^ 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{i<id him for the task:
20 LECTURES ON
be has undertaken, was not only his thorough acquaintance
with ancient history, sacred and profane ; but his profound
skill in the oriental languages, and in all branches of rabbini-
cal literature. To say thus much is no ntiore, in my appre-
hension, than doing justice to his abilities and indefatigable
application : at the same time, it is but doing justice to you,
my hearers, to take notice of what I think amiss in his per-
formance. 1 told you, and told you truly, that he shows
more moderation than is customary with those of his sett and
order, yet not so much of impartiality, as not to betray, on
several occasions, that (if he was not a disguised freethinker,
as has been suspected oy some eminent catholicks) he was deep-
ly tinctured with the servile spirit of his church. Hence the
implicit deference he sometimes ofriciously displays, to human
prescriptions, to oral tradition, to those customs which can
plead the sanction of antiquity, or of a general reception,
however absurd they may be, when examined on the princi-
ples of reason, however unscriptural, or even antiscriptural,
■when examined on those of holy writ : nay, I might add, his
deference to those practices and tenets, concerning which his
knowledge and discernment must have satisfied him, that their
origin was such as could by no means serve to recommend[
them. Hence also the propensity he shows, on every occa-
sion, to insist on the ambiguity and obscurity of the scriptures,
which he greatly exaggerates, and on the need of an infallible
interpreter. Hence the straitened and ambiguous manner where-
in he expresseth himself on some delicate points, which he
could not altogether avoid mentioning, and on which it is
plain that he did not think himself at liberty to speak out his
sentiments. On such topicks, you w'dl perceive a timidity and
caution very unlike the generous freedom and boldness of a
man, who hath ever been unaccustomed to the galling yoke
of human authority. He puts one in mind of the situation
described by the poet, and even appears to consider himself,
as, incedens per ignes suppcsitos cineri cloloso. But I shall say
no more here of this author, having had an occasion, of late,
both of giving, and of supporting my opinion, of him, more
fully in the third preliminary dissertation to the translation- of
the Gospels, to which I refer you. As to his work, I may
jusdy say, that on the whole, with all its errours and defects,
(and what human composition is exempt from errours and de-
fects ?) The critical History of the Old and New Testaments
contains a valuable fund of knowledge, and deserves an atten-
tive perusal from everv serious inquirer into the divine ora-
cles. On some points, he has been warmly opposed by some
•protestant divines, to whose animadversions on his work he
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 21
has returned answers. The controversy is published in the
later editions of his book. In some things they appear to be
in the right, but not in all.
Houbigant, also, another priest of ^^the oratory, has, in the
work of his above-mentioned, freely animadverted on some of
Simon's observations. He too is no inconsiderable critick,
though of a very different turn. The excess of Simon (where
alterations appeared necessary) perhaps was ciifhdence ; of
Houbigant, temerity. I am not sure, that some of our mo-
dern English criticks on the Hebrew scriptures are not charge-
able with this fault of Houbigant ; I mean their making too
free with the text, in setting aside the common reading for the
sake of emendations merely conjectural. But as to these
things, every person ought to judge for himself. I purpose to
lay only the materials before you, which may serve as pre-
mises : it is yours to canvass and arrange them, and to draw the
proper conclusions. It is not my province to dictate, but to
suggest. Your assent to any opinions, that might be laid
before you, would be of little value, if it were the result of a
lazy and implicit confidence, and not of a careful examination
and rational conviction. Let me only subjoin, before dismis-
sing this article, a recommendation of Michaelis's Introductory
Lectures to the sacred books of the New Testament, which
will deserve your serious perusal. Thus much shall suffice for
what concerns the history of the canon, and the valuable pur-
poses to which this bianch of knowledge is subservient.
I proceed now to consider the ends which may be answered
by ecclesiastical history, and to inquire what is the readiest and
most profitable way of studying it. Before that memoiabje
era, the incarnation of the Son of God, the history of the
church of God was the history of one particular peojile, first
distinguished by the name of the patriarch Israel, (otherwise.
called Jacob) whose descendants they were ; and after the loss
of the ten tribes, who were carried into captivity by Shalma-
nezer, king of Assyria, denominated from Judah, one of the
sons of Jacob, and one whose progeny the greater part of the
remnant were, the nation of the Jews. The history of thijt
people, and the history of the church, was under the Mo.saick
economy the same thing. Neither do we find in the annals,
and other remains of those ancient times, the k^ast vestige of
the distinction of a community into church and state, such ari
hath obtained universally in the nations who have received the
christian law. This distinction hath given rise to a species of
history, whereof the world before had not conceived so much
as an idea. It may not therefore be irnt^roper, in the first
place, to trace its origin, that we may the better apprehend
what is meant by the history of the church.
2? LECTURES ON
When we consider attentively the institution of Moses, we-
perceive that it comprehends every thing necessary for form-
ing a civil establishment ; not only precepts regarding the dis-
position and morals of the people, and the publick and private
offices of religion, but also laws of jurisprudence ; such as re^
gulate the formalities of private contracts, inheritance, succes-
sion, and purchases ; such as fix the limits of jurisdiction and
subordination of judicatories, appoint the method of procedure
in trials, both eivil and criminal, and the punishments to be
awarded by the judges to the several crimes. I may add, it
comprehends also a sort of law of nations for the use of that
people, in adjusting the terms of their intercourse with other
states and kingdoms, and prescribing rules to be observed in
making and conducting peace and war, entering into publick
treaties and the like. In this polity or state, however, we find
that what concerns religion forms an essential, or rather
the principal part. Every thing in their consiitaiion seems
to act in subserviency to this great end, the preservation of
the purity of their faith and worship. In this there was
a very material difference between them and pagan nations.
In these last, the established superstition, ra whatever po-
pular traditions it may have been originallv founded, was
modelled by the ruling powers in such a manner, as that
it might best answer the purpose of an engine of govern-
ment. The religion of such nations, therefore, can be consi-
dered in no other light, than as one of those political machines
which in various ways co-operated for the support of the whole.
With the Jews, indeed, the case was totally different : for, in
their establishment, the religion was manifestly not the means
but the end.
God hath been considered as in some respect the chief ma-
gistrate or head of that community, and the government for
that reason has been not unfitly termed a theocracy. Thus
much seems even implied in the words of God to Samuel,
when the people became solicitous to have a king. And even
when the kingly sway was established among them, the pre-
servation of their religion, and of their code of laws, contained
in the Pentateuch, (for they had no other) effectually prevent-
ed this change from being a subversion of their polity. The
king himself v/as considered (though in a way somewhat dif-
ferent) as a minister of religion. His office was holy, and he
was inaugurated with the like religious ceremony of unction,
with which the high-priest was separated for the discharge of
the duties of his sacred function; and the king's person, in
consequence of this rite, was accounted holy as well as the
priest*s. A strong evidence of the influence of this circum-
stance we have in the behaviour of D.avid to king Saul, his
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 23
tnemy, who sought his life, David found him asleep and un-
attended in the cave of Engeddi ; and when desired by some
of his followers to kill him, answered, " The Lord forbid that
" I should do this thing unto my master, the Lord's anointed,
'* to stretch forth my hand against him, seeing he is the anoint-
" ed of che Lord: so David stayed his servants with these
*' words " iMevrtheless the legislative power was not in the
monarch. God was the sole legislator ; for, as was observed,
they had ro peiinanent body of laws other than the books of
Moses : besides, on every emergency of importance, the Deity
was consuUed by Urim and Thummin.
It must be acknowledged, that this original constitution was
gradually corrupted by them. Having lound means, in preju-
dice to the divine commandments, to foist in rules and pre-
cepts of their own devising, under the specious name of oral
traditions, they rendered them equivalent to laws ; but still, as
appears from the name they gave them, under the pretended
sanction of divine authority. Thus their religious and civil
■rights were so blended, as not to admit a separation: the
same judges indiscriminately took cognizance of both. These
were the elders of the city in smaller matters, and in the first
instance ; and the great sanhedrim, senate, or council of the
nation, composed of seventy senators and a president, com-
monly called the elders of the people, in greater matters, and
in the last resort. And in this body there was generally a con-
siderable number, though not any fixed proportion, of priests,
levites, and scribes. I mention, in conformity to our modes of
thinking, the religious and the civil as different kinds of rights.
Their customs and modes of thinking, on the contrary, pre-
vented their making this distinction ; ail being alike compre-
hended in the same code, established by the same authority,
and under the jurisdiction of the same magistrates. An at-
tention to this is necessary, in order to make us understand the
import of some expressions used in the New Testament.
Thus the terms voyM<jte< and vtfAsJ'iJ'etgKetxoi, which our translators
render lawyers and doctors of law, are precisely equivalent to
what would be termed by us theologists and doctors of divini-
ty. Not that the words are mistranslated in our version : it
was even proper in this case, by paying a regard to the etymo-
logy of the names, in rendering them into English, to suggest
to the unlearned reader the coincidence of the two professions,
divinity and law, among the Hebrews. With them, therefore,
the divine and the jurist, the lawyer and the scribe, were terms
which denoted nearly the same character j inasmuch as they
had no other law of nations, or municipal law, but their reli-
gion, and no other religion but their law. Of any of the Pa-
gan nations we may say with justice, that their religion was a po-
24 LECTURES ON
lltical religion ; but of the Jews we should say more properly^
that their polity was a religious polity.
What may serve to give us an idea of such a constitution is
the present state of the Mahometan world. Though Maho-
metism, in regard to its doctrine and its rites, borrows some-
what both from Judaism and from Christianity, it is, as an es-
tablishment, raised more on the Jewish model than on the
Christian. With them the Alcoran is the only standing or
statute law of the country ; and as it is conceived by them to
be of divine authority, and therefore unrepealable, it is both
the onlyrule in alljudiciaryproceedings,andtheonlycheckupon
the despotism of their princes. Hence it has happened, that
though there never arose such a conception among the Jews,
as what I may call the history of the synagogue, or among
the Mahometans, as the history of the mosque, distinct from
the histories of their different nations ; the christian church
and christian empires, or commonwealths, form histories,
which, though connected as those of neighbouring republicks
or kingdoms may be, are in their nature perfectly distinct.
It is worth while to inquire, what has given rise to this pe-
culiarity in the religion of Jesus. An inquiry of this kind
is a proper introduction to the study of ecclesiastical his-
tory. It will serve to throw light on the spirit and genius of
our religion, and may lead to the detection of the latent springs,
whence originally flowed that amazing torrent of corruption,
by which, in process of time, this most amiable religion has
been so miserably defaced.
