^ PRINCETON, N. J. ^'^ Section Shelf Number '\/A:^.sJtk ;■■■.'. ■-.y.'.WMtai-- <:^<^-2^ \ LECTURES ON ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. BY THE LATE / GEORGE CAMPBELL, D. D. PRINCIPAL OF MARISCHAL COLLEGE, ABERDEEN. TO WHICH IS ADDEDj HIS CELEBRATED ESSAY ON MIRACLES CONTAINING, AN EXAMINATION OF PRINCIPLES ADVANCED BY DAVID HUME, ESQ: PHILADELPHIA: PUBLISHED BY B. B. HOPKINS, W CO. T. L. PLOWMAN, PRINTER. i8or. ^ ADVERTISEMENT. THE following discourses on Church History arfe a considerable part of a course of Theological Lectures, delivered in Marischal College. The Author had transcribed and revised them, and was every year mak- ing considerable alterations and additions to the Work, For more than the last twenty years of his life, his Lec- tures to the Students of Divinity occupied the greater part of his time, and those now offered to the Publick were distinguished as the most curious and entertaining branch of the w hole. By the hearers, and many others, the Publication has been called for with a degree of earnestness, which now seldom attends the appearance of a theological performance. Those who have read the other writings of the Author, will naturally ex- pect here something of that clearness of apprehension, and acuteness of investigation, so eminently displayed in the Dissertation on Miracles, in answer to Mr. Hume. And such as are acquainted with the subject, will admire the Author's well-digested learning, and will readily perceive the importance of an accurate his- torical deduction of the progress of church power, and the establishment of a hierarchy, and how clear and iv ADVERTISEMENT. decisive it is, in all that may be termed the hinge of the controversy between high church and others. Sel- dom, very seldom indeed, has the subject been treated with the perspicuity, candour, and moderation, which distinguish the writings of doctor Campbell. LECTURES ON ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. LECTURE I. THE SACRED HISTORY. X INTEND that the subject of the present, and some suc- ceeding Lectures, shall be the Sacred History, the first branch of the theoretick part of the theological course which claims the attention of the student. This is subdivided into two parts : the first comprehends the events which preceded the Christian era, the second those which followed. The first, in a looser way of speaking, is included under the title of Jewish History, the second is what is commonly denomi- nated Church History, or Ecclesiastical History. 1 say in a looser way of speaking the first is included under the title of the Jewish History : for, in strictness of speech it compriseih several most important events, which happened long before the existence of the nation of the Jews. Such are the crea- tion of the world, the fall of man, the universal deluge, the dispersion of the human race, the call of Abraham, and those promises which gave to man the early hope of restoration. But as all the credible information we have on these topicks is from the Jews, and intimately connected with their history, and as little or no light can be derived from the Pagan histo- ries, or rather fables, that have a relation to ages so remote, it hath not been judged necessary to have a regard to these in the general division. It seemed more natural and commo- dious to allow all that part of sacred history which preceded the commencement of the christian church, to come under the common name of Jewish. 6 LECTURES ON Need any arguments be used in order to evince, that every theological student should make this, at least, as far as the bibli- cal records bring us, a particular object of his application ? In every view we can take of the subject, it is suitable, in some it is even necessary. Let it be observed, that all the ariicles of our faith may be divided into three classes. Some may not improperly be denominated philosophical, some histo- rical, and some prophetical. Of the first kind, the philoso- phical^ are those which concern the divine nature and perfec- tions, those also which concern human nature, its capacities and duties ; of the second kind, the historical, are those which relate to the creation, the fall, the deluge, the iVsDsaick dispen- sation, the promises, the incarnation of the Messiah, his life, his death, his resurrection, his ascension, the descent of the Holy Spirit, the mission of the apostles, and the several pur- poses which, by these means, it pleased the divine Providence to effectuate ; of the third, or the prophetical kind, are those which regard events yet future, such as the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, the resurrection of the human race, the general judgment, eternity, heaven and hell. As there- fore a considerable portion of the christian faith consists in points of an historick nature, it must be of consequence for elucidating these, to be acquainted with those collateral events, if I may so express myself, which happen to be connected with any of them by the circumstances of time and place. But this knowledge is of importance to us not only for the illustration of the christian doctrine, but for its confirmation also. When the religion of Christ was first promulgated throughout the world, as the difficulties it had to encounter would have been absolutely insurmountable, had no other than ordinary and human means been employed in its favour, it pleased God, by an extraordinary interposition of provi- dence, in the gift of miraculous powers^ to ensure success to this great design, in defiance of all the powers of the earth combined against it. But no sooner was the strength of the opposition broken, insomuch that the friends and the enemies of Christ came, if I may so express myself, to stand on even ground, than it pleased heaven to withdraw those supernatural aids, and leave this cause to force its way in the world, by its own intrinsick and external evidence. I would not by this be understood to insinuate, that the christian cause hath not always been under the protection of a special and over-ruling providence. I would not be understood to signify, that any external means whatever could have given to our religion its full effect on the hearts and consciences of men, without the internal influences of the divine spirit. I only mean to ob- ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. T serve to you, what was certainly the fact, that, when matters came to be thus balanced between faith and unbelief, outward miracles apd prodigies were not judged by the supreme dis- poser of all events, to be any longer necessary for silencing gainsayers, and for reaching conviction to the understanding. That the power of working miracles did at first accompany the publication of the gospel by the apostles, we have at this day the strongest evidence, as from other sources, so especially from the success of their preaching, which, without this help, would be utterly unaccountable, and in direct contradiction to all the laws of probability hitherto known in the world. For not to mention the inveterate prejudices arising from imme- morial opinious and practices, as well as from mistaken inte- rest, which the first preachers of Christianity had to encoun- ter, not to mention the universal contempt and detestation wherein the nation to which they belonged was holden, both by the Greeks and by the Romans, not to mention the appa- rent ridicule and absurdity there was in exhibiting to the world, as a saviour and mediator with God, a Jew, who had been ignomjniously crucified as a malefactor by a Roman pro- curator, how inconceivably unequal must have been the com- bat, when on the one side were power, rank, opulence, birth, learning, and art j and on the other side, weakness, depend- ance, poverty, obscurity, and illiterate simplicity. The suc- cess of the last in a warfare so disproportionately matched, is an irrefragable demonstration, that the work was not of man, but of God. But as the conviction we have of the reality of those events, and of the means by which they were effected, is derived to us through the channel of testimony, it behoves us to be as careful as possible, in order that the evidence may- have its full effect upon us, that we be right informed, both as to the nature of the testimony itself, and as to the charac- ter and capacity of the witnesses. This is one consideration, which immediately affects the evidence of the christian reve- lation. Again, as the last mentioned dispensatioti is erected on the mosaical, the divine origin of which it every where pre-sup- poseth ; whatever affects the credibility of the latter, will un- questionably affect the credibility of the former ; whatever tends to subvert the basis, tends of necessity to overturn the superstructure; and, on the contrary, when once the connex- ion between the two establishments, the mosaick and the christian, is thoroughly understood, whatever tends to confirm the one, tends also, though more indirectly, to confirm the other. This reflection naturally leads us to carry our re- searches farther back, and endeavour, as much as possible, to 8 LECTURES ON get acquainted with all those circumstances and events, which can throw any light upon the scripture history. But it may be objected, that if all this were necessary to confirm our iaith in the gospel, what would be the case of the bulk of mankind, who, by reason of the time they must employ in earning a subsistence, have no leisure for such inquiries ; and, by reason of the education they have received, are not jn a capacity of making them ? To this objection a twofold answer may be returned : first, such inquiries are not neces-^ sary to the man, who, through want of education and of time, is incapacitated for prosecuting them. Those very wants, which unfit him for the study, are his great security that he shall have no occasion for it. The man of letters, on the con- trary, whose time is much at his own disposal, is daily exposed, especially in this age and country, both from reading and from conversation, to meet with objections against revealed reli- gion, which the other has no probability of ever hearing ; and which, if he should by any accident come to hear, it is a thou- sand to one he does not understand. As our resources, there- fore, ought to be in proportion to our needs, and as our means and methods of defence ought to be adapted to the particular ways wherein we are liable to be attacked, there is a peculiar reason which men of letters have for entering so far at least into these inquiries, as to be acquainted with both sides of the question, and to be equitable judges between the friends and the enemies of the Gospel. There is also another reason, which ought to determine those in particular who have the holy mi- nistry in view. It is their business, and therefore in a special manner their duty, to be furnished, as much as possible, for re- moving not only their own doubts, but the doubts of other peo- ple. It is their province to support the weak, to confirm the doubting, and to reclaim thg strayed. In spiritual matters, es- pecially, they ought to serve as eyes to the blind, and feet to the lame. But further, the knowledge of the sacred history is not on= ly of importance for illustrating the truths of our religion, and for strengthening the evidences of its divinity, but also in the way of ornament and recommendation to the ministerial - cha- racter. Nor let it be imagined that this is a matter of little moment. It will not require an uncommon share of penetra- tion to discover, that this, on the contrary, is a matter of the greatest consequence. Whatever tends to adorn the charac- ter of a pastor, and render him respectable, is sure of procur- ing him in general a more favourable reception with mankind. When he speaks, he commands a closer attention, which gives double weight to every thing he says. It is this respect to su- ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 9 periority In knowledge and discernment, which makes, as Job poetically expresseth it, even princes refrain talking, and the nobles lay their hand upon their mouth. The utility ©f every such qualification, as serves to attract this veneration, will be readily acknowledged by all who are duly sensible how great a point in instructing is carried, when the people to, be instruct- ed are induced seriously to attend, to think, to feel. Thus much shall suffice for what regards the propriety of the study, and the several purposes of illustrating, confirming, and recommending our religion, which it is fitted to serve. Let us next inquire into the manner in v/hich we may hope success- fully to prosecute it. And here I beg leave to take notice by the way, that it is not my intention, either on this, or any other branch of the theological science, or on what more im- mediately regards the pastoral care, to recommend to your perusal a multitude of books. Nothing could be easier, for one who has the honour to, give lessons in theology, than to present the students with a long catalogue of authors, who have, with some reputation, treated the various topics to be studied. You might get in one half hour the titles of more volumes, than a whole life-time would suffice you to read over. There are several reasons which induce me to be rather spar- ing on this article. In the first place there is, in the practice of accumulating the names of books and authors, adding vo- lume to volume, and folio to folio, something very forbidding, which tends greatly to dishearten the young learner. The la- bour appears immense, and the difficulties insuperable. The toils he hath to undergo, and the obstacles he hath to sur° mount, are all set full in his view ; and that before he is made so sensible of the charms of the pursuit, as to be heartily en- gaged in it, and animated to persist in defiance of every thing that might discourage or oppose him. The conduct of nature, in this respect, is more worthy of imitation. She commonly renders the first difficulty a screen, by which the second is con- cealed from sight ; the second answers the same purpose to the third, and so forwards. In travelling over a ridge of mountains, like the Alps or Pyrenees, every summit the tra- veller approaches he imagines to be the highest ; and it is not till he has reached it, that he is sensible he must climb stili higher. And this is what will happen to him for several suc- cessive times. Now there is this advantage in this gradual opening of the scene, that the time he has already spent, and the difficulties he hath already overcome, prove the most co- gent arguments with him, not to lose his past time and labour by giving over the pursuit. The farther he advances, these arguments have the greater weight. And thus, by the help ^0 LECTURES ON pf a, growing zeal and perseverance, a man will, with, honouv and advantage, come off victorious in an enterprise, which, had he seen from the beginning all its difficulty, he had never uiidertaken. A second reason for using this ^^ethocl is, the great variety of studies in which 4he divine, as you have seen, must necessa- rily be conversant. None of them can, without hurt both to his reputa,tiQn and usefulness, be entirely neglected. Now the greater diversity there is of subjects in this study, th,e ^ore the inquiry into each ought to be simplified, that t^te young student may neither be perplexed, and, as it were, lose himself in a cumbersome multiplicity ; nor so attach himself! to one part of the study, as to swallow u,p all the time that should be employed on the other parts. He ought to be in- troduced into every province of this extensive country : the most patent roads should be poin,te4 ou^ to him : a, perfect ac= quaintance with each must be the work of time, and the fruit of his own assiduity and labour. Or dropping the nrietaphor : of every separate article of this study, he ought, in the schools of divinity, to acquire sonie general notions ; but to attain a thorough proficiency in them all, is rather the business of a r^fe-time, than the effect of a few years application. It is in- deed in this, as in every other art or science, the foundation only is laid at school, the manner of building is indicated j the scholar may afterwards rear the superstructure, as high as his disposition and pppprtuni,ties shall enable him. Now it is my design here, rather to Jay a wide foundation, on which a goodly edifice n>ay in time be erected ; though I should make but lit'? tie or no progress in raising the walls, than on a narrow bot- tom, to advance farther in the building ; because, in this case, the fabrick, though it be raised ever so high, naust, by reason of the straitened limits to which its fou,ndati,oi;i d,oes necessari^ ly confine it, be both mean and incommodious. I shall assign a third reaspn for not harassing my hearers, by recommending a great variety of books. Young people are but too apt to imagine, that learning and reading are synony? tsaous, terms, and that a man is always the more learned the more he has read. Nothing can be a more egregious mistake. Food is necessary for the support of the body, and without a competency of it, we could not enjoy either vigour or health j but we shoi^ld not suspect him to be overstocked with wisdom, \^ho should coiiclude from this concession, that the more a i^an eats, the more healthy and vigorous he must be. We know from experience, that when a certain proportion is ex-? ceeded, those corporeal endowments, health and strength, me impaired i>y the very m^ans, which, if used in moderation.. ECCLEStAStlCAL HI^TdHY. ii Vdiild have inct^eased them. The same thing exactly hold^ with reading, which is the food of the mind; The memory may be loaded and encumbered in the one case^ as the stomacE is in the other. Alnd in either case, if we take more than we can digest, it can hevet turn to good account. There have been instances 6f such helltiones Ubrofum^ such book-gluttons, as very much resembled the lean kine in Pharaoh's vision, vrhichi when they had devoured the fat and well-favoured kine^ were themselves as lean and ill-favoured as befote. It is in- deed necessary that we accustom ourselves t6 read : but it is likewise necessary, and rtiuch more difficult, that We accus- tom ourselves to reflect. There ought to be stated times for both exercises ; but to the last, particularly, our best eridea* Vours ought frequently to be directed. And for this purpose^ I kiiowno better helps, than to be obliged, sometimes bv con- versation^ sometiiiies b)' composing, to express oiir sentiments oh the subjects of Which wfe readi The use which the student makes of the food of the mirid) bears th^ closest analogy to the iise which the ruminating animals make of their pasture* They recall it and ehjoy it a second time to much greater ad- Vantage than the first. Resemble them in this particular,— -oil \Vhatever you find instructive often ruminate. The fourth and last reasoii I shall mention is, ivheii a riilth- ber of books on every topick ^re recorhmended, the student finds it^ I say not difficult, but impossible, to get them all, or «Ven the greater part of them. Fruitless endeavours, ofteii repeated^ will in time extinguish the greatest ardoui" ; and from finding part of our task impracticable, we are but toO apt to- grow careless about the whole. A few directions exactly followed are mOre conducive to bur impi^overhent, than ^ much greater number little minded. But to return from this, which will possibly be looked on as a digression ; the first thing I would earnestly recommend^ in order to your acquiring the knowledge of the Old Testa- ment history^ is the frequent and attentive perusal of the Old Testament itself. Let not this reconfimeftdation, far the most important I can give, be the more lightly esteemed by any of yoiij because it is a book so common j a book wlvich all rtieh, learned and unlearned, haVe access tO. Are not th^ greatest blessings always the conimonest ? Such is the sun, that glori- ous luminary which enlightens us, the earth which we inha- bit, and the air which we breathe. Or are these invaluable benefits the leSs regarded by the pious and judicious, because of their commonness ? Indeed it may be thought, that ever s6 great proficiency in the knowledge of a book, which is iii every body's hands, can never procure si man the' envied characteur i2 LECttjRESON of erudition. True ; but, on the other hand, will not that Ve- ry circumstance of its universality justly fix the brand of igno- rance on him, in whom there appears, in this respect, a re- markable deficiency ? Besides, to be ignorant in one's own profession, is always accounted a matter of the greatest re- proach : the divine is, by profession, an interpreter of Scrip- ture •, therefore, to be deficient here, is the most unpardon- able kind of ignorance. I am the more particular on this point, because, by a very common tendency in our nature, what we think we have it in our power to do at any time, we are apt, by perpetually procrastinating, to leave undone at last* But, it may be asked, in what manner shall we read this book most profitably for the attaining of a thorough acquain- tance with the history it contains ? For this purpose, I would humbly suggest to you some such method as the following : it will require but a superficial notion of the whole to be able to distinguish the most remarkable epochs in sacred history ; let these be marked for heads of study at different times. It is not a matter of great consequence, whether, in the division you make, you consider most the celebrity of the era at which the period terminates, or what will nearly produce an equal division of the subject. Let the first epoch, for example, be from the creation till the call of Abraham ; the second, from that period till Jacob's journey into Egypt ; the third, till the deliverance from Egypt, by the passing through the Red Sea, and the extinction of Pharaoh's host ; the fourth, till the death of Moses ; the fifth, till the death of Joshua ; the sixth, till the commencement of the Israelitish monarchy ; the seventh, till the defection of the ten tribes from Rehoboam ; the eighth, till the captivity ; and the ninth, till the restoration of the two tribes, Judah and Benjamin. Let the student, first, atten- tivel}^ read over so much of the sacred volume as contains the account of one period ; let him then lay by the book, and write in his own style and manner, an abstract, or abridgment, of the narrative he has read, > carefully noting all the memorable events, and interspersing such remarks of his own, as he shall judge to arise naturally out of the subject. After finishing one epochj let him proceed in the same manner to the succeeding epoch. By this method, he will fix in his mind the sacred his- tory more effectually, than it could be done by twenty read- ings. Besides, there are several other very considerable advanta- ges which will redound from this plan regularly prosecuted. First, the student will acquire a habit of reading with greater attention, having close in his view the use he must make of what he reads, immediately after reading j secondly, he will ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. IS find this practice an excellent exercise of memory, and one of the best methods of strengthening it ; thirdly, it will produce in him a habit of reflection ; fourthly, as it will render com- position habitual to him, there is not an expedient that I know of, which will contribute more to give him a readiness of writ- ing his sentiments on any subject with a natural facility, and perspicuity of expression. Permit me to add a few more directions for assisting you in the prosecution of the plan proposed. In periods, of which an account is given by more than one of the inspired his- torians, it will be proper to read both accounts, and com- pare them together ; those, for example, given in the books of Kings, and in the books of Chronicles, before you begin to compose the intended abstract. It will not be im- proper to join, in like manner, the reading of the prophets, with those parts of the history which relate to the times wherein they lived. The historians, and the prophets, will often be found to reflect light upon each other. As to other helps, the chief I would recommend to you is Josephus, the Jewish historian J and the best way of studying him, as I imagine, is carefully to read his relation of every particular epoch, imme-^ diately after perusing the account of it given by the inspired penmen of the Old Testament, as far as their history extends. Both may be read previously to the attempt of forming a nar- rative of the different periods as mentioned above. In this there will be a twofold advantage ; first, by the double repre- sentation of the facts, there is a probability they will be more deeply rooted in the memory ; secondly, by the diversity of manner in which the same things are told, a fuller view iS' given of the subject, and the reader's own manner is better se- cured against too close an imitation of either. Before I conclude this lecture, allow me to subjoin a few re- marks in regard to the character of that historian, and the cre- dit that is due to him. That he was a man, who, to a consi- derable degree of eminence in the Jewish erudition of those days, added a tolerable share of Greek and Roman literature, is a character which, in my opinion, cannot justly be refused him. As a compiler of history, it must be admitted, that ia every instance in which his account, on a fair examination, is found to contradict the account given in holy writ, he is enti- tled to no faith at ail. In cases wherein he may be said not to contradict scripture, but to differ considerably from it, by the detail of additional circumstances, it will be proper to dis- tinguish between the earlier ages of his history and the later ages. With regard to the first, we are sure that he had no Mother authenti<:k records to draw his information from, thaa i^ LECTURES ON those we have at this day in our hands. TTiese are Moses^ and those prophets, who came nearest to the time of that law- giver. With regard to the last, though within the era of the Old Testament history, we are not so certain^ that he might not have had the assistance of credible annals extant in his time, though now lost. There are two things, however, in his character, that affect his manner of writing, and require a par- ticular attention : one is, too close an affectation of the manner of the Greek historians. This appears^ as in the general tenour of his style, so especially in the endeavours he uses to embel- lish his narration with long speeches, v/hich he puts in the mouths of the persons introduced, a silly device for displaying the talents and eloquence of the writers rather than of the his* torical characters* I cannot help taking notice of one instance, in which, through an ill-judged attempt to improve and adorn, he hath spoiled, one of the finest speeches in all the history* The speech I mean, is that of Judah to his brother Joseph^ then governour of Egypt, offering to ransom his brother Ben* jamin, by the sacrifice of his own liberty* It is impossible for any one, whose taste can relish genuine simple nature, not to be deeply affected with that speech as it is in the Pentateuch* On reading it, we are perfectly prepared for the effect which it produced on his unknown brother. We see, we feel, that it was impossible for humanity, for natural affection, to hold out longer. In Josephus, it is a very different kind of performance : isomething so cold, so far-fetched, so artificial, both in seriti- tnents and in language, that it savours more of one Who had been educated in the schools of the Greek sophists, than of those plain, artless, patriarchal shepherds. The other thing that deserves our notice in this author, is the excessive fear he had of exposing himself to the ridicule Of his Greek and Roman readers, whose favour he very assiduous- ly courts. This hath made him express himself on some points with such apparent skepticism, as hath induced many to think, that he was not a firm believer in his own religion^ But this< on a closer examination, will be found entirely without founda- tion : on the contrary, he piques himself not a little, on the dis- tinction of his nation from all others, by the knowledge arid worship of the true God. But he did not write his history t6 make proselytes, and therefore chose to put On those parts of his work which he thought would expose him most to the sneer of the infidel, such a gloss as would make it pass more easily with gentile, and even with philosophical readers, (for he had an eye to both) amongst whom he knew the Jews were branded with credulity, even to a proverb. It may be thought, indeed, that with regard to the more ancient part of his histo- ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 15 jy, as nothing in point of fact can be got from it, which is not to be learnt from the Bible, that part, at least, can be of little or no service to christians. But even this conclusion woulcl not be just. As the historian himself was a pharisee, a con- temporary of the apostles, and one who lived till after the destruction of the Jewish temple and polity by Titus Vespa'? sian, we may reap instruction even from his errours. They y/ill serve to show, what were the tenets of the sect at that time, what were their notions both concerning historical events, and sacred institutions, and what were some of their principal traditions. All this to the christian divine is a mat- ter of no little consequence for the elucidation of several pas- sages in the New Testament, which allude to such erroneous sentiments, and vain traditions. From the time of the re- building of the temple under Ezra, to its final demolition, and the total extinction of the Jewish government by the Ro- mans, Josephus alone affords almost all the light we have. The two books of Maccabees are the only other ancient monuments now extant of the transactions of that people within the aforesaid period. These books, though they are not acknowledged by protestants to be canonical scripture, very well deserve your attention as historical tracts of considerable antiquity, and, to all appearance, worthy of credit. We have, indeed, in English, an excellent work of Prideaux, called. The Connexion of the Old Testament history with that of the New, which 1 would also earnestly recommend to your peru- sal. I hope I scarcely need to mention, that it is more proper for the student to read Josephus in his own language than in a translation : it will thus answer a double end, as an exercise in Gre^k as well as in history. To the knowledge of the sacred, it will be found proper to add as much at least of profane history, as is most nearly con-f liected with it, and may serve to throw some light upon it, together with a little of the chronology and the geography of the times and the countries about which the history is conver- sant. The connexion which the four great monarchies, the Assyrian, the Persian, the Macedonian, and the Roman, have with the Jewish history, is manifest; but as to these, it is by no means requisite that, in this place, I should be particular. The Jewish history is necessary to the theologian, the others are useful. The former ought to be begun immediately, the latter should be studied afterwards, as you find leisure and opportunity : but we do not incline to embarrass you with ^ needless multiplicity of directions. In the next prelection, I intend to begin with some obser- vations on the history of the ssicre4 qanon. LECTURE3 OH {-^^ LECTURE IL X HE subject of this day's discourse is, as I hinted to you at a former meeting, some observations on the nature and utility of the history of the sacred canon ; to which I shall add some reflections, tending to explain both the origin and the character of that species of history which is denominated ecclesiastical. As to the history of the canon, it will be pro- per, in the first place, to give an explanation of the phrase. That book which we christians denominate the Bible^ uBi^xtg, the book, by way of eminence, and which is also termed the canon^ and the sacred canon^ comprehends a considerable num- ber of treatises, or pieces totally distinct, composed (for the most part) at periods distant from one another, and in sundry- places, written by diverse penmen, on different subjects, and in various styles : nor were they all originally in the same lan- guage. The greater part of the books which compose the Old Testament, are in Hebrew, a small part in Chaldee, and all the books of the New Testament in Greek ; at least, if the origi- nals of any of them were in another tongue, they are not now extant : some are in prose, and others in verse ; some are >his-. torical, some juridical, and some prophetical ; some instruct us by the way of simple narrative ; some are written in a highly figurative and allegorick diction ; some in a vehement and declamatory ; others address us in a free epistolary strain : one piece is a collection of devotional hymns and prayers, another is an assemblage of moral maxims and observations. The name canon^ in like manner as the word Bible, we have borrowed from the Greek. The term xww, with them, sig- nifies rule, or standard. Now the Scriptures are thus denomi- nated, as being eminently the great rule or standard to the christian, in all that concerns both faith and manners. Hence also those writings, of whose authenticity and inspiration there is sufficient evidence, are termed canonical scripture. Now concerning the several books of which the Bible is composed, a number of questions naturally arise in the mind ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. it of the inquisitive student. Such are the following : Who were the writers and conipilers, and at what periods, in what places, and on what occasions, were the writings and compila- tions made ? Whence arises that authority they have so gene- rally obtained ? Has this been an immediate, or a gradual con- sequence, of their publication ? Has the christian world been utianirtiious in this respect, in regard to all these books, or has it been divided, as to all, or any of them? And il divided, what have been the most cogent arguments on the different sides ? How, by whom, where, and when, were they collected into one volume ? What hath been their fate and reception since ? What have been the most remarkable editions and translations they have undergone ? What the variations occa- sioned by these, and what the most eminent paraphrases and commentaries they have given rise to ? I would not be under- i3tood by this enumeration, as meaning to insinuate, that all these questions are of the same importance. There is a ma- nifest and very considerable difference among them in this respect. A succinct account, however, of all the facts, which would serve for a solution to the several queries above-men- tioned, those at least which are of principal moment to the theologian, would constitute what is commonly called the his- tory of the sacred canon. The utility of such inquiries to the theologian Is the point which naturally comes next to be discussed. As the questions themselves are pretty different in their nature, however much connected by their concurrence in composing the history of the Bible, the purposes they are fitted to answer are also dif- ferent. In order to prevent mistakes, let it be observed once for all, that by the history of the Bible, I do not here mean, the history contained in the Bible, but the history of the compile- ment, and of the various fates of the book so denominated. The same thing may be said of that synonymous phrase, the history of the canon. As to those queries which regard the origin of the sacred books, they are chiefly conducive for confirming the truth of our religion ; and as to those which regard their reception, good or bad, with all the consequences it hath produced, they are chiefly conducive for illustrating its doctrines. I use the word chiefly in both cases, because, in inquiries into the origin of the scriptures, discoveries will sometimes be made, which serve to illustrate and explain the meaning of things contained in them ; and, on the other hand^ in inquiries into their reception, with its consequences, w^ shall often be enabled to discover the grounds of the favoura- ble reception they have met with, and thereby to trace the vestiges of a divine original. To the former class belong^ c 18 LECTURES ON questions like these : Who were the writers ? When, where^ for whose use, and to what purpose were they written? Whence arises the veneration they have drawn ? Why, by whom, and on what occasion or occasions, were they collected ? To the latter class belong the following. In what manner have they been receiv^ed in different countries, and at different peri- ods ? To what causes does the reception, whether good or bad, appear imputable I What are the most eminent editions ? What are the principal variations to be found in the editions and manuscripts still extant ? What translators and commen- tators have been occupied in conveying and illustrating their doctrine to the most remote nations and distant ages ? In the discussion of such questions, especially in what regards the books of the New Testament, there arises a number of curious investigations, tending to discriminate the genuine produc- tions of the authors, whose names they bear, from the spurious pieces ascribed to them, the authentick dictates of the Holy Spirit from those which, at most, can only be styled apocry- phal, that is hidden or doubtful. That the church was early pestered with a multitude of fictitious accounts of the life of Christ, and the labours of his apostles, is manifest not only from the concurrent testimony of all antiquity, but even from the introduction which the evangelist Luke hath given to his Gospel : " Forasmuch," says he, " as many have taken in hand ** to set forth in order a declaration of those things Which are " most surely believed among us." It is universally acknow- ledged, that John's Gospel was not written till a considerable time afterwards ; and if none had preceded Luke in this work but Matthew and Mark, he would never have denominated them many. Besides, it is plain, from the manner in which preceding attempts are mentioned, that several of the accounts that had been given, were such as could not be depended on j otherwise, this circumstance, that many had undertaken the work before him, instead of being a good reason for his tak- ing up the subject, would have been a very strong reason for his not doing it, since christians were already so amply sup- plied with information. But the very expressions he uses, evidently contain an insinuation, at least, that the writers he alludes to, had not themselves been sufficiently informed of thc truth. " It seemed good to me," says he, " having had per- " feet understanding of all things, from the very first to write " them to thee in order, most excellent Theophilus." But to return to the two classes into which the questions relating to the history of the canon were divided, they will generally be found, agreeably to the observation already made, concerning the principal utility of each, to be treated by authors ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 19 of different denominations, and with different views. Those who, as defenders of revelation, have entered the lists with its adversaries, more especially those, who, like Stillingfleet, in the last age, or Lardner, in the present, have applied them- selves to support the authority and inspiration of the Scrip- tures, did always consider themselves as under a necessity of doing something for our satisfaction, in regard to the ques- tions of the first order. Those, on the other hand, who have assumed the character not of the champions of religion, but of its interpreters, do commonly attach themselves more to the discussion of the questions of the second order. Accordingly, we find a great deal of information on these topicks in the works of some of our scriptural criticks; whether they come under the denomination of scholiasts, paraphrasts, commentators, trans- lators, or barely editors, particularly the two last. The only examples of these I shall now mention, are, Houbigant's pro- legomena to the different parts into which he has divided his Latin version of the Old Testament, and Mill's and Wetstein's. prolegomena to the splendid and valuable editions they have given of the Greek New Testament, with the various read-, ings. These I only mention b'' the way as deserving to be carefully perused by you, if you should happen to meet with them. For all the three (especially the first) being voluminous and expensive works, and not very common, there are not many that, in this part of the world, have an opportunity of consulting them. There is, indeed, one author, who, in a particular work written on purpose, has, with a good deal of judgment and acuteness, treated all the questions of both classes above enu- merated : the author I mean, is Richard Simon, a priest of the Oratory, commonly known by the name of Father Simon. This man first published, in French, a book, entitled, A criti- cal History of the Old Testament^ which was soon after follow- ed by another in the same language, entitled, A critical History of the Neiv Testament ; both which together complete the his- tory of the sacred canon. This work has been translated, not badly, into Latin. There is a translation of it into English [which I have seen] that is very ill executed, in regard both to the sense and to the expression. In relation to the character of the performance, it will not be improper to make here a i€:w observations. In the first place, it clearly evinces in the au- thor a large fund of erudition, accompanied with an uncommon share of critical sagacity and penetration ; and, I may justly add, a greater degree of moderation, than is generally to be met with in those, either of his sect as a romanist, or of his o-rder as a priest. What particularly quali{iord, preserved by a most friendly intercourse, and by frequent instructions, admonitions, reproofs when necessa- ry, and even by the exclusion of those who had violated such powerful and solemn engagements : in all this, I say, there was nothing that interfered with the temporal powers. They claimed no jurisdiction over the person, the liberty, or the pro- perty of any man. And if they expelled out of their own so- ciety, and, on satisfying their conditions, re-admitted those who had been expelled, they did in this only exercise a right, which (if we may compare great things with small, and hea- venly things with earthly) any private company, like a knot of artists or philosophers, may freely exercise ; namely, to give the benefit of their own company and conversation to whom, and on what terms, they judge proper : a right which can never justly be considered as in the least infringing on the secular powers. The christians everywhere acknowledged themselves the subjects of the state, whether monarchical or republican, ab- solute or free, under which they lived ; entitled to the same privileges with their fellow-subjects, and bound as much as any of them (I might say more, in respect of the peculiar ob- ligation which their religion laid them under) to the observance of the laws of their country. They pleaded no exemption but in one case ; a case wherein every man, though not a christian, has a natural title to exemption ; that is, not to obey a law which is unjust in itself, and which he is persuaded in hisr con- science to be so. But in regard to rights merely of a person- al or private nature, over which the individual has a greater power, far from being pertinacious asserters of these, they held it for an invariable maxim, that it is much better to suffer wrong, than either to commit or to avenge it. This, in my judgment, is the true footing on which the apostolical church stood in relation to the secular powers. To what causes the wonderful change afterwards produced, ought to be attributed^, I intend to make the subject of another prelection. ECCLESIASTIGAL HISTORY. 