Skip to main content

Full text of "Two treatises on the Christian priesthood and on the dignity of the episcopal order : with a prefatory discourse in answer to a book entitled The rights of the Christian Church, &c., and an appendix"

See other formats 




BV 659 .H5 1847 v.2 

Hickes, George, 1642-1715. 

Two treatises on the 
Christian priesthood and on 





Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2009 


httos://archive.org/details/twotreatisesonchO2hick 


Le ἢ 


ΝῊ 








πο στ Ω. Ὧν ' ‘5 


TWO TREATISES, 


ON THE 


CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD, 


DIGNITY OF THE EPISCOPAL ORDER: 


A PREFATORY DISCOURSE 


IN ANSWER TO 


A BOOK ENTITLED, THE RIGHTS OF THE CHRISTIAN 
CHURCH, ἃς, 


AND AN APPENDIX. 


BY GEORGE HICKES, D.D., 


SOMETIME FELLOW OF LINCOLN COLLEGE, AND DEAN OF WORCESTER. 





THE FOURTH EDITION. 





ΜΘ ΤΠ 


OXFORD: 
JOHN HENRY PARKER. 


MDCCCXLVII. 


: 


ee 
a || 


On 
a 
“.. 





VOLUME II. 


CONTAINING 


THE TWO TREATISES, 


THE CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD ASSERTED, 


THE DIGNITY OF THE EPISCOPAL ORDER. 





ADVERTISEMENT. 


Tue Editor cannot send out this volume without acknow- 
ledging his obligations to several friends who have relieved 
him from much of the most laborious part of his work. 
Without such assistance the publication of the volume must 
have been delayed much longer. If any apology is needed 
for the length of the notes, it may be found in the wish not 
only to present to the reader the originals of the passages 
quoted by the Author, but also to give the substance, and if 
possible the words, of the authorities referred to by him; a 
course which the peculiar character of the treatises seemed 
to make desirable. 

The Author’s table of contents has been retained. It 
will be found to combine the objects of an index and an 
analysis of the work ; and its terms have been adopted in 
the headings of the pages and the marginal contents of the 
sections; which have been added in this as in the previous 


volume. 


Sept. 8, 1847. 








ΟΥ̓ yyy y cn ae we 
ὡς, AULIN Be 


CONTENTS 


OF THE 


CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD ASSERTED. 


CHAP. I. 


THE GRAND OBJECTION AGAINST THE CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD, FROM THE 
SILENCE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, CONSIDERED. 


Page 
Sect. I.—THE OCCASION OF WRITING THIS TREATISE - = I 
The objection against the Christian priesthood proposed - - Spd, 
Which is taken from Chemnitius, p. 2; 
But originally started by the annotators on the Geneva Bible - 228, 236 
And promoted by some late writers amongst us with a particular view - 2 
The manner of their conduct in joining with these to degrade the 
priesthood, censured - - - - - 2, 3, 229 
Their mistake of the current doctrine of that Church for which they 
pretend to be advocates - - - - - - 3 


The author of the Regal Supremacy in Ecclesiastical Affairs Asserted re- 
flects upon our first reformers, as well as upon the ancient fathers 
ib., see note g, and pp. 91, 92 


The advantage which he takes from a passage of Dr. Outram considered- 3 

The character of Dr. Outram, and the weight of his single authority - 4 
A proper caveat to all writers in characterizing the authors whom they 

cite - - - - - - - - ib. 

The modesty of Grotius in speaking of this subject - - - ib. 
The author's chief design both in his Propositions and in his Letter of the 

Dignity of the Episcopal Office - - - - =D 


They that deny bishops and presbyters to be priests, do yet carry the spiri- 
tual authority of the presbyters as high as he doth that of the bishops 7b. 
The author’s profession what he will herein stand by - - - 6 


Srcr. II].—THE METHOD BY HIM TAKEN TO CLEAR THIS OBJECTION. 


The parts of his design premised - - - - - Ξ 7G 


Sect. [Π1.---(1.) Iv 1s No ARGUMENT THAT BISHOPS AND PRESBYTERS 
ARE NOT PRIESTS, BECAUSE THAT NAME IS NOT GIVEN TO THEM 
ΙΝ THE New TESTAMENT. 
This argument as good against 
1. Original sin - = = - ἊΝ ᾿ ΞΡ 


11 CONTEN'S, 


Page 
2. The Divine authority of the whole New Testament - - aq 
3. Admission of women to the holy Eucharist - - - ib. 
4. Baptism of infants (and) - il - - - - ib. 
5. Some common principles of Christianity - - - - ie 
That Christian priests are proper ‘ hierophants’ and ‘ mystagogues,’ proved 
against Toland - - - - - - 9,10 


Both mysteries and stewards of those mysteries supposed in the Christian 
religion by the New Testament writers, particularly by St. Paul” - ib. 
And testified to by St. Ignatius, Tertullian, Sozomen, Nazianzen, &c. 
9, 10, and note b 


St. Paul ἃ mystagogue of the Gospel - - - - - 10 
The difference of the Christian from the Aaronical priesthood - - iM 
CHAP. ΤΙ. 


THE POSITIVE PROOFS FOR THE CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD, UPON THE PRIN- 
CIPLES AND REASONINGS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 


(11.) THAT THOUGH THE NAMES OF PRIEST AND PRIESTHOOD ARE NOT USED 
FORTHE MINISTERS OR MINISTRY OF CHRIST IN THE NEW TESTAMENT, 
YET THE THINGS SIGNIFIED BY THESE NAMES ARE, AND PROPERLY DO 
BELONG TO THEM - - - - - - - 18 


Sect. I.—SrT. PAUL’s DESCRIPTION OF AN HIGH-PRIEST OR PRIEST 13, 14 


Sect. II.—Tuar PRIESTS ARE GOD’s VICEGERENTS IN His CHURCH, AS 


PRINCES AREIN THESTATE- - - = - = 14—18 
This proved by comparing the New with the Old Testament - 13, sqq. 
Observations on the signification of the Hebrew word ‘cohen’ - 15, 23 

Another critical remark to the same purpose, serving to illustrate St. Paul 
by Moses - - - - - - - 16 

How the heathens also had the same common notion of priests and priest- 
hood - - - - - - - = ἢ 

The notion of the pagan Goths: hence Gud, Gudin, Gudi, Gudinon, 
&c., transferred into the Gothic Gospels’ - - - - 18 


Sect. I1].—THat ΙΝ THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH BISHOPS AND PRESBYTERS 
ARE AS PROPERLY PRIESTS AS AARON AND HIS SONS IN THE JEWISH 


18—26 
This proved from the nature of their office, and from the testimony of 
Scripture - - - - - - - - 19 
Both the Jewish and Gentile notion of the priesthood exactly applicable 
to the Christian ministry - = = = = - 20 


A collection of terms relating to the priestly office, extracted out of 
Pollux, Suidas, Dionysius Halicarnasseus, Plutarch, Hesychius, and 
Phavorinus - - - - -  20—22, and notes 

That all these terms are in strict propriety no less applicable to the 
Christian ministry - - - - - 22, sqq. 


CONTENTS. 11 


Page 
St. Cyprian’s definition of the priesthood Ξ - - τ) ἢ 

The dignity of the priesthood, and eminence of its ministry - - ib. 

Ministers of the sanctuary, λειτουργοὶ - - - - - 24 
What λειτουργία properly 5 - τς - - - 25, 37 
Of liturgic acts - - - - - - - ib. 
That the bishops and presbyters of the Catholic Church are in a true 

sense Christian liturgs = Seu he - - 24—26 
Sect. [V.—Or THE SEVERAL SORTS OF PRIESTHOOD, 

Bloody sacrifices not at all essential to the priesthood - - 20, 98 
The Persian priests - - - - - - - id. 
These compared with the Grecian and Roman - - - - ib. 
Mahometan priests and sacrifices - - - 27, and note x 

The end of all material offerings - - 27, 28, and notes y, z 
They are not necessarily tied to the priestly office - - 28, 29 

Both bloody and unbloody sacrifices constantly supposed of an honorary 

nature - - - - - Ξ = = MaBs 

Spiritual sacrifices of the mind made by pagans and Jews, as well as Chris- 

tians, the chief or only sacrifices - - - - 29, 30 
The weakness of some in arguing hence against the Eucharistical sacrifice 
ib., note d 


The Jewish priests proper priests in the captivity, without sacrifices and 
sacrificial rites - = Ξ a 


- - - 30 
Though without a priest there cen be no sacrificing, yet a man may without 

sacrificing be a priest - - 4 & a ect] 

Absurdities of the contrary opinion - = = Ξ 89, 88 
Secr. V.mA PLEA FOR THE PRIESTHOOD OF THE TWO SUPERIOR ORDERS 
OF PRESBYTERS AND BISHOPS, EVEN FROM THE SHARE THEREOF WHICH 

IS COMMUNICATED TO THE INFERIOR ORDER OF DEACONS - d3—42 

The deacon’s office of a sacerdotal nature in the third or lowest degree - 84 


A passage of Optatus Milevitanus hence set in a clear light - 34, 35 
The Diaconica of Dionysius of Alexandria - 


- - - 35 
Some passages of St. Ignatius for farther illustration and confirmation 

hereof - - - - - - - 35, 36 

Two sorts of ministering or deaconship in all religions - - 36, 37 

The office of a deacon, in what respect servile - - - 37—39 

And in what respect sacerdotal - - - - Ξ BY 


Deacons allowed to receive confessions and absolve penitents in some cases 40 
Not anciently permitted to preach e cathedra, and why 


- - - 41 
An argument a fortiori from the sacerdotal acts of deacons for the priest- 
hood in the superior degrees - = = Ξ ἈΝ δ 
Sect. VI.—Or THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR, ANOTHER PLEA FOR THE SAME 
UPON THE PRINCIPLES OF THE NEw TesTAMENT - - 42—53 
That the ministers of Christ are proper altar ministers 


Not only priests but also sacrificing priests - 


iv CONTENTS. 


Page 
Gift, a sacrificial term, as used by Christ Himself - - - 42 
And of a very comprehensive signification - - -  ib., note x 
The precept of reconciliation, which relates to it, evidently a Gospel precept 
42, 43 
Many other precepts of Christ given by way of anticipation for the Gospel 
state - - - = = = = mr oleh 
This accordingly so understood of the Eucharistical oblation or sacrifice by 
the primitive Church - - - - - - 44 
Which appears particularly, 
1. By the Apostolical Constitutions - - - - Abs 
The most primitive order of the Eucharistical service - - 45 
3. By St. Irenzeus - Ξ : = = - 46 
4. By Tertullian - - - - - - - ib. 
Munus perficere, a sacrificial expression to offer the Eucharistical oblation - 47 
Of τελεῖν and τελετὴ, and Christ’s last word on the cross, τετέλεσται, 
sacrificial terms = = = = = -  ib., notes 
4. By St. Cyprian - - - - - - 48 
5. By Eusebius” - - - - - - - 49 
6. By St. Cyril of Jerusalem - - - - - 60 
The holy kiss of peace founded on this text 
7. By St. Chrysostom - - - - - - id. 
Several Christian sacrifices distinguished - - - - 
8. By St. Jerome - - - - - - 02 
9. By St. Augustine - - - - - renee 
Sect. VIJ.—Tuis FARTHER CONFIRMED FROM THE WORDS OF THE INSTI- 
TUTION - - = - - - - 53—68 
1, An ample and plain proof from the testimony of St. Cyprian, and of the 
whole Church of his time - - - - 54, 55 
2. Another from the Eucharistical office in the Apostolical Constitutions - 56 
3. From St. [renzus = - - - - - 56, 57 
Dr. Grabe’s catalogue of testimonies for the Eucharistical oblation, 
from the prophecy in Malachi - - - 67, noter 
The signification of the word ποιεῖν and ἱεροποιεῖν, both in profane and 
sacred writers - - - - - - 58, sqq. 
More than forty instances in the Septuagint translation of this sacri- 
ficial sense - - - - - - 59—64 
This [ποιεῖν | taken in the same sense by ecclesiastical writers - 64 
1. By St. Clemens Romanus - - - - - ib. 
2. By St. Justin Martyr = = = = Be, 
3. By St. Cornelius bishop of Rome - - - - 65 
4. By St. Chrysostom - - - - - - 66 
5. By St. Irenzus - - - - - - ἐν. 
6. By Tertullian - - - - - - 67 
Mr. Poole’s mistake corrected - - - - - ib. 
7. In the ancient Liturgies - - - - 67, 68 


The proper determination of thé words of institution = = =) 468 


CONTENTS. Vv 


4 

Page 

Sect, VIII.—From THE PLACES ΟΡ THE NEw TESTAMENT WHICH IMPLY 
AND EXPRESS THAT THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION HAS AN ALTAR 69—81 
1. 1 Cor. ix. 3. By the consentient interpretation of primitive writers - 69 
2. Matt. v. 28. By the same so applied’ - - - - - 70 
8. Heb. xiii. 10. The exposition of Tena commended - =) 1. note t 
The proper sense hereof vindicated against a late writer - - 1.12 


Assisted by 
1. The Apostle’s argument against the Jews, taken from their own law 73 
2. The practice of the Syriac Churches - - - - 74 
3. The testimony of ancient fathers - - - 74, 75 
The Lord’s table a name given to the great altar at Jerusalem 
76, and note m 
Altar and table the same in different respects 
72, 73, note a; and 76, 77, 80 
Some farther critical observations upon the use of the name altar 


77, 566. 
The same [name altar] applied to tables - - - - - ib. 
To certain rocks in the Mediterranean δὰ - - - - 78 
And to the rock of Manoah_ - - - - - Ξι 26: 
The communion-table so called from the very time of the Apostles down 
to the Reformation - - - - - 78, 5η4. 
Four times in the epistles of St. Ignatius - - - ib. 
The vanity of the objection against its being an altar from its being a 
table - - - - - - - - 80 


Sect. [IX.—THE SACRIFICE OFFERED UPON THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR. THIS 
PROVED OUT OF THE WRITINGS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT = 81—93 


[1.1 From the argument of St. Paul, taken from the feasts of the heathens 
upon their idol sacrifices - - - - - 81, 82 
The common notion upon which all sacrificial feasts were founded 
ib., and pp. 85, 105 


Sacrifices eaten at the place where they were offered - - 82, noteg 
The sacrificial feast of Cleobis and Biton - - - - ib. 
εἰδωλεῖον, ‘idoleum’ - - - Ξ - - 88 
The remark of Drusius and Livelius upon those idol feasts - ib. 
Such sacrificial tables in the temples commonly referred to in the 
Greek and Latin poets - - - - - 84 
The ceremony used at approaching them - - 84, 85 
The exact parallel between the Lord’s table and the table of devils - ib. 
A paraphrase on 1 Cor. x. 20, 21. = - - - - ib. 
The Jewish and Gentile notion of communion with the Deity allowed 
by the Apostle - - - - - - 86 
A parallelism betwixt altar-communion with the true God and that of 
devils in four particulars - - - - - ib. 
Whence bread and wine in the holy Eucharist were even in the age 
of the Apostles called gifts and offerings - - - 87 


And ministers of the Gospel, offerers and sacrificers, as also waiters 
at the altar, &c. - - - - - - ib, 


vl CONTENTS. 


Page 
Some passages of St. Clement express for this - - 87, 88 
St. Cyprian and the Cyprianic age bearing testimony to it - 89 
The elements hence ordinarily called δῶρα and ἅγια δῶρα - ib. 
Modern vouchers for this 
1. Mr. Mede in his Christian Sacrifice - = Β = 790 
2. Dr. Grabe in his annotations on St. Irenzeus - - 9], note ἢ 
3. Bishop Beveridge in his notes on the ancient canons (and) 90, note | 
4, Bishop Bull in his answer to the bishop of Meaux - 91, 92, note p 
Both our old Saxon ancestors and first reformers believed it a real sacri- 
fice - - - - - - 91, note ο, and 92 


Sect, X.—[ THE SACRIFICE OFFERED UPON THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR, ETC. ] 


[2.1 From another argument of the same Apostle, clearly alluding to the 
ministration of the Christian sacrifice. As 
Ist. To the oblation of the elements - - - = - 93 
His προσφορὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν being interpreted either of 
1. The offering of the Gentiles, as understood by St. Justin, St. Irenzus, 


St. Cyprian, &c. (or else of) - - - - 94—96 

2. The offering up of the Gentiles, as understood of the Apostle’s 
sacerdotal power - = - - - - 96 
As interpreted by Castalio - - Ξ - - 100, note m 
And so interpreted by Grotius* - - - - ἐδ., note 1 

2ndly. To the sanctification of the elements by the descent of the Holy 
Ghost - - = - - - - - 96 

The prayer of invocation for this descent of Apostolical authority, accord- 
ing te St. Basi] and St. Chrysostom - - 93, 94, note z 

How the ancient Church thought the Holy Spirit to be the chief agent 
in the ministration of the Eucharist - - 96, sqq. 
And Christian priests His co-agents, σύνεργοι τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματορ - 98 
St. Paul truly the priest of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles” - - - 100 


This shewed, 
1. From the use of the word λειτουργὸς, being the same with ‘cohen’ ib. 


2. Of ἱερουργῶν, a sacrificing minister - - - - ib. 
8. Of τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν, the subject of his priestly ministration - 101 
4, Paraphrase on Rom. xv. 15, 16. - - - 99, 100 


THE PRIMITIVE NOTION OF THE EUCHARIST’s BEING THE OBLATION OF 


THE GENTILES - - = - = - - ἐδ. 
[a] An account of Justin Martyr concerning the institution of the holy 
Eucharist as a sacrifice - - - - - 101—104 
Christian priests as proper priests as the priests of Mithra—- - 102 
Oblation of bread and water in the mysteries of Mithra - 101, 102 
The Eucharistical oblation properly τελετὴ, a solemn material sacrifice, 
and the ministers of it τέλεσται - - 5 Β Εν 
The same why called τελεῖον in the canons, and τελείωσις 103, see note z 
[6] The account of Irenzeus concerning it = = - - 104 
[9] The testimonies of Eusebius (and Symmachus?) for it - - 105 
a {In the contents to the third edition » [The addition of Symmachus seems an 
these words were wrongly put to the first — error.] 


interpretation. | 


CONTENTS. vil 
Page 
An appeal to the common sense of mankind concerning solemn sacrificial 


entertainments - - - - - - - 105 

The practice of the primitive Church, and of our Church at the Refor- 
mation, to mix water with the wine - - - 106, note ἢ 
The whole Eucharistical action a sacrificial mystery - - 106, 107 
The notion of such a mystery stated - - - - 107 
Every federal sacrifice a Sacrament also - - - - ib. 


THE OFFERING OF BREAD AND WINE TAKEN IN A PROPER AND LITERAL 
SENSE BY THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIANS, AND BY ALL THE CHURCHES 
BEFORE THE REFORMATION - - - - 107---109 


[a] Attestations hereof from 1. St. Chrysostom. 2. St. Basil. 
3. Eulogius Alexandrinus. 4. St. Isidore. 5. Eusebius Czsa- 


riensis - - - - - - ib., note k 
And from the Jewish doctors also - - - - ib. 

But were it only a Sacrament, the ministers of it must nevertheless be 
proper priests - - - - - - - 109 

This proved from the definition of a priest; from the usage of sacer- 
dotal terms; and from mystical rites and offices - - ib. 


[Ὁ] Melchisedec a type of Christ and His priesthood, in bringing forth 
bread and wine as a type of the Eucharistical oblation, when he 


blessed Abraham - - - - - 110, 119 

A notion not scrupled at by the primitive Christians, who were yet as 
afraid of idolatry as any can now be - - -  ib., note | 

[0] Their common belief that this was the pure offering foretold by 
Malachi - - - - - 110, 111, note m 
[4] The faith and practice of the first council of Nice as to this matter - 111 

What the Nicene fathers understood by ἀθύτως applied to the Eu- 
charistical sacrifice - - - - -  ib., note o 
[6] How and why this came to be called the unbloody oblation - 111, 112 
Which is confirmed by a passage of Constantine the Great - - 112 
Also both by Christians and Jews - - - - - 118 

Two texts of St. Peter concerning the priestly polity of the Church 
hereupon vindicated from acommon mistake - - - 118 


The Jewish and Christian theocracy hence compared 113,114, and note t 
This theocratical constitution of the Church or a priestly kingdom 
the sentiment of primitive antiquity - - - - 114 


THE OBLATION OF THE BREAD AND WINE, AS THE SYMBOL HEREOF, 
PROVED A CATHOLIC PRACTICE. | 


(1.) This anciently thought so principal a part of the holy communion, as 
the whole was signified by it, and thence called in the Greek Church 


προσφορὰ and θυσία - - - - - - 115 

As in the ancient Latin Church ‘ oblatio’ - - - - 116 
(2.) This oblation of the elements upon the altar plainly distinguished by 

the ancient Christians from all other altar-offerings - =e iy 118 
(3.) This admitted in the reasonings of the orthodox fathers of the second 

council of Nice against the use of images in Divine worship - - 118 


Vill CONTENTS. 


Page 
Their medium between the Jewish and Gentile religion - - 119 

(4.) This prefigured according to the ancients by the offering of Melchi- 
sedec - - - - = Ξ - - ib. 


That this Melchisedec did (as a priest) really offer bread and wine, with 
which he made his entertainment, which was an Eucharistical 


festival - - - - - - - - ib. 

And that Christ did as really offer bread and wine to the Father when He 
instituted the Eucharist - = - - - - ib, 
(5.) Two oblations of the elements in the Eucharist plainly distinguished - 0. 
1. By St. Justin Martyr - - - - - - 120 
2. By the Apostolical Constitutions - - - - ib. 
3. By St. Cyril of Jerusalem - - - - - 121] 
4. By our present Liturgy - - - - - ib. 
Solemn rites attending our second Eucharistical oblation - 121, 122 
This truly called a sacrifice of praise - - - 118, 122 


(6) THIS DEMONSTRATED FROM THE PRIMITIVE MANNER OF THE ADMI- 


NISTRATION OF IT, AS - - - - - - 120 

1. The liturgical account of it in the Apostolical Constitutions - 122, sqq. 
Explained and confirmed by ancient fathers, Xe. 128, sqq., notes, p. 127 

2. The Ethiopic Liturgy - - - - - 125, note n 
An observation upon it of moment respecting the Arian controversy - 7b. 

3. The Liturgy of St. Chrysostom - = = = = 159 
4, That of St. Basil - = = = g = = 434 
5. That of the Church of Jerusalem - - - - - 133 
6. That of the Church of Alexandria, called St. Mark’s - - 186 
7. That of the Church of Rome, called St. Peter’s = - - 137 
8. The Sacramentary of St. Gregory the Great - - - 142 
9. The Codices Sacramentorum, published by J. M. Thomasius - 144 
10. The ancient Gallican Liturgy - - - - - 146 
The harmonious agreement of liturgies and fathers - - - ib. 


Particulars in which all the ancient liturgies are agreed unanimously 146, 149 
The Eucharistical office in the Apostolical Constitutions the true standard 149 


Innovations and additions how to be discovered - - - 4b. 
These are of two sorts, viz., Ist, more ancient; as, 

i. The use of incense - - Ξ - - 149, 151 

A censure hence on Hip~ol. de Consummatione Mundi - 149, 150 

ii. The Oratio Propositionis - - - - - 151 

iii. The Oratio Velaminis = = = - - ἐδ. 

2. More modern - - - - - - - - 153 

And both these either 1. good, or 2. bad - - - - 151 

[i.] Instances of alterations for the better - - - 151, 162 

The ὁμοούσιος, the Nicene and-Constantinopolitan creed, ἧτο. - - δε 

Upon what occasions introduced by the Church - - - ib. 

Instances of alterations for the worse - - - - - 153 

When and how introduced” - - - - - - tb. 


The liturgies most abominably corrupted after the second council of 
Nice - - - - - - - - ib. 


CONTENTS. 1X 


Page 

OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS NOTION OF THE CHRISTIAN SACRIFICE ΕΧ- 
AMINED - - - - - - - - 154 
I. The objection from Dr. Outram’s definition of a sacrifice stated - ib. 

Answered, 

1. From the authority of such as must needs know the nature of sacrifices, 
both Jewish and Christian - - - - - - 7b. 

And could see no inconsistence between the notion of a sacrifice, and 
that of the holy Eucharist - - - - - 155, 156 

2. From the difference of a Jewish and Christian sacrifice, through the 
change of the priesthood - - - - - 156, 157 

3. From the silence both of Scripture and tradition for the consumption 
of the elements in the Jewish manner - - - 157, 158 


4, From the putative consumption thereof, or mutation, by virtue of the 
mystical union between the sacramental and natural Body of Christ, 


158—160 
This explained by what the Roman laws eall ‘ fictio’ - - - 159 
Instances of such a sort of fiction in several cases - - - ib. 
Particularly, 
1. In the civil polity of kingdoms, and ordinary administration of 
justice - - - - - - - ib. 
2. In divinity; and God’s economy in the restoration of man, 
159, 160 
Exemplified, 
1. In matrimony - - - - - - ib. 
2. In the doctrine of justification: and - - - - ib. 
3. In that of adoption - - - - - - ib. 
5. From the definition not being general, but of one species only of Jewish 
sacrifices - - - - - - - - 160 
For it excludes many Jewish oblations - - - - ib. 
As 1. The [first-fruits, called a] corban; (Vatablus, and the Jewish 
commentator) = = - » - - 161 
2. The red heifer, (Abarbanel) - - - - 161, 162 
3. The scape-goat, (Maimonides) - - - - 162, 163 
With whom also agree St. Barnabas and Justin Martyr Soe se eS ICES 
And of moderns, Mr. Ainsworth, Bishop Patrick, Dr. Bright - 163 
Sacrifices and oblations equivalent terms in the Old Testament - 165 


THE AUTHOR’S OWN DESCRIPTION OF A SACRIFICE, AS TAKEN EITHER FOR 


1. The administration or act. (Or else,) - - - - 167 
2. The matter of the sacrifice or gift - - - - - ib. 
The several parts of it explained - - - - - 168 

1. Its subject; a gift = - - - - =) 80s 

The difference of gifts dedicated and offered - - 168, 169 


Of corban, δῶρον, donum, and cherem: and ἀνάθημα, donarium 
168, note r 


Circumstances of time and place - - - - - 170 
2. Its object; the God, to whom it is 
1. Brought - - ae - - - - 109 


2. Offered - - - - - - - ib. 


Χ CONTENTS. 


Page 
Ritual observations about it - - - - - - 170 
3. Its efficient; the priest  e - - - 168, 170 
1. Ordinary - - - - - - - ib. 
2. Extraordinary - - - - - - 191 
4. Its end; the worship of the God - - - - 171 
The chief end of burnt-offerings - - - 172, note m 
The excellent author of The Propitiatory Oblation in the Holy Eucharist 
referred to - - - - - - - - 178 


II. THe OBJECTION FROM Dr. CUDWORTH’S NEW NOTION OF THE LORD’S 
SUPPER EXAMINED - - - - - 178, sqq. 


His notion how far agreeable and disagreeable with the ancient notion of it 175 


Of no authority, because itisnew - - - - 177, 182 
Against the faith and practice of all Churches for 1500 years- 177, 178 
And a perfect contradiction to Justin Martyr’s famous description of 
the holy Eucharist - - - - - - ib. 
As well as to the consentient testimony of Apostolical fathers ; such as 
1. St. Clement - - - - - - ib. 
2. St. Ignatius - - - - - - 180 
Who most likely to understand St. Paul, a fellow-labourer of his, or a 
modern doctor - = - - - - ΞΟ 


The Eucharistical office of prayer anciently called προσευχή 175, note Ὁ 
God’s meat, and the bread of God, whence applied to the Jewish 


sacrifices, and to the Eucharistical bread 178, note m, and 180 
The ground of his mistake that Christians have no altar considered 178, sqq. 
His assertion contrary to fact - - - - - 178 
And without any concinnity to the nature of the thing - - 180 
1. The singularity - = = 3 + Sitriy/ 
2. Nicety - - - - - - - - 182 
3. Uselessness, and - - - - - - ib. 
4. Dangerous consequences of this notion taxed - - - ib. 

Evidences from ancient fathers and ecclesiastical writers against this 
novel hypothesis - - - - 180, 181, notes 
Tertullian is a better expositor of himself than any modern author - 181 
His Participatio Sacrificii interpreted in his own words - ib., notez 
Sacrificial phrases used by him - - - - ib., note ἃ 

A fair challenge about sacrificial feasts and the notion of Epulum ex 
oblatis - a Oo es - - - 178, 180, 183 


The whole matter decided by the rule of Vincentius Lirinensis 184, note g 
Yet the truth of this doctor’s notion even supposed Christian ministers 


must be still proper priests - - - - 188, 184 
A serious expostulation concerning the defect of administering the Eucha- 
rist only as a Sacrament = - = - - 184, 185 


III. Dr. Forses’ pEscRIPTION OF THE HOLY ΕΘΗ ΛΕΙΒῚ CONSIDERED 

186, sqq. 
‘ It is a perfect description of a sacrifice in four particulars - - 186 
His inconsistent reasoning upon it - - - - - 187 





CONTENTS. xi 


Page 

Sect. XI.—AN ARGUMENT FROM THEIR BEING MINISTERS OF THE ARCHE- 
TYPAL MELCHISEDEC - - - - - 187—192 

As Christ is a priest by commission from His Father, so Christian 
bishops and presbyters are priests by commission from Him 187, sqq. 

No man but who is divinely authorized can exercise the office of a priest 
without sacrilege ~ - - = 192, 199, note i 
Of extraordinary commissions - - - - 191, 192 
The law of an hour - - - - - - 191 
How David and Solomon sacrificed as prophets - - - 192 


But Saul and Uzziah being none, forfeited thereby the kingdom - ib. 


Sect. XIJ.—F Rom THE NATURE OF THEIR OFFICE - - 192—207 


[1.1 Priests by their office separated to mediate and make intercession for 


the people - - - - - - - 192 
This shewed from the consent of all nations - - - 193 
The Persian priests in Herodotus - - - - 194 
Chryses the priest of Apollo in Homer - - - - ἐδ. 
How Homer herein Hebraizes - - - - - 195 

A passage of Alcuin to his scholar Eanbald, archbishop of York - ib. 
Two testimonies from St. Ambrose - > - - 195, 196 
Priests whence called καθαρταί, or purgators - - - - 197 
Allusions hereto both by St. John and St. Paul - - - ib. 
Evangelical ministers are proper purgators - - - - 198 


The Levitical and evangelical priesthood as to this compared 
ib., note c, and pp. 204, 205, 227 
The patriarchal priesthood a confirmation of this - - - 198 
Instances hereof in Abraham, Melchisedec, Abel, &c. 
ib., sqq. See also notes f, ἢ, and pp. 199, 200, note i 


Also in Noah, Job, and Moses - - - - - 200 
Moses properly a sacerdotal prince - - - - εὖ: 
A hypercritical emendation of Grotius set hereupon to rights, 
out of Philo and Nazianzen - - - ἐδ., note | 
His commission to the family priests, the first-born, accounted 
for - - - - - - ib., noten 
Several instances besides of sacerdotal intercession in him 201, sqq. 
The atonement of the Aaronical priesthood - - - - 202 
Samuel’s priestly mediation - - - - - 203 


The intercessorial office of priests where described in Scripture 204, 544. 
St. Hierome’s application of Joel ii. 17 to Christian priests, as attested- 


by miracle - - - - - -  ib., notes 

Descriptions of the Jewish priests = = ᾿ ie 2» 4B: 

The author’s definition of a priest - - - - - ib. 

Dr. Outram’s definition of the same - - - - 205 

Another of his - - - - - - - 207 
According to which, Christian liturgs must be as proper priests as 

the Jewish - - - - - - - bd. 


b 


ΧΙ CONTENTS. 


Page 

Of sacerdotal benediction, and the great obstruction to it - - - 206 

Intercession by prophets jure prophetico - - - 206, 207 

Sect. XIII.—FrRom THE TRANSLATION OF THE PRIESTHOOD - 207—210 
[2.1 Christian ministers by their office made by Christ mediators or inter- 

cessors with God for the people - - - - - 207 

This the most proper and distinguishing office of the priesthood - ib. 


1. Which in the greatest propriety belongs to the ἀρχιερεὺς λόγος 207, 208 
The Epistle to the Hebrews herein illustrated by two passages of 


Philo - - - - - ib., notes ἃ, f 

2. And is by him communicated to his ministering priests - - 208 
Who are not inferior to the patriarchal and Jewish ministers, in the 

essentials of the sacerdotal office - - - - 209 

But rather superior to them - - - - 208, 215 


The same common office, though not the same rites of atonement * 
209, note g 


Sect. XIV.—FrRom APoOSTOLICAL PRECEPT AND PRACTICE - 210—226 


The first ministers of Christ in His Church, were in fact such advocates, &c. 210 
This shewn, 


1. By their baptizing for the remission of sins - - - ib. 
2. By their solemn intercessions in the Eucharist - - - 211 
The proper distinction between ‘ sacrificare’ and ‘ litare’ ib., note m 

Extraordinary commissions, as in the Old so in the New Testament 
also, for prophetical priests - - - - - tb. 

A place of St. Paul so interpreted by the ancient fathers with respect 
to the celebration of the Eucharist - - - 212) sqq: 

Another to shew that in the beginning of Christianity it was the work 
of inspired ministers to make intercessions - 214, notes c, ἃ 

A third of St. James, to shew the primitive practice of priestly inter- 
cession for the sick, by imposition of hands and unction - 215 


The analogy hereof with the Jewish priesthood, and the dignity of 
the Christian above it, excellently set forth by St. Chrysostom 


215—217 

A fourth argument for the usage of this sacerdotal intercession, from 
the request of Simon Magus to St. Peter - - - 217 

A fifth from other solemn sacerdotal acts of the Apostles, and first 
ministers of the Church - - - - - 218 

A sixth, St. Paul’s exhortation to St. Timothy for sacerdotal supplica- 
tions, &c. in the Eucharistical office - - - - 218 
As interpreted by St. Augustine - - - - «19 
And as favoured by two learned moderns - - - - 220 
A seventh, from the apostolical forms of benediction - -' 221,.sqq. 


Of the priest’s actual and yirtual presence - - - - 225 


CONTENTS. xiii 


Page 
Sect. XV.—ConsEQUENCES FROM THE CONTRARY OPINION 226—229, and 234 


If Christian ministers be not priests - - - - - 


1. They are inferior in dignity and utility to the Jewish ministers - 227 

2. They are guilty of sacrilege in arrogating to themselves the most 
proper part of the priest’s office - - - - “= ab. 

3. The ancient prophecies concerning the evangelical priesthood are 
unfulfilled - - - - - - ib, and 228 

The Geneva notes upon Isaiah Ixvi. 21, and Jer. xxx. 17, partial and 
absurd - - - - - - 228, 229, note v 


Sect. XVI.—ADVANTAGES WHICH THE NOTION OF A METAPHORICAL 


PRIESTHOOD AFFORDS TO THE DEISTS, &c. - - - 229-234 

1, That metaphorical priests are not priests at all - - - 229 
2. That the Apostolical and other primitive fathers must have been 

enthusiasts for holding the real Christian Priesthood; or, - - 230 

3. That they must be knaves; and that all is mere priestcraft ib., 544. 

4. That ministers without priesthood can have no right to tithes - 234 

5. Nor to stand before God as advocates through Christ forthe people - 230 

6. Nor to bless them in His Name - - - - 221, 230 
7. That as they are but mock priests, so He whose ministers they are, is 

no true priest - - - - - - [ - 281 

Compassionate reflections upon the practice of some of the clergy - 232, 5664. 


Sect. XVII.—A RECAPITULATION OF THE GENUINE CONSEQUENCES OF. 
NOT ASSERTING THE SACERDOTAL DIGNITY BOTH OF BISHOPS AND 


PRESBYTERS - - - - - - - 284 
The author’s congratulatory address to his correspondent - - - ib. 
His Parenesis to quicken others of his order to stand up for the original 

rights of the Christian priesthood - - - ie - ib. 

Since the contrary notion tends to, 

1, The dishonour and depravation of the clergy - - - ἐδ. 

2. The secularizing their manners’ - - - - 232, 234 

3. The debasing their ministry in the esteem of the people - - ib. 

4, The decay of Christian piety and religion, and growth of deism and 

infidelity ; and, = Ξ as = Ε ae abe 

5. The total dissolution of the Church - - - - 235 


ΧΙΥ CONTENTS. 


CHAPS [iT 


REASONS WHY THE WRITERS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT DID ABSTAIN FROM 
THE NAME, AND YET EXPRESS THE THING SIGNIFIED BY IT. 
Page 
(3.) Wuy, AND HOW, IT CAME TO PASS THAT THE MINISTERS OF CHRIST 


BEING PROPER PRIESTS UNDER HIM, ARE NOT CALLED BY THAT NAME 
IN THE WRITINGS OF THE NEw TESTAMENT = - - 236 


Sect. I.—How THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF THE MESSIAS WAS NOT TAUGHT 
EXPRESSLY BY ANY OF THE APOSTLES TILL ABOUT THIRTY YEARS 


AFTER THE FOUNDATION OF HIS CHURCH - - - 237, sqq- 
How and why none of His Apostles or other ministers did during that time 
expressly call themselves priests, or their ministry a priesthood - 238 


How and why they did also then forbear to use the proper words for temple, 
or house of God, in speaking of places set apart for Christian worship δῦ. 
How studiously this was-declined by St. Paul, when a proper occasion for 


it was given - - - - - - - - ib. 
A probable reason for this long silence of our Saviour's priesthood, as well 
as of that which depended upon it - - - - - 239 


Secr. [I].—THE FIRST REASON FOR THE FORBEARANCE OF THE APOSTLES 


TO TAKE UPON THEM THE SACERDOTAL TITLE - - 240—245 
Its not being mentioned in their commission - - - - 240 
1. That Christ gave forth His first commission as to Apostles, not as 
to priests - - - = - - - ib. 
The great reasonableness of so doing - - - - ἐν. 
2. That He did not alter their character after His resurrection, when 
their commission was enlarged - - - - - ib. 
What is included in the character of the Apostlesh ip - - 241 
How the Apostles were vicars of Christ, no less in His sacerdotal 
. than in His prophetical office - = = =a 
The names of bishops and presbyters relate but to the regal and 
prophetical offices of Christ - - = Ξ Τῶν). 
A noble testimony of Origen for the are hetypal presbytership, 
priesthood, and episcopacy in Christ - Ε = ee 
Christ the αὐτοαρχιερεὺς according to the aticients - - 242 
The Apostles hence must have had a ministerial priesthood and 
episcopacy under Him, as also their successors - 241, 242 
According to Origen and Nazianzen - - - ib., note ἢ 
As also St. Ignatius - - - - = - 242 
The testimony of Polycrates for the priesthood of St. John in particular 
242, 243 
An observation concerning his wearing the pontifical plate - - 244 
A passage in Epiphanius concerning James the Just corrected by 
Petavius - - - - - - ἐῤ., note q 


The just inference to be made hereupon — - - - 244, 248 


CONTENTS. XV 


Page 
Sect. III.—Tuer secoND REASON FOR THEIR FORBEARANCE TO TAKE 
UPON THEM THE SACERDOTAL TITLE - - - 245—249 
The more easy conversion of the Jews - - - - - 245 
The regard they were to have to the Jewish religion and temple economy 
for a season - - - - - - 345, 5644. 
For this reason they complied with the temple worship as far as they could 
with any safety - - - - - - - ib. 
The great reasonableness of this method shewed_ - - - 246, sqq. 


But when the Jews rejected and blasphemed Christ, they then broke off 
communion with them, shaking off the dust of their feet against them 248 


Secr. [V.—Tue THIRD REASON FOR THEIR FORBEARANCE MIGHT PROBABLY 
BE A PARTICULAR DIRECTION FROM THEIR LORD SO TODO - 249—254 


The author’s ground for such a particular direction, viz., that all appear- 
ance of schism by two different altars at the same time among one 


people was to be avoided - - - - - 249, 250 

An observation of Baron Spanheim concerning the unity of the altar and 
worship of the heathen deities - - - - 260, note t 
Three arguments which shew this no precarious supposition - 250, 251 


Sect. V.—THAT SUCH A FORBEARANCE IN THE APOSTLES, IF NOT BY EX- 
PRESS COMMAND, MUST AT LEAST HAVE BEEN BY ALLOWANCE 251—254 


The difference between direction and permission in a supreme lawgiver but 


small - - - - - - - - 29] 
The compliance in the Apostles with the Mosaical observances, does neces- 
sarily infer one or the other - - - - - 261, 252 


The ground whereof is well expressed by St. Barnabas in his epistle - 252 
Yet even during that period they are implicitly, and by intimation, called 
priests - - - - - - - - 264 


Sect. ΥΙ.---ΤῊΛΤ AFTER THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM THE NAME 
PRIEST WAS MORE FAMILIARLY USED - - - - 254 


How and why latter Church-writers use words and phrases not occurring in 


the former - - - - - - - 254, sqq. 
Some instances hereof given - - - - - - ἐν. 
Why the name of priest and priesthood came to be more familiar with the 
Christians after the destruction of the temple - - - 255 
Why yet St. John writing after that time mentions neither the name of 
priest or Christian - - - - - - - 257 


Observations upon the analogy of the angelical and sacerdotal office 2688, 259 
How Christian liturgs are hence to be considered as to their priesthood 


260, sqq. 
And how as to their prelacy or spiritual superiority - - - 262 
A very good account hereof out of Mr. Hill’s De Presbyteratu -- ὠἔῤ., note f 


Which is cleared farther from Isidore’s Originals - - - ἐδ. 


Xvi CONTENTS. 


Page 

That bishops, as such, are princes in Christ's” spiritual dominions on earth, 
according to St. John - - - - - - 265 
And are regal priests - - - - - - ib., 544. 
An excursion hence concerning the apocalyptical angels and elders 263, 264 
The affinity of πρεσβυτὴς and ἄγγελος observed - - - 259 

Priests called angels, being sent εὐαγγελίζειν, ana one sort of sacrifices 
εὐαγγέλια - - - - ib., and p. 260, note ἃ 

Though St. John doth not expressly call the bishops priests, yet he calls 
them so by other mystical names - ae - - - 270 
And sets forth their ministry as a proper priesthood - - - ib. 

He calls them priests in the same figurative way of writing as he calls 
Christians Jews - - - - - - fl 


The author’s prayer and conclusion in the words of St. Ambrose - Ξ 97} 


CONTENTS 


OF THE 


DIGNITY OF THE EPISCOPAL ORDER. 


CHAP. I. 


AN ANSWER TO THE FIRST CAPITAL OBJECTION AGAINST THE EPISCOPAL 
OFFICE BEING A FREE AND SPIRITUAL PRINCIPALITY FROM THE NOVELTY 
AND IMPROPRIETY OF THE EXPRESSION. 


Page 
Sect. .—THE DIGNITY OF THE ARCHIERATICAL OFFICE AMONG CHRIS- 
TIANS ILLUSTRATED AND CONFIRMED BY THE COMMON NOTIONS BOTH 
OF JEWS AND HEATHENS CONCERNING THE DIGNITY AND AUTHORITY 


OF THEIR SEVERAL PRIESTHOODS ~~ - - : - 273—277 
1. The dignity of the Jewish priesthood and pontificate, according to 
Philo and Josephus - - - - - 274, 275 
The declaration hereupon of King Agrippa to Caligula - - 275 
2. The dignity of the heathen priesthood and pontificate, as set forth by 
Dr. Potter and Grotius - - - - - - 276 
3. The comparison urged to give Christians a true light and notion of the 
dignity of their priesthood and episcopacy above the other - ib. 
4, The harmonious practice herein of primitive Christianity - - 277 
A passage of St. Ignatius referring to the three honourable orders in 
the Church, hence illustrated - - - - - ib, 


Sect. II.—THE TRUE NOTIONS OF THE FREE ESTATE OF THE CHURCH, 
AND ITS REAL DISTINCTION AS A SOCIETY FROM THE STATE SETTLED 
277—301 


1. Of the independent nature of the Church, as an unworldly society - 277 
2. Of the essential distinction between spiritual and temporal government 7b. 


XVili CONTENTS. 


Page 
3. Some reasons why that distinction is so little understood or considered, 
V1Z., 
1. The abuse of it by the Church of Rome; and - - - 278 
2. By dissenters - - - - - - - ib. 
3. The neglect of the clergy; δὰ - - - - - ib. 
4. The prejudice of lawyers - - - - ib. 
4, This proved to be the language of the Apostles and Apostolical 
writers - - - - - - - 279—282 
[a] Bishops were called spiritual princes or prefects in Scripture 
A bishop called by St. Paul 
l. προιστάμενος, and - = - - - - 219 
2. προεστὼς, being by the Greek and Latin fathers thus under- 
stood and applied; also’ - - - ib., and note y 


8, ἡγούμενος, which is the very title given to Christ Himself; 
and by his disciple St. Clement directly applied to the Apo- 
stles and their successors 279, 280, see note i; and pp. 306—308 


As by the Hellenistical Jews to their prince and high-priest - 281 
ἡγεμονία used by St. Luke for the supreme authority - - 282 

The title of 1. ἄρχων for the same reason, thus appropriated by ancient 
ecclesiastical writers - - - - - 282, 308 
2. βασιλεὺς, in the Apostolical Constitutions - - - 806 
8. δυνάστης - - - Ξ - - - ἐδ. 

ὅ. The reason of these princely titles being given to Christian bishops 

282—288 

The nature, distinction, and extent of the spiritual empire committed to the 
bishops, both in general and particular - - - - 283 
Casaubon de Libertate Ecclesiastica referred to for this - ib., see note v 


Which is the ecclesiastical ἀρχὴ mentioned by the council of 
Laodicea, and corroborated by the Apostolical canons and 


Constitutions = Ξ 288, 544. ; and 306 
With the concurring evidence of the primitive fathers - - ib. 
Their ἡγεμονία - - = - ᾿ Ξ 80 
The excellence of their principality - - - - 286 
Their δυναστεία = = 4 = Ξ 588 
Their βασιλεία - - - - - 806, sqq. 


6. Wherein and how far the spiritual government excels the temporal 
285 and 308 


7, That the bishops’ chairs were anciently called thrones - 289, 292 
The Apostolical throne - - - - - - 289 
Inthronization - - - - Ξ - - 290 
Catholic and cecumenical thrones - = = - 290, 291 

ἱεραρχία an holy principality ; bishopric a bishop’s principality - 291 

The chair of every bishop considered as the throne of Christ - - 292 
Of St. James, first bishop of Jerusalem - - - - 291 
The Greek ordinal ; Justinian’s code and novels; Dr. Lowth’s Subject 

of Church power, &c. - - - - - - 292 

Subscriptions in Christi nomine - - - - - 298 

St. Jerome’s exposition of Isai. lx. 17. - - - - ib, 


This proved to be most primitive by St. Clement, Ep. 1 ad Cor. 
cap. xiii, - - - - - - - 294 


CONTENTS, ΧΙΧ 


Page 
And agrees both with Irenzus and Tertullian - - 294, 295 
8. That they have every thing iu their office that denominates ἃ prince 

295—301 

1. An authority to make laws for the society - - - 295 

2. A right to challenge the obedience of all the members of it - ib. 
Of the fidelity hence required both of the people and clergy to their 

bishop - - - - - - 296, sqq. 

Nothing to be done without him in the society - 296, 298, 299 

How he stands in God’s and Christ’s stead - 292, 298, 544. 


Words which set forth the eminent spiritual power, authority, and 
dignity of bishops, used by the Apostles and Apostolical writers 
285, 289, 293, 296, 305 
9. That their authority to make laws and orders, and give directions for 
the society, is delegated to them from the invisible Bishop whom 
they represent - - - - - - - 299 


Sect. III.—Tue spisHorps HAD ORIGINALLY POWER TO COERCE OR COM- 
PEL THEIR SUBJECTS OF THE CLERGY AND LAITY, WITHOUT DISTINC- 
TION OF PERSONS, TO OBEY THEM, BY SPIRITUAL CENSURES AND 


PUNISHMENTS - - - - - - 3801—313 

(1.) The practice herein of the Apostolical age - - - 301—308 

The power of spiritual coercion, how and to whom derived - - 3801 
How exercised, 

(1.) By the Apostles - - - - - - 802 

By St. Peter, St. Paul, and St. John - - - - 808 

(2.) By their successors - - - - - - ib. 


The difference of the Apostolical rod and sword or axe 303, 304, note n 
An instance where the Church punishes for a crime which the State 


allows = 005) ἢ - - - - - - 3804 
The rectoral power cannot subsist without a coercive of the same kind 305, 307 
That in both these respects the episcopal office is a spiritual principality - ib. 
The comparison of the two offices, regal and episcopal - - 308, 309 
A very ancient description of an episcopal consecration - - - 310 
A Christian bishop held anciently equal to a Jewish high-priest - - 811 
(IL) The abuse of this practice in the latter ages of the Church censured 
311, 312 
1. By the canonists - - - - - - ib. 
2. By Calvinists - - - - - - - 377 
The false and arrogant maxim of the canonists about the subjection of 
the temporal to the ecclesiastical power, how introduced - 311, 312 
Confuted by the real difference between these two powers and jurisdic- 
tions - - - - - - - 312 
As stated by Hugo Floriacensis, Du Pin, and Bishop Beveridge - ib. 
(III.) The practice of the ancient Greek Church = - 305—825 


As the same appears by the testimonies of 
1. Constantine the Great - - -, = = 305, 351 


ΧΧ CONTENTS. 


Page 
2. The Apostolical Constitutions - - “ -  3805—309 
3. St. Gregory Nazianzen - - - - - 310, 311 
4, St. Chrysostom - - - . - - 915-24 
5. Eusebius - = - - = - - - 305 
6. Sozomen - - - - - - - - 325 
This doctrine publicly taught in the imperial city, and never objected 
against by the emperors, even when there was both opportunity and 
inclination so to do - - - - - - 824 
Sect. [V.—(IV.) THE PRACTICE OF THE ANCIENT LaTIN CuuRCH - 325 
The opinion and practice of the fathers of the Latin Church, delivered 
concerning episcopacy and its power = - - 820, sqq. 
1. Of St. Cyprian - - - - - - - 826 
2. Of St. Ambrose - - - - - 326—336, 347 
3. Of Facundus Hermianensis - - - - 330, 335 
4. Of Paulinus - - - - - 331, 332, note ἢ 
5. Of St. Hierome - - - - - - - 844 
6. Of St. Augustine’ - - - - - - - ib. 
7. Of Gelasius - - - - - - - 349 
Sect. V.—THE OPINION AND PRACTICE OF THE CHRISTIAN EMPERORS 
FROM THE BEGINNING - - - Ξ - 336—344 
They looked on themselves as laics, and in that respect subjects of the 
Church - - - = - - - 886, 337 
The distinction of laity and clergy not only older than popery 338, 339 
But as old even as the very first ages of Christianity 339, 355 
And acknowledged by our constitution - - - - 338 
And even by Henry VIII. and Edward VI. - - - ib 
The use of the word laity in Scripture - - = - 339, 340 
And in Apostolical writers - - - - - 840, 841 
Thence received by Tertullian and St. Cyprian = - - 342 


Sect. VI.—(Or THE MUTUAL RELATIONS OF THE SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL 
POWERS. | 


An argument for the great dignity of the episcopal office, as prophesied of 


in Ps, xlv. - - - - - - - - 844 
And as in ver, 16, interpreted both by St. Hierome and St. Augustine ἐφ. 
And ver. 17 by Eusebius Cesariensis - - - 846, 346 


And as confirmed by the decisions of emperors themselves, as well as 
of bishops in their letters to them, pursuant to sucha claim 347—353 


ee 


CONTENTS. ΧΕΙ 
Page 
The difference between Church and State, according to the bounds which 
Christ has set betwixt them : - - - 348, 351, 368 
The different origins and mutual subordinations of the spiritual and tem- 
poral powers, fully set forth, 
1. By St. Ambrose - - - = - - 847 
2. By the emperor Justinian, and the civil law of the empire 
347, note p, 348 


3. By Hosius, in his letter to Constantius - - - 848 

4. By Gelasius in his to Anastasius, &c. - - 049, sqq. 

5. By Symmachus, in his to the same emperor - - 3651, 352 
Casaubon, de Libertate Ecclesiastica, and Du Pin, de Antiqua Ecclesie 

Disciplina, hereupon referred to - - - - 349, note w 


The Catholic practice for the first five hundred years of the Church con- 
cerning the liberty and dignity of the episcopal order, how and by whom 
changed - - - - - - - 3651, sqq. 

The mistake of our lawyers about the subjection of the ecclesiastical to the 
temporal power, how and when introduced - - - 338, 360 

Considerations upon the act of supremacy: viz., that it ought to be taken 
in a sense, 

1. Consistent with other acts of parliament, and with Magna Charta 355, 357 
2. Which saves, and not which destroys the distinction of the sacerdotal 


from the civil power - - - - - 2 Ap 
3. Consistent with the spiritual power of the keys - - - ib. 
The confession hereupon of Sir Edward Coke - - - - 357 
Sect. VII.—Tue OBJECTION FROM LAW CONSIDERED - - 860—368 
How Henry the Eighth exercised his modern supremacy = - 360 
An haughty preface of his to a Latin Bible - - - - 358 
An observation on a medal of his, with an arrogant inscription in Latin, 
Greek, and Hebrew - - - - - - 361 
On the ecclesiastical commission given by him to Cromwell = - 362 
Ecclesiastical preferments and benefices given by Edward the Sixth to 
this Cromwell and other laymen’ - = - > - ib 
Reflections upon the conduct of the clergy in those two reigns - - 365 
The judgment of lawyers concerning the ecclesiastical supremacy - - ib, 
Sir Edward Coke wherein faulty - - - - 960, 367 
A learned answer to him recommended, but with two restrictions 367, 368 


Exemption of persons and goods of the clergy from temporal tribunals - 368 


Sect. VITI.—Tue opsecTION FROM SCRIPTURE CONSIDERED - 368—376 


Our Lord’s injunction to His Apostles against assuming authority and titles 
[such] as did not belong to them looked carefully into, and retorted 
upon the objectors - - - = - = - 369 


Xxil CONTENTS. 


Page 

The honourable titles of Apostle and Bishop Ξ = - 369, 370 
The concurrent testimony of St. Chrysostom and St. Hierome with the 

true state of the case - - - - - - ib. 

The character and testimony of Hugo Floriacensis to the same purpose 9710 

Titles of honour given of old to bishops - - - 371— 374 
The difficulty from a canon of the African Church examined, and the 

true sense of it and of the whole Catholic Church discovered - 375 


That all bishops are principes sacerdotum, and summi sacerdotes ; but none 
of them principes episcoporum, shewn to be the sense of Tertullian and 


Facundus Hermianensis, in consent with the African fathers - 4b. 
Also of the commentators Balsamon and Zonaras, together with St. 
Hierome - - - - - - - 376, note 
CHAPS iI: 


AN ANSWER TO THE SECOND CAPITAL OBJECYION AGAINST THE DIGNITY 
AND AUTHORITY OF THIS OFFICE, FROM THE CHURCH'S INDEPENDENCY 
BEING A PRESBYTERIAN DOCTRINE. 


Sect, I.—THE DISTINCTION OF THE POWER AND POLITY OF THE CHURCH 
FROM THAT OF THE STATE, BY DIVINE INSTITUTION, WHICH PreEs- 
BYTERIAN WRITERS SO MUCH INSIST ON, IS PROPERLY NO PRESBYTE- 
RIAN, BUT A CATHOLIC DOCTRINE~ - - 3 - > 377380 


1. The doctrine of Church power and independency to be carefully dis- 
tinguished from the abuse of it = - - - = 
Security against invading the prince’s rights, and encroachments 


in ordine ad spiritualia - - - - - - 378 
Wherein the peace of the Church and a Christian State consists —- =) ib: 
2. The abuse of this doctrine, whether by Presbyterians or Papists, no 
reflection upon the doctrine itself - - - ib., 382, 394 
3. How it is founded on positive Divine institution, but misapplied by the 
Presbyterians - - = - - - 378, 381 
Of Presbyterian mixtures and corruptions - 378, 386, 387 


4. Several truths asserted by the Presbyterians, and excepted against by 
Spotswood, for having been by them misapplied, to which the author 
here declares his full assent - - = 3 - 379 

Several passages in their confession of faith, and their books purposely 
written for the jus divinum of the ecclesiastical government and 
ministry, wherein he likewise joins with then - 5 - 380 


CONTENTS. XXill 


Page 
Secr. [].—Tue MISAPPLICATION AND ABUSE OF THIS POWER BY THE PRES- 
BYTPRIANS UTTERLY INCONSISTENT WITH ALL CIVIL ORDER, AND CON- 
TRARY TO THE GOSPEL - - - - - 93881—387 


1. This distinction of the power and polity of the Church from that of the 
State how determined by the Gospel, and how calculated for the peace 


of the latter = - - - - = - 381 

2. Made and declared by Christ Himself = - = =) (Hd, 

3. Nothing more visible than it for three hundred years together ey 
4. Nosound doctrine to be rejected because held by the Church’s enemies 

in other matters - = = = = = - 382 

The author’s resolution herein the same as that of St. Ignatius = = lee 


5. The sentiment of the Independents concerning Church power and inde- 
pendency considered, and compared with that of the Presbyterians 


- 382, sqq. 
The independency of the Church on the State, gure divino, as laid 
down by Mr. Nye in his book about the oath of supremacy - ib. 


Wherein he differs from the Presbyterian opinion, and how he 
qualifies that oath to make it consistent with his independent 
power of the Church by Divine right = => 384; sqq. 


Sect. III.—NotTHine coNTRARY TO THE REGAL SUPREMACY, AS QUALI- 
FIED AND EXFLAINED BY OUR KINGS AND QUEENS, ADVANCED HERE 


UPON BY THE AUTHOR - = - 387—392 


How Bishop Bilson and Sanderson were approved for what they writ to the 
very same purpose, and never yet censured for derogating thereby from 


the rights of the prince - = = = - 388, 389 
Bishop Sanderson’s opinion of the episcopal order and office = - 388 
How far it affects the regal supremacy - = 5 = - ib. 
His Episcopacy no ways prejudicial to Regal Power = - Ξὸ ἐδ. 
Excellently cleared by Dr. Lowth - Ξ = Ξ =) li 


An extract out of Bishop Bilson concerning the Divine original of the epi- 
scopal office and the monarchical government of every Church 389—392 
Which is also conformable to the sentiment of Dr. Isaac Barrow 391, note f 


Sect. [V.—NoTwitTHsTANDING THAT SOME MAY HAVE INVADED THE REGAL 
SUPREMACY UNDER PRETENCE OF THIS DOCTRINE, YET IT IS FOR THAT 
NEVERTHELESS CATHOLIC AND PRIMITIVE - = - 392—396 


1. The abuse of any power, or the possibility of its abuse, the weakest 

argument in the world against the reality of it = Ξ - 393 
2. The contrary opinion exposed to as great or greater difficulties = τὸ: 
3. The argument of Erastians and super-Erastians most novel and dan- 


gerous - - = = = - = PVE 


XXIV CONTENTS. 


Page 
4. The true state of the Saxon Church - - = - 394 

5. By whom the first invasion was made upon the rights and liberties of 
the English clergy - - - - - - ib. 

6. It is remarkable that the English people lost also their rights and 
liberties by the same - - = - - - ib. 

7. There is as much reason for holding the rectoral as the doctoral autho- 
rity of Christian bishops - - - = - - 395 

These anciently recognised as Christ’s vicegerents in His kingdom, 
independent of the kingdoms of the world = - - ib, 

And as such obeyed by all ranks of Christians, as well after as before 
the empire became Christian, emperors not excepted = - 396 

CRITICAL AND MISCELLANEOUS REMARKS. 
Honourable titles and appellations anciently given to Christian bishops. 

1. Προεστώς - Ξ - - - - 279, 306 
2. Mpoorarns, and Antistes - = - - 279, note y; 349 
3. Ἡγεμών and Ἡγούμενος - - - > - 280, note i 
4. “Apxwy - - < - - - 282, 288, see note c 
4. Κύριος, and Dominus Sanctus - - - - 871, 874 
6. Δεσπότης - - - - Ξ - 371, 372 
7. Papa, a general name for all bishops : Ξ = - 872 


Words setting forth the eminent dignity and authority of the episcopal office. 
1. ᾿Αρχή. 2. ‘lepapxia, hierarchy. 3. Ἡγεμονία. 4. ᾿Εξουσία. 5. Amo- 
στολή. 6. Ὑπατία. 7. Δυναστεία. 8. Βασιλεία. 9. Σκῆπτρον. 10. 

Θρόνος - - = 279—292, 306—309, 316—318, 349 


Words expressing the subjection and obedience due to them, both from 
clergy and laity. 


1. Εἰδέναι, to value, esteem, and regard - - - 296, note i 
2. Προσέχειν, to have a deference to - - - 298, note q 
3. Δέχεσθαι, to recognise and submit to - - - 800, note c 
4. “Ὑπακούειν, to obey - - - - - - ib. 
5. ᾿Ακολουθεῖν, to adhere to with the highest fidelity - - 296, note g 
6. Ὑποτάσσεσθαι, to be subordinate in their respective lots; and ᾽Αντι- 
τάσσεσθαι, to rebel, or go out of their order 298, note τ; 299, note t 
7. ᾿Αναψύχειν. 8. Svyxwpeiv - - - - 800, note c 
Ἐπίσκοπος and Βασιλεύς, in Hesychius the same - = - - 809 
Ἱερεύς and sacerdos used to signify a bishop, and Ἱερωσύνη for the episcopal 
dignity - - - - - 297, notem; 314, noteu 
Λαϊκὸς ἄνθρωπος in St. Clement, &c. Ξ - 840, sqq.; see note k 
And Λαός - - - - = = - - 842 
FIA700s, a name given in Scripture to the laity Ξ τ 340, see note g 


Πλήρωμα for the same - - - - > = - 342 


CONTENTS. XXV 
᾿ Page 

Rules of the canon law concerning the sacerdotal rights 
823, 324, notes k, m; 350, note z 


Rules of the civil law concerning them - = - - 347, note p 
St. Ambrose’s treatment of the emperor Theodosius approved by the Church 

of England - - - - = - - 331, notem 
The ancient custom of emperors bowing the head at receiving the bishop’s 

blessing - - - = - - ~ 314, note s 
An apology for making use of the Apostolical Constitutions - - 309 
Father, a solemn appellation of God with Jews and pagans 274, and note d 
The Abrahamical old Father a title given to Hosius - - - 348 


The medal of King Henry VIII. = τ - - - 361 








CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD 


ASSERTED. 


CHAP. 1. 


THE GRAND OBJECTION AGAINST THE CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD, FROM THE 
SILENCE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, CONSIDERED, 


REVEREND Sir, 


I rHanxk you for putting me in mind of what you think The occa- 
will be objected against the fourth proposition in my first eee i 
letter*. You grant I have sufficiently proved from Scripture {i's trea- 
that the Christian Church, by its constitution, is a royal or 
regal priesthood, or sacerdotal kingdom? ; but that I have not 
proved from it that the ministers of the Church are priests, 
which you say will be brought as an objection by some men 
against the second reason which I give, why the Church is 
called a royal or regal priesthood, to wit, ‘‘ because the royal 
priest or sacerdotal king of it, Christ Jesus, hath com- 


mitted the government and administration of His kingdom 


to priests.” 


a (This most probably is the first 
letter sent to Serjeant Geers: for the 
mention of this, and the circumstances 
of the composition of this discourse, 
see the Prefatory Discourse, vol. i. pp. 
61, 62, and the notes there. 

The fourth proposition (ibid., p. 66) 
is, ‘IV. That the Church, or incor- 
porate body of Christians, is by its con- 
stitution a holy, royal, or regal priest- 
hood, as it is called in the Scriptures. 
First, because Christ the head of it, is 
the antitype of Melchisedec, and as 
such, a sacerdotal sovereign, or regal 
priest. And secondly, because this 
sacerdotal Sovereign has committed the 


HICKES, 


You tell me those men will be sure to observe 


government and administration of His 
kingdom to ministerial priests, who, as 
I must often put you in mind, are the 
vicars, substitutes, legates, represen- 
tatives, or vicegerents of their royal, 
sacerdotal Lord and Master, in His 
kingly, as well as His priestly office, 
throughout all the districts and domi- 
nions of His spiritual kingdom upon 
earth.’’ | 

> [This proof is contained in the 
third proposition, and the passages of 
Scripture and of the fathers given in 
support of it. See Prefat. Disc., pp. 
64—66, and the notes there: and be- 
low, note n, p. 5.] 


2 Objection that Christian Ministers are never 


cHRISTIAN against me, that the ministers of Christ in the whole New 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Testament are not once called priests, nor their ministry 
priesthood; but that those names or titles grew into use 
among the ecclesiastical writers after the times in which the 
Scriptures were written. This, Sir, you say, is expressly 
affirmed by Chemnitius, in the following words*: “In 
the writings of the New Testament the name of priest and 
priesthood is never given to the ministry of the Gospel, but 
the custom of calling the ministry priesthood, and the minis- 
ters priests, came to prevail from the use of those names in 
ecclesiastical writers.” And that bishops are proper priests 
you say is affirmed by a late writer‘, to be “absolutely re- 
jected by the whole Protestant communion.” This writer 
seconds himself with great assurance in another book*, where 
he tells us, that when the author of the Second Defence of 
the Church of England denied bishops to be priests in the 
proper sense of the word, “he spake in the language that 
hath been current in this Church ever since the Reforma- 
tion. And for his own part, he saith, he cannot conceive 
why the author of the Regale and Pontificate asserted a 
proper priesthood, unless it were to make way for a proper 
sacrifice, and if that be the reason, (saith he, very igno- 
rantly as well as maliciously,) it is easy to guess what men 
would be at.” Indeed, it is easier to guess from whom he 





© Examen Concil. Trident. [pars ii-] 
de Sacram. Ordin., cap. 1. [In Scrip- 
tura Novi Testamenti appellatio sacer- 
dotum et sacerdotii nusquam tribuitur 
ministerio Novi Testamenti. Sed ec- 
clesiasticorum scriptorum usu invaluit, 
ministerium vocare sacerdotium, et mi- 
nistros sacerdotes. p. 259. Franc. 1574. | 

4 Second Defence of the Church of 
England, from the Charge of Schism 
and Heresy, [as laid against it by the 
Vindicator of the deprived Bishops, 
Lond. 1698; 1. 6. Dodwell, (in his Vin- 
dication of the deprived Bishops, 1692, 
and the Defence of it, 1695.) ‘He 
positively affirms our bishops to be 
properly priests, and that of a more 
noble order too than the Aaronical, 
even the order of Melchisedec. And 
what is it, | wonder, that makes him 
so readily admit that which, by his 
own confession, is so very difficultly 
admitted by many, (that which is ab- 
solutely rejected by the whole Pro- 


testant communion, he should have 
said,) viz., that bishops are properly 
priests, and the Eucharist a proper 
sacrifice.’’] p. 8. [The author’s name 
is not known. Hickes afterwards says, 
‘‘your late writer and his second.’’ ] 

* In a book entituled, The Regal 
Supremacy in Ecclesiastical Affairs 
asserted; in a Discourse occasioned by 
the Case of the Regale and Pontificate. 
[London, 1701. The passage referred 
to is, ‘As for the author cited by the 
objector, &c., his words have been 
grossly misrepresented; for he doth 
not positively deny that there are any 
priests or priesthood in the Church; 
but only that there are any priests in 
the proper sense of the word. And he 
spake in the language that hath been 
current in the Church ever since the 
Reformation.”—p. 59. This work was 
answered by Leslie in a Defence, &c., 
in 1702. See his Theol. Works, vol. i. 
Ρ. 493. | 


called Priests in the New Testament. 3 


borrowed this phrase, and at his ill meaning in it, which 
doth not only reflect, as he intended, upon that learned 
writer, but on the ancient fathers and councils, who thought 
the holy Eucharist a proper sacrifice, and upon our first 
reformers, as may be seen in our first liturgy’, and upon 
those learned bishops’ in both kingdoms who compiled the 
liturgy of the Church of Scotland, and upon Bishop Andrews, 
Mr. Mede, and some other very learned men now living, 
mentioned in the following discourse. Nay, he is so very 
self-assured as to affirm, that “the priesthood in a proper 
sense is not to be proved";” and yet he brings no other 
argument for his assertion but the single authority of one 
man, Dr. Outram‘, to whom he sends the author of the 
Regale as a scholar to his master, to learn “the difference 
betwixt a proper priesthood and the evangelical ministry.” 
And that he might oblige that excellent writer to hearken to 
him with all deference and submission, as a disciple, he tells 
him that he was “as great a man as this Church ever had.” 


f Commonly called the First Book 
of K. Edward VI. [See Appendix, No. 
i.; and for the Scottish Liturgy, Ap- 
pendix, No. ii. See also Prefatory Dis- 
course, vol. i. pp. 126, sqq. and p. 
133. ] 

& Archbishop Spottiswood and Arch- 
bishop Laud, Xc. [Spottiswood, arch- 
bishop of St. Andrew’s, Maxwell, bishop 
of Ross, and Wedderburne of Dumblane, 
were the most active in the work; with 
Whitford of Brechin, Guthrie of Mo- 
ray, and Lindsay of Glasgow. They 
requested Laud’s assistance, and the 
book being first prepared in Scotland, 
was submitted to the consideration of 
Laud, Juxon, and Wren; but from 
Juxon’s engagements as lord treasurer 
the burden of the work devolved on the 
other two.—Heylin’s Life of Laud, p. 
504. | 
ἔν {The Regal Supremacy, &c., p. 

i De Sacrificiis [libri duo; quorum 
altero explicantur omnia Judzorum, 
nonnulla gentium profanarum sacrifi- 
cia; altero sacrificium Christi ;] lib. i. 
cap. 19. ὃ 5. p. 222. [ Lond. 1677. ] Jam 
vero quamvis S. Paulus (Rom. xy. 16, 
17.) tralatitio loquendi genere, &c. 
“And now, though St. Paul using a 
metaphorical kind of speech, assumes 
the person of a priest, and although 
all Christians, upon the account of 


those spiritual sacrifices which they 
daily offer unto God, are sometimes 
called priests { Rev. i.6.]; yet it is to be 
noted, that no ministers of the Gospel, 
of what order soever, are upon the ac- 
count of their office called priests or 
high-priests. Which I therefore ob- 
serve, that you may understand the 
great difference betwixt the evangelical 
ministry, and the Aaronical priest- 
hood: which chiefly appears in this, 
that the former is ordained for God in 
things pertaining to men, but the latter 
for men in things pertaining to God. 
From whence we may learn this also, 
that that hath chiefly to do with men, 
but this to do with God: to this we 
may add, that the priesthood of Christ, 
and not the evangelical ministry, suc- 
ceeds the Jewish priesthood. So that 
now there is none but Christ Himself, 
who by authority derived from God, is 
a priest or high-priest, that is, an ad- 
vocate for men with God.’’ 

k [“ But now to shew this author, if 
he will vouchsafe to learn, not from me, 
but from as great a man as this Church 
ever had, wherein lies the difference 
between a proper priesthood and the 
evangelical ministry, I shall desire him 
to consider this passage of Dr. Out- 
ram’s,’’ &c.—The Regal Supremacy, 
&c. p.62. Dr. William Outram was a 
fellow of Christ’s College, Cambridge ; 


B2 


CHAP, L 


SECT. I. 


4 Value of Dr. Outram’s authority. Grotius. 


curistian He was indeed a learned and a pious man, and an ornament 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


to the Church, and his learning and piety make me honour 
his memory. Particularly he was well versed in the Hebrew 
and rabbinical learning; but even in that, which was his 
chief study and talent, there were many eminent men of the 
Church, who flourished before him and in his time, whom he 
would have acknowledged his superiors, as Mr. Nic. Fuller, 
Dr. Pocock, Bp. Walton, Dr. Lightfoot, not to mention 
others. And as for the knowledge of the fathers and coun- 
cils, which is so requisite for a divine, I wish he had been as 
well versed in them as in Ben Maimon and Abarbanel, and 
then indeed he might have been as great a man as this au- 
thor, for his own purpose, describes him to have been, even 
a star of the first magnitude in the firmament of the Church. 
But, Sir, we injure the memories of such worthy men when 
we stretch their characters, and make them greater than 
they were; and therefore, as writers should take care not to 
lessen the just worth and greatness of authors when they 
give testimony against them, so ought they not to magnify 
and aggrandize them above what is meet, when they are on 
their side, especially when they reason only from their au- 
thority, as your late writer, in both his books, doth in a point 
wherein, against the voice of antiquity, it did not become 
him to be so dogmatical and assured. 

But Grotius writes on this subject with more modesty 
than this gentleman; for he, when speaking of the Christian 
priesthood, writes thus!: ‘Truly it was a received custom 


archdeacon of Leicester, 1669; after- make it sensible how great they were; 


wards prebendary of Westminster, and 
rector of St. Margaret’s. He diedin 1679, 
aged 54. The only work published by 
himself was the one here mentioned. 
After his death a volume of twenty ser- 
mons was published by Dr. Gardiner, 
afterwards bishop of Lincoln ; who pre- 
fixed a preface to a second edition in 
1697, in which he says, “ His extraor- 
dinary skill in rabbinical learning he 
hath made appear in his book De Sa- 
crificiis, wherein he hath also given a 
proof of his profound skill in the high- 
est points of Divine wisdom. But 
what his abilities were in other parts 
both of Divine and human knowledge, 
he had not leisure enough from his 
ministerial labours to let the world 
know: nor have I leisure enough to 


or to represent the gravity, sobriety, 
simplicity, truth, and plainness of his 
conversation, his devotion to God, and 
his charity to the neighbourhood,” &c. 
His epitaph in Westminster Abbey 
says that by his great labours and 
application of mind in the study of the 
Holy Scriptures and the fathers, he 
contracted the disease of the stone, of 
which he died.—See Biogr. Britannica, 
1760. | 

{Ut autem precones Novi Testa- 
menti Sacerdotes speciatim appellen- 
tur, est quidem receptum antiqua ec- 
clesiz consuetudine, sed non de nihilo 
est quod ab eo loquendi genere et 
Christus ipse, et ejus Apostoli semper 
abstinuerunt. Idque satis esse debet 
ad nos admonendos ne passim atque 


The question does not affect Hickes’ main argument. 5 


in the ancient Church to call the preachers of the Gospel 
priests, but there was some reason why Christ and His Apo- 
stles abstained from that way of speaking, which is sufficient 
to admonish us, lest we lightly and inconsiderately draw an 
argument (about some things mentioned there) from the 
Levitical priests to the ministers of the Gospel, because 
there is a great difference of one from the other in the func- 
tion and the succession of the persons to it.” Before I pro- 
ceed to obviate that objection, I must observe that it makes 
no great difference as to my undertaking in the first letter™, 
whether bishops be, properly speaking, priests or not, or 
whether or no they be so much as priests in an improper 
sense; that is, whether they are priests at all or no. For 
my chief design there is to shew, that they are Christ’s 
stewards in His house; His vicegerents upon earth in the 
several principalities or dominions of His spiritual king- 
dom ; and that all Christians as such, kings and senates, as 
well as their people, are subjects to them as to His vice- 
gerents, or chief ministers over the Catholic Church". To 
prove this is my chief design in my propositions®, and this is 
true, whether they be admitted to be priests or no; or whe- 
ther or no they represent Christ the antitypal Melchisedec 
in His double capacity, and are servants and ministers under 
Him in the several dominions of His spiritual kingdom, both 
as High-Priest and King. You know, Sir, the presbyterians, 
who do not allow bishops and presbyters to be priests, yet 
assert the nature of Christ’s spiritual kingdom, and all the 
rights of it, to be independent of the kingdoms of the world ; 
and carry the spiritual power and authority of the presby- 


promiscue a sacerdotibus Leviticis ad 
Evangelii ministros argumentum du- 
camus, cum et in ipso munere et in 
modo personas designandi latum sit 
discrimen.—De Imperio Summarum 
Potestatum circa Sacra, (opus posthu- 
mum,) cap. 11. ὃ 5. Grotii Opera, tom. 
iv. p. 210, a. Lond. 1679.] 

m [See note, Ὁ. 1. That undertaking 
ultimately had reference to the non- 
juring question. See Pref. Discourse, 
vol. i. p. 62. note g. | 

τί [He refers to Prop. III. ‘“ Christ 
the archetypal, eternal Melchisedec, is 
the King of this spiritual kingdom, 
Lord of this spiritual dominion, and 
supreme Head of this spiritual corpo- 


ration; and the bishops, as successors 
to the Apostles, are under Him, by 
commission derived from Him, spiri- 
tual lords, chiefs, and princes, as well 
as priests in His spiritual kingdom ; 
to whom, in their respective spiritual 
dominions and jurisdictions, He re- 
quires obedience of all His subjects, of 
what temporal rank or condition soever, 
as to His stewards, vicegerents, or chief 
ministers over His Church.’’—Pref. 
Dise., vol. i. pp. 64—66. ] 

° The first four of which are printed 
in the beginning of the Prefatory An- 
swer. [The whole number was first 
twenty-three, afterwards forty. See 
Pref. Disc., vol. i. p. 62. note g. | 


6 The objection obviated by three considerations. 


curistran tery, as His ministry, to as great a height as I have done 
ἤρου that of bishops, whom, agreeably to the consentient testi- 
~ mony of ecclesiastical writers and councils, I assert to be 
priests, and their authority to be a sacerdotal authority, and 
their college in every Christian province, and in and through 
the whole world, to be a sacerdotal college. And I am nei- 
ther afraid nor ashamed to say, that I will adhere to this 
consentient authority and tradition of the ancient Church, 
in the best and purest ages of it; though it were rejected, as 
your late writer falsely asserts, “by the whole Protestant 
communion,” or as he should have said, by all the Protest- 
ant Churches; for they are many and different, and few of 
them, as the common adversary observes, are in communion 

one with another. 


sncr.._ IJ. Having premised this, I proceed, as you advised me, 
πὸ aoe to obviate the objection which these men will be apt to make 
amen against the second reason of my fourth proposition, not be- 


lieving bishops and presbyters to be priests, or proper priests , 
because they are neither called priests, nor is their office 
or ministry called priesthood in the Scriptures of the New 
Testament, which hath been also observed by many learned 
men who yet never doubted but that they were priests. 
Wherefore, to set my answer to this objection in as clear a 
light as I can, I will shew first, that it is not a good argu- 
ment to prove that the ministers of the Christian Church are 
not priests or their office not a priesthood, because they are 
not so called in the New Testament. Secondly, I will shew, 
that though the names of priests and priesthood, as applied 
to the ministers and ministry of Christ, are not found in the 
New Testament, yet the thing signified by those names is 
there, and properly belongs to them. And thirdly, I will 
give you the reasons for which learned men conjecture they 
are not called by those names in the writings of the New 
Testament. 
secr.m. III. First, then, I will shew that it is no good argument to 
pene ae prove the bishops and presbyters of the Christian Church not 
ie New to be priests, or their respective offices a priesthood, because 
no objec- those names are not given them in the Scriptures of the New 
mon. Testament. For there are many things contained in the 
New Testament which have been taught for Gospel-truths 


The doctrine may be in Scripture, though not the name. 7 


and doctrines by the Catholic Church, though the names or 
terms by which they are expressed and taught are not to be 
found there. The word or term ‘ original sin, or birth-sinP,’ 
is not to be found in the whole Bible, and yet because the 
thing signified by it is there, very few divines or other Chris- 
tians doubt of the doctrine signified by it, as it was taught 
in the time of the Pelagian controversy, and is defined in the 
ninth article of our Church. The Divine authority of the 
New Testament, is and hath been a previous article of faith 
taught and believed in all Churches, and yet there is not one 
book in it which either saith of itself, or of the whole Testa- 
ment, that it is of Divine authority, or was written by Divine 
inspiration. So the admitting women as well as men to the 
holy Eucharist, hath been the universal custom and practice 
of the Church; and yet no one book of the New Testament 
saith in express words, that women were admitted to the 
holy Sacrament, indeed no more than that infants were bap- 
tized. ‘There are many more doctrines and practices, which 
have been taught and professed in all Churches and ages as 
common principles of Christianity%, of which we have no 


» [X. Article of Religion. [of Origi- 
nal or Birth Sin.] Ministration of 
Public Baptism for Infants. ‘‘ Dearly 
beloved, forasmuch as all men are con- 
ceived and born in sin,’”’ ὅτ. 

4 See Dr. William Beveridge’s Proce- 
mium before his Codex CanonumEccles. 
Primitive Vindicat. [§ 2. Lond. 1678. 
Multa autem sunt, que, licet in sacris 
Scripturis expresse ac definite non le- 
gantur, communi tamen omnium Chris- 
tianorum consensione ex iis eruuntur. 
Exempli gratia, tres distinctas in sacro 
sancta Trinitate personas venerandas 
esse, Patrem, Filium, et Spiritum 
Sanctum, eosque singulos verum esse 
Deum et tamen unum tantummodo 
esse Deum: Christum θεάνθρωπον esse, 
vere Deum, ac vere hominem in una 
eademque persona. Hee et similia, 
quamvis totidem verbis ac syllabis, nec 
in veteri nec in novo Instrumento tra- 
duntur, de iis tamen, ut utroque fun- 
datis, inter omnes semper convenit 
Christianos: demptis tantummodo pau- 
cis quibusdam heereticis, quorum in 
religione haud major habenda est ratio 
quam monstrorum in natura. Sic 
etiam infantes sacro baptismate ablu- 
endos esse, et sponsores ad illud Sa- 


cramentum adhibendos: Dominicam 
sive primam per singulas septimanas 
feriam religiose observandam esse: 
Passionis, Resurrectionis, et Ascensionis 
Domini ad eccelum, necnon Spiritus 
Sancti adventus commemorationem per 
singulos annos peragendam: LEccle- 
siam ubique per episcopos a presby- 
teris distinctos iisque prelatos admi- 
nistrandum esse. Hee et alia hujus- 
modi nusquam in sacris Seripturis di- 
serte ac nominatim precipiuntur; sed 
nihilominus per mille et quadringentos 
ab Apostolis annos in publicum Eccle- 
siz usum ubique recepta fuerunt; nec 
ullam intra illud tempus invenire est 
Ecclesiam, in ea non consentientem. 
Adeo ut quasi communes sunt notiones 
omnium ab origine Christianorum ani- 
mis insite, non tam ex ullis particu- 
laribus Sacre Scripture locis, quam 
ex omnibus: ex generali totius Evan- 
gelii scopo et tenore; ex ipsa religionis 
in eo stabilitze natura et proposito; at- 
que ex constanti denique Apostolorum 
traditione, qui ecclesiasticos hujusmodi 
ritus, et generales, ut ita loquar, Evan- 
gelii interpretationes per universum 
terrarum orbem una cum fide propa- 
garunt. Alioguin enim non incredibile 


CHAP. I. 


SECT, IL. 


8 Objection would hold against the chief Christian doctrines. 


cuRIstiAN express mention in the New Testament, nor can find therem 


PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


the name or terms in which they have been taught and 
defined by the Catholic Church. The words Person or 
Trinity, or Trinity in Unity are not there ; ὁμοούσιος or con- 
substantial, as the Arians objected, are not there to be found ; 
nor is θεάνθρωπος in all the Greek Testament; or is it any 
where expressly, or in terms therein taught, that Jesus Christ 
is very God and very man in one and the same person.’ The 
like is to be said of the Deity of the Holy Ghost, who, as the 
Unitarians object’, is not once expressly affirmed to be God 
in all the Scriptures of the New Testament. The same may be 
said of the doctrine of satisfaction’, which is there, though not 
under that name; and also of infant baptism ; the religious 
observation of the first day of the week, by Christians called 
the Lord’s day ; and of the polity or government of the Church 
by bishops superior to and distinct from presbyters, which 
yet was the form of government in all Churches and ages for 
almost sixteen hundred years from the time of the Apostles, 
though it is not in express words mentioned or described in 
the holy Scriptures. So the doctrine of the two Sacraments‘ 
is not expressly to be found there, nor of the Eucharist’s 
being a real, external, and material oblation, though the one, 


imo vero impossibile prorsus esset, ut 
tam unanimi consensione, ubique, et 
semper, et ab omnibus reciperentur. ] 

© Wolzogenii Comment. in Act. 
Apost., cap. v. ver. 3. Ut mentireris in 
Spiritum Sanctum. Bene hoc loco 
Piscator in Scholiis, ‘ Spiritum Sanc- 
tum, id est, nos Apostolos, in quibus 
agit Spiritus Sanctus, et quibus reve- 
lat, quz opus est ad edificationem 
Ecclesiz. Metonymia adjuncti.’ ver. 
4. Non mentitus es hominibus, sed 
Deo. Simile huic dictum est, Exod. 
xvi.; ubi postquam (ver. 2.) scriptum 
est congregationem Israelitarum mur- 
murasse contra Mosen, et contra Aaro- 
nem; deinde (ver. 8.) dicitur: non 
contra nos murmurationes vestra, sed 
contra Dominum. Et Numb. xx.; post- 
quam dictum est (ver. 3.), jurgatum 
esse populum cum Mose; postea (ver. 
13.) dicitur ibi tune jurgatos esse filios 
Israelis cum Domino, seu Jehovah. 
Vide etiam Matt. x. 40; xviii. 5; 
Mare. ix. 87; Luc. x. 16; 1 Cor. viii. 12. 
[ He proceeds, Non recte ergo hine qui- 
dam concludunt Spiritum Sanctum hoc 


loco expresse vocari Deum.—Johannis 
Ludovici Wolzogenii Baronis Austriaci 
Op., tom. ii. p. 30. apud Bibliothecam 
Fratrum Polonorum., Irenopoli. 1656. 
Piscator however had said on ver. 4, Deo, 
τῷ @cg* nempe Spiritui Sancto, qui in 
nobis agit, et arcana quum opus est, 
nobis revelat.—Johannis Piscatoris 
Commentarii, tom. iii. in N. T. p. 392. 
Herbonz Nass. 1638. } 

5 [ By ‘‘ satisfaction’? Hickes means 
the satisfaction made by the death of 
our Lord. } 

t See the Preface to my Second 
Collection of Controversial Letters, pp. 
lv, lvi. [ Lond. 1710. See note ο, vol. i. 
p- 1. Hickes is there replying to Dr. 
Hancock’s demand for Scripture proof 
of the Eucharistic Sacrifice; ‘* I might 
challenge him in return,’’ he says, ‘‘ to 
prove from Scripture that the Lord’s 
Supper is a Sacrament, and to give me 
out of it one express proof for that.’ 
Again; ‘‘ There is not one place in the 
Greek Testament where the Lord's 
Supper is called a mystery (the Greek 
word for Sacrament)” &c. } 


Terms transferred from Gentile to Christian uses. 9 


as well as the other, hath been the constant and invariable 
tradition of the Church, this to the time of the Reformation, 
and that to this day. So to give an example of another kind, 
the word μυσταγωγεῖν, which signifies to teach religious 
mysteries and rites ; μυσταγωγία, teaching religious mysteries 
and rites; mystes", hieromystes, mystagoyus, hierotelestes, 
and hierophantes*, a teacher of religious mysteries and rites, 
are not any of them once used in the New Testament ; and 
yet the things signified by them are there, for which reason 
many Christian writers thought it fit and proper to translate 
the use of them from heathenism to Christianity, and from 
the priesthoods, and religious rites and mysteries of the 
Gentiles to the Christian Church. St. Ignatius in his epistle 
to the Ephesiansy, tells them they were the disciples of St. 
Paul, Παύλου συμμύσται τοῦ ἡγιασμένου, for μύστης“ signifies 
a scholar as well as a master, and a learner as well as a 
teacher of holy mysteries ; and Tertullian in his Apology? doth 
by allusion call the Christian bishop pater sacrorum, who 
had among the Latins the same office as the mystes, my- 
stagogus, or hierophantes had among the Greeks. It is well 
known how the author of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy”, under 


ἱερὰ μυστήρια εἰση- 
Phavorinus adds, 


ἃ Ἱερομύστης" 
γούμενος. Suidas. 
καὶ διδάσκων. 

χ Ἱεροφάντης᾽ μυσταγωγὺσ, ἱερεύς. 
Suidas. 6 τὰ μυστήρια δεικνύων, is 
added by Hesychius. 

y [S. Ignat. Epist. ad Eph. c. xi. 
Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 14. ] 

2 Μύστητ᾽ ὃ τὰ μυστήρια ἐπιστάμενος, 
ἢ διδάσκων. Suidas. Μύστης" τελού- 
μενος, σιωπηλὸς τά μυστήρια μαθὼν, 
μεμνημένος. Hesych. 

2 At quin volentibus initiari moris 
est, opinor, prius patrem illum sacro- 
rum adire, que preparanda sunt de- 
scribere; tum ille, infans tibi neces- 
sarius, &c. [Apol.c. 8. Op., p. 9, A. 
Tertullian is contrasting heathen and 
Christian initiation. ] 

b He calls the Apostles ἑερομύστας, 
[οἱ τῆς καθ᾽ ,ἡ μᾶς θεολογικῆς παραδό- 
σεως ἱερομύστα. | Pseudo-Dionysii 
Areopagite De Divinis Nominibus, 
cap. ii. § 4. Op., tom. i. p. 317, D 
Venet. 1755.] And de Ecclesiast. 
Hierarchia, [cap. i. ὃ 4.1 he calls the 
Apostles and writers of the New Testa- 
ment ἱεροτελεστὰς, [σεπτότατα δὲ Ad- 
για ταῦτά φαμεν, ὅσα πρὸς τῶν ἐνθέων 


ἡμῶν ἱεροτελεστῶν ἐν ἁγιογράφοις ἡμῖν 
καὶ θεολογικαῖς δεδώρηται δέλτοι:.--- 
Ibid., p. 156, 1). and ὃ ὅ. p. 157. re- 
peatedly,] and Christ πρῶτον ἱεροτε- 
λεστὴν, according to Tertullian, who 
calls Him [ Adv. Mare. iv. ο. 35. p. 451, 
D.] authenticum Pontificem Dei Patris, 
eliminatorem humanarum macularum, 
ον et sacrificiorum zternum Antistitem. 
[The words πρῶτος ἱεροτελεστὴς do 
not occur in this passage of Dionysius, 
but thesentimentruns through the whole 
chapter. He also calls the catechetical 
institution into the Christian religion, 
μύησις: De Hierarch. Eccles. [μεμνυη- 
μένος occurs in this sense, 6. ii. § 2. p. 
168, B. and μύησις, de Hierarch. Ce- 
lest. c. ii. § 5. p. 16, C. as often else- 
where.] And the bishops (whom the 
historian calls ‘the priests of Christ’) 
[τοὺς ἱερέας τοῦ Χριστοῦ.) who in- 
structed Constantine the Great in the 
Christian religion, made no difficulty 
in what they said to him, to call bap- 
tism μύησις, the baptized μεμνημενθε, 
and the unbaptized ἀμύητοι; . [εἶναι.. 

ἀφορμὴν σωτηρίας, καὶ κάθαρμον ἁμαρ- 
τημάτων' ἀμυήτοις μὲν, μύησιν κατὰ τὸν 
νόμον τῆς ἐκκλησίας" τοῖς δὲ μεμυημέ- 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. IIT. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Matt. 13. 
28; Mark 
11. 10; 

Luke 7. 28; 
9. 2. 


[Col. 4. 3.] 


10 Christian Ministers are Stewards of Mysteries. 


the name of Dionysius Areopagita, affects the words. And Gre- 
gory Nazianzen saith’, that “Christ as a mystes taught His 
disciples the mysteries of the passover.” It would be tedious 
to shew how the fathers called the two Sacraments by the 
name of μυσταγωγία, nor need we wonder, when the word 
μυστήριον, ‘mystery,’ is so often used in the New Testament. 
The kingdom of heaven or the kingdom of God, as the 
Church is called by our Lord, had its institutions and mys- 
teries, and (1 Cor. iv. 1), the ministers of it are called the 
“stewards or dispensers of the mysteries of God ;” which ex- 
pression, whether Mr. Toland will or no‘, is a plain description 
or gloss of a mystagogue, even as plain and significant a de- 
scription of an hierophant or mystagogue as that of Hesy- 
chius‘, ‘a mystagogue is a priest who instructs, a learner of 
religious mysteries ;᾽ or that in Suidas®, “ἃ mystagogue is a 
priest, who is a teacher of mysteries.” Hence St. Paul, as an 
hierophant or mystagogue of the Gospel, desires the Colossians 
“to pray for him, that God would open unto him a door of ut- 
terance to speak the mystery of Christ.” If you desire to see 
more applicable to this purpose, you may consult 1 Cor. 1]. 4— 
7; 1 Tim. in. 16; Rom. xvi. 25; Eph. ii. ὃ, 4; Coloss. 1. 


vos, τὸ μὴ πάλιν ἁμαρτεῖν. |—Sozom. 
Hist. Eccl., lib. i. cap. 3. [ Hist. Eccl., 
tom. ii. p. 13. ] 

© (Xpiorbs) μυσταγωγεῖ τοὺς μαθητὰς 
τὸ πάσχα.---ὃ. Greg. Naz. Orat. xl. [§ 
30. Op., tom. i. p. 725, C.] 

4 [See Suicer, Thesaurus, tom. ii. 
p- 380, who, after giving the authori- 
ties referred to by Hickes, says, He 
voces usurpantur de Sacramentis; 1. 
de Baptismo; 2. de S. Coena; giving 
instances of each. ] 

e {Hickes refers to Toland’s work, 
entitled, Christianity not Mysterious: 
or a treatise shewing that there is no- 
thing in the Gospel contrary to reason, 
nor above it; and that no Christian 
doctrine can be properly called a mys- 
tery. London, 1698. He maintains, 
ch. i, sect. 3. § 6. p. 73, “that in the 
New Testament mystery is always 
used... for things naturally very in- 
telligible, but so covered by figurative 
words or rites, that reason could not 
discover them without special revela- 
tion; and that the vail is actually taken 
away; and that the doctrines so revealed 
cannot now be properly called myste- 
ries.’’ So ch. iii. sect. 8. § 30. p. 100, 


he interprets the words of the text, 
1 Cor. iv. 1, ‘‘the preachers of those 
doctrines which God was pleased to 
reveal;’’ and ch. v. sect. 8, after trac- 
ing, as he professes to do, the gradual 
introduction of ‘mystery’ into Chris- 
tianity from paganism, he says, § 84. 
p. 164, ‘‘their terms were exactly 
the same without any alteration; they 
both made use of the words ‘ initiating,’ 
μυεῖσθαι, and ‘perfecting,’ τελεῖσθαι. 
They both called their mysteries μυή- 
σεις, τελειώσεις, τελειωτικὰ, ἐποπτεῖαι, 
&e. They both looked upon initiation 
as a kind of deifying. And they both 
styled their priests mystagogues, mys- 
tes, hierotelestes, &c. | 

Ε Μυσταγωγός᾽ ἱερεὺς 6 τοὺς μύστας 
&ywv.—Hesych. 

§ Μυσταγωγόκ᾽ ἱερεὺς μυστηρίων δι- 
δάσκαλος. [Suidas. The words μυσ- 
τηρίων διδάσκαλος are enclosed in 
brackets in Gaisford’s edition.] Μυσ- 
ταγωγῶ. τὰ μυστήρια διδάσκω. [ Pha- 
vorinus. Μυσταγωγεῖ" αἰτιατικῇ. μυσ΄- 
τήρια ἐπιτελεῖ, ὡς μυστήρια ἄγει, ἢ 
ἐκδιδάσκει.  Suidas. μυστήριον ἄγει. 


Hesychius. } 


“ὦ τὰν ΔΕ el cake 


Distinction of Jewish and Christian Priesthood. 1k 


25—27; 11.2. Which places being considered, I believe it 
will be impossible for Mr. Toland, that bold enemy to all 
revealed religion", to give a good reason why a Christian 
priest, or pater sacratus, may not as properly be called a 
mystes in one sense for a mystagogue, (whose office it is to 
initiate into the mysteries of the Christian sect,) as well as 
the learners whom he initiates and instructs, are so called in 
the other. St. Ignatius, as I have shewed, so calls the latter ; 
and why we may not so esteem and call the former, I can 
give no reason, though the word is not to be found in the 
writings of the New Testament, since the thing, in other 
words, is denoted there. In like manner the ministers of 
the Christian Church have been ever deemed, and spoken of 
as priests from the time of the Apostles by the Church and 
Church writers, who could not be ignorant of the common 
notion of priesthood among Jews and Gentiles, and of the 
nature of their own ministry; and who had more sanctity 
than to usurp the title of priests, when they first began to be 
so called, if they had not known and believed themselves to 
be such, and their office, in which they ministered unto God, 
to be as truly and properly sacerdotal under the new law, 
as that of Aaron and his sons was under the old. It was 
indeed a priesthood of a different kind and religion, nay of 
a more simple kind, because of a more simple religion; of a 
more simple, free, and easy kind, because in conformity to 
Christianity, which was but reformed Judaism ; it was stripped 
of much ceremonial pomp, and many carnal rites; and 


OHAP. I. 


SECT, III. 


servile and burdensome observances “imposed upon them [Heb. 9. 
till the time of reformation ;” and particularly discharged of 1% 441 


all the sacrifices by slaughter and blood, as of goats, bulls, 
and calves, to which Christ put an end by His one offering 
up of Himself once upon the cross for the sins of the whole 
world. But then, though it was a more simple priesthood 
than the Levitical, yet nevertheless they thought it had the 
nature and notion of priesthood, as much as that ministry, 
or else it is difficult to imagine that the successors to the 
Apostles, after the destruction of Jerusalem, should arrogate 
and assume to themselves a title which did not truly belong 
to them, as ministers of the New Testament. They un- 


n [See vol. i. p. 51, note h.] 


12 Universal consent of Christians to the doctrine. 


curistian Goubtedly knew the reasons for which the Apostles and pres- 

RS byters in the infancy of the Church did not call themselves 
priests ; but if they had thought their office and ministry 
was not a priesthood, they would also have abstained from 
the title of priests after their example; but since they did 
not, it is reasonable to presume that they thought their office 
to be truly sacerdotal, and that the great difference which 
Grotius saith was between them, consisted in circumstance 
as to their different succession and designation, and not in 
essence or substance; as will appear from the Scriptures of 
the New Testament, as expounded by the consentient opinion 
and practice of all Christians till of late years. “ Andi as 
Tully saith, that ‘the consent of all men is the voice of 
nature :’ so the consent of all Christians in opinion and 
practice for so many ages, ought to be received as the un- 
doubted sense of the Scriptures, and the voice of the Catholic 
Church ;” and particularly as to this thing, as well as others, 
which I have proved by several instances are in the Scrip- 
tures of the New Testament, and may be proved from thence, 
though they are not named therein. 


i Dr. Beveridge’s Proemium [ὃ 2.7] 516 etiam in hujusmodi rebus consensus 
above cited, [note q, p. 7. Quemad- omnium Christianorum vox Evangelii 
modum enim omni in re ‘consensus merito habeatur. On this follows the 
omnium vox nature est,’ ut ait Cicero, passage quoted above. | 


CHAPTER II. 


THE POSITIVE FROOFS FOR THE CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD, UPON THE PRIN- 
CIPLES AND REASONINGS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 


I. Wuererore I proceed to shew in the second place, 
that though the names of priest and priesthood, as applied 
to bishops and presbyters, and their office, are not to be 
found in the New Testament; yet the things signified by 
them are there, and properly belong to the ministers and 
ministry ordained by Christ under the dispensation of the 
Gospel, which is the very end, substance, and verity of the 
Mosaic economy, and the fulfilling of the Mosaic law. 

To evince this, I begin with the description or definition st. Paul’s 
of an high-priest or priest, which the Apostle gives us in the pete: 
fifth chapter of his Epistle to the Hebrews, ver. 1. “ Every 
high-priest,” saith he, “taken from among men, is ordained 
for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both 
gifts and sacrifices for sins.” Or, “ Every high-priest is taken 
from among men, and ordained in things pertaining to God, 
that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins : that is, 
every high-priest is taken from among men, and ordained 
for men, to preside* in holy matters relating to God, or the 
worship of God!; or as the Syriac version renders the place™, 
“every high-priest among men stands for men in things that 
are of God,” i. e. every high-priest on earth among men 
stands in the presence of God to perform Divine offices for 
them, and “ for their benefit and good", to reconcile them to 


k Pro hominibus preest rebus divinis. 
—Castalio. [Biblia Sacra ex Sebast. 
Castalionis postrema recognitione cum 
annotationibus ejusdem, &c. Basilezx. 
1573. ] 

! Etabli pour les hommes en ce qui 
regarde le culte de Dieu.—Mons-Tes- 
tament. [Le nouveau Testament, tra- 
duit selon l’edition vulgate avec les 
differences des Grec (par le maistre de 
Sacy, Arnauld, Nicole, &c.) tom. 2. 
8vo. ed. 2. Mons. 1699.] Etabli pour 
les hommes, en ce qui regarde Dieu. 
—LeClere. [Le nouveau Testament, 
traduit sur l’original Grec, avec de 
remarques, per Jean le Clerc; tom. 2. 
4to, Amst. 1703. 


Hickes has selected the classical ver- 
sion of Castalio; and the then most re- 
cent ones, by the Port Royalists, and 
Le Clere, the great critic of his day, 
and of views quite opposed to himself. ] 


m [or pay [Peas ὦ; \\s 
41.109 ον fon 41.159 
eal [ax ταν UX fo 


Omnis enim pontifea qui est ex homini- 
bus, pro hominibus stat super tis que 
Dei sunt.—Vers. Syr. Biblia Polyglotta, 
Waltoni. tom. v. p. 856. ] 

" A cause des hommes, pour leur 
bien et leur utilité; afin de les recon- 
cilier ἃ Dieu, ou de leur obtenir quel- 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


SECT. II. 





A priest 

is a vice- 
gerent of 
God in His 
Church. 


Exod. 7. 1. 


14. Argument from Scripture descriptions of Priesthood. 


God, and God to them, or to obtain graces and favours to 
them from Him, and as it were to interpose between Him 
and them.” So in the second chapter of the same Epistle, 
ver. 17, the Apostle, describing the priesthood of Christ from 
the nature of the priesthood or priestly office among the 
Jews, saith, “in all things it behoveth Him to be made lke 
unto His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful 
high-priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconcilia- 
tion for the sins of the people.” 

II. Sir, you know the words in the original here and in 
the first verse of the fifth chapter are, τὰ πρὸς Tov Θεὸν, and 
perhaps you may also know, that the Apostle took them from 
the Greek translation of the Old Testament, Exod. xvii. 19, 
where Jethro saith unto Moses, πο πὶ Syn pyd ans an, γίνου 
σὺ τῷ λαῷ τὰ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν. In our translation, “ Be thou 
to the people to God-ward, that thou mayest bring the causes 
unto God.” In other versions®, “Be thou to the people before 
God,” or “in the presence of God,” or “ Be thou to the people, 
a parte Dei, on God’s part,” or as the vulgar Latin transla- 
tion?, “Be thou to the people in things pertaining to God.” 
Or4, “ Be thou for the people in things towards God,” or as 
Castalio, Tu populi rem apud Deum agito—<Do thou the 
people’s business with God.” So in Exod. iv. 16, where God 
told Moses that Aaron should be his prophet, and he should 
be Aaron’s prince, the Greek and Latin translations have it, 
“He shall speak for thee to the people, he shall be a mouth 
unto thee, and thou shalt be unto him in things’ pertain- 
ing to God*;” that is, thou shalt be unto him a king*. 


ques graces, et bienfaits de lui, et ainsi 
s’interposer entre Dieu et eux. In the 
great French Bible [commonly known 
as the Geneva Bible] on the place, 
published with large notes, [ Geneva, 
&c.] by Samuel and Henry Des Ma- 
rets, Amsterdam, 1669. 

9. {The Samaritan version of the 


words is "4V 2, "XA OTH 
MMALZANX “24P Esto tu pro 


populo ante Dominum. The Arabic, 


aS Kh vy? οἷν Paar ἜΣ 
Sis tu populo a parte Dei.—Walton, 
Polyglott, tom. i. p. 305. Pagninus’ 
version, corrected by Montanus; Esto 
tu populo coram Deo; commonly known 


as Montanus’ version, Antw. 1584. ] 

P Esto tu populo in his que ad Deum 
pertinent.—[ Vers. Vulgata. | 

4 Que tu sois pour Je peuple envers 
Dieu.— Great French Bible. [See 
note l.] 

τ pbs, Lelohim. 

5. [Vulg. Jpse loquetur pro te ad 
populum et erit os tuum; tu autem 
eris et in his que ad Deum pertinent. 
LXX. Καὶ αὐτός σοι λαλήσει πρὸς τὸν 
λαὸν καὶ αὐτὸς ἔσται σοι στόμα" συ δὲ 
αὐτῷ ἔσῃ τὰ Tpds τὸν Θεόν.) 

* Grot. [Inter Criticos Sacros, tom. 
i, pars 1. Annot. in Exod. p. 88. Amst. 
1698. Textus Hebreus habet,] Tu 
eris ipsi in Deum, id est, Jus gladii 
habebis in ipsum et alios.s Nunquam 


Meaning of the Hebrew word for Priest. 15 


From hence, Sir, I think it is plain, that the priest’s office 
is the same in sacred, as Moses’ was in civil affairs; when 
as king, or ruler of the twelve tribes in the beginning of 
the theocracy, he ministered in temporal matters betwixt 
God and the people. Hence Grotius thinks that the sixth 
verse of the ninety-ninth Psalm, ought not to be rendered 
“ Moses and Aaron among His priests,”’ but rather, ‘“‘ Moses 
and Aaron among His ministers" ;” that is, Moses among 
His ministers of state, and Aaron among His priests, or minis- 
ters of His Church. For the original word jn5, cohen sig- 
nifies in its general signification λευτουργὸς, ‘ minister ;? and 
though it is most commonly used in the Old Testament to 
denote a sacred minister or priest, yet sometimes it is used 
to denote a prince or great man in the state, as in 2 Sam. 
viii. 18, where it is said, that ““ Benaiah was over the Chere- 
thites and Pelethites,” there it is said of the sons of David, 
that they were p¥3n3, cohenim, which we render ‘ chief rulers,’ 
and the Greek translation, ‘ princes, or rulers of the court*.’ 
So in Gen. xh. 45, what our and other translations render 
‘priest of Ony,’ the Chaldee version translates 34 san, rabba 
deon”, ‘prince of On,’ and some of the critics think it the better 
version*. So saith Buxtorf”, “n>, cohen, the Hebrew word, 
sometimes is used in a large sense for prefects, governors of 
cities and provinces, and civil governors, and then it is ren- 
dered in the Targum by xan, radbba, which signifies a prince.” 
Wherefore as Moses, in his regal capacity, was God’s 
minister over the people in the state; so Aaron, in his 


enim hoe nomen hominibus datur, nisi 
ad significandum jus vite, ac necis. 
Fagius, [ibid., p. 67,] Et tu eris illivs 
Deus. Nam principes, judices et ma- 
gistratus dii vocantur in Scriptura, 
propterea quod Dei judicium in terris 
exercent, ut Hebrzi loquuntur. See 
also chap. vii. 1. 

ἃ [Inter ministros ejus : nam vox }75 
valde generalis est, etsi plerumque per 
ἀντονομασίαν (nominis adstrictionem) 
quandam de sacerdotibus usurpatur. 
Vid. 2 Sam. viii. 19—Grotius in Fs. 
xcix. 6. Crit. Sacr., ton. iii, p. 532. 
In his work de Imperio Summ. Po- 
test. quoted note 1, p. 5, he says, when 
speaking of the union of the regal and 
sacerdotal offices in patriarchal times ; 
‘haud aliter Moses ad consecratum us- 


que Aaronem, unde eum et regem et 
sacerdotem vocant sacre litere.’—Grot. 
Opera Theol., tom. iv. p. 208. ] 

* avAdpxas, LXX. 

Y 8 1732, Cohen On. 

* [Paraph. Chald. apud Bibl. Poly- 
glott. Walton, tom. i. p. 185.] 

4 [Vatablus in Gen. xli. 45. says; 
Doctiores hoe loco principem malunt 
transferre.—Apud Crit. Sacr., tom. i. 
p- 911.] 

> Lexicon Rabbinicum; in Cohen. 
(}73, NIN, sacerdos, ut Hebrei 
j3. Hebrzum autem vocabulum ali- 
quando late accipitur pro prefectis, 
toparchis, gubernatoribus politicis, et 
tune in Targum redditur 83° prin- 


ceps. | 


CHAP, I. 


SECT. Il. 


16 A Priest is one who stands between God and man. 


curistian sacerdotal, was His minister over them in the Church: as 
scone one, as a temporal prince, was His vicegerent to transact 
temporal matters between Him and the people; so the other, 
as a priest or spiritual prince, was His vicegerent to transact 
spiritual matters between God and them. They both acted 
as God’s ministers, though in different spheres, and there- 
fore saith Grotius of the priest®, Heb. ii. 17, Hrat ejus of- 
ficium Dei vice apud populum fungi, et populi vice apud 
Deum, “It was the priest’s office to be in God’s stead to 
the people, and the people’s stead to God.” I say from this 
comparison it is plain, that the common notion of a priest is 
to be a negotiator between God and man in sacred things, 
as Moses’ was in civil. Aaron was so, after God divided the 
sacerdotal from the regal office. He was chosen and ap- 
pointed chief minister in the Jewish Church, as Moses was 
in the Jewish state, to transact and mediate in all sacred 
offices betwixt Him and the people: I say he was chosen ; 
because, as the Apostle observes, no man can take this 
honour to himself, of standing, mediating, or interceding 
betwixt God and men in Divine matters, but he that is 
called of God, as Aaron and his sons were. So Christ our 
great archetypal High-Priest did not arrogate to Himself the 
honour of the priestly office, because He was called to it by 
Ble God, who said unto Him, “Thou art My Son, to-day have 
I begotten Thee ; Thou art a priest for ever after the order 
of Melchisedec.” This vicegerency, or mediatory office to 
transact and minister in sacred matters betwixt God and 
man, which belongs to the priestly character, as such, is em- 
phatically set forth by the Hebrew preposition Sip, which 
signifies, erga, adversus, ‘ towards,’ e regione, ‘over against’, 
ante, coram, ‘before, ‘in the presence of,’ and with e/ before 
it, ava μέσον, in terminis, or in medio duorum, ‘in the boun- 
daries,’ or ‘middle between two, nigh, near;’ and ad ‘to.’ 
And therefore by the import of onbyn Syn, of which the 
Apostle’s Greek is but the translation, the priest is the 
common manager, or minister of sacred affairs betwixt God 
© (Crit. Saer., tom. vii. Annot. in from among men, is set, or placed for 
Ep. ad Hebr., p. 932. ] men over against God.” Der werd 
d Hence in the German version by _ geset3t fiir bie Menschen gegen Gott. [Wit- 


M. Luther, Heb. v. 1. is rendered thus: tenberg, 1555. ] 
“For every high-priest that is taken 


σύν 


» 


This notion of a Priesthood common to Heathens. 17 


and the people, over whom, by God’s appointment, he is 
priest. He is their procurator or proxy, to transact with 
Him, and His procurator to transact with them. He stands 
and acts as mediator between both parties, as it were in the 
middle line of conversation, and in the very centre of com- 
munication betwixt them. He limits and regulates the in- 
tercourse on both sides between them, as their common vice- 
gerent; and in this double relation to the two parties is con- 
ceived to be as it were posted ‘ between,’ or ‘in the middle’ 
of them, and ‘over against’ them both. When he speaks to, 
or acts with the people in God’s name, God is understood 
to draw nigh unto them; and when he speaks to Him, or for 
them in their name, and as their orator, they are understood 
to draw nigh unto Him. A priest, then, properly speaking, 
is oben by oy, legnam moul haeloim, and pyr Sip Ὁποῦ, 
leloim moul ha gnam, ‘a person ordained to act for the people 
God-ward, and for God to the people-ward ;’ i. 6. as learned 
men are wont to express it, pro hominibus constituitur in iis 
que erga Deum, pro Deo constituitur in iis que erga homines 
aguntur. Adstat propter populum coram Deo, et propter Deum 
coram populo. ‘To express myself about the proper notion of 
a priest in other words; he is an advocate, mediator, inter- 
cessor, negotiator, representative, vicegerent, mandatory, in- 
terpellant; or if there is any other name that will better ex- 
press the force of the Hebrew and Greek words, or better 
suit with the honourable character or office of a priest, who 
by Divine institution is to officiate between God and man, in 
their spiritual addresses to, and negotiations one with the other. 

The heathens themselves had the same common notion of 
priests and priesthood. “They accounted them as mediators 
betwixt God and men, being obliged to offer the sacrifices of 
the people to their gods; and on the other side, ἑρμηνευταὶ 
mapa θεῶν ἀνθρώποις, deputed by the gods to be their in- 
terpreters to men, to instruct them how to pray for them- 
selves, what it was most expedient to ask, what sacrifices, 
[what vows,] what gifts would be most acceptable to the 
gods; and, in short, to teach them all the rites and cere- 
monies in Divine worship.” These are the words of a most 
learned antiquary®, in the beginning of the third chapter of 


© Dr. Potter. [Antiquities of Greece, book ii. c. 3.] 
’ HICKES. Cc 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


SECT. III. 
Christian _ 
bishops 
and pres- 
byters pro- 
per priests. 
Exod. 28.1; 
29. 1. 


18 Ancient Gothic terms for Priesthood. 


the second book of his “ Archzeologia Greeca, or the Antiqui- 
ties of Greece.” Here I am invited to observe how the com- 
mon notion of priesthood, and the idea of a priest answering 
to it, were expressed by the pagan Goths, or rather Ger- 
mans, in words which are formed from their word Gup, 
which signifieth God, and in the plural is evprn‘, ‘gods.’ 
Those words are GUDINASSUS, and GUDI, or GuUDA, from 
whence also the verb cup1Non signifies ‘to do the office of a 
priest.’ These words were all transferred from the idolatrous 
use of them to the Christian religion, as may be seen in the 
Gothic Gospels? ; and according to their notation they sig- 
nify the ministers and ministry of any god, whatever he be, 
true or false. No doubt but their religious worship and 
rites were as various as their gods; but whoever was ap- 
pointed as a public minister, in the service of any of their 
gods, he was cunt, his office GupiINAssus, and he was said 
GUDINON, when he performed Divine service, of what nature 
soever it was, purely moral without signs or symbols, or 
mystical, or sacramental, with signs or symbols; both which 
sorts of Divine offices all religions ever had. 

III. Now, Sir, to apply this general notion of a priest, or 
priesthood, I would fain ask your late writer, if it doth not 
properly belong to Christian bishops and priests. Are they 
not taken, or separated from men, as Aaron and his sons were, 
inob, lecahen, ἱερατεύειν, GUDINON, ministrare, fungi sacerdo- 
tio; or in the words of our translation, to “‘ minister unto the 
Lord” in the priestly office? Are they not omnbdsn dy oy, 
legnam moul haelohim, populo in his que ad Deum pertinent ? 
‘ordained for men in things pertaing to God?’ Do they not 
stand in the presence of God to perform mystical as well as 
moral offices, and minister in His holy worship for the benefit 
of the people, and serve before Him, especially at the altar, to 
make reconciliation for their sms? Are” they not a parte Dei, 


f [Rather Gupa. | tium, Lue. i. 9. rnaGl Gudji 
& [ Quatuor Evangeliorum versionem 


sacerdos, Luc. i. 


Gothicam (ex celeberrimo codice argen- 
teo), et Anglo-Saxonicam deprompsit 
Franciscus Junius. Dordrechti. 1665. 


PQ Goth, Johnix. 31. Pad λ 
Guda, dii, John x. 3. rMna Gl- 
U jf 2 2 ai 2 Gudjinassus, sacerdo- 


5. ΤΠΔΟΛ 


Gudja, sacerdos, Mare. xiv. 61; John 


xvii 19. PAAGIMRU Guaij- 


non, sacerdotali officio fungi, Luc.i. 8. ] 
4 Sacerdos in altari vice Christi fun- 
gitur, et sacrificilum verum et plenum 


These Priestly characters in Christian Ministers. 19 


‘on God’s part’ to the people? Do they not negotiate their busi- 
ness with Him? Are they not His vicegerents to them, and 
their vicegerents to Him; and act between God and them in 
sacred, as Moses did in civil things? Are they not mediators, 
intercessors, or procurators betwixt God and man, and, as 
such, transact and minister in sacred matters between them ? 
Are they not representatives of both parties, and placed by the 
nature of their office, as it were Sy Sy, el moul, in terminis, on 
the frontier of intercourse, or in the middle line of commu- 
nication between them? Do they not speak to, and act with 
the people in God’s name, and with God in the name of the 
people? Is it not their office to initiate them by the mystical 
washing of baptism, and to offer their sacrifices as well as 
prayers and praises, and thanksgivings to Him; and to bless 
them more especially in the more solemn benedictions of 
their public ministrations, sacramental or not sacramental : 
of which latter sort are their offices of mere prayer, as also 
those in and by which they consecrate things or persons to 
God? And on the other side, are they not deputed and ap- 
pointed by Him to be His interpreters, and the interpreters of 
His laws, and will, and pleasure in all things to them? I 
cannot think that your late writer, upon more mature 
thoughts, will deny this; and if he will not deny it then he 
must grant that bishops and presbyters are properly priests, 
and, like Aaron and his sons, properly ordained in things 
pertaining to God. I am persuaded, Sir, that no sober man 
or sound reasoner will deny this proposition, that considers 
the nature of the several holy offices, that ministers over the 
Christian Church are ordained to perform under and by the 
authority of our sovereign High-Priest, the Son of God. 
Though it would take up a great deal of time to shew this 


Deo Patri in passionis Unigeniti sui 
offert recordationem.—Cyprian. Epist. 
Ixiii. [The passage is so quoted by 
Hickes, who appears to have copied it 
from Grabe’s note on Irenzus, lib. iv. 
ce. 34, where the same words are given, 
and the reference is erroneously made 
to Ep. Ixviii., which error was also 
copied by Hickes, and has been here cor- 
rected. The words of St. Cyprian are; 
1116 sacerdos vice Christi vere fungitur 
qui id quod Christus fecit, imitatur; et 
sacrificium verum et plenum tunc offert 


Deo Patri, si sic incipiat offerre, &c.— 
Epist. lxiii. ad Cecilium, p. 109. ed. 
Ben. In the same epistle, a few lines 
below, the words occur; Calicem in 
commemorationem Domini et passio- 
nis ejus offerimus; and in Epist. lviii. 
ad Lucium ; ut altari Dei assistat an- 
tistes, p. 96. ed. Ben. Grabe seems to 
have intended to give the substance 
of St. Cyprian’s statement, supplying 
words occurring elsewhere to make his 
meaning clearer. | 


c2 


CHAP, II. 


SECT. ΠῚ. 


CHKISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


20 Received definitions of Priests. 


out of the more ancient and modern offices of the Church ; 
yet I would take the pains to prove it from them all, that 
bishops and presbyters are, truly and properly speaking, 
sacerdotal ministers of God, and their offices of a sacerdotal 
nature, but that I think it needless to go about to prove a 
thing, which will be evident to any man who will but read 
and consider the several offices of our own Church, and 
apply the common notion of a priest, and priesthood, as I 
have explained it out of the Scriptures, and in which, as in 
the notion of temple and sacrifice, both Jews and heathens 
did agree. In Julius Pollux! priests are called οἱ τῶν θεῶν 
θεραπευταὶ, ‘the ministers of the gods;’ and in Suidas ἱερα- 
τικὴ, ‘the priesthood,’ is according to the Egyptians said to be 
θεῶν θεραπεία", ‘the ministry, or service of the gods,’ and ‘to 
be conversant about the immortality of souls, and the things 
of the other state, and virtue, and vice.’ All which agree to 
the Christian ministry, and shew it to be a proper priesthood, 
and the ministers of it to be @eoupyol, ‘ ministers in things 
that relate to God,’ as Pollux! also calls priests. I hope it 
will not be much from the purpose, or give offence to any 
thinking man, if I here set down the expressions which 
Dionysius Halicarnassensis uses in the second book of his 
Roman Antiquities", in describing the priests and several 
sorts of priesthood instituted by King Numa, to see whether 
the common notion they had of priests, and the priestly 
office, is applicable to the ministers and ministry of the 
Christian Church : they are these ; ἱερᾶσθαι", sacerdotio fungi, 
‘to execute the priest’s office,’ as in this; " διὰ παντὸς ἱερω- 
μένοι τοῦ Biov®,’—‘to exercise the priest’s office all their lives 
long;’ ἱερατεία peyiotns—‘the office of the chief pontiff, 


! Julii Pollucis Onomasticon, lib. i. 
cap. 1. segm. 24. [ὀνόματα τῶν θεοὺς 
θεραπευόντων" of δὲ τῶν θεῶν θεραπευ- 


περὶ ταῦτα πραγματεύεσθαι, περὶ ἀθα- 
νασίας ψυχῶν, ὅτι κατὰ τὰ αὐτὰ καὶ 
Αἰγυπτίοις φιλοσοφεῖται: τῶν δὲ ἐν 


ταὶ, ἱερεῖς, θύται, τελεσταὶ ... ὑπηρέται, 
Geouvpyol.—tom. i. p. 6. ed. Dind. | 

* [ἱερατικὴ is said by Suidas to be 
θεῶν θεραπεία, not “among the Egyp- 
tians,’’ but simply. ‘The passage is 
one in which ἱερατικὴ and φιλοσοφία 
are contrasted, as holding correspond- 
ing positions among the Greeks and 
the Egyptians. τὴν δὲ ἱερατικὴν, ἥ 
ἐστι θεῶν θεραπεία, ἐντεῦθέν ποθεν ἀπὸ 
τῶν περικοσμίων αἰτιῶν ἄρχεσθαι, καὶ 


ἅδου μυρίων λήξεων παντοίων πρὸς ape- 
τὴν καὶ κακίαν ἀφωρισμένων, τῶν τε 
περὶ τὸν βίον μεταβολῶν μυρίων. 

Αἰγύπτιοι δὲ ταῦτά εἰσιν οἱ πρῶτον φι- 
λοσοφοῦντες. Suidas in νοῦ. ἱερατική.) 

! [See note ἃ.] 

m [Dionys. Halic. Antiq. Roman., 
lib. ii, ο. 72. Op., tom. i. p. 389. Reiske. 
Lips. 1774. ] 

ns Lbids;(c..72. p. 089.1] 

° [Ibid., c. 73. p. 393.] 


Descriptions of their office by Dionysius Halicarn. 21 


or priest ; τελευταῖος 8 ἣν τῆς Nowa παρατάξεως μερισ- 
μὸς ὑπὲρ τῶν ἱερῶν, ὃν ἔλαχον οἱ τὴν μεγίστην [παρὰ ‘Pwo- 
μαίοις] ἱερατείαν καὶ ἐξουσίαν Eyovres—“ the last part of 
Numza’s institutions about sacred things, was that which was 
allotted to them who had the chief priesthood and power ;”— 
μία τῶν ἱερουργιῶν dSudta~vs?—“ the first order of the holy 
ministries ; --οὗτοι τεταγμένας τινὰς ἱερουργίας ἐπετέλουν 
—‘these performed certain appointed holy ministrations ;”— 
ὑπ᾽ ἀνδρὸς οὐκ ἀπείρου τῆς περὶ τὰ θεῖα copias'—“< from 
a man not ignorant of Divine matters,” ΟΥ̓“ mysteries ;” 
παρθένων τὰς θεραπείας κατεστήσατο τῇ Oes*—<he or- 
dained virgins to be ministers (or priestesses) to the god- 
dess ;’—ai δὲ θεραπεύουσαι τὴν θεὸν παρθένοι τέτταρες 
μεν ἦσαν κατ᾽ apxyast—the virgins, which at first were 
ministers (or priestesses) to the goddess, were but four ;”,— 
διὰ πλῆθος τῶν ἱερουργιῶν ἃς ἐπιτελοῦσιν — “through 
the multitude of the holy offices which they perform ;’— 
Ths οὐχ ὁσίως ὑπηρετούσης τοῖς ‘epois*—*< of the priestess 
who did not minister aright in holy things ;’—» περὶ ra 
θεῖα νομοθεσίαν .----““ an institution of things pertaining to 
God,” or “ Divine matters ;” 
ἱερὰς δίκας ἁπάσας ἰδιώταις τὲ καὶ ἄρχουσι καὶ NEeLTOUpyots 
θεῶν... τάς τε ἀρχὰς ἀπάσας- ὅσαις θυσία τε καὶ θεραπεία 
ἀνάκειται, καὶ τοὺς ἱερεῖς ἅπαντας ἐξετάζουσιν--““ the chief 
pontiffs have cognizance of all causes relating to holy matters, 
both among private men and magistrates and the ministers 
(or priests) of the gods....and they examine all magis- 
trates to whose care sacrifice and the worship of the gods is 
committed, and all priests whatsoever ;’—7roAdovs δὲ βω- 
μοὺς καὶ ναοὺς idpvopevos, ἑορτάς τε ἑκάστῳ αὐτῶν ἀπονέ- 


\ \ / - \ 
καὶ yap δικάζουσιν οὗτοι Tas 


μων, καὶ τοὺς ἐπιμελησομένους αὐτῶν ἱερεῖς καθιστάς"--- 
“he (Numa) built many altars and temples, and appointed 
several festival days for every one of them, and ordained 
priests, who were to take care of them ;᾽ --περιλαβὼν δὲ 
ἅπασαν τὴν περὶ τὰ θεῖα νομοθεσίαν γραφαῖς, διεῖλεν 


P [Dionys. &c., c. 64. p. 371.] u [Tbid.] 

a [Ibid., p. 372.] x [Ibid., p. 380.] 

r [Ibid., c. 65. p. 374. ] Y [Ibid., c. 63. p. 371.] 

s [Ibid., p. 375.] z ae c. 73. p. 394 ἢ 

t [Ibid., c. 67. p. 378.] « [Ibid., c. 63. p. 369.] 


CHAP. Il. 


SECT. IIL. 


22 All these descriptions apply to Christian Ministers. 


CHRISTIAN εἰς ὀκτὼ wolpas*—“farthermore (Numa) having committed 
PRIEST- . . . . ee aD 
noop. his whole institution about matters of religion to writing, 

he divided them into eight parts ;”—rols δὲ ἰδιώταις, ὁπόσοι 





μὴ ἴσασι τοὺς περὶ τά θεῖα ἢ δαιμόνια ceBacpods, ἐξηγηταὶ 
γίνονται καὶ προφῆται" ----“ they are the expositors and inter- 
preters of matters of religion to the people who are ignorant 
of them‘;” περὶ οὖν τῶν ἱερέων τῶνδε, εἴτε βούλεταί τις 
αὐτοὺς ἱεροδιδασκάλους καλεῖν, εἴτε ἱερονόμους, εἴτε ἱεροφύ- 
λακας, εἴτε, ὡς ἡμεῖς ἀξιοῦμεν, ἱεροφάντας, ody’ ἁμαρτήσε- 
Tat τοῦ ἀληθοῦς"---““ wherefore as to these priests, (under- 
standing the chief pontiffs,) if a man will call them teachers 
of holy things, or administrators of holy things, or keepers 
and curators of holy things, or, as I think, the chief masters 
in teaching holy things, he will not err from the truth.” 

Sir, I think I have omitted no word or expression by 
which my author describes the priestly office, but θυηπόλο-“, 
which Pollux reckons among the poetical names for a priest & ; 
and according to the notation of that word, it signifies one 
conversant or employed about offerings and sacrifices", as 
I shall hereafter shew the ministers of the Church are. But 
in the mean time let me ask your late writer, whether the 
terms of my author are not in propriety applicable to the 
Christian ministry? Is it not properly ἱερουργία and θερα- 
mela τοῦ Θεοῦ, or λειτουργία τοῦ Θεοῦ, and περὶ τὰ θεία 
νομοθεσία And are we not, properly speaking, ἱερωμένοι, 
who may properly be said, when we minister in our holy 
offices sacramental, or not sacramental, and with or without 
holy rites, ἱερᾶσθαι; or ἱερατεύειν ἢ Are we not ἱερουργοὶ, and 
θεραπεύοντες τῷ Θεῷ; in propriety of speech, and ὑπηρέται 
τοῦ Θεοῦ, or ὑπηρετοῦντες TO Oecd? Are we not τῶν ἱερῶν 


> [Ibid.] 

¢ [Ibid., c. 73. p. 394.] 

4 So in Plutarch’s Life of Numa. 
ὃ δὲ μέγιστος τῶν ποντιφίκων, οἷον ἐξη- 
γητοῦ καὶ προφήτου, μᾶλλον δὲ ἱεροφάν- 
του τάξιν ἐπέχει, οὐ μόνον τῶν δημοσίᾳ 
δρωμένων ἐπιμελούμενος, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς 
ἱδίᾳ θύοντας ἐπισκοπῶν, καὶ κωλύων παρ- 
εκβαίνειν τὰ νενομισμένα, καὶ, διδάσκων 
ὅτου τις δέοιτο πρὸς Θεῶν τιμὴν ἢ παρ- 
αίτησιν.---ἰ ο. 9. Op., tom. i. p. 262. 
Lips. 1774. | 

© (Ibid.] 

' [Ibid., c. 67. p. 379. θυηπολούσας 
τε καὶ τὰ ἄλλα θρησκευούσας κατὰ νό- 


μον. 

& [Onomast., lib. i. cap. 1. segm. 
14. (the continuation of the passage 
quoted in note i, p. 20.) ποιητικώτερον 
γὰρ τὸ OunwdéAos.—tom. i. p. 7. ] 

2 θνηπόλος. ὃ ἱερεὺς, ὃ περὶ τὰς θυ- 
σίας πολῶν, καὶ ἀναστρεφόμενος. Pha- 
vorinus. 6 περὶ τὰς θυσίας ἀναστρε- 
φόμενος ἱερεύς. Hesychius. 6 θύων, 6 
ἱερεύς. Suidas. 

θυηπολοῦσι. περιπολοῦσι, διὰ θυσιῶν 
ὑπισχνούμενοι θεοὺς ἐξιλάσκεσθαι.--- 
Suidas and Phavorinus. [ Hickes quoted 
the passage as περὶ τὰ ἵερα πολοῦσαι.]} 


If so, the name Priest properly belongs to them. 23 


ἐπιμελοῦντες ? and in full propriety of speech τῶν ἱερῶν 
ἐξηγηταὶ καὶ προφῆται, “teachers, and interpreters of holy 
things?” Is not the episcopal office μεγίστη ἱερατεία ἢ and 
may it not be properly said of our bishops, that ὑπὲρ τῶν 
ἱερῶν ἔχουσι τὴν μεγίστην ἐξουσίαν; or that τὰς ἱερὰς δίκας 
ἁπάσας δικάζουσιν, or that they have power, τοὺς ἱερεῖς 
ἅπαντας ἐξετάζειν Ὁ are not they principally, and their pres- 
byters under them, ἱεροδιδάσκαλοι, ἱερονόμοι, ἱεροφύλακες. 
and ἱεροφάνται ὃ And is not their office περὶ τὰ ἱερὰ, or 
περὶ τὰ θεῖα πολεῖν, “ to be conversant about holy and Divine 
things?” Or is it not as St. Cyprian speaks', divinis rebus 
et spiritalibus occupari,—operationibus divinis insistere,— 
celestibus rebus et spiritalibus servire: “to be employed in 
Divine and spiritual matters,—to apply themselves wholly 
to Divine ministrations,—and to devote themselves to 
heavenly and spiritual things?” How like are my heathen 
author’s descriptions of priests and priesthood to those of 
this holy father; and if they are properly applicable to 
Christian ministers and their ministry, as I think they are, 
then, I hope, Sir, we have a good title to the priesthood, and 
without the help of a metaphor, may be dignified with the 
holy and honourable name of priests. If these descriptions 
belong to our holy office, the thing described by them must 
belong to us, according to this maxim in logic; Cui convenit 
definitio, et eidem convenit definitum. Your late writer may 
undervalue the name and character of priest, and put it as 
far as he will from himself, but I value it to the highest 
degree ; and I speak it to God’s honour, I had rather be the 
poor deprived priest that I am, with all the hatred, and con- 
tempt, and persecution that now attends the Christian priest- 
hood in this most irreligious age, than be premier, or pleni- 
potentiary to the greatest monarch, or the most victorious 
conqueror in the world. The Hebrew word j75, cohen, which, 
in relation to God, all translations render ‘priests,’ signifies 
primarily a ‘minister,’ ὑπηρέτης θεοῦ, as Pollux also calls a 
priest™, and it is a verbal noun derived from the verb ;n> cihen, 


i S. Cypr., Epist. i, [ed. Oxon., k [Jul. Poll. Onomast., lib. i, cap. 
Epist. Ixvi. p. 114. ed. Ben. See the 1. segm. 14, among the titles of priests. 
passage quoted at length, Pref. Dise., See note i, p. 20. Dindorf reads iw 7- 
vol. i. p. 95, note y. | ρέται simply, others ὑπηρέται θεοῦ. 


CHAP. II. 


SECT, UI. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Heb. 8. 2. 
1 Cor. 9. 13. 


24 Argument from λειτουργὸς, λειτουργεῖν, λειτουργία; 


which signifies λειτουργεῖν, ‘to minister';’ and as λειτουργὸς, 
when it relates to God and sacred matters, signifies a ‘priest,’ 
or minister of the Church, so when it relates to the king, as 
I observed before, it signifies a ‘ prince,’ or minister of state. 
From which notation of the word it follows, that bishops and 
presbyters, as ministers of God, and employed in His service, 
are cohens, or ‘priests; or as Philo describes the Jewish 
priests, they are οἱ ἀμφὶ τὸ ἱερὸν ὑπηρέται, Kal NecToupyol™, 
‘servants and ministers of God, to perform holy offices in 
His temple ;’ or as the Apostle speaks, τῶν ἁγίων λειτουργοὶ; 
‘ministers of the sanctuary, or holy things ;’ ἱερὰ ἐργαζόμενοι, 
‘ministers about holy things ; τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ προσεδρεύον- 
τες, ‘waiters at the altar,’ or the same to the one true God, 
the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, what Plutarch saith 
that the priests of the Gentiles were to their idols, ἱερεῖς» 
θεῶν λειτουργοὶ; ‘priests are the ministers or liturgs of the 
gods"? So Acts xi. 2, Barnabas and Paul’s ministering to 
the Lord by fasting and prayer, is thus expressed, λευτουρ- 
γούντων αὐτῶν τῷ Κυρίῳ. In which place, as well as in Heb. 
vill. 2, [τῶν ἁγίων Nectoupyos, | had the holy writers written in 
Hebrew, I doubt not but they would have expressed themselves 
by jn cohen and 1Π5 cihen; for what is expressed ‘the priest’s 
office,’ Luke i. 8, 9, by ἐν τῷ ἱερατεύειν, and ἱερατεία, is ex- 
pressed by Xevtoupy/a, ‘ministry,’ in the twenty-third verse, 
and therefore the ministers of God and Christ, by all an- 
alogy, must be sacerdotal ministers, λειτουργοὶ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χρισ- 
Tov, cohens, or ‘ministers of Jesus Christ,’ as St. Paul calls 
himself, Rom. xv. 16. Hence the words, λειτουργεῖν. λει- 


' [The verb 713, only found in Pi- 
hel, (LXX. λειτουργεῖν, ἱερατεύειν,) is 
never used, as Hickes’ words might 
seem to imply, in the simple sense of 
‘ministering.’ It is however by Fiirst 
derived from the root })3, and so would 
mean ‘ parare, apparare, adornare, mi- 
nistrare.’ See his Concordant. Hebr., 
p. 544. For this connection there are 
analogies; see Gesenius, Lex. Hebr., 
ad lit. 9. Furst interprets the noun 
a3 “minister Dei, tanquam adpari- 
or; sacerdos ;” but considers the use 
of the word for ‘a prince,’ (see above, 
p- 15,) to be derived from the notion 
of dignity connected with the sacerdo- 
tal office, Gesenius and others derive 


}75 from a root found in Arabic 
meaning ‘to divine,’’ and thence hay- 
ing the sense of intercession and me- 
diation. | 

m [τοῖς ἀμφὶ τὸ ἵερον ὑπηρέταις καὶ 
λειτουργοῖς χαρίζεσθαι, x. τ. A.A—Philo. 
Jud. de Sacerdot. Premiis, Op., tom. 
ii. p. 236.] 

« [The passage referred to seems to 
be, ἀλλ᾽, οἷς δίκαιόν ἐστι ταῦτα λειτουρ- 
γοῖς θεῶν ἀνατιθέντες, ὥσπερ ὑπηρέταις 
καὶ γραμματεῦσι, δαίμονας νομίζωμεν, 
ἐπισκόπους θεῶν ἱερῶν καὶ μυστηρίων 
opy:aords.—Plutarch. de Oraculerum 
Defectu, tom. vii. p. 641, Lips. 1774; 
but it is the δαίμονες who are spoken of 
as λειτουργοὶ θεῶν. 


as applied in Scripture and Ecclesiastical writers. — 25 


toupyla, λειτουργὸς, came in ecclesiastical writers to be ap- 
propriated to the service of God, and priestly ministration of 
holy things, as in Canon IV. Concil. Antioch.°, εἰ tis ἐπέσκο- 
mos, &c. ‘If any bishop deposed by the synod, or priest or 
deacon deprived by the bishop, presume to do any liturgical 
act, τολμήσειέν Te πρᾶξαι THs λειτουργίας, he shall not be 
restored.” Balsamon on the place paraphraseth the words 
in this expression, ἱερατικόν Tu ἐνεργήσασθαι, “to do any 
part of the priestly officeP;” and Zonaras upon the same 
canon saith that λευτουργία in this place does not only sig- 
nify τὴν ἱερουργίαν Kai τὴν τελετὴν τῆς ἀναιμάκτου θυσίας 
μόνην, “not only the performance of Divine services, and the 
celebration of the unbloody sacrifice” of the Eucharist, ἀλλ᾽ 
ἅπαν ἀρχιερατικὸν δίκαιον, “but all the functions of the 
chief-priest’.” The new covenant is better than the old, 
and the house of Christ much more excellent than that of 
Moses, inasmuch as the Christian is the full improvement 
and perfection of the Mosaic religion and worship, and there- 
fore it would be strange if either the liturgical ministrations 
of the Christian worship for men, should be less holy, or per- 
tain less to God for them than those of the Jewish Church ; 
or the Christian liturgs, or ministers, should either not at all 
be priests, or priests in a less proper sense than those of the 
Levitical order and institution, who were ministers by fire 
and immolation under the first testament. What is there in 
the notation of ἱερεὺς, or sacerdos', that doth not properly 
belong to the Christian ministers? they only denote holy 
ministers, or ministers of holy things; ministers of God for 
the people in holy offices, and employments, whatever those 
offices be, ministers of Divine rites and services for men, of 


what kind soever those rights and services be. 


° [The council was held A.D. 341. 
Canon iv. is, εἴ τις ἐπίσκοπος ὑπὸ συνό- 
δου καθαιρεθεὶς, ἢ πρεσβύτερος ἢ διάκο- 
νος ὑπὸ τοῦ ἰδίου ἐπισκόπου, τολμήσειέν 
τι πρᾶξαι τῆς λειτουργίας. . . μήκετι 
ἐξὸν εἶναι αὐτῷ, μήδ᾽ ἐν ἑτέρῳ συνόδῳ 
ἔλπιδα ἀποκαταστάσεως, μήτε ἄπολο- 
γίας χώραν éxew.—Concil., tom. ii. p. 
588, C. et apud Beveregii Pandect., 
tom. i. p. 434, A, B.] 

P [ἐνεργοῦντας, ἐνεργήσαντας iepa- 
Tikoy τι, repeatedly.— Balsamon, Schol. 


For as there 


apud Beveregii Pandect., ibid., C, D:] 

4 [λειτουργίαν ἐνταῦθα ov τὴν tepoup- 
γίαν καὶ τὴν τελετὴν τῆς ἀναιμάκτου 
θυσίας φησὶ μόνην, GAN ἅπαν ἄρχιερα- 
τικὸν δίκαιον.---- Ζοπαταβ, ibid., F. | 

r Sacer, cra, um; quicquid ad reli- 
gionem pertinet. Sacerdos; a sacer; 
qui sacris preest, et ea administrat, 
“ quasi sacra dans.’’—[The last words 
are quoted from the Origines of St. 
Isidore Hispalensis, lib. vii. cap. 12. 
§ 17. Op., tom. iii. p. 341.] 


CHAP, 11. 


SECT. III. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


SECT. IV. 


Of the se- 


veral sorts 
of priest- 
hood. 


26 Instances of Priesthood without Sacrifices ; 


have been different Churches and religions, so there have 
been different rites and services in them, and yet the minis- 
ters of those different holy rites and services for the people 
to their God, have all been counted priests, as agreeing in 
the common notion of priesthood, which is the function or 
office of a person separated, or taken from men, and or- 
dained πρὸς τὸ ἱερουργεῖν, or, θεουργεῖν, as human authors 
speak, to minister for the people in holy services pertaining 
to God. 

IV. Wherefore, as there are several sorts of religions, so 
there are several sorts of priesthood, as among the heathens‘, 
whose sacrifices and priests, or ministers of holy rites, were 
as different as the deities and rites themselves. Some were 
men, and some women; some of their services were more 
simple, and some more ceremonious; some sacrificed by 
blood, and slaughter, and burning, and some not; some 
used rites and ceremonies of this kind in sacrificing, and 
some of that: the ancient Persianst had no temples, nor 
statues, nor altars, and in sacrificing to their gods they 
never used fire or libations, or the mola salsa made of meal 
and salt, or music, or pontifical mitres, and yet the ministers 
of their gods were as proper priests as those of the Romans 
and Grecians, who used all these things. Nay, “the Ro- 
mans, for a hundred and seventy years after Numa, though 
they built temples, yet they had no sort of images to repre- 
sent their gods, being taught by that great king, lawgiver, 
and priest, that there could be no representation of God, 
who was invisible and incorruptible, but His idea in the 
mind of man.” In that period also their sacrifices were 
simple “ Pythagorean, and unbloody oblations,” as Plutarch 
tells us in the life of Numa", whither I refer you. The 


5. Jam sacrorum ritus, statasque et 
solemnes caremonias non est quod a 
me quisquam expectet. Itaque nec 
que cuique Deo grate decoreque 
essent hostiz, nec cui maribus, cui 
fceminis, cui majoribus, cui lactentibus 
immolaretur, dicam. Nec farciminum, 
liborum, et pultium, vel vasorum, qui- 
bus in sacris locus erat, nomina, et 
genera recensebo, nec denique quo or- 
dine, rituque res divine fierent, expli- 
cabo.—Brisson. de Formul., lib. i. p. 
32. See also Dr. Potter’s Antiquities 


of Greece, book ii. cap. 3. 

' [Πέρσας δὲ ofda νόμοισι τοῖσδε 
χρεωμένους᾽ ἀγάλματα μὲν καὶ νηοὺς 
καὶ βωμοὺς οὐκ ἐν νόμῳ ποιευμένους 
ἰδρύεσθαι ... οὔτε βωμοὺς ποιεῦνται, 
οὔτε πῦρ ἀνακαίουσι, μέλλοντες θυειν" 
ov σπονδῇ χρέωνται, οὐκὶ αὐλῷ, οὐ στεμ- 
μασι, οὐκὶ οὐλῇσι. |—Herodot., lib. i. 
cap. 180. 132. 

u p. 65. edit. Lutetiz. 1624. [οὔτε 
γὰρ ἐκεῖνος αἰσθητὸν, ἢ παθητὸν, adpa- 
τον δὲ καὶ ἀκήρατον καὶ νοητὸν ὑπελάμ- 
βανεν εἶναι τὸ πρῶτον, καὶ οὗτος διεκώ- 


among the Persians, ancient Romans, Mahometans. 27 


Mahometans have no bloody sacrifices, or altars for them, cnav. τι. 


but at Mecca*, and offer them but once in the year; yet they 


look upon the ministers of their religion separated from the 
people in all other places, as proper priests as those of 


Mecca. 


For expiation, atonement, or propitiating an 


offended deityy, or otherwise procuring his favour and 


λυσεν ἀνθρωποειδῆ καὶ ζωόμορφον εἰκόνα 
θεοῦ Ῥωμαίους νομίζειν. οὐδ᾽ ἣν παρ᾽ 
αὐτοῖς οὔτε γραπτὸν, οὔτε πλαστὸν εἶδος 
θεοῦ πρότερον, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ἑκατὸν ἑβδομή- 
κοντα τοῖς πρώτοις ἔτεσι ναοὺς μὲν οἰκο- 
δομούμενοι, καὶ καλιάδας ἱερὰς ἱρῶντες, 
ἄγαλμα δ᾽ οὐδὲν ἔμμορφον ποιούμενοι 
διετέλουν᾽ ὡς οὔτε ὅσιον ἀφομοιοῦν τὰ 
βελτίονα τοῖς χείροσιν, οὔτ᾽ ἐφάπτεσθαι 
θεοῦ δύνατον ἄλλως ἢ νοήσει. κομιδῇ 
δὲ καὶ τὰ τῶν θυσιῶν ἔχεται τῆς Πυ- 
θαγορικῆς ἁγιστείας" ἀναίμακτοι γὰρ 
ἦσαν, αἵ γε πολλαὶ δι’ ἀλφίτου καὶ 
σπονδῆς καὶ τῶν εὐτελεστάτων πεποι- 
nuevar.—Plutarch. Vit. Nume, c. 8. 
Op., tom. i. pp. 258, 259. Lips. 1774. ] 

* Herbelot’s Biblioth. Orientale, in 
the word ‘adhha.’ ‘‘‘ Adbha,’ a reli- 
gious feast of the Mussulmans, which 
they celebrate on the tenth day of the 
month, which they call ‘ dhoulheciat,’ 
which is the twelfth and last month of 
their year. This month being parti- 
cularly set apart for the ceremonies 
which the pilgrims observe at Mecca, 
takes its name from thence, for it sig- 
nifies the month of pilgrimage. They 
solemnly sacrifice on that day a sheep 
at Mecca, and no where else; and it is 
called by the name of the feast, which 
the Turks commonly call the grand 
Beiram, to distinguish it from the 
little feast of that name, with which 
they conclude their fast, and which 
the Christians of the Levant call the 
pasque, or Easter of the Turks. This 
feast is also called Jaum al Corban, 
that is, the day of sacrifices and vic- 
tims. For every pilgrim on that day 
may offer as many sheep as he will, 
and every one of these sacrifices hath 
the name of ‘dhahiat.’ The Mussul- 
mans go out of Mecca unto a valley 
called Mina or Muna, to solemnize 
this feast, and there sometimes they 
sacrifice a camel. The books which 
treat of the ceremonies of this sacrifice, 
which is the only one the Mahometans 
have, have the title of Manasseck.”’— 
{p. 62. Paris. 1697. ] 

y Heb. ii. 17, ‘‘ That He might be a 
merciful and faithful High-Priest, to 
make reconciliation for the sins of the 


people.”? Ch. vi. 1, “‘ Every high-priest, 
taken from among men, is ordained 
for men, in things pertaining to God, 
that he may offer both gifts and sacri- 
fices for sins.’’ 3rd verse, ‘‘ He ought, 
as for the people, so also for himself, to 
offer for sins.’”’ Lev.i. 4, ‘‘ He shall put 
his hand upon the head of the burnt- 
offering, and it shall be accepted for 
him to make atonement for him.’’ So” 
in chap. iv. 20, 26, ‘‘The priest shall 
make atonement for them.’’ And chap. 
v. 6, ‘‘ He shall bring his trespass-offer- 
ing unto the Lord, and the priest shall 
make an atonement for him concerning 
his sin.’’ So in the 10th, 13th, 16th, 
and 18th verses of the same chapter, and 
the 7th verse of the sixth, ‘‘ The priest 
shall make an atonement for him be- 
fore the Lord, and it shall be forgiven 
him.”? So Numb. xvi. 46, sqq., ‘‘ Moses 
said unto Aaron, Take a censer, and put 
fire therein from off the altar, and put 
on incense, and go quickly unto the 
congregation, and make an atonement 
for them. And Aaron took as Moses 
commanded, and ran into the midst of 
the congregation, and behold the plague 
was begun among the people, and he 
put on incense, and made atonement 
for the people, and he stood between 
the dead and the living, and the plague 
was stayed.” 

Brisson. de Formul, p. 28. Litare 
enim Macrobius explicat, [Saturnal. ] 
lib. iii. cap. 5, ‘ Sacrificio facto placare 
numen.’ Unde et ‘litationem propitia- 
tionis’ idem dixit. In Somn. Scipion., 
lib. i. cap. 7. Nonius etiam Mar- 
cellus inter litare, et sacrificare hoc in- 
teresse tradit, quod ‘sacrificare sit ve- 
niam petere, litare vero propitiare, et 
votum impetrare.’ [De differentiis 
verborum, p. 424. Paris. 1614.] Virg. 
fEneid, lib. iv. 50. 

Tu modo posce Deos veniam, sacris- 

que litatis 

Indulge hospitio— 

Ubi Servius, ‘ diis litatis debuit dicere, 
non enim sacra, sed Deos sacris lita- 
mus, i. 6. placamus.’ [Servius’ words 
are, ‘nove dictum; nam Deos litamus, 
non sacra.’ | 


SECT. IV. 


28 Sacrifice not essential to Priesthood, 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST~ 
HOOD. 


good-will# being the end of all material offerings and sacri- 
fices in priestly ministrations, as you may see in the margin ; 
it must follow, that if the true God is pleased to supersede 
or take away the use of them, and be as effectually propi- 
tiated when He is offended, or otherwise made favourable by 
holy ministrations without them, as before with them, then I 
say it must follow that the liturgs or ministers, whose office 
it is to make expiation and atonement for their own sins, or 
for the sins of the people, or otherwise to procure the Divine 
favour, without gifts and sacrifices, must be as true and 
proper ministers of atonement and procuring the favour 
and blessings of God, as the priests who did the same thing 
with offerings and sacrifices, and, by consequence, be true 
priests; because in the same manner as priests they are 
“taken from the people, and ordained for them in things per- 
taining to God ;” that by prayers, supplications, intercessions, 
and praises, and thanks, which they offer up to Him, accord- 
ing to His own appointment, without sacrifice or sacrificial 
rites, they may reconcile God, and make atonement for their 
own and the people’s sins, or otherwise procure His favour 
and blessings to themselves and them. For gifts and sacri- 
fices, i. 6. ‘offerings of inanimate things and of animals?,’ or 
offerings without or with slaughter, were both of an hono- 
rary nature”; for as it was thought dishonourable to their 


* Asin peace-offerings, whether they 
were sacrifices of thanksgiving or free- 
will offerings upon vows: all which in 
the Scripture phrase are also said to 
be ‘*a sweet savour unto the Lord,”’ 
[ Lev. i. 9, &c.,] or that He “ hath re- 
spect unto them,” [ Gen. iv. 4, 5,] aud 
that He “‘accepts them,” [Ps. xx. 3,] 
which are all terms to signify that 
God is pleased with them. 

* Diodati upon Hebr. v. 1. Offerte. 
Questa parola, posta in differenza de’ 
sacrificii, significa l’offerte delle cose 
inanimate. [La Sacra Biblia tradotta 
in lingua Italica da Giovanni Diodati. 
Geneva, 1641.] Jac. Cappellus; ‘Con- 
stituitur Pontifex, ut offerat dona rerum 
inanimatarum pro peccatis, et sacri- 
ficia rerum animatarum.’ [Crit. Saer., 
tom. vii. p. 974.] Grotius; ἵνα προσ- 
φέρῃ δῶρά τε καὶ θυσίας ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν. 
Explicat generalitatem per species 
quasdam; [i. 6. by the addition of 


ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν) δῶρα, (dona,) D933); 
(oblationes) est generale, sed eximie 
dicitur de holocaustis, ut videre est 
Lev. i. 2. θυσία (sacrificium) item satis 
generale. Comprehendit enim et AMID 
(oblationem e simila), sed cum hie ad- 
datur ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν (pro peccatis) in- 
telligendum DW delictum in commit- 
tendo; de quo Levit. iv. ὃ, sqq.’—Ibid., 
p- 979. Grotius, it seems, does not 
(as Hickes’ referring to him might 
imply) identify δῶρα and θυσίαι re- 
spectively with inanimate and animate 
sacrifices: but considers each a general 
term, including both kinds of offering. ] 

» Brisson. de Formul., lib. i. pp. 29, 
30. [Atque hujusmodi sacrificiis, et 
tam hostiarum cede, quam ture et 
vino dato, honor Diis haberi dicebatur. 
He then gives numerous instances of 
the use of ‘honor,’ ‘honorare,’ in this 
sense. ] 


if the use of it is superseded. 29 


kings to make solemn approaches to them without presents, 
especially when they were to ask or expect favour, so was it 
counted dishonourable to God to come empty handed to wait 
upon Him in solemn worship, as it is written, “none shall 


ς 79 


appear before Me empty‘°; 


and therefore the true God, as 


well as the false deities, was supposed to be appeased, pleased 
or gratified with the honour of gifts, when those who brought 
them were duly purified, especially with virtuous and holy 
minds, which the pagan, as well as Jews and Christians, 


¢ Exod. xxiii. 15; Deut. xvi. 16. 
So Ecclesiasticus xxxv. 4, ‘* Thou shalt 
not appear empty before the Lord, for 
all these things are to be done because 
of the commandment. The offering 
of the righteous maketh the altar fat, 
and the sweet savour thereof is before 
the Most High. The sacrifice of a just 
man is acceptable, and the memorial 
thereof shall never be forgotten. Give 
the Lord His honour with a good eye, 
and diminish not the first-fruits of thine 
hands. In all thy gifts shew a cheer- 
ful countenance, and dedicate thy 
tithes with gladness.” 

4 So commentators interpret these 
verses of Menander, εἶτ᾽ od’, &c., pre- 
served in Athenzus, lib. iv. p. 146. 
[Lugd. 1657. 

εἶτ᾽ οὐχ ὕμοιας πράττομεν καὶ θύομεν ; 

ὕπου γε τοῖς θεοῖς μὲν ἠἡγορασμένον 

δραχμῶν ἄγω προβάτιον ἀγαπητὸν 
δέκα, 

αὐλητρίδας δὲ καὶ μύρον καὶ ψαλτρίας 


ταύτας, * Θάσιον, ἐγχέλεις, τυρὸν, 
μέλι" 

μικροῦ ταλάντου γίγνεται τὸ κατὰ 
λόγον. 


Atheneus ex recension. G. Dindorf., 
tom. li. p. 73. Lips. 1827.] See Per- 
sius, Satyr. 11. v. 63—75. 
[At vos 
Dicite, pontifices, in sacro quid facit 
aurum ? 
Nempe hoc quod Veneri donate ἃ 
virgine puppe. 
Quin damus id superis, de magno 
quod dare lance 
Non possit magni Messale lippa 
propago, 
Compositum jus fasque animo, sanc- 
tosque recessus 
Mentis et incoctum generoso pectus 
honesto. 
Hee cedo ut admoveam templis et 
farre litabo. | 
Tsaiah lvii. 15; Psalm li. 17; xxxiv. 
18; exxxviii. 6; Isaiah 1. 10; lxvi. 2; 


Jeremiah vii. 9, 21—23. Sacrificia 
omnia non dignitate rei oblate, sed 
offerentis animo estimantur. Grot. 
Consult. Cass., Art. xxiv. [The ex- 
tract is made from ‘ Georgii Cassandri 
de articulis Religionis inter Catholicos 
et Protestantes controversis Consultatio, 
Art. xxiv. De Missa.’ apud Grotii Opera, 
tom. iv. p. 607. Grotius’ comment on 
it is; De sacrificio corporis et sanguinis 
Christi. Recte dici in actione Eucharis- 
tica corpus et sanguinem Domini, sive 
ipsam Domini passionem a nobis offerri 
supra diximus ad Art. x.; unde et propi- 
tiatorium sacrificium recte dicitur, si- 
quidem Christi sanguis propitiatio est 
pro mundi peceatis. Accedit quod qui 
criminum sibi conscii sunt, non nisi 
per pcenitentiam piati accedunt, et sic 
ipsam suam peenitentiam et pcenitentiz 
opera, quz et ipsa, ex visacrificii gene- 
ralis, sacrificia sunt propitiatoria Novi 
Feederis, Deo offerunt.—Grotii anno- 
tata in Consult. Cass. ibid., p. 626. ] 
So in the Morals of Confucius we are 
told that ‘though the Chinese offered 
sacrifice, and worshipped God with 
extraordinary pomp and magnificence, 
yet they taught that all this external 
worship was not acceptable to the 
Divinity, if the soul was not inwardly 
adorned with piety or virtue.’ { Non aliis 
quam suprema majestate dignis honori- 
bus et sacrificiis, non alio magis quam 
virtutum et recti animi cultu colendum 
tam verbis docuerunt, quam factis et 
exemplis; ut nihil hic dicam de ex- 
terno quoque apparatu, gravitate, mo- 
destia, continentia, abstinentia, decore et 
ornatu; sic tamen ut negarent omnem 
hune cultum exteriorem placere ccelo 
posse, quando cultu animi virtuteque 
interna non esset imbutus.—Confucius 
Sinarum Philosophus, sive scientia Si- 
nensis Latine exposita. Procem. Declar. 
pp. Ixxxiii, Ixxxiv. fol. Paris. 1687. ] 
Which shews how weakly they argue 
against the Eucharistical sacrifice, who 


CHAP, IL. 


SECT. IV. 


950. Jews in the Captivily had Priests without Sacrifices. 


counted and called the chief or only sacrifices, without which 
no gifts or external material sacrifices could be acceptable to 
any God, true or false, and that those alone would be ac- 
cepted when these could not be had. Wherefore if we may 
suppose any deity to discharge his worshippers for any time, 
or altogether, of those offerings, and to order his priests to 
offer up prayers, and supplications, and thanksgivings, and 
praises without them, his priests would nevertheless remain 
proper priests still, and their ministrations, though stripped 
of all sacrificial solemnities, would yet be sacerdotal, that is 
to say, of as holy a nature, and as much pertaining to that 
god and his honour, and as acceptable to him, and of as 
much force to atone him, as when they were solemnized 
with gifts and sacrifices, and he was honoured and adored 
with them as holy rites. Thus in the seventy years of cap- 
tivity, when the Jews had neither temple nor altar, nor 
sacrifice of any sort, yet their priests remained proper 
priests, and their ministrations, by solemn prayers, and sup- 
plications, and confessions, were of the same sacerdotal, 
holy, and honorary atoning nature as when they minis- 
tered at the altar, and filled the courts of the temple with 
the nidors of their offerings, as it is in the apocryphal prayer 
of Azarias*: “O Lord, we ate become less than any nation, 
and are kept under this day in all the world, because of our 
sins. Neither is there at this time prince, or prophet, or 
leader, or burnt-offering, or sacrifice, or oblation, or incense, 
or place to sacrifice before Thee, and to find mercy. Never- 
theless, in a contrite heart and humble spirit let us be ac- 
cepted. Like as in the burnt-offering of rams and bullocks, 
and like as in ten thousand of fat lambs, so let our sacrifice” 
(of penitential prayer and confession, and deprecation) “be 
in Thy sight this day.” Thus if their captivity and line of 
priestly succession had continued to this day they would 
have been proper priests still, and their worship sacerdotal 
worship, though without sacrifice or altar, and acceptable 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST= 
HOOD. 


say that under the Gospel dispensation 
instead of an external material sacrifice 
the spiritual sacrifices of the mind are 
only to be offered to God, against the 
most express testimonies of the fathers 
for that sacrifice, because they prefer 
the living sacrifice of ourselves, and of 


a contrite heart to it, as Jewish and 
heathen writers do, calling it the chief 
or only sacrifice which God requires. 
See the note in pp. 91, 92, of the Pre- 
fatory Answer; |[ vol. i. ] 

e [The Song of the Three Holy 
Children, ν. 14—17.] 


What is essential to a Priesthood. Si 


to God without their sacrifices and sacrificial rites. In lke 
manner, upon supposition that the Christian religion hath 
neither altar nor sacrifice, as some few writers rashly main- 
tain, yet the ministers of it, as I have already shewed from the 
general notion of priesthood, are proper priests or sacerdotal 
ministers, and their solemn ministrations of as holy, hie- 
ratical, acceptable, and atoning a nature, as those of the 
Jews were, and as much pertaining to God, and as powerful 
to procure His favour and protection, and blessings of all 
sorts. Christ Himself, our eternal High-Priest in heaven, 
hath made intercession for His Church and the faithful mem- 
bers of it, ever since He entered into the holy place, without 
any sacrifice, only by presenting that before the Father 
which He offered up once for all upon the cross. This shews 
that the priest’s office doth not consist only in offering sa- 
crifices, but that it may be executed when and where there are 
no more oblations appointed to be offered; and so at all 
times and in all places where sacrifice is no part of the wor- 
ship or service of God. Wherefore it was not sacrifices, or 
power to offer them, which alone made the Jewish ministers 
priests, but other holy performances pertaining to God for 
which they were ordained, and the ministering in which, as 
well as sacrificing, belonged to their priestly office ; and there- 
fore, though it be certain there can be no sacrifice, or sacri- 
ficing, without priests ordinary or extraordinary, yet it is as 
certain there may be priests without offerings or sacrifices, as 
when God is pleased to suspend or abolish the use of them ; 
and therefore upon supposition that God hath abolished all 
sorts of offerings and sacrifices, as well as those by fire or im- 
molation, in the Christian religion; yet the Christian priest- 
hood, like the Jewish, being a separate order of men, severed 
and set apart from the community of the people, and, like 
them, ordained to act and administer for them in holy things 
pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for sins, and to im- 
petrate His favour and blessings for them, they must be as 
proper priests as the Jewish cohens were in captivity, though 
not sacrificing priests. Sir, I have said thus much for the 
sake of such men as your late writer’, who thinks sacrificing 
essential to the office of a priest, and therefore denies bishops 


f(isce ips 2el 


CHAP. II. 


SECT. IV. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Heb. 7. 8. 


32 Jewish rites accidental to a Priesthood. 


and presbyters to be proper priests; because, as he affirms, 
“they have no material sacrifices to offer ;’ whereas offering 
material sacrifices belongs only to priests of a sacrificing reli- 
gion, and is only a part of their holy ministerial office; as 
many things besides offering gifts and sacrifices for sims be- 
longed to the office of a Jewish priest. It belonged to them 
to judge of legal uncleannesses, and to bless the people. 
And as the high-priests were to enter once a year into the 
holy of holies ; so God, had He pleased, might have continued 
that ordinance as a part of the holy ministry of every Chris- 
tian bishop, to signify that Christ had entered with His own 
blood into heaven, there to appear for us in the presence of 
God. But as the common definition of a priest doth belong 
to a Christian bishop, though the Christian religion had not 
that ministration ; so, granting that it hath no material sacri- 
fice, yet its presbyters are priests, because they are taken 
from among men, and ordained for them in other things of 
as solemn and holy a nature as sacrifice, which pertain unto 
God. In truth, Sir, I think they may as well say that Chris- 
tian Churches are not proper temples, or that the definition 
of a temple doth not properly belong to them, because they 
are not built after the pattern of the Jewish temple, nor have 
an altar for burnt-offermgs in their courts or yards, nor an 
altar for incense, or tables for presence-bread in them, or a 
veil to distinguish the holy from the most holy place. Nay, 
Sir, in my opinion, by the same way of reasoning, your late 
writer may deny the Christian religion to be a proper religion, 
as well as its presbyters to be proper priests, because, as they 
assert, it hath no proper ‘sacrifice. Do they not know that 
the shew-bread belonged only to the priests or ministers of 
the Jewish temple ; and that they only had a right to eat it? 
And will they therefore deny Christian ministers to be proper 
priests, because the Christian religion hath no such holy bread 
to be always set for them in the presence of God? The 
ministers of God, as priests, received tithes before and under 
the Mosaic law; and St. Paul describes a Jewish priest by 
taking of tithes, as well as by offering of gifts and sacrifices ; 
and if these men think, as probably they do, that tithes are 
not due under the Christian religion by Divine right to its 
ministers, will they for that reason deny them to be proper 


Intercession is a sacerdotal office. 33 


priests? Nay, in religions which had sacrifices, the ministers cna. n. 
of it were thought to act as priests in other applications to ———~— 
their gods as well as in sacrificing. Thus the sovereign pon- 
tiff* among the Romans acted as much the priest in ‘walking 
at the head of that most solemn funeral sort of procession of 
a defiled vestal, and the secret prayers he made with hands 
lifted up to heaven, at the brink of the pit where she was to be 
buried alive,’ as when he offered sacrifice. And Jesus Christ, 
when as advocate with His Father, and by consequence as a 
priest", though not yet so declared, He made public and most 
solemn intercession unto His Father; the intercession, I 
mean, which He made not only for His Church at that time, John 17. 1, 
but for His future Church throughout the world, with His = 
eyes lifted up to heaven ; I say, when He then interceded with 
God in a most pathetic prayer for His little Church in Judea, 
and His Catholic Church, which was to be dispersed over the 
world, He offered no sacrifice, though He had all power given 
Him, and was Lord of the temple as well as of the sabbath; 
and might, had He pleased, have solemnized His prayer with 
burnt offering, and peace offering, either at the great altar of 
Jerusalem, or at any other which He had power to erect. 
This shews, Sir, though there can be no sacrificing without a 
priest, yet that a man may be a priest, and act as a priest, 
particularly by solemn sacerdotal prayers and intercession, 
without sacrifice or altar. 
V. And therefore, Sir, it is so far from being true, that _ skcr. v. 


Christian bishops and presbyters are not priests for want of The dea- 





con’s office 
in a mea- 
ede : sure sacer- 
8 Plutarch. invita Nume. [7 δὲ τὴν » Qui rex erat semper; sacerdos au- Aotal 
παρθενίαν καταισχύνασα, ζῶσα κατορ- tem factus est quando carnem suscepit. 
ρύττεται.... ἐξίστανται δὲ πάντες ot- —S. Ambros. in Epist. ad Hebreos, 


wn, καὶ παραπέμπουσιν ἄφθογγοι μετά [ad cap. 7. ver. 14. Op., tom. iii. p. 500. 
τινος δεινῆς κατηφείας᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἐστὶν €re- Rom. 1579. This is a spurious work, 
pov θέαμα φρικτότερον, ovd’ ἡμέραν 7 which is not printed in the Benedictine 
πόλις ἄλλην ἄγει στυγνότεραν ἐκείνη. edition. See S. Ambr. Op., tom. ii. 
ὅταν δὲ πρὸς τὸν τόπον κομισθῇ τὸ App. p. 26. ed. Ben. It is a compilation 
φορεῖον, of μὲν ὑπηρέται τοὺς δεσμοὺς from various authors, and is found in 
ἐξέλυσαν, 6 δὲ τῶν ἱερέων ἔξαρχος εὐχάς a fuller form in Rabanus Maurus, in 
τινας ἀπορρήτους ποιησάμενος, καὶ χεῖ- Ep. ad Hebr., Op., tom. iii. The ex- 
pas avaretvas θεοῖς πρὸ τῆς ἀνάγκης, tract here given occurs p. 554, B, 
ἐξάγει συγκεκαλυμμένην, καὶ καθίστη- where it is referred to Alcuin; see his 
ow ἐπὶ κλίμακος εἰς τὸ οἴκημα κάτω Works, tom. i. p. 687. It is originally 
gepovons εἶτ᾽ αὐτὸς μὲν ἀποτρέπεται the observation of St. Chrysostom; in 
μετὰ τῶν ἄλλων ἱερέων, THs δὲ κατα- Epist. ad Hebr., Hom. xiii. ὃ 1. βασι- 
βάση, ἥ τε κλίμαξ ἀναιρεῖται, καὶ κατα- λεὺς μὲν γὰρ ἦν del’ ἱερεὺς δὲ γέγονεν 
κρύπτεται τὸ olknua.—ec. 10. pp. 266---ὀ ὅτε τὴν σάρκα ἀνέλαβεν. Op., tom. xii. 
268. Lips. 1774. ] p- 130, A. ] 


HICKES. D 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


34 Even the deacon’s office may be deemed in a degree 


oblation or sacrifice, that it seems more consonant and rea- 
sonable to think the deacons who cannot offer, to be sharers 
of the priesthood in the third or lowest rank or order, be- 
cause by their office they have power and authority, with 
the leave of the bishop, to minister public prayers and 
praises, and to administer the mystical, or sacramental office 
of baptism ; in the former of which Divine services the of- 
ficiating deacon acts as the people’s orator, or spokesman, to 
offer up their devotions to God; and in the latter he is ap- 
pointed to act as God’s procurator, or representative, to 
stand in His stead to receive such candidates of heaven as 
offer themselves to be baptized into covenant with Him, and 
enrolled into the number of Christ’s Church. In the former 
he solemnly and in a sacerdotal manner offers up prayers, 
and supplications, and praises, and thanksgivings for the 
people, and makes intercessions to God for them; or what is 
equivalent, the people by him, or his mouth and ministry, 
offer up their prayers and other devotions to God; and in 
the latter he is the minister of God for remission of sins by 
spiritual regeneration, and His vicegerent to receive the bap- 
tized person’s profession of faith, and his most solemn vows 
and promises; and in God’s name to release him of his sins, 
and to promise him the kingdom of heaven, and everlasting 
life, and to write his name in the book of life. In these 
Divine and honourable ministrations the office and characters 
of priesthood, as above described, are visible, and by conse- 
quence it is not absurd to assert that the deacons, who are 
thus allowed to officiate and act in things of such weight 
and concern between God and the people, may be deemed 
priests, or sharers in the priests’ office in the largest sense of 
priesthood ; and that their ministration in things pertaining 
to God is truly and properly sacerdotal, though in the lowest 
degree. Of this opinion was Optatus, bishop of Milevi in 
Africa, the great mall of the Donatists, and equal to St. Au- 
gustine in piety and learning, with whom he was contem- 
porary’. “ What need I (saith he*) mention many of the mi- 

i [St. Optatus was earlier than St. he is called ‘venerabilis memoriz’ by 
Augustine; he wrote this work about St. Augustine; and recognised as a 
A.D. 370; the time of his death is un- saint by the Latin Church: Dupin 


certain. His testimony is alleged with calls him a person “magne eruditionis 
that of St. Ambrose and St. Augustine; et excellentis ingenii.’”’ See the Pre- 


sacerdotal. Ancient indications of such a view. 35 


nisters, either deacons in the third, or presbyters constituted 
in the second degree of priesthood? when in those times of 
persecution, some bishops, though the supreme and chief 
rulers of clergy and people, that they might save this short 
uncertain life by the loss of life eternal, delivered up their 
bibles to be burnt.” So in another place!; “The Church (saith 
he) hath several sorts of members; of the ministry, bishops, 
priests, and deacons, and the flock of the faithful people. 
Tell me then, what sort of men in our Church you charge 
with those things which you object.” Perhaps there were 
others before this father, who thought the deacon’s office of 
a sacerdotal nature in the lowest degree. For we read in 
Eusebius™ of an epistle of Dionysius bishop of Alexandria, 
sent by Hippolytus to the brethren at Rome, styled διακονικὴ, 
diaconica, which Valesius thinks was so called “ because it 
treated of the office of a deacon,” about which there might be 
different sentiments or disputes at that time™. If any then 
thought it a degree of the priesthood, they might be led into 
those sentiments by some passages in St. Ignatius’ Epistles ; 
who in that to the Trallesians speaks of deacons thus°®; “ It 
becomes the deacons as ministers of the mysteries of Jesus 


face to his Works; ed. Dupin, Paris, 
1700, and the Veterum Testimonia ap- 
pended to it. ] 

* [Optatus is speaking of the Dio- 
clesian persecutions; his words are, 
Quid commemorem laicos qui tunc in 
Ecclesia nulla fuerant dignitate suffulti 

quid ministros plurimos? quid 
diaconos in tertio? quid presbyteros in 
secundo sacerdotio constitutos? Ipsi 
apices et principes omnium, aliqui 
Episcopi illis temporibus, ut damno 
zterne vitz istius incerte lucis moras 
brevissimas compararent, instrumenta 
divine legis impie tradiderunt.—S. 
Optat. Milev. de Schismate Donatist., 
ἘΣ 19: pil. fol. Paris: 1700. 
On this use of the word ‘priesthood’ 
Dupin observes: Sacerdotii nomen hic 
usurpat generatim Optatus, pro jure 
ac potestate exercendi alicujus muneris 
ecclesiastici, quo sensu diaconi tertium 
in sacerdotio ordinem obtinere merito 
dici possunt.—Dupin. ibid., not. in lo- 
cum. | 

1 (Certa membra sua habet Eccle- 
sia, episcopos, presbyteros, diaconos, 
ministros, et turbam fidelium; dicite 
cui generi hominum in Ecclesia nostra 


hoe possit ascribi.—Ibid., lib. ii. c. 14. 
p. 35. In both instances ‘ ministros’ 
means a distinct class, lower than the 
deacons ; not, as Hickes translates it, 
the general class under which all the 
three orders come. See Bingham, book 
iii. chap. 1. sect. 6.] 

m KEecl. Hist., lib. vi. cap. 46. 
[ἑτέρα τις ἐπιστολὴ τοῖς ἐν Ῥώμῃ τοῦ 
Διονυσίου φέρεται, διακονικὴ, διὰ Ἵππο- 
Avrov.—Hist. Eccl., tom. i. p. 319. 
Valesius’ words are; Ego Rufino as- 
sentior, qui epistolam Dionysii idcirco 
διακονικὴν dictam esse innuit quod de 
officio diaconi pertractaret. — Valesii 
annot. ad loc. ibid. ] 

™ Concilii Niceni Can. xviii. 
below, note x, p. 37.] 

° [δεῖ δὲ καὶ τοὺς διακόνους ὄντας 
μυστήριον (scribe μυστηρίων, Voss.) 
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, κατὰ πάντα τρόπον 
πᾶσιν ἀρέσκειν. οὐ γὰρ βρωμάτων καὶ 
ποτῶν εἰσὶν διάκονοι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκκλησίας 
Θεοῦ ὑπηρέται: δέον οὖν αὐτοὺς φυλάσ- 
σεσθαι τὰ ἐγκλήματα ὡς πῦρ. ὁμοίως 
πάντες ἐντρεπέσθωσαν τοὺς διακόνους, 
k. τ. A. (see note q).—S. Ignat. Ep. ad 
Trall., Ὁ. 2, 3. Patr. Apost., tom. 11; 


p. 22.] 


[See 


D2 


CHAP. 11. 


SECT. V. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD, 


36 St. Ignatius on the importance of the Diaconate. 


Christ, by all means to study to please all; for they are not 
the ministers of meats and drinks, but of the Church of God ; 
wherefore it behoves them to avoid all offences, as they would 
avoid fire. Accordingly, let all reverence the deacons,” &c. 
So in his Epistle to the Magnesians?; “ I exhort you, that you 
study to do all things in divine concord, your bishops pre- 
siding in the place of God, your presbyters in the place of 
the council of the Apostles, and your deacons most dear to 
me, as those to whom is committed the ministry of Jesus 
Christ.” And then a little after? he speaks of their order as 
essential to the Church, with those of the bishops and pres- 
byters; ‘In like manner (saith he) let all reverence the dea- 
cons, as Jesus Christ; and the bishop, as the Father™; and 
the presbyters, as the sanhedrim of God and college of the 
Apostles; without these there is no Church*.” For the clearer 
understanding of this matter, Sir, we must remember that in 
all religions, true or false, there have been two sorts of minis- 
tries, or ministers: one of the priests, who were ministers of 
the gods, and the other of those who were ministers, or ser- 
vants to the priests, who among the Latins were called mi- 
nistri, as Brissoniust hath shewed by many examples. Such 
were the pope, or succincti, who bound and slew the victims ; 
victimari, who prepared the beasts for sacrifice by holy rites ; 
the editui, or sacristans, who kept the holy vessels, and 
habits, and the temple, ὅθ. And for this reason the mi- 


P [παραινῷ ἐν ὁμονοίᾳ Θεοῦ σπουδάζετε 
πάντα πράσσειν, προκαθημένου τοῦ ἐπι- 
σκόπου εἰς τόπον Θεοῦ, καὶ τῶν πρεσβυ- 
τέρων εἰς τόπον συνεδρίου τῶν ἀποστό- 
λων, καὶ τῶν διακόνων, τῶν ἐμοὶ γλυκυ- 
τάτων, πεπιστευμένων διακονίαν Ἰησοῦ 
Xpiorov.—Id. Ep. ad Magnes., c. 6. 
ibid., p. 18.] 

4 [That is ‘a little after’ the passage 
from the Epistle to the Trallesians 
just quoted, which continues, ὁμοίως 
πάντες ἐντρεπέσθωσαν τοὺς διακόνους 
ὡς ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστόν" ὡς καὶ τὸν ἐπίσκο- 
πον, ὄντα υἱὸν τοῦ πατρός" τοὺς δὲ πρεσ- 
βυτέρους ὡς συνέδριον Θεοῦ, καὶ ὡς σύν- 
δεσμον ἀποστόλων" χώρις τούτων ἐκ- 
κλησία οὐ καλεῖται.----[ἃ. Ep. ad Trall., 
c. 8. ibid., p. 22.] 

τ See Vossius in locum. [ὄντα υἱὸν 
τοῦ matpds’ etiam interpres, codicem 
corruptum secutus, ut puto. Antiochus 
autem nos hoc loco juvare potest, apud 


quem est; καὶ τὸν ἐπίσκοπον, ὡς τὸν 
πατέρα. Ac similiter legisse Pseudo- 
Ignatius videtur.—Vossii annott. ibid. ] 

8 St. Polycearp in his Epistle to the 
Philippians magnifies the deacons’ 
office almost in the same words, saying 
‘they are not the servants of men but of 
God in Jesus Christ.’ [ὁμοίως διάκονοι 
ἄμεμπτοι κατενώπιον αὐτοῦ τῆς δικαιο- 
σύνης, ὡς θεοῦ ἐν Χριστῷ διάκονοι, καὶ 
οὐκ ἀνθρώπων. S. Polyearpi Epist., 6. 5. 
Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 188. ] 

t De Formul., lib: i. [pp. 1257135 
where the ministri, popz, succincti, et 
victimarii are treated of.] See Rosini 
Antiquit. Rom., lib. iii, cap. 31. 
[ De ministris sacerdotum populi Ro- 
mani; he makes the statement given 
by Hickes respecting the Flaminii, 
quoting Festus on the point, and treats 
of the editui, popz, and victimarii. 
pp. 227, 228. Amst. 1685. ] 


Two kinds of ministers in all religions. 37 


nisters of the heathen priest called flamen dialis, were from 
him named flaminii. To the pope, victimarii, and editui 
among the Latins, answered, the κήρυκες, or (epoxjpuxes, the 
νεωκόροι, ΟΥ̓ ζάκοροι, and ναοφύλακες among the Greeks : 
and so among the Jews the Levites were set aside to serve 
and attend the priests, and do all the servile offices of the 
sacrifices about the tabernacle, and afterwards about the 
temple, in such manner as I need not describe. Hence 
came a twofold use of the verb XNectoupyetv, which signifies 
‘to minister,’ and of all the words that come from it, in the 
Christian Church. For in the more noble" and usual signifi- 
cation they denote sacerdotal ministration, but sometimes by 
a catachresis they also denote the servile ministry of those 
inferior officers, who attended the bishop and priests, and 
the ministration of holy services, and kept the church. Ae- 
τουργική" κυρίως μὲν ἡ ἱερατικὴ, καταχρηστικῶς δὲ ἡ δου- 
λική" “* Liturgical’ (saith the gloss in Suidas) properly signi- 
fies ‘sacerdotal,’ but catachrestically ‘ servile.” According 
to which explication of the word, the office of deacon is of a 
double nature; first, servile*, with respect to the bishop 


ἃ Λειτουργικάς. ἱερατικάς. Hesychius. 

* Concil. Nicen. Can. xviii. ‘‘ Let 
the deacons contain themselves within 
their own bounds, and know that they 
are (τοῦ μεν ἐπισκόπου ὑπηρέται) the 
bishop’s servants, and inferior to the 
presbyters.” [ἦλθεν εἰς τὴν ἁγίαν καὶ 
μεγάλην σύνοδον, ὅτι ἔν τισι τόποις καὶ 
πόλεσι, τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις τὴν εὐχαρι- 
στίαν οἱ διακόνοι διδόασιν" ὅπερ οὔτε 6 
κανὼν, οὔτε ἣ συνήθεια παρέδωκε, τοὺς 
ἐξουσίαν μὴ ἔχοντας προσφέρειν, τοῖς 
προσφέρουσι διδόναι τὸ σῶμα τοῦ Χρι- 
στοῦ. κἀκεῖνο δὲ ἐγνωρίσθη, ὅτι ἤδη 
τινὲς τῶν διακόνων καὶ πρὸ τῶν ἐπισκό- 
πων τῆς εὐχαριστίας ἅπτονται. ταῦτα 
μὲν οὖν ἅπαντα περιηρήσθω" καὶ ἐμμενέ- 
τωσαν οἱ διακόνοι τοῖς ἱδίοις μέτροις, 
εἰδότες ὅτι τοῦ μὲν ἐπισκόπου ὑπηρέται 
εἰσὶ, τῶν δὲ πρεσβυτέρων ἐλάττους τυγ- 
xdvovor’ λαμβανέτωσαν δὲ κατὰ τὴν 
τάξιν τὴν εὐχαριστίαν μετὰ τοὺς πρεσ- 
Butépous, τοῦ ἐπισκόπου διδόντος αὐτοῖς, 
ἢ τοῦ πρεσβυτέρου. ἀλλὰ μηδὲ καθῆ- 
σθαι ἐν μέσῳ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων ἐξέστω 
τοῖς διακόνοις" παρὰ κανόνα γὰρ καὶ παρὰ 
τάξιν ἐστὶ τὸ γινόμενον. εἰ δέ τις μὴ 
θέλοι πειθαρχεῖν καὶ μετὰ τούτους τοὺς 
ὅρους, πεπαύσθω τῆς διακονία. ---- (ΟΠ 61]. 
tom. ii. p. 42.] Const. Apost., lib. viii. 
cap. 27. ‘The deacon doth not ad- 


minister the Eucharist, but when the 
bishop or presbyter administers [rather 
“has offered’’ |, he delivers it to the 
people, not as a priest, but as one who 
serves the priests.’””—[ ζδιάκονος ov προσ- 
φέρει: Tod δὲ ἐπισκόπου προσενεγκόν- 
τος ἢ τοῦ πρεσβυτέρου, αὐτὸς ἐπιδίδωσι 
τῷ λαῷ, οὐχ ws ἱερεὺς, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς διακονού- 
μενος ἱερεῦσι.---Τ Ὀ14., tom. i. p. 493, C.] 
So in the spurious but ancient Epistle of 
St. Ignatius to Heron the deacon: “ Do 
thou nothing without the bishops, for 
they are priests, but thou art the ser- 
vant of priests. They baptize, sacrifice, 
ordain, absolve; but thou dost minister 
to them, as St. Stephen did to James 
and the presbyters at Jerusalem.” 
[μηδὲν ἄνευ τῶν ἐπισκόπων πράττε" 
ἱερεῖς γάρ εἰσι’ σὺ δὲ διάκονος τῶν 
ἱερέων. ἐκεῖνοι βαπτίζουσιν, ἱερουργοῦσι, 
χειροτονοῦσι, χειροθετοῦσι᾽ σὺ δὲ αὐτοῖς 
διακονεῖς, ws Στέφανος 6 ἅγιος ἐν Ἵερο- 
σολύμοις Ιακώβῳ καὶ τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις. 
—S. Ignat. δάβου. Epist. δὰ Heronem 
diaconum, § iii. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 
109. Of the spuriousness of this epi- 
stle Le Clere says; “ad ea accedunt 
manifest allusiones ad Constitutiones 
Apostolicas, aut potius verba inde ex- 
scripta, que hasce epistolas non minus 
spurias esse evincunt quam ipsum opus 


38  Deacon’s proper office to minister under the priests. 


curistian and presbyters to whom they were subservient’ in the 


PRIEST~ 
HOOD. 


performances of holy offices, and in other affairs of the 
Church. As such they were the bishop’s attendants? and sub- 
almoners® to look after the necessitous, as widows and orphans 
and sick persons, that they should be duly supplied out of the 
public stock of the Church; and his messengers to carry his 
pastoral letters and orders to his flock, and his communica- 
tory letters to other bishops and Churches”; and in Divine 
service to be the iepoxjpuxes®, or criers, to forbid those who 
bore any grudge to come to the holy Eucharist‘, to command 
silence and attention when the holy offices began, and parti- 
cularly, as often as they called upon them by the oremus, ‘let 
us pray;’ to dismiss the penitents, catechumens, and hearers, 
when the holy Eucharist was to begin; to prepare the altar 
for 1; to receive the offerings from the people, and carry 
them to the priest or bishop, who placed them upon the holy 
table; to carry the holy cup about, and, in cases of necessity, 
the bread to the faithful?; and when the communion was 


unde desumpta sunt, ut Usserius et 
Dallezus multis ostenderunt.—Disser- 
tatio ii. de Epist. Ignat. § 26. ibid. p. 
611. 

y | rabert Pontificale Ecclesiz 
Grece [ad Partem ix. Liturg. Or- 
dinum] Observ. iii. [Diaconum non 
solius episcopi, sed etiam presbyteri 
ministrum esse.] p. 197. [ Paris. 1643. 
See Bingham, book ii. chap. 20. § 13.] 

2 Tov μὲν ἐπισκόπου ὑπηρέται εἰσὶ, 
τῶν δὲ πρεσβυτέρων ἐλάττους. Conc. 
Nic. Can. xviii. [quoted above p. 39. 
note x. | 

5 Habertus, [bid., Observ. iv. [De 
reliquis extra mysteria Diaconorum 
officiis. Primum est ministrare men- 
sis.] p. 200. [See Bingham, ibid., § 16, 
and the Apost. Const., lib. 11. ο. 31, 32, 
and lib, iii. c. 19. there referred to. | 

b [See Bingham, ibid., ὃ 18.] 

© Habertus, ibid., Observ. ii. pars 
altera, pp. 192,193. [De ministerio di- 
aconorum in tremendis mysteriis. .. . . 
Tertium (munus) erga populum; mo- 
nendo, excitando, imperando, precipue 
frequenti illa voce πρόσχωμεν, ‘atten- 
damus:’.... submovebant etiam eos 
qui mysteriis adeundis inepti erant. | 
See also Observ. v. p. 203. 

4 [ Bingham, ibid., § 10. See Const. 
Apost., quoted below, note c, p. 44. | 

e (Habertus, ibid., p. 193, quoting 
Hugo de S. Victor, Diaconorum offi- 


cium est... sacrificium in altari com- 
ponere, corpus et sanguinem Domini 
distribuere, licet non ubique hoc ob- 
servetur. | 

f (Bingham, ibid., § 5.] 