The moral precepts of our Lord Jesus Christ are remarka-
bly sublime and pure. I'hey are admirably calculated for re-
gulating the passions and affections of the heart, out of which,
as Solomon has observed, are the issues of life. The doc-
trines he taught, which are the motives whereby an observance
of the precepts is enforced, are all purely spiritual, arising
from considerations of the divine nature, and of our own ; es-
pecially of God's placability and favour, of the testimony of
conscience, of the blessedness which the principles of true re-
ligion, faith, and hope, love to God, and love to man, infuse
into the heart ; and from considerations regarding the future
retribution both of the righteous and of the wicked. The;
positive institutions or ceremonies he appointed, are both few
and simple, serving as the expressions of the love and grati.
tude of his disciples to God, their common parent, and to
Jesus their master, the oracle of God ; of their engagements
to the christian life, and their perfect union among themselves.
And that whilst these institutions were suflPered to remain in
their native simplicity, which constituted their true beauty and
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 25
excellence, it was impossible they should be misunderstood.
With regard to the founding of what mighl be called a polity
or state, it is manifest that nothing could be farther from hia
intention. " His kingdom," he acquaints us, " is not of this
world." It is not of a secular nature, to be either propagated
or defended by the arm of flesh, or to have its laws enforced by
human sanctions, or any such temporal punishments as merely
human authority can inflict.
It is impossible to conceive a greater contrast between the
spirit which his instructions breathe, and that spirit of pride
and domination, which not many centuries afterwards be-
came the predominant spirit of what then came to be denomi-
nated the church. Again and again did Christ admonish his
apostles, and other followers, to live as brethren and equals,
not to affect a superiority over their fellow-disciples, or over
one another ; inasmuch as in this, his kingdom would differ in
its fundamental maxims from all the kingdoms of the world :
that that person alone would there be deemed the greatest,
whose deportment should be the humblest, and he alone supe-
riour, who should prove most serviceable to the rest. As to
worldly monarchies or commonwealths, of whatever kind, he
taught them to regard it as their duty, to submit to such pow-
ers as providence should set over them ; cheerfully paying tri-
bute, and yielding obedience to every human ordinance and
command that should not be found to contradict the law of
God. " Render to Csesar," said he, " the things which are
*' Caesar's, and to God the things which are God's." Far
from affecting any secular power himself, he refused a royalty
of this sort, when the people would have conferred it, and
would not take upon him to decide in a matter of civil right
and property, though desired. " Man," said he to the person
who applied to him, '* who made me a judge or a divider over
** you ?" Then he said to the people, *■'' take heed and beware
** of covetousness :"-— supporting his admonition as usual by
an affecting parable. It was the end of his institution to puri-
fy the heart, and his lessons were ever calculated for extirpat-
ing the seeds of evil that remained there. In a similar man-
ner, when the disciples privately contended among themselves
who should be greatest, he took occasion to warn them against
ambition. Jesus calling to him a child, placed him in the
midst of them, and said, " Verily I say unto you ; unless ye b©'
converted," quite changed in your notions and conceptions of
things, " and become as children, ye shall never enter the
** kingdom of heaven. Whosoever, therefore, shall become
" humble as this child, shall be the greatest there."" The
same maxims were warmly inculcated by his, apostles ; ami
p.
26,. LECTURES ON
in their time, under the happy influence of their instructions,
generally prevailed among christians.
Now indeed was formed a community of the disciples of
Jesus, which was called his church, a word that denotes no
more than society or assembly, and is sometimes used in the
New Testament with evident analog)' to the common use, to
signify the whole community of christians considered as one
body, of which Christ is denominated the head, and some-
times only a particular congregation of christians. In this
general society, founded in the unity of their faith, their hope,
their love, cemented, as it were, by a communion or joint par-
ticipation, as occasion offered, in religious offices, in adora-
tion, in baptism, and in the commemoration of the sufferings
of their l>ord, 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^ <ar(is9-ft/T«fo«, J*/a«.8vo;, bishops or ovcrscers, presb3-ters or
elders, and deacons or attendants. Now the doubts that have
arisen are chiefly concerning the two first of these nismes,
tTTtTKO'Troi and tfftcr^vTtfoi ; and the question is, whether they are
names for the same office, or for different offices. I'his, at;
least, is the first question ; for it must be owned, that there
have been some strenuous advocates for the apostolical origin
of episcopacy, who have entirely given up the argument found-
ed on the names. As to the last title of the three, hotMvoi^ it
is allowed on all hands, that it is the name of a different office,
though commentators are not entirely agreed as to the nature
?ind extent of that office.
That the terms fTt^rxavti and tffiv0vrtf»sy are sometimes used
promiscuously in the New Testament, there is no critick of
any name who now pretends to dispute. The passage, Acts
XX. is well known. Paul, we are told, v. 17, " from Miletus
*' sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church" n-ug
<nr/u<r^t/Tfp85 Tjff i^mxiie-iet?. In the spccch he made to them, when
they were convened, he has these words, v. 28 : " Take heed,
*' therefore, to yourselves, and to all the flock over which the
*' Holy Ghost hath made you overseers," s5r<9^Bo^j<5, bishops, is
the term in the Greek. Here there can be no question that
the same persons are denominated presbyters and bishops.
Pretty similar to this is a passage in the epistle to Titus, ch. i.
The apostle says, ver. 5, " For this cause left I thee in Cr^te,
" that thou shouldst set in order the things that are wanting,
*' and ordain elders, Ts-pta-^vltfbu. in every city." Ver. 6, " If
" any be blameless," &c. Ver. 7, " For a bishop must
" be blameless," eviTM-prav. Here, unless we will say that
the apostle argues very incoherently, he must mean the
same thing by elder^ at the fifth verse, and bishops at the se-
venth. In like manner the apostle Peter : 1 Peter v. 1. " The
*' elders, Ts-peT^vlifm. which are among you, I exhort," &c. Ver.
2. " Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the
" oversight thereof," fTric-KoTravlei. discharging the office of bi-
shops. The truth is, the word cTnc-KoTroi was properly the name
of office, and ■zs-fitr^vle^'^^ was a title of respect, borrowed from
the Jewish custom, (which was, indeed, analogous to that of
other nations) of calling not only the members of the sanhedrim
^(icTjivlipoi, elders or senators, but also the members of the city
councils.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 65^
To all this, indeed, the common answer is, that most of the
tiames of offices are, in scriptural language, not so uniformly
appropriated to the particular oflfices, as not occasionally to be
applied to others, agreeably to the etymological import of the
words. Thus the term ^luxovoi is applied to the apostles them-
selves. John calls himself -irpec-jivj spa, elder; so also does Pe-
ter ; and Christ is styled eminently both apostle and bishop.
To the same purpose it is urged, that sometimes in the Old
Testament the high priest is called simply the priest. It would,
however, be much more to the point, if a passage could be
named wherein an ordinary prwst is styled high priest. The
^uperiourorder, itis universally admitted, includes the inferiour,
but this does not hold conversely. Now, in the first passage
■above quoted from the Acts, it is manifest^ that the ordinary
pastors of Ephesus are styled bishops ; for in no period of
episcopacy, according to the present acceptation of the word,
was there a plurality of bishops in one city and church. It is
indeed affirmed, that in one passage, 2 Cori viii, 23^ the terni
vipoatle is applied to those who were of a loWer order than the;
apostles properly so called. Itis, however, observable, that the ex-
pression there used, isaa-esaAo; ex.K.M'rim, apostles, or messengers of
the churches, not apostles of Jesus Christ, or apostles simply,
without any addition, which are the common expressions used
for those who were selected to be the principal promulgators
of the faith. And it shows, that Theodoret^ Who lived several
hundred years after, was very mtich puzzled where to find the
origin of the office of bishop, as the word in his time implied,
when he imagined he discovered it in a phrase which occurs
but once in the New Testament, and of which the application
is extremely doubtful. But the short, though full reply^ to thd
aforesaid answer, is this : It is not denied, that those terms
urged by the objectors, arei, on certain occasions, used with
greater latitude than in the ordinary application. Neverthe-
less, the ordinary and peculiar application is supported by so
many clear passages of sacred writ, as to be rendered quite in-
dubitable. On the contrary, one single passage from the apos*
tolical writings has not yet been produced, in which it appears
from the context, that the two terms 3r/)fc/3t/7ff!«5 and £5r«rxo55-®*
mean different offices.
Nay, we can say more than this, which may be called a tie-*
gative and presumptive proof only, that there is the strongest
positive evidence which the natui-e of the thing can admit, that
in those writings the two terms uniformly mean the same of*
fice. The apostle Paul, in the directions he gave to Timothy^
about the proper supply of churches with suitable ministers,
takes particular notice of two orders, and no more. One of
6S LECTURES ON
them he calls bishops, and the other deacons. Now if by bi-
shops he meant what in modern style is so denominated, those
who have the charge of many presbyters, it is astonishing that
he should not think it of importance to give any directions
about the qualifications of presbyters, who had the immediate
inspection of the flock; at the same time that he is very parti-
cular in regard to the qualifications of deacons, though their
order has ever been allowed to be much inferiour to the other.
And if (as even some friends of episcopacy have admitted; he
here means by bishops only presbyters ; that an office of so great
importance as the bishops, (if it was a different and superiour
office) should havebeen entirely overlooked, is no It ss surprising.
Further, in support of this argument, that there were but two
orders then established, let it be observed, that Paul, in ad-
dressing the Phiiippians i. 1, expresses himself in this manner;
*' To all the saints at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons."
All commentators of an} name, except Dr. Hammond, of
whom I shall take notice afterwards, agree, that by bishops
here is meant the ordinary pastors or presbyters j for it is al-
most universally allowed, as I had already an occasion of hint-
ing, that when the distinction came to be established there
was never more than one bishop in a city or church. And as
true it is also, that then there was no city which had a church,
and not a bishop. Now if there was a bishop, in the modern
sense, at Philippi, when the apostle wrote that letter, it looks
a little strange, that he who was the chief of that christian so-
ciety should be the only person that was neglected by the apos-
tle on that occasion. The arbitrary suppositions that have been
framed, in order to elude the force of this argument, as they
are without even the shadow of evidence, can merit no regard.