27 LECTURE IIL I CONCLUDED the last discourse I gave you on the subjisct of Sacred History, with an account of the origin and primitive nature of the christian church. I observed to you, that being founded in the concurrence of its members in the faith of the doctrine, and the observance of the precepts of Christ their common Lord, and being supported by brotherly affection one to anothet, as well as ardent zeal for the happiness of the whble, it was in no respect calculated to interfere with the rights of princes, or afford matter of umbrage or jealousy tb the Secular pibwers. But what God makes upright, man always corrupts by his inventions. This was the case of the human species itself. This was the case of the first religion, call it traditional, or call it natural, which, in process of time, did, in the different nations of the earth, degenerate into the grossest idolatry and abominations. Atid as to what has been communicated since by written revelation, this Was certainly the case of the preced- ing or Mosaical institution. And this, upon inquiry, will be found to have been eminently the case of the pres&nt or chris- tian dispensation. When the disciples in populous cities begaii tb multiply, as no association of imperfect creatures will ever be found, in all respects, perfect, it is by no means strange, that sometimes differences and interferings should arise between individuals concerning matters of property and civil right. These dif- ferences Occasioned law-suits before the ordinary judgfes who were pagans. Law-suits, a^ might be expected, not only occa- sioned, to the great prejudice of charity, heart-burnings among themselves, but tended tO bring a scandal on the profession, whose criterion or badge had been expressly declared by their master to be their mutual love. Examples there were of these mischiefs as early as the times of the apostles, particularly at Corinth^ a city abounding in wealth and luxury. The apostle Paul, effectually to remedy this evil, and to prevent the scandal and hurt which must arise from its continuance, first expostu- lates with the Corinthians (J Cor. vi. 1, &t.) on the nature 28 LECTURES ON and dignity of their christian vocation, to which it would be much more suitable patiently to suffer injuries, than, with so imminent a risk of charity, to endeavour to obtain redress : — ■" '' Why do ye not rather,*' says he, " take wrong ? Why do ye " not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded ?" And even should the injury appear too great to be entirely overlooked, he enjoins them, and with them doubtless all christians in the like circumstances, to submit those differences, which should unhappily arise among them, to arbitrators chosen from among themselves. By this expedient a double end would be an- swered : the parties would, by the mediation of their brethren, be more easily conciliated to each other, and the reproach of the heathen would be prevented. It is evident that in this there was no encroachment on the province of the magistrate. A similar practice, ever since the Babylonish captivity, had obtained among the Jews in all the countries through which they were dispersed. To put an end to differences, either by compromise or by arbitration, is the exercise of a natural right, which all civil establishments acknowledge, and which most of them show a disposition to encourage and promote. Jars and quarrels are universally admitted to be evils, though unavoidable in the present lapsed condition of human nature. Judicatories are erected to put an end betimes to these evils. The litigation of the parties, though a bad consequence, is permitted solely to prevent a worse. But no human polity commands men to be litigious. The less a man is so, he is the better subject of the state. The apostle's aim is to crush strife as early as possible, and to prevent an ill effect, though not the worst effect, of private differences ; to wit, publick con- tention in courts of law. His advice is such as every good man, every lover of peace, and therefore every good citizen, would very readily give to the members of any society in which he had a concern. It was, besides, perfectly suitable to the peaceful maxims of his great master : " Resist not evil. *' Agree with thine adversary quickly whilst thou art in the " way with him." And " Blessed are the peace-makers, for *' they shall be called the children of God." Let it be remarked further, that those primitive and chosen arbiters claimed no coercive power of any kind over their fel- low-christians. The judgment they pronounced was very properly termed, in primitive times, the judgment of charity or love. By this principle alone were the judges influenced (without salary or emoluments) to undertake the office : by this principle alone were the parties disposed to submit to the sen- tence : and by this principle alone, where an injury had been committed, the offender was induced, as far as possible, to ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. S9 make reparation, and the oflFended as readily to grant forgive- ness. No mention do we find of bailiffs or tipstaves, fines, imprisonments, or distraining of goods. As their principal view in examining and deciding such questions was the radi- cal cure of the evil, that is, of every thing that might look like animosity or discontent among the disciples of Christ f they neither had, nor desired to have any other means of en- forcing their decisions, than such as the love of peace and union, and the interest of the common cause necessarily gave them. To have applied, as umpires in christian states are wont, for the interposition of the secular arm to enforce their decrees, would have been recurring to that very evil, for the prevention of which they had been nominated as judges by their brethren. It deserves also to be taken notice of, that ttie apostle, fit from taking upon him to assign this office of terminating their diiferences to such as he might think properly qualified, does not so much as recommend, or even mention to them any individual, or any class of men. On the contrary, he leaves the matter entirely to their own free choice. And indeed it was proper it should be so. This expedient is recommended purely from the charitable and prudential considerations of decency and peace. These could not be promoted otherwise than by the people's perfect confidence, not only in the equity but in the abilities of the persons to be intrusted, who there- fore doubtless ought to be of their electing. Besides, it would have ill suited the genuine but spiritual dignity of the aposto- lick office, for Paul, so unlike the examples given by his Lord, to have assumed an authoritative direction in matters merelv temporal. For this reason I am inclined to think that, if he had judged it necessary to oflFer his opinion as to the particular persons proper to be chosen, he would have judged it fitter to exempt the pastors from a charge which might, in some re- spects, appear foreign from their office, than to recommend them to it. The consequence however in fact was, that at least in several congregations or churches, the choice fell upon their ministers, a very natural effect of that confidence and respect which, in those times of purity, we have ground to believe they merit- ed. Nor let it be imagined, from any thing advanced above, that this was a charge which the ministers of religion, as things then stood, ought to have declined. 1 have indeed acknowledged, that, in some respects, the cognizance of secu- lar matters did not so naturally unite with their spiritual func- tions. But, consider the affair in another view, and we shall find that both in regard to the motive which influenced them, 30 LECTURES ON and the end which their acceptance of this task tended to pfd- mote, there was a real suitableness to the nature and design of their office. Hardly could ambition be supposed to ope- rate in inducing them to accept a charge which added to their labour, and exposed them the more to the notice of the com- mon enemy, and consequently to danger, without adding to their wealth, or rank, or even power in the common accepta- tion of the term. For the award of these judges was nd more than the declaration of their opinion ; and the execution of the sentence was no more than the voluntary acquiescence of the parties. The pastors derived no kind of authority from this prerogative, except that which integrity and discernment inva- riably secure with those for whose benefit these talents are exerted. An authority this which depends entirely on the right discharge of the trust, and is incompatible with the abuse of it. Their motive therefore could only be the chari- table desire of making peace and preventing offences. The harmony of christians among themselves, and their unblem- ished reputation in respect of the heathen, were no less manifestly the blessed ends to which their labour of love con- tributed. But might it not be urged, on the other hand, that this work would infallibly prove an avocation frorii the spiritual and more important duties of their office ? In those early ages, before the love of many had waxed cold, before the christian congre- gations were become either so numerous or so opulent, as some time afterwards they became, it is not to be imagined that such questions, in relation to property and civil rights, would be either so frequent, or so intricate, as to occupy a con- siderable portion of the arbitrator's time, and thereby inter- fere with his other more essential duties. Had it been other- wise, this judiciary charge ought doubtless, from the beginning, to have been devolved into other hands. The apostles them- selves, we find, at first took the trouble of distributing to the people, according to the respective necessities of each, the money which the charity and zeal of the converts had thrown into the common stock. But when this work became so bur- densome, as to interfere with the peculiar functions of the apostleship, they made no delay in resigning it to others. " It is not reason," said they, " that we should leave the word " of God, and serve tables." The like part no doubt ought those primitive pastors to have acted ; the like part no doubt they would have acted, had there been the like occasion. That they did not, ought to be accounted bv us as sufficient- evidence that the like occasion did not exist, and that the task was then no way cumbersome. They had apostolical example ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. SI alike for undertaking an office of benevolence, when it did not interfere, and for renouncing it when it did interfere,,wixh the sacred duties of their spiritual function. But to return, this custom of nominating their pastors to he arbitrators of all their differences in matters of civil property and right, from being pretty common, seems very quickly to have become general. The example of one christian society influenced another, who did not choose to appear deficient in any testimony of esteem for their teachers. From being ge- neral it became universal. Every congregation would think it proper to avoid distinguishing themselves by a singularity, which would be understood to reflect either on the judgment ©r the discretion of their pastors. Some learned men seem to be of opinion, that the business of determining such civil controversies as arose between chris- tians, belonged at first to the whole congregation ; or, in other words, to that particular church or society whereof the parties concerned were members. But this mistake appears to have arisen from confounding two things totally distinct. When one christian had ground, real or supposed, to complain of the conduct of another as unbrotherly and injurious, after private methods of reclaiming the offender had been tried in vain by the offended, it belonged to the congregation to judge between them ; and either to effect a reconciliation, or to discard dhe who, by his obstinacy in the wrong, showed himself unworthy of their fellowship. This method had been clearly pointed out to them by their great founder. *•'■ If thy broiher," says he, "trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault, between *' thee and him alone : if he hear thee, thou hast gained thy " brother ; but if he will not hear thee, then take widi thee one " or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses .*' every word may be established ; and if he neglect to hear *' them, tell it to the church ; but if he neglect to hear the *' church, let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican, " Verily I say unto you. Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, ** shall be bound in heaven ; and whatsoever ye shall loose on *' earth, shall be loosed in heaven." What ye thus do, agree- ably to the instructions I give you, God himself will ratify. The practice of the apostolick age, which has the best title to the denomination of primitive, is the surest commentary on this precept of our Lord. Not only were such private of- fences then judged by the chuirch, that is, the congregation, but also those scandals which affected the whole christian fra- ternity. Accordingly, the judgment which Paul, by the spirit ©f God, had formed concerning the incestuous person, he en- joins the church, to whom his epistle is directed, that is, (te ^2 LECTURES ON use his own words for an explanation) '* them who at Corinth *' are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, to pronounce " and execute." And in his second epistle to the same church, (chap. ii. v. 6.) he says, in reference to the same delin- quent, " Sufficient to such a man is the censure which was *' inflicted by many ;" Cno t«v 5rx«/evw, by the community. And (v. 10.) "To whom ye forgave any thing," addressing him- self always to the congregation, " I forgive also." We admit, with the learned Dodwell^, that in the censure inflicted on the incestuous person, the christians at Corinth were but the exe- cutors of the doom avirarded by the apostle. Nor does any one question the apostolical authority in such matters over both the flock and the pastors. But from the words last quoted, it is evident that he acknovvrledges, at the same time, the ordi- nary power in regard to discipline lodged in the congrega- tion ; and from the confidence he had in the discretion and integrity of the Corinthians, he promises his concurrence in what they shall judge proper to do. " To whom ye forgive *■'• any thing, I forgive also." Now, though in aftertimes the charge of this matter also came to be devolved, first on the bishop and presbyters, and afterwards solely on the bishop, yet that the people, as well as the presbyters, as far down, at least, as to the middle of the third century, retained some share in thfc decision of questions wherein morals were immediately concerned, is manifest from Cyprian's letters still extant. In his time, when congregations were become very numerous, the inquiry and deliberation were holden (perhaps then more com- modiously) in the ecclesiastical college, called the presbytery, consisting of the bishop, the presbyters, and the deacons. When this was over, the result of their inquiry and consulta- tions was reported to the whole congregation belonging to that church, who were called together on purpose, in order to ob- tain their approbation of what had been done, and their con- sent to the resolution that had been taken: for without their consent, no judgment could regularly be put in execution. But this is quite a different subject of inquiry from ques-. tions merely in regard to right or property. The one is more analogous to a criminal, the other to a civil process. Two persons may differ in regard to the title to a particular subject, each claiming it as his, though neither accuse the other of inju- rious, or unchristian treatment ; it is not because these pleas always spring from some malignity of disposition, that this amicable method of terminating them is recommended ; but it is because there is an imminent hazard, that if long conti^ * De jure Laicoram sacerdotali, c. iii. § 10. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 33 nued, and brought to publick view, they breed some maUg'^iJ^y in the minds of the parties towards each other, and affr,^i-^ ^ handle to idolaters to blaspheme the good ways of the Lord. Now it is manifest, in the first place, that questions of civil right are not so much within tlie sphere of the m.oltitude, as those which concern practical religion rend morals; and se- condly, that the apostle does not recommend it to the peorjle to take such secular matters under their own cognizancv*. collec- tively, but only to appoinc proper persons to judge in them. " If then," says he, " ye have judgment of things pertaining " to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the *' church." In the epithet least esteemed^ I imapi^'me he couches an ironical reproof to the Cor5,nthians, for their appearing to be at a loss in finding persons proper to discuss matters in themselves of very little moment compared with those with which, as christians, they were conversant. But to guard against being mistaken by too literal an interpretation of his words, he immediaiely subjoins, '•■'• \ speak this to shame you. " Is it so, that there is not a wise man amongst you ? No, not «' one, that shall be able to judge between his brethren ?" So that it appears extremely probable, that unless what was first only a ciyil, controversy, afterwards became a scandal, by the improper behaviour of one or both of the litigants, the people did not intermeddle in the cause. They left it entirely to the arbiters, or wise men, whom they had nominated for the pur- pose : and these, as was observed before, came at last univer- sally to be the pastors. Time, the greatest of all innovators, though, when it ope- rates by slow degrees, the least observable ; (time, 1 say) which alters every thing, did, from the universality of the practice of committing this trust to, the pastors, and from its continuance for a course of successions in their hands, at length, in eiFect, establish it as a right. As charity cooled^ ambition, a very subtle passion, insensibly insinuated itself. This it would do at first more modestly under the guise of publick virtue, as a desire of being more extensively useful to the people, afterwards more boldly, as a commendable zeal for every thing that could be deemed a prerogative of the sacred order. When persecutions had ceased, the churches, as they grew in the number and the wealth of their members, produced, in proportion, more fruits of contention, and fewer of brotherly love. Every thing, then, that might give any sort of ascendancy over the minds of others, would be greedily grasped at : and this privilege of judging, in civil matters, would then be very naturally claimed by the bishops, as a part of their office. It must, howeyej-, be acknowled^-ed^ $4, LECTURES ON that though, in particular instances, this trust might be abused.;^ it was, upon the whole, expedient for the christian brotherhood^ and could scarcely be considered as dangerous so long as it re- mained on the original footing, and was unsupported by the se^ cular arm. But when Christianity came to receive the countenance and sanction of the ruling powers, the Roman emperours imagined they could not n^ore effectually show their zeal for the cause of Christ, tlian by confirming every prerogative which had been considered as belonging to his ministers. It is, besides not unlikely, that the happy influence which the pastoral decisions, aided by the authority of religion, generally had in composing differences among the people, would prove an additional mo= live for their interposition in support of a practice seemingly so conducive to publick utility. But whatever be in this, so it was, that the bishop's power of judging, in secular matters, was not only ratified by law, but through an ill-judged induU gence, as soon appeared by the event, was further extended, backed by the secular arm, and rendered compulsory. Con- stantine, the first christian emperour, made a law, that the sentence of the bishop should, in every case, be final, and that the magistrate should be obliged to execute it ; that if in any cause depending before the secular judge, in any stage of the process, either party, though in direct opposition to the other party, should appeal to the bishop ; to his tribunal, from which there could be no appea.1, the cause should instantly be re-, jnitted. Then, indeed, began the episcopal judgment to be properly forensick, having compulsive execution by the ministry of the magistrate. Then, indeed, began the prelates, for the greater state and dignity, in their judicial proceedings, to adopt the model and appendages of civil judicatories, and to have their chancellors, commissaries, officials, advocates, proctors, regisv ters, apparitors, &:c. &c. Then originated these phrases un= heard before, episcopal jurisdiction^ episcopal audience^ and other such like. When one considers the origin of ecclesiastical judicature, as deduced above, and the reasons for which some expedient of this sort was first recommended by Paul to the Corinthians, it is impossible to conceive any thing more un- suitable to his design, than the footing on v/hich it was now es- tablished. One principal ground for which the apostle advis- ed the measure, was to avoid the scandal which one christian suing another before a tribunal of infidels, must necessarily bring upon their religion. '•'• Brother," says he, " goeth to " law with brother, and that before the unbelievers." Now this evil was radically cured when Christianity became the es« ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 2S tablisbed religion, and the secular judges themselves were taken from the christian brotherhood. I acknowledge, how- ever, that this is not the only ground of the apostle's recom- mendation : his other reason is, thiat to prevent law-suits en- tirely, by a compi-omise of any differences that might arise, or by a friendly reference to proper urinpires, Would be greatly conducive to the cause of charity, which is the common cause, by preserving peiace among themselves : but no sooner is the bishop, or indeed any man, vested with legal and coercive au- thority, ii>6omuch that people cari be comjiellecl to appear be- fore him, and to submit to his sentence, than he ceases to be . an umpire, his court is erected into a secular tribunal, and the procedure before him is as really a law-suit as that which is carried on before any other judge. All the weight, therefore, of the apostle's second reason from fraternal love, operates as strongly against suing an advei^sary in this coiirt, as it doe^ against suing him in any other. It was not at first understood, or duly attetided to, how great the chaiige was, which this new arrangement of Constantine made in the constitution of the empire. It\vas, in effect, throwing the whole judiciaiy power of the state into the Hands of the clergy. All the ordinary judicatories were how reduced to act solely in subordination to the spiritual courts, which could overrule the proceedings of the secular, whilst their own were not lia- ble to be overruled by any. The civil magistrate who. might fee compielled to eiecute their sentences, but was not entitled to revise or altei- them, was, in fact, no better than the bishop's sergeant. His office, in this instance, was by iio means magis« terial, it was merely mifaisterial and subservient. It was in vain, at the period at which we are now arrived, to imagine, that in the same way as formerly, a sense of reli- gion should operate on the minds of the people. This is a sentiment of too delicate a nature to be rendered compatible with the measures now adopted. Froth the moment the pas- tor was armed with the ttrrdurs of the magistrate, the powei' of religion was superseded, atid the gentlfe voice of love was drowned in the clamour of commitmetits, forfeitures, and dis- tress of goods. It deserves also to be remarked, that whilst matters remained on the primitive footing, thet-e was the strongest tie on the pastors to a strict observance of equity, as It was theiice only that their judgments could derive authority, br command respect. . The po^ver itself was of such a nature, as could not long subsist after beirig perverted : the case was quite different now. It appeared of little consequence to draw respect to a verdict, to which they could enforce obedience : "iud this could equally be effected, whatever were the sentence^ 36 LECTURES ON just or unjust, reasonable or absurd. Of the like pernicious tendency, as they flowed from the same cause, were the mea- sures that were afterwards adopted to enforce ecclesiastical censures and excommunications, by the sanction of civil laws, inflicting pains and penalties. When so much depended on the dignitaries of the church, they could not fail to meet with all the adulation, and other seductive arts, by which the favour of the great and powerful is, through the influence of avarice, and other irregular desires, commonly courted by inferiours and dependents. Whether this would contribute to improve these shepherds of the flock in humility and meekness, may be sub- mitted tathe determination of every impartial and judicious hearer. One favourable circumstance, however, which per- haps inclined the people more easily to acquiesce in it, was, that it was the only considerable check which they had, for ages, on the too absolute power of the emperour. It is thus that Providence, in the worst of circumstances, is ever at work, bringing good out of evil, making usurpations on diff'erent sides balance and control one another, and rendering the greatest calamities reciprocal correctives. But to proceed in our narration ; the emperour Valens still enlarged the jurisdiction of the bishops, assigning to them the charge of fixing the prices of all vendible commodities, which was, it must be owned, a most extraordinary assignment. It is but doing justice to some worthy bishops to declare, that far from being gratified by these changes, they loudly complained of them. Possidonius relates concerning Augustine in parti- cular, that though he gave attendance to this forensick busi- ness all the morning, sometimes till dinner-time, and some- times till night, he was wont to say, that it was a great griev- ance to him, as it diverted his attention from what was much more properly his charge ; that it was, in fact, to leave things useful, and to attend to things tumultuous and perplexed; that saint Paul had not assumed this ofiice to himself, well knowing how unsuitable it was to that of a preacher of the Gospel, but was desirous that it should be given to others. Such were the sentiments of that respectable father of the church. But ev.ery bishop was not of the same mind with Augustine. About seventy years afterwards, when this authority came to be very much abused, the law of Constantine was repealed by Arcadius and Honorius, who limited the bishops, in civil matters to those only which were referred to their judgment by the consent of both the litigants. But in some cities the bishops were already become too powerful, and too rich, to be so easily dispossessed. In Rome particularly, this new regula- tion had little or no effect, till Valentianus, about the middle ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Sir of the fifth century, being'himself in Rome, renewed it, and caused it to be put in execution. However, it was soon after- wards revoked by subsequent princes, who restored to the clergy a great part of that jurisdiction which had been taken away. Justinian in particular established the episcopal tribu- nal, allotting to it, in the first place, all causes that could be any way understood to concern religion, then the ecclesiastical de- linquencies of clergymen, and also diverse sorts of voluntary jurisdiction over the laity. By the methods above recited, it happened, we find at last, that the brotherly corrections, and charitable interpositions, instituted by Christ and his apostles, degenerated into mere worldly domination. When, on the one hand, the ministers of religion thought fit to exchange that pa- rental tenderness, w^hich was the glory of their predecessors, for that lordly superiority which succeeded, it was a natural con- sequence, that, on the other hand, the amiable reverence of the child should be overwhelmed in the fearful submission of the slave. " Perfect love," says the apostle John, " casteth out fear." It is no less true in the converse. " Perfect fear casteth out love." The great engine of the magistrate, is ter- rour J of the pastor, love. The advancement of the one is the destruction of the other. To attempt to combine them in the same character, is to attempt to forna a hideous monster at the best. Paul understood the difference, and marked it well in his epistles, especially those to Timothy and to Titus* ** The servant of the Lord," says he, " must not strive, but be " gentle to all men, apt to teach, patient and meek, not greedy " of sordid lucre, no striker." The weapons of his warfare are not carnal; he forbears threatening, and does not employ the arm of flesh : his weapons are the soft powers of persuasion, anJ* mated by tenderness and love. In vain is it pretended, that the ecclesiastical jCirisdiction, above explained, is not of the nature of dominion, like the secular. Where is the difference that can be called material ? Is not the execution, wherever there is either opposition or delay on the part of him who is cast effected ultimately by the same methods of coercion, im- prisonment, distraining of goods, and the like as in the tempo- ral judicatories ? Are not the parties loaded with expenses to the full as heavy ? Or are there not as many hungry vultures, retainers to the court, that must be satisfied ? Is there not the same scope for contention, altercation, and chicane ? Or ate the processes in the spiritual courts (where such spiritual courts still subsist) less productive of feuds and animosities than in the secular ? In almost all cases wherein a particular mode of religion has obtained, in a country, a legal establishment, in preference to every other mode, there has been a strong tendency in the acts 38 ttCTURES ON of the legislature to confound civil rights and civil authority with those that are purely moral or leligious. Nor is it sd easy a matter in practice, to ascertain the boundary, in everv instance, and draw the line by which the one may be effectually discriminated from the other, as one at first would be apt t6 imagine. The distinction has been better preserved in our own country, notwithstanding the few exceptions of little mo- ment which I shall mention, than perhaps in any other* There is a part of the office of a minister in this country that is pure- ly of a civil nature, derived from the law of the land, and quite extraneous to the business of a pastor, which, in strictness, is only what is called the cure of souls. By this secular branch, I mean, the power with which presbyteries are vested by the legislature, in giving decrees, after proper inquiry, against the landholders, or heritors, as we more commonly term them, for the repairing, or the rebuilding, of churches, mrinses, and pa- rochial schools, in the taking trial, and the admitting of school- ntiasters, in the allotting of glebes, and perhaps some other things of a similar nature. That the presbytery, in these mat- ters, does not act as an ecclesiastical court, is evident^ not only from the nature of the thing, but from this further considera- tion, its not being in these, at least, in what relates to churches, manses and glebes, as in all other matters under the correction of its ecclesiastical superiours, the provincial synod, and the national assembly, but under the review of the highest civil judicatory in this country, the court of session. Another kind of civil power committed to presbyteries, is the power of presenting (as some understand the law) to vacant parishes, upon the devolution of the right, by the patron's ne- glecting to exercise it for six months after the commencement of the vacancy. In this, however, our ecclesiastical ideas, and our political, so much interfere, that the power'^of issuing out a presentation, has never yet, as far as I know, been exerted by any presbyter)^, in the manner in which it is commonly ex- erted by lay patrons, or in the manner in which it was former- ly exerted by bishops in this country, in the times of episcopa- cy, or in which it is at present exerted by bishops in Ireland, as well as in the southern part of the island. Presbyteries do com- monly, I think, on such occasions, consultthe parish, and regulate their conduct in the same manner as though patronages were not in force by law. I should, perhaps, add to the aforesaid list of particulars not properly ecclesiastical, the concern which the pastor must take along with the heritors and elders of the parish, in the management and disposal of the publick chari- ties, also the power of church judicatories in appointing con- tributions for pious uses, to be made throughout the churche'- within their jurisdiction* ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 39 ' The conduct of a minister in regard to the few caTSes, \<'hich, \h strictness, are without the sphere of his spiritual vocation, is, it must be owned, extremely delicate ; and not the less so that in some of the particulars enumerated, as in what regards manses and glebes, he will naturally be considered as a party, from the similarity of situation in which they are all placed, in the very cause in which he must act as a judge. Whether it is a real advantage to us to possess this kind of secular authority, is a question foreign to my present purpose. For my own part, I am strongly inclined to think, that if the legislature had made proper provision for supplying parishes and ministers with sufficient churches and manses, by means of the civil ma- gistrate only, it had not been the worse for us. As, on the one hand, we should have been freed from temptations to par- tiality, which will, no doubt, sometimes influence our judg- ment as well as that of other men, so on the other hand, w^e should have been freed from the suspicion and reproach of it, from which the strictest regard to equity and right will not al- ways be sufficient to protect us. And in a character, on the purity whereof so much depends, I must say, it is of