do
not already enjoy the beatific vision, and whose happiness is
not complete, since as yet our incarnate Lord is the only
partaker of our flesh and blood who is in heaven. The
contrary doctrine is indeed affirmed in the third part of the
Homily concerning prayer, but our approval of these dis-
courses does not pledge us to every tenet, or to every fact
they contain. Several of our reformers, as Tyndall and
Frith, both martyrs for the faith, declare against it as a
» Rev. i. ]K. * Rev. xx. 18. 1 Iren. v. 31 . " Pe Fide et Gratian. iv. 1.

LECTURE III.

135

tenet of heathen philosophers; and the former asks this
pertinent question, " tell me if their souls be in heaven,
why they should not be in as good case as the angels, and
then what cause is there for the resurrection?" He considers
also that it destroys Christ's argument for the resurrection of
the body, from the declaration, lam the God of Abraham, &c.

Homer in the opening of the Iliad s, speaking of dead
warriors, marks death by the separation of the two parts of
man's compound being, giving the body to dogs and birds of
prey, and assigning the soul to Hades. And it is this sepa-
ration which I understand the Article to affirm, meaning
thereby no more than that he actually died. In the same
manner, I believe we shall at our death descend, that is, our
disembodied spirits, to Hades, and remain in a state of
consciousness, where those who are hereafter to rise to
glory are in a state of great though still imperfect enjoy-
ment. The principal reason for introducing this Article
into the Creed was, the guarding against the doctrine
of Apollinarius, who believed that our Lord assumed
only a human body, and that the place of the soul was
supplied by his divinity. He was anathematized by the
second Council of Constantinople, A.D. 381, and it occurs,
it is true, before that time in an Arian Creed, and is com-
mented upon by Epiphanius and Cyril of Jerusalem, but
first appeared in a public authorized Creed, as mentioned
by Ruhnus, in that of the Church of Aquileia7.

x noAAos 5' Icpdi/movs \pvx&s &'8t Trpo'idtyev
'Hpuoov, avrovs 5' kKoipia revx* Kvyeacriy
Olaivoicri Te ttchti- Iliad, i. 3.
Many brave souls to hell untimely sent
Of heroes ; and themselves to dogs a prey
And all the birds.

y Matt. xvi. 18.

LECTURE IV.

ARTICLE IV.

OF THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST.

Christ did truly rise again from death, and took again his
body, with flesh, bones, and all things appertaining to the
perfection of mans nature ; wherewith he ascended into
heaven, and there sitteth until he return to judge all men
at the last day.

This Article continues our Lord's history, and asserts,
l.his resurrection; 2. his ascension; 3. his sitting now at the
right hand of God ; and, 4. his future coming to judgment.
It would have been unbecoming to have closed the state-
ment of our belief in him with his humiliation, and not to
have proceeded to his exaltation, though this Article is not
in conformity with our definition, that it ought to be
directed not against infidels, but against Christians who,
acknowledging the authority of Scripture, interpret it
differently from ourselves. With them on these topics
can be no discussion ; for however they may differ as to
the nature of Christ, and the object of his mission, none
in modern times have called in question these fundamental
truths ; and indeed the name of Christian cannot be con-
ceded to one who denies them ; for the Apostle's de-
claration is self-evident ; that if Christ be not risen, then is
his preaching and our faith vain, we should be yet in our
sins*. Happily we have sufficient evidence, though not over-

■ ] Cor. xv.

LECTURE IV.

137

powering and irresistible, that as he was delivered for our
offences, so he rose again for our justification^. By his
death we know he suffered for sin ; by his resurrection we
are assured that the sins for which he suffered were not his
own ; had no man been a sinner, he would not have died ;
had He been a sinner, he would not have risen again ; but
dying for those sins which men had committed, he rose to
show that he had made full satisfaction for them, being by
his resurrection declared, or proved to be, the son of God
with power0. His death assures us of his humanity, this
event of his divinity. By his resurrection his Father is said
to have begotten him^; and thereby he also hath begotten
believers, who are called brethren, and co-heirs with Christ.
We are the members of that body of which Christ is the
heade; and if the Holy Spirit dwell in us, as it does in
all true Christians, then he that raised up Christ from the
dead, shall also quicken our mortal bodies by his Spirit
dwelling in us ; for, as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall
all be made alive : and hence our comfort is, that his resur-
rection is the evidence and pattern of our own ; If we have
been planted together in the likeness of his death, ive shall be
also in the likeness of his resurrection*. Let us ever re-
member the Apostle's inference, as Christ was raised up
from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so should we
walk in newness of life. As might be expected, this funda-
mental fact, upon which our wrhole religion rests, is narrated
by all the Evangelists ; is the great subject of the Apostle's
preaching ; and is taken for granted and made the basis of
reasoning and exhortation in - the Epistles. None of his
followers were present at it ; and we know not the precise
hour at which he burst these bonds of death, which it was
impossible should detain him ; but he by infallible proofs
convinced the disciples of the reality of the event, being
seen of them for no less a time than forty days, and speaking
to them of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God. The
following appearances are recorded :

1. On the resurrection-day, to the women ; to Peter; to

b Rom. iv. e Rom. i. 4. d Psalm ii. quoted in the Acts ; 1 Pet. i. 3.
e Rom. viii. f Rom. vi.

138

LECTURE IV.

the two disciples walking to Emmaus ; and to the whole
company, when assembled at their evening meal, when he
ate before them. He now left them to consider the proofs
he had given them of his resurrection, particularly the
fulfilment of the prophecies, that he should suffer, and on
the third day rise from the dead.

2. On the following Sunday, when he again appeared to
them all, including Thomas, who before was absent, and
refused to believe on their report, but was now convinced
by the offer of the very test he had himself required, of the
bodily appearance of his Master.

3. At the lake of Galilee to seven, when he granted
them, as at the opening of his ministry, a miraculous draught
of fishes.

4. At the mountain in Galilee, which seems to be the
appearance mentioned by St. Paulg to five hundred bre-
thren at once, many of whom were, when he wrote, alive.

5. To James, mentioned only in the same chapter. And,

6. To the whole company, when he led them out to the
mount of Olives, previous to his Ascension.

To these we may add his appearance after the Resurrec-
tion, to Stephen, to Paul, and to John in Patmos.

No others are specified, perhaps, because, as West on the
Resurrection suggests, these answered the purpose of their
conviction, and are enough for our's ; the other which occurred
during the forty days, were for their instruction in the
faith.

It has been objected, that the resurrection was attested
only by interested persons and Peter allowTsh, that God
shelved him openly, not to all the people, but to witnesses
chosen before of him. It is therefore of the more im-
portance that we should be satisfied with their credibility ;
and to establish it, we are to show, 1. that they were not
themselves deceived; and, 2. that they did not intend to
deceive others.

1. The fact was obviously one of which they were able
to judge ; the appearances were frequent, and to many at
once, and were not momentary, but the Lord suffered
e 1 Cor. xv. »» Acts x.

LECTURE IV.

139

them to touch him, and ate and conversed with them. They
were not enthusiasts, and the event was contrary to their
preconceived notions ; and the narrative shows that they
were slow of heart to believe, first that our Lord would
suffer, and then that he would triumph over the grave.
Nor were the witnesses so few as infidels represent. On
one occasion ten persons were present, at another eleven,
at one five hundred. Most of the extraordinary and
inexplicable tales of supernatural appearances, in which,
illusion may be supposed to have taken place, are reported
to have been seen by a single person ; it would be difficult
to find an instance in which two unexceptionable witnesses
have testified to the same illusion, and when we raise
the number to eleven, the improbability becomes incal-
culable. It is also enhanced beyond measure, by the
repetition of the fact in so many instances, to so many
persons together, with all the circumstances by which it was
attended. But when we remember that Christ not only
appeared, but ate and drank, walked and conversed with
them, through forty days, the improbability changes into
impossibility, for they had all the evidence that they could
have that he was living, and which they had of the life of
each other.

The simplicity and artlessness of their character places
them be}Tond every reasonable suspicion of intentional
deception, and they could, if so inclined, have had no
adequate temptation to attempt to impose upon the world,
since a report so extraordinary had no chance of being received.
Such a story if false would certainly not be credited now,
though liable to no other objections than those which arise
out of itself; but then the Jews were called upon to
acknowledge as the Messiah one whom they had put to
death as a blasphemer, and to sacrifice their hopes of
earthly power and glory. The Apostles knew, that in the
attempt they must undergo contempt and sufferings ; and as
they gained nothing in this world, so if impostors they
could expect nothing in the next but to endure the wrath
of God.

If Christ were not raised from the dead, the report could

140

LECTURE IV.

have been immediately disproved by the exhibition of his
body. Why was it not then produced ? The Jews indeed said,
the only thing that they could say, that his disciples had stolen
it; but how was this practicable ? they had themselves provided
the strongest evidence against their own story, for they had
sealed the sepulchre and set a watch, not less probably than
sixty men ; the disciples were few, friendless, and discouraged,
in hourly expectation of arrest, and when they ventured to
assemble, fastened the doors, for fear of the Jews. The time
was the passover, when the town was crowded, and there was a
full moon, and therefore light, and the tomb was just without
the walls, and exposed to continual inspection. Could the
whole guard be sleeping, and if sleeping could they be com-
petent witnesses of what happened ? and why were they not
examined, and all the Apostles seized and imprisoned till
they should give up the body ? But the Sanhedrim did not
themselves believe the story to which they endeavoured to
give currency ; for when the Apostles were brought before
them twice, and boldly declared that him whom they had
put to death God had raised, they did not venture to make
this charge.

It is however an objection as old as Celsus, that Jesus
ought to have publicly shown himself as the Messiah ;
Origen answers, that as the pure in heart only can see
God, this was a privilege of which the nation was not
worthy, and which could not with propriety have been
granted. Bishop Sherlock also suggests, that our Lord took a
solemn leave of the Jews when he quitted the temple, telling
them that they should see him no more till they should
welcome him as the Messiah : and that after his resurrection
he opened a new Commission addressed to the world at
large, and that once opened, all preference of them was at an
end. Modern infidels have required even more than this ;
they ask that demonstration should be afforded to all
countries and all ages : but they misconceive the nature
of the case, for such evidence would be irresistible, and
belief would be swallowed up in certainty. We are to
walk not by sight but by faith; the Apostles indeed, who were
to be witnesses to the world, had this evidence ; and so

LECTURE IV.

141

indispensable was it, that the Apostle of the Gentiles, who was
added to the number after our Lord's ascension, was favoured
with the sight of him in glory ; and he appeals to this fact as
a test of his Apostleship, Am not I an Apostle, have 1 not
seen the Lord ? but our conviction does not rest merely on
their words as honest credible witnesses. We have also the
witness of God, as our Saviour himself said, the Spirit of
Truth which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me;
and this he did by the miraculous effusion of the Holy
Ghost, only ten days after the ascension, when Christ
received gifts for men. It was to this evidence that Peter
appeals in his speech on that memorable day, being by
the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the
Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth
this which ye now see and hear; that is, the gift of
tongues : and all the subsequent miracles which the Apostles
worked are a confirmation of the reality of this event.
The same evidence establishes also the Ascension. The
Apostles would never have proclaimed the Gospel, had they
not been endued with power from above ; this power they
would not have received, if the Holy Ghost had not de-
scended upon them ; and the Holy Ghost would not have
descended, except our Saviour had ascended first. If I go
not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I
depart, I will send him unto you. The Apostles did not see
Christ when he arose ; it was sufficient that they afterwards
saw him alive whom they knew to have been put to death ;
for whatsoever was a proof of his life after death, was a
proof of course of his resurrection ; but as they were not to
see him in heaven, it was necessary they should be eye-
witnesses of the act, as they were not to behold the effect :
they were therefore all present at the ascension.

Our Article maintains, that our Lord rose, and ascended
with the same body in which he was incarnate ; " with flesh,
bones, and all things pertaining to the perfection of man's
nature." The idea of his having flesh and bones in heaven,
has been condemned in two Councils ; and many Christians
seem to think that he has now only an apparent body : yet
he evidently took pains to convince his disciples that it was

142

LKCTURE IV.

a real one, by eating, and by inviting them to handle it; and
with good reason, since it is only because his body rose
again, that we have reason to believe there will be a resur-
rection of our own. They urge, however, that he forbad
Mary Magdalene to touch him ; but the meaning seems to
be, you need not detain me now, for as I have not yet
ascended, you will have other opportunities of seeing me.
That it was for no mysterious reason appears from the
fact, that immediately after he suffered the embraces of the
other Mary and of Salome. But it is presumed that he had
now a spiritual body, because he entered a room, the doors
of which had been fastened. The phrase «<pa>T0£ eysveTO, how-
ever, means no more than that he ceased to be seen, as it is
rendered in the margin: and it is used in other writers where
nothing supernatural is intended1. As plausibly might it
be urged that he had never a real body; for when at Nazareth,
the irritated multitude would have thrown him down a
precipice, he went through the midst of them unseen.

Still it is asserted, that such a body as ours cannot
ascend, and that flesh and blood cannot inherit the king-
dom of heaven; but though we maintain that it is the
same identical body, we do not affirm that it has undergone
no alteration; it may be, in the act of ascending; on the
contrary, we believe that it has been so far changed, as
to suit it for its present abode ; and this Scripture teaches,
when it says of our own, that it has been sown a natural,
that it will be raised a spiritual body ; and that he shall
change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto
his glorious bodyv. We may presume that the transfiguration
was an exhibition by anticipation, both of his appearance
and of ours, if we are counted worthy of admission into his
presence, for when we see him, we shall be like him. There
is therefore "a man in heaven," the Adam from above;
acting both as our intercessor and as our sovereign ; for all

1 The word is often used of those who in a way, and especially abruptly or
suddenly, withdraw, and are no longer visible. Blomfield's Keceptio Sy-
noptica. He produces several examples in prose as well as in poetry, as
'Ei/Ob nod rhv Fayv/xribrju apnaaOcvTa a<pay^ yevecrdai \6yos. Herodian i. 1. 5.

k Phil. iii. 21.

LECTURE IV.

143

power is given unto him, and his sitting on the right hand of
God implies his administration of the universe. This was
foretold of him by David, Jehovah said unto my Lord, Sit
thou on my rigid hand till I make thy enemies thy footstool ;
affirmed by himself on his trial, and urged in the epistle,
When he had by himself purged our sins, he sat down on
the right hand of the majesty on high1. But when he
appeared to Stephen he was standing, to show the exertion
of power, as rising for his protection. From thence he
will come as our judge; so the angels assured the Apostles
as they were gazing after him ; this same Jesus which is
taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like maimer
as you have seen him go into heaven ; and he himself has
taught us, that he shall come in his kingdom in the glory
of his Father, and that the office of judgment has been
assigned to him, because he is the son of man. It is needless
to accumulate texts to prove a doctrine which is, as might
be expected, brought before us in every part of the New
Testament, as a tenet to be embraced, and to influence our
conduct : that as we look for the glorious appearing of him
who is at once our Saviour, and our great God; ice should deny
ungodliness and icorldly lusts, and live soberly, righteously, and
godly in this present world. He is to judge the quick and
dead ; the former, meaning those whom the Apostle to the
Thessalonians says, shall be alive and remain to the coming of
the Lord. We must all appear at his judgmentm ; and more
need not be said, for all who believe a judgment will allow
it to be universal. The Article is not contradictory to the
Creed, the former extends only to the judgment-day, the
latter, " of whose kingdom there shall be no end," to the
eternity that follows it ; then, indeed, cometh the end of
Christ's mediatorial office ; as Prophet, he will no longer
instruct ; as Priest, he will no longer intercede ; as King, he
will no longer protect ; yet his humanity will still enjoy
the rewards of his sufferings and obedience, and as God
the Son, he shall reign for ever and ever with his Father.

1 Heb. i. 3. via. 1 ; Rom. viii. 34 ; 1 Pet. iii. 22. m 2 Cor. v.

LECTURE V.

ARTICLE V.

The Holy Ghost, proceeding from the Father and the Son, is
of one substance, majesty, and glory with the Father and
the Son, very and eternal God.

It must have been thought at the revision in 1562, that
a separate acknowledgment of the Holy Ghost was required:
and this was then introduced from the Wurtemburg Con-
fession, none such occurring in that of Augsburg, which
was seemingly the reason why there is none in the original
edition of our Articles. It is very brief, affirming merely
the procession, divinity, and equality with the Father and
the Son of the third Person of the ever-blessed Trinity ;
passing over altogether both his ordinary and extraordinary
gifts, and his part in the work of salvation, by delivering
the believer from the power of sin, the guilt of which the
second Person had cancelled, and qualifying him by sanc-
tification for the inheritance of the saints in light.

There is sufficient evidence, that the Holy Ghost is a
person, distinct from the Father and the Son, not a creature;
but the proofs are not so numerous as for the distinction of
the Son from the Father, for an obvious reason. The
second Person became man, and lived above thirty years a
public and conspicuous life, among multitudes, whom his
teaching and miracles attracted to him. His existence
separate from the Father was perceived by all, and could
not be disputed : but the Holy Spirit hath never rendered

LECTURE V.

145

himself visible, being manifested only by his operations; and
his ordinary ones, with which alone we are experimentally
acquainted, are hardly to be distinguished, if at all, from the
workings of our own minds. Not but that their importance
is inestimable; for were it not for his preventing, restraining,
and cooperating grace, were it not for his regenerating,
renewing, and sanctifying agency, creation would have been
not a blessing but a curse, and redemption but a name ; for
what are the merits of Christ and the salvation wrought out
by him to us, till applied by the Spirit. That God will
write his laws in our hearts, that is, give us the desire to
keep them, is the promise of the New Covenant, which
therefore from the greater effusion of his holy influence,
both as to person and degree, is called the dispensation of
the Spirit. Thus in our Catechism the distinction between
the offices of the three Persons is accurately marked. The
Father who creates, the Son who redeems, the Holy Ghost
who sanctifies. As we shall state more at length hereafter,
the original corruption of our nature, and the method of
our renewal, and our deliverance from its consequences,
render the influence of the Spirit indispensable, not only to
our commencing the Christian course, but to every step we
take in it : and as he is the author of all good desires, he may
be called with a reference to his effects on us, as well as to
distinguish him from other spiritual beings, the Holy Spirit.

Language from its nature can have no proper terms for
invisible beings, or for the acts of the understanding, or the
feelings of the heart. We can only speak of them figu-
ratively, that is, by transferring to them words which
primarily apply to objects and operations that fall under
the cognizance of some of the senses. Thus the Hebrew
nn Ruah, the Greek Ylveu^u, and the Latin Spiritus, ori-
ginally meant air in motion, that is, wind ; and Ghost in old
English, as Geist in German, which we have corrupted into
gas, and use to distinguish the factitious airs of Chemistry
from that of the atmosphere, is synonymous. But in this,
as in many other instances, the secondary sense has overcome
the primary one, though it is still retained in the phrase,
'give up the ghost,' a literal translation of a$vjx; to nv=u[xu, and

LECTURE V.

s%z7rvsv<rsi, sent forth his spirit, is equivalent to our expired,
since as we live by breathing, the words were soon extended
to that living part of us which animates and directs the
body, that is, the soul. By analogy it is transferred to in-
visible and incorporeal beings, as to angels, and ultimately to
God. Thus our Saviour says, that God is a Spirit, speaking
of the Deity as contradistinguished from man, without any
reference to his personal distinctions.

The Spirit of God is used for his power or energy in action,
as Word is for his wisdom in declaring his will ; but as the
latter is not like our speech of a momentary existence, but
permanent, so is the former ; and as, to give us some idea
though faint of the difference of the latter from the Father,
he is called a Son, and generation is predicated of him ; so
spiration, procession, or going forth, which is the scriptural
term, has been considered most appropriate to the former.

The early heretics maintained, that the Holy Ghost was
a creature subordinate to the Son ; modern Anti-trinitarians
confound him with the Father, denying his separate ex-
istence. The divinity of the Spirit therefore may be said
to be allowed as much as the humanity of the son; the
discussion here then is the reverse of the former ; we have
only to show the separate existence of the Spirit ; and this
is perhaps the most effectually done by the texts, which
prove the Trinity, for to pray that blessings may proceed
from the three, if they be really but one, or at the most
two persons, or to be baptized into the name of the Father,
a human teacher, and an attribute, would be a revolting
absurdity, and if the Spirit be taken for the Father, it is
unmeaning tautology. Our opponents resolve the whole
into a rhetorical personification. The Holy Ghost, say
they, is no more a person than charity or sin, Charity
suffereth long and is kind, that is, the charitable man ; sin,
that is sinful inclinations, slew mea. They urge that in like
manner, what is said to be done by the Spirit is really done
by an inspired manb, or by God himself, whose spirit or
energy is personified. We grant that some passages may
bear either sense; and that the Holy Ghost is often put for
a Rom. vii. b Acts x. 10.

LECTURE V.

147

the effects he produces. Thus, My Father will give the
Holy Spirit to them that ask himc. Have you received the
Holy Ghost since ye believed A ; and in this sense he is said to
be given, shed abroad, extinguished: still after making all
allowances, a sufficient number of texts will remain, to
satisfy us of his personality ; for actions are ascribed to
him, which cannot be ascribed to the Father, or to the Son;
for our Lord says, when the Comforter is come, whom I will
send unto you from the Father; but God. the Father is always
named in the gospel economy, not as sent, but as sending;
and the expression, from the Father, confutes any such sup-
position. Intercession also is not made by the Father, but
to him by the Son our advocate in heaven, and by the Holy
Spirit our advocate below, who itself maketh intercession for
us\ And he who proceedeth from the Father cannot be the
Father. In the same way we may show, (though it is not so
necessary,) that the Holy Ghost is distinct from the Son,
because our Lord said of him, He shall glorify me, for he
shall receive of mine, and show it unto you. The Apostle
teaches us, that through the Son we have access by one Spirit
unto the Father, consequently assuring us, that the Spirit
by whom, is not the Father to whom, nor the Son through
whom, we have this access. His personality is marked by
the use of the masculine pronoun, though the noun in the
original is neuter. The Scriptures assign personal offices to the
Spirit, which we have already mentioned : 1. sending: 2. in-
terceding : 3. speaking ; He shall not speak of himself, &c.f

4. guiding ; He will guide you into all the truth. For as
many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of Godg:

5. helping; the Spirit helpeth our infirmities^ : 6. testifying;
The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirits1: 7. revealing ;
As it is now revealed to his holy prophets and apostles by the
Spirit*. He shall show you things to come1; Now the Spirit
speaketh expressly m : and, 8. his own especial work, sancti-
fication : and this is expressly declared in our Lord's last
discourse, in which he promises him as a second advocate,
who will more than supply his own place, a declaration which

e Luke xi. d Acts xix. 2. * Rom. viii. 26. f John xvi. 13.

* Rom. viii. 34. h Rom. viii. 26. ' Rom. viii. ]6. k Eph. iii, 5u
1 John xvi. 13. mi Tim. iv. 1.

h 2

118

LECTURE V.

ought to be decisive. Finally, he communicates the ordinary
and the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, as they are for
this very reason called, and after enumerating some, the
Apostle adds11, All these worketh one and the same Spirit,
dividing to every man severally as he will; thus strongly, by
referring to his volition, affirming his personality. As the
Gospel is the dispensation of the Spirit, it is his peculiar
office to prepare and consecrate those who are to proclaim
and enforce it ; accordingly when it was first to be preached
to proselytes, the Spirit instructed Philip to join himself unto
the Ethiopian descendant of Ham, and when the first fruits
of the Gentiles of the progeny of Japheth, Cornelius, was to
be received into the Church, it was the Spirit that said to
Peter, Behold three men seek thee ; and the grace and the
gifts conferred on him and others in baptism are ascribed
to the Spirit as the agent. Thus it was the Holy Ghost
that said to the prophets and teachers at Antioch, Separate
me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called
them. In conformity with Scripture then is the candidate
asked in our Ordination service, " Dost thou think thou art
called by the Holy Ghost?" and justly is He invoked on
that solemn occasion, and at the consecration of Bishops,
since Paul declares of the Ephesian elders, irgea-pvTepoi, that
the Holy Ghost had made them overseers, eTrltntwroi 0 : and he
seems to be the Lord of the harvest, to whom the Saviour directs
us to pray, that he may send forth labourers into the harvest.
The Holy Ghost is moreover described as affected by the
behaviour of men ; as vexed ; they rebelled and vexed his
Holy Spirit; and as resisted; ye do always, says Stephen,
resist the Holy Ghost; and the Apostle cautions the
Ephesians not to grieve him, and the Thessalonians not
to quench him p. And his divinity is implied in our
Lord's awful declaration, that reviling him should never
be pardoned, which we cannot conceive if he were only
a creature, since the reviling even of the Saviour in his
incarnate nature, as the Son of man, might be remitted.
Finally, the name of God is actually given to him. Thus
Peter having said to Ananias, Why hath Satan filled thy
heart to lie to the Holy Ghost ? he immediately adds, thou
n I Cor. xii. 8. • Acts xiii. 4. P 1 Thess. v. 19.

LECTURE V.

149

hast not lied unto men, but unto God; and Paul by impli-
cation, The temple of God is holy, which temple ye are*.
Know ye not that your bodies are the temple of the Holy
Ghost q f Our Lord as man was conceived by the Holy Ghost,
and the Angel says, that in consequence he shall be called the
Son of Godr. He is also said indifferently to have wrought
his miracles by the finger of God9, and by the Spirit of God1.
Holy Scripture is said to be inspired by Goda, by St. Paul;
and the Spirit spake through the prophets, according to
St. Peter1. The Holy Ghost then as God is a legitimate
object of worship; yet, as we have seen of the Son, he is not
addressed so often as the Father; and there seems to be
greater reason still why our petitions should be less fre-
quently offered up to him, since it seems to suit better his
peculiar attributes to consider him as the gift bestowed, and
the Father or the Son as the giver. This is the rule in our own
and in the ancient liturgies, both of the East and the West ;
but pray the Lord of the harvest, justifies the practice, for
which I believe we may plead scriptural precedent. For the
Lord to whom the Apostles prayed, lifting up their voices
with one accord seems to be the Spirit; as they say, Thou
who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the
heathen rage, &c. and Peter on the day of Pentecost had
thus spoken of the same passage, This scripture must needs
have been fulfilled which the Holy Ghost spake by the mouth
of Davidz. It is also inferred from the separate mention
of the other persons of the Trinity in these petitions of
St. Paul. The Lord direct your hearts unto the love of God,
and the patient waiting for Christ*: and the Lord make you
increase and abound in love, to the end that he may establish
your hearts in holiness before God, even the Father, at the
coming of our Lord Jesus Christ: that the Lord whom he
addressed was the Spirit.

Having shown that the Holy Ghost is properly and truly
God, and yet neither the Father nor the Son, it follows,
that he is a distinct person in the Trinity ; for though
coequal and coeternal, he is in order subordinate to both ;

p 1 Cor. iii. 10. i 1 Cor. vi. 19. r Luko i. 35. 3 Luke xi. 20.
1 Matt. xii. 28. u 2 Tim. iii. 10. * 1 Peter i. 11. y Acts iv. 24.
1 Acts i. 0. a 2 Thess. iii. 5.

150

LECTURE V.

for the Godhead was communicated by the Father to the
Son, and by the Father and the Son to the Spirit. This
joint procession, Ixwoggycns, is the characteristic distinction
of the Western from the Eastern Church. We and other
Protestants, as branches of the former, retain the addition of
Filioque, ' and from the Son,' in our Creed. ' Not begotten,
but proceeding,' is the definition of the Athanasian, not
that we pretend to discriminate between these modes of
emanation ; but generation suits the idea of a Son, and the
term we want for the Spirit, our Lord himself supplies. The
procession from the Father is positively, that from the Son
virtually, affirmed ; as proceeding from the Father, he is called
the Spirit of the Father0 ; but he is also called the Spirit of
the Sond} and of Christ e; and we infer that he proceedeth
from the Son, for he is sent by the Father, and he is also sent
by the Son. And Bishop Pearson shows that the doctrine
was believed by the Greek Fathers, though they chose to
keep to scriptural terms, and therefore it was not introduced
into the Nicene Creed. This assertion will surprise those
who only know that Creed as it stands in our Communion
Service ; but the question being agitated in the West, the
clause 'and from the Son,' filioque, was inserted by the French
and Spanish Churches, who referred to Leo III. As how-
ever it had been determined at the Council at Ephesus, that
no alteration should be made in the Creed, the Pope not
only forbad this addition, but set up in the Vatican a correct
copy without it, graven on silver plates in Greek and
Latin. This interpolation was sanctioned, however, by
Nicolaus I. who was elected Pope A.D. 858. Photius, the
then Patriarch of Constantinople, complained, and treated the
Roman Church in consequence as schismatical ; and thus a
barrier was raised up which still separates the two Churches;
and how bitterly this alteration, without the authority of a
Council, is still resented by Greek divines, we learn from
travellers. Thus a recent one, Mr. Jovvett, informs us,
that having presented the Greek translation of our liturgy
to the Bishop of Smyrna, on a subsequent visit, he asked
his opinion of it. " He said the prayers were excellent, very
much in accordance with theirs; but turning to the Nicene
« Matt. x. 20. « Gal. iv. (i. b Phil. i. 19 ; Rom. viii. 9 ; I Pet. i. 11

LECTURE V.

151

Creed, where he had doubled down the leaf, he bade me
read. When I came to the Article, ' proceeding from the
Father and the Son,' I stopped. This, said he, is one of the
five principal points in which our Church differs from that
of Rome, I was aware, I replied, of the difference; it is a
point which at the present day has not been much con-
troverted, being considered as somewhat indifferent. But
with us, he said, it is considered as a great blasphemy, a very
great one. I touched on the reasons by which the Western
Churches support the doctrine; particularly St. John, And when
he had said this, he breathed upon them, and said unto them,
Receive ye the Holy Ghost z. He quoted of course John xv. 26.
But when the Comforter is come, ivhom I will send unto you
from the Father, even the Spirit of truth which proceedeth from
the Father. He desired his assistant Bishop to read the Acts
of the first and second Councils, so far as they related to the
Creed; and he turned over our Prayer Book with evident con-
cern, that this expression prevailed in it. It was a matter of
some pain to me, although my surprise gradually diminished,
to find other ecclesiastics dwelling on this point of the
Procession of the Holy Ghost. With the learned Bishop
of Scio, I had long conversations on this and other theo-
logical subjects. On my mentioning the name of Bishop
Burnet, and the conciliating opinion of that Prelate, who
considers the controverted doctrine concerning the proces-
sion of the Holy Ghost not to be a sufficient ground for a
separation between Churches, he was very desirous of taking
down the name of this celebrated Expositor of our Articles,
still withholding his assent from this moderate view, and
strenuously dwelling on this as an irreconcilable difference
between the Eastern and Western Churches a."

As the Holy Ghost is God, it follows that we with truth
affirm in the Athanasian Creed, that " the Godhead of the
three persons is all one, the glory equal, the majesty
coeternal;" or, as is expressed in this Article, " of one sub-
stance, majesty, and glory." We have thus concluded the
doctrine of the ever-blessed Trinity, neither as we hope
" confounding the persons nor dividing the substance,"
* John xx. 22. a Christian Researches in the Mediterranean, p. 16-19. vol. i.

152

LECTURE V.

maintaining that no one person is greater than another, for
whatever apparent inferiority there may appear to be, on
the first impression, of the Son to the Father, or of the
Holy Ghost to both, it will be dissipated by the consider-
ation that it arises out of the subordinate offices of the two
latter. We presume not with our feeble intellect to discuss
this mystery, which no created intelligence can fully com-
prehend. Scripture has revealed to us enough of the
Divine nature and actions to show us our obligation for
redemption to the three persons in the Godhead, and no
more. It will therefore be our wisdom to refrain from
curious and unbecoming speculations on the secret things
which belong unto the Lord our God) for we cannot find out
the Almighty to perfection. Such knowledge is too wonderful
for man, he cannot attain to it. The human eye may be
blinded in the rash attempt to fix it upon a light which it
cannot sustain ; but we may discern him, and in the degree
in which we can, shall admire and adore him, as reflected in
his works of nature and of providence, and above all in those
of grace. That "almighty and everlasting" Being, God
blessed for ever, " has given unto us grace by the confession
of a true faith to acknowledge the glory of the eternal
Trinity, and in the power of the divine majesty to worship
the Unity ;" May he ever keep us stedfast in that faith, and
may we be not content to rest in a barren orthodoxy which
enlightens, but does not warm and invigorate ; and let us
remember, that the truth has been revealed not that we
should meditate, but that we should act. St. Peter has a
reference to the three divine persons, when he addresses the
strangers scattered throughout the lesser Asia, as elect
according to the foreknowledge of God the Father through
sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience and sprinkling of
the blood of Jesus Christ. May we then, as He who has
called us is holy, be holy in all manner of conversation. And
may we take his exhortation as designed, as indeed it is, for
us, and for all Christians; Ye are a chosen generation, a
royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people, that ye
should show forth his praises, who hath called, you out of dark-
ness into his marvellous lighth.

b J Pet. ii. 0.

LECTURE VI.

ARTICLE VI.

OF THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES FOR
8ALVATION.

Holy Scripture containeth all tilings necessary to salvation :
so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved
thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be
believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite
or necessary to salvation. In the name of the holy Scripture
we do understand those Canonical Books of the Old and
New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in
the Church.

Of the Names and Number of the Canonical Books.

Genesis, The First Book of Chronicles,

Exodus, The Second Book of Chronicles,

Leviticus, The First Book of Esdras,

Numbers, The Second Book of Esdras,

Deuteronomy, The Book of Esther,

Joshua, The Book of Job,

Judges, The Psalms,

Ruth, The Proverbs,

The First Book of Samuel, Ecclesiastes or Preacher,

The Second Book of Samuel, Cantica, or Songs of Solomon,

The First Book of Kings, Four Prophets the greater,

The Second Book of Kings, Twelve Prophets the less.

And the other Books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth read
for example of life and instruction of manners ; but yet doth
it not apply them to establish any doctrine; such are these
following :

The Third Book of Esdras, Baruch the Prophet,

The Fourth Book of Esdras, The Song of the Three Children,

The Book of Tobias, The Story of Susanna,

The Book of Judith, Of Bel and the Dragon,

The rest of the Book of Esther, The Prayer of Manasses,

The Book of Wisdom, The First Book of Maccabees,

Jesus the Son of Sirach, The Second Book of Maccabees,

All the Books of the New Testament, as they are commonly

received, we do receive, and account them Canonical.

In the Articles we have now considered, there has been
happily for a^es unanimity among Christians, with the

154

LECTURE VI.

exception of a few sects in the East, whose verbal differences
on the Incarnation do not seem to derogate from their
respect to Christ as the Son of God : and the far worse
modern heresy among ourselves of the Anti-Trinitarians. On
these points the Church of Rome is orthodox, although the
benefits of its acknowledgment of the divinity, and pro-
pitiatory sacrifice of the Saviour, are much depreciated by
its doctrine of the subordinate mediation of his saints.
Still many in charity believe, that though it has raised a
building of wood hay and stubble, instead of one of silver,
gold, and precious stones, it is upon the true and only
foundation Jesus Christ: and therefore concede to this
corrupt communion the title of Christian ; and it is upon
this presumption that our own reformed branch of the
universal Church, though strongly denouncing it, and even
branding it as Antichristian, nevertheless allows the va-
lidity of its Orders. At first sight it appears extraordinary,
that Christians should differ so little wTith respect to the
Deity, and so greatly respecting their own salvation. The
cause is probably the deeper interest we feel in the latter,
and the "infection" of original nature, "which remains even in
the regenerate ;" which inclines even amiable and respectable
persons to lower their obligation to the Saviour, and to claim
some share, however small it may be, in his finished salvation.

We now come to the first and fundamental difference between
Roman Catholics and Protestants, the source of religious
knowledge. We maintain that there is only one, the Word of
God; its authority they do not deny, but they add a second
Tradition, which in several important Articles contradicts and
supersedes it. The unbeliever imagines, that the first man was
left to discover by his own unassisted faculties the existence,
and character, and will of the Deity. The believer rejoices that
he has not been overlooked ; but that he has the happiness
to have handed down to him a narrative of the creation of his
progenitors, and to know that they were not abandoned to
their own guidance ; but that Jehovah their God conversed
with them, and gave them all the instructions that their
state required. He shewed himself afterwards to Noah, our
common ancestor, both before and after the flood : and the

LECTURE VI.

155

descendants of his three sons, who gradually peopled the
world, in whatever country they settled, must have brought
with them the simple religion of their parent. Sacrifice,
their mode of worship, as has been recorded by his-
torians, and verified by travellers, has prevailed almost
universally, both among civilized and barbarous nations ;
but so unfaithful a preserver of doctrines is Tradition, that
in a few generations it became distorted and intermixed
with error, till at length the creature was worshipped instead
of the Creator ; and when Abram was called upon by God
to leave his country, that from him a great nation might
spring, and that he should be the progenitor of the future
deliverer of mankind from the snares of the devil,
though he was only the tenth descendant of Noah his
father, and we may infer, the other inhabitants beyond
the river already served false gods. The rest of mankind
were left to what is called the light of nature, and to the
glimmering of truth which they more or less retained ;
but it pleased God in his mercy to form to himself a
peculiar people out of his descendants, to whom he would
whenever it was desirable reveal himself; and to whom he
would commit his oracles, as soon as it was expedient that
they should be written, that they should be to them a suffi-
cient guide ; and which were to be in due time communicated
to the rest of the nations. To Adam, to Noah, to Abraham
and his descendants, and to Moses, he spoke as a man face to
face, revealing to them the truths they required to know,
and the commands which he expected them to obey. With
Moses commences a new asra. The family of Abraham has
now grown into a nation, and has to receive a code of laws ;
and this is too comprehensive and too particular to be
trusted to such a treacherous depository as Tradition. As
time goes on too, new instances of God's providence occur,
the memory of which ought not to be suffered to perish ;
new intimations of the coming of a future deliverer, and
fuller delineations of his character and offices, and of the
marks by which he may be recognised, are graciously vouch-
safed ; and from age to age additional manifestations are
made of the divine will.

Moses was commanded to write the Law, and also

156

LECTURE VI.

we may suppose, the narrative of the deliverance of the
Israelites from Egypt, and their subsequent journeying
till they reached the promised land, as well as his intro-
ductory review of history, commencing with the creation.
The conquest of the promised land is followed by a
history in chronological order of their possession of it under
judges, and afterwards under kings. But the authors do
not treat the subject like uninspired historians. Intervals
are specified from time to time of considerable length, of
forty, fifty, and even fourscore years, in which nothing is
recorded, not from want of materials, for regular
chronicles were kept, but many wars and civil trans-
actions, important in their day, are advisedly passed over ;
a selection being made which brings the annals of centuries
into a very moderate compass, and presents such a nar-
rative of God's providential government of his people,
punishing and rewarding them according to their deserts, as
it was desirable should be an " everlasting possession" for
the instruction and warning and encouragement of future
ages. Towards the close of the history, and the expatriation
first of Israel, and then of Judah, God was pleased to raise
up a new race of prophets, who performed not the miracles
of Elijah and Elisha, but who were commissioned to act as
preachers of righteousness, and whose exhortations as well
as their predictions, they were instructed to record. The
majority had run their course before the Babylonian cap-
tivity. Jeremiah however outlived it, and Ezekiel and
Daniel, in the foreign land to which they had been carried,
sustained the faith and courage of the exiles by their
predictions of the promised King of Israel, and the hap-
piness of his people under his reign. Ezra and Nehemiah
were raised up to restore the city and the temple, but under
the civil government of the Persian kings. Haggai and
Habakkuk encourage them to complete this work. Zechariah
obscurely foretels the future glories of Israel ; and Malachi,
the last of this long line, who plainly declares that the Lord
shall come to his own temple, and a herald shall be sent to
precede him, announces that the voice of prophecy should
cease, by concluding the volume with exhorting the people
of -God to attend to the Law. It is a probable supposition,

LECTURE VI.

157

that Ezra collected all the books then extant, introduced a
few explanatory notes into the Pentateuch, and made what
in modern language would be called an edition of the
ancient oracles. He was also the author of the book which
bears his name, and perhaps of that of Nehemiah. The
Chronicles are also supposed to be compiled by him out
of the national annals ; and Malachi seems to have been his
contemporary. These works therefore must have been
added at some later period; and to none can this completion
of the Canon be ascribed with so much probability as to
Simon the Just, who lived under the first Seleucus, and
with an encomium on whom the son of Sirach closes his
enumeration of the worthies of Israel. Four centuries
pass away, and the nation is left to the ordinary providence
of God. Still the temple service has been restored, and
the Law remains as a lamp unto their feet. At length the
voice of prophecy once more proclaims the coming
Saviour ; and God, who at sundry times and in divers
manners spake unto the fathers by the prophets, speaks now
by his Son. Four narratives of his ministry and a brief
sketch of the origin and progress of his religion, are recorded
by disciples. Letters follow from four of his Apostles to
their converts, and the volume of inspiration closes with a
prophetic view of the persecution and sufferings of believers,
and the ultimate triumph of the Faith. It is a probable
conjecture, that the beloved disciple, who long survived his
contemporaries, completed the Canon : but be this as it may,
it was early acknowledged as the New Covenant or Testa-
ment, which with the Old is received as the sole Word of
God. They consist of as many as sixty-six independent
works, differing in style and character, yet so harmoniously
combining in one consistent whole, as if the composition of
a single author, though produced in different languages, and
the most diversified circumstances during a series of fifteen
centuries. The two Testaments united bear the significant
title of the Holy Scriptures or writings, or of Bible, that is to
say, the Book, as preeminently deserving the title, — the book
which above all ought to be studied. To the unbeliever this
harmony, which cannot be denied, is unaccountable ; to the

158

LECTURE VI.

Christian it presents no difficulty ; for though different pen-
men are employed, there is but one author of the whole, that is,
God ; it being, as Pope Gregory the first calls it, 1 God's Epistle
to mankind.' We accept it therefore with gratitude and
reverence, not as the word of fallible men, but as it indeed
is, the word of God; who neither will nor can indite what
is not truth, and truth of the highest importance. The
title implies its inspiration. Such has been, with reference
to the Old Testament, the constant opinion of the Jews, and
almost each successive portion bears testimony to that,
which in order of time precedes it. Thus the Pentateuch,
which contains so many speeches of the Deity, recorded, it
should seem, in the very words in which they were delivered ;
and the whole Law, testified by continued miracles, is
treated as a divine revelation by the prophets. Inspiration
is inferred whenever Christ appeals to it as Scripture, and
he recognises in one sentence at once the authority of the
Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets : and as this was the
division then in use, it may be considered as an attestation
to the whole volume. It is upon the evidence of these
books that he proves himself to be the Messiah, and con-
futes his adversaries. The Apostle of the Gentiles declares
all Scripture to be given by inspiration of God; and the
Apostle to the Jews, that prophecy came not in the old time
by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were
moved by the Holy Spirit. The primitive Church had not
only the same respect as the Jews for the writings of Moses
and the Prophets, but received likewise the Gospels, and
Acts, and the Epistles, as in an equal degree inspired. The
Holy Ghost we know was promised to the disciples as a
guide, that should both bring all things to their remembrance
which they had seen and heard, during their attendance
upon their Lord, and also lead them into all the truth, which
they could not bear before, but which it was necessary they
should know to render them competent instructors. There
is as much, we might say more, reason to believe that they
should be inspired in what they wrote for the use^of every
age, as what they preached for the benefit of their own;
and this inspiration they claim.

LECTURE VI.

159

The nature and extent of inspiration have been much dis-
cussed. A plenary one, which makes them the mere amanuenses
of the Spirit, simply writing as he dictates, which was the
original belief, does not seem to me tenable; certainly it is not
essential, and it has probably led to the opposite extreme. On
this supposition there would have prevailed throughout a
perfect uniformity of style. If the Holy Ghost had dictated
every word, why, it has been asked, should Isaiah, who was
bred in a court, be more eloquent than Amos, who had his
education among herds ? why should St. Luke write better
Greek than St. John ? or why should St. Paul, who was brought
up at the feet of Gamaliel, show more Jewish learning and
Rabbinical reasoning than the other Apostles ? Why, as
in the writings of uninspired authors, should we be able
to distinguish differences not only in style, but also in the
train of thought, and mode of reasoning and of narrating ?
Surely the most cursory perusal must force upon us the
conclusion, that the temper and education of the authors
entered in some measure into their composition. Their
thoughts indeed, unless we would degrade them to the
level of other writers of veracity and good intentions, must
be allowed to be in substance under the immediate direction
of the Deity ; and though it be impossible for us who are
not inspired to define how far the Holy Spirit was concerned
in suggesting them, yet we have abundant reason to believe,
that he afforded them sufficient assistance, to make their
writings infallible, and that the measure of his assistance
was in proportion to the nature of their subject. Thus
when they wrote historically of matters of fact, which they
had either seen, or which had been reported to them by
credible witnesses, there wTas no reason that the substance
of their histories should be revealed to them again. No
more seems required than that their memories should be
refreshed, and that the Holy Ghost should so far super-
intend their writing, as to prevent any error in the relation.
In like manner, when they delivered any moral precepts, or
argued from any revealed truths, he suffered them to use
their intellectual powers as far as the arguments were
suitable and solid, and at the same time quickened their

160

LECTURE VI.

faculties, and enlightened their understandings, and kept
them from writing any thing erroneous or irrelevant. But
when future events were to be predicted, which they them-
selves did not comprehend, or doctrines to be announced,
which had not been revealed to them by their Master when
on earth, we maintain their inspiration in a higher sense,
because as these communications were not the result of
memory or reasoning, they could come into the mind no
other way ; and when great and fundamental tenets were to
be proposed or explained, no doubt the very words were
occasionally dictated, as appears from some seemingly
accidental hints of great use even in this remote age, in the
confutation of prevalent error, which could not have been
caused by their prophetic anticipations, and from passages
of more than human energy and suitability for conviction
or persuasion, not only of their contemporaries, but of men
of all times and countries, whether learned or uneducated.
Upon the whole we conclude, that the measure of inspiration
varied with the dignity of the subject, and the exigencies
of the writers ; that for the main they pursued their own
method and manner, but on some important occasions had
the very words suggested to them, and were never so left to
themselves as not to have the Holy Spirit presiding over
them, and keeping them from error.

We assume then the Bible to be the word of God,
and all Christians agree to this position. It was there-
fore designed for the information of all believers, for
the command to the Apostles to proclaim the Gospel is
unlimited; and there is no intimation that it was de-
signed for the clergy only, who might deal out its contents
according to their discretion. Nay, on the contrary, some
epistles are avowedly written for the use of all believers ;
and even those which contain doctrines hard to be under-
stood, were read out from the beginning, without a com-
mentary, in the congregations. The Book itself we are
commanded to search, and we are directed to no other
guide. The proofs that it cannot be comprehended, or is
dangerous to read, except to a privileged class, rests on
those who, allowing its inspiration, call in question its

LECTURE VI.

answering its purpose. I therefore with my whole heart
embrace the opinion expressed so powerfully by the memo-
rable Chiilingworthj in an often quoted passage from his
work of convincing reasoning, " The Bible, the Bible only,
is the religion of Protestants ; whatsoever else they believe
besides it, and the plain, irrefragable, indubitable conse-
quences of it, well may they hold it as a matter of opinion, but
as matter of faith and religion neither can they with coherence
to their own grounds believe it themselves, nor require the
belief of it of others, without most high and most schismatical
presumption. I for my part, after a long and, as I verily be-
lieve and hope, impartial search of the true way to eternal
happiness, do profess plainly, that I cannot find any rest for
the sole of my foot, but upon this rock only. I see plainly
and with my own eyes, that there are Popes against Popes,
Councils against Councils, some Fathers against others, the
same Fathers against themselves, a consent of Fathers of one
age against a consent of Fathers of another age. In a word,
there is no sufficient certainty but of Scripture only for any
considering man to build upon. This therefore, and this only,
I have reason to believe, this I will profess, and according
to this I will live. Propose to me any thing out of this book,
and enquire whether I believe it or no, and seem it never
so incomprehensible to human reason, I will subscribe it
with hand and heart, as knowing no demonstration can be
stronger than this, God hath said so, therefore it is true. In
other things I will take no man's judgment from him,
neither shall any man take mine from me ; and what
measure I mete to others, I expect from them again. 1 am
fully assured, that God does not, and therefore that man
ought not, to require any more of any man than this — to
believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God, to endeavour
to find the true sense of it, and to live according to it."

The sufficiency of Scripture, and the right of private
judgment to determine its meaning, is the characteristic and
the justification of Protestantism ; and amid all the variety
of doctrine which separates from one another the churches
and sects that are included within this comprehensive name,
this one principle is a bond of union which distinguishes

162

LECTURE VI.

them all from those, who are content to accept with implicit
deference their faith from the Bishop of Rome. Some
of these differ on questions of Church government and
discipline, a few even renounce vital and essential tenets,
still all Protestants refer their disputes to the decision
of the same judge, the Word of God. The question with
them is to be settled by the interpretation of Scripture ; but
the Romanist, though he allows the inspiration of Scripture,
denies its supreme jurisdiction, and appeals to the equal
authority of Tradition, or, as he prefers calling it, the
unwritten word ; but when he says unwritten, he means
that it was delivered orally, not that it is still unwritten, for
it is to be found in the decrees of the Councils, and in the
works of the Fathers. This renders the Roman Catholic
controversy an irksome and interminable one ; since these
decrees and opinions are all included within the term ; and
as they occupy many volumes, and run through many
centuries, the disputants are wearied out, and the subject
buried under a heap of learning. In conducting it, they
will not confine themselves to Scripture. It is not enough
to show, that the inspired record is silent, or contradicts one
of their tenets. In the former case an appeal is made to
Tradition : in the latter the interpretation of some approved
divine is brought forward as decisive, on the authority of
the present Church. The only mode then of disputing
with the Romanist successfully is to show, that our Article
is right in maintaining that "Holy Scripture containeth
all things necessary to salvation, so that whatsoever is not
read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be re-
quired of any man that it should be believed as an Article
of the faith." Whereas the Council of Trent, A.D. 1546,
had declared, that " following the example of the orthodox
Fathers, it received and venerated with sentiments of equal
piety and reverence all the books, as well of the Old as of
the New Testament, since one God was the author of them
both ; and also the traditions relating as well to faith as to
morals, inasmuch as coining from the mouth of Christ
himself, or dictated by the Holy Spirit, they have been
pn served in the Catholic Church, in uninterrupted succes-

LECTURE VI.

169

si on ; and if any person shall not receive as sacred and
canonical the books of Scripture as read in the Catholic
Church, and contained in the ancient vulgate Latin edition,
or shall knowingly and designedly contemn the aforesaid
traditions, let him be accursed." Our Article, we see,
unequivocally rejects Tradition, though it does not name it;
and the twentieth and twenty-first Articles are no less decisive.
The Homilies speak the same language : and the beginning
of the first shows how important it appeared to our
Reformers to free themselves from this incumbrance.
" Unto a Christian man there can be nothing either more
necessary or profitable than the knowledge of Holy Scrip-
ture, forasmuch as in it is contained God's true word,
setting forth his glory, and also man's duty. And there is
no truth or doctrine necessary for our justification and
everlasting salvation, but that is or may be drawn out of
that fountain and well of Truth :" thus contradicting the
declaration of two fountains. And here we perceive a funda-
mental difference between the two Churches, which is
explicitly allowed by Cardinal Bellarmine, one of their
ablest controversialists. He grants indeed that Scripture,
inasmuch as it is a rule, has this quality, that whatever it
contains is necessarily true, and to be believed, and what-
ever is repugnant to it, is necessarily false. Since however,
he continues, it is not a total but a partial rule, it does not
contain all things ; and therefore there are some things
relating to faith not to be found in it. The natural con-
sequence is, that Scripture is brought under the tutelage
of Tradition ; and this tutelage is soon converted into
vassalage ; for since the comment claims the same divine
homage as the text, that comment, if supposed to be full
and clear, in proportion as the text is supposed to be
imperfect and obscure, has in fact superior authority. Hence
Tradition, which in theory is only equal to Scripture,
becomes in practice paramount. The written word, there-
fore, is represented as so ambiguous, as to be unintelligible,
unless explained by an infallible authority. Bellarmine
observes, that in very many places we cannot be certain of
its meaning, unless we call in the aid of Tradition : and goes

M 2

164

LECTURE Vr.

so far as to say, that the Gospel without unwritten Tra-
dition is an empty name, that is, words without sense.
Let us proceed from causes to effects. The Douay Catechism
thus boldly answers the question. " Are all these points of
Faith written in the holy Bible ? Many are there clearly
expressed, and some are only delivered by the living voice
of the faithful, and are called Apostolical traditions." Thus
the Council of Trent, though it refers to both where it can,
in some Articles wisely appeals only to the latter. In
the decrees concerning indulgences, in; ages, relics, and invo-
cations of saints, there is no attempt to press Scripture
into their service. Our own Church in discarding Tradition
rejects in the fourteenth, twenty-second, twenty-fifth,
twenty-eighth, thirtieth, and thirty -first Articles, works of
supererogation, purgatory, pardons, worshipping as well of
images as of relics, and the invocation of saints, and "because
they have no warranty of Scripture." Five of the seven Sacra-
ments and Transubstantiationare rejected on the same ground,
and also the adoration of the elements. The thirtieth declares,
that the Cup is not to be denied to the Laity; but here Tra-
dition also is on our side. Holy Mother Church therefore,
says the Decree, acknowledges its own authority in the ad-
ministration of the Sacraments, and says, that although from
the commencement of Christianity the use of it was not
uncommon, yet that the Church, induced by just and grave
causes, has approved and decreed communicating only under
one kind. The thirty -first declares the offering of Christ
once made to be a perfect satisfaction for the sins of the
whole world, and that there is no other; whereas the Council
urges the daily sacrifice of the mass under the name of the
unbloody sacrifice, and as truly propitiatory for the sins, not
only of the living, but of the dead, who are not yet released
from purgatory. For this also they can only plead Tradition.
There is also a difference as to original sin ; the tenth, af-
firming man's inability to prepare himself for faith, is
opposite to their doctrine; the twelfth says, that good works
follow after justification; and the thirteenth, that works done
before it cannot be good. The following is a proof of
vassalage. Some supposed intimation of a doctrine is

LECTURE VI.

165

sought in the words of Scripture, and then through the
light of Tradition this obscure intimation becomes a clear
and full account. For example, in favour of extreme unction
a reference is made to James, who is said to teach not
indeed in so many words, but from Apostolical Tradition,
the matter, form, proper minister, and effect of this salutary
Sacrament. Now of this commentary imposed by Tradition
there is not one word in the text. Penance is established
in a similar manner. MsTavoeTrs, reform or repent, is ren-
dered do penance, upon which the Rhemish Testament has
this note: 'Which word, according to the Scriptures and
the holy Fathers, does not only signify repentance and
amendment of life, but also punishing past sins by fasting
and such-like penitential exercises V

The arguments in favour of Tradition are specious, and
recommend themselves by a show of humility and modesty,
qualities peculiarly characteristic of the genuine Christian :
yet it can be only the show, for they resolve at last unto this
proposition, God hath inspired persons to commit to
writing the knowledge of his will, and it has not been
done with sufficient fulness or clearness. Its advocates
will urge, that the Apostles must have communicated orally
much which they did not commit to writing, but which
does not on that account lose its value and authority. Our
answer is, that information, however conveyed, would have
equal value and authority, if we could depend upon the
channel through which it comes : but we are certain that
many of the Jewish traditions were not only erroneous but
mischievous; we have reason to believe the same of several
of the Christian. It is in the highest degree improbable,
that any doctrine should have been omitted in the Testa-
ment, and confided to the future record of the Fathers.
Even if such traditions were extant, they would be useless,
unless we could ascertain their authenticity. Now if an
author states what was delivered by another long before
his birth, he only transmits a report, and those traditions
are not recorded by any Father of the first four centuries !
How then were they conveyed to those of a subsequent
* Bishop Marsh's Comparative View.

166

LECTURE VI.

age ? In the Mohammedan traditions, on the contrary,
which make up so much of the religion of Islam, as is
reasonable, the name of the person to whom the prophet
delivered, and of those by whom it was successively handed
down, are carefully noted. I wish to observe, that in
reading the earliest of the Fathers, called from their date
Apostolical, it has forcibly struck me as a providential
arrangement, that their writings are so brief and meagre.
Such as they are, they appear to me to be vastly over-
valued ; and I consider that their importance consists in
their testimony to the inspiration of Scripture, and their
copious citations from the New Testament, which assures
us, that their text, which is prior to any manuscripts, is
substantially the same as our's. Their immense inferiority
is by contrast a strong internal testimony to the inspiration
and consequent authority of the former, which they appeal
to as " authority in controversies of faith." Coming so
near to the time of the Apostles, if they had the eloquence
of Chrysostom or the unction of Augustine, or treated at
equal length on dogmas, it would have been almost im-
possible, humanly speaking, to have been satisfied with the
sincere milk of the word.

We do not contend that all regard to Councils, Fathers,
and ecclesiastical decrees, should be set aside ; the question
is, whether they should be obeyed implicitly as divine, or
only reverenced as human, when it appears to our reason
that they are deserving of reverence. If the Romanists are
right, Tradition is to judge us ; if we are right, Tradition is to
be judged by us. I would observe, that Tradition is of two
kinds; of doctrine, which we altogether disclaim; of customs,
which we in a degree approve, as will be shown under the
84th Article. The latter, the Romanist allows to be of
human origin, nor is it less different in quality. Bellarmine
describes it as consisting of certain ancient customs, which
having originated partly in the practice of Bishops, partly
in that of the laity, have gradually and by tacit consent
acquired the force of law, and this is called Ecclesiastical.
It has been urged, that Tradition is even recommended in
Scripture b, / praise you that ye keep the ordinances (or

LECTURE VI.

167

traditions) as I have delivered them to you; this is of the
latter description : again, Stand fast, and hold the traditions
which ye have been taught, whether by word or our epistle* ;
this is of the former. But the Apostle had lately quitted
them; they must have known to what he referred, and
if they had mistaken him, he could by letter set them
right. Let us know as well what he said as what he wrote
to them, and we shall raise no dispute about receiving it.
We argue, that the truth of what professes to be conveyed
by Tradition cannot be depended upon ; and also that we
find, that upon essential points the Bible is sufficiently
explicit. Still in maintaining this sufficiency, we take the
Scripture in the largest and most liberal sense, not limiting
ourselves to its precise words, but comprehending all the
inferences that may be logically drawn from it ; and as to
private judgment, though we think, that by comparing what
is in one passage obscure, with another in which it is more
plainly revealed, even the unlearned may discover all funda-
mental truths ; we are not for throwing aside as useless the
interpretations of those who have devoted their time and
talents to this study. We will not yield up our judgment
to any fallible teacher, considering it not so much a right as
a duty to examine all things, and holdfast that which is true.
Nevertheless the commentaries and treatises of pious and
able individuals, in every communion, are to be consulted.
Still more ought we to respect the deliberate judgment of
Councils, and the Confessions of the Reformed Churches ;
and I regard it as no small cause of thankfulness to Almighty
God, that I can subscribe ex animo the propositions which
our own scriptural Church has deduced from the unerring
word.

It is observable, that in every religion, true or false,
men have been desirous of being wise above that which is
written. The people of the Book, as the Koran terms
those who profess to have a divine revelation, are not con-
tented with it. Thus Jews and Mahometans, as well as
Roman Catholics, have traditions; and those of the former
having been long since brought together, may be consulted
h 1 Cor. xi. 2. c 2 Thess. ii. 1&\

168

LECTURE VI.

at pleasure. Those of both far exceed in bulk the original
Law, and in many instances evade or explain it away. Of
the Mahometan sayings of their Prophet, some thousands
are allowed to be authentic. These of course do not
concern us, but I mention them to show the tendency of
human nature, and that we ought to be upon our guard
against a weakness to which we are all so liable. The Jews,
with the exception of the Karaites, (of which there are now
very few, so called from their attachment to the written
word,) maintain, that many things were spoken to Moses on
Mount Sinai which were not recorded; these according to
them he orally delivered to Joshua, and he to the elders,
they to those that came after them, till at length this oral law-
being in danger of being forgotten, it was thought proper
to commit it to writing. About the middle of the second
century, Rabbi Judah, the holy, gathered the traditions
into one volume, consisting of six books, or sixty-three
treatises, which is called the Mishna, or secondary law. The
Commentary upon this is called Gemara, or the completing
of it; and of this there are two, that of Jerusalem, A.D. 300,
and that of Babylon t wo centuries later. The first is in one
folio volume, the second, which is the most fanciful and the
most followed, in no less than twelve. The whole is called
the Talmud, or what ought to be learnt. The Rabbis, since
our Lord's time, do not scruple positively to give it a pre-
ference over the Law, comparing the first to wine, the second
to water; and we know that many of the'r traditions
prevailed even in his time. Far from submitting to their
interpretations, he declares, that they had made the law of
God of none effect by their traditions, and reproaches
them that they worshipped God in vain, teaching for doctrines
the commandments of men. In all his discussions with the
Pharisees, he refers to Moses and the Prophets. To them,
and not to Tradition, does he appeal. What is a great part
of the Sermon on the mount but rectifying errors of Tra-
dition ? 11 he had intended that his own religion should be
grounded even in part upon such a foundation, he would
not have spoken as he has. The Romanists reply, that the
tradition he condemns is either repugnant to God's law, or

LECTURE VI.

169

is frivolous and unprofitable, not like theirs ; but granting
this, we are to judge of traditions. A genuine tradition
sufficiently attested, that is useful, no reasonable man can
reject; but if we are to judge Tradition, its authority is gone,
that is, if we are only to adopt it when we think it reason-
able. The Apostles in all their disputes with the Jews
make a constant appeal to the Scriptures ; the Bereans are
praised for comparing their doctrines with that alone ; and
Paul, in his argumentative epistles, refers to no other rule of
faith. He declares to Timothy, that the Scriptures [of the
Old Testament] are able through faith to make him wise
unto salvation, and that by answering the different purposes
of teaching, reproving, correcting, and instructing in righ-
teousness, the man of God may be rendered perfect, and
thoroughly furnished to all good works. Matthew, according
to Eusebiusd, tells us, that being about to leave the Jews
among whom he had preached, gave them his Gospel in
writing to supply his presence. Mark, according to Clement
of Alexandria, left his as a monument of the doctrine which
Peter had orally delivered. Luke drew up his Gospel,
that readers might know the certainty of those things in
which they had been orally instructed. John says, these signs
were written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the
Son of God ; and that believing ye might have life through his
name ; surely then he left nothing to Tradition which he
thought necessary for the attaining of this object. He long
outlived the other Apostles, and had experienced how little
Tradition could be trusted, since it had even in his time
been corrupted in so weighty a matter as the nature of his
Lord's person. When Peter knew by a special revelation,
that he must shortly put off his tabernacle, he does not refer
his converts to Tradition, or to the teaching of any successor,
but wrote a second Epistle, that they might be able after his
decease to have the tenets he had taught them always in
remembrance. The Apostles give no hint of having left any
thing with the Church to be conveyed down by oral tra-
dition ; and I select a few passages in chronological order, to
show that the early Christian writers acknowledged no other

d iii. 21.

170

LECTURE VI.

rule of faith than the Bible ; and when they occasionally
justify their opinions or language by human authority, they
only do it to clear themselves from the charge of innovation,
and in arguing with those who did not acknowledge the
Scriptures. The Gnostics also claiming this very tra-
dition in their favour, are refuted by Irenaeus and Ter-
tullian, who show that there was none such in existence.
" We have known," says the first of these, " the method of
our salvation, through no other than those through whom
the Gospel came to us, which they then truly proclaimed ;
but afterwards by the will of God, they [tradiderunt]
delivered it to us in writing, to be to us in future the
foundation and pillar of the faith. He proceeds to say,
" Read more diligently the Gospel given to us by the Apostles,
and read more diligently the Prophets, and you will find the
entire conduct, and the whole doctrine, and the whole passion
of our Lord preached in them." And the latter says, " Let
the school of Hermogenes show us that it is written; if it
be not, let them fear the woe allotted to such as add to or
take from Scripture." In his Prescriptions he uses this
remarkable language. " They confess indeed that the
Apostles were ignorant of nothing, and differed not among
themselves in their preaching, but they are unwilling to
believe that they revealed all things to all, and not some
secretly, and to a few ; and this because Paul used these
words, 0 Timothy, guard that which is deposited with thee
through the Holy Spirit." And these very passages so
turned aside from their obvious meaning by the heretics
whom he condemns, receive the same interpretation from
Bellarminee. "Consider how eminent their danger is
who neglect to study the Scriptures, in which alone a
knowledge of their condition can be ascertained f." And
Jerome g and Augustine h, these great pillars of the Roman
Church, shall supply us with these passages, out of many
which I might cite. The first these. " As we deny not
those things which are written, so we refuse those which
are not written. That God was born of a Virgin, we believe,

De voibo Dei non scripto. Origen 2r>2. f Horn, in Matt.

* A.D. 420. »• A.D. 430.

LECTURE VI.

171

because we read it ; that she did marry after her delivery we
believe not, because we do not read itg." " Those things
which they make and find, as it were, by Apostolical Tra-
dition, without the authority and testimony of the Scriptures,
the sword of God smites in Aggai." From Augustine let
these suffice. " Whatsoever ye hear from the Scriptures,
be that well received by you ; whatsoever is not in them
refuse, reject, lest you wander in a mistV " All writings
since the confirmation of the Canon of Scripture are liable
to dispute, and even Councils themselves are to be examined
and amended by Councils. Whatever our Saviour would
have us read of his works and words, he commended his apostles
and disciples to write as his hand1." With us Protestants
the Fathers have no other authority on questions of doctrine
than other uninspired authors ; but as their voluminous
works are included in the mass of documents which the
Church of Rome receives as the unwritten word of God, it
is important to show that they are really on our side. It
should also be observed, that they use the word Tradition in
a larger sense than the Romanist, according to its etymology,
for whatever has been delivered down both in writing as
well as orally. Thus St. Paul using the word thus largely
says, for I delivered unto you 7r«£=bWa that which I have
received ; and he expressly commands the Thessalonians to
hold fast the traditions H-agaSoVs^ which they had received,
whether by his word or his epistle ; and Jude speaks of the
faith delivered iragotZoHslo-r, once for all. In the same sense
Irenaeus calls it a tradition, that Christ took the cup. The
following passage from Irena3usk is claimed by Romanists as
favourable to their view, and certainly uses Tradition in their
sense. " If the Apostles had not left us the Scriptures, must
we not then have followed the order of Tradition, which
they delivered to those to whom they committed the
Churches ? To this course truly assent many nations of the
barbarians who have salvation, without ink or characters,
upon the heart." And certainly even in modern times,
in the conversion of all heathen nations, even of the most
learned, preaching generally speaking must precede read-
* Contra Helvidium, h De Doct. Ch. ' De Consensu Evang. k iii. 4.

172

LECTURE VI.

ing; still the missionary who knows how uncertain a
guide Tradition cannot fail to be, will, as William Williams
the Evangelist of New Zealand has done in the Maouri
tongue, as soon as it is practicable, commit the truths he has
proclaimed to writing; and that this was the ancient practice
appears from the remarkable fact, that Ulphilas, who con-
verted the Goths, translated for his converts the Scriptures,
and like our modern missionaries embodied in a grammar
the rules of their tongue, and introduced a written
character. The continuation of the citation from Irenaeus,
respecting the ancient tradition, shows that he afterwards
uses the word in the original not in the Roman sense ; for
his examples are doctrines that have been recorded in
Scripture, and their tradition is recommended, because it
professes to add. knowledge not contained, therein, exactly in
kind the same as that of the Gnostics, as appears from this
remarkable passage of the same ancient writer1. "When
these heretics are accused, by Scripture, they accused Scrip-
ture itself, because it varies in its sayings, and because truth
cannot be obtained from it by those who are ignorant of
Tradition. For the truth was not delivered by writing, but
by the living voice. But when we again refer those who
are averse to Tradition, to that Tradition which is from the
Apostles, and which is preserved by succession of presbyters
in the Churches, they will say that they are not only wiser
than the presbyters, but also than the Apostles, and have
found out the unadulterated truth ;" Irenaeus then, we may
conclude, would have rejected Roman as well as Gnostic
additions to the written word.

We have reason to think, that whatever was necessary to
be known or done, would be written in the Christian Law,
as it had been in the Jewish ; and what could be God's
design in first ordering Moses, and after him all inspired
persons, to write down his communications, but to preserve
men from the uncertainty and corruption of oral tradition.
In the first ages there were circumstances which have long
ceased, very favourable to its purity : the doctrines and rites
to be handed down were few and simple ; the whole race
1 Iren. iii. 2. m Gnos. iii. 2.

LECTURE VI.

173

of mankind sprung from one common pair, and the life of
each individual was protracted greatly beyond the period
allowed to later generations. Methuselah lived above three
centuries during the life of Adam, and Shem, who was almost
a hundred years of age when Methuselah died, was also the
contemporary of Abraham. Thus two persons might have
conveyed down the knowledge of true religion to the father
of the faithful : and yet we know, that when it pleased God
to reveal himself to him beyond the river, and commanded
him to forsake his country and kinsmen, they were
idolaters. What could be more likely to be remembered
than the law delivered at Mount Sinai, from the aweful
manner in which it was promulgated, and from the brevity
and the distinctness of the commandments ? yet even the
Decalogue was written or engraved upon two tables of stone.
What could make a deeper impression, than the deliverance
of the whole nation of Israel from Egyptian bondage by
the miraculous destruction of their oppressors ; yet this
marvellous event was recorded during the time of the very
generation that had experienced it, though annual festivals
were appointed to preserve the memory of it, and wThile the
Urim and Thummim might be consulted. Why write so
much, if oral teaching could be perfectly preserved ? And
how much more necessary was it that Christianity should be
fixed at its commencement, and not left to the looseness of
reports, since that dispensation was immediately to be spread
to distant countries among the inhabitants of which there could
be little intercommunication. The Jews were a small people
kept together by many ceremonial observances, and destined
to live alone, and not to be reckoned among the nations.
Christianity was designed to be an universal religion, and
to combine with customs and manners of every kind,
from barbarism to the utmost refinement, and no more than
two external rites were positively enjoined. Since then
oral tradition, when it had on its side the utmost possible
advantage, failed so much in the conveyance of natural
religion, and was not entrusted with that of Israel,
we conclude that it cannot be relied upon for Christianity :
we see that it is not recognised in the New Testament, and

174

LECTURE VI.

practically we do not feel any want of it. The most
specious argument in favour of Tradition is, that the religion
itself was professed and flourished before the books were
written, from which alone, our opponents say, according to
us, it can be learned. They taunt us with the fact, that
the Apostles went not with books in their hands to deliver
Christ's doctrine, but words in their mouths ; and that
primitive antiquity learnt their faith by another method
before these books were in existence. To this, as I think
only plausible objection, I answer, that they overlook the
fact, that the Old Testament was then extant, and that our
Lord and his Apostles appealed to it. While they survived,
their living voice was sufficient for those whom it could
reach ; but as soon as they could, they communicated the
revelation to writings, which were to be their only autho-
ritative successors. It is a probable tradition, that when
they were about to separate, Matthew drew up his gospel,
that a sketch of our Lord's ministry might be preserved in
an authentic form, and not be left to the possibility of
alteration in passing through many mouths. Our Lord's
promise, that the Holy Spirit would bring all things to their
remembrance, seems to imply, that they were to record them ;
and the fact that the former dispensation had been com-
mitted to writing is a presumption, that it was designed to
employ the same method of securing the latter from the
variations that might be introduced, either with or without
intention. There might be no need of committing Chris-
tianity to writing while there was access to infallible wit-
nesses ; but it became necessary when those who could
correct errors were no longer wTithin reach, and supernatural
aid had been withdrawn. If preachers now could give us
the same evidence of public and unquestionable miracles,
then we need not examine their doctrines by any other rule.
But it is manifest, that the Apostles themselves, from their
writing gospels and epistles, would not trust to such an
uncertain conveyance, and the disciples who immediately
succeeded the Apostles as they travelled to preach the
gospel, did, as Eusebius" tells us, at the same time deliver
n Eusebius iii.

LECTURE VI.

175

to their converts the writings of the holy Evangelists ; and
Ignatius as he travelled towards Rome, where he was to
suffer martyrdom, exhorted the Churches of every city to
which he wrote, to hold fast the traditions of the Apostles,
which for greater security he held necessary to be copied in
writing for the instruction of believers. We may assume,
that no essential or really desirable information has been
withheld : nor do the early opponents of the faith attack
any fact or tenet that is not found in Scripture. The
sufficiency of the New Testament may be argued from its
completeness. If God has given us eternal life in his Son,
and St. John wrote his gospel, that by believing we might
have life in his name, it follows that we have all we require ;
and we have a right to ask the Romanist, in what respect
the New Testament is deficient. When hard pressed, they
say that we learn only from Tradition the practice of infant
baptism, and the transfer of the Sabbath from the last to
the first day of the week. We allow that Tradition is a
safer hander down of rites and ceremonies than of doctrines.
Still we reject its right of deciding even in such cases, and
believe (though we allow weight to primitive usage) that
both are inferred from Scripture0. They also assume, that
our Lord's divinity can only be proved by Tradition, and in
their zeal endanger the basis of the faith ; for who would
accept the doctrine, if the inspired writers had not affirmed
its truth. It is a sufficient answer, that none of the Fathers
can have argued from it, or deduced from it more forcible
appeals to conscience and gratitude, than Paul, Peter, and
John; and I refer to my exposition of the second Article

° The lawfulness and duty of baptizing infants is argued from the analogy
of circumcision : from the probability that there were such in the households
mentioned in the Acts, as baptized at the same time with the heads of the
families ; and from St. Paul's reasoning, 1 Cor. vii. 14. St. John expressly
states that he was in the spirit on the Lord's day, Rev. i. 10.; and He himself
appears to have consecrated the first day by his resurrection, and so his
Apostles seem to have understood him, since they met together on tbe same
day in the following week, John xx. 26. And the fact is inferred from passages
in the Acts, Acts xxi. 4; xxviii. 14. and especially when the disciples emu
together lo break bread, Acts xx. 7. or, as we should now express ourselves, to
partake of the Lord's Supper.

176

LECTURE VI.

for the scriptural evidence of this vital essential truth.
Finally, Scripture maintains its own sufficiency. Tt may be
said, a book can no more than a man bear witness to its own
veracity. But my reply is, that it can, when it is allowed
by both parties to be true. Its sufficiency is allowed by
the Fathers and the Councils from the beginning ; and
what has Rome to urge for Tradition, but her own modern
and on this question interested divines? Our Lord ascribes
the error of the Sadducees to their not understanding the
Scriptures. Even these early Scriptures are declared to be
able to make the reader wise unto salvation ; and if they
needed no living interpreter, still less can the Christian
additions to the Canon, which exhibit not the shadow but
the substance ; not the truth through the veil of types and
predictions, but stated in the plainest language. And the
whole tone and spirit of St. Paul's Epistles to the Ephesians
and other Christians show, that the fault was not in these
writings, but in themselves, if they did not comprehend with
all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and
height, and know the love of Christ, and be filled with all the
fulness of God.

But dismissing Tradition, as the equal or rival of
Scripture, it comes before us in the most insidious form of
its friend and ally, as affording us amid contradictory inter-
pretations an authorized guide, upon which we can rely
with confidence. No doubt a Church that pretends to
infallibility might be expected to have long ago put an end
to all disputes, by producing an infallible commentary.
Yet, though we hear so much of infallibility and of tra-
dition, we find as much difference of opinion among Roman
Catholic as Protestant commentators, and the Church has
never put forth one in her name. Subjects which do not
interfere with the claims of the Church, are left as with us
to private judgment ; thus the doctrine of the divine decrees
has divided them as much as us ; yet the Church, unwilling
to offend either the Dominicans or the Jesuits, who have
taken opposite sides, has never ventured to pronounce
judgment. When this question is asked, a triumphant
appeal is made to the decisions of general Councils ; yet

LECTURE VI.

177

there is much of Scripture, especially of the obscurer parts,
which they leave altogether untouched : and it is deserving
of note, that the doctrines which the early ones, which we
acknowledge as orthodox, determined, they decided not by
the opinion of divines, but exclusively by Scripture.

Whatever tends to show the perspicuity of the Bible, is
of course unfavourable to Tradition, either as a substitute,
or as its interpreter. It is therefore the object of the
Romanist to dwell upon its obscurity : and so far do
their divines proceed in this profane attempt, that they
have by exaggeration furnished infidels with weapons
against Christianity, and have said nearly as much as was
possible to lower it in public estimation. Not content
with disparaging it as obscure, while they acknowledge its
inspiration, they presume to call it a dangerous book, and
obstruct consistently its perusal. The supreme Pontiffs,
perceiving by a sort of instinct of self-preservation that the
Book condemned by anticipation their unchristian doctrines
and usurped authority, have in every age exerted themselves
to suppress this witness against them. Thus Wycliffe's
translation was denounced by a Papal Bull, addressed,
A.D. 1378, to our University, which favoured his religious
movement, and being exempt from episcopal jurisdiction,
wras able to protect him. Luther, and our own Tyndale in a
later age, had to encounter similar treatment. Nor can we
wonder that the noble undertaking of modern philanthropy,
which aspires to supply the whole family of mankind with
the word of God, should be the special object of Roman
abhorrence. It was denounced, (as soon as it became for-
midable to this perverter of the truth, who hated the light
that would detect and reprove him,) in A.D. 1816, as a
crafty device, by which the very foundations of religion are
undermined. He confirmed the Trent determination, that
the Bible printed by heretics, (that is, Protestants,) should
be included in the index of prohibited books, it being-
evident from experience, that the holy Scriptures circu-
lated in the vulgar tongue, produce more harm than good ;
thus declaring the Word of God to be, without an interpreter,
not only an insufficient, but a dangerous guide. The pro-

178

LECTURE VI.

hibition was renewed by his successor Leo ; and again by
the present Pope, who, though hailed on his election with
enthusiasm as a reformer of the State, has shown no dis-
position to improve the Church, but added a new Article, the
immaculate conception of the Virgin, to the heretical creed of
the predecessor whose name he bears, and whose memory he
professes to revere. In the prohibition of God's Word, as has
been observed, the Popes have only acted in conformity with
the Council of Trent. Thus early in the preceding century
Father Quesnel had written some edifying reflections on the
New Testament, which were widely circulated, and were ad-
mired and recommended by the most pious prelates in his own
Church. But he had dared to announce the position that
"It is useful and necessary, at all times, in all places, and for
all sorts of persons, to know the spirit, piety, and mysteries
of the Scripture :" and for this offence he was imprisoned.
He contrived to escape to Holland : and the Pope, on the soli-
citation of Louis XIV, issued the Bull Unigenitus, which
condemned this proposition as false, scandalous, impious, blas-
phemous ! Such being the decrees of the heads of that corrupt
Church, we cannot wonder that the Bible is treated with
contempt by individual members. Pighius teaches us to call
it a nose of wax, and Turrian a shoe that may fit any foot ;
and we have lived to see it burnt by the priests of Ireland,
who had been told by Leo XII, that through a perverse inter-
pretation there has been framed out of the Gospel of Christ,
a gospel of man, or what is worse, a gospel of the devil !
They catch eagerly at Peter's warning, but they reject his
remedy : they would close the book ; he would have his
converts grow in grace, and in the knowledge of the Lord and
Saviour. He speaks of some things hard to be understood,
and only in St. Paul's Epistles ; they object to the whole
volume. And these things, before they can injure must
be wrested, that is, tortured; and the persons named by
him the untaught, or unteachable, are also described as
unstable. It is out of a tender care of souls that Rome
professes to forbid the laity to read even Roman versions
with approved notes, without a written licence from the
Bishop of the diocese, with the advice of a priest; yet

LECTURE VI.

179

their own Dupin truly observes, that the perusal seldom
causes any but the learned to fall into error, and that
generally the simple have found in the Scriptures only
instruction and edification. Now that ultra-montanism seems
to have extinguished whatever liberality had lingered in
that Church, this defender of the Gallican liberties will find
less favour than ever ; but even Bellarmine, who advocates
extreme views, maintaining the Pope's personal infallibility,
allows, that almost all heresiarchs were bishops or presbyters.
This prohibition is an express contradiction of St. Paul,
who adjures the Thessalonians to read out his Epistle in
the congregation. In fact, the Bible is the common property
of Christians ; and who shall presume to keep back from any
what the Holy Ghost has indited for the benefit of all? yet
Rome arrogantly claims it as her exclusive possession, Milner,
in his so-called 'End of Controversy,' thus unblushingly
stating to his opponent the difference of their position. " I
am bound, dear Sir, in conformity with my rule of faith, to
protest against your right to argue from Scripture, for I
have proved to you that the whole business of the Scriptures
belongs to the Church, who alone authoritatively explains
them. It is impossible that the sense of Scripture should
ever be against her ; hence I might quash every objection
you draw from any passage by this short reply, the Church
understands the passage differently, therefore you mistate it!
Such a claim can only be supported by the partial defini-
tion of a Church common with those who think with him,
a definition which substitutes a part for the whole, the
ministry for the congregation.

Roman Catholics enlarge upon the enthusiasm of Pro-
testants, as arising out of an abuse of the Bible ; but where
shall we discover so many whose enthusiasm has driven
them, at least to the verge of insanity, as among their monks
and nuns, or in any denomination men who have inflicted
such injuries on mankind, as the founders of their two orders
of begging friars, the half-crazy Francis and Dominic, the
hard-hearted fanatical founder of the Inquisition ? They are
also fond of dwelling upon the varieties of doctrine among Pro-
testants, which they ascribe to their perusal of the Scriptures.

N 2

180

LECTURE VI.

Thus Bossuet, relying on the boldness of his assertion, says,
that the Church, which professes to teach no more than she
has received, never varies ; whereas heresy, which began by
innovation, is always innovating. Ecclesiastical history
however, and this he could hardly fail to know, abundantly
confutes him, by marking the precise aera at which image
worship, transubstantiation, and other pernicious errors, were
introduced ; and the published Confessions of the reformed
Churches will, to any who will compare them, show them
substantial harmony in all leading doctrines.

It may be also argued, that the Bible is a sufficient rule of
faith and morals, because no other exists. Believers of the
primitive times have transmitted it to us, and proved from
it their faith. The rule being a written one may be con-
sidered an accident; still because written it is more accurately
preserved, more certainly transmitted, and fitter for use ;
and we may say that the Protestant aphorism is established
by the fact, that there is no doctrine that can pretend to a
clear universal tradition, and the testimony of the first ages
and churches, but what is contained in the Old and New
Testaments. Reason satisfies us, and the fact is confirmed
by St. John, that Jesus must have said and done much more
than has been recorded of him. It may be natural to wish for
a fuller statement, but we must bow to the superior wisdom
which has arranged it as it is ; and it is wonderful, and no
doubt providential, that we have not, as of other eminent
characters, speeches and actions of our Lord handed down
by subsequent authors. Suppose Clement, or Polycarp, or
Ignatius, had supplied any probable anecdotes, we could
hardly have refused to accept them, as in profane history
we do those of Diodorus of Sicily or of Plutarch, on the
presumption that they found them in earlier writings, which
have since perished. Certainly the more we reflect upon
the subject, the more thankful we shall feel that so very
few sayings of our Lord have been recorded that are not
embalmed, as it were, in the G ospels : and that they are obscure
and unimportant, except the one which St. Paul, by quoting
it to the elders at Miletus, has stamped with scriptural

LECTURE VI.

181

authority. The early Fathers neither appeal to Tradition, or
express a wish for it ; and the Scriptures being designed for
all, are written in a style intelligible to the unlearned. Much
too of Scripture is now easy, that was once difficult ; and
passages which are still difficult, time will make as easy.
For instance, many of the types and prophecies which
relate to the Messiah were perhaps till his coming, at least
as to their chief intention, unintelligible, which to us who
live since are plain and perspicuous. We allow, however,
that there are still difficulties : we do not however find that
Tradition has explained them to the Roman Catholics; and
the obscurity of any part does not affect our argument, if
we can show, that the leading doctrines and duties may be
easily understood by pious and well-meaning men, though
of little education. This is a practical question, which the
experience of every age abundantly demonstrates. For
wherever the Scriptures have been allowed to have free
course, there they have been glorified, in the conversion
of souls ; or in the edification in the faith and of good
works of . those converted, through the instrumentality of
preaching. Whether as converting, or as sanctifying the
previous believer, they have proved themselves by their
effects wherever they have been read to be the word of God.

This argument may, however, be pushed too far ; for it is
the pure and holy doctrine, so worthy of a perfect Being,
so suitable to our wants, so consolatory to our feelings, and
so calculated to improve us, which we are convinced is from
above. As to the language in which it is conveyed, we can
hardly venture to affirm that we could have always distin-
guished it from that of pious uninspired men, conveying in
their own words the same doctrine; especially in the historical
books, though exceptions must of course be made for pas-
sages which speak authoritatively, or report a message
avowedly from God. If asked why we receive the present
canon, we refer to historical testimony: and then the tra-
ditionist comes round upon us to convict us out of our own
mouths, maintaining that we believe the Scriptures upon the
authority of the Church, and therefore end in submission to
Tradition. To avoid this embarrasment, many of the Reformers

182

LECTURE VI.

declared that the Scriptures manifested themselves to be
the word of God. According to the Belgian confession, they
themselves testify their authority ; the Gallican proceeds fur-
ther, not only declaring faith in the Scriptures to depend upon
the internal persuasion of the Spirit; but that thereby they
know canonical from ecclesiastical or apocryphal books ; and
the Assembly's Confession solves our conviction ultimately
into internal evidence. " "We may be moved and induced
by the testimony of the Church to a high and reverent
esteem of the holy Scripture: and the heavenliness of the
matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the majesty of the style,
and the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole of
which is to give all glory to God ; the full discovery which
it makes of the sole way of man's salvation, the many other
incomparable excellencies, and the entire perfection thereof,
are arguments whereby it doth abundantly evince itself to
be the word of God ; yet notwithstanding, our full per-
suasion and assurance of the infallible and divine authority
thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit, bearing
witness by and with the word in our hearts." Whitaker,
in his controversy with Bellarmine, goes so far as to
say, the sum of our opinion is, that the Scriptures have
all their authority from themselves: that they are to
be received, not because the Church has so appointed,
but because they come from God ; and that they came
from God cannot be certainly known, but by the Holy
Ghost. Calvin says, the majesty of God will presently
appear in them to every impartial examiner, and extort
his assent, so that they act preposterously, who endeavour
by argument to beget a solid credit to them, as the word
will never meet with belief, till it be sealed by the internal
testimony of the Spirit who wrote it. The internal
evidence of the truth of Christianity itself will be allowed
by all genuine believers to bring home conviction both
to the understanding and the heart; but this is the effect
of the doctrine, whether conveyed orally, or by writing ;
but with respect to the channel through which this doctrine
is conveyed, that is, the books in which it is preserved,
this proof 1 conceive would at the utmost only apply to our

LECTURE VI.