On the other hand, it is remarkable, and may serve, if possible,
to convince the most obstinate of the futility of those supposi-
tions, that in the epistle written by Polycarp to the same con-
gregation, about sixty years after, we find mention only of those
two orders, the presbyters and the deacons ; and no more allu-
sion made either to a vacancy in their number, or to any spiri-
tual superiour, present or absent, than was made by Paul in his
letter to them so long before. Now whether we call their pas--
tors bishops:^ with the apostle, or preabyters^ with Poljcarp, is
a matter of no consequence, as it is evident that both speak of
two orders only among them, and not of three ; and wherever
one of these names is employed, the other is dropped, this be-
ing the surest evidence which the nature of the thing admits,
that the words were synonymous.
But I observe further, that the sacred penmen, in speaking
of, or to particular churches, if the spiritual instructors and
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 69
guides of the people be mentioned at all, always mention thetai
in the plural number, which, though it may be compatible with
some little difference in rank or precedency, can scarcely be
thought compatible with so material a difference as that of o£'
fice or trust. Thus the apostle to the Thessalonians, 1 Tbesa.
V. 12, " We beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour
" among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish
** you," 7*s KOTTtsiilxi xJit zrpotiu^iyimt»f iiiB-eliiif]oi4- It is remarkable
too, that the term ^pti^etfi.iv'^, as every other name implying da-
Tection, or government, came afterwards to be appropriated to
the bishop ; with whom, according to the doctrine of high
church, the whole authority over the congregation was origi-
nally lodged. The presbyters could do nothing but as they
happened to be authorized or commissioned by him- I'he use
of such terms here, in the plural, when the apostle was addres-
sing the members of one single church, shows, that the appli-
cation was very different, and that matters were then on a very
different footing. In the Acts also, it appears very plain, that
all the stated pastors are always considered as coming under
one denomination. Thus we are told of the apostles Paul and
Barnabas, Acts xiv, 23, that, when journeying together, they
ordained elders, -zs-peT^vlspai, in every church. This is, indeed,
the common title given to the ministers settled in particular
churches throughout that book. When a collection is made
for the poor christians in Jerusalem, it is sent roii zs-peT^hpt-ti §
and if the pastors of any church are sent for, that they may re-
ceive proper directions, it is Tm Ts-psa-^vlifm. In the fifteenth,
chapter, where we have an account of the consultation held at
Jerusalem, about the Mosaick ceremonies, the ordinary pas-
tors are no less than five times, to wit, in verses 2d, 4th, 6th,
22d, and 23d, distinguished by this appellation from either the
apostles, or private christians, or both. Nor do we find a sin-
gle hint in the whole book of any thing like different clas-
ses of iFfe<r^v]epot. The name tTricmoTroi occurs there but once,
which is in the place above quoted, where it is applied to the
same individuals, who, in the same chapter, are termed ar^fp-
(ivlifot.
In regard to the imposition of hands, which is considered by
many as a necessary attendant on ordination, we find this also,
1 Tim. iv. 14, attributed to the presbytery. The word^perr^tt-
Itpiov-, though it occurs sometimes in the New Testament as ap-
plied to the Jewish sanhedrim, or council of elders, is foimd
only in the passage now quoted, applied to a christian council.
The sense of the word ■srpeT^vlcpoi, as well as the application of
the word ia-pe(rfivltpi<»i in other places, to a convention of those
called ■a^peo-^vltpoi, determines the sense of the word in this pas-
70 LECTURES ON
sage. And, indeed, all christian antiquity concurs in affixing
this name to what may be called the consistory of a particular
church, or tiie college of its pastors.
It must be remarked by every person who gives due attention
to the apostolical writings, that the custom then, if not uni-
formly, was, with very few exceptions, to give a plurality of
teachers to every church. The state of the christian commu-
nity at that time, which consisted almost entirely of new con-
verts, men and women, who had been habituated to principles
and practices very different from those they were to be in-
structed in, beside the more imminent dangers to which all
christians, but especially the pastors, were then exposed, ren-
dered ihis precaution absolutely necessar\ . They had, by this
means, a probable ground to expect, that if some of the teach-
ers should fall a sacrifice to the malice of their enemies, some
would escape their fury, and that in every church a timely op-
portunity might thus be found of supplying their vacancies, so
that the congregations should never be entirely destitute of
pastors.
To what has been adduced from sacred writ, I shall add two
very ancient testimonies : one of them is from the most res-
pectable remains we have of christian antiquity next to the in-
spired writings. The piece I allude to, is the first epistle of
Clemens Romanus to the Corinthians, as it is commonly styled,
but as it styles itself, the epistle of the church of God at
Rome to the church of God at Corinth. It is the same Cle-
ment whom Paul (Philip, iv, 3,) calls his fellow-labourer, and
one of those whose names are in the book of life. There we
are told, chap, xlii, that " the apostles having preached the
*> 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
whi<h did not descend to any after them. Of this kind was,
first, their receiving their mission immediately from the Lord
Jesus Christ, not mediately through any human ordination or
appointment : of this kind also was, secondly, the power of
conferring, by imposition of hands, the miraculous gifts of the
spirit on whomsoever they would; and, thirdly, the knowledge
they had, by inspiration, of the whole doctrine of Christ. It
was for this reason thev were commanded to wait the fulfil-
ment of the promise which their Master had given them, that
they should be baptized with the Holy Ghost. What pains
does not Paul take to show, that the above mentioned marks
of an apostle belonged to him as well as to any of them ? That
he had seen Christ after his resurrection, and was consequent-
ly qualified as an eye-witness to attest that memorable event,
he observes, 1 Cor. ix, 1 ; xv, 8 : that his commission came di-
rectly from Jesus Christ and God the Father, without the in-"
tervention of any human creature, he acquaints us. Gal. i, 1 ;
ii, 6. To his conferrirg miraculous powers as the signs of an
apostle, he alludes, 2 Cor. xii, 12 ; and that he received the
knowledge of the Gospel not from any other apostle, but by
immediate inspiration, Gal. i, 11, &c.
1 hirdly, their mission was of quite a different kind from
that of any ordinary pastor. It was to propagate the Gospel
throughout the world, both among Jews and Pagans, and not
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 7?
to take the charge of a particular flock. The terms of their
commission are, " Go and teach all nations." Again ; " Go
" ye into all the •vrorld, and preach the Gospel to every crea-
*' ture." No doubt they may be styled bishops or overseers,
but in a sense very different from that in which it is applied to
the inspector over the inhabitants of a particular district.
They were universal bishops ; the v/hole church, or rather,
the whole earth was their charge, and they were all colleagues
one of another. Or to give the same sentiment, in the words
of ChrySOStOm, Ecriv otto S-sa %f/^o?av^S-£v7£? XT^-oTJcXot ctpp/ov']ii. iiK. s!hn',
" The apostles were constituted ot God, rulers, not each over
*'• a separate nation or city, but all were intrusted with the
" world in common." If so, to have limited themselves to
any thing less, would have been disobedience to the express
command thev had received from their Master, to go into atl
nations, and to preach the Gospel to every creature. If, in the
latter part of the lives of any of them, they were, through
age and infirmities, confined to one place, that place would
naturally fall under the immediate inspection of such. And
this, if even so much as this, is all that has given rise to the
tradition, (for there is nothing like historical evidence in the
case) that any of them were bishops or pastors of particular
churches. Nay, in some instances, it is plain, that the tradi-
tion has originated from this single circumstance, that the first
pastors, in such a church, were appointed by such an apostlt.
Hence it has arisen, that the bishops of different churches
have claimed (and, probably, with equal truth) to be the suc-
cessours of the same apostle.
Fourthly and lastly, as a full proof that the matter was thus
universally understood, both in their own age, and in the times
immediately succeeding, no one, on the death of an apostle,
was ever substituted in his room, and w^hen that orisrinal sacred
college was extinct, the title became extinct with it. The
election of Matthias by the apostles, in the room of Judas, is
no exception, as it was previous to their entering on their
charge. They knew it was their Master's intention, that
twelve missionaries, from among those who had attended his
ministry on the earth, should be employed as ocular witnesses.
to attest his resurrection, on which the divinitv of his religion
depended. The words ot Peter, on this occasion, are an
ample confirmation of all that has been said^ both in regard to
the end of the office, and the qualifications requisite in the
person who fills it, at the same time that they afl'ord a demon-
stration of the absurdity as well as arrogance of modern pre-
tenders. " Wherefore of these men which have companied
rs LECTURES ON
" with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out
" among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto that
" same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordain-
*' ed to be a witness with us of his resurrection." But after-
wards, when the apostle James, the brother of John, was put
to death by Herod, as recorded in the Acts of the Apostles,
we find no mention made of a successour. Nor did the subse*
quent admission of Paul and Barnabas to the apostleship form
any exception from what has been adyanced ; for they came
not as successours to any one, but were specially called by the
Holy Spirit as aposdes, particularly to the Gentiles ; and in
them also were found tht qualifications requisite for the testi-
mony which, as apostles, they were to give.
It is a similar subterfuge to recur to any of the other extra-
ordinary minir-ters who wtre at that time in the church. It
holds true of them all slike, that their office was temporary,
and the charge they had was univ-ersal : it extended to the
whole church. Of this kind evidently was the office of evan-
gelist, a title which, like apostle, fell v/iih those who first en-
joyed it. Such ■was Philip, such was Timothy, and such cer-
tainly was also Titus* The last mentioned, I own is no
where expressly called so. Bat from a proper attention to
what we learn concerning him and limoihy, both in the Acts
of the A-postles, and in Paul's epistles, we find their situa-
tions, services, and trusts, so perfectly to correspond, that we
cannot hesitate a moment in affirming that their f;mctions
were the same, and that they both served as assistants to the
apostle Paul. Such, also, probabh , were Mark and Luke. I
do not here allude to the. right they acquired to this title from
the gospels which thev wrote, but as due to them from having
assisted some of the apostles in that capacity. Luke was long
the companion of Paul ; Mark is said to have attended Peter.
And if he was a different person from this evangelist (about
which some have doubted) John, surnamed Mark, ought also
to be included, who for some time attended the apostles Paul
and Barnabas, and after their separation, Barnabas.