no small consequence, not only that it be unbiassed by any partial re- gards, but even that it be beyond the remotest suspicion of such a bias. In England, the natural limits have been very ill preserved^ and both kinds of jurisdiction, the civil and che religious, are made strangely to encroach on one another. I do not here so much allude to the judicial power of the consistorial courts, in matters matrimonial and testamentary, though these are pure- ly secular, as to the confusion in what regards the executive part of jurisdiction. As, with them, church censures are followed with civil penalties, the loss of liberty, or imprison- ment, and the forfeiture of the privileges of a citizen, the cler- gy must have become absolute lords of the persons and pro- perties of the people, had there not been lodged in the civil judicatories, a paramount jurisdiction, by which the sentences of the spiritual courts can be revised, suspended, and annulled. Add to this, that the participation of one of the sacraments having been with them, by a very short-sighted policy, perr verted into a test for civil offices, a minister may be compelled, by the magistrate, to admit a man who is well known to be a most improper person, an atheist, blasphemer, or profligate. The tendency of this prostitution plainly is, by the law of the land, to make void the institution of Jesus Christ, as far as re- gards its meaning and design. By the appointment of Jesus Christ, the participation was to serve in the participants purely as a testimony of their faith in him, and love t» •40 LECTURES ON him, " Do this in remembrance of me." Bv the law of the land, it is rendered a qualification, or test, abso- lutely necessary for the attainment of certain lucrative offices, and for securing a continuance in them when at- tained ; so that, in a great number,, it can serve as a tes- timony of nothing but of their secular views. And to ren- der this testimony, if possible, perfectly unequivocal, such peo- ple must have a certificate from the minister of cheir I'eceiv- ing the sacrament, to present to their superiours when requir- ed. For my own part, I do not see how the divine command- ment, in what regards its spirit, power, and use, couid be more effectually abrogated by statute than by thus retaining the form, the letter, the body of the precept, and, at the same time, totally altering the purpose, object, and intention. Men have been very long in discovering, and even yet seem scarcely to have discovered, that true religion is of too deli- cate a nature to be compelled, if I may so express myself, by the coarse implements of human authority and worldly sanc- tions. Let the law of the land restrain vice and injustice of every kind, as ruinous to the peace and order of society, for this is its proper province ; but let it not tamper with religion, by attempting to enforce its exercises and duties. These, unless they be free-will offerings are nothing ; they are worse. By such an unnatural alliance, and ill-judged aid, hypocrisy and superstition may, indeed, be greatly promoted, but genuine piety never fails to suffer. Another consequence of the confusion of spiritual jurisdic- tion and secular in that church, however respectable on other accounts, (for these remarks affect not the doctrine taught, the morals inculcated, nor the form of worship practised, but only the polity and discipline) another consequence, I sa}', is, that ecclesiastical censures among them have now no regard, agreeably to their original destination, to purity and manners. They serve only as a political engine for the eviction of tithes, surplice fees, and the like, and for the execution of other sen- tences in matters purely temporal. Would it have been possi- ble to devise a more effectual method, had that been th^ ex- press purpose, for rendering the clerical character odious, and the discipline contemptible ? Luckily with us, in those few raatters of a secular nature above specified, wherein presbyte- ries are, in the first instance, appointed judges, when the pres- bytery have given their decree, they have no part in the exe- cution, and indeed, no further concern in the matter. Their decision is nrierely declarative of right, and their power is ex- actly similar to that of arbitrators. The only difference is, that the fornier are authorised by law, t^e latter by the nomi- ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 41 Iftation of the parlies : but in neither is there any coercive au- thority. The par ty in whose favour the sentence is given, ap- plies tor the intervention of the lords of session to compel the obedience of all concerned. This interposition is always grant- fed as a thing of course, unless when the presbyterial decree is Drought under the review of that court by suspension. In this case the lords may affirm, reverse, or alter, as they see cause. Then it becomes their own sentence, and is enforced in the usual manner. But no process in our church can terminate in excommunication, or in any ecclesiastical censures, but a pro- cess of scandal, by which term is commonly understood some flagrant immorality. These censures our constitution does not permit us to employ, on any occasion, as expedients for ei- ther securing our property, or asserting our prerogatives and power. And as we have not the same temptations with our neighbours to abuse them, so neither does the constitution iu this country permit the civil magistrate to interfere with the procedure of the ecclesiastical courts. A sufficient security is provided, against the rashness or injustice of the inferiour ju- dicatories, the presbyteries, by the right of appeal to the im- mediately superiour tribunal, the synod, and thence, in the last resort, to the general assembly. Besides, where no civil pe- nalty follows the sentence of the church, as is now very properly the case with us, the church courts have this additional motive to be cautious of employing those censures except in claimant cases, namely, that if their sentences be not supported by what I may call the verdict of the country, the general sense of the people, they will very soon, and very justly, become contempti- ble. And this is the true footing on which all ecclesiastical censures ought to stand. But from what has been said, it is evident, that in our establishment, sufficient care has been ta- ken that there be no material encroachment of either side, on the natural province of the other. WTiat I have said on this article, it will be observed, militates chiefly, if not solely, against what may be called a coercive power in the ministers of religion, either direct, by seizing the persons, and distraining the goods of obnoxious people, or which, in my judgment, is still worse, an indirect coercion, by emploving ecclesiastical censures as the tools for effecting the same worldly purpose. Thus much only by the way. 1 return to the narrative. When the western provinces were entirely severed from the eastern, Italy, France, and Germany, making one empire, and Spain a kingdom, the principal bishops in all these four provinces, who, to a consi- derable share of the national riches, had this advantage iilso, that they were at the head of an order which engrossed almost F 42 LECTURES ON all the little learning of the times, were commonly chosen fey the prince for his counsellors. The weight which this honour- able distinction gave them in temporal matters, and in affairs of state, brought an immense increase of authority to the epis- copal tribunal. In less than two hundred years afterwards, they pretended an absolute and exclusive right to all criminal and civil jurisdiction over the clergy, and, in various cases, over the laity also, under pretext that, though the persons were not, the causes were, ecclesiastical. Beside those, they invented another sort of causes, which they denominated causes of mixed cognizance, insiscing, that in them, the bishop might judge, as well as the magistrate, and that the right of prevention ought to take place ia favour of that court before- which the cause should first be brought. In consequence of this curious distinction, they at length, through their exquisite solicitude, and the attention of their agents and dependents, who found their account in their diligence, appropriated all such causes, leaving none of them to the secular judge. And as to those which remained still uncomprehended, under either denomination, of ecclesiastical or mixed, they came at last to be comprised under one universal rule, which they most assiduously and strenuously inculcated as the very founda- tion of the faith ; which was, that every cause devolved on the ecclesiastical tribunal, if the magistrate either refused, or neglected, to do justice. It was no wonder that in those days it should prove a common saying, that " except in places bor- " dering on the infidels, a good lawyer makes a better bishop '^ than a good divine ;" for the more he was occupied in hear- ing causes, and in other secular functions, the less leisure he had for teaching, which fell at last to be totally disused by those of that station. Thus what at first was the bishop^s principal, I may say, his whole business, came to be regarded as no part of it. But if the clerical claims had rested here, the state of Christendom had yet been tolerable. There still remained a remedy. Whenever the people in republicks, and the princes in monarchies, should see the abuses become insupportable, they would, by their ordinances and edicts, reduce this over- grown authority of churchmen within reasonable limits, as, in former times, had been often done when judged necessary, iiut that encroaching spirit which first put christian states under the yoke, in a great measure succeeded at last in de- priving them of the means of wrenching it from their necks. The lordly prelates having already arrogated to themselves all the pleas of clergymen, together with so many pleas of lay- men, under the colour of spirituality, and having shdre4 "^ ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, 43 ajmost all the rest, either by the name of mixed cognizance, or by superseding the magistrate, under the pretext, that jus- tice had been denied, or unduly delayed, they proceeded, about the middle of the eleventh century, aided by the profound ignorance and gross superstition of the age, to broach and maintain, that this extensive power of judging in the bishop was not derived from the concession of princes, or from their connivance, or from the consent of the people, or from imme- morial custom, but that it was essential to the episcopal dig- nity, and annexed thereto by Christ. Now although the im- perial laws are still extant in the codes of Theodosius and Justinian, in the capitulars of Charlemagne, and Lewis the pious, and other later princes, both oriental and occidental ; though all clearly show how, when, and bv whom such power was conceded ; though all the histories, both ecclesiastical and civil, agree in relating the same concessions, and the usages introduced, mentioning the reasons and causes ; yet so noto- rious a truth has not been able to surmount the single affirma- tion of the canonist doctors, who have, on the contrary, had the audacity to support the divine original of prelatical domi- nion. They have even bolclly proclaimed those to be hereticks, who pay any regard to evidence as clear as sunshine, M^ho can- not submit entirely to renounce their understandings, and to be treated as fools, and blind. They did not even confine themselves within these bounds, but maintained, that neither the magistrate, nor the prince him- self, could without sacrilege, intermeddle in any of those causes which the clergy had appropriated, because thev nre things spiritual, and of spiritual things laymen are incapable. The light of truth was not, however, so perfectlv extinct, but that even in those dark times there were some learned and pious persons who opposed this doctrine, showing that both the premises were false. The major, that laymen are incapable of spiritual things is, said they, absurd and impious, since they are, by adoption, received into the number of the sons of God, made brethren of Jesus Christ, and citizens of the New Jerusalem ; since they are honoured to participate in the di- vine grace, in baptism, and in the communion of the body and blood of the Lord. What spiritual things are there superiour to these ? And if there be none, how can he, who partakes in these supreme blessings, be called absolutely incapable of spi- ritual things ? But the minor also is false, that the causes ap- propriated to the episcopal tribunal are spiritual, since they are all reducible to these two classes, transgressions and contracts^ which, if our judgment is to be determined by the qualities 44 LECTURES ON assigned to things spiritual in scripture, are as far from being, such as earth is from heaven. But it seldom fares so well Avith mankind, that the majority is on the side of truth and reason. So it is in regard to our pre- sent subject, thnt upon the spiritual power given bv Christ to the church, or whole community of his disciples, of binding and loosing, that is, of excluding from, and receiving back into their communion, and upon the institution of Paul for terminating amicably their differences in matters of property by reference, without recurring to the tribunal of infidels, there has been erected, in a course of ages, and by several degrees, the principal of which have been pointed out to you, a spiritual-teinporal tribunal, the most wonderful the Avorld ever saw. In consequence of this it has happened, that in a great part of Christendom, (I speak not of protestant coun- tries, nor of the Greek church) in the heart of every civil go- vernment, there subsists another, independent of it, a thing which no political writer could before have imagined possible. How church-power came all at last to centre in the Roman pontiff, I intend particularly to illustrate in some subsequent lectures, some of those I purpose to give on the rise and pro- gress of the hierarchy. In the history of ecclesiastical juris- diction I have now given,you see the gradual usurpations of the church, or rather of the clergy, on the temporal powers ; iij the next, I propose to begin the sketch which I intend to lay before you, of the histor\ of ecclesiastical polity, and trace the usurpations of part of the church upon the collective body. I cannot conclude without acquainting you what will pro- bably appear surprising, that, for a great part of the account now given, I am indebted to the writings of a Romish priest, Fra Paolo Sarpi, the celebrated historian of the council of Trent, one who, in my judgment, understood more of the liberal spirit of the Gospel, and the genuine character of the christian institution, than any writer of his age. Why he chose to continue in that communion, as I judge no man, I do not take upon me to say. As little do I pretend to vindi- cate it. The bishop of Meaux (Histoire des Variations des Eglises Protestantes, liv. 7"^^ ch. IIO"^^) calls him a protestant and a calvinist under a friar's frock. That he w^as no calvinist, ;3 evident from several parts of his writings. I think it is also fairly deducible from these, that there was no protestant sect then in existence with whose doctrine his principles would tiave entirely coincided. A sense of this, as much as any thing, contributed, in my opinion, to make him remain in the communion to which he originally belonged. Certain it is, that as no man was more sensible of the corruptions and usurpa- ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 43 tions of that church, no man could, with greater plainness, ex- press his sentiments concerning them. In this he acted very differently from those who, from worldl} motives, are led to profess what they do not believe. Such, the more effectually to disguise their hypocrisy, are commonly the loudest in ex- pressing their admiration of a system which they secretly de- spise. This was not the manner of Fra Paolo. The free- doms, indeed, which he used, would have brought him early to feel the weight of the church's resentment, had he not been protected by the state of Venice, of which he was a most use- ful citizen. At last, however, he fell a sacrifice to the enemies which his inviolable regard to truth, in his conversation and writings, had procured him. He was privately assassinated by a friar, an emissary of the holy see. He wrote in Italian, his native language ; but his works are translated into Latin, and into several European tongues. His History of the Council of Trent, and his Treatise on ecclesiastical Benefices, are both capital performances. One knows not, in reading them, whe- ther to admire most the erudition and the penetration, or the noble freedom of spirit every where displayed in those works. All these qualities have, besides, the advantage of coming re- commended to the reader, by the greatest accuracy of compo- sition and perspicuit} of diction. This tribute I could not avoid paying to the memory of an author, to whom the repub- lickof letters is so much indebted, and for whom I have the iiighest regard. 46 LECTURES O^^ J.-r LECTURE IV. J.N my last lecture, I attempted a brief detail of tlie princi?^ pal causes, which contributed to the rise and progress of eccle- siastical jurisdiction. In doing this, I had occasion to show how, from regulations originally the wisest and the best draar ginable, there sprang, through the corruptions that ensued:, one of the grossest usurpations, and one of the greatest evils that have infested the christian church. This we are well en- titled to call it, if what has proved the instrument of avarice, ambition, contention, and revenge, as well as the source of tyranny and oppression, can justly be so denominated. You know that the rise and progress of that form of government, into which the church, by degrees, came at last to be moulded^, and which has been termed the ecclesiastical polity, and the hierarchy, is to be the subject of the present, and of some subsequent lectures. The former regarded only .the jurisdic* tion of churchmen, the bishops in particular, in civil matters : the present subject is the internal polity of the church, and the form she has insensibly assumed, with the rules of subordina- tion which have obtained, and, in many places, do still obtain, in the different orders. The one refers properly to the secu- larpowerof ecclesiasticks, the other to the spiritual. The two discussions are nearly related, and have generally a joint con- nexion with the same events, operating either as causes, or as instruments. However, in treating that which I have just now mentioned as the theme of this discourse, I shall avoid repetition as much as possible, and shall not recur to what has been observed already, unless when it appears necessary in point of perspicuity, for the more perfect understanding of the argument. Permit me to premise in general, that the question so much agitated, not only between protestants and papists, but also be- tween sects of protestants, in regard to the original form of government established by the apostles in the church, though not a trivial question, is by no means of that consequence which some warm disputants, misled by party prejudices, and ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 47' that intemperate zeal, into which a struggle long maintained commonly betrays the antagonists on both sides, would affect to make it. It is said proverbially by the apostle, as holding alike of every thing external and circumstantial : '•'' The king- '■'■ dom of God is not meat and drink, but righteousness, and " peace, and joy, in the Holy Ghost. For he that in these *' things serveth Christ, is acceptable to God, and approved of *'^ men." To me nothing is more evident, than that the essence of Christianity abstractly considered, consists in the system of doctrines and duties revealed by our Lord Jesus Christ, and that the essence of the christian character consists in the belief of the one, and the obedience of the other. " Believe in the •"' Lord Jesus Christ," says the apostle, " and thou shalt be " saved." Again, speaking of Christ, he says, "being made " perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation to all *' them that obey him." The terms rendered sometimes be- lieving, and sometimes obeying, are commonly of so extensive signification as to include both senses, and are therefore used interchangeably. Now nothing can be conceived more absurd in itself, or more contradictory to the declarations of Scrip- ture, than to say that a man's belief, and obedience of the Gos- pel, however genuine the one, and however sincere the other, are of no significancy, unless he has received his information of the Gospel, or been initiated into the church by a proper minister. This is placing the essence of religion not in any thing interiour and spiritual, not in what Christ and his apos- tles placed it, something personal in regard to the disciple, and what is emphatically styled in scripture, the hidden man of the heart ; but in an exteriour circumstance, a circumstance which in regard to him is merely accidental, a circumstance of which it may be impossible for him to be apprized. Yet into this absurdity those manifestly run, who make the truth of God's promises depend on circumstantials, in point of order no where referred to, or mentioned in these promises ; nay, I may say with justice, no where, either explicitly declared, or implicitly suggested, in all the book of God. Not but that a certain external model of government must have been originally adopted for the more effectual preserva- tion of the evangelical institution in its native purity, and for the careful transmission of it to after ages. Not but that a presumptuous encroachment on what is evidently so instituted, is justly reprehensible in those who are properly chargeable with such encroachment, as is indeed any violation of order,, and more especially when the violation tends to wound charity, and to promote division and strife. But the reprehension can alfect those only who, are conscious of the guilt : for the fault 48 LECTURES ON of another will never frustrate to rae the divine promise given by the Messiah, the great interpreter of the father, the faith- ful and true witness to all indiscriminately, without any limita- tion, that ^' he who receiveth his testimony hath everlasting *' life." I may be deceived in regard to the pretensions of a minister, who may.be the usurper of a character to which he has no right. I am no antiquary, and may not have either the knowledge or the capacity necessary for tracing the faint out- lines of ancient esiabiishments, and forms of government, for entering into dark and critical questions about the import of names .iud titles, or for examining the authenticity of endless genealogies ; but I may have all the evidence that conscious- ness can give, that 1 thankfully receive the testimony of Christ, whom I believe, and love, and serve. If I cannot know this, the declarations of the gospel are given me to no purpose : its proii:iises are no better than riddles, and a rule of life is b. dream. But if I may be conscious of this, and if the chris- tian religion be a revelation from heaven, I may have all the security which the veracity of God can give me, that I shall obtain eternal life. " No," interposes a late writer*, " Cannot God justly " oblige men, in order to obtain the benefits which it is his *' good pleasure to bestow, to employ the means which his " good pleasure hath instituted? It pleased not him to cleanse " Naaman the Syrian from his leprosy by the water of any " other river than the Jordan ; insomuch, that had Naaman " used the rivers of Syria for this purpose, he would have " had no title to expect a cure." Certainly none, Mr. Dod- well. But could any thing be more explicit than the oracle of God pronounced by the prophet? "Wash in Jordan seven times, " and thou shalt be clean." Naaman did not, and could not mis- Understand it. Whereas, had the prophet said barely, " Wash *' seven times, and thou shalt be clean ;" and had the Syrian then washed seven times in Abana or Pharphar, rivers of Da- mascus, and remained uncured, would he have had reason to regard Elisha as a true prophet ? Could he have formed from this transaction the conclusion which he did so justly form in favour of the God of Israel? Yet such an expression of the promise, wherein an essential article of the condition is sup- pressed, would be necessary to make the case parallel to the present. He who believeth and is baptized^ saith our Lord, t:hall be saved. You qualify his promise with the additional clause, " if he be baptized by a minister who has himself received " baptism and ordination in such a particular manner." But • Dodwell ParKneiisj 34. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 49 where do you find this qualification specified ? Scripture is silent. The spirit of God hath not given us the remotest hint of it ; would it not then be wiser in you to follow the advice which Solomon hath given by the same spirit ? Add thou not unto his xvords^ lest he reprove thee^ and thou be found a liar. The terms of the gospel-covenant are no where, in the sacred pages, connected with, or made to depend on, either the mi- nister, or the form of the ministry, as Naaman's cure mani- festly was on his washing in one particular river. But so strange is the inconsistency of which human nature is suscep- tible ! No person can be more explicit than this man, in admit- ting that there is nothing in scripture from which we can infer that any particular form of polity was, for every age and coun- try, appointed in the church. A passage to this purpose I shall soon give you in his own words. Nay more, that very episcopacy, for which he so strenuously contended, making the existence of Christianity depend upon its reception, is, by his own account, not only destitute. of scriptural warrant, but is not properly of apostolical origin, not having been instituted till after the death of the apostles, in the sixth or seventh year of the second century : for even John, who lived the longest, is not said to have reached that period. Arrogant and vain man ! what are you, who so boldly and avowedly presume to foist into God's covenant articles of your own devising, nei- ther expressed nor implied in his words ? Do you venture, a worm of the earth ? Can rou think yourself warranted to stint what God hath not stinted, and following the dictates of your contracted spirit, enviously to limit the bounty of the universal parent, that you may confine to a party, what Christ hath freely published for the benefit of all ? Is your eye evil, because he is good ? Shall I then believe, that God, like de- ceitful man, speaketh equivocally, and with mental reserva- tions ? Shall I take his declaration in the extent wherein he hath expressly given it ; or, as you, for your own malignant purpose, have new-vamped and corrected it ? " Let God be " true, and every man a liar." But as for you, who would thus pervert the plainest declarations of the oracles of truth, and instead of representing Christ as the author of a divine and spiritual religion, as the great benefactor of human kind, exhibit him as the head of a faction, your party forsooth. I must say that I have stronger evidence that you have no mis- sion, than all your traditions, and antiquities, and catalogues, will ever be able to surmount. For if "he whom God send*. " eth, speaketh the words of God," (and this is a test which Christ himself hath given us) he who contradicteth God's G so, LECTURES ON words is not sent by him. This is alike the language of scrip,- ^ure, and the language of common sense. Yours is neither. In regard to the outward order, however important it be, it affects not the essence of religion in the least ; and even our adversaries themselves, being judges, is not represented in scripture as affecting it. The garments which a man wears, or the house in which he lodges, however necessary for his ac- commodation and comfortable subsistence, are not as his limbs and meinbers, and still less as the powers and faculties of his mind, a part of his person. Now in this respect there appears a very close analogy. For though in our present situation, clothes and dwelling are requisite for protecting us against the inclemencies of the weather, and other external accidents, we may, nevertheless, have both clothes and dwelling of different forms, yet equally commodious. Nay, one form may be more convenient in certain climates, and certain situations, which is less convenient in other climates, and other situations. The same thing may with equal truth be affirmed concerning the forip of church- government. This is evidently true also of civil government. Of whatever mode it be, absolute or limit- ed, monarchical or republican, unless it degenerate into tyran- ny, it is entitled to the obedience of the subjects. For '' the powers that be," «/ n^ai t^mrixi " are ordained of God." No criterion is mentioned but established possession. Now I can see DO reason why a church may not subsist under different forms as well as a state ; and though it must be owned, that one form may be more favourable than another to the spirit and design of the constitution, we cannot always judge with safety from the first of these how much it has retained of the last. Nay, I must acknowledge, that for any thing I could ever discover in the sacred oracles to the contrary, the extern nal order may properly undergo such alterations, as the ends of edification in different exigencies may require, and prudence may direct. The only thing of real imp(!a:tance is, that nothing be admitted which can, in any way, subvert the fundamental inaxims, or infringe the spiritual nature of the government. Thus much in general is conformable to the doctrine both of the church of England, and of the church of Scotland, For how different soever these churches are in the plans of govern- ment they have adopted, and how much soever each of them is attached to its own, they "equally avoid limiting the chris- tian ministry to one particular model. The former in her 23d article, entitled, Ofministringin the Congregation^ says express- ly, " Those We ought to judge lawfully called and sent, which ^' be chosen and called to this work by men, who have publick ^' authority given unto them in the congregation, to call and £CCLEStASTICAL HISTORY. Si ** send ministers into the Lord's vineyard." This, if It mean, any things and be not a mere identical proposition, of whichj I own, it has some appearance, refers us ultimately to that au- thorit}^, however modelled, which satisfies the people, and is settled among them. Again, in the Westminster confession pf faith, which is of equal authority with us, as the 39 articles are of in England, chap, xxv, entitled. Of the churchy Sect. 3. " Unto the catholick visible church Christ hath given the min- *' istry, oracles^ and Ordinances of God, for the gathering and " perfecting of the saints in ihis life, to the end of the world." And this is all that is said on the Subject. Neither has pre- sumed to delineate the essentials of a christian ministry, or to say any thing which could be construed to exclude thoSe who are governed in a different manner frorti that in which they themselves are governed. So much moderation has on this ar- ticle been showii by both churchesi I shall add to these thfe doctrine of the episcopal reformed church of Scotland, contain- ed in a confession of faith ratified by law in this country in 1567 ; which, though set aside in the time of the civil tvars, to> make room for the Westminster confession^ was te-enacted after the restoration, and continued in force till the abolition of prelacy at the revolution. I recur to it the rather, in order to show how much, on this article, the sentiments of bur late nonjurors (for we have none of that description at present) dif» fer from the sentiments of those whom they considered as their ecclesiastical predecessors, and from whom they derived their spiritual pedigree. In article 19, entitled. Of the notes of the true kWk^ (I uSe the words of that formulary) it is affirmed, " They are neither an- " tiquity, title usurped, lineal descent^ place appointed, nor *' multitude of men approving an errour.'' Again^ article 23, Of the right administration of the sacraments ;-i— *•* That sacraments " be rightly ministrate, we judge two things requisite: the one, *' that they be ministrate by lawful ministers, whom we affirm " to be only they that are appointed to the preaching 6f the '* word, they being men lawfully chosen thereto by some kirk, " &c. We fly the dbctrine of the papistical kirk in participa*' " tion of their sacraments : 1st. Because their ministers are *' no ministers of Christ Jesus, &c." Here not Only is lineal descent expressly excluded, but its very channel is removed, as the popish clergy are declared (I think with too little ceremo" ay and too universally) to be no ministers of Christ. Nay, all that appears externally necessary^ according to them, to con* stitute a minister, is the choice of some congregation. Fat from believing one particular form of ecclesiastick polity to be sacred and inviolable, they say, article 21, C^ general conneils^ 52 LECTURES ON &c. " Not that we think that any policy and any order of cere- "■ monies can be appointed for all ages, times, and places." It will be owned, likewise, by those who on this subject are capable of examining with coolness, and pronouncing with im- partiality, that viQ have not that sort of information in holy writ, from which we can with certainty form a judgment con- cerning the entire model of the apostolick church. What we can learn thence on this subject, we must collect from scatter- ed hints given as it were incidentally, when nothing seemed less the intention of the writers, than to convey to us a parti- cular account of the plan of the society they had formed. It is a just observation of a writer of the last century, and de- serves the attention of disputants on both sides : — " Videmus " apostolos in scriptis suis magis sollicitos fuisse de ministro- " rum virtutibus quam gradibus^ et pluribus inculcasse et des- " cripsisse eorum mores, quales illo statu digni essent et loco, *' quam quidem de forma regiminis disceptasse." [Hoornbeck de episcopatu.] But who can be more express on the silence of scripture, in regard to this article of church-government, than that zealous defender of prelacy, Mr. Dodwell, in a pas- sage which I but just now promised to give you in his own words. They are these* : — " Est sane admodum precaria ora- " nis ilia argumentatio, qua colligitur disciplinze ecclesiasticce^ " in posterum recipiendae rationem omnem e scripturis N. Foe- " deris esse hauriendara. Nullus enim est qui id profiteatur " aperte sacri scriptoris locus, Et ne quidem ullus qui ita de " regimine agat ecclesiastico quasi id voluisset scriptor, aut " scriptoris auctor Spiritus Sanctus^ ut formam aliquam unam " regimhiis ubique et in orane aevum duraturi describeret. " Nusquam scriptores sacri satis expresse tradiderunt, quanta " secuta fuerit m regimine ecclesiarum mutatio cum prinaum " discederent a synagogarum communione ecclesice. Nus- " quam satis aperte, quantum donis concessum fuerit Spiritus " S. personalibus^ quantum vicissim locis et officiis. Nusquam '^ officiarios extraordinarios qui illo ipso seculo finem habituri " essent ab ordinariis satis accurate secernunt qui nullo un- " quam seculo essent, dum iterum veniret Christus, in desue- " tudinem abituri. Imo sic omnia turn passim nota ipsi quo- " que nota supponunt, nee ipsi posterorum causa explicant, " quasi eum duntaxat, qui turn obtinuerit, statum in animo ha- " berent. Officia ipsa nuspiam qualia fuerint, aut quam late pa- " tuerint, ex professo describunt, quod tamen sane faciendum " erat si formam prescripsissent perpetuo duraturam." To this I shall only subjoin. If the case be as you, Mr. Dodwell, * Paraenesis, N, 14. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 53 have, in my opinion, in the passage above quoted^ fairly repre- sented it ; if ail the reasoning be quite precarious from which men conclude, that the whole model of ecclesiastical discipline may be extracted from the writings of the New Testament ; if there be no passage of any sacred writer which openly pro- fesses this design ; if there be not one which so treats of eccle- siastical government, as if the writer, or the writer's author, the Holy Spirit, had intended to describe any one form of po- lity, as being to remain eve^^'' where, and for ever inviolate ; if the sacred penmen ha\'^e no where declared, with suiEcient clearness, how great a change must take place in church-go- vernment, when the churches should firstwithdrawfromthe com- munion of the synagogues; if they no where clearly enough show how much was allowed to the personal gifts of the Holy Ghost, and how much also to places and offices ; if they no where, with sufficient accuracy, distinguish the extraordinary officers who were not to outlive that age, fi'om the ©rdinary who were not to cease till the second coming of Christ ; nay, if all the things then generally known, they also suppose known, and never, for the sake of posterity, explain, minding only the state wherein things were at the time ; if they no where professed- ly describe the ministries themselves, so as to explain either their nature, or their extent : which was surely indispensable, if they meant to settle a model in perpetuity ; in brief, if the case was really as that gentleman affirms it to have been, (for what is here put by me hypothetically, is positively averred by him in terms the most express) what can we conclude, but that nothing v/as farther from the view of the inspired writers, than to prescribe any rule to us on the subject, or to give us any information which could lead us to imagine, that a particular form of polity was necessary, or even more acceptable to God than another? What can we conclude, but that it was intend- ed by the Holy Spirit thus to teach us to distinguish between what is essential to the christian religion, the principles to be believed, and the duties to be practised, and which are therefore perpetual and unchangeable ; and what is comparatively circum- stantial, regarding external order and discipline, which, as mat- ters of expedience, alter with circumstances, and are therefore left to the adjustment of human prudence? What can better account for the difference remarked by Hoorrvbeck, that the apostles were more solicitous about the virtues than the de- grees of the ministers, and more strenuous in inculcating the manners to be observed by them as suitable to their office, and conducing to their usefulness, than copious in describing tlu- form of their government? The one is essential, the other only circumstantial ; the one invariable, the other not. M XECTtTRES ON But what shall we say of a doctrine which, like this of the episcopal polity, was never alleged to belong to the religion of nature, and is now discovered, by one of its warmest advocates^ to have no better title to be accounted a principle of revelation^ not having been instituted by Christ, or his apostles, or even in their time ? No mention is made of it in scripture, the canon of which was finished, before this novelty appeared upon the earth ; nor is any appointment given in holy writ by anticipa-' tion concerning it. Whence therf'have we either the institU" tion, or the doctrine of its necessity ? I know not what answer Dodwell could give to this, except the following. From fre- quent study, profound researches into antiquity and critical in- vestigations concerning doubtful idioms, we have made the discovery. These exercitations, I acknowledge, have their use, and are sometimes subservient to the cause of religious verity ; chiefly indeed for illustrating its evidences, or repel- ling objections, but never for teaching its fundamental princi- ples or essential duties. These, like the prophet's vision, are written in characters so legible and plain, that, " he may fun. ■who readeth them.