183

Lord's own discourses, and parts of the Epistles : and with-
out an immediate personal revelation, no man would in this
way have a satisfactory conviction, that the books them-
selves and no others, are the word of God. We grant that
the fabrications of gospels, acts, and epistles, which have come
down to us, carry with them from their absurdity or
inability their own condemnation ; but we know that seven
of the books now admitted into the New Testament, were
at one time only partially acknowledged. This, as Burnet
observes, is only an argument to him who feels it : and to
assert that the Scriptures can be only proved by the testi-
mony of the Spirit, is likely to introduce such enthusiasm
as would render the Canon uncertain and precarious; for as
every person must be the only judge for himself of this
testimony, it will not be strange, if some should urge it for
other books not commonly received, and if they should,
how can these divines answer them ? According to this
hypothesis, all who believe the Scriptures to be the word
of God, must have the testimony of the Spirit ; whereas it
is a fact, that multitudes firmly believe in them, who are
not conscious of such an inward illumination. " For my
part," says Baxter, whose integrity none will deny, " I
confess I could never boast of any such light of the spirit,
or reason either, which without human testimony, would
have made me believe, for instance, that Solomon's Song is
canonical ; and the Book of Wisdom apocryphal ; nor could
I have known all or any historical books, as Joshua and
Judges, (and we may add the Gospels and Acts,) to be
written by divine inspiration, but by Tradition." We
cannot show the genuine gospels and acts to be inspired,
since we could imagine similar uninspired ones, written by
competent reporters, that should be true, and between
which and the four received ones our own judgment would
not allow us to discriminate. It is well known, that, in
point of fact, no higher authority than this is allowed to
tho^e of Mark and Luke by Michaelis and other critics.
Some, unwilling to dispute the validity of the argument
from internal evidence, have attempted a sort of medium ;
as Placaeus, who observes, that the truly canonical books

184

LECTURE VI.

have more or fewer characters and evidences of their in-
spiration, as they are more or less necessary ; and that
apocryphal books, as they are more or less unfit for the
Canon, have more or fewer marks of human composition,
so that there may be books, as that of Esther, which we
shall hardly be able to prove canonical, and such a com-
position as Manasses' prayer, which we shall hardly be able
to prove apocryphal, by any other arguments than such as are
drawn from the language in which they are written, and the
constant testimony of the Church. If of books claiming
inspiration, we are to judge from their style and contents,
without any external arguments from tradition, since each
party will be most attached to such as seem most to
favour its scheme of divinity ; it is a probable conclusion
that several now received would have been at times
rejected. It is well known, that the early heretics
acting upon this principle, rejected books because they
were not in harmony with their preconceived opinions ;
and their reasoning has been well confuted by Augustinp.
The advocates of this kind of proof would do well to con-
sider, how uncertain they make the Canon. In the
Church of Corinth were deceitful workers, transforming
themselves into the apostles of Christ, and artfully imitating
their doctrines. Now if such had published books under
the names of the genuine Apostles, it would have been
almost impossible, without some rational arguments, for
the ordinary believers to have detected their forgeries ; and
St. Paul did not put them upon this method of ascertaining
the genuineness of his epistles. Knowing them as he did to
be from God, still he did not trust to their intrinsic evidence,
but mentions the mark which he made use of in all, to
distinguish them from supposititious ones. The other
extreme is to receive the Scriptures solely upon the
authority of the Church, as if it depended upon Popes and
Councils to sanction or reject at their pleasure. This we
regard as too absurd to require confutation ; we must then
acquiesce in the only remaining method, tradition handed
down from those who lived in or near the time of their
P Contra Faustum, xi. 2 ; xxxiii. 0,

LECTURE VI.

185

being written. The question is concerning the fact, whether
certain books were written by their reputed authors, and
we prove it in the same way, only with much stronger
evidence, as we prove that Virgil or Livy wrote the works
that have always passed under their names. The scriptural
works have also the advantage of having been published as
soon as written, being delivered to the churches for their
use ; they who first received them knew them to be the
works of those names they bore, and could and did testify
to the succeeding age their knowledge of this fact. This
testimony is still faithfully preserved in the writings of the
ancient Christians, and is therefore not only a sufficient, but
the principal cause of our conviction. This, says Huet, is
an axiom which cannot be disputed by those who will allow
any thing in history to be certain : and the deference which
has been always shown to the Scriptures, and the copious
citations from them by the Fathers, and their continual
perusal, must have secured them from corruption. The early
Christians were not credulous, but very careful to separate
the true from the false. This appears from the fact, that it
was long before some of the books were universally received,
and from the steps they took to discountenance the spurious.
Thus when Paul, a presbyter of Asia, confessed that he has
written in the Apostle Paul's name the acts of Paul and
Thecla, a notice of his forgery was conveyed to the African
church. Modern advocates of infidelity assert, that the
New Testament Scriptures, as we have them, were never
accounted canonical, until the Council of Laodicea, as late
as A.D. 364. The canons of this Council are, we allow, the
earliest extant, which give a catalogue ; but there is reason to
believe, that the Bishops there present did not meet to settle
the Canon, but simply to determine what books should be
read out in the congregation. This explains the otherwise
unaccountable omission of the Revelation, which could not
fail to be known to them, Laodicea being one of the seven
churches more peculiarly under St. John's care, to which it
was addressed, and to whom no doubt a manuscript of it
must have been confided. A similar catalogue had been given
before by Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem, by Eusebius, and by

186

LECTURE VI.

Athanasius, including the Revelation. We may ascend as
high as to Origen, A, D. 210; and (since the publication of
Jones's instructive Dissersation on the Canon) a fragment has
been discovered of the lost dialogue of the still earlier author
Caius, in which he enumerates twenty-two books out of
twenty-seven, and makes a marked distinction between the
Canonical and the Apocryphal, saying that it is not fit that
gall should be mixed with honey. Neither the names of
the persons concerned in forming the Canon, nor the date of
it, can be ascertained ; but it is a probable opinion, that it
was determined by St. John, who long survived his brethren.
We at least know that he approved the three first gospels, and
added by way of a supplement his own, and it may be
presumed that the books once disputed were subsequently
added.

This statement by no means makes oral tradition the rule
of faith. Oral tradition, for example, sufficiently assures us
that a certain ancient document is Magna Charta, and that
the Statute books contain the laws, but it does not therefore
follow that Tradition can report to us the substance of these
laws better than the written laws themselves3. Suppose any
oral message, consisting of an hundred particulars to be deli-
vered to an hundred persons of different degrees of under-
standing and memory, by them to be conveyed to an hundred
more, who were to convey it onwards ; is it probable that
this message with all its particulars would be as truly con-
veyed through so many mouths, as if it were written down
in so many letters, concerning which every bearer need say
no more than this, that it was delivered to him as a letter,
written by him whose name was subscribed to it ? The letter is
a message in which no man need err, but as to the errand,
every messenger may either forget, or make some mistake
in it.

It was a great omission in King Edward's Article, that
though the sufficiency of Scripture is asserted, Scripture is
not defined ; and this is the more extraordinary, since we are
not only at issue with the Church of Home as to its autho-
rity, but as to the books of which it consists. In this
a Lancaster's Bampton Lectures.

LECTURE VI.

187

enlarged edition under Elizabeth this is rectified, a list
being given of the books which we retain, and of those
we reject. In the enumeration, Nehemiah is considered
as a continuation of Ezra, and therefore called, the second
book of Esdras, his name being so written in the Vulgate.
The Bible of the Roman Catholics, it is to be remembered,
is not identical with that of the Protestants. The Lutherans
are satisfied, generally speaking, with Luther's translation,
and we with our excellent authorized version, yet neither
regard them as infallible; and therefore if any dispute on the
meaning of a particular text arise, we refer to the original.
The Council of Trent, on the contrary, professing to have con-
stantly in view the removal of error, and the preservation of
the purity of the gospel, has declared, that the vulgate Latin
translation should be held as authentic in all public lectures,
disputations, and sermons, and that no one shall under any
pretence presume to reject it. Having thus decreed, the
Council with reason ordered a careful revision of St. Jerome's
version. This was executed in 1590 by the command of
Sixtus V. who denounced with the greater excommunication
not even to be absolved by the Pope, any person who
should presume to change the smallest particle. Yet
Clement VIII. published only two years later an improved
edition, with no less than two thousand corrections.

Not only has Rome substituted a translation for the
originals, but it includes in the Bible several books which our
Reformers rejected. Our Lord acknowledges the same division
of the Law, the Psalms, and Prophets, as Josephus, who was
almost his contemporary: "We have not," says that author*1,
"myriads of books differing from each other, but only
twenty-two, which comprehend the history of all past
time, and are justly believed to be divine. And of these,
five are the works of Moses, which contain the law^s, and an
account of things from the creation of man to his death :
the Prophets then recorded the transactions of their own
times in thirteen books: and the four remaining ones contain
hymns to God, and precepts for the conduct of human
i Against Appian. i. 8.

188

LECTURE VI.

life." How our thirty-nine books are more particularly
reduced to this number, is not settled by any authority ; but
we have evidence enough from the modern Jews compared
with this passage, that all our books are comprehended in
the three classes. The Jews reduced their sacred books to
twenty-two, the number of letters in their alphabet; but it
appears, that in the time of Jerome some persons, as now, made
twenty-four; and this is easily done, as Ezra, and Nehemiah,
and the Chronicles might reckon respectively for one or two,
and, according to Jerome, Ruth was detached from Judges,
and the Lamentations from Jeremiah. The historical books,
as we call them, are arranged by them among the Prophets,
which shows their opinion that they are as much inspired as
the rest. So far of the Old Testament collectively : and
when we examine the authority of particular books, we
shall find our Lord's attestation to the inspiration of more
of them than we should have supposed. I premise that we
receive the same books as the Jews, and that their scriptures
are authorized by our Saviour without any exception; and
when blaming them for superseding the Scriptures by their
traditions, he gives no intimation of their having added to,
taken from, or in any way corrupted them. Also St. Paul,
calling them the Oracles of God, committed to their care,
implies that he found no fault in their preservation of them.
When our Lord was tempted by the devil, he put the tempter
to flight by texts chosen from Deuteronomy, saying, it is
written; and if it had been asked where, He would have
answered, in the word of God. In the sermon on the mount
he continually refers to the Law as divine, declaring that
he came not to destroy but to fulfil it; and charges the
Pharisees with making void God's commandments, expressly
referring to the fifth and seventh. He in this way attests the
reality of many of the events recorded in the Pentateuch,
as the creation, the institution of marriage, the deluge, and
the fate of Sodom, and of Lot's wife ; and in the parable of
the rich man and Lazarus, he names Moses and the
Prophets as sufficient, and therefore inspired guides. He
likewise refers to the history of David, of the Queen of

LECTURE VI.

189

Sheba, and of Elijah, and Jonah, and bears testimony to
several verses of the Psalms, and the Prophets q.

The external testimony to the integrity of the Hebrew
text is stronger than is generally supposed. The examin-
ation of manuscripts, commenced by Kennicott and
carried on by De Rossi and others, has proved the care
with which the Jews have preserved their Scriptures ;
for it appears from their collations, that all that they
compared were of the same family, exhibiting scarcely
any various readings of importance. No collusion can be
imagined between Jews and Christians, who have been
in opposition to each other from the beginning; and neither
party, supposing it to have had the will, had the power
of interpolating or altering any of the books of the Old
Testament. The Septuagint translation substantially re-
presents the Hebrew text before the incarnation, and that
and the other Greek versions vouch for its integrity in their
respective ages. The Chaldee Targums or versions carry
us back to a still earlier period ; and for the Pentateuch we
have the additional authority of the Samaritan copy, which
must have existed before the captivity of Israel, and is
probably nearly as ancient as the disruption of the state
into two kingdoms, since neither the ten nor the two
tribes were likely to accept a copy from the other. As-
suming this view to be correct, we have all the evidence
which the case will admit, for it ascends beyond that for the
authenticity of the poems of Homer, the earliest of un-
inspired compositions.

In our authorized Bible there are inserted between the
Old and New Testament nine books, six. historical, and the
remainder moral or didactic, with a few additional chapters
to Esther and Daniel. And these are called Apocryphal,
hidden or secret, either because their authors were unknown,
or that they were not read out in the congregation. In the
Septuagint and in the Vulgate they are intermixed with
the others, so that the unlearned reader may not easily
discover that they are not entitled to equal authority ; and

i Ps. viii ; lxxxii ; cx ; cxviii ; Isaiah vi. 9; Daniel x. 27 ; Hosea vi. 6 ;
Jonah i. 17 ; Mieah vii. (i ; Malachi iii. i ; iv. 5, (j.

190

LECTURE VI.

the firm adherence of the British and Foreign Bible Society
to its principle of circulating nothing but the Word of God,
has alienated from it many of the Lutherans. Our reformers
placed them in a supplement, and sheltered their rejection
of their authority under St. Jerome, the translator of the
Vulgate, and a better judge of the question than Augustin
or any other ancient writer. The following is the original
of the passage translated in the Article, and is taken from
his preface to the books ascribed to Solomon. " Sicut ergo
Judith et Tobiae et Maccabueorum libros legit quidem
Ecclesia sed eas inter canonicas Scripturos non recipit, sic
et hac duo volumina legit ad adificationem plebis, non ad
auctoritatem ecclesiasticarum dogmatum conflrmandam."
The Church, that is, the Church at large, not merely the
English branch of it, orders them to be read, as she does
homilies or sermons. In the former they are cited occasionally
as Scripture, but no chapters of the books of Esdras, Maccabees,
or Esther are readoutin the congregation, andnosunday lessons
are taken from the remaining books. Neither our Lord or his
Apostles appeal to them; and Josephus says of them in
general, " There is a continuation of writings from Artax-
erxes to the present time, but they are not considered
deserving of the same credit, because there was not a clear
succession of prophets." The early Christians do not bring
proofs of doctrine from them, though they sometimes in-
troduce passages for the sake of their moral instruction.
And those who give catalogues of canonical books may be
said to omit them, though the exception of a book or two
may occur in some of their lists. They were mostly the
works of the Jews of Alexandria. One can hardly suppose
that the Wisdom of Solomon was meant to pass for more
than a successful imitation of his writings: and the prologues
to the most valuable of them, Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom
of Jesus the son of Sirach, is so far from claiming equality
with the Law and the Prophets for this compilation, that
it calls the author an imitator of Solomon, and describes
him as no more than a man of great diligence and wisdom,
who did not only gather the grave and short sentences of
wise men, but himself also uttered some of his own, full of

LECTURE VI.

191

much understanding and wisdom." A few of his maxims are
objectionable : and, as might be expected, the work can bear
no comparison with the inspired Proverbs; but our jealousy
for the superiority of the Bible may perhaps make us unjust;
and it must be allowed to be a valuable compendium of
ethics, far excelling the precepts of any heathen moralists, yet
owing its superiority to the light reflected from the
Scripture. According to Dupin, the apocryphal books were
first received as canonical by a provincial synod at Hippo,
A.D. 393, but subject to the confirmation of the Church
beyond the sea ; and its decree was accepted by the Pope
and bishops of Italy, but was not formally established before
the Council of Trent. It rejected however the Prayer of
Manasseh, and the third and fourth books of Esdras, appa-
rently because they were not in the old Latin version.
Bellarmine has made great use of these books, arguing from
them in favour of purgatory, and the worship of saints,
quoting Wisdom in commendation of monastic life, and
supporting papal supremacy from Judith.

Happily there is no Apocrypha to the New Testament ;
for though fragments of many spurious works under the
name of Apostles are extant, none of them have been ac-
knowledged by the Church ; and the most cursory examin-
ation of any will convince a reader, that such idle and
sometimes objectionable legends will be accepted as Scrip-
ture by no reasonable person. Fortunately the canon of
the New Testament was fixed at an early date ; and in the
catalogues, beginning with that of Origen, all the books are
enumerated, except in some, the Epistle to the Hebrews and
the Revelation. Eusebius, our earliest informer, divides the
Scriptures into the books acknowledged by all, and those which
had been spoken against by some, but were in his time gene-
rally received, and were believed to be authentic by himself.
These are in number seven, the Epistle to the Hebrews, and
those of James and Jude, the second of Peter, and the
second and third of John, and the Revelation. All are
cited as Scriptures by authors who lived near their time,
and their doctrine is in harmony with those books of which
no doubt was ever entertained. In those early times the

192

LECTURE VI.

communication between distant countries was not so rapid
and so frequent as it has been since ; and therefore letters
addressed to the Christians of one country might remain
for years unknown to those of another. Gospels would
spread sooner and farther than Epistles, for no one could
well go to teach Christianity any where, without taking
with him one. Epistles would have a more confined
and local interest, and these to particular Churches would
sooner be acknowledged than those to dispersed converts.
Suppose any one to ask whether or riot the Epistles to
the Corinthians and that of James were authentic, the
former he might be sure to find at a well-known city, and
many witnesses ready to vouch for its genuineness ; and
this certainty would have weight at any distance, whereas
the evidence of the latter would be more scattered and
feeble. Their being then received upon examination, after
being confounded with other books, is a strong presumption
in their favour, a more rigid trial than if they had met
with acceptance on their first appearance ; and it is a satis-
factory reflection, that the claims of these books have been
weighed and allowed, when the materials for forming a judg-
ment were more abundant than at present. Pursuing this
thought, we ask how it happens that all Christians have long
since agreed upon their authenticity ? This is no ordinary
phenomenon ; a point once disputed generally continues to
be disputed, but in this there is now no dissenting Church,
scarcely an hesitating individual.

The Epistle to the Hebrews is quoted by Barnabas
Clement of Rome, Polycarp, and Clement of Alexandria, as
may be seen in Lardner's elaborate and accurate work ; the
Councils of Laodicea, A.D. 364, and Carthage, A.D. 397, sho w,
that by that time all doubt was at an end. The Epistle is in
general ascribed to Paul: and if the language be thought too
classical, which is the main objection with critics, we may
suppose that it was composed in Hebrew, and turned into
Greek by Luke, Silvanus, or some other of his companions.
The internal evidence is strong, for it is such a commentary
upon the Law as we might expect from him. Timothy is
spoken of in it in a manner like that of Paul; the term Medi-

LECTURE VI.

193

ator occurs in this and twice in the other Epistles which have
been always ascribed to him, and in no other part of Scripture ;
and a resemblance may be pointed out to passages in his un-
questioned writings1. The Epistle of James is acknowledged
by the earliest Fathers, but it does not seem to have reached
those of the West, as Tertullian and Cyprian. Its apparent
opposition to St. Paul's doctrine of justification by faith, as
set forth in his Epistle to the Romans universally received,
might for a season delay its reception : and its being more
moral than doctrinal, is a reason why it should be quoted less
often. The Second Epistle of Peter contains allusions not
likely to be in a forged letter, to his presence at the trans-
figuration, (i. 18.) and to our Lord's foretelling his death,
(i. 14.) which he intimates to be near. The difference of
style which has been brought forward against it is limited to
a single chapter, which strikingly resembles, not only in
matter but in unusual words, the Epistle of Jude ; and it is
thought with probability, that they had both before them
the same written description of false teachers, from which
they borrowed both facts and remarkable expressions. It is
alluded to by our earliest Fathers, as Clement of Rome,
Justin Martyr, and Irenasus. We cannot be surprised that
the two short Epistles of St. John should be at first neg-
lected as private letters. It is only the circumstances that
led them to be regarded as catholic wThich caused them to
be placed in the canon. If we take them to be written to
remedy evils then common, though with a view only to two
particular instances, they might be in time perceived to be
generally applicable. By calling himself not an Apostle
but only an elder, some were led to ascribe them to another
John mentioned by Eusebius ; but there is reason to think
he took this title on account of his old age, and to avoid
assuming too much consequence. The internal evidence is,
I should say, decisive, since many of the verses are identical
with those in his undisputed Epistle. The Epistle of Jude
has early evidence in its favour, and the only difficulty is
concerning the quotation from Enoch ; but though the

r Heb. v. 12. compared with 1 Cor. iii. 2 ; Heb. xii. 3 ; Gal* vi. 0; xiii. 16
<6bil. iv. 18.

194

LECTURE VI.

book which now bears his name is fabulous, the verse with
which it begins might in substance have been handed down
by Tradition. And certainly it opens that book, and is
unconnected with what follows. The Apocalypse has the
earliest and most frequent attestations to its authenticity ;
and such is its nature and obscurity, that it was not likely
to have been received unless known to be written by the
Apostle. Its authority, however, sunk, as it was found to
give occasion to gross interpretations of the Millenium,
which led to an early rejection of that doctrine of the first
Christians. Its genuineness was then called in question,
and it was gradually neglected, but rose again into repute
at the Reformation, when the reformers generally inter-
preted the woman on the scarlet coloured beast, the
mystical Babylon, as symbolical of Papal Rome.

Thus we have seen, that the Roman Catholics and all
Protestants differ in the point from which they start, the
Rule of Faith ; and therefore it is not surprising that they
arrive at such different conclusions on so many articles of
belief. Ours is a simple and a reasonable one; and as they
acknowledge the Bible to be the Word of God, they cannot
deny its truth, and are obliged in order to make room for
Tradition, to magnify its difficulties, and to misrepresent
and exaggerate the results of private judgment. The Pro-
testant Churches, however, they must be aware, have not
been content with opening the Bibles to their members,
and leaving them to form a creed for themselves. All
have their authorized confessions and catechisms ; and
divines in each have written learned treatises on the various
articles of faith, and compiled bodies of divinity ; but in
these works and in their sermons, whatever they advance is
substantiated by texts of Scripture. The Roman Catholic
also admits the authority of the sacred Scriptures, but it is
according to the sense of Holy Mother Church, to whom it
belongs to judge of the true sense and interpretation ; and he
must also interpret them according to the unanimous sense
of the Fathers. Pie also receives all things declared in all
the Councils, particularly in that of Trent; and must firmly
admit all the Traditions of the Church. The Romanist

LECTURE VI.

195

then who would seek the truth for himself must examine a
multitude of volumes, some of which are contradictory, and
can only be read in Latin. By the unlearned, or even to the
learned who has other pursuits, such a search must be given
up in despair. What then becomes of their boasted cer-
tainty, which they oppose to an assumed doubt? Milner
contemptuously pities those who cannot even make an act
of faith. But can the Roman Catholic? Let the reader judge
from this definition in the Douay Catechism : ' Oh great
God! I believe all the sacred truths which thy holy Catholic
Church believes and teaches, because thou hast revealed
them.' But not a single one is specified. For real belief
then they substitute what they call implicit faith. Those
who believe in doctrines on examination of them are explicit
believers ; those who believe in a presumption of their credi-
bility, implicit ; nor is such belief considered less efficacious
than the former. Thus it is an imputative faith ; and the
Romanist believes by proxy, and cheats himself by reliance
upon what is done by others.

It is the Word preached that has been in all ages and
countries the ordinary instrument of conversion ; and indeed
before the invention of printing the written word was
accessible to few, and reading was a rare accomplishment.
More than eighteen centuries have passed, since the inspired
preachers of the faith have been removed ; and we have now
no authoritative guide, except the few and short works
which the Holy Spirit suggested to them to write, that
after their decease believers might have the facts and
doctrines and precepts and promises of Christianity in
remembrance. Even now, in a cultivated and reading age,
the majority of professing Christians still receive their
knowledge of religion from the lips of living ministers, or
from written discourses and tracts ; but all teaching will
be of no avail, and will fall without power on the ear, except
in as much as directly or indirectly the instruction is drawn
from the pure well of scriptural truth. To the Law and to
the Testimony the parochial minister at home as well as the
missionary abroad must appeal, as his own guide, and without
prayerful meditation on the Word, he will have no security

o 2

196

LECTURE VI.

for his own orthodoxy. Let any who think this an exag-
gerated statement, examine the annals of the Jesuit mission-
aries recorded by themselves, and they will find in China,
Japan, and India, unjustifiable suppression of vital truth in
deference to pagan prejudices ; the adoption of idolatrous
rites, denounced as such even by Popes, and false reports of
the country from which they came, and the religion they
professed, by which they boasted that they had procured a
more favourable reception. There are still countries only
accessible to these silent missionaries; for if the preachers of
the Gospel should venture to return to Madagascar, we can
hardly doubt that the tyrant queen would put them, as she
has done some of her own converted subjects, to death. It is
painful to think, that in countries much nearer home, where-
ever the Pope has unrestricted power, the simple perusal of
the Bible is an offence, punished in the noble by exile,
in the lower ranks by imprisonment. To the indiscriminate
perusal of the Word of God we have seen that the Roman
Church ascribes the overflowings of ungodliness and vice,
but mediaeval history teaches us a different lesson. The
chronicles of those days depict a period of feudal tyranny
and general licentiousness, of coarseness and violence in the
gentry, and of ignorance and insolence in the clergy. As
the morning of the Reformation began to dawn, there came
with Gospel truth a moral improvement ; and to what
human agency can we ascribe it but to Wycliff's translation
of the Scriptures in our country, and in Germany to the
version of Martin Luther ? And what but a prevalent know-
ledge of the Word of God has produced the comparative
purity of manners in Protestant countries, beyond the standard
S2t up in Spain, and the Spanish settlements in America,
in Portugal, and in Italy? To judge of the effects of an
open Bible, let us turn to the least promising portions of
our native island, and even there we shall find the spiritual
darkness vanishing before this marvellous light, which,
while it enlightens the understanding, purifies and warms
the heart. In the retired recesses of our great towns,
swarming with a squalid miserable and depraved population,
it is only the Scripture reader that will care to penetrate.

LECTURE VI.

197

There by a self-denying and judicious reading of the Word
he will often bring the sinner to a conviction of guilt, and.
gradually prepare him to be a worshipper in the house of
God; while in the country, the pious cottager, who has
digested the Word's saving truth, finds in it a transforming
efficacy, which, while it assures him of a blessed futurity,
ennobles his present character, and stamps upon him the
genuine dignity of an immortal being saved by unmerited
favour, and ready at his Master's call to run with alacrity in
the way of his commandments. Such a book may well be
called in its own language, a light to the feet, and a lamp
unto the path ; and never can we be sufficiently grateful,
that it is not so large a volume as to deter the busy from its
perusal, or to be placed beyond the purchase of any but
the rich. Far more than any classical remains does it
deserve to be read by day and to be meditated on in the
night. A cursory though a repeated perusal will never
satisfy one who has tasted of the sincere milk of the Word,
and grown thereby. He will gladly avail himself of the
help afforded by theological works, but his ambition will be
that the Word shall dwell richly in his heart through faith ;
he will be constantly digging into this mine for himself,
and he will not only repeat the Advent Collect, but really
make it his own petition, that not only by hearing and
reading, but by marking and inwardly digesting all holy
Scriptures, he may ever hold fast the blessed hope of ever-
lasting life, which God the Father has given us in our
Saviour Jesus Christ.

The Spirit breathes upon the Word,
And brings the truth to sight ;
Precepts and promises afford
A sanctifying light.

A glory gilds the sacred page,

Majestic, like the Sun,

1 1 gives a light to every age ;

It gives, but borrows none.

The hand that gave it still supplies

The gracious light and heat;

His truths upon the nations rise ;

They rise, but never set.

198

LECTURE VI.

Let everlasting thanks be thine,
For such a bright display;
It makes a world of darkness shine,
With beams of heavenly day.

My soul rejoices to pursue
The steps of him I love,
Till glory breaks upon my view
In brighter worlds above.

LECTURE VII.

ARTICLE VII.

OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

The Old Testament is not contrary to the New : for both in
the Old and New Testament everlasting life is offered to
mankind by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God
and man, being both God and man. Wherefore they are
not to be heard, which feign that the old Fathers did look
only for transitory promises. Although the Law given from
God by Moses, as touching Ceremonies and Rites, do not
bind Christian men, nor the civil precepts thereof ought of
necessity to be received in any commonwealth ; yet notwith-
standing, no Christian man whatsoever is free from the
obedience of the Commandments which are called Moral.

This Article is supplementary to and explanatory of the
sixth, and is opposed to those who in different ages and in
various manners have set aside or misconceived the authority
of the Old Testament. The Gnostics were led by their
peculiar notions to reject it, and some of them went so far
as to maintain, that the God of the Old Testament was not
merely a Spirit inferior to the Supreme Being, but that
Christ was manifested to overthrow the system which he
had introduced. At the time of the Reformation the
Antinomians abounded, and Luther was obliged to write
against them, for they had perverted the doctrine of justifi-
cation by faith alone; and because it was rightly maintained
that works were not meritorious, they argued that the moral
Law was abrogated. It was probably in opposition to this

200

LECTURE VII.

pernicious heresy that our Article was chiefly drawn up ;
but there was a contrary error even then beginning, and
which during the civil wars attained its height, that the
ceremonial and political laws of Israel were binding upon
Christians. There is also a confused notion prevalent more
or less among many, that the old dispensation is superseded,
instead of a clear understanding that since the fall there
has been but one method of salvation for a sinner, that is,
through the atonement effected by the propitiatory sacrifice
of the Son of God; and that the only difference between the
believers of these times and of those preceding Christ is,
that the latter looked forward to a Redeemer promised, the
former back to one already come.

Though the first proposition of our Article, " The Old
Testament is not contrary to the New," brings on a com-
parison of the whole of both, yet since the reason assigned
is, that " both teach everlasting life through Christ," they
need be compared only in that particular : and in order to
show that they are not contradictory with regard to this
leading doctrine, it will suffice to examine the Old, since none
doubt Christ has clearly brought life and immortality to
light ; and if we prove that the Old Testament promises
Christianity, it must follow that it also promises life and
immortality. Now the promise of Christ is the grand subject
of prophecy, from the mysterious intimation of it to Eve in
paradise, until its completion in Malachi. Express decla-
rations of a future state are to be found in the ancient
Scriptures, though they are both less frequent and more
obscure than might have been presumed in a divine reve-
lation. Much misconception has prevailed upon the subject
by confounding the Mosaic dispensation, or the system of
divine appointment, under which the Israelites were governed
as a nation, with the belief of the individuals recorded in the
Bible, who lived under or before that dispensation. War-
burton has built his argument for the divine legation of
Moses upon the fact, that unlike other Legislators who
have called in religion to their aid, he has purposely kept a
future life out of sight. He thus recapitulates his cele-
brated theory. The doctrine of a future state is necessary to

LECTURE VII.

201

the well-being of civil society under the ordinary government
of Providence; and all mankind have ever so conceived of the
matter. The Mosaic institution was without this support,
and yet it did not want it; what follows, but that the Jewish
affairs were administered by an extraordinary Providence,
distributing reward and punishment with an equal hand,
and consequently that the mission of Moses was divine.
Thus far we may agree with him ; and it might easily be
shown, that a national code of laws can have no other than
temporal sanctions : but this great writer, pushing his doc-
trine to an extreme, which his hypothesis by no means
required, unhappily proceeds to state, that in no one place
of the Mosaic institutes is there the least mention, or any
intelligible hint of the rewards and punishments of another
life, and that to the time of the captivity, the Israelites were
never influenced by it. I may well say unhappily, for too
many even in our time, still dazzled by the splendid
paradoxes, and borne down by the learning and dogmatism
of this eminent prelate, maintain this doctrine in its full
extent, hereby contradicting' this very Article, and classing
themselves with those whom our Saviour condemns, as
greatly erring, and not understanding the Scriptures, when
he shows that a future life was revealed to Moses by God
when he addressed him out of the fiery bush. Warburton
himself seems to have been hurried by his ardour into
this untenable and unnecessary extension of his theory,
for he afterwards so qualifies and limits it, as to remove
from it whatever is offensive and objectionable, though
his followers and admirers almost universally overlook
these concessions in subsequent editions. A future state
of rewards and punishments made no part of the Mosaic
dispensation, yet the Law had certainly a spiritual
meaning to be understood when the fulness of time was
come, and hence it possessed the nature and afforded the
efficacy of prophecy. In the interim, the mystery of the
Gospel (including by this learned writer's own definition the
doctrine of a future retribution) was occasionally revealed
by God to his chosen servants, the fathers and leaders of
the Jewish nation, and the dawning of it was graduallv

202 LECTURE VII.

opened by the prophets to the people3. In another passage b,
he limits his position to the Mosaic dispensation, saying, that
no texts are to the purpose after the time of David. Thus
Warburton himself supplies a contradiction to the offensive
part of his theory, which we may accept as modified by
Dr. Greaves, that Moses did not sanction his laws by the
promise of future rewards and punishments, and that the
history he records shows not only his own belief in it, (which
Warburton admits,) but contains passages which must
suggest it to every reflecting mind, though with less clear-
ness than the succeeding works of the Old Testament,
which exhibit this great truth with a perpetually increasing
brightness, till by the prophets it was so authoritatively
revealed, as to become an article of popular belief. How
far the Israelites understood the promises of a Saviour and
of eternal life, we cannot of course ascertain ; no doubt,
while some more or less entered fully into the spiritual
meaning of types and ceremonies, there were many who
rested in the letter, contented with the plainer, and to them
more attractive, promises of temporal prosperity ; yet we
cannot imagine that those to whom spiritual blessings were
revealed, and often as a special favour for their consolation,
could be themselves ignorant of their meaning. As to
Abraham, our Lord's declaration, that he saw His day
and rejoiced, doubtless when he was favoured with a
figurative representation of it in the ram caught in the
thicket, and provided as a substitute for his son, seems
decisive. Christ was promised to Abraham; and the reason-
ing in Galatiansc seems to imply, that Abraham had a
competent understanding of the promise and covenant made
with him. How indeed can a person be a party in a cove-
nant, without some knowledge of its conditions? As to
Moses, it is not easy to conceive, that when he wrote of
Christ, he had not some conception of the person and offices
of that legislator and prophet like unto himself, whose coming
he foretold ; and this will be confirmed by the declaration
in the Epistle to the Hebrews, that he feared not the wrath
of the King, but endured as seeing him who is invisibte ; and
a B. vi. s. v. b B. vi. B. i. c Gal. iii. 16.

LECTURE VII.

203

that he chose rather to suffer affliction with the people of God,
than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season, esteeming the
reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt.
Indeed the whole chapter shows of all the elders from the
time of righteous Abel, that they looked not for transitory
promises. i( The Patriarchs before and after Job, and the
Israelites before Christ, had a notion of a future state. By
sacrifices was plainly shown that there was a way open to
the divine favour, and the favour of God imports happiness,
which to Abel, who, because he was accepted by God, was
unjustly slain, could be only in a future state, and dying on
account of that faith ; he being dead yet speaketh of an in-
visible state of reward hereafter. The translations of Enoch
and Elijah in two distant ages, were also demonstrations of
a future state of reward and glory d." Of the Patriarchs it
is expressly said, that they did not receive the things pro-
mised, seeing them only afar off; and because they were not
satisfied with Canaan, but desired a heavenly country, there-
fore God had prepared them a city, a city concerning the
site of which there can be no doubt, for it is one whose
builder and maker is God. Wherefore, the writer infers,
God is not ashamed to be called their God; and of this we have
our Lord's interpretation, that since God is not the God of the
dead, they are now alive unto Him. Can we then suppose
that they would have suppressed this important truth,
since it was the support of their virtue and the source
of their consolation through all the sufferings of their
eventful lives? The peculiar purposes of the divine economy
did not permit the Jewish lawgiver to employ it as the
sanction of his laws, which were to be enforced by an
immediate extraordinary providence, but it was his own
support as an individual, and doubtless that of many of his
people, in his own and succeeding generations, in their in-
dividual, though it could not be in their national, capacity.
The Psalms contain strong assurances of a future state, nor
is it easy to conceive how such passages as, Thou shall show me
the path of life; in thy presence is the fulness of joy, and at thy
right hand there is pleasure for evermore^ — As for me, I will
d Taylor's Scheme. « Ps. wi.

204

LECTURE VII.

behold thy presence in righteousness ; and when I awake up after
thy likeness, I shall be satisfied with its — God will redeem my
soul from the power of the grave, for he shall receive meh —
can be neutralised by others seemingly of a different tone.
This doctrine, incidentally mentioned in the Proverbs1, is the
great basis of Ecclesiastes, the object of which is to prove
the insufficiency of earthly pursuits to procure happiness
here, and thence to infer its existence in a future state
beyond the grave. It is unnecessary to trace the doctrine
through the Prophets, because their knowledge of it is
conceded; but I cannot refrain from referring to the assevera-
tion of Job, which was probably the earliest committed to
writing, and which if we adopt this the ancient, the obvious,
and the only reasonable interpretation, because in harmony
with the scope of the book, well deserved the solemnity
with which it was introduced : 0 that my words were now
written, that they were graven with an iron pen and lead in
the rock for everk I

The entire omission of future punishments in the Mosaic
Law, I apprehend, only excites surprise, because as we do
not live under that dispensation, and his statutes are not
referred to by our judges, we are apt to consider it not so
much as a code of laws, as a system of ethics. In the
latter point of view the omission would have been unreason-
able, in the former it ought to have been expected ; and
Michaelis, in his Commentaries on this Law, makes the
following judicious reflections. " I do not wonder at the
Hebrew legislator's omission of any reference to rewards
or punishments in another world, but at the short-sighted-
ness of those who look for such a sanction to a civil and
political constitution. Moses was no impostor or enthusiast,
and such alone can sanction civil laws by the terrors of
futurity. God we know will not punish all, even of the
most heinous capital offences beyond the grave ; for even the
greatest criminal, who even at his last hour throws him-
self unreservedly on his mercy, may escape everlasting
misery. No legislator, since he cannot read the heart,

g Ps. xxi. xlix. h Ps. lxxiii. 1 Proverbs iv. 18 ; xiv. 32.

k Greaves on the Pentateuch.

LECTURE VII.

205

would venture to lay down such a law, since it would be
liable to endless exceptions; and now instead of threatening
such criminals with the torments of hell, the mercy of Christian
governments gives them time and means, as the attendance
of a minister of religion, to lead them to repentance.

The remainder of the Article is designed to rectify oppo-
site errors, then beginning to appear, which in a later age
became prevalent, and have not yet altogether ceased,
respecting the obligation of the Mosaic Law. While one
party judaised, deeming the civil and political regulations of
the Hebrew commonwealth the model after wrhich a
Christian state should be formed, there was another that
regarded obedience to its moral precepts as an intolerable
burden, not to be endured by those who had been
admitted into the glorious liberty of the Gospel. These
have in consequence been called by their opponents Anti-
nomians.

The Jews maintain the perpetual obligation of the Law,
and appeal to the solemn asseveration of their legislator
continually repeated, that his statutes should be kept for
ever, throughout their generations, in all their dwellings11.
Other passages, however, occur, that show that the expression
must not be taken literally; and that in many instances it is
clear that eternity means no more than an unlimited futurity,
and that a law which has no definite duration assigned to it,
is considered perpetual, because no time can be specified at
which its authority is to cease. While the Israelites
sojourned in the wilderness like the wandering Arabs, it was
required of any wrho would kill a sheep or bull, to bring it
as an offering to the Lord. Such a law however would
have been impracticable, when they were settled as a nation
in the promised land, and it was consequently abrogated \
The Jews also urge, that on our own confession the Law
was dictated by the infinite wisdom of the Deity, and that

u Lcvit. xiii. 14. 21. 31. 41.

x Deut xii. 15. 20. Strangers, after a price paid for them, are to be bond-
men for ever Lev. xxv. 46. Yet they might be at any time manumitted, and
seem to be so called in contrast to Israelites, wliose term of slavery must
expire at the next jubilee. Michaelis gives several other instances.

206

LECTURE VII.

if it were not the best that could have been devised, it
implies imperfection to promulgate it, or, and if the best, to
repeal it. Yet it is the highest wisdom not to enact a code
abstractedly the best, but one which will best suit the cir-
cumstances and capabilities of a people; and as they change
to introduce suitable alterations. What it was wise to in-
troduce to effect a particular object, it may be equally wise
to abolish, when that object has been attained. The many
statutes designed to insulate the Israelites from other
nations, that they might dwell alone, and carefully preserve
the knowledge of the one true God, had no inherent
excellence, and were ready to vanish away when He came,
who though a Jew by birth, was to be the King of the
whole earth. The time being come when the partition wall
was to be removed, and Jew and Gentile were to become
one people under the promised Messiah, in whom all the
nations of the earth were to be blessed ; the many laws which
prevented their amalgamation had become not only useless but
injurious; and the sacrificial service which prefigured the
offering of the only victim that could really atone for sin
ought to pass away, when all these types had been fulfilled in
the propitiatory death of our Redeemer. Thus to take
a son who is come to maturity from his schoolmaster is as
much an act of wisdom, as it was before to place him under
him. St. Paul calls the Law our schoolmaster, to bring us unto
Christ, that we might be justified by faith ; but after that
faith is come, he adds, we are no longer under a schoolmaster1 ;
and the Epistle to the Galatians is written on purpose to
prove, that the ceremonial law has been superseded by
Christianity. The author reproves them for their folly in
wishing to return to its beggarly elements, and to be entangled
again with the yoke of bondage, instead of standing fast in the
liberty wherewith Christ hath made them free. In the same
spirit he says to the Colossians, Let no man judge you in
meat or in drink, or in respect of an holiday, or of the new
moon, or of the sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to
come, but the body is of Christ111: and in the Epistle to the
Hebrews" it is argued, from the transference of the Priest-
I Gal. iii. 24. m Col. ii. 16, 17. " Heb. vii. 12.

LECTURE VII.

207

hood from the tribe of Levi to that of Judah in our Lord's
person, that there is made of necessity a change also in the
Law. The same Epistle declares the weakness and unpro-
fitableness of the Law, which is therefore disannulled ; and
not only shows that the first covenant hath given place to a
better one, established upon better promises, but quotes
Jeremiah0, Isaiah p, and Zechariah'i, as foretelling the change :
Behold the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a
new covenant with the house of Israel, and the house of
Judah. He hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth
and waxeth old is ready to vanish away, is the comment of
the inspired Apostle; and even some Jews have expected a
a new law on the coming of the Messiah. The command to
go up to Jerusalem thrice a year, is incompatible with
universality; yet the universality of the religion of the Mes-
siah is a frequent subject of prophecy r. The Jewish ritual
could not therefore be perpetual, because it could not be
universal. And as St. Paul taught it was to be abolished,
he acted in consistency with his declarations, for he would
not permit Titus a Greek to be circumcised, and withstood
Peter to the face, because on the arrival of certain Juda-
izing brethren, he left off eating with the Gentiles. God
indeed had shown Peter by a vision, that the distinction of
meats, one of the peculiarities that prevented much social
intercourse with Gentiles, was at an end; and the Apostles
in their council3 refused to put the yoke of the ceremonial
law upon the neck of Gentile converts, only requiring them
to abstain out of charity from certain things that would
have offended the converts from Judaism, as eating things
strangled, and blood. The religious and ceremonial laws
were blended together, and were calculated to prevent their
intercourse with the rest of mankind. The obligation
ceased with the coming of the Messiah, and the ceremonial

0 Jer. xxxi. p Isa. fiv. 13. <i Zech. viii. 8.

r From the rising of the Sun to the going down of the same mg name shall be
great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered to mg name,
and a pure offering. Mai. i. 11. The earth shall be full of the knowledge of the
Lord, as the waters cover the sea. Isa. xi. 9. Men shall worship him every one
from his place, even all the isles of the heathen, ii. 11.

8 Acts xv.

LECTURE VII.

law in its most important and significant part died as it
were a natural death, when the destruction of the temple
prevented the possibility of sacrificing in the only place in
which it was allowed. No Christian thinks any part of this
branch of the Law of perpetual obligation, except a few
who have a scruple about the eating of blood, though the
reason of that prohibition clearly ceased with the failure of
animal sacrifices. In the idolatrous worship of the East,
blood was drank. Moses, who was raised up by God to
found a constitution so entirely under the divine government
as to be called a Theocracy, had a special mission to forbid
whatever had any connection with idolatry : he therefore
prohibited any eating of blood on pain of death on this
account, as well as for the primary reason, a reference to
that most precious blood, without whose shedding in due
time there could have been no remission of sins. This, says
Michaelis, was so much an Asiatic usage, that the Romans
notice it as a foreign custom ; and in subsequent ages, as in
the Roman persecutions, the Christians were required as a
test of renunciation of their faith to burn incense ; so were
they in the Persian to eat blood. In the East the one
and in the West the other were regarded as signifying
a return to heathenism, because both were idolatrous
practices ; and therefore Moses forbade the eating of blood,
while he consecrated instead of prohibiting many other rites
by performing them in honour of the true God. In a
moral point of view it is a matter of indifference, and the
Council of Jerusalem viewed it in this light, for they re-
commended the Gentile converts to abstain from it, lest
they should scandalize the believers of the race of Israel.
I am not aware that the most scrupulous Christian ever
thought himself bound by the other prohibitions of not
eating the flesh of hogs and hares, or the use of butter or of
fat, though in two places* it is united with blood; and in the
latter it is said, that the soul that eateth it shall be cut off
from his people.

The Article proceeds to say, " the civil precepts ought
not of necessity to be received in any commonwealth."
1 Lev. iii. 17. and vii. 25.

LECTURE VII.

209

This proposition indeed is so reasonable, that it will hardly
be disputed ; and the circumstances in which Christian
nations are placed, evidently render it in its whole extent
impracticable; we may therefore venture to affirm, that
except among some heated enthusiasts, the notion has never
prevailed. The Apostle Paul had no scruple to retain his
Roman citizenship, and to avail himself of the privileges
which it conferred ; and both he and Peter acknowledge the
constituted authorities of the Roman empire, as entitled to
the obedience of Christians for conscience sake. The Mosaic
Law is in no part of the Bible enjoined, or in any way
recommended to the rest of mankind for adoption ; and
Paul expressly declares without any exception that it does
not bind Christians.

Still superstition has often led them to act in several
respects in its spirit : and there is, I suppose, no state in
Christendom whose code has not been materially modified
by its statutes. Moses himself extols the wisdom of these
laws: and it has been concluded hastily that they are ab-
stractedly the best ; and that it follows that they should be
enacted in every state, with such omissions and alterations,
as the change of religious worship renders indispensable.
From a connected view of them, however, the judicious
divine must see that they can never serve as a model, and
will therefore refrain from blaming the legislature where
the code differs, as in the punishment of theft and adultery,
and from thus exalting himself from a preacher into a law-
giver. The first of these offences is punished much more
severely with us; to the latter properly speaking the English
common law assigns no punishment, because it comes under
the cognisance of the ecclesiastical courts. It would be
absurd if not impracticable to detach particular laws, and
to attempt ingrafting them on other systems, to which they
must prove incongruous. Thus many in their admiration
of the mercy of the Mosaic law in not punishing theft with
death, forget that the thief incapable of making restitution,
according to that code, was to be sold for a slave ? The
Fathers and the Schoolmen have been led, by their admiration
of the Mosaic prohibition of taking interest for the loan of

210

LECTURE VII.

money, to brand it as a mortal sin, to be punished by ex-
communication. In our country it was first legalised in
the reign of Henry VIII. up to a certain rate, which the law
calls interest, and whatever exceeds it usury. The practice
was still condemned by statesmen and moralists : and on
this question Protestant divines inherited the prejudices of
the Romanists. The declamation adopted even by philo-
sophers against " the breed of barren metal," as it is styled
by Shakespeare, is now universally allowed to be unworthy
of them ; and it is understood, that there is no more im-
morality in requiring remuneration for a loan of money, than
in asking rent for a farm or a house. It is strange how long
it was before men even of ability could distinguish between
a moral precept and a political regulation, especially since
the Israelites were allowed to take interest from strangers.
In the peculiar position of the chosen people, commercial
intercourse with other nations was discouraged ; and the
design of their constitution was to make them an agricultural
people, with as much equality in every respect as was com-
patible with social order. The claim of David and his
descendants on the allegiance of Israel, bears but a remote
analogy to the connection between an European sovereign
and his people ; and the exaggerated notion of the divine
right of kings, and the duty of passive obedience, have been
derived from the practice borrowed from the Bible of con-
secrating the sovereign with oil, and styling him the Lord's
anointed. The law of retaliation seems to have been abo-
lished by our Lord ; and we learn from him, that the
toleration of polygamy and divorce, a deviation from the
original law of God, was not approved, but only permitted
to the Israelites, on account of the hardness of their hearts.
Tithes are considered by many as due by divine right,
which they were by the law of Moses, according to which
the whole land belonged to the Deity as Lord paramount,
and was held under this tenure. Yet this, like our usury
laws still extant, is an example of this once popular error.
I do not say that the tenth may not be a proper proportion;
and indeed it was not uncommon to have this payment
among the heathens, and it was vowed as a voluntary

LECTURE VII.

offering by Jacob; but it was no part of the provision of the
Church under the Roman empire, and only began to prevail
in an age, when the distinction between the Jewish polity
and Christian ethics was confounded. I fully concede, that
the Christian minister of religion is no less entitled than the
Jewish priest to a becoming maintenance, but the amount is
left to Christian legislatures to determine. St. Paul decides,
that as the priests who wait upon the altar are partakers
with the altar, even so hath the Lord ordained, that they
that preach the gospel should live by the gospel. He
reasons from the equity of the case, and quotes our
Lord's authority, that the labourer is worthy of his hire,
but never appeals to the provisions appointed for the
priesthood. The Israelite had also a second title to give in
charity: and this is perhaps the reason why among Christians
the tenth has been a favourite sum to appropriate to that pur-
pose, without taking into consideration the proportion it bore
to their means, though it is obvious that to some it would be
a burdensome sacrifice, more than was required, while from
others it would be a scanty offering. To confounding the
Jewish Theocracy, in which idolatry was high treason against
Him who was their King as well as their God, with the
constitution of Christian states, may be traced the con-
demnation of heretics to death, so opposite to the genius of
Christianity, and positively condemned by our Lord. It
has also led to an undue exaltation of the clerical character,
by converting the presbyter into a priest, that is, a sacrificer,
considering the clergy as the successors of Aaron and his
family, whereas as such, Christ alone is the only Priest; and.
in Christianity there is but one sacrifice, made by Him,
which the Roman Catholic indeed professes to offer con-
tinually, but we Protestants only commemorate. We con-
clude with the remark, that though the Mosaic code is not
the best for us, it was the best for the Israelites, and for
the purposes they were destined to fulfil. I may add, that
as coming from God it deserves the highest respect, and that
we may often derive valuable instruction from a judicious
study of its spirit. For instance, the considerate attention
to the poor, and the care that they should not be oppressed,

p 2

212

LECTURE VII.

is deserving of our imitation ; and we may infer from the
frequent recurrence of the penalty of death, which seems
supported by St. Paul's remark, that the magistrate is a
minister of God that heareth not the sword in vain; that
capital punishment even for other crimes than murder,
though it ought to be most rare, is not an unauthorized
assumption of the divine prerogative.

The Article having declared the abrogation of the cere-
monial and civil law, is careful to establish the authority of
the moral; for there were in that age persons who considered
that the believer was released by Christ from the obligation of
the whole. There is a more dangerous because a more plausible
class of Antinomians, or opponents of the moral law, who in
their zeal to magnify the glory and goodness of the Saviour,
maintain that he has not only endured for us the punishment
of the broken commands of God, but has obeyed them in our
stead, imputing to us not only his merits, but making it need-
less for us to have holiness and virtues of our own. These abusers
of gospel privileges turn the grace of God into licentiousness,
making Christ the minister of sin, confounding our title to
eternal happiness with our fitness for it. They fall into the
error condemned by St. James; and in their eagerness to main-
tain the vital doctrine of justi fication by faith alone, overlook
its inseparable connection with good works, and degrade it to
a barren speculative unprofitable belief. This misrepre-
sentation of Christianity we shall consider hereafter. The
Antinomianism, however, which we are now considering, is
of a different origin, and must be combated with other argu-
ments. Those who maintain the abrogation of the whole
Mosaic code argue, that moral precepts are so intermixed
with others, that they know not how to separate them, and
that even the Decalogue itself, which seems preeminently
entitled to the term moral, and to which the Article mainly
refers, has one commandment enjoining the sanctification
of the seventh day, which Christianity has superseded. If
we urge that this portion was promulgated with peculiar
solemnity, spoken by the Deity himself, who is said to have
added no more, while the rest was privately communicated
to Moses, it is answered, that there are other precepts as

LECTURE VII.

213

entirely moral in their nature, given in the latter manner ;
and that the Deity ceased to speak, not to mark the peculiar
importance of these ten words, hut because the people in treated
that they might not hear his voice. It may however be
replied, that God was pleased to write them, in order to
mark their preeminence : and their nature shows that they
are of perpetual obligation. The assertion that the Deca-
logue has been abrogated, as well as the Ceremonial Law, is
startling; yet the difference between these two classes of
divines is, I apprehend, more apparent than real, for both
would earnestly maintain the immutability and eternal obli-
gation of every jot and tittle of morality, whether formally
announced in the Ten Commandments, or intermixed with
laws of a temporary nature. And such ordinances must for
ever bind the people of God, not as they did the Jews
through their national legislator, but as a transcript of the
divine will, revealed to Moses as intrinsically and immutably
right ; and consequently the duty not only of the family of
Abraham, but of the whole human race. It is acknowledged
as such by the conscience in many cases, and would in all,
if the moral sense had not been blunted and partially cor-
rupted by original sin. It is obligatory on those who are
not descended from Abraham, and to whom Moses is un-
known : and would have been as binding upon Israel, if it
had not been solemnly announced to those from Sinai.
Divines, who do not regard the Decalogue as obligatory
now, because so announced, are nevertheless anxious to
show that these commandments have been reenacted by our
Lord and his Apostles. The Sermon on the Mount confirms,
they state, and enlarges the third, sixth, and seventh ; the
others are inculcated in various places; and the tenth, which
is as it were a preservative of all the rest, and one as it is
called of imperfect obligation, consequently not so much a
statute as a moral precept, is summed up in this saying,
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself; that royal law,
as St. James terms it, which as it worketh no ill but good,
is the fulfilling of the Law, as far as it concerns our fellow
creatures.

There are only a few points which can admit of the

214

LECTURE VII.

question, whether they be ceremonial or moral, that is,
whether or not they are still obligatory. By far the most
important of these is a dedication of one day in seven
to Religion; nor is the subject without difficulty. The
practice of Roman Catholics seems to show, that they con-
sider it, with many members of our Church, as only an
ecclesiastical regulation, like fast days and festivals, which
the Church has authority to decree ; and Calvin, and conse-
quently the Reformed Church abroad, views it in the same
light. Happily a different view prevails in both divisions of
our island; and our Church, by incorporating the Decalogue
into her service, and accompanying each commandment with
a petition, that our hearts may be inclined to keep it, has, I
conceive, committed us to the opinion, that it is binding still;
but binding, I would say, in the spirit, not in the letter. The
substance, I mean, is moral, the circumstantials, ceremonial.
Thus to the Israelite it was a sign that he was in covenant
with God ; and in Deuteronomy the reason assigned for his
keeping it is the commemoration of his deliverance from
Egyptian bondage. As such, it ceased with the rest of the
Law; and as such, it appears to be condemned in the Epistle
to the Galatians ; but we read in Isaiah lvi, that blessed is
he that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, in a passage
which evidently alludes to the Gospel dispensation. It
is to be kept then under the new covenant, as it was by the
patriarchs before the giving of the Law, and as it was kept
even in Paradise by our progenitors on their creation, for
the commandment w7as originally to them ; and the reason
was recognised on Mount Sinai, a reason which applies, and
will apply, and to the end of time, to all their descendants.
The commemoration of God's resting after the creation, and
the word Remember, by which the commandment is intro-
duced in the Decalogue, seem clearly to show, that it was
then only reenacted. And to this primary reason was su-
peradded, in the case of Israel, a grateful recollection of
deliverance from the temporal bondage of Egypt; to that of
the Christian, the commemoration of deliverance from spiri-
tual slavery, of which the former was a type. That it might
be a better commemoration of redemption, it was transferred

LECTURE VII.

215

to the day when that greater blessing was accomplished,
the day on which our Saviour rose from the dead; hence our
Sabbath is called the Lord's Day ; and the transference we
have reason to believe was made by the Apostles, who were
authorized to bind and loose, that is, to make regulations
for the Church. We conclude, therefore, that the conse-
cration of one day in seven to God's service is a part of the
moral law ; but the choice of the day may be varied by the
proper authority ; the precise mode too commanded to the
Israelite is not obligatory on us, as we learn from Christ's
example; yet his axiom, the Sabbath was made for man
and not man for the Sabbath, shows the perpetuity of
the ordinance ; and that the mode of keeping it is left
to a pious and reasonable discretion. It is an interesting
thought, that as man, God's noblest work, was the last, his
first day was given not to repose after fatigue, but dedicated
to the active service of his Maker; and that the seventh day,
which succeeded the six days' creation, was to Adam the
first. I need not enlarge on the goodness of our heavenly
Father, wTho knowing whereof we are made, and how apt his
creatures are, though endowed with reason, even when walk-
ing in the light of revelation, to be drawn into forgetfulness
of Him by pleasure or business, recalls us by this institution
to a recollection of Himself. The sanctification of the day
to his service, however imperfectly observed, and with
exceptions much to be regretted, honourably distinguishes
Britain from every other Christian state ; and if a higher
tone of morality, and a more Christian spirit, pervades our
country, it is mainly to be ascribed to the keeping of the
Lord's day. May we acknowledge the benefit by keeping it
better ourselves, and not defrauding our dependents of the
edification of it. I advisedly say defrauding, for if the
Sabbath was made for man, man has a right to it for the
refreshment and recruiting of his body and for the improve-
ment of his soul, by the worship of his Creator, and the
study of the word of Him who has not only created but
redeemed him, and desires his sanctification and salvation.

LECTURE VIII.

ARTICLE VIII.

OF THE THREE CREEDS.

The three Creeds, Nicene Creed, Athanasius's Creed, and
that which is commonly called the Apostles' Creed, ought
thoroughly to be received and believed: for they may be
proved by most certain warrants of holy Scripture.

Having premised that the holy Scriptures are the sole
source of religious knowledge, and having enumerated the
writings entitled to that appellation, the Articles proceed
to acknowledge the three Creeds retained in our Liturgy,
which state many particulars which it was not thought
necessary to comprehend in such a scheme of doctrine as
that before us, wrhich requires rather a statement of the
points in which we differ from other Churches, than those
in which we agree. This acknowledgment sufficiently con-
futes the charge of heresy and of schism, in departing from
the primitive faith, since we assent to the only Creeds which
have been generally acknowledged, and which continued in
use in the time of the Reformation. Yet faithful to the
grand Protestant principle, we do not receive them because
handed down by tradition, and on the authority of the
Church, which another Article maintains " may err and has
erred," but "affirm that they ought to be received thoroughly
and believed, because they may be proved by most certain
warrants of holy Scripture."

Our Saviour commissioned his Apostles to go into all
the world, and preach the gospel to every creature ; and it

LECTURE VIII.

217

was reasonable that none should be admitted into the
Christian Church, that is, congregation, who did not profess
their belief in the three Persons of the Trinity, into whose
name or religion, they were baptized. The first Creeds or
professions of faith seem to have contained no more ; but
then we must not understand that they were content with
the bare assertion, that in the unity of the Deity there were
three Persons, denominated Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,
but that they acknowledged their respective offices in the
work of man's salvation, as designed by the first, accom-
plished by the second, and applied by the third ; and this
the ancients understood to be implied in the phrase used,
which is not simply believe, but believe in. This remark is
as early as Epiphanius, who, writing of the followers of
Macedonius, the first who opposed the Divinity of the
Holy Spirit, and whose followers boasted of their entire
adherence to the Nicene Creed, affirming that it did not
maintain it, replies, that there was sufficient said therein to
declare him God, though it is only I believe in the Holy
Ghost, since we are directed not only to believe that there
is a Holy Ghost, but in him ; and Gregory of Nazianzum
writes to the same effect, to prove that He is not a
creature8. Bishops Bull and Pearson are indeed unfavour-
able to this distinction ; and the latter remarks, that it is not
observed in some Creeds, as in that of Cyril of Jerusalem, and
that it is no more than a Hebraism for believe. Still I
cannot but allow weight to the opinion above cited of a
Greek, writing to Greeks in their own tongue ; and at all
events, it has prevailed in the Latin Church upon the
authority of Augustin, where the same grammatical ob-
jections will not hold. " Non dicit credo Deum vel credo
Deo, aliud enim est credere illi et ilium et in ilium. Cre-
dere ill! est credere vera esse quaa loquitur credere ilium
credere quod ipsi Deus est credere in eum deligere eum,
a belief of hope and affiance, credimus Paulo sed non cre-

a 'AAA'et /xev KTifffxa irtcs els avrb Tnarevofxev, ov yap ravrbs eari els tu Kal
ire pi avrov iria-reveiu rb fieu yap eari 0e6rt]ros rb Se -navrbs irpdyfiaTos. But if
He be a creature, how shall we believe in Him ? For to believe in or con-
cerning is not the same thing, the one refers to Deity, the other to any
subject.

218

LECTURE VIII.

dimus in Paulum." The devil believes that God is, for an
Apostle tells us* that demons believe and tremble, and it
is indeed impossible that they should not ; but to believe in
God is to seek him with faith, and to transfer to him our
love. To believe in him is to worship him, and to place
one's self under his authority and dominion. But without
dwelling longer on verbal niceties, we may affirm without
fear of contradiction, that belief in the three Persons of the
Godhead includes belief in whatever is affirmed in Scripture
concerning their character, attributes, and operations.

In process of time each particular Church came to have
had its Creed drawn up or approved by the Bishop: and
each was enlarged as errors began to prevail ; for new converts
were naturally required not only to renounce the devil and
the flesh, and to profess in general terms their faith, but to
declare the doctrines they rejected ; and in this way we may
account for the introduction of almost every Article. As
these errors chiefly prevailed among the inquisitive and
disputatious Greeks, their Creeds enter most into detail.
The West in early times was not agitated by theological
discussions, which explains the brevity of the Roman
Creed, retained by us under its popular title of that of the
Apostles, a distinction probably derived from the fact, that
the Church of Rome, as being founded by the two Apostles
Peter and Paul, was early entitled Apostolical. This Creed
was used at Baptism throughout that Patriarchate, though
the Council of Ephesus and Chalcedon had enjoined the
exclusive use of the Nicene: and wre and other Protestants
who inherited it did not reject it on our secession, since we
believe whatever it affirms; but the Roman Church has long
exchanged it for the latter, as it stands in her service and
ours ; and added to it at the Council of Trent, a declaration
of adherence to the decrees of that and former Councils,
and to Traditions and to the Fathers, and specifies the most
important of their peculiar tenets, the whole of which is
known by the name of Pius the Fourth's Creed, from the name
of the Pontiff" reigning at the time of the termination of that
assembly.

* James ii. 19.

LECTURE VIII.

219

Several local Creeds are extant previous to that of
Nice, the first adopted by the whole Church; and these,
though varying in terms and in the order of arrangement,
are substantially the same, and closely resemble that of
Nice, as might be expected; for the 318 Bishops there
assembled did not meet to form a new one, but to declare
what was the original faith ; and as the Arians denied our
Lords proper divinity, to condemn whom they were con-
vened ; it was necessary that they should be most full upon
that article, and so word it that heretics might not shelter
themselves under the ambiguity of received language.

I transcribe the earliest extant, that of Irenaeus, (i. 1.) who
calls it " the unalterable canon or rule of Truth, which
every one received at his baptism."

"The Church, though it be dispersed all over the world from
one end of the earth to the other, received from the Apostles
and their disciples the belief in one God the Father Almighty,
Maker of heaven and earth and sea, and all things therein ;
and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who was incarnate
for our salvation ; and in the Holy Ghost, who preached by
the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advent, and
the nativity of the Virgin and passion, and resurrection from
the dead, and bodily ascension of the flesh of his beloved
Son, Christ Jesus our Lord, into heaven, and his coming
again from heaven in the glory of his Father to recapitulate
all things, and raise the flesh of all mankind, that according
to the will of the invisible Father, every knee should bow
of things in heaven and things in earth and things under the
earth, to Jesus Christ our Lord, God and Saviour and
King, and that every tongue should confess to him, and that
he may exercise just judgment upon all, and send spiritual
wickednesses and the transgressing and apostate angels and
blaspheming men into everlasting fire, but grant life to all
righteous and holy men, that keep his commandments, and
persevere in his love, some from the beginning, others after
repentance, on whom he confers immortality, and invests
them with eternal glory."

This faith, he says, was the same in all the world, men
professed it with one heart and one soul ; for though there

220

LECTURE VIII,

were different dialects in the world, yet the power of the
faith was one and the same. Tertullian furnishes two
Creeds, which more closely resemble that of the Apostles ;
and we have another not unlike the Nicene, in the so-called
Apostolical Constitutions, a work concerning the ritual and
discipline of the early Church, which was once supposed to
have been the work of the Apostles themselves, as the name
implies, but is now allowed to be not earlier at the soonest
than the end of the third century, yet even as such is an
interesting document, Bingham gives us in addition the
acknowledged Creeds of several Churches. I transcribe that
of Jerusalem, the mother Church of all, as preserved in the
catechetical discourses of St. Cyril, Bishop of that see.

" I believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of
heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible :
and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of
God, begotten of the Father before all ages, the true God,
by whom all things were made ; who was incarnate and made
man, who was crucified and buried, and the third day he
rose again from the dead, and ascended into heaven, and
sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and shall come to
judge the quick and dead, of whose kingdom there shall be
no end. And in the Holy Ghost the Comforter, who spake
by the prophets. In one baptism of repentance, in the
remission of sins, in one Catholic church, in the resurrection
of the flesh, and in life everlasting." In none of these have
we the communion of saints, or the descent into hell, which
first appears in the Creed of Aquileia.

The Creed originally was only recited at Baptism, which
was ordinarily administered at Easter and Whitsuntide. Its
repetition in public worship was first ordered at Antioch,
A.D. 471, and A. D. 571 at Constantinople; and was
introduced from the East into Spain, A.D. 589, by a Council
of Toledo, to prevent believers from lapsing into Arianism,
from which they had been lately recovered. In the time of
Charlemagne it was brought into the Gallican Church,
though not approved by the Pope. It was finally received
at Rome, A.D. 1014, four centuries after the daily use of it
had been enjoined in Spain.

LECTURE VIII.

Rufinus relates as a tradition, that before the Apostles
separated to preach to different nations, they composed
the Creed, and ordained it to be a test of their future
sermons, and a rule of faith to be given to believers; and
other early writers go so far as to assign to each his par-
ticular Article, from which contribution it is said to have
derived the name of Symbolum. To this it is objected,
that contribution is not symbolum, but symbola ; and
the same authors give a more reasonable meaning, that of
sign or watchword, by which the orthodox believer is dis-
tinguished not only from infidels, but from heretics. Accord-
ing to this tradition, Peter began with declaring his belief in
God the Father Almighty ; John followed with Maker of
heaven and earth ; and the rest in order ; Matthias con-
cluding with Life everlasting. It certainly divides into twelve
propositions; and this probably gave rise to the fable, for
such we can have no hesitation in pronouncing it ; and it is
obvious, from the way in which they express themselves, that
it was not believed by the compilers of our Articles. Indeed
the story is confuted by the fact, that several of the par-
ticulars were inserted from time to time. Thus on the
authority of the same Rufinus, who gives us the tradition,
we learn, that the descent into hell was neither in the Roman
or Oriental Creeds, that the communion of Saints in none
for four centuries, and that life everlasting does not occur
in all. The early Creeds yet extant differ both in the
articles and arrangement ; and we cannot doubt, that if one
had been drawn up by the Apostles even in a briefer form, it
would have been retained by all churches without variation.
Still it may be truly styled Apostolical, as substantially con-
tained in the writings of the Apostles; and St. Paul gives us
the rudiments of it in an inverted order, One body, one
Spirit, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father
of allh; and in another place, I delivered unto you first of all
that ivhich 1 also received, how that Christ died for our sins,
that he was buried, and rose again the third day0. The
Creed, therefore, in its outlines may be considered as the
form of sound words, delivered by the Apostles, enlarged
b Eph. iv. c I Cor. xv.

LECTURE VIII.

from time to time, and differently in different places, as
circumstances rendered it expedient. Thus we learn from
Rufinus, that whereas the Roman Creed began with, I
believe in God the Father Almighty, there were in those of
other churches words added, to exclude certain heresies; as
in that of Aquileia, to Almighty was subjoined invisible,
impassible, in opposition to the Sabellians and the Patri-
passians. So in the Eastern Creeds, the first article is in
one God, and in one Lord Jesus Christ, because the Gnostics
believed some of them in more Gods than one, and some
made Jesus and Christ two distinct beings, who were not
united till his baptism, and were separated again at the cruci-
fixion. There were also Gnostics who denied that the true
God was the maker of heaven and earth, which they con-
sidered to be the work of an inferior spirit, and deemed
unworthy of Him, from their absurd notions concerning the
inherent evil of matter. Almighty properly expresses not
the attribute latent, but brought out into action ; that is,
God's providential government of the world, a doctrine even
in these days not practically felt or even acknowledged by
all Christians otherwise sound in the faith. This appears
from the Greek term used, TloivToxgxTctig; and it is worthy of
observation, that the same word Almighty, where it occurs
afterwards, stands for Yluvro^uva^os, which more properly
means almighty, that is, omnipotent. By believing in Jesus the
Christ, or the Messiah, we profess that a man who bore the
former name was the anointed one, consecrated not by a
material anointing like the kings of Israel, but by the
unction of the holy Spirit, called by the Psalmist the oil of
gladnessy to his triple office of Prophet, Priest, and King.
It appears from the New Testament, that at the time of his
appearance, Messiah and the Son of God were convertible
terms; thus, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God, thou art the King
of Israel^. I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God,
which should come into the world*; and the word only, marks
that he is such in a peculiar sense, not as we the creatures of
God become his children by adoption, but in the proper one
of a real son by generation. By calling him our Lord, we

d John i. 40. « John xi.27 ; Matt. viii. 29.

LECTURE VIII.

223

acknowledge him as our rightful Master, who has purchased
us by redemption, and that we have passed over from the
usurped dominion of Satan, the prince of this world, whom
we renounced in baptism. The Creed then proceeds to his
humanity, declares his miraculous conception, his birth, his
sufferings, death, resurrection, and ascension, in opposition
to the errors of the Gnostics, which we have considered
already ; and the time is fixed as in almost all the Creeds,
that it might not be objected to as a fable. In this part of
the ancient Creeds there is considerable variety; in those of
Irenasus, the passion only is named, as including the rest;
and in two of Tertullian's the crucifixion ; in others, his
burial comprehends his death ; and all the four appear first
in a Creed of St. Augustin.

The fundamental doctrine of the Resurrection was always
a part of the Creed, but the sitting at the right hand first
appears in that of Tertullian. We believe the Church, we
do not believe in the Church, for the Church is not God, but
the house of God ; and the modern Greek Creed, in which it
is followed by the French and low Dutch, repeats after the
Holy Ghost, I believe. Holy first appears in Tertullian, as
an epithet of the Church ; and the Greeks afterwards added
catholic and apostolic ; so that we predicate of it unity,
sanctity, universality, and apostolicity. The Unity, which
is decidedly declared in the Creed of Constantinople, is
well expressed in that early writer Irenams. The Church
although dispersed through the whole world, yet as if she
dwelt in one and the same house, did diligently preserve the
faith, believing it as if she had but one soul and one heart,
and uniformly teaching and preaching it as if she had but
one mouth; and this unity includes the love, concord, and
connection, that there ought to be between particular mem-
bers and particular churches; which understood here is
declared in the following clause, which is not found in any
Creed before St. Augustin, and probably not even in any
of his genuine works. It was inserted on account of the
secession of the Donatists, who although orthodox in
doctrine, yet by reason of a quarrel concerning the election
of a Bishop of Carthage, involved the African Church in a

224

LECTURE VIII.

long schism, and contended that their party, though rejected
by all transmarine Churches, was exclusively the one holy
catholic Church, and that all others being beyond its pale,
had no right to administer any of its rites. The holiness
of the Church is to be understood of the purity of its
doctrine ; thus Rufinus ; " the Church in which there is one
faith and one baptism, in which there is believed one God
the Father, one Lord Jesus Christ his Son, and one Holy
Ghost, is the holy Church without spot or wrinkle ; for many
others have gathered Churches, as Marcion, Arius, and other
heretics, but their Churches were not without the spot or
wrinkle of perfidiousness." "We believe, says Augustin, the
holy, that is, catholic, Church ; for heretics and schismatics
call their congregations churches ; but heretics by false
opinions concerning God violate the faith, and schismatics
by unjust separation depart from brotherly love, though
they believe what we believe. Wherefore a heretic does
not belong to the catholic Church, because she loves God,
nor a schismatic, because she loves her neighbour." The
universal Church from its nature could, strictly speaking, be
found only in local congregations: but though circumstances
prevented their union in one place, they were desirous of
showing that they were one in faith and practice, that there
was a communion of saints. And this was shown by com-
municatory letters granted to such members as travelled,
which are called by Tertullian the communication of peace,
the appellation of brotherhood, the ticket of hospitality.
Thus in primitive times the Church was essentially one,
and continued so as long as the existence of the Roman
empire. In the West the supremacy of the Bishop of the
capital survived its dissolution, and his authority was
augmented by its subdivision into independent kingdoms.
Till the Reformation, the Christians of France, and England,
and Germany, though acknowledging different temporal
sovereigns, formed one ecclesiastical whole, and their com-
munion was facilitated by the offering up of the same sacri-
fice in the same common language. This brotherhood exists
no more as far as Protestants are concerned, and the Romanist
no longer communicates with the Greek or oriental Churches.

LECTURE VIII.

225

Practically, the question affects few, for it is a small pro-
portion of any national Church whom business or pleasure
calls into foreign lands. Our insular position makes it to
most of us a subject of indifference; and I fear we do not
sufficiently cultivate, when opportunity offers, a friendly
intercourse with those foreign congregations, which satisfy
our definition of a true Church, which looks only to the
purity of doctrine and the due celebration of the sacraments,
without any reference to its government. The Protestant
Churches remarkably agree in their definition of the Church ;
and our own is little more than a translation of the Article in
the Augsburg Confession. With any then who agree with
this definition, the members of our Church seem bound by our
own Article to associate, unless there be in their liturgies
expressions which we cannot, as we think, reconcile with
those of our own. Forgiveness of sins is the peculiar and
characteristic blessing which Christianity revealed and
offers, yet it was not expressly declared in the Creed before
the days of Cyprian. The heathens knew nothing of the
doctrine : the Mosaic sacrifices did not reach the greater
offences ; and our Lord, before his ascension, clearly laid down
this fundamental article, that repentance and remission of
sins should be preached in his name among all nations f.
The period when this takes place is when we are admitted
into his religion; and this, which is understood in the Apostles'
Creed, is expressed in the Nicene, I believe one Baptism
for the remission of sins, declaring thereby that it is never
to be repeated. The doctrine is authorized by Scripture,
Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus
Christ for the remission of sins% : and Ananias says to Saul
already penitent, And now why tarriest thou ? Arise, and be
baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the
Lordh. Faith and Repentance are always assumed as ne-
cessary qualifications in adults, for which reason the diligence
of the Church took care that none should be admitted to
baptism, till they had by convenient time of trial given
proof sufficient of their sincerity, and of their desire to live
a new life. Both original sin and actual were then forgiven;
f Luke xxiv. g Acts ii. 38. h Acts xxii. 16.

226

LECTURE VIII.

but, as we shall see in another Article, the clause also
includes the forgiveness of sins repented of, into which
believers fall after baptism, in contradiction to the rigour of
the Montanists, which excited Augustin's astonishment, that
any should deny repentance to the lapsed, or pardon to the
penitent, when it is written, Remember from whence thou art
fallen, and, repent, and do thy first works. The Resurrection
of the Body has always been in the Creed, and is a necessary
addition to Life Everlasting ; for in early times several of the
philosophers who derided the first, believed in the second ;
and even in modern days, Christians dwell so much on the
future existence of the soul, that they often lose sight of its
companion the body, to which at the judgment day it is to
be again united, although they do not formally deny the
resurrection. This we know to be the doctrine preached
by the Apostles, and that it has been fully stated and vindi-
cated in the first Epistle to the Corinthians. Our translation
is not accurate, for both in the Greek and Latin, it is the
resurrection not of the body but of the flesh ; and the latter
term is said to have been used to prevent the evasion of those
who believed that a new body would hereafter be created
to receive the soul, and not the identical one be raised
again that had seen corruption. Life everlasting is added
in opposition to the doctrine of annihilation, for the Gnostics
thought that the wicked should perish in the conflagration
at the last day ; some of the earlier Creeds accordingly
specify the destination of them as well as of the good, and
this is also clearly affirmed in that ascribed to Athanasius.

The Nicene Creed is so called, because authorized by the
Council assembled at Nice, A. D. 325, by the first Christian
Emperor, to maintain the orthodox doctrine of the proper
divinity of the Son of God. It has been argued by Petavius
and many moderns, that the Antenicene fathers did not
believe in the Son's equality with the Father ; and it is pro-
bable that they did not express themselves with the critical
accuracy which subsequent disputes rendered necessary.
Bishop Bull, however, has satisfied me of their orthodoxy,
and that they teach no other inferiority than that subordination
which flows from, and the idea of a son, and of the office he

LECTURE VIII. 2Z7

voluntarily undertook in the economy of redemption, and can-
not be separated from it. Such a subordination is expressed
in the phrase Gso§ sx Qsov, God of God, or more properly,
God out of or from God, as contrasted with the title given
to the Father of AutoQsos, God of himself. <t>ws ex $wto$, light
out of light, " bright effluence of bright essence increate," as
our own poet beautifully renders it, is the same idea con-
veyed by a metaphor, and is certainly sanctioned by the cnruv-
yaafxct rr\g lofo of the Epistle to the Hebrews, a ray beaming
from his Father's brightness, a ray, be it observed, imme-
diately from him, which cannot be affirmed of any other
being, for even the most glorious and highest archangel was
made through him ; and the western Church maintains, that
the Holy Spirit itself is an emanation from the Father
through the Son. The subordination of his divine nature
in this sense is understood by Athanasius and other orthodox
fathers to be revealed by himself, when he says, My Father
is greater than I, though modem divines generally refer it
to his humanity. Still it must be granted, than an Arian
could assent to these propositions ; but then the Creed pro-
ceeds to add, that he is of the same nature with the Father,
and to preclude the possibility of error, it went on to state,
that " the Son was not created or variable, that he existed
before he was born or made, and that there never was a
time when he was not," words which since the extinction of
the Arian heresy have been dropped. The original Nicene
Creed is supposed to have terminated with the simple asser-
tion of belief in the Holy Ghost, and that all that follows
was added, A.D. 381, at the Council of Constantinople, which
decided against Macedonius, who denied his divinity. Several
of these articles however appear in earlier Creeds ; that
opinion therefore seems to me most probable, that the Nicene
fathers being assembled, not to make a creed, but to authen-
ticate what had always been the catholic faith, passed over
the articles that were not then in discussion, and have given
us in substance the Creed of Cassarea. The Holy Ghost is
here designated as the Lord and Giver of life, and the
English reader is led to suppose that life alone is here
ascribed to him. The articles in the original, tov Kvgiov xcti to

Q *2

228

LECTURE VIII.

ImkoCov, however, show that we confess him, like the other
persons of the Trinity, to he the Lord, as well as the giver
of spiritual life. The Church might deduce his right to the
title of Lord from a comparison of Acts i. 16 ; iv. 24. wTith
Exodus xxiv. 4; and 2 Cor. iii. 17. and 1 Thess. iii. 12.
That He spake through the prophets is declared by St. Peter1.

The Athanasian Creed, as it is called, is a full and accurate
statement of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity and
Incarnation, of the former of which Athanasius was the per-
severing, undaunted, and ultimately triumphant champion;
but though it faithfully records his belief, it is a vulgar
error to suppose it to be his composition. Though written
in a language he did not probably know, this error generally
prevailed among the learned, till it was confuted by Vossius
in 1642; yet the compilers of our Articles seem to be aware
that it was ascribed to Athanasius without sufficient autho-
rity, for the rubric says, commonly so called. Nor is it
properly a Creed, for it was never recognised by any Council,
or used in baptism ; it is rather an Exposition of the faith,
and this, or the Catholic Faith, or the Faith of Athanasius,
is the title it really bears in manuscripts. It has not been
adopted by the Greek Church, and though extant in Greek,
the original is certainly Latin. The time of *its introduction
into the Roman liturgies is unknown, but was probably the
tenth century. We know that it was previously in use in
this country, Germany, Spain, and the diocese of Milan,
and it is likely that it was first used in France. From the
close resemblance between many of its clauses, and passages
in Augustin's writings, it must have been written by one to
whom they were familiar ; and Waterland, to whose learned
history of this Creed I would refer those who wish for
more complete information, has made it probable that it
was written about A.D. 430, before Nestorianism was much
known in the West, and that the author was Hilary, the
distinguished Bishop of Aries. It may surprise the reader
to learn, that it was used in France before it was at Rome :
but the fact is overlooked in modern times, that though the
Papal preeminence was insisted on, uniformity of ceremonies
1 1 Peter i. 10.

LECTURE VIII.

229

and services was not then thought, as now, essential to union.
Our Church even in its most distant colonies has the same
identical liturgy; and one was drawn up for all the branches
of the Roman Cathcflic Church by the order of the Council
of Trent ; but previous to the Reformation there was more
liberty. Thus in our own country there were several in use.
That of Salisbury, compiled for that diocese, was the most
approved, and was even used in Normandy, while Canterbury
alone conformed to the Roman ritual. We have already
seen, that the Nicene Creed did not for some centuries
supersede the original one in Rome.

The exposition of the Athanasian Creed speaks for itself.
I need only observe, that the term incomprehensible may mis-
lead the English reader, as it is the rendering of immersus,
meaning what cannot be limited. The damnatory clauses have
caused much uneasiness to the scrupulous : and few will be
disposed to believe, that an assent to so many metaphysical
definitions can be required as necessary to salvation. It is
now, I believe, the received opinion, that we are only expected
.to profess belief in the Trinity and the Incarnation. It is in
fact a statement of the orthodox exposition of these two fun-
damental Articles. Having affirmed that we are "to worship
one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, not confounding the
persons nor dividing the substance," and added explanations,
the first part concludes with the warning, " let him who will
be saved thus think, ita sentiat, of the Trinity." The second
part is thus introduced. "It is furthermore necessary to ever-
lasting salvation, that he also believe rightly the incarnation of
our Lord Jesus Christ," which is treated in the same manner.
Still though it is generally held that our salvation does not
depend upon the acceptance of the following exposition, 1
cannot but agree with Bishops Burnet and Tomline, that it
is highly desirable that these clauses should be expunged.
And this is to be wished not merely out of charity to tender
consciences, but because they naturally excite a prejudice
against the Exposition itself, and afford a specious pretence
to those whose real objection is to the doctrine which is
therein so clearly stated. We have a precedent for their
omission ; for the anathema with which the Council of Nice

230

LECTURE VIII.

strengthened their Creed has been long universally dropped.
It was the custom for Councils to anathematise those pro-
fessing heretical opinions; and it is the invariable termination
of each dogma decreed by the Council of Trent. Thus, for
example, " whoever shall say that by the sacraments of the
new law grace is not conferred by the mere performance of
the act, ex opere operato, let him be accursed, anathema sit."
The phrase occurs only in one of our own Articles, the
eighteenth. " They also, sunt anathematizandi, are accursed
that presume to say that every man shall be saved by the
law or sect which he professeth, so that he be diligent to
frame his life according to that law." This however seems
not quite so strong as the Athanasian clauses; anathematised
or cursed means put out of the church, and if a person
dies excommunicated, he cannot of course claim any of the
privileges promised to its members. Nevertheless, she
pronounces not their external damnation, she leaves them
to the uncovenanted mercies of their God.

Some divines, observing that the Church had been satisfied
for centuries with two Creeds, (for the Athanasian cannot
be reckoned such.,) have expressed their regret that the
Reformers should have encumbered themselves with minute
confessions of faith, which instead of putting an end to
controversy, provoke it. Bishop Taylor even suggests, that we
ought to be content with the Apostles' Creed; but surely a
careful examination of it will lead any one on reflection
to perceive, that it bears so little on the contested points
of modern theology, that it could be signed by persons
of opposite opinions, and could produce only an apparent
conformity. According to our notions, Confessions of
faith include too many particulars : and with our expe-
rience we should be disposed to leave as open questions,
several which our ancestors thought themselves bound
to determine. In every Church there will be a high and
low school, and each will have a tendency to different
doctrinal views; but considerable latitude will be granted on
both sides on questions which have not been recently debated.
The Laity indeed, speaking generally, have only to recite
the ancient Creeds, for there is no other test of their con-

LECTURE VIII.

forinity than their joining in the use of the Book of Common
Prayer. But from those who have not only to administer
the Sacraments but to teach the congregation, it is reason-
able to require a more specific test of their orthodoxy. The
Creeds also rather state the facts than the doctrines of our
religion. The modern Unitarian indeed could not repeat
the Nicene : but I doubt if a conscientious one would have
any scruple to call the second Person of the Trinity the
only-begotten Son of God. His birth, death, burial,
resurrection, and ascension, are facts which he maintains ;
and nothing is affirmed of the atoning efficacy of that death,
or of the fulfilment of the intercessory office of his priest-
hood in heaven. The Holy Ghost he will acknowledge in
name, though he denies his reality ; and nothing is declared
respecting the doctrines of grace. The forgiveness of sins
is all that is said respecting the scheme of salvation. In the
Nicene Creed indeed it is connected with Baptism, but
nothing is added respecting Regeneration. The other
Sacrament is altogether overlooked, though it presents the
most marked difference between Roman Catholics and Pro-
testants, and even separates the latter into two grand
divisions. The Creeds, short as they still are, were enlarged
from time to time to exclude heretics as they arose ; but
these heresies have died away. The early Church discussed
the nature of the Deity ; the subjective divinity of modern
times has more wisely examined the nature of the salvation
wrought, and the method by which a sinner is to obtain an
interest in it. The ancient Creeds have been retained by
the Reformers, but they found it necessary to draw up ad-
ditional statements to explain the Articles on which they
differed from Rome, and the Pope found it equally ex-
pedient to lengthen the Nicene Creed.

LECTURE IX.

ARTICLE IX.

OF ORIGINAL OR BIRTH-SIN.

Original Sin standeth not in the following of Adam, (as the
Pelagians do vainly talk;) but it is the fault and cor-
ruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is
ingendered of the offspring of Adam ; whereby man is very
far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own
nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always
contrary to the spirit; and therefore in every person born
into this world, it deserveth God's wrath and damnation.
And this infection of nature doth remain, yea in them that
are regenerated ; whereby the lust of the flesh, called in the
Greek, tpgovypoL <rag>tbs, which some do expound the wisdom,
some sensuality, some the affection, some the desire, of the
flesh, is not subject to the law of God. And although there
is no condemnation for them that believe and are baptized,
yet the Apostle doth confess, that concupiscence and lust
hath of itself the nature of sin.

Having laid down the doctrines of the Church as far as
concerns the Deity, having acknowledged the three ancient
Creeds, and declared that the Scripture is the only source
of religious knowledge, we proceed to the second division
of the Articles, which treats of the application of the salva-
tion provided by God to Man, who is first considered as an
individual ; and in the discussion of this we must consider
his moral nature, both as he is by birth, and under the
covenant of grace, that is, as a Christian. In our first

LECTURE IX.