The work of an evangelist appears to have been to attend
the apostles in their journeys for the promulgation of the gos-
pel, to assist them in the office of preaching, especially in places
which the gospel had not reached before. This conveys the
true distinction between the (ireek v^ords x'.;pvG-(reiv and evxyye?Ki^£iv.,
from which last the nam.e evangelist is taken. The former
signifies to preach in generjil, or proclaim the reign of the
Messiah ; the Litter, the igh freqiiently rendered in the same
wr?y, denotes, properlv, to declare the good news, that is, the
gospel, to those who had before known nothing of the matter.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 79
The evangelists assisted also in settling the churches, always
acting under the direction oi the apostles, and bearing messages
from them to those congregations vvhiijh the apostles could
not then personally visit, serving to supply their places in re-
forming abuses, and settling order. But the whole history ma-
nifestly proves, that their superintendenc) , in pariicuiar places,
was not stationary, and for life, but occasional and ambula-
tory. The words of Paul to Titus clearly show thus much.
" For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldst set in
*' order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every
" city, as I appointed thee." This is not the language of one
who had assigned him this as his fixed station, bat of one who
had intrusted him with the execution of x special purpose,
which the apostle could not then execute himself; and vvhich,
when Titus had executed, the sole intention of his presence
there was accomplished. But that they remained still in their
extraordinary character of evangelists, and were still under
the direction of those apostles whom they assisted in that
capacity, appears also from this, that Paul enjoins Fimothy to
make dispatch, in regard to the matters he was charged with in
Asia, that he might be with him in Rome before the winter.
As to Titus, he orders him to meet him at Nicopolis, in Ma-
cedonia, where he intended to pass the winter ; and afterwards,
he writes to Timothy, (for the second epistle to Timothy was
posterior to the epistle to Titus) that Titus was gone to
Dalmatia.
As to the dates or postscripts subjoined to the epistles in the
common bibles, it is universally agreed, among the learned,
that- they are of no authority. They are not found in some of
our best and most ancient manuscripts : they are not the same
in all copies, and some of them are evidently false. The time
in which they have been annexed, is not thought to have been
earlier than the fifth century. We know how far at that time a
species of vanity carried people, to trace the line of their pas-
tors upwards, through a very dark period, to apostles and
evangelists, supplying, by their guesses, the imperfections of
tradition. Certain it is, that in the three first centuries, nei-
ther Timothy nor Titus is styled bishop by any writer. It
also deserves to be remarked, that in the island of Crete, of
which Titus is said, in the postscript of Paul's epistle to him,
to have been ordained the first bishop, there were no fewer,
according to the earliest accounts and catalogues extant, than
eleven bishops. Hence it is that Titus has been called by some
of the later fathers an archbishop ; though few of the warmest
friends of episcopacy pretend to give the archiepiscopal order
so early a date. Yet it is not without some colour of reason
80 LECTURES ON *
that they have named him so; since he was appointed to or-
dain elders in every eity, and hud therefore a superintendency
for the time over the whole island. Whereas it is well known,
that in the earliest times of episcopacy, every city wherein
there was a church, that is, wherein there were christian con-
verts enow, hud its own bishop. Now if such was the case
with Titus, he enjoyed an office there in which he had no suc-
cession J since in all the ancient history of the church, after the
death of the extraordinary ministers, till the rise of the metro-
political jurisdiction, whiwh was near two centuries afterwards,
the bishop of a single congregation Avas the highest order
known in the church. But our adversaries in this question do
not reflect, that b)- making him a metropolitan, they deprive
themselves of the only plausible account that has been given
on their side, why he got no directions concerning the conse-
cration of bishops, namely, that he himself was the bishop.
For being in that island, by their hypothesis archbishop, he had
se\'eral suiTragans of the episcopal order, in whose ordination
alone he was immediately concerned. The ordaining of pres-
byters and deacons was properly their work, and not his.
Paul, on that supposition, omitted to give him instructions on
the only point in which he had a concern. This holds still
more evidently in regard to Timothy, whom the same persons
have made primate, or rather patriarch, of the proconsular
Asia, wherein there were many bishops. What excuse will
their ingenuity invent for this repeated oversight of the apos-
tle, in mentioning only two orders instead of three ? Indeed,
so little can the instructions, given by Paul to Timothy and
Titus, be made to quadrate with any ordinary ministry that
ever obtained in the church, that we are forced to conclude
with the learned Dr. Whitby, (see his preface to the epistle to
Titus) that theirs was extraordinary as well as temporary,
and that they were not succeeded in it by any that came after
them. But if we must have successours to those extraordinary
missionaries, why do we not retain both their titles and their
ofSces ? And why have we not successours to them all? Why
have we not still our apostles, and evangelists, and prophets, and
governments, and tongues, and interpreters, and miracles, and
discerncrs of spirits, as well as they ? This would be no more
than the native consequence of that principle, that we must
have something corresponding and successive to offices which
were then, by the wisdom of God, judged necessary for the
subversion of idolatry, and the first publication of the faith.
It is of as lit'de weight to urge, that committing the charge
of ordaining presbyters and deacons to those extraordinary
ministers, Timothy and Titus, was an evidence that there was
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 81
no such power in the pressbyters or bishops, as they are also
called, who had been ordained in those places before. But
how does it appear, that there had been any ordained in the
churches to which their charge then extended ? The congre-
gations, as was hinted already, for some time left under the
tutelage of those extraordinary ministers, the prophets and
wise men who happened to be among them. 1 he first men-
tion that is made of the ordination, or settlement of eiders in
every city, is in the fourteenth chapter of the Acts, whereas
many thousands had been converted to Christianity in dif-
ferent places long before. And that some oi the churches
to which Paul's epistles were directed, had no fixed ministry!
is evident from the tenour of the epistles themselves, parti-
cularly from those written to the Corinthians. Now the
directions given to both Timothy and Titus clearly show,
that they relate to the planting of churches, by supplying for
the first time, with stated pastors, those converts who had
none before. This must have been done b)' the extraordi-
nary ministers, if it was ever to be done at all. But when
that was once effected, no other than ordinary means, to
which the pastors to be ordained were equal, were requi-
site for the supply of occasional vacancies, and for preserving
an order once established. Accordingly, the ex^rcution of
the charge which Paul gave to Timothy, whereof the plant-
ing of churches, by supplying them with pastors, was a prin-
cipal part, he denominates doing the work, not of a bishop,
but of an evangelist, and fulfilling that ministry. Aaron, the
first high priest under the former dispensation, and after him
Eleazar his son, were solemnly consecrated by Moses, who
was an extraordinary minister, in as much as he was the
steward and sole superintendent over the house of God. But
was this ever understood to imply, that no succeeding priest,
and especially no succeeding high priest, could be legally
consecrated by any who was inferiour in ofhce to Moses ?
Had that been the case, the priesthood niust have expired
with that generation. Moses, in his exalted station, had no
successor. And till the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,
it might be justly said, " There arose not a prophet since in
" Israel, like unto Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face."
It was necessary indeed that he should lay the foundation of
the Israelitish church, but that he should raise the super-
structure was not necessary. To effect this was left to mean-
er hands. And the priesthood, once established, was suffi-
cient of itself for filling up the voids that iTiight be made by
death, and other accidents. And it is reasonable to think,
that the case, in this respect, would not be similar with the
L
k LECTtTRE^bS
church of Christ? Hence it is evident, that all the arguments,
in favour of the distinction, v/hich are brought by Epiphanius»
and others, from some passages in the epistles to Timothy and
Titus, being built on a false hypothesis, must fall to the ground.
They proceed upon the notion, that these were properly bi-
shops in the modern acceptation ; a notion utterly unknown to
that christian antiquity, which alone deserves the name of pri-
jnitive ; a notion, besides, incompatible with the authentick ac-
counts we have concerning these extraordinary ministers, who
\vere not made bishops till about five hundred years after their
death.
There is only one other plea of any consequence in favour
of the apostolical antiquity of episcopacy, which I shall now
examine, I have reserved it for the last, because it affords an
excellent handle for inquiring into the real origin of subordi-
nation among the christian pastors. The plea I mean is taken
from the epistles to the seven Asian churches in the Apoca-
lypse, addressed to the angels of these churches severally, and
in the singular number ; to the angel of the church of Ephe-
sus, and so of the rest. It appears from the first chapter of
that book, that each epistle is intended for all the church or
congregation mentioned in the direction or superscription.
But one person, called the angel of that church, is addressed
in name of the whole. This is evidently different from the
uniform style both of the Acts of the apostles and of Paul's
epistles. In them, as we have seen, the pastors in every
church are always spoken of in the plural number. The same
titles are used promiscuously of all, (except the deacons) as of
persons quite co-ordinate in power and trust. Here, on the
contrary, the singular number is used, and a name given which
is not commonly applied to those in the ministry, ordinary or
extraordinary. Angel properly denotes messenger or ambas-
sadour, It is the name usually assigned to the celestial spirits,
as expressive of the relation they stand in to God. The infer-
nal spirits are, in like manner, called the devil's angels. It is
sometimes also used of men. Thus it is predicted in scripture
concerning John the baptist : — " Behold, I send my angel be-
*' fore thee, who shall prepare thy way." But what shall we
say of the import of the expression in that part of the Apoca-
lypse now referred to? Shall we, withmany,considerthisunusual
application of a name, and the adopting of the singular num-
ber in reference to the sacred office, though but in one single
book, and that a very mysterious and prophetical book, as a
sufficient counterpoise to all the arguments in favour of the co-
ordination of the pastors, taken from the uniform style of the
plain and historical part of scripture, which informs us of the
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. &^
planting of churches ; and from the familiar epistles of the
apostles to those churches that had been planted, or to their as-
sistants in the ministry? I do not think, that by any just rule
of interpretation we can. This would be not to borrow light
from the perspicuous passages, in order to dispel the darkness,
of the obscure, but to confound the light of the clearest pas-
sages, by blending it with the obscurity of the darkest.