^' No scope for Herculean labour, bodily or mental. " Say not^ Who shall ascend into heaven P" No need for scaling the firmament, diving into the abyss, or crossing the ocean. *•• The word is nigh thee^ in thy mouth., and in thine heart." That system must convey a strange idea of revela- tion, which exhibits it as, in respect of the truths necessary td be known by all, perfectly mute to the unlearned, and of ser- vice only to linguists, criticks, and antiquaries. How different is the notion conveyed by Christ, — the founder and the finisher of the faith ! *' I adore thee., O Father., Lord of heaven and earth., because having hidden these things from sages and the learned., thou hast revealed them to babes." It was to instruct and save the ignorant and the sinful that Jesus Christ came into the world. And, in consequence of this divine purpose, nothing recommended wretches to his charitable attention more than their needs. Besides, if the scriptures contain a re- velation from God, and consequently be true, we must admit them to be perfect, and to want nothing essential to the infor-. mation of christians in faith and practice ; for this is what they affirm concerning themselves. " They are able to make men TX}ise unto salvation : for all scripture., given by inspiration of God., isprof table for doctrine., for reproof for correction in righ* teousness^ that the man of God may be perfect^ thoroughly fur^ nished unto all good xvorks." But in this a true Dodwellian can never consistently acquiesce, who maintains a certain ec- clesiastical polity to be essential, concerning which he at the same time admits, that scripture has given us neither informa-- ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Si tion nor command. This necessarily forces us into the dilem- ma of affirming, either that the doctrine of Dodwell is not only false but pernicious, in subverting the suihority of scripture ; or that scripture is both false and self-contradictory, in assert- ing the perfection of its own doctrine, whilst it has withholden all intelligence upon one article ; without the observance of which, all the other instructions it gives are vain, our faith is \'ain, we are yet in our sins. And who is the revealer of this article, this mystery which hath been hidden from ages and ge- nerations ? If the revelation itself be of importance, it is but just to acknowledge, that the world is indebted for it, more to Mr. Henry Dodwell, than to all the apostles and evangelists of our Lord, or even to all the sacred penmen of either Old or New Testament put together. But as it is not every one's province or humour to trace non- sense through all its dark and devious windings, I shall desist from expatiating further on the absurdity of making that a doctrine of the gospel with which the New Testament does not acquaint us, or a christian institution v/hich did not com- mence till after the decease of the last of the apostles ; and ^hall only further observe, that the defect of scriptural evi- dence, so frankly acknowledged on the other side, will be al- lowed by any person of understanding to be an irrefragable ar- gument, that the polity or model of government was not judg- ed by the apostles to be of so great consequence, as that it should of necessity be either fixed or perfectly known. Where- as it must have been of the last consequence, if the very exis- tence of a church, and the efficacy of God's word and ordi- nances, totally depended on it- But that there was no such dependance, as is supposed, on any thing in the form of the ministry, is manifest also from this, that in the directions given to christians, as to the judg- ments they ought to make of those who may assume the char- acter of teachers m divine things, the people are never direct- ed to an examination of, what I may call, the ostensible source cf the authority of those teachers, but solely to the considera- tion of their character and conduct, and of the doctrine M'hich they teach. " Beware of false prophets," said our Lord, *' who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly thev are " ravening wolves." But how shall we beware cf them, or by what criterion shall we distinguish the false from the true ^ Shall we critically examine their spiritual pedigree, and see whether, by an uninterrupted succession of regular bnptisms and ordinations, they be lineally descended from the apostles? Impossible. A method this wliich would involve every thing in impenetrable darkness, and plunge all the hopes and pros- 5^ LECTURES ON pects of the christian into a skepticism, from which there could be no recovery. On the contrary, the test he gives is plain and familiar. Mark his words":—" Ye shall know them by *' their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of tt thistles ? Even so, every good tree bringeth forth good u fruit, but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good ti tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree tt bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth a good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore «i by their fruits you shall know them." And the apostle John says, " Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether " they are of God." And how are we to try them ? The se- quel plainly shows, that it is by the coincidence of their doc- trine with that of the gospel. The like was also the method prescribed under the former dispensation by the prophet. »■'• To the law and to the testimony," says he, " if they speak *' not according to this word, it is because there is no light in *■'■ them." A very different mode of trial would now be assign- ed by a zealous patroniser of the hierarchy, popish or protes- tant. There is a memorable incident, and entirely apposite to the point in hand, which is recorded by tAvo of the evangelists, Mark and Luke. John said to Jesus, " Master, we saw one *' casting out devils in thy name, and we forbade him, because *' he followeth not us." Jesus answered, " Forbid him not, for " there is no man who shall do a miracle in ray name, that can *' lightly speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is *' for us." The apostles still retained too much of the Jewish spirit, not to consider more the party than the cause. *' He ■" followeth not us," — a reason which to this day, alas ! would be thought the best reason in the world by most christian sects, and by everj' individual who possesses the spirit of the sectary. From Christ's testimony we have ground to believe, that what this man did, was done with an intention truly pious ; not to make dissension, or form a party against the disciples, but to promote the common cause. And what was so done, would probably be productive of the great end of the christian ministry,, the conversion of the hearers to the faith, love, and obedience of the Messiah. But even where so much cannot he said of the goodness of the intentions, we are not warranted to decide against the uti- lity or success. The apostle Paul observes, that whilst some preach Christ of love, others do it of envy, and strife, and contention. This, I imagine, is the scriptural, I say not thg ecclesiastical, notion of schismatical teachers. For that alone is schism in the sense of the holy writ, which wounds charity, ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 5f and which, in order to umte christians more closely to a sect or faction, alienates their hearts from one another, and conse» quently from the interest of their common master; or which detaches them, in respect of love, even though outward unity should not be violated, from the whole community of chris- tians, in order to attach them more firmly to a part. The for- mer only, those who preach out of love, the apostle regards as true ; the latter, those who preach out of envy and strife, he considers as pretended preachers, or heralds of Christ. Yet he adds : — " What then ? Notwithstanding every way, whe* " ther in pretence or in truth, Christ is preached, and I there- " in do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice." Would he have said so, think ye, if a defect, either in the mission, or in the dispo- sition of the minister, could have rendered their ministrations ineffectual to the hearers ? In those days of the church's infan- cy, when the far greater part of the world was Jews and Pa- gans, such teachers as the apostle speaks of, though bad men themselves and uncommissioned, might have been instru* mental in converting infidels and idolaters to the faith of Christ. But there had been no subject of joy here, if the conversion of such, however sincere, and their p'articipation in the ordinances of religion, however piously intended by the participants, had been, according to the doctrine of our anta*- gonists, rendered ineffective by the defects of the instrument* The very success of the preaching of such unauthorized pre* tenders would, in that case, have been a fitter subject of grief to the apostle, than of joy, as the unhappy proselytes mighty by an apparent conversion to Christ, have been lulled into a security much more fatal than the unbelief in which they were before. His joy, on the contrary, was a demonstration of his sentiments, that the people might receive spiritual benefit, whatever exceptions there might be to the ministry. I own the case is, in many respects, worse with the modern authors ©f division, the founders of new sects, in countries where Christianity is universally professed, and where there is free access by the scripture, both to its doctrines, and to its precepts^ It is hard to conceive to what the disciples of some recent sectaries can be made proselytes, unless to uncharitablenessj hatred and calumny agamst their fellow-christians, and that ©n the most frivolous or unintelligible pretexts. For neither idolatrous worship, nor the exaction of unlawful terms of com* munion, are so much as pretended. If, according to our Lord's criterion, we are to know the tree by the fruits, the evil fruits above-mentioned, the invariable effects of such divi- sions will be thought more analogous to the nature of briers and thorns, than to the fruit of the fig-tree, or of the vine-. H 58 LECTURES ON However, even of such contentious teachers I would not pre- sume to say, that they may not occasionally do good, though there be but too great reason to dread that the evil preponde- rates. And even here I am to be understood as speaking of the first authors of such unchristian separations. I know top well the power of education, and of early prejudice, to impute - equal malignity to those who may succeed them whether teachers or disciples. But to return : — To assign to the Messiah, or rather, under that colour, to procure for themselves a worldly kingdom, was not an er- rour peculiar to the Jews. The same evil principle, which in them proved the cause of the rejection of the true Messiah, proved quickly among the Gentiles, who acknowledged him, the source of the grossest corruption and perversion of his institution. After it became the aim of church rulers to secu- larize the kingdom of Christ ; they uniformly had it for their object, in exact conformity to the example the Pharisees had given them, to remove the attention of men from things spi- ritual and essential, to things corporal and circumstantial. And in this, as in all other corruptions, they have but too well succeeded. The more effectually to answer this purpose, they have not scrupled to introduce such dogmas, (of which that I have been examining in this lecture is an example) as tend to subvert the spirit of the gospel, and are inconsistent with the veracity of God. Of a very different character and tendency are some sen- timents I have latelv met with concerning the spiritual king- dom of the Messiah, in the Sermons of Mr. Comings, preben- dary of St. Patrick's, Dublin, now deceased. They convey an idea of the church truly rational, enlarged, and sublime j such as strongly distinguishes it from all the pitiful and contracted pales, so uncharitably erected by the different sectaries of all known denominations, popish and protestant, established and unestablished : for it is not a legal establishment, as some vainly imagine, or any thing merely external, that either makes or unmakes a sectary in the scriptural sense : it is solely the spirit by which a man is actuated. But without any further comment, I shall leave this author to speak for himself, by giving you his own words. In my judgment, he unfolds his conceptions on this subject with uncommon energy. It may not however be improper to premise, that the words in the gospel, to wiiich the preacher specially refers, are these : (Luke xvii. 15, 19.) One of them^ -when he saw that he was healed^ tvn.-ed back^ and with a loud voice glorified God^ and fell down on his face at Jesus' feet, givi7ig him thanks ; and he xuas a Sa- maritan. And Jesus ansxvering^ said^ Were there not ten ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. m cleansed ? But xvhere are the nine ? There are not found that returned to give glory to God^ save this .stranger. And he said u?ito him^ Arise^ p-o th?.; xvay^ thy faith hath made thee rvhole. " Thus you see, though the Jews learnt no humility, no gra- *' titude, yet the Samaritan^ ignorant as he was then thought, " misinformed as he is noiv reckoned ; yet the Samaritan was **■ deeply impressed with both. The Almighty himself taug'iit " him, and he was obedient to the divine instructor. I'he *■'• pride of religion v/ould make the Jews brand him with the ** factious name of herctick or schismatick ; but were he here- " tick or schismatick, he oftered to heaven as grateful a sacrir '' fice as was ever laid on the altar at Jerusalem by prophet or •■' by saint. The contentions about the forms of religion de- " stroy its essence. Authorized by the example of Jesus " Christ, we will send men to the Samaritan to find out how *' to worship. Though your church was pure, without spot *' or imperfection, yet if your heart is not turned to God, the *' worship is hateful, and the prayers are an abomination. " The homage of the darkest pagan worshipping he knows *' not what, but still worshipping the unknown power that " formed him, if he bows with humility, if he praises with gra- " titude, his homage will ascend grateful to heaven ; while the ♦' dead careless formality of prayer, offered up in the proudest ** christian temples, shall be rejected as an offering vuiholy. ** For think you that the Almighty esteems names and sects \ " No : it is the heart that he requires ; it is the heart alone '' that he accepts. And much consolation does this afford to " the contemplative mind of man. We may be very ignorant *' in spiritual matters, if that ignorance cannot be removed, " and yet may be very safe. We may not know in what *.' words to clothe our desires in prayer, or where to find lan- *' guage worthy of being presented to the majesty of heaven. " But amitlst the clouds that surround us, here is our com- "fort: in every nation, he that worshippeth with humility, *' worshippeth aright ; he thatpraiseth with gratitude, praiseth *' well. The pride of establishments may despise him, but *' the wisdom and the righteousness of heaven will hear, *' and will approve him. It was to the humble thankful Sa- *' maritan, though separated from the true church ; yet it was *' to him alone, because he alone returned to glorltV God, that *' Jesus Christ said, Arise^go thy ivay^ thy faith hath made tl\ee *' whole. Thus, in a moment, vanished and becanae of no ef-. " feet, the temple of the Jews, built by prophetick direction : ** its ritual given by their illuminated legislator : all gave way " to the profound humility, and the sublime gratitude, of what *' they called an unbeliever, of what Jesus ChrivSt called the 60 LECTURES ON *' only faithful servant of God among them." Permit me only to subjoin, to the above quotation, what is particularly apposite to the subject now in hand. Let us but reflect who were at that time the sacred ministers, the teachers and the priests of the Samaritans ? In the very beginning of theirdefec- tion,in the revolt of the ten tribes under Jeroboam, the sacred historian acquaints us, that this idolatrous king cast out the priests of the Lord, and made priests of the lowest of the people, who were not of the family of Aaron, or of the sons of Levi. And of the same character they still remained. No order of men, existing at present in the christian church, can give any evidence of a divine right compared with that of the tribe of Levi, and of the posterity of Aaron in the Jev/ish. Yet this passage, in relation to the humble, the pious, and the thankful Samaritan, may show us effectually, if we be capable of being taught, that, under no dispensation of things whatsoever, can the validity of God's covenant be made to depend on the min- istry, or his promises be rendered ineffectual to the humble be- liever, and grateful worshipper, on account of any defect in the priesthood. We see tllKt such defects were no obstruc- tion to the efficacy of the humble Samaritan's faith, or the ac- ceptance of his person. Arise^ go thy way^ thy faith hath made thee whole. ;. Thus much I thought proper to premise, in regard both to the nature and to the consequence of the question about the government instituted by the apostles in the church. I next proceed to the examination of the fact. And in this it is my purpose to proceed with all the candour and impartiality of which I am capable ; and to speak out boldly what appears to me most probably to have been the case, without considering what sect or party it mav either offend or gratify. I am sen- sible that, in historical inquiries of this kind, it becomes us to be modest, since we must know, that persons, both judicious and candid, have mistaken ; for, on all the questions that arise from the subject, there have undoubtedly been men of this character on the opposite sides. It is comparatively of little moment, whether we approve most the monarchical, the aris-- tocratical, or the democratical form of church government, or to which of the three we have thought it our duty to subject ourselves. The only errour that is here of consequence, is, when people are led to consider this as a ground of disunion, or, which is still worse, of alienation of affection from those who, though differing in this particular, have received the like precious faifh with themselves ; when they think them- selves warranted by this difference ih unchurching their bre- thren, as the phrase is, that is, in pronouncing them to have ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. M no concern, no portion in the commonwealth of Christ. This I take to be indeed a fundamental errour, as it strikes at the root of that charity which is the end of the commandment, and the bond of perfectness ; and consequently, without wliich, whatever be our boasted attainments in faith, in knowledge, or in clerical degrees, we are, in all that concerns the vitals of religion, absolutely nothing. It was to guard you all against an extreme of this kind, that I have been so particular in the discussion of this preliminary point. Now as to the form of the church first instituted by Christ and his apostles, let it be observed, that there were at that time especially two objects which seemed equally to claim attention. The one was the conversion of the v/orld to the Messiah, the other was not only the preservation of the converts that should be made, but the securing of a continuance of the faith in their families. These two, though they concur in the ulti- mate end they are fitted to answer,. the glory of God in the sal- vation of men, are very different in themselves, and require very different instruments and measures. To take a simili'^ tude from temporal things, it isit^e thing to conquer a king- dom, and become master of it, and another thing to govern it when conquered, so as to retain the possession which has been acquired. The same agents, and the same expedients, are not properly adapted to both. For the first of these purposes, there was a set of extraordinary ministers or officers in the church, who, like the military forces intended for conquest, eould not be fixed to a particular spot, whilst there remained anv provinces to conquer. Ti|ieir charge was in a manner uni- versal, and their functions ambulatory. For the second, there was a set of ordinary ministers or pastors corresponding to civil governpurs, to whom it was necessary to allot distinct charges or precincts, to which their services were chiefly to be confined, in order to instruct the people, to preside in the pub- lick worship and religious ordinances, and to give them the necessary assistance for the regulation of their conduct. With- out this second arrangement, the acquisitions made could not have been long retained. There must have ensued an uni- versal relapse into idolatry and infidelity. This distinction of ministers into extraordinary and ordinary has been admit- ted by controvertists on both sides, and therefore cannot j ustly be considered as introduced (which sometimes happens to dis- tinctions) to serve an hypothesis. The great patron of prelacy avows the difference, in a quotation lately given from his Pane- nesis, at the same time that he complains that the sacred writers have not been explicit in assigning the boundaries of either: an oversight which I own I think would have been unpardona- 62 LECTURES ON ble in them, if they had believed the knowledge of this article so indispensable as Mr. Dodwell did. Of the first kiad, oi- extraordinary ministers, were the apos- tles, prophets, and evang>jiists. i hese -at least wtrQ the chief.i For, from some passages in Paul's M'^ritings-, it appears verv probable, that all those who were endowed, in an eminent de- gree, with any of the ^npia-fjittrai^ or supernatural jrifts, were con- sidered as a sort of extraordinary ministers. Compare 1 Cor. xii. 28, &c. with Eph. iv. 11, &c. But it is not with that ex- traordinary and temporary arrv.ngement, suppr,rted bv the power of working miracles, which was calculated chieSy for the founding of the church, that we are here concerned. It is with the ordinary and permanent establishment, to the suit- able discharge of the duties of which, it is not the ;^ap»(!r^«T«^ but the ;^^«p/Tsj, not the miraculous and shining gifts of the spi- rit, but the less conspicuous, though more important, graces of knowledge, faith, and charity, which are requisite. In regard to these, it is from the acts of the apostles and the epistles, that we principally derive our iniormation. Th'imce we learn, that the apostles regularly established cliurches, aiid settled therein proper ministers in every city and village, "where they had made as many proselytes as might form a con- gregation. I do not say that the settlement of pastors, and other officers, took place immediateiv, on the conversion of the people, but on the first convenient occasion afterwards. The converts every where seem, for some time, to'have been instructed chiefly by such of their number as were endowed with supernatural gifts, those called prophets in particular, who also had the principal part in conducting the publick offices of religion. Of these mention is made in the thirteenth chap- ter of the Acts. This was the footing on which the apostles commonly left the places they travelled to, on their first visit. It was not till afterwards, either by messengers sent on pur- pose, or on a second or third visit, that they gave them fixed teachers. It has been said, that in the extraordinary and un- settled state of the church, the sacred offices were not so much appropriated to the ministers, as to exclude private christians from occasionally exercising them, especially in the absence of the former. The first order given to the eleven 7(? maJ^e converts (for such is the import of ucc^HTivs-etTi) to baptize and to teach^ carries in it nothing from which we can discover, that it was a commission intrusted to them exclusively as apostles or ministers, and not given them also as christians ; and that the apostles were particularized, because best quali- fied, from their long attendance on Christ's ministry, for pro- moting his religion in the world ; but not with a view to ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. m exclude any christians, who were capable, from co-operating with them in the same good cause. That this last was the construction then put upon that charge, appears not improba- ble, from the subsequent part of the scripture history. Phi- lip, though no apostle, and probably at that time no more than a deacon, (that is, a trustee for the poor in matters purely se- cular) did all to the Ethiopian eunuch, which the apostles had in charge with regard to aii nations. He converted, baptized, and taught him. No reasonable man can doubt that any pri- vate christian was then, and is still, warranted if he can, to convert an infidel, and to teach him the principles of Christi- anity. Yet these are two important parts of the apostolical commission. If I should say the most important parts, I should not speak without warrant. Oar Lord himself made proselytes, and instructed them, but baptized none, leaving this merely ministerial work to his disciples. Peter was sent to open the door of faith to the Gentiles, by the conversion of Cornelius and his family. But the charge of baptizing theni he trusted entirely to the christian brethren who attended him. Ananias, a disciple, was employed to baptize Paul. And Paul says himself of his own mission, that Christ sent him not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel, denoting thereby, according to the import of the Hebrew idiom, that baptizing compared with preaching, though a part, was but an inferiour and subor- dinate part of his charge. Nothing here advanced can justly be understood to combat the propriety of limiting, for the sake of discipline, the power of baptizing to fewer hands than that of preaching, when once a fixed ministry is settled in a church, and regulations are adopted for its government. The doctrine I have been illustrating, so far from being, as some romanists ignorantly pretend, one of the many novelties sprung from the protestant schism, was openly maintained at Rome without censure, about the middle of the fourth century, by Hilary, a deacon of that church, a man of erudition and discernment, of whom I shall have occasion to speak after- wards. This commentator, in his Exposition of the Epistle to the Ephesians iv. 11, 12, has these words " Postquam om- " nibus locis ecclesise sunt constitutae, et officia ordinata, aliter "• composita res est, quam cosperat ; primum enim omnes do- " cebant, et omnes baptizabant, quibuscunque diebus vel tem- " poribus fuisset occasio." A little after, " Neque Petrus *•' diaconos habuit quando Cornelium cum omni domo ejus bap- *' tizavit ; nee ipse, sed jussit fratribus qui cum illo ierant ad " Cornelium ab Joppe." Again : '' Ut ergo cresceret plebs, " et midtiplicaretur, omnibus inter ioitia concessum est et *' evangelizare, et baptizare, et scripturas in ecclesia expla- 64 LECTURES ON " nare." Such were the sentiments of a respectable member of the Roman presbytery in those days ; for conclave, both in name and thing, was as little known at Rome then as it is with us at present. Now though the gradual settlement of a regu- lar ministry throughout the churclr, would gradually abolish an usage of this kind, it is natural to conclude, that wherever there happened to be a return of the like exigencies, through want of licensed pastors, every private christian would not only be entitled, but bound, if capable, to supply the defect. So thought the christians, who were dispersed on the persecution mentioned Acts viii. For " they that were scattered abroad," the historian makes no distinction, " went every where, " preaching the word." Now the apostles remained in Jeru- salem, and ordinary pastors were not yet appointed. Thijs is agreeable to what appears to have been the general opinion, and even the practice where circumstances required, as far down as Tertullian's time, about the beginning of the third century. This author, the first of the Latin fathers, in his Ex- hortatio ad castitatem^ wherein he inveighs against second mar- riages, having urged that Paul made it necessary in a bishop that he be the husband of one wife, introduces an antagonist replying, that the prohibition to pastors implies a permission to others to marry oftener. He answers, that the distinction among christians, between the priesthood and the people, who, by the evangelical law, are all priests, is of the church's mak- ing, that is, as I understand him, is not of divine original ; referring to what appears to have been the approved practice of laymen even then, who, when none of the clerical order could be had, celebrated the eucharist, and baptized, and serv- ed as priests to themselves. " Three persons," says he, " though laymen, make a church." " Ubi ecclesiastici ordi- " nis non est consessus, et offers, et tinguis, et sacerdos es tibi *' solus. Sed ubi tres, ecclesia est, licet laici." It matters nothing to the present question, that his doctrine of the unlaw- fulness of second marriages is unreasonable ; it matters uo- thing, that his argument is inconclusive ; we are concerned only with the fact, to which he refers as notorious. Hardly could any attentive reader, who is a stranger to th«- disputes that in latter ages have arisen about holy orders, think the passage susceptible of any other meaning than that I have given it, and which indeed Rigaltius, a romanist, and Grotius, a protestant, had given before me. I know the pains which have been taken by some learned men, who cannot con- ceive a kingdom of Christ, that is not a kingdom of priests, to- tally to disguise this passage. The French Jesuit Petavius admits, indeed, according to the obvious meaning of the ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, es words, that Tertullian argues from the known praictice in the specified ; and as the Romish church acknowledges the validi- ty of lay-baptism, he admits also, that tinguis means, you bap- tize ; but adhering sacredly to the principles of his party, does not admit that offers can be interpreted, you consecrate the eu- charist. The Irish nonjuror Dodwell, of whose system lay- baptism and lay-consecration are equally subversive, not only admits, but proves, that unless offers refer to the priestly of- fice, as well as tingiiis^ there can be no meaning in the argu- ment. At the same time he affirms, that this author does not argue from a known practice, but from his own opinion of the rights of laymen in such emergencies, explaining offers et tin- guis^ you have a right to celebrate the eucharist and to baptize: The impartial inquirer, who has no hypothesis to serve, will readily agree with Dodwell, that the only interpretation oi oj^ ferre^ as connected with tinguere^ is to celebrate the eucharist; and no less readily agree with Petavius, that the only natural import of the present of the indicative here used, is, you do; and not, you have^ in my judgment^ a title to do. The argument drawn from an allowed and known custom, in support of his opinion, was confessedly of some weight, but an argument in support of his opinion, drawn from another opinion of hii equally questionable, and, as Dodwell thinks, contradicted by the universal practice of the age, was of no conceivable weight, and could not have been adduced by any person of common understanding. Tertullian, like Dodwell, held some extrava- gant tenets, but was incapable of arguing so ridiculously as this critick would represent him. That laws, declarative of right, are sometimes expressed in the present of the indicative, is true, but never when the common practice is in contrfidiction to the law. Dodwell's quotations from the apostolical consti- tutions are so far from answering his purpose, that tiiey are a confirmation of what was just now observed. I'hev are not more declarative of the canons than of the customs which ihcii obtained. If the prevailing practice had been repup:n:int to those canons, no writer of common sense, who did not intend to deceive, would have expressed himself in that manner. The words which conclude the argument, Igitnr si habesjussa' cerdotis^ &c. showno more than thatthe author inferred the right from the practice. Is there any incoherence in saying, In an urgent case^ when no priest can he founds you baptize^ you give the eucharist^ and you alone serve as priest to yourself. If, then'^ you have the right of priesthood in yourself in a case of neccsjiity^ you ought to have the discipline of a priest^ ivherever it may be necessary to exercise the right. This is literally Tertairuiu\ ar- gument. 6S LECTURES ON But to return from this digression to those fixed officers or ministers, whom the apostles assigned to the churches which the^; planted ; beside some general names used promiscuously in Scripture, such as iya/mam^ cT/eTairxrtXs/, ^T)»f«Ta«, X8/Tspj«*, guides, teachers, ministers, officers, and perhaps a few others, there are three terms more frequently applied to them, which are, tTTia-Kovoi^ Gospel in countries and towns, constituted the first fruits of " their ministry, whom they approved by the spirit, bishops and " deacons of those who should believe." And in order to sa- tisfy us, that he did not use these words in a vague manner for church-officers in general, but as expressive of all the distinct orders that vi^ere established by them in the church, he adds., *' Nor was this a new device, inasmuch as bishops and deacons ** had been pointed out many ages before ; for thus says the ♦' Scripture, " Ixuill constitute their bishops in righteounneas and- their deacons in jaith^'' The passage quoted is the last clause of the 17th verse of the 6()th chapter of Isaiah. It is thus ren- dered in our version : '•■ I will make thine officers peace, and •' thine exactors righteousness." Whether this venerable an- cient has given a just translation, or made a proper application of this prediction, is not the point in question. It is enough that it evinces what his notion was of the established rainistere then in the church. And if, (as no critick ever questioned, and ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. «! as his own argument necessarily requires) he means the same by bishops with those who, in the Acts, are called ts-pis-^vjepeiiy whom the apostles Paul and Barnabas ordained in every churchy and whom Clement, in other parts of this epistle, also calls Tsrps'r^vlepei, namely, the ordinary teachers, it would seem strange, that the bishop, properly so called, the principal officer of all, should be the only one in his account, of whom the Holy Spi- rit, in sacred writ, had given no previous intimation. Nay, do not the words of this father manifestly imply, that any other office in the church than the two he had mentioned, might be justly styled a new device or invention ? Dr. Pearson, in his Vindicise Ignatianae, insists much, that whenever any of the fathers purposely enumerate the different orders in the church, they mention always three. If the above account given by Clement is not to be considered as an enumeration, I kr,ow aot what to call it. If two were actually all the orders then in the church, could he have introduced the mention of them, by telling us he was about to give a list, or catalogue, or eveti to make an enumeration of the ecclesiastical degrees ? Is this a way of prefacing the mention of so small a number as two ? It is this writer's express design to acquaint us what the apos- tles did for accommodating the several churches they planted, in pastors and assistants. And can we suppose he would have omitted the chief point of all, namely, that they supplied eve- ry church vvith a prelate, ruler, or head, if any one had really been entitled to this distinction ? If it should be urged, that under the term sTria-KOTrot both functions of bishop and presbyter are comprehended, it is manifest, that, as it was the writer's scope to mark the different offices established, as being predicted by the prophets in the Old Testament, there cannot be a stronger indication, that there was then no material, if any difference, between them, and that they were properly denominated and considered as one office. The appellatives also by which they are denoted^ are invariably employed by him in the plural number, as being equally applicable to all. It is said in chap, i, T0/5 yiynf^sMi u/miv vTTolxs^ofMvot^ submitting to your governours or guides. It is •remarkable also, that the word ttyafMUi, hereused in the plural of all their pastors, is one of those terms which came after- wards to be appropriated to the bishop. Nav, since it must be admitted, that in the New Testament, as well as in the ancient christian monument just now quoted, the words ftr/c-xo^ro? and T^pea-^vlepoi, are not occasionally, but uniformly, used synony- .mously, the very discovery, that there was not aiiy distinctive appellation for such an office as is now jcalled bishop, is not of iii9pn§jclerable jvei^^^^^ P^^ove, tharXl^dici, npt .ex^st,;^ We n LECTURES ON inow that every other office, ordinary and extraordinary, is suSciently distinguished by an appropriated name. But 1 cannot help observing further concerning this episde ©f Cieraent, that though it was written with the special view of conciliating the minds of the Corinthians to their pastors, commonly, in this letter, called presbyters, some of whom the people had turned out of their offices, or expelled, efxo riis e«-/er- xe/TT^i^ from their bishoprick, as his words literally imply, there is not the most distant hint of any superiour to these irpio-^vlepoif iR^bose proper province it was, if there had been such a supe- TJour, to inspect their conduct, and to judge of it ; and whose smthoTity the people had treated most contemptuously in pre- suming, without so much as consulting him, to degrade their presbyters. It was natural, it was even unavoidable, to take notice, in such a case, of the usurpation whereof they had been guilty upon their bishop, the chief shepherd, who had the oversight of all the under shepherds the presbyters, as well as of the people, and to whom alone, if there had been such a person, those presbyters were accountable for their con- duct. Yet there is not so much as a syllable in all this long letter that points this way. On the contrary, he argues from the power with which those presbyters themselves were vest- ed, and of which they could not be justly stripped, whilst they discharged faithfully the duties of their office. I will appeal to any candid person who is tolerably conversant in christian antiquities, whether he thinks it possible, that in the third cen- tury, such a letter, on such an emergence, could have been written to any christian congregation, by any man in his senses, wherein there was no more notice taken of the bishop, who was then, in a manner, every thing in his own church, than if he were nothing at all. And that there was so great a differ- ence, in less than two centuries, in people^s style and senti- laents on this article, is an uncontrovertible proof, that in that period things came to stand on a very different foot. This epistle of Clement, who was a disciple of Paul, appears, in- deed, from one passage, to have been written so early as before the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem, and, consequently, before the seventy-second year of Christ, according to the- %'ulgar computation. And if so, it was written before the Apocalypse, and, perhaps, some other parts of the sacred canon. Nothing, therefore, that is not Scripture, can be of greater authority in determining a point of fact, as is the ques- tion about the constitution of the apostolical church. The other testimony I shall produce is that of Polycarp, who had been a disciple of the apostle John, and must certain- ly have written his epistle to the Philippians a considerable ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 73 time before the middle of the second century. He also takes notice only of two orders of ministers in the church, enjoining the people, chap, v, to be subject to their presbyters and dea- cons, as to God and Christ. He could go no higher for a similitude ; nor cotdd he decently have gone so high, had he known of a higher order in the church. Not a syllable of the bishop, who, in less than a hundred and fifty years after, would have been the principal, if not the only person, to whom their subjection would have been enjoined by any christian writer. Let it be observed further, that, though, inchap. v, he lays down the duties and qualifications of deacons, and, in chap, vi, those of presbyters, wherein every thing befitting judges and governours is included, and, through the whole epistle, those of the people, there is no mention of what is proper in the cha- racter and conduct of a bishop. I shall remark here, by the way, that there is one very an- cient author, Ignatius, who also comes within the denomina- tion of the apostolick fathers, whose writings are supposed to have intervened, between those of Clement and those of Poly- carp, and whose authority is strongly urged on the opposite side. Of him I shall have occasion to take notice afterwards. I shall here only add, in regard to Polycarp, that what has been now observed, of his epistle to the Philippians, is a full confu- tation of that hasty assertion of Dodweli*, that the christian writers, posterior to Ignatius, most accurately observe even the distinction of the names ; to wit, of bishop and presbyter, of which he had been speaking. His words are, "• Juniores au- " tern Ignatio scriptores christiani et nominum distinctionem *' observant accuratissimara." It is evident from the above quotation, that Polycarp knew of no christian minister superi- our to the presbyters. If the bishop was of a different order, and yet included in the term, he has been as little observant of accuracr in the distinction of the names, as of propriety and decency in his injunctions on this head. But there are other topicks from which the episcopate has, by its warmest patrons, been supported, and which it will be proper to examine particularly in the following lectures. I shall in these also endeavour to trace (as far as -it this distance of time it is practicable) the outline of the apostolick church, and inquire into the origin and progress of sul)ordination in the pastors. It will be observed by the judicious and the candid, that what has been advanced does not affect the lawfulness, or even, in certain circumstances, the expediency of the episcopal model J it only exposes the arrogance of pretending to ixjus di- * Parse" . 