§ [It was so decided by the fourth 
council of Carthage, c. 38. (quoted 
by Bingham, book ii. chap. 20. § 7.) 
Diaconus, presente presbytero, eucha- 
ristiam corporis Christi populo, si 
necessitas cogat, jussus eroget. The 
earlier rule of the Church allowed 
them to administer both ‘the bread 
and the holy cup.’ Nonnulli qui- 
dem, qui de altera solum specie ag- 
noscendum velint, de calice nimi- 
rum; at de utraque censendum in 
veteri ecclesie disciplina, ex sequenti- 
bus plura declarabunt. Habertus, ibid., 
p- 194. He quotes St. Justin Martyr, 
(Apol. i. 6. 67. p. 83, E.) and St. Am- 
brose, De Officiis, lib. i. c. 41. (Op. 
tom. ii, p. 55, A.) See also the pas- 
sage of Hugo de S. Victor quoted 
above, and the passage from the Apo- 
stolical Constitutions, lib. viii. ο. 27. 
quoted above, note x, p. 37. Of the 
rule of the later Church, he says, (Ob- 
serv. ii. pars altera, p. 196;) Decretum 
vero postea apud nos, Diacono non li- 
cere przesente presbytero corpus Christi 
tradere. Bingham, as above, § 7, says 
the same. | 


Allowed in some cases to act as priests. 39 


done, like the Athenian κήρυκες" at the end of their sacrifices, cuar. 1. 
to dismiss the people. It was their office also to be directors ~“— 
and monitors to the bishop and presbyters in the performance 

of Divine service’, and to attend upon the person of the bishop 

at home and abroad; to make part of his holy retinue, and 

in many things to minister to him’. But then, secondly, as 

their office was servile in these respects, so it seems to have 

been sacerdotal, as they were sharers in the lowest degree of 

the priestly office, when in virtue of it they were appointed 

and allowed, especially in the absence of the bishops and pres- 

byters, to administer the most solemn and federal office of bap- 

tism, and offer up praises and supplications and thanksgivings 

and prayers in the public congregations*; inthe former of which 

two offices, as I have observed, the deacon stands on God’s 

part to admit the candidates of baptism into the Church ; and 

in the latter on the people’s part, as their orator, to put up 

their united prayers, and in both acts as a priest. For which 

reason, perhaps, it was that St. Ignatius said, “that they 

were not ministers of meats and drinks, but of the Church of 
God!';” that is, they are not only ministers of tables, to serve 

at which they were first appointed, as St. Hierome observes™, Acts 6. 43. 
but also sacerdotal ministers, ‘“‘ ministers of God” and the 2 Cor. 6. 4. 
Church, “ ministers of the mysteries of Jesus Christ;” to whom, 1 Cor. 4. 1. 
saith he in another way of speaking", “is committed the mi- See 2 Cor. 
nistry of Jesus Christ.” So the council of Eliberis°, in the ὅν 


4 Peractis vera solennibus religionis, 
populum dimittebant his verbis λαῶν 
ἄφεσις, ex templo, vel, ite, missa est.— 
Is. Casaub. Animady. in Athenzi 
Deipnos., lib. xiv. [c. 23. Annott. 
p- 939. fol. 1657. tom. vii. p. 668. 
Schweigh. 1805. ] 

i Habertus, ibid., p. 192. [Diaco- 
nus celebrantem cum reverentia sub- 
monere debet. | 

J Ibid., Observ. iii. 
Bingham, ibid., § 18. ] 

κ { Habertus, ibid. Observ. iv. 3. Ter- 
tium (munus) baptizare, extra ordinem 
scilicet, abseute episcopo et presbytero 
si necessitas ingruat. Quarum ea pre- 
stare, absente episcopo et presbytero, 
quz ad pascendam et regendam ple- 
bem spectant, seclusa nimirum ordina- 
tione et sacrificio.—p. 202. See Bing- 
ham, ibid., ὃ 9. ‘‘ Deacons allowed to 
baptize in some places;” and § 10. ‘tin 
several prayers they repeated the words 


[See note y, 


before (the people) to teach them what 
they were to pray for.’ See Apost. 
Const. quoted below, pp. 44, 45. ] 

' [note 0, p. 35. ] 

m Viduarum et mensarum minis- 
tri; Epist. ad Evagrium Ixxxv. [ Quid 
patitur mensarum et viduarum minis- 
ter, ut supra (presbyteros) se efferat.— 
Epist. exlv. (al. Ixxxv.) ad Evangelum; 
(al. Evagrium) S. Hieron. Op., tom. i. 
col. 1075, A. Sciant quare diaconi con- 
stituti sint; legant Acta Apostolorum, 
recordentur conditionis suee.—Ibid., col. 
1077, C. The object of the epistle is 
to shew the inferiority of deacons to 
presbyters. | 

n [See note p, p. 36. ] 

© Canon xxxii. [Apud presbyterum, 
siquis gravi ]apsu in ruinam mortis in- 
ciderit, placuit agere poenitentiam non 
debere, sed potius apud episcopum ; 
cogente tamen infirmitate necesse est 
presbyterum communionem prestare 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


40 These powers extraordinary, and by commission ; 

year 362”, decreed that in case of necessity a deacon might 
absolve dying penitents or excommunicates, if the bishop 
commanded him. And this power of reconciling penitents 
in imminent danger of death, when a priest cannot be had, 
was granted to deacons by the Church in succeeding ages, as 
is shewed in many instances by a late learned writer and 
monk of the Benedictine order, to whom I refer the reader. 
And before this, in the Church of Africa", deacons were 
allowed to receive confessions and absolve penitents, when 
neither the bishop nor any presbyter could be present, as is 
plain from the place in the margin. Upon which Rigaltius, 
favouring the opinion of Optatus, saith’, Est enim etiam in 


debere, et diaconum, si ei jusserit sacer- 
dos, (that is, the bishop, see the note 
of Albaspinzus, p. 1020;) but another 
reading, followed by Aguirre, (Cone. 
Hisp., tom. ii. p. 264,) is; non est pres- 
byterorum aut diaconorum, communi- 
onem talibus preestare debere, nisi eis 
jusserit episcopus.—Concil., tom. i. p. 
996, A, B.] 

P [This date is an oversight. The 
council is dated era 362, that is, of the 
era Hispanica, instituted B.C. 38, in 
honour of Augustus, when Spain was 
allotted to him in the second trium- 
virate. It was the first use of the word 
era, in this sense, which was a Spanish 
word for time. See Spelman’s Gloss., 
pp. 243—245. The date era 362 cor- 
responds to A.D. 324. This is the 
latest date assigned to the council; 
Harduin places it in 313, (Concil., 
tom. i. p. 247. ed. Paris. 1725); Baluz 
thinks it should be put later; Aguirre 
(Concil. Hisp., tom. 11. diss. 1. n. 18) 
places it in the latter part of 303; as 
does Colet, Concil., tom. i. p. 987. ] 

4 Edm. Martene de Antiquis Ecclesiz 
Ritibus, lib. i. cap. 6.[art. vii, E. Diaconi 
olim urgente necessitate confessiones 
excipiebant.... Id muneris non raro 
diaconis concessum esse fidei est indu- 
biz. ... He then quotes the authorities 
given by Hickes, and afterwards other 
and still later ones, forbidding deacons 
to hear confessions, (as in the dioceses 
of London, Lincoln, and Worcester in 
the thirteenth century,) and concludes, 
His omnibus luce meridiana clarius 
constat, diaconos ad usque finem szculi 
xiii. confessiones poenitentium, absen- 
tibus presbyteris, urgenteque necessi- 
tate excepisse; immo citra necessi- 
tatem id attentasse.—tom. i. p. 273. 
Antw. 1763. The confessions which 


deacons were allowed to receive, in 
cases of necessity, were the last acts of 
public humiliation before reconciliation ; 
(see Bp. Fell, quoted note t, and note L, 
p- 377 of the Oxford translation of Ter- 
tullian;) and the imposition of their 
hands gave only a readmission to com- 
munion, authorized by the bishop. See 
Petavius, not. ad Epiphanium, pp. 71, 
233, 250, ed. Paris, 1622; and his Dia- 
tribe de Pcenitentia et reconciliatione, 
capp. i., ii., iv. Thesaurus Theologicus, 
tom. xii. Venet. 1763, as referred to in 
the notes to the place, p. 399. ed. Ben. | 

ΤΟ Si incommodo aliquo et infirmi- 
tatis periculo occupati fuerint, non ex- 
pectata preesentia nostra, apud presby- 
terum quemcunque presentem, vel si 
presbyter repertus non fuerit, et urgere 
exitus cceperit, apud diaconum quoque 
exomologesin facere delicti sui possint, 
ut manu eis in pcenitentiam imposita 
veniant ad Dominum cum pace.—Cy- 
prian., Epist. xviii. ad Clerum de Lap- 
sis, ed. Oxon. p. 40. [Epist. xii. p. 22. 
ed. Ben. | 

5. [Rigalt does but express the senti- 
ment of St. Cyprian (Epist. xiv. p. 24. 
ed. Ben.) which he quotes ; ‘Item pres- 
byteris et diaconibus non defuit sacer- 
dotii vigor.’ His note on the passage, 
Epist. xii. p. 25. Paris, 1666, quoted 
note r, continues; At diaconos peeni- 
tentibus manum imponere sola neces- 
sitatis ratio admittit; nempe si urgeat 
exitus, et presbyter repertus non fuerit. 
On the words quoted from Epist. xiv., 
he says, p. 27; Operz pretium fuerit 
semel observasse, vocabulis sacerdotii 
et sacramenti, in rebus Christianis, 
omnia significari que administrande 
disciplinze Christiane conveniunt, (in- 
stancing the giving of baptism and 
offering prayers.) Atque inde fit, ut 


still they shew there may be Priesthood without Sacrifice. 41 


diaconatu sacerdotium, “there is something of priesthood in 
the deacon’s office.” But as learned a man, the annotator in 
the Oxford edition‘, is of opinion that the deacons did not 
perform these sacerdotal acts as priests, in virtue of their 
office, or as sharers of the priesthood, but only as deputed by 
the authority of the bishops, in extraordimary cases of neces- 
sity, when there were no bishops or presbyters to perform 
them. Habertus, in his fifth observation on the Greek Pon- 
tifical, is of this opinion"; and there likewise shews that an- 
ciently deacons never were permitted to preach e cathedra, in 
a solemn and sacerdotal manner; that is, as messengers or 
“ambassadors of Christ,’ by whom God did instruct them, 2 Cor. 5. 20. 
and exhort them to repent, and who, in Christ’s stead, our 
great High-Priest in heaven, prayed them to be reconciled to 
God. Sir, my undertaking doth not oblige me to arbitrate 
between these opinions, but only to shew that it is more con- 
sonant to the notion of priesthood to think deacons to be 
priests of the lowest form who had not power to offer, than 
to deny the more noble orders of bishops and presbyters to be 
truly sacerdotal; because to administer baptism and officiate 
in public prayers, properly speaking, seem to be sacerdotal 
acts in them as well as in the presbyters, though they could 
not administer the holy Eucharist, and by consequence it is 
far from being true that bishops and presbyters are not pro- 
per priests, upon supposition that the Christian religion hath 


CHAP, II. 
SECT. VI. 


Cyprianus etiam in diaconibus sacer-  diaconi et fratres laici in hane rem 


dotii vigorem laudaverit. It is remark- 
able that Hickes does not refer to these 
words of St. Cyprian, which are more 
explicit than those of Optatus. | 

t [Bishop Fell. Caute hic legendus 
est Rigaltius dum ait, ‘esse in Diaco- 
natu sacerdotium’...Quzecunque neces- 
Sitas cogit etiam illa defendit, sed tan- 
tisper dum incubuerit.... Dicitur porio 
apud Diaconum exomologesis facta, 
non quasi is solus esset ejusdem con- 
scius; pcenitentia enim vel egrotan- 
tium, quantum fieri potuit istis sz- 
culis, publica erat; sed quia absente 
presbytero, ad ‘quem munus_ illud 
imprimis spectabat, diaconi presentia 
habebatur prorsus necessaria, quot- 
cunque e plebe adesse contingeret, .. 
Forma a Cypriano episcopo data fuit: 
conditionem nimirum sub qua lapsi in 
ecclesiam reciperentur is preescripsit. 
... Forme sive conditionis implete, 
Ecclesiz nomine testes et arbitri erant 


accitiimAnnott. in S. Cypr. Epist., p. 
40. ed. Oxon. | 

u [The subject of the Observation is ; 
Munus predicandi ad diaconum, non 
nisi extra ordinem pertinere. Habertus 
says, Omnes autem inter theologos 
conyenit, diaconum baptismisolum ex- 
traordinarium ministrum esse; igitur 
et ipsius que baptizandi officium se- 
quitur, predicationis. Illius, inquam, 
predicationis publice et solennis, qua~ 
lis episcoporum et presbyterorum officio 
continetur. Privatz siquidem aut mi- 
nus solemnes adhortationes eis plerum- 
que commissz sunt, publice extra or- 
dinem, aut in necessitate, absente epi- 
scopo et presbytero, lege vero et more 
communi interdicte; and he shews 
that κηρύσσειν, when applied to deacons, 
means ‘bidding’ the people to prayer, 
&c.—Habertus, Pontif. ubi sup. Ob- 
serv. v. pp. 202, sqq- See Bingham, 
book ii. chap. 20. § 11.] 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


1 Cor. 9. 13. 


words, 
speaking 
of the 
Christian 
altar. 


42 The terms ‘ gift, and ‘altar, used by our Lord; 


neither altar nor sacrifice of any sort, as the Jewish neither 
now hath, nor formerly in the captivity had. 

I say, ‘upon supposition,’ which for argument sake I am 
willing to grant your late writer, though in reality it hath 
both, as I now proceed to shew from the writings of the New 
Testament; and thereby prove that the ministers of Christ 
are so far from not being proper priests, that they are proper 
altar ministers, or sacrificing priests, τὰ ἵερα ἐργαζόμενοι, as 
the Apostle calls the Jewish priests. 

VI. I will begin with the twenty-third and twenty-fourth 
verses of the fifth chapter of St. Matthew’s Gospel: “If thou 
bring thy gift (ro δῶρόν cov) unto the altar, and there remem. 
berest that thy brother hath ought against thee, leave there thy 
gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy 
brother, and then come and offer thy gift.” The original word 
for gift is a sacrificial term of a general signification, and de- 
notes a material sacrifice, or offering of any sort, as may be 
seen in the margin*, and therefore it is to be taken here in 
that sense in which it is to be understood in Matthew vii. 4; 
“‘Shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift (or oblation) 
that Moses commanded.” So in chapter xxiii. 18; “Whosoever 
shall swear by the altar, it is nothing, but whosoever sweareth 
by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty.” In this sense of 
the word our Lord spake to the Jews in their common lan- 
guage. But then it is to be observed, that those Jews were 
His disciples, and that this precept of reconciliation was 
therefore intended by Him for an ordinance of the New Tes- 
tament, like many others which He gave His disciples, while 
He instructed them in the doctrines relating to the kingdom 
of God. Thus He spoke by way of anticipation of baptism 
and baptismal regeneration to Nicodemus’, John 11]. 3—5, 


x Lev. i. 2, “If any of you bring an 
offering to the Lord, προσαγάγῃ δῶρα 
τῷ Κυρίῳ, ye shall bring your offering 
of the cattle, of the herd, and of the 
flock, ἀπὸ τῶν κτηνῶν, καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν Body 
καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν προβάτων προσοίσετε τὰ 
δῶρα ὑμῶν. ver. 3, “1 his offering be 
a burnt-sacrifice, ἐὰν ὁλοκαύτωμα Td 
δῶρον αὐτοῦ." Chap. ii. 1, ‘‘ When any 
will offer a meat-oftering unto the Lord, 
his offering shall be of fine flour, ἐὰν 
δὲ ψυχὴ προσφέρῃ δῶρον θυσίαν τῷ 
Κυρίῳ σεμίδαλις ἔσται τὸ δῶρον αὐτοῦ. 
ver. 7, “ If thy oblation be a meat-offer- 


ing baken ina pan, ἐὰν δὲ θυσία ἀπὸ 
ἐσχάρας τὸ δῶρόν cov.’ See also chap. 
i. 10, 14; ii. 4, 5,13; iii. 1. [δῶρον is 
used in each place, the corresponding 
Hebrew word is corban, j37p, ‘ what is 
brought, presented.’ ] 

y S$. Cyprian. de Orat. Domin. Homo 
novus, renatus, et Deo per ejus gratiam 
restitutus, ‘ Pater,’ primo in loco dicit, 
quia filius esse jam ccepit. p. 206. ed. 
Ben.—See Epist. Ixxii. [ad Stephanum 
Papam. Tune enim demum esse filii 
Dei possuni si sacramento utroque 
nascantur, cum scriptum sit, ‘nisi quis 


His teaching was in anticipation of the Gospel state. 48 


and of the holy Eucharist’, John vi. 50—58. Many other 
doctrines and precepts of Christian perfection were given by 
way of anticipation for the Gospel state, which are to be found 
in His sermon on the mount, and other places of the evan- 


CHAP. II. 


SECT. VI. 


gelists: as that wherein He told His disciples, that their Matt. 5. 20. 


righteousness was to exceed the righteousness of the scribes 


and pharisees ; that of not calling our brother fool; that of v 


er. 22. 


not looking upon a woman with a lustful eye; that whereby ver. 28. 
He forbid divorce in other places, as well as in His sermon ; ver. 22. (c. 
that of not resisting evil; of loving our enemies; and of for- ἴδ᾽ ΠῚ με 
giving others their offences and trespasses against us, as a ver. 39. 
condition without which God would not forgive us ours ver. 44; ο, 
against Him. To these we may add the special beatitudes Pees 


promised to those who mourn; to the poor, meek, and humble ο. 5. 3—11, 


in spirit; and to those who are reviled and persecuted for 
His sake. All which were given to them, as well as the pre- 
cept of being reconciled before they offered at the altar, as to 
His disciples, and for the future Christian Church, to renew 
the Divine likeness and image in us, and make us partakers 
of the Divine perfections, by conforming our lives and our 
whole selves to His instructions and will. And as the primi- 
tive Church conceived this precept of reconciliation to be in- 
tended, among those I have mentioned, for a Gospel precept, 
so they always applied it to the Eucharist, as the Gospel sa- 
crifice or oblation, ‘ not thinking (as Mr. Mede well observes?) 


renatus fuerit ex aqua et Spiritu, non 
potest introire in regnum Dei.’ ]|—p. 
128. ed. Ben. ] 

Epist. lxxiii.[ad Tubaianum. Ut qui 
legitimo et vero, atque unico Sancte 
Ecclesiz baptismo ad regnum Dei re- 
generatione Divina preparantur, sacra- 
mento utroque nascantur, quia scrip- 
tum est, ‘nisi,’ &c. p. 136. ed. Ben. ] 

Testimoniorum adversus Judzos, lib. 
i. c. 12. [p. 279. ed. Ben.] lib. iii. ¢. 
25. [p. 814. ed. Ben.] Concil. Car- 
thag. [A.D. 256. apud S. Cypr. Op. 
p- 330. ed. Ben. 7 

* Ibid., [de Orat. Dom. ] Ipso pre- 
dicante, et monente, ‘ego sum panis 
vitae, qui de ccelo descendi. Si quis 
ederit de meo pane, vivet in zternum. 
Panis autem quem ego dedero, caro 
mea est pro seculi vita,’ &c. [p. 209. 
ed. Ben.] See also Testimon. adversus 
Judzos, lib. i. ο. 22. [p. 228. ed. Ben. ] 


lib. iii. c. 25. [p. 314. ed. Ben. ] 

Tertull. de Orat. [c. 6. ] Panem nostrum 
quotidianum da nobis hodie, spiritualiter 
potius intelligamus. Christus enim 
panis noster est, quia vita Christus, et 
vita panis, ‘Ego sum,’ inquit, ‘ panis 
vite.’ Et paulo supra; [Panis est 
sermo Dei vivi, qui descendit de ccelo. 
—Op., p. 131, Di] 

a (“It is altogether improbable our 
Saviour would then annex a new rite 
to the legal sacrifices, when He was so 
soon after to abolish them by His sacri- 
fice upon the cross... . Ergo, He in- 
tended it for an ordinance of the king- 
dom of God, (as the Scripture speaks,) 
that is, for the Church of His Gospel.” 
—Of the name Altar, or θυσιαστήριον, 
anciently given to the Holy Table.— 
sect. ii) Mede’s Works, p. 390. See 
vol. i. p. 5, note s. | 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD, 


44 Our Lord’s words (Matt. v. 23, 24) understood of the 


that our Lord would make a new law,’ or, let me add, enforce 
an old one, ‘concerning legal sacrifices, which He was pre- 
sently to abolish, but that it had reference to that oblation 
which was to be instituted by Him for the Gospel dispensation,’ 
and to continue with and under it for ever. Thus, in the Apo- 
stolical Constitutions»; ἐὰν προσφέρῃς τὸ δῶρόν σου, κ.τ.λ. 
“ Tf thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest 
thy brother hath ought against thee, leave thy gift there, and 
go thy way first and be reconciled to thy brother, and then 
come and offer thy gift; δῶρον δέ ἐστιν Θεῷ ἡ ἑκάστου προσ- 
εὐχὴ καὶ εὐχαριστία, For the gift that is offered to God is 
every one’s prayer and thanksgiving.” What immediately fol- 
lows in chapter 54, shews that this relates to the Eucharist, 
διὰ τοῦτο ὦ ἐπίσκοποι, μελλόντων ὑμῶν εἰς προσευχὴν ἀπαν- 
τᾷν" «.T.r. “Wherefore, Ὁ bishops, when you proceed to prayer 
after the lesson and singing of psalms, and expounding the 
Scriptures, let the deacon standing near you proclaim with a 
loud voice, ‘ Let no man have ought against his brother, let 
no dissembler come hither,’ that if any persons are guilty of 
any thing for which they ought to ask forgiveness, they may 
pray unto God, and be reconciled to their brethren.” In 
this last citation, which continues the former, the very order 
of the liturgy, or Eucharistical service, is described as it is 
mentioned in Justin the Martyv’s first Apology“, and partly set 
forth in the same Const. Apost., lib. vii. cap. 12 and 13°. And 
I cannot but observe that it hath the air of a true and most 
genuine passage, worthy of that apostolical father, who, as I 


> Const. Apost., lib. ii. cap. 53. [Con- 
cilia, tom. i. p. 289, H.'292; A. The 
concluding words would be more cor- 
rectly translated, ‘‘ Now the prayer and 
thanksgiving of each is a gift to God ;” 
and so our prayers come under the rule 
of being reconciled before offering our 
gifts, which properly belongs to literal 
oblations. | 

© διὰ τοῦτο ὦ ἐπίσκοποι, μελλόντων 
ὑμῶν εἰς προσευχὴν ἀπαντᾷν, [ μετὰ 
τὴν ἀνάγνωσιν καὶ τὴν ψαλμῳδίαν, καὶ 
τὴν ἐπὶ ταῖς γραφαῖς διδασκαλίαν, ὃ 
διάκονος ἑστὼς πλήσιον ὑμῶν μετὰ ὑ- 
ψηλῆς φωνῆς λεγέτω" μή τις κατά τι- 
νὸς" μή τις ἐν ὑποκρίσει" iva ἐὰν ἐυρεθῇ 
ἐν τισὶν ἀντιλογία, συνειδήσει κρου- 
σθέντες δεηθῶσι τὸν Θεὸν, καὶ διαλλα- 
γῶσι τοῖς adeApots.—Ibid., c. 54. p. 
292, Ὁ. This passage is not, as the 


words following in the text would 
imply, immediately after the former. ] 

ἃ τῇ τοῦ ἡλίου λεγομένῃ ἡμέρᾳ πάν- 
τῶν κατὰ πόλεις ἢ ἄγρους μενόντων ἐπὶ 
τὸ αὐτὸ συνέλευσις γίνεται, καὶ τὰ ἀπο- 
μνημονεύματα τῶν ἀποστόλων ἢ τὰ συγ- 
γράμματα τῶν προφητῶν ἀναγινώσκεται 
μέχρις ἐγχωρέι. εἶτα παυσαμένου τοῦ 
ἀναγινώσκοντος, ὃ πρυεστὼς διὰ λόγου 
τὴν νουθεσίαν καὶ πρόκλησιν τῆς τῶν 
καλῶν τούτων μιμησέως ποιεῖται" ἔπειτα 
ἀνιστάμεθα πάντες, καὶ εὐχὰς πέμπομεν" 
καὶ ὡς προέφημεν, παυσαμένων ἡμῶν τῆς 
εὐχῆς ἄρτος προφέρεται, kK. T.A.—S.Jus- 
tin. M., Apol. i. [6. 67. Op., p. 83, D.] 
The quotation is continued (in refer- 
ring to ὁ. 65. p. 82, quoted below), 
sect. vii. | 

© [Ibid., pp. 473—485, quoted be- 
low, sect. x. | 


Christian Oblation, in the Apostolical Constitutions. 45 


have more than once noted, in his first epistle to the Corin- 
thians, § xliv., calls bishops προσενέγκοντες τὰ δῶρα, “ offer- 
ers of the gifts’”” These gifts of bread and wine, which 
the people brought and the priests offered, they frequently 
called ἅγια δῶρα, to distinguish them from the other ob- 
lations, as of the first-fruits of corn and grapes, which 
were also presented to God upon the altar. But to return 
to St. Clement, he virtually applies this text to the Eucha- 
ristical sacrifice, Apost. Constit., lib. ii. cap. 57%, where 
the order of the liturgy is more fully described ‘ited in 
the fifty-third and fifty-fourth chapters; “ After prayer,” 

saith he, “let some of the deacons attend only to the 
oblation of the Eucharist, ministering to the body of the 
Lord with fear: let others look after the people and make 
them keep silence ; but let the deacon that assists the bishop 
say, μή τις κατά τινος, ‘let no man have ought against his 
brother, let no dissembler come here.’ Then let the men 
salute the men, and the women the women with a holy kiss, 
but not treacherously, like Judas, who betrayed the Lord with 
akiss. After this, let the deacon pray for the universal Church 
and the whole world. Then let the bishop give the ‘ peace’ to 
the people, and bless them, as Moses commanded the priests 


CHAP, II. 


SECT. VI. 


to bless the people in these words: ‘The Lord bless thee and — G. 


keep thee, &c. Then let the bishop pray, and say, ‘O Lord, ἢ 
save Thy people, and bless Thine inheritance which Thou 


f [S. Clem. R. Epist. ad Cor. i. c. 
xliv. Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 173. On 
the authorship of the Apostolical Con- 
stitutions, see Cotelerius, ibid., p. 195. ] 

& [οἱ δὲ διάκονοι μετὰ τὴν προσευχὴν 
οἱ μὲν τῇ προσφορᾷ τῆς εὐχαριστίας 
σχολαζέτωσαν, ὑπηρετούμενοι τῷ τοῦ 
Κυρίου σώματι μετὰ φόβου" οἱ δὲ τοὺς 
ὕχλους διασκοπέτωσαν, καὶ ἡσυχίαν av- 
τοῖς ἐμποιέτωσαν᾽ λεγέτω δὲ 6 παρεστὼς 
τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ διάκονος τῷ λαῷ᾽ μή τις 
κατά Tivos’ μή τις ἐν ὑποκρίσει" εἶτα 
καὶ ἀσπαζέσθωσαν ἀλλήλους οἱ ἄνδρες, 
καὶ ἀλλήλας αἱ γύναικες, τὸ ἐν κυρίῳ 
φίλημα" ἀλλὰ μή τις δολίως, ὡς ᾿Ιούδας 
τὸν Κύριον φιλήματι παρέδωκε" καὶ μετὰ 
τοῦτο προσευχέσθω ὃ διάκονος ὑπὲρ τῆς 
ἐκκλησίας ἁπάσης καὶ παντὸς τοῦ κοσ- 
μου ... καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο 6 ἀρχιερεὺς 
ἐπευχόμενος τῷ λαῷ εἰρήνην, εὐλογείτω 
τοῦτον" ὡς καὶ Μωσῆς ἐνετείλατο ἱερεῦ- 
σιν εὐλογεῖν τὸν λαὸν, τούτοις τοῖς ῥή- 


μασιν" εὐλογήσαι σε Κύριος καὶ φυλάξαι 
oe’ ἐπιφάναι Κύριος τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ 
ἐπί σε, καὶ δῷη σοι εἰρήνην" ἐπευχέσθω 
οὖν καὶ ὃ ἐπίσκοπος καὶ λεγέτω" σῶσον 
τὸν λαόν σου, Κύριε, καὶ εὐλόγησον τὴν 
κληρονομίαν σου, ἣν ἐκτήσω, καὶ πε- 
ριεποιήσω τῷ τιμίῳ αἵματι τοῦ Χριστοῦ 
σου" ἣν ἐκάλεσας βασίλειον ἱεράτευμα 
καὶ ἔθνος ἅγιον: μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα γινέσθω 
ἡ θυσία, ἐστῶτος παντὸς τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ 
προσευχομένου ἠσύχως" καὶ ὅταν ἄνεν- 
εχθῇ, μεταλαμβανέτω ἑκάστη τάξις καθ᾽ 
ἑαυτὴν τοῦ κυριακοῦ σώματος καὶ τοῦ 
τιμίου αἵματος ἐν τάξει, μετὰ αἰδοῦς καὶ 
εὐλαβείας, ὡς βασιλέως προσερχόμενοι 
σώματι" καὶ αἱ γυναῖκες κατακεκαλυμ- 
μέναι τὴν κεφαλὴν, ὡς ἁρμόζει γυναικῶν 
τάξει, προσερχέσθωσαν" φυλαττέσθω- 
σαν δὲ αἱ θύραι" μή τις ἄπιστος εἰσέλθοι 
καὶ &uvnros.—Const, Apost., lib. ii. c. 
57. Concil., tom. i. p. 297, C, D, E.] 


46 Matt. v.23 applied to the Eucharistic oblation 


curisttan hast purchased, ἣν περιεποιήσω, as a peculiar people, with 


PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


the precious blood of Thy Christ, and called a royal priest- 
hood and a holy nation.’ After this γενέσθω ἡ θυσία, let 
the sacrifice be done, the people standing, and praying si- 
lently ; καὶ ὁτὰν ἀνενεχθῇ, and when the oblation is finished, 
let every order by itself receive the Lord’s body and precious 
blood, orderly, with reverence and fear, as coming to the body 
of a king; and let the women come as it becomes them, with 
covered heads, (or veils,) and let the doors be kept, that no 
infidel or uninitiated person enter.” 

To the same Eucharistical oblation is this text applied by 
Ireneus, lib. iv. cap. 34. Igitur ecclesie oblatio, quam Dominus 
docuit offerri in universo mundo", &c. “ Therefore this oblation 
of the Church, which the Lord (by His prophet Malachi’) 
commanded to be offered through all the world, is accounted 
a pure sacrifice with God, and is accepted by Him; not that 
He needs any sacrifice from us, but because he that offers is 
himself honoured in what he offers, if his offering is accepted : 
for honour and affection is shewed to a king by a gift (per 
munus) ; Which our Lord being willing that we should offer 
in all simplicity and imnocency, commanded, saying; ‘ when 
thou bringest thy gift unto the altar, and there rememberest 
that thy brother hath ought against thee, leave thy gift 
before the altar, and go and be reconciled to thy brother, 
and then come and offer thy gift.’”” This father also alludes 
to this text at the latter end of this chapter, in these words: 
sicut et ideo nos offerre vult munus ad altare frequenter sine 
intermissione*. And so much for the sense of this text, ac- 
cording to the disciple of St. John!. 

The next father who useth this text, is Tertullian, de Pati- 
entia, cap. 12." Nemo convulsus animum in fratrem suum, 


h [Ecclesiz oblatio, quam Dominus 
docuit offerri in universo mundo, pu- 
rum sacrificiim reputatum est apud 
Deum, et acceptum ei est: non quod 
indigeat a nobis sacrificium, sed quo- 
niam is qui oftert, glorificatur ipse in 
eo quod offert, si acceptetur munus 
ejus. Per munus enim erga regem, et 
honos, et affectio ostenditur: quod in 
omni simplicitate et innocentia Domi- 
nus volens vos offerre, pradicavit di- 
cens ‘cum igitur offers munus tuum ad 
altare,’ &c.—S. Iren. adv. Hereses, ec. 
18. ὃ 1. p. 250. ed. Ben.] 


i Id. ibid., cap. 33. [ed. Grab. cap. 
17. p. 249. ed. Ben. The passage is 
quoted below, p. 57, see note r. | 

k [The reading of the Benedictine 
edition is, sic et ideo nos quoque, &c. 
—Ibid., § 6. p. 252.] 

'! [Hickes calls St. Irenzeus the dis- 
ciple of St. John elsewhere, probably 
as being the disciple of St. Polyearp, 
who was the disciple of St. John. See 
the Fragm. Epistole ad Florinum, S. 
Iren. Op., pp. 339, 340. ] 

πὶ (Tertulliani De Prese. Her. c. 
12. Op., p. 147, A. ] 


by St. Ireneus and Tertullian. 47 
munus apud altare perficiet, nisi prius reconciliando fratri re- 
versus ad patientiam fuerit. “No man who hath a rancorous 
mind against his brother, shall offer his gift at the altar, 
unless he returns to patience, and is first reconciled to his 
brother.” In this allusion to the text, the father must take 
the word gift, and altar, in the literal sense, for which I have 
produced it; [ mean, for the Eucharistical offering at the 
holy table, which was the sense of the Church in his time, as 
may be proved from his writings". But without citing any 
of them here, it is evident from his phrase munus perficere ; 
which is a sacrificial expression borrowed from the Greek 
writers, both sacred and profane, among whom ἱερὸν τελεῖν, 
θυσίαν τελεῖν. and τελεῖν put by itself, signifies rem sacram 
facere, ‘to offer sacrifice,’ and so munus perficere must sig- 


Δ [See below, sect. vii. p. 57.] 

° See Julius Pollux, lib. i. [cap. 1. 
segm. 35. tom. i. p. 18, D. περὶ μυστη- 
ρίων, τελούντων Kal τελουμένων" εἴη δὲ 
ἂν τῆς αὐτῆς ἰδέας καὶ τάδε, μυστήρια, 
τελεταὶ... μυσταγωγοὶ, TeAcoTal... 
μυεῖν... τελεῖν, 6 δὲ μυηθεὶς, τετε- 
λεσμένος, ὥσπερ ὃ ἐνάντιος. .. ἀτέλε- 
στος, ... τὰ δὲ μυστήρια τελεταὶ, καὶ 
τέλη μυστικὰ, κ. T.A-] Budeus’s Com- 
ment. Grecre Lingue. [p. 622. τελῶ 
‘initio’ significat et ‘res divinas facio’ 
.-. Inde τελετὴ ‘expiatio,’ et ‘cexre- 
monia,’ et ‘sacerdotium’... Augustinus 
libro decimo de civitate Dei hoc verbo 
consecrationem significari dixit [ cap. 
ix. Op., tom. vii. p. 245, G.]... Synesius 
altaris sacrificium τελετὴν ἀπόρρητον 
vocare solet, quasi arcanam et mysti- 
cam ceremoniam ... τελεῖν agere et 
celebrare significat et rem sacram fa- 
cere. ] Constantini Lexicon in verb. [p. 
749. τελῶ ‘initio’... ‘ago’ et ‘celebro,’ 
et ‘rem sacram facio,’ ἄγω, ut τελεῖν 
τὰ παναθήναια.) Hen. Steph. Thesaur. 
Grece Lingue. [p. 9236. τελέω, ago, 
perago, celebro, de rebus sacris potissi- 
mum: ut θυσίας τελέσαι, ap. Appian. | 
So S. Chrysost. Hom. Ixxxii. (al. 
Ixxxiii.) in cap. xxvi. S. Matth. εἰ yap 
μὴ ἀπέθανεν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, τίνος σύμβολα 
τὰ τελούμενα; [Op., tom. vii. p. 783, 
C.] si vero mortuus non est Christus, 
cujus symbola hz oblationes; ‘if Christ 
died not, of what (or whom) are the 
oblations, the symbols ΟΥ̓ signs?’ 
Which makes me think, that τετέ- 
λεσται, the last word which our Lord 
spake as He expired upon the cross, 
relates in its sacrificial sense to His 


Passion ; as the grand sacrifice of our 
redemption, where it was finished, and 
our redemption thereby accomplished. 
The word is so used by Cabasilas of 
the holy Eucharist, { Nicolai Cabasilz 
Archiep. Thessalon. (A.D. 1850.) Li- 
turgie Expositio, cap. 27; where he 
is speaking of the words of consecra- 
tion, and the prayer for the conversion 
of the elements | τούτων δὲ εἰρημένων τὸ 
πᾶν τῆς ἱερουργίας ἥνυσται, καὶ τετέλε- 
σται.----ἰ Biblioth. Patr., tom. ii. p. 233, 
E. Paris. 1624.] And from this sig- 
nification of the verb τελεῖν, and the 
verbal noun τελετὴ for a sacrifice or 
oblation, the prayer of oblation is called 
τελεστικὴ εὐχή.---ἰ 1. ibid., B.] And 
the latter Greeks call the Holy Spirit, 
which the ancient Church in all places 
prayed unto God to send down upon 
oblations, τελεταρχικὸν, καὶ ἁγιαστικὸν 
πνεῦμα, as B. Samonas in his discep- 
tation with Achmed a Mahometan 
Saracen; in which, as all the latter 
Greeks after the second council of 
Nice, but more especially after the 
tenth century, he went most absurdly 
to prove, that the bread and wine by 
consecration was made the true and 
real body and blood of Christ. [The 
title of the work is, Beati Samone Gaze 
civitatis Archiepiscopi(cire. A.D. 1072) 
disceptatio cum Achmed Saraceno, 
perspicue docens, panem ac vinum 
utrumque per sacerdotem consecra- 
tum, verum esse et integrum corpus et 
sanguinem Domini nostri Jesu Christi. 
The words quoted occur, ὃ 3. Biblioth. 
Patr. Gallandii, tom. xiv. p. 226, E.] 


CHAP. WU, 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


48 St. Cyprian understood Matt. v. 23 of the Eucharist. 


nify to offer the Eucharistical gift, or oblation, as he calls it, 
de Prescript. Her. cap. 40? ; where speaking of Mithra, the 
Persian goddess, who aped the mysteries of the Christian reli- 
gion, “ ¢ingit, saith he, she baptizes, celebrat et panis oblatio- 
nem, and hath a sacrifice of bread.” So de Oratione, cap.104. 
Ne prius ascendamus ad Dei altare, quam si quid discordie vel 
offense cum fratribus contraxerimus, resolvamus. “ Let us not 
come unto God’s altar, before we have removed all differences, 
or offences we had contracted with our brethren.” What he 
calls altare Dei here, he, who uses ara and altare promis- 
cuously, which other Latin fathers distinguish, he, I say, calls 
aram Dei in cap. 14°. Similiter et stationum diebus, non putant 
plerique sacrificiorum orationibus interveniendum, quod statio 
solvenda sit accepto corpore Domini. Ergo devotum Deo obse- 
quum Eucharistia resolvit ? An magis Deo obligat ὃ Nonne 
solennior erit statio tua si et ad aram Dei steteris. 

The next father, who applies this text to the Christian 
sacrifice, is St. Cyprian. Saith he in his tract of Church 
unity®, Ad sacrificium cum dissentione venientem revocat ab 
altari, et jubet prius concordare cum fratre, tune cum pace re- 
deuntem munus offerre, quia nec ad Cain munera respexit Deus. 
Neque enim pacatum Deum habere poterat, qui cum fratre pacem 
per zeli discordiam non habebat. ‘ Him that comes to the 
sacrifice with dissension (our Lord) repulses from the altar, 
and commands him first to agree with his brother, and then 
returning in peace to offer his gift, because God had no 
respect to the offering of Cain,” &c. After citing so many 
testimonies out of this father for the Eucharistical oblation'’, 
I conceive it needless to prove what he meant by sacrificiwm 
and munus offerre in this place, where he compares the of- 
fering of unreconciled Christians at the holy communion, 
and the offering of Cain together. There is more to the same 
purpose in his treatise of the Lord’s prayer on the fifth peti- 
tion", 816 nec sacrificium Deus recipit dissidentis, et ab altari re- 


p [Tertull. de Presc. Her.c.40.Op. ara and altare, see Prefatory Discourse, 
p- 216, D. The passage is quoted at vol. i. p. 122, note a.] 


length, sect. x. ] s [S. Cypr. de Unitate Ecclesiz, 
4 (Id. de Orat. ο. 10. Op. p. 133, B. Op., p. 198. ed. Ben. ] 

‘ascendimus,’ apparently a misprint, t [ Prefat. Disc., vol. i. pp. 94, sqq. ] 

is the reading of the Paris edition of “ [S. Cypr. de Oratione Dominica, 

1675. | Op., p. 211. ] : 


r [Id.ibid., p.135, A. On the words 


as did Eusebius and Constantine. 49 


vertentem prius fratri reconciliari jubet, ut pacificis precibus et σπᾶν. τι. 
Deus possit esse pacatus. Sacrificium Deo majus est pax nostra, _“_ 
et fraterna concordia [et de unitate Patris et Filii et Spiritus 

Sancti plebs adunata.| Neque enim in sacrifictis que Abel et 

Cain primi obtulerunt, munera eorum Deus, sed corda intuebatur 

[wt alle placeret in munere qui placebat in corde.| Abel paci- 

ficus et justus dum Deo sacrificat innocenter, docuit et ceteros, 

quando ad altare munus offerunt sic venire [cum Dei timore, cum 
simplice corde, cum lege justitie, cum concordie pace.| Here 

again is a comparison of sacrifice to sacrifice, altar to altar, 

and gift to gift; and Abel set forth as an example to us, 

when we offer our gifts at the altar, venire cum Dei timore, 

cum simplici corde, cum lege justitie, cum concordie pace. So 

at the latter end of his tract De Zelo, et Livore*. Dimittentur 

tibi debita, quando ipse dimiseris: accipientur sacrificia tua, 

cum pacificus ad Deum veneris: “thy sins shall be forgiven, 

when thou dost forgive, and thy sacrifices shall be accepted, 

when thou comest to God in peace.” 

Eusebius, de Vita Constantini, lib. iv. cap. 41, speaking of 
the great synod, which the emperor caused to assemble at 
Tyre for composing some dissensions which had arisen in the 
Church, “ He thought it not lawful,” saith hey, “for those 
who had dissensions in their minds against one another to 
come to the holy worship (of the Eucharist) μὴ ἐξεῖναι ἐπὶ 
τοῦ Θεοῦ παρεῖναι λατρείαν", because the law of God com- 
manded, that those who had differences should not offer the 
gifts, before they had returned to mutual friendship, and were 
united in peace.” And what Eusebius thought of the holy 
Eucharist may be seen in cap. 45. of the same book, and 
De Laudibus Constantini, cap. 16." 





x [Id., de Zelo et Livore,Op., p. 261. ] 

Υ [μὴ γὰρ ἐξεῖναι τὰς γνώμας διηρῃ- 
μένους ἐπὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ παρεῖναι λατρείαν" 
θείου νόμου διαγορεύοντος μὴ πρότερον 
τὰ δῶρα προσφέρειν τοὺς ἐν διαφορᾷ 
τυγχάνοντας, ἢ φιλίαν ἀσπασαμένους, 
καὶ τὰ πρὸς ἀλλήλους εἰρηνικῶς διαθέν- 
τας. --- Euseb. de Vita Const. iv. 41. 
Hist. Eccl., tom. i. p. 648. ] 

2 Suicerus in Thesaur. Eccl. ‘‘Aa- 
τρεία stricte Eucharistie celebrationem 
denotat.”? [tom. ii. p. 218.] 

8 [οἱ δὲ τοῦ Θεοῦ λειτουργοὶ, εὐχαῖς 
ἅμα καὶ διαλέξεσι τὴν ἑορτὴν κατεκόσ- 
μουν" οἱ μὲν... οἱ δὲ μὴ διὰ τού- 

HICKES, 


των χωρεῖν οἷοί Te, θυσίαις ἀναίμοις Kar 
μυστικαῖς ἱερουργίαις τὸ θεῖον ἱλάσκοντο, 
[ὑπὲρ τῆς κοινῆς εἰρήνης. ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐκ- 
κλησίας τοῦ Θεοῦ, οὐτοῦ τε βασιλέως 
...lkeTyplous εὐχὰς τῷ Θεῷ προσανα- 
pépovres.—Id. ibid., ο. 45. p. 651.] 

» ἀναίμους καὶ λογικὰς θυσίας τὰς 
5? εὐχῶν καὶ ἀπορρήτου θεολογίας τοῖς 
αὐτοῦ θιασώταις, τίς ἐπιτελεῖν παρέδω- 
κεν ἄλλος, ἢ μόνος 6 ἡμέτερος σωτήρ; 
διὸ ἐπὶ τῆς καθ᾽ ὅλης ἀνθρώπων οἰκου- 
μένης, θυσιαστήρια συνέστη, ἐκκλησιῶν 
τε ἀφιερώματα, νοερῶν τε καὶ λογικῶν 
θυσιῶν ἱεροπρεπεῖς λειτουργίαι, μόνῳ τῷ 
παμβασιλεῖ Θεῷ πρὸς ἁπάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


{ Matt. 5. 
23.] 


[Rom. 16, 
16.] 


50 Matt. v. 23 understood of the Eucharist 


To these testimonies I shall add that of Cyril of Jerusalem, 
as I have cited it in my preface to the Second Collection of 
Controversial Letters‘, p. liv. “The μή τις κατά Twos, and 
the holy kiss of peace were founded on this text, as requiring 
a new qualification for the sacrifice of the holy Eucharist, ac- 
cording to this holy father‘, εἶτα Bod ὁ διάκονος" ἀλλήλους ἀπο- 
λάβετε, Kal ἀλλήλους ἀσπαζώμεθα, K.T.r. “ Then the deacon 
cries aloud, ‘embrace one another, and let us kiss one another?’ 
but do not think this kiss to be like to those which are com- 
monly used in other salutations; for it is not such: but this 
kiss reconciles souls, and is a pledge of amnesty and forgive- 
ness, a sign that there is a commixture of souls, and a perfect 
obliterature of all injuries; and for this reason it was that 
Christ said, ‘if thou bringest thy gift unto the altar,’ &c. 
Wherefore this kiss is reconciliatory, and consequently holy, 
as St. Paul said, ‘Salute you one another with a holy kiss,’ ” 

The next author who took the bread and wine to be the 
gifts or offerings of this text in a proper and literal sense, is 
St. Chrysostom, in his commentary upon the place®; διὰ yap 
τοῦτο οὐκ εἶπε μετὰ TO προσενεγκεῖν, ἢ πρὶν ἢ προσενεγκεῖν" 
ἀλλ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῦ δώρου κειμένου καὶ τὴς θυσίας ἀρχὴν ἐχούσης 
πέμπει διαλλαγησόμενον τῷ ἀδελφῷ : “For which reason He 
did not say, ‘after thou hast offered,’ or ‘before thou offerest,’ 
but ‘when the gift is laid (upon the altar), and the sacrifice 
ready to begin, then He sends the offerer to be reconciled to 
his brother.” . .. ὁ yap κελευσθεὶς μὴ πρότερον προσενεγ- 
κεῖν, ἕως ἂν KaTadrayh, κἂν μὴ διὰ THY πρὸς TOV πλησίον 
ἀγάπην; διὰ γοῦν τὸ μὴ κεῖσθαι ἀτέλεστον, ἐπειχθήσεται 
δραμεῖν πρὸς τὸν λελυπημένον;, καὶ καταλῦσαι τὴν ἔχθραν" ἢ 


ἀναπεμπόμεναι" τὰς δὲ δι᾽ αἱμάτων καὶ 
λύθρων, καπνοῦ τε προσεπιτελουμένας 
θυσίας, τάς τε ὠμὰς ἐκείνας, καὶ μανιώ- 
δεις ἀνδροκτασίας τε, καὶ ἀνθρωποθυσίας, 
τίς ἀφανεῖ τε καὶ ἀοράτῳ δυνάμει, σβε- 
σθῆναι, καὶ μηκέτι ὑπάρχειν παρεσκεύα- 
σεν ; ὡς μαρτυρεῖσθαι πρὸς αὐτῆς γε τῆς 
Ἑλλήνων ioropias.—| Euseb. de Lau- 
dibus Constantini, ibid., p. 768. ] 

ὁ [See Additions to Third Edition, 
vol. i. p. 1. note ec. 

4 [εἶτα βοᾷ ὃ διάκονος" ἀλλήλους 
ἀπολάβετε καὶ ἀλλήλους ἀσπαζώμεθα" 
μὴ ὑπολάβῃς τὸ φίλημα ἐκεῖνο σύνηθες 
εἶναι τοῖς ἐπ᾿ ἀγορᾶς γενομένοις ὑπὸ τῶν 
κοινῶν φίλων" οὐκ ἔστι τοίνυν τοιοῦτο 
τὸ φίλημα" ἀνακίρνησι τὰς ψυχὰς ἀλ- 


λήλαις, καὶ πᾶσαν ἀμνησικακίαν αὐταῖς 
μνηστεύεται: σημεῖον τοίνυν ἐστὶ τὸ 
φίλημα τοῦ ἀνακραθῆναι τὰς ψυχὰς, καὶ 
πᾶσαν ἐξορίζειν μνησικακίαν" διὰ τοῦτο 
ὁ Χριστὸς ἔλεγεν᾽ ἐὰν προσφέρῃ, k.T-A. 
οὐκοῦν τὸ φίλημα διαλλαγή ἐστι, καὶ 
διὰ τοῦτο ἅγιον ; ὥς που ὃ μακάριος Παῦ- 
Aos ἐβόα λέγων" ἀσπάζεσθε ἀλλήλους 
ἐν φιλήματι aylw.—S. Cyril. Hierosol. 
Catech. Mystag. v. § 3. p. 326, A, B.] 

e §. Chrys. Hom. xvi. in S. Matth., 
cap. 5. § 9. [Op., tom. vii. p. 216, D. 
The Latin is from the version of Ani- 
anus, published in Erasmus’ and Mo- 
rell’s editions. | 

f [Id. ibid., pp. 216, E. 217, A.] 


by St. Cyril of Jerusalem, and St. Chrysostom. 51 


“ For he that is commanded not to offer before he is recon- cmar. 1. 
ciled, though not to gain the love of his brother, yet at least —_ 
that his sacrifice may be rightly offered, he is enjoined to 
run to his offended brother, and put an end to the enmity 
which is between them”... οὕτω καὶ ὁ Χριστὸς οὐκ ἀφίησιν 
οὐδὲ μικρὸν ὑπερτίθεσθαι, ἵνα μὴ τῆς θυσίας πληρωθεί- 
σης ῥᾳθυμότερος ὁ τοιοῦτος γένηται, ἡμέραν ἐξ ἡμέρας ἀνα- 
βαλλόμενοςξ: “Sd Christ does not allow (the offerer) 
the least delay, lest the sacrifice being ended, he should 
become backward in his duty by putting it off from 
day to day.” εἰπὼν γάρ' ἄφες τὸ δῶρόν cov, οὐκ ἔστη 
μέχρι τούτου; ἀλλ᾽ ἐπήγαγεν" ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου, 
καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ τόπου πάλιν εἰς φρίκην αὐτὸν ἐμβαλών" καὶ, 
ἄπελθε" καὶ οὐκ ἁπλῶς εἶπε, ἄπελθε, ἀλλὰ προσέθηκε, πρῶ- 
Tov, καὶ τότε ἐλθὼν πρόσφερε τὸ δῶρόν σου; διὰ πάντων 
τούτων δηλῶν, ὅτι οὐ δέχεται τοὺς ἀπεχθῶς πρὸς ἀλλήλους 
ἔχοντας αὕτη ἡ τράπεζα" ἀκουέτωσαν οἱ μεμυημένοι, ὅσοι 
μετὰ ἔχθρας προσέρχονται" ἀκουέτωσαν καὶ οἱ ἀμύητοι" καὶ 
γὰρ καὶ πρὸς τούτοις ἔχει τι κοινὸν ὁ λόγος᾽' προσάγουσι γὰρ 
καὶ αὐτοὶ δῶρον καὶ θυσίαν, εὐχὴν λέγω καὶ ἐλεημοσύνην" ὅτι 
yap καὶ τοῦτο θυσία (quia enim et hec sacrificii instar obti- 
neant), ἄκουσον Ti φησιν ὁ προφήτης" θυσία αἰνέσεως δοξά- 
ce pe’ καὶ πάλιν" θύσον τῷ θεῷ θυσίαν αἰνέσεως" ἔπαρ- 
σις τῶν χειρῶν μου θυσία ἑσπερινή: ὥστε κἂν εὐχὴν μετὰ 
τοιαύτης γνώμης προσάγῃς βέλτιον ἀφεῖναι τὴν εὐχὴν, καὶ 
ἐπὶ τὴν καταλλαγὴν ἐλθεῖν τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ, καὶ τότε τὴν εὐχὴν 
προσφέρειν" : For having said, ‘ leave thy gift,’ He did not 
stop there, but added, ‘before the altar,’ giving him an im- 
pression of horror from the place, ‘and go thy way;’ nor does 
He only say, ‘go thy way,’ but adds, ‘ first, and then come and 
offer thy gift ; giving us to understand by all this, that this 
table does not receive such as are at enmity with each other. 
Let those hear this, who being initiated into (these) holy 
mysteries approach (the altar) with enmity, and let those also 
hear who are not yet initiated; for this text has some re- 
lation also to them: for they also bring a gift, and a sacri- 
fice, I mean prayer and alms; for these are a sacrifice 
also; hear what the Prophet saith; ‘the sacrifice of praise 
honoureth Me;’ and again; ‘offer unto God the sacrifice of 
5. [Td. ibid., § 10. p. 218, A.] b [Id. ibid., § 10. p. 217, A, B.] 
E2 





CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Ps, 142. 2. 


_ him may be imposed upon thee. 


52 Matt. v. 23 understood of the Eucharist 


praise ; and, ‘the lifting up of my hands as the evening 
sacrifice.’ ” Here the father distinguishes between the sacri- 
fice of the baptized and unbaptized Christians ; between the 
sacrifice of the altar, and the sacrifice of those who were not 
yet qualified to come to the altar; between the mere oral 
sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, and the real sacrifice or 
oblation of the bread and wine, with praise and thanks- 
giving; between sacrifice in the most eminent proper sense, 
for an external material sacrifice presented unto God at the 
altar, and sacrifice only in the less proper and analogical 
sense, for praise, and thanksgiving, and alms, as it is in 
our, and all other translations of the last place cited by the 
father: “Let my prayer be set forth before Thee as the 
incense, and the lifting up of the hands as the evening 
sacrifice.” These words were spoken by King David, when he 
was in exile from Jerusalem and the temple, where morning 
and evening sacrifices were offered, instead of which he begs 
of God, that He would be pleased to accept of his prayers, 
that like the daily sacrifices, they might come up for a me- 
morial unto Him. 

To these let me add the testimonies of Hierome and Augus- 
tine, the former of whom in his commentary of Matt. v. writes 
thusi: Non divit, si tu, &c. “He doth not say, if thou hast any- 
thing against thy brother, but if thy brother hath any thing 
against thee, that a greater necessity of being reconciled to 
For as long as we are not 
able to pacify him, I know not if we can warrautably offer our 
gifts to God.” The latter in his sixteenth Sermon De Verbis 
Domini writes thus*; Si obtuleris munus tuum ad altare, &e. 
“ God is not angry with thee for deferring to present thy gift, 
for He desireth thee more than thy gift; for if having an 
evil mind against thy brother, thou shalt come with thy 
gift to God, He will answer thee; What hast thou brought: 


i [Non dixit, si tu habes aliquid ad- 
versus fratrem tuum, sed si frater tuus 
habet aliquid adversum te, ut durior 
reconciliationis tibi imponatur necessi- 
tas. Quamdiu illum placare non pos- 
suinus, nescio an consequenter munera 
nostra offeramus Deo,—S. Hieron. 
Comm. in Matt., lib. i. cap. 5. Op., tom, 
vil. col. 27, B, C.] 


k [Si obtuleris munus tuum ad al- 
tare, et ibi recordatus fueris, quia fra- 
ter tuus habet aliquid adversum te; 
relinque ibi munus tuum ante altare. 
Non irascitur Deus, quia differs im- 
ponere munus tuum: te querit Deus 
magis quam munus tuum. Nam si 
malum animum gerens adversus fra- 
trem tuum, adveneris cum munere ad 


by St. Jerome and St. Augustine. 53 


CHAP. 11. 
SECT. VI. 


to Me to thy own destruction? Thou offerest thy gift when 
thou thyself art not a fit offerimg to God. Christ values thee 
more, whom He hath redeemed with His blood, than what 
thou foundest in thy storehouse. Therefore leave thy gift 
before the altar, and go, and be first reconciled to thy 
brother, and then come and offer thy gift. See how soon 
the danger of hell is taken away: not reconciled, thou art in 
danger of hell, but when thou art reconciled thou securely 
offerest thy gift at the altar.” Here St. Augustine takes the 
text in the literal sense. So likewise De Sermone Domini in 
Monte, he understands it literally!; ‘‘if the offended brother 
be present; but if he be absent, as perhaps beyond the sea,” 
then he thinks in that case it may be taken in a spiritual 
sense for any spiritual gift, as prayer, or praise, and for the 
spiritual altar of the heart, which is in the inner temple of the 
body, as it is written, “The temple of God is holy, which 
temple ye are,” and “that Christ may dwell in your hearts 
by faith.” 

VII. The next scriptural proof which I shall produce in szcr. vn. 
order for the Eucharistical oblation of the bread and wine, ΔΤΕΒΡΙΡΗΣ 
is taken from the words of the institution, Matt. xxvi. 26, ues ee i 
Mark xiv. 22, Luke xxi. 19, recited by the Apostle in these 
words: “The Lord Jesus in the same night that He was be- [1 Cor. 11. 
trayed, took bread, and when He had given thanks He brake ἜΤΣΙ 
it, and said, Take, eat, this is My body which is broken for 
you; this do inremembrance of Me. After the same manner 
also He took the cup, when He [had] supped, saying, This 


ante altare jubearis] si ergo de ab- 
sente, et, quod fieri potest, etiam 
trans mare constituto aliquid tale 
veniat in mentem, absurdum est cre- 


Deum tuum, respondet tibi, tu peristi, 
mihi quid adtulisti? offers munus tuum, 
et tu non es munus Dei. Plus querit 
Christus quem redemit sanguine suo, 


quam quod tu invenisti in horreo tuo. 
Ergo relinque ibi munus tuum ante al- 
tare, et vade, prius reconciliari fratri 
tuo, et sic veniens offeres munus tuum. 
Ecce illo reatus gehenne quam cito 
solutus est. Nondum reconciliatus, 
eras gehenne reus: reconciliatus, se- 
curus offers munus tuum ad altare.— 
S. Aug. Serm. Ixxxii. (al. de Verb. 
Domini, xvi.) Op., tom. v. pp. 441, G. 
442, A, B.] 

! (St. Augustine’s words are; Si ac- 
cipiatur ad literam fortassis aliquis 
credat ita fieri oportere, si prasens 
frater sit: non enim diutius differri 
potest, cum munus tuum relinquere 


dere ante altare munus relinquendum, 
quod post terras et maria pererrata 
offeras Deo. [Et ideo prorsus intro ad 
spiritalia refugere cogimur, ut hoc quod 
dictum est sine absurditate possit in- 
telligi. Altari itaque spiritaliter in in- 
teriore Dei templo ipsam fidem accipere 
possumus.... cum tale aliquid oblaturi 
sumus in corde nostro, id est, in inte- 
riore Dei templo; ‘templum enim Dei 
sanctum est,’ inquit, ‘quod estis vos’ 
(1 Cor. iii. 17): et, in interiore homine 
habitare Christum per fidem in cordibus 
vestris (Eph. iii. 17.)—S. Aug. De 
Serm. Dom. in Monte, lib. i. ὃ 27. Op., 
tom. iii. pars 11. p. 176, A, B, D.] 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


54: That our Lord instituted an oblation of the 


cup is the New Testament in My blood; this do ye, as oft as 
you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” ‘That the ancients 
believed that our Lord made an oblation of the bread and 
wine at His institution of this Sacrament, “and commanded 
His disciples so to do,” is past all doubt from the sixty- 
third epistle of St. Cyprian to Cecilius, against an evil custom 
introduced in some places to offer nothing but water, without 
wine, at the holy Eucharist. Quanquam sciam frater charis- 
sime™, &c., “ Although, most dear brother, (saith he,) I know 
that most of the bishops set over the Churches of the Lord, 
by Divine mercy through the whole world, do keep the rule 
of evangelical truth, and of our Lord’s command, nor do 
swerve at all by a mere human and new institution, from 
what Christ our Master commanded to be done, and did Him- 
self: nevertheless, because some through ignorance or sim- 
plicity, in consecrating the cup of our Lord, and distributing 
it to the people, do not do what Jesus Christ our Lord and 
God, the author and institutor of this sacrifice, did and com- 
manded to be done, I thought it necessary to write unto you 
of this matter, that if any is withheld in this error, he may 
by the light of truth return unto the original tradition of our 
Lord.” Admonitos autem nos scias, &c., “ But know that we are 
commanded in offering the cup to observe the ordinance of 
our Lord, and to do no other thing than what He first did, 
(that is to say,) that the cup, which is offered in remembrance 
of Him, be a mixture of water and wine.” Nam quis magis 
sacerdos Dei summi, &c., ‘For who is more a priest of the Most 
High God, than our Lord Jesus Christ? who offered a sacrifice 
to God the Father, and the very same sacrifice that Melchi- 


m [Quanquam sciam, frater caris- 
sime, episcopos plurimos, Ecclesiis Do- 
minicis in toto mundo divina dignatione 
prepositos, evangelice veritatis ac do- 
minice traditionis tenere rationem, nec 
ab eo quod Christus magister et praece- 
pit et gessit humana et novella insti- 
tutione decedere, tamen quoniam qui- 
dam vel ignoranter vel simpliciter in 
ealice dominico sanctificando et plebi 
ministrando, non hoe faciunt quod 
Jesus Christus, Dominus et Deus nos- 
ter, sacrificii hujus auctor et doctor 
fecit et docuit, religiosum pariter ac 
necessarium duxi has ad vos literas 
facere, ut si quis in isto errore adhuc 


tenetur, veritatis luce perspecta ad 
radicem atque originem traditionis do- 
minice revertatur.... Admonitos au- 
tem nos scias ut in ealice offerendo 
dominica traditio servetur, neque aliud 
fiat a nobis quam quod pro nobis Do- 
minus prior fecerit, ut calix qui in 
commemorationem ejus offertur mix- 
tus vino offeratur.—p. 104. ed. Ben. 
... Nam quis magis sacerdos Dei 
sumini quam Dominus noster Jesus 
Christus, qui sacrificium Deo Patri 
obtulit, et obtulit hoc idem quod Mel- 
chisedech obtulerat, id est, panem et 
vinum, suum scilicet corpus et san- 
guinem. ... Ut ergo in Genesi per 


bread and cup, taught by St. Cyprian. 55 


sedec offered, that is, bread and wine.” Ut ergo in Genesi, &c., 
“Therefore [that jin Genesis the high-priest Melchisedec might 
duly bless Abraham, the representation of the sacrifice of Christ 
by bread and wine was to precede, which our Lord verified 
and fulfilled when He offered bread and a cup of wine and 
water, which was the plenitude and verity of that prefigura- 
tion.” Sed et per Solomonem, &c., “ Nay, the Holy Ghost, by 
Solomon, did not only foreshew the figure of the sacrifice of 
our Lord, to wit, immolate hostie et panis et vini, the obla- 
tion of bread and wine, but also made mention of the altar 
and of the Apostles. ‘ Wisdom, saith he, hath builded her 
house; she hath hewn out her seven pillars, she hath killed 
her beasts, she hath mingled her wine, she hath also fur- 
nished her table.” Qua in parte, &c., “where we find that 
it was a mixed cup which our Lord offered, and that it was 
wine which He called His blood.” Nam si in sacrificio, quod 
Christus obtulerit, &c., “ For if none but Christ is to be fol- 
lowed in administering the sacrifice which Christ offered, 
then it is our duty to obey and do what Christ did and com- 
manded to be done.” Nam si Jesus Christus, Dominus et Deus 
noster, ipse est summus sacerdos, &c., “For if Jesus Christ, 
our Lord and God, is the High-Priest of God the Father, 
and first offered Himself a sacrifice to the Father, and com- 
manded that this should be done in remembrance of Him, 
doth not he who doth as Christ did, truly act as a priest in 
the place of Christ, sacerdos vice Christi vere fungitur ; and 
then offer a true and perfect sacrifice in the Church to God 
the Father, when he offers in the same manner which he may 
Melchisedech sacerdotem benedictio 
circa Abraham posset rite celebrari, 


precedit ante imago sacrificii Christi, 
in pane et vino scilicet constituta ; 


parte invenimus calicem mixtum fuisse 
quem Dominus obtulit et vinum fuisse 
quod sanguinem suum dixit.—pp. 106, 
107. ed. Ben... . Nam si in sacri- 


quam rem perficiens et adimplens Do- 
minus, panem et calicem mixtum vino 
obtulit, et qui est plenitudo veritatis 
veritatem preefigurate imaginis adim- 
plevit. Sed et per Solomonem Spiritus 
Sanctus typum Dominici sacrificii ante 
premonstrans immolate hostiz et panis 
et vini, sed et altaris et Apostolorum 
faciens mentionem, ‘ sapientia,’ inquit, 
(Proy. ix. 1, 2.) ‘zdificavit 5101 do- 
mum, et subdidit columnas septem, 
mactavit suas hostias, miscuit in cra- 
tera vinum suum et paravit mensam 
suam.’—p. 105, ed. Ben.... Qua in 


ficio quod Christus obtulit non nisi 
Christus sequendus est, utique id nos 
obaudire et facere oportet quod Chris- 
tus fecit, et quod faciendum esse 
mandavit.—p. 108. ed. Ben... Nam si 
Jesus Christus Dominus et Deus 
noster ipse est summus sacerdos Dei 
Patris, et sacrificium Patri se ipsum 
primus obtulit, et hoc fieri in sui com- 
memorationem precepit: utique ille 
sacerdos vice Christi vere fungitur, 
qui id quod Christus fecit imitatur, et 
sacrificium verum et plenum tunc of- 
fert in ecclesia Deo Patri, si sic in- 


CHAP. 11. 


SECT. VII. 


cnristiAN perceive Christ Himself offered ?” 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


56 That our Lord instituted an oblation of the bread and cup 


Post cenam mixtum cali- 
cem obtulit Dominus ; “after supper our Lord offered a mixed 
cup.” ΕἸ quia passionis ejus mentionem, &c., “ And because 
we commemorate His passion in all our sacrifices (passio est 
enim Domini, for the passion of our Lord is the sacrifice we 
offer") we ought to do nothing but what He did.”  Religiont 
agitur nostre congruit, &c., “ Wherefore, dear brother, it is 
very agreeable to our religion, and to the fear we have of 
God, and to our order and priestly function, that in mixing 
and offering the cup we strictly observe the ordmance of our 
Lord, and by His authority correct the errors of others; that 
when He shall come in His glorious majesty from heaven, He 
may find us holding what He taught, observing what He 
commanded, and domg what He did.” Here is a noble, 
ample, and plain literal proof from the testimony of this 
father, and of the whole Church of his time, that our Lord, 
at the institution of the holy Eucharist, offered up the bread 
and cup to His Father, and commanded His disciples in the 
ministration of the same Sacrament to do as He had done. 
So in the Eucharistical office, Const. Apost., lib. vii. cap. 12°, 
μεμνημένοι τοίνυν, K.T.r., “ Being mindful, therefore, of His 
passion,” &c. προσφέρομεν, k.T.r., “ We offer unto Thee, our 
King and God, according to His commandment, this bread 
and this cup.” The same may be proved from the testimony 
of Irenzeus, who flourished in the second century, above four- 
score years before St. Cyprian. This father, speaking of the 
holy Eucharist, lib, iv. cap. 32, writes thus?: Sed et suis 


cipiat offerre, secundum quod ipsum 
Christum videat obtulisse. . . Post cce- 
nam mixtum calicem obtulit Dominus 

. et quia passionis ejus mentionem 
in sacrificiis omnibus facimus (passio 
est enim Domini sacrificium quod 
offerimus) nihil aliud quam quod ille 
fecit facere debemus.—p. 109. ed. Ben. 
Religioni igitur nostre congruit et 
timori et ipsi loco atque officio sacer- 
dotii nostri, frater carissime, in domi- 
nico calice miscendo et offerendo cus- 
todire traditionis Dominic veritatem, 
et quod prius apud quosdam videtur 
erratum Domino monente corrigere ; 
ut cum in claritate sua et majestate 
coelesti venire coeperit, inveniat nos te- 
nere quod monuit, observare quod do- 
cuit, facere quod fecit.—S. Cyprian. 
Epist. Lxiii. ad Ceecilium, p. 110. ed. 


Ben. ] 

n T}lius ἀνάμνησις. Luce. xxii. 91; 
1 Cor. xi. 24, 25. [ Fell’s note in locum, 
p- 156. ed. Oxon. | 

ο [μεμνημένοι τοίνυν τοῦ πάθους av- 
τοῦ καὶ τοῦ θανάτου καὶ τῆς ἐκ νεκρῶν 
ἀναστάσεως καὶ τῆς εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἐπα- 
νόδου καὶ τῆς μελλούσης αὐτοῦ δευτέρας 
παρουσίας, ἐν ἣ ἔρχεται μετὰ δόξης καὶ 
δυνάμεως κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκροὺς“, καὶ 
ἀποδοῦναι ἑκάστῳ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ, 
προσφέρομέν σοι, τῷ βασιλεῖ καὶ Θεῷ, 
κατὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ διάταξιν, τὸν ἄρτον τοῦ- 
τον καὶ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο, K.T.A.—Con- 
cil., tom, i. p. 481, A.] 

P Sed et suis discipulis dans con- 
silium primitias Deo offerre [ex suis 
creaturis, non quasi indigenti, sed ut 
ipsi nee infructuosi nee ingrati sint, 
eum qui ex creatura panis est accepit 


asserted by the Apost. Const. and St. Ireneus. 57 


discipulis dans consilium’ primitias Deo offerre, &c., “ But 
also authorizing His disciples to offer to God the first-fruits 
of His creatures, He took the creature of bread, and gave 
thanks, saying, This is My body. And in hke manner He 
delivered the creature of wine in the cup to be His blood; e¢ 
Novi Testamenti novam docuit oblationem, &c., and instituted 
the new sacrifice of the New Testament, which the Church 
receiving from the Apostles, offers to God throughout the 
whole world; which offering was foretold by the prophet 
Malachi", Non est mihi voluntas in vobis, &c., “1 have no plea- 
sure in you, saith the Lord of Hosts,’” &c. So chap. 34. 
Igitur ecclesia oblatio, quam Dominus docuit offerri in universo 
mundo | purum sacrificium reputatur apud Deum, et est accep- 
tum ei’.| “Therefore this oblation of the Church, which the 


et gratias egit, dicens, hoc est meum 
corpus. Et calicem similiter, qui est 
ex ea creatura que est secundum nos, 
suum sanguinem confessus est,] et 
Novi Testamenti novam docuit obla- 
tionem, [quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis 
accipiens in universo mundo offert Deo; 
de quo in duodecim Prophetis Mala- 
chias sic prwsignavit;] ‘non est mihi 
voluntas in vobis, [dicit Dominus om- 
nipotens, et sacrificium non accipiam 
de manibus vestris. Quoniam ab ortu 
solis usque ad occasum nomen meum 
clarificatur inter gentes, et in omni loco 
incensum offertur nomini meo et sacri- 
ficium purum.’—S. Iren., cont. Her., 
ec. 17. (32. ed. Oxon.) ὃ 5. p. 249. ed. 
Ben. | 

4 The phrase occurs in the Latin 
version, [Vulgate] 1 Cor. vii. 25. Con- 
silium autem do, tanquam misericor- 
diam consecutus a Domino; in the 
Greek γνώμην δὲ δίδωμι. So 2 Cor. 
vill. 10; et consilium in hoc do; in the 
Greek, καὶ γνώμην ἐν τούτῳ δίδωμι. 

* Οδρ.1.10,11. Dr. Grabe, not. ad loc. 
p- 823. (ed. Oxon.) ‘ Locum hunce pro- 
phetz de sacrificio corporis et sanguinis 
Christi in Eucharistia, ante Irenzeum 
interpretati sunt Clemens Romanus, c. 
81. [Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 431, C.] 
Const. Apost., lib. vil. cap. 31. [apud 
Concil., tom. i. p. 432, C.] Martialis 
Epist.ad Burdegalenses, cap. 3. [S. Mar- 
tialis apostoli, confessoris et episcopi 
Lemovicensis ad Burdegalenses Epist., 
cap. ὃ. Biblioth. Vett. Patrnm, tom. ii. 
Ρ. 106, B. Lugd. 1677.] Justin. M. 
in Dialogo. [§ 28. p. 126, D. § 41. pp. 
137, E. 138, A. § 117. p. 210, A, B.] 
(sed priores duo [scil. Const. Apost. et 


Mart. Epist. ] supposititiisunt). Postea 
vero Tertullianus, lib. iii. contra Mar- 
cionem, [c. 22. p. 410.] Cyprianus, 
lib, i. [Testimoniorum] ady. Judzos. 
cap. 10. [p. 280.] Chrysos. Ps. χουν. 
[opus spurium; tom. v. p. 630, C, Ὁ. 
vid. autem adv. Judzos, v. tom. i. ὃ 
12. pp. 647, Ὁ, C. 648, A.] Au- 
gust. de Civ. Dei, lib. xviii, ὁ. 36. 
[tom. vii. p. 517, F. ibid.,] lib. xix. 
c. 23. [p. 569, F.] contra adversarium 
Legis, lib. i. οἱ 20. [tom. viii. p. 571, 
A, B.] Euseb., lib. i. de Dem. Evang. 
cap. ult. [p. 40, A.] S. Joan. Damascen. 
[de Fide Orthodoxa, lib. iv. ο. 13. Op., 
tom. i. p. 272. Paris. 1712.] Petrus 
cognomento Venerabilis, lib. i. contra 
Petrobusianos [ Biblioth. Patr., tom. xii. 
pars il, p. 221, C, D. Colon. 1618.] 
et lib. ii. contra Judzos, cap. 3. 
[ibid., p. 171, F.] Imo et qui Christo 
nomen non dederat, Rabbi Samuel, 
Parastasi veri Messiz ad Rabbi Isaac 
magistrum synagogze Subiulmete in 
Regno Marrochiano, cap. 20. et 22. 
[Rabbi Samuelis Marrochiani de ad- 
ventu Messiz, quem Judzi tamen ex- 
pectant. Biblioth. Patr., tom. iv. pp. 267, 
270. Paris. 1589.] ut impietas sit plus- 
quam Judaica huic interpretationi re- 
pugnare.’ [Feuard. Horum et aliorum 
auctorum verba recitavit Coccius The- 
sauri Catholici lib. vi. Artic. 6. ac 
przcipua etiam Medus in ante laudato 
Tractatu (on the Christian Sacrifice, 
ch. iii. Works, p. 358.) tanquam com- 
mentario in hune Malachie locum 
scripto. Mede’s Treatise is a discourse 
on this text of Malachi. | 
* [Id., Ὁ. 18. § 1. p. 250. ed. Ben. ] 


CHAP. II. 


SECT, VII. 


CILRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


58 ποιεῖν and similar words mean ‘to offer’ 


Lord appointed to be offered throughout the whole world, is 
looked upon by God as a pure sacrifice, and is accepted by 
Him.” Non quod indigeat a nobis sacrificium' ; “ Not that He 
needs any sacrifice from us, but because he that offers it is 
honoured in that which he offers, if his gift be accepted: for 
by gifts we shew the affection and honour we have for the 
emperor ; and our Lord, commanding us to offer in all sim- 
plicity and innocence, charged us, saying, ‘ When thou bring- 
est thy gift to the altar,’” &c. So at the latter end of the 
same chapter, Sicut igitur non his indigens" ; ‘ Therefore as He 
does not need these oblations, but would have them per- 
formed by us for our own sakes, that we might not be with- 
out fruit; so the Word Himself hath given His people this 
command for making these oblations, though He has no 
need of them, but that they should learn to serve God; and 
therefore He would have us offer our gifts at His altar fre- 
quently, and without ceasing. Therefore there is an altar and 
temple in heaven whither our prayers and oblations are di- 
rected, as St. John says in the Apocalypse, ‘and the temple 
and tabernacle of God was opened*;’ for saith he, chap. xxi. 
8, ‘Behold the tabernacle of God, in which He dwells with 
men, 7 

It is plain from these testimonies how the primitive Church 
understood the words of the institution of the Lord’s Sup- 
per, and what was their sense of them, which is very agree- 
able to the signification of the word ποιεῖν, which in profane, 
as well as sacred writers, signifies ‘to offer ;? as in that phrase 
of Herodotus concerning the Persians’, ἄνευ yap δὴ μάγου οὔ 
σφι νόμος ἐστὶ θυσίας ποιέεσθαι" “ without one of the Magi 
it is not lawful for them to offer sacrifice.” In the precedent 
chapter’ he uses θυσίας ἕρδειν in the same sense: of δὲ vo- 


Ὁ [See above p. 46, note h. ] 

ἃ Sicut igitur non his indigens 
{vult tamen a nobis propter nos fieri, 
ne simus infructuosi : ita id ipsum Ver- 
bum dedit populo przceptum facien- 
darum oblationum, quamvis non indi- 
geret eis, ut discerent Deo servire. 
Sic et ideo nos quoque offerre vult 
munus ad altare frequenter sine inter- 
missione. Est ergo altare in ceelis; 
(illuc enim preces nostre et oblationes 
diriguntur), et templum; quemadino- 
dum Joannes in Apocalypsi ait; ‘et 


apertum est templum Dei;’ et taberna- 
culum; ‘ecce enim, inquit, taberna- 
eulum Dei, in quo habitabit cum homi- 
nibus.’—Id. ibid., c. 17; ὃ 6. p. 252. 
ed. Ben. | 

x [| Rather, ‘‘ and the temple of God 
was opened, and a tabernacle; for,’ 
&c. | 

Y Herod., lib. i. ο. 132. [See lib. ix. 
c. 19. ποιήσαντες δὲ καὶ ἐνθαῦτα ipa, 
k.7.A. These instances however do 
not establish Hickes’ assertion. ] 

2 ΠΗ. 011. 6 13. : 


in Classical writers and the Septuagint. 59 


μίζουσι Ait μὲν, ἐπὶ τὰ ὑψηλότατα τῶν οὐρέων ἀναβαίνοντες, pape 
θυσίας ἕρδειν" “they have a custom to offer sacrifices to Jove —— we 
upon the tops of the highest mountains.” From whence it is 
evident, even from human writers, that ποιεῖν, as well as 
ἕρδειν, is a sacrificial term*. But more especially it is so used 
in the Septuagint translation, which all learned men know 
is followed by the writers of the New Testament, even where 
they recite the words and speeches of our blessed Saviour. 
In that translation of the Old Testament ποιεῖν signifies the 
same as ἱεροποιεῖν or ἱερουργεῖν, ‘to offer or sacrifice,’ as Ὁ» 
does in the Hebrew, and facere in the vulgar translation. 
So Exod. xxix. 36; καὶ τὸ μοσχάριον [τῆς ἁμαρτίας] ποιή- 
σεις, x. τ. Δ. “ And thou shalt offer every day a bullock for a 
sin-offering ;” Et vitulum pro peccato offeres. Ver. 38. καὶ 
ταῦτά ἐστιν, ἅ ποιήσεις ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου" ‘ Now this 
is that which thou shalt offer upon the altar;” Hoe est quod 
facies in altari®, And ver. 39; τὸν ἀμνὸν τὸν Eva ποιήσεις TO 





a [Itdoes not appear that the use of 
ποιεῖν absolutely, as that of €pdew and 
ῥέζειν, is classical: its use in this 
sense by the LXX, as representing 
literally the Hebrew FWY, is uniform. ] 

+ [“Jo. Saubertus de Sacrificiis Ve- 
terum Collectanea; cap. 1. pp. 10, 11. 
(Lugd. Bat. 1699.) Facere autem sim- 
pliciter hoc loco significat ποιεῖν sive 
πράσσειν, agere, peragere: quanquam 
apud veteres nuda hee vox sepe etiam 
pro sacrificare sumitur. Plautus in 
Rud. 3. iv. 4. ‘Tun’ legirupionem hic 
nobiscum dis facere postulas?’ Stro- 
bilus apud eundem: ‘ Mulsi congialem 
plenam faciam tibi fideliam. Id adeo 
tibi faciam?’ ΑἸ]. 4. ii. 15. Leonida 
apud eundem; ‘Jam nunc secunda mihi 
facis.’ Asin 2. iv. 89. Varro, de Re 
Rust., lib. i. c. 1. proverbium adducit: 
‘Dii facientes adjuvant.’ Laberius, 
(Fragm. 1. 40. ap. Corpus Vett. Poet. 
Lat, p. 1518. Lond. 1713.) “ Bidentes 
propter viam facere.’ A. Gellius (quot- 
ing a sacred formula from Fabius 
Pictor), ‘Vestalem facere pro populo 
Romano.’ Lib. i. c. 12. Virg. ‘Cum 
faciam vitula pro frugibus.’ Eel. iii. 
77. Juven. ‘Pro populo faciens.’ 
Sat. ix. 117. Ovidius, 

Nos faciamus ad annum 
Pastorum domine grandia liba Pali. 
Jib. iv. Fast. 775. 
Atque ita facere vel idem erit quod red- 
dere, sive que Deus postulavit, sive 
χαριστήρια, i.e. pro benefactis gratum 





animum, sive pro peccatis piaculares, 
quo sensu extat faciendi 175. ff de 
V. 5. (Andr. Alciati de Verb. Sign. lex 
175. p. 515. France. 1582.) vel idem, 
quod dare, aut solvere.—Id., ]. 218. ff 
eod. (lex 218. ibid., p. 593.) Confer 
etiam Alciatum Lex. Plaut. voc. Fa- 
cere, et Brissonium in Form., lib. i. 
p- 18. Inde quidem pontificis nomen 
deducere laborant a posse et facere, i.e. 
sacrificare. Apud Grecos similia verba 
sunt ἔρδειν ac ῥέζειν, i.e. et facere et 
sacrificare. Hom. Odyss., ix. 553. 
Theocr. Idyll., xvi. 26, xxvii. 63. 
Scholiasta Theocriti doctissimus Za- 
charias Calliergus ad Idyl. 8. quod 
inscribitur φαρμακεύτρια, (1. 3.) τὸ 
ἕρδειν καὶ τὸ ῥέζειν ἔλεγον ἐπὶ τῶν σφα- 
γίων: λέγεται δὲ καὶ ἀντὶ τοῦ καίειν 
ἁπλῶς, καὶ ἐν πυρὶ τιθέναι τε, κάθο 
λέγεται ἐνταῦθα. Eodem intellectu 
tam apud sacros quam profanos auc- 
tores aliquando reperiri voces ποιεῖν 
kal δρᾶν aliquot exemplis evincit mag- 
nus Bosius preceptor atque patronus 
meus. Exercit. de Pont. Max., c. 1. ὃ 
6.’ (apud Grevii Thes. Antiq. Rom., 
tom. v. p. 234. He asserts that ποιεῖν 
and δρᾶν are so used by profane writers, 
but does not give any instances. )—Ad- 
ditional note from the Supplement of 
1715, No. xi. p. 10, corrected from 
Hickes’ MS. ; see advertisement to vol. 
i. ; the words in parentheses have been 
added by the editor. j 


CHRISTIAN 


PRIEST- 
HOOD, 


60 Instances of ποιεῖν and facere meaning ‘ to offer’ 


mpwl, καὶ τὸν ἀμνὸν τὸν δεύτερον ποιήσεις τὸ δειλινόν" 
“The one lamb thou shalt offer in the morning, and the 
other lamb thou shalt offer at even.” And ver. 41; καὶ τὸν 
ἀμνὸν τὸν δεύτερον ποιήσεις TO δειλινόν: “ And the other 
lamb thou shalt offer at even ;᾽ Alterum vero agnum offeres 
ad vesperam. So Exod. x. 25; καὶ εἶπε Motions, ἀλλὰ καὶ 
σὺ δώσεις ἡμῖν ὁλοκαυτώματα Kal θυσίας, ἃ ποιήσομεν 
Κυρίῳ τῷ Θεῷ ἡμῶν" “And Moses said, thou must give 
us also sacrifices and burnt-offerings, which we may sacrifice 
unto the Lord our God;” Ait Moyses, hostias quoque et 
holocausta dabis nobis, que offeramus Domino Deo nostro. So 
Levit. iv. 20; καὶ ποιήσει τὸν μόσχον, ὃν τρόπον ἐποίησε 
τὸν μόσχον τὸν τῆς ἁμαρτίας; οὕτω ποιηθήσεται: et faciet 
vitulum quemadmodum fecerat vitulum qui peccati: sic Ποέ 5, 
In English thus: “And he shall offer the bullock as he 
offered the bullock for a sin-offering ; so shall it be offered.” 
Where our English translation uses the word ‘ do’ in a sacri- 
ficial sense’. Castalio in his classical Latin renders it thus: 
Tauro facito item uti faciet tauro piaculart. Levit. vi. 22; 
ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ χριστὸς ὁ ἀντ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῶν υἱῶν αὐτοῦ ποιήσει 
αὐτήν" “ And the priest of his sons that is anointed in his 
stead shall offer it ;” Offeret autem eam, &c. Levit. ix. 7; καὶ 
εἶπε Μωῦσῆς τῷ Aapwv, πρόσελθε πρὸς τὸ θυσιαστήριον; καὶ 
ποίησον τὸ περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας σου, καὶ τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμά σου» 
καὶ ἐξίλασαι περὶ σεαυτοῦ, καὶ τοῦ οἴκου σου; καὶ ποίησον 
τὰ δῶρα τοῦ λαοῦ, καὶ ἐξίλασαι περὶ αὐτῶν, καθάπερ ἐνε- 
τείλατο Κύριος τῷ Μωῦσῇ ““Διᾶ Moses said unto Aaron, 
Go unto the altar, and offer thy sin-offering, and thy burnt- 
offermg, and make an atonement for thyself and for the 
people: and offer the offermg of the people, and make an 
atonement for them, as the Lord commanded :” Ht dixit ad 
Aaron, accede ad aliare, et immola pro peccato tuo, offer holo- 
caustum, et deprecare pro te et pro populo ; cumque mactaveris 
hostiam populi, ora pro eo, sicut precepit Dominus. So verse 
16; Kat προσήνεγκε τὸ ὁλοκαύτωμα, καὶ ἐποίησεν αὐτὸ, ὡς 
καθήκει: “ And he brought the burnt-offering, and offered 
it according to the manner.” And verse 22; καὶ κατέβη 


¢ [The Latin given here is the trans- quomodo fecit et prius. Eng. Vers., 
lation of the LXX in Walton’s Poly-  “ And he shall do with the bullock as 
glott, tom. i. p. 418. he did with the bullock for a sin offer- 
4 [Vulg. Ste faciens et de hoc vitulo, ing.’ | 


in the Septuagint and the Vulgate. 61 


ποιήσας TO περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, kK. τ. Δ.» “ And came down 
from offering the sin-offering ;” Completis hostiis pro peccato, 
&e., descendit. So chapter xiv. 19; καὶ ποιήσει 6 ἱερεὺς τὸ 
περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, x. τ. Δ.» “And the priest shall offer the 
sin-offering ;” Εἰ faciet sacrificium pro peccato. And ver. 30; 
καὶ ποιήσει μίαν ἀπὸ τῶν τρυγόνων, κ. τ. r., “ And he shall 
offer the one of the turtle doves;” Ht turturem offeret. 
Chap. xvii. 4; ὥστε ποιῆσαι αὐτὸ εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα; K. τ. Δ.» 
“to offer an offering,” &c., obtulerit oblationem. And ver. 9 ; 
μὴ ἐνέγκῃ ποιῆσαι αὐτὸ τῷ Κυρίῳ" “and brings it not, &c., 
... to offer it unto the Lord ;” non adduxerit eam, ut offeratur 
Domino. Chap. xxiii. 12; καὶ ποιήσετε... πρόβατον ἄμωμον 
ἐνιαύσιον; kK. τ. d., “ And ye shall offer . .. an he lamb with- 
out blemish of the first year,” &c.; Caedetur agnus immacu- 
latus anniculus, &c. Deut. xvi. 1; φύλαξαι τὸν μῆνα τῶν νέων; 
καὶ ποιήσεις τὸ πάσχα Κυρίῳ τῷ Θεῷ σου “ Observe the 
month of Abib, and keep the passover unto the Lord thy 
God,” that is, “sacrifice the passover,” as in the next verse. 
So the Latin; Odserva mensem novarum frugum, ut fa- 
cias phase Domino tuo. Which place Mr. Aimsworth glosses 
thus: “Thou shalt do or make,’ that is, ‘celebrate’ the 
feast of the passover, or ‘sacrifice’ the passover®.” 501 Kings 
Vili. 63; ἐποίησεν ἔκει τὴν ὁλοκαύτωσιν, K. T. r., “There he 
offered burnt-offerings ;”” Fecit quippe holocaustum ἐδ. And 
chap. xvili. 23; καὶ ἐγὼ ποιήσω τὸν βοῦν τὸν ἄλλον : in our 
language; “And I will offer the other bullock ;” as in the 
Latin; Et ego faciam bovem alterum ; or as Castalio; Alterum 
ego immolabo. So ver. 25; ἐκλέξασθε ἑαυτοῖς τὸν μόσχον 
Tov ἕνα, καὶ ποιήσατε πρῶτοι, K.T.r.; in English; “Choose 
you one bullock for yourselves, and offer it first ; as in the 
Latin ; Eligite vobis bovem unum et facite primi. And ver. 26; 
καὶ ἔλαβον τὸν μόσχον καὶ ἐποίησαν, Kal ἐπεκαλοῦντο, 
κ-τολ.; in English; “ And they took the bullock, and offered 
it, and called upon the name of Baal ;” as the Latin; Qui cum 
tulissent bovem .. . fecerunt et invocabant nomen Baal. Though 
our translation in these three places renders it by the word 
‘dress,’ that is, ‘ prepare’ the sacrifice. So ver. 29; μετώστητε 


¢ [Annotations upon the five bookes Ainsworth. London, 1639. Annota- 
of Moses, the booke of the Psalmes, tions on Deuteronomy, p. 61. ] 
and the Song of Songs; by Henry 


CHAP. Il. 


SECT. VII. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


62 Instances of ποιεῖν and facere meaning ‘to offer’ 


ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν; Kal ἐγὼ ποιήσω TO ὁλοκαύτωμά μου" Discedite 
a modo, et ego faciam holocaustum meum. Which passage is 
wanting in the Hebrew, and therefore in ours and the vulgar 
translations. So 2 Kings x. 21; καὶ ἀπέστειλεν ᾿Ιοὺ, “ and 
Jehu sent through all Israel,” λέγων, ... ὅτι θυσίαν μεγάλην 
ποιῶ, “for I have a great sacrifice to offer.” Which expression 
is also wanting both in the original and in our translation, 
and in the vulgar. So ver. 24; καὶ εἰσῆλθε τοῦ ποιῆσαι τὰ 
θύματα Kal Ta ὁλοκαυτώματα" “And when they went in to 
offer sacrifices and burnt-offerings ;” Ingressi sunt igitur ut 
facerent victimas et holocausta. So ver. 25; καὶ ἐγένετο ws 
συνετέλεσε ποιῶν τὴν ὁλοκαύτωσιν" “And it came to pass 
as soon as he had made an end of offering the burnt- 
offerings ;” Factum est autem cum completum esset holo- 
caustum. So 2 Chron. xxx. 1; καὶ ἀπέστειλεν “Efexias, 
Ke τ. Δ... .. ἐλθεῖν εἰς οἴκον Κυρίου eis “Ἱερουσαλὴμ; ποιῆσαι 
τὸ φασὲκ τῷ Κυρίῳ Θεῷ ᾿Ισραήλ' “And Hezekiah sent, 
&c., that they should come to the house of the Lord at 
Jerusalem to keep (that is to offer) the passover unto the 
Lord God of Israel :” as in the Latin, Ut venirent . . . et fa- 
cerent phase Domino Deo Israel. And ver. 2; καὶ ἐβουλεύ- 
σατο ὁ βασιλεὺς, ... ποιῆσαι TO φασὲκ τῷ μηνὶ τῷ δευ- 
τέρῳ" “For the king had taken counsel (or decreed) to keep 
(or offer) the passover in the second month;” Decreverunt 
ut facerent phase mense secundo. Chap. xxxv. 1; καὶ ἐποίησεν 
᾿Ιοσίας τὸ φασὲκ τῷ Κυρίῳ: “ Moreover Josiah kept (or 
offered) a passover unto the Lord;’’ Fecit autem Josias... 
phase Domino. And Ezra vi. 19; [Εσδρὰς B. LXX.] καὶ 
ἐποίησαν οἱ viol τῆς ἐποικεσίας TO πάσχα “ And the chil- 
dren of the captivity kept the passover;” Fecerunt autem 
Μιὰ Israel transmigrationis pascha, ἕο. So Numb. ix. 2; 
καὶ ποιείτωσαν οἱ viol ᾿Ισραὴλ τὸ πάσχα Kal ὥραν αὐτοῦ" 
“Τοῦ the children of Israel also keep the passover at its ap- 
pointed season ;” Faciant filii Israel phase in tempore suo. So 
Joshua v. 10. [ver. 9, LXX.] καὶ ἐποίησαν οἱ υἱοὶ ᾿Ισραὴλ τὸ 
πάσχα. “And the children of Israel kept the passover ; 
Filit Israel . . . fecerunt phase. So 2 Kings xxiii. 21; καὶ 
ἐνετείλατο ὁ βασιλεὺς... λέγων, ποιήσατε πάσχα τῷ Κυρίῳ 
Θεῷ ἡμῶν: “And the king commanded, ... saying, Keep 
the passover unto the Lord your God:” Et precepit ... 


»““ τυ νυν“ CU OO Άβξ! 


in the Septuagint and the Vulgate. 63 


dicens, facife phase Domino Deo vestro. See the same phrase 
concerning the sacrifice of the passover, 2 Chron. xxxv. 17 
—19, and in 1 Esdras i. 6; καὶ ποιήσατε τὸ πάσχα κατὰ τὸ 
πρόσταγμα τοῦ Κυρίου" “ Keep (offer) the passover accord- 
ing to the commandment of the Lord.” Here I must not 
omit Psalm lxvi. 15, where “I will offer unto Thee burnt- 
offerings,” is in the Hebrew, “I will do;” which the LX XII 
render by ἀνοίσω, just as in Exod. xxix. 36, above cited, 
what is in our translation, “Thou shalt offer every day a 
bullock for a sin offering,” is in the Hebrew nwyn, in the 
Greek ποιήσεις, and in the Latin facies‘, “Thou shalt do 
every day a bullock,” &. And Mr. Ainsworth writes thus 
upon the place; “‘ Make,’ to wit, ready for sacrifice, that is, 
kill, sprinkle the blood, offer,’ ἕο. So on ver. 38", wx An 
naron-by nyn, καὶ ταῦτά ἐστιν ἃ ποιήσεις ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστη- 
ptouv' Hoc est quod facies in altari; ‘This is that which thou 
shalt offer upon the altar.” So on Exod. x. 25, cited also 
above, saith he; ‘‘‘Do’ sacrifice,”’ or ‘ offer.’ The word sacri- 
fice here understood, is elsewhere expressed, as in 1 Kings 
ΧΙ. 27. And when the word ‘do,’ or ‘ make’ is joined with 
sacrifices, as in this place, it signifies to ‘ offer ;’ as Levit. ix. 
7, 22, and xvi. 9; Exod. xxix. 36, 39, 41, 42.'” 

To these testimonies out of the Old Testament, to shew 
that ‘do’ signifies ‘ offer,’ I think fit to add one more out of 
a Jewish Hellenistical writer, Baruch i. 10; 
ἀπεστείλαμεν πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἀργύριον .. . Kal ποιήσατε μάννα, 


Ν Φ 3 \ 
καὶ εἶπαν, ἰδοὺ 


καὶ ἀνοίσατε ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον Κυρίου τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν" 
“And they said, Behold we have sent you money... and 
prepare, (i. 6. offer) ye manna*, and offer upon the altar of 
the Lord our God;” Kcce misimus ad vos pecunias ... et 


f [ Facies occurs in Munster’s ver- 
sion (Biblia Hebraica, Latina planeque 
nova Sebast. Munsteri Versione. Ba- 


legendum esse Mincha. [ab Hebreo 
Mod, aut AMID, quod sacrificium mu- 
nus oblationemque significat.—Critici 


silez, 1534—1546.) and in Montanus’ ; 
the Vulgate has offeres. | 

8 [Ainsworth’s Annotations, &. on 
Exod. ibid., p. 124. ] 

» [* Make or do, that is, offer unto 
God.’’—Ainsworth, ibid. ] 

(bid, p- 82. | 

k “*Corruptly for mincha, that is, a 
meat-offering,’”’ [Marg. Eng. Vers. ] 

Badvellus. Omnia exemplaria Greca 
legunt manna, sed puto cum Beza 


Sacri, tom. v. pars ii. in Baruch, 
p- 1.] 

Grotius. Legendum in Greco non 
manna sed manaa, ita enim 773 (de 
qua Lev. ii.) vertunt veteris Testa- 
menti interpretes. Idem error et alibi 
in libros irrepsit, ut diximus ad Mare. 
ix. 49. [ibid., p. 4. The places he there 
refers to are Jerem. xvii. 26; xlviii. 5: 
and hence the word μάννα is found in 
this sense in Suidas, tom. ii. p. 97. ] 


CHAP. 11. 


SECT. VII. 


64 ποιεῖν meaning ‘to offer, used by the Fathers ; 


curisttan facite manna, et offerte pro peccato ad aram Domini nostri. 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


The verb ποιεῖν, as I have elsewhere observed!', is used for 
‘to offer’ in the New Testament, as Heb. xi. 28; πίστει πε- 
ποίηκε TO πάσχα, Kal THY πρόσχυσιν τοῦ αἵματος" “Through 
faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of blood,” other- 
wise, “through faith he offered the passover, and the blood 
of sprinkling,” sanguinem effusum. For in the Hellenistical 
style, the “sprinkling of blood,” and the ‘blood of sprink- 
ling,’ or ‘effusion,’ is the same thing. Fide celebravit pascha 
et sanguinis effusionem, Vulg., that is, sanguinem effusum. So 
1 Tim. ii. 1, ποιεῖσθαι may very well be rendered ‘ offered.’ 
“T exhort therefore that first of all prayers, &c., be offered 
for all men ;” as it is in the Syriac version™ 

The verb ποιεῖν is also used in the Hellenistical sense, to 
signify ‘offer, in the Greek writers of the Church, par- 
ticularly where they have occasion to speak of the holy Eu- 
charist. We find it so used in St. Clement’s first Epistle to 
the Corinthians, ὃ xl."; οἱ τοῖς προστεταγμένοις καιροῖς πού- 
obvtes τὰς προσφορὰς αὐτῶν, “those who offer their obla- 
tions in the appointed times, are accepted and blessed.” In 
the same sense Justin Martyr useth the word in his first 
Apology®; ἔπειτα προσφέρεται TH προεστῶτι τῶν ἀδελφῶν 
ἄρτος, καὶ ποτήριον ὕδατος καὶ κράματος; καὶ οὗτος λαβὼν, 
αἷνον καὶ δόξαν τῷ πατρὶ τῶν ὅλων, διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματος τοῦ υἱοῦ 
καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ ἁγίου, ἀναπέμπει" καὶ εὐχαριστίαν 
ὑπὲρ τοῦ κατηξιῶσθαι τούτων παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ πολὺ ποιεῖται; 
κ. τ. Δ., Then the bread and the cup of water and wine is 
brought to the bishop, who receiving them, sends up praise 
and glory to the Father of all things through the name of 
the Son and Holy Spirit, and offers up a very large thanks- 
giving to God for deeming us worthy of these His creatures,” 
&e. So in his Dialogue with Trypho?; καὶ ἡ τῆς σεμιδάλεως 
δὲ προσφορὰ, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἔλεγον; ἡ ὑπὲρ τῶν καθαριζομένων 
ἀπὸ τῆς λέπρας προσφέρεσθαι παραδοθεῖσα, τύπος ἣν τοῦ 


1 [In the Preface to the second edi- ν. p. 822.] 


tion of Controversial Letters, pp. Ixxvii, 
Ixxvili. Tondon, 1710. | 


"ote? yto Nanci la] Lx 
lonZ [Zora yo,od5 %,0 


Obsecro te igitur, ut JaXu poko 
ante omnia deprecationem orleras Veo, 
&c.—Biblia Polyglotta, Walton, tom. 


n [S.Clem. R. Epist. i. c. 40. Patr. 
Apost., tom. i. p. 170. ] 

ο [S. Justin. M. Apol. i. ο. 65. Op., 
p- 82, D.] 

Ρ Td. [ Dial. cum Tryph. Jud., Ὁ 41. 
ibid., p. 137, Ὁ. Hickes read δὴ in- 
stead of kal: hence his translation. ] 


St. Clement R., St. Justin Martyr, and Cornelius. 65 


ἄρτου τῆς εὐχαριστίας, ὃν εἰς ἀνάμνησιν τοῦ πάθους οὗ 

ἔπαθεν ὑπὸ τῶν καθαιρομένων τὰς ψυχὰς ἀπὸ πάσης πονη- 
, ἋΣ a Χ ΝΣ He ΄ ΓΑΕ “ὃ a “ Si 

plas, Incovs Χριστὸς ὁ Κύριος ἡμῶν παρέδωκε ποιεῖν. Irs, 


CHAP.If. 


SECT. VII. 


truly, I said, that the oblation of the flour commanded to be Lev. 14. 10. 


offered for those who are cleansed from the leprosy, was a 
type of the Eucharistical bread, which Jesus Christ our Lord 
commanded us to offer in remembrance of His passion, 
which He suffered for those whose souls are cleansed from 
all iniquity.” So afterwards in the same Dialogue? : ὅτι μὲν 
οὖν καὶ εὐχαὶ καὶ εὐχαριστίαι ὑπὸ τῶν ἀξίων γινόμεναι; τέ- 
λείαι μόναι καὶ εὐαρεστοί εἰσι τῷ Θεῷ θυσίαι, καὶ αὐτός φημι. 
ταῦτα γὰρ μόνα καὶ Χριστιανοὶ παρέλαβον ποιεῖν, καὶ ἐπ᾽ 
ἀναμνήσει δὲ τῆς τροφῆς αὐτῶν ξηρᾶς τε καὶ ὑγρᾶς, ἐν ἧ 
καὶ τοῦ πάθους ὃ πέπονθε δι’ αὐτοῦ ὁ Θεὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ 4 μέμνη- 
ται: “And indeed, that prayers and thanksgivings made 
by those that are worthy, are the only perfect and accept- 
able sacrifices to God, I also affirm. But these only the 
Christians have been taught to offer, in the thankful remem- 
brance we make to God for our dry and wet food, in which 
also a commemoration is made of the passion, which God 
(the Son) of God suffered by Himself.” So in the epistle 
which Cornelius, bishop of Rome, wrote to Fabius, bishop of 
Antioch, concerning the wicked practice of Novatian, who, 
when he administered the Sacrament to his followers, made 
them swear’ by the body and blood of Christ that they 
would never forsake him, nor return to Cornelius, he begins 
the narrative in these words; ποιήσας yap τὰς προσφορὰς, 
Kal διανέμων ἑκάστῳ τὸ μέρος; καὶ ἐπιδιδοὺς τοῦτο, ὀμνύειν 
ἀντὶ τοῦ εὐλογεῖν τοὺς ταλαυπώρους ἀνθρώπους ἀναγκάζει.... 
“The oblation being offered, he, dividing to every communi- 


Baidabid. cc 117}. 210, Bs] tinues, (- 315,) κατέχων ἀμφοτέραις 

4 Forsan legendum 6 vids, vel 6 Θεὸς ταῖς χέρσι τὰς τοῦ λαβόντος καὶ μὴ 
vids. [Manifesti librariorum errores fa- ἀφεὶς ἔστ᾽ ἂν ὀμνύοντες εἴπωσι ταῦτα" 
eile tolluntur; in promptu est enim τοῖς yap ἐκείνου χρήσομαι λόγοις" ὄμο- 
legendum ἐν 7 καὶ τοῦ πάθους ὃ πεπονθε σόν μοι κατὰ τοῦ σώματος καὶ τοῦ 
δι αὐτοὺς 6 υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ μέμνηται. αἵματος τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χρι- 
Retinendum μέμνηται existimat Cl. στοῦ, μηδέποτέ με καταλιπεῖν, καὶ ἐπι- 
Thirlbeius. Annott. ad locum ap. ed. στρέψαι πρὸς Κορνήλιον. καὶ 6 ἄθλιος 
Ben. | ἄνθρωπος ov πρότερον γέυεται, εἰ μὴ 

τ [The letter is given by Eusebius, πρότερον αὐτῷ καταράσαιτο" καὶ] ἀντὶ 
Eccl. Hist., lib. vi. ο. 43. (See Eccl. τοῦ εἰπεῖν λαμβάνοντα τὸν ἄρτον ἑκεῖ- 
Hist., tom. i. p. 310.) The narrative νον τὸ duty, οὐκέτι ἀνήξω πρὸς Κορνή- 
of this particular enormity begins with Aco λέγει. 
the words in the text; the passage con- 


HICKES. ¥ 


66 ποιεῖν and facere used for ‘to offer’ by St. Chrysostom, 


cursrax cant his part, at the delivery thereof compels the wretched 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


people to swear, instead of blessing and praising God, (viz. by 
saying Amen.)” So St. Chrysostom upon the words of the 
institution’, St. Matt. xxvi. Hom. Ixxxil. (al. Ixxxin.) $1; 
καὶ πάλιν λέγει τοῦ θανάτου τὴν αἰτίαν, TO ὑπὲρ πολλῶν 
ἐκχυνόμενον εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν" καί φησι, τοῦτο ποιεῖτε εἰς 
τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν: εἶδες πῶς ἐξάγει τῶν ᾿Ιουδαϊκῶν ἐθῶν 
καὶ ἀφίστησι; καθάπερ γὰρ ἐκεῖνο ἐποιεῖτέ, φησιν, εἰς ἀν- 
άμνησιν τῶν ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ θαυμάτων" οὕτω καὶ τοῦτο εἰς ἐμήν" 
ἐκεῖνο ἐξεχύθη εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν πρωτοτόκων" τοῦτο εἰς ἄφε- 
σιν ἁμαρτιῶν τῆς οἰκουμένης ἁπάσης : “ And afterwards He 
declares the cause of His death; ‘which is shed for many 
for the remission of sins,’ and saith, τοῦτο ποιεῖτε, ‘do’ 
(or offer) ‘this in remembrance of Me.’ You see how He 
weans and draws them from the Jewish rites: for, says He, 
as ἐκεῖνο ἐποιεῖτε, ye offered that in remembrance of the 
miraculous deliverance from Egypt, so offer this in remem- 
brance of Me: that (blood) was shed for the preservation of 
the first-born, this for the remission of the sins of the whole 
world.” I think I may justify this translation, because this 
father does afterwards bring in our Saviour speaking thus': 
“ For this reason I have greatly desired to eat this passover 
(τὸ πάσχα τοῦτο) with you, that is, to deliver unto you new 
rites, and a new passover (τὰ καινὰ πράγματα Kal πάσχα 
δοῦναι,) whereby to render you spiritual.” And this trans- 
lation also agrees very well with what the same father says 
on the words of the institution, Hom. xxvii. in 1 Cor. xi.%, 
where he twice calls the Eucharist a sacrifice, as he called it 
the passover before. 

From this sacrificial use of the verb ποιεῖν in the Hebrew, 
or Hellenistical sense ‘to offer,’ we have in Irenzus* this 
expression, dedit preceptum faciendarum oblationum, which 
in all likelihood was ἐντολὴν τοῦ ποιῆσαι θυσίας παρέδωκεν, 


5 [S. Chrysost. Hom. in S. Matt. 


lxxxii. ὃ 2. Op., tom. vil. p. 782, D, E.] 

t [διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἐπιθυμίᾳ ἐπεθύμησά, 
φησι, τὸ πάσχα τοῦτο φαγεῖν, τουτέστι 
παραδοῦναι ὑμῖν τὰ καινὰ πράγματα καὶ 
πάσχα δοῦναι καθ᾽ ὅ μέλλω πνευματικοὺς 
movetv.—Ibid., p. 783, A. | 

" [καὶ em αὐτῆς κειμένοι τῆς στιβάδος, 
καὶ map’ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Χριστοῦ λαμβάνον- 


τες τὴν θυσίαν ταύτην, κ. τ. Δ. «+. τὶ 
δέ ποτε; ὅτι ἐξέχεεν αὐτὸ, καὶ σφαγὴν 
τὸ πρᾶγμα ἀπέφηνεν, οὐκέτι θυσίαν..---- 
Id. Hom. xxvii. in 1 Cor. xi. ὃ 4. Op., 
tom. x. p. 247, A, B.] 

x §. Iren. adv. Her., lib. iv. cap. 
84. [ed. Oxon. c. 18. ὃ 6. p. 251. ed. 
Ben. See the whole passage quoted 
above, p. 58 note u. | 


St. Ireneus, Tertullian, and the Liturgies. 67 


or ἐνετείλατο ποιεῖν θυσίας : and in Tertullian, who Grecised 
much in his writings, we find odlationes facimus, in that fa- 
mous passage’, so egregiously abused and perverted by the 
writers of the Church of Rome, to justify their way of pray- 
ing and offering for the dead, oblationes pro defunctis, pro 
natalitiis annua die facimus. Mr. Poole, on the words hoc 
facite, Luke xxii. 19%, acknowledges that the Hebrew verb 
nwy signifies to ‘offer,’ but by a gross mistake denies that 
the LXX ever rendered it by ποιεῖν, or that facere with an 
accusative case is so used in the Latin: which I have shewed 
is not true of the vulgar Latin Bible, nor by consequence of 
the writers of the Latin Church, who cite that translation, 
or otherwise Hellenize in their writings. He might have 
remembered missam facere, which is a phrase of the Latin 
Church for offering the Eucharist, at least as old as the lat- 
ter end of the fourth century*. 

In this sacrificial signification of ποιεῖν, προσκομιδὴν ποι- 
εῖν in St. Gregory’s Liturgy signifies ‘to offer the oblations”,’ 
and in St. Chrysostom’s office of the holy Sacrament, where 
the deacon saith to the priest® καιρὸς τοῦ ποιῆσαι τῷ Κυρίῳ, 
“it is time to offer, or sacrifice to the Lord.” Upon which the 
learned editor hath this note*. Diaconus tribus digitis stolam 
tenens, et altare indicans, divinum et tremendum sacrificii mi- 
nisterium ut sacerdos aggrediatur admonet : et Domini verbis, 
&e.... Preterea faciendi verbum ad sacrificia pertinet. Hine 
Varro, lb. vi. de Lingua Latina, [c. 11. § 16.] ‘agnam® Jovi 


Υ Tertull., de Corona, cap. 3. [Op., 
p. 102, A.] 

2 [Poole’s words are; Quis unquam 
legit apud Grecos σῶμα ποιεῖν, pro 
‘corpus sacrificare ;’ nec Latini dicunt, 
facere victimam, sed facere victima, 
subaudi sacra. Heb. AY quidem in- 
terdum valet, ‘ offerre ;’ quod tamen 
LXX nunquam per ποιεῖν, sed ἀνα- 
φέρειν vertunt.—Synopsis Criticorum, 
tom. iv. p. 1102. Ultraj. 1684. The 
statement as respects the LXX is 
manifestly incorrect: the first clause 
was probably intended to refer to the 
classical usage. | 

4 [As in the quotation from St. Am- 
brose, in the next page. For other in- 
stances see Card. Bona de Rebus Li- 
turgicis, lib. i. iii. § 1. pp. 17, sqq. ] 

8 [εἶτα ποιεῖ τὴν προσκομιδήν. 5. 
Gregorii Missa, Bibl. Patrum, tom. ii. 


p. 127, A. Paris, 1624. This Liturgy 
is a translation of that of St. Gregory 
II. into Greek, by Georgius Codinus, 
the Byzantine writer, towards the close 
of the fifteenth century, first published 
by Morell, Paris, 1595. ] 

ὁ [S. Chrysost. Liturg. Euchologium, 
Goar, p. 64.] In the Liturgy extant 
in the fourth vol. of his works, [ed. 
Morell. Paris, 1636.] it is θύσον. [Of 
this edition, which is from a copy of 
late date and little value, see below, 
p- 128, note b. ] 

4 [Goar. Annott. in Miss. 8. Joan. 
Chrys. n. 58. ibid., p. 122.) 

e Thisis an error: for itis, ‘ Flamen 
Dialis agna Jovi ἴδοις. And so in 
Virgil ‘ facere vitula,’ and the places are 
so cited by Brisson. de Formulis, p. 18. 
But the Latins say, ‘facere rem divi- 
nam,’ and, ‘ sacra facere,’ 


F2 


CHAP, II. 


SECT. VII. 


CHRISTIAN 
“PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Ps, 50. 14. 


68 The words ‘ τοῦτο ποιεῖτε᾽ are an institution of a sacrifice. 


facere, et similiter Virgilius', ‘facere vitulum pro frugibus :? 
rursusque idem Varro®, pontificis nomen tradit ex eo deductum, 
quod potens sit facere, id est sacrificare. Nec ignota est He- 
breis, addit Pineda in Job", hec loquendi ratio: ubi enim in 
Psalm. lxvi.' legimus, ‘ offeram tibi boves cum hircis, Hebrea 
litera habet ‘faciam tibi boves cum hircis’ Et pariter Exod. 
xxix.J ubi habemus, ‘vitulum pro peccato offeres, legit iterum 
Hebrea ‘facies: et eodem faciendi verbo utitur Christus in 
hujus sacrificii institutione, dicens, ‘hoc facite in mei memo- 
riam;? et de altaris sacro ministerio loquens Ambrosius*, 
‘missam,’ inquit (Epist. xxxiii.) ‘facere cepi” Καιρὸς ergo 
τοῦ ποιῆσαι τῷ Κυρίῳ... .. et pari ratione admonet diaconus 
Latinus sacerdotem ; ‘Immola Deo sacrificitum laudis’ 
According to this sacrificial signification of the verb ποιεῖν 
facere, and in particular from the signification of it, ‘ to offer,’ 
in the Paschal service, we may justly observe, that the words 
τοῦτο ποιεῖτε, hoc facite, either relate to the whole action 
and ministration of the holy Eucharist, as sin in the Hebrew, 
and τοῦτο in the Greek, relate to the whole service of the 
passover, Exod. xii. 27!, and then it proves the celebration of 
the Lord’s Supper (in which the oblation of the bread and 
cup to God the Father was a principal part) to be ἱεροποιΐα, 
or ἱερουργία, ‘a sacrificial service:’ or else they relate more 
especially to the bread and wine; and then by a natural 
and easy interpretation they may be translated thus: “Take, 
eat, this is My body; offer this in remembrance of Me:” 
and ‘This is My blood .... offer this as oft as ye shall 
drink it in remembrance of Me.” Either of these senses of 
τοῦτο ποιεῖτε, hoc facite, gives us a good account of the rea- 
son why the ancient fathers, treating of this mystery, affirm 
it to be “the oblation of the Church, which Christ appointed 
to be offered,” as I have already shewed, particularly out of 
Treneeus, lib. iv. cap. 34™, whither I refer the reader. 


f [ Virgil. Bucol. iii. 77.] 

* [ Pontifices, ut Scevola Quintus 
Pont. Max. dicebat, a posse et facere, 
ut potifices; ego a ponte arbitror, Xe. 
—Varro, lib. y. c. 15. § 83.] 

h [Joannis de Pineda Comment. in 
Job libri xiii. in cap. i. ver. 5. num. 27. 
tom, i. p. 51. Colon. 1600. Pineda’s 
words are, Sacris Scriptoribus fami- 
liaris etiam siguificatio. } 


i [v. 15. Vulg. Ixv. 14.] 

J [v. 86. See above, p. 59. ] 

k [S. Ambros. Epist. xx. (al. xxxiii.) 
ad Marcellinam, § 4. Op., tom. ii. p. 
853, B.] 

1 [“ It is the sacrifice of the Lord’s 
Passover.’ Hebr. ΠῚ S17 ADDY 
LXX. θυσία τὸ πάσχα τοῦτο Kuple. | 

πὶ [0 18. p. 250. ed. Ben. See p. 
46.] 


They that wait at the altar’ implies a Christian Altar. 69 


VIII. The next places of the New Testament from which cmap. n. 
I shall prove that the Christian religion hath a sacrifice are πα 
those which imply or express that it hath an altar. For if it Cee 
hath a sacrifice, or oblation, as I have shewed, then it must Testament 
have an altar at which to offer that oblation; and if it have ply [ΠῈῸ ane 
an altar, as I am going to shew, then it must have an obla- religion 
tion to be offered at or upon it, and then by consequence the jin.” 
ministers of the Gospel must be altar-ministers, as well as 
offering priests. I will begin with that text, 1 Cor. ix. 13, 
‘Do ye not know that they who minister about holy things 
live of the things of the temple, and they who wait at the 
altar are partakers with the altar?” The words in the ori- 
ginal for “ minister about holy things” are ἱερὰ ἐργαζόμενοι, 
“those who exercise the priestly offices,” saith the Arabic", or 
“the offerers of sacrifices,” as the Aithiopic® version hath it ; 
and for “those who wait at the altar,” οἱ τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ Tpo- 
cedpevorTes, literally, gui assident altari, “those whose office is 
to attend at the altar.” In the Latin version?, nescitis guoniam 
qui ™ sacrario operantur que de sacrario sunt edunt, et qui 
altari deserviunt cum altari participant. “Know you not that 
they who minister in the temple eat of the things of the 
temple, and they who serve at the altar partake with the altar.” 
This text is applied by Irenzeus to the Christian ministers in 
these words’: Sacerdotes autem sunt omnes Domini apostoli, 
qui neque agros neque domos hereditant hic, sed semper altart 
et Deo serviunt ; where I doubt not the original words were 
οἱ τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ καὶ θεῷ προσεδρεύοντες, and the learned 
Dr. Grabe puts this note of Feuardentius™ upon the place: 
“Tt is easy to see from hence, that from the times of Christ 
His apostles and martyrs, and thereafter, the Christians had 





τ [Feuardentius’ note, as quoted by 


7 [ Ses yl Cyphers oI 


qui exercent munera sacer- KaS gh 


dotalia. Vers. Arab. Bibl. Sacr. Poly- 
glott. Walton, tom. ν. p. 701... London, 
1657.] 


* (PAVPOTL : WOE: 
literally ‘ sacrificing sacritices ;’ but in 
Walton’s translation, sacrificium offe- 
rentes. Vers. Aithiop. ibid. } 

> [The Vulgate is here meant. } 

4 §. Iven. adv. Heres., lib. iv. c. 20. 
[ed. Grabe; c. viii. ὃ 3. p. 237. ed. Ben. ] 


Grabe, p. 336, is; Vel hine profecto 
apertum est videre Christianos a tem- 
poribus Christi, Apostolorum, mar- 
tyrum, et deinceps, sua in templis 
altaria servasse, quibus Deo sacrifi- 
cium incruentum corporis et sanguinis 
Christi in perpetuam mortis ejus re- 
cordationem offerrent: quod etiam hu- 
jus libri cap. 34. (c. 18. ed. Ben. see 
above, p. 46, note h.) confirmat noster 
Irenzus in his Christi verbis: ‘cum 
offers munus tuum ad altare,’ &e. 
Feuard. | 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


70 Ireneus and Cyprian on the clergy ‘waiting at the altar? 


altars in their temples, at which they offered the unbloody 
sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ, in perpetual memory 
of His death. Which Irenzus also confirms in the thirty- 
fourth chapter of the same book, by these words of Christ : 
‘When thou bringest thy gift unto the altar.’” This place is 
also applied by St.Cyprians in the first epistle to the priests and 
deacons, and the people of Furni, a city of Africa so called, in 
this passage: [Cum] jampridem in concilio episcoporum sta- 
tutum sit, ne quis de clericis et Dei ministris tutorem vel cu- 
ratorem testamento suo constituat, quando singuli Divino sa- 
cerdotio honorati et in clerico ministerio constituti, non nisi 
altart et sacrificiis deservire, et precibus atque orationibus va- 
care debeant: ‘It was long since decreed in a council of bi- 
shops, that no man should appoint a clergyman and minister 
of God for tutor or curator of his last will and testament, be- 
cause all that are dignified with the Divine priesthood (that is 
all priests), and (deacons) constituted in the clerical ministra- 
tion, ought not to wait but at the altar and oblations, and de- 
vote themselves to prayer.” Here this holy father plainly 
alludes to altari deserviunt in the text, as he also alludes to 
Ta ἱερὰ ἐργαζόμενοι; they who minister about holy things, in 
the other expressions which follow; gui divinis rebus et spi- 
ritalibus occupati ; qui operationibus divinis insistunt ; ab altari 
et sacrificiis non recedant. ΑἸ] which shew that he thought 
evangelical priests to be as proper ministers about holy things, 
and waiters at God’s altar in a proper sense, as the Levitical 
clergy under the law. 

I should from hence return to Matt. v. 23; “When thou 
bringest thy gift to the altar,” &c.; but having said enough 
upon that place, I proceed to Heb. xiii. 10, where the Apostle 
saith expressly, “We have an altar whereof they have no right 
to eat who serve the tabernacle.” In the original whereof is 
ἐξ οὗ, which may be rendered in a literal and proper sense ex 


8 [S. Cypr. Ep. Ixvi. (Ep. i. ed. 
Oxon.) ad Clerum et Plebem Fur- 
nis consistentem, p. 114. ed. Ben. 
The passages next referred to are; 
Molestiis et laqueis szcularibus obli- 
gari non debent, qui divinis rebus et 
spiritalibus occupati, ab ecclesia rece- 
dere, et ad terrenos et seeculares actus 
vacare non possunt..... Again, speak- 
ing of the provision for the Levites in 


the Mosaic law: quod totum fiebat de 
auctoritate et dispositione Divina, ut 
qui operationibus Divinis insistebant, 
in nulla re avocarentur, nec cogitare 
aut agere secularia cogerentur. Que 
nunc ratio et forma in clero tenetur, ut 
qui in Ecclesia Domini ordinatione 
clerica promoventur ... ab altari non 
recedant, sed die ac nocte celestibus 
rebus et spiritalibus serviant.—Ibid. ] 


The word ‘altar, Heb, xii. 10, to be understood literally. 71 


quo or de quot, ‘of which,’ or ‘from which they have no right 
to eat;’ as the excellent author of The Propitiatory Oblation in 
the Holy Eucharist hath rightly observed". But because the 
generality of learned men have taken altar here in the meto- 
nymical sense for the altar-offering, as the Latin translation 
and ours take “temple,” 1 Cor. ix. 13, for the holy provision 
of the templex, I am therefore content to take it in the same 
sense, which will not in the least abate the force of my argu- 
ment from the place, because if altar there be put for the sa- 
crifice or oblation of the altar, that metonymical use of the 
word proves the first and proper sense of it as much as the 
use of τράπεζα in Greek, and mensa in the Latin tongue, for 
the meat or entertainment upon the table, proves it to be a 
table in the primary, proper, literal sense. 

But perhaps, Sir, your late writer will say, the Apostle 
doth not mean a proper material altar, upon which offerings 
were made, and then eaten, but an improper metaphorical 


* Tena in locum. Quare inepte Lu- 
therani, et Beza [ut fugiant hunc lo- 
cum quo probatur Christianos habere 
sacrificium miss, quod supra altare 
celebratur (de quo edere possunt boni 
Christiani) | fingunt Paulum hic agere 
de sacrificio orationum, laudum vel 
gratiarum actionum: quia, preterquam 
quod ad hee non necessario altare eri- 
gitur, cum possint sine illo fieri, hic 
Paulus agit de sacrificio manducabili, 
quod supra altaris mensa Christianis 
ponitur ... Sacrificium vero orationum 
et laudum non est manducabile; [ex 
quo fit neque de altari crucis hic loqui 
Paulum, quia Christus ibi se obtulit 
cruenta et propria specie, non realiter 
comedendus, sed spiritualiter:] cum 
ergo hic de altari et mensa realis et 
propriz manducationis sit sermo, ut 
Judaicis escis nostra esca contrapone- 
retur, consequens est de altari Eucha- 
ristize loqui, que est vera esca realiter et 
sacramentaliter manducabilis.—[ Com- 
mentaria et Disputationes in Epistolam 
D. Pauli ad Hebrzos, auctore Ludo- 
vico Tena, cap. 13. Diff. vii. p. 708. 
.Lond. 1661.] His whole exposition 
of the place is most excellent, and 
worthy to be read, excepting that he 
misapplies the Eucharistical sacrifices 
to the popish sacrifice of the mass. 

u [In this work (The Propitiatory Ob- 
Jation in the Holy Eucharist truly stated 
and defended, &c. London, 1710,) which 


is a defence of Hickes against Dr. Han- 
cock, the author (John Johnson, see 
vol. i, p. 2. note p) maintains (p. 48), 
that “by the altar here mentioned 
(Heb. xiii. 10) the Apostle means the 
communion-table.” ‘And in this (he 
proceeds) I differ from Dr. Hickes, as 
well as Dr. Hancock, for I can see no 
reason for what they here assert, that 
the altar is put for the sacrifice. The 
preposition ἐξ or ék may signify ‘at,’ 
or ‘ off from ;’ it does not necessarily 
imply that the altar was the thing 
eaten, or that the altar was that which 
they used as a table or trencher in 
eating; it is sufficient, that what they 
ate was brought or taken from the 
altar; and therefore it is an ellipsis, 
rather than a metonymy, and may thus 
be supplied, ‘ We have an altar, from 
which they have no right to (take or) 
eat the sacrifice, who serve the taber- 
nacle.... To eat ‘of’ or ‘from’ the 
altar is to be a guest at the altar; so 
they who minister about holy things 
are said to eat from the temple, 1 Cor. 
ix. 13, (Gr. ἐκ τοῦ ἱεροῦ ἐσθίουσιν,) 
that is, the provision and gifts which 
they have from the temple.” | 

x [Our version, ‘live of the things 
of the temple,’ and the Vulgate, que 
de sacrario sunt edunt,’”’ supply these 
explanatory words to the original ἐκ τοῦ 
ἱεροῦ ζῶσιν. 


CHAP. It. 
SECT. VIII. 





72 ‘We have an altar, δὸ. Heb. xii. 10. implies a 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


altar, by way of allusion and similitude; and so, Sir, if he 
pleases he may say the Apostle meant only an improper meta- 
phorical high-priest, where he says in the same Epistle, “we 
ee 4,14, have a great High-Priest that is passed into the heavens ;” 

; “we have not an High-Priest who cannot be touched with the 
feeling of our infirmities;” “we have such an High-Priest, who 
is set on the right hand of the throne of the majesty in the 
heavens.” The phrase is the same’, ἔχομεν θυσιαστήριον, 
and τοιοῦτον ἔχομεν ἀρχιερέα; and ov yap ἔχομεν ἀρχιερέα 
μὴ δυνάμενον συμπαθῆσαι, ὅτο. ‘Habemus altare, ‘talem habe- 
mus pontificem, ‘non enim habemus pontificem, qui non possit 
compati infirmitatibus nostris’ And since the High-Priest 
we have, is a more proper High-Priest than the Jewish 
high-priest, who was but His shadow’, it would be very arbi- 
trary in him to assert that the altar we are said to have is 
not a proper altar, especially considering that the Jerusalem 
altar?, for the reason hereafter given, is several times called 


[chap. 8. 
1 


Υ Heb. xiii. 10. Habemus altare 
ex quo edendi non habent potestatem, 
qui tabernaculo deserviunt. Extra 
Judzorum itaque templum in ecclesia 


So among the Gentiles, as well as 
among the Jews, consecrated or dedi- 
cated tables were used for altars, as 
Macrobius shews upon this verse of 


erat θυσιαστήριον, altare, et per conse- 
quens etiam θυσία, sacrificium, non 
solum rationale laudis et precum, sed 
et materiale panis et vini, quod verbo 
edendi clare significat Apostolus.—Dr. 
Ernest. Grabe on Iren. lib. iv. cap. 
84. [p. 324. ed. Oxon. 1702. ] 

* [‘*Which serve unto the example 
and shadow of heavenly things.’’—Heb. 
vill. 5. ‘The law having a shadow of 
good things to come.’’—Ibid., x. 1.] 

* “There is no more difference be- 
tween atable and an altar, than between 
another cup and a chalice, or an house 
and a church, or a feast and a sacrifice.” 
—Mede of the name Altar, sect. ii. 
[Mede’s words are, ‘‘ An altar is not 
every table, or a table for a common 
feast, but an holy table; and an holy 
table is an altar. . .. For in times past 
(when men perhaps were as wise as we 
are now) it was thought fit and decent 
that things set apart unto God and 
sacred should be distinguished not only 
in use but in name also from things 
common. For what is a temple or 
church but an house? yet distinguished 
in name from other houses. What is 
a sacrifice but a feast? yet distin- 
guished in name from other feasts.’’— 
Works, p. 387. | 


Virgil, 

In mensam leti libant divosque pre- 

cantur.—[ Ain. viii. 279. } 

in answer to this objection of Evan- 
gelus, ‘Cum non in mensam, sed in 
aram secundum morem libare debu- 
erint.’... Ego autem, quod mihi ma- 
gistra lectione compertum est, publi- 
cabo. In Papiriano enim jure, eviden- 
ter relatum est ara vicem prestare 
posse mensam dicatam. ‘ Ut in templo,’ 
inquit, ‘Junonis Populoniz augusta 
mensa est. Namque in fanis alia va- 
sorum sunt, et sacree supellectilis, alia 
ornamentorum. Qu vasorum sunt, 
instrumenti instar habent, quibus sacri- 
Ποῖα conficiuntur. Quarum rerum 
principem locum obtinet mensa, in qua 
epulz, libationes, et stipes reponuntur. 
Ornamenta vero sunt clypei, corone, 
et ejusmodi donaria. Neque enim do- 
naria dedicantur eo tempore, quo delu- 
bra sacrantur. At vero mensa, aru- 
leeque eodem die quo zdes ipse dedi- 
cari solent. Unde mensa hoc ritu 
dedicata in templo are usum, et reli- 
gionem obtinet pulvinaris.’ Ergo apud 
Evandrum quidem fit justa libatio ; 
quippe apud eam mensain, que cum 
ara maxima, more utique religionis, 
fuerat dedicata, et in luco sacrato, et 


literal altar from which we may eat. 73 
the table of the Lord; in Malach. i. 7, 12; and Ezekiel xli. 
22; xliv. 16”; as the offerings upon it are called His foods, 
which He consumed by fire. And that the altar we are said 
to have is such an altar, of which‘, that is, of the sacrifices of 
which, neither the priests, who were ministers of the taber- 
nacle, nor their people had any right to eat, but the Christian 
ministers and people have, the Apostle proves by an argu- 
ment taken from their own law. For if they could not eat 
of the sacrifices of atonement ® and expiation, which prefigured 
the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross, how could they partake 
at the Christian altar of the Christian sacrifice, which was the 
mystical flesh and blood of Christ, by which the sacrifice of 
Himself upon the cross was represented according to His own 
institution under the new law, as it was under the old by the 
sacrifices of expiation, whose bodies were burnt without the 
camp? “ We have an altar,” saith he, “ that is, an altar-sacri- 
fice, whereof they have no right to eat who serve the tabernacle. 
For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into 
the sanctuary by the high-priest for sin, are burnt without 


inter ipsa sacra, in quibus epulabantur. 
—Lib. iii. cap. 11. p. 289. 

To this let me add what Servius saith 
on this verse; Queritur sane, cur in 
mensam, et non in aram libaverint? 
Sed apud antiquos inter vasorum sup- 
pellectilem, etiam mensam cum aris 
mos erat consecrari, quo die templum 
consecrabatur: unde bene ait ‘in men- 
sam leti libant,’ quam constabat cum 
ara maxima dedicatam. So De la 
Cerda, “‘‘ In mensum leti libant,’ vide- 
licet, effusa aliqua parte vini e patera 
in mensam. Ex eodem more in Ain. i. 
736, dixit, ‘in mensam laticum libavit 
honorem.’ Et Silius Italicus, xi. 301. 


Ante omnes ductor honori 
Nominis Augusto libat carchesia 
ritu. 
Cetera quem sequitur, Bacchique 
ex more liquorem 
Irrorat mensis turba. 


Sed que ratio hujus moris? Quia 
veteribus mensa pro ara fuit [et sacrum 
quiddam]... Vid. Scaliger. in Festum 
[De Verb. Sign., lib. xi. ‘ Mense in 
zdibus sacris ararum vicem obtine- 
bant.’ ] et Lipsium (lib. iii. Antiq. Lect. 
c. 6.) Oppugnat posterior, imo ridet 
Macrobium (Sat., lib. iii. cap. 11), inter- 
pretantem Virgilium, secus ac par est.”’ 


[ Virgil. Op., cum notis J. L. De la 
Cerda, tom. ii. p. 192. Lugd. 1612. 
Lipsius said the table was not regarded 
as an altar, and that the libation was 
made on any thing, pro re nata. ] 

b [The texts are quoted p. 76. 
note m. | 

© Lev. iii. 11, 16. [“It is the food of 
the offering made by fire.’’] In the ori- 
ginal AWS pnd, and nybai-by. Vulg. 
In pabulum ignis, et oblationis Do- 
mini; in alimoniam ignis et suavis- 
simi odoris. Vide Munsterum, Fagi- 
um, et Clarium in locum.—[ Crit. Sacr. 
tom. 11. pp. 30—32. Munster’s words 
are, Id quod supra vocatur sacrificium 
ignitum in odorem suavitatis, hie vo- 
catur panis et cibus suavis, igne de- 
coctus, et quo Deus delectatur. Fagius 
and Clarius use almost the same ex-~ 
pressions.] Castalio; Jove dapem rei 
divine. 

4 Tena. Nomine enim altaris per 
figuram metonymiam intelligitur sacri- 
ficium super altare positum. [ubi su- 
pra, p. 707. ] 

© Ley. vi. 30. [‘‘ And no sin offering 
whereof any of the blood is brought 
into the tabernacle of the congregation 
to reconcile withal in the holy place, 
shall be eaten; it shall be burnt in the 
fire.” ] iv. 7—12; xvi. 27. 


CHAP. II. 


SECT. VILL 





74. ‘We have an altar,’ §c. understood literally by St. Chrysost., 


curisttan the camp; wherefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


people with His own blood, suffered without the city gate ; 
and His suffering there signifies the exclusion of all legal 
eaters from partaking of Him, who, as a sin-offering, was 
carried without the camp.” Here is altar answering to altar, 
and sacrifice to sacrifice; the sacrifice, which was a figure of 
Christ’s sacrifice upon the cross before His suffering, to that 
which is the figure of it after. And therefore the Syrian 
Churches read this place as proper in the ordination of their 
priests’. And what St. Chrysostom saith upon the place can 
relate to nothing but the Eucharistical oblation of the ele- 
ments, and the participation of them, as will appear from this 
version of them, οὐχ οἷα τὰ ᾿Ιουδαϊκὰ, x.7.r. “ The rites, or 
religious observances among us,” saith he, “ are not such as 
the Jewish were, insomuch that it is not lawful for the high- 
priest to partake of them. Wherefore, because he had said do 
not observe μὴ παρατηρεῖτε, like one who overthrows his own 
sayings, he turns about in this manner: What, and do not we 
observe (meats), saith he? Yes, we observe them more exactly, 
not communicating of them to the priests themselves.” If 
this commentary on the text, “ we have an altar,” &c., relates 
not to the communion-table, and literal and oral eating of 
the Eucharistical bread at it, I must confess I do not rightly 
understand it: the original words μετέχειν αὐτῶν and pera- 
διδόντες αὐτῶν are communion phrases. But upon supposi- 
tion that they relate not at all to the oral eating at the com- 
munion-board, it is no argument against that sense of the 
text, because this father speaks of it in the common sense of 
the Church as ofthe Christian altar, and of the oblation and 


f [Hickes’ statement seems to be Asseman says, (notes, p. 45,) Iisdem 


derived from Tena, (ubi supra, p. 708,) 
who speaks of the ‘ consuetudo ecclesi- 
arum Syriz, que in ordinatione sacer- 
dotum hoc loco utuntur.’ Tena appears 
to refer to the use of these words in the 
prayer at the imposition of hands in 
the ordination of priests by the Nesto- 
rian Syrians: Elige illos ad sacerdo- 
tium Domine, Deus fortis, ut ... corde 
puro conscientiaque bona inserviant 
altari tuo sancto, offerentes tibi obla- 
tiones orationum et sacrificia confes- 
sionum in Ecclesia tua sancta, &e.— 
Asseman. Codex Lit. Eccl. Univ., lib. 
Vill. pars vi. p. 39. Of this prayer 


fere verbis precatur pontifex in Eucho- 
logio Greecorum, Maronitarum, Jacobi- 
tarum et Coptarum. | 

% [οὔκ οἷα τὰ ᾿Ιουδαϊκά, φησι, τοιαῦτα 
τὰ Tap ἡμῖν, ws μηδὲ ἀρχιερεῖ θέμις 
εἶναι μετέχειν αὐτῶν᾽ ὥστε ἐπειδὴ εἶπε, 
μὴ παρατηρεῖτε, ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο κατα- 
βάλλοντος εἶναι τὰ ἴδια, πάλιν αὐτὸ 
περιστρέφει" μὴ γὰρ καὶ ἡμεῖς οὐ παρα- 
τηροῦμέν, φησι; καὶ παρατηροῦμεν, καὶ 
σφοδρότερον, οὐδὲ αὐτοῖς τοῖς ἱερεῦσι 
μεταδιδόντες αὐτῶν. ---, Chrysost. in 
Epist. ad Hebrazeos, Hom. xxxiii. ὃ 2. 
Op., tom. xii. p. 304, A, B. ] 


Theodoret, Theophylact, and Oecumenius. 75 


participation of the bread and wine as of a sacrifice, in nu- 
merous places of his works; as I have shewed in this book, 
and might shew it from many more; as that in Hom. viii. de 
Penit. et Hom. xxviii.in 1 Cor., μετὰ καθαροῦ συνειδότος τῆς 
ἱερᾶς ἄπτου τραπέζας καὶ τῆς ἁγίας μέτεχε θυσίας". Theo- 
doret, Theophylacti, and Oecumenius*, all understand it in ἃ 
literal sense of a proper altar, and the summary of all their 
commentaries upon the place amounts to thus much; that 
“after the Apostle had told the Hebrews that they had been 
fed with meats of carnal sacrifices and offerings, which had 
not profited them, then, lest they should think the Christian 
worship contemptible for want of such observances, he tells 
them that the Christians have an altar, and a sacrifice, but 
of another kind, of which their priests were not worthy to 


h [Id. de Poenit. Hom. vi. (viii. ed. 
Morell.) § 5. tom. ii. p.326,B. The other 
passage referred to is; δεῖ τὸν προσι- 
ὄντα, πάντα ἐξαντλήσαντα ταῦτα, οὕτω 
τῆς καθαρᾶς ἐκείνης ἅπτεσθαι θυσίας. 
—Id. ἴῃ 1 Ep. ad Cor. Hom. xxviii. ὃ 
1. tom. x. p. 250, D.] 

i [The words of Theophylact are; 
on v. 9; κάλον γὰρ χάριτι βεβαιοῦσθαι 
τὴν καρδίαν, οὐ βρώμασιν ἐν οἷς οὐκ 
ὠφελήθησαν οἱ περιπατήσαντες. .. τῇ 
χάριτι, τουτέστι τῇ πίστει βεβαιοῦσθαι 
δεῖ ἡμᾶς, καὶ πληροφορεῖσθαι ὅτι οὐδὲν 
ἀκάθαρτον, ἀλλὰ πάντα τῷ πιστεύοντι 
καθαρά" πίστεως οὖν δεῖ, οὐ βρωμάτων 
παρατηρήσεως" οἱ γὰρ ἐν τοῖς βρώμασι 
περιπατήσαντες, τουτέστι, τῇ τῶν βρω- 
μάτων παρατηρήσει στοιχήσαντες δια- 
παντὺς, οὐδὲν εἰς ψυχὴν ὠφελήθησαν, 
ὡς τῆς πίστεως ἔξω ὄντες, καὶ τῷ νόμῳ 
τῷ ἀνωφελεῖ δουλεύοντες" καὶ ἄλλοις δὲ, 
τὶ ὠφελοῦντο ἀπὸ τῆς παρατηρήσεώς, 
φησιν, ὅπου γε οὔτως ἦσαν μιαροὶ, ὥστε 
μὴ δύνασθαι μετέχειν τῶν θυσιῶν ; ν. 10. 
ἔχομεν θυσιαστήριον, κ. τ. Δ... ἐπειδὴ 
εἶπεν ὅτι οὐ δεῖ παρατηρεῖσθαι βρώματα, 
ἵνα μὴ δόξῃ εὐκαταφρόνητα εἶναι τὰ 

ἡμέτερα διὰ τὸ ἀπαρατήρητον᾽ φησὶν, 
ὅτι καὶ ἡμεῖς ἔχομεν παρατήρησιν, ἀλλ᾽ 
οὐκ ἐπὶ βρώμασι τοιούτοις, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τῷ 
θυσιαστηρίῳ, ἤτοι τῇ ἀναιμάκτῳ θυσίᾳ 
τοῦ ζωοποιοῦ σώματοϑ᾽ ταύτης γὰρ οὐδὲ 
τοῖς νομικοῖς ἀρχιερεῦσι μεταλαβεῖν ἔξε- 
στιν, ἔως ἄν λατρεύωσι τῇ σκηνῇ, του- 
τέστι, τοῖς νομικοῖς τύποις, τοῖς παροδι- 
κοῖς, τοῖς καταλυομένοις (τοιοῦτον γὰρ 
ἣ σκηνὴ) ἢ τῷ κόσμῳ τούτῳ, ὥσπερ τῶν 
νομικῶν θυσιῶν οὗ μετεῖχον οἱ λαοὶ, ὡς 
évdttot.—Theophylact. Comm, in Ep. 


ad Hebr., cap. xiii. Op., tom. ii. pp. 758, 
C. 759, A.] 

* [Gicumenius says; ἐν τῇ πίστει 
οὖν τῇ διὰ χάριτος Θεοῦ ἐνεργουμένῃ 
δεῖ βεβαιοῦσθαι τὴν καρδίαν, οὐ μὴν 
βεβαιοῦσθαι. πρὸς παρατήρησιν βρωμά- 
των οἱ γὰρ εἰς τὰς παρατηρήσεις 
ταύτας περιπατοῦντες, τουτέστιν, οἷ 
ταῦτα φυλάττοντες, οὐδὲν ἐξ αὐτῶν 
ὠφελήθησαν" αἰνίττεται δέ τινας παρ᾽ 
αὐτοῖς ἔθει ᾿Ιουδαικῷ παρατηρουμένους 
τὰ βρώματα. ἔχομεν θυσιαστήριον. ἐπειδὴ 
εἶπεν ὅτι οὐ χρὴ παρατηρεῖσθαι βρώ- 
ματα, va μὴ νομίσωσιν εὐκαταφρόνητα 
εἶναι τὰ ἡμέτερα τῷ εἶναι ἀπαρατήρητα, 
φησὶ, μὴ γὰρ καὶ ἡμεῖς οὐκ ἔχομεν 
παρατηρήσεις ; ἀλλ᾽ οὐ βρωμάτων, ἀλλὰ 
τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου ἡμῶν" τῶν γὰρ ἐκεῖ 
κειμένων οὐδὲ αὐτοῖς τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίων ἀρ- 
χιερεῦσιν ἔξεστι μετασχεῖν" οὗτοι γὰρ 
οἱ τῇ “σκηνῇ, οἷον τῷ τύπῳ καὶ τῇ σκιᾷ, 
καὶ οὐκ ἀληθείᾳ δουλεύοντες. ἐξ οὗ φα- 
γεῖν οὐκ ἔχουσιν ἐξουσίαν. οὐχ οἷά, φησι, 
τὰ ᾿Ιουδαικὰ, τοιαῦτα καὶ τὰ ἡμέτερα, ὡς 
μηδὲ τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ θέμις εἶναι μετασχεῖν 
αὐτῶν... .. Then after speaking of our 
Lord suffering without the camp, and 
His blood being shed to purge the sins 
of the world, he adds, that as the priests 
took in the blood of the sin-offerings to 
the altar, τοῦτυ δὴ οὖν τὸ αἷμα διὰ τοῦ 
ἀρχιερέως εἰσφέρεται παρ᾽ ἡμῖν εἰς τὸ 
παρ᾽ ἡμῖν θυσιαστήριον. διὸ οὐκ ἔξεστι 
τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίων ἀρχιερεῦσιν ἐξ αὐτοῦ τοῦ 
θυσιαστηρίου φαγεῖν. ---- Cicumenii in 
Epist. ad Hebr. cap. xxi. Comment. in 
Nov. Test., tom. ii. pp. 431, D. 432, 
A, sqq.] 


CHAP. IIL.» 


SECT. VIII. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


76 ΑΨ dase. 


partake, because they served the tabernacle, and not the 
truth, of which that was the type and shadow.” Particu- 
larly, saith Theodoret!, “we have an altar much more excellent 
than that old one under the law, for that was but the shadow 
of this. That was an altar for sacrifices void of reason, but 
this is an altar for a spiritual and Divine sacrifice, of which 
none of the Jewish priests could partake, unless they were 
first converted to faith in our Lord.” For the farther expli- 
cation of which it is to be observed, that as the great altar 
at the temple of Jerusalem was so called with respect to 
the sacrifices which were offered there, but, with respect to 
the consumption of them upon it by fire, was called also 
the Lord’s table™ 50 the Lord’s table in Christian Churches 
was considered in a double respect, first with relation to the 
offering of the bread and wine upon it, and secondly with 
relation to the consumption, or participation of them in the 
sacrificial feast at it; and as in the latter respect the Apostle 
called it the Lord’s table, so in the former it is an altar, and 
therefore the Apostle, by a usual metonymy of the altar for 
the sacrifice of the altar, said, ‘we have an altar whereof 
they have no right to eat, who serve at the tabernacle.” So 
in different respects it was called by both names in ecclesias- 


tical writers”. 


pillars which support Thy sacred table, . 
So Gregory Nyssen?P ; 


altar.” 


! [ἔχομεν θυσιαστήριον, κ. τ. A. τοῦτό, 
φησι, τοῦ παλαιοῦ πολλῷ τιμιώτερον. 
ἐκεῖνο γὰρ τούτου σκιά. ἐκεῖνο δέχεται 
τὰς ἀλόγους θυσίας" τοῦτο δὲ τὴν λογι- 
κήν τε καὶ θείαν" οὗ δὴ χάριν οὐδεὶς ἐκεί- 
νων τῶν ἱερέων ταύτης μεταλαγχάνει, εἰ 
μὴ πρότερον τὴν εἰς τὸν Κύριον δέξηται 
atoriw.—Theodoret. in Epist. ad Hebr. 
cap. xiii. ver. 10. Opera, tom. iii. p. 460, 
ΒΟΥ 

™ Ezek. xli. 22. ‘‘ The altar of wood 
was three cubits high... and He said 
unto me, This is the table that is before 
the Lord.” xliv. 16. “ They shall enter 
into My sanctuary, and they shall come 
near to My table to minister unto Me, 
and they shall keep My charge.”’ Mal. 
i. 7. ‘* Ye say the table of the Lord is 
contemptible.” Ver. 12.‘ The table of 
the Lord is polluted, and the fruits 
thereof, even His meat, is contempt- 
ible.” 


As in Synesius®; “I will cleave to the holy 


... the unbloody 
θυσιαστήριον τοῦτο TO ἅγιον, 


n [Many other instances will be 
found in Bingham, book viii. chap. vi. 
§ 11, 12.] 

° In Catastasi. προσφύσομαι τῶν κι- 
ὄνων τῶν ἱερῶν, [ai τὴ" ἄσυλον ἀπὸ γῆς 
ἄνεχουσι τράπεζαν" ἐκεῖ καὶ ζῶν καθε- 
δοῦμαι καὶ ἀποθανὼν κείσομαι. λειτουρ- 
γὸς εἰμι τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ τὴν ψυχὴν ἴσως 
ἀπολειτουργῆσαί με δεῖ" οὐ μὴν ὅγε Θεὸς 
περιόψεται τὸν βωμὸν τὸν ἀναίμακτον 
ἱερέως αἵματι μιαινόμενον. ---- Synesii 
Episcopi Cyrenensis. Op., p. 303, B, C. 
Paris. 1631. These are the concluding 
words of the Catastasis, an address de- 
livered by Synesius on the occasion of 
the expected irruption of the barba- 
rians into the Pentapolis, A.D. 431. | 

P Oratio de Baptismo Christi. [ἐπεὶ 
kal τὸ θυσιαστήριον τοῦτο τὸ ἅγιον, ὦ 
παρεστήκαμεν, λίθος ἐστὶ κατὰ τὴν φύ- 
σιν κοινὺς, οὐδὲν διαφέρων τῶν ἄλλων 
πλακῶν, at τοὺς τοίχους ἡμῶν οἰκοδο- 


Instances of both names in the Fathers. 77 
κι το r. “This holy altar at which we stand is by nature a 
common stone, but after it is consecrated to the worship of 
God, and receives the blessing, it becomes an holy table, an 
unpollutable altar, not to be touched by every one, but only 
by the priests, and such priests as fear God.” So Socrates, 
lib. 1. cap. 37, telling how Alexander, bishop of Constantino- 
ple, retired into the church of St. Irene to pray4, saith, “ that 
having made himself to be locked up alone in the church of 
Irene, he went to the altar and prostrating himself under 
the holy table, he continued many nights and days together, 
praying unto God with tears.” So in the Disputatio contra 
Arium in Concilio Niceno, ascribed to Athanasius’, p. 122. 
ed. Par. 1627; προτεθεικὼς τράπεζαν, τοῦτ᾽ ἐστὶ τὸ ἅγιον 
θυσιαστήριον, καὶ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ ἄρτον οὐράνιον, καὶ ἄφθαρτον, 
“having set forth the table, that is the holy altar, and the 
heavenly and incorruptible bread thereupon.” An altar 
therefore it is according to the ancients, as well as a table; 
an altar with respect to the oblations, and a table with re- 
spect to the eating or participation of them, as among the 
heathens, who according to the verse of Virgil, and Macro- 
bius’ comment on it in the margin before, not only ate their 
altar-offerings at their holy tables, but often offered upon 
them ; especially their meat and drink-offerings, upon which 
they feasted with their priests in honour of their gods. 
Indeed they used them so often as altars to offer on, as 
well as tables to eat at, that learned men are of opinion they 
looked upon them as altars, as is to be seen in the margin‘. 


μοῦσι, καὶ καλλωπίζουσι τὰ ἐδάφη" 
ἐπειδὴ δὲ καθιερώθη τῇ τοῦ Θεοῦ θερα- 
πείᾳ, καὶ τὴν εὐλογίαν ἐδέξατο, ἐστὶ 
τράπεζα ἅγια, θυσιαστήριον ἄχραντον, 
οὐκέτι παρὰ πάντων ψηλαφώμενον, ἀλλὰ 
μόνον τῶν ἱερέων, καὶ τούτων εὐλαβου- 
μένων.---ϑ. Greg. Nyss. Op., tom. iii. 
pp. 369, Ὁ. 370, A. The last words 
seem rather to mean ‘only by the 
priests, and by them with reverence.’’ ] 

4 [Socrates is speaking of the course 
taken by Alexander when pressed to 
receive Arius to communion. ἐν ταυτῇ 
τοίνυν τῇ aywvia καθεστὼς, χαίρειν 
πολλὰ φράσας τῇ διαλεκτικῇ, προσφεύ- 
γει Θεῷ, καὶ νηστείαις μὲν συνεχέσιν 
ἐσχόλαζε" καὶ τοῦ προσεύχεσθαι οὐδένα 
τρόπον παρέλειπε" Kal.... ἐν τῇ ἐκ- 
κλησίᾳ ἣ ἐπώνυμον Εἰρήνη, μόνον ἑαντὸν 


κατακλειστὸν ποιήσας, καὶ εἰς τὸ θυσι- 
αστήριον εἰσελθὼν, ὑπὸ τὴν ἱερὰν τράπε- 
Cay ἑαυτὸν ἐπὶ στόμα ἐκτείνας, εὔχεται 
δᾶκρύων..----οογαῖ, Eccl, Hist., tom. ii. 
p- 73. | 

τ [Opus spurium; ap. S. Athanas. 
Op., tom. iii. p. 213, B. ed. Ben. | 

S Martini Lexicon in /ibo. Turnebus 
[Adversaria], lib. xi. 7. illud Plauti, 
‘de poculo paululum hoe tibi dabo 
[haud} lubenter’ explicans ait; ‘de 
poculo pleno, quod erat potatura, pau- 
lulum Veneri libat, i. e. in honorem 
Veneris effundit ; Sic enim libare sole- 
bant, quod vel in aram faciebant, vel 
in mensam, que loco are erat,’ &c. et 
lib. xxiv. c. 40. ‘Quid est in mensam 
libare? nempe religionis causa, de pa- 
tera, priusquam bibas, in mensam, que 


CHAP, IT. 


SECT. VIII. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST=- 


HOOD. 





I 


78 An altar is ‘a place of offering ;’ the name 


I have observed this to shew that the same thing in different 
respects may be both a table and an altar. For as a table 
is that at which we eat; so an altar is that at, or upon which 
we offer, and therefore an altar in the old Teutonic language 
is called $unsel-staths', ‘ the place of offering.’ So the rocks 
in the Mediterranean sea between Sardinia and Africa, upon 
which the Romans and Carthaginians sacrificed, when they 
solemnized their mutual league", were ever after called altars 
by the Latins, as Virgil tells us im these verses : 

Tres Notus abreptas in saxa latentia torquet : 

Saxa vocant Itali mediis que in fluctibus aras, 

Dorsum immane mari summo*— 
And so the rock upon which Manoah offered unto the Lord, 
Judges xiii. 19, is called the altar in ver. 20, τὸ θυσιαστήριονν 
in the Greek version, which I have observed to shew with 
what propriety of speech the holy communion table hath 
been called the altar from the Apostles’ time to the Reforma- 
tion. It is so called four times in the epistles of the holy 
martyr St. Ignatius, who was St. John’s disciple’, first in 
his Epistle to the Ephesians, where he saith*, μηδεὶς trAavacbw, 
ἐὰν μή τις ἢ ἐντὸς τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου; ὑστερεῖται τοῦ ἄρτου τοῦ 
Θεοῦ: “ Let no man deceive himself, unless a man be within 
the altar he is deprived of the bread of God.” From whence 
it is plain, that by the altar> he meant the Lord’s table upon 
which the bread was offered. So in his Epistle to the Magne- 
sians®; “ Being come together into the same place, have one 
common-prayer, one supplication, one hope in charity, and 


opinione veterum sacra erat, et tan- 
quam quedam ara, aliquid de vino 


effundere,’ &c. 
hnusa- 


“Ati Phe word 


AST AWS utare, Evang. Gothic., 


Matt. v.23; Luc.i.11.is compounded of 


h nu ὃλε hn U2 A victima, 
sacrificium ; and 2@T AWS locus; 


Lye’s Dictionarium Saxon. et Gotho- 
Latin. See note g,p.18. and note 0,p.91. 
u [So Servius and Hortensius in lo- 
cum; and Turnebus, Adversaria, lib. 
XXVvi. c. 23.] 
x Virg. Ain., lib. i. 107—110. 
Υ ἐπάνω τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου. 
LXX. Jud. xiii. 19.] 
* [See above, note ], p. 46.] 


[Vers. 


a [S. Ignat. Ep. ad Eph.,c.5. Patr. 
Apost., tom. ii. p. 13. ] 

υ «These words of Ignatius,” saith 
Mr. Mede, ‘‘ directly imply, that the 
altar was the place, as of the bread of 
God, so of the public prayers of the 
Church. So that he that was not within 
the altar, (that is, who should be divided 
therefrom,) had no benefit of either.””— 
Christian Sacrifice, book ii. cap. y. 
[ Works, p. 364. ] 

© [ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ μία προσευχὴ, 
μία δέησις, εἷς νοῦς, μία ἐλπὶς, ἐν ἀγά- 
TH, ἐν τῇ χαρᾷ τῇ ἀμώμῳ" ... εἷς ἐστὶν 
Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς, οὗ ἄμεινον οὐδέν ἐστιν" 
πάντες οὖν ὡς εἰς (ἕνα) ναὺν συντρέχετε 
Θεοῦ, ὡς ἐπὶ ἕν θυσιαστήριον, ὡς ἐπὶ ἕνα 
Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν τὸν ἀφ᾽ ἑνὸς πατρὸς 
προελθόντα.--- ὃ. Ignat. Ep. ad Magn., 
c. 7. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 19.] 


used literally of the Holy Table by St. Ignatius. 79 


in pure joy. (For) there is one (that is, but one) Lord Jesus 
Christ, than whom nothing is more excellent. Wherefore 
come ye all together (ws εἰς ναὸν) as unto one temple of 
God, as to one altar, as to one Jesus Christ, who proceeded 
from the Father.” Here as ναὸς, ‘temple,’ is taken literally, 
so θυσιαστήριον, ‘altar,’ is to be understood. So in his Epistle 
to the Philadelphians‘, “‘ Wherefore let it be your study to 
partake all of the same Eucharist. For there is but one flesh 
of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup for the unity of His 
blood; one altar, as also there is one bishop (i. e. but one 
bishop) with his presbyters and deacons, my fellow servants, 
that whatsoever you do, you may do it according to the will 
of God.” From this place we may learn first what is the 
sacrifice of this one altar, viz., the holy Eucharist; and who 
are the priests that offer up this sacrifice; the bishops and 
presbyters, as sacerdotal ministers, and the deacons as sub- 
servient inferior ministers, according to their office before 
described®. So in his Epistle to the Trallesians‘, “ Continue 
inseparable from Jesus Christ our God, and from your bishop, 
and from the commands of the Apostles. For he that is 
within the altar is pure; but he that is without, that is, 
who doth any thing without the bishop and presbyters and 
deacons, is not pure in his conscience.” Indeed this phrase 
of being within, and without the altar, is a figure or me- 
tonymy, by which altar is put for the communion of the 
altar. But then, as the Eucharistical cup, when it is so used 
for the wine in the cup, supposes the cup to be a real material 
cup: so the Christian altar, when it is put for the communion 
of the altar, where the priests and the faithful people partake 
together of the holy feast, it signifies a real material altar, at 
which they ministered, and these received. I need not say 
more to shew how the ancient Christians took the Lord’s 
table to be a proper material altar, and that it is implied to 


4 [omovdafere οὖν μιᾷ εὐχαριστίᾳ 


χρῆσθαι" μία γὰρ σὰρξ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν 
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ ἕν ποτήριον εἰς ἕνω- 
σιν τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ" ἕν θυσιαστήριον, 
ὡς εἷς ἐπίσκοπος, ἅμα τῷ πρεσβυτερίῳ, 
καὶ διακόνοις τοῖς συνδούλοις μου ἵνα 
ὕ ἐὰν πράσσητε, κατὰ Θεὸν πράσσητε.--- 
Id. Ep. ad Philadelph., c. 4. ibid,, 
p- 30.] 
© [See above, sect. v. pp. 37, 38.] 


f [τοῦτο δὲ ἔσται ὑμῖν .. . οὖσιν ἄχω- 
ρίστοις Θεοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ τοῦ 
ἐπισκόπου, καὶ τῶν διαταγμάτων τῶν 
ἀποστόλων. 6 ἐντὸς τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου 
ὧν, καθαρός ἐστιν᾽ τοῦτ᾽ ἔστιν ὃ χωρὶς 
ἐπισκόπου καὶ πρεσβυτερίου καὶ διακό- 
νου πράσσοντι, οὗτος οὐ καθαρός ἐστιν 
τῇ συνειδήσει.---1ά., Ep. ad Trall., ο. 7. 
ibid., p. 23.] 


CHAP, 11. 


SECT, VIII. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


80 The same thing may be an altar and a table. 


be such in those words of our Lord, “If thou bringest thy 
gift unto the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother 
hath ought against thee, leave thy gift before the altar, and 
go, first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and 
offer thy gift.” “The ancient Christians (saith Mr. Mede Ε) 
took this to be an evangelical constitution, wherein our 
Saviour implied, by way of anticipation, that He would leave 
some rite to His Church ® instead of, and after the manner of 
the sacrifices of the law, which should begin with an oblation, 
as they didi; and that to require this proper and peculiar 
qualification in the offerer, to be at peace, and without enmity 
with his brother.” ... “ Hence also they may seem to have 
learned to call bread and wine (in respect of this oblation) 
ἅγια δῶρα, ‘the holy gifts,’ from the word our Saviour here 
useth,” &c. 

I hope I have now made it appear in this paragraph that 
the communion-table, in respect of its different uses, is an 
altar as well as a table: an altar upon which the elements 
are presented, and offered up by the minister to God the 
Father, and a table at which after they are consecrated into 
the symbols of Christ’s dead body and blood, they are con- 
sumed by the offerers in the holy sacrificial banquet. This 
I have done to obviate a common modern objection* that the 
holy table cannot be an altar, because it is a table; an ob- 
jection which will as well prove that the same man cannot 
be a preceptor, as well as a father to his child; or that the 
same machine, as among the Nomades, Scythians, old Ger- 
mans, and other Hamaxobians, cannot be both a waggon 
for carriage, and a dwelling-house; or lastly, to give a scrip- 
tural, and more reverential instance, that our Saviour could 
not be both sacrifice and priest: and that the communion- 
table was not a mere table, but an altar too, is also plain from 


& Mede, Of the name Altar, sect. ii. 
[ Works, p. 390. | 

h S. Cypr. Epist. Ixiii. ad Czcilium, 
Christus hujus sacrificii auctor, et doc- 
tor [p. 104. ed. Ben.|—Irenzus, lib. 
iv. cap. 34. Imgitur Ecclesie oblatio, 
quam Dominus docuit offerri in uni- 
verso mundo, purum sacrificium, et 
acceptum est ei.—[c. 18. ὃ 1. p. 250. 
ed. Ben. See the whole passage above, 
p- 46.] 


i Non genus oblationum reprobatum 
est; oblationes enim et illic, oblationes 
autem et hic. Sacrificia in populo, 
sacrificia et in ecclesia, sed species im- 
mutata est tantum [quippe cum jam 
non a servo, sed a liberis offeratur.— 
Id. ibid., § 2. p. 250. This and the pre- 
ceding note are added by Hickes. 

k [Dr. Hancock is particularly refer- 
red to. See below, note u, p. 83.] 


Argument from the parallel of eating the sacrifices of idols. 81 


the distinction in the Greek Church, between the πρόθεσις cnar. τι. 
and the θυσιαστήριον), the former of which they accounted ὁπ ὅπ 
only as a table, to which the offerings were brought, but the 
latter they esteemed as an altar, because the bread and wine 
were there presented to God the Father, and then conse- 
crated into the body and blood of Christ. 

IX. Having shewed from one place of the New Testament, 
that the ministers of Christ are proper altar-ministers, because ΤΠ act, 
they minister at a proper altar; I now proceed to shew from προ ἐπε 
another place, 1 Cor. x. 20, 21, that they offer sacrifice, and Altar; from 
by consequence that they are proper offering or sacrificing the parallel 


in 1 Cor, x. 
priests. These are the words; 


SECT. IX. 





“ But the things which the 7% 7! 
Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God, 
and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. 
Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils ; 
ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and the table of 
devils.” For the devils had their tables for their sacrificial 
feasts, as well as the true God, as is plain from the testimony 
of St. Chrysostom in his Homily on St. Lucian the Martyr, 
whom they tempted by famishing of him to eat of the things 
offered to the idol-gods. ‘ But, (saith he™,) in that extremity 
of hunger, the fear of God withheld the martyr’s hands, and 
made him forget nature: for while he beheld that polluted 
and execrable table, he remembered the other tremendous 
table, which was full of the Spirit, and was so inflamed that 
he chose to endure and suffer all things, rather than taste of 
those unhallowed meats.” So in his twenty-fourth Homily 
on 1 Cor. x. the same father expressly takes notice of the 
tables at which the heathens ate of their idol-sacrifices®: 


' [See Prefatory Discourse, pp. 129, 
130, and notes.] Goar in his notes in 
Ordines sacri Ministerii; Eucholo- 
gium, p. 16; πρόθεσις, quam _ perpe- 
ram Genebrardus altare interpretatur, 
cum rectius propositio, seu proposi- 
tionis mensa dici queat, que non sa- 
crificio, sed pani tantum offerendo 
dicata sit... τράπεζα itaque solum- 
modo est πρόδεαις, non θυσιαστήριον. 
In Miss. S. Chrysost., ibid., p. 116. 
Illud certum est, πρόθεσιν esse men- 
sam, In qua sacra dona προτίθενται, 
primo immolanda proponuntur. 

™ [kal τοῦ λιμοῦ μέγα ἔνδοθεν ἐμ- 
βοῶντος καὶ τῶν προκειμένων κελεύον- 
Tos ἐφάπτεσθαι, ὃ τοῦ Θεοῦ φόβος τὰς 


HICKES, α 


χεῖρας ἀνέστελλε, καὶ τῆς φύσεως αὐὖ- 
τῆς ἐπιλαθέσθαι παρεσκεύαζε" καὶ τρά- 
πεΐαν ὁρῶν μιαρὰν καὶ ἐναγῆ, τραπέζης 
ἐμνήσθη ἑτέρας τῆς φρικώδους καὶ πνεύ- 
ματος γεμούσης, καὶ οὕτως ἐπυροῦτο. ws 
ἑλέσθαι πάντα ὑποστῆναι καὶ παθεῖν, ἢ 
τῶν μιαρῶν ἐκείνων ἀπογεύσασθαι ἑδεσ- 
μάτων.---ἃ. Chrysost. Hom. in 5. Lu- 
cian. Martyr., § 2. Op., tom. ii. p. 527, 
1.} 

n [πῶς οὖν οὐκ ἐναντία ποιεῖτέ, φη- 
σιν, ὦ Κορίνθιοι, εὐλογοῦντες μὲν τὸν 
Θεὸν, ὅτι τῶν εἰδώλων ὑμᾶς ἀπήλλαξε, 
πάλιν δὲ ἐπὶ τὰς ἐκείνων τρέχοντες 
tpaméCas.—Id., in Epist. i. ad Cor. 
Hom. xxiv. ὃ 1. Op., tom. x. p. 212, E.] 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HoobD, 


[ Marg. of 
Eng. Ver.] 


See Exod. 
ἘΣ ἢ; Ὁ» 

1 Sam. 9. 
1155 
Gen. 91. 84. 


82 Sacrifices were eaten in the temples ; 


“ How then ye Corinthians can ye do such contrary things, 
as to bless God, who hath delivered you from idols, and yet 
run again unto their tables?” And again® ; “Art thou not then 
ashamed, when these damned and slavish people prepare a 
table, to run and partake of what is set thereon?” So 
Tsaiah ἰχν. 11, 12, the idolatrous part of the Jews are charged 
with preparing two tables, one to Gad, and the other to Meni: 
« But ye are they that forsake the Lord, that forget My holy 
mountain, that prepare a table for Gad, and that furnish a 
drink-offering unto Meni.” It is, in the LXX, ἐτοιμάζοντες 
τῷ δαιμονίῳ τράπεζαν, “that prepare a table to the devil,” 
and is so cited by Justin Martyr Dialog. cum Tryphone?. It 
is plain from Scripture, that the sacrifices were eaten at the 
place where they were offered. Thus Numb. xxv. 2; the 
Amorites called the Israelites unto the.“ sacrifices of their 
gods, and the people did eat, and bowed down to their gods.” 
So Exod. xviii. 12, “Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, took a burnt- 
offering and sacrifices for God, and Aaron and all the elders 
of Israel came to eat bread with Moses’ father-in-law before 
God.” So in 1 Sam. xvi.; Jesse and his sons were called by 
Samuel to the sacrifice, ver. 5 ; and in the eleventh verse, when 
Jesse told him his youngest son was not there, he said, “ Send 
and fetch him, for we will not sit down? till he come hither.” 
Now at what were they to sit down, or according to the ori- 
ginal, “ about” what were they to sit? I suppose at, or about 
a table. It is also plain from the story of Cleobis and Biton 
in Herodotus’, that sacrifices among the heathens were eaten 
before the idol, or at the place where they were offered to 
him; for it was in the temple of Juno, where her image was, 
that the mother of those two brethren, and the rest of the 
Argives, “sacrificed and feasted.”” Which occasioned Drusius 
to write on these words, “and they lay themselves down by 


ο [πῶς οὖν οὐκ αἰσχύνῃ... ὅταν θῶσι proprie Hebraismus  circwmdabimus, 


τράπεζαν οἱ κατάδικοι οὕτοι, τρέχων 
ἐκεῖ καὶ μετέχων τῶν προκειμένων.--- 
Ibid., § 3. p. 215, B.] 

P [ἑτοιμάζοντες τοῖς δαιμονίοις τρά- 
πεζαν.---8ὃ. Just. M. Dial. cum Tryph., 
c. 135. p. 227, D.] 

4 Munster in locum. Discumbemus. 
Hoe dicitur, quod post sacrificia paci- 
ficorum edebantur consecrata. Habet 


quoniam sedebant in corona ad men- 
sam.—[ Crit. Sacr., tom. ii. p. 899. ] 

τ [ἀπίκοντο ἐς τὸ ἱρόν"... στᾶσα 
ἄντιον τοῦ ἀγάλματος εὔχετο... μετὰ 
ταύτην δὲ τὴν εὐχὴν, ὧς ἔθυσάν τε καὶ 
εὐωχήθησαν, κατακοιμηθέντες ἐν αὐτῷ 
τῷ ἱερῷ, x. τ. A.—Herodot., lib. i. ec. 
31.] 


where there were tables for feasting on the sacrifices. 83 


every altar,” as followeth’; Veteres intra ipsum templum 
solebant solennia sacrificiorum convivia agitare, ut apparet ex 
historia, quam refert Herodotus de Cleobe, et Bitone, et ex 
Aristophane in Pluto (660, sqq.] 1 Cor. viii. 10, εἰδωλεῖον 
quibusdam est idolorum templum, aliis ipsa mensa in qua epule 
celebrabantur ; so Livelius upon the place*, Inclinant se ; | Allu- 
dit ad veterem discumbendi morem, quo epulantes ad mensam 
non ut nos hodie sederunt, sed accubuerunt, reclinata supera 
parte corporis in cubitum sinistrum, &c..... Juxta omnia altaria 
in domo deorum suorum ;| Idololatre in idoleis suis coram idolis 
conviventes accumbebant ; 1 Cor. viii. 10, ‘ Si quis te viderit in 
idoleo accumbere, conscientia infirmi instruetur ad comedendum 
ea que sunt idolis mactata.” Ibid. x. 21,‘ Non potestis poculum 
Domini bibere, et poculum demoniorum.’ THorat. Od. xxxvii. 
lib. i. 

Nure est bibendu, nunc pede libero 

Pulsanda tellus: Nune Saliaribus 

Ornare pulvinar deorum 

Tempus erat dapibus, sodales. 


So certain it is, as a late writer may observe", that the 
heathens had tables at which they ate of the sacrifices of 
their gods, that the learned translator* of Homer’s Iliads into 
Latin verse renders 


Z 7 / 
TETUKOVTO TE δαίτα 





δαίνυντ᾽--- 


in the sacrifices which the Grecians offered at the altars of 
ApolloY and Jupiter’ ; 


* [Drusii Annot. in Amos ii. 18. 
apud Crit. Sacr., tom. iv. p. 247.] 

t [Livelii Annot., ibid., pp. 252, 
253. | 

" Dr. Hancock. [In his Answer to 
some things contained in Dr. Hickes’ 
Christian Priesthood asserted. London, 
1709. See Account of Additions, &c. 
vol. i. p. 2. noteg. Dr. Hancock, p. 12, 
sqq. opposes Hickes’ view (see above, 
p- 72, note a), as if he had said that 
‘there is no difference between a table 
and an altar ;” for his words are (p.13), 
**So no doubt there is a considerable 
difference between an altar and an holy 
table; the altar was the place whereon 


sacrifices were solemnly offered up to 
God, and the holy tables were the 
places whereon the sacrificial feasts 
were made. Nor has the Doctor proved, 
nor ever can prove, that the altars were 
places to eat at, nor the tables places 
to offer upon.” | 

x Helius Eobanus Hessus. [The 
work referred to is a translation of the 
Iliad into Latin hexameters, with this 
title, Homeri Iliados libri xxiv, nuper 
Latino carmine elegantissimo redditi, 
Helio Eobano Hesso interprete. Basi- 
lex, 1540. ] 

Υ Iliad., lib. i. 467. 

z Ibid., lib. ii. 430. 


G2 


CHAP, IL. 


SECT. IX. 


84 Instances of tables and sacrificial feasts in the temples. 


CHRISTIAN ——Mensas dapibus prestantibus augent*. 


PRIEST- . . ooh ὁ . 
HOOD. Lautisque agitant convivia mensis”. 


a> And their custom of eating their sacrificial feast in their 
temples, or in places so called from their sacrifices, is plaim 
from such passages in the prince of poets as these which 


follow : 








Hoc illis curia templum, 
He sacris sedes epulis: hic ariete ceso 
Perpetuis soliti patres considere mensis°. 


Nune pateras libate Jovi, precibusque vocate 
Anchisen genitorem, et vina reponite mensis®. 


——— Ocyus omnes 
In mensam leti libant, divosque precantur®. 


These tables, on which they ate their sacrificial banquets, 
were in the same place where they offered them, at or near 
the images or altars of their gods, as appears from the sa- 
crifice just now mentioned which the Grecians offered to 
Apollo ; 
ἑκατόμβην βῆσαν ἐκηβόλῳ ᾿Απόλλωνι. 
τὴν μὲν ἐπεῖτ᾽ ἐπὶ βωμὸν ἄγων". 

To which let me add these verses in Virgil speaking of 
Tarbas : 


Dicitur ante aras media inter numina divum 
Multa Jovem manibus supplex orasse supinis. 
‘ Jupiter omnipotens, cui nunc Maurusia pictis 
Gens epulata toris Leneum® libat honorem™, 


Jamque dies epulata novem gens omnis, et aris 
Factus. honos'\—— 


Brissonius* shews that as they were wont in their prayers 
to touch or embrace the altars and images of their gods: so 
they used in their addresses to them to touch the tables: 


« [Hessus, p. 23. ] h fin., iv. 204. 

> [Ibid., p. 50. | i fin. v. 762, 

ς /En. vil. 174—6. k De Form., lib. i. p. 40. [eos qui 
4 Thid., v. 133. orabant, aras tangere et amplecti soli- 
© Ibid., viii. 278. tos, Macrob. Sat. lib. iii. ο. 2. tradit, et 
f [Tliad, i. 438, 440.] adductis Virgilii lib. iv. 219 et xii. 201 


* Lenzeum libare honorem, est vini ®neidos versibus confirmat. Vide 
primitias in mensam sive aram Jovis Plaut. Rud. iii. 3. 83. Hor., lib. iii. 
infundere. Οἀ, 28. 17.) 


Parallel of Christians partaking of the Lord’s table. 8 


Similiterque in mensa, in qua bene precari moris fuit Livius car. 1. 
5 . . + SECT, IX. 
ait, precantes mensam tangebant. Ovid. lib. 1. Amor. Eleg. ———— 

iv. 27. 


Tange manu mensam, tangunt quo more precantes. 


_ Lastly, that the Greeks had tables in their temples appears 
from what Tully saith of the Sicilian tyrant and great derider 
of the gods, Dionysius!: Jam mensas argenteas de omnibus 
delubris jussit auferri, in quibus quod more veteris Grecie in- 
scriptum esset ‘ Bonorum Deorum, uti se eorum bonitati velle 
dicebat. 

I have observed all this of tables in the temples, or places 
of idol-worship, to shew how exact the analogy or parallel of 
the Apostle is between eating at the Lord’s table and the 1Cor.10. 21. 
table of devils; and I need not observe, that to drink the 
cup of the Lord and the cup of demons or devils, and to be 
partakers of the Lord’s table and the table of devils, are me- 
tonymical expressions, which properly signify to drink of the 
wine offered to the Lord, and of the wine offered to devils, 
and to be partakers of the sacrifices of the Lord’s table or 
altar, and of the sacrifices of the tables or of the altars of 
devils. Such is the phrase in the preceding chapter, “ They 1 Cor. 9. 13. 
who wait at the altar are partakers with the altar,” 1. 6. 15. Ἔν 10: 
They who wait at the altar are partakers of the sacrifices with 
the altar. According to this observation, the words of the 
Apostle may be paraphrased thus: “ But in answer to the ob- ch. 10. 19, 
jection that an idol is nothing, you ought to understand, that τ 
the things which the Gentiles sacrifice to idols they indeed 
sacrifice to devils, and not to God, and they who eat of the 
things sacrificed to them have communion with those devils, 
and I would not, my brethren, that you should have fellow- 
ship with devils; for by the common notion of communion, 
in which the worshippers of demons in images and the wor- 
shippers of God agree, ye cannot with consistency drink the 
cup of the Lord and the cup of devils, ye cannot be partakers 
or communicants at the Lord’s table and at the tables of 
devils, i.e. ye cannot hold communion, ye cannot be in co- 
venant with them both.” The argument which the Apostle 
here uses against the Christians’ eating of the sacrifices at the 


' De Natura Deorum, lib. iii. c. 34. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


86 A Christian sacrifice and priests implied in the parallel, 


tables or at the altars of devils, is founded on this common 
principle, received by the Jewish and Gentile world, that the 
eating or partaking at the table, or from the altar of any re- 
puted god, of the things sacrificed to him, was in its nature 
and common construction an act of communion with that 
god, and therefore by this common notion of religious fellow- 
ship or communion, Christians could not consistently with 
their religion eat at the Lord’s table and at the table of devils, 
or communicate with devils and with Him who came to de- 
stroy the works of the devil, and all the religious worship of 
devils in the Gentile world. This observation helps to set the 
parallel which the Apostle draws betwixt altar-communion 
with God and devils in a clear light. For first, oblations or 
sacrifices were offered to both: to the former, only upon the 
holy-table-altar, but to the latter both upon their altars and 
their tables™; secondly, it is plain those oblations to both 
were eaten by the offerers at tables; and thirdly, that the 
cup was offered at the Lord’s table, as well as at the table of 
devils ; and by consequence in the fourth place, that they were 
θῦται, or ‘sacrificing ministers,’ as Pollux calls priests", who 


‘offered upon the Lord’s table, as idolatrous priests did upon 


the altars or tables of the devils, and thence and there feasted 
their people in the name of their false gods. I say, the whole 
parallel between eating and drinking at the table of the Lord 
and the table of devils, supposes that they ate and drank of 
things which had been offered, and by consequence, that the 
ministers of the Lord’s table, upon which the bread and wine 
were first solemnly offered and then consumed in the sacri- 
ficial banquet, are sacrificing priests: such as in the ninth 
chapter and thirteenth verse of this Epistle, the Apostle 
speaking of Jewish priests, calls ta ἱερὰ ἐργαζόμενοι, τῷ 
θυσιαστηρίῳ tpocedpevovtes* sacra operantes®, or sacra pro- 
curantes?, altart deservientes%, or altari operam dantes*, ‘mi- 
nisters about holy things’ pertaining to God, ‘ waiters at the 


™ Brissonius de Form., lib. i. p. 82. n Lib. 1. cap. 1. segm. 14. [See 
Illud compertum habeo, in mensa et note i, p. 20.] 
inter scyphos et pocula, ubi libare diis ° [Qui sacra operantur.—Erasmus, 
dapes, et bene precari moris fuisse Crit. Sacr., tom. vii. p. 1067. ] 
Livius, lib. xix., scribit, jactari con- P [Qui sacra procurant.—Castalio. ] 
snevisse vocem hanc bene. ... Hoc 4 [Qui altari deserviunt.—Vulg. ] 
certe ita perspicue demonstrat Plau- τ [Qui are operam dant.—Castalio. | 


tus, [Persa, y. 1. 22.] 


Sacrificial terms used of the Eucharist τη, the Apostles’ days. 87 


altar, without whom there could have been no sacrifice 
or offerings, or any partaking of the offerings at the holy 
table, in which the act of communion doth consist. 

Hence as I have shewed, and shall shew again, in the time 
of the Apostles the bread and wine in the holy Eucharist 
came to be called δῶρα and προσφοραὶ, ‘ gifts’ and “ offer- 
ings, and the ministers of the Gospel προσεδρεύοντες τῷ 
θυσιαστηρίῳ, ‘waiters at the altar, and προσενέγκοντες τὰ 
δῶρα, ‘offerers,’ or ‘sacrificers;’ their ministration at the 
Lord’s table being the most special and excellent part of 
their priestly function, in which making the bread and wine 
an holy and acceptable sacrifice to God by solemn oblation 
and prayer’, they thereby make intercession and atonement 
for their own sins and the sins of the people, as by a most 
solemn rite of supplication, according to the nature and use 
of sacrifices, by which God is atoned and His mercy and 
favour procured. 

I say, according to this parallel of the Apostle between 
the communion with the true God and that of devils, bread 
and wine, the holy Eucharist, were called gifts and offerings, 


and the ministers of the Gospel offerers and sacrificers, in’ 


the age of the Apostles, as appears from two or three pas- 
sages in St. Clement’s epistle to the Corinthians, who was 
fellow-labourer with the Apostles, and must have understood 
their meaning. Saith he, cap. 40‘, “ Seeing then these things 
are very evident, it is our duty, who have looked into the 
depths of Divine knowledge, to do all things in order, what- 
soever our Lord hath commanded us to do. Especially that 
we perform our offerings and ministrations (προσφορὰς καὶ 
Aevtoupyias) to God at the times appointed for them; for 
these He hath commanded to be done, not unseasonably 
and disorderly, but at certain appointed times and hours. 
Wherefore He hath ordained, by His sovereign authority, 


5. See the prayer of consecration in 
the Apostolical Constitutions, lib. viii. 
cap. 12. [apud Concil., tom. i. pp. 481, 
483, quoted below, p. 123, sqq.] and 
in the Communion-Office of the Scot- 
tish Common-Pxrayer Book. [Appen- 
dix, No. ii. ] 

t [προδήλων οὖν ἡμῖν ὄντων τούτων, 
καὶ ἐγκεκυφότες εἰς τὰ βάθη τῆς θείας 


γνωσέως, πάντα τάξει ποιεῖν ὀφείλομεν, 
ὕσα 6 δεσπότης ἐπιτελεῖν ἐκέλευσεν. 
κατὰ καίρους τεταγμένους τάς τε προσ- 
φορὰς καὶ λειτουργίας ἐπιτελεῖσθαι, καὶ 
οὐκ εἰκῇ ἢ ἀτάκτως (ἐκέλευσεν) γίνε- 
σθαι, ἄλλ᾽ ὡρισμένοις καιροῖς καὶ ὥραις. 
Tov τε καὶ διὰ τίνων ἐπιτελεῖσθαι θέλει, 
αὐτὸς ὥρισεν τῇ ὑπερτάτῃ αὐτοῦ βουλή- 
ce iv ὁσίως πάντα γινόμενα ἐν evda- 


CHAP. II. 


SECT. IX. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


88 ‘ Oblations, and ‘ offering gifts’ used by St.Clem. Rom. ; 


both where and by whom they are to be performed, that 
so all things being done without fault, to all well-pleasing, 
they may be acceptable to His will. They therefore who 
make their offerings (οὗ ποιοῦντες τὰς προσφορὰς αὐτῶν) at 
the appointed seasons, they are blessed and accepted, for 
being obedient to the orders of the Lord, they offend not.” 
The same order is to be observed by those who minister 
unto Him in Divine service". “For the chief priest hath 
proper offices assigned to him, and to the priests is their 
proper station appointed, and to the Levites belong their 
proper ministrations, and the layman is confined within the 
bounds of what is commanded to laymen.” So chapter 44. 
saith he* ; “We cannot think that those may be justly thrown 
out of their ministry who were either appointed by the Apo- 
stles, or afterwards by emiment men, with the testimony and 
approbation of the whole Church, and have with all humility 
and innocency ministered to the flock of Christ in peace and 
without self-interest, and for a long time have been approved 
by all: such, we think, cannot be justly thrown out of their 
ministry. For it would be an heinous sin in us if we should 
cast out those from their episcopal charge, τοὺς ἀμέμπτως 
Kal ὁσίως προσενέγκοντας Ta O@pa’, who without blame or 


κήσει, εὐπρόσδεκτα εἴη τῷ θελήματι 
αὐτοῦ" οἱ οὖν τοῖς προστεταγμένοις και- 
ροῖς ποιοῦντες τὰς προσφορὰς αὐτῶν, 
εὐπρόσδεκτοί τε καὶ μακάριοι" τοῖς yap 
νομίμοις τοῦ δεσπότου ἀκολοθοῦντες οὐ 
διαμαρτάνουσιν.---ὃι Clem. R., Epist. 
ic. 40. Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 170.] 

υ [τῷ γὰρ ἀρχιερεῖ ἱδίαι λειτουργίαι 
δεδομέναι εἰσὶ, καὶ τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν ἵδιος ὃ 
τόπος προστέτακται, καὶ λευίτας ἱδίαι 
διακονίαι ἐπίκεινται" 6 λαικὺὸς ἄνθρωπος 
τοῖς λαικοῖς προστάγμασιν δέδεται.---- 
Ibid. ] 

* [τοῦς οὖν κατασταθέντας ὑπ᾽ ἐκεί- 
νων, ἢ μεταξὺ ὑφ᾽ ἑτέρων ἐλλογίμων 
ἀνδρῶν, συνευδοκησάσης τῆς ἐκκλησίας 
πάσης, καὶ λειτουργήσαντας ἀμέμπτως 
τῷ ποιμνίῳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ ταπεινο- 
φροσύνης, ἡσύχως καὶ ἀβαναύσως, με- 
μαρτυρημένους τε πολλοῖς χρόνοις ὑπὸ 
πάντων, τούτους οὐ δικαίως νομίζομεν 
ἀποβαλέσθαι τῆς λειτουργίας" ἁμαρτία 
γὰρ οὐ μικρὰ ἡμῖν ἔσται, ἐὰν τοὺς ἀμέμπ- 
τως καὶ dolws προσενέγκοντας τὰ δῶρα 
ἐς ἐπισκοπῆς amroBdAwuev.—lIbid., c. 

p- 173.] 

᾿ ἴδω Cotelerius’ note on the place. 

[Sacerdotes dona seu munera Deo offe- 


runt, preces fidelium, sacrificia incru- 
enta, sanctam Eucharistiam.—Tertull. 
cont. Marc., iv. 9. (Op., p. ee - Sic 
apud Maximum ad cap. . Coelestis 
Hierarchiz, ‘ Sacerdotum ee τὸ δῶρον 
προσκομίζειν.᾽---(8.. Dion. Areop. Op., 
tom, ii. p. 13, A.) Vide hic in Const. 
Apost. ii. 59. (Cone., tom. i. p. 301, 
A.) viii. 5. 12, 18. (ibid., pp. 461, Ὁ. 
481, A. 484, B.) et in Ignatio ad 
Smyrn. ec. 7. (Patr. Apost., tom. ii. 
p. 86.) Origenes, Hom. xiii. in Exo- 
dum, (Op., tom. ii. p. 176, F.) ‘Cum 
suscipitis corpus Domini cum omni 
cautela et veneratione, servatis, ne ex 
eo parum quid decidat, ne consecrati 
muneris aliquid dilabatur.’— Dionysius 
de Eccl. Hierarch., iii. 3. τὰς δωρεὰς 
τῶν θεουργιῶν.---(Ο., tom. i. p. 188, B.) 
Greg. Nyssen. sub finem Orationis xi. 
contra Eunomium, τὴν μυστικὴν Swpo- 
φορίαν, &e.—(Op., tom. ii. p. 704, A.) ] 
Bishop Fell on cap. 40. “ Hine szpius 
in hae epistola τῆς προσφορᾶς mentio ; 
ubi etiam episcopi describuntur hoe 
charactere et elogio, quod sint προσε- 
νέγκοντες τὰ S@pa.’—S. Clem. R. Epist. 
Annott, in p. 92. Oxon. 1669. The 


89 


default offer up the holy gifts.’ We find the like passage in 
the Apostolical Constitutions’, in the prayer of consecration 
of a bishop: δὸς... ἐπὶ τὸν δοῦλόν σου τόνδε, K.T.Xr., “ give 
unto this Thy servant chosen by Thee to be a bishop to feed 
Thy holy flock, and to do the part of an high-priest in mi- 
nistering night and day to Thee, (ἀμέμπτως,) without blame ; 
and making atonement in Thy presence .... καὶ προσφέ- 
pew σοι τὰ δώρα τῆς ἁγίας σου ἐκκλησίας, and to offer up 
unto Thee [the] gifts (or oblations) of Thy holy Church ;” 
and St. Cyprian hath the same phrase in the next marginal 
note, which I desire the reader to observe. In translating 
τὰ δῶρα, I have added the word ‘holy,’ because the bread 
and wine in the Eucharist were called not only édépa*, but 
ἅγια δῶρα by the ancients; and I must also observe, that as [Heb. 7. 8.] 
the Apostle describes the priests under the law by one of 

their properties, which was to take tithes, so St. Clement 

here, whose name the Apostle tells us was written in the [pnil.4.3.] 
book of life, calls the presbyters of Corinth ‘ offerers of the 

gifts’ in the holy Eucharist, because it was part of their 

proper office, and the most solemn part of it”, to offer them 

up to God, as is evident from the authorities cited in the 


as in the Apostolical Constitutions and St. Cyprian. 