Shall we then maintain with some zealous patrons of the
presbytei'ian model, that in the sublime and allegorical style of
prophecy, a community is here personified and addressed as
one man ? Shall v/e affirm, that by the angel is meant the pres-
bytery, which our Lord, the better to express the union that
ought to subsist among the members, emphatically considers
as one person ? With this interpretation I am equally dissatis-
fied. It is indeed evident, that each of these epistles is ulti-
mately intended for the congregation. The faults reprehend-
ed are therefore to be understood as the faults not of the mini-
ster or ministers peculiarly, but as the faults that predominated
among the people, and with which both the pastors and the flock
are more or less chargeable 5 and the warnings and admoni-
tions, as given to them all. Accordingly, when there is a ne-
cessity of distinguishing the conduct of some from that of
others, the plural number is adopted as in chap, ii, v. 10 :— ^
*' Behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that yoU
*' may be tried.'* See also verses 13, 23, 24, and 25. But to un-
derstand by the name angel another community, namely^ that
of the pastors, appears to me an unnatural supposition^ which
does violence to the text. Though we have instances, especi*
ally in precepts and denunciations, wherein a community is
addressed by the singular pronouns thou and thee^ I do not re-
collect such an use of an appellative as the application of the
word angelhtvQ Would be, on the hypothesis of those interpre-
ters. But is there no medium ? Must the angel of each church
here addressed be of an order diifering from that of the other
ministers, and superiour to it, or must it imply their collec-
tive body ? To me an intermediate opinion^ which has been
adopted by some criticks, appears much more probable than ei»
ther. My sentiment therefore is, that, as in their consistories
and congregations, it would be necessary, for the sake of order^
that one should preside, both in the offices of religion, and in
iheir consultations, for the common good, it is their president
pr chairman that is here addressed under the name of angeL
A regulation of this kind all sorts of societies are led to adopt
from necessity, in order to prevent confusion in conducting bu-
siness ; and those christian societies would also fall into it by
example; They had adopted the name ^p£<r^vlsfi»v presbyterv
84 LECTURES ON
or senate, from the name frequently given to the Jewish san-
hedrim. The term Trpfa-S'fTfp®-, elder or senator, they had also
borrowed from the title given to the members of that council.
Nothing could be more natural, than to derive from that court
also the practice of conducting their affairs more decently and
expeditiously by the help of a president.
Let it not be imagined that I mean to signify, that the pres-
bytery was formed on the model of the sanhedrim, because
they adopted the same name. This, far from being necessary,
is not even probable. Their difFerent uses and purposes must
suggest the propriety of many differences in their structure
iand procedure. But on the first erection of this christian se-
nate, or council, they could hardly fail to take as much of the
form of the Jewish, as was manifestly of equal convenience in
both. It still adds to the probability of this, that in the syna-
gogue from which many of the terms used in the church in
those early times were borrowed, he who presided in conduct-
ing the worship and in directing the reading of the law, was
styled the angel of the congregation.
An example they likewise had in the apostolical college
itself, in which Peter appears, by the appointment of his mas-
ter to have presided ; though in no other particular was he
endowed with any power or privilege not conferred on the
rest, who were, in respect of apostleship, his colleagues and
equals. I shall not detain you v/ith entering into the contro-
versy that has been so much laboured between protestants and
papists, and of the latter, between some more and some less
papistical, in regard to the prerogatives of Peter. I think it
has been made sufficiently manifest, that there was not any
kind of power conferred on him, in which his fellow-apostles
were not sharers with him. He is indeed made a principal
foundation of the church * ; but they also are foundations -j* ;
for the house of God is built on the foundation of the apostles
and prophets ; and on the twelve foundations of the wall of
the new Jerusalem were inscribed the names of the twelve
apostles ;}.. The power of binding and loosing, that is, of
pronouncing, without danger of errour, the sentence of God
hi either retaining or remitting sins, was indeed first conferred
upon Peter 11, but afterwards, as we learn in other passages,
particularly from the apostle John **, on all the eleven. Yet I
think it would be putting a forced construction on the words
used by Christ, when Peter first professed his faith in him as
the Messiah, and had his name changed from Simon to Ce-
• Mat. xvi. 18. t Eph. ii.SO. jj. Rev. xxi. 14.
y Mat. ivi. 19. *"■ Matt, sviii. 18; John xi. 23.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 85
phas, or Peter, that is, Rock ; to affirm, that they convey to
this apostle no pre-eminence or distinction whatever. For
though we are taught from scripture to consider the declara-
tions made to Peter as being also applicable to them all, still
they are to be regarded as most eminently applicable to him,
to whom, in the singular number, our Lord, in the audience
of the rest, addressed himself in this manner : " I say to ihee,'*
— and " I will give to thee." The confession which Peter
made was doubtless the confession of them all. They were
therefore all made partakers of the same benefits. But as
Peter's zeal had led him to be, as it were, their mouth, in
making this profession to his master, Christ, after the effusion
of the spirit, honoured him to be their mouth also, in first
preaching this doctrine, and giving testimony for him to the
Jews, and afterwards, by the special call of God, to the uncir-
cumcised Gentiles. It is thus this apostle himself speaks of
it: — "Brethren, ye know that God made choice among us,
*' that the Gentiles, by my mouth, should hear the word of the
*' gospel." This is called, in another place, " opening the
" door of faith to the Gentiles," and affords a natural exposi-
tion of Christ's declaration to Peter, " I give thee the kevs
" of the kingdom of heaven." Yet even here there is nothing
peculiar given to Peter, but merely that he should be honour-
ed to be the first. In the conversion of the Gentiles after-
wards, Paul was incomparably more eminent than he.
That Peter however was considered as the president of
that college, appears from several particulars. One is, he is
not only always named first in the gospels, and in the Acts,
but by Matthew, who Vv'as also an apostle, he is called lipa?®-,
the firsts which I imagine is equivalent to president or chief.
Tifaroi '2,if4.a¥, — the first Simon. It is not the adverb Tpaltv, that
is used here, which would have barely implied, that the histo-
rian began with his name, but the adjective or epithet w^*?*?-
This is the more remarkable, that he was not first called to the
apostleship, for his brother Andrew was called before him, as
we learn from the gospel of John. There is hardly therefore
any other sense, than that now given, that can be put upon the
expression. Sometimes when the apostles are spoken of,
Peter alone is named. Thus : " Tell his disciples and Peter."
I acknowledge, however, that as another reason may be as-
signed for the distinction that is made in this passage, very
little stress can be laid on it. Again : " Peter stood up with
" the eleven." " They said to Peter and the rest of the apos-
*' ties." And of the three whom our Lord, on some occasions,
distinguished from the rest, honouring them to be witnesses
of his transfiguration, his raising from the dead Jairus's daugh-
«6 LECTURES ON
ter, and his agony in the garden, Peter is not only one, but
invariably named first. Paul indeed once, in mentioning
those three, arranges them otherwise, (Gal. ii. 9,) James^
Cephas^ and yohn. It appears, however, from this very pas-
sage, that Paul considered him as the head of the twelve.
When he says the gospel of the circumcision was committed
to Peter, it is evident that he is particularized by way of emi-
nence, for no person can doubt that Peter had this ministry in
common with the other eleven. And in taking notice of the
success of the gospel among the Jews, Peter alone is again
named as the great instrument God had employed for that
purpose. And in another place, he mentions his own visit to
the mother church at Jerusalem, as made peculiarly to Peter,
with whom he abode fifteen days. These, I acknowledge,
are but slight circumstances taken severally, but taken in con-
junction, they are strong enough for supporting all that I
intend to build vipon them. For nothing is here ascribed to
him as peculiar but the presidentship, or the first place in the
discharge of the functions of an apostle common to them all.
He was not among the apostles as a father among his children,
of a different rank, and of a superiour order, but as an elder
brother among his younger brothers, the first of the same rank
and order. " Be not you called rabbi," said Jesus to the
twelve, some time after the honourable declaration made tO
Peter, " for one is your master, even Christ, and all you arc
*' brethren ; and call no man your father upon the earth, for
" one is your father who is in heaven." It is perhaps unneces-
sary to add, that whatever was conferred on Peter was merely
personal, and could descend to none after him. This indeed
is an unavoidable consequence of another point, that the apos-
tolate itself was personal, and did not admit succession, which
I have proved to you in the the preceding part of this discourse.
As to Dodwell's notion of the presidency of the apostle James,
the son of Alpheus, otherwise James the less, also called the
Lord's brother, and supposed to have been the first bishop of
Jerusalem, and likewise of the temporary primacy, first of the
church of Jerusalem, afterwards of the church of Ephesus, X
have taken notice of both in another place.
Some keen controvertists on the protestant side would be
apt to censure what has been now advanced in regard to the
apostle Peter, as yielding too much to the Romanist. Yet ia
fact nothing at all is yielded. The bishop of Rome has no more
claim to be the successor of Peter, than the bishop of London
has, or indeed any pastor in the church. It is but too com-
monly the effect, though* a very bad effect, of religious contro-
versy, that impartiality and even judgment are laid aside by
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Sf
both parties, and each considers it as his glory to contradict the
other as much, and to recede from his sentiments as far, as
possible. One is afraid of every thing that looks like conces-
sion : it is like losing ground in a battle, For when once un-
happily the controversial spirit has gotten possession of a man,
his object is no longer truth but victory. Against this evil I
would warn you, my young friends, as much as possible. Re-
vere truth above all things wherever you find it. Attend cool-
ly and candidly to the voice of reason, from what quarter so-
ever it comes. Let not the avenues to your understanding be
choked up with prejudices and prepossessions, but be always
open to conviction.
Now, though what has been advanced in regard to the apos*
tolate should not be deemed sufficiently established, yet that
one, on account either of seniority, or of superiour merit, ha-
bitually presided in the presbytery, will still remain probable,
for the other reasons assigned, the obvious conveniency of thfr
thing, the commonness of it in all sorts of councils and conven-
tions ; particularly in the sanhedrim and synagogue, the only-
rational account that, in a consistency with other parts of sacred
writ, or with any christian relicks of equal antiquity, can be gi.^
yen of the address, in the singular number, to the pastors of
the seven churches severally in the Apocalypse ; and I may
add, the most plausible account which it affords of the origin
of the more considerable distinction that afterwards obtained
between bishop and presbyter. The whole of life shows us,
that from the most trivial causes the greatest effects sometimes
proceed. History in particular evinces this truth, and no sort
of history more remarkably than the ecclesiastical.
It may further be obse'rved, in support of the same doctrine,
that some of the most common appellations, whereby the bi-
shop was first distinguished, bear evident traces of this origin.
He was not only called ^poira^, but arpoe^^a?, president, chairman ;
and by periphrasis the presbyters were called «< bk m ^idlspa S-pova,
they who possessed the second seat or throne, as the bishop was
■xp6>ro«.x6i^fio<i, he who possessed the first. Thus he was in the
presbytery, as the speaker in the house of commons, who is not
of a superiour order to the other members of the house, but is
a. commoner among commoners, and is only, in consequence ot
that station, accounted the first among those of his own rank.
The same thing might be illustrated by the prolocutor of either
house of convocation in England, or the moderator of an eccle-
siastical judicatory in Scotland. Now as the president is, as
it were, the mouth of the council, by which they deliver their
judgment, and by which theyaddress themselves to others, it is
natural to suppose, that through the same channel, to wit, their
88 LECTURES ON
president, they should be addressed by others. A letter there-
fore to the congregation might very naturally be directed to
him who possessed the first place, and presided among them.