27". K r4 LECTURES ON vinum- I am satisfied that no form of polity can plead such an ex- clusive charter as that phrase, in its present acceptation, is under- stood to imply. The claim is clearly the offspring of sectarian bigotry and ignorance. In regard to those polities which ob- tain at present in the different christian sects, 1 own ingenuous- ly thdt I have not found one of all that 1 have examined which can be said perfectly to coincide with the model of the aposto- lick church. Some, indeed, are nearer, and some are more re- mote ; but this we may say with freedom, that if a particular form of polit\ had been essential to the church, it had been laid down in another manner in the sacred books. The very hypo- thtsis is, in my opinion, repugnant to the spiritual nature of the evangelical economy. It savours grossly of the conceit with which the Jews were intoxicated of the Messiah's secu- lar ki^^-'^onn a conceit with which many like-minded christians ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY* tS LECTURE V. .AlFTER some considerations on the nature and consequence of the question about the polity originally established in the church, I discussed in the former lecture the principal topicks relating to the equality of the pastors, at least in point of func- tion and official duties. I observed also, in the conclusion of that discourse, that there were other topicks from which those who maintain a subordination among them, have endeavoured to defend their sentiments. Many, indeed, convinced by such arguments as were then adduced, that it is in vain to search for the office of bishop, as the word is understood by moderns, in those ministers ordained by the apostles in the churches which they founded, have referred us for its origin to the apos-* tolate itself, I have passingly observed already, that this was One of those extraordinary offices, which were in their nature temporary, and did not admit succession. But this point, as so much stress is laid upon it, will deserve to be examined more particularly. The apostles may be considered in a twofold view, either in their general character as the first pastors of the church and teachers of the christian faith, or in what is implied in their special character, of apostles of Jesus Christ. In the first ge- neral view they are, doubtless, the predecessors of all those who,, to the end of the world, shall preach the same gospel, and administer the same sacraments, by whatever name we distin- guish them, bishops, priests, or deacons, overseers, elders, or* ministers. But the question still recurs. Whether agreeably to the primitive institution, their successors, in respect of the more common character of teachers and directors of the churches, should be divided into three orders, or only into two ? To presume without evidence, that the first, and not the second, was the fact, is merely what logicians call 2ipeiitio prin*^ cipii, taking that for granted, which is the very point in debate. 76 LECTURFSON But if it be alleged, that not in the general character of teach- ers, but in their special lunction as apostles, the bishops are their proper successors, the presbyters and deacons being only the successors of those who were, in the beginning, ordained by the a])ostles, this j^oint will require a separate discussion. And for this purpose your attention is entreated to the following re- marks. First, the indispensable requisites in an apostle sufficiently demonstrate, that the office could be but temporary. It was necessary that he should be one who had seen Jesus Christ in the flesh after his resurrection. Accordingly they were all spe- cially destined to serve as eve-witnesses to the world of this great event, the hinge on which the truth of Christianity de- pended. The character of apostle is briefly described by Peter, who was himself the first of the apostolictil college, as one ordained to be a witness of Christ's resurrection. Acts i, 22, a circumstance of which he often makes mention in his speeches both to the rulers and to the people. See Acts, ii, 32; iii, 15; v, 32 ; x, 41 ; xiii, 31. And if so, the office, from its nature and design, could not have an existence after the extinction of that generation. Secondly, the apostles were distinguished by prerogatives whiro«.x6i^fio^, LECTURES ON - vi^nother point, in which they had doubtless all a share, w^s the election of their pastors and deacons. That the deacons were at first chosen t>y the people, is manifest from the acf count we have of their institution above referred to. Yet this point, however clear in its origin, seems very clearly to have undergone a change. In regard to the choice of pastors, the matter is not so plain. Some expressions in ancient authors seern to favour the opinion, that these also were constituted in consequence of the election of the people. Other expres- sions favour more the notion, that the choice was in the presby- tery, who pi-oposed the candidate they had elected to the people ; and that the people had the power of rejecting, with- out assigning a reason, when they did not approve the choice. It is not improbable, that different methods, in this respect, obtained in different congregations. From scripture we have not sufficient ground for concluding positively on either side. Clement, in the forecited epistle, seems to favour the second opinion. - The passage I allude to is in chap, xliv, where, speaking of the pastors, he uses this expression : " Those who " were constituted by the apostles, and afterwards by other " eminent men, with the consent of the whole congregation."— It is not to be imagined, that among people so artless, and at the same time so charitable, as we have reason to think the first christian societies actually were, the bounding lines of the powers and privileges of the different orders would be accu- rately chalked out. It is more than probable, that the people, in a perfect reliance on the knowledge, zeal, and experience o£ their pastors, would desire, before every thing, to know whom they, who were the fittest judges, and had the same object in, view, would think proper to recommend ; and that, on the other hand, the pastors, having nothing so much at heart as the edification of the people, would account their disapprobation of a candidate a sufficient reason for making another choice. It is indeed certain, as appears by the epistles of Cyprian, which were written about the middle of the third century, that for the three first ages of the church, though most matters came at last to be previously discussed in the presbytery, where some judgment was formed concerning them, no final resolution was taken in any affair of moment, without commu- nicating it to the people, and obtaining their approbation. I signified before, that the presbytery, of which there is frequent mention in the ancient fathers, consisted not only of the pres- byters, with their president, to whom the name bishop, at first common to them all, came soon to be appropriated, but also of the deacons. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 93 It has, in modern times, been made a question, whether the presbyters, even exclusive of their president, could all come under one denomination ; or whether some of them were pro- perly pastors and teachers, and others only assistants in mat- ters of government and discipline. Some keen advocates for presbytery, as the word is now understood, on the model of John Calvin, have imagined they discovered this distinction in these words of Paul to Timothy, (1 Tim. v. 17,) — ''Let the '' elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour ; *' especially they who labour in the word and doctrine." Here, say they, is a two fold partition of the officers comprised under the same name, into those who rule, and those who labour in the word and doctrine, that is, into ruling eiders and teaching elders. To this it is replied, on the odier side, that the especially is not intended to indicate a different oiiice, but to distinguish from others those who assiduously apply them- selves to the most important as well as the most difficult part of their office, publick teaching ; that the distinction intended is therefore not official but personal ; that it does not relate to a difference in the powers conferred, but solely to a difference in their application. It is not to the persons who have the charge, but to those who labour in it, o< xow<«vTf5. And to this ex- position, as far the more natural, I entirely agree. What was affirmed before, in relation to the coincidence of the office of bishop and presbyter, from the uniform and promiscuous ap- plication of the same names and titles, may doubtless be urged, in the present case, with siill greater strength. The distinc- tion is too considerable between a pastor and a lay eider, as it is called, to be invariably confounded under one common name. When the character of such as are proper for the office of elder is pointed out by Paul to Timothy *, apt to teach, or fit for teaching, S'i^»yS}ix,(^, is mentioned as an essential quality ; and though the words be different in the charge to I'itus f , the same thing is implied, »W hvct]®^ » xai TrxpccKoiXBiv £v rt, h^d^KctXta, rt) if/iutvairii xeit t«5 eivriXs'ye)iTai; eP^.ey^stVi that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. This is spoken indiscriminately of all who were proper to be nomi- nated bishops or elders, which we cannot suppose would have been done, if part of them were to have no concern in teach- ing. We find no such quality among those mentioned as ne- cessary in deacons. And a dubious, not to say a forced, exposition of a single passage of scripture, is rather too small a circumstance, whereon to found a distinction of so great consequence. If, therefore, it were only from this passage, * 1 Tim. iii. 2. f Tit, i. 9. 94 LECTURES ON that an argument could be brought for the admission of those denominated laymen to a share in the management of church aflfairs, I, for my part, should most readily acknowledge, that our warrant for the practice would be extremely questionable. But I shall have occasion to consider this afterwards. In the second century it is very plain, that a settled dis- tinction, in several respects, obtained between the bishop and his colleagues in the presbytery, for as yet they may still be called colleagues. Many titles, which had before been com- mon to them all, came at length to be appropriated to him who v/as considered as their head, such as s'STta-Mzr^; iya^ /K.Fy(^) TT^oerai, TirparoKct^eof)®-', zrpoirccfiiv^, -zs-oiiAOivy and SOme Others. Though names are but sounds, those who are conversant in the history of mankind will readily alloAv, that they have greater in- fluence on the opinions of the generality of men, than most people are aware of. Besides, it is of the nature of power, unless guarded by a watchful jealousy, (rarely to be found in unexperienced and undesigning people) to accumulate and gather strength. Distinguish one at first but by a small de- gree of superiority, and the distinction you have made will very soon, and as it were naturally, carry other distinctions along with it. There is something here that resem- bles gravitation in material things. As the quantity of mat- ter increases, its attractive force increases, and it more easily draws other matter to itself. Some have represented it as an insuperable objection to the presbyterian h3'pothesis, concerning the rise of episcopal superiority, that it seems to imply so great ambition in one part, and so great supineness (not to give it a worse name) in the rest of the primitive pastors, ordained by the apostles, and by the apostolick men that came after them, as is perfect-^ ly incredible ; this they seem to think a demonstration a pri' ori^ that the thing is impossible. Let it be observed, that I have all along admitted an original distinction, which, though very different from that which in process of time obtained, served for a foundation to the edifice. And so far am I from thinking that the ambition, or the vices, of the first minis- ters gave rise to their authority, that I am certain, that this ef- fect is much more justly ascribed to their virtues. An aspi- ring disposition rouses jealousy — jealousy puts people on their guard. There needs no more to check ambition, whilst it re- mains unarmed with either wealth or power. But there is nothing which men are not ready to yield to distinguished merit, especially when matters are in that state wherein every kind of pre-eminence, instead of procuring wealth and secular advantages, exposes but to greater danger, and to greater ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 95 suflferihg. Even the small distinction of being accounted the first in the society, and, as it were, the senior brother among the pastors, would be a strong incitement to a faithful and zea- lous minister to distinguish himself, by being the first also in every difficulty, and in every danger. This would beget in the people a more implicit deference to his judgment, and respect to his person. A deference at first merely paid to virtue, comes at last, through the gradual operation ot habit, to be considered as due to office. What was gratuitously conferred on the meritorious predecessor, is claimed by the undeserving successour as a right. And the very principles of our nature tend to favour the claim. But when ease and affluence succeed to danger and distress, then indeed ambition on the one side, and dependance on the other, will be able to secure what virtue alone could earn. Such is the ordinary progression of human things. Similar to this, if traced backwards, will be found the origin of almost all the governments that are not founded in conquest. It were easy, on the same ground, with those objectors, to evince a priori^ (if a specious declamation on a sort of general principles, which pay no regard to fact and testimony, could evince) that monarchy, or the dominion of one man over innu- merable multitudes of men, who, taken severally, may be his equals, both in understanding, and in bodily strength, is, in the nature of things, impossible « But how do all such futile rea- sonings vanish, like shadows, before the torch of history. This I observe only by the way, not that I think the steps so difficult to imagine by which this ecclesiastick power has first arisen. For example, from making their president a man of great consequence among them, the transition is easy to their making his concurrence in all measures a conditio sine qua non ; that is to say, their considering every thing as invalid that is done against his judgment. It is but one step further, and every thing becomes valid which bears the stan:ip of his au- thority. Now if, in this manner, the president had been raised in the churches of some principal cities, these would soon become a standard to the rest. And to their first rising in such cities to this pre-eminence, analogy to the civil govern- ment (as appears both from the testimony of antiquity, and from the reason of the thing) did not a little contribuie. In this judgment we can plead the concurrence of some of our keenest antagonists. '*• Civitatum Ronvanorum," says Dod- well, " Grse' arumque disciplinam in civitatem ecclesiastica *' etiam administratione observatam constat e TertulUani ali- *' quantisper coaevo Origine. Sic enim ille illas invicem cou- " tendit, ut partes partibus etiam responderent." Thus he 96 LECTURES ON who presided was considered as corresponding in ecclesiasticJc matters to their prefect, proconsul, or chief magistrate, by whatever title he was distinguished, the presbytery to their senate or council, and the congregation to the comitia or con- vention of the people. I make no doubt, as Jerom plausibly supposes, that the acquiescence of the people would be given the more readily, from the consideration of the expediency of such an arrangement for preserving union. When one and the same congregation was under the direction of a plurality of pastors entirely equal, unless there were an umpire, to whose decision they were all considered as under an obligation to submit, there might be some danger of a rupture, in case their sentiments should jar. But we shall see in the sequel, (what is fully as unaccountable) that from causes perfectly similar, to wit, an allowed presidentship in synods and councils to the bishops of the capitals of provinces, kingdoms, regions, and of the empire itself ; and from the gradual appropriation of titles, formerly common, arose insensibly the real presidency of metropolitical, patriarchal, and even papal power. The first ecclesiastical author who mentions bishop, pres- byter, and deacon, as three distinct orders of church officers, is Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, who is supposed to have writ- ten about the sixteenth year of the second century, and by some even sooner. Indeed, several of the epistles ascribed to him are now acknowledged, by criticks of all denominations^ to be spurious, and some of the rest are admitted, even by his ablest advocates, to be interpolated ; insomuch, that it would not be easy to say how we could with safety found a decision on an author, with whose works transcribers, in the judgment of both sides, have made so free. What makes his testimony the more to be suspected is, first, because the fore-mentioned distinction is so frequently and officiously obtruded on the rea- der, sometimes not in the most modest and becoming terms, as was the manner of the apostles, when speaking of their own authority; and obedience is enjoined to the bishop and pres- byters, even where the injunction cannot be deemed either na- tural or pertinent, as in his epistle to Polycarp, who was him- self a bishop : secondly, because the names bishop and presby- ter are never used by him for expressing the same office, as they had been uniformly used by all who had preceded him, and were occasionally used by most of the ecclesiastick writers of that century; thirdly and principally, because Polycarp, a contemporary and surviver of Ignatius, in a letter to the Phi- iippians, quoted in a former discourse, pointing out the du- ties of all ranks, pastors, and people, makes mention of only two orders of ministers, to wit, presbyters and deacons, in the ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 9f same manner as Luke, and Paul, and Clement, had done be» fore him ; nay, and recommends to the people submission to them, and only to them in terms, which I u ust say were nei- ther proper, nor even decent, if these very ministers had a superiour in the church, to whom they themselves, as well as the people, were subject. To me the difference between these two writers appears by no means as a diversity in style, 43ut as a repugnancy in sentiment. They cannot be both made applicable to the same state of the church. So that we are forced to conclude, that in the writings of one, or the other, there must have been something spurious or interpolated. Now I have heard no argument urged against the authenticity of Polycarp's letter, equally cogent as some of the arguments employed against the authenticity of the epistles of Ignatius. And indeed the state of the church, in no subsequent period, can well account for such a forgery, as the epistle of the for- mer to the Philippians ; whereas, the ambition of the ecclesias- ticks, for which some of the following centuries were remark- able, renders it extremely easy to account for the nauseous re- petition of obedience and subjection to the bishop, presbyters, and deacons, to be found in the letters of Ignatius. The way in which Dodwell accounts for it, (though in itself not implausible) is very singular, aa his sentimtats are on many subjects. He says, that it was because the bishop's authority was at that time a perfect novelty, totally unknown in the church, that Ignatius found it necessary to exert himself to the utmost, to recommend and establish it. According to this modern, the power and all the prerogatives of bishops were a mere upstart of the second century, after the death of all the apostles, and after the compilement of the canonical scrip- tures. It is in vain, therefore, he acknowledges, to look for any trace of episcopal authority in the New Testament. In the days of the apostles, it was not bj- prelacy that the church was governed, but by a species of popery, with which, if I mistake not, Mr. Dodwell was the first v, ho brought the world acquaint- ed. The pope was not the apostle Peter, but the apostle James : the papal throne was erected not at Rome, but at Jeru- salem; and after the destruction of this city by the Romans, trans- ferred to Ephesus ; and when finally suppressed, the episcopa- cy was reared upon its ruins. Yet of this episcopacy, though neither coeval with the christian religion, nor of apostolical institution, for it did not obtain till after the death of John, the last of the apostles, and of which we cannot have scriptural evidence, as it did not exist till several years after the finishing of the canon, the absolute necessity since the sixth year of the second century, and no sooner, is such, that without it there is N 98 LECTURES ON no church of Christ, no salvation of men. Damnation or an- nihilation is all the prospect that remains even for those who believe and obey the gospel. For the rejection of an innova- tion which has no place there, and of which all the sacred wri- ters were ignorant, can never imply either disbelief or disobe- dience of ihe gospel. But why, it mav be said, detail extrava- gancies, more like the ravings of a disordered brain, than the sober deductions of a mind capable of reflection? 1 should indeed have thought the task unnecessary, if experience had not proved, that even such extravagancies have sometimes been productive of infinite mischief. If Dodwell, with all his learning, had not been a perfect idolater of his own eccentrick imagination, he could not have acquiesced in a system so chi- merical, so ill-compacted, so destitute of every kind of proof, external or internal, and to which all the sources of evidence, hitherto known in theological controversy, reason, scripture, and tradition, are equally repugnant. If it had been his ex- press object to produce a scheme which might outdo even the Romish, not only in absurdity but in malignity, he could not have succeeded better. His unceasing cry was schism ; yet in the scriptural sense a greater schismatick than himself the age did not produce. Whose doctrine was ever found more hostile to that fundamental principle, declared by our Lord to be the criterion of our Christianity, mutual love ? Whose doc- trine ever was more successful in planting, by means of uncha- ritable and self-opinioned judgments, the principle of hatred in its stead ? 1 he test to which Scripture points is. Does the teaching in question alienate the hearts of christians, or unite them? Does it conciliate the affections where differences have un- happily arisen? ordoesitwiden thebreach? Iftheformer,thespirit is christian ; if the latter, schismatical. The former is not more productive of charity^ the end of the commandment, or gospel- covenant, and the bond of perfectness, than the latter is of its opposite, malignity, the source of discord, the parent of into- lerance and persecution. It would be unjust not to add, in ex- tenuation of the guilt of those who mistake bigotry for zeal, what our Lord pleaded in behalf of his murderers. They hioTV not what they do. This charity, where there appears the smal- lest scope for it, is due even to the uncharitable. In regard to vital religion, it is to be regretted, that men, even of talents and science, often show little penetration, rarely going deeper than the surface. Thenatiirnl w*?;?, (saith Paul, 1 Cor. ii, 14, more properlv the animal man^ •^uyjy.(^, not (pvariy.'^ uvB-pwx-®^) receiveth not the things of the spirit of God ; for they are foolish- ness to him^ neither can he know them^ because they are spiritual- ly discerned. Their acquaintance is merely with the outside : ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 99 they break their teeth upon the shell, without reaching the kernel. But to return to Ignatius, I say not that the epistles in ques- tion ought to be rejected in the lump, but that undue freedoms have been used even with the purest of them, by some over zealous partisans of the priesthood. They have, in many things, a remarkable coincidence with the sentiments repeat- edly inculcated in the apostolick constitutions, a compilation probably begun in the third century, and ended in the fourth or fifth. Among the writers of the second age, I shall men- tion also Ireneus, who is supposed to have written about the middle of the second century, and in whose writi-.igs the names, bishop and presbyter, and others of the like import, are sometimes used indiscriminately. I acknowledge, hov/ever, that the distinction of these, as of different orders, began about this time generally to prevail : the difference was not indeed near so considerable as it became afterwards. Accord- ingly, Ireneus talks in much the same style of both. What at one time he ascribes to bishops, at another he ascribes to pres- byters : he speaks of each in the same terms, as entided to obe- dience from the people, as succeeding the aposdes in the mini- stry of the word, as those by whom the apostolick doctrine and traditions had been handed down. Thus (lib. iii, chap. 2,) he says, concerning the hereticks of his time, " Cum autem ad ** earn iterum traditionem- quae est ab apostoiis, quae per succes- *' siones presbyterorum in ecclesiis custoditur, provocamus *' eos, qui adversantur traditioni, dicent se non solum prt-shy- *' teris, sed etiam apostoiis existentes sapientiores, synceraui *' invenisse veritatem." Here not only are the presbyters men- tioned as the successours of the apostles, but in ranging the ministries, no notice is taken of any intervening order such as that of the bishops. It is not always easy to say, whether by the two appellations, bishop and presbyter, Ireneus means the same order, or different orders. In the former case he would appear to make no distinction, and in the latter very little be- tween them. Dr. Pearson admits, (which by the way is con- tradicted by Dodwell) that the names, bishop and presliyter, are often interchanged by this father, and others of his time, even to the end of the century. This, however, he maintains, happen- ed only when they spoke of the ministry in general terms, or mentioned those ministers in particular who had preceded them ; affirming, that in regard to their own contemporaries,, the offices of individuals are never thus confounded* A man, who was in their time a bishop, is not called a presbyter, nor is a presbyter called a bishop. I admit the truth of ihif; re- mark, and consider it as a very strong confirmatiaa o-f due 100 LECTURES ON doctrine I have been defending, f'or what reasonable ac-^ count can be given of this manner ^otherwise chargeable with the most unpardonable inaccuracy) but by saying, that, in the time of the predecessors of Ireneus, there was no distinction worthy of notice in the ministry ; whereas, in his own time, the distinction began to be niarked by peculiar powers and prerogatives. If this had not been the case, it was as little natural as excusable, to be less accurate in speak- ing of those that went before, than in speaking of the peo- ple of his own ti;ne. Was it ever observed of writers in the fourth and iifth centuries, to come no lower, chat they in this manner confounded the different ecclesiastical of- fices of the third? Is Cyprian, for instance, in any suc- ceeding age, styled a presbyter of Carthage, or Rogatian the bishop ? Are not their respective titles as uniformly observed in after ages as in their own ? But to return to the epistles of Ignatius, it is not only what we find singular in them, for so early a period, relating to the different orders of ministers in the church, which has raised suspicions of their authenticity, or at least of their integrity ; there are other causes which have co-operated in producing the same effect ; one is, the style in many places is not suited to the simplicity of the times immediately succeeding the times of the apostles. It abounds with inflated epithets, unlike the humble manner of the inspired writers ; and in this, as in other respects, seems more formed on that which became fash- ionable after the acquisition of greater external importance, which opul'-nce never fails to bring, and after the discussion of certain theological questions agitated in the third and fourth centuries, to whJch v/e find, sometimes, a manifest allusion. What I am goiwg to observe has much the appearance of ana- chronism, vvhich often betrays the hand of the interpolator. The expression, the church which is in Syria^ occurs twice. Now nothing can be more dissimilar to the dialect which had prevailed in the apostolick age, and which continued to prevail in the second century. Except when the church denoted the whole christian community, it meant no more than a single congregation. Of this I sh 11 have occasion to take notice presently. Now there were many churches in Syria in the days of Ignatius, and many bishops. Indeed when, through the increase of converts, a bishop's parish came to contain more people than could be compiehended in one congregation, the custom continued, in contradiction to propriety, of still calling his charge a churchy in the singular number. But it was not till after the distinction made between the metropolitan and the suffragans, which was about a century later, that this use originated, of calling all the churches of a province the church ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 101 (not the churches) of such a province. To this they were gradually led by analogy. The metropolitan presided among the provincial bishops, as the bishop among the presbyters. The application of the term was, after the rise of patriarchal jurisdiction, extended still further. All that was under the jurisdiction of the archbishop, or patriarch, was his church. But it is not the style only which has raised suspicion, it is chiefly the sentiments. " Attend to the bishop," says Ignatius to Polycarp, " that God may attend to you. I pledge my soul " for theirs who are subject to the bishop, presbyters, and dea- *' cons. Let my part in God be with them." Atn-iPv^ov tym t£i vmrxTo-efAsvav ru eTrio-Mva k. r. A- which Cotelerius renders Devovear ego pro its qui subditi sunt episcopo^ &c. Admit that, from his adopting the plural of the imperative Ts-poo-exelf) in the beginning of the paragraph, he is to be considered as ad- dressing the congregation of Smyrna, and not the bishop, ta whom the letter is directed: Is there nothing exceptionable in what he says ? Was it the doctrine of Ignatius, that all that is necessary to salvation in a christian is an implicit subjection to the bishop, presbyters, and deacons? Be it that he means only in spiritual matters. Is this the style of the apostles to their christian brethren ? Was it thus that Ignatius exhibited to his followers the pattern which had been given by that gTeat apostle, who could say of himself and his fellow- apostles, appealing for his voucher to the people's experi- ence of their ministry. We preach not ourselves^ but Christ Jesus the Lord^ and ourselves your servants^ for Jesus^ sake. In ex- act conformity to this, Paul expressly disclaims all dominion over the faith of his hearers, who, he was sensible, were not to be dictated to, but to be reasoned with, not to be command- ed, but to be convinced. Not that we have dominion over your faith^ but are helpers of your joy. And a little after, Knoiving the terrours of the Lord^ we persuade men. It is no part of our office to constrain, it is merely to teach ; it is not to extort an outward, and perhaps reluctant compliance, but it is by the ef- ficacy of persuasion to subdue the refractory will, and com- pletely engage the heart ; for no obedience in this cause is available, which is not voluntary, and does not proceed from love. It suits not even the apostolick diction to prescribe, to order, but to entreat, to pray. As though God^ says the apostle, did beseech you by us^ we pray you, in Christ's stead. Be you re- conciled to God. The most authoritative language that he em- ploys runs in this strain ; / beseech you by the mercies of God, and I beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ. Nor is this manner peculiarly Paul's. Peter, the prince of the apostles, as roraanists style him, recurs neither to bulls nor to 102 LECTURES ON rescripts, but, with equal mildness as his colleague Paul, em- ploys exhortation and entreaty. The presbyters amongst you^ says he, / their felloxv-presbyter exhort^ Feed the Jiock of God among you^ taking the oversight thereof not by constraint^ hut xviUingly. It is added, neither as being lords over God'*s heri- tage^ but being ensamples to the Jiock ; and, consequently, en- gaging their imitation by the attraction of an amiable example, and not enforcing submission by stern authority and command. Had Ignatius been such as the letters ascribed to him repre- sent him, could he have had the assurance to address his An- tiochians in the words of Paul above quoted, " We preach not " ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord, and ourselves vour *' servants, for Jesus* sake ?" For is it not his predominant scope, in those letters, to preach himself and other ecclesias- ticks, inculcating upon the people the most submissive, unli- mited, and blind obedience to all of the clerical order? This is an everlasting topick, to which he never slips an opportunity of recurring in season, and out of season. The only consistent declaration which would have suited the author of these epis- tles, must have been the reverse of Paul's. We preach not Christ Jesus the Lord, but so far only as may conduce to the increase of our influence, and the exaltation of our power ; Eay, for an object so important, we are not ashamed to preach lip ourselves your masters, with unbounded dominion over your faith, and consequently, over both soul and body. For surely, if, in the application of words, any regard is due to proprietv as well as consistency, those only must be called masters who are entitled to command, and those must be ser- vants who are obliged to obey. There are besides several things in these letters which, though expressed with simplicity of diction, I find in meaning unintelligible. Such is that in his letter to the Ephesians, chap, vi, ^' The more silent a man *' finds the bishop, he ought to reverence him the more." Con* sequently if, like the Nazianzene monk, celebrated by Gre- gnr\ , he should, in praise of God, devote his tongue to an in- violable taciturnity, he would be completely venerable. This, one would be tempted to think, has originated from some opulent ecclesiastick, who was by far too great a man for preaching; at least we may say, it seems an oblique apologv for those who have no objection to any thing implied in a bishcpritk, except the function. None v. hose notion of the duties of a bishop corresponded v/ith Isaiah's idea of a watchman, (Ivi, lO,) M'oukl have thought dumbness a recom- mendation. Yet Ezekiel did not think his prophetical office disparaged by God's telling him, that he had made him a watch- man to the house of Israel, (iii, 17.) I shall only add, that if I be not perfectly unprtjudiced on this subject, the prejudice ECCLESIASTICAL. EJISTCRY. 