233

division, with the exception of the Article on the sufficiency
of Scripture, not only the Church of England and other
Reformed Churches, but that from which we have seceded,
and the orthodox dissenters, that is, all who have seceded
from us, with the exception of the Unitarians and the Friends,
are unanimous ; upon this second division there is consider-
able difference of opinion. St. Paul informs usa, that no
other foundation of Christian doctrine can be laid than
Jesus Christ : and unless this foundation be correctly and
deeply laid, the superstructure will not answer its purpose,
and will be in perpetual danger of falling. But what ne-
cessity, the unbeliever proudly and scoffingly asks, for this
foundation ? Is it not sufficient for God to declare his will,
and for man to obey it? To this we readily reply, that
nothing more is or could be required by God than perfect
obedience, and this (which divines call the covenant of
works) was the religion revealed to our first parents in
paradise. Adam was created with the ability of keeping
this law, which ability he lost by his disobedience, both for
himself and his posterity ; and certainly if any man could
have since kept the whole moral law, Christ need not have
died for him ; but who will dare to challenge the scrutiny of
the heart-searching God ? The experience of all, even of
those who by baptism have been admitted into covenant,
and placed under the most favourable circumstances, de-
monstrates that this is impossible ; and if any maintain the
contrary, it must be from some misconception of the divine
law. As soon as he perceives that it extends to the thoughts
and desires, not being like the law of man restricted to the
cognisance of actions, that it requires the dedication of all
our faculties, times, and means, to the service of God the
Giver, that it makes no allowance for omissions, and demands
constant obedience to every precept; he must confess, that at
least, if he hath committed no positive offence, he has some-
times failed in the performance of duty ; and as the law
knows nothing of repentance, which derives its efficacy
solely from the death of the Saviour, a transgressor can
have no hope from an agreement, the condition of which is,
■ 1 Cor. iii. II.

234

LECTURE IX.

do this and live, the penalty, cursed is every one who con-
tinueth not in all things that are written in the book of the
Law to do themh. This impossibility is occasioned by
human depravity, that is, the corrupt nature that we have
all in succession inherited from our progenitor Adam. A
belief therefore in his fall and its consequences, which makes
the satisfaction and atonement wrought by Christ indis-
pensable, is the first principle of genuine Christianity, and
therefore the Articles upon this branch of Theology com-
mence with one on Original or Birth-sin.

This tenet must be acknowledged and heartily embraced,
before we can see the necessity of the foundation that is
laid ; and it is from ignorance or disbelief of it, that this
living stone, chosen of God and precious, has been disallowed
by so many builders, and become even a stone of stumbling
and rock of offence. To them who believe, He is precious; and
in proportion to their knowledge of the divine perfections,
and their sense of their own sinfulness, will be their love and
gratitude ; thus while to the contrite and humble Christian
his Saviour appears to be altogether lovely, the chief est among
ten thousand, the self-righteous can see no comeliness in him
that they should admire him. The pride of man naturally
revolts from this humiliating doctrine, and endeavours when
it cannot wholly deny it, to evade it ; and too many who
admit it into their creed, show that though they acknow-
ledge it for form's sake, it has no practical influence upon
their system. It is therefore the more important that our
faith in this fundamental doctrine should be fully established.
It follows from this truth, that all systems of Ethics, however
plausible and imposing, which assume that man is originally
innocent, and of his own accord prefers virtue to vice, are
radically erroneous. The works too of heathen moralists,
however admirable as literary compositions, though they
may contain many just remarks, and excellent rules for
conduct in particular cases, must never be appealed to
as authorities, but are themselves to be tried by the only
standard of right and wrong, the revealed word of God. If
read in the Christian spirit, they have their use in showing

b Girl. iii. 10.

LECTURE IX.

235

the limits of our faculties in religious and moral speculations,
and in some instances shaming those who enjoy greater
light. But taken as guides, they will only feed our self-
righteousness with exaggerated notions of our dignity and
excellence. The best systems also devised by human
moralists view man only as a creature ; but his duty as such
is clearly not the same as when to this relation is superadded
that of a sinner justified. The wisdom that cometh from
above, that is, Christianity, discloses the remedy which in-
finite wisdom and mercy have provided for the recovery of
sinners, both from the guilt and from the power of sin.
This is implied in the very language of religion ; a Redeemer
intimates a previous captivity ; a Sanctifier previous impurity ;
atonement to divine justice our righteous condemnation ;
regeneration or a new birth the necessity of a complete
change both of state and of character. So obvious is this,
that no believer in Christ can well deny this statement.
Accordingly all concede some degree of corruption, yet an
attempt is often made to reduce it almost to nothing. This
opposes the doctrine of the Reformers: and the Church of
England in particular maintains in this Article that this
corruption is total. " Man is very far gone from original
righteousness, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to
the spirit; and therefore in every person born into this
world, it deserveth God's wrath and damnation." The
context sufficiently denotes the meaning ; some however
have eagerly caught at the antiquated phrase, "very far gone
from original righteousness," as if equivalent to not altogether
departed from it. The Latin, quam longissime, shows that
this is a misconception. Still such an important doctrine
will not depend upon the strict meaning of a single phrase.
If indeed the belief in it was firmly rooted in the minds of
all the Reformers, it may then be expected to be showing
itself continually in all their formularies, and that it doth
pervade them is a matter of notoriety. Upon what other
view can we explain the following passages in our own Book
of Common" Prayer ? "there is no health in us, — make clean
our hearts within us, — O God, from whom all holy desires
do proceed, — who seest that of ourselves we have no power

236

LECTURE IX.

to help ourselves, — we cannot do any thing good without
thee." The Homilies are so full of this doctrine, that our
only difficulty is selection. The following quotations will
suffice. From the second. "On the Misery of all Mankind."
" We are sheep that run astray, but we cannot of our own
power come again to the sheepfold in ourselves ; therefore
may we not glory, which of ourselves are nothing but sinful.
The Holy Ghost in writing the holy Scriptures is in
nothing more diligent than in putting down man's vain
glory and pride, which of all vices is most universally grafted
in all mankind, even from the first infection of our first
father Adam. Of ourselves and by ourselves, we are not
able to think a good thought, or work a good deed, so that
we can find in ourselves no hope of salvation, but rather
whatsoever maketh for our destruction." And from the
Homily for Whitsunday. • "Man of his own nature is fleshly
and carnal, corrupt and naught, sinful and disobedient to
God, without any spark of goodness in him, without any
virtuous or godly motion, only given to evil thoughts and
wicked deeds." Let us now examine how far the charge is
borne out by Scripture ; and here again the subject recurs
so continually, that we have abundance of texts. The
imagination of mans heart is evil from his youth0. There is
no man that sinneth notA. The flesh is weak*. I see another
law in my members warring against the law of my mind, and
bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my
members*. The carnal mind is enmity against God, for it is
not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can beg. Our
Saviour's argument with Nicodemus is, that man must be
born again, because he is flesh ; now a new birth implies not
a partial amendment, but an entire renovation; and St. Paul
arguesh, that if one died for all, then were all dead; and
treats the subject methodically in the Epistle to the Romans,
the object of which is to prepare mankind for the reception
of the good tidings of salvation, by showing that both Jews
and Gentiles, that is, all the descendants of Adam, are
guilty before God, and that by the deeds of the law no flesh

c Gen. viii. 21. d 1 Kings viii. 46. « Matt. xxvi. 41. f Rom. vii. 23.
k Rom. viii. 7. h 1 Cor. v. 14.

LECTURE IX.

231

shall be justified in his sight. Now if one sinless man had ever
existed, he would have been justified by his own obedience;
as therefore no flesh, that is, no child of Adam, shall be
justified by the works of the Law, it follows that every one
is a sinner. St. Paul thus announces it; What then are we —
that is, Jews, who had an advantage in their knowledge of
God's revealed will, and at least outward assistances — better
than they ? No, in no wise, for we have before proved both
Jews and Gentiles that they are all under sin ; as it is
written, There is none righteous, no, not one. He prefers this
and other quotations from the Old Testament to words of
his own, because they would have more weight with those
to whom he was writing ; and they also prove that he is not
declaiming against the particular depravity of his own age,
for his design is not simply to bring them to repentance,
but to convince them that all are sinners, and that not by
habit or imitation, but by nature ; for otherwise his reason-
ing could not stand, that salvation is from the free unmerited
mercy of God.

Such is the language of Revelation, and what it declares
on this head is abundantly proved by experience. The
universality of sin is shown by the history and present state
of every nation, which presents a general picture of war,
tyranny, and rebellion. Laws are made to prevent or
punish crimes ; they exist in every country, and are changed
continually, as they are found to fail of their effect, by the
substitution of others that promise greater success. To
this head are to be referred all the means of safety devised
for our persons and property ; the bolts, bars, and locks
by which we defend our houses, the notes, bonds, and
deeds, by which we endeavour to secure our contracts,
prevent fraud, and compel the dishonest to fulfil their engage-
ments ; also prisons and legal punishments ; for in a world
of virtuous beings, none of these would be wanted, and we
should have no prisons or legal punishments. The religion
of heathen nations confirms the same doctrine, for it is every
where expiatory, that is, its object has been to appease an
offended Deity ; it therefore consists of penances, ablutions,
and sacrifices. The two first speak for themselves; attempts

LECTURE IX.

have been made to explain away the latter; but though the
offerings of fruits, as the result of the labour of the hus-
bandman, may be resolved into a thanksgiving, the death
of unoffending animals, especially of human victims, shows
that the worshippers conceived it necessary to appease the
offended Deity, and that he was an object of his displeasure.
The writings of moralists, poets, and historians, attest the
same fact of human corruption ; none of them have ever
referred us to any character, in any age, that they have
considered to be free from sin; and if they have ever
attempted to delineate such an one from imagination,
it has always been pronounced unnatural ;

" A faultless monster, whom the world ne'er saw."

The fact is so undeniable, that it has forced itself upon the
notice of the thoughtful in every age. Thus Cicero1
observes, that if nature had so framed us as to give us a full
and perfect view of her, and ability to follow her as a guide,
then mankind would have needed no other teacher ; but
that the true light of nature is now no where to be found.
No sooner are we born than we fall into all depravity, and
extreme perversity of opinion, so that we seem to suck in
error almost with our own nurse's milk. And St. Augustin
quotes him as complaining that nature had brought man
into the world more like a stepmother than a parent, too
weak for labour and too prone to desire, with some sparks
indeed of the divine fire in his mind, but those smothered
and obscured. His remark is, that Cicero very clearly
saw the thing, but was ignorant of the cause ; he knew
not the reason why so heavy a yoke was laid upon the
sons of Adam, and being unacquainted with the sacred
records, was a stranger to the doctrine of inherited sin.
The cause they could not know, but they saw and felt the
effect; and the Manichean fancy of an evil principle, and
the philosophical notion that this depravation proceeded
from a pre-existent state, and that our propensity to sin in
this world was an evil habit contracted by the soul in
another, by a voluntary deviation from God, for which

' Tuscul. Disp. iii.

LECTURE IX.

reason it was sent into the body, were only unsuccessful
endeavours to explain it; while the fable of the golden age
and of the reign of Saturn, indicated an original state of
perfection which had ceased. The best of Christians have
always been the most ready to acknowledge this humiliat-
ing truth, because they are best acquainted with the extent
and spirituality of the divine law; but the conscience of
every man convicts him, to say the least, of some sin com-
mitted, or some duty neglected, and when he endeavours to
keep the Commandments, though his judgment approves of
them as excellent, he finds within himself a spirit reluctant
to perform them. Even the heathen poet Ovid makes
Medea say, " I see and approve what is better, I follow
what is worse." And this struggle was delineated long
before him by Xenophonk, in his tale of Araspes, who, when
overcome by his passion for Panthea, his captive, against his
sense of duty, exclaims, that the sophist love has taught him
that he has two souls, for if he had but one, it would not at
the same time be both good and bad. The fear of death, and
the aversion to any intercourse with the Creator, found in
all, except in as far as they are renewed in the spirit of
their minds, spring from a sense of sin ; for the good would
have nothing to fear from a just Judge, and would delight
in communion with a holy God. The rejection of the word
of God, which is never received in the love of it, except
where nature has been subdued by grace, is a decisive
proof of this depravity. This is strikingly manifested by
the manner in which it has been rejected, for its opponents
have always treated it with contempt or hatred; and though
they have declaimed in praise of virtue, they have generally
been the slaves of sin, and in no instance to be compared as
moral men to the real followers of Christ. The practical
unbelief of nominal Christians is substantially of the same
character, for they deny the real import of the book they
profess to receive ; its doctrines they have in forms very
different, but in design and spirit wholly the same, lowered
continually down, so as to suit, or at least so as not to dis-
gust, the taste of a sinful heart. The extent also and
k Cyropajdia, vi.

240

LECTURE IX.

purity of its moral precepts they have contracted and
debased, so as to license many evil practices that are grati-
fying to the natural mind. The sum of this argument is,
that God has not only given to man a perfect law for the
government of his conduct, reasonable and just in itself, but
has annexed a reward to its performance, and punishment to
the breach and neglect of it ; if therefore man was vir-
tuously disposed, he would render an immediate cheerful
and universal obedience to it as soon as proposed. Now
even supposing such a being to apostatize, and afterwards
to be informed of a method by which it might return to
obedience, and the favour of God, still if he did not prefer
sin, he would accept it with gratitude ; now this we have
already stated, that no man is inclined to do, unless by the
preventing grace of God.

The unwillingness of Christians to embrace this tenet in
all its fulness, arises, I conceive, from misconception.
They perceive neither in themselves, nor in their acquaint-
ance, that entire unmixed wickedness, which they suppose
to be necessarily comprehended in it ; but they forget, and
we are all apt to forget, that in making this broad state-
ment, we are not talking of Christian but of human nature.
The grace conferred in baptism, even allowing it to be as
weak as those maintain who lower it, as much as is con-
sistent with distinguishing it as a sacrament from a rite,
must, unless entirely lost, make an essential difference
between the weakest Christian and a heathen. Inasmuch as
any partake of the spirit of Christ; and the gradations are
more than we can enumerate ; they have subdued sin, and
though it still dwells in them, opposing itself to their good
resolutions, it no longer, as in the unregenerate, reigns.
They should also consider, that some vicious habits are con-
trary to others, and that the sinful principle will not break
faith into all kinds of overt acts in the same individual ;
each has his constitutional bias or besetting sin ; one is
more tempted by the lusts of the flesh, another by those of
the spirit ; but St. James shows, that he who is guilty in
one point is guilty in all, for all sins being forbidden by
the same legislator, the same authority is defied, whichever

LECTURE IX.

241

we break; and if a sense of duty cannot keep us, for instance,
from stealing, from the strength of our inclination, we have
no reason to conclude it would from adultery, or murder, if
our tendencies towards those crimes were as strong. Love
is the fulfilling of the law; selfishness therefore, or the
preferring our own supposed interest or gratification to the
welfare of our neighbour, or the command of God, is the
contrary. The virtues of heathens are pleaded as an
objection; but, strictly speaking, we cannot allow their title
to this appellation, since they do not spring from the perfect
motive, the desire of obeying their Creator. Augustin calls
them shining vices, splendida vitia; and though men are
accustomed with classical enthusiasm to admire, perhaps to
magnify them, we shall, on calmly weighing them in the
balance of the Sanctuary, find the best of them defective,
and some that have been highly extolled more deserving of
blame than praise. Nor is he more rigid than our own
Church, which affirms in a following Article, XIII, "in-
asmuch as such actions spring not out of faith in Jesus
Christ, they are not pleasant to God, yea rather for that
they are not done as God hath willed and commanded, we
doubt not that they have the nature of sin." We must alsc
bear in mind, that much of the depravity of man is unknown
to us. God hides from all but his own eyes that worst of
sights, " a naked human heart ;" shame, outward circum-
stances, and the fear of consequences, will often restrain the
disposition from declaring itself in actions. If all of these
impediments were withdrawn, how much worse would men
appear to be than they now do ? and such we must recollect
they do appear to the heart-searching God. In all there-
fore of this description, who keep up a fair show of
outward conduct, there must be an inward latent depravity,
much greater than is suspected by others, or even by
themselves.

After all, I allow that the doctrine may be overstated.
That all men are by nature as bad as possible, cannot be
maintained, because we observe gradations of evil in the
wicked ; and the same wicked person, unless he amend, will
not be stationary, but will grow worse and worse; so that in

242

LECTURE IX.

an earlier stage of his course he must have been com-
paratively innocent. The natural man has also preserved
some feelings of benevolence and justice, though not suffi-
cient to preserve the name of goodness, because the exercise
of them has not its source in the love of God, is not directed
to his glory, nor regulated by a reference to his will. It is
spirituality of mind that was lost. According to Augustin,
the supernatural talents were totally lost, but the natural
ones only corrupted; reason may be debilitated and vitiated,
but it is not destroyed ; and the intellectual faculties of man,
however impaired, still proclaim, that the hand that made
him is divine. Majestic though in ruins, the exertions of
human genius, as exhibited in poets, artists, philosophers,
and statesmen, are still wonderful. It is when it goes
beyond the limits of the present life, that the understanding
best shows its imbecility. So the will of man, being in-
separable from his nature, was not annihilated by the fall ;
it has only received such a bias from that event, that it is
now inclined to evil ; it is under no necessity from any
external cause to do wrong, but it does wrong because it
suits its inclination, and will not do right, till it is freed
from the slavery of sin by divine grace. With respect to
the theoretical knowledge of duty, the Apostle declares to
the Romans, that when the Gentiles who have not the law,
do by nature the things contained in the law, they are a law
unto themselves, which shows a natural consciousness of right
and wrong ; we cannot therefore say, that they are altogether
ignorant of their duty, and indeed if they were, they must
be absolved from guilt. St. Paul had said just before, as
many as have sinned without law, shall also perish without
law ; and as many as have sinned in the law, shall be judged
by the law. Because it would appear unreasonable, that the
Gentiles should suffer for their transgression of a law that
had not been made known unto them, he subjoins, that their
conscience supplied the place of positive prohibitions, and
deprived them of the plea of ignorance ; for it is not the
want of knowledge, (though that be imperfect,) but the want
of inclination to practise what they knew to be right, that
will condemn them.

LECTURE IX. 243

It is so natural to wish to underrate the degree of human
depravity, that all observations that have this tendency
ought to be received with suspicion, as it is well known
how much, even where there is no intention to mislead, the
understanding is biassed by the will. All that I mean to
contend for, when I say that the image of God in which
Adam was created has been destroyed, is, that man is now
so depraved, that he cannot of himself do any thing pleasing
to God, and that he does not even wish to be liberated from
this bondage of sin. And this is fully proved by a survey
of the business and the amusements of mankind, even in
Christian countries; the difficulty there is found of sup-
pressing vice, and promoting virtue by education, exhort-
ations, or rewards and punishments ; and by the confessions
of those who in their renewed state of heart, have looked
back upon their original condition. The inspired writers
acknowledge, that even the Christian who has been freed
by grace from the dominion of sin, much more than the
mere natural man, is not sufficient of himself to think any
thing as of himself. David, conscious of this imbecility,
prays that understanding may be given him, to enable him
rightly to learn the commandments of the Lord ; for his
ardent and repeated desire to obtain a new understanding,
implies the insufficiency of his own. And what he requests
for himself, St. Paul frequently supplicates for the Church
at large. We do not cease to pray for you, that ye may
be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and
spiritual understanding, that ye may walk worthy of the
Lord unto all pleasing. This picture of man's depravity
will be heightened, if to his vices and defects we add the
imperfection of his best qualities, which I give in the
energetic language of Hooker, in his Sermon on Justification.
"If we could say we are not guilty of any thing at all in
our consciences, (we know ourselves far from this innocence,)
should we therefore plead not guilty before the presence of
our Judge, that sees further into our hearts than we our-
selves can do ? If our hands did never offer violence to our
brethren, a bloody thought does prove us murderers before
him ; if we had never opened our mouth to utter any scan-
it 2

244

LECTURE IX.

dalous, offensive, or hurtful word, the cry of our secret
cogitations is heard in the ears of God. If we did not
commit the sins, which daily and hourly, either in deed,
word, or thought, we do commit, yet in the good things we
do, how many defects are there intermingled ! God in that
which is done respecteth the mind and intention of the doer;
cut off therefore all those things wherein we have regarded
our own glory, those things which men do to please men,
and to satisfy their own liking, those things we do for any
bye respect, and a small score will serve for the number of
our righteous deeds. Let the holiest and best things we
do be considered. We are never better affected unto God
than when we pray, yet when we pray, how are our
affections many times distracted ? The best things we do
have something in them to be pardoned, how then can we
do any thing meritorious or worthy to be rewarded? Indeed,
God doth liberally promise whatever appertaineth to a
blessed life, to as many as sincerely keep his law, though
they are not able exactly to keep it ; wherefore we acknow-
ledge a dutiful necessity of doing well, but the meritorious
dignity of doing well we utterly renounce." It must also
be remembered, that Hooker is here speaking of believers,
who as baptized are renewed at least in part. This
depravity shows itself most strikingly in aversion to the
real character of the Deity, and by real I mean his
character as delineated in Scripture ; that is, as including
the attributes of justice and holiness ; for the natural man
and the worst of sinners may form to themselves such a
notion of God as they can delight in, that is, a Being
all love and mercy, too kind to punish any sins which
are not greatly injurious to mankind, and those only for a
season. This however is little better than a refined species
of idolatry, and it seems to be with reference to such
persons, who substitute for the true God an idol of their
own imagination, that the Deity is thus introduced in the
fiftieth Psalm. These things (that is, theft, adultery, and
other sins enumerated) hast thou done, and I held my tongue,
and thou thoughtest wickedly that I am even such an one as thy-
self'; but I will reprove thee, and set before thee the things that

LECTURE IX.

245

thou hast done. The truth of this statement will appear from
the opposition made to the character of God as revealed in
his own word, which avowed infidels argue against, or
ridicule, and which too many others labour to explain
away. From the moment Adam ate the forbidden fruit,
God was no longer his delight ; he was alarmed at his pre-
sence, and would fain have hid himself from him. This
feeling his posterity inherits : and God being reconciled to
man by the atonement effected by his Son, now through
his Holy Spirit reconciles man to himself. According to
this view, which is that of our own Church, which we have
confirmed by the Bible, and supported by facts, man
naturally utterly destitute of love to God considered as he
is, not as he would wish him to be, seeks his own gratifica-
tion only, and chooses voluntarily as his portion, the lust of
the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life. Hence,
when thwarted in his pursuits, proceed envy, hatred,
malice, and, according to the different habits and propen-
sities of men, unrighteousness, licentiousness, or ungod-
liness. Eternal punishment is annexed to every transgres-
sion of the divine law, which prohibits all sin ; and when
this is made known to the sinner, unless it convince and
convert him, his hatred to God will then manifest itself.

The next enquiry is, whence doth this tendency to evil
proceed ? and the Article explicitly answers, " it is the fault
of the nature of every man that naturally is engendered of
the offspring of Adam," and not as the Pelagians vainly talk
in the following, that is the imitation, of Adam. The
Pelagians are so called from one Morgan a Welshman, a
monk, who was in Rome in A.D. 405, where he lived in
friendship with the best and most eminent Christians, and
who is mentioned by his illustrious opponent Augustin, as
a man of extraordinary capacity and accomplishments, and
one whom he should much admire and love, were it not for
his heterodox opinions. The Greek term UsKuyio^ mari-
time, by which he is known, is a translation of Morgan, and
was given to him, or assumed by him, because he came
from beyond sea. Rome having been sacked in A.D. 410,
we find him in Africa, and afterwards in Palestine. He

246

LECTURE IX.

had two followers, Celestius and Julian, as well known as
himself. The Christian world was so much agitated by the
discussion of his doctrine, that no less than twenty-four
Councils were held upon the subject, between 412 and 430.
St. Jerome wrote against him ; but his most distinguished
opponent was St. Augustin, who completely confuted
him, and the doctrine of original sin has ever since been
held in all the divisions of the Western Church. The term
he first used, but the doctrine, though like others before it
had been called into question, it had not been so fully
stated, or so clearly proved, being an essential one, may be
found in the earliest fathers, who call it the old guilt, the
ancient wound, the common curse. The following quo-
tations may suffice. " Christ was born and crucified for
mankind, who through Adam had fallen under death and
the deception of the serpent, besides the particular sins of
which each person is guilty1." Origen, " the curse of Adam is
common to all menm." And from the words of David,
I was shapen in wickedness, and in sin hath my mother con-
ceived me. And from the practice of Infant Baptsim, which,
as Augustin argues against Pelagius, is decisive of the
opinion of the Church, for if there were nothing in children
which required remission, the grace of Baptism would seem
superfluous.

The universality of the corruption proves it to be com-
mon to the whole race now ; and as far as history goes back,
we find it to have been the same. The antediluvian world
we know to have been drowned, with the exception of a
single family, because the thoughts of their hearts were only
evil continually; and the first descendant of Adam mur-
dered his brother. Imitation will not explain the crime of
Cain, for there is reason to believe that his parents were
penitent: and if mankind were by nature virtuously inclined,
or even in a neutral state, good examples would be more
followed, or at least as much as bad ones. The passages
from Scripture already cited are in opposition to the
Pelagian view, which followed out into its legitimate con-
sequences would bring us to Socinianism, which maintains
1 Justin Martyr, Dialogue. m Celsus iv.

LECTURE IX.

that we derive no other advantage from Christ's righteous-
ness than the proposal to our imitation of a perfect example.
But it appears certain that in the same manner as other
animals beget an offspring resembling themselves, we all,
since Adam sinned before he had any children, derive from
our progenitor a nature so frail and inclined to sin, that as
soon as temptations arise, it will show itself forth in actual
transgressions4 Thus Augustin, though he calls it the sin
of another, the more clearly to intimate its transmission to
us by propagation, yet at the same time asserts that it
belongs to each individual. Our Saviour and his Apostles
declare that we are born with sinful dispositions; and it
could not be otherwise, unless God had interposed to
restore Adam to his original righteousness, which we know
he did not ; for it is expressly said, that Adam was created
in the divine image, which he lost, and afterwards that he
begat Seth in his own image. Both circumcision, the
initiatory rite before the coming of Christ, and Baptism
which since succeeded it, signify that flesh and blood, that
is the nature we derive from Adam, cannot inherit the
kingdom of Heaven. But original sin does not only con-
sist in the corruption of our nature, but is generally con-
sidered as also a state of condemnation, in which we are
born, or, as it is said, the sin of Adam is imputed to us as
guilt. This is objected to by many as a harsh saying; nor
can they perceive how it can be consistent with the goodness
or even the justice of God, to render men guilty of a sin
in which they had no personal concern. We can
readily conceive, they say, how God in the riches of his
grace may transfer merit and blessing from one person to
another ; this is an economy of mercy wherein all is free,
and such a method is taken herein as best demonstrates the
goodness of God ; but. in the imputation of sin and guilt,
which are matters of strict justice, the case is widely dif-
ferent; and therefore we find God often appealing to man-
kind concerning the righteousness of his ways, denying
expressly that children are to suffer for the transgressions of
their parents", but that the soul that sinneth it shall die, and
n Ezek.xviii. 20.

248

LECTURE IX.

affirming positively, that every one shall bear his own burden0,
and give an account of his own works*. Yet the Apostle's
comparison between the first Adam and the second, as he
calls Christ, seems to show, that as through faith the merits
of the latter are imputed to us for justification, so by the
offence of one judgment came upon all to condemnation;
and by one man's disobedience many would be made, or
treated, as sinners1!. And the whole design of the dis-
course seems to be defeated, if this imputation be denied,
nor can Adam upon this view be called the figure of the
Messiah. God, according to our doctrine, is represented
as making Adam stand forth as the representative and
surety of his posterity, to make a covenant for them,
as well as himself ; and the condition of his obedience
was eternal life, the penalty eternal death; and of this,
temporal death is the sign, and the latter at least can hardly
be denied, for death hath certainly passed upon all men,
and even those who have committed no actual sins, that is,
infants, die. That the Scriptures do sometimes represent
men as to be considered, nay, even to be rewarded or
punished, not only individually, but collectively, may easily
be proved; considered, as when Levir paid tithes in Abraham
to Melchizedec ; rewarded, as when Abraham was made the
father of the faithful, and when believers are redeemed in
Christ; punished, as when God himself declares, that he
himself will visit the sins of the fathers upon the children
to the third and fourth generation. The chief objection
seems to be the consequence that is hence supposed to
follow of the condemnation of infants not baptized, or at
the utmost, not the offspring of at least one believing
parent, to eternal punishment. This is a doctrine certainly
revolting to the feelings; as stated by Augustin, it is less
offensive, for he assigns to them a particular abode ; which
is no more than the loss of Heaven without any positive
suffering ; but the Calvinists in general go further, and as
the Westminster Confession affirms, that elect infants dying
in infancy are regenerated, and saved by Christ, this very
declaration seems to imply, that there are other infants
0 Gal. vi. 5. p Rom. v. 15. «* Rom. v. JO. r Heb. vii. 4.

LECTURE IX.

249

condemned to eternal perdition. But these consequences
do not seem to me to be necessary ones. I will grant, that
they are, if we look exclusively to the imputation of
original sin ; but the Apostle, from whom the doctrine is
derived, tells us at the same time, that the remedy is com-
mensurate with the injury. As in Adam all die, so in
Christ shall all be made alive3. As by the offence of one
judgment came upon all men to condemnation, even so by
the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men
unto justification of life. The doctrine therefore of universal
redemption, which is declared in the second, and still more
explicitly in the thirty-first, Article, entirely removes this
objection. If the offering of the Lamb, slain from the found-
ation of the world, be a perfect redemption and satisfaction
for all the sins of the whole world, both original and actual,
and the whole scheme of man's salvation had been decreed
from all eternity in the divine counsel, and was actually
promised, before any child of Adam was born, even before
sentence was pronounced, the benefit of redemption immedi-
ately commenced. Upon this hypothesis then every infant
that comes into the world, brings along with it at the
same time the guilt of Adam's sin, and the benefit of
Christ's meritorious death ; nor can the want of baptism be
any obstruction to the remedy, since the remedy was ex-
hibited long before the institution of this Sacrament. With
this explanation, I hope that no objection will be felt to the
doctrine of the imputation of original sin, for I think it is
conveyed as well as that of a depravity of nature by our
Article, which goes on to say, in scriptural language, that it
deserves God's wrath and damnation, which in the case of
infants, and they are evidently here included, must mean
eternal ; I observe by the way, that to say it deserves, is
very different from saying it will receive, and this is
expressly stated in the Augustan Confession1: from which
it appears, that the Lutherans as well as we maintain,

8 1 Cor. xv. 22.

1 Quo nascentes Adae propter lapsum rei sunt irse Dei et mortis crternce.
Est vitium origines vere peccatum damnans et afferens nunc quoque cetemam
mortem his qui non renascuniur per baptismum et Spiritum Sanctum.

250

LECTURE IX.

that this guilt is washed away in baptism, in which
opinion also we accord with Rome ; and it is indeed
implied in the term Regeneration, so that those who do not
consider that act as always taking place in baptism, still
take care to maintain this position. This the Dort Canons,
which profess Calvinism more fully than any other Con-
fession, say is not imputed for condemnation to the
children of God.

"We have now traced up moral evil to the first man,
but it would be an aweful impiety to suppose that the
pure and perfect Creator could be the author of it. This
only have I found, saith the Preacher, that God made man
upright, but they have found out many inventions. We
know that God, on completing all his works including
man, declared them to be very good, and that Adam was
created in his image ; by which we are not merely to under-
stand that he was a rational being, but, as it is explained by
St. Paul1, like his maker in holiness and righteousness. His
reason, as our Homily for the Nativity expresses it, "was
incorrupt, his understanding pure and good, his will was
obedient and godly ; he was made like unto God in righ-
teousness, in holiness, in wisdom, and truth. But though
innocent, he was, as we now all are, a free agent, and placed
in a state of probation ; life and death were set before him,
and he chose the latter. If it be asked, by whose fault ? we
answer in the words of our great Poetu,

Whose but his own? Ingrate, he had of God
All he could have; He made him just and right,
Sufficient to have stood, though free to fall.

Why he was permitted to fall, I presume not to enquire ;
it is enough for us to know, that as he was the author of
his own sin and misery, he was inexcusable ; and that
though he might have been justly left in the condition
which he had chosen, God, who is rich in mercy, and can
bring good out of evil, has taken occasion from his fall to
exhibit to angels and men his own glorious attributes,

* Eph. iv. 24.

u Book iii.

LECTURE IX.

251

which could not otherwise have been made so fully known,
his holiness, his justice, and his mercy. An act which
brought sin and death into the world, and to remove the
effects of which it was necessary that the coequal Son of
God should become incarnate, and endure an ignominious
and painful death, could be no slight offence; but as in-
fidels represent it as by no means proportionate to God's
indignation, and that he is described as unreasonable and
severe, and as even some believers in a degree feel the
objection, it may be proper briefly to consider the nature of
the test of his obedience. We premise, that the objection
carries with it its own refutation ; for in the proportion in
which they would represent the eating of the forbidden
fruit as a trifle, in the same proportion they lower the
temptation, and enhance the guilt of the offender. God's
eye fixes upon the state of the mind, and this is discovered
as much, or rather more, in matters comparatively small,
and in an arbitrary appointment more than in a moral
precept, which would at once recommend itself to the
judgment. Many of the latter he as lord of all that he
beheld, and with no other fellow creature, except her who
had been given to him as a friend and assistant, had not the
power or temptation to break ; nor if he could, would they
have been so correct a trial of the state of his heart towards
his Maker. If he put the question, How can this be? ought
not the word of God to have satisfied him ? It is fit then a
creature should obey his Creator, and it is his interest as
well as his duty, nor could he as a rational and moral being
be otherwise virtuous and happy. Now obedience supposes
a previous commandment, and none could be easier, for
Adam possessed whatever he could need or require, and
was not like many of his descendants tempted by any sense
of want. His acceptance we must also remember was
suspended upon a single point, of which he was previously
fully warned, so that he completely knew his duty, and
might summon all his strength and watchfulness to his
support in this only assailable quarter. His experience
taught him, that God could have no other design in
this trial than his good ; he had the strongest motives to

252

LECTURE IX.

obedience, arising from gratitude, a knowledge of his in-
terest, the fear of punishment, and the hope of reward, and
above all, being as yet innocent, he had no sinful propensity.
The trial therefore was not a hard one. But why was the
offence so strictly punished ? We reply, what hath been
said tends to show its magnitude, which was indeed
of the deepest die ; it was not the mere gratification of
appetite, or curiosity, inexcusable as that would have been,
but an act of decided rebellion, a practical declaration, that
God was a severe master who forbad his creature what
would have improved his condition; it was therefore distrust
and want of faith in the highest degree, and that under
circumstances which were most favourable to its exhibition ;
and if it be asked why a fruit was fixed upon, we answer,
that whatever was the mode or instrument of rebellion,
the sin was substantially the same ; for the same authority
was despised, the same obligation broken, and the same guilt
incurred.

It is essential not only to sound theological knowledge,
but to genuine confidence in and reliance upon God, as a
just and merciful Governor of the world, (as a means to
which sound knowledge is requisite,) that we should not
only acknowledge, but feel that the Lord is righteous in all
his ways, and holy in all his works ; we must therefore
endeavour to convince ourselves, that God is perfect in all
his moral attributes, and consequently that his condemn-
ation of our progenitors was just. Thus only can we be
prepared to appreciate the inestimable gift of redemption,
and to receive it with humble gratitude ; for unless we
acquiesce in the justice of the sentence, we shall look upon
the remedy provided, rather as a debt due to human nature,
to compensate for what it lost in Adam, than as an act of
free unmerited mercy. But when brought to this acknow-
ledgment, (which is difficult to the best of us from the
remainder of this corruption which still worketh in us,) we
shall find Christianity to deserve the title of Gospel, or
good tidings, and shall comprehend why the Saviour
d-emands from us the highest degree of love, and why the
Epistles abound with exhortations to gratitude ; St. Paul's

LECTURE IX.

253

prayer for the Ephesians will then be made our own, that
the eyes of their understanding being enlightened, they
might be rooted and grounded in love, and be able to know
the love of Christ which passeth knowledge ; we shall then, in
the language of the Homily on the Kativity, " praise him
with our tongues, believe on him with our hearts, and
glorify him with our good works."

There are some who are misled by a false analogy to
conclude, that it would not have been unbecoming, and
might have been honourable to the Deity, to have pardoned
the offence, because forgiveness is a virtue in man ; but these
persons do not consider, that what is fit from one imperfect
being to another, cannot be so between a perfect Creator
and his guilty creature ; for that which it was right to
threaten, it must be right to execute. The true cause of
the punishment of sin is not the vindictive feeling of an
injured or offended Being, but the justice of God, which is
an essential property of his nature ; and this is the same
with his holiness, so that he does not punish arbitrarily ;
but these attributes require it, as it is indispensable that
God should in all things be just and holy, in other words, that
he should continue to be God. In proclaiming his cha-
racter to Moses, he declares that he will by no means clear
the guilty ; the punishment therefore of every transgressor,
if not in his own person, yet by his surety, does not depend
upon a mere optional arrangement, nor is it solely resolv-
able into God's veracity in fulfilling his threatening, but is
antecedently necessary, unless we would have the divine
nature changed, that sinners might enjoy impunity. We
may add, that if the penalty depended only upon the revealed
will of God, and his faithfulness to his engagements, it
would be expected only by those nations to whom his will
was revealed ; yet those that have not the written law to
instruct them, find when they sin, as the Apostle says, that
conscience accuses them, and accordingly they have invented
various methods of appeasing the Deity whose displeasure
they fear, which proves that even the light of nature shows
that sin is worthy of punishment. Scripture affirms x, that it is
* 2 Thess. i. 6.

254

LECTURE IX.

a righteous thing with God to render tribulation to sinners,
and he is saidy to have declared his righteousness by the
sufferings of Christ. This exhibited his justice no less
than his mercy, but if it were just to punish sin, it must
have been unjust to pardon it. Men are too apt to fancy,
that though God's promises will be fulfilled, his threat-
enings may not be executed ; but it was through this
very delusion that sin entered into the world, " Has God
said that you shall die if you eat ?" A suggestion arises,
that if this be the meaning, still it will not be acted on, and
this delusion still widely prevails ; but what ground is there
for this presumed distinction between threats and promises ?
What difference between these two clauses in their autho-
rity, He that believeth shall be saved, he that believeth not
shall be damned 'i

Many who allow the reasonableness of punishment,
stumble at the notion of its eternity, since the sins to be
punished are finite, transient, temporary. Yet even among
ourselves we consider the- guilt of crimes to be aggravated
in proportion to the excellence of the person against whom
they are committed, and our obligations to respect and love
them ; now no creature, knowing fully the Deity against
whom all sin is committed, can fully understand its enormity;
and God alone understands what it is for his creature, who
is dependent upon him for life and all things, to withdraw
himself as it were from his government, and to oppose his
authority. He alone knows what sin deserves, and what
ought to be the degree and duration of punishment. Some
Christians, even contradicting the words of Scripture, deny
the eternity of future punishments ; but this is setting up
their own notions of fitness against God's express declara-
tion, and we may reprove them in the words of Balaam,
God is not a man that he should lie, nor the son of man that
he should repent. Hath he said, and shall he not do it;
or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good* ? If the
wicked are to be punished for ever, it is the part of mercy
to reveal the fact, in order to alarm men, and bring them to
repentance ; but to hold out threats which are not to be
J Rom. i. 18. 1 Numbers xxiii. 19.

LECTURE IX.

255

executed is derogatory from God's moral character, and
would leave us incapable of trusting him for the pro-
mised rewards of Heaven. Such a supposition, though
it may have the semblance of piety, must arise from
inadequate views of holiness and sin, and from a notion
that punishment is of a purifying quality ; but so far is this
from being true, that it would increase the wickedness of
the sufferer, and especially his hatred of the Being by whom
it is inflicted. And it is disproved in the case of the evil
spirits, who in our Saviour's time had been enduring punish-
ment for thousands of years, and were no less hostile then to
God than when they fell ; and they we know are reserved
to everlasting torments. If men, therefore, in a future state
continue to sin, they will continue to suffer punishment; re-
straining grace will be withdrawn from them, the Holy Spirit
will no longer strive with them, and therefore they will grow
worse continually, so that as they are immortal beings, they
will ever remain in the state in which death has found them.

We have seen that God is not the author of evil, and
that the man and woman whom he created were free from
any sinful inclination. How then came they to disobey?
By the deception of an evil spirit, who had himself
previously fallen through the suggestion of his own mind.
If the inquiry be pushed a step further, and it be asked
why or how evil should originate in the creation of a
Being of perfect power and purity, we must confess that our
limited faculties are unequal to the discovery. It is one of
the deep things of Him whose ways are past finding out.
Metaphysicians have exhibited much sub til ty in their dis-
quisitions, yet have " found no end in wandering mazes
lost ;" it is the part therefore of real wisdom and genuine
piety to refrain from such high and dangerous speculations,
and to rest satisfied with knowing, that even moral evil
itself shall be ultimately overruled so as to raise those who
really turn to God to a happier and more glorious state
through the second Adam, than they would ever have
enjoyed, if the first Adam had not fallen. Canst thou by
searching find ou t God ? canst thou find out the Almighty to
perfection? Higher than heaven, what canst thou do? deeper

256

LECTURE IX.

than hell what canst thou know ? longer than the earth is his
measure, and broader than the sea", is Zophar's just rebuke
to Job. And certainly, if we were fully sensible of the
distance between God and ourselves, we should see the
reasonableness of the Apostle's interrogation, Who art thou,
0 man, that repliest against Godb? If we find fault with
God's government of the world, we virtually declare our-
selves fit to be His counsellors; whereas it becomes us to cry
out, 0 the depth of the riches, both of the wisdom and knowledge
of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past
finding out! The consideration of the infinite distance between
His understanding and ours should make us cheerfully
acquiesce in all He does, however mysterious ; nor have
we a right to expect that He should give us an account of
his matters. We find, therefore, that when Job was per-
plexed with the divine dispensations, God answered him
not by a vindication of his providence, but by showing him
how infinitely he was his superior. It became Job to
submit to his Creator in those things which he did not
understand, and to believe that his reasons, though unknown,
were good, in other words, to have faith ; and the reply,
which so awefully proclaims the divine power, wisdom, and
sovereignty, had a tendency to bring him to this. Job accord-
ingly ceases to justify himself, or to repine, but exclaims as
a penitent, Behold, I am vile, what shall I answer thee ! 1
will lay my hand upon my mouth. Once I have spoken, but
I will not answer ; yea twice, but I will proceed no further !
It is not astonishing that a God of infinite glory should
shine with a brightness too dazzling for mortal eyes, when
even Angels are represented as veiling their faces in this
overpowering light.

The practical importance of the doctrine of original sin
should be attentively marked, for there is a cold and specu-
lative assent to it, that has no influence upon the conduct.
If a man assumes that he was originally virtuous, and only
corrupted by example, he will be apt to think himself as
good as a frail imperfect creature can expect to be, and he
will consider justification and acceptance as his due; or if
• Job xi. 7—9. b Rom. ix. 20.

LECTURE IX.

257

he should allow that Christ has in some sense died for him,
he will conceive that his merits make up for his own de-
ficiencies, and will regard, him rather as an assistant in the
work, than as the author and finisher of his faith, and
consequently of his salvation, so that his reliance will be
mainly upon himself. To him the gospel, instead of being
what its name imports, is but a valuable system of morals,
purer indeed than any other, and enforced by stronger
sanctions ; whereas he who commences his moral course,
with a full conviction of his exposure to God's wrath, of
the corruption of his nature, and his danger of final con-
demnation, will proceed in a different path. As a sinner
he will feel himself to be guilty and condemned, yet as an
object of mercy he sees glorious hopes dawning upon him
from heaven. Christ to him will be infinitely precious,
and to his atonement he will fly for refuge, because he
can make no atonement for himself. The renewing power
of the Holy Spirit will appear to him to be necessary,
because without his divine energy exerted upon his heart,
he must continue a sinner for ever. With these views his
self-examination, his prayers and praises, resolutions and
efforts, will take their peculiar character from this primary
and leading truth, that he is by nature depraved. His life
therefore will be the life of a returning penitent, owing
infinite obligations to the free unmerited grace of God ; and
he will feel more to animate his love and gratitude, and to
stimulate him to show it forth by obedience, than an Angel
could feel, with the same powers, because he is a forgiven
and restored sinner, forgiven an immense debt, restored to
endless life, and enabled, by the preventing and cooperating
grace of God, to love and to serve him, though imperfectly,
yet sincerely, notwithstanding the fall of his progenitors,
and his own hereditary corruption. He is not therefore
preserved from sin by the servile motives of the rewards and
punishments held forth, nor yet by the nobler, yet it is to
be feared too feeble, sense of duty, which has been rarely
able to hold out against strong temptation ; but by that
overpowering gratitude which the cross of Christ alone
can excite. This will not merely keep him innocent, but

258

LECTURE IX.

sustain him in the heaviest trials, and constrain him to a
life of active service, for he judges with 'the Apostle, that
if one died for all, then were all dead; and that he died for
all, that they who live should not henceforth live unto them-
selves, but unto him who died for them : therefore if any man
be in Christ, he is a new creature0; sl principle which is
recognised by our Lord, if you love me, keep imy command-
ments.

We have seen, that the judgment brought upon the human
race by the offence of its first federal head, has been re-
moved through the meritorious obedience of the second. We
know also, that the new covenant of grace made with him,
provides not only pardon, but divine cooperation; and that
though by nature born in sin and the children of wTrath, on
our admission into it by baptism, we are said to be born
again, and become the children of God. That Baptism is
regarded by our own Church, which therein repeats the uni-
versal opinion of Christian antiquity, as the sign and instru-
ment of Regeneration, is evident from the baptismal service,
and from this very article, for the original Latin has renatis
and credentibus nulla propter Christum est condemnatio, as
answering to the English, there is no condemnation for
them that believe and are baptized; and the Church of
Rome takes regeneration in so strict a sense, as to maintain
that original sin is entirely removed in Baptism, contradicting
Augustin, to whose authority it so often appeals. He writes,
" Is all iniquity blotted out in baptism, doth no infirmity
remain ? if no infirmity remained, we might live without
sin ; but who can say this, unless he be proud ? unless
unworthy of the mercy of the Redeemer ? unless he will
deceive himself, and be one in whom is no truth ?" And in
another place ; " let it not be thought that we should say,
that concupiscence is sanctified, with which the Regenerate
themselves are forced to contend in an intestine war as with
an enemy ; and in baptism sin is dismissed, not that it does not
exist, but that it is not imputed." And that Scripture main-
tains this doctrine, appears from the very passage that is intro-
duced into the Article from the Epistle totheRomansd. " And
c 2 Cor. v. 14. d Rom. viii.

LECTURE IX. 259

this infection of nature doth remain even in them that are re-
generate, whereby the $go'wjaa <rxgxo$ is not subject to the law
of God." The Apostle proceeds, neither indeed can be. The
Article gives us four translations in both languages of $govi}fta :
sapientia, wisdom; sensum, sensuality; affectum, affection;
and studium, desire. The first is that of the Vulgate, but it is
extraordinary that the version of our own translators, carnally
minded, is not given, especially as it appears to be the best ;
for Qgwetf refers rather to the inclination than the judg-
ment. Our Lord says to Peter, thou savourest not;
meaning rather, thou dost not relish, than thou dost not
comprehend, the things that be of God; and in the word
mind, both feeling and understanding seem to be united.
It is well known that it is disputed, whether Paul in this
celebrated passage, descriptive of the workings of indwelling
sin, is speaking of the regenerate, or of man in his uncon-
verted state. Instead therefore of resting on a controverted
passage, I refer to other texts, from Epistles which
were evidently addressed to the baptized. The flesh lusteth
against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh, and these
are contrary the one to the other, so that ye cannot do the
things as ye would. St. Paul admonishes Christians to
abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul. And
St. John writing of believers says, if we say that we have
no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. This
very lust or concupiscence is said by him to be not of the
Father, but of the worlde, and is expressly forbidden by the
tenth Commandment, for the corresponding Greek word is the
same. The meaning of the flesh we learn from our Lord,
when he says, that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and
declares that it cannot see the kingdom of God. St. Paul,
in his long enumeration of the works of the flesh, does not
confine himself to the sins of sensuality ; and it is obvious that
they cannot be subject to the law of God, since they are
the very affections which that law forbids. Nor is it less
certain from experience as well as from revelation, that
in a soul not renewed by divine grace, this carnal-minded-
ness will prevail through life, and that they only who trulv
4 Gal. v. 17. * 1 John ii. lu'.

260

LECTURE IX.

receive Christ, and become the children of God, are born not
of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but
of God. Experience convinces us that this is true; and that
though grace may take away the strength, it cannot take
away the life of sin. Though, says Bishop Beveridge, a
saint may not live in sin, still sin will live in him ; his strong
sins may every day grow weaker, and his weak graces
stronger ; yet grace will not be fulfilled nor sin destroyed,
while he is in the body. The Romanist too must be aware
of the fact: but then he considers that the propensities which
he cannot deny, are only the same which Adam had on his
creation. The Article more rationally allows that they have
" the nature of sin," but continues, " there will be no con-
demnation for it to the baptized." Surely we sufficiently
value Baptism when we assign to it the pardon of original
sin, placing us into a state of grace, and entitling us
to such assistance as will enable us to resist and repress it.
The moderation here shown is remarkable. The Westminster
Confession as usual enlarges upon the subject, and is much
stronger. " This corruption of nature during this life doth
remain in those that are regenerated; and although it be
through Christ pardoned and mortified, yet both itself and
all the motions thereof are truly and properly sin." Our
Article only says that it hath the nature of it ; and even
Augustin goes no farther, for he observes f, explaining the
words of St. James, Every one is tempted when he is drawn
aside by his own lusts, " the mother is concupiscence, the child
is sin ; but concupiscence doth not bring forth, unless it
conceive ; and it does not conceive, unless it draw aside the
will to consent to an evil action."

The difference between our own and the Roman Churches
is thus exhibited by Archbishop Laurence §. The Schoolmen
contended that the infection of our nature derived from Adam
was not a mental but merely a corporeal taint; and that the
body alone receives and transmits the contagion, while the soul
jn all instances proceeds immaculate from the hands of the
Creator. Original sin they opposed to original righteous-
ness, and this they considered not as connatural with man,
f contra Julian, vi. 3. g Barapton Lectures.

LECTURE IX.

261

but as a superinduced habit. They regarded therefore man
as an object of divine displeasure, not because he possessed
that which was offensive, but because he was defective in
that which was pleasing to the Almighty. According to
them, the lapse of Adam conveys imputed guilt which
effectually precludes salvation, until the reception of a
new birth in baptism ; though the corporeal taint be not
sin itself, only fomes peccati, a kind of fuel, which the
human will kindles or not at pleasure. In opposition to
this conceit, our Church represents original sin to be the
fault and corruption of the nature of every man, not the
loss of a superadded grace, but the vitiation of his innate
powers, by which he is far gone from original righteousness,
and is inclined to evil of his own nature; yet while she does
not consider it, as the Council of Trent had then recently
maintained, as an innocuous propensity, she does not declare it
punishable as a crime, but, steering a middle course, asserts
it only to be deserving of God's displeasure. "This infection
of nature doth remain, yea in them that are regenerated; and
yet the Apostle doth confess, that concupiscence hath of
itself the nature of sin;" are manifestly opposed to the Trent
decree, which not only contradicts this very passage, but
anathematizes those who hold the doctrine.

LECTURE X.

ARTICLE X.

OF FREE-WILL.

[ The condition of man after the fall of Adam is such, that he
cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own natural strength
and good works, to faith, and calling upon God: wherefore~\
we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable
to God, without the grace of God by Christ preventing us,
that we may have a good will, and working with us, when
we have that good will.

The preface in brackets was introduced at the revision of
A. D. 1562, from the Wurtemburg Confession. A second
Article followed, which was then suppressed ; but I reprint
it, as showing the views of our Reformers on this much
contested subject.

" Of Grace.

" The Grace of Christ, or the Holy Ghost which is given
by him, doth take from man the heart of stone, and giveth
him an heart of flesh. And though it rendereth us willing
to do those good works, which before we were unwilling to
do, and unwilling to do those evil works, which before we
did, yet is no violence offered by it to the will of man ; so
that no man when he hath sinned can excuse himself, as if
he had sinned against his will or upon constraint, and
therefore that he ought not to be accused or condemned
upon that account."

LECTURE X.

263

The latter part of the tenth Article is taken from St.
Augustin, altered to receive an appropriate application.
Sine illo operante ut velimus, aut cooperante cum volumus
ad bena pietatis opera nihil valemus8. The additions, quae
per Christum est, and, quae Deo grata sunt et accepta, were
made to narrow the question, and assert the single point of
human insufficiency to merit congruously. The English,
"when we have that good will," is not a correct rendering of
dum volumus. Augustin's cum has been altered into duiri,
and his operans into praeveniens.

The tenth Article will not occupy us long, for it follows
necessarily from the preceding one, since if in consequence
of Birth-sin man is so far gone from original righteous-
ness, that the flesh alivays lusteth contrary to the spirit, and
he is born in a state deserving God's wrath and damnation ;
who can deny that he cannot turn and prepare himself by
his own natural strength and good works to faith, and
calling upon God ?

The words, " turn and prepare," are chosen with a reference
to several passages in Scripture. The preparations of the
heart are from the Lordh. T urn thou me, and I shall be
turned*; a passage the more familiar to our ears, for having
been introduced into our liturgy. In St. Luke's Gospel d we
have both : He shall go before him in the spirit and power of
Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, to make
ready a people prepared for the Lord. " Wherefore we have
no power to do good works without the grace of Christ pre-
venting us, or going before us, that we may have a good
will." The Article goes still further, and with reason, for
if this infection remains in the regenerate, it is not enough
that the will is liberated from bondage, it must be kept
from yielding to the temptations that beset it. Grace must
therefore still cooperate with us when we have that good will.
It is not only necessary that the Spirit sets us to work,
but that He himself also work with us, for without him
we cannot begin, carry on, or perfect any work really good.
And this is fully recognised in our liturgy, which teaches us

* De Gratia, xvii. b Prov. xvi. J. « Jeremiah xxxi. 18.

d Luke i. 17.

264

LECTURE X.

to pray, that "we may both perceive and know what things
we ought to do, and may also have grace and power faith-
fully to fulfil the same." This acknowledgment frequently
occurs : " Almighty God, who seest that we have no power
of ourselves to help ourselves e — because the frailty of man
without thee cannot but failf — and may thy grace always
prevent and follow us."

And this is fully borne out by Scripture. He that abideth
in me and I in him, says our Saviour, the same bringeth forth
much fruit ; for apart from me you can do nothing*; answer-
ing as it were by anticipation Pelagius. He doth not say,
that without him it is difficult, but that it is impossible to
please God ; without me you can do nothing. Whereas if we
could either prepare ourselves to turn, or turn ourselves
when prepared, we should do much ; and to put this out of
all doubt, the Apostle tells us, that it is God that worketh
in us both to will and to do of his good pleasure^. He first
enables us to will what we ought to do, and then to do
what we will ; the grace we desire, and the desire of grace,
alike proceed from Him. No man can come unto me% except
the Father who hath sent me draw him1 : and St. Paul says,
we are not sufficient of ourselves even to think any thing as
of ourselves : but that our sufficiency is of Godk. The under-
standing is so darkened, that the natural man sees no beauty
in the Saviour that he should desire him, although he be
altogether lovely, and not being conscious of his hopeless
state, feels not any wish to be delivered from it. Tlie things
of the Spirit of God are foolishness to him, neither can he
know them, because they are spiritually discerned1. And
even supposing the understanding to be so far enlightened
as to discern good from evil, still the will is vitiated and
depraved, for we may sin against our judgment, and feel
what the Apostle writing to the Romans complains of; that
which I do I allow not ; for that which 1 would do, I do not ;
but what I hate, that I dom.

e Collect for the Second Sunday in Lent.

f Collect for the Fifteenth Sunday after Trinity.

g John xv. 5. h Phil. iii. 13. 1 John vi. U. k 2 Cor. hi.

' 1 Cor. ii. 14. m Rom. vii. 10.

LECTURE X.

265

This Article therefore positively denies the freedom of
the will : and yet how clamorously are those frequently
attacked who hold this language, even by persons who have
subscribed their assent to it. They say that man is thereby
reduced to a machine, and that his agency is resolved into
necessity, which clears him from responsibility, but in
this they only betray their ignorance ; and if they were
acquainted with the writings of the Divines whom they
think it no sin to condemn unheard as fatalists, ascribing
to them doctrines and consequences which they have again
and again disclaimed, and indeed often confuted, they
would perceive that they have confounded two perfectly
distinct questions, a religious and a philosophical one, and this
the very terms used show to an attentive reader ; for it is not
will, arbitrium, that is denied, but free will, liberum arbitrium.
That every man has a will, Heathen or Christian, the most
profligate sinner as well as the most perfect saint, must be
allowed by all reasonable persons who study their own
volitions, or observe those of their neighbours, and has'
never been denied, I apprehend, by the most ultra Calvinist.
It is for philosophers to discuss the profound subject of
liberty and necessity, that is, whether we have a will of
indifference, or whether the will is always influenced by
motives, so that it necessarily chooses what appears to it to
be upon the whole best. Let this question however be
decided as it may, it does not affect our Article. The will
still, theologically speaking, remains, but it is not free, but
enslaved: not that we mean to say, as our opponents choose
to state it, that a man sins against his will, but most willingly,
because he is inclined to sin; and again, when the will is set
free by grace, we are not driven to Christ against our will, but
God draws us with our wills, making us a willing people in
the day of his power11, I transcribe a passage from a sermon
of the late Thomas Scott, the pious and excellent com-
mentator, who after stating that the invitation to come to
Christ is general, and that no one is accepted by name or
character, thus meets the objection, that sinners cannot obey
the call. "This is a truth, if properly understood. They are

n Psalm ex.

266

LECTURE X.

under a moral not a natural inability. Is this distinction
useless or unintelligible ? Is there no difference between a
covetous wretch, who with a full purse hath no heart, and a
compassionate man who hath no money to relieve a fellow-
creature in distress? Both are effectually prevented, but the
one from himself, the other by an external hindrance. When
the case is put divested of all false colouring, the one could
if he would, the other would if he could. It is said of God
that he cannot lie, but whence arises this impossibility ?
surely not from external restraint, but from the perfection of
his essential holiness. Satan cannot but hate his Maker,
not because of outward force put upon him, but through
the malignity of his disposition. If there be no real
difference between the want of natural faculties and that of
moral dispositions, there can be no culpability; but what is
it that God requires from man ? not to love him as an angel
does, but with all his human heart, with all the strength
that he has; and why does he not do this, which he must
allow to be a reasonable service ? merely because he does
not like it. Man is not reduced to the state of the brute
who has no power, but of the evil spirits who have no
inclination to obey. And where our fellow-creatures only
are concerned, all think alike ; for no one would allow that a
thief should be acquitted who said, I am so prone to steal
that I cannot help it ; and all grant that a failure from a
sudden strong temptation is more venial than when the
effect of a rooted disposition. Sinners cannot stoop so
low and leave so much as the Gospel requires; they cannot
be willing to renounce the world, the flesh, and the devil,
and follow Christ, and without this willingness, they cannot
be his disciples. This is the real and the only hindrance.
Were they once willing, they would ask, and God would
give them all the rest. Such as become willing are drawn
by rational inducements, and this drawing is affected not
by the communication of new f acuities, h\xt of new dispositions,
and of discoveries which give a new direction to the judg-
ment, desires, and affections. They are taught by God, and
learn from the Father who takes the veil from their hearts,
and causes his light to shine upon them, and within them,

LECTURE X.

267

convincing them of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment,
and laying open to their view the eternal world in all
its tremendous importance ; till alarmed at their danger,
they take warning to Jiee from the wrath to come. Their
terror is accompanied by humiliation and penitence : and
despairing of atoning for the past, or justifying themselves
before a holy God, they are made cordially willing to
accept of a free salvation. They discover likewise the
necessity of personal holiness, and that none can be meet for
the presence of a holy God, without conformity to his
holiness. At the same time they learn their natural inability
to obtain it; and therefore prize sanctification by the Spirit
no less than redemption by the blood of Christ, and in pro-
portion as these views prevail, sin grows odious to them,
and the attraction of worldly objects diminishes." And to
show that this is no modern refinement, I quote from
Bishop Beveridge on this Article. " The fall did not
destroy the will, but corrupted it; it is still free, but not to
God, only to the world and sin. It is a willing necessity;
man willingly loves sin, not from any external but an
internal necessity, not forced by others, but allured by
himself, his own will being so taken by sin that he cannot
but take delight in it; he cannot turn to God, and why not
but because he will not, and therefore if he cannot will it,
he cannot do it. By rectifying the will, its liberty is not
destroyed but healed, so that it is free after as well as
before conversion." The subject was discussed early in the
Reformation, 1524, by Erasmus and Luther, and the latter
styles his tract, "De servo Arbitrio;" and the following sen-
tences show his opinion to be the same as that I have now
stated. " I wish we had a better word than necessity, for
it conveys an idea of restraint, which is totally contrary to
the act of choosing. So long as the operative grace of God
is absent from us, every thing we do has in it a mixture of
evil, and therefore of necessity our works avail not to sal-
vation. I mean, not a necessity of compulsion, but a
necessity as to the certainty of the event. A man who has
not the Spirit of God does evil willingly, but not against
his will ; and though he may be externally restrained from

268

LECTURE X.

doing evil, he is averse to the restraint, and his inclination
remains the same. Again, when the Holy Spirit is pleased
to change the will of a bad man, the new man still acts
voluntarily, he is not compelled by the Spirit to determine
contrary to his will, but his will itself is changed." This is
well expressed in the Helvetic Confession of faith. Non
sublatus est quidem homini intellectus, non erepta ei
voluntas, et prorsus in lapidem vel truncum est commu-
tatus — intellectus obscuratus est, voluntas vero ex libera facta
est voluntas serva, nam servit peccato, non nolens sed volens,
etenim voluntas non noluntas dicitur. Ergo quoad malum
sive peccatum homo non coactus vel a Deo vel a Diabolo
sed sua sponte malum facit et hac parte liberrimi est
judicii. And I conclude with one extract to the same effect
from the great doctor of grace, as he has been called,
Augustin0. Magnum aliquid Pelagiani se scire putant quum
dicunt non juberet Deus quod sciret non posse ab homini
fieri, sed ideo jubet aliqua quae non possumus, quia ab illo
petere debeamus. Ipsa est enim fides qua? orando impetrat
quod lex imperat. Certe est nos velle quum volumus, sed ille
facit ut velimus bonum, quum dicit faciam ut faciatis. Ipse
ut velimus operatur incipiens, qui volentibus cooperatur per-
ficiens. Qui dicet facite dicit etiam dabo vobis. Voluntas non
tollitur sed ex mala mutatur in bonam. Vult homo sed non
bene vult nisi fuit liberatus. It requires little experience
to know, that the law which clearly defines duty, gives no
ability to perform it; that is the peculiar gift and glory of
the gospel ; obedience is not the result of a command
authoritatively enforced on our incapable nature, but the
result of the operation of God's Spirit by changing our
inclination. To this, and not to conviction of its reason-
ableness, does the Apostle ascribe holiness ; and the rubric
in the Communion Service, which precedes the reading of
the Commandments, intimates that it is by grace alone that
we can keep them. Now the law knows nothing of grace,
accordingly we acknowledge our natural incapacity, when
at the end of each we say, " Lord, have mercy upon us," that is,
in pardoning our violation of it ; and we seek refuge in the
■ De gratia et Libert Arbitrio, torn. vii. c. xvi.

LECTURE X.

269

gospel when we say, "incline our hearts to keep" it; and we
conclude with pleading the new covenant, as the only source
of obedience, " Write all these thy laws in our hearts, we
beseech Thee." Remember, O Lord, thy promise in thy
new covenant of mercy, and give us, what by nature we
cannot have, a hearty desire to do thy will and to obey thy
commandments.

We have not yet had the opportunity of considering the
important and comprehensive doctrine of Grace, which like
other dogmas lay comparatively unnoticed in Scripture, as the
ore in the mine, till controversy caused enquiry, and it was as it
were gradually transmuted into the shining and useful metal.
It is recognised by none of the early Councils, and does not
occur in the Creeds, and there is no definition of it in our
formularies. In a popular sense, derived from the Augus-
tinian and the Scholastic, it may be defined as a specific
influence, passing as it were a ray from the sun, from the
Holy Spirit to the human soul, as a gift sup ernatur ally
infused, and may be considered as conveyed through preach-
ing, the Sacraments, and other channels, or as coming
immediately from Him who is the author of every good and
perfect gift, the source of spiritual as well as of temporal
life, dividing His gifts severally as He will. Theological
terms ought always to be traced up to the primary
sense, which will more or less modify the secondary ;
and is the most effectual method of confuting and guard-
ing against erroneous received conclusions. Gratia, you
are aware, is the translation of meaning first a

favour bestowed, and next the thankfulness it produces in
the receiver1?. It occurs more than a hundred times in the
New Testament, and is sometimes rendered favour and
sometimes grace, and it will be useful to bear in mind, that
the first is the original meaning. Thus our version properly

P Gratia, and grace in French, are used in this sense, which is retained in
English in the phrase of saying Grace before and after meals. Dr. John
Taylor has made a collection of texts in which x^Pls occurs, and though he
finds ten senses for the word, he will not include among them this. Yet in
his paraphrase of Romans viii. 27, he allows that the Holy Spirit inspired
good dispositions. Another collection may be found, with translations, in
Wilson's Bampton Lecture, 1851.

270

LECTURE X.

renders, Jesus increased in favour with God and man?, as
well as having favour with the people*. But not such
passages as, Now to him that worketh1, reward is not reckoned
of grace but of debt ; therefore it is of faith that it might be
of grace, I prefer grow in graces, and my grace is sufficient
for thee1, to favour, yet at the same time we should bear in
mind the primary idea, favour. Thanks be to God for his
unspeakable gift, might have been better rendered favour.
That memorable address of the Angel to the Virgin, Hail,
Mary, highly favoured, which the Roman Catholics are con-
tinually addressing to her as a prayer, conveys a very
different idea when read in the Rheims Testament erroneously,
full of grace.

Divines have given distinguishing epithets to grace, ac-
cording to its manner and power of operation. As it begins
to act, it is called, according to the now obsolete Latin
idiom, preventing or going before, familiar to our ears from
the Collect, "Prevent us, O Lord, in all our doings, with thy
most gracious favour," so often used to introduce the sermon,
yet it is to be feared understood only by a few of the con-
gregation. It is well described in its acting by Milton, with
an equivalent epithet;

Prevenient grace descending had removed

The stony from their hearts, and made new flesh

Regenerate grow instead ; that sigh now hreathed

Unutterable ; which the spirit of prayer

Inspired, and winged for heaven, with speedier flight

Than loudest oratory.

The grace which afterwards works with us when we have
a good will, is called cooperating, and when it preserves us
from sin, restraining. Divines have also enquired into its
mode of acting, whether its effects be instantaneous or gradual,
and this has given rise to much theological discussion. If
however we are by nature dead in trespasses and sin, and
have no power to do good works, and we properly pray to
God to create a right spirit within us; our sanctification
must commence not on our part, but with the Holy Spirit,

p Luke ii. 52. i Acts iv. 47. r Rom. iv. 4. 16. ■ 2 Pet. iii. 18.
1 2 Cor. xii. 9.

LECTURE X.

271

and must be instantaneous, though it may in most cases be
unperceived by the recipient, like the good seed in the
parable, which grows up the sower knoweth not how. The
miraculous call which produced immediate obedience in Saul
the persecutor ; cannot be mistaken, nor was it more
gradually, though it was by a gentle influence, that the
Lord opened the heart of Lydia to the truths of the
Gospel. As "the infection of original sin doth remain
even in the baptized," too many of those " who profess
and call themselves Christians," often resist, even if they
do not quench the Spirit; while to prevent the pro-
fligate from despair, we have for their encouragement in
every age illustrious instances of brands plucked out of the
burning; as Augustin, Colonel Gardiner, and John Newton.
But all brands are not plucked out. A favour has been
conferred, grace has been imparted, and He who bestowed
the favour " willeth not the death of a sinner, but rather
that he may turn from his wickedness and live." Yet
these are impenitent sinners who have been baptized, and the
impenitent sinner will perish. Can we then frustrate the grace
of God? once given, can it be lost? or is it indefectible and
invincible ? In vain shall we attempt to remove the clouds
that hover round the throne of our Creator and Sovereign.
Creatures must not attempt to discover " the counsel" of
the Creator, " secret to us," or to read in his hidden decrees
their title to eternal blessedness. But theologians, in their
desire to vindicate the ways of God, have introduced a
distinction between the grace which is conferred upon
all, and that which is reserved for the elect. In the Church
of Rome, the Dominicans have been the advocates of effi-
cacious grace, which according to Pascal was preached by
Paul, and explained by Augustin, and transmitted to them
by Thomas Aquinas as a deposit to be ever maintained, and
which they had gloriously defended under the Popes,
Clement and Paul. Sufficient grace was maintained by
the Jesuits, whom the Jansenists their opponents condemn
as semi-Pelagian and Arminian. Sufficient grace would be
sufficient to answer its purpose, if men were willing to avail
themselves of it, but the weakness of man and his tendency

LECTURE X.

to sin prevents it; efficacious grace alone succeeds, and turns
the will in the right direction. The distinction prevails in
our divinity under the epithets of common and special. From
the former, the sixteenth Article teaches us we may fall and
arise again, the latter it should seem would preserve us unto
everlasting life. " My good child," says the Catechism, "know
that thou art not able to walk in the commandments of God
without his special grace, which thou must learn at all times
to call for by diligent prayer :" and in the Easter Collect,
" We humbly beseech Almighty God, that as by his special
grace preventing us, he does put into our minds good
desires, so by his continual help we may bring the same to
good effect3." The condition of man after the fall of Adam
is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own
natural strength. This shows that man is viewed in this as
in other Articles not as a Christian, but as under the weight
of original sin ; a fact too apt to be forgotten, which explains
and justifies the apparent harshness of the language both
here, and in some of the Homilies.

8 Hey, on this Article.

LECTURE XI.

ARTICLE XI.

OF THE JUSTIFICATION OF MAN.

We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of
our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for
our own works or deservings : wherefore, that we are
justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine, and
very full of comfort, as more largely is expressed in the
Homily of Justification.

No tenet of Christianity has been more warmly contested,
or so variously explained, as Justification; nor is this
surprising, since of all it most deeply concerns us, for on
the settlement *of this depends the answer to the most
momentous of all questions, What shall I do to be saved f
Can good works, if indeed man has any to offer, recommend
him for acceptance ; or will faith be taken instead, and
counted to him for righteousness ; or is salvation to be obtained
from an union of the two ? The latter is decided by the
Council of Trent, which says, " Si quis dixerit homines
justificari vel sola imputatione justitiae Christi, vel sola
peccatorum remissione, exclusa gratia, et caritate quae in
cordibus eorum per Spiritum Sanctum difTundatur atque in
illis inhaereat, aut etiam gratiam qua justificamur esse
tantum favorem Dei, anathema sit:" evidently confounding
sanctification with justification. This no doubt was par-
ticularly levelled against Luther, whose reformation may be
chiefly characterised by his reviving and proclaiming un-
reservedly in all its fulness, the great doctrine of Pro-
testantism and of Christianity, justification by faith only,

274

LECTURE XI.

the belief or neglect of which he considered with reason, as
the sign of a standing or falling Church.

The age of Augustine was engaged in the discussion of
original sin and grace, but human agency had been little con-
sidered. The settlement of this point was reserved for the
period of the Reformation. It is well known, that it was
the sale of indulgences that awakened the indignation of
Luther; but no real reformation could be accomplished
through the correcting the abuses of this traffic* The only
adequate remedy was the knowledge of the true scheme of
justification ; and if it could once be established, this and
all other human contrivances for procuring pardon would be
rejected as unavailing. The state of Christendom was
peculiarly adapted to its reception. Believers had become
entangled with a yoke of bondage, and through the prevailing
doctrinal corruptions, could not find access to the throne
of grace of their heavenly Father. The road of simple
faith, grounded on the divine promises, always connected
with humility, and productive of hearty and grateful obe-
dience, was stopped up with briars and thorns. No certain
rest could be afforded to the wearied mind ; and a state of
doubt and anxiety was even recommended by spiritual
advisers. What joyful intelligence then was the real
gospel, of remission of sins through Christ alone, to be
received by faith ! a doctrine which indeed pervades the
New Testament ; but that precious volume, which had not
yet been printed, was then almost unknown. In his
monastery, however, Luther had found a Latin Bible, which
he diligently examined, and discovered in it this consolatory
and sanctifying truth. For we must not respect him merely,
as he is described by the worldly historian, as the energetic
opponent of ecclesiastical abuses, and the vindicator of the
right of human judgment. Milner has shown, that with all
his infirmity of temper he was a humble Christian ; and that
his chief desire was to spread genuine vital Christianity.
He himself tells us, that his thirst to understand the Epistle
to the Romans was insatiable; and that as he was meditating
day and night upon the righteousness therein revealed, it
pleased God to open his eyes, and to show him that it

LECTURE XI.

275

related to the method of justifying a sinner by faith.
" Hence I felt myself a new man, and all the Scriptures
appeared to have a new face ; I ran quickly through them,
as my memory enabled me ; I collected together the leading
terms, and I observed in their meaning a strict analogy
according to my new views. The expression, Righteousness
of God, now became as sweet to my mind as it had been
hateful before ; and this very passage of St. Paul, against
which my heart had risen up in a silent sort of blasphemy,
proved to me the entrance into Paradise*." He settled the
true limits of the Law and the Gospel, and distinguished
between acceptance with God and personal holiness. The
former he shows is received as a free gift on Christ's
account alone by faith, in the heart of a humbled sinner,
and implies complete pardon and reconciliation with God ;
the latter, which he insists on as equally necessary for
eternal happiness, he describes as conjoined, but not com-
pounded, with the former, imperfect always in this life,
but when sincerely pursued, affording a pure delight. Neither
the superstitions of the Papists, the splendid alms of the osten-
tatious, nor the most powerful efforts of unassisted nature,
avail in the smallest degree to the purchase of pardon and
peace ; and he who in real humility rests in Christ alone, is
the true Christian. This precious doctrine here stated has
no doubt been frequently abused ; and St. Paul's Epistles
abound with suitable cautions. The sixth chapter of that
to the Romans is decisive on the point ; and this very fact,
that the true notion of justification is apparently liable to a
charge of Antinomianism, unquestionably demonstrates
that Luther and the other Reformers did not misunderstand
the Apostle, because, on the supposition that he meant to
ascribe justification to human works in any sense, the
plausibility of the objection loses all foundation.

How came it that our ecclesiastical historians entirely
omit or slightly mention the extraordinary labour Luther
bestowed upon the Epistle to the Galatians ? Must not
the answer be, that they do not view the corruptions
of the Roman Church with the same eyes ? They are
a Tom. i. Preface.
T 2

276

LECTURE XI.

abundant in their praises of him for his exertions against papal
tyranny and superstition, but scarcely a sentence escapes them
in commendation of his peculiar Christian tenets. Hence many
have "been taught to admire the Reformation, while they
remain ignorant of its fundamental principles. Luther him-
self sa}Ts in this exposition, "As I have often forewarned you,
our greatest and most pressing danger is, lest the Devil should
contrive to take away from us the pure doctrine of faith,
and bring back into the Church the exploded notions of
works and human traditions. This Christian article can
never be handled and inculcated too much; if this doctrine
perish, the knowledge of every truth in religion will perish
with it. On the contrary, if this do but nourish, all good
things will also flourish15." Unhappily the doctrine has been
nearly lost among the continental Protestants ; and within
half a century was rarely brought forward in our own
country from the pulpit or the press. It is once more
generally acknowledged among us, and the beneficial effects
of it are apparent both in a deeper piety, and its best
evidence, a greater activity of Christian love. Nevertheless,
several of our divines do not seem to be fully aware of its
paramount importance ; and too many have recourse to
Papal modes of mixing up faith and works as the conditions
of our justification.

I now proceed to the Article, which, notwithstanding
all that has been preached and written about it, states a
simple proposition, easy to be proved from Scripture, and
which fairly stated recommends itself to our judgment.
Indeed, if we were to keep constantly to the definition of
justification, I conceive there could be no dispute ; for
justification is not our becoming righteous, but, as the
Article says, our being accounted righteous ; and this is the
only righteousness that a sinner can possess. The ninth
Article showed that man was born with a corrupt nature,
and the tenth, that he had no power to free himself from
this corruption. If he then is to be accepted, it cannot be
for his merits, for the preceding Articles show that he
cannot lay claim to any; and if he could, then he would not

LECTURE XI.

277

only be accounted, but be, at least in a degree, righteous.
But the Article observes, we are accounted righteous " only
for," propter, on account of, " the merits of our Lord and
Saviour, and not for our own works or deservings." And
here we may observe, whatever we lost in the first Adam,
we recovered in the second. Are we accounted sinners by
the imputation of Adam's sin, it is for the sake of Christ's
righteousness that we are accounted righteous. The Apostle
says, to him that workcth not, but bclieveth on him that
justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
But as long as a man is ungodly, he cannot be said to
be justified by any, but an outward righteousness, so
that justification is properly opposed, to accusation. Who
shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect ? It is God
that justifieth, who is he that condemneth? it is Christ that
died, but not because they are themselves righteous, but
because Christ was made sin for us, that we might be made
the righteousness of God in him0. He was accounted a
sinner, and therefore punished for us ; we are accounted
righteous, and therefore glorified in him: our sins were
laid upon him, and therefore he died for us in time ; his
righteousness is laid upon us, and therefore we shall live
with him for ever. Thus was the innocent punished as if
guilty, that the guilty might be rewarded as if they were
innocent. And this is the right notion of Justification as
distinguished from Sanctification; the first is the imputation
of righteousness to us, the second is the implantation of it
in us ; the one is the act of God towards us, the other is
the act of God in us ; but though distinct they are never
separate, for the first will invariably produce the second.

The merits of Christ, however, can be of no more avail to
the sinner, than food is to the hungry man who cannot get
it, or medicine to the diseased who refuses it. To be bene-
ficial it must be made ours, and this can only be by our
believing its efficacy. Faith therefore is the means by
which it is appropriated ; we are not saved by faith, but by
grace through faith, and this is accurately expressed in the
Article, on account of Christ's merits as the cause, by faith
c 2 Cor. v. 21.

278

LECTURE XI.

as the instrument, " the only hand, as Hooker writes, which
putteth on Christ to justification, and Christ is the only
garment which being so put on, cover eth the shame of our
defiled natures, and hideth the imperfection of our works,
before whom otherwise the weakness of our faith was cause
sufficient to make us culpable ; yea to shut us out from the
kingdom of heaven, where nothing that is not absolute can
enter." In renouncing the merit of our works, we must
beware of making a merit of our faith, and turning that
into a good work, and against this the Homily on Salvation,
Part Y, warns us. " The true understanding of this doctrine,
we be justified freely by faith without works, or that we be
justified by faith in Christ only, is not that this our faith
doth justify us, and deserve our justification unto us, (for
that were to count ourselves to be justified by some act
within ourselves ;) but the true meaning is, that we must
renounce the merits of all our virtues and faith, as too weak
and insufficient to deserve remission of sins. As great and
as godly a virtue as lively faith is, yet it putteth us from
itself, and appointeth us unto Christ, as to have only by him
justification, so that our faith in Christ, as it were, saveth ;
it is not I that take away your sins, but it is Christ only, and
to him only I send you for that purpose. Seeing then that
his merits are made over to us by our faith in him, we are
said to be justified by faith, not as it is an act in us, but
as it applies Christ to us. No doctrine is more clearly
revealed : and the conclusion of the Epistle to the Romans,
the only systematic view we have from inspired authority
of Christianity, is deduced from the guilt and corruption of
both Jew and Gentile, of those who had the written law as
well as of those who had only the light of nature, that man
is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. And no ex-
ception is made even for Abraham, the father and pattern of
believers. His acts of obedience were most pleasing to God,
and will be had in everlasting remembrance, but they were not
the cause or condition of his justification. They indeed afford
the noblest testimony that his faith was genuine;' and in that
sense he was justified, or declared righteous by his works;
but they were far from being placed to his account in the

LECTURE XI.

279

article of divine acceptance ; for if Abraham were justified
by his own works, he hath whereof to glory. But
what saith the Scripture ? Abraham believed the promise
of God, concerning the Messiah, and it was counted to him
for righteousness. Nor had he any exclusive privilege, for
it is added, now it was not written in the ancient Scriptures
for his sake alone, for they which be of faith are blessed with
faithful Abraham. Certainly, if a person of such victorious
faith, exalted piety, and amazing obedience, did not obtain
acceptance with God on account of his holiness or duty, who
shall pretend to an interest in the heavenly blessing, in virtue
of his sincere endeavours or pious performances, performances
not fit to be named in comparison with those that adorned
the conduct and character of him whom Jehovah emphatically
calls his friend? The Apostle having shown in what way the
Father of the chosen people was justified, in illustration of his
doctrine, presents the reader with David's description of the
man who is truly blessed, not because he is free from sin,
but because the Lord will not impute it to him. Justification
then is by a righteousness without us, sanctification by holiness
wrought in us ; that precedes as a cause, this follows as an
effect ; j ustification is by Christ as a priest, and has regard
to the guilt of sin ; sanctification is by him as a king, and
refers to its dominion; the former deprives it of its con-
demning power, the latter of its reigning ; justification is
instantaneous and complete in all its subjects, sanctification
is progressive. The persons on whom the blessing of sancti-
fication is bestowed are the justified, who are in a state of
acceptance. Sanctification is a blessing of the new covenant,
and in that gracious constitution is promised as a choice
privilege, not required as an entitling condition. The
same doctrine is announced to the Galatians; Knowing /hat
a man is not justified by the works of the Law, but by the
faith of Jesus Christ \ For by grace are ye saved through
faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not of
works, lest any man should boast*. And I count all things but
loss, that I may win Christ, and be found in him, not having
my oivn righteousness which is of the laiv, but that which is
A Gal. ii. JO. « Eph. ii. 8. and Phil. iii. 8.

280

LECTURE XX.

through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God
by faith.

And indeed, if the Scriptures were less explicit, reason
should convince us, that nothing but perfect undeviating
obedience could justify us, which none can be so pre-
sumptuous as to claim. Even if we could make this claim
honestly, we still should have done no more than it was our
duty to do. And how can God be indebted to us by our
payment of what we owe him ? There can be but two sorts
of justification, our own inherent righteousness, or Christ's
imputed. The notion therefore still so common, though
perhaps but half avowed, that when we have done our best,
He will make up our deficiencies, when thoroughly ex-
amined will be found to have no scriptural foundation, and
can only be entertained by those who confound justification
and sanctification. To complete our proof, the thirteenth
Article declares, that works done before the grace of Christ
are not pleasing to God, and have even the nature of sin.
If this be true, it is impossible that we should be justified
by works ; since whatever precedes justification, instead of
recommending us as worthy of it, requires to be forgiven.

This doctrine is said to be full of comfort, and this will
be readily conceded : for if we were to look to our own merits
for acceptance, knowing our frailty and the strength of
temptation, we might well despair of holding out to the
end of our career ; and the negligences and infirmities
into which all have fallen, happy indeed if they have
escaped altogether from grosser sins, might well excite
doubts and misgivings ; but it is also called wholesome,
saluberrima, or salutary ; and this meets the grand practical
objection ; for it has been abused in every age, as if it gave
us licence to sin, and that because we were delivered from •
condemnation, we might live as we pleased, and many are
afraid of stating it fully, for fear of this consequence. This
arises from a misunderstanding of the word faith, which we
know from the Epistle of James was understood by some to
be no more than a mere historical belief. This opinion he
confutes at once by the simple statement, that the demons
also believe, yet notwithstanding tremble. In theological

LECTURE XI.

281

knowledge, who can compare with the evil spirits, for
doubtless they excel the most gifted of the sons of Adam in
capacity, and they may be said not only to believe but to
know. It follows then, that to constitute saving faith, the
affections must unite with the intellect. Christianity must
not only satisfy the judgment that it is true, but it must
recommend itself to the heart as desirable. It must be
worked into us by love, as well as work by love, for either
translations of evsgyoupevvi, whichever be deemed the correct
one, conveys an important truth. We must receive the truth
in the love of it.

It is to be lamented, that the definition of Faith in several
popular religious works is of an Antinomian tendency. It
has been advocated by men of eminence and of holiness; but
appears to me to be calculated to encourage the presumptuous
in sin, and to plunge the humble into despair. It makes the
essence of faith to consist in assurance, in other words, that
it is the duty of all to believe that Christ is their Saviour,
and it follows that those who have not this belief are
destitute of saving faith. Such persons seem to confound
the result of faith with faith itself, though the distinction
is retained in Scripture f. Bishop Bull and Barrow both argue
against this doctrine ; and the latter has a Sermon on justifying
faith, in which he says, that this definition inverts and con-
founds the order of things; for faith is in Scripture set before
obtaining God's good will, (as a prerequisite condition
thereto,) but this assumes God to be our friend by our
knowing that he is ; and supposes the assurance of coming
to our journey's end to be the way of getting there!
The doctrine is also abjured and confuted by some of our
Calvinistic divines, who distinguish between a faith of
adherence, and a faith of assurance. Thus, faith, says
Archbishop Usher, is that act of God by which he opens
the understanding to assent to the truth of the Gospel
scheme of salvation, and inclines the heart to see its ex-
cellence, and embrace it. But it is not necessary, he adds,

f Thus in Eph. iii. 12. we are said to have access eV ■neiroiO'haei 5ik rrjs
Trfo-Ttws, in confidence through faith, cum fiducia per tidem.

282 LECTURE XI.

to my justification to be assured that my sins are pardoned.
No, that is not an act of faith as it justifieth, but an effect
and fruit that followeth after ; for no man is pardoned by
believing that he is pardoned, for he must be pardoned
before he can believe it. It is the direct act of faith that
justifieth, and it is the reflect act that causes assurance.
Whoever relieth upon Christ for justification, by so doing,
is justified according to the Word of God, But many
times both propositions may be granted to be true, and
yet a weak Christian may want strength to draw the
conclusion ; for it is one thing to believe, and another
to believe that I believe. Faith is but the espying of
Christ as the only means to save, and the reaching out of
the heart to lay hold of him. As soon as the soul can
do this, God imputeth to it the righteousness of his Son,
and it is actually justified in the court of heaven, though it
is not immediately quieted in the court of conscience.
That is done afterwards, in some sooner, in some later,
by the effects and fruits of justification. In conformity
with this distinction, Andrew Fuller, I conceive, argues
correctly ; showing that a man' can never be required to
believe as a fact what he cannot know to be such, and which
may be even untrue. Scott takes the same view when he
says, that nothing can be an object of faith except what
God has revealed in his word; but the interest of any
individual in the blessings of the Gospel is not revealed.
Salvation is mentioned with respect not to persons but
to characters. God abundantly promises, that all who
believe in, love, and obey him, shall be saved ; and a
persuasion that if we sustain these characters, we shall
be saved, is doubtless an exercise of faith; but whether
we do or not is an object not of faith, but of con-
sciousness. Whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the
love of God perfected ; hereby know we that we are in him.
To believe ourselves in a state of salvation, (however desir-
able when grounded on evidence,) is far inferior in its object
to saving faith. The grand object on which faith fixes is
the glory of Christ, and not our happy condition as interested
in him. It is the peculiar property of true faith to endear

LECTURE XI.