But it may be said, Is not this at most but a plausible conjec-
ture, and not a proof ? 1 acknowledge, indeed, that the poirxt
does not admit so positive a proof as might be wished. But in
a case of this kind, the most plausible conjecture, as it is all
that can be had, v/ill be accounted sufficient by a reasonable
man for determining the question. This solution appears to
me the best, because it puts no undue stretch upon the words,
and is perfectly compatible M'^ith that equality in power and or-
der, which the uniform style of the Acts and the Epistles, in
the promiscuous application of the same appellatives, and in
the use of the plural number on such occasions, proves to have
subsisted among the pastors first settled by the apostles and
evangelists. This equality is, in my opinion, strongly sup-
ported. It is only the solution now given of the difficulty,
arising from the noted passage in the Apocalypse, that I ad-
mit to be conjectural. And all I plead in its favour is, that
of all the conjectures I have seen on that article, it is the
most likely.
It was doubtless the distinction of one pastor in every
church, marked by this apostle, chough not made by any who
had written before him, which has led TertuUian, whose pub-
lications first appeared but about a century after the apostles,
to consider him as the institutor of episcopacy. These are
his words, (lib. iv. adv. Marcionem) "•' Ordo tamen episcopo-
" rum ad originem recensus, in Joannem stabit auctorem :'*
which Bingham (Christian Antiquities, b. ii. chap. 1, sect. 3,)
translates thus: — •' I'he order of bishops, when it is traced
*' up to its original, will be found to have Saint John for one
*' of its authors." A palpable misinterpretation of our anti-
quary. TertuUian says expressly, " Our inquiries into the
*' origin of the episcopal order terminate in John the author."
Had that father said, " Mundus ad originem recensus, in
*' Deum stabit creatorem ;" would Bingham have rendered it,
*' The world, when it is traced up to its original, will be found
" to have God for one of its creators ?" I cannot allow myself
to think it. Yet the interpolation in rendering creatorem one
of its creators, is not more flagrant, than in rendering auctcrem
one of its authors. By this version he avoids showing what is
extremely plain from the words, that TertuUian did not think
there was any subordination in the pastors of the churches
instituted by the other apostles. Else how should he refer us
to John, of whom, though an eminent propagator of the faith,
we have not such particular accounts as of some of his col-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 89
leagues ? If he had discovered any traces of such a disparity
in the settling of the churches, recorded in the Acts of the
Apostles, or mentioned in the Epistles of Paul, it is impossi-
ble he should have referred us solely to John, of whom we
have so little information, as the author. But this opinion he
has evidently founded on the Apocalypse, a book mentioned
by him in the same sentence. Now if he thought that that
apostle gave a model to the churches escablished by him, which
the other apostles had not given to theirs, (though in after-
times it came to be universally adopted) we must conclude, at
least, that he did not consider any particular external form as
essential to the christian church, but as a thing entirely discre-
tionary in the several founders. And that this was his opinion,
appears at least probable from this, that he had mentioned
John's paternal care of certain churches in the preceding sen-
tence, which he therefore considered as peculiarly his. " Ha-
*' bemus et Joannis allumnas ecclesias." To me, however, it
is more likely, that John, in the direction of the epistles to
the seven churches, availed himself of a distinction, which had
subsisted from the beginning, but as it implied no difference
in order and power, was too inconsiderable to be noticed in
the history. This I think at least more credible, than that
either the church was new modelled by this apostle, or that
the different apostles adopted different plans.
In my next lecture, I shall make a few more observations
on the constitution of the apostolick church, and on the nature
and character of episcopacy, which obtained in the second and
third centuries ; and shall, in that and some subsequent dis-
courses, proceed in tracing the progress of the hierarchy from
the latent and inconsiderable seeds or principles whence it
sprang^ to the amazing height at which it at length arrived.
M
96 LECTURES ON
LECTURE VI.
J. HE purpose of this lecture is to make a few more obser-
vaiions on the constitution of the apostolick. church, and on
the nature of the episcopacy which obtained in the second
^nd ihird centuries.
When the gospel was preached by the apostles throughout
the different cities and countries into which they travelled,
wherever they made as many converts as would be sufficient
to form a congregation, they caused them to unite together for
this purpose ; and with the first convenient opportunity, set-
tled (as Clemens Romanus expresses it) bishops and deacons
among them, for instructing them more fully, both publickl;^
and privately, for guiding them by their counsel in every
doubtful or difficult exigence, and for conducting more regu-
larly in their assemblies the publick worship and ordinances.
When the disciples in any place were not numerous enough
to form a congregation by themselves, they united them to that
which was nearest. To the congregation they gave the name
^xx^^Tjincc. which is commonly rendered church.
The deacons, who seem at first to have been chosen merely
in consequence of a particular exigence, as we learn from
Acts vi. 1, &c. to wit, for the inspection of the poor, and the
distribution of the charitable collections, were admitted very
early, probably in the time of the apostles, to an inferiour
part in the sacred ministry, such as attending the pastors in
the discharge of the religious offices, and acting under their
direction. The deaconship served in fact as a noviciate to the
ministry.
The bishops or pi"esbyters (for these terms, as we have seen,
were then used synonymously) appear to have been all-per-
fectiy co-ordinate in ministerial powers. That a certain pri-
oritv or presidentship, for order's sake, and in deference either
to seniority, or to distinc;uishable talents, was allowed to one
of their number, is probable for the reasons assigned in my
last discourse. That the p-istors were from the beginning
vested with a superintendency over the congregation purely.
ECCLESrASTICAL HISTORY. 91
in what concerned spiritual matters, cannot be questioned.
Some of the titles that are given them in scripture, liya/itevoi,
Trpeis-xfievet, guides, governours, undoubtedly imply thus n U( h,
as JO also che terms in which the duty of the people to their
pastors is recommended; vu^ea-de vveuHs, obey, submit, which
manifestly require a respectful observance on their part. For
this reason 1 imagine^ that the generality of those modern
sects, which have adopted the congregational, or independent
plan, as it is called, have gone to an extreme, though not the
most common extreme, in bringing the pastoral authority too
low.
It is however certain, that when authority of any kind is
unattended with what are commonly called coercive measures,
or the power of the sword, and unsupported by temporal
splendour, or worldly sanctions, it is impossible to preserve it
otherwise amongst an enlightened people, than by purity of
character in those vested with it, and by diligence in the dis-
charge of the duties of their station. In such cases, this is the
only foundation on which the respect, obedience, and submis-
sion of others can be raised. It was therefore a pertinent
advice that Paul gave to Timothy, however oddly it mav ap-
pear at first : — " Let no man despise thee." For we may
justly say, that in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, if a
pastor is despised, he has himself to blame. All however
that I purpose, by quoting the aforesaid titles and commands,
is to show, that in what related to the peculiar duties of their
office, a reverential attention was acknowledged to be due tb
them, as the guides and guardians of the flock.
There were some things, however, which, from the begin-
ning, were conducted in common by the pastors, the deacons,
and the whole congregation. This appears particularly and
most properly to have been the case in all matters of scandal
and offence. In regard to these, it is the community, that, in
strictness of speech, is offended. The very word scandal or
stumbling-block implies this. It is the community, therefore,
that ought to be satisfied. It is to them our Lord appears
(Matth. xviii. 15, &c.) to have committed the charge of ad-
monishing delinquents, and even of excommunicating obsti-
nate offenders. But 1 shall have occasion to examine the import
of that passage in the gospel afterwards. Only it may be
further observed, in confirmation of what has been now ad-
vanced, that the earliest practice of the church was conforma-
ble to the interpretation now given. Clement, in the epistle
above quoted, (chap, liv.) calls church censures ra, ^pee-lxa-ovfum,
ozs-o TH vXnB-evg, the things commanded by the multitude, that
is, the congregation.
9>^, 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}<ri»
Io-f«j)A. And after the revolt of the ten tribes, when they ceased
to make one people or state with the other two, we hear of
Ts-utrct i ey-itXyiu-iat, la^ot. This is the large or comprehensive use of
the word as above observed. In regard to the more confined
application, the same term fJcxAufr^a was also employed to denot«
a number of people, either actually assembled, or wont to
assemble, in the same place. Thus all belonging to the same
synagogue were called indiflferently nacXtj^toi, or a-vuxyuyyiy as
these words in the Jewish use were nearly synonymous. But
never did they call the people belonging to several neighbour-
ing synagogues cKKXii<^tx, or a-vvxyayn, in the singular number,
but sKuXnirten, and ervyxyuYxi, in the plural. Any other use in the
apostles, therefore, must have been as unprecedented and un-
natural as it would have been improper, and what could not
fail to lead their hearers or readers into mistakes. There are
some other differences between the modern and the ancient
applications of this word, which I shall take another opportu-
nity of observing.
Now as one bishop is invariably considered, in the most an-
cient usage, as having only one ckkMo-ix, it is manifest that his
inspection at first was only over one parish. Indeed, the words
congregation and parish are, if not synonymous, predicable of •
each other. The former term relates more properly to the
people as actually congregated, the other relates to the extent
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ior
of ground which the dwelling houses of the members of one
congregation occupy. Accordingly, the territory to which
the bishop's charge extended, was always named, in the period
I am speaking of, in Greek ■sret^tx.tat, in Latin parochia^ or ra-
ther paroeda^ which answers to the English word parish^ and
means properly a neighbourhood.
Let it not be imagined that I lay too great stress on the import
of words, whose significations in time come insensibly to alter.
It merits to be observed, that in the first application of a name
to a particular purpose, there is commonly a strict regard paid
to etymology. As this word, together with the adjective
vrxpotK^, vicinus, neighbouring, are conjugates of the verb
^xpeiKeu, accolo^jiixta habitOy it can be applied no otherwise when
it relates to place, than the term parish is wiih us at this day.