1^3 by which I am biassed is not against Ignatiu.s, but in Ms favour. It is because I think very highly of the martyr, and have a strong impression of his virtue, and of the service which his sufferings and testimony did to the cause of his master, that I am unwilling rashly to attribute lo him what could not fail to lessen him in my estimation. I would save him, if possible, from a second martyrdom in his works, through the attempts not of open enemies, but of deceitful friends. But should we admit, after all, in opposition to strong pre- sumptive evidence, the entire genuineness of the letters in ques- tion, all that could be fairly inferred from the concession is, that the distinction of orders and subordination of the presby- ters, obtained about tvi^enty or thirtv years earlier than I have supposed, and that it was a received distinction at Antioch, and in Asia Minor, before it was known in Macedonia and other parts of the christian church. That its prevalence has been gradual, and that its introduction has arisen from the example and influence of some of the principal cities, is highly probable. I shall mention only one other ancient author by whom the three orders seem to be discriminated, and whose testimony is commonly produced in support of their apostolical institution. The author is Pius, bishop of Rome, reckoned by the roman- ists the ninth in succession from Peter and Paul, and conse- quently, the sixth or seventh from Clement, for they are not entirely agreed about the order. All that remains of him are two short letters to Justus, bishop of Vienna. He is supposed to have written these a little before the middle of the second century, but after Ignatius and Polycarp. This comes so close to the time, when I admit the distinction to have generally ob- tained, that even the clearest testimony from him, though there were no doubt as to the authenticity of the letters, could not be said to weaken my hypothesis. There is something in his words which appears even to favoiir that hypothesis. At the same time that they mark a distinction, they show it to be but in its infancy, and not comparable to wh^t it arose to in a few- centuries. Passing the obscure and indefinite expression, colo- hio epiacQporum ve&tims^ the only passage which is apposite to the question, is in his second letter : "■ Presbytei-i et diaconi " non ut majorem, sed ut ministrum Christi te observent." " Let the presbyters and deacons reverence thee (the bishop) " not as their superiour, but as Christ's minister." I do not say that these words imply that there was no superiority in the bishop. If there had been none, I do not think it would have been natural to add the clause 7ion ut major em. But tliey imply that the writer thought this difference too inconsiderable to be 104 LECTURES ON •a ground of esteem from colleagaes in the ministry ; and that he accounted the true foundation of their respect to be supe- riour diligence in the service. I believe it will be admitted by the impartial and intelligent, that such an expression from a bishop (not to say the bishop of Kome) in the fourth or fifth century, would have been reckoned rather derogator)' from the authority of the office, which woidd have been thought justly entitled to respect and obedience, independently of the per- sonal merit of the officer. But that the two functions of bishop and presbyter were, through the whole of that age, occasionally comprehended under the same name, and considered as one office, and not two, I sh;dl show further, by an example from Clement of Alex- andria, who wrote at the close of the second century. Hav- ing observed, (Strom. L. 1,) that in most things there are two sorts of ministry ; the one of a nobler nature than the other, which is subservient ; and having illustrated this distinction, as by other examples, so by that of philosophy and physick, the former of which he considers as superiour, because it admi- nisters medicine to the soul, the latter as inferiour, because it administers only to the body, he adds, Ofc«<«5 Jv x.eii kocIx. r^t ikkXh- o-itiV', rt)\ f^ev jSeAV'wtocjjv oi wps(r(iv]ipot tra^ao-iv sIkovx tijv ujntpe] t)i.i})i ei otcuteiaiy TccvTXi uiu/piiTfUi S'tcttcovieti ovyyihtu rt VTnipijtivlcti Tea S-ea, ttetiet rtji rat zTspf •yeivv oiMvof4,toe.v. " Just SO in the church the presbyters are in- " trusted with the dignified ministry, the deacons with the " subordinate. Both kinds of service the angels perform to " God in the administration of this lower world." Here the distinction is strongly marked between presbyter and deacon : but is it not plain from his words, that Clement considered the distinction between bishop and presbyter as, even in his days, comparatively not worthy of his notice ? But passing all critical disquisitions in regard to the precise time and manner of the introduction, as necessarily involved in darkness and uncertainty, and admitting that the distinction obtained generall)^ before the middle of the second century, let us now inquire into the nature of that episcopacy which then came to be established. It has once and again been ob- served passingly, that every church had its own pastors, and its own presb} tery, independently of every other church. And when one of the presbyters came to be considered as the pastor by way of eminence, while the rest were regarded only as his assistants, vicars, or curates, who acted under his direction ; as then every church or congregation had but one who was called bishop, so every bishop had but one congregation or church. This is a remark which deserves your particular notice, as it regards an essential point in the constitution of the primitive ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 10^ tfetweh^ a point w,hi.ch is generally admitted by those who can make any pretensions to the knowledge of christian antiquities, in the epistles written to particular congreg; lions, or churches, during the third century, and. in some before^ notice is almost always taken of their own bishop and presb) tery, as belonging specially to themselves. The great patrons of the hierarchy, who found so much on the testimony of Ignatius, will not den\', that on this article he is quite explicit. The bishop's charge is, in the primitive writers, invariably denominated tmM^t^, a church, or congregation, in the singular number, pever ex.KX'/j~ice4^ churches, or congregations, in the piuraL But as this argument may not appear so strong to those^ who: are accustomed to form their opinion of things from the import of their names in modern dialects, it will not be amiss to inquire particularly into the ancient applications ot the ■word. Properly there are, in the New Testammt, but two original senses of the word £x>6/sjo-/«- which can be called differ- ent, though related. One is, when it denotes a number of people actually assembled, or accustomed to assemble tqge** ther, and is then properly rendered by the English terms^ con- gregation, convention, assembly, and even sometimes tri'owd, ^s in Acts xix. 32, 40. 1 he other sense is rO denote a society united together by some common tie, though not convened^ perhaps not convenable in one place* And in this acceptation^ as well as in the former, it sometimes occurs in clissical wri- ters, as signifying a state, or commonwealth, and nearly tot^ responding to the Latin civkas. When the word is limited^ or appropriated, as it generally is in the New Testament, by its regimen, as raB-m. ta Kvpifi rs Xpurla, or bv the scope ot the place, it is always to be expli ned in one or other of the twd sei\ses following, corresponding to the two general senses above^ mentioned. It denotes either a single congregati. n of chris- tians, in correspondence to the first, or the whole christian com« muniiy, in correspondence to the second. We can hardly ever be at a loss to know from the context which of the two is imc plied. That it is in the former acceptation, is sometimes evi- ■dent from the words in construe tion^ as t>;s ex.K\i}a-ictg rv, ev K£yp(^fetiit4y imd rtf sx.Kkiio'ta ra S-ea tfi £v K«^<»Sw, ar^d the like. In the latter sense it ought always to be understood when we find nothing in the expression, or in the scope of the passage, to determine us to limit it ; for instance in the following, Et* 'loiv]t] tj? ifejfiii Tt) e)Ci(.>a)a-ios.. In this last acceptation of the word, tor the whole body of Christ's disciples, wheresoever dispersed, it came afterwards to be distinguished by the epithet koJ^oXikh. They said i t)iK?\tiTiet i Kct^eXiKti, the catholick or universal church* o 106 ,^^ot^I;b:ctures oN\ Biit in any intermediate sense, between a single congregd.* tion and the whole community of christians, not one instance can be brought of the application of the word in sacred writ. We speak now, indeed, (and this has been the manner for ages) of the Gallican church, the Greek church, the church of Eng- land, the church of Scotland, as of societies independent and complete in themselves. Such a phraseology was never adopted in the days of the apostles. They did not say the church of Asia, or the church of Macedonia, or the church of Achaia, but the churches of God in Asia, the churches in Macedonia, the churches in Achaia. The plural number is invariably used when more congregations than one are spoken of, unless the subject be of the whole commonwealth of Christ. Nor is this the manner of the penmen of sacred writ only. It is the constant usage of the term in the writings of ecclesiastick authors for the two first centuries. The only- instance to the contrary that I remember to have observed is in the epistles of Ignatius, on which I have already remarked* It adds considerable strength to our argument, that this is exactly conformable to the usage, in regard to this term, which had always obtained among the Jews. The whole nation, or commonwealth of Israel, was often denominated ot-«5-« i etcKXt} ject, I entered on the exammation of that which immediately succeeded it, and took place in the second and third centuries, 1 observed, that before the middle of the second century, a sub- ordination in the ecclesiastick polity, which I call primitive episcopacy, began to obtain very generally throughout th$ christian world ; every single church or congregation having a plurality of presbyters, who, as well as the deacons, were all under the superintendency of one pastor or bishop, I observ- ed, that all antiquitv are unanimous in assigning to one bishop no more than one »icxA;j5-<« or congregation, and one ■srct^tiyAo. or parish. For this reason, though it was a proper episcopacy, in respect of the disparity of the ministers, it was a parochial episcopacy, in respect of the extent of the charge. I endea* voured to set this mat<^er in a stronger light from the consider*, ation of the import of these words ey,x.?^(rioc. and TrctfotKtot, accord* ing to the ancient usage. But that I may not be thought to depend too much on the signification of names and words, I shall evince, beyond all possible doubt, that the bishop's cure was originally confined to a single church or congregation. This I intend to show from the particulars recorded in ancient authors, in relation both to him and to it. For brevity's sake, I shall not produce the passages at length from the fathers of the second and third centuries referred to, but shall barely mention the principal topicks whi h serve to vouch the fact, and which can be veri- fied from the clearest and most explicit declarations of those primitive writers, particularly of Ignatius, (for though the work ascribed to him is with reason suspected to have been in- terpolated with a y'lew to aggrandize the episcopal order, it was never suspected of any interpolation with a view to lessen it) of Justin Pviartx r, of Ireneus, of Tertullian, of Cvprian, and several others. Indeed, the facts I found upon are incontro- vertible. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 109 Now from the writings of those fathers, it is evident, that the whole flock assembled in the same place, ctti to uvre, with their bishop and presbyters, as on other occasions, so in par- ticular every Lord's day, or every Sunday, as it was com-p monly called, for the purposes of publick worship, hearing the Scriptures read, and receiving spiritual exhortations. The perseverance in this practice is warmly recommended by the ancients, and urged on all the christian brethren, from the consideration ot'the propriety there is, that those of the same church and parish, and under the same bishop, should all join in one praytr and one supplication, as people who have one mind and one hope. For it is argued, " if the prayer of one *' or two have great efficacy, how much more efficacious must " that be which is made by the bishop and the whole church. " He, therefore, who doth not assemble with him is denomi- " nated proud and self-condemned." Again, as there was but one place of meeting, so there was but one communion ta- ble or altar, as they sometimes metaphorically called it. " There is but one altar," said Ignatius, " as there is but one bishop." 'Ei Bv Stephen and Philip, on the contrary, derived their spiritual functions, either from that title with which, accord- ing to TertuUian and the deacon Hilarius, every qualified per- son, in that state of the church, was invested for promoting the common cause, or from the supernatural gifts they had re- ceived for the advancement of the faith, before their election to the deaconry, or (as some have thought most probable) from their being called of God to the office of evangelists. Philip is, in another place, but at a later period, expressly called an evangelist. Acts xxi, 8. It is worthy of notice, that his office of deacon is there also named, that v/e may not confound them, or ascribe to the one what belonged to the other. We entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven. Though it might be unsuitable, when the num- ber of believers was greatly increased, to an office of so much weight as the apostleship, to be encumbered with a charge of this nature, it might not be incompatible with any office (like that of evangelist) of less importance. But soon after the apostolick age, (or perhaps sooner) though, by the way, we have no direct information concerning it, the deacons were ad- mitted to assist in the inferiour parts of the sacred service. At present, indeed, in almost all the churches where the three orders of bishop, presbyter, and deacon, are found, the last mentioned has no sort of charge in that particular which at ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 12r first was his whole charge, and which alone gave occasion for the institution of the office ; insomuch that we cannot say that the modern deacon is in any respect the same with the aposto- lick deacon, unless it be in the name. Properly the original charge of the institution, of which we are informed Acts vi, 1, is abolished, though the name be retained, and applied to an office totally distinct. At present the oversight of the poor belongs, in England, to the church-wardens, who are annually elected in each parish by vhe vestry. The deacons have no concern in it. In other churches, other methods are adopted. There was another office also in the primitive church fronj. the times of the apostles, which was conferred on elderly wo- men, commonly widows, that of deaconess. Like the former^ it did not belong to the ministry of the word, but to that of tables, and seems to have been devised for the discharge of certain charitable services to strangers and to the female poor, which could not be so properly performed by the deacons. That it was of apostolick institution, though we be not inform- ed of the occasion and manner, there is no ground to doubt, since mention is made of it in the New Testament. Phebc is denominated by Paul, Rom. xvi, 1, " a deaconess, ae-ca *' hctKovov, of the church in Cenchrea." And the directions given in the fifth chapter of the first epistle to Timothy have always been considered, and with great appearance of reason, as regarding those women who were proper to be admitted to this function. Yet this is an office which has now, for many centuries, been universally disused. What is truly of divine right in this whole matter of polity is, in my judgment, plainly this, that those important and di- vine lessons, which have been transmitted to us by the pastors who pi'eceded us, should by us be committed to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also ; and that as much as possible every thing should be done for the advancement of the knowledge, the faith, and the obedience of the Gospel. This is, doubtless, a duty incumbent on the church and her gover- nours to the end of the world. But though it be admitted, that a ministry is essential to the church, there are many things regarding the form of the mi- nistry which must be accounted circumstantial. For my own part, I acknowledge it to be my opinion, that there is not a church now in the world which is on the model of that form- ed by the apostles. The circumstances of men and things are perpetually varying in respect of laws, civil polity, customs, manners ; these, m every society, give rise to new regula- tions, arrangeiTients, ceremonies : these, again, insensibly in- troduce changes in the relations of different classes and ranks 128 LECTURES ON of men one to another, exalting some, and depressing others* Sometimes alterations arise from a sort of necessity. A par- ticular measure may be expedient at one time and in certain circumstances, which is inexpedient at another time and in different circumstances. But it is equally certain on the other hand, that changes do not always spring from prudential con- siderations of fitness. As little can we say that they are always for the better. They more frequently result from the unbrid- led passions of men, favoured by circumstances and oppor- tunity. From what hath been said above, therefore, let it not be imagined, that I consider the outward form of polity, because not of the essentials of religion, as a matter absolutely indif- ferent. That, I imagine, would be an errour in the other extreme. To recur to an illustration I formerly employed, though the house in which a man lodges make no part of .his person, either of his body or of his soul, one house may prove a very comfortable and convenient lodging, and another so in- commodious as to be scarcely habitable. Under whatever form of ecclesiastick polity a man lives, it will still hold an infallible truth, that if he believe and obey the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, he shall be saved. But certain it is, that one model of church government may be much better calcu- lated for promoting that belief and obedience than another. Nay, it is not impossible that such changes may be introduced, as are much more fitted for obstructing the influence of true religion than for advancing it ; nay, for inspiring a contrary temper, and nourishing the most dangerous vices. How far this proved the case with the christian community is submit- ted to every judicious student of ecclesiastick history. 1 now proceed in the brief detail of changes which ensued. In my last discourse on this subject, I brought the history of the ecclesiastick polity as far down as the end of the third cen- tury. I observed, that the government which then very ge- nerally prevailed, might justly be denominated a parochial episcopacy. The bishop, who was properly the pastor, had the charge of no more than one parish, one church or con- gregation, the parishioners all assembling in the same place with him for the purposes of publick worship, religious in- struction, and the solemn commemoration of the death of Christ ; that in all these the bishop commonly presided ; that each congregation almost universally had also a college of presbyters, who were more or less in number, as the exigen- cies of the parish required ; that these constituted the bishop's council in judicial and deliberative matters, and his assist- ants in the performance of religious functions, both in publick ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ik atid in private. And when the bishop was detained by sick- ness, or was otherwise necessarily absent, they supplied his place. He was also attended by those called deacons, who, beside the care of the publick charities, assisted in some of the inferiour oiBces of religion, as in distributing the sacra- mental elements in the eucharist, in making the preparations necessary for baptism, and other the like services. Socie- times these also were specially empowered by the bishop to baptize, and even to preach. The pastor, with his colleagues the presbyters, (for so Cyprian frequently denominates them) and the deacons, constituted the presbytety, with the assist- ance of which, but not intirel)^ without thre people, in matters of principal concernment, he conducted the affairs of his church. Fra Paolo Sarpi, of whom I gave you a character in a for- mer lecture, speaking of the ancient government of the churches, affirms, after Jerom, that in the beginning they constituted so tnany aristocracies, governed by the council of their respective presbyteries, anriong the members whereof there subsisted a perfect parity ; that afterwards, in order the more effectually to obviate the divisions which sprang up, the monarchical form came to be adopted. The superintendency of the whole was given to the president or bishop, to whom all the orders of the church were bound to submit. It is to be observed, that he speaks not of the church universal, but of individual churches or congregations. As to the govern- ment of the whole christian commonwealth, I shall have oc- casion to consider it afterwards. But even in the original form of government in single parishes, it was not^ as Sarpi seems to signify, a pure aristocracy, but rather a mixture of the two forms, the aristocratical and the democratical ; for in some matters at least, as I observed before, nothing was done withovU the consent of the people, not declared by represen- tatives, but by themselves, assembled in a collective body. And even when afterwards it came to assume more of the monarchical form, it was not, at least till after the middle of the third century, as we learn from Cyprian's letters, an un- mixed monarchy, but a monarchy limited, and checked by the mixture it still retained of the two other sorts of government, the one in the presbytery, the other in the congregation. Hith- erto, however, it held, with but a few exceptions, towards the end' of the aforesaid period, that to one bishop there was only ,one parish, one chUrch, one altar or communion-tAble, (for both names were used) one baptistery, and though there were several presbyters, the parish was undivided, each of then^ K 13© LECTURES ON belonged equally to the whole, and was, in the discharge of his functions, at the direction of the bishop. The first thing that next deserves our notice, is to inquire from what causes it proceeded, that one bishop came to have the oversight of many congregations, and that the several presbyters came to have their several parishes, every congre- gation having its own church, altar, and baptistery, as well as pastor or presbyter, to whose care the smaller parish, or sub- division of the larger one, was peculiarly allotted, they all continuing still in subordination to the bishop, who was ac- knowledged their common head. We have seen already, that in the first planting of churches* (however wonderful the progress which the apostles made may jusdy be accounted) as the disciples bore but a small pro- portion compared with the unconverted Jews and Heathens, the tract of country, that would be necessary to yield but a middling congregation, must have been of pretty large extent. The extent for some time would occasionally be enlarged, by the accession of new converts in neighbouring places, where there were none before. This would frequently cause an in- crease not only to the number of people in the congregation, but also to the territory of the parish. As additions were made gradually to this profession by the diffusion of christian knowledge to places it had not reached before, the method which would naturally occur would be, to annex the converts, where they were but few, to the parish that lay nearest. It would be only when considerable acquisitions were made all at once to the christian cause in remoter places, where for- merly there had been few or none, that the notion of new erec- tions would suggest itself. And that in the purest and sim- plest times, (before vanity or avarice had insinuated them- selves) recourse was had to this method of erecting new pa- rishes, the x'^psTTiTy^TToi^ country bishops, mentioned by eccle- siastick writers, is an undoubted evidence. But what would make people in most cases recur rather to the other method, is the consideration of the plurality of presbyters they had in every church. As in this they were not confined to a set num- ber, but had more or fewer, as the exigencies of the parish required, they would, when the charge grew greater, think it necessary to add to the number of the presbyters, in order to prevent its becoming burdensome. Further ; it is no reflection on the church in general, or even on the pastors in particular, to suppose, that however sincere their zeal for the cause of Christ might be, as it un- doubtedly was with a very great majority, they would not be intirely siiperiour to considerations either of interest or of ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 131 ambition, when such considerations were not opposed by mo- tives of a higher nature. Now as the pastors were supported by the voluntary contributions of the people, of which the bishop had a fixed proportion, the number and wealth of his people, and the extent of his parish, added both to his import- ance and to his interest. Indeed, it would be impossible otherwise to account for it, that because in a large city, when only one congregation of christians could be collected, they had but one bishop, they should continue to have but one^ when there were more christians in it than would be sufficient to constitute forty, fifty, or a hundred congregations. This, at the same time, strongly shows the influence of names and titles on mankind. The chief pastor had been distinguished, as was observed, from about the middle of the second century, by the title of bishop of such a city or town, suppose Rome, Alexandria, or Antioch, when he had only one congregation, and that perhaps a little one. But this congregation was col- lected not only from all parts of the city, but from the suburbs, and, probably, some of the nearest, villages. This suggested the notion, that however much the number of the disciples might be increased, it would be unsuitable to his title, dero- gatory from his dignity, as well as hurtful to his interest, to cut off any part of the city, or suburbs, or suburban territory, which had always been considered as under his inspection be- fore, and to which he seemed to have acquired a right by pre- scription. It would have looked like a sort of degradation to make him exchange the title of bishop of Rome, or Alexan- dria, into bishop of such a street or lane. It is indeed certain, that a pastor's charge is properly the people, not the place. It is accordingly styled cura anitnariim^ the cure of souls. Nevertheless, there are several rea- sons, which contribute to make the territorial boundaries have more influence on the imagination in the notions of right, than the number of the people has. In the first place, the former are more easily ascertained than the latter. Those are permanent, these are perpetually changing. The people are denominated from the place, not the place from the people. Whatever revolutions come, the inhabitants of Rome will always be Ro- mans,of Carthage, Carthaginians, and of Alexandria, Alexan- drians. Add to this, that the restriction of a pastoral charge to a part of the former local precinct, would have withdrawn many people from that bishop, under whose cai'e they had been, perhaps, the greater part of their lives. This would have had the appearance of an injury both to him and them too, if they esteemed him. But nobody could be considered as injured by the addition of numbers, who had no pastor at all 132 LECTURES ON before. That it is not a mere hypothesis, that sentinaeints o£ dignity and rank contributed to prevent a new partiion, bet- ter suited to the circumstances that ensued, oi discri..ts vvhii;h, with great propriety, had been called parishes, when each con- tained no more christians than were sufficient to compose a single congregation j appears from this, thai, in the canons after- wards established, it is assigned as a reason for the suppres- sion of the ^apsTrta-Mvoi-. and for not ordaining, in tin. e to come^ bishops in villages and little towns, lest the v-piscopai name and aiithority should be brought into contempt. Such canons, however, were not always observed. Augustine, i)ishop of Hippo, more regardful of his master's service, than ot any honours or profits he might derive from the ext^. nt of his charge, erected a bishoprick at Fussala, a villitge in his dio- cess, as the bishop's charge came then to be denouiinated. But to return to the first subdivision of the pastoral charge, into smaller precincts, since calji^d parishes, the name which had formerly belonged to the whole, there can be no doubt, that theVe had been instances of it in great cities long before the expiration of the third century; in some, perhaps, as Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, even before the expiration of the se- cond ; though it was far from being general till a considerable time after the third. Churches, or oratories for the accom- modation of the people, now that these were too numerous to assemble as formerly in one place, began to be built, at first only in the remoter parts of the parish. They were then no more than what we call chapels of ease, and scarcely so much. They had not yet fixed presbyters of their own, but got occasionally sometimes one, sometimes another sent them, from the mother church, which was the parish church, to preside in the religious service, among those who assembled in these chapels, or con- venticles, as they were also called, for it was not a name of re- proach then. Still, however, the idea so much prevailed, that where there was but one bishop, there was properly but one congregation, and ought to be but one altar, that as far down as the beginning of the fifth century, pope Innocent the first, as appears from his epistles, wherein he m_entions his sending the eucharisticai bread to the presbyters ofil'^iating in those subor- dinate churches, assigns this for his reason, that they might not, on such occasions, consider themselves as separated from his communion. It had been chiefiv in the century immedi;!tely precetiing, when the christian religion was legally established as the religion of the empire, and when, through the concur- ref t of secular with spiritual motives, there came to be an ia'^^mense accession of people to the church, that there was a necessity for building so great a number of chapels, or -tituli^ ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 133 as, in the Latin churches, they were, for diistinction's sake, at ' first denominated. And hence the English phrase to have a title^ when used of one who has obtained a presentation to a parish. but as changes must be gradual not to shock those senti- ments to which men have been long habituated, they could not, at first, have any notion of the propriety of settling, in these chapels, presbyters to officiate constantly, at their appointed times of meeting. This could not fail to look too much like what they had been always taught to consider as the principal outward badge of schism, cutting off a part from the rest of the congregation, separating, as it were, the members from the head, assigning them, pastors different from the bishop, presby- ters, who, when allotted to particular charges, could not remain in the same immediate dependance on the bishop as formerly, or in the like intimate connexion with the pres- bytery. Gradually, however, the sense of obvious convenience wore off their prejudices ; and, first in the suburban villages at the greatest distance, a single presbyter was assigned to every cha- pel as their minister. The chapels in the city long continued to be supplied occasionally from the mother church, or bishop's church, according to any arrangement he thought proper to adopt. Hence arose a distinction between city presbyters and country presbyters. The former were, more properly, of the bishop's council, and the latter, as having their fixed charges in the country, were not entitled to officiate in the city, unless by special desire. At length the custom crept into the cities also, from the sense of its manifest conveniency. Alexandria, by Epiphanius's account, with which Sozomen's agrees, was the first wherein every church or chapel had its own ministers or chaplains, one presbyter, and one or more deacons, as its extent and necessities seemed to require. In Rome, the prac- tice, though not so early, appears to have been, to give two presbyters to every chapel or titulus. It were easy, if neces- sary, to give a still stronger confirmation of this account, from the vestiges that yet remain of christian antiquities in most countries of Europe. I shall only instance in England, and, for this purpose, adduce some quotations from Burn's Ecclesiastical Law, a book universally and justly held a stand- ard on the subject whereof it treats, and in which the author has been careful to support, by the best authorities, whatever he advances. On the article cathedral^ he affirms, "• The ca- " thedral church is the parish church of the whole du/cess, *' (which diocess was therefore commonly called j&«r.o<77i(r/ in *' ancient times, till the application of this name to the lesser 13'^ LECTURES ON •^"^ "branches into which it was divided, made it, for distinction's ''sake, to be called only by the name of diocess :J and it hath *^ been affirmed, with great probability, that if one resort to the ** cathedral church to hear divine service, it is a resorting to *' the parish church, within the natural sense and meaning of *' the statute." Again, on the word appropriation^ he has these remarks: — '' For the first six or seven centuries, iht parochia^-. ** was the diocess, or episcopal district, wherein the bishop and **' his clergy lived together at the cathedral church ; and what- " ever were the tithes and oblations of the faithful, they were '^ all brought into a common fund, from whence a continual *^ supply was had for support of the bishop, and his college of *•■ presbyters and deacons, and for the repair and ornaments of *^ the church, and for other suitable works of piety and charity. *' So that before the distribution of England into parishes, (as *'^ the word is now used) all tithes, offerings, and ecclesiastical " profits whatsoever, did entirely belong to the bishop and his *' clergy for pious uses. This commvmity and collegiate life ** of the bishop and his clergy, appears to have been the prac- ** tice of our British, and was again appointed for the model of " our Saxon churches. While the bishops thus lived amongst ** their clergy, residing with them in their proper seats, orca-i " thedral churches, the stated services, or publick offices of reli-> " gion, were performed only in those single choirs, to which?- **■ the people of each whole diocess resorted, especially at the *' more solemn times and seasons of devotion. But to supply " the inconveniences of distant and difficult access, the bishops ''^ sent out some presbyters into the remoter parts to be itine^-; *' rant preachers, or occasional dispensers of the word and safe; *' craments. Most of these missionaries returned from their «■' holy circuit to the centre of unity, the episcopal college, and '*' bad there only their fixed abode, giving the bishop a due ac- *' count of their labours and successes in their respective pro- " gress. Yet some few of the travelling clergy, where they " saw a place more populous, and a people zealous, built there. '' a plain and humble conveniency for divine worship, and pro- *' cured the bishop to consecrate it for an oratory^ or chapel. 4' at large, not yet for a parish church, or any particular con-^i *' gregation, to be confined within certain bounds and limits*;. ^' And while the necessities of the country were thus upon' '' occasion supplied, it did not alter the state of ecclesiastical *' patrimony, which still remained invested in the bishop, for.' ^' the common uses of religion. The division of a dioces^Hi '"'■ into rural parishes, and the foundation of churches adequate " to them, cannot be ascribed to any one act, nor indeed to any^ ".one single age. Several causes and persons did. contribute ECCLESIASTICAL tllSTORY. 