CHAP. I. 
SECT, IX. 


note is also given in Cotelerius’ Patr. 
Apost., tom. i. p. 170.] 

z Lib. viii. cap. v. [δὸς ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί 
σου, καρδιογνώστα Θεὲ, ἐπὶ τὸν δοῦλόν 
σου τόνδε, ὃν ἐξελέξω εἰς ἐπίσκοπον, 
ποιμαίνειν τὴν ἁγίαν σου ποίμνην, καὶ 
ἀρχιερατεύειν σοι, ἀμέμπτως λειτουρ- 
γοῦντα νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας" καὶ ἐξιλα- 
σκόμενόν σου τὸ πρόσωπον, ἐπισυναγα- 
γεῖν τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν σωζομένων, καὶ 
προσφέρειν σοι τὰ δῶρα τῆς ἁγίας σου 
exkAnolas.—Apud Concil., tom. i. p. 
462, D.] 

Ὁ Tsaac Casaubon, Exercitationes Se- 
decim ad Annales Baronii Exercit. xvi. 
sect. li. [p. 507. Genev. 1655.] In 
Liturgiis antiquis, et apud patres τὰ 
δῶρα, vel τὰ ἅγια δῶρα appellantur ob- 
lationes panis, et vini ad sacram com- 
munionem in Ecclesia veteri solite 
offerri. ... Propterea in Greecorum 
Mmonumentis τὰ ἅγια δῶρα, vel τὰ mpo- 
κείμενα δῶρα, aut simpliciter τὰ δῶρα 
vel τὰ ἅγια pro ipso Christi corpore 
mystico accipiuntur; vel propter jam 
factam consecrationem, vel propter fu- 
turam, &c. 

> S. Cyprian Epist. [iv. (v.ed. Oxon. ) 


ad Presbyteros et Diaconos, p. 9. ed. 
Ben. | ita ut presbyteri, qui illic apud 
confessores offerunt &ec. Epist. [lxviii. 
(Ixvii. ed.Oxon.) ad Clerum et Plebem 
in Hispania, p. 118, ed. Ben.] Quee 
ante oculos habentes, et sollicite ac re- 
ligiose considerantes, in ordinationibus 
sacerdotum non nisi immaculatos et 
integros antistites eligere debemus, 
qui sancte, et digne sacrificia Deo offe- 
rentes, audiri in precibus possint, quas 
faciunt pro plebis dominicz incolumi- 
tate. 

In Homilia Pontificis consecrantis 
in ordinatione Episcopi apud Haber. 
tum, p. 867. εἶτα τὰς χεῖρας [ἀνατεί- 
νεις τῷ Θεῷ ; εἶτα δῶρα προσάξεις ; εἶτα 
ὑπερεύξῃ τοῦ λαοῦ ;) “ Then shall you 
hold up your hands unto God? after 
that shall you offer the gifts? and then 
pray for the people?’’ [This homily is 
a part of that of St. Gregory Nazian- 
zen, in consecratione Eulalii, Orat. xii. 
(ali xxx.) Op., tom. i. p. 254,,C2 The 
words just given, with those preceding 
them, are quoted in the Prefatory Dis- 
course, vol. i. p. 89, note u. ] 


CHRISTIAN Margin. 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


90 ‘Offering gifts’ used by St. Paul of the Levitical priesthood, 


I must also observe, that the phrase προσφέρειν 
Ta δῶρα, ‘to offer up gifts,’ is a sacrificial expression used by 
St. Paul of the Levitical priesthood, Heb. viii. 3, 4; “ For 
every high-priest is ordained, εἰς τὸ προσφέρειν δῶρά τε Kal 
θυσίας, to offer gifts and sacrifices. For if He were on 
earth He should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests, 
ὄντων TOV ἱερέων προσφερόντων κατὰ τὸν νόμον τὰ δώρα;, 
that offer gifts according to the law.” See also Heb. x. 11, 
12; ix. 9; x1. 4. And therefore since St. Clement not only 
calls the holy Eucharist ‘an offering,’ but the ministers of it 
‘offerers of the holy gifts,’ which is a proper sacrificial phrase, 
it must needs follow that the Lord’s table hath its proper 
sacrifice or oblation, of which the faithful Christians are par- 
takers; and that they who are appointed to minister at it, 
the bishops and presbyters, are proper sacrificing priests. 
Sir, I am discharged from proceeding any farther here by 
the labours of the learned Mede‘, in his Christian Sacrifice4, 
where, after explaining and defining the nature of the Chris- 
tian sacrifice*, he first shews, “that the holy Eucharist is an 
oblation’:” secondly, “that it is an oblation of thanksgiving 
and prayer’:”’ thirdly, “that it is an oblation through Jesus 
Christ, commemorated in the creatures of bread and wine?;” 
fourthly, “that the commemoration of Christ, according to 
the style of the ancient Church, is also a sacrifice‘:” fifthly, 


© See also Bishop Beveridge’s Codex 
Canon. Eccles. Prim., lib. 11. cap. 10. 
in his excellent notes, sect. 3, 4. [pp. 
206—298. Beveridge is engaged in 
meeting an objection to the antiquity 
of the Apostolical canons, grounded on 
their use of the words θυσιαστήριον for 
the Lord’s table, and θυσία and προσ- 
φορὰ for the holy Eucharist. He 
says, Hee et hujusmodi nomina de 
istis rebus usitata in antiquissimis 
Ecclesiz monumentis passim inveni- 
mus; and after quoting Cyprian, Tertul- 
lian, and Ignatius, adds; Constat itaque 
mysticam mensam ab istis A postolorum 
temporibus vocatam fuisse θυσιαστή- 
ριον, non autem βωμόν. He then ex- 
plains how the primitive Christians 
came to say they had no βωμοὶ, or ‘ are.’ 
Again; Hee ipsa sacra actio sive Eu- 
charistize celebratio θυσία et προσφορὰ, 


‘sacrificium’ et ‘oblatio’ sepeappellatur. _ 


He instances Tertullian and Irenzus, 
and proceeds; Sacra Eucharistia est con- 


vivium quoddam federale (qualia etiam 
antiqua fuerunt sacrificia) inter Deum 
et homines. Homines enim primo offe- 
runt panem et vinum Deo, quas crea- 
turas sibi oblatas et in symbola magni 
perChristum sacrificii consecratas, Deus 
iterum hominibus impertit ; quo pacto 
ipsi per fidem de magno Christi sacri- 
ficio revera participant. Ac proinde 
magnum hoe mysterium nullo alio 
vocabulo aptius pleniusve exprimi 
potest, quam istis θυσία, προσφορὰ, 
‘sacrificium,’ ‘ oblatio,’ et similibus. 
He adds instances of the usage from 
Justin Martyr and St. Clement of 
Rome. | 

4 [The Christian Sacrifice, a dis- 
course on Mal. i. 11, published after 
Mede’s death ; in 1648. ] 

e [c. 2. Works, p. 356; c. ὃ. p. 857. ] 

f [Ibid., c. 4. p. 360. ] 

s [Ibid, c. 5. p. 362.] 

h [Ibid., c. 6. p. 365. | 

i [Ibid., c. 7. p. 369. ] 


Mede, Grabe, and Bp. Bull on the Christian Sacrifice. 91 


“that the body and blood of Christ in this mystical service 
was made of bread and wine, which had been first offered 
to God to acknowledge* Him the Lord of the creature! :” 
sixthly, “‘that this sacrifice was placed in commemoration 
only of Christ’s sacrifice upon the cross, and not in a real 
offering of His body and blood anew™.” ‘To him, Sir, and 
to Dr. Grabe, in his learned Annotations on the thirty-third 
and thirty-fourth chapters of the fourth book of Irenzeus", at 
present I refer your late writer for proof that the holy Eu- 
charist is a real sacrifice, as our ancestors called 105, and by 
consequence, that bishops and presbyters are proper sacrific- 
ing priests. Nay, for his present satisfaction, before I pro- 
ceed to farther authorities, I refer him to the learned Bishop 
Bull, in his answer to the bishop of Meaux, from p. 246 to 
p- 252”; and to the authority of our first Reformers in the 


k [ Hickes has substituted ‘ acknow- 
ledge’ for ‘agnize,’ the word used by 
Mede. } 

ilbids, ὅν 8: Ὁ. 372.) 

m { Mede’s words are, “ That Christ 
is offered in the Eucharist commemo- 
ratively only, and not otherwise... In 
this sacrifice [Christ is] no otherwise 
offered than by way of commemoration 
only of His sacrifice once offered upon 
the cross . .. not hypostatically... (for 
so He was but once offered), but com- 
memoratively only.’”’-—Ibid., c. 9. p. 
376. | 

n [The notes referred to are on the 
words, per Jesum Christum offert Ec- 
clesia, &c. (ec. 17. § 6. p. 249. ed. Ben.) 
and, Igitur Ecclesiz oblatio, &c. (c. 
18: δ ole 250, ed. Ben.) quoted 
p. 46; parts of these notes are quoted 
p- 57, note r, 72, note y. Grabe here 
brings together numerous passages from 
the fathers, expressing the doctrine. 
He explains ‘ purum sacrificium’ (Mal, 
i, 11) after Mede; respectu Christi, 
cujus immaculatum corpus et mundis- 
simus sanguis mystice in sacro altari 
representantur; andinterpreting Matt. 
v. 23, 24. of the Eucharist, he says, 
altare et sacrificium Ecclesie jamjam 
instituendum precipue respexisse vi- 
detur; and Heb. xiii. 10, In Ecclesia 
erat θυσία sacrificium, non solum ra- 
tionale laudis et precum, sed et mate- 
riale panis et vini, quod verbo ‘edendi’ 
clare significat Apostolus. On the 
words, ‘ sacrificia in populo, sacrificia et 
in Ecclesia,’ quoted p.80. notei, he says, 


(Feuardentius) bene observat Irenzeum 
hoe loco non loqui de sacrificiis spiri- 
tualibus cordis contriti, orationis, lau- 
dis, gratiarum actione, et beneficentiz, 
quz omni etate et legi communia 
fuerunt; sed de nova Novi Testamenti 
eaque externa oblatione, quam legalibus 
externis opponit Irenzeus. | 

© The word by which our Saxon 
ancestors called the holy Eucharist, in 
conformity to the doctrine of the Catho- 
lic Church, was hurel, or huyl, ‘ husel,’ 
which came from the ancient Gothic, 
or rather old German word Sungef or 
Hungl, which signifies ‘a sacrifice,’ by 
leaving out n, as in the Saxon words 
mud, ‘mouth,’ cud, ‘known,’ and 
ἰδ, ‘tooth, from the old Teutonic 
munths, funths, tunths, or tunthus. [So 
Lye, Dictionar. Saxonicum et Go- 
thico- Latinum, ed. 2, 1772.] See the 
eighth page of the preface to my 
Saxon Grammar, in the first of the 
two books entituled, Antique Litera- 
ture Septentrionalis Libri duo, &c. 
[Oxon. 1705; that is, his Linguarum 
Veterum Septentrionalium Thesau- 
rus; where there is a discussion on the 
language of Ulphila’s Gospels, (see 
above, note g, p. 18), which Hickes 
maintains to be the old German lan- 
guage. N.B. The pages of the preface 
are not numbered. } 

P [ The work referred to is “ The Cor- 
ruptions of the Church of Rome, in 
relation to Ecclesiastical Government, 
and the Rule of Faith and Form of 
Divine Worship; in answer to the 


CHAP, II, 


SECT. IX. 


92 Testimonies of our first Reformers and the Scottish Liturgy. 


curist1an liturgy printed in the second year of King Edward VI.4, 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


which is in Sion College Library ; or what is to this purpose 
in Hammond I|’Estrange’s Alliance of Divine Offices", where, 
not to mention the Scottish Liturgy’, he will find that our 
Reformers called the Lord’s table “the altar‘,” and the holy 
Eucharist “a sacrifice,” as well as the minister a “priest.” Sir, 
I hope your late writer will admit the composers of the litur- 
gies above mentioned, as well as the other writers I have 
cited, to be a part of the Protestant communion; and there- 
fore he spoke too liberally, when he said that ‘the whole 
Protestant communion deny” bishops to be proper priests¥, 
and that he was mistaken when he said that he “ spoke in the 
language of the Church” in denying them to be priests in the 
proper sense. I may also add, that this text in 1 Cor. x. 20, 
21, may also allude to the custom the Gentiles had of sacri- 
ficing to their gods of hospitality at their own feasts upon 
their own tables, as may be seen in Virgil’s description of 
Queen Dido’s entertainment of Aineas and his Trojans, Ain. 
lib. i. 700—736. 


Dixit, et in mensam laticum libavit honorem. 


By such offerings they used their tables as altars, and 


Bishop of Meaux’s (Bossuet’s) que- 
ries,’ (sent to Mr. Nelson on the pub- 
lication of Bull’s Judicium Ecclesiz 
Catholicz.)London,1705. See Nelson’s 
Life of Bull, p. 829, ὅς. Bull’s words 
are; “It is true the Eucharist is fre- 
quently called by the ancient fathers 
προσφορὰ, θυσία, ‘an oblation,’ “ ἃ sa- 
crifice.’ But it is to be remembered 
that they say also it is θυσία λογικὴ καὶ 
ἀναίμακτος, ‘a reasonable sacrifice,’ ‘a 
sacrifice without blood.’’”’ (See Const. 
Apost., vi. 23. Conc., tom.i. p. 404, A.) 
.... “They held the Eucharist to be a 
commemorative sacrifice, and so do we. 
This is the constant language of the 
ancient Liturgies. ‘ We offer by way 
of commemoration,’ (μεμνημένοι προσ-- 
φέρομεν), according to our Saviour’s 
words, when He ordained this holy 
rite, ‘Do this in commemoration of 
Me.’ In the Eucharist then, Christ 
is offered, . . . . but commemoratively 
only: and this commemoration is made 
to God the Father, and is not a bare 
remembering, or putting ourselves in 
mind of Him. For every sacrifice is 
directed to God, and the. oblation 


therein made, whatsoever it be, hath 
Him for its object, and not man. In 
the holy Eucharist therefore, we set 
before God the bread and wine, as 
‘figures or images of the precious blood 
of Christ shed for us, and of His pre- 
cious body,’ [τοῦ τιμίου αἵματος Ἰησοῦ 
Χριστοῦ τοῦ ἐκχυθέντος ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, καὶ 
τοῦ τιμίου σώματος τὰ ἀντίτυπα], (they 
are the very words of the Clementine 
Liturgy, [Const. Apost., vii. 26. p. 
428, D]) and plead to God the merit 
of His Son’s sacrifice once offered on 
the cross for us sinners, and in this 
sacrament represented, beseeching Him 
for the sake thereof to bestow His 
heavenly blessings on us.’’—Bull’s 
Works, vol. ii. pp. 251, 252. Oxford, 
1827.] 

4 [Appendix, No. i. See note f, 
Ρ. ὃ. 

τ [Chapter 5. p. 155, Oxford, 1840.1 

s [ Appendix, No. ii, See above, 

3 


t [See Prefatory Discourse, vol. i. pp. 
126, sqq. | 
u [See above, p. 2. } 


Argument from the allusions in Rom, χν. 15, 10. 93 


made them the tables of devils, and it was as unlawful for 


CHAP, II. 

Christians to go to such feasts, when invited to them, as to *°"™ 
the sacrificial feasts in their delubra or εἰδωλεῖα, upon moun- 
tains, in groves, or in temples*, where I have shewed they 
had consecrated tables to eat their idolatrous offerings upon. 

X. From this I proceed to another place of the New Tes- «που. x. 


tament, to shew that it is a sacrifice, viz., Rom. xv. 15, 16%; From the — 


: or : ae ; Minne 
where, alluding to the ministration of the Christian sacrifice, st", 


in which at the oblation of the bread and wine the priest’, Christian 
alluded to 
Rom. xv. 


* Macrob. Saturn., lib. iii. cap. 11. 
[See above, note a, p. 72. ] 

Y Dy. Grabe in his notes on Justin 
Martyr, p. 127. [Grabe is commenting 
on the prayers mentioned by Justin 
M.,Apol. i. ο. 67. ed. Ben. He says that a 
prayer for the descent of the Holy Spi- 
rit to sanctify the elements was uni- 
versal in the most ancient Liturgies; 
and is reckoned by St. Basil (de Spi- 
ritu Sancto, c. 27, quoted in the note 
following) among the unwritten apo- 
stolic traditions. Tune vero ad hee 
ipsa Apostolus allusisse omnino mihi 
videtur, quando Rom. xv. 16, trans- 
latis ad sacrificium improprie dictum 
verbis Liturgicis scribit; εἰς τὸ εἶναί με, 
Kk. T.A. | 

2 S. Basil. de Spiritu S., cap. 27. 
**Some of the ordinances and institu- 
tions observed in the Church we have 
taught us in express words of Scrip- 
ture, and some we have received as 
delivered in secret by tradition from 


‘the Apostles: both which are of like 


~ use unto godliness ; nor doth any man 


speak against these, who is the least 
conversant in ecclesiastical constitu- 
tions. For if we attempt to lay aside 
the unwritten customs and usages of 
the Church, as not being of great mo- 
ment, we do not know what harm we 
shall all do the Gospel by our impru- 
dence: inall probability we shall there- 
by reduce the preaching of it to an 
empty name. Of this sort of unwritten 
usages (that I may instance first in the 
chief and most common of them) let 
me ask, who taught us in writing to 
sign those with the sign of the cross 
who believe in the name of Christ our 
Lord? What Scripture hath taught 
us, when we pray, to turn towards the 
east? Or which of the holy penmen 
left us in writing the words of invoca- 
tion in the consecration of the Eucha- 
ristical bread and cup of blessing?” 
[τῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησία πεΦφυλαγωένων 


δογμάτων καὶ κηρυγμάτων, τὰ μὲν ἐκ 
τῆς ἐγγράφου διδασκαλίας ἔχομεν, τὰ 
δ᾽ ἔκ τε τῶν ἀποστόλων παραδόσεως 
διαδοθέντα ἡμῖν ἐν μυστηρίῳ παρεδεξά- 
μεθα: ἅπερ ἀμφότερα τὴν αὐτὴν ἰσχῦν 
ἔχει πρὸς τὴν εὐσέβειαν. καὶ τούτοις 
οὐδεὶς ἀντερεῖ, οὐκοῦν ὅς τίς γε κατὰ 
μικρὸν γοῦν θεσμῶν ἐκκλησιαστικῶν πε- 
πείραται. εἰ γὰρ ἐπιχειρήσαιμεν τὰ 
ἄγραφα τῶν ἐθῶν ὡς μὴ μεγάλην ἔχοντα 
τὴν δύναμιν παραιτεῖσθαι, λάθοιμεν ἂν 
εἰς αὐτὸ τὰ καίρια ζημιοῦντες τὸ εὐαγ- 
γέλιον᾽ μᾶλλον δὲ εἰς ὄνομα ψιλὸν περιΐ- 
στῶντες τὸ κήρυγμα. οἷον (ἵνα τοῦ 
πρώτου καὶ κοινοτάτου πρῶτον μνησθῶ) 
τῷ τύπῳ τοῦ σταυροῦ τοὺς εἰς τὸ ὄνομα 
τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἢλπι- 
κότας κατασημαίνεσθαι, τίς ὃ διὰ γράμ- 
ματος διδάξας; τὸ πρὸς ἀνατολὰς τε- 
τράφθαι κατὰ τὴν προσευχὴν, ποῖον ἐδί- 
δαξεν ἡμᾶς γράμμα; τὰ T ἐπικλήσεως 
ῥήματα ἐπὶ τῇ ἀναδείξει τοῦ ἄρτου τῆς 
εὐχαριστίας καὶ τοῦ ποτηρίου τῆς εὐλο- 
γίας, τίς τῶν ἁγίων ἐγγράφως ἡμῖν κα- 
ταλέλοιπεν.---ὃ. Basil. Op., tom. iii. 
pp. 54, Ὁ, E. 55, A.] So St. Chry- 
sost., lib. vi. de Sacerdotio. ‘‘ It behoves 
the priest to excel those for whom he 
makes intercession, in all things, as 
much as a governor should excel those 
who are subject to him. And tell me, 
I beseech you, in what rank shall we 
place him, and what degree of purity 
and piety we may expect from him, 
whose office it is to invocate the Holy 
Ghost, and offer up the tremendous 
sacrifice, and frequently to take in his 
hands the common Lord of all? What 
kind of hands ought those to be, which 
administer such things, and what tongue 
ought that to be, which utters such 
words? And whose soul ought to be 
more pure, and holy, than his, who 
receives so great a Spirit? At that time 
the angels stand round about the priest, 
and the whole order of the heavenly 
powers make their acclamations, and 
the place about the altar is filled with 


10. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


94 The Eucharist commonly called ‘the offering of the Gentiles; 


as I shall shew, prayed unto God to send down His Holy 
Spirit upon them, he said, ver. 15, 16, “‘ Nevertheless, bre- 
thren, I have written the more boldly to you in some sort, 
as putting you in mind of the grace that is given to me of 
God, that I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the 
Gentiles, ministering the Gospel of God, that the offering 
up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by 
the Holy Ghost.” The words in the original for “the offer- 
ing up of the Gentiles” are προσφορὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν, “ the offer- 
ing of the Gentiles,” as the Eucharist is called by Justin Mar- 
tyr in his Dialogue with Trypho, in these words, p. 260°; περὶ 
δὲ τῶν ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ bp ἡμῶν τῶν ἐθνῶν προσφερομένων 
αὐτῷ θυσιῶν, τουτέστι τοῦ ἄρτου τῆς εὐχαριστίας καὶ τοῦ 
ποτηρίου ὁμοίως τῆς εὐχαριστίας", κι τι. ‘But as to the sacri- 


a choir of angels ἴῃ honour of Him who 
lies thereupon.” [δεῖ δὲ πάντων αὐτὸν 
ὑπὲρ ὧν δεῖται, τοσοῦτο διαφέρειν ἐν 
ἅπασιν, ὅσον τὸν προεστῶτα τῶν προ- 
στατευομένων εἰκός. Or ἂν δὲ καὶ τὸ 
Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καλῇ, καὶ τὴν φρικω- 
δεστάτην ἐπιτελῇ θυσίαν, καὶ τοῦ κοινοῦ 
πάντων συνεχῶς ἐφάπτηται δεσπότου, 
ποῦ τάξομεν αὐτὸν, εἰπέ μοι; πόσην δὲ 
αὐτὸν ἀπαιτήσομεν καθαρότητα καὶ πό- 
ony εὐλάβειαν; ἐννόησον γὰρ, ὁποίας 
τὰς ταῦτα διακονουμένας χεῖρας εἶναι 
χρὴ, ὁποίαν τὴν γλῶτταν τὴν ἐκεῖνα 
προχέουσαν τὰ ῥήματα, τίνος δὲ οὐ καθα- 
ρωτέραν καὶ ἁγιωτέραν τὴν τοσοῦτο 
πνεῦμα ὑποδεξαμένην ψυχήν; τότε καὶ 
ἄγγελοι παρεστήκασι τῷ ἱερεῖ, καὶ οὐ- 
ρανίων δυνάμεων ἅπαν τάγμα Boa καὶ ὃ 
περὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον πληροῦται τόπος“, 
εἰς τιμὴν τοῦ κειμένου. ----ὃ., Chrysost. 
Op., tom. i. p. 424, Β. C.] So in his 
third book of the Priesthood: “ Pass 
then from the Jewish sacrifices to ours, 
and you shall see them not only won- 
derful, but surpassing all admiration ; 
for here is the priest, who doth not 
bring down fire, but the Holy Spirit 
from heaven, making earnest supplica- 
tion, not that a flame should fall down 
from heaven, and consume the offering, 
but that the Spirit (ἡ xdpis) may de- 
scend upon the sacrifice, and by it in- 
flame the souls of all (who partake 
thereof) and make them purer than 
silver refined in the fire. And there- 
fore who but a very madman, and out 
of his wits, can despise this most tre- 
mendous mystery.” [mer dn τοίνυν 
ἐκεῖθεν ἐπὶ τὰ νῦν τελούμενα, καὶ οὐ 
θαυμαστὰ ὄψει μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ πᾶσαν 
ἔκπληξιν ὑπερβαίνοντα. ἕστηκε γὰρ ὃ 


ἱερεὺς, οὐ πῦρ καταφέρων, ἀλλὰ τὸ Πνεῦ- 
μα τὺ 6 ἅγιον" καὶ τὴν ἱ ἱκετηρίαν ἐπὶ πολὺ 
ποιεῖται, οὐχ ἵνα τις λαμπὰς ἄνωθεν 
ἀφθεῖσα καταναλώσῃ τὰ προκείμενα, 
ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα ἣ χάρις ἐπιπεσοῦσα τῇ θυσίᾳ, 
δι᾽ ἐκείνης τὰς ἁπάντων ἀνάψῃ ψυχὰς, 
καὶ ἀργυρίου λαμπροτέρας ἀποδείξῃ πε- 
πυρωμένου. ταύτης οὖν τῆς φρικωδε- 
στάτης τελετῆς, τίς μὴ σφόδρα μαινό- 
μενος μηδὲ ἐξεστηκὼς, ὑπερφρονῆσαι 
δυνήσεται. Id. ibid., p. 383, A.] So 
Isidor. Origines, lib. vi. Sacrificium 
dictum quasi sacrum factum: [quia 
prece mystica consecratur in memoriam 
pro nobis Dominice passionis; unde 
hoc eo jubente corpus Christi, et san- 
guinem dicimus, quod dum sit ex fruc- 
tibus terre, sanctificatur et fit sacra- 
mentum, operante invisibiliter Spiritu 
Dei.—S. Isidori Hispalensis Etymolo- 
giarum, lib. vi. c. 19. ὃ 88, Op., tom. 
111. p. 285.] “ The sacrifice is so called, 
as a sacred fact, because it is conse- 
crated in the memory of our Lord’s 
passion; from whence, by His com- 
mand, we call it the body and blood 
of Christ, because though it is made 
of the fruits of the earth, it is sancti- 
fied and made a sacrament by the invi- 
sible operation of the Spirit of God.” 

8. [The pages in the text are those of 
the Paris edition of St. Justin Martyr, 
1636. | 

9 [The passage continues, προλέγει 
τότε, εἰπὼν καὶ τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ δοξάζειν 

ἡμᾶς, ὑμᾶς δὲ βεβηλοῦν. He had 

quoted the words of Malachi imme- 
diately before the extract in the text. 
—S. Just. M., Dial. cum Tryph., ο. 41. 
Op., p. 188, A.] 


from the prophecy of Malachi, ch, i. 10, 11. 95 


fice offered up by us Gentiles in every place, that is, of the cmar.c. 


Eucharistical bread and cup, the prophet Malachi foretold it — 


Mal. 1. 10, 
So Irenzeus, in the margin’, speaks of the it,’ 


in this place.” 
Eucharist as that sacrifice by which the same prophet fore- 
told God “should be glorified among the Gentiles.” The 
same place of the prophet is cited to the same purpose by 
St. Cyprian against the Jews ; and by his master Tertullian, 
adversus Marcion., lib. iii. cap. 22%; and by Justin Martyr a 
second time, in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, p. 344, 
ἀρχιερατικὸν TO ἀληθινὸν γένος ἐσμὲν, K. τ. Δ.» “We are the 
true royal priesthood of God, as God Himself testifieth, say- 
ing, ‘that we, in every place among the Gentiles, offer up 
unto Him acceptable and pure sacrifices.” So p. 3455, 
«There is no part of mankind, either of the barbarians or 
Greeks, among whom prayers and thanksgivings® are not 
made to the Father and Creator of all things.” By these 
prayers and thanksgivings he means the Eucharist, as is 
evident from the citation in the margin, and the preceding 
words, ταῦτα yap pova'i,x.t. X., “ But these perfect and ac- 
ceptable sacrifices to God the Christians only are taught 
thankfully to make, especially in the remembrance of their 
dry and wet food, wherein also is commemorated the pas- 


sion, which the God of God suffered by Himself *.” 
So Const. Apost., lib. vii. cap. 31; τὴν ἀναστάσιμον τοῦ Κύ- 


« S. Iren. adv. Heeres., lib. iv. cap. 
32.  Manifestissime significans per 
hee [the words of Mal. i. 10, 11.] 
quoniam prior quidem populus ces- 
sabit offerre Deo: omni autem loco 
sacrificium offeretur Deo, et hoc pu- 
rum; nomen autem ejus glorificatur 
in gentibus. [c. 17. § 5. p. 249. ed. 
Ben. | 

4 §. Cypr. Testimoniorum Adversus 
Judzos, lib. 1. c. 16. [Op., p. 280. ed. 
Ben. | 

€ | Tertulliani Op., p. 410, D. j 

2 ἰἀρχιερατικὸν τὸ ἀλήθινον γένος ἐσ- 
μὲν τοῦ Θεοῦ, ws καὶ αὐτὸς 6 Θεὸς μαρ- 
τυρεῖ, εἰπὼν ὁτὶ ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ ἐν τοῖς 
ἔθνεσι θυσίας εὐαρέστας αὐτῷ καὶ καθα- 
pas προσφέροντε-.---ὃ. Just. M., ibid., 
§ 116. p. 209, D.] 

& [οὔδε ἕν yap ὅλως ἐστὶ τὸ γένος 
ἀνθρώπων, εἴτε βαρβάρων, εἴτε Ἑλλή- 
νων, ... ἐν οἷς μὴ διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματος 
τοῦ σταυρωθέντος ᾿Ιησοῦ εὐχαὶ καὶ εὐ- 


χαριστίαι τῷ Πατρὶ καὶ ποιητῇ τῶν 
ὅλων ylvovrat.—ld. ibid., pp. 210, E. 
211. aha 

h ‘These are the words he uses in his 
description of the Eucharist, Apol. i. 
Ιχχχν. of Dr. Grabe’s edition. [6. 67. 
ed. Ben. καὶ ὃ προεστὼς εὐχὰς ὁμοίως 
καὶ εὐχαριστίας, ὅση δύναμις αὐτῷ, ava- 
πέμπει.---Ὁ. 88, 1), E.] 

ῖ [ταῦτα γὰρ aaa καὶ Χριστιανοὶ 
παρέλαβον ποιεῖν, καὶ ἐπ᾽ ἀναμνήσει δὲ 
τῆς. τροφῆς αὐτῶν ξηρᾶς τε καὶ ὑγρᾶς, 
ἐν ἣ καὶ τοῦ πάθους ὃ πέπονθε δι᾽ αὐτοῦ 
6 Θεὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ μέμνηται.----Τἃ. ibid., 
p- 210, Β.} 

ἐν ἧ καὶ τοῦ πάθους ὃ πέπονθε δι 
αὐτοῦ 6 θεὸς τοῦ θεοῦ μέμνηται, in the 
Latin, Led. Paris, 1636, ] ‘in qua et pas- 
sionis quam pertulit per ipsum Deus 
Deum, meminit;’ otherwise; ‘‘in which 
also is ‘commemorated the passion, which 
God suffered by God Himself.” [See 
above, note q, p. 69. | 


SECT. Xe 


906 <The offering up of the Gentiles’ explained ; like that 


CHRISTIAN poy ἡμέραν, K.T. r.,! “ Cease not to meet on the Lord’s day, 


PRIEST- 
HOOD, 





Mal. 1. 11, 
14, 





the day of our Lord’s resurrection, giving thanks to God for 
the benefits which He through Christ hath bestowed upon us, 
ὅπως ἄμεμπτος 7 ἡ θυσία, that your sacrifice may be un- 
blameable, and acceptable to God, who said of His cecu- 
menical Church (dispersed through the world), ‘In every 
place incense shall be offered up to Me, and a pure offering : 
for I am a great King, saith the Lord Almighty, and My 
name shall be great among the Gentiles.’” Now if according 
to this primitive notion of the Eucharist’s being the sacrifice 
of the Gentiles in all places, προσφορὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν signified 
their offering or sacrifice, not as offered, but as offerers, this 
text would be a direct and express proof. But although the 
ancients always spoke of the Eucharist as the sacrifice, or 
oblation of the Gentiles, in opposition to those of the Jews, 
when they argued against them from the prophecy of Malachi, 
yet because they understood the words of the Apostle for ‘ the 
offering up of the Gentiles,’ I think we ought to take them in 
that sense. But then I think that in mentioning that offer- 
ing of his as being sanctified by the Holy Ghost, he plainly 
alludes to the ministration of the Christian sacrifice, in which 
they solemnly prayed unto God “to send down His Holy 
Spirit upon the oblations ;’ without whom being specially 
present St. Cyprian thought the bread and wine could not be 
sanctified into the body and blood of Christ™. ‘This solemn 
prayer to the Holy Spirit may be seen in the ancient form of 
ministering the holy Sacrament hereafter set down", as we 
find it in the Apostolical Constitutions, as well as in the cita- 
tions of the margin®, to which I shall add these that follow ; 
St. Chrysostom in his panegyrical Homily on Lucian the 
Martyr, speaks of the communion-table as full of the Holy 


1 [τὴν ἀναστάσιμον τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμέ- 
ραν, τὴν κυριακήν φαμεν, συνέρχεσθε 
ἀδιαλείπτως εὐχαριστοῦντες τῷ Θεῷ καὶ 
ἐξομολογούμενοι ἐφ᾽ οἷς εὐεργέτησεν ὑμᾶς 
6 Θεὸς διὰ Χριστοῦ ῥυσάμενος ἀγνοίας, 
πλάνης, δεσμῶν, ὕπως ἄμεμπτος ἢ ἡἣ 
θυσία ὑμῶν καὶ εὐανάφορος Θεῷ, τῷ 
εἰπόντι περὶ τῆς οἰκουμενικῆς αὐτοῦ ἐκ- 
κλησίας, ὅτι ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ μοι προσε- 
νεχθήσεται θυμίαμα καὶ θυσία καθαρά" 
bri βασιλεὺς μέγας ἐγώ εἰμι, λέγει κύ- 


ριος παντοκράτωρ, καὶ τὸ ὄνομά μου 
θαυμαστὺν ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσι.----(οηϑί. Αροϑί., 
lib. vii. c. 31. Concil., tom. i. p. 431, 
Β,6. 

m Epist. Ιχν. ad Epictetum. Quando 
nec oblatio sanctificari illic potest ubi 
Spiritus Sanctus non sit.—[S. Cypr., 
Epist. lxiv. p. 112. ed. Ben. ] 

" [See below, pp. 123, sqq.] 

© [See below, pp. 123, sqq. notes ἢ, 
&c. | 


in the Eucharist, ‘ sanctified by the Holy Ghost. 97 


Ghost’; St. Cyprian calls it, spiritalem mensam%; and Gre- 
gory τ κα ξοης and Chrysostom’, τράπεζαν ΤΣ Ν 
“the table of the Holy Spirit.” In the ancient Liturgies 
nothing is more common than the prayers of the priest to 
God, to send down His Holy Spirit upon himself, and the 
communicants, and the oblations. So in the Liturgy of 
St. Chrysostom, of Goar’s edition, p.72', cal ἱκάνωσον, k.T.X., 
“ And make me fit, by the power of the Holy Ghost, . to 
officiate at this holy table, and consecrate Thy holy and im- 
maculate body, and Thy precious blood.” And p. 77%, ἐτὲ 
προσφέρομεν, κ. τ. r., “ We also offer up unto Thee this rea- 
sonable and unbloody sacrifice [service ἢ], and pray, and be- 
seech, and supplicate Thee to send Thy Holy Spirit upon us, 
and upon these gifts.” Soin the Liturgy of St. Basil, p. 162*; 
σὺ ἱκάνωσον, κ. τ. r., “Thou, O Lord, by the power of the 
Holy Ghost make me fit for this ministration.” So p. 1639, 
“Strengthen me with the power of 
So p. 164%, σὺ εἶ ὁ 


σὺ ἐνίσχυσον, ΚΟ: δ... 
Thy Holy Spirit in this ministration.” 
θέμενος: x. T.r., “Thou art He, who hast placed us in this 
ministration by the power of Thy Holy Spirit.” So p. 1693, 
δεόμεθα, κ. τ. λ., “ We who minister at Thy altar, pray, and 
beseech Thee, that Thy Holy Spirit may come upon us, and 
upon these gifts which lie before Thee, to bless and sanctify 


Ρ ἱτραπέξης ἐμνήσθη é ἑτέρας, THs φρικώ- 
δους καὶ πνεύματος γεμούση».---5. Chry- 
sost. Hom. in S. Lucian. M. § 2. 
Op., tom. ii. p. 527, D. quoted above, 
p- 81, note m. } 

4 [The editor has not found this ex- 
pression in St. Cyprian. | 

τ (St. Gregory is applying the words 
of Ps. xxiii. 5. to Christians; he says, 
ἔχω καὶ τράπεζαν, τὴν πνευματικὴν ταύ- 
τὴν καὶ ἔνθεον, ἣν ἡτοίμασέ μοι Κύριος, 
κ΄ τ. A.—Orat. ν. ὃ 35. Op., tom. i. p. 
71. .] 

8 [werd παρρησίας τῇ φρικτῇ καὶ 
πνευματικῇ τραπέζῃ προσελθεῖν. --- ὃ. 
Chrysost. Hom. i. in Gen. Op., tom. 
iv. p. 7, A.] 

τ [καὶ ἱκάνωσόν με τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ 
ἁγίου σου πνεύματος gc παραστῆναι 
τῇ ἁγίᾳ σου ταύτῃ τραπέζα, καὶ i ἱερουρ- 
γῆσαι τὸ ὃ ἅγιον καὶ ἄχραντόν σου σῶμα, 
καὶ τὸ τίμιον afua.—Missa S. Joan. 
Chrys. Goar, Eucholog., p: 72.) 

u [ἐτὶ προσφέρομέν σοι τὴν λογικὴν 
ταύτην καὶ ἀναίμακτον λατρείαν, καὶ 

HICKES, 


παρακαλοῦμεν, καὶ δεόμεθα, καὶ ἱκετεύ- 
ομεν, κατάπεμψον τὸ πνεῦμά σου τὸ 
ἅγιον ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς, καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα 
δῶρα ταῦτα.---ΤΌ1ά., p. 77.] 

x [σὺ ἱκάνωσον ἡμᾶς τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ 
ἁγίου πνεύματος εἰς τὴν διακονίαν ταύ- 
thv.—Miss. S. Basilii, ibid., p. 162. } 

Υ [σὺ ἐνίσχυσον ἡμᾶς τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ 
ἁγίου σου πνεύματος εἰς τὴν διακονίαν 
ταύτην .---Τ Ὀ]4., p. 163. } 

2 [σὺ εἶ ὁ θέμενος ἡμᾶς εἰς τὴν δια- 
κονίαν ταύτην ἐν τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ πνεύ- 
ματός σου τοῦ aylov.—lbid., p. 164. ] 

a [ἡμεῖς .. of καταξιωθέντες λειτουρ- 
γεῖν τῷ ἁγίῳ σου θυσιαστηρίῳ... δεό- 
μεθα, καί σε παρακαλοῦμεν. .. ἐλθεῖν 
τὸ πνεῦμά σου τὸ ἅγιον ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς, καὶ 
ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα ταῦτα καὶ εὐλο- 
γῆσαι αὐτὰ, καὶ ἁγιάσαι, καὶ ἀναδεῖξαι 

: τὸν μὲν. ἄρτον τοῦτον ποίησον αὐτὸ 
τὸ τίμιον σῶμα τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ Θεοῦ καὶ 
σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. . τὸ δὲ 
ποτήριον τοῦτο αὐτὸ τὸ τίμιον ohia τοῦ 


Κυρίου, κ. τ. A.— Ibid., p. 169. ] 


CHAP, 11. 


SECT. X, 


98 The operation of the Holy Spirit in the consecration ; 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


them, and (ἀναδεῖξαι) make them the body and blood of 
Christ.” 

Those who desire to have more authorities of this kind 
may find many more in Habertus’ Greek Pontifical, Odservat. 
iv. ad parlem x. Liturgie Ordinum*’. From all which it will 
appear, that the ancient Church thought the Holy Spirit to be 
most especially present at the Eucharistical sacrifice, and to 
be the chief agent in the ministration of it; who as Maximus@ 
and Cabasilas® both express themselves, “sanctifies the gifts 
by the hand and tongue of the priest.””’, The Holy Ghost then 
is the principal, and the priests but the instrumental minis- 
ters in the ministration of the Eucharistical oblation, σύνεργοι 
τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος, co-agents or workers together with the 
Holy Spirit in the ministration of it, even as St. Paul saith 
that he, and the other Apostles were in preaching the Gospel, 
and planting Churches in the world. This part which the Holy 
Spirit hath in the ministration of the Encharistical sacrifice, 
(Heb.9.14.]inclines me to think, that where it is written that “ Christ 





> ἀναδεῖξαι. See Is. Casaubon. Ex- 
ercit. in Baron. xvi. cap. 33. [ Casau- 


Baronii Prolegomenain Annales, &e.— 
pp. 458, 459. Geneve, 1655. } 


bon says that three senses have been 
given to this word. 1. The exhibiting 
of the sacrament to the people. 2. The 
manifesting it to be the body of our 
Lord by its effects, ostendere aliquo 
effectu prasentiam suam, as Bellar- 
mine understands it, (De Sacram. 
Euch., lib. iv. c. 14. Op., tom. iii, 
p- 135, D.) 3. That which he considers 
it to mean, from comparing its use here 
with that of ἀνάδειξις in St. Basil de Spi- 
ritu Sancto, c. 27. (quoted note z, p. 
93,)viz.what the Latin fathers express by 
‘conficere’ or ‘efficere’ corpus Domini. . 
Dubitari, mea quidem sententia, non 
potest, quin ἀναδεῖξαι in Liturgia Basi- 
lii id sit quod Hieronymus, Augusti- 
nus, et alii patres Latini dicunt ‘ confi- 
cere corpus Christi,’ sive ‘ sacramen- 
tum corporis Christi,’ ... docent enim 
patres, ad sacerdotis invocationem, per 
Spiritus Sancti operationem, elementa 
sanctificari, sic ut que prius erant tan- 
tum panis et vinum, jam incipiunt dici 
et esse in mysterio corpus et sanguis 
Christi: propterea dicunt iidem, Chris- 
tum apparere in Eucharistia et videri: 
nempe oculis fidei. Hence, he says, 
ἀναδεικνύειν here means ‘conficere’ 
‘creare.’ De rebus sacris et Ecclesi- 
asticis Exercitationes xvi. ad Card. 


Tov κοσμοπολίτην ἄνθρωπον | ev αὐτῷ 
ἐποίησας} κόσμου κόσμον [ αὐτὸν) ava- 
δείξας.---Οοηδι. Apost., lib. viii. cap. 
12. [Concil., tom. i. p. 475, C.] 

¢ [ Habertus observes that the con- 
secration is in a peculiar way attributed 
to the operation of the Holy Spirit ; 
he notices the analogy of the mysteries 
of the Incarnation and the Eucharist ; 
alleges many testimonies from Greek 
and Latin fathers, and particularly one 
on that analogy from S. Joan. Damase. 
de Fide Orthod., lib. iv. ὁ. 14 (Op., 
tom. i. p. 270, B.) which concludes 
with the words, 6 τῆς προθέσεως ἄρτος 
οἶνός τε καὶ ὕδωρ διὰ τῆς ἐπικλήσεως 
καὶ ἐπιφοιτήσεως τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος 
ὑπερφυῶς μεταποιοῦνται εἰς τὸ σῶμα 
τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ aiua.—Haberti Pontif., 
pp. 251---250.] 

4 [Hickes may have referred to S. 
Maxim. Mystagogia, c. 24, Bibl. Patr., 
tom. ii. p. 189, E. Paris. 1624, but the 
editor has not found these words. ] 

© [τοῦτο (τὸ πνεῦμα) διὰ τῆς χειρὸς 
καὶ τῆς γλώσσης τῶν ἱερέων τὰ μυστή- 
pia TeAeoovpye.—Nicolai Cabasilz, 
Liturgiz Expositio, cap. 28. Bibl. Pa- 
trum, tom. ii. p.234. Paris. 1624] 

£ | Cor. iii. 9. Θεοῦ γάρ ἐσμεν σύνερ- 
you. 2 Cor. vi. 1. συνεργοῦντες δὲ, Kk. τ. A. 


applied to the interpretation of Heb. ix. 11 ; Rom. xv. 16. 99 


offered up Himself by the Eternal Spirit,” the place is not to 
be understood impellente Spiritu, ‘by the impulse of the Holy 
Spirit,’ as some expound 108, nor ‘by His own Divinity, or 
Godhead,’ as others", but ‘by the presence and com-minis- 
tration of the Holy Spirit,’ who was assisting to Him in that 
oblation of Himself for the sins of the world. But this I 
submit to the judgment of learned meni. 

From all that Ihave said, or cited out of the solemn prayers 
which were made to God in the administration of the Eu- 
charist to send down His Holy Spirit upon the priest, the 
sacrifice, and the people, and from His mighty most special 
assistance, and chief ministration in the holy action, parti- 
cularly in the sanctifying the oblations, I say, I cannot from 
considering all this but think it very probable, that the 
Apostle alluded to the common notion the Christians had of 
the Eucharistical oblations being sanctified by the Holy 
Ghost, in saying that the oblation he made of the Gentiles 
was acceptable to God, being (like the Eucharistical bread 
and wine) sanctified by the Holy Ghost. 

After all this I take the liberty to paraphrase the text thus: 
* Nevertheless, brethren, I have written more boldly to you 
in some sort, desiring to put you in mind of the things you 
know, because of the honour of the apostolical office which 
is given me of God, that, according to the prophecy of Isaiah), 
I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, to 


5. [‘Impellente spiritu’ are the words 
of Vatablus, in loc., (Crit. Sac., tom. 
vii. p. 1039.) “ Et sic plerique apud 
Estium,”’ is said by Poole, (Synopsis, ) 
in locum. Estius says that expositors 
were agreed in understanding ‘the 
eternal Spirit’ of the third Person of 
the Holy Trinity, (except Ribeira, who 
suggested that it might mean the soul 
and human will of our Lord,) and that 
it means ‘ movente et incitante Spiritu 
Sancto.’—Estii Comment. in Epist., 
pp. 1002, 1003, ed. Par. 1640. ] 

h [This is the interpretation of Go- 
marus; he is followed by Cappellus, 
(Crit. Sacr., ibid., p. 1052,) Junius, 
and others of the foreign Protestants. 
See Poole’s Synopsis in loc. ] 

i [St. Chrysostom’s words might 
suggest an interpretation such as 
Hickes’, τὸ δὲ, διὰ πνεύματος ἁγίου, 
δηλοῖ ὁτὶ οὐ διὰ πυρὸς προσήνεκται, οὐδὲ 


Η 


δι’ ἄλλων τινῶν.--- τη. xv. in Ep. ad 
Hebr., Op., xii. pp. 152, D. 153, A. 
See also de Sacerdotio, lib. iii.Op., tom. 1. 
p. 424, B, C, quoted note z, pp. 93, 94.] 

2 Ainsworth, Annot. on Levit. 1]. 
[p. 10.] Secondly, it (the mincha) 
figured the persons of Christians, who 
through Him are cleansed and sancti- 
fied to be pure oblations unto God ; as 
it was prophesied, ‘“‘ They shall all bring 
your brethren for a minchah (a meat- 
offering) unto the Lord, out of all the 
Gentiles, &c. as the sons of Israel bring 
a meat-offering (79D, minchah) in a 
clean vessel, into the house of the 
Lord,” Isa. xlvi. 20. The accomplish- 
ment whereof the Apostle sheweth to 
have been by his ministration of the 
Gospel of God unto the Gentiles, that 
the oblation (προσφορὰ) of the Gentiles 
might be acceptable, being sanctified 
by the Holy Ghost, Rom. xv. 16.” 


6} 


ἔν 


CHAP, It. 
_ SECT. X. 


15. 66. 20. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


100 λειτουργὸς ἱερουργῶν (Rom. xv. 16) a sacrificial metaphor ; 


bring your brethren out of all nations for an offering unto 
the Lord, ministering the Gospel of God as in my priestly 
office*, that the offering up, or sacrifice of the converted Gen- 
tiles by me as an evangelical priest to God, might be accept- 
able to Him!, being not like the legal sacrifices of beasts 
seasoned with salt, but like the evangelical offering of the 
holy Eucharist, sanctified by the Holy Ghost™.” The word 
here, ‘minister’ of Jesus Christ, is Nectovpyds, which, as I ob- 
served above", is the word by which the Greek version often 
renders the Hebrew cohen, which at other times they trans- 
late by ἱερεὺς, ‘priest ; and had the Apostle written this epi- 
stle in Hebrew, I am of opinion that the translation would 
have been, “That I should be the priest of Jesus Christ to 
the Gentiles.” But ἱερουργοῦντα being added to λειτουργὸν 
makes it signify a priest; for a priest (ἱερεὺς, sacerdos) can- 
not be better defined, than that he is λευτουργὸς ἱερουργῶν, 
sacrorum publicus minister°, minister rem sacram operans, mi- 
nister fungens administratione sacrorum? ; ‘a minister of holy 
things,’ or ‘a minister about holy things,’ the same with ὁ τὰ 
ἱερὰ ἐργαζόμενος, res sacras faciens, 1. 6. ἃ priest, 1 Cor. ix. 18. 
“Do you not know,” saiththe Apostle, “that they who minister 
about holy things, live of the things of the temple,” 1. e. do 
you not know that the priests live, or are maintained, of the 
things of the temple? So ἱερουργοῦντα in Hesychius is 
glossed by προσφέροντα θυσίαν, ‘a sacrificing minister ;’ and 
the Apostle continuing his metaphor in terms belonging to 


mate that he thought that προσφορὰ 


Pisa ell cyan ΟἿ. 
KMS Kyling Ligh oo 35 3 


Ue sim Jesu Christo minister uber gen- 
tes, sacerdotali munere exercens evange- 
lium Dei, Vers. Arab. [Biblia Sacra 
Polyglotta, Walton., tom. v. p. 677. ] 

' So Grotius on the place, Rom. xv. 
16. Ut factis probem me ministrum 
esse Christi ad gentes missum, .. . dum 
obeo sacerdotium non Leviticum sed 
Christianum ex vaticinio Isaiez Ixvi. 
20....non pecudes Deo offerens, sed 
homines multos per me ad Deum con- 
versos. Persistit in similitudine vic- 
time: ideo dicit εὐπρόσδεκτος, Xe. 
[Crit. Sacr., tom. vii. p. 921. ] 

™ Castalio. Ut extraneorum libatio 
accepta sit per Sanctum consecrata Spi- 
rilum. Which words seem to inti- 


τῶν ἐθνῶν, signifies not ‘the offering up 
of the Gentiles,’ but ‘the offering of the 
Gentiles,’ as the holy Eucharist is called 
in opposition to the Jewish offerings ; 
but the words are to be understood in 
the allusive senses, as the Church 
always understood them. [In the mar- 
gin there is the gloss ‘qua Deo libantur’ 
added, which determines this to be Cas- 
talio’s view of the meaning of thewords. ] 

n [See above, p. 15. ] 

° {Ut sim Jesu Christi publicus 
minister ad extraneos. Castalio. | 

P See Erasmus on the place. [ie- 
ρουργοῦντα, quasi rem sacram operans, 
ut respondeat ad λειτουργὸν, qui pro- 
prie sacrorum aut rei publice minister 
est: et fepoupyeiy ‘fungi administra- 
tione sacrorum.’— Crit. Sacr., tom. vii. 
p. 909. } 


implies the reality of the Christian Priesthood and Sacrifice. 101 


the priesthood, he saith, ἔχω οὖν καύχησιν ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ 
τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν, “I have therefore whereof I may glory 
through Christ Jesus,” as to my priestly ministration, ‘‘inthings 
pertaining to God.” Wherefore as the Apostle’s allusion to 
the Christian offering, which was sanctified or made holy by 
the descent of the Holy Ghost, obliged him to call his offer- 
ing up of the converted Gentiles an offering or sacrifice, and 
himself λειτουργὸν ἱερουργοῦντα τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, ‘a priest of 
the gospel’ in that respect; so it proves the holy Eucharist, 
to which that allusion was made, to be a proper sacrifice, and 
the ministers who offer it to be proper sacrificing priests. 
Justin Martyr, in his first Apology 4, having related how Jesus 
Christ commanded the Apostles, after His example, to take 
the bread, and when they had solemnly given thanks, to say, 
‘This is My body, this doin remembrance of Me;’ and in like 
manner to take the cup, and when they had solemnly given 
thanks, to say, ‘This is My blood,’ he observes to the Gen- 
tiles that the wicked demons had, by way of imitation, com- 
manded the same to be done in the sacraments of Mithra'; 
“ For,” saith he, “ you either know, or may know for certain, 
that a loaf and a cup of water, with a form of words, was used 
ἐν ταῖς τοῦ μεμυημένου τελεταῖς, in the solemn sacrifices 
for him who was initiated in that religion ;” meaning, as he 
had shewn‘, that the holy Eucharist was administered im- 
mediately upon the baptism or initiation of men into the 
Christian religion; and his parallel between the two mys- 
teries and initiation implies, that the oblation of the Eucha- 
ristical bread and wine' was τελετὴ", a solemn material sacri- 


4 [St. Justin’s words are, of yap ἀπο- 
στόλοι ἐν τοῖς γινομένοις ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν 
ἀπομνημονεύμασιν, ἃ καλεῖται εὐαγγέ- 
λια, οὕτως παρέδωκαν ἐντετάλθαι αὐτοῖς 
τὸν Ἰησοῦν" λαβόντα ἄρτον εὐχαριστή- 
σαντα εἰπεῖν, τοῦτο ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἀνάμ- 
νησίν μου" τουτέστι τὸ σῶμά μου" καὶ τὸ 
ποτήριον ὁμοίως λαβόντα καὶ εὐχαριστή- 
σαντα εἰπεῖν, τοῦτό ἐστι αἷμα μου" καὶ 
μόνοις αὐτοῖς μεταδοῦναι. ὅπερ καὶ ἐν τοῖς 
τοῦ Μίθρα μυστηρίοις παρέδωκαν γίνε- 
σθαι μιμησαμένοι οἱ πονηροὶ δαίμονες" 
ὅτι γὰρ ἄρτος καὶ ποτήριον ὕδατος τί- 
θεται ἐν ταῖς τοῦ μυουμένου τελεταῖς 
per ἐπιλόγων τινῶν ἢ ἐπίστασθε ἢ μα- 
θεῖν δύνασθε.----ΑῬο]. 1. ο. 66. p. 88, B.] 

τ So Tertullian de Prezscript., ο. x]. 
A diabolo scilicet, cujus sunt partes 


intervertendi veritatem, qui ipsas quo- 
que res sacramentorum divinorum ido- 
lorum mysteriis emulatur. Tingit et 
ipse quosdam, utique credentes et fide- 
les suos: expositionem delictorum de 
lavacro repromittit; et, si adhuc me- 
mini, Mithra signat illic in frontibus 
milites suos; celebrat et panis oblatio- 
nem, et imaginem resurrectienis in- 
ducit, et sub gladio redimit coronam.— 
[Op.; ps 216,.C; D.] 

5. [S. Justin M., Apol. i. c. 65. p. 
82, C.] 

τ Habert. Pontif. p. 335, &e. [For 
the use of τελετὴ see the extract in 
note ο, p. 47. ] 

ἃ τελετή" θυσία μυστηριώδης. ἣ με- 
stern, καὶ τιμιωτέρα. Telete; sacri- 


CHAP, II. 


SECT, Χ, 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


102 Parallel of the rites of Christian and Natural Religion. 


fice in the opinion of the Christians, as the oblation of the 
other diabolical bread and water was in the mysteries of 
Mithra; and by consequence that their bishops and presby- 
ters, who were ministers of baptism and the holy Eucharist, 
were τελεσταὶ, as Pollux” calls priests, even as proper priests* 
as the priests of Mithra or the sun were esteemed by his 
worshippers to be. The degrees or introduction to any 
religion were threeY, κάθαρσις, ‘ purgation,’ μύησις, “ initia- 
tion,’ and τελείωσις, ‘consummation,’ which was by sacri- 
fice; and therefore sacrifice was called τελετὴ. because it 
was the ‘consummation’ and perfection of all the rites by 
which men were initiated into the worship and religion of 
any god; and likewise because it was the last rite by which 
excommunicates were reconciled to their gods upon their re- 
pentance. Hence the sacrifice of the holy Eucharist came 
to be called τὸ τέλειον, ‘ perfection,’ as that which finisheth 
the initiation of a Christian, and the reconciliation of a 


ficium mysteriorum plenum; maxi- 
mum, honoratissimum.—Suidas. 

Vv Lib.i. cap. 1. segm. 14. [See note 
i, p. 20. ] 

x Haberti Pontificale, p. 125. [ Obs. 
iii. ad Part. viii. Liturg. Ordin. De 
sacerdotali munere offerendi et sacrifi- 
candi... Sacerdotis est solius offerre 
sacrificia vere ac proprie dicta, quale 
sacrificium verum ac plenum a sacer- 
dote quod Chiistus fecit faciente, of- 
ferri dixit S. Cyprianus Ep. Ixiil. 
(see above, p. 19, note h.)] p. 140. 
[ Obsery. viii. De nomine ἀναφορᾶς... 
Non dnbium est hoe sensu (sacrificii) 
nomen ἀναφορᾶς adorando Liturgiz sa- 
crificio impositum esse... Hesychius 
avapopa, δέησις... Rem pene attigit, 
voce siquidem δεήσεως, apud Paulum 
(Epist.i. ad Tim. cap. ii. 1.) sacrosane- 
tum Eucharistiz mysterium et sacrifi- 
cium significari docuit S. Augustinus 
Epistola ad Paulinum.] p. 145. [Ob- 
serv. ix. περὶ τῆς θείας ἱερουργίας, κ-τ.λ.] 
p. 162. [Obsery. iv. ad Part. x.] p. 283. 
[Obsery. ii. ad Part. xi. Ab Apostolo, 
quem ἱερουργὸν τῆς ἐκκλησίας vocat S. 
Cyrillus.] Cyprian de Orat. Dom., pp. 
149, 150.[ ed Oxon. nec sacrificium Deus 
recipit dissidentis..... Abel pacificus 
et justus, dum Deo sacrificat inno- 
center docuit et czteros quando ad 
altare munus offerunt, ὅσο. p. 211. ed. 
Ben. | Sursum Cord. Cyprian de Orat. 
Dom., p. 152. [ed. Oxon. Ideo et sacer- 


dos ante orationem prefatione praemissa 
parat fratrum mentes dicendo ‘ Sursum 
corda,’ p. 213. ed. Ben. ] 

y Haberti Pontif., p. 335. [The 
passage referred to is an extract from 
the Pseudo-Dionysius, who connects 
these three degrees of initiation with 
Christian baptism, the holy Kucha- 
rist, and ordination, administered re- 
spectively by the three orders of the 
clergy. ἡ μὲν οὖν ἁγιωτότη τῶν 
τελετῶν ἱερουργία, πρώτην μὲν ἔχει 
θεοειδῇ δύναμιν, τὴν ἱερὰν τῶν ἀτελέ- 
στων κάθαρσιν" μέσην δὲ, τὴν τῶν καθαρ- 
θέντων φωτιστικὴν μύησιν" ἑσχάτην δὲ, 
τῶν προτέρων συγκεφαλαιωτικὴν τὴν 
μυηθέντων ἐν ἐπιστήμῃ τῶν οἰκείων μυ- 
hoewy τελείωσιν. ἣ δὲ τῶν ἱερουργῶν 
διακόσμησις ἐν μὲν τῇ δυνάμει τῇ πρώτῃ 
διὰ τῶν τελετῶν ἀποκαθαίρει τοὺς ἄτε- 
λέστους᾽ ἐν τῇ μέσῃ δὲ, φωταγωγεῖ 
τοὺς καθαρθέντα ἐν ἐσχάτῃ δὲ καὶ 
ἀκροτάτῃ τῶν ἱερουργῶν δυνάμεων, ἄπο- 
τελειοῖ τοὺς τῷ θείῳ φωτὶ κεκοινωνηκό- 
τας, ἐν ταῖς τῶν θεωρηθεισῶν ἐλλάμ- 
ψεων ἐπιστημονικαῖς τελειώσεσιν" 7 δὲ 
τῶν τελουμένων δύναμις, ἣ πρώτη μέν 
ἐστιν ἣ καθαιρομένη" μέση δὲ, μετὰ τὴν 
κάθαρσιν ἣ φωτιζομένη καὶ τινῶν ἱερῶν 
θεωρητική" τελευταία δὲ καὶ θειότερα 
τῶν ἄλλων, ἣ τῶν ἱερῶν φωτισμῶν, ὧν 
ἐγεγόνει θεωρὸς, ἐλλαμπομένη THY TCH 
λεστικὴν ἐπιστήμην.----. Dionys.Areop. 
de Eeclesiastica Hierarchia, c. 3. ΟΡ.» 
tom. i. p. 233, C, D.] 


ὙΥῸΝ 


St. Justin Martyr on the Eucharistic sacrifice. 


Christian penitent. 


103 


It is so called in six several canons cur. πο 
of the council of Ancyra’, relating to the readmission o 


penitents, lapsers, adulterers, and murderers, to the peace 
and perfect communion of the Church. But to return to 
St. Justin, he speaks to the same purpose in his Dialogue 


with Trypho the Jew, p. 259, 260°: “And the meat-offer- Lev. 14. 10. 


ing of fine flour, which was appointed to be offered for 
those who were cleansed from the leprosy, was a type of the 
Eucharistical bread, which Jesus Christ our Lord commanded 
to be offered in remembrance of His passion, which He suf- 
fered for those whose souls are purged from all sins, that we 
might give thanks to God for creating the world and all 
things therein for man, and for delivering us from all the 
wickedness of which we were guilty, and for conquering the 
principalities and powers with a complete victory. And there- 
fore God by Malachi, who was one of the twelve prophets, 


speaks of the sacrifices which you then offered, thus: ‘I have Mal. 1. 10, 


no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of Hosts, neither will I τ 
accept an offering at your hand; for from the rising of the 


2 Can.4, 5, 6,9, 22,23. [The coun- 
cil of Ancyra (Concil., tom. i. p. 1485, 
sqq.) was held A.D. 314, after the per- 
secutions ceased at the death of Max- 
imus. The canons are chiefly on the sub- 
ject of the restoration of the lapsed. The 
places referred to are Can. iv. (p. 1488, 
D.) τότε ἐλθεῖν ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον : Can. v. 
(ibid. E.) ἵνα τὸ τέλειον τῇ τετραετίᾳ 
λάβωσι: Can. vi. (p. 1489, B.) καὶ 
οὕτως ἐλθεῖν ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον : Can. ix. 
(ibid., D.) τοῦ τελείου μετάσχωσιν : 
Can. xxii. (p. 1423, C.) τοῦ δὲ τελείου 
ἐν τῷ τέλει τοῦ βίου καταξιούσθωσαν : 
Can. xxiii. (ibid.) τοῦ τελείου μετα- 
σχεῖν.] Isaac Casaubon. in Exercit. 
xvi. ad Annal. Baron. xlviii. Quare 7d 
τέλειον, ‘ perfectio’ et ‘consummatio,’ 
est ipsa Eucharistia, que etiam a Dio- 
nysio dicitur τελείωσις, [. . . quia con- 
junctionis nostre cum Christo, cujus 
instrumenta sunt verbum Dei et sacra- 
menta, velut colophonem imponit parti- 
cipatio corporis et sanguinis Christi in) 
Ceena Dominica: nullus enim restat 
alius modus quo in terris versantes 
arctius cum Christo capite nostro con- 
jungamur.—p. 505. 

ἃ [καὶ 7 τῆς σεμιδάλεως δὲ προσφορὰ, 
ὦ ἄνδρες, ἔλεγον, ἣ ὑπὲρ τῶν καθαρι- 
ζομένων ἀπὸ τῆς λέπρας προσφέρεσθαι 
παραδοθεῖσα, τύπος ἦν τοῦ ἄρτου τῆς εὐ- 


χαριστίας, ὃν εἰς ἀνάμνησιν τοῦ πάθους οὗ 
ἔπαθεν ὑπὲρ τῶν καθαιρομένων τὰς ψύχας 
ἀπὸ πάσης πονηρίας ἀνθρώπων, ᾿Ιησοῦς 
Χριστὸς ὃ Κύριος ἡμῶν παρέδωκε ποιεῖν, 
ἵνα ἅμα τε εὐχαριστῶμεν τῷ Θεῷ ὑπὲρ 
τε τοῦ τὸν κόσμον ἐκτικέναι σὺν πᾶσι 
τοῖς ἐν αὐτῷ διὰ τὸν ἄνθρωπον, καὶ ὑπὲρ 
τοῦ ἀπὸ τῆς κακίας ἐν ἣ γεγόναμεν ἐλευ- 
θερωκέναι ἡμᾶς, καὶ τὰς ἄρχας καὶ τὰς 
ἐξουσίας καταλελυκέναι τελείαν κατά- 
λυσιν διὰ τοῦ παθητοῦ γενομένου κατὰ 
τὴν βουλὴν αὐτοῦ. ὅθεν περὶ μὲν τῶν 
ip’ ὑμῶν τότε προσφερομένων θυσιῶν 
λέγει 6 Θεὸς, ὧς προέφην, διὰ Μαλαχίου 
ἑνὸς τῶν δώδεκα: οὐκ ἔστι θέλημά μου 
ἐν ὑμῖν, λέγει Κύριος, καὶ τὰς θυσίας ὑμῶν 
οὗ προσδέξομαι ἐκ τῶν χειρῶν ὑμῶν, διότι 
ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς ἡλίου ἕως δυσμῶν τὸ ὄνο- 
μά μου δεδόξασται ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσι, καὶ ἐν 
πάντι τόπῳ θυμίαμα προσφέρεται τῷ 
ὀνόματί μου καὶ θυσία καθαρά᾽ ὅτι μέγα 
τὸ ὄνομά μου ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσι, λέγει Κύ- 
ριος, ὑμεῖς δὲ βεβηλοῦτε αὐτό. περὶ δὲ 
τῶν ἐν πάντι τόπῳ ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν τῶν ἐθνῶν 
προσφερομένων αὐτῷ θυσιῶν, τουτέστι 
τοῦ ἄρτου τῆς εὐχαριστίας, καὶ τοῦ πο- 
τηρίου ὁμοίως τῆς εὐχαριστίας, προλέγει 
τότε, εἰπὼν καὶ τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ δοξάζειν 
ἡμᾶς, ὑμᾶς δὲ βεβηλοῦν.---ϑ. Just. M. 
Dial. cum Tryph., 6. 41. pp. 137, 
D, E. 138, A.] 


f SECT, X. 


10. δὲ. Ireneus on the Institution of the Euch. Sacrifice. 


sun unto the going down of the same, My name shall be 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST~ . . . 
ποον. great among the Gentiles, and in every place incense shall 


be offered unto My name, and a pure offering, for My name 
shall be great among the heathen, saith the Lord, but you 
have profaned it.’ But of the sacrifice of the Gentiles offered 
by us in every place, that is to say, of the bread of the Eu- 
charist and cup of the Eucharist, He then spoke beforehand, 
saying, that we glorified His name, and you profaned it.” 
To the same purpose speaks Irenzeus”: “ Our Lord appoint- 
ing His disciples to offer unto God the first-fruits of His 
creatures, not as if He had need of them, but that they might 
not be unfruitful and ungrateful, took the creature of bread 
and gave thanks, saying, ‘This is My body.’ In like manner, 
taking the cup (of wine), which is one of the creatures among 
us, He called it His blood, and imstituted* the new oblation 
of the New Testament, which the Church receiving from the 
Apostles, offers to God throughout the whole world, to that 
God who gives us food, (as being) the first-fruits of His gifts 


> Lib. iv. cap. 32. (Dominus) suis 
discipulis dans consilium primitias Deo 
offerre ex suis creaturis, non quasi in- 
digenti, sed ut ipsi nec infructuosi, nec 
ingrati sint, eum qui ex creatura panis 
est, accepit, et gratias egit, dicens: hoc 
est corpus meum. Et calicem simili- 
Ler qui est ex ea creatura, que est se- 
cundum nos, suum sanguinem confes- 
sus est, et Novi Testamenti novam 
docuit oblationem, quam Ecclesia ab 
Apostolis accipiens, in universo mundo 
offert Deo, ei qui alimenta nobis pre- 
stat, primitias suorum munerum in 
Novo Testamento, de quo in duodecim 
Prophetis Malachias sic presignifica- 
vit; ‘Non est mihi voluntas in vobis, 
dicit Dominus, &c.’ manifestissime sig- 
nificans per hc, quoniam prior qui- 
dem populus cessabit offerre Deo, omni 
autem loco sacrificium offeretur Deo, 
et hoc purum, nomen autem ejus glo- 
rificatur in gentibus. [c. 17. § 5. p. 
249.1 See Dr. Grabe’s notes, p. 118. 

[Grabe’s note on the prophecy of 
Malachi has been quoted note r, p. 57. 
His words on the former part of this 
quotation are; Certum est Ireneum ac 
omnes, quorum scripta habemus pa- 
tres, Apostolis sive cozvos, sive prox- 
ime suceedentes, S. Eucharistiam pro 
nove Legis sacrificio habuisse, et pa- 
nem atque vinum tanquam sacra mu- 
nera in altari Dei Patris obtulisse; ante 


consecrationem quidem, velut primitias 
creaturarum in recognitionem supremi 
ejus super universa dominii; post con- 
secrationem vero, ut mysticum corpus 
et sanguinem Christi, ad reprasentan- 
dum cruentam personalis ejus corporis 
ac sanguinis in cruce oblationem, et 
beneficia mortis ejus omnibus pro qui- 
bus offerretur, impetranda, Atque hance 
non privatam particularis Ecclesia vel 
doctoris, sed publicam universalis Ee- 
clesiz doctrinam atque praxim fuisse, 
quam illa ab Apostolis, A postoli ab ipso 
Christo edocti acceperunt, &c. And 
again, after giving several authorities, 
particularly from St. Clement R., he 
proceeds; Atqui cum hujus epistole 
auctor ille ipse Clemens fuisse videtur, 
cujus nomen in libro vite scriptum 
Philippensibus scripsit Paulus cap. iv. 
vers. 3. cumque is modo citata duobus 
vel tribus post Petri et Pauli Aposto- 
lorum martyrium, et viginti ante S. 
Joannis obitum annis scripserit, vix 
ullus dubitandi locus relictus est, ab 
ipsis SS. Apostolis hane de sacrificio 
Eucharistie doctrinam promanasse, ac 
proinde omnino tenendam esse, licet 
nullum pro ea dictum ex ipsis Prophe- 
tarum vel Apostolorum scriptis adduci 
possit. ] 

* Docuit, ἐδίδαξε : “ διδάσκειν de prae- 
cipiente dicitur.”’ Budeus in Comm. 
Ling. Grece, p. 762. 


Eusebius on allusions to it in the Psalms and Prophets. 105 


in the New Testament, of which Malachi, one of the twelve 
(minor) prophets prophesied in these words, ‘I have no 
pleasure in you,’ &c., manifestly signifying by these words 
that His former people should cease to offer any more to God, 
but that sacrifice should be offered to Him in every place ; 
and this pure one (of which the prophet spake) that His 
name might be glorified among the Gentiles.” To the same 
purpose also speaks Eusebius, in his commentary on Psalm li. 
and the last verse’: ‘ But Symmachus saith, ‘thou shalt re- 
ceive,’ instead of ‘thou shalt accept,’ an offering and holocausts, 
to wit, of ‘righteousness ;’ and moreover adds ‘ calves.’ For all 
are offerings of righteousness, according to the spiritual sacri- 
fices without blood, which are offered through the whole world. 
In another of the Jewish prophets it is also said, ‘I have no 
pleasure ;? and, ‘in every place incense and a pure sacri- 
fice shall be offered to My name.’ This is now called the 
‘ sacrifice of righteousness,’ and also ‘ of praise,’ as he called it 
in the foregoing psalm, saying, ‘ offer up to God the sacrifice 
of praise.’”? See also his comment on Isaiah xviii. 7.° 

I believe no man in the world, that was of any religion 
where sacrifice was used, and that by chance should see the 
Sacrament of the holy Eucharist administered among Chris- 
tians, as it was administered in the primitive times‘, or as it 
is administered according to the order and usage of the 
Church of England, but would take the bread and wine for 


4 [προσδέξῃ δὲ εἶπεν, ἀντὶ τοῦ εὐδο- 
Khoets, 6 Σύμμαχος. καὶ τὴν ἀναφορὰν 
δὲ, καὶ τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα, δικαιοσύνης 
νοητέον, καὶ προσέτι τοὺς μόσχους. πάν- 
τα γὰρ δικαιοσύνης ἐκτελεῖται, κατὰ 
τὰς ἀναίμους καὶ πνευματικὰς θυσίας, 
τὰς ἐν τῇ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐκκλησίᾳ καθ᾽ ὕλης 
τῆς οἰκουμένης προσφερομένας᾽ καὶ ἐν 
ἄλλῳ γὰρ εἴρηται πρὸς ᾿Ιουδαίους προ- 
φήτῃ" οὐκ ἔστι μου θέλημα ἐν ὑμῖν, λέ- 
yet κύριος παντοκράτωρ,. .. καὶ ἐν παντὶ 
τόπῳ θυμίαμα προσφέρεται τῷ ὀνόματί 
μου, καὶ θυσία καθαρά" αὐτὴ νῦν λέγε- 
ται, θυσία δικαιοσύνης᾽ ἔστι δὲ καὶ 
αἰνέσεως καθὰ πρόσθεν ἔλεγε: θύσον τῷ 
Θεῴ θυσίαν aivecews.—Eusebii Cxsa- 
riensis Comment. in Psalmos (Ps. 1.) 
apud Collectionem Novam Script. 
(Montfaucon), tom. i. p. 212, C, D.] 

© [ἐν τῷ καιρῷ ἐκείνῳ ἀνενεχθήσεται 
δῶρα Κυρίῳ σαβαὼθ, ἐκ λαοῦ τεθλιμμέ- 
νου καὶ τετιλμένου, καὶ ἀπὸ λαοῦ μεγά- 
λου, ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν καὶ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα χρό- 
νον. εἴη δ᾽ ἂν οὗτος 6 τὴν στενὴν καὶ 


τεθλιμμένην ὁδεύων, τὴν ἀπαγούσαν εἰς 
τὴν ζωὴν, 6 αὐτὸς καὶ ἐκτετιλμένος 
ὑπάρχει, ὡς ἂν τῆς κοινῆς τῶν ἀνθρώ- 
πων ζωῆς ἠλλυτριώμενος, καὶ μέγας δέ 
ἐστι παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ καὶ πολὺ», διὸ λέλεκ- 
ται, ἀπὸ λαοῦ μεγάλου. καὶ γὰρ ἐν τῷ 
παρόντι βίῳ, καὶ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι δὲ 
αἰῶνι τὰ λογικὰ δῶρα καὶ τὰς ἀναιμάκ- 
τους τῷ Θεῷ θυσίας ἀναπέμπων οὐ δια- 
λιμπάνει ὃ δηλωθεὶς λαός.--- Eusebii 
Cesariens. Comm. in Hesaiam, ibid., 
tom. ii. p. 429, B, C.] 

' παυσαμένων ἡμῶν τῆς εὐχῆς, ἄρ- 
τος προσφέρεται [ καὶ οἷνος καὶ ὑδωρ᾽ καὶ 
ὁ προεστὼς εὐχὰς ὁμοίως καὶ εὐχαρι- 
στίας, ὅση δύναμις αὐτῷ, (totis viribus, 
id est, magna animi intentione) ἄνα- 
πέμπει, Kal ὃ λαὸς ἐπευφημεῖ, λέγων Td 
ἀμήν" καὶ ἡ διάδοσις καὶ ἡ μετάληψις 
ἀπὸ τῶν εὐχαριστηθέντων ἑκάστῳ γίνεται, 
καὶ tots οὐ παροῦσι διὰ τῶν διακόνων 
πέμπεται.---ὅ. Just. Mart. Apol. i. ¢. 67. 
p. 88, Ὁ, E.] 


CHAP. II. 


SECT. Χ, 


100 76 Form of administering the Holy Eucharist 


onrstiaN an offering or sacrifice, and the whole action for a sacrificial 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


ministration; and the eating and drinking of the holy ele- 
ments for a sacrificial entertainment of the congregation at 
the table of their God. Τὸ see bread and wine mixed with 
water’ so solemnly brought to the table, and then a loaf of 
that bread and a cup of that wine brought by the deacon 
in manner of an offering to the liturg, or minister, which he 
also taking in his hands, as an offering, sets them with all 
reverence on the table ; and then after solemn prayers of obla- 
tion and consecration to see him take up the bread, and say, 
in a most solemn manner, “This is My body,” &c., and then 
the cup, saying, as solemnly, “This is My blood,” &c., and 
then to hear him, with all the powers of his soul, offer up 
praises, and glory, and thanksgiving, and prayers to God, the 
Father of all things, through the name of the Son, and 


| πόλυ ποιεῖται. 


& ἔπειτα προσφέρεται τῷ προεστῶτι 
τῶν ἀδελφῶν ἄρτος, καὶ ποτήριον ὕδατος 
καὶ κράματος. [καὶ οὗτος λαβὼν, αἶνον 
καὶ δόξαν τῷ πατρὶ τῶν ὅλων διὰ τοῦ 
ὀνόματος τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ 
ἁγίου ἀναπέμπει" καὶ εὐχαριστίαν ὑπὲρ 
τοῦ κατηξιῶσθαι τούτων παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ 
οὗ συντελέσαντος τὰς 
εὐχὰς καὶ τὴν εὐχαριστίαν, πᾶς ὃ πα- 
ρὼν λαὸς ἐπευφημεῖ λέγων, ἀμήν" τὸ 
δὲ ἀμὴν, τῇ “EBpatd: φωνῇ, τὸ γένοιτο 
σημαίνει. εὐχαριστήσαντος δὲ τοῦ προε- 
OTOTOS, καὶ ἐπευφημήσαντος πάντος τοῦ 
λαοῦ, οἱ καλουμένοι παρ᾽ ἡμῖν διάκονοι 
διδόασιν ἑκάστῳ τῶν παρόντων μετα- 
λαβεῖν ἀπὸ τοῦ εὐχαριστηθέντος ἄρ- 
Tov καὶ οἴνου καὶ ὕδατος, καὶ τοῖς οὐ πα- 
ροῦσιν ἀποφέρουσι.----1ἃ. 1014., c. 65. 
pp- 82, D, E. 83, A.] 

h This was the practice of ourChurch 
at the Reformation, as may be seen in 
the Rubric of the communion office of 
the first Common Prayer-Book of 
Edward VI. [Rubric after the offer- 
tory. ‘Then shall the minister take so 
much bread and wine as shall suffice 
for the persons appointed to receive the 
holy communion . . . putting the wine 
into the chalice, or else into some fair 
or convenient cup prepared for that 
use, (if the chalice will uot serve,) put- 
ting thereto a little pure and clean 
water, and setting both bread and wine 
upon the altar.”” See Appendix, No. 1. ] 

See also Dr. Grabe’s notes on 7d 
κεκραμένον ποτήριον, in Irenzus, lib. v, 
cap. 2. p. 897. ed. Oxon. [The words 
of St. Irenzeus are, ὅπότε οὖν καὶ Td 


κεκραμένον ποτήριον, καὶ 6 γεγονὼς ἄρ- 
τος ἐπιδέχεται τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ 
γίνεται ἡ εὐχαριστία σῶμα Χριστου, 
Kk. τ. A. (p. 294. ed. Ben.) Grabe’s 
note is to this effect; Sicuti supra, 
lib: 15 τὸ. 9 (618: 5 ΡΞ 


Ben.) Mareum hereticum ποτήρια 
κεκραμένα οἴνῳ consecrasse refert; 


ita hoe loco Catholicis quoeque κρᾶμα 
istud in usu fuisse insinuat, quod et 
ex Justini Martyris Apologia (i. e. 65, 
c. 67. quoted above) aliisque scripto- 
ribus constat. Fecerunt id exemplo 
ipsius Salvatoris, qui in prima S. Ceena 
‘temperamentum calicis suum sangui- 
nem confirmavit,’ ut Irenzus supra 
libsiv. οἱ "57. (δ: 332 § 2p; 27ONeds 
Ben.) scribit, et ‘mixtionem calicis no- 
vam in Regno cum discipulis habitu- 
rum se pollicitus est,’ prout inferius 
lib. v. ο. 86. (§ ὃ. p. 887. ed. Ben.) lo- 
quitur. Neque hae de re dubitabit qui 
istum ritum inter Judzos adeo recep- 
tum fuisse consideraverit, ut Paschale 
epulum haud rite mero vino sine aqua 
se celebrare putaverint. ... Atqui hee 
Judzorum ante Christum et Christi- 
anorum post eum continua praxis ac 
doctrina, sicut idem ab ipso Christo 
factum indicat, ita et omnibus facien- 
dum injungit. He quotes and argues 
from St. Cyprian’s epistle to Czcilius, 
Ixiii, against those who used only water, 
(see above, note m, p-d4.) and the canon 
of the council in Trullo, A.D. 692. 
against those who used only wine. 
(Canon 52, Concilia, tom. vii. p. 1362, 


B.) ] 


shews it to be a Sacrificial Service and Mystery. 107 


Holy Spirit, which they beseech Him to send down upon the 
bread and cup, and the people with the greatest harmony and 
acclamation saying aloud, Amen. After which also to see 
the liturg first eat of the bread, and drink of the cup, and 
then the deacon to carry about the blessed bread and wine, 
to be eaten and drunk by the people, as in a sacrificial feast ; 
and lastly, to see and hear all concluded with psalms and 
hymns of praise, and prayers of intercession to God with the 
highest pomp-hke' celebrity of words. I say, to see and hear 
all this, would make an uninitiated heathen conclude that 
the bread and wine were an offering, the whole Eucharistical 
action a sacrificial mystery, the eating and drinking the 
sanctified elements a sacrificial banquet, and the liturg who 
administered, a priest. I have here used the term sacrificial 
mystery, because there was no federal sacrifice but what was 
a religious mystery, exhibiting one thing to the sense, and 
another to the understanding of the votist ; or what was not 
an outward sign of an invisible inward grace of the God, true, 
or believed to be true, to whom the sacrifice was offered: I 
say, every federal sacrifice is an outward sign of an invisible 
grace, and by consequence is a mystery, or Sacrament; for 
Sacrament in the Latin Church, from which we borrowed the 
word, signifies the same as mystery in the Greek, and there- 
fore the Eucharistical sacrifice is also a Sacrament, or to speak 
more properly of it, it is a Christian Sacrament or mystery, 
as a federal commemorative sacrifice, in which as Christ re- 
presents unto God His passion, and the merits of it, as our 
High-Priest in heaven, so in this sacrifice the priests upon 
earth in conjunction with it, present, and commemorate the 
same unto Him, by setting before Him the symbols of His 
dead body and blood effused for our sins. 

I speak this to let the reformed world see, that they need 
not be afraid of believing the holy Eucharist to be a proper 
sacrifice * or offering, in which the bread and wine are offered 


i [μόνην ἀξίαν αὐτοῦ τιμὴν ταύτην 
παραλαβόντες, τὸ τὰ bm ἐκείνου εἰς 
διατροφὴν γενόμενα, οὐ πυρὶ δαπανᾶν 
ἀλλ᾽ ἑαυτοῖς καὶ τοῖς δεομένοις προσφέ- 
pew, ἐκείνῳ δὲ εὐχαρίστους ὄντας] διὰ 
λόγου πομπὰς, καὶ ὕμνους πέμπειν.---8. 
Justin. Mart. Apol. i. p. 28. ed. Oxon. 
[e. 31. Op., p. 51, A. ed. Ben. ] 


k §. Chrysost. de Sacerdotio, lib. iii. 
ὅταν yap ἴδῃς, “ When thou shalt see the 
Lord sacrificed, and the priest standing 
over the sacrifice, and pouring out 
prayers, and the people dyed red with 
His blood, canst thou think thou art 
among men or upon the earth, or that 
thou art translated into heaven?” 


CHAP, IT. 


SECT. Χ, 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD, 


108 Ifthe Eucharist is a Sacrifice, the Ministers of it are Priests. 


in a proper and literal sense, and that by consequence the 
ministers of it are properly, and literally speaking, offermg 


[ὅταν γὰρ ἴδῃς τὸν κύριον τεθυμένον, 
καὶ κείμενον, καὶ τὸν ἱερέα ἐφεστῶτα τῷ 
θύματι, καὶ ἐπευχόμενον᾽ καὶ πάντας 
ἐκείνῳ τῷ τιμίῳ φοινισσομένους αἵματι" 
ἄρα ἔτι μετὰ ἀνθρώπων εἶναι νομίζεις, 
καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἑστάναι; ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ εὐ- 
θέως ἐπὶ τοὺς οὐρανοὺς μετανίστασα .---- 
S. Joan. Chrys. de Sacerdot., lib. iii. ὃ 
4. Op., tom. i. p. 382, D.] S. Basil. de 
Baptismo, lib. ii. quest. 2. ‘‘ But when 
the Lord said, ‘a greater than Solomon 
is here,’ He thereby taught us how 
much more wicked he is, who being 
impure, dares offer up the body of our 
Lord, ‘who gave Himself for us an 
offering and sacrifice to God.’”’ [6 δὲ 
κύριος λέγων, μεῖζον τοῦ ἱεροῦ ὧδε, παι- 
δεύει ἡμᾶς, ὅτι τοσοῦτον ἀσεβέστερός 
ἐστιν 6 τολμῶν ἱερατεύειν τὸ σῶμα τοῦ 
κυρίου τοῦ δόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν 
προσφορὰν καὶ θυσίαν τῷ θεῷ εἰς ὀσμὴν 
evwdias.—De Baptismo, lib. ii. quest. 
2. (opus spurium) S. Basilii Opera, tom. 
ii. App. p. 653, D, E. | Eulogius Alexan- 
drinus Patriarcha apud Photii Biblio- 
thecam. ‘‘ Here the Apostle (Heb. x. 46) 
doth not forbid all sacrifice, but the legal 
sacrifices, nor doth he absolutely dis- 
charge all sacrifice, but threatens the 
last judgment to those, who after they 
had acknowledged the truth, and been 
partakers of the mystical sacrifice, re- 
turned to the legal sacrifices by calves 
and bulls... . Wherefore as he forbids 
them ihe legal baptism, so he forbids 
them the bloody sacrifices of the law, 
for the tremendous sacrifice of the body 
of our Lord, which is offered among 
us, is not an institution of different 
sacrifices, but a commemoration of the 
sacrifice once offered for us. For, saith 
He, ‘Do this in remembrance of Me,’ 
and therefore as often as we do it, we 
do shew forth the death of our Lord.” 
[καί φησι 67) ἐνταῦθα οὐχ ἁπλῶς θυσίαν 
ἀποτρέπει, ἀλλὰ νομικὴν θυσίαν, καὶ οὐχ 
ἁπλῶς ἀπαγορεύει, ἀλλὰ καὶ κρίσιν 
ἐσχάτην ἀπειλεῖ τοῖς μετὰ τὴν ἐπίγνω- 
σιν τῆς ἀληθείας καὶ τῆς μυστικῆς θυ- 
σίας τὴν ἀπόλαυσιν εἰς ἐκείνην τὴν νο- 
μικὴν, τὴν διὰ μόσχων καὶ ταύρων τε- 
λουμένην, ἐπανιοῦσι.... ὥσπερ οὖν τὰ 
νομικὰ βαπτίσματα κωλύει τούτους ἐπι- 
τελεῖν, οὕτω καὶ τὰς ἐναίμους θυσίας 
... καὶ γὰρ καὶ ἣ map’ ἡμῶν ἐπιτελου- 
μένη, τοῦ σώματος τοῦ Κυρίου φρικτὴ 
τελετὴ, οὐ θυσιῶν ἐστὶ διαφόρων προσ- 
αγωγὴ, ἀλλὰ τῆς ἅπαξ προσενηνεγ- 
μένης θυσίας ἀνάμνησις, τοῦτο γάρ, 
φησι, ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν.--- 


Photii Biblioth. cod. 280. p. 540, b. 
Berlin. 1824.] S. Isidor. Orig., lib. vi. 
duo autem sunt, que offeruntur, [do- 
num et sacrificium. Donum dicitur, 
quidquid auro argentoque, aut qua- 
libet alia specie efficitur. Sacrificium 
autem est victima, et quecunque cre- 
mantur in ara seu ponuntur.... Im- 
molatio ab antiquis dicta, eo quod in 
mole altaris posita victima cederetur: 
unde et mactatio post immolationem 
est. Nunc autem immolatio pani et 
calici convenit, libatio autem tantum- 
modo calicis oblatio est.—S. Isidor. 
Hispalensis, Op., tom. 111. pp. 283, 
284.] ‘There are two things which 
are offered to God, gifts and sacrifices. 
Gifts consist in gold or silver, or any 
other species, which is offered. But 
sacrifices are victims, and whatsoever 
is burnt or placed upon the altar..... 
Immolation was so called by the an- 
cients, because the victim to be slain 
was brought to the mole (or bulk) of 
the altar, and there slain, and there- 
fore mactation was after immolation. 
But now immolation is agreeably said 
of the bread and the cup, but libation is 
properly the oblation of the cup only.” 
Eusebius Cesariensis in Psalm. xev. 9, 
10. ‘‘ He means the rational and spiri- 
tual sacrifices, which we see are daily 
offered up by the priests for the faith- 
ful.” [θυσίας μὲν λέγων τὰς λογικὰς 
καὶ πνευματικὰς, ἃς ὁρῶμεν διηνεκῶς ὑπὲρ 
τῶν εὐσεβῶν προσφερομένας, καὶ ἱερουρ- 
γουμένας ὑπὸ τῶν iepéwy.—apud Col- 
lect. Nov. Montfaucon, tom. i. p. 636, 
C.] To these may be added the Jewish 
doctors, who taught, “that under the 
Messias all sacrifices should cease, but 
that of bread and wine,’’ cited in the 
most excellent tract of The Great Duty 
of Frequenting the Christian Sacrifice, 
lately written and published by Mr. 
Nelson. [pp. 21, 22. London, 1706. 
He quotes from the Bereschit Rabba, 
‘that is the larger commentary of the 
Jews upon Genesis,’ Rabbi Pinehas on 
Numb. xxviii., “Tempore Messiz om- 
nia sacrificia cessabunt, sed sacrificium 
panis et vini non cessabit, sicuti dic- 
tum est, (Gen. xiv.) ‘Et Melchizedek, 
&c. ;? Et Melchisedecum rex Messias 
excipiet a cessatione sacrificiorum, si- 
cuti dicitur, (Ps. ex.) ‘Tu es sacerdos,’ 
&c.;” and Rabbi Johai on the same 
chapter of Numbers, “Tempore Messiz 
omnia sacrificia desinent; sacrificium 
vero panis et vini nunquam desinet.”’ ] 


They would be so, were it only a Sacrament. 109 


priests, as the primitive Christians and all Churches before 
the Reformation taught and believed. But then, I must say 
again, upon supposition that like baptism it is only a Sacra- 
ment or religious mystery, and not a sacrifice, that, according 
to the notion of priest and priesthood, as I have before ex- 
plained it out of profane and holy writers, the ministers of it 
must be priests. For to be taken from among men to per- 
form all the most holy solemnities above-mentioned, pertain- 
ing unto God, to have authority from Him to represent before 
Him the passion of His Son, and the merits of it on earth, as 
He doth in heaven, and in virtue of it to intercede unto Him 
for the people, for whom He performs the holy mystery, and 
to admit them in His name to feast at His table, and to 
deliver unto them the bread and wine, as pledges of His love 
and seals of pardon—to minister in this manner in the most 
intimate act of communion that can be betwixt God and 
man, as fully answers the notion and character of a priest, 
as to offer sacrifice; and the signification of τῶν ἁγίων λειτουρ- 
ros, ἱερουργεῖν. ἱερὰ ἐργάζεσθαι in the Divine Writings, and 
of δρᾶν, ῥέζειν, and ἔρδειν in profane authors, which by 
special usage were applied to the action of sacrificing, as 
properly belong to any other ministerial action as holy and 
solemn as sacrificing, which the public liturg performs by 
God’s appointment; but more especially to ministerial actions, 
in which there are religious mysteries, external signs, mys- 
tical rites, and manual operations, as taking and breaking of 
bread, and taking and pouring out wine, and feasting upon 
them as God’s entertainment, and concluding all with most 
solemn acts of intercession. These are τὰ θεῖα, most holy 
performances, as holy and solemn as any sacrifice, and per- 
taining as much to God; and therefore he that by God’s 
appointment administers in such holy and mystical rites and 
offices, cannot but be λειτουργὸς ἱερουργῶν, which I said before 
was the definition of a priest. I have said this upon mere 
supposition, by granting more than I should, for the more 
effectual conviction of your late author. For the holy Eu- 
charist is so very like a sacrifice, or sacrificial mystery, in all 
its rites and manner of ministration, that if it be not a 
sacrifice, no man can well tell what the common notion of a 
sacrifice is, or easily distinguish it from the nature of any 


CHAP. IT. 
SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


110 ThePrimitive Christians saw it figured in the Old Testament. 


sacrifice, upon which the votists used to feast in the temple 


and at the altar of their God. 


The primitive Christians, 


who were as afraid of idolatry as any of the Protestants, 
were so far from not having this notion of it, or being afraid 
to own it as such, that as they believed Melchisedec was a 
type of Christ!, so they believed the bread and wine, which 
he brought forth to Abraham when he blessed him, to have 
been a type of this commemorative sacrifice by bread and 
wine, which Christ instituted for His Church. They believed it 


1 Et Melchisedech rex Salem pro- 
tulit panem et vinum. Fuit autem 
sacerdos Dei summi, et benedixit Abra- 
ham. Quod autem Melchisedech ty- 
pum Christi portaret declarat in Psalmis 
Spiritus Sanctus [ex persona Patris 
ad Filium dicens: ante luciferum ge- 
nuite; Tu es sacerdos in zternum | se- 
cundum ordinem Melchisedech. Qui 
ordo utique hie est de sacrificio illo 
veniens et inde descendens, quod Mel- 
chisedech sacerdos Dei summi fuit, 
quod panem, et vinum obtulit, quod 
Abraham benedixit. Nam quis magis 
sacerdos Dei summi, quam Dominus 
noster Jesus Christus, qui sacrificium 
Deo Patri obtulit, et obtulit hoc idem, 
quod Melchisedech obtulerat, i.e. pa- 
nem et vinum, suum scilicet corpus et 
sanguinem. Et circa Abraham bene- 
dictio illa precedens, ad nostrum popu- 
lum pertinebat,&c. S.Cyprian. Ep. Ixiii. 
[ad Cecilium, p. 105. ed. Ben.] See 
Grotius upon the place. [Alimenta de- 
dit (Melchisedech) Abrahamo exerci- 
tuique ejus... neque tamen improbabi- 
lis sententia, factum hoc sacrificio prae- 
cedente: ἐπινίκια ἔθυε (sacra fecit vic- 
toriz ergo) ait Philo (de Abrahamo. 
Op., tom. ii. p. 34.) Nam et 6 simila 
oblatio Hebrzis AID (sacrificium) 
Grecis θυσία (hostia) dicitur, Lev. ii. 
... et vinum ante mensam eo libare 
mos omnium gentium. Grotii Annott. 
in Gen. xiv. 18. Crit. Sacr., tom. i. p. 
388. The quotations which follow were 
in the third edition included, apparently 
by a mistake, in note m.] Μελχισεδὲκ, 
βασιλεὺς Σαλὴμ, 6 ἱερεὺς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ 
ὑψίστου, ὃ τὸν οἶνον καὶ τὸν ἄρτον τὴν 
ἡγιασμένην διδοὺς τροφὴν εἰς τύπον 
εὐχαριστία. ----ὃ. Clemen. Alex. Strom., 
lib. iv. p. 539. [ Paris, 1629. p. 637. ed. 
Oxon.] So St. Ambrose in Epist. ad 
Hebr., cap. 5. Hujus ordinem sacrificii 
per mysticam similitudinem Melchise- 
dech justissimus rex instituit, quando 
Domino panis et vini fructus obtulit. 


Constat enim pecudum victimas peri- 
isse, que fuerunt ordinis Aaron, non 
Melchisedech: sed hoe manere potius 
institutum, quod toto orbe in sacra- 
mentorum erogatione  celebratur. — 
[Op., tom. iii. p. 492, Ὁ). Rom. 1579. 
see note h, p. 33; from Rabanus M. 
Op., tom. v. p. 548, A., and ultimately 
from Alcuin, Op., tom. i. pp. 679, 680. ] 
Cap. 7. Neque carnis, et sanguinis 
victimas immolaverit et brutorum san- 
guinem animalium dextra susceperit, 
sed pane et vino simplici puroque 
sacrificio Christi dedicaverit sacerdo- 
tium.—[Pseudo-Amb. ibid. p. 498, 
D., Rabanus M. ibid. p. 552, D., 
Aleuinus, ibid., p. 686.] Which per- 
haps should be read ‘sacramentum,’ 
as in the words of St. Hierome, cited 
below out of his epistle to Evagrius, 
tom, iii. of the Basil edition; Sacerdos 
in eternum secundum ordinem Melchi- 
sedech ; Ordinem autem ejus multis 
modis interpretantur, quod solus et 
rex fuerit et sacerdos, et ante circum- 
cisionem functus sacerdotio, ut non 
gentes ex Judzis, sed Judi e Genti- 
bus sacerdotium acceperint; neque 
unctus oleo sacerdotali, ut Moysis prae- 
cepta constituunt, sed oleo exultationis 
et fidei puritate; neque carnis et san- 
guinis victimas immolaverit, et brutg- 
rum (sanguinem, eorum) animalium 
exta, (id est, quicquid super escam 
est,) susceperit, sed pane et vino, sim- 
plici pureque sacrificio, Christi dedi- 
caverit sacramentum.—[S. Hieron. 
Epist. 78. ad Evangelum (al. 126. ad 
Evagrium) ὃ 3. Op., tom. i. col. 449), 
A, B. The words in parentheses are 
omitted in Vallarsius’ edition, Verona, 
1734.] Petrus de Marea de Sacrificio 
Misse ... Hoc esse Melchisedechi sa- 
crificium, qui panis et vini species Deo 
prius ab se oblatas, ut decebat sacer- 
dotem Altissimi, ad agendas de Abra- 
hami victoria gratias, ipsi dein atque 
commilitonibus edendas bibendasque 


The Council of Nice speaks of it as ‘ the unbloody sacrifice’ 111 


to be that mincha purum™, that “ pure offering” foretold by the 
prophet Malachi, which should be “offered in every place,” and 
not in one, as among the Jews, “unto the name of God among 
the Gentiles, from the rising of the sun unto the going down 
of the same.” Hence they called it, to distinguish it from the 
Jewish sacrifices, θυσίαν λογικὴν Kal ἀναίμακτον, sacrificium 
rationale et incruentum, ‘ the spiritual and unbloody sacrifice, 
or offering without slaughter and blood” And accordingly 
the fathers" in the first council of Nice, speaking of the 
mystery or Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, 
express themselves in this manner; ‘‘ When we are at the 
Lord’s table let us not with low thoughts attend to the bread 
and cup set thereupon, but exalting our minds, let us by 
faith conceive that the Lamb of God°, which taketh away the 


prebuit, ut sacrificii participes omnes 
faceret.... Cujus exemplo Christus, 
pane et vino prolatis in ultima mensa 
Deo gyratias egit.... Quare frugum 
illarum sacrificium a Melchisedecho ad 
Dei venerationem adhibitum, typus fuit 
veri sacrificii a Christo instituti.—[ Pe- 
tri de Marea Archiepiscopi Parisiensis 
Dissertationes Posthume, p.94. Baluz. 
Paris, 1669.] See also St. Hierome 
in Matth. de Consecr. dist. 2. Assumit 
panem, qui confortat cor hominis, et 
ad verum pasche transgreditur sacra- 
mentum, ut quomodo in prefiguratione 
ejus Melchisedech [summi Dei sacer- 
dos] panem et vinum offerens fecerat, 
ipse quoque in veritate sui corporis, et 
sanguinis representaret, —[Comm. in 
Metiba libs tv. ὁ; 26: Op:,, tom. vil. 
col. 216, C. Hickes’ reference is to 
the Decretum (ap. Corpus Juris Ca- 
nonici, tom. i.) Pars iii. Dist. ii. § 88. 
where this passage is quoted. ] 

m Cur itaque postea per Prophetas 
predicat Spiritus futurum, ut in omni 
terra, aut in omni loco offerantur sacri- 
ficia Deo, sicut per Malachiam an- 
gelum unum ex duodecim prophetis: 
‘non recipiam sacrificium de manibus 
vestris, quoniam ab oriente sole usque 
ad occidentem nomen meum clarifica- 
tum est in omnibus gentibus, dicit Do- 
minus omnipotens, et in omni loco of- 
feruntur sacrificia munda nomini meo.’ 
—Tertull. Adversus Judzos, c. 5. [Op., 
Ρ. 187, D.] So contra Marcion., lib. 
lil. c. 22. (ibid. Ρ- 410, 1): 

Z [ ἐπὶ τῆς θείας τραπέζης πάλιν κἀν- 

ταῦθα, μὴ τῷ προκειμένῳ, ἄρτῳ, καὶ τῷ 
ποτηρίῳ ταπεινῶς προσέχωμεν" ἀλλ᾽ 
ὑψώσαντες ἡμῶν τὴν διάνοιαν, πίστει 


νοήσωμεν κεῖσθαι ἐπὶ τῆς ἱερᾶς ἐκείνης 
τραπέζης τὸν ἀμνὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, τὸν at- 
ροντα τὴν ἁμαρτίαν τοῦ κόσμου, ἀθύτως 
ὑπὺ τῶν ἱερίων θυόμενον" καὶ τὸ τίμιον 
αὐτοῦ σῶμα καὶ αἷμα ἀληθῶς λαμβά- 
νοντας ἡμᾶς, πιστεύειν ταῦτα εἶναι τὰ 
τῆς ἡμετέρας ἀναστάσεως σύμβολα.--- 
Gelasii Cyziceni Commentarius Acto- 
rum Niczni Concilii. (Interprete Rob. 
Balforeo) c. 31. Concilia, tom. ii. p. 
241. | 

ο τὸν ἀμνὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ ... ἀθύτως 
ὑπὸ τῶν ἱερέων θυόμενον : ‘ Agnum 1]- 
lum Dei... incruente ἃ sacerdotibus 
immolatum.’ So the words are trans- 
lated truly and properly by Rob. Bal- 
fore, who first published Gelasius’ 
History of the First Council of Nice 
at Paris, 1600. [This translation is re- 
printed in the Councils, see the note on 
it, Concilia, tom. ii. p. 112.j Foras θύω 
in the primary sense signifies to kill or 
slay, Matth. xxii. 4; Luke xv,.22, 23; 
John x. 10; Acts x. 13, so ἄθυτος, from 
whence ἀθύτως, in its primary sense 
signifies ‘non mactatus,’ ‘not killed or 
slain.’ But as θύω in its secondary 
sense signifies to sacrifice, or offer 
animals by slaughter, or mactation, 
and thence again to offer, or sacrifice 
in the most general sense; so the holy 
fathers said, that in the holy Eucha- 
rist the Lamb of God was offered or 
sacrificed ἀθύτως, ‘ incruente,’ without 
blood, or being slain. Indeed ἄθυτος 
also signifies ‘non sacrificatus,’ not 
offered, or sacrificed, and that both in 
a literal and figurative sense. First in 
a literal sense, as in that passage of 
Athenzus, lib. iv. [p. 79. ed. Lugd.] 
where he saith of Epicurus, ἄθυτα δ᾽ ἱερὰ 


CHAP. II. 
SECT. X. 


Mal. 1. 11, 
12. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD, 


112 The Eucharist called a Sacrifice by Constantine. 


sin of the world, is placed upon the holy table, and offered or 
sacrificed by the priests in an unbloody oblation, and that we 
receiving His precious body and blood, believe them to be the 
symbols (or pledges) of our resurrection.” For the same rea- 
son they called the holy Eucharist, ἁγνὴν θυσίαν, hostiam mun- 
dam, puram, a pure offering, because pure from violence and 
blood, as in the words of Constantine the Great, in the twelfth 
chapter of his oration to the Church of the saints, where 
speaking of the commemoration of martyrs in the holy 
Eucharist, he saith’, ‘Such Eucharistical sacrifice is per- 
formed in commemoration of these men, as is pure from 
blood and all violence, in which also there is no need of the 
odour of incense, or of fire, but only of as much pure light 


[ ipa, Dind., tom. i. p. 409] πολλάκις κα- 
τεσθίει, ‘that he frequently eats flesh 
whereof he offered uo part to the gods.’ 
To the right understanding of which I 
must transcribe the words of Is. Casau- 
bon, in his notes on lib.i. cap. 11 of 
Atheneus, [p. 35. Lugd. 1621.] Ob- 
servamus Grecos scriptores ἱερεῖα ap- 
pellare non solum victimas, quz vere 
ἱερεύονται, et in sacrificiorum usum 
mactantur: verum omnia quzecunque 
ad comedendum jugulantur animalia. 
Satis constat tam ex sacris quam ex 
aliis literis, primis temporibus ignota 
hominibus carnium manducatione, tan- 
tum in honorem numinis mactari soli- 
tas hostias. Piguit postea mortales 
olerum, et τῆς ἀπύρου τροφῆς: itaque 
coepere etiam ipsi carnibus vesci: sed 
parce initio... Nunquam autem ullum 
animal in proprios usus mactabant, 
quin ejus aliquam partem Deo conse- 
crarent adolendam. Qui secus face- 
rent, proverbio notati ἄθυτα ἱερὰ κατε- 
σθίει. Quod de homine impio impro- 
boque solitum dici. So in Suidas, 
[tom. i. col. 129, ] ἀθύτους" ἄνευ θυσιῶν, 
καὶ γήμας ἀθυτούς τε καὶ ἀγάμους γά- 
μους ἐκείνους (ἐκεῖνος, Gaisf.) ‘ Having 
solemnized marriage without sacrifice.’ 
And in the same word, ἐδεῖτο μὲν of τὸ 
σῶμα κρεοφαγίας-, ἀθύτου δὲ οὐκ ἠνέσχετο 
μεταλαβεῖν" ‘ His body required eating 
of flesh, but he never eat of it, before 
some part was offered in sacrifice to 
the gods.’ Secondly, &@uros signifies 
‘not sacrificed’ in a figurative sense, 
when the sacrifice or offering is not 
accepted by reason of some defect in 
the offerer or offering, and is therefore 
deemed as no sacrifice. So Philo de 
vita Mosis, lib. iii. [Op.,] p. 669, [E. 


Paris, 1640,] saith the sacrifices of the 
wicked are ἄθυτοι θυσίαι, καὶ ἀνιεροὶ 
ἱερουργίαι, ‘sacrifices not sacrificed, and 
unholy oblations.’ And elsewhere in 
the same book, [p. 677, C.] θυσίας 
ἀθύτους ἀνήγαγον, ‘They offered pro- 
fane unhallowed abominable sacrifices ;’ 
that is, profane polluted sacrifices, in 
the same sense as the Greeks called 
null marriages γάμους ἀγάμους, [ Soph. 
(id. T., 1214.]; and a gift of an enemy 
δῶρον ἄδωρον, [ Id. Aj. 665,] as being a 
gift, which in effect was no gift. Now 
in the literal sense of ἄθυτος, the Lamb 
of God cannot be said not to be offered 
at all in the Eucharist, because His re- 
presentative body and blood were lite- 
rally offered, and presented to God upon 
the holy table, as is plainer from all 
antiquity than to need proof. Nor se- 
condly, could it be the intention of the 
Nicene fathers to say that Christ in 
the holy Eucharist was not offered in 
this figurative sense, for that had been 
to assert that the propitiatory oblation 
of the Eucharist for the remission of 
sins, and the resurrection unto life eter- 
nal, had been a profane, polluted, and 
vain oblation; and therefore ἀθύτως 
θυόμενος, in the passage here cited, can 
only signify ‘offered, but not slain,’ 
offered or sacrificed without mactation 
or blood. 

P [καὶ τοιαύτη τις εὐχαριστίας θυσία 
τοῖς ἀνδράσιν ἀποτελεῖται: ἁγνὴ μὲν 
αἵματος, ἁγνὴ δὲ πάσης Blas’ οὐδὲ μὴν 
ὀσμὴ λιβάνων ἐπιποθεῖται, οὐδὲ πυρκαϊά" 
καθαρὸν δὲ φῶς, ὅσον ἐξαρκέσαι πρὸς 
ἔκλαμψιν τοῖς evxouevors.—Constantini 
Imp. Oratio que inscribitur ‘ad Ce- 
tum Sanctorum;’ ad cale. Euseb. Vit. 
Const. ap. Hist. Ecel., tom. i. p. 692. ] 


Spiritual Sacrifices and Priesthood 1 Pet. ii. δ. 118 


CHAP. If. 


as is sufficient to give light to the worshippers.” So St. 
SECT. X. 


Chrysostom in his Homily on St. Eustathius saith4, “the ini- 
tiated knew” ἐστὶ θυσία καὶ χώρις αἵματος, “that there is a 
sacrifice without blood.” They also called it, θυσίαν αἰνέσεως, 
‘a sacrifice of praise,’ according to what Buxtorf’ tells us 
some Rabbins said, “ that the sacrifice of praise should never 
cease ;” and agreeably to what St. Peter the Apostle of the 1 Pet. 2. 
circumcision saith, to the whole house or family of Christians P. 
converted from Judaism, “ Ye also as lively stones are built 

up a spiritual house*, into an holy priesthood to offer up 
spiritual sacrifices” (of which the holy Eucharist is the chief) 
“acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” This spiritual house, 

built up of converted Jews and Gentiles into an holy priest- 

hood, was a political house, or society, of which Jesus Christ, 

whom He calls the “ living precious corner-stone,”’ was the vers. 4, 6. 
supreme head and governor. For as the head and governor 

of every political house is what the corner-stone is to a 
building, the strength and support of it, and as this spiri- 

tual house must be taken for the political house of God’s 

Church, as it is taken, Heb. iii. 5, 6, in these words, “ whose 

house we are :” so the holy priesthood mentioned here, is not 

to be taken for the priestly function or office, as if all Chris- 

tians were priests, but for the priestly polity, and govern- 

ment of the Church, “ which is the house of God.”’ It is also 1 Tim. 3. 5. 
taken in the same sense in the ninth verse, where the whole 

body of Christians, like the Jewish people, Exod. xix. Θ᾽, is 

said to be “a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy 


4 


1 [ἀλλ᾽ ἔστι θυσία καὶ χωρὶς aluaros’ quod ex opibus et armis, sed quod ex 


ἴσασιν of μεμυημένοι τὸ Aeyouevov.—S. 
Chrys. Hom. in S. Eustathium, § 2. 
Op., tom. ii. p. 606, C.] 

τ Lexicon Rabbin. in 132. [p. 
2122. Basil. 1639, apud Rabbinos 
mtn yap) odor natn 55 


nbyys abp3 43°, omnia sacrificia ces- 
sabunt, sed sacrificium laudis non ces- 
sat in eternum.—Medr. Psal. 100. ] 

5. eis prefigunt Steph. 8. 1. Alex. 
N.1. Barb. 5, cov. 4. Genev. ASthiop. 
Dr. Mills’ Greek Testament. [ Novum 
Testamentum cum Lect. Var. Oxon. 
1707. | 

* Fagius upon the place. [In He- 
bro est,] regnum sacerdotale, vel sa- 
cerdotum, h. e. regnum non profanum, 


HICKES. 


sacerdotibus, rebus sacris et divinis 
constat: q.d. Sacrum et divinum erit 
hoc regnum. Nemo dubitet Spiritum 
Sanctum hic potissimum respexisse ad 
Christum, qui est verus ille rex et 
sacerdos, qui tandem ex populo Judaico 
secundum promissiones Dei proditurus 
erat. Quandoquidem autem una est 
Judzorum et Gentium fides, unus 
Deus, unaque Ecclesia, cum ad vite 
innocentiam et puritatem Christianum 
populum hortaretur Petrus, his verbis 
commodissime est usus; ‘ Vos, inquit, 
genus electum, regale sacerdotium.’— 
[ Crit. Sacr., tom. i. pars 1, Annott. in 
Exod., p. 388. ] 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


114 The Christian Church has a Fegal Priesthood. 


nation, and a peculiar people,” which was as true in the 
proper political sense of the Christians, as it was of the Jews, 
because the Church as one spiritual body politic hath Jesus 
Christ for its supreme governor, who is both king and 
priest. This polity. of His kingdom is properly expressed by 
a royal or kingly priesthood, in which the Christians are 
governed, as the Jews in their theocracy were, by a priest, 
who was a secular as well as a sacerdotal minister, and a 
type of Christ, who is both king and priest of His Church. 
To this purpose speaks St. Clement in his Epistle to the 
Corinthians, chap. lviii.": “ Now God (saith he) the seer of all 
things, the Father and ruler of all spirits, and Lord of all 
flesh, who hath elected* our Lord Jesus Christ, and us by 
Him, to be His peculiar people, grant to every soul that 
calleth upon His glorious holy Name, faith, fear, peace, 
patience, long-suffering, continence, purity, and wisdom, unto 
all well-pleasing of Him, through our High-Priest and pre- 
fect, Jesus Christ, to whom be glory, majesty, dominion, and 
honour, now and for ever. Amen.” Wherefore the Church 
by its theocratical constitution having such a governor, to 
whom glory, and majesty, and dominion, and honour be- 
longeth, that is, who is a king as well as an High-Priest, the 
government of it must be a kingly priesthood, or a priestly 
kingdom under His administration, of whom it is written, 
“Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec.” 
So saith St. Hierome’, Et ipse rex, et sacerdos nobis utrumque 
donaverit, ut simus genus regale et sacerdotale, et quasi angu- 
laris lapis parietem utrumque conjunxerit, et de duobus gregibus 
bonus pastor unum effecerit gregem: “ He also,” (speaking of 
Christ as the antitype of Melchisedec) “being king and 
priest, gave us both (honours), that we should be a regal and 
sacerdotal sort (of people), and He as the corner-stone hath 


" [ὁ παντεπόπτης Θεὺς, καὶ δεσπότης ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ" δὲ οὗ αὐτῷ δόξα 


τῶν πνευμάτων καὶ κύριος πάσης σαρκὺς, 
ὁ ἐκλεξάμενος τὸν κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χρι- 
στὸν, καὶ ἡμᾶς δι᾽ αὐτοῦ εἰς λαὸν περι- 
ούσιον, δῴη πάσῃ ψυχῇ ἐπικεκλημένῃ 
τὸ μεγαλοπρεπὲς καὶ ἅγιον ὄνομα αὐτοῦ, 
πίστιν, φόβον, εἰρήνην, ὑπομονὴν, μα- 
κροθυμίαν, ἐγκράτειαν, ἁγνείαν καὶ σω- 
φροσύνην, εἰς εὐαρέστησιν τῷ ὀνόματι 
αὐτοῦ, διὰ τοῦ ἀρχιερέως, καὶ προστάτου 


καὶ μεγαλωσύνη, κράτος, τιμὴ καὶ νῦν 
καὶ εἰς πάντας τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων" 
ἀμήν.---. Clem, Ep. ad Cor. i. ο. 58. 
Patr. Apost., tom. i. pp. 180, 181.] 

x παρὰ Θεῷ ἔκλεκτον, 1 Pet. ii. 4. Al- 
θον ἀκρογωναῖον ἔκλεκτον, ibid., ver. 6. 

y [S. Hieron. Epist. 73 ad Evange- 
lum (al. 126 ad Evagrium) Op., tom. 
i. fol. 444, A. ] 


The Euch. anciently called the Oblation, and the Sacrifice. 115 


united both the walls, and as the good Shepherd of two flocks cuar. u. 
hath made one.” = 
But to return to the Christian oblation or sacrifice in the 
holy Eucharist, I cannot but observe that the offering of the 
bread and wine was of old esteemed so special a part of that 
most holy service, that the administration of the holy Com- 
munion and the Communion itself was signified by προσφέ- 
ρειν and προσφορὰ in the Greek, and by offerre and odlatio 
in the Latin Church. So Can. Apost., viii.*: “If any bishop, 
or presbyter, or deacon, doth not receive, προσφορᾶς yevo- 
μένης, at the Communion, let him give a reason for it; but if 
he will not tell his reason, let him be excommunicated, as 
one who gives offence to the people and brings a scandal κατὰ 
τοῦ προσενέγκαντος, upon him that administers, as if he did 
not rightly administer 10. So Constit. Apost., lib. viii. cap. 
28%: “The bishop blesseth, lays on hands, ordains, and 
προσφέρει, administers the Communion. But the deacon 
ov προσφέρει, doth not administer the Communion, τοῦ δὲ 
ἐπισκόπου προσενεγκόντος ἢ TOU πρεσβυτέρου, but when the 
bishop or presbyter administers the Communion, he delivers 
(the cup) to the people.” So Can. 18. Concil. Nicen.”, the 
council forbids deacons to “deliver the Eucharist to priests, 
because they who have no power προσφέρειν, to administer 
the Communion, cannot give the body of Christ τοῖς προσφέ- 
ρουσι, to those who minister it.” It is also called θυσία" : and 
by Justin the Martyr’, τῶν ἐθνῶν θυσία; the sacrifice of the 
(converted) Gentiles, to distinguish it from the sacrifices of 
the Jews. But those who desire to see more authorities of 
this sort, may consult the citations in the margin®, and for the 





2 [el τις ἐπίσκοπος, ἢ πρεσβύτερος, 
ἢ διάκονος, ἢ ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τοῦ 
ἱερατικοῦ προσφορᾶς γενομένης μὴ με- 
ταλάβοι, τὴν αἰτίαν εἰπάτω: καὶ ἐὰν 
εὔλογος ἢ, συγγνώμης τυγχανέτω" εἰ 
δὲ μὴ λέγει, ἀφοριζέσθω, ὡς αἴτιος βλά- 
Bns γενόμενᾳς τῷ λαῷ, καὶ ὑπόνοιαν 
ποιῆσας κατὰ τοῦ προσενέγκαντος (alii 
addunt ὡς μὴ ὑγιῶς ἀνενεγκόντος, et ita 
Dionysius. )—Concil., tom. i. p. 26, D.] 

@ [Concil., tom. i. p. 493, C. See 
above, p. 37, note x. ] 

® [Ibid., tom. ii. p. 42. 
p- 37, note x. | 

ὁ Canon. Apost. χὶν. [ἐπίσκοπον, ἢ 
πρεσβύτερον αἱρετικῶν δεξάμενον βάπ- 


See above, 


τισμα, ἢ θυσίαν, καθαιρεῖσθαι προστάσ- 
couev.—Concil., tom. i. p. 36, Β.] 

4 (S. Justin. M. Dial. cum Tryph. 
ce. 41. p. 138, A. quoted above, p. 94. ] 

€ Concilii Niceni, Can. xi, [δύο δὲ 
ἔτη χώρις προσφορᾶς κοινωνήσουσι τῷ 
λαῷ τῶν Tpoocvx@v.—Concil., tom. 11. 
p. 87, D.] Can. xiii. [καὶ κοινωνίας τυ- 
χὼν καὶ προσφορᾶς μετασχών, and με- 
ταδιδότω τῆς προσφορᾶς, are the clauses 
referred to by Hickes; they are now con- 
sidered spurious. See Labbe and Cois- 
sart, ibid., p. 40, B. marg. The second 
clause is given as genuine in Beve- 
ridge’s Pandecte, tom. i. p. 74, A.] 
Concil. Ancyrani, [A.D. 314] Can. 


ΠΣ; 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


116‘ Oblatio’ and ’ offerre’ used of the Eucharist. 


authorities of single fathers of the Greek Church I forbear to 
cite them, because they are so numerous, and I have already 
cited enough. As for the writers of the Latin Church, who 
use oblatio and offerre for the Eucharist, and for to administer 
the same, it is sufficient for my purpose to send the reader 
back to the testimonies of St. Cyprian, cited in the Preface‘, 
and to his master Tertullian, particularly to that famous pas- 
sage which hath exercised the pens of so many learned men®, 
et offers, et tinguis, et sacerdos es tibi solus. So de Cultu Fe- 
minarum, lib. 11. cap. 11": aut imbecillus aliquis ex fratribus 
visitatur, aut sacrificium offertur, aut Dei sermo administratur. 
So de Corona, cap. 3': oblationes pro defunctis, pro natalitiis 
annua die facimus, which is to be understood of the Eucha- 
ristical oblations, as is evident from the like passage de Kx- 
hortatione Castitatis,cap.11): Pro cujus spiritu postulas, pro 
qua oblationes reddis? et offeres pro duabus? et commenda- 
bis illas duas per sacerdotem? Upon which place saith Ri- 
galtius*’, Recte autem dicitur ‘offerre per sacerdotem, quia 
solius sacerdotis, non vero laicorum est offerre sacrificium. To 
which let me add what he saith of the devils applying the 
Christian sacraments and ceremonies; de Prescriptione He- 
reticorum, cap. 40': Diabolus res sacramentorum divinorum 
emulatur. Tingit et ipse quosdam... Mithra signat in fronti- 
bus milites suos, celebrat et panis oblationem ; “The devil imi- 
tates the Divine sacraments or mysteries, &c. he baptizes 
some, and Mithra signs his worshippers in their foreheads, 
and is solemnly worshipped with an oblation of bread ;”” which, 


xvi. [τότε καὶ τῆς προσφορᾶς ἐφαπτέσ- 
θωσαν.---ΤὉ14., tom. i. p. 1492, C.] 
Concil. Neoczsar. [A.D. 314.) Can. 
ix. [πρεσβύτερος.... μὴ προσφερέτω. -- 
p. 1512, D, E.] Can. xiii. Lem xwpior 
πρεσβύτεροι ἐν τῷ κυριακῷ τῆ" πόλεως 
προσφέρειν οὐ δύνανται, παρόντος ἐπι- 
σκόπου, kK. τ. A.—Ibid., p. 1518, B.] 
Concil. Gangrensis, [A.D. 824 Can. 
iv. [εἴ τις διακρίνοιτο παρὰ πρεσβυτέρου 
γεγαμηκότος, ὡς μὴ χρῆναι λειτυυργή- 
σαντο αὐτοῦ 'προσφορᾶς μεταλαμβάνειν, 
ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.---ΤὈϊά., tom. ii. p. 427, 
C.] Concil. Laodiceni, A.D. 364 2] 
Can. xix. [καὶ οὕτω τὴν ἁγίαν προσφο- 
ρὰν ἐπιτελεῖσθαι.----ΤὈ14., tom. i. p. 1533, 
D.] Can. lviii. [ὅτε οὐ δεῖ ἐν τοῖν ateots 
προσφορὰς γίνεσθαι παρὰ ἐπισκόπων ἢ 
mpeoBurépwy.—ibid., p. 1540, D.] 

f [See vol. i. of this edition, pp. 


94—98. ] 

Β Tert. de Exhort. Castit., cap. 7. 
[Op., p. 522, A. See Pref. Disc., vol. i. 
p. 238, note a. | 

h [Tertull. Op., p. 159, C.] 

i [Ibid., p. 102 AL] 

ὁ [Ibid., p. 523, D. Tertullian is 
addressing one supposed to have mar- 
ried a second time. } 

k [The note is not one of Rigalt’s 
but of Pamelius’, who published a vo- 
lume of annotations appended to Ri- 
galt’s text and notes, forming the se- 
cond volume of the edition of Tertul- 
lian’s works, called Rigalt’s, tom, ii. p. 
587. Paris, 1635. | 

1 [Tertull. Ops p. 216; Des seenp: 
101, note r, and p. 48, where Hickes 
incorrectly speaks of Mithra (the sun) 
as a goddess. | 


The oblation of the bread and wine distinct from any other. 117 


as I observed on the like passage of Justin the Martyr™, shews cmap. u. 
that the bread was literally offered in the Eucharist, because ~~ 
it was offered in the sacrifices of the idol Mithra, in imitation 
of the Christian sacrifice. From these testimonies, I think 
it is plain that the oblation of the elements was a principal 
rite or ritual part of the Eucharistical service, and that from 
thence it came to be emphatically denoted by ‘ oblation’ and 
‘sacrifice ;) and the administration of it by προσφέρειν and 
offerre in the writers of the ancient Greek and Latin Church. 
in the second place, I cannot but observe that the ancient 
Church made a plain and accurate distinction between the 
oblation of bread and wine upon the altar in the Eucharist, 
and the oblation of other things thereupon. So in the third 
Apostolical Canon"; “If any bishop or presbyter offers any 
thing upon the altar besides what the Lord has ordained (to 
be offered) ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ, in the holy Communion, . . . he shall 
be deposed, excepting the first-fruits of corn and grapes in 
their proper season.” So the council in Trullo®; “ Understand- 
ing that the ministers of some Churches used (θυσίᾳ) at the 
Communion to join the oblation of grapes (which were only 
to be blessed as first-fruits) with the unbloody oblation, and 
to distribute both together to the people, they forbid any 
priest to do so for the time to come, but to deliver to the 
people only the oblation, for the resurrection after death unto 
eternal life, and the remission of sins.” The great council of 
Carthage in like manner ordained, “ That in the Eucharist 
nothing should be offered but bread, and wine mixed with 
water; but when the first-fruits of corn or grapes were 
offered, or honey and milk on the accustomed day for infants, 
that they should be offered by themselves upon the altar 





m [See above, p. 101, q.] 

n [εἴ tis ἐπίσκοπος, ἢ πρεσβύτερος 
παρὰ τὴν τοῦ κυρίου διάταξιν τὴν ἐπὶ 
τῇ θυσίᾳ, προσενέγκῃ ἕτερά τινα ἐπὶ τὸ 
θυσιαστήριον. ἢ μέλι, ἢ γάλα, ἢ ἀντὶ 
οἴνου σίκερα ... καθαιρείσθω, πλὴν νέων 
χίδρων, ἢ σταφυλῆς τῷ καιρῷ τῷ δέοντι. 
—Canon. Apost. iii. Concil., tom. i. p. 
25. Hickes has misapprehended the 
force of ἐπί. 

° { Concilii Constantinopolitani dicti 
Quinisexti sive Trullani, (A.D. 692.) 
Canon xxviii. ἐπειδὴ ἐν διαφόροις ἐκ- 
κλησίαις μεμαθήκαμεν, σταφυλῆς ἐν τῷ 


θυσιαστηρίῳ προσφερομένης κατά τι κρα- 
τῆσαν ἔθος, τοὺς λειτουργοὺς ταύτην τῇ 
ἀναιμάκτῳ τῆς προσφορᾶς θυσίᾳ συνάπ- 
τοντας, οὕτως ἅμα τῷ λαῷ διανέμειν 
ἀμφότερα᾽ συνείδομεν, ὧς μηκέτι τοῦτό 
τινα τῶν ἱερωμένων ποιεῖν: ἀλλ᾽ εἰς 
ζωοποίησιν καὶ ἁμαρτιῶν ἄφεσιν τῷ λαῷ 
τῆς προσφορᾶς μόνης μεταδιδόναι" ὡς 
ἀπαρχήν δὲ τὴν τῆς σταφυλῆς λογιζο- 
μένους προσένεξιν, ἰδικῶς τοὺς ἱερεῖς 
εὐλογοῦντας τοῖς αἰτοῦσι ταύτης μετα- 
διδόναι πρὸς τὴν τοῦ δοτῆρος τῶν καρπῶν 
evxapicriav.—Concilia, tom. vil. p. 
1360, C, D.] 


118 The second Council of Nice on the Euch. Sacrifice. 


curistiAN apart, that they might be distinguished from the Sacrament 


PRIEST- 
HOOD, 


of the body and blood of the Lord”.” 

This distinction of the bread and wine from other altar- 
offerings is also expressed in the prayer for the communi- 
cants, Const. Apost., lib. viii. c. 10%; καὶ ὑπὲρ τῶν τὰς Ovcias 
καὶ Tas ἀπαρχὰς προσφερόντων Κυρίῳ τῷ Θεῷ ἡμῶν δεηθώῶ- 
μεν: “ Let us also pray for those who offer sacrifices and 
first-fruits to the Lord our God.” And it is ἃ demonstra- 
tion that they were offered in the Sacrament, and that the 
oblation of them was the practice of the Catholic Church. 

But thirdly, it is evident from one argument which the 
orthodox fathers used in the second council of Nice against 
the worship of images, that the bread and wine were solemnly 
offered in the Eucharist, and that the oblation of them was 
esteemed a sacrifice of Divine institution. That argument 
was to this purpose, viz.", “That the Catholic Church of us 
Christians agreed with the Jewish and Gentile religion, being 
a medium between both, as having a new mystical sacrifice 
instituted by God, but without the rites and ceremonies of 
either, not admitting the bloody sacrifices and burnt-offerings 
of Judaism, and abhorring the idols and idol-worship in the 
sacrifices of Gentilism, which was the author and inventor of 
that abominable art (of making and worshipping idols.) For 
the Gentiles having no hope of a resurrection, invented this 
mockery of religion, worthy of themselves, ridiculously to re- 
present what was not present as present. Wherefore let us 


P (Concilii Carthag. tertii nomine [... ἐπείπερ ἣ καθολικὴ ἡμῶν τῶν Χρισ- 


vere secundi, (A.D. 397.) Canon xxiy. 
Hoe caput in vetustis codicibus ita 
hibetur: Ut in sacramentis corporis et 
sanguinis Domini nihil amplius offe- 
ratur quam ipse Dominus tradidit, hoc 
est, panis et vinum aqua mixtum. 
Primitiz vero, seu mel et lac, quod 
uno die solemnissimo pro infantis mys- 
terio solet offerri, quamvis in altari 
offeratur, suam tamen habent propriam 
benedictionem, ut a sacramento domi- 
nici corporis aut sanguinis distinguan- 
tur; nec amplius de primitiis offeratur, 
quain de uvis et frumentis. The pas- 
sage from ‘ Primitiz’ to ‘ distinguan- 
tur’ is not given as genuine by Labbe. 
—Concil., tom. ii. p. 1403, A, B.] 
4 [Concil., tom. i. p. 470, D.] 

_* Concil. Niczn. ii. (A.D. 787.) Ac- 
tio Sexta. Tpnydpios ἐπίσκοπος ἀνέγνω. 


τιανῶν ἐκκλήσια ᾿Ιουδαϊσμοῦ καὶ ἑλλη- 
νισμοῦ τυγχάνουσα, οὐδ᾽ ὁποτέρας αὐτῶν 
συνήθους τελετῆς μετέχει, ἀλλὰ καινὴν 
εὐσεβείας καὶ μυσταγωγίας θεοπαραδό- 
του τρίβον ὁδεύει, τοῦ μὲν ᾿Ιουδαϊσ μοῦ 
τὰς ἐναίμους θυσίας καὶ ὁλοκαυτώσεις μὴ 
παραδεχομένη, τοῦ δὲ ἑλληνισμοῦ πρὸς 
ταῖς θυσίαις καὶ πᾶσαν εἰδωλοποιΐαν τε 
καὶ εἰδωλολατρείαν βδελυσσομένη, ὃς 
ἀρχηγὸς καὶ ἐφευρετὴς τῆς βδελυρᾶς 
ταύτης τέχνης γεγένηται. ἐλπίδα γὰρ 
ἀναστάσεως μὴ ἔχων, ἄξιον ἑαυτοῦ παίγ- 
νιον συνεσκόπησεν, ἵνα τὰ μὴ παρόντα 
διὰ τῆς χλεύης παραστήσῃ. οἱ οὖν οὐδὲν 
τῶν ξένων ἐστὶν ἐν αὐτῇ. ἄρα ὡς ἀλλό- 
τριον τοῦτο καὶ δαιμονιοφόρων ἀνδρῶν 
εὔρημα ἀποτραπέσθω τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ 
éxkAnotas.—Concilia, tom. viii. p. 1107, 
ΒΟ 


Melchisedec’s offering a type of the Eucharist. 119 


reject this foreign invention of men inspired by the devil, 
from the Church of Christ.” From this way of reasoning 
against the use of images in Divine worship, it is plain that 
these holy fathers thought the Christians had a sacrifice of 
Divine institution, though not a bloody sacrifice as the Jews 
had, nor polluted with image worship after the manner of the 
Gentiles, but a pure unbloody sacrifice in the holy Eucharist, 
which was a medium of negation from both, as being neither 
a bloody nor an idolatrical oblation. 

In the fourth place, the ancients asserted that Melchise- 
dec, who was the type of Christ, offered bread and wine; 
and that the bread and wine which he offered prefigured the 
oblation of it in the Eucharist. That he offered the bread 
and wine mentioned Gen. xiv. 18, appears from the version 
of the LXX.° καὶ Μελχισεδὲκ βασιλεὺς Σαλὴμ ἐξηνέγκεν ap- 
τους καὶ οἶνον. So Tertullian adversus Jude@os, lib. i. cap. 3: 
Melchisedech, qui ipsi Abraham jam incircumeiso revertenti de 
prelio, panem et vinum obtulit incircumcisus. And cap, 2: 
Unde Melchisedech sacerdos Dei summi nuncupatus, si non ante 
Levitice legis sacerdotium Levite fuerunt, qui sacrificia Deo 
offerebant 2 And as they believed that Melchisedec first 
offered the bread and wine with which he entertained Abra- 
ham, so they taught, as I have already shewed from many 
authorities, that Christ, the antitypal Melchisedec, as really 
offered bread and wine to the Father at the institution of the 
holy Eucharist. From those and other authorities cited in 
this letter, it is plain that the bread and wine were really 
offered in the Eucharist, and were, in the opinion of the 
ancient Church, as properly an external material oblation in 
that pure unbloody sacrifice, as any other thing could be 
that was offered by any priest upon the altar of any god. 

Indeed there were two oblations' of the elements in the 


5. [This statement seems to have 
arisen from some mistake. | 

t See Irenzus, as cited before, lib. 
iv. cap. 32, and Dr. Grabe’s notes upon 
the place. [On the subject of the two 
oblations see Johnson’s Unbloody Sacri- 
fice, Prefatory Epistle, vol. i. p. 33, ed. 
1847. Hickes in writing to Johnson 
April 21, 1713, seemed disposed to 
modify his opinion. He says, “I fore- 
see I shall come entirely into your 
notion of the one sacrifice, but as to the 


oblation of the elements 1 have still a 
notion that they were first offered up 
in common with the first fruits, when 
they were set upon the altar, and again 
for a sacrament or sacrifice in the 
prayer of consecration ; but I think it 
is not material to the controversy, 
whether they were once or twice offered 
... but when I have read your papers, 
I expect I shall alter my opinion for 
yours.”’—Appendix to Johnson’s Post- 
humous Works, p. 394, Lond, 1748. And 


CHAP. Il. 


SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST « 
HOOD. 


120 = =Two oblations of the elements in the Eucharist, 


Eucharist ; one before the consecration, in which they were 
presented to God the Father upon the altar, as the first- 
fruits of His creatures, to acknowledge Him for our sovereign 
Lord and benefactor; the other at the consecration, when 
they were offered to Him as the symbols of Christ’s body 
and blood, or as the mystical body and blood of Christ, to 
represent that oblation He made of both upon the cross, and 
to obtain the benefits of His death and passion ; “ who, by the 
oblation of Himself once so offered, made a full and perfect 
satisfaction for the sins of the whole world.” These two obla- 
tions are distinguishable in Justin Martyr’s short account 
of the celebration of the Eucharist"; the first at the offering 
of the bread and the cup of water and wine, “ which, saith 
he, the bishop (or priest) receiving, offers up αἶνον καὶ δόξαν, 
praise and glory to God the Father of all things, through the 
name of His Son and the Holy Spirit; and also offers up 
thanksgiving for deeming us worthy of these His creatures.” 
This long action of praise and thanksgiving, καὶ εὐχαρισ- 
tlav....€ml πολὺ ποιεῖται; may be seen at large in the 
Apostolical Constitutions, lib. viii. cap. 12%; where it be- 
gins after these words, ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς εἰπάτω" ἄξιον ὡς ἀλη- 
θώς καὶ δίκαιον" and ends in these, καὶ ἐκαθέσθη ἐκ δεξιῶν 
σου τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Πατρὸς αὐτοῦ. Then after a short in- 
troduction, in which are the words of the institution, fol- 
lows the second oblation of the elements, beginning at μεμ- 
νημένοι οὖν ὧν δι’ ἡμᾶς ὑπέμεινενῦ, κ. τ. r., which I shall 
hereafter transcribe. This second Eucharistical oblation, in 
which the elements were offered as the mystical body and 
blood of Christ, and wherein they prayed God the Father 
graciously to accept them, is implied by Justin’ in the word 


kal δόξαν τῷ πατρὶ τῶν ὅλων διὰ τοῦ 
ὀνόματος τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος 


in another letter without date, written 
before May 15, 1713, he says, “ By 


the first oblation of the holy elements 
I never meant any other than what they 
had in being presented to God upon the 
altar with the first fruits.”’ On the out- 
side of the letter Johnson had written, 
“Ἢρ comes into my notion of the ob- 
lation.’’ Hickes, however, did not alter 
any thing which he had here said, either 
in the Supplement of 1715, orinhis MS, 
notes. | 

ἃ ἔπειτα προσφέρεται TH προεστῶτι 
τῶν ἀδελφῶν ἄρτος, καὶ ποτήριον ὕδατος 
καὶ κράματος [καὶ οὗτος λαβὼν, αἶνον 


τοῦ ἁγίου ἀναπέμπει" καὶ εὐχαριστίαν 
ὑπὲρ τοῦ κατηξιῶσθαι τούτων παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ 
ἐπὶ πολὺ ποιεῖται. ---. Just. Mart. Apol. 
i. c. #5. p. 82, D. quoted note g, p. 106.] 

τ [Concil., tom. i. p. 473, C. ] 

x [Ibid., p. 480, D.] 

y [Ibid. This is a mistake. The 
words in the text precede the words of 
institution. The second oblation be- 
gins at μεμνημένοι Toivuy.—p. 482, A. } 

z [S. Just. Mart. Apol. i. ο. 65. p. 
82, E. note g, p. 106.] 


in the ancient, and in our present Liturgy. 121 


εὐχὰς in the sentence next to that which 1 have cited, viz., 
οὗ συντελέσαντος τὰς εὐχὰς καὶ τὴν εὐχαριστίαν; πᾶς ὁ Ta- 
ρὼν λαὸς ἐπευφημεῖ, ἀμήν" which I cannot better translate 
than in the words of Mr. Reeves*, ‘When the bishop (or 
priest) hath finished the prayers, all the people present con- 
clude with an audible voice, saying, Amen.” ‘These two 
forms of oblation of the bread and wine, though then in one 
continued prayer, are plainly distinguished by St. Cyril of 
Jerusalem, Catechesis Mystagogica v.», where the first is de- 
scribed § v. vi., and the latter in § vii. ix., and the descrip- 
tion of them in both places exactly agrees with the large 
account of ministering the holy Sacrament in the Apo- 
stolical Constitutions, cited above; and they are also to be 
found in all the ancient liturgies. In our present liturgy 
the first oblation is made in the beginning of the prayer 
for the whole state of Christ’s Church, immediately after 
the priest hath placed the bread and wine upon the table, 
in these words, “ Almighty and everlasting God... 

>... . we humbly beseech Thee ..... to accept [these] our 
alms and oblations.” And the latter is made in substance, 
and according to the intention of the Church in the prayer 
of consecration to God the Father, where, after the comme- 
moration of Christ’s offerimg Himself upon the cross, and 
His institution of the perpetual memorial of His precious 
death, God the Father is implored to hear us, while, “ac- 
cording to the same institution, we receive His creatures of 
bread and wine in remembrance of His Son our Saviour’s 
death and passion.”’ And then, while the priest recites the 
words of the institution, he is to take the bread into his 
hands and break it; and at the words ‘ This is My body,’ to 
lay his hand upon all the bread; and at the words, ‘ He took 
the cup,’ he is to take the chalice into his hand; and at these 


a [The Apologies of Justin Martyr, 
Tertullian, &c., translated by the Rev. 
William Reeves, pp. 118,119. London, 
1709. ] 

b [The fifth Catechesis Mystagogica 
is an explanation of the Eucharistic 
service, to prepare the catechumens for 
admission to it; ὃ v. ison the words ev- 
χαριστῶμεν τῷ κυρίῳ, and the response 
ἄξιον καὶ δίκαιον. ὃ vi. he says, μετὰ 
ταῦτα μνημονεύομεν οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς, 


καὶ θαλάσσης, K.T.A. Then after men- 
tioning the consecration, ὃ vii. he 
speaks, ὃ viii., of the proper oblation, 
εἶτα μετὰ τὸ ἀπαρτισθῆναι τὴν πνευμα- 
τικὴν θυσίαν, τὴν ἀναίμακτον λατρείαν 
ἐπὶ τῆς θυσίας ἐκείνης τοῦ ἱλασμοῦ πα- 
ρακαλοῦμεν τὸν Θεὸν, ὑπὲρ κοινῆς τῆς 
ἐκκλησιῶν εἰρήνης, kK. TA. The account 
of these intercessions continues through 
the following section. ὃ. Cyril Hieros. 
Op., pp. 326, 328. ] 


CUAP, 11. 
SECT. X. 


192 The primitive form for the administration of the Lord’s 


curistian words, ‘This is My blood of the New Testament,’ &c., he is 


PRIEST - 
HOOD, 


to lay his hand upon every vessel in which there is wine to 
be consecrated. These are the solemn rites which attend 
‘our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving,’ (as it is truly 
called in the prayer of the post-communion,) at the conse- 
cration, as the placing the bread and wine upon the table by 
the priest, in order to be so consecrated by him, is also to be 
observed. And therefore those bishops and priests who can 
satisfy their consciences in the total neglect of this rite, may 
as well satisfy them in the total omission of the other; and 
then take upon them to say, as some lately have done‘, “ That 
the general neglect of the clergy to observe them vacates 
them ;” a way of arguing, which were it true might vacate 
all the other rules and rubrics of the Church. 

But to return to the Christian oblation or sacrifice: the 
next argument I shall produce to prove that the bread and 
wine were really offered in the holy Communion is taken 
from the primitive manner of the administration of it, as 
set forth in the eighth book of the Apostolical Constitu- 
tions, cited in the last paragraph*. In this liturgical ac- 
count of the holy Sacrament we read that the catechu- 
mens, and audients, &c., being gone out of the church, 
the deacon began the office of the holy Eucharist with 
that general admonition®; μή Tus κατά Tivos’ μή Tis ἐν 
ὑποκρίσει" “ Let none that is not in charity, let no hypo- 
crite come hither.” After pronouncing these admonitions 
he said; ὀρθοὶ πρὸς Κύριον μετὰ φόβου καὶ τρόμου ἐστῶτες 
ὦμεν προσφέρειν: “ΤῊ sincerity towards our Lord let us 
standing offer with fear and trembling.” ‘“ Which being 


done (saith the rubric, for so I call the direction) of διάκο- 
¢ (Dr. Hancock. See vol. i. p. 323, 


πάντας, εἰπάτω, ἡ χάρις τοῦ παντοκρά- 


note Z. | 

4 (Const. Apost., lib. viii. cap. 12. 
Concilia, pp. 473, &c. | 

© [μή τις κατά Tivos’ μή τις ἐν ὗπο- 
κρίσει" ὀρθοὶ πρὸς κύριον μετὰ φόβου 
καὶ τρόμου ἐστῶτες ὦμεν προσφέρειν" 
ὧν γενομένων οἱ διάκονοι προσαγέτωσαν 
τὰ δῶρα τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ πρὸς τὸ θυσιαστή- 
plov ... εὐξάμενος οὖν καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ὁ 
ἀρχιερεὺς ἅμα τοῖς ἱερεῦσι, καὶ λαμπρὰν 
ἐσθῆτα μετενδοὺς, καὶ στὰς πρὸς τῷ θυσι- 
αστηρίῳ τὸ τρόπαιον τοῦ σταυροῦ κατὰ 
τοῦ μετώπου τῇ χειρὶ ποιησάμενος εἰς 


τορος Θεοῦ καὶ ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν 
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἣ κοινωνία τοῦ ἁγίου 
πνεύματος ἔστω μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν" καὶ 
πάντες συμφώνως λεγέτωσαν" ὅτι καὶ 
μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματός σου" καὶ ὃ ἀρχιε- 
ρεύς' ἄνω τὸν νοῦν' καὶ πάντες" ἔχομεν 
πρὸς τὸν κύριον' καὶ 6 ἀρχιερεύς" εὖχα- 
ριστήσωμεν τῷ κυρίῳ" καὶ πάντες" ἄξιον 
καὶ δίκαιον: καὶ 6 ἀρχιερεὺς εἰπάτω, 
ἄξιον ὡς ἀληθῶς καὶ δίκαιον πρὸ πάντων 
ἀνυμνεῖν σε, τὸν ὄντως ὄντα Θεὸν, K.T.A. 


—Ibid., A, B, C.] 


Supper, as set forth in the Apostolical Constitutions. 123 


νοὶ προσαγέτωσαν τὰ δῶρα τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ πρὸς TO θυσιαστή- 
ρίον; let the deacons bring the offerings unto the altar to the 
bishop.”. . . . Then the bishop, standing in his priestly robes 
before the altar, στὰς πρὸς τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ, began the sa- 
cramental office with this blessing: “The grace of Almighty 
God, and the love of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the com- 
munication of the Holy Spirit be with you all.” To which 
the people answered, “ And with thy spirit.” Then the 
bishop, “ Lift up your hearts ;” to which the people, “ We 
lift them up unto the Lord.” Then the bishop, ‘ Let us 
give thanks unto our Lord.” To which the people, ἄξιον 
καὶ δίκαιον: “It is meet and right.” Then the bishop, 
“Tt is truly meet and right,” &c. And then after a long 
and noble hymn of praise and glory to God the Father, and 
the Son, abbreviated in after ages‘, in which is the hymn® 
Tersanctus, and after an introduction, in which the words 
of the institution are recited, he proceeds to the consecration, 
the most special part of the sacrificial action, beginning with 
the prayer of oblation, in the words which follow: μεμνημέ- 
νοι τοίνυν τοῦ πάθους αὐτοῦ Kal TOD θανάτου, καὶ τῆς EK VEK- 
ρῶν ἀναστάσεως, καὶ τῆς εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἐπανόδου, καὶ τῆς 
μελλούσης αὐτοῦ δευτέρας παρουσίας; ἐν ἣ ἔρχεται μετὰ 
δόξης καὶ δυνάμεως κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκροὺς, καὶ ἀποδοῦναι 
ἑκάστῳ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ, προσφέρομέν σοι τῷ βασιλεῖ 
καὶ Θεῷ, κατὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ διάταξιν. τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον, καὶ τὸ 
ποτήριον τοῦτο, εὐχαριστοῦντές σοι δι’ αὐτοῦ, ἐφ᾽ οἷς κατηξίω- 
σας ἡμᾶς ἑστάναι ἐνώπιόν σου καὶ ἱερατεύειν σοι" καὶ ἀξιοῦ- 
μέν σε ὅπως εὐμενῶς ἐπιβλέψῃς ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα" 
ταῦτα ἐνώπιόν σου, συ ὁ ἀνενδεὴς Θεὸς, καὶ εὐδοκήσῃς ἐπ᾽ 

f [The prayer continues from p. 473, 


C, to 480, D. Mr. Palmer conceives 
that this prayer, as it stands in the Apo- 


ἅγιος ἅγιος ἅγιος κύριος σαβαὼθ, πλή- 
pns ὃ οὐρανὸς καὶ ἣ γῆ τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ" 
εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν" Kal 6 


stolical Constitutions, contains addi- 
tions to the Liturgies actually used. 
** The author,” he says, ‘‘has evidently 
permitted his learning and devotion to 
enrich the common formularies with 
numerous ideas full of piety and 
beauty.”—Orig. Liturg., Dissertation, 
sect. 1. vol. i. p. 39. ] 

& [τὰ Χερουβὶμ καὶ τὰ ἑξαπτέρυγα 
Sepaplu... λέγοντα, ἅμα χιλίαις χιλί- 
ασιν ἀρχαγγέλων, καὶ μυρίαις μυρίασιν 
ἀγγέλων ἀκαταπαύστως καὶ ἀσιγήτως 
βοώσαιΞς" καὶ πᾶς ὃ λαὸς ἅμα εἰπάτω" 


ἀρχιερεὺς ἑξῆς λεγέτω, κ. τ. A.—p. 477, 
E. 480, A.] 

h §. Cyril. Hieros. Catech. Myst., 
[v. § 8.] εἶτα μετὰ τὸ ἀπαρτισθῆναι Thy 
πνευματικὴν θυσίαν, τὴν ἀναίμακτον λα- 
τρείαν ἐπὶ τῆς θυσίας ἐκείνης τοῦ thac- 
μοῦ, [παρακαλοῦμεν τὸν Θεὸν ὑπὲρ κοι- 
νῆς τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν εἰρήνης, ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ 
κόσμου εὐσταθείας, κ. τ. A.—p. 327, C, 
D. 

: See Irenzus, lib. iv. cap. 32. [¢e.17. 
§ 5. ed. Ben.] Sed et suis discipulis 
dans concilium primitias offerre ex suis 


CHAP, 11, 


SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


124 The primitive form for the administration of the Lord’s 


αὐτοῖς εἰς τιμὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου, καὶ καταπέμψῃς τὸ “Αγιόν 
σου Πνεῦμα" ἐπὶ τὴν θυσίαν ταύτην, τὸν μάρτυρα τῶν παθη- 
μάτων τοῦ Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ, ὅπως ἀποφήνῃ! τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον 
σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου, καὶ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο αἷμα τοῦ Χρι- 
στοῦ σου; ἵνα οἱ μεταλαβόντες αὐτοῦ βεβαιωθῶσι πρὸς εὐσέ- 
βειαν, ἀφέσεως ἁμαρτημάτων τύχωσι, τοῦ διαβόλου καὶ τῆς 
πλάνης αὐτοῦ ῥυσθῶσι, Πνεύματος ‘Ayiov πληρωθῶσιν, ἄξιοι 
τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου γενῶνται, ζωῆς αἰωνίου τύχωσι: σοῦ καταλ- 
λαγέντος αὐτοῖς, δέσποτα παντοκράτορ. ἔτι δεόμεθά σου, Κύ- 
ple, καὶ ὑπὲρ τῆς ἁγίας σου ᾿Εκκλησίας τῆς ἀπὸ περάτων ἕως 
περάτων, ἣν περιεποιήσω τῷ τιμίῳ αἵματι τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου, 
ὅπως αὐτὴν διαφυλάξης ἄσειστον καὶ ἀκλυδώνιστον; ἄχρι 
τῆς συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος. καὶ ὑπὲρ πάσης ἐπισκοπῆς τῆς 
ὁρθοτομούσης τὸν λόγον τῆς ἀληθείας. ἔτι παρακαλοῦμέν σε 
καὶ ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐμῆς τοῦ προσφέροντός σοι οὐδενίας, καὶ ὑπὲρ 
παντὸς τοῦ πρεσβυτερίου; ὑπὲρ τῶν διακόνων καὶ παντὸς τοῦ 
κλήρου, ἵνα πάντας σοφίσας, Πνεύματος Ayiov πληρώσῃς. ἔτι 
παρακαλοῦμέν σε, Κύριε, ὑπὲρ τοῦ βασιλέως", x.T-r. “ Where- 
fore remembering His passion and death, and resurrection 
from the dead, and His return (ascension) into heaven, and 
His second appearance, in which He will come in glory and 
power to judge the living and the dead, and to reward every 
one according to their works: we offer this bread and this 
cup to Thee (our) King and God, according to His institu- 
tion; giving thanks to Thee through Him, that Thou hast 
thought us worthy to stand in Thy presence, and execute the 
priest’s office to Thee; and we beseech Thee, that Thou 


creaturis non quasi indigenti [&c. See he concludes; Hee igitur est Basilii 


above, p. 104, note b. } 

k §. Cyril. [Hieros. ibid., § 19.] 
μετὰ ταῆτα λέγει 6 ἱερεὺς, τὰ ἅγια τοῖς 
ἁγίοις, ἅγια τὰ προκείμενα ἐπιφοίτησιν 
δεξάμενα ἁγίου mvevuaros.—[Ibid., p. 
331, A. | 

1 “ Ostendat sive efficiat corpus 
Christi.’” See Isaac Casaubon in Exer- 
eit. xvi. Ad Annales Baronii, ὃ xxxiii. 
ubi de ἀναδεῖξαι, et ἀναφανῆναι. [See 
above, note Ὁ, p. 98. Of ἀναφανῆναι 
he says, (p. 459,) Observabimus non 
dissimile in eadem re apud alios patres 
ἀναφαίνεσθαι, quasi dicat, repente ex- 
istere et conspiciendum se dare. Then 
after the passage quoted above, note b, 
p- 98, of the body of Christ appearing 
in the Sacrament to the eye of faith, 


ἀνάδειξις, hoc aliorum patrum ἄναφα- 
viva. Hippolytus Martyr in libro de 
Consummatione Mundi, c. 34. (Op., 
App., p. 21. see below, note 1, p. 149.) 
τὸ τίμιον σῶμα Kal αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐν 
ταῖς ἡμέραις οὐκ ἀναφανήσεται, NON ex- 
istet in diebus illis pretiosum corpus 
et sanguis Christi. ] 

S. Cyril. Hier. ibid., [ὃ 7.1 παρακα- 
λοῦμεν τὸν φιλάνθρωπον θεὸν τὸ ἅγιον 
πνεῦμα ἐξαποστεῖλαι ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα, 
ἵνα ποιήσῃ τὸν μὲν ἄρτον, σῶμα Χριστοῦ, 
τὸν δὲ οἶνον, αἷμα Xpiotov.—[p. 327, 
ΟἿ 
™ Tertull. [ad Scapulam, c. 2.1 Sa- 
crificamus pro salute imperatoris, sed 
Deo nostro, et ipsius. [ Op., p. 69, C.] 


Supper, as set forth in the Apostolical Constitutions. 


125 


wouldst look with complacency on these offerings lying 
before Thee, O God who standest in need of nothing, that 
Thou wouldst accept them for the honour of Thy Christ, 
and" send Thy Holy Spirit®, the witness of the sufferings of 
our Lord Jesus Christ upon this sacrifice, that HeP may 
(make) shew forth this bread to be the body of Thy Christ, 
and this cup to be Thy Christ’s blood, that the partakers 
thereof may be confirmed in godliness; obtain the remission 
of their sins; be delivered from the devil, and his wiles; be 
filled with the Holy Ghost; made worthy of Thy Christ ; 
(and) obtain eternal life, Thou, O Lord Almighty, being 
reconciled to them. Farthermore we pray unto Thee for Thy 
holy Church dispersed from one end of the world to the 


n So in the Ethiopic Liturgy, as 
translated by Ludolf; {Constitutiones 
seu Statuta lviii. Habesinis dicta Apo- 
stolorum, Statutum xxi. de ritu Eucha- 
ristiz. Jobi Ludolfi ad suam Histo- 
riam /Ethiopicam ante hac editam 
(Francof. 1681.) Commentarius, Fran- 
cof. 1691.] p. 325. Recordantes igitur 
mortis ejus, et resurrectionis ejus, offe- 
rimus tibi hune panem et calicem, gra- 
tias agentes tibi, quod nos reddidisti 
dignos ut stemus coram te et sacer- 
dotio tibi fungamur. Suppliciter ora- 
mus te, ut mittas Spiritum tuum Sanc- 
tum super oblationes hujus Ecclesiz ; 
pariterque largiaris omnibus, qui su- 
munt de iis, (ut prosit eis ad) sanctita- 
tem; ut repleantur Spiritu Sancto, &c. 
{The words in parentheses are inserted 
by Ludolf; see his note on the place. 
The latter part of this passage, as 
given in Renaudot’s translation, Li- 
turg. Orient. Coll., tom. i. p. 517, 
stands thus; Rogamus te, Domine, et 
deprecamur te, ut mittas Sanctum Spi- 
ritum et virtutem super hune panem, 
et super hune calicem, faciatque utrum- 
que corpus et sanguinem Domini et 
salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi, in secula 
seculorum, Amen... . Da ut omnibus 
illa sumentibus fiant ad sanctificatio- 
nem, et plenitudinem Spiritus Sancti, 
&c. In his Observations on this Li- 
turgy, Obs. i. pp. 523, 524, Renaudot 
accuses Ludolf of unfairness, and want 
of acquaintance with ecclesiastical cus- 
toms and language, saying that he has 
suppressed some things, and translated 
others in unusual terms. | 

This is the form of consecration in 
their general Liturgy ; but besides that 


they have particular Liturgies to be 
used on particular days, one of which 
is entituled, Oratio Eucharistica Do- 
mini, et Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi; 
not that they pretend it was made by 
our Lord, but that it is used on those 
special holydays in which His nativity, 
resurrection, and ascension were cele- 
brated. In this administration the con- 
secration is as follows, (ibid., pp. 343, 
344): Nune igitur, O Domine, me- 
mores sumus mortis et resurrectionis 
tuz, confidimus tibi, et offerimus tibi 
pinem et calicem, gratias agentes tibi ; 
tibi soli, quia a seculo (es) Salvator 
Deus. Quoniam tu jussisti nos, ut 
stemus coram te, et tibi instar sacer- 
dotum ministremus; propter hoc nos 
quoque servi tui, [ Domine, ] rogamus 
te, Domine, et supplicamus tibi, ut 
mittas Spiritum Sanctum, et virtutem 
super hunc panem, et super hune cali- 
cem, (ut) efficiat corpus, et sanguinem 
Domini, et salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi 
in secula seculorum. Porro offerimus 
tibi hance gratiarum actionem, O eterna 
Trinitas, Domine Pater Jesu Christi, 
quem omnis creatura et anima vene- 
ratur. This office was undoubtedly 
made after the first general council of 
Nice to the honour of Christ as God, 
‘equal to the Father as touching His 
Godhead,’ and therefore the oblation 
is made unto Him. [See below, p. 
153. | 

ο Heb. ix. 14: ‘“* How much more 
shall the blood of Christ, who through 
the eternal Spirit offered up Himself,” 
&c. 

P Alias, ‘ that it,’ if understood of the 
sacrifice. 


CHAP. II. 


SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


126 The Apostolical Constitulions shew that the bread 


other, which Thou hast purchased with the precious blood of 
Thy Christ, that Thou wouldst preserve it unshaken, and 
unmolested to the end of the world. (We pray) likewise for 
the whole episcopate, rightly dividing the word of truth. We 
pray also for my worthless self, who am making this oblation, 
and for all the presbyters, for the deacons, and the clergy, 
that Thou wouldst instruct them, and fill them with the 
Holy Spirit. Farthermore, O Lord, we offer unto Thee for 
the emperor,” &c. 

This is as plain a description of a sacrifice, and a sacrificial 
action, as is in any author sacred or profane; and mutatis 
mutandis may be said of any sacrifice offered upon any altar, 
or to any god. And we find the bishop in the thirteenth 
chapter saying’: “Let us also pray unto God through His 
Christ (ὑπὲρ τοῦ δώρου τοῦ προσκομισθέντος) for the offer- 
ing which has been offered to the Lord God, that our merci- 
ful God through the mediation of His Christ would receive it 
up unto His holy heavenly altar for a sweet-smelling savour.” 
In the same chapter the rubric calls the consecrated bread to 
be distributed, ‘the offering’.’ Answerably to all which in the 
fifty-seventh chapter of the second book, in a short account of 
the manner of administering the holy Sacrament*, the adminis- 
tration of it is called ‘the oblation of the Eucharist.’ “ Let 
some of the deacons attend to the oblation of the Eucharist, 
(οἱ μὲν TH προσφορᾷ THs εὐχαριστίας σχολαζέτωσαν,) minis- 
tering to the body of the Lord with fear, and let others look 
after the congregation, and enjoin them silence. Then let 
the deacon who assists the bishop say, ‘ Let none come here 
who hath injured another; let no hypocrite come hither.’ 
Then let the men mutually salute the men, and the women 
the women, with the holy kiss. But let none salute another 
treacherously, as Judas did, who betrayed our Lord with a 
kiss. After this let the deacon pray for the universal 
Church, &c. Then let the bishop, having given the peace 
of God to the people, bless them as Moses commanded the 


4 [ἔτι καὶ ἔτι δεηθῶμεν τοῦ Θεοῦ διὰ edwd{as.—Ibid., Concil., tom. i. p. 484, 
τοῦ Χριστοῦ αὐτοῦ, ὑπὲρ τοῦ δώρου τοῦ 8Ἐ.] 


προσκομισθέντος κυρίῳ τῷ Θεῷ᾽ ὅπως 6 ‘Kal ὃ μὲν ἐπίσκοπος διδότω τὴν 
ἀγαθὺς Θεὸς προσδέξηται αὐτὸ διὰ τῆς προσφορὰν.---ἰ Const. Apost., ibid. E. } 
μεσιτείας τοῦ Χριστοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸ " [Ibid., p. 297, C. See above, p. 


ἐπουράνιον αὐτοῦ θυσιαστήριον εἰς ὀσμὴν 405, note g. | 


and wine are oblations in a proper literal sense. 127 


priests, and praying, say: ‘The Lord bless thee and keep 
thee,’ &c. μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα γενέσθω ἡ θυσία : after this let the 
sacrifice be done (offered), all the people standing and pray- 
ing in silence; καὶ ὅταν ἀνενέχθῃ, and when it is offered up, 
let every order by itself orderly partake of the Lord’s body 
and precious blood with reverence and fear.” 

This account of the Eucharistical service is, as I have 
before observed, most agreeable to the accounts we have of 
it, and of the administration thereof, both in the first Apology 
of Justin Martyr’, and also to the doctrine of it in his 
Dialogue with Trypho", and I do not doubt, but it is most 
conformable to the primitive and apostolical form. And 
now let any candid reader judge, whether the bread and 
wine are not the δῶρα, ‘offerings,’ in a proper literal sense, 
which were brought by the deacons to the altar unto the 
bishop, that he might place them on the holy table to be 
consecrated in the service of the holy Eucharist ; the προκεί- 
μενα δῶρα, ‘proper material offerings,’ that lay upon the altar, 
and upon which the bishop prayed God to look down in 
mercy ; the offerings, of which the bishop or priest only was 
the offerer (ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐμῆς τοῦ προσφέροντος ovdevias) ; the 
offerings, which he took in his hands, and offered in the 
name of the people (προσφέρομέν σοι); the offerings, of which 
God has no need; the offerings, or the sacrifice (θυσίαν), 
upon which he prays God “ to send down His Holy Spirit, that 
it might shew forth the bread to be the body, and the cup 
the blood, to the receivers.” Lastly, the offerings of which 
the oblation and consecration was called the sacrifice, and 
of which they said in the ancient offices, sancta sanctis, and 
tibi ex tuis offerimus*. And if all this be true, then let the 
reader also judge, whether the celebration of the holy Eu- 
charist was not a sacrificial action, or administration, and the 
bread and wine the materials of that sacrifice, which were 
first presented, and then by solemn consecration offered up 
unto God, and last of all distributed to the faithful’ for the 


t [S. Just. M. Apol. i. capp. 65, 67. 
See above, pp. 105, 106, notes f, g. 

ἃ (ce. 117. p. 210, B. quoted above, 
p- 103. ] 

* [The words ἅγια τοῖς ἁγίοις occur 
in all the Greek Liturgies, (see p. 147, r, 
and for St. Cyril, p. 124, k); and ἐκ 


τῶν σῶν προσφέρομέν cor in those of 
St. Chrysostom (see p. 130, k), St. 
Basil (see Goar, p. 118), and St. Mark 
(see below p. 137, m); as the corre- 
sponding Latin does in the Western 
Liturgies, (sce pp. 143, ο; 145, g.)] 

Y Constit. Apost., lib. viii. cap. 14, 


CHAP, Il. 


SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


128 A proper Sacrifice, literally and sacramentally. 


favour of God, “ the remission of their sins, the benefit both of 
their bodies and souls, the confirmation and increase of their 
faith, and preserving of them in all godliness, and unto the 
life of the world to come.” In a word it is evident, that 
according to the ancient Church the bread and wine were 
the matter which the people brought, and the bishop re- 
ceived, to be spent or consumed in the celebration of the 
Eucharist ; the matter which the bishop solemnly offered up 
to God by consecration for the heavenly banquet of the 
Lord’s Supper, and which as they were in the literal sense 
a proper, external, material offering or sacrifice, which suc- 
ceeded in the place of the legal sacrifices; so in the sacra- 
mental or mystical, they were the body and blood of Christ, 
of which they were the representatives, and whereof the one 
was broken with wounds, and the other shed upon the cross. 
To this liturgical testimony in the Apostolical Constitutions, 
I shall, as I promised in another place’, produce the testi- 
monies of the ancient liturgies, which suppose the Eucharist 
to be a sacrifice, in which the bread and wine were solemnly 
offered in a proper literal sense by prayer and thanksgiving 
to God. 

I begin with the liturgy of St. Chrysostom, of which there 
are two editions, one in the fourth vol. of his works®, the 
other by Goar in his Euchologion®, both which begin with 


[15. cap. 14. μεταλαβόντες τοῦ τιμίου 
σώματος Kal τοῦ τιμίου αἵματος τοῦ 
Χριστοῦ εὐχαριστήσωμεν τῷ καταξιώ- 
σαντι ἡμᾶς μεταλαβεῖν τῶν ἁγίων αὐτοῦ 
μυστηρίων, καὶ παρακαλέσωμεν, μὴ εἰς 
κρίμα ἀλλ᾽ εἰς σωτηρίαν ἡμῖν γένεσθαι, 
εἰς ὠφέλειαν ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος, εἰς 
φυλακὴν εὐσεβείας, εἰς ἄφεσιν ἅμαρ- 
τιῶν, εἰς ζωὴν τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος, 
κι τ. λ. ο. 15. δέσποτα ὃ Θεὸς 6 παντο- 
κράτορ,.... εὐχαριστοῦμέν σοι, ὕτι κατη- 
ξίωσας ἡμᾶς μεταλαβεῖν τῶν ἁγίων σου 
μυστηρίων, ἃ παρέσχου ἡμῖν εἰς πληρο- 
φορίαν τῶν καλῶς ἐγνωσμένων, εἰς φυ- 
λακὴν τῆς εὐσεβείας, εἰς ἄφεσιν πλημ- 
μελημάτων᾽ κ. τ. A.—Ibid., p. 485, A, 
B, C.] 

z Preface to a second Collection of 
Controversial Letters, &c. [p. xlviii. ] 
Printed for Rich. Sare, at Gray’s-Inn- 
Gate, Holborn, 1710. 

a Paris, 1636. ᾿ 

> Lutetiz Parisiorum, 1647. 

[There are five texts of the Liturgy 


of St. Chrysostom in the Euchologium, 
besides the various readings of other 
MSS. Of these texts the first (Goar, 
p- 58) is the one referred to by Hickes, 
and is the same as that in Savile’s and 
in the Benedictine edition of his works. 
It had been previously printed at Rome. 
The last of those given by Goar (p. 
104) is the one which Hickes refers to 
as being in Morell’s editions of his 
works; it is from a much more modern 
MS., and the least valuable of those 
which are given. The text of Goar is 
used in the following notes, references 
being made also to the Benedictine edi- 
tion of St. Chrysostom’s works. Mr. 
Palmer observes that learned men have 
represented the text of this Liturgy as 
very uncertain, the copies differing 
“toto ccelo’ from each other. He shews 
however that this is not the case. Some 
differences arise from the insertion or 
omission of rubrics. Others are in the 
introductory portion of the Liturgy, 


The Liturgy of St. Chrysostom. 129 


this secret prayer of the priests in the beginning of the 
ministration’; “Send down, O Lord, Thy assistance (τὴν 
χεῖρά cov) from Thy holy habitation, and strengthen me in 
Thy service which I am going to perform, that I may stand 
without blame before Thy tremendous altar, and minister 
the unbloody sacrifice,” ἕο. So in the prayer at the πρό- 
θεσις, or table where the people’s oblations of bread and 
wine were set, before they were brought to the altar*; “Of 
Thy goodness and love for mankind, remember those who have 
offered, and those for whom they have offered.” So in the 
prayer for the communicants®; “O Lord, the God of powers, 
we give thanks to Thee, who hast deemed us worthy to ap- 
pear at Thy altar to supplicate Thy mercy for our sins, and 
the errors of Thy people: O God, receive our prayer, and 
make us worthy to offer up to Thee prayers and supplica- 
tions, and unbloody sacrifices for all Thy people,” ἕο. So in 
the Cherubic hymn, or prayer!; “Who out of Thy ineffable 
and immense love of mankind wast made man, not by con- 
version or confusion (of substance), and hast been declared 
our High-Priest by God, and as Lord of all hast instituted the 
ministration of this unbloody sacrifice, &c. ... to Thee do 1 
come,...and beseech Thee not to turn Thy face from me, nor 


which was not of the same solemn cha- τελέσω, κ. τ. A—S. Chrysost. Liturg. 
racter as the canon. Again,newritesand Goar. Euchol. p. 58.—Op., tom. xii. p. 
prayers were added, differing in dif- 778, B.] 
ferent Churches, as time wenton. The 1 [μνημόνευσον, ws ἀγαθὸς καὶ φιλάν- 
variations however do but confirm the θρωπος, τῶν προσενεγκάντων καὶ δι obs 
antiquity of the text in the parts which mpoofyyayov.—Goar, p. 68. Op., ibid., 
agree; so that in the two texts which p. 780, A.] 
seem to differ most, it will be found © [εὐχὴ πιστῶν πρώτη μετὰ τὸ ἅπλω- 
that ‘the main body of the Liturgy θῆναι τὸ εἰλητὸν (postyuam expansum 
is exactly the same in both; the rites est corporale,) ἣν 6 ἱερεὺς μυστικῶς 
identical, the ancient prayers the same, (secreto) λέγει. εὐχαριστοῦμέν σοι, κύ- 
word for word.””—Palmer’s Orig. Li- pie 6 θεὸς τῶν δυναμέων, τῷ καταξιώ- 
turgice, vol. i. Dissertation, sect. 3. σαντι ἡμᾶς παραστῆναι καὶ viv τῷ ἁγίῳ 
pp- 7ὅ, 77. ed. 3. 1899. cov θυσιαστηρίῳ, Kal προσπεσεῖν τοῖς 
The Liturgy of St. Chrysostom ἰδ οἰκτιρμοῖς σου ὑπὲρ τῶν ἡμετέρων ἅμαρ- 
that of the Church of Constantinople, τημάτων καὶ τῶν τοῦ λαοῦ ἀγνοημάτων. 
and ‘‘it appears to have been used in πρόσδεξαι ὃ θεὺς τὴν δέησιν ἡμῶν, ποίη- 
Thrace from the fourth century, and in coy ἡμᾶς ἀξίους γένεσθαι προσφέρειν σοι 
Macedonia and Greece from time im- δεήσεις, καὶ ἱκεσίας, καὶ θυσίας ἀναιμάκ- 


memorial.’’—Ibid., p. 80. ] Tous ὑπὲρ παντὸς τοῦ λαοῦ cov.—Goar, 
© [ὅτε δὲ προσκυνοῦσι λέγουσι τὴν εὐς pp. 70. Op., p. 786, C, D.] 

χὴν ταύτην μυστικῶς᾽ κύριε ὃ θεὸς ἡμῶν ἴ [εὐχὴ ἣν λέγει 6 ἱερεὺς μυστικῶς 

ἐξαπόστειλον τὴν χεῖρά σου ἐξ ἁγίουκα- τοῦ χερουβικοῦ ἀδομένου. . ... ἀλλ᾽ 


τοικητηρίου σου, καὶ ἐνίσχυσόν με εἰς ὅμως, διὰ τὴν ἄφατον καὶ ἀμέτρητόν σου 

τὴν προκειμένην διακονίαν σου, ἵνα φιλανθρωπίαν, ἀτρέπτως καὶ ἀναλλοι- 

ἀκατακρίτως παραστὰς τῷ φοβερῷ σοῦ τως γέγονας ἄνθρωπος, καὶ ἀρχιερεὺς 

Η n “ “ 

βήματι, Thr ἀναίμακτον ἱερουργίαν ἐπι- ἡμῶν ἐχρημάτισας, καὶ τῆς λειτουργικῆ5 
HICKES, K 


CHAP. II. 


SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Heb. 9. 7. 


130 Evidence of the Euch. Sacr. from the Primitive Liturgies. 


to reject me from among Thy children, but graciously per- 
mit that these gifts may be offered up by me a sinner.” So 
in the prayer after the oblations are placed upon the altar$ ; 
“OQ Lord God Almighty, who only art holy, and who re- 
ceivest the sacrifice of praise from those who call upon Thee 
with their whole heart, receive the prayer of us sinners, and 
bring it to Thy holy altar, and make us worthy to offer up 
these gifts and spiritual sacrifices for our sins, and the errors 
of the people, and grant we may find grace in Thy sight to 
have this our sacrifice made acceptable to Thee.” Then after 
the Sursum Corda, and the prayer of thanksgiving mentioned 
by Justin Martyr", and the words of the institution, the priest 
saith, as in the consecration before cited out of the Aposto- 
lical Constitutions: ; “ Wherefore remembering* this salutary 
commandment, and all the things that are done for us, His 
death, burial, resurrection on the third day, His ascension 
into heaven, His sitting at Thy right hand, and His second 
and glorious coming, we offer Thy own (gifts, or creatures) 
unto Thee. .... We also offer up unto Thee this reasonable 
and unbloody sacrifice, and we pray and beseech Thee to 
send down Thy Holy Spirit upon us, and upon these gifts. 
Amen.” 

“Make this bread the precious (mystical) body of Thy 


ταύτης, Kal ἀναιμάκτου θυσίας τὴν μενα Sapa ταῦτα, καὶ ἐπὶ πάντα τὸν 
ἱερουργίαν se ἡμῖν, ὡς δεσπότης λαόν cov.—Goar, p. 74. Op., p. 789, 


τῶν ἁπάντων... .. σοὶ γὰρ προσεύχομαι 


B,C.) 


κλίνας Thy ἐμαυτοῦ αὐχένα, καὶ δέομαί 
σου μὴ ἀποστρέψῃς τὸ πρόσωπόν σου ἀπ’ 
ἐμοῦ, μηδὲ ἀποδοκιμάσῃς με ἐκ παίδων 
σου, ἀλλ᾽ ἀξίωσον προσενεχθῆναί σοι ὑπ᾽ 
ἐμοῦ τοῦ ἁμαρτωλοῦ, καὶ ἀναξίου δούλου 
σου τὰ δῶρα tatra.—Goar, Euch., p. 
ΠΣ Op Ρ᾽ 187; Ὁ; ἘΠ᾿ Ὁ. 788, A.] 

& [εὐχὴ προσκομιδῆς, μετὰ τὴν ἐν τῇ 
ἁγίᾳ τραπέζῃ τῶν θείων δώρων. ἀπόθεσιν, 
ἣν λέγει ὃ ἱ ἱερεὺς μυστικῶς. κύριε ὃ θεὸς 
ὁ παντοκράτωρ, ὃ μόνος ἅγιος, ὃ δεχόμε- 
νος θυσίαν αἰνέσεως παρὰ τῶν ἐπικαλου- 
μένων σε ἐν ὅλῃ καρδίᾳ, πρόσδεξαι καὶ 
ἡμῶν τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν τὴν δέησιν, καὶ 
προσάγαγε τῷ ἁγίῳ σου θυσιαστηρίῳ, 
καὶ ἱκάνωσον ἡμᾶς προσενεγκεῖν σοι δῶ- 
ρά τε καὶ θυσίας πνευματικὰς ὑπὲρ τῶν 
ἡμετέρων ἁμαρτημάτων καὶ τῶν τοῦ 
λαοῦ ἀγνοημάτων, καὶ καταξίωσον ἡμᾶς 
εὑρεῖν χάριν ἐνωπίον σου, τοῦ “γενέσθαι 
σοι εὐπρόσδεκτον τὴν θυσίαν ἡμῶν, καὶ 
ἐπισκηνῶσαι τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς χάριτός σου 
Td ἀγαθὸν ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς, καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκεί- 


4 [See notes f, g, pp. 105, 106.] 

i [See p. 123. ] 

x06 ἱερεὺς κλίνας κεφαλὴν ἐπεύχεται 
μυστικῶς" μεμνημένοι τοίνυν τῆς σωτη- 
ρίου ταύτης ἐντολῆς, καὶ πάντων τῶν 
ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν γεγενημένων, τοῦ σταυροῦ, 
τοῦ τάφου, τῆς τριημέρου ἀναστάσεως, 
τῆς εἰς οὐρανοὺς, ἀναβάσεως, τῆς ἐκ δε- 
ξιῶν καθέδρας, τῆς δευτέρας καὶ ἐνδόξου 
πάλιν παρουσίας. ἐκφώνως" (alta voce) 
τὰ σὰ ἐκ τῶν σῶν σοι προσφέρομεν κατὰ 
πάντα καὶ διὰ πάντα... μυστικῶς" 
ἐτὶ προσφέρομέν σοι τὴν Nine ταύ- 
τὴν καὶ ἀναίμακτον λατρείαν, καὶ παρα- 
καλοῦμεν, καὶ δεόμεθα, καὶ ἱκετεύομεν, 
κατάπεμψον τὸ πνεῦμά σου τὸ ἅγιον ἐφ᾽ 
ἡμᾶς, καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα ταῦτα. 
eee ποίησον τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦτον 
τίμιον σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου. ἀμήν... 
τὸ δὲ ἐν ποτηρίῳ τούτῳ τίμιον αἷμα τοῦ 
Χριστοῦ σου. . μεταβαλὼν τῷ πνεύ- 
ματί σου τῷ ΒΡ δι —Goar, pit (Opps 
700. De 8... 792. Bel) 


a 


The Liturgy of St. Basil. 131 


Christ. Amen... And what is in this cup the precious blood 
of Thy Christ,... changing (them) by Thy Holy Spirit.” Then 
in a prayer after the Lord’s Prayer’; “‘ Thou therefore, O Lord, 
bless these gifts which are set before Thee (τὰ προκείμενα 
dépa), to us all, according to every one’s necessity,” &c. 

So in the Liturgy of St. Basil™, in the prayer at the pro- 
thesis, upon which the oblations were set; εὐλόγησον τὴν 
πρόθεσιν ταύτην, kK. τ. dr. “ Bless this table, and the oblations 
thereupon, and receive them up unto Thy altar in the highest 
heavens; and of Thy goodness and love towards men remem- 
ber the offerers, and those for whom they have offered, and 
preserve us free from all sin in the administration of these 
holy mysteries",’ &c. So in the prayer of the priest after 
the offerings are set on the holy table, or altar®; “ May it 
please Thee, O Lord, as we are ministers (διακόνους) of the 
New Testament, and liturgs (λειτουργοὺς) of Thy holy mys- 


! [σὺ οὖν, δέσποτα, τὰ προκείμενα 
πᾶσιν ἡμῖν εἰς ἄγαθον ἐξομάλισον κατὰ 
τὴν ἑκάστου ἰδίαν xpelav.—Goar, p. 81. 
Op., p. 794, E. ] 

™ [The Liturgy of St. Basil was 
anciently used throughout the patri- 
archate of Czsarea, which included 
(with the exception of proconsular 
Asia, Phrygia, and some maritime pro- 
vinces) the whole of Asia Minor. Of 
the Liturgies which bear St. Basil’s 
name there are many varying texts, 
which are however reduced by Mr. 
Palmer to three; the Constantinopo- 
litan, which has been used, in Greek, 
from time immemorial throughout the 
patriarchates of Constantinople and 
Cesarea; the Alexandrian, which has 
been long used in that of Alexandria, 
and is found in Coptic, Greek, and 
Arabic ; the Syriac, which is only ex- 
tant in the Syriac language. 

Mr. Palmer considers the Constan- 
tinopolitan text to be the genuine one. 
It is found on the whole alike in all 
MSS. which profess to represent that 
Liturgy; the interpolations and mo- 
dern additions, he says, are easily de- 
tected, and the variations naturally 
accounted for. This text is found in 
the best form in Goar’s Euchologium, 
(p. 158,) which Hickes used; but it is 
printed from a modern copy; and to 
ascertain it critically the Varie Lec- 
tiones given by him must be consulted. 
The copies in the Benedictine edition 


of St. Basil, tom. ii. App. pp. 674, sqq., 
are the Alexandrian Greek, and a trans- 
lation of the Coptic. Goar’s text is 
used in this edition; no collation of 
any other text has been given, as it was 
found that the variations were many, 
and, as respects the doctrine for which 
the extracts are alleged, immaterial. 
Of the Alexandrian texts, the Arabic 
(of which there is a Latin version in 
the Bibl. Patrum, tom. vi. col. 75. 
Par. 1654) is translated from the 
Coptic; a Latin translation of the 
Coptic is given by Renaudot, Lit. 
Orient., tom. i. p. 1; and the Alexan- 
drian Greek is printed in the same 
volume, p.57. The Syriac text is a 
translation from the Greek of the Con- 
stantinopolitan one, with additions; a 
Latin version of it by Masius is given 
by Renaudot, Lit. Orient., tom. ii. p. 
548. ] 

Ὁ [εὐλόγησον τὴν πρόθεσιν ταύτην, 
καὶ πρόσδεξαι αὐτὴν εἰς τὸ ὑπερουράνιόν 
σου θυσιαστήριον, μνημόνευσον, ὡς aya- 
θὸς καὶ φιλάνθρωπος, τῶν προσενεγκάν- 
των, καὶ δι᾽ οὕς προσήγαγον, καὶ ἡμᾶς 
ἀκατακρίτους διαφύλαξον ἐν τῇ ἱερουρ- 
γίᾳ τῶν θείων σου μυστηρίων᾽ κ. τ. Ἁ.---- 
5. Basilii. Liturg., Goar Euch., p. 168.] 

° [εὐχὴ προσκομιδῆς, μετὰ τὴν ἐν TH 
ἁγίᾳ τραπέζᾳ τῶν θείων δώρων ἀπό- 
θεσιν, ἣν ὃ ἱερεὺς λέγει μυστικῶς ..... 
εὐδόκησον δὴ, κύριε, τοῦ γενέσθαι ἡμᾶς 
διακόνους τῆς καινῆς σου διαθήκης, λει- 
τουργοὺς τῶν ἁγίων σου μυστηρίων" 


K 2 


CHAP. 11. 


SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


132 Evidence of the Euch. Sacr. from the Primitive Liturgies. 


teries?, according to the multitude of Thy mercies, to re- 
ceive us who are approaching to Thy holy altar, that we may 
be worthy to offer unto Thee this reasonable and unbloody 
sacrifice for our sins and the errors of the people; which 
Thou having received up for a sweet savour to Thy holy and 
intellectual altar, send down for it the grace of Thy Holy 
Spirit upon us, (ἀντικατάπεμψον ἡμῖν τὴν χάριν, K. τ. dr.) 
Look upon us, O Lord, and upon this our sacrifice (λατρεί- 
av), and receive it, as Thou didst receive the oblations of 
Abel; the sacrifices of Noah; the holocausts of Abraham ; 
the consecration-offerings of Moses and Aaron; the peace- 
offerings of Samuel; even as Thou didst receive this Eucha- 
ristical oblation, the verity of them (τὴν ἀληθινὴν ταύτην 
λατρείαν) from Thy holy Apostles” .... “Let us stand" as 


~ s+ κατὰ τὸ πλῆθος τοῦ ἐλέους σου" 
ἵνα γενώμεθα ἄξιοι τοῦ προσφέρειν σοι 
τὴν λογικὴν ταύτην καὶ ἀναίμακτον θυ- 
σίαν, ὑπὲρ τῶν ἡμετέρων ἁμαρτημάτων 
καὶ τῶν τοῦ λαοῦ ἀγνοημάτων᾽ ἣν προσ- 
δεξάμενος εἰς τὸ ἅγιον καὶ νοερόν σου 
θυσιαστήριυν, εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας, ἀντικα- 
τάπεμψον ἡμῖν τὴν χάριν τοῦ ἁγίου σου 
πνεύματος" ἐπίβλεψον ep ἡμᾶς, 6 θεὺς, 
καὶ ἔπιδε ἐπὶ τὴν λατρείαν ἡμῶν ταύτην, 
καὶ πρόσδεξαι αὐτὴν, ὧς προσεδέξω ᾿Αβὲλ 
τὰ δῶρα, Νῶε τὰς θυσίας, ᾿Αβραὰμ τὰς 
ὁλοκαρπώσεις, Μωσέως καὶ ᾿Ααρὼν τὰς 
ἱερωσύνας, Σαμουὴλ τὰς εἰρηνικάς᾽ ws 
προσεδέξω ἐκ τῶν ἁγίων σου ἀποστόλων 
τὴν ἀληθινὴν ταύτην Aarpetav.—Goar, 
Euchol., p. 164. ] 

P Or Sacraments; meaning the Sa- 
crament or Mystery of the bread, and 
the Sacrament of the cup: for so the 
ancients used to speak of the holy Eu- 
charist, as of one Sacrament or mys- 
tery made up of two. So Gregory the 
Great called his Eucharistical office, 
Liber Sacramentorum. See the Bene- 
dictines’ note on the title of the book, 
and Menardus’ note on the same. 
[The Benedictines’ note is (Op. S. 
Greg., tom. iii. Ὁ. 1); Per Sacramenta 
intelliguntur vel omnia nove legis Sa- 
cramenta; vel tria potissimum Sacra- 
menta, que simul accipiebantur olim, 
scilicet Baptismus, Confirmatio, et Eu- 
charistia; ... vel solum Eucharistic 
Sacramentum, quod plurali numero in 
singulis fere missis designatur, tum 
propter duplicem panis et vini mate- 
riam, tum propter corpus et sanguinem 
Christi que continet. Vide notam 2. 