And this exactly agrees with the exposition of the word given
by Stephanus, that learned and accurate lexicographer. " Ego
*' non parochias primum, sed paroecias appellatas esse censeo :
^* zretpotKoi enim sunt accolse, quare qui fanum aliquod accolunt
*' paroeci dicti sunt, ejusdem scilicet fani consortes, etparoecia
*' accolarum conventus et accolatus, sacraque vicinia, nam
** zrtipaiMt dicuntur etiam ei TrpoTemet, id est vicini."
fii^Let it be observed further, that in those early ages the bi-
shop's charge or district was never called hotx.yiirii; a diocess»
concerning the import of which I shall add the following pas»
sage from the same authority. ** Latini quoque utuntur hoc
** vocabulo: diceceses vocantes quasdam quasi rainores provin-
** cias, quas aliquis, qui eis prsefectus est, administrat, et in
*i quibus jus dicit, unde et pontificum <Ji©<«!j3-f*«, apud recenti-
** ores." Thus in a few ages afterwards, when the bishop*s
charge became so extensive as more to resemble a province
than a parish, nay, when in fact it comprised mimy churches
and parishes within it, the name was changed, and it was then
very properly called a diocess. The other term, without de*
viating in the least from its original and proper import, re^
ceived anew application to that which was put under the cure
of a presbyter only.
But I shall offer a few more thoughts on this subject in Tny
];iext prelection, and shall consider more particularly the con^ni*
tution of the church, and the powers of the several ord-vvs of
its miiiisters in the second and third centuriesc,
108 LECTURES ON
LECTURE Vil.
XN some preceding discourses, I have considered the nature
anci different orders of the ministry in the church constituted
by the apostles. Particularly in my last lecture on this sul>
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<rict?-fipiov ai lis criiTKoTi-®^.
Nothing can be more contemptible than the quibbles which
some keen controvertists have employed, ro elude the force
of this expression. They will have it to import one sort of
unity in the first clause, and quite a different sort in the se-
cond, though the second is introduced merely in explanation
hf the first. In the first, say they, it denotes not a numerical,
but SI mystical unity, not one thing, but one kind of ihing ; in the
second, one identical thing. One would think it impossible for
a writer more accurately, by any words to fix his meaning.
The illustration of one bishop puts it beyond question what sort
of unity he ascribes to the altar, one altar as one bishop j inso-
much that if, in a consistency with his assertion, there can be,
in one diocess, but one individual bishop, there can be, in
one fliocess, but one individual altar ; and contrariwise, if in
a consistency with his assertion, there may be, in one diocess,
many individual altars of the same kind, there may be also
many individual bishops of the same kind. Indeed, by their
mode of interpreting, the simile adduced, so far from tend-
ing, agreeably to the author's design, to explain and illustrate,
serves only to confound and mislead. What he ought to
have said is the reverse of what he did say. He ought, on
that hypothesis, to have said. There is one altar, but not as
there is one bishop, for in regard to the last, the bishop, we
affirm, that there is literally and properly but one in a dio-
cess ; in regard to the first, the altar, we affirm the unity only
figuratively and improperly, since, in the literal sense, there
may be many. The like chicane has been employed for elud-
tiO^ LECTURES oisr
ing the argument founded on the expressions one prayer and
one supplication,
' But to return; when the eucharist (which we more com-
pionly denominate the Lord's supper) was celebrated, the
whole people of the parish, or bishoprick, if you please to call
it so, communicated in the same congregation, and all receiv-
ed the sacrament, if not from the hands of the bishop, at
least under his eye. Hence it was that the setting up another
altar within the limits of his parish, beside the one altar of
the bishop, was considered as the great criterion of schism.
And as the whole of the bishop's parish generally received the
symbols of Christ's body and blood, mediately or immediate-
ly, from his hand, so they were, for the most part, baptized,
either by him, or in his presence. He had also the particular
superintendence of all the christian poor, the widows, the
orphans, the strangers, the prisoners, \vithin the bounds of
his charge, and the chief direction in the disposal of the pub-
lick charities. The testimonials, or Uteres J'ormatce^ as they
were called, which private christians were obliged to have
when removing from one district to another, that they might
be received as brethren in other christian congregations, were
all signed by the bishop, in like manner as with us they are
signed by the minister of the parish. Now all the particulars
above-mentioned were considered as belonging to his office.
No doubt when, through sickness or necessary absence, he
could not discharge any part himself, his place was supplied
by one or more of his presbvters or vicars. Nay, it was even
thought befitting, that the bishop should know, by name,
every individual of his flock, and that there should not be a
marriage among them without his approbation.
When all these things, which are supported by unexcepi
tionable testimonies, are duly weighed, is it possible to con-
ceive otherwise of the bishop, during the period I am here
speaking of, than as of the pastor of a single parish ? He an-
swers precisely to what, in later times, has been called thi
parson ; a. title of respect when it first came into use, though
I know not how, through the caprice of custom, it at present
conveys an idea of disrespectful familiarity. The presbyters
were his counsellors and assistants, or, as people would now
denominate them, his curates. I do not pretend that this
resemblance holds in every particular, though it plainly does
In most. Perhaps, in some things, the case may bear a great-
er analogy to some highland parishes in this northern part of
the island, wherein, by reason of their territorial extent, the
pastor is under the necessity of having ordained itinerant a^v
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Hi
sjatants, whom he can send, as occasion requires, to supply
his place in the remote parts of his charge.
I'his, by the way, suggests the principal difference between
those ancient and the greater part of modern parishes. In ge-
neral (not indeed universally) they were larger in respect oT
territory, though even, in this respect, far short of a modern
diocess. But it is not so much by the measure of the ground
as by the number of the people, that the extent of a pastoral
charge is to be reckoned. Now that, in this last respect, they
did not, at first, exceed modern parishes, is manifest from the
several particulars which have been observed above. Nay, if
every circumstance be considered, there is reason to believe
that they were less. There were yet no magnificent edifices,
built for the reception of christian assemblies, such as wer^
afterwards reared at a grt'at expense, and called churches*
Their best accommodatiorj, for more than a century, was the
private houses of the weaithiest disciples, which were but ill
adapted to receive very nunverpus conventions. However, as
it was but a small part of the people of a city or village, with
its environs, which composed the church, the extent of
territory, that would be necessary to supply the pastor with
one sufficient congregation, must be so much the greater ia
proportion as the number of unconverted Jews and Heathens
would exceed the number of converts. Suppose at the time
the churches were first planted by the apostles, the christians at
a medium were one-thirtieth part of the people. This. I be-
lieve is rather counting high, for in very populous cities, like
Rome and Alexandria, we have no reason to think that they
amounted to one hundredth part. However, as in a suppo-
sition of this kind, intended merely for illustration, there i$
no occasion for historical exactness ; let the number of chris-
tians be reckoned one thirtieth of the inhabitants over all Asia
Minor. Suppose further, that country to have been equal
then, in point of populousness, to what Great Britain is at,
present. One of their bishopricks, in order to afford a con-
gregation equal to that of a middling parish, ought to have
been equal in extent to thirty parishes in this island. Yet take
them at an average, and they will be fouud to have been scarce-
ly equal to one-third of that number. By the account which
Bingham gives us in his Christian Antiquities, (b. ix, ch, ii,
sect. 8,) an author by no means inclined to diminish the epis-
copal dignity, the whole forty-eight bishopricks, in the fourth
Century, comprehended in the patriarchate of Jerusalem, were
no more than equal to two middling German diocesses. And
as that patriarchate included three provinces under their re-
spective metropolitans, the district of a primate, or inetrop<s
112 LECTUllES ON
litan, in Palestine, under whom there were many bishops,
wanted one third to be of equal extent with the precincts of
s^n Ordinary bishop in Germany. We may, however, form
some notion of the origin of those extensive parishes, for,
considered as parishes, they must be called extensive, from
what happens in the manner of proceeding adopted by any
new religious sect, which springs up amongst ourselves.
Where their proselytes are not numerous, the parishes or dis-
tricts assigned to their ministers must be so much the more
extended. In fact, they are not less sometimes, if we reckon
by the distance of one conventicle from another, than twenty,
thirty, or even fifty miles in length.
Bingham has observed, on the province of Pontus Polemo-
niacus, that it comprehended only five diocesses, and that of
those Neocesaria, the metropolis, was no less than a hundred
miles from Polemonium, and sixty from Comana, the two
nearest bishopricks, or rather the two nearest episcopal resi-
dences. But he has not thought proper to observe also, what
Tillemont hath shown from Basil and Gregory of Nyssa, both
natives of Cappudocia, that, in the middle of the third cen-
tury, there were no more than seventeen believers in that ex-
tensive diocess : and these probably all resided in the city.
Could fewer be properly associated into one congregation ?
It deserves likewise to be remarked, that the largeness, even
in point of territor}', of those primitive parishes or diocesses,
if you please to call them so, was more in appearance than in
reality. In a particular province, I shall suppose, there were,
immediately after the first publication of the gospel, twelve
parishes erected. This does by no means imply, that the
whole province was divided into twelve parishes, though this
is the way in which we too commonly understand it. There
might be, and often were, many towns, and villages, and
tracts of land, in the province, wherein there were no chris-
tians at all, and which therefore were not at first considered as
belonging to any of those parishes. A parish generally was
in fact no more than one city or village, with its suburbs and
environs. Afterwards, indeed, when in such places as had
not been originally included there came to be some christian
converts, these would naturally join themselves to the congre-
gation assembling in the nearest town or village j which,
agreeably to the fraternal love that then prevailed among the
disciples of Christ, would cordially receive them. This was
one principal cause of the gradual enlargement of parishes,
as it proved afterwards the cause, (when Christianity became
the religion of the empire, and when, by the sudden accession
of multitudes of converts from all quarters, a subdivision of
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 113
Swhat appeared to be comprehended under the original district
w^as necessary, it then 1 say proved the cause, that the ancient
parishes, still retaining their first naaies, assumed the form as
well as the extent of diocesses. But of this more afterwards.
I,t adds not a little to the credibility of the account now given,
that it represents the christian churches as originally analo-
gous, in point of polity, to the Jewish establishment of syna-
gogues. Nothing can be more evident than that, in respect
of the interiour part, it was the intention of the founders of the
church to adopt, as far as possible, thai model which, under
the conduct ol Providence, hrid been settled in Judea, as some
learned men think, by the prophet Ezra. Certain it is, that
the very names of church-officers were borrowed from the sy-
nagogue, which hnd also its elders, overseers, deacons, or
almoners ; and amongst whom one usually presided, who was
called the angel of the congregation, the title given by our
Lord in the Apocalvpse to the presidents of christian assem-
blies. Now it is well known, that among the Jews, every
synagogue had its own ministry, and was complete in itself,
having no dependency except on the sanhedrim, or supreme
counsel of the naiion. Such a thing as several synagogues,
under the inspection of the same minister, or ministers, was
never heard of.