135 ** to the rise of the parochial churches." Then follows an enumeration of the principal causes. Once more on the word parish : — '' At first there were no parochial divisions of cures " here in England, as there are now. For the bishops and " their clergy lived in common ; and before that the numbef of " christians was much increased, the bishops sent out their " clergy to preach to the people as they saw occasion. But " after the inhabitants had generally embraced Christianity, " this itinerant and occasional going from place to place was "found very inconvenient, because of the constant offices that *' were to be administered, and the people not knowing to " whom they should resort for spiritual offices and directions. *' Hereupon the bounds of parochial cures were found neces- " sary to be settled here by those bishops, who were the great " instruments of converting the nation from the Saxon idola- *'" try. At first they made use of any old British churches, *' that were left standing, and afterwards, from time to time, *' in successive ages, churches were built and endowed by ** lords of manors and others, for the use of the inhabitants of *' their several manors or districts, and, consequently, paro- *' chial bounds affixed thereunto. And it was this which gave . " a primary title to the patronage of laymen ; and which also, *' oftentimes, made the bounds of a parish commensurate to " the extent of a manor." I have been the fuller in these quotations, as I thought it of consequence to produce the senti- ments of a learned divine of the church of England, who is^ besides, a celebrated jurist and christian antiquary, that it might be evi-dent to every impartial inquirer, that the account I have given is not the misrepresentation of a party, but strict- ly conformable to the judgment of the most candid and best informed of opposite parties. I return to the general state of things in the empire, on the establishment of the christian re- ligion by Constantine. When almost the whole people were proselyted to Christi- anity, those chapels were so greatly multiplied, that it was no longer possible to supply them ail with the eucharist from the' bishop's altar or communion-table. Then it was judged expe- dient tp permit the erecting of other altars in those inferiour churches, wherein the presbyters settled as pastors in the sub- divisions, or smaller districts severally assigned to them, should officiate in consecrating the sacramental elements, and distributing them to the people. Each presbyter came to have a peculiar tie to the discharge of all pastoral duties to those allotted to him, such as baptizing, visiting the sick, instructing the catechumens, admonishing the irregular, publick and private teaching, and giving testimonials to stich as removed. In 136 LECTURES ON these, on account of the vast multiplicity which the change of circumstances had occasioned, it was impossible now, as for- merly, that the bishop should be always consulted, or that the presbyters should always act by immediate direction. Every presbyter came to be considered as the pastor of the charge committed to him, and in every material respect as the same to his part of the parish, which the bishop had been to the whole. His charge itself came to be denominated jrotpoiKix. a parish, a name which, as I remarked before, had oeen uni- formly given to the whole bishoprick, whereof this was but a portion, and the latter began to be distinguisht:'d by the name haiicria-tq. diocess, though the distinction was not regularly ob- served till long afterwards. The names xv^ixxev and ecc/esia came to be given universally to those meeting-houses as to proper parish-churches, and then the inother-church got the name cathedral, as there the throne of the bishop and the bench of the presbytery were erected. By the account given above, one would imagine, that in some things the power of the bishop was nov/ impaired, though the number of his spiritual subjects was greatly mul- tiplied. The presbyters had more authority in their respective flocks, and were not under the necessity, as formerly, of re- curring always to his warrant or permission. When the charge became so extensive, and consequently burdensome, the bi- shops were obliged to sacrifice some of their prerogatives to the love of ease. But this sacrifice had, in effect, more the appearance of abridging their power than the reality. The change, upon the whole, tended much, in the eye of the world, to aggrandize the order. From being the pastor of a parti- eular flock, he was become the superintendant of mam pas- tors. Whereas formerly he had the charge of one parish and one congregation, for these terms are cori'elates, he had now the charge of, perhaps, fifty parishes and fifty congregations, comprised within the same compass. He was not so closely connected with the people as before, but that was solelv be- cause he was raised higher above them, his immediate connex- ion being with their pastors. Besides, in respect of wealth, he drew great advantages from the increase of numbers, being entitled to the same proportion from the publick contri-. butions of the whole diocess. Not to mention that the super- stition, or mistaken piety of some wealthy converts, also con- tributed to the increase of his opulence. And if, in rtgard to most official duties, the presbyters did more of themselves in their several charges, they were totally excluded by canons from confirming and ordaining, which sufliciently secured their depeudance and inferiority. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 137 Add to this, that the separation of the presbyters fronq one another, by their being obliged to reside in their several pa- rishes, and their having opportunity only when called for a particular purpose to come together, assisted the bishop in engrossing the jurisdiction in spiritual matters, which formerly belonged to the presbytery, or bodj' of the pastors. And as in things temporal (which I showed in a former discourse) the judicial power had, before now, come entirely into his hands, the immense accession of people to his jurisdiction added immensely to his importance. And if the aristocrati- cal part of church gorernment was greatly diminished, the democratical was totally subverted. The impossibility ther? was, that business should be managed by the people of a dio cess collectively, when they amounted, as in several bishopricks to some htmdred thousands, put an end, in matters of disci- pline, to their pretensions. The only vestige that remained of their former rights was, that in several places they conti- nued to assemble tumultuously at the election of a bishop. But as this affair was generally conducted with riot and cla- mour, and sometimes ended in blood, the principles of sound policy required, that a practice so fruitful of bad consequences, and so barren of good, should be abolished. It was not now, as formerly, a single congregation choosing their own pastor, who was to ha\e the immediate charge of their spiritual in-» struction and guidance, but it was a mob, often a most out- rageous one, collected from a whole diocess or province, tp nominate a great man, better known by his extensive jurisdic- tion and splendid titles, than by any pastoral duties he had to exercise. The train in which things were now put, gave rise to a new application of the word nutXvjo-ioc. I observed that this term had before been always used to denote either a single congre- gation, or the whole christian community. When the bishop^s charge was no more than a single congregation, it was very proper to denominate it by that name, and call it a church in the singular number. Now that the term had, for ages, been employed to express all that was under the inspection of one bi- shop, and that people were inured to such phrases as these, the church of fintioch, the church of Cesarea, the church of Constantinople, and the church of the bishop of Antioch, &c., the word continued to be so applied, notwithstanding the change of circumstances, in consequence of which many con- gregations came to be included. This paved the way for extending still farther the import of the term, and employing ft in the singular number, to denote all the churches of a pro- », i38 LECTURES ON vince under the same metropolitan, or even of one or more kingdoms under the same patriarch. It may not, however, be improper to remark, that for several, ages there remained here and there the traces of the footing on which things had forinerly stood. In small and distant towns and villages, wherein bishops had been planted, an J whereof the circuinjacent country was but thinly peopled, the charge, even after the conversion of all the inhabitants, remain^ ed undivided, and the bishop was still no more than what every bishop was primitively, the pastor of a single congregation, with his assistant, presbyters, and deacons. But these changes, in process of time, gave place to stiil greater. When the di-. vision of ancient parishes, which I shall henceforth call dio-> cesses, became universal, the principal reason foV confining them within moderate bounds entirely ceased, and motives of interest and ambition operated the contrary way without coi^- trol. Tile immediate dependance of the people, and even of the clergy, upon the bishop, and the connexion of ninety-niqe parts in a hundred of the diocess with the bishop's church, formerly the parish-^church, now the cathedral, being totally dissolved, and the people more commodiously supplied in every part of the religious services, worship, sacraments, and teach- ing, by those tituli, now called parish-churches, newly erectecl, there needed no more to abolish the presbytery, whose princi- pal use subsisted no longer. The diocess accordingly under- went a new division into deaneries, so named from their in- cluding at first ten parishes, or ten presbyters in each, though they did not long confine themselves to that number. The president, called decanus, the dean, is properly an arch-presby- ter, such as anciently, in the bishop's absence, presided in the presbyterv. The deanery of the cathedral, consisting of the clergy, whose duty it is to perform there the sacred service, and to preach, is denominated capitulum, the chapter, being, as it were, the head of the clergy of the diocess. But the rural deaneries, as they answered little purpose, have, in most places, gone into disuse. The presbj-ters, who under the dean offici- ated in the mothsr-church, came to be distinguished from the parochial clergy by the titles of prebendaries and canons. The former name they derived from the appointments called pre- bends, to which they were entitled, the latter from the regula- tions to which they were subjected. The chapter served, instead of the presbytery, in matters of election, not only in electing the inferiour officers, but in supplying vacancies, in concurrence with the bishop, in the prebends or canonries and deanship j nay, that they anciently, on the decease or transla- I:CCLESIASTICAL HISTORY* 139 iibti of the bishop, elected his successour, the conge ct'elire^ still in use in England, though now no better than a torm, is a standhig evidence. They had the superiniendency ofthefabiick, with the goods and ornaments belonging to the cathedrial, and were also guardians of what is now called the spiritualties of the bishoprick, when the see was vacant* In regard to the espiscopal jurisdiction, whicn fextehded over the whole diocess, the chapter, consistitig only of the clergy of the cathedral, could not be considered as a pro|Jer council. In the bishop's court of judicature, denominated the consistory, his counsellors and assessors in judgment when he was present, and delegates in his absence, were those call- ed archdeaconsi The archdeacon was originally of the br-^ der of deacons, as the name importsj. There was but one of them in a diocess. He presided among those of his own bf^ der, was a constant attendant upon the bishopi and was consi- dered as his prime minister* But some time after, the parti- tion of diocesses became very general, particularly after the country bishops were, through a jealously that they would les- sen the dignity of the order, suppressed by canon, and their parishes annexed to those of the next city bishops, it was found convenient to elect those delegates, the archdeacons, from the order of the presbyters, and to have more or fewer in a diocess, according to its extent. Through the influence of custom, in opposition to propriety, the name archdeacon was retained. The diocess was accordingly divided into archdeaconries, and these subdivided into deaneries, not unlike the division of counties that obtains in England into hundreds and tithings. It was then judged expedient to invest archdea- cons w^ith a share of episcopal jurisdiction, both in teinporals and in spirituals, within their archdeaconries, where they perform I regular visitations, like the bishops, hold spiritual courts, either in person or by their deputies, called officials, and are accounted dignitaries. The only acts peculiar to the bishop are confirming and ordaining. I have been the more partictdar in this deductioii, iti order to give at once a faint sketch of the model which, in a great measure, still subsists in England and Ireland, and among the secular clergy of the church of Rome. The variations, in- deed, are considerable, which the influence of time and local customs have produced in different places. A perfect uni formity in these things is not to be expected. We are now arrived at the second step of the hierarchy, when prelacy or diocesan episcopacy succeeded the parochial, and began gene- rally to prevail. UO LECTURES ON LECTURE IX. XN my last lecture, I traced the origin of prelacy, or dioce- sian episcopacy. I shall now, ere 1 proceed, for the further illustration of the subject, contrast the two methods that might naturally be supposed to have suggested themselves, upon the great revolution in circumstances which the establishment of Christianity by the imperial laws, and the numerous conver- sions from paganism consequent thereon, occasioned in the church. There was then, indeed, an absolute necessity to make a considerable alteration in the arrangement which had subsisted formerly, in order that such multitudes of people might be supplied with pastors, and with the ordinances of re- ligion. One way of answering this end was to attempt anew the division of christian countries into such parishes, as were no more than necessary for affording each a sufficient congre- gation, and to give each, as formerly, its own bishop, presby- ters, and deacons, independently of every other parish. In this way, indeed, there would have been vast alterations made on the territories and local extent of pastoral charges, which would have had the appearance of dispossessing, in a great aieasure, those then actually in office. But the form, as well as the spirit, of the model adopted in the second century, would have remained. And, indeed, this was the only possi- ble method v/hereby it could have remained unimpaired. The other way was to preserve the same division of territory thac had been made so long before, and which the people, through custom, were brought to regard as sacred, to conti- nue the same nominal parishes in the same hands, but in or- der also to accommodate the parishioners without overload- ing the pastors, to increase the number of presbyters, and as they couldnot now all convene in one place, to erect a sortof sub- ordinate chapels or churches, (a thing in thctwo fir^t-centiirieS ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 141 probably not conceived) to affix to each in subordinatioti to the prelate its proper presbyter, who in most things was to be, in respect ol this smaller parish, what the bishop had been in respect of the larger parish whereof it was a part. If the former of these methods suited more the primitive constitu- tion of the church, the latter (which in fact was adopted) was more accommodated to the natural bent of the imagination. It had the appearance of paying a proper regard to ancient land-marks, of accommodating the people without injuring in- dividuals, by stripping them both of the titles and of the terri- tories which had been immemorially possessed by them and their predecessors. Besides, though the accession of proselytes to the christian cause was both great and sudden on the establishment of Christi- anity as the religion of the empire, there had been a real, though more gradual accession, for centuries before. And as this, through its being gradual, had never given rise to any new division, but, perhaps, in a few distant places, to the erection of country-parishes, under the care of those called chorepis- copi, or to the addition of some presbyters to the bishop's council, they would be prepared by custom to adopt the se- cond method rather than the first. 1 have hinted already, that both interest and ambition pointed to the same conduct* I might add another thing, which has no inconsiderable influ- ence on our apprehensions of fitness, that a certain analogy to the civil government would also contribute to recommend this^ plan. How far this principle operated on the advancement of the hierarchy to the grandeur, which in process of time it at- tained, as it is admitted by every judicious and candid histo- rian, shall be evinced more full) in the sequel. Thus a circumstance in itself merely accidental, and which we have reason to think was not regarded as of any moment by the first publishers of the gospel, namely, the extent of ter- ritory that was necessary for affording converts enow to make a congregation, (this circumstance, I say) aided by some con- curring causes, proved the secret source of that total change, in respect of government, which the church in a few ages after underwent. Some of those concurrent causes' have been cxplai,ned already, and we shall have occasion to investigate others of them as we proceed. But that we may, if possible, be more fully satisfied of the truth of the foregoing remark, in regard to the rise of the diocesses, comprehending many congregations out of parishes, which, though generally the same, or nearly so, in local extent, comprehended each but one congregation, let us suppose that the apostles and other founders of the churches, instead of converting, as they did^ a H2 LECTURES ON thirtieth, or a fortieth part of every city where they preached^ had converted all the inhabitants^ is it hot manifest that the same principle of combining as many converts as would con- stitute a congregation, which made them include the whole city in the parish, when the whole could furnish no more than one congregation, would have led them to erect as many parishes as there were streets or lanes, whett each street or lane could afford the same number which, as things happened, were afforded by the whole city ? Had this been the case from the beginning, such a revolution in the circumstances of the church as I have endeavoured to explain to you, could never have happened. But I promised to advert briefly to some other causes, which concurred in producing the same eft'ect. The more effectually to accomplish this promise, it will be necessary to turn back a little, that we may trace the origin and progress of ecclesiastick courts. I have had frequent occasion to mention the presby- tery. It was the radical court, and subsisted from the begin- ning. Mention is made of it in Scripture. And as a plurality of pastors was settled in most christian congregations, planted by the apostles, and as those pastors were required to conduct their matters with harmony and prudence, there was a necessity that, for this purpose, they should often meet and consult together. This was properly the council of the congregation. And the different congregations, with their ministers, seemed, in a great measure, independent of one another. Every thing regarding their own procedure in wor- ship, as well as discipline, was settled among themselves* But it is extremely plain, that a total independency was not adapted to the more general character that belonged to all as members of the commonwealth of Christ. It was not the being members of the same congregation that constituted their christian brotherhood and unity, but the being all, through one Mediator, adopted as children into the family of God, or, as it is otherwise expressed, the being members of the same body whereof Christ is the head, and, consequently, all mem- bers one of another. As Christ is not divided, as his cause and interests will ever be the same, it was not less expedient for maintaining union, and consequently charity, through the v/hole christian fraternity, that the churches should preserve a proper correspondence and intercourse with one another, than it was necessary for preserving the peace and harmony of a congregation, that there should be a settled order among them for conducting the religious ordinances, and for consul- ting, deliberating, and determining, in all matters of common concern. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 143 That such an union in everything essential to the cause, was. what the apostles had much at heart, is very plain not only- from the strain of their writings, but from the measures, they took to get the same rule universally to prevail in relation to the great dispute that, in their time, was so hotly agitated about circumcision, and the other ceremonies of the law. The rule which, in consequence of the consultation holden at Jerusalem, was unanimously established by the apostles, elders, and brethren there assembled, at the same time that it tended to unite the disciples in love, and in the observance of every thing essential, breathed a spirit of forbearance and to- leration in matters merely circumstantial, that bears but little resemblance to the greater part of the ecclesiastical canons of later date. This example, doubtless, suggested to the churches found- ed by the apostles, prophets, and evangelists, to devise some regular plan of intercourse with one another, in order the more effectually to promote unity and brotherly affection in the church universal. For this purpose the congregations, in the same canton or province, agreed to have stated conjunct meet- ings, wherein they might discuss those matters which were of general concern, concert the measures that would be necessa- ry both for the propagation of the faith amoiigst idolaters, and for the defence of its purity from internal scandals and penii-i cious errours. Since it was impossible for the whole people oi many churches to assemble thus for consultation, it would na- turally occur, as being of practicable methods the most expe- dient, that the pastors and deacons, who in respect of office were most nearly concerned in the cause, should, together with a delegation from the people of the different congrega-. tions, convene in the most commodious place, and treat toge- ther of those matters that concerned the common salvation. That in these, at first, the people had a share as well as the pastors, we have sufficient ground from primitive writers to believe. I shall mention but a few of the many authorities which, in support of this matter, might be produced. Euse- bius, in the synodical epistle he has preserved in his history, b. vii, 1. 30, from the assembly or synod at Antioch, which condemned Paulus Samosatenus, thus titles the persons (or rather represents them as titling themselves) who had concur- red in that measure, cTrio-iuiTrot kxi zr^sa-^vlsfai, KMt ^iXKavoi, KMi ai ey.KXfi' cixt Tn B-ea; the bishops, and presbyters, and deacons, and the churches of God. When the term churches is thus contra- distinguished from the pastors, it always denotes the people. Nor are someof these classes represented here as actors, and others only as spectators, or passive consenlers. What was lU. LECTURES ON acted on this occasioa, is exhibited as alike the action of all. Hpflfcyits«.9T!,«t.£» «•;. x. t. A. " We were therefore under a necessi- *' ty of expelling this adversary of God, and settling another *' bishop in his stead*." I shall produce but one other authority, which is a letter to Cyprian, the 31st in his epistles, from the presbyters and dea- cons of Rome, in relation to the lapsed, wherein we find these words : '-'■ Quanquam nobis in tarn ingenti negotio placeat, *' quod et tu ipse tractasti prius ; ecclesiae pacem sustinendam, " deinde, sic collatione consiliorum cum episcopis, presbyte- *^ ris, diaconis, confessoribus, pariter ac stantibus laicis facta, *'^ lapsorum tractare rationem." Here laymen, who had con- tinued firm in times of persecution, are judged proper to be joined in council on this most important subject, with bishops, presbyters, deacons, and confessors, or those, whether lay- men or clergymen, who had suffered for the testimony of Jesus. The same thing may also be evinced from the 14th and the 26th of his epistles, and from the account he gives of the African synod, holden at Carthage, for determining the ques- tion that had been raised about the rebaptization of hereticks. To what purpose insist that those courts were often styled synods of bishops, and that the decisions are sometimes as- cribed to the bishops, and no mention made of any other or- der. It is admitted, that this was the principal order, and at that time essential to the existence of a synod, which, proba- bly, the other orders were not. Hence a synod might natural- ly be denominated a convention of bishops. It is admitted further, that there have been svnods in which no other mem- bers were present. From neither of these concessions can we infer, in contradiction to direct testimony, that this was the case with all synods, and that none of any inferiour order had a voice among them, either legislative or judicial. In our church judicatories in Scotland, presbyteries, synods, and assemblies, (for church-sessions consist mostly of the laity) the numbers of ministers and of laymen, who are constituent members, are nearly equal. Yet they are familiarly termed meetings of the clergy, and it sometimes happens, both m presbyteries and in synods, that none are present hut minis- * How trifliiig is the attempt to elude the force of this argument, by saying that as to the inferiour orders and the people, this address ought to be considered as conveying only their salutations. The only place in a letter for coraplimental salutations, is the end. Tae title bears always (and to this use it is appropriated) the desig VA'ion of those by whom, and of those to whom the letter is sent. Here we perceive, as plainly as we can perceive an) thing by the help of langijage, the d'm'eient classes oi persotis above-mentioned giving an account of their joint pro- Ctediajrs. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 14| ters. They make a regular court notwithstanding ; whereas lay-elders without ministers would not make an ecclesiastic^' judicatory. But to return. In the manner above explained, the churches maintained a mutual correspondence, consulting with one another in all mat- ters of very great and general concernment, insomuch that there arose a sort of republick from the association of th&, churches in a particular province, which was, in a manner,* governed by its council or synod. Some of these synods me^ annually, others twice a year, or even oftener, if occasion required. The divisions of the country made by the civil go- vernment were commonly adopted here, not as necessary, but as commodious, and affording opportunities on other accounts^ of ^sembling more frequently. The metropolis of the pro«. vince, as being the most centrick, or at least the most convcri,; nient, was the usual place of meeting ; and the bishop of that place, from a sort of natural title to preside in the convention, came by the gradual, but sure operation of custom, to be re- garded as the head of the body. Hence the bishop of the me- tropolis came very naturally to be denominated the metropo# litan ; and this term was, by consequence, understood to de- note his presidency over the bishops of the province. This custom, however, did not obtain every where from the begin- ning. At first, the office of president seems generally to have hten elective, and to have continued no longer than the sessiou;: of the synod. Nor did it ever obtain in the provinces of Afri-t ca, (except Africa propria, of which the bishop of Carthage was always metropolitan) nor of Numidia and Mauritania,, for in these the honour of presidency was determined by seni- ority. The senior bishop was president of the synod, and head of the province. Accordingly with them he was deno- minated primus^ primate, and not metropolitan. In this, however, the African churches remained singular. But even this singularity sufficiently confutes those vain patronisers of the hierarchy, who are absurd enough to derive the metropoli- tical primacy, as well as the patriarchal sovereignty from apostolical institution. Thus the presidency of this new dig- nitary over the bishops evidently sprang from the identical causes, which first raised the bishop above the presbyters, and not long after, as we shall see, subjected the metropolitans, themselves. For this fraternal intercourse was, in process of time, still further extended. As all the provinces within the same pre- fecture had a closer connexion with one another, than those which happened to have different civil governours, and to be wore disjoined, this communion, in respect of ecclesiastipk T i4S LECTURES ON polity, was enlarged, and councils were sometimes convened irom all the thurches within the prefecture, or at least the civii dioccss, which gradually gave the bishop of the capital, where the prelect had his residence, and kept his court, the like as- cendant over the metropolitans, within the bounds of that jurisdiction, which the latter had obtained, from similar causes, over the bishops withm their respective provinces. These prefectures were the imperial city of Rome, which presided over all the suburbiary provinces, as they were called ; the city of Alexandria, which governed Egypt, L-; bia, and Pentapolis ; the city of Anticch, comprehending under it Sy- ria, and other oriental provinces ; the city of Jerusalem, com- prehending Palestine and Arabia Pen sea, onginail\ and pro-, peri} a part of the civil diocess of Antioch ; and lastly. Con- st intinople, which being the seat of empire, came by degrees, through the favour of the emperours, to attain such extensive dominion, and high prerogatives, as to appear, for a while, a formidable rival, if not an overmatch for Rome herself. In the western dioc . sses of Gaul, Spain, and Britain, there seem to have been no patriarchs, though there were as many metro- politans as provinces, which were pretty numerous. Indeed, this want appears to have given the bishop of Rome, in after- ages, a great ascendant over them, the metropolitans being too inconsiderable to cope with him. The patriarchs were likewise called archbishops, though this denomination was also givento the primates, and even sometimes as an honorary title to those who were but bishops. 1 here were some other bishops of less note than the patriarchs, but superiour to the metro- politans, in those governments by the Greeks called eparchicks, on whom the intermediate title and dignity of exarch w ere conferred. Thus the bishop of Ephesus was styled exarch of the Asiatic diocess, and the bishop of Cesarea, in Cappadocia, exarch of the Pontick. Now each of these comprehended ten Or eleven provinces under their respective metropolitans, and each province a considerable number of bishopricks. But I do not intend to enter into minute particulars. Those I have 3jamed were the chief. This polity having been gradually introduced, and estab- lished partly by custom, parth by imperial authority, received, according to. some, the sanction of the first ecumenical coun- cil assembled at Nice, under Constantine, the first christian emperour, in which a canon (so the laws of the church are de- noiniaated) was enacted, making the subordination which then obtained perpetual. But there are who think, that that canon exfeoded onl\- to the power of metropolitans ; for that the patriarchal, not having yet got firm footing, did not receive the ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Uf Sanction of the church till about fifty years afterwards* It is remarkable, that the verv same powers which the bishops had rjaimed and acquired over the presbyters, were now first claim* ed and acquired by the metropolitans over the bishops, and soon after by the patriarchs over the; metropolitanso The pres- bytery was the bishop's court, which he had the power of con* vening when he judged it proper, and wherein he presided* The same prerogatives were exercised by the metropolitan, in regard to the provincial synod, and by the patriarch, in regard to the diocesan council. And as to the power of convoking an ecumenical council, nothing is more evident than that, for some ages, it was claimed and exercised only by the emperoun Such a council or assembly was denominated ecumenical from the Greek word oty.iif.unj-. the name then commonly given to the Roman empire. The charge of a presbyter was now called a parishi, and that of th.; bishop a diocess ; and sometimes;, for distinction's sake, a smaller diocess, the district under the me^ tropolitan's jurisdiction was named a province, and that under the patriarchs a larger diocess, being the satne (or nearly so) with what v/as termed a dioce.ss in the civil division of the empire. As the bishop claimed an exclusive title to ordain, his presbyters, the same was challenged by the metropolitan, in regard to the consecration of the bishops of his province^ fend by the patriarch in the instalment of the metropolitans of his diocess. The umpirage exercised by the bishop in deter- mining the differences that arose amongst his presbyters, came also to be exercised b)' the metropolitan over the bishops, and by the patriarch, or exarch, over the metropolitans. Thus there was an established scale of authority from the lowest orders in the church to the patriarchs, who were the highest, and who were the judges of all ecclesiastical matters in the last resort ; for there obtained also a regular course of appeal from the inferiour to the superiour orders, as well as synods* It may not be improper to take notice here in passings thafe as the superiour oi'ders. a()Ove-mentioned, sprang up and grew into consideration in the church, there was also introduced^ especially in the populous cities, a number of inferiour orders, by whose means the deacons were relieved of some of the more menial parts of the service, which had formerly, before they were grown so considerable, been required of them. Such were sub-deacons, acolvtes, readers, singers, exorcists, janitors, and some others, for they were not the same in all churches. What cardinal Bona said of the inferiour O'ders may be justly said of all the orders, the two original ones (bishop and deacon) alone excepted. " Contigit nimirum 148 LECTURES ON " ecclesias quod hominibus solet, qui dum tenue patrimoniuin " habent, uno servo contenti sunt, qui solus omnia administrat. *' Si vero reditus augeantur, servorum etiam augetur nunnerus ; " eoque magis crescit familia, quo illi locupletiores et spectabi- " liores e\ adunt. Sic evangelicee predicationis initio parvula " adhuc et latitans ecclesia paucis indiguit ecclesiasticarum " functionuni ministris. Cresccnte autem credentium multi- " tudine, et auctis facultatibus, ex fidelium oblationibus, cum *' soli diaconi non possent omnibus incumbere, diversa onera " et officia diversis personis distributa sunt; ex quo factum *' est ut splendidiori et augustioii apparatu ecclesiasticarum " functionum ceremoniae peragerentur." [De Rebus Liturg» 1, 1, c. XXV, § 17,] on which Basnage remarks, " Atque ex " incremento ecclesiae non officia, sed ministri, crescere debue- " runt." True. And if the increase of the church had been solely in the number of believers, an increase of ministers, and not of ministries, would possibly have sufficed. But as there came also a great accession of wealth and splendour to the church and churchmen^ as the words are now understood, a variety of offices or degrees was requisite to suit the claims and expectations of men of various conditions. Kings and princes have not only many servants, but many offices under them, adapted to men of different ranks. But to return to the superiour orders. I do not say that all the adjustments I have mentioned, in regard to their respec- tive privileges and authority, were observed uniformly and universally. There still remained considerable differences in the customs that obtained in different places. And it was hardly possible it should be otherwise, considering the manner in wliich this power arose. But the account given above is a just representation of what was, in the main, the state and con- stitution of the church, universal during part of the third, fourth, the fifth, and some successive centuries. There were no doubt many causes which cannot here be specified, that co- operated in raising this wonderful fabrick of church-dominion, which was now become a kind of oligarchy, the administration whereof rested ultimately in the patriarchs. Among these causes none of the least was (as power always follows property) the vast accession of wealth, which, by the numei'ous conver- sions of pagans of high rank, accrued at last to the bishops of the principal cities. When, in the fourth century, Christianity, as we usually speak, became the religion of the empire, the like combination, of a still greater number of churches, and such as were more widely diffused through Christendom, was effected with the assistance of the eraperour. This last kind of congress was ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 149 denominated a general or ecumenical council. Every one must perceive, that the greater the number of churches was, from whom a deputation was required, the fewer deputies they could admit from each. The natural consequence of this would be, that when the christian community came to spread over an immense extent of territory, and to become very po- pulous by the accession of multitudes of new proselytes, the privilege of representing the different congregations would come entirely into the hands of the pastors. Nay, even of these at last, especially in the diocesan synods and ecumeni- cal councils, there would be found access for none but digni- taries. And in this manner the laity would come by degrees (as in fact it happened) to be entirely justled out. We cannot be surprised that, in consequence of this a power which at first may be justly said to have been derived, should, in process of time, be accounted original, and that what in the beginning had been conferred by election, should at last be considered as inherent in particular offices. From the imperfection of the ecclesiastick history of the first ages, it is impossible to trace the progress of usurpation through its various stages with all the clearness that could be wished. Enough, however, may be clearly discovered, when we compare the state of things in latter times with what we learn from the sacred records, and from the genuine undis- puted remains of the apostolick fathers, to satisfy us both of the reality and of the greatness of that usurpation. There are very few, either protestants or papists, who with Baronius, and the other tools of ecclesiastick tyranny, pretend to assign to the metropolitical or patriarchal authority an apos- tolical original, yet there is not a single objection that can be raised against the feasibility of an acquisition of pov/er in the bishops over the presbyters, that does not operate with at least equal force against the feasibility of such an acquisition in the metropolitans over the bishops, and in the patriarchs over the metropolitans j and, I may add, with equal reason, (as it came afterwards, in a great measure, to obtain) in the pope over the whole or greater part of the christian world. There is a gra- dation in the whole progress : the steps by which we ascend are exactly similar. Nor is the origin of any one part of the system more unaccountable than of another. Many strenuous advocates for episcopacy do not admit, that there was originally any visible power in the church paramount; to that of the bishops, who were all, in this respect, on a foot of perfect equality. There was no " episcopus episcoporum," say they, no bishop of bishops, but Christ. Yet the fact is Undeniable, that the jurisdiction of the metropolitans and pri» 150 LECTURES ON mates which these men consider as mere usurpation, c^me, in a few centuries, very easily and universally to obtain ; inso- much, that Dodwell's smart expostulation with the presbyte- rians may, without the smallest diminution of energy, be retorted upon himself. Change but the word presbyteriis into provinciisy^ and the argument is the same, **• Quid enim ? Fate- " buntur fuisse ^tAowp^ry;, qui pares non ferrent, Pompeios? " Nee interim agnoscent in provinciis fuisse Csesares, prio- *' rum pariter iinpatientes ?" Will they acknowledge^ that among so many Pompeys^ who could endure no equals there was not in the provinces one Cces:ar^ who could suffer no sitperiour ? In fact, the rise of the bishop's power over the presbyters is more easily accounted for than that of the metropolitans over the bishops. The situation of things m the church was totally- changed ; and it could not be said now, as it might with truth of the second century, that as no secular end could be promot- ed, there was no rational motive to excite either avarice or ambition on the one side, and consequently to rouse jealousy on the other. An ascendant, which appeared to be the result merely of superiour zeal and virtue, and attended with more imminent danger, would not be warmly opposed, whilst world- ly motives had hardly scope to operate. If for our direction in forming a judgment concerning the persons who were originally, and seem to be naturally, entitled* to have a share in all consultations about church-affairs, we recur to the account given us in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts, concerning the assembly convened at Jerusalem, on occasion of the dispute about circumcision, v/e can be at no loss as to the privilege of the people in this respect. Those who composed that convention were (as the sacred historian informs us) the apostles, elders, and brethren ; first the apos- tles, the extraordinary ministers of Jesus, who were destined to be the founders of his church, and whose office, like the title that expressed it, was temporary, and expired with them ; secondly, the elders, 7rpes-(svl£^ot, the stated and ordinary pastors^ whose office was successive and perpetual ; thirdly, the bre- thren, that is, as the term in the New Testament is known to denote, private christians, who possessed no particular charge or office in the church. And to cut off all pretext, that these last were present only as witnesses or bystanders, the decree runs as much in their name as in the name of the apostles and presbyters, being given expressly and authoritatively as the joint command of all the three classes mentioned. Thus v* 23, &c. " The apostles, and elders, and brethren, send greet- " ing to the brethren which are of the Gentiles. I'orasnuich " as we have heard, it seemed good unto us, being assembled ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 151 " with one accord, to lay upon you no greater burden than * these necessary things." I do not say that that meeting could be denominated either a provincial or a diocesan synod, and far less a general council. This model ot" management, in regard to ecclesiastick matters, w;is not then devised. But that the apostles themselves, not- withsianding their supernatural gifts, called the private disci- ples to assist in the determination of matters of publick con- cernment, may serve as demonstration to us of the natural title that such have (whatever be the model) to participate in those councils whereby the christian community are to be concluded. And that private christians continued, in the first ages, to share in the deliberations of their synods, we have suificient evidence, as was signified already, from the ancient ecclesiastical writings still extant. fiowever, as in the space of a few centuries matters were, in this respect, greatly altered, and the church w^ore a new face, and as these came at last to be totally excluded, it began of course to be maintained as a doctrine, that those persons, who did not belong to any of the sacred orders, were absolute- 1} unfit for being received into their councils, to deliberate and judge in spiritual and holy things ; that for the pastors to admit them, would be to betray their trust, and profane their office ; and for such unhallowed men to arrogate any power in these matters, would be no better than a sacrilegious usur- pation. But before such tenets as these, which savour so much of the political views of an aspiring faction, and so little of the liberal spirit of the gospel, coidd generally obtain, several causes had contributed in preparing the minds of the people. On every occurrence the pastors had taken care to improve the respect of the lower ranks, by widening the distance between their own order, and the condition of their christian brethren ; and for this purpose had early broached a distinction, which, in process ot time, universally prevailed, of the whole christian commonwealth into clergy and laity. The terms are derived from two Greek words, »;uj^o;. lot or inheritance, and A««5. peo- ple. The plain intention was to suggest, that the former, the pastors or clergy, for they appropriated the term K>o,foi; to themselves, were selected and contradistinguished from the multitude, as being, in the present world, by way of eminence, God's peculium^ or special inheritance. It is impossible to conceive a claim in appearance more arrogant, or in reality worse founded. God is indeed in the Old Testament said to be the inheritance of the Levites, because a determined share of the sacrifices and offerinjrs made 152 Z.ECTirRES ON to God v^as in part to serve them instead of an estate in land> such as was given to each of the other tribes. But, I pray you, mark the difference ; no where is the tribe of Levi called God's inheritance, though that expression is repeatedly used of the whole nation. Concerning the whole Israelitish nation, Moses, who was himself a Levite, says in an address to God, Deut. ix, 29, — -'' The}- are thy people, and thine inheritance, *' which thou broughtest out by thy mighty power." The words in the septuagint translation deserve our particular attention. Ovroi A«£«« m x^ y.