Menardi. (S. Gregorii Lib. Sacramen- 
torum, ed. Hugo Menardus, Paris, 
1642, note, pp. 1, 2.) Menard, after 
quoting authorities for the title, ‘ Li- 
ber Sacramentorum,’ says that the 
fathers anciently called the Eucharist 
Sacramenta; and gives instances from 
St. Optatus, St. Ambrose, and St. Au- 
gustine Epist. 149, ad Paulinum, § 16. 
Op., tom. ii. p. 509, C ; and the follow- 
ing passage from his tract de Dono 
Perseverantiz, c. 13. ὃ 33. Op., tom. x. 
p- 839, B. Quod ergo in Sacramentis 
fidelium dicitur, ut sursum corda ha- 
beamus ad Dominum, munus est Do- 
mini, ut precationes accipiamus dictas, 
quas facimus in celebratione Sacra- 
mentorum, antequam illud quod est in 
Domini mensa, incipiat benedici. Me- 
nard’s notes are given entire in” the 
Benedictine edition of St. Gregory’s 
works. (Op. S. Greg., tom. iii. col. 
274, B, D.)] See also Suicerus in 
μυστήριον. Sacra ccena vocatur μυσ- 
τήριον [idque ἃ. ἑνικῶς, singulariter ; 
b. | πληθυντικῶς, pluraliter. [He gives 
many instances of the plural use of 
μυστήρια, adding, et alibi frequentis- 
sime.—Thes. Eccl., tom. ii. p. 383. 

9 λατρείαν : which word in the Eu- 
charistical offices is used in the most 
strict sense for the’ celebration of the 
Eucharistical or Christian sacrifice. 
See Suicer’s Thesaurus, in the word 
λατρεία [ quoted above, note z, p. 49. ] 

τ [στῶμεν καλῶς, στῶμεν μετὰ φό- 
βου, πρόσχωμεν τὴν ἁγίαν ἀναφορὰν ἐν 
εἰρήνῃ προσφέρειν.---. Basilii Lit. 
Goar, p. 165.] 


δ. ss ... ὦ 


The Liturgy of St. James. 133 


becomes us with reverence, and take heed that we offer this 
holy offering (τὴν ἁγίαν ἀναφορὰν) in peace.” 

“ Wherefore most holy Lord’ . . . we approach to Thy holy 
altar, and having set (thereupon) the figures (or symbols) of 
the holy body and blood of Thy Christ, we pray and beseech 
Thee, O most Holy, by the pleasure of Thy goodness, that 
Thy Holy Spirit may come upon us, and upon these gifts 
lying before Thee, to bless them, and sanctify them, and 
make (ἀναδεῖξαι) them the body and blood of Christ.” 

“Thou, O our God, who hast received these giftst, cleanse 
us from all filthiness of flesh and spirit,” &c. 

I could add more such passages out of this Eucharistical 
office, but because they are the same with those in that of 
St. Chrysostom, or almost the same, I thought fit to pass 
over them, and proceed to the other Greek Liturgies, as I 
find them in the second volume of the Bibliotheca Patrum 
Veterum, published at Paris, 1624. I shall begin with the 
Liturgy of St. James, 1. 6. of the Church of Jerusalem", of 
which he was the first bishop*. There in the beginning of 


5. [6 ἱερεὺς κλίνας τὴν κεφαλὴν εὔχε- 
ται μυστικῶς. διὰ τοῦτο, δέσποτα πανά- 
TOS Coe προσεγγίζομεν τῷ ἁγίῳ σου 
θυσιαστηρίῳ, καὶ προσθέντες τὰ ἀντίτυπα 
τοῦ ἁγίου σώματος καὶ αἵματος τοῦ Χρι- 
στοῦ σου, δεόμεθα, καὶ σὲ παρακαλοῦ- 
μεν, ἅγιε ἁγίων, εὐδοκίᾳ τῆς σῆς ἀγαθό- 
τητος, ἐλθεῖν τὸ πνεῦμά σου τὸ ἅγιον 
ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς, καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα 
ταῦτα, καὶ εὐλογῆσαι αὐτὰ, καὶ ἁγιάσαι, 
καὶ ἄναδεῖξαι" . . .. τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦ- 
τον, ποίησον αὐτὸ τὸ τίμιον σῶμα τοῦ 
κυρίου, καὶ θεοῦ, καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ 
Χριστοῦ. . .. τὸ δὲ ποτήριον τοῦτο, αὐτὸ 
τὸ τίμιον αἷμα τοῦ κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ καὶ 
σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Xpictod.—Goar, 
Euchol., p. 169. | 

τ [σὺ ὃ θεὸς ἡμῶν 6 προσδεξάμενος τὰ 
δῶρα ταῦτα, καθάρισον ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ παντὸς 
μολυσμοῦ σαρκὸς καὶ πνεύματος, κ. τ. A. 
Goar, Euchol., p. 137. | 

« [The Liturgy of St. James is that 
of the patriarchate of Antioch, origi- 
nally including Judza, Mesopotamia, 
Syria, and some provinces of the south- 
ern part of Asia Minor. Itis still used 
by the Monophysites in Syriac ; by the 
orthodox only on the feast of St. James, 
and then in Greek. Two forms of the 
Syriac Liturgy of the Monophysites are 
translated in Renaudot’s Liturgiarum 


Orientalium Collectio, tom. ii. pp. 1, 
12, 29, differing considerably in the in- 
troductions, but agreeing in the ana- 
phora or most solemn part.- The first 
edition of the Greek was published at 
Rome by Demetrius Ducas, A.D. 1526, 
whence it was copied into the Bibli- 
otheca Patrum (tom. ii. p. 1. Paris, 
1624) ; it is found also in Fabricius’ 
Codex Apocryphus Nov. Test., tom. iii.; 
and in Asseman’s Codex Liturg., tom. 
v. p. 1. With the last of these, which is 
the text used by Mr. Palmer, the pas- 
sages quoted by Hickes have been col- 
lated and corrected. Another text from 
a MS. of the tenth century, and various 
readings of one of the twelfth, are pub- 
lished by Asseman, ibid., pp. 68, 400. 
These copies, though they frequently 
differ apparently in order, yet on ex- 
amination appear to exhibit very nearly 
the same text. Mr. Palmer considers it 
to be the ancient Liturgy of the ortho- 
dox of Jerusalem and Palestine, which 
before the tenth century had received 
several additions and alterations to 
adapt it to the formularies of the 
Church of Constantinople. See Pal- 
mer’s Orig. Liturg., vol. i. p. 15, sqq. | 

x This Liturgy, corrupted as we have 
it, agrees in many things with what 


CHAP. IL 
SECT. Χ, 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


134 Evidence of the Euch. Sacr. from the Primitive Liturgies. 


the sacramental office the priest prays’, δέσποτα Κύριε *In- 
σοῦ, κιτιλ. “O Lord Jesu Christ... purge us from all sin, 
and grant that we may present ourselves pure before Thy 
altar, that we may offer unto Thee the sacrifice of praise,” &c. 
Ὃ Θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ, x.T.r. “Ὁ Almighty God, who givest 


us access to the holy of holies, . 


. . fearing and trembling to 


approach Thy holy altar we implore Thy goodness: sénd 
down Thy grace upon us, and sanctify our souls, bodies, and 
spirits . . . that we may offer these gifts*, presents, and sacri- 
fices with a pure conscience,” ἕο. Ὃ ἱερεὺς εἰσάγων Ta ἅγια 


δῶρα [λέγει τὴν εὐχὴν ταύτην".] 


Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, mentions 
in his fifth Catechesis Mystagogica. 
[See above, pp. 121, 544. note "ἢ. That 
discourse is probably of the date A.D. 
330 or 340. The points of agreement 
noticed by Hickes are traced by Mr. Pal- 
mer in further confirmation of the an- 
tiquity of the Liturgy of St. James; 
“‘Cyril (he says) begins by speaking of 
the ceremony of the bishop or priest’s 
washing his hands, as denoting the 
purity which at this time should be in 
the mind. (Catech. Myst. ν. ὃ 2. p. 325, 
B, C.) He then mentions the kiss of 
peace, (εἶτα βοᾷ 6 διάκονος" ἀλλήλους 
ἀπολάβετε καὶ ἀλλήλους ἀσπαζώμεθα, 
326, A.) Then the form of the Sursum 
Corda, (ibid., C, D, E. μετὰ τοῦτο βοᾷ 
ὃ ἱερεὺς" ἄνω τὰς Kapdlas... εἶτα ἀπο- 
κρίνεσθε' ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν κύριον . .. 
εἶτα 6 ἱερεὺς λέγει᾽ εὐχαριστήσωμεν τῷ 
Κυρίῳ... εἶτα λέγετε" ἄξιον καὶ δίκαιον. 
And then most minutely describes the 
thanksgiving down to the hymn Ter 
Sanctus. (See above, note g, p. 123. 
λέγοντα, ἅγιος, ἅγιος, ἅγιος, Κύριος 
Σαβαώθ.---"». 327, A, B.) Of this, the 
order, sentiments, and expressions will 
be found the same as in the orthodox and 
Monophysite Liturgies of St. James,” 
‘* Cyril does not allude to the words of 
our Lord, but he plainly refers to the 
solemn oblation of the gifts.’’—(Ibid., 
C, D. See above, noteh, p. 123.) He 
then proceeds to speak of the invoca- 
tion and prayer for the Holy Ghost to 
make the bread and wine the body and 
blood of Christ, (ibid., C. See above, 
note 1], p. 124.) He next notices the 
general prayers for all men and 
things, (ibid., D.) the commemora- 
tion of the living and dead; and the 
heads of petitions which he mentions 
are all found in the corresponding part 
of the Liturgies. Then he speaks of 


“The priest who brings 


the Lord’s Prayer, (ὃ xi. sqq- pp. 328 
—330.) Then of the ἅγια τοῖς ἁγίοις, 
(§ 19. p. 331, A. See above, note k, 
p- 124,) and the response of the peo- 
ple; all which occur in the Liturgies. 
‘All this,”? he concludes, “ critically 
agrees with the order, the substance, 
and the expressions of the anaphora 
which may be deduced from a com- 
parison of the orthodox and Mono- 
physite Liturgies of St. James.’ The 
same confirmation is found on ex- 
amining the writings of Theodoret, 
St. Jerome, St. Ephrem Syrus, and 
St. Chrysostom, who all lived within 
this patriarchate. — Palmer’s Orig. 
Liturg., vol. i. p. 37. ed. 3. ] 

y [εὐχὴ τοῦ θυμιάματος τῆς εἰσόδου 
τῆς ἐνάρξεως. δέσποτα κύριε ᾿ΙΤησοῦ 
Χριστὲ... καθάρισον ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης 
κηλῖδος, καὶ παράστησον ἡμᾶς ayvous 
τῷ ἁγίῳ σου θυσιαστηρίῳ τοῦ προσενέγ- 
και σοι θυσίαν αἰνέσεως, κ. τ. A.—S. 
Jacobi Missa, Bibl. Vett. Patrum, De 
la Bigne, tom. ii. p. 2, A. Paris, 1624. 
Asseman. Cod. Liturg., lib. iv. pars 
2. p. 3.] 

2 [ὃ δοὺς ἡμῖν εἴσοδον εἰς τὰ ἅγια 
τῶν ἁγίων... ἐπειδὴ ἔμφοβοι καὶ ἔν- 
τρομοί ἐσμεν, μέλλοντες παρεστάναι τῷ 
ἁγίῳ σου θυσιαστηρίῳ: ἐξαπόστειλον 
ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς, ὁ θεὸς, τὴν χάριν σου τὴν 
ἀγαθὴν, καὶ ἁγίασον ἡμῶν τὰς ψύχας 
καὶ τὰ σώματα, καὶ τὰ πνεύματα, ... 
ἵνα ἐν καθαρῷ συνειδότι προσφέρωμέν 
σοι δῶρα, δόματα, καρπώματα, κ. τ. λ.--- 
Bibl. Patr., p. 8, C. Asseman, p. 7.} 

* δῶρα, δόματα, καρπώματα. In the 
Missale of Gregory the Great, dona, 
munera, sacrificia [hee dona, hee 
munera, hee sancta sacrificia illibata. 
—Op. S. Greg., tom. 111. col. 2, B. 
See below, note z, p. 142.] 

> [Bib]. Patr., p. 7, A. Asseman, 
p- 17.] 


a 


The Liturgy of St. James. 135 


in the ΓΟ gifts shall say this prayer.” 


κ.τ.λ, 


Ὃ ἐπισκεψάμενος", 
“Ὁ Lord, who hast visited us in mercy and pity, and 
given us poor sinners and Thine unworthy servants, leave to 
come unto Thy holy altar, and offer this tremendous and un- 
bloody sacrifice (τὴν φοβερὰν ταύτην Kai ἀναίμακτον θυσίαν) 
for our sins, &c.... And of Thy goodness receive me, who 
approach Thy holy altar; and grant that these gifts offered by 
my hands may be made acceptable to Thee,” &c.: ... καὶ τὰ 
περικείμενα TH ἱερᾷ ταύτῃ τελετῇ“, K.T-r. “ And uncovering 
the secret meaning,-which is symbolically veiled in this holy 
sacrifice, shew it clearly to us,” &c. And then in the prayer 
of consecration, μεμνημένοι οὖν“, x. τ. Χ. “ We sinners there- 
fore, being mindful of His sufferings, &c. . . offer unto Thee, 
O Lord, this tremendous and unbloody sacrifice ; have mercy 
upon us, O Lord, and send down Thy most Holy Spirit upon 
[us, and upon] these gifts which are set before Thee . . . that 
descending upon them He may by His holy, gracious, and 
glorious presence, make this bread the holy body of Christ, 
and this cup His precious blood.” Ὑπὲρ τῶν προσκομισ- 
θέντων, κ. τ. Δ. “Let us pray unto God for these sanctified, 
precious, heavenly, ineffable, pure, glorious, tremendous, 
dreadful, and Divine oblations, that our Lord would receive 
them into His holy, heavenly, intellectual, and spiritual altar, 


for a sweet-smelling savour,” &c.:.... ὁ Θεὸς καὶ πάτηρ τοῦ 


© [6 ἐπισκεψάμενος ἡμᾶς ἐν ἐλέοις των, K.T.A..-.- προσφέρομέν σοι, δέσ- 


καὶ οἰκτιρμοῖς, δέσποτα κύριε, καὶ χα- 
ρισάμενος παῤῥησίαν ἡμῖν τοῖς ταπεινοῖς 
καὶ ἁμαρτωλοῖς καὶ ἀναξίοις δούλοις σου, 
παρεστάναι τῷ ἁγίῳ σου θυσιαστηρίῳ, 
καὶ προσφέρειν σοὶ τὴν φοβερὰν ταύτην 
καὶ ἀναίμακτον θυσίαν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἡμετέ- 
pov ἁμαρτημάτων καὶ τῶν τοῦ λαυῦ ἀγ- 
νοημάτων, ... πρόσδεξαί με διὰ τὴν 
ἀγαθότητά σου προσεγγίζοντα τῷ ἁγίῳ 
σου θυσιαστηρίῳ" καὶ εὐδόκησον, κύριε, 
δεκτὰ γενέσθαι. τὰ προσαγόμενα ταῦτα 
δῶρα διὰ τῶν ἡμετέρων χειρῶν, κ. τ. λ. 
—Bibl. Patr., p. 10, Β, C. Asseman, 
pp. 25, 26. | 
[καὶ τὰ περικείμενα TH ἱερᾷ ταύτῃ 
τελετῇ συμβολικῶς ἀμφιάσματα τῶν 
αἰνιγμάτων ἡμῖν ἀνακαλύψας, τηλαυγῶς 
ἡμῖν ἀνάδειξον.----Β10]. Patr., p. 12, B. 
Asseman, p. 32. This is the prayer 
used at taking the veil from off the 
elements. See below, note c, p. 151. ] 
© [μεμνημένοι οὖν καὶ ἡμεῖς of ἅμαρ- 
τωλοὶ τῶν ζωοποιῶν αὐτοῦ παθημά- 


ποτα, τήν φοβερὰν ταύτην καὶ ἀναίμακ- 
tov θυσίαν, ... ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς, 6 θεὸς 

ον καὶ ἐξαπόστειλον ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ 
τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα ταῦτα, τὸ πνεῦμά 
σου τὸ πανάγιον ᾿ς ἧνα ἐπιφοιτῆσαν 
τῇ ἁγίᾳ καὶ ἀγαθῇ, Γ ἐνδόξῳ αὐτοῦ 
παρουσίᾳ ἁγιάσῃ, καὶ ποιήσῃ τὸν μὲν 
ἄρτον τοῦτον, σῶμα ἅγιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 
gov... καὶ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο, αἷμα 
τίμιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ cov.—Bibl. Patr., 
p- 14, B, C, E; p.15, A, B. Asseman, 
BE: 37, sqq.] 

[imp TOV προσκομισθέντων, καὶ 
ἁγιασθέντων τιμίων, ἐπουρανίων, ἀῤῥή- 
των, ἀχράντων, ἐνδόξων, φοβερῶν, φρικ- 
τῶν, θείων δώρων κυρίῳ τῷ θεῷ δεηθῶ- 
μεν" ὕπως κύριος 6 Beds ἡμῶν ὃ προσδε- 
ξάμενος αὐτὰ εἰς τὸ ἅγιον, καὶ ὑπερουρά- 
Ψιον, νοερὸν, καὶ πνευματικὸν αὐτοῦ θυ- 
σιαστήριον, εἰς ὑσμὴν εὐωδίας πνευματι- 


κῇ5.---Β10]. Patr., p. 17, E. Asseman, 
p- 48. ] 


CHAP, I. 


SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


136 Evidence of the Euch. Sacr. from the Primitive Liturgies. 


Kupiov®, x.t.r. “0 God, the Father of our Lord and Saviour 
Jesus Christ ..... who hast received the gifts, presents, and 
sacrifices offered unto Thee for a sweet-smelling savour, and 
hast vouchsafed to sanctify and consecrate them by the grace 
of Thy Christ, and the descent of Thy most Holy Spirit: O 
sanctify also our souls, bodies, and spirits,” &c. 

So in the Liturgy of St. Mark4, or the Church of Alex- 
andria, at the beginning of the oblationi: “O Lord our 
God, who art our sovereign Lord ... who hast made all things 
by Thy Wisdom, the true Light, Thy only-begotten Son, our 
Lord and God, and only Saviour Jesus Christ, through whom 
giving thanks to Thee, [with Him] and with Thy Holy Spirit, 
we offer this reasonable and unbloody sacrifice, which all na- 
tions offer up unto Thee from the rising of the sun unto the 
setting thereof, from the north to the south; because! great 
is Thy name among all people, and incense, and sacrifice, 
and oblation is offered unto Thee in every place. Kal δὸς" 


& [ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ τοῦ κυρίου καὶ 
θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ 

. τὰ μὲν προσενεχθέντα σοι δῶρα, 
δόματα, καρπώματα, εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας 
πνευματικῆς προσεδέξω, καὶ ἁγιάσαι καὶ 
τελειῶσαι κατηξίωσας, ἀγαθὲ, τῇ χάριτι 
τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου, καὶ τῇ ἐπιφοιτήσει τοῦ 
παναγίου σου πνεύματος" ἁγίασον, δέσ- 
ποτα, καὶ τὰς ἡμετέρας ψυχὰς καὶ σώ- 
ματα, καὶ τὰ πνεύματα, K.T.A.—Bibl. 
Patr., p. 18, A, B. Asseman, p. 49. ] 

h [The Liturgy of St. Mark was that 
of the patriarchate of Alexandria. Mr. 
Palmer shews from the agreement be- 
tween this Liturgy, which continued to 
be used by the orthodox, and that called 
St. Cyril’s, which is in use among the 
Monophysites, that it is in substance 
earlier than the council of Chalcedon, 
(A.D.451,) when the two bodies ceased 
to hold communion with each other. 
This Liturgy was first published at 
Paris in 1583, from a MS. of the 
tenth or eleventh century. It is found 
in the Bibliotheca Patrum, which 
Hickes used; in Asseman, lib. iv. pars 
4; in Fabricius, Cod. Apocryph. Noy. 
Test. tom. iii. ; and in Renaudot, tom. 
i. p. 131. The last is the text used by 
Mr. Palmer; the extracts here given 
have been collated by it. | 

i [6 ὧν, δέσποτα, κύριε θεὲ, ἜΝ 
πάντα δὲ ἐποίησας διὰ τῆς σῆς σοφίας, 
τοῦ φωτὸς τοῦ ἀληθινοῦ, τοῦ μονογενοῦς 


σου υἱοῦ, τοῦ κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆ- 
ρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ" δι᾽ οὗ σοι σὺν 
αὐτῷ καὶ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι εὐχαριστοῦν- 
TES, προσφέρομεν τὴν λογικὴν καὶ ἀναί- 
μακτον λατρείαν ταύτην, ἣν προσφέρει 
σοι, κύριε, πάντα τὰ ἔθνη ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν 
ἡλίου καὶ μέχρι δυσμῶν, ἀπὸ ἄρκτου καὶ 
μεσημβρίας, ὅτι μέγα τὸ ὄνομά σου ἐν 
πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι, καὶ ἐν πάντι τόπῳ θυ- 
μίαμα προσφέρεται τῷ ὀνόματι τῷ ἁγίῳ 
σου, καὶ θυσία, καὶ προσφορά.---ὃ. Marci 
Liturgia, pp. 82, C, E. 33, A. Bibl. 
Vett. Patrum, De la Bigne, Paris, 1624. 
Renaudot, Liturg. Orient. Coll., tom. i. 
pp. 144, 145. In Renaudot there is a 
point after 6 ὧν, which is not in the 
Bibl. Patr., giving it the meaning of 
‘the living God.’ ] 

j These words allude to Malachi i. 
Lh 11. 

κ [καὶ δὸς ἡμῖν μερίδα καὶ κλῆρον 
ἔχειν μετὰ πάντων τῶν ἁγίων σου τῶν 
προσφέροντων τῆς θυσίας τὰς προσφοράς" 
τὰ εὐχαριστήρια πρόσδεξαι ὃ θεὸς εἰς τὸ 
ἅγιον καὶ ἐπουράνιον καὶ νοερόν σου 
θυσιαστήριον. ---- Β10]. Patr., p. 35, B. 
Renaudot, pp. 150, 151. In Renaudot 
the passage runs, τὰς θυσίας, καὶ τὰς 
προσφορὰς, and the point 15 after τῶν 
ἁγίων cov, not after προσφοράς ; so as 
to have the sense ; “‘ with all Thy saints. 
And, O God, receive the Eucharistical 
gifts of those who bring unto Thee 
sacrifices and oblations,’’ &c. ] 


The Liturgy of St. Mark. 137 


ἡμῖν μερίδα, x.7.r. “And grant that we may have our part 
and lot with all Thy saints, who bring unto Thee sacrificial 
oblations (τῆς θυσίας tas προσφορὰς), and, O God, receive 
up these Eucharistical gifts (τὰ εὐχαριστήρια) into Thy 
heavenly and intellectual altar.” Κύριε 6 Θεὸς ἡμῶν τὰ oa 
ἐκ TOV σῶν δώρων, K.T.r.' “0 Lord our God, we have set 
what are Thine of Thy own gifts before Thee; and we pray 
and beseech Thee, O bountiful lover of mankind, to send 
down from the height of Thy holy place, from Thy prepared 
tabernacle, from Thy infinite bosoms (of love), (ἐξ ἑτοίμου 
κατοικητηρίου σου; ἐκ τῶν ἀπεριγράπτων κόλπων σου,) the 
Paraclete Himself, the Spirit of truth, the holy, quickening 
Lord (ζωοποιὸν), who spake in the Law, and the Prophets, 
and Apostles, who is every where present, and fills all 
things, and worketh not ministerially, but by His own 
power (ἐνεργοῦν τε avteEouciws, οὐ διακονικῶς), holiness 
according to Thy good pleasure, in whom He will; who is 
simple by nature, but manifold in His operations; who is 
the fountain of Divine gifts and graces, consubstantial to 
Thee, and proceeding from Thee, and sits with Thee and 
Thy only-begotten Son, and our Lord and God and Saviour 
Jesus Christ in the throne of Thy kingdom: O send down 
this Holy Spirit upon us, and upon these loaves and these 
cups; that as God omnipotent He may sanctify and con- 
secrate them, and make this bread the body, and the cup 
the blood of the New Testament of our Lord and God and 
Saviour, and King of kings, Jesus Christ.” 
So in the Liturgy of St. Peter, that is, of the Latin Liturgy 


anyhv' τὸ σοὶ ὁμοούσιον, τὸ ἐκ σοῦ 


'[ool, κύριε ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν, τὰ σὰ ἐκ ch 
ἐκπορευόμενον, τὸ σύνθρονον τῆς βα- 


τῶν σῶν δώρων προεθήκαμεν ἐνώπιόν 


σου" καὶ δεόμεθα καὶ παρακαλοῦμέν σε, 
φιλάνθρωπε, ἀγαθὲ, ἐξαπόστειλον ἐξ 
ὕψους τοῦ ἁγίου σου, ἐξ ἑτοίμου κατοι- 
κητηρίου σου, ἐκ τῶν ἀπεριγράπτων 
κόλπων (σου,) αὐτὸν τὸν παράκλητον, τὸ 
πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας, τὸν ἅγιον, τὸν 
κύριον, τὸ ζωοποὶον, τὸ ἐν νόμῳ καὶ 
προφήταις καὶ ἀποστόλοις λαλῆσαν, τὸ 
πανταχοῦ παρὸν καὶ τὰ πάντα πληροῦν, 
ἐνεργοῦν τε αὐτεξουσίως, οὐ διακονικῶς, 
ἐφ᾽ ods βούλεται, τὸν ἁγιασμὸν εὐδοκίᾳ 
τῇ σῇ, τὸ ἁπλοῦν τὴν φύσιν ‘Kar πολυ- 
μερὲς᾽ [τὸ πλημερὲς, Renaudot] τὴν 
ἐνέργειαν, τὴν τῶν θείων χαρισμάτων 


σιλείας σου καὶ τοῦ μονογενοῦς σου 
υἱοῦ, τοῦ κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος 
ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. ἔτι δὲ ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς 
καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἄρτους τούτους καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ 
ποτήρια ταῦτα τὸ πνεῦμά σου τὸ ἅγιον, 
ἵνα αὐτὰ ἁγιάσῃ καὶ τελειώσῃ ὡς παν- 
τοδύναμος θεὸς, . . . καὶ ποιήσῃ τὸν μὲν 
ἄρτον σῶμα, Ἐς αὐ ιδὲ “ποτήριον, αἷμα 
THS καινῆς διαθήκης αὐτοῦ τοῦ κυρίου καὶ 
θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος καὶ παμβασιλέως ἡμῶν 
Ἰησοῦ Xpiorod.—Ibid., pp. 37, E. 38, 
B. Bibl. Patr., pp. 156, 157, Renaudot. 
The cov in parentheses is not in Re- 
naudot. | 


CHAP. It. 
SECT. X, 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 





138 


The Liturgy of St. Peter. 


of the Church of Rome, translated into Greek™, θυσίαν Κύριε, 
cot, K.T.AX." “QO Lord, sanctify this sacrifice, which is to be 
offered to Thee, and receive us graciously,” &c.... σὲ τοίνυν, 
x. τ᾿ λ.5 “ We therefore pray, and beseech Thee, most mer- 


ciful Father, 


through our Lord Jesus Christ, that Thou 
wouldst please to accept and bless these gifts’, this obla- 


tion, this holy and pure sacrifice, which we offer up to Thee, 
in the first place for Thy holy Catholic Apostolical Church.”... 
ταύτην τοίνυν THY προσφορὰν, K.T- 4 “40 Lord, we beseech 
Thee mercifully to receive this offering of our (bounden duty 
and) service which we offer to Thee, .. . which we beseech Thee 
that Thou wouldst vouchsafe to make blessed" (ἀπερίγραπο 


m [This Liturgy was first published, 
from a MS. at Paris, by Morell, in 1595. 
It is the work of some later Greek, 
who compiled it from a translation of 
the Canon of the Mass of the Latin 
Church, and the Liturgy of St.Chrysos- 
tom. See Renaudot. Lit. Oriens., tom. 
ii. Ρ. 168.] 

" [θυσίαν, κύριέ, σοι προορισθεῖσαν 
προσφορὰν ἁγίασον, καὶ δ αὐτῆς ἡμᾶς 
ἀσμένως πρόσδεξαι.---8. Petri Liturgia, 
Biblioth. Patr. ibid., p. 118, E.] 

° [σὲ τοίνυν ἐπιεικέστατε πάτερ, διὰ 
τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἱκετεύ- 
οντες παρακαλοῦμέν σε καὶ δεόμεθα, ἵνα 
προσδεκταῖα σχῇ καὶ εὐλογήσῃς ταῦτα 
τὰ δῶρα, ταύτην τὴν προσφορὰν, ταύτην 
τὴν ἁγίαν θυσίαν, τὴν ἀμώμητον, ἐν 
πρώτοις ἅπερ σοι προσφέρομεν ὑπὲρ τῆς 
ἁγίας σου καθολικῆς καὶ ἀποστολικῆς 
ἐκκλησίας, κιτ.λ.---Τ014., p.119, C, D.] 

P ταῦτα τὰ δῶρα, mainte ah προσ- 
φορὰν, ταύτην τὴν ἁγίαν θυσίαν τὴν ἀμώ- 
μητον ; in the Roman Missal, ‘hee 
dona, hee munera, hee sancta sacri- 
ficia illibata.’ 

4 [ταύτην τοίνυν τὴν προσφορὰν τῆς 
δουλείας ἡμῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ παντὸς τοῦ 
λαοῦ σου, ἥν σοι προσφέρομεν, δέομεθα 
κύριε ἀσμένως πρόσδεξαι eae εὐλογη- 
μένην, ἀπερίγραπτον, ἐράσμιον, εὐαπο- 
λόγητον, προσδεκταίαν τε ποιῆσαι κα- 
ταξιώσῃ», ἵνα ἡμῖν. σῶμα καὶ αἷμα γέ- 
νηται τοῦ ἀγαπητοῦ σου υἱοῦ, κυρίου δὲ 
ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Xpiotod.—Ibid., p. 120, 
(AIDS | 

τ δεόμεθα εὐλογημένην, ἀπερίγραπ- 
τον, ἐράσμιον, εὐαπολόγητον, προσδεκ- 
ταίαν τε ποιῆσαι καταξιώσῃς. In St. 
Gregory’s Sacramentary, [and the Ca- 
non of the Mass of which the Greek 
is a translation]: Quam oblationem 
tu Deus in omnibus quesumus bene- 
dictam, adscriptam, ratam, rationabi- 


lem, acceptabilemque facere digneris. 
-ἰ 5. Greg. M. Op., tom. iii. col. 3, C.] 
All which terms are explained by Me- 
nardus, not. 46—49. The Greek trans- 
lator did not rightly understand the 
Latin terms, and therefore he absurdly 
rendered ‘adscriptam’ by ameplypar- 
tov, Which in the theological] sense al- 
ways signifies ‘ incomprehensible,’ ‘un- 
conceivable.’ ‘As in Hesychius, [ἀπε- 
pwoéntoy |; Phavorinus, [ἀπεριόριστον" 
. ἡ ἅγια ἐκκλήσια τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις 
ἀπεριγράπτως ὁμολογεῖ: καὶ ἀπερίσκο- 
πον]; Suicer, [non circumscriptus, in- 
comprehensibilis, qui mente compre- 
hendi non potest; frequenter de Deo 
usurpatur; he adds several instances of 
this.—Thes. Eccl.,tom.i. col. 432. | Ste- 
phani Thesaurus, [περίγραπτος, qui cir- 
cumscribi potest et finiri, unde ἀπερί- 
ypanros huic contrarium, ut Damascen. 
de Deo; ἀκατάληπτος, ἀπερίγραπτος : | 
in Liturgia que S. Petri esse creditur, 
non ita recte legitur ἀπερίγραπτον, id 
est incircumscriptam, incomprehensibi- 
lem.—[ tom. iii.col.3056. | Hesych.dazepi- 
γραπτον, ἀπερινόητον, id est, incompre- 
hensibilem. Menard. in not.47. [The 
translator seems to have read ‘ gratam’ 
for ‘ratam,’ for which he uses ἐράσμιον. 
Menard’s notes are given S. Greg. M. 
Op., tom. ili. col. 275, 276. He ex- 
plains benedictam, consecratam; as- 
criptam ; id est, in numerum benepla- 
citorum tuorum receptam; ratam; id 
est, immobili firmitate perpetuam, in 
versione Codini (see above, note b, p. 
67) βεβαίαν ; rationabilem, in versione 
Codini λογικὴν, i. 6. rationalem, which 
is variously explained by cum ratione 
actam; justa ratione plenam; cum 
ratione oblatam; the Greek word by 
which it is mistranslated, εὐαπολόγητον, 
Menard translates, excusabilis. ] 


The Liturgia Ante-Consecratorum. 139 


τον), amiable, grateful, and acceptable, that it may be unto 
us the body and blood of Thy beloved Son Jesus Christ our 
Lord.” ....tTa σὰ ἐκ τῶν σῶν προσφέρομέν, K. τ. λ." “Thy 
own of Thy own; this pure sacrifice, this holy sacrifice, this 
spotless sacrifice, this holy bread of eternal life, and cup of 
everlasting salvation we offer, of Thy gifts and benefits, unto 
Thee, upon which we beseech Thee that Thou wouldst look 
with a propitious and serene countenance, and accept as 
Thou wast pleased to accept the gifts of Thy righteous child 
Abel; and command that it be carried up by the hand of 
Thy ministering angel unto Thy altar above, before Thy 
Divine majesty; that whosoever of us shall receive any 
holy part of the body of Thy Son, or of His blood, may be 
filled with Thy heavenly benediction and grace, through our 
Lord Jesus Christ.” 

So in the Lent-office of administering the Eucharist, ex 
presanctificatis', translated by Genebrard ; ὑπὲρ τῶν προτε- 
θέντων, Kal προαγιασθέντων τιμίων δώρων τοῦ Κυρίου δεη- 
θῶμεν": “Let us pray for the precious gifts, or oblations, 
which have before been presented and sanctified.” 
appytov’, x.T.r. “O God of ineffable and invisible myste- 
ries, with whom are hid the treasures of wisdom and know- 
ledge, and who of Thy great love towards men hast ap- 


νον. ὁ TOV 


8 [τὰ σὰ ἐκ τῶν σῶν προσφέρομεν TH (ΟΟΠΟΙ]1α, tom. i. col. 1540, A.) they do 


Tyla μεγαλωσύνῃ gov, ἐκ τῶν σῶν δω- 
ρεῶν καὶ χαρισμάτων, θυσίαν καθαρὰν, 
θυσίαν ἁγίαν, θυσίαν ἄμωμον, ἄρτον 
ἅγιον ζωῆς αἰωνίου, καὶ ποτήριον σωτη- 
ρίας ἀεννάου" ὑπὲρ ὧν ἵλεῳ καὶ εὐϊλάτῳ 
προσώπῳ ἐπισκέψαι καταξιώσῃς, καὶ 
προσδεκτὰ σχεῖν, καθὰ κατηξίωσας τὰ 
δῶρα τοῦ παιδός σου τοῦ δικαίου ᾿Αβέλ 
ες κέλευσον τοῦτο διακονηθῆναι διὰ χει- 
pos ἁγίου ἀγγέλου σου εἰς τὸ ὑψηλόν σου 
θυσιαστήριον, ἐνώπιον τῆς θείας μεγα- 
λειότητός σου, ἵνα οἵαν δήποτε ἐκ τού- 
του τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου μερίδα ἁγίαν τοῦ 
σώματος τοῦ υἱοῦ σου ἢ καὶ τοῦ αἵματος 
ληψώμεθα, πάσης ἐπουρανίου εὐλογίας 
καὶ χάριτος ἐμπλησθῶμεν, διὰ τοῦ κυ- 
ρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ ae —S. Petri 
ini bids. 191. BoC, Ds] 
bois is a service used in the Greek 
churches during Lent. In that season 
in conformity with Canon xlix. of the 
council of Laodicea, A.D. 364? (ὅτι 
ov δεῖ TH τεσσαρακοστῇ ἄρτον προσφε- 
ρειν, εἰ μὴ ἐν σαββάτῳ καὶ κυριακῇ μόνον. 


not consecrate the Eucharist except on 
Sundays and Saturdays ; on other days 
they partake of the previously conse- 
crated elements, with this service, as 
enjoined by the council i in Trullo, A.D. 
692. ἐν πάσαις τῆς ἁγίας τεσσερακοστῆς 
τῶν νηστειῶν ἡμέραις, παρεκτὸς σαβ- 
βάτου καὶ κυριακῆς, καὶ τῆς ἁγίας τοῦ 
εὐαγγελισμοῦ ἡμέρας, γινέσθω ἣ τῶν 
προηγισμένων ἱερὰ Aertoupyia.—Con- 
cilia, tom. vii. col. 1372, D. See Ge- 
nebrard’s note, Biblioth. Patr., tom. ii. 
p- 10]. 1624.1] 

ἃ [Liturgia Ante-Consecrat., Biblioth. 
Patr., tom. ii. Ρ. 98, A. 1624. ] 

Vv [6 τῶν ἀβῥήτων ead aBedrooy μυστη- 
ρίων Θεὸς, παρ᾽ ᾧ οἱ θησαυροὶ τῆς σοφίας 
καὶ τῆς γνώσεως ἀπόκρυφοι, ὁ ὃ τὴν διακο- 
νίαν τῆς “λειτουργίας ταύτης ἀποκαλύψας 
ἡμῖν, καὶ θέμενος ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἁμαρτωλοὺς 
διὰ πολλήν σου φιλανθρωπίαν εἰς τὸ προσ- 
φέρειν σοι δῶρα. καὶ θυσίας ὑπὲρ τῶν ἧμε- 
τέρων ἁμαρτημάτων, K.T.A.—ibid. C.] 


CHAP, 11. 
SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


140 Further authorities for the Eucharistic Oblation, from 


pointed us sinners to offer gifts and sacrifices for our own 


sins,” &c. 


I might, Sir, from the Greek Liturgies as now extant, 
return to the ancient Greek writers, and cite many more 
authorities out of them for the Eucharistical oblation, espe- 
cially that in the margin’, to which I refer my reader: but 


Y In the prayer of consecration of a 
bishop, Apost. Const., lib. viii. ec. 5. 
δὸς ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί cov, καρδιογνώστα 
θεὲ, ἐπὶ τὸν δοῦλον σου τόνδε, ὃν ἐξελέξω 
εἰς ἐπίσκοπον, ποιμαίνειν τὴν ἁγίαν σου 
ποίμνην, καὶ ἀρχιερατεύειν σοι ἀμέμπ- 
τως, λειτουργοῦντα νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας, 
καὶ ἐξιλασκόμενόν σου πρόσωπον, ἐπι- 
συναγαγεῖν τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν σωζομένων, 
καὶ προσφέρειν σοι τὰ δῶρα τῆς ἁγίας 
σου ἐκκλησίας" δὸς αὐτῷ, δέσποτα παν- 
τοκράτορ, διὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου, τὴν μετου- 
σίαν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος, ὥστε ἔχειν 
ἐξουσίαν ἀφιέναι ἁμαρτίας κατὰ τὴν ἐντο- 
λήν σου" διδόναι κλήρους κατὰ τὸ πρόσ- 
ταγμά σου, λύειν δὲ πάντα σύνδεσμον 
κατὰ τὴν ἐξουσίαν ἣν ἔδωκας τοῖς ἀποστό- 
λοις εὐαρεστεῖν δέ σοι ἐν πραότητι καὶ 
καθαρᾷ καρδίᾳ, ἀτρέπτως, ἀμέμπτως, ἂνε- 
γκλήτως προσφέροντά σοι καθαρὰν καὶ 
ἀναίμακτον θυσίαν, ἣν διὰ Χριστοῦ διε- 
τάξω, τὸ μυστήριον τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης, 
εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας διὰ τοῦ ἁγίου παιδός 
σου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ [τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆ- 
ρος ἡμῶν} δι᾽ οὗ σοι δόξα, τιμὴ καὶ 
σέβας, ἐν ἁγίῳ πνεύματι, νῦν καὶ ἀεὶ 
καὶ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων.--- 
Concil., tom.i. p.461,D. [The words 
τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν were omitted 
in the third edition ; they are inserted 
in Hickes’ copy. See vol. i. p. 36, notef. ] 
“Ὁ God, who knowest the heart, give 
for Thy own name to this Thy servant, 
whom Thou hast chosen to be a bishop, 
grace to feed Thy holy flock, and to 
execute before Thee the office of an 
high-priest, ministering by night and 
by day unblameably, to make atone- 
ment before Thee, (and) to assemble 
the number of those who are saved, 
and to offer the gifts of Thy holy 
Church. Give him, O Lord Almighty, 
through Thy Christ, the communica- 
tion of the Holy Ghost, that he may 
have power to remit sins according to 
Thy command; to give holy orders; 
to loose every bond according to the 
power Thou gavest to Thy Apostles; 
to please Thee in all meekness, and 
with a clean heart to offer unto Thee 
constantly, unblameably, and without 
fault the pure and unbloody sacrifice 
which Thou hast ordained by Christ to 


be the Sacrament of the New Testa- 
ment, for a sweet savour through Thy 
holy Child Jesus Christ our God and 
Saviour, through whom in the Holy 
Spirit be unto Thee glory, honour, and 
worship now, and always, and for ever 
and ever.” In the commentary of 
Jobus Ludolphus, ad suam Historiam 
fEthiopicam, p. 324, [see above, note 
n, p. 125,] this passage is rendered as 
follows: Da, O gnare cordium Pater, 
ut servus tuus, quem elegisti ad epi- 
scopatum, pascat gregem tuum, et sa- 
cerdotio fungatur coram te absque re- 
prehensione, ut ministrans noctu die- 
que suppliciter oret, videatque faciem 
tuam, ut digne offerat oblationem sanc- 
te Ecclesie tuz, et in Spiritu sacer- 
dotii sancto habens facultatem remit- 
tendi peccata secundum mandatum 
tuum, et dandi ordines (secundum) 
institutionem tuam, atque solvendi 
omne vinculum iniquitatis secundum 
potestatem, quam dedisti A postolis tuis, 
ut acceptus tibi sit in sinceritate, et 
puro corde offerendo tibi odorem sua- 
vem, per filium tuum Jesum Christum, 
in quo tibi (sit) laus et potentia: gloria 
Patri, et Filio, et Spiritui Sancto in 
sancta Ecclesia nunc et semper, et in 
secula seculorum. Amen. 

In the Baroccian MS. at Oxford, 26 
fol. 151, Ὁ, entituled διατάξεις τῶν av- 
τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων περὶ χειροτονιῶν, 
διὰ Ἱππολύτου, the same passage is to 
be read in these words: [fol. 153, line 
14.1 καὶ νῦν ἐπίχεε τὴν παρά σου 
δύναμιν τοῦ ἡγεμονικοῦ πνεύματος, ὅπερ 
διὰ τοῦ ἠγαπημένου σου παιδὸς Ἰησοῦ 


Χριστοῦ δεδώρησαι τοῖς ἁγίοις σου 
ἀποστόλοις, οἵ καθίδρυσαν τὴν ἐκ- 


κλησίαν κατὰ τόπον ἁγιάσματός σου 
> >. > / ~ 
(εἰς δόξαν καὶ αἶνον ἀδιάλειπτον τοῦ 
ὀνόματός cov) καρδιογνώστα πάντων, 
} | ~ a > / 
ἐπὶ τὸν δοῦλόν σου τοῦτον, ὃν ἐξελέξω 
εἰς ἐπισκοπὴν cov τὴν ἁγίαν, καὶ 
ἀρχιερατεύειν σοι ἀμέμπτως λειτουρ- 
γοῦντα νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας, ἀδιαλείπ- 
τως τε ἱλάσκεσθαι τὸ πρόσωπόν σου, καὶ 
προσφέρειν σοι τὰ δῶρα τῆς ἁγίας σου 
ἐκκλησίας, καὶ τῷ πνεύματι τῷ ἀρχιε- 
ρατικῷ ἔχειν ἐξουσίαν ἀφιέναι ἁμαρτίας 
κατὰ τὴν ἐντολήν σου, διδόναι κλήρους 


the ancient Prayers at the Consecration of Bishops. 141 


from the Liturgies of the Greek Churches it is time to lead cmap. π. 
you to those of the Latin, among whom I shall begin with ae 


κατὰ τὸ πρόσταγμά σου, λύειν Te πάντα copy, or some other place. [The 





σύνδεσμον κατὰ Thy ἐξουσίαν ἣν δέδωκας 
τοῖς ἀποστόλοις, εὐαρεστεῖν τε σοι ἐν 
πραότητι καὶ καθαρᾷ καρδίᾳ" προσφέ- 
ροντά σοι ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας διὰ τοῦ παιδός 
σου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν, 
μεθ᾽ οὗ σοι δόξα, κράτος, τιμὴ σὺν ἁγίῳ 
πνεύματι νῦν καὶ ἀεὶ, καὶ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας 
τῶν αἰώνων. ἀμήν. 

[The first of the works to which 
Hickes refers is a collection of thirty- 
eight Constitutions, which exist in 
Ethiopic, and are received in the Abys- 
sinian Church as Apostolical Constitu- 
tions. Twenty-three of them are printed 
in Ludolf’s Comment. in suam Hist. 
/Ethiop., pp. 314, but he admits (p. 
329) that they were carelessly trans- 
cribed, and that he had to correct and 
supply passages. The other isa similar 
collection of twenty-eight Constitutions 
existing in Greek, which in two MSS., 
one at Vienna the other at Oxford, are 
attributed to St. Hippolytus, the dis- 
ciple of Ireneus, (fl. A.D. 220, Cave); 
they are printed, together with a Latin 
translation by Grabe, in the collected 
edition of the works of Hippolytus by 
Fabricius, p. 248, Hamb. 1716. They 
correspond with much of the eighth 
book of the Apostolical Constitutions. 
Hickes refers to a MS. in the Bodleian 
Library, among the collection made by 
Giacomo Barocci, a Venetian noble- 
man; and given to the University by 
the earl of Pembroke, when chancel- 
lor; with which the copy edited by 
Fabricius was collated. ] 

Though there is a verbal difference 
between these two Greek copies of the 
ancient prayer of consecration, and of 
the Abyssen-Ethiopic version, from 
them both, yet as to sense and sub- 
stance they are really the same. And 
the difference of words and expressions, 
and of the order of them, shews that 
what they all agree in must be genuine 
and true; and particularly that the 
holy Eucharist is, and was anciently 
esteemed to be the sacrifice of the 
Christian Church. I must also adver- 
tise my reader, that the words in the 
Baroccian copy included within the 
hooks, though they are written in the 
same hand and same ink with the rest 
of the manuscript, yet they have points 
made over against them at the left hand 
in the margin: which seems to denote 
that the copyist who so distinguishes 
them, suspected them not to be genuine, 
but inserted from the margin of some 


words included in the parentheses are 
themselves written in the margin of the 
MS., but not in the same ink or hand, 
though in one nearly cotemporaneous ; 
the points mentioned by Hickes seem 
immaterial. The genuineness of the 
words does not seem suspected ; in fact 
a later hand has supplied what was 
omitted by the copyist.] The like 
sacrificial phrase for the Eucharist as 
προσφέρειν δῶρα, used by St. Clement 
in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, 
[c. 44. Patr. Apost., tom. i, p. 173; 
see above, p. 88, note x,] and in this 
prayer of consecration, is also used by 
Gregory Nazianzen in his oration at 
the consecration of Eulalius bishop of 
Doara in Cappadocia, [Orat. 13. ὃ 4. p. 
254, C ; see vol. i. p. 89, notes t, u, | 
“Ὁ son of Dathan and Abiram (saith 
he in an apostrophe to some factious 
bishop) who durst rise up against Moses, 
and laid thy hands upon us, as they 
did their tongues upon him, the great 
servant of God; how hadst thou no 
horror? Wast thou not confounded ? 
And did not thy countenance fall to 
the ground, when thou thoughtest of 
these things? Durst thou after this 
hold up these hands to God? εἶτα δῶρα 
προσάξεις; Durst thou after this offer 
the gifts? Durst thou after this pray 
for the people?’’ With this ancient 
consecration prayer agree those in the 
modern Greek rituals, as may be seen 
in Goar’s Euchologium, pp. 302, 303, 
and Habertus, Lib. Pontif. Ecclesiz 
Greece, pp. 317, 318: δέσποτα κύριε [6 
θεὺς ἡμῶν, 6 νομοθετήσας ἡμῖν διὰ τοῦ 
πανευφήμου σου ἀποστόλου Παύλου βαθ- 
μῶν καὶ ταγμάτων τάξιν, εἰς τὸ ἐξυπη- 
ρετεῖσθαι καὶ λειτουργεῖν τοῖς σεπτοῖς 
καὶ ἀχράντοις σου μυστηρίοις ἐν τῷ ἁγίῳ 
σου θυσιαστηρίῳ᾽ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους, 
k.T.A.—Ex ordine qui observari solet 
in ordinatione Episcopi. | “Ὁ Lord our 
God, who by Thy glorious Apostle St. 
Paul hast given a rule for degrees and 
orders to serve in the ministration of 
Thy venerable and immaculate mys- 
teries of Thy holy altar: as first Apo- 
stles,” ὅς. So; κύριε 6 θεὸς ἡμῶν, [6 
διὰ τὸ μὴ δύνασθαι τὴν ἀνθρώπου φύσιν 
τὴν τῆς θεότητος ὑπενεγκεῖν οὐσίαν, τῆ 
σῇ οἰκονομίᾳ ὁμοιοπαθεῖς ἡμῖν διδασκά- 
λους καταστήσας, τὸν σὸν ἐπέχοντας 
θρόνον, εἰς τὸ ἀναφέρειν σοι θυσίαν καὶ 
προσφορὰν ὑπὲρ παντὸς τοῦ λαοῦ σου, 
σύ, κύριε, τοῦτον τὸν ἀναδειχθέντα oiKO- 
νόμον τῆς ἀρχιερατικῆς χάριτος ποιήσον 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
WOOD. 


142 


The Liturgies of the Latin Churches. 


the Sacramentary of Gregory the Great*, where the Canon of 
the Mass (for mass of old, as well as pope, was a word of 
good and harmless signification) begins with this prayer: 
“ Wherefore, O most merciful Father, we humbly pray and 
beseech Thee, through Jesus Christ Thy Son our Lord, that 
Thou wouldst accept and bless these gifts, these presents, 
these holy pure sacrifices’, which we offer up to Thee for 


Thy holy Catholic Church. . 


.. . Wherefore, we beseech 


Thee, that Thou wouldst graciously receive this oblation 
of our service, oblationem servitutis nostre, and of Thy 
whole family; quam oblationem, quesumus, benedictam, ad- 
scriptam, ratam, rationabilem, acceptabilemque facere digneris, 


γενέσθαι μιμητήν σου, τοῦ ἀληθινοῦ ποι- 
μένος, τιθέντα τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ὑπὲρ 
τῶν προβάτων σου, ὁδηγὸν τυφλῶν, φῶς 
τῶν ἐν σκότει, παιδεύτην ἀφρόνων, διδά- 
σκαλον νηπίων, φωστῆρα ἐν κόσμῳ, ἵνα 
καταρτίσας τὰς ψυχὰς τὰς ἐμπιστευθεί- 
σας αὐτῷ ἐπὶ τῆς παρούσης ζωῆς, πα- 
ραστῇ τῷ βήματί σου ἀκαταισχύντως“, 
καὶ τὸν μέγαν μίσθον λήψηται ὃν ἡτοί- 
μασας τοῖς ἀθλήσασιν ὑπὲρ τοῦ κηρύγμα- 
τος τοῦ εὐαγγελίου cov.—lbid., pp. 318, 
819.1 “0 Lord our God, who because 
the nature of man cannot bear Thy Di- 
vine presence, hast by Thy economy ap- 
pointed doctors of like infirmities with 
us (τὸν σὸν ἐπέχοντες θρόνον) to sit on 
Thy throne, and to ofter up unto Thee 
(θυσίαν καὶ προσφορὰν) a sacrifice and 
oblation for all Thy people: do Thou, 
O Lord, make this elected steward of 
the episcopal grace a follower of Thy 
true Shepherd, in laying down His life 
for Thy sheep; a guide to the blind; 
a light to those who live in darkness ; 
a preceptor of the ignorant; a teacher 
of babes; a luminary to the world, that 
when he hath reformed the souls com- 
mitted to his charge in this life, he may 
without shame present himself before 
Thy tribunal, and receive the great 
reward which Thou hast prepared for 
those champions who endure much 
contention in preaching the Gospel.” 
The same prayers are given in the 
place referred to in Goar. | 

* [Sacramentary, or book of Sacra- 
ments, was the old name for the missal, 
which besides the canon of the mass 
contained a number of prayers and 
offices for particular days. These 
prayers St. Gregory (cire. A.D. 595) 
collected, arranged, remodelled, and 
added to. He inserted a short pas- 
sage into the canon, and joined the 


Lord’s prayer to the canon, from which 
it had before been separated by the 
breaking of the bread. The canon itself, 
that is, the essential portion of the ser- 
vice, which is here quoted, remained 
unchanged. Hence the Sacramentary 
bore hisname. The Sacramentary ofSt. 
Gelasius, previously in use in the Latin 
Church, is referred to, pp. 144. There 
is a still earlier one, the Sacramentary 
of St. Leo, given in Muratori, Liturgia 
Romana Vetus, tom. i. pp. 294, sqq. 
Venet. 1748. The portion of the Li- 
turgy which bears on Hickes’ argument 
is, as will be seen, invariably the same. ] 

Y [Te igitur, clementissime ac mise- 
ricors Pater, per Jesum Christum 
Filium tuum Dominum nostrum, sup- 
plices rogamus et petimus, uti accepta 
habeas et benedicas hee dona, hee 
munera, hee sancta sacrificia illibata, 
imprimis que tibi offerimus pro tua 
Ecclesia tua sancta Catholica, pacifi- 
care &c.... Hane igitur oblationem 
servitutis nostra, sed et cunctze familiz 
tue, quesumus, Domine ut placatus 
accipias, ... Quam oblationem tu Deus 
in omnibus quzsumus, benedictam, ad- 
scriptam, ratam, rationabilem, accepta- 
bilemque facere digneris: ut nobis cor- 
pus et sanguis fiat dilectissimi filii tui 
Domini Dei nostri Jesu Christi.—S. 
Gregorii Sacram. Op., tom. iii. col. 2, 
Β΄. ὮΙ 8. Coll 

z Heec dona, hee munera, hee sane- 
ta sacrificia illibata——Menard. in lo- 
cum. Dona sunt, que voluntarie do- 
nantur: munera sunt, que pro aliquo 
munere vel mercede offeruntur, sicut 
nos offerimus Deo ut peccata nostra 
dimittantur: sacrificia sunt, que cum 
orationibus consecrantur. —[ Menard. 
not. 26, Op., S. Greg., tom. iii. col. 
283, B.] 


The Sacramentary of St. Gregory the Great. 143 


ut nobis corpus, §c., which oblation we beseech Thee that 
it may please Thee to make blessed, appropriated, approved, 
rational, and acceptable, that it may be unto us the 
body and blood of 'Thy most beloved Son, Jesus Christ our 
Lord.” In the treatise de Sacramentis, falsely ascribed to 
St. Ambrose, but written by some orthodox author of the 
ninth century, the words of this prayer are these which fol- 
low*: Vis scire quia verbis celestibus consecratur?  Accipe 
que sunt verba. Dicit sacerdos: fac nobis hanc oblationem 
adscriptam, {ratam, ed. Ben.] rationabilem, acceptabilem, 
quod sit in figuram” corporis, et sanguinis Domini nostri Jesu 
Christi. In this prayer to God to appropriate, ratify, and 
accept the elements to be offered, and thereby to become the 
figurative or mystical body and blood of Christ, the words 
benedictam and ratam are omitted; but in the present canon 
of the Roman Mass they are as in the Sacramentary of Gre- 
gory I.; “ Wherefore, O Lord, we Thy servants, and Thy 
holy people, being mindful of Thy Son our God, and of His 
blessed passion, also of His resurrection from the dead, and 
His glorious ascension into heaven, offer unto Thy glorious 
majesty’, hostiam puram, hostiam sanctam, hostiam immacula- 


a S. Ambros. de Sacramentis, lib. iv. 
cap. 5. [Op., tom. ii. p. 371, B. This 
treatise is given as genuine by the 
Benedictine editors. Τὺ is however 
more generally rejected, and that by 
some Roman Catholic as well as Pro- 
testant writers. See Card. Bona de 
Rebus Liturg., lib. i. cap. 7. ὃ 4, who 
was first led to doubt its genuineness 
from its style differimg from that of 
St. Ambrose. He conceives however 
that it was cited as St. Ambrose’s in 
the eighth and ninth centuries ; in the 
controversy to which Hickes refers in 
the following note. ] 

b This seems to shew that the author 
lived in the time of the controversy be- 
tween Paschasius Radbertus and Ber- 
tramus; the former of whom, as Bel- 
larminus de Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis 
confesses, was the first, ‘qui serio et 
copiose scripsit de veritate corporis et 
sanguinis Domini in Eucharistia.’ 

{ But Bellarmine adds, ‘ contra Ber- 
tramum presbyterum, qui fuit ex pri- 
mis qui eam in dubium revocarunt.’— 
Bellarmini Op., tom. vii. p. 288, A. 
Paschasius, monk and afterwards abbot 
of Corbey, composed his work, De cor- 


pore et sanguine Domini, (Marten. 
Amplissima Collectio Veterum Scerip- 
torum, tom. ix. p. 378,) A.D. 831, and 
sent out a second edition A.D. 848, 
which was opposed by Bertram, in a 
work under the same title. It is to be 
observed that the Roman editions of 
St. Ambrose’s works read ‘quod sit 
in figuram corporis,’ the true reading 
is ‘ quod figura est corporis,’ and the 
Roman editors are accused of having 
introduced this reading, from which 
Hickes infers the late date of the trea- 
tise, without any MS. authority, to avoid 
the doctrine apparently implied in St. 
Ambrose’s words, The Bened. editors 
(notea, ad locum) say, ‘ communis lec- 
tio legitima est, nec vel transversam 
unguem a pio et catholico sensu ab- 
horrens.’ | 

© [ Unde etmemores sumus, Domine, 
nos tui servi, sed et plebs tua sancta, 
Christi filii tui Dei nostri, tam beate 
passionis, necnon et ab inferis resur- 
rectionis, sed et in ccelos gloriosz as- 
censionis; offerimus majestati tuz, de 
tuis donis ac datis, hostiam puram, 
hostiam sanctam, hostiam immacu- 
latam, panem sanctum yite zterne, 


CHAP, IL. 


SECT. X. 


144 Evidence from the ancient Latin Liturgies. 


curistan tam, a pure, holy, and spotless sacrifice of Thy own gifts* 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


and benefits, the holy bread of eternal life, and the cup of 
everlasting salvation. Upon which, we beseech Thee, look 
with a propitious and serene countenance, and vouchsafe to 
accept them, as Thou didst receive the oblations of Thy 
righteous servant Abel, and the sacrifice of our patriarch 
Abraham, and the holy sacrifice, that immaculate host which 
Melchisedec Thy high-priest offered to Thee. And we 
humbly beseech Thee, Almighty God, command that these® 
(oblations) be carried up by the hands of angels unto Thy 
heavenly altar in Thy sight; that as many of us as have 
partaken of the body and blood of Thy Son at this altar may 
be filled with Thy benediction and grace, through Jesus 
Christ our Lord.” 

So in the Codices Sacramentorum, published at Rome by 
Joseph Maria Thomasius, 1680, which are ancient offices, 
written about the latter end of the eighth century‘, in which, 
omitting all the prayers of the priest, I shall only cite the 
words in the Canon® of the celebration of the Eucharist, 
where, after Sursum Corda, &c. “ Lift up your hearts.” R. 
“ We lift them up untothe Lord.” “ Let us give thanks unto 
our Lord God.” R. “It is meet and right so to do;”’ then 


et calicem salutis perpetuz; supra 
quz propitio ac sereno vultu respicere 
digneris, et accepta habere, sicut mu- 
nera pueri tui justi Abel, et sacrificium 
patriarche nostri Abrahz, et quod tibi 
obtulit summus sacerdos tuus Melchi- 
sedech: sanctum sacrificium, immacu- 
latam hostiam. Supplices te rogamus 
omnipotens Deus, jube hee perferri 
per manus sancti angeli tui in super- 
cceleste altare tuum, in conspectu di- 
vine majestatis tue, ut quotquot ex 
hac altaris participatione sacrosanctum 
filii tui corpus et sanguinem sumpse- 
rimus, omni benedictione ccelesti et 
gratia repleamur; per Christum Do- 
minum nostrum.—S. Greg. Op., tom. 
iii. col. 8, E. 4, A, B.] 

d De tuis donis ac datis. See Me- 
nardus on the place, [note 62, Op., S. 
Greg., tom. iii. col. 288, D. Menard 
refers to the words in the Liturgies of 
St. Chrysostom and St. Basil quoted 
above, note k, p. 130. ἐκ τῶν σῶν σοι 
προσφέρομεν, and the adoption of the 
words in an inscription by the Emperor 
Justinian. | 

e Jube hee perferri, viz. the bread 


and wine, which therefore could not be 
the very body and blood of Christ, who 
is always in heaven. 

f [The Liturgy from which Hickes 
now proceeds to quote was printed by 
Thomasius from a MS. from the queen 
of Sweden’s library, of a date earlier 
than the year 800. It has been proved 
by many arguments, and is now allowed 
to be the Sacramentary of St. Gelasius, 
bishop of Rome A.D. 492, which he 
is known to have arranged, and which 
continued in use till the time of St. 
Gregory the Great. See the preface 
of Thomasius; Muratori, Liturg. Rom. 
Diss., cap. v. p. 51; Cave, Hist. Lit., 
tom. i. p. 464; referred to by Palmer, 
Orig. Lit., vol. i. p. 116. It does not 
contain the words filioque in the Ni- 
cene Creed, and the Creed itself is 
given in Greek words, written in Latin 
characters, p. 55. | 

& Lib. ili. p. 196. [Incipit canon 
actionis. Sursum corda, . Habemus 
ad Dominum. Gratias agamus Do- 
mino Deo nostro. ΒΚ. Dignum et 
justum est. 

Et justum est, equum et salutare 


The Sacramentary of St. Gelasius. 145 


it follows, Ht justum est, equum, et salutare, &c. “It is 
meet, right, and for our comfort, that we should always, and 
in all places give thanks unto Thee, O Lord, Holy Father, 
Almighty and eternal God,” &c. Te igitur, clementissime 
pater, ber Jesum Christum filium tuum, &c. “ We therefore, 
most merciful Father, humbly pray and beseech Thee, 
through Jesus Christ Thy Son our Lord,” wtt accepta 
habeas, et benedicas hec dona, hec munera, hec sancta sa- 
crificia illibata, &c. “that Thou wouldst accept and bless 
these oblations, these gifts, these holy unspotted sacrifices, 
which in the first place we offer unto Thee for Thy Holy 
Catholic Church,’ &c. Hane igitur oblationem servitutis 
nostre, &c. “ We therefore pray Thee, O Lord, that it may 
please Thee to accept this oblation of our bounden duty and 
service, and of Thy whole family,” &c. Quam oblationem 
tu Deus in omnibus quesumus benedictam, ascriptam, &c. 
“Which oblation, we beseech Thee, O God, being blessed, 
appropriated, &c., Thou wouldst vouchsafe to make ac- 
ceptable, that it may be unto us the body and blood of Thy 
Son, our Lord and God, Jesus Christ.””’, And then, after the 
words of the Institution, Unde et memores, &c. ‘“ Wherefore, 
O Lord, we Thy servants, and also Thy holy people, being 
mindful of the blessed passion of Thy Son our Lord God,” 
&e. Offerimus preclare majestati tue de tuis donis ac datis 
hostiam puram, hostiam sanctam, hostiam immaculatam, &c. 
“ We offer unto Thy glorious Majesty of Thy own gifts and 


nos tibi semper et ubique gratias agere, 
Domine sancte, Pater omnipotens, 
zterne Deus, &c. Te igitur clemen- 
tissime Pater,’ per Jesum Christum 
Filium tuum Dominum nostrum sup- 
plices rogamus et petimus: uti accepta 
habeas et benedicas hee dona, hee mu- 
nera, hee sancta sacrificia inlibata. In 
primis que tibi offerimus pro Ecclesia 
tua sancta Catholica: quam pacificare, 
custodire, adunare, et regere digneris 
toto orbe terrarum una cum famulotuo 
papa nostro illo, et antistite nostro illo 
episcopo. Memento Domine famulo- 
rum famularumque tuarum et omni- 
um circumadstantium ; quorum [10] 
fides cognita est, et nota devotio; qui 
tibi offerunt hoe sacrificium laudis pro 
se, Suisque omnibus, pro redemptione 
animarum suarum, pro spe salutis et 
incolumitatis suze; tibi reddunt yota 


HICKES, 


sua zterno Deo vivo et vero. ... Hane 
igitur oblationem servitutis nostra sed 
et cuncte familiz tue, quesumus Do- 
mine ut placatus accipias.... Quam 
oblationem tu Deus in omnibus que- 
sumus benedictam, ascriptam, ratam, 
rationabilem, acceptabilemque facere 
digneris: ut nobis corpus et sanguis 
fiat dilectissimi Filii tui Domini Dei 
nostri Jesu Christi. ... Unde et me- 
mores sumus, Domine, nos tui servi 
sed et plebs tua sancta, Christi Filii 
tui Domini Dei nostri tam beate 
passionis, necnon et ab inferis resur- 
rectionis, sed et in czlos gloriose as- 
censionis: offerimus preclare majes- 
tati tuze de tuis donis ac datis hostiam 
puram, hostiam sanctum, hostiam im- 
maculatam, panem sanctum vite eter- 
nz, et calicem salutis perpetuz. Supra 
que propitio ac sereno vultu respicere 


CHAP. Ii. 


SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRLIEST- 
HOOD. 


140 Those things in which the ancient Liturgies do all har- 


benefits, a pure, holy, immaculate sacrifice, the bread of 
eternal life, and the cup of everlasting salvation, upon which 
we beseech Thee to look with a propitious countenance, and 
to accept them as Thou didst the gifts of Thy righteous ser- 
vant Abel,” &c. To this I might add the Canon of fhe Eu- 
charistical action in the ancient Gallican Liturgy, published 
by Mabillon®, but because it is almost of the same with the 
former I omit it. Many collections and observations of the 
same kind might also be extracted out of the elaborate and 
useful volumes of the learned Benedictine, Edmund Mar- 
tene, de Antiquis Ecclesie Ritibus'. But having produced 
enough out of the ancient Liturgies to prove the sacrifice of 
the holy Eucharist from the harmonious agreement of them 
all in that point, I forbear to collect any more. Sir, I say 
the harmonious agreement of them all, to prevent cavil from 
such men as your late writer: for in whatsoever they all 
agree among themselves, and every one of them with the 
account we have of the Eucharist in Justin Martyr’s Apo- 
logy*, and in the twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth chap- 
ters of the Apostolical Constitutions', (which answer so ex- 
actly to the celebration of it, as described by Justin,) that 
must needs be primitive and apostolical, and the consenting 
suffrage, 1. 6. the consentient doctrine and practice of the 
ancient Catholic Church. 

Of this sort were the salutation of the bishop or priest 
at the altar™, “The peace of God be with you all: and the 
people’s answer, “ And with thy spirit ;” the kiss of peace” ; 


digneris, et accepta habere, sicuti ac- 


πνεύματός σου. S. Marci, Renaudot, 
cepta habere dignatus es munera pueri 


tom. i. p. 145. See also S. Chrysost. 


tui justi Abel, &c.; as in the Canon 
quoted from St. Gregory’s Sacramen- 
tary, p. 144, note c.—Thomasius, pp. 
196—198. Hickes’ translation “being 
blessed,”’ &c., seems incorrect. ] 

4 [De Liturgia Gallicana libri iii. 
opera et studio Johannis Mabillon. ] 
Par. 1685. [See Palmer’s Orig. Lit. 
Dissert., sect. ix. vol. i. pp. 143, sqq. ] 

1 [See lib. i. 6. 4. Art.12. De Singu- 
laribus Sacre Liturgiz Ritibus; where 
a large collection of Liturgies is given; 
tom. i. pp. 166, sqq. Antw. 1763. ] 

k [See above, pp. 105,106, notes f,¢. | 

' [See above, pp. 120—127. ] 

™ [S. Jacobi Lit. Asseman., p. 8, 
ὁ κύριος μετὰ πάντων. καὶ μετὰ τοῦ 


Lit. Goar, p. 80. 5. Basilii ibid., p. 
165; the references are made to the 
above editions in the notes which fol- 
low.—Dominus vobiscum. Rx. Et cum 
spiritu tuo. S. Greg. Sacram. Op., tom. 
ili. col. 1, B. The Gelasian Sacramen- 
tary begins at the words Sursum Corda. 
See above, p. 144, g, For the corre- 
sponding passages in the Apostolical 
Constitutions, see above, pp. 122, sqq. ; 
and in St. Cyril, note x, p. 134. ] 

" [ἀγαπήσωμεν ἀλλήλους ἐν φιλήματι 
ἁγίῳ. S. Jacobi, p. 20. See S. Marci, 
Ρ. 142. S. Chrysost., p. 75. S. Ba- 
silii, p. 165. This practice is not found 
in the Latin Liturgies. Ducange says 
of its disuse, Abrogatus osculorum pa- 


moniously agree must needs be primitive and apostolical. 147 


the priest’s washing his hands°® before he began the ministra- 


tion; the μή τις κατά τινος, or monition”? of the deacon to - 


the people, “that none should presume to communicate who 
had injured his brother’ and was not reconciled to him; 
the stemus cum timore4, or, charge to the communicants to 
“stand with fear and trembling before the Lord;” to offer the 
sancta sanctis’, “holy things to holy men;” the apostolical 
benediction of the bishop standing in his robes at the altar’: 
“The grace of Almighty God, the love of our Lord Jesus 
Christ, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all ;” 
to which the people answered, “ And with thy spirit ;’” then 
the Sursum Cordat, “ Lift wp your hearts ;” and the people’s 
answer, “ We lift them up unto the Lord ;” then, “ Let us 
give thanks unto the Lord ;” and the answer, “It is meet and 
right so to do:” to which the priest, “It is truly meet and 


cis in ecclesia usus, inductusque alius, 
ut dum sacerdos verba hee profert, ‘ pax 
Domini sit semper vobiscum,’ diaconi 
vel subdiaconi imaginem quandam ad- 
stantibus clericis et plebi osculandum 
porrigaut, quam vulgari vocabulo pa- 
cem appellamus.—Ducange, Glossa- 
rium, tom. iv. p. 1404, Par. 1733. ] 

° [εἶτα ἀπελθόντες εἰς Thy πρόθεσιν 
νίπτουσι τὰς χεῖρας, λέγοντες, νίψομαι 
ἐν ἀθώοις. (Ps. xxvi. 6, sqq.) 5. Chry- 
sost., p. 60. This occurs in the pre- 
paration for the Liturgy, which is not 
given in any of the other Greek Li- 
turgies; that of St. Basil refers to St. 
Chrysostom’s for this portion. Neither 
is this portion in the Sacramentary of 
St. Gregory or of St. Gelasius. In the 
Ordinarium Misse; ‘Sacerdos lavat 
manus, dicens; Lavabo inter inno- 
centes, &c.’ (Ps. xxvi. 6, sqq.) It 
may be added that besides the Prepa- 
ration the Liturgies themselves are di- 
vided into two parts; the Introduction, 
and the Anaphora or solemn prayer, 
containing the Preface, Consecration, 
&c.—Palmer, Orig. Lit., vol. i. p. 20.] 

P [ Const. Apost., lib. 11. ο. 57. Conci- 
lia, tom. i. p. 297, and lib. viii. ο. 12, 
quoted above, p. 122, e. Corresponding 
monitions are found, S. Jacobi, p. 15; 
S. Marc., p. 141; S. Chrys., p. 70; S. 
Basilii, p. 162. This and the following 
portions are not found in the Liturgies 
of the Latin Church. ] 

4 [στῶμεν καλῶς, στῶμεν μετὰ φό- 
βου: πρόσχωμεν τὴν ἁγίαν ἀναφορὰν ἐν 


εἰρήνῃ προσφέρειν.----. Chrysost., p. 75. 


S. Basilii, p. 165. στῶμεν καλῶς, or d- 
μεν εὐλαβῶς, στῶμεν μετὰ φόβου Θεοῦ 
καὶ καταύξεως-.--- ὃ. Jacobi, pp. 19, 31. ] 

τ [τὰ ἅγια τοῖς aytows.—S. Jacobi, p. 
53. 5. Marci, p. 161. 5. Basilii, p. 
175. S. Chrysostomi, p. 81. ] 

S [See above, p.122, note e. ἡ χάρις 
τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ 7 
ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὺς, καὶ 7 κοινω- 
νία τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος εἴη μετὰ πάν- 
των ὑμῶν. ὃ χόρος. καὶ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύ- 
ματός cov.—S. Chrysost., p. 175. S. 
Basilii, p. 165. 5. Jacobi, p. 82. In 
the Liturgy of St. Mark the Sursum 
Corda is immediately preceded by the 
versicles, 6 κύριος μετὰ πάντων. καὶ 
μετὰ τοῦ πνεὐματός σου: the benedic- 
tion is reserved for the dismissal of 
the people, and occurs in an expanded 
form, p. 164. tom. i. ed. Renaudot. ] 

t [6 ἱερεύς. ἀνὼ ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας. ὁ 
λαός. ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν κύριον. ὃ ἱερεύς. 
εὐχαριστῶμεν τῷ κυρίῳ. ὃ λαός. ἄξιον 
καὶ δίκαιον. 6 ἱερεὺς ἄρχεται τῆς ἄνα- 
φορᾶς. ἀληθῶς γὰρ ἄξιόν ἐστι καὶ δί- 
καιον, κ. τ. λ.---. Marci, p. 144. 5. 
Chrysost., p. 75. 8. Basilii, p. 165. 
S. Jacobi, p. 33.—Sursum corda. k. 
Habemus ad Dominum. Gratias aga- 
mus Domino Deo nostro. . Dignum 
et justum est. Vere dignum et justum 
est, &c, 8. Gelasii Sacra. Thomasius, 
p- 196. S. Gregorii, Op. tom. iii. col. 
1, B.2, A,|—-S.Cyprian. de Orat. Dom. 
[Ideo et sacerdos ante orationem pre- 
fatione premissa parat fratram mentes 
dicendo,] Sursum corda, ut dum re- 
spondet plebs, Habemus ad Dominum, 


iy! 


CHAP, TI. 
_ SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD, 


148 Points in which the Ancient Liturgies agree. 


right,” &c. To these I must add the Hymnus Tersanctus", 
or, “ Holy, holy, holy,” &c., with. which they concluded their 
prayer of thanksgiving; the κρᾶμα, or mixture of water 
with the Sacramental wine, which with the bread they 
offered up, as hath been shewn’, to God the Father; the 
words of the Institution? ; the expressions of “ these gifts here 
set before Thee’, these gifts of which Thou standest not in 
need,” in the prayer of oblation; and after it, the prayer of 
the congregation to God, through Christ, for the offering?, 
“that of His goodness, through the mediation of Jesus Christ, 
He would please to receive it unto His heavenly altar for a 
sweet smelling savour.” To these again I must not forget to 
add the prayer in the consecration unto God the Father‘, “ to 
send down His Holy Spirit upon the sacrifice, to make the 
bread the (mystical) body, and the cup the (mystical) blood 
of Christ4.” This prayer is expressly in all the Greek Li- 
turgies, and virtually in the Latin®, where they pray to God 


admoneatur nihil aliud se quam Do- 
minum cogitare debere.—p. 213. ed. 
Ben. | 

u [S. Chrysost., p. 76. 5. Basilii, p. 
166. S. Jacobi, p. 84. 5. Marci, p. 
154. S, Gelasii, ubi supra. S. Grego- 
rii, ubi supra. | 

x [S. Chrysost., p. 61. See note ἢ, 
p- 106. In the Latin Liturgy, Deinde 
... Ministrat diaconus vinum, subdia- 
conus vero aquam in calice; vel si 
privata est missa utrumque infundit 
sacerdos, et aquam miscendam in ca- 
lice benedicit, dicens, &c. Ordinarium 
Missz. ] 

y [See pp. 120, 129, sqq. ] 

* [S. Chrysost., p.76. S. Basilii, p. 


168. S. Jacobi, p. 36. S. Marci, p. 
155. S. Gelasii, p. 197. S. Gregorii, 
col. 8, D.] 


Ὁ [See above, notes, pp. 130, k; 133, 
s; 185, 6; and p. 128, 1.1 

> [See above, pp. 126, q; 144, c; 
and S. Chrys. Lit., p. 79. 5. Basil, p. 
164, (see above, p. 131, 0); S. Mark, 
p. 151; S. Jacobi, p. 29. In these 
three Liturgies this prayer precedes 
the consecration. } 

¢ [See above, p. 97. S. Jacobi, p. 
40. S. Marci, p. 157. S. Chrysost., p. 
77. 8. Basilii, p. 166.] 

ἃ See Dr. Grabe’s learned notes on 
cap. 11. lib. v. of Irenzeus, pp. 399, 400. 
{ed. Oxon. 1702. The first of the notes 
is on the words, ἥτις καὶ ἐκ τοῦ ποτη- 


ρίου αὐτοῦ, ὅ ἐστι τὸ αἷμα αὐτοῦ, τρέ- 
φεται, καὶ ἐκ τοῦ ἄρτου, ὅ ἐστι τὸ σῶμα 
αὐτοῦ, αὔξεται: in which Grabe shews, 
by many references, in what sense the 
fathers held that the bread and wine 
were made the body and blood of 
Christ. The second is on the words 
προσλαμβανόμενος τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ, 
εὐχαριστία γίνεται. He explains τὸν 
λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ, not of the words of 
institution, but of the invocation of the 
Holy Spirit, whose power he maintains 
to be the principal cause in the conse- 
eration. | 

6 [The words which “ virtually” con- 
tain the invocation of the Holy Spirit, 
in the Latin Liturgies, are those which 
have been quoted above, note y, p. 142; 
Quam oblationem tu Domine in om- 
nibus quaesumus benedictam, ascrip- 
tam, ratam, rationabilem, acceptabi- 
lemque facere digneris, ut nobis cor- 
pus et sanguis fiat dilectissimi Filii 
tui Domini Dei nostri Jesu Christi. 
They are found in the Sacramentary 
of St. Gelasius, Thomasius, Cod. Saer., 
p- 197, as they are still used, and 
that they imply an invocation appears 
from the doctrine that the consecration 
is effected by the operation of the Holy 
Spirit, (see above, pp. 96—98 and 
notes,) which is expressed in the fol- 
lowing words of St. Gelasius, (if the 
tract be really his, which is so much 
disputed) ‘In hane, scilicet in Divi- 


Additions to the Liturgies ; the earliest ones. 149 


to sanctify the gifts. The ancient Liturgies, how different 


soever among themselves, agree in all these things with - 


Justin Martyr’s account of the Eucharist’, and the Eucha- 
ristical office in the Apostolical Constitutions, which is the 
standard and test by which all the others are to be tried. 
And by comparing those with this, the innovations and ad- 
ditions in after times, be they good or bad, will appear. 
Among the innovations, Sir, some are more ancient than 
others; one of the ancientest of them I take to be the use of 
incense", mentioned in the third of the Apostolical Canons’, 
and in Hippolytus* de Consummatione Mundi et de Antichristo, 
in these words': πενθοῦσι δὲ καὶ ai ἐκκλησίαι, K.T.r. “ And 
there shall be great lamentations among the Churches, 
because there is no oblation or incense offered, nor any 
service acceptable to God.” But whoever this Hippolytus 
was, I think he could not be that Hippolytus Martyr, in the 
third century, mentioned by Eusebius™, who was the friend 


nam, transeunt, Spiritu Sancto perfi- 
ciente, substantiam, permanente tamen 
in sue proprietate nature.’ S. Gelasii 
Tractatus contra Nestorium et Euty- 
chem. Biblioth. Patrum, tom. viii. p. 
703, F. Lugd. 1677. ] 

t [See above, pp. 105, 106. notes f, 


g. ] 

& [See above, pp. 122, sqq. That 
this Liturgy is not that of St. Clement 
of Rome, under whose name, as a part 
of the Apostolical Constitutions, it 
passed, is admitted; Mr. Palmer ob- 
serves that it is not of the family of 
the Latin Liturgies, but agrees most 
nearly with that of St. James, or the 
Liturgy of Antioch: he conceives 
that it was not the Liturgy of any 
particular Church; and as it was not 
in actual use it is without the addi- 
tions which were gradually introduced 
into the other Liturgies, and conse- 
quently, except such points as are 
mentioned note f, p. 123, it preserves 
to us the Liturgy as it existed at least 
in the fourth century. See the Origines 
Liturgice, vol. i. pp. 388—41. ] 

4 (S. Chrysost., pp. 62, 68. 5. Ba- 
silii. S. Jacobi, pp. 3, 5, 16. S. Marci, 
pp- 137, 143.—In missa solenni cele- 
brans incensat altare, &c. Ordinarium 
Misse. ] 

i [In this Canon incense at the time 
of the oblation is excepted from the 
general rule of not offering any thing 
but the bread and wine. μὴ ἐξὸν δὲ 


ἔστω προσάγεσθαί τι ἕτερον εἰς τὸ θυ- 
σιαστήριον, ἢ ἔλαιον εἰς τὴν λυχνίαν καὶ 
θυμίαμα τῷ καιρῷ τῆς ἁγίας προσφορᾶς. 
—Canon. Apost. 38. Concila, tom. i. 
col. 25, B.] 

k Bibl. Patrum, vol. ii. p. 357. 
Parisiis, 1624. [The references below 
are made to the edition of St. Hippoly- 
tus’ works by Fabricius. ] 

1 [πενθοῦσι δὲ καὶ ai ἐκκλησίαι πένθος 
μέγα, διότι οὔτε προσφορὰ οὔτε θυμί- 
apa ἐκτελεῖται, οὔτε λατρεία θεάρεστοΞ" 
ἀλλὰ τὰ ἱερὰ τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν ὡς ὀπω- 
ροφυλάκιον γενήσονται" καὶ τὸ τίμιον 
σῶμα καὶ αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέ- 
pais ἐκείναις οὐκ ἀναφανήσεται. --- ὅ. 
Hippolyto tributus liber de consum- 
matione mundi et de antichristo, &c. 
c. 84. Op., App., p-21. There is another 
treatise of St. Hippolytus, de Christo 
et Antichristo, which is held to be 
genuine. | 

™ [ἤκμαζον δὲ κατὰ τοῦτο πλείους 
λόγιοι καὶ ἐκκλησιαστικοὶ ἄνδρε" - - - 
Ἵππόλυτος, ἑτέρας που καὶ αὐτὸς προε- 
στὼς ἐκκλησίας. The period Eusebius 
is speaking of is about A.D. 280. Eu- 
seb. Hist. Ecel., lib. vi. ο. 20. tom. i. p. 
284. τότε δῆτα καὶ Ἱππόλυτος συντάτ- 
των, μετὰ πλείστων ἄλλων ὑπομνημάτων, 
καὶ τὸ περὶ τὸ πάσχα πεποίηται σύγ- 
Ὑραμμα" after enumerating several of 
his works, not including the one here 
in question, he adds; πλείστά τε Kal 
ἄλλα καὶ παρὰ πολλοῖς εὕροις ἂν σωζό- 
peva.—Ibid., ο. 22. p. 286.] 


CHAP. II. 
SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


150 St. Hippolytus de Consummatione Mundi not genuine. 


of Origen": for who can believe that a father of that century 
could write in such a manner as this Hippolytus doth, viz., 
that Antichrist should be a devil really born of a strumpet, 
and yet not have a real body, but only in show and appear- 
ance°®; that among his other false miracles, he should remove. 
πα πεαΐπ, and whirl the sun about whither he pleased?; that 
those who suffered martrydom under his tyranny, should be 
more blessed and illustrious martyrs than those who suffered 
in ancient persecutions, because they overcame the devil him- 
self4: that St. John did not die’, and other false and vain 
conjectures and opinions, observed and censured by Dupin’ 
and Tillemondt. To which I might add some expressions, 
which do not savour of that age in which Hippolytus lived. 
As iepdpyat" for bishops, a word perhaps not used before the 
Pseudo-Dionysius, who wrote at the latter end of the fourth 
century*: such are the words in that address to Christ, od εἶ 
ὁ cuvdvapyos’, κ. τ. Δ. “ Thou art without beginning with the 
Father, and co-eternal (cvvaidvos) to the Holy Spirit.” Of the 


n [λέγεται δὲ οὗτος Ἱππόλυτος καὶ élevé... Il γ᾽ a beaucoup de vaines con- 


προσομιλεῖν τῷ λαῷ κατὰ μίμησιν ’Opr- 
γένους, οὗ καὶ συνήθης μάλιστα καὶ ἐρα- 
στὴς τῶν λόγων ὑπῆρχεν.--- Ρ]ιοίϊπι5, 
Biblioth. Cod. 121. p. 94. ed. Berolini, 
1824. ] 

ο [ὁ διάβολος ek pace γυναικὸς 
ἐξελεύσεται ἐπὶ τῆς vais” el Kar 
σάρκα ἀναλάβοι, ἀλλὰ ταῦτα ἐν δοκήσεί 

. φανταστικὴν τῆς σάρκος αὐτοῦ οὐ- 
olay ἀναλήψεται dpyavov.—De Consum- 
matione Mundi, ο. 22. ib., p. 15.] 

P [μεταστήσει Opn ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς τῶν 
θεωρούντων . .. τὸν ἥλιον μεταστρέψει 
ὕπου BovAerat.—Ibid., τς 26. p- 18. ] 

4 [μακάριοι οἱ τότε νικήσαντες τὸν 
τύραννον, OTL παρὰ τοὺς πρώτους “μάρτυ- 
ρας ἐνδοξότεροι καὶ ὑψηλότεροι ἔ ἔχουσιν 
ἀναδειχθῆναι" οἱ γὰρ μάρτυρες πρῴην 
τοὺς αὐτοῦ ὑπασπιστὰς ἐνίκησαν" οὗτοι 
δὲ αὐτὸν τὸν διάβολον.---ἸὈϊά., c. 30. 
p. 20.1 

r (That St. John did not die is not 
expressly said, but that he with Enoch 
and Elijah would be the precursors of 
our Lord’s second coming, ibid., c. 22. 
p. 14.] 

5. Les livres d’Hippolite étoient in- 
titulez, De la Resurrection et de ]’An- 
tichrist, suivant le rapport d’Eusebe, 
et de S. Jerome: celui-ci est intitulé, 
de la Consummation du Monde, &c. 
Le stile est basse, et puerile, au lieu 
que celui d’Hippolite étoit grave, et 


jectures sur la naissance, et sur la vie 
de l’ Antechrist. I] croit qu’il sera un 
démon; il dit que S. Jean n’est point 
mort, se qui est contraire a ]’ancienne 
tradition; il cite l’Apocalypse pour 
Daniel; il tient que les ames des hom- 
mes on esté de tout tems, ce qui revi- 
ent a l’opinion d’Origenes. Enfin ce 
traite est de tres peu d’utilité. [ Dupin, 
Bibliotheque des Auteurs Ecclesiasti- 
que, tom. i. p. 849. ed. 2. 1688. The 
passage quoted here is a note on the 
words; I] est fort incertain, si c’est le 
traité de l’Antechrist qui est attribué 
presentement a Hippolite, dont Eusebe 
fait mention.—Ibid., p. 345. ] 

τ Tillemont’s Memoires, tom. iil. 
partie 2. notes sur S. Hippolyte, [note 
vi. p. 678. ed. 2. Paris, 1701. ] 

υ [δεῦτε of ἱεράρχαι of λειτουργήῆσαν- 
τές μοι Gumuws.— De Consumm. Mund., 
c. 41. p. 25. 

* {The Pseudo-Dionysius is placed 
by Cave about A.D. 362. (Hist. Lit., 
tom. i. p.225.) He and 5. Maximus who 
commented on his writings, are the 
only ecclesiastical writers quoted by 
Suicer on the word ἱεράρχης, tom 1. 
col. 1439. ] 

Υ [σὺ ef ὁ συνάναρχος τῷ πατρὶ καὶ 
συναΐδιος τῷ πνεύματι.---Ἴ)6 Consumm. 


Mundi, ο. 43. p. 26.] 


Additions to the Liturgies ; some of them good. 101 


same nature is that”: ““Come to the kingdom prepared for you, 
and enjoy it for ever from My Father which is in heaven, καὶ 
τοῦ Tavayiov καὶ ζωοποιοῦ πνεύματος, and the most holy 
quickening Spirit;” which shews that he must have lived 
after the second general council, which met at Constan- 
tinople to condemn Macedonius. And as for the third of 
the Apostolical Canons, that collection being of canons and 
customs of different ages, it is of no authority to prove that 
incense was offered, much less that it was offered up with 
prayer in the Eucharist, at least in the three first centuries, 
in the writers whereof there is no mention of it*. Another 
innovation is the oratio propositionis», or prayer at the pro- 
thesis, or table upon which the bread and wine was set and 
prepared for the holy altar. To which I may add the oratio 
velaminis*, or prayer upon removing the covering from off the 
mysteries: none of which are in the office of the Apostolical 
Constitutions. 

Among the additions some are good, and some bad. And 
any man who is conversant in the history of the councils, 
may see how and when both the sorts were introduced into 
the Liturgies of the Church. Of the first sort is the word 
ὁμοούσιος“, in acknowledging the Son to be of the same sub- 
stance with the Father, which likely was not brought into 
the Liturgies before the first council of Nice®; the Constan- 
tinopolitan, commonly called the Nicene creed‘, which could 
not be introduced before the second general council, of Con- 


z [δεῦτε εἰς Thy ἡτοιμασμένην ὑμῖν 
βασιλείαν ἀπὸ καταβυλῆς κόσμου" ἄπο- 
λαύσατε εἰς αἰῶνα αἰῶνος παρὰ τοῦ πα- 
τρός μου τοῦ ἐν οὐρανοῖς, καὶ τοῦ πανα- 
γίου καὶ ζωοποιοῦ mvevuatros.—lbid., ο. 
44, p. 27.] 

a [See a work entitled A Discourse 
concerning the use of Incense in Divine 
Offices, &c., by Henry Dodwell, Lond. 
1711.) 

Ὁ [ἡ εὐχὴ τῆς mpodécews.—S, Chry- 
sost., p. 63. S. Basilii, p. 158. S. 
Marci, p. 143. ] 

© [ἢ εὐχὴ τοῦ καταπετάσματος. S. 
Jacobi, p. 80. See S. Chrysost., pp. 
62, 63, where this prayer immediately 
precedes the one last mentioned, with 
which St. Basil’s Liturgy begins. | 

a [S. Jacobi, p. 53. 5. Marc., p. 161. 
None of the following additions are 
found in the Roman Liturgy, except 


the Nicene creed, the late introduction 
of which is ascertained. See Palmer, 
Orig. Lit., vol. ii. p. 55. ] 

e [A.D. 325. ]} 

f [πιστεύω εἰς ἕνα θεὸν, k.T.A.—S. 
Chrysost., p. 75. 85. Basilii, p. 165. 
S. Marci, p. 143. The first clauses 
only of the creed are given in the 
Liturgies: in the Liturgy of St. James, 
p- 18, the words ‘‘and of all things 
visible and invisible’ do not occur. 
“Tt is said that Peter Fullo, patriarch 
of Antioch, (excerpta ex Eccl. Hist. 
Theodori Lectoris, lib. ii. § 48. ap. Hist. 
Eccl., tom. iii. p. 582,) was the first 
who inserted the creed in the Liturgy, 
about A.D. 471. About the year 511 
it was received into the Liturgy of Con- 
stantin ple by Timotheus, patriareh of 
that Chureh.’’—(Ibid., ὃ 32. p. 578.) 
Palmer, Orig. Lit., vol. ii. p. 54. ] 


CHAP. IT, 


SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


152 Alterations for the better ; their respective dates. 


stantinople ; the benediction£ in the name of the “ holy, con- 
substantial, and adorable Trinity,” which must have come in 
after one of those two councils. The epithets added to the 
Holy Spirit in the prayer of oblation, in which they did not 
only call Him τὸν παράκλητον, τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας", “the 
Paraclete, the Spirit of truth,’ but τὸν Κύριον, τὸν ζωοποιὸν, 
“the Lord, the giver of life, who spake in the law, the 
prophets, and Apostles, and who worketh sanctifying grace 
in all, αὐτεξουσίως, οὐ Svaxovixds, by His own power, not as 
a minister, ἐκπορεύομενος ὁμοούσιος, avvOpovos, proceeding 
from the Father, being consubstantial to the Father, and 
sitting upon the same throne with Him, and His Son Jesus 
Christ.” This must have been added after the second 
general council of Constantinople, KATA TOV πνευματομάχων. 
In the same Liturgy is this invocation of Christ’ of the same 
date, Κύριος ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν, ἀκατάληπτε Θεοῦ oye, τῷ πατρὶ 
καὶ τῷ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι ὁμοούσιε, συναΐδιε, καὶ σὐναναρχε: 
“0 Lord our God, the incomprehensible Word of God, so one 
substance with, and co-eternal to the Father and the Holy 
Spirit, and without beginning, accept our hymn,” &c. So the 
expression), ἀτρέπτως ἐνανθρωπήσας, “who was made man 
not by conversion” (of the Godhead into flesh), must have 
been added after the fourth general council of Chalcedon*, 
against Dioscorus and Eutyches. So wheresoever we find 
the blessed Virgin called ἅγια Geotéxos'!, we may presume it 
was an addition brought in after the third general council at 
Ephesus™, against Nestorius, who not believing Christ to be 


8 [καὶ ἔσται ἣ χάρις, Kal τὰ ἐλέη τῆς 
ἁγίας, καὶ ὁμοουσίου, καὶ ἀκτίστου, καὶ 
προσκυνητῆς τριάδος μετὰ πάντων ἡμῶν. 
—S. Jacobi, p. 52.] 

h [See above, p 137, note τη. αὐτὸν 
τὸν παράκλητον, τὺ πνεῦμα τῆς ἄλη- 
θείας, τὸν ἅγιον, τὸν κύριον, τὸ ζωοποιὸν, 
τὸ ἐν νόμῳ καὶ προφήταις καὶ ἀποστό- 
λοις λαλῆσαν, τὸ πανταχοῦ παρὸν καὶ 
τὰ πάντα πληροῦν, ἐνεργοῦν τε αὐτεξου- 
σίως, οὐ διακονικῶς, ἐφ᾽ οὺς βούλεται τὸν 
ἁγιασμὸν εὐδοκίᾳ τῇ σῇ" τὸ ἁπλοῦν τὴν 
φύσιν, τὸ πλημερὲς τὴν ἐνέργειαν, τὴν 
τῶν θείων χαρισμάτων πηγήν᾽ τό σοι 
ὁμοούσιον" τὸ ἐκ σοῦ ἐκπορευόμενον, τὸ 
σύνθρονον τῆς βασιλείας σου, καὶ τοῦ 
μονογενοῦς σου υἱοῦ, τοῦ κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ 
καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. -- 
S. Marci, p. 157; S.Jacobi, p. 39.] 


i {S. Marci, p. 161; and with some 
slight variations in that of St. James, 
p- 53. The passage continues πρόσ- 
δεξαι τὸν ἀκήρατον ὕμνον, K.T.A. | 

J [ὃ μονογενὴς υἱὸς καὶ λόγος τοῦ 
θεοῦ ἀθάνατος ὑπάρχων, καταδεξάμενος 
διὰ τὴν ἡμετέρων σωτηρίαν σαρκωθῆναι 
ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας θεοτόκου καὶ ἀειπαρθένου 
Μαρίας, ἀτρέπτως ἐνανθρωπήσας, σταυ- 
ρωθείς τε, Χριστὲ ὃ θεὺς, θανάτῳ θάνατον 
πατήσας, εἷς ὧν τῆς ἁγίας τριάδος, συν- 
δοξαζόμενος τῷ πατρὶ καὶ τῷ ἁγίῳ πνεύ- 
ματι, σῶσον juas.—S, Jacobi, p. 6.] 

ΕΑ). 4.61.7 

1 [5. Chrysost., pp. 58, 61, 63. 8. 
Basilii, p. 167. S. Jacobi, pp. 6, 24. 
S. Marci, p. 150. ] 

m (A.D. 431. | 


Later alterations ; some for the worse. 109 


God, would only call her χριστοτόκος, “the mother of Christ,” 
though, as the fathers of that council shewed®, she was called 
θεοτόκος by the writers of the Church in the ages before. 
And with these additions I may take notice of the alteration 
from the ancient form of oblation of the elements to God 
the Father, to the oblation of them to God the Son, as an 
acknowledgment of His Godhead, in the proper offices (as I 
have observed before? upon the Ethiopic Liturgy) for Christ- 
mas, Easter, and Ascension-day, which could not come, I 
think, into use till after the first council of Nice. 

But then after the second council of Nice were introduced 
additions of the latter sort, [by some of which?] the Liturgies 
were most abominably corrupted, by commemorations‘, salu- 
tations", gratulations of the holy Virgin, and desiring to be 
heard through her intercessions’, and the intercessions of 
other saints. Among these additions I may also reckon their 
superstitious practices, as putting warm water‘ to the sacra- 
mental wine, saying prayers" at putting on every vestment in 
the robing of the priest, [impressing the sign of the cross” 
upon the bread*], and the late addition’ of σταυροθεοτόκος, 


n [See Concilii Ephesini actio pri- 
ma; Concil., tom. 111. p. 1052, C. sqq. ; 
particularly the testimony of St. Atha- 
nasius, p. 1053, B. and St. Gregory 
Nazianzen, p. 1060, A. ] 

© [See above, note n, p. 125.] 

P [The words in brackets are substi- 
tuted for ‘‘whereby,”’ the reading of 
the third edition, from the MS. correc- 
tions in Hickes’ copy. See below, note 
ΧΗ] 

4 [τῆς παναγίας, ἀχράντου, ὑπερευ- 
λογημένης, ἐνδόξου δεσποίνης ἡμῶν, 
θεοτόκου καὶ ἀειπαρθένου Μαρίας, μετὰ 
πάντων τῶν ἁγίων μνημονεύσαντες, Eav- 
τοὺς καὶ ἀλλήλους καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν ζωὴν 
ἡμῶν Χριστῷ τῷ θεῷ παραθώμεθα.--- 
S. Chrysost., pp. 65, 74. 5. Basilii, p. 
159. S. Jacobi, pp. 13, 24, 61.] 

τ [χαῖρε κεχαριτωμένη Μαρία, ὃ κύ- 
plos μετὰ σοῦ" εὐλογημένη σὺ ἐν γυναιξὶ, 
καὶ εὐλογημένος ὃ καρπὸς τῆς κοιλίας 
σου, ὅτι σωτῆρα ἔτεκες τῶν ψυχῶν ἡμῶν. 
This salutation is followed by a long 
address; S. Jacobi, pp. 44, 46. See 
also S. Chrysost., p. 78. } 

5. [Χριστὸς 6 ἀληθινὸς θεὸς ἡμῶν ταῖς 
πρεσβείαις τῆς παναγίας, ἀχράντου, 
ὑπερευλυγημένης, ἐνδόξου δεσποίνης 
ἡμῶν, θεοτόκου καὶ ἀειπαρθένου Μαρίας, 
τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ τιμίον καὶ ζωοποιοῦ 


σταυροῦ, καὶ πάντων τῶν ἁγίων, ἐλεήσαι 
ἡμᾶς ds ἀγαθὸς θεὸς, καὶ prrdvOpwros.— 
S. Chrysost., pp. 63, 68, 78, 88, 84, 85. 
S. Basilii, p. 170.] 

τ [S. Chrysost., p. 82. 
notes, p. 148. ] 

u [S. Chrysost., p. 59. This occurs 
in the preparatory portion of the ser- 
vice, which is adopted in the Liturgy 
of St. Basil from that of St. Chrysos- 
tom; but not printed in the copies of 
St. Basil’s or the other Liturgies.] 

Υ [εἶτα σφραγίζει τὰ Sapa.—sS. Ja- 
cobi, p. 24. See also S. Chrysost., p. 
76. 5. Basilii, p. 166. S. Jacobi, p. 
34, 85. Marci, p. 154. ] 

x [The words in brackets are substi- 
tuted for the reading of the third edi- 
tion, which was “‘making the sign of the 
cross upon the δῶρα, according to the 
correction in the Supplement of 1715, 
No. 12. For the reason of this altera- 
tion, and that noticed note p, see A letter 
from the Rev. Mr. J. M—n to Dr. G. 
Hickes, concerning some passages in 
his Christian Priesthood; with Dr. 
Hickes’ answer; published in the Sup- 
plement of 1715, and now reprinted at 
the end of the Appendix. ] 

y Liturgia Ante-Consecratorum. 
Bibl. Patr., vol. ii. Paris. 1624. [See 


See Goar’s 


CHAP. 1. 


SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HMOovD. 


154 Catholic testimony to the Eucharist being a sacrifice. 


“the mother of the crucified God,” to θεοτόκος, “the mother 
of God.” Thus, Sir, by animadverting upon the innovations, 
additions, and corruptions which have crept into the ancient 
Liturgies, I have thereby shewed you the Apostolical anti- 
quity, simplicity, and purity of the ancient Eucharistical 
office in the Apostolic Constitutions, and by consequence 
whatever the other Liturgies’ have in common with it and 
with one another, must be primitive and pure. In particular 
the harmonious testimony of them all with it, and with one 
another, and with the fathers, and councils, for the Eucha- 
ristical oblation, is such a proof for the truth of it, that he 
that will not submit to such concurrent evidence, may bring 
into controversy (not to mention other things received by 
the Church in all ages) the Divine authority of the inspired 
writings, infant baptism, episcopacy, the Lord’s day, and 
even the divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and 
so at once blow up the Catholic faith and Church. I wish, 
Sir, your late author, and such men would consider this, and 
not give such advantage to deists and sceptics, by standing 
out against such a noble tradition, as is supported by anti- 
quity, universality, and consent. 

Thus, Sir, I have gone through the fathers, and councils, 
and ancient Liturgies to prove the Eucharist to be a real 
oblation or sacrifice, and by consequence that the ministers 
of it are proper priests, as the bishops and presbyters of the 
ancient Catholic Church thought, and taught themselves to 
be, according to that of St. Cyprian de Oratione Dominica’, 
Quando in unum cum fratribus convenimus, et sacrificia divina 
cum Dei sacerdote celebramus. But as men biassed by precon- 
ceptions are apt to object, so such men as your late writer 
taking the notion of a sacrifice from Dr. Outram, who is a 
great author with them, object his definition of a sacrifice to 


above, note t, p. 139. The word oravpo- 
@cordxos does not occur in this Liturgy ; 
nor, it is believed, any where else. 
Hickes inferred its existence from the 
word σταυροθεοτόκιον, which occurs 
with θεοτόκιον in arubriec of the Liturgy 
referred to, (p. 89, C.) which enjoins 
the recitation of θεοτόιειον καὶ σταυρο- 
θεοτόκιον. These are addresses to the 
Blessed Virgin, the latter being a θεο- 
τοκίον, or commemoration of St. Mary, 


in connection with the cross; like the 
Stabat Mater of the Latin Church. See 
the Menzum, Februar., p. 113. Venet. 
1843. Suicer explains the word thus; 
σταυροθεοτόκιον vocatur, ubi non tan- 
tum beate Virginis, sed et passionis 
Christi mentio est; multa σταυροθεοτό- 
kia occurrunt in Menologiis.—Thesaur. 
Kecl., in voe, tom. ii. col. 1001. ] 

5. [S. Cypr. de Orat. Dom., Op., p. 
205, ed. Ben. ] 


Objection derived from Outram’s definition of a Sacrifice. 155 


the sacrificial notion of the holy Eucharist, which they truly 
say do not agree together; and therefore I must acknow- 
ledge, that either he is mistaken in his definition, or that the 
ancient Church hath erred in the sacrificial conception they 
had of the holy Eucharist, which must be false, if the Doctor’s 
definition or description of a sacrifice be strictly true. Where- 
fore, Sir, before I proceed to my other proofs of the Christian 
priesthood, you must give me leave to examine Dr. Outram’s 
definition of a sacrifice, which they oppose to the sacrificial 
idea the ancients had of the holy mystery, and I here give it 
you in his own words, which you will find in the eighty- 
second page of his book. A sacrifice, saith he, may be thus 
defined, ut sit προσφορὰ rite consumpta. Seu ut paulo 
explicatius dicam, sacrificium apud populum Hebreum ejus- 
modi sacrum erat, quod cum Deo oblatum erat, tum rite con- 
fectum et consumptum; that is in English, ‘‘A sacrifice is 
an oblation rightly* consumed. Or that I may speak more 
plainly, a sacrifice among the Hebrews was such a holy thing, 
as was both offered to God, and rightly destroyed and con- 
sumed.” Now, say they, this definition of a Jewish sacrifice 
is not applicable to the holy Eucharist, in which there is 
nothing consumed, nor poured out either upon the Lord’s 
table or at the bottom of it, as was usual for the blood to be 
poured upon the altar, in order to make an atonement for sin, 
or to be sprinkled round about upon the altar; nor is there 
any wine poured out on the Lord’s table, or upon the bread, 
as it was formerly upon the sacrifice; nor are there any re- 
mainders of our blessed Lord’s natural body, who was sacri- 
ficed, to be taken by the communicants: how therefore the 
Sacrament, wanting these sacrificial rites, should come un- 
der the notion of a sacrifice (saith the objector) I cannot 
conceive. 

Sir, I have given you the words of the objection, as I re- 
ceived them, and 1 shall lay several answers to it before you, 
and leave you to judge whether they are satisfactory or not. 
First, then, I pray you to consider, that the ancient writers 
of the Church knew the nature of sacrifices, both Jewish and 
Gentile, as well as any Christian writers since the Reforma- 
tion; and yet, as I have often observed, and sufficiently 


a Or ‘ritely,’ i. e. according to the holy rites appointed by God. 


CHAP. II, 
SECT, X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


156 The Early Christians understood the nature of a sacrifice. 


shewed, they were so far from apprehending any incon- 
sistency between the notion of a sacrifice, and the nature of 
the holy Eucharist, that they believed» and thought it to be 
a pure commemorative sacrifice, foretold by the prophets, 
and instituted by Christ, and solemnly offered it as such. 
Secondly, I must intreat you to consider, that Dr. Outram’s 
definition of a sacrifice, is, as he confesseth, of a Jewish or 
Levitical sacrifice, and doth it follow, from his definition, that 
every thing that belongs to a Jewish sacrifice, or the defini- 
tion of it, must belong to the Christian oblation of bread and 
wine, which was appointed instead of all the Levitical sacri- 
fices, or else that it cannot be such? ‘The law is changed, 
and the priesthood is changed, as the Apostle observes in his 
Epistle to the Hebrews; and with them the altar and sacrifice 
is changed too, as St. Ireneeus saith m the words I cited 
before in the margin’; “ God hath not rejected oblations, but 
as they had oblations, so have we ; there were sacrifices among 
that people, and there are sacrifices in the Church, the species 
(or kind) of sacrifices being only changed.” Wherefore since 
the Christian religion is another sort of religion, different in 
so many things from the Jewish, is it reasonable to try and 
examine the one external sacrifice of that religion so nicely 
and strictly by that definition of a Jewish sacrifice? or to 
reject it as a sacrifice, because it doth not in every point 
agree with that test? Wherefore supposing the formal reason 
of a sacrifice in the Jewish Church consisted in the destruc- 
tion and consumption of the oblation, or some part of it, upon 
the altar, or at the bottom of it, must it of necessity be so in 
the Christian religion, which hath changed the rites, and re- 
duced the number of sacrifices to one, and altered the whole 
frame of the Jewish or Levitical worship, which Dr. Outram 
hath described? For the same reason, as I observed upon 
another occasion‘, they may deny our Churches, where the 
Christian sacrifice is offered, to be temples, because Ben. 
Maimon’s, or the Doctor’s description of the Jewish temple is 


» Petrus de Marca de Sacrificio renda erat, a Malachia pranuntiata 
Misse: Hoe est novum Christianze testantur.—[ Petri de Marea Disserta- - 
legis externum sacrificium, ut summo ___tiones Posthume, pp. 94, 95. ] 
consensu docent omnes antiqui Patres, © [See above, p. 80, note i. } 
nemine dempto, qui hane esse obla- d [See above, p. 32. ] 
tionem mundam, que toto orbe offe- 


Jewish rites accidental, and changed with the religion. 157 


not applicable to them; or that the true notion of Divine 
worship belongs to the Christian way of worshipping God, 
because it is so different from that of the Jews. There were 
many other rites belonging to Jewish sacrifices, besides 
destruction and consumption, in whole or in part, at the 
altar, as heaving and waving in the therumahs and thenu- 
phas®, and eating or participation of the things sacrificed, 
either by the priests alone, as in the sin-offerings and 
trespass-offerings, or by the offerers as well as the priests, 
as in the peace-offerings, which of all Levitical sacrifices the 
Eucharist most resembles; and by consequence, from this 
objection brought against the Christian sacrifice, the ob- 
jectors may also, if they please, say that the holy Eucharist 
cannot be such, because it is not held up to heaven, or waved 
towards the four corners of it, as well as because it is not in 
whole or in part consumed upon the altar. But though it hath 
not these, it hath many other sacrificial rites belonging to it ; 
for the bread and wine are brought to the Christian temple 
and altar, and delivered to the Christian cohen, or minister, 
who stands on God’s part to receive them of the people, and 
on the people’s part to offer them up for them to God; and 
when the oblation is finished, both priest and people together 
participate of the offerings at God’s table, which signifies, as 
it did in the Jewish religion, that the communicants are in a 
state of favour and friendship with God. I would fain ask 
these gentlemen, if these three holy rites, without others, 
and especially without destruction and consumption in the 
Jewish manner, are not by God’s appointment, who is the 
arbiter of religious rites and ceremonies, sufficient to make 
a sacrifice? If they will say they are not sufficient, let them 
give their reasons for it. But if they will acknowledge they 
are, then let them no more deny the holy Eucharist to be a 
true and proper sacrifice, because Dr. Outram’s definition of 
a Jewish sacrifice is not applicable to it. 

But, Sir, in the third place a good reason may be given 
from the Jewish. law of sacrifices, why neither the bread nor 
wine of the holy Eucharist, nor any part of them, is so con- 
sumed; and that is, because the Christian Church hath no 


€ [ADIN and AHN, therumah for the heave-offering, and the wave- 
and thenupha, are the Hebrew words offering. See Lev. vii. 34. | 


CHAP, IL. 


SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST=- 
HOOD. 


158 Mode of consumption different in the Christian Church. 


Scripture or tradition for such consumption of any part of 
them, and by consequence hath no such altars, nor stands in 
need of any such altars as the Jewish had, for the consump- 
tion of her offerings. Those altars were the great brazen 
altar without the house of the temple, in the inner court 
thereof, and the golden altar of incense in the holy place. 
And therefore the Christians, having no such Levitical rites 
for consumption of the elements in the Jewish manner and 
after the Jewish forms, they have no occasion for such altars 
to consume them at, or upon. The same fabric serves them 
both for altar and table, and as I have shewed in different 
respects was, and was deemed, both the one and the other, 
as the Jewish altar was’. 

I might add in the fourth place, in answer to this ob- 
jection, that by reason of the straight mystical union and 
conjunction between the sacramental and natural body and 
blood of Christ, or between the represented and represen- 
tative sacrifice, the wine of the holy Sacrament, which is the 
mystical and putative blood of sprinkling’, was, and always is 
in full effect poured out and sprinkled, as that was upon the 
cross, by virtue of the Divine institution whereby the bread 
and wine are substituted, and deputed" in the Lord’s Supper 
for His body and blood, and in virtue of that deputation are 
to be deemed, taken and esteemed as His natural body and 


f [See above, pp. 72, sqq. ] 

8 De Marca de Sacrificio misse. 
Necesse non est, ut rationem cujusque 
sacrificii in victimz mactatione vel 
interitu hostiz constituamus; cum 
sufficiat sola rei sensibilis ad honorem 
Divini Numinis ex ipsius decreto dicate 
oblatio, que illi a ministro publico 
nuncupatur, ut sacrificium dicatur. 
Quamvis in sacrificio Eucharistico non 
desit quoque suo modo mysticus vic- 
time interitus, si quis hane quoque 
conditionem in sacrificii veri ratione 
desideret.—[ Dissertationes Posthume, 
p- 96. ] 

h Mr. Thorndike of Religious As- 
semblies, pp. 357, 858. Camb. 1642. 
“The creatures of bread and wine are 
deputed to the effect of becoming the 
body and blood of Christ..... It seem- 
eth unquestionable that the thanks- 
giving, [wherewith our Lord in the 
Gospel is said to have celebrated this 
Sacrament at His last Supper], con- 
tained also prayer to God for the effect 


to which the elements, when they ke- 
came this Sacrament, are deputed... 
In the true sense of the Church they 
are consecrated, that is, deputed to be 
this Sacrament. . . . Let me suppose in 
the first place, that the elements by be- 
ing deputed,” &e. [| Thorndike’s Works, 
vol. i. pp. 842, 848. Oxford, 1844. ] 

' Poynet’s Diallacticon, p. 33. Hoe 
corpus, hune sanguinem [et carnem, 
hane substantiam corporis, ] non com- 
muni more, nee ut humana ratio dic- 
tat, accipi oportere, sed ita nominari, 
existimari, credi, propter eximios quos- 
dam effectus, virtutes, [et proprietates 
conjunctas, quz corpori et sanguini 
Christi natura insunt, nempe quod 
pascat animas nostras, &c.—Diallac- 
ticon viri boni et literati de veritate 
nature atque substantiz corporis et 
sanguinis Christi in Eucharistia. This 
tract was published in 1557, and sup- 
posed to be written by John Poynet, 
Bishop of Winchester; it was reprinted 
in 1688. } 


Mystical and putative character of the Sacrifice. 159 


blood. This power in legislators of making and supposing car. n. 
things to be to all intents and purposes and effects in law ----- 
what in reality they are not, is called by the civil law ‘ fiction ;? 
but it is such fiction as is invented to produce real and true 
effects for the benefit of those for whose sake it is by au- 
thority devised. Thus many of the Roman laws imagine a 
child in the womb to be born*, and a man who lives or dies 
in captivity, to have lived or died at home’, and therefore the 
maxims of fiction are such as these™: fictio imitatur naturam ; 
fictio inducitur, ut suppleat id in quo desideratur facti veritas, 
ut ex ea producantur veri juris effectus ; and, fictio juris tantum 
operatur, quantum veritas, or, fictio tantum valet in re ficta, 
quantum veritas in re vera. There is no law or government 
without such fictions; ours hath many of them, as when it 
supposes and imagines our captive or exiled kings, to whom it 
allows jus postlimind, to be all the time of their absence in 
possession of their thrones. So it is in the case of the king’s 
putative or virtual presence, the law supposing him at the 
same time to be present, not only in every room of his palace, 
but in all his courts of judicature, and im all the places of his 
dominions, though his real person can be but in one at a 
time. So, in virtue of legal substitution, the procurator or 
attorney is his principal, the ambassador his king, and the 
sentence of the judge the king’s sentence. In like manner, 
Sir, there are fictions in divinity, which infinite wisdom and 
goodness hath devised for our benefit and advantage. Thus Gen, 2. 24. 
man and wife are supposed to be, and therefore are, made one 
flesh, as the law makes them one person. Thus Christ is 
supposed to be the Lamb slain from the foundation of the Rev. 13.8. 
world; thus Abraham’s believing of God was imputed unto Rom.3, 12. 
him for righteousness, and by this putative, or imputative 
righteousness, he was as righteous in God’s account as if he 
had never sinned. Thus also are the faithful still justified by 


k [ Digest., lib. l. tit. 17. De diver- 
sis regulis juris antiqui. ὃ 187. Si- 
quis pregnantem uxorem reliquerit, 
non videtur sine liberis decessisse. 
Justin Instit., lib. i. tit. 13. § 4. Post- 
humi pro jam natis habeantur.’’ This 
note is added from the Supplement of 
1715, No. 13.] 

1 [ Instit., lib. i. tit. 12. § 5. Post- 
liminium fingit eum qui ab hostibus 


captus fuerit, in civitate semper fuisse. 
So by the ancient Roman laws parents 
emancipated their children by imagi- 
nary venditions, which Justinian calls 
fictionem pristinam. Instit., lib. i. tit. 
12. ὃ 6. De emancipatione.”’ From 
the Supplement of 1715, No. 13.] 

m [See Tuschi, Practice Conclu- 
siones Juris, tom. iii. pp. 441, sqq. 
Lugd. 1634. ] 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
noop. 


Rom. 8. 84, 


Rom. 8. 17. 


160 Union of the Eucharistic Sacrifice with that of the Cross. 


Divine imputation, as it is written, “It is God that justi- 
fieth, who is he that condemneth?”’ Thus also the doctrine 
of adoption is a Divine fiction in the Gospel, as it was a 
human fiction in the Roman civil law, and in both cases hath 
all the effects of real and legitimate sonship. And therefore 
in answer to these men’s objections, I hope it is no great or 
dangerous paradox to say, that by Divine fiction, or substitu- 
tion, the bread is made the body, and the wine the blood of 
Christ in the holy mystery, and that by virtue of this sub- 
stitution and mystical union between them, His body is 
supposed and deemed to be broken, and His blood shed and 
sprinkled in the holy Sacrament, as it was upon the cross; 
or in other words, that the offering and breaking of the bread 
is supposed to be the offering and breaking of His body, 
and the pouring out of the wine, the effusion and sprinkling 
of His blood; and in this mystical union and relation be- 
tween them, and real identity as to all spiritual virtues and 
effects, the mystery of the holy Eucharist doth consist. 

Sir, I have said allthis upon supposition that Dr. Outram’s 
definition of a Jewish sacrifice, as these objectors suppose, is 
general, adequate, and just. But they are much mistaken in 
arguing from it, as such; because it is not a definition of a 
Jewish sacrifice in general, but of one sort and species of it”, 
as any man will be convinced who will peruse Dr. Bright’s 
accurate tables of Jewish sacrifices or oblations, in which he 
will find sacrifices distinguished into those which were con- 
sumed, and those of which nothing was consumed®. Dr. 


" [There is considerable obscurity in 
the argument of the following passage, 
and a seeming want of accuracy in 
Hickes’ use of authorities. In this fifth 
answer to the objection, the question be- 
tween Hickes and Outram is, whether 
consumption (partial or entire) is neces- 
sary to constitute a Jewish sacrifice. 
This leads to the further question, to 
what offerings was the term sacrifice pro- 
perly applicable. Outram distinguished 
between an oblation, the general term, 
and sacrifice, the specific name, ac- 
cording to his view, for consumed obla- 
tions. Hickes held sacrifice and obla- 
tion to be synonymous. The difficulty 
as respects his references is, that he al- 
leges against Outram, and as agreeing 
with himself, authorities who call par- 


ticular offerings corbans, for which he 
substitutes the term sacrifices, which 
he himself held to be equivalent to it, 
which Outram denied, thus assuming 
the point in dispute. It ought to be 
added that jap in the Rabbinical 
writers is very frequently translated 
sacrificium, as by Buxtorf, (see below, 
p- 169,) and by Outram, as observed 
p- 162, note u. | 

° [ What Hickes here refers to are very 
large broad sheets, containing tables of 
the laws of Moses and of the Jewish 
sacrifices, published in London in 1680, 
under the title, Tabula Mosaice due, 
quarum altera precepta legis Mosaice 
commoda methodo disposita; altera 
oblationum omnium ex efficiente, ma- 
teria, consumptione, personis, signifi- 


Outram’s definition of Jewish sacrifices too narrow. 161 


Outram therefore gives us too narrow a definition ; a defini- CHAE ἘΣ 
tion of the species, and not of the genus, and by consequence ———— 
in their way of arguing, excludes not only the holy Eucharist, 

but many Jewish oblations from the nature and notion of 
sacrifice, as the offering of the first-fruits, of which it is said, 

Levit. ii. 12, “ As for the oblation of the first-fruits, ye shall 

offer them unto the Lord, but they shall not be burnt? on the 

altar for a sweet savour.” This oblation is called cordan in the 

text, the general word among the Hebrews for an oblation 

or sacrifices, and is used in speaking of offerings by blood 

and slaughter, as well as other things. And Maimonides’ 
reckons it among the sacrifices which were neither in whole 

nor in part consumed. It also excludes the red heifer out 

of the number of proper sacrifices (Numb. xix.) though it was 
brought to Eleazar, chief of the priests, and slain before his ver. 5. 
face, and he took of her blood with his finger, and sprinkled 

it directly before the tabernacle seven times, and had the ver. 6. 
whole essence of a piacular and expiatory sacrifice, as the 

Jews observe’; in a word, though it was one of the most Heb. 13.11. 
eminent types of the expiatory sacrifice of Christ upon the 

cross, yet Dr. Outram by the restrictions of his own defini- 

tion, excludes it out of the number of sacrifices, because it is 

not called coréan, and slain at the altar as other sacrifices 

were. The learned Bishop Patrick, in his commentary*t upon 


catu, tempore, distributiones varias con- _first-fruits to be a corban, or oblation, 
tinet. Authore Georgio Bright, S.T.P. but nota sacrifice; defining a sacrifice 
Cantabrigiensi. The passage referred (asabove)asa species of corban, namely 
to is, Tabula ii. p. 1. Divisio iii, Ex “προσφορὰ rite consumpta.’—De Sacri- 
adjuncto absumptionis ; in quibusdam  ficiis, lib. 1. cap. 8. ὃ 1, 2. p. 82, and 
enim, 1. Partes omnes penitus con- § 10, p. 92; where he says, primitie 


sumpte... 2. Tota caro etexta... ille, προσφοραὶ seu ferta recte dici posse 
3. Interiora tantum quedam... 4. Ni-  videntur; utpote que ante aram sta- 
hil, uti in pane facierum p55 On tuende erant. On this whole subject 
appellato... It should be added that see the extracts made by Bp. Cosin, 
Bright speaks of oblationes: he rarely vol. i. pp. 108, 111—113.] 

uses the word sacrificia, and he uses τ De cultu Divino, v. Tract. ο. 13. 
oblationes as equivalent to corbans. ] [There is not any reference to this sub- 


P Vatablus, in Lev. ii. 12, Nonim- ject in Tract. v. cap. 13, but in Tract. 
ponentur altari, ut incendantur exspi- ν΄. cap. 2. ὃ 13, Maimonides says, Liba- 
rature nidorem Domino; quia debent mina non sumebantur nisi de commu- 
quidem offerri Deo primitiz, sed non nibus; non igitur sumebantur nec de 
debent adoleri, quod cedant in cibum  oblatione, nec de decimis, nec de pri- 
sacerdotum.| Crit. Sacr., tom. ii. col.20.] —_mitiis.] 

7 (Lev. 11. 12. Hebr. ΟΝ Ἢ jap 5. [See note τι, p. 162.] 


ya pn. + For instances of corban used τ [Patrick’s words on the sprink- 
generally for things offered, see above, ling of her blood, Numb. xix. 4, are, 
note x, p. 42. Outram admitted the ‘‘Though this was not a sacrifice, yet 


HICKES. M 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Ley. 16.17. 


ver. 5. 


162 Outram’s definition excludes the red heifer, and the 


the place, favours this opinion of Dr. Outram", against Abar- 
banel, who calls the red heifer an offering for sin. And as 
the testimony of that Rabbi, as to the nature and notion of 
sacrifices is great, so Dr. Bright, who is of the same opinion, 
reckons it among the animal sacrifices, and with a respectful 
correction of Dr. Outram’s opinion, thinks it ought to be 
called a corban, or sacrifice, as you may see by his words in 
the margin’. It likewise excludes the scape-goat out of the 
number of sacrifices, because it was not slain and consumed 
by fire like the other goat, although they were both alike 
presented before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle, and 
both alike were presented for the same use and for the same 
end, to make atonement*. Nay, though the scape-goat, after 


it had something of that nature in it, 
and may be called a piaculum, an 
expiatory thing: though nothing was 
called corban, a sacrifice, but what was 
offered at the altar, as our Dr. Outram 
hath most justly observed against 
Abarbanel, who calls this red cow an 
offering for sin.’””—A Commentary on 
the Historical Books of the Old Testa- 


‘ment, vol. i. p. 632. Lond. 1809. | 


ἃ [Outram’s words are ‘ Erat,’ inquit 
Abarbanel (ad Numb. xix.),‘ Vacca rufa 


ΓΝ Π 2D IYI NNN 12 Ρ sacrificium 
piaculare totius ccetus.’ Et paulo post 
‘erat, mea sententia, vacca rufa sacri- 
ficium pro toto ccetu filiorum Israelis, 


sw 52 ΠῚ $5 sya yaqp) quo 
mundarentur a funeris pollutione, ne- 
quando forte sanctuarium, ejusve sacra 
inquinarent.’ Cujus ego sententiam ita 
probo, ut vaccam illam piaculum, aut 
sacrum piaculare, recte quidem dici 
posse, at 1), ex sacre Scripture usu 
minime dici posse judicem. Neque 
enim jp dici solet nisi quod Deo 
pro ara ejus ritu solemni offerebatur.— 
De Sacrificiis, lib. i. ο. 14. pp. 152, 153. 
It will be observed that Hickes wrongly 
represents Outram as saying “ because 
it is not slain at the altar;’’ Outram 
denied it to be a corban, because it was 
not “offered ” at the altar. It will 
also be observed that he admits it to 
be a “sacrum piaculare,’’ as he says 
also ὁ. 8. ὃ 2. p. 83; classing with it 
the bird killed in the purification of 
the leper, Lev. xiv. 5. Abarbanel calls 
it 12.» corban, which Outram himself 
translates sacrificium. ] 


* Hane enim et 12 ‘ oblationem’ 


dici posse puto; aliter ac doctissimo 
Outramo et in istis scriptori diligen- 
tissimo visum est, (Libro de Sacrifi- 
clis, 1. cap. 14.) quippe cujus sanguinis 
coram tentorio conventus aspersio Deo 
offerendi aliquid ritus haberi debeat, 
etiamsi ea ipsa nunquam are admota 
fuerit: Id quod in agno paschali mani- 
festum; is etenim, etiamsi nunquam 
pro ara sisteretur, sed aspersum dun- 
taxat super altare sanguinem haberet, 
et quidem juxta Judeorum nonnullos 
evaporatum adipem, oblatio tamen Dei, 
MM JI dicitur, Num. ix. 7, 13. 
[Bright, Tabule Mosaice, Tabula ii. 
γ. 1. Diveniel 

x Fagius in Ley. xvi. 8. Hircus 
super quem ascendit sors pro Sosery 


Azazel, statuatur vivus coram Domino, 
ut per eum expiationem faciat...Grzcus 


interpres pro voce Hebraica Srey 
Azazel posuit ἀποπομπαῖον, quo nomine 
Greci vocant malorum depulsorem. 
Hine et Deos, quos coluerunt ad depel- 
lenda mala, vocarunt ἀποπομπαίους, ἢ 
ἀποτροπαίους, aut etiam ἀλεξικάκους. 
Respexerunt ergo Greci eo, quod iste 
caper peccata populi, causam omnium 
malorum, in desertum auferret. Ponti- 
fex enim imprecabatur confessione sua 
capiti hujus capri omnia peccata Is- 
raelitarum, et emittebat eum postea in 
desertum, ut esset pro omnibus pecca- 
tis totius Israelitici populi expiatio. 
Hoe recte dicitur ἀποπομπαῖον esse ad 
auferenda, et expianda peccata populi. 
—([Crit. Sacr., tom. ii. pars ii. col. 
251. ] 


scape-goat from the number of proper sacrifices. 


163 


the lot fell upon him to be sent away, was presented alive 
before the Lord a second time, and so was twice consecrated 
and devoted to God, to remove the sins of the congregation 
far from Him, and as it were to carry them out of His sight ; 
yet for all this Dr. Outram will not allow it to be a proper 
sacrifice, because it was not consumed’ according to his 
narrow definition, which is perfectly contrary to the opinion 
of Maimonides’, and I believe of all other Jewish writers, 
who reckon both goats alike among the number of sacrifices, 
as do also our own writers, Mr. Ainsworth?, Bishop Patrick”, 
and Dr. Bright*, who also reckons both goats among the 
public sacrifices of the Jewish Church. 


y [Outram says that the scape-goat 
was a corban; and in his division of 
corbans or oblations he puts this first ; 
Eorum autem que Deo pro ara offere- 
bantur, alia dimissa et ablegata, ut 
hireus in deserta ductus; (De Sacrif., 
lib. i. c. 8. § 1. p. 81.) And again, after 
mentioning several things which were 
offered and consecrated but not con- 
sumed, and therefore, according to his 
definition, not sacrificed, he concludes, 
quod idem quoque statuendum de hir- 
co isto qui Deo ante aram oblatus in 
deserta vivus abducebatur.—Ibid., p. 
82. After this he proceeds; Jam vero 
quz Deo ante aram, vel in mensa sacra 
in adyto exteriori posita, ita quidem of- 
ferrebantur ut rite consumenda essent, 
ea Judei in numerum sacrificiorum 
censum referunt.— 3. ibid. Outram, it 
seenis, admitted the first-fruits and 
scape-goat to be oblations, but not 
sacrifices; and the red heifer to be in 
one sense a sacrifice but not an obla- 
tion, (corban). Hickes’ authorities only 
shew that these were all corbans. ] 

2 [Maimonides,] de Cultu Divino, 
Tract. viii. [de solemni die Expiati- 
onis, cap. i. ὃ 1.7 Preeterea autem de 
publico offerebantur hirci duo [quorum 
alter, immolatus in hostiam pro pec- 
cato cremabatur, alter vivus emitte- 
batur in solitudinem.] Itaque ad diem 
illum sacrificabantur bestiz quinde- 
cim: jugia sacrificia duo, juvencus, 
[duo arietes, agni septem, et hi omnes 
in holocausta.] Przeterea hirci duo in 
hostiam pro peccato: [ quorum alterius 
sanguis respergebatur altari exteriori 
..+ alterius autem sanguis resperge- 
batur intus in sancto p.330. The two 
goats, ‘hirci duo,’ then, do not refer to 


the two goats on which the lots were 
cast, as Hickes seems to have supposed, 
and as the portions of the passage as it 
was printed by him would imply. The 
former is the goat for a sin-offering, 
mentioned Numb. xxix. 11, which Mai- 
monides mentioned some lines before ; 
the latter the fellow of the scape-goat. 
Maimonides does not therefore reckon 
the scape-goat among the number which 
were sacrificed, but rather excludes it ; 
offerebantur probably means brought 
near, implying that it is an oblation, 
as Dr. Bright calls it. ] 

a [Ainsworth on Lev. xvi. 5, com- 
menting on the words which speak of 
both as a sin-offering, says, “ figuring 
Christ, who should be a sin-offering 
for His Church, ... and these goats, 
the one was killed, the other sent away.’” 
Ainsworth does not call the scape-goat 
a sacrifice more explicitly than in these 
words: on Numb. xxix. 2, however, he 
enumerates the sacrifices of the day of 
expiation, and mentions the two goats, 
as Maimonides does in the words quoted 
in the Jast note. Hickes may have 
understood them, as he did when men- 
tioned by Maimonides, of the two on 
which the lots were cast. ] 

» [Patrick on Lev. xvi. 10, says, 
‘*For this was a sin-offering, though 
not slain, no less than the other, as 
appears from ver. 5, which shews these 
two goats together made but one sin- 
offering, which was partly slain at the 
altar, and partly let go.’””—Commen- 
tary, vol. i. p. 447. ed. 1809.] 

© In hune porro publicarum obla- 
tionum censum reponimus ... in die 
expiationis hircos duos. Quorum unus 
erat piacularis czsus, alter emissarius 


M 2 


CHAP. IT. 
SECT. X. 


ver. 10; 
ver. 22. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Lev. 16, 8, 
10. 


Lev. 16. 10. 


164 The scape-goat was a sacrifice ; authorities. 


I have said that I believe all Jewish writers reckon both 
goats alike amongst the number of sacrifices. For so I 
doubt not but the LXX did, who called the scape-goat 
ἀποπομπαῖος, that is, the piacular goat, because he was offered 
to be a piacle, and as such sent away into the wilderness 
laden with all the sins of the people. So St. Barnabas, 
who was a Jew, for this reason calls him κατάρατος, ‘ the ac- 
cursed’ goat, and as such saith that he was a type of Christ ; 
“Hear,” saith he’, “the appointment of Christ ; ‘Take two 
goats unblemished and alike, and offer them, and let the high- 
priest take one of them for a burnt-offering.’?, And what must 
be done with the other? ‘ Let it,’ saith he, ‘be accursed.’ ” 
And afterwards®: “ One was offered upon the altar, and the 
other to be accursed.” Both then were offered ; the one to be 
a sin-offering, the other for a piacle, to bear all the iniquities 
of the children of Israel, and the curses due unto them, in 
the type, as Christ our piacle in the antitype bore the sins 
of the whole world in His body upon the tree. If therefore a 
goat solemnly offered before the altar to be a piacle, and to 
make atonement and expiation for the transgressions of the 
people be a proper sacrifice, such was the scape-goat, though 
he was not slain, nor any of his blood put upon the horns of 
the altar, or poured out at the bottom thereof, nor his fat 
and kidneys consumed upon the altar by fire. 

So Justin Martyr; after he had said‘ that one of the 
goats was to be ἀποπομπαῖος, and the other to be slain εἰς 
προσφορὰν, speaks of the oblation of both of them in these 
words®: καὶ ὅτι καὶ ἡ τῶν δύο τράγων τῶν νηστείᾳ κελευσ- 
θέντων προσφέρεσθαι, προσφορὰ οὐδαμοῦ ὁμοίως συγκε- 
χώρηται γίνεσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν ἱΙεροσολύμοις, ἐπίστασθε. So far 
was he from thinking the consumption of an offering, or any 
part of it upon the altar necessary to make it a sacrifice. 

Sir, I hope I have now made it appear with what little 


SINID pro expiatione sanctuarii, altaris, 
totiusque ccetus,—[ Bright, Tabule 
Mosaice, tab. 11, p. 3.] 

ἃ [πῶς οὖν ἐνετείλατο; προσέχετε" 
λάβετε δύο τράγους καλοὺς καὶ ὁμοίους, 
καὶ προσενέγκατε" καὶ λαβέτω ὃ ἱερεὺς 
τὸν ἕνα εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα" τὸν δὲ ἕνα τί 
ποιήσουσιν ; ἐπικατάρατος, φησὶν, ὁ εἷς" 
προσέχετε πῶς ὃ τύπος τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ φανε- 


ροῦται.---ϑι. Barnab. Epist., c. vii. Patr. 
Apost., tom. i, pp. 21, 24, ] 

© [τὸν μὲν Eva ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, 
τὸν δὲ ἕνα ἐπικατάρατον .---ΤὈ]4., p. 24. | 

f [ὧν ὁ εἷς ἀποπομπαῖος ἐγίνετο, ὁ δὲ 
ἕτερος εἰς mpoopopdv.—S. Just. Mart. 
Dial. cum Tryph., c. 4. p. 137, B.] 

* [Id. ibid., D. ] 


Sacrifice and oblation the same. 165 


reason the holy Eucharist is denied to be a sacrifice, because cuar. πὶ 
Dr. Outram’s narrow definition of a Jewish sacrifice is not ~——~ 
applicable to the institution of it, nor the institution of it to 
that definition, which is neither so general as to answer the 
notion of a sacrifice common to all religions, or to take in all 
the sorts of Jewish sacrifices or oblations. I say of Jewish 
sacrifices, or oblations, because sacrifice and oblation are 
equivalent terms in the Old Testament, which I premise for 
the sake of those who, according to the more common use 
of the words in our language, make a distinction between 
them, restraining the word sacrifice to victims, or animal 
oblations, and oblation to the sacrifices of inanimate things, 
contrary to the usage of other languages and authors, and 
particularly of Dr. Outram himself, who makes sacrifice a genus 
to animal and inanimate sacrifices in these words? : nos omnia 
sacrificia, que ex animantibus lecta erant, victimas, aut hostias 
appellabimus, reliqua autem ferta', aut dapes ; “1 shall call all 
sacrifices of animals, victims, or hosts, and the rest meat- 
offerings, or feasts.” 

Sir, this observation, and the remarks I have made upon 
Dr. Outram’s definition of a sacrifice, will perhaps make you 
think it incumbent upon me to give another definition of it, 
so general as may take in not only all sorts of Jewish, but 
Gentile sacrifices, and which, if it be a good definition, may 
also prove the holy Sacrament to be such. But if you expect 
such a definition of a sacrifice or oblation, as a genus to all 
sorts of sacrifices or oblations, from me, you expect a most 
difficult thing. For generical terms come so near to the 
nature of transcendentals, that they are seldom capable of 
a strict, proper, and exact definition, though the nature of 
the things signified by them may be clearly conceived. Such 
terms are usually described, rather than defined), and learned 


h [De Sacrificiis, lib. i. c. 8. ὃ 8. p. 146. See Grotiusin Gen. xiv. 18, 
p- 84.] quoted p. 110, note 1.1 

i Fertum, Hebraice 43%) minchah; i [Descriptionum usus, cum alias 
quod vocabulum [et generatim quod- utilis, tum etiam sepe est necessarius. 
vis donum et munus sonat, et] speci- Quoties scilicet aut res explicandz oc- 
atim sumitur [in scriptura] pro libi currunt, que non sunt capaces per- 
quodam genere, quod Deo sacrifica- fectarum definitionum, qualia sunt 
batur. Hoc vulgatus interpres sim-  transcendentalia, genera generalissima, 
pliciter sacrificium nominat.—Compi-_ entia rationis, &c.—Sanderson, Artis 
egne de Veil, in annot. in Maimon., Logic Compendium, lib. i. cap. 17, 
{de cultu Divino, Tract. vii.c. 2. § 1. 8.6. i 





CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD, 


106 An exact definition of Sacrifice not to be expected. 


men content themselves with the unaccurate descriptions of 
them, because they can have no better. So the schools ac- 
quiesce in this definition of substance, substantia est quod per 
se subsistit, or substantia est ens per se subsistens*, that is, “sub- 
stance is what subsists by itself,” or, “substance is a thing 
that subsists by itself,’ which is no more than, substance is 
substance, and so is rather a description than a definition, 
and a description rather of the name than the thing; and yet 
though we can have no better a definition of it, every illi- 
terate as well as every learned man conceives what is meant 
by substance, and hath a clear notion of it, though he never 
heard it defined. The like may be said of ens, a being, or 
thing, defined to be quod habet essentiam, which is but a 
nominal definition, or explication of the term, though every 
vulgar understanding knows what a being or thing means, 
and would have a right idea thereof, though it had never 
been defined. . 

Sir, I have observed this to let you know you are not to 
expect an exact definition of a sacrifice from me, which 
contains under it so many and various species, and divisions, 
and subdivisions, as in examining Dr. Outram’s too narrow 
definition of a sacrifice hath appeared. But then, Sir, 
though I cannot give you such a definition of a sacrifice in 
general as perhaps you expect; nay though I should give 
you none at all, yet I must profess I have a clear generical 
notion of it, as I have of time, though it is very hard to find 
terms to express it in. I instance in time, because all men 
alike have a clear notion of it, though the philosopher’s de- 
finition of it in his Physics! is imperfect, and liable to excep- 
tions, and short of the.common notion thereof. Wherefore, 
Sir, I hope you will be content with any tolerable description 
of a sacrifice in general, because it is not capable of a perfect 
definition, and that you will consider the cases, in which the 
schools tell us we must take up with descriptions, particu- 
larly in the cases expressed in the margin™. Thus far, Sir, to 


« (Sanderson, ibid., lib. i. c. 9. ὃ 1.7 | verarum differentiarum, aut verborum, 
1 [τοῦτο γάρ ἐστιν ὃ χρόνος, ἀριθμὸς quibus eas exprimamus: quorum 
κινήσεως κατὰ τὸ πρότερον καὶ ὕστερον. utrumque ex eo swpissime contingit, 
—Aristotelis (Physica) Nat. Ausec., quod et rerum nature atque essentiz 
jib, 10. ὍΣ Π͵Π ΒΤ Ἢ sunt nobis plerumque parum satis cog- 
™ Quoties ipsi inopia laboramus aut nite, neque suppetunt usque dictiones 


Sacrifice used in two senses. Definitions of it. 167 


bespeak your candour in censuring and examining the de- 
scription I shall give of a sacrifice in general, which if I 
should describe but nominally, by the mere notation or ety- 
mology of the word, I think I might be excused. For there 
are some consecrated things that have a near alliance and 
resemblance with sacrifices, and yet are not sacrifices, 
though it is not so easy, for want of words, to express the 
difference between them. 

But before I can define a sacrifice or oblation in general, 
you must give me leave to distinguish the words into their 
several acceptations. For they are sometimes used for the 
whole sacrificial administration, and sometimes for the res 
oblata, or ‘ thing sacrificed.’ And therefore the administration 
of the holy Sacrament being called a sacrifice as well as the 
bread and wine, I shall give you two descriptions of a sacri- 
fice, one, as it is taken for the ‘epovpyia, or holy adminis- 
tration, and the other as it is taken for the matter of the 
sacrifice, the holy gift. But before I proceed to my two 
descriptions, or if you please you may call them explications 
of the word, I must beg leave to put in this previous caveat, 
that if they do not rightly answer the general conceptions we 
have of sacrifice in both senses, it is not for want of a true 
notion of them, but rather of words significant enough in our 
language to express them in. 

In the first sense I define a sacrifice thus": “ A sacrifice is a 
religious action (or operation) of a priest, ordinary or extraor- 
dinary, by which a gift brought is solemnly offered according 
to the rites and observances of any religion in, before, at, or 
upon any place, unto any god, to honour and worship him, 
and thereby acknowledge him to be god and lord.” 

Sir, you will now easily imagine, that in the second sense 
I shall define a sacrifice in this manner: “ A sacrifice is a 
gift brought, and solemnly offered by a priest, ordinary or 
extraordinary, according to the rites and observances of any 
religion in, before, at, or upon any place, unto any god, to 


exprimendis animi conceptionibus satis 
idonee, &c.—Sanderson, [ibid., lib. i. 
.17.8 6:1] 

" [To the same purpose J. Sau- 
bertus de Sacrificiis, ο. 1. p. 13, (see 
note Ὁ, p. 59.) Sie definio sacrificium, 


sacram et externam actionem qua res 
quepiam externa a certis personis, loco 
ritibusque certis, ad finem certum, dis 
aut deorum loco habitis consecrabatur 
et offerebatur.’’—Additional note from 
the Supplement of 1715, No. 14. ] 


CHAP, Il. 


SECT. Χ, 


168 Hickes’ definition of Sacrifice explained. 


peed honour and worship him, and thereby acknowledge him to 
_noov. be god and lord.” 

If my first definition be good, the second must be so, and 
therefore let me observe to you, first, that it agrees to the 
notation of sacrificium, and answers to the terms of sacri- 
ficing, δρᾶν, ἔρδειν, ῥέζειν, ποιεῖν in Greek, nwy in Hebrew, 
and facere in Latin, as above explained®. The summum 
genus therefore of sacrifice, for sacrificing, must be action, 
and actions, as the schools tell usP, must be defined by their 
subject, object, efficient, and end: all which I have endea- 
voured to comprise in the first definition, as well as the thing 
defined and the want of more proper words would bear. The 
subject of this holy action is ‘a gift brought ;’ the object to 
whom it is brought is ‘any god ;’ the efficient, who offers the 
gift brought, is ‘a priest ;? and the end of offering that gift 
is ‘to worship that god to whom it is offered, and acknow- 
ledge him to be god and lord.’ I have said ‘a priest, or- 
dinary or extraordinary,’ to comprehend the holy adminis- 
tration of those who sacrifice, or offer jure prophetico upon 
particular occasions. As in the first definition I have made 
‘gift’ the subject of offering or sacrificing, so in the second I 
have put it forthe genus proximum of sacrifice according to 
the Hebrews, Greeks, and Latins, who call it in the proper, 
sacrificial signification, 130, δῶρον, donum4, as distinguished 
from other gifts', which were upon any account hanged up in 


° [See above, pp. 58, sqq. ] 

P [Definiende sunt... actiones per 
subjectum, objectum, efficientem et 
finem.—Sanderson, lib. i. c. 17. ὃ 5.] 

4 Brisson. de formulis, p. 30. [ Quae- 
cunque autem deorum placandorum 
causa aris inferebantur, ea dona appel- 
labant; of which he gives numerous 
instances. | 

© Martinii Lexicon Philologicum in 
Donarium. [The passage occurs under 
the word donum: Gloss. Donum, δῶ- 
ρον, χάρισμα, &c. Lue. xxi. 5. templum 
quod bonis lapidibus et donis ornatum 
dicitur; pro donis est in Greco ava- 
θήμασι ... ἀναθήματα autem proprie 
donaria ;| Macrob. Saturn., lib. iii. cap. 
11. [see note a, p. 72. |] Ornamenta vero 
sunt clypei, coronz, et ejusmodi dona- 
ria. Julii Pollucis Onomasticon, [lib. 
i. cap. 1. segm. 28.]. περὶ ἀναθημά- 
τῶν Kal λοιπῶν προσφερομένων. [περὶ 


ἀναθημάτων" τὰ δὲ ἀναθήματα ὡς ἐπὶ 
τὸ πολὺ στέφανοι, φιάλαι, ἐκπώματα, 
θυμιαματήρια, χρυσίδες, ἀργυρίδες, οἶνο- 
χόαι, ἀμφορίσκοι.] Phavorini Glossa- 
rium in ἀνάθημα" [ἄγαλμα, κόσμος" ἄνα- 
θήματα ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πόλυ λέγονται στέ- 
φανοι, φιάλαι, ἐκπώματα, θυμιατήρια, 
χρυσίδες, οἰνοχόαι, ἀργυρίδες, ἀμφό- 
ρισκοι. καὶ ἀναθήματα δαιτὸς, 7 n μολπὴ, 
καὶ 7 ὀρχηστρίς" ὥσπερ γὰρ ναοῖς ἀνα- 
θήματα, οὕτω καὶ αὐτὰ κόσμος τις ἄνα- 
κείμενος τῇ δαιτί.)ῦ See the word in 
Suiceri Thesaurus, tom. i. col. 272. 
Andin Budi Comment. Ling. Greece, 
pp. 502, 503. [ἀναθήματα, aprepduara, 
id est, donaria. Macrobius ornamenta, 
inquit, fanorum sunt clypei, corone et 
hujuscemodi donaria; neque enim do- 
naria dedicantur eo tempore quo delu- 
bra sacrantur.—Herod., lib. i. cap. 14. 
Γύγης δὲ τυραννεύσας ἀπέπεμψε ἀναθή- 
ματα εἰς Δελφοὺς οὐκ ὄλιγα.] 


Its parts considered separately. 169 


temples, or fastened to altars, which they called on, ἀνα- 


θήματα", donaria, though among the Latins donum is some-- 


times used for donarium, asin that of Virgil, Ain., lib. xii. 768. 


Servati ex undis ubi figere dona solebant'. 


So ἀνάθημα is rendered by donum, 2 Macc. ix. 16%, but in 
chap. 11. 18, it is rendered by donarium’, and again by donum, 
as in our translation, Luke xxi.5*. But in 2 Mace. ii. 18, 
we render ἀναθημάτων by ‘ holy gifts ; for both sacrifices, and 
gifts signified by ἀναθήματα and donaria agreed in this, that 
they were consecrated, but then the latter were said to be 
dedicated, and not offered, as sacrifices or oblations are 
always said to be. Before the word ‘gift’? I have put the 
word ‘ brought,’ as it is written, Gen. iv. 3, 4, “ Cain brought 
of the fruit of the ground, and Abel brought of the firstlings 
of his flock an offering unto the Lord.” Hence these scrip- 
tural words in HebrewY yan, apn, nyn, for bringing to the 
priest and altar. This the Greeks express by προσάγειν, 
ἀναβαίνειν [avabeivar|, the Latins by ducere, and admovere, 
of which in the proper sacrificial sense see Brissonius at large ; 
De formulis, pp. 15, 165, 

I need say nothing of the word ‘ offered,’ but that I mean by 
it ‘actually offered, and that joined with ‘ brought,’ it denotes 
a sacrifice or oblation offered, or to be offered, as Buxtorf > 
saith 13, corban, est oblatio, sacrificium quod offertur aut 
offerri debet. But what is actually offered is most properly 
called a sacrifice or oblation: for as Gregory Nyssen some- 


8 [ Hickes has been misled in trans- 
lating 0°97N donaria, by the inter- 
change in the LXX of ἀναθέματα and 
ἀναθήματα. OD 7M are ‘things devoted’ 
or ‘accursed ;’ generally rendered in the 
LXX ἀναθέματα, e. g. Josh. vi. 17, 18; 
but in Ley. xxvii. 28, 29, erroneously 
by ἀναθήματα; as, on the contrary, in 
2 Mace. ii. 13, (quoted below, note v,) 
and in Judith xvi. 17, ἀνάθεμα is used 
for ἀνάθημα. 

Ὁ [See also Martinius, quoted above, 
note r, p. 168. ] 

ἃ [καλλίστοις ἀναθήμασι κοσμήσειν. 
Vers. LXX. 2 Mace. ix. 16; optimis 
donis ornaturum. Vulg. | 

Y [ἐπιστολὰς βασιλέων περὶ ἄναθε- 
μάτων, Vers. LXX. 2 Mace. ii. 13; et 
epistolas regum et de donariis, Vulg. ; 
‘and the holy gifts,’’ Eng. Vers. | 


* [ὅτι λίθοις καλοῖς καὶ ἀναθήμασι Ke- 
κόσμηται. Luc. xxi. 5; quod bonis la- 
pidibus et donis ornatum esset, Vulg. ; 
“ sifts,’’? Eng. Vers. } 

y [NIM, Gen. iv. 4, ‘he brought;’ 
3pn, ‘to bring near:’ of sacrifice, 
Lev. iii. 1, 7,8; DPT, ‘to cause to 
stand, to present’ before the Lord, Lev. 
xiv. 11; and passively, Lev. xvi. 10, 
‘ presented.’ | 

2. Jul. Pollucis Onomast., lib. i. cap. 
1. segm. 29. περὶ τῶν προσαγομένων 
ἱερείων. [ἱερεία προσάγειν, and at the end 
ἀναθεῖναι εἰς τὸν νεών ; for which ava- 
βαίνειν in the text appears to be ἃ 
mistake. | 

4 {Numerous instances are given by 
Brissonius at this place. } 

> Lexic. Talm. [in voc. 12, p. 
2122. } 


CHAP. IL. 
SECT. X._ 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Num. 19. 


170 Hickes’ definition ; its parts considered. 


where speaks’, “a sheep before it is offered is but a sheep, 
but being offered it becomes what it was not before, a sacri- 
fice to God.” 

I have also said offered ‘in, before, at, or upon’ any place 
to distinguish sacrifices from temples and altars, which are 
also said to be consecrated® and dedicated, upon which 
account they become holy, but are never said to be offered. 
I have used the word ‘ before,’ because in religious ritualities 
it is all one as to the nature of a sacrifice, whether it be 
offered ‘before,’ or ‘towards’ the place of the special presence 
or residence of any deity, or ‘in’ it, if the pontifical laws and 
usages so direct or permit. So as I have shewed before, the 
red heifer which was slain before Eleazar the priest, who 
sprinkled her blood seven times directly before the tabernacle, 
was as ritual and perfect a sacrifice of expiation, as if she had 
been slain at the altar, and the priest had sprinkled her blood 
thereupon. Temples therefore and altars, properly speaking, 
are not gifts, or offerings, but only holy places in and at 
which gifts are offered ; places, I say, for so Julius Pollux calls 
them, lib. i. segm. 6: ὁ τόπος ἐν ᾧ θεραπεύονται : of “the 
place in which the gods are worshipped,” καὶ τὸ μὲν χώριον, 
x.T.d.f “and the place in which we worship the gods is ἵερον 
and veds.” So segm. 78, speaking of the altar, saith he, “the 
place upon which we sacrifice and burn the fire is βωμὸς, 
θυσιαστήριον, ἑστία, κιτιλ. And in segm. 84, he calls the 
ἐσχάρα, or grate of the altar, ὁ δεκτὸς τόπος τῶν θυσιῶν, 
“‘the place which receives the sacrifices.” 

I have also added, ‘according to the rites and customs of 
any religion,’ because as there never was any religion with- 


23. Hane ego aram, inquit, Pudicitiz 
Plebeiz dedico. Ovid. Fast., lib. i. 609. 


¢ [These words do not occur in St. 
Gregory Nyssen. For several similar 


analogies see his Oratio de Baptismo 
Christi, Op., tom. iii. pp. 369, 370; 
quoted above, p. 76, note p. | 

“ So Thomas Aquinas, Ad primum 
ergo dicendum, quod sacrificia offerri 
oportebat et in aliquibus locis, et per 
aliquos homines. [Summez Theol. Pri- 
ma Secunde, Queest. ci. Art. 4. ] 

ὁ Brisson. de Form., pp. 113—115. 
[ Brissonius among other authorities 
for the consecration of temples, quotes 
Varro de Ling. Lat., lib. ii. § 54. Hine 
fana nominata, quod pontifices in sa- 
crando fati sunt finem ; Liy., lib. x. ec. 


Sacra vocant Augusta patres; Augusta 
vocantur templa, sacerdotum rite di- 
cata manu. | 

f (Jul. Poll. Onomast., lib. i. cap. 1. 
segm. 6. 6 τόπος ἐν ᾧ θεραπεύονται" καὶ 
τὸ μὲν χωρίον ἐν ᾧ θεραπεύομεν τοὺς 
θεοὺς, ἱερὸν, καὶ veds. | 

Κ [{Ibid., segm. 7. περὶ θυσιαστηρίου" 
ἐφ᾽ ὧν δὲ θύομεν, ἢ πῦρ ἀνακαίομεν, Bw- 
μὸς, θυμιαματήριον, ἑστία : no edition 
reads θυσιαστήριον.) 

h [Ibid., segm. 8. ὁ δεκτὸς τόπος τῶν 
θυσιῶν" ἐσχάρα δ᾽ ἰδικῷς δοκεῖ μὲν ὧδε 
ὠνομάσθαι, K.T.A. | 


The end of sacrifices is to honour God; so Aquinas. 171 


out priests and some sacrifice, so every religion has its ritual, 
or pontifical observations, not to be omitted or transgressed. 

The end which I have assigned of sacrifices or oblations 
in general, is ‘to honour or worship the god to whom they 
are offered, and to acknowledge him for god and lord” To 
this purpose also speaks Thomas Aquinas', Secundum enim 
quod sacrificia ordinabantur ad cultum Dei, causa sacrificiorum 
dupliciter accipi potest, &c. “ For as sacrifices were appointed 
for the worship of God, the cause of them may be conceived 
two ways. In one, as we conceive that the disposition of the 
offerer’s mind towards God was represented by them. But 
this is requisite to the right disposition of a man’s mind 
towards God, that he acknowledge that all he hath comes 
from God, as the first principle, and ought to be referred to 
Him, as the ultimate end. And both these were set forth in 
oblations and sacrifices, because a man was understood to 
offer those things by way of acknowledgment to God from 
whom he had them. According to what David speaks, 
1 Chron. xxix. 14, ‘ All things come of Thee, and of Thine 
own have we given Thee.’ And therefore in offering sacri- 
fices a man protested that God was the first principle of all 
things, and the ultimate end to which all things ought to be 
referred. And because it belongs to the right disposition of 
a man’s mind towards God, that he acknowledge no other 
but God to be the first cause of all things, and the ultimate 
end to which they are to be referred, and had no other end 
but Him: therefore in the law it was forbid to offer sacrifice 
to any other but to God, according to what is written, 


i [Secundum enim quod sacrificia 
ordinabantur ad cultum Dei, causa sa- 
crificiorum dupliciter accipi potest. 
Uno modo secundum quod per sacri- 
ficia reprasentabatur ordinatio mentis 
in Deum, ad quam excitabatur sacri- 
ficium offerens. Ad rectam autem or- 
dinationem mentis in Deum pertinet, 
quod omnia que homo habet recog- 
noscat a Deo tanquam a primo prin- 
cipio, et ordinet in Deum tanquam in 
ultimum finem; et hoc representa- 
batur in oblationibus et  sacrificiis, 
secundum quod homo ex rebus suis 
quasi in recognitionem, quod haberet 
ea a Deo, in honorem Dei ea offerebat: 
secundum quod dixit David, 1 Paralip. 


xxix. ‘Tua sunt omnia, et que de manu 
tua accepimus, dedimus tibi;’ et ideo 
in oblatione sacrificiorum protestabatur 
homo, quod Deus esset primum prin- 
cipium creationis rerum, et ultimus 
finis, ad quem essent omnia referenda. 
Et quia pertinet ad rectam ordina- 
tionem mentis in Deum, ut mens hu- 
mana non recognoscat alium primum 
auctorem rerum, nisi solum Deum, 
neque in aliquo alio finem suum con- 
stituat: propter hoc prohibebatur in 
lege, offerri sacrificium alicui alteri, 
nisi Deo, secundum illud Exod. xxii. 
‘Qui immolat diis occidetur, preter- 
quam Domino soli’—Summa Theol. 
Prima Secunde, Qu. cii. Art. 3. ] 


CHAP, 11. 


SECT, X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


172 Hickes’ definition includes all Sacrifices ; 


Exod. xxii. 20, ‘He that sacrificeth to any God save unto 
the Lord* only, he shall be utterly destroyed.’ ” 

This shews that the common end of all sacrifices was ‘to 
honour and worship and do homage to the god to whom 
they were offered, and acknowledge him to be lord,’ as 
Brisson! also shews at large out of human authors. And 
indeed the bare act of offering in itself, without speaking a 
word, is an act of religious homage, and of honour, worship, 
and recognition of the god to whom the offering is made. 
And therefore to honour, worship, and recognise Jehovah as 
the only true God, and supreme Lord, being if not the only, 
yet the chief end of burnt-offerings™, the Jews permitted the 
Gentiles to bring or send such offerings, but of no other 
sort, to be offered unto God. 

Having now explained the terms used in my definitions of 
sacrifice or oblation in general, I hope, the difficulties above- 
mentioned ‘being considered, they may pass for sufficient 
definitions. I believe they are as good as many hundred 
definitions among the schoolmen and writers of civil law, 
among whom, considering how hard it is to find proper 
terms to define many notions in, they are fain to excuse 
themselves by that common saying in the margin", which 
shews how difficult and nice things general definitions are, 
and that allowances ought to be made for them in many 
cases upon that account. Wherefore if mine are sufficient 
definitions of sacrifice in general, they must comprehend all 
sorts of sacrifices howsoever distinguished in sacred or pro- 
fane writers, especially in the sacred code: voluntary or com- 
manded; animate or inanimate, the oblation of the Levites 
in Numb. viii. not excepted; consumed in whole or in part 
upon the altar, or not to be so consumed; public or private; 


k In the original, ‘except unto Je- 
hovah.” 

1 De Formulis, lib. i. pp. 29, 30. 
[See above, note b, p. 28. } 

™ Thomas Aquinas. [ Holocaustum 
offerebatur Deo specialiter ad reve- 
rentiam majestatis ejus ; ‘et ideo 
totum comburebatur, ut sicut totum 
animal resolutum in vaporem, sursum 
ascendebat, ita etiam significaretur to- 
tum hominem et omnia que ipsius 
sunt, Dei dominio esse subjecta, et ei 


esse offerenda ... totum comburebatur 
in honorem Dei: et nihil ex eo come- 
debatur.—Summa Theol. Prima Se- 
cunde, Quest. cii. Art. 3.] 

. Definitiones rerum sunt omnium 
periculosissime. 

® [See Num. viii. 11. ‘ And Aaron 
shall offer the Levites before the Lord 
for an offering of the children of Israel, 
that they may execute the service of 
the Lord.” } 


even that of our Lord upon the Cross. 173 


daily, weekly, monthly, or anniversary sacrifices ; principal or 
annexed ; more holy, or less holy sacrifices ; burnt-offerings, 
sin-offerings, trespass-offerings, and peace-offerings, and that 
which succeeded in the room of them all under the New 
Testament, the propitiatory oblation of the Eucharist as 
treated of in the learned and judicious discourse whose title 
is set down in the margin’. Nay, I do not doubt but it is 
fairly applicable to the grand expiatory sacrifice upon the 
altar of the cross, the sacrifice of our Lord, of which the 
legal sacrifices were types, and the Eucharistical a repre- 
sentative commemoration, as I have proved by many testi- 
monies: for He being a priest after the order and similitude 


CHAP. Il. 
SECT. X. 


of Melchisedec, “there was a necessity that he should have Heb. 8. 3. 


something also to offer,’ which was the sacrifice of Himself, 
that one sacrifice for sin, the one offering which He offered 
but once, and by which He hath perfectly cleansed us from 
the guilt of sin. And as there was a necessity that He should 
have something to offer, so there was a necessity that He 
should have something to offer Himself upon, which by the 
determinate counsel of God was the cross; and therefore I 
make no difficulty to call it an altar, being the appointed 
fabric or place upon which (ἐφ᾽ οὗ, as Julius Pollux speaks?) 
He was to offer Himself “an offering, and a sacrifice to God, 
for a sweet-smelling savour.” | 

But, Sir, there yet remains another objection to be answered, 
taken also from the opinion of another of our learned divines, 
Dr. Cudworth, who in “A Discourse concerning the true 
notion of the Lord’s Supper’,” asserts, that “it is not a sacri- 
fice, but evulum ew oblatis*, ‘a feast upon a sacrifice,’ or else 


This was Cudworth’s 


? The Propitiatory Oblation in the 
Holy Eucharist truly stated and de- 
fended from Scripture, Antiquity, and 
the Communion-Service of the Church 
of England, in which some notice is 
taken of Dr. Hancock’s Answer to Dr. 
Hickes. London, printed 1710. [See 
above, note τι, p. 71, and vol. i. p. 2, 
note h. ] 

4 [See note g, p. 170. ] 

r [A Discourse concerning the true 
notion of the Lord’s Supper, by R. C. 
(Ralph Cudworth, then M.A. of Ema- 
nuel College, Cambridge, and rector of 
North Cadbury, Somersetshire. ) Cam- 


bridge, 1642. 
first publication. In 1644 he was made 
master of Clare Hall by the Parlia- 
mentary Commissioners. ] 

5. Cudworth, ibid., chap. 5. pp. 54, 
55. [Cudworth’s words, at the begin- 
ning of ch. 5, are, ‘‘ Thus having de- 
clared and demonstrated the true no- 
tion of the Lord’s Supper, we see how 
that theological controversy, which hath 
cost so many disputes, whether the 
Lord’s Supper be a sacrifice, is already 
decided; for it is not sacrificium, but 
epulum ek τῆς θυσίας; not a sacrifice, 
buta feast upon sacrifice; or else,”’ &c. | 


Eph. 5. 2. 


174 Cudworth’s objection, That the Eucharist is only a feast 


curist1AN in Other words, not oblatio sacrificii, but as Tertullian’ excel- 


PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


lently speaks, (saith he,) participatio sacrificii, not the offering 
of something up to God upon an altar, but the eating of 
something which comes from God’s altar, and is set upon our 
tables.” And then in contradiction to all antiquity, he asserts, 
that the notion of a Sacrament’s being a sacrifice is “‘ a mis- 
take"” for what is the true notion, of its being a feast upon a 
sacrifice, and that it grew up “by the degeneration of this 
truth,” as he expresseth himself; adding, ‘‘ There is a sacrifice 
in the Lord’s Supper symbolically, but not as there offered up 
to God, but feasted on by us, and so not a sacrifice, but a sacri- 
ficial feast, which began too soon to be misunderstood.” In 
another place he expresseth himself in this manner: “ The* 
eating of sacrifices was a due and proper appendix unto all 
sacrifices one way or other, either by the priests” (whom he 
owns to be the owners’ “ mediators unto God, and as their 
proxiesy”’) “or (by) themselves, when the person that offered 
was capable thereof;” that is, “when he had no unclean- 
ness upon him, and was perfectly reconciled to God?,” as he 
also expresseth himself. In a word, from analogy to this 
ancient rite of feasting upon things sacrificed, and eating of 
those things in person or proxy which they had offered up 
to God, he takes his new notion of the Lord’s Supper being 
a feast upon a sacrifice, and not a sacrifice itself. To this 
purpose he speaks in another place*: “the very concinnity and 
harmony of the thing itself leads me to conceive, that that 
Christian feast under the Gospel, called the Lord’s Supper, 
is the very same thing, and bears the same notion in respect 
of the true Christian sacrifice of Christ upon the cross, that 
those did to the Jewish and heathenish sacrifices, and so is 
epulum sacrificiale, a sacrificial feast, I mean a feast upon 
sacrifice, or epulum ex oblatis, a feast upon things offered up 
to God. Only this difference arising in the parallel, that 
because those legal sacrifices were but types and shadows of 
the true Christian sacrifice, they were often repeated and re- 


‘ [Tertull, De Oratione, cap. 14. that mistake grew up, and that by the 
Op., p. 186; quoted below, p. 181, note degeneration of this truth.’’] 
Z. * Ibid., chap. 1. p. 5. 
“ Cudworth, ibid., p. 56. [ Cudworth’s y [Ibid., p. 4] 
words are, “‘ Having thus discovered 4 [Ibid., paulo supr. ] 
the true notion of the Lord’s Supper, " [bid., p. 15. 
we may from hence discern also, how 


upon a sacrifice, not itself a sacrifice ; answered. 175 


newed, as well as the feasts which were made upon them; 
but now the true Christian sacrifice being come, and offered 
up once for all, never to be repeated, we have therefore no 
more typical sacrifices left among us, but only the feast upon 
the true sacrifice, still symbolically continued and often re- 
peated in reference to that one great sacrifice, which is always 
as present in God’s sight and efficacious, as if it were but 
now offered for us.” 

Now, Sir, in answer to the objection taken from this 
learned man’s new notion of the Lord’s Supper, it will be 
convenient to distinguish in this sacrificial feast of Christians 
between the matter, or entertainment of it, and the eating 
and participation thereof in the holy feast, that it may appear 
in what this opinion agrees, and how it differs from the 
ancient and common notion which the Church had of it in 
the primitive and purest times. First, then, as to the matter 
of it, the bread and wine ; it must be granted that by Christ’s 
own institution, they are symbols of His natural body and 
blood, and by His appointment are to be deemed, reputed, 
and received as His natural flesh and blood in the holy 
feast. And, secondly, it must be granted that the participa- 
tion of them is a federal rite, and hath all the moral effects 
between God and the faithful communicants, as if they did 
eat and drink of His natural body and blood, which was 
sacrificed for us upon the cross. Those moral effects are the 
solemn and comfortable commemoration of His all-sufficient 
sacrifice upon the cross, and representing it before God on 
earth, as He represents it before Him in heaven, together with 
a confirmation and ratification of the covenant between God 
and the communicants ; and the signification and assurance 
of God’s pardon, and of peace, reconciliation, and fellowship 
between God and the worthy partakers, who eat and drink 
the mystical and vicarious body and blood of Christ, accord- 
ing to what St. Ignatius” said of the heretics, who asserted 
that Christ was not a real man, but only in appearance: 
“They abstain (saith he) from the Eucharist, and (the Eu- 


» εὐχαριστίας καὶ προσευχῆς ἀπέχον. Hyepev.—S. Ignat. Epist. ad Smyrn., 
ται, [διὰ τὸ μὴ ὁμολογεῖν τὴν εὔχαρισ- § 7. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 36.] 
τίαν σάκρα εἶναι TOU σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰη- Multa et gravia peccat ad hune lo- 
σοῦ Χριστοῦ, τὴν ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν cum oppugnator epistolarum nostra- 
παθοῦσαν, ἣν τῇ χρηστότητι ὃ πατὴρ rum. 1. Perperam accipit vocem προσ- 


CHAP. Il, 


SECY. X, 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


176 The Sacrifice on the Cross ; in what sense the only one. 


charistical office of) prayer, because they do not confess the 
Eucharist to be the flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, which 
suffered for our sins, and which the Father of His goodness 


raised again.” 


The true sense of which passage is explained 


by Tertullian’ in the fortieth chapter of his fourth book 
against Marcion, to which I refer you. Thirdly, it must be 
acknowledged that the one great sacrifice of Christ upon 
the cross is the only true and proper sacrifice of the Chris- 
tian religion, as by one true sacrifice is understood the one 
great sacrifice of propitiation for sin, which was the truth and 
completion of all the typical sacrifices ; but then his opinion 


εὐχῆς latissimo modo pro omni pror- 
sus oratione: cum Ignatius aut loqua- 
tur de prece mystica, aut oratione so- 
lemni, qua corpus Christi conficitur. 
S. Hieronym. Epist. 85. [Ad quorum 
preces Christi corpus et sanguis con- 
ficitur.—Epist. 146, ad Evangelum, 
Op., tom. i. col. 1075, A. ed. Vallars. ;] 
et Sophoniz, cap. 3. [Sacerdotes impie 
aguut in legem Christi, putantes εὐχα- 
ριστίαν imprecantis facere verba, non 
vitam, et necessariam esse tantum 
solennem orationem et non sacerdotum 
merita.—S. Hieron. Comment.in Soph., 
cap. 3. Op., tom. vi. col. 718, C.] ΒΚ. 
Aug. de Trinitate, lib. 111. cap. 4. [I]lud 
quod ex fructibus terre acceptum, et 
prece mystica consecratum rite sumi- 
mus.—Op., tom. viii. col. 798, B, C.] 
εὐχὴ appellatur a Justino Mart. Apol. 
2. [Apol. 1. c. 65 and 67, pp. 82, E. 
83, D. quoted above, pp. 105, 106, 
notes f, g], et Origene, tum contra 
Celsum, lib. viii. [ο. 33. robs μετ᾽ εὐχα- 
piotias καὶ εὐχῆς τῆς ἐπὶ τοῖς δοθεῖσι 
προσαγομένους ἄρτους ἐσθίομεν, σῶμα 
γενομένους διὰ τὴν εὐχὴν ἁγιόν τι καὶ 
ayiafov τοὺς μετὰ ὑγιοῦς προθέσεως 
αὐτῷ χρωμένου-.---Ορ., tom. i. p. 766, 
D, E.], tum ad Matt. xv. 17. [τὸ 
ἁγιαζόμενον βρῶμα διὰ λόγου θεοῦ καὶ 
évreviews.—Ibid., tom. iii. p. 499, C.] 
προσευχὴ ab Augustino, Epist. 59. 
[‘Sed eligo in his verbis (1 Tim. ii. 1) 
hoe intelligere, quod omnis vel pene 
omnis frequentat ecclesia, ut precationes 
(δεήσει5) accipiamus dictas, quas faci- 
mus in celebratione Sacramentorum, 
antequam illud quod est in Dominimen- 
sa incipiat benedici; orationes (mpoc- 
εὐχὰς) cum benedicitur, et sanctifi- 
catur, et ad distribuendum comminui- 
tur, quam totam petitionem fere omnis 
Ecclesia Dominica oratione concludit.’ 


—S. Aug. Epist. 149. ad Paulinum, § 
16. Op., tom. ii. col. 509, C. ed. Ben. ] 
Aut potius intelligat preces liturgicas 
[sive missam] juxta  constitutiones 
Apostolicas, lib. ii. c. 54. [See above, 
note c, p. 44.] Cyrillum Hierosolym. 
Catechesi Mystagog. 5. [§ viii. sqq. 
pp- 327, D, sqq. See above, notes Ὁ, 
121, and x. p. 134.] Zonaram ad ca- 
nones Apostolicas ii. [τὸ συνεύξασθαι 
ἀντὶ συνιερουργῆσαι παραληφθήσεται. 
—ap. Bevereg. Pandect., tom. i. p. 7, 
E.] et Neoczsariensem 13. [οὔτε ἄρτον 
ἢ ποτήριον δοῦναι ἐν εὐχῇ, τουτέστιν 
οὐδὲ τῶν ἁγίων δώρων ἔξεστιν αὐτοῖς 
μεταδιδόναι τῷ λαῷ ἐν εὐχῇ, ἤτοι ἐν 
ἱερουργίας καιρῷ.---ΤΌ14., p. 413, C.] 
Sacrificiorwm orationes in Tertulliano lib. 
de Oratione, cap. extremo; [‘ similiter 
stationum diebus non putant plerique 
sacrificiorum orationibus intervenien- 
dum.’—c. 14. Op., p. 135.] ‘In ora- 
tione quando offerimus sacrificia Deo.’ 
—S. Epiphanii Joanni Hierosolymitano 
[ Episcopo Epistola; extat tantum La- 
tine, S. Hieronymo interprete.—S. Epi- 
phanii Op., tom. ii. p. 313, B.] Recta 
itaque etiam allegatio Theodoriti Dia- 
log. 3, sed ex sensu magis, quam ad 
verbum, εὐχαριστίας καὶ προσφορὰς οὐκ 
amrodéxovrat.—| Theodoret. Op., tom. iv. 
p- 154, D, where this passage of Igna- 
tius is thus quoted. Cotelerius, Annott. 
in locum, ibid. ] 

© [Acceptum panem et distributum 
discipulis, corpus illum suum fecit, 
‘ Hoc est corpus meum’ dicendo, id est, 
figura corporis mei. Figura autem non 
fuisset, nisi veritatis esset corpus. Ca- 
terum vacua res, quod est phantasma, 
figuram capere non posset.—Tertull. 
adv. Mare., lib. iv. c. 40. Op., p. 448, 
A.] 


Cudworth opposes the uniform teaching of the Church. 177 


that there is no other external material oblation in the Chris- car. π' 
tian religion, no “offering at God’s altar, but only eating = 
something that comes from it,” and that the mystical or 
sacramental body and blood of Christ, of which we partake 
at the Lord’s table, “are not there offered up unto God,” if 
there were no other reason, is to be rejected as of no au- 
thority, because it is new, and contrary to the consentient 
belief and practice of all Churches for above fifteen hundred 
years. Of what weight, Sir, can the opinion of a modern 
single man, though never so learned, be, if put into the scale 
against such a tradition? But why do I say against such a 
tradition ? when it is of no weight against the single testi- 
mony of St. Clement, who in his Epistle to the Corinthians, 
as I have often observed‘, calls the ministers of the Church 
προσενέγκοντες Ta δῶρα, ‘ offerers of gifts,’ or ‘sacrifices®:’ as 
it was said by our Lord, “ If thou bring thy gift (τὸ δῶρόν cov) Matt. 5. 28. 
to thealtar,and there rememberest that thy brother hathought 
against thee, leave there thy gift,and go thy way, first be recon- 
ciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.” In the 
same Hpistle, as I have also noted, he exhorts the Corinthians 
to “perform their oblations and public ministrations at the 
appointed times’.” This holy apostolical author laboured in 
the Gospel with St. Paul, and it is no reflection to say that 
he understood the Apostle’s writings, and the mind of God 
in them, better than Dr. Cudworth, or your late writer. And, 
Sir, I dare appeal to you, or any other divine who is as well 
versed in the fathers and councils as you, which of the two 
it is most reasonable to believe. Indeed, Sir, I cannot but 
think if Dr. Cudworth had been as well acquainted with the 
ancient Christian writers as he was with the Rabbinical and 
Platonic, and as well skilled in the primitive customs and 
practices of the Church, as in other theories, that he would 
not have vented an opinion, which, to repeat but one instance 
more, is a perfect contradiction to Justin Martyr’s description 
of the holy Eucharist, as administered in those early timess ; 
and if these holy men’s notion and description of it as a 
a [S. Clem. R. Ep. i. ad Cor. and ec. £ [S. Clem. Rom. ibid., ο. 40. p. 170, 
44, Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 173. See quoted above p. 87, note t.] 
above, pp. 64, 88, note x, 141, note. ] & [See above, pp. 105, 106, notes ἔν 
€ See Bishop Fell’s learned notes ong. ] 


the place, [see above, p. 88, note y. } 
HICKES, N 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD, 


1 Cor. 10. 
18. 


178 The Sacrifice feasted on cannot be that of the Cross. 


sacrifice be, as he affirms, a mistake, it is as ancient as the 
time of the Apostles, and stood uncorrected for almost six- 
teen hundred years. I cannot also but believe that St. 
Clement in particular understood the tenth chapter of the 
first Epistle to the Corinthians, and the parallel which the 
Apostle there makes between Jewish and Gentile sacrifices 
and the Lord’s Supper, where the very analogy requires that 
the bread and wine with which we are entertained at the 
Lord’s table, must be, as he calls it, “an oblation,” and the 
priest who administers, “the offerer” thereof. This I could 
not but observe again, because he turns the Apostle’s parallel 
to another meaning, making" the sacrifice of Christ upon the 
cross, and not the offering of bread and wine, (which, con- 
trary to fact, he asserts was not offered at the Lord’s Supper’,) 
to be the only sacrifice of which the Christians were partakers 
at the Lord’s table. But I may challenge him and all the 
world, to shew me that any priests or people of what religion 
soever, ever feasted of any sacrifices which they did not offer 
before; and therefore he, granting that the Lord’s Supper 
was a feast upon a sacrifice, it was a singularity of his own, 
without any concinnity to the nature of sacrificial feasts, or 
the practice of eating of them, to assert, against fact, that the 
mystical body and blood of Christ, of which we are partakers 
at the Lord’s table, were not first solemnly offered up. 

To confirm his opinion, he asserts that we have no altar to 
offer upon*: “It was never known, saith he, among the Jews 
or heathens, that the tables upon which they ate their sacri- 
fices were called altars.” But I have shewed at large before’, 
that holy tables in the heathen temples were used as altars, 
especially in meat and drink-offerings ; and therefore it is no 
wonder that the Christians called the Lord’s table an altar, 


» Cudworth, pp. 52—54, 70. [Cud- 
worth is here discussing the parallel in 
1 Cor. x. 14—21. He says, “ Which 
he (the Apostle) doth illustrate from a 
parallel rite in Christian religion: where 
the eating and drinking of the body and 
blood δῇ Christ, offered up to God upon 
the cross for us, is a real communica- 
tion in His death and sacrifice.””—p. 53. 
And again, “To eat the body and 
blood of Christ in the Lord’s Supper, 
is to be made partakers of His sacrifice 


offered up to God for us.’”,—Ibid. And 
again, “To eat of the sacrifice of Christ, 
once offered up to God, in the Lord’s 
Supper, is to have federal communion 
with Him,’’—Ibid., p. 70. } 

i [Cudworth, chap. 5. p. ὅδ. See 
above, “not the offering of something 
up to God,”’ &c. p. 174. ] 

k Cudworth, chap. 5. p. 55. 

1 [See above, p. 72, note a, and pp. 


77, sqq, | 


Cudworth’s assertion that we have no Altars; answered. 179 


which they used as an altar in offering up the bread and wine 
upon it, it being very common for things to have several 
names, according to the several uses in which they are em- 
ployed. Thus he himself grants, that the “altar” at Jeru- 
salem “was a table,” and so called, “ because it was a table 
upon which God Himself did eat in consuming the sacrifices™ 
with His holy fire".” And if that altar was a table, and is so 
called, not in Scripture only, but by the Talmudical writers°, 
because the sacrifices were eaten upon it; why should not 
the holy tableP of the Lord be called an altar, because the 
meat and drink of the holy feast are solemnly offered upon it, 
before the priest and people participate thereof? He farther 
saith4, that “ St. Paul, speaking of the feasts upon idol sacri- 
fices, calls the places on which they were eaten the tables of 
devils, because the devils’ meat was eaten upon them, not 
the altars of devils; and yet doubtless (saith he) he spake 
according to the true propriety of speech, and in those 
technical words which were then in use among them. And 
therefore keeping the same analogy, he must needs call the 
communion-table by the name of the Lord’s table; i. e. the 
table upon which God’s meat is eaten, not His altar upon 
which it is offered.”” To which I answer, that St. Paul spake 
indeed properly when he called the places upon which the 
idol sacrifices were eaten the “ tables of devils,” and with the 
same propriety he called the place upon which the bread of 
God was eaten “the Lord’s table ;” but then as the prophets 
Ezekiel and Malachi calling the Jerusalem altar the “ table of 


™ Therefore the sacrifices which God 
so ate in whole or in part, are called 
His ‘‘ meat,’’ Malachii. 12; and His 
‘*bread,’’ i. 6. His food, Isa. 111. 7.—Lev. 
iii. 11, [‘* the food of the offering made 
by fire unto the Lord.’’ See] xxi. 6, 
8, 17, 21, 22; xxii. 25, (“the bread of 
their God.’’ ] 

® [Cudworth’s words are, “ An altar 
is nothing but a table, but it is a table 
upon which God Himself eats, con- 
suming the sacrifices by His holy fire.” 
—lIbid., c. 5. p. 55, ] 

° Joh. Lightfoot, in 1 Cor. xi. 21. 
{ Hebrew and Talmudical exercitations 
upon the first Epistle to the Corin- 
thians. Works, vol. ii. p. 769. fol. 1684. 
Lightfoot merely states the fact that 
“ΤῊ. table of the Most High’ is a 
phrase not unusual in the Talmudists 


for the altar.’’ | 

Ρ As it was indifferently called by 
both names in the ancient Catholic 
Church, (see above, pp. 76, 77,) and is 
called by both in the Rubric of the 
holy Communion of the first Liturgy 
of King Edward VI. [In the second 
Rubric before the Communion Service 
in this Book, there are the words, ‘ not 
to presume to the Lord’s table;”’ in the 
third, “‘to be partakers of the Lord’s 
table;’’ in the Rubric after the Kyrie 
Eleison, and before the prayer, “* We do 
not presume,” &c., “Then the priest, 
stauding at God’s board,’”’ and “ turn- 
ing him to God’s board ;’’ excepting in 
these places the word “altar’”’ is used 
in the Rubrics. See Appendix, No. 1.] 

4 [Cudworth, ibid., c. 5. p. 55. ] 


N 2 


CHAP, II. 
SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD, 


Heb. 13. 10. 


180 = There must be a Sacrifice before a Sacrificial Feast. 


the Lord',” did not imply that it was not an altar, so the 
Apostles calling the place upon which the bread of God was 
eaten in the Christian temples “the Lord’s table,” did not 
imply that it was not an altar, upon which it was offered 
before it was eaten and consumed. He owns it was God’s 
meat that was eaten upon it; and, I profess, I cannot well 
understand how the materials of that holy feast came to be 
God’s meat, without being first offered unto Him, and there- 
by made His meat in the most special sense; as St. Ignatius* 
calls the Eucharistical bread the “ bread of God,’ not in the 
common sense as all bread is, but as all material things 
by being offered to Him, became His. He talks much of 
“analogy,” and “concinnity,” and if that must be the rule 
by which to judge in this late controversy, which was none 
for sixteen hundred years, then I am sure, whether we 
consider the sacrificial feasts of Jews or Gentiles, it will 
prove that the external materials of the holy Christian com- 
munion must be a sacrifice or oblation, before they could be 
a sacrificial feast. Wherefore the primitive Christians, as 1 
must often inculcate, solemnly offered up the bread and wine 
upon the Lord’s table, and as in offering them up they used 
it as an altar, so they esteemed and called it an altar, as I 
have shewed' St. Paul did in saying “‘we have an altar,” that 
is, we have an altar-offering, “of which they have no right to 
eat who serve the tabernacle.” Wherefore not to recite the 
testimonies of St. Ignatius and other writers, who so often 
call the Lord’s table an altar", and many others which might 
be brought*, the holy Eucharist is an altar-offering, before it 


τ [See above, note m, p. 76.] 

- [S. Ignat. Epist. ad Ephes., c. 7. 
ὑστερεῖται τοῦ ἄρτου τοῦ @cov.—Patr. 
Apost., tom. 11. p. 18. See above, p. 
78. | 

t [See above, pp. 70, sqq. ] 

® [See above, pp. 78, sqq. ] 

x As that in Euseb. Hist. Eccl., lib. 
x, cap. 4. versus finem, in his descrip- 


βλέμματι καὶ ὑπτίαις ὑποδεχόμενος χερ- 
ol, τῷ κατ᾽ οὐρανὸν πατρὶ καὶ θεῷ τῶν 
ὅλων Tapaméumerai.—Hist. Eccl., tom. 
i, p. 479.] ‘‘ But the august, great, 
and one altar, what can it signify but 
the most pure and most holy soul of 
the common Priest of all: at whose 
right hand stands the great High- 
Priest of the whole world, Jesus Him- 


tion of all the parts of the altar, 
σεμνὸν δὲ καὶ μέγα καὶ μονογενὲς θυσι- 
αστήριον, [ποῖον ἂν εἴη, ἢ τῆς τοῦ κοινοῦ 
πάντων ἱερέως τῆς ψυχῆς τὸ εἰλικρινὲς 
καὶ ἁγίων ἅγιον" ᾧ παρεστὼς ἐπὶ δεξιᾷ 
ὁ μέγας τῶν ὅλων ἀρχιερεὺς, adds’ Ἰησοῦς 
6 μονογενὴς τοῦ θεοῦ, τὸ παρὰ πάντων 
εὐῶδες θυμίαμα, καὶ τὰς δι᾽ εὐχῶν ἀναί- 
uous καὶ ἀὔλους θυσίας, φαιδρῷ τῷ 


self, the only begotten Son of God, who 
with a cheerful look and hands stretched 
out, receiveth from all that sweet-smell- 
ing incense, and unbloody and immate- 
rial sacrifices by prayers, and transmits 
them to His heavenly Father, the su- 
preme God.’’ [The passage appears 
to be wrongly translated. | 


Cudworth’s view unsupported by any authority. 181 


is the Lord’s Supper; and the holy table, like the altar at 
Jerusalem, is used in every communion as an altar for 
sacrifice, before it is employed as a table for the sacrificial 
feast. St. Hierome, in the forecited place, calls it by both 
names’; “we pollute,” saith he, “the bread of God, i. 6. 
the body of Christ, when we come unworthily to the altar, 
and we declare the table of the Lord to be contemptible, 
when being impure we drink His pure blood.” I must farther 
observe, that Dr. Cudworth hath not one testimony, divine 
or human, for his new opinion; participatio sacrificii, which 
he cites with an eulogy out of Tertullian, being to be under- 
stood of the participation of the bread and wine offered as 
sacrifice upon the Lord’s table, as is plain from the place 
cited in the margin’, and from many others, collected out of 
his other tracts by Rigaltius in his first note upon his tract 
Of Prayer, some of which I have also put in the margin®. 

I could say more to refute this learned man’s opinion, 
were it needful or convenient to enter into a theory of the 
Jewish sacrifices, but I think it is time to dismiss this cause, 
and therefore to conclude, as this notion of the Lord’s Sup- 
per being only a feast upon the sacrifice of Christ is new and 


¥ [*Polluimus panem,’ id est, corpus 
Christi, quando indigni accedimus ad 
altare, et sordidi mundum sanguinem 
bibimus; et dicimus, ‘mensa Domini 
despecta est,’ non quod hoe aliquis 
audeat dicere, ... sed opera pecca- 
torum despiciunt mensam Dei, — S. 
Hieron. Comm. in Malach. cap. 1. Op., 
tom. vi. col. 949, A. ] 

* Que oratio cum divortio sancti 
osculi integra, quem Domino officium 
facientem impedit pax? Quale saeri- 
ficium est, a quo sine pace receditur ἢ 
... Similiter et stationum diebus, non 
putant plerique sacrificiorum orationi- 
bus interveniendum, quod statio sol- 
venda sit accepto corpore Domini. 
Ergo devotum Deo obsequium Eucha- 
ristia resolvit? An magis Deo obligat? 
Nonne solennior erit statio tua, si et ad 
aram Dei steteris? Accepto corpore 
Domini, et reservato, utrumque salyum 
est, et participatio sacrificii, et executio 
officii.—{ Tertullian. de Oratione, c. 14. 
Op., p. 1385, A, B.] 