283

Christ. Unto you that believe he is precious ; and when this
is the case, if there be no impediment from constitutional
dejection or other accidental causes, we shall seldom be in
doubt respecting our interest in him. Being justified by faith,
we have peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ. The
faith which our Lord highly commends, as that of the cen-
turion and of the woman of Canaan, is represented as termi-
nating upon his all-sufficiency to heal them, and not as
consisting in a persuasion that they should succeed, because
specially objects of his favour. And indeed the Scrip-
tures always represent faith as terminating in something
without us. It is the truth and excellence of the scheme
which the sinner is apt to disbelieve, and it is on this that
faith primarily fixes. His personal interest in it ought
to be called hope. And this is a remark which I wish to
impress upon your attention, for it is strange how commonly
Faith and Hope are confounded, though the Apostle, con-
trasting them with the spiritual gifts of his own age, declares,
that these, with the third Christian grace Love, will abide in
the Church, after the former have been withdrawn. Faith
I regard as a firm conviction of the truth of Christianity;
but it is Hope which satisfies me that I have an interest in
it ; and that hope is described by the Apostle to the
Hebrews as an anchor to the soul, sure and stedfast. It is
the effect and the completion of faith, by which we have
access to Christianity, or, as the Apostle calls it, this grace,
[favour] wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of
God; a hope which maketh not ashamed. I cannot but
think, that if this distinction had been carefully observed,
erroneous definitions of faith would, if suggested, have been
corrected," and many a weak and scrupulous believer would
have been spared much harassing perplexity. We find in
the Epistle to the Hebrews both the assurance of faith, and
the assurance of hope, which the books to the teaching of
which I object confound, but which the inspired writer uses
as conveying different ideas. " He who so understands the
Gospel, as to perceive the relation of each part to all the
rest, and its use as a part of one grand design, has the

284

LECTURE XI.

full assurance of understanding^. The man who is fully
convinced that this consistent and harmonious, though com-
plicated, scheme is the work of God, and has no douht that
Christ will certainly save all true believers, has the full
assurance offaithh; though he may through misapprehension
or other causes doubt of his own personal interest in this
salvation. But he who beyond doubt is assured that he
himself is a true believer and a partaker of the glory that
shall be revealed, has the full assurance of hope. The first
is the duty of every Christian, but the second must be
attained and preserved by diligence. In its highest meaning
it is attained by comparatively few, and is seldom, if ever,
preserved without some degree of diminution or variation
through the remainder of life1."

Our own Church does not encourage any false definition
of Faith, for it is described in the Homily as a trust in
God that our offences are obliterated by the blood of
Christ ; [not, when we believe them to be obliterated,
but] whensoever repenting we truly return to him with
our whole heart, stedfastly determining with ourselves
through his grace to obey and serve him, in keeping his
commandments. It sends us not to fancies and feelings
which are variable, but to what can be ascertained, to
actions, the only evidence which Scripture allows of a state
of grace. The primary meaning of Faith is belief, the
secondary reliance, and both occur in Scripture, and in
reality coincide. We are told that faith and repentance are
the conditions of acceptance, but the latter is included
within the former ; and even those who talk of obedience or
good works as a condition, err more in language than mean-
ing, for faith also includes them. For if I really believe in
Christ as a Saviour, I by that very act confess that I believe
that I need a Saviour, that is, I am morally diseased, and cannot
cure myself. I must also follow the advice of this Physician
of the soul, and if 1 believe he died to procure the salvation
of mine from the double penalty of sin, its guilt and power,
I cannot but loathe the offences which put him to shame
I Col. ii. 2. h Heb. x. 22. I Scott on Heb. vii. 11.

LECTURE XI.

285

and misery, and caused him to humble himself unto death.
Both this repentance and gratitude for his unmerited phi-
lanthropy I can only prove by an endeavour to perform my
duty. If he died for me, I judge with the Apostle that
/ must live to him; and reason no less than Scripture tells
me, that if sin was the cause of his death, his redeemed
people should abhor it, be zealous of good works, and,
denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, live soberly, righ-
teously, and godly; that is, fulfil their duty in its triple
division as referred to God, our neighbour, and ourselves ;
since they long to be hereafter with him, and never can
unless they endeavour to purify themselves even as he is
pure. The purifying nature of genuine faith cannot be
overlooked by any reader of the New Testament ; and
indeed the inspired writers are so anxious to guard against
any Antinomian abuse of the doctrine, that they rarely
mention free salvation without pointing out its indissoluble
connection with holiness. Faith worketh by love, says
St. Paul ; and whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ,
according to St. John, is born of God; and this, he continues,
is the love of God, that we keep his commandments.

At the Reformation, it is no wonder that this doctrine,
which had been long forgotten, should be occasionally
abused ; and that the Romanists, some maliciously and more
ignorantly, should urge the common objection against it,
which we must allow to be plausible. Luther, howTever,
takes care to disclaim the imputation continually in his
Commentary on the Galatians. " A true and lively faith
is opposite to the feigned faith of the hypocrite; and
incites a man to good w^orks through love. He that
would be a Christian must be a believer, but no man is a
sound believer if works of charity do not follow his faith.
Thus on both hands the Apostle shuts hypocrites out of the
kingdom of God. On the left he shuts out all who depend
upon their works for salvation ; when he says, neither circum-
cision nor uncircumcision, that is, no kind of work, but faith
alone avails before God. On the right he excludes all
slothful idle' persons, who are disposed to say if faith
justifies us without works, than let us have no anxiety

286

LECTURE XI.

respecting them, let us only take care and believe, and we
may do whatever we please. Not so, ye enemies of godli-
ness. It is true that Paul tells you faith alone without
works justifies; however, he also tells you, that a true faith
after it hath justified, does not permit a man to slumber in
indolence, but that it worketh by love. To teach justifica-
tion by faith without works, and at the same time to insist
on the necessity of good works, it must be owned is a
matter of considerable difficulty and danger. If works
alone are taught, as in the Pope's kingdom, faith is lost ;
again, if nothing but faith be inculcated, carnal men soon
begin to dream that there is no need of good works. How
careful is Paul to avoid being misunderstood. The faith of
true believers, says Hooker, cannot be divorced from hope
and love afterwards ; it is a childish cavil, wherewith in the
matter of justification our adversaries do so greatly please
themselves, exclaiming that we tread all Christian virtues
under our feet, and require nothing but faith, because we
teach that faith alone justifieth, whereas by this speech
we never meant to exclude either hope or charity from
being always joined as inseparable mates with faith in the
man that is justified, or works from being added as
necessary duties required at the hands of every justified
man. Then what is the fault of the Church of Rome ?
Not that she requireth works at their hands which will be
saved, but that she attributeth unto them a power of
satisfying God for sin, yea a virtue to merit both grace
here, and in heaven glory; and that this overthroweth the
foundation of faith, I grant willingly."

I conclude with a reference to the Homily which
we formally approve, and which has the more weight,
because the Article sends us to it for a further explanation.
It calls it the Homily of Justification, but there is none
with that title, and that on Salvation seems to be the one
intended. Nothing can be more clear than the doctrine as
there stated, and none who reads it can mistake the nature
of the faith that is said to justify, for it declares that we are
esteemed righteous in God's sight solely for the sake of
Christ ; and not rendered perfectly so, in point of fact, as the

LECTURE XI.

Papists held; by our own virtues, which we are told are far
too weak, insufficient, and imperfect to deserve the remission
of our sins; and that we are thus reputed righteous, not on
account of the act but of the object of faith, on account of
him in whom alone we are to trust, except upon a previous
condition, that is, that we truly repent and turn to God
unfeignedly ; for when, as the same Homily remarks, we are
said to be justified by faith only, it is not meant that this
justifying faith is in man alone, but the purport of such
expressions is to take away all merit of our works, as
being unable to deserve justification at God's hands.
The right and true Christian faith is not only to believe
that holy Scripture and all the Articles of our faith
are true, but also to have a sure trust and confidence
in God's merciful promises to be saved from everlasting
damnation by Christ, whereof doth follow a loving heart to
keep his commandments : but we are not left to infer this :
obedience is positively enjoined. If ye love me, said our
Lord, keep my commandments ; and he warns them that at
the last day he will reject all the workers of iniquity, though
they have acknowledged him as their master. And as he
has commanded us to fulfil every moral duty, it is as much
a part of faith to believe that we ought to do what he com-
mands, as to believe what he promises. " This faith the holy
Scripture teacheth, this is the strong rock and foundation of
Christian religion; this doctrine all ancient doctors of Christ's
Church do approve ; this doctrine advanceth and setteth forth
the true glory of Christ, and beateth down the vain-glory of
man; this whosoever denieth is not to be accounted for a
Christian man."

LECTURE XII.

ARTICLE XII.

OF GOOD WORKS.

Albeit that good works, which are the fruits of faith, and
follow after justification, cannot put away [expiate] our
sins, and endure the severity of God's judgment ; yet are
they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ, and do
spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith ; insomuch
that by them a lively faith may be as evidently known as
a tree discerned by the fruit.

The same language also pervades the Homily upon Faith ;
and certainly no candid reader of our formularies can fail
to see the distinction always carefully observed between a
true and lively, and a dead devilish and feigned faith,
which bringeth forth either evil works or none that are
good. Still from anxiety not to be misunderstood, it
was thought expedient, at Archbishop Parker's revision
of the Articles, to add this, which beginning with ' Albeit,'
seems to be intended as a continuation of the preceding,
and a caution against the possible abuse of it. That Article
excluded works from any share in our justification, lest
any should therefore despise them as useless ; another
is added, declaring that though they cannot expiate
sin, nor from their imperfection endure the severity of
God's judgment, yet they are pleasing to Him, and are also
the necessary effects of faith. The Council of Trent has
decreed, that men by their good works have fully satisfied

LECTURE XII.

289

the divine law, and that these good works are of their own
nature meritorious of eternal life. It is true that this high
tone is lowered by the intimation, that none ought to glory
in himself, but in the Lord, whose goodness makes his own
gifts to them to be meritorious. And to this they are led by
the notion, that nothing can please God in which there is a
mixture of sin ; whereas we believe that though our nature
even when regenerate retains' so much alloy, that our best
deeds could not bear his scrutiny, He notwithstanding
graciously passes over the defects of those who serve him
sincerely. Our Saviour, as Augustine often urges, in
teaching us to pray, has made forgive us our trespasses a
standing petition, as well as give us our daily bread; for we
sin daily, and so always need a pardon ; and from this and
from the confessions of the holiest Christians, humbling
themselves for the imperfection of their obedience, we
conclude that our good works need Christ's intercession,
and are therefore only acceptable to God in Him. But
if it be granted that they are defective, they can have
no pretension to merit; and Bishop Burnet well observes,
that merit has a sound so daring and so little suitable
to the humility of a creature, (I may add, much more of
a sinner,) to be used towards a Being of infinite majesty,
and with relation to endless rewards ; that though a
sense is given to it by many of the Church of Rome,
to which no just exception can be made, yet there seems
to be something too bold in it, especially when condignity
or worthiness is added. That they are pleasing to God
cannot be doubted, for it was to serve him that man was
first created ; and when renewed, we are told that he is
God's workmanship i created in Christ Jesus to good works.
It is his will that they should be done, and therefore
they cannot but please him when they are done. That
which is of his commanding, cannot but be of his accepting ;
and moreover as whatever is good in them is derived from
his grace, they may be considered as in some respect his.
Good works, or virtue, is the grand object of Christianity,
for we are called unto holiness, our sanctification is the will
of God, and God sent Christ to bless us by turning us from our

290

LECTURE XII.

iniquities. Good works from Christian motives is the great
subject of the preaching of our Lord, and of his Apostles.
To enumerate all the texts that prove it would be to tran-
scribe a large portion of the New Testament. The following
specimen must suffice. / exhort, that supplications be made
for kings and all in authority, that we may lead a quiet and
peaceable life in all godliness and honesty ; for this is good
and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour". We exhort
you, as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please
God, so ye would abound more and moreb. We are to present
our bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto Godc; we
are to perform moral duties, not as pleasing men, but God —
with doing good, God is well pleased11 ; and resignation under
unmerited suffering is declared to be acceptable to God.

Faith is denned as productive of good works ; and the
significant comparison to a tree which is originally our Lord's,
By their fruits ye shall know them ; every good tree bringeth
forth good fruit, but a corrupt tree evil fruit, shows that faith
and good works are inseparable, or rather the same thing
under a different aspect, according to the station from which
wre view it, whether we consider virtue in its actions, or as
the principle from which actions flow ; in the former it is
works, and in the Jatter faith ; and this appears to me to
be the only difference between the two Apostles as to justi-
fication, which I conceive it proved by the referring of both
to the same persons as examples of faith and good wrorks,
and each citing the declaration of Scripture6. Abraham
believed in the Lord, (that is, believed he should have a son,
and through him a numerous posterity,) and it was counted
to him for righteousness. God wTho sees the heart knew the
reality of the Patriarch's faith, but its reality was proved
to himself and to others, by his offering his son many years
after, as it had been before when by faith he obeyed the
call to leave his country and his father's house, and went
out, not knowing wrhither he went, and sojourned in the
land of promise as in a strange country, looking for a city
which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

a 1 Tim. ii. b 1 Thess. iv. 1. c Rom. xii. 1. 1 Thess. ii. 4.

d Bet) xiii. 10. • Gen. xv.

LECTURE XII. 291

ARTICLE XIII.

OF WORKS BEFORE JUSTIFICATION.

Works done before the grace of Christ, and the inspiration of
his Spirit, are not pleasant to God, forasmuch as they
spring not of faith in Jesus Christ, neither do they make
men meet to receive grace, or (as the School-authors say)
deserve grace of congruity ; yea rather, for that they are
not done as God hath willed and commanded them to be
done, we doubt not but they have the nature of sin.

The title of works done before justification, that is, before
a person has entered into the Christian covenant, shows
that this Article is contrasted with the preceding, which
explained the nature of works that follow after justification,
that is, the works of Christians. The works now under
consideration, are the natural good works mentioned in the
tenth Article. The epithet * good1 seems to have been here
purposely omitted, in order to avoid the seeming contra-
diction which there would be in affirming that good works
have the nature of sin. If we connect this Article with the
preceding, we see the two sorts of good works, Christian
and Heathen, compared, both imperfect in themselves, the
former pleasing in Christ, the latter not pleasing, because
seen only in themselves ; neither do they make men meet or
fit to receive grace, or, as the School-authors say, deserve
grace of congruity; the meaning of both seems to be the same,
only the first is a popular, the second the Scholastic ex-
pression. The Latin instead of School-authors has multi. To
use Scholastic terms, a man may deserve either ex condigno,
or ex congruo ; that is, either of strict right, or according to
moral propriety. A servant deserves his wages of condignity ;
if his life has been spent in our service, and he has served us
faithfully; he deserves to be supported by us, when no longer
capable of service, of congruity : the first he can legally
claim ; the second he cannot, yet his master would be
blamed for withholding an equitable allowance.

v 2

292

LECTURE XII.

These Schoolmen universally allowed, that neither before
nor after the fall was man capable in himself of meriting
heaven. Still they maintained, that in paradise he could live free
from sin, but to deserve everlasting life required grace ; he was
enabled to preserve his innocence and live free from sin, but
to operate upon his will in its primary determinations, and also
in its ultimate acts. It was therefore to the loss of this
superadded gift, and not to any depravity of his mind, that
they ascribed the principal evil derivable from his fall; a loss,
which by a due exertion of his innate abilities, they deemed
to be retrievable. Hence sprung that offensive doctrine of
human sufficiency, which in Luther's estimation extin-
guished the glory of the Gospel ; and when applied to
the sinner's conscience, taught the haughty to presume,
and the humble to despair. According to this system, the
favour of God in this life, and his beatific presence in the
life to come, are both attainable, the former by congruous
personal merit, the latter by condign, the one without the
other with the assistance of grace. But though we cannot,
they say, merit heaven itself without works of condignity,
yet we can merit the means of obtaining it, by works of
congruity. Considering the latter as introductory to the
former, they stated that we may so prepare ourselves for
grace as to become entitled to it congruously, not as to a
debt which in strict justice God is bound to pay, but as to
a grant which it is congruous in him to give, and which it
would be inconsistent with his attributes to withhold. With
such an opinion of man's integrity, the Scholastics, as
Melancthon justly observed, conceived the influence of the
Holy Spirit to be superfluous.

In the sixth Session of the Council of Trent, the seventh
Canon anathematises those that say that all works done
before justification, however performed, are really sins.
Still these Canons seem fully to disclaim all merit in these
worksa; and they affirm that no man can be justified by
works of nature, or of the law of Moses, without divine
grace by Jesus Christ. The doctrine against which our Article

a Nihil corurn qujc ju.stificatioiicm prtecedunt sivc fides sive opera ipsam
justifications gratiam prornerctur.

LECTURE XII.

293

is levelled, is thus expressed in a note to the Rheims Testa-
ments " Such works as are done before justification, though
they suffice not to salvation, yet be acceptable preparatives
to the grace of justification, and such works preparative come
of grace, also otherwise they could never deserve at God's
hands of congruity, or any otherwise towards justification.
From the ninth Article it appears, that men as men are in a
state of enmity to God, and that their propensities are such
as will carry them into actual sin ; from the eleventh and
twelfth, that Christians are released from that state of
enmity, and are no longer under condemnation collectively,
and have assistance given them for the performance of
good actions, which however imperfect, are accepted as
pleasing to the Supreme Being, on account of their relation
to the Saviour, who has obeyed and suffered and died for
them. If then men are under the divine displeasure, and
even Christian virtues are only accepted through Christ,
what must be the consequence with regard to heathen
virtues? Must they not appear to God at least as faulty and
deficient ? Actions may be good in themselves, but they
may proceed from unworthy motives, as almsgiving from
ostentation ; and if the motive be innocent, it may not be
praiseworthy, or if praiseworthy, not so excellent as to found
a claim for an eternal reward. And if this be the character
of natural good works, they cannot even deserve grace of
congruity, so that God should not do what is unfitting,
though he never reward any of the works of mere natural
men, and the reason is clearly asserted, because they have
the nature of sin. The only question therefore to be
determined is this. And it will appear that they have the
nature of sin, because they do not perfectly answer to the
will, or to the laws of God. If all men, as such, are
concluded under sin, all their actions must partake of it;
and what was said of the (pgovYifxu accgxog, the carnal mind not
being subject to the law of God must hold good. The
Pelagians denied the necessity of grace for acting well ; and
in arguing on the doctrine, used a plea which led to the
subject before us. Why should we Christians have this

b Acts x. 2.

294

LECTURE XII.

assistance, when some of the Heathens, who had no such
help, displayed such admirable specimens of virtue ? Au-
gustine replies : " Be it far from us to think that true virtue
should be in any one, unless he be a righteous man ; and let
it be as far from us to think that any one is truly righteous,
unless he live by faith, and who of these who would be
accounted Christians, unless it be the Pelagians only, will
say, that an unbeliever, a man enslaved to the devil, is
righteous. Yea, though he were Fabricius, though he were
Fabius, though he were Scipio, though he were Regulus,
with whose names thou thinkest to terrify me, as if we
were talking in the old Roman Court." He shows, that
though the action may be good, it may be performed from
inferior motives, not with a view to the glory of God ;
that though well meant, it might be strictly speaking faulty ;
nay, considering the nature of perfect Christian virtue, it
might be called sinful. What there was in it of good might
lessen future punishment, or even procure temporal rewards,
but could by no means have the effect of Christian virtue, or
merit, which even that virtue cannot do, eternal happiness.
The doctrine appears harsh; but the Article does not say of
such actions, as Luther and Calvin did, that these are
themselves sins, only that they have the nature of sin; and
the same has been said of Christian virtues, since even they
are confessedly imperfect, and are only accepted through
Christ. We by no means put them on the same footing as
sins properly so called ; and though we maintain, that they
cannot procure for the agent admission into heaven, or a
title to a knowledge of the Gospel ; yet for Christ's sake
salvation may be granted to those who never heard of him ;
and the argument of the Apostle to the Romans shows, that
the heathen will be judged by the law of nature, not by a
law that was never revealed to them. When the Gentiles
that have not the law, do by nature the things contained in
the law, these not hawing the law are a law unto themselves.
Doubtless, God will be a righteous Judge, and will require
no more from them than obedience to the law, the obli-
gations of which they knew. No work truly good can
precede grace, because without grace no such work can be

LECTURE XII.

295

performed. It is a sentiment often repeated by Augustine,
that good works follow after and do not precede justification,
and the distinction seems to be referred to in these two
Articles; for in the former we have, "Albeit, that good works
which follow after justification cannot put away our sins,
yet are they acceptable to God in Christ ;" and this is
entitled, "Of works before justification."

ARTICLE XIV.

OF 'WORKS OF SUPEREROGATION.

Voluntary tvorks besides, over and above, God's commandments,
which they call works of supererogation, cannot be taught
without arrogancy and impiety : for by them men do declare,
that they do not only render unto God as much as they are
bound to do, but that they do more for his sake, than of
bounden duty is required: whereas Christ saith plainly,
When ye have done all that are commanded to you, say, We
are unprofitable servants.

That man can do more than his duty, and even transfer
the benefit of such superfluous merits to the account of
others who have fallen short of the services required, is so
preposterous and arrogant a proposition, that one who hears
it for the first time, can hardly suppose that it has ever been
maintained by any reasonable person ; and yet it is not only
the opinion of a few individuals, but is the avowed tenet of
the Church from which we withdrew, and as such has been
defended by its advocates.

The proofs of the eleventh and twelfth Articles are proof
of this. If we are not justified by works, we cannot be
more than justified by them ; if our Christian virtues are so
imperfect as to be only accepted through Christ, we can
have no merit at our disposal. The following Article asserts,
that Christ alone is without sin, and that all Christians
offend in many things; but if all men are sinners, they want

296

LECTURE XII.

more than all their merit for themselves. Our Lord, in his
own form of prayer, has taught us to ask our Father in
heaven to forgive us our trespasses ; we are commanded to
love God with all our heart, to do all to the glory of God,
can we do more? We are bought with a price; have persons
who have been bought any services to give away? There is
no abiding place where we may stop, as though we were already
perfect, and say, I need make no further advance in virtue ;
we are to press forward, we are to run so as to obtain, to strive
to enter in at the strait gate. The parable of the prudent
and foolish virgins shows, as St. Hilary observed long ago,
that the Scripture is opposed to this doctrine. The former
answered, he says, that they could give none of their oil, lest
they might not have enough for themselves ; for no one can
be helped by another's merits, because it is necessary that
every one buy oil for his own lamp. But no other passage' is
needed, than that decisive one brought forward in the Article
itself ; When ye shall have done all these things which are
commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants, we have
done that which it was our duty to doh. Do I deny myself, take
up my cross, and follow Christ ? it is no more than he requires0.
I am ever faithful unto death? it is no more than I am com-
mandedd. There can be no good thing performed by me,
but what is commanded by God ; and if it be God's will to
command it, it is my duty to perform it. And hence in the
parable of the labourers in the vineyard ; he that came in
at the last hour had his penny as well as he who came in at
the first8; plainly showing, that they who had borne the
heat of the day — the heat of temptations, of afflictions, of
persecutions — had deserved or earned no more than the rest.
Nor is it possible that any one should do more good wrorks
than are commanded, when nothing is a good work but what
is commanded, and only good because commanded. These
voluntary wrorks, are they commanded or not ? if com-
manded, they are not supererogatory, and I should sin if I
do them not ; and if they be not commanded, it is my duty
not to perform them.

b Lukexvii. in. e Matt. xvi. 24. A Rev.ii. 10.

t Matt. xx. a.

LECTURE XII.

297

But even granting for argument's sake that there can
be such works, how are they to be made available to the
benefit of others ? This would be to annul the Gospel, and
to substitute, or at least to admit into partnership with the
Saviour's merits, those of his creatures. What He did He
did of merit, not of duty ; what all others do, they do of
duty, not of merit. The Apostle tells us, that ive must all
appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that every one may
receive the things done in his body, according to what he hath
done1. That every one shall bear his own burden? , and
receive his own reward according to his own labourh. So that
the father shall not there be punished for the son's iniquity,
nor the son rewarded for the father's piety. If so, what will
become of these works of supererogation ? It may not be
generally known, that the word is derived from the Latin
translation of the Bible. In the parable, the good Sama-
ritan says to the host on consigning the wounded traveller
to his care, whatsoever thou spendest over and above,
7rgo<rda7ravy)<rei$, supererogaveris, I will repay thee. Here are
two acts of beneficence, the one definite, the giving the two
denarii, the other indefinite, and, as the text expresses
it, supererogatory. The Fathers in pressing determinate
and indeterminate duties, had sometimes recourse to this
passage. Definite commands they compared to the
two pence, and duties left to discretion to the unlimited
order of the Samaritan. Hence the famous distinction
of Precepts and Counsels of perfection ; which words
are derived from another passage of the Vulgate, where
St. Paul says1, concerning virgins I have no command,
prceceptum, of the Lord, but I give my advice, consilium.
According to the Roman doctrine, an ordinary Christian
obeys all precepts ; it is only the preeminent one that
aspires to counsels, or evangelical perfection. He who
obeys precepts will have some reward, but he who obeys
counsels, a much higher one. He who disobeys precepts
will be punished, but not so he who neglects counsels. The
Romanist endeavours to support this doctiine by the autho-

f 2 Cor. v. 10. s Gal. vi. 5. h 1 Cor. iii. 8.

i 1 Cor. vii, 29.

298

LECTURE XII.

rity of Augustine, but he has nothing respecting the transfer
of merit ; which is impressively renounced in the following
citation. " Although brethren may die for brethren, yet the
blood of no martyr is poured out for the forgiveness of their
brethren's sins, as that of Christ was for us." According to
Mosheim, the doctrine did not prevail before the thirteenth
century. It is founded upon the notion, that the Saviour
had suffered more than he needed, and that his superfluous
merits were laid up in a treasury for the benefit of the
faithful. They proceeded to assert, that the saints had
done more than their duty. They might have enjoyed this
world innocently, therefore their self-denial was more than
innocence, it was merit, and this merit as well as that of their
Lord was the property of the Church, and who they argued,
ought to dispose of it for the benefit of the faithful, but its
earthly head the Pope. Now out of this fund the ordinary
Christian may purchase to satisfy for what he has done less
than was required of him, and so his deficiency is cured by the
excess of good works in the saints. The Council of Trent avoids
the term, though it calls indulgences the heavenly treasures
of the Church. The Rhemish Testament speaks out. uHoly
saints may, in measure of other men's necessities and de-
servings, as well allot unto them the supererogation of their
spiritual works, as those that abound in worldly goods may
give alms of their superfluities to them that are in necessity."
It was the abuse of this doctrine that originated the Reform-
ation. It maybe said that Scripture encourages the distinction
between counsels and precepts, and that this or that man may
in some cases do more than he is obliged to do. Still they
seem only to differ as duties determinate and indeterminate;
and the difference appears to be because circumstances are
so indefinite and variable, that a calculation of them must be
left to the agent; but this affects not the essence of duty, nor
the judgment of God. St. Paul's gratuitous preaching is
cited as an instance ; but he never intimates that God was on
that account his debtor. Had he accepted a stipend, no
man would have blamed him; yet if he had neglected
knowingly this mode of furthering the Gospel, he might
have had blame from God.

LECTURE XII.

299

These counsels of perfection are generally reduced to three;
voluntary poverty, perpetual chastity, and obedience; which
triple vow is voluntarily taken by all members of the monastic
orders. The first is founded chiefly upon our Lord's command
to the rich young man, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that
which thou hast ; the second upon some expressions in the
Epistles of St. Paul; the third with less plausibility upon
the mention made in the Epistles of the respect due to
spiritual governors. A sound criticism will easily dispel
any support which Scripture apparently gives to these
refinements: and the distinction is completely overturned by
showing, what easily admits of proof, that every man is bound
both to refrain from whatever is really sinful, and to embrace
all the opportunities of doing good which his situation
affords, because the service of his whole life, and the full
exertion of all his faculties, are due to his Creator. Every
counsel therefore of the divine word respecting moral duty
must be a command, and to him who knoweth to do good and
doeth it not is sin, A man ought also to be satisfied that the
counsels which he aspires to keep are really agreeable to
God ; or by neglecting the duties of his calling in search
after a perfection not only ideal but erroneous, he may be
found to have omitted what he ought to have done, while
by the substitution of what was not required, he may after
all his mortifications and exertions, entangle himself in
difficulties beyond his strength, and thus fall short in
Christian virtue of those beyond whom he aspired to
soar.

300

LECTURE XII.

ARTICLE XV.

OF CHRIST ALONE WITHOUT SIN.

Christ in the truth of our nature was made like unto us in
all things, sin only except, from which he was clearly void,
both in his flesh, and in his spirit. He came to be the
Lamb without spot, who, by sacrifice of himself once made,
should take away the sins of the world, and sin, as St. John
saith, was not in him. But all we the rest, although
baptized, and born again in Christ, yet offend in many
things ; and if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves,
and the truth is not in us.

The Church having explicitly acknowledged the corrup-
tion of human nature, now calls upon us to make a single
exception in favour of our Redeemer. Yet from anxiety
to maintain the tenet of original sin, the very foundation of
Christianity, and to show that His case is peculiar,
it is here repeated in the most unequivocal manner. The
sinfulness of human nature, as derived from our fallen
progenitor, is too clearly revealed to be denied by the candid
student of Scripture ; but it may be, and it has been said,
that Baptism has placed us in a new state ; and that the
strong declarations that all are under sin, and that there is
none that doeth good, designed for the natural man, must not
be applied to the regenerate; that we are not only justified
but sanctified in baptism, and that original sin is therein
obliterated as well as pardoned. The Anabaptists, who
sprung up in the time of Luther, maintained, that the visible
Church consists of saints, or persons perfectly free from
sin. The enthusiasm of its founder, Munzer, prevented
him from perceiving that such a Church could never exist
on earth ; and these high pretensions to purity were soon
painfully belied by the scandalous licentiousness into which
they degenerated, which predominated in the short-lived

LECTURE XII.

301

Commonwealth, which his followers established in Munster.
There are still some who contend in the Church of Rome,
and among the Wesleyan Methodists, that there is not in the
believer a moral necessity of failing in keeping the divine
commandments, and, that there are individuals who, sustained
by divine grace, have attained to Christian perfection. In
such this presumption has its foundation in the confidence
entertained of the immediate controlling influence of the
Holy Spirit ; for it is as Christians, not as men, that they
conceive that they enjoy this rare privilege. Pelagians and
Socinians do not admit that the powers of human nature
were injured by the fall ; they therefore consistently with
their principles conclude, that all are now able, as Adam
was on his creation, to obey trie commands of God. The
Franciscans and Jesuits, to reconcile the doctrine of human
perfection with the errors and defects which have been
observed in the lives of the best of men, make a distinction
between mortal and venial sins. By the former they under-
stand the flagrant transgressions of the law of God, which
imply such deliberate wickedness as to deserve final con-
demnation ; and from these they consider that every one into
whom the grace of God has been infused at his first justifi-
cation at baptism, as completely preserved. By venial sins
they understand both those sudden emotions of passion and
inordinate desire, which so long as they are restrained from
going forth into action, are regarded by them as the con-
stitutional infirmities of human nature ; and also those
actions which are comparatively trifling transgressions, or
are attended with alleviating circumstances. It was meant
by calling such sins venial, either that they deserve no
punishment, or are expiated by sufferings on earth and in
purgatory ; and it was understood that when the sins of
this kind, into which it is admitted that a saint may
fall, are set overagainst his uninterrupted obedience to all
the great commandments and the supereminent excellence
of his good works, his character, upon the whole, is entitled
to be accounted perfect. On the other hand, the Dominicans
and Jansenists had learnt from Augustine to maintain, "That
there are divine precepts which good men, notwithstanding

302

LECTURE XII.

their desire to observe them, are nevertheless unable to
obey, nor has God given them the measure of grace neces-
sary to render them capable of such obedience. This is one
of the five propositions in Jansenius's Augustinus, in which
folio volume he gives a full report of the sentiments of that
eminent Father, which the Jesuits had sufficient influence
to get condemned by the Pope. All Protestants who hold the
system which Calvin also learned from Augustine say, that
in this life perfection is not attainable, and that sanctifi-
cation, though originating in the operations of the Holy
Spirit, continues to be incomplete. Thus the Westminster
Confession of Faith declares, that " our best works, as they
are wrought by us, are defiled and mixed with so much
weakness and imperfection, that they cannot endure the
severity of God's judgment; but that He, looking upon
believers in his Son, is pleased to accept and reward that
which is sincere, although accompanied with many weak-
nesses and imperfections." Our own Church evidently
maintains the same doctrine ; the ninth Article affirms, that
the infection of nature doth remain, yea in the regenerate ;
and this, that although baptized and born again in Christ,
yet we offend, that is, fail in many things ; and that if we
my ice have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not
in us; a position borne out by universal experience, and
which is here supported by the authority of St. James and
St. John, whom the context in their Epistles shows to be
speaking of genuine Christians. The New Testament
describes a continual struggle between the new principle
of infused holiness and original corruption. The most strik-
ing passage of this kind is in the seventh chapter of Romans,
in which Calvinists and other divines consider the Apostle as
speaking from his own Christian experience ; there are others
who suppose that he here assumes the character of an
unregenerate person, in which case the expressions would
mark the combat between appetite and conscience. With-
out referring to a contested passage, we have an undeniable
one equally strong in the Galatiansk: The Jlesh lusteth
against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh : and these

k Gal. v. 17.

LECTURE XII.

303

are contrary the one to the other, so that ye (that must be
Christian converts) cannot do the things which ye would.
It appears too, that the general strain of Scripture — the
image of a warfare, under which it describes the Christian
life — the fear and circumspection which it enjoins, and the
daily prayer for forgiveness, which our Lord directs his
followers to offer, are all in favour of the imperfection of
sanctification. To these arguments from Scripture it may
be added, that this doctrine corresponds with the circum-
stances of man, who is surrounded with temptations to evil,
and retains in a greater or less degree a propensity to yield
to them ; and with the experience of the best Christians,
who not only feel many infirmities, but acknowledge, that
after all their exertions, they fall very far short of perform-
ing the whole of their duty. To a doctrine thus supported,
it is not enough to oppose reasonings drawn from the power
and holiness of God, the intention of the death of Christ,
and the gift of the Spirit. Every passage of Scripture
therefore which appears to contradict it, must receive such
an interpretation as will render Scripture consistent with
itself. When therefore we read1, Whosoever is bom of God
doth not commit sin, and, he cannot sin because he is born of
God, we understand the Apostle to mean, not that sin is
never committed by those who are born of God, for in the
same Epistle he writes, if we say we have no sin ice deceive
ourselves, and the truth is not in us; but that no child of
God is an habitual and willing sinner. "When we meet
with exhortations to perfection, and when we read of persons
walking in all the commandments of the Lord blameless,
we understand it of a comparative perfection ; that is, of
sincerity of obedience, hatred of sin, and a wish and en-
deavour to conform in all things to the divine law. Augustine
propounds this question, Whether there could ever have
been, or ever shall be, any of the children of men perfectly
free from sin ? and his answer is, that there never was and
never will be such an one, beside the one Mediator between
God and men, the man Christ Jesus. His twofold nature,
and the very object for which he came into the world,

1 John iii. 9.

304

LECTURE XII.

preclude the supposition of his resembling us in this
particular. The Saviour of mankind must not only be free
from positive sin, but from the omission of any duty ; for if
he had failed in the least conceivable degree, and been in
his human nature less than perfect, he would himself have
required an atonement for sin. Of course, on that suppo-
sition, he could never have removed the guilt of it from us.
The Apostle to the Hebrews accordingly declares, that the
victim must be without spot, {a lamb without blemish and
without spot, in the language of St. Peter m;) and that such an
high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate
from sinners, and made higher than the heavens, who needed not,
like the high priests under the Mosaic dispensation, to offer
up a sacrifice for his own sins, and then for those of the people.
This perfect holiness was indispensable for the fulfilment of
his priesthood in both its branches ; first, his offering up
himself as a victim, and secondly, his continual intercession
with his Father. It is also of the highest importance, as the
means of assisting us in the endeavour to obey God's com-
mands, by the exhibition of a perfect example in the
various relations and duties of life. The fact of his
complete exemption from sin, is maintained by the sacred
writers : thus St. Peter declares, that he did no sin, and
that guile was not found in his mouth : St. John, that in him
was no sin: St. Paul, that he knew not sin. He himself
says, the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in
me: and his Father bore this testimony to him from
heaven, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
Pilate's repeated examination, terminated with this public
declaration, / find no fault in this man. Even Judas, who
would willingly have relieved the agonies of conscience by
a recollection of the least fault, declared, that he had sinned
in betraying innocent blood. And when Jesus himself appealed
to his enemies, Which of you convicteth me of sin, they did
not venture to object any thing. Correspondent with this
testimony is that of all antiquity. And we learn from
Origen, that neither Jew or Pagan had ever brought forward
any charge against him. That we was free from actual
m l Peter i. J 9. Heb. vii. 36.

LECTURE XII.

305

transgressions, no Christian will deny; but we also maintain,
in opposition to the late Mr. Irving, that his nature was
free from the taint of original sin. In order that his human
nature might be pure, he was not born in the ordinary way,
but in one peculiar to himself, having no earthly father, but
made "man of the substance of his Mother," through the
creative energy of the Holy Spirit; and we are expressly
informed, that he took upon him not the reality, but only
the likeness, of sinful flesh". And this immaculate con-
ception, which is recorded in all Creeds, the exclusive
prerogative of the seed of the woman, is impiously claimed
by the modern Romanists for his Virgin Mother. I say
advisedly, impiously ; for not content with assuming that
she never committed the least even venial sin, they contradict
her own confession, in her inspired hymn, that she required
a Saviour; a confession which is denied by those divines
who assert, that she was created like Eve in original righ-
teousness. They cannot on this tenet appeal to the Fathers,
since Augustine and Bernard, who alone consider the
subject, argue against it. It is a novelty of the Scholastic
age ; but though encouraged by Popes, and by the service
for the festival of the Conception, formally confirmed in
1472, it remained no more than a pious opinion. It was
much discussed in Spain, between the Franciscans and the
Dominicans, and the nation received it so enthusiastically,
that the kings Philip the third and fourth were for years
soliciting a Bull in its favour. The Popes, however, pru-
dently evaded their importunity : and it was reserved for
the reigning Pontiff to complete, as it appears to me, this
mystery of iniquity. Long has the Roman Church blas-
phemously transferred to this humble handmaid of the
Lord her Son's office of forgiveness, making him the source
of justice and her of mercy ; and declaring her to be Queen
of heaven. A papal rescript has now exalted her above
human nature, as if it were meant to justify those who
stigmatize the Roman faith as the religion of Mary.

n Rom. viii. 3.

306

LECTURE XII.

ARTICLE XVI.

OF SIN AFTER BAPTISM.

Not every deadly sin willingly committed after Baptism is sin
against the Holy Ghost, and unpardonable. Wherefore the
grant of repentance is not to be denied to such as fall into
sin after Baptism. After we have received the Holy
Ghost, we may depart from grace given, and fall into sin,
and by the grace of God we may rise again, and amend our
lives. And therefore they are to be condemned, which say,
they can no more sin as long as they live here, or deny the
place of forgiveness to such as truly repent.

All who believe that " the infection of sin doth remain
even in the regenerate," and will break forth sometimes
into outward acts, and that, in the Apostle's language,
we all offend in many things, that is, an immense majority
of Christians, must adopt this Article as incontrovertible.
Yet there have been, and there still are, those who maintain,
that" they can sin as long as they live here :" and certainly such
alone can reasonably " deny the place of forgiveness to such
as truly repent," For any others " to deny the grant of
repentance to such as fall into sin after baptism," is virtually
to abrogate the Gospel, which assures us, that the best even
of believers cannot endure the strict judgment of the all-
searching Deity, and therefore offers eternal life, not as the
reward of perfect obedience, but on the only conditions which
we can fulfil, repentance and faith. We must not however
misrepresent or exaggerate the opinions of those from whom
we differ. We are only considering sin after baptism.
Such declarations then as, He is willing that none should
perish, but that all should come to repentance, and that
repentance and remission of sins should be preached in the
name of Christ to all nations, are not to the purpose, as our
opponents will readily allow that the repentance of the
unregenerate will be accepted. They only maintain, that it
is the grace of God, not human strength, that will enable

LECTURE XII.

307

them to persevere in an undeviating obedience ; and that,
to adopt the language of Scripture, it is impossible for
those who were once enlightened, (that is, baptized,) and
have been made partakers of the Holy Ghost, if they shall
fall away and sin wilfully, after they have received the
knowledge of the truth, to renew them again unto repentance.
Nor would they include under their condemnation the
negligences and ignorances, from which we pray to be de-
livered in the Liturgy, but deliberate presumptuous trans-
gressions of the divine law, or, as it is expressed in the
Article, deadly sin, willingly committed. The Roman
division of sin into deadly and venial is strongly condemned
by Protestants ; and certainly with reason, when connected
with the conclusion, that venial or pardonable sins deserve
only temporal punishment, and may be expiated by penance,
or a transfer of the supererogatory merit of the saints ; for
no sin not repented of can be venial. Every transgression
of God's law exposes the sinner to his wrath ; and as in the
violation even of the least commandment, His will is dis-
obeyed, His authority disregarded, whoever, as St. James
argues, offends in one point is guilty of all. Still common sense
teaches us, that the Stoic errs when he puts all offences upon
the same level, and that there must be shades of difference in
moral turpitude, even in the commission of the same offence,
according to the religious education, the constitutional
tendency, or the unfavourable or favourable circumstances
of the individuals concerned. Still more apparent is it,
that the sins into which we may fall from infirmity under
sudden temptation, cannot leave so deep a stain of guilt as
deliberate ones planned and committed against our judgment,
when we have time and opportunity to consider their nature
and consequences, and we might fly from, or at least arm
ourselves against the temptation. Human ethics, and
courts of justice, have accordingly acknowledged so obvious
a truth. Thus a broad distinction has been always made in
estimating the guilt and consequently the punishment of one
who has deliberately meditated a murder, and of another who
has killed a man in the heat and frenzy, as it were, of passion.
And it is recognised in the nineteenth Psalm, Cleanse

x 2

308

LECTURE XII.

thou me from secret faults ; and, keep back thy servant from
presumptuous sins, let them not have dominion over me.
Our Church then is, I conceive, justified in retaining the
distinction when properly understood, a distinction which
appears not only in this Article, but in the petition of
the Litany, " From fornication and all other deadly sin,
Good Lord, deliver us."

This rigid doctrine was first taught by the Novatians,
who denied absolution not only to such as apostatised in
times of persecution, but to such as had been guilty of any
notorious sin. It was revived at the Reformation by the
Anabaptists in Germany, and by the Brownists in our
own country. To Novatian, his contemporary, Cyprian
answers : " I wonder that there are some so obstinate as
to suppose, that pardon should be denied to penitents,
when it is written, Remember from whence thou art fallen,
and repent, and do the first works0." The proverb which
says, a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up againp,
shows that he may depart from grace given and fall into
sin, and by the same grace, as the Article declares, we may
arise again and amend our lives. Now if he rise again, it
must be by repentance. And that the repentance of believers
will be accepted by our merciful Father in Heaven, we
know from our Lord, who has taught us to pray for forgive-
ness of sins, which he assures us will be granted if we
forgive one another ; and his beloved disciple declares, that
if we (evidently from the context, baptized believers)
acknowledge our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive us
our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. The
denial and the recovery of Peter ought to convince and
silence all who doubt the efficacy of repentance ; and the
Apostles authorize, and indeed enjoin, the forgiveness of
penitents, and their restoration to Church communion.
Thus St. James writes, if any one err from the truth, and
one convert him, he that converteth the sinner from the error
of his way, shall save a soul from death. St. Jude exhorts us
to have compassion upon some, making a difference ; and to
save others with fear, plucking them out of the fire. And
° Rev. ii. ft. p Prov. xxiv. 16.

LECTURE XII.

309

St. Paul admonishes Timothy to instruct in meekness those
that oppose themselves, if peradventure God will give them
repentance to the acknowledgment of the truth, that they may
recover themselves from the snare of the devil. And he acted
upon this principle, when he ordered the Church of
Corinth to receive back into their communion, on repent-
ance, one who had clearly been guilty of deadly sin, and
whom they had by his own previous directions delivered
over unto Satan. He gives as the reason, lest he should be
swallowed up by overmuch sorrow; and this in the Epistle to
the Galatians he had laid down as a general rule ; If any
one is overtaken in a fault, ye who are spiritual restore such
an one in the spirit of meekness, considering thyself lest thou
also be tempted*.

Against texts so positive, it would be impossible to main-
tain the doctrine we are now combating, if others could not
be brought forward of an opposite character. One of these
in the Epistle to the Hebrews has been already cited ; and
in a later part of the same Epistle r it is declared, that
if we sin wilfully, after we have received the knowledge of
the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a
certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation.
St. John alsos speaks of a sin unto death, for which prayer is
not to be made; and our Lord, while he tells us that all
manner of sin and blasphemy is pardonable, excepts the sin
against the Holy Ghost. That sin we know was ascribing the
miracles wrought by the Holy Spirit to the Devil, which is
reviling the third Person of the Trinity, from whom alone our
own sanctification can proceed, and by whom alone it can
be sustained. And the reason of this exception seems to be,
not because there is not a sufficiency of merit in Christ to
atone even for this calumny, or of mercy in God the Father
to forgive it; but because they who commit it are of so
refractory and incorrigible a disposition, that they resist the
Holy Spirit till God withdraws his grace, ceasing to strive
with them ; so that deserted of God, they continue finally
impenitent, and become incapable of forgiveness, both
in this world, and that which is to come. There is unques-
n Gal. vi. 1. r Heb. x. 26. • 1 John v. 16.

310

LECTURE XII.

tionably a difference in point of conviction between reading
of miracles and seeing them with our own eyes ; and in pro-
portion to the strength of the evidence, must be the guilt of
those who reject Christianity. This blasphemy against the
Holy Ghost in its full extent could only be committed by
the generation who witnessed the miracles of our Lord and
his Apostles. A profane scoffing at religion now, its
rejection by those who have been baptized, and the wilful
misrepresentation of it, is certainly resisting and doing
despite to the Spirit ; but how far it approaches towards the
unpardonable offence, I presume not to ascertain. In
King Edward's Articles, there was one explanatory of the
blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which is declared to be
committed when any man, out of malice and hardness of
heart, doth wilfully reproach and persecute in an hostile
manner the truth of God's word manifestly made known
to him. It is certainly only sin of this nature that can be
the one denounced by our Lord or his Apostles ; for the
persons, whom the writer to the Hebrews describes as
incapable of being renewed again unto repentance, had
renounced the faith, since they are branded with the
name of adversaries ; and are said to crucify the Son of
God afresh, to trample him under foot, and to count the
blood of the covenant an unholy thing. These men it is
impossible to renew while they continue in their apostasy,
because they have cast off faith, their only remedy; con-
sequently they are not within the covenant, nor under the
influence of grace, having denied the Lord ivho bought them.
But the case is far otherwise with those who are engaged in
a course of sin, and yet have not renounced Christianity.
There is an essential difference between walking unworthy
of the Christian profession, and being open and avowed
opponents; betwreen conduct unbecoming the Gospel, and
principles that avowedly overthrow it. The Epistle to
the Hebrews, to prove the superiority of the Christian
to the Levitical institution, affirms, that through Christ is
preached forgiveness of sins, and that by him all that believe
are justified from all tilings, from tvhich they could not be
justified by (he law of Moses. Now if the former allowed of

LECTURE XII.

311

sacrifices for the expiation of involuntary sins, such as pro-
ceeded from ignorance and infirmity, yet made not the
same provision for wilful and deliberate sins, it follows, that
by the evangelical covenant even these are capable of pardon
in believers. That we are right in restricting the sin
against the Holy Ghost which is unpardonable to this one
offence, may further be shown from the instance of Simon
Magus, which seems to approach to it as nearly as possible ;
yet we know that it was not of this deadly nature, for the
Apostle Peter says, even to him whom he declared to be in
the gall of bitterness, and bond of iniquity, Repent of this thy
wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thy heart
may be forgiven thee.

LECTURE XIII.

ARTICLE XVII.

OF PREDESTINATION AND ELECTION.

Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God,
whereby [before the foundations of the world were laid) he
hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to
deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath
chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by
Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour.
Wherefore, they which be endued with so excellent a benefit
of God be called according to God's purpose by his Spirit
working in due season: they through grace obey the calling:
they be justified freely : they be made sons of God by
adoption : they be made like the image of his only-begotten
Son Jesus Christ : they walk religiously in good works,
and at length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting
felicity.

As the godly consideration of Predestination, and our Election
in Christ, is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable com-
fort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves the
working of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the
flesh, and their earthly members, and drawing up their
mind to high and heavenly things, as well because it doth
greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal salvation
to be enjoyed through Christ, as because it doth fervently
kindle their love towards God : so, for curious and carnal
persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually
before their eyes the sentence of God's Predestination, is a
most dangerous downfall, whereby the Devil doth thrust

LECTURE XIII.

318

them either into desperation, or into wretchlessness of most
unclean living, no less perilous than desperation.
Furthermore, we must receive God's promises in such wise, as
they be generally set forth to us in holy Scripture : and, in
our doings, that will of God is to be followed, which we
have expressly declared unto us in the Word of God.

Hitherto our way has been straight before us, for we
have had to exhibit, generally speaking, only the grand and
leading doctrines of Christianity, which it has been easy to
establish to the conviction of all who defer to the authority
of Scripture, and allow of no other judge of controversies.
We have considered man as fallen from original righteousness,
and unable to recover himself from sin, or from its just
penalty, eternal punishment, or to render himself worthy of
forgiveness. We have seen also, that the mercy of God the
Father has provided sufficient satisfaction to his justice by
the death of bis beloved Son, who unites for that purpose out
of his own free will, the natures of the offended and offending
parties, and that the Holy Spirit applies this remedy, by
working in man, through his regenerating grace, a fitness for
the eternal happiness, to which faith in the Redeemer's
sacrifice entitles him.

That Saviour's last commission to his disciples was,
Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every
creature; but the remedy, though devised by the wisdom
of the Almighty, is not commensurate with the disease;
for not to perplex ourselves with speculations concerning
the heathen, whom these glad tidings have never reached,
we know from Scripture that all professors of Christianity
will not be saved, but that some of them will go into
everlasting punishment. What then is the cause of the
difference between those that enter into the joy of their
Lord, and those whom he will banish from his presence into
everlasting fire ? Why are some exposed to greater tempt-
ations, or have some more grace to resist them than
others ? These are questions which will unavoidably
occur to every one who thinks upon the subject; and
they are questions to which no one has yet been able to

314

LECTURE XIII.

give an answer in all respects satisfactory. Here then the
difficulty begins, and here pious believers, of whose faith
and ultimate salvation we cannot reasonably doubt, have come
to opposite conclusions, both appealing, and with plausibility,
to Scripture as supporting their views, and both sincerely
actuated by the desire of vindicating the ways of God to
man. Each system has its strong and weak points, and it
will be easier to show the defects of either, than to establish
the other. The subject, however, is one that cannot be
altogether omitted in any systematic view of Theology ; but
it should be approached with caution and reverence; and in
considering it, we should never lose our tempers, nor charge,
as is often done, the advocates of the opposite opinion with
blasphemy and unworthy conceptions of the Deity, because
we conceive such to be the result of their scheme, since,
however mistaken, they seek, perhaps as sincerely and
honestly, if more ignorantly than ourselves, the glory of
God.

Our Article is original, for Predestination is altogether
omitted in the Augsburg Confession, to which on other doc-
trines our reformers are so largely indebted. Luther, however,
had expressed himself quite as strongly as Calvin, though
not in so systematic manner; and Melancthon had even at
first expressed himself in his Common Places in an objection-
able manner, by opposing not free will, in the theological
sense of that term, but free agency; maintaining, that the
Scriptures take away liberty from our wills by the necessity
of Predestination. But in the second class of editions, which
are much enlarged upon most topics, he censures Valla,
whom he had formerly defended, for improperly taking
away liberty from the human will. Melancthon has been
represented as having changed his opinions: but in a familiar
letter to Brentius, he says, I avoided the long and inextricable
question of Predestination, for I have no wish to entangle
men's consciences in these endless labyrinths. He retained
to the last the opinions of the other reformers, saying ex-
pressly, that though he speaks less harshly and less like a
Stoic, he knows that Luther substantially agrees with him.
To Calvin he says, I am satisfied our views agree, only mine

LECTUHE XIII.

315

are stated in a less refined manner : and Calvin writes of
him, that his design was only to recall men from a daring
and perverse curiosity, which would break through into the
secret counsels of the Most High, to discover in them their
election. The reason of the silence of the Augsburg Con-
fession on these points seems to be, that Predestination and
Election had not been brought under discussion, being as it
were doctrines which the Roman Catholics had inherited from
Augustine. This appeared in the Council of Trent ; for its
historians, Father Paul, whom Bossuet calls a Calvinist in a
friar's frock, and Dupin, testify that nothing was found
worthy of censure on. this subject in the writings of Luther,
or in the Confession of Augsburg, or the Apologies. And
though opinions were diverse, the most esteemed divines
among them thought that even the high supralapsarian
doctrine was catholic, because the good school-writers,
Aquinas, Scotus, and others, did so think a.

We know that Bradford and Carless, and others, discussed
the subject when in prison for heresy under Mary, and
dispersed their writings abroad. Probably the subject had
excited such an interest in Edward's reign, that our re-
formers might be forced to draw up the seventeenth Article ;
and we learn from the Reformatio Legum, that many at
that time used the plea of Predestination as an excuse for
their immoral lives. Bishop Hooper expresses himself
strongly, as to the necessity of keeping as close as possible
to Scripture on such a tenet; and certainly this idea has
been carefully followed out by our Article, the first para-
graph of which is little more than a series of texts carefully
arranged, and the framers of it dismiss the subject as soon
as they can, adding cautions against its abuse. It is drawn
up with such admirable moderation, that while it maintains
(at least as it appears to me, upon a long, deliberate, and I
trust an impartial examination) the opinion which was
first brought prominently forward by Augustine, and
continued to be till after the Reformation the received
doctrine of the Western Church, it carefully avoids the high
supralapsarian Calvinism of Beza, and other eminent con-
8 Scott's Continuation of Milner's History, vol. ii. ch. 12, 13.

316

LECTURE XIII.

tinental Protestants, and concludes with a clause concerning
God's general promises and will, under which the Arminian
may without scruple sign his adherence to it. " It is not
to be denied," says Bishop Burnet, "but that the Article
seems to be framed according to St. Austin's doctrine, and
that the Calvinists have less occasion than the Remonstrants
or Arminians for scruple, since it doth seem more plainly to
favour them." Such is the candid acknowledgment of a
Prelate, who had been brought up a Calvinist, but tells us
in the preface to his Exposition, that he follows the doctrine
of the Greek Church, from which St. Austin departed.
This testimony is of the more importance in the present
day, as of late years it has been the fashion of our Arminian
Divines, that is, of a vast majority of the Ministers of the
Church of England, to claim the Article not merely as
neutral, but as even Anti-Calvinistic ; a position which must
seem absurd to all who know that before the time of
Archbishop Laud, all our divines were more or less Calvin-
istical ; that a deputation of them were at the Synod of
Dort, and that during that period, Calvin's Institutes was
the book chiefly recommended to the candidates for Holy
Orders. A Calvinistic sense is put upon this Article by
Rogers, who, as 1 have before observed, wrote the first
Exposition upon them in 1607, before the disputes upon
this subject arose, only forty-five years after they had been
enacted, and dedicated them to Bancroft, the then Arch-
bishop of Canterbury. "In the Scripture," he writes, " we
read of man's predestination, the cause efficient to be
the everlasting purpose of God ; the cause formal, God's
infinite mercy and goodness ; I will shew mercy to whom I
will shew mercy b; the cause material the blood of Christ;
the cause final or end, why, both God the Father hath
loved, and Christ for his elect hath suffered, is the glory of
God and the salvation of man. And this do all the Churches
militant and reformed with a sweet consent testify and
acknowledge. Hereby is discovered the impiety of those
men who think, 1. that man doth make himself eligible for the
kingdom of Heaven by his own good works; and, 2. that God
b Exodus xxxiii. 12. Rom ix. 15.

LECTURE XIII.

317

beheld in every man whether he would use his grace
well, and believe the Gospel or no; and as he saw a man
affected, so did he predestinate, choose, or refuse him."
The late Bishop of Winchester in his Exposition intro-
duces a passage from Waterland, who strongly approves
of the distinction made by Plaifere, of two kinds of
Predestination, a distinction not likely to be made
in so short an Article ; and a mode of cutting the knot
instead of untying it, which certainly would not occur to
any reader but one prejudiced against Augustine's doctrine,
and therefore predetermined to find some other meaning in
the Article. I have no doubt with other Expositors that
the difference is to be sought not in two kinds of Predes-
tination, but in the different disposition with which " godly
persons, and carnal and curious ones lacking the spirit of
Christ," contemplate the same divine decrees. According
to Burnet, the three cautions added intimate that St.
Austin's doctrine was designed to be settled by the Article ;
for the danger of men's having the sentence of God's pre-
destination always before their eyes belongs only to that
side; and the other two, of taking God's promises in the
sense in which they are set forth in holy Scripture, and of
following the declared will of God, relate to the same
opinion. Theological hatred has unhappily become a
proverb; and on no subject of controversy has been shown
among Protestants, and even among members of the same
Church, more intemperance and more uncharitable impu-
tation of bad motives and blasphemous conclusions than on
this, as if zeal grew furious and bitter and dogmatical in
proportion to ignorance. We may learn in this instance a
lesson from the Church from which we have separated, in
which Dominicans and Jesuits bear with one another, though
they advocate the same contradictory systems to which we
give the name of Calvinism and Arminianism, and which
neither the Council of Trent nor the Pope have ever ven-
tured to decide. " We of this Church," says Burnet, "are
very happy in this respect, we have all along been much
divided, and once almost broken to pieces, while we disputed
concerning these matters; but now we are much happier;

318

LECTURE Xllf.

for though we know one another's opinions, we live not
only united in the same worship, but in great friendship
with those of other persuasions ; and the boldness of some
among us, who have reflected in sermons or otherwise on
those who hold Calvin's system, has been much blamed and
often censured by those, who, though they hold the same
opinions with them, are yet both more charitable in their
thoughts, and more discreet in their expressions." In this
respect there has been of late years a melancholy change,
but I think that there is before us a more cheering prospect,
and a growing desire among those who differ to avoid
unprofitable controversies, and as they cannot attain to
unity of opinion, to strive to keep the unity of the spirit in
the. bond of peace and mutual love.

The comparative unimportance of this subject should also
teach us moderation and forbearance. For it is not the
vital doctrines of atonement through the sacrifice of a
Saviour both God and man, and of a renewal to the divine
image through the Holy Spirit, which are in discussion ;
doctrines a practical and influential belief in which is
essential to genuine Christianity ; but concerning the appli-
cation of a remedy for a lost world, and why of those to
whom the same Gospel is proclaimed, some receive it
and become the sons of God, while others reject or disobey
it. The first are revealed with a clearness which will render
all who refuse to credit them inexcusable ; and a belief in
them is, to all to whom they are made known, an indis-
pensable condition of salvation. But though it is necessary
that we should work out our own salvation, it cannot be neces-
sary for us to know why some succeed in this great work,
while others fail,; and whatever may be the cause in the Divine
Mind of election, and whatever probabilities we may deduce
from our growth in grace, the judgment day alone will
with certainty reveal who are the elect. Upon the subject
of the divine decrees then we may be allowed to differ.
Both sides argue plausibly, and each seems able to show
that the Scripture is on his side, while he keeps out of sight
the passages that apparently favour the other view. " It is
no wonder then," to use the words of Burnet, " if education,

LECTURE XIII.

319

the constant attending more to the difficulties of the one
side than of the other, and a temper some way proportioned
to it, does fix men very steadily to either the one or the
other persuasion ; both sides have their difficulties, so it will
be natural to choose that side where the difficulties are least
felt; but it is plain there is no reason for either of them to
despise the other, since the arguments of both are far from
being contemptible. Both sides seem zealous for God, both
lay down general maxims that can hardly be disputed, and
both argue justly from their first principles. The source of
both opinions is the different idea of the Deity, the one
looking chiefly to his sovereignty, the other to his benevolence,
and both ideas are true, men only differing in the conclusions
which they draw from them. Here are the clearest grounds
imaginable for a mutual forbearance, for not judging men
imperiously, nor censuring them severely upon either side.
"And those," he adds from experience, "who have at different
times of their lives been of both opinions, and who upon the
evidence of reason, as it has appeared to them, have changed
their persuasions, can speak more affirmatively here, for
they know that in great sincerity of heart they have thought
both ways. Each side has some practical advantages and
some peculiar temptations; the common fault is, that both
are too apt to charge each other with the consequences their
adversaries draw from their tenets, and both sides too often,
in order to represent the contrary opinion as absurd, bring
in the Deity himself in a manner not only unbecoming, but
bordering upon blasphemy." The Calvinist is tempted to a
false security and sloth, the Arminian to trust too much to
himse'.f and too little to God; so equally may a man of
calm temper and of moderate thoughts balance the matter,
and so unreasonable is it to give way to a positive and
dictating temper in this point. He thus concludes his state-
ment; " I leave the choice as free to my readers as the Church
has done. Ill then would it become me to pronounce dog-
matically my judgment, and to presume to decide between
Calvinist and Arminian. The veil that covers the divine
decrees will never be entirely raised by any uninspired man ;
and even the Apostle, whose language our Article adopts

320

LECTURE XIII,

in contemplating the mystery of election, closes the subject
with an acknowledgment, that it is a depth unfathomable
by our finite intellects. O the depth of the riches both of the
wisdom and knowledge of God ! How unsearchable are his
judgments, and his ways past finding out0.'" Motives for for-
bearance may be found in the consideration, that the Pre-
destinarian controversy is one of natural religion, and that
it divides Mahometans as well as Christians, Roman Catholics
as well as Protestants ; and that while Calvinism can boast
of many names illustrious for learning, wisdom, and piety,
Arminianism has to oppose to them high and distinguished
champions. If in our own Church the one side glories in
Hooker and Usher, South, Beveridge, Hopkins, and Leigh-
ton, the other is no less proud of Tillotson, Taylor, and
Barrow. Let Calvinists and Arminians then bear with each
other in charity till they know even as they are known ; let
us, with Paul, love all who love the Lord Jesus Christ in
sincerity; and never forget, that whatever may be the cause
of election, whether foreseen merit, or the mere pleasure of
the Almighty, the fact of election, (since the divine decrees
are not revealed,) in our own case or that of others, can only
be presumed from a holy and virtuous life, and the evidence
of course will be clear in proportion to our growth in grace ;
for election, we should remember, (and if we do, it will
remove much of the dislike of the doctrine which is com-
monly entertained,) is not described as of persons but of
characters, and that we are not elected to eternal life
nakedly and abstractedly of our conduct, but predestined
to be conformed to the image of Christ, that is, to holiness,
as the means without which we shall never attain the end,
eternal life. This golden chain, which commencing in
election, terminates in glory, has sanctification for its inter-
mediate and connecting link ; for though not mentioned
there by the Apostle, it is in the preceding verses, in which
he tells us, that the called according to God's purpose are
those who love him, and that they who have not the spirit of
God, are none of his.

Independently of the angry and bitter spirit which per-
c Rom. xi. 33.

LECTURE XIII.

321

vades too many defences of Calvinism and Arminianism,
they are often written in confutation of particular treatises,
and are therefore only partially understood by those who
have not read the works to which they are replies. Such
authors are very apt to misrepresent their adversaries, to
introduce extraneous matter, and to charge the other party
with conclusions which they deny. The best course I can
take is to lay before you a calm dispassionate statement of
the different systems. This has been done already by
Burnet, and his is generally considered as a fair one ; but
the late Dr. Hill, Professor of Divinity at St. Andrew's,
says, that it is done with some degree of confusion, and
with an impartiality more apparent than real. Not-
withstanding, the Bishop's Exposition is well worth
reading, and he gives the reasonings and the principal
scriptural passages on which both parties build. I extract
from Calamy's Memoirs of his own life, the following
interesting narrative u. "Among other discourse, Bishop
Burnet asked me what apprehensions we Dissenters com-
monly had of his Exposition of the Articles, particularly
of the seventeenth, which had caused him a great deal of
pains. I replied, that as to things of that nature, there was
a variety of sentiments among those out of the Establishment,
as well as those under it. He said he was very sensible of
it, but as he knew that those whom I was most conversant
with were the more moderate sort of Dissenters, he was
particularly desirous to know their sentiments. I told his
Lordship, that as for them, though they were very thankful
to him for his pains and his charity, yet upon the head of
Predestination, which he had so laboured, they could not
but be surprised to find, that when he had been at such
pains nicely to state the two extremes, he should quite
overlook the middle way, where Truth commonly lies. He
told me the true reason of that was, because he could not
see how that called the middle way differed from one of the
extremes. I freely told him, that this seemed the more
strange to many of us, because the learned Davenant, one
of his Lordship's predecessors in the see of Sarum, had not
* Vol. i. p. 469.

322 LECTURE XIII.

only vigorously asserted and defended that middle way in
the Synod of Dort, in opposition to Remonstrants and
Supralapsarians, but had also been at no small pains to
support it in several of his writings, of which his Lordship
took not the least notice. This led to a pretty close
discourse of two hours length, in which he endeavoured to
convince me, that such as declared for the middle way must,
at last when pressed, fall into the Arminian scheme."

This third opinion, which is sometimes called Baxterian-
ism, from the celebrated non-conformist, is the one most
satisfactory to myself, since it avoids the difficulties which
beset the two extremes ; and it appears to me, though it
may be hard to maintain it against a subtle disputant, to
be the nearest to the truth, because while it resolves salva-
tion into the free unmerited grace of God, it makes man
inexcusable, since if he perishes, it is only from a moral not
a natural inability to avail himself of the salvation, which
though it will only be accepted by the elect, has been
offered to all. It is, I conceive, the doctrine of our own
Church, which it cannot be denied teaches at the same time,
election in Christ, and universal redemption. It has thus
been expressed by our great Poete.

Man shall not quite be lost, but saved who will ;

Yet not of will in him, but grace in me

Freely vouchsafed : once more I will renew

His lapsed powers, though forfeit, and enthralled

By sin to foul exorbitant desires ;

Upheld by me, yet once more he shall stand

On even ground against his mortal foe ;

By me upheld, that he may know how frail

His fallen condition is, and to me owe

All his deliverance, and to none but me.

Some I have chosen of peculiar grace,

Elect above the rest ; such is my will :

The rest shall bear me call, and oft be warned

Their sinful state, and to appease betimes

The incensed Deity, while offered grace

Invites : for I will clear their senses dark,

What may suffice ; and soften stony hearts

To pray, repent, and bring obedience due.

e Paradise Lost, book iii. 172.

LECTURE XIII.

323

To prayer, repentance, and obedience due,
Though but endeavoured with sincere intent,
Mine ear shall not be slow, mine eye not shut.
And I will place within them as a guide,
My umpire, Conscience; whom if they will hear,
Light after light, well used, they shall attain,
And, to the end persisting, safe arrive.
This my long sufferance and my day of grace,
They who neglect and scorn, shall never taste;
But hard be hardened, blind be blinded more,
That they may srumble on, and deeper fall;
And none but such from mercy I exclude.

As it is unquestionably the doctrine of Scripture, that
none partake of the salvation which the Gospel was given to
afford but those who repent, believe, and obey it ; we are
entitled to say, that the remedy offered is connected with a
certain character of mind. But as many, it is plain, of
those who have every opportunity of believing in Christ
either reject Christianity, or show by their conduct that they
have not saving faith, we are led to consider the extent and
application of the remedy — universal or particular redemp-
tion; that is, whether Christ died for all men, or only for the
elect, that is, for those who shall finally be saved by him.
The latter is the Calvinistic scheme, while our formu-
laries unequivocally affirm that the Saviour died for all men.
The Calvinist, however, does not deny the sufficiency of the
sacrifice for all, only that for some secret reason it was not
designed to be universal.

I shall begin with the Arminian statement.

" Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world, died for all men,
and for every individual ; but we do not mean," says
Whitby, one of its ablest defenders, " that he hath purchased
actual reconciliation for all, this being in effect to say, that
he procured an actual remission of sins to unbelievers, and
actually reconciled God to the impenitent and disobedient,
which is impossible. He only by his death has put all men
into the capacity of being pardoned and justified, upon
their turning to God, and having faith in Christ, his death
having rendered it consistent with the justice and wisdom
of God, and with the honour of his majesty, and with the

y 2

324

LECTURE XIII.

ends of government, to pardon the penitent believer."
According to this doctrine, the death of Christ is an uni-
versal remedy for the condition in which the whole posterity
of Adam is involved by sin ; it removes the obstacles
opposed to their deliverance, by the justice and holiness
of the Deity ; it puts all into a condition in which they
may be saved, and it leaves their actual salvation to depend
upon their faith. In this way the remedy may be much
more extensive than the application of it. But even though
the offer of pardon were rejected by all, it would not follow
that the atonement was unnecessary, for the offer could not
have been given without it, and whatever reception the
Gospel may meet with, the love of God is equally con-
spicuous in having provided a method by which he may
enter into a new covenant with all who have sinned. He
has therefore an antecedent will to save all, but as he foresaw
before the foundation of the world, the use which all would
make of the means provided for them in Christ, he chose some
upon account of, and through Christ upon a. foresight of their
faith and good works, to eternal life. He has therefore a con-
sequent will to save only such as deserve it, and to leave the
rest to merited condemnation. Thus the strongest motives
are held forth to make our calling and election sure ; the
remedy is limited only by the fault of those to whom it is
offered, and divine justice is exhibited by giving eternal
life to those who make a proper use of the means. The
Arminians, however, acknowledge the inability of our own
depraved nature, and therefore they believe that the grace
purchased by Christ restores all men to a situation in which
they may do those works which are well-pleasing to God.
This grace is called common, because of some measure of it
no man is supposed to be destitute ; it accompanies the
light of nature in heathen countries, as well as the preaching
of the Gospel in Christian, and every one who improves
the measure given him, is thereby prepared for more.
Those who are not wanting to themselves, are certainly
conducted to such degrees as produce Faith and Repentance,
and all these receive subsequent and cooperating grace.
They accordingly consider the efficacy of grace to depend

LECTURE XIII.

325

upon the reception it meets with. It is from the event
alone that it is to be distinguished as effectual or ineffectual ;
and the same grace being given, the difference of the effect
must be ascribed to the difference of the characters of those
by whom it is received. The operation of the Holy Spirit
suggesting good thoughts and inspiring good desires, is
called moral Suasion; but this counsel may be rejected, the
grace of God may be resisted, and the believer after he has
been renewed, may return to the habitual practice of sin,
and finally fail of attaining salvation.

The system is allowed by Dr. Hill, an able and candid
Calvinist, in his Lectures on Divinity, to appear upon a
general view most satisfying to a pious and benevolent
mind. Pardon procured by the death of Christ for all that
repent and believe, when conjoined with an administration
of the means of grace sufficient to bring all to repentance
and faith, forms a remedy suited to the extent of the
disease, a remedy from which none are excluded by any
circumstance foreign to themselves ; and which if it does
not in the end deliver all from the evils of sin, fails not
from any defect in its own nature, or any partiality in the
Being from whom it proceeds, but purely through the
obstinacy and perverseness of those to whom it is offered.
But while this scheme, he continues, appears to derive
from its correspondence with our notions of the goodness
and justice of God the strongest internal recommendation,
it is found to labour under these three difficulties.

1. The supposition of grace sufficient to bring all to
repentance and faith, appears to be contradicted by facts.

2. This scheme resolves our salvation into something
independent of grace.

3. And it seems to imply a failure in the purpose of the
Almighty, which is not easily reconciled with our notions of
his Sovereignty.

The Calvinist, proceeding from the wisdom and power of
God, conceives that he could have no intention of saving all
mankind, since many will not be saved. Maintaining, that
He worketh all things after the counsel of his own will, he
dwells upon such texts as, / lay down my life for the sheep,

326

LECTURE XIII.

that seem to favour particular redemption, while those that
describe the Saviour as dying for all men, they explain as
meaning that the benefit of his death is not limited to any nation .
but was designed for persons of all countries, ages, conditions,
and characters. The characteristic feature of this system is
the entire dependence of the creature upon the Creator. God
chose out of the whole body of mankind, whom he viewed
in his eternal decree as involved in guilt and misery, certain
persons, therefore called the Elect, whose names are known
to him, and whose number is unchangeably fixed. Jesus
Christ undertook to be their Saviour, and God gave them
to him to be redeemed by his blood, to be called by the
Holy Spirit, and finally to be brought to everlasting glory.
As all the children of Adam were involved in the same guilt
and misery, these persons had no merits that could be fore-
seen, to render them more worthy than others, and therefore
the decree is called absolute, by which is meant, that it
arose entirely from the good pleasure of God, because the
faith and good works of the Elect are the effect (not the
cause, as the Arminians hold) of their election. The grace
of the Calvinist is very different from moral suasion. Being
conferred in execution of an unchangeable decree, it cannot
fail of attaining its purpose ; and being the action of the
Creator upon the mind of the creature, it is able to sur-
mount all the opposition and resistance which arises from
the corruption of human nature. This grace, which forms
the character connected with salvation, is of course confined
to the elect, and is seldom exerted without the use of
means. It enlightens the understanding, and it inclines the
will to follow its dictates, so that the renewed mind pursues
a certain line of conduct because it is its choice, and has in
so doing a perfect liberty, because it has been rendered
willing to do that, from which it was by nature averse.
Augustine expresses this by the significant phrase victrix
delectatio, or a delight in God's commandments, which over-
comes every inferior appetite; and the Calvinists, when they
speak of the efficacy of divine grace, mean that it acts upon
man, not as a machine, but as a rational and free agent.
As this grace overcomes all opposition, it is invincible ; and

LECTURE XIII.

327

as it continues to be exerted, it is indefectible, and preserves
those on whom it has been conferred from drawing back to
perdition. The perseverance of the saints flows naturally
from that decree, by which they were from eternity chosen
to salvation ; and all the principles of the system must be
renounced, before it can be conceded that any of those for
whom Christ died can fall from grace either finally or
totally, that is, that they should persist so obstinately in
presumptuous sins, as to forfeit entirely the divine favour.
The objections to this system may be reduced to two.

1. Its inconsistency with the nature of man as a free
moral agent.

2. And its representing the Almighty in a light repugnant
to our notions of his moral attributes.

The Calvinistic system is itself divided into two, Supra-
lapsarian or Sublapsarian, according as we conceive the
Deity to view mankind either as in the state of innocence
before the fall of Adam, or the state of condemnation after
it. The former also maintains Reprobation, that is, a positive
decree to condemn all but the Elect ; the latter adopts the
milder term of Pretention, passing over. According to
Dr. Hill, the good sense of modern times has almost effaced
the remembrance of this distinction, which was allowed not
to be essential, even when it engrossed the attention of
Theologians. To God indeed, to whom the future lies
open as if present, there can be no order in the Divine
decrees, though the distinction may be convenient to use
in our consideration of them. The following Schemes are
from Plaifere's True doctrine of divine Predestination, con-
corded with God's Free-Grace and Man's Free-Will.

1. That God from all eternity predestinated some men to
everlasting life, and others he reprobated to everlasting
death.

2. That in this act he respected nothing but the pleasure
of his own will.

3. That he decreed to permit sin to enter in upon all
men, that the reprobate might be condemned for it, and
that he decreed to send his Son to recover out of sin his
elect, fallen together with the reprobate.

328

LECTURE XIII.

Such is the ultra-Calvinism which was advocated in
this country by Perkins, whose work drew forth the reply
of Arminius; it was embodied in the Lambeth Articles, and
was maintained abroad by Piscator and Beza, who is
described as a higher Calvinist than Calvin. It is charged
with making God the author of sin, and is called Irre-
spective, because it hath no respect to any thing foreknown,
not even to the fall of man, and much less to his restoration
through Christ ; and consequently it is not the doctrine of
the Article, or of the Westminster Confession, which nearly
copies it.

The Sublapsarian or modified system is that of Au-
gustine, followed by the Dominicans and Bellarmine. It
was established at the Synod of Dort, and was advocated
there by the Representatives of the English Church, and is
thought by many to be taught in this Article.

It is thus stated by Plaifere.

1. That God from all eternity decreed to create mankind
holy and good.

2. That he foresaw that man, being tempted by Satan,
would fall into sin, if God did not hinder it, which he
decreed not to do.

3. That out of mankind, as seen fallen into sin and misery,
he chose a certain number to raise to righteousness and to
eternal life, and rejected the rest, leaving them in their
sins.

4. That for these his elect he decreed to send his Son
to redeem them, and his Spirit to call and sanctify them ;
the rest he decreed to forsake, leaving them to Satan and
themselves, and to punish them for their sins.

The most formidable objection against Calvinism is, that
it not only represents the Deity as partial, but as imposing
upon men a necessity of sinning. Those however who
defend it, reject all external compulsion, and maintain that
there is no other necessity for sinning, but what arises from
the inclination of the sinner, which he cannot, because
he is not willing to resist. The distinction between a
physical necessity of sinning which frees from all blame,
and the moral necessity which implies the highest degree

LECTURE XIII.

329

of blame, has been already explained. It is the foundation
of our daily judgments upon moral conduct, and removes
from Calvinism the odious imputation of representing men
as punished by God for what he compels them to do. Still,
however, a cloud hangs over the subject, and there is a
difficulty in reconciling the mind to a system, which after
laying for a foundation, that special grace is necessary to the
production of human virtue, adopts as its distinguishing
tenet, that this grace is denied to many. When this
objection is calmly examined, it will be found resolvable
into that question which has exercised the human mind
ever since it began to speculate, without being able to
answer it. How was moral evil introduced ? and why is it
permitted to exist under the government of a Being, whose
wisdom, power, and goodness, are without bounds ? It is
seen that some do not repent and believe, but their conduct,
like every other event in the universe, was comprehended
in the divine plan. Because God has not conferred upon
them the grace which would have led them to pursue a
different conduct, the Calvinist infers that it was not his
purpose to confer that grace, and he believes the purpose
is good, because it is that of a perfect Being. The
Arminian seems to remove the difficulty, but he only
seems. His explanation is, that men do not repent and
believe, because they resist the grace that was given for
that purpose. But if we ask, why one man yields to it,
when another, under circumstances equally favourable,
resists it ; his only explanation is, that the one has naturally
a better disposition than the other. Now as it is the same
God that confers grace who made us, and who also by his
providence orders the place of our birth, and the circum-
stances of our lives, the two systems, though the steps be
somewhat different, lead ultimately to the same conclusion.
The salvation of some and not of others, is ultimately
resolvable into the good pleasure of Him, who by a different
dispensation of the gifts of nature or of grace might have
saved all. Such being the difficulties of Arminianism and
Calvinism, it is natural to think that there must be some
middle course. I shall therefore in the last place state the

330

LECTDRE XIII.

third opinion, supported by Bishop Davenant in his latin
Dissertationes on the Death of Christ and on Predestination,
and in his english Animadversions on Hoart's Treatise on
God's Love to mankind, which endeavours to unite the
universal redemption of the former, with God's purpose of
special love to the elect. It is thus stated by Plaifere.

That God decreed to send his Son to die for the world,
and his Word to call, and to offer salvation unto all men,
with a common and sufficient grace in the means to work
faith in men, if they be not wanting to themselves ; and
that out of God's foreknowledge of man's infirmity, and that
none would believe by this common grace, he decreed to
add a special grace, more effectual and abundant to whom-
soever he pleased, chosen according to his own purpose, by
which they shall not only be able to believe, but also
actually believe. The secret will of God is thus reconciled
with his general and conditional will, that is, as the Article
expresses it, " that will is to be followed by us, which we
have expressly revealed in his word," that Christ redeemed
all mankind, that Christ commanded the Gospel to be
preached unto all, that God wills and commands all
men to receive it. And this opinion agrees with the
judgment of Augustine, as he is expounded by Prosper,
who says, that the whole dispute may be settled by this
single text calmly considered, God is the Saviour of all
men, specially of those who believe1. I think, says Bishop
Davenant, that no sound theologian of the Reformed Church
wishes to deny the general intention of saving all men
through the death of Christ, upon the condition of believ-
ing, although his absolute intention, which cannot be
frustrated, of granting faith and eternal life to some, is
special, and restricted to the elect. Thus there is no
ground for complaint, and Augustine's observation upon
the first man is applicable to all his descendants. " So God
ordained the life of all angels and men, that therein he
might first manifest how far free will could go, and then
what the benefit of his grace and the judgment of righteous-
ness could doe."

1 l Tim. iv. 10. % De Corrupt, cap. 10.

LECTURE XIII.

331

I proceed to a brief analysis of the Article. It consists
of two parts ; the first, which lays down the doctrine of
Predestination; the second, which points out the use and
abuse of it. The doctrine, which is stated with great
caution almost exclusively in St. Paul's words, is that of
Predestination unto life; it does not so much as name
Predestination unto death, or, as it is called, Reprobation,
leaving men to regard it contrary to high Calvinism,
as no 'positive decree, and no more than the bare nega-
tion or denial of that special favour, which in mercy is
bestowed upon the elect. Prceterition, or passing by,
is certainly a distinct act from positive Reprobation,
"God," says Bishop Davenant, "did eternally decree to
glorify himself in the salvation of some, and the damna-
tion of others, which the event will plainly demonstrate.
But for those in whose salvation he decreed to glorify
his mercy, he worketh in them the means of their
salvation, by an influx of grace into their souls, by a
powerful yet not violent, by a most sweet and yet most
infallible, guidance of their will. As for those in whose
damnation God glorifieth his sovereignty and justice, he
doth it not by an influx of malice into their souls, nor by
unavoidable wresting of their wills unto any particular sin,
but leaves all sinful actions to their own sinful and defective
will; and they wanting the special grace and effectual guidance
proceeding from divine Predestination, never fail to run
themselves willingly and wittingly upon their own damna-
tion. The means whereby men are brought unto salvation
are real effects of divine election wrought by God's Spirit,
as light and heat are the effects of the sun ; but the means
whereby men are carried to their own damnation proceed
from themselves. Notwithstanding the absolute decrees,
that is, God's secret will, his revealed will, and the Gospel
promises, stand in their full force. If Cain repent and live
well, he shall be pardoned and saved. If Peter repent not,
he shall be damned. Election and pretention are no good
arguments to prove that therefore the non-elected are left
without sufficient remedy. Adam was not predestined to
stand, but he was not thereby bereft of sufficient means of

332

LECTURE XIII.

standing. Judas is reprobated, therefore he will not use the
means offered for his salvation ; but it is not a just con-
sequence to say, therefore God hath not given him sufficient
remedies, were not his own wicked will the only hindrance.
All that the Father hath given to the Son will come unto
him, and whoever is willing, may take of the water of life
freely. The case has been thus illustrated. Who is there
among you of all his people f his God be with him, and let
him go up to Jerusalem. Such was the decree of Cyrus to
the captive Jews. This was a general invitation and per-
mission to all. But many had got comfortable settlements
at Babylon, and they cared not enough for the holy city, or
for the interests of religion, to encounter the perils and
hardships of such an expedition. Who then eventually
availed themselves of the king's unlimited permission ?
All they whose spirit God had raised to go, and none
else. The others might, and could, had they had a willing
mind; but they had not, and therefore they went not. Nor
would any have gone, had not God interposed to make some
of them willing.

Calvin does not shrink from a statement of the conse-
quences, which he, as well as his opponents, considers to
result from the system. "Election itself," he says, "could
not exist without being opposed to Reprobation." He
reminds us, that St. Paul silences the objector, by stating
that election proceeds from the good pleasure or decree of
God ; but though he does not give any account of his
matters, it does not follow that he has not a good reason for
his conduct, though we cannot discover it. As an arbitrary
sovereign is too often actuated by caprice or some other un-
worthy motive, arbitrary will suggests the idea of an unjust
and unreasonable one ; but, as Calvin remarks, since the will
of God is the highest rule of justice, so what he wills must be
considered just, because he wills it. We represent not God
as lawless, who is a law unto himself; his will being the
highest standard of perfection, the law of laws. Never-
theless, Pretention is a term more pleasing to my ears, and
is, I think, supported by the description of mankind as dead
in trespasses andsin, and consequently obnoxious to the divine

LECTURE XIII.

333

displeasure. God sent his Son not to condemn t/te world, but
that through him the world might be saved'; and, He thatbelieveth
not is condemned already, not as it should seem on account
of any decree of reprobation, but because he has not believed
in the name of the only-begotten Son of God; and this is said to
be the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men
loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evilk.
The same advice is given by the preeminent French Divine,
so highly praised by the "judicious" Hooker, from whom in
modern times and in Protestant countries the doctrine of
Predestination has received the name of Calvinism. The
subject forms a very small part of his celebrated Institutes,
which are much fuller on the means of grace and on the
commandments ; and is treated entirely, by him, not as a
philosopher, but as a theologian. He begins with some
preliminary advice, desiring only this general admission,
that we should neither scrutinize those things which the
Lord has left concealed, nor neglect those which he has
openly exhibited ; lest we be condemned for excessive
curiosity, or for ingratitude ; for, he continues, " it is judi-
ciously observed by Augustin that we may safely follow the
Scripture, which proceeds as a mother stooping to the
weakness of a child. Of the former he says, let them
remember that they penetrate into the inmost recesses of
divine wisdom, where the careless and confident intruder
will obtain no satisfaction to his curiosity, but will enter a
labyrinth from which he will find no way to depart. It is
unreasonable for men to scrutinize with impunity those
things which the Lord hath determined to hide in himself,
and to investigate, even from eternity, that sublimity of
wisdom which God would have us to adore, and not com-
prehend, that it may promote our admiration of his glory.
The secrets of his will which he determined to reveal to us,
he reveals in his Word : and these he foresaw are all that
would concern us, or conduce to our advantage." And
further on, " We shall observe the best order, if in seeking
an assurance of our election, we confine our attention to
those subsequent signs which are certain attestations of it.
1 John iii. 17, 38. k John iii. 19.

334

LECTURE XIII.

Satan never attacks the faithful with a more dangerous
temptation than when he disquiets them with doubts of their
election, and stimulates them to seek it in a wrong way.
Therefore if we dread shipwreck, let us earnestly beware of
this rock on which none ever strike without being destroyed.
But though the discussion may be compared to a dangerous
ocean, yet in traversing it the voyage is safe, and I will add
pleasant, to those who do not expose themselves to danger.
For as those who seek the assurance of their election
without the Word, plunge into a fatal abyss, so those who
investigate it in the Word, derive from it peculiar con-
solation. Those who err in the opposite extreme, and from
fear of its abuse wish Election to be altogether omitted, he
admonishes that Scripture is the school of the Holy Spirit,
in which as nothing useful is omitted, so nothing is taught
which it is not beneficial to know. Let the Christian open
his ears and his heart to all discourses addressed to him by
God, but as soon as he closes his gracious mouth, let him
desist from enquiry8."