^aifio'; era «5 s^i/yxyei; tx yr^i Afyvrla e* 7» t;pei»), aX?M tk/ttoi yive[^;ui th TroiiMiH. They are part of a charge given to the presbyters, or pastors, relating to their care of the people committed to them, who are called God's flock, which they are commanded to feed, of which they are to take the oversight, not the mastery, and to which they are to serve as patterns. The same persons, therefore, who both in this, and in the preceding verse, are styled voifA.- vtev, the flock, under the direction of God's ministers, the shep- herds, are also called xAjji'o/ his inheritance, over whom their pastors are commanded not to domineer. It is somewhat extraordinary, that in the choice of distinctions, which the church-rulers so soon showed a disposition to affect, they should have paid almost as little attention to the style, as they did to the spirit and meaning of the sacred books. Let it be observed then, in the first place, that this distinction, so far from having a foundation in Scripture, stands in direct contra- diction both to the letter, and to the sense of that unerring standard. I am not ignorant that some expositors, jealous for the priesthood, render the term »a?;/jo< here, the church's posses- ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY^ 153 sions. Not to mention that this explication but ill suits the context, and annihilates the contrast between an imperious master and an engaging patron, and supposeth an awkward ellipsis in the words, allow me to ask, What were the church's possessions in those days ? Was she so early vest rd with lauds and hereditaments, for it is to such only that the term kAjj^©-, when denoting property or possession, is applied? Or have those mterpreters been dreaming of the truly golden age of pope Gregory the seventh, when the patrimonies of some metropolitical and patriarchal sees were indeed like dukedoms and principalities, and the grand hierarch himself could dispose of kingdoms and empires ? In the apostolick times, on the contrary, the church's patrimony consisted mostly, I may say, in persecution and calumny, hatred and derision, agreeably to the prediction of her Lord. Some have ascribed, but very unjustly, the origin of the distinction we have been considering, to Clemens Romanus, who, in his epistle to the Corinthians, which I had formerly an occasion of quoting, contradistinguishes a«x«o< (the laicks, as we shoidd be apt to render it) among the Jews, from the high- priest, the priests, and the Levites. It ought to be observed, that it is introduced by him when speaking of the Jewish priesthood, and not of the christian ministry ; neither does it stand in opposition to any one general term such as xA^^a? or KMipiKot i but after mentioning three different orders, he uses the term Xa-tMi^ to include, under one comprehensive name, all that were not specially comprised under any of the former ; and in this respect it exactly corresponds to the application sometimes made of the Latin word popularis. In this view it may with equal propriety be contrasted with men in office of any kind whatever. Thus in speaking of civil government, it may be opposed to etp^evlii, to denote the people as distin- guished from the magistrates ; or, in speaking of any army, to ?-px%yet, to denote the soldiers as distinguished from the com- manders or officers. I maintain further, that in the way the term is emplo)'ed by Clement, it does not imply that he considered it as in itself exclusive of the priesthood and Levitical tribe, to which the term a«/ko< is opposed in that passage. They are here indeed excluded, because separately named, but not from the import of the word. But as this criticism may, to a superficial hear- er, appear a mere subtlety or refinement, I shall illustrate it from some similar examples, which I hope will be thought decisive. Acts xv, 22. " Then pleased it the apostles and el- " ders with the whole church." Here are three orders plainly mentioned and distinguished, the apostles or extraordinary u 154 LECTURES ON ininisters, the elders or fixed pastors, and the church or chris-? tian people. But does this Imply that the narat church does not properly comprehend the pastors as well as tht people ? By no means. 1 hey are not indeed, in this passage, - onj- prised under the term, not because it does not properh txteiid so far, (which is not fact) but because they are separately named. The import oi the expression is, therefore, no more than this, '-'■ The apostles and elders, with all the christian *' brethren, who come not under either of these denomina- " tions." Of the same kind exactly is the pass;*ge lately quoted from Peter, where the '^^la-jivhpoi are opposed to the jcX^iea, not as though the former constituted no ipun of God's heri- tage, or, to adopt the modern style, clergy ; they onl)' do not constitute that part, of which they are here commanded to take the >.harge. In like manner Clement's mention of as6^ perfected for ever them that are sanctified." Sometimes, iriticcd, in regard lO the Mosaick institution, an allegorical Style IS adopted, wherein all christians are represented as priests, being, as it were, in baptism, consecrated to the service of God, the whole community as a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices to him, the bodies of christians as temples de&lined for the inhabitation of God through the spirit. The oblations are thanksgivings, prayer, and praise. The same name is also given to acts of beneficence and mercy. " To do *' good and to communicate forget not, for with sych sacrifices " God is well pleased." This is also the manner of the ear- liest fathers. Justin Martyr, in his dialogue with Trypho, the Jew, after mentioning Christ as our all-sufficient high-priest, insists, that in consequence of our christian vocation, we, his dis-ipies, not the pastors exclusively, are God's true sacer- doud family. Hjtce/j ot^^ts^oQiiio)) to etAj)^- hnp Si in Hebrew, and ztxtx » iKuXnc-tx, jc-peteh in Greek, the whole church of Israel, do frequently occur in the Old Testament, there is not a single passage in which they are not confessedly equivalent to the phrases iM, b:i^Dr\V>'' ^nd 7S-0UI T« eS-ve? lo-paisP^y all the nation of Israel. The same may be said of the phrases o^nbj* brh and d'hSn ay, » £«- x>yi their governours, pastors, or priests, for instance, as representing the whole. 'I'he only passage, as far as I can learn, that has been, with any appearance of plau- sibilitv, alleged for this purpose, is Matt, xviii. 17, where our Lord, in the directions he gives for removing offences between brethren, enjoins the party offended, after repeated admonitions in a more private m umer have proved ineffectual, to relate the whole to the church, uTt-e r-^ e>t.>i.Xea-tec, j and it is added, " li he neglect to bear the church, let him be to thee as a hea- *' then and a publican." Now I ask by what rule of sound criticism can we arbitrarily impose here on the word churchy the signification of church representative, a signification which we do not find it bears in one other passage of scripture ? Tq affirm, without proof, that this is the sense of it here, is taking for granted the very point in question. But Wit have more than merely negative evidence that the meaning of the word is here, as in other places, no more than ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. m congregation, and that the term ought to have been rendered so. Let it be observed, that our Lord gave these directions during the subsistence of the Mosaick establishnaent ; and if we 'believe that he spoke intelligibly, or with a view to be un- derstood, we must believe also, that he used the word in an acceptation with which the hearers were acqu'inted. Dodwell himself saw the propriety of this rule of interpreting, when he said,* " It very much confirms me in my reasonings, when I " find an interpretation of the scriptures not only agreeable to *' the words of the scriptures, but agreeable also to the notions " and significations of words then received. For that sense " which was most likely to be then understood was, in all like- *♦ lihood, the true sense intended by the Holy Ghost himself. ** Otherwise there could be no security that his true sense " could be conveyed to future ages, if they had been them- " selves mistaken in it, to whose understanding the Holy " Ghost was then particularly concerned to accommodate him- *' self." Now all the then known acceptations,. as I showed before, of the name £Kx?^crix, were these two, the whole Jewish people, and a particular congregation. The scope of the place sufficiently shows it could not be the former of these senses, it must therefore be the latter. What further confirms this inter- pretation is, that the Jews were accustomed to call those assem- blies, which met together for worship in the same synagogue, by this appellation ; and had, if we may believe some learned men conversant in Jewish antiquities, a rule of procedure similar to that here recommended, which our Lord adopted from the synagogue, and transplanted into his church. Another collateral and corroborative evidence, that by jxTfA,^ trtu, is here meant not a representative body, but the whole of a particular congregation, is the actual usage of the church for the first three hundred years. I had occasion formerly to re- mark, that as far down as Cyprian's time, which was the mid- dle of the third century, when the power of the people was in the decline, it continued to be the practice, that nothing in matters of scandal and censure could be concluded without the consent and approval of the congregation. And this, as it appears to have been pretty uniform, and to have subsisted from the beginning, is, in my opinion, the best commentary which we, at this distance, can obtain on the passage. If any impartial hearer is not satisfied on this point, I would recommend it to him, without the aid of any commentator on either side of the question, but with the help of proper con- cordances, attentively to search the scriptures. Let him exa- * Distinction between soul and spirit, &.C., § 7. 166 LFXTUPvES ON mine every passage in the New Testament wherein the word we render church is to be found, let him canvass in the writings of the Old Testanient every sentence wherein the correspond- ent word occurs, let him acid to these the apocryphal books received by the romanists, which, as they were either originaLy written, or translated by Hellenists, amongst whom the term eicitXtiTix was in frequent use, must be of some authority in ascertaining the Jewish acceptation of the word; and if he' find a single passage, wherein it clearly means either the priest* hood, or the rulers of the nation, or any thing that can be called a church representative, let him fairly admit the distinc- tion as scriptural and proper. Otherwise he cannot admit it, in a consistency with any just ride of interpretation. I observed, in a preceding lecture, that the term tK.x.Xr,9i» is, in some passages, applied to the people, exclusively of the pastors. The same was remarked of the word KXyipoi;- (not as though these terms did not properly comprehend both, but be- cause, in collectives, the name of a whole is often given to a great majority) but I have not discovered one passage wherein either tycy^Xn^tu^ or xA^jpasi is applied to the pastors, exclusive- ly of the people. The notion, therefore, of a church repre- sentative, how commonly soever it has been received, is a mere usurper of later date. And it has fared here as it some- times does in cases of usurpation, the original proprietor comes, though gradually, to be at length totally dispossessed. Should any man now talk of the powers of the church, and of the rights of churchmen, would the hearers apprehend, that he meant the powers of a christian congregation, or the rights of all who are members of the christian community ? And it they should come to learn that this is his meaning, would they not be apt to say, ' It is pity that this man, before he attempt * to speak on these subjects, does not learn to speak intelligi- *■ bly, by conforming to the current use of the language V It is therefore not without reason that I affirm, that the more modern acceptation, though an entruder, has jostled out the rightful and primitive one almost intirely. But as every man, •who would be understood, is under a necessity of employing words according to the general use of the time present, Quern penes arbilrium es:, et jus, et norma loquer.di ; when I employ, for the future, any of the words affected by this remark, I am always, unless where the connexion indi- cates the contrar}', to be understood as using them in the sense in which they are now commonly received. Only by the de- duction that has been given of the origin of this change, we ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. IGf may perceive, that from what is said in relation to the church in scripture, nothing can justly be concluded in support of church-authority, or the privileges of churchmen, in the sense which these terms generally have at presents The distinction just now taken notice of, in concurrence with the interferences between the civil magistrate and the minister of religion, or between the spiritual tribunals (as they were called) and the secular, gave rise to another dis- tinction in the christian community between church and state. When thegospel was first published by the apostles, andtheapos- tolick men that came after them, it was natural and necessary to distinguish believers from infidels, living in the same coun- try, and under the same civil governours. The distinction between a christian church or society, and a Jewish or an ido- latrous state, was perfectly intelligible. But to distinguish the church from its own members, those duly received into it by baptism, and continuing in the profession of the faith, we may venture to affirm, would have been considered then as a mere refinement, a sort of metaphysical abstraction* For where can the difference lie, when every member of the state is a member of the church, and conversely, every member of the church is a member of the state ? Accordingly, no suck distinction ever obtained among the Jews, nor was there any thing similar to it in any nation before the establishment of the christian religion under Constantine. But what hath since given real significance to the distinc* tion lis, in the first place, the limitation of the term church to the clergy and the ecclesiastical judicatories, and, in the se- cond place, the claims of independency advanced by these, as well as certain claims of power and jurisdiction, in some things differing, and in some things interfering with the claims of the magistrate. For however much connected the civil powers and church-governours are in christian states, still they are distinct bodies of men, and, in some respects, inde- pendent. Their very connexion will conduce to render them rival powers, and if so, confederate against each other. When this came actually to be the case, considering the cha- racter and circumstances of the times, it will not be matter of great astonishment, that every thing contributed to give success to the encroachments of the latter upon the former. Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury, once wrote t» the empress Matilda, mother of Henry II. king of England, in these words : *•' God has drcnvn his borv, and will speedily shoot from thence the arroxvs of deaths if princes do not permit his ' spoils e^ the churchy for the love of xvhoin he had deigned to die^ 168 LECTURES ON to remain free^ and to he honoured with the possession of thosS privileges and dignities^ which he had purchased for her with his blood on the cross.^^ " Whoever has read the gospel," says the noble historian*, " must be astonished to hear, that an ex- " emption tor clergymen from all civil justice was one of the " privileges purchased by the blood of Christ for his church." He might have said further, must be astonished to hear, as the words manifestly imply, that the church, the spouse of Jesus Christ, for the love of whom he died, is no other than the clergy, and tha| the heavenly blessings, (for that his king- dom was not of this world he himself plainly declared) which were the price of his blood, were, secular dominion, earthly treasure, and an unlimited licence in the commission of crimes with impunity. It is not easy to conceive a grosser perver- sion of the nature, design, and spirit of the gospel. Yet by means of the artful appropriation of some names, the word church in particular, and misapplication of others, such ab- surdities were propagated by one side, and believed by the other. Nay, the frequency of the abuse is acknowledged, even by such Roman catholick authors as can make any preten- sion to discernment and candour, Fleury, the ecclesiastical historian, has pointed out the perversion of the term church in more places than one. " Peter de Blols," he tells us, " warmly recommended to the bishop of Orleans, to remon- " strate with his cousin king Philip, and warn him against lay- *' ing any subsidies whatever upon the clergy, in support of *' the war, even though a holy war, for extending the domini- ** ons of the church ; as nothing, he affirms, should be exact- *' ed from the clergy but prav ers, of which the laitv stand ." greatly in need." Further, he acquaints us, that this zea- lous man wrote also to John of Coutances, whom he exhorted to employ his credit with the king of England, to maintain the dignity of the church. " She is free," says he, " by the " libefrty which Jesus Christ has procured us, but to load her ** with exactions, is to bring her into bondage like Hagar. If " your princes, under pretence of this new pilgrimage, will " render the church tributary, every son of the charch ought " to resist, and die, rather than submit to servitude." The historian pertinently subjoinsf , *' We see here the equivocal *' use made in those days of the words church and liberty ; as * Lord Littleton. + On voit ici les equivoques <^rdinaires en ce terns ia sur les mots d'Eglise et de Libert^ ; comme si I'Egl^ae delivree par Jt-sus Christ n'eroit que le clerge, ou qu'il nous eut delivrez d'autre chose que du peche et des ceremonies iegales, L. Ixxiv, ch. XV. L. Ixxxix, ch. cxJiv. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 169 " If the churcli delivered by Jesus Christ were only the clergy, '' or as if our deliverance were from aught but sin and the le- " gal ceremonies." Again, from the sas-ne hand, we are in- formed, that, in reply to a letter from pope Boniface viii, wherein, by the same perversion of words, the pontilT had appropriated the title church to ecclesiasticks, king Philip of France, amongst other things, wrote to him, "■ The church, *' the spouse of Jesus Christ, does not consist of clergy only, *' but of laymen also. He has delivered it from the slavery " of sin, and the yoke of the old law, and has willed, that all *' who compose it, both clerks and laics, enjoy this freedom. " It was not for ecclesiasticks only that he died, nor to them " alone that he pi-omised grace in this life, and glorj' in the " next. It is but by an abuse of language that the clergy arro- " gate peculiarly to themselves the liberty, which Jesus Christ " has purchased for us." Which of the two, the king or the priest, was the greater statesman, I know not, but it does not require a moment's hesitation to pronounce, which was the better divine. The inferiority of his holiness here, even in his own profession, compared with his majesty, in a profession not his own, is both immense and manifest. But amongst a rude and ignorant people, in ages of barbarity and superstition, it was easy to confound, in their minds, the cause of the priest with the cause of God, in every quarrel which the former happened to have with the magistrate. I shall here remark in passing, and with it conclude the present discourse, that it is doubtful whether the word iy.y.Xnis-ioi ever occurs in the New Testament in a sense, wherein the word church is very common with us, as a name for the place of worship. There are only two passages, that I remember, which seem to convey this sense. They are both in the ele- venth chapter of the first epistle to the Corinthians. The first is, verse 18th, When ye come together in the churchy c-vi^yjf.>^am vfA^m aln iK-KXTiTioi.. Here, however, the word is susceptible of another interpretation, as a name for the society. i'hus we say, "The lords spiritual and temporal, and the commons, in " parliament assembled," where parliaiTient does not mean the house they meet in, but the assembly properly constituted. The other is verse 22d, Have ye not houses to eat and drink in^ or despise ye the church of God ? rs^s sy.y.Xi]rnx,i r^ B-is ^ccclaQfoufli : where, it is urged, the opposition oi ty.y.M'^i.A tu oix./**, the church to their houses, adds a probability to this inierpreui- tion. But this plea, though plausible, is not decisive. The sacred writers are not always studious of so much accuracy in their contrasts, nor is it here necessary to the sense. The apostle's argument on my hypothesis stands thus: What Y i7Q LECTURES ON can be the reason of this abuse ? Is it because you have nat houses of your own to eat and drink in ? Or is it because you despise the christian congregation to which you belong ? This, though it do not convey so exact a verbal antithesis, is, in jny judgment, more in the spirit and style of the New Testa- ment, than to speak of despising stone walls. But as to this I affirm nothing. To express the place of meeting, we find the word crx^vaywyj}, as observed above, used by the apostle James. In ancient authors, the words first adopted were oucXi^a-icisyiptoi^ fKKXisTtoK afjtfls^ and xvp'*'^", whence the words kirk and church. At length the term sx.y-M}fA.£Viii upta-iv 71 otyta crvvooog xx,vpov tx^tv Tjjy roiAv%v ^upoB-ecrietV) 3^ (Mj^ccfAii ^vvot.^s>^v/^emi, that is, without giving him either subjects or a kingdom ? You will say, But may not the right to a kingdom be conferred on a man, whom we cannot put in possession ^ Admit it may ; that is not parallel to the case in hand. Those merely titular bishops get no more the right, than they get the possession, of any one diocess on the face of the earth. Nor was it ever denied, that if, on the pretence of their consecra- tion, they had seized any charge, whether vacant or full, thev would have been as much intruders, as though they had never been ordained at all. The only thing, therefore, that could be said to be exactly similar, would be the coronation and en- thronement of a man with many pompous ceremonies, whom you in the end saluted king, but to whom you gav^e neither the right nor the possession of a single subject, or of a single foot of territory. What could be said more justly of such a ceremony than what Pope Leo said of those ordinations ? *' Vana est habenda inauguratio." It ought to be held a sham inauguration, " Qua nee loco fundata est, nee auctoritate 18^ LECTURES ON " munita." Should it be urged, that the title king must be very blank without the name of some region or country, over which the kingly power extends. I answer, not a jot blanker tiian the title biahop or priest^ without the name of diocess or parish. And if a bare name will serve, nothing is more easily supplied : king of the planet Saturn^ or of Terra australis in- cognita^ will sound as well, and mean as much, as bishop in partibus injidelium. By the way, a bishop's charge is a church, exj4A;js-<«, and a church consists only of believers. Infidels, therefore, are properly no part of his charge, no more than evolves or foxes are part of the flock of a shepherd. With the Romanists matrimony and holy orders are both equally sacraments, and are, besides, thought to have a great analogy to each other. The relation which Christ bears to his church, that is, the church universal, is in Scripture compared to the relation which the husband bears to the wife. And the relation which the bishop bears to the particular church under his care, has been often represented by the fathers as an einblem of the relation which Christ bears to the church universal. Pope Innocent the third adopts the same metaphor, calling ordination the spiritual marriage of the bishop to his church. To this idea also the ceremony of the ring in consecration, still retained in the church of Rome, unquestionably owes its origin. No consistent Roman catholic, therefore, can be of-* fended, that I borrow an illustration from what he accounta likewise a sacrament, and the most analogous of them all, by the consent of popes and fathers, to the subject in hand. Now if it had happened to be (as, no doubt, if it had suited any poli- tical purpose, it v/ould have been) the practice to celebrate marriages sometimes, »7coXzXv^au.:ch as it was, in the strictest sense, lonncied by Jesus Christ uiai- self. For on occasion of the election of Matthias, before the descent of the Holy Spirit, and, consequenily, before the apostles entered on their office, the number of disciples that were convened there, probably not all that were in Jerusalem, was, savs the sacred historian, about a hundred and twenty. And as the foundation of that individual church was laid by him who is the Lord and head of the whole, so the raising of the superstructure may most justly be accounted the work not of one apostle, but of the whole college of apostles. Yet the bishdp of Jerusalem, though honoured with some special pri- vileges, came in fact to be ranked among the patriarchs only in the fifth place, his patriarchal diocess being, in reality, but a small part, taken from the diocess of Antioch. And if the rejection of the Jews, on account of their unbelief, be held a good reason for the rejection of Jerusalem from being the capital of this spiritual kingdom, cujisisting mosdy of tonverts from gentilism ; why was not Caesarea, or, as it was anciently- called, Straton's tower, preferred beiore every other city ; con- cerning wbkh we have undoubted evidence, that it was honoured to be the place where, by the preaching of Peter to Cornelius and his friends, the door of faith was first opened to the gentiles ? Yet the bishop of thi-:. Csesarea never attained any higher dignity than that of meiropolitan. What but its new-acquired importance raised the see of Constantinople, fonnt^rly Byzantium, whose bishop, till the city, was made by Constantine the seat of empire, vi'as suiTra- gan to the exarch of Heraclea, to be one of the principal patriarchates in the christian world ; and to which its former superiour became, in his turn, suffragan ? That it arose from no other cause, is manifest from the canon which first vested this see with that pre-eminence. The canon, I mean, is the third of the council of Constantinople, in the year 381, being the second ecumenical co jmtil. The words are- rov f^ev toi Kov- {■xvlivnTroXeai f7riKciiri rcc ZTpeTJ^eta, id ra a.v](» Q-K.o'TVoi Ksvuf^ivoi ot pv BsopiM'^ciloi iTTioriioToii rcc ii xpivxvlei;. rtjv Ztx.'nXiiu, s^ orvyKXtflu Ti^TiB-siTM nroXiVj x^j ron e«-&'v a.TroXu.vnTm ■ZTpso-^eiav rjj zrpia-Bvlepvi ^acriXt^i Fni^)}, ^ £v7a'S £x.x.X}t!-ioi^tKo!i, «5 ;x-eir/]]> f^syci?iiivestress and capital of the world, to believe, that she had hac a principal share in the ministry of both. Here was an original disadvantage, that Constantinople, or New Rome, as she was sometimes palled, laboured under, which it was impossiMe lor her ever Jo surmgunt. Antiquity has great influence o\ every human establishment, but especially on those of a reigious nature. What advantage Old Rome derived hence, whe^ sihe found it convenient in supporting her claims, to change ht- gi-ound, as it were, and rear the fabrick of spiritual despotism not as for- merly, on the dignity of the world's metropolis nd human constitutions, but on divine right, transmitted tl-ough the prince of the apostles, is too well known to need a^articular illustration. And though the younger sister soon leaiit to imi- tate the elder, and claim an origin and antiquity neay equal, pretending, on I know not what grounds, to have bee found- ed by the apostle Andrew, the brother of Peter, thyght to be the elder brother, and who was certainly, as we lejn from John's gospel*, a disciple of Christ before him ; yet'ie no- torious recenc)'^, the suddenness, and the too maniiestjource of her splendour and power, rendered it impracticable »r her, without arrogance, ever to vie with the elder sister in h- high pretensions. But with the two causes above-mentioned, namely, e su- periour dignity of the city of Rome, and the opulence P her church, there were several others which co-operated in is'mg her to that amazing greatness and authority, at which, i the course of a few centuries, she arrived. To enumere all would be impossible. I shall therefore only select a f / of the principal of themf The first I shall take notice of is the vigilant and unmit- ted policy she early showed in improving every advanta^for her own aggrandizement, which rank and wealth coulbe- stow. Scarcely had Christianity received the sanction o.he legislature, erecting it into a sort of political establishivit, before the bishops of this high-minded city began to tnteiin the towering thoughts of erecting for themselves a new xt * John J, 41, 423 42- ' ^06 LECTURES ON k monarchy, a spiritual domination over their brethren, the "Aembers of the church, which might in time be rendered '^ini- vWsal, analogous to the secular authority lodged in the em- -perours over th« subjects of the empire. The distin^rtions al- ready introduced, of presbyter, bishop, primate, and (which soon followed) patriarch, seemed naturally to pave the way for iv These distinctions, too, having taken the sr origin- from the civil distit^.tions that obtained in regard t(> the vil-. lages, towns, and cii>es, that were the seats of these different orders, seemed to furbish a plausible argument from analogy, that the bishop of the capital of the whole should have an as- cendant over the exarchs of the civil diocesses into which it was divided, sinilar to that which every exarch enjoyed over the metropolians of the provinces within his diocei>s, or ex- archate, andA^hich every metropolitan exercised over his suf- fragans, theoishops of his province, and similar to that which the emperpir himself exercised over all the membeifs of the empire, ^t, by Constantine's establishment, the bishop of Rome in ytrictness was not so much as an exarch ; the civil diocess o/Italy having been, on account of its greater popu- lousness/nd opulence, divided into two parts, called vicari- ates, or,lcarages ; the vicariate of Rome containing ten pro- vinces, nd including the islands, Sicily, Corsica, and Sar- dinia, uder the bishop of Rome ; and the vicariate of Italy contaiivg seven provinces, under the bishop of Milan. In defere]|e, however, to a name which was become .'30 venera- ble as |at of Rome, the precedency, or as it was also called, the priiacy, of its pastor, seems to have been very early, and very gnerally, admitted in the church. But that for some ages ijthing further was admitted, would have been at this day Jversally acknowledged an indisputable historical fact, had nc many learned and indefatigable writers found it their interc to exert all their abilities to perplex and darken it. It was (jficult, however, for wealth and splendour, the genuine pareii of ambition, to rest satisfied with so trifling a pre- emiiice. Bides, many fortunate incidents, as the minions of Rome no ftibt thought them, contributed greatly to assist and for- warder ambitious schemes. The council of Sardica, about the Iddle of the fourth century, at the time that the Arian conAversy inflamed and divided the whole christian commu- nity this council I say) after the oriental bishops were with- draw, was, by Osius bishop of Cord.ova, a zealous defender of Ithanasius, and a firm friend of J ulius, bishop of Rome, wfwas on the same side with him in the great controversy, tW agitated with such furious zeal, was induced to make a ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 207 canon, ord«eringj that if any bishop should think himself un- jusdy condemned by his comprovincials and metropolitan, his judges should acquaint the bishop of Rome, who might either confirm their judgment, or order the cause to be re-examined by some of the neighoouring bishops. In this Osius had evi- dently a double "view. One view was to confer an honour on his friend Julius, the other to give an additiotial security to the clergy of his own side. In those times of violence and party rage, bisho.ps who, on tiie controverted points, happen- ed to be of a diif erent side from their colleagues in the same province, and especially from the primate, were sometimes, for no other reasoLi, very tumukuously and irregularly deposed. A revisal of this l:ind seemed then at least to secure the final determination infjivourof the orthodox, (an epithet which in. church history coreimonly expresses a concurrence in opinion •with the majority) whose doctrine was at that time vigorously supported by the pope. This end, however, though probably the principal, it dotis not appear to have answered. The east- ern bishops paid no regard to the acts of a synod, from which they thought they h,ad the justest reasons to separate them- selves. Nor was it ever accounted, by the African bishops, of authority sufficierit for establishing a custom so totally re.- pugnant to ancient praciice, and so subversive of the stand- ing discipline of the church. But the popes, loE