® [This note is one of Pamelius’, 
(see above, note |, p. 116.) It is on 
the title of the tract, De Oratione ; and 


begins, Etsi initio orationis vox a Ter- 
tulliano accipiatur in genere, post ni- 
hilominus explicationem Orationis Do- 
minice fere usurpatur pro oratione 
mystica, seu sacrificio Christiano, ut 
illi sint idem oratio et sacrificium. After 
treating further on this prayer and the 
word Missa, he gives, among others, 
the instances quoted by Hickes.] Obla- 
tiones reddere, offerre, et commemorare 
per sacerdotem [ Exhort. Castit. c. 11. 
p 523, D. Pamelius reads comme- 
morabis for commendabis.— Tertull. 
Op., p. 567. ed. Pamelii Franc. 1597. ] 
Sacrificium offerri [De Cultu Foemi- 
narum, lib ii. c. 11. p.159, C.] Offerri 
calicem [Incerti auctoris adv. Mare. 
libri v. carmine conscripti, lib. 1. Tert. 
Op., p. 631. col. 1.] Ne prius ascen- 
damus ad altare [ De Oratione, c. 10. p. 
133, B.] Quo modo audebit orationem 
ducere ad altare [Exhort. Cast., ο. 
10, so read by Pamelius, p. 567; 
the reading of Rigalt’s text, p. 523, 
C, is ducere ab illa. He conjectures, 
deducere ad altare.| Celebrat et panis 
oblationem [De Presc. Her., c, 40. 
Ρ. 216, D.] 


CHAP. I. 
SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HooD. 


182 Dangerous consequences from opposing received doctrines. 


singular, and as I have shewed, contrary to Catholic tradi- 
tion both in belief and practice; so is it a nice notion, and 
of no use or service that I know of to religion. First, it is a 
very nice notion and vain imagination thus to separate the 
table from the altar, the sacrament from the sacrifice, and 
the outward offering of the one from the federal feast of the 
other, in the Lord’s Supper. This is to put asunder what 
God hath joined together, and in effect to declare, that if 
the bread and wine be first made an oblation to God they 
cannot become the mystical flesh and blood of His Son. 
Secondly, as this is a nice and new notion, so is it of no use 
or service to the Church. On the contrary, it disserves reli- 
gion, and is of dangerous consequence to this holy Sacrament 
itself; for by the same liberty this author, I am sure with- 
out any ill intention, hath taken away the solemn offering of 
the bread and wine from the holy mystery, others, after his 
example, have presumed to take away the solemn consecra- 
tion of them, and so have reduced it, in their blasphemous 
language, to nothing but “a health.” So dangerous it is 
for learned, though never so good men, to remove the old 
landmarks, and advance new notions destructive or tending 
to the destruction of the old. I believe this author might 
really intend by this notion to secure the holy Eucharist 
from the popish notion of it; for if it is not a real sacrifice 
at all, most certainly it cannot be such a sacrifice as the 
papal Church defines it to be‘, to wit, “‘a proper propitiatory 
sacrifice for the living and the dead, in which the body and 
blood of Christ, with His soul and Divine Nature, is in truth, 
reality, and substance, offered up for the living and the dead, 
the whole substance of the bread being converted into the 
body, and the whole substance of the wine into the blood of 
Christ.” But this is running from one extreme to the other 
without any reason, because the ancient notion of this holy 


» [See above, vol. i. p. 212, note Υ; sanctissimo Eucharistie sacramento 


and the Rights of the Christian Church, 
&c., p. 105. ] 

¢ {This is an extract from what is 
commonly called the Creed of Pope 
Pius IV. The original words are; Pro- 
fiteor pariter in missa offerri Deo ve- 
rum, proprium et propitiatorium sacri- 
ficium pro vivis et defunctis; atque in 


esse vere, realiter, et substantialiter 
corpus et sanguinem, una cum anima 
et divinitate Domini nostri Jesu Christi; 
fierique conversionem totius substantia 
panis in corpus, et totius substantize 
vini in sanguinem, &c.—Professio Fi- 
dei apud bullam Pape Pii ITV. Con- 
cilia, tomy xx. col, 221, D.] 


The Eucharist’s being a Sacrifice implies proper Priests. 183 


Sacrament’s being a commemorative sacrifice, in which we 
represent before God the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross, 
perfectly secures the holy mystery from that corrupt and 
absurd notion, it being impossible that a solemn commemo- 
ration of a fact or thing should be the fact or thing itself ; 
or to speak otherwise with respect to the holy symbols by 
which we make the commemoration, that what represents 
should be the thing represented, the figure the verity itself, 
or the sign that which is signified thereby 4. 

Sir, I have said all this in defence of the old against the 
Doctor’s new notion of the holy Eucharist, much more out of 
love to that old truth than to prove Christian ministers to be 
proper priests. For as it will follow from that that they are in 
the literal sense θῦται, true “ sacrificing priests,” as Gregory 
Nazianzen® calls bishops; so it will follow even from this 
that they must be proper priests, because, as none but a 
priest can offer a sacrifice, so none but a priest can preside 
and minister in such a sacrificial feast as he allows the holy 
Sacrament to be. Who but a priest can receive the elements 
from the people, set them upon the holy table, and offer up to 
God such solemn prayers, praises, and thanksgivings for the 
congregation, and make such solemn intercessions for them, 
as are now and ever were offered and made in this holy Sa- 
crament? Who but a priest can consecrate the elements by 
solemn prayer, and make them the mystical body and blood 
of Christ? Who but a priest can stand in God’s stead at 
His table, and in His name receive His guests? Who but a 


4 [For the fuller statement of the Christus continetur, et incruente im- 


doctrine by the council of Trent, see 
Concil. Trident. Sessio xxii. cap. 1. 
Dominus noster... ut... relinqueret 
sacrificium, quo cruentum illud semel 
in cruce peragendum representaretur, 
ejusque memoria in finem usque szculi 
permaneret, atque illius salutaris virtus 
in remissionem eorum, que a nobis 
quotidie committuntur peccata appli- 
caretur, corpus et sanguinem suum 
sub speciebus panis et vini Deo Patri 
obtulit, ac sub earundem rerum sym- 
bolis apostolis... ut offerrent prece- 
pit... Novum instituit pascha, seip- 
sum ab ecclesia per sacerdotes sub sig- 
nis visibilibus immolandum.—cap. 2. 
In divino hoe sacrificio... idem ille 


molatur, quiin ara crucis semel seipsum 
cruente obtulit... una enim eademque 
est hostia, idemque nunc offerens sacer- 
dotum ministerio, qui seipsum tune in 
cruce obtulit, sola offerendi ratione di- 
versa; Cujus quidem oblationis, cruen- 
te inquam, fructus per hance incruentam 
uberrime percipiuntur; tantum abest 
ut illi per hance quovis modo derogatur. 
See further the words of Maldonatus 
on this subject, transcribed by Bishop 
Cosin, vol. i. note s, pp. 108, sqq. ] 

© οὐδὲ θύτας καθαροὺς, ἀλλὰ προστά- 
τας ἰσχυροὺς ζητοῦσιν.---[8. Greg. Naz. 
Orat. xlii. (al. xxxii.) ὃ 24, Op., tom. i. 
p. 765, E. ] 


CHAP, II, 


SECT. X. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


184 Whether Priests, who do not believe the Eucharist 


priest hath power to break the bread, and bless the cup, and 
make a solemn memorial before God of His Son’s sufferings, 
and then deliver His sacramental body and blood to the 
faithful communicants, as tokens of His meritorious suffer- 
ings and pledges of their salvation? A man authorized thus 
to act “for men in things pertaining to God,” and for God in 
things pertaining to men, must needs be a priest, and such 
holy ministrations must needs be sacerdotal, whether the 
holy table be an altar, and the Sacrament a sacrifice, or not. 
This, Sir, I have proved‘, and therefore now shall content 
myself only to say so much upon the subject of priesthood 
as is sufficient to put you in remembrance of what I said 
before. 

Having now, Sir, got over the objections taken from the 
writings of these two learned men against the Eucharist’s 
being a sacrifice, I desire your late writer, and such gentle- 
men as he, who have been led into their errors by these and 
other writers since the Reformation, to consider, that if the 
holy Eucharist be a sacrifice, as the Catholic Church believed 
in all ages before that time, how far the defect, in adminis- 
tering of it only as a Sacrament, may affect the holy office and 
the ministration of it; and whether the communion admi- 
nistered by a priest, who neither believes himself to be such, 
nor the Sacrament to be an oblation or sacrifice, can be a 
communion in or with the Catholic Church? 1 say, I leave 
it to themselves to consider these things, and I think they 


preferant partis corruptioni universita- 


f [See above, sect. ii. pp. 14, sqq. | 
i tis integritatem, &c.—[Ibid., 6. 27. p. 


& Vincent. Lirin., cap. 3. In ipsa 





Catholica Ecclesia magnopere curan- 
dum est, ut id teneamus quod ubique, 
quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum 
est, hoc est enim vere proprieque Catho- 
licum.—[Commonitorium, c. 2. Bibl. 
Patr., tom. x. p. 103. col. ii. C.] Cap. 
88. Hoc facere magnopere curabunt... 
ut divinum canonem secundum univer- 
salis Ecclesiz traditiones, et juxta Ca- 
tholici dogmatis regulas interpretentur ; 
in qua item Catholica Apostolicaque 
Ecclesia sequantur necesse est univer- 
sitatem, antiquitatem, consensionem. 
Et si quando pars contra uniyersitatem, 
novitas contra vetustatem, unius vel 
paucorum errantium dissensio, contra 
omnium vel certo multo plurium Ca- 
tholicorum consensionem rebellaverit, 


114. col.i. 1), E.] Cap. 39. Quiequid vel 
omnes, vel plures uno eodemque sensu 
manifeste, frequenter, perseveranter, 
velut quodam consentiente sibi magis- 
trorum concilio, accipiendo, tenendo, 
tradendo firmayverint, id pro indubitato, 
certo, ratoque habeatur.—[Ibid., c. 28, 
ibid., col. ii. D.] Cap. 41. Quiequid 
uno sensu atque consensu tenuisse in- 
venirentur, id Eecclesiz verum et Ca- 
tholicum absque ullo scrupulo judica- 
retur.—[Ibid., c. 29. p. 115. col. ii. A; ] 
see also cap. 42. pp. 140-—142. [Ibid., 
6. 31. p. 116. col. 1. B—E. Hickes’ re- 
ferences are made to an edition of the 
Commonitorium, published at Oxford, 
impensis Gul. Webb. 1631. ] 


to be a Sacrifice, can rightly and duly administer it. 185 


deserve their consideration, and hope they will seriously CHAP. πὶ. 


and impartially ruminate upon them, lest they should not ~~ 


“rightly and duly administer that holy Sacrament.” The 
best of the Jewish writers tells us», that it was a profanation 
of a sacrifice, if the priest thought when he offered up one 
sacrifice that it was another; as if when he offered a burnt- 
offering he thought it was a peace-offering, or if when he 
offered a peace-offering he thought it was a burnt-offering. 
Whether that obliquity of thought, when it happened, had 
such an effect or no, I shall not now enquire; but this I 
dare say, if a Jewish priest, who did not believe himself to 
be a proper priest, nor the Jewish altar a proper altar, nor 
the sacrifices of the law true and proper sacrifices, had pre- 
sumed to offer while he was in this unhappy error, that he 
had profaned the sacrifice as far as he was concerned in it, 
and not offered it up ὁσίως καὶ ἀμέμπττω-ἷ, according to the 
will of God, though according to all the appointed rites, nor 
in unity of communion and conjunction with the Jewish 
Church. For the Jewish Church would not have suffered 
such priests, if known, to minister among the sons of Aaron 
and Zadok; nor would the ancient Catholic Church have 
endured bishops and presbyters without censure, who durst 
have taught that the Christian ministry was not a proper 
priesthood, the holy Eucharist not a proper sacrifice, or that 
Christian ministers were not proper priests. 

But to finish this part of my discourse about the holy Eu- 
charist, and to prevent, as much as in me lies, the sinister 
censures and constructions of suspicious or ill-minded men, 
I conclude it with the words of Dr. John Forbes in his Jre- 
nicumk, where he treats of the Lord’s Supper. 


h Maimonides de Cultu divino, 
Tract. vii. cap. 13. art. 1. [Tria cogi- 
tationum erant genera, quibus teme- 
rabantur victimz: hoc erant, si cogi- 
tando mutaretur nomen: si cogitando 
‘routaretur locus; si cogitando muta- 
retur tempus. Jam cogitando muta- 
batur nomen si victima non immola- 
retur suo nomine; ut si quis immo- 


p- 800. Par. 1678. ] 

i [S. Clem. Rom. Ep. i. ad Cor. ec. 
44, quoted note x, p. 88. ] 

k [The title of this work is, Ireni- 
cum amatoribus veritatis et pacis in 
Ecclesia Scoticana. Prece et studio 
Joannis Forbesii, $.S. Theol. Doct. et 
ejusdem Profess. in Acad. Aberdoni- 
ensi; it was first printed at Aberdeen, 


lando holocausto cogitaret immolare 
victimam pacificam, si primo aditu 
victimam immolaret nomine holocausti, 
et nomine hostiz pacifice, contrave.— 


4to. 1631, and reprinted in the first 
volume of the edition of his collected 
works, fol. Amsterdam, 1703, to which 
last the references are made. ] 


ECT. X. 





186 Forbes’ Irenicum ; exact description of the Sacrifice. 


a The holy fathers', who used the words sacrifice, priest- 

noop. hood, altar, oblation, and mass, were far from the error of 

those _mass-mongers, who blasphemously boast that they 

properly and truly offer unto God Christ Himself, included 

under the species of bread and wine, as a truly propitiatory 

sacrifice. But nothing of this nature is found among the 
fathers.” 

To which let me add what he saith by way of introduction 
to what he writes of the Lord’s Supper, immediately after 
the words above cited. 

“T will not speak™ of the oblation of the elements, which 
was made by the people, and how the pastors, taking the 
oblations from their hands, placed them upon the Lord’s 
table, and with humble prayers offered them to God, that 
they might be sanctified and consecrated into a Sacrament 
of salvation to the communicants. Nor will I mention the 
Kucharistical sacrifice of praise which the faithful offered to 
God in the commemoration of the death of our Lord,’’ τα. 

Here is as perfect a description of a sacrifice as can be 
made. First, the people’s offerings in bringing the gifts: 
secondly, the priest’s receiving them from their hands, and 
setting them upon the Lord’s table: thirdly, his offering 
them to God by prayer, to be sanctified into a Sacrament 
for the people; and, lastly, the solemnization of the action 
with a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, which the people 
by the minister’s mouth offered up to God. And if this be 
not a description of a most solemn oblation or sacrifice, I 
must confess I am not able to know what is. It exactly 
agrees with the order of administration of the Lord’s Supper 
in the Scottish Liturgy, which was framed according to this 
‘description of the holy Eucharist, and that of Justin Martyr ; 
and I have often wondered how this writer came to make 


! [Sancti illi patres, qui vocabulis torum a populo factam, et quod res a 
sacrificii, sacerdotii, altaris, oblationis, populo oblatas acceperint ex ofleren- 
miss, usi sunt, procul erant ab errore — tium manibus pastores, easque in mensa 
istorum missificorum, qui blasphe- Dominica collocarint, et prece supplice 
mantes jactant se proprie et vere of- eas Deo obtulerint sanctificandas et con- 
ferre Deo ipsum Christum, speciebus  secrandasin sacramentum salutare po- 
panis et vini inclusum, in sacrificium pulo, Ut etiam omittam Eucharisti- 
vere propitiatorium. Nihil hujusmodi cum sacrificium Jaudis, quod pii, in illa 
invenitur apud patres.—Forbesii Ire- commemoratione mortis Domini, Do- 
nicum § 20. p. 441. col. ii. | mino offerrebant, &c.—Ibid., § 21. p. 
' ™ [Ut omittam oblationem elemen- 441], col. ii.] 


Inconsistent in asserting only a metaphorical Sacrifice. 187 


such an introduction to a discourse, wherein he endeavoured CHP. τι. 
as much as he could to prove that the holy Sacrament of the a 
Lord’s Supper was only an improper metonymical sacrifice, 
and the Lord’s table an altar only in a metaphorical sense. 
But in that discourse he hath more such inconsistencies ; as 
where he saith®, “ The third consideration of a spiritual sacri- 
fice and oblation in the holy Eucharist, is obvious in the 
oblation, by which the faithful did not only offer up to God 
the symbols to be consecrated, but themselves also, coming 
to the table of the Lord, and there professing themselves to 
be His servants, and vowing all holy obedience to Him by 
right of redemption, as being redeemed by His blood.” But 
were not the symbols, which the faithful so solemnly offered 
up to God with themselves, by the ministration of the bishop 
or presbyter, an external material oblation? And was not the 
table to which they approached, and upon which their obla- 
tions were offered up in most solemn manner, used as an 
altar? and from that constant use of it, to which it was set 
apart, did it not, as things are denominated from their use, 
properly deserve that name? But indeed this learned man 
in that discourse confounds the notions of a real, or proper, 
and propitiatory sacrifice, one with the other, as likewise 
the notions of a truly proper and spiritual oblation, as if 
the Lord’s Supper could not be the one, because it is some- 
times called the other. 
XI. From hence, Sir, I proceed to my last argument, which sect. xt. 
I shall produce out of the writings of the New Testament, to Christian 


Ministers 


prove bishops and presbyters, but more especially bishops, Priests, as 
represent- 


to be proper priests, because they are ministers of the arche- ing the true 
typal Melchisedec in His priestly kingdom upon earth, who jo" S* 
was made priest with an oath by His Father, who sware unto 

Him, “ Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchi- Ps. 110. 4. 
sedec.” Being therefore ministers under Him, who is a priest 

after the order and similitude of Melchisedec, who was both 

king and priest, they must represent Him in His priestly as 

well as His kingly capacity, and by consequence be invested 


n [Tertia consideratio sacrificii, et ad mensam Dominicam, seque Domini 
oblationis spiritualis in Eucharistia, sanguine redemptos, et redemptionis 
occurrit in ea oblatione, qua fideles, jure servos Domini profitendo, et fidele 
non solum symbola consecranda, sed servitium yovendo.—Ib., ὃ 27. p. 445. 
etiam seipsos Deo offerunt: accedendo col. i. | 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD, 


188 Christian Ministers are Priests, as 


by Him with sacerdotal as well as regal power. As His 
ministers, or stewards, or ambassadors, or lieutenants in His 
kingdom upon earth, they must be His vicegerents in all 
His three offices, as priest, prophet, and king. I believe, Sir, 
your late writer will not deny that they represent Him in His 
prophetical office, as prophet is taken for a teacher, or that 
by their office they are proper prophets or teachers, whom 
He hath appointed to instruct His people in the mysteries 
of His kingdom unto the end of the world. For the same 
reason, unless the unhappy subject upon which he writes 
oblige him to deny it, I believe he will grant that they re- 
present Him also in His regal office, in virtue of which He is 
supreme rector or governor of His kingdom; and that as 
His vicegerents in it, they are proper governors of His 
Church. For what reason then should he deny them to be 
proper priests, who represent Him as really in His priestly as 
in His kingly and prophetical offices, and, like the Jewish 
priests, are His vicegerents in that, as truly and properly as 
they are in these. To illustrate this truth as much as I can, 
let us suppose that the typical Meichisedec, the sacerdotal 
king of Salem, like the Lord in the Gospel, had gone a long 
journey into a far country, and had called one of his subjects 
unto him, and given him authority in his absence to admi- 
nistrate his kingdom for him, with a particular power to 
perform all Divine worship duly, and more especially to offer 
sacrifice in the appointed times and place; upon such a 
supposition, Sir, I would ask your late writer whether such a 
minister of Melchisedec would not have been his vicegerent 
in both offices, and really invested with the sacerdotal, as 
well as the regal power? Would he not have been a vice- 
high-priest as well as a viceroy? and would not the people of 
Salem, when he prayed and sacrificed for them, have looked 
upon him as a true and proper, though a deputed high- 
priest? Sir, it is not without ground that I make this familiar 
comparison, because the antitypal Melchisedec so often com- 
pares Himself in the Gospel to a man taking a far journey, 
or travelling into a far country, who leaving his house gave 
authority to his servants, as He did to His Apostles and their 
successors, before He was parted from them and carried up 
into heaven. He committed the government of His sacer- 


representing Christ, the true Melchisedec. 189 


dotal kingdom in whole, and in part, jointly and severally to cuar. πὶ 
them. “As My Father sent Me (saith He) even so I send Pee, 
you; and when He had said this He breathed on them, and —23. 
said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost ; whosesoever sins ye remit, 
they are remitted, and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are re- 
tained.” Or as their commission is expressed, Matt. xxviii. 
18—20, “ And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All 
power is given unto Me both in heaven and earth. Go ye 
therefore and make all nations My disciples, baptizing them 
in the name of the Father, &c., and teaching them to observe 
whatsoever I have commanded you, and I am with you alway, 
even unto the end of the world.” This commission He gave 
them upon the mount, when He was ready to ascend, as it 
is also written, “ When He ascended up on high, He led in Ps. 68. 18. 
triumph a great multitude of captives, and gave gifts unto eee = 
men, that some might be Apostles, some prophets, &c., for 
perfecting the body of the saints, or Christians, made up of 
Jews and Gentiles, for the work of the ministry in doctrine, 
worship, and discipline, for the edifying the whole body of 
Christ, till we all, both Jews and Gentiles, come in the 
unity of the faith and knowledge of the Son of God unto 
a perfect manhood, unto the full measure of the stature of 
Christ.” 

Wherefore, Sir, this eternal archetypal and antitypal 
Melchisedec going up into the Heaven of Heavens, as it 
were into a far country, and leaving His Apostles and their 
successors as His stewards and vicegerents, invested with full 
power and authority to administrate His sacerdotal kingdom, 
is it not reasonable to believe that their ministry is truly and 
properly sacerdotal as well as regal, and a communication, or 
commission of the sacerdotal powers to mediate and make 
intercession for the people by prayers and sacrifices, as well 
as by their prophetical to teach, or by their rectoral® or ruling 
authority, which they derive from Him as a spiritual king, to 
govern His kingdom? which in the second place is therefore 
called a royal priesthood, as I have already observed, because 


ο S. Ambros. de Dignitate Sacerdo- Unde quia regendz sacerdotibus con- 
tali; Quas oves, et quem gregem non traduntur, merito rectoribus suis subdi 
solum tune beatus suscepit Apostolus dicuntur——[S. Ambros. Op., tom. ii. 
Petrus, sed et [nobiscum eas accepit, App., p. 359, C. opus spurium. See 
et} cum illo eos nos accepimus omnes. above, vol. i. p. 195, notes p, 4.] 


192 Unauthorized exercise of the Priest’s office, sinful. 


given. So prophets by special command, or prophetical 
inspiration from God, often sacrificed and prayed, as others 
also did by special direction from them; thus King David 
built an altar in the threshing-floor of Araunah by the direc- 
tion of the Prophet Gad, ‘‘and offered burnt-offerings, and 
peace-offerings,” so that “the Lord was entreated for the 
land, and the plague was stayed from [5186]. So King 
Solomon who was a prophet, and as a prophet had secret 
intercourse with God, who appeared several times to him in 
dreams, dedicated the temple, and hallowed the court, and 
kneeling before the altar blessed the people, and made sup- 
plication forthem. But other kings, who were not prophets, 
and had no such prophetical directions or commands as 
David and Solomon had, could not execute any part of the 
priest’s office without sacrilege, nor could they presume to 
do it without sin at any other times but when they were 
authorized by God. Of this we have two remarkable ex- 
amples, one of King Saul, who having not patience to stay 
until Samuel the priest came, presumed to sacrifice and make 
supplication to the Lord, by which transgression he provoked 
God to seek out another man after His own heart to be 
king. The other is of King Uzziah, who presumed to go into 
the temple of the Lord, and offer incense upon the altar; but 
while he held the censer in his hand, the high-priests and the 
priests withstood him, and told him, it did not belong to him 
to burn incense upon the altar, but to the priests the sons of 
Aaron, who were consecrated to burn incense; and while 
they spoke thus, the leprosy rose in his forehead in the house 
of the Lord, for which they thrust him out thence, and con- 
tinuing a leper to the day of his death, he was cut off from 
the house of the Lord, so that the kingdom was administered 
by Jotham his son. 

XII. Having premised this, I proceed to enquire what it 
is in which the exercise of the priest’s office doth more 
eminently consist, to prove more abundantly thereby that 
Christian ministers are proper priests. I have in part shewed 


nature of before’, that one of the most noble, divine, and proper acts of 
their office. the priest’s office, is to mediatet, and make intercessions for 


* [See above, sect. ii. p. 16, sqq.] ac Redemptore, [ad id1 Tim. ii. ‘unus 
Ὁ Claud. Espenceus de Mediatore, Mediator Dei et hominum’]; cap. 1.— 


The common belief of all nations respecting Priesthood. 198 


the people. And when I have shewed this more fully, and 
that it is part of the office of Christian liturgs or ministers 
to be mediators and intercessors with God; then I hope your 
late writer will see reason enough to think as you and I do, 
that they are proper priests. 

As to the first, he cannot doubt of it; but however, because 
it is a truth which is now turned into ridicule among us, and 
by the sinful silence of our priests upon this subject is not 
understood by some, and worn out of the minds of others, I 
think I shall do God and His Church service, by shewing 
from the consent of all nations, and the common notion and 
belief of all mankind who were not perfectly barbarous, that 
priests by their office were ever taken to be mediators and 
advocates, or intercessors with the god whose priests they 
were. This I shall shew with as much brevity as I can, from 


Christus solus verus, ac perfectus Me- 119 in Basilium, 1. 24, Op., tom, ii. 
diator. Nihil tamen prohibet medi-  p. 1157.] Nec dubito quin plerique 
atores tum angelos, tum homines suo alii, qui nunc non occurrunt, non ve- 
quoque modo, et esse et dici, quatenus _rentur sacerdotes appellare pro universo 
ad hominum salutem, hoe est cum Deo _ terrarum orbe, Deique et hominum, seu 
unionem, Deo et Mediatori cooperantur inter hos et illum, mediatores, medios, 
et ministrant. ;Illos, [inquam, inter sequestres, legatos, deprecatores, inter- 
Deum et hominem medios... quivir- _cessores. [Claudii Espencei, Doctoris 
tutes subyehendo, superiorainferioribus Parisiensis, Opera; pp. 267. col. ii. C. ; 
jungant et hominibus ministrent]; hos 268. col. i. A.; and col. ii, C. D. fol. Par. 
autem utriusque testamenti ministros, 1619.] I desire the reader to observe, 
veteris quidem, quod verum Mediato- that Espenczus here speaks of angels 
rem figurant et prenunciant; noviau- as mediators for men with God, accord- 
‘tem, quatenus ejusdem Christi salu- ing to the corrupt doctrines and prac- 
taria ipsius tum verba, tum Sacra- [166 of the Roman Church, in praying 
menta hominibus exhibent, atque dis- unto angels. 


pensant. Si sic aiebat Moses fnisse So in St. Hierome, adversus Luci- 
se ac stetisse sequestrum, ac medium  ferianos; [ὃ 5.] ‘Sacerdos quippe pro 
inter Deum et Israel, &c..... Quid laico offert oblationem suam, imponit 


multa? Prophetarum Apostolorumque manum subjecto, reditum Sancti Spi- 
singuli mediatores fuerunt. Sic ad _ ritus invocat, atque ita eum, qui tradi- 
Fabiolam de veste sacerdotali Hierony- tus fuerat Satanz in interitum carnis, 
mus [Epist. 64. § 5. Op., tom. i. col. ut spiritus salvus fieret, indicta in 
365, C.] et ad Malach. cap.ii. [Comm. populum oratione, altario reconciliat.’ 
in Malach., Op., tom. vi. col. 960, A.; [S. Hieron. Op., tom. ii. col. 17, 
see below.] Pontifices, episcopos, sa- A.] So on Malachi ii. 7; ‘ Exponit 
cerdotes, Dei et hominum sequestres;) nomen suum Esdras sacerdos Dei, hoe 
Theophylactus ad Joan. cap. 111. [Op., est Malachi, quod angelus Dei inter- 
tom. i. p. 548, E.].... Chrysostomus  pretatur. Angelus autem, id est, nun- 
Homil. de verbis Isaiz [Hom. ν. ὃ 1. cius, sacerdos Dei verissime dicitur, 
Op., tom. vi. p. 132, C.]; Lib. vi. de quia Dei et hominum sequester est, 
Sacerdotio. [Id. Op., tom. i. p. 424, A.] | ejusque ad populum nunciat volunta- 
—Ambrosius, Oratione priore prepa- tem, et idcirco in sacerdotis pectore 
ratoria ad Missam [ὃ 5. apud Op., S. rationale, [et in rationali doctrina et 
Ambr., tom.ii. App., p.491,C.opusspu- veritas ponitur,] ut discamus sacer- 
rium. |—Nazianzenus in Apologetico dotem doctum esse debere, et praco- 
[S. Greg. Naz. Orat. ii. § 91. Op., tom. nem Dominice veritatis——[Id., Op., 
i, p. 55, B.], et Monodia in Basilium, tom. vi. col. 960, A.] 

[Id. Carm., lib. ii, sect. ii, Epitaph. 

HICKES, ra) 


SECT, XII. 


CHAP. II. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST~ 
HOOD. 


Judg. 5. 30. 


194 Priests universally believed to be Mediators and 


the agreeing practice of heathens, and of the Church of God 
under the patriarchal, Jewish, and Christian dispensations ; 
among whom the priests ever acted, and were ever esteemed, 
as mediators between God and men. 

I shall give but two examples, though I might give more 
from heathen authors. The first is that of the Persian priests", 
who at their sacrifices put up prayers not only for them- 
selves, but for all the Persians, and especially for the king. 
The second is that of Apollo’s priest in the first book of 
Homer’s Iliads. The story in short, you know, Siz, is this ; 
the Grecians among other captives had carried away the 
daughter of Chryses the priest of Apollo, whom King Aga- 
memnon took for his prey, as the custom of war was in 
ancient times, according to the song of Deborah and Barak, 
“ Have they not divided the prey, to every man a damsel or 
two?” Upon this, the priest arrayed in all his pontificals, 
and holding a golden sceptre, the ensign of his god, in his 
hand, goes to the Grecian camp, supplicating, and offering 
ransom for his daughter. But King Agamemnon treated him 
very roughly, and without any respect shewed to his cha- 
racter, sent him away without her. Chryses upon the re- 
pulse and affronts he received, prayed to his god to revenge 
him on the Grecians, upon which Apollo shot his arrows’ of 
pestilence among them, which first brought a murrain among 
their cattle, and then a grievous mortality among the men. 
This obliged them to consult Calchas the augur, to know 
what was the cause of Apollo’s anger, who upon security 
and protection promised by Achilles, told them, it was not 


> ἊΝ », 


ἃ [It does not appear to be the Αὐτὰρ ἔπειτ᾽ αὐτοῖσι βέλος ἐχεπευκὲς 


priests, but the person who gives the ἀφιεὶς 
sacrifice, who is meant. τῶν δὲ ὡς ἑκάσ- Βάλλ᾽. 
τῳ θύειν θέλει. ... ἑωυτῷ μὲν δὴ τῷ 110. 


θύοντι: ἰδίῃ μούνῳ οὔ οἱ ἐγγίνεται ἀρᾶ- 
σθαι ἀγαθά: ὃ δὲ πᾶσι τοῖσι Πέρσῃσι κα- 
τεύχεται εὖ “νίνεσθαι, καὶ τῷ βασιλεῖ. 
ἐν γὰρ δὴ τοῖσι ἅπασι Πέρσῃσι καὶ αὐ- 
τὸς ylverat.—Herod., lib. i. cap. 182.7 
v Tl. i. 42—52. 
τίσειαν Δαναοὶ ἐμὰ δάκρυα σοῖσι βέ- 
λεσσιν. 
“Exdayiay δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὀϊστοὶ ἐπ᾿ ὥμων χωο- 
μένοιο. 
Μετὰ δ᾽ ἰὸν ἔηκεν 
Δεινὴ δὲ κλαγγὴ γένετ᾽ ἀργυρέοιο 
βιοιο. 


‘Qs δὴ τοῦδ᾽ ἐνεκά σφιν Ἑ κηβόλος 

ἄλγεα τεύχει. 

So Psalm xci. 5. οὐ φοβηθήσῃ ἀπὸ 
φόβου νυκτερινοῦ, ἀπὸ βέλους πετομέ- 
νου ἡμέρας. vers. LXX. 

Οὐδὲ μεθημέριον πταμένου ῥοιξηδὸν 
éicrod.—Apollinarii Episc. Laod. In- 
terpretatio Psalmorum | versibus heroi- 
cis, Ps. xe. 1. 11. Biblioth. Patr., tom. 
v. p- 417, E. It is uncertain whether 
this translation was made by Apol- 
linarius the father, of Alexandria, who 
flourished A.D. 362, or by the son, fl. 
370. See Cave, tom. i. p. 225.]- 


Intercessors ; instances from Herodotus and Homer. 195 


for any want of supplication or sacrifice, that his deity was 
angry at them, but that he was provoked by King Aga- 
memnon’s ill usage of his priest, and refusing to restore his 
daughter, and farther assured them, that the plague would 
not stop till they had freely restored to Chryses his daughter, 
and sent him an hecatomb to offer to his god. With great 
unwillingness and difficulty King Agamemnon was brought 
to part with his beloved captive Chryseis, for so was she 
called; but at last his majesty sent her back very honourably 
to her father, with an hecatomb for Apollo, to pacify* his 
wrath, both which Ulysses with all respect and humble 
language presented to the priest. Having received his 
daughter with great joy, he proceeded to offer the sacrifice 
which the Grecians sent to Apollo, whose deputies joined 
their pans of praise with his intércessions, and so the plague 
was stayed in the Grecian camp. 

Sir, one cannot but observe here how Homer Hebraizes, 
and how the plague is described by him to have been stayed 
by the mediation of Chryses, from wasting the Grecian 
army, as that which arose in the congregation of Israel upon 
the rebellion of Korah, was stayed by the atonement which 


CHAP. IL 


SECT. XII. 


Aaron madey, after it had destroyed fourteen thousand and Numb. 16. 


seven hundred men. This brings to my remembrance that 
passage of our learned countryman Alcuin, proper to this 
subject, in his epistle to his scholar Eanbald’, when he was 
archbishop of York. Ut omnia fiant acceptabilia Domino 
Deo, qui te elegit sibi sacerdotem, ..... “That all things 
(saith he) may be acceptable to the Lord God, who hath 


chosen thee to be His priest. 


* Φοίβῳ θ᾽ ἱερὴν ἑκατόμβην 

Ῥέξαι ὑπὲρ Δαναῶν, bpp’ ἰλασόμεθ᾽ 
ἄνακτα.---ἰ I]. i. 443, 444. | 

y S. Ambros.in Hebr. cap. vii; Tanta 
quippe erat sacerdotii excellentia, ut 
etiam qui similis essent honoris proge- 
nitoribus, et eundem haberent proge- 
nitorem, tamen ut multo amplius me- 
liores essent fratribus suis, quo sacer- 
dotio digni efficerentur, velut Aaron 
inter vivos et mortuos, ut Dei iram 
placaret que exarserat, stare legitur: 
quod propterea unus ex populo facere 
poterat (licet omnes unum haberent 
progenitorem) quod sacerdos esset.— 
{S. Ambros. Op., tom. iii. p. 499, A. 
ed. Rom. 1579; (see above, note h, p. 


‘For every high-priest taken 


33.) See Rabanus M. Op., tom. ν. p. 
553, E. Alcuin. Op., tom. i. p. 686. 
S. Chrysost. Op., tom. xii. p. 123, A. 
τοσαύτη, φησὶ, τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἣ ὑὕπερ- 
βολὴ, ὥστε τοὺς ὁμοτίμους ἀπὸ προγό- 
νων, καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν ἔχοντας προπάτορα, 
πολλῷ βελτίους εἶναι τῶν ἄλλων. 

2 [Β. Flacci Albini seu Alcuini Ab- 
batis, Epist. 50. (scr. A.D. 796.) ad 
Eanbaldum Episcopum. Dilectissimo 
in Christo filio Eanbaldo Archiepiscopo 
devotus per omnia pater Albinus salu- 
tem. (Hic Eanbaldus idem fortassis 
est, quem Epist. 6. vocat Presbyterum 
ac paulo post electus est episcopus Ebo- 
racensis Ecclesiz. Annott. in locum.) 
Ut omnia acceptabilia fiant Domino 


0 2 


47—49, 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOP. 


196 The heathen retained the true notions of Priesthood, &e. 


from among men, is ordained for men in things pertaining 
to God.’ Aaron stood with the censer of his office between 
the living and the dead, that the anger of God should not 
burn longer against the people. For the priest of God ought 
to be the preacher of His will to the people, and an inter- 
cessor for the people to God, as a mediator between God and 
men.” So saith St. Ambrose, in EHpist. ad Hebr., cap. v.4 
Pontificis officium est, inter Deum stare et populum, et Deum 
deprecari pro populi delictis. Hoc enim Christus fecit, seipsum 
offerens pro peccatis nostris, semper vivus ad interpellandum 
pro nobis: “It is the office of a priest to stand between God 
and the people, and to pray unto Him for the forgiveness of 
their sins, which Christ did who ever lives to make inter- 
cession for us, when He offered Himself upon the cross.” 
According to this common notion that all religions had of 
priests, he saith in his words cited in the page foregoing”, 
“that the priests were more excellent than their brethren, 
upon the account of the priesthood, and that Aaron made 
atonement for the people, standing between the living and 
the dead, because he was a priest.” Indeed it is difficult not 
to observe, how the very heathens, though so bewildered in 
polytheism by the delusions of devils, yet with the original no- 
tions of temple, altars, and sacrifices, retained that of priests, 
and believed that their intercessions as such were most 
powerful to remove Divine judgments, and impetrate Divine 
blessings and favours, and that the anger of heaven was 
more easily atoned by their prayers, than those of other men. 
They also esteemed priests as holy persons, and the affronts 
and indignities which men put upon them, they. understood 
to be put upon their gods. These first notions of religion, 
and some others, as of blasphemy and sacrilege, they held in 
common with the Church of God, and therefore they offered 
all their sacrifices for the public safety by the priests only, 
and to them they had recourse when any public calamity was 
Deo, qui te elegit 5101 sacerdotem. pradicator debet esse in populum, et 
Omnis namque pontifex ab hominibus intercessor ad Deum pro populo, quasi 
assumptus pro hominibus constituitur mediator inter Deum et homines.— 
in his que sunt ad Deum. Aaron  B. Alcuini Op., tom. i. pp. 63, 64. ] 

stabat cum turribulo dignitatis suze * [S. Ambros. Op., tom. iii. p. 491, 
inter vivos ac mortuos, ut ira Dei non D.ed. Rom. 1579. Rabanus M., tom. 


ardesceret plus in populo. Sacerdos ν. p. 548, E. Alcuin., tom. i. p. 678.] 
vero Dei (verbi) et voluntatis illius Ὁ [See note y, p. 195.] 


The office of a Priest to cleanse and expiate, ministerially. 197 


to be averted, or any great and public blessing was to be cmar.u. 
obtained, accounting them as the immediate ministers of “~~ 
the gods, by whom they dispensed their favours to men. For 

this reason they called them καθαρταὶς, i. 6. ‘ purgators,’ or 
‘cleansers,’ because by their sacrifices and intercessions they 
thought they were cleansed and purified from their sins, and 
delivered from the punishments due untothem. That Greek 

word comes from καθαίρω, which in common acceptation 
literally signifies to ‘ purge, cleanse, or purify,’ as John xv. 2, 

but in its religious and tropical sense it signifies to ‘ expiate,’ 

Heb. x. 1, 2, “The law can never with those sacrifices which 

they offered year by year continually make the comers there- 

unto perfect; for then would they not have ceased to be 
offered? because that the worshippers once purged should 

have no more conscience of sins.” This is otherwise expressed 

by καθάρισμον ποιεῖν, Heb. i. 3, “ Who when He had by 
Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the 
Majesty on high.” It is likewise expressed by καθαρίζω, 

chap. ix. 13, 14, “For if the blood of bulls and goats sancti- 

fieth to the purifying of the flesh; how much more shall the 

blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered up 
Himself without spot to God, purge your consciences from 

dead works?” He, as our sovereign pontiff, who put away 

sin by the sacrifice of Himself, is our great purgator in the 
primary and most principal sense of the word, as it is written 

1 John 1. 7, “The blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth 

us from all sin.” But then according to His holy will and 
ordinance, and in virtue of His all-powerful expiation, His 
priests are also καθαρταὶ, ‘purgators,’ and in a secondary 
ministerial sense expiate the sins of the people. This was 

true of the Levitical priests, who had power not only -to 

purify the flesh, as in case of the leprosy, but to expiate the 

sins of a ruler, of any one of the common people, nay of Lev. 4. 22, 
the whole congregation, as it is written, “The priest shall oo 2076.7. 
make atonement‘,” or “the priest shall make atonement be- 


¢ Jul. Poll. Onomasticon, lib. i. c. 1. 
segm. 14. [ καθαρταὶ follows ἱερουργοὶ in 
the passage, part of which was quoted 
note i, p. 20. ] 

4 The Hebrew δον, which we ren- 
der ‘to make atoneinent,’ and other ver- 
sions ‘ to make expiation,’ or ‘to pro- 


pitiate,’ ‘expiate,’ ‘ pacify,’ or ‘recon- 
cile,’ [so the Vulgate, see below, note 
g, p- 209,] the Spanish translation of 
the Jews renders by such expressions, 
perdonar, por perdonar sobre, [{ Ley. i. 
4,] para perdonar sobre, [ Exod. xxx. 
16 ;] and by perdonangas, as de sangre 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Acts 22. 6. 


John 20. 23. 


198 Christian Priesthood instituted for the remission of sins. 


fore the Lord, and it shall be forgiven him.” So the evan- 
gelical ministers are all ‘purgators,’ or ‘atoning ministers®,’ 
all their offices being instituted for the “ pardon or remission 
of sins.” Their baptism is for the washing away of sins, as it 
was said by Ananias to Saul, “ Arise, and be baptized, and 
wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” The 
office of the holy Eucharist is all of an atoning nature; for 
it is a commemorative sacrifice of that which Christ offered 
upon the cross, and the priest delivers it to the faithful com- 
municants, as a pledge of their salvation, and a seal of the 
pardon of their sins. The office of absolution in His name 
and by Tis authority, as well as in the virtue of His all- 
sufficient merits, is also for the purging and putting away of 
sin, as it was spoken by His own blessed lips, ‘‘ Whosesoever 
sins ye retain, they are retained, and whosesoever sins ye re- 
mit, they are remitted unto them;” and let us glorify God, 
who hath given such ministerial power of pardoning unto men. 
But this by the way of the Jewish and Christian ministry or 
priesthood, of which my undertaking will oblige me to speak 
again. And therefore to proceed from heathenism to the 
patriarchal religion; in the times of the patriarchs, the 
priests, and prophets empowered to act as priests, were also 
‘purgators’ by God’s appointment to expiate sins. 

So when Abimelech king of Gerar had taken Sarah Abra- 
ham’s wife, God said unto him in a dream, “ Restore the 


man his wife, for he is a prophet, and he shall pray for thee, 


and thou shalt live ;” 


de limpieza de las pardonangas, [ Exod. 
xxx. 10,] plata de las perdonangas, 
[ibid., ver. 16,] &c., that is to say, ‘to 
procure pardon or forgiveness,’ ‘the 
sin-offering of pardon or forgiveness,’ 
‘the pardon or forgiveness-money,’ or 
‘atonement money.’—[ The translation 
referred to is entitled, Biblia en lengua 
Espanola; traduzida palabra por pala- 
bra de la verdad Hebrayca, por muy 
excelentes letrados. ed. 2. Amsterd. 
Anno 5471. (A.D. 1661.) ] 

€ Const. Apost., lib. vill. cap. 5. 
δὸς .., ἐπὶ τὸν δοῦλόν σου τόνδε, ὃν 
ἐξελέξω εἰς ἐπίσκοπον, ποιμαίνειν τὴν 
ἁγίαν σου ποίμνην, . . -. καὶ ἐξιλασκόμε- 
voy σου τὸ πρόσωπον, κ.τ.λ. “Give unto 
this Thy servant, who is chosen by Thee 
to be a bishop, grace to feed Thy holy 
flock, ... and by making atonement in 


aud so Abraham, who was a priest’, 


Thy presence,’’ &e.—[{ Concil.,tom.1. p. 
461, quoted at length, note y, p. 140.] 

f [ταῦτα μὲν οὖν ὑμῖν] ὃ σεμνὸς ᾿Αβρα- 
ἃμ οὗτος, 6 πατριάρχης .. . 6 τῆς ἀρετῆς 
κανὼν, ἣ τῆς ἱερωσύνης τελείωσις, 6 τὴν 
ἑκούσιον θυσίαν προσάγων τῷ κυρίῳ σή- 
μερον, τὸν μονογενῆ.---. Greg. Nazianz. 
{ Orat.i. (al. xli.)§ 7. Op., tom. i. p.6, Α.] 
This he spake of his father in allusion to 
Abraham, of whose sacrifice he speaks 
properly; μέγας 6 ᾿Αβραὰμ, [καὶ πα- 
τριάρχης, καὶ θύτης καινῆς θυσίας, τὸν 
ἐκ τῆς ἐπαγγελίας τῷ δεδωκότι προσα- 
γαγὼν, ἱερεῖον ἕτοιμον καὶ πρὸς τὴν 
σφαγὴν ἐπειγόμενον.-- Orat.xliii.(al.xx.) 
§ 71. ibid., p. 825, C.] καὶ τὴν ᾿Αβραὰμ 
θυσίαν [πάντως ἀκήκοας. --- Orat. xvii. 
(al. xiii.) § 10. ibid., p. 828, E. In the 
third edition the last reference was re- 
peated, perhaps instead of ᾿Αβραὰμ... 


Patriarchal Priesthood intercessory and expiatory. 199 


as well as a patriarch and prophet, prayed unto God for him, 
and God healed him and his house. So Cosmas Indico- 
pleustes describes Melchisedec as an intercessor by virtue of 
his priestly office, in these words: οὗτος ὁ βασιλεὺς, k.7.r.2 
“This is the king who instructed the people committed to 
him to be conversant in these things, and by ministering in 
holy things in this order (of the priesthood) made atonement 
for his own people. And this man, first as a priest having 
blessed Abraham, and offered up thanks to God, took tithes 
of all that Abraham had.” Nay, I might have begun with 
Abel*, Enoch, and Noah, who were all priests as well as 
patriarchs'; and as such offered up sacrifices of atonement 


OM. θυσίαν ξένην, καὶ τῆς μεγάλης ἀντί- 
τυπον.---ΟΥαῖ. xxvii. §18.ibid., p.509,B. ] 
& τῆς ᾿Αβραμιαίου θυσίας | ἐκείνης εἰ μή τι 
τολμητέον καὶ μεῖζον.---ΟΥαῖ. xxv. § 4. 
ibid., p. 288, E. The offering mentioned 
in the first extract was St. Gregory him- 
self, who that day was entering on the 
exercise of the priesthood, being given 
to God by his father; he was not lite- 
rally μονογενή».] ’ 

“ [οὗτος 6 βασιλεὺς πάντως καὶ τὸν 
ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ διοικούμενον λαὺν, ἐν τούτοις 
ἀναστρέφεσθαι νουθετῶν διετέλει, αὐτῇ 
τῇ τάξει ἱερουργῶν καὶ ἐξιλεούμενος περὶ 
τοῦ ἰδίου λαοῦ... οὗτος πρῶτος ὡς 
ἱερεὺς τὸν ᾿Αβραὰμ εὐλογήσας, καὶ τῷ 
θεῷ εὐχαριστήσας δεκάτας ἐλάμβανεν 
ἀπὸ πάντων ὧν εἶχεν ABpadu.—Cosme 
monachi Agyptii Topographia Chris- 
tiana, seu Christianorum opinio de 
Mundo,] lib. v. p. 217, B., published 
with Eusebius Czsariensis’ Comment 
on the Psalms, We. in folio, at Paris, by 
D. Bernard Montfaucon, a Benedictine 
monk. [ Nova Collectio Patrum, tom. 
ii. published 1706. | 

ἃ [Quum] Abel quoque, et Enoch, 
et Noe placuerint Deo, et victimas ob- 
tulerint.—[S. Hieron. Epist. 73. (al. 
126,) ad Evangelum, (al. Evagrium,) 
§ 2. Op., tom. i. col. 439, C.] Simul 
et hoc tradunt, quod usque ad sacerdo- 
tium Aaron omnes primogeniti ex stirpe 
Noe, cujus series et ordo describitur, 
fuerint sacerdotes, et Deo victimas im- 
molarint.—[Tbid., § 6. col. 442, D.] 

i In the prayer of consecration of a 
bishop, Const. Apost., lib. viii. cap. 5. 6 
προορίσας ἐξ ἀρχῆς, K.T.A. ‘Thou who 
from the beginning appointedst priests 
to preside over Thy people, Abel at 
first, Seth, and Enos, and Enoch, and 
Noah, and Melchisedec, and Job: 
who didst constitute Abraham, and 


the rest of the patriarchs, with Thy 
holy servants Moses, Aaron, Eleazar, 
and Phineas; who didst of them elect 
princes and priests (ἄρχοντας καὶ ἱερεῖς) 
to serve in the tabernacle of the testi- 
mony ; who chosedst Samuel to be a 
priest and a prophet; who never didst 
leave Thy sanctuary without ministers,’’ 
&c. [6 mpoopicas ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἱερεῖς εἰς 
ἐπιστασίαν λαοῦ σου" ᾿Αβὲλ ἐν πρώτοις, 
Σὴθ, καὶ ᾿Ενὼς, καὶ Ἐνὼχ, καὶ Νῶε, καὶ 
Μελχισεδὲκ, καὶ ᾿Ιώβ' ὁ ἀναδείξας 
᾿Αβραὰμ, καὶ τοὺς λοιποὺς πατριάρχας 
σὺν τοῖς πιστοῖς σου θεράπυυσιν Μωῦσεῖϊ 
καὶ ᾿Ααρὼν, καὶ ᾿Ελεαζάρῳ καὶ Φινεές" 
ὃ ἐξ αὐτῶν προχειρισάμενος ἄρχοντας 
καὶ ἱερεῖς ἐν τῇ σκηνῇ τοῦ μαρτυρίου" ὃ 
τὸν Σαμουὴλ ἐκλεξάμενος εἰς ἱερέα καὶ 
προφήτην" ὃ τῷ ἁγιάσματί (f. τὸ ἁγίασ- 
μά) σου ἀλειτούργητον μὴ ἐγκαταλιπών" 
κ. τ. A.—Concil., tom, i. p. 461, C.] So 
St. Chrysostom, Hom. in Genesin xxxv. 
(Μελχισεδὲκ) . . . ἱερεὺς δὲ ἦν ἴσως ad- 
τοχειροτόνητοΞ᾽ ἷ οὕτω γὰρ ἦσαν τότε οἱ 
ἱερεῖς" ἤτοι οὖν διὰ τὸ τῇ ἡλικίᾳ προ- 
βῆναι of προσήκοντες αὐτῷ ἀπονενεμή- 
κασι τὴν τιμήν" ἤ καὶ αὐτὸς ἱερατεύειν 
ἐπετήδευσε, καθάπερ ὃ Νῶε, καθάπερ 6 
᾿Αβὲλ, καθάπερ 6 ᾿Αβραὰμ, ἥνικα τὰς 
θυσίας mpoonyov.—Op., tom. iv. p. 356, 
E.] ‘‘ Melchisedee was a priest per- 
haps ordained by himself, (for such 
were priests then,) either because his 
people attributed that honour to him 
for his seniority, or that he devoted 
himself to the priesthood, as Noah, 
as Abel, as Abraham, when they offered 
sacrifices.” But I do not doubt they 
were also called and approved by God 
at least by signs, as this father saith 
that Aaron was, (ἐχειροτον θη), by the 
fire that fell from heaven upon Corah 
and his crew, and by the blossoming 
rod, Numb. xvi. and xvii. [6 yap ’Aa- 


CHAP. 11. 
SECT. XIL 





CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Gen. 8. 20, 
Pail 


Job 42. 8, 9 


chap. 1. 8. 


Deut. 33. 5. 


Exod. 26. 
A, 8. 


200 Noah and Job were Priests as well as Princes. 


for themselves and their people. When Noah went out of 
the ark he built an altar unto the Lord, and offered burnt- 
offerings upon it of every clean beast and fowl, and the Lord 
smelled a sweet savour, and was so pleased with his priestly 
administration, that He “said in His heart, I will not curse 
the ground any more for man’s sake, neither will I again 


smite every living thing, as I have done.”’ But to proceed ; 


-so God bid Job’s friends, when His anger was kindled 


against them, go to him with a burnt-offering, “and he 
(saith He) shall pray for you, and him will I accept.” For 
Job* was a priest as well as a prince, or a sacerdotal patri- 
arch, who, according to the practice of those times, when 
princes of tribes and countries were priests, offered as many 
burnt-offerings as he had sons to make atonement for, if 
perhaps they had sinned against God in the time of their 
feasting with one another. So Moses was a priest! as well 
as a prophet and a king; priest in such an eminent man- 
ner, that Grotius, whom I cited before™, had no occasion to 
mend the versions of the sixth verse in the ninety-ninth 
Psalm, which all translations, as well as ours, render ‘‘ Moses 
and Aaron among His priests,” For as priest, or sacerdotal 
prince, he builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars 
according to the twelve tribes of Israel, and offered" one of 


ρὼν ἐχειροτονήθη πόλλακις, ὡς ἐπὶ τοῦ 
ῥάβρου, καὶ ὅτε τὸ πῦρ κατῆλθε, καὶ Hpa- 
νισε τοὺς ἐπιπηδῶντας τῇ ἱερωσύνῃ.--- 
S. Chrys. Hom. in Hebr. viii. Op., tom. 
xii. p. 82, C.] Thus it is written of 
Abel, that ‘“‘God had respect to him 
and his offering,’’ [Gen. iv. 4,7 and as 
the Apostle speaks, Heb. xi. 4, ‘‘ bore 
testimony to his gifts’’ or oblations, 
‘“‘nempe igne czlitus misso super ea 
dona,’”’ as learned men generally ex- 
pound the place. [Grotius in locum; 
after the words just quoted, he adds, 
‘*et ita hic Grzeci interpretes omnes.’’— 
Crit. Sacr., tom. vii. col. 1134.] And 
so, Gen. vill. 21, God is said to have 
‘*smelled a sweet savour’’ from the 
sacrifice of Noah, who doubtless was a 
priest as well as a prophet before the 
flood. 

« In Job volumine legimus, quod et 
ipse oblator munerum fuerit, et sacer- 
dos, et quotidie pro filiis suis hostias 
immolarit.—S. Hieron. [ Epist. 73. (al. 
126,) ad Evangelum, § 2. Op., tom. i. 
col, 439, C.] Quid Job in operibus 


promptius, [in tentationibus fortius, in 
dolore patientius, in timore submissius, 
in fide verius, nec his tamen si roga- 
rent concessurum se Deus dixit. ]|—S. 
Cyprianus de Lapsis, [Op., p. 187. ed. 
Ben. ] 

1 ἱερεῖς δὲ ὁμοίως ἀμφότεροι" Μωσῆς 
γάρ, φησι, καὶ ᾿Ααρὼν | ἐν τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν 
αὐτοῦ" ὃ μὲν ἄρχων ἀρχόντων καὶ ἱερεὺς 
ἱερέων, K. T.A.—S. Greg. Naz. Orat. xi. 
(al. vi.) § 2. Op., tom. i. p. 242, C.] 
“Both were equally priests, for He 
saith, ‘Moses and Aaron among His 
priests.’ ’—[Ps. xcix. 6. } 

καὶ ἐπιδεδειχὼς Μωῦσῆν ἄριστον 
βασιλέα καὶ νομοθέτην καὶ ἀρχιερέα, τὸ 
τελευταῖον ἔρχομαι δηλώσων, ὅτι καὶ 
προφητῶν γέγονε δοκιμώτατος“.--ἘὮΠ]Ο, 
de Vita Mosis, lib. iii. [Op., tom. ii, p. 
163. } 

m [See above, p. 15, note u. | 

π It is said, [ver. 5,] “ Moses sent 
young men of the children of Israel, 
who offered burnt-offerings, and sacri- 
ficed peace-offerings unto the Lord.” 
These young men were the first-born, 


Moses as a Priest atoned and interceded. 201 


the most solemn sacrifices of burnt-offerings and peace-offer-  cmar. 1. 
ings unto the Lord that ever was offered to Him, even that — 
holy federal sacrifice, of which he took half the blood and 

put it in basins, and half of it he sprinkled on the altar; and 

when he had read the book of the covenant in the audience 

of all the people, he sprinkled the blood upon them, and 

said, “ Behold the blood of the covenant, which the Lord 

hath made with you.” Asa priest he offered another most Exod. 29. 
solemn sacrifice to God, when he consecrated Aaron and his aa 
sons to minister to Him in the priest’s office, at which time 

he took of the blood of the ram of consecration, and sprinkled ver. 20, 21. 
it upon the altar, and put it upon the tips of their right 

ears, the thumbs of their right hands, and the great toes 

of their right feet, and also sprinkled it with the holy oil 

upon them and their garments ; by which, as the text saith, 

« Aaron and his garments were hallowed, and his sons and 

their garments with him.” As a priest he had power to go 

into the tabernacle to speak with God, whose voice he heard Numb.7.89. 
from the mercy-seat from between the two cherubims, and 

to bless the people with Aaron; and to hasten to my sub- Lev. 9. 23. 
ject, as a priest he cried unto the Lord for Miriam, and the Numb. 12. 
Lord healed her; as a priest he interceded with God after ΤΣ 532. 
the sin of the golden calf, when the Lord said, “ Let Me 10. saa. 
alone, that I may consume them.” But he made atonement te ane 
for their sin by his intercession, and upon the continuance τ 88. 


y 1 





or priests of every family, who were 
afterwards redeemed, when the children 
of Israel solemnly offered up the tribe 
of Levi to God for His service. Numb. 
viii. 6, 13; so chap. 111. from ver. 5 to 


= τ τ --— misit primogenitos, ha- 


ss} CRIs bet (ibid.) sed etiam 


Tawasii Persica, qua quod ipsum so- 


ver. 14. The young men then were 
such priests as these, and therefore the 
Chaldee paraphrase reads it, ‘‘ Moses 
sent the first-born.” 

To which agree the Arabic and Per- 
sian translation, as Mr. Selden observed, 
De successione in Pontificatum Hebre- 
orum, c. 1. [Qui 4) seu juvenes hic 
dicti sunt, pro primogenitis, utpote qui 
jure suo tune sacerdotes fuere, (Tal- 
mudici) sumunt. Unde etiam eodem in 
loco Chaldzus Paraphrastes Onkelos 
expressim pro misit juvenes substituit 
receptissime sententiz satis callens 
22 MN) Mow, misit primogenitos.— 
(Bibl. Polyg!. Walton., tom. i. p. 329.) 
Adstipulatur non solum R, Saadize 
versio Arabica, que hoc in _ loco 


nat, legitur, Cn 0 Helin 5 
Pers. Taw. (iv. p. 147.)—Seldeni Op., 
vol. ii. col. 83, 84. Lond. 1726.] and 
De Successionibus ad leges Hebre- 
orum, cap. 5. [Ibid., col. 16, 17. 
The sacerdotal privileges of the first- 
born are treated of in that place; 
but this text is not referred to.] And 
Dr. Cudworth, in his True Notion of 
the Lord’s Supper, [p. 31, only quoting 
Selden as above, ] London, 1642, six- 
teen years before the Polyglot Bible 
was printed. See also Martinii Lex- 
icon Philologicum in the word sacri- 
ficium. [Persone offerentium due sunt, 
anima scilicet et synagoga. Animarum 
alia sacerdos, alia princeps, alia pri- 
vata persona. | 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Numb. 11. 
PR 


5.81: 5:19. 


Numb. 16. 
47, 48, 


ver. 33. 


ver. 12—19, 


202 The Aaronical Priesthood instituted for mediation and 


of his mediation by earnest prayers and supplications, God 
also promised to let His Presence go with them, and to give 
them rest. His prayers as a priest obtained the victory over 
Amalek, according to that of Gregory Nazianzen®, “God, 
by the secret and mystical figure of Moses’ hands, discom- 
fited Amalek ; so powerful were the hands of a priest held 
up upon the mountain, and put in the posture of prayer to 
obtain a victory, which many myriads of men could not have 
obtained.” At Taberah also, when the Lord was provoked 
to consume the people with fire, he prayed unto the Lord as 
a priest, and the fire was quenched. And to conclude; as a 
sacerdotal prince he mediated between God and the people 
at Horeb, when as he speaks, Deut. v. 5?, “I stood between 
the Lord and you at that time; and with respect to which 
the law that God then gave them, is said by the Apostle to 
have been “ ordained by angels in the hands of a mediator.” 
So after Aaron and his sons were consecrated to the priest’s 
office, and the priesthood was as it were entailed upon them, 
they became, by virtue of their office, the great mediators 
betwixt God and men in the Jewish Church. I have already 
more than once mentioned Aaron’s staying the plague by 
offering imcense in the Jewish camp; and in the thirtieth 
chapter of Exodus, verse 10, it is said of the altar of incense, 
“That Aaron shall make atonement upon the horns of it 
once in a year, with the blood of the sin-offerimg of atone- 
ments, as being most holy unto the Lord.” This was done 
on the tenth day of September4, the great day of expiation, 
which is particularly described in Levit. xvi., where we read 
how the high-priest on that day of every year made atone- 
ment for himself, for his house, and for all the congregation 
of Israel, by sacrifices there mentioned, and by entering into 
the most holy place within the veil, with a censer full of 


burning coals of fire from off the altar, and his hands full of 


© [οὗτος (sc. 6 Oeds) κατεπολέμησε Versio Vulg. Cum quidem ego tune 


τὸν ᾿Αμαλὴκ, χειρῶν ἀποῤῥήτῳ καὶ μυ- 
στικῷ σχήματι: τοῦτο γὰρ ἴσχυσὰν 
ἱερέως χεῖρες ἐπὶ τοῦ ὄρους αἰρόμεναι, 
καὶ εἰς εὐχὴν τυπούμεναι, ὃ πυλλαὶ μυ- 
ριάδες οὐκ ἴσχυσαν.---. Greg. Nazianz., 
Orat. xiii. (al. xxx.) Op., tom. i. p. 
258, Ὁ, D.] 

Ego sequester et medius fui inter 
Dominum et vos in illo tempore.— 


inter Jovam et vos enunciandorum 
ijlius dictorum sequester essem.—Cas- 
talio. Nam [et] Moyses pro peccatis 
[populi petiit, nec tamen peccantibus 
veniam cum petiisset accepit. |—S. Cy- 
prianus de Lapsis, [Op., p. 187. ed. 
Ben. | 

4 [Rather, “the tenth day of the 
seventh month,” Ley. xvi. 29. ] 


atonement. The sacrifice and intercession of Samuel. 203 


sweet incense, the cloud of which was to cover the mercy- cuar. u. 
seat, and with his finger to sprinkle the mercy-seat eastward a 
seven times with the blood of the sin-offerings, as the Apo- 

stle observes, Heb. ix. 7, where he saith, “ But mto the se- 

cond went the high-priest alone once every year, not without 
blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the 
people.” To this let me add the example of Samuel’s me- 
diation and intercession for the people, 1 Sam. vu. There ver. 8. 
“the children of Israel said unto Samuel, Cease not to cry 

unto the Lord our God for us. And Samuel said, Gather all ver. 5. 
Israel together at Mizpeh, and I will pray for you unto the 
Lord. And Samuel took a sucking lamb, and offered it for ver. 9. 
a burnt-offering wholly to the Lord for Israel, and the Lord 
heard him.” So in chapter xii. the people said again unto ver. 19. 
him; “ Pray for thy servants unto the Lord thy God, that 

we die not, for we have added unto all our sins this evil to 

ask us a king.” To whom he answered; “God forbid that ver. 23. 
I should sin against they Lord in ceasing to pray for you.” 

For to intercede with God for the people was the common 
office of all priests, as we read in Psalm xcix. 6; ‘“ Moses 

and Aaron among His priests, and Samuel among them that 

call upon His name; they called upon the Lord, and He 
answered them.” [This is observed by the son of Sirach in 
Ecclesiasticus, chap. xlv. 6, 7,15, 16. “ He exalted Aaron 

an holy man like unto him, even his brother, of the tribe of 
Levi. An everlasting covenant He made with him, and gave 

him the priesthood among the people . . .. Moses consecrated 

him with holy oil. This was appointed unto him by an ever- 
lasting covenant, and to his seed so long as the heavens 
should remain; that they should minister unto Him, and 
execute the office of the priesthood and bless the people 

in His name. He chose him out of all men living to offer 
sacrifices unto the Lord, imcense and a sweet savour, 

for a memorial, to make reconciliation for His people’.”’] 

As for the atonement which the priests of the second 
order made for the people, they are at large and in order 

set down in the seven first chapters of Leviticus, where 
nothing can be plainer than that it was the priest’s office, 

as their orator, to confess the sins of the people, and to 


τ [This addition is taken from the Supplement of 1715, No. 14, p. 11.] 


204 Priests, the ministers of the Lord. The Definitions 


curistiAN make supplications and intercessions for them by sacrifice, 
PRIEST- . . . . . 
noop. OF without it, as is evident from the ninth and tenth chapters 


of Ezra, and the ninth of Nehemiah, to which I refer you, 
and from the second of Joel, from the twelfth to the eight- 
eeuth verse, where the prophet saith, “ Rend your heart, and 
not your garments..... blow the trumpet in Sion..... 
gather the people, sanctify the congregation..... Let the 
priests’, the ministers of the Lord, weep between the porch 
and the altar, and let them say, Spare Thy people, O Lord 
..... Then will the Lord be jealous for His land, and pity 
His people.” Here, Sir, for the sake of your late writer, let 
me descant a little on the prophet’s definition of a priest: 
“‘the priests, the ministers of the Lord ;” myn ‘nwp, me- 
sherte Jehovah; in the Greek version, of λειτουργοῦντες 
τῷ Κυρίῳ, “those who minister to the Lord ;᾽ in the Chal- 
dee paraphrase‘, “those who minister before the Lord ;᾽ and 
you may see in the margin how aptly St. Hierome applies 
the place to the Christian priests. To these let me add 
two more descriptions of the Jewish priests out of Philo, in 
his Life of Moses, the first of which is this; οἷς [μὲν] ἐπυτέ- 
τρᾶπται τὰ περὶ Tas εὐχὰς Kal θυσίας, Kal Tas ἄλλας ἱε- 
ρουργίας", “to whom [to some] the care of prayers, and sacri- 
fices, and all other (holy) ministrations is committed.” The 
other is this; διὰ δὲ τῆς ἱερωσύνης, μὴ μόνον τὰ ἀνθρώπεια, 
ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ θεῖα διέπη", Moses, “as a priest, did not only 
administer (or preside over) human, but Divine affairs.” Sir, 
all these descriptions of a priest, with that of the Apostle in 
his Epistle to the Hebrews, come to no more than this; that 
a priest of any religion is “a minister of his God over the 
people, to take care of His worship, whatever that is, and its 
rites, and all other holy ministrations, in his rank and order ;” 


S St. Hierome upon the place : Post- 
quam sacerdotes pro populo deprecati 
sunt, et dixerunt, Parce, Domine, po- 
pulo tuo,[fecitque populus quod precep- 
tum est,] zelatus est Dominus terram 
suam, quam prius quasi alienam con- 
temserat, et passus fuerat locusta vas- 
tante populari.—[S. Hieron. Comm. 
in Joel. cap. ii. Op., tom. vi. col. 194, 
C,D.] Etiam nostris temporibus vi- 
dimus agmina locustarum terram tex- 
isse Judawam, que postea misericordia 
Domini, inter vestibulum et altare, hoc 


est, inter crucis et resurrectionis locum, 
sacerdotibus et populis Deum depre- 
cantibus atque dicentibus, Parce populo 
tuo, vento surgente, in mare primum 
et novissimum precipitate sunt.— 
[Ibid., col. 195, B, C.]} 

* (9 DIP ΣΟΦΟῚ N13, sacer- 
dotes qui ministrant coram Domino.— 
Chald. Paraph., Bibl. Polyg]. Walton., 
tom. iv. p. 30. ] 

a [Phil. Jud. Op., tom. ii. p. 161.] 

x [Id., ibid., p. 163. Hickes’ third edi- 
tion had λειτουργίας for ἱερουργίας. ] 


of Jewish Priests apply to Christian ones. 205 


and if this be a good definition of a proper priest, and ade- SRA 
quate to the thing defined, I appeal to you, Sir, whether ———— 
bishops and presbyters are not proper priests. Other modern 
writers define a priest’ by his office thus: “ A person whose 
office it is to perform Divine services to God, and in His 
name to bless the people ;” which, I think, cannot be denied 
to belong to a bishop or presbyters of the Church. “ The Deut. 21. 5. 
Lord thy God (saith Moses) hath chosen the priests the sons 
of Levi to come near to Him, and minister to Him, and to 
bless in the name of the Lord.’ And so hath He chosen 
the orders of bishops and presbyters to approach Him and 
minister to Him, and bless the people also in His name. So 
in 1 Chron. xxiii. 18, it is likewise written; “ Aaron was 
separated, that he should sanctify the most holy things, he 
and his sons for ever, to burn incense before the Lord, to 
minister unto Him, and bless in His name for ever.” This 
is a description of the priests under the Jewish law and sanc- 
tuary; but then, Sir, you ‘know, as I have already observed, 
that “the priesthood being changed, there was a necessity Heb. 7. 12. 
that a change should also be made of the law;” and there- 
fore excepting the burning of incense, which was an ap- 
pointed rite of the Jewish priesthood and worship, and abo- 
lished by the change of the law, every word of this descrip- 
tion of the Jewish priests belongs properly to the Christian 
liturgs or ministers, and by consequence they must be pro- 
per priests. So saith St. Hierome on Isaiah Ixvi. 21, 227; 
Quando dicit, ‘assumam ex iis in sacerdotes, et Levitas, osten- 
dit vetus sacerdotium pretermissum, &c. “ When He saith, ‘1 
will take of them for priests and Levites,’ He shews that the 
old Levitical priesthood is laid aside, which descended not by 
election, but by natural order and family succession ; ‘ for the 
priesthood being changed, it was necessary there should be 
an alteration of the law,’ and that they should be made 
priests by election upon whom the priesthood was to be 
conferred, not by right of blood, but according to merit and 


¥Y Outram de Sacrificiis, [lib. i. ce. sacerdotium pretermissum, quod tribui 
4. p. 47.... propria erant sacerdotii Leviticee debebatur, ubi non est electio, 
munera, ut Deo rem divinam facerent, sed ordo nature, et series est familiz 
ejusque nomine populo benedicerent. per posteros descendens. ‘Translato 
z [Quando dicit, ‘assumam ex eis in enim sacerdotio, necesse est, ut et legis 
sacerdotes et Levitas,’ ostendit vetus translatio fiat, et electio ad eos perti- 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD, 


206 St. Jerome of the Priesthood as foretold in the Prophets. 


virtue ; who should come from the nations of the Gentiles, 
and declare the glory of the Lord, and be brought upon 
horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and upon mules.” So 
on Ezek. xliv. 304, “‘ The first of all that we eat (saith he) is 
also offered to the priests, that we may taste nothing of our 
new fruits till the priest hath first tasted of them. And this 
we do, that he laying up our blessings and offerings in his 
house, God may bless our houses when he prays for us.”” So on 
those words of Malachi to the priests, ch. 11. 2, “O ye priests, 
if you will not hear, if you will not lay it to heart, and give 
glory to My name... . I will curse your blessings.” “This 
(saith he”) is properly said to the priests, that if they will not 
hear, &c., but on the contrary, cause His name to be ill 
spoken of among the Gentiles, He would send among them 
a want of all good things, and turn their very blessings into 
curses. For those priests who abuse their health in lust, and 
convert their riches into luxury, and disgrace their honour- 
able character with sordid conversation, they change the 
blessings of God into a curse. Or otherwise this word is 
truly directed to priests, who when they do not bless the 
people of God with true affection of heart, as Isaac blessed 
Jacob, Jacob the patriarchs, and Moses the twelve tribes, 
their blessings are turned into curses.” 

But to return from this digression to the priestly media- 
tion, 1 need not farther insist on the priestly acts of prayer 
and intercession performed by prophets jure prophetico, upon 


neat, quibus nequaquam juxta san- 
guinem, sed juxta merita atque vir- 
tutes sacerdotium defertur, ‘qui venient 
de insulis gentium, et gloriam Domini 
nuntiabunt. Et adducentur in equis, 
et in quadrigis, et in lecticis, et in mulis, 
et in carrucis..—S. Hieron. Comm, in 
Isaiam, lib. xviii. cap. 66. Op., tom. 
iv. col. 825, D, E.] 

ἃ {Primitiz quoque ciborum nostro- 
rum sacerdotibus offeruntur, ut nihil 
gustemus novarum frugum, nisi sacer- 
dos ante gustaverit. Hoc autem faci- 
mus, ut reponat sacerdos benedictio- 
nem et oblationem nostram in domo 
sua: sive ut ad imprecationem suam 
Dominus benedicat domibus nostris.— 
Id., Comm. in Ezek., lib. xiii. cap. 45. 
tom. v. col. 555, E. } 

» {Unde proprie sacerdotibus dicitur, 


quod ‘si audire noluerint et corde reti- 
nere, ut dent gloriam nomini Domini’ 
per bonam conversationem ; sed e con- 
trario ‘nomen illius propter eos maledi- 
catur in gentibus,’ mittat in illos eges- 
tatem bonorum omnium, et ‘ benedic- 
tiones eorum vertat in maledictionem.’ 
Qui sanitate abutuntur in libidinem, 
et divitias vertunt in luxuriam, bonam- 
que famam sordida conversatione de- 
turpant, hi benedictiones Dei mutant 
in maledictionem. Vel certe, quia ad 
sacerdotes proprie mandatum est, ver- 
tuntur benedictiones eorum in maledic- 
tionem, quando non benedicunt sanctis 
ex vero cordis affectu, sicut Isaac 
Jacob, et Jacob patriarchis, et Moyses 
duodecjm tribubus.—Id., Comm. in 
Malach. ec. ii. tom. vi. col. $55, E. 956, 
A, B.] 


Intercession the most proper office of Priesthood. 9207 


extraordinary occasions. So Elijah built an altar to the Lord cnar. τι. 


J ; SECT. XII. 
on Mount Carmel, and sacrificed and “ prayed, saying, Hear —— 


me, O Lord, hear me, that this people may know that Thou Ἔρις τ 
art the Lord God. Then the fire of the Lord fell and con- ver. 8. 8. 
sumed the burnt-sacrifice, and the wood, and the stones, and 

the dust, and licked up the water which was in the trench.” 

After which he proceeded to intercede with God for rain 

after the drought of three years. “ He prayed earnestly Pamede 10, 
(saith St. James) and the heaven gave rain, and the earth ~ 
brought forth her fruit.” 

XIII. Such were the public intercessions of other prophets, srcr. xm. 
which I pass over, hastening to my main point, which is to Cas 
shew in the second place, that Christian liturgs or ministers, are, under 
by their office are mediators or intercessors with God for the ee a 
people, to make atonement for their sins, and impetrate fa- nen 
vours and blessings for them, and by consequence that they 
are proper priests. For though other offices are joined with 
the priest’s office, and by consequence belong in common to 
priests of all religions, yet nothing is more essential to the 
character of priests than to be advocates or intercessors for 
men with God. For the office of teaching and preaching 
belongs to them as doctors or prophets, and that of govern- 
ing the sacred economy belongs to them as rectors or stew- 
ards appointed by the God whose priests they are, and both 
have the people for their objects, or relate to them; but to 
make intercession belongs to a priest as a priest, and hath 
the God with whom he intercedes for its object, and there- 
fore with regard to this most proper office of priesthood, 
some have defined a priest to be patronus hominum apud 
Deum®, “an advocate or orator for men with God.”~ Which 
belongs in the greatest propriety and fulness of perfection to 
Christ, whom the Apostle, in his Epistle to the Hebrews, 
calls ten times an High-Priest, and seven times a Priest. He 


is the ἀρχιερεὺς λόγος, the λόγος High-Priest, who was as a 





© Outram de Sacrificiis, lib. ii.cap.1. voluntary sins.’’ [There is not any 


[§ 1. p. 287.] 

4 Philo de Pont. Max. λέγομεν γὰρ, 
τὸν ἀρχιερέα οὐκ ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλὰ λόγον 
θεῖον εἶναι, πάντων οὐχ ἑκουσίων μόνον, 
ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀκουσίων ἀδικημάτων ἀμέτο- 
χον. “1 speak of an High-Priest, who 
is not a man but the Word of God, not 
only free from all voluntary but in- 


treatise of Philo de Pont. Max.; the 
passage occurs in his tract De Pro- 
fugis, where he interprets the laws re- 
specting the high-priest as designed to 
shadow the sinless and eternal High- 
Priest.—De Profugis, Op., tom. i. p. 
562. | 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD, 


1 John 2. 2. 
Rom. 8. 34. 


Heb. 7. 24, 
25. 


Heb. 9. 24. 


Heb. 2. 17; 
18. 


Heb. 4. 16. 
1 Tim. 2. 5. 


208 Our Lord’s Priesthood intercessory ; so that of His ministers. 


Priest with His Father before the beginning of the world®, 
and in virtue‘ of whose meritorious sacrifice, to be offered at 
the appointed time, the Jewish priests, though they knew it 
not, made atonement for the sins of the people. But now 
more eminently as High-Priest of His Church, He is “ our 
advocate with the Father, and makes intercession for us at 
the right hand of God.” And because “ He continued for 
ever, and hath an unchangeable priesthood, He is able to 
save them to the uttermost who come unto God by Him, 
seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them.” “He 
entered into the Holy of Holies on purpose to appear as an 
advocate in the presence of God for us,” and was therefore 
“made like unto His brethren, that He might be a merciful 
and faithful High-Priest in things pertaining to God, to 
make reconciliation for the sins of the people.” And be- 
cause this mediation with His Father, as our High-Priest, is 
so powerful and prevalent, therefore are we bid to “ come 
boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy 
through Him who is the one mediator between God and 
man.” And as He intercedes for us, as our supreme adyo- 
cate and orator in heaven, and presents our prayers to His 
Father, in virtue of His own merits; so do His ministers 
upon earth intercede for us in His name, and therefore they 
must be priests in this respect, as with respect to teaching 
and governing the people they are prophets and spiritual 
rulers over them in their several ranks. 

They must be priests in this respect as much as the minis- 
ters or liturgs of the patriarchal and Jewish Churches were, 
who made atonement for the people by sacrifice and prayer, 
and often by prayer without sacrifice; for what belonged in 
common to God’s ministers under both these dispensations, 
must needs belong to His ministers of the most perfect and 
excellent evangelical economy, unless it can be imagined it 
was His pleasure that the most noble Church and institu- 


€ [On the doctrine contained in this 
statement see the Additions to the 


ἀγαθῶν. --- 110. iii, Op., tom. ii. p. 
155.] “It is necessary for him who 


Third Edition, vol. i. p. 20, note p. | 

f Philo de Vita Mosis: ἀναγκαῖον 
ἦν τὸν ἱερωμένον τῷ τοῦ κόσμου πατρὶ 
παρακλήτῳ χρῆσθαι τελειοτάτῳ τὴν 
ἀρέτην υἱῷ, πρός τε ἀμνηστείαν ἅμαρ- 
τημάτων, καὶ χορηγίας ἀφθονωτάτων 


sacrifices to the Father of the world to 
use the Son, who is most perfect in a] 
virtue, as mediator or advocate, both 
to obtain pardon of sins and the grant 
of those gracious blessings which he 
desires,” 


Jewish and Patriarchal Priests imply Christian ones. 209 


tion should have the meanest and least noble ministry, with- cue. πὶ 


SECT. XIIL 


out the sacerdotal power of making intercession for the - 
people, which the ministers of His Church before and under 
the law had. But why do I say, unless it can be imagined ? 
1 ought rather to say, unless it can be proved. For as those 
who have written in defence of infant baptism argue for it 
from the right that infants had to be admitted into the cove- 
nant of grace in the Jewish Church, and tell the adversaries 
of it, that the condition of children would be worse under 
the Gospel than it was under the law, if they might not be 
baptized under the one as well as circumcised under the 
other; and when the Antipzedobaptists require a precept for 
it, tell them it lies upon them to bring a precept against it ; 
so it is an excellent argument to prove the ministers over 
the Christian Church to be proper priests, and as such to 
have the power and dignity of making solemn intercession 
for the people, because the ministers of God over His Church 
in the patriarchal and Jewish dispensations were such priests. 
The sacerdotal power which was common to the ministerial 
or liturgical office in such different dispensations must there- 
fore belong to it now, unless something to the contrary can 
be shewn in the Gospel; but, Sir, until that is shewn, we 
ought to presume that Christian liturgs are proper priests, 
who are not inferior to the patriarchal and Jewish ministers 
in the essentials of the sacerdotal office and power. For they 
are “taken from among men” as they were, and like them are 
‘ordained for men to minister for them in things pertaining 
to God,” and so have the same common office and ministry, 
though not the same ceremonies, rites, and forms of ‘ pray- 
ing, and ‘entreating,’ and ‘propitiating, and-‘expiating’ 
God’s anger, and ‘ deprecating’ His judgments, and ‘making 
reconciliation’ for sinners ; which are the several terms in the 
Latin£ translation for what we render ‘atonement,’ and ‘mak- 
ing atonement,’ and aptly express the office of an advocate, 


& Exod. xxix. 36, Ad expiandum. 
Cap. xxx. 10, Deprecabitur Aaron... 
et placabit. Ver. 16, Propitietur anima- 
bus eorum. Cap. xxxii. 30, Si quo 
modo quivero eum deprecari pro sce- 
lere vestro. Ley. i. 4, In expiationem 
ejus. Cap. iv. 20, Rogante pro eis sacer- 
dote, “the priest praying for them ;’’ so 
ver. 26, Rogabit pro eo sacerdos. Cap. 


HICKEs, 


P 


ν. 6, Orabit pro ea sacerdos, et pro 
peccato ejus. Cap. vi. 7, [Cap. v. ver. 
26. Hebr.} Rogabit pro eo coram Do- 
mino. Numb. xxv. 25, Rogabit sacer- 
dos pro omni multitudine filiorum 
Israel. Lev. xvi. 10, Statuet eum (ca- 
prum emissarium) vivum coram Do- 
mino, ut fundat preces super eo, ‘ta 
make an atonement with him.” 


CURISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 





Jer. 7. 16. 


SECT. XIV. 


From Apo- 
stolical pre- 
cept and 
practice. 


Acts 2. 38; 
22. 16. 


210 Evidence from the New Testament that the Christian 


which is to pray, and entreat, and plead for his criminal 
client, whose orator he is; to propitiate the king or judge, in 
whose presence he stauds for him, and to procure pardon for 
his offences. ‘Pray not thou for this people (saith God to 
the priest and prophet Jeremiah) nor lift up cry or prayer 
for them, neither make intercession» to Me, for I will not 
hear thee.” That is, do not thou be their advocate, to in- 
tercede, and pray, and plead for them, ‘“‘do not come to Me 
about them',” for I will not hear thee. 

XIV. In like manner it belonged to the Apostles and 
presbyters, by virtue of their sacerdotal office and ministry, 
to be advocates and intercessors with God, and as such to 
pray and entreat God for the people, and by prayer to obtain 
pardon or make atonement for their sins, and propitiate 
Him, and to procure favours and blessigs of Him for them. 
There are instances to prove this in the New Testament, as 
short a memorial as it is of the practice of the first ministers 


of the Church. 


I need not insist upon their power of bap- 


tizing for the remission of sins with fasting and prayer*, 
which was a most solemn act of expiation for washing away‘ 


4 [The word in the original is 455, 
as also in the passages in the note pre- 
vious. | 

i μὴ προσέλθῃς μοι περὶ αὐτῶν, LXX. 
The same phrase is used of the priests, 
Deut. xxi. 5, and I cannot but observe 
that phrases of that kind are specially 
applied by the Gentiles to their priests, 
to set forth the intercessions they be- 
lieved they had power to make with 
their gods. So Jul. Pollux, lib. i. cap. 
1. seom. 25. περὶ τῶν προσίοντων θεοῖς. 

ος προσιέναι θεοῖς, πρόσοδον ποιεῖσθαι 
πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς, εὔχεσθαι θεοῖς, ἀνατεί- 
νειν τὰς χεῖρας, ἐντυγχάνειν θεοῖς, προ- 
τρέπεσθαι θεοὺς, κατακαλεῖν θεοὺς, ἀνα- 
καλεῖν θεοὺς, αἰτεῖν παρὰ τῶν θεῶν τὰ 
ἀγαθὰ, προσφεύγειν θεοῖς, ποτνιᾶσθαι, 
ἐπαντιβολεῖν καὶ ἀντιβολεῖν, καθικε- 
τεύειν, θύειν θεοῖς, ἱερουργεῖν, ἱεροποιεῖν, 
«.7.A. “Οἵ those who have access to 
the gods... to go unto the gods; to 
pray to the gods; to stretch out hands 
unto the gods; to intercede with the 
gods; to atone the gods; to ask bles- 
sings of the gods; to fly to the gods; 
to obsecrate the gods; to meet, or con- 
front, and supplicate the gods ; to per- 
form holy offices in things pertaining 
to the gods.’’ All which phrases are 


most proper to the office of Christian 
ministers, changing gods into God, 
and by consequence prove them to be 
priests. So segm, 29; θυσία... κατά- 
κλησις θεῶν, ἀνάκλησις, ἔντευξις, πρόσο- 
δος, ἱερουργία, ἱεροποιία,.. . σπονδή. “Sa- 
crifice, calling upon the gods, erying 
unto the gods, intercession, coming to 
the gods, performing holy offices, sa- 
crificing, libation.’’ See Herodotus, lib. 
i. p. 37. [cap. 182; quoted above, p. 
194, note u. | 

k S. Just. Mart. Apol. i. ed. Oxon. 
[Grabe, 8°. 1700] ο. 79, 80. [ὅσοι ἂν 
πεισθῶσι Kal πιστεύωσιν ἀληθῆ ταῦτα 
τὰ ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν διδασκόμενα καὶ λεγόμενα 
εἶναι, καὶ βιοῦν οὕτω δύνασθαι ὑπισχνῶν- 
ται, εὔχεσθαί τε καὶ αἰτεῖν νηστεύοντες 
παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ τῶν προημαρτημένων 
ἄφεσιν διδάσκονται, ἡμῶν συνευχομένων 
καὶ συννηστευόντων αὐτοῖς. ἔπειτα ἄγον- 
ται ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν ἔνθα ὕδωρ ἐστὶ, κ. τ. λ.-τττι 
6. 61. Op., p. 79, D. ed. Ben.] 

1 ἀφορμὴν σωτηρίας καὶ κάθαρμον 
ἁμαρτημάτων. So the bishops that in- 
structed Constantine the Great called 
baptism.—Sozomen. Hist. Eccl., lib. i. 
cap. 3. [ Hist. Eccl., tom, ii. p. 12. See 
above, note b, p. 9. ] 


ministry is one of Intercession and Propitiation. 211 


all the past sins of the baptized. Nor need I spend much 
time to prove that it was their office to administer the holy 
Eucharist, in which more especially they exercised the priest’s 
office in making prayers and intercessions at the holy altar 
upon the account and in virtue of the same sacrifice™, that 
Christ makes continual intercession in the presence of God 
for us. And to these solemn prayers and intercessions which 
the priests make in the holy Eucharist, the people, with all 


CHAP, 11. 


SECT, XIV. 


the powers of their souls, are to say Amen. “The cup of 1 Cor. 10. 
blessing which we bless (saith the Apostle) is it not the com- es 


munion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, 
is it not the communion of the body of Christ?” [Ὁ is their 
office then to make atonement most especially in this sacri- 
fice, which consists of the celebration of the sacrifice which 
Christ made upon the cross, when they make a most solemn 
memorial and representation of it unto God upon earth, cor- 
respondent to that which He daily makes of it before Him in 
heaven. It was they only who administered this pure com- 
memorative sacrifice of propitiation: bishops, or presbyters 
licensed by their bishops, as St. Ignatius speaks in his Epi- 
stle to the Church of Smyrna®, “look upon that Eucharist 
as lawful and valid which is either offered by the bishop, or 
one whom he shall appoint.” Hence we read of the three 
thousand baptized persons who “ were added to the Church, 
that they continued stedfastly in the doctrine which the 
Apostles taught them, and in fellowship with them,” as the 
principle of unity, “and in breaking of bread, and prayer,” 
as the Eucharist is there described, of which they were the 
ministers. And when I consider that prophets sometimes 
sacrificed under the Old Testament by extraordinary com- 
mission from God, and that the first ministers of Christ were 
generally prophets, I cannot but think that place in 1 Cor. 


i.e. impetratis. Plaut. in Peenulo, ii. 
42. Si Hercle istue unquam factum 
est, tum me Jupiter faciat, ut semper 
sacrificem, neque unquam litem.— 


πῃ Non. Marcel. Sacrificare est veniam 
petere, litare est propitiare et votum 
impetrare. Virg. ποῖα, lib. iv. 50. 
Auctores Linguze Latine Gothofred., 


p- 1336. [Genev. 1622.] So more at 
_ large. Inter sacrificare, et litare hoc 
interest ; sacrificare est veniam petere, 
litare est propitiare, et votum impe- 

trare. 
Tu modo posce Deos veniam, sacris- 
que litatis.—Virg. Aineid. iv. 50. 


Ῥ 


Ibid., p. 723. 

n ἐκείνη βεβαία εὐχαριστία ἡγεί- 
σθω, ἡ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου οὖσα, ἢ 
ἂν αὐτὸς ἐπιτρέψῃ.---ὃ. Ignat. Epist. 
ad Smyrn., 6. 8. [Patr. Apost., tom. ii, 
p- 36.] 


2 


Acts 2. 41, 
42. 


212 1 Cor. xiv. 16 (uniting ‘blessing’ and ‘giving thanks’) to be 


curistiAN xiv. 16°, is to be understood of the holy Eucharist’s being 
administered by those prophetical priests, because both the 
solemn words which our Saviour used at the institution of it 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


are likewise used by the Apostle in that place. 
and ‘give thanks.’ 


are ‘bless,’ 


The words 


« Jesus,” saith St. Matthew 


and St. Mark?, “took bread and blessed it ;᾽ or as St. Luke4, 


* Jesus took bread, and gave thanks.” 


And of the cup they 


say’, “ He took the cup, and blessed it ;” but St. Luke saith’, 


“He took the cup, and gave thanks.” 


For as learned men 


have observed, those words in Scripture signify the same 


thingt, and are indifferently used for one another. 


And 


from them the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper came to be 
called Eucharistia and Euloyia", though more generally by 


° [ἐπεὶ ἐὰν εὐλογήσῃς τῷ πνεύματι, 6 
ἀναπληρῶν τὸν τόπον τοῦ ἰδιώτου πῶς 
ἐρεῖ τὸ ἀμὴν ἐπὶ τῇ σῇ εὐχαριστίᾳ, 
ἐπειδὴ τί λέγεις οὐκ οἷδε; 1 Cor. xiv. 
16.1 

P [λαβὼν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς τὸν ἄρτον, καὶ 
εὐλογήσας ekAace.—Matt. xxvi. 26. 
λαβὼν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἄρτον, εὐλογήσας ἔκ- 
Aaoe.— Mark xiv. 22. ] 

4 [λαβὼν ἄρτον εὐχαριστήσας ἔκ- 
Aace.—Lue. xxii, 19.] 

τ [λαβὼν τὸ ποτήριον, καὶ εὐχαριστή- 
σας ἔδωκεν, K.T.A.—Matt. xxvi. 27. 
λαβὼν τὸ ποτήριον, εὐχαριστήσας ἔδω- 
κεν, K.T.A.— Mark xiv. 23. ] 

5 [δεξάμενος ποτήριον, εὐχαριστήσας 
εἶπε, K.T.A.—Luce. xxii. 17. ] 

‘ De Marca de Sacramento Eucha- 
ristiz, pp. 7—9. Cameron and Grotius 
on Matt. xxvi. 26. [De Marca ob- 
serves that the Jews offered up thanks- 
giving with prayer before partaking of 
their food, and that the food being 
regarded as thereby sanctified, the 
terms to ‘sanctify’ or ‘bless’ were used 
to express this thanksgiving; and that 
hence when the blessing of bread is 
spoken of, the words ‘ give thanks’ and 
‘bless’ are used indiscriminately. He 
alleges the parallel passages in the 
narratives of our Lord’s feeding the 
multitudes, and those given in the text 
from the narrative of the institution; 
and afterwards says, Veteres Christiani 
hac in re secuti sunt Dominum, con- 
jungentes in peragende Eucharistie 
formulis gratiarum actiones, &e. 

Cameron in locum; εὐλογήσας, h.e. 
εὐχαριστήσας. Kodem enim hec re- 
deunt: id quod non solum ex consensu 
Evangelistarum, qui indiscriminatim 


his verbis usi sunt, sed etiam ex usu 
et consuetudine Judzorum constat: 
etenim heee εὐλογία nihil aliud illis 
fuit quam εὐχαριστία: nempe bene- 
dicere Deo et gratias agere eadem sunt. 
—Critici Sacr., tom. vi. col. $81. ; 

So Grotius: Moris semper Judzis 
fuit...cibum nullum aut vinum su- 
mere nisi prins Deo tanquam conditori 
donatorique laudes et gratias egissent, 
addita precatione .. . ipsam precationem 
wy ap, id est, ἁγίασμον, sanctificationem, 
wana aut ΠΣ Δ, id est, εὐλογίαν, be- 
nedictionem. He then goes through the 
instances of the use of the words in the 
parallel passages of the New Testa- 
ment, and in the early Christian wri- 
ters.—Crit. Sacr. ibid., col. 898. ] 

ἃ Suiceri Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus 
in εὐλογία. [ὃ iv. Illud precipue dili- 
genter observandum, hane vocem de S. 
Coena frequenter usurpari. Of this 
use he gives several instances, e. g. 
S. Cyril. Alex., lib. iv. cap. 2. in Joan. 
(cap. vi. 54.) Op., tom. iv. p. 361, A. 
and ibid., p. 364, D. kat σῶμα καὶ 
μέλη Χριστοῦ χρηματίξομεν, ὡς διὰ 
τῆς εὐλογίας αὐτὸν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς δεχό- 
μενοι τὸν υἱόν᾽ and accounts for the 
use of the word by adducing τὸ πο- 
Thpiov τῆς εὐλογίας, 1 Cor. x. 16; 
quoting Theophylact on the passage, 
(Op., tom. ii. Ρ. 180, C, D.) 7d ποτή- 
ριον τῆς εὐλογίας, τουτέστι τῆς εὐχα- 
ριστίας. ἐπὶ γὰρ χεῖρας αὐτὸ ἔχοντες, 
εὐλογοῦμεν καὶ εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ τὸ 
αἷμα αὐτοῦ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἐκχέαντι: and * 
St. Chrysostom (in Ep. 1 ad Cor. 
Hom. xxiv. Op., tom. x. p. 213, A.) 
more fully to the same effect. He 
afterwards treats of the Jewish custom 





understood of the Euch. So St. Chrys. Theophyl. & Aicumen, 218 


the former than the latter name. Hence St. Chrysostom’, 
Theophylact*, and GicumeniusY expound this place of the ad- 
ministration of the Lord’s Supper according to the following 
paraphrase : “‘ Else when thou shalt bless the bread and wine 
at the Lord’s Supper in an unknown tongue, how shall the 
unlearned people say Amen at thy blessing or giving of 
thanks, seeing they understand not what thou sayest?” 
“When thou shalt bless,’ you know, Sir, answers to the 
Eucharistical phrase, “the cup of blessing which we bless,” 
just now cited; and to that in Matt. xxvi. 26, “ Jesus took 
bread, and blessed it ;” and the other term, εὐχαριστία, 
translated by “giving of thanks,’ most probably is the 


and terms of thanksgiving, and the use 
of the word among Christians. The- 
saur. Eccl., tom. i. col. 1249, sqq. | 

Vv [ἰδιώτην δὲ τὸν Aaikdy λέγει, καὶ 
δείκνυσι καὶ αὐτὸν οὐ μικρὰν ὑπομένοντα 
τὴν ζημίαν, ὅταν τὸ ἀμὴν εἰπεῖν μὴ 
δύνηται. ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν᾽ ἂν εὐ- 
λογήσῃς τῇ τῶν βαρβάρων φωνῇ, οὐκ 
εἰδὼς τί λέγεις, οὐδὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι δυνά- 
μενος, οὐ δύναται ὑποφωνῆσαι τὸ ἀμὴν 
ὃ λαϊκός. οὐ γὰρ ἀκούων τὸ εἰς τοὺς 
αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων, ὕπερ ἐστὶ τέλος, οὐ 
λέγει τὸ Gunv.—s. Chrys. in 1 Cor. 
Hom. xxxv. Op., p. 325, Ὁ, E.] 

x (Theophylact connects εὐλογήσῃς 
with the ψάλλει of the preceding verse. 
He says; ὅταν, φησὶ, ψάλλῃς, ἐὰν εὐ- 
λογήσῃς τῷ πνεύματι, τουτέστι, τῷ 
πνευματικῷ χαρίσματι διὰ τῆς γλώσσης, 
6 ἀναπληρῶν τὸν τόπον τοῦ ἰδιώτου, του- 
τέστιν, ὃ λαϊκὸς, πῶς ἐρεῖ τὸ ἀμὴν ἐπὶ 
τῇ σῇ εὐχῇ ; σοῦ γὰρ εἰπόντος τὸ εἰς 
τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀσαφῶς καὶ ἐν 
γλώσσῃ, οὐκ ἤκουσεν᾽ ὥστε οὔτε ὠφε- 
Aetroat.—Theophylact. Comment. in 1 
Cor. xiv. Op., tom. ii. p. 209, D.] 

Υ [ἐὰν yap μόνον σὺ ἐπίστασαι, φησὶ, 
τί εὐλογεῖς, ἤγουν τί εὔχεσαι, καὶ ἣ σὴ 
ψυχὴ τοῦτο λέγει τῷ πνεύματι, οἱ δὲ 
λοιποὶ ἀγνοοῦσι τῷ σε μὴ εἰδέναι ἑρμη- 
νεῦσαι, ἤγουν μὴ εἰδότα τὴν δύναμιν 
τῶν λεγομένων, 6 δὲ εἰς ἰδιώτην τελῶν, 
οὐκ ἂν εἴπῃ τὸ ἀμὴν ἐπὶ τῇ σῇ εὐχῇ. 
μὴ εἰδὼς γὰρ τὶ λαλεῖς, οὐδὲ γινώσκει 
πότε δεῖ σοι τὸ Guhvy ὑπακοῦσαι.--- 
Cicumenii Comment. 1 Cor. xiv. Op., 
tom, i. p. 560, C, Ὁ. 

In a note on the words of St. Chry- 
sostom on this text, quoted above, 
note v, Mr. Palmer says, ‘‘ Chrysostom 
obviously understood the Apostle to 
speak of the Liturgy by alluding to 


the words εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων, 


which he says ἐστὶ τέλος, that is, the 
end of the Liturgy. And accordingly 
if we look to the Liturgies of Antioch, 
where he preached these homilies, we 
find these words terminating the Li- 
turgy.’’ (See Liturgia S. Jacobi Gree. 
Assem.,tom. v. p. 67.)—Orig. Lit., chap. 
4. sect. xv. vol. ii. p. 116. And of the 
meaning of St. Paul’s words he says, 
“In the Liturgy of Constantinople or 
Greece, which has probably been al- 
ways used at Corinth, the bishop or 
priest takes bread, and ‘blesses’ it in 
the course of a very long ‘ thanksgiv- 
ing,’ at the end of which all the people 
answer, ‘Amen.’ (SeeS.Chrys. Liturg. 
Goar, pp. 75—79.) The same may be 
said of the Liturgies of Antioch and 
Cesarea, and of all the countries of the 
East and Greece, through which St. 
Paul bare rule or founded Churches. 
It may be added that there is I believe 
no instance in the writings of the most 
primitive fathers in which the ‘ Amen’ 
is ever said to have been repeated at 
the end of an office containing both 
blessing and thanksgiving, except in 
the Liturgy of the Eucharist.’’—Ibid., 
p. 117. It will be observed that Mr. 
Palmer considers the words εὐλογεῖν 
and εὐχαριστεῖν to be distinct in sense, 
the former meaning the invoking the 
Divine blessing on the elements, (see 
above, pp. 131, sqq.,) the latter simply 
giving thanks. That they are distinct, 
notwithstanding the authorities and ar- 
guments alleged by Hickes, would ap- 
pear from both words being used in the 
commemoration of our Lord’s actions 
in the institution of the Eucharist in 
all the Liturgies, and the very definite 
sense of εὐλογεῖν in the passages quoted 
by himself, pp. 311, sqq. ] 


CHAP. 11. 


SECT. XIV. 
a 


214 Intercession a gift of the Spirit in the Apostolic age ; 


enristAN Church’s name for the Lord’s Supper here, as in St. Igna- 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 





tius’; for the people then saying Amen, answers exactly to 
that passage in Justin Martyr’s first Apology’, οὗ συντελέ- 
σαντος Tas εὐχὰς, Kal THY εὐχαριστίαν, Tas ὁ παρὼν λαὸς 
ἐπευφημεῖ λέγων, ᾿Α μήν: “The bishop having finished the 
prayers and offering, all the people say aloud, Amen.” But 
however that place is to be interpreted, it was the work of 
the inspired or gifted ministers in the beginning of Christi- 
anity to make intercessions, as is plain from Rom. viii. 26, 
which according to Origen” and St. Chrysostom¢ upon the 
place, I shall paraphrase in these words: “ Likewise the Spirit 
also helpeth our infirmities, for as yet we know not in what 
manner, or for what we should pray as we ought, but the 
inspired minister, by the help of the Spirit which moves and 
directs him, maketh® intercessions in most eminent manner 


* [See above, p. 211, note ἢ. 

5. ΤΆ, Just. M. Apol. i. c. 65. Op., p. 
82, E. See above, p. 106, note g. | 

> [Origen’s words are, ὃ γὰρ δεῖπροσ- 
εὐχεσθαί, φησι, καθὸ δεῖ, οὐκ οἴδαμεν. 
ἀναγκαῖον δὲ οὐ τὸ προσεύχεσθαι μόνον, 
ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ προσεύχεσθαι καθὸ δεῖ, καὶ 
προσεύχεσθαι ὃ δεῖ, k.T.A.... οὐ τοῖς 
τυχοῦσι στεναγΎμοϊς χρώμενον ὕπερεν- 
τυχάνει τῷ θεῷ, ἀλλά τισιν ἀλαλήτοις, 
ἐχομένοις τῶν ἀρρήτων λόγων ὧν οὐκ 
ἔστιν ἀνθρώπῳ λαλεῖν. τοῦτο δὲ τὸ 
πνεῦμα, οὐκ ἀρκούμενον τῷ ἐντυγχάνειν 
τῷ θεῷ, ἐπιτεῖνον τὴν ἔντευξιν ὑὕπερ- 
evTuyxavet.—Origen, περὶ εὐχῆς, ὃ 2. 
Op., tom. i. pp. 197, E. 199, C.] 

ο [St. Chrysostom begins by speak- 
ing of the different gifts bestowed on 
the baptized in the Apostolic age, one 
of which was that of prayer: τίς οὖν 
ἡ τότε κατάστασις ἦν; διάφορα πᾶσι 
τοῖς τότε βαπτιζομένοις ἐδίδου χαρίσματα 
6 θεὸς, & δὴ καὶ πνεύματα ἐκαλεῖτο... 
μετὰ δὲ τούτων ἁπάντων ἦν καὶ εὐχῆς 
χάρισμα, ὃ καὶ αὐτὸ πνεῦμα ἐλέγετο. 
καὶ 6 τοῦτο ἔχων, ὑπὲρ τοῦ πλήθους 
παντὸς εὔχετο. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ πολλὰ τῶν 
συμφερόντων ἡμῖν ἀγνοοῦντες, τὰ μὴ 
συμφέροντα αἰτοῦμεν, ἤρχετο χάρισμα 
εὐχῆς εἰς ἕνα τινὰ τῶν τότε, καὶ τὸ 
κοινῇ σύμφερον τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἅπάσης 
αὐτός τε ὑπὲρ ἁπάντων ἵστατο αἰτῶν, 
καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους ἐπαίδευε. πνεῦμα τοίνυν 
ἐνταῦθα καλεῖ τό τε χάρισμα τὸ τοιοῦ- 
τον, καὶ τὴν ψυχὴν τὴν δεχομένην τὸ 
χάρισμα, καὶ ἐντυγχάνουσαν τῷ θεῷ, 
καὶ στενάζουσαν. 6 γὰρ τοιαύτης κατα- 
ξιωθεὶς χάριτος, ἑστὼς μετὰ πολλῆς τῆς 


κατανύξεως, μετὰ πολλῶν τῶν στεναγ- 
μῶν τῶν κατὰ διάνοιαν, τῷ θεῷ προσπίπ- 
των, τὰ συμφέροντα πᾶσιν αἱτεῖ. οὗ καὶ 
νῦν σὐμβολόν ἐστιν ὃ διάκονος τὰς ὑπὲρ 
τοῦ δήμου ἀναφέρων evxds.—S. Chrys. 
Hom. in Ep. ad Rom. xiv. Op., tom. ix. 
Ῥ- 586, A, B.] 

4 ὑπερεντυγχάνει ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν. Pro 
nobis postulat. Vulg. Pro nobis sup- 
plicat.—Castal. See also Claud. Es- 
penceus de Christo Mediatore, cap. 11. 
Hi ergo (Grvci interpretes) Spiritum, 
...non Spiritus hoc loco substantiam 
intelligunt, sed ex divinis ejus charis- 
matibus unum; precationis nimirum 
donum in Apostolica ecclesia, quod 
in communem totius ecclesiz usum, 
qui divinitus accipiebat, pro tota qui- 
dem ecclesia, sed pro simplicibus pre- 
sertim orandi nesciis, stans orabat, 
magna tum compunctione, tum alacri- 
tate, [et alios idem facere docebat. ] 
[Ὁ]. Espene. Opera, p. 291, col. ii, C. 
fol. Paris. 1610.] 1). Ambrosius re- 
spondet [De Spiritu Sancto, lib. iii. 6. 
2. § 70: Op:, tom. i. 60] 6797 5 
Spiritum plerumque poni pro spiritali 
gratia [sicut hie dicitur postulare. 
Que Hieronymo, Sedulio, Primasio 
in Paulum.... Commentaria inscri- 
buntur] hic utroque modo exponunt, 
et Spiritum, Spiritus gratiam nominari 
[qui docet nos Domino postulare]... 
Ita hic, ‘Spiritus postulat,’ i.e. pos- 
tulare nos facit.... Quid est ‘inter- 
pellat,’ nisi quod nos interpellare facit. 
—[Ibid., p. 292, col. i. D.] 


the office of Christian Priests, as shewn in the New Test. 215 


for us, with sighs and groans which cannot be expressed.” 
What is expressed here by the inspired liturg’s “ making in- 
tercession for us,” in the next verse is ‘‘ making intercession 
for the saints,” that is, for the Church; so that from the be- 
ginning it was the office of Christ’s ministers, as advocates, 
or priests of the Gospel, to pray and supplicate for the peo- 
ple, even for the whole state of His Catholic Church. 
any man sick among you? (saith St. James) let him call for 
the presbyters of the Church, and let them pray over him, 
anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the 
prayer of faith shall save the sick, and if he have committed 
sins they shall be forgiven him.” “ Let them pray over him,” 
that is, by imposition of hands, according to what is written 
Mark xvi. 18°, and “anointing him with oil in the name of 
the Lord.” To this purpose speaks St. Chrysostom‘: ‘“ The 
Jewish priests had power to cleanse the leprosy of the body, 
or rather not at all to cleanse it, but to pronounce when the 
lepers were clean of it... .. But our priests have received 
power not to cleanse the leprosy of the body, but the un- 
cleanness of the soul, and not only to judge when we are 
clean, but to put away our uncleanness; so that they who 
despise them are much wickeder, and worthy of greater 
punishment, than Dathan and his company. For these hav- 
ing the priesthood in admiration, desired and endeavoured 
to get a dignity which did not belong to them;.... but 
the others, though the excellency and honour of the priest- 


e [They shall lay hands on the 
sick, and they shall recover.”,—Mark 
xvi. 18.] 

£ De Sacerdotio, lib. iii. [ὃ 6. λέ- 
πραν δώματος ἀπαλλάττειν, μᾶλλον δὲ 
ἀπαλλάττειν μὲν οὐδαμῶς, τοὺς δὲ ἀπαλ- 
λαγέντας δοκιμάζειν μόνον, εἶχον ἐξου- 
σίαν οἱ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων ἱερεῖς" καὶ οἶσθα 
πῶς περιμάχητον ἦν τὸ τῶν ἱερέων τότε. 
οὗτοι δὲ οὐ λέπραν σώματος, ἀλλ᾽ ἀκα- 
θαρσίαν ψυχῆς, οὐκ ἀπαλλαγεῖσαν δοκι- 
μάζειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπαλλάττειν παντελῶς 
ἔλαβον ἐξουσίαν. ὧστε οἱ τούτων ὑπερ- 
ορῶντες πολὺ καὶ τῶν περὶ Δαθὰν εἶεν 
ἐναγέστεροι καὶ μείζονος ἄξιοι τιμωρίας. 
οἱ “μὲν γὰρ εἰ καὶ μὴ προσηκούσης αὐ- 
τοῖς ἀντεποιοῦντο τῆς ἀρχῆς, ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως 
θαυμαστήν τινα περὶ αὐτῆς εἶχον δόξαν, 
(καὶ τοῦτο τῷ μετὰ πολλῆς ἐφίεσθαι 
σπουδῆς ἔδειξαν") οὗτο: δὲ ὅτε ἐπὶ τὸ 
κρεῖττον διεκοσμήθη, καὶ τοσαύτην ἔλα- 


βεν ἐπίδοσιν τὸ πρᾶγμα, τότε ἐξ ἐναν- 
τίας μὲν ἐκείνοις, πολλῷ δὲ ἐκείνων μεί- 
ζονα τετολμήκασιν. οὐδὲ γὰρ ἴσον εἰς 
καταφρονήσεως λόγον, ἐφίεσθαι μὴ προσ- 
ἡκούσης τιμῆς καὶ ὑπερορᾶν τοσούτων 
ἀγαθῶν: ἀλλὰ τοσούτῳ μεῖζον ἐκείνου 
τοῦτο, ὕσῳ τοῦ διαπτύειν καὶ θαυμάζειν 
τὸ μέσον ἐστί. τίς οὖν οὕτως ἀθλία 
ψυχὴ, ὡς τοσούτων ὑπεριδεῖν ἀγαθῶν, 
οὐκ ἄν ποτε φαίην ἐγώγε, πλὴν εἰ μή τις 
οἷστρον ὑπομείνειε δαιμονικόν. GARG 
γὰρ ἐπάνειμι πάλιν, ὕθεν ἐξέβην. οὐ γὰρ 
ἐν τῷ κολάζειν μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τῷ 
ποιεῖν εὖ, μείζονα τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν ἔδωκε 
δύναμιν τῶν φυσικῶν γονέων ὃ θεός" 
καὶ τοσοῦτον ἀμφοτέρων τὸ διάφορον, 
ὅσον τῆς παρούσης καὶ τῆς μελλούσης 
ζωῆς. οἱ μὲν γὰρ εἰς “ταύτην, οἱ δὲ εἰς 
ἐκείνην γεννῶσι" κἀκεῖνοι μὲν οὐδὲ τὸν 
σωματικὸν αὐτοῖς δύναιντ᾽ ἂν ἀμῦναι 
θάνατον, οὔτε νόσον ἐπενεχθεῖσον ἂπο- 


CHAP, Il. 


SECT. XIV. 


“€ Ts James 5. 


14, 15. 


216 St. Chrysostom on the Intercession of Christian Priests. 


curistran hood is increased, in a way contrary to them presume to 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


commit a greater sin. For to aspire to an undue honour is 
not so great a crime as to have contempt for it; and there is 
as great a difference in the account of this sin from that, as 
between admiration and contempt. Who, therefore, can 
have so wretched a soul as to despise so excellent a thing? 
I think I may say no man can be so wicked but who is acted 
by the furies. But to return from this digression; God hath 
given the priests a greater power, not only of punishing, but 
of doing good, than He hath given to our parents by nature, 
between whom and priests there is as much difference as 
between this life and that which is to come. Our parents 
begat us into this life, but priests beget us into life eternal. 
Those cannot deliver us from the death of the body, or repel 
any approaching disease, but these have often saved sick 
souls which were going to destruction, inflicting upon some 
a milder punishment, and not permitting others to fall; and 
this not only by doctrine and instruction, but by the help of 
their prayers; for they do not only regenerate us, but have 
power to remit sins. ‘Is any sick among you (saith he) let 
him call for the presbyters of the Church,’ &e. Now our 
parents by nature, if any of their children offend the su- 
preme powers and potentates, they cannot help them, but 
priests, though they cannot reconcile kings and princes to 
us, yet they often propitiate God when He is angry at us.” 
So in his sixth book Of the Priesthood’: “ But if any man will 
exactly consider what a bishop doth in things pertaining to 
God (τὰ πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν,) he will find nothing will require 
greater or more exact care and study, than they. For what 
manner of person ought he to be who makes intercession for 


κρούσασθαι" οὗτοι δὲ καὶ κάμνουσαν καὶ 
ἀπόλλυσθαι μέλλουσαν τὴν ψυχὴν πολ- 
Adicts ἔσωσαν, τοῖς μὲν πραοτέραν τὴν 
κόλασιν ἐργασάμενοι, τοὺς δὲ οὐδὲ παρὰ 
τὴν ἀρχὴν ἀφέντες ἐμπεσεῖν, οὐ τῷ 
διδάσκειν μόνον καὶ νουθετεῖν, ἀλλὰ καὶ 
τῷ δι᾽ εὐχῶν βοηθεῖν. ov γὰρ br ἂν 
ἡμᾶς ἀναγεννῶσι μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ 
μετὰ ταῦτα συγχωρεῖν ἔχουσιν ἐξουσίαν 
ἁμαρτήματα. ἄσθενεῖ γάρ τις, φησὶν, 
ἐν ὑμῖν" προσκαλεσάσθω τοὺς πρεσβυτέ- 
ρους τῆς ἐκκλησίας, καὶ προσευξάσθω- 
σαν ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν ἀλείψαντες αὐτὸν ἐλαίῳ, 
ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ κυρίου. καὶ ἣ εὐχὴ 
τῇς πίστεως σώσει TOY κάμνοντα, καὶ 


> ~ > t Ζ τ = 
ἐγερεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ κύριος" κἂν ἁμαρτίας ἢ 
πεποιηκὼς, ἀφεθήσονται αὐτῷ. ἔπειτα 
οἱ μὲν φυσικοὶ γονεῖς, εἴ μέν τισι τῶν 
ὑπερεχόντων καὶ μεγάλα ὧδε δυναμένων 
προσκρούσαιεν οἱ παῖδες, οὐδὲν αὐτοὺς 
wv > De ον a > 
ἔχουσιν ὠφελεῖν" ot δὲ ἱερεῖς οὐκ ἄρχον- 
5 A ~ > > > > ~ 
τας, οὐδὲ βασιλεῖς, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὸν αὐτοῖς 
πολλάκις δργισθέντα κατήλλαξαν τὸν 
θεόν.---Ορ., tom. i. pp. 384, B. 385, A.] 
% [εἰ δέ τις τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἐξετά- 
σειεν, οὐδὲν ὄντα εὑρήσει ταῦτα, οὕτω 
μείζονος καὶ ἀκριβεστέρας ἐκεῖνα δεῖται 
τῆς σπουδῆς. τὸν γὰρ ὑπὲρ ὅλης τῆς 
πόλεως, καὶ τί λέγω ; πόλεως, πάσης" μὲν 
οὖν τῆς οἰκουμένης πρεσβεύοντα, καὶ 


_ Simon Magus sought the intercession of the Apostles. 217 


the whole city? (but why do I say the whole city, and not 
rather the whole world?) and prays God to be propitious to 
the sins of all men, not only of the living, but of those who 
are departed this life? I truly never thought the great 
liberty (παῤῥησίαν) of interceding by Moses and Elias to 
have been sufficient for such supplication. For in truth, as 
the whole world is committed to his trust®, he comes unto 
God, as the Father of all, beseeching Him to put an end to 
wars in all the world, and to make tumults cease every where ; 
and that peace and happiness may succeed in their place, 
and that all manner of private or public calamities may be 
speedily removed. Wherefore how ought he to excel those 
in all things for whom he makes intercession to God?” Thus 
this great and holy Christian, perhaps before he was a priesti, 
wrote of sacerdotal intercession. So Acts viii., when Peter 
said to Simon Magus, “‘ Repent of thy wickedness, and pray 
God, if perhaps the thought of thy heart may be forgiven 
thee ;’ Simon, who knew what belonged to the office of an 
Apostle, as a priest, answered, “ Pray ye for me to the Lord, 
that none of these things which ye have spoken come upon 
me.” He had seen the new converts of Samaria receive the 
Holy Ghost by the prayer of Peter and John, and imposi- 
tion of their hands, and therefore he looked upon them as 
men who had special power of intercession for sinners with 
God, and said, “ Pray ye,” that is, make ye atonement for 
me to the Lord, and expiate my sin, “that none of these 
things come upon me.” And that they, and the presbyters 
under them, were the Church’s liturgs and orators in all 


δεόμενον ταῖς ἁπάντων ἁμαρτίαις ἵλεων 
γενέσθαι τὸν θεὸν, οὐ τῶν ζώντων μόνον 
ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ἀπελθόντων, ὅποϊόν τινα 
εἶναι χρή; ἔγὼ μὲν γὰρ καὶ τὴν Μωσέως 
καὶ τὴν ᾿Ηλιοὺ παῤῥησίαν, οὐδέπω πρὸς 
τὴν τοσαύτην ἱκετηρίαν ἀρκεῖν ἡγοῦμαι. 
καὶ γὰρ ὥσπερ τὸν ἅπαντα κόσμον πε- 
πιστευμένος, καὶ αὐτὸς ὧν ἁπάντων πα- 
τὴρ, οὕτω πρόσεισι τῷ θεῷ, δεόμενος 
τοὺς ἅπανταχοῦ πολέμους σβεσθῆναι, 
λυθῆναι τὰς ταραχάς εἰρήνην, εὐετη- 
ρίαν, πάντων τῶν ἑκάστῳ κακῶν ἐπι- 
κειμένων, καὶ ἰδίᾳ καὶ δημοσίᾳ, ταχεῖαν 
αἰτῶν ἀπαλλαγήν. δεῖ δὲ πάντων αὐτὸν, 
ὑπὲρ ὧν δεῖται, τοσοῦτο διαφέρειν ἐν 
ἅπασιν, ὕσον τὸν προεστῶτα τῶν προ- 
στατευομένων eixds.—Id., ibid., lib. vi. 


§ 4. p. 424, A.] 

h Note, that it was the common doc- 
trine of Christianity, that the care of 
the Catholic Church was committed 
jointly as well as severally, and in 
whole as well as in part, to the Apo- 
stles and their successors the bishops. 
In which the government of the Church 
differs from the government of the 
world. 

i [See Socrates, Eccl. Hist., lib. vi. 
c. 3. τῆς τοῦ διακόνου ἀξίας παρὰ Μελε- 
τίου τυχὼν, τοὺς περὶ ἱερωσύνης λόγους 
συνέταξε (Eccl. Hist., tom. ii. p. 512): 
that is, shortly after A.D. 381. See 
Monitum in libros de Sacerdotio, S. 
Chrysost. Op, tom. i. p, 861. ed. Ben.] 


CHAP, IL 
SECT. XIV. 


Acts 8. 22, 


ver. 24, 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


218 Instances and precepts for Priestly intercession in N. T. 


public assemblies, and upon all occasions, and officiated for 
them in things pertaining to God, is also evident from the 
writings of the New Testament, though they give but a 


‘short, and that far from a full and perfect account, of what 


Acts 1. 24. 
chap. 4. 31. 
chap. 13. 2. 
chap. 21. 
36. 


1 Tim. 2. 1, 
2, 


was done in the Church. They prayed, as I observed before, 
at the confirmation of the disciples of Samaria, and were the 
advocates or orators upon whose supplications they received 
the Holy Ghost. They prayed in a congregation of about 
a hundred and twenty, at the election by lot of Matthias, 
to be ordained in the place of Judas. Peter and John prayed 
in that assembly where the place was shaken in which they 
met together. The Apostles prayed at the ordination of the 
seven deacons, when they laid their hands upon them. Other 
public liturgs or ministers at Antioch, called prophets from 
their prophetical vocation, ministered to the Lord when the 
Holy Ghost said unto them, ‘Separate unto me Barnabas 
and Saul, unto the work whereunto I have called them.” So 
in the solemn meeting of the elders at Ephesus, Paul kneeled 
down and prayed with them after he had made his exhorta- 
tion to them. ‘To conclude, St. Paul in his first Epistle to 
Timothy, exhorts him in the first place that he), and all 
ministers under him, as the people’s orators, should have 
constant public offices of devotion, consisting of supplica- 
tions (δεήσει5), or deprecations for averting hurtful things, 
sins, and dangers. Secondly, of prayers (προσευχὰς), or 
obsecrations for obtaining mercies and blessings, and good 
things of which they stood in need. Thirdly, of interces- 
sions (€vrev&ecs), or interpellations for others. And lastly, of 
thanksgivings (εὐχαριστίας) for mercies received; and all 
these in the greatest extent of charity for men of all con- 
ditions and ranks. “ First of all, therefore, I exhort that” 
(in your Eucharistical devotions) “ supplications, prayers, in- 
tercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men.” Which 
shews, that as Christian ministers, like the Jewish, “are 
taken from among men,” so also that like them too they 
are advocates and orators at the throne of grace, or that 
‘“‘they are ordained for men in things pertaining to God.” 


i Sicut imperatores Romani man- — scopis.—[Grotius, Annot. ad 1 Tim. ii. 
data dare presidibus solebant, ita 1, Crit. Sacr., tom. vii. col. 447. ] 
Paulus in Timotheo mandata dat epi- 


“»ΌΞΟΟῬΟ 


1 Tim. ii. 1, 2, understood of the Euch. Serv. by St. dug. 219 


I have said ‘ Eucharistical devotions’ upon the authority of 
St. Augustine, who so interprets the place*: Sed eligo in his 
verbis hoc intelligere, quod omnis, vel pene omnis frequentat 
ecclesia, το. “1 choose to understand in these words what the 
whole, or almost the whole Church declares [practises ἢ], that 
we take precationes for the prayers which are made in celebra- 
tion of the mysteries before that which is on the Lord’s table 
is blessed ; orationes for the prayers when it is blessed and 
sanctified, and broken to be distributed; both which almost 


_ the whole Church concludes with the Lord’s Prayer.” Then 


he proceeds to shew the difference between εὐχὴν and προσ- 
εὐχὴν, and shews that the former is generally used im the 
Scriptures for votum, and the latter for oratio, and that in 
this text oratio is to be understood of prayer which attends 
a vow; “For all things are devoted,” saith he, “which are 
offered to God, especially the holy oblation of the altar, in 
which Sacrament we openly make the greatest vows, by 
which we vow to remain in Christ, that is, in the union of 
His body. Inéerpellationes, or as your books have it, postula- 
tiones, are then made, when the people are blessed by the 
priest; for then the bishops, as advocates, offer the people 
whom they receive, by imposition of hands, to the most mer- 
ciful potentate; which being done, and so great a Sacra- 
ment received, all is concluded with giving of thanks (gratia- 
rum actio.)” 

I am not the only or first writer that hath taken notice of 
St. Augustine’s understanding 1 Tim. ii. 1, 2. of the sacer- 


Voventur autem omnia que offeruntur 


k [Sed eligo in his verbis hoc intel- 
Deo, maxime sancti altaris oblatio, quo 


ligere, quod omnis vel pene omnis fre- 


quentat Ecclesia, ut precationes acci- 
piamus dictas, quas facimus in cele- 
bratione sacramentorum, antequam il- 
lud quod est in Domini mensa incipiat 
benedici: orationes cum benedicitur 
et sanctificatur, et ad distribuendum 
comminuitur, quam totam petitionem 
fere omnis Ecclesia Dominica oratione 
concludit. At quam intellectum etiam 
verbi Greci origo nos adjuvat. Nam 
eain quam dicunt εὐχὴν raro ita Scrip- 
tura ponit ut intelligatur oratio, sed 
Scriptura plerumque et multo usita- 
tius ... votum appellat εὐχὴν, προσευ- 
χὴν vero... semper orationem vocat.. -. 
Ka proprie intelligenda est oratio quam 
facimus ad votum, id est πρὸς εὐχήν. 


Sacramento predicatur nostrum illud 
yotum maximum, quo nos vovimus in 
Christo esse mansuros, utique in com- 
page corporis Christi... . Inéerpella- 
tiones autem, sive, ut vestri codices 
habent, postulationes, fiunt cum popu- 
lus benedicitur. Tunc enim antistites, 
velut advocati, susceptos suos per ma- 
nus impositionem  misericordissimz 
offerunt potestati. Quibus peractis, et 
participato tanto sacramento, © grati- 
arum actio cuncta coneludit, quam in 
his etiam verbis ultimam commendavit 
Apostolus.—S. Augustini Epist. exlix. 
ad Paulinum, cap. 2. ὃ 16. Op., tom. ii. 
p. 509 C—F. | 


CHAP. II. 
SECT. XIV. 





220 Benedictions at the Eucharist and other times ; 


curisttan (otal supplications, prayers, and intercessions at the holy 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Eucharist, or as he expresses it, at the “ holy oblation of the 
altar.” I find it observed by our learned countryman Mr. 
Thorndike, in his Book of Religious Assemblies, pp. 376, 
377', 383™; and by Habertus in his Pontifical, p. 283", where 
he also understands what Tertullian saith in cap. 30 of his 
Apology®, of the Eucharistical service, (and so that passage 
ad Scapulam, cap. 2, may also be understood, viz., Sacrifica- 
mus pro imperatore”) in which at the blessing, or prayer of the 
bishop or celebrating priest for the people, they were wont 
to bow their heads to receive it, the bishop holding his hands 
over them, as a sign that God’s hand was stretched out over 
them to bless them; and at the same time, as we find it in 
some of the ancient Liturgies4, to say this prayer; “ Extend, 
O Lord, Thy invisible hand, and bless Thy servants and 
handmaidens, and cleanse them from all stain of flesh and 


1 Printed at Cambridge in 1642. 
[ Thorndike after speaking of the prayer 
for the whole Church found in the an- 
cient Liturgies, (The Service of God in 
Religious Assemblies, chap. x. § 59. 
Works, vol. i. pp. 351, 544. ed. 1844) 
proceeds, (ὃ 63. p. 355,) “ It is hard 
for me to give account of this general 
practice of the ancient Church, other- 
wise than by conjecture. Thus much 
may be affirmed with confidence, that 
the practice of this prayer was the 
effect of the Apostle’s instruction, 
whereof our service speaketh; ‘ who 
by Thy holy Apostle hast taught us to 
make prayers and supplications, and to 
give thanks for all men,’ the words of 
the Apostle, 1 Tim. ii. 1,2.’’ He then 
quotes St. Ambrose on this text, 
(Pseudo-Ambrose in 1 Tim. ii. 1. Op., 
tom. ii. App., col. 292, C.) and adds, 
(ἢ 64. p. 356,) ** when he calls it the rule 
of that service which their priests 
ministered (regula ecclesiastica qua 
utuntur sacerdotes nostri), it is plain 
he understandeth the words of the 
Apostle concerning the prayers which 
were made at the Lord’s board, at 
celebrating the Eucharist.” 

m [§ 72. p. 860. ed. 1844. Thorn- 
dike here quotes the words of St. 
Augustine given above, interpreting 
1 Tim. ii. 1,2, of the prayers to be used 
at the Communion. | 

» (Habert. Pontif. Observ. ii. ad 
partem xi. Liturg. Ordin. De oratione 
in mysteriis pro pace, eeclesiis, sacer- 


dotibus et principibus. ... Precipua 
hujus pro regibus instituta: orationis, 
immo unica, causa, ab Apostolo.... 
commemorata est; (1 Tim. ii. 1.) Pax. 
He quotes St. Augustine, Epist. ad 
Paulinum, as above note k, and (p. 284.) 
Tertullian ; see the next note. | 

ο [the passage in Tertullian is, 
(Apol. i. 6. 30, 31.) Nos enim pro salute 
imperatorum Deum invocamus eter- 
num, manibus expansis, quiainnocuis.. 
oramus pro omnibus imperatoribus, 
vitam illis prolixam, imperium secu- 
rum, domum tutam, exercitus fortes, 
senatum fidelem, populum probum, or- 
bem quietum et quecunque hominis et 
Cesaris vota sunt... Scitote.. . pra- 
ceptum esse nobis... . ‘ Orate, inquit, 
pro regibus, et pro principibus, et po- 
testatibus, ut omnia tranquilla sint vo- 
bis.’—Tertull. Op., p. 27, A—D.] 

P [Itaque et sacrificamus pro salute 
imperatoris...... quomodo przcepit 
Deus, pura prece.—Id. ad Scapulam, 
δ. Ὁ. ΟΡ: 8. 591] 

a [Hickes seems to have combined 
two passages; ἐξαπόστειλον τὴν adpa- 
τόν σου δεξιὰν, καὶ πάντας Tuas εὐλό- 
γησον .. -. περίελε ἀφ᾽ ἡμῶν σαρκιικῆς 
ἐπιθυμίας épyaciayv.—S. Mare. Lit. Re- 
naudot., tom. ii. p. 164; and τοὺς ὗπο- 
κεκλικότας σοι τὰς ἑαυτῶν κεφαλὰς εὐ- 
λόγησον καὶ καταξίωσον ἀκατακρίτως 
μετασχεῖν τῶν ἀχράντων σου τούτων καὶ 
ζωοποιῶν μυστηρίων. --- ὃ. Basil. Lit. 
Goar., p. 174.} 


instances in New Test.; imply superiority, as of a Priest. 221 


spirit, and account them worthy to be partakers of the body cnar. πὶ. 
and blood of Thy only-begotten Son.” So at other times, ao 
and upon other occasions, they used, like the Jewish priests, 

to bless or pray for the people, as is evident from the many 
apostolical prayers and benedictions in the New Testament, 

in which they blessed the people as Melchisedec blessed 
Abraham. Such are these salutations: ‘Grace be to you, Rom. 1. 7. 
and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ ;” 
“Grace, mercy, and peace from God our Father, and Jesus 1 Tim. 1. 2. 
Christ our Lord ;” “Grace to you, and peace from God our Philem. 3. 
Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ ;” “Grace and peace be 2 Pet. 1. 2. 
multiplied unto you, through the knowledge of God, and of 

Jesus Christ our Lord;” “Grace be with you, mercy, and peace 2 John 3. 
from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the 

Son of the Father, in truth and love;” ‘And the grace of 2 Cor. 13. 
our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship (or ὡς 
communion) of the Holy Ghost be with you all; Amen.” 

You know, Sir, that the less is blessed by the greater, and Heb. 7. 7. 
that a blessing, therefore, is but an authoritative prayer' of a 
superior for an inferior, as of a priest for the people, or any 

single person among them, though, like Abraham, he may 

be a temporal prince. And when the superior in any rela- 

tion blesses the inferior, he blesses him in God’s name, and 

as one who had power with God to obtain a blessing for him, 

as in those other benedictions of the Apostle, ‘The peace of Phil. 4. 7. 
God, which passeth (or surpasseth) all understanding, keep 


τ Haberti Pontif. [Observ. iv. ad  eximie sacerdotale, adducing Heb. vii. 


partem xi. Liturg. Ord., ] pp. 291—293. 
[De Benedictione Pontificis.... Bene- 
dictio est actio intelligentie simul et 
affectus, mentis et voluntatis, potentis 
ad bonum et efficacis; unde ad Deum 
precipue benedicere attinet. .. . Quis- 
quis igitur benedictionem impertit, 
Deum exhibet atque reprzsentat, tan- 
quam auctorem boni illius quod bene- 
dictio pollicetur et confert: Deus enim 
tanquam primarius ac supremus bene- 
dictionis auctor in pontifice cogitandus 
est... . Tria illa hominum genera pe- 
euliari quodam jure in Scripture his- 
toria benedicunt: Patres, Reges, Sacer- 
dotes ... Ratio clarissima, quia tres 
hi pre ceteris, Patres, Reges, Sacer- 
dotes, Deum peculiari quodam titulo 
reprzesentant, illiusque, si fas esset dici, 
personam sustinent, vices agunt. He 
speaks of benediction as munus vere ac 


1,6,7. Again, | pp. 298—296. [ Observ. 
v. De Benedictione Episcoporuin. Epi- 
scopi proprium est, ut Christum sacer- 
dotem et episcopum animarum nostra- 
rum, inter presbyteros velut inter Apo- 
stolos, peculiari quadam ratione re- 
presentet, &c.] p. 296. [He instances 
the Apostolical benediction, 7 χάρις, 
K.T.A. as given by the bishop on his 
being enthroned, Apost. Const., lib. 
viii. c. 5. p. 464, A.] p. 297. [Observ. 
vi. de Benedictione Presbyterorum Sa- 
cerdos in ecclesia benedicit.—Vetus 
ordo Romanus et pontificale, ‘ Sacer- 
dotem oportet offerre, benedicere,’ Be- 
nedictio ‘est enim opus sacerdotale,’ 
εὐλογία ἱερατικὸν ἔργον, ait collector 
Constitutionum Apostolicarum, &c.— 
Lib. iii. c. 10. p. 317, C.] Martene 
de Antiquis Ritibus, [lib. 11. de Sacris 
Benedictionibus, tom. ii. p. 145. ] 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HLOOD. 


2 Cor. 13. 
14 


222 Blessing the office of a Priest ; as from God. 


your hearts and minds through Jesus Christ ;” and “The grace 
of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the com- 
munion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all; Amen.” Such- 
like is the salutation or blessing of the clergy of Rome to 
the Church of Corinth, in the beginning of St. Clement’s 
Epistle*; “Grace be to you, and peace from the Almighty 
God by Jesus Christ be multiplied ;’” and in the endt: “The 
grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you, and with all 
others who are called by God through Him.” So in the 
salutation of St. Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians": 
“ Mercy unto you, and peace from God Almighty and the 
Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour be multiplied.” So in 
St. Ignatius’ Epistles, as in that to the Church of Smyrna’: 
“ All joy (to you), through the immaculate Spirit, and 
through the Word of God.” As in their absence they 
blessed their own and other people when they wrote to 
them, so when they were present they orally blessed them, 
and the people were wont to receive their blessings with all 
veneration, as from the oracles of God. Hence St. Ambrose 
observes how indecent it is for a bishop to curse, whose office 
it is to bless; and compares the mouth of such a bishop to “a 
fountain* that sends out bitter waters and sweet.” In parti- 
cular they looked upon them as intercessors between them 
and God, and that their prayers, and intercessions, and 
blessings were very powerful with Him to avert judgments 
and obtain mercies; so the great Emperor Jovian in his 
letter to St. Athanasiusy: “Our majesty calls you back, and 
wills that you return to preach the saving faith. Go back 
then to your holy Churches, and feed the people of God, and 
put up hearty prayers for our clemency unto God. For I 
Smyrn. init., ibid., p. 33. ] 


x [Non decet de ore episcopi bene- 
dictionem simul et maledictionem 


S [χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ παντο- 
κράτορος θεοῦ διὰ ᾿Τησοῦ πληθυνθείη.--- 
S. Clem. Ep. i. init., Patr. Apost., tom. 


i. p. 146.] 

t [ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ 
Χριστοῦ μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν καὶ μετὰ πάντων παν- 
ταχῇ τῶν κεκλημένων ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ 
δι᾿ avrov.—Ibid., ο. 59. p. 181. ] 

α [ἔλεος ὑμῖν, καὶ εἰρήνη mapa θεοῦ 
παντοκράτορος, καὶ κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ Χρισ- 
τοῦ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν πληθυνθείη.--- 
S. Polycarp. Kp. ad Phil. init., ibid., 
tom. 11. p. 186.] 

Y [ἐν ἀμώμῳ πνεύματι, (καὶ) λόγῳ 
θεοῦ πλεῖστα xalpew.—S, Ignat. Ep. ad 


egredi... quia non potest de uno fonte 
dulcem et amaram producere aquam. 
—Pseudo-Ambros. de Dignitate Sacer- 
dotali, c. 4. ap. 5. Ambros. Op., tom. 
ii. App., p. 861, C. See vol. 1. p. 195, 
notes p, q. | 

Υ [ἀνακτᾶταί σε τοίνυν ἣ ἡμετέρα 
βασιλεία, καὶ ἐπανελθεῖν βούλεται πρὸς 
τὴν τῆς σωτηρίας διδασκαλίαν. ἐπάνιθι 
τοίνυν εἰς τὰς ἁγίας ἐκκλησίας, καὶ ποί- 
μαινε τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λαὸν, καὶ τὰς ὑπὲρ 
τῆς ἡμετέρας πρᾳότητος προθύμως εὐχὰς 


The People revered and sought the Blessing of Priests. 223 


know that by your supplication I, and all orthodox Chris- 
tians who believe as I do, shall obtain great favour and pro- 
tection from God.” So the bishops of Africa, in their Epi- 
stle to the Spanish Christians in the cause of Basilides and 
Martialis?: “Setting these things before our eyes, and care- 
fully and religiously considering them, we ought to elect 
men of unblemished and upright lives for bishops, who holily 
and worthily offering sacrifices of the holy Eucharist to God, 
may be heard in the prayers which they make for the safety 
of the Lord’s people.” And according to this received opi- 
nion of the sacerdotal prayers, the Emperor Valentinian the 
First*, in his letter to the Arian bishops, who had perse- 
cuted the orthodox that met in council in Illyricum, writes 
thus; “ Do not,” saith he, “ persecute those who minister to 
God with all care and diligence, by whose prayers wars are 
made to cease in all the world, and the assaults of apostate 
angels are repelled. And as by prayer they endeavour to 
drive away the destroying demons, so they introduce the 
public ministration according to law.” Afterwards he calls 
them “the stewards or procurators of the great King” (τοὺς 
διοικητὰς τοῦ μεγάλου βασιλέως) ; “ For so,” saith he”, “our 
imperial majesty always commanded that the labourers in 
the field of Christ, and the stewards of the great King should 
not be persecuted, or oppressed, or vexed, or driven from 
their flocks.” The Empress Eudoxia, seeing the Egyptian 
monks in the street, as they came up to her stopped her 
royal chariot, and “ bowing her head‘, she desired them to 


ἀναπέμπετε εἰς θεόν. οἴδαμεν γὰρ ὅτι 
τῇ σῇ ἱκεσίᾳ ἡμεῖς τε καὶ οἱ σὺν ἡμῖν 
τὰ Χριστιανῶν φρονοῦντες, μεγάλην 
ἀντίληψιν σχοίημεν παρὰ τοῦ ὑπερέχον- 
τος Qeov.—Joviani Imp. Epist. ap. S. 
Athanasii Op., tom. i. pars ii. p. 779, 
Β, 6.1 

2 [Que ante oculos habentes et sol- 
licite ae religiose considerantes, in or- 
dinationibus sacerdotum non nisi im- 
maculatos et integros antistites eligere 
debemus, qui sanete et digne sacrificia 
Deo offerentes audiri in precibus pos- 
sint, quas faciunt pro plebis Dominice 
incolumitate, cum scriptum sit: ‘Deus 
peccatorem non audit.—S. Cyprian. 
Epist. 68. (67. ed. Oxon.) p. 118. ed. 
Ben. | 





® Theodoret, Eccl. Hist., lib. iv. cap. 
8. [ἐπιστολὴ τοῦ βασιλέως Οὐαλεντίνου, 
κι τ. Δ... .. μὴ διώκετε τοὺς ἀκριβῶς τῷ 
θεῷ λειτουργοῦντας, ὧν ταῖς εὐχαῖς καὶ 
πόλεμοι καταπαύονται ἐπὶ τῆς γῆ», καὶ 
ἀγγέλων ἀποστατῶν ἐπιβάσεις ἀποστρέ- 
φονται" καὶ πάντας δαίμονας φθοριμαίους 
ἀποστρέφειν διὰ δεήσεως σπουδάζοντες, 
καὶ τὰ δημόσια κατὰ νόμους εἰσκομίζειν 
Yoaou—Hist. Eecl., tom. iii. pp. 154, 
155. ] 

Ὁ [οὕτως καὶ τὸ ἡμέτερον κράτος διὰ 
παντὸς ἐνετείλατο, μὴ διώκειν, μήδε 
ἐπικλύζειν, μήτε ζηλοῦν τοὺς ἐργαζομέν-- 
ous τὸ χώριον τοῦ Χριστοῦ, μήτε τοὺς 
διοικητὰς ἀπελαύνειν τοῦ μεγάλου βασι- 
Aéws.—Id. ibid., p. 166.1 

© Sozom., lib, viii. cap. 13. [ἡ δὲ (ἡ 


CHAP. IL 


SECT. XIV. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


224 The Blessings of Priests, to be valued greatly; 


bless and pray for the emperor, and herself, and their chi.- 
dren, and for the empire.” This the empress did to them, 
not as monks but as priests, as it is plain from the preceding 
chapter to that cited in the margin the chief of them, Dios- 
corus, Isidorus, and Petrus, were*. The people of Constan- 
tinople, at the return of St. John Chrysostom from his banish- 
ment, carried him by force into his church®, though he told 
them they who condemned him should first revoke their 
sentence against him, and compelled him to bless them, or 
“‘ give them the peace of God” in his throne. And also out 
of the church were the bishops wont to bless the people’, 
wheresoever they met them, and both in and out of the 
church they received their benedictions bowing, or upon 
their knees. And the sacerdotal power and privilege of 
blessing the people, common both to bishops and priests, 
brings to remembrance what Cosmas Indico-Pleustes$ saith 
of the Levitical law and priesthood, which was the ministry 
of the law, that they were “the guards and fortresses of the 
Jewish nation ;” and of what St. Ambrose writes in his short 
golden tract of the Sacerdotal Dignity to the college of 
bishops". “It is fit,” saith he, “that the sacerdotal dignity 
should be understood by you, that you may the better main- 
tain and preserve it, and that the words of the Psalmist may 
not be applied to you, ‘Man being in honour doth not un- 
derstand, but is like the beasts that perish.’ For the episco- 
pal honour, and sublime dignity, my brethren, cannot be 
equalled by any comparison. If you should compare it to 
the glory of kings, and the diadems of princes, your com- 


βασιλέως γαμετὴ) ἐπιβουλευθέντας av- 
τοὺς ἤσθετο, καὶ τιμῶσα ἔστη" καὶ προ- 
κύψασα τοῦ βασιλικοῦ ὀχήματος, ἐπέ- 
vevoe τῇ κεφαλῇ" καὶ εὐλογεῖτε, ἔφη, 
καὶ εὔχεσθε ὑπὲρ βασιλέως καὶ ἐμοῦ, 
καὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων παίδων, καὶ τῆς apxis. 
—Ibid., tom. ii. p. 849.] 

4 [ Dioscorus was bishop of Hermo- 
polis, Isidore had been designed for 
that of Constantinople, and Peter was 
arch-presbyter.—Ibid., ec. 12. pp. 340, 
341.] 

© [ἄγουσιν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν. 
παραιτούμενόν τε, καὶ πολλάκις ἰσχυ- 
ριζόμενον χρῆναι πρότερον τοὺς κατα- 
ψηφισαμένους αὐτοῦ πάλιν ἀποψηφί- 
σασθαι, ws ἱερεῦσι θέμις, ἠνάγκασαν τὴν 
εἰρήνην τῷ λαῷ προσειπεῖν, καὶ εἰς τὸν 


ἐπισκοπικὸν καθίσαι Opdvov.—ld. ibid., 
c. 18. p. 849.] 

f [See Kingham’s Antiquities, vol. 
ii. chap. 9. § 1.] 

& Geographia Christiana, lib. ν. διὰ 
τοῦτο ὃ νόμος προσετέθη, ἵνα φυλαχθῇ 
δι αὐτοῦ καὶ τῆς ἱερατείας φρουρούμενον 
τὸ ἔθνος [τὸ τὰς ἐπαγγελίας λαβὸν καὶ 
μὴ μίξις τις γένηται αὐτοῦ μετὰ ἕτερου 
€0vovs.—Apud Novam Collect. Scriptt. 
Montfaucon, tom. ii. p. 206. ] 

h [Dignum est enim ut dignitas 
sacerdotalis prius noscatur a nobis et sic 
deinde servetur a nobis; ut psalmo- 
graphi sententia queat repelli a nobis; 
‘homo cum in honore esset non intel- 
lexit, comparatus est jumentis insipi- 
entibus, et similis factus est illis:’ 


their efficacy, as made in the name of Christ. 225 


parison would debase it as much as if you compared the glit- 
tering and splendour of gold to that of lead. For kings and 
princes humble themselves at the knees of bishops, and kiss 
their hands, because they believe they are defended by their 
prayers.” Thus, Sir, all Christian kings and princes, as well 
as the common laity or people, believed that the prayer or 
blessing of a priest was more effectual than the prayer of 
a private person, because, as St. Chrysostom observesi, he 
prays not barely as a single person, but as a liturg or public 
minister of God, and the mouth of the whole congregation, 
yea of the whole Catholic Church, as being a member of 
that priesthood which is but one through the whole world. 
Wherefore as the prayer of a congregation of saints, or faith- 
ful Christians, though consisting but of two or three, is of 
more force than that of a single person, so must the prayer 
of a priest be, because he represents the Church, being sup- 
posed to be always present among his flock in person, or in 
spirit, actually or virtually by the authority of Christ com- 
mitted to him, as it is written by the Apostle, “In the name 
of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, 
aud my spirit;” and, “ To whom you forgive anything I 
forgive also (ἐν προσώπῳ Χριστοῦ) in the person of Christ,” 
1. 6. by the authority which I have from Christ, in and over 
His Church. Indeed these two places relate to the power of 
binding and loosing, or excommunicating and absolving by 
solemn prayer in the Church. But their authority to pray 
and intercede, and the efficacy of their prayers and inter- 
cessions, specially called blessings, was the same upon all 
other occasions ; which was the reason why in the purest and 
most holy times the people crowded after the bishops to have 
their benedictions, though now to ask the sacerdotal blessing 
is grown into too much contempt among too many of those 


honor igitur, fratres, et sublimitas epi- 
scopalis nullis poterit comparationibus 
adequari. Si regum fulgori compares 
et principum diademati, longe erit in- 
ferius, tanquam si plumbi metallum ad 
auri fulgorem compares; quippe cum 
videas regum colla et principum sub- 
mitti genibus sacerdotum, et exosculata 
eorum dextra, orationibus eorum cre- 
dant se communiri.—De dignitate Sa- 
cerdotali opus spurium, c. 2. inter Op., 


HICKES, 


S. Ambrosii, tom. ii. p. 359, A, B. 
See vol. i. p. 195, notes p, q. ] 

i [See above, note g, p. 217. ] 

k Injunctions by King Edw. VL, 
1547. [ὃ 20.] ““ Forasmuch as priests 
be public ministers of the Church, and 
upon the holy days ought to apply 
themselves to the common administra- 
tion of the whole parish,’ &c.—[In- 
junctions, &c., Wilkins’ Concilia, tom. 


Mea (ed 


CHAP. II. 
SECT, XIV- 


1 Cor. 5. 4. 


2 Cor. 2.10. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


SECT. XV. 





Conse- 
quences of 
the view 
that Chris- 


226 Recapitulation. If Christian Ministers are not Priests, 


whose duty it is to desire it; but I presume not, as is re- 
ported, among any of them who should give it in most solemn 
manner, ἐν προσώπῳ Χριστοῦ, in the name of their Master 
and great High-Priest, Jesus Christ. Certainly if mm the 
patriarchal Churches the prayers (whether in blessings or 
curses) of priests, who were heads of tribes and families, were 
thought to be of such force as to be confirmed and ratified in 
heaven, it is reasonable to believe now, that the blessings 
and intercessions of faithful priests, who are heads of national, 
provincial, or parochial Churches, have the same force. And 
I am so convinced of the powerfulness of sacerdotal inter- 
cession, as such, at the throne of grace, that I had rather 
have the benefit of priestly supplication and intercession for 
me in any time of need, especially in time of sickness, and 
at the hour of death, than thousands of their gold and silver 
who hate or but despise and ridicule priests. 

XV. I have now, Sir, shewed by many arguments taken 
from the New Testament, that the ministers of Christ are 
proper priests, and that their sacred office hath all the essen- 


tian Minis- tials of priesthood, though they are not once called priests, 


ters are not 


Priests. 


nor that priesthood in any of those sacred writings. I have 
shewed that, like the Jewish priests, they are taken or set 
apart from the people, and, like them, ordained to minister 
for men in things pertaining to God’. I have shewed that 
it is their office to transact and negotiate between them, as 
between two parties, to stand on the people’s part before 
God, and on God’s part before the people™; that they are 
His messengers or ambassadors, and their orators, to pray 
and supplicate in their name; that they are Christ’s stewards 
in His house, His ministers in His Church or kmgdom upon 
earth, who represent Him in His sacerdotal as well as in His 
regal and prophetical office, by a coalition and union of all 
the three offices in one. I have shewed that as they are 
governors under Him as King, and messengers and teachers 
under Him as a Prophet, so are they priests under Him as 
our High-Priest, and in virtue of the priestly office advocates 
to intercede for men, and as priestly superiors to bless them, 
and that they have a real altar", which is the holy table, and 


1 [Sect. 3. p. 18.] n [Sectt. 6, 8. pp. 42, sqq. 63, sqq. ] 
m [Thid., p. 19.] 


they are inferior to the Jewish Ministers. 227 


areal external sacrifice of bread and wine®, or upon suppo- 
sition that they have not, that yet they cannot but be priests? ; 
which I have shewed from the nature of priesthood, as it is 
described in the Scriptures, and other both Christian and 
heathen authors‘, all which descriptions 1 have applied to the 
Christian ministry and ministers, to prove them to be proper 
priests. As the house of Christ is more noble than the house 
of Moses, and the religion of it much more excellent than 
that of the Jews, so the ministry of it must be more noble, 
and excellent too, which yet, as I observed before, cannot be, 
if it wants the sacerdotal honour and holiness which the Jew- 
ish ministry had. In the coalescence of the three offices into 
one in our Saviour’s ministers, as well as in His own person, 
the character of priest is the most noble of the three, and of 
most concern and comfort to His people: but if they are 
only teaching and ruling ministers under Him, and not 
priests, you must give me leave to say it again, they are much 
inferior in dignity and utility to the Jewish ministers, who 
had power to bless the people, and to make atonement for 
their sins, as well as to teach and govern them. Priests 
therefore they must be, otherwise the ministers of the Gospel 
are of a rank and order much meaner in many respects than 
that of the cohens or ministers of the law; nay priests they 
must be, or else your late writer, and such ministers of the 
Church as he, must be involved in a dangerous consequence 
of their own opinion, which is to be guilty of sacrilege in 
arrogating to themselves the most proper part of the priest’s 
office, which is to stand for them before God, and as their 
orators to pray for them, and to supplicate and intercede for 
them, as their advocates at the throne of mercy, and likewise 
to bless them in God’s name, and yet not believe themselves 
to be proper priests. But priests they are in the most proper 
sense, and so 1 think they are called by God Himself in the 


CHAP. 11. 


SECT. XV. 


Old Testament, where foretelling by the Prophet Isaiah that Is. 66. 21. 


the “ Gentiles should become an holy Church,” which are 
the words in the contents of the chapter, then it follows, 
“and I will also take of them for priests, and for Levites, 
saith the Lord.” Saith Eusebius Czsariensis, in his com- 
°, [Sectt..7, 9, 10. 1 (Sect. 1, 2, 3, pp. 12, sqq. j 
? [Sectt. 4, 5. pp. 26, sqq.] 
Q 2 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


228 Proper Christian Priests foretold in Isaiah and Jeremiah. 


ment on the twenty-second verse of this chapter’: “If there 
is anew heaven and a new earth, and a new Jerusalem, by 
consequence there must be new priests and Levites.” To 
this place of the Prophet Isaiah answers that of Jeremiah, 
chap. xxxilil. 17, 18, “ For thus saith the Lord, David shall 
never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of 
Israel; neither shall the priests and Levites want a man be- 
fore Me to offer burnt-offerings, and to kindle meat-offerings, 
and to do sacrifice continually.” It is plaim from the con- 
tents of the chapter’, that our Church understands this place 
of the kingdom of Christ, which is His Church. So most 
commentators take it in a spiritual evangelical sense, and 
think that it relates to the times of the Gospel, and the state 
of the Christian Church. The commentators on the great 
French Bible are positive that the place sets forth “ the firm- 
ness and immutability of the kingdom and priesthood of 
ΟΠ βου", but then they render priests and Levites in both 
places, “‘ Docteurs de ’Eglise, ministres du Saint Evangile",” 
“teachers of the Church, or ministers of the Gospel.” But 
according to that translation, what is become of the two 
orders, priests and Levites? for the ministers of the Gospel, 
according to them, are equal, and make but one order. Nay, 
in their own sense of ministers without priesthood, they will 
scarce allow the ministers of the Gospel to be meant here, 
for they say’ it is rather to be understood of the whole house- 
hold of the faithful, who make one spiritual priesthood ; “ It 


τ [εἰ yap οὐρανὸς καινός ἐστι, καὶ 4 
γῆ καινὴ, καὶ Ἱερουσαλὴμ καινὴ, ἀκό- 
λουθον ἂν εἴη καὶ τοὺς ἱερεῖς καὶ λευίτας 
καινοὺς €oeo0a1.—Euseb. Cesar. Com- 
ment. in Hesaiam, ap. Noy. Collect. 
Montfaucon, tom. ii. p. 593, A.] 

* [God promiseth , Christ 
the branch of righteousness, a con- 
tinuance of kingdom and priesthood.” 
—Contents of Jerem. chap. xxxiii. in 
the English Bible. } 

t [See below, note v. ] 

ἃ (Hickes refers to the folio French 
Bible printed by L. and D. Elzevir, 
under the title, Le Sainte Bible, edition 
nouvelle faite sur Ja Version de Genéye, 
enrichie, outre Jes anciennes notes, de 
toutes celles de la Bible Flamande, &c. 
Par S. et H. Des Marets, Amst. 1669. 
The version in the textis ‘ Sacrificateurs 


eee 9 δ᾽ ὦ 


et Levites,’ the words given by Hickes 
are a marginal gloss. | 

v Isaiah Ixvi. 2]. Si mieux nous 
n’aimons étendre ceci 4 tous les fideles 
éleus d’entre les Gentils, honorés de 
Dieu d’un Sacerdoce Spirituel en sa 
maison, selon le privilege de la nouvelle 
alliance: étant d’ailleurs fort certain, 
que nulle part au Nouveau Testament 
les Ministres d’ ]’Eglise ne sont ap- 
pellés Sacrificateurs ou Levites. So 
on Jer. xxxiil. 17. Par ces paroles et 
les suivantes ... est ici montré...la 
fermeté et l’immutabilité de la Royaute 
et du Sacerdoce de notre Seigneur J. 
Christ... lequel a en outre sous soi 
non seulement Jes Pasteurs, et les Doc- 
teurs de son Eglise, mais aussi tous les 
membres delle, qu’il a tous faits Rois 
et Sacrificateurs. 


The Geneva Commentators upon these passages. 229 


being certain,” say they, “that the ministers of the Church 
8 y the} 


are not called priests or Levites in any part of the New Tes- — 


tament.” Sir, I suppose your late writer had his eye upon 
these notes, commonly called the Geneva notes, when he 
said that the notion of “bishops being properly priests was 
absolutely rejected by the whole Protestant communion.” 
But if that place of the prophet is to be understood of all 
the faithful, who make one spiritual priesthood, then women 
(not to mention children) are a part of it; women who never 
had any share in the priesthood of the true God: and if so, 
then I must ask again, what is there left to answer to the 
Levites in the text? For the faithful, and every one of them, 
whether men or women, are equal in this privilege of priest- 
hood without any such disparity or subordination as the Le- 
vites had to the priests. But in the proper priesthood, by 
which I explain the place with the ancient Church*, the 
deacons properly answer to Levites, and bishops and _pres- 
byters to priests. 

XVI. To conclude, Sir, I must tell your late writer that to 
say the ministers of Christ are not proper priests, or their 
ministry a proper priesthood, is to affirm with the deists and 
other enemies of the Christian priesthood, to the disbasement 
and disparagement of the Gospel dispensation, that they are 
not priests at all. Whereas of the two the evangelical cohens 
or ministers are the more proper and excellent priests, 
who perform that in substance and truth which the Jewish 
did in the shadow and letter. But if they are not proper or 
properly priests, then they are only metaphorical priests, 
priests in mere likeness but not in truth and reality, as love 
is fire and knowledge light, or a crafty fellow a fox, but are 
not indeed what they are called. In lke manner according 
to this, and such late writers, the Christian ministers are not 
truly and really priests, but only so called because they have 
some resemblance with priests, upon the account whereof 


they came to have the name. 


x [See St. Jerome on Isaiah xvi. 21. 
Quomodo enim in abscondito Judzeus 
est . .. sic et Sacerdotes et Levitz 
in abscondito sunt, qui non seriem ge- 
ueris sequuntur sed ordinem fidei.— 
Comment. in Esaiam, lib. xviii. Op., 
tom. iv. col. 825, A. And Theodoret on 


But so a painted man and 


Jerem. xxxiii. 17. ἅπασα yap γῆ καὶ θά- 
λαττα πλήρεις ἀρχιερέων, καὶ τῶν Thy 
Λευιτικὴν λειτουργίαν πληρούντων δια- 
Kévwv.—Op., tom. ii. pp. 234, Ὁ. 235, 
A. The deacons were commonly called 
Levites in the ancient Church. See 
Bingham, book ii. ch. 20. ὃ 2.] 


CHAP. II, 
SECT. XV. 





SECT. XVI. 


Advautages 
to the 
Deists, and 
other evil 
effects of 
denving a 
proper 
Christian 
Priesthood. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
I 100 dD, 


230 The Clergy’s denying these doctrines destroys the people’s 


star hath the name of a man and star; that is, they have a 
name, but not the things signified by those names. And 
therefore these men, who deny Christian ministers, truly 
and lawfully called and ordained, to be proper priests, do as 
effectually deny the verity and reality of the Christian priest- 
hood, as the greatest enemies of revealed religion, and, like 
them, by consequence make our Clements, Ireneus’, Ter- 
tullians, and Cyprians, who were not fools, notwithstanding 
all their sanctity and sufferings, to have been enthusiasts or 
knaves, and the Christian priesthood, which they taught to 
be such in truth, to be in truth nothing but what is now 
most impudently and impiously called priestcraft. Nay, they 
debase our office as much as our enemies do, and though not 
designedly, yet, I fear, with more success, because their tes- 
timony will sooner be believed against themselves by the 
people, before whom they will soon become contemptible 
and base, by the just judgment of God, as well as by the con- 
sequences of their own doctrine, by which in a manner they 
degrade themselves? But what do I say? will soon become con- 
temptible? They are in a great degree so already, and have 
almost made their whole order despicable by this false doc- 
trine, which hath helped so much to render the whole clergy 
vile in the sight of the people. Did they themselves only 
feel the effect of their doctrine it would not be matter of 
such complaint; but being thus false to their own profes- 
sion, and sapping the ground upon which both it and the 
honour due unto it stands, they serve the design of their and 
their Lord’s greatest enemies, in exposing their office to the 
scorn and hatred of the people as a mock-priesthood, and 
themselves to their contempt as mock-priests. As long as 
the people are taught the true nature of the Christian mi- 
nistry to be, as really it is, a true and proper priesthood, and 
that their ministers are true and proper priests ordained by 
God, to stand before Him as advocates for them, and before 
them as His oracles to bless them in His name, so long they 
will honour and reverence them as priests; but when they 
are pleased to strip themselves of that part of their character 
and relation to God, to which those powers belong, and 
which above any other makes their ministry and them, as 
Church-ministers, venerable and holy, then they will soon 


reverence, & their own sense of the holiness of their office. 231 


find the veneration of the people begin to decay, and by 
degrees wear off into utter contempt, when they have once 
laid aside the notion of their being orators and advocates 
ordained by God to intercede with Him for them; which, 
Sir, their flocks can no longer retain than they believe them 
to be proper priests. Nay, what must they think of such 
men who presume to act as their orators and advocates with 
God, in presenting their prayers to Him, and making solemn 
intercessions for them in a proper sacerdotal manner, and 
yet deny themselves to be proper priests? I wish your and 
other such late writers among the clergy would well consider 
this and the consequences of it, and then they would find 
themselves obliged to quit their ministry, or own and assert 
themselves to be truly and properly sacerdotal ministers, 
taken from among men to minister in things pertaining to 
God. But neither are these, Sir, all the ill consequences of 
this doctrine, which must also tempt clergymen themselves 
who believe it to have a lower and meaner idea of their 
ministry, and not to think their order to be of that dignity 
and holiness, and so separate from the world, as it is, and 
the ancient Christians believed it to be. They cannot have 
that honour and reverence for it as they themselves ought to 
have, if they do not believe it to be a true priesthood, nor 
will they distinguish themselves so carefully, as it becomes 
ministers of Christ, from other men, by the singular piety of 
their lives, and the gravity of their garb and behaviour, if 
they do not believe themselves to be priests. I doubt not, 
Sir, but that latitude of opinion among the clergy in this 
point is one of the reasons why so many ministers of late are 
more than ever secularized in their conversation, and with- 
out reverence to themselves, conform themselves and families 
to the sinful fashions and vanities of the world, against which 
they ought to preach with one mouth, and with the zeal of 
a Cyprian, a Basil, a Gregory, an Ambrose, or Chrysostom, 
lift wp their voices like trumpets, and not spare the greatest 
of men. This secularity of the clergy in complying with the 
excessive vanities and lux of the age is so common in some 
places, that it is become a common subject of discourse, but, 
as men are affected, of a different kind. The sober among 
the laity of both sexes who love the clergy deplore it, and 


CHAP. Il. 


SECT. XVI. 
SESE 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Ὁ ΤΠ πη. 2. 
20. 


232 Secularity of the Clergy, from not believing, and the 


the vain themselves ridicule it, and despise and expose the 
clergy for it. ‘Do you know, Sir,’ said one of the latter sort 
to one of the former, ‘that beau clergyman there with the 
long powdered wig and the sparkling ring?’ ‘No, Sir,’ 
answered the other, ‘nor do I desire to know any such who 
forget how they are separated and stand related to God and 
their flocks.’ Thus some with grief lament, and many more 
deride the clergy for the sinful airs they give themselves in 
modish vanities, even in the Church as well as without. Is 
it not grievous to hear it said in scorn that we have a well- 
powdered clergy? not to mention other deserved reproaches 
of them for the secularity of their families as well as of 
themselves, to such a degree of vanity as can hardly proceed 
from any other cause but their not believing or forgetting 
themselves to be priests, and their relation to God and the 
people as such. Alas! Sir, do these men think to convert 
souls? or can they imagine that the people think that they 
themselves really believe what they preach, when their com- 
pliance with the sinful fashions of the world, both in them- 
selves and in their nearest relations is so great, that they 
look more like the vainest of laymen than priests? But did 
they believe them to be priests, and seriously reflect on their 
characters as such, they would soon live up more answerably 
to it; they would soon retrieve the ancient reverence to the 
priesthood, and recover that religious respect which of old 
used to be paid to Christian ministers as priests, and (pardon 
the severity of the expression, because it is the Apostle’s) 
“recover themselves out of the snare of the devil.” To these 
gentlemen, for so I now call them, because they affect the 
genteel airs more than the gravity of priests, let me recom- 
mend that rule of St. Augustine’, Non sit notabilis habitus 
vester, nec affectetis vestibus placere, sed moribus ...... In 
incessu, statu, habitu, in omnibus motibus vestris, nil fiat, quod 
cujusguam offendat adspectum, sed quod vestram deceat sancti- 
tatem. 

To this cause also it is chiefly to be ascribed that clergy- 
men so much neglect to teach the people what we are, or 
acquaint them with our relative holiness, and with the 
powers we have as priests, and how beneficial our priestly 

Y Regula ad servos Dei. ὃ 6. | Op., tom. i. p. 791, B, C.] 


other ill consequences of not enforcing, these doctrines. 233 


office, above all others, is to mankind, and what subjection 
and reverence is due to us and our authority upon those 
accounts. Indeed this omission is not so bad (though bad 
enough), as to deny their function to be a priesthood, and 
themselves priests, as your late writer doth. But as it 
plainly proceeds from a sinful latitude, scepticism, and neu- 
trality, so is it of very ill consequence to the souls of the 
people, and the Church of God. Fathers take care to pre- 
serve the reverence due to them as fathers, and kings are 
never wanting in their care to keep the people in a constant 
sense of the sacredness of majesty, and the obedience which 
is due to them as kings; only we priests, who are of greatest 
concern to the world, are not careful to let the people know 
the holiness of our office as sacerdotal, and the honour that 
is due to it, and that the honour and obedience which is paid 
to it, as well as the contempt of it, terminates in God. From 
this cause also it proceeds that clergymen so often value 
themselves more upon some other character or account than 
as the ministers of God, and by their own example teach the 
laity to do so too. But did they believe themselves to be 
priests, and to minister in the priestly office under the eter- 
nal antitypal Melchisedec, who is our High-Priest and Advo- 
cate in heaven, standing continually before His Father for 
men; did they believe that they are His ministers in this as 
well as His other offices, and consider that it is really more 
honourable to be His minister than the minister of the great- 
est king, they would value themselves more upon their 
priestly character, and thereby teach their flocks to do so 
too. And believe me, Sir, the people would soon learn to 
do it, when they saw them reverence themselves, and pay 
due regard to their own character; they would most cer- 
tainly follow their good example, in giving them the same 
respect they give themselves; and when they learnt from 
them what was due to the priestly character, they would 
reverence all priests of the same order alike; the poorest as 
much as the richest, those who were not dignitaries of the 
Church as much as those who are; there being really no 
greater dignity imaginable than to be a priest. All other 
differences between priests of the same order are extrinsecal 
to the honour and essence of the priesthood, as to be lord 


CHAP. If. 


SECT. XVI, 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 


SECT. XVII. 
Recapitu- 
lation of 
the conse- 
quences of 
not assert- 
ing the dig- 
nity of the 
Priesthood. 


234 Spiritual dignity greater than any temporal distinctions. 


of a manor, or a lord of the realm, or a favourite at court, or 


curiously learned, or a writer of many books, or to be very 


rich, or of noble extraction, upon which scores the world is 
apt enough to pay respect to the man, when they despise 
him as a clergyman, because they understand not his dignity 
as a priest. 

XVII. Sir, I have enlarged more than at first I thought 
upon this subject, to shew the danger of this doctrine, which 
denies bishops and presbyters to be proper priests, and the 
very ill consequences and tendencies thereof. It tends, as 
you see, to the dishonour and depravation of the clergy, the 
secularizing of their manners, the debasing of them and 
their ministry in the esteem of the people, and every way to 
their utter contempt, the decay of Christian piety and reli- 
gion, and the dissolution of the Church. In a word, it gra- 
tifies all her enemies and the enemies of the priesthood, and 
gives them infinite advantage over the clergy, particularly as 
to their Divine right to tithes (which I presume your late 
writer, who doth not think himself a priest, must deny,) and 
the most odious charge which is laid upon them of priest- 
craft. But, Sir, you are none of those clergymen who are 
false to their profession, though you have given me this 
occasion to consider the doctrine of those who unhappily are 
their own enemies, and the ill tendencies and effects thereof. 
On the contrary, as you believe yourself to be a proper 
priest, so have you lived up to your sacred character in the 
exemplary piety of your life, the gravity of your garb and 
conversation, without disgracing or betraying your order or 
the Church: which would have been now in much better 
condition, and more like the Church in the best and purest 
ages, were all the clergy as true to it and its rights as you 
are: I mean, the original rights which belong to it by the 
laws of its High-Priest and founder, and the constitution of 
the evangelical theocracy, which is the Catholic Church. 
These rights, Sir, which many have no notion of, and which 
all those who understand them do not value as they ought, 
are nevertheless of highest moment to the well-being of the 
Church, and much to be preferred before all the revenues 
and temporal liberties with which pious princes have en- 
dowed her. But were all the clergy, or the generality of us, 


Good effects which would result from teaching these truths. 235 


of your mind, whatsoever is taken from her would be re- 
stored, whatsoever is amiss would soon be reformed, and 
every thing wanting in her supplied. Were the majority of 
us so affected as you are to her spiritual interests, the su- 
preme interests of the Christian world, and preferred them 
before the little interests of this life, as not only the priests, 
but the people ought to do, she would then indeed look like 
a theocracy or royal priesthood, like a new Sion indeed, like 
Jerusalem which came from above, and is free, and not like 
the Jewish Jerusalem, which was in bondage with her chil- 
dren. But, Sir, alas! the whole Catholic Church in all 
places groaneth together, and waiteth for the time when she 
shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the 
glorious liberty of the children of God. 


CHAP. II. 
SECT. XVI¥. 


CHAPTER III. 


REASONS WHY THE WRITERS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT ABSTAINED FROM 
THE NAME [or PRIESTS, | AND YET EXPRESSED THE THING SIGNIFIED 
BY IT. 


I. Havine now, Sir, shewed that it is not a good argu- 
ment to prove that the ministers or liturgs of the Church 
Christian are not priests, or their sacred office or ministry is 
not a priesthood, “ because they are not so called in the New 
Testament ;” and having also shewed that though the names 
of priest and priesthood are not used for the ministers or 
ministry of Christ therein, yet the things signified by those 
names are there, and properly belong to them; I now, Sir, 
proceed in the last place to give you some reasons for which 
it may, without presumption, be conjectured why or how it 
came to pass that they are not called by those names in the 
writings of the New Testament, as Messieurs de Geneve 
object. Certainly, as Grotius saith’, “It was not without 
some reason that Christ and His Apostles” forbore to call 
themselves so; or as he expresseth it, “ abstained from that 
way of speaking,” to which they had a right, though for 
some reasons not expressed in the New Testament, they 
forbore to use it. That Christ might have called Himself 
ἀρχιερεὺς or ἱερεὺς, High-Priest or Priest, before His ascen- 
sion, or ordered His Apostles to have given Him that title 
immediately after it, your late writer and his second* cannot 
deny ; but we do not read He ever took that title upon Him, 
or preached the doctrine of His priesthood, when He taught 
publicly in the temple, or instructed His disciples in private, 
or that He commanded His Apostles to preach of Him by 
that title, whom as we find in their sermons to the people in 
the book of their Acts, they set forth as a King or Lord, 


z De imperio Summ. Potest., cap. 2. quod ab eo loquendi genere, et Christus 
5. Ut autem precones Novi Testa-  ipse, et apostoli semper abstinuerunt. 
menti sacerdotes speciatim appellentur, _[ See above, note ], p. 5. ] 
est quidem receptum antiqua ecclesiz a [See notes ἃ, e, p. 2.] 
consuetudine, sed non de nihilo est, 


Our Lord’s Priesthood not publicly preached at first. 237 


and Prophet, and Messiah, but never as a Priest. “'There- cuar. ut 
fore,” saith St. Peter at the end of his sermon on the day of nie os 
Pentecost, “let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that a 
God hath made that same Jesus, whom you crucified, both 

Lord and Christ.” And so in his next sermon, which he 
preached openly in the temple to the people, who ran toge- 

ther unto him and John, greatly wondering at the healing of 

the lame man, “‘ You have killed the Prince of Life,” saith ch. 3. 15. 
he, “whom God hath raised from the dead.” And again, 

“For Moses truly said unto the fathers, a Prophet shall the ver. 22. 
Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren like unto 

me, Him shall ye hear in all things.” ‘And every soul that ver. 24. 
shall not hear that Prophet, shall be cut off from among the 
people.” So in the sermon which he preached before the 
council, “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you ch. 5. 30. 
slew, and hanged on a tree ; Him hath God exalted with His 

own right hand to be a Prince, and a Saviour, to give re- 
pentance to Israel and remission of sins.” Thus they preached 

up His authority as King and Messias, as the unbelieving 

Jews said of Paul and Silas: “These do all contrary to the ch. 17. 7. 
decrees of Cesar, saying there is another King, one Jesus.” 

Yet we never read that they said one word to them of His 
priesthood, though He was the High-Priest of our profession, Heb. 3. 1; 
an High-Priest of good things to come, our merciful and πὸ. us, 
faithful High-Priest, who offered up Himself by the eternal 

Spirit, whereby He obtained eternal redemption for us, and 
afterwards once for all entered with His own blood into the 

holy place, to stand in the presence of God for us, and make 
reconciliation for the sins of the people. But we do not find 

that this priestly office of the Messias was taught expressly 

by any of the Apostles till St. Paul taught it to the Jewish 
Christians of Jerusalem and Judea, in his Epistle to the 
Hebrews, about twenty years after his conversion, and thirty 

after the ascension of Christ». In like manner though His 
ministers were really and truly priests under Him, and their 
ministry a most true and proper ministerial priesthood after 

His ascension, from whence we date the beginning of His 


υ [The Epistle to the Hebrews was years earlier.—Lardner, History of the 
written, according tomost chronologers, Apostles and Evangelists, c. 2. ὃ 
in the year 63, according to some two Works. | 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


238 The Apostles abstained from calling Churches temples. 


Church, yet, as is objected, we read not in the New Testa- 
ment that any of the writers of it ever called them priests, or 
that a priesthood, or that they called themselves or it by 
those names which “ non de nihilo erat, was not without some 
reason,” as Grotius, no zealot for the Christian priesthood, 
observes. Likely for the very same reason, or reasons, 
whatever they were, we do not find that any of the houses 
where they met together for religious worship, is called ναὸς, 
or in the Hellenistical style ἱερὸν, ‘a temple‘, or οἶκος τοῦ 
Θεοῦ, ‘the house of God;’ for which we may also presume 
there was some reason why they abstained from that way of 
speaking, though in those days God was wont to signify His 
presence in the places which they set apart for His worship, 
by as sensible manifestations of His presence as ever He did 
in the Jewish temple, as by shaking the place where they 
were assembled, and the miraculous effusions of the Holy 
Ghost. St.Paul when he had a fair occasion for the use of 
one of those words seems studiously to decline it, as in 1 Cor, 
xl, 18—22. There saith he to the profane and irreverent 
Corinthians, “ First of all when ye come together ἐν τῇ 
ἐκκλησίᾳ, in the Church, I hear there are divisions among 
you.... when you come together therefore into one place” 
with such dissensions among you, “it is not to eat the Lord’s 
Supper” in that reverent manner as you ought to do; “ but 
in your eating there every one as he cometh taketh before 
others his own supper, and so one” who is poor and comes 
later, “is hungry,” getting nothing, “and another” with his 
own provision “is drunken,” i.e. eats and drinks to excess. 


to drink in ?’ 


ὁ [τὸ ἵερον is the term more gene- 
rally used for the temple in the New 
Testament, the LXX, and Josephus. | 

4 See Mr. Mede’s Works, book ii. on 
1 Cor. xi. 22. [This is a discourse en- 
titled, “‘ Churches, that is, appropriate 
places for Christian Worship, both 
in and ever since the Apostles’ times. 
—A Discourse at first more briefly de- 
liveredina College Chapel, and since en- 
larged.”’ At the opening he says, “Here 
I take the word ἐκκλησία, or church, to 
note, not the assembly, but the place 
appointed for sacred duties; and that 
from the opposition thereof to οἰκίαι, 
‘their own houses,’ μὴ γὰρ οἰκίας οὐκ 
ἔχετε; ‘ Have ye not houses to eat and 


... Thus (Works, book 
ii. p. 319.) most of the fathers took 
ἐκκλησία in this passage.’’ He adduces 
several passages in proof of this state- 
ment, Works, pp. 319, sqq.] Card. 
Bona rerum Liturg., lib. i. cap. 19. 
[This chapter is on Churches; in § 1. 
he says; A temporibus Apostolorum 
loca fuisse Deo dicata que a quibus- 
dam oratoria, ab aliis ecclesiz dice- 
bantur, in quibus populus orare, verbum 
Dei audire, synaxim agere, et corpus 
Christi sumere consueverat, Paulus 
Apostolus ad Corinthios seribens, Ep. 
i. cap. 11. testis est locupletissimus, 
&c.—Card. Bona, Opera Liturgica, lib. 
i. pars 2. p. 25.] 


This was done out of respect to the Jewish Religion. 239 


“ What, have you not houses of your own to eat and drink 
in” in this disorderly manner; “or, τῆς ἐκκλησίας Θεοῦ 
καταφρονεῖτε, despise ye the Church of God?” 

This forbearance in the holy penmen to use the Greek 
word for ‘temple’ when they spoke of the places appropri- 
ated to Christian worship, as well as their long silence of 
our Saviour’s priesthood, and omitting in Greek to call His 
ministers priests, seems to proceed from one common cause, 
I mean from some regard they had to the Jewish religion, 
which principally consisted in the temple economy and 
priesthood that was in being not only when our Lord the 
founder of the new Sion and new Jerusalem was upon earth, 
but was also to continue for some time after His ascension, 
till the destruction of the old temple and the old Jerusalem, 
which happened about seventy-two years after His birth, and 
thirty-nine after His ascension, Every one who well con- 
siders this, will grant that there are apparent reasons why 
during that part of this period in which our Lord was con- 
versant upon earth he would not declare Himself to the Jews 
to be the antitype of their High-Priest, that is, to be a Priest 
as well as a King and Prophet. For first, as a Jew He was 
to observe the law and the temple worship, and live in com- 
munion with the Jews, which though He could do as a King 
and a Prophet, yet could He not do it with congruity had 
He declared Himself to be their sovereign Pontiff, that very 
High-Priest of which Aaron himself was but a type and 
shadow. Secondly, they were willing to hearken to Him as 
a Prophet, and as one that set Himself up to be their King 
or Messias, whom they had long waited for, and under whom 
they expected not only that the temple and temple-worship 
should continue, but that it should be in greater glory than 
in the time of King Solomon. But had He taught them 
that He was or was to be the mystical Melchisedec, Priest as 
well as King, the prejudice of the people would have been 
too great to let them hearken to Him. That doctrine would 
have forthwith made them shut their ears against His preach- 
ing as much as the high-priest and priests themselves did, 
and their eyes against all His miracles as the Pharisees did, 
when they maliciously told Him that He cast out devils by 
Beelzebub the prince of the devils. In like manner, when 


CHAP. 11. 


SECT. I. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Matt. 10. 
6, 7; 
Luke 6. 13. 


First reason 
for not call- 
ing them- 
selves 
Priests ; 
Priesthood 
not men- 
tioned in 
their com- 
mission. 
Mark 16. 
15. 


Heb. 9. 11, 
12. 


240 Prejudices of the Jews respected by our Lord. 


He first chose His twelve disciples, and sent them out to 
preach the kingdom of heaven to the lost sheep of the house 
of Israel, if instead of calling them His Apostles or mission- 
aries*, He had called them His priests, they had indeed been 
sent forth as sheep among wolves, who would have torn them 
in pieces, notwithstanding all their precautions of being wise 
as serpents and innocent as doves. No town or country of 
the Jews would have received them under that character and 
with that doctrine, the preaching of which, and by conse- 
quence, of another more spiritual priesthood, and new Jeru- 
salem to come, would have made them rise up against them 
as one man; nor when they were persecuted in any one city 
would they have found another into which they could flee. 
This would have been their lot with their character of priests, 
and the doctrine of their Master’s high-priesthood, unless 
it had pleased God, by the almighty power of His grace, in 
a miraculous manner to take off the veil from their hard 
hearts, and of those stones to raise up seed unto Abraham. 
11. And as He styled them Apostles and not priests when 
He sent them forth to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, 
so neither did He alter their character after His resurrec- 
tion; no not at the time of His ascension, when He solemnly 
sent them forth the second time into all the world “ to preach 
the Gospel to every creature ;” though as many learned men 
think’, He had made them priests at the institution of the 
holy Eucharist, and had performed part of His priestly office 
in offering up Himself upon the cross for us, and was ready 
to perform the whole in ascending up to heaven, to “enter by 
His own blood once into the holy place not made with hands, 


e Tertull. de Prescript. Heret., c. 
20. Statim igitur Apostoli (quos hee 
appellatio Missos interpretatur) as- 
sumpto per sortem duodecimo Matthia 
&c.—[Op., p. 208, C.] 

f [So Hill, in his work entitled, 
de Presbyteratu Dissertatio, quoted 
below, note e, p. 262, as ‘‘a learned 
divine of our own country,’’ in speak- 
ing of what was implied in the words 
of the institution of the Lord’s Supper, 
1 Cor. xi. 24, 25, says of our Lord; In 
actu tertio pontificem egit sacerdotes 
sacrantem et authorizantem; quasi 
dixerat, Jd autem quod ego coram 
Deo, vobis et pro vobis ut discipulis et 


filiis meis przstiti, ita ut pontifex vos 
in hoe sacerdotii devoveo, ut idem mys- 
terlum sacerdotii vestri, hujus aucto- 
ritate, ecclesiz filiis et discipulis in 
futurum distribuendum consecratis.— 
Lib. iv. ο. 3. ὃ 4. p. 187. Lond. 1691. 
So the Council of Trent; Hoc ‘autem 
(novum in ecclesia sacerdotium) ab 
eodem Domino Salvatore nostro insti- 
tutum esse, (Matt. xxvi.; Mace. xiy.; 
Luc. xxii.) atque Apostolis eorumque 
successoribus in sacerdotio potestatem 
traditam consecrandi, oflerendi, et mi- 
nistrandi corpus et sanguinem ejus.— 
Cone. Trid. Sess. xxii. cap. 1. Concilia, 
tom. xx. col. 138, B.] 


As Apostles they represented Christ in all His offices. 241 


having obtained eternal redemption for us.” Nevertheless as 


there is not one word of His priesthood in this period of 
time, or in any book of the New Testament written in it but 
in the Epistle to the Hebrews, so is there not one word 
therein of their being priests, but they were still called Apo- 
stles, a character indeed of greatest honour and authority, 
by which Christ gave them all the spiritual power upon 
earth which He had received from the Father, as King, Pro- 
phet, and Priest. For as He was His Father’s Apostle and 
plenipotentiary upon earth, so they were His, as it is writ- 
ten, John xx. 21, καθὼς ἀπέσταλκέ pe ὁ πατὴρ, Kal ἐγὼ 
πέμπω ὑμᾶς, which may be rendered, “as the Father hath 
made Me His Apostle, so I make you Mine;” for what is 
here expressed by πέμπω ὑμᾶς, is ἀποστέλλω ὑμᾶς. Matt. x. 
16. Yet, as I must observe again, though the sacerdotal 
power was one part of that power which was given Him both 
in heaven and earth, and though the Apostles were His vicars 
and vicegerents in His sacerdotal as well as in His kingly 
and prophetical office, nevertheless they themselves conti- 
nued in the old title of Apostles after His ascension, and in 
like manner gave to the different orders of ministers, whom 
they ordained for the service of the Church, the names of 
bishops and presbyters, which were names of power to govern 
and teach, and related to the regal and prophetical office of 
Christ, but in their signification did not directly connote 
Him as priest. Saith Origen in his sixteenth Homily upon 
Joshua, or Jesus the son of Nun: “ But® because I am resolved 
to refer the things which I shall say of Jesus (or Joshua) to 
our Lord and Saviour, who is understood to be an elder, and 
full of years as He who is the first-born of every creature ; 
wherefore He alone, before whom none was, is truly and en- 


5. [Verum quoniam instituimus que 
de Jesu dicuntur etiam et ad Dominum 
et salvatorem nostrum referre, quis ita 
presbyter et senior provectus dierum 
intelligitur, sicut ipse qui est princi- 
pium, primogenitus omnis creature ? 
Ideo fortasse ipse solus vere et integre 
presbyter dicitur, ante quem nemo est. 
Igitur tametsi sunt qui dicantur in 
Scripturis presbyteri vel seniores, vel 
pontifices, tamen Dominus Jesus sicut 
in pontificibus pontificum princeps est, 
et sicut in pastoribus princeps pasto- 


HICKES. 


rum est, ita et in presbyteris vel seni- 
oribus princeps presbyterorum putan- 
dus est, et in episcopis princeps epi- 
scoporum, et omne quod honorabile 
nomen est, primum in hoc, et princi- 
pem esse credendum est salvatorem, 
quia ipse est omnium caput.—Origen. 
in lib. Jesu, Hom. xvi. § 2. Op., tom. 
ii. p. 346. col. i. E, F. col. ii, A. The 
words, ‘‘I am resolved to refer the 
things which I shall say,” should 
rather be, ‘‘I have begun to refer the 
things which are said.”’ | 


CHAP. II, 


SECT, 11, 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


John 3. 2. 


242 They were Priests under the One High-Priest ; soon 


tirely [called] a presbyter. Though therefore there are in the 
Scriptures who are called presbyters or priests, (presbyteri vel 
pontifices,) yet as the Lord Jesus among priests is chief priest, 
and as among pastors He is chief pastor, so among presby- 
ters He is chief of presbyters, and among bishops chief of 
bishops.” They were therefore under Him, the chief priest®, 
subordinate ministerial priests, as well as subordinate minis- 
terial presbyters and bishops, under Him as chief presbyter 
and bishop. And let me add, they were subordinate Apo- 
stles, under Him as the chief apostle; subordinate pastors, 
under Him as chief pastor or shepherd of our souls; and 
subordinate prophets, and teachers, and evangelists, under 
Him as chief prophet, teacher, and evangelist, as Nicode- 
mus said unto Him, “ Rabbi, we know Thou art a teacher 
come from God.” In like manner St. Ignatius, whom I cited 
before', calls Him “the invisible Bishop,” and the bishops 
upon earth “ visible bishops.” So in the same way of reason- 
ing, though they are not called priests in the New Testa- 
ment, yet they must have been visible priests under Him, 
the αὐτοαρχιερεὺς, their invisible archetypal High-Priest ; 
and soon began to be so called by the Church of God after 
the destruction of Jerusalem, at least within that period of 
time after it in which St. John outlived all the other Apo- 
stles, and wrote his Revelation and Gospel. Polycerates, 
bishop of Ephesus, famous for his learning, piety, and zeal 
as a Christian, who flourished towards the latter end of the 
second century, in an epistle* which he wrote in the sixty- 


4 S.Greg. Naz. Apol.Orat. i.pp. 37, 39. 
Epist. p. 800. vol. i. [ed. 1638, ψυχῶν 
προστασίαν δέξασθαι, ἢ μεσιτείανθεοῦ καὶ 
ἀνθρώπων (τοῦτο γὰρ ἴσως ὃ ἱερεὺς) οὐκ 
ἀσφαλὲς εἶναι γινώσκω... afterwards 
among the titles of our Lord, τοῦ 
ποιμένος, τοῦ ἀμνοῦ, TOD ἀρχιερέως, τοῦ 
θύματος, κι τ.λ.---8. Greg. Naz. Hom. ii. 
Op., tom. i. pp. 55, A, B. 58, A. ed. Ben. 
ἐπαινεῖς τὸν ἅγιον καὶ τὸν κοινὸν ἡμῶν 
πατέρα, ... τὸν πιστὸν θεράποντα, καὶ 
μέγαν ἀρχιερέα, τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώ- 
πων μεσίτην, K.T.A.—Id., Epist. Ἰχχῖχ. 
ad Simpliciam, de S. Basilio, Op., tom. 
ii. p. 70, A. ed. 1840. ] 

i [The passage referred to is, ἐπεὶ 
οὐχ ὅτι Toy ἐπίσκοπον τοῦτον τὸν βλε- 
πόμενον πλανᾷ τις, ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀόρατον 
παραλογίζεται.----ὃ. Ignat. Epist. ad 
Magn.,c. 3. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 18, 


quoted above, p. 190, note q.] 

k Euseb. Eccl. Hist., lib. v. cap. 24. 
[TloAvkpdrns* ds καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν ἣ πρὸς 
Βίκτορα καὶ τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἐκκλησίαν 
διετυπώσατο γραφῇ, τὴν εἰς αὐτὸν ἐλ- 
θοῦσαν παράδοσιν ἐκτίθεται διὰ τού- 
Tov’... ἔτι δὲ καὶ Ἰωάννης 6 ἐπὶ τὸ 
στῆθος τοῦ κυρίου ἀναπεσών" ὃς ἐγενήθη 
ἱερεὺς τὸ πέταλον πεφορεκὼς, καὶ μάρ- 
Tus καὶ διδάσκαλος" οὗτος ἐν ᾿Εφέσῳ 
Kekolunta.—pp. 243, 244. For the 
other circumstances mentioned by 
Hickes, see cap. 22. δεκάτῳ ye μὴν τοῦ 
Κομόδου βασιλείας ἔτει... διαδέχεται 
Βίκτωρ ... κατὰ τοὺς αὐτοὺς χρόνους 
ἐπίσκοπος... τῆς ἐν ᾿ΕἘφέσῳ παροικίας 
Πολυκράτης.---». 241. ἐγὼ οὖν ἀδελφοὶ, 
ἑξήκοντα πέντε ἔτη ἔχων ἐν κυρίῳ... -- 


Ibid., cap. 24. p, 244. ] 


called so; as by Polycrates Bp. of Ephesus after St. John, 948 


fifth year of his age to the bishop and Church of Rome, cuar. m. 
coming to mention St. John among the Asian worthies and =" 
luminaries of the Church: ‘ Moreover,” saith he, “John, 

who lay in the bosom of our Lord, who was a priest, and 

wore” upon the front of his mitre ‘the holy golden plate,” Exoa. 98, 
upon which was engraven Holiness to the Lord, ‘ John, who ad θθιοίς 
was also a martyr and doctor, this John died in Ephesus.” 