But to return to the administration of religious ordinances
in those primitive parishes, let it be observed, that though the
presbyters were all assistants to the bishop, in the discharge
of all parochial duties, the parish was not then divided or par-
celled out among them like a modern diocess. They all, with
their bishop and the people, as was observed above, assembled
in one place, for the publick offices of religion, "• For where
" should the flock be," says Ignatius, " but with their shep-
*' herd ?" And this title was given to him by way of emi-
nence. The principal part of the work of the presbvters, be-
side what belonged to their judicial capacity in the presbvterv,
was, by the bishop's direction, to execute the less publick
parts of the pastoral function, as visiting the sick, instructing
and preparing the catechumens, exhorting the penitents, and
other such ministerial offices in those parts of the parish, (for
all the presbyters belonged in common to the wholej to which
he found it reasonable to send them. Thev also assisted him
in the publick offices of religion ; and when he was sick, or
otherwise necessarily absent, they supplied his place. As the
charge of the parish was eminently devolved upon him, they
acted in all the ministerial duties by his direction, or at least
with his permission. The only question of moment that has
been raised on this head is, whether, by his order or allow-
p
lU LECTLfRES ON
ance, they could exercise every part of the pastoral office ai
well as the bishop, or whether there were some things, such
as ordainilig others to the ministry, which even his commands
could not empower them to do. As the power of the bishops
arose, and that of the presbyters sunk gradually, I am dispos-
ed to think, that, in the course of two centuries, or even a
century and a half, there was a considerable diflference, in this
respect, in the state of things, at the beginning and at the end*
Towards the conclusion of that period I imagine, it became
very unusual for a bishop to delegate this, which was ever
looked LI pan as the most sacred and most momentous trust, to his
presbyters. The transition is very natural from seldom to we-
ver ; and, in our ways of judging, the transition is as natural
from what never is clone, to what cannot lawfully be done.
We know that some time after the period to which 1 have
here confined myself, ordination by presbyters was prohibited,
and declared null by ecclesiastical canons. But the very pro-
hibitions themselves, the verv assertions of those whom they
condemned as hereticks, prove the practice, then probably
wearing, but not quite worn out. There was no occasion for
making canons against ordination by deacons, or by laymen,
who did not pretend to such a right. In deference, however,
to the apostle Paul's authority, the bishop still admitted, and
even required, all the presbyters present to join with him in
ordaining a presbyter, by the imposition of their hands with
his, but not in ordaining a bishop. They did not reflect, that
in the only instance mentioned by Paul, the presbytery had
assisted in ordaining an evangelist, an extraordinary minister,
even superiour to a bishop. The arbitrary supposition of
Chrysostom, who was himself a bishop and a patriarch, about
four hundred years afterwards, when things were on a very differ-
ent footing, and when the episcopate, on account of the wealth
and secular power that accompanied it, was become a great
object of ambition, (Chrysostora's supposition) that by the
presbytery the apostle meant a synod of bishops, a notion to-
tally unsupported by evidence, and repugnant to the uniform
usage of the term in christian antiquity, has hardly merit
enough to entitle it to be mentioned.
But that, about the middle of the third century, the presby-
ters were still considered jis vested with the power of confer-
ring orders, has been plausibly argued from an expression of
Firmilian, in his letter to Cyprian : ^ Quando omnis potestas
" et gratia in ecclesia constituta sit, ubi praesident majores natu,
*' qui et baptizandi, et manum imponendi, et ordinandi possi-
" dert potestatem." Cypr. Epist. 75^ in some editions the 43d.
That by majorca natu^ in Latin, is meant the same withOT^f£<rCt)7s-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 115
fot in Greek, of which it is indeed a literal version, can scarce-
ly be thought questionable. Besides, the phnise so exactly
coincides with that of i'ertullian, who says, " Probati praesi-
" dent seniores," approved elders preside, as to make the ap-
plication, if possible, still clearer. Indeed, if we were not to
consider the latin, majores natu, as meant to correspond to the
Greek, TrftaCvhfoi^ the only translation we could give to the
phrase, used by Firmilian, would be, " where old men pre-
" side ;" an afhrmation which could hardU' ever have been in
such general terms given with truth. For when the canonical
age of bishops came to be established, it was no more than
thirty ; and it is a certain f^ct, that, both before and after that
canon, several were ordained younger. I am far from think-
ing, that under this term, majores natu, those who were then
peculiarly called bishops are not included, or even principally
intended ; but what I maintain is, that, now that the distinc-
tion had obtained, the use of so comprehensive a term seems
sufficiently to show, that it was not his intention to affirm it of
the latter order, exclusively of the former, else he would never
have employed a word which, when used strictly^ was appropri-
ated to the former order, and not to the latter. Thus the name
priests., in English, in the plural number, is ofcen adopted to
denote the clergy in general, both bishops and priests. But
no intelligent person, that understands the language, and does
not intend to deceive, would express himself in this manner;
" In the church of England, the priests have the power of
*' baptizing, confirming, and ordaining." Nor could he ex-
cuse himself by pretending, that in regard to the two last
articles, he meant by the word priests the bishops, exclusivelv
of those more commonly, and for distinction's sake, called
priests. Yet the two cases are exactly parallel ; for, in Firmi-
lian's time, the distinction of the three orders was, though not
so considerable, as well known b)' the christians in Cappadocia,
and in Africa, as they are at this day m England. This also
serves to show, how little truth there is in that observation of
Uodwell's, quoted in a former discoui-se, that from Ignatius'
time, the distinction of the names was most accurately observ-
ed by all christian writers.
As another eminent authority I shall produce Cyprian. I
recur to him the more willingly, because he is held the great
apostle of high-church. Cyprian's own words, in Epist. 5,
directed to his presbyters and deacons at Carthage, when he
himself for some time found it necessary to retire, are these :
" Quoniam mihi interesse nunc non permittit loci conditio,
^' peto vos pro fide et religione vestra, fungamini illic et ves-
*' tris partibus et naeis, ut nihil vel ad disciplinam vel ad djli-
115 LECTURES ON
^* gentiam desit." Is it to be supposed, that be v/ould have so
expressly enjoined them, .vithoat exception or limitation, to
discharge the duties of his function as well as their own, if
neither presbyters nor deacons could do any thing in ordina-
tion, thai part which as the chief of ail i Na}', might it not
be justly thought, that it he meant to except this, ht would
have given them some hint in that letter, what method, in
case of any vacan^ y in their presbytery, (which, during his ab-
sence, would be doubly incommodious) they should take, to get
it quickly and properly supplied ? but his general rule for the
removal of all doubts, and which renders the descending to
particulars unnecessary is, that they are to discharge his of-
fice, and their own.
To come to the writers of the age that succeeded, the first
I shall mention is Hilary, a Roman deacon, whom I had occa-
sion to mention once betore, who wrote a commentary upon
Paul's epistles, about the middle of the fourth century. His
works are always bound up with those of Ambrose, bishop of
JViilan ; and, by some blunder in the editors, continue to pass
under his name. He is sometimes quoted by moderns under
the name of Pseudambrose and Ainbrosiaster. Of his com-
mentarv Sixtus de Sienna has given this character: "In om-
" nes Pauli epistolas libri quatuordecim, breves quidem in
" verbis, sed sentcntiarum pondere graves ;^' which is entirely
approved by Richard Simon, of the oratory, (Hist. Crit. du
Nouveau Test. p. 3, chap, ix,) who adds, " There are few
" ancient commentaries or. the epistles of St. Paul, and even
" on the whole New lestament, which can be compared with
"this." Ihis commentator, in his exposition of the third
chapter of the first epistle to I imothy, has these words :
" Post episcopum tamen diaconi ordinationem subjecit.
" Quare ? nisi quia episcopi et presbyteri una ordinatio est ?
" Uterque enim sacerdos est. Sed episcopus primus est ; ut
" omnis episcopus presb} ter sit, non omnis presbyter episco-
" pus. Hie enim episcopus est, qui inter presbyteros primus
" est. Denique Timotheum presb- terum ordinatum signifi-
" cat, sed quia ante se alterum non habebat, episcopus erat."
Nothing ran be more evident, than thiU the whole distinction
of the episcopate is here ascribed to senioritv in the ministry,
without either election or special ordination. When the bishop
died, the senior colleague succeeded of course. As to ordi-
nation, it was the same in both ; and bishop meant no more
than first among the presbyters, or the senior presbvter. This
is verv probably the footing on which the preccdencA in the
presbvtery originally stood, though it did not long remain so.
It was out of the earliest converts that the first pastors were
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. lir
chosen ; jindnhe conclusion is analogical, that the oldest pastor
wouici .'C entitled to preside.
Aiiotiier. witness whom I shall adduce is jerom, who wrote
about the eAd of rhc iourth century, and the beginning ol the
fitth.<- ■'i'iie tcstimuny which I shall bring iroin him, regards
the pructice that had long subsisted at Alexandria. 1 shall
•give you ihe passage in his own words from his epistle to Eva-
■gvius^' '^'■.Akxauurise a Marco evangelista usque ad Heraclam
'^ et Dionysium episcupos, presbyteri semper unum ex se elec-
**■ tuni, iuexcelsiori gradu collocatum, episcopum nominabunt :
"■ quomodo si exercitus imperatorem facial : aut diaconi eli-
'^ g^nt de se qutm industrium noverint, et archidiaconum
" vocent." 1 know it has been said, that this relates only to
the election of ihe bishop of Alexandria, and not to his ordi
nation. i o me it is manifest that it relates to both j or, to ex-
press myself with greater precision, it was the intention of
that father to signify, that no other ordination than this elec-
tion, and those ceremonies with which the presbyters might
please to accompany it, such as the instalment and salutation,
was then and there thought necessary to one who had been
ordained a presbyter before ; that according to the usage of
that church, this form was all that was requisite to constitute
one of the presbyters their bishop. But as lam sensible, that
unsupported assertions are entitled to no regard on either side,
I shall assign my reasons from the author's own words, and
then leave everyone to judge for himself.
Jerom, in the preceding part of this letter, had been main-
taining, in opposition to some deacon, who had toolislily boast-
ed of the order of deacons as being superiour to the order of
presbyters, Jerom, I say, had been maintaining, that in the
original and apostolical constitution of the church, bishop and
presbyter were but two names for the same office. That ve
may be satisfied that what he says implies no less, I shall give
it vou in his own words. — " Audio quendam in tantarn tru-
*' pisse vecordiam, ut diaconas presbjteris, id est episcopis,
*' anteferret. Nam cum apostolus perspicue doceat eosdem
*' esse presbyteros quos episcopos, quid patitur