This decree is described as an everlasting purpose,
determined by God's secret counsel, which implies, that
though there be revealed to us some hopeful signs of
election, as is witnessed in the next paragraph, "the feeling
of the working of the Spirit of Christ," yet the certainty of
it is a secret hidden in God, and in this life undiscoverable.
The purpose is "to deliver from curse and damnation those
whom God hath chosen in Christ1* out of mankind." The
decree then, according to our Church, does not view man in
a state of innocence, according to the high Calvinist, nor in
a state of restoration, and all but glorification, with the
Lutheran and the Arminian, but in a lapsed state, as
miserable and damnable.

Then follows the mode of executing the decree, or the
manifestation of Predestination unto life. "Wherefore they
who be endued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called
according to God's purpose by his Spirit, working in due
season ; they, through grace, obey the calling, they be

8 Institutes, book iii. 21, 22.
>' In Christ, was added in 1502.

LECTURE XIII.

335

justified freely, they be made sons of God by adoption, they
walk religiously in good works, and at length, by God's
mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity." The passage
evidently refers to the Apostle's declaration to the Romans:
Those whom he foreknew he did predestinate, and whom
he did predestinate them he also called ; whom he called he
also justified, whom he justified he also glorified1. Here
we learn, that whoever would know whether he be himself
of the number of the elect, must not fix his eye imme-
diately upon either of the extremes, predestination or
glorification, but upon the middle links of the chain. That
he hath been called, no baptized person can doubt; but let
him examine himself whether or not he hath obeyed the
call, whether he hath been in any degree made like to the
image of God's only Son, and walks religiously in good works ;
and in proportion as he can answer these questions affirm-
atively, he may trust that he hath been predestinated
to salvation. I think also, that the language conveys
the meaning, that foreseen faith and virtue are not the
causes, but the effects of election ; and that God hath chosen
us in Christ, not because he foresaw that we would be,
but in order that we should be, holy and without blame
before him in lovev ; and that we are his workmanship,
created in Jesus Christ unto good works, which God hath
before ordained, that we should walk in them1. This inter-
pretation seems to be borne out, by the caution in the
second part of the Article, on the use and abuse of the
doctrine, both of which are very intelligible upon this view,
whereas the other admits scarcely of the first, and certainly
not of the second. The consideration of Election is called a
godly one; not therefore a presumptuous and hopeless attempt
to read the closed volume of God's secret book of life, but an
humble endeavour by self-examination to ascertain, if we have
the moral character, with which it is inseparably united, of
which these tests are given ; " the feeling of the working of
the Spirit of Christ, in mortifying the works of the flesh,
and in drawing up the mind to high and heavenly things."
This consideration, it is added, is full of sweet, pleasant,
l Rom. viii. k Eph. i. 4. 1 Eph. ii. 10.

336

LECTURE XIII.

and unspeakable comfort ;" and the reason assigned is, " that it
doth fervently kindle love to God" — doubtless by exciting
gratitude — and also that " it confirms the faith of eternal
salvation," that is, I conceive, by leading us to infer from the
evidence of present grace, that we shall persevere to the
end, in faith and holiness, and consequently shall attain
salvation. On the other hypothesis of a conditional decree,
I do not perceive what greater comfort can be drawn from
the consideration of election, than from the general promises
of redemption, of the acceptance of the penitent, and of the re-
compense of good works. And the remark applies still more
forcibly to the abuse of the doctrine. We are told, that "for
curious and carnal persons lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have
continually before their eyes the sentence of God's Predesti-
nation, is a most dangerous downfall," as if they were standing
on the verge of a steep precipice of dangerous and dizzy
height, from which the Devil may thrust them either into
despair, or a recklessness of unclean living." Nothing is more
common in the opponents of Calvinism, than the charging these
evils upon it; and it must be confessed, that though not its
legitimate results, as will be allowed by all who know that the
election is to holiness as the means, no less than to glory as
the end, still there have been in all ages too many disposed
to abuse it in either way ; there are those who in despair think,
that Christ did not die for them, and that they are excluded
from mercy; and there are those also, probably fewer, who
maintain, that if they are elect, they may live if they please,
in sin. The Arminian doctrine is clearly not capable of
this abuse. Two characters are under consideration, the
curious to whom desperation refers, the carnal to whom
wretchlessness. The latter, spelt recklessness, occurs in
Shakespeare, and reckless is still in use. The Latin
original has securitatem impurissimae vitae, corresponding
to solutam quandam et mollem vita? securitatem of the
Reformatio Legum. That code has prorsus alieni as the
equivalent of lacking the Spirit of Christ.

The remedy is in God's general promises, and in his will,
as expressly declared unto us in his word. His promises are
so large, that none are excepted by name or character ; him

LECTURE XIII.

337

that cometh unto me I will not cast out '1. Ho, every one that
thirsteth, come ye to the waters*: and Christ complaineth of
men, Ye will not come unto me, that ye might have life1. The
promise being general, why should any exclude themselves ?
Every one who asketh receiveth, and he that seeketh Jindethm.
Even at the latest hour the greatest sinner may receive
pardon ; no one then who sincerely seeks it can be a reprobate.
There have been instances of persons who have plunged the
deepest into iniquity in every age, of whom it may be said,
as St. Paul addressing the Corinthians writes after a cata-
logue of enormous sins, and such were some of you, but ye
are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the
name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and by the Spirit of our Godn.
Suppose one of these awakened to a sense of his guilt
and danger, could he even himself have drawn up a clause
more encouraging him to come to the Saviour, than that
Saviour's own gracious words, not once, but continually
repeated? He has no occasion to enquire whether he be
elect, which he cannot know. He has only to ask himself,
Am I desirous to be saved from the pollution as well as from
the power of sin ? do I believe in the all-sufficiency of the
remedy provided, and am I willing to trust to Christ as my
Saviour, and to obey him as my King ? And he may be
satisfied that every approach to a temper and conduct so op-
posite to corrupt nature, must be from the suggestions of the
holy Spirit. Still less reason can he have to despair of his
election, who is a real believer, and is desirous of obeying
the commandments of God, for to him the Scriptures abound
with comfort. As many as are led by the Spirit of God are
the sons of God0 ; and, there is no condemnation to them who
are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh but after the
Spirit* , Whence Augustine says, From your godly and
upright course of life, ye may conclude that ye belong to
God's gracious election. And I will add, that foreseen
merit cannot be so full of comfort to godly persons, or so
kindle their love to God, as His everlasting purpose before
the foundation of the world was laid.

5 John vi. 37. k Isaiah lv. 1. 1 John v. 40. ™ Matt. vii. 8.

D I Cor. vi. ] I. 0 Rom. vhi. 14. p Rom. viii. 1.

338

LECTURE XIII.

The opposite error is presumption ; and to a hasty con-
clusion of their own election the carnal annex this profane
inference, Live as I will, since I am predestinated, I shall be
saved. To this we oppose the revealed will of God, which
expressly declares, that the wicked shall go into everlasting
punishment. I borrow from Bishop Davenant this admonition
to such rash presumers. Although God has from eternity
elected some, yet if we come down to particular persons, it
is a secret kept close in his own breast. The decree, as it con-
cerneth others, is altogether unsearchable by us ; as it concerns
ourselves it is unsearchable also in its causes, and is to be
perceived only in its effects after our conversion and sanctifi-
cation. Thus St. Paul describes the foundation stone, The
Lord, knoweth them that are his: and, Let every one that
nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity*. As if he
had said, God himself knoweth who are elected from the
secret decree of his own will; but thou, O man, whosoever
thou art, dost not know that thou art elected, but by de-
parting from thy course of iniquity. In the beginning of
the Epistle to the Ephesians also the Apostle teacheth both
these points. That God chose his before the foundation of
the world, and that they have not the assurance of this
election, till after they have believed from the heart. If
thou obey est God's call, thou mayest rightly conclude that
thou wast from all eternity predestinated. If thou persevere
in thy unbelief and impiety, dream thou mayest, or surmise,
know or believe thou canst not. Let us put a case, that a
battle were to be waged between two armies, and that God
by some prophet had revealed, that the far greater part of the
soldiers should perish in the fight, without mentioning what
particular persons should escape ; I demand, if any man, by
occasion of the divine will thus far revealed, would before
the combat reckon himself to be one of those who must
perish, and hereupon throw down his weapons, and run
upon the swords of the enemy — I demand, whether this
wretch shall rather be thought to be driven into this
despair by the divine revelation, or by his own madness ?
A man, saith Augustine, ought not to despair of the salvation
* 2 Tira. ii. 19.

LECTURE XIII.

339

of any one, whom the patience of God doth suffer to live,
least of all, of his own. This deadly conclusion, therefore,
that I am one of the reprobate, ought to be repelled by
every Christian as " a most dangerous downfall."

Dr. Hey, certainly no Calvinist, asks, Ts not the doctrine
of Predestination hurtful to virtue ? and thus answers it.
No ; virtue is in our Article presupposed, before men are
allowed to meddle with predestination : those who are to
hope that God's purpose will prove favourable to them,
must "walk religiously in good works;" those who may
meditate on the Christian dispensation as having been planned
in the divine counsels, must not be carnal but godly persons.
And even these, according to our notions, ought only to
dwell upon the decrees of God as far as will promote and
strengthen their virtue. Besides, these texts which mention
predestination, are also so linked1" with the mention of virtue
and holiness, that no ingenious man will take the former
and leave the latter. He sums up with this remark, One
would do a great deal to suit weak brethren ; but there is
no sufficient reason why those who are not weak should lose
such sublime devotion ; especially as those who are per-
plexed by meditations on the benign purposes and plans of
the Supreme Being, are under no sort of obligation to dwell
upon them.

• Eph. i. 4 ; ii. 10.

Z g

LECTURE XIV.

ARTICLE XVIII.

OF OBTAINING ETERNAL SALVATION ONLY BY THE NAME
OF CHRIST.

They also are to be had accursed that presume to say, That
every man shall be saved by the law or sect which he
professeth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according
to that law, and the light of nature. For holy Scripture
dolh set out unto us only the Name of Jesus Christ, whereby
men must be saved.

The Hindus represent Heaven as a palace with many
gates, and regard the varieties of worship prevailing in
different countries as agreeable to the Universal Parent.
The heathen philosophers of the lower empire, pleading for
toleration after the triumph and establishment of Christi-
anity, advocate the same sentiment : and a Poet of our own
has gone so far as to say,

For modes of Faith let graceless zealots fight,
His can't he wrong, whose life is in the right.

The distich, however, has been stretched beyond its legiti-
mate meaning ; for the allusion to grace, and the phrase
modes of faith, not faith itself, seem to show, that Pope is
not arguing for the sufficiency of natural religion, but
that he means to assert that the faith of no Christian can be
essentially wrong if it causes him to lead a good life. As a
professing Roman Catholic, he could not justify to his own

LECTURE XIV.

341

Church such a position, even in a qualified sense. We
Protestants allow all who retain essential doctrines to
be within the pale of salvation ; and the Article speaks not
of erring brethren, but of those who deem all doctrines
unimportant speculation, and "presume to say that every
man shall be saved by the law or sect which he professes, so
that he be diligent to frame his life according to that law,
and the light of nature."

Such a doctrine is not extraordinary among nations who
do not lay claim to any revelation of the divine will, and
whose religion mainly consists in traditional rites and cere-
monies : but if God hath declared the conditions on wThich
he will accept us, assent or refusal cannot be supposed to
be indifferent. If a man may be saved by any law which
he chooses to profess, why should a particular one be
revealed ? He is not entitled to the appellation of
Christian, who resolves his religion into a mere scheme of
agenda and credenda, of what he is himself to believe and to
do ; Christianity also reveals what God has done for man,
and Christ is called our Saviour and Redeemer, because he
has died to deliver us from eternal death, and to make us
capable of enjoying eternal happiness. Since we all die in
consequence of the transgression of Adam, we can only live
through the propitiatory sacrifice of the death of Christ.
As we have no personal righteousness of our own to re-
commend us to God, we must by faith appropriate to our-
selves that of Christ, and whatever interpretation we adopt
of the preceding Article, we declare that " God has delivered
from curse and damnation those out of mankind whom he
hath chosen in Christ" confessing thereby that without
Christ, they must have remained under the curse. How
then can a Christian hesitate to assent to this proposition,
that "holy Scripture doth set forth unto us only the name
of Jesus Christ, whereby men must be saved?" The words
themselves are a portion of holy writ, for they contain the
declaration of Peter to the Sanhedrim, when he and John
were brought before that assembly, in consequence of their
healing the lame man at the gate of the temple. The con-
text shows, that both miraculous bodily cures, and the

342

LECTURE XIV.

salvation of the soul, are to be exclusively ascribed to
Christ. Similar declarations, equally positive, may be found
throughout the New Testament. Thus St. Paul replied to
the jailer, who enquired what he should do to be saved,
Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ*. This, saith St. John,
is the record, that God hath given us eternal life, and this
life is in his Sonb. And our Lord himself declares, lam the
way, the truth, and the life ; no man cometh unto the Father
but by me0. And when he said unto his Apostles, go into
all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature, he
added, whoever believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but
he that believeth not shall be damned11. The declaration
approves itself to our judgment ; for surely God would not
have given his only-begotten Son to save the world, if any
other method could have availed ; and we must allow the
force of the Apostle's argument, If there had been a law
given which could have given life, verily righteousness had
been by the law; but the Scripture hath concluded all under
sin, that the promise of faith by Jesus Christ might be given
to them that believee.

The doctrine here rejected would make belief in Christi-
anity indifferent. No wonder then that it is denounced in
such strong language, both in the Article and in the Refor-
matio Legum, which declares, Horribilis est et inanis
illorum audacia qui contendunt in omni religione vel secta
quam homines professi fuerint, salutem illis esse sperandam,
To be had accursed; Anathematizandi sunt; is the esta-
blished language of the Church, as may be seen in the Acts
of Councils, which use this form of condemning error. The
meaning seems to be, that they ought to be excommunicated,
and while in this state, deprived of any portion in God's cove-
nant with his people. No persons had been pronounced
accursed before, yet we have the word also ; several errors,
however, had been censured, as in the sixteenth Article, "they
are to be condemned which say that they can no more sin."
Still this doctrine seems to many to be too harsh to be
true ; and although we readily concede that there can be no

» Acts xvi. SI. h 1 John v. 11. c John xiv. 6.

J Mark xvi. 10, hi. • Gal. iii. 21.

LECTURE XIV.

343

hope for those who wilfully reject the faith into which they
were baptized, and count the blood of the covenant whereby
they have been sanctified an unholy thing*, yet they are
perplexed on considering, that, even in the nineteenth cen-
tury of its promulgation, Christianity has been offered to a
minority of the human race ; and upon this supposition
millions of every generation have passed into endless misery,
no opportunity of avoiding which was ever afforded them.
Not only do our feelings revolt from the statement, but
Scripture itself contains passages which seem to hold out
hope to the virtuous and well-meaning heathen. We are
told, that God is no respecter of persons s, but that in every
nation he that feareth him and worheth righteousness, is
accepted with him; and though the alms and devotions of
Cornelius were not in themselves sufficient, but an
Apostle was divinely commissioned to instruct and baptize
him, still in other countries and ages when miraculous
interferences have ceased, and, humanly speaking, the Gos-
pel could not penetrate, we may conclude that similar
characters would meet with the like acceptance, and be
acknowledged by Christ at the last day as bis, though
never admitted into his Church. The notion seems
encouraged by St. Paul's questions ; How can they call on
him in whom they have not believed? and how can they
believe in him of whom they have not heard ? and how can they
hear without a preacher^ ? which apparently intimate, that
men cannot be bound to believe, and by consequence will
not be punished for not believing, unless the Gospel be
preached to them. And in the opening of the same Epistle,
where he divides mankind into Jew and Gentile, he adds,
when the Gentiles that have not the law, do by nature the
things contained in the law, these having not the law are a law
unto themselves.

How far they act up to this light of nature, and whether
the best may not be found wanting, even according to their
own low standard of moral duty, is not the question, but that
they will be tried by it, appears to be here asserted. There
is a natural and easy way of solving the whole difficulty,
f Heb. x. 29. I Acts x. 34, 35. h Rom. x. H.

LECTURE XFV.

to those at least who believe with our Church in universal
redemption. The thirty -first Article declares, that "the
offering of Christ once made is that perfect redemption,
propitiation, and satisfaction for all the sins of the whole
world, both original and actual ;" and the seventh, " that in
the Old as well as in the New Testament eternal life is
offered to mankind by Christ." If then this sacrifice will
by anticipation prove efficacious to the salvation of the
Patriarchs, who looked forward to it in faith before it took
place, why may not the benefit of it be assigned to those
who have never heard of it, if they endeavour to live up to
the light they have. Thus they may be saved in their own
religion, though not by it. It is the latter opinion which
would nullify Christianity, that the Article condemns :
nothing is said respecting the former. If they be saved,
Christ will still be their Saviour^ though they never knew
him to be such, since it is his sacrifice only that enables God
to be merciful, without compromising his holiness and his
justice. This doctrine seems to me to be most in harmony
with reason, and most honourable to our Redeemer; nor
ought it to relax our exertions in behalf of missions to his
ancient people, who reject him ; to the Mahometans, who
regard him as inferior to their own prophet ; or to the
millions of the heathen, to whom his religion is unknown
even by name. To announce his salvation, as far as our
opportunities enable us, ought to be our delight, and is an
imperative duty. And though the Heathen, who continues
in ignorance without any fault of his, may be saved through
a Redeemer of whom he has never heard, we know that
the sincere and genuine convert, if he persevere to the end,
will be accepted, and will in this state of trial receive such
aid from the Holy Spirit, as can be conferred on none but a
believer.

LECTURE XIV.

345

ARTICLE XIX.

The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful
men, in the which the pure Word of God is preached, and
the Sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ's
ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite
to the same.

As the Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch, have
erred; so also the Church of Rome hath erred, not only in
their living and manner of ceremonies, but also in matters of
faith.

We have reviewed the leading doctrines of Christianity,
and have seen that the Bible is the only rule of faith ; we
have considered the state of individuals by nature, and as
modified by divine grace, the quality of their actions, and
the grounds upon which they may look for salvation. In
the remaining Articles, therefore, we have to treat of them
as united in a Religious Society ; for, as we have observed in
the Introduction, Religion is not merely a personal concern,
but it was our Lord's intention to form his people into a
spiritual Commonwealth. This appears by his command to
his Apostles, to admit converts into his kingdom by the
significant rite of Baptism, upon entering into which they
renounced by themselves if adults, by their proxies if the
infants of believers, the Devil, the Prince as he is called of
this world, which he has usurped, and engaged to serve their
lawful Master, who claims them as his, both by creation and
redemption. This society is called in the original language
'ExxArjtna, the Greek term for a public meeting of any
description. Congregation is the word invariably used by
our translators in the Old Testament, Church in the New :
thus among other instances, " there was not a word of all
that Moses commanded which Joshua read not before all
the congregation of Israel1;" "this was he that was in the
church in the wilderness k." Congregation, however, is the
rendering in Tyndal's New Testament, and is in some
1 Joshua viii. 35. k Acts vii. 38.

346 LECTURE XIV.

respects better, since in modern times we apply the former
word to the building in which the Church properly so
called, that is, the congregation, assembles. This sense
of the word does not occur in the New Testament. In
ordinary language men are too apt to restrict its meaning
to the Clergy, a similar error to that which applies the
word State to the governors of it, in both of which it is
obvious, though in both it has been occasionally forgotten,
that the officers are appointed for the sake of the body, not
that the body exists for the sake of the officers. Bearing this
in mind, a very different sense is given to this text, a leading
one in the controversies on Church government, if thy brother
will not hear thee, tell it unto the Church ; and if he will not
hear the Church, let him be unto thee as a heathen; that is, out
of the congregation, out of the communion of believers.

The preceding Article showed, that salvation was not
to be expected out of the Church ; and the Romanist
claims that sacred name as exclusively belonging to
him. Our Reformers, however, thought that they could
not lawfully communicate with one so corrupt. They not
only felt themselves at liberty, but bound in duty, to
reform it, and the liberty they assumed they could not deny
to other national Churches. It became consequently neces-
sary to define a Church, in order to distinguish it from an
unlawful assembly ; and this is done in the present Article,
which consists of two propositions ; the first defining the
Church, the second affirming an historical fact which none
of us will dispute, that " the Church of Rome hath erred
not only in life but in doctrine." The definition of a Church,
which is a very liberal one, is in accordance with that in
the enlarged Confession of Augsburg. Ad veram unitatem
Ecclesiae satis est consentire de doctrina Evangelii et ad-
ministratione Sacramentorum. The only indispensable
conditions then here laid down are, that the pure Word of
God should be preached and the Sacraments duly admin-
istered in all essential particulars. Even prayer is not
mentioned, though it must be understood ; for the first
record of the Church is, that those who were baptized on
the day of Pentecost continued stedfastly in the Apostles'

LECTURE XIV.

347

doctrine and fellowship, and in the breaking of bread, and
in prayers*; and indeed neither could breaking of bread, that
is, the Eucharist, nor the other Sacrament, be duly ad-
ministered without it. Nothing is said of discipline, yet
enough to preserve the existence, if not the good govern-
ment, of the Church must be presumed. It is silent also as to
the name, rank, employments, and ordination of its ministers,
which form the subject of two subsequent Articles, drawn
up with equal moderation, for the questions of Episcopacy
and Presbyterian ordination are not brought forward; other
systems of Church government are not condemned, and of
our own it is not said to be the best, or to be of divine
authority, and no more is required than the negative com-
mendation, that " the Book of Consecration of Archbishops
and Bishops, and Ordering of Priests and Deacons, hath
nothing in it superstitious or ungodly;" and the necessary
consequence from this, that persons so consecrated or ordained
are lawfully admitted to their spiritual functions.

The general assembly and church of the first-born who are
enrolled in Heaven1, are described in the New Testament under
various figures, as# the heavenly Jerusalem, the mother of us
allm, the spouse of which Christ is the Bridegroom11, the body0
of which He is the Head, and for which Christ delivered
himself, that he might sanctify it, and cleanse it with the
washing of water by the word, that he might present it to
himself a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle?. This
is the society for which Jesus prayed that they might be all
one, the corporation whose citizenship is in heaven*; that
one spiritual house, built upon the foundation of the prophets
andthe Apostles, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone ;
in whom all the building fitly framed together groweih to a
holy temple in the Lord*; that one body into which we are all
baptized8, which is knit together, and compacted of parts
affording mutual aid to its nourishment and increase* ; which
derives its life from its one Head, and is moved by one Spirit.
Such a Church, however, in the full meaning of these

k Acts ii. 42. 1 Heb. xii. 23. » Gal. iv. 2G. n John iii. 29.

° Col. i. 18. p Acts xx. 28 ; Eph. v. 26, 27. q Phil. iii. 20.

r Eph. ii. 20, 21. ■ 1 Cor. xii. 13. 1 Eph. iv. 10.

348

LECTURE XIV.

magnificent characteristics, has never appeared upon earth,
not even after the pentecostal descent of the Holy Ghost,
when the saved were daily added to the Church*, and the
baptized continued stedfastly in the Apostles' doctrine and
fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayersy ; for
in this the original, and probably the purest, congregation
ever formed, there were Ananias and his wife, and murmur-
ings of the Hellenizing believers against the Jewish, in
which one part at least must be to be blamed. It is that
invisible Church, which, according to Hooker2, " cannot be
sensibly discerned, inasmuch as the parts thereof are some
in heaven already with Christ, and the rest that are on
earth, we do not discern under this property whereby they
are truly and infallible of that body." Concerning this
flock it is that our Lord and Saviour has said, I give unto
them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any
pluck them out of my hands*. They who are of this Society
have such notes of distinction from all others, as are not
an object to our senses, only unto God they are clear and
manifest. These everlasting promises belong to the mys-
tical Church; "but this," says Barrow b, "the visible
Church doth enfold, as one floor the corn and the chaff, as
one field the wheat and the tares, as one fold the sheep and
the goat ; because this society is designed to be in reality,
what the other is in appearance, the same with the
other ; because therefore presumptively every member of
this doth pass for a member of the other, (the time of
separation being not yet come,) therefore commonly the
titles of the one are imparted to the other.

The Article only treats of the visible Church. I
therefore transcribe the definition of the invisible in
No well's Catechism, which, like Bishop Jewel's Apology,
may be considered of semi-symbolical authority. " The
Church is the universal society of all the faithful, whom
God predestinated from eternity to everlasting life through
Christ." The Creed properly relates to this community,
which can neither be seen nor always discerned; but there

■ Acta ii. 47. i Acts ii. 42. 1 Book iii. a John x. 28-.

b Barrow concerning the unity of the Church.

LECTURE XIV.

349

is also a visible Church, which is so called, because though
many belong to it who are any thing but true members,
nevertheless, because wherever the Word is purely preached
and the Sacraments rightly administered, there will be
found some destined to salvation through Christ; for he has
promised, that wherever even two or three are gathered
together in his name, there he will be in the midst of them."

The properties of the Church, as expressed in the Apostles'
Creed, are Unity, Sanctity, and Catholicity, to which the
Nicene adds, Apostolicity. The Church is one, having one
Lord, one baptism" , and preserving the one faith once com-
mitted to the saints^, as if, to use the words of Irenaeus, she
dwelt in the same house, had but one soul, and one heart,
and uniformly teaching as if she had but one mouth.
Holiness is also predicated of it, and this Article defines
the Church as a congregation of faithful men, meaning by
that word that they are holy, not as represented in the Roman
Catechism, simply because set apart to God's service, but in
conformity with all the Protestant Confessions, inwardly
sanctified by the Holy Spirit. It need not be matter of
surprise, says that Catechism, that the Church, which com-
prises in itself the evil as well as the good, should notwith-
standing be termed holy, for to that appellation all are
entitled who profess to believe in Christ, and have received
the Sacrament of baptism. From this it follows, that all,
except unbelievers, heretics, and schismatics, and the ex-
communicated, however wicked they may be, must without
doubt be held to be within the pale. Mr. Litton, in his
able and instructive Treatise on the Church of Christ, thus
states the difference. " The Romanist, while admitting that
there is, or ought to be in the Church an interior life, not
cognizable by mortal eye, yet regards this as a separate
accident, and makes the essence of the Church to consist in
what is external and visible ; the Protestant, while admit-
ing that to be visible as an inseparable property of the
Church, makes the essence thereof to consist in what is
spiritual and unseen ; viz. the work of the Holy Spirit in
the hearts of Christians. Neither party can absolutely
c Eph. iv. 5. a juae 3.

350

LECTURE XIV.

refuse assent to the well-known aphorism of Irenaeus,
" where the Church is, there is the Spirit of God; where the
Spirit of God is, there is the Church but since in its two
clauses that aphorism may be held to represent different
tendencies ; on the one hand, to make the presence of the
Spirit dependent upon and posterior in point of time to the
existence of the Church ; and, on the other, to make the
existence of the Church dependent upon the presence of the
Spirit; it accurately expresses the true point of controversy
between Romanists and Protestants. This apparently
unimportant difference of view is pregnant with important
results. The Romanist makes a distinction between Church
membership and a state of salvation ; the latter can only be
affirmed of those who are renewed in heart, but the former
may be enjoyed even by those who are living in mortal sin.
The Protestant idea is derived from the phraseology of the
Epistles, throughout which the members of the Church are
presumed to be in living union with Christ ; saints and
faithful brethren, reasonings and exhortations being ad-
dressed to them, the force of which cannot be supposed to
be admitted except by those who are led by the Spirit of
God. Catholicity primarily is equivalent with universality,
and designates the Church existing every where, and formed
of believers of every kindred, tongue, and people, as dis-
tinguished from the synagogue limited to the Jewish nation.
It was used by the Fathers in a secondary sense, to mark
its orthodoxy, to the exclusion of the assemblies of Gnostics,
Donatists, and other schismatics."

Rome, wrhich allows no other Church but its own, claims an
exclusive right to the title of Catholic. In the proper sense
it was never strictly correct, and after its separation from the
Greek Church, and still more, since the Reformation has
emancipated from its bondage the north of Europe, our own
country with its colonies, and the United States of
America, it has become a glaring misnomer. Protestants
in carelessness, or out of civility, yielded to them the title ;
but as they take advantage of the concession, we ought
always to qualify it with the addition of Roman ; though
the title so qualified is a contradiction in terms. Papist,

LECTURE XIV.

351

which is really a fit distinction for those who accept Bel-
larmine's definition of the Church, as an assembly of men
united in the profession of one and the same Christian
faith, and in the communion of the same Sacraments, under
the government of their lawful pastors, but especially of
the Roman Pontiff, is regarded as an insult by those
(unhappily a decreasing number) who are averse from the
Italian theory of the Papacy, like Bossuet, and the former
advocates of the Gallican liberties, whom we may dis-
tinguish as their low Churchmen, Romanist appears
to be the best term, as both correct and less offensive,
Apostolicity is claimed by Romanists as a note of the Church.
It is called, says one of their approved divines, apostolical,
on account of the doctrine, and on account of the ministry.
They contend, that by an uninterrupted line of succession
from the Apostles, their bishops have derived their authority,
and consequently their ministrations alone are valid, to
the exclusion of all who cannot trace their origin without
interruption to the same source; and they acknowledge, that
the doctrines taught by the Apostles form a necessary
element of the succession. On personal succession giving
validity to Sacraments, Scripture is silent ; it even foretells
false preachers, and predicts that Antichrist will sit in the
temple of God ; and when separated from apostolical purity
of faith and morals, it is held in no estimation by the
Fathers. " We do not," says Augustine, " prove our
Church either from the succession of Bishops, or from the
authority of Councils. Those who sit in the seat are to
be heard, for in sitting in that seat they teach the law
of God ; but if they teach their own doctrines, you are
neither to obey nor hear them*." " They possess not, says
Ambrose f, the inheritance of Peter, who do not possess the
faith of Peter;" and long before then, Irenaeus8, when he said,
"it is proper to submit to those presbyters who have the
succession of the Apostles," adds, "who with the succession
to the episcopate have received the undoubted gift of truth."
This very passage is quoted by Archbishop Laud, in his
Conference with Fisher the Jesuit. " And most evident it is,"
e De Unitate Eoclesise, i. 4. f De Poenitentia, i. 6. * iv. 43.

352

lecture xiv.

he observes, " that the succession which the Fathers meant
is not tied to place or person, but is tied to the verity of
doctrine ; for so Tertullian says expressly11, beside the order
of bishops in succession from the beginning, there is required
a consanguinity, so to speak, of Apostolical doctrine. I do
not find, says Laud, any one of the ancient Fathers that
makes local, personal, visible, and continued succession, a
necessary mark of the true Church in any one place ; and
where Vincentius Lirinensis calls for antiquity, universality,
and consent as great notes of truth, he hath not one word
of succession." Since these Lectures were drawn up, the
notion of a succession of Bishops repudiated by Laud,
seems to have been gaining ground in our Church, which is
much to be lamented, since there is no scripture warrant for
its importance, and it would be impossible to prove it. In
all other Protestant Churches, Sweden excepted, episcopacy
has been superseded by a presbytery, not from choice, but
from necessity ; and in our own, though it is easy to trace
upward to Cranmer, and to his papal predecessors, an un-
broken line for centuries, who shall vouch for the due
consecration of the missionary to Kent, Augustine and his
immediate successor ? Or the still more doubtful succession
from the Apostles of Aidan and the other Scottish monks,
who converted the pagans of the north of England' ? And
with respect to Rome itself, which claims to be the Mother
and Mistress of all other Churches, one who calmly investi-
gates the question will probably agree with Comber k, there
is no certainty who was Bishop next to the Apostles.
"There is not," says Archbishop Whately, "a Minister in all
Christendom who is able to trace up with any approach to
certainty his own spiritual pedigree. The sacramental
virtue, (for such it is that is implied, whether the term be
used or not,) on this principle, dependent on the imposition
of hands, with a due observance of apostolical usages by a
Bishop, himself duly consecrated, after having been in like
manner ordained Deacon and Priest; this sacramental

h De Prescript, xxxii.

' Mason's Vindication of the Church of England hy Lindsay, book ii. 7.
k On Roman Forgeries, i. 1.

LECTURE XIV.

353

virtue, if a single link of the chain be faulty, must be
utterly nullified ever after, in respect of all the links that
hang on that one. And who can undertake to pronounce,
that during that long period, designated as the dark ages, no
taint was ever introduced ?" The advocates of this opinion
respect the authority of the Fathers ; but this extract from
Gregory of Nazianzen's panegyric of Athanasius, shows how
little he valued a mere personal succession. " He who
maintains the same doctrine of faith is partner in the same
chair; but he who defends a contrary doctrine ought, though
in the chair of St. Mark, to be esteemed an adversary to it.
This man may have a nominal succession, but the other has
the very thing itself, the succession in deed and in truth."
This is a subject upon which Scripture is silent; and the
earnest enquirer after religious truth will be satisfied with its
possession, without a curious and unprofitable enquiry into
the channels through which it has flowed, or whether those
from whom he received it, had to draw it themselves from
the pure undefiled well of salvation, the Word of God.

The Article passes over without notice many assumed notes
of the true Church, and confines its definition to the essential
points of the Word and the Sacraments. As the Church is
viewed here, not as it has for centuries existed in Christ-
endom, during which its members have been introduced into
it by infant baptism, but as exhibited by the Missionary to
adults, the word is first mentioned, as it is that which, read or
faithfully preached, convinces the understanding, and opens
the heart. The believer thereby bom again, not of corruptible
seed, but of incorruptible, is admitted to the laver of regene-
ration, in which by the answer of a good conscience towards God
he hath his faith confirmed and grace increased. Of both
Sacraments we shall have occasion to speak hereafter. I will
only here observe, that it is difficult to conceive how the
Lord's Supper can be duly administered according to Christ's
ordinance in all these things that of "necessity are re-
quisite to the same," in a Church which worships one of the
elements, and deprives the congregation of the other. We
forbear to enquire what additions or defects annul the
efficacy of Sacraments in other Churches, having abundant

a a

354

LECTURE XIV.

reason to be thankful for the services with which they are
administered in our own. The adoration of the sacramental
Bread and Wine, we are taught, "were idolatry to be
abhorred of all faithful Christians ;" and the Homilies bring
against Rome other charges of the same offence ; but as the
Jews, notwithstanding their worship of the images, not of
saints or of angels, but of false gods, were still addressed by
the prophets as the people of Jehovah, our Church practi-
cally acknowledges that of Rome, as she does not reordain
the priests who leave her communion for our's, but is
satisfied with a recantation of her errors, and the abjuration
of the Papal Supremacy.

Church in the restricted sense here used, is authorized
by the New Testament, for Paul speaks of the church at
Corinth ; St. Luke speaks of that Apostle as going through
Syria and Cilicia confirming the churches; and St. John
was commanded to write to the seven in Asia. The
conclusion of the Article is levelled against Rome, which
not only maintains that she has never erred, but that she
never can. She appeals to her infallibility as the test of
her being the true Church ; and till this monstrous claim
was not only made, but enforced by carnal weapons, so that
for ages none dare openly dispute it, it would, if the idea
had ever occurred to the believer of an earlier age, have
been rejected as incredible. Our Article accuses her as
guilty not only "in living and manner of ceremonies," but also
" in matters of faith." The Latin is more definite, agenda
and credenda ; the former meaning not merely wicked
living, but the allowing and even teaching immorality.
To make the charge at the same time less offensive and
more probable, it is observed, that " as the Churches of
Hierusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch, have erred, so also
has the Church of Rome." As to the errors of the latter,
the greater part of the remaining Articles is directed against
them : on those of the former, it is not necessary to dwell :
as it is not denied by the Romanists ; but we may observe,
that they at one time favoured Arianism. If speculation
was allowable on a point which may be at once decided by
an appeal to facts, the claim to the maintenance of the

LECTURE XIV,

355

truth might have been advanced with as much plausibility
by any of these churches as by Rome. Jerusalem could
boast of being the origin and parent of all, and had had
St. James for her Bishop ; that of Alexandria, that she was
founded by the Evangelist Mark, the convert and companion
of St. Peter; and that of Antioch could prove, what Rome
can only render probable, that St. Peter was her founder.
They were all also as well as Rome Patriarchates, that is,
had many churches, not only episcopal but archiepiscopal,
under the jurisdiction of their prelates. It is well known to
the reader of ecclesiastical history, that the Roman Supremacy
grew up gradually, originating in its legitimate authority
as the Patriarchate of the West, strengthened by the natural
deference of the recently converted barbarous nations, who
occupied the greater part of its provinces, and by its having
been the ancient capital of the empire in which the Papal
power, temporal as wTell as spiritual, was much promoted by
the withdrawing of the supreme civil governor to new
Rome, as Constantine called his city. The name Pope is
only the English rendering of Papa, and means in fact the
Father, by way of eminence. In the west it has been long
restricted to the Holy Father, as Roman Catholics call the
Bishop of Rome ; and we use similar phraseology when we
address our own bishops as fathers in Christ. In the east,
as may be seen in any book of travels, it is the common
appellation of all priests.

Supremacy was asserted by Rome early, but infallibility
is a later claim. St. Cyprian resisted even the first; and
when Constantinople was raised to patriarchal dignity and
privileges, it was declared to be equal to Rome, rank and
order only being reserved to the original capital. It is
strange that the Roman Catholics are not themselves agreed
as to the seat of this infallibility, which some place in the
Pope, others in a General Council. If in the latter it can
be learnt only from its decrees, and its voice for many ages
together has been silent. Upon this supposition it has not
been heard since the close of the last, that of Trent, which
terminated about the same time as the final settlement of
these Articles. Till Romanists are agreed where it is

a a 2

356

LECTURE XIV.

lodged, they can hardly expect Protestants to acknowledge
it. In an enlightened age like this, and one so little prone
to how to authority, except its claims can be substantiated
by reason or Scripture, they wisely keep so offensive and
absurd a doctrine as much as possible out of sight. If we
convict them of a single error, there is at once an end of
their infallibility, and no other Church puts forth the
claim. It is clear that the western Patriarchate has no
greater reason than the others to expect such a privilege to
be conferred upon it ; nor can the Pope inherit either this,
or supremacy from his presumed predecessor St. Peter, who
had not the latter to confer, and whose apostolical infal-
libility, like that of Paul and the rest, was not transferable.
The doctrine is too absurd to require refutation, and has
indeed been refuted by facts. When Pope Liberius con-
demned Athanasius, he was universally condemned himself,
and was not again acknowledged till he had retracted.
Honorius was condemned as a Monothelite, in the sixth
General Council. Pelagianism, condemned by Innocent,
was approved by his immediate successor Zozimus; and the
sentence of the same Innocent, in favour of Infant Com-
munion, was anathematized by Pius IV. in conformity to
the Council of Trent. Thus we have Pope against Pope,
and we shall soon find Councils opposed to Councils.

The effusion of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost,
formed out of Jews and Proselytes a new religious body.
The next Church recorded is that of Antioch, which sent
forth Barnabas and Paul ; and through their preaching and
that of others to the idolatrous heathen, Christianity gra-
dually took possession of the cities of the Roman empire,
and was even propagated beyond its pale. These churches,
before the conversion of Constantine, were independent of
one another, yet keeping up a friendly intercourse, and pro-
viding their members who travelled, with commendatory
letters, which admitted them into full communion with the
brethren wherever they found them. Heretics formed
associations of their own, but they were few and insig-
nificant, and for the most part gradually expired. This
federative Republic composed the Catholic Church, united

LECTURE XIV.

357

in one bond of faith and in one spirit, though prevented
by distance from joining together in worship. It soon
assumed under its Bishops an aristocratical character, which
slowly degenerated into a monarchy, through the failure of
the western branch of the Roman empire, and the occu-
pation of its European provinces by the barbarians. The
Church continued to use the Latin tongue; and while Britain,
France, Italy, and Germany, became distinct sovereignties,
the Pope remained the spiritual governor of them all.
Such was the ecclesiastical state of Christendom, till the
formal separation of the Greek Church, which Rome only
condemns as schismatical, while for the Churches of the
Reformation she reserves the severer term heretical. We
have already referred to the infallibility claimed by this
corrupt community, which has in the course of ages accu-
mulated so many pernicious errors, and such degrading and
demoralizing superstition, that if we had not the attestation
of history to the fact, we should reject it as an incredible
libel. The tyranny it claims, and endeavours wherever it
it can to exercise, is still more odious. Professing to be the
only Church, it claims all baptized persons as its subjects,
for it maintains the validity of the baptism of heretics, and
even of infidels. And this claim renders it far more for-
midable than it appears on this simple statement, or as
uninformed Protestants can be easily made to believe. This
monstrous pretension not only justifies, but requires as a
duty in a loyal member of the church, the persecution, even
unto death, when prudence permits, of the heretics whom
arguments fail to convince. A Pagan, a Mahometan, a Jew,
the Church will tolerate; but all who profess Christianity
are its subjects, and when opportunity of knowing its juris-
diction is granted, the contumacious become amenable to
its laws as rebels. Such is the decision of the Canon Law.

The Church is entitled Holy Mother, not merely in hymns,
or in the glowing language of devotional books, but in such a
cold and formal enumeration of Articles of faith as the Papal
Creed. We find the epithet as early as in an epistle of
Cyprian, and it is said in a tract which used to pass under the
name of Augustine, that he shall not have God for his father,

358

LECTURE XIV.

who will not have the Church for his mother. Personification
is a figure in which on all subjects and in all times the
human mind is disposed to indulge ; thus the politician
speaks of the State, or of England, and the Scholar of his
College or University, as if it were an individual. And
such is our tendency to clothe abstract ideas with an
objective reality, that we are apt to forget that they are non-
entities, and that though it be convenient to use such terms,
individuals alone exist, and these idols of the imagination
ought to have no hold upon our feelings, as they can have
no just claim on our allegiance. Such language is so
natural, that we imperceptibly adopt it ; but the accurate
thinker will take care not to suffer himself to become the
dupe of his imagination. Even divines of our own com-
munion, not content with the simple term our Mother the
Church, have incautiously followed out the notion, de-
scribing her, and sometimes without thinking of its con-
sequences, as a tender parent devising ceremonies and
composing religious services for the benefit of her children,
who in return are expected to show her filial reverence and
affectionate obedience, till the hearer is led unconsciously into
a refined idolatry, which transfers in a degree to an abstrac-
tion of the mind the homage due alone to the Redeemer
and the Sanctifier. Such may well be called the magic
effect of a word; translate ecclesia not church, but congre-
gation, and the spell is broken ; and hear the Church,
assumes quite a new meaning. If we ask what is the Church,
the Canon will reply, " The whole congregation of Chris-
tian people dispersed throughout the whole world." This
simple definition at once demolishes a fanciful, unscriptural,
and pernicious theory. I may well call it pernicious, for it
substitutes for personal union with a personal Saviour,
union with this abstraction ; derives spiritual life not imme-
diately from the vine, but from its branches. " Let this
dogma," says Mr. Litton, in his able and valuable work on
the Church, " be combined with that of the efficacy of the
Sacraments, ex opere operato, and from the combination the
Romish conception of the Church will follow. According
to this system, the blessings which flow from incorporation

LECTURE XIV.

359

in Christ are bestowed upon all, however destitute they may
be of sanctifying grace, who partake of the Sacraments,
the Church being the interposed medium through which
lies access to the Saviour. And what is required in order
to ensure their due operation ? Nothing but that the reci-
pient place no positive hindrance in the way, and performs
the prescribed act." Under the influence of such impressions
a distinguished layman tells us, that the individual who
addresses the Saviour in the closet, stands in a lower
position than when praying in the congregation, as a part
of her incorporated life ! Happily the scriptural image of
a temple is applied to individuals'1, as well as to the whole
body of believerse; it is individuals who are bought with a
price, and are made kings and priests; they are sons, who
may come boldly to the throne of grace, heirs of God, and
joint-heirs with Christ. We may indeed both suffer and
rejoice in our collective capacity, but judgments upon nations
or churches are of necessity limited to this world, in which
alone they can be said to exist. Our connection with both
may have tended to form our character, but it is as indi-
viduals that wre must stand hereafter before the judgment-
seat of Christ, to receive the things done in the body.

d 1 Cor. vi. 17.

e Eph. iii. 21.

360

LECTURE XIV.

ARTICLE XX.

OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH.

The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and
authority in controversies of faith : and yet it is not lawful
for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to
God's word written, neither may it so expound one place
of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore,
although the Church be a witness and a keeper of holy writ,
yet, as it ought not to decree any thing against the same,
so besides the same ought it not to enforce any thing to be
believed for necessity of salvation.

Having ascertained what entitles a union of professors
of religion to the appellation of a Church, the next question
that occurs is the nature and extent of its jurisdiction : and
the subject naturally divides itself into two parts ; rites and
ceremonies, and, secondly, tenets. The first paragraph is
directed against the Puritans, the second against the Papist;
the former allowing no discretion, the latter advancing
human authority above the word of God. In this Article
our Church condemns these two extremes*

We have seen in the introductory Lecture, that the external
evidence is in favour of the authenticity of the opening
clause, and indeed the sense seems to be deficient without it.
The question however is merely one of curiosity, since the
Act of Parliament requires signature to a copy in which
the clause is contained. It is here maintained, that the
Church hath power, that is of course rightful power, to
decree rites and ceremonies, and authority in controversies
of faith. A distinction seems intended; the first gives power
which cannot be innocently resisted, the second only weight
or influence. Thus it may be proper to respect a person's
judgment when he has no right to insist upon obedience,
and the concurring judgment of many would be entitled to
greater respect than that of one, in proportion to their
number and qualifications for determining. The expression,

LECTURK XIV.

361

" in controversies of faith," implies, that we are not expected
to give up our private judgment, except in doubtful and
difficult points. The Church, like every Society, must
provide means of answering the ends of its institution. No
religion, says Augustine, true or false, can subsist without
ceremonies. If it be a duty to meet together to worship,
our meetings must be regulated by established forms, to
prevent disorder and confusion. As some rites and cere-
monies are essential, the first question is, has it pleased the
divine Founder of our religion to give any particular
directions. Now all we find of this nature is exhortation
to social prayer and the institution of the two Sacraments,
and some general precepts; as, let all things be done decently
and in order, let all things be done to edifying*; but the
application is left to the discretion not of each individual,
but of the body, for without this, no body could have a
permanent duration. The Sacraments themselves may be
and are administered with considerable variation ; no detail
of a particular method is recorded, so that even in Christ's
own institution, something must be left to the wisdom of
the Church. And there are many other cases that must be
settled, upon wdiich Scripture is silent, as the attitude and
seasons of prayer, and whether we should pray extempore,
or use a form ; so that even the most rigid in their theory
must in practice adopt some regulations of human invention.
The nature of the Jewish religion required a minute
detail of sacrifices, purifications, and other rites ; yet in the
course of time, though the ceremonial was of divine origin,
new ones were introduced, as baptism, alterations were
made as in the paschal service, new fasts and festivals were
added, and the worship of the synagogue was established.
Our Saviour does not reprove the Jews on this account; he
frequented their synagogues, and attended the feast of the
dedication ; and while of the greater and scriptural moral
precepts he says, these things ye ought to have doneh ; he
adds concerning certain human regulations, and not to have
left the other undone. Tf then such a liberty was tolerated
in a system confined to one spot and mainly divine, how
a 1 Cor. xiv. 40. 26. b Matt, xviii. 23.

362

LECTURE XIV.

much more may it be claimed for the Christian Church in
which God is avowedly to be worshipped in spirit and in
truth, since the kingdom of God consists not in meats and
drinks, but in joy in the Holy Ghost, and the dispensation is
designed for the whole race of mankind. Upon the principle,
that mercy is better than sacrifice, aspersion in the colder
climates of Europe has superseded immersion in baptism, and
the love feasts and the kiss of peace, though practised with
the approbation of the Apostles, have been laid aside. If
Apostolical usages may be dropped, it is certainly not neces-
sary to justify the decreeing rites and ceremonies in matters
which they left untouched. We infer, that in all such ordi-
nances, unless we find in them something to which our con-
science cannot assent, individuals are bound to submit, although
the customs of other denominations may be more congenial to
their taste and judgment. In such cases it is our duty to bear
with imperfections ; it is only doctrinal error, and that in
important points, that wTill justify separation. It is otherwise,
although civilly legal, morally schismatical ; and this should
be considered by those who habitually attend dissenting
places of worship instead of those of the Church, merely
because the preacher may be more edifying. Where doc-
trinal differences are great, separation must ensue, as in our
secession from Rome ; but it will be difficult to clear from
the guilt of schism dissenters who would agree to our Articles,
and do not disapprove of our Church government. The
three ceremonies the Puritans chiefly objected to were the
sign of the Cross in Baptism, the wearing of surplices, and
kneeling at the Lord's Supper. These have been called the
three nocent ceremonies, in opposition to others in them-
selves innocent. In the time of King Edward there was a
serious controversy about the habits of the Clergy ; and Hooper,
who had lived at Zurich, and adopted the simpler views
of the Swiss reformers, refused the bishopric of Gloucester,
because he could not be consecrated and officiate without
wearing the episcopal habits then in use, which he abhorred
as popish. His refusal was not admitted, and he was im-
prisoned, and treated with rigour ; but a compromise was at
last effected, and he submitted. He and his friends con-

LECTURE XIV.

363

suited the foreign divines, especially Bullinger, and they
wisely answered, that they ought to conform rather than
make a schism, and that those in authority ought to indulge
their scruples rather than hazard one. At this distance of
time the points in debate appear to us so frivolous, that we
wonder that they were viewed in so serious a light by men
of sense and piety, and that one party should strive to
retain, the other to throw them off, with as much energy
and perseverance as if they were the fundamentals of religion.
So much are times altered, and feelings and opinions with
them, that now many dissenting ministers of their own
accord, and with the approbation of their congregations,
make use of surplices, so odious in the eyes of their ancestors ;
but we should recollect, that these dresses and ceremonies
were badges, which many scrupled to use not only on their
own account, but from their assumed connection with the
corruptions of Rome.

Authority also is claimed for the Church "in controversies
of faith," and the very Synod in which these Articles were
adopted, shows that our own branch of it has acted upon
this claim, and if it did not possess this authority they
would not be obligatory upon us. This authority has
been claimed and exercised from the beginning, for what
Council was ever assembled that did not either determine
controversies or decree ceremonies. In the first, the
time of celebrating Easter was decreed, and the doctrine
of Athanasius on the nature of the Son of God was declared
to be the Catholic Faith. Indeed, if this authority were
not conceded, it would be impossible that a controversy
should ever terminate. The Scripture is certainly the rule
of faith, and the supreme judge of all controversies whatever;
but as in almost all disputes each party appeals to
Scripture, the Church must examine and arbitrate between
them. The conclusion gives three rules for the regulation
of this authority. The first, that it is not lawful for the
church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God's
word written, a position too evident to require proof, and
which seems to be mentioned rather to remind us of what
is right, than to inform us. The second, that it may

864

LECTURE XIV.

not so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant
to another. As the Scriptures are all inspired by the
same God of Truth, they of course contain nothing really
contradictory ; whatever apparent contradictions there may
be, must therefore be resolved into our own imperfect com-
prehension, for which the only effectual remedy is a study
of the whole volume, since what is slightly hinted in one part
is often fully explained in another. The third rule is, that
exclusive of the Scripture, nothing ought to be enforced
to be believed for necessity of salvation. This has been
already declared in other words in the sixth Article, which
assigns the reason : * Holy Scripture contain eth all things
necessary to salvation, so that whatsoever is not read therein
nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man
that it should be believed as an Article of Faith, or be
thought requisite or necessary to salvation.' It is obvious
that no Church could refuse so equitable a rule, unless, like
that of Rome, she professes to have been entrusted with some
other rule of Faith. The Church is called " a keeper of
Holy Writ," w7ith a reference to the Apostle's declaration0,
that to the Jews were committed the oracles of God. And to
this trust the ancient people of God was faithful, not only
as a keeper but as a " witness," in their synagogues, by
its lessons from the LawT and the Prophets. In this, the
Roman Church has failed ever since the Latin language
ceased to be understood by the congregation, and foreign
Protestants and our own Dissenters comparatively neglect
this duty. The conduct therefore of our own Church, which
in the course of the year reads out the greater part of the
Old Testament, and the whole of the New three times, in
addition to the Epistles and Gospels, which is all that is
done by the Roman or Lutheran Churches, is in this respect
deserving of the highest commendation, and entitles her
above all others to the epithet of Scriptural. It proves that
she does not fear the light, but challenges for all her tenets
investigation, and will abide by the decision of the Word of
God.

c Rom. iii. 2.

LECTURE XIV.

365

ARTICLE XXI.

OF THE AUTHORITY OF GENERAL COUNCILS.

General Councils may not be gathered together without the
commandment and will of Princes. And when they be
gathered together, (forasmuch as they be an assembly of
men, whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and
Word of God,) they may err, and sometimes have erred,
even in things pertaining unto God. Wherefore things
ordained by them as necessary to salvation have neither
strength nor authority, unless it may be declared that they
be taken out of holy Scripture.

Nothing can be more reasonable either in worldly or
religious concerns, than consultation. The Christian com-
munity of one province, if at a loss to decide a controverted
opinion, or to confirm a disputed custom, or if convinced of
what it thought right, yet to satisfy those of opposite senti-
ments, would naturally apply for aid to the nearest congrega-
tion; and as the whole body of believers could not travel, the
business would be entrusted to delegates, and none would
seem so competent to explain and to judge as the ministers
of religion. The greater the importance of the points in
dispute, and the further the dispute had spread, the more
churches it would be desirable to consult; and where the
same language prevailed, and there was one civil govern-
ment, these seem to be the only circumstances that could
limit the extent and authority of such assemblies. In
this manner Parliaments meet to deliberate : and in a
few instances both in ancient and modern times, as in the
Achaean league, the Swiss Cantons, and the American United
States, independent republics have agreed to the super-
intending authority of a Congress, to which each sent its
delegates, with power to decide in questions concerning
their common interests. The former resembles a national
Synod, such as our own Convocation in 1562, in which
these Articles were agreed to ; the latter, a General or

366

LECTURE XIV.

Ecumenical Council, as it is sometimes called, from Olxoujxewj,
the Greek word for the inhabited world.

What is here assumed as probable, actually took place a
very few years after the promulgation of the Gospel, almost
as soon as it had been preached to the Gentiles. We find
from the Acts of the Apostles, that the first dispute that
arose in the Church, was settled in this manner. The
Jewish believers could not bring themselves to conceive
that the Mosaic system revealed by God was ever to be
abrogated, and therefore regarded Christianity not as super-
seding it, but only as the improvement and extension of
Judaism, It was determined at Antioch, the chief seat of the
Gentile converts, that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of
them should go up to Jerusalem to consult upon the subject
their brethren of the circumcision; and the result of their
deliberations they embodied in a decree, which they sent to
all the churches. This is considered by the advocates for the
authority of Councils to be the first general one, and they
conclude from the terms in which the decree is drawn up, It
hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, that all future
Councils have been under the same infallible guidance.
But as well might we claim infallibility in their profes-
sional capacity for the presbyters and bishops of modern
times, because their Ordination may be traced up ulti-
mately to the Apostles, as for a Synod, because the earliest
was favoured with inspiration. We believe, and have all
possible negative evidence, that the extraordinary gifts of
the Holy Spirit, which were required in the infancy of the
Church, have been long withdrawn, including in the number
inspiration ; and there is not a single text, the present
excepted, from which it can with a shadow of reason be
inferred. The few passages mentioned by Burnett are, as
he shows, so little to the purpose, that it is unnecessary to
cite them. "If," he observes, "infallibility is supposed to
be in Councils, then the Church may justly apprehend that
she has lost it, for as there has been none that has pretended to
the title now during 130 years, so there is no great probability
of our ever seeing another." Since that Prelate wrote this
sentence, that period is more than doubled, and certainly

LECTURE XIV. 367

the probability is no greater. A General Council indeed, in
the strict meaning of the term, has never been assembled.
Christianity and the jurisdiction of Constantine and his
successors, were nearly commensurate ; and therefore the
earlier ones held in the east may in popular language
deserve the title of Ecumenical. Yet at the first there
were only 318 bishops, at the second and third not so
many, and 600 at the fourth, and few at any of them from
the western division of the empire. The subsequent ones,
whether convened by Popes or German Emperors, were at
the best but Synods of the western Patriarchate. The
Greek and oriental churches were represented in none of
them : and the extension of Christianity is continually
rendering such meetings more and more difficult, now it has
spread to a new world. Not to say that its division into
different communities, which condemn each other as schisma-
tical, or even heretical, renders it impracticable.

The sole object of a General Council would be to intro-
duce uniformity of doctrine, for each national church is
competent to determine its own rites and ceremonies, and to
relax or strengthen, or in any way alter, its discipline. Now
who would be allowed to summon one for the settlement of
the tenets at issue between Protestants and Romanists? and
even if we suppose that such a council met, what probability
is there that the party against which it determined would
abide by the decision ?

The first Council was convened by Constantine in the
second year of his reign, in the early part of the fourth
century of Christianity. The Pope sent thither two
Legates, but Hosius a Spanish bishop, who was in the
Emperor's confidence, seems to have presided. It is memo-
rable as establishing the orthodox scheme of the consubstan-
tiality of the Father and the Son, for determining the time of
keeping Easter, and laying down as a canon that a bishop
should be consecrated by three of his own order.

The second, held at Constantinople by the Emperor
Theodosius, A. D. 381, completed the doctrine of the
Trinity, by its declaration respecting the Holy Ghost.

The third, at Ephesus, was called by the younger Theodo-

368

LECTURE XIV.

sius, A. D. 431. Cyril of Alexandria, the imperious opponent
of Nestorius, presided, and the behaviour of the assembly was
so disgraceful, that it was dismissed by the Emperor with a
severe rebuke. Still its determination of the double nature of
our Lord has always been accepted by the Catholic Church.

The fourth General Council, which was held at Chalcedon,
A.D. 431, condemned the errors of Eutyches, and so com-
pleted the orthodox scheme respecting the second Person
of the Trinity. The decisions of these four General Coun-
cils are universally received.

The two next General Councils, A.D. 553, and 680, are
of no great doctrinal importance; but controversialists ought
to note, that Pope Vigilius, who refused his assent to the
decrees of the first, at which he was present, was banished
till he acquiesced in them ; and that in the second, Pope Mar-
cellus was condemned as a Monothelite. The next Council,
which is rejected by the Greeks, and was opposed at the
time by the Germans, French, and Britons, was held at
Nice, A.D. 787, by the Empress Irene. It is no wonder
that it is allowed by Rome, since it authorized the worship
of images and of the cross, and denounced punishments
against those who maintained that God was the sole object
of adoration. The rest of the Councils were all held in
the west, and convened by Popes, and can be regarded as no
more than those of the Roman Patriarchate.

The next four, which met A. D. 1123, 1139, 1170, 1215,
were held in the Lateran palace, and the last of them, by
far the largest ever assembled, consisting of above 12,000
persons, broke up in less than a month, accepting without
examination the dogmas presented for its acceptance by the
overbearing Innocent III, and thereby confirming Transub-
stantiation, and Auricular Confession. Among them is the
canon compelling secular powers to extirpate heretics under
the penalty of excommunication, so odious in a Protestant
country, that it has not only been described as obsolete and
temporary, but even denied to be genuine or binding before
Parliament by the Irish Roman Catholic prelates. It has
notwithstanding been proved to be authentic, and is certainly
confirmed by subsequent acts of the Papacy.

LECTURE XIV.

369

The three that follow at Lyons, A.D. 1245, and 1274,
and at Viemie, A.D. 1311, were chiefly of a political cha-
racter, but the last established the rule of St. Francis, and
suppressed the order of Knights Templar.

A new series follows, of a very different description.
That of Pisa, called A.D. 1409, by a body of Cardinals,
deposed the two rival Popes, and nominated a third, and
thus proved as well as asserted, the superiority of a Council.
This decree was confirmed, A.D. 1416, by the Council of
Constance, which was summoned, with papal consent, by the
Emperor Sigismond, and sat upwards of three years, for the
purpose of reforming the Church, but rendered itself infamous
by its condemnation to the flames of John Huss and Jerome
of Prague ; and as death had saved our Wycliff from their
fury, his remains were at its command disinterred, and
thrown into the stream that flows by his grave at Lutterworth.
The Council of Basil, A.D. 1431, following in the same
course, was excommunicated by the Pope, who called a rival
assembly, which at Florence effected an union of the Greek
and Roman churches, which proved to be of very short
duration. A fifth Lateran Council, A.D. 1512, was only
of temporary importance ; and even the greater ones are
eclipsed by the celebrated Assembly at Trent, which com-
pletes the number, the proceedings of which have been
minutely detailed; and which, while it produced a con-
siderable reformation in manners and discipline, has been
injurious to Rome, by stereotyping as it were its errors, and
converting into irrevocable dogmas many Articles which
had previously been no more than the private opinions of
irresponsible individuals.

Our first position is, that " General Councils may not be
gathered together without the commandment and will of
Princes;" and this must be clear to all, who allow that the
Sovereign is the head of the Church, that the Clergy owe
him obedience, and that they ought not without his per-
mission to leave the places in which they exercise their
functions, in order to assist at meetings where canons may
be decreed which he may not be disposed to confirm. I
do not deny that the clergy may meet of their own accord

370

LECTURE XIV.

for such purposes in pagan countries, or dissenting Ministers
in Christian ones ; but this is a right which an established
Church gives up on its endowment by the State. The
General Councils, as we have seen, were all called by the
Emperors; the Popes in the dark ages, when they had
usurped so much temporal power, summoned several by
their own authority, as the Lateran and that of Florence.
The later Councils having assumed the power of deposing
them, and proved their superiority in so decisive a manner,
naturally excited apprehension. That of Trent was ac-
cordingly summoned with reluctance, and upon every
plausible pretext suspended ; and the Popes in future, to
procure the concurrence of sovereigns on their side, made
Concordats with them, by which the jurisdiction was gene-
rally given up, though those points, from which profit might
be derived, were retained.

The second position is, that these Councils "may err, and
have erred;" and that not only on minor points, as ceremonies,
but even in the weightiest matters — "things pertaining unto
God." That they may err, all reasonable persons, knowing
that they are composed of men, with no promise of divine
superintendence, will readily allow ; that they have repeat-
edly erred, the anti-scriptural decrees of many of them
demonstrate to all who are acquainted with the sacred
volume. The greater part of the following Articles are
directed against Purgatory, Transubstantiation, and other
Roman errors, and these errors have been approved and
ratified by the Lateran Councils, by those of Florence,
Constance, and Basil, and above all by that of Trent. Nor
can all even of these assemblies, which have a more
plausible claim to the name of General Councils, be cleared
from serious error ; for the second Nicene Council decreed
the worship of images. The Article concludes with de-
claring, in unison with its former declarations respecting
the extent of the power of the Church, that the things
ordained by Councils have neither strength nor authority,
except what they derive from Scripture, nor did the earlier
Councils pretend to any other.

Gregory Nazianzen openly pronounced an unfavourable

LECTURE XIV.

371

opinion of Councils. Athanasius disregarded a summons to
that of Csesarea, and retired from that of Syrmium, when he
foresaw from the rancour of his opponents the result of its de-
liberations; and the bishops of the West refused to attend it.
And after all, what is the true description of those Councils,
which are so confidently called General ? Look at the
extent of Christ's universal Church, embracing as it does
within its wide circuit the Christians of the whole world,
and then tell us what we are to say of the greatest and
fullest Council ever assembled in Christendom ? Verily it
is nothing better than a private meeting of Bishops, it is a
mere provincial Synod. What though there be the as-
sembling of Italy, and France, and Spain, and England, and
Germany, and Denmark, and Scotland. Is it a General
Council ? Are its decrees to be registered as the consenting
voice of the Church Catholic ? Then where are Asia and
Greece ? Why are their Churches to be forgotten ? But
indeed the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ does not
depend on Councils, or, as St. Paul writes, on man's judg-
ment. Without Councils and against Councils, God is able
to advance his kingdom4.

d Jewel's Apology.

B b 2

LECTURE XV.

ARTICLE XXII.

OF PURGATORY.

The Romish doctrine concerning purgatory s pardons, wor-
shipping and adoration, as well of images as of reliques,
and also invocation of saints, is a fond thing vainly in-
vented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but
rather repugnant to the word of God.

This Article is of a miscellaneous character, for though
it only is entitled " Of Purgatory," it condemns together
with it as unreasonable and as unscriptural, pardons, the
worship of images and relics, and the invocation of saints.
All are comprehended as one fond thing, probably because
the others have been chiefly used as means of shortening
the endurance of the first. Of pardons, or indulgences as
they are more commonly called, there can be no question ;
and adoration is chiefly offered to saints through the medium
of images or relics, to prevail upon them to assist in deliver-
ing souls out of purgatory.

It is here called the Romish doctrine. In the Article of
1552, it was that of the Schoolmen; and if that word had
been retained, the Romanists might have said, we do not
defend the judgment of the Schoolmen in every particular.
'Fond' in this sense is obsolete, but is explained by the
corresponding Latin futilis. It is said to have been " vainly
invented," inanitur conficta, that is, unsupported by reason,
as contradistinguished from the following assertion, that it
is "grounded upon no warrant of Scripture." And not only
is it not supported by the word of God, but rather repugnant

LECTURE XV.

573

to it, which is equivalent in modern English to, nay con-
tradicts, Immo verbo Dei contradicit, but perniciose of the
original Article is dropped.

It is admitted by all % that remission of sins cannot be
obtained, except by the intervention of a full and exact
satisfaction ; but what that satisfaction is, and by whom
rendered, which makes up for the injury offered to God, is
matter of debate between the Romanist and the Protestant.
The former maintains, that whoever sins after baptism,
obtains through Christ not an absolute remission, but a
merciful commutation of punishment. For according to
him, after guilt is remitted, the very same punishment of
the bodily senses must be endured by the sinner as
in hell, only taking away its eternity. Divine justice
requires, that when we are freed from guilt by Christ,
we should be punished either in this life or in purga-
tory ; now he maintains, that satisfaction is made by
works of penance, imposed according to the judgment of
the priest, voluntarily undertaken by the penitent or in-
flicted from without, and in requiring satisfaction, he
thinks that God acts so strictly, that he requires a full
measure of the punishment due, and whatever the sinner
has left unpaid here, must be paid in purgatory. We, on
the contrary, maintain, that our Lord's sacrifice expunged
both guilt and punishment, and that the punishments
anciently enjoined to penitents were imposed not to satisfy
divine justice, but the offended Church; that works voluntarily
undertaken were not payments of satisfaction, but exercises
of humility and mortification ; and that the misfortunes that
follow are either the natural consequences of sin, or sent
to mark God's displeasure, and to improve the sinner.
We deny that acts of penance, or any human works, can
compensate for the injury done to God. And this is proved,
first, by the definition of satisfaction, which is giving an
equivalent for an equivalent ; secondly, from the quality of
our works, the best of which are not free from imper-
fection ; and even if they were, are God's gift, and, as
such, wholly due to Him on the mere score of our
a Bishop Davenant's eighth Determination.

374

LECTURE XV.

creation, can never go to the discharge of a new debt.
Thirdly, we confirm our cause by the consideration of the
divine remission of sins, for the remission made by God is
always entire, and it should be such, that when it is
obtained, the sinner can feel that he has obtained peace
with God. Fourthly, the truth of our opinion appears from
the perfection of the satisfaction which Christ himself offered
to the Father in the name of all believers; for it is most
certain that our Redeemer offered a price abundantly suf-
ficient to expiate the guilt and punishment of our sins. If
therefore the Father should require satisfaction from the
members of Christ, which they have paid to the last farthing
in their head, he would twice exact payment, and thus do
a manifest injury both to the Redeemer and the redeemed.
With respect to the argument from God's inflicting punish-
ment on Moses, David, and others, after their sins were
forgiven, we are to look to the end of punishment in con-
sidering this question. If a judge order an offender's hand
to be cut off, it is as a punishment ; if a physician, he
does it to prevent a greater evil ; so here afflictions are sent
by God not as a judge to take vengeance, but as a kind
father to remedy the evils of our nature.

Purgatory, however, is so congenial to the natural mind,
that even in Protestant communities there are many dis-
posed to embrace it from a vague notion, that though not
good enough to be received immediately after death into a
state of bliss, they are too good to be sent for ever into
punishment. Affliction in this life has often an improving
and reforming efficacy ; and it is conceived that (when
temptations are removed, and the truths of religion, which
were objects only of faith, will have become to the most
sceptical undeniable realities) sufferings after death will
complete what is wanting to purge the soul from the alloy
of sin, which renders it incapable of admission into the
regions of the blessed. If indeed man could work out
his own salvation, it would be no unreasonable supposition,
that having accomplished the work in part here, the divine
goodness will grant him time for its completion in another
stale of existence. Christianity however, which teaches that

LECTURE XV.

375

he can be justified by faith alone, and that Christ is the only
Saviour, subverts the foundation of this doctrine. Purgatory
originated in the natural feelings of man, and with many
other human inventions has been introduced into the Church,
which accommodated its worship to the prejudices of super-
stitious converts, by adopting many of the ceremonies to
which they had been accustomed as heathen. Plato has
an intermediate state, in which guilty souls remained till
" the foul crimes done in their days of nature were burnt
and purged away," and they were through suffering qualified
for the society of the blessed in the Elysian fields. But
this was not the invention of philosophers, it is but the
refinement and embellishment of the popular belief, which
had been long before embodied in the Odyssey of Homer.
This heathen purgatory, as the name implies, was designed
to purify the departed spirit for a future life of innocent
enjoyment, by the correction of its sinful propensities ; and
as the Deity is not to be limited either as to the efficacy of
the means or their duration, it would seem to follow, that
a time would come when the purpose of punishment would
be in each individual accomplished, and that therefore all
would become finally holy and happy. Such was the belief
of Origen ; and it has been adopted by some of our latitu-
dinarian divines ; but Scripture has spoken so positively
of the eternal punishment of the wicked, that it is impossible
to explain it away. His opinion has been condemned by
the Church ; and when purgatory was introduced into
Christianity, it was with this important modification, that
the decidedly wicked were left to the torments of hell, and
that persons guilty only of venial, that is pardonable,
sins were reserved for this temporary punishment. It
was evidently much promoted by the custom which grew
up in the third century of prayers for the dead ; and it
was favoured in a degree by the great oracle of the west,
Augustine, who in his youth had embraced several of the
Manichean errors. He had acquired the idea of a purga-
torial fire, but went no farther than to say it did not seem
incredible. In other places, however, he expressed himself
decidedly against it ; and when he treated of the Limb us

376

LECTURE XV.

Infantum, that is, the abode of children dying unbaptized,
he argued against a third state. After his time, the notion
began to prevail through the influence of St. Gregory ; and
it was promoted by legends of visions and fictitious miracles.
Still even in the twelfth century it was no more than a pious
opinion, and was not established as an Article of faith before
the Council of Florence. Though the offspring of eastern
philosophy, it had never been acknowledged by the Greek
Church, till the delegates, who attended that assembly in
the hope of thereby prolonging the independence of their
falling empire, were prevailed upon by Pope Eugenius to
assent to it. Nevertheless on their return home they retracted,
and cast themselves on the mercy of their offended brethren.
At the rival Council of Basil, which the Pope now opposed,
they had said, "we own no temporary punishment by fire, for
we received no such doctrine by tradition, nor does the
Eastern church profess it." And they added, " it ought to be
cast out of the Church as tending to slacken the endeavours
of the diligent, and hindering their doing their utmost in
this life, since another purification is expected after it.'*
Bishop Fisher, who suffered under Henry VIII. candidly
confesses, that purgatory had been rarely if at all mentioned
by the ancients ; and it may be shown, as is owned by
other competent Roman Catholic authorities, (what fair
judges must allow to be fatal to their cause,) that no one
Council or even Father for five centuries taught it.

They had therefore recourse to legends, which are still
current among the lower classes in Roman Catholic countries,
and men of piety and learning seem to have believed them
beyond the period of the Reformation. For the celebrated
controversialist Cardinal Bellarmine, the contemporary of
our James I. says, " Since many persons will not believe what
they never saw, it has pleased Almighty God sometimes to
raise his servants from the dead, and to send them to announce
to the living what they have really beheld." I extract an
instance which he gives from the life of St. Ludgardis, to
whom Innocent III. is said to have appeared shortly after
his decease, encircled with flames, telling her who he was,
and the three reasons for his sufferings. " They would," he

LECTURE XV.

377

continued, " have consigned me to eternal punishment, had
I not through the intercession of the most pious Mother
of God, to whom I founded a monastery, repented on the
point of death. As it is, I shall be tortured in the most
horrible manner till the day of judgment ; and that I am
now permitted to solicit your prayers, is a boon which the
Mother of mercy has obtained for me from her Son." The
Cardinal's remark is, " This instance always affects me with
the greatest terror; for if a Pontiff entitled to so much praise,
one who to all human observation was not merely a man of
integrity, but of exemplary sanctity, if even he so narrowly
escaped hell, and as it is, must suffer the most excruciating
torments till the day of judgment, what Prelate is there who
does not trembleb?"

The great Poet of the middle ages, in his description of
hell and purgatory, seems to have exhausted the catalogue
of bodily suffering; but the picture is not drawn ex-
clusively from his own imagination, for he had several
predecessors, who have graphically described from reputed
eyewitnesses the region in which the departed spirits are
undergoing their appointed torments. We have a remark-
able description in Matthew Paris's history of a descent
into purgatory, from one of its entrances, at Lough Derg in
Ireland; and Bedec much earlier tells us of a pilgrim led by
angels into a valley filled with human souls, which were
incessantly whirled about by a tempest, from the extreme
of heat to the intensest cold. And such tales were pro-
bably current among our ancestors in the time of Shakes-
peare, since he makes one of his characters, under the fear
of execution, speak of the spirit doomed

To bathe in fiery floods, or to reside

In thrilling regions of thick-ribbed ice ;

To be imprisoned in the viewless winds,

And blown with restless violence round about

The pendent world.

k The reader of history will hardly recognise in the Cardinal's panegyric
the arrogant Pontiff who excommunicated the King of France, and humi-
liated our King John; and both decreed the extirpation of heretics, and
encouraged the cruel persecutions carried on in the south of France, at the
instigation of St. Dominic, the inventor of the Inquisition.

c Bede v. 19.

378

LECTURE XV.

Fire, however, is the element which is supposed to be
usually employed ; and Thomas Aquinas tells us, that it is
the same in its qualities as that of hell. These Schoolmen
enter into minute particulars, as if they spoke not from
conjecture, but from personal knowledge. Thus they lay
down by common consent, that there are four gulphs in
the interior of the earth ; the first for the damned, the
second for those who are to be purified, the third for
unbaptized infants, and the fourth for the righteous who
died before the crucifixion, which is now empty, the Saviour
having freed them, and taken them with him to heaven.

The Council of Trent seems rather to take the doctrine
of purgatory for granted as fixed by Fathers and Councils,
than to define it ; all who say that sins are so remitted in
Christ as to leave no temporal punishment due, it anathema-
tizes and it decrees that the sound doctrine shall be preached,
setting aside all nice and subtle questions, but does not
say wTherein that sound doctrine consists. In the Catechism
however, drawn up by order of that Council, it is called a
purgatorial fire. The doctrine is, I believe, thus fairly laid
down by Burnet. Every man is liable both to temporal
and to eternal punishment for his sins ; the latter is par-
doned on account of the death and intercession of Christ,
but the former must be expiated by acts of penance, and
such sufferings as God shall think fit to lay upon him ; and
if not expiated in this life, they must be in another after
death, that is, in purgatory.

An attempt is made to support it from the New Testa-
ment, but the texts themselves will show without much
comment with how little success. I find no more than three.
The first is our Lord's declaration concerning blasphemy
against the Holy Ghost, that it shall not be forgiven, neither
in this world, neither in the ivorld to comeh. Hence the
Romanist infers, that some sins remain to be forgiven after
death, and that there must be a purgatory ; yet that, upon
the showing of his own Church, is the abode of those
whose sins are already forgiven, and the object of enduring
its torments is not pardon, but satisfaction. Sins are not
b Matt. xii. 32.

LECTURE XV.

379

there remitted, but punished, and punished after remittance.
Nay more, they are punished because they are remitted, for
if they were not, the sinner would not go to purgatory, but
to hell. They should also recollect, that the world to come
cannot exist till time has ceased, and with it purgatory. In
fact, our Lord here adverts to a Jewish notion, that some
sins upon repentance received immediate forgiveness, others
not till the day of expiation, but all would be blotted out
by death, since every Israelite would be admitted into
future happiness. To correct this error, our Lord says
that this offence will not be forgiven, under the dispensation
of the Law or of the Gospel. This is equivalent to saying
that it will never be forgiven, and so is the saying recorded
without a figure, in the parallel passages in the other
Gospels0. The second is taken from a figurative speech of
our Lord : Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till
thou hast paid the uttermost farthing &. The farthings are
venial sins, the payment is human satisfaction. There can
be no commutation, the debtor must pay the whole in his
own person ; and the prayers and masses therefore offered
by others can be of no avail. However, the prison, as the
context shows, is hell, and so it is maintained to be by the
Fathers, and by the Roman Catholic commentator Maldo-
natus. In conformity with which Augustine writes: "when
we shall have departed hence, there will be neither room for
contrition nor satisfaction, nothing will then remain except
the judge, the officer, and the prison. He shall never go
out, because those in hell owe an infinite punishment,
which it is impossible that they should ever satisfy.
The third is perhaps somewhat more specious, if it be
detached from the context. If any man build upon this
foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble,
every man's work shall be made manifest, for the day of the
Lord shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire ; and
the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is ; if any
man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall
receive a reward; if any man's work burn, he shall suffer loss,
but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by firee. The passage
c Mark iii. 29. Luke xii. 10. <* Matt. v. 25. • 1 Cor. iii. 8.

380

LECTURE XV.

is far more favourable to Origen's fancy, that all were to
be prepared for heaven by passing through the fire, for
every man is mentioned good no less than bad. Paul and
Apollos who built gold and silver, as well as those who
built wood, hay, and stubble ; the fire is therefore proba-
torial not purgatorial, and is expressly said to be that of
the last day. If we turn to the context, we shall find that
the passage is thus introduced. Now he that planteth and
he that watereth are one. And every one shall receive reward
according to his own labour. And there can be no doubt
that the Apostle is speaking not of private Christians but
of ministers, not of works but of doctrines ; and this is so
clear, that Bellarmine and some of the ablest advocates
of Rome support our interpretation.

A passage from the second Book of Maccabees, in which
it is declared to be a good and holy thing to make a recon-
ciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from
sin, is familiar to those who have visited Roman Catholic
churches, as it is frequently inscribed upon the chests for
alms for the poor souls in purgatory. To understand it,
we must refer to the context, which shows that Judas
having found things consecrated to idols under the clothes
of the slain, besought God that this sin might wholly be
put out of remembrance ; and having made a collection, he
sent it as a sin-offering to Jerusalem. This might have
been offered for himself and his living soldiers, that judg-
ment might not come upon them, because he had not care-
fully corrected the idolatrous propensities of his army, and
could hardly have been offered in behalf of the slain, as
there was no expiation for idolatry. Granting however
that it was offered for the dead, it could not have been to
release them from purgatory, as they died in mortal sin,
and the object must have been not the mitigation of present
punishment, but a future resurrection. The opinion how-
ever of an author whose work we do not admit into the
canon of Scripture, and who requests his readers to bo
indulgent to the imperfections of his narrative, is not
entitled to an authority which he does not claim. Nor are
we bound to yield to that of Judas, who, if he believed in

LECTURE XV.

381

purgatory, must have derived his belief, not from the Law,
but from a heathen source. Passages such as these, and I
am not aware that the Romanists bring forward more, are
enough to satisfy us, that Purgatory is not a Scriptural
doctrine, but that being adopted in a dark age, when the
Bible was scarcely known, it became expedient, when it
was called in question, to examine the volume for texts
that might seem to favour it. A real knowledge of the
nature of Christian redemption, must convince us, that pur-
gatory is (( a fond thing," and that it is justly declared to be
"repugnant to God's word." It is avowedly built upon the
distinction of venial and mortal sins, a human invention for
which there is no warrant in that word, for the greatest sin
will be forgiven to the penitent, the least, unless repented
of and pardoned, will consign us to eternal punishment;
but if this foundation be removed, the superstructure neces-
sarily falls, and how insufficient it is to bear such a weighty
structure, will appear at once from the received opinion of
the distinction between mortal and venial sin. In many
cases it is merely a question of degree, as this passage from
Dr. Bailey's work used at Maynooth shows. How great
must be the quantity of a thing stolen, in order to constitute
the theft a mortal sin ? After some remark on the diffi-
culty of determining it, he observes, that theologians are
accustomed, with a view to the settlement of the question,
to divide men into four classes, according to their pecuniary
means. If the subject were less serious, such decisions
would be ridiculous. To steal sixty pence from the
wealthiest would be a mortal sin, it follows, that if a thief
takes but a penny less, his sin is venial. In the former
case he will be condemned to hell, in the latter he will
only undergo a temporary punishment in purgatory !
The Council of Trent declares, that if any shall say that
after the grace of justification has been received, the offence
is so remitted to the penitent sinner, and the guilt of eternal
punishment so effaced, that there remains no guilt of tem-
poral punishment to be suffered either in this world or in
purgatory before admission can be obtained to the kingdom
of Heaven, let him be accursed. The Bible on the con-

382

LECTURE XV.

trary declares divine forgiveness to be immediate, full, and
unconditional on the part of God. / am he that blotteth
out thy iniquities for mine own sake, and I will not remember
thy sins*. I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember
their sin no mores. And, If the wicked will turn from all
his sins, and do that which is lawful and right, all his trans-
gressions shall not be mentioned to himh. How can we
fear, that what God will neither mention nor remember,
he will punish ? Our Saviour has taught us to pray,
Forgive us our debts, (meaning our sins,) as we forgive
our debtors'1. But can any man be said to forgive a debt
to another, and yet require the payment of it in whole
or in part ? Does that deserve the name of forgiveness,
which supposes that we must suffer, till the uttermost
farthing for wrhich we are accountable is exacted. Their
sins and iniquities will I remember no more ; the Apostle's
deduction from which is, there is no more an offering
for sin: having therefore boldness to enter into the holiest
by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way, that is to
say, his flesh; and having a High Priest over the house of
God, let us draw near with a true heart, in full assurance of
faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience ;
a confidence not grounded upon our own presumed merits,
or those of others, who though far better than us, have
themselves need of pardon, but on the only foundation laid
in Zion, the all-sufficient sacrifice of the Son of God. The
blood of Jesus Christ, we are assured, cleanseth from all
sins ; and if we confess our sins, God is faithful and just to
forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all iniquity. The
doctrine of purgatory therefore derogates from the suffi-
ciency of his sacrifice, and contradicts these and similar
texts. We are also expressly taught, that the true believer
is reconciled to God, that there is no condemnation to those
who are in Christ Jesus, that such have passed from death
unto life; and St. Paul triumphantly exclaims, Who shall lay
any thing to the charge of God's elect! He was persuaded
that nothing should have power to separate such from the

' Isa. xliii. 25. s Jerem. xxxi. 34. h Ezek. xviii. 21.

1 Matt. vi. 12.

LECTURE XV.

383

love of God in Christ k. The New Testament also, when
speaking of the condition of men after this life, has not the
most distant allusion to any third state; there are but two
classes, those that go into eternal happiness, and those that
are condemned to eternal misery; that happiness and that
misery will commence, there seems reason to believe,
immediately after death, though both will not be completed
till the resurrection, when the soul will be reunited with the
body, fitted in the one case to endure the fire prepared for the
Devil and his angels, in the other assimilated to the glorified
body of the Redeemer, and qualified to enter into his joy.
The parable describes Lazarus as carried immediately into
Abraham's bosom, the common phrase among the Jews for
the abode of pious souls departed ; and into this paradise our
Lord promised to the penitent thief immediate admission,
though according to the Roman doctrine he ought to have
been sent to purgatory, for he had made no satisfaction
as to the temporal punishment of his sins, since he died
after a vicious life, upon a very short and sudden repent-
ance. When the Apostle Paul1 contrasts our present earthly
tabernacle with the house eternal with which we are to be
clothed, the discourse implies there will be no intermediate
state of suffering : and to be absent from the body and
present with the Lord are identified. His language shows
that he is not speaking of any personal peculiar privilege,
but of that which is common to believers; and to the same
effect spoke the voice from Heaven which was heard by
St. John, Blessed are the dead that die in the Lord, from
henceforth (or immediately) : yea, saith the Spirit, that they
may rest from their labours. The people of God, whether
they live or die, are the Lord's. We may then justly affirm
that the tenet " is repugnant to Scripture."

The Romish doctrine of purgatory is offensive to the
sincere believer, because it eclipses the glory of his
Redeemer, and restricts by unauthorized limitations the
freeness and fulness of the pardon which He has purchased
for his people, by his own most precious blood. It cruelly
draws off* the mind of the dying sinner from the only refuge,
k Rom. viii. 1—33. i 2 Cor. v.

384

LECTURE XV.

and while it sustains the guilty with false hopes, it darkens
the deathbed of the humble Christian, who is not permitted
to feel peace and joy in believing, for even to him the road
to heaven is through purgatory, and the dart of Death
which Christ removed, the church of Rome replaces ; and
restores him, whom the pious believer who is waiting for
his Lord welcomes as the messenger of peace, to the office
of the king of terrors. We sometimes hear thoughtless
Protestants say, that the Roman Catholic religion must be
a comfortable one to those who can bring themselves to
believe it, and refer to purgatory as an instance. They are
perhaps not aware, that, in the opinion of those who believe
in it, its torments exceed the worst we can imagine ; and if
any of its inhabitants were permitted

"to tell the secrets of that prison-house,
He could a tale unfold, whose lightest word
Would harrow up the soul."

To the terrified but still impenitent sinner, temporary
punishment, however long, is no doubt a less dreadful
prospect than eternal ; but to any who have scriptural
grounds for believing that they " die in the Lord," purga-
tory is an unjustifiable substitution of misery, for a
reasonable hope. Manifold are the pernicious conse-
quences that have been so ingeniously yet inconsistently
deduced from the doctrine of purgatory. I say incon-
sistently, for the same authority that made and peopled
purgatory, has invented keys to open it ; and while it main-
tains the necessity of purification, allows the degree of
torture to be lessened, and the period to be shortened by
the agency of others, making the exaction of the uttermost
farthing necessary, but allowing it to be paid either by the
debtor, or by any other competent and willing. The simple
statement of so strange and monstrous a doctrine, though it
was familiar to and constantly acted upon by our ancestors,
is now so little known, that it might be thought an extra-
vagant caricature. I prefer therefore giving it in the author-
ized terms of the Council of Trent. " There is a purgatory,
and the souls detained therein are assisted by the prayers of
the faithful, and more especially by the acceptable sacrifice

LECTURE XV.

385

of the ciltar. Since the power of granting indulgences
hath been bestowed by Christ upon the Church, and such
power, thus divinely imparted, hath been exercised by her
even in the earliest times, this holy Synod teaches and
enjoins, that the use of indulgences, as very salutary to
Christian people, and approved of by the sacred councils, be
retained in the Church ; and pronounces an anathema on
such as shall affirm them to be useless, or deny the power of
granting them."

Tetzel, a notorious profligate, the chief agent for retailing
these indulgences in Saxony, whose scandalous recommend-
ation of them led to the Reformation, issued this form of
absolution.

" May our Lord Jesus Christ have mercy upon thee, and
absolve thee by the merits of his most holy Passion. And I, by
his authority, and by that of his blessed Apostles Peter and
Paul, and of the most holy Pope, granted and committed to
me in these parts, do absolve thee, first, from all ecclesiastical
censures in whatever manner they may be incurred, and
then from all thy sins, transgressions, and excesses, how
enormous soever they may be, even from such as are
reserved for the cognizance of the holy see ; and as far as
the keys of the Holy Ghost extend, I remit to you all
punishment which you deserve in purgatory on their ac-
count ; and I restore you to the holy Sacraments of the
Church, to the unity of the faithful, and to that innocence
and purity which you possessed at Baptism ; so that when
you die, the gates of punishment shall be shut, and the
gates of the paradise of delight shall be opened, and if you
shall not die at present, this grace shall remain in full force
when you are at the point of death."

Pardons are, I believe, no longer offered for sale in this
promiscuous manner in Europe; but, at all events, they used
to be exported to Spanish America, before it assumed inde-
pendence of the mother country, and were found to be a most
profitable article of commerce ; and a Church that glories in an
assumed infallibility, as she boasts, never changes. Her worse
doctrines, in more enlightened and especially in Protestant
countries, may be prudently kept out of sight, but where it

c c

386

LECTURE XV.

is safe, they appear in all their original deformity. Every
traveller must have noticed repeatedly grants of plenary
indulgence conferred upon favoured places of worship ; and
the last jubilee, revived after a considerable suspension,
sufficiently declares, that Rome is far from renouncing her
lofty pretensions. The mass is not the only means em-
ployed for delivering souls out of purgatory ; the super-
erogatory works of the saints compose an immense treasure
of merit, out of which inexhaustible source the Pope is
empowered to assign to such as he deems fit the portion
suitable to his guilt. Such a doctrine we have already seen,
as our XlVth Article declares, cannot be taught without
arrogance and impiety. Even if the saints could have done
more than was required for their own salvation, how is the
Pope entitled to transfer them ? but with the superfluous
merits themselves, the foundation of pardons, the whole su-
perstructure falls. As may be supposed, the only resource
of the Romanist here is tradition ; there are no texts that
can even be perverted to give it plausibility, as is allowed by
their own writers. Thus one with much simplicity observes,
" Many things are known to us of which the ancients were
altogether ignorant, as purgatory, indulgences, &c. :" and
Cardinal Caietan remarks, " if we could have any certainty
concerning the origin of indulgences, it would help us much
in the disquisition of the truth of purgatory ; but we have
no knowledge of it, either from the holy Scriptures, or on
the authority of ancient doctors, Greek or Latin. Any
doctrine or practice, however absurd or gross, must have
had a plausible beginning; thus, this of indulgences grew
out of the discipline of the primitive church in this manner.
It had been the practice from the first, to exclude those guilty
of great offences from a participation in the Lord's Supper,
and from communion in other church privileges ; and it is
clear that the same authority might on the contrition of the
offending party revoke this excommunication. The sentence
on the incestuous Corinthian, and its removal, is an Apostolica1
case in point. In the course of time, penances began to be
inflicted upon the guilty, as proofs of penitence. As igno-
rance and superstition increased, these were commuted for

LECTURE XV.

387

money, to be laid out in works of charity and piety ; and
thus the bishops commenced the sale of pardons or indulg-
ences. When, says Mosheim, the Roman Pontiffs cast an eye
upon the treasure thus rapidly accumulating, they thought
proper to limit the episcopal power of remitting penalties,
and took almost exclusive possession of this profitable
traffic. Thus the Court of Rome became the great repository
of indulgences, and by degrees published not only an
universal, but also a plenary remission of all the temporal
penalties which the Church had annexed to certain trans-
gressions. They then took a still more important step,
by extending it to the pains that were due in purga-
tory for such as had not been remitted in this life ;
and in support of it was invented the doctrine of super-
erogatory merit, which was modified by Thomas Aquinas in
the thirteenth century. In 1100, Urban II. to encourage
the Crusade which had been undertaken for the recovery
of the Holy Sepulchre, granted a remission of sins to all who
should take up arms for the purpose. Some of his successors
granted the same indulgence to such as should serve by sub-
stitute; and gradually to other objects. It is generally known,
that the indulgences which provoked the indignation of
Luther, were issued to enable Leo X. to rebuild in a
magnificent style the Church of St. Peter at Rome, so that
this noble edifice, the largest and in general estimation
the most beautiful ever consecrated to the worship of the
true Godj may be regarded as a memorial of the Reformation!
I mention as an instance of these papal grants of indulgence,
a deliverance of three years and a hundred and sixty days
from purgatory to all who attended the Council of Trent.
Boniface VIII. celebrated, in A.D. 1300, the first jubilee,
with a view to the extension of such pardons, and granted a
plenary indulgence to such as came to Rome on this occasion,
and visited St. Peter's Church once, for thirty successive
days. This papal jubilee was found so advantageous, that
the interval was shortened, and it is now kept each quarter
of the century.

The chief of the means for delivering souls out of pur-
gatory we see was the saying of masses, that is, repeating

c c 2

388

LECTURE XV.

a solitary commemoration of the last Supper, not for the
benefit of the priest who offered, but of the soul in whose
behalf he acted. The priest was paid for the service, and
in proportion to the number offered. Not only were they
paid, but monasteries were founded, for the express purpose
of employing ecclesiastics continually in this way ; admis-
sion into heaven was purchased with money, religion was
turned into a trade, and the house of God, under the new
dispensation as under the old, became a den of robbers. Men
were made to believe, that by the virtue of masses, which
could be bought, souls were redeemed out of purgatory :
and tales of apparitions, of tormented and of delivered souls,
were published with such a wonderful effect, that in two or
three centuries, endowments were so increased that if the
scandals of the Church on the one hand, and the statutes
of Mortmain on the other, had not restrained the profuse-
ness that the world was wrought up to,- it is not easy to
imagine how far this might have gone1.

The use made of purg*atory to enrich and to augment the
influence of the Clergy, rendered it in its practical bearings
one of the most pernicious errors of the times, and the excess
to which it was carried, and the effrontery with which in-
dulgences were sold, by exciting the virtuous indignation
of Luther, originated the Reformation. A doctrine so
gratifying to the pride and covetousness of the clergy, so
deadening to the moral sense of the laity, and so satisfactory
to those who, while they still clung to their darling sins,
would cherish the hope of final salvation, was well calculated
when the Bible was closed, and superstition triumphed, to
meet with universal acceptance. The dark ages from the
time of Bede, supplies us with legends designed to work
upon the feelings, and to stimulate believers to increasing
charity, if charity we may call the alms bestowed on the
poor souls in purgatory, for in many instances it was only
a refined selfishness. How many churches, colleges, and
hospitals, were founded upon the express condition, that
the persons benefited were to pray for the souls of their
founders and their relations! A Spanish proverb truly says

1 Burnet on tlie Articles.

LECTURE XV.

389

of one who by will so appropriates his property, that he
makes his soul his heir, There is scarcely, I may venture
to say, the instrument of endowment of any Roman
catholic charitable institution, in which this is not
declared to be the founder's principal motive. We some-
times hear even Protestants expatiate on the piety and
charity of the middle ages, and on the comparative self-
ishness of the Christians of our own day. But they are
generally persons little acquainted with the active and
expansive philanthropy of their countrymen. Our ancestors,
working, be it remembered, (as much of their architecture
shows,) through a length of time, anticipated us in slowly
providing places of worship, yet new churches are now rapidly
rising where required by an increasing population. Surely
our hospitals and schools may be favourably contrasted with
their monasteries; and their fraternities are surpassed by our
Societies for Missions abroad, for the promotion of Christian
knowledge at home, and for the cheap circulation of reli-
gious works, and above all, of the Word of God. But I
would not chiefly dwell on the amount of the expenditure.
It is the motive that sanctifies the gift ; and though some
Protestants may act on the Romish principle of merit, and
others give from the impulse of their feelings, we have reason
to hope that it is the love of Christ which constrains many
to live to Him, by feeding the hungry, providing for the
sick, and teaching the ignorant the way of salvation, for his
sake.

We next condemn, for the same reasons, the worshipping
of images and relics and the invocation of saints, which are
naturally connected, and are indeed joined together not in
this Article only, but also by the Council of Trent. It will
be most convenient to consider the last first, as the other
two must stand or fall with it. Among the heathen, as
St. Paul tells the Corinthians1", there are gods many and
lords many; but to Christians there is but one God the
Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ; and when giving
Timothy" instructions for offering prayers and intercessions
for all men, he reminds him, that as there is one God, so
m 1 Cor. viii. 5. n ] Tim. ii.

390

LECTURE XV.

there is one Mediator, the man Christ Jesus. Nevertheless,
the Council of Trent presumes to declare those accursed
who assert either that the saints who enjoy eternal happi-
ness in heaven do not pray for men, and that invoking them
to pray for us is idolatry, or that it is contrary to the
honour of this one God and this one Mediator. Who then
are these saints, and what are their transcendent merits, that
they should be introduced into the office of our great and
sole Priest, and have a share assigned to them, however
small, in the finished salvation which he accomplished once
for all as a victim upon the altar of the cross ! Saint is a
term that ought to be familiar to us, since it is St. Paul's
ordinary appellation of believers. We now only use it
as a substantive, and speak of places as holy, though in
conformity with the Latin and French idiom we have a few
instances, as in Saint Sepulchre and Saint Cross. But living
persons ought to be holy in both senses, not only consecrated
to God's service, but sanctified by his Spirit, to show forth
his praises for calling them out of darkness into his mar-
vellous light. All real believers, who are God's workmanship,
created unto good works, ought to be saints ; but the term
has attained a technical meaning, and would not be applied
to any living Christian, however deserving of the title.
We confer it on such as have suffered for righteousness'
sake, not only martyrs, but confessors, and on those of
ancient times, of whom we judge, with or without reason,
that the world was not worthy. First come the Apostles
and Evangelists; and custom has given it to the Fathers, that
is to all the orthodox Greek and Latin theological writers,
but certainly with no more propriety than we should extend
it to eminent modern divines. These are followed by saints
of a more questionable character, for it includes almost all
the Christians of the middle ages wrho were founders of
religious orders, or eminent for their writings, or austerities,
or superstition, or enthusiasm. There are several whose
history is doubtful, and even some whose existence has been
disputed. In process of time they were not only canonized
by public opinion, but by a formal decree of Bishops ; and
at length the privilege was taken from them, and assigned

LECTURE XV.

391

by the second Lateran Council, A. D. 1179, to the Pope,
who continues to exercise it down to the present time.
Reason teaches, that the Creator and Governor of the world
is the sole proper object of adoration, and, as might be
expected, his revealed will ratifies the teaching. Our
goodness extendeth not to Jehovah ; and the prayers of the
holiest of our fallen race, which cannot procure even their
own salvation, are only accepted through the one Inter-
cessor, the Son of his love0. There is no record under the
Jewish dispensation of a prayer addressed to angel or de-
parted saint, not to Abraham, the father of the faithful and
the friend of God, or to Moses, the revealer of the Law.
The rule was without exception, Call upon me in the day
of trouble, I will hear thee, and thou shalt glorify me? ; and its
advocate will search in vain for permission in the New, in
the opening of which our Lord, invited to do homage to
Satan, does not confute him by showing the invalidity of
his pretensions, but in his rebuke condemns the adoration
of any created being, by citing from Deuteronomy ; Thou
shalt worsltip the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve*.
Express condemnation of errors, which did not yet exist,
cannot reasonably be expected, but in condemning the
worship of false gods, no reserve is made for it as limited
to the adoration of the heathen. When under a show
of humility and ivill worship1, the Gnostics would have
brought into the Church of Colosse the worship of angels,
(and that we may presume only with the inferior honour
which the more enlightened Romanists are content to claim
for the saints,) St. Paul charges them to beware of that vain
philosophy . And we may conclude what would have been
Peter's censure of the invocation of saints, from his saying
to the centurion, who fell at his feet and worshipped him,
whatever he might mean by that mark of respect, Stand
up, I myself am also a man*. No doubt he would have
regarded his worship as profanation, and would reject with
horror now the prayers of Christians ; and even when
St. John prepared to worship the Angel, who had made to him

■ Coloss. i. 13. p Ps. L 15. n Matt. iv. 10. ' Coloss. ii. 18.

s Acts x. 20.

392

LECTURE XV.

such glorious discoveries of the future, his homage, which
we can hardly suppose was more than of the inferior kind,
was not accepted, but the answer was, See thou do it not :
worship God1. And so unfavourable to their view do Roman
Catholics feel the fact when fairly exhibited to be, that in
their improved " Abridgment of Christian doctrine," St.
John's attempt to worship is made to answer the question,
Is it lawful to honour the angels and saints? but the angel's
rebuke of him for the attempt is omitted. In the same
spirit, it is well known, that the second Commandment does
not appear in their Catechisms ; and to keep up the number,
the tenth is divided into two ; a clumsy contrivance, for
coveting is the same sin, whether the object be a wife or a
house ; and it is remarkable, that in the edition of the
Decalogue as repeated in Deuteronomy the order is inverted,
and house follows wife.

Worship which is forbidden to Angels cannot innocently
be offered to men. The Hebrews are exhorted to remember
them which had the rule over them11, (who were now dead,)
and to follow their faith, but there is no suggestion to pray
to them. Paul, opposing the worship of angels, enlarges
on the glory of Him, in whom dwelleth all the fulness of the
Godhead bodily, the head of all 'principality and power, in
whom believers are complete^ ; and his willingness is equal to
his sufficiency; his human nature enables him to sympathize
with us as a brother, as much as any departed saint ; why
then, even if it were lawful, should we in a false humility
seek for any other advocate, invited as we are to come
boldly through the Saviour to a throne of grace, since that
Saviour has taught us to ask in his name, and in no
other, and encourages importunity ? And the Apostle Paul
declares, that as there is only one God, so there is only one
Mediator; a mediator, be it noted, not only of reconciliation,
but of intercession, as the context shows y, for he is there
directing prayers to be made for all men. It is the
honourable and consolatory privilege of the Christian to
address the Lord of heaven and earth as his Father, why
then in the spirit of bondage apply to others to prevail on
» Rev. xix. 10. ■ Heb. xiii. 7. * Coloss. ii. 0, 10. » 1 Tim. ii.

LECTURE XV.

393

him who already waiteth to be gracious ? Uirough the Son
we have access by one Spirit unto the Father ; and, if any
man sin, we have — what ? ten thousand mediating saints ?
no, but — an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the
righteous; and he is our advocate on the only basis — his
atonement — on which intercession can have any value, for he
is the propitiation for our sinsz. He is able to save to the
uttermost all who come unto God by him*; and because we are
sons, hath sent forth the Spiritof his Son into our hearts, crying
— not Hail Mary, or Queen of Heaven and of Angels, pray
for us, but — Abba Father^! we are come at once, without any
intervention, to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to
the blood of sprinkling*. When the Reformation opened the
Bible to the people, the alternative was before the Church
of Rome, either to bring up her practices to the Word of
God, or to bring down His Word to the level of her practices.
She, worthy of the name and principles of a corrupt and
apostate communion, chose the latter, wresting it, with all
the ingenuity of sophistry and perverted erudition, to make
it speak a non-natural sense. A system so revolting to
reason and so offensive to God, who describes himself as a
jealous Godd, who will not give his honour to another, could
find no converts among his ancient people, to whom was ever
present the text, Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one
Gode; and must have been equally odious among the Gentiles,
who had turned to God from idols, to serve the living and
true God{. Like the Jews before them, they were treated
by the heathen polytheists as atheists : and their refusal of
any worship to a created being may be established from
the writings both of themselves and of their adversaries.

Thus an Epistle written by the Church of Smyrna, before
the end of the second century, shows, that the invocation of
saints would not have been endured in that early age. It
refers to the Jews, at whose suggestion Polycarp's body had
been burnt, lest, as they pretended, it should be taken by
the Christians and worshipped. " These men know that we
can neither forsake Christ, who suffered for the salvation of

z 1 John ii. 2.
d Exod. xx. !5.

* Heb. vfl. 25.
« Deut. vi. 4.

b Gal. iv. 6. c Heb. xii. 24.

f 1 Thess. i. 0.

394

LECTURE XV.

all that are saved, the innocent for the guilty, nor worship
any other ; him truly being the Son of God we adore, but
the martyrs and disciples and followers of the Lord we
justly love for that love which they have expressed towards
their King and Master, of whose happiness God grant that
we may partake, and that we may learn by their example s."
In the Council of Laodicea, the worship of angels was con-
demned as a secret idolatry, and forsaking of Christ; and the
first apologists for Christianity arraign the worship of
demons, and of such as once lived on the earth, in a style
that showed that they did not apprehend that the argument
could be turned against them, for worshipping either
angels or departed saints ; and when the Arian controversy
arose, the invocation of Christ was urged in proof of his
divinity ; " for none," says Athanasius, " would pray to
receive any thing from angels, or any other creatures :" and
at the time it was beginning, the fifth century, Augustine
warns the Church against the practice ; " Let not the
worship of dead men be any part of our religion; they ought
to be so honoured that we may imitate them, but not
worship them." The practice was promoted by the custom
of praying for the dead, which was introduced as early as
the third century, not as many think for souls in purgatory,
but for those who though not yet received into heaven, were
believed to be already in some hidden receptacle in the
enjoyment of imperfect bliss, which God was entreated to
increase. Among those they prayed for were the most
eminent departed saints, as the Apostles and our Lord's
Virgin Mother ; and this can be proved by early liturgies
still extant. And it was by an extraordinary misconception,
that prayers for their benefit were turned into prayers for
their help. Though the practice became universal, it is diffi-
cult to ascertain its commencement. It probably originated
in the custom of delivering orations in honour of martyrs
on the anniversaries of their decease. In these declamatory
panegyrics occurred addresses to the commemorated saints
to intercede with God for those who were now honouring
his memory, but it was with the qualification, if they were
g Euseb. iv. 15.

LECTURE XV.

395

conscious of what was passing in this world. In process of
time the qualification was dropped, and there was no scruple
in entreating them ; and ' Pray for us' became the common
language of Liturgies addressed to a long and ever-increas-
ing catalogue of saints, but though still called upon as
intercessors, they were also soon addressed as capable
of themselves to bestow spiritual blessings. St. Bernard,
who is entitled the last of the Fathers, and whose less
objectionable works have been praised by some Protestants,
has written homilies in honour of the Virgin ; and this short
specimen will show how the piety of the middle ages had
unhappily been turned aside from its proper object. " There
is none more useful to us than Mary, to whom we are to
have recourse as an advocate with Him, and as the woman h
who was to bruise the serpent's head. Remember, O most
pious Virgin! it is a thing unheard of that thou ever for-
sakest those who have recourse to thee. Encouraged with
this hope and confidence, I, a most miserable sinner, cast
myself at thy sacred feet, humbly beseeching that thou wilt
adopt me as thy son for ever, and take upon thee the care
of my salvation." The first persons on record who paid her
divine honours were the Collyridians, who derived their name
from a Greek word for cakes, which they offered to her on her
yearly festival, as they had done while pagans to Astarte, the
Queen of heaven; and they were thus reproved by Epipha-
nius, whom Rome acknowledges for a saint : " The body of
Mary is indeed holy, but not God. The Virgin was indeed
honourable, but not given to us for adoration, but one who
did herself worship Him who was born of her in the flesh."
He concludes, " let Mary be in honour, but let the Father
and the Son and the Holy Ghost be worshipped." Her
worship, however, notwithstanding continued to spread over
the western church, and by the close of the tenth century,
Saturday had become a fast day in her honour ; daily offices
were introduced, and the rosary, brought, it seems, by the

r It appears, that in the prophecy in Genesis, iii. 3 5. of the Seed of the
woman, he read in his Bible, not ipsum but ipsa, a various reading which
has contributed to the undue exaltation of this handmaid of the Lord, and
has induced painters to represent her as treading upon a serpent.

396

LECTURE XV.

crusaders from the East, shows the estimation in which she
was held ; for this method of recollecting the number of
the same oft-repeated petitions, called counting beads, that
is, prayers, contains but six Lord's prayers to sixty Aves,
that is, the Salutation of the angel converted into an act of
adoration. The Litany is profanely parodied, so that we
read, "in all time of our tribulation, in all time of our wealth,
in the hour of death, and in the day of judgment" — instead of
"good Lord," — O Virgin Mary, "deliver us;" but Bonaven-
tura, cardinal and canonized saint, has reached, as I conceive,
the ne plus ultra of impiety, in profaning in this manner
even the Word of God, by expunging throughout the Psalter
the Divine name, and substituting that of Mary, making, to
give one instance, Jehovah to say, not to my Lord, but to
Mary, Stand thou at my right hand, till I make thine enemies
thy footstool'. And so well satisfied with this Saint is
Rome, that on his day she puts the following petition into
the mouths of her members : " O Lord, who didst give
blessed Bonaventura to thy people for a minister of sal-
vation, grant that he who was the instructor of our life here
on earth, may become our intercessor in heaven !"

In the state of the public mind during the session of the
Council of Trent, the invocation of saints was a delicate
subject, difficult to treat, without giving offence to popular
prejudices, or contradicting the Scriptures. The divines
determined on retaining it as an article of faith, but so
expressed themselves, as to limit themselves to the declara-
tion, "that it is a good and useful thing to flee to the prayers
and assistance of the saints, who reign together with
Christ, and that they are men of impious sentiments who
affirm, that to beseech them to pray for us is idolatry, or
that it is contrary to God's word, or opposed to the honour
of the one mediator." Roman Catholic doctors evade the
obvious charge of idolatry by an ingenious yet untenable
distinction in the degrees of respect that is shown to the
Creator and his creatures, which they represent by worship
Xar^eloi due to the former alone, and service fovxlot which
may be offered to the latter. Conscious that they describe

' Ps. ex. l .

LECTURE XV.

39 T

the Virgin as raised above the rest, and desirous of retaining
the title blasphemously assigned to her of Queen of heaven,
they invented, to justify their excessive homage, the term
u7r-^ov\lct, or more than service. But this plea is silenced
out of our Lord's mouth, who thus discomfited Satan;
Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Hun only shalt
thou serve. A Greek concordance will show, that the two
words are used indiscriminately ; and the angel who refused
the homage offered by St. John, saying, worship God,
declared himself to be abv SouXog his fellow servant. The
cautious language of Trent emboldened Bossuet, who as a
controversialist placed his church in the most favourable
light, to assert, that they only pray to saints to intercede for
them ; and the declaration of the Vicars Apostolic in Great
Britain, adapted to a Protestant latitude, says, that "in this
saint worship, when done according to the principles and
spirit of the catholic church, there is neither superstition,
nor any thing contrary to true piety, for the catholic church
teaches her children not to pray to the saints as the givers
of divine grace, but only to solicit them to pray for us in
the same sense, as St. Paul desired his friends on earth to
pray for him." T notice in passing the essential difference,
that when we ask our friends to pray for us, it is under-
stood that their requests will be presented through the sole
Mediator and Advocate ; but that they intreat the saints in
the hope that they may prevail through their own merits. The
doctrine, I may also observe, is absurd as well as impious.
Angels are ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them
who shall be the heirs of salvation^ ; and of those it might be
said, that they know our wants, and can communicate them to
God. They may be supposed to hear prayers addressed to
them, yet even this will ivorship, that is of man's own
unauthorized devising, is condemned by St. Paul, as in-
truding into things ichich a man has not seen1. The saints, we
grant, may sympathize with the Church militant upon
earth ; but we have no reason to infer that they can keep
up any intercourse with them. The primitive and seemingly
true opinion is, that the souls of those departed in the faith
k Heb. i. 14. < Col. ii. 18.

398

LECTURE XV.

do not ascend into heaven, (which Justin Martyr condemns
as a Gnostic error,) but enter into a resting place, not
beholding the glory of God, which is reserved till the
Resurrection, yet enjoying a vision of their Redeemer,
such in kind though in degree far surpassing that
previously vouchsafed to prophets. It was the Council of
Florence, says Bishop Bull, which first boldly, in opposition
to primitive Christianity, decreed, that souls which are purged
from the stain of sin, do immediately go to heaven, where they
clearly see God as he is. This decree they made to intro-
duce purgatory, and to establish the worship of the saints.
They met the objection against their ability to know the
concerns and wishes of their brethren in the flesh, by the
supposition that they were shown to them in the mirror of
the Trinity. This explanation, that God discovers our
desires to the saints, in order to enable them to pray to
Him for us, demonstrates the doctrine to be as repugnant
to reason, as we have already seen it to be to Scripture.

Some of the most offensive prayers and hymns were omitted
in the Breviary, as reformed by command of the Council of
Trent ; but the evil was so far from being checked, that it
has been gradually growing, till supreme worship has
practically been transferred to this co-called Queen of
heaven ; and she and the saints are even introduced as
mediators to save the world from the vengeance of the
Saviour, whom they impiously change into a stern and
severe Judge. Thus Biel, one of their approved authors,
tells us, that our heavenly Father gave the half of his
kingdom to the most blessed Virgin, retaining justice,
and giving up to her the exercise of mercy. He, who
when on earth would not suffer her to interfere in his
ministry, is now addressed as if under her control, and
she is called upon in hymns to show her maternal
power. Newman, with the zeal of a proselyte, will not
fall short of any of her hereditary worshippers in his
devotion ; for, in a sermon on her glories, he declares, that
by condescending to become the Mother of Jesus, she
has earned the throne of heaven, and that the Deification of
her is the perfection of Christianity ! Nor would, I conceive,

LECTURE XV.

399

this blasphemous avowal be repudiated at Rome, since the
late Pope Gregory XVI. selected for his encyclical letter of
1832, the festival of her [pretended] triumphant assumption
into heaven, because she had been through every great
calamity his patroness; and he prays that she may watch over
him writing, and lead his mind by her heavenly influence
to those counsels which may prove most salutary to Christ's
flock. He adds, that she destroys heresies, and is the entire
ground of his hope. His successor writes in the same
strain. Lewis XIII. solemnly placed his kingdom under her
special protection, and his vow was formally renewed by
Lewis XVIII. on his restoration. The month of May is
now set apart for her more peculiar service, and in addition
to the many prayers to be found in manuals of devotion,
there is even a litany to her heart. The following is an
extract from a prayer of Alphonso Liguori, in whose
writings Rome has pronounced there is nothing deserving
of censure, and who was canonized in A.D. 1839 : " Queen
of heaven and of earth ! Mother of God ! my sovereign
Mistress ! I present myself before you a poor mendicant
before a mighty Queen. O illustrious Virgin, you are the
Queen of the universe, and consequently mine. Dispose of
me according to your good pleasure. Direct me. I abandon
myself wholly to your conduct. Chastise me if I disobey
you. I am then no longer mine, I am all your's. Save me,

0 powerful Queen, save me by the intercession of your Son."

1 close this painful subject with another extract. " Brother
Leo once saw in a vision two ladders reaching to heaven,
one red, at the summit of which was Jesus Christ; the other
white, on which was his blessed Mother. Those who en-
deavoured to ascend by the former, after mounting a few
steps, fell down ; but the voice having told them to make
trial of the other, they reached heaven, the Virgin having
held out her hands to receive them."

Such is the height of folly and awful impiety, (for
awful, however well-intended, it is to transfer our adoration
from the Creator to any creature,) which the most learned
may attain, who presume to be wise above what is written ;
to whom we may apply St. Paul's condemnation of the

400

LECTURE XV.

sages of antiquity, Professing themselves to be wise, they
became fools™. Reading the New Testament in the light of
history, we perceive why the blessed Virgin, the mistaken
object of worship to so many Christians, is scarcely ever
mentioned therein without some depreciating circumstances;
and we are thankful that her Son checked the incipient
spirit of Mariolatry, which led a woman to exclaim, Happy
is the womb that bare thee ! with the remark so consolatory
to the believer, happy rather are they who hear the word of
God and keep it. " What a sublime rebuke ! yet, like
Christ's severest rebukes, bearing a blessing in the heart of
it. And how should we pray that every Roman Catholic
should feel this blessed truth, that the man who hears God's
word and does it, is more blessed in so doing, than the
Virgin Mary was in being selected to be the mother of our
Lord according to the flesh ! There is no room for her
interposing mediation, if we consider that Christ is God-
Man. Sin had made a yawning chasm, between the abso-
lutely holy God, and the ruined creature ; and the Lord
Jesus Christ by his death introduced himself as the glorious
ladder typified by that seen in vision by Jacob, connecting
heaven and earth. There is no room for her between her
Son and man, for he is very man entering into the depths of
our sympathies, and conversant with the source of our tears.
There is no room for her, for he spans the whole chasm, and
forms a pathway so wide, that the greatest sinner may walk
in it, and yet so holy, that the least sin is not tolerated
in itn."

Images and relics are naturally associated, for whoever
venerates the portrait of a saint, will respect any part of
him, as a bone or a hair, that has been preserved. A
memorial of a departed friend, or of a revered character
personally unknown, will be valued in proportion to our
estimation of the original, and the representation of such
will be dear, as recalling the image of one beloved, or as
giving some idea of the features of those of whose appear-
ance we should be glad to have a conception. The feeling

m Rom. i. 22.

n Cummmg's Lectures for the Times, viii. 1844.

LECTURE XV,

401

kept within due limits is innocent; but so prodigious has
been the abuse of it, that with our experience we ought to
do nothing to encourage it. No corruption of religion was
more glaring than this at the period of the Reformation.
The divines assembled at Trent must have been fully aware,
that it supplied one of the most popular objections to the
established system ; and yet they dared not concede, that
the practice which had so long been universally prevalent
was erroneous. They therefore dismissed these points as
briefly as possible, only maintaining, that due honour ought
to be paid to images and to relics, without determining what
was due. To this the Protestant answers without hesitation,
none; for if saints themselves are not to be worshipped even
with the lower kind of adoration, what respect can be due
to their relics supposing them authentic, or to their por-
traits though they were real likenesses, more than to those
of other persons whom we admire or love ? The texts
which they bring forward only prove, that they must seek
from some other source the justification of the practice.
The woman cured by touching the hem of our Saviour's
garment, did not adore it, but him ; and it was her faith, not
in that but in him, that cured her. The rod that budded,
and the pot of manna, which the people were never per-
mitted to see, were laid up merely as memorials. The
care bestowed on the burial of Stephen, is an argument
in favour only of the decent interment of the saints. Even
the Brazen Serpent, erected by divine command by Moses,
and declared by our Lord himself to be a type of him,
was destroyed by King Hezekiah, when it ensnared the
people into idolatry; and his conduct is a much stronger
condemnation of relics than any passage that can be adduced
in their favour. The early Christian writers, who had to
vindicate their worship of an invisible Deity against those
who fell down before images, confute the very arguments
which are now brought forward by Roman Catholics to
show, that it is not the image itself, but the person whom it
represents, that is worshipped.

This is a distinction impossible for those to maintain who
recommend prayer as more acceptable, when offered before

d d

402

LECTURE XV.

one picture than another. The devotee who, not content
with worshipping the Virgin Mary at home or in his parish
church, thought and had been taught to think, that he had
more reason to expect her aid when he addressed her at a
favourite shrine, as at Halle or at Walsingham, must have
attributed some peculiar sanctity to the image which he
visited ; and in Italy, at the present time, the authorities
exert themselves to keep up this delusion. They have
miraculous portraits of the Madonna or Lady, some ascribed
to St. Luke, others reputed to be finished by angels while
the artist slept, and these are only exhibited by priests with
lighted candles ; and devotion to them is encouraged by a
plenary indulgence of all sins to those who visit them, and
miracles are declared to have been wrought by the intercession
of her whom they represent, when invoked under the auspices
of some favourite picture. There is a celebrated one in the
church of S. Maria Maggiori, which Gregory the Great had
removed in a solemn procession to St. Peter's: and it was a
delightful miracle, says the narrative, to behold how the
pestilence ceased entirely along the streets, through which it
passed. Twelve centuries after, one of his successors ac-
companied the same picture in a procession, when Mary, ac-
cording to the official report, " entered into her privileged
temple." They place the august picture upon the pontifical
altar: the Litanies are chaunted, and the Holy Pope offers
incense to it, and utters a prayer full of sweet hope, that Mary
had heard the vows and prayers of her people. There are
Madonnas at Rome, which are attested to have wept, as if
animated by the original ; and one in the crypt beneath
St. Peter's, an inscription declares, poured forth blood
when struck by an impious hand ! Men of subtlety may
invent explanations palliative of the honour shown to them ;
but the fact will still remain, that among the masses of the
people, these miraculous pictures are not regarded as mere
painted canvass, but as possessing some mysterious power.
The explanation of the priests was, that for some unknown
cause, a picture was a special favourite with the Virgin
Mary; and they argued, that miracles were wrought0 before,
• Seymour's Pilgrimage to Rome, xiii.

LECTURE XV.

408

but not by it. 1 refer to Seymour's pilgrimage for a
striking account of the Bambino, blessing from the summit
of the capitol not less than five thousand persons, every
head uncovered, and every face upturned, gazing intently
upon the scene in front of the church. This image of the
infant Jesus, a small doll wearing a royal crown, and
wrapped in swaddling clothes gemmed with precious stones,
is brought at a considerable cost to the sick, and to women
to ensure a safe delivery. It is conveyed in a state carriage
accompanied by priests ; as it slowly passes, every head is
uncovered, and every knee is bent ; and even the host itself
does not elicit the same degree of prostration. It was a pious
fraud, but like all frauds pernicious, which, in order to win
the heathen, accommodated Christian worship to their super-
stition and worldly love of show ; adopting their ceremonies
and decorations, as lighted candles at noon-day, which Ter-
tullian had ridiculed, incense, gorgeous robes, and proces-
sions, till in process of time, God, whom his Son had declared
as a Spirit, ought to be worshipped in spirit, was approached
in the same manner as Jupiter had been before ; and it
became difficult to distinguish in its furniture and the services
celebrated therein, a Christian church from a pagan temple.
The saints of the modern Romans succeeded in their
offices and their honours the gods and heroes of their
ancestors. Nay the very idols of the latter, often with an
alteration of name and accompaniments, became the images
of the former. Thus the Capitoline Jove, having exchanged
his thunderbolt for a key, sits in St. Peter's church as
prince of the Apostles. The foot of the image of him who
refused the homage of Cornelius is still notwithstanding
kissed by those who claim exclusive right to the title of
Christians ; and shows, by its worn condition, that it
had been treated with the same respect by its heathen
worshippers. In pagan Rome, abstractions of the mind, as
virtue and honour, were deified, and every profession had
its patron deity. The Christian metropolis has substituted
for them male and female saints, who preside over their
occupations, or whom they invoke to relieve them when
suffering from pain or sickness. The subject has been

d d 2

404

LECTURE XV.

treated at length by Dr. Middleton in his letter from Rome,
and by more recent authors ; but I will only notice one
comprehensive instance, the consecration of the still extant
Pantheon, the temple, as its name implies, of all the gods, to
the service of the Queen of heaven and all the saints. The
Homily against Peril of Idolatry, gives an interesting
sketch of the progress of saint worship, and declareth,
that "although our Saviour Christ taketh not, or needeth not
any testimony of men, this truth concerning the forbidding
of images, and worshipping of them, taken out of the holy
Scriptures, was believed and taught of the old holy fathers
and most ancient learned doctors, and received in the old
primitive church, which was most uncorrupt and pure." The
influence of paganism is discoverable in the reverence of
martyrs and their relics, which began to show itself before
the conversion of Constantine ; but it was not till the fourth
century that this reverence was exalted into actual worship.
Pilgrimages were undertaken to pray at their tombs, and
sometimes to obtain one of their bones, to the employment
of which prodigies were ascribed ; still the most enthusiastic
of their admirers never proposed the introduction of their
images into the churches ; and Theodosius enacted laws
against painting the likeness of the Saviour. However,
the custom spread among the vulgar through heathen
converts with rapid though silent growth, and was generally
tolerated before the end of the sixth century. To Gregory
the Great we must ascribe not only the improvement of
public worship, but the encouragement of superstition, and
the establishment of the supremacy of his see. During his
pontificate, Serenus Bishop of Marseilles, observing that the
people worshipped the images placed in his church, de-
stroyed them. The Pope wrote to him on the occasion,
praising his zeal, but arguing in favour of retaining them ;
because " what writing teaches to those who can read,
painting renders intelligible to those who have only eyes to
see." Thus a compromise was established. It was right
to have images in churches, it was wrong to worship them.
Idolatry had been firmly established in the east long
before it obtained a footing among the barbarous tribes

LECTURE XV.

405

who bad possessed themselves of the western empire.
Notwithstanding the strong hold which images had taken of
the affections of the Greeks, and especially of the monks
and of the populace, the Emperor Leo became a determined
iconoclast, or destroyer of them. His perseverance in
opposition to the prejudices of his subjects occasioned a
civil war, which ended in the defection of Italy, and the
renunciation of his nominal allegiance by the Pope. But
this did not alter his determination ; and his policy was carried
on during a long reign by his son, whose widow Irene, acting
as regent for his grandson, summoned a general Council to
Nice, which decided in favour of image worship. Her
exertions, supported by the monks and the mob, and en-
couraged by the Pope, were triumphant; and the attachment
to images increased in the west till the Reformation, which
did not exclude them from the Lutheran churches, though
it has from our own, and from those which have adopted
the system of Geneva.

These " books of the unlearned," as representations have
been called, too often convey erroneous ideas, even when the
works of orthodox artists, whose genius is under the control
of good sense and genuine piety. Unhappily all the ancient
masters, whose paintingsare regarded with almost superstitious
admiration, were under the influence of Romish prejudices,
which they have encouraged, perhaps more effectually than
authors, and when they have not actually misled, they have
too often corrupted the charmed spectator from the sim-
plicity which is in Christ. The weight of Gregory's argu-
ment, whatever it might be in the middle ages, is reduced
to insignificance when the Bible has become the cheapest
of publications, and the art of reading is common. The
Reformation cleared our churches of altars and roods,
statues and pictures, and all the appendages of Popery.
Since the idea of their sanctity has died out, it has become
not uncommon to place a single painting over the com-
munion table, which it is understood must be the repre-
sentation of a Scriptural subject. As Protestants then, we
happily have nothing to do with legends. The only case
we have to consider is the propriety of attempting to delineate

406

LECTURE XV.

the Deity. The Roman Catholic omission of the second
commandment is a tacit confession that the Old Testament
is against them ; and with regard to the New, St. Paul's
reasoning with the Athenians implies that Christians, now
the times of ignorance are past, are not to worship God
through means addressed to the senses. Every reasonable
and pious worshipper of this enlightened age is shocked
with the attempts which are yet extant to represent the
ever-blessed Trinity. Raphael and other of the more cele-
brated Italian painters have not scrupled to paint the
Supreme Being as a venerable old man. We see at once
the absurdity of thus degrading the Deity, whom we are
told by his Son, who has alone known him, is a Spirit, and
the Apostles teach, no man hath seen or can see, dwelling
in unapproachable light: and the attempt to delineate
must have appeared not only hopeless, but profane, to any
one who remembered the Almighty's strong prohibition of
it to Moses ; a prohibition, which from the nature of
things must be ever equally binding. Take ye therefore
good heed unto yourselves, for ye saw no manner of simi-
litude in the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb
out of the midst of the fire, lest ye corrupt yourselves, and
make unto you a graven image?. But it may be said, that
since his Son our Lord Jesus Christ took upon him our
nature, there can be no impropriety in representing him as
a man. It is however a fact well worthy of our notice,
and a strong presumption against the attempt, that no
authentic portrait of our Lord is come down to us, though
we have of his contemporaries the Roman Emperors.
There is indeed a description of one which he is said
to have sent to Abgarus King of Edessa, from which the
conventional idea of him is formed. But it is clear that
it was the forgery of a later age, and has no authority,
from the different opinion of his person entertained by
the Greek and Latin Fathers, the former of whom, from
their admiration of ideal beauty, maintained, that he was
perfect in form as well as in disposition; while the latter,
from a rigorous interpretation both of Isaiah's text and
p Dent. iv. t5.

LECTURE XV.

107

the reply of his adversaries, thou art not yet fifty years
old, argued, that he had literally no form or comeliness. It
seems reasonable to suppose, that this was purposely con-
trived to prevent his unconscious portrait sharing in the
homage due to himself alone, upon the same principle that
the burying-place of Moses was concealed, lest his remains
should prove a stumblingblock to his people. As St. Paul
says, those who had known Christ after the flesh, were to
know him so no more.

A false, and therefore an injurious impression is caused
by such attempts, even when faithful to the Scripture
narrative: and as works of art they are with rare exceptions
failures, the artist's genius being cramped by his reverence,
for the object he undertakes to delineate, and a feeling of his
own inadequacy, so as often to render the figure that ought
to be his master-piece inferior to the subordinate person-
ages. The sensation produced is disappointment : but it is
an evil of far greater magnitude, when the artist passes
out of the real into an imaginary world, though such pictures
happily with us adorn not our churches, but the mansions
of the wealthy. The most innocent specimens of this
description are holy families, with or without the Baptist,
diversified with an endless variety, and in which the holy
Child is frequently introduced playing with various animals,
from which these pictures derive their technical distinctions.
Such imaginary scenes are more in accordance with the
apocryphal than the real gospels, which sketch not the
family history, but the ministry of our blessed Lord. The
evil attains its height, when he is degraded to a mere
appendage to his exalted and deified mother, to distinguish
her from other saints, as the wheel marks St. Catherine,
and a vase the Magdalene. Thus she appears as a Queen,
and often crowned, and enthroned above the clouds, honoured
by angels, and worshipped by the kneeling saints of later ages,
as for instance by Saint Barbara, and a Pope in a celebrated
picture by Rallaelle. These anachronisms tend to cheat
the spectator into forgetting, that he who attained to man-
hood on earth, is not still an infant : and it fosters the
delusion of helplessness in Him, who, as perfect man. is

408

LECTURE XV.

set down at the right hand of the throne of God — not, as
represented in other paintings, as assisting the Father in the
coronation of Mary, but Himself to reign — till he hath put
all enemies under his feet. Such pictures " create the
impression on the mind, that Mary is the primary person in
heaven, as being the primary object in the picture ; that she
cannot only influence but command her child ; and this is
precisely the tone of feeling actually generated11."

We need not stop to consider Relics, the veneration of
which is defended and confuted by the same arguments as
that of images.

These are of two sorts ; the actual remains, as a limb or
hair of the bodies of saints, or the instrument of their suffer-
ings. The multitude of the former is so prodigious, as
to excite suspicion and ridicule. Cologne boasts of
chests full of the bones of the Theban legion, and of
St. Ursula and her eleven thousand virgin companions ; and
a catalogue of those at Rome may be read in Mr. Seymour's
Pilgrimage. They afford ample materials for scoffers, since
the authenticity of all is questionable ; and sometimes there
are rival claims to the possession of a relic, as a head, which
of necessity can be only in one place. The veneration for
these remains long preceded the adoration of images, and
was much encouraged by Gregory. In an extraordinary
letter, which manifests the superstitious awe with which he
regarded the bodies of St. Peter and St. Paul, deposited, as
is believed, in the basilica of the former, he declines to
favour the Empress Irene with the smallest portion of these
honoured remains, and hardly ventures to promise her some
filings from his reputed predecessor's chains. This vene-
ration was not always disinterested, for the bone of a favourite
saint would often bring pilgrims to his shrine, and thus one
monastery would surpass another both in wealth and fame.
In a superstitious yet unscrupulous age, relics gave a sanction
to solemn engagements, which might otherwise have been
disregarded. Thus the crafty William of Normandy, having
forced an oath upon the reluctant Harold, showed him the
venerated relics on which he had unconsciously sworn, and

p Seymour, p. 42-3.

LECTURE XV.

409

admonished him to keep a promise ratified by so tremendous
a sanction. In the Roman service is a most objectionable
hymn to the Cross; and I conclude this painful subject,
with referring you to Mr. Seymour's description of the
adoration of that memorial of our Saviour's passion on Good
Friday by the Pope, who lays aside his robes and mitre, and
whose shoes are even taken off, that he may worship it with
greater respect and awe, than he does even the host. As
the author remarks, observing the critical distinctions of
Rome, it is an act not of veneration or worship, but of
adoration. Yet, strictly speaking, it is no relic, not being
made out of the fragment of the true cross, and therefore
no more than an emblem.

LECTURE XVI.

ARTICLE XXIII.

OF MINISTERING IN THE CONGREGATION.

It is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of public
preaching, or ministering the Sacraments in the congre-
gation, before he be lawfully called, and sent to execute the
same. And those we ought to judge lawfully called' and
sent) which be chosen and called to this ivork by men who
have public authority given unto them in the congregation,
to call and send Ministers into the Lord's vineyard.

ARTICLE XXXVI.

OF CONSECRATION OF BISHOPS AND MINISTERS.

The Book of Consecration of Archbishops and Bishops, and
Ordering of Priests and Deacons, lately set forth in the
time of Edward the Sixth, and confirmed at the same time
by authority of Parliament, doth contain all things neces-
sary to such Consecration and Ordering : neither hath it
any thing, that of itself is superstitious and ungodly. And
therefore whosoever are consecrated or ordered according
to the Rites of that Book, since the second year of the
forenamed King Edward unto this time, or hereafter shall
be consecrated or ordered according to the same Rites ; we
decree all such to be rightly, orderly, and lawfully con-
secrated and ordered.

These two Articles are so closely connected, that to
prevent repetition I shall consider them together.

In the first, though entitled Of Ministering in the Congre-

LECTURE XVI.

411

gation, Preaching and the Sacraments alone are named; but
the offering up of the prayers of the congregation must of
course be understood to be comprehended in the Minister's
functions. Public preaching and in the congregation are
opposed to family devotion, which is also a Christian duty,
but being private, remains at the discretion of the head of
the family, and is no subject of public regulation.

If religion is to be more than a personal concern between
man and his Creator ; and it is our duty, as the Apostle to
the Hebrews affirms*, not to forsake the assembling of our-
selves together, but to unite with our fellow Christians in
worship ; and if, which will not be denied, the service ought
to be performed with decency and in order ; it seems to
be a necessary conclusion, that it must not be left to be
casually supplied; in which case it might be a subject of
debate who should officiate, or it might be assumed by an
incompetent person. In the earliest ages the heads of
families, and afterwards chiefs, that is, the heads of clans,
led the worship of their families or people : and the
propriety of such arrangements is established upon divine
authority, since under the Mosaic dispensation this privi-
lege was transferred to one particular tribe. Under the
Christian system, especially since miraculous aid has been
withdrawn, and there is not a routine of formal ordinances
to be performed, but doctrines to be explained and precepts
to be inculcated, it would seem to be indispensable, unless
it could be shown that the distinction was designed to be
done away. And that it was not might be fairly concluded
from the fact, that the distinction now existing between the
clergy and laity, may be traced up to Clement of Rome, the
contemporary of St. Paul, supposed to be the same Clement
mentioned by him in his Epistle to the Philippians, and is
recognised in the New Testament. At first sight it might
appear from certain texts that this distinction was to cease.
Thus in his opening address to the seven Asiatic Churches,
St. John's ascription of, Glory and dominion unto Him that
loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and
hath made us kings and priests unto God*, includes the laity ;
* Heb. x. 5. »» Rev. i. 5, 6.

412

LECTURE XVI.

those who partake of the first resurrection, and who reign
with Christ a thousand years, are called priests ; and
St. Peter c designates the whole body of believers a chosen
generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar
people. On further enquiry we shall discover, that these
expressions are not to be taken to the letter, for the Apostle
is evidently referring to the title applied in Exodus d, by
God himself to his ancient people, Ye shall be unto me a
kingdom of priests, and a holy nation; and no one can doubt,
that under that dispensation there was a regular divinely
appointed priesthood, and that God miraculously interfered
to punish Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, who would have
usurped it, and acted upon this very interpretation; for their
speech to Moses and Aaron was, Ye take too much upon you,
ye sons of Levi, seeing all the congregation are holy every one
of them*. In the same Epistle too St. Peter expressly
acknowledges the distinction ; for the presbyters, or elders
as they are rendered in our version, he thus addresses, Feed
the flock of Christ which is among you, taking the oversight
thereof ; neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being
ensamples to the flock, and ye shall receive a crown of glory
when the chief Shepherd shall appear{; plainly showing that
he exhorts them as under shepherds.

Whoever receives the New Testament must allow, that
our Lord himself selected twelve of his followers to be
the ministers of his religion ; and that upon the vacancy
occasioned by the treachery and death of Judas, the eleven
filled up their number, and that the act was approved by
the Holy Ghost. The Apostles, however, might be presumed
to be not examples of the rule, but exceptions ; and indeed
in their peculiar office they had no successors, though as
bishops they ordained elders in the churches which they
founded ; and St. Paul writes to Timothy and Titus, as to
persons entrusted, at least for a season, with episcopal
functions. They are directed as to the particulars of public
worship, and to the ordaining and governing of ministers,
whose qualifications are enumerated : and these directions
are given to Timothy, that he may know how to behave
c 1 Teter ii. 9. d Exod. xix. 6. « Numb. xvi. 3. * 1 Tet. v. 2—4.

LKCIUltE XVI.

413

himself in the house of Godg ; and he is required to divide
the ivord of truth, to preach (he word, to reprove, rebuke,
exhort, do the work of an evangelist, and make full proof of
his ministry h ; and to lay hands suddenly on no man\ Titus
is instructed as to the doctrines he was to teach k, and the
doctrines he was to avoid1, and also how to censure heretics.
And it appears that there should be a succession in after
times of qualified ministers; for in this second Epistle, a
legacy as it were to the Church, the Apostle now ready to
be offered, charges his beloved son in the faith, Timothy,
not only to study to show himself approved unto Godm,
but writes, the things that thou hast heard from me among
many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who
shall be able to teach others a!soa. In the Epistles to the
Romans and Corinthians, the same Apostle reckons up the
several orders that God had set in his Church; and though
some of these have ceased with miraculous gifts, the general
fact of a Christian ministry of some kind, for which I am
contending, is supported by them as well as by the passage
in the Ephesians0, where he reckons apostles, prophets,
evangelists, pastors and teachers, among the gifts, which
Christ on his ascension obtained for men; and assigns the
reason of the gift, the perfecting of the saints, the work of the
ministry, the edifying of the body of Christ ; purposes which
we should infer would be as much wanted in every subse-
quent age as in that ; but which seems to be expressly
stated in the conclusion of the sentence, till we all come in
the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of
God, unto a perfect man ; not therefore to be limited to the
infancy of the Church. And not only instructions are
given to the clergy, but proper respect and obedience
is enjoined to the laity; as in that to the Hebrews p,
Obey them that have rule over you, and submit yourselves,
for they watch for your souls as they that must give account.
" Hereupon I hold," to adopt the language of Hooker, "that
the Clergy are a state which hath been and will be as long

g 1 Tim. iii. 15. »• 2 Tim. Lv. 2— ». 1 Tim. v. 22. * Titus ii.

1 Tit. iii. 9. » 2 Tim. ii. 15. ■ 2 Tim. ii. 2. ° Eph.iv.

p Heb. xiii. 17.

414

LECTURE XVI.

as there is a Church upon earth, necessarily by the plain
word of God himself." I conclude with referring you to
Paul's own solemn separation to the ministry. " Any one, says
Dr. Hey, fixing his thoughts on it, would naturally exclaim,
it was not enough then to authorize Paul to go and preach
the word, that he had been struck blind by the immediate
interference of God, that the design of divine Providence
in teaching a new religion, had been communicated to him by
a voice from heaven ; and that Ananias had been sent unto
him, as unto a chosen vessel unto God, to bear his name before
the gentiles and kings, and the children of Israel'1; to deliver
him from a blindness of three days. This chosen vessel must
still be consecrated by men; the presbyters of Antioch
must fast and pray over him, and lay their hands upon
him, before he could be a legitimate minister of the Gospel,
though he could say with more propriety than any other,
that he was an Apostle not from men neither by menr."
What teacher then of other days could take to himself
the office? The Article condemns self -ordination ; and
even if Scripture had been silent, which we see it is not,
reason would tell us, that a man is a partial and bad
judge of his own qualifications. The vain and conceited
would put themselves forward, the modest and diffident
would retire, and some would make themselves ministers
from unworthy interested motives. The question then
naturally arises, with whom doth the appointment rest? and
there are several who will answer, with Bishops exclusively,
denying the validity of the ministration of those who have not
received episcopal ordination. Their decision would exclude
from the covenant of Christianity all the churches who
have thrown off the yoke of Rome, except our own and that
of Sweden ; a position so startling, when we consider the
many eminent Protestant divines that have flourished in
Scotland, and France, and Germany; and the difficulty, and
in some instances the impossibility, of the laity of those
countries finding a true church with which they could
communicate, that it requires overpowering authority to
establish it. The Article is clearly against this view. And
i Acts ix. 15. r Gal. i. I.

LECTURE XVI.

415

we have already seen, that a former one so defined the
church as not to reject any other community which
held the unity of the faith. It would be easy to form
a catena of our divines from the time of Archbishop
Whitgift and Hooker, who, while they maintain the desir-
ability of episcopal ordination, deny its necessity; and who
would echo the sentiment of Bishop Cosins, " Are all the
churches of Denmark, Sweden, Poland, Germany, France,
Scotland, in all points of substance or circumstances dis-
ciplinated alike ? Nay, they neither are nor can be ; nor
yet need be, since it cannot be proved that any set and
particular form is recommended to us by the word of God."
Bishop Hall writes5, "Blessed be God, there is no difference
in any essential matter betwixt the Church of England and
her sisters of the Reformation. Their public confessions
and ours are sufficient conviction to the world of our full
and absolute agreement. The only difference is in the form
of outward administration, wherein also we are so far agreed,
as that we all profess this form not to be essential to the
being of a Church, though much importing the well or better-
being of it according to our several apprehensions thereof,
and that we do all retain a reverent and loving opinion of each
other in our several ways, not seeing any reason why so poor a
diversity should work any alienation of affection in us, one
towards another." And to this I add the judgment of the
contemporary lay philosopher, Bacon. " That there should
be but one form of discipline in all churches, and that
imposed 'by necessity of commandment and prescript out of
the word of God, I, for my part, do confess, that on
reading the Scriptures I could never find any such thing ;
but that God hath left the like liberty to the church
government as he hath done to the civil government, to be
raised according to time, and place, and accidents, which
nevertheless his high and divine Providence doth order
and dispose." I conclude with the judgment of two Bishops
on this very Article. Burnet says, "the definition here given
of those who are lawfully called and sent, is in very general
terms far from that magisterial stiffness in which some have
• Peacemaker, i. G.

416

LECTURE XVI.

taken upon them to dictate in this matter. The Article does
not resolve itself into any particular constitution, but leaves
the matter open and at large for such accidents as had hap-
pened, and such as might still happen. They who drew it had
the state of the several churches that had been differently
reformed before their eyes, and although their own had
been less forced to go out of the beaten path than any other,
yet they knew that all things among themselves had not
gone according to those rules, that ought to be sacred in
regular times. Necessity has no law, and is a law unto itself.
Happily this Article concerns us only indirectly. If a
Christian community find the public worship what they
conceive to be idolatrous, or in other respects contrary to
sound doctrine, and if their ministers agree with them,
excepting those whose province it is to ordain, we cannot
deny them the right of separating from those whom they
deem heretical ; and unless the society is to expire with its
original members, we must permit their ministers to con-
tinue their own succession. This has been the case both in
the Lutheran and the French Protestant church, and also
in that of Scotland, and in consequence there has been much
discussion upon the validity of Ordination by presbyters
or elders." Tomline, " that as the Scriptures do not
prescribe any definite form of church government, so they
contain no directions concerning the establishment of a
power by which ministers are to be admitted to their
sacred office. The adherence to the fundamental principles
of the Gospel is sufficient to constitute a visible Church."
And this axiom has the more weight, because he intro-
duces it with these words ; " Though I flatter myself
that I have proved Episcopacy to be an Apostolical Insti-
tution."

Le Clerc, a celebrated divine of the Dutch Church, itself
Presbyterian, bears this strong testimony in favour of
Episcopacy. "I have always professed to believe, that man
has no right to change Episcopacy in any place, unless it
were otherwise impossible to reform the abuses that crept
into Christianity; that it was justly preserved in England,
where the Reformation was practicable without altering

LECTURE XVI.

417

it ; and that therefore Protestants, in places where there
are Bishops, do ill to separate from that discipline."
Calvin himself had before given the same judgment.
Church government is certainly very subordinate in im-
portance to the maintenance of sound doctrine and holy
practice, the latter being indeed the end, which the
former is the means to attain. If therefore in any church
gross corruption should prevail, as throughout Europe before
the Reformation, and not only as on the continent then
the Bishops, but the whole body of the clergy should
oppose it; upon the same principle the congregation
might elect a new clergy for itself, and according to this
Article would have lawful authority. As before observed,
this does not materially concern us. It is true that several
of our divines in the commencement of our Reformation
had been ordained abroad by elders ; but in the reign of
James the First, the validity of their Ordination was called
in question. Yet persons so ordained were permitted to
hold preferment, till an Act of Parliament required as a con-
dition, that our clergy should receive episcopal ordination,
which has been ever since the only one acknowledged by
Law ; for the consecration of Archbishop Parker and his
suffragans by one another at the Nags-head Tavern, has
been long since exploded as an incredible fable : and the
due consecration of the three prelates, who set them apart
to their high office, not there, but in Lambeth palace, has
been ascertained. Through these Bishops, the English Orders
have been transmitted, and whatever right or privilege Rome
can claim from succession, must equally belong to our re-
formed branch of the Catholic Church. We believe, that
though the Ministry has passed through a corrupted channel,
it has not been vitiated by erroneous doctrines or superstitious
worship ; and upon this principle, whenever a priest abjures
popery, he is permitted to officiate among us without a
second ordination. While on the one hand we have the same
claim for the validity of our Orders as the Roman Catholics,
and this has been allowed by some of their own divines, we
can justly claim on the other the right asserted in the
Article; for as the Legislature has recognised and confirmed

E e

418

LECTURE XVI.

the power of Bishops, they are " the men among us who
have public authority given unto them in the congregation,
to call and send ministers into the Lord's vineyard."

The liberality of our Reformers with regard to church
government is remarkable. The Articles respecting it are
very few, and are so worded as not to commit the subscriber
to a declaration even of the superiority of our own. Few, I
conceive, can deny that we ought to judge "lawfully called and
sent those which be chosen, and called by men who have public
authority given them in the congregation" for that purpose ; and
none of our communion can reasonably withhold assent to an
Article, which does not assert that the Book of Consecration
of Archbishops and Bishops, and of Ordaining of Priests
and Deacons, is the best that could be devised, but claims
for i t only the negative merit of being neither " superstitious
nor ungodly." Dr. Burgess told King James, that he did not
mean to express approbation of every phrase, but only to
declare that our calling and ordination was on the whole
such as not to be deemed unlawful, or contrary to the word
of God, and his sense was accepted as the right one. The
Article mentions the Book set forth in the time of Edward
VI., but the Act of Uniformity declares it is to be under-
stood of the form as altered after the Restoration. These
alterations, however, are too trifling to excite any scruples
in the mind of persons who would sign the original book.

If every National Church be independent and at liberty,
as we have seen, to settle its own forms and ceremonies, the
truth of our position can only be disproved, by showing
that the distinction of the Ministry into three Orders, or
the terms in which they are admitted into them, is contrary
to the word of God.

An order of Priesthood, generally hereditary, has pre-
vailed from time immemorial in Egypt and in the East,
while professional distinctions were unknown to the Greeks
and Romans ; so that consuls and generals aspired to the
office of Pontiff ; and their presiding at sacrifices and other
religious rites did not incapacitate them from resuming the
management of civil affairs. Under the Mosaic dispensation,
when the land of Canaan was divided by lot among the

LECTURE XVI.

419

tribes of Israel, Jehovah1 was said to be the inheritance of
Levi, because as dedicated to his service, his descendants were
maintained by the tithes and other offerings of their brethren.
K\Y)go$, the Greek translation of lot, was transferred to the
Christian ministry: and this distinction of clergy and laity,
which was fully established in the time of Tertullian, is
recognised in our liturgy, in the suffrages of the minister
and congregation for each other, ' save thy people,' and,
* bless thine inheritance.' Episcopacy, which we find in
an incipient state under the Apostles, was completely
developed in the east before the close of the first century,
and "no Church without a Bishop" had become a fact
as well as a maxim. The triple division of Bishops,
Priests, and Deacons, has been supposed by some divines to
have been adumbrated in the High Priest, Priests, and
Levites of the Jewish temple. This theory early recom-
mended itself to the ambitious, since it exalted the lowly
minister to the dignity of a sacerdotal sovereign ; but
though plausible at first sight, it will not bear examination,
for the laity, that is, the body of believers, is the church,
or, the congregation, and the clergy their officers, should
claim no higher eminence than Paul himself, your servants
for Jesus' sakeu3 a dignity to those who can appreciate it,
surpassing what any title of this world can bestow, since even
our Master came not to be ministered to, but to minister x; and
he has said, Let him who will be chief among you be your
servant. The clergy form no priesthood, because they offer
no sacrifice; they are a ministry to feed the flock of Gody, to
preside over their religious services, and to be helpers of their
joy1. The Epistle to the Hebrews proves, that the high priest
after the order of Aaron can have no mortal successor,
being a type of that greater High Priest after the order of
Melchizedek, whose office cannot be filled by any creature ;
and indeed will never be vacant; for though by one offering*
of himself, as sacriflcer and sacrifice, he has perfected for
ever them that are sanctified, he still performs in heaven
for his people the second part of his office, intercession.

« Deut. x. 9. "2 Cor. iv. 5. * Matt. xx. 28. J 1 Pet. v. 2.

■ 2 Cor. i. 4. a Heb. x. 14.

e e 2

LECTURE XVI.

And the writer to the Hebrews argues, that the priesthood
being changed^ there is also of necessity a change in the law b.
We should also remember, that the Mosaic polity survived
the Apostles, who still, after the Ascension, frequented the
temple. It never occurred to them to offer, like the
Romanists, an unbloody sacrifice, but they felt a desire to
join in religious exercises with their converts ; and we find,
that from the day of Pentecost, which gave birth to the
church, while they continued with one accord in the temple0 9
they also continued stedfastly among themselves in breaking
of bread and in prayer*. There was however another scheme
of worship, not like the temple-service limited to Jerusalem,
and served by an hereditary priesthood, but common
wherever Jews are to be found, in their own land or abroad.
This too had been honoured by our Lord's presence, and
especially in the building appropriated to it in the town in
which he had been brought up, and in this he opened his
ministry by reading a prophecy of it by Isaiah. I mean,
the Synagogue; and this in its officers and its services
appears to have been the model of Christian assemblies ; and
St. James actually calls their religious meeting by that
namee. This theory is supported by Vitringa, and is
explained to the English reader by Mr. Litton, who
contrasts the two dispensations, showing at length how the
former worked from without inward, the entire system
being imposed at once, with a solemn prohibition against the
introduction of alterations or additions into the divine
original; while the latter worked from within outward, so
that the want was always allowed to be felt before it was
supplied; and thus originated the office of Deacon, and sub-
sequently that of Bishop.

The Preface to the Book of Consecration and Ordering to
which we subscribe our acceptance, opens with this passage :
" It is evident unto all men diligently reading the holy
Scriptures and ancient authors, that from the Apostles' time
there have been these Orders of Ministers in Christ's
Church, Bishops, Priests, and Deacons." This is opposed
to the seven distinct orders in the Church of Rome, which

b Heb. vii. 12. • Acts ii. 46. d Acts ii. 42. « James ii. 2.

LECTURE XVI.

were confirmed, as of apostolical authority, by the Council
of Trent. But their minor ones are not properly initiatory
orders, but ecclesiastical offices, as clerks, and sextons,
which can claim no higher authority than their utility, being
of human invention, as well as more important ones, such as
archdeacons and archbishops.

The Apostolical institution of Deacons and Presbyters
may be proved; for St. Paul, in his Epistles to Timothy and
Titus, authorizes them to ordain both, and points out their
qualifications. The third office, that of Bishop or Super-
intendent, who adds to the duties of the Presbyter or Elder
that of ordaining and overlooking and governing them, has,
since the establishment of the Presbyterian system in Geneva
and Scotland, been the subject of much discussion. Little
information is to be obtained from the New Testament;
and the evidence may at first sight appear to be against us ;
yet, as Epiphanius says, the Apostles could not establish
every thing rightly at once ; and in their higher dignity the
office of Bishop which they themselves exercised was merged.
The Presbyters were equal in rank and authority; and while
the Christians were few, no inconvenience arose from their
equality, as the Apostles from time to time visited the
churches they had planted, and occasionally sent Evangelists
with episcopal power, as Timothy and Titus, to ordain
elders. But as Christianity spread into more distant parts,
and congregations became more numerous, the occasional in-
spection of the Apostles would be both more requisite and less
frequent ; and it also became necessary to provide for the
period, when they would be removed by death. The
following passage from Jerome deserves the more at-
tention, since he is the only Father who is ever brought
forward as favourable to the Presbyterian scheme. " Till
factions grew through the instinct of the devil, churches
were governed by the common advice of Presbyters; but
when every one began to reckon those whom he himself
had baptized his own and not Christ's, it was decreed in
the whole world, that one chosen out of the Presbyters
should be placed over the rest, to whom all care of the
Church should belong, and so the seeds of schism be re-

422

lp:cture xvi.

moved. And in another part of the same work he tells us,
that James was appointed by the Apostles Bishop of Jeru-
salem, Timothy of Ephesus, and Titus of Crete by St. Paul,
and Polycarp of Smyrna by St, John. Bishops were sub-
sequently chosen by the congregation at large, and some-
times by popular acclamation, as Chrysostom and Ambrose,
against their own inclinations; but elections growing tumul-
tuous, and the power of the clergy increasing, the appointment
gradually lapsed to the latter, and ultimately from the
whole body of them to a select few, the Chapter of a
Cathedral Church. Still the approbation of the Sovereign
as representing the laity was required ; nor did the Pope
himself form an exception; for his election by the Cardinals,
that is, by a body which was originally the parochial clergy
of Rome and its immediate vicinity, was confirmed by the
Emperor. As his power increased, the nomination of Bishops
became the great topic of contention between Popes and
Sovereigns, which terminated in the triumph of the former.
Henry VI IT. on renouncing his supremacy and assuming it
himself, granted a permission to Chapters to elect, but
recommended the person. A direct nomination by the Crown
was substituted under Edward VI., which now prevails in
Ireland ; but in England the former practice was restored
by Elizabeth. Bishop Warburton 8 considers such patronage
as a compensation made by the Church to the State for
revenues, and protection, and authority.

The Reformation restored to us the primitive constitution
of the church, freed from the gradual and ever-increasing
usurpation of the Bishop of Rome ; which had gradually
changed an aristocracy into a despotic monarchy. As it was
conducted by our own Bishops, there was no change of
government, but they retained the authority transmitted to
them by their predecessors of ordaining and consecrating; and
none therefore can call in question the Apostolicalsuccessionof
the English clergy who allow that of the Papal. Ordination by
Presbyters alone, Calvin himself, the author of that discipline,
only justified on the plea of necessity ; and he and the con-
tinental Protestants generally concede, that Episcopal ordi-
s Alliance between Church and State.

LECTURE XVI.

423

nation is desirable. Since the New Testament, unlike the
Old, does not exhibit a pattern of church government, which
we discover in it only incidentally, and in an incipient state,
I cannot assent to the proposition, that Episcopacy is essential
to the existence of a Church ; still we may be thankful that
our ancestors, being placed under more favourable circum-
stances than the reformers of Germany and France, were
enabled to retain an order, which may be traced up to the time
of the Apostles, and has substantially the weight though not
of their command, yet of their practice. Our adversaries,
says Veneer, have been challenged long since to produce an
Ordination during the first fifteen hundred years after Christ
performed by Presbyters, which was not considered invalid ;
and persons who have been ordained by Presbyters alone,
have been stripped of their Orders. A famous instance is
Ischyras, who was deposed by the Synod of Alexandria,
because Colluthus, who ordained him, was supposed to be
no more than a Presbyter, though claiming to be a Bishop.
" How came Ischyras," says Athanasius, " to be so much as
a Presbyter ? Who ordained him? did Colluthus?" This is
all that can be urged. But as Colluthus died a Presbyter,
all ordinations by his hand were invalid. And even Jerome,
when endeavouring to lower Episcopacy, asked, What does
a Bishop do, which a Presbyter may not do, except ordain-
ing? Ascending from our own time till the Apostolical age,
we discover not only in the western, but in the Greek and the
Oriental Churches the Episcopal Order. Tertullian, arguing
against certain heretics, says, Let them show the origin of
their Churches, let them exhibit the order of their Bishops
so succeeding each other from the beginning, that the first
Bishop had for his author and predecessor some one of the
Apostles, or of those apostolical men who persevered with
the Apostles, for in this manner apostolical churches assert
their rights. Thus Smyrna has Polycarp placed there by
St. John, and Rome has Clement ordained by Peter. The
same declaration concerning Polycarp is made by Irenaeus,
himself Bishop of Lyons, whom, he adds, I saw when T was
young; and Ignatius, who suffered martyrdom at the latest
in A. D. 112, and was a contemporary of the Apostles, in his

424

LECTURE XVI.

reduced epistles generally allowed to be genuine, mentions
Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, as three separate Orders.

But it will be naturally asked, if this be a correct state-
ment, why is there any dispute ? Merely, I reply, for the
reason above assigned, that at the time of writing the
Epistles, the Apostles were the only Bishops in our sense
of the word, and that Presbyter and Bishop were then con-
vertible terms. So much are we the slaves of words, that
this has not been seen even by all learned men, such as
Hammond, who follows Irenaeus in supposing that the Ephe-
sian elders, whom Paul sent for to Miletus, and told in his
exhortation, that the Holy Ghost had made them overseers^, or
bishops, were bishops in this higher sense. But if these were
bishops, where were the presbyters ? We cannot conceive so
many Prelates at Ephesus and the immediate vicinity at
that early period ; still less in the single city of Philippi ;
yet Paul addresses his Epistle to the Christians there, to
the bishops and deacons, altogether dropping presbyters, or
elders. The omission of presbyters, whom we are informed
in the Acts were ordained from the beginning in every
city, proves the two terms to be then synonymous, and used
indifferently. Who can doubt this that reads in St. Paul's
Epistle to Titus, For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou
shouldest ordain elders in every city, if any be blameless, for
a bishop must be blameless f The injunctions also in the
Epistle to Timothy, where bishops and deacons are the only
officers mentioned, are decisive; and the qualifications for the
bishop here are the same as those for the elder in the Epistle
to Titus. In the Revelations, written at a later period, we
find a presiding person in each of the Asiatic Churches,
called the Angel ; who appears to be a bishop in the
modern sense, and he might be so called as the messenger
of the Apostles.

I infer from the New Testament, that neither Titus nor
Timothy were then resident bishops with a local charge ;
and I doubt if the latter were at a subsequent period, as his
settlement at Ephesus would seem to interfere with the su-
premacy of the Apostle John. Still if they only performed

k Acts xx. 88.

LECTURE XVI.

425

episcopal functions as the delegates of St. Paul, it equally
gives his sanction to the office. No reasonable doubt can
be entertained that Episcopacy prevailed before the end of
the first century, and as little that it was either established
or sanctioned by the Apostles then living, especially by
St. John, whose residence in Asia Minor, where tradition
fixes the beginnings of the Episcopate, points him out as in
all probability the one of the twelve, to whom the Church
owes this extension of her polity1."

In process of time, when Christianity had become the
religion of a large proportion of the inhabitants of the
Roman Empire, even prior to its establishment, questions
would arise for the deliberation of Bishops, and the
settlement of these would require that one should pre-
side over the rest, with a casting vote at least in cases of
equality. Such is now the practice of the Scottish and
American Episcopal churches, in which the senior member
of the Episcopacy is Primate. In the second century,
the distinction of archbishop was invented for this purpose;
again to four of these, the archbishops of the principal
cities of the Empire, Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, and
Alexandria, a preeminent rank was given, and they were
called Primates or Patriarchs. The See of Constantinople
was not raised to this dignity till the first Council held in
that city, A.D. 381 ; the others, the date of which is not known,
were prior to the Council of Nice. It was this patriarchal
preeminence, aided by the absence of the Emperor, and
afterwards by the ignorance and superstition of the barbarous
nations who conquered the western provinces, that enabled
the Bishop of the ancient capital to put forth claims, which
ultimately ended in complete ascendancy both over the
clergy and the civil power. For these superior offices no
higher authority than that of antiquity is claimed : and,
properly speaking, they form but one order with gradation
of rank, since all the spiritual functions of an Archbishop
or Patriarch may be equally performed by a Bishop ; so
Deans and Archdeacons are no more than presbyters, though
with a similar superiority of rank. These distinctions,
1 Litton, Church of Christ, p. 435.

426

LECTURE XVI.

therefore, which vary according to circumstances, may exist
or be abolished without affecting the essence of an Episcopal
Church, which consists in a ruling order, in contradistinction
to the parity of ministers, which is the characteristic of
Presbyterianism.

The words, Receive ye the Holy Ghost, by which the
presbyter is admitted to his office, scandalized some, who
conceive them as only fit to be used, as they were by our
Lord, who could impart as well as announce the gift.
Burnet suggests, that they may be understood as a wish or
prayer ; and such was the ancient form in the Western
Church. In the East it has been always declaratory. " The
Divine grace makes thee a presbyter." Or it may be observed,
he adds, that the ministers consider themselves as acting in
the name and person of Christ, It has not been in use
above six centuries, and when adopted by our Reformers,
they dropped the concluding words of the appointment
authorizing the presbyter to offer sacrifices for the living
and the dead.

ARTICLE XXIV.

OF SPEAKING IN THE CONGREGATION IN SUCH A TONGUE AS
THE PEOPLE UNDERSTANDETH.

It is a thing plainly repugnant in the Word of God, and the
custom of the Primitive Church, to have public prayer in
the church, or to minister the Sacraments in a tongue not
understanded of the people.

Any person of common sense ignorant of ecclesiastical
history, and of the practice of other churches, must regard
it as superfluous, and almost absurd trifling, to require
assent to so plain and obvious a truth ; how strange then as
well as painful must it be to him to learn, that even at the
present day, not only Roman Catholics, but the Greeks and
the Eastern Christians, that is, a vast majority of believers
attend public worship in a language they do not understand;
and that the Council of Trent, not satisfied with decreeing
that it was lawful and proper, goes so far as to anathematize

LECTURE XVI.

427

those who affirm, that the mass may be celebrated in the
vulgar tongue ! So powerful are prejudice and custom, that
its full absurdity does not appear to have been seen at first ;
at least the Article was originally worded less positively. The
first edition only affirms the use of a known tongue to be most
fit and agreeable to the Word of God ; but in the present,
that the contrary is repugnant to it, and adds, "to the custom
of the primitive Church." King Edward's Article took in
preaching with prayer ; the former is dropped as needless,
since, I apprehend, that it is no where practised. " A
tongue not understanded by the people," comprehends also,
in the reason of the thing, a voice not audible. This is ex-
pressly required of the priest in the canon of the mass, in
opposition to which the minister is desired in our service to
speak with a loud voice, and to turn himself to the people; for
the Priest has always his back to the congregation, except
when he occasionally addresses to them Dominus vobiscum,
The Lord be with you. The same Council of Trent, which
justifies and requires the mass to be said in a language not
generally understood by the congregation, also consistently
vindicates the uttering, if uttering it can be called, of the con-
secration of the elements in a voice inaudible. The practice
here condemned is so irrational, that it would be needless to
reason against it ; for unless we ascribe a magical efficacy
to prayer, such as the Romanists do to Sacraments, it
?' is obvious, that the edification of the congregation
must wholly depend upon its being understood ; and
nothing could shake our confidence in this conclusion, but
the positive approbation in the Scriptures of the contrary
plan, or the clear testimony that the primitive Church was
instructed by the Apostles to worship God in a language
of which they were ignorant. The primitive Church, how-
ever, we know, will in this as in many other respects, bear
its testimony against Rome. The liturgies of Basil and
Chrysostom were in Greek, those of the Eastern Christians
in Syriac, those of Egypt in Coptic. It is true that they
are no longer understood, but that is, because that while
language was changing, the Church services continued
stationary. There was a time when even the Latin

428

LECTURE XVI.

liturgy was understood, both in Italy and in the Pro-
vinces. Nay, our adversaries can hardly deny that this
must have been the reason why it was used in the Western
Patriarchate ; for though it is now considered as the
sacred language, it had originally no pretensions to this
distinction, since the New Testament is written in Greek.
The Nicene Creed was formally appointed by a Papal
decree to be read at Rome as drawn up in Greek, and I
have myself heard the Pope on Christmas day, A.D. 1817,
read the Gospel in the original tongue. The very argu-
ments therefore now used in favour of a Latin mass, might
some centuries ago have been turned against the Latinists,
and with more force, by any disposed to advocate a
Greek liturgy. It is a fact that cannot be contradicted;
and if it cannot, the cause must be given up, that no
Church, excepting those formed by Roman missionaries,
has ever begun with a liturgy not understood by the people.
Latin gradually ceased to be intelligible, and was then
thought too sacred to be laid aside ; but if the practice
had any intrinsic merit which would outweigh its obvious
disadvantages, that ought to have recommended it to all
places from the beginning. For the first thousand years,
however, Latin was generally understood. Origen expressly
says, that Greeks in Greek, Romans in Latin, and every
one in his own dialect, prayeth unto God ; and Justin
Martyr's account of their worship plainly shows, that
it must have been in the vernacular tongue. The testimony
of the Apostle Paulk is as decisive as if he was arguing
against the practice ; for when some of the Corinthians used
their miraculous gifts not to edification but ostentation, he
reproves them, and shows that he who speaketh in an
unknowrn tongue can be of no use unless he interpret; for if
the meaning of what he says be not understood, he is only
as a barbarian, or one speaking a foreign tongue. He then
goes on to say of prayer, If I pray in an unknown tongue,
my spirit (that is, the gift that is within me) prayeth, but
my understanding is unfruitful ; and therefore he concludes
that he will both pray and give thanks with the spirit, and

k J. Cor. xiv.

LECTURE XVI.

429

with the understanding also; and the reason he subjoins is
one that is suitable to all times : Else ivhen thou shalt bless
icith the Spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the
unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he under-
standeth not what thou sayest? for thou verily givest thanks
well, but the other is not edified. How then can a practice
be justified so contrary to that of the Apostle, who declares,
that he had rather speak five words with his understanding,
that by his voice he might teach others also, than ten thousand
in an unknown tongue. Nay even the earlier practice
of their own Church is against them, for in the ninth
century, a Pope allowed the Slavonians the use of their own
language in divine service ; and many of their most approved
writers, as Thomas Aquinas and Cardinal Caietan, prefer it.
It has in modern times been in part conceded to Germany,
and is more hard to defend than any other point of the
Roman Catholic discipline, since it contradicts common
sense as well as Scripture Antiquity ; and the Council of
Trent recommends frequent explanations to be made, lest
the sheep of Christ should be hungry and his babes want
bread. The laity who can read, are allowed to have Latin
prayers, with translations on the opposite page. It would be
but a single but how important a step, for the priest to read
out these translations instead of the original !

LECTURE XVII.

ARTICLE XXV.

OF THE SACRAMENTS.

Sacraments ordained of Christ be not only badges or tokens of
Christian mens profession, but rather they be certain sure
witnesses, and effectual signs of grace, and God's good will
towards us, by the which he doth work invisibly in us, and
doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our
faith in him.

There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the
Gospel, that is to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord.

Those five commonly called Sacraments, that is to say,
Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and Extreme
Unction, are not to be counted for Sacraments of the
Gospel, being such as have grown partly of the corrupt
following of the Apostles, partly are states of life allowed
in the Scriptures ; but yet have not like nature of Sacra-
ments with Baptism, and the Lord's Supper, for that they
have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God.

The Sacraments were not ordained of Christ to be gazed upon,
or to be carried about, but that we should duly use them.
And in such only as worthily receive the same they have a
wholesome effect or operation : but they that receive them
unworthily purchase to themselves damnation, as St. Paul
saith.

Having seen in what language the Sacraments are to be
administered, we now proceed to define what they are as
distinguished from rites, and to ascertain their number.
The subject is so important in itself, and has been rendered
still more so by the unhappy divisions that it has occasioned
not only between Romanists and Protestants, but among

LECTURE XVII.

431

Protestants of different denominations, that the framers of
our Articles found it expedient to treat of it in no less than
seven. The two first relate to Sacraments in general, the
third to Baptism, and the other four to the Lord's Supper.
The main object of the present is to distinguish the only two
which we see reason to acknowledge, from the others of the
church of Rome. I quote the testimony of Augustine, as re-
ferred to in the Homily, on "Common Prayer and Sacraments."
i( He weighing the true signification and exact meaning
of the word, writing to Januarius, and also in the third book
of Christian Doctrine, affirmeth, that the Sacraments of the
Christians as they are most excellent in signification, so
are they most few in number ; and in both places maketh
mention expressly of two, the Sacrament of Baptism, and. of
the Supper of the Lord." And the original Article as first
set forth, begins in these words of his. " Our Lord Jesus
Christ gathered his people into a society by Sacraments,
very few in number, most easy to be kept, and of most
excellent signification." " Our Church," says Archbishop
Bramhall, " receives not the septenary number of the
Sacraments, that being never so much as mentioned in any
Scripture council or creed, or father, or ancient author,
but first divided in the twelfth century by Peter Lombard ;
decreed in the fifteenth century by Pope Eugenius IV.
and established at Trent. This Peter Lombard is called
the Master of the Sentences, from the title of his work,
which is a small volume giving a condensed body of divinity
from Augustine, and the other Latin fathers and later
writers. This epitome till the Reformation was the intro-
duction in Theology of every academical student, and so
popular, that our countrymen alone wrote more comment-
aries on it than on any other works, except those of
Aristotle".

Sacramentum is the term by which the Latin translator
has rendered Muo-r^iov, which in our version is unhappily
turned into an English word ; I say, unhappily, because it
conveys a false meaning. Mystery, in our sense, we call

• Sharon Turner gives an analysis of these Sentences. Hist. England,
vol. v. p. iv. 1.

432

LECTURE XVII.

any of those profound doctrines, which the human intellect
cannot fathom ; but Muor^ov is only a secret, which when
revealed, is no longer a mystery. Thus St. Paul, writing to
the Ephesians, designates the admission of the Gentiles into
the church as formerly not made known, but now revealed; yet
still an intelligible proposition; and to the Corinthians he
writes, / show you a mystery. The heathens used the word in
the same sense, for the Eleusinian and other religious myste-
ries, though mysterious to the profane vulgar, were no secrets
to the initiated. Mystery, in the Greek Testament, is never
applied to any external rite, though it was early applied by
the Greek church to the Eucharist, probably in imitation
of the heathen secret rites ; and we read in our own com-
munion service, that Christ " hath instituted and ordained
holy mysteries as pledges of his love." Sacramentum was
first employed with a reference to religion by a Pagan, the
younger Pliny, who in his celebrated letter to his friend
and master, the Emperor Trajan, so honourable to the
primitive Christians, informs him, that they were in the
habit of meeting before day to bind themselves, sacramento,
not to any crime, but that they would not commit theft,
robbery, adultery, not to betray confidence, and not to
refuse to restore a deposit. As Pliny reported what they
had told him, they might use the word in the Christian
sense, though he would take it in its classical, meaning
an oath ; and this is strengthened by so early an author
as Tertullian, who calls the Lord's Supper the Sacrament
of the Eucharist, as he does Baptism, that of water, and
of sanctification. Sacrament, we know, was used formerly
in a large sense, and this no doubt occasioned the abuse of
it in mediaeval theology. " The name," says the Homily,
" may in a general acceptation be attributed to any thing
whereby an holy thing is signified. In which under-
standing of the word the ancient writers have given this name
not only to the other five, commonly of late years taken
and used for supplying the number of the seven Sacraments,
but also to divers and sundry other ceremonies, as to oil,
washing of feet, and such like, not meaning thereby to
repute them as Sacraments in the same signification as

LECTURE XVII.

433

Baptism and the Lord's Supper are." It is certainly more
convenient, and more favourable to the forming of clear ideas,
that Sacraments and mere rites, being in themselves so
different, should be called by different names. We are far
from wishing to engage in verbal disputes, but the Council of
Trent forbids the word to be taken in a lower sense, and
maintains the seven to be vere et proprie Sacraments, and
anathematizes those who reckon fewer or more. To ascertain
which party is in the right, we must define terms. The defini-
tion of Augustine, "an outward and visible sign of an inward
and spiritual grace," is familiar to us, because it has been intro-
duced into our Catechism ; and that of Trent is " a sensible
thing, which, by divine institution, causes as well as signifies
holiness and righteousness." Our Catechism adds, " ordained
by Christ himself, as the means whereby we receive the same,
and a pledge to assure us thereof." And the definition in this
Article is substantially the same. The Catechism seems to
use the word in the old lax sense, when it says, two only are
generally necessary to salvation ; and the Roman Catholics
so far agree with us ; for avowedly Matrimony, instead of
being required in all, is forbidden to the clergy, and dis-
couraged in the laity ; and Ordination is of necessity re-
stricted to the former. In several it is difficult to
discover either inward grace or outward sign, and in the
five, which as Sacraments we reject, divine command. Three,
Baptism, Confirmation, and Orders, they say impress a
character which is indelible, and therefore are not to be
reiterated. While we reject the five as Sacraments, we
retain them in a lower sense, and have turned them into
religious offices. Confession and Absolution are incor-
porated into our liturgy, and Extreme Unction has been
superseded by Visitation of the Sick ; Confirmation is re-
tained as an impressive rite, and both Orders and Matrimony
are sanctified by special services.

All Christians, Friends alone excepted, will agree with
the Article, that " Sacraments are ordained of Christ,
and are the badges and tokens of Christian men's pro-
fession." Anti-Trinitarians go no farther, but all other
denominations consider this definition, though true, as

F f

434

LECTURE XVII.

incomplete. Sacraments, according to the Church of Rome,
consist of matter, deriving, from the action of the Priest in
pronouncing certain words, a divine virtue, by which grace
is conveyed to the soul of every recipient. He must be
free from any of the sins called mortal, but he is not
required to exercise any good disposition, to possess faith, or
even to resolve to amend his life. For such is considered
the physical virtue of a Sacrament, administered by a Priest
with a good intention, that unless when opposed by the
obstacle of a mortal sin, the very act of receiving it is
sufficient. This act was called in the language of the
schools, opus opera turn, the work done, independently of
any disposition of mind attending that work ; and the su-
periority of the Sacraments of the New Testament to
those of the Old was proved by showing, that the latter were
effectual, ex opere operands, from the piety and faith of
the doer, while the former convey grace, ex opere operato,
from their own intrinsic virtue. This represents the Sacra-
ments as a mere charm, the use of which being totally
disjoined from every mental exercise, cannot be regarded as
a reasonable service. This view is condemned in the con-
clusion of the Article, and the condemnation is sustained
by an appeal to the Apostle. " In such only as worthily
receive the same, they have a wholesome effect or operation,
but they that receive them unworthily, purchase to themselves
damnation, as St. Paul saith." We rest therefore in a
middle point, neither reducing them to mere rites, nor
exalting them as irresistible medicine that acts mechanically
upon the soul. We regard them as signs, intended to
represent an inward visible grace, which proceeds from
Him by whom they are appointed, and as pledges, that
that grace will be conveyed to all who receive them with
the proper disposition, as seals of the covenant of grace,
following the expression of the Apostle to the Romans b.
It is usual for covenants among men to be confirmed by
certain solemnities. In the simplicity of ancient times, large
stones were raised as the memorials of any important trans-
action ; in more advanced stages of society, the solemnities

LECTURE XVII.

435

have been deeds sealed and delivered. As circumcision
was ordained as the token and seal of the covenant with
Abraham, we are led to expect that when this same
covenant was made known to other nations, God would be
pleased to grant some sensible sign, which might establish
a reliance upon his promise, and constitute the ground of a
federal act. Our two Sacraments, and they alone, come up
to this notion, and hereby are distinguished from rites, for no
rite not of divine appointment can be conceived to be a seal
of God's promise, or a pledge of any gift that cometh from
Him. Hence that any rite may answer our definition
of a Sacrament, we require in it not merely a vague and
general resemblance between the external matter, which is
the visible substance of the rite, and the thing thereby
signified, but also words of institution, and a promise by
which the two are connected together. Accordingly, we
reject five of the seven Sacraments of Rome, because in
some we do not find any matter, without which there is not the
sign which enters into our definition, and in others no promise
connecting the matter used with the grace thereby signified,
although upon this connexion, the essence of a Sacrament
depends. Our Church has distinctly tied the wholesome effect
of Sacraments to the qualification of the recipients. As the
word of God is said to work effectually, but only in them that
believe, so the Sacraments are only effectual signs to those
who worthily receive them. This view is supported by
Hooker0, who says, "Sacraments contain in themselves no
vital force or efficacy ; they are not physical but moral
instruments of salvation ; duties of service and worship, which
unless we perform them as the Author of grace requireth,
they are unprofitable, for all receive not the grace of God
which receive the Sacraments of his grace." And that this
was the opinion of the framers of our Articles in Edward's
reign, which substantially agree writh those of Elizabeth's,
is put beyond doubt, by a recently recovered letter of Peter
Martyr, which tells us, " that grace conferred by virtue of
the Sacraments, is a point which many were desirous should
be established by public authority. Others who saw clearly
c E. Polity, v. 67. 4.
F f 2

436

LECTURE XVII.

how many superstitions such a determination would bring
with it, made it a primary point to endeavour in all ways
to show, that nothing more is to be granted to the Sacra-
ments than to the external Word of God; for by both
is signified to us the salvation obtained for us through
Christ, which as many are made partakers of as believe
these signs and words, not indeed by the virtue of them,
but by the efficacy of faith. Moreover it was added, that it
was impossible they should be worthily received, unless those
who received them have beforehand that which is signified
by them; for if faith be not present, they are always re-
ceived unworthily ; but if they who come to the Sacrament
are endowed with faith, they have already received through
faith the grace proclaimed in the Sacraments, and then
the reception and use of them is the seal of the promise
already apprehended." The Church of Rome, from its
predilection for the number seven, has probably enu-
merated so many, for though something might be urged in
behalf of Confirmation, Penance, and Extreme Unction, we
can see no ground for admitting Orders and Marriage,
which, as the Article observes, are "states of life." They are
positively excluded by the Catechism description, * generally
necessary to salvation ;' and it is remarkable, that what is
exalted to be a Sacrament, is at the same time denied to
the Clergy. The five commonly called Sacraments must be
understood to mean commonly in that age, and of the
Gospel, as opposed to Sacraments in the large and ancient
sense.

CONFIRMATION.

In a Church into which members are unconsciously
received, before they are capable of volition, it is a reason-
able and edifying custom, that " children being come to
years of discretion, and having learnt what their godfathers
and godmothers promised for them in Baptism, may them-
selves with their own mouth and consent openly before the
congregation ratify and confirm the same." It originated no
doubt in an imitation of the conduct of Peter and John,
who went down to Samaria, where the inhabitants had been

LECTURE XVII.

437

oaptized by Philip, and laid their hands upon the converts,
who then received the Holy Ghost d. And this fact is also
assigned as a reason, why the administration of this rite
should be restricted to the highest order of the Clergy. It
is obvious however, that it was the extraordinary gifts of
the Holy Ghost that were then bestowed: and the extending
it to the ordinary ones, lowers, if it does not altogether take
away, baptismal grace. It seems safer, if it requires Scrip-
tural authority, to urge in its favour this verse from the
Epistle to the Hebrews e. Of the doctrine of baptisms, and
of laying on of hands, which are summed up among the
principles of the doctrine of Christ, after the mention of
repentance and faith, and subsequent to baptism. The
mode of its administration in early times is thus described
by Bingham. Immediately after the baptized came up out
of the water, the)' were presented for the benediction of the
minister, which was a solemn prayer for the descent of the
Holy Ghost upon them, and to this there was usually joined
the ceremony of a second unction, and the imposition of
hands, and the sign of the cross. If the Bishop were absent,
then Confirmation was deferred till he could visit them.
Infants were confirmed as well as adults ; and this practice
prevailed in the western church as long as they received the
eucharist, which continued from the time of Cyprian to that
of Charlemagne. The rite was administered by priests, till
limited by Pope Innocent the First to bishops, who may at
their discretion delegate the office to an inferior minister.
Such a confirmation resembles that of our reformed church
little more than in name, and was no better than a super-
stitious perversion of an apostolical act. But it should be
known that the ancients regarded it as no more than the
completion of the Sacrament of Baptism. To make it a
Sacrament, the Church of Rome appoints as the matter
chrism, that is, a mixture of olive oil and balsam, which
must have episcopal benediction ; and as the form, the
anointing with it the forehead, with the words, " I sign thee
with the sign of the cross, and confirm thee with the chrism
of salvation, in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of
d Acts viii. « Heb. vi. 2.

438

LECTURE XVII.

the Holy Ghost." We have no scriptural authority for the
use of oil, except for anointing the sick, and the Church
accordingly has no right to make it sacramental. Burnet
seems to rest our retaining Confirmation upon its expediency ;
and adds, here is no Sacrament, for the laying on of hands is
only a gesture in prayer, nor is it a federal rite. The
Helvetic Confession condemns it together with Extreme
Unction, as human inventions which the Church can dispense
writh without loss, and which have in them some things that
cannot be approved. Calvin e, however, regarded it as an
edifying rite, and wished it to be revived. And this custom
we learn from Rivet h, having been corrupted among the
papists, was restored by the Protestant Church of France to
its lawful use, by catechising, and blessing of children in
prayer, before their admission to the Lord's Supper. The
utility of some preparation for a first communion will
hardly be disputed ; and the present doctrine of Rome is,
that it is inexpedient to administer Confirmation to those
who have not reached the use of reason. It is regarded as
strengthening and confirming the grace of Baptism, and
having annexed to it the promise of the seven gifts of the
Holy Spirit ; and in our liturgy the Bishop is instructed to
pray, that the confirmed may be strengthened with the
Holy Ghost the Comforter, and that God would daily
increase in them his manifold gifts of grace.

PENANCE

Is the next Sacrament which we reject, as not answering
to our definition. It is divided between the penitent and
the confessor ; the former supplying the matter, contrition,
confession, and satisfaction ; the latter, the form, which
consists of this sentence, st I absolve thee." Contrition
will be allowed by all to be required from a sinner, for it is
a detestation of sin, because it is hateful in the sight of God ;
but Romish casuists have contrived to do away its necessity,
by maintaining the sufficiency of attrition to give validity to
this Sacrament ; and this pernicious distinction is allowed
i Inst. iv. 19.

h Rivet. Cathol. Orth. Tract, iii. as quoted in Bingham's French Churches,
Apology for the Church of England.

LECTURK XVII.

439

by the Council of Trent: pernicious I am justified in
calling it, for attrition is the sorrow that is felt for the
consequences of sin, and is therefore compatible with
the love of it. " This will indeed," says Bishop Burnet,
" make many run to the Sacrament, and raise its value; but
it will raise it upon the ruins of true piety and holiness: we
conclude, therefore," he continues, " that this wounds religion
in its vitals, and we are confirmed in the opinion by the
confessions on the subject of the best writers in that com-
munion." Contrition is to show itself in confession, which
is called auricular, to distinguish it from public, and because
it is whispered into the ear of the priest, who neither sees noi-
l's seen by the penitent; and this confession must be particular
and unreserved, and of offences against the tenth, as well as
against the other commandments, that is, of wicked thoughts
and desires as well as of words and actions. It is however not
insisted upon oftener than once a year. Confession is to be fol-
lowed by satisfaction, that is, by the penance enjoined, which
by the constant practice of the Church for above twelve cen-
turies was to precede Absolution, except in extraordinary
cases, such as death or martyrdom. In later times, the
necessity of confession has been carried higher, and the
obligation of satisfaction lowered; the former has been
rendered essential, but the latter is no longer considered
as such, though without satisfaction taken in its proper-
sense there can be no genuine repentance, since repentance
is nothing but that godly sorrow which produces reformation
not to be repented of-. The Church of Rome is desirous
that the penitent should suffer ; yet she finds a difficulty in
enforcing this, because the Priest's absolution gives com-
plete forgiveness even of mortal sins, without such suffering.
It is therefore said that God is described as forgiving sins,
when those forgiven have some partial temporary punish-
ment continued, and that in a Christian, even after penance
and absolution, there are embers as it were of sin, remains
of vicious habits, from which clanger is to be apprehended.
For the continuance of some punishment, and for the coun-
teracting of these remains, it is judged proper to set some
s 2 Cor. 10.

440

LECTURE XVII.

kind of tasks to be performed after absolution. It is added,
that when the Church has been witness to a man's offending,
it should have the satisfaction of seeing some marks of
amendment. The satisfactions enjoined are to be prayers,
alms, and fasting, which concern God, our neighbours, and
ourselves. As early as the eighth century, the repetition of
prayers and the giving alms were substituted for those acts
of austerity which come more under our notion of doing
penance. Next, the paying for masses was allowed, then
came pilgrimages, and the crusades, and in the twelfth
century, indulgences. The penitent having performed his
part, the Priest completes the sacrament by absolution; and
the Council of Trent anathematizes those who declare it
not to be a judicial act, but a mere ministerial declaration
of the remission of sins. A judicial absolution can only be
pronounced by man with propriety, from Church censures,
or from punishments which he may be authorized to remit.
Absolution from the punishments of a future state depends
upon the sincerity of the penitent's repentance, which God
alone can know, and must be therefore conditional. In the
form which follows our General Confession, the minister
is only authorized to pronounce the absolution of those
who have faith and repentance. The uniform practice of
primitive times accords with Protestant notions, for the
Church never till the twelfth century claimed to forgive as
God, and in cases of absolution from censures, prayers were
offered that He would forgive the offender as the Church
had done. The forms of absolution which have been in use
are four: the precatory, the optative, the indicative, and the
declarative; as, God forgive this penitent — May God pardon
and deliver you from all your sins — I absolve thee from all
thy sins— God pardoneth all them that truly repent. Our
Church uses the declaratory in morning and evening
Prayer; the optative, which is in sense precatory, in the
Communion Service; and the indicative, in the Visitation
of the Sick. The latter began to be used in the twelfth
century ; and, to soften an expression which seemed new
and bold, it was added, as far as is granted to my frailty,
or, as far as the pardon is in me ; nor did it before the

LECTURE XVII.

441

fourteenth supersede the ancient precatory form. The
idea that naturally rises out of these words, says Burnet,
is, that the Priest pardons sin ; and since that is subject to
such abuses, and has let in so much corruption, we think
we have not only reason to deny that Penance is a Sacrament,
but also to affirm that Roman Catholics have corrupted
the doctrine of repentance in all its branches. Some, how-
ever, may say, that our own Church is not free from these
objections, since it recommends private confession to a Priest,
and has the same indicative absolution, and in the same
words. We reply, that this absolution is only granted to
the sick, and if they humbly and heartily desire it; and that
from the precatory form with which it begins, and from the
prayer that follows, it is inferred, that the person absolved
has faith and repentance. The sick person also is only to
be moved to make a special confession, if he feel his con-
science troubled with any weighty matter; and so far is
our Church from exacting this from those in health, that
in the Exhortation communicants are recommended to
confess their sins to Almighty God; and it is only when
they cannot otherwise quiet their consciences, and require
further comfort or counsel, that they are directed to open
their grief to a Minister, and that too one of their own
choice, and clearly only with a reference to their fitness
for coming to the Lord's table. Repentance and faith
are the conditions upon which we are admitted into the
Christian covenant, and whenever after that admission
we are guilty of any breach of the divine law, repent-
ance is an indispensable duty. This we know, if sincere,
will be accepted for our Saviour's sake; for St. John
declares, that if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves,
and the truth is not in us ; but if we confess our sins, God is
faithful and just to forgive us our sinsh; faithful, because he
has promised; just, because Christ has borne the penalty of
the transgressions of all real believers, that is, of those who
lament their failures, and are endeavouring to obey his
commandments. This doctrine differs widely from the
sacrament of Penance, requiring particular confession to a
h 1 John viii. 9.

442

LECTURE XVII.

Priest, which did not prevail till a late age, and receives no
support from Scripture. For the confession recommended
by St. James1, is of offences against our neighbour, which
is a sort of reparation, and is not to be made to a Priest, but
to be mutual ; confess your sins one to another. More-
over it is enjoined in order to procure not absolution but
intercession, and therefore he adds, pray for one another ;
and this is confirmed by the conclusion, the effectual fervent
prayer of a righteous man availeth much. The practice we
reject seems to have originated in the readmission into the
Church of persons who had lapsed in times of persecution.
These were required to make a public confession of their
offence in the presence of the congregation. In this maimer
confession became a part of ecclesiastical discipline, and
was gradually extended from public to private sins. Inde-
pendently of the shame and exposure of public confession,
the offender was compelled to submit to public reproofs, to
acts of penance, and to a temporary exclusion from the Lord's
Supper. Public confession had been found on long trial to
be inseparable from serious objections, and therefore was in
time commuted for a private one to the Bishop, or to
penitentiary priests of his appointment. The penance
imposed was still performed publicly, though the sin was
concealed. The fathers who recommended confession, did
not urge it as a necessary prerequisite to pardon, but as
procuring for the penitent an interest in the prayer of the
congregation ; while the greatest of the Latin, Augustine,
does not scruple to say, " What have I to do with men that
they should hear my confession, as though they could heal
my disease ?" And Chrysostom's language is, " I do not
bring thee to the theatre of thy fellow-servants, neither do
I constrain thee to discover sins to men. Unclasp thy con-
science before God, and show thy wounds to him, and from
him ask a medicine." As time introduced a change of
manners, men grew reluctant to submit to the exposure of
public penance, and it was found expedient to allow its
performance in a monastery, or in any unfrequented place
in the presence of a few witnesses. Solitary auricular

* James v. 16.

LECTURE XVII.

443

confession gradually superseded public, and became of
course more searching and circumstantial. It was not
enjoined till the third Lateran Council, A. D. 1215, and
was decreed to be an ordinance of Christ, and absolutely
necessary to salvation, in the Council of Trent. I readily
concede, that the intention of instituting secret confession
was good ; but it was a serious mistake even in theory, and
in practice it has been found to be of the most demoralizing
character, both to penitent and confessor. It has ruined the
peace of families, and it has taught the priest to enslave and
to pollute the mind. It blunts the delicacy of feeling,
gradually removes the barrier of modesty, hardens the con-
science, instructs the innocent in sins of which they were
happily ignorant, and defiles the imagination, even if it
should not warp the judgment or corrupt the heart. It
must strengthen vicious habits, by forcing the mind to dwell
upon temptations, our best security against which is to
drive them away as instigations to sin, by pursuing other
trains of thought, or, what is better still, by active occupa-
tions. " To me," says Hey, " it seems bad even in theory ;
that is, mischievous, not through mere abuse. And what
can be expected from reducing indeterminate duties to
determinate laws, but a mechanical religion, coldness, and
evasion ? What man pays with generous fervour, what he
is obliged to pay by law ? What can be expected from re-
quiring towards strangers that confidence, and those effusions
of sincerity and contrition, which every delicate mind re-
serves for a few intimate friends, but hypocrisy or self-
deceit!" Pascal k has exposed the doctrine of probability
maintained by the Jesuits, which allows a man to act against
his own conviction by deferring to the judgment of some
divine, whose different opinion renders it probable, that
what he thought sinful may be innocent; and their casuists
have composed bulky volumes, as it should seem with the
express purpose of enabling confessors to absolve persons,
who have committed grievous crimes contrary to their own
consciences. This was indeed an awful abuse, but I
wonder it escaped the sagacity of this pious Jansenist and
k Les Provinciales.

444

LECTURE XVII.

profound reasoner, that the fault was not only in the
authors whom he has condemned to infamy, but in the
system itself. Happily the Bible, which allows of no sub-
stitution of a Church for the Saviour, nor of the interposition
of a saint between him and us, rejects the introduction of a
fellow-sinner, as the instrument of conveying his free for-
giveness; and judicial absolution, which is again and again
pronounced even of those who, though willing to submit to
penance, give no signs of genuine repentance, can hardly fail
to harden the conscience, which the rules of the Confessional
have familiarized with all the minute distinctions of sin,
which an unscrupulous casuistry has discovered.

EXTREME UNCTION.

This sacrament, as the Roman Catholics call it, is a strange
perversion of the Apostolical practice of anointing the sick
with a view to their recovery ; and bears this name as the
sacrament of the dying, because it is the last anointing, oil
having been previously employed in Baptism, and in Confirm-
ation. It appears to have been the custom among the Jews,
to use oil when they attempted the recovery of the sick ; and
the custom was retained by the Apostles when they looked
for recovery, not to God's blessing upon medicine, but to his
direct miraculous interference. Accordingly Mark1 informs
us, that when their Master sent forth the twelve by two and
two, they anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed
them; and St. James directs, that the elders of the Church
should pray over the sick, anointing him with oil in the
name of the Lord; adding, the prayer of faith shall save the
sick, and the Lord shall raise him, up. The efficacy was
ascribed not to the anointing, but to the gift of healing;
but as miraculous powers were not suddenly withdrawn but
gradually ceased, this custom accompanied with prayer was
continued, in the hope rather than the expectation of a
cure, and that through the operation of God's ordinary
providence. And we find a form of prayer in Pope Gre-
gory's Sacramentary, which shows that the object then

1 Mark vi.

LECTURE XVII.

445

sought by this anointing, was the recovery of bodily health,
as is still the case in the Greek church. In the twelfth
century, failure was so frequent, that the notion was intro-
duced that it was meant for the benefit of the soul, and
only of the body if bodily health would not prove preju-
dicial to the former. A change in its administration now
took place, for they anointed no longer the diseased organs,
but those which were regarded as the instruments of
sin. Prayer had been always offered for the soul of the
sick as preparatory to bodily cure, but now it became the
principal part. The Schoolmen brought it into a sacra-
mental form, and it was decreed by the Council of Florence,
and confirmed under anathema at Trent. We are taught
by that Council, that Christ intimated it in St. Mark's
Gospel, and published it by St. James. The Church, it adds,
learns from Tradition, that the matter of the Sacrament is
oil, and the form, God by his holy unction and his mercy
pardon thee, whatever sins thou hast committed through the
sight, the hearing, &c. The effect is to wipe off sin, and
to promote, where beneficial to the soul, the health of the
body. The ceremony was for a season retained by our
Reformers, but in King Edward's second Liturgy was
superseded by an Office for the Visitation of the Sick.
Orders and Matrimony are "states of life," and have sacra-
men tary character, for they are not only not required from
all believers, but are even considered incompatible.

ORDINATION.

Our Church acknowledges the Ministry as a divine
appointment, but rejects it as a sacrament ; for though it
was ordained by Christ, he has never promised to make it
the channel of conveying grace, and it has neither matter
nor form, only a separation of the persons ordained to a
sacred office, by the imposition of hands and prayer. It
was not till the eleventh century that the present practice
was introduced, of delivering the vessels, accompanied with
words authorizing the ordained person to offer sacrifices to
God, and to celebrate Masses both for the living and the
dead. But if these be the matter and the form, then,

446

LECTURE XVII.

according to their own showing, our opponents must con-
fess that Orders is a sacrament of recent institution, since
for the first ten centuries no other ceremonies were used on
that occasion but the imposition of hands with prayer.
The Schoolmen maintain, that the Priest has the power
both of consecrating and absolving, and that he is ordained
to the former in the manner above named, to the latter by
the Bishop's laying on of hands, and saying, Receive ye the
Holy Ghost: whose sins ye remit they are remitted, and whose
sins ye retain they are retained.

MATRIMONY.

In the Epistle to the Ephesians, St. Paul, inculcating
the duties of husbands and wives, says, this is a great
mystery. If in the Latin Bible Mvo-Tygiov had not been
here as in other places rendered Sacramentum, Matrimony
would probably never have been exalted into a sacrament.
This is an argument, if it can be called an argument, only
in one language ; translate it, and it disappears ; but even in
Latin it is but the shadow of an argument, for the Apostle
tells us, that when he says, this is a great mystery, he is
speaking not of the union between husband and wife, but of
that between Christ and his Church. I know of no other
text that can be adduced to support the sacramental cha-
racter of marriage ; for they two shall he one flesh, urged
by the Council of Trent, does not establish it; and that
Council, in considering this and their other sacraments,
seems to be much perplexed, for it mentions neither matter
nor form. The Roman doctors indeed assign the inward
consent of the parties as conveyed by signs and words.
Still such matter and form are common to all mutual
compacts; and the practical evil of this definition is obvious,
since it suspends the moral validity of the contract upon
the inclinations of either party. The Supreme Being is not
a party, which seems essential to a sacrament, nor can it be
reasonably said to convey grace. No unbelievers can partake
of a sacrament ; in what light then do Roman Catholics
regard their marriages ? But we know that Matrimony is a
divine institution, previous not only to the incarnation of

LECTURE XVII.

447

Christ, but the first notification of Christianity; for Adam
and Eve were united by their Creator in Paradise, before their
fall gave occasion to the merciful scheme of the redemption
of themselves and their descendants from its consequences.
Bingham shows, that marriages were solemnized by the
Clergy for the first three hundred years. The custom after-
wards ceased, but it revived in the eighth century. So
important an engagement ought to take place before witnesses ;
and the presence and the benediction of a spiritual person has
a tendency to impress upon the parties their obligations to
fulfil their vows, by making them in the house of God and
before his ministers. Still the contract is clearly of a civil
nature, and as such only is it recognised by our Lord. He
declared it to be permanent, and to be only broken by
infidelity, which is in fact a violation of it. So it is still
regarded by the Greek Church, and was acknowledged by
early Councils in the west. St. Gregory and succeeding
Popes allowed the innocent party to marry another ; but
when it was finally settled at Trent that marriage was a
sacrament, its perpetuity, which had for some time been
the prevalent doctrine, was determined. It is extraordinary,
that we who reject it as a sacrament, unlike other Pro-
testants, still retain this consequence of its sacramental
character ; for by the law of England, marriage is indis-
soluble, and each divorce is only obtained by a specific Act
of Parliament; a grievance to the injured party, who if he
has the means, is made to pay dearly for an act of justice,
if he is poor, is denied redress. It is a grievance, however, for
which our Reformers are not responsible ; they determined the
dissolution of marriage by adultery, as appears from the
Reformatio Legum; but the jealousy of Elizabeth, and the
negligence of subsequent ages, have prevented its ratification ;
so that while our Ritual and Articles are Protestant, we are
still mainly governed in ecclesiastical matters by the Papal
Canon Law. Separation from bed and board is an in-
vention of the Canonist, to render the burden tolerable, but
such separation does not permit the forming a second
contract. A Protestant is astonished, that a Church which
confers sacramental dignity upon marriage restricts it to

LECTURE XVII.

the laity, and treats it even in them as less honourable than
celibacy.

It is added, that Sacraments, meaning thereby the Lord's
Supper, are not to be gazed upon or carried about, but
that we should duly use them. In Roman Catholic
countries, the host or victim, as the bread or rather wafer
is called, is held up after consecration for the adoration of
the people, and is carried in procession under a canopy,
attended by the Priest, and others, bearing lights even in
the day time, to the sick who wish to communicate, for the
elements are never consecrated as with us in a house. No
text can be found to recommend such respect, nor was it
the practice of the primitive church. It naturally arose out
of the belief, that it had been transubstantiated into the
body of the Saviour, and ceases of course with that belief.

ARTICLE XXVI.

OF THE UNWORTHINESS OF THE MINISTERS, WHICH HINDERS
NOT THE EFFECT OF THE SACRAMENT.

Although in the visible Church the evil be ever mingled
with the good, and sometimes the evil have chief authority
in the Ministration of the Word and Sacraments, yet for-
asmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but in
Christ's, and do minister by his commission and authority,
we may use their Ministry, both in hearing the Word of
God, and in receiving of the Sacraments. Neither is the
effect of Christ's ordinance taken away by their wickedness,
nor the grace of God's gifts diminished from such as by
faith and rightly do receive the Sacraments ministered unto
them; which be effectual, because of Christ's institution
and promise, although they be ministered by evil men.

Nevertheless, it appertaineth to the discipline of the Church,
that enquiry be made of evil Ministers, and that they be
accused by those that have knowledge of their offences ; and
finally being found guilty, by just judgment be deposed.

LECTURE XVII.

449

The Sacraments have been defined as effectual signs of
grace, yet they do not act mechanically as charms. They
are appointed channels, but the reception of grace depends
upon the disposition of the receiver ; for, as it is said in the
conclusion of the last Article, " in such only as worthily
receive the same they have a wholesome effect or operation :
but they that receive them unworthily purchase to them-
selves damnation, as St. Paul saith." The error here con-
demned had become so prevalent, that the Sacraments are
scarcely ever named without a caution against this abuse.
Thus in the XXVII th we have, " they that receive Baptism
rightly are grafted into the Church ;" in the XXVIIIth, to
" such as rightly, worthily, and with faith receive the same,
the bread which we break is a partaking of the body of
Christ;" and it was thought necessary to maintain in a
separate Article the XXIXth, that " the wicked commu-
nicant does not at the Lord's Supper eat the body of Christ."
Another question arises as to the character of those who
administer. Does the unworthiness of the Minister vitiate
and annul the Sacrament ? and in this Article it is
answered in the negative.

The occasion that was given for this Article, was the heat
of some at the beginning of the Reformation, who, disgusted
by the open profligacy of the Clergy, revived the notion of
the Donatists, that sacred functions were invalidated not
only by heresy and schism, but by the personal sins of those
who administered them. There are passages in Cyprian
which seem to favour this view. The Donatists, near a
century later, separated upon no doctrinal point, but on
the appointment of Ca)cilianus to the Bishopric of Carthage,
both as a man of immoral character, and as having been
consecrated by one, who in a time of persecution had
through fear delivered up the Scriptures to those who
claimed them, in order to destroy them. A church governed
by such persons, they said, could be no true church, because
all its ordinances, even the Sacraments, must lose their proper
effect under such administration. " Against this," Burnet tells
us, " Augustine set himself very zealously, and answered all
that was brought from Cyprian in such a manner, as to

g g

450

LECTURE XVII.

teach us how we ought to separate the just respect due to
the Fathers, from an implicit receiving of all their notions."
Wickliffe had been condemned by the Council of Constance,
among other propositions, for affirming, that if a bishop or
priest live in mortal sin, he doth not ordain, baptize, or
consecrate ; and Luther says of the Anabaptists, that they
condemn true baptism on account of the vices or unworthiness
of men. In this Article, not only do the Helvetic and
Augsburg Confessions agree with us, but also the Trent
Catechism, which is drawn up in similar language.

The Article contains in itself sufficient proof of its
assertion. First it maintains, that we may lawfully attend
the preaching of an unworthy minister, and receive from
him the Sacrament, because he acts not in his own name,
but in that of Christ, and by his authority. Secondly,
though the Sacraments be ministered by evil men, their
effect is not thereby taken away or diminished from those
who by faith and rightly do receive them. We must dis-
tinguish between the acts of the clergy as public officers
and as individuals. The value of their private prayers will
depend upon their own inward disposition ; their public
functions are equally efficacious whatever be their character.
And if miraculous virtue may be inherent in bad men, so
that in the great day some of those to whom Christ shall
say, / never knew you, depart from me, ye that work iniquity x,
may yet with truth reply, Lord, have we not prophesied
in thy name, and in thy name done many wonderful works?
certainly this may be concluded much more confidently
concerning permanent officers in the church. The
efficacy of ministerial acts has been confounded with the
duty of ministers. No doubt it is wrong for ministers to
be vicious, still if they act by a divine commission, benefits
may be received through their agency. So it is wrong for
a magistrate to be vicious, yet we may receive redress
and protection from warrants signed by him. Our Saviour
confirms this view, by telling his disciples to attend to the
instructions of the Scribes and Pharisees, because they sit
in Moses* seaty.

■ Mutt. vii. 23, 24. 1 Matt, xxiii. 2.

LECTURE XVII.

451

The latter paragraph is too clear to need explanation or
proof ; it seems intended to obviate an objection that might
be made to the former. If any should think that the wicked-
ness of Ministers is treated too lightly, it corrects the
impression ; the evil is great, but it suggests the punishment
of the guilty, not of the innocent. Proceed against them,
but do not prevent the people from benefiting by institutions
designed for their benefit.

The Article says in conclusion, that " it appertaineth to
the discipline of the Church, that evil Ministers be accused
by those who have knowledge of their offences, and finally
being found guilty by just judgment, be deposed." Timothy
is required to receive accusation of an elder, to rebuke
before all, those that sinned, and to withdraw himself from
those teachers who consented not to wholesome words, and that
supposed gain was godliness?. The discipline of the primitive
Church lay heaviest on the Clergy ; and such of them as
either apostatized or fell into scandalous sins, though upon
their repentance received into the peace of the Church,
were never readmitted into their ministry. The love of
believers soon waxed cool, and instead of teaching " per-
suasion to do the work of fear," gentleness yielded to
severity; and the stern ecclesiastic is unfavourably con-
trasted with Paul, who restores to communion a repentant
brother, lest he should be swallowed up by overmuch sorrow2.
The Church of Rome agrees with ours in this Article, yet
maintains an error nearly connected with it : one indeed not
expressly referred to, yet which we cannot doubt would
have been rejected, the necessity of the Priest's intention
to give validity to the Sacraments. This is carried so far,
that it is a rule in the rubrics of the Missal, that if a
Priest about to consecrate twelve wafers, should have a
general intention to omit one of them without specifying it, no
consecration ensues. And thus they make the secret acts of a
Priest's mind so to influence divine appointments, that by his
malice, impiety, or mere absence of mind, he can render the
Sacraments which he visibly blesses and administers, the
mere outward shows of them. If this be true, no one can
y 1 Tim. v. 19, 20 ; vi. 3. 5. > 2 Cor. ii. 7.

Gg 2

LECTURE XVII.

be at ease ; for no one can know whether or not he has ever
really partaken of the Lord's Supper, or even if he has been
baptized. This may be carried so far as to annihilate the
Church, for a man never baptized, cannot be truly ordained;
so that all the ordinances and the succession of Ministers
may be broken by the impiety or carelessness of one Priest.
This, says Burnet, we look upon as such a chain of ab-
surdities, that if this doctrine of intention were true, it alone
might serve to destroy the whole credit of the Christian
religion, in which the Sacraments .are taught to be both
necessary and efficacious, and yet their efficacy is made to
depend upon that which can neither be known nor pre-
vented.

ARTICLE XXVII.

OF BAPTISM.

Baptism is not only a sign of profession, and mark of differ-
ence, whereby Christian men are discerned from others that
be not christened, but it is also a sign of regeneration or
new birth, whereby, as by an instrument, they that receive
Baptism rightly are grafted into the Church; the promises
of forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be the sons of
God by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed;
faith is confirmed, and grace increased by virtue of prayer
unto God. The Baptism of young Children is in any wise
to be retained in the Church, as most agreeable with the
institution of Christ.

The Church having, as we have seen, with sufficient cause
rejected five oF the Sacraments received by Rome, pro-
ceeds to define and explain the two which she retains.

All societies require some mark of distinction by which
its members should be known by themselves and others, as
constituting one body ; and the Church being a society
formed by God, the initiatory rule of admission into it has
been chosen not by man but by Him. Baptism then is

LECTURE XVII.

453

God's seal, set by his own authority upon those who are
visibly his children. It is, as the Article expresses it, " a
sign of profession and mark of difference, whereby Christian
men are discerned from others that are not christened."
Baptism, whether administered by immersion or by affusion,
is a significant emblem, through washing away the filth of
the flesh, of the purification of the soul : and to this inter-
pretation we are directed by the Prophets, / will pour my
Spirit upon thy seed, and my blessiny upon thy offspring*;
then I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be
cleanh. The baptism of infants shows that it is not only
needful that human nature should be cleansed from the
pollution contracted by actual transgressions, but that such
is the taint inherited from our progenitor x\dam, that it
must be purified antecedently to the possibility of the
commission of sin.

In all nations, whether the notion was derived from
tradition, or from the consciousness that men were not what
they ought to be, religious worship consisted largely of
purifications. There are many in the Mosaic ritual : and
though Circumcision, which in another manner indicated the
necessity of inward purity, was the seal of God's covenant both
with Abraham and with Moses ; yet in later ages, the Jews
reasoning from this analogy baptized as well as circumcised
their heathen proselytes, to denote their purifying them
from the uncleanness of idolatry ; and such proselytes were
described as born again. St. John, who from his chief
employment is called the Baptist, invited the Jews them-
selves to repentance, and they were baptized by him con-
fessing their sins. This was an invitation never heard
before, and it was designed to show that the seed of Abraham,
though the people of God, needed as well as the heathen
inward purification. The Jews of his time must have been
persuaded that the Messiah, and even his expected herald
Elijah, would baptize; for when John disclaimed being
either, they said, zvhy baptizest thou thenc? Our Saviour
had no sins to confess, yet even he submitted to this pre-
paratory ordinance, to profess his belief in the necessity of
■ Isaiah xliv. 2. b Ezekicl xxxvi. 85. c John i. 35.

454

LECTURE XVII.

repentance for the reception of the Messiah ; and by his
Apostles he baptized into the expectation of that deliverer
whom John had announced. In his last commission he
instituted Christian Baptism, which differs from that of John
in requiring faith as well as repentance, and by the promise
of the remission of sins. Those who were baptized among
the heathen, were baptized into certain mysteries ; and the
Jews are said by the Apostle Paul to have been baptized unto
Moses in the cloud and in the sea. Those who received
John's Baptism were baptized unto the expectation of him
whom John announced, and into repentance of the sins
which John condemned ; and Christians are baptized into
the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, that
is, into the religion of which creation by the first, redemption
by the second, and sanctification by the third, is the essen-
tial and distinguishing doctrine. So plainly are the offices,
and of course the existence, of each person in the ever-
blessed Trinity denoted in this Sacrament, that we cannot
wonder if Socinians should wish to explain it away. Socinus
treats it as an institution highly proper at the forming of
the Church out of Jews and idolaters, but as since super-
seded by the general profession of Christianity. It appeared
to him that what was intended merely to serve as a dis-
criminating rite, ceases of course where there is no need of
discrimination, and that the observance of it is important
only in the rare cases of the conversion of persons who had
been educated in another religion. His followers have not
paid so much deference to him as to leave off baptism, yet
they entertain the same opinion. " They would make no
great difficulty," says Dr. Priestley, " of omitting it entirely
in Christian families, but do not think it of importance
enough to act otherwise than their ancestors, in a matter of
so great indifference." The Friends are the only denomi-
nation who do not baptize, yet as there is a Canon of the
Council of Trent against them who deny water baptism,
there must have been then persons who rejected it. When
the Baptist says, Z indeed baptize you with water unto repent-
ance, but he that cometh after me shall baptize you with the

<l 1 Cor. x. 2.

LECTURE XVII.

455

Holy Ghost and with Jiree ; it appears to the Friends, that
he means by this contrast to represent his own baptism as
emblematical of that of Jesus ; and to intimate that the
baptism by water, which was the sign, should cease as
soon as the baptism with the Holy Ghost, which was the
thing signified, should commence. The baptism of the
Apostles they consider an accommodation to the prejudices
of the times, till the spiritual nature of the Gospel was
understood; and they find in the miraculous effusion of the
gifts of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, called by our
Lord himself baptism by the Holy Ghost, the true inter-
pretation of that word as it occurs in his discourses. Other
Christians are not satisfied with this reasoning; they do not
admit the general principle, that all signs are superseded on
the coming of the things they signify ; and with respect to
this particular case, they think that there is no limitation in
the commission to the Apostles as to time; and therefore as
baptism was retained by the primitive Church, and has
been continued ever since, they believe that our Lord
designed it to be always the admission into his religion.

Baptism from its very nature, as signifying by outward
washing the necessity of inward purity,' accompanied as it
has ever been by a confession of belief in the Christian
faith ; a renunciation of the devil, and of the pomps and
vanities of the world, and a dedication of the baptized to
the service of the true God, is a ceremony well calculated
to produce on adult recipients, and on those who witness
the administration of it, a powerful moral effect. But this
appears to all denominations of Christians except Unitarians
to be, though true as far as it goes, an incomplete view of
Baptism, which they believe to be not merely an impressive
rite, but a sacrament ; which a former Article defined to
be "an effectual sign of grace, and of God's good will
towards us, by the which he doth work in us invisibly."
Baptizing into the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Ghost, exhibits them under relations which give an assurance
of the communication of blessings to those thus baptized.
Such expressions as, He that believeth and is baptized shall
e Matt. iii. U.

456

LECTURE XVII.

be saved1 ; Baptism saves us*; repent and be baptized for the
remission of sinsh ; could not be used with propriety, unless
there was some connection between this Sacrament and the
two characteristical blessings of the Gospel, forgiveness of
sin and communication of grace. The Epistle to the
Romans1 illustrates it by an allusion drawn from the
original form of Baptism. Immersion is an impressive
emblem of the death unto sin, by which conversion is ex-
pressed ; and rising out of the water, of the new life unto
righteousness, into which believers are born by their Chris-
tian profession, and which the influence of the Holy Spirit
can enable them to lead. Buried as it were with Christ in
the laver of a spiritual birth, they emerge after the image of
his resurrection into a life of righteousness here and of glory
hereafter. This is a most significant representation of what
they engaged to perform, of the grace by which their sins
were forgiven, and the strength communicated to their souls,
so that Baptism as thus interpreted is exalted from a mere
<£ sign of profession and mark of difference," to a federal
act, by which the mutual stipulations of the covenant of
grace are confirmed. Accordingly St. Paul represents Bap-
tism as succeeding* to Circumcision; for to the Colossiansk he
proves it to be no longer necessary by this argument, that
their being buried with Christ in Baptism was emblema-
tical of that change of life and that internal purity which
Circumcision intimated to Israel. And to the Romans he calls
the sign of Circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith
which Abraham had, that is, a seal of his faith, being counted to
him as righteousness1; and as the use of the sign was appointed
to his posterity, it was to them also a seal of the covenant,
confirming to all who received it, their share in the promise
made to him. If therefore Baptism supply the place of Cir-
cumcision, and bring Christians under the same obligations to
Christ, as Circumcision brought the Jews to the Law, it
must also supply the same security and pledge for the
blessings conveyed. And Circumcision is shown in the
Epistle to the Galatiansm, to be more still than an intra*

t Mark xvi. in. el Tet. iii. 21. * Acts ii. 38. i Itoni vi. 3- fc
k Col. ii. 11, 12. 1 Eoin iv. 11. m Gal. hi.

LECTURE XVII,

457

tluction to the Sinai covenant, being to Abraham a sign of
the Gospel, that is of the good news, that in him should
not only his own natural descendants, but all the nations of
the earth be blessed. Consequently, it was to him not the
sign of a covenant made with his descendants, of obedience,
more than four centuries later, but as it is called in the
Epistle to the Romans, a seal of the righteousness of faith.

Baptism, then, is not only a mark to distinguish the
followers of Christ from the professors of any other religion,
but by admitting us into covenant with God, changes our
relation towards him. To all the descendants of Adam, He
is a justly offended Creator, and will be hereafter a judge;
but those who believe in his Son, he for his sake treats as
adopted children, accepting us, who were born in sin, as
our Catechism expresses it in the words of Scripture, and
children of wrath, in Baptism as "children of grace, members
of Christ, and inheritors of the kingdom of Heaven." We
are in that sacrament emancipated from the usurped dominion
of Satan, whose service we therein solemnly renounce, and
are translated into the kingdom of God's dear Son. The
conditions on our part are repentance and faith. Grieved for
our sins, and desirous of forsaking them, we embrace the
doctrines, the precepts, and the promises of the Gospel,
which include a free pardon of actual guilt, and the
cancelling the imputation of the offence of Adam.

Thus far nearly all Christians agree, but the majority
advance farther. They find regeneration or the new birth
in Scripture applied to Christians, and in connection with
water, and draw the conclusion, that Baptism not only brings
us into a new state, but produces a new disposition suitable
to that state ; that we are not only adopted into God's
family, but are begotten again, and obtain through this
birth a new spiritual nature. The necessity of regeneration
is allowed by all; but in modern times, many, not observing
in all the baptized any signs of a spiritual nature, and even
too many of them appearing to be notwithstanding carnally
minded, and some even dead in trespasses and sins, are led
to deny that regeneration is necessarily connected with
Baptism. Still 1 think no candid person will deny,

458

LECTURE XVII.

that Baptism is regarded by our Church as the instru-
ment of regeneration ; and Doddridge and many estimable
Dissenters have been of this opinion, and have stated it as
their main objection to joining our Communion. The ninth
Article, as we have observed, renders the Latin renati
not born again, but baptized; in the fifteenth, we have bap-
tized and born again in Christ as if inseparable; and in the
Baptismal Service, not only of adults but of infants, the
necessity of regeneration is first announced ; then a prayer is
offered up that they may be born again, and a declaration
follows baptism that they are regenerate. So plain is this
language, that our divines who object to this declaration,
either with Bishop Hopkins make a distinction between
regeneration properly so called, that is, an internal sanc-
tification and an external ecclesiastical one, which admits
into the visible church ; or, taking the word in its natural
meaning, pronounces the baptized only hypothetically
regenerated, namely, upon the supposition in case of
adults of their sincerity, and in that of infants of their
possessing the disposition which shall lead them, when come
to years of discretion, to keep their baptismal vows. The
Bishop's distinction is, I conceive, untenable ; the latter, as
far as it concerns adults, would I apprehend be conceded
by the strongest advocates for baptismal regeneration in our
Church ; for, faithful to the principle, that Sacraments do
not work as charms necessarily ex opere operato, inde-
pendent of the disposition of the receiver, she limits in this
Article the regeneration effected in Baptism to those who
rightly receive it. Now a right reception must refer to him
who receives, not to him who administers. The case of
infants is different ; and though our Church allows of infant
baptism, yet as adults are the proper subjects of this covenant
rite, and they only stipulate in person, and at the time of
stipulation perform their part of the covenant, we ought in
considering the results of Baptism to argue from their case.
In many discussions on the subject, however, the baptism of
infants has been principally treated of, being, as we are in
this Christian nation, with exceptions scarcely worth naming,
all baptized in infancy ; but this tends to obscure still more

LECTURE XVII.

459

a subject, over which on any theory some darkness will
continue to rest. In as far as the benefits of the covenant
depend upon faith and repentance, the Catechism says, that
infants promise them by their sureties, which promise when
come to a proper age they themselves are bound to perform;
intimating thereby, that these benefits depend on their per-
formance of their promise. Independently, however, of this
stipulation, some prevenient grace may be imparted, which
unless in after life resisted and extinguished, will form a
Christian character, and which though in somewhat a lower
sense than in the case of adults, may be fairly called re-
generation. The ancient liturgies and the fathers agree
in restricting regeneration to Baptism. Thus, one of the
earliest, Justin Martyr, who presented his Apology for
Christianity to the Emperor Antoninus Pius, about forty
years after the death of St. John, says, "I will relate the
manner in which we dedicate ourselves to God, being re-
newed by Christ. Whoever are persuaded that these doctrines
are true, and promise to live agreeably to them, are in-
structed to ask of God with fasting, forgiveness of their sins;
and we also pray and fast together with them. They are then
led by us to a place where there is water, and they are
regenerated in the same manner that we ourselves were
regenerated, for they are washed in the name of God the
Father and Lord of all, of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of
the Holy Ghost; for Christ said, if ye be not regenerated, ye
shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." He means in
his discourse with Nicodemus, in which he is supposed to
refer to the baptism he was about himself to establish, a
baptism, which should not only show by that of John the
necessity of a new birth, but should ensure it. This inter-
pretation of the text followed in our Baptismal Service, was
never denied by any one before Calvin ; and even he allows that
Baptism regenerates those who receive it with proper faith,
for he says of such, that they truly experience the efficacy
of Christ's death in the mortification of the flesh, and the
energy of his resurrection in the vivification of the Spirit ;
and adds that Paul calls baptism" the laver of regeneration,

» Titus iii. 6.

460

LECTURE XVII.

and renewing of the Holy Spirit. Thus we are promised,
first, the gratuitous remission of sins and imputation of
righteousness; and secondly, the grace of the Holy Spirit to
form us to newness of life. The church of Rome carries
this as well as other doctrines to an extreme, both irrational
and immoral, declaring that Baptism infallibly conveys re-
generation, and is absolutely necessary to salvation. Our
own, which in this and other tenets endeavours to steer a
middle (because it seems to be the scriptural) course, says
no more of the two Sacraments in the catechism, than that
they are generally necessary to salvation ; and in her service
for the baptism of adults, that it is necessary where it may be
had. Regeneration itself, according to the interpretation of
Rome, conveys higher privileges than is allowed by any of
the reformed churches; for not only are actual transgressions
and original sin declared therein pardoned, but the baptized
are pronounced restored to the purity in which Adam was
created. A person therefore baptized at the point of death,
would upon this system enter undefiled into another world ;
but all sins committed after baptism must be expiated by
the sacrament of penance. Against this doctrine, these
expressions in the Article are levelled. " Although to those
who believe and are baptized, or regenerate, there is no
condemnation, the concupiscence which remains in them has
the nature of sin." The Church of Scotland recedes in this
as in other doctrines further from Rome than our own,
though she defines Baptism to be a sign and seal of the
covenant of grace ; and adds of regeneration, " that grace
and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, that
no person can be regenerated or saved without it, or that all
that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated. Still, she con-
tinues, by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised
is not only offered, but really conferred by the Holy Ghost
to such, (whether of age or infants,) as that grace belongeth
unto, according unto the counsels of God's own will." Here
regeneration is limited to the elect ; but our Church in this
and in other doctrines follows Augustine, who maintained,
that all who were baptized were regenerated, but unless
they were predestinated, they did not persevere in their

LECTURE XVII.

461

regenerate state. It is a modern sense put upon regeneration,
and a belief of the indefectibility of the grace therein
bestowed, and the consequent certain perseverance of the
regenerate, which makes so many even in our Church
hesitate to embrace the tenet of baptismal regeneration;
but they argue upon a different meaning of the term, as is
plain from a former Article, which says, that we may fall
from this baptismal grace, and again recover it ; and in the
service, the priest, after declaring the baptized to be re-
generate, calls upon the congregation to give thanks unto
Almighty God, and with one accord to make prayers unto
Him, that this child may lead the rest of his life according
to this beginning. Even Calvin allows, that infants are
regenerated in this ordinance; for he writes0, "as the
Lord, immediately after having made the covenant with
Abraham, commanded it to be sealed in infants by an
external sacrament, what cause will Christians also assign
why they should not also seal the same in their children ?
The covenant is common, the reason for confirming it is
common, the mode of confirmation alone is different; to them
is was confirmed by circumcision, which among us has been
succeeded by baptism, otherwise, if the testimony whereby
the Jews were assured of the salvation of their seed be taken
away from us, the advent of Christ will have rendered the
grace of God less attested to us than it was to them."
He continues, "let us never forget the similarity of Baptism
and Circumcision, between which we discover a complete
agreement in the internal mystery, the promises, the uses,
and the efficacy. How, it is enquired, are infants regenerated,
who have no knowledge of good or evil ? we reply, that the
work of God is not yet without existence, because we do
not observe it. It is certain that some infants are saved,
and that they are previously regenerated by the Lord is
beyond all doubt. Adults who embrace Christianity are not
to receive the sign of baptism without the intervention of
faith and repentance, which alone can give them admission
into the covenant ; but that the infant children of believing

0 Inst. xvi.

462

LECTURE XVir.

parents, being admitted to the inheritance of the covenant
as soon as they are born, are also to be admitted to baptism."
He concludes with saying, " How delightful is it to pious
minds, not only to have verbal assurances, but even ocular
proof, of their standing so high in the favour of their
heavenly Father, that their posterity are also the objects of
his care. It is no small stimulus to our education of them
in the fear of God, to reflect, that they are acknowledged by
him as his children as soon as they are born." It seems then
that Calvin allows the grant of some grace to infants in
baptism, for his reasoning extends beyond the elect to the
children of all, and if God will at an early age accept the
children of believers who are brought to him, the acceptance
of one who is perfect in power and goodness, seems to show
that they are not only admitted into the covenant by which
they stand in a new relation to him, but receive a capability, (if
they be not hereafter wanting to themselves,) to keep it. The
Article itself seems to define what the Reformers meant by
Regeneration, for it proceeds thus ; " it is a sign of regeneration
or new birth, whereby as by an instrument they that receive
baptism rightly, are grafted into the church," that must be
the true invisible church, for no one could doubt that it
admitted them into the visible congregation, and it was said
before, that it was a mark of difference whereby Christian
men are discerned from others that are not christened. God's
promises are therein signed and sealed, and in spiritual as in
temporal matters, signing and sealing marks our actual
obtaining what is so signed and sealed. The first of these
promises is the forgiveness of sin. Through this man is
preached to you the forgiveness of sinsv. And now why
tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins,
calling upon the name of the Lordq. The second promise is,
adoption by the Holy Ghost as the sons of God ; faith is
also said to be confirmed by it, and grace increased by
prayer ; and these two clauses, and the expression increased
not given, seem to show, that this part of the Article refers
chiefly to adults. I extract the judgment of Waterland.
p Acts xiii. 38. 9 Acts xxii. 16.

LECTURE XVII.

463

Taking for his text the passage in Titus r, He saved us by
the washing or laver of regeneration, and renewing of the
Holy Ghost, he proceeds to show, that Baptism ordinarily
carries with it in adults fitly prepared, both regeneration
and renovation. Regeneration on the part of the granter,
God Almighty, means adoption into sonship, and on the
part of the receiver man, his entrance into that state. Man
does not adopt, regenerate, or justify himself, whatever share
he may have (but still under grace) of qualifying himself for
it. God makes the grant, and it is entirely his act; man only
receives and is acted upon, though sometimes as in adults,
active in preparing himself, and sometimes, as in infants,
entirely passive. The grant is a translation from the curse
of Adam into the grace of Christ, and brings with it many
privileges, all reducible to two, remission of sins (absolute
or conditional), and a covenant claim to eternal happiness.
These blessings may be forfeited by revolt from God, and
then such person is no longer in a regenerate state with
respect to any saving effects. Still God's original grant
stands in full force to take place, as often as any such revolter
shall return, and he will require to be not regenerate but
renewed. This St. Peter speaks of in the active sense,
saying, God hath begotten us again to a living hopes ; and
passively, being born again not of corruptible seed, but in-
corruptible by the word of God, describing it as transient ;
but when the phrase, born of God, is found to denote a
permanent state, it is to be understood of a person who
has been born of God, and abides entirely in that sonship.
Renovation is the renewal of the heart, and this in adults
may and should be, before, in, and after baptism. Pre-
venting grace must go before to work in the subject,
faith and repentance, the qualifications previous to baptism.
Those first influential visits of the Holy Spirit turning the
heart, are the preparative rene wings, the first and lowest
degrees of renovation. Afterwards in Baptism the same
Spirit fixes as it were in it his dwelling, and if after this
regeneration his motions are more and more complied with,
the renewing grows through the whole course of the spi-
* Titus ii. 4, 5, 6. * 1 Pet. i. 3. 23.

4<54

LECTURE XVII.

ritual life. Therefore though we find iio Scripture exhort-
ations made to Christians (for Nicodemus was a Jew) to
become regenerated, yet we meet with several to them to
be renewed ; as, Be ye transformed by the renewing of your
mind1; the inward man is renewed day by dayu. This dis-
tinction has been carefully kept up by the Lutheran divines,
and is expressed in our Collect for Christmas Day, wherein
we beg of God, that being regenerate, and made his children
by adoption and grace, we may be daily renewed by his
Holy Spirit. Regeneration and renovation also differ as to
the effective cause ; the first is the work of the Spirit only
in the use of water ; the second the work of the Spirit and
the man together; for though it is God that worketh in us both
to will and to do*, still we concur in a subordinate way, that
we also both will and do. Another difference is, that the
one occurs but once, and the second may be often repeated
in adults. In infants, regeneration commences before reno-
vation, which shows how distinct they are ; still as regene-
ration is a renewal of the spiritual state, and renovation a
renewal of the heart, it must follow, that so far as the
second is necessary to the first, they go together. This
must be the case in adults, because there can be no regene-
ration without a capacity or qualification. We see then
the importance of the words in the Article, that baptism is
the sign of regeneration in those who rightly receive it.
It appears from Peter's address5', Repent, and be baptized for
the remission of sins in the name of Jesus Christ, and ye shall
receive the gift of the Holy Ghost; that remission comes
through repentance, and only formally, visibly, and minis-
terillay through Baptism. Paul is declared also a chosen
vessel2, before Ananias calls upon him to be baptized. In
the language of Peter Lombard, he was before justified in
the judgment of God, and then also in the judgment of
the Church. Cornelius's right to baptism is grounded
by St. Peter on his previous reception of the thing sig-
nified ; and Cyril's observation in his Catechetical Lectures
is, that Peter directed him to be baptized, in order that

1 Rom. xii. '2. u 2 Cor. iv. 16. « Philip, ii. 13. 1 Acts ii. 38.

z Acts x. 1 5.

LECTURE XVII.

465

his soul, having been regenerated through faith, his body
through baptism might receive grace ; and in the con-
text he explains the separability of outward baptism, and
the regenerating influence of the Holy Ghost. " The
Church," says Jeremy Taylor, " gives the Sacrament, God
the grace of the Sacrament; but because he does not always
give it at the instant, and yet afterwards does give it,
when the impediment is removed, it follows, that the
Church may administer rightly even before God gives the
grace." And again, " Though by the present custom we
are baptized in infancy, and do not actually reap that fruit
of present pardon which persons of mature age did in the
primitive Church ; yet we must remember that there is a
baptism of the Spirit, as well as a baptism of water; and
whenever that happens, whether it be together, as it actually
was when only those of years of discretion were baptized,
or whether it were administered in Confirmation, or by an in-
ternal and merely spiritual ministry, when by our own election
we verify the promise made in baptism, we bring back the rite
by receiving the effectp." In the earlier ages of Christianity
grown persons were the most frequently admitted into the
Church. As discipline came to be settled, candidates were
trained by proper instructions, and were therefore called Cate-
chumens. Faith and repentance alone, though both of them
antecedently gifts of the Spirit, were not supposed ordinarily
to make them regenerate. The solemn saving stipulation
was not supposed to pass in due form, till the candidate's
consecration to the blessed Trinity in Baptism. He was
not yet buried with Christ into death, nor planted in the
likeness of his resurrection*, therefore in strictness not a
member of Christ nor a child of God, but still an alien,
having no covenant claim to Gospel privileges. " As," says
Hooker1", " we are not naturally men without birth, so
neither are we Christian men, in the eye of the Church of
God, but by new birth; nor, according to the manifest ordi-
nary course of divine dispensation new born, but by that
baptism which both declareth and maketh us Christians."
The innocence and incapacity of infants are to them instead
of repentance which they do not need, and of faith which
P Life of Christ, i. (J. q Rom. vi. 4. (J. » Keel. Polity, v.

H h

46G

LECTURE XVII.

they cannot have. They are capable of being savingly born
of water and the Spirit, and of being adopted into sonship,
with what depends thereupon ; because though they bring
no positive righteousness, yet they bring no impediment.
They stipulate by their sureties upon a presumptive and
interpretative consent; they are solemnly consecrated to the
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, pardon, mercy, and other
covenant privileges are made over to them, and the Holy
Spirit translates them out of their state of nature (to which
a curse belongs) into a state of grace. This is their regene-
ration." It may be reasonably presumed, that from this time
the renewing of the heart may come on gradually with the
first dawning of reason in such measures as they shall yet be
capable of, in a way to us imperceptible, till they defile
themselves with actual sin. In this case regeneration pre-
cedes, and renovation can only follow after, though infants
may perhaps be capable of receiving some seeds of internal
grace sooner than is commonly imagined, I would add, even
in the act of regeneration.

The second part of the Article maintains, but with great
moderation, the doctrine of infant baptism, for it is not
represented as a positive command ; it is only said, that it
should be retained as most agreeable with the institution
of Christ ; and such has ever been the opinion, and
consequently the practice, of believers. It is not men-
tioned in the canons of any council, nor is it inserted
in any creed, yet it has been practised by every established
Church ; and we know7 that it was never controverted, till
the Anabaptists arose at the period of the Reformation,
though they did not reach England till long after the Articles
were settled. They are called Anabaptists, from repeating
the rite on those who had been baptized in infancy ;
but as they do not acknowledge such baptism to be valid,
they call themselves Baptists. Augustine had never heard
of any Christian, catholic or sectary, who taught such a
doctrine ; and even his opponents the Pelagians allowed
infant baptism, though it furnished him with a strong argu-
ment against them in support of original sin; and it was
held by all the ancients, that no children unbaptized can
enter the kingdom of heaven. Tertullian was the first to

LECTURE XVII.

U>7

object to it, from a notion, that the greater sins cannot
be remitted after baptism ; yet his manner shows that he
was opposing the general custom ; and even he allows
that infants ought to be baptized if in danger of death,
which is virtually conceding the principle. As early as
the time of Cyprian it was determined, A. D. 254, by an
African Synod, that it was not necessary to defer baptism
till the eighth day ; and we can trace up the custom to
Irenaeus and Justin Martyr ; nor can we imagine, that they
who must have known the practice of the Apostles would
have deviated from it. As Paul baptized whole households,
we may presume that some of them comprised children.
Our Saviour encouraged those who brought babes unto
him, who were young enough to be taken up in his arms,
declaring that of such ivas the kingdom of heaven; and his
language has a tendency to mislead, if the Gospel dispensation
in this respect was distinguished from the Mosaic. Circum-
cision too was before the giving of the Law the initiatory rite
into the Abrahamic covenant, which is in fact the Christian ;
and if Baptism takes its place, it is a fair presumption that
Jesus in the general words, make disciples of all nations,
baptizing them, meant to include infants. Certainly the
Missionary of a Paedobaptist Church would now put this
interpretation on that commission. When Peter5 having
said, Be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ,
continues, for the promise is unto you and your children; the
persons addressed being Jews, whose children had been
admitted into covenant by circumcision, could hardly fail
to conclude, that they as well as themselves were proper
objects of Baptism; and the conclusion seems to be unavoid-
able, if the Church be under both dispensations the same,
as is declared to the Ephesians by Paul, for he is our peace
who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle
wall of partition between Jew and Gentile. Infant Baptism
is also implied in the observation, the unbelieving husband is
sanctified, by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified
by the husband, else were your children unclean, but now are
they holy1, that is, dedicated to God; but in what other
way can this be done than by Baptism ? This, howeve r,
■ Actsii. 3S. I 1 Cor. vii. 11.

H h 2

468

LECTURE XVII.

limits it to the offspring of one believing parent, and
the arguments drawn from the analogy of circumcision
confirm this restriction. Indeed there seems to be no
warrant and no reason for baptizing others, till they can
understand the nature of the ordinance and stipulate for
themselves ; though in China and in other heathen states,
the Romish Missionaries introduce themselves in disguise
into native hospitals, or sprinkle exposed dying infants, and
so superstitiously and absurdly swell the number of their
nominal converts. Most Paedobaptists hold, that God doth
at Baptism by his Spirit apply to the infant therein dedicated
to him the promises of the covenant of which he is capable ;
viz. adoption, pardon of sin, and translation from a state of
nature to a state of grace or favour. And on this account
the infant is said to be regenerated by the Spirit ; not that
God does by miracle then illuminate or convert it ; and
they hold, that God does by his covenant abolish therein
the guilt of original sin, and consigns to it by promise such
grace as shall afterwards by the use of means be sufficient
to keep under, though not to extirpate it, for it is left as a
subject of constant Christian warfare.

The New Testament is wholly silent on the baptism of
infants, which we can only maintain from its analogy to
circumcision under the old dispensation. There are indeed
few texts from which the effects of this Sacrament, even
when administered to adults, can be ascertained. The Article
only stating that infant baptism should be retained, we
naturally turn to the Service in the Prayer Book to discover
in a devotional form what is omitted both in our Confession
of faith, and in the Homilies. As in a country which had
been long converted, our ancestors with rare exceptions were
like ourselves baptized in infancy, the Service was drawn
up with a reference to infants; and though another for
adults was added after the Restoration, the difference
between the two is less than might have been expected.
A sacrament which grafts into the body of Christ's Church
the convert who is convinced of sin, and joyfully embraces
the doctrine which proclaims to him, through a crucified
Redeemer, deliverance from its penalty and power, on the
condition of repentance and faith, must be accommodated,

LECTURE XVII.

469

as well as we can, to those who from their tender age are
incapable of either, and unconscious of their reception of
it. It hath pleased our own Reformers, and their conti-
nental brethren, as well as the Church from which they
seceded, to require, alike from both, the renunciation of
the devil, the world, and the flesh, a declaration of belief,
and a promise of obedience. The answer of a good con-
science towards God of these questions by the adult, the
unconscious babe makes by the mouth of sponsors, upon
the understanding, that when of proper age he will take the
engagement upon himself. As in the Lord's Supper, so
in Baptism, it is the Roman Catholic doctrine, that the
grace signified invariably follows the sign, unless opposed by
mortal sin, which in infants cannot be imagined. Bearing
in mind the remark, that in such only as worthily receive
the Sacraments, " they have a wholesome effect," and of
the subsequent specification of each, that " such as be void
of lively faith eat not the body of Christ in the use of the
Lord's Supper;" and that Baptism is the sign of new-birth
[only] to them that receive it rightly ; and reading in the
Service, that after the stipulations made by their sureties,
and the supplications of the congregation, the child is de-
clared to be regenerate, it appears to me that the Articles and
the Liturgy can only be reconciled on the hypothetical
principle11. As both proceed from the same authors, any

u The secret effects of election and of the Spirit are in Scripture ascribed
to all who are of the outward communion. So St. Peter calls all the Christian
strangers of the eastern dispensation, elect ; and St. Paul says of the Thes-
salonians, that their faith ivas spoken of in all (he world; and yet it is not to
be supposed that all the professors had an uuroprovable faith. These are
usually significant of a general custom, and natural expectation of events.
Such are those also in this very question, As many of you as have been
baptized into Christ have put on Christ, that is, so it is regularly, and so it
will be in its due time, and that is the order of things and the designed
event. But from hence we cannot conclude of every person, and in every
period of time. This man hath been baptized, now he hath put on Christ.
Such is St. Paul's saying, Whom he hath predestinated. This also declares
the regular event, but not the actual verification of it to all persons. He that
shall argue from hence, that children are not rightly baptized because thev
cannot in a spiritual sense put on Christ, concludes nothing, unless these
propositions did signify universally, which can no more pretend to truth, than
that all Christians are God's elect, and all tbat are baptized are saints. These
things declare only the usual effect and proper design in their proper season,
in their limited properties. Life of Christ, i. 9. p. P31 .

470

LECTURE XVII.

apparent contrariety must arise from our misconception ;
and I am confirmed in this opinion by a reference to the
works of the Reformers, which, though unauthorized, con-
vey their sentiments, and by the consideration that our form
of Baptism is mainly of Protestant origin. The exorcism
of the evil spirit which deformed King Edward's first Liturgy,
with the white vesture and the anointing, are omitted in the
second; and in this and the other occasional Services they
were largely indebted to Herman, the venerable Elector of
Cologne, who willingly resigned the dignity and power of
an ecclesiastical Sovereign, when called upon to choose
between them and an open profession of the Gospel. He
had previously caused a book to be drawn up by Melanc-
thon and Bucer, in conformity with the older Liturgy
of Nuremberg, and an English translation of it was pub-
lished as early as 1547. This principle has not been
invented to explain baptismal regeneration, but will be
found to pervade the Prayer Book, and proceeds from the
definition of a Church common to the Protestant confes-
sions as a congregation, (not as described by Roman
Catholics as consisting of all professors of Christianity, good
and bad, but) of saints, or faithful men. This principle is a key
which unlocks all the services. Thus in the Catechism the
baptized child is taught to call himself not only a child
of God, but one of his elect people ; and in the Burial
Service hope is expressed that the departed brother, whose
body is committed to the ground, rests in our Lord Jesus
Christ; and in the prayer to God to accomplish the number
of the elect and to hasten his kingdom, it is implied that
every one over whom the Service is read, departed in the
Lord. To some this judgment of charity, applied to all the
members of a national Church, may seem to be carried too
far. They should however consider, that when the Service
was published, dissent was not contemplated, and that it is
not to be used over persons excommunicated; and the Com-
mination shows, that our Reformers had the wish (and pro-
bably entertained the hope) of restoring the godly discipline
of the primitive church, when such persons as stood convicted
of notorious sin were put to open penance.

In conclusion, I will speak briefly of the mode of admin-

LECTURE XVIf.

471

istering this Sacrament. The giving a name at the time,
called in consequence a Christian name, is in imitation of the
Jewish custom, and is clearly no essential part of the service.
The form consists in the candidate's renunciation of the world,
the flesh, and the devil, and his engagement to be God's soldier
and servant. As St. Peter says, Baptism saves us, but not the
mere act, not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the
answer of a good conscience towards Godx. The matter is
allowed by the Romanist to be pure water, yet by traditionary
rules they use holy chrism and salt, and extinguish in the
water a wax light, in allusion to the description of our Lord's
Baptism with fire. They sign eight parts of the body with
the sign of the Cross. Baptism was originally administered
in ordinary cases by immersion in a spring, a river, a pond,
or the sea, it is indifferent in which, says Tertullian; but after
the erection of churches, in detached buildings near them
called baptisteries, of which there are several in Italy; or in
fonts, where they were not disposed to go to this expense,
which, as we see in our parish churches, were capacious
enough for the immersion of infants. The baptized were
plunged at the naming of each divine Person ; but this trine
immersion, which is mentioned by Jerome, Basil, and Chry-
sostom, was discontinued by order of a Council of Toledo,
and regarded by Gregory as unimportant. After Baptism,
a mixture of milk and honey used to be given, and a white
garment put on; and as Baptism, except under particular
circumstances, was chiefly administered on the festival which
commemorates the miraculous descent of the Holy Spirit, it
was in consequence called White-Sunday. Cyprian allows
after some reasoning the validity of the clinic baptism of the
sick, which shows that immersion was then general. Sprin-
kling, however, was probably used occasionally, even by the
Apostles, where we cannot imagine that sufficient water could
be found for the original mode, as when three thousand persons
were baptized at once in Jerusalem, and the jailor and his
family in the night by Paul and Silas. Gennadius of Mar-
seilles, in the fifth century, is the first who speaks of sprin-
kling as common. In the thirteenth century, Thomas Aquinas
mentions the three modes, immersion, affusion, and sprin-
* 1 Tet. iii. 2L

472

LECTURE XVII.

kling, and prefers immersion as the safer, because more
usual. Erasmus tells us, that infants were sprinkled in
Holland and dipped in England. When affusion was first
substituted for immersion, they poured the water upon the
face three times. In King Edward's first Book of Common
Prayer, the minister is directed to dip the child thrice ; but
this direcction is omitted in the second. Calvin's is the first
form which prescribes sprinkling ; and the practice seems to
have been introduced into England by those who had taken
refuge on the continent from Mary's persecution. Im-
mersion had been left off in most of the western churches
much earlier than in our own, but still prevails in the east.
No direction being given in Scripture, the thing signified,
and the declaration made, not the quantity or mode of
applying water, being the important point, especially in a
religion, like Christianity, not ceremonial but spiritual, the
several methods are equally valid. The Baptists have revived
the ancient form; and we concede, that the metaphor drawn
from immersion better represents the death unto sin and
new birth unto righteousness, which are figured by this
Sacrament. Still the modern method significantly repre-
sents that sprinkling of the blood of Jesusy, to which we owe
our salvation, and the use of it seems to be not only foretold
by Isaiah, who says of Him2, that he shall sprinkle many
nations &; but to be had in view also by the Apostle,
where he speaks of our having our hearts sprinkled from an
evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water b.
The baptism of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost
ivas poured out ; and it has been contended that the word
fiuitTi&o and its derivatives means cleansing, the effect and
not the mode of washing, and may therefore be rendered
either dipping or sprinkling. St. Paul may be said to employ
both metaphors0, in speaking of Israelites being baptized
unto Moses in the cloud, and in the sea. The persons to
administer the Sacrament are the Clergy, for it was to his
Apostles that Christ gave the commission, which they
handed down to those they ordained; and to admit into the
Church seems to be their peculiar province. This is denied
by none; but as infants may sometimes die before a minister
y ] Tet. i.2. z Is. Hi. 15. ■ Ezek. xxxvi. 25. b Heb. x. 22. r J Cor. x. 2.

LECTURE XVII.

473

can be found, it seems cruel to suffer them to leave the
world without having been admitted into the Church. The
higher the value set upon this Sacrament, the more readi-
ness there will be to facilitate its administration. Rome,
which regards it as indispensable, authorizes lay baptism,
and even tolerates its administration by an avowed un-
believer. The Church of Scotland, on the other hand,
speaks with horror of baptism by women, and assigns it to a
lawfully appointed minister. Our own Church continued for
a time the ancient practice, but in A.D. 1575 it was unani-
mously agreed in Convocation that baptism should not be
administered by the laity. At the Hampton Court con-
ference, the rubric was altered, and " lawful minister" in-
serted. And after the Restoration, it was worded with still
greater restriction. In A.D. 1712, the dispute about the
validity of lay-baptism running pretty high, the Archbishops
with all the Bishops of their provinces that were in town,
came unanimously to the resolution, that though baptism
by any other persons except lawful ministers ought as much
as may be to be discouraged, nevertheless, such baptisms
wherein the essentials were observed were valid, and ought
not be repeated d.

Several years since this Lecture was drawn up, the con-
nection between Baptism and Regeneration has been not
only again discussed, but has been brought formally under the
consideration of a Committee of Privy Council, the judg-
ment of which leaves it an open question. A work of this
description could not do justice to the subject; instead
therefore of attempting to revive the controversy, I would
recommend the student to examine for himself the best works
that have been written on both sides ; observing in conclu-
sion, that I consider with Archbishop Usher, the announce-
ment of the regeneration of the baptized infant as the judg-
ment not of certainty but of charity; and that it surprises
me, that while all agree that in the Lord's Supper grace is
not inseparably connected with the act of feeding, so many
believe that every baptized infant is born again, while the
definition common to botli Sacraments expressly limits their
wholesome effect to the worthy reception of them.

a Life of Archbishop Sharp, and Sharp on the Rubric.

LECTURE XVIII.

ARTICLE XXVIII.

OF THE LORD'S SUPPER.

The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that
Christians ought to have among themselves one to another ;
but rather is a Sacrament of our redemption by Christ's
death : insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with
faith, receive the same, the bread which we break is a
partaking of the body of Christ ; and likewise the cup of
blessing is a partaking of the blood of Christ.

Transubstantiation {or the change of the substance of bread
and wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by
holy Writ ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scrip-
ture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath
given occasion to many superstitions.

The body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper,
only after an heavenly and spiritual maimer. And the
mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the
Supper is faith.

The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's
ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or tvorshipped.

The other Sacrament, which our Church retains as such,
is the Lord's Supper; and, like Baptism, it is so plainly
declared in Scripture to be of divine institution, that the
fact has never been denied. The Friends alone maintain

LECTURE XVIII.

475

that they were designed solely for the existing generation.
To this it is a sufficient reply, that the command is given in
both instances without restriction or limitation, and what-
ever arguments recommend the temporary are no less forcible
for the perpetual observance of them. The descendants
of Adam in every age are equally the children of wrath,
and the inheritors of a corrupt nature, and as such equally
require to be born again of water and of the Spirit, and the
followers of Christ are in every age equally bound by their
unspeakable obligations to a devout and thankful com-
memoration of his death. This reasoning is unanswerably
confirmed by the universal practice of the Church, till the
appearance of the Friends, so late as the 17th century, who
moreover have prevailed upon no sect to follow their solitary
example, St. Paul's first Epistle to the Corinthians shows,
that the celebration of the Lord's Supper was kept up by
them. He informs us, that it had been the subject of a
special revelation to himself, which is proof that it was
designed not for the Apostles alone, but for all believers ;
and his own words, ye do show forth the Lord's death till he
come, determine that it is to be retained till his second advent.
We can only wish that all other disputes respecting this Sa-
crament could be as easily settled ; but unhappily, as is well
known, this feast of grateful commemoration, calculated
and designed to be a bond of brotherly affection, in which,
as implied in its ordinary appellation, we ought to hold
communion with one another as well as with our common
Lord, has become a mark of distinction. Its nature,
the benefits derived from it, and the manner of cele-
bration, have all been fiercely and bitterly contested, not
only between Roman Catholics and Protestants, but by
Protestants among themselves. The doctrine of the real
presence of the body and blood of Christ, or, as it is called
by a convenient name invented for the purpose, Transub-
stantiation, is not merely an absurdity contradictory to our
senses and our reason, but brings with it several strange
and revolting conclusions. The mysterious dignity thus
conferred on this Sacrament has produced an injurious

476

LECTURE XVIII.

reaction, so that some Protestants, in their anxiety to avoid
this error, have fallen into an opposite one, and have
deprived the Lord's Supper altogether of its sacramental
character, and degraded it to a mere commemoration. Our
own Church here as generally takes a middle course, in which
truth is usually to be found, and receives it not as a rite,
but as a sacrament, that is, as the means of grace.

We will now review the principal systems which prevail
concerning this ordinance.

If Scripture had represented the Lord's Supper as no
more than a remembrance of the death of Christ, it could
hardly have given occasion for so many conflicting opinions.
But there are expressions both in the words of the Insti-
tution, and in other passages, which seem to open a further
view. Thus new testament, or rather new covenant, as it
ought to have been rendered, in my blood, implies some
important connection respecting the nature and extent of
which men may differ. New covenant of course recalls a
former one : and the occasion when it was instituted after the
paschal supper, reminds us that the supper was a lamb eaten in
commemoration of God's mercy, in commanding the destroy-
ing angel who slew the first-born of the Egyptians to pass
over the houses of the Israelites, which had been sprinkled
with the blood of that animal. This annual festival carries
back our thoughts to that great national deliverance, which
we are thus led to consider as typical. By us as well as by
all the generations of Israel, it is a night to be observed to the
Lord. The words, this is my body, will convey to different
minds different ideas; and St. Paul's remark on the danger
of eating and drinking unworthily, and of not discerning the
Lord's body, seems to intimate much more than mere
commemoration. In the same Epistle to the Corinthians
he calls the cup the communion of the blood of Christ ; and
our Lord's discourse at Capernaum recorded by St. John,
on eating his flesh and drinking his blood, may be affirmed
to refer, at the least indirectly, to this Sacrament.

The Romanists take the words literally, and believe that
when Jesus spake them, he changed the bread upon the table

LECTURE XV1IT.

477

into his body, and the wine into his blood, and actually deli-
vered them into the hands of his disciples. They believe more-
over, that whenever the Lord's Supper is administered, the
priest by pronouncing these words with a good intention, con-
verts the bread into his flesh. This change is called Transub-
stantiation, the propriety of which name is conceived to consist
in this, that while the bread and wine are not changed in
figure, taste, weight, or any other accident, the substance of
them is annihilated, and that the body and blood of Christ,
although clothed with all the sensible properties of bread
and wine, are truly present ; so that those who receive what
is consecrated, do not receive bread and wine, but the flesh
of Christ. It is further conceived, that the elements thus
transubstantiated are presented by the priest to God ; and
he receives the name of priest, (that is, not as an elder but as
a sacrificer,) because in laying them upon the altar, he offers
to God a sacrifice, which, though it be distinguished from
all others, by being without the shedding of blood, is a true
propitiatory offering for the sins of the dead as well as of
the living ; the body and blood of Christ which were pre-
sented on the cross being again offered in the sacrifice of the
mass. It is also conceived, that this sacrifice possesses an
intrinsic virtue, independent of the disposition of the
receiver, and operates immediately upon all who do not
obstruct the operation by a mortal sin. Hence it is most
important for the salvation of the sick and dying, that
this host, (that is, victim,) should be brought to them ; and
it is understood, that such partaking in private, is as
salutary as joining with others in' the Lord's Supper. It
is further conceived, that it is a duty both to worship
the bread so changed upon the altar, and to bear it in
solemn procession, to receive the homage of all who
meet it. What therefore had been transubstantiated was
lifted up for adoration, and as it is the original sacrifice
repeated, the act is called the Elevation of the host. The
wine being exposed to accidents, the sick who believed in
this change, became reconciled to the custom of only re-
ceiving the bread ; and in order to remove their scruples
about this half communion, they were taught, that as the

478

LECTURE XVIII.

bread was changed into Christ's body, they partook, by
concomitancy, as it was termed, of the blood. In process
of time the laity even in church were denied the
wine ; and it was said, that when Jesus spake these words,
Drink ye all of it, he was addressing himself only to the
Apostles, whom he thereby instituted priests, so that his
command is fulfilled when the priests, the successors of
the Apostles, drank of the cup, though the people are
excluded. Thus the last part of the system conspired
with the first in exalting the clergy very far above the
laity, for the former, who assumed the power of chang-
ing the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ,
and presented what they had thus transubstantiated as
a sacrifice for sin, enjoyed the exclusive privilege of par-
taking of the whole Sacrament. Although the Lord's
Supper had early been regarded with a reverence which
would easily degenerate into superstition ; and in all ages
there had been a notion founded upon our Lord's words,
that communicants partake of his body and blood ; it was
not till after long and much opposition that the system,
the result of increasing ignorance and superstition, was
finally completed. Several of the Fathers have spoken
so strongly of eating the flesh and drinking the blood of
Christ, that it is easy for an ingenious partisan to select
passages from their works that shall seem to favour this
doctrine ; though others positively reject it as a prepos-
terous conclusion. The nature of these Lectures prevents
my entering upon the proof of this, which has been
ably accomplished by many of our controversialists, for it
could only be shown by a series of passages from a multi-
tude of voluminous authors. I will merely refer to a
decisive passage in Augustine, which must be taken as
qualifying and explaining away any high-flown tropes and
metaphors, which he may have used in his devotional
works. " If a passage be a precept either forbidding a
crime, or enjoining an useful or charitable act, it is not
figurative ; but it is figurative if it seems to command a
crime, or to forbid an useful or charitable act. When
our Lord says, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man

LECTURE XVIII.

479

and drink his blood, ye have no life in you, he appears to
enjoin a crime. It is therefore a figure, teaching that we
participate in the passion of the Lord, and we must sweetly
and passionately treasure up in our memory, that his flesh
was crucified and wounded for us\" Transubstantiation
appears to have been unknown b during the Eutychian and
Nestorian controversies, or to Gelasius Bishop of Rome in
A. D. 490. Its invention is ascribed to Radbertus Paschasius,
a French monk, when it was resisted by Scotus Erigena,
the great luminary of Ireland, which is a strong presump-
tion, that it was not held by the ancient British Church ;
and it is also contradicted by a Saxon homily of the tenth
century. In the eleventh, Berengarius argued against it;
and Lanfranc, who was brought by William the conqueror
from a Norman Abbey to be Archbishop of Canterbury,
introduced it into England. Even after the invention of
the name in the thirteenth century, and the declaration of
the fourth Lateran Council, that the doctrine was an article
of faith, the impression made by Berengarius was not effaced,
and some who did not venture to profess a disbelief of an
article imposed upon them by the supreme authority of
the Church, tried to avoid its palpable absurdity of it, by
a modification of it, called Consubstantiation.

This was adopted by Luther, and is used to express the
distinguishing character of the second system. That Re-
former could never free himself from his original belief, that
the words of the Institution implied the real presence of the
body and blood of Christ; yet he saw the absurdity of main-
taining, in contradiction to our senses, that what appears
to be as much bread and wine after consecration as before,
is literally changed into another substance; and therefore
he taught, that the bread and wine remain, but that together
with them is present the body and blood of Christ, which is
truly received by all communicants. As in a red hot iron,
he said, two distinct substances, iron and fire, are united, so
is the body of Christ joined with the bread. Some of his
followers, wishing to give a more accurate statement, had

8 Lib. iii. de doetrina Christ. b Pearson on the Creed, p. 162.

480

LECTURE XVIII.

recourse to the mysterious and incredible doctrine of the
communication of properties. They said, that all those
properties of the Divine Nature, the exercise of which is
essential to the office of Mediator, were communicated to
the human ; and that as he can only act where he is, and as
the human nature enters into the conception of his office,
there is communicated to that nature a majestic omni-
presence, by which the body of Christ, although a true
body, may be in all places at the same time. This doc-
trine seems to me as incredible as Transubstantiation itself.
Our own Reformers, though adopting many of Luther's
opinions, dissent from this, for King Edward's twenty-ninth
Article, from which the present one is altered, thus con-
cludes, " Since the very being of human nature doth
require, that the body of one and the same man cannot
be at one and at the same time in many places, but of
necessity must be in some certain and determinate place,
therefore the body of Christ cannot be present in many
different places at the same time. And since, as the
holy Scriptures testify, Christ hath been taken up into
heaven, and there is to abide till the end of the world, it
becometh not any of the faithful to believe or profess, that
there is a real or corporal presence (as they phrase it) of the
body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist; and a declaration
to the same effect is appended to our Communion Service.
This ubiquity was not held by Luther himself, but was
invented by» some of his followers, as a philosophical ex-
planation of his tenet. The modern Lutherans reject the
term Consubstantiation, and also that of Impanation, or
being connected with the bread, but still profess to hold the
doctrine of their founder. They now probably only ac-
quiesce in it, because maintained in their symbolical books;
and it never led to the same practical consequences as
Transubstantiation, such as imparting to the receiver a
physical virtue, by which the benefit derived is independent
of his disposition, or as giving it the nature of a sacrifice, or
as rendering the bread and wine an object of adoration to
Christians. And their doctrine, being thus separated from

LECTURE XVIII.

481

the three great practical errors of the Church of Rome,
meets with indulgence even from those who account it
false and ridiculous.

Carlestadt, a professor, together with Luther, in the
University of Wittemberg and Zwingli, taught, that when
Jesus said, This is my body, this is my blood, he used a
figure exactly of the same kind with that by which,
according to the abbreviations practised in ordinary speech,
the sign is often put for the thing signified. As this figure
is in itself common, above all in the Hebrew and cognate
languages, in which there is no verb equivalent to "means,"
"represents," "signifies," so there were also two circumstances
which would prevent the Apostles from misunderstanding
him ; the one was, that they saw and heard him speaking,
and could not suppose that when he delivered to them the
bread, they were eating his body. The other was, that
they had just been partaking of a Jewish festival, in the
institution and celebration of which the same figure was
used. For in the night in which the children of Israel
escaped out of Egypt, God said of the lamb which each
house was to slay and eat, it is the Lord's passover, not
meaning that it was the action of the Lord's passing over
every house, but the token and pledge of that action. And
it must be admitted by all, even the Roman Catholics, that
a figure is used in the latter part of the Sacrament, this cup
is the new covenant, and if this be allowed as to the wine,
why not as to the bread ? We thus avoid both the absurdities
of the literal interpretation, and that of the Lutherans, who
must interpret this is my body, not this represents my
body, but this accompanies my body. This method of inter-
pretation leaves no opening for the adoration offered by the
Church of Rome to the elements, for they are only the
signs of the things believed to be absent. Nor is there any
ground for accounting the Lord's Supper to the dishonour
of the High Priest of our profession, a new sacrifice pre-
sented by an earthly priest, for the bread and wine are only
the memorials of that sacrifice which was formerly offered
on the cross ; and this interpretation destroys the papal
idea of a physical virtue in the Lord's Supper; for if the

i i

482

LECTURE XVIII.

bread and wine are signs of what is absent, their use must
be to excite the remembrance of it, but this can only exist
with regard to those whose minds are thereby brought into
a proper frame. This interpretation has been adopted by
the Socinians, as a full account of the Lord's Supper, and
has been supported and illustrated by Bishop Hoadley.
According to this statement, it is no more than a religious
commemoration of the death of Christ, which it is the duty
of every believer in him to celebrate, and the performance
of it is not attended with any other benefits, than those we
ourselves take care to make it produce.

But there is a fourth system which originated with Calvin,
and has been adopted by the Churches of England and
Scotland. He thought that the third system, that of
Zwingli, did not come up to the full meaning of Scripture ;
and it appeared to him that there was a sense in which the
signiflcancy of its language might be preserved, and a part
of the Lutheran language be properly continued in use.
Agreeing with Zwingli in thinking that the bread and wine
were the signs of what was not locally present, he renounced
both Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation. He agreed
farther with him, that the use of these signs was intended to
produce a moral effect ; but he taught moreover, that to all
who remember the death of Christ in a proper manner by
the signs, He is spiritually present ; and he considered this
spiritual presence as giving a signiflcancy, far beyond
the Socinian sense, to these words, the cup of blessing
which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ?
The blessing pronounced upon the cup makes no change ;
but to all who join with suitable devotion in the thanks-
giving then offered, Christ is spiritually present, so that
they may emphatically be said to partake of his body and
blood, because his body and blood being spiritually present,
convey the same nourishment to their souls, as actual
bread and wine do to their natural life. Hence Calvin was
led to connect the discourse at Capernaum with the Lord's
Supper, not in the literal sense of Papists and Lutherans,
but in one agreeable to our Lord's own explanation ; The
words that I speak unto you, they are spirit and they are life.

LECTURE XVIII.

483

According to this system, the full benefit of the Lord's
Supper is confined to those who partake worthily ; and it
becomes the duty of every Christian to examine himself
before he eats of that bread and drinks of that cup, not only
with regard to his understanding the Sacrament, but also with
regard to his works, words, and thoughts. The passage in
the Epistle to the Corinthians suggests the idea of a feast
upon a sacrifice as the true explanation, and the institution
itself is made in sacrificial language. If we make the Lord's
Supper as instituted by him a mere commemoration, we make
it a strange and unintelligible rite ; for what can be more
strange than eating the flesh and drinking the blood, either
really or metaphorically, of one who is an instructor and
benefactor, and no more ; and he himself, while he expects
it to be done in remembrance of him, calls it a covenant in
his blood. But when Sacrifice formed the principal part
of religion, all who partook of the material feast, were
understood to partake of the spiritual benefits of the sacri-
fice. Are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of
the altar0? the worshipper as well as the priest partook of
the altar, except in the case of whole burnt offerings, which
were entirely consumed. Christ was our victim ; on his
body we do not feast literally, because it is in heaven; but
he appointed bread to represent it; on that we can feast, and
so partake of his body, and such bread is the bread of life,
because by his own appointment it represents his flesh.
This idea which was illustrated by Cudworth, was adopted
by Warburton as an effectual answer to both the Popish and
Socinian schemes.

This view of the principal systems of the Lord's Supper,
will prepare us for the better understanding of the wording
of the Article.

The Lord's Supper " is not only a sign of the love that
Christians ought to have among themselves one to another,"
but rather, verum potius, something more, that is, "a sacrament
of our redemption by Christ's death." In the following
Article, those " who take the Lord's Supper, are said to eat
and drink the sacrament of so great a thing," (as the body and

c l Cor. x. 18.
ii 2

484

LECTURE XVIII.

blood of Christ,) which shows that sacrament and sign were
considered synonymous terms, A sacrament of our redemption ;
but the death of Christ is efficacious only as a sacrifice ; the
Lord's Supper, therefore, is a feast upon a sacrifice. The
external part of the ordinance being visible, and peculiar
to Christians, must be a badge, and whatever is a badge of
Christians, must be a sign of mutual affection. It repre-
sents our redemption by the death of Christ, and therefore has
an internal part or spiritual grace, so that the bread which we
break is a partaking of the body of Christ; and likewise the
cup of blessing is a partaking of the blood of Christ. This
proposition is here purposely expressed in the language of
St. Paul to the Corinthians*1. Some Protestants think, that
our Church approximates too nearly to the language of
Rome ; and modern Romanists endeavour to catch unwary
and imperfectly informed members of our communion, by
attempting to show that the difference between us is only
verbal. A little attention however will show the fallacy.
The term, real presence, is used by some of our divines, as
by Archbishop Seeker; and even Latimer, at his disputation
here in Oxford, previous to his martyrdom, said, that he
maintained the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, but
not the corporal. Our Church however has wisely for-
borne to use the term in any of the books set forth by
authority; for it is not easy to conceive as really present
what is locally absent, though we may conceive it to be
really received, in the manner that a man receives an estate,
though he may be at a distance from it when he receives
the deeds that convey it. In the Sacrament our Church
says, "the body and blood are verily and indeed taken,"
but not by all, only " by the faithful ;" and here too the
partaking is restricted to such as " rightly, worthily, and
with faith, receive the same." Further on it is expressly
said, that " the body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, only
after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean where-
by the body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is
faith." That such a real presence, which must be spiritual,
is different from the Roman, is manifest, from the strong
d 1 Cor. x. 16.

LECTURE XVIII.

485

condemnation of Transubstantiation, of which it is said, not
only that it "cannot be proved by holy writ, but that it is
repugnant to the plain words of Scripture." It is not my
intention to enter into this controversy, because as this is
the most prominent among the tenets that separate us from
the communion of Rome, it will be familiar to most of you,
and a long and satisfactory confutation of it may be read
in Burnet's Exposition.

How, it may naturally be asked, could a doctrine, so
incredible to the understanding and so revolting to the
feelings, ever have prevailed, if it had not been revealed ?
Has not Christ positively declared the bread to be his body,
and the wine his blood ? has not his Apostle warned us
of the danger of not discerning his body ? and is there
not a long discourse of our Lord prophetical of this insti-
tution, which his hearers understood, and which he meant
them to understand, literally, since many of his disciples
replied, this is a hard saying, ivho can bear it ? It is con-
ceded, that a hasty reader might form this conclusion; yet
the first impression will yield to examination ; and it
is a presumption against this interpretation, that it is not
approved by many Roman Catholic divines. In fact, it
would prove too much for them, since it would supply
a powerful argument for infant communion, which their
Church has long laid aside, and it would be diametrically
opposite to their practice of denying the cup to the laity.
Waterland, in his Treatise on the Eucharist, shows at length,
that the eating is not sacramental but spiritual; that is, spi-
ritual feeding, not as confined to the Eucharist, but in that, or
the other Sacrament, or in any way by which we show
our faith in the atoning efficacy of Christ's death. He takes
the universality of the proposition, which, according to
St. John's manner, is stated both affirmatively and nega-
tively, as his guide, and he sums up the whole in this pro-
position, that all who feed upon what is here mentioned, and
they alone, have life. The Roman Catholic will not maintain
that it is the Eucharist, for upon this hypothesis, what will
become of baptized infants who die before they come to years
of discretion, or others who though believers may never have

486

LECTURE XVIII.

had the opportunity of communicating. It would also
promise eternal life to all partakers, though St. Paul says,
that in this Sacrament we may eat and drink our own damn-
ation. Waterland takes the meaning to be, that it is only
through the expiation effected through our Lord's sacrifice
of himself, that any one can be accepted. For example,
Except ye eat the flesh of Christ, does not mean, you
have no life without the Eucharist, but that you have no
life without participating of our Lord's passion. Never-
theless, since the Eucharist is one mode of participating, it
was proper to urge the doctrine of this discourse both for
clearer understanding the beneficial nature of this Sacra-
ment, and for encouraging believers to frequent and devout
communion. Such was the use made of it by some of the
early Fathers and by our own divines. The result of his
investigation is, that though this discourse was early applied
to the Eucharist, it was not interpreted of it before the fifth
century. Even if interpreted exclusively of the Eucharist,
it will rather prove that the body and blood are turned into
bread and wine, than the converse ; for our Lord says,
/ am the bread of life, the living bread, that came down from
Heaven. But he himself gives a key to unlock his hidden
meaning, and explains his language as metaphorical. It is
the Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing; the
words that I speak unto you they are Spirit and they are
life. As if he had said, it is not my natural flesh, though
you should eat it, that would procure you everlasting life,
but the Holy Spirit who must quicken you. Archbishop
Sharp in an able Sermon on this discourse says, that to eat
Christ's flesh and to drink his blood, means no more than
to believe in him, for to both these is the same promise
made in the same words. Thus we read, This is the will
of him that sent me, that every one who seeth the Son and
believeth on him may have everlasting life, and I will raise
him up at the last day ; and, Whoso eateth my flesh and
drinketh my blood hath everlasting life, and I will raise
him up at the last day. Our Lord was naturally led to
use this allegorical language, because he had miraculously
fed his hearers in the desert, and they now urge him in

LECTURE XVIII.

487

imitation of Moses to grant them, as the sign of his divine
mission, bread from heaven.

The simple fact, that our Lord instituted this Sacrament
in person is a proof that there could be no transubstan-
tiation in its first celebration. And if there were not then,
surely at no future period, nor indeed was it possible
on any subsequent commemoration of his death. The
same mode of expression which our Lord employed in
instituting the memorial of his new covenant, this is, not
this represents, my body, had been already used, without
being understood in a gross literal sense by Moses, and is
still repeated by the Jews in partaking of the feast which
typified this ; This is the Lord's Passover. None supposed
that the lamb was the Lord passing over, or that the passing
over was not a remote event; nor could the Apostles, when
they heard their Master say, this is my body given or broken
for you, and this cup is the new covenant in my blood which
is shed for you, believe that he meant it literally before
that event had taken place ; and surely, if they had so
misunderstood our Lord, some expression of surprise would
have escaped them ; and if he really meant to teach the
doctrine of Transubstantiation, he would not have suffered
them to rest in our notion of mere commemoration. The
Roman Catholic entrenches himself in the literal inter-
pretation of Scripture, and therefore calls upon us to bow
to that supreme authority. In this his presumed strong-
hold, however, we venture to attack him, and maintain, not
only that he cannot so prove this tenet, but that it is
repugnant to the plain words of Scripture. We must
remember, that in addition to the narratives of the insti-
tution in the three Gospels, we have another inspired
account specially revealed to Paul, which he communicated
to the Corinthians. And in this, of equal authority, he
three times, after consecration, calls what is eaten, bread.
Surely therefore the more obscure and mysterious ex-
pression ought to be interpreted by the plainer one, so that
if the former account required a comment, we have here an
infallible one. His remarkable addition, which enables us

488

LECTURE XVIII.

to maintain against the Friends, that the Lord's Supper was
meant to be a permanent rite ; For as often as ye eat this
bread and drink this cup, ye do show forth the Lord's death
till he come, was urged on his trial by Bishop Ridley, as
evidence, that Christ did not come in the Sacrament; and
his corporal presence therein is also excluded by the decla-
ration, that the heavens must receive him until the times of
the restitution of all things. Their reasoning, such as it is,
embraces but one of the elements, for He calls the wine after
consecration6, the fruit (rathe? product) of the vine; and the cup,
not the wine, his blood ; but we deny that his words, fairly
cited, prove the bread to be his body as it actually exists.
I say fairly, for when they have said, This is my body, they
leave off in triumph. That triumph, however, can only be
supported by half a citation. The whole sentence is, This is
my body broken or given for you; it is not therefore his body
absolutely, but his body in a particular state, as broken, and
as broken also for us, that is, as offered up to God in
sacrifice for us, deprived of life for our sakes, and this took
effect once for all on the cross. In the same manner He
says of the cup, that it is the blood of the new covenant, also
not absolutely, but as shed for the remission of sins. We
say then, that at that time, the literal sense was impossible,
because Christ could not give away with his own hands,
while he was alive, his body to his Apostles, much less
broken before he was crucified, and his blood separated
from his body. It is justly said in the rubric to the Com-
munion Service, that " the natural body and blood of our
Saviour are in Heaven and not here, and therefore our
eating is only after a spiritual and heavenly manner." It is
the broken body and the blood shed upon which we are to
feed; and as the Apostles could not do that literally till they
were broken and shed, that is, till his death, so cannot we,
nor could ever any after his resurrection, for it was only in
that short interval that it was practicable. The body
broken and the blood shed have now no existence, we
cannot therefore receive more than the benefits purchased
* Matt. xxvi. 29.

LECTURE XVIII.

489

by them. The body which now exists is the glorified body.
His body broken and his blood poured out can no otherwise
be present in the Eucharist than by a representation, and
no otherwise received than by a grateful recollection, and a
faithful application of his merits ; His presence therefore
can be no more than sacramental, and our eating must be
spiritual ; as says St. Augustin, not that which is seen, but
that which is believed, feeds us.

Transubstantiation is also declared to overthrow the
nature of a sacrament, which contains, according to the
ancient definition, a sign, and the thing signified. In
baptism, this has not been disputed ; and in the Lord's
Supper we have for the outward part or sign bread and
wine, for the thing signified the body and blood of Christ.
It is obvious, that on the Roman Catholic hypothesis, we
have only the second. According to our Church catechism,
our souls are made partakers of the body and blood of
Christ to their strengthening and refreshment, as bread and
wine benefit the body. The body and blood of Christ,
therefore, in the sense of our Church, are only the benefits
of Christ's passion, that is to say, the pardon of sin, and the
grace of the Holy Spirit, and a closer union with Christ, and
our eating and drinking of that body and blood is our being
made partakers of those benefits, and the mouth whereby
we thus eat and drink is our true and lively faith. This,
according to Archbishop Sharp, is plainly the sense of our
Church. It is certain that it cannot be the real body,
because she expressly affirms that to be now in heaven
and not here ; and she declares further, that the body
which we eat, is for the nourishment not of our bodies
but of our souls ; and that faith is such a mouth as
was never heard of for the eating a body properly so
called. I conclude then in Augustine's words, " How shall
I send up my hands to heaven to take hold of Christ sitting
there ? Send thy faith, and thou hast hold of him. Why
preparest thou thy teeth and thy belly ? Believe, and
thou hast eaten. For this is to eat the living bread. He
that believeth in Christ eateth Christ; he is invisibly fed,
because he is invisibly regenerated."

490

LECTURE XVIII.

That such a doctrine should have given rise to many
superstitions is not surprising, indeed it could not be other-
wise ; for the honours due to the host on their hypothesis is
only reasonable, but will be allowed to be idolatrous by all
who consider the elements as never more than bread and
wine. The wafer is consequently reserved, it is conveyed
to the sick with a view to performing cures ; it is sometimes
carried through the street, in order to deprecate some national
calamity, in solemn processions, during which every one
present is to kneel ; and after consecration, it is elevated
that all may see and adore his God. This doctrine has also
occasioned the multiplying of altars in churches, and has, in
the estimation of those that hold it, conferred an efficacy
upon the Sacrament, in benefiting the living and the
deceased in purgatory, even when it is taken by the priest
alone; and it has given an undue exaltation to the sacerdotal
character, to the injury of both laity and clergy.

The Article affirms, that the Sacrament by Christ's
ordinance was not reserved, carried about, lifted up, or wor-
shipped. Certainly, no texts can be brought forward in
support of these customs, and they will stand or fall with
our belief or rejection of Transubstantiation. The Institution
is, Take, eat and drink, which imports that participation of
the elements is an essential part of the Institution. This
custom of reserving began early, when there were few priests
to administer, or they could not meet their congregations in
seasons of persecution. Portions therefore used to be taken
to the absent, to prisoners, and especially to the sick. We
however, such circumstances having ceased, choose to con-
secrate no more than the number of communicants requires,
and according to ancient custom the whole is consumed,
that no occasion may be given either to superstition or
irreverence. As for the sick who cannot join the congre-
gation, we think it more in the spirit of the Institution, to
consecrate for their use as much as will be needed, in their
presence. Of the elevation, we find no traces in primitive
times but the words which we retain from the ancient
liturgies, Lift up your heart, which they transfer to the
wafer. Elevation is first mentioned in the eleventh

LECTURE XVIII.

491

century, when it was done to represent the Resurrection
of Christ ; and Durandus in the thirteenth is the first that
speaks of adoring the host.

ARTICLE XXTX.

OF THE WICKED WHICH EAT NOT THE BODY OF CHRIST IN
THE USE OF THE LORD'S SUPPER.

The wicked, and such as be void of a lively faith, although
they do carnally and visibly press with their teeth (as
Saint Augustine saith) the Sacrament of the body and
blood of Christ, yet in no wise are they partakers of Christ:
but rather, to their condemnation, do eat and drink the sign
or sacrament of so great a thing.

This Article was not in the original edition, nor is it
required, since it is substantially contained both in the last,
and in the twenty -fifth; for if in such only as worthily receive
the Sacraments they have an wholesome effect, and they that
receive them unworthily purchase to themselves damnation ;
and the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and
eaten in the Supper is faith ; it will follow as a necessary
consequence, that the wicked and such as are void of a
lively faith are in no wTise partakers of Christ in the Lord's
Supper ; and this, to give it the more weight, is expressed
in the words of St. Augustine, taken from his twenty-sixth
Tract on St. John. " He that does not abide in Christ, and
in whom Christ doth not abide, certainly doth not spiritually
eat his flesh or drink his blood, though he may visibly and
carnally press with his teeth the sacrament of the body and
blood of Christ, but he rather eats and drinks the sacrament
of so great a matter to his condemnation." Similar passages
might be produced from other Fathers, from which we
prove, that they did not believe in the corporal presence.
How different from the doctrine of Rome, as thus stated
by the Annotator on the Rhemish Testament ! " 111 men
receive the body and blood of Christ, be they infidels or ill-

492

LECTURE XVIII.

livers." We ought however in fairness to add, that we urge
too strongly against Roman Catholics their doctrine of the
mechanical virtue of the Sacrament ; for though they speak
much of the opus operatum, and maintain, that all com-
municants receive the body, which according to Transub-
stantiation they must do, still they profess, that while the
wicked eat Christ's body, it is to their condemnation.
The Trent catechism quotes this very passage of Au-
gustine ; and Dupin says, that the body and blood of Christ
are truly and really received by all, yet none but the faithful
derive any benefit from them.

ARTICLE XXX.

OF BOTH KINDS.

The Cup of the Lord is not to be denied to the lay -people ;
for both the parts of the Lord's Sacrament, by Christ's
ordinance and commandment, ought to be ministered to all
Christian men alike.

There is no practice of the Roman Church so difficult to
defend, as the denial of the Cup to all but the officiating
priest. Its members confess it to be an innovation, for they
cannot plead the sanction of antiquity ; and the wording
of this Article affords a sufficient confutation of it.

The custom naturally arose out of Transubstantiation.
To prevent any profanation of what was assumed to be our
Lord's real body, wafers were substituted for bread, and were
put at once into the mouth of the communicants by the
officiating minister, instead of being delivered into the hand,
as in Protestant congregations ; but no expedient could be
devised against the occasional spilling of the wine. As the
doctrine grew popular, the wine was sucked up through a
tube, which custom afterwards fell into disuse, and is now
peculiar to the Pope. The first attempt to withhold it, which
was made in the twelfth century, appears to have been

LECTURE XVII t.

493

acquiesced in universally, but was first authorized by the
Council of Constance. It was acknowledged, that Christ
did institute this Sacrament in both kinds, and that the
faithful in the primitive Church did so receive it; yet
a practice being reasonably introduced to avoid some
dangers and scandals, they confirm the custom of con-
secrating in both kinds, and of giving to the laity only in
one. At Trent it was openly contended, that the Church
had power to make the alteration. It is remarkable, that a
Pope of the fifth century, Gelasius, having heard that the
Manichaeans, regarding it as a sin to taste wine, did not
partake of the cup, decreed that all persons should com-
municate entirely, or not at all, for that such a dividing of
one and the same Sacrament could not take place without
heinous sacrilege. In a Convocation in the first year of
Edward Vlth's reign, it was unanimously voted, that the
Sacrament should be received in both kinds by the laity as
well as by the clergy, though no article on the subject was
drawn up before the revision in 1562. In the Greek Church,
the laity communicate in both kinds, receiving the bread
and wine together in a spoon from the hand of the Priest.
In the Council of Trent two questions wTere agitated ; the
first, whether the Church's weighty and just causes were so
strong, that the use of the cup was to be allowed to no lay
person whatsoever ; and the second, that supposing it might
be allowed to some particular nation, whether it should not
be upon conditions ? They were ultimately left for Papal
decision. It has become instead of a question of doctrine,
one of discipline. Cyprian severely censures the Aquarii,
who substituted water for wine, saying, If it be not lawful
to loose any one of the least commandments of Christ,
how much more is it unlawful to break so great an one,
which so very nearly relates to the Sacrament of our Lord's
passion, and of our redemption ; or to change it into
what is quite different from the original institution. Roman
divines, who cannot deny that the Apostles partook of both
elements, assert, to get rid of the difficulty, that they ate the
bread as laymen, but were made priests by receiving the
cup. This, however, is contradicted by the reason assigned

494

LECTURE XVIII.

by our Lord ; Drink ye all of this ; for this is my blood of
the new covenant, which is shed for you and for many for
the remission of sins; showing that they were to drink it
not on account of their office, but of their state as sinners ;
and the same reason applies in every age to all believers
who are sinners. It may be added, that they were not
made priests till after his resurrection, when he breathed
upon them, and said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost. St. Paul
shows that it is to be received in both kinds ; the cup of
blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood
of Christ ? the bread which we break, is it not the communion
of the body of Christ ? He also uses drinking for the whole ;
we have all been made to drink into one spirit; and if the dis-
course in the synagogue of Capernaum is to be applied to
the Sacrament, as much is said of the necessity of drinking
Christ's blood as of eating his flesh. They vindicate the
practice by the incredible position, that Christ is received
whole and entire in the bread, so that they to whom one
kind alone is administered, are thereby defrauded of no
saving grace. Whoever denies this, is pronounced accursed
by the Council of Trent. This is only a modification of
Transubstantiation, which we have already disproved, and is
liable to this additional objection, that it calls in question
the wisdom of the Saviour, in enjoining the Supper to be
taken in both kinds ; and also proves too much, since upon
this supposition, the Priest also need never consecrate nor
communicate in the two.

LECTURE XVIII.

495

ARTICLE XXXI.

OF THE ONE OBLATION OF CHRIST FINISHED UPON THE
CROSS.

The offering of Christ once made is that perfect redemption,
propitiation, and satisfaction, for all the sins of the whole
world, both original and actual; and there is none other
satisfaction for sin, but that alone. Wherefore the sacrifices
of Masses, in the which it was commonly said, that the
Priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have
remission of pain or guilt, were blasphemous fables, and
dangerous deceits.

Roman Catholics affirm, that the Lord's Supper is not only
a sacrament, but a sacrifice. This aweful error, arising out
of Transubstantiation, is denied in the present Article. The
oblation of Christ it declares to have been finished upon
the cross, therefore not upon the altar ; or rather, that the
Cross is the only Christian altar, for on that alone was the
victim offered. If this fundamental truth be established,
the sacrifice of the mass can be no longer maintained. If
this offering once made is a perfect redemption, pro-
pitiation, and satisfaction for all the sins of the whole
world, it follows, that there is none other, for it would be
irrational to seek for more than a perfect redemption.
The proposition is announced in his Epistle by St. John ;
He is the propitiation for our sins ; and not for ours only,
but also for the sins of the whole world*. That such a
sacrifice would be offered but once, we might reasonably
expect; but as if it were to make a prophetical protest
against this pernicious notion of its continual repetition,
the fact is prominently brought forward in the Epistle to
the Hebrews. Thus, we are sanctified through the offering
of the body of Jesus Christ once for alls. Who needeth
not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first
for his own sins, and then for the people; for this he did
* 1 John ii. 2. s Heb. x. 10.

496

LECTURE XVIII.

once, when he offered up himself h. Christ entered in once into
the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption '1. Christ
was offered up once, to bear the sins of manyk; every priest
stands daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same
sacrifices, which can never take away sin ; but this man, after
he had offered up one sacrifice for sins, for ever sat down on
the right hand of God1. And now once at the end of the
world he hath appeared, to put away sin by the sacrifice of
himself m. St. Peter also writes to the same effect : Christ
also hath once suffered for sin, the just for the unjust, that he
might bring us unto GodD. Well then may we adopt the con-
clusion, that there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin0; and
those who agree to this, which, as it is a plain scriptural
declaration, it does not seem easy for a believer to reject,
must adopt the conclusion of the Article. " Wherefore the
sacrifice of masses, in the which it was commonly said that
the priest did offer Christ for the quick and dead, to have
remission of pain or guilt, were blasphemous fables, or
dangerous deceits." We have seen that the Lord's Supper
may be properly called a feast upon a sacrifice, and no
Protestant carries his notion of it higher than a symbolical
commemorative sacrifice. The Council of Trent lays down,
that though Christ was a Priest for ever, he did not mean
that earthly priesthood should cease ; and therefore offered
up to his heavenly Father his body and blood, under the
symbols of bread and wine, and ordained his Apostles
priests, that they and their successors might in succession
repeat this offering. Still there was to be but one Priest,
the Apostles acting only for their Lord ; and the appointed
sacrifice was to represent the original one, both being real,
but the one bloody, the other unbloody. They were to be
considered as one and the same, differing only in the mode
of offering, strictly propitiatory, capable of gaining remission
of even great sins, and to be offered for the dead as well as the
living. The doctrine was first established in the dark ages,
yet like other errors it grew gradually, and might originate
from the strong and unguarded language of the Fathers,

h Heb. vii. 27. 1 ix. 12. k ix. 28. 1 x. 11, 12. m ix. 2(j.

° 1 Pet. iii. 18. ° Heb. x. 26.

LECTURE XVIII.

497

who sometimes called it the unbloody sacrifice ; yet in their
most declamatory sentences, the careful reader will perceive
that the expression was not to be taken literally, for the
Christians were reproached by the heathen for belonging to
a religion without a sacrifice, and the Fathers in their
Apologies allowed that they had none. Thus Justin Martyr
saysp, that "God has no need of material oblation, but that
the Christian manner wras to offer him prayers and thanks-
givings." Tertullian*1 says, "that we may learn that we
ought to offer spiritual not earthly services, from what
is written ; the sacrifice of God is an humble and contrite
spirit ;" and in another place, " offer unto God the sacrifice of
thanksgiving .•" and when Celsus had objected to Christians
their want of altars, Origenr implies, " the objector does not
consider that with us every good man's mind is his altar,
from whence truly and spiritually the incense of perfume is
sent up, that is, prayers from a pure conscience." Waterland",
who from his intimate study of the Fathers is of the highest
authority as to their meaning, declares, that they will all be
found constant and uniform in one tenor of doctrine, rejecting
all material sensible sacrifices, and admitting none but spiritual
ones, such as prayers and praises. The wThole of the matter,
as he says, has been well summed up in one of Sharp's
Sermons1; " we offer up our alms, we offer up our prayers,
our praises, and ourselves, and all these we offer up in the
virtue and consideration of Christ's sacrifice, represented
by way of commemoration ; nor can it be proved that the
ancients did more than this : this whole service was their
Christian sacrifice, and this is ours." " We do not deny,"
says the Archbishop, " that the Communion Office may be
called a sacrifice, nor do we scruple to call this service the
Christian sacrifice by way of eminence, because we find the
ancient Fathers frequently so styling it ; but then it is only
upon these three accounts; first, that we bring our offerings
to God for the use of the poor, with which kind of sacrifice,
St. Paul tells us, God is well pleased ; which alms and
oblations made up one great part of that unbloody sacrifice

p Apol. i. p. 14. 1 Adv. Jud. v. p. ]8. r Contra Celsum, p. 755.

• Review of the Eucharist. 1 Vol. v. S. ii.

K k

498

LECTURE XVIir.

that the Fathers so often speak of : secondly, we offer up
our prayers for ourselves, and our intercessions for the
whole Church, our thanksgivings, and ourselves : and, thirdly,
to complete the Christian sacrifice, we offer up both with a
particular regard to that one sacrifice of Christ which he
offered upon the cross, and which is now lively represented
before our eyes in the symbols of bread and wine. What
then, do we not offer every day? says Chrysostom. Yes,
we offer by making a commemoration of his death, and we
do not make another sacrifice every day, but always the
same, or rather a remembrance of that sacrifice. And to
the same purport says Eusebiusu, "we offer sacrifice by
celebrating the memorial of the grand sacrifice." In these
three things consisted the whole of the Christian sacrifice,
as it was held by the primitive Church ; and so we in our
Communion Service, having offered up our sacrifice of
alms, and our sacrifice of devotions for the rendering
these two acceptable, plead before God the sacrifice of
our Lord Jesus Christ. The Fathers, accustomed on the
one side to the temple service, on the other to heathen
sacrifice, were naturally led to adopt metaphorical language,
which appears strong and forced to us, who know of both
only from books. In this they follow the example of the
Bible; for St. Peter* not only calls works of piety spiritual
sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ, but he
ascribes a holy priesthood to all Christians to offer these up;
and upon this account St. Johny calls them priests ; St. Paul
declares his willingness to be poured out as a drink-offering
upon the sacrifice of his Philippian converts2; and calls upon
the Romans to present their bodies to God a living sacrifice,
as a rational mode of worship. So the calves of the lips of
Hosea3, which appears to us a harsh figure, is reproduced
in the Epistle to the Hebrews15, where Christians are re-
quired to offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually,
that is, the fruit of our lips; and the metaphor is carried
on to works of charity, with which sacrifices we are assured
that God is well pleased.

■ Demon. Evang. i. 10. * 1 Pet. ii. 15. y Eev. i. 6. * Philip, ii. 17.
• Hosea xiv. 2. b Heb. xii. 15.

LECTURE XVIII.

499

The early Church offered oblations as well as alms ; and
though the former word was introduced at the revision into
our Communion Service, it now refers to the devotions of
the congregation, for the use of the Minister, whose claim
upon their justice rather than charity is enforced in several
of the sentences of the Offertory. The original oblation
was the bread and wine provided for the occasion, out of
which, after it had been solemnly presented to God as an
acknowledgment that it was his gift, the Minister selected
sufficient for his purpose, which he made by consecration,
according to the language of the times, the body and blood
of Christ. This was then distributed to the people, who
were thus as it were entertained at God's table, as a recon-
ciled Father, in the manner that the Israelites partook of the
peace offerings. According to modern custom, this would be
a mere ceremony : there was reality in it when the Lord's
Supper was followed by a love-feast. A misconception of
it seems to have introduced the notion of the sacrifice of
the mass; and it was probably this abuse that occasioned the
rejection of a prayer for a blessing on the elements, from
King Edward's second book, which has been restored in
the Scottish and the American Liturgies.

The Epistle to the Hebrews proves the sufficiency of
Christ's one offering of himself once for all, and a sacrifice that
needs repetition cannot be sufficient to take away sin. The
doctrine here denounced depends upon Transubstantiation,
for if that be disproved, the Eucharist can be no more than
the commemoration of a sacrifice. The Roman Catholics
endeavour to support their position from the Scripture; but
the prediction in Malachi and the priesthood of Melchizedek,
the most plausible passages they can find, may be shown to
have no connection with the Mass. Jehovah, declaring that
he had no pleasure in the mercenary services of his priests,
directs the attention of Israel to a happier period, announcing
that from the rising of the sun even to the going down of the
same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every
place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offeringc.
Bellarmine maintains, that this is a prediction of the Mass,
c Malachi i. ] ] .
k k 2

500

LECTURE XVIII.

which his Church calls the unbloody sacrifice, and that it was
so understood by all the Fathers ; but he must have relied on
the ignorance of his readers, for Tertulliand explains it of
prayer out of a pure conscience ; and Eusebius's comment is
" not in Jerusalem, or in any particular place, but in every
country and in all nations they shall offer the incense of
prayers ; and not by blood, but by pious works, offer unto
God that which is called a pure offering6."

The prediction, as describing under the figures of the
Law the worship of the Gospel dispensation, is easily
understood; but if the literal meaning be pressed, it is
incompatible with Transubstantiation ; for, to use the
language of the Bible f, without shedding of blood there is
no remission, so that no pure offering of flour can be a
propitiatory oblation. The other passage is, Melchizedek's
refreshing with bread and wine Abraham, after his victory
over the allied kings. From the Psalm f, and from the
explanation of it in the Epistle to the Hebrews, we
learn, that he was both priest and king, and was a type of
the great High Priest of our profession, who filled no temporary
office like Aaron, but continues a Priest for ever. There is
no intimation that the bread and wine which he supplied
was a sacrifice, or symbolical of one ; and as the reasoning
shows that Christ is a Priest for ever, he is now pleading at
his Father's right hand the merit of his sacrifice, offered
once for all upon the cross, and interceding for his people.
There is now no victim to be offered ; consequently, since
every priest has something to offer, Christ has no successor
in his office. Scripture is so explicit, that the Romanist
is driven to evasion, to save the credit of his creed. Thus he
says, that though Christ suffered only once upon the cross a
bloody victim, he is offered without blood in the Mass. The
Article not merely denies the sacrifice, but declares the
doctrine to be blasphemous fables, and dangerous deceits,
figmenta et imposturae. Deceits and fables that may well
be called, which is contradicted by Scripture. Blasphemous,
as professing to bring down Christ, whenever a priest
pleases, from the right hand of God in heaven, and litei*ally
d Against Marcion, iv. e Demon, i. 6. f Heb. ix. 22. & Psalm ex.

LECTURE XVIII,

501

to feed upon him ; an absurdity, which Cicero tells ush was
too gross even for the Egyptians, who worshipped beasts,
reptiles, and vegetables, and which depreciates the value of
his own voluntary offering of himself ; for if a second sacrifice
be needful, it implies that something was wanting in the
first. Pernicious, because such sacrifices tend to reduce
religion to a form, a work wrought by the will of man," and
to give a dispensation to sin to all who can purchase masses
for themselves, either in this life or in the next ; for the
Council of Trent declares him accursed, who shall say that
the sacrifice of the Mass is only a sacrifice of praise and
thanksgiving, or only a commemoration of the sacrifice
performed on the cross, or that it is not propitiatory, or
that it is only profitable to him who takes it, and ought not
to be offered for the living and the dead, for all manner of
sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities.

h De Natura Deorum.

LECTURE XIX.

ARTICLE XXXII.

OF THE MARRIAGE OF PRIESTS.

Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, are not commanded by God's
law, either to vow the estate of single life, or to abstain
from marriage : therefore it is lawful for them, as for all
other Christian men, to marry at their own discretion, as
they shall judge the same to serve better to godliness.

Reason, unprejudiced and unperverted, must acknow-
ledge,, that marriage was the mode designed by our Creator
of continuing our species; and what is prompted by instinct
and approved by reason must be lawful. The Bible ex-
pressly declares it to be a divine institution, and that the
parents of our race were for this very purpose created a male
and a female, from which fact our Saviour decides in favour
of the union of a single pair, and of its indissolubility, and
against polygamy. Notwithstanding, there grew up early in
eastern countries, from the same principle that recommends
and makes a merit of every kind of abstinence and of self-
denial for its own sake, and not as the means to an end, a
notion, that single life was purer and more acceptable to God;
and this maxim of a visionary philosophy soon found its
way into the Church, being sanctioned by the example of
several admired characters of both sexes, panegyrized by the
Wading divines of the age, and apparently deriving coun-
tenance from certain passages of Scripture. The Gnostics,
we learn from Epiphanius, went so far as to forbid marriage

LECTURE XIX.

503

altogether, not for the sake of superior virtue, the ground
taken by the Fathers and ascetic writers in every age, but
as in itself abominable, though instituted by the Lord.
Against that mystery of iniquity*, already at work in his
time, St. Paul's denunciation, of forbidding to marry, and
commanding to abstain from meatsh, appears to have been
levelled, especially as it is connected with the doctrines con-
cerning demons. It may be fairly accommodated to the
Church of Rome, but I conceive only accommodated, as
that Church is so far from condemning matrimony in itself,
that it has exalted it into a sacrament, forbidding it to none
but the ministers of religion, and enjoins abstinence from
certain articles of food only at stated seasons, which is very
different from the positive and universal prohibition of the
Gnostic heretics. The Manichaeans forbade marriage to
the elect, but tolerated it in the auditors. Tertullian, and
Ambrose and other orthodox writers, magnified virginity,
and celibacy, which, through their writings, and the ex-
cessive admiration of hermits and nuns, soon grew to be
considered so meritorious in both sexes, and in all pro-
fessions, that at last it was considered to be the indispensable
duty of the clergy. An attempt was made to enforce it as
early as at the Council of Nice, when it was proposed that
married ministers should put away their wives ; but this
proposal was overruled by the piety, good sense, and
liberality of Paphnutius, an unmarried Egyptian bishop.
Jovinian, an Italian monk in the fourth century, spoke
strongly in favour of a married clergy, and was strongly op-
posed by Jerome, and condemned by Pope Siricius. In the
dark ages, public opinion grew more and more favourable to
celibacy, and convents multiplied both for men and women.
Still the secular clergy, in many instances, resisted and
refused to put away their wives ; but their opponents tri-
umphed, in some countries earlier than in others, ultimately
in all. Under our Saxon ancestors, Dunstan distinguished
himself by his zeal in ejecting the married clergy from
cathedrals and monasteries ; Lanfranc, the Conqueror's
Archbishop of Canterbury, condemned the marriage of
a 2 Thess. ii. 7. b I Tim. iv. 1. 3.

504

LECTURE XIX.

priests; and it was enforced by his successor Anselm. At
the Reformation, the celibacy of the clergy was fully esta-
blished throughout the I^apal dominions, and the result
was found to be so injurious to morality, that even a Pope,
Pius II, who died in A. D. 1464, is remembered for having
said marriage was for great reasons forbidden priests, and
for greater is to be restored to them. Unnatural and un-
reasonable as the restriction now appears to us, much
scandal was no doubt excited even among Protestants by
this departure in their ministers from ancient usage. In
our own country, Queen Elizabeth would not authorize the
marriages of her clergy, which she only endured ; and it was
not till the reign of her successor, that an Act of Parliament
made them legal. In her Injunctions, 1559, she orders, that
no priest shall marry without the consent of his Bishop, two
neighbouring justices, and the bride's parents. Their mar-
riage afforded a specious colour to the assertion of Roman
Catholics, that the Reformers were led to introduce inno-
vations into the Church, from an impatience of the moral
restraints to which they had been accustomed, and found
a burden too heavy to bear. Cranmer, Hooper, and
many more, acted in this respect upon their convictions,
setting an example of marriage; and Luther himself, who
had been a monk, wedded after deliberation a nun, confirm-
ing by his practice the doctrine he had previously main-
tained, that the vow of celibacy was not binding. Under
these circumstances, it is not surprising that an article
justifying the marriage of the Clergy should appear in
most of the Protestant Confessions of Faith, or that it should
be condemned by the Council of Trent. Both the Helvetic
and Augustan Confessions argue the question, and cite the
principal texts in its favour ; and the marriage of the clergy
is warmly defended in the Reformatio Legum ; but our
own Article as usual only asserts it without attempting
to prove. The Westminster Confession considers matri-
mony at length, but the clergy are not named. They
are only comprehended under this general clause. " It is
lawful for all sorts of people to marry, who are able with
judgment to give their consent." " Bishops, Priests, and

LECTURli XIX.

505

Deacons are not commanded by God's law either to vow
the estate of single life, or to abstain from marriage." The
concluding clause was added in 1562. Our only proposi-
tion is, the liberty of ministers to marry if they think it
expedient, avoiding alike the extreme of the Roman Church
which forbids it, and of the Greek which, from an erro-
neous interpretation of the Apostle's injunction, requires it
as a qualification for Ordination, (though the same Church
inconsistently takes its Bishops out of the monastic Order,)
and representing neither matrimony nor celibacy as best
in itself.

Marriage is allowed by all Christians of these days to be
a divine institution, and is declared by the Apostle to the
Hebrews to be honourable in all0. It is then for the ad-
vocates of the celibacy of the clergy to show, that they
form an exception ; and it is a remarkable presumption
against them, that the Jewish office of priests was hereditary,
and that it pleased the Almighty to make regulations re-
specting their marriages. When we consider, that the high
priest of that dispensation was typical of our great High
Priest, and that Aaron's descendants were entitled to the
name, being ordained to offer sacrifice, whereas our clergy
are only ministers who commemorate the all-sufficient
sacrifice made once for all by Him who is the only
Priest in the Christian Church, we cannot suppose a
greater sanctity in them than in the ministers of the
temple ; and if marriage was compatible with the purity
of the latter, nothing less than an express declaration
can convince us that it is forbidden to the former.
Peter, when chosen to be an Apostle, was married ; and
it appears that he continued to live with his wife when
St. Paul wrote to the Corinthians and claimed a right to
marry, and to have his wife maintained by his converts,
though he did not avail himself of it. Philip the Evan-
gelist41, and Aquilae, were married, and are not blamed;
and St. Paul's instructions to Timothy and Titus respecting
Ordination shows that he did not disapprove of a married
clergy. Our Lord declares, that some cannot receive this
e Heb. xiii. 4. * Acts xxi. 0. e ^cis jy^t 2.

506

LECTURE XIX.

saying1 , therefore it can be no general command, and there
is no reservation to ministers. The only portion of Scripture
brought forward on the other side is the first Epistle to the
Corinthians, in which the author appears to recommend
celibacy as preferable to married life. But recommending
is not commanding, and his very recommendation is with
reference to a period of distress. He also allows in the
same chapter, that some ought to marry, and he draws no
distinction between laity and clergy.

If the clergy are not commanded to abstain from marriage,
they cannot be commanded to vow a single life ; and the
making of vows, which it may not be in our power to keep,
and for which we have no promise of divine assistance, is
leading ourselves into temptation. It must then be un-
lawful to take them upon ourselves, or to impose them upon
others.

ARTICLE XXXIII.

OF EXCOMMUNICATE PERSONS, HOW THEY ARE TO BE
AVOIDED.

That person which by open denunciation of the Church is
rightly cut off from the unity of the Church, and excom-
municated, ought to be taken of the whole multitude of the
faithful as an heafhen and publican, until he be openly
reconciled by penance, and received into the Church by a
judge that hath authority thereunto.

The Popes in the plenitude of their power exercised
the right of excommunication in defiance of reason and
equity, not only against offences not of a spiritual nature,
but accompanying it with execrations and revolting circum-
stances, which clearly showed that their object was not the
benefit of the offender, but their own aggrandisement, or
the gratification of their own resentment. The penalties
too inflicted were not merely spiritual, but such as dissolved
the connections and obligations of civil society. They even
f Matt. xix. 12.

££CTURE XIX.

507

proceeded, as La the instance of the Emperor Henry IV.
and our King John, to national interdicts, by which whole
nations, who could not be pretended to be guilty, were put
out of the pale of the Church, and deprived of sacraments
and prayer, on account of the offences of their sovereigns.
This outrage on sense and feeling was too violent to be
long endured ; and such a reaction took place, that now it
is necessary to vindicate excommunication even under the
most aggravated circumstances. The Council of Trent itself
professes to have been taught by experience, that when
rashly denounced and for light offences, it is rather
despised than feared, and produces rather injury than
benefit. In England it is rarely inflicted, and then by our
spiritual Courts; and it has been long a reproach to our
Church, that whatever may be said in praise of its discipline
in theory, there is none in practice. This Article, the only
one upon the subject, maintains the right of excommunica-
tion. There may and have been disputes concerning those
who are to exercise the right, and in what cases it should be
exercised, but the right itself cannot reasonably be called
in question ; for as in the State there is authority to banish
and to inflict penalties, so in the Church or any other society
there must be a power of punishing unworthy members,
and of excluding the incorrigible. The distinction between
a lesser and greater excommunication seems to suit the
differences of offences, and to have prevailed at all times,
the first being an exclusion from sacraments, the second the
cutting off from all intercourse with the faithful, so that
the first had chiefly in view the improvement of the offender,
the second, the edification of the community, The word
" until" shows that the excision is not final, unless the
offender chooses ; his continuance in an excommunicated,
state must be solely owing to his refusing to undergo the
penance to which he is sentenced. Our Lord's direction6,
that when a brother trespasses against another, the injured
party should tell him his fault alone, then before two or
three witnesses, and finally to the church, that is, the
assembly, and in case of the failure of the last appeal, to
I Matt, xviii. Ift.

508

LECTURE XIX.

consider him as a heathen man or a publican, establishes
upon divine authority the right of excommunication. We
have two instances in which it was exercised by St. Paul; in
the first, he orders the Corinthians e to deliver over to Satan
an incestuous professor, that is, to cut him off from the
church, and this was mainly designed for his own benefit.
In the second, he informs Timothy h that he has delivered
unto Satan Hymenaeus and Alexander, that they might
learn not to blaspheme. According to Burnet, this would
be going too far except for a really infallible church, and
he considers the delivery unto Satan as visibly an act of
miraculous power, as the striking persons dead or blind ;
and that therefore the Apostles never reckon this among
the standing functions of the Church, nor do they give any
direction about it. The delivering unto Satan, however,
became the common form of excommunication, and may be
defended as meaning no more in the case of uninspired
men than ejection, since all who are not under Christ's
government, may be considered as the subjects of that evil
spirit, who is described as the god of this world. The com-
mand to Titus', a man that is an heretic after the first and
second admonition reject, shows that false doctrine is a suffi-
cient reason for rejection; but then it must be false doctrine
obstinately persevered in, and such as respect essential and
clear truths. This separation we learn from St. John is
to extend to domestic familiarity. If there come any unto
you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your
house, neither bid him God speed^ : and St. Paul's in-
structions, arising out of the incestuous member of the
Corinthian congregation, extended to all cases of gross
immorality. Put away from yourselves that wicked person :
I have written unto you not to keep company if any man
that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner, with
such an one no not to eat1. The forgiveness and restoration
of the same person"1 in the name and by the authority of
Christ also proves the previous right of expulsion. We

k 1 Cor. v. 5. h 1 Tim. i. 20. ' Titus iii. 10. k 2 John 10. 11.
i 1 Cor. v. 11. ■ 2 Cor. ii. 10.

LECTURE XIX.

509

shall however search in vain for texts to authorize any civil
punishment for spiritual offences. The power of the sword is
the prerogative of the magistrate, and has never been con-
ferred upon the Church. Exclusion from its privileges and
social intercourse with the brethren is the whole amount of
punishment that can be inflicted by spiritual governors, and
even these were enjoined for the benefit of the offender,
as well as the edification of the rest. This is so manifest,
that the most ferocious bigots that persecuted even unto
death, never burned heretics in the name of the Church ;
having condemned them, they consigned them to the judg-
ment of the civil power. The object of excommunication
is not the indulgence of resentment, but the keeping the
congregation pure, and the recovery of the condemned,
who on his ascertained repentance, is to be restored.
Having constantly in view the nope of his recovery, he is,
as Paul enjoins the Thessalonians, not to be counted as
an enemy, but admonished as a brother71. Brethren, if a
man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual restore
such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself,
lest thou also be tempted0.

n 2 Thess. iii. 15. 0 Gal. vi. 1.

510

LECTURE XIX.

ARTICLE XXXIV.

OF THE TRADITIONS OF THE CHURCH.

It is not necessary that traditions and ceremonies be in all
places one, and utterly like; for at all times they have
been divers, and may be changed according to the diversities
of countries, times, and men's manners, so that nothing be
ordained against God's Word, Whosoever through his
private judgment, willingly and purposely, doth openly
break the traditions and ceremonies of the Church, which
be not repugnant to the Word of God, and be ordained
and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked
openly, {that others may fear to do the like,) as he that
offendeth against the common order of the Church, and
hurteth the authority of the magistrate, and woundeth the
consciences of the weak brethren.

Every particular or national Church hath authority to ordain,
change, and abolish, ceremonies or rites of the Church
ordained only by mans authority, so that all things be done
to edifying.

This Article is entitled " Of the Traditions of the Church,"
but the traditions here considered are those not of doctrine,
but of practice. It is maintained, that " they need not be,"
for in fact they never have been, "in all places one, or
utterly like;" it is only required that "they be not ordained
against God's word." We have already shown under the twen-
tieth Article, that " the Church hath power to decree rites
and ceremonies" with this limitation; and we have seen from
the nature of the New Testament, that it was necessary that
the Church should have this power, since we find there no
details of the mode of conducting public worship. And if
the Church has the power, it must be the duty of individuals
to submit in all matters not contradicted by Scripture, for
otherwise it would be impossible not only to preserve peace,
but even to unite in prayer and participation of the Lord's

LECTURE XIX.

511

Supper. The eastern and western Churches have always
differed in many observances, even while under the same
Emperor ; and this appears from two Epistles of Augustine
to Januarius, in which he maintains the right of one diocese
to differ from another in subordinate points : from the first
of which we have already quoted a remarkable passage,
showing that he acknowledged only two Sacraments. He
maintains the rights of dioceses to differ from one another
in subordinate points, as rites and ceremonies ; and he gives
as the best rule for a conscientious Christian, that he ousrht
to follow the practice of the place in which he happens
to be, for what is proved not to be against the faith or
propriety, is to be held indifferent. "A traveller," he
continues, " should observe the customs of the towns he
visits, and not require those of his own country :" and he
tells us, that his mother having consulted Ambrose, he an-
swered, " Do as I do ; when I am here I do not fast upon
Saturdays, when at Rome I do ; and so in whatever Church
you are, keep to its customs." The strict uniformity
of public prayer in the Church of England is unknown to
continental Protestants or the Kirk of Scotland; in the
latter, though they have a directory as a general guide, the
ministers are allowed to put up petitions in their own
words, and according to their own discretion. The Council
of Trent has fixed the Roman formularies, but anciently
there was more national liberty. Thus the Gallican Missal
prevailed in France, till Charlemagne substituted for it the
Roman ; and the Milan diocese used that called after its
celebrated Prelate the Ambrosian ; and in our country there
were several, of which the most extensively used was that of
Salisbury. The Article further maintains, that every parti-
cular or national church hath authority to ordain and to
change these ceremonies, with the reservation of the sacra-
ments instituted by Christ ; and certainly, whatever power
the Church once possessed of legislating, she still retains ;
since no generation can have the right to enact irrevoc-
able laws. General Councils have been thought by some
to have had this power, but in fact they wrere not general
in the proper sense of the word, for they were only those

5X2

LECTURE XIX.

of one empire, and when that empire ceased and was broken
into independent states, the Churches of these states owed
no allegiance to that of Rome, although the claim was
made and allowed; but each Church has a right to act within
itself as an entire and independent body.

The fourth book of the Ecclesiastical Polity is an interest-
ing examination of the question of rites and ceremonies, and
a vindication of the "moderate kind of reformation which the
Church of England hath taken," in preference to the other
more extreme and rigorous, which certain Churches else-
where have better liked. I select from it the following remarks.
Hooker inclines to the charitable speech of Augustine; "Let
the faith of the whole Church, how wide soever it hath spread
itself, be always one, although the unity of belief be
famous for variety of certain ordinances, whereby that which
is rightly believed, suffereth no kind of impediment."
Calvin goeth further: "As concerning rites, let the sentence
of Augustine take place, which leave th it free unto all
churches to receive their own custom. Yea, sometimes it
profiteth and is expedient that there be differences, lest
men should think that religion is tied to outward cere-
monies. Always provided that there be not any emulation,
nor that churches delighted with novelty affect to have
that which others have not. Seeing that the law of God
doth not prescribe all particular ceremonies which the
Church may use, and that it is not possible that the law of
nature and of reason should direct all churches to the same
thing ; the way to establish the same things indifferent
throughout them all, must needs be the judgment of some
judicial authority. And because such authority is too
much to be granted unto any one mortal man ; there yet
remaineth the verdict of the whole Church set down in
some General Council. It is urged, that uniformity may
be maintained, if where we have better ceremonies than
others, they shall be bound to follow us; and we them,
where their's are better ? But who is to decide ? " The
east Church did think it better to keep Easter day after
the manner of the Jews, the west Church better to do other-
wise: the Greek Church judgeth it worse to use unleavened

LECTURE XIX.

513

bread in the Eucharist, the Latin leavened : one Church
esteemeth it not so good to receive it sitting as standing,
another Church not so good standing as sitting. There being
on the one side probable motives as well as on the other,
we are not a whit the nearer for that they have hitherto
said. They hold that the fewer should yield to " the elder
and the more," and conclude, that " our Church should
conform, as a younger sister, to the earlier churches of the
Reformation." But this is an example which he shows we
are not bound to follow ; and he maintains the right of
our national Church, " to keep the mean between the two
extremes, of too much stiffness in refusing, and of too much
easiness in admitting any variation from it°."

ARTICLE XXXV.

OF THE HOMILIES.

The second Book of Homilies, the several titles whereof we
have joined under this Article, doth contain a godly and
wholesome doctrine, and necessary for these times, as doth
the former Book of Homilies, which were set forth in the
time of Edward the Sixth ; and therefore we judge them to
be read in Churches by the Ministers, diligently and dis-
tinctly, that they may be understanded of the people.

Of the Names of the Homilies.

1 Of the Right Use of the Church. 11 Of Alms-doing.

2 Against Peril of Idolatry. 12 Of the Nativity of Christ.

3 Of repairing and keeping clean of 13 Of the Passion of Christ.

Churches. 14 Of the Resurrection of Christ.

4 Of Good Works : first of Fasting. 15 Of the worthy receiving of the Sa-

5 AgainstGluttonyandDrunkenness. cranient of the Body and Blood

6 Against Excess of Apparel. of Christ.

7 Of Prayer. 16 Of the Gifts of the Holy Ghost.

8 Of the place and time of Prayer. 17 For the Rogation days.

9 That Common Prayers and Sacra- IB Of the state of Matrimony.

ments ought to be ministered in 19 Of Repentance,
a known tongue. 20 Against Idleness.

10 Of the reverend estimation of God's 21 Against Rebellion.
Word.

Preaching may be regarded as one of the fruits of the
Reformation, for in the preceding ages it had been almost
confined to Lent and the great festivals. It is still com-

0 Preface to the revised Book of Common Prayer.
L 1

514

LECTURE XIX.

paratively rare in Roman Catholic countries, and Dissenters
are accused of going too far into the opposite extreme, and
of giving to it an undue proportion over the more essential
part of divine service, the worship of God. We may easily
conceive, that at the period of our Reformation, which
originated, as far as doctrines were concerned, in the zeal
of a few of the superior clergy, it was difficult, from the
incapacity of many of the parochial ministers, and from the
attachment of others to the old religion, to find persons com-
petent to preach Gospel truth. It became therefore necessary
to provide sermons for them to read to their congregations ; and
these in imitation of those of the Fathers are called Homilies,
from a Greek word meaning a familiar discourse. We may
infer from the Archbishop's Address to the Convocation of
1541, and the resolution of the Upper House in the follow-
ing year, that there was in Henry's reign an intention, " to
make Homilies for the stay of such errors as were then by
ignorant preachers sparkled among the people but the
volume was not ready for distribution till after his son's
accession. The publication was the cause of great rejoicing
to the Protestants at Strasburg ; and Bucer, then a minister
there, addressed on the occasion a gratulatory epistle to the
Church of England.

The second book of Homilies, the titles of which are here
enumerated, appeared in 1560, early in the reign of Elizabeth,
but had been in a great degree prepared before her brother's
death, and is promised in his Injunctions. The Article
orders them to be read in churches ; and requires us to
approve of them, as containing a godly and wholesome
doctrine, and necessary for these times, that is, the times in
which they were composed. In the present age, when we
have a highly educated clergy, capable from their own
resources of instructing and edifying the people, they
are no longer so important, and though very valuable,
especially the doctrinal ones, both intrinsically, and as
showing the opinion upon contested points of our Reformers,
they are now scarcely ever heard in the church. They are
still found, however, to be very useful to the lower classes
of society, to whom from their antiquated style resembling

LECTURE XIX.

515

that of the liturgy, and our version of the Scriptures, they
are more intelligible than modern tracts, and are consequently
more acceptable ; and, through the exertions of the Prayer
Book and Homily Society, they have obtained a considerable
circulation. As the art of reading is now so common, and
they are shorter than modern sermons, it seems better to
recommend them to the laity for private perusal, than to
ministers to supersede their own.

During the long religious apathy and ignorance into which
the Church had fallen, they had sunk into comparative
oblivion ; but as piety and orthodoxy have revived, they are
again studied, and, as they deserve to be, admired. No one
who has read them, and believes in the leading doctrines of
the Reformation, will be unwilling to sign this Article.
Still, as fallible compositions, they have defects, and even
mistakes ; nor can a reasonable person suppose, that the
approbation here required, pledges us to an entire and full
assent to every proposition therein contained, as if it were
an article of faith. The doctrine we must believe to be
godly and wholesome, but occasionally the arguments
brought forward may be insufficient, and some of the
assertions erroneous. This Bishop Burnet allows : and yet
he thinks, that as they so often charge the church of Rome
with idolatry, no one who doth not believe the truth of that
charge, can sign the Article with a good conscience. In
this he appears to me overscrupulous, and certainly con-
tradicts his previous observation, that the approbation is
not to be stretched so far, as to carry in it a special assent
to every particular. It is extraordinary, that the history of
our Reformation is so imperfect, that the authorship of these
Homilies can be only conjectured. We assign them with
probability to Cranmer as the principal writer, and infer, that
he had the assistance of Latimer and Ridley. The second
Book is mainly attributed to the learned and able champion
of Protestantism, the author of the Apology for the Church
of England ; but that on Adultery, is the composition of
Becon, a popular divine of the day.

Since the compilation of these Lectures, my friend Dr.
Cardwell has largely contributed to the illustration of the

l 1 2

516

LECTURE XIX.

early history of our reformed Church, by several valuable
reprints of scarce documents. Among them is Taverner's
Postils on the Epistles and Gospels, in the year 1540. He
informs us in an interesting preface, that though not entitled
to rank with the Homilies, with Fox's Acts and Monuments,
the Paraphrase of Erasmus, or the Apology of Bishop
Jewel, all of which, though in different degrees, are books
of authority ; it obtained from collateral circumstances a
degree of sanction, deserving to be compared to a decree
of Convocation, or a mandate of the Crown. The Exhort-
ation upon the Passion of Christ, and the Sermon of the
Resurrection, were adopted by Archbishop Parker without
any alterations of importance, and have become our Homilies
for Good Friday, and for Easter-day. A very remarkable
Sermon against the authority of Rome, appointed for the
first Sunday in Lent, was taken out of this book by that
prelate, and is found among the papers bequeathed by him
to his College. We may infer, adds Dr. Cardwell, that the
Archbishop had detached it for the purpose of sending it to
the press, but was afterwards diverted from his purpose. It
is not improbable that he was prevented by the Queen, and
that in place of that sermon, she directed him to supply the
Homilies against Wilful Rebellion, two of which contain such
invectives against the papal see as she was willing to allow.
These were not published till 1571.

The Homilies I consider to have a peculiar value, as
authorized Commentaries upon the Articles by those who
formed and revised them, and who could not have been
ignorant of their real meaning. To us of this distant age,
they may be from their brevity sometimes obscure ; and we
must be aware of the tendency of preconceived opinions to
distort the judgment, and to discover in a document which
commands assent, a sense that was never intended. Cranmer
puts this clue into our hands in summing up the short
Article on Justification, with the hint, that "it is more
largely expressed in the Homily." They also instruct the
preacher rightly to divide the word of truth, and make the
profound truths which unite in the accomplishment of man's
salvation, promote the edification of the least educated of
his congregation.

LECTURE XX.

ARTICLE XXXVII.

OF THE CIVIL MAGISTRATES.

The King's Majesty hath the chief power in this realm of
England, and other his dominions, unto whom the chief
government of all estates of this realm, whether they be
ecclesiastical or civil, in all causes doth appertain, and is
not, nor ought to be, subject to any foreign jurisdiction.

Where ice attribute to the King's Majesty the chief govern-
ment, by which titles we understand the minds of some
slanderous folks to be offended ; we give not to our Princes
the ministering either of God's Word, or of the Sacraments,
the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by
Elizabeth our Queen do most plainly testify ; but that only
prerogative, which we see to have been given always to all
godly Princes in holy Scriptures by God himself; that is,
that they should rule all states and degrees committed to
their charge by God, whether they be ecclesiastical or
temporal, and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn
and evil-doers.

The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this realm of
England.

The laws of the realm may punish Christ tan men with death,

for heinous and grievous offences.
It is lawful for Christian men, at the commandment of the

magistrate, to wear weapons, and serve i/i the wars.

Subjection to the higher powers as ordained by God, and
to subordinate ministers, though they were aliens from the

518

LECTURE XX.

faith, is commanded by St. Paula; and the king, (as the Roman
Emperor was called in the provinces,) whom St. Peterb calls
upon those to whom he wrote to honour, was a heathen.
The New Testament is silent upon the mutual obligations
of sovereigns and subjects, and we must learn them from
the Old, or deduce our duty from general principles, regu-
lated by Christian experience, exercised to discern both good
and evil. It is well known, that the Church had increased
and prospered under persecution, or at the best neglect, till,
as Tertullian boasts in his Apology, Christians were in the
camp, in the forum, and in the senate, and left the heathen
only their temples. The Church, grown into an empire
within an empire, was seated on the throne by Constantine,
who while he endowed it with honours and privileges,
presided in its first General Council ; and succeeding Em-
perors, while they bestowed upon it liberal gifts, made laws
which regulated ecclesiastical concerns. Warburton has
adopted a Roman Catholic Archbishop's ingenious theory
of an alliance between Church and State, in which each
party is supposed to make concessions in return for ad-
vantages. It is plausible, but unsubstantial, since they
are not rival powers contracting as he represents them a
treaty ; but the same individuals are reckoned to one or
the other body, as we consider them in a civil or eccle-
siastical point of view ; and in a country in which there
were no dissenters from the establishment, they would be
identical. Scripture does not touch the subject. Inde-
pendence of the State claiming no assistance, but relying
on the voluntary principle, and tendering no allegiance, is
quite a modern notion, and would have been rejected as a
sinful disowning of the Deity in our corporate capacity, by
the early puritans, and by Owen and all the eminent non-
conformists. In our time the notion is no longer confined
to Dissenters, but there are even Churchmen who regret that
their own form of faith has been established, and believe that
it is cramped in its exertions by the fetters, not of a lay
tyranny, but of a constitutional supremacy, which till now,
with the exception of Papists, and of extinct fanatics, as the
a Rom. xiii. 1. b 1 Peter ii. 17.

LECTURE XX.

519

original Anabaptists and the family of love, has been regarded
as the safeguard of religion and the duty of a Christian
governor. We at least, who are by law secured in the enjoyment
of a scriptural liturgy, and of a form of sound words delivered
down to us in these Articles of Faith, have no reason to
sigh for the imaginary blessing of a nominal independence,
which would probably soon degenerate into the government
of an ecclesiastical oligarchy, while the State's resumption
of the emoluments and honours which it bestowed, would
banish our bishops from the great council of the nation, would
force the poor, who have now the Gospel preached to them
gratuitously, to contribute to the support of their Ministers,
and thinly peopled rural districts, instead of benefiting by
the services of a Rector or Curate, would depend, as before
the formation of parishes, on the occasional preaching of an
itinerating Missionary. This would be indeed deserting
the vantage ground inherited from the piety of remote
ages, and discarding privileges which early believers would
have rejoiced in possessing. In embracing Christianity, we
devote ourselves, and faculties, and means, to Him, whose we
are and ivhom we serve ; and the same obligations bind the
sovereign and the citizen. So Christians have thought and
acted in every country from the time of Constantine ; and
so reasonable is the thought, that the Missionaries of the
London Society who repudiated connection with the State
at home, when it pleased God that they should convert the
isles of the Pacific, forgetting their voluntary principle,
gladly availed themselves of the fostering patronage of the
king of Tahiti. If we could realize our beautiful prayer,
and " be all of one heart and one soul, united in one
holy bond of truth and peace, of faith and charity," the idea
of separation would never occur ; and we should labour,
not only as individuals, but in our public capacity, by
directing the national resources into this channel, through
the endowment of schools and churches, and the other
suggestions of an enlightened philanthropy, to strengthen
and to extend the Redeemer's kingdom. Happily the
idea is likely to be restricted to a Christian Atalantis or
Utopia, for which imaginary state it is fitter than for this
imperfect world. The recent disruption of the Church of

520

LECTURE XX.

Scotland proves, that though an establishment may be in-
jured by a large secession of pious and influential preachers,
successors can be found to occupy the manses, and com-
petently to minister in the churches which they have from
mistaken principle abandoned. I say mistaken, for they
were not called upon to surrender an iota of the truth ; and
surely patronage belongs not of right to a spiritual king-
dom, which has neither gold nor silver, and is not out of
this world.

There are u slanderous folks" now, as well as in the
reign of Elizabeth, who are offended by the Supremacy
which this Article assigns to her Majesty ; but our
Reformers were too wise and pious to ascribe to their lay
Sovereign the office of his Vicar, which they had refused to
the Pope. The original article stated, that the King of
England is supreme head in earth, next under Christ; and
as the title was disliked, especially in a female reign, the
present reservation of chief power to him was substituted.
The explanatory clause declares, that by this expression we
give not any spiritual office to the Sovereign, and refers to
the Injunctions lately set forth, which state, that her Majesty
doth not challenge any other authority than 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 with these her realms, either ecclesiastical or
temporal, so that no foreign power shall or ought to have
any superiority over them ; and they go on to say, that
this is the whole of the supremacy required ; and the
Article states, that the only prerogative conferred is such as
has been always given to all godly princes in holy Scrip-
ture by God himself.

Such a supremacy I cannot see how any reasonable
person can deny, who allows of any connection between
Church and State ; and will not maintain, that the former
is to govern the latter. Even an enlightened Roman
Catholic would grant that the papal power is only spiritual,
and that the temporalities of prelates, that is, their honours
and estates, are derived from the civil power. From the
time of the Conqueror till the Reformation, there was a
perpetual conflict between the See of Rome and our ancient

LECTURE XX.

521

Kings ; and law as well as reason was on the side of the
latter, and many statutes were enacted declaratory of the
national rights. The Popes, when in the height of power,
went so far as to claim the decision even of capital offences,
in which the clergy were concerned ; but no exemption from
civil jurisdiction is even hinted in the New Testament ;
obedience to the civil powers is enjoined to all, and the
clergy are also subjects as well as ministers, bound therefore
for conscience sake to submit to the Sovereign, and those
in authority under him in temporal concerns. Even General
Councils we have seen were convened by the Roman
Emperors ; and we find, as intimated in the Article, that
in the Jewish Theocracy, though the temple services were
of divine institution, the kings, not only David and Solomon,
who might be presumed to have had a special commission
from God, but Hezekiah, Jehoshaphat, and Josiah, gave
directions and orders respecting religion.

The Article proceeds to say, " the Bishop of Rome hath
no jurisdiction in this realm of England." Our Saviour
solemnly declared, that his kingdom was not of this world,
and no passage can be shown that conferred upon his
Apostles any but spiritual power. The jurisdiction con-
sequently of a Bishop must be of that kind, and the
exercise of it must be limited to his own diocese, which
alone is committed to his charge. The only way therefore in
which the Bishop of Rome, the once capital of the world,
can claim any authority over our prelates, must be as the
Vicar of God, or, as he calls himself, Universal Bishop; and
this arrogant demand has been fully and elaborately dis-
proved. In a brief exposition like the present, it is enough
to refer to the New Testament to show, that Peter himself
never claimed or received any greater authority than the
other Apostles ; and that they were not conferred by the
celebrated text, upon this rock I will build my Church? , even
if we allow the rock to be the person instead of the con-
fession of Peter, is plain, from the fact that the twelve
disputed to the last which among them should be the
greatest. The Council at Jerusalem, and several passages in
t Matt. xvi. 18.

522

LECTURE XX.

the book of Acts, equally confute any conclusion that might
be drawn from the charge to him after the Resurrection,
Feed my sheep, which seems to be only confirming him in
the office which his desertion might appear to have vacated.
St. Paul withstood Peter to the face, and claims to be not a
whit behind the very chiefest of the Apostles Cyprian1
addresses the Bishop of Rome as a colleague and a brother,
and says, that all apostles and bishops were equal ; and
the first General Council declares that the Bishops of
Alexandria and Antioch have according to custom the same
authority over the churches subordinate to them, as that
of Rome had over those in the capital of the empire. This
power only claims to rest upon custom, and is considered
as liable to the decision of a General Council. It is re-
markable that Pope Gregory, under wiiose Pontificate, and
through whose zeal in sending Augustine to England, our
Saxon ancestors were converted, was so far from claiming
spiritual preeminence, that he declared, that he who assumed
(as the Patriarch of Constantinople had done) the title of
Universal Bishop, was the forerunner of Antichrist; and
as he renounced all right to it himself, so he affirmed that
none of his predecessors had ever aspired to such supremacy.
Whatever power the See of Rome possessed as a Patriarchate,
was only a regulation of the Roman Empire, and when that
empire was broken into independent states, these states
were no more bound by its ecclesiastical than its civil con-
stitution, though from the force of habit, while there was
a German Emperor beyond the Alps, the Bishop of Rome
continued to be head of the western Church.

Having determined the authority of the Sovereign as
supreme in all causes and over all persons ecclesiastical as
well as civil, our Church here, in opposition to the scruples
of others, maintains the lawfulness of capital punishments
and of war ; and in the two last Articles, of property and
of oaths. A tender conscience which hesitates to conform
to general usage, has been often influenced by a desire
of attaining to perfection, and this desire may spring from a
mild and gentle, or from a harsh austere temper, the former

n 2 Cor. xi. 5. ' Ep. lxxxi.

LECTURE XX.

523

intent upon the good that may result from a change, the
latter dwelling more upon the selfishness and other faults
that obstruct it. It must be owned, that capital punish-
ments, war, and oaths, indicate the imperfection of our
social system. If we were all as we ought to be, and if
we had among us no " stubborn" persons nor " evil-doers,"
civil government itself might cease, and certainly wars and
capital punishments ; and if we could always rely on the
veracity of men, oaths would not be required. In our
actual condition, they may be plausibly represented as evils
by those who forget, or purposely keep out of sight, that
they prevent greater. Every scruple proceeds from some
misconception of Scripture, and generally from too literal
an interpretation. The Sermon on the Mount is cited, as
prohibiting all resistance to evil by states as well as by
individuals, and even legal oaths. The same scruples are
not common to all; some, like the Friends, who object to
war and oaths, allow of private property ; but in all over-
scrupulous persons the conscience is in an unhealthy state ;
and we can only pray with the Apostle, that their love may
abound more in all judgment, that they may approve things
that differ, and study to have their senses exercised to dis-
cern both good and evil\

Thou shalt not kill, is one of the prohibitions of the
Decalogue ; and putting to death a being formed in the
image of God, and sending him to his final account, is so
aweful an act, that it is not surprising that some should
have called in question the right of society to command what
all allow would be deeply criminal in a private individual.
The right, however, to exact blood for blood, that is, to
put the murderer to death, is almost universally conceded ;
and seems to be expressly granted by God to Noah after
the flood, together with permission to eat animal food. At
the hand of man, at the hand of every man's brother, will I
require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man
shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God made he man1.
It is observable, writes Scott in his Commentary, that the
reason given for this punishment is the affront to God,
not the injury to man. Several are of opinion, that ex-
s Phil. i. 9, 10. Heb. iv. 14. ■ Gen. ix. 5, 6.

524

LECTURE XX.

ecution for any other offence is forbidden ; yet no believer
in the divine authority of the Mosaic code, which condemns
to death other criminals beside murderers, can suppose that
capital punishments are incompatible with the essential
principles of justice and mercy. This precedent seems a
full justification of such punishments under the Gospel,
though the legislature that has imbibed the genuine spirit
of Christianity, will be tender of human life, and will have
recourse to severe laws only when milder have failed.
St. Paul admits, that the civil magistrate hath the power of
life and death, by saying, that he beareth not in vain the
sword, clearly the sword of justice, and describes him as the
minister of God for this very purpose, a revenger to execute
wrath upon him that doeth eviln. He also in his defence
before Felix allows, that there were offences worthy of death".
Nor does Christian charity interfere with the penalty ; for
though an individual may forgive the greatest offence as
far as he is personally concerned, the sin against him is also
an offence against society, which he cannot remit.

The precepts in the Sermon on the Mount which forbid
us to resist evil, are generally taken to mean, not that we
are bound to fulfil them literally in each particular instance,
but to cultivate a peaceful and forgiving disposition. They
are directions to us as individuals, and not as members
of society; and whatever arguments will justify the Magis-
trate in protecting the lives and properties of citizens, from
the ill-disposed among their fellow-subjects, will hold good
against foreign invaders. Defensive war seems as lawful
as the infliction of capital punishment ; and if we are once
engaged in defensive war, it will scarcely be possible to
avoid offensive measures. But those who commence a war
incur a deep responsibility; and no moralist will consider
one, that can be safely and honourably avoided, to be just
or innocent. The early Christians we know served in the
armies of pagan emperors without any misgiving of con-
science; and Augustine y, arguing against the Manichaean
Faustus, calls soldiers not homicides, but ministers of the
law, defenders of the public safety. The Psalmist2 blesses
God for teaching his hands to war, and his fingers to fight.

■ Bom. xiii. 4. * Acts xxv. 11. > xxii. lxxiv. z Ps. cxliy.

LECTURE XX.

525

John the Baptist, in requiring the soldiers who came to
his baptism to be content with their wages, permits them
to retain their profession ; nor is Cornelius required by
St. Peter to retire from the army.

We think that the sword which the Magistrate beareth not
in vain, may be conscientiously unsheathed to protect national
interests as well as private property; to insure national
safety as well as individual security ; and as much of national
safety rests on character, it may be, to vindicate national
honour. And as nations find it convenient, and an economy
of bloodshed, to carry on war by the agency of a separate
class, there appears to be no well-founded objection to
the profession of arms. The right of warfare is clearly
deducible from the inherent right of defence, which every
individual brings with him into the world, which is ex-
panded and generalized when men form societies, and which
is methodised and applied according to the convenience and
judgment of the social union; but this excepted indulgence
in favour of defence failing, the original prohibition, Thou
shalt not kill, returns in full force.

ARTICLE XXXVIII.

OF CHRISTIAN MEN'S GOODS, WHICH ARE NOT COMMON.

The riches and goods of Christians are not common, as
touching the right, title, and possession of the same, as
certain Anabaptists do falsely boast. Notwithstanding,
every man ought, of such things as he possesseth, liberally
to give alms to the poor, according to his ability.

This Article opposes the error of Anabaptists, who con-
tended for a community of goods; and were strongly opposed
by Luther and the other continental Reformers. It was
thought proper, as Christians are accountable for the use
of riches to God, though not to society, to add, that
" every man ought of such things as he possesseth liberally

526

LECTURE XX.

to give alms to the poor, according to his ability." It
might have had the appearance of harshness and selfishness
to insist upon the right of property, without at the same
time referring in any degree to the proper use of it ; and it
was desirable to remind the rich of what they are too apt
to forget, that though in duties of imperfect obligation, as
they are called, they are not accountable to man, they are
the trustees of God. It answers also the purpose of proving
the first part of the Article, for the exhortations to alms-
giving to all men, especially to the household of faith, with
which the New Testament abounds, presuppose the exist-
ence and lawfulness of private property. Arguments against
the abuse of any thing imply that there is a proper use of
it; while our Saviour in the strongest language declares the
danger of riches, he does not prohibit the possession of
them; and St. Paul's advice to rich men is not to renounce
them, but to guard against the temptations that beset their
owners3; not to be high-minded, nor to trust in them, but to
do good with them, and to be rich in good works. Giving
and lending, and all the distinctions of society which the
Gospel acknowledges, imply property. St. James b pre-
supposes traffic ; Paul c in the Ephesians forbids stealing,
and as a motive to industry, urges that it will furnish
property out of which a man can give ; and his remark,
that if any man provide not for his own, and specially for
those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse
than an infidel*, shows, that there are claims upon property
of justice as well as of benevolence, and of course prove the
possession of it to be permitted. Under the present con-
stitution of society consisting of masters and servants,
of the governed and of governors, which the Bible recog-
nises by pointing out their respective duties, and declaring
the powers that be are ordained of God, property must
unavoidably exist; and as it has been often justly observed,
if at any given period it was equalized, the difference of
ability, of prudence, and of character in men, and in the
circumstances of their lives, would be continually repro-
ducing inequality. It is true that the abolition of property
» 1 Tim. vi. 17. h Junes iv. 8. e Epli. iv. 28- d 1 Tim. v. 8.

LECTURE XX.

527

would do away with some temptations, but it would intro-
duce other evils; it would remove the great inducement to
industry, and prevent the virtues both of the rich and the
poor from developing themselves. The God of grace is
also the God of Providence ; it cannot therefore be sup-
posed that his word can be in opposition to the arrange-
ments of human nature and of society. The only passage
that can be urged is the state of the Primitive Church,
when all that believed were together, arid had all things
common, and sold their possessions and goods, and parted
them to all men as every man had need6. Yet this very
history shows, that this sacrifice of property was voluntary,
and was not required by the Apostles; for Peter inter-
rogating Ananias, says, whiles it remained was it not thine
own, and after it was sold was it not in thine own power'? It
was probably only temporary in that congregation, and we
know did not prevail in others, whose example would be of
equal authority. Thus the disciples at Antioch, every man
according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the
brethren in Judcea*; and St. Paul's instruction to the Galatians
and Corinthians, that upon the first day of the week every
one should lay by him in store as God hath prospered himh, is
a sufficient proof that he did not consider the conduct in this
respect of the believers of Jerusalem as a model of imita-
tion to the churches of his own planting. A few fanatics
alone have maintained the unlawfulness of property; many
persons however in the Roman Church have considered the
renunciation of it as a council of perfection ; and hence the
vow of voluntary poverty, which is deemed, though not a
necessary duty, meritorious. It is said that the celebrated
St. Francis was so struck by our Lord's advice to the young
man to sell all that he had, that he literally acted upon it ;
yet we have no reason to think that it was meant for more
than a touchstone of sincerity. Peter, though he followed
our Lord, had still a house1; and the right which St. Paul
claims k of a maintenance for the clergy shows, that he did
not consider poverty as a duty in them.

e Acts ii. 44, 4f>. «■ Acts v. 4. B Acts xi. 20. 1 Cor. xvi. 1, 2.

1 Matt. mi. 14. k 1 Tim. v. 18.

528

LECTURE XX.

ARTICLE XXXIX.

OF A CHRISTIAN MAN'S OATH.

As we confess that vain and rash swearing is forbidden
Christian men by our Lord Jesus Christ, and James his
Apostle, so we judge, that Christian religion doth not pro-
Mbit, but that a man may swear when the Magistrate
requireth, in a cause of faith and charity, so it be done
according to the prophet's teaching, in justice, judgment,
and truth.

Solemn oaths taken in obedience to authority are here
declared to be not forbidden by the Gospel, but they must
be taken, as the Prophet teaches us, in justice, judgment, and
charity. This is a reference to the fourth chapter of Jere-
miah, which is thought to relate to the age of the Messiah.
And thou shalt swear, The Lord liveth, in truth, in judgment,
and in righteousness ; and the nations shall bless themselves
in him, and in him shall they glory. The text is also a
justification of the practice, as well as a guide to the
manner, of taking an oath ; and, as Scott upon the place
observes, the constant mention of swearing as an act, and a
part of true religious worship, which in some places is
expressly commanded, constitutes a full proof, that they
who understand certain passages in the New Testament, as
indiscriminately prohibiting all oaths, lie under a mistake,
for God could never have commanded that which is essen-
tially evil. An oath is a solemn appeal to Him : it implies
in its very nature then a belief in his knowledge, his power,
and providence, and is an act of religion. The writer to
the Hebrews calls it an end of all strife1, and its utility is so
great, that under some form or other it has been employed
in the administration of justice in every country. We find
it customary with the Patriarchs"1, and it is frequently
commanded in the Law. The accused, when called upon by
1 Heb. vi. 16. . ,n Gen. xxiv. 3.

LECTURE XX.

529

the competent authority, was required to answer, under the
penalty of perjury"; and our Lord himself when adjured by
the high priest, though he had continued silent till then,
acknowledged the obligation of his oath, by declaring that he
was, what he was said to be, the Son of God0. The reason of
the thing, and our Lord's example, will justify the practice,
and silence every Christian objector, unless it can be shown
that he swore as under the Mosaic law, but had forbidden
the custom to Christians. So improbable a supposition
ought to rest upon some plain and decisive text, especially
when we find continual appeals for his sincerity to God,
that is, in fact, oaths, in the writings of his inspired
disciple Paul. As God is true, our word towards you
was not yea or nay p. I call God for a record upon my souh.
There are two passages in the New Testament, the Sermon
on the Mount, and one in the Epistle of St. James, who
evidently had that discourse in view, that have satisfied
Friends, like the early Baptists, of the unlawfulness of oaths.
Of this, as of many such interpretations, we may venture to
say, that it errs from too rigid attention to the letter, and the
neglect of the context. Both are noticed in our Article,
but explained of vain and rash swearing, which few will
deny is their purport. Let your communication be yea, yea,
nay, nay, shows that our Lord speaks of ordinary conver-
sation; they evidently are also voluntary oaths, whereas
judicial ones are compulsory. The object of the Sermon
on the Mount is to correct the false glosses of the Pharisees.
They taught, that men should not forswear themselves, but
perform their oaths to the Lord. Our Saviour's command
is, swear not at all; and the real meaning probably is, the
prohibition of vows. The candid and attentive reader must
at once perceive, that these passages do not condemn oaths in
a court of justice. The reverence for the Deity, which leads
us to swear by his name in a cause of faith or charity, will
prevent our appeal to him on trifling occasions, lest we
should fall into the condemnation of those who take his
name in vain.

n Leyit- v. 1. o Matt. xxvi. 63, 64. v 2 Cor. i. 18.

i 2 Cor. i. 23.

M m

530

LECTURE XX.

This Exposition, which opened with affirming the exist-
ence of the Triune Jehovah, after asserting the Protestant
principle, that the Bible is the sole rule of faith, proceeded
to state the scheme of man's salvation, and has closed
with a review of his relation to Church and State. My
Lectures are finished; but I cannot dismiss you without
adverting to that gracious Providence, which has by extra-
ordinary means perfected our Reformation. Both the men,
and the age in which they accomplished their noble under-
taking, call for a grateful acknowledgment. The men who
were to restore the fabric which Cranmer had raised, but
was then in ruins, had been trained in the school of
adversity in foreign lands, and especially in Zurich, where
they found a wise counsellor in Bullinger ; and they laboured
to render this Confession as comprehensive as was com-
patible with what they esteemed essential truth. Coming
after the German Reformers, they borrowed largely from
their professions of faith, and have provided us with a
fuller and more systematic statement of dogmatic Theology.
How contracted was the sovereignty of Elizabeth, reigning
only over the southern division of our island, compared
with that of the vast colonial empire of Victoria, stretching
from the western shore of America to China, upon which it
has been said without a figure, that the sun never sets !
Her London could bear no comparison in population or
wealth with our Manchester or Liverpool ; and the intel-
ligence and knowledge which now pervade the community,
were then confined to a limited higher circle. Our Articles
were accepted seemingly without a discussion by a sub-
missive Synod ; while the laity apparently deemed divinity
without their province ; and had Parliament shown a dis-
position to give an opinion, its voice would probably have
been silenced by the Queen. Now all denominations enjoy
not only toleration, but liberty ; laity as well as clergy think
themselves competent to determine religious controversies;
and though I believe that piety and orthodoxy are more
influential than they have ever been before, there is also a
manifest tendency towards Romanism on the one hand, and
on the other to latitudinarianism and scepticism, if not to a

LECTURE XX.

531

refined and subtle infidelity under the disguise of rational
Christianity. If then the delicate task of drawing up
Articles of Faith had been left for such an age, it could
hardly have been accomplished in so satisfactory a manner.

In conclusion, let me warn you against an exclusive study
of these Articles, or of any brief compendiums of tenets, or
even of more elaborate bodies of divinity. These synthe-
tical arrangements are most valuable, as the condensed
result of the reading of men who have deeply studied the
volume in which, as in a mine, all we can know of God
or of the salvation of man is deposited. They are aids to
memory ; but they ought not to supersede our own investi-
gation. They instruct, but they cannot edify. From their
very nature they must be dry, and are to some repulsive.
They are to the Bible what skeletons or exhibitions of the
nervous or vascular system stripped of the clothing of
flesh and skin are to the living body animated by a soul.
The word, like the world, of the same wise as well as all-
mighty Author, appears at first view from its variety a maze
without a plan; and the uninstructed enquirer, in commenc-
ing his study of it, feels like the naturalist, who would
rather acquaint himself with plants as grouped in a botanic
garden, or with minerals arranged in a cabinet according to
some useful though imperfect system, than as found in their
localities in apparent confusion. But with these Articles as
a guide, we shall discover in seeming disorder a concealed
design in the Bible, to bring before the mind in sundry
ways revealed truth; and by this repetition, while it satisfies
the intellect, to impress it upon the heart. The Homilies
direct us in this course, by beginning with " A fruitful
Exhortation to the reading of holy Scripture," followed
by discourses " on the misery and on the salvation of all
mankind," and "of the true and lively faith," which worketh
by love. Under such guidance, and with prayer that the
Lord would open his eyes to see the wondrous things of his
law, the student will discover in the word a lantern unto Ms
feet and a lamp unto his path. He will find that he has more
understanding than his teachers, and God's testimonies being
his study, they will become the very joy of his hearty sweeter

532

LECTURE XX.

than honey, and dearer to him than thousands of gold and
silver.

It is the glory of our Church, that while she adheres to
the decrees of the first four General Councils, and retains
the three ancient Creeds, she accepts them, not upon the
authority of fallible divines, but because " they may be
proved by most certain warrants of holy Scripture." That
Scripture is undervalued by the enthusiast, who seeks for
illumination within himself, and by the superstitious, who dis-
trusts it, and while he allows it to be inspired, thinks it needs
to be guarded from abuse, by human interpretation. By
the infidel it is rejected with scorn; and the increasing
attachment to this best gift of God, which has strengthened
with reviving piety, and not content with selfish enjoyment,
has given it an unprecedented circulation in almost every
land and tongue, has provoked the spleen of such as look
to human speculations for the amelioration of mankind,
and ridicule the love of the Bible under the title of
Bibliolatry. Ridicule however will strive in vain to laugh
the believer out of his attachment to this charter of his
salvation, the very titles of which show that it is the work
which, above all others, deserves his study. The constant
enjoyment of any blessing, is too apt to make us forget
its value ; we can only recover our due appreciation of it,
by endeavouring to imagine what would be our condition
without it. The wisest of the heathen, who had no
other intellectual guide than traditionary knowledge or
their reason,

" Were ignorant of themselves, of God much more,
" And how the world began, and how man fell:
" Much of the soul they talked, but all awry."

In this volume, a child now reads the truths which
philosophy sought in vain, and truths which will sustain him
in the trials of life, and qualify him for heaven. The
doctrine which it has preserved, and communicates from
age to age, teaches a higher morality than the schools of
Greece, and has placed it on a firmer basis. To it we
owe a genuine civilization, extending wherever its spirit
penetrates, which has gradually extinguished slavery, abo-

LECTURE XX.

533

lished the civil and political evils which the heathens
approved, or at the best endured; and has introduced schools
and hospitals, and all the plans for the removal of igno-
rance and vice and misery, and for the happiness and the im-
provement of man, which Christian philanthropy can suggest.
Happy it is that the life-giving truths of our most holy Faith
were not entrusted to Tradition, which lost or disfigured
them. Embodied in a volume of moderate size, they are
recoverable : and those who have drunk deep of this well of
life, have not only quenched their own spiritual thirst, but
have opened streams for the healing of the nations. Our ad-
miration might be justly deemed extravagant, if the written
word were no more than the history of an ancient people, a
code of laws, or even a system of morality. But it supplies
the Christian with his only offensive weapon, the sword
of the Spirit, with which to fight the battles of the Lord,
and that weapon is sharper than any two-edged sword, and a
discerner of the intents and thoughts of the heart. It
needs no other commendation than the Apostle's description
of it, as profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction,
for instruction in righteousness* , always remembering that it
derives its efficacy from the faith which is in Christ Jesus.
That faith, whenever and by whatever means it has been
implanted in the heart, feeds upon this written word, which
reveals in all his grandeur and loveliness the eternal divine
and ever-living Word, who gives to all who believe in him
a right to the appellation of sons of God. The Holy Spirit
whom he hath sent, takes of his, and shows it to all whom the
Father has given to him ; and the eyes of their understanding
are by his teaching enlightened to understand in some degree
the love of Christ, and that love constrains them to live
to him who died for them. May the author and the reader
of these Lectures be led to dwell more and more on the
manifold wisdom of God, in his scheme of reconciliation
revealed in Scripture, and discover in this mine more and
more of the unsearchable riches of Christ, till we perceive him
to be as he is, fairer than the children of men, altogether
lovely, and full of grace and truth! All minor truths will then
r 2 Tim. it. 15, 16.

534

LECTURE XX.

sink into due subordination to the great fact, that God has
set forth his beloved Son as a propitiation through faith in
his blood, and the reader will learn how the Father can
be not only merciful, hut just, in justifying him who believeth
in Jesus. May these Lectures facilitate to their readers
an intelligent perusal of the Scriptures, which exhibit in
all his offices Him whom to know is everlasting life ; and
may they with unveiled face, beholding reflected in that
mirror the glory of the Lord beaming on their souls with
transforming efficacy, be gradually changed into their
Saviour's image of righteousness and holiness, growing
more and more like him in disposition and affections, till,
made meet for the inheritance of the saints in light, they
see that nearest kinsman, the Lord of Hosts, Jehovah, Jesus,
as he is, and be like him !

THE END.

BAXTER, PRINTER, OXFORD,

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Lectures on The Articles of the United Church of England and Ireland"

See other formats