Sir, I have rendered the Greek word ἱερεὺς ‘ priest,’ which is 

the literal signification of it, though here it should be trans- 

lated an high-priest ; for you know, Sir, ἱερεὺς is often used goo Heb.10. 
for ἀρχιερεὺς in the Epistle to the Hebrews, as priest is often ay and 
put for high-priest in the Old Testament'; and accordingly 

St. Hierome translates the place thus™: Qui supra pectus 
Domini recubuit, et pontifexr ejus fuit, auream laminam in 

Ffronte gestans, “who lay in our Lord’s bosom, and was His 
high-priest, and wore the golden plate on his forehead.” 
Rufinus translates it thus": Qui fuit summus sacerdos, et pon- 

tificale (πέταλον) gessit, ‘who was high-priest, and wore the 
pontifical golden plate.” And as for this testimony of Poly- 

crates, there is no reason to doubt of the truth of it, because 

he lived so near the time of St. John, who died in or about 

the hundred and fourth year of the Christian account ; or, as 

St. Chrysostom® thinks, in the hundred and twentieth, for 
Polycrates wrote that epistle in 196, which was the sixty- 

fifth of his age, and by consequence he was born in 1381, 

which was but twenty-seven years after St. John’s death, 
according to the first account of it, and but eleven according 

to the latter; and being also his successor in that see, after 

many others of his family, he had advantages and opportu- 

nities of informing himself of the truth of this matter; and 

as he could not well be deceived, so neither would he de- 

ceive. You know, Sir, Valesius in his notes on the place 


) fe. Ὁ. Exod. xxxv. 19; xxxviii. 
21.] 
™ [De Viris Illustribus (al. de Scrip- 
toribus Ecclesiasticis,) cap. 45. Op., 
tom. ii, col. 871. See Valesius’ note 
below. ] 

= {Ecclesiastice Historie Eusebii, 
Ruffino presbytero interprete, fol. Ar- 
gent. 1514. ] 

o [This statement occurs in a spu- 
rious sermon, de S. Joanne Apostolo, 


published as St. Chrysostom’s by Mo- 
rell, Op., tom. vi. pp. 603, sqq. εἶτα 
ἐπανελθὼν τῆς ἐξορίας καταλαμβάνει 
τὴν Ἔφεσον, κἀκεῖσε διατρίβων συντάτ- 
τει τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὧν ἐτῶν ἕκατον, διαρ- 
κέσας ἕως ὕλων ἑκατὸν elkoow.—S. 
Chrysost. Op., tom. viii. inter Spuria, 
p- 131, C.ed. Ben. The same statement 
is made by Suidas in voc. Ἰωάννης, tom. 
i. col. 1786, but by no other writer. 
See note ed. Ben. ad loc. S. Chrysost. | 


R 2 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


244. They were Priests before, though not so called. 


makes this remark?P, viz. “That Polycrates observes three 
things in the praise of St. John; 1. That he was high-priest. 
2. That he was a martyr; and 3. That he was a doctor or 
evangelist ; and therefore as he was the martyr and evange- 
list of Christ, so must he be understood to have been His 
priest. And as for wearing the golden plate” on the front of 
his mitre, as a badge of his pontifical office, “ Epiphanius 
writes the same thing of St. James, the brother of our Lord, 
and first bishop of Jerusalem ; but by mistake, as Peta- 
vius thinks’. But were it true, it would give a good account 
why the high-priest* of that time, with the scribes and pha- 
risees, taking advantage of the death of Festus the Roman 
governor, before the arrival of Albinus his successor, when 
there was an anarchy in Jerusalem, full of rage, and more 
like a rabble than a council, hurried him without trial to the 
top of the temple, from whence they threw him down; and 
because he did not die upon the spot, one of them, as he was 
praying for them, brained him with a fuller’s club. But to 
return from this digression about James the Just to what 
Polycrates saith of St. John. As our blessed Lord could not 
have been a priest to His Father at the writing of the Epistle 
to the Hebrews, unless He had been so before, so neithey 


Ρ [“ Hieronymus in lib. de Scriptori- resi Nazarzeorum, et in Heresi lxxviii.”’ 


bus Ecclesiasticis hee Polycratis verba 
sic vertit: ‘qui supra pectus Domini 
recubuit et pontifex ejus fuit, auream 
laminam in fronte portans.’ Rufinus 
vero ita interpretatus ; ‘ quifuit summus 
sacerdos, et pontificale (πέταλον) gessit.’ 
De pontificatu Judzorum hee non esse 
accipienda, satis apparet. Neque enim 
Joannes pontifex fuit Judzorum, aut 
ex genere sacerdotali. Itaque recte 
Hieronymus vocem addidit ‘ pontifex 
ejus,’ id est Christi. Tria enim in Jo- 
anne notat Polycrates, que ad com- 
mendationem ejus faciebant; Primum 
quod sacerdos fuerit, deinde quod mar- 
tyr, tertio quod doctor seu evangelista. 
Proinde ut martyr Christi et evange- 
lista Christi fuit, sic etiam sacerdos 
Christi intelligatur necesse est. Quod 
autem de lamina dicit Polycrates, cre- 
dibile est primos illos Christianorum 
pontifices, exemplo Judzorum ponti- 
ficum, hoc honoris insigne gestasse. 
Certe et Jacobum fratrem Domini qui 
primus Hierosolymis episcopus est or- 
dinatus, pontificalem laminam in fronte 
gestasse auctor est Epiphanius in Has- 


—Valesii adnott. ad Hist. Eccl. Euseb., 
lib. v. c. 24. p. 243. ] 

4 Quod de Johanne Evangelista tes- 
tatum reliquit Polycrates apud Euse- 
bium, lib. v. cap. 24. ds ἐγενήθη ἱερεὺς 
τὸ πέταλον πεφορεκὼς, de Jacobo haud 
scio an quisquam prodiderit. Nam 
quos hevresi xxix. citat (Eusebium, 
Clementem) Epiphanius. de Johanne, 
non Jacobo ista scripserunt.’’ Petavius 
ad Heres. Ixxviii. vol. ii. p. 333. [The 
words of Epiphanius, Heres. ]xxviii. 
§ 14, are οὗτος ὁ ᾿Ιάκωβος καὶ πέταλον 
ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς ἐφόρεσε.---Ορ., tom. 1. 
p. 1046. A.; and Heer. xxix. ὃ 4 (Naza- 
reorum) speaking of St. James’ being 
admitted into the holy place, he says ; 
οὕτω yap ἱστόρησαν πολλοὶ mpd ἡμῶν 
περὶ αὐτοῦ, Εὐσέβιός τε καὶ Κλήμης, 
καὶ ἄλλοι. ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ πέταλον ἐπὶ 
τῆς κεφαλῆς ἐξῆν αὐτῷ φέρειν, καθὼς οἱ 
προειρημένοι ἀξιόπιστοι ἀνδρὲς ἐν τοῖς 
ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ ὑπομνηματισμοῖς ἐμαρτύρη- 
cav.—Ibid., p. 119, B, C.] 

τ Euseb. Hist. Eccl., lib. ii. ec. 28. 
[ Hist. Eccl., tom. i. pp. 77—82. ] 


The Mosaic Institutions reverenced by the Apostles. 245 


could St. John have been His ministerial priest when he was car. m. 
bishop of Ephesus, unless he had been so before, even from ὅπ. 
the beginning of the Christian Church, though he is not so 

called either in his own or any other writings of the New 
Testament. 

[111.1 This forbearance in the Apostles, bishops, and pres-_ secr. τι. 
byters, to take upon them the sacerdotal title, or to style Second rea- 
themselves priests in their writings after our Lord’s ascen- τς κα 
sion, is secondly to be referred to the regard they had, and (fine Jews. 
were to have to the Jewish religion, which, as I said before, 
principally consisted in the temple economy and priesthood, 
with which none of their doctrines were so inconsistent as 
that of their being priests. They knew the temple-worship 
was to continue to the destruction of Jerusalem; and that in 
the meantime it was to be decently treated by them; and as 
they had still a right to the temple, and owned the God of 
the temple, so they were obliged by the will of their Lord, 
and all the rules of religious prudence, to comply, as far as 
they could, consistently with preaching up Jesus, with the 
temple-worship and the law of Moses, that thereby they 
might more easily convert the Jews, and when they were 
converted, keep them firm in their communion from relaps- 
ing to Judaism again. For the Jewish Christians were 
wont to continue zealots of the law after their conversion, as 
you may see in Acts xxi., where James the Apostle, and Acts 21.10. 
bishop of Jerusalem, told Paul, that of the many thousands 
of Jews who believed, they were all zealous of the law. This, 

Sir, was twenty-five years after the ascension of Christ; in 
which time if St. James, for instance, had preached up him- 
self to be the ministerial high-priest of Jerusalem under 
Jesus our High-Priest in heaven over the house of God, it 
would have been a much greater offence both to the believ- 
ing and unbelieving Jews, than it was in St. Paul to teach 
the convert Gentiles not to circumcise their children, or ver. 21. 
walk after their rites and customs, but to forsake the law of 
Moses. As long, therefore, as it was necessary for them to 
comply with the temple-worship and the Mosaical observ- 
ances, so long it was inconsistent for them to own them- 
selves for priests, because their ministerial priesthood upon 
earth, as well as the priesthood of Jesus in heaven upon 


246 The Apostles avoided causing offences to the Jews. 


curisttAN Which it depended, was a priesthood opposite to that of the 
ge temple, and could not at the first preaching of it but be so 
pet understood by the believing as well as the unbelieving Jews, 
and have equally enraged them both against the Apostles, as 

men who had a design to set up another altar, and another 
priesthood, and another temple economy against Moses and 

the law. To what degree this would have offended them, 

and what the effects of that offence would without a miracle 

have been, may be seen in the 22nd chapter of Joshua, from 
Josh.22.10. the history of the great altar of witness, which the children 
of Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh built by 

Jordan, which the children of Israel thinking was erected in 
opposition to the altar of the sanctuary at Shiloh, gathered 
themselves together there to go up to war against them, that 

they might destroy them. So they presently destroyed St. 
Stephen upon the evidence of false witnesses, whom, because 

Acts 6.10, they could not resist the spirit of wisdom by which he spake, 
they suborned false witnesses to testify that they heard him 

speak blasphemous words against God and Moses, and 

against the temple and the law. It therefore highly con- 

cerned the Apostles to conceal the doctrine of their own 

and their Lord’s priesthood, as a mystery which yet neither 
believing or unbelieving Jews were prepared to receive. On 

the contrary, they were obliged to all prudential compliances 

and condescensions to their weakness, and to Judaize as 

much as lawfully they could, that they might gain the Jews. 

Acts 2. 46, Thus the Apostles, and their first proselytes whom St. Peter 
converted on the day of Pentecost, “continued daily with one 

accord in the temple praising God, and having favour with 

all the people,” which they could not have had without such 
compliances, by which they made such additional conver- 

sions to the Church as they could not have made had they 
pretended to be priests. We read in the fifth chapter of the 

Acts5. 14, Acts, that out of Jerusalem and the countries round about it 
‘believers were more and more added to the Lord, multitudes 

Acts 6.7. both of men and women ;” and in the sixth chapter, that “ the 
word of God still increased, and that the number of believers 

was greatly multiplied in Jerusalem, and that a great num- 

ber of the priests were also obedient to the faith.” 1 believe, 

Sir, you will grant that these in all appearances would not 





They conformed to the Law and Temple worship. “247 


easily have come over to the Church, had the Apostles de- cur. πὶ. 
clared themselves to be priests, which they could not well —_«“_«_. 
have done without preaching up Jesus, whom the Jews were 

content to believe in as King and Messias, to be their High- 

Priest. Indeed we do not read in the Acts that St. James, 

or any of the Apostles, preached or prayed in the temple 

after the persecution in which St. Stephen the first martyr 
suffered, till we come to the twenty-first chapter, where he 

and the elders persuaded St. Paul to comply with the Jewish 
Christians in going up to the temple with some brethren Acts 21. 23. 
who had a Nazarite’s vow upon them, to purify themselves, 

that is, to offer all the sacrifices, and perform all the other 

rites of the Jewish religion, which are described in the sixth 

chapter of Numbers, from the thirteenth to the twenty-first 

verse. But it is not probable that they would have per- 

suaded St. Paul to Judaize in this solemn piece of temple- 
worship, had they not in the meantime gone themselves 

thither. Their forbearance so long, for about two or three 

and twenty years, would have made the Jewish brethren 

jealous of St. James their bishop, and suspect that he also, 

as well as St. Paul, was a forsaker of Moses and his law. It 

is much more reasonable to believe they continued their 
compliances in going up to worship at the temple, as far as 

they could do it with safety, in times free from persecution, 

as in that interval of quiet after the martyrdom of St. Ste- 

phen, when “the Churches had rest throughout all Judea, Acts 9. 3¢. 
and Samaria, and Galilee, and were edified in walking in 

the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost 

were multiplied.” So had it peace again after the death of 

Herod Agrippa, who, to gratify the Jews, persecuted the Apo- 

stles at Jerusalem, and killed James the brother of John Acts12.1— 
with the sword; for after he was smitten by the angel of 8: 

the Lord, it is said that “the word of God grew and mul- 
tiplied,” Acts xii. 24.° After this we have no farther account 

of matters relating to the Church of Jerusalem, but of the 

council of the Apostles and elders, who met there to deter- Acts 15. 
mine how far the Gentile Christians were obliged to keep 

the law of Moses, and of St. Paul’s going thither from Czsa- 

rea in the twenty-first chapter, which I mentioned before, 

and which happened in the twenty-fifth year after Christ’s 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Acts 13. 14, 
15. 


ver. 21. 


248 This continued till the Jews quite rejected the Gospel. 


ascension, and about two or three years before the martyr- 
dom of St. James, who frequented the temple to the last, 
into which he, of all the Christians, was, for his most emi- 
nent and superlative sanctity of life, permitted to enter and 
pray, as Hegesippus in Eusebius‘ writes, and “there was he 
found when he was apprehended, interceding with God for 
the sins of the people upon his knees; which, by long and 
frequent kneeling on the ground in prayer, were become as 
hard as those of a camel.” The same regard they were to 
shew to the Jewish religion at Jerusalem obliged them also, 
in all other cities and countries where the Jews had syna- 
gogues, to Judaize as much as it was lawful for men to do 
who preached Jesus to be the Messias, that they might the 
more easily convert the Jews and Jewish proselytes, as at 
Antioch in Pisidia, in which place Barnabas and Paul went 
into the synagogue, where, after the reading of the law and 
the prophets, the rulers of the synagogue sent to them to 
tell them if they pleased they might preach to the people. 
I cannot think they would have invited them to preach un- 
less they had joined with them in their synagogue-worship, 
as looking upon their brethren the Jews wherever they came 
as one people of God with themselves, and within the same 
covenant of grace, till they rejected and blasphemed Jesus, 
whom they preached; and then, as our Lord commanded 
them, when He first sent them forth to the lost sheep of the 
house of Israel, they broke off communion with them, and 
shook off the dust of their feet against them, as St. Paul and 
Barnabas did against the contradicting and blaspheming 
part of that synagogue, as a sign of the destruction which 
should overtake them. But many of them, Jews and Jewish 
proselytes, followed Paul and Barnabas, which there is no 


S τούτῳ μόνῳ ἐξῆν εἰς τὰ ἅγια εἰσίε- hanius (Her. Ἰχχν. tom. i. p. 1045, 
ῳ μόνῳ Ύ Ρ 


vat... καὶ μόνος εἰσήρχετο εἰς τὸν vady" 
[ηὑρίσκετό τε κείμενος ἐπὶ τοῖς γόνασι, 
καὶ αἰτούμενος ὑπὲρ τοῦ λαοῦ ἄφεσιν" 
ὡς ἀπεσκληκέναι τὰ γόνατα αὐτοῦ δίκην 
καμήλου, διὰ τὸ ἀεὶ κάμπτειν ἐπὶ γόνυ 
προσκυνοῦντα τῷ θεῷ, καὶ αἰτεῖσθαι 
ἄφεσιν τῷ AaG.—Hegesippus ap. Eu- 
seb. Hist. Eccl., lib. 11. ο. 23. tom. i. 
p- 78.] See also the animadver- 
sions of Petavius against Scaliger, 
in his notes on Heres. lIxxviii. of 
Epiphanius, tom. ii. p. 332. [Epi- 


D.) had substituted εἰς τὰ ἅγια τῶν 
ἁγίων for εἐς τὰ ἅγια : Scaliger objected 
to the credibility of the history on the 
ground of the improbability that one 
who was not even a Levite should be 
allowed to enter the holy of holies. 
Petavius shews that the holy place 
was intended ; that the Apostle’s being 
admitted there was a remarkable dis- 
tinction, but that the fact was to be 
believed on the testimony we have for 


it.] 


They were probably directed to act so by our Lord. 249 


reason to believe they would have done had they preached a 
truth so inconsistent with their religion as that there was 
an evangelical altar and priesthood among the Christians, 
which was to succeed to the altar and priesthood of the tem- 
ple, and that Moses was to give place to Christ. The like 
success they had in the synagogue at Iconium, where, saith 


CHAP. Il. 
SECT. IIT. 


the text, “they so spake, that a great multitude both of the Acts 14.1. 


Jews and also of the Greeks believed.” What I. have said 
here of the compliance of the Apostles with the Jews is plain 
from the words of St. Paul, 1 Cor. ix. 20, ““ Unto the Jews I 
became as a Jew (in observing the Jewish rites and ceremo- 
nies); to them who are under the law, as (if I also were) 
under the law.”” And what he did, no doubt but the rest of 
the Apostles aud Evangelists likewise did. 


IV. But in the third place, as the Apostles out of regard _ 
Third rea- 
son; pro- 
bably by 
our Lord’s 


to the Jews, whom they considered as one peculiar people of 
God with themselves till they resisted their doctrine and 


SECT. IV. 





miracles, did Judaize in the temple and synagogues, and for- command. 


bear in great compassion to their weakness to acquaint them 
with the great mystery of the evangelical altar and priest- 
hood, that they might more easily convert them: so it is 
very probable they also concealed it from them by our Lord’s 
direction, it being very agreeable to the wisdom of God to 
conceive that He would not have two priesthoods openly set 
up in the same place, or as I may say in the same Church, at 
one time. , The Jewish priesthood was of Divine institution 
as well as the Christian, and as it became the infinite wisdom 
of our Lord to bid His Apostles tarry at Jerusalem, and 


wait there for the promise of the Father before they entered Acts 1. 4. 


upon their Apostolical office, so might it become Him to for- 
bid them to preach, or set up the latter, till the former was 
put down; because two opposite priesthoods and two opposite 
altars appearing among one people, would have wrought great 
distraction and confusion, when it could be truly affirmed 


by both sides that both were from God. “God,” saith the 1 Cor. 14. 
Apostle, “is not the author of tumult and confusion, but of a 


peace and order ;” and therefore we may without presumption 
believe that it was His will that the new priesthood should 
not be promulged, nor its new altar erected publicly in 
every place, till the appointed time came when the old priest- 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


John 20. 30. 
1. 21. 90. 


250 Many things done and said by our Lord not recorded. 


hood with the temple and its altar were to be destroyed. 
The new Jerusalem was not to be complete till old Jerusalem 
was laid waste. Before that it was only in fieri, but after it 
was in facto esse, and then the Christian priesthood and altar 
became the only priesthood and altar in the world of Divine 
erection, when they were left alone, and were no longer 
opposite to the Jewish priesthood and altar, which were then 
no more. But had the Christian priesthood and altar been 
set up publicly and in form before this period, there had 
been in appearance altar against altar, and priesthood against 
priesthood in public view, and one Divine institution plead- 
able agaist the other, which would have distracted the 
worshippers of the one true God, the God of the Jews, and 
brought forth strife, envying, and distraction, and every evil 
work. This was so detestable in the eyes of the heathens 
that they could never endure two different altars, or the 
appearance of two different altars to one god*, and therefore 
all colonies were wont to build their temples and altars after 
the same form, and make the images of their gods after the 
same likeness that they were built and made in the mother 
cities, lest they should seem to set up opposite temples and 
altars. It was therefore very agreeable to the wisdom of our 
Lord and lawgiver, to command His Apostles to abstain from 
all appearance of schism by two priesthoods, till this time, or 
the times near it, when there were no more hopes of convert- 
ing the obdurate and blasphemous Jews now ripe for destruc- 
tion. If it be objected that this is all precarious, because it 
is nowhere written in the New Testament that our Lord gave 
any such order, I answer, first, that as He did many miracles 
in the presence of His disciples which are not written, so He 
spoke and did many other things which likewise are nowhere 
written, and which if they had been written every one, would 


t Doctiss. et Nobiliss. Ezech. Span- 
hemii Dissertatio nona de prestantia et 
usu Numismatum, pp. 572, &c. [Illa 
equidem fuit conditarum olim urbium, 
aut deductarum in eas coloniarum ratio, 
ut preter alia que obiter supra adtigi- 
mus, sacra in primis patria (quod mo- 
nuit jam ad Polybium et qua de re 
ante doctissimus Valesius) quaque ad 
eorum cultum ac czremonias adtinent, 
in novas illas urbes vel colonias trans- 


’ 


portarent cives illi advenz et coloni. 
Hine primo loco hic commemorandi 
presides ac tutelares conditorum suo- 
rum Dei; quorum nempe simulacra, 
nomina ac cultum, eandem etiam dica- 
tarum iis edium formam, iidem coloni 
constanter ac religiose conservabant.— 
(§ 3. Eorundem numinum et sacro- 
rum, qu antiquz patriz conspectus 
in nummis,) pp. 572, 544. Lond. 1706. } 


Not assuming this name at least permitted by our Lord. 251 


have made a world of books, St. Paul cites one of His say- cmap. τι. 
ings, which is nowhere else recorded, that ‘it is more blessed”? ~ τας. 
. pati : A Acts 20. 35. 
or heroical for a Christian “to give than to receive.” But 
secondly, considering the fact is plain that the Christian 
priesthood was kept so long secret, it is not precarious or 
presuming to ascribe it to a direction or order of our Lord, 
for the reasons given, till a better cause can be assigned. 
V. Thirdly, considering the Apostles, who never called _ scr. v._ 
themselves or other ministers priests, could not but under- Fourth rea- 


son; at 
stand the will of their Lord, we may presume they forbore es 


that title for the prudential reasons above given, -by His nade 
allowance or permission, if not by His direction, and then 
the difference between permission and direction in a supreme 
lawgiver being not very great, it is not so precarious to re- 
solve their practice into the latter rather than the former, 
since doing or forbearing to do a thing by the direction or 
permission of a superior are both according to his will. The 
Jewish proselytes, at their first coming over to Christianity, 
and some time after, thought of nothing less than a dissolu- 
tion of the temple-priesthood and altar. On the contrary, 
they thought that the house of Christ was but a superstruc- 
ture upon the house of Moses, but never imagined it was to 
be the destruction thereof. Hence they expected that the 
Gentile proselytes to the Messias should be circumcised and 
observe the law, as becoming members of the Jewish Church, 
in which they still reputed themselves to be, and to be ob- 
liged, while the temple stood, to observe the Jewish rites. 
This, not to mention the epistle of St. Barnabas", is so plain 
from the fifteenth chapter of the Acts, and the epistles of 
the Apostle to the Romans and Galatians, that I need not 
insist upon the proof of it. And St. Paul so far complied 
with their opinion as to circumcise Timothy, that he might 
not offend the Jews at Derbe, Lystra, and Iconium, who Acts 16. 8. 
knew him to be the son of a Greek. This was done about 
seventeen years after Christ’s ascension, and I mention it to 
shew that these and such like compliances of the Apostles 
with the believing Jews are, in like manner as I have said 
of their forbearance to call themselves priests, to be ascribed 


u [See the extracts from St. Bar- andcap.2.(Latine.) Patr. Apost., tom, 
nabas’ Epistle, in the following notes, i. p. 57. ] 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 


HOOD. 





Acts 13. 46. 


252 The Jewish converts were the true people of God : 


to the direction, or at least to the permission of our Lord, 
which I suppose, Sir, your late writer will not think fit to 
deny. I am so much of this opinion, that I believe they 
suffered the convert priests to minister in their priestly 
office when they could do it with safety to themselves, and 
without having fellowship with their unbelieving brethren, 
who rejected Christ. For after their conversion the Jews 
had the same right as before to have communion with the 
God of the temple, and to be partakers of His altar, where 
they might still offer and eat as Jews, so they did not do it 
in society with their disobedient brethren; who, as St. Paul 
and Barnabas said unto those at Antioch in Pisidia, “ put 
the word of God from them, and made themselves unworthy 
of everlasting life.’ The completion of the covenant was 
not in the unconverted, but in the converted Jews; they, as 
Christians, were the true heirs of the promise among that 
people with the converted Gentiles, and the covenant which 
God made with their father Abraham was with them, and 
them only of all the Jewish nation; and as His believing 
children they more especially had a right to the temple 
and altar of God, as long as they were in being. To this 
purpose speaks St. Barnabas in his epistle*: “ Be not like to 
them, who heaping up their sins, say that their covenant is 
ours; whereas it is ours only, for they (by their unbelief ) 
have for ever lost that which Moses received.” So chapter x :¥ 
“Let us see then whether this (unbelieving) people or the 
former be heirs according to the promise, and the covenant 
be with us or them.” So in the same chapter’; “‘And Jacob 
said unto Joseph, I know it, my son, I know it;’ but the 
elder shall serve the younger, though he shall also be 
blessed. You see then whom He hath appointed that they 
should be the first people and heirs of the covenant. And 
what also if God hath mentioned this by Abraham? Then 
we have the perfection of knowledge. What then saith He 


* [c. 4. (extant only in Latin.) Non 
similatis eis, qui peccata sua congerunt 
et dicunt; quia testamentum illorum 
et nostrum est.—S. Barnab. Epist. 
Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 59. | 

Υ [ἀλλ᾽ ἴδωμεν" εἰ οὗτος ὃ λαὸς κλη- 
ρονόμος, ἢ ὃ πρῶτος, καὶ εἰ ἡ διαθήκη 
εἰς ἡμᾶς, ἢ εἰς éxelvovs.—Ibid., c. 13. 
Ρ. 41.] 


* [καὶ εἶπεν ᾿Ιακὼβ πρὸς Ἰωσὴφ, οἶδα, 
τέκνον, οἶδα" ἄλλ᾽ 6 μείζων δουλεύσει 
τῷ ἐλάσσονι, καὶ οὗτος δὲ εὐλογηθήσε- 
ται βλέπετε ἐπὶ τίνων τέθεικε, τὸν 
λαὸν εἶναι τοῦτον πρῶτον, καὶ THs δια- 
θήκης κληρόνομον᾽ εἰ οὖν ἔτι καὶ διὰ τοῦ 
᾿Αβραὰμ ἐμνήσθη, ἀπείχομεν τὸ τέλειον 
τῆς γνώσεως ἡμῶν" τί οὖν λέγει τῷ 
᾿Αβραὰμ, ὁτὶ ἐπίστευσας ἐτέθη εἰς δι- 


they thought the Law obligatory on them at first. 09 


to Abraham? ‘Because thou hast believed it is imputed unto 
thee for righteousness ;’ behold I have set thee for a father 
of the nations which by uncircumcision believe in the Lord. 
Let us therefore enquire whether God hath fulfilled the 
covenant which He swore to our fathers that He would give 
this people. Truly He gave it, but they were not worthy to 
receive it for their sins:” and a little after®, ‘“ Moses there- 
fore received them, but they were not worthy; now then 
learn how we have received them; [Moses received them 
as a servant,|] but the Lord Himself hath given them 
unto us, that we might be the people of His inheritance.” 
All this he said to bring the Christian Jews to a right 
understanding of the Gospel, for till this time and after ", 
they were zealous of the law, thinking not only themselves 
but the Christian Gentiles obliged to observe it, as is plain 
from what follows; “In¢ this therefore, brethren, God was 
foreseeing and merciful to us, because the people whom He 
hath purchased by His beloved was to believe in simplicity, 
and therefore He shews things to us that we should not 
run as proselytes to their law.” But to return from this 
short digression: such was the weakness of the Christian 
Jews, which obliged the Apostles to so much compliance 
and forbearance with them, and more particularly, as I hope 
I have made it appear very probable, in not taking their 
titles from the temple, I mean the title of priests, upon 
them, or giving it to others whom they made bishops and 
presbyters, while the temple and temple-priesthood were 


in being. But though during that period they are not ex- 


καιοσύνην ; ἰδοὺ τέθεικά σε πατέρα ἐθ- 
νῶν τῶν πιστευόντων διὰ ἀκροβυστίας 
τῷ κυρίῳ. ναὶ ἀλλὰ τὴν διαθήκην ἣν 
ὥμοσε τοῖς πατράσιν δοῦναι τῷ λαῷ, 
εἰ δέδωκε, ζητοῦμεν" δέδωκεν" αὐτοὶ δὲ 
οὐκ ἐγένοντο ἄξιοι λαβεῖν διὰ τὰς ἅμαρ- 
τίας avra@v.—lbid., ο. 18, 14. p. 42.} 

* (Ibid. c. 14. Μωσῆς μὲν γὰρ ἔλα- 
Bev, αὐτοὶ δὲ οὐκ ἐγένοντο ἄξιοι" πῶς 
ἡμεῖς ἐλάβομεν, μάθετε: Μωσῆς θερά- 
mov ὧν ἔλαβεν" αὐτὸς δὲ 6 κύριος ἡμῖν 
ἔδωκεν, εἰς λαὸν κληρονομίας, δι’ ἡμᾶς 
broueivas.—Ibid., p. 48.1 

» See S. Ignatius, Epist. ad Magnes. 
[c. 8. et sqq. μὴ πλανᾶσθε ταῖς ἕτερο- 
δοξίαις, μήδε μυθεύμασιν τοῖς παλαίοις 


ἀνωφέλεσιν οὖσιν" εἰ γὰρ μέχρι νῦν κατὰ 
νόμον ᾿Ιουδαϊσμὸν ζῶμεν, ὁμολογοῦμεν 
χάριν μὴ εἰληφέναι' x. τ. A.—S. Ignat. 
Ep. ad Magn., tom. ii. pp. 19, 20. 
The editors of St. Ignatius would either 
omit νόμον or read Ἰουδαϊσμοῦ. 

© [ς. 8. (extant only in the Latin 
version.) In hoc ergo, fratres, provi- 
dens est et misericors Dominus, quia 
in simplicitate crediturus esset popu- 
lus, quem comparavit dilecto suo, at- 
que ante ostendit omnibus nobis, ut 
non incurramus, tanquam proselyti ad 
illorum legem.—S. Barnab., Epist. Vet. 
Int. c. 3. Ibid., tom. i. p. 58. ] 


CHAP If. 
SECT. V. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


1 Pet. 2. 9. 


Heb. 13. 10, 


SECT. VI. 


The name 
Priest 

used after 
the destruc- 
tion of 
Jerusalem. 
John 1. 1, 
14. 


254 Even then Christian Ministers called Priests implicitly ; 


pressly called priests, yet they are called so implicitly and 
by intimation, as by St. Peter, who told the Christian Jews 
of the Asian dispersion that in their Christian state they were 
“a royal priesthood,” or “kingdom of priests.” So, as is 
shewed above, St. Paul told those of Judea and Jerusalem, 
that the Christians “had an altar,” or altar-sacrifice offered 
by priests, “ whereof unbelievers who served at the tabernacle 
had no right to eat.” So I have shewed how St. Clement, 
in his epistle to the Corinthians, using the definition for 
the definitum, called their ministers προσενέγκοντας Ta δῶρα", 
‘offerers of gifts or sacrifices,’ that is sacerdoti, as the Italian 
and Spanish, or ‘ sacrificers’ or ‘ pontiffs,’ as all the French 
versions translate the Greek and Hebrew words for priest®. 
I have also shewed it from many other fathers, and from the 
most ancient form of consecration of a bishop, which is in 
The Apostolical Constitutions, hb. viii. cap. 5, and in the 
Baroccian MS. of Hippolytus, entitled διατάξεις τῶν ἁγίων 
ἀποστόλων περὶ χειροτονιῶν᾽, both which agree in their 
testimony as to this point. 

VI. Wherefore in the next place let me farther observe, 
that later Church-writers use words and phrases which do not 
occur in the former. So Dionysius Alexandrinus observes in 
Eusebius? that St. John uses many peculiar words and ex- 
pressions that were not in use before, as “in the beginning 
was the logos,” &c.; and “the logos was made flesh,” &e. ; 
and “that which we have seen, heard, and handled of the 
logos of life ;” to which he adds his use of τὴν ζωὴν; τὸ φῶς, 
ἀποτροπὴν τοῦ σκότους, THY ἀλήθειαν, and some others, 


4 ΓΚ, Clem., Epist. i. c. 44. Patr. 
Apost., tom. i. p. 173.] See Cotelerius’ 
note on the place, [quoted above, note 
y, p. 88. 

€ [Sacerdote is uniformly used for 
ἱερεὺς or $795, in Diodati’s version; 
(see above, note a, p. 58;) and in Cas- 
siodore de Reynal’s Spanish version, 
Basle, 1569. The Geneva Bible and 
Le Clere (see above, notes 1, ἢ, pp. 13, 
14,) translate ἱερεὺς and }D by ‘sa- 
crificateur,’ ἀρχιερεὺς by ‘le souverain 
sacrificateur,’ and in the plural by ‘ les 
principaux sacrificateurs.’ The Mons 
Testament (see above ibid.) translates 
ἀρχιερεὺς by ‘pontife,’ ἱερεὺς uniformly 
by ‘ prestre.’ | 

f [See above; p. 140, note vy. ] 


& [St. Dionysius is pointing out the 
similarity of style and expression which 
pervades the Gospel and Epistle of St. 
John, and indicates the same author ; 
and arguing that the Apocalypse was 
written by another person of the name 
of John, from its differing in these re- 
spects from those writings of the Apo- 
stle. Thus he says; συνάδουσι μὲν yap 
ἀλλήλοις τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καὶ ἣ ἐπιστο- 
λὴ, ὁμοίως τε ἄρχονται" τὸ μέν φησιν, ἐν 
ἀρχῇ ἣν 6 λόγος" ἡ δὲ, ὃ ἦν ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς». 
τὸ μέν φησιν, καὶ ὃ λόγος σάρξ ἐγένετο 
καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν, καὶ ἐθεασάμεθα 
τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, δόξαν ὡς μονογενοῦς 
παρὰ πατρός᾽ ἡἣ δὲ τὰ αὐτὰ σμικρῷ παρ- 
ἡλλαγμένα' ὃ ἀκηκόαμεν" ὃ ἐωράκαμεν 
καὶ αἱ χεῖρες ἡμῶν ἐφηλάφησαν περὶ τοῦ 


more familiarly after the destruction of Jerusalem. 255 


which he saith he used against the heretics of his time, who 
denied that Christ was come in the flesh. These he called 
Antichrists and Antichrist, words which we do not find in the 
writings of the other Apostles ; by which we may see that 
the Church might have occasion to use terms in after-times 
which she did not use before, and particularly when she was 
arrived to a perfect and settled economy ; in facto esse, she 
might think fit to give names to her ministers from which 
she abstained before. 

Thus after the destruction of Jerusalem, or when it was 
near, she might begin to use the word priest, or use it more 
familiarly than before. 
before St. John died, the ἁγία καὶ μεγάλη κυριακὴ ', the 
anniversary festival of our Lord’s resurrection was called the 
pascha or ‘‘ passover” by the ancient Christians, though it is 
not so called in the writings of the New Testament. And 
from Ignatius *, that the Church of Christ dispersed through 
the world was called the ‘‘Catholic” Church, and the oblations 
of bread and wine in the holy Eucharist “the mysteries!,”’ 


λόγου τῆς ζωῆς" καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἐφανερώθη. 
ταῦτα γὰρ προανακρούεται, διατεινόμε- 
νος ὡς ἐν τοῖς ἑξῆς ἐδήλωσε πρὸς τοὺς 
οὐκ ἐν σάρκι φάσκοντας ἐληλυθέναι τὸν 
κύριον... διὰ γὰρ τῶν αὐτῶν κεφαλαίων 
καὶ ὀνομάτων πάντα διεξέρχεται, ὧν τινὰ 
μὲν ἡμεῖς συντόμως ὑπομνήσομεν᾽ ὃ δὲ 
προσεχῶς εὐτυγχάνων εὐρήσει ἐν ἑκα- 
τέρῳ πολλὴν τὴν ζωήν: πολὺ τὸ φῶς" 
ἀποτροπὴν τοῦ σκότους" συνεχῆ τὴν 
ἀλήθειαν... 6 ἔλεγχος τοῦ κόσμου τοῦ 
ἀντιχρίστου ... καὶ ὅλως διὰ πάντων 
χαρακτηρίζοντας, ἑνὰ καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν συ- 
νορᾶν καὶ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου καὶ τῆς ἐπι- 
στολῆς χρῶτα πρόκειται.---- 560. Hist. 
Ecel., lib. vii. cap. 25. tom. i. pp. 354, 
355.] 

h Td. ibid., lib. v. cap. 24. [οὗτοι 
πάντες (St. Philip, St. John, St. Poly- 
carp, and others) ἐτήρησαν τὴν ἡμέραν 
τῆς τέσσαρας καὶ δεκάτης τοῦ πάσχα 
κατὰ τὸ evayyeAwov.—lbid., p. 248. 
These words are an extract from the 
letter of Polycrates, who was speaking 
of the practices of the Apostolic age, 
and himself lived in the following one. 
See above, pp. 242, 243, note 1. ] 

1 [Easter day is so called in the Ty- 
picon Sabe, or Ordo recitandi officium 
per totum annum ex prezscripto Sabe, 
me. col. ii. ap. Liturg. Gree. Venet. 
1615. ] 


k Epist. ad Smyrn. [c. 8. ὅπου ἂν 
φανῇ ὁ ἐπίσκοπος, ἐκεῖ τὸ πλῆθος ἔστω" 
ὥσπερ ὕπου ἂν ἢ Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς, ἐκεῖ 
ἡ καθολικὴ exkAnota.—Patr. Apost., 
tom. ii. p. 36. It is more probable, 
however, that Hickes had in his mind 
the epistle of the Church of Smyrna 
respecting the martyrdom of St. Poly- 
carp, where there occurs, 6. 8, speaking 
of his prayers, μνημονεύσας ἁπάντων 
καὶ τῶν ποτὲ συμβεβηκότων αὐτῷ, μι- 
κρῶν τε καὶ μεγάλων, ἐνδόξων τε καὶ 
ἀδόξων, καὶ ἁπάσης τῆς κατὰ τὴν οἰκου- 
μένην καθολικῆς exxAnoias.—Ep. Eccl. 
Smyrn. de Mart. S. Polycarp., ibid., p. 
197. See also c. 16 of the same epistle, 
where St. Polycarp is called ἐπίσκοπος 
τῆς ἐν Σμύρνῃ καθολικῆς ἐκκλησία.---- 
Ibid., p. 201: and c. 19, ποιμένα τῆς 
κατὰ τὴν οἰκουμένην καθολικῆς ἐκκλη- 
olas.—Ibid., p. 208. 

! δεῖ δὲ καὶ τοὺς διακόνους ὄντας 
μυστηρίων ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, κ.τ.λ..---- 
Epist. ad Trall., c. 2. Usser. [ Appendix 
Ignatiana, p. 17. Lond. 1647. So Ja~ 
cobson. Cotelerius gives μυστήριον, the 
MS. reading, in the text, but with 
Vossius considers μυστηρίων the true 
reading. Arndt and Hefele retain 
μυστήριον, and understand it, simili- 
tudo, imago Christi]; or else μυστη- 
ρίων may here signify both the mys- 


CHAP. IIL. 
SECT. VI. 


1 John 1.3. 


chap. 2. 18, 
21, 


So we are sure from Eusebius?, that © 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Rev. 1. 10. 
Acts 20. 7; 
1 Cor. 16.1. 
Acts 24. 6. 
Ib. 11. 26. 


256 Other new terms introduced, as ‘ Lord’s Day, ‘ Christians.’ 


though the Church is not once called Catholic, nor the 
Lord’s Supper a sacrament or mystery, in the whole book of 
the New Testament. So κυριακὴ ἡμέρα, ‘the Lord’s day,’ is 
used for the weekly festival of our Lord’s resurrection in the 
Revelation of St. John, but is not found in any other writ- 
ings of the New Testament, where it is only called the first 
day of the week. So though in Antioch the followers of’ 
Christ, who before were called Nazarites and Galileans, 
came, after the Greek fashion, to be first called Christians, 
from the name of their master Christ; yet neither any of 
the writers of the New Testament, or any other of the Apo- 
stolical age, call them by that name, or our religion Chris- 
tianity, or the Christian religion. St. Luke, in his history of 
the Acts, tells us that King Agrippa said unto Paul, “ Al- 
most thou persuadest me to be a Christian;’’ but St. Paul 
seems to decline the name in his answer, saying, “I would 
to God that not only thou, but also all who hear me this 
day, were both almost and altogether such as I am, except 
these bonds.” In his epistles he never saith “ Paul an Apostle 
to the Christians, or Christian Church” at such a place, but 
to “the beloved of God, the Church of God, the saints,” and 
“the faithful brethren ;” which*are all common Jewish ex- 
pressions, that did not distinguish the Christians by name as 
a sect. St. James, when he wrote to the converted Jews of 
the dispersion, inscribes his epistle not ‘to the Christian 
Jews” or Jewish Christians, “ but to the twelve tribes scattered 
abroad.” And St. Peter inscribes his first epistle to them, 
“to the strangers or sojourners scattered throughout Pontus, 
Galatia,” &c. And the second is addressed to them in this 
circumlocution, “to them who have obtained like precious 
faith with us;”’ as if it then were a private rule of the 
Church not to call themselves by a characteristical name, 
which would have distinguished them, and offended the 
other Jews. St. Ignatius, St. John’s disciple™, bishop of 
Antioch, is the first ecclesiastical writer in whom we find 
those names, who in his epistle to the Magnesians hath 


teries or Sacraments of the Church, m [ Ἰγνάτιος, ὃ τοῦ ἀποστόλου Ἴω- 
Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, neither ἄννου μαθητής.--- Martyrium S. Ignatii, 
of which is called a mystery or Sacra~ ο. 1. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 177.] 
ment in the New Testament. 


Objection, St. John does not call Christian Ministers Priests. 257 


these words, πρέπον οὖν ἐστὶν μὴ μόνον καλεῖσθαι Χριστια- 
νοὺς, ἀλλὰ καὶ εἵναι", “it is therefore fitting that we should 
not only be called Christians, but be so indeed;” and διὰ 
τοῦτο μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ γενόμενοι μάθωμεν κατὰ Χριστιανισμὸν 
ζῇν, “wherefore being His disciples, let us learn to live ac- 
cording to the Christian religion ;” and again, ὁ yap Χριστια- 
vio mos οὐκ εἰς ᾿Ιουδαϊσμὸν ἐπίστευσεν», κ.τ.λ. “for the Chris- 
tian religion was not converted to the Jewish, but the Jewish 
to the Christian religion.” Wherefore if it be asked why 
St. John, who lived long after the destruction of Jerusalem, 
neither called himself, nor the bishops and presbyters of the 
Churches to whom he wrote, priests; I answer first, it may 
as well be asked why he did not call the people of those 
Churches Christians, or their profession of Christianity by 
name, as his scholar Ignatius did? He wrote his book of 
Revelation about twenty-six years after the fatal period of 
the old Jerusalem and the temple-worship, and his Gospel 
about eight years after it, and yet in neither of them doth 
he call the disciples of Christ Christians; nor, what is yet 
more observable, doth he say one word in either of them, or 
in his epistles, of the priesthood of Christ, though in his 
book of Revelations he again and again describes Him in a 
most majestical style as King. And as the doctrine of His 
priesthood was then undoubtedly the doctrine of the Church, 
though he makes no mention of it, so His disciples were 
then Christians, though he doth not call them so. In like 
manner the bishops and presbyters of the Church were then, 
without doubt, esteemed priests, though he omits the name. 
And so no doubt before he died, in the beginning of the 
second century, the names of bishops and presbyters, which 
before had been used in common and indifferently‘, were 
then used differently, in distinct senses, to signify the two 
holy orders, as in all the epistles of his disciple’; so weak 


" [S. Ignat. ad Magnes., c. 4. Patr. Epist. ad Magn., ὃ 2. Cotelerius is 
Apost., tom. ii. p. 18.] answering the objection to the genuine- 


° [Ibid., c. 10. p. 20.] 

P [The passage continues, ἀλλὰ Ἰου- 
δαϊσμὸς εἰς Xpioriavicudy.—lbid. ] 

4 [See Acts xx. 17, 28. Tit. i. 5, 7. 
See below, Second Discourse, ch. ii. § 3. 

τ See Cotelerius upon the place. 
[The note referred to is on S. Ignat. 


HICKES. 


ness of the epistles of St. Ignatius, 
drawn from their distinguishing ἐπί- 
σκοπος and πρεσβύτερος, whereas in the 
New Testament those words are inter- 
changed; Ex eo quod primis ecclesiz 
temporibus nomina episcopus et pres- 
byter communia erant primo et secundo 


CHAP. IT, 


SECT. VI. 


CHRISTIAN 
PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


258 They are called Priests figuratively in the Revelations. 


an argument is this negative argument against any thing 
which was the general belief and practice of the ancient 
Catholic Church, and by consequence against the true 
Christian ministers being proper priests, because they are 
not expressly so called in the writings of the New Testa- 
ment. 

But secondly, as to this objection from St. John’s not 
calling them priests in the books which he wrote after the 
destruction of Jerusalem, I answer, that in his Gospel, which 
he wrote last of all, but a little before his death, he had no 
occasion to call the Apostles priests, because he doth not con- 
tinue his history of Jesus till the time when they began to 
gather and form Churches, which was not till after Christ’s 
ascension. But in his book of Revelations, which is a pro- 
phetical book, he calls the ministers of the Church priests in 
such figures and similitudes and allusions as are proper to 
the prophetical style, and in such representations of one 
thing for another, as belong to that sublime way of writing 
in which visions use to be expressed. Thus because Chris- . 
tians were the mystical Israel, in whom the covenant and 
all the promises were accomplished, he calls them Jews, 
chap. 11. 9, and 111. 9, where he saith’, “I know the blas- 
phemy of them who say they are Jews, and are not.” In the 
same place he calls the false heretical Christians, and their 
Churches, the synagogues of Satan, often using prophetical 
and Jewish words and ways of speaking, in things relating 
to Christians and the Christian Church. So by the name of 
heavent is often signified the Christian Church, and by the 
temple-worship and ceremonies, the devotions of Christians, 
and to come to my point, by angels are often denoted priests, 
because of the likeness of their offices. For as angels are all 


ordini sacerdotum, in epistolis autem 


Ignatianis semper episcopi appellantur 
qui sunt sacerdotes summi, presbyteri 
vero, qui sunt minores sacerdotes, ar- 
gumentum palmarium contra earum 
epistolarum veritatem et antiquitatem 
ducere se putant; quod tamen ne qui- 
dem argumentum, meo sane judicio, 
dici meretur, adeo infirmum est et in- 
validum. Constat enim, id de quo du- 
bitare nos non sinunt sacre scripture 
et sancti patres, apostolico seculo duos 
extitisse sacerdotii gradus, superiorem 


et inferiorem, re diversos, quanquam 
nomine communi. Nonne fas fuit Ig- 
natio de utroque sacerdotio simul 
loqui? Nemo negabit, ni fallor ... 
Necesse igitur habuit, episcopos vocare 
supremos antistites, presbyteros anti- 
stites subjectz dignitatis, quemadmo- 
dum fecit.—Cotelerii Annott. ap. Patr. 
Apost., tom. ii. p. 17. ] 

* [Cf. App. No. 12, where this in- 
terpretation is discussed. ] 

t [See below, pp. 260, 261. ] 


Correspondence of the offices of Priests and Angels. 259 


CHAP. Ill. 
SECT. VI. 


spirits who minister unto God in heaven, so His priests 
minister unto Him upon earth". And as angels were wont 
to be sent with messages, and on embassies from God to 
men, so His priests are His angels, or rather evayyedou, His 
good angels or messengers, who are sent to preach in His 
name the Gospel unto men; and as the Apostle speaks, to 
be “the ambassadors of Christ, to beseech them in His 2Cor.5. 20. 
stead to be reconciled unto God.” The words in the original 
are ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ πρεσβεύομεν, and so in Eph. vi. 20, ὑπὲρ 
οὗ πρεσβεύω, “ for which (saith he, speaking of the mystery 
of the Gospel) I am an ambassador in bonds.” An ambas- 
sador, i. e. a messenger, an angel, a preacher; for you know, 
Sir, how πρέσβυς and πρεσβυτὴς in the Greek tongue is 
glossed by ἄγγελος", and how near akin it is in its signifi- 
cation to «jpvE¥, a ‘preacher,’ ‘ publisher,’ or ‘ promulger ;’ 
so that it is not without great agreement in their respective 
offices that. priests are called angels, who are sent from God 
κηρύσσειν καὶ εὐαγγελίξειν, to publish the best doctrine, and 
most happy joyful news that men ever heard or received. 
The sacrifices which the Greeks offered upon receiving good 
news were called εὐαγγέλιαξ, and the gifts and presents 
which they gave to messengers of good news they also called 
εὐαγγέλιαϑ, the very word by which the Holy Ghost hath 
chosen to express the Gospel, the joyful tidings of salvation 
as it is called by the Apostle, saying, “ How shall they preach, 
except they be first sent? as it is written, (of us) How beautiful 
are the feet, (or coming) of them who preach the Gospel of 


ἃ Κ΄, Chrysost. de Sacerd., lib. iii. [ὃ 4. 
ἢ γὰρ ἱερωσύνη τελεῖται μὲν ἐπὶ γῆς, 
τάξιν δὲ ἐπουρανίων ἔχει πραγμάτων. 
καὶ μάλα γε εἰκότως" οὐ γὰρ ἄνθρωπος, 
οὖις ἄγγελος, οὐκ ἀρχάγγελος, οὐκ ἄλλη 
τις κτιστὴ δύναμις, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὸς ὃ παρά- 
κλητος ταύτην διετάξατο τὴν ἀκολου- 
θίαν, καὶ ἔτι μένοντας ἐν σαρκὶ τὴν ay- 
γέλων ἔπεισε φαντάζεσθαι διακονίαν. διὸ 
χρὴ τὸν ἱερώμενον ὥσπερ ἐν αὐτοῖς ἑστῶ- 
τα τοῖς οὐρανοῖς μεταξὺ τῶν δυνάμεων 
ἐκείνων οὕτως εἶναι καθαρόν. | 
priesthood indeed is administered upon 
earth, but is of the order of things in 
heaven. For it is neither man, nor 
angel, nor archangel, nor any created 
power that ordained this hierarchy, 
(or retinue,) but the Holy Ghost, who 


SETHE. = 


hath taught mortal men to imagine 
they have the ministry (ἀκολουθίαν) of 
angels. And therefore it behoves a 
priest to be as pure as if he were among 
those potentates in  heaven.’’—[S. 
Chrysost., Op., tom. i. p. 382, B. ] 

x ὃ δὲ πρεσβευτὴς εἴη ἄν καὶ ἄγγε- 
Aos.—Jul. Pollux, Onomasticon, lib. 
viii. cap. 11. [segm. 137. ] 

Υ ὅθεν εἴρηται, τῷ κήρυκι καὶ mpeo~ 
Bela xpnuarifev.—lbid., segm. 138. 

2 [περὶ τοῦ συγχαίρειν ... ἣ μέντοι 
ἐπὶ τῷ συνήδεσθαι θυσία, εὐαγγέλια. |— 
Ibid., lib. v. cap. 25. segm. 129. 

ἃ [περὶ δωρεᾶς... ἀγγέλῳ, εὐαγγέ- 
Awa. |—Ibid., lib. vi. cap. 11. segm. 
187. 


s2 


200 The Church on earth is representea 


curistran peace, (τῶν εὐαγγελιζομένων εἰρήνην,) and bring glad tidings 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 





of good things, (τῶν εὐαγγελιζομένων Ta ἀγαθά.) The office 
then of Christian priests is the very same with that of the 
angel which first preached the Gospel to the shepherds, say- 


Luke 2,10 ing, “ Behold I bring you good tidings of great joy, which 


—l10. 


shall be to all people, for unto you is born this day in the 
city of David a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord.” Upon 
which that angel, and many others, even “a multitude of the 
heavenly host praised God, saying, Glory be to God in the 
highest, and on earth peace, good will towards men.” Such 
congruity there is in the office of angels and Christian priests. 
They are both God’s liturgs or ministers” ; they are both His 
ambassadors, messengers, and preachers sent forth to men, and 
to minister among men for them who are heirs of salvation. 
And upon the account of this excellent angelical sort of 
ministry I may suppose it was that this title was given in 
special manner to the chief priest, and under him to the 
priests, who ministered to God in the temple under the Old 
Testament, as in Malachi 11, 7: “The priest’s lips should 
preserve knowledge, for he is the messenger (or angel) of the 
Lord of Hosts.” So our Christian prophet, in the begin- 
ning of the eighth chapter, representing the things of the 
Church on earth by things in heaven: “There was silence 
(saith he) m heaven about the space of half an hour, and I 
saw seven angels who stood before God, and to them were 
given seven trumpets ;” and another angel came and stood at 
the altar, having a golden censer, and there was given unto 
him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers 
of the saints upon the golden altar, which was before the 
throne, and the smoke of the incense, which came with the 


> 6 ποιῶν τοὺς ἀγγέλους αὐτοῦ πνεύ- 
ματα, καὶ τοὺς λειτουργοὺς αὐτοῦ πυρὸς 
φλόγα. Heb. i. 7. Sacerdotes dona 
seu munera Deo offerunt, preces fide- 
lium, sacrificia ineruenta, sanctam 
Eucharistiam, &c.—Cotelerius in S. 
Clem, Epist. 1. ad Cor. c. 44. [Patr. 
Apost., tom. i. p. 173. See above, 
note y, p. 88.] Grotius on Malach. 
ii. 7. Quia angelus Domini, &c., 
Angeli preces hominum ad Deum, Dei 
mandata ad homines deferunt. Idem 
aciebat in lege summus sacerdos [qui 
semel in anno expiationem faciebat 


populi,] Levit. xvi. 1. [et qui in con- 
troversiis de sensu legis ortis consule- 
batur,] Deut. xvii. 9; ejus locum 
implet in Christiana ecclesia episcopus, 
angelus ob id ipsum dictus in Apoca- 
lypsi. Diodorus Siculus de Judzis 
apud Photium; [Biblioth. cod. 244. 
p- 380. col. 2. ed. Berolin. 1824. ] 
ἀρχιερέα τοῦτον προσαγορεύουσι,. Kat 
νομίζουσιν αὐτοῖς ἄγγελον γενέσθαι τῶν 
τοῦ θεοῦ πρυσταγμάτων.---ἰ Grotii An- 
nott. in Mal. ii. 7. Crit. Sacr., tom. iv. 
col. 813.] ' 


under the figure of the Church in heaven. 261 


prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the cmap. om 
angel’s hand. By the prayers of the saints all interpreters — 
here agree is signified the prayers of all faithful Christians, 
as in chap. v. 8, where it is said; “The four living creatures 
and twenty-four presbyters fell down before the Lamb, hav- 
ing every one of them harps, and golden phials full of (in- 
cense or) odours, which are the prayers of the (Christian) 
saints.” So by the angel is represented the chief minister- 
ing priest or bishop in every Church, who offered up their 
prayers, all in allusion to the Jewish temple and the service 
thereof; where, as may be seen Luke i. 10, all the people 
went to their private prayers and devotions in the court of 
the temple, while the priest continued at the golden altar in 
the temple to offer up incense. In this vision, therefore, is 
a metalepsis, or comprehension of two allusions or figures ; 
for first by heaven is meant the Catholic Church of that 
prophetical period, by the angels are signified the Chris- 
tian high-priests, and by incense their offering up the peo- 
ple’s prayers in all Churches of the saints, and all again 
under another figurative representation of the Jewish temple, 
priesthood, and worship. So in the seventh chapter, where 
under the type of the twelve tribes of Israel is mystically 
represented the Church of Christ, after the sealing of the 
faithful out of every tribe or Church it is said; “ After this 
I beheld, and lo, a great multitude, which no man could 
number, of all nations... . stood before the throne and the 
Lamb .. . and they cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation 
unto our God, who sitteth upon the throne, and unto the 
Lamb ; and all the angels stood about the threne, and about 
the elders, and the four living creatures, and fell before the 
throne with their faces, and worshipped God, saying, Amen, 
blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and 
honour, and power, and might, be unto God for ever and 
ever; Amen.” Here again, as we have the faithful Chris- 
tians of all Churches praising God, so under the representa- 
tion of angels we have all their bishops, with their presby- 
ters, at their priestly work of blessing and praising God. At 
their priestly work I say, and exercising their priestly office 
throughout all the mystical Israel, signified by the four 
living creatures, which were the four symbols or ensigns of 


curisttan the four camps of Israel. 


PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


262 


Christian Ministers may be regarded as Rulers, 


I say at their priestly office; for 


the ministers of the Church may be considered as to their 
priesthood’, or as to their prelacy or spiritual superiority 


over the people. 


As prelates, or spiritual superiors over the 


people, they are called bishops and presbyters, of the reason 
of which titles you know, Sir, we have a very good account 
in Mr. Hill’s book®, cited in the margin, and in Dr. Ham- 


¢ L’Ancienne police de l’Eglise sur 
Vadministration de l’Euchariste, par 
M. Gabriel] de l’Aubespine, Evesque 
d’Orleans, livre ii. ch. viii. Premiere- 
ment i] y a deux qualités dans l’epi- 
scopat, la prelature, et le sacerdoce. 
La premiere est, le pouvoir, l’autho- 
rité, et la jurisdiction ecclesiastique... 
l’autre est le pouvoir du caractere, et 
de l’ordination. Les anciens ont con- 
nus ces deux puissances, [aussi claire- 
ment et aussi distinctement que nous, 
et ont exprimé la premiere par ces 
termes, president, prevost, et prelat: 
et lautre, par ceux cy, sacrificateur, 
sacerdot, recteur de l’autel—Op. Gab. 
Albaspinzi, p. 250, ad caleem S. Op- 
tati Op., Par. 1679.] So a learned 
divine of our own country, Mr. Sam. 
Hill, in the third chapter of his book 
de Presbyteratu. [The passage referred 
to is the continuation of that quoted 
above, note g, p. 240. Ubi notari velim, 
sacerdotum a pontifice peractam ordi- 
nationem a duplici fluere principio: 
sacerdotali, in eo quod ordinati in ordi- 
natione Deo sacrantur: et regio, eo 
quod authoritas obeundi sacerdotii in 
ipsa ordinatione donatur, a regio Dei 
jure primo defluens, et pontifici, quasi 
sacerdotum omnium principi et rectori 
divinitus constituto concessa.— Lib. iv. 
c. 3. § 4. pp. 187, 188.] 

ἃ De Presbyteratu Dissert., lib. iv. 
cap. 3. [§ 1. De Sacerdotii Christiani 
origine.| Quandoquidem sapientiam, 
et senioritatem animi internam ad pub- 
licum senioritatis didacticze ordinem et 
officium praviam probavimus, ejus- 
demque senioritatis virtutes et officia 
ad veram et intrinsecam_ sacerdotii 
dignitatem necessario prerequirantur ; 
exinde patet sacerdotium aliquid am- 
plius senioritati additum apertissime 
complecti. Commune igitur sit seniori 
et sacerdoti, ut religionis θεοπαραδότου 
sancteque sapientiz traditionem ex 
officio divinitus concesso et sacro uter- 
que propaget. Quod vero sacerdotii 
proprium est, et mero senioris ordini 
extrinsecum, et superius, hie loci op- 


portune discutiendum videatur. [ὃ 2.] 
Omne ergo sacerdotium publicum, 
quantum rimari liceat, ab ipsis mundi 
primordiis duplicia exequitur pietatis 
officia, moralia scilicet, et mystica, sive 
symbolica, vel sacramentalia. Mys- 
tica autem sacerdotii Levitici in his 
tribus potissimum constiterant, in lo- 
tionibus, sacrificiis, et dapibus, eorum- 
que propriis ceremoniis. Moralia au- 
tem in sacris benedictionibus, Deut. 
xxi. 5. liturgiis precum, et laudis, 
et personarum et rerum piis usibus 
devotarum consecrationibus celebran- 
dis, versabantur. [ὃ 8.1 Notari igitur 
velim, et in veteri et in nostro sacer- 
dotio eadem omnino esse moralia, mys- 
tica vero diversa, nostra vero prioribus 
ἀντίτυπα. Siquidem lotionibus Leyiti- 
cis nostrum lavacrum, istorum sacri- 
ficiis Christi victima, veterum dapibus 
Ccena Domini ex adverso respondent: 
ex quibus unicum, i.e. Christi sacri- 
ficium ab ipso solo Christo pontifice 
offerri potuit, semelque ideo offereba- 
tur. Lavacrum, et sanctam Coenam 
selectis ad hee sacerdotii Christiani 
munera discipulis Christus consecranda 
tradidit. 

To which let me add out of Isi- 
dore’s Original, { Etymologiarum, | lib. 
vii. cap. 12. ὃ 11. Episcopatus autem 
vocabulum inde dictum, quod ille qui 


superefficitur, superintendat, curam 
scilicet subditorum gerens: σκοπεῖν 


enim Grece, Latine ‘intendere’ dicitur. 
Episcopi autem Greece, Latine ‘ specu- 
latores’ interpretantur. ...§ 13. Pon- 
tifex princeps sacerdotum est, quasi via 
sequentium. Ipse et summus sacerdos, 
ipse et pontifex maximus nuncupatur: 
ipse enim efficit sacerdotes, atque Le- 
vitas: ipse omnes ordines ecclesiasti- 
cos disponit: ipse quid unusquisque 
facere debeat, ostendit....§ 16. An- 
tistes sacerdos dictus ab eo, quod an- 
testat. Primus est enim in ordine ec- 
clesiz et supra se nullum habet. § 17. 
Sacerdos autem... quasi sacrum dans: 
sicut enim rex a regendo, ita sacerdos 
a sanctificando vocatus est: consecrat 


Pastors, and Priests; their offices in each character. 263 


mond’s note J on Acts xi.°; and as bishops and presbyters cmr. m. 
they have authority to govern and teach the people the ae 
revelations and institutions of God; and because their doc- 
trine is to the people’s souls as food is to their bodies, they 
are said to be their pastors, who feed as well as govern their 
flocks. Also as bishops and presbyters, that is, as chief and 
subordinate rulers appointed by God, they receive their peni- 
tential acknowledgments and confessions, and absolve or re- 
fuse to absolve them of their offences, in His name; and in 1 Car τι ; 
this relation they stand before the people for God. But 885. ὁ 
priests they stand before God for the people, to pray for 
them, that is, to bless them, and to offer up their prayers, 
and praises, and sacrifices; and to perform the mystical rites 
and offices of our religion in the Holy Supper and Baptism, 
which answer to the mystical lavations, sacrifices, and fede- 
ral sacrificial feasts, both of the Jewish and Gentile world, 
whereof the latter, as any man may plainly see from the 
most ancient heathen authors‘, was a depravation and corrup- 
tion of the former. As priests also they consecrate places to 
the service, and persons to the ministry of God, by solemn 
separation of the one from common use, and of the other 
from common employments, to Divine uses and employ- 
ments. 
But to return from this short excursion to the holy apoca- 
lyptical angels; the seven bishops of the seven Asian Churches 
are called the seven angels, chap. i. 20, “The mystery of 
the seven stars, which thou sawest in My right hand, and 


enim, et sanctificat.... § 20. Pres- 
byter Greece, Latine ‘ senior’ interpre- 
tatur: non modo pro etate... sed 
propter honorem, et dignitatem, quam 
acceperunt, presbyteri nominantur. ... 
§ 21. Ideo autem et presbyteri sacer- 
dotes vocantur, quia sacrum dant, sicut 
et episcopi, qui licet sint sacerdotes, 
tamen pontificatus apicem non habent, 
quia nec chrismate frontem signant, 
nec Paracletum Spiritum dant, quod 
solum deberi episcopis lectio Actuum 
Apostolorum demonstrat. § 22. Levitz 
. .. Grece ‘ diaconi,’ Latine ‘ ministri’ 
dicuntur, quia sicut in sacerdote conse- 
cratio, ita in diacono ministerii dis- 
pensatio habetur.—| S. Isidori Hispal. 
Op., tom, iii, pp. 341, 342. ] 

¢ [In the note here referred to Ham- 


mond traces the Scripture use of the 
word πρεσβύτερος from the derived 
sense of ruler; which according to 
Dionys. Halic. it had in Greek, as the 
corresponding words have in modern 
languages, and D°3pt most commonly 
in Hebrew. Hence he thinks bishops 
were called the elders of their respec- 
tive Churches, and conceives that in 
the New Testament this word is con- 
fined to bishops, that there is no evi- 
dence that the order of priests was then 
instituted, and that when πρεσβύτεροι 
is used in the plural in the New Testa- 
ment, it means the several bishops of a 
district Hammond’s Works, vol. 11]. 
pp. 380, sqq. | 

f [See Prefatory Discourse, vol. i. 
p. 123, and-the notes there. | 


264 Christian Ministers are represented under the figures of 


curisttAN the seven golden candlesticks; the seven stars are the 


PRIEST- 
HOOD. 


Reyz2. 1. 


angels of the seven Churches, and the seven golden candle- 
sticks which thou sawest are the seven Churches.” And as 
they are called so in general, so every one of them in par- 
ticular is mystically so called in the second chapter of this 
prophetical book; as for instance, “To the angel of the 
Church of Ephesus,” that is, to the chief priest or bishop of 
the Church of Ephesus, write these things. I say to the 
chief priest or bishop, for as these mystical angels are some- 
times described as priests by this evangelical prophet, so 
under the name of presbyters, 1. e. of ruling or presiding® 
presbyters, they are described as spiritual chiefs or princes, 
chap. iv. 4, according to what, Sir, you know I have written 
of them in my second letter" to Mr. S[ergeant] Geers]. 
The text with the context is as follows: “ Immediately I was 
in the Spirit, and behold a throne was set in heaven, and 
one sat on the throne.....And round about the throne 
were four and twenty seats (or other thrones), and upon the 
seats I saw four and twenty presbyters sitting, clothed in 
white raiment, and they had on their heads crowns of gold. 
.... And they fell down before Him who sat on the throne, 
and worshipped Him who liveth for ever and ever, and cast 
their crowns before the throne, saying, Thou art worthy, O 
Lord, to receive glory, and honour,” &c. Here, Sir, I must 
observe that as to the golden crowns‘, this prophetical de- 
scription answers to the golden crown which was made for 
Joshua the high-priest, Zech. vi. 11; and that by golden 
crowns here are signified golden mitres, such as the high- 
priests had under the law, whose mitres were also called 
crowns. This shews, Sir, that by presbyters cannot be un- 


representation,’’ says, ... “it is said of 


& προεστῶτες πρεσβύτεροι, 1 Tim. v. 
every one of these that he had ‘on his 


17. ἡγούμενοι, Heb. xiii. 7, 17. προι- 


στάμενοι, Rom. xii. 8. 

h [On the Dignity of the Episcofral 
Order, chap. i. sect. 2. ] 

i [See the opening of the Prefatory 
Discourse, vol. i. pp. 59, 544. and p. 
61, note e. | 

k See Dr. Hammond on the place. 
{ Hammond after interpreting the four- 
and-twenty elders of the bishops of 
Judea, and Him that sat on the 
throne, as ‘‘ God in the thing signified, 
but the bishop of Jerusalem in the 


head a golden crown,’ parallel to that 
of Joshua the high-priest, Zech. vi. 11, 
that is,a golden mitre such as the high- 
priest had under the law, called indif- 
ferently a crown and a mitre, which 
cannot belong to inferior presbyters, 
but doth fitly represent the power of 
rulers, i. e. bishops in the church, with- 
out attributing anything of regality to 
them.’’—Hammond’s Annotations on 
Rev. iv. 4, note d. Works, vol. iii. p. 
884. | 


Angels, Elders wearing crowns, Kings, and Priests. 265 


derstood the inferior presbyters, but the chief ruling presby- 
ters, the bishops, who are here represented as chief, or 
princes!, in the spiritual dominions of Christ upon earth. 
They are also said to be twenty-four, in allusion to the 
chiefs of the twenty-four lots of the priests, 1 Chron. xxiv. 
And, in allusion to the presbyters sitting about the throne 
of the bishop™, they are represented to sit round the throne 
of God; and they are said to be clothed in white garments, 
to set forth their sanctity and great dignity, as Christ’s chief 
ministers in the Church. Here then let me observe, the 
bishops are described by their regal character, as Christ’s 
vicegerents, to govern His Church in their respective dis- 
tricts. But in the first chapter, ver. 6, they are represented 
in their double capacities, both as kings and priests, in these 
words: “ Unto Him who loved us, and washed us from our 
sins in His own blood, and hath made us kings and priests 
unto God, to Him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. 
Amen.” This place, as that in 1 Pet. ii. 9, relates to Exod. 
xix. 6, where God promised the Jews, that “if they would 
obey His voice, and keep His covenant, they should be unto 
Him a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation, and a pecu- 


1 Viginti quatuor seniores qui ad 
declarandam omnipotentis Dei gloriam 
in circuitu throni ejus considere dicun- 
tur, ecclesiz rectores et episcopos de- 
signant: atque hi, quia tam sacerdotes 
sunt quam reges, juxta illud, c. i. 6. 
‘Fecit nos reges, et sacerdotes,’ idcirco 
* candidis vestimentis induti, et coronas 
aureas’ ferentes cernuntur; per que 
mystice illorum decor et gloria ex- 
presse intelliguntur. Ideo autem vi- 
ginti quatuor-seniores, vel potius pres- 
byteri (nam dignitatem hic πρεσβύτερος 
declarare arbitror potius quam ztatem) 
cernuntur, ut respondeant viginti qua- 
tuor sortibus sacerdotum, quas David 
ex duabus familiis Eleazar et Ithamar 
filiorum Aaron constituit 1 Par. 24. ut 
quemadmodum sub illis viginti quatuor 
sortibus, i. e. sedecim ex filiis Eleazar, 
et octo ex filiis Ithamar, universa sa- 
cerdotum ac Levitarum turba contine- 
batur, ita in his viginti quatuor pres- 
byteris omnes totius ecclesia przefecti 
designentur.— Zeger. Annot. in Rev. 
iv. 4, [Crit. Sacr., tom. viii. col. 380. | 

αἱ προκαθημένου τοῦ ἐπισκόπου εἰς τό- 
mov θεοῦ καὶ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων εἰς τό-͵ 
mov συνεδρίου τῶν amootéAwy.—I gnat. 


ad Magnes, [c.6. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. 
p- 19.] So in Epist. ad Trall. [e. 3. 
ibid., p. 22.] ἐντρεπέσθωσαν .. . τὸν 
ἐπίσκοπον ὡς byTa τύπον τοῦ πατρὸς 
(as Cotelerius, or as Vossius corrects 
the place, ὧς τὸν πατέρα) τοὺς δὲ πρεσ- 
βυτέρους ὡς συνέδριον θεοῦ. [The MS. 
reading is ὁμοίως πάντες ἐντρεπέσθω- 
σαν τοὺς διακόνους ὡς ᾿Ιησοῦν ριστόν" 
ὡς καὶ τὸν ἐπίσκοπον, ὄντα υἱὸν τοῦ 
matpos, k.T.A. Cotelerius conjectures 
ὡς ἐντολὴν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ ἐπίσκο- 
mov ὡς ὄντα τύπον τοῦ πατρὸς. For 
Vossius’ note see above, note r, p. 36. ] 
See H. Hammondi Dissert. contra 2 sen- 
tentiam Blondel., [c. 25. § 35. Works, 
vol. ii. p. 768. Hammond’s conjecture 
is; ὦ Ἰησοῦς Χριστοῦ, ὡς καὶ τὸν ἐπίσκο- 
mov (inserenda sunt ex veteri Latino 
interprete ὡς Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν) ὄντα 
υἱὸν τοῦ πατρός. (He also, Diss. 4. ὁ. 
20. ὃ 10. p. 815, understands the 
passage in the Apocalypse in the same 
way as Hickes in the text.) Hefele 
reads, τοὺς διακόνους ὧς ἐντολὴν ᾿Ιησοῦ 
Χριστοῦ, καὶ τὸν ἐπίσκοπον ὡς Ἰησοῦν 
Χριστὸν, ὄντα υἱὸν τοῦ matpds.—Patr. 


Apost., p. 190. Tub. 1847.] 


CHAP. IL 
SECT. IV. 





curisttaAN liar treasure above all other people.” 


PRIRST- 
HOOD. 


266 The Christian Church is described as ‘a priestly kingdom’? 


This promise of God, 
which was made to the whole collective body of the Jews, is 
to be understood of that theocratical form of government 
under the high-priest and priests", in which, as a nation or 
people, they were to be thoroughly settled; and this honour- 
able promise was made but a very short time before it was 
performed. Hence the Greek interpreters aptly translate 
a “kingdom of priests” a “regal priesthood,” because Aaron 
and his successors were the chief magistrates of that people 
as well as their high-priests. St. Peter useth the same ex- 
pression, 1 Epist. 1. 9, where, after he had told the Christian 
Jews that as a Christian people they, “as lively stones, were 
built up into a spiritual house®,” or economy of an “ holy 
priesthood” upon Christ as the chief corner-stone, to offer 
up spiritual sacrifices to God by Him; then farther, to ex- 
plain the form of this spiritual economy, he proceeds to tell 
them that they were still, as in the time of their theocracy, “a 
chosen generation, an holy nation, a peculiar people” formed 
into the government of “a regal priesthood” or “kingdom of 
priests,” under Jesus the High- Priest of our profession and 
His ministers, to make them again the people of God. So 
in this place the apostolical prophet gives glory and domi- 
nion to Christ, for purchasing a Church with His blood, and 
making the economy of it a “kingdom of priests?.” St. Paul 
means the same thing in his second epistle to the Corin- 
thians, chap. vi. 16: “ What agreement hath the temple of 
God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God, as 
God hath said, I will dwell in them, (or among them,) and I 
will be their God, and they shall be My people.” Here, as 
in all places where the Church is called an house, there is a 
metalepsis of tropes; for first the temple signifies a holy 
house dedicated to God; and secondly, that holy house sig- 


ἢ So Vatablus thinks it is in the place, see above, note t, p. 113. | 


primary sense to be understood; Reg- 
num sacerdotale| ad verbum regnum 
sacerdotum, h. e. regnum non profanum, 
quod ex opibus et armis, sed quod ex 
sacerdotibus, rebus sacris ac divinis 
constat, 4. d. sacrum ac divinum erit 
hoe regnum.—([Crit. Sacr., tom. i. 
pars 1. Annott. in Exod. p, 389. The 
same words are used by Fagius on the 


© See the allegory of building the 
tower of the church in Hermas’ Pastor, 
lib. i. visio 3. [Ecce non vides contra 
te turrim magnam, que edificatur 
super aquas, lapidibus quadris splen- 
didis? &c.—Patr. Apost., tom. i. Ὁ. 79.Ἷ 

» See Zeger, a little above cited in 
the margin, [ p. 265, note n. ] 


or ‘kingdom of Priests, that is, ruled by Priests. 267 


nifies the family or economy of that holy house4 which 15 
built on Christ as its foundation, and in which the priests, 
as superiors, are to govern, teach, and minister in holy offices, 
and the people, as inferiors, are to be governed, and taught, 
and perform holy offices by the priests, and which therefore 
make a holy theocracy unto God. So 1 Cor. iii., after the 
Apostle had told them that there was no foundation of the 
Church but Christ, and that He had laid no other founda- 
tion; “Know ye not (saith he) that you,” as a building 
erected upon Christ, “are the temples of God, and that the 
Spirit of God dwelleth in you,” as in His sanctuary? “if any 
man,” therefore, by bad materials dare “ defile,” or destroy 
“the temple of God, him shall God destroy, for the temple 
of God is holy, which temple ye are.” The economy, there- 
fore, of the Church in general, and of every particular 
Church, is a temple or spiritual economy, where the priests 
have the whole administration, and the high-priest, as 
Christ’s vicegerent’, is chief rector as well as chief priest. 
Such similitudes as these do the writers of the New Testa- 
ment use to make Christians, as Christians, understand that 
the Church is a holy spiritual kingdom, a theocracy in the 
most proper sense, in which the priests are the sanhedrim or 
senate, and the high-priests as princes or presidents thereof. 
And for this St. John gives glory to Christ, who “hath made 


@ 1 Cor. iii. 11, 12; Ephes. ii. 20. 
Sacerdotes templi spiritualis, id est 
ecclesie.—Tertull. adversus Judzos, 
cap. 14. [Op., p. 201, C.] 

τ Cum te judicem Dei constituas, 
ac Christi, qui dicit ad apostolos, ac 
per hoe ad omnes przpositos, qui apo- 
stolis vicaria ordinatione succedunt, 
‘qui vos audit me audit.’-—[S. Cypr., 
Epist. lxix. (Ixvi. ed. Oxon.) ad Floren- 
tium Pupianum, p. 122. ed. Ben.] So, 
Neque enim aliunde hezreses oborte 
sunt, aut nata sunt schismata, quam 
inde quod sacerdoti Dei non obtempe- 
ratur, nec unus in ecclesia ad tempus 
sacerdos, et ad tempus judex vice 
Christi cogitatur.—[Id., Epist. lv. (lix. 
ed. Oxon.) ad Cornelium, p. 82. ed. 
Ben.] Potestas ergo peccatorum re- 
mittendorum apostolis data est, et ec- 
clesiis quas illi a Christo missi consti- 
tuerunt, et episcopis, qui eis ordina- 
tione vicaria successerunt.—[ Firmili- 
ani Epist. ap. 5. Cypr., Epist. Ixxv. p. 


148. ed. Ben.] Tertullian de Prescript. 
Her., c. 32. [Op., p.213, Β.} 5. Clem. 
Ep. ad Cor.i.c. 42. [ Patr. Apost., tom. 
i. p. 171. The last two passages are 
quoted in the Prefatory Discourse, on 
Prop. III. vol. i. p. 65, note u.] St. 
Ignatius’ Epistles. [See above, p. 36, 
notes p, q, r, and the Discourse on the 
Dignity of the Episcopal Order, chap. 
i. sect. 2, |—1 Cor. iv.1. And Erasmus, 
in his Latin prayer for the peace of the 
Chureh: Da pastoribus, quibus tuas 
vices delegare dignatus es, prophetiz 
donum, ut arcanas scripturas non ex 
humano sensu, sed ex tuo afflatu inter- 
pretentur. [Precatio ad Dominum 
Jesum pro pace Ecclesie, written 
March 5, 1532; it was printed with the 
tract entitled, Πόλεμος sive Belli De- 
testatio, per Erasmum_ Roterdamum 
(E. 5.) s. a. Colonize. It is contained 
in his collected Works, tom. iv col. 
656, A. fol. Ludg. Bat. 1703—1706. | 


CHAP, III. 


SECT. VI. 


1 Cor. 3. 16. 


268 The words ‘a royal priesthood, or ‘ Kings and Priests,’ 


curistiAN us kings” (or as many copies have it’, who “hath made 


PRIEST- 


us a kingdom).and priests unto God.” 


So Arethas* upon 


the place also reads it; so the vulgar Latin", Syriac*, Ara- 
bic’, and Ethiopic” versions translate it; as also Tertullian 
Eixhort. ad Castit., ο. 7.2 To be “a kingdom of priests,” or “ a 
royal priesthood,” or ‘‘ a kingdom and priests,” or “ kings and 
priests,” are but different expressions for the same thing, for 
the second is the Greek translation, and the third the Chal- 
dee version of ona nabne, mamlecheth cohenim; “a king- 
dom of priests,” in Exod. xix. 6, which Miles Coverdale in 
his English Bible (supposed to be printed at Zurich*) 1550, 
renders “a priesterly kingdom‘.” And if it is the true read- 


S βασιλείαν Steph. a. re. Alex. Baroc. 
Cov. 2. Sin. M. Hunt. 1. [Vulg. Syr. 
Arab. AEthiop. Tertull. Ex. ad Cast., 
ce. 7. Arethas, Victorinus.] Dr. Mills 
on the place. [Novum Testamentum, 
p- 766. Oxon. 1707. βασιλείαν is re- 
ceived as the true reading by Gries- 
bach, Scholz, and most critical editors. | 

t [καὶ ἐποίησεν ἡμᾶς βασιλείαν, 
ἱερεῖς τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρὶ αὐτοῦ.---(οι- 
menii Comment. in N. Τὶ and Arethz 
Explanationes in Apocalypsim, tom. ii. 
p- 650, 1). Paris. 1631. ] 

u [Et fecit nos regnum et sacer- 
dotes Deo et patri suo. Apoe. i. 6. Ed, 
Vule.! 


* [ [Asses (Zea St ἢ τὸ 
Jad Et fecit nobis regnum, sacer- 
dotate Deo.—Ibid., Vers. Syriac. Bibl. 
Sacr. Polygl., tom. v. p. 932. ] 


xh Wh. W δ. 9..." 


—Fecitque nobis regnum sacerdotii. 
εν et fecit nobis regnum ac sacerdotes 
Deo—Vers. Arab. ibid., p. 933.,] 


“ “O2nPnag;: σι: 
συ AU ET: PEAT: ANU: 
ATMLANACL: — Et constituit 


vos in regno sancto patris ejus Dei. 
—Vers. AXthiop. ibid. ] 

a [Nonne et laici sacerdotes sumus ? 
scriptum est, ‘regnum quoque nos et 
sacerdotes Deo et patri suo fecit.’— 
Tertull. Op., p. 522, A. See below, 
note ἢ, p. 270. ] 

» [The original Hebrew nabyp 
('5n5, Exod. xix. 6, is rendered in the 
LXX βασίλειον ἱεράτευμα : and in,the 
Chaldee Paraph. wp DY) pons yobn, 


ore 


(Vers. Lat.) reges et sacerdotes, et popu- 
lus sanctus.—Bibl. Sacr. Polyg. Wal- 
ton., tom. i. pp. 306, 307. ] 

© [This is a mistake of Hickes. The 
edition of 1550 is the second edition 
of Coverdale’s Bible. It was the 
first edition of 1535 which was sup- 
posed (by Mr. Humphrey Wanley, 
who was a friend of Hickes,) to have 
been printed at Zurich, from the pecu- 
liar character of the type. See Lewis, 
History of English Translations, &c., 
p- 91. Ed. 1739. Wanley assisted 
Hickes in his Thesaurus; he is re- 
ferred to in the Discourse on the Epis- 
copal order as a possessor of a rare 
Bible; and it appears from a Letter 
published in the Philosophical Trans- 
actions for June 1705, that he attended 
particularly to this subject. The type 
of the edition of 1535 is peculiarly 
sharp, that of 1550 is the common 
English one of that time. This Bible 
has on the title-page “The whole 
Bible, that is, the Holy Scripture of 
the Olde and Newe Testament, faith- 
fully translated into English by Myles 
Coverdale, and newly over sene and 
corrected.... MDL. Printed for An- 
drew Hester, dwelling at the sign of 
the Whyte Horse, and are there to be 
sold; set forth with the king’s most 
gracious license.’’ In the first edition 
the words are ‘ presterly kingdom.’ ] 

ἃ “Tf ye will hearken now unto My 
voice, and keep My covenant, ye shall 
be Mine own before all people; for the 
whole earth is Mine, and ye shall be 
unto Me a priesterly kingdom, and a 
holy people.” In 1 Pet. ii. 9 thus, 
Βαϊ ye are that chosen generation, 
that kingly priesthood, that holy nation, 
that peculiar people.” 


— 


express the Church governed by sacerdotal princes. 269 


ing of this place, St. John makes use of it, as St. Peter doth 
of a royal priesthood, to let us understand what reason we 
have to glorify Christ, who hath made us members of this 
holy theocracy, which in every part of it is governed under 
Him by sacerdotal princes or priests. This expression of 
“making us kings and priests unto God,” is also used by 
this Christian prophet in the tenth verse of the fifth chapter : 
“Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by Thy 
blood, out of every kindred, tongue, people, and nation, and 
hast made us unto our God kings and priests, and we shall 
reign on earth.” He also speaks much after the same man- 
ner in the sixth verse of the twentieth chapter, where it is 
said that those who have part in the first resurrection “ shall 
be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a 
thousand years.” And in the twenty-second chapter, ver. 5, 
that in the holy city, the new Jerusalem, the servants of 
God “shall reign for ever and ever.” But because these 
places relate to a future, and far more glorious, and different 
state of the Church, I pass them over, only desiring liberty 
to tell my own opinion, that if they are not to be understood 
of Christians severally, as Tertullian takes them in a meta- 
phorical sense to denote Christian purity*®, but as in 1 Pet. 
i. 9, of the whole collected body of Jewish Christians as a 
spiritual building, an holy nation, a peculiar polity, people 
incorporated into the Church; then also they must relate to 
the Christian theocracy, and the administration of it Ina 
royal priesthood under Christ, though in a much more 
happy, triumphant, and glorious state, than this. 

But, Sir, whatever the sense of these passages or that in 
the first chapter be, whether they are spoken of Christians 
severally or collectively, of single Christians or of Christians 
formed into a society, or polity of a royal priesthood‘, I have 


© [Tertullian uses the argument that 
every Christian is a priest against 
second marriage. De Exhort. Cast., 
ec. 7. p. 522, A, quoted above, note c, 
and de Monogamia, c. 7, 8. Nos autem 
Jesus summus sacerdos et magnus 
patris, de suo vestiens (quia qui in 
Christo tinguuntur, Christum indu- 
erunt) ‘sacerdotes Deo patri suo fecit,’ 
secundum Joannem.—p. 529, B, C.] 

f (Illi sunt] ecclesia plebs sacerdoti 


adunata, et pastori suo grex adherens. 
Unde scire debes episcopum in ecclesia 
esse; et ecclesiam in episcopo; et si 
qui cum episcopo non sint, in ecclesia 
non esse; et frustra sibi blandiri eos, 
qui pacem cum sacerdotibus Dei non 
habentes obrepunt, et latenter apud 
quosdam communicare se credunt; 
quando ecclesia que catholica una est, 
scissa non sit, neque divisa; sed sit 
utique connexa, et coherentium sibi in- 


SECT, V1. 


270 = The Jewish Church, Rites, and Priesthood were 


cnrisman SUfficiently shewed from other places of the Revelation, that 


PRIEST- 


HOOD. 


though St. John doth not expressly call the bishops of the 
Church priests, yet he calls them so by other mystical names, 
and sets forth their ministry as a proper priesthood, which 
offered up the mystical incense, the prayers of all saints, that 
is of the Church, more especially in the service of the holy 
Eucharist, when, according to the prophecy of Malachi, the 
most solemn prayers and praises were offered unto God by a 
holy priesthood on the mystical golden altar in every Chris- 
tian Church. Christians then are a kingdom of priests as 
well as the Jews were; a congregation or multitude of people 
formed like them into a priestly government, and by the 
ministration of priests to serve and worship God, and by 
their hands to offer their external sacrifices of bread and 
wine, and by their mouths to offer up Eucharistical’ prayers, 
and praises, and intercessions to Him, which God, through 
Christ our High-Priest, will accept, as He did the sacrifices 
and prayers of the Jews. This is very agreeable doctrine to 
what I have shewed was taught in the early and pure ages of 
the Church. ᾿Αρχιερατικὸν τὸ ἀληθινὸν γένος ἐσμὲν Tod 
θεοῦ, κ-. τ. Δ. (saith Justin in his Dialogue with the Jew";) 
“ We are the true sacerdotal people of God, as God Himself 
testifies, saying, that ‘in every place among the Gentiles pure 


vicem sacerdotum glutino copulata.— 
S. Cyprian. [ Epist. lxix. (Ep. Ixvi. ed. 
Oxon.) ad Florentium Pupianum, pp. 
122, 123. ed. Ben.] See also the ex- 
cellent annotations on Tertull. lib. de 
Exhortatione Castitatis, cap. 7, note 
39, 40. [The notes are those of Pame- 
lius, mentioned above, note k, p. 116. 
Note 39 is on the words, Nonne et laici 
sacerdotes sumus, ὅσ. quoted above, 
note ὁ, p. 268, which after quoting 
Rey. i. 6, there referred to, says; Mi- 
nime istud favere potest Lutheri hzresi, 
qui omnes laicos facit sacerdotes; sed 
ita intelligi debet ; quod reges et sacer- 
dotes spiritales fideles omnes censean- 
tur utpote qui sacrificia spiritalia offe- 
runt ; alioqui eodem argumento posset 
quis concludere omnes reges esse. 
Quam suam sententiam satis indicat 
verbis sequentibus auctor: this is then 
shewn at length. Note 40 is on the 
words, Sed ubi tres, ecclesia est, licet 
laici; discussed in the Prefatory Dis- 
course, vol. i. p. 238, note a, on which 
Pamelius observes; Hie alludere vide- 


tur, ‘ubi enim sunt duo vel tres, con- 
gregati in nomine meo, ibi sum in 
medio eorum;’ verum ad hzresim 
Montani videtur pertinere, quod addat 
‘licet laici,’ utpote in cujus sectatores 
potissimum competat illud lib. de 
Prescript. Her., c. 41. (Op., p. 217, C.) 
‘ Hodie presbyter qui cras Jaicus; nam 
et laicis sacerdotalia muneri injungunt.’ 
Ex contrario B. Cypr. teste Epist. 69. 
ad Florentium Pupianum; ‘Ecclesia 
plebs est sacerdoti adunata,’ &c.] Ter- 
tull., tom. ii. pp. 684, 685. Par. 1635. 

8 [otros yap ἐξαίρετος ἱερεὺς καὶ ai- 
évios βασιλεὺς, 6 Χριστὸς, ὡς υἱὸς θεοῦ. 
οὗ ἐν τῇ πάλιν παρουσίᾳ μὴ δόξητε λέ- 
yew Ἦσαΐαν ἢ τοὺς ἄλλους προφήτας 
θυσίας ἀφ᾽ αἱμάτων ἢ σπονδῶν ἐπὶ τὸ 
θυσιαστήριον ἀναφέρεσθαι, ἀλλὰ ἀλη- 
θινοὺς καὶ πνευματικοὺ5», αἴνους καὶ εὖ- 
χαριστίας.---ὃ. Just. M. Dial. cum 
Tryph., c. 118. Op., p. 211, C.] 

h [ἀρχιερατικὸν τὸ ἀλήθινον γένος 
ἐσμὲν τοῦ θεοῦ, ws καὶ αὐτὸς 6 θεὸς 
μαρτυρεῖ, εἰπὼν bri ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ ἐν 
τοῖς ἔθνεσι θυσίας εὐαρέστας αὐτῷ καὶ 


Jfigurative of the Christian; so Justin Martyr. 271 


and acceptable sacrifices should be brought unto Him.’ But 
God accepts sacrifices from none but by His priests. God 
therefore testifies before the time that all sacrifices should 
be acceptable to Him in this name (of Jesus) which Jesus 
appointed to be done, I mean in the Eucharist of the bread 
and the cup, and which are offered up by Christians in all 
places of the earth; but your sacrifices offered up by your 
priests He utterly rejects, saying, ‘I will not receive your 
sacrifices from your hands; because from the rising of the 
sun unto the setting thereof My name shall be glorified 
among the Gentiles; but you have profaned it.’” He speaks 
to the same purpose, citing the prophet Malachi, more per- 
fectly, as I have transcribed the passage before’. Thus 
much, Sir, as to the prophetical book of the New Testament, 
in which I hope I have shewed that, setting aside the texts, 
in which we are said to be kings and priests, St. John hath 
called Christian bishops priests in the same figurative way of 
writing that he calls Christians Jews*. To which I have but 
one observation more to add, which relates to his description 
of the four and twenty elders, who had crowns or mitres of 
gold on their heads, and the tradition of his wearing the 
golden crown or mitre, in the front of which there was en- 
graven HOLINESS To THE Lorn. Sir, you cannot but remark 
that this story, which is so well attested, and his description 
of the Christian priests, agree very well together. But it is 
time to put an end to my letter, and the exercise of your 
patience in reading of it, which I shall here do with an 
hearty prayer that all Christian presbyters and bishops 
would, as it becomes them, assert the truth of their priestly 
character with all boldness, and adorn it with all sanctity of 
life and manners, to the honour of Him who is our King’, 


καθαρὰς προσφέροντες. ov δέχεται δὲ 
παρ᾽ οὐδενὸς θυσίας 6 θεὺς, εἰ μὴ διὰ 
τῶν ἱερέων αὐτοῦ..... πάντας οὖν οἱ 
διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματος τούτου θυσίας ἃς 
παρέδωκεν ᾿Ιησοῆς ὃ Χριστὸς γίνεσθαι, 
τουτέστιν ἐπὶ τῇ εὐχαριστίᾳ τοῦ ἄρτου 
καὶ τοῦ ποτηρίου, τὰς ἐν πάντι τόπῳ 
τῆς γῆς γενομένας ὑπὸ τῶν Χριστιανῶν, 
προλάβων 6 θεὸς, μαρτυρεῖ εὐαρέστους 
ὑπάρχειν αὐτῷ" τὰς δὲ ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν καὶ δι᾽ 
ἐκείνων ὑμῶν τῶν ἱερέων γενομένας ἀπα- 
ναίνεται, λέγων, καὶ τὰς θυσίας ὑμῶν οὐ 


προσδέξομαι ἐκ τῶν χειρῶν ὑμῶν" διότι 
ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς ἡλίου ἕως δυσμῶν τὸ ὄνομά 
μου δεδόξασται, λέγει, ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσι" 
ὑμεῖς δὲ βεβηλοῦτε αὐτὺ.----Τα. ibid., ο. 
116, 117. p. 209, D.] 

i (Id. ibid., § 41. pp. 187, D, E. 
138, A; quoted above, p. 103, note a. | 

k [See above, p. 258. | 

1 §. Justin. M. Apol. dict. 11. [καὶ 
ἄγγελος δὲ καλεῖται καὶ ἀπόστολος, 
αὐτὸς γὰρ ἀπαγγέλλει ὅσα δεῖ γνωσθῆ- 
ναι.--- ΑῬο]. i. (ii. vett. edd.) ο. 63. Op., 


CHAP. Il. 
SECT. VI. 


Malia Ll. 


272 Conclusion. 


curisttan Prophet, and High-Priest, the Angel and Apostle of God, 


PRIEST- 
HOOD, 


from whom we derive our priestly powers and authority, and 
to whom, with the Father and the Holy Ghost, be all honour 
and glory in all the Churches of the saints now and for ever. 
Amen. With this prayer, and part of that with which 
St. Ambrose ended his book of the Sacerdotal Dignity™, I 
conclude this Discourse of the Christian Priesthood : 
Quanquam sciam pro hoc libello plurimos mihi sacerdotes, 
gui que loquimur agere nolunt, infideliter esse detracturos ; 
credo tamen plurimos, qui hec agunt, vel agere obnituntur, 
fideliter pro nobis oraturos. Sed sicut lacerationibus obtrecta- 
torum minime pregravamur, sic demum probatorum et sancto- 
rum virorum orationibus adjuvamur. Age jam nunc, sanctifi- 
cus spiritus, gui nos in hoc opere divinis inspirationibus adju- 
visti, cunctos sacerdotes adjuva, et presta, ut faciant que in 
hoc opusculo ipse eloqui inspirasti [ut eis una mecum tribuas 


celorum regna qué sanctis in fine seculorum dare promisisti 
perpetua".| Amen. 


p- 81, B.] Dial.cum Tryph.[kal αὐτὸς  dotali, cap. 7. S. Ambr. Op., tom. ii. 

amd Tov πατρὸς ἔλαβε τὸ βασιλεὺς, Kal App., p. 364, E. | 

Χριστὸς, καὶ ἱερεὺς, καὶ ἄγγελος-.---Ο. " [The editor has presumed to add 

86. Op., p. 184, A.] the concluding words from the ori- 
™{Pseudo-Ambr.de Dignitate Sacer- _ ginal. ] 


THE 


DIGNITY 


OF THE 


EPISCOPAL ORDER. 


CHAPTER I. 


SIR, 
I. I am glad to find by your answer to my letter, that you srcr.1._ 
object so little to my propositions, and that the objections me 


you make against them affect neither the truth, nor order, Jews and 
Gentiles 


nor connection of them. First, you object, that my way of as to the 
speaking of bishops as “spiritual princes,” and of their dienty Fe 
dioceses as “ spiritual principalities,” seems to you novel and 14 
uncouth, and will be apt to give offence to some good Church- 

men, who do not think so loftily, as I write, of the episcopal 

office; but that the terms of princes, and lords, and princi- 
palities, and lordships, are fitter for temporal sovereigns and 


lords, according to what our Saviour saith to His Apostles, 


* [The person to whom this letter 
was addressed was Mr. Serjeant Geers, 
the brother of Mrs. Susanna Hopton. 
It was for his satisfaction that Hickes 
had drawn out the Propositions which 
gave rise to the composition of these 
two Discourses. See the opening of 
the Prefatory Discourse, vol. i. pp. 
59—62, and notes, particularly note g, 
p- 62. ] 

> [The serjeant made several objec- 
tions to Hickes’ propositions. The first 
two are treated here. They were made 
to Hickes’ third proposition ; viz., that 
“ Christ the archetypal, eternal Mel- 
chisedec, is the King of this spiritual 
kingdom, Lord of this spiritual domi- 
nion, and supreme Head of this spiri- 
tual corporation, and the bishops, as 


HICKES. 


successors to the Apostles, are under 
Him, by commission derived from Him, 
spiritual lords, chiefs, and princes, as 
well as priests in His spiritual king- 
dom; to whom, in their respective 
spiritual dominions and jurisdictions, 
He requires obedience of all His sub- 
jects, of what temporal rank or con- 
dition soever, as to His stewards, vice- 
gerents, or chief ministers over His 
Church.’’—See vol. i. pp. 64—66. The 
first objection is answered in this chap- 
ter; the second in the next. The re- 
maining ones, and the replies to them, 
are printed in the posthumous work, 
entitled, the Constitution of the Catho- 
lic Church, &c., by George Hickes, 
D.D. 1716. ] 


DIGNITY OF 
EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


Matt. 20. 
26, 27. 


274 Low notions of the Episcopal authority now prevailing. 


“Whosoever will be great among you, let him be your 
minister, and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be 
your servant.” Indeed, Sir, I grant, that in a Church and 
age wherein the episcopal office and its authority has been 
80 many ways depressed, some good people may be choked 
at those expressions; but when they shall have the same 
idea of it and of the Church, which I hope this letter will 
help to raise in you, they will be no longer offended at them, 
but think them just and proper, and such as the nature of 
that high spiritual trust and office requires. It is the un- 
happiness of our times, that men have too mean and low 
notions of the episcopal authority, and those who by succes- 
sion and ordination are advanced to it. But, Sir, if you had 
the same notion of the dignity and honour of the priesthood 
that the Jews had of it, I believe you would not think I had 
spoken too loftily of the archieratical or episcopal office, or 
that the terms of “princes, and spiritual sovereigns,” were 
so improper, or too high for it. Philo in his first book περὶ 
μοναρχίας, saith® that “God rewarded Phineas for his zeal 
with the honour of the priesthood, or service of the Father*,” 
i.e. of God, ‘ whose service was not only freedom, but more 
excellent than the kingly office,” (ᾧ τὸ δουλεύειν οὐκ ἐλευθερίας 
μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ βασιλείας ἄμεινον,) and that it was the inten- 
tion of the Jewish law®, “that the priests should have equal 
honour and veneration with their kings.” In his book περὶ 
Γιγάντων, he saith‘, that “ priests and prophets are the men of 
God, who are of greater dignity, than that they should be im- 
mersed in mundane affairs, and become citizens of the world, 


© [τῇ δ᾽, ὅτι γέρας εὐσεβοῦς ἀνδρὸς 
οἰκείοτατον ἱερωσύνη, θεραπείαν ἐπαγ- 
γελλομένου τοῦ πατρὸς, ᾧ τὸ δουλεύειν 
οὐκ ἐλευθερίας μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ βασι- 
λείας Guewov.—Philo περὶ μοναρχίας, 
ΠΡ. 1. Op., tom. ii. p. 220. .The ἀνὴρ 
εὐσεβὴς is Phinehas, of whom Philo is 
speaking. } 

4 Father was a solemn appellation 
of a heathen deity among the Greeks 
and Romans, as is observed by Bris- 
sonius de Formul., lib. i. pp. 48, 49, 
&c. in the edit. in folio, Paris, 1583. 
[Certum ‘inter sollemnes ritus et pre- 
cationes generaliter deos omnes patres 
nuncupatos,’ Lactantius (Institut. Di- 
vin., lib. iv. ¢. 3.) tradit, ‘non tantum ho- 
noris gratia, verum etiam rationis. Ita- 


que,’ addit, ‘ Jupiter a precantibus voca- 
tur Pater, et Saturnus et Liber et ezteri 
deinceps dei;’ quod his Lucilii versibus 
confirmat; ‘ Ut nemo sit nostrum quin 
pater optimw’ divum ; Ut Neptunw’ pa- 
ter, Liber, Saturnw’ pater, Mars, Janu’, 
Quirinw’ pater, nomen dicaturad unum,’ 
—(Bib]. Patr., tom. iv. p. 288. E.) 
Barn. Brissonius, De Formul., lib. 1. 
pp. 43, 44. 4to. Francof. 1592. ] 

© [ἐξ ὧν ἁπάντων ἐστὶ δῆλον bri 
βασιλέων σεμνότητα καὶ τιμήν περι- 
ἅπτει τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν ὃ vduos.—Philo de 
Premiis Sacerdotum, Op., tom. ii. p. 
234. ] 

f [θευῦ δὲ ἄνθρωποι ἱερεῖς καὶ mpo- 
φῆται, οἵ τινες οὐκ ἠξίωσαν πολιτείας 
τῆς παρὰ τῷ κόσμῳ τυχεῖν, καὶ κοσμο- 


— 


Dignity of the Priesthood among the Jews. 275 


but that soaring above all sensible things, they removed to the 
intellectual world, and dwelt there, being registered in the 
- society of the incorruptible and incorporeal ideas.” And 
King Agrippa’ in the supplicatory letter he sent to Caligula, 
in favour of his countrymen the Jews, writes after this 
manner: “1 was born a Jew, as your majesty knows, and 
Jerusalem is the place of my birth, in which is the temple of 
the most high God. I have had kings for my progenitors, 
some of whom have been high-priests, who thought the regal 
dignity inferior to the sacerdotal, supposing, that as much as 
God was more excellent than men, so much the high-priest- 
hood was more excellent than the kingly office, the service of 
God being committed to that, but to this the care of men.” 
And Josephus in the beginning of his life, written by himself, 
to set forth his illustrious and most honourable original, tells us 
“he descended of a priestly race,”’ which he saith was “a proof 
of the splendor of his family,” and then lets us know that 
his descent was also “of the first rank, or order of priests,” 
and in the last place saith, that he “was also of the royal 
Asmonzean family, by the mother’s side.” I hope, Sir, you 
will allow the Christian priesthood and priests, to be at least 
as honourable and venerable as the Jewish. I am sure they 
are ministers of a better covenant, and a more perfect and 
excellent religion, and as nearly related to the Father, and 
His Son, the θεῖος λόγος ἀρχιερεὺς, as Philo calls Himi, as the 
Jewish priests were, and perform as holy ministrations under 
the new law as they did under the old. 

And how great and honourable the priesthood was among 


πολῖται γενέσθαι: τὸ δὲ αἰσθητὸν πᾶν 
ὑπερκύψαντες, εἰς τὸν νοητὸν κόσμον 
μετανέστησαν κἀκεῖθι ᾧκησαν, ἔγγρα- 
Petes ἀφθάρτων ἀσωμάτων ἰδεῶν πολι- 
τείᾳ.---Τὰ. de Gigantibus, Op., tom. i. 
p- 271.] 

5. [γεγένημαι μὲν ws oldas ᾿Ιουδαῖος. 
ἔστι δέ μοι Ἱεροσόλυμα πατρὶς, ἐν ἣ 6 
τοῦ ὑψίστου θεοῦ νεὼς ἅγιος ἵδρος. πάπ- 
πων καὶ προγόνων βασιλέων ἔλαχον, 
ὧν οἱ πλείους ἐλέγοντο ἀρχιερεῖς, τὴν 
βασιλείαν τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἐν δευτέρᾳ 
τάξει τιθέμενοι.---[4. de Virtutibus et 
Legatione ad Caium, Op., tom. ii. 
p- 586. ] 

h [ἐμοὶ δὲ γένος ἐστὶν οὐκ ἄσημον, 
ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ ἱερέων ἄνωθεν καταβεβηκὺς, 


a 


ὥσπερ δὴ map’ ἑκάστοις ἄλλη τίς ἐστιν 
εὐγενείας ὑπόθεσις, οὕτως παρ᾽ ἡμῖν ἡ 
τῆς ἱερωσύνης μετουσία τεκμήριόν ἐστι 
γένους λαμπρότητος᾽ ἐμοὶ δ᾽ οὐ μόνον ἐξ 
ἱερέων ἐστὶ τὸ γένος, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐκ τῆς 
πρώτης ἐφημέριδος τῶν εἰκοσιτεσσά- 
ρων. πολλὴ δὲ κἂν τούτῳ διαφορά. ὑπάρ- 
χω δὲ καὶ τοῦ βασιλικοῦ γένους ἀπὸ τῆς 
μητρός. of yap’ Acapwvatov παῖδες, ὧν 
ἔκγονος ἐκείνη, τοῦ ἔθνους ἡμῶν ἐπὶ 
μήκιστον χρόνον ἠρχιεράτευσαν καὶ 
éBactAevoay.—Flavii Josephi Vita, ὃ 
1. Op., tom. ii. p. 1.] 

i [Philo de Profugis, Op., tom. i. p. 
562. See the context quoted above, 
note ἃ, p. 207. | 


2 


CHAP. I. 
SECT I. 


276 The Priesthood honoured among the heathen ; 


pienity or the heathens many have observed ; particularly a late author*, 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 





whose words I shall transcribe for your use. 

“On this account the priests were honoured with the next 
places to their kings and chief magistrates, and in many 
places wore the same habit. ‘In most of the Grecian cities, 
and particularly at Athens,’ as we are informed by Plato! 
and several others, ‘the care of Divine worship was com- 
mitted to the chief magistrates, who were often consecrated 
to the priesthood.’ Thus Anius in Virgil, was king of Delos, 
and priest of Apollo. 


Riex Anius, rex idem hominum, Pheebique sacerdos™.” 


He also observes after Clemens Alexandrinus”, that “ ‘in Egypt 
the kings were all priests, and if any one who was not of the 
royal family usurped the kingdom, he was obliged to be con- 
secrated to the priesthood, before he was permitted to govern,’ 
and we are assured by Plutarch®, ‘that the dignity of priests 
was equal to that of kings.’ At Sparta? ‘the kings imme- 
diately after their promotion took upon them the two priest- 
hoods of the heavenly and the Lacedzemonian Jupiter, which 
was rather esteemed an accession to their honour, than any 
diminution from it:’” with more to the same purpose. So 
Grotius in Genesis, cap. xiv. ver. 18%. Hrat enim sacerdos Dei 


altissimz. | 


k Dr. Potter in his Archzologia 
Grzeca, or Antiquities of Greece, book 
ii. ch. 8. [Hickes gives the substance 
of Potter’s statement, whose werk had 
then been very recently published. ] See 
also Sir John Hayward of Supremacy in 
Affairs of Religion, p. 22, &c. [ London, 
1624, The work was dedicated to King 
Charles I. The passage referred to 
contains a large collection of instances 
of the union of the regal and sacerdotal 
offices in the same persons. ] 

1 [ἔτι δὲ καὶ τῶν Ἑλλήνων πολλαχοῦ 
ταῖς μεγίσταις ἀρχαῖς τὰ μέγιστα τῶν 
περὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα θύματα εὕροι τις ἂν 
προσταττόμενα θύειν. καὶ δὴ καὶ παρ᾽ 
ὑμῖν οὐχ ἥκιστα δῆλον ὃ λέγω" τῷ γὰρ 
λαχόντι βασιλεῖ φασὶ τῇδε τὰ σεμνό- 
τατα καὶ μάλιστα πάτρια τῶν ἀρχαίων 
θυσιῶν ἀποδεδόσθαι.---Ῥ]αἴοπὶΒ Politi- 
cus, c. 30. Op., Pars 2. tom. ii. p. 319, 
ed. Bekker. | 

™ (Virgil. Aneid. iii. 80.] 

" [ὥστε περὶ μὲν Αἴγυπτον οὐδ᾽ ἔξεστι 


βασιλέα χωρὶς ἱ ἱερατικῆς ἄρχειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐὰν 
ἄρα καὶ τύχῃ πρότερον ἐὲ ἄλλου γένους 
βιασάμενος, t ὕστερον ἀναγκαῖον εἰς τοῦτο 
εἰστελεῖσθαι αὐτὸν τὸ yévos.—Platonis 
Politicus, ibid. This passage imme- 
diately precedes the one quoted in note 
1. Hickes has put Clemens Alexan- 
drinus for Plato, apparently by mistak- 
ing one of the references in Potter for 
another. | 

9 [ὡς ἐνιαχοῦ τῆς Ἑλλάδος ἀντίῤῥο- 
mov ἣν τὸ τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἀξίωμα πρὸς τὸ 
τῆς Baotvctas.—Plutarch. Questiones 
Romane, tom. vii. p. 169. ] 

p [Reges Spartanorum quum pri- 
mum in eam assumpti sunt digni- 
tatem, privilegio honoris precipui, Jo- 
vis ccelestis et Lacedzmonii sacerdotio 
funguntur.— Alexander ab Alexandro, 
Gen. Dier., lib. ii. c. 8. (tom. i. Ὁ. 317. 
Lugd. Bat. 1673,) is the authority re- 
referred to by Potter. ] 

4 {Grotius Annott. in Gen. xiv. 18. 
Crit. Sacr., tom. i. col. 388. ] 


ee 


as also by Christians in the purest ages of Christianity. 277 


Rex Anius, rex idem hominum Pheebique sacerdos'. 


Ubi Servius, 
esset sacerdos, vel pontifex.’ Hine ‘domus, in qua pontifex 
habitabat regia dicebatur, docente eodem Servio ad Atneid. 
viii. [362.| qui et sepe notat a Virgilio omnia jura sacerdota- 
lia tribui Ainee. 

In the first and purest ages of Christianity, all the orders 
of clergy were counted so honourable, that the most noble of 
the laity thought it an honour to be a priest or deacon, and 
therefore the governors of the Church, to discourage such and 
such blameable practices, incapacitated those who were guilty 
of them, to be priests. And it was in reference to the three 
honourable orders in that Church, St. Ignatius said’, τόπος 
μηδένα φυσιούτω, “let no man’s place puff him up.” 

II. I have set these things before you, dear Sir, to raise 
"your conceptions to the full and just height of the sacerdotal 
dignity, which the council of Sardica‘ calls “ Divine, and 
most venerable,’ and of that pre-eminent unworldly power 
and authority, which the spiritual governors and magistrates 
have over their spiritual subjects in the kingdom of Christ. 
I thought it proper for me to speak of them in such a style, 
and such expressions, as I conceived was fittest for my 
‘purpose in framing those propositions in my former letter, 
and useful at all times, especially in ours, to help Christian 
men, of all ranks and professions, to the right apprehension 
of that spiritual superiority to which God hath made them 
subject without exception; and, that being once rightly ap- 
prehended, to give them thereby a true notion of the free 
estate, or independent nature of the Church, and its real 
distinction", as a society, from the State. This indeed by a 
concurrence of unhappy causes, among which I reckon the 
great liberty of writing against the Church, especially by 


‘sane majorum erat consuetudo, ut rex etiam ~~ 


r Virgil. Aneid. iii. 80. 

s §. Ignat. Epist.ad Smyrn., [ce. 6. 
Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 36. ] 

' Can. xx. [ἴσμεν yap καὶ αὐτοὶ] 
πλεονάκις διὰ Thy ὁλίγων ἀναισχυντίαν, 
τὸ θεῖον καὶ σεβασμιώτατον ὄνομα τῆς 
ἱερωσύνης εἰς κατάγνωσιν ἐληλυθέναι.---- 
[Concilii Sardicensis, (A.D. 347.) Ca- 
non xx. Concil., tom. ii. col. 672, B.] 

ἃ [Postremo in rebus mere divinis 


sacerdotes plenariam potestatem obti- 
nentes, princeps ovis erit; at in rebus 
civilibus, sacerdos communi jure cum 
ceteris e populo censebitur, nisi bene- 
ficio principis prerogativa honoris et 
privilegia illi fuerunt inducta.—De 
Libertate Ecclesiastica, inter Episto- 
las Casauboni ed. Almeloveenii, tom. 
ii. p. 177. Roterodami. 1709. See 
Appendix, No. 6.] 


CHAP, IL. 
SECT, I. 





SECT, If. 


A distinct — 
d inde- 
ἘΠΕ 
spiritual 
authority 
in the 
Bishops of 
the Church. 


DIGNITY OF 
EPISCOPAL 
ORD1 R, 


278 Causes why the Independence of the Church is lost sight of. 


the deists, is become a hard and almost unintelligible doc- 
trine to many of the Church of England, even to some of 
that order, whose dignity I am defending; though it is a 
very familiar notion, and clearly understood not only by the 
most ignorant of the clergy and laity of the Church of 
Rome, but by the ministry and people among dissenters of 
all sorts, whose practice 1 know it is to speak with contempt 
of the Church of England, for being, as they conceive and 
object, so dependent upon the State, and against the clergy, 
whom they love to blame without distinction, for subjecting 
the rights and authority of the kingdom of Christ to the 
kings and kingdoms of the world. One of the causes why 
the doctrine of the Church’s being a society distinct from 
the State, and independent of it, is so little known and un- 
derstood among us, is and hath been, the great modesty of 
many of the clergy, who have forborne to preach it lest they 
should seem thereby to preach up themselves. Others of 
them have forborne to preach it purely because they did not 
understand it: for employing themselves too much in the 
study of other sorts of learning external to their profession, 
they have unhappily neglected the study of ecclesiastical 
antiquity, which was more necessary for them to know. 
Others of them, who studied it, and made themselves masters 
of it, have been silent, because they had little or no provo- 


cation for many years to preach it. Others again, when 


there hath been occasion enough to preach it, have for fear 
of offending those by whom they expected to be preferred, 
either been wholly silent, or shewed it only by half lights. 
And some, Sir, have wrote of it in such a dilute manner, as 
is hard to tell whether they wrote for or against it. This, 
Sir, was your own expression to me, when we discoursed 
last together on this melancholy subject, before the good 
lady*. Then I put you in mind of the notions and doctrines, 
which some of the gentlemen of your robe have taught of the 
king’s supremacy, which you allowed to be another cause 
why the doctrine of the Church’s independency, as a society 
really distinct from the State, was so great a stranger in 
our Israel; but because we then fully discoursed that point 
together, I shall here say nothing more of it, than that men 


* [This lady was Mrs. Hopton. See vol. i. pp. 59, sqq.] 


Names of authority applied to Bps., Primitive & Scriptural. 279 


who have imbibed those later notions and doctrines from 
these writers, will be more apt than others to think the ex- 
pressions, in which [ call bishops princes, and their dioceses 
principalities, to be novel and uncouth, though in truth they 
are not. On the contrary, Sir, as they are very ancient, so 
are they the common language of primitive Christianity, 
as you may see by the following authorities. St. Paul calls 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. II. 


them προισταμένους ἐν Κυρίῳν, “ presidents, prefects, rulers, 1 Thess. 5. 
or governors in the Lord,’ and προεστῶτας πρεσβυτέρους, ἜΑ 5 


‘ruling, or governing presbyters.’ 
they are frequently called προεστῶτες, ‘ presidents’; and by 
Gregory Nyssen*, πνευματικοὶ προεστῶτες, ‘spiritual presi- 
dents,’ and by St. Basil in Psalm xxviil.”, of τῆς ποίμνης τοῦ 
Χριστοῦ προεστῶτες, ‘ prefects, or presidents of the flock of 
Christ.’ So St. Cyprian, Epist. lix. ad Cornelium, calls the 
bishop Ecclesia prepositum:, and prepositum (Christi) servum*, 
and the bishops those, gui in Ecclesia Catholica fratribus 
presunt®. So in Epist. Ixix.!, gui se schismaticis contra pre- 
positos et sacerdotes miscuerint. Epist. lxxiii.® unde intelligimus 
non nisi in Ecclesia prepositis.....licere boptizare. St. 
Paul in Heb. xii. 7, 17, 24, calls the bishops ἡγουμένους, a 
word used to set forth our Lord’s spiritual dominion. Matt. 
i. 6, ἐκ cod yap ἐξελεύσεται ἡγούμενος, “for out of thee 
shall come a governor (or prince) who shall rule My people 
Israel.” It is also used of the Apostles to whom Christ 
committed all His power, and the administration of His king- 
dom; Luke xxii. 26. “ But ye shall not be so, but he that 


Y προιστάμενος, προεστὼς, of the same 
signification with προστάτης, ‘ prefec- 
tus, preeses, qui alicui rei preeest, eam- 
que administrat,’ all from προΐσταμι, 
“antesto, presum, prefectus sum.’ See 
Budzi Commentar., p. 487, and Ste- 
phani Thesaur. in προΐσταμαι, [tom. iv. 
col. 4610, D.] προστασία, [ibid., col. 
4611, D.] προστάτης, [ibid., col. 4612, 
C.,] the words by which Greg. Na- 
zianzen expresseth himself, in his first 
apologetical oration, when he speaks of 
bishops and the episcopal office.—[S. 
Greg. Naz. Orat. ii. (al. i.) Apologetica, 
§ 1]. τοῦ προεστῶτος. Op., tom. ii. p. 
17, C. τὴν mpooractay.—Ibid., ὃ 16. 
p- 20, A. τὸν mpoordrny.—Ibid., ὃ 44. 
p. 34, A.; et alibi spins. ] 

4 [See S. Just. M. Apol. i. c.65, 67. 


Op., pp. 82, 83, quoted above, pp. 105, 
106, notes f, g. The word προεστὼς 
occurs repeatedly in the context of the 
passages there extracted. ] 

a[S. Greg. Nyssen., de Scopo Chris- 
tiano, Op., tom. iii. p. 306, B. The 
word προεστὼς occurs frequently in the 
context. ] 

> [S. Basilii Hom. in Psalm. xxviii. 
§ 2. Op., tom. i. p. 115, A.] 

ο [S. Cypr. Epist. lv. (lix. ed. Oxon.) 
pp. 82, 88. ed. Ben. ] 

a [Id. ibid., p. 82. ed. Ben. ] 

e [Id. ibid., pp. 83, 84] 

f (Id. Epist. Ixxvi. (Jxix. ed. Oxon.) 
ad Magnun, ibid., p. 15d. ] 

s ({Id., Epist. Ixxiii. ad Jubaianum, 
ibid., p. 131. ] 


So in Justin Martyr 17. 


280 Bishops called ἡγούμενοι, in Scripture ; 


piexiry oF 1s greatest among you let him be as the younger, καὶ 6 ἡγού- 
voRpEen, μένος, and he that is chief (or prince) as he that doth serve.” 
Clemens Romanus useth the same word to distinguish the 
Apostles and their Apostolic successors from presbyters in 
the Church of Corinth, cap. 1". ‘ You did all things without 
respect of persons, you walked in the laws of God, being sub- 
ject τοῖς ἡγουμένοις ὑμῶν, to your chief governors, or princes, 
and giving due honour τοῖς παρ᾽ ὑμῖν πρεσβυτέροις, to the 
presbyters among you.” He also useth the same word, cap. 
21, for the successors of the Apostles in the Church; “ Let 
us,” saith he*, “worship our Lord Jesus Christ, whose blood was 
offered for us, let us reverence our chiefs, [zponyoupévovs, | 
let us honour our presbyters, and instruct the new disciples 
in the fear of God.” I call it the same word though in 
composition, because it hath the same signification, and I 
have rendered νέους ‘ new disciples,’ as it certainly signifies 
also in cap. 1, 3!; and as νεώτερος doth, Acts v. 6, and 1 Pet. 
v.5. But to proceed, so Origen on Matt. xx. 20™, ὁ δὲ ἡγού- 
μενος" ovTws δὲ οἶμαι ὀνομάζειν τὸν καλούμενον ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλη- 
σίαις ἐπίσκοπον, “the prince, for so I think fit to call him 
that is called a bishop in the Churches.” So contra Celsum, 
lib. vii.", where, speaking of bishops as Archons® of the 
Church, he saith, καὶ ἀναγκαίως ἅμα καὶ δικαίως ἡγούμενοι, 
καὶ πάντων πεφροντικότες, K.T-r. “Our rulers, who are made 
so by constraint, as well as for merit, have the care of all; of 


» [ἀπροσωπολήπτως yap πάντα ἐποι- 
εἴτε, καὶ τοῖς νόμοις τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπορεύ- 
εσθε, ὑποτασσόμενοι τοῖς ἡγουμένοις 
ὑμῶν, καὶ τιμὴν τὴν καθήκουσαν ὑπονέ- 
μοντες τοῖς παρ᾽ ὑμῖν πρεσβυτέροι-.--- 
S. Clem. R. Ep. i. ad Cor. § 1. Patr. 
Apost., tom. i. p. 147.] 

i ἡγούμενος, signifies as ἡγεμών. See 
the use of the word in the civil signifi- 
cation, by profane authors in ἡγέομαι, 
ovmal, ἡγεμὼν, ἡγεμονία, in Stephani 
Thesaur. [ἡγεόμαι pro dux sum, i. 6. 
imperator, ducto, presum in generali- 
ter pro presum. Xen. (Am. i. 7.5.) ὡς 
ἱκανὸς εἴη τῆς πόλεως ἡγεῖσθαι. Item, 
ἡγούμενος τῆς Γερμανίας, 6 Plut. ut 
Lat. dicitur ‘ preesse’ provincia. Steph. 
Thes., tom. iv. col. 4076, D. ἡγεμὼν, 
princeps; sicut Lat. quoque ducem et 
principem interdum copulant.—Ibid., 
col. 4078, B. ... ἡγεμονία imperium, 
generaliter pro imperio, principatu.— 
Tbid., D, and col. 4079, A.] 


Κ τὸν κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν, οὗ τὸ 
αἷμα ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἐδόθη, ἐντραπῶμεν. 
τοὺς προηγουμένους ἡμῶν αἰδεσθῶμεν. 
τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους ἡμῶν τιμήσωμεν. 
τοὺς νέους παιδεύσωμεν τὴν παιδείαν 
τοῦ φόβου τοῦ θεοῦ.--ἰ 8. Clem. R. 
Epist. i. c. 21. Patr. Apost., tom. i. 
p. 160.] 

1 [τιμὴν τὴν καθήκουσαν ἀπονέμοντες 
τοῖς Tap ὑμῖν πρεσβυτέροις" νέοις τε 
μέτρια καὶ σέμνα νοεῖν ἐπιτρέπετε.---Ἰὰ. 
ibid., c. 1. p. 147. ἐπηγέρθησαν.. .. οἱ 
νέοι ἐπὶ τοὺς πρεσβυτέρου-.----Ἰ ὈΪ4., c. 
3. pp. 148, 149. } 

m [6 δὲ ἡγούμενος" οὕτω δὲ οἶμαι dvo- 
μάζειν τὸν καλούμενον ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλη- 
σίαις ἐπίσκοπον, ὡς ὃ τοῖς ὑπηρετουμέ- 
νοις Siakovovmevos.—Origenes Comm. 
in Matt., tom. xvi. Op., tom. iii. p. 728, 
C. The right translation seems rather 
to be ‘‘ for so I think He calls him who 
is called a bishop,” &c. ] 

" [kal ἀναγκαίως ἅμα καὶ δικαίως 


a 


by St. Clement R. and Origen. Force of the term. 281 


CHAP, 1. 
SECT. IL 


those within, that they may live better and better every day ; 
and of those without, that they may bring them to know- 
ledge of true piety and religion in words and works, and to 
the worship of the true God... and be united to God, who is 
Lord over all, by His Son God the Word, the Wisdom, the 
Truth, and the Justice, who unites all converts to Him, who 
live in all things according to the Divine will.” 

And that this word imports greatness in its signification, 
even principality, or chief rule and authority in all commu- 
nities, is evident from 1 Mace. xiv. 41, καὶ ὅτι εὐδόκησαν 
οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι καὶ οἱ ἱερεῖς τοῦ εἶναι Σίμωνα ἡγούμενον καὶ 
ἀρχιερέα: “ΑἸδο that the Jews were well pleased that Simon 
should be their governor (or prince) and high-priest.” I 
have observed this, because the word ἡγούμενος, like the 


ἡγούμενοι, Kal πάντων πεφροντίκοτες, 
τῶν μὲν ἔνδον, ἵν’ ὁσημέραι βέλτιον 
Bidar τῶν δὲ δοκούντων ἔξω, ἵνα yévwv- 
ται ἐν τοῖς σεμνοῖς τῆς θεοσεβείας λό- 
yous καὶ epyots* καὶ οὕτω θεὸν ἀληθῶς 
σέβοντες, καὶ πολλοὺς, ὅση δύναμις, 
παιδέυοντες ἀνακραθῶσι τῷ τοῦ θεοῦ 
λόγου, καὶ τῷ θείῳ νόμῳ καὶ οὕτως ἕνω- 
θῶσι τῷ ἐπὶ πᾶσι θεῷ, διὰ τοῦ ἑνοῦντος 
αὐτῷ υἱοῦ θεοῦ λόγου, καὶ σοφίας, καὶ 
ἀληθείας, καὶ δικαιοσυνης, πάντα τὸν 
προτετραμμένον ἐπὶ τὸ κατὰ θεὸν ἐν 
πᾶσι Cyv.—ld. contr. Celsum, lib. viii. 
c. 75. Op., tom. i. p. 798, D—F.] 

° Ussher, Vett. Testimonia de Igna- 
tio, p. 4. [ Ussher quotes a passage from 
St. Chrysostom, Hom. in S. Ignat. M., 
ὃ 2. (Op., tom. 11. p. 593, D.) where, 
after speaking of St. Ignatius’ living 
with the Apostles, he says; καὶ τοσαύ- 
Ts εἶναι δόξαντα αὐτοῖς ἀρχῆς ἄξιον : and 
on this observes, Episcopatus autem 
dignitatem hic intelligit, quam ab Apo- 
stolis Ignatium accepisse in sequenti- 
bus ita ostendit; οὐ yap μόνον, ὅτι 
τοσαύτης ἀρχῆς ἄξιος εἶναι ἔδοξε, θαυ- 
μάζω τὸν ἄνδρα ἐγὼ, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι καὶ παρὰ 
τῶν ἁγίων ἐκείνων τὴν ἀρχὴν ταύτην 
ἐνεχειρίσθη, καὶ αἱ τῶν μακαρίων ἀπο- 
στόλων χεῖρες τῆς ἱερὰς ἐκείνης ἥψαντο 
κεφαλῆς.---ἰ( 5. Chrys. ibid., p. 594, A.) 
Ignatii &c. Epistole, ed. Usser. Oxon. 
1643. ] 

P See Dr. Hammond and Grotius on 
Heb. xiii. 7. [Hammond observes that 
the word ἡγούμενος is a common word 
to signify all kind of authority or rule, 
instancing Ecclus. ix. 22; x. 2, 24; 
xiii, 54; 1 Mace. xiii, 8, 42: and that 


the Hebrew N°, by, and ‘7°39, 
which are ordinarily rendered ἄρχων, 
are often rendered ἡγούμενος. He 
quotes the instances given above, and 
others from the New Testament; par- 
ticularly Acts xv. 22, where he under- 
stands the word to be used of Judas and 
Silas, as being bishops in Judea, follow- 
ing St. Chrysostom and others; and 
lastly, he shews that the persons spoken 
of in Heb. xiii. were bishops, in that 
they, ver. 7, had ‘‘spoken to them the 
word of God ;”’ ver. 17, ‘‘ watched over 
their souls ;’’ and with the saints, ver. 
24, (‘‘ Salute all the rulers and all the 
saints,’’) made up the whole Church. 
—Hammond, Annotations on Heb. xiii. 
Works, vol. iii. p. 768. 

μνημονέυετε τῶν ἡγουμένων ὑμῶν. Me- 
mentote prepositorum vestrorum; 7- 
γούμενοι, Qypyby in Veteri Testamento, 
sunt populorum aut exercituum duces 
atque principes, quod nomen hic optimo 
jure aptatur eis qui apud Christianos 
kat’ ἐξοχὴν (per excellentiam) tum 
προεστῶτες (presides) tum ἐπίσκοποι 
(episcopi) dicuntur, quorum munus est 
non tantum preesse presbyterio, sed 
et κοπιᾷν ἐν τῷ λόγῳ (laborare in verbo) 
1 Tim. v. 17. quale apud Judzos fuit 
et nunc est munus τῶν ἀρχισυναγώγων 
(principum synagogz). Sic et in Epi- 
stola Clementis ad Corinthios bis po- 
nuntur ἡγούμενοι (prepositi), deinde 
πρεσβύτεροι (seniores). Loquitur au- 
tem de iis qui jam obierant, ut osten- 
dunt sequentia.—Grotius in Ep. ad 
Hebr., cap. xiii. 7. Crit. Sacr., tom. vii. 
col. 1187. } 


DIGNITY OF 
EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


282 Bishops called Princes or Rulers, and their office ἀρχή : 


Hebrew cohen, carries so much greatness and excellency 
of power in its signification; for ἡγεμονία, the noun, sig- 
nifies supreme authority both in sacred and profane writers, 
as Luke ii. 1. τῆς ἡγεμονίας Τιβερίου Καίσαρος, ‘in the 
fifteenth year of the reign, or empire of Tiberius Cesar.” 
And therefore Chrysostom in Hom. xxxiv. on the Epistle to 
the Hebrews", compares them to what is chief, and pre- 
eminent in every kind, as to “the precentor and governor of 
a chorus, the general of an army, the captain of a ship, and 
the shepherd of a flock.” He calls them ἄρχοντας, which in 
Latin and English too is familiarly translated ‘princes. It 
is so translated in both languages, Matt. xx. 25; Mark in. 22; 
John xii. 31; and in many other places, as 1 Cor. 1. 8; Eph. 
11. 2; and is also so rendered throughout the ancient Latin 
version of the Epistles of St. Ignatius‘, and almost where- 
soever the LXX translate by ἄρχοντες, where we use the 
word princes, as 1 Chron. xxviii. 1, and 21. According to this 
observation the same father speaks of tod ἀξιώματος τὸ 
μέγεθος", “the greatness of their dignity,” and upon those 
words, “salute those who have the rule over you” (τοὺς ἡγου- 
μένους ὑμῶν, 1. e. your rulers, or princes) “ and all the saints.” 
“See (saith he) how he honoured them, in writing to these 
for the sake of them.” 

But before I proceed further, let me, Sir, observe to you, 
that it 15 no wonder such titles are given to bishops and their 


4 [See above, the Christian Priest- 
hood, chap. li. sect. 2. p. 16. ] 

τ [κακὸν μὲν ἣ ἀναρχία πανταχοῦ, 
καὶ πολλῶν ὑπόθεσις συμφορῶν, καὶ 
ἀρχὴ ἀταξίας καὶ συγχύσεως μάλιστα 
δὲ ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τυσοῦτον ἐπισφαλεστέρα 
ἐστὶν ὅσον καὶ τὸ τῆς ἀρχῆς μεῖζον καὶ 
ὑψηλότερον. ὥσπερ γὰρ ἄν χοροῦ τὸν 
κορυφαῖον ἀνέλῃς, οὐχὶ κατὰ μέλος καὶ 
κατὰ τάξιν ὁ χορὸς ἔσται, καὶ φάλαγγοξ 
στρατοπέδου τὸν στρατηγὸν ἂν ἀπο- 
στήσῃς, οὐκ ἔτι ῥυθμῷ καὶ τάξει τὰ τῆς 
παρατάξεως ἔσται, καὶ πλοίου τὸν κυ- 
βερνήτην ἐὰν περιέλῃς, καταδύσεις τὸ 
σκάφος" οὕτω καὶ ποιμνίου τὸν ποιμένα 
ἐὰν ἀποστήσῃς, πάντα ἀἄνέτρεψας καὶ 
ἠφανίσα-.----ὃ. Chrysost. in Hebr., Hom. 
xxxiv. ὃ 1. cap. 13. Op., tom. xii. Ὁ: 
$14, A, Bul 

5 Edit. Voss., pp. 5, 27, 31, 42, 49, 
60. [The ancient Latin version is 
printed parallel with the Greek in 
Vossius’ edition of St.Ignatius’ Epistles. 


Epistole genuine S. Ignatii M. que 
nune primum lucem vident ex bibli- 
otheca Florentina. Amst. 1646. It is 
given in Cotelerius’ Patr. Apost., tom. 
il. pp. 124, sqq. The passages referred 
to are; ad Smyrn., c. 6. Patr. Apost., 
tom. ii. p. 85. Vers. Lat. p. 130; ad 
Ephesios, ὁ. 19. ibid., pp. 16, 125; ad 
Magnes., c. 1. ibid. pp. 17, 126; ad 
Philadelph., c. 6. pp. 32, 129; ad Trall., 
c. 4. pp. 22, 127; ad Rom., c. 7. pp. 
29, 128. In all these places except the 
first the words are 6 ἄρχων τοῦ αἰῶνος 
τούτου, translated, ‘ princeps sxeuli 
hujus.’ ] 

τ [φεύγειν μὲν προορῶντας τοῦ ἀξιώ- 
ματος τὸ μέγεθο-.---. Chrys., ibid., p. 
313, C.] 

u [ipa πῶς αὐτοὺς ἐτίμησεν, εἴγε 
ἐκείνοις ἐπέστειλεν ἀντ᾽ ἐκείνων. --- 8. 
Chrys. ibid., ὃ 2, p. 816, A. Hickes 
seems to have misapprehended the 
meaning of ἀντὶ.] 


as governing the Church under Christ. 283 


office, because to them is committed the government of the 
whole Church throughout the world, even the kingdom of 
Jesus Christ, which, as it is of greater extent than any 
worldly empire was or ever will be, so it is of greater dig- 
nity than all the kingdoms of the earth. This vast spiritual 
empire, which reaches from the rising to the setting sun, is 
committed by God to the bishops in general, as well as par- 
ticular, in whole, as well as in part’, which is a prerogative, 
that no temporal prince can challenge, whose authority is 
confined and limited to his dominions. And, Sir, if you 
rightly consider this, you will see the reason of the princely 
titles which I shall shew the fathers give them and their 
power. The council of Laodicea* calls their power ἐκκλησιυ- 
ἀστικὴν ἀρχήν. And by the fifty-fourth Apostolical canon’, 
a clergyman who unjustly calumniates a bishop is to be 
deposed, because it is written, “Thou shalt not speak evil 
of the Archon’, the ruler of thy people.” So Origen, 
whom I cited before, calls them* βουλευτών" καὶ ἀρχόν- 
των" ἐκκλησίας θεοῦ, “senators and princes of the Church 
of God.” And in another place‘, “ We,” saith he, “ know- 
ing that there is another frame of government in every 
city, ordained by the word of God, exhort those who are 
fitted by sound doctrine and holy lives, ἐπὶ τὸ ἄρχειν ἐκ- 


V See this most learnedly set forth 
by Isaac Casaubon, de Libertate Ec- 
clesiastica, in the late edition of his 
epistles by Almeloveen, pp. 206, &c. 
{The part of Casaubon’s treatise here 
referred to is chap. ili. sect. 4, of which 
the heading is; A sententiis synoda- 
libus appellabatur illis temporibus ad 
majorem svnodum vel ad principem. 
In this he first shews that each bishop 
shared in the government of the whole 
Church. See the translation of the 
treatise in the Appendix, No. 6.] 

* [περὶ τοῦ τοὺς ἐπισκόπους κρίσει 
τῶν μητροπολιτῶν, καὶ τῶν πέριξ ἐπι- 
σκόπων καθίστασθαι εἰς τὴν ἐκκλησιασ- 
τικὴν ἀρχὴν, kK. τ. AA—Concil. Laodicen. 
(cire. A.D. 364?) Canon xii. Concil., 
tom. i. col. 1533, A.] 

Υ [εἴ τις κληρικὸς ὑβρίζει τὸν ἐπί- 
σκοπον, καθαιρείσθω" ἄρχοντα γὰρ τοῦ 
λαοῦ σου οὐκ ἐρεῖς κακῶς. --- Canon. 
Apost. liv. (lv. Bevereg. Pandect., p. 
37.) ibid., col. 37, A. In the third 
edition the reference in the text, appa- 
rently by mistake, was to the 47th 
Apostolical canon. } 


Z Principem populi tui non male- 
dices. 

ἃ [ἵνα karavonons, ὅτι καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν 
σφόδρα ἀποτυγχανομένων βουλευτῶν καὶ 
ἀρχόντων ἐκκλησίας θεοῦ. --- Origen. 
cont, Celsum, lib. iii. ce. 30. Op., tom. 
i. p..466, F. ] 

>’ The Areopagites are called βού- 
Aevrat by Lucian, [Anacharsis, c. 19. 
Op., tom. iii. p. 144. Lips. 1839 ;] and 
in profane writers βουλευτικὸς always 
relates to the courts of legislation, or 
supreme judicature. 

© ἄρχων, from ἄρχω, ‘I am chief,’ in 
profane authors signifies the chief com- 
mander in any society, as in that of 
Aristotle, οἷον στρατιᾶς ἄρχοντι, ἢ πό- 
Aews, ἢ otxov.—| De Mundo, c. 6. ὃ 8. ] 
See Budzi Commentar., pp. 130, 152. 
[ἄρχειν est presse et imperium ha- 
bere, &c.—p. 130. The other passage 
(p. 152) is respecting the Athenian 
Archons, | 

4 [ἡμεῖς δὲ ἐν ἑκάστῃ πόλει ἄλλο 
σύστημα πατρίδος, κτισθὲν λόγῳ θεοῦ, 
ἐπιστάμενοι, τοὺς δυνατοὺς λόγῳ καὶ 
βίῳ ὑγιεῖ χρωμένους ἄρχειν ἐπὶ τὸ ἄρ- 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. H, 


DIGNITY OF 
EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


284 Terms expressive of ruling used of Bishops, by 


κλησιῶν, to govern, to reign over, or, be rulers of the 
Churches.” For the same word is used Mark x. 42, to 
signify the princes of the Gentiles, of δοκοῦντες ἄρχειν TOV 
ἐθνῶν “they who are accounted to rule over the Gentiles.” 
And what is more observable, it is used to signify the power 
and greatness of our Lord Himself, Rom. xv. 12; “There 
shall be a root of Jesse, and in Him who shall rise, ἄρχειν 
ἐθνῶν, to reign over the Gentiles, shall the Gentiles trust.” 
Then he proceeds, “and our good princes, or magistrates, 
οἱ καλῶς ἄρχοντες ἡμῶν, are forced to take upon them the 
care of the Churches, by the command of the great King, 
whom we believe to be the Son of God.” So Church power 
and authority is called by Gregory Nazianz., Hpist. xlvi. 
p. 807°, ἀναίμακτος ἀρχὴ; “an unbloody dignity, or power,” 
because it hath not the power of the sword; τοῦτο yap ὁ 
ἄρχων εἷναι μοι φαίνεται; βοηθὸς ἀρετῆς καὶ ἀνταγωνιστὴς 
κακίας" κἄν τὴν ἀναίμακτον ἄρχη ἀρχὴν, καθάπερ ἡμεῖς, κἄν 
τὴν μετὰ ξίφους. καὶ τελαμῶνος : “ For an Archon, or magis- 
trate, seems to me to be nothing else than an encourager 
of virtue and an enemy of vice, whether he have an unbloody 
power and jurisdiction, as we (bishops) have, or the power of 
the sword and chains.” So in his first apologetical oration, 
speaking of refusing a bishopric‘, saith hes’, ὡς εἴ ye πάν- 
Tes φεύγοιεν ταύτην, τὴν εἴτε λειτουργίαν χρὴ λέγειν, εἴτε 
ἡγεμονίαν" which Billius renders thus, Si omnes hoc, sive 
ministerium dicere oportet sive imperium, defugiant. And then 
describing the anarchy and confusion of the Church without 
a bishop, saith he, οὐκ ὄντος βασιλέως, οὐδὲ ὄντος ἄρχον- 
Tos', οὐδὲ ἱερατείας, οὐδὲ θυσίας. sic nec rex, nec archon 
esset, nec sacerdotium, nec sacrificium. And then, speaking 


xew ἐκκλησιῶν παρακαλοῦμεν... καὶ 
οἱ καλῶς ἄρχοντες ἡμῶν βιασθέντες 
ὑπάρχουσι, τοῦ μεγάλου βασιλέως ἀναγ- 
κάζοντος" ὃν πεπείσμεθα εἶναι υἱὸν θεοῦ, 
λόγον @eov.—Orig., ibid., lib. vii. ο. 75. 
Op., tom. i. p. 798, B, C.] 

¢ [S. Greg. Naz., Epist. eexxiv. p. 
187, B. ed. Paris. 1840. Hickes’ refe- 
rence is to the Paris edition of 1630. ] 

f [The oration was an apology for 
avoiding the office of a priest. See 
above, vol. i. p. 90, note z. | 

® (Id., Orat. ii. § 4. Op., tom. i. p. 
13, A. ed. Ben.; for the Latin see his 


Orationes, Jacobo Billio Interprete, tom. 
1. p. ὃ, A. ed. Par. 1630. ] 

4 (Id. ibid., B. ed. Ben.; Lat. ibid., 
B. ed. Par. 1630. ] 

i Haberti Pontificale, p. 586. [Ex- 
archi nomen primariam quandam cum 
imperio et dignitatem et principatum 
significat. Lexicon vetus Steph. ἔξαρ- 
χοι, principes, proceres, &c.—Observat. 
1, ad edicta patriarchee que ad archi- 
mandritas exarchos et prafectos mo- 
nachorum spectant. Pars altera. De 
Exarchis. ] 


St. Greg. Naz., the Apost. Const., and St. Chrysost. 285 


against promoting unqualified persons to the episcopal office, 
“Tt would be strange, (saith he*,) ἐπὶ τὸ ἄρχειν ἀναβαίνειν 
ἀπὸ τοῦ ἄρχεσθαι, e subditorum classe, ac ordine ad imperium 
evehere.”’ You see then, Sir, by what princely names the 
rulers of the Church were then called. So St. Ignatius is 
introduced speaking in that pretended epistle of his to the 
Antiochians!. “O ye presbyters, feed the flock among you, 
ἕως ἀναδειξῇ ὁ θεὸς τὸν μέλλοντα ἄρχειν ὑμῶν, until God 
shall shew whom He will have to rule over you.” In the 
Apostolical Constitution™ for electing bishops we find these 
words: ὁ δὲ πρόκριτος τῶν λοιπῶν ἐρωτάτω πρεσβυτέριον 
καὶ λαὸν; εἰ αὐτός ἐστιν; ὃν αἰτοῦνται εἰς ἄρχοντα' καὶ ἐπι- 
νευσάντων, προσεπερωτάτω εἰ μαρτυρεῖται ὑπὸ πάντων 
ἄξιος εἶναι τῆς μεγάλης ταύτης καὶ λαμπρᾶς ἡγεμονίας: 
“The chief of the rest (that is, of the bishops presiding in 
the election) shall ask the priests and the people if that be 
the person whom they desire to have for their ruler (or 
prince); and they signifying their consent, he shall ask 
them again if they all testify that he is worthy of this great 
and glorious principality.” And so St. Chrysostom, in his 
fifteenth homily on the second Epistle to the Corinthians, 
calls it ἀρχὴν πνευματικὴν ", a “spiritual principality,” of 
which he speaks in this manner®: “If the civil empire or 
government is an art or science better than all others, how 
much more is this of ours? which truly is so much more 
excellent than that as that is more excellent than others, 
yea, and much more excellent®..... For there are two 
sorts? of empire or government; one relating to civil life, 
by which men govern people and cities, of which St. Paul 
speaks, when he said, ‘Let every soul be subject to the 


k [ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ ξένον τι καὶ ἀπὸ τρόπου 
τοῖς πολλοῖς τὰ θεῖα φιλοσοφοῦσιν, ἐπὶ 
τὸ ἄρχειν, K.T.A. Hickes has over- 
looked the negative particle—S. Greg. 
ibid.,C.ed. Ben. ; ibid.,C. ed. Par. 1630. | 

1 [οἱ πρεσβύτεροι, ποιμήνατε τὸ ἐν 
ὑμῖν ποίμνιον, ἔως ἀναδείξῃ ὃ θεὸς τὸν 
μέλλοντα ἄρχειν ὑμῶν.---8. Ignat. ad- 
script. Epist. ad Antioch., c. 8. Patr. 
Apost., tom. ii. p. 106. ] 

™ Constit. Apost., lib. viii. cap. 4. 
[Concilia, tom. i. col. 460, E.] 

® [ἀλλ᾽ οὔτε ὁ Thy πολιτικὴν ἀρχὴν 
μετιὼν, οὔτε ὃ τὴν πνευματικὴν, K.T.A. 

. καὶ πάλιν κἀνταῦθα ἀμείνων τῆς 


πολιτικῆς ἡ πνευματικὴ, ὥσπερ 6 λόγος 
ἀπέδειξεν. S. Chrysost, ad 2 Cor. Hom. 
xv. § 4. Op., tom. x. p. 548, C, D. 
These clauses are a part of the passage 
quoted below note p, following the 
words πλάττοντες τούς avOparous. | 

ο [εἰ yap ἣ τῶν ἔξωθεν ἀρχὴ, τέχνη 
καὶ ἐπιστήμη πασῶν βελτίων ἐστὶ, πολ- 
AG μᾶλλον αὕτη καὶ γὰρ τοσούτῳ 
ἀμείνων ἐκείνης αὕτη ἢ ἀρχὴ, ὅσῳ τῶν 
ἄλλων ἐκείνη" μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ πολλῷ 
mdéov.—Ibid., § 3. p. 546, E. | 

P [ἔστι γὰρ ἀρχῆς εἴδη" ἕν μὲν καθ᾽ 
ὃ δήμων καὶ πόλεων ἄρχουσιν ἄνθρωποι, 
τὸν πολιτικὸν τοῦτον διορθοῦντες βίον. 


CHAP. I. 
SECT. II. 


286 St. Chrysostom on the contrast between 


pienity or higher powers’... . . and another more sublime than that, I 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 


mean that of the Church, of which St. Paul speaks, saying, 
‘Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit your- 
selves, because they watch for your souls, as those that must 
give an account.’ This government is as much more excel- 
lent than the civil as heaven is than the earth; yea, and 
much more, for it takes care chiefly that crimes may not be 
committed, rather than punish them when they are com- 
mitted; and when they are committed, it doth not destroy 
the criminal, but takes care that his crimes be taken away. 
And it hath little regard to the things of this life, but all its 
concerns are for heavenly things. ‘ For our conversation is 
in heaven,’ and ‘our life is there hid with Christ, in God’ 
Moreover, there are the rewards for our labours, and here 
we run for the crowns that are there; for this life is not 
extinguished by death, but then shines with greater lustre. 
Wherefore those to whom this empire is entrusted have a 
greater honour committed to them, not only than the gover- 
nors of provinces, but [than] those who are encircled with the 
imperial diadem, as being ordained to form and fit men for 
greater and more excellent things... Farthermore, those who 
are governors in this life are as much inferior to them who 
have the ecclesiastical government, as it is more excellent to 
have the authority over the willing more than the unwilling ; 
for the former is a natural empire, but the latter is full of 
fear and force; this is the effect of compulsion, but that 


of election and free-will. Again, that empire is more excel- 


ὅπερ ὁ Παῦλος δηλῶν ἔλεγε" πᾶσα ψυχὴ vols πραγμάτων χρηματίζει: ἡμῶν γὰρ 


ἐξουσίαις ὑπερεχούσαις ὑποτασσέσθω... 
ἐνταῦθα δέ ἐστι καὶ ἑτέρα ἀρχὴ τῆς πο- 
λιτικῆς ἀρχῆς ἀνωτέρα. τίς οὖν ἐστιν 
αὕτη, ἣ ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ" hs καὶ αὐτῆς ὃ 
Παῦλος μεμνήται λέγων, πείθεσθε τοῖς 
ἡγουμένοις ὑμῶν, καὶ ὑπείκετε" ὅτι αὐτοὶ 
ἀγρυπνοῦσιν ὑπὲρ τῶν ψυχῶν ὑμῶν, ὡς 
λόγον ἀποδώσοντες. αὕτη γὰρ ἡ ἀρχὴ 
τοσοῦτον τῆς πολιτικῆς ἀμείνων, ὅσον 
Tis yns 6 οὐρανός" μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ πολλῷ 
πλέον. πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ οὐχ ὕπως γενό- 
μενα κολάσειεν ἁμαρτήματα σκοπεῖ προ- 
ηγουμένως, ἀλλ᾽ Baws μὴ γένοιτο τὴν 
ἀρχήν: ἐπεῖτα γενόμενα, οὐκ ὕπως 
ἀπενέγκοι τὸν κάμνοντα, ἀλλ᾽ ὅπως 
ἀφανισθείη. καὶ βιωτικῶν μὲν οὐ πολὺς 
αὐτῇ λόγος" πάντα δὲ ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐν οὐρα- 


τὸ πολίτευμα ἐν οὐρανοῖς ὑπάρχει, καὶ ἣ 
ζωὴ ἡμῶν ἐκεῖ. κέκρυπται γάρ, φησι, 
σὺν τῷ Χριστῷ ἐν τῷ θεῷ. καὶ τὰ 
ἔπαθλα ἐκεῖ, καὶ οἱ δρόμοι περὶ τῶν ἐκεῖ 
στεφάνων. οὐδὲ γὰρ καταλύεται μετὰ 
τὴν τελευτὴν αὕτη ἢ ζωὴ, ἀλλὰ τότε 
διαλάμπει μειζόνως" διὰ δὴ τοῦτο, οὐκ 
ὑπάρχων μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτῶν τῶν τὰ 
διαδήματα περικειμένων μείζονά εἰσιν 
ἐγκεχειρισμένοι τιμὴν οἱ ταύτην ἔχοντες 
τὴν ἀρχὴν, ἅτε ἐν μείζοσι καὶ ἐπὶ μεί- 
foot πλάττοντες τοὺς ἀνθρώπους... οἱ 
δὲ τοῦ βίου τοῦ παρόντος ἄρχοντες, το- 
σοῦτον αὐτῆς ἐλάττους πάλιν, ὅσον τὸ 
ἑκόντος τοῦ ἄκοντος κρατεῖν, βέλτιον. 
αὕτη γάρ ἐστι καὶ ἣ φύσει ἀρχή. ἐκει 
μὲν γὰρ τὸ πᾶν τῷ φόβῳ γίνεται καὶ τῇ 


civil and ecclesiastical government. 287 


lent than this, because it is not only an empire but a pater- 
nity, as having all the gentleness and sweetness of a pater- 
nal government, commanding greater things than the civil 
government, and at the same time persuades. For the civil 
magistrate saith, if thou committest adultery thou shalt die ; 
but the ecclesiastical threatens the greatest punishment that 
can be to him who looks on a woman with a wanton eye. 
This then is a venerable tribunal, which arraigns the body 
and reacheth the soul; and therefore there is as much dif- 
ference between this empire and the other as between the 
body and the sou]. Moreover, he that is a judge in the one 
can only sit in judgment upon open crimes; and not of all 
open crimes neither, but only of such as are proved. But 
on the contrary, our court informs all who appear in it that 
He who sits judge with us will lay open all things, and mani- 
fest them upon the stage of the whole world, and that it will 
be impossible for any man to hide himself from Him.” And 
in his homily on Acts xv. he commends St. James, bishop 
of Jerusalem, that he let Peter and Paul speak before him in 
the council’, “seeing he was placed in the supreme power, 
(τὴν ἀρχὴν eyKexerpicpévos). For it becomes those who 
were in great power or principality (ἐν μεγάλῃ δυναστείᾳ), 
to be more humble and gentle,” &c. So then the Church 
hath an empire and is a principality, as well as the state, of 
which the bishops are Archons or princes under Christ Jesus, 
as the Apostles were. So Isidorus Pelusiota, in the case of 


ἀνάγκῃ" ἐνταῦθα δὲ τῆς προαιρέσεως καὶ 
τῆς γνώμης ἐστὶ κατόρθωμα. καὶ οὐ 
ταύτῃ μόνον αὕτη βελτίων ἐκείνης GAN 
ὅτι οὐκ ἀρχὴ μόνον ἐστὶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ πα- 
τρότης, ὡς ἄν τις εἴποι. καὶ γὰρ πατρὸς 
ἔχει τὸ ἥμερον, καὶ μείζονα. ἐπιτάττουσα 
πείθει. ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἔξωθεν ἄρχων φησὶν, 
ἐὰν μοιχεύσῃς, ἀπέθανες" οὗτος δὲ κἂν 
ἀκολάστοις ὀφθαλμοῖς ἴδῃς, τὰ μέγιστα 
ἀπειλεῖ. καὶ γὰρ σεμνὸν τοῦτο δικαστή- 
ριον, καὶ ψυχῆς, οὐχὶ σώματος μόνον 
διορθωτικόν. ὅσον οὖν ψυχῆς καὶ σώ- 
ματος τὸ μέσον, τοσοῦτον πάλιν αὕτη 
διέστηκεν ἐκείνης ἡ ἀρχή. κακεῖνος μὲν 
τὸν φανερῶν κάθηται κριτὴς, μᾶλλον δὲ 
οὐδὲ τούτων ἁπάντων, ἀλλὰ τῶν ἐλεγ- 
χομένων. πολλάκις δὲ καὶ τούτων προ- 
δότης γίνεται τὸ δὲ κριτήριον τοῦτο παι- 
δεύει τοὺς εἰσιόντας, ὅτι 6 παρ᾽ ἡμῖν δι- 
κάζων, πάντα γυμνὰ καὶ τετραχηλισμένα 


εἰς μέσον ἄξει ἐπὶ τοῦ κοινοῦ τῆς οἰκου- 
μένης θεάτρου, καὶ λαθεῖν ἀμήχανον. ---- 
Ibid., pp. 547, E.; 548, A—550, Α.] 

4 [μετὰ Πέτρον Παῦλος φθέγγεται, 
καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐπιστομίζει" Ἰάκωβος ἀνέχε- 
ται καὶ οὐκ ἀποπηδᾷ. ἐκεῖνος γὰρ ἣν 
τὴν ἀρχὴν ἐγκεχειρισμένος ... ἐξ ἀρχῆς 
σφοδρότερον μὲν ὃ Πέτρος διελέγετο" 
οὗτος δὲ ἡμερώτερον. οὕτως del χρὴ τὸν 
ἐν μεγάλῃ δυναστείᾳ ποιεῖν: τὰ μὲν 
φορτικὰ ἑτέροις παραχωρεῖν, αὐτὸν δὲ 
ἀπὸ ἡμερωτέρων διαλέγεσθαι.----ὸ. Chrys. 
in Act. Apost., Hom. xxxili. ὃ 2. Op., 
tom. viii. p. 255, A, B.] 

τ A word often used in his book de 
Sacerdotio. [e.g. οὐ τοῦ ἔργου, τῆς δὲ 
αὐθεντίας καὶ δυναστείας ἐπιθυμεῖν.--- 
S. Chrys. de Sac., lib. iii 6.. 10. Op., 
tom. i. p. 388, B. ἑερατικῆς δυναστείας 


mérpov.—Ibid., ο. 17. p. 400, A.] 


CHAP. 1. 


SECT. Il. 


288 The Church in a special sense the kingdom of Christ. 


pienity or Zosimus, Maro, and Eustathius: “There is this difference 
ee Εν (saith he*) betwixt ἀρχὰς κοσμικὰς and ἀρχὰς tvevpartixas*, 
the ecclesiastical ministers or magistrates, and ministers or 
magistrates of state; if these offend, the whole world can 
distinguish betwixt their persons and their functions; no 
disparagement falleth upon any but the offenders. But if 
ecclesiastical persons become obnoxious, then they confound 
their persons and their functions, and transfer the shame of 
the faults of some even upon all, yea upon the whole order 
itself.” We who live in these latter times, wherein Church 
authority and the spiritual power of Church governors is so 
little understood, and so much despised and depressed, must 
not wonder that the ancient writers styled the Church a 
spiritual principality, and the bishops the spiritual princes 
thereof. For they taught that the Church, as the Scriptures 
represent it, was the kingdom or empire of Jesus Christ, 
whose vicegerents they were, to govern it, as I have before 
observed, jointly as well as severally, in part as well as in 
whole. Thus St. Clement, in his epistle to the Corinthians, 
calls Christ τὸ σκῆπτρον τῆς μεγαλωσύνης τοῦ θεοῦ, “the 
sceptre of God’s majesty,” proposing Him as an example of 
humility to those who with pride and haughtiness “ exalted 
themselves over His flock".” And St. Ignatius, in his epistle 

to the Ephesians, saith, that “He received a perfect ἀρχὴν» 
principality or empire from God* ;” which principality is the 
Church, called in the Scripture phrase by St. Barnabasy His 
βασιλεία, “ kingdom or empire,” of which He is the supreme 
head and governor, and the bishops the subordinate gover- 





‘ [The passage referred to seems to 
be, εἰ γὰρ ἐπὶ τῶν κοσμικῶν ἀρχῶν, 
ἄλλο μέν τοί ἐστι TH πρᾶγμα, ἄλλος δὲ 
6 οὐ δεόντως αὐτὸ μετιών" καὶ τῆς ἀρχῆς 
τὴν οἰκείαν ἐχούσης τάξιν τε καὶ ἀξίαν, 
6 παροινῆσας εἰς αὐτὴν, δίκην δίδωσι τὴν 
ἑσχάτην, δι᾿ ἣν αἰτίαν ἐπὶ τῆς ἱερωσύνης 
συγχέουτι τὰ πράγματα, καὶ τὰ τῶν οὐ 
δεόντως αὐτὴν μεταχειριζομένων ἅμαρ- 
τήματα εἰς αὐτὴν ἀναφέρειν πειρῶνται. 
παυέσθωσαν οὖν οἱ δι’ Εὐσέβιον (fors. 
Εὐστάθιον) καὶ Ζώσιμον, Παλλαδίον τε, 
καὶ Μάρωνα τὴν ἱερωσύνην ἐξευτελίζον- 
τες, K.T.A.—S. Isidori Pelusiotz Epist., 
lib. ii. Ep. 52. ad Theodosium Episco- 
pum, p. 144, C, Ὁ. The words ἀρχαὶ 
πνευματικαὶ do not occur in the epistle. | 

* S. Chrysost. de Sacerdotio, hath 


the same distinction. [e. g. lib. iii. e. 5. 
p- 383, C. quoted below, Sect. iv. ] 

ἃ [ταπεινοφρονούντων γάρ ἐστιν ὃ 
Χριστὸς, οὐκ ἐπαιρομένων ἐπὶ τὸ ποίμ- 
νιον αὐτοῦ. τὸ σκῆπτρον τῆς μεγαλωσύ- 
yns τοῦ θεοῦ, ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν Χριστὸς 
Ἰησοῦς, οὐκ ἦλθεν ἐν κόμπῳ ἀλαζονείας, 
οὔδε ὑπερηφανίας, καίπερ δυνάμενος, 
K.T.A.—S. Clem. R. Ep. i. ad Cor. 
c. 16. Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 16.] 

x [ἀρχὴν δὲ ἐλάμβανε τὸ παρὰ θεῷ 
ἀπηρτισμένον.---ὃ. lenat. Ep. ad Ephes. 
ο. 19, Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 16. | 

Y [οὕτω, φησὶν (ὃ Xpiords), of θέλον- 
τές με ἰδεῖν, καὶ ἅψασθαί μου τῆς βασι- 
λείας, ὀφείλουσι θλιβέντες καὶ παθόντες 
λαβεῖν we.—S. Barnab. Ep. c. 1. Patr. 
Apost., tom. i. p. 24. ] 


The Bishops rule under Him ; seated on thrones. 289 


nors of it under Him, as the worldly emperors and kings are 
also under God. I suppose that this sceptre or principality 
did not cease when the imperial sceptre and civil empire 
submitted to it, and owned the Church as a spiritual society, 
of which Christ Jesus was the head. And according to this 
great spiritual authority and dignity of the Church, and its 
rulers under Christ, Eusebius setting down the successions 
of these archons, the bishops in the several Churches, accord- 
ing to the common appellation then in use calls their chairs 
thrones. So he saith of Simeon, bishop of Jerusalem’, that 
“he was worthy of his throne;” and of Justus his succes- 
sor*, that he succeeded him “in the throne of the bishopric 
of Jerusalem.” And lib. vii. cap. 32°, he calls the see of 
Jerusalem θρόνον ἀποστολικὸν, “ the apostolic throne.” And 
lib. vii. cap. 14, he saith’, that “after the death of Mazaban, 
bishop of Jerusalem, Hymeneus obtained the episcopal 
throne.” This way of speaking is taken from the words of 
our Lord, who said unto His Apostles ; 
you, that ye who have followed Me, in the regeneration when 
the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of His glory, ye also 
shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of 
Israel.” Among the false accusations of St. Athanasius in 
the synod of Tyre this was one, that‘ ἐπισκοπικὸν καθεῖλε 
θρόνον, “he pulled down the bishop’s throne.” And that 
father speaking of an Arian, who in pulling down the 
bishop’s throne was killed by it, saith®, καὶ μᾶλλον ὁ θρόνος, 
«.T.r. “the throne rather destroyed him than he the throne.” 
St. Gregory Nazianzen, in his valedictory oration, speaks thus’: 


Μαζαβάνου, τὸν θρόνον 
. διεδέξατο.----ΤὈ1ἃ., ο. 35. 


παυσσμένου 
Ὑμέναιος, .. 


5 [καὶ δὴ ἀπὸ μιᾶς γνώμης τοὺς πάν- 
τας Suueava Thy τοῦ Κλωπᾶ, οὗ καὶ ἣ 


τοῦ εὐαγγελίου μνημονεύει γραφὴ, τοῦ 
τῆς αὐτόθι παροικίας θρόνου ἄξιον εἶναι 
δοκιμάσαι ἀνεψιόν γε, ὡς φασὶ, γεγονότα 
τοῦ owrT7jpos.—Euseb. Eccl. Hist., lib. 
iii. ὁ. 1]. tom. i. p. 105. ] 

* [ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῦ Συμεῶνος τὸν δηλω- 
θέντα τελειωθέντος τρόπον, τῆς ἐν Ἵερο- 
σολύμοις ἐπισκοπῆς τὸν θρόνον ᾿Ιουδαῖός 
τις ὄνομα ᾿Ιοῦστος, μυρίων ὅσων ἐκ περι- 
τομῆς εἰς τὸν Χριστὸν τηνικαῦτα πεπι- 
στευκότων εἷς καὶ αὐτὸς ὧν, διαδέχεται. 
—Ibid., lib. iii. ο. 35. Ρ- 129.} 

bale Ἕρμων. . τὸν εἰσέτι νῦν ἐκεῖσε 
πεφυλαγμένον dmarroAuchy διαδέχεται 
O@povov.—Ibid., lib. vii. ο. 32. p. 372.] 

© [ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις, ava- 

HICKES. 


p. 340.] 

t! [κατηγόρουν δὲ αὐτοῦ, τοῦ μέρους 
Ἰωάννου, Καλλίνικος ἐπίσκοπος, καὶ Ἴσ- 
χυρίων τις, ὕτι μυστικὸν ποτήριον συν- 
έτριψε, καὶ ἐπισκοπικὸν καθεῖλε θρόνον. 
—Sozom. Eccl. Hist., see 1. οὐ» 35. 
Hist. Eccl., tom. ii. p. 

® [εἶτα ἀναστὰς Ὁ τὸν eae 
ἀποσπᾶν, καὶ πρὸς ἑαυτὸν ἕλκειν. : 
καὶ ὕπερ εἷλκεν, εἰς ἑαυτὸν ἐπεσπάσατο, 

. καὶ μᾶλλον ὃ θρόνος ἐκείνου τὸ ζῇν 
ἀπέσπασεν, ἢ αὐτὸς ἀπεσπάσθη πρὸς 
éxefvov.—S. Athan. Hist. Arian. ad 
Monachos, § 57. Op., tom. i. pp. 378, 
E. ; 379, A.) 

{ [οὐ yap καὶ τὸν θεὸν ἀπολοῦσιν οἱ 


CHAP. I. 
SECT. Il. 


“ Verily I say unto Matt. 19. 
28. 


290 The Bishop’s seat called a throne, as a Viceroy’s ; 


piswity or “ Farewell, O my chair, for they do not lose God who cede from 


EPISCOPAL 
~ ORDER. 





their thrones, but shall have more sublime and stable chairs 
above.” St. Chrysostom saith, in Hom. Ixxxvi. on St. John’s 
gospel’, Christ did invest His Apostles with power, καθάπερ 
τὶς βασιλεὺς ἄρχοντας ἀποστέλλων, “as a king sends forth 
his archons,” i.e. princes and governors with power imme- 
diately from himself. And accordingly as a viceroy sits upon 
the king’s throne, he saith that the first action of a new bishop 
is τὸν θρόνον ἀναβαίνειν", “to mount into his throne,” or as 
we say, to be thronized. And in the beginning of his third 
homily to the Antiochians, saith he’, ὅταν eis τὸν θρόνον τοῦ- 
τον, κι τ. λ. “when I look upon this empty throne I both 
rejoice and weep.” This was said in the absence of the 
bishop upon a sad occasion, when he was gone to the empe- 
ror to intercede for mercy in behalf of the people of Antioch. 
And in the packed synod, ad Quercum, it was one article of 
accusation against him‘, “ that he robed and unrobed himself 
in his throne.” So Nilus, archbishop of Thessalonica, tran- 
scribes these words out of the acts and subscriptions of the 
sixth general council'; “Peter, presbyter and vicar of the 


apostolical throne of the metropolis of Alexandria.” 


And 


so the five patriarchal sees™ were called καθολικοὶ;, καὶ οἰκου- 


τῶν θρόνων παραχωρήσαντες, ἀλλ᾽ ἕξουσι 
τὴν ἄνω καθέδραν, ἣ πολὺ τούτων ἐστὶν 
ὑψηλότερά τε καὶ ἀσφαλέστερα.---85. 
Greg. Naz. Orat. xlii. (al. xxxii.) Su- 
premum vale coram centum quinqua- 
ginta episcopis.—Op., tom.i. p. 768, A. 
The words “ Farewell O my chair”’ are 
not in the original. | 

& [καθάπερ γάρ τις βασιλεὺς ἄρχον- 
τας ἀποστέλλων, καὶ ἐξουσίαν εἰς δεσμω- 
τήριον καὶ ἐμβαλεῖν καὶ ἀφίεναι δίδωσιν" 
οὕτω, kK. T.A.—S. Chrys. Hom. ᾿Ἰχχχνυῖ. 
(al. Ixxxv.) in S. Joan. (cap. xx. 21— 
23.) Op., tom. viii. p. 516, ἢ). 

h [ὃ yap φιλάνθρωπος beds... τα- 
χέως ἡμῖν ἕτερον ποιμένα ἀνέδειξε. 
ὃς ἐπὶ τὸν θρόνον ἀναβὰς, κ.τ. A.—Id. 
Orat. de S. Meletio Antioch., ὃ 3. Op., 
tom. ii. p. 521, C.] 

i [ὅταν eis τὸν θρόνον ἀπίδω τοῦτον 
ἔρημον ὄντα καὶ κενὸν τοῦ διδασκάλου, 
χαίρω τε ὁμοῦ καὶ daxpiw.—Id. Hom. 
ad Pop. Antioch. iii. ὃ 1. ibid., p. 85, A.] 

kK [εἰκοστὸν ὄγδοον" ὅτι ἐν θρόνῳ ἀπο- 
δύεται καὶ ἐνδύεται καὶ πάστιλον τρώγει. 
—Synodus in Quereu, ap. Photii Bib- 
lioth. Cod. 59. p. 18. Berolini. 1824. 
The above is part of an enumeration of 


the charges against St. Chrysostom. ] 

1 [Πέτρος πρεσβύτερος καὶ τοπο- 
τηρητὴ5 τοῦ ἀποστολικοῦ θρόνου τῆς 
᾿Αλεξανδρέων μητροπόλεως (ὑπέγραψα.) 
Concilii Constantinop. III. (A.D. 680.), 
Subscriptiones.—Concilia, tom. vii. col. 
1064, 1) ; quoted by Nilus de primatu 
pape, ad calcem Salmasii de primatu 
pape, p. 49. Lugd. Bat. 1645. (See 
above, vol. i. p. 309, note r.) ] 

m Theophan. in Chronographia, et in 
vita Constantini Copronymi. [τοὺς ἀρ- 
χιερεῖς τῶν μεγάλων καὶ οἰκουμενικῶν 
θρόνων, Ῥώμης τε, φημὶ, καὶ Κωνσταν- 
τινοπόλεως“, ᾿Αλεξανδρείας τε, καὶ ᾽Αντι- 
οχείας, καὶ ‘LepocoAdvuwy.—S. Theopha- 
nis Chronographia, Procemium, p. 1. 
apud Corpus Histor. Byzant. Venet. 
1729. οἱ καθ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς τὰ δόξαντα δογ- 
ματίσαντες μηδενὸς παρόντος τῶν καθο- 
λικῶν θρόνων, Ῥώμης φημὶ, ᾿Αλεξαν- 
δρείας, καὶ ᾿Αντιοχείας, καὶ Ἱεροσολύ- 
pov.—Ibid., p. 285, D. (p. 359. ed. 
Par.) Theophanes is speaking of the 
Iconoclast council at Constantinople 
(A.D. 754) in that portion of the his- 
tory which treats of the times of Con- 
stantine Copronymus. | 


His diocese a principality. 29] 


μενικοὶ θρόνοι, ‘the catholic and cecumenical thrones.” Here 
I cannot but put you in mind, that hierarchy from the 
Greek ἱεραρχία signifies “an holy government,” and the word 
bishopric, which is the word for a diocese in our mother 
tongue, signifies a bishop’s principality”; a word which Ire- 
neeus used of the Church of Rome, which being the most 
powerful of all Churches when he wrote, he speaks thus®; dd 
hanc enim ecclesiam propter potentiorem principalitatem, &c. ; 
“Unto this Church, upon the account of its more power- 
ful principality, every Church must resort.” Every Church 
then was a principality’, though this then was the greatest. 
But to return to the ancient writers, who called the bishops’ 
chairs thrones: they are so called by Epiphanius, Heeres. 
Ixxviii. 7, who speaking of St. James our Lord’s brother, who 


was first bishop of Jerusalem, saith‘; 


n (Bishopric; bipeoppice, Saxon; 
literally, as Mr. Malone also observes, 
the kingdom of a bishop; the Saxon 
pice signifying a kingdom. The ap- 
purtenances of a bishop are all of 
princely denomination; his diocese is 
his kingdom; his mansion his palace ; 
his seat his throne; and he has also his 
chancellor.’’—Todd’s additions to John- 
son’s Dictionary, ed. 1818. But pice 
primarily is ‘‘ ‘regio ;’ ΕΑ] ΡΒ pice,‘ Om- 
nia ἰδία regio,’ Matt. 111. 5; Iuddeire 
pice, ‘Judaica regio,’ Mar. i. 5. Item, 
Regnum, imperium, ditio, jurisdictio.’ 
Rice, ‘ terminatio plurium substantivo- 
rum muuus et dominium significan- 
tium; ut Lyn-pic, ‘regnum;’ Bip- 
ceop-pic, ‘Episcopatus.’’’—Lye’s Dict. 
Anglo-Saxon. et Goth. ad verb. Rice. ] 

© Lib. iii. cap. 3. Cum Johannis 
Ernesti Grabe notis in-locum. [Ad 
hane igitur eeclesiam, propter potio- 
rem (potentiorem, ed. Oxon. ut omnes 
editt. et MSS. codices preter unum 
Clarom.) principalitatem, necesse est 
omnem conyenire ecclesiam, hoc est, 
eos qui sunt undique fideles, in qua 
semper ab his qui sunt undique conser- 
vata est ea que est ab Apostolis tra- 
ditio.—S. Iven. adv. Her.,, lib. iii. ο. 3. 
pp: 175, 176. ed. Ben. Grabe, after 
stating and examining the more obvious 
interpretations of these words, says; 
per conventum omnis ecclesiz, id est, 
eorum qui sunt undique fidelium, ad 
ecclesiam Romanam propter poten- 
tiorem principalitatem, intelligo con- 
fluxum eorum qui ab omni ecclesia 
Romam mittebantur, ut causam Chris- 


U 


Kal πρῶτος οὗτος εἴ- 


tianorum agerent apud imperatores, 
quorum potentior erat principalitas, id 
est suprema potestas.—Grab. not. in 
loc. p. 201. ‘This interpretation, how- 
ever, which understands principalitas 
of the imperial power, is inconsistent 
with Hickes’ application of the passage. 
He might possibly refer to Grabe’s 
observation, that Irenzeus did not hold 
it to be absolutely necessary to agree 
and hold communion with the Church 
of Rome, because when Pope Victor 
had excommunicated the Churches of 
Asia Minor for holding to their pecu- 
liar tradition as to the observance of 
Easter, Irenzus reproved him for so 
doing.—See S. Iren. adv. Her. ed, 
Grabe, pp. 201, 202.] 

Ρ See Archbishop Laud’s Conference 
with Fisher the Jesuit, p. 110. [ed. 3. 
1673. “ΝΟΥ is the word principatus 
so great, nor were the bishops of those 
times so little, as that principes and 
principatus are not commonly given 
them both by the Greek and the Latin 
fathers of this great and learnedest age 
of the Church, made up of the fourth 
and fifth hundred years: always under- 
standing principatus of their spiritual 
power, and within the limits of their 
respective jurisdictions.” This state- 
ment is supported in a note by in- 
stances in part the same as those given 
above by Hickes.—Laud’s Conference, 
&e. sect. 25. ὃ 10. p. 139. Oxford, 
1839. } 

a(S. Epiphanii adv. Heer., lib. 11], 
tom. 2. Op., tom, i. p. 10389, B.] 


2 


CHAP. 1. 


SECT, II. 


292 Bishops are placed on the throne of Christ ; 


an na - ψ' Ν 
pianity or Ande τὴν καθέδραν τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς, ᾧ πεπίστευκε Κύριος τὸν 


EPISCOPAL 


ORDER. 


θρόνον αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς πρώτῳ ; “ He first received the epi- 
scopal chair, being the person to whom Christ first commu- 
cated His throne upon earth.” So in the prayer at the con- 
secration of a bishop in the Greek ordinal, set forth by 
Habertus": “Ο Lord our God, who because human nature 
cannot bear the presence of Thy Godhead, in compassion to 
it hast in Thy dispensation constituted doctors for us to sit 
upon Thy throne, (τὸν σὸν ἐπέχοντας θρόνον,) and to offer sacri- 
fice and oblations for all Thy people. Do Thou, O Lord,” ἕο. 
The chair of every bishop then is the throne of Christ, and 
therefore are the bishops’ chairs called thrones by the Empe- 
ror Justinian in the Code and Novels, as when he calls the see 
of Constantinople “ the throne of Epiphanius’.” Sir, you may 
see more to this purpose out of Justinian’s Code, in pp. 119, 
120 of a most exact book, entitled, Of the subject of Church 
Power‘, written by the learned Dr. Simon Lowth, and printed 
in the year 1685, against the Erastians, Latitudinarians, and 
mongrel Churchmen of this age. And you need not won- 
der that their chairs are called thrones, since as Ignatius 
saith‘, “they preside εἰς τόπον Θεοῦ, in the place of God :” 
according to Acts xx. 28, “Take heed to yourselves, and to 
all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you ἐπι- 
σκόπους, bishops.” In the Latin version", Attendite vobis et 
universo gregi, in quo vos Spiritus Sanctus posuit episcopos. 
So Gregory Nazianzen speaks to the bishops he had con- 
secrated*; “Come, O most excellent pastor, and with us 


τ [Ex ordine qui observari solet in 


ordinatione episcopi. Haberti Ponti- 
ficale, p. 318. The passage is quoted 
above, p. 141, note col. 2.] 

5 [Lowth’s words are; “6 τῆς σῆς 
μακαρίοτητος θρόνος : so Justinian the 
emperor calls the see of Constanti- 
nople, the throne of Epiphanius, then 
patriarch there. (The passage is an 
extract from a rescript addressed by 
Justinian to Epiphanius, Codex Jus- 
tin., lib. i. tit. 4. 6. 34. § 4. ap. Corpus 
Jur. Civilis,) and he evidently distin- 
guishes between ἱερωσύνη and βασιλεία, 
betwixt the priesthood and the empire ; 
he assigns them two distinct offices and 
apart duties, ἣ μὲν τοῖς θεοῖς ὑπηρετου- 
μένη, ἣ δὲ ἀνθρωπικῶν ἐξάρχουσή τε 
καὶ émipedouuern.—(Authentic. Col- 





lat., lib. i. tit. 6. Novell. 6. Przefat.) 
He calls the ecclesiastical power τῶν 
ἱερατικῶν Opdyvwy.—(Ibid., lib. iv. tit. 
19. Novell. 42. Preefat.’’) He adds 
references to lib. vi. tit. 12. Novell. 83. 
and lib. ix. tit. 14. Novell. 131. cap. 1, 
which recognise the distinet authority 
of the ecclesiastical powers. } 

t [προκαθημένου τοῦ ἐπισκόπου eis 
τόπον θεοῦ, καὶ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων εἰς 
τόπον συνεδρίου τῶν ἀποστόλων, καὶ 
τῶν διακόνων, τῶν ἐμοὶ γλυκυτάτων, 
πεπιστευμένων διακονίαν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. 
—S. Ignat. Epist. ad Magnes., ὁ. 6. 
Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 19. ] 

“ [Acts xx. 28. ed. Vulg. ] 

X [νῦν δὲ, ὦ ποιμένων ἄριστε καὶ τε- 
λεώτατε, δεῦρό μοι καὶ τὸν ody ἀπολάμ- 
βανε λαὺν, σὺν ἡμῖν τε καὶ πρὸ ἡμῶν, 


They are called Princes in Prophecy. 293 


and before us, receive thy people which the Holy Ghost 
hath committed to thee.” Hence, Sir, proceeded the ancient 
subscriptions of the bishops in council, 7 Christi nomine ; 
and that of St. Basil, Epist. 393, to Amphilochius, bishop of 
Iconium’: “ Quit thyself like a man, and be strong, and pre- 
cede before the people which God hath committed to thy 
trust.” But to return to these spiritual archons or princes 
who sit on our Lord’s throne, I must add what St. Hie- 
rome writes in his Commentary upon Isaiah, chap. lx. 17, as 
the words are in the Greek translation’; “I will give thy 
archons or princes (τοὺς ἄρχοντάς cov) in peace, and thy 
bishops in righteousness.” Upon which words saith that 
father*: In quo Scripture sancte admiranda majestas, quod 
principes futuros ecclesie episcopos nominavit, quorum omnis 
visitatio in pace est, et vocabulum dignitatis in justitia: “ In 
which the admirable majesty of the Scriptures appears in 
that he called the bishops who were to be in the Church 
princes, whose visitation is all in peace.” The version of 
the ancient Greek, and the sense in which St. Jerome ex- 
plains it, was followed in the primitive times, and so under- 
stood, as you will see by the following words out of St. Cle- 
ment’s epistle to the Corinthians, chap. xli.°; ‘The Apo- 
stles preached the Gospel from the Lord Jesus Christ, and 
Jesus Christ from God. Christ therefore was sent from 
God, and the Apostles from Christ, and both their missions 
were in order from the will of God; wherefore having re- 
ceived the command, and being full of assurance by the 
resurrection of Jesus Christ, and being confirmed by the 


dv ἐνεχείρισέ σοι τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον.--- 
S. Greg. Naz. Orat. xiii. (al. xxx.) 
ὃ 4. Op., tom. i. p. 254, D.] 

Υ [ἀνδρίζου τοίνυν καὶ ἴσχυε καὶ mpo- 
πορεύου τοῦ λαοῦ, ὃν ἐπίστευσε τῇ δεξιᾷ 
σου ὃ ὕψιστος.---. Basil. Epist. elxi. 
(al. ecexcili.) ὃ. 2. Op., tom. iii. p. 252, 
B. 


2 [καὶ δώσω τοὺς ἄρχοντάς σου ἐν 
εἰρήνῃ, καὶ τοὺς ἐπισκόπους σου ἐν δι- 
Kaoovvn.—Is. lx. 17. vers. LXX.] 

Ἀ {The passage begins; De auro et 
argento, quod significent in Scripturis 
sanctis, sepius diximus. Ponam, in- 
quit, principes tuos in pacem, et episcopos 
tuos in justitiam. Pro quo in Hebraico 
scriptum est: Ponam visitationem tuam 
pacem, et prepositos tuos in justitiam. 


In quo Scripture sancte admiranda 
majestas, quod principes futuros eccle- 
siz, episcopos nominavit, quorum om- 
nis Visitatio in pace est, et vocabulum 
dignitatis in justitia.—S. Hieron. Com- 
ment. in Isaiam, lib. xvii. cap. lx. 17. 
Op., tom. iv. p. 728, E, F.] 

> [οἱ ἀπόστολοι ἡμῖν εὐαγγελίσθησαν 
ἀπὸ τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ᾿Ιησοῦς 
ὁ Χριστὸς ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ. ἐξεπέμφθη ὃ 
Χριστὸς οὖν ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ οἱ ἀπό- 
στολοι ἀπὸ τοῦ Χριστοῖ" ἐγένοντο οὖν 
ἀμφότερα εὐτάκτως ἐκ θελήματος θεοῦ. 
παραγγελίας οὖν λαβόντες, καὶ πληρο- 
φορηθέντες διὰ τῆς ἀναστάσεως τοῦ κυ- 
ρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ πιστω- 
θέντες τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ θεοῦ, μετὰ πληρο- 
φορίας τοῦ πνεύματος aytov, ἐξῆλθον 


CHAP, I, 


SECT. Il, 


DIGNITY OF 
EPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 


294. Bishops are Successors of the Apostles, and in 


will of God, and the full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they 
went out to publish the good news of the kingdom of God 
which was to come. Therefore preaching in all countries 
and cities, they ordained their first converts bishops and 
deacons of those who were believers, trying and proving 
them by the Holy Ghost. And this not without authority, 
for bishops and deacons were written of many ages before, 
for the Scripture somewhere saith, ‘I will constitute your 
bishops in righteousness, and your deacons in faith.’” The 
Scripture which this father citeth is the Scripture of the Old 
Testament; for he is the same St. Clement whom St. Paul 
calls his fellow-labourer, and who, when he wrote this epistle, 
or shortly after, was bishop of Rome. But there is no place 
of the Old Testament but this of Isaiah, chap. lx. 17, to 
which his words can refer; which, as the annotators on this 
epistle rightly observe‘, he applied to the Church Christian, 
changing the order of the words, and reading the original 
word in the Hebrew and that in the Greek version which 
signifies ‘peace,’ not without reason, ‘faith.’ In the place 
above cited, you see St. Clement expressly saith that the 
Apostles ordained or constituted bishops; and so saith Ire- 
neus, Advers. Her., lib. iii. cap. 34: “The tradition of the 
Apostles is evident in every Church to those who desire to 
know the truth; for we can produce those who were or- 


εὐαγγελιζόμενοι τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ 
θεοῦ μέλλειν ἔρχεσθαι. κατὰ χώρας 
οὖν καὶ πόλεις κηρύσσοντες, καθίστανον 


σκοπὴ redditur, sed procurationem et 
officium omne significat, hie efferri per 
διακόνους, et piby quod per εἰρήνην 


τὰς ἀπαρχὰς αὐτῶν, δοκιμάσαντες τῷ 
πνεύματι, εἰς ἐπισκόπους καὶ διακόνους 
τῶν μελλόντων πιστεύειν. καὶ τοῦτο οὐ 
καινῶς᾽ ἐκ γὰρ δὴ πολλῶν χρόνων ἐγέ- 
Ὑραπτο περὶ ἐπισκόπων καὶ διακόνων" 
οὕτως γάρ που λέγει ἣ γραφή" κατα- 
στήσω τοὺς ἐπισκόπους αὐτῶν ἐν δικαι- 
οσύνῃ, καὶ τοὺς διακόνους αὐτῶν ἐν πί- 
oret.—S.Clem. R. Ep, i. ad Cor. ο. 42. 
Fatr. Apost., tom. i. p. 171.] 

¢ [See Bishop Fell’s note, in loc. ap. 
Patr. Apost., tom. i. p. 178. In Hebr. 
APTS PwWID Drew qNIp|a "ΓΟ", 
quod LXX Intt. vertunt, δώσω τοὺς 
ἄρχοντάς σου ἐν εἰρήνῃ, καὶ τοὺς ἐπι- 
σκόπους σου ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ. Fell then 
observes that the two portions of the 
verse are transposed by St. Clement, 
and that PH quod alibi spe ém- 


explicari solet, sed bona quecunque 
denotat, hic πίστιν, nec id quidem in- 
commode, verti ... hee autem satis 
opportune a S. Clemente referri ad 
ecclesiz Christianz preefectos, non fa- 
cile diffitebitur quisquis locum Isaize 
inspexerit, atque totum hoc caput ad 
Messize tempora pertinere, Judzis ipsis 
caleulum apponentibus, meminerit. ] 

“ [Traditionem itaque Apostolorum 
in toto mundo manifestatam, in omni 
ecclesia adest resp.cere omnibus qui 
vera velint videre; et habemus annu- 
merare eos qui ab Apostolis instituti 
sunt episcopi in ecclesiis, et succes- 
sores eorum usque ad nos, qui nihil 
tale docuerunt, neque cognoyverunt, 
quale ab his deliratur.—S. Tren. ad- 
versus, lib. iii. c. 3. p. 175. ] 


the place of Christ ; their offices those of Princes, 99 


dained bishops by the Apostles, and their successors to our 
own time, who neither taught nor knew any such thing.” 
And Tertullian, De Prescript. Hereticor., cap. 32, challenging 
heretics to appeal to the time of the Apostles, writes thus®: 
“Let them publish the original of their Churches, and un- 
fold the succession of their bishops in order from the begin- 
ning, so that it may appear that the first bishop had one of 
the Apostles, or apostolic men who lived with the Apostles, 
for his predecessor. For thus the apostolic Churches re- 
port, as that of Smyrna affirms Polycarp to be placed there 
by St. John, and that of Rome reports Clement to have been 
ordained by St. Peter. In like manner other Churches shew 
them, whom being made bishops by the Apostles, they had 
[as] propagators of the apostolic doctrine. And let the heretics 
shew the like.” And can you, Sir, when you consider that 
bishops are appointed to succeed the Apostles, and like them 
to stand in Christ’s place, and exercise His kingly, priestly, 
and prophetical office over their flocks, can you, when you 
consider this, think it novel, or improper, or uncouth, to call 
them spiritual princes, and their dioceses principalities, when 
they have every thing in their office that can denominate a 
chief or prince? For what is a prince but the principal or 
chief ruler of a society, that hath authority over the rest to 
make laws for it, to challenge the obedience of all the mem- 
bers and all ranks of men in it, and power to coerce them if 
they will not obey? And now, Sir, I pray you attend to 
what follows, and then tell me if the office of bishops con- 
tains not every thing that is in the definition of a chief or 
prince. St. Ignatius, who was St. John’s disciple, writes of 
them as such. So in his epistle to the people of Smyrna‘; 
“ All of you follow the bishop, (τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ἀκολουθεῖτεβ,) 


© [Ceterum, si que audent inter- 
serere se xtati Apostolic, ut ideo 
videantur ab Apostolis tradita, quia sub 
Apostolis fuerunt, possumus dicere: 
Edant ergo origines ecclesiarum sua- 
rum: evolvant ordinem episcoporum 
suorum, ita per successiones ab initio 
decurrentem, ut primus ille episcopus 
aliquem ex Apostolis, vel Apostolicis 
viris, qui tamen cum Apostolis perse- 
veraverit, habuerit auctorem et ante- 
cessorem. Hoe enim modo ecclesiz 
Apostolic census suos deferunt; sicut 


Smymeorum ecclesia Polycarpum ab 
Joanne conlocatum refert: sicut Ro- 
manorum, Clementem a Petro ordi- 
natum itidem. Perinde utique et cz- 
terze exhibent quos ab Apostolis in 
episcopatum constitutos Apostolici se- 
minis traduces habeant.— Tert. de 
Prescript. Hereticor., c. 32. Op., p. 
213, B.] 

f [πάντες τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ἀκολουθεῖτε, 
ὡς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς τῷ πατρί: καὶ τῷ 
πρεσβυτερίῳ, ὡς τοῖς ἀποστόλοις" τοὺς 
δὲ διακόνους ἐντρέπεσθε, ὡς θεοῦ ἐντο- 


CHAP, I. 


SECT. 11. 


296 The authority of a Bishop that of a 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or as Christ followed the Father, and the presbyters as the Apo- 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 





stles, and reverence the deacons as the ordinance of God.” 
This regards the subjection and obedience of the laity to 
the bishop and presbyters, but what follows concerns the 
subjection of the clergy to the bishop; “Let no man do 
any thing in Church matters without the bishop, and let 
that be a valid Eucharist that is administered by the bishop, 
or by one licensed by him. For where the bishop is there 
let the Church be, as where Christ is there is the Catholic 
Church. Without the bishop (i. e. without the bishop’s 
license) it is neither lawful to baptize nor celebrate the 
love feast", but that which he approves that is pleasing . 
to God, that whatsoever is done may be secure and firm. 
..... Again, it is good to have regard: to God and the 
bishop, and who honours the bishop (ὁ τιμῶν ἐπίσκοπον) * 
shall be honoured of God; but he that doth things clandes- 
tinely without the bishop doth service to the devil.” In the 
interpolated epistle of this martyr his precepts are para- 
phrased out of the Apostolical Constitutions in these words, 
according to the doctrine of the Catholic Church!: “ Honour 
God as the Creator and Lord of all things, and the bishop 
as the high-priest representing God; representing God as a 
prince, and Christ as a priest. After (or next to) God you are 
to honour the king, (βασιλέα, emperor.) For there is nothing 


Anv' μηδεὶς χωρὶς τοῦ ἐπισκόπου τὶ 
πρασσέτω τῶν ἀνηκόντων εἰς τὴν ἐκκλη- 
clay: ἐκείνη βεβαία εὐχαριστία ἡγείσθω, 
ἢ ὑπὸ τὸν ἐπίσκοπον οὖσα, ἢ ᾧ ἄν αὐτὸς 
ἐπιτρέψῃ" ὅπου ἄν φανῇ ὁ ἐπίσκοπος, 
ἐκεῖ τὸ πλῆθος ἔστω" ὥσπερ ὕπου ἄν ἢ 
Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς. ἐκεῖ ἢ καθολικὴ ἐκκλη- 
σία" οὐκ ἐξόν ἐστιν χωρὶς τοῦ ἐπισκόπου, 
οὔτε βαπτίζειν, οὔτε ἀγάπην ποιεῖν" 
GAN ὅ ἄν ἐκεῖνος δοκιμάσῃ, τοῦτο καὶ 
τῷ θεῷ εὐάρεστον" ἵνα ἀσφαλὲς ἢ καὶ 
βέβαιον πᾶν ὅ πράσσεται... καλῶς ἔχει, 
θεὸν καὶ ἐπίσκοπον εἰδέναι: ὁ τιμῶν 
ἐπίσκοπον, ὑπὸ θεοῦ τετίμηται" ὁ λάθρα 
ἐπισκόπου τι πράσσων, τῷ διαβόλῳ λα- 
τρέυει.----. Ignat. Epist. ad Smyrn., ¢. 
8, 9. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. pp. 36, 37. | 

& Here it is to be observed that St. 
Ignatius, as the other Apostolic fathers, 
useth the words of the New Testament 
in the sense of the New Testament; so 
he here uses the word ἀκολουθεῦτε, Which 
denotes the highest fidelity and obedi- 
ence; asinJohn x. 27; xxi.22; Mark 
Vill. 34; x. 21; Luke ix, 23; xviii, 22; 


John xii. 26; Luke xviii. 28; Rev. 
xiv. 4. 

h 1. 6. the holy Eucharist, which was 
then administered at the conclusion of 
the love feasts, 1 Cor. xi. [20, sqq. ] 

i θεὸν καὶ ἐπίσκοπον εἰδέναι: where 
εἰδέναι signifies to ‘acknowledge, value, 
esteem, and regard,’ as in 1 Thess. v. 
12, “ We beseech you, brethren, εἰδέναι, 
to know them who labour among you, 
and are over you in the Lord.’’ See 
1 Cor. ii. 2. 

k ὃ τιμῶν ἐπίσκοπον : to ‘honour’ in 
the Scripture signifies all submission 
and obedience of an inferior to a supe- 
rior, as of a child to a father, Matt. xv. 
4, 8; John viii. 49; a subject to his 
prince, 1 Pet. ii. 17, ‘Fear God; 
honour the king.” 

1 [τίμα μὲν τὸν θεὸν, ὡς αἴτιον τῶν 
dAwy καὶ κύριον" ἐπίσκοπον δὲ, ὡς ἂρ- 
χιερέα, θεοῦ εἰκόνα φοροῦντα" κατὰ μὲν 
τὸ ἄρχειν, θεοῦ, κατὰ δὲ τὸ ἱερατεύειν, 
Χριστοῦ. καὶ μετὰ τοῦτον, τιμᾶν χρὴ 
καὶ βασιλέα. οὔτε γὰρ θεοῦ τις κρείτ- 


Spiritual Prince ; as described by St. Ignatius. — 297 


more excellent than God, or like unto Him in the whole 
creation; nor is there aay thing greater in the Church than 
a bishop, who is consecrated to God for the salvation of the 
world ; neither among princes (ἐν ἄρχουσιν) or magistrates, is 
any like to an emperor (or king), who administers and governs 
for the peace and happiness of his subjects. He that honours 
the bishop shall be honoured of God, in like manner as he 
that dishonours the bishop shall be punished by God. For 
if he that riseth up against emperors is justly thought worthy 
of punishment, as violating the good legal order and consti- 
tution, of how much more grievous punishment do you think 
him worthy who dares presume to do any thing without the 
bishop, breaking the unity and confounding the good order 
of the Church? For the episcopate™ is the top of all the 
honours among men, which whosoever doth furiously oppose 
he dishonours not man but God, and Christ Jesus the first- 
born, who alone by nature is the High-Priest of the Church 
to mediate for us with the Father. Let all things, therefore, 
be done by you in Christ, with orderly subordination. Let 
the laics be subject to the deacons, the deacons to the pres- 
byters, the presbyters to the bishop, the bishop to Christ, as 
Christ is to the Father.” So in the interpolated epistle to 
the Trallesians, his precept of the people’s obedience to the 
bishop, and presbyters, and deacons is also paraphrased out 
of the Apostolical Constitutions in these words": “ For what 
else is the bishop but one that hath all power and authority 


τῶν, ἤ παραπλήσιος ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς οὖσιν" 
οὔτε δὲ ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ ἐπισκόπου τι μεῖζον, 
ἱερωμένου θεᾷ ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου 
παντὸς owrnpias’ οὔτε βασιλέως τις 
παραπλήσιος ἐν ἄρχουσιν, εἰρήνην καὶ 
εὐνομίαν τοῖς ἀρχομένοις πρυτανεύοντοϑ᾽ 
6 τιμῶν ἐπίσκοπον, ὑπὸ θεοῦ τιμηθήσε- 
ται ὥσπερ οὖν ὃ ἀτιμάζων αὐτὸν, ὑπὸ 
θεοῦ κολασθήσεται. εἰ γὰρ ὃ βασιλεῦσιν 
ἐπεγειρόμενος, κολάσεως ἄξιος δικαίως 
γενήσεται, ὥς γε παραλύων τὴν κοινὴν 
εὐνομίαν" πόσῳ δοκεῖτε χείρονος ἀξιω- 
θήσεται τιμωρίας, ὃ ἄνευ ἐπισκόπου τι 
ποιεῖν προαιρούμενος, καὶ τὴν ὁμόνοιαν 
διασπῶν, καὶ τὴν εὐταξίαν συγχέων; 
ἱερωσύνη γάρ ἐστι, τὸ πάντων ἀγαθῶν 
ἐν ἀνθρώποις ἀναβεβηκός" fs 6 κατα- 
μανεὶς, οὐκ ἄνθρωπον ἀτιμάζει, ἀλλὰ 
θεὸν, καὶ Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν, τὸν πρωτό- 
τόκον, καὶ μόνον τῇ φύσει τοῦ πατρὸς 


ἀρχιερέα. πάντα οὖν ὑμῖν μετ᾽ εὐταξίας 
ἐπιτελείσθω ἐν Χριστῷ. οἱ λαϊκοὶ, τοῖς 
διακόνοις ὑποτασσέσθωσαν. οἱ διάκονοι, 
τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις οἱ πρεσβύτεροι, τῷ 
ἐπισκόπῳ" ὃ ἐπίσκοπος, τῷ Χριστῷ, ws 
αὐτὸς τῷ πατρί. --- ὃ. Ignat. Interp. 
Epist. ad Smyrn., c. 9. Patr. Apost., 
tom. ii. p. 87. See Const. Apost., lib. 
vi. ec. 2. Concilia, tom. i. col. 372, Εἰ. 
quoted below, p. 308, note c; and 
Ussher’s Dissertationes de Ignatii M. 
Epistolis, c. 10; ad calc. Patr. Apost., 
tom. ii. pp. 222, 223. ] 

™ ἱερωσύνη, generally used κατ᾽ ἐξο- 
χὴν for the episcopal dignity, as sacer- 
dos in Latin for a bishop. [See in- 
stances in Suicer, Thes. Eccl. in voce. 
ἱερεύς. § 11. tom. i. col. 1441, 1442.) 

n [τὶ γάρ ἐστιν ἐπίσκοπος; ἄλλ᾽ ἢ 
πάσης ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐξουσίας ἐπέκεινα πάν- 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. IL. 


DIGNITY OF 
EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


298 The Bishops and Priests to be regarded as 


(πάσης ἀρχῆς, καὶ ἐξουσίας) above all men, as much as a 
man can have that represents the person of Jesus Christ ? 
and what is the presbytery but a holy meeting, in which the 
presbyters are the counsellors and assessors of the bishop ὃ 
And what are the deacons but representations of the ange- 
lical office, ministering a holy and unblameable ministry to 
the bishop, as St. Stephen to James the Blessed, and Timo- 
thy and Linus to Paul, and Anacletus and Clemens to 
Peter?” In his epistle to Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna’, saith 
he, “ Let nothing be done without thy will (or pleasure), nor 
do thou any thing but what is the will of God:’ and then 
to the people’; “Take heed4 to the bishop that God may 
regard you; my soul shall answer for theirs to God, who 
obey" the bishop, presbyters, and deacons, and let me have 
my part with them to enjoy God.” In his epistle to the 
Ephesians’; “ You ought to regard the Bishop Onesimus as 
the Lord. For we ought to receive every one whom the 
master of the house sends into his house for the government 
of it as him that sent him, and therefore we ought to regard 
the bishop as God. And God resisteth the proud; let it 


τῶν κρατῶν, ws οἷόν τε ἄνθρωπον Kpa- 
τεῖν, μιμητὴν γινόμενον κατὰ δύναμιν 
Χριστοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ" τὶ δὲ πρεσβυτέριον ; 
ἀλλ᾽ ἢ σύστημα ἱερὸν, σύμβουλοι καὶ 
συνεδρευταὶ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου" τὶ δὲ διά- 
κονοι; ἀλλ᾽ ἢ μιμηταὶ τῶν ἀγγελικῶν 
δυνάμεων, λειτουργοῦντες αὐτῷ λειτουρ- 
γίαν καθαρὰν καὶ ἄμωμον, ὡς Στέφανος 
6 ἅγιος ᾿Ιακώβῳ τῷ μακαρίῳ, καὶ Τιμό- 
θεος καὶ Λῖνος Παύλῳ, καὶ ᾿Ανέγκλητος 
καὶ Κλήμης Πέτρῳ.---ὔ. Ignat. Interp. 
Epist. ad Trall., ο. 7. Patr. Apost., tom. 
ii, p. 63. See Const. Apost., lib. ii 
c. 26. Concilia, tom. i. col. 264, B. 
see below, p. 306, note s, and Us- 
sher, ibid. } 

ο [μηδὲν ἄνευ γνώμης σου γινέσθω, 
μηδὲ σὺ ἄνευ θεοῦ γνώμης τι πράσσε.---- 
S. Ignat. Epist. ad Polyearp.,c.4. Patr. 
Apost., tom. ii. p. 40.] 

P [τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ προσέχετε, ἵνα καὶ ὃ 
θεὸς ὑμῖν" ἀντίψυχον ἐγὼ τῶν ὕποτασ- 
σομένων τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ, πρεσβυτέροις, 
διακόνοις" καὶ μετ᾽ αὐτῶν μοι τὸ μέρος 
γένοιτο σχεῖν ἐν θεῷ.---Τ01]4., ο. 6. p. 
41.] 

4 τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ προσέχετε, Where the 
word προσέχειν signifies to have re- 
gard, or give heed to an eminent per- 
son, and of great authority, as in Acts 


viii. 6, 10, 11. 

τ τῶν ὑποτασσομένων τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ, 
which is the very word of the Apostle 
where he commands subjection to the 
higher powers, Rom. xiii. 1, πᾶσα 
ψυχὴ ἐξουσίαις ὑπερεχούσαις ὑποτασ- 
σέσθω, “ Let every soul be subject to 
the higher powers.’’ He uses the same 
word ad Magnes. [c. 13. Patr. Apost., 
tom. ii. p. 21.] ὑποτάγητε τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ. 
So ad Tralles. [c. 13. ibid., p. 25.] 
ὑποτασσόμενοι τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ὡς TH ἐν- 
τολῇ, where ἐντολὴ also signifies the 
commandment of God, as in Matt. xix. 
17; xxii. 38; Mark x.19; Luke xxiii, 
56. 

s [The passage runs thus; γέγραπ- 
ται γὰρ' ὑπερηφάνοις ὁ θεὸς ἀντιτάσ- 
σεται" σπουδάσωμεν οὖν μὴ ἀντιτάσ- 
σεσθαι τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ, ἵνα ὦμεν θεοῦ ὑπο- 
τασσόμενοι. καὶ ὅσῳ βλέπει τις σιγῶντα 
ἐπίσκοπον, πλειόνως αὐτὸν φοβείσθω" 
πάντα γὰρ ὃν πέμπει ὃ οἰκοδεσπότη5 εἰς 
ἰδίαν οἰκονομίαν, οὕτως δεῖ ἡμᾶς αὐτὸν 
δέχεσθαι, ὡς αὐτὸν τὸν πέμψαντα" τὸν 
οὖν ἐπίσκοπον δῆλον, ὅτι ὡς αὐτὸν τὸν 
κύριον δεϊ προσβλέπειν. ---- δ. Ignat. Epist. 
ad Ephes., ὃ 5, 6. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. 
p- 18. Onesimus is mentioned as bi- 
shop in the following sentence. | 


representing God and Christ ; so St. Ignatius. 299 


therefore be our care and study not to resistt the bishop, 
that we may be subject unto God.” To the Magnesians" ; 
“You ought not to despise the age of your young bishop, 
but to give him reverence according to the ordinance of 
God, as I know the presbyters do... .. submitting to him, 
and not to him (only) but to the Bishop of all, the Father of 
our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore for His honour it is our 
duty to obey without dissimulation, because no man deceives 
the visible bishop, but he goes about to put fallacies upon 
the invisible Bishop, who knows all secret things.” Again*; 
“T exhort you to do all things in Divine unity, the bishop 
presiding in God’s place, and the presbyters in the place of 
the apostolic college, and the deacons as those to whom is 
committed the service of Jesus Christ.” To the Philadel- 
phians’; “ As many as are of God and Christ they are with 
the bishop.” To the Trallesians?; “Being subject to the 
bishop as to Christ Jesus, (τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ὑποτάσσεσθε ws Inaod 
Χριστῷ) you seem to me not to live after the manner of men, 
but according to Jesus Christ, who died for us.” In another 
place, which I translate thus; “In like manner reverence 
the deacons as the order of Jesus Christ, who is the Son of 
the Father; and the presbyters as the senate of God and the 
constitution of the Apostles; for without these there can be 


no Church.” 


t μὴ ἀντιτάσσεσθαι τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ, 
‘‘not to rebel against the bishop.’’ This 
is the very word the Apostle useth for 
not resisting the secular potentates, Rom. 
ΧΕΙ, 2, [ὁ ἀντιτασσόμενος τῇ ἐξουσίᾳ. 

ἃ [καὶ ὑμῖν δὲ πρέπει μὴ συγχρᾶσθαι 
τῇ ἡλικίᾳ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου, ἄλλὰ κατὰ 
δύναμιν θεοῦ πατρὸς πᾶσαν ἐντροπὴν 
αὐτῷ ἀπονέμειν, καθὼς ἔγνων καὶ τοὺς 
ἁγίους πρεσβυτέρους, οὐ προσειληφότας 
τὴν φαινομένην νεωτερικὴν τάξιν, ἀλλ᾽ 
ὡς φρονίμους ἐν θεῷ συγχωροῦντας αὐὖ- 
τῷ" οὐκ αὐτῷ δὲ ἀλλὰ τῷ πατρὶ Ἰησοῦ 
Χριστοῦ τῷ πάντων ἐπισκόπῳ. εἰς τιμὴν 
οὖν ἐκείνου τοῦ θελήσαντος ἡμᾶς πρέ- 
πον ἐστὶν ἐπακούειν κατὰ μηδεμίαν ὑπό- 
κρισιν᾽ ἐπεὶ οὐχ ὅτι τὸν ἐπίσκοπον τοῦ- 
toy τὸν βλεπόμενον πλανᾷ τις, ἀλλὰ 
τὸν ἀόρατον παραλογίζεται, τὸ δὲ τοι- 
οῦὔτον, οὐ πρὸς σάρκα ὃ λόγος, ἀλλὰ πρὸς 
θεὸν τὸν τὰ κρύφια εἰδότα.--- 8. Ignat. 
Epist. ad Magnes., ο. 8, Patr. Apost., 
tom. ii. p. 18.] 

* [παραινῷ ἐν ὁμονοίᾳ θεοῦ σπουδά- 


Again?; “It behoves every one of you to re- 


Gere πάντα πράσσειν, προκαθημένου Tod 
ἐπισκόπου εἰς τόπον θεοῦ, K.7.A.—Ibid., 
ce. θ. p. 19.. The rest of the passage is 
quoted above, p. 292, note t. | 

Υ [ὅσοι yap θεοῦ εἰσὶν καὶ ᾿Ιησοῦ 
Χριστοῦ, οὗτοι μετὰ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου εἰσίν. 
—lId. Epist. ad Philadelph., c. 8. 1014.» 
p- 31. ] 

2 [ὅτ᾽ ἄν γὰρ τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ὑποτάσ- 
σεσθε ὡς Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ φαίνεσθέ μοι οὐ 
κατὰ ἀνθρώπινον ζῶντες, ἀλλὰ κατα 
Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν, τὸν δι᾽ ἡμᾶς ἀποθανόν- 
7a.—Id.Epist.ad Trall.,§ 2.ibid., p. 22. 

a [ὁμοίως πάντες ἐντρεπέσθωσαν τοὺς 
διακόνους ὡς Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν" ὡς Ka. 
τὸν ἐπίσκοπον, ὄντα υἱὸν τοῦ πατρός" 
τοὺς δὲ πρεσβυτέρους ὡς συνέδριον θεοῦ, 
καὶ ὡς σύνδεσμον ἀποστόλων. χωρὶς 
τούτων ἐκκλησία οὐ Kadetrat.—lbid., 
ο. 8, p. 22. Hickes read τοὺς διακόνους 
ὡς ἐντολὴν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. See above 
p- 265, note m. | 

> [πρέπει yap ὑμῖν τοῖς καθ᾽ ἕνα, 
ἐξαιρέτως καὶ τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις, ava- 


CHAP, I. 


SECT, IL 


900 The authority of Bishops that of Princes ; 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or fresh the bishop’, to the honour of Jesus Christ and the 


EPISCOPAL 


ORDER. 


Apostles.” Again’; “ Honour the bishop as Christ, accord- 
ing to the commandment of the Apostles.” Lastly®; “ Fare- 
well in Christ Jesus, being subject to the bishop as to the 
commandment of God; likewise to the college of presbyters,” 
or, as other copies have it, “to the presbyters,” who were 
governors of the Church under the bishop, as under their 
prince or chief. 

You see, Sir, how this saint and martyr speaks of bishops 
and their office. ‘They stand in God’s and Christ’s stead over 
their flocks ; the clergy as well as the people are to be sub- 
ject to them, as to the vicegerents of our Lord. Nothing 
was to be done without them in the Church. But all laws 
and orders in their respective districts had their sanction from 


ψύχειν τὸν ἐπίσκοπον, εἰς τιμὴν πατρὸς 
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ τῶν ἀποστόλων.--- 
Ibid., ο. 12. p. 24.] 

ἀναψύχειν τὸν ἐπίσκοπον. See 2 
Tim. i. 16. [πολλάκις με ἀνέψυξε. But 
besides these there are many other em- 
phatical words in St. Ignatius’ epistles 
which emphatically set forth the duty 
of the people to the bishop and the 
clergy, as ἐπιτασσόμενοι τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ, 

““commanded by the bishop,” ad Ephes. 
[ὁ. 2. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 12. ὕπο- 
Taco dmevorconj. Hefele |—draxovew τῷ 
ἐπισκόπῳ ὡς χάριτι θεοῦ, “to obey the 
bishop, as the commission of God,” or 
“according to the commission given 
him from God,” ibid. [ὑπακούειν ὑμᾶς 
τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ occurs ad Eph. ath, 20}: 
16. ὑποτάσσεται τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ws χάριτι 
θεοῦ, ad Magn., ο. 2. p. 18.] — ἐπακού- 
ev, [ad Magn., c. 3. p. 18. quoted 
above, note z.|—dayamay κατὰ ᾿ἸΙησοῦν 
Χριστὸν (τὸν ἐπίσκοπον,) ‘to love the 
bishop in Jesus Christ,’ ad Ephes. [e. 
1, p. 12.]---δέχεσθαι: πάντα ὃν πέμπει 
6 οἰκοδεσπότης εἰς ἱδίαν οἰκονομίαν οὕ- 
τως δεῖ ἡμᾶς αὐτὸν δέχεσθαι, ὡς αὐτὸν 
τὸν πέμψαντα, “ whomsoever the mas- 
ter of the house sends to be over His 
household, we ought to receive him in 
such manner as we would receive 
Him that sent him,’ [Ibid., c. 6. p. 
13. |—ovyxwpeiv: ὡς φρονίμους ἐν θεῷ 
συγχωροῦντας αὐτῷ, οὐκ αὐτῷ δὲ ἀλ- 
λὰ τῷ πατρὶ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τῷ πάν- 
τῶν ἐπισκόπῳ, “submitting to him 
as those who have wisdom from God, 
or rather not to him, but to the Fa- 
ther of Jesus Christ, the Bishop of us 
all;” ad Magnes. [e. ὃ. p. 18. ]—Inood 


Χριστοῦ γνώμη (see Rev. xvii. 17; Phi- 
lem. 14. γνώμη placitum, decretum, 
sententia) ms καὶ ἐπίσκοποι of κατὰ 
τὰ πέρατα ὀρισθέντες ἐν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ 
γνώμῃ εἰσίν, ‘for even as Jesus Christ 
is sent by the will of the Father, so the 
bishops are appointed unto the utmost 
parts of the earth by the will of Jesus 
Christ. Wherefore it will become you 
to concur according to the will of the 
bishop ;’”’ ad Ephes. [e. 3, 4, p. 12.] 

All the words I have here observed 
to set forth the eminent spiritual 
power, authority, and dignity of bi- 
shops, and their office. are in the New 
Testament, except one [sc. ἐπακούειν, 
and I desire those to consider the em- 
phasis of them, and the expressions in 
which they are used, who object that 
T have carried the notion of the episco- 
pal dignity too high, and in too high 
expressions, 

4 [The passage stands thus in the 
genuine epistle ; ;: φυλάττεσθε οὖν τοῖς 
τοιούτοις" τοῦτο δὲ ἔσται ὑμῖν μὴ φυσι- 
ουμένοις, καὶ οὖσιν ἀχωρίστοις θεοῦ, 
Ἰησοῦ Χριστουῦ, καὶ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου, καὶ 
τῶν διαταγμάτων τῶν ἀποστόλων.--- 
Ibid., ο. 7. p.23. But the quotation is 
evidently from the interpolated epistle, 
where the passage runs thus: αἰδεῖσθε 
δὲ καὶ τὸν ἐπίσκοπον ὑμῶν, ὡς Χριστὸν, 
καθ᾽ ὅ ὑμῖν of μακάριοι διετάξαντο ἀπό- 
oroAo.—S. Ignat. Interp. Epist. ad 
Trall., c. 7. Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 
63. ] 

© [ἔῤῥωσθε ev Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, ὕπο- 
τασσόμενοι τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ὡς τῇ ἐντολῇ, 
ὁμοίως καὶ τῷ πρεσβυτερίῳ.---Ἰὰ, Epist. 
ad ΤῪΔ]]., c. 18. ibid., p. 25. ] 


in giving laws ; in power of spiritual coercion. 301 


them, they presiding in all meetings of the clergy as Christ ciar.1. 

did among the Apostles. Several such precepts, orders, and κέν. δε τος 
directions occur in the epistles of St. Paul to the Churches 

of his foundation; in this holy martyr’s epistles; in that of 

St. Polycarp to the Philippians; and in that of St. Clement 

~ to the Corinthians; all which express that authority with 

which St. Paul spoke to the Corinthians in these words: ‘ If 1 Cor. 14. 

any man among you think himself to be a prophet or spiri- i 

tual, let him acknowledge that the things which I wrote to 

you (as your Apostle) are the commandment of the Lord.” 

III. And as they had power to make laws and orders, and sect. m1 
give directions for the regulation of the Church, and all pos 
orders of men in it, so had they power to coerce or compel eae 
their subjects of the clergy and laity, without distinction of means of 
persons, to obey them, by spiritual censures and punish- ie 
ments, particularly by excommunication, which in the most ™¢" 
holy and pure times was ever accounted more dreadful than 
death itself. This power of spiritual coercion was promised 
by Christ to the Apostles in those most solemn words ; 
“Whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in πον 
heaven, and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be ® 
loosed in heaven.” This is the power which He promised 
to give St. Peter, Matt. xvi. 19; “I will give unto thee the 
keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt 
bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou 
shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” 

Thus our Lord, who instituted the apostolical office, gave 
authority therewith not only to mstruct, command, and 
direct, but to punish and compel, yea to extirpate and cut 
off those who were rebellious and contumacious, and would 
not submit to their orders, and the censures of the Church. 

They were actually invested with this coercive power after 

His resurrection, when He said unto them, “ Peace be unto John 20, 
you; as My Father sent Me, so send I you: whosesoever poe. 
sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whoseso- 

ever sins ye retain, they are retained.” 

When He said, “ As My Father sent Me, so send I you,” 
according to the common import of the words, as well as the 
received sense of them in the Catholic Church, He was to be 
understood as if He had said, With the same power and au- 


302 Power of Excommunication exercised by the Apostles. 


pienity or thority that My Father sent Me into the world to constitute 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 


Acts 10. 20, 
21. 


1 ‘Cor: 5. ὃ. 
2 Thess. 3. 
14, 


i Cor: 5. 
3—), 


and govern My Church, I send you and your successors ; 1. 6. 
with all spiritual power and authority directive and coercive, 
which is necessary to your office and charge, in gathering, 
fixing, and governing Churches unto the end of the world. 
This power was exercised in various corrections and 
punishments by the Apostles, as by St. Peter on Simon 
Magus, when he said, “Thy money perish with thee..... 
Thou hast neither part nor Jot in this matter, for thy heart is 
not right in the sight of God.” By these words he was cut 
off from the Church, and all spiritual benefits belonging to 
it, which, as a father observed, was a more dreadful punish- 
ment than to be burned, or drowned, or pierced through 
with a temporal sword. It was variously exercised by St. 
Paul, as where he commanded the faithful “not to keep 
company with Christian fornicators ;’ and to ‘note those 
who behaved themselves disorderly, and would not obey his 
word, and to have no company with them that they might 
be ashamed.” So in the name of Christ, and his own apo- 
stolic authority, though absent, he ordered the incestuous 
Corinthian to be separated and cut off from the communion 
of the Church, and thereby delivered up to the power of the 
devil till he should repent. “1 have already judged, as 
though I were present, in the name of our Lord Jesus 
Christ, and my spirit, to deliver such a one unto Satan for 
the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in 
the day of our Lord 6805. The same discipline he exer- 
cised on Hymenzeus and Philetus, 1 Tim. 1. 20, according to 
what he wrote, 2 Cor. x. 4—6: “The weapons of our war- 
fare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling 
down of strong holds, casting down imaginations, and every 
thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, &c. 
and having in readiness to revenge all disobedience.” So 
in 1 Cor. iv. 21, saith he, provoked by the disobedience of 
some that were puffed up with spiritual gifts, “What will 
you? that I come unto you with a rod, or in love, and in the 
spirit of meekness ?” By the rod is here to be meant some 
of the greater spiritual punishments, and in all appearance 
excommunication, of which he saith, 2 Cor. x. 8, “Though I 
should boast somewhat of our authority, which God hath 


The exercise of the same authority by their Successors. 303 


given us for edification, and not for destruction, I should not 
be ashamed.” It was with some of these spiritual censures, 
and likely with excommunication, that St. John threatened 
Diotrephes for “ prating against him with malicious words, 
and for not receiving the brethren himself, and forbidding 
others that would.” 

And the successors of the Apostles, the bishops, like spiri- 
tual princes, exercised the same authority, the same coercive 
authority that they did‘, in inflicting spiritual censures upon 
their disobedient subjects. It would require a volume to 
shew you the various punishments with which they corrected 
their disobedience. They suspended and deprived clergymen, 
or degraded them from their order’; and as for the peo- 
ple, they put down those who were in the uppermost class of 
communion into the station of penitents, and prostrators ; 
others they forbid to come farther than the church doors; 
and those whom they did not so disgrace, they often sus- 
pended from the Sacrament, some for a longer, some for a 
shorter time, and some till their last hours. The contu- 
macious, both of the clergy and laity, they punished with 
excommunication; from which, after very long and very 
severe penances, as I have mentioned, they absolved some ; 
and others, who were enormous and very frequent lapsers, 
they would not absolve and reconcile to the peace of the 
Church, but at their last breath, or perhaps not at all’, leaving 
them to the mercy of God at His own tribunal. I need not 
tell you how much the ancient Christians stood in awe of the 
apostolic rod in the hands of their bishops, as well after as 
before the empire came to the Church, when she as a distinct 
society inflicted her censures upon the same Christian crimi- 
nals, and for the same crimes, which the empire punished by 
its laws*; as likewise upon others for crimes which the empire 


f Disciplinam preceptorum nihilo- 
minus inculcationibus densamus. Ibi- 
dem etiam exhortationes, castigationes, 
et censura divina. Nam et judicatur 
magno cum pondere ut apud certos de 
Dei conspectu; summumque futuri 
judicii prejudicium est, si quis ita de- 
liquerit, ut a communicatione orationis, 
et conventus, et omnis sancti com- 
mercii relegetur.—Tertull. Apol. [cap. 
39. p. 31, A.] 


& [See Bingham’s Antiquities of the 
Christian Church, book xvii. ] 

h [Ibid., c. 1.] 

i [Ibid., c. 4. § 2-—4.] 

k See the canons of St. Basil the 
Great, ad Amphilochium Iconii Epi- 
scopum. [e. g. Can. 7. φονεῖς, καὶ pap- 
μακοὶ καὶ μοιχοὶ, καὶ εἰδωλολάτραι τῆς 
αὐτῆς καταδίκης εἰσὶν ἠξιωμένοι. --- 8. 
Basilii Epist. ΟἸχχχνηϊ, Canonica i. ad 
Amphilochium. Op., tom. iii. p. 272, 


CHAP, 1. 
SECT. III. 


8 John 9. 
0. 


304 Hxcommunication regarded as more terrible than death. 


pienity oF did not punish butallow, as in the Abyssinian Aithiopia ', where 


EPISCOPAL 


ORDER. 


though the State allows polygamy, or having many wives at 
once, the Church punishes polygamists with deprivation of 
the holy Communion, which was looked upon as a great dis- 
honour, and grievous punishment in the pure ages of Chris- 
tianity, as to be repelled from their sacrifices was among the 
heathens ; and it was called the lesser excommunication to 
distinguish it from the greater ™, which the ancient Christians 
looked upon as the spiritual axe and sword” to the soul, and 
thought more terrible than death. 

Sir, I have wrote all this to help you to a just idea of the 
episcopal office and power, and to shew you what reason I 
had in my letter to call them spiritual princes, and their 
dioceses principalities, which I did, not rashly or by chance, 
but upon thought, knowing how the ancients wrote of it, as 


you shall see in a few more examples. 


B. et apud Concilia, tom. ii. col. 1511, 


! [De ritibus nuptialibus nune di- 
cere restat, cum et ilJi Christianis sacri 
habeantur; et conjugiorum jura e lege 
divina decisionem fere sumant. Id 
vero imprimis notabile est, polygamiam 
in ecclesia Habessinorum improbari: 
et tamen in republica civili tolerari. 
Non enim a magistratibus puniuntur 
qui plures simul uxores ducunt, et ta- 
men a sacra coena arcentur: tanquam 
ex eorum genere sit que rempublicam 
non Jedant, et tamen sanctitati Chris- 
tianorum adversentur; quasi sanetos 
et probos homines efficere, non regum 
et principum, sed episcoporum ecclesiz 
officium sit.] Jobi Ludolphi Hist. 
ZEthiopica, lib. iii. cap. 6. ὃ 99, 100. 
[| Matrimonia Christiano more contra- 
hunt Habessini cum singulis uxoribus. 
Plures ducere nulla quidem lege civili 
prohibentur, id tamen peenis ecclesias- 
ticis coercetur: quia Christianorum in- 
stitutis sacrisque canonibus adversatur. 
He then refers to what he had said as 
above. ]—Ibid., lib. iv. cap. 4. ὃ 1—3. 

m [See Bingham, book xvi. chap. 2. 
§ 7, 8.] 

 Cujus, ut gladium spiritalem, et 
venturum judicii diem unusquisque 
fratrum possit evadere omni consilio 
providere, et elaborare debemus. ... 
Interfici Deus jussit sacerdotibus suis 
non obtemperantes, et judicibus a se 
ad tempus constitutis non obaudientes, 


et tune quidem gladio occidebantur, 
quando adhue et cirecumcisio carnalis 
manebat. Nune autem quia cireum- 
cisio spiritalis esse apud fideles servos 
Dei ccepit, spiritali gladio superbi et 
contumaces necantur, dum de ecclesia 
ejiciuntur.—S. Cypr. Epist., [lxii. (iv. 
ed. Oxon.) ad Pomponium, p. 103. 
ed. Ben.] εἶδες πῶς καὶ ξίφος ἔχουσιν 
οἱ ἀπόστολοι, κ. τ. λ. --- ὃ. Chrysost. 
Serm. de utilitate legendi Scripturas. 
[Op., tom. iii. p. 78, C. See the pas- 
sage quoted below, p. 319.] Phineas 
sacerdos adulteros simul inventos ferro 
ultore confixit. Quod utique degrada- 
tionibus, et excommunicationibus sig- 
nificatum est esse faciendum hoc tem- 
pore, cum in ecclesize disciplina visi- 
bilis fuerat gladius cessaturus.—S, Au- 
gust. De Fide et Operibus, cap. 2. [Op., 
tom. vi. p. 166, B.] Galat. v. 12, I 
would they were cut off that trouble 
you.” 1 Cor. iv. 21, “Shall I come 
unto you with a τοῦ See Is. Ca- 
saub. de Libert. Eccles., lib. 11. Thesis 4. 
[Quum non alias poenas vetus ecclesia 
noverit preter presbyterii censuras et 
anathematis vinculum, qui est gladius 
ille spiritualis: opinio magni "hujus pa- 
tris (S. Chrysostomi) fuit, dirum illud 
telum aut quam rarissime aut ne sic 
quidem, adversus fideles esse vibran- 
dum.—Apud Epistolas Is. Casaubon, 
tom, ii. p. 183. Amst. 1709. See Ap- 
pendix, No. 7. ] 


Constantine and Eusebius on the authority of Bishops. 305 


Constantine the Great, in his speech to the bishops of 
the Catholic Church assembled in the first general council, 
speaks to them in these words®; “God hath appointed you 
to be priests and princes, (ἱερεῖς τε καὶ dpyovtas,) to judge 
the people, and determine causes, and hath described you to 
be gods, as being more excellent than all other men; accord- 


CHAP. I. 
SECT HL. 


ing to what is written, ‘I have said ye are gods, and all the Ps. 82. 6. 
sons of the Most High: and again, ‘ God standeth in the νον. 1. 


339) 


congregation of gods. That this place was applicable to 
Christian bishops, as priests, is plainly to be proved from the 
exposition of it in the commentary of Eusebius Cesariensis, 
“1 have said ye are gods?,” &c. “God the Word, (ὁ Θεὸς Ao- 
yos,) judging the presidents of the people, to wit, the priests, 
and high-priests, τούς τε λοιποὺς ἄρχοντας, and the other 
rulers, or princes, declareth these things; and therefore it is 
said, ‘God standeth in the congregation of gods,’” ἕο. 

In the eleventh chapter of the second book of the Apo- 
stolical Constitutions, which were of great authority in the 
Church’, the bishop is thus described™: ‘‘ Wherefore, O 
bishop, study to be pure, and to make known thy conversa- 
tion and dignity, as one that represents God among men 
(ὡς θεοῦ τύπον ἔχων ἐν ἀνθρώποις) in presiding over all 
men, (τῷ πάντων ἄρχειν ἀνθρώπων,) priests, kings, princes, 


ο [rod θεοῦ ὑμᾶς προχειρισαμένου 
ἱερεῖς τε καὶ ἄρχοντας, κρίνειν τε καὶ 
διακρίνειν τὰ πλήθη, καὶ θεοὺς εἶναι, ἅτε 
δὴ ἀνθρώπων ἁπάντων ὑπερέχοντας, δρι- 
σαμένου, κατὰ τὸ εἰρημένον᾽ ἔγὼ εἶπα 
θεοί ἐστε, καὶ υἱοὶ ὑψίστου πάντες" καὶ 
τό ὃ θεὸς ἔστη ἐν συναγωγῇ θεῶν. |— 
Gelasii Cyziceni Hist. Cone. Nic., cap. 
8. [The words are part of an address 
of Constantine to the bishops. Con- 
cilia, tom. ii. col. 176, A, B.] 

P [τοὺς δὴ οὖν τοῦ λαοῦ προεστῶτα, 
ἱερέας δηλαδὴ καὶ ἀρχιερέας, τούς τε 
λοίπους ἄρχοντας ἀνακρίνων ὃ θεὸς λό- 
γος, τὰ μετὰ χεῖρας διέρχεται. διὸ εἴρη- 
ται" ὁ θεὸς ἔστη ἐν συναγώγῃ ἰσχυρῶν .--- 
Euseb. Cesar. Comm. in Psalm. |xxxi. 
ap. Montfaucon. Noy. Collect. Patrum, 
Par. 1706. tom. i. p. 506, A. The 
word ‘ gods,’ at the end of the transla- 
tion by Hickes, seems to be put in by 
mistake from the extract from Gela- 
sius. The Hebrew is πον. which 
the LXX translate literally θεῶν, as 
Constantine quoted it, but Eusebius 
ἰσχυρῶν. 


HICKES. 


4ᾳ See Canon. Apost. Ixxxv. [In this 
Canon the Apostolical Constitutions are 
enumerated among the sacred books. 
ἔστω πᾶσιν ὑμῖν κληρικοῖς καὶ λαικοῖς 
βιβλία σεβάσμια καὶ ἅγια, τῆς μὲν πα- 
λαιᾶς διαθήκης, Μωσέως πέντε, κ. τ. λ. 
... ἡμέτερα δὲ, τοῦτ᾽ ἔστι, τῆς καινῆς 
διαθήκης, εὐαγγέλια τέσσαρα... Παύ- 
λου ἐπιστολαὶ δεκατέσσαρες, Πέτρου 
ἐπιστολαὶ δύο, ᾿Ιωάννου τρεῖς, Ἰακώβου 
μιὰ, Ἰούδα μιὰ, Κλήμεντος ἐπιστολαὶ δύο, 
καὶ αἱ διαταγαὶ ὑμῖν τοῖς ἐπισκόποις δι᾽ 
ἐμοῦ Κλήμεντος ἐν ὀκτὼ βιβλίοις προσ- 
πεφωνημέναι (ἃ οὐ δεῖ δημοσιεύειν ἐπὶ 
πάντων, διὰ τὰ ἐν αὐταῖς μυστικὰ) καὶ 
αἱ πράξεις ἡμῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων.---Οα- 
non. Apost., Ixxxiv. (al. Ixxxy.) Con- 
cilia, tom. i, col. 44, A—C; but see 
below, p. 309, note ἢ] 

¥ [διὰ τοῦτο οὖν, ἐπίσκοπε, σπούδαζε 
καθαρὸς εἶναι τοῖς ἔργοις, γνωρίζων τὸν 
τρόπον σου καὶ τὴν ἀξίαν, ὡς θεοῦ τύπον 
ἔχων ἐν ἀνθρώποις, τῷ πάντων ἄρχειν 
ἀνθρώπων, ἱερέων, βασιλέων, ἀρχόντων, 
πατέρων, υἱῶν, διδασκάλων, καὶ πάντων 
ὁμοῦ τῶν ὑπηκόων, καὶ οὕτως ἐν ἐκκλη- 


806 The Apostolical Constitutions on the offices 


prenity or fathers, sons, doctors, and all who in like manner are thy 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 


P5182. Ὁ. 
Ex, 22, 28. 


subjects; and so preach from thy seat in the Church as one 
who hath power to judge offenders; for it is said to you 
bishops, “ Whatsoever you bind upon earth shall be bound 
in heaven, and whatsoever you loose upon earth shall be 
loosed in heaven.” So in the [twenty-sixth] chapter of the 
same book’: “The bishop is the minister of the word, the 
keeper of knowledge, the mediator in the Divine worship 
betwixt you and God; the teacher of religion; the father in 
God, who regenerated you by water and the Spirit unto 
adoption; the prince (ἄρχων), aud governor (ἡγούμενος) ; the 
king (βασιλεὺς), and potentate (δυνάστης); under God the 
earthly god whom you ought to honour: for of him and 
those like him God saith, ‘I said ye are gods, and all of you 
are children of the Most High, and, ‘Thou shalt not speak 
evil of the gods‘.’ Therefore let the bishop so preside over 
you as honoured with authority from God, by which he 
governs the clergy and all the people.” So chap. 28, 29, 
30": “ Honour God by those who preside over you (προεσ- 
τώτων), esteeming the bishops as the mouth, or oracles 
of God. For if Aaron was called a prophet for speaking 
the words of Moses to Pharaoh, and Moses was called the 
god of Pharaoh, as being king and high-priest, as it is 


cia καθέζου τὸν λόγον ποιούμενος, ws 
ἐξουσίαν ἔχειν κρίνειν τοὺς ἡμαρτηκότας, 
ὕτι ὑμῖν τοῖς ἐπισκόποις εἴρηται, ὃ ἐὰν 
δήσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆ», ἔσται δεδεμένον ἐν 
τῷ οὐρανῷ" καὶ ὃ ἐὰν Avonre ἐπὶ τῆς 
γῆ», ἔσται λελυμένον ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ.--- 
Const. Apost., lib. ii. cap. 11. Concilia, 
tom. i. Ρ. 234, D, E.] 

5. [6 ἐπίσκοπος οὗτος λόγου διάκονος, 
γνώσεως φύλαξ, μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ὑμῶν, 
ἐν ταῖς πρὸς αὐτὸν λατρείαις" οὗτος δι- 
δάσκαλος εὐσεβεία-" οὗτος μετὰ θεὸν 
πατὴρ ὑμῶν, δι ὕδατος καὶ πνεύματος 
ἀναγεννήσας ὑμᾶς εἰς υἱοθεσίαν᾽ οὗτος 
ἄρχων καὶ ἡγούμενος ὑμῶν" οὗτος ὑμῶν 
βασιλεὺς καὶ δυνάστης. οὗτος ὑμῶν ἐπί- 
γειος θεὸς μετὰ θεὸν, ὃς ὀφείλει τῆς 
παρ᾽ ὑμῶν τιμῆς ἀπολαύειν. περὶ yap 
τούτου καὶ τῶν ὁμοίων αὐτῶν 5 θεὸς 
ἔλεγεν" ἐγὼ εἶπα, θεοί ἐστε, καὶ υἱοὶ 
ὑψίστου πάντες. καὶ θεοὺς οὐ καταλο- 
γήσει:" 6 γὰρ ἐπίσκοπος προκαθεζέσθω 
ὑμῶν ὡς θεοῦ ἀξίᾳ τετιμημένος" ἡ κρατεῖ 
τοῦ κλήρου καὶ τοῦ λαοῦ παντὺς ἄρχει. 


—Ibid., cap. 26. col. 264, A, B. The 
editor has substituted in the text the 
word twenty-sixth for eleventh, the 
reading of the third edition. The 
eleventh chapter, which is on the treat- 
ment of penitents, does not contain any 
thing to this effect. | 

t [6 δὲ ἐπίσκοπον ἢ λόγῳ ἢ ἔργῳ κα- 
κολογῶν, θεῷ προσπταίει, οὐκ ἀκούσας 
αὐτοῦ εἰπόντος, θεοὺς οὐ κακολογήσει5" 
οὐ γὰρ περὶ λίθων ἢ ξύλων προσοχθισ- 
μάτων ἐνομοθέτει, βδελυκτῶν ὄντων διὰ 
τὴν ψευδωνυμίαν, ἀλλὰ περὶ τῶν ἱερέων 
καὶ τῶν κριτῶν" οἷς καὶ εἶπεν, ὅτι θεοί 
ἐστε, καὶ υἱοὶ ὕψιστοι.----Τ Ὀ14., ¢. 31. col. 
248, E.] 

5 [τιμᾷν διὰ τῶν προεστώτων κύριον 
τὸν θεὸν, ἡγουμένους στόμα θεοῦ εἶναι 
τοὺς ἐπισκόπους. εἰ γὰρ ᾿Ααρὼν ἐπειδὴ 
ἤγγειλε τῷ Φαραὼ παρὰ Μωσέως τοὺς 
λόγους, προφήτης εἴρηται, Μωσῆς δὲ 
θεὸς τοῦ Φαραὼ, ὡς βασιλεὺς ὁμοῦ καὶ 
ἀρχιερεὺς, ὡς φησὶν ὁ θεὸς πρὸς αὐτὸν, 
θεὸν τέθεικά σε τῷ Φαραὼ, καὶ ᾿Δαρὼν 6 


and the authority of Bishops. 307 


written: ‘See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh, and Aaron 
thy brother shall be thy prophet,’ why then do you not 
esteem the messengers and ministers among you as pro- 
phets, and honour them as gods? For the deacon or minis- 
ter is as Aaron to you, and the bishop as Moses. If there- 
fore Moses was called a god by the Lord, let the bishops be 
honoured among you as God, and the deacon as His prophet. 
For as Christ doth nothing without the Father, so let not 
the minister do any thing without the bishop.” So chap. 
33, 34*: “Tf you honour your fathers according to the flesh, 
how much more ought you to honour your spiritual fathers, 
as your benefactors and mediators unto God, who rege- 
nerated you by water and replenished you with the Holy 
Ghost, &c.? Wherefore fear and honour them who have 
received power of life and death from God in judging sin- 
ners, and condemning them to eternal fire, and absolving 
those who repent from their sins. Esteem them therefore 
as your Archons; esteem them as your kings or emperors, 
and offer tribute to them as kings, for they and their fami- 
lies ought to be maintained by you. For as Samuel or- 
dained that the people should maintain the king, and Moses 
that they should maintain the priestsy, so we command that 


ἀδελφός σου ἔσται cov προφήτης, διατὶ 
μή καὶ ὑμεῖς τοὺς μεσίτας ὑμῶν τοῦ 
λόγου προφήτας εἶναι νομίσητε, καὶ ws 
θεοὺς σεβασθήσεσθε; νῦν γὰρ ὑμῖν μὲν 
6 ᾿Ααρών ἐστιν 6 διάκονος, Μωυσῆς δὲ 
6 ἐπίσκοπος" εἰ οὖν ἐῤῥέθη Μωυσῆς ὑπὸ 
κυρίου θεὸς, καὶ ὑμῖν ὃ ἐπίσκοπος εἰς 
θεὸν τετιμήσθω, καὶ 6 διάκονος ὧς προ- 
φήτης “αὐτοῦ: ὡς γὰρ ὃ Χριστὸς ἄνευ 
τοῦ πατρὸς οὐδὲν ποιεῖ, οὕτως οὐδὲ 6 
διάκονος ἄνευ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου. ---Ἰ Ὀϊά., 
cap. 28—30. col. 267, A—D.] 

x [εἰ yap περὶ τῶν κατὰ σάρκα γονέων 
φησὶ τὸ θεὸν λόγιον, τίμα τὸν πατέρα 
σου καὶ τὴν μητέρα σου, πόσῳ μᾶλλον 
περὶ τῶν πνευματικῶν γονέων ὑμῖν 6 
Adyos παραινέσει τιμᾷν αὐτοὺς, καὶ στέρ- 
yew ὡς εὐεργέτας καὶ πρεσβευτὰς πρὸς 
θεὸν τοὺς δι’ ὕδατος ὑμᾶς ἀναγεννή- 
σανταΞ᾽ τοὺς τῷ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι πληρώ- 
σαντα, κιτιλ, . .. τούτους εὐλαβούμενοι 
τιμᾶτε παντοίαις τιμαῖς" οὗτοι γὰρ παρὰ 
θεῷ ζωῆς καὶ θανάτου ἐξουσίαν εἰλήφα- 
σιν ἐν τῷ δικάζειν τοὺς ἡμαρτηκότας, 
καὶ καταδικάζειν εἰς θάνατον πυρὸς aiw- 
νίου" καὶ λύειν ἁμαρτιῶν τοὺς ἐπιστρέ- 
govtas’ καὶ ζωογονεῖν αὐτούς. τούτους 
ἄρχοντας ὑμῶν καὶ βασιλεῖς ἡγεῖσθαι 


νομίζετε, καὶ δασμοὺς ὡς βασιλεῦσι 
προσφέρετε, ἐξ ὑμῶν γὰρ αὐτούς τε καὶ 
συνοίκους αὐτῶν τρέφεσθαι χρή. ὡς 
Σαμουὴλ διετάξατο πρὸς τὸν λαὸν περὶ 
τοῦ βασιλέως ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ τῶν βα- 
σιλειῶν, καὶ Μωσῆς περὶ τῶν ἱερέων ἐν 
τῷ Λευιτικῷ, οὕτω καὶ ἡμεῖς ὑμῖν περὶ 
τῶν ἐπισκόπων διατασσόμεθα, ..... 
πλεῖον οὗτος λαμβανέτω, ἢ ἐκεῖνος τὸ 
παλαιόν. ὃ μὲν γὰρ στρατιωτικὰ μόνα 
διεῖπε, πόλεμον καὶ εἰρήνην ἀναδεδεγμέ- 
νος εἰς φυλακὴν σωμάτων, ὃ δὲ, τὴν εἰς 
θεὸν ἱερωσύνην, σῶμα καὶ ψυχὴν παραι- 
τούμενος κινδύνων ὅσῳ τοίνυν ψυχὴ 
σώματος κρείττων, τοσούτῳ ἱερωσύνη 
βασιλείας" δεσμεύει γὰρ αὐτὴ, καὶ λύει 
τοὺς τιμωρίας ἢ ἀφέσεως ἀξίους" διὸ τὸν 
ἐπίσκοπον στέργειν ὀφείλετε ὡς πατέρα, 
φοβεῖσθαι ὡς βασιλέα" τιμᾷν ὡς κύριον" 
τοὺς καρποὺς ὑμῶν, καὶ τὰ ἔργα τῶν χει- 
ρῶν ὑμῶν εἰς εὐλογίαν ὑμῶν προσφέρον- 
τες αὐτῷ, τὰς ἀπαρχὰς ὑμῶν, κ. T.A.— 


Tbid., cap. 88, 84. col. 270, C, D, E, 
A 


¥ Philo Jud. [de Premiis Sacerdo- 
tum, Op., tom. ii. p. 234, quoted vol. i. 
p- 188, note d. } 


x2 


CHAP. 1. 


SECT. III. 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or you should maintain the bishops, &c. 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 


308 Terms of the highest dignity applied to Bishops 


For if they adminis- 
tered in so many things to the king, who administered 
peace and war for bodily safety, how ought they not to 
administer more liberally to him, who administering the 
priesthood towards God, secures both body and soul from 
danger by his prayers? Wherefore, by how much the soul 
is more excellent than the body, by so much is the priest- 
hood more excellent than the kingly power; for he binds 
and also looses from punishment those who are worthy of 
absolution ; therefore ought you to love the bishop as a 
father ; to fear him as a king or emperor; to honour him as 
a lord; offering to him your fruits, and the works of your 
hands, and your first-fruits,’ &c. To these testimonies add 
what is said in the twenty-fifth and twenty-sixth chapters 
of this book’: 
ἐστὲ προφῆται, ἄρχοντες, Kal 


ὦ ἐπίσκοποι... .. ὑμεῖς τοῖς ἐν ὑμῖν λαϊκοῖς 


ἡμούμενοι, καὶ βασιλεῖς: “0 
bishops, ye are to the laity or people, prophets, princes, 
rulers, and kings.” So in the twenty-sixth chapter?: 
“He that is a bishop is a minister of the word, the keeper 
of knowledge ... . after God your Father, who regenerated 
you into the adoption of sons by water and the Holy Spirit. 
οὗτος ἄρχων, καὶ ἡγούμενος ὑμῶν" οὗτος ὑμῶν βασιλεὺς, Kal 
δυνάστης" οὗτος ὑμῶν ἐπίγειος θεὸς μετὰ θεὸν: He is your 
prince and governor, he is your king and lord, he is under 
God your god upon earth, whom you ought to honour; for 
of him and such like God hath said, ‘I have said ye are 
gods, and the sons of the Most High,’ and ‘ Thou shalt not 
revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people.” To these 
may also be added the thirty-fourth chapter’, and to the 
same purpose is the second chapter of the sixth book*: “ If 
any who rose up against kings deserved punishment, though 
a son or a friend, how much more he who rises up against 
the bishops? For as the priesthood is more excellent than 
the kingly office, as labouring for the soul’s health, so is he 


: [Apost. Const., lib. ii. cap. 25, 26, 
ibid., col. 260, E. ] 

® [This extract is a repetition of that 
given above, p. 306, note s. | 

> [The thirty-fourth chapter has been 
quoted just before, p. 307, note x. The 
passage from the words “the twenty- 
fifth’? to “the same purpose is’ was 
added in the third edition; apparently 


through some mistake. ] 

ς [εἰ yap 6 βασιλεῦσιν ἐπεγειρόμενος 
κολασέως ἄξιος, κἂν υἱὸς ἢ, κἂν φίλος, 
πόσῳ μᾶλλον 6 ἱερεῦσι ἐπανιστάμενος ; 
ὕσῳ γὰρ ἱερωσύνη βασιλείας ἀμείνων, 
περὶ ψυχῆς ἔχουσα τὸν ἀγῶνα, τοσούτῳ 
καὶ βαρυτέραν ἔχει τὴν τιμωρίαν, 6 
ταύτῃ τολμήσας a&vTOMmaTetv.—Const. 


Apost., lib. vi. cap. 2. col. 872, E, A.] 


the common language of ancient Christianity. 909 


worthy of greater punishment who dares move his eye 
against it.” Sir, you ought not to wonder that the ancients 
equal bishops in their spiritual office to kings, for in the an- 
cient glossary of Hesychius ‘bishop’ is explained by ‘king’ 
(ἐπίσκοπος" βασιλεὺς 4,) because as kings are bishops of the 
State, so bishops are as kings in the Church. The com- 
parison between them, and their offices, is properly and ele- 
gantly expressed by St. Fulgentius in these words®: Quan- 
tum ergo pertinet ad hujus temporis vitam, constat quia in 
Ecclesia nemo pontifice potior, et in seculo nemo Christiano im- 
peratore celsior invenitur; and this comparison of the two 
offices in their several spheres, as it seems to be just, so it 
seems to be grounded in Scripture, not only in that of the 
Psalms, “I have said ye are gods;” but in Rev. v. 10, 
“Thou hast redeemed us unto God by Thy blood, and hast 
made us kings and priests.” Sir, all these terms, even that 
of king itself, were applied to bishops as spiritual princes, by 
the best Christian authors, as you may observe by other 
authorities cited in this letter; and as strange as this mag- 
nificent way of speaking of them may appear unto you, or 
others not conversant in the ancient ecclesiastical learning, 
yet you see it was the common language of ancient Chris- 
tianity, and therefore I have made no difficulty to lay it 
before you out of the Apostolical Constitutions so called, 
though I own they have suffered by imterpolations and cor- 
ruptions, as it was the lot of some primitive tracts to do, for 
which reason, but chiefly upon the account of some Arian 
expressions in them, they were censured by the sixth gene- 
ral council, Canon 2.£ But what I have cited out of them in 


ὁ [Hesychii Lexicon, tom. i. col. 
1885. | 

¢ S. Fulgentius De Veritate Predes- 
tinationis et Gratia, lib. ii. cap. 22. [ap. 
Bibl. Vett. Patrum, tom. ix. p. 247, 
H.; Lugd. 1677. ] 

f [The body of canons here referred 
to is that of the council in Trullo, 
held at Constantinople A.D. 692, called 
Quinisextum. There were not any 
canons made either by the fifth or sixth 
general councils. These are considered 
by the Greeks as supplemental to the 
acts of those councils, and called the 
canons of the sixth general council, 
and are so given by Beveridge, (Pan- 


dect, tom. i. see pp. 151, sqq.) but are 
not received by the Latins. The pas- 
sage respecting the Apostolical consti- 
tutions, excepts from the reception of 
the Apostolical canons that which con- 
firms the Constitutions, (see above, p. 
305, note g,) in these words; ἐπειδὴ δὲ 
ἐν τούτοις τοῖς κανόσιν ἐντέταλται δέ- 
χεσθαι ἡμᾶς τὰς τῶν αὐτῶν ἁγίων ἀπο- 
στόλων διὰ Κλήμεντος διατάξεις, αἷς τισὶ 
πάλαι ὑπὸ τῶν ἑτεροδόξων ἐπὶ λύμῃ 
τῆς ἐκκλησίας νόθα τινὰ καὶ ξένα τῆς 
εὐσεβείας παρενετέθησαν, τὸ εὐπρεπὲς 
κάλλος τῶν θείων δογμάτων ἡμῖν auav- 
ρώσαντα, τὴν τῶν τοιούτων διατάξεων 
προσφόρως ἀποβολὴν πεποιήμεθα πρὸς 


CHAP. I. 


SECT, III. 


310 St. Gregory Nazianzen; 


piexity or honour of the episcopal order and office, hath the air of pris 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 





Ex. 29. 1, 
sqq. 


Heb. 8. 2. 


Ps, 45. 5, 


mitive and Catholic; and as lofty as at first sight it may 
appear, perhaps you will not think it so when you rightly 
consider the holiness of their ministry, the greatness of their 
spiritual power, and by whom and whose authority they 
were made bishops, as St. Gregory Nazianzen sets it forth 
at the latter end of his fifth oration, in the following words8 : 
διὰ τοῦτο χρίεις TOV ἀρχιερέα, K.T.r. “Therefore you anoint 
me bishop, and put the robe of the ephod upon me, and the 
mitre upon my head, and bring me to the altar of the spiri- 
tual holocaust, and slay the bullock of consecration, and 
consecrate my hands to the Holy Ghost, and lead me to the 
sight of the Holy of Holies, and make me a minister of the 
true tabernacle, which the Lord hath pitched, and not man. 
But whether he whom you have anointed is worthy to be 
anointed by you, and for what he is anointed, and of Him to 
whom he is anointed, the Father of the true and proper (Son 
of God) Christ, whom He hath anointed with the oil of glad- 
ness above His fellows, knows, having anointed the manhood 
with the Godhead to make both one. And He that is God, 
our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have obtained reconcili- 
ation, knows it, and also the Holy Spirit, who hath appointed 
us to this holy ministry, on whom we stand, and rejoice in 
the hope of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be 
glory for ever. Amen.” It is evident from this mystical 
description of an episcopal consecration, in which this father 


τὴν τοῦ Χριστιανικωτάτου ποιμνίου οἶκο- 
δομὴν καὶ ἀσφαλείαν" οὐδαμῶς ἐγκρί- 
vores τὰ τῆς. αἱρετικῆς, ψευδολογίας 
κυήματα, καὶ τῇ γνησίᾳ τῶν ἀποστόλων 
διδαχῇ mapevelpovres. —Concil. Qui- 
nisext. Can. ii. Concilia, tom. vii. col. 
1344, E, 1345, A. See the Admo- 
nitio ad Lectorem, ibid., col. 1328, and 
Binius’ notes, col. 1416, 564. That 


εἰσάγεις εἰς τὰ ἅγια τῶν ἁγίων ἐποπ- 
τεύσοντα, καὶ ποιεῖς λειτουργὸν τῆς σκη- 
νῆς τῆς ἀληθινῆς ἣν ἔπηξεν 6 κύριος 
καὶ οὐκ ἄνθρωπος" εἰ δὲ καὶ ἄξιον ὑμῶν 
τε τῶν χριόντων, καὶ ὑπὲρ οὗ, καὶ εἰς ὃν 
ἡ χρίσις, οἷδε τοῦτο ὃ πατὴρ τοῦ ἀλη- 
θινοῦ καὶ ὄντως Χριστοῦ, ὃν ἔχρισεν 
ἔλαιον ἀγαλλιάσεως παρὰ τοὺς μετόχους 
αὐτοῦ, χρίσας τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα τῇ θεό- 


some of the interpretations were Arian 
is said by Photius, Biblioth. Cod. 112, 
113, ai δέ ye διαταγαὶ τρισὶ μόνοις δος 
κοῦσιν ἐνέχεσθαι" κακοπλαστίαᾳ, κ. τ. A. 
. +. Καὶ er)’ ᾿Αρειανίσμῳ. -—p- 90.) 

g [διὰ τοῦτο χρίεις ἀρχιερέα, καὶ πε- 
ριβάλλεις τὸν ποδήρη, καὶ } περιτίθης τὴν 
κίδαριν, καὶ προσάγεις τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ 
τῆς πνευματικῆς ὁλοκαυτωσέως, καὶ 
θύεις τὸν μόσχον τῆς τελειώσεως, καὶ 
τελειοῖς τὰς χεῖρας τῷ πνεύματι, καὶ 


τητι, ὥστε ποιῆσαι τὰ ἀμφότερα ἕν" καὶ 
αὐτὸς ὃ θεὸς καὶ κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς 
Χριστὺς, δι᾿ οὗ τὴν καταλλαγὴν ἐσχή- 
καμεν, καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, ὃ ἔθετο 
ἡμᾶς εἰς τὴν διακονίαν ταύτην, ἐν ἣ καὶ 
ἑστήκαμεν καὶ καυχώμεθα ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι 
τῆς δόξης τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χρισ- 
τοῦ, ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώ- 
νων. aunv.—S. Greg. Naz., Orat. x. (al. 
v.) ὃ 4. Op., tom. i. p. 241, A—C.] 


on the spiritual authority of Bishops. 311 


alludes to the twenty-eighth and twenty-ninth chapters of cnar.1 - 


Exodus, that he thought a Christian bishop equal in dignity 
to a Jewish high-priest. And so in his ninth oration he 
speaketh thus to Julian the apostate emperor®; “ What do 
you say to these things? or what will you write? O! you 
who were the greatest of our friends and contemporaries ? 
You who had the same preceptors that we had, and were 
instituted as we were, though God hath raised us to a more 
excellent, I am loth to say, a more troublesome station, to 
teach you, who are the higher powers.” And in the seven- 
teenth oration he speaketh thus of bishops and the episcopal 
poweri: “ And now, O ye potentates and prefects, I come to 
speak to you, lest I should seem partial in speaking what 
was meet for the people; but passing by your dignity or 
pre-eminence, for shame or fear, or to take care of them, 
and forget you, of whom I ought especially to take care. 
What say ye then? or how shall we treat one another? 
Allow me then liberty of speech, for the law of Christ hath 
subjected you to my power and tribunal. For we (bishops) 
have an empire or magistracy also, and that greater and 
more excellent than yours, except you will say the spirit is 
inferior to the flesh, and heavenly things to earthly : with 
more to this purpose. In the Decretum, pars i. dist. x. 
c. 6, this passage is translated thus: Suscipitisne libertatem 
verbi? Libenter accipitis, quod lex Christi sacerdotal vos 
subjicit potestati, atque istis tribunalibus subdit? Dedit enim 
et nobis potestatem, dedit et principatum multo perfectiorem 
principatibus vestris. Aut nunquid justum nobis videtur, st 
cedat spiritus carni, si terrenis ceelestia superentur, si divi- 
nis preferantur humana? Upon which the canonists have 
grounded this false and most arrogant maxim; 7ribunalia 


h [τί πρὸς ταῦτα λέγεις ; τί γράφεις, 
ὦ φίλων ἄριστε καὶ ἡλίκων, καὶ παιδευ- 
τῶν ἡμῖν κοινωνὲ καὶ παιδευμάτων; εἰ 
καὶ νῦν ἡμᾶς εἰς τὴν κρείττω μοῖραν ὃ 
θεὸς ἔταξεν, ὑμᾶς ταῦτα παιδεύειν τοὺς 
ἐν etovotg.—tld., Orat. xix. (al. ix.) 
§ 16. ibid., p. 373, D.] 

i [τί δὲ ὑμεῖς of δυνάσται καὶ ἄρ- 
χοντες, ἤδη γὰρ πρὸς ὑμᾶς 6 λόγος μέτ- 
εἰσιν, ἵνα μὴ δόξωμεν πάντῃ τυγχάνειν 
ἄνισοι, καὶ τοῖς μὲν τὰ εἰκότα παραινεῖν, 
ὑμῶν δὲ τῇ δυναστείᾳ παραχωρεῖν, ὥσ- 
περ αἰδοῖ τὴν κατὰ Χριστὸν ἡμῶν ἐλευ- 


θερίαν, ἢ δέει ἐκκλίνοντες" ἢ τῶν μὲν 
κήδεσθαι μᾶλλον, ὑμῶν δὲ ἀμελεῖν, ὧν 
καὶ μᾶλλον φροντίζειν ἄξιον"... τί οὖν 
φατέ; καὶ τί διομολογούμεθα πρὸς ἀλλή- 
λους; apa δέξεσθε συν παῤῥησίᾳ τὸν 
λόγον; καὶ ὃ τοῦ Χριστοῦ νόμος ὕὗπο- 
τίθησιν ὑμᾶς τῇ ἐμῇ δυναστείᾳ καὶ τῷ 
ἐμῷ βήματι. ἄρχομεν γὰρ καὶ αὐτοί" 
προσθήσω δὲ ὅτι καὶ τὴν μείζονα καὶ 
τελεωτέραν ἀρχήν" ἢ δεῖ τὸ πνεῦμα ὑπο- 
χωρῆσαι τῇ σαρκὶ, καὶ γηΐνοις τὰ ἐπου- 
ράνια.---14., Orat. xvii. § 8. ibid., pp. 
322, Ὁ, E. 323, A.J 


SECT. III. 
ἔτεκον... ΧΑ 


312 Testimonies to the distinctness and relation of the civil and 


pionity or regum sacerdotali sunt potestati subjecta*. 
EPISCOPAL 
_ ORDER. — 


False I call it, 
because the ecclesiastical power and jurisdiction is distinct 
from the temporal or civil', which are ordained by God not 
to hurt, or invade, or destroy, but to aid, assist, and help 
one another. To this purpose writes a good author in bad 
and a learned author in dark times, Hugo Floriacensis, of 
whom more hereafter™: Regiam et sacerdotalem diynitatem 
Deus in terris ordinavit [sive disposuit| non absque magno, ac 
saluberrimo sacramento. Unde congruit, et valde conveniens 
est, ut he due potestates sibi invicem fraterna charitate sem- 
per adhereant, et ut se mutua solicitudine tueantur, το. Dupin 
in his Preloquium before the seventh dissertation of his book 
de Antiqua Ecclesia Disciplina", also shews that the regal or 
civil power is of a different and distinct nature from the 
sacerdotal or ecclesiastical, and the sacerdotal or ecclesiasti- 
cal of a different and distinct nature from that; and that 
these two powers and jurisdictions cannot be subject each to 
other, though the persons using these two different powers 
and jurisdictions are mutually subject to one another. And 
the learned Bishop Beveridge in the Prolegomena to his 
Συνοδικὸν, or Pandecte Canonum®, demonstrates the real 


* [This is the canon grounded on 
the passage just quoted. Gratiani De- 
cretum, pars i. dist. x. c. 6. ap. Corpus 
Juris Canonici. | 

1 24 Hen. VIII. cap. 12. Preamble. 
[ Where by divers sundry old authentic 
histories and chronicles it is manifestly 
declared that this realm of England is 
an empire ... governed by one su- 
preme head and king,] unto whom a 
body politic compact of all sorts and 
degrees of people divided in terms and 
by names of spirituaiity and tempora- 
lity, [being bounden, W&c.]... the body 
spiritual whereof having power when 
any cause of the law divine happened 
to come in question, or of spiritual 
learning, &c. [and the laws temporal 

. was executed by sundry] judges 
and administers of the other part of the 
said body politic, called the temporality, 
and both their authorities and jurisdic- 
tions do conjoin together in the due 
administration of justice, the one to 
help the other, Xe. 

™ [Hugo Floriacensis, (fl. A.D.1120) 
Tractatus de Regia Potestate et Sacer- 
dotali Dignitate; apud Baluzii Miscel- 
lanea, tom. ii. p. 193. col. i. ed. Mansi. 


Luce. 1761. ] 

n [Due sunt inter homines maxi- 
mz atque prestantissimz societates, 
civilis et ecclesiastica, que licet inter 
eosdem ineantur, ideoque spe vide- 
antur inter se confuse atque permixte, 
revera tamen, &c.—L. E. Dupin De 
antiqua Ecclesiez Disciplina Disser- 
tationes Historice, p. 433. Par. 1691. 
See Appendix, No. 5. | 

ο [The passages referred to are at 
the beginning of Beveridge’s Prolego- 
mena; and the subject is continued 
through the first two sections. § 1. Eti- 
amsi Ecclesia in imperio sit, unumque 
cum eo in singulis reguis caput com- 
mune habeat, reapse nihilominus ab eo 
distinguitur non secus atque anima a 
corpore; hoc enim medici, illa theologi 
eure committitur: proinde homo ex 
duabus istis conflatus partibus, com- 
mune est utriusque regiminis subjec- 
tum, sub diverso tamen respectu, im- 
perio quidem quatenus ζῶον πολιτικὸν 
est, Ecclesia autem quatenus ζῶον ἀθά- 
vatov, sempiterne scilicet felicitatis, 
vel miseriz capax, ὅθ. ὃ 2. Vel me 
tacente, nemo non videat quare hac 
premissa sunt, et quid ex iis conse- 


spiritual powers. St. Chrysostom on the same point. 313 


difference between these two powers and jurisdictions, and 
their administrations, and how the Church and empire are 
not to hurt one another, but that each ought to give the 
other his due; and that every man in a Christian nation 
is in a different respect a member of both societies, and 
ought to be subject to the laws of both. 

To the same purpose with Gregory doth St. John Chry- 
sostomP speak in his fourth Homily, de Verbis Esaie ; “Ozias 
being king would usurp the empire of the priest. I will, 
saith he, offer incense, because I am worthy. But remain, 
O king, within thy bounds, for there are other bounds of 
the regal and others of the priestly power. This is greater 
than that... . The king hath the administration of earthly 
things, but the law of the priesthood is from above; for 
‘whatsoever they shall bind on earth shall be bound in 
heaven.’ To the emperor are committed things here, but 
heavenly things are committed to me .... And when I say 
to me, I speak of myself as a priest . .. . To the emperor are 
committed bodies, to the priest souls; he remits temporal 
mulcts, the priest remits sins; he useth fleshly weapons, the 
priest spiritual ; he makes war with the barbarians, I make 
war with the devils; greater is this principality, and there- 
fore the emperor submits his head to the hand of the priest, 
and every where in the Old Testament priests did anoint 
kings.” So in his third Homily, ad Populum Antioch., εἰ yap 
γυνὴ ὑπὲρ ᾿Ιουδαίων", «.7.rX. “For if a woman interceding 
quetur. Ut enim ad prescriptos im- 


perii consequendos fines, leges ab eo 
ferantur necesse est, quibus singuli 
3 


v ie 0 τα γα , 

ἔλαχεν οἰκονομεῖν" ὃ δὲ τῆς ἱερωσύνης 
θεσμὸς ἄνω κάθηται: ὅσα ἂν δήσητε 
ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ἔσται δεδεμένα ἐν τῷ οὐρα- 


constringimur, et quarum servi omnes 
idcirco sumus, ut liberi vivere possi- 
mus: sic etiam Ecclesize prestitutos 
sibi fines nunquam assequetur, nisi 
suas habeat leges, quibus omnes tene- 
antur, qui in spiritualem istam societa- 
tem admissi sunt.—Zvvodiucdy sive Pan- 
dectze Canonum SS. Apostolorum et 
conciliorum ab Ecclesia Grea recep- 
torum Gul. Beveregius recensuit, &c. 
Prolegomena, Oxon. 1672.] 

P [ὁ ᾿Οζίας otros ... βασιλεὺς dv 
ἱερωσύνης ἀρχὴν ἁρπάζει: βούλομαί, 
φησι, θυμίασαι, ἐπειδὴ δίκαιός εἰμι. ἀλλὰ 
μένε ἔσω τῶν δικαίων ὅρων" ἄλλοι ὅροι 
βασιλείας, καὶ ἄλλοι dpa ἱερωσύνης" 
ἀλλ᾽ αὕτη μείζων ἐκείνης... 6 βασι- 
λεὺς οὗτος μὲν γὰρ τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς 


νῷ. ὃ βασιλεὺς τὰ ἐνταῦθα πεπίστευται, 
ἐγὼ τὰ οὐράνια. ἐγὼ ὅταν εἴπω, τὸν 
ἱερέα λέγω... .. ὃ βασιλεὺς σώματα ἐμ- 
πιστεύεται, 6 δὲ ἱερεὺς ψυχάς" ὁ βασι- 
λεὺς λοιπάδας χρημάτων ἀφιήσιν, ὃ δὲ 
ἱερεὺς λοιπάδας ἁμαρτημάτων. ἐκεῖνος 
ἀναγκάζει, οὗτος παρακαλεῖ" ἐκεῖνος 
ἀνάγκῃ, οὗτος γνώμῃ" ἐκεῖνος ὅπλα ἔχει 
αἰσθητὰ, οὗτος ὅπλα πνευματικά. ἐκεῖ- 
vos πολεμεῖ πρὸς βαρβάρους“, ἐμοὶ πόλε- 
μος πρὸς δαίμονας. μείζων 7 ἀρχὴ αὕτη. 
διὰ τοῦτο ὃ βασιλεὺς τὴν κεφαλὴν ὑπὸ 
χεῖρας τοῦ ἱερέως ἄγει, καὶ πανταχοῦ 
ἐν τῇ παλαιᾷ ἱερεῖς βασιλέας ἔχριον.--- 
S. Chrysost. Homil. in Oziam iv. ὃ 4. 
Op., tom. vi. p. 127, B, C, F.] 

4 [εἰ yap γυνὴ ὑπὲρ ᾿Ιουδαίων παρα- 
καλοῦσα βαρβαρίκον ἴσχυσε καταστεῖλαι 


CHAP. 1... 


SECT. IIL. 


DIGNITY OF 
EPISCOPAL 
~ ORDER. 


314 St. Chrysostom; on the 


for the Jews could appease the anger of a barbarian, how 
much more shall our master™ (6sdacKaXos), supplicating for 
so great a city and so great a Church, be able to prevail with 
so indulgent and merciful an emperor. For if he have re- 
ceived power to remit sins committed against God, much 
more will he be able to remove and blot out crimes against 
men. For he is a prince, (ἄρχων ἐστὶ καὶ avtos,) and a 
prince more honourable than he (σεμνότερος) ; for the holy 
laws have subjected the emperor’s head to his hands*; and 
when any blessing is to be asked from above, the emperor is 
wont to come to the bishop, and not the bishop to the em- 
peror.” So in his second Homily, de Fide Anne, speaking 
of the great reverence David had for King Saul in the cave, 
considering his dignity as a king, and not his unworthiness 
as a wicked man; “ Let those hear this (saith he‘) who despise 
bishops"; let them observe how great reverence he shewed 


to a king, whereas a bishop 


θυμὸν, πολλῷ μᾶλλον 6 διδάσκαλος 6 
ἡμέτερος ὑπὲρ τοσαύτης πόλεως, καὶ 
μετὰ τοσαύτης ἐκκλησίας δεόμενος, τὸν 
πραότατον καὶ ἡμερώτατον βασιλέα τοῦ- 
Tov πεῖσαι δυνήσεται. εἰ γὰρ τὰς εἰς 
θεὸν ἁμαρτίας λύειν ἔλαβεν ἐξουσίαν, 
πολλῷ μᾶλλον τὰς εἰς ἄνθρωπον γενο- 
μένας ἀνελεῖν καὶ ἀφανίσαι δυνήσεται. 
ἄρχων ἐστὶ καὶ αὐτὸς, καὶ ἄρχων ἐκείνου 
σεμνότερος" καὶ γὰρ αὐτὴν τὴν βασιλι- 
κὴν κεφαλὴν οἱ ἱεροὶ νόμοι ταῖς τούτου 
φέροντες χερσὶν ὑπέταξαν᾽ καὶ bray τι 
δέοι γενέσθαι χρηστὸν ἄνωθεν, ὃ βασι- 
λεὺς πρὸς τὸν ἱερέα, οὐκ ὁ ἱερεὺς πρὸς τὸν 
βασιλέα καταφεύγειν εἴωθεν.---. Chrys. 
Homil. ad Pop. Antioch. iii. Op., tom. i. 
p- 88, C, D.| 

r Flavian bishop of Antioch, [who 
had gone to Constantinople to intercede 
with the emperor Theodosius for the 
people of Antioch, after the offence 
given by throwing down the statues of 
the emperor and empress, A.D. 387. | 

§ This alludes to the ancient custom 
of emperors bowing their heads to re- 
ceive the bishop’s blessing.—[ See Bing- 
ham, book ii. chap. 9. § 1.] 

t [ἀκουέτωσαν ὅσοι καταφρονοῦσι fe 
ρέων, μανθανέτωσαν bony εὐλάβειαν οὗ- 
τος περὶ βασιλέα ἐπεδείξατο' καίτοι 
πολὺ τιμιώτερος καὶ αἰδεσιμώτερος βα- 
σιλέως 6 ἱερεὺς, ὕσον καὶ ἐπὶ μείζονα 
ἀρχὴν κέκληται" μανθανέτωσαν μὴ κρί- 
νειν, μηδὲ εὐθύνας ἀπαιτεῖν, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπο- 


is more to be honoured and 


τάσσεσθαι καὶ εἴκειν. ob μὲν yap τὸν 
τοῦ ἱερέως βιὸν, κἂν φαῦλος ἢ τις καὶ 
ἠμελημένος, οὐκ oldas* οὗτος δὲ ἤδει 
μετ᾽ ἀκριβείας ἅπαντα, ὅσα ἐποίησεν 6 
Σαούλ᾽ ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως καὶ οὕτως ἠδεῖτο τὴν 
παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ δοθεῖσαν ἀρχήν. ὅτι δὲ 
xa os\ ἣν - ~ > ΕΣ > 
κἂν εἰδὼς ἧἢς ἀκριβῶς, οὐκ ἔχεις ἄπολο- 
γίαν, οὐδὲ συγγνώμην, καταφρονῶν τῶν 
προεστώτων, καὶ παρακούων τῶν λεγο- 
μένων, ἄκουσον πῶς καὶ ταύτην ἡμῶν 
ἀνεῖλε τὴν πρόφασιν 6 Χριστὸς δι᾽ ὧν 
> > ΄ eS a i 
φησιν ἐν εὐαγγελίοις" ἐπὶ τῆς καθέδρας 
Μωὺῦσέως ἐκάθισαν οἱ γραμματεῖς καὶ of 
φαρισαῖοι" πάντα οὖν ὅσα ἂν εἴπωσιν ὑμῖν 
ποιεῖν ποιεῖτε, κατὰ δὲ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν 
μὴ ποιεῖτε. ὁρᾶς πῶς ὧν ὃ βίος οὕτω διε- 
φθαρμένος ἦν, ὡς ἄξιος εἶναι διαβολῆς 
τοῖς μαθητενομένοις, τούτων τὴν παραί- 
νεσιν οὐκ ἠτίμασεν, οὐδὲ τὴν διδαχὴν 
οΣ 7 δ a \ ΄ > ake 
ἐξέβαλε" ταῦτα δὲ λέγω, οὐχὶ τῶν ἱε- 
ρέων κατηγορεῖν βουλόμενος μὴ γέ- 
νοιτο᾽ καὶ γὰρ ὑμεῖς μάρτυρες ἦτε τῆς 
τὲ ἀναστροφῆς αὐτῶν καὶ τῆς εὐλαβείας 
> , > > ‘¢ > “ rol 
ἀπάσης᾽ ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα ἐκ πολλῆς τῆς περι- 
ουσίας πολλὴν αὐτοῖς τὴν αἰδὼ καὶ τὴν 
\ / 
τιμὴν mapexwmev.—lId., De Anna Ser- 
mo; Op., tom. iv. p. 717, E, B.]} 
u c cs « \ . 
ἱερέων, ἱερεὺς, and sacerdos, in the 
Latin and Greek fathers, are used to 
signify a bishop, and ἱερωσύνη, and 
sacerdotium, the order and office of a 
bishop. [See Suicer, in voc. ἱερεὺς, 
Thes. Eccl., tom. i. col. 1441, 1442. ] 


reverence due to the Bishops. 315 


reverenced than a king, by how much he is called to a more cmap. τ. 
noble empire*. aoe 
“Wherefore let them learn not to judge bishops, but to 
be subject and obedient to them. For thou likely dost not 
know the life of the bishop, though it is wicked and vile, 
but David knew very well all the evils Saul had done; but 
nevertheless he reverenced the supreme power which was 
given him by God. So though thou knewest the wicked- 
ness of their lives exactly thou hast no excuse or permission 
to despise bishops, (τῶν προεστώτων,) or disobey their com- 
mands. For hear (I pray thee) how Christ hath obviated 
this pretence by what He hath said in the Gospel; ‘The 
scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’ chair; all therefore 
whatsoever they command you to observe, that observe and 
do, but do not ye after their works.’ Dost thou not see 
how He would not have them slight the exhortations or re- 
ject the doctrine of those whose lives were so corrupt that 
they deserved to be censured by their disciples? I speak 
this not with any reflection on the bishops, God forbid, (for 
you are witnesses of their conversation and godliness,) but 
that we should give them the more abundant reverence and 
honour.” 
So in his sermon, “Of the benefit of reading the Scrip- 
tures,” there are many things to the same purpose: o7- 
μερον avaykaiovy, κι τι. “ Now it is necessary to explain 
the rest of the inscription, and shew what the name of 
Apostle signifies. For it is not an empty name, but a 
name of principality!; of the noblest principality ; of the 1866 also 


most spiritual ΠΡ e ; of a principality on high (τῆς Boe 


ἀρχῆς προσηγορία, ἀρχῆς μεγίστης, ἀρχῆς τῆς πνευματι- ane 
-] 


κωτάτης, ἀρχῆς τῆς ἄνω). Attend, I pray you, diligently ; 
for as in this world there are many governments (ἀρχαὶ 
πολλαὶ) or principalities, but not all of the same dignity, 
but some are greater and some less; as to begin with the 


bo 
[9 
ou 


* ἐπὶ μείζονα ἀρχήν. From this ψιλόν ἐ ἐστι τὸ ὄνομα τοῦτο, ἀλλ᾽ ἀρχῆς 
passage itis plain that these two powers ἐστὶ προσηγορία, ἀρχῆς μεγίστη, ἀρχῆς 
or principalities of the emperor and τε πνευματικωτάτης, ἀρχῆς τε ἄνω. 
the bishop, were distinct andindepen- ἀλλὰ διανάστητε. καθάπερ γὰρ ἐν τοῖς 
dent of one another. βιωτικοῖς πράγμασίν εἰσι πολλαὶ ἀρχαὶ, 

Υ [σήμερον ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τὸ ἐπί-. οὐ πᾶσαι δὲ τῆς αὐτῆς ἀξίας, ἀλλ᾽ αἱ 
λοιπὸν τῆς ἐπιγραφῆς, καὶ δεῖξαι τί ποτέ μὲν μείζους, ai δὲ ἑλάττους᾽ οἷον, ἵνα 
ἐστι τὸ ὄνομα τῶν ἀποστόλων" οὐδὲ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῆς κατωτέρας τὸν ἀριθμὸν ποιησώ- 


316 St. Chrysostom ; on the spiritual 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or inferior, a mayor of a city; the governor of a country is 
“orper. above him, over whom there is also a superior governor, and 
go in several other gradations, as the general, proconsul, and 
the power of the consuls, (τῶν ὑπάτων ἀρχὴν,) which is above 
them, and all these governments are not all of the same dig- 
nity: so are there many spiritual governments or magistra- 
cies, but not all of the same dignity, the dignity of the 
apostolate being greater than all. And as you are to be led 
by sensible to spiritual things . . . so coming to discourse of 
government (περὶ apxyfjs) I did not first speak of spiritual 
but temporal government, which is the object of sense, that 
from this I might lead you as it were by the hand to that. 
You have heard how many secular powers or dignities I have 
reckoned up, of which some are greater and some less, and 
how the power of the consul is the top and head of the rest. 
Now let us see what spiritual powers (ἀρχὰς mvevpatixas) or 
dignities there are; the power of a prophet is a spiritual 
power; the power of an evangelist is another spiritual 
power; so is the power of a pastor, of a doctor; of gifts 
and healings; of interpreting of tongues. These indeed are 
all names of gifts, but the things signified by them imply 
dignity and power. With us a prophet is a spiritual digni- 
tary (ἄρχων πνευματικὸς) or great officer; so is a caster out 
of devils; so is a pastor and a doctor; but the apostolical 
dignity is greater than them all. But how doth this appear 
that an Apostle is above the rest, and that as a consul 
among temporal powers so an Apostle among spiritual is the 
chief? Let us then hear Paul reckoning up the (spiritual) 


μεθα, ἔστιν ὃ τῆς πόλεως ἔκδικος" ἔστιν 
ἀνώτερος ἐκείνου 6 τοῦ ἔθνους ἡγεμών. 
ἔστι μετ᾽ ἐκεῖνον ἕτερος ἄρχων μείζων. 
ἔστι πάλιν ὁ στρατηλάτης᾽ ἔστιν ὃ 
ὕπαρχος" ἔστιν ἀνωτέρα τούτων ἀρχὴ 
ἡ τῶν ὑπάτων ἀρχή" καὶ πᾶσαι μὲν αὗ- 
ται ἀρχαὶ, οὐ πᾶσαι δὲ τῆς αὐτῆς ἀξίας" 
οὕτω καὶ τῶν πνευματικῶν πολλαὶ μὲν 
ἀρχαὶ, οὐ πᾶσαι δὲ τῆς αὐτῆς ὀξίας, 
πασῶν δὲ μείζων ἣ τῆς ἀποστολῆς ἀξία. 
καὶ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν αἰσθητῶν ὑμᾶς ἐπὶ τὰ 
νοητὰ χειραγωγεῖν δεῖ... διὰ τοῦτο 
περὶ ἀρχῆς διαλεγόμενοι, οὐ πνευματικῆς 
ἐμνήσθημεν ἀρχῆς, ἀλλ᾽ αἰσθητῆς, ἵνα 
ἀπὸ ταύτης πρὸς ἐκείνην ὑμᾶς χειρα- 
γωγήσωμεν. ἠκούσατε πόσας ἠριθμήσα- 
μεν ἀρχὰς βιωτικὰς, καὶ πῶς αἱ μὲν μεί- 


fous, αἱ δὲ ἐλάττους" καὶ πῶς ἡ τῶν 
ὑπάτων ἀρχὴ καθάπερ κορυφὴ καὶ κε- 
φαλὴ πᾶσιν ἐπίκειται" ἴδωμεν καὶ τὰς 
ἀρχὰς τὰς πνευματικάς. ἔστιν ἀρχή 
πνευματικὴ, προφητείας ἀρχή; ἔστιν 
ἕτερα ἀρχὴ εὐαγγελισμοῦ" ἔστι ποιμένος" 
ἔστι διδασκάλου" ἔστι χαρισμάτων" ἔσ- 
τιν ἰαμάτων, ἔστιν ἑρμηνείας γλωσσῶν. 
ταῦτα πάντα ὀνόματα μέν ἐστι χαρισμά- 
τῶν, πράγματα δὲ ἀρχῶν καὶ ἐξουσιῶν. 
ὁ προφήτης ἄρχων ἐστί" παρ᾽ ἡμῖν 6 
δαίμονας ἐξελαύνων ἄρχων ἐστί" παρ᾽ 
ἡμῖν 6 ποιμὴν καὶ διδάσκαλος ἄρχων 
ἐστὶ πνευματικός ἀλλὰ τούτων ἅπάν- 
των μείζων ἐστὶν ἀρχὴ ἣ ἀποστολική. 
καὶ πόθεν τοῦτο δῆλυν ; OTL πρὸ πάντων 
ὁ ἀπόστολος τούτων ἐστί. καὶ καθάπερ 


principalities of Bishops. 317 


powers (ἀρχαὶ), and putting the apostolical dignity in the 
first and highest place. Saith he; ‘God hath set some in 
the Church ; first Apostles, secondarily prophets,’ &c. Here 
you see the top of spiritual dignities, the Apostle sitting on 
high, none before him, none higher than he; for he first 
names Apostles, &c. Neither is the office of an Apostle 
(ἡ ἀποστολὴ) only the chief of all other dignities, but the 
root and foundation of them. And as the head which is the 
highest is the supreme governor and ruler (ἀρχὴ καὶ ἐξου- 
σία) of the body, yea, and the root of it; forasmuch as out 
of the brain arise the nerves and spirits, which actuate and 
guide the whole animal, so the apostolical office is not only 
more excellent than all other gifts, as being the chief dig- 
nity and power, but it comprehends and unites in it the 
roots of them all. So that (for example) thouezh a prophet 
is not an Apostle and prophet too, yet an Apostle is a pro- 
phet in perfection, and hath the gifts of healing, and of 
diversity of tongues, and interpreting tongues, &c. Did 
you then heretofore think the name of Apostle a mere 
name? Now then understand what a depth of signification 
there is in that word, &c. Wherefore we had reason to call 
the apostolical dignity a spiritual consulship, (ὑπατίαν πνευ- 
ματικὴν,) because the Apostles were chosen or ordained ar- 
chons or magistrates by God, who had not only different 
cities and provinces severally, but the whole world in com- 
mon committed to their charge. I will now proceed to shew 


ὁ ὕπατος“ ἐν ταῖς αἰσϑηταῖς ἀρχαῖς, οὕτως 
ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐν τοῖς πνευματικοῖς τὴν 
προεδρείαν ἔχει. αὐτοῦ τοῦ Παύλου ἀκού- 
σωμεν ἀριθμοῦντος τὰς ἀρχὰς, καὶ ἐν τῷ 
ὑψηλοτέρῳ χωρίῳ τὴν ἀπυστολικὴν κα- 
θίξζοντος᾽ τί οὖν οὗτός φησιν; οὕς μὲν 
ἔθετο ὁ θεὸς ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ, πρῶτον 
ἀποστόλους, δεύτερον προφήτας, κ.τ.λ. 
ον εἶδες ὑψηλὸν καθήμενον τὸν ἀπό- 
στολον, καὶ οὐδένα πρὸ ἐκείνου ὄντα, 
οὔτε ἀνώτερον; πρῶτον γὰρ ἀποστόλους 
φησί: K.T.A. ... οὐκ ἀρχὴ δὲ μόνον 
ἐστὶν ἣ ἀποστολὴ τῶν ἄλλων ἀρχῶν, 
ἀλλὰ καὶ ὑπόθεσις καὶ ῥίζα. καὶ καθάπερ 
ἡ κεφαλὴ ἐν τῷ ὑψηλυτέρῳ τοῦ παντὸς 
καθημένη, οὐ μόνον ἀρχὴ τοῦ σώματός 
ἐστι καὶ ἐξουσία, ἀλλὰ καὶ ῥίζα" τὰ γὰρ 
νεῦρα τὰ διοικοῦντα τὸ σῶμα ἐξ ἐκείνης 
τικτόμενα, καὶ ἐξ αὐτοῦ βλαστάνοντα 
τοῦ ἐγκεφάλου, καὶ τὴν τοῦ πνεύματος 
δεχόμενα xoonylay, οὕτως ἅπαν oiko- 


νομεῖ τὸ ζῶον. οὕτω καὶ ἣ ἀποστολὴ οὐ 
μόνον ὡς ἀρχὴ καὶ ἐξουσία τοῖς λοιποῖς 
ἐπίκειται χαρίσμασιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰς 
ἁπάντων ῥίζας ἐν ἑαυτῇ συλλαβοῦσα 
κατέχει. καὶ ὃ μὲν προφήτης οὐ δύναται 
εἶναι καὶ ἀπόστολος καὶ προφήτης. 46 
δὲ ἀπόστολος καὶ προφήτης ἐστὶ πάν- 
τως, καὶ χαρίσματα ἔχει ἰαμάτων, καὶ 
γένη γλωσσῶν, καὶ ἑρμηνείας γλωσσῶν, 
K.T-A...-Gp οὐ ψιλὸν ἐνομίζετε τοὔ- 
νομα τῶν ἀποστόλων πρὸ τούτου; ἰδοὺ 
νῦν ἔγνωτε πόσον βάθος ἔχει νοήματος 
τὸ ὄνομα, ... εἰκότως ἄρα ὑπατίαν πνευ- 
ματικὴν ἐκαλέσαμεν τὴν ἀποστολήν. 
ἄρχοντες γάρ εἰσι ὑπὸ θεοῦ χειροτο- 
νηθέντες of ἀπόστολοι" ἄρχοντες οὐκ 
ἔθνη καὶ πόλεις διαφόρους λαμβάνοντες, 
ἀλλὰ πάντες κοινῇ τὴν οἰκουμένην ἐμ- 
πιστευθέντες. καὶ ὅτι ἄρχοντές εἶσι 
πνευματικοὶ, καὶ τοῦτο ὑποδεῖξαι πειρά- 
σομαι, ἵνα μετὰ τὴν ὑπόδειξιν μάθητε, 


CHAP. I. 


SECT, IIL. 


318 St. Chrysostom ; on the analogy of 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or you that they are spiritual archons, that you may thereby 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 


understand how much more excellent they are than tempo- 
ral archons, even as much more excellent as these are than 
boys who in play imitate their power, &c. ... We have respect 
for temporal magistrates from their ensigns of honour, as 
the girdle, the voice of the crier, their guards, their habits, 
and the sword. Let us now therefore see if the apostolical 
magistracy hath the like marks and signs of honour; indeed 
it hath, but much more excellent than those, by which you 
may understand that the one hath the name and shadow of 
which the other hath the truth, and that there is the like 
difference between the two powers as between little boys 
acting the parts of magistrates, and magistrates themselves. 


_Let us, if you please, first compare the two powers as to 


prisons ; for-as I said before, the magistrate hath power to 
bind and loose, and see I pray you how the Apostles have 
the same power. ‘ Whomsoever you shall bind on earth shall 
be bound in heaven, and whomsoever you shall loose on 
earth shall be loosed in heaven.’ Thou seest the power of 
prison and prison, and indeed the name is the same to both, 
but the thing signified by it is not the same. Here is bonds 
and bonds; bonds on earth and bonds in heaven; for the 
Apostles bind in heaven. Learn therefore the greatness and 
extent of their jurisdiction; they being on earth pronounce 
sentence, and the force of it pierceth heaven. And as when 
emperors being in one city give judgment or make laws, the 
force thereof goes through the whole empire, so at the same 
time if the Apostles being resident in one place did decree 


ὅτι τοσούτῳ βελτίους εἶσιν οἱ ἀπόστολοι 
τῶν ἀρχόντων τῶν βιωτικῶν ὅσῳ αὐτοὶ 
οἱ βιωτικοὶ ἄρχοντες τῶν παίδων τῶν 
παιζόντων ἀμείνους εἰσί ἀπὸ τῆς 
ζώνης δὲ πάλιν δοκιμάζομεν τὸν ἄρχοντα, 
ἀπὸ τῆς τοῦ κήρυκος φωνῆς, ἀπὸ τῶν 
ῥαβδούχων, ἀπὸ τοῦ ὀχήματος, ἀπὸ τοῦ 
ξίφους" ταῦτα γὰρ πάντα ἀρχῆς σύμ- 
Boda. ἴδωμεν τοίνυν καὶ τὴν τῶν ἀπο- 
στόλων ἀρχὴν, εἰ ταῦτα ἔχει τὰ σύμ- 
Boda ἔχει μὲν, οὐ τοιαῦτα δὲ, ἀλλὰ 
πολλῷ βελτιόνα. καὶ ἵνα μάθῃς ὅτι ταῦτα 
μὲν ὀνόματα πραγμάτων, ἐκεῖνα δὲ ἀλή- 
θεια πραγμάτων ἵνα μάθῃς τὸ μέσον τῶν 
παιδίων τῶν παιζόντων ἀρχὰς, καὶ τῶν 
ἀρχῶν τῶν ἐχόντων τάς ἀρχάς" καὶ εἰ 
βούλεσθε, ἀπὸ τοῦ δεσμωτηρίου πρῶτον 
ἀριθμήσομεν. καὶ γὰρ εἰρήκαμεν, ὅτι 
κύριος τοῦ δῆσαι καὶ λῦσαί ἐστιν ὁ ἄρ- 


S018, (60 


χων" ὅρα δὴ ταύτην τὴν ἀρχὴν τοὺς 
ἀποστόλους ἔχοντας. ὅσους γὰρ ἂν δή- 
onte ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, φησὶν, ἔσονται δεδε- 
μένοι ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, καὶ ὅσους ἂν 
λύσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔσονται λελυμένοι 
ἐν οὐρανοῖς. εἶδες δεσμωτήριον καὶ δεσ- 
μωτηρίου ἐξουσίαν" καὶ τὸ μὲν ὄνομα τὸ 
αὐτὸ, τὸ δὲ πρᾶγμα οὐ τὸ αὐτό. δεσμὰ 
καὶ δεσμά. ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, τὰ 
δὲ ἐν οὐρανῷ. οὐρανὸς γάρ ἐστιν αὐτοῖς 
τὸ δεσμωτήριον" μάθε τοίνυν τὸ μέγεθος 
τῆς ἀρχῆς. ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς καθήμενοι φέ- 
ρουσι τὴν ψῆφον καὶ τῆς ψήφου ἡ δύνα- 
μις διαβαίνει τοὺς οὐρανούς. καὶ καθάπερ 
οἱ μὲν βασιλεῖς καθήμενοι ἐν μιᾷ πόλει 
ψηφίζονται καὶ νομοθετοῦσιν, ἣ δὲ τῶν 
ψηφισμάτων καὶ τῶν νόμων δύναμις πᾶ- 
σαν διατρέχει τὴν οἰκουμένην" οὕτω καὶ 
τότε, οἱ μὲν ἀπόστολοι ἐν ἑνὶ τόπῳ καθή- 


civil and spiritual magistracies. 319 


, the force of their laws, and particularly the sen- Bi ari: 


any thing 
tence of “Ghake bonds, did not only go through this habitable 
world, but mount up unto heaven. Here you see binding 
and binding; binding on earth, and binding in heaven, 
binding of bodies, and binding of souls, or rather both of 
souls and bodies, &c. .. . Would you also understand how it 
was in their power as lords to forgive debts? where there is 
also a great difference, for they did not forgive debts of 
money but debts of sins, according to what He said, ‘Whose- 
soever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them, and 
whosesoever sins you retain they are retained.’ ” 
After this he shews at large how as magistrates “ they had 
the power of the sword, the sword of the Spirit,’ and could 
“by a word kill as well as make alive again.” And that “they 
had their girdles also, not of leather but truth, that holy spi- 
ritual girdle with which they had their loins always girt*.” He 
also shews “how they had executioners” to chastise, punish, 
and torment, “not men but devils4,” as it is written, “To de- 1 Cor. 5. 5. 
liver such an one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh,” 
and “whom I have delivered to Satan that they may learn 1 Τίπι. 1 
not to blaspheme.” I must also observe unto you, that he ἦν 
set forth in this manner the great dignity and excellency of 


μενοι ταῦτα ἐνομοθέτουν" 7 δὲ τῶν νόμων 
δύναμις, καὶ τῶν δεσμῶν τούτων, οὐχὶ 
τὴν οἰκουμένην μόνον διέτρεχεν, ἀλλὰ 
καὶ εἰς αὐτὸ τὸ ὕψος τῶν οὐρανῶν ἀνέ- 
βαινεν. εἶδες δεσμωτήριον καὶ δεσμω- 
τήριον, τὸ μὲν ἐπὶ γῆς, τὸ δὲ ἐν οὐρανῷ" 
τὸ μὲν σωμάτων, τὸ δὲ ψυχῶν" μᾶλλον 
δὲ καὶ ψυχῶν καὶ σωμάτων" οὐ γὰρ σώ- 
ματα ἐδέσμουν μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ψυχάς. 
ἐν νιν βούλει μαθεῖν πῶς κύριοι ἦσαν καὶ 
ὀφλήματα ἀφεῖναι; καὶ γὰρ καὶ ἐνταῦθα 
πολὺ τὸ διάφορον" ὄψει. οὐ γὰρ ὀφλή- 
ματα χρημάτων, ἀλλὰ ὀφλήματα ἀμαρ- 
τημάτων ἀφίεσαν. ὧν γάρ, φησιν, ἀφῆτε 
τὰς ἁμαρτίας, ἀφέωνται αὐτοῖς" καὶ ὧν 
ἂν κρατῆτε, κεκράτηνται.---Τὰ. Homil. 
de Utilitate Legendi Scripturas in prin- 
cipio Actorum Apost. Op., tom. iii. p. 
% E—78, C.] 

b [After speaking of St. Peter’s 
striking Ananias dead, he proceeds; 
εἶδες πῶς καὶ ξίφος ἔ ἐχουσιν οἱ i ἀπόστολοι. 
ὅταν & ἀκούσῃς Παύλου λέγοντος, ὅτι ἐπὶ 
πᾶσι τὴν μάχαιραν τοῦ πνεύματος, ὅ 
ἐστιν ῥῆμα θεοῦ, ἀναμνήσθητι τῆς ἂπο- 
φάσεως ταύτης" ὅτι οὐδαμοῦ ξίφος, καὶ 
τῷ ῥήματι πληγεὶς 6 ἱερόσυλος ἔπεσεν. 


... τὰ ῥήματα ἀντὶ τῆς μαχαίρας ἐξε- 
νεγκοῦσα εὐϑέως ἐκεῖνον ἀπέσφαξεν. 
and then of his raising Tabitha; θανά- 
του καὶ ζωῆς ἐξούσιαν εἶχον... ἤκουσε 
γοῦν Tis φωνῆς 6 θάνατος καὶ οὐκ ἴσχυσε 
κατασχεῖν τὴν νεκράν.---[ἃ ibid., p. 78, 
Gs 79: 8. 

© [βυύλει μαθεῖν οὖν καὶ τὴν ξώνην 
αὐτῶν; καὶ γὰρ ἐζωσμένους αὐτοὺς ὁ 
Χριστ τὸς ἔπεμψεν, οὐχὶ ἐν «δέρματι, ἀλλ᾽ 
ἐν ἀληθείᾳ" αὕτη ἡ ζώνη ἁγία καὶ πνευ- 
ματικὴ, καὶ διὰ τοῦτό φησιν, περιεζωσ- 
μένοι τὴν ὀσφὺν ὑμῶν ἐν ἀληθείᾳ.--- Id. 
ibid., p. 79, C.] 

4 [ἀλλὰ τὶ βούλει; Kal τοὺς δημίους 
ἰδεῖν... οὐκ ἀνθρώπους ἔχουσιν ἀλλ᾽ 
αὐτὸν τὸν διάβολον, καὶ τοὺς δαίμονα. 

. ἄκουσον γοῦν πῶς μετὰ αὐθεντίας 
ἐκείνοις ἐπέταττεν 6 Παῦλος᾽ περὶ γοῦν 
τοῦ πεπορνευκότος γράφων ἔλεγε" παρά- 
δοτε τὸν τοιοῦτον τῷ Σατανᾷ εἰς ὄλε- 
θρον τῆς σαρκός. πάλιν ἐφ᾽ ἑτέρων βλα- 
σφημούντων τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο πεποίηκε" 
παρέδωκα γὰρ αὐτούς, φησι, τῷ Σατανᾷ 
ἵνα παιδευθῶσι μὴ βλασφημεῖν.---1άὰ. 
ibid., p. 79, D.] 


890 St. Chrysostom; on the power of binding and loosing. 


ΡΙΟΝΙΤῪ or the apostolical office and authority, to revive in the people a 


EPISCOPAL . 
ORDER. 


just idea of the dignity and excellence of the episcopal order, 
it being a received principle in the Church that bishops suc- 
ceeded the Apostles in their spiritual magistracy and autho- 
rity, and were under Christ, as this father saith they were, 
“ spiritual archons and consuls of the Church*.” 

In his fourth Homily on the second chapter of the Epistle 
to the Hebrews, after he had threatened to excommunicate 
those who, after the idolatrous custom of the heathens, hired 
women to weep at funerals, he speaks thus‘: “ But if any 
one is so arrogant as to contemn the bonds wherewith we 
bind, let Christ again be his instructor, who saith, ‘ whatso- 
ever things ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, 
and whatsoever things ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed 
in heaven.? For though we are miserable men, and despi- 
cable as indeed we are, yet it is not to avenge ourselves or 
wreak our anger (that we do this), but that we take care of 
your salvation, and therefore I exhort you to demean your- 
selves with modesty and reverence .... Neither say I these 
things to shew my authority, who do not desire to put it in 
practice, but out of grief and trouble for you. Pardon me 
therefore, let no man despise the bonds of the Church, for 
it is not man who binds, but Christ, who gave us this autho- 
rity, and invests men with this honour. For we would wil- 
hingly have none bound; but when we are compelled to bind 
you must not take it ill, for we never bind with pleasure 
and willingness, but grieving more than they who are bound. 
But if any despise what I say, let him know the day of judg- 
ment will come when he shall find it to be true.” 


* [See above, pp. 316, 317.] 


τῶν ἐκκλησιαστικῶν. ov γὰρ ἄνθρωπός 
a > / 
f [ei δέ τις ἀπαυθαδιαζόμενος κατα- 


ἐστιν 6 δεσμῶν, ἀλλ᾽ 6 Χριστὸς ὃ τὴν 


φρονεῖ, ἀκουέτω τοῦ Χριστοῦ λέγοντος 
καὶ νῦν... ὅσα ἂν δήσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς 
ἔσται δεδεμένα ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ" εἰ γὰρ καὶ 
ἡμεῖς ταλαίπωροι καὶ οὐδαμινοὶ καὶ τοῦ 
καταφρονεῖσθαι ἄξιοι, ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ 
ἄξιοι, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἑαυτοὺς ἐκδικοῦμεν, οὐδὲ 
ὀργὴν ἀμυνόμεθα, ἀλλὰ τῆς ὑμετέρας 
σωτηρίας φροντίζομεν. αἰδέσθητε, παρα- 
καλῶ, καὶ ἐντράπητε. .. οὐ yap ἐξου- 
σίαν ἐπιδείξασθαι βουλόμενοι, ταῦτα 
λέγομεν. πῶς γὰρ οἱ μηδὲ εἰς πεῖραν 
αὐτῶν ἐλθεῖν εὐχόμενοι" σύγγνωτε δὴ, 
καὶ μηδεὶς καταφρονείτω τῶν δεσμῶν 


ἐξουσίαν ταύτην ἡμῖν δεδωκὼς, καὶ κυ- 
ρίους ποῖων ἀνθρώπους τῆς τοσαύτης 
Tims... οὐδένα yap βουλόμεθα εἶναι 
δεσμώτην παρ᾽ ἡμῖν" ... εἰ δὲ ἀναγ- 
κασθείημεν, σύγγνωτε" οὐ γὰρ ἑκόντες, 
οὐδὲ βουλόμενοι, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον ὑμῶν τῶν 
δεδεμένων ἀλγυῦντες, τὰ δεσμὰ περι- 
βάλλομεν. εἰ δέτις καταφρονοίη τούτων, 
ἐπιστήσεται ὃ τῆς κρίσεως καιρὸς ὃ δι- 
δάσκων av’tév.ld. Hom. iv. in Epist. 
ad Hebrzos, cap. 2. pp. 48, D; 49, 
A, B, D.] 


Extract from his work de Sacerdotio on the same point. 321 


So in the fifth chapter of his third book de Sacerdotio, 
he thus compares the power of a king and a priest®: “It is 
true that earthly princes have a power to bind, but bodies 
only, but the binding of the priest toucheth the soul and 
reacheth unto heaven, so that what the priests do here below 
God ratifies above, and confirms the sentence of His servants. 
And what is this else but that God hath given all heavenly 
power unto them? for, saith He, ‘ whosesoever sins ye remit 
they are remitted unto them, and whosesoever sins ye re- 
tain they are retained... What power, I pray you, can be 
greater than this? God hath given all power of judgment 
unto the Son, and I see it all delivered from the Son to 
them, who, as if they were translated into heaven, made 
something above men, and exempt from human affections, 
are advanced to this princely power. ΤῸ be short, if a king 
gives power to any of his subjects to cast men into prison 
and set them free again, he is counted honourable and re- 
garded by all. But he that receives power from God, so 
much greater as heaven is more excellent than the earth, or 
the soul than the body, he seems to some but to have re- 
ceived a little honour, because he knows that some of those 
to whom this honour is committed despise the gift of God. 
Oh shame of this madness! For it is manifest madness to 
despise this so great princely power, without which we can 
neither obtain salvation, nor the blessings promised by God, 
&e.. .. Upon which account priests ought to be feared more 
than princes and kings, and had in more honour than our 
parents [, for they]! begat us of blood and of the will of the 


& [ἔχουσι μὲν γὰρ καὶ of κρατοῦντες 
ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς τὴν τοῦ δεσμεῖν ἐξουσίαν, 
ἀλλὰ σωμάτων μόνον" οὗτος δὲ 6 δεσμὸς 
αὐτῆς ἅπτεται τῆς ψυχῆς, καὶ διαβαίνει 
τοὺς οὐρανοὺς, καὶ ἅπερ ἂν ἐργάσωνται 
κάτω οἱ ἱερεῖς, ταῦτα 6 θεὸς ἄνω κυροῖ, 
καὶ τὴν τῶν δούλων γνώμην ὃ δεσπότης 
βεβαιοῖ. καὶ τί γὰρ ἀλλ᾽ ἢ πᾶσαν αὐτοῖς 
τὴν οὐράνιαν ἔδωκεν ἐξουσίαν; ὧν γὰρ ἄν, 
φησιν, ἀφῆτε τὰς ἁμαρτίας, ἀφέωνται: καὶ 
ὧν ἂν κρατῆτε, κεκράτηνται. τίς ἂν γέ- 
νοιτὸ ταύτης ἐξουσία μείζων ; πᾶσαν τὴν 
κρίσιν ἔδωκεν ὃ πατὴρ τῷ υἱῷ" δρῶ δὲ 
πᾶσαν αὐτὴν τούτους ἐγχειρισθέντας ὑπὸ 
τοῦ υἱοῦ. ὥσπερ γὰρ εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἤδη 
μετατεθέντες, καὶ τὴν ἀνθρωπείαν ὑπερ- 
βάντες φύσιν, καὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων ἀπαλ- 

HICKEs. 


λαγέντες παθῶν, οὕτως εἰς ταύτην ἤχθη- 
σαν τὴν ἀρχήν. εἶτα ἂν μὲν βασιλεὺς 
τινὶ τῶν ὑπ᾽ αὐτὸν ὄντων ταύτης μεταδῷ 
τῆς τιμῆς, ὥστε ἐμβάλλειν εἰς δεσμωτή- 
ριον οὺς ἂν ἐθέλῃ, καὶ ἀφιέναι πάλιν, ζη- 
λωτὸς καὶ περίβλεπτος παρὰ πᾶσιν οὗ- 
Tos’ ὃ δὲ παρὰ θεοῦ τοσούτῳ μείζονα 
ἐξουσίαν λαβὼν, ὅσῳ γῆς τιμιώτερος ov- 
ρανὸς καὶ σωμάτων ψυχαὶ, οὔτω μικράν 
τισιν ἔδοξεν εἰληφέναι τιμὴν, ὡς δυνη- 
θῆναι κἂν ἐννοῆσαι, ὅτι τῶν ταῦτά τις 
πιστευθέντων καὶ ὑπερφρονήσει τῆς δω- 
peas; ἄπαγε τῆς μανίας. μανία γὰρ περι- 
φανὴς, ὑπερορᾶν τῆς τοσαύτης ἀρχῆς, ἧς 
ἄνευ οὔτε σωτηρίας ἡμῖν, οὔτε τῶν ἐπηγ- 
γελμένων τυχεῖν ἔστι ἀγαθῶν. ὥστε ἡμῖν 
οὐκ ἀρχόντων μόνον οὐδὲ βασιλέων φο- 


CHAP. I. 
SECT. III. 


18rd ed. 
“that”} 


322 δέ. Chrysostom on the dignity of the Priesthood, 
pianity or flesh ; but to them we are beholden for our birth from God, 
EPISCOPAL . . 
orver. that blessed regeneration, and true liberty, and gracious 
- adoption, whereby we become the sons of God.” 
So in his fifth Homily de Verbis Isaie*: “ Wherefore it is 
a duty to restrain that unreasonable passion with religious 
reason, which Ozias not doing, transgressed against the 
supreme power of all. For the priesthood is a princely 
power, greater and more venerable than that of the empire. 
Do not tell me of the purple, or diadem, or golden apparel 
of kings, for these are all shadows, and more vain than 
spring flowers .... But if you would see the difference be- 
tween them, and how much the king is inferior to a priest, 
consider the measure of power delivered to them both, and 
you shall see the priest placed much higher than the empe- 
ror; for though the emperor’s throne seems glorious to us 
from the gems and gold with which it is adorned, yet he has 
only the administration of earthly things, nor hath he any 
other authority ; but the throne of the high-priest is placed 
in heaven, and he hath power to judge of things there. And 
who saith this? The King of Heaven Himself in these 
words: ‘ Verily, verily, I say unto you, whatsoever you shall 
bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever ye 
shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.’ What honour 
is comparable to this? Heaven receives the power of judg- 
ing from earth, for the judge sits upon earth, and the Lord 
complies with His servant, and ratifies the sentences above 


βερώτεροι, ἀλλὰ καὶ πατέρων τιμιώτεροι 
δικαίως ἂν εἶεν. οἱ μὲν γὰρ ἐξ αἱμάτων 
καὶ ἐκ θελήματος σαρκὸς ἐγέννησαν" οἱ 
δὲ τῆς ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ γεννήσεως ἡμῖν εἰσιν 
αἴτιοι, τῆς μακαρίας παλιγγενεσίας ἐκεί- 
νη5, THS ἐλευθερίας τῆς ἀληθοῦς, καὶ τῆς 
κατὰ χάριν viobectas.—S. Chrys. de 
Sacerd., lib. iii. c. 5. Op., tom. i. 
pp. 383, C; 384, A.] 

" [διὸ χρὴ συνεχῶς αὐτὴν ἀνακρού- 
εσθαι, καὶ καθάπερ τινὶ χαλινῷ τῷ τῆς 
εὐσεβείας λογισμῷ, τὴν ἄλογον αὐτῆς 
αναχαιτίζειν ὁρμήν ὅπερ ὁ ’OCias οὐκ 
«ποίησεν, ἀλλ᾽ εἰς αὐτὴν τὴν ἀνωτάτω 
παντων ἀρχὴν παρηνόμησεν. ἱερωσύνη 
γὰρ καὶ αὐτῆς τῆς βασιλείας σεμνοτέρα, 
καὶ μείζων ἐστὶν ἀρχή" μὴ γάρ μοι τὴν 
ἁλουργίδα εἴπῃς, μηδὲ τὸ διάδημα, μηδὲ 
τὰ ἱμάτια τὰ χρυσᾶ: σκία πάντα ἐκεῖνα, 
καὶ τῶν ἐαρινῶν ἀνθῶν εὐτελέστερα. 


ἀλλ᾽ εἰ βούλει ἱερέως πρὸς βασιλέα τὸ 
διάφορον ἰδεῖν, τὸ ἑκάστῳ διδομέης ἐξου- 
σίας τὸ μέτρον ἐξέτασον, καὶ πολλῷ τοῦ 
βασιλέως ὑψηλότερα ὄψει τὸν ἱ ἱερέα κα- 
θήμενον. εἰ γὰρ καὶ σεμνὸς ἢ ἡμῖν 6 θρόνος 
φαίνεται ὃ ὁ βασιλικὸς ἀπὸ τῶν προσπε- 
πηγότων αὐτῷ λίθων, καὶ τοῦ περισφίτ- 
τοντος αὐτὸν χρυσίου, GAN ὅμως τὰ ἐπὶ 
τῆς γῆς ἔλαχεν οἰκονομεῖν, καὶ πλεῖον 
ἔχει τῆς ἐξουσίας ταύτης οὐδέν' ὁ δὲ τῆς 
ἱερωσύνης θρόνος ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς ἵδρυται, 
καὶ τὰ ἐκεῖ διέπειν ἐπιτέτραπται. τὶς ταῦ- 
τά φησιν; αὐτὸς ὁ τῶν οὐρανῶν βασι- 
λεὺς, ὅσα γὰρ ἂν δήσητέ, φησιν, ἐπὶ τῆς 
γῆς, ἔσται δεδεμένα ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς" καὶ 
ὅσα ἂν λύσητε ἐπὶ τῆς ys, ἔσται λελυ- 
μένα ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. τί ταύτης ἴσον 
γένοιτ᾽ ἂν τῆς τιμῆς; Gard τῆς γῆς τὴν 
ἀρχὴν τῆς κρίσεως λάμβανει ὁ οὐρανός" 
ἐπειδὴ ὁ κριτὴς ἐν τῇ γῇ κάθηται, 6 


ana the power of excommunication. 323 


which he pronounceth below. Wherefore the priest stands 
mediator betwixt God and man, bringing down blessings 
from Him to us,.and conveying our petitions to Him, by 
which God hath put the emperor’s head under the hands of 
the priest, teaching us that he is a greater prince than he.” 
So in his eighty-third Homily on the twenty-sixth chapter 
of St. Matthew’s Gospel, shewing that the priest ought to 
deny the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist to profane persons, 
saith he', “ Let no Judas, no lover of money be present at 
this table. He that is not Christ’s disciple let him depart 
from it .... Let no inhuman, no cruel person, no uncom- 
passionate man, or who is impure, come thither. I speak 
this to you that administer as well as to you who partake; 
for it is necessary I speak these things to you, that you may 
take great care and use your utmost diligence to distribute 
these offerings aright; for your punishment will be great if 
knowingly you suffer any wicked person to partake of this 
table, for his blood shall be required at your hands. Where- 
fore if any general or governor, or the emperor himself be not 
worthy, repel him, for thou hast a greater power (or authority) 
than he*.” This reminds me of what the holy patriarch 
said in answer to the demand of the emperor, when he 
required him to leave his Church. Palladius tells us he 
refused to do it, saying', “I received this Church from 


¥, ~ / ο a 
δεσπότης ἔπεται τῷ SovAw’ καὶ ἅπερ 


μετασχεῖν, ταύτης τῆς τραπέζης᾽ τὸ 
ἂν οὗτος κάτω κρίνει, ταῦτα ἐκεῖνος ἄνω 


αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῶν χειρῶν ἐκξητηθήσεται 


κυροῖ. καὶ μέσος τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τῆς τῶν 
ἀνθρώπων φύσεως ἕστηκεν ὃ ἱερεὺς, τὰς 
ἐκεῖθεν τιμὰς κατάγων πρὸς ἡμᾶς, καὶ 
τὰς παρ᾽ ἡμῶν ἱκετηρίας ἀνάγων ἐκεῖ, 
ὀργιζόμενον αὐτὸν τῇ κοινῇ καταλλάτ- 
των φύσει. διὰ τοῦτο καὶ αὐτὴν τὴν βα- 
σιλικὴν κεφαλὴν ὑπὸ τὰς τοῦ ἱερέως 
χεῖρας φέρων τίθησιν 6 θεὸς, παιδεύων 
ἡμᾶς, ὅτι οὗτος ἐκείνου μείζων ὃ ἄρχων. 
—Id. Hom. vy. in Oziam, ὃ 1. Op., 
tom. vi. p. 182, B, D, E.] 

i [μηδεὶς τοίνυν ᾿Ιούδας παρέστω" μη- 
δεὶς φιλάργυρος. εἴ τις μὴ μαθητὴς, πα- 
ραχωρείτω ... μηδεὶς ἀπάνθρωπος προ- 
σίτω, μηδεὶς iis καὶ ἀνελεὴς, μηδεὶς 
ὅλως ἀκάθαρτος" ταῦτα πρὸς ὑμᾶς τοὺς 
μεταλαμβάνοντας λέγω, καὶ πρὸς ὑμᾶς 
τοὺς διακονουμένους" καὶ γὰρ ἀναγκαῖον 
καὶ πρὸς ὑμᾶς διαλεχθῆναι, ὥστε μετὰ 
πολλῆς τῆς σπουδῆς διανέμειν ταῦτα τὰ 
δῶρα. οὐ μικρὰ κόλασις ὑμῖν ἐστιν, εἰ 
συνειδότες τινὶ πονηρίαν συγχωρήσητε 


τῶν ὑμετέρων. κἂν στρατηγός TIS ἢ, κἂν 
ὕπαρχος, κἂν αὐτὸς 6 τὸ διάδημα περι- 
κείμενος, ἀναξίως δὲ προσίῃ, κώλυσον" 
μείζονα ἐκείνου τὴν ἐξουσίαν exe1s.— 
Id. Hom. in Matt. Ixxxii. (al. 1xxxiii.) 
§ 5, 6. Op., tom. vii. p. 789, A—C. ] 

k Hence these rules of canon law, 
Lex imperatorum non est supra legem 
Dei, sed subtus.—[ Decretum Gratiani; 
pars i. dist. 10. c. 1.§ 1.] Non licet 
imperatori ... aliquid contra divina 
mandata praesumere.—([Ibid., c. 2. 
See below, p. 327. note a.] Imperiali 
judicio non possunt ecclesiastica jura 
dissolvii—[Ibid., c. 1.] Imperium 
[vestrum suis publice rei quotidianis 
administrationibus debet esse conten- 
tus,] non usurpare, que sacerdotibus 
Domini solum conyeniunt.—[Ibid., ¢. 
5.] 

: [καὶ δηλοῖ τῷ ᾿Ιωάννῃ, ἔξελθε ἐκ 
τῆς ἐκκλησίας. ὃ δὲ ἀντιδηλοῖ, ἐγὼ 


ὙΠῸ 


CHAP, IL. 
SECT. III, 





324 These doctrines acknowledged as the doctrines of the Church. 


picnity or Christ, to take care of the souls thereunto belonging, and I 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


must not relinquish it™. But the care of the city is yours; 
and if I must be gone, force me hence by your authority, 
that I may have an excuse for quitting my post.” 

Thus these two fathers, Gregory and John, who were 
bishops of Constantinople, spake and wrote of the dignity 
of the priesthood, or episcopal office and power, in the im- 
perial city where the emperors were resident: and yet was 
this doctrine never objected against either of them, because 
it was the doctrine of the Church. Had it been a new doc- 
trine, or injurious to the emperor, or against his prerogative 
or any part of it, it would certainly have been taken notice 
of, especially to prosecute the latter, against whom the court 
was ready to take any advantage, for the liberty he took in 
taxing the vices of the great, which procured him the empe- 
ror’s and empress’ displeasure, and [that of] some of the 
greatest of the clergy. This doctrine and these principles 
were answerable to his conduct, and the struggle he had 
with the court and his court enemies for his sacerdotal rights 
and the rights of the Church. In this contest a great part 
of his flock, called from his name Joannites", and almost 
all the bishops and Churches of the empire, adhered to him 
when he was proscribed and deposed by the imperial power. 


παρὰ τοῦ σωτῆρος θεοῦ ὑποδέδεγμαι τὴν 
ἐκκλησίαν ταύτην εἰς ἐπιμελεῖσθαι τῆς 
τοῦ λαοῦ σωτηρίας, καὶ οὐ δύναμαι αὐτὴν 
καταλεῖψαι, εἰ δὲ τοῦτο βούλει, (ἡ γὰρ 
πόλις σοι διαφέρει) βιᾷ με ἐξέωσον, ἵνα 
ἔχω ἀπολογίαν τῆς λειποταξίας τὴν σὴν 
αὐθεντ είαν ---- Δ11Δ411 Episcopi Heleno- 
politani de vita S. Johannis Chrysos- 
tomi Dialogus, cap. 9. S. Chrys. Op., 
tom. xiii. p. 33, A.] 

m So the rule of the canon law, 
[ Decretum ; pars ii. caus. 7, quest. 1, 6. 
8.] Suo jure quis cedere non debet.— 
Quam periculosum sit autem in divinis 
rebus, ut quis cedat jure suo et potes- 
tate, scriptura sancta declarat, cum in 
Genesi Esau primatus suos inde perdi- 
derit, nec recipere id postmodum po- 
tuerit quod semel cessit.—S. Cypr. 
[ Epist. lxxiii.] ad Jubaianum, [p. 137. 
ed. Ben.] Quid ergo, quia et honorem 
cathedrz sacerdotalis Novatianus usur- 
pat, num idcireco nos cathedre renun- 
ciare debemus? Aut quia Novatianus 
altare collocare, et sacrificia offerre 
contra fas nititur, ab altari et sacrifi- 


ciis cessare nos oportet, ne paria et 
similia cum illo celebrare videamur.— 
Id. ibid., [p. 130. ed. Ben.] Nam 
cum unanimitas et concordia nostra 
scindi omnino non debeat, quia nos 
ecclesia derelicta foras exire, et ad vos 
venire non possumus, ut vos magis ad 
ecclesiam matrem, et ad nostram fra- 
ternitatem revertamini, quibus possu- 
mus hortamentis, petimus et rogamus. 
—(Id. Epist. xliv. (xlvi. ed. Oxon.) ad 
Maximum et Nicostratum, p. 58. ed. 
Ben.] See Epist. xlvii. [ed. Oxon. 
Epist. xliii, ad Cornelium, p. 58. ed. 
Ben. | 

® [See Socrates, Hist. Eccl., lib. vi. 
cap. 18, in speaking of St.John Chry- 
sostom, εὐθὺς οὖν πάντες of αὐτῷ προσ- 
κείμενοι, ἐκ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἀναχωρήσαν - 
τες, τὸ μὲν πάσχα ἐν τῷ δημοσίῳ λουτρῷ 
τῷ ἐν Κωνσταντιαναῖς ἐπετέλεσαν. σὺν 
αὐτοῖς δὲ πολλοὶ ἐπίσκοποι καὶ πρεσβύ- 
τεροι, καὶ ἄλλοι ἱερατικοῦ τάγματος. ἐξ 
ἐκείνου τε κατ᾽ ἰδίαν τὰς συναγώγαξ ἐν 
διαφόροις τόποις ποιούμενοι, ᾿Ιωαννῖται 
προσηγορεύθησαν. --- Ἐς]. Hist., tom. ii. 


The testimony of the Latin Fathers to the same point. 325 


CHAP. 1. 


To the authorities of these two great and holy men give 
SECT, III. 


me leave, Sir, to add what is said by Sozomen°® the ecclesias- 
tical historian, who was not of our but your profession’, who 
speaking of the interment of Constantine the Great in the 
Church of the Apostles, concludes thus: “ From this time it 
became the custom for the Christian emperors who died at 
Constantinople to be buried there, and likewise for the 
bishops; the sacerdotal office (or dignity) being of equal 
honour with the regal, and in holy places superior thereto.” 
IV. But from the bishops of the Greek Church let us go secr.tv._ 


to those of the Latin, and see how they speak of the episco- pies 
pal office and power. Cyprian, bishop and martyr, in his ef theres 


fifty-ninth epistle to Cornelius, bishop of Rome, against the the Latin 
schismatics Felicissimus and Fortunatus, hath this expres- pee: 
sion’: ‘‘ There is an end of episcopacy, and of the supreme 
and Divine power of governing the Church, if the violence of 
wicked men becomes terrible to bishops,” &c. In another 
passage he applies to schismatics who reject their lawful 
bishops the words of God to Samuel’: “They have not re- 
jected thee, but they have rejected Me.” And the words of 
our Lord to the Apostles*: “He that heareth you heareth 
Me, and he that despiseth you despiseth Me, and he that 
despiseth Me despiseth Him that sent Me.” There he also 
equals the bishop in place and dignity to the high-priest 
among the Jews, applying to him the words of St. Paul, Acts 
xxii. 5: Principem populi tut non maledicest, in the Latin 


1 Sam. 8. 7. 


p- 337, and Sozomen., lib. viii. cap. 21. 
p. 353.] 

° [Κωνστάντιος. .. βασιλικῶς κηδεύ- 
σας αὐτὸν, ἔθαψεν ἐν τῇ ἐπωνύμῳ τῶν 
ἀποστόλων ἐκκλησίᾳ, ἔνθα δὴ περιὼν αὐ- 
τὸς Κωνσταντῖνος ἑαυτῷ τάφον κατε- 
σκεύασεν. ἀπὸ τούτου δὲ, ὡς ἔκ τινος 
ἀρχῆς ἔθους γενομένου, καὶ of μετὰ 
ταῦτα τελευτήσαντες ἐν Κωνσταντίνου- 
πόλει βασιλεῖς Χριστιανοὶ κεῖνται. ov 
μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπίσκοποι, ὡς καὶ τῆς 
ἱερωσύνης ὁμοτίμου τῆς βασιλείας οὔ- 
ons, μᾶλλον μὲν οὖν ἐν τοῖς ἱεροῖς τό- 
ποις καὶ τὰ πρῶτα ἐχούση». |—Sozomen., 
lib. ii. 6. 84. [ibid. p. 93.] 

P [See Photius, Biblioth. Cod. 30, 
speaking of Sozomen, οὖτος δὲ δίκας ἦν 
λέγων ἐν Κωνσταντινουπόλει. 

a Actum est de episcopatus vigore, 
et de ecclesiz gubernande sublimi ac 
divina potestate, [nec Christiani ultra 


aut durare aut esse jam possumus, si 
ad hoc ventum est ut perditorum minas 
atque insidias pertimescamus. — S. 
Cypr. Epist. lv. (lix. ed. Oxon.) ad 
Cornelium, p. 80. ed. Ben. ] 

τ [Item ad Samuelem, cum a Judzis 
sperneretur, Deus dicit: ‘ Non te spreve- 
runt, sed me spreverunt.’— Ibid., p. 81.] 

5. [Et Dominus quoque in evangelio: 
‘Qui audit vos, inquit, me audit, et 
eum qui me misit; et qui rejicit vos, 
me rejicit, et qui me rejicit, rejicit eum 
qui me misit.’—Tbid. ] 

t [Item in Actibus apostolorum post- 
modum beatus apostolus Paulus &c.... 
‘nesciebam,’ inquit, fratres, quia pon- 
tifex est. Scriptum est enim; Prin- 
cipem populi &c.’...cum hee tanta ac 
talia et multa alia exempla, preecedant, 
quibus sacerdotalis auctoritas ..... 
firmatur &c.—lIbid. ] 


826 St. Cyprian on the Priesthood. St. Ambrose ; 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ oF translation of that Church, “Thou shalt not revile the prince 


EPISCOPAL 


ORDER. 


of thy people.” In another passage he speaks of the bishop 
as “ the vicar of Christ",” and saith, that “ he who makes him- 
self judge of the bishop makes himself judge of God.” He 
also calls bishops “ the stewards of God’,” and saith, that “he 
who is the adversary of the lawful bishop is the adversary of 
God*,” with more to this purpose. I recommend the serious 
perusal of this epistle to you, to inform you better about the 
nature of those things which have been in dispute between 
you and me. 

St. Ambrose saith the office of a bishop “is such an 
honour’, and a dignity so sublime, that it cannot be matched 
by any comparison; and that to liken it to the splendour 
and diadems of princes is a more inferior comparison than 
to compare lead to splendid gold.” In his epistle to the 
emperor Valentinian I., as a bishop he conjured him by the 
Christian faith not to hearken to the petition of his heathen 
subjects’, who desired leave to set up altars to their gods, 
upon which they might sacrifice to them; and said if he did 


" [Neque enim aliunde hereses 
oborte sunt aut nata sunt schismata 
quam inde quod sacerdoti Dei non ob- 
temperatur, nec unus in ecclesia ad 
tempus sacerdos et ad tempus judex 
vice Christi cogitatur: cui si secun- 
dum magisteria divina obtemperaret 
fraternitas universa, nemo adversum 
sacerdotum collegium quicquam move- 
ret, nemo post divinum judicium, post 
populi suffragium, post cdepiscoporum 
consensum, judicem se jam non epi- 
scopi, sed Dei, faceret.—lId. ibid., p. 
82. ed. Ben. | 

v [Cum ille nec minima fieri sine 
voluntate Dei dicat, existimat aliquis 
summa et magna aut non sciente aut 
non permittente Deo in ecclesia Dei 
fieri, et sacerdotes id est dispensatores 
ejus, non de ejus sententia ordinari ?— 
Ibid. ] 

x [Non... ideo adversarius et ini- 
micus major est Christo quia tantum 
sibi vindicat in seeculo.—Ibid., p. 80. 
Tile qui Christi adversarius et ecclesiz 
ejus inimicus ad hoc ecclesie przepo- 
situm sua infestatione prosequitur.— 
Ibid., p. 82. Qui adversarius Christi 
est.—Ibid., p. 89. ] 

Y [ Honor igitur, fratres, et sublimitas 
episcopalis nullis poterit comparationi- 
bus adequari. Si regum fulgori com- 


pares et principum diademati, longe 
erit inferius, tanquam si plumbi me- 
tallum ad auri fulgorem compares.— 
Pseudo-Ambr. jde Dignitate Sacerdo- 
tali, c. 2. ap. S. Ambr. Op., tom. ii. 
App. col. 359, B. See above, vol. i. 
p- 195, notes p, q. ] 

z [Et ideo memor legationis prox- 
ime mandate mihi convenio iterum 
fidem tuam, convenio mentem tuam ; 
ne vel respondendum secundum hujus- 
modi petitionem gentilium censeas, vel 
in ejusmodi responsa sacrilegium sub- 
scriptionis adjungas. .. . Certe si aliud 
statuitur, episcopi hoc #quo animo pati 
et dissimulare non possumus; licebit 
tibi ad ecclesiam convenire: sed illic 
non invenies sacerdotem, aut invenies 
resistentem. Quid respondebis sacer- 
doti dicenti tibi: munera tua non que- 
rit ecclesia; quia templa gentilium 
muneribus adornasti? Ara Christi dona 
tua respuit, quoniam aram simulacris 
fecisti; vox enim tua, manus tua: et 
subscriptio tua, opus est tuum. Obse- 
quium tuum Dominus Jesus recusat 
et respuit, quoniam idolis obsequutus 
es; dixit enim tibi: non potestis duo- 
bus dominis servire.—S. Ambrosii 
Epist. xvii. (xi. ed. Rom.) ad Valenti- 
nianum, Op., tom. ii. col. 826, E; 
827, B.] 


his epistle to the emperor Valentinian I. 327 


grant their petition, “the bishops would neither suffer nor 
connive at it, and that come to the church when he would 
he should either find no priest, or a priest to withstand him. 
What wilt thou answer the bishop when he shall say, ‘The 
Church desires none of thy offerings, who hast adorned the 
temples of the Gentiles with gifts? The altar of Christ 
refuseth thy offerings, who hast made an altar to idols. Thy 
speech, thy hand, thy subscriptions are evidence against 
thee: our Lord Jesus refuses and rejects thy worship, be- 
cause thou hast served idols, for He hath told you you can- 
not serve two masters.’” In another epistle to his sister 
Marcellina he shews what he did when the great officers of 
the court brought him that emperor’s decree to deliver up 
his church to the Arians’: “TI answered,” saith he, “as be- 
came my order, that a church of God ought not to be given 
up by a bishop... The next day,.being the Lord’s day, they 


a Non licet imperatori, vel cuiquam 
pietatem custodienti aliquid contra di- 
vina presumere, nec quicquam, quod 
evangelicis, propheticis, aut apostolicis 
regulis obviet, agere.—| Decret., pars i. 
dist. x. cap. 2. ] 

> Epist. xiv. [Convenerunt me pri- 
mo principes virtutum viri, comites 
consistoriani, ut et basilicam traderem, 
et procurarem ne quid populus turba- 
rum moveret. Respondi quod erat or- 
dinis, templum Dei a sacerdote tradi 
non posse. Acclamatum est sequenti 
die in ecclesia: etiam prefectus eo ve- 
nit; ccepit suadere vel ut basilica Por- 
tiana cederemus. Populus reclamavit. 
Ita tune discessum est, ut intimaturum 
se imperatori diceret. Sequenti die, 
erat autem Dominica (it will be ob- 
served that Hickes confuses these two 
days) . . - symbolum aliquibus compe- 
tentibus in baptisteriis tradebam basi- 
lice. Illic nuntiatum est, &c..... 
populum eo (se. in Portianam basili- 
cam) pergere. Ego tamen manui in 
munere ; missam facere ceepi. Dum 
offero, raptum cognoyi a populo Castnu- 
lum quendam, quem presbyterum di- 
cerent Arriani. Amarissime flere et 
orare in ipsa oblatione Deum cepi, ut 
subveniret, ne cujus sanguis in causa 
ecclesiz fieret: certe ut meus sanguis 
pro salute non solum populi, sed etiam 
pro ipsis impiis effunderetur. Conve- 
nior ipse a comitibus et tribunis ut ba- 
silice fieret matura traditio, dicentibus 
imperatorem jure suo uti; eo quod in 


potestate ejus essent omnia. Respondi, 
si a me peteret, quod meum esset, non 
refragaturum ; verum ea que sunt di- 
vina, imperatoriz potestati non esse sub- 
jecta....His dictis, illi abierunt. ... Man- 
datur denique: Trade basilicam. Re- 
spondeo: Nec mihi fas est tradere, nec 
tibi accipere, imperator, expedit; do- 
mum privati nullo potes jure temerare, 
domum Dei existimas auferendum ἢ 
Allegatur imperatori licere omnia, ip- 
sius esse universa, Respondeo: Noli 
te gravare, imperator, ut putes te in ea 
que divina sunt, imperiale aliquod jus 
habere ; esto Deo subditus; scriptum 
est: que Dei Deo, que Cesaris Cx- 
sari.—Ibid., Epist. xx. (xiv. ed. Rom.) 
ad Marcellinam, § 2. Op., col. 853, A, 
864. ὃ 10. col. 855, A. § 16. col. 857, 

3 

Paulinus in vita 5. Ambrosii, col. 
81, 82. ap. Op.S. Ambr. ed. Par. 1614. 
tom. i. The passage referred to is an 
account of a similar instance of St. Am- 
brose’s firmness when Theodosius or- 
dered that a Jews’ synagogue should 
be rebuilt which had been burnt down 
by some monks, and that the monks 
should be punished. St. Ambrose first 
wrote to the emperor (Epist. xl. tom. ii. 
col. 946, sqq.); then preached on the 
subject in his presence; and refused to 
proceed with the service of the altar 
till the emperor had promised that the 
edict should be recalled.— Vita S. Ambr. 
a Paulino, § 22, 23. ap. S. Ambr. Op., 
tom. ii. App. col. vi. vii. ed. Ben. ] 


CHAP. I. 
SECT. IV. 


328 St. Ambrose’ refusal to give up the Churches to the emperor. 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or came again, when I was officiating, and continuing in my 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


office, I began to administer the holy Eucharist, (missam 
facere cepi,) and while I was offering I understood that one 
Castulus, an Arian presbyter, was seized by the people. I 
began to weep bitterly, and beseech God in the very obla- 
tion that by His help no man’s blood might be shed in the 
cause of the Church, but that my blood rather might be 
shed, not only for the people, but for the wicked themselves. 
They told me the emperor did but use his own right, because 
all things were in his power, and that I should presently 
deliver up the church. I answered, that if they asked for 
any thing that was mine I would not refuse it, but things 
that were God’s were not subject to the emperor’s power. 
With these sayings they went away. It was peremptorily 
demanded, Deliver up the Church; I answered, It is nei- 
ther lawful for me, O emperor, to deliver it up, nor for thee 
to receive it. Thou that hast no right to invade a private 
man’s house, dost thou think to seize the house of God? To 
this it was replied, that all things were the emperor's. I 
answered, O emperor, do not hurt yourself so much as to 
think that you have any imperial right to the things that are 
God’s. Do not exalt yourself; if you would reign long, be 
subject to God; for it is written, ‘Render unto Cesar the 
things that are Cesar’s, and unto God the things that are 
God’s:’” with much more to the same purpose. 

When the young emperor cited him to dispute with Auxen- 
tius the Arian bishop, before him and his counsellors, he 
sent him a letter, in which he speaks thus®: “In answer to 
your summons, I think I may very fitly return what the 
emperor your father, of glorious memory, not only answered 
in word, but established by laws, that in a cause of faith, or 
relating to any ecclesiastical order, he ought to judge who is 
rightly qualified by his office,” (i. e., that priests should judge 


¢ [Cui rei respondeo, ut arbitror, 
competenter. Nec quisquam contu- 
macem judicare me debet, cum hoc 
adferam, quod angustz memorize pater 
tuus non solum sermone respondit, sed 
etiam legibus suis sanxit: in causa 
fidei vel ecclesiastici cujus ordinis eum 
judicare debere, qui nec munere impar 
sit, nec jure dissimilis; hoc est, sacer- 
dotes de sacerdotibus voluit judicare. 


Quinetiam si alias quoque argueretur 
episcopus, et morum esset examinanda 
causa, etiam hee voluit ad episcopale 
judicium pertinere. Quis igitur con- 
tumaciter respondit clementie tux? 
Ille qui te patris similem esse desi- 
derat, an qui vult esse dissimilem ? 
Quando audisti, clementissime impe- 
rator, in causa fidei laicos de episcopo 
judicasse? Ita ergo quadam adulatione 


The emperor had no right to judge in ecclesiastical causes. 329 


of priests ;) “ moreover, that if a bishop should be called in 
question for his manners, the judgment likewise should 
belong to bishops. Which then of us did answer perversely, 
he that would have you like your father, or he that would 
have you unlike him? And when did you hear, most gra- 
cious emperor, that laics judged of bishops in causes of faith ? 
Iam not so depraved with flattery that I should be unmindful 
of my sacerdotal right, and give up that to another, which 
God hath given to me. If a bishop must be taught by a 
layman, it will follow that a bishop must learn of a layman, 
and the layman dispute, and he hear. But if we will con- 
sider the Scriptures, or ancient times, no man can deny 
but that in matters of faith, I say, in matters of faith, 
bishops used to judge Christian emperors, and not emperors 
bishops. When by God’s blessing, you are older, you will 
be able to judge what a kind of bishop he is, that will 
subject the right of the priest to laymen. Your father, 
who by God’s blessing lived till riper years, said, It be- 
longs not to me to judge among bishops; but your grace 
now saith, 1 ought to be judge .. . The life of Ambrose is not 
of that moment*, that for it he should betray the priest- 
hood; one man’s life is not of that value as the dignity 
of all the bishops, by whose advice I have wrote all these 
things.” 

To the same effect, but more at large, speaks another 
bishop, who had the spirit of St. Ambrose, to Justinian the 
emperor; I mean Facundus Hermianensis, in the three last 


curvamur, ut sacerdotalis simus imme- 
mores, et quod Deus donavit mihi, hoc 
ipse aliis putem esse credendum? Si 
docendus est episcopus a laico, quid 
sequetur? Laicus ergo disputet, et epi- 
scopus audiat: episcopus discat a laico? 
Ut certe si vel scripturarum seriem 
divinarum, vel vetera tempora retrac- 
temus, quis est qui abnuat in causa 
fidei, in causa inquam fidei, episcopos 
solere de imperatoribus Christianis, 
non imperatores de episcopis judicare. 
Eris, Deo favente, etiam senectutis 
maturitate provectior, et tune de hoc 
censebis, qualis ille episcopus sit, qui 
laicis jus sacerdotale substernit. Pater 
tuus, Deo favente, vir maturioris vi, 
dicebat: non est meum judicare inter 
episcopos; tua nunc dicit clementia; 
ego debeo judicare... Non tanti est 


Ambrosius, ut propter se dejiciat sacer- 
dotium; non tanti est unius vita, 
quanti est dignitas omnium sacerdo- 
tum, quorum de consilio ista dictavi.— 
S. Ambr., Epist. xxi. (xiii.ed. Rom.) ad 
Valentinianum, ὃ 2—5. col. 860, C. 544. 
§ 13. col. 862, B.] 

4 Paulinus in Vita Ambrosii. [ Hickes 
seems to refer to a parallel expression 
in St. Ambrose’s epistle to Theodosius, 
mentioned above, note b, p. 327, in 
which he said, as Paulinus relates it, 
paratum se esse pro tali negotio mor- 
tem subire, ne dissimulatione sui pre- 
varicatorem faceret imperatorem qui 
tam injusta contra ecclesiam precepis- 
set.—§ 22. ap. Op., S. Ambros., tom. ii. 
App. col. vi. See Epist, xl. ὃ 7. tom. 
ii. col. 948, C, D.] 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. IV. 
Sa 


330 Facundus on the emperor’s interference in spiritual things. 


piety or Chapters of his twelfth book*, in which he plainly distin- 


EPISCOPAL 


ORDER. 


guishes between the office and authority of the bishop, and 
that of the emperor, shewing that it belongs not to the latter 
to determine in matters of faith. I wish you would read 
those chapters, out of which, till you have leisure, let me 
present you with two or three passages’: Cognovit ille (Mar- 
cianus imperator) quibus in causis uteretur principis potestate, 
et in quibus exhiberet obedientiam Christiani .... sicut qui 
meminerat exitus Ozie.... Οὐ hoc itaque vir temperans, et 
suo contentus officio, ecclesiarum canonum executor esse voluit, 
non conditor, non exactor.... Verum non solum Ozie regis 
exitu Marcianus imperator potuit tum moveri, sed Chore quoque, 
Dathan et Abiron; quorum Chore, licet de filtis esset Levi, qua 
ex omni populo Israel electi et sacro templi ministerio fuerant 
deputati ; tamen quoniam simul omnes usurparunt officium 
sacerdotum, ut immolare Deo auderent, quod multo minus est 
quam de fide Christiana decernere, terre dehiscentis absorpti 
voratu, novo et singulari suo exitio stupendum cunctis exemplum 
presumptoribus reliquerunt. Quomodo ergo sibi laico religiosus 
et sapiens imperator crederet impune cessurum, vel sanctorum 
patrum que de fide jam decreta fuerant retractare, vel nova 
ipse decernere ... . Idcirco igitur pie memoria Leo® (im- 
perator) quietem non perturbavit Ecclesiae, quia non suo arbitrio 
ac potestate presumsit doctrine Dominice decreta statuere, nee 
guicquam solis creditum sacerdotibus usurpavit .... Ea vero™ 
que postea Zeno imperator, calcata reverentia ordinis Dei, pro 
suo arbitrio ac potestate decrevit, quis accipiat ? 

But to return to St. Ambrose; the same excellent bishop, 
resolving to animadvert upon the emperor Theodosius the 
Great by his spiritual authority, for delivering up the people 
of Thessalonica, without distinction, to the slaughter of the 


© [The work of Facundus, to which 
Hickes refers, is his Defensio Trium 
Capitulorum, that is, of the three arti- 
cles, which had been allowed by the 
council of Chalcedon, and had been 
recently condemned by an edict of 
Justinian, A.D. 544. The work is 
rather a defence of the council of Chal- 
cedon, which Facundus conceived to be 
condemned; and is directed against 
the emperor’s interference in determi- 
nations of doctrine, It is the substance 
of the answer given by him in the name 


of the bishops of Africa to the emperor 
at Constantinople, A.D. 547, which was 
afterwards enlarged and completed. 
The condemnation of the three articles 
was afterwards passed by the fifth 
general council, at Constantinople, 
A.D. 553. 

f [Facundi Hermianensis, pro De- 
fensione Trium Capitulorum, lib. xii. e. 
3. Bibl. Patr., tom. xi. p. 801. col. 1. 
A—D.] 

s (Id. ibid., p. 803. col. 1. A.] 

h [Id. ibid., c. 4. p. 804. col. 1. A.] 


St. Ambrose repelling Theodosius from the Church. 331 


soldiers, did it if this manner; first, he wrote him an excel- 
lent letter’, with great apostolical freedom, as it became a 
bishop, but with that submission and respect which was due 
to his prince. In his letter he vehemently exhorts him to 
repentance for the Thessalonian massacre, and plainly tells 
him*, if he did not, he could not administer the holy Eu- 
charist if he were present; nor should he himself be ad- 
mitted to offer, before his offering was acceptable to God. 
But the emperor! presuming to come to church before he 
had done penitence, the bishop met him at the porch, and 
after setting before him the greatness of his sin, thus ad- 
dressed himself to him: ‘“ Oemperor, there is one Lord, and 
Emperor of all, who made all things. With what eyes can 
you behold the temple of our common Lord? With what feet 
can you tread upon holy ground? Or how can you lift up 
your hand, dropping with the innocent blood of the slain? 
How can you receive with such hands the blessed body of 
our Lord? Or how can you bear His precious blood to your 
mouth, who shed so many men’s blood with the words of it, 
when you spoke in fury? Be gone therefore, and do not 
aggravate your crime with a new sin; but take upon you 
this band, which the Lord of all doth confirm above™.” 
“This command?,” saith the historian, “the emperor 


vets, ἀποσταζούσας ἔτι τοῦ ἀδίκου φόνου 


i Epist. [li. (lix. ed. Rom.) Op., 


tom. ii. col. 997, sqq. ed. Ben. ] 

k [Offerre non audeo sacrificium si 
volueris adsistere.—§ 13. col. 1000, B. 
Tune offeras, cum sacrificandi acce- 
peris facultatem, quando hostia tua ac- 
cepta sit Deo.—§ 15. ibid. D. | 

1 Theodoret. Eccles. Hist., lib. v. cap. 
18; and Sozom. Eccles. Hist., lib. vii. 
cap. 25. [The passage of Sozomen 
(Eccl. Hist., tom. ii. pp. 315, sqq.) re- 
lates the same events as the narrative re- 
ferred to from Theodoret, which is trans- 
lated by Hickes in the text, and which 
is as follows; ᾿Αμβρόσιος ... . ἀφικο- 
μένον εἰς τὸν Μεδιόλανον τὸν βασιλέα, 
καὶ συνήθως εἰς τὸν θεῖον εἰσελθεῖν βου- 
ληθέντα νέων, ὑπαντήσας ἔξω τῶν προ- 
θύρων, ἐπιβῆναι τῶν ἱερῶν προπυλαίων 
Ἰοιάδε λέγων ἐκώλυσεν" εἷς... ἅπάν- 
των δεσπότης καὶ βασιλεὺς, ὃ τῶν 
ὅλων δημιουργός. ποίοις τοίνυν ὀφθαλ- 
μοῖς, ὄψει τὸν τοῦ κοινοῦ δεσπότου νεών ; 
ποίοις δὲ ποσὶ τὸ δάπεδον ἐκεῖνο πατή- 
σεις τὸ ἅγιον; πῶς δὲ τὰς χεῖρας ἐκτε- 


τὸ αἷμα; πῶς δὲ τοιαύταις ὑποδέξῃ χερ- 
σὶ τοῦ δεσπότου τὸ πανάγιον σῶμα; πῶς 
δὲ τῷ σώματι προσοίσεις τὸ αἷμα τὸ τί- 
μιον, τοσοῦτον διὰ τὸν τοῦ θυμοῦ λόγον 
ἐκχέας παρανόμως“ αἷμα; ἄπιθι τοίνυν, καὶ 
μὴ πειρῶ τοῖς δευτέροις τὴν προτέραν 
αὔξειν παρανομίαν, καὶ δέχου τὸ δεσμὸν, 
ᾧ 6 θεὸς ὁ τῶν ὅλων δεσπότης ἄνωθεν 
γίγνεται σύμψηφος-.---Εἰοο]. Hist., tom. 
iii, pp. 215, 216. The extract below 
in note 0, p. 332, is the continuation of 
this passage. ] 

m This reproof of the emperor Theo- 
dosius, and penance imposed upon him 
by St. Ambrose, is approved by our 
Church, in her Homily of the Right 
Use of the Church.—[Second Book of 
Homilies, Homily i. part ii. p. 162, 
Oxford, 1832, quoted above, vol. i. p. 
160.] 

n Per idem tempus causa Thessalo- 
nicensis Civitatis non minima successit 
tribulatio sacerdoti, cum civitatem pene 
deletam comperisset; promiserat enim 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. IV. 
ee 


332 The contrition of Theodosius ; 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or Obeyed®, for being well instructed in the Divine oracles, he 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 





knew very well what was the duty of the bishop, and what 
was the emperor’s, and returned with sighs and tears to his 
palace. Eight months passed, and on the next Christmas- 
day, as the emperor sat in his palace all in tears, Rufinus, 
one of his great officers, who was familiar with him, came to 
him, and asked him why he wept so much? The emperor 
with bitter sighs and more tears answered Rufinus, ‘ You 
are not sensible of my misery; I sigh and lament considering 
my calamity, in that the Church of God is open to slaves and 
beggars, but its doors and heaven are shut up against me; 
for I well remember the words of our Lord, who plainly 
said, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in 
heaven.’ ‘Sir,’ said Rufinus,. ‘I will run, if you please, 
to the bishop, and entreat him to loose the bands. The 
emperor replied, ‘ You will never persuade Ambrose to do it ; 
1 acknowledge his sentence is just, nor will he ever trans- 
gress the law of God, for fear of the imperial power.’ But 
Rufinus pressing to go, the emperor gave him leave, hoping 


1111 imperator se veniam daturum civi- 
bus supradictz civitatis: sed agentibus 
comitibus occulte cum imperatore, ig- 
norante sacerdote, usque in horam ter- 
tiam gladio civitas est donata, atque 
plurimi interemti innocentes. Quod 
factum ubi cognovit sacerdos, copiam 
imperatori ingrediendi ecclesiam dene- 
gavit; nec prius dignum judicavit 
ceetui ecclesia, vel sacramentorum 
communione, quam publicam ageret 
peenitentiam. Cui imperator contra 
asserebat, David adulterium simul et 
homicidium perpetrasse. Sed respon- 
sum illico est; Qui secutus es erran- 
tem, sequere corrigentem. Quod ubi 
audivit clementissimus imperator, ita 
suscepit animo, ut publicam pceniten- 
tiam non abhorreret.—Paulinus in vita 
S. Ambrosii, col. 82. [ὃ 24. ap. S. Ambr. 
Op., tom. ii. App. col. vii. ed. Ben. } 

° [τούτοις εἴξας 6 βασιλεὺς τοῖς λό- 
yous* (τοῖς yap θείοις λογίοις ἐντεθραμ- 
μένος, ἤδει σαφῶς τίνα μὲν τῶν ἱερέων, 
τίνα δὲ τῶν βασιλέων ἴδια") στένων καὶ 
δακρύων ἐπανῆλθεν εἰς τὰ βασίλεια. 
χρόνου δὲ συχνοῦ διελθόντος, ὀκτὼ γὰρ 
ἀναλώθησαν μῆνες, κατέλαβεν ἣ τοῦ 
σωτῆρος ἡμῶν γενέθλιος ἑορτή. ὁ δὲ 
βασιλεὺς ἐν τοῖς βασιλείοις ὀλοφυρό- 
μενος καθῆστο, τὴν τῶν δακρύων dva- 
λίσκων λιβάδα. τοῦτο θεασάμενος Ῥου- 


φῖνος, μάγιστρος δὲ τηνικαῦτα ἦν, καὶ 
πολλῆς μετεῖχε παῤῥησίας, ἅτε δὴ συνη- 
θέστερος ὧν, προσέλθων ἤρετο τῶν δα- 
κρύων τὸ αἴτιον. 5 δὲ πικρῶς ἀνοιμώξας, 
καὶ σφοδρότερον mpoxéas τὸ δάκρυον, σὺ 
μὲν, ἔφη, Ῥουφῖνε, παίζεις τῶν γὰρ 
ἐμῶν οὐκ ἐπαισθάνῃ κακῶν. ἐγὼ δὲ στέ- 
vw καὶ ὀλοφύρομαι τὴν ἐμαυτοῦ συμφο- 
ρὰν λογιζόμενος, ὡς τοῖς μὲν οἰκέταις 
καὶ τοῖς προσαίταις ἄνετος 6 θεῖος νεὼς, 
καὶ εἰσιάσιν ἀδεῶς, καὶ τὸν οἰκεῖον ἂν- 
τιβολοῦσι δεσπότην" ἐμοὶ δὲ καὶ οὗτος 
ἄβατος, καὶ πρὸς τούτῳ μοι ὃ οὐρανὸς 
ἀποκέκλεισται. μέμνημαι γὰρ τῆς δεσπο- 
τικῆς φωνῆς ἢ διαῤῥήδην φησὶν, ὃν ἂν 
δήσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ἔσται δεδεμένος ἐν 
τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. ὃ δὲ, διαδραμοῦμαι, ἔφη, 
εἴ σοι δοκεῖ, καὶ τὸν ἀρχιερέα πείσω λι- 
παρήσας λῦσαί σοι τὰ δεσμά. οὐ πείσε- 
ται, ἔφη ὃ βασιλεύς. οἶδα yap eye τῆς 
᾿Αμβροσίου ψήφου τὸ δίκαιον" οὐδὲ aide- 
σθεὶς τῆς βασιλείας τὴν ἐξουσίαν, τὸν 
θεῖον παραβήσεται νόμον. ἐπειδὴ δὲ 
πλείοσι χρησάμενος ὁ Ῥουφῖνος λόγοις 
πείθειν ὑπέσχετο τὸν ᾿Αμβρόσιον, ἀπελ- 
θεῖν αὐτὸν ὁ βασιλεὺς κατὰ τάχος ἐκέ- 
λευσεν. καὶ αὐτὸς δὲ ὑπὸ τῆς ἐλπίδος 
βουκοληθεὶς, ἠκολούθησε μετὰ βραχὺ, 
ταῖς ὑποσχέσεσι Ῥουφίνου πεισθείς. av- 
τίκα δὲ τὸν ‘Povdivoy ἰδὼν ὁ θεῖος ᾿Αμ- 
βρόσιος, τὴν τῶν κυνῶν ἀναίδειαν, ἔφη, 
“Ῥουφῖνε, ζηλοῖς. τοσαύτης γὰρ μιαιφο- 


his submission to St. Ambrose. 333 


he himself should follow. But as soon as the divine Am- 
brose, as the historian calls him, saw Rufinus, he severely 
rebuked him, as one of the authors of the massacre: but 
Rufinus continuing to supplicate, and telling him that the 
emperor was ready to come; the divine Ambrose being 
warmed with zeal said, ‘I tell you, Rufinus, before he comes, 
that I will hinder him from entering into the church: and 
if he turns his power into tyranny, I will receive my death 
with pleasure.’ Rufinus hearing this despatched a mes- 
senger to the emperor, to pray him to stay at home, but 
meeting him in the piazza, ‘I will go,’ saith his majesty, ‘and 
bear my just reproach.’ And coming to the bounds of the 
church, he did not offer to go into it, but coming to the 
bishop who was in the chapter-house, he prayed him to ab- 
solve him from his bands; Ambrose told him that his coming 
in that manner was tyrannical, and that he had been trans- 
ported with fury against God, and trodden His laws under 
foot. To whom the emperor replied, ‘I dare not transgress 
the (Church’s) laws, nor contrary to them do I desire to 
enter within the holy doors, but I come to beseech you to 
loose me from my bands, and to consider the mercy of our 
common Lord, nor to keep that door shut against me, which 


our Lord hath opened to all that repent.’ 


To whom the 


bishop thus replied; ‘What penitence will you then shew 


vias γενόμενος σύμβουλος, Thy αἰδῶ τῶν 
/ > i > \ Leu’ a 
μετώπων ametvoas. .. ἐπειδὴ δὲ ὁ Ῥουφῖ- 
νος ἠντιβόλει, καὶ τὸν βασιλέα ἔλεγεν 
ἥξειν, ὑπὸ τοῦ θείου ζήλου πυρποληθεὶς 
᾿Αμβρόσιος 6 θεσπέσιος, ἐγὼ μὲν, ἔφη, & 
« ~ ΄ ε , ~ ε 
Poudive, προλέγω ὡς κωλύσω τῶν ἷε- 
ρῶν αὐτὸν προβῆναι προθύρων. εἰ δὲ εἰς 
τυραννίδα τὴν βασιλείαν μεθίστησι, δέ- 
foum κἀγὼ μεθ᾽’ ἡδονῆς τὴν σφαγήν. 
τούτων 6 “Poudivos ἀκούσας, ἐμήνυσε διά 
τινος τῷ βασιλεῖ τὸν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως σκο- 
mov’ καὶ μένειν εἴσω τῶν βασιλείων πα- 
ρήνεσεν" 6 δὲ βασιλεὺς, κατὰ μέσην τὴν 
ἀγορὰν ταῦτα μαθὼν, ἄπειμι, ἔφη, καὶ τὰς 
δικαίας δέξομαι παροινίας. ἐπειδὴ τοὺς 
c \ ta ’ \ 
ἱεροὺς περιβόλους κατέλαβεν, εἰς μεν 
τὸν θεῖον οὐκ εἰσελήλυθε νεὼν, πρὸς δὲ 
τὸν ἀρχιερέα προσγενόμενος, ἐν δὲ τῷ 
> ~ Ὁ co 
ἀσπαστικῷ οἴκῳ οὗτος καθῆστο, ἐλιπάρει 
λυθῆναι τῶν δεσμῶν. ὃ δὲ τυραννικὴν 
ἐκάλει τὴν παρουσίαν, καὶ κατὰ τοῦ θεοῦ 
/ wv ‘ 
μεμῃνέναι τὸν Θεοδόσιον ἔλεγε, καὶ τοὺς 
ἐκείνου νόμους πατεῖν. ὃ δὲ βασιλεὺς, οὐ 
θρασύνομαι, ἔφη, κατὰ τῶν κειμένων νό- 


μων, οὐδὲ παρανόμως ἐπιβῆναι τῶν ἱερῶν 
προθύρων ἐφίεμαι" ἀλλὰ σὲ λῦσαί μοι 
τῶν δεσμῶν ἀξιῶ, καὶ τὴν τοῦ κοινοῦ 
δεσπότου φιλανθρωπίαν λογίσασθαι, καὶ 
μὴ κλεῖσαί μοι θύραν, ἣν πᾶσι τοῖς μετα- 
μελείᾳ χρωμένοις 6 δεσπότης ἀνέῳξεν. 6 
δὲ ἀρχιερεὺς ἔφη ποίαν οὖν μεταμέ- 
λειαν ἔδειξας μετὰ τοσαύτην παρανο- 
μίαν; ποίοις δὲ φαρμάκοις τὰ δυσίατα 
ἐθεράπευσας τραύματα; 6 δὲ βασιλεὺς, 
σὺν ἔργον, ἔφη, τὸ καὶ δεῖξαι καὶ κερά- 
σαι τὰ φάρμακα, καὶ τὰ δυσίατα θερα- 
πεῦσαι: ἐμὸν δὲ δέξασθαι τὰ προσ- 
φερόμενα. τότε 6 θεῖος ᾿Αμβρόσιος, ἐπει- 
δὴ τῷ θυμῷ, ἔφη, τὸ δικάζειν ἐπιτρέπεις, 
καὶ οὐκ ὃ λογισμὺς τὴν γνῶσιν, GAN 6 
θυμὸς ἐκφέρει, γράψον νόμον τοῦ θυμοῦ 
τὰς ψήφους ἀργὰς ποιοῦντα καὶ περιττάς" 
καὶ τριάκοντα ἡμέρας αἱ φονευτικαὶ καὶ 
δημευτικαὶ μενέτωσαν γνώσεις ἐγγεγραμ- 
μέναι, τὴν τοῦ λογισμοῦ προσδεχόμεναι 
κρίσιν. διελθωσῶν δὲ τῶν ἡμερῶν, οἱ τὰ 
ἐγνωσμένα γεγραφότες τὰ προστεταλ- 
μέναδεικνύτωσαν .κκαὶ τηνικαῦτα τοῦ θυμοῦ 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. IV. 


DIGNITY OF 
EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


Ps. 119. 25. 


1 Adhesit 
pavimento. 
—Vers.Lat. 


334 The penitence and humility of Theodosius ; 


for so great a crime? and by what medicines will you heal 
so great a wound?’ ‘It is your part,’ saith the emperor, 
‘to prescribe that.’ ‘Then,’ saith the bishop, ‘make a law, 
that the execution of the imperial sentences should be de- 
ferred for thirty days, that the anger of the emperor may 
have time to cool, and that their passions being moderated 
by time, they may then consider whether orders are just or 
unjust.’ The emperor liking this proposal presently enacted 
it into a law, and signed it with his hand. When he had 
done this, Ambrose absolved his majesty from his bands; 
and he went into the church, and neither standing, nor 
kneeling, but prostrating his body to the earth, he spoke the 
words of David, ‘ My soul cleaveth to the dust', but quicken 
Thou me according to Thy word.’ Then tearing his hair, 
and beating his forehead, and weeping very much, he begged 
absolution. Then the time coming when the offermg was 
to be made upon the holy table, he got up, and went up 
weeping to the altar; and when he had offered, he stayed 
within the rails, as he was wont to do at Constantinople. 
But the great Ambrose sent his archdeacon to him, to know 
what he meant; and when he replied he only stayed there 
to receive the holy mysteries; he sent him word again, that 
the place within the rails was only for the priests, and none 
else; and therefore bid him go into the common station 
without the rails, and communicate with the rest, for the 


πεπαυσμένου καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν δικάζων ὃ λο- 
γισμὸς ἐξετάσει τὰ ἐγνωσμένα, καὶ ὄψε- 
ται εἴτε ἄδικα, εἴτε δίκαια εἴη. ταύτην ὃ 
βασιλεὺς δεξάμενος τὴν εἰσήγησιν καὶ 
ἄριστα ἔχειν ὑπολαβὼν, εὐθὺς γραφῆναί 
τε τὸν νόμον ἐκέλευσε, καὶ τοῖς τῆς ol- 
κείας χειρὸς ἐβεβαίωσε γράμμασι. τού- 
του δὲ γενομένου, διέλυσε τὸν δεσμὸν 6 
θεῖος ᾿Αμβρόσιος. οὕτως ὁ πιστότατος 
βασιλεὺς εἴσω γενέσθαι θαῤῥήσας τοῦ 
θείου νεὼ, οὐκ ἑστὼς τὸν δεσπότην ἱκέ- 
τευεν, οὐδὲ τὰ γόνατα κλίνας" ἀλλὰ 
πρηνὴς ἐπὶ τοῦ δαπέδου κείμενος, τὴν 
Δαυϊτικὴν ἀφῆκε φωνήν ἐκολλήθη τῷ 
ἐδάφει ἡ ψυχή μου, ζησόν με κατὰ τὸν 
λόγον σου" καὶ ταῖς χερσὶν ἀποτίλλων 
τὰς τρίχας“, καὶ τὸ μέτωπον, καὶ ταῖς τῶν 
δακρύων σταγόσι τοὔδαφος καταῤῥαίνων, 
συγγνώμης ἠντιβόλει τυχεῖν. ἐπειδὴ δὲ 
ὁ καιρὸς ἐκάλει τῇ ἱερᾷ τραπέζῃ τὰ δῶρα 
προσενεγκεῖν, ἀναστὰς μετὰ τῶν ἴσων 
δακρύων, τῶν ἀνακτόρων ἐπέβη" προσε- 


νεγκὼν δὲ ὥσπερ εἰώθει, ἔνδον παρὰ τὰς 
κιγκλίδας μεμένηκεν. ἀλλὰ πάλιν 6 μέ- 
γας ᾿Αμβρόσιος οὐκ ἐσίγησεν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξε- 
παίδευσε τὴν τῶν τόπων διαφοράν. καὶ 
πρῶτον μὲν ἤρετο εἴ τινος δέοιτο. τοῦ δὲ 
βασιλέως εἱρηκότος, ὡς προσμένει τὴν 
τῶν θείων μυστηρίων μετάληψιν, ἐδήλω- 
σεν, ὑπουργῷ τῷ τῶν διακόνων ἡγουμένῳ 
χρησάμενος, ὅτι, τὰ ἔνδον, ὦ βασιλεῦ, μό- 
νοις ἐστὶν ἱερεῦσι βατά" τοῖς δὲ ἄλλοις 
ἅπασιν ἀδύνατά τε καὶ ἄψαυστα. ἔξιθι 
τοίνυν, καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις κοινώνει τῆς 
στάσεως, ἁλουργὶς γὰρ βασιλέας, οὐχ 
ἱερέας, ποιεῖ. καὶ ταύτην δὲ ὃ πιστότατος 
βασιλεὺς ἀσμένως δεξάμενος τὴν εἰσή- 
ynow, ἀντεδήλωσεν, ws οὐ θρασύτητι 
χρώμενος ἔνδον τῶν κιγκλίκων μεμέ- 
νηκεν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν Κωνσταντινουπόλει τοῦτο 
εἶναι ἔθος μαθών: χάριν δὲ ὀφείλω, 
ἔφη, καὶ τῆσδε τῆς ἰατρείας. τοσαύτῃ 
καὶ τηλικαύτῃ καὶ 6 ἀρχιερὲυς καὶ ὃ 
βασιλεὺς διέλαμπον ἀρετῇ. ἀμφοτέρων 


alleged by Facundus to the emperor Justinian. 335 


purple made emperors but not priests. This most faithful 
emperor took this admonition with meekness, and bid the 
archdeacon tell the bishop that he stayed there not out of 
any presumption, but because he had been wont to do so at 
Constantinople. So much grace, saith the historian, shone 
both in the bishop, and the emperor, who told Nectarius 
afterwards, that of all the bishops of the empire, Ambrose 
alone was worthy of that name.” ‘This great example of 
Theodosius, Facundus bishop of Hermiane in Africa proposed 
to Justinian the emperor, as worthy of his imitation, with a 
courage like that of Ambrose, becoming a bishop of God and 
the Church. Si princeps quoque pro suis peccatis intercesso- 
rem vult habere sacerdotem” ... Quod metuens beate recorda- 
tionis major Theodosius imperator, cujus semper memorabilis 
erit in ecclesia Christi memoria, quanquam sepe de magnorum 
barbarorum preliis, et de maximorum tyrannorum triumphave- 
rit : non tamen ex hujuscemodi victoriarum frequentia, in quibus 
Trajano, filio gehenne, comparari non potest, veram meruit 
gloriam, sed de supplici et publica peccati sui penitentia, quam 
expugnato regali fastigio placide atque humiliter antistite Am- 
brosio castigante suscepit, et indictum sibi debite satisfactionis 
tempus ab ecclesie communione remotus implevit. Pie ad- 
modum credens, et sapienter intelligens, quod non ex temporali 
potestate qua fuerat etiam sacerdotibus Dei prepositus, sed ex 
eo pervenire posset ad vitam quod illis erat ise subjectus. 
Unde credendum est quia si nune Deus aliquem Ambrosium 
suscitaret Theodosius non deesset. “If the emperor,” saith 
he, “would have the bishop intercede to God for his sins, he 
must not disdain to let him chastise him for them; so that 


γὰρ ἔγωγε ἄγαμαι. .... τοὺς δὲ δὴ τῆς εὐ. ret., Hist. Eccl., lib. v. cap. 18. pp. 


σεβείας bpous, ods παρὰ τοῦ μεγάλου 
ἀρχιερέως μεμάθηκε, καὶ εἰς τὴν Κων- 
σταντινούπολιν ἐπανελθὼν διετήρησεν. 
ἑορτῆς γὰρ αὐτὸν πάλιν θείας εἰς τὸν 
θεῖον ἀγαγούσης νεὼν, τῇ ἱερᾷ τραπέζῃ 
τὰ δῶρα προσενεγκὼν εὐθὺς ἐξελήλυθεν. 
τοῦ δὲ τῆς ἐκκλησίας προέδρου, Νεκτά- 
ριος δὲ τηνικαῦτα ἦν, δεδηλωκότος, τί 
δή ποτε μὴ μεμένηκας ἔνδον ; στενάξας, 
μόγις, ἔφη, βασιλέως καὶ ἱερέως ἐδι- 
δάχθην διαφοράν" μόγις εὗρον ἀληθείας 
διδάσκαλον" ᾿Αμβρόσιον γὰρ οἶδα μόνον 
ἐπίσκοπον ἀξίως καλούμενον. τοσοῦτον 
ὀνίνησιν ἔλεγχος παρὰ ἀνδρὸς ἀρετῇ 
λάμποντος προσφερόμενος. --- Theodo- 


216, sqq. } 

P [The words of the original are; 
Si princeps quoque pro suis peccatis 
intercessorem yvult habere sacerdotem, 
etiam in suis peccatis castigatorem 
ferre non dedignetur, ut pro illo inter- 
cedens possit audiri, ne dicatur ei quod 
Hieremiz dictum est: ‘ Noli orare pro 
populo hoc, et ne postulaveris misereri 
illius, et non accesseris ad me pro eis, 
quia non exaudiam te?’ Quod metuens, 
&c. as in the text.—Facundi Hermia- 
nensis pro Defensione Trium Capitu- 
lorum, 110. xii. c. 5. Bibl. Patr., tom. 
xi. p. 806, col. 1. B, sqq.] 


CHAP. I. " 


SECT. IV. 


896 Theodosius regarded himself as one of the people. 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or when he makes intercession for his majesty, he may be 


EPISCOPAL 


ORDER. 


SECT. V. 


The dis- 
tinction of 
clergy and 
laity as 
old as the 
Christian 
religion. 





heard, and that God may not say unto him as He did to the 
prophet Jeremiah, ‘Pray not thou for this people, neither 
lift up cry or prayer for them, neither make intercession to 
Me, for I will not hear thee.’ The emperor Theodosius the 
elder, of blessed remembrance, (whose memory will alway be 
celebrated in the Church,) although he triumphed over the 
greatest tyrants, and won many battles over great barbarous 
princes, yet deserved he true glory, not from the frequency 
of such great victories, in which he may not be compared to 
Trajan, the son of hell, but that dreading this, he did humble 
and public penitence for his sin, to which upon the censure 
of his bishop, Ambrose, he submitted his regal greatness, and 
in suspension from the communion of the Church fulfilled 
the time of due satisfaction that was imposed upon him; 
very piously believing and wisely understanding, that he 
was to attain life eternal, not by his temporal power, in 
which he was superior to the bishops, but by subjection to 
them. From whence it is reasonable to believe, that if it 
would please God now to raise up an Ambrose, we should 
not want a Theodosius.” 

V. You see, Sir, by this story, that the great Theodosius 
looked upon himself as one of the laity or people, and by 
consequence as a subject of the Church as much as any 
other man, according to what I laid down in my former 
letters, and that St. Ambrose treated him and Valentinian 
11. as such. Nay, Valentinian I. calls himself a layman 
when he refused to preside in conference between the 
Catholic bishops and the Arians: “For met,” saith he, 


4 [The view referred to is expressed 
in the latter part of the third Proposi- 
tion, sent to Serjeant Geers in a pre- 
vious letter (see above, p. 273, note b.) 
It is in these words: ‘‘to whom (the 
bishops)... He requires obedience of 
all His subjects, of what temporal rank 
or condition soever.’”’ And more ex- 
plicitly in Prop. ix. “that all empe- 
rors and kings, whether absolute or 
limited in the exercise of their royal 
power, become members and subjects 
of (this sacerdotal kingdom) by bap- 
tism, in the same manner as other men 
do.’ ] 

¥ Sozomen. Hist. Eccl., lib, vi. c. 7. 


[ὑπολαβὼν Οὐαλεντινιανὸς, ἐμοὶ μὲν, 
ἔφη, μετὰ λαοῦ τεταγμένῳ, οὐ θέμις 
τοιαῦτα πολυπραγμονεῖν. οἱ δὲ ἱερεῖς 
οἷς τούτου μέλει καθ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς ban βού- 
λονται cvvitwoay.—Hist. Eccl., tom. 
ii. p. 227.) and Hist. Tripart., lib. vii. 
c. 12. { Historiz Ecclesiastice triparti- 
te, ex tribus Grecis auctoribus Sozo- 
meno, Socrate et Theodoreto, ab Epi- 
phanio Scholastico versis, per Cassio- 
dorum Senatorem in Epitomen redac- 
tis, libriduodecim ; apud Cassiodori Op., 
tom. i. p. 807. Rotomagi, 1679. The 
passage in the Historia Tripartita is 
simply a translation of that in Sozo- 
men. ‘The occasion was a request 


Emperors treated simply as laymen, in the ancient Church. 837 


“who am but one of the laity or people, it is not lawful to 
examine such things, but let priests, to whom the care of 
those things appertain, meet to determine them where they 
please.” So Facundus, the forecited bishop, spoke of Zeno 
the emperor as a layman, as you may see by the words in 
the margin‘, as well as by those above cited by me*. And 
the Church treated Philip the emperor’ in no other manner 
than as a common layman after he turned Christian, for 
Babylas the bishop of Antioch, afterwards martyr, “refused 
to let him come to church to pray with the rest of the 
people till he had made a solemn confession of his sins, and 
stood in the order of penitents, and the emperor obeyed.” 
So Constantine the Great*, mindful of his relation to the 
Church, sat as a layman in the great council of Nice, in a 
little throne below the bishops, in which he would not sit 
down till the synod desired him. He considered what kind 
of court and whose tribunal that was where he did appear, 
as it is evident from the speech he made to the bishops, 
upon receiving the accusations which many of them pre- 
sented to him against one another, in these words, part of 


made by the orthodox bishops to the 
emperor to allow a council to be held. 
His answer led to the holding the sy- 
nod of Lampsacus, A.D. 365. | 

* Qui si ea tanquam concilii de- 
creta susciperent, que unius laici es- 
sent composita voluntate, statueret om- 
nia cui de talibus causis judicare non 
competit, illi vero nihil decernerent, 
quibus competit judicare.—Facundus 
Hermianensis, ibid., lib. xii. cap. 3. 
[ Bibl. Patr., tom. xi. p. 803. col. 1, B.] 

« [See above p. 320. ] 

Υ [τοῦτον (τὸν Φίλιππον) κατέχει 
λόγος Χριστιανὸν ὄντα, ἐν ἡμέρᾳ τῆς 
ὑστάτης τοῦ πάσχα παννυχίδος, τῶν ἐπὶ 
τῆς ἐκκλησίας εὐχῶν τῷ πλήθει μετα- 
σχεῖν ἐθελῆσαι" οὐ πρότερον δὲ ὑπὸ τοῦ 
τηνικάδε προεστῶτος ἐπιτραπῆναι εἰσβα- 
λεῖν, ἢ ἐξομολογήσασθαι, καὶ τοῖς ἐν πα- 
ραπτώμασιν ἐξεταζομένοις, μετανοίας 
τε χώραν ἴσχουσιν, ἑαυτὸν καταλέξαι 

. καὶ πειθαρχῆσαί γε προθύμως λέγε- 
ται, τὸ γνήσιον καὶ εὐλαβὲς τῆς περὶ 
τὸν θεῖον φόβον διαθέσεως ἔργοις ἐπι- 
δεδειγμένον. J—Euseb. Hist. Eccl., lib. 
vi. 6. 34, [tom. i. p. 298. This cir- 
cumstance is related in the Chronicon 
Paschale (Alexandrinum) ad Olymp. 
257. (ap. Corp. Hist. Byzant., tom. iv. 


HICKES. 


p- 216. Venet. 1729) on the authority 
of Leontius, who was bishop of Antioch 
in the reign of Constantius; and a si- 
milar story is told by St.Chrysostom, in 
his Liber de S. Babyla et contra Juli- 
anum, § 5, 6. (Op., tom. ii. p. 545, B, 
sqq.,) but scarcely as an historical fact, 
and without mention of the emperor’s 
name. He begins (p. 542, D.) ἐγένε- 
τό τις βασιλεὺς ἐπὶ τῶν προγόνων τῶν 
ἡμετέρων, καὶ τὰ μὲν ἄλλα ὁποίος τις 
ἣν οὗτος 6 βασιλεὺς οὐκ ἔχω λέγειν, 
k.T.A. Pagi considers it to be men- 
tioned by Eusebius on insufficient au- 
thority, since Constantine is spoken of 
by so many writers as the first Chris- 
tian emperor. Philip was emperor A.D. 
244—249, ] 

* [θρόνου δὲ σμικροῦ ἐν μέσῳ τεθέν- 
τος κεκάθικεν, ἐπιτρέψαι τοῦτο τοὺς ἐπι- 
σκόπους αἰτήσας. |—Theodoret., Hist. 
Ecel., Aiba sy Ca), 7:5 LOM, ὙΠ; Ρ. 26. 
παρ et δὲ καὶ 6 βασιλεὺς μετ᾽ αὐτοὺς, καὶ 
ἐπεὶ παρῆλθεν, eis μέσον ἔστη, καὶ οὐ 
πρότερον καθίζειν ἡρεῖτο, πρὶν ἂν οἱ ἐπί- 
σκοποι ἐπινεύσειαν. τοιαύτη τις εὐλά- 
βεια καὶ αἰδὼς τῶν ἀνδρῶν τὸν βασιλέα 
κατεῖχε. |—Gelasii Cyziceni Hist. Conc. 
Nic., lib. ii. c. 6. [Concilia, tom. ii. col. 
164, D.] 


CHAP. I, 


SECT. V. 


DIGNITY OF 
EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


338 Our kings regarded by the Church simply as laymen. 


which I cited before’: “God hath appointed you, as priests 
and princes, (ἱερεῖς τε καὶ apyovras,) to judge and determine 
controversies ; and thought fit to style you gods, as being 
more excellent than other men, according to what is written, 
“1 have said, you are gods, and the sons of the Most High ;’ 
and ‘God standeth in the congregation of gods, He judgeth 
among the gods;’ wherefore it is your duty to pass by these 
common matters, and study Divine things.” Thus the ru- 
bric of our liturgy, which distinguisheth the priest from the 
people or laity”, supposes the king to be one of the latter, as 
much as any other man of the congregation. And in Sta- 
tute 87 Hen. VIII., cap. 172, after he was declared head of 
the Church of England, he is spoken of as a layman in the 
preamble of the act. So I take the king to be compre- 
hended among laymen in a parliament of Edw. I.: “ Lay- 
men have no authority to dispose of the goods of the Church, 
but (as the holy Scriptures do testify) they are committed 
only to the priests to be disposed of.” 

I remember, Sir, you were once a little choaked at my 
discourse in using these words “laity” and “layman,” and 
making such a distinction between the clergy and the people, 
though laity is but another word for people; and then you 
said you had heard that this distinction was first used in the 
Romish Church, in order to subject kings and enslave the 
people to the clergy. This, Sir, is a vulgar error, as I have 
found in conversation, especially among the sceptics, deists, 
and latitudinarians of all sorts, who commonly affirm it with 
malicious reflections upon the clergy, though this distinction 
is necessary in the order of Church government, and was in 


Y Gelasius Cyzicenus, ibid., c. 8.[ col. 
176, A, B. quoted above, note o, p. 305. 
The concluding words are, χρὴ τῶν μὲν 
κοινῶν ὀλιγωρεῖν πραγμάτων, πᾶσαν δὲ 
τὴν σπουδὴν περὶ τὰ θεῖα ποιεῖσθαι. Ἴ1--- 
Theodoret, lib. i. [c. 8. ταῦτα δὲ καὶ τὰ 
τούτοις παραπλήσια, οἷα δὴ παῖς φιλο- 
πάτωρ τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν ὡς πατράσιν προ- 
oépepe.—Hist. Eccel., tom, iii. p. 27. ] 

7 (e.g. In the fourth Rubric before 
the Communion Service, ‘The priest 
standing, &c.... the people kneeling ;”’ 
before the confession ‘‘ both he and all 
the people kneeling ;’’ at the Com- 
munion; “ Then shall the minister first 
receive the Communion in both kinds 


himself, and then proceed to deliver 
the same to the bishops, priests, and 
deacons in like manner, (if any be pre- 
sent,) and after that to the people.” ] 

a {“ Where your most royal Majesty 
is and hath always justly been by the 
word of God supreme head in earth of 
the Church of England... neverthe- 
less the bishop of Rome and his adhe- 
rents ... have ordained that no lay 
or married man should... exercise... 
any jurisdiction ecclesiastical ... which 

. did sound. . . to be directly repug- 
nant to your majestie of supreme head 
of the Church... your grace being a 
layman.” —37 Hen. VIII. ο. 17.] 


Distinction of the laity from the clergy, scriptural. 389 


CHAP, I. 
SECT. V. 


use among the Jews, in whose writings the priests and peo- 
ple are distinguished both in the law and the prophets, and 
in the apocryphal writers. The writers of the New Testa- 
ment use the same distinction, calling the Jewish people by 
the name of λαὸς, from whence our word laity comes. To 
omit other places, the Apostle makes the distinction Heb. v. 
3: “By reason hereof the high-priest ought as for the peo- 
ple (περὶ τοῦ Xaod), so for himself, to offer for sins.” So the 
people of the Jews were not only distinguished from the 
priests in the temple, but from their doctors and ministers 
in the synagogue, as in Acts xiii. 15: “ And after the read- 
ing the law and the prophets, the rulers of the synagogue 
said unto them, Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word 
of exhortation πρὸς τὸν λαὸν, for the people, say on.” So 
John, as a prophet and minister of baptism to the people, 
is distinguished from them, Acts xix. 4: “Then said Paul, 
John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance τῷ 
λαῷ λέγων, saying unto the people.” This distinction be- 
tween the ministry and the people is as necessary in the 
Christian as it was in the Jewish Church; and therefore in 
the New Testament the people or laity are distinguished 
from their presbyters by the name of flock, according to Acts 20.28; 
the notation of which word St. Cyprian defines a Church ἄν pe 
thus”: Ecclesia est plebs sacerdoti suo adunata, et pastori [suo] 

grex adherens*. [Plebs in the Roman law signifies all ranks 

of people, as distinguished from the senators; so Gaius, lib. 

vi. ad Legg. XII Tabularum, 1. 238%. Plebs est ceteri cives sine 

senatoribus. And in the legal sense I doubt not but the holy 

fathers used the word for all ranks and conditions of people, 

as distinguished from the clergy, whose diocesan assemblies 

are called synedria by St. Ignatius®, i.e. in his Syrian phrase 


Ὁ [St. Cyprian’s words are, I]li sunt 
ecclesia, plebs &e.—Epist. ]xix. (Ixvi. 
ed. Oxon.) p.123. ed. Ben. See vol. i. 
p. 1388. note m. ] 

¢ [In the third edition the passage 
ran on, “‘ Wherefore if the enemies of 
priesthood please, they may as well in- 
veigh against us for calling our people 
our flocks. For ‘flock’ is a word which 
distinguishes their people from their 
spiritual pastors, as much as ‘people’ 
distinguishes them from their priests.’’ 
The alteration is made, and the portion 


Z 


of the text following in brackets in- 
serted, according to the Supplement of 
1715, No. 15.] 

4 [Digest., lib. 1. tit. xvi. de Verbo- 
rum significatione, 1. 238. ] 

e {S. Ignat. Epist. ad Magnes., 6. 
6. (Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 18;) ad 
Trall., c. 3. (ibid., p. 22,) quoted above, 
p- 36, notes p, q.; and Epist. Inter- 
polata ad Philadelph., c. 8. ἐὰν συδρά- 
μωσιν eis ἑνότητα Χριστοῦ, καὶ συνε- 
δρείαν τοῦ emicxdrov.—lIbid., p. 80.1 


2 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or sanhedrims, senates ; 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


340 Distinction of the clergy and laity, in Scripture, 


so that in those times it was thought 
no arrogance to make the same distinction of them in the 
Church that was in the state, which Theophilus Ant. de jure 
Personarum expresses thus: Et circa personas cum dicimus, 
hic συγκλητικός senatorius est, aut ex plebe: ὁ δεῖνα συγκλη- 
TLKOS ἐστιν, ἢ ἰδιώτης. Besides, if the enemies of the priest- 
hood please, they may as well inveigh against us for calling 
our people our flocks, as the Apostle did; for ‘flock’ is a word 
which distinguishes the people from their spiritual pastors, as 
much as the word ‘people’ distinguishes them from their 
priests, or the word plebs from the clergy, their ecclesi- 
astical senators.] This distinction between the clergy and 
laity is plainly to be seen Acts iv. 32%, where the people 
are called τὸ πλῆθος: τοῦ δὲ πλήθους τῶν πιστευσάν- 
των, κιτιλ. “The multitude of those that believed (that is, 
the people which believed) were of one heart.” So St. Cle- 
ment calls the laity πλῆθος, 1 Epist. cap. 6; there speak- 
ing of the Apostles he saith", τούτοις τοῖς ἀνδράσιν... .. 
συνηθροίσθη πολὺ πλῆθος ἐκλεκτῶν, “To these men were 
joined a numerous elect people,” or “a numerous people of 
believers.” So in the same epistle he saithi: “The chief- 
priest hath his proper office, and to the priests their proper 
place is assigned, and to the Levites belongs their proper 
ministration, ὁ δὲ λαϊκὸς ἄνθρωπος, but the layman is con- 


£ [καὶ περὶ πρόσωπα μὲν, ὅταν εἴπω- 
μεν, ὁ δεῖνα συγκλητικός ἐστιν, ἢ ἰδιώ- 
Ττη5. --- Theophilus Antecessor, Para- 
phrasis Greca Institutionum, de Jure 


personarum, p. 43. Hage, 1751. ]| lib. i. 


eee 3. 

& So Acts vi. 5. καὶ ἤρεσεν ὃ λόγος 
ἐνώπιον παντὸς Tod πλήθους. Chap. xv. 
12. ἐσίγησε δὲ πᾶν τὸ πλῆθος. Ver. 30. 
συναγαγόντες τὸ πλῆθος. Chap. xxi. 22. 
πάντως δεῖ τὸ πλῆθος συνελθεῖν. Chap. 
xxv. 24. τὸ πλῆθος τῶν ᾿ἸἸουδαίων. --- 
Henr. Stephan. Thesaur., πλῆθος, mul- 
titudo, i. e. multitudo popularis, seu 
turba, plebs, vulgus, (quam significa- 
tionem inter alias habet et dxAos,... 
item of πολλοὶ, quibus opponuntur of 
ὀλίγοι. .. .] Thucyd., lib.» v. .c. 84. 
πρὸς μὲν “πὸ πλῆθος ἘΠ ἤγαγον, ἐν δὲ 
ταῖς ἀ ἀρχαῖς, καὶ τοῖς ὁλίγοις λέγειν ἐκέ- 
λευον περὶ ὧν ἥκουσιν.---ἰ Steph. Thes., 
tom. vi. col. 7701.] 

h [S. Clem. Rom. Ep. i. ad Cor. § 6. 


Patr. Apost., tom. 1. Ῥ. 151. ] 

[τῷ γὰρ ἀρχιερεῖ ἰδίαι λειτουργίαι 
δεδομέναι εἰσι, καὶ τοῖς ἰερεῦσιν ἴδιος ὁ 
τόπος προστέτακται, καὶ λευΐταις ἰδίαι 
διακονίαι ἐπίκεινται" ὃ λαϊκὸς ἄνθρωπος 
τοῖς λαϊκοῖς πρυστάγμασιν δέδεται.--- 
Ibid., § 40. p. 170. ] 

Κ Tbid., cap. 40; where Dr. Fell writes 
most judiciously and learnedly on the 
place: λαϊκὸς ἄνθρωπος Nulla tam 
addicta, tam misera servitus est, quam 
δουλεύοντος τῇ ὑποθέσει. Alias viri 
doctissimi Salmasius et Seldenus, ut 
alios minorum gentium criticos pra- 
teream, Calvini aut Erasti placitis 
addictos, nunquam tam graviter in arte 
quam profitebantur lapsi essent, ut di- 
cere sustinerent ‘olim presbyteros fuisse 
laicos, et laici vocem, quatenus clero 
contradistinguitur, serius in ecclesia 
obtinuisse.' Ignatii loca non affero, 
siquidem novatores, quando ejus aucto- 
ritate premuntur, breviter se expediunt, 


in the Apostolical Fathers, and the Constitutions. 541 


fined to lay matters.” This distinction of laity and clergy, 
at which our enemies are so offended, descended from these 
early times to all other ages of the Church, as is plain from 
almost all the Epistles of St. Ignatius, where also the people 
of all ranks, in distinction from bishops, priests, and dea- 
cons, are called πλῆθος,, (which Hesychius glosses by δῆμος, 
“the people™,” as in Aristotle’s Politics, lib. vi. τέσσαρα δὲ μέρη 
τοῦ πλήθους, K.T-r." “ there are four sorts of the people.”) In 
his Epistle to the Ephesians®, where there were great num- 
bers of Christian people, he calls them πολυπληθίαν, “ the 
numerous laity.” He likewise calls them πλήρωμα, as the 
word signifies a body of people in a city, or of men in an 
army, for so the word is used by Aristotle, in the Politics, 
lib. iii. ἢ πλείους μὲν ἑνὸς, μὴ μέντοι δυνατοὶ πλήρωμα παρα- 
σχέσθαι πόλεως, “Though they are more, yet they are too 
few to make a just number of people for a city.” Thus in 
the prayer of intercession at the holy Eucharist extant in 
the twelfth chapter [of the eighth book] of the Apostolical 
Constitutions, after interceding for all the ecclesiastical 
orders’, as bishops, &c., then follows the intercession of the 
Church ὑπὲρ τῶν λαϊκῶν “ for the laics.” And at the latter 


dicendo Wevderiypapoy eum, aut inter- 


k.7.A. 5. Ignat. Epist. ad Ephes. ὃ 1. 
polatum.— Fell, Annot. ad loc. ibid., 


Patr. Apost., tom. ii. p. 12.] 


p- 171.] 

1S. Ignat. c. 8. Ep. ad Smyrn, [ Patr. 
Apost., tom. ii. p. 36.] ὅπου ἂν φανῇ 6 
ἐπίσκοπος, ἐκεῖ τὸ πλῆθος ἔστω.--ἰ[ Ad 
Magnes., 6. 6. ibid., p. 18.] τὸ πᾶν πλῆ- 
θος ἐθεώρησα ἐν πίστει καὶ ἀγάπῃ.--- 
ad Trall. [c. 1. ibid., p. 22.] Πολύ- 
Bios ὃ ἐπίσκοπος ὑμῶν... ὥστε μὲ Td 
πᾶν πλῆθος ὑμῶν ἐν αὐτῷ θεωρῆσαι.--- 
Ibid., [c. 8. p. 23.] μὴ ἀφορμὰς δίδοτε 
τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, ἵνα μὴ δι’ ὁλίγους ἄφρονας 
τὸ ἐν θεῷ πλῆθος βλασφημῆται. 

m [There is a slight inaccuracy in 
this statement. Hesychius says, πλῆ- 
os" ἀθροισμὸς, ὄχλος, but just below 
πληθύς" ὄχλος, Sijuos.—Hesychii Lexi- 
con in yoc., tom. ii. col. 978. ] 

® [ἐπειδὴ τέτταρα μέν ἐστι μέρη μά- 
λιστα τοῦ πλήθους, γεωργικὸν, βάναυ- 
σον, ἀγοραῖον, θητικὸν, τέτταρα δὲ τὰ 
χρήσιμα πρὸς πόλεμον, K.T.A.—Arist. 
Pol., lib. vi. ο. 7. § 1. Op., tom. x. p. 
177, Oxon. 1837. | 

ο [ἐπεὶ οὖν Thy πολυπληθίαν ὑμῶν ἐν 
ὁνόματι θεοῦ ἀπείληφα ἐν ᾿Ονησίμῳ, 


P [Ἰγνάτιος, 6 καὶ θεοφόρος, τῇ εὺ- 
λογημένῃ ἐν μεγέθει θεοῦ πατρὸς (καὶ) 
πληρώματι, τῇ προωρισμένῃ, κ. τ.λ. TH 
ἐκκλησίᾳ. |—Id. Epist. ad Eph. In- 
script. [ibid., p. 11.--- Ἰγνάτιος... ἐκ- 
κλησίᾳ ayia... ἣν ἀσπάζομαι ἐν τῷ 
πληρώματι, (cujus omnia saluto mem- 
bra.) |—Id. Epist. ad Trall. Inscript. 
(ibid, p. 21.] 

4 [Arist. Polit., lib. iii. c. 13. § 13. 
p- 83. ] 

τ [ert προσφέρομέν σοι καὶ ὑπὲρ πάν- 
τῶν τῶν ἀπ᾽ αἰῶνος εὐαρεστησάντων σοι 
ἁγίων" πατριαρχῶν" προφητῶν" δικαίων" 


ἀποστόλων: μαρτύρων᾽ ὁμολογητῶν" 
ἐπισκόπων: πρεσβυτέρων διακόνων" 
ὑποδιακόνων᾽' ἀναγνωστῶν. ψαλτῶν" 


παρθένων" χηρῶν" λαϊκῶν καὶ πάντων 
ὧν αὐτὸς ἐπίστασαι τὰ d6vdéuara.—Const. 
Apost., lib. viii. ec. 12. Concilia, tom. 
i. col. 481, C. It is to be observed 
that these are intercessions (with the 
offering of the Eucharistic sacrifice) 
for the departed. ] 


CHAP, I. 


SECT. VY. 


342 Distinction of laity & clergy in St. Cypr., Tert., & Orig. 


pienity or end of the [thirteenth]* chapter in the directions for the 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 


orderly distribution of the holy mysteries, it is saidt, “ After 
this let the bishop receive, then the presbyters, &c., and 
then let mas ὁ λαὸς, all the laity, receive in order, with re- 
verence and devotion.” In this chapter also we find πλή- 
ρωμα used, as in Ignatius’ epistles for the people, as dis- 
tinguished from Church ministers, in this prayer"; “ Let us 
pray for this Church, and ὑπὲρ τοῦ λαοῦ, the people of it, 
for the universal episcopate and the whole presbytery, &c. ; 
and παντὸς Tov πληρώματος τῆς ἐκκλησίας, and for all the 
people of the Church.” But to give an example or two 
more, we read in St. Cyprian’s thirtieth Epistle’, Cum episco- 
pis, presbyteris, diaconis, confessoribus, pariter ac adstantibus 
laicis. So Epist. lix. p. 1385*, Viderint laici hoc quomodo cu- 
rent ; sacerdotibus major labor incumbit. In other epistles 
he calls the laity, as distinguished from the clergy, plebs and 
populus, as in Epist. lv.Y, Cum Trophimo pars maxima plebis 
abscesserat. So in Epist. xlix.2, Ceteros cum ingenti populi 
suffragio recepimus. So before him Tertullian, de Prescript. 
Heret. c. 41, Hodie presbyter, qui cras laicus, nam et laicis 
sacerdotalia munera injungunt. So de Fuga in Persecutione, 


ο. 110, 


Sed quum diaconi, presbyteri, et episcopi fuyiunt, quo- 


modo laicus intelligere poterit, qua ratione dictum, ‘ Fugite de 


civitate in civitatem ?’ 
disciplina precedit in laicis. 


So de Monogamia, 11°. 
[This distinction is also to be 


Si non hec 


read in Origen’s fifth tract upon Matth. (of the Basil edit. 
1571, p. 58°), Christum autem ecclesie caput esse, non ego, sed 


8 [In the third edition ‘ twelfth” 
was printed by mistake. ] 

t [καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο μεταλαμβανέτω ὃ 
ἐπίσκοπος" ἔπειτα οἱ πρεσβύτεροι, καὶ 
οἱ ψάλται, καὶ οἱ ἀσκηταὶ, καὶ ἐν ταῖς 
γυναιξὶν at διακόνισσαι, καὶ αἱ παρθένοι, 
καὶ αἱ χῆραι" εἶτα τὰ παιδία, καὶ τότε 
πᾶς ὃ λαὺς κατὰ τάξιν μετὰ αἰδοῦς καὶ 
evAaBelas,—Ibid., c. 13. col. 484, E.] 

« [ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ταύτης καὶ παν- 
τὸς τοῦ λαοῦ δεηθῶμεν: ὑπὲρ πάσης 
ἐπισκοπῆς, παντὸς πρεσβυτερίου, πάσης 
τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ διακονίας καὶ ὑπηρεσίας, 
παντὸς τοῦ πληρώματος τῆς ἐκκλησίας. 
—Ibid., supra, B. | 

¥ [Cleri Romani ad Cyprianum, ap. 
S. Cyprian. Epist. xxxi. (xxx. ed. 
Oxon.) p. 43, ed. Ben. | 

* [The whole passage is; Viderint 


laici hoc quomodo curent. Sacerdo- 
tibus labor major incumbit in asserenda 
et procuranda Dei majestate, ne quid 
videamur in hae parte negligere.—S. 
Cypr. Epist. lv. (lix. p. 135. ed. Oxon.) 
ad Cornelium, p. 86. ed. Ben. | 

y [S. Cypr. Epist. lii. (lv. ed. Oxon. ) 
ad Antonianum, p. 69. ed. Ben. 

z [Cornelii Epist. ad Cypr. ap. S. 
Cypr. Epist. xlvi. (xlix. ed. Oxon.) p. 
61. ed. Ben. | 

4 [Tertull. Op., p. 217, C.] 

> [Ibid., p. 540, D.] 

© [Ibid., p. 531, D.] 

4 [Origenis Comment. in Matth., 
tomus xiii. ὃ 24. Op., tom. iii. p. 603. 
ed. Ben. This portion of the com- 
mentary is extant only in the old Latin 
version. | 


No diminution of the dignity of sovereigns implied. 848 


Apostolus intellexit: Sacerdotes autem rationabiliter possunt 
dici ecclesia oculus, quoniam et speculatores habentur ; diaconi 
autem ceterique ministri, manus. Populum autem esse pedes 
ecclesie, το. You may also find this distinction in the 
descriptions of the most ancient Christian Churches, where 
there were distinct places for the clergy and the people, and 
the throne in which the bishop sat in the midst of the clergy 
was esteemed the most sacred and honourable seat, and of 
greater dignity than that of the emperor, as you may see in 
Du Fresne’s Constantinopolis Christiana, lib. 111. cap. 42, 49°. 
Sir, I the rather observe this, because you, and I knew one of 
the twelve judges who took it ill that he was not placed in 
the bishop’s seat to hear sermon, as being the most honour- 
able in the body of the Church. And as this distinction 
hath been used in all the ages of Christianity, so it is just, 
and founded in the constitution of the Church, which, as I 
have shewed by a cloud of witnesses, is a spiritual society, m 
which, by Christ’s appointment, the clergy are superiors, and 
the laity or people of all degrees subjects. And as it is no 
diminution of the clergy and their spiritual dignity to be 
reckoned, as indeed they are, a part of the people, as the 
people are distinguished from the prince, so it is no diminu- 


tion of the dignity of emperors, kings, and princes, and tem- ~ 


poral magistrates, to be reckoned among the laity or people, 
as the people are distinguished from the clergy, whom Christ 
hath set over them in His kingdom. If it were not to en- 
large too much upon this distinction, I could shew it abun- 
dantly out of the councils, as where they speak of the 


e [This passage is inserted from the 
Supplement of 1715, No. 16.] 

£ [Chap. 42. In the description of 
the church of St. Sophia, on the ‘Sedes 
Imperatoris ;’ after the account of St. 
Aibrose’s preventing Theodosius from 
remaining in the Sacrarium (see above, 
pp- 384, 335); it is said from Sozo- 
men, Imperatori in ecclesia locum as- 
signavit ante sacrarii cancellos, ita ut 
populum imperator, imperatorem or- 
dine sedis sacerdotes antecederent. . . 
addit Theophanes ab eo tempore mo- 
rem hunce inyaluisse, ut deinceps im- 
peratores extra Bema cum reliqua plebe 
consisterent: Du Fresne, Constantino- 
polis Christiana, p. 24, D, E. (p. 187. 
ed. Par.) ap. Corpus Hist. Byzant., 


tom. xxiv. Venet. 1727.—and cap. 49. 
In tres (partes) . .. templum dividitur, 
βῆμα scilicet, ναὸν... et narthecem 
... Locum templi sanctissimum . . 
βῆμα nuncupant ... cumque Bema so- 
lis sacerdotibus ingredi vel in eo sedere 
fas esset, inde qui ei inserviebant dicti 
of ἀπὸ τοῦ βήματος, kK. T.A.—Ibid., p. 
27, A. (p. 42. ed. Par.) ] 

& Can. Apost. 10, 17, 40, 43, 49, 
61, and so in the other canons which 
are not of equal authority, viz. 52, 75, 
76. [The numbering of the Apostolical 
canon which Hickes follows in these 
references, is that of Cotelerius, (Patr. 
Apost., tom. i. pp. 442, sqq.) followed 
by Johnson in the Clergyman’s Vade 
Mecum, (vol. 11. p. 2, sqq. See his 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. V. 


DIGNITY OF 
EPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 


SECT. VI. 
Of the 


mutual 
relations of 
the spiri- 
tual ‘and 
temporal 
authorities. 


344 Ps. xlv. 16. to be understood of the Apostles and bishops, 


clergy and people together, or reducing the former to lay 
communion; but I hope I have said what is sufficient to 
convince you of the reason and antiquity of it, and then I 
have said enough. 

VI. I might, to justify myself, proceed to examine 
St. Hierome and St. Augustine as particularly as I have 
done St. Ambrose; but hoping I have said enough in my 
vindication, I will only tell you that they both interpret the 
sixteenth verse of the forty-fifth Psalm, of the Apostles, and 
their successors the bishops: “Instead of thy fathers thou 
shalt have children whom thou mayest make princes in all 
the earth.” Pro patribus tuis nati sunt tibi filii, constitues 
eos principes super omnem terram. Upon which words saith 
the former’; “O Church! the Apostles were thy fathers 
because they begat thee, but now because they are departed 
this world thou hast in their place thy sons the bishops, 
whom thou hast constituted, and these are also thy fathers 
because thou art governed by them. And they are princes 
of the Church in all parts of the earth, whithersoever the 


Gospel is come.” 


‘instead of thy fathers thou shalt have sons’? 


Preface, p. 2.) The passages are, εἴ τις 
κληρικὸς, ἢ λαϊκὸς, ἀφωρισμένος, ἤτοι 
ἄδεκτος, x. T.A.—Canon Apost., xii. (x. 
Cotel.) Concil., tom. i. col. 28, B. εἴ 
Tis κληρικὸς by" k.7.A.,.. . καθαιρείσθω 
- «- λαϊκὸς ἄφοριξζέσθω ἔτη Tpla.—Can. 
XXii. xxiii. (xvii. Cotel.) ibid., col. 29, 
B. εἴ tis λαικὸς. k.7.A.—Can. xvii. 
(xl. Cotel.) ibid., col. 36, B. εἴ τις 
ἐπίσκοπος, ἢ πρεσβύτερος, ἢ διάκονος, 
ἢ bAws τοῦ καταλόγου τοῦ ἱερατικοῦ, 
K.T.A.... καθαιρείσθω, καὶ τῆς ἐκκλη- 
σίας ἀποβαλλέσθω, ὡσαύτως καὶ λαϊκός. 
—Can. 1. (xliii. Cotel.) ibid., col. 36, 
D. εἴ τις κληρικὸς, k.T.A... « ἄφορι- 
ζέσθω. ὡσαύτως καὶ Aaikds.—Can. lvi. 
(xlix. Cotel.) ibid., col. 37, Β. εἴ τις 
ἐπίσκοπος, ἢ πρεσβύτερος, ἢ διάκονος ἢ 
ἀναγνώστης, ἢ ψάλτης τὴν ἁγίαν τεσ- 
σερακοστὴν (τοῦ πάσχα) οὐ νηστεύει, 
ἢ τετράδα, ἢ παρασκευὴν, καθαιρείσθω" 
ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ δι’ ἀσθενείαν σωματικὴν ἐμ- 
ποδίζοιτο" εἰ δὲ λαϊκὸς εἴη, ἀφοριζέσθω. 
—Can. Ixviii. (Ixi. Cotel.) ibid., col. 
40, B. ef τις τὰ ψευδεπίγραφα τῶν 
ἀσεβῶν βιβλία, ὡς ἅγια, ἐπὶ τῆς ἐκκλη- 
σίας δημοσιεύει... καθαιρείσθω.---ΟΔῃ. 
lix. (111. Cotel.) ibid., col. 87, C. εἰ 
μὲν κληρικὸς, καθαιρείσθω" εἰ δὲ λαϊκὸς, 


So the latter’: “ What doth this mean, 


The Apo- 


apopiSéoOw.—Can. Ixxxiii. (Ixxv. Co- 
tel.) ibid., col. 44, A. ἔστω δὲ ὑμῖν 
πᾶσι κληρικοῖς καὶ λαικοῖς βιβλία σε- 
βάσμια καὶ ἅγια, x.7.A.—Can. ᾿χχχὶν. 
(Ixxvi. Cotel.) ibid. ] 

h [Fuerunt, o ecclesia, apostoli pa- 
tres tui: quia ipsite genuerunt. Nune 
autem quia illi recesserunt a mundo, 
habes pro his episcopos filios qui a te 
creati sunt. Sunt enim et hi patres 
tui: quia ab ipsis regeris, ... Consti- 
tuit Christus sanctos suos super omnes 
populos. In nomine enim Domini 
dilatatum est Evangelium in omnibus 
finibus mundi: in quibus principes 
ecclesiz, id est, episcopi, constituti 
sunt.—Breviarium in Psalterium, S. 
Hieronymo falso ascriptum, in Ps. xliy. 
17. S. Hieron. Op., tom. vii. App. col. 
123. ] 

i [Quid est, ‘Pro patribus tuis nati 
sunt tibi filii?” Patres missi sunt Apo- 
stoli, pro Apostoli filii nati sunt tibi, 
constituti sunt episcopi ... Hee est 
Catholica Ecclesia: filii ejus constituti 
sunt principes super omnem terram, 
&e.—S. Aug. Enarr. in Psalm, xliy. 17. 
Op., tom, iy. col. 398, A, C.] 


as by St. Jerome, St. Augustine, and Eusebius. 345 


stles were sent as fathers unto thee, and instead of the 
Apostles sons are born to thee, who are made bishops. 
This is the Catholic Church, whose sons are made princes 
in all the earth.” Optatus Milevitanus calls bishops api- 
ces et principes of the ecclesiastical economy, lib. 1. p. 15*. 
And so Simeon Thessalonicensis de Grecorum Ordinationi- 
bus, which is in Morinus de sacris Ecclesie ordinationibus, 
pars ii. p. 106]: καὶ οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς δὲ, x.7.d. “and bishops, 
(or chief priests) upon the account of their power and 
principalities, are anointed with the grace of the Holy Spi- 
rit: saith the Scripture, ‘Thou shalt make them princes 
over all the earth.” And he (the archbishop) sanctifies 
him (the consecrated bishop) as the ancient chief-priests, 
Melchisedec, Aaron, and Samuel, and as those hierarchs of 
grace,’ &c. But to carry this spiritual sense of this place 
unto a much higher original, Eusebius Czsariensis in his 
commentary on Ps. xly. 17, saith™, “ Aquila renders it thus: 
‘Instead of thy fathers thou shalt have sons ;? but Sym- 
machus thus: ‘Instead of thy fathers thou hast had sons.’ 
But this is the meaning of the place: thy sons, who are born 
in thee, and from thee, shall be to thee for fathers, for thou 
shalt have those for thy fathers, whom thou thyself hast 
‘begotten. But you will understand how this was fulfilled, if 
you consider how the Gentile strangers coming to the 
Church, and regenerated in her, become her sons, and grow- 
ing great proficients, are constituted her fathers, being pro- 
moted to places of government in her, and chosen to the 


The 


k [S. Optati Milev. de Schism. Do- 
natist, lib. 1. c. 13. p. 11. ed. Par. 1700; 
quoted above, p. 35, note k. Hickes’ 
reference is to an edition of the works 
of Optatus and Facundus Hermianen- 
sis, Priorii. Par. 1679. ] 
ie: | [καὶ of ἀρχιερεῖς δὲ διὰ τὴν ἐξου- 
σίαν καὶ τὴν ἀρχὴν τοῦ πνεύματος τῇ 
χάριτι χριόμενοι, καταστήσεις γὰρ αὐ- 
τούς, φησιν, ἄρχοντας ἐπὶ πᾶσαν τὴν 
γήν᾽ ἁγιάζει δὲ τοῦτον ὡς οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς" 
καὶ τοὺς πάλαι μὲν ἐκείνους τὸν Μελ- 
χισεδὲκ, τὸν ᾿Ααρών τε καὶ Σαμουὴλ, 
ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς ἀποστόλους καὶ ἱεράρχας 
τῆς χάριτος, k.7.A.—Symeonis Thess. 
Archiep. de Sacris Ordination., cap. 7. 
Ritus omnes ordinationis et consecra- 
tionis episcopatis, &c.—ap. Morini de 
Sacris Ecclesiz Ordinationibus, pars 


ii. p. 130, Ὁ. ed. 2. Antw. 1685. 
first edition, to which Hickes’ reference 
is made, was published at Paris, 1655. 
Symeon’s work is also contained in the 
Bibl. Patr., tom. iii. Par. 1624. ] 

m [ἀντὶ τῶν πατέρων σου ἐγεννήθη- 
σάν σοι υἱοί. τούτων τὴν διάνοιαν σα- 
φέστερον ἀποδεδώκασιν οἱ λοιποί. ὃ μὲν 
᾿Ακύλας εἰπὼν, ἀντὶ τῶν πατέρων σου 
ἔσονταί σοι υἱοί: 6 δὲ Svupaxos, ἂντὶ 
πατέρων ἐγένοντο viol σου. ἣ δὲ ἑρμη- 
νεία τοῦ λόγου ταύτην ἔχει τὴν διάνοιαν" 
οἱ viot σου οἱ ἐν σοὶ καὶ ὑπὸ σου γὙεγε- 
νημένοι, ἀντὶ πατέρων γενήσονταί σοι. 
ἕξεις yap αὐτοὺς πατέρας ods αὐτὴ γε- 
γέννηκας. νοήσεις δὲ τοῦ λόγου τὸ ἀπο- 
τέλεσμα, ἐπιστήσας ὕπως οἱ ἐξ ἐθνῶν 
ἀλλόφυλοι προσέλθοντες τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ 
τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἀναγεννηθέντες ἐν αὐτῇ, 


CHAP. I. 


pienity or sacerdotal office. 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 


346 To speak of bishops as princes not strange or novel. 


And in what sense thou art to have them 
for fathers is more plainly expressed in these words": ‘Whom 
thou shalt make princes in all the earth. In which words 
the prophet speaks to the Church upon the earth, which 
reaches from one end of it to the other, and which makes her 
own sons her fathers and princes.” I was willing, Sir, to 
add this more ancient testimony of Eusebius to that of St. 
Hierome, and Augustine in the Latin, to shew you that this 
sense of those words in Psalm xlv. was in all appearance the 
sense of the Catholic Church. And the parliament in Queen 
Elizabeth’s time seems to have been no stranger to these 
notions, which, 8 Eliz. [c. 1.°] in the preamble to the act, 
declares the state of the clergy to “be one of the greatest 
states of this realm.” And before the Conquest every one 
knows the bishop sat with the count in the county court 
to administer ecclesiastical law and justice, according to the 
canons, as he did the secular, according to the customs 
and laws. 

Sir, I hope I have now said enough to shew you that my 
speaking of bishops as princes is not novel, or uncouth to 
any but such as are not conversant in the ancient records of 
the Church, and if there be any good Churchmen, as you 
say, among your friends, who think I have written too loftily 
of the episcopal office in my former letter to youP, I pray you 
to shew them this for my vindication. Many of them who 


viol αὐτῆς γίγνονται" κἄπειτα ἐπιδιδόν - 
τες τῇ προσκοπῇ, πατέρες αὐτῆς καθί- 
στανται, προαγόμενοι εἰς τὴν αὐτῆς προ- 
στασίαν, καὶ τῆς ἱερατικῆς λειτουργίας 
καταξιούμενοι. πῶς δ᾽ ἕξεις αὐτοὺς ἀντὶ 
πατέρων διερμηνεύει, σαφέστερον λέγων" 
καταστήσεις αὐτοὺς ἄρχοντας ἐπὶ πᾶσαν 
τὴν γῆν. λέγει δὲ ταῦτα πρὸς τὴν ἐπὶ 
γῆς ἐκκλησίαν 6 λόγος, τὴν ἀπὸ περά- 
τῶν ἕως περάτων διήκουσαν. ἐφ᾽ ἣν 
ἄρχοντας καὶ πατέρας τοὺς ἰδίους υἱοὺς 
αὑτὴ ἡ ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ καθίστησιν.--- 
Eusebii Cesariensis Comment. in 
Psalm. xliv. 17. ap. Montfaucon. Noy. 
Collect., tom. ii. p. 192, C—E. ] 

ἃ The place is thus paraphrased by 
Apollinarius : 

᾿Αντὶ τεῶν πατέρων viol σέθεν ἡβω- 

οὔσι" 
Τοὺς δὲ καταστήσειας ὅλης χθονὸς 
ἡγεμονῆας. 

[Apollinarii Epise. Laodicensis Meta- 


. 


phrasis Psalmorum, Ps. xliv. 17. Bibl. 
Patr., tom. v. p. 886, A. ] 

° [An act declaring the manner of 
making and consecrating of the arch- 
bishops and bishops of this realm to be 
good, lawful, and perfect. Forasmuch 
as divers questions,. .. . have lately 
grown upon the making and conse- 
crating of archbishops ard bishops 
within this realm, whether the same 
were and be duly and orderly done 
according to the law-or not, which 
is much tending to the slander of all 
the state of the clergy, being one of the 
greatest states of this realm, &c.—8 
Eliz. 6. 1, A.D. 1566. ] 

P [This was the letter containing the 
forty Propositions; it is printed in the 
Constitution of the Catholic Church, 
&c. p. 61. See Prefatory Discourse, vol, 
i. p. 62, note g. | 


Mutual subordination of the temporal and spiritual powers. 347 


are true to their own order, and never betrayed the Church 
in their sermons or writings, yet with great numbers of the 
people have been set wrong in their apprehensions of the 
Church and Church power by some gentlemen of your pro- 
fession, who have written otherwise of the Church than as 
of a society founded by Christ Jesus in a manner independent 
on the powers of the world: and have so explained and mag- 
nified the ecclesiastical supremacy of kings, as is not con- 
sistent with it in reality or in the conceptions of men. You 
cannot but call to mind what I told you some said upon 
occasion. Really, Sir, one would wonder that men born 
and bred Christians should say things so reproachful to the 
priesthood, so dishonourable to Christ our High-Priest in 
heaven, so derogatory and opprobrious to the power of the 
keys, which He hath committed to His priests, and so repug- 
nant to the constitution of the Catholic Church. Certainly, 
Sir, these men had no right idea of the two powers, spiritual 
and temporal, ecclesiastical and regal, nor of their different 
origins, and mutual subordination of the one to the other. 
Solvimus que sunt Cesaris Cesari, saith St. Ambrose?, “ We 
pay unto the emperor the things which belong to the emperor, 
and we give unto God the things which are God’s. Is it the 
emperor’s tribute that is demanded? We deny it not. 15 it 
the Church of God? That ought not to be given up to the 
emperor, for the temple of God cannot be his right; which 
no man can deny to be spoken to the emperor’s honour ; for 
what is more honourable for him, than that he should be a 
son of the Church? For a good emperor is within the Church, 


P Concio de Basilicis non tradendis 
hereticis, aut gentilibus, ad Mediola- 
nensem populum. [Solvimus que sunt 
Cesaris Ceesari, et que sunt Dei Deo. 
Tributum Cesaris est, non negatur: 
ecclesia Dei est, Ceesaris utique non 
debet addici; quia jus Cwsaris esse 
non potest Dei templum. Quod cum 
honorificentia imperatoris dictum nemo 
potest negare. Quid enim honorifi- 
centius, quam ut imperator ecclesiz 
filius esse dicatur? Quod cum dicitur, 
sine peccato dicitur, cum gratia dicitur. 
Imperator enim (bonus, editt. vett. om- 
nes; omnes MSS. omittunt) intra ec- 
clesiam, non supra ecclesiam est, bonus 
enim imperator quzrit auxilium eccle- 
size, non refutat. Hee ut humiliter 


dicimus, ita constanter exponimus. 
Sed incendia aliqui, gladium, depor- 
tationem minantur. Didicimus Christi 
servuli non timere. Non timentibus 
nunquam est gravis terror.—S. Am- 
bros. Sermo contra Auxentium de Ba- 
silicis tradendis; Op., tom. ii. col. 
873, D, E.] 

So the civil law of the empire. [ὃ 7. 
Nullius sunt res sacre, et religiose, 
et sanctz: quod enim divini juris est 
nullius in bonis est. § 8. Sacre res 
sunt, que rite per pontifices Deo con- 
secrate sunt.—Just. Instit., lib. ii. tit. 
i. de rerum divisione, § 7, 8. Res 
sacra non recipit zstimationem.—Ul- 
pian., lib. lxviii. ad edictum. Digest., 
lib, i. tit. viii. c. 9. § 5.] 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. VI. 


348 Mutual subordination of the temporal and spiritual powers, 


pienity or but not above it, and seeketh help of the Church, and doth 


EPISCOPAL 


ORDER. 


not refuse it. This, as we speak with humility, so with con- 
stancy we declare it ; and though some threaten us with fire, 
and sword, and deportation, yet we being Christ’s servants 
have learned not to fear, and no terrors are formidable to 
those who do not fear.” Justinian the emperor confesseth4, 
“That the greatest honours God of His mercy hath conferred 
upon men are sacerdotium et imperium, the priesthood and 
the regal office, the former to administer in Divine things, 
and the latter to preside in human affairs.” And long before 
his time, ὁ ᾿ΑΙ βραμιαῖος γέρων, ὁ ἀληθῶς “Οσιοςῦ, “ The Abra- 
hamical old father, the truly holy Hosius,” put the emperor 
Constantius in remembrance of the distinction of these two 
powers, and the independency of the one on the other, in 
these words’: ‘“ Do not you meddle in ecclesiastical affairs, 
nor command us (bishops) what to do in them, but rather 
learn of us what ye are to do therein. God hath delivered 
the empire to you, and the care of the Church to us, and as 
he who secretly invades your authority, resists the ordinance 
of God, so be you afraid lest by drawing the affairs of the 
Church upon you, you make yourself guilty of a grievous 
sin. For it is written, ‘Give unto Cesar the things that are 
Ceesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.’ Therefore 
neither is it lawful for us to take upon us to command in 
civil matters; neither, O emperor, have you authority over 
the incense’. And truly out of the care I have of your salva- 
tion, I write these things.” This great bishop and confessor 
for the rights of the Catholic Church, as well as for the 


4 [Maxima quidem in hominibus κελεύου ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον παρ᾽ ἡμῶν σὺ 


sunt dona Dei a superna collata cle- 
mentia sacerdotium et imperium, et 
illud quidem divinis ministrans, hoc 
autem humanis przsidens ac diligen- 
tiam exhibens.—Imp. Justinianus Au- 
gust. Epiphanio archiepiscopo et pa- 
triarchze Constantinopolitano. Authent. 
Collat. i. tit. 6. Quomodo oporteat epi- 
scopos. Novell. Const. 6. Preefatio ap. 
Corpus Juris Canonici. The same 
passage was quoted in the Greek, p. 
292, note s. | 

τ (S. Athanasii Historia Arianorum 
ad Monachos, ὃ 45. Op., tom. i. p. 371, 

8 [μὴ τίθει σεαυτὸν εἰς τὰ ἐκκλησι- 
αστικὰ, μηδὲ σὺ περὶ τούτων ἡμῖν παρα- 


μάνθανε ταῦτα. σοὶ βασιλείαν 6 θεὸς 
ἐνεχείρισεν, ἡμῖν τὰ τῆς ἐκκλησίας 
ἐπίστευσε. καὶ ὥσπερ ὁ τὴν σὴν ἀρχὴν 
ὑποκλέπτων ἀντιλέγει τῷ διαταξαμένῳ 
θεῷ" οὕτω φοβήθητι μὴ καὶ σὺ τὰ τῆς 
ἐκκλησίας εἰς ἑαυτὸν ἕλκων, ὑπεύθυνος 
ἐγκλήματι μεγάλῳ γένῃ" ἀπόδοτε, γέ- 
γραπται, τὰ Καίσαρος, Καίσαρι, καὶ τὰ 
τοῦ θεοῦ, τῷ θεῷ. οὔτε τοίνυν ἡμῖν ἄρ- 
xew ἐπὶ τῆς vis, ἔξεστιν, οὔτε σὺ τοῦ 
θυμιᾷν ἐξουσίαν ἔχεις, βασιλεῦ. ταῦτα 
μὲν οὖν κηδόμενος τῆς σῆς σωτηρίας 
γράφω..---Τὰ δῖ. Hosii ad Constantium, 
apud S. Athanas., ibid., A, B. ] 

t The holy father here alludes to 
the story of King Uzziah, 2 Chron. 
xxvi. 16—18. 


as stated by Justinian, Hosius, and St. Gelasius. 849 


Catholic faith, by “power or authority over the incense,” 
figuratively meant the sacerdotal office, as distinguished from 
the regal; the powers of the Church, which could not belong 
to the empire, and the administration of matters spiritual, 
which belonged to the bishops, the delegates or vicegerents 
of Christ in His kingdom upon earth. So Pope Gelasius, 
who was advanced to the see of Rome in the year of our 
Lord 492, in his eighth Epistle to Anastasius the emperor, 
writes thus: Duo quippe sunt,imperator Auguste", &c. “For 
there are two things, great emperor, by which principally 
this world is governed, the holy pontifical authority and 
the regal power. Of which the sacerdotal charge is much 
the greater, because the bishops at the day of judgment 
must give an account to our Lord of kings. For you 
know, most gracious son, (fili clementissime,) that although 
you are set in dignity above all men, yet you are devoutly 
subject to those who preside over spiritual affairs, (religionis 
antislites,) and desire those things from them by which you 
expect to be saved; and in receiving the holy mysteries, 
and ordering them as is meet, you know that by the rank 
you hold in religion you are to obey rather than command. 
Therefore in things of this nature, you know that you are 
to submit to their judgment, and that they are not to be 
governed by your will. For if the rulers of the Church, 
knowing that the empire is given to you by God’s appoint- 
ment, obey your laws*; with what affection, I beseech you, 


« [Duo quippe sunt, imperator Au- 
guste, quibus principaliter mundus hic 
regitur, auctoritas sacra pontificum, et 
regalis potestas. In quibus tanto gra- 
vius est pondus sacerdotum, quanto 
etiam pro ipsis regibus Domino in divino 
reddituri sunt examine rationem. Nosti 
etiam, fili clementissime, quod licet 
presideas humano generi dignitate, 
rerum tamen presulibus divinarum 
devotus colla submittis, atque ab eis 
causas tue salutis expetis, inque su- 
mendis ccelestibus sacramentis, eisque 
(ut competit) disponendis, subdi te de- 
bere cognoscis religionis ordine potius 
quam preesse. Nostiitaque inter hee, 
ex illorum te pendere judicio, non illos 
ad tuam velle redigi voluntatem. Si 
enim, quantum ad ordinem pertinet 
publice discipline, cognoscentes im- 
perium tibi superna dispositione colla- 


tum, legibus tuis ipsi quoque parent 
religionis antistites, ne vel in rebus 
mundanis exclusz videantur obviare 
sententiz ; quo (rogo) te decet affectu 
eis obedire, qui pro erogandis venera- 
bilibus sunt attributi mysteriis? ... Et 
si cunctis generaliter sacerdotibus, recte 
divina tractantibus, fidelium convenit 
corda submitti; quanti potius sedis 
illius preesuli consensus est adhiben- 
dus, quem cunctis sacerdotibus, et divi- 
nitas summa voluit preeminere, et sub- 
sequens ecclesie generalis jugiter pietas 
celebravit?— Gelasii Pape I. Epist. 
viii. ad Anastasium Imperatorem.— 
Concilia, tom. v. col. 308, C—E. ] 

= Du Pin de antiqua Ecclesiz dis- 
ciplina, Dissert. vii. § 4. [ Principibus 
in rebus civilibus et temporalibus om- 
nes esse subjectos; where this passage 
is quoted, p. 474. Par. 1685. ] 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. VI. 


350 St. Gelasius on the relation of bishops and emperors. 


piexity or Ought you to obey them who are appointed to dispense the 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


venerable mysteries? .... And if the faithful ought to be 
obedient to all bishops, who rightly manage holy things, how 
much must it be your duty to comply with the bishop of 
that see, whom it has pleased God to advance in dignity 
above all bishops, and the piety of the Catholic Church hath 
in all times honoured and esteemed?” So in his tome de 
Anathematis vinculoY: “But if they are afraid to attempt 
these things, which they know come not within the measure 
of your power to whom it is permitted only to judge of 
human affairs, and not to preside over the Divine, how dare 
they presume to judge of them who administer Divine things? 
These things were so before the coming of Christ, as some 
say by way of figure, though kings and priest were both ap- 
pointed in the administration of secular affairs ; but after the 
coming of Christ, who was in one person the true King and 
Priest, neither the emperor assumed the title of priest, nor 
the priest pretended to his royal dignity .... Christ”, know- 


Y [Quod si hee tentare formidant, 
nec ad suz pertinere cognoscunt mo- 
dulum potestatis, cui tantum de hu- 
manis rebus judicare permissum est, 
non etiam presse divinis, quomodo de 
his, per quos divina ministrantur, judi- 
care presumunt? Fuerint hee ante 
adventum Christi, ut quidam figura- 
liter, adhue tamen in carnalibus actio- 
nibus constituti, pariter reges extiterint, 
et pariter sacerdotes...sed cum ad 
verum ventum est eumdem regem at- 
que pontificem, ultra sibi nec impera- 
tor pontificis nomen imposuit, nec pon- 


tifex regale fastigium vindicavit.—lId. 


Tomus de anathematis vinculo, ibid., 
col. 357, Ὁ, E; 358, A.] 

+ [Christus memor fragilitatis huma- 
ne quod suorum saluti congrueret dis- 
pensatione magnifica temperans, sic ac- 
tionibus propriis, dignitatibusque dis- 
tinctis officia potestatis utriusque dis- 
crevit, suos volens medicinali humili- 
tate salvari, non humana superbia rur- 
sus intercipi; ut et Christiani impe- 
ratores pro eterna vita pontificibus in- 
digerent, et pontifices pro temporalium 
cursu rerum imperialibus dispositioni- 
bus uterentur, quatenus spiritualis actio 
a carnalibus distaret incursibus; et ideo 
militans Deo, minime se negotiis se- 
cularibus implicaret: ac vicissim non 
1116 rebus divinis presidere videretur, 
qui esset negotiis secularibus impli- 


catus, ut et modestia utriusque ordinis 
curaretur, ne extolleretur utroque suf- 
fultus, et competens qualitatibus acti- 
onum specialiter professio aptaretur.— 
Id. ibid., col. 358, A, B. 

Hickes here gives the passage as it is 
quoted in the canon law. ] Quoniam idem 
mediator Dei et hominum homo Chris- 
tus Jesus, sic actibus propriis, et dig- 
nitatibus distinctis officia potestatis 
utriusque discrevit propria, volens me- 
dicinali humilitate hominum corda 
rursus in inferna demergi: ut sur- 
sum efferri, non humana superbia 
et Christiani imperatores pro eterna 
vita pontificibus indigerent, et ponti- 
fices pro cursu temporalium tantum- 
modo rerum imperialibus legibus ute- 
rentur, quatenus spiritalis actio a car- 
nalibus distaret incursibus; et ideo 
militans Deo minime se negotiis sx- 
cularibus implicaret: ac vicissim non 
ille rebus divinis praesidere videretur, 
qui esset negotiis swcularibus impli- 
catus.—Decretum, pars i. dist. x. ¢. 8. 
[ap. Corpus Juris Canonici. | 

See also dist. xevi. c.6,where the same 
words are cited, without any difference, 
but in the beginning, which in the latter 
is thus: Cum ad verum ventum est, 
ultra sibi nec imperator jura pontifica- 
tus arripuit, nec pontifex nomen impe- 
ratorium usurpayit, quoniam, &c. See 
more authorities in the same place to 


Emperors (as Constantine) reverenced bishops as fathers. 351 


ing the frailty of human nature, and ordering things by His 
royal dispensation as most conduced to the salvation of His 
people, He separated the offices of both powers by their 
proper actions and distinct duties, willing to save His people 
by a medicinal humility, znd not to beset them with human 
pride ; so that Christian emperors (and kings) should have 
need of bishops, in order to obtain eternal life; and bishops, 
according to the nature of temporal affairs, should make use 
of the imperial (or regal) administration, as far as the dif- 
ference between spiritual and carnal actions will permit. 
So that on the one hand the soldier of Christ should not 
meddle in secular business; and on the other, he to whom 
secular businesses belong should not pretend to authority in 
Divine affairs, but he that both orders should modestly and 
carefully observe their bounds,” &c. 

Here you see the difference between Church and State, 
and the bounds which Christ hath set between them; and 
that bishops are in that, what kings and emperors are in 
this, and that both are mutually subject to one another. 
Religious emperors of old made no difficulty to own bishops 
for their ecclesiastical fathers and superiors, and pay all 
reverence and submission to them as such. Eusebius tells 
us how Constantine the Great “personally* sent for them 
to himself, and vouchsafed them the highest veneration and 
honour, as persons consecrated to his God, aud was pleased 
to behold God honoured in each person, though their out- 
ward garb and dress was contemptible, and that he took 
them along with him in all his journeys, being fully per- 
suaded that God for this very reason would be propitious 
to him.” He would hear them speak, though never so long, 
“in a standing posture, though they supplicated his majesty 
to sit in his throne’.” He gave his sons in charge, “ before 


prove the independency of the Church 
upon the State, and the difference be- 
twixt the ecclesiastical and civil power. 

a [βασιλεὺς δὲ αὐτὸς τοῦ θεοῦ λει- 
τουργοὺς συγκαλῶν θεραπείας καὶ τιμῆς 
τῆς ἀνωτάτω ἠξίου" ἔργοις καὶ λόγοις 
τοὺς ἄνδρας ὡσανεὶ τῷ αὐτοῦ θεῷ κα- 
θιερωμένους, φιλοφρονούμενος. ὁμοτρά- 
πεζοι δῆτα συνῆσαν αὐτῷ, ἄνδρες εὐτε- 
λεῖς μὲν τῇ τοῦ χρήματος ὀφθῆναι περι- 
βολῇ, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ τοιοῦτοι καὶ αὐτῷ νενο- 


μισμένοι. ὅτι μὴ τὸν ὁρώμενον τοῖς πολ- 
λοῖς ἄνθρωπον, τὸν θεὸν δὲ ἐποπτεύειν 
ἐδόκει. ἐπήγετο δὲ αὐτοὺς καὶ ὅποι ποτε 
στέλλοιτο πορεΐαν. κἂν τούτῳ τὸν θερα- 
πευόμενον πρὸς αὐτῶν δεξιὸν αὐτῷ πα- 
ρεῖναι πειθόμενος. ]-- Εα860. de vita 
Constantini, lib. i. cap. 42. [ap. Keel. 
Hist., tom. i. p. 522. ] 

υ [ἐπειδὴ γάρ ποτε θάρσει τῆς αὐτοῦ 
περὶ Td θεῖον εὐλαβείας, ἀμφὶ τοῦ σωτη- 
ρίου μνήματος λόγον παρασχεῖν εἰς ἐπή- 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. VI. 


352 The emperors defenders, not governors of the Church. 


pienry or all things, that they should take particular charge of God’s 


EPISCOPAL 


ORDER. 


Church*.” When he resolved on his expedition into Persia, 
“he prepared a tabernacle in the form of a church, in which 
most richly furnished, he resolved with the bishops, who 
accompanied him, to offer up supplications to God, the giver 
of victory*.” And therefore it is no wonder that following 
Christian emperors looked upon the Church as a society 
distinct from the empire, of which Christ was founder, and 
the bishops the rectors, who presided in it under Christ, 
and that they themselves were not the governors, but the 
defenders of the Church. So Pope Symmachus, who was 
made bishop of Rome in the year of our Lord 498, in his 
apologetical epistle to the same emperor who was involved 
in the excommunication® of the Eutychians‘ in the cause of 
Acacius& : “ Let us compare the honour of the emperor with 
the honour of the bishop, between whom there is as great 
a difference as there is between him who hath the charge 
of human, and him who hath the charge of Divine affairs. 
Thou, O emperor, receivest baptism, takest the Sacrament 
from the bishop, entreats him to pray for thee, hopes for 
his benediction, and begs him to absolve thee after repent- 
ance. Lastly, thou administerest human things, and he dis- 
penses Divine things to thee. Wherefore, if I may not say 
his honour is greater, it is certainly equal to thine. Do not 


Kooy αὐτοῦ δεδεήμεθα, πλήθους δ᾽ akpoa- 
τῶν περιεστῶτος, ἔνδον ἐν αὐτοῖς βασι- 
λείοις ὄρθιος ἑστὼς ἅμα τοῖς λοιποῖς 
ἐπηκροᾶτο. ἡμῶν δ᾽ ἀντιβολούντων ἐπὶ 
παρακειμένῳ τῷ βασιλικῷ θρόνῳ διανα- 
παύεσθαι, ἐπείθετο μὲν οὐδαμῶς.  --- 
Ibid., lib. iv. cap. 33. [p. 643.] 

¢ [Eusebius, speaking of Constan- 
tine’s advice to his sons, says, καὶ τὴν 
ἐκκλησίαν δὲ τοῦ θεοῦ διὰ φροντίδος 
ἄγειν ἐν πρώτοις παρήνει, αὐτοῖς δὲ 
διαῤῥήδην Χριστιανοῖς εἶναι παρεκελεύ- 
ero.}—Ibid., lib. iv. cap. 52. [p. 
655.] 

4 [ἔπειτα καὶ τὴν σκηνὴν τῷ τῆς ἐκ- 
κλησίας χρήματι mpos τὴν ἐκείνου τοῦ 
πολέμου παράταξιν σὺν πολλῇ φιλοτιμίᾳ 
κατειργάζετο. ἐν ἣ τῷ θεῷ τῆς νίκης 
δοτῆρι, τὰς ἱκετηρίας ἅμα τοῖς ἐπισκό- 
ποις ποιεῖσθαι ἐπενόει. |—Ibid., lib. iv. 
cap. 56. [p. 658. ] 

e Nos non te excommunicavimus, 
sed Acacium: tu recede ab Acacio, et 
ab illius excommunicatione recedis. 


Tu te noli miscere excommunicationi 
ejus, et non es excommunicatus a no- 
bis. Si te misces, non a nobis, sed a 
te ipso excommunicatus es. Ita sit ut 
in utroque, sive discedas, non es ex- 
communicatus a nobis, sive non dis- 
cedas, non es excommunicatus a nobis. 
-—Symmachi Pape Epistola vi. Apo- 
logetica adversus Anastasii Imperato- 
ris libellum famosum.—[ Concilia, tom. 
v. col. 428, D.] 

f An benefactus essem, si Eutychi- 
anis faverem? si Acacii nomini com- 
municarem.—[ Ibid., col. 427, E.] 

& [Conferamus autem honorem im- 
peratoris cum honore pontificis: inter 
quos tantum distat, quantum ille rerum 
humanarum curam gerit, iste divina- 
rum. ‘Tu, imperator, a pontifice bap- 
tismum accipis, sacramenta suis, 
orationem poscis, benedictionem spe- 
ras, peenitentiam rogas. Postremo tu 
humana administras, ille tibi divina 
dispensat. Itaque ut non dicam supe- 


Pope Symmachus to Anastasius. Sir Thomas More. 353 
think the better of yourself, because you excel in worldly 
pomp and splendour; for the weakness of God is stronger 
than men. ...I beg leave to remind you that you are but a 
man, that you may use the power that God hath given you, 
well... . But perhaps you will say, ‘let every soul be subject to 
the higher powers.’ Truly we acknowledge the human powers 
in their bounds, till they set up their will against the will 
of God. But if all power is of God, that is more especially 
so, which presides over Divine affairs. Do you submit to us 
for God’s sake, as for God’s sake we submit to you. But 
if you will not submit for God’s sake, you can have no favour 
from Him whose laws you despise.” One of the greatest 
men and lawyers that England ever bred (whom I believe 
his good sense and integrity, had he not been cut off, would 
have engaged in a reformation), understanding this doc- 
trine®, bore his testimony, like a faithful confessor, to the dis- 
tinction and independency of the two powers, unto death, 
in the reign, which you know some writers call the tyranny, 
of Hen. VIII., who first to the astonishment of Christendom‘, 


rior, certe zqualis honor est. Nec te 
putes mundi pompa precellere, quia 
quod infirmum est Dei, fortius est ho- 
minibus... Precor, imperator, pace tua 
dixerim, memento te hominem, ut pos- 
sis uti concessa tibi divinitus potestate. 
Fortassis dicturus es, scriptum esse, 
omni potestati nos subditos esse de- 
bere. Nos quidem potestates humanas 
suo loco suscipimus, donec contra 
Deum suas erigunt voluntates. Cete- 
rum si omnis potestas a Deo est, magis 
ergo que rebus est prestituta divinis. 
Defer Deo in nobis, et nos deferemus 
Deo in te. Ceterum si tu Deo non 
deferas, non potes ejus uti privilegio, 
cujus jura contemnis. This is thesame 
emperor (Anastasius) whom Gelasius 
addressed, above p. 349.—[Ibid., col. 
427, E.—428, C.] 

h [“ Rich pressed him (Sir T. More) 
that since the parliament had enacted 
that the king was supreme head, the 
subjects ought to agree to it; and, 
said Rich, what if the parliament 
should declare me king, would you not 
acknowledge me? I would, said More, 
‘ Quia’ (as it is in the indictment) 
‘rex per parliamentum fieri potest, 
et per parliamentum deprivari;’ but 
More turned the argument on Rich, 
and said, what if the parliament made 


HICKES. 


an act that God was not God; Rich 
acknowledged it would not bind, but 
replied to More that since he would 
acknowledge him king, if he were made 
so by act of parliament, why would he 
not acknowledge the king supreme 
head, since it was enacted by the par- 
liament. To that More answered that 
the parliament had power to make a 
king, and the people were bound to 
acknowledge him whom they made, 
but for the supremacy, though the par- 
liament had enacted it, yet those in 
foreign parts had never assented to it.’’ 
..-‘‘More being on his trial, pleaded 
against the statute that made it treason 
to deny the supremacy, and argued 
strongly that the king could not be 
supreme head of the Church,”’ &c. |— 
Burnet’s History of the Reformation, 
part i. Ὁ. iii. pp. 354, 355. 

i Martini Chemnitii Epist. ad Elec- 
tor. Brandenburg. [Thisisa dedication 
prefixed to the first part of Chemnitius’ 
Examen Concilii Tridentini, A. D.1565. 
In ecclesia vero Filii Dei, Spiritus Sanc- 
tus vult principes terre non tantum ad 
politicas et bellicas virtutes formari, sed 
preecipue vult ipsos erudiri ut serviant 
Domino in timore, et Filium ipsius, 
Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum a 
tenera ztate osculari discant (Ps. ii.) 


Aa 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. VI. 


354 «οἰ of Supremacy to be interpreted in a sound 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or took upon him the title of “the only supreme head upon 
vonnen earth of the Church of England.” 

“ Albeit (saith the statute*) the king’s majesty justly, and 
rightfully is, and ought to be the supreme head of the Church 
of England, and so is recognised by the clergy of this realm 
in their convocations ; yet nevertheless for corroboration and 
confirmation thereof, and for increase of virtue in Christ’s 
religion within this realm of England, and to repress and 
extirpate all errors, heresies, and other enormities and abuses 
heretofore used in the same, be it enacted by authority of 
this present parliament, that the king our sovereign lord, 
his heirs and successors, kings of this realm, shall be taken, 
accepted, and reputed the only supreme head in earth of the 
Church of England, called Anglicana Ecclesia, and shall have 
and enjoy, annexed, and united to the imperial crown of 
this realm, as well the title and style thereof, as all honours, 
dignities, preeminences, jurisdictions, privileges, authorities, 
immunities, profits, and commodities to the said dignity of 
supreme head of the same Church belonging and appertain- 
ing; and that our said sovereign lord, his heirs and succes- 
sors, kings of this realm, shall have full power and authority, 
from time to time, to visit, repress, redress, reform, order, 
correct, restrain, and amend, all such errors, heresies, abuses, 
offences, contempts, and enormities, whatsoever they be, which 
by any manner of spiritual authority or jurisdiction ought, 
or may lawfully be reformed, repressed, ordered, redressed, 


utque sint benefici miserz et exulantis 
ecclesiz nutrices (Is. xlix.) &c. 

Calvin in Amos, cap. vii. [Qui 
initio tantopere extulerunt Henricum 
regem Anglize, certe fuerunt inconsi- 
derati homines; dederunt illi summam 
rerum omnium potestatem: et hoc me 
semper graviter vulneravit ; erant enim 
blasphemi quum vocarent ipsum sum- 
mum caput ecclesiz sub Christo. Hoe 
certe fuit nimium, Sed tamen sepul- 
tum hoe maneat, quia peccarunt in- 
considerato zelo.—Calvini Przelect. in 
Amos vii. 18, Op. Theolog., tom. iii. 
pars ll. p. 282. Geneva, 1617] et in 
Epist. ad Mycon. 

[ Mundus hoc habet solenne, quod pro 
libidine regnare cupit, Christo autem 
imperium resignare non sustinet. Sed 
utcunque, &c... . forti et invicto zelo 
pugnemus pro sacra illa potestate, quam 


inviolabilem esse decet... Mosem al- 
legant et Davidem. Quasi vero non 
aliud muneris habuerint illi duo, quam 
ut populum civili potestate regerent. 
Dent igitur nobis insani isti similes 
magistratus, hoc est, singulari prophe- 
tice spiritu excellentes .. . nos talibus 
id quod postulant libenter largiemur. .. 
Pii alii reges constitutum ordinem tu- 
entur sua potestate, ut decet: ecclesiz 
tamen suam jurisdictionem, et sacer- 
dotibus partes illis a Domino attributas 
relinquunt.—Id, Epist. ad Myconium, 
(March 14, 1544.) Epist. et Respons., 
col. 59, 60. Gen. 1617. ] 

k 26 Hen. viii. cap. 1. [An act con- 
cerning the king’s highness to be su- 
preme head of the Church of England, 
and to have authority to reform and re- 
dress all errors, heresies, and abuses in 
the same, A.D. 15384. 


Christian sense ; must be consistent with the Prayer-Book; 355 


corrected, restrained, or amended, most to the pleasure of 
Almighty God, the increase of virtue in Christ’s religion, 
and for the conservation of the peace, unity, and tranquillity 
of this realm, any usage, custom, foreign laws, foreign au- 
thority, prescription, or any thing or things to the contrary 
hereof notwithstanding.” 

Sir, I do not doubt, but you are of the same opinion you 
were of when we discoursed together, viz., that the latter 
part of this act is exegetical of the former, and that the 
words of it restrict and limit the sense and intention of it 
to such a sound Christian sense, as is consistent with the 
original inherent rights of the Church, which she derives from 
Christ and His Apostles; and that it was chiefly intended 
to secure the rights both of Church and State, agaist the 
usurped jurisdiction, both temporal and spiritual, which the 
popes took upon them to exercise in this, as in other king- 
doms. I doubt not also but it is your opinion, that this 
act and all others relating to the king’s ecclesiastical supre- 
macy, are to be interpreted in a sense consistent with those 
other acts of parliament, which confirm the Book of Common 
Prayer! and administration of the Sacraments, and other 
rights and ceremonies of the Church, according to the Church 
of England ; and the form and manner of making, ordaining 
and consecrating of bishops, priests, and deacons. In those 
offices the sacerdotal power, as distinct from the civil, and 
derived from Christ, is clearly expressed aad asserted. We 
baptize, and admit into the body of Christ’s Church, as our 
Lord authorized us to do, not in the name of the king, or in 
the name of king and parliament, but “in the Name of the 
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” And by 
the authority of our Lord committed to us, we have power 
to absolve penitent sinners after this sort™: “ Our Lord Jesus 
Christ, who hath left power to His Church to absolve sinners 
who truly repent and believe in Him, of His great mercy 
forgive thee thine offences, and by His authority committed 
to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, in the name of the 
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Iam sure 


1 [18 and 14 Car. 11. ο. 4. sect. 2. αἰ [The Order for the Visitation of 
30, 31, quoted above, vol. 1. p. 246, the Sick. ] 
note h. | 


Aad 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. VI. 


356 to be understood consistently with the Ordination 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or you will acknowledge, that all the kings and senates upon 


EPISCOPAL 


ORDER, 


earth cannot give such a power, or take upon them, without 
sacrilege, to say", “ Take thou authority to execute the office 
of a deacon in the Church of God, committed unto thee in 
the name of the Father,” ἕο. Οὐ, “ Receive the Holy Ghost 
for the office and work of a priest in the Church of God, now 
committed to thee by the imposition of our hands; whose 
sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven, and whose sins 
thou dost retain, they are retained. And be thou a faithful 
dispenser of the word of God, and of His holy Sacraments, in 
the name of the Father,” &c. ΟΥΡ, “ Receive the Holy Ghost 
for the office and work of a bishop in the Church of God, 
now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands, in 
the name of the Father,’ &c. To these I might add the 
epistles and gospels of these offices, and some of the prayers, 
and the preface to them; in consistency and agreement with 
which the very oath of supremacy, which every person or- 
dained to any of those holy offices is to take, and by conse- 
quence every other act relating to the king’s ecclesiastical 
supremacy, I humbly conceive ought to be interpreted; I 
mean in a sense which saves, and not which destroys the 
distinction and difference of the sacerdotal from the civil 
power, and the spiritual rights and powers which belong to 
the priesthood of the Christian Church. I may also I hope 
without offence say, that they are to be explained in a sense 
agreeable to the injunctions of Edw. VI., 1547, where it is 
said, that4 “the office and function of the ministers of the 
Church is appointed by God ;” to the Articuli per archiepi- 
scopum, episcopos, &c. Cantuariensis provincie ; 1584": and 


n [The Form and Manner of mak- 
ing of Deacons. } 

© {The Form and Manner of order- 
ing of Priests. ] 

P {The Form of ordaining or conse- 
crating of an Archbishop or Bishop. | 

4 [‘* Also, whereas many indiscreet 
persons do at this day uncharitably con- 
temn and abuse priests and ministers 
of the Church, because some of them 
(having small learning) have of long 
time favoured phantasies rather than 
God’s truth; yet forasmuch as their 
office and function is appointed of God,’ 
&c.—Injunctions given by the most 
excellent prince Edward VI., to all 


and singular his loving subjects, as well 
of the clergy as of the laity, &c. (A.D. 
1547.) art. 33. Wilkins’ Concilia, vol. 
iv. p. 3. ] 

τ [ Hickes seems to refer to the arti- 
cles framed in the convocation which 
commenced its sittings in 1584. The 
articles themselves were published 
March 381, 1585, under the title, Arti- 
culi per archiepiscopum, episcopos, et 
reliquum clerum Cantuarensis pro- 
vinciw stabiliti, &c. In the articles 
the bishops are throughout spoken of 
as alone possessing the power of ordi- 
nation and ecclesiastical jurisdiction.— 
Wilkins, ibid., p. 315. Hickes refers 


Services, and with other Statutes and Injunctions. 957 


to Queen Elizabeth’s Injunction, 1559, Art. 28°, where it is 
likewise declared that “the office and function of the mi- 
nisters of the Church is appointed by God.” All which 
agrees exactly to the prayers to be said in the ember 
weeks: “ Almighty God, the giver of all good gifts, who 
of Thy Divine providence hast appoimted divers orders in 
Thy Church, give Thy grace, we humbly beseech Thee, to 
all those who are to be called to any office and adminis- 
tration in the same.” And who they are that have power to 
admit those who are so called to serve in the sacred minis- 
try, is evident from the other prayer: “ Almighty God, our 
heavenly Father, who hast purchased to Thyself an universal 
Church by the precious blood of Thy dear Son, mercifully 
look upon the same, and at this time so guide and govern 
the minds of Thy servants the bishops and pastors of Thy 
flock, that they may lay hands suddenly on no man, but 
faithfully and wisely make choice of fit persons to serve in 
the sacred ministry of Thy Church; and to those who shall 
be ordained,” &c. Perhaps, Sir, I might also say that they 
are to be interpreted in a sense consistent with the first 
article of Charta Magna‘; for in the books written for the 
Church during the time of the Great Rebellion, that article 
was produced, as well as other laws, in her defence. To 
speak plainly, I believe you think as I do, that the act of 
supremacy, which was made by Henry VIII.", ought to be 
taken in a sense consistent with the spiritual power of the 
keys, as it was exercised by the Apostles and their successors 
in the most pure and primitive times; and with the preamble 
of 24 Hen. VIII. [c. 12.]¥, which was made against appeals to 
Rome, and as I observed before, distinguishes between the spi- 
ritual and temporal jurisdiction, and secures their respective 
rights unto both, against the papal usurpations. This lawas I 
have heard, was not long ago pleaded in court. And Sir Edw. 
Coke, Instit. part 4. cap. Ixxiv., asserts the distinction in 
to and argues from these articles in the Wilkins, ibid., p. 185. } 
Prefatory Discourse. See above, vol. t [See vol. i. p. 139, note o. ] 
1. p. 288. note h. ] u [26 Hen. VIII. c. 1, quoted above, 
s [Injunctions given by the queen’s Ρ. 354, and Prefatory Discourse, vol. i. 
Majesty, &c. A.D. 1559, art. 28. The p. 226, note k. See the subject dis- 
injunction simply repeats that of Ed- cussed in that and the following pages. | 


ward VI., quoted note q, except that it v [See above, note I, p. 312.] 
adds the word ‘‘ fond” before fancies. 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. VI. 


358 Henry’s claims to Supremacy exceeded these bounds ; 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or these words* ; “ Of what things the clergy hath spiritual juris- 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER 


Is. 14. 13, 
14, 


{Thom. ] 


(Quadru. 
Ecclesi. | 


diction is evident in our books, and particularly in Cawdrey’s 
case, whereof there is no question. And certain it is, that 
this kingdom hath been best governed, and peace and quiet 
preserved, when both parties, that is, when the justices of 
the temporal courts and the ecclesiastical judges, have kept 
themselves within their proper jurisdictions, without en- 
croaching or usurping one upon another.” 

But King Hen. VIII. went beyond all these measures, as 
if after the act of supremacy this distinction had been swal- 
lowed up, and an end put to the difference between spiritual 
and temporal persons and power. For not long after that act 
was made, he set forth a Latin BibleY with this title, Sacre 
Biblia tomus primus, in quo continentur quingue Libri Moysis, 
Libri Josue et Judicum, Liber Psalmorum, Proverbia Salo- 
monis, Liber Sapientia, et Novum Testamentum Jesu Christi. 
At the end of the book are these words: | Londini.| Excudebat 
Thomas Bertheletus Regius Impressor, Anno MDXXXV. Mense 
Jul. In the king’s preface, which is inscribed Pio Lectori in 
general, are these following words, the like whereof were never 
used by any Christian king before’, and which sound some- 
thing like those in which the king of Assyria said in his 
heart, “I will exalt my throne above the stars of God.” 

Nos itaque considerantes id erga Deum officit nostri, quo 
suscepisse cognoscimur, ut in regno simus sicut anima in cor- 
pore, et sol in mundo*, utque loco Dei judicium exerceamus in 
regno nostro, et omnia in potestate habentes quoad jurisdic- 
tionem, ipsam etiam Kcclesiam vice Dei sedulo regamus ac 


* [The fourth part of the Institutes Bible in the library of the British Mu- 


of the Laws of England: concerning 
the jurisdiction of courts. Authore 
Edwardo Coke, milite. J.C. p.321, 1644. 
The chapter is, Of ecclesiastical courts, 
and begins thus: “‘ Where some may 
doubt, how we that profess the common 
law should write of ecclesiastical courts 
which proceed not by the rules of the 
common laws. To this we answer by 
good authority in our books that the 
king’s laws of this realm do bound the 
jurisdiction of ecclesiastical courts,’’ &c. 
For Cawdrey’s case see below, p. 366, 
note p. | 

¥ This Bible is in the possession of 
Mr. Humphry Wanley. [See above, 
note e, p. 268. There is a copy of this 


seum, 465, a 1, with which this extract 
has been collated. | 

* [Hickes had either not seen the 
original of this passage, or had over- 
looked the marginal references, which 
have been added in the present edition 
from the Bible of 1535. They will be 
found to be authorities for applying 
some of the expressions against which 
he objects to Christian princes. | 

a [The expression is still stronger 
in St. Thomas: ‘ Hoe igitur officium 
rex se suscepisse cognoscat, ut sit sicut 
in corpore anima, et sicut Deus in 
mundo.” S. Thom, Aquin. Opuscul. 
xx. De regimine Principum, e. xii. 
Op., tom. x. fol. 165, H. Venet., 1593. ] 


as did the Act 1 Edw. VI. on election of Bishops. 359 


tueamur, et disciplina ejus sive augeatur aut solvatur, nos δὲ σπλν. τ. 
rationem reddituri simus, qui nobis eam credidit”, et in eo Det «πὴ 
vicem agentes, Deique habentes imaginem® : quid aliud vel co- (Ambrosi, 
gitare vel in animam [tam] inducere potuimus, quam ut eodem Ren.) af 
confugeremus, ubi certo discendum esset, ne quid aliud vel ipst 
faceremus vel faciendum aliis prescriberemus, quam quod ab 
hac ipsa Dei lege ne vel tranversum quidem digitum aberrare 
convinci queat. 

But before I proceed farther to observe in what manner 
this prince exercised his modern supremacy, let me recite 
what was afterwards enacted by statute 1 Edw. VI., chap. 2. 
There, Sir, it is enacted and declared, [ᾧ 1.1 that the elec- 
tion of archbishops and bishops by congé-d’-élire to the dean 
and chapter should be taken away, as “derogatory and pre- 
judicial to the king’s prerogative’;” that [ὁ 11.1 “all au- 
thority of jurisdiction, spiritual and temporal, is derived and 
deducted from the king’s majesty as supreme head of the 
Churches and realms of England and Ireland, and so justly 
acknowledged by the clergy of the said realms,” and accord- 
ingly it is enacted, “that all summons, citations or other pro- 
cess ecclesiastical, within the said two realms in all suits, &c. 
should be made in the name, and with the style of the 
king, as it is in writs original or judicial at the common law, 


b [These expressions are from a work 
entitled Quadruvium Ecclesiz, quatuor 
prelatorum officium quibus omnis ani- 
ma subjicitur, by Joannes Hugo de 
Sletstat, vicarius parochie Sancti Ste- 
phani Argentin. Par. 1509.—Omnia 
sunt in potestate imperatoris; quoad 
jurisdictionem et defensionem. fol. xlii. 
2.—Ipsis namque principibus a Christo 
ecclesia Dei est commissa, ut eam tu- 
eantur et defendant, et sive augeatur 
pax et disciplina ecclesie per fideles 
principes, sive solvatur, ille ab eis rati- 
onem exigit qui eorum potestati suam 
ecclesiam credidit committendam. Cog- 
noscant ergo principes seculi Deo se 
debere rationem esse reddituros prop~ 
ter ecclesiam, &c.—Ibid., fol. Ixxv. 2. 
The first passage is an extract from 
the gloss on the Decretum, Pars 2. 
Causa xxiii. Questio viii. ο. 21; it 
refers only to jurisdiction in temporal 
things. 

¢ [Principi. . . qui vicem Dei agit 
. .- Pseudo- Ambros. Comment. in Epist. 
ad Rom. xiii. 6... Principes. .. Dei 


habentes imaginem... Id. in ver. 3: 
Op. S. Ambros., tom. ii. App. col. 99. 
c, A. 

4 [The words of the act are, ‘‘ Foras- 
much as the elections of the arch- 
bishops and bishops by the deans and 
chapters within the king’s majesty’s 
realms of England and Ireland at this 
present time be as well to the long de- 
lay as to the great costs and charges of 
such persons as the king’s majesty 
giveth any archbishoprick or bishop- 
rick unto: and whereas the said elec- 
tions be in very deed no elections, but 
only by a writ of congé-d’-élire have 
colours, shadows, or pretences of elec- 
tions, serving nevertheless to no pur- 
pose, and seeming also derogatory and 
prejudicial to the king’s. prerogative 
royal, to whom only appertaineth the 
collation and gift of all archbishopricks 
and bishopricks and suffragan bishops 
within his highness’ said realms,” &c. 
—Preamble of the Act, 1 Edw. VI. 
δ:.2.] 


360 Henry claimed to be the source of all spiritual power ; 


pieniry or and that the teste thereof be in the name of the archbishop, 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


SECT. VII. 


Henry’s 
exercise of 
the supre- 
macy; the 
objection 
from law 
considered. 


or bishop, or other having ecclesiastical jurisdiction, who hath 
the commission or grant of the authority ecclesiastical imme- 
diately from the king’s highness, and that his commissary, 
&c. shall put his name in the citation or process after the 
teste.” And § IV., it is also enacted, that all ecclesiastical 
persons, “ who have the exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, 
shall have [in their seal of office] the king’s highness’ arms 
decently set, with certain characters under the arms, for the 
knowledge of the diocese, and shall use no other seal of juris- 
diction, but wherein his majesty’s arms be engraven.” But 
then again there is a proviso in § VI., by which certain 
cases are excepted, wherein the archbishop and bishop may 
use their own seals*, which had this good effect, to help to 
keep up the distinction between the spiritual and temporal 
authority or jurisdiction, though that as well as this was 
declared to be deducted and derived from the king as 
supreme head of the Church. 

VII. Sir, this derivation of the original of spiritual power 
from kings is a new discovery, not known or understood by 
former ages; and I presume you will grant there is nothing 
like it in what I have produced in this letter out of ancient 
Christian writers. But however, without any retrospection 
to old principles, the king’s ecclesiastical supremacy in virtue 
of these laws was put in ure, and exercised to such a height, 
and in such a degree, as many then thought, and some think 
at this day is not to be reconciled with the spiritual supre- 
macy of Christ in His kingdom upon earth, and the most 
solemn commission He gave to His Apostles, and in them to 
their successors, in His last words a little before He as- 
cended into heaven. 

King Henry VIII. was so fond of it that he caused a 
golden medal to be struck “ with his effigies half faced in his 
usual bonnet, furred gown, and invaluable collar of rubies, 


¢ [The exceptions are as follows: own names under their own seals... . 


““ Provided always, &c., that the arch- 
bishop of Canterbury, W&e., shall use 
his own seal and in his own name in all 
faculties and dispensations.....and 
that the said archbishop and bishops 
shall make, admit, order, and reform 
the chancellor’s officials, &c., and com- 
missions to suffragan bishops in their 


and shall certify to the court of tenths 
their certificates under their own name 
and seals .... and likewise shall make 
collations, presentations, gifts, institu- 
tions, and inductions of benefices, let- 
ters of orders, or dimissories under their 
own names and seals as they have here- 
tufore accustomed,’’—ILbid. § 6. | 


had a gold medal struck with his new titles inscribed. 361 


which was since sold abroad, to give the royal family bread?.” 
I have caused it to be engraven in the Appendix, Number 3, 
as it is done according to Dr. Sloane’s original® in the 
eighty-eighth page of Mr. Evelyn’s Numismata, printed in 
folio, London, 1697. The legenda take up a double circle. 
In the outward circle HENRICUS OCTA. ANGLIZ. FRANCI. ET 
HIB. REX. [FIDEI . DEFENSOR . ET.] within the inner, IN 


TERR. ECCLE. ANGLI. ET HIBE. SUB. 


MUM. 
harp, are crowned. 


CHRIST. CAPUT. SUPRE- 


In these circles the rose, portcluse, fleur-de-lis, and 
On the reverse, 


ἘΠ ῊΣ 


WDA 
mea ΡΟ 3 ΣΡ ῸΦ 
IN NID I" 

mw nnn won 

oy wx 


ENPIKOS O ΟΓΔΟΟΣ TPIS 
BASIAETS. ΠΙΣΤΕΩΣ ΠΡΟ- 
ΣΤΑΤΗΣ. EN TH ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑ 
ΤΗΣ ΑΓΓΛΙΑΣ ΚΑΙ IBEPNI- 
Az. THO ΧΡΙΣΤΩ. AKPH 
* H. KE@AAH. * 


Londoni. 1545. 


Thus, Sir, triumphed this king in his new style and title, 


f [This passage is extracted from 
Evelyn’s work entitled, Numismata; 
A Discourse of Medals, ὅσο. by J. Eve- 
lyn, Esq., F.R.S., London, 1697, p. 
88. Ina collection of letters from Sir 
Edward Nicholas to King Charles L., 
with the king’s answers written in the 
margin, which were in Evelyn’s pos- 
session, is one dated Sept. 10, 1641, on 
the opposite page of which is the re- 
ply in the king’s handwriting, dated 
Eden. 16, (Edinburgh, Sept. 16,) in 
these words: “I co’mand you to draw 
up anie such warrant, as my Wyfe 
shall direct you for the disposing of 
the Great Collar of Rubies that is in 
Holland, and tell her how I have di- 
rected you to wait her co’mands in 
this: and that I am confident of your 
secrecie in this, and anie thing else, 
that I shall trust you with. C. R.” 
See the Correspondence appended to 
Evelyn’s Memoirs, vol. ii. p 19, marg., 
1819. Henrietta Maria was then in 

land; it may be conjectured that 
rubies had been conveyed by her 


mother, who had just left England for 
Holland. See Evelyn’s Memoirs, vol. 
i. p. 20. She herself went over to Hol- 
land, Feb. 16. in the next year with 
jewels on which she borrowed large 
sums of money; in the account of mo- 
nies so raised, (see Memoirs of Hen- 
rietta Maria, London, 1671,) the item 
occurs, To Weltster six rubies 40,000 
gilders. The jewels at this time were 
disposed of not “to give the royal 
family bread,’’ but to raise money for 
the wars in Scotland and Ireland in 
1641, and in England in 1642. ] 

s [This medal is now in the collec- 
tion at the British Museum. ] 

h [The letters on the medal appear 
to be these, as on the fac-simile in the 
Appendix (Number 3) of the third edi- 
tion, and in Evelyn’s work; perhaps 
the word intended was 1), protecting ;” 
in the third edition the word 13), ‘a 
governor,’ was substituted in this place, 
unless it were a misprint for 12, ‘a 
shield.’ ] 


CHAP. L 
SECT. VIL. 


DIGNITY OF 
EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 





362 Henry’s exercise of his supremacy ; Cromwell’s offices ; 


from whence he derived his ecclesiastical supremacy, making 
an inscription of it in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, 
as Pilate did that over our Lord upon the Cross, Tus Is THE 
Kine or tur Jews. I never yet heard any man talk of this 
medal but who made this observation, viz., that King Henry 
crucified the Church, as Pilate did her Saviour, with the 
solemnity of three superscriptions; and I have so much re- 
spect for his memory, because he delivered us from the 
Pope’s supremacy, as to wish he had given less occasion for 
such a severe but obvious reflection, by exercising his eccle- 
siastical supremacy with more moderation to the pleasure 
and honour of God, and the conservation and benefit of the 
Church. But he presently proceeded to excess; for “the first 
exercise of his supremacy,” as supreme head of the Church, 
“was naming Cromwell his vicar-general, and general visitor 
of all the monasteries and other privileged placesi,” longing 
to get their treasures and lands, which by the just judgment 
of God did not prosper with him, who of a member would 
be the head of the Church. 

The next was his making him “lord vicegerent in ecclesi- 
astical matters), by which he had authority over the bishops, 
and precedence next the royal family, being clothed with a 
complete delegation of all the king’s new power in ecclesias- 
tical affairs.” From this supremacy it also proceeded that 
Cromwell was made dean of Wells*, and that “ other secu- 
lar men had prebendaries and benefices without cure con- 
ferred upon them” in the reign of Edward VI.’ From this 


i Bishop Burnet’s History of the 
Reformation, part i. book iii. p. 181. 
{fol. ed. 1679. ‘The first act of the 
king’s supremacy was his naming 
Cromwell his vicar-general,’’ &c. } 

J {The passage quoted in the last 
paragraph continues thus; ‘This is 
commonly confounded with his follow- 
ing dignity of lord vicegerent in eccle- 
siastical matters; but they were two 
different places, and held by different 
commissions. By the one he had no 
authority over the bishops, nor had he 
any precedence; but the other, as it 
gave him precedence next the royal 
family, so it clothed him with a com- 
plete delegation of the king’s whole 
power in ecclesiastical affairs. For two 
years he was only vicar-general. But 
the tenor of his commissions and the 


nature of the power devolved on him 
by them, cannot be fully known, for 
neither the one nor the other are in the 
Rolls,’ &c.—Burnet, ibid. ] 

k History of the Reformation, part ii. 
book i. pp. 7, 8. [See further on this 
point the act of Cromwell’s attainder. 
‘* Provided alwaysand be it enacted by 
the authority aforesaid, that this act of 
attainder, ne any offence, ne anything 
therein contained, extend not unto the 
deanery of Wells in the county of 
Somerset, nor to any manors, lands, 
tenements, or hereditaments thereunto 
belonging.’’—The Attainder of Thomas 
Cromwell. Burnet, ibid., part i. book 
ili. Records, No. 16, p. 192. | 

1 [At the beginning of his history of 
Edward's reign, Burnet says; ‘‘ Henry 
VIII, having at the suit of Sir Edward 


Bishops forced to take out commissions from the King. 368 


rigorously exercised supremacy, which our princes have since 
explained into a sounder sense, it also proceeded that bishops 
were forced to take out commissions for their bishoprics 
from the king to hold them only during his pleasure, and to 
exercise their episcopal office as his delegates, in his name 
and by his authority™. In these commissions “all jurisdic- 
tion, as well ecclesiastical as secular, is said to flow from the 
king, as supreme head, and that the bishops were his com- 
missioners and vicegerents, and licensed by him to ordain 
priests, and to admit them to spiritual cures, to keep their 
courts, visit, inflict spiritual censures, and finally, do all 
things that any way belonged to the episcopal authority and 
jurisdiction.” Sir, pray consider as you read the following 
words, if they are for the honour or “ pleasure of Almighty 
God,” or well consistent with the original rights of the 
Church: Quandoquidem omnis jurisdicendi authoritas, atque 
etiam jurisdictio omnimoda, tam illa que ecclesiastica dicitur 


North promised to give the earl of 
Hertford six of the best prebends that 
should fall in any cathedral, except 
deaneries and treasurerships; at his 
suit he agreed that a deanery and trea- 
surership should be instead of two of 
the six prebendaries’’... afterwards... 
“ΤῈ may perhaps seem strange that the 
earl of Hertford had six good prebends 
promised him ; two of these being after- 
wards converted into a deanery and trea- 
surership. But it was ordinary at that 
time ; Lord Cromwell had been dean of 
Wells, and many other secular nen had 
these ecclesiastical benefices without 
cure conferred upon them.’’—Burnet, 
ibid. The observation refers to Henry’s 
reign rather than Edward’s. ] 

™ [Burnet says, “ Bonner took a 
strange commission from the king on 
the 12th of November this year (1539) 

- whether the other bishops took 
such commissions from the king I know 
not. But I am certain there is none 
such in Cranmer’s Register; and it is 
not likely, if any such had been taken 
out by him, that ever it would have 
been razed. The commission itself 
will be found in the collection of papers 
at the end. The substance of it is, 
* That, since all jurisdiction both eccle- 
siastical and civil, flowed from the king 
as supreme head, and he was the foun- 
dation of all power; . . therefore the 
king, upon Bonner’s petition, did em- 
power him in_his own stead, to ordain 


such as he found worthy, to present 
and give institution, with all the other 
parts of episcopal authority, for which 
he is duly commissioned: and this to 
last during the king’s pleasure only.’ 
... After he had taken this commis- 
sion, Bonner might well have been 
called one of the king’s bishops.’’ ] 
History of the Reformation, part i. 
book iii. p. 267. [The commission 
itself is printed, under the title Li- 
centia regis concessa Domino Epi- 
scopo ad exercendam jurisdictionem 
episcopalem; with the reference Re- 
gist. Bonner. fol. primo.] Collection 
of Records, No. 14, p. 184. [Burnet 
again, in speaking of the beginning of 
the reign of Edward VI., says, “ The 
bishops were required to take out new 
commissions of the same form with 
those they had taken out in King 
Henry’s time, (for which see p. 267 of 
the former part,) only with this differ- 
ence, that there is no mention of a 
vicar-general in these commissions as 
there was in the former, there being 
none after Cromwell advanced to that 
dignity. Two of these commissions 
are yet extant, one taken out by Cran- 
mer, the other by Bonner. But this 
was only done by reason of the present 
juncture, &c, ... Cranmer set an ex- 
ample to the rest, and took out his 
commission, which is in the collection.” 
—See Collection of Records, ibid., No. 
2. p. 90.] 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. VII. 


364 Supremacy as claimed by Henry and Edward ; 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or guam secularis, a regia potestate velut a supremo capite, [et 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


omnium infra regnum nostrum magistratuum fonte et scaturi- 
gine] .. . primitus emanavit ... [Quum itaque] nos perdilectum 
commissarium nostrum Thomam Cromwell, &c. ... . nostrum- 
que, ad quascunque causas ecclesiasticas nostra authoritate, ult 
supremi capitis dicte Ecclesie Anglicane, quomodolibet trac- 
tandas sive ventilandas, vicemgerentem, vicarium generalem 
[. - - constituerimus et prefecerimus. Quia tamen ipse Thomas 
Cromwell nostris et hujus reyni Anglie tot et tam arduis nego- 
tiis adeo prepeditus extitit, quod ad omnem jurisdictionem 
nobis uti supremo capiti hujusmodi competentem, ubique loco- 
rum infra hoc regnum nostrum prefatum, in his que moram 
commode non patiuntur, aut sine nostrorum subditorum injuria 
differri non possunt, in sua persona expediendis non sufficiet, | 
Nos tibi (episcopo) vices nostras sub modo et forma inferius 
descriptis committendas fore, teque licentiandum esse decerni- 
mus, ad ordinandum [igitur quoscunque infra Dioc. tuam Lon- 
don. ubicunque oriundos, &c....ad omnes etiam sacros et pres- 
byteratus ordines promovendos, &c.| et alia quecumque autho- 
ritatem et jurisdictionem episcopalem quovismodo respicienda et 
concernenda, preter et ultra ea que tibi ex sacris literis com- 
missa esse dignoscantur, vice, nomine et authoritate nostra exe- 
quendum tibi tenore presentium committimus [ac liberam facul- 
tatem concedimus|. In this form of commission the two kings 
successively took upon them almost the whole power of the 
keys, and the power of licensing bishops to ordain priests, 
and instituting and inducting them to their spiritual cures, 
and that clause preter et ultra ea, &c., which seems to except 
some spiritual power, it may be that of absolving penitents 
and administering the holy Sacraments, yet in effect excepts 
nothing if you consult the whole tenor of the commission, 
especially those words of it wherein it is declared that those 
bishops", “who had formerly exercised their power preca- 
riously ought thankfully to acknowledge that they had it 
only from the king’s bounty, and to declare that they would 


» [After the words, primitus ema- 
navit, in the commission quoted above, 
follows the clause, Sane illos qui juris- 
dictionem hujusmodi antehac non nisi 
precario fungebantur, beneficium hujus- 
modi sic eis ex liberalitate regia indul- 


tum gratis animis agnoscere, idque re- 
giz munificentiz solummodo acceptum 
referre, eique, quotiens ejus majestati 
videbitur, libenter concedere convenit. 
—Burnet, part i. book iii. Collection of 
Records, No. 14, p. 184. ] 


as understood by Lawyers ; evil consequences of it. 365 


cheerfully surrender it to him again whensoever he should 
require them to do it.”” Thus did two of our kings, without 
example, the one out of pride and ambition, the other in 
nonage and ignorantly, set themselves in the throne of 
our Lord. And the bishops of the Church of England in 
those two reigns before and after the Reformation, overawed 
through human weakness by terrible penalties, gave up the 
cause of Christ and the Church, for which they ought to 
have died martyrs, and by their compliance have left a blot 
upon their memories which no apology can wipe off, unless 
it be that humble one of father Paul, who with sorrow said, 
“God has not given me Luther’s spirit.” Their compliance 
brought a blemish upon the Church, which our adversaries, 
making no allowance for human frailty, seldom fail to put us 
in mind of, with insoleuce enough, as often as they have oc- 
casion, without any reflection, and sometimes when they have 
none at all. And from that rigid practice of this new eccle- 
siastical supremacy in those reigns it hath also proceeded in 
great part that the true notion of the Church, as of a society 
distinct from the world, and all the temporal kingdoms of it, 
and of her spiritual power and authority invested by Christ 
in His ministers, hath been too much forgotten and neg- 
lected among us, to the great dishonour of God, the un- 
speakable damage of religion, and contempt of the Church 
and clergy, which are every day more and more insulted by 
every vile mescroyant, and every blaspheming tongue and 
pen. I must here beg leave again to tell you, without 
offence, that the opinions, judgments, and cases written by 
some gentlemen of your profession, have not a little contri- 
buted to the perplexing of that plain primitive notion of the 
Church and the ecclesiastical power. You will easily ima- 
gine I have Sir Edward Coke’s Fifth Part of Reports in my 
eye, from whom I have heard you and some other excellent 
lawyers assert that by the statute made in the first year of 
Queen Elizabeth, whereby there is given to her and her suc- 
cessors° “all power and jurisdiction ecclesiastical, as by any 
spiritual and ecclesiastical power hath heretofore been, or 
may lawfully be executed, with full power and authority to 
assign, name, or authorize any person or persons, being 
ο [Coke’s Reports, part v. fol. 1, 1605, vol. iii. p. 16. London, 1826. ] 


CHAP, I. 
SECT. VII. 


366 Spiritual power not inherent in the Crown ; consequences 


pienity or natural born subjects, to exercise and execute any manner 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 


of spiritual or ecclesiastical power, authority, and jurisdic- 
tion.” I say I have heard you and other lawyers affirm that 
this statute “was not introductory of a new law, but only 
declaratory of an old one; so that if that act had never been 
made, yet the queen had had that authority, and might have 
given it to whom she thought fit.’ But, Sir, I leave it to 
your second thoughts to consider if this late doctrine, which 
affirms that the spiritual or ecclesiastical power belongs to 
our kings and queens as such, and by consequence is inhe- 
rent in the crown, be agreeable to the preamble before men- 
tioned of 24 Hen. VIII. cap. 124, or to the favourable sense 
and intendment of 26 Hen. VIII. cap. 1, as restricted by 
the words at the latter end of it", or to the king’s ecclesias- 
tical supremacy as it hath been explained by our kings and 
queens since that time, or by other persons by their con- 
sent or permission, as I have hereafter observed’, in a sense 
not contrary to the original and inherent power of the 
Church. Nay, I beseech you to consider if it is reconcile- 
able to the sense and language of former ages of Christian- 
ity, and the doctrines, reasonings, and authorities which I 
have produced out of the best Christian writers. For if it 
be inherent in the crown, then, as I conceive, it must be- 
long to it, whether it be Christian or not Christian; and 
when it is Christian, it also matters not in what sense it is 
so, or of what sort or kind of Christians, kings and queens, 
and let me add, sovereign states shall be; for according to 
your opinion, if I mistake not, they may execute all ecclesi- 
astical power and jurisdiction without any new law; but if it 
be not so inherent in the crown, then I pray you to consider 


P [Coke, ibid., fol. 8. (pp. 26, 27, 
ed. 1826,) “declaratory of the old,” are 
the words of Coke. This was a part 
of the decision of the judges in Caw- 
drey’s case, with which the fifth part of 
Coke’s reports De jure regis ecclesias- 
tico, (of the king’s ecclesiastical law,) 
begins. Term. Hil. Eliz. 33. Robert 
Cawdrey, clerk, brought an action for a 
trespass on the rectorial property at 
Northlaffenham against George Alton. 
It was denied that Cawdrey was parson, 
as having been deprived by ecclesias- 
tical commissioners appointed by the 
queen, and so arose the question on 


which the judgment above was given 
unanimously by the judges. Coke, 
(fol. 9,) after some other arguments, 
gives instances of the exercise of such 
a power by our kings, from Kenulph, 
A.D. 755, downwards. | 

4 [See above, note ], p. 312. ] 

τ [The words referred to are, ‘which 

. may lawfully be reformed, &c. 
most to the pleasure of Almighty God,” 
&c. See above, p. 355. ] 

8 [See below, chap. 2, sectt. 2, 3, and 
the Prefatory Discourse, yol. i. pp. 
228, sqq. | 


of such a doctrine. Coke’s assertions refuted by Parsons. 367 


how much wrong the Church of God may come to suffer by 
that doctrine, when it is taught and received in a Christian 
kingdom or state. 

This, and other assertions of Sir Edward Coke are in my 
humble opinion thoroughly refuted in a book entitled, “ An 
Answer to the Fifth Part of Reports lately set forth by Sir 
Edward Coke, knight,” printed 1606. Sir Edward, then 
attorney-general, never made any reply to it, but only in a 
preface before the Sixth Part of his Reports, which I believe 
you will think scarce deserves the name of a reply", or that 
it is worthy of Sir Edward’s mighty name. His adversary 
did not fail to return him, I think, a full and solid answer to 
what he hath said in that preface, in the eighth chapter of 
his answer to Mr. Thomas Moreton, entituled, “A quiet and 
sober reckoning with Mr. Thomas Moreton*,” which was 


Ὁ [On the title-page of this book was 
added ‘‘by a Catholic Divine.’”? The 
author was Robert Parsons, the Jesuit. 
On the back of the title- page the ques- 
tion is thus stated: “ The state of the 
controversy discussed throughout this 
work... The question is, whether this 
authority and spiritual jurisdiction were 
conform to the ancient laws of England 
in former times, or not; and whether 
it were a statute not introductory of a 
new law, but declaratory only of an 
old, so as if the said act had never been 
made, yet the queen had had that 
authority, and might have given it to 
others, as she did? M. Attorney hold- 
eth the affirmative part, and the Ca- 
tholie divine the negative.” ] 

ἃ [This reply is in an address “to 
the reader.’’ Coke declines to reply to 
Parsons’ book, first, because of the 
temper in which it is written; secondly, 
that he himself “dealt only with the 
municipal laws of England,” in which 
he found Parsons “ utterly ignorant,’’ 
&e. ‘For his divinity, and histories 
cited by him, (he says,) I will not 
answer, for then I should follow him 
in his error, and depart from the state 
of the question, whose only object is 
the municipal laws of this realm.” 
There is an allusion to the controversy 
in the preface to part viii. vol. iv. (p. vi. 
ed. 1826,) but only intimating that the 
defenders of the opposite views ran the 
risk of involving themselves in a pre- 
munire. } 

x [The chapter here referred to is 


headed, “A piece of reckoning with 
Sir Edward Coke.” It is introduced 
by the way into this book, which was a 
reply to Morton, afterwards bishop of 
Durham. Morton had, in 1606, sent 
out an ‘‘exact Discovery of Romish 
doctrine in the case of conspiracy and 
Rebellion, by pregnant observation.’’ 
It was replied to in a work entitled, 
‘* A just and moderate answer to the 
Discovery, &c.,’’ without place or date. 
Morton rejoined in a book called A 
Full satisfaction concerning a double 
Romish iniquity, heinous rebellion, 
and more than heathenish equivoca- 
tion. Lond. 1606.” To this Parsons’ 
work, published in 1607, entitled, ‘A 
Treatise tending to mitigation towards 
Catholic subjects in England against 
the seditious writings of Thomas Mor- 
ton and others, by P. R., was a reply. 
Morton in answer sent out ‘‘ A pream- 
ble unto an encounter with P. R., the 
author of the deceitful treatise of mitiga- 
tion, &c. 1608;”’ and Parsons rejoined 
in the work referred to in the text, 
of which the full title is ‘‘ A quiet and 
sober reckoning with Mr. Thomas 
Morton concerning imputations of wil- 
ful falsities objected to the said T. M. 
in a treatise of P. R. entituled of Miti- 
gation :’’ at the bottom of the title-page 
of which is added, ‘‘ There is also ad- 
joined a piece of a reckoning with Sir 
Edward Coke, now lord chief justice of 
the common pleas, &c. Permissu su- 
periorum. Lond. 1609.’’] 


CHAP, 1. 


SECT. VIL. 


368 Two points in which Hickes differs from Parsons. 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or printed in 1609. Nor hath any lawyer that I have heard of, 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


SECT. VUr. 


The objec- 
tion from 
Scripture 
considered, 





since replied to either of those answers in the defence of that 
great man. And, if it were not presumption in a man of my 
profession, I would recommend them to your reading, for 
better information in this controversy, which however it hath 
been long laid asleep, I take to be of greater moment and 
importance to Christianity, than most men seem to think 
it is. I must acknowledge there are two great errors in 
them, whereof one is, that the author bemg a Roman 
Catholic, makes the pope and papal hierarchy, exclusive of 
all others, the governing Church, contrary to all sound doc- 
trine and tradition; and the other is, that he endeavours to 
exempt the persons and goods of the clergy from the tem- 
poral powers and your tribunals, asserting that when they 
offend against temporal laws, they are first to be judged and 
condemned by the ecclesiastical judges, and not before to be 
delivered up to the secular power to inflict upon them the 
punishment of the temporal laws; which are intolerable 
usurpations of the Church in any Christian State, and con- 
trary to that code of canons which Pope Adrian I. sent to 
Charles the Great under the name of Codex Canonum Ecele- 
sie Romane). 

VIII. I have now I think, fully answered the first objec- 
tion, except that I have not yet said any thing to the text 
Matt. xx. 25—27, which you thought did not favour the 
calling bishops lords. But that text and the whole context, 
only shews the differences that were to be between spiritual 


Y [The body of canons referred to by 
Hickes is a collection of the canons of 
the Eastern and African councils, given 
by Adrian I. to Charlemagne, A.D. 773, 
as the canons received by the Western 
Church. They were printed at May- 
ence in 1525, and again at Paris in 
1609, under the title Codex Canonum 
Vetus Ecclesiae Romane. An epitome 
is given in the collections of councils. 
(Concilia, tom. viii. col. 565, sqq.) 
Hickes’ statement does not seem quite 
accurate. The following passage from 
Thorndike’s work “Of the Forbear- 
ance or Penalties which a due Refor- 
mation requires,’ may have been his 
authority. Thorndike says, (c. 23, 
p- 119,) “If it be said that it is not 
visible when those usurpations took 


place, I shall allow all the time which 
that code of the canons contains, which 
Pope Adrian sent to Charles the Great; 
in whose time there can be no pretence 
of usurpations upon the temporalties 
of princes by the see of Rome. That 
code is yet read, under the name of 
Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Romane.’’ 
The observation refers not to the spe- 
cial instance of usurpation referred to 
by Hickes, but to ‘‘usurpations upon 
the temporalties of princes by the see 
of Rome”’ generally; and they are not 
so correctly said to be “contrary to 
that code,’’ as not to be contemplated 
by it. The Canons do not appear to 
have been sent by Pope Adrian under 
this name; it is that with which they 
were printed in the sixteenth century. ] 


Dignity of the Apostolical office, not temporal. 369 


and temporal princes: “ But it shall not be so among you, 
as among the princes of the Gentiles, but whosoever will be 
great among you, let him be your minister, and whosoever 
will be chief among you, let him be your servant ;” after My 
example, who, though I am a King, and have a kingdom, and 
am exalted above all principalities and powers, and even King 
of kings, and Lord of lords, yet “I came not to be ministered ver. 28. 
unto, but to minister, and give My life a ransom for many.” 
Wherefore as this place supposes Christ to be a King, though 

not of such a nature as temporal kings are: so it supposes 

the Apostles to be princes under Him, though princes of ano- 

ther intention and very unlike the princes of the earth. The 

very name of an Apostle is a name of grandeur, and honour, 

and princely trust, as I shewed before out of St. Chrysostom’. 

For what can be more great and honourable upon earth, than 

to be legate and vicegerent of our Lord in heaven, who sits 

at God’s right hand, who “hath given Him a name above 

every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should 

bow,” and of whom He hath said by the prophet David, “ Thy Ps. 45. 6. 
throne, O God, is for ever and ever, a sceptre of righteous- 

ness is the sceptre of Thy kingdom?” As His Father sent 

Him, so sent He them, and by virtue of their mission they 

acted and transacted with men in His name, which made St. . 
Hierome write on these words’, “ Paul an Apostle of Jesus 

Christ :’” “On this manner he begins with the authority of 

that name and office for your sakes, to whom he was to 

write ;” and upon Titus 1, saith he», “Styling himself the 
Apostle of Jesus Christ, it seems such a way of speaking as 
Prefectus Pretorio Augusti Cesaris, Magister exercitus Tiberii 
Imperatoris. For as the judges of this world, that they may 

seem the more noble, take names from the kings they serve, 

and from the dignity of the office unto which they are ex- 


CHAP. I. 
SECT. VIL. 


2 [See above, pp. 315, sqq.] 

a [Paulus Apostolus Jesu Christi. 
Auctoritas et nominis et officii preno- 
tatur, propter eos quibus erat respon- 
surus.—Pseudo-Hierom. Comment. in 
1 Ep. ad Tim. i. 1. ap. S. Hieronym. 
Op., tom, xi. col. 1043, A.] 

» [Porro quod ait: Apostolus autem 
Jesu Christi, tale mihi videtur, quale si 
dixisset, Prefectus Pretorio Augusti 
Cesaris, Magister Exercitus Tiberii 
Imperatoris. Ut enim judices seculi 


HICKES. 


hujus quo nobiliores esse videantur, ex 
regibus quibus serviunt, et ex dignitate 
qua intumescunt, vocabula sortiuntur : 
ita et Apostolus grandem inter Chris- 
tianos sibi vindicans dignitatem, Apo- 
stolum se Christi titulo przenotavit, ut 
ex ipsa lecturos nominis auctoritate 
terreret: indicans omnes qui in Christo 
crederent, debere sibi esse subjectos.— 
S. Hieron. Comment. in Epist. ad 
Titum i. 1. Op., tom. vii. col. 688, C, 
D; 682, 


Bb 


370 Dignity of Bishops as representing Christ. 


pianity or alted; so the Apostle, challenging to himself great autho- 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 


rity among Christians, did signify beforehand that he was 
the Apostle of Christ, that by the authority of the name he 
might create reverence in his readers, and thereby shew that 
all believers in Christ ought to be subject to him.” And as 
Apostle, so is Bishop a name of no less honour and dignity, for 
Christ under God is the Shepherd and Bishop of our souls, and 
as He deputed that trust and office to the Apostles, so they, 
and He by them, committed it to their successors. He is our 
High-Priest in heaven, and they under Him our high-priests 
upon earth. Nay, they represent Him both as king and 
priest ; in both these capacities they preside over us, and in 
the former they are no less than His viceroys in the several 
principalities of His kingdom. To this purpose speaks an 
author who lived in the time of King Henry I. or King 
Henry IT., (who both had differences with the archbishops of 
Canterbury, Anselm and Becket,) and as it were arbitrates 
the difference between both parties in a book intituled as 
in the margin’, which he dedicates Henrico Regi Anglorum 
gloriosissimo, and as far as he then could, favours the king’s 
side. He shews himself to have been a learned man for 
those dark times, and well versed in the Latin fathers, and 
thus he writes: Nam et regalem dignitatem habere sancte 
scripture testimonio videtur episcopus. Ait enim Dominus 
Jesus Christus Apostolis suis eorumque sequacibus: ‘ Ego dis- 
pono vobis, sicut disposuit mihi Pater meus regnum. Et Apo- 
stolus: ‘Vos estis genus electum, regale sacerdotium,.... 
Vices enim Christi filii Dei summi in terra videtur obtinere 

. . unde inter nos et Deum mediator debet existere. Ipse 
est sanctus sanctorum, clericorum scilicet ac presbyterorum, 
quibus omnibus eminet, ac precellit. Hic est ecclesie sponsus, hic 
Christi vicarius. .. Honorandi igitur sunt omnes episcopi, sicut 
regni celestis clavicularii, το. [lib. i.] cap. 9. p. 34°.—Nune 
autem sanctorum prophetarum vicem in ecclesia Christi retinent 
sacerdotes. Sic enim Dominus ad ipsam loquitur [ per Isaiam 
Prophetam] : ‘ Ecce constituam principes tuos sicut antea, et 


° Hugonis Floriacensis Tractatus de Henry the First that the tract was ad- 
Regia Potestate, et Sacerdotali Digni- dressed. See vol. i. p. 332, note s. ] 
tate. In Miscellaneorum Steph. Ba- 4 [Hugon. Floriac. &c., p. 189. col. 
luzii libro quarto. Parisiis, 1683. [tom. ii. ed. 1761. ] 

ii. ed. Luce. 1761. It was to King 


Titles of honour given them, in primitive times. 371 


consiliarios tuos sicut ab initio” Ht Psalmista: ‘ Pro patribus 
tuis nati sunt tibi filit; constitues eos principes super omnem 
terram” Igitur regiam et sacerdotalem dignitatem Deus in 
terra ordinavit, &c.* 

This indeed is an author of popish times ; but long before 
the beginning of popery they spoke of bishops in this manner, 
as of spiritual lords. Not to repeat what was cited above, 
out of the twentieth chapter of the second book of the Apos- 
tolical Constitutions‘, the title of which is this, ὅπως χρὴ τοὺς 
ἀρχομένους πειθαρχεῖν τοῖς ἄρχουσιν ἐπισκόποις, “ How the 
subjects (of the Church) ought to obey their governors the 
bishops :” in that chapter we read thus®: “ Let the layman 
honour, love, and fear a good shepherd as his lord, and 
despot, and the high-priest of his God, and his preceptor 
in religion. For he that hears him, hears Christ; and he 
that doth not obey him doth not obey Christ, and he that 
doth not receive Christ, doth not receive His Father, as it is 
written, ‘He that heareth you heareth Me, and he that de- 
spiseth you despiseth Me, and he that despiseth Me, despiseth 
Him that sent Me.’” The first of those titles, κύριος, is a 
title of great dignity, both in its secular and sacred signifi- 
cation. In its secular signification, it is used to denote the 
emperor"; and in its sacred signification, it is given to God 
and to Christ, whose legates and vicegerents the bishops are, 
and to the Holy Ghosti, whose dispensers they are. In like 


CHAP, I. 


SECT. VI. 


manner δεσπότης is a title of God, and the emperor, and his Jude 4. 


regal relations, and the great princes, and magistrates under 
the emperor in the Greek writers ; and upon the principles 
I have laid down, they were given to the bishops upon the 
score of their great spiritual dignity and pre-eminence in 
the kingdom of God and Christ, who is King of kings, and 
Lord of lords. Thus Arius begins his letter to Eusebius 


€ [Ibid., p. 193. col. i. ] 

f [See above, pp. 305, sqq. This 
chapter, however, is not quoted there. ] 

& [τὸν μέντοι ποιμένα τὸν ἀγαθὸν ὃ 
λαϊκὸς τιμάτω, ἄγαπάτω, φοβείσθω ὡς 
κύριον, ὧς δεσπότην, ὡς ἀρχιερέα θεοῦ, 
ὡς διδάσκαλον εὐσεβείας. ὃ γὰρ αὐτοῦ 
ἀκούων Χριστοῦ ἀκούει, καὶ 6 αὐτὸν ἀθε- 
τῶν Χριστὸν ἀθετεῖ, καὶ 6 τὸν Χριστὸν 
μὴ δεχόμενος οὐ δέχεται τὸν αὐτοῦ θεὸν 


καὶ πατέρα' ὃ ὑμῶν γάρ, φησιν, ἀκούων, 
ἐμοῦ ἀκούει, καὶ ὁ ὑμᾶς ἀθετῶν, ἐμὲ ἀθε- 
τεῖ, καὶ ὃ ἐμὲ ἀθετῶν, ἀθετεῖ τὸν ἀπο- 
στείλαντά me.—Const. Apost., lib. ii. 
c. 20. Concilia, tom. i. col. 248, A, B.] 

h [See Acts xxv. 26. περὶ οὗ ἀσφαλές 
τι γράψαι τῷ κυρίῳ οὐκ ἔχω. | 

i [See 2 Cor. iii, 18. καθάπερ ἀπὸ 
κυρίου πνεύματος. 


Bb 2 


372 Instances of Bishops being called 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or bishop of Nicomedia/: “Arius unjustly persecuted by Alex- 
“onpan, ander my bishop, to my most desired lord Eusebius.” 

The same Eusebius, writing to Paulinus bishop of Tyre, 
begins thus*: ‘ Eusebius sendeth greeting in Christ, τῷ 
δεσπότῃ μου, to my lord (or despot) Paulinus ;” this shews 
what the custom was before the council of Nice. Not long 
after which the bishops who came out of Egypt with Atha- 
nasius, inscribed a letter to the bishops assembled at Tyre’, 
“To our most honourable lords.” The synod of Jerusalem 
in their letter to the clergy of Egypt and Lybia, tell them™, 
“they could never be thankful enough to God, who had 
restored unto them their pastor and lord, Athanasius.” So 
Valens and Ursacius, writing to Julius bishop of Rome in 
their own vindication, thus address to him”, “To the most 
blessed lord Pope Julius.” Where I must observe to you, 
that Papa was then a title common to all bishops. Gregory 
Nazianzen, in a letter to Gregory Nyssen, hath these words®, 
“Let no man speak untruth of me, nor of my lords the bishops.” 
And St. Chrysostom superscribes his letter to Pope Innocent ?, 
τῷ δεσπότῃ μου ᾿Ιννοκεντίῳ, “To my lord (or despot) Inno- 
cent, peace in the Lord.” Palladii Dialog., p.10. In the same 


epistle mentioning several bishops, he calls them4 τοὺς κυρίους 


μου TLt@TaTovs, “my most honourable lords.” And a letter 
of George, bishop of Laodicea, hath this superscription’, “To 


J Γ Αρείου ἐπιστολὴ πρὸς Εὐσέβιον 
τὸν Νικομηδείας ἐπίσκοπον. κυρίω πο- 
θεινοτάτῳ, ἀνθρώπῳ θεοῦ, πιστῷ, ὀρθο- 
δόξῳ Εὐσεβίῳ, ΓΑρειος ὃ διωκόμενος ἀπὸ 
᾿Αλεξάνδρου τοῦ πάπα ἀδίκως διὰ τὴν 
πάντα νικῶσαν ἀλήθειαν. --- Theodoret. 
Hist. Eccl., lib. i. cap. 5. tom. iii. p. 
22, | 

k [Εὐσεβίου ἐπισκόπου Νικομηδείας 
ἐπιστολὴ πρὸς Παυλῖνον ἐπίσκοπον Τύ- 
ρου. τῷ δεσπότῃ μου Παυλίνῳ, Εὐσέβιος 
ἐν κυρίῳ χαίρειν.---Τὰ. ibid.; cap. 6. 
p- 23. | 

1 [rots ἐν Τύρῳ συνελθοῦσιν ἐπισκό- 
ποις, κυρίοις τιμιωτάτοις, οἱ am’ Αἰγύπ- 
του σὺν ᾿Αθανασίῳ ἐλθόντες τῆς καθο- 
λικῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐν κυρίῳ χαίρειν.--- 
ap. S. Athanas. Apolog. contra Aria- 
nos, ὃ ii. ΟΡ.» tom. 1. pars i. p. 193, D.] 

m [ἡ ἅγια σύνοδος ἣ ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις 
συναχθεῖσα, τοῖς ἐν Αἴγυπτῳ καὶ Λιβύῃ, 
καὶ τοῖς ἐν ᾿Αλεξανδρείᾳ πρεσβυτέροις, 
K.T.A. κατ᾽ ἀξίαν τῷ τῶν ὅλων θεῷ 
εὐχαριστεῖν ovK ἀρκοῦμεν ἀγαπητοὶ, ἐφ᾽ 
οἷς θαυμασίοις ἐποίησε πάντοτε, ἐποίησε 


δὲ καὶ νῦν μετὰ τῆς ὑμετέρας ἐκκλησίας, 
τὸν ποιμένα ὑμῶν καὶ κύριον καὶ συλ- 
λειτουργὴὺν ἡμῶν ᾿Αθανάσιον ἀποδοὺς 
buiv.|—Sozomen. Eccl. Hist., lib. iii. 
cap. 22. [ Hist. Eccl., tom. ii. p. 127. ] 

ἢ [ὁμολογία Οὐάλεντος καὶ Οὐρσακίου 
τῶν τὰ ᾿Αρείου φρονούντων, πρὸς τὸν 
Ῥώμης, ὡς ψευδῆ κατεῖπον ᾿Αθανασίου 
νος τῷ κυρίῳ μακαριωτάτῳ πάπα ᾿Ιουλίῳ, 
Οὐρσάκιος καὶ Οὐάλη».---ΤὈϊά., ο. 23. p. 
128.] 

© [ἡμῶν δὲ μηδεὶς καταψευδέσθω, πα- 
ρακαλῶῷ, μηδὲ τῶν κυρίων τῶν ἐπισκό- 
mwv.—S. Greg. Naz. Epist. elxxxit. ad 
S. Greg. Nyssen. Op, tom. ii, p. 149, 
A.] 

P [τῷ δεσπότῃ μου αἰδεσίμῳ καὶ ὅσι- 
ὠὡτάτῳ ἐπισκόπῳ ᾿Ιννοκεντίῳ ᾿Ιωάννης ἐν 
κυρίῳ xalpev.—Palladii vita 5. Chry- 
sost. Op., tom. xii. p. 5, A. ] 

4 [ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι ἐνομίσαμεν τοὺς 
κυρίους μυυ τιμιωτάτους καὶ εὐλαβεστά- 
Tous ἐπισκόπους Δημήτριον, K.T.A. πεῖ- 
oat.—Id. ibid., B.] 

r , , / 

[κυρίοις τιμιωτάτοις, Μακεδονίῳ, 


Lords in the ancient Church. 373 


my most honourable lords Macedonius, Basilius, Cecropius, 
Eugenius, George sendeth greeting in the Lord.” The bishops 
of the second general council’, “To the most honourable lords 
Damasus, Ambrose,” &c. In a synodical epistle sent by the 
bishops who met in a council in Illyricum, to the bishops of 
Asia, Phrygia, Cataphrygia, and Pacatiana'‘, they style Elpi- 
dius bishop of Illyricum, by whom they sent the letter, τὸν 
κύριον ἡμῶν Kal συλλείτουργον, “ Elpidius our lord and fellow 
minister ; so they also style Eustathius bishop of Sebastia. 
And the same Eustathius, Silvanus bishop of Tarsus, and 
Theophilus bishop of Castabala, in the inscription of their 
letter to Pope Liberius write thus": “ Eustathius, &c. send 
greeting in the Lord, to our lord, and brother, and fellow mi- 
nister Liberius.” So St. Ambrose, holding asynod with other 
bishops, wrote a synodical epistle to Siricius bishop of Rome, 
which Aper, a presbyter, subscribed for his bishop in these 
words*; “At the commandment of my lord bishop Geminia- 
nus.” In the third tome of Bibliotheca Patrum, edit. 4Y, may 
be seen abundance of letters inscribed to bishops with the 
title of lord, which were written towards the end of the fifth 
century ; which they who have not those volumes, may see 
collected, lib. xvi. cap. 1. of Dr. John Forbes’ Instructiones 


Historico- Theologica. 


Βασιλείῳ, Κεκροπίῳ, Evyeviw, Γεώργιος 
ἐν κυρίῳ xalpew.|—Sozomen. Hist. 
Kccl., lib. iv. 6. 18. [tom. ii. p. 147.] 

5. [κυρίοις τιμιωτάτοις καὶ εὐλαβεστά- 
τοις ἀδελφοῖς καὶ συλλειτουργοῖς, Δα- 
μάσῳ, ᾿Αμβροσίῳ, K.T.A. ... ἡ ἅγια 
σύνοδος τῶν ὀρθοδόξων ἐπισκόπων, τῶν 
συνεληλυθότων ἐν τῇ μεγαλῇ Κωνσταν- 
τινουπόλει, ἐν κυρίῳ xalpew.—Theodo- 
ret., lib. v. c. 9. Hist. Eccl., tom. iii. 
p. 203.] 

t [συνοδικὸν τῆς ἐν ᾿Ιλλυρικῷ συνα- 
χθείσης συνόδου περὶ τῆς πίστεως. οἱ 
ἐπίσκοποι τοῦ ᾿Ιλλυρικοῦ ταῖς ἐκκλησί- 
ais τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ ἐπισκόποις διοικήσεως 
᾿Ασιανῆς, Φρυγίας, Καροφρυγίας, Πακα- 
τιανῆς ἐν κυρίῳ χαίρειν. ἀναγκὴν οὖν 
ἔχομεν, πέμψαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς τὸν κύριον 
ἡμῶν καὶ συλλειτουργὺν ᾿Ἐλπίδιον ἀπὸ 
τῆς βασιλευούσης Ῥωμαίων ἀρχῆς. And 
so again twice in the following page. | 
—Id. ibid., lib. iv. ο. 9. [p. 157. εἴγε 
οὕτως ἔχει ὥσπερ ἀκηκόαμεν παρὰ Tod 
κυρίου ἡμῶν τοῦ συλλειτουργοῦ Εὐστα- 
θίου.- Τὰ. ibid., p. 158.] 

ἃ [κυρίῳ ἀδελφῷ καὶ συλλειτουργῷ 


Clodoveus, king of France, so in- 


AiBepiw, ἙΕὐστάθιος, Σιλβανὸς, Θεόφι- 
λος, ἐν κυρίῳ χαίρειν. |—Sozom.,, lib. vi. 
cap. 11. [p. 282. ] 

x [Domino dilectissimo fratri Siricio 
pape Ambrosius, Sabinus, Bassianus 
et ceteri.... ex jussu domini episcopi 
Geminiani, ipso presente, Aper pres- 
byter subscripsi.m—Rescriptum Episco- 
porum Ambrosii, &c. ad Siricium pa- 
pam. Concilia, tom. ii. col. 1220, B. 
1222, E.] 

y [The third volume of the Biblio- 
theca Patrum, de la Bigne, in tomis viii. 
edit. 4. Par. 1624, consists entirely of 
letters .. Epistole quas de Deo et re- 
bus divinis ecclesie patres conscripse- 
runt. | 

2 [The subject of lib. xvi. is De suc- 
cessoribus Petri et aliorum episcopo- 
rum, and cap. 1. is against a difference 
of grade among bishops; at § 28. he 
gives the extracts from the Epistles in 
the Bibl. Patrum, beginning with the 
instances which Hickes has copied, 
thus, Veterum quorundum episcopo- 
rum Gallorum, qui sub finem quinti 


CHAP. I. 


SECT, VIII. 


374 Bishops called Lords from their spiritual pre-eminence. 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ oF scribed his letter to the bishops met in council at Orange®, 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


Dominis sanctis, &c., “To my holy lords the bishops,” and in 
the end of his letter (saith he) Orate pro me domini sancti, &c., 
“Pray for me my holy lords.” They were his lords in spiri- 
tuals, as he was theirs in temporals; his superiors under God 
the Son, as he was theirs under God the Father. Lastly, this 
was the usual style of priests, when they subscribed councils 
for their bishops. Thus were bishops styled lords‘ and despots 
upon the account of their great dignity, power, and pre- 
eminence, to which they were advanced by our Lord in His 
kingdom ; and therefore, Sir, my way of speaking of them in 
my Propositions, was not new or insolent; and it will never 
be well with Christianity, till men think of bishops as I have 
written of them, till they reverence them more for their spiri- 
tual, than any temporal dignity, and be as afraid to assail 
their thrones as the thrones of kings. Sir, I protest to you 
as a divine, I know nothing that can be objected against my 
lofty way, (for so you call it,) of speaking of bishops as 
princes, but the thirty-ninth canon in the book of the canons 
of the African Church, which forbids the metropolitan or 
primate of any province to be called prince of the bishops, or 


seculi claruerunt, leguntur quedam 
epistole, tom. iii. Bibl. Patr. edit. 4. 
cum his inscriptionibus, &c.—Instruc- 
tiones Historico-Theologice . . . prece 
et studio Ioannis Forbesii a Corse, pp. 
759, 760. fol. Amst. 1645. ] 

a [Et Clovodeus Francie rex epis- 
tolam suam ad episcopos, quos ad 
concilium Aurelianense venire jusserat 
(A.D. 507) sic imscribit, ‘ Dominis 
sanctis, et apostolica sede dignissimis 
episcopis Clovodeus rex.’ Eundemque 
sic claudit; ‘Orate pro me, domini 
sancti, et apostolica sede pape dig- 
nissimi.’—Ibid., § 39. p. 760. 

Ὁ Dr. Downame’s Defence, b. iii. cap. 
6. pp. 148, 149. [In 1608, Downame 
(or Downham, afterwards bishop of 
Derry), published a sermon preached 
at the consecration of James Moun- 
tague as bishop of Bath and Wells, ‘‘in 
defence of the honourable function of 
bishops,” on Rev. i. 20. To this an 
answer was sent out, and in 1611 Dow- 
name published a reply, with the title, 
A Defence of the Sermon preached at 
the consecration of the bishop of Bath 
and Wells, against a confutation thereof 
by a nameless author: divided into four 


books ... the third defending the supe- 
riority of bishops over other ministers, 
and proving that bishops always had a 
priority not only in order, but also in 
degree, and a majority of power both 
for ordination and jurisdiction ... by 
George Downame, D.D. London, 1611. 
The subject of chapter 6. is “ Titles of 
honour given to bishops; of § 1. 
‘Whether bishops may be called 
lords.”” He gives the same instances 
as Hickes has done, and adds (p. 149) 
after the word Geminianus (see above, 
notex); ‘and this was the usual style of 
presbyters when they did subscribe to 
councils instead of their bishop whose 
place they supplied.” He refers to 
several instances. ] 

© See more instances, Habert. Pon- 
tif. Gree., p. 539. [Observat. viii. Ad 
Edictum Metropolite ordinato. Qualis 
episcopi dominatus. He adds, how- 
ever, after quoting several of the in- 
stances given by Hickes and others ; 
Neque mirum episcopos . . . dominos 
vocari; cum ipsi quoque presbyteri 
domini vocarentur etiam ab episcopis ; 
of this he gives instances. ] 


Canon of the African Church considered. 375 


supreme bishop. The words are these’; Ut prime sedis epis- 
copus non appelletur princeps sacerdotum, aut summus sacerdos, 
aut aliquod hujusmodi, sed tantum prime sedis episcopus, i. e. 
“That the bishop of the prime see be not called prince of the 
bishops, or supreme bishop, or by any such name, but only 
bishop of the prime see.” But this canon hath no relation 
to bishops, either severally considered as spiritual chiefs or 
princes in their proper districts over the clergy and laity, or 
as collegiate princes over the whole Church of God, but only 
to metropolitans, primates, or patriarchs ; and particularly, to 
the metropolitans or primates of Rome, who began betimes 
to behave themselves like episcopi episcoporum®, contrary to 
the collegiate equality of bishops; and therefore to prevent 
that this fast and arrogance, which began to appear in the 
oriental and occidental Churches, should not come among 
the African primates, they would not have them called princes 
of the bishops, lest they should think themselves as much 
superior to their fellows and colleagues in the episcopal 
office, as bishops were to presbyters, or the first to the second 
order of priests. For this reason they would have them only 
called primates, or bishops of the prime see: though as supe- 
riors to presbyters, bishops were called principes sacerdotum, 
and summi sacerdotes, according to that of Tertullian de Bap- 
tismo', Dandi quidem baptismi jus habet supremus sacerdos, qui 
est episcopus ; and that of Facundus Hermianensis®, Quid com- 
memorem laicos... quid ministros plurimos ? Quid diaconos 
in tertio? quid presbyteros in secundo sacerdotio constitutos ὃ 
Ipsi apices, et principes omnium episcopt, &c. Bishops therefore 
are princes of the clergy and laity, princes of the Church in 
its several districts, as a spiritual society, though primates, 


ἃ [Codex Canon. Eccles. Africane, 
Canon xxxix. Concilia, tom. ii. col. 
1281, C. This codex is a collection of 
canons of different African councils. 
This is Canon 26 of the third council 
of Carthage, (A.D. 397.) Concilia, 
ibid., col. 1403, C. The Greek trans- 
lation is, ὥστε τὸν THs πρώτης καθέδρας 
ἐπίσκοπον μὴ λέγεσθαι ἔξαρχον τῶν 
ἱερέων, ἢ ἄκρον ἱερέα, ἢ τοιουτοτρόπον 
τί ποτε ἄλλα μόνον ἐπίσκοπον τῆς 
πρώτης Kadedpus. | 

€ Neque enim quisquam nostrum 
episcopum se esse episcoporum consti- 
tuit, aut tyrannico terrore δα obse- 


quendi necessitatem collegas suos adi- 
git; [quando habeat omnis episcopus 
pro licentia libertatis et potestatis suze 
arbitrium proprium; tamque judi- 
cari ab alio non possit, quam nec ipse 
potest alterum judicare.—Conce. Carth. 
de Bapt. Heret. apud Cyprianum. [S. 
oypt Op., pp. 329, 330. ed. Ben. ] 

[Tert. de Bapt. cap. 17. Op., p. 
230, C. ] 

s [This seems a mistake for Optatus 
Milevitanus (lib. de Schism. Donatist. 
cont. Parmenian., lib. i. 6. 13. p. 11. 
quoted above, p. 35. note k.) ] 


CHAP. 1. 


SECT, VIII. 


376 Bishops, as such, equal to each other. 


pienity or and metropolitans, and patriarchs are not princes of the 
EPISCOPAL . . ἢ - 
bishops, who are of the same order with them", and their 


ORDER. 
brethren and colleagues. 


h Hieronymus in Epist. ad Eva- 
grium. Ubicunque fuerit episcopus, 
sive Rome, sive Eugubii, sive Constan- 
tinopoli, sive Rhegii, sive Alexandriez, 
sive Tanis, ejusdem meriti, ejusdem est 
et sacerdotii. Potentia divitiarum, et 
paupertatis humilitas, vel sublimiorem 
velinferiorem episcopum non facit. Cz- 
terum omnes Apostolorum successores 
sunt. [S. Hier. Epist. exlvi. ad Evan- 
gelum (al. Ixxxv. ad Evagrium) Op., 
tom. i. p. 1076, D. 1077, A.] See also 
Balsamon, and Zonaras on canon xlii. 
Concil. Carth. [This is the canon 
quoted above, p. 374, as the thirty- 
ninth of the canons of the African 


Church, see note d. Balsamon and Zo- 
naras observe that in the sixth and 
seventh canons of the council of Sar- 
dica, and the ninth and seventeenth of 
the general council of Chalcedon, Me- 
tropolitans are called ‘exarchs;’ that the 
latter council therefore approved the 
decision of the council of Sardica in 
this point rather than that of Car- 
thage; in which the primates’ not 
having titles of distinction given is to 
be attributed only to the desire of re- 
pressing ambition. See their words in 
Beveridge, Pandecta Canonum, tom. i. 
p. 567, A—C. | 


CHAPTER II. 


AN ANSWER TO THE SECOND CAPITAL OBJECTION AGAINST THE DIGNITY 
AND AUTHORITY OF THIS OFFICE, FROM THE CHURCH INDEPENDENCY 
BEING A PRESBYTERIAN DOCTRINE. 


Your next objection against my Propositions is for con- _ 8507. 1. 


taining a doctrine so like that of the presbyterians concern- The dis- 
tinct power 
ing Church power and independency, by which they have aad polity 
endeavoured to enslave the State to the Church. Pei nnik 
To which I answer, that there are few sects that do not ἃ 7esby" 
retain some truths, one of which is the distinction of eccle- rented 
siastical and civil power, and the independency of the Church 
on the State, and as far as the presbyterians have abused 
and misapplied this doctrine to the wrong or disturbance of 
the secular potentates, and invading their rights, so far it is 
to be condemned and abhorred by every good Christian, in 
the presbytery as well as in the pope. But then that abuse 
of the doctrine, which is catholic and primitive, is purely the 
fault of the men. But as I have taught and explained it in 
my letter’, it can never hurt the State, or secular sovereigns 
and those put in authority under them, otherwise than by 
their own fault, when they bring the judgments of God upon 
themselves and the people for acting contrary to it, and 
their duty to Christ and His Church. According to my 
Propositions the Church hath no sword, but the spiritual one 
of excommunication, nor any arms to defend itself against 
the oppression of the State, but spiritual censures, prayers, 


[The letter referred to is the 
fuller one containing the forty Propo- 
sitions, published under the title of the 
Constitution of the Catholic Church, 
and the nature and consequences of 
Schism, in a Letter to a Sergeant at 
Law, in the posthumous volume bear- 
ing the same title sent out in 1716. 
See Proposition 24. (pp. 78, 79.) “That 
the union or interweaving of the civil 
with the ecclesiastical laws and govern- 
ment gives the State no more right or 


pretence of right to usurp it over the 
Church or invade its spiritual rights 
which it derives from Christ, than it 
gives the Church to usurp it over the 
State, or invade its temporal rights 
which it derives from God.’? So Prop. 
28. (p. 81.) ‘*(Men) are bound under 
the relation of faithful temporal sub- 
jects to defend the rights of the State, 
which are their own civil rights, against 
the Church, when she invades them.” ] 


378 The doctrine stated by Hickes guarded from abuse. 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤῪ or and tears. Its rights, as a society founded by Christ Jesus, 


EPISCOPAL 


orper. are no otherwise to be maintained, than its faith and wor- 


ship, by patience and suffering, commonly called passive obe- 
dience; and so far am I from enslaving the laity to the clergy, 
or the Church to the State, that in my Propositions I make 
them subordinate, and subject to one another; the Church 
to the State in all temporal matters, and the State to the 
Church in purely spiritual matters: and in this divine har- 
mony doth the peace of the Church and a Christian State 
consist. My doctrine condemns the Church’s going beyond 
its bounds, and invading the rights of princes in ordine ad 
spiritualia, as much as the State’s transgressing its bounds, 
and violating the rights of the Church in ordine ad temporalia ; 
but more especially if Church magistrates go beyond their 
bounds in disturbing the peace, order, frame, or government 
of the State, I would have them undergo more severe and 
exemplary punishments than other men. 

Thus, Sir, you see the doctrine of Church power and 
independency is to be distinguished from the abuse of it ; 
and the abuse of it, whether by presbyterians, or the clergy 
of the Church of Rome, is no reflection upon the pure and 
innocent doctrine, but upon them who make so ill use of it, 
contrary to the intention of our blessed Lord, and the ends 
for which He gave it tothe Church. Wherefore I say of this 


Rom. 7. 12, doctrine, as St. Paul said of the law, it is “ spiritual, holy, just 


14, 


and good;” though like the law, it hath been much abused 
with mixtures, as other doctrines have been. But in my 
Propositions, you know it is delivered in its primitive original 
purity, without presbyterian or popish mixtures, and secured 
as much as it can be in writing, from being perverted and 
abused. If you would see how much it is corrupted with 
presbyterian mixtures, you need but consult the sixth book 
of Spotswood’s Church History, from p. 289 to p. 302. But 
nevertheless there are many truths asserted there con- 
cerning the Church and Church government, to which I give 
my full assent. They are such as these*: [chap. 1. 8.1 “The 


k [The following passages are ex- Church; and first of the policy thereof 
tracted from ‘‘a form of Church policy,” in general, wherein it differeth from 
presented to the Scottish parliament the civil.’’ Hickes’ reference is to the 
by the Presbyterian body in 1578, and fourth edition of The History of the 
entitled; ‘‘ Heads and conclusions ofthe Church and State of Scotland, &c. by 


Correct views of Presbyterians respecting Church power. 379 


Church, (as it is taken for them who exercise the spiritual 
function,)” i. 6. for the Church governors, “hath a certain 
power granted by God, according to which it useth a proper 
jurisdiction, or government..... [4.] This power ecclesi- 
astical is an authority granted by God the Father, through 
the mediation of Jesus Christ [unto the Church gathered 
and having the ground in the word of God,] to be put in 
execution by them unto whom the spiritual government of 
the Church by lawful calling is committed. 

[8.] This power and polity is different and distinct in its 
own nature from that power and polity which is called the 
civil power. ... [9.] For this power ecclesiastical floweth 
[from God] immediately [and] (from) the Mediator Jesus 
Christ, and is spiritual, not having a temporal head in the 
earth, but only Christ, the only spiritual King and Governor 
of the (universal) Church. 

[13.] As the ministers and others of the ecclesiastical 
State are subject to the magistrate civilly; so ought the 
person of the magistrate to be subject to the Church spiri- 
tually [and in ecclesiastical government. | 

[15.] The civil power is called the power of the sword; 
(and) the other power the power of the keys. 

[19.] The civil magistrate getteth obedience by the sword 
and [other] external means; but the minister by the spiri- 
tual sword and spiritual means. [22.] As ministers are 
subject to the judgment and punishment of magistrates in 
external things, if they offend; so ought the magistrates to 
submit themselves to the discipline of the Church, if they 
transgress in matters of conscience and religion. 

[Chap. x. Art. 2.] It pertains to the office of a Christian 
magistrate to fortify and assist the godly proceedings of the 
Church;... [4.] to assist and maintain the discipline of 
(it) .... without confounding the one jurisdiction with the 
other; ... [7.] or usurping any thing that pertains not to 
the civil sword, but belongs to the offices merely ecclesias- 


J. Spotswood, archbishop of St. An- 
drew’s. London, 1077. The first pas- 
sage extracted is the third article of 
chapter 1, which runs thus in the ori- 
ginal; ‘‘ The Church in this last sense 
hath a power,” &c.... referring to art. 
2.‘*(The Church is taken)sometimes for 
them that exercise the spiritual func- 


tions amongst the congregation of them 
that profess the truth.’”’ The words in 
parentheses in the text are added by 
Hickes, (who also substitutes ‘ polity’ 
for ‘ policy’); those in brackets are in- 
serted by the editor, from the original 
of Spottiswood. } 


CHAP. Il. 


SECT. I. 


DIGNITY OF tical ; 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 


380 The Westminster Confession, Se., state the same doctrines. 


as the ministry of the word or Sacraments, using 
ecclesiastical discipline, and [spiritual] execution thereof, or 
any part of the spiritual keys, which the Lord Jesus gave to 
the Apostles, and their true successors.” 

So in the Westminster Confession, chap. xxv. § 3!: “Christ 
hath given to the Catholic visible Church the ministry, as 
well as the oracles, and ordinances of God.”’ So chap. xxx. 
§ 1: “The Lord Jesus, as King and Head of His Charch, 
hath therein appointed a government in the hand of Church 
officers, distinct from the civil magistrate.” § 2: “To these 
oflicers the keys of the kingdom of heaven are committed,” 
&c., not to transcribe many other passages out of that Con- 
fession, and two or three presbyterian books more, viz., Jus 
Divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici™, and Jus Divinum Ministerii 
Evangelici ; Jus Divinum Ministerii Anglicani® ; which assert 
“Church power to be seated in Christ the head of the Church, 
and from Him committed to the Apostles, and from them to 
Church officers, and that they alone who received it from the 
Apostles” (which I have shewed were bishops superior to, 
and distinct from presbyters), “can derive and transmit it to 
others ;” and that this transmission, and derivation of Church 
power by continued lineal succession, as well as the power it- 
self, was founded on positive Divine institution. For the proof 
of all which, they cite such texts of Scripture as I made use 
of in the former letter you gave me leave to write to you. 

11. This distinction of the power and polity of the Church 
Divi- 


1 [The Confession of Faith and 
Catechisms agreed upon by the assem- 
bly of Divines at Westminster, to be a 
part of uniformity in religion between 
the Churches of Christ in the three 
Kingdoms. London, 1650. Chap. 26. 
Of the Church. ὃ 3. “Unto this Catholic 
visible Church, Christ hath given the 
ministry, oracles, and ordinances of 
God,” &c. Chap. 30, § 1, is Of Church 
Censures; from which Hickes’ quota- 
tions are made verbatim. | 

m [The first work referred to is, “Jus 
Divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici; or 
the Divine Right of Church Govern- 
ment asserted and evidenced by the 
Holy Scriptures, &c., by sundry Minis- 
ters of Christ within the city of Lon- 
don.” ed. 8, 1654. See chap. xi. sect. 
2. pp. 178—202. ] 

n [The two last mentioned works 
are two parts of the same book; of 


the first the title is, “Jus 
num, or the Divine Right of the Gos- 
pel ministry. The first part.” Lon- 
don, 1654. Of the other, ‘‘ The second 
part, containing a justification of the 
present ministers of England, both 
such who were ordained during the 
prevalency of episcopacy from the foul 
aspersion of Antichristianism, and 
those who have been ordained since its 
abolition from the unjust imputation 
of novelty; that a Bishop and Pres- 
byter are all one in Scripture, and that 
ordination by Presbyters is most agree- 
able to the Scripture pattern.’’? London, 
1654, The heading of the pages is 
“Jus Divinum ministerii Anglicani, or 
the Divine Right of the ministry in 
England.”’ The work is directed 
against the independents as well as 
the Church. ] 


Real distinctness of the two powers. 381 


from that of the State by Divine institution, which the pres-  cnar. πὶ 
byterian writers insist so much upon, is indeed not only like — 
to what I laid down in my former letter to you, but the very of this 
same, and the doctrine is never the worse, no more than other eae 
sound doctrines, for being taught in the Kirk ; though, as they pad 
have misapplied and abused it, it is to be abhorred and de- the Inde- 
tested by all good Christians, as contrary to the holy Gospels, ee 
and the doctrine and practice of the holy Catholic Church, 

and utterly inconsistent with the civil order and peace of 
kingdoms and sovereign states. The peace and quiet ofa 

nation, where there is such a Church or Churches, is not to be 
preserved without a standing army; but the distinction be- 

tween the two powers, jurisdictions, and governments, which 

1 have taught, as it was ordained by the wisdom from above ; 

so is it “ pure, peaceable, and gentle, without hypocrisy, and 

full of the fruits of righteousness and good works.” It isa 
distinction “not of man, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, 

and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead.” It isa 

real distinction and difference, not invented by priests, but 
ordained by Jesus Christ, to distinguish His kingdom from 

the kingdoms of the world, and the things which belong to 

God from those which belong to Cesar, or betwixt the things 

which belong to the empire, and those that belong to the 
Church. A real distinction, I say it is, by all the rules of Logic, 

which teacheth us°, “that different subjects and the accidents of 
different subjects, are really different from one another ;” and 

“that those things are really distinct, of which one can exist 
without the other.” Thus the Church subsisted without the 

State for three hundred years together; there was then nothing 

more visible than the distinction or rather opposition between 

it and the empire, or between the kingdom of Christ and that 

of Cesar. The two societies and governments were all that 

time as distinguishable as light from darkness to every vulgar 

eye, while the Apostles and their successors preached against 

the Jewish and Gentile religions, planted and formed Chris- 

tian societies or Churches, in the greatest cities of the world, 

and thereby turned it upside down, “ doing all things contrary Acts 17. 6, 
to the decrees of Czesar” and the laws of the empire, and ἡ 


ὁ [Differunt vero realiter, quorum  subjectis vel diversa subjecta.—San- 
unum potest esse sine alio absque con- _—_derson, Logie, lib. i. c. 19, § 5.] 
tradictione ; vel que sunt in diversis 


382 Doctrine of the Independents. P. Nye on the 


prenity or vouching all they did by the authority of ‘‘ another King, one 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 





Jesus,” “who was dead, but whom they affirmed to be alive.” 
Sir, “ He that liveth and was dead, but is alive for evermore,” 
is the founder of the Church. ‘He who hath the keys of 
hell and death” gave the power of the keys to commission 
ministers of His own to govern His kingdom unto the end of 
the world, to admit in and to exclude out of it, to bind and 
to loose, to chastise and correct with spiritual censures, to 
humble and exalt, to suspend, deprive, degrade, and restore, 
and finally to cut off the incorrigible with the spiritual sword. 
If this be presbyterian, or popish doctrine, I own myself to 
be so unhappy as to believe both, and bound in conscience 
to maintain them in behalf of the Church against the world. 
Here, Sir, my conscience saith unto me, as St. Ignatius said 
to Polycarp®, στῆθι ἑδραῖος ὧς ἄκμων τυπτόμενος, “stand 
steady, and fast, like a beaten anvil.” Indeed, Sir, the insti- 
tutions of Christ, without making comparison between them, 
are dear and sacred to me, as well as His revelations, and I 
have no more power to do any thing against the doctrines 
which I think relate to the being and government or disci- 
pline of the Church, as a society, than against those which 
relate unto it as a sect. Ι 

Τῇ you had pleased, you might have objected as well against 
my Propositions about the distinction of the Church from the 
State, for containing a doctrine so like that of the independ- 
ents. For there is not a little of that doctrine in P. Nye’s 
posthumous book entitled, “Of the oath of Supremacy, and 
power of the King in ecclesiastical affairs,” printed at London, 
1683”. In that book you will find the author, in the words 
of other writers, asserting’ that “ government or discipline” 
(as well as doctrine) “is intrinsic (to) and inseparable from 
the [very] essence of a Church, ... and not the grant and con- 
stitution of any secular prince and State; that ‘the Church 
is endued’ with a judicature immediately derived from Christ, 


° {S. Ignat. Epist. ad S. Polycarp. 
c. 3. Patr, Apost., tom. ii. p. 40. ] 

» [From the address of the publisher 
to the reader at the beginning of this 
work it would seem to be a reprint. 
It begins; “The reprinting of this 
judicious and learned treatise of Mr. 
Nye’s, is occasioned by the reimposing 
of the oaths of allegiance and supre- 
macy on the city of London at this 


juncture for election of common council 
men,’ &c. Its design is to shew that 
“the principles of dissenters are not 
inconsistent with the king’s supremacy 
in ecclesiastical affairs.’’ | 

4 [The following extracts are from 
Nye, chap. 5. Obj. 1. § 2. p. 38.] 

r [This is an extract from Dr. 
Thomas Jackson’s Treatise of the holy 
Catholic Faith and Church, first pub- 


independent power of the Church, quoting authorities. 383 


and independent upon any earthly power, or any power what- 
soever upon earth, whether spiritual (1. e. papal) or tempo- 
ral;’” that “‘the things comprised in the Church*, and by 
God Himself commanded to the Church,’ as ‘the word, Sacra- 
ments, and use of the keys, or ecclesiastical power, and cure 
of souls,’” (of which let me add the episcopal certainly is the 
greatest,) “‘are subject to no mortal creature, pope, or prince;”” 
that “‘the Church hath the keys from Christ‘ equally inde- 
pendent upon any mortal man, in discipline asin doctrine ;’” 
that “all grant there is a government jure Divino and by 
the appointment of Jesus Christ ;” that “it is denied by none 
but Erastus and his followers, who may as well deny praying, 
preaching, or Sacraments to be jure Divino ;” that “it is as 
expressly ordained, that discipline be exercised in the name 
of Christ, as to preach, pray, or baptize in His name; that 
there are certainly things of God” (among which give me 
leave to reckon the episcopal cure and jurisdiction, as well 
as you reckon the order) “that are not things of Cesar.” 
And p. 24 he observes", that ‘“ Churches were planted, esta- 
blished, and kept up where there was no assistance from the 
princes of the earth, but opposition ;” that is, as I have 
shewed in my first letter*, “ against the laws and consent of 
secular powers.” In p. 23 he shews the difference between 
Church power and government, and the temporal, and of that 
he saith, that it is “spiritual, and hath all particulars for 


lished in 1627, cap. 8. ὃ 5. The words 
of Nye, p. 38, are: “Churches are 
endued (saith Dr. Jackson),”’&c. Jack- 
son’s are: ‘‘It is probable that there 
were as many several distinct visible 
Churches as there were Apostles or 
other ambassadors of Christ, immedi- 
ately endued,’ &c.—See his collected 
Works, vol. 111. p. 834. ed. 1673.] 

* [This is an extract from Bp. Bil- 
son’s work, The true difference between 
Christian Subjection and Unchristian 
Rebellion, p. 171. Oxford, 1685. Nye’s 
words (p. 38) are, ‘by God Himself 
commanded to the Church, (these 
things are specified in p. 227, to be the 
word, &c.)’’ | 

ὁ [This extract is from Rutherford 
(a presbyterian )’s work, entitled, ‘“‘ The 
due right of Presbyteries, or a peace- 
able plea for the Government of the 
Church of Scotland, by Samuel Ru- 
therford, professor of Divinity at St. 


Andrews, London, 1644.’ | 

" [Nye’s words are: ‘‘It is not to 
be denied that souls were converted 
and Churches established and kept up,”’ 
&e. | 

x [**They (the Apostles) challenged 
maintenance, and levied contributions 
of their spiritual subjects, and erected 
tribunals of spiritual judicature, and 
inflicted spiritual punishments by their 
own authority, in a way wholly inde- 
pendent of the secular powers, and con- 
trary to their established customs and 
laws.”’ This positionis very fully drawn 
out in the context of the passage in 
the letter referred to, ‘‘ Of the Consti- 
tution of the Catholic Church, and the 
nature and consequences of Schism, in 
a letter sent toa Sergeant at Law.’’— 
See Hickes’ posthumous work pub- 
lished under that title, pp. 110, sqq. 
London, 1716, and above vol. i. p. 62, 
note g. | 


884 The oath of supremacy consistent with these doctrines. 


pienity or Substance, both in respect of persons and administrations, 
“onver, for matter and manner appointed by Jesus Christ, and in all 
nations to be the same.” And p. 21°, “that Church power 
architectonically considered, is the jurisdiction and authority 
of Christ, and seated in Him as head of the Church, and 
in the Church it is διακονία, and seated in her only ministe- 
rially, because the Church acts all in the name, and by the 
authority of Christ ;” p. 18 he saith that “Christ is ap- 
pointed by His Father to be King and Law-giver of the 
Churches, who hath left rules and laws for managing the 
affairs of those spiritual corporations.” But then he differs 
from the presbyterians in this, that he endeavours to recon- 
cile the power and authority spiritual with the king’s su- 
premacy; shewing the true scope and sense of the oath of 
supremacy, as it hath been altered and interpreted by our 
kings, not to be contrary to the power and jurisdiction of the 
Church’. He cites the letter of King Hen. VIII. to the clergy 
of the province of York in 15334, who were offended at his 


Y [Nye’s words are; ‘And truly 
ἀρχιτεκτονικὴ Church power, is not 
properly jurisdiction or authority as in 
the Church, but as in Christ, the head 
of the Church ; as seated in the Church, 
or ‘ccetus fidelium,’ it is only διακονία, 
‘ministerium’ not ‘dominium,’ and acts 
all in the name or authority of Christ.’ ] 

z See Mr. Thorndyke’s Forbearance 
of Christian Penalties. [The proper 
title of Thorndyke’s work is, “a Dis- 
course of the Forbearance or the 
Penalties which a due Reformation 
requires. London, 1670.” It treats of 
the questions of the reforming the 
Church itself, and of the treatment due 
to recusants. Chap. xxiii. is what 
Hickes refers to; its subject is, “ Of 
restoring and reforming the Jurisdic- 
tion of the Crown and of the Church 
in Ecclesiastical causes,’’ pp. 118, sqq. ] 

Dr. Simon Lowth of the Subject of 
Church Power, chap. vi. [The portion 
of this chapter which is referred to is 
sect. 4, where the subject of the king’s 
supremacy is very fully treated, pp. 
431, 544. Lond. 1685. ] 

The Discourse concerning the Ille- 
gality of the Ecclesiastical Commis- 
sion. London, 1689, pp. 13, 14. [This 
work was published anonymously. It 
was written by Stillingfleet, who, on 
being summoned before the Ecclesi- 


astica] Commission appointed by James 
II., drew up the substance of it; which 
he afterwards completed and published 
after the king had left the country. 
He refers to the act, 5 Eliz. ec. 1. ὃ 14, 
and the admonition attached to the 
queen’s injunctions, to the thirty- 
seventh article, and the testimonies 
given in the text, and to others from 
our divines: the position he maintains 
is that “as in temporal matters the 
king’s supreme authority is exercised 
in his ordinary courts, so likewise in 
ecclesiastical, but as to extraordinary 
jurisdiction, that depends on the legis- 
lative power.”’ | 

* [ Nye, when speaking of the oath 
of supremacy as it stood in the time of 
Henry VIII. and Edward, (according 
to the act 85 Hen. VIII, ο. 1, in which 
the king was acknowledged to be the 
supreme head of the Church,) says, that 
“Henry by his letter written to the 
clergy of York province well defends 
it.’ The letter was written in 1533, 
when the convocation of the province 
of York hesitated to acknowledge the 
king’s supremacy as that of Canter- 
bury had done; see above, vol. i. p. 
225, note. The letter is printed in 
Wilkins’ Concilia, tom. iii. pp. 762, 
sqq- | 


Authoritative explanations of the oath. 


385 


title of being head of the Church; and secretary Walsing- 
ham’s letter to Monsieur Critoy, in which he tells him how 
“the oath of supremacy was altered into a more grateful 
form, the hardness of the name and appellation of supreme 


head being removed.” 


He cites the sense and interpretation 


by which Queen Elizabeth explained it in the form it now 
stands, in the admonition annexed to the injunctions’; the 
confirmation of that sense by way of proviso in Stat. 5. Eliz. 
1¢; the 37th article in the Articles of Religion concluded in 
the year 1562°, King James the First’s explication of it, in his 
Apology‘, p. 76, 1604; Bp. Bilson’s’, Dr. Morton’s", and Mr. 


> [This letter of Walsingham, ex- 
plaining the seeming inconsistency of 
the queen in persecuting both papists 
and puritans, was first printed in 1654, 
in a collection of letters entitled, ‘‘ Ca- 
bala sive Scrinia sacra, Mysteries of 
State and Government, in Letters of 
illustrious persons, and great agents in 
the reign of Hen, VIIT., Queen Eliza- 
beth, King James, and the late King 
Charles,” part ii. p. 89. The date of 
the letter is uncertain. It is also 
printed in Collier’s Eccl. Hist., vol. ii. 
p. 607; referred to by Nye, p. 10. } 

¢ (“The queen’s majesty being in- 
formed that in certain places of the 
realm, sundry of her native subjects, 
being called to ecclesiastical ministry 
of the Church, be by sinister persua- 
sion, and perverse construction per- 
suaded to find some scruple in the 
form of an oath, &c.... her majesty 
neither doth nor will challenge any 
authority than that was challenged and 
lately used by... king Henry VIII. 
and king Edward VI., which is, and 
was of ancient time due to the imperial 
crown of this realm; that is, under God 
to have the sovereignty and rule over 
all manner of persons born within 
these her realms, dominions, and coun- 
tries, of what estate, either ecclesiasti- 
cal or temporal soever they be, so as no 
other foreign power shall or ought to 
have any superiority over them.’’—An 
admonition to simple men deceived 
by malicious, appended to injunctions 
given by the queen’s majesty, We. 
A.D. 1559.—Wilkins’ Concilia, tom. 
iv. p. 188; referred to by Nye, ibid. ] 

4 [“ Provided also, that the oath ex- 
pressed in the said act, made in the 
said first year, shall be taken and ex- 
pounded in such form as is set forth in 
an admonition annexed to the queen’s 


HICKES, 


injunctions, published in the first year 


of her majesty’s reign,’’? &e.—Act 5 - 


Eliz. 1, § 14.] 

e [Nye, p. 10. The words of the 
article are, “* The queen’s majesty hath 
the chief power in this realm of Eng- 
land, and all other her dominions, 
under whom the chief government of 
all estates of this realm whether they 
be ecclesiastical or civil, in all causes 
doth appertain, and is not, nor ought 
to be subject to any foreign jurisdic- 
tion. 

Where we attribute to the queen’s 
majesty the chief government, by 
which titles we understand the minds 
of some slanderous folk to be offended, 
we give not to our princes the minis- 
tering either of God’s Word or of the 
Sacraments; the which thing the in- 
junctions also lately set forth by Eliza- 
beth our queen do most plainly testify ; 
but that only prerogative which we see 
to have been given always to all godly 
princes in Holy Scriptures by God 
Himself, that is, That they should rule 
all estates and degrees committed to 
their charge by God, whether they be 
ecclesiastical or temporal, and restrain 
with the civil sword the stubborn and 
evil doers.’’ See vol. i. p. 230, note u. | 

f {In that oath is contained only 
the king’s absolute power over all per- 
sons, as well civil as ecclesiastical, ex- 
cluding all foreign powers and poten- 
tates to be judges within his domi- 
nions.’”’-—An Apology for the Oath of 
Allegiance ; first sent forth without a 
name: but now acknowledged by the 
author, the right high and mighty 
prince James, &c. p. 47. Lond. 1609; 
quoted by Nye, p. 11.] 

& [‘ Bishop Bilson, a great searcher 
into the doctrine of the supremacy of 
kings, gives this as the sense of the 


cc 


CHAP. It. 


SECT. II. 


886 Rightly understood not prejudicial to Church power. 


pienity or Mason’s! sense of it; and lastly, he also cites the preface to 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


Statute 24 Hen. VIII. cap. 12, wherein the temporal and 
spiritual bodies of this realm, and their respective authorities 
and jurisdictions are distinguished, and the king’s supremacy, 
as head over both united into one body politic, is declared in 
such manner as is no ways prejudicial to the Church, as a 
spiritual society immediately instituted by Christ, and com- 
mitted to the administration and government of the Apostles 
and their successors, independently on the secular powers. 
But to return to the presbyterians: I could pick up more 
gold out of the dross and rubbish with which this unhappy 
sect have debased and depraved the pure doctrine of Church 
power, and the distinction of the independency of the Church 
from the State. They have rejected the supreme order and 
authority to which Christ hath committed the administration 
of His kingdom, and declared it to be an antichristian usurp- 


oath. ‘The oath,’ saith he, ‘ex- 
presseth not kings’ duty to God, but 
ours to them; as they must be obeyed 
when they join with truth, so must 
they be endured when they fall into 
error. Which side soever they take, 
either obedience to their wills, or sub- 
mission to their swords, is their due by 
God’s law, and that is all which our 
oath exacteth.’? And a few lines fol- 
lowing he interprets what is meant by 
supremacy. ‘We do not,’ saith he, 
‘ give to princes power to do what they 
list, in the matters appertaining to God 
and His service. Indeed we say the 
pope may not depose them, nor pull the 
crown off their heads. In this only 
sense we defend them to be supreme, 
that.is, not at liberty to do what they 
list without regard of truth or right, 
but without superior on earth.’ (Bil- 
son’s True Difference, &c. p. 218.) 
Nye; p. 12.] 

» (Dr. Morton against the pope’s 
supremacy, out of an epistle of Leo to 
the emperor, speaking thus: ‘ You 
must not be ignorant that your princely 
power is given unto you, not only in 
worldly regiment, but also (spiritual) 
for the preservation of the Church.’ 
As if he had said, not only in cases 
temporal, but also in spiritual, so far as 
it belongeth to the outward preserva- 
tion, not to the personal administration 
of them. And this is the substance of 
our English oath: and further, neither 
do our kings of England challenge, 


nor subjects condescend unto,’—p. 26.”’ 
(The reference is to the third part of 
Morton’s work, entitled ‘* A full satis- 
faction concerning a double Romish 
iniquity, &c.”’ part iii., ‘which is a con- 
futation of the principles of Romish 
doctrine in two points;’’ “1. The su- 
preme head of rebellion,’’ the pages of 
which are headed ‘‘a confutation of the 
pope’s supremacy over kings.’’ chap. 
9. p. 26. Lond. 1606,) quoted by Nye, 
p- 12. See above p. 807, note x. ] 

i [‘*Mr. Mason in his Vindicie Ee- 
clesiz Angliz, speaking of Calvin’s 
being offended, ‘verum si intellexisset 
nihil aliud sibi valuisse hunc titulum,’ 
&c. ‘Calvin would never have dis- 
allowed this oath if he had understood 
by the title of supreme governor in 
ecclesiastical things, that nothing else 
had been claimed, but an exclusion of 
popish tyranny, and a lawful power 
in the king over his subjects ; which 
stands not in coining new articles of 
faith or forms of religion, such as were 
Jeroboam’s calves; but in defending 
and propagating that faith and religion 
of which God in the Scriptures is the 
undoubted author. In this sense and 
no other that ever we have heard of is 
the title of supreme governor given to 
and accepted by the king.’ (Vindicize 
KEcclesie Anglican, sive de legitimo 
ejusdem ministerio, &c., lib. iii. c. 5. 
p. 319. Lond. 1625; p. 270 of the 
translation, Lond. 1628.) Nye, p. 13. ] 

k [Nye, see above, p. 312, note 1.] 


The abuse of these doctrines by the Presbyterians. 587 


ation, and contrary to the word of God. They have most 
sacrilegiously taken the administration to themselves, even 
the whole power of the keys, which Christ gave to His Apos- 
tles and their successors the bishops, together with the power 
of ordination, and by consequence have altered the polity of 
His kingdom, and subverted the constitution of the Catholic 
Church. They have also extended! their pretended ecclesi- 
astical powers from matters of faith and pure spiritual disci- 
pline, to secular business, and matters of temporal govern- 
ment, to the great prejudice of the royal authority, as to 
abrogate acts of parliament, and discharge people from obe- 
dience to them, making Church power to signify any thing 
in ordine ad ecclesiastica, and spiritualia, by extending it to 
whatsoever they think conducible to God’s glory, the ad- 
vancement of Christ’s kingdom, or the good of the Church. 
Furthermore, these usurpers of the spiritual power, add the 
temporal to the spiritual sword, and contrary to the doctrines 
of the Gospel, fight against the temporal sovereign, for King 
Jesus, as often as they think it needful to defend His sceptre, 
and the rights of His kingdom, of which they are the greatest 
invaders, having rebelled against their lawful bishops, and 
opposed as much as they can the whole order; and for want 
of succession and ordination having none but groundless and 
impudent pretensions to the ministry, and by consequence 
no right to administer spiritual authority, or take upon them 
the government of the Church. 


CHAP. I. 


SECT. 11. 


III. All this, Sir, you know as well as 1; I have heard szcr. m. 
you often speak of ΠΝ upon principle, as the scandal and Nothing 


ere ad- 


reproach of the reformed name, and declare that they were vanced con- 


no Church; which made me a little wonder that you should 
think the primitive doctrine in my propositions concerning 


trary to the 
Regal Su- 

premacy as 
rightly un- 


the power and independency of the Church like that of derstood. 


theirs, who indeed have endeavoured to enslave the State to 
the Church. To conclude, Sir, in all my letter there is 


' The king’s large declaration, foul acts and writings: by which it 


printed at London 1639, from p. 402 
to the end. [A large declaration con- 
cerning the late tumults in Scotland, 
from their first originals: together 
with a particular deduction of the sedi- 
tious practices of the prime leaders of 
the covenant, taken out of their own 


doth appear that religion was only pre- 
tended by those leaders, but nothing 
less intended by them. By the King. 
London, 1639.’’ The part referred to 
by Hickes is the narrative of the re- 
bellious proceedings of the presbyte- 
rians. | 


ὅ88 Hlickes’ views not more apparently opposed to the 


ῬΙΟΝΊΤΥ or nothing contrary to the regal supremacy, as it hath been 
EPISCOPAL * 


ORDER. 


Acts 10. 37, 
38 


Luke 3. 22. 


John 20.21. 


Matt. 28. 
—20. 


qualified and explained by our kings and queens, nor to any 
other part of the law. And that you may not censure what 
I have written, or rather collected as such, pray read Bishop 
Sanderson’s opinion of episcopacy, delivered in these words™ : 
“My opinion is, that episcopal government is not to be de- 
rived merely from apostolical practice or institution, but 
that it is originally founded in the person and office of the 
Messias, our blessed Lord Jesus Christ, who being sent by 
His Father to be the great Apostle, Bishop, and Pastor of 
His Church, and anointed to that office immediately after 
His baptism by John, ‘with power and the Holy Ghost’ de- 
scending then upon Him ‘in a bodily shape,’ did after- 
wards, before His ascension into heaven, send and empower 
His Apostles (giving them the Holy Ghost likewise, as His 
Father had given Him) in like manner as His Father had 
before sent Him, to execute the same apostolical, episcopal, 
pastoral office, for the ordering and governing of His Church 
until His coming again; and so the same office to continue 
in them and their successors ‘unto the end of the world.’ 
This I take to be so clear from these and other like texts of 
Scripture, that if they shall be diligently compared together, 
both between themselves and [with] the following practice 
of all the Churches of Christ, as well in the Apostles’ time 
as in the purest and primitive times nearest thereto, there 
will be left little cause why any man should doubt thereof.” 
Nothing that I have said affects the regal supremacy more 
than this opinion of that great casuist and the consequences 
of it, which you can infer as well as I. I could produce 
more passages of the same tendency out of his book enti- 
tuled “Episcopacy not prejudicial to Regal Power,” which 
you may see in the sixth chapter of the learned Dr. Lowth’s 
excellent book “Of the subject of Church Power,” a book 


m [These extracts are made from a 
Postscript to the Reader, appended to 
the posthumous treatise of Sanderson 
entitled “ Episcopacy, as it is esta- 
blished in England, not prejudicial to 
regal power, written in the time of the 
long parliament, by the special com- 
mand of the late king,”’ p. 101. Lon- 
don, 1678. | 

» Printed at London by Ben. Tooke, 


1685. [The portion of Lowth’s work 
referred to is that in which he makes 
the following quotation from San- 
derson’s Episcopacy, p. 121, ‘* That 
there is a supreme ecclesiastical power, 
which by the law of the land is esta- 
blished, and by the doctrine of our 
Church acknowledged to be inherent 
in the Church,” with other long ex- 
tracts from the same work. | 


Regal Supremacy than those of Sanderson and Bilson. 889 


you may remember which upon my recommendation you 
promised me to read. In the same chapter® you will also 
find some places of the same nature taken out of Bishop 
Bilson’s “True Difference betwixt Christian Subjection and 
Unchristian Rebellion?,’” which was allowed by public au- 
thority, and dedicated to Queen Elizabeth, a princess jealous 
enough of her prerogative and supremacy. I refer you to 
them, and when you have read them you will find yourself 
obliged to censure those great men Bilson and Sanderson, 
who were approved for what they wrote, or to acquit me. 
I could also produce abundance of places to the same pur- 
pose out of the former’s excellent book entituled “ The Per- 
petual Government of Christ’s Church,” printed in English 
at London 15934. Indeed, Sir, it is difficult to write as one 
should of the constitution and rights of the Catholic Church, 
and of the episcopal order and office, without writing what 
may in some kind or degree seem to thwart the laws and 
government of some or other kingdoms or sovereign states, 
which have taken the liberty to make laws contrary to the 
consentient doctrine and practice of the ancient Catholic 
Church. The whole title of the book which Bishop Bilson, 
then Warden of Winchester College, wrote Of the Perpetual 
governing of Christ’s Church, as well as the book itself, was 
opposite and cross to many new-modelled Churches then set 
up by the civil power in divers places, though, praised be 
God, it was not so much as thought contrary to the regal 
power and supremacy established by the laws of this realm. 
I will take the pains to transcribe part of two or three pages 
out of the thirteenth chapter of it’, which if I had written 
now 1 am afraid you would have thought in the consequences 
of it to have looked obliquely upon the regal supremacy 
and civil power. ‘Cyprian (saith he) hath written a whole 
book to prove ‘that the unity of each Church resteth on the 


° [See Lowth On the Subject of 
Church Power, sect. 19. pp. 472, sqq. ] 

P [Ibid., sect. 18, pp. 459, sqq. ] 

4 [A Latin translation of this work 
was sent out by Bilson in 1611. ] 

rp. 245. [The subject of chapter 
13 is: ‘that some chief pastors, in and 
ever since the Apostles’ times, have 
been distinguished from the rest of the 


presbyters by the power of ordination 
and right of succession, and placed in 
every city, to preserve the external 
unity and perpetuity of the Church, 
whom the ancient fathers did, and we 
after them do call by the name of 
bishops.” The extracts have been 
corrected according to the original of 
Bilson. } 


CHAP. 11. 


SECT. 11. 


890 Extracts from Bilson quoting ancient authorities 


ῬΙΟΝΙΤΥ or singularity of the pastor’,’ whither I remit him that is de- 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER. 


sirous to read more at large; as also to his first book and 
third epistle, entreating of the same matter, and written to 
Cornelius. The effect of all is contained in these wordst: 
‘Who is so wicked and perfidious, who so mad with the fury 
of discord, that believeth the unity of God, the Lord’s ves- 
ture, the Church of Christ, may be torn in pieces, or dare 
tear it? Himself in His Gospel warneth and teacheth (us) 
saying, There shall be one flock and one shepherd. And 
doth any man think there may be in one place either many 
shepherds or many flocks?’ In the aforesaid epistle . .. . he 
saith", ‘Heresies have sprung and schisms risen from none 
other fountain than this, that God’s priest is not obeyed, nor 
one priest in the Church acknowledged for the time to be 
judge in Christ’s stead; to whom, if all the brethren would 
be subject, according to the Divine directions, no man would 
after the Divine judgments, after the suffrages of the people, 
after the consent of other bishops, make himself judge now, 
not of the bishop, but of God.’ .... And therefore is the 
conclusion general, both with councils and fathers, that there 
could be but one bishop in one city, where the presbyters 
were many. Cornelius, bishop and martyr, long before the 
council of Nice, reporting to Fabius, bishop of Antioch, the 
original of Novatian’s* schism, saith’, ‘This jolly imquisitor 
of the Gospel understandeth not that there ought to be but 
one bishop in (that) Catholic Church in which he knoweth 

5. De Unitate Ecclesiz, vel de Sim- 


plicitate Prelatorum. [De Simplici- 
tate Prelatorum is the title of this 


tempus sacerdos et ad tempus judex 
vice Christi cogitatur: cui si secun- 
dum magisteria divina obtemperaret 


tract in Erasmus’ edition, p. 246. Ant. 
1541; de Unitate Ecclesiz, that in 
later editions. } 

t [Quis ergo sic est sceleratus et 
perfidus, quis sic discordiz furore ve- 
sanus, ut aut credat scindi posse aut 
audeat scindere unitatem Dei, vestem 
Domini, Ecclesiam Christi? Monet 
ipse in Evangelio suo et docet dicens; 
‘et erit unus grex et unus pastor;’ et 
esse posse uno in loco aliquis existimet 
aut multos pastores aut plures greges? 
—S. Cypr. de Unitate Ecclesiz, Op., 
p. 196. ed. Ben. | 

u [Neque enim aliunde hareses 
obortz sunt, aut nata sunt schismata, 
quam inde quod sacerdoti Dei non ob- 
temperatur, nec unus in ecclesia ad 


fraternitas universa, nemo adyversus 
sacerdotum collegium quicquam mo- 
veret, nemo post divinum judicium, 
post populi suffragium, post coepisco- 
porum consensum, judicem se jam 
non episcopi, sed Dei, faceret.—Id. 
Epist. lv. (lib. i. Ep. 3. ed. Erasm. Ant. 
1541.) ad Cornelium, p. 82. ed. Ben. ] 

x [* Novatius,’ Bilson. ] 

Υ [6 ἐκδικητὴς οὖν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου 
οὐκ ἠπίστατο ἕνα ἐπίσκοπον δεῖν εἶναι 
ἐν καθολικῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ" ἐν ἣ οὐκ ἠγνόει 
(πῶς γάρ ;) πρεσβυτέρους“ εἶναι τεσσερά- 
κοντα ἕξ.----Τὰ δέ. Cornelii Episc. Rom. 
ad Fabium Epise. Antioch. ap. Euseb. 
Hist. Eccl., lib. vi. cap. 43, H. E. tom. 
i, p. 812,1 


for the Unity of the Episcopate. 391 


there are forty-six presbyters.? The great Nicene council 
took special care......‘that* there should not be two 
bishops in one city.’ Chrysostom, when Paul writeth to 
‘the bishops and deacons’ of Philippi, asketh this question? : 
‘What meaneth this? were there many bishops of one city ?’ 
and answereth, ‘ By no means, but by this title he designeth 
the presbyters, for then the name was common.’.. .. Theo- 
doret (in 1 cap. ad Phil”) ‘In no case many bishops could 
not be pastors of one city.’. . . . Gicumenius*; ‘The presby- 
ters he calleth bishops, for as yet the words were common to 
both.’ Optatus (contra Parmenianum, lib. 11.)4 ‘ He is a schis- 
matic and a sinner that against one episcopal chair erecteth 
another.’ Hierome (in 1 cap. ad Philip.*) ‘ Bishops here we 
understand to be presbyters, for in one city there could not 
be many bishops.’. .. . This is a certain rule to distinguish 
bishops from presbyters: the presbyters were many in every 
Church, of whom the presbytery consisted. Bishops were 
always singular, that is, one in a city and no more‘, except 
another intruded, (which the Church of Christ counted a 
schism, and would never communicate with any such,) or 
else an hclper was given in [respect of] extreme and feeble 


2 [Concil. Nicen. Canon viii. The 
council was providing for the reception 
of bishops returning from schism to 
the Catholic communion; the canon 
concludes: εἰ δὲ τοῦτο αὐτῷ μὴ ἀρέσκοι, 
ἐπινοήσει τόπον ἢ χωρεπισκόπου ἢ πρεσ- 
βυτέρου, ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἐν τῷ κλήρῳ ὅλως 
δοκεῖν εἶναι, ἵνα μὴ ἐν τῇ πόλει δύο 
ἐπίσκοποι @ow.—Concil., tom. ii. col. 
37, B.] 

a [τί τοῦτο; μιᾶς πόλεως πολλοὶ 
ἐπίσκοποι ἦσαν; οὐδαμῶς" ἀλλὰ τοὺς 
πρεσβυτέρους οὕτως ἐκάλεσε, τότε γὰρ 
τέως ἐκοινώνουν τοῖς ὀνόμασι.---ὃ. Chrys. 
Hom. i. in Epist. ad Phil. Op., tom. xi. 
p. 194, Εἰ; 195, A.] 

Ὁ [ἄλλως τε οὐδὲ οἷόν τε ἣν πολλοὺς 
ἐπισκόπους μιὰν πόλιν ποιμαίνειν.-τ-- 
Theodoret. in Epist. ad Phil., cap. 1. 
Op., tom. iii. p. 828, D.] 

© [οὐκ ἔπειδαν ἐν μιᾷ πόλει πολλοὶ 
ἦσαν ἐπίσκοποι, GAN ἐπισκόπους τοὺς 
πρεσβυτέρους καλεῖ. τότε γὰρ ἔτι ἐκοι- 
νώνουν τοῖς ὀνόμασι.--- (ξουτη 1 et 
Arethe Comment., tom, ii. p. 65, 
C,D.] 

4 [The whole passage is as follows: 
Igitur negare non potes scire te in 
urbe Roma Petro primo cathedram 


episcopalem esse collatam, in qua se- 
derit omnium Apostolorum caput Pe- 
trus; unde et Cephas appellatus est, 
in qua una cathedra unitas ab omni- 
bus servaretur, ne ceteri Apostoli sin- 
gulas 5101 quisque defenderent, ut 
jam schismaticus et peccator esset, qui 
contra singularem cathedram alteram 
collocaret.—S. Optati contra Parmen. 
sive de Schism. Donatist., lib. ii, ο, 2. 
p- 28. ] 

© [Hic episcopos presbyteros intelli- 
gimus: non enim in una urbe plures 
episcopi esse potuissent.— Pseudo- 
Hieron. in Epist. ad Philip.,c.1. S. 
Hieron., Op., tom. xi. col. 1011, D.]} 

f “Tt is a fundamental rule of the 
Church, necessary for preserving peace 
and unity therein, that but one bishop 
should be in one Church.” Dr. Isaac 
Barrow in a Discourse of the Unity of 
the Church, c. 7. [ Barrow’s words are, 
‘‘When some confessors had abetted 
Novatianus against Cornelius, (thereby 
against a fundamental rule of the 
Church, necessary for preserving of 
peace and order therein, that but one 
bishop should be in one Church.”)— 
Works, vol. vii. p. 652. Oxford, 1830. ] 


CHAP. Il. 


SECT, ΠῚ, 


392 Powers of Government and Ordination in Bishops. 


prenity oF age, in which case the power of the latter ceased in the pre- 
EPISCOPAL . . 5 - 
orver. sence of the former. And this singularity of one pastor in 
each place descended from the Apostles and their scholars in 
all [the famous] Churches of the world, by a perpetual chair 
of succession, and doth to this day continue but where abo- 
mination or desolation, I mean heresy or violence, interrupt 
it. Of this there is so perfect record im all the histories and 
fathers of the Church, that I much muse with what face men 
that have any taste of learning can deny the vocation of 
bishops came from the Apostles. For if their succession be 
apostolic, their function cannot choose but be likewise apo- 
stolic; and that they succeeded the Apostles and Evangelists 
in their Churches and chairs may inevitably be proved, if 
any Christian persons or Churches deserve to be credited. 
The second assured sign of episcopal power is imposition of 
hands to ordain presbyters and bishops. For as pastors were 
to have some to assist them in their charge, which were pres- 
byters ; so were they to have others to succeed them in their 
places, which were bishops. And this right by imposing 
hands to ordain presbyters and bishops in the Church of 
Christ, was at first derived from the Apostles unto bishops, 
and not unto presbyters ; and hath for these fifteen hundred 
years, without example or instance to the contrary, till this 
our age, remained in bishops, and not in presbyters.” 
secriv. IV. Sir, these Catholic doctrines relating to the Divine 
eee. original of the episcopal office, and the single or monarchical 
ete government of every Church, or spiritual district in the king- 
been dom of Christ, have been often abused to the hurt of the 
abused. State, as well as the doctrine relating in my Propositions to 
the power of the keys, which you say is so like that of the 
presbyterians, by which they indeed endeavoured to enslave 
the State to the Kirk. But though all these doctrines have 
been too often abused by proud and turbulent prelates, 
especially by the bishop of Rome, yet they are true and 
Catholic doctrines, and ought to be so received in all the 
parts of the Christian world. We have had our Anselms, 
and Beckets, and in many other kingdoms the mitres have 
sometimes most insolently and unrighteously justled with 
the crown, and the spiritual lords over the flocks of Christ 


8 [Hickes, ed. 3. “ chain.’’ ] 


The powers of the State abused against the Church. 393 


have sometimes been most undutiful to their temporal lord ; 


but notwithstanding you know, Sir, there is nothing more - 


unreasonable, than to argue against the truth, or right, or 
use of a thing from the abuse of it, especially against power 
and authority, whether spiritual or temporal, which through 
the corruption and infirmities of human nature is most easily 
abused. If men will be always jea'ous of power, and arguing 
continually against it, because it may be abused, there can 
be no entire peace in any societies, not in families, senates, 
republics, and kingdoms, as well as in Churches, whose 
governors our Lord supposed might, and sometimes would 
abuse their power, as well as the governors of the world. It 
were easy to shew how these have abused their power in all 
forms of civil government, and particularly in the oppres- 
sions, and persecutions, and vexations of the Churches in 
their dominions, though their power was of God, and they 
the ministers of God; and if you should make a scheme of 
civil government in propositions after the same manner as 1 
have done of the ecclesiastical, I might with as much reason 
say after your example that the doctrine of your proposi- 
tions, though never so true, looked something hke that of 
Erastus, or perhaps of the Super-Erastians, Hobbes, Selden, 
and other such writers, who have endeavoured to destroy the 
being and constitution of the Church, as a society, by argu- 
ments not at all known to the Jewish Church, nor to the 
Christian, till these latter ages, in which scepticism, and un- 
belief, by the just judgment of God, have increased from 
small beginnings, to as full and perfect a stature as the en- 
vious powers of hell can wish. 

Wherefore, Sir, we must neither argue against Church or 
State, from the abuses of their respective powers. For God, 
who ordained them, hath set bounds between them, and if 
either of the two go beyond those bounds, it is not the fault 
of the powers, but of the potentates, who may easily live in 
perfect amity and peace together by mutual agreement with, 
and subjection to one another, as, not to instance in foreign 
kingdoms and empires, our Christian ancestors of the Eng- 
lish-Saxon Church and State did for many hundred years, 
when they made their respective laws, and ministered their 


respective justice together in such perfect concord, that I 
_ HICKES. pd 


CHEAP. IT. 
SECT. IV. 


DIGNITY OF 
IVPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 


394  Lnvasion of the rights of our Church by William I. 


may challenge you to shew me any one Saxon law, that is 
against any one canon of the Church. It was William the 
Conqueror, who first invaded the rights and liberties of 
the English people, that first broke in upon the rights and 
liberties of the English Church. “ He would not suffer the 
primate" in a general council of the kingdom to enact any 
canon which he did not first approve. He would not suffer 
any bishop to censure any of his ministers or courtiers, or 
inflict any rigorous ecclesiastical penances upon them, though 
they were guilty of adultery or incest.” And what is very 
remarkable, though he pretended to be a true and zealous 
son of the Church of Rome, which then was esteemed the 
Catholic Church, yet “he would let none! in his dominions 
acknowledge any, who was constituted bishop of Rome, for 
pope, without his order, or admit any of his letters as such, 
unless they were first shewn to him.” Thus, saith the his- 
torian *, “all Divine, as well as human affairs, were governed 
by his beck.” So easy a thing is it, Sir, to abuse power. 
That bright archangel and heavenly potentate Lucifer, who 
kept not his first station, transgressed the Rubicon of his 
power, and thereby became a devil, and therefore we need 
not wonder that among the angels of the Church, some of 
Luciferian tempers have done the like, and thereby became 
tyrants in the Church, and rebels to God and their kings. 
But still, I say, the abuse of the ecclesiastical power must 
not always make us jealous of it, or those who defend it, as 
the ordinance of God, especially in such dregs of time as 
these, when to the great decay of Christian piety, it is 
become precarious, and oppressed to such a degree in so 


h Eadmeri Historia Rerum Nova- 
rum, lib. i, p. 6. ed. Lond. 1623. [ Pri- 
matem quceque regni sui, archiepi- 
scopum dico Cantuariensem (seu Do. 
robernensem), si coacto generali epi- 
scoporum concilio prasideret, non sine- 
bat quicquam statuere aut prohibere 
nisi que suze voluntati accommoda, et 
a se primo essent ordinata. Nulli 
nihilominus episcoporum suorum con- 
cessuin iri permittebat, ut aliquem de 
baronibus suis seu ministris, sive in- 
cesto, sive adultero, sive aliquo capi- 
tali crimine denotatum, publice nisi 
ejus praecepto implacitaret aut excom- 
muinicaret, aut ulla ecclesiastici rigoris 


poena constringeret.—pp. 29, E; 30, A. 
ad cal. S. Anselmi Op., Par. 1721; 
where the words enclosed in paren- 
theses are omitted. | 

i [Non ergo pati volebat quemquam 
in omni dominatione suze constitutum 
Romane urbis pontificem pro apo- 
stolico, nisi se jubente, recipere, aut 
ejus literas, si primitus sibi ostensee non 
fuissent, ullo pacto suscipere.—Id. ibid. 
This sentence immediately precedes 
the one last quoted. | 

k [Cuneta ergo Divina simul hu- 
mana ejus nutum expectabant.—Id, 
ibid., paulo supra. | 


Bishops’ power of ruling given by Christ. 395 


many protestant countries, that it is almost brought to its 
last gasp. As you love the Church, and believe its govern- 
ment by bishops to be of Divine institution: so methinks 
you should be for giving them all the powers that belong to 
their spiritual office. You own their authority by which they 
preach, and administer the holy Sacraments, and ordain pres- 
byters and bishops, to be originally and immediately given 
by Christ to the Apostles, and that it was conveyed by them 
to their successors, and so to be transmitted from successors 
to successors unto the end of the world. Why then are you 
so shy in owning their rectoral power; since the same bles- 
sed Saviour, who bid the Apostles teach and baptize all na- 
tions, and “‘ Do this in remembrance of Me,” said also to them, 
“ Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth,” &c., and ‘‘ Whosesoever 
sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, and whosesoever 
sins ye retain, they are retained.” And as they exercised 
the power of preaching, and administering the Sacraments, 
and ordaining, by the one commission, so by the other they 
exercised spiritual jurisdiction, and equally gave both powers 
to their successors; and their pretensions to the one power 
was never called in question, more than to the other, in 
former times, no not when it was most abused. You are 
willing in the full latitude of their delegation to hear them, 
as teachers in chief under Christ, as He is a prophet, and to 
acknowledge them as chief-priests under Him, who is High- 
Priest of His Church. But you are loath in virtue of their 
delegation, to own and obey them im the vicegerency of His 
regal office, and to be subject to them as your spiritual 
lords. You admit them as shepherds under Him the chief 
Shepherd of our souls, to feed, but not to govern His flock ; 
but according to the Scriptures, and Catholic tradition, 
which is the best expositor of them, you must take them 
for pastors in both senses; for they have authority for the 
one, as well as the other from Christ, and therefore without 
choosing you ought to own or reject both. But, Sir, why 
should you make a doubt or difficulty of their authority, as 
masters under our Lord in His house, vicegerents under 
lim in His kingdom, governors under Him in His cities, or 
if you please, as senators of His own appointment to govern 
His commonwealth. They were acknowledged and obeyed 


CHAP. IL. 
SECT. IV. 


Matt. 18. 


J 
J 


ὃ, 
ohn 20. 28. 


DIGNITY OF 


EPISCOPAL 
ORDER, 


396 Conclusion. 


as such without scruple, by Christians of all ranks, as well 
after as before the empire turned Christian, when emperors, 
as well as their subjects, submitted themselves to them, as 
their spiritual superiors ; emperors, who knew very well what 
they did, and who had too much courage to fear any thing 
but God, and too much wisdom to be imposed upon by the 
craft of priests. 

I hope I have shewed this fully in my answer to your 
letter; and when you have well considered what I have 
written, I desire you to send your second thoughts and 
reflections upon it to 

Your most faithful, 


and humble servant, 


[GEORGE HICKES.] 


OXFORD: 


PRINTED BY 1. SHRIMPTON, 


aoe 

es adie sais bp) 
eo υ ὅδ ἐν 
Δ Π τῶν εἰν: b 


ἀνῇ 


op! very 


᾿ ἜΝ, ay 
fe eos bj 


Ma 

















Princeton Theological 


ini 


1 1012 01196 


is : 4 i ἢ en ἣ ἐν ‘a 
Ἢ vat it) te : il me an ἣ 


ἡ ae es, 
ks ee ae bs | 


ὴ ee; ᾿ ΝΥ 7 
ἡ Ne yin 
ἵ af 


Poa wig mm) Cath, 
f ΔῊΝ bas ὧδ Ἑ, 
ire 1 ἢ. ὃ Ἷ 
ἢ ᾿ ; ἣν ty 
ei ἢ ᾿ ‘ ᾿ 


ce 





αν, παρε φως 
ἐπ ace 


ii ak eee 
pie Pee nee ern Meh Seas 
- συγ τὴ 
he ᾽ 
serine 
peed 


ἈΜ ταν τ Ασα τ πο eens Sees sae 


cour 


Ὁ eet Reh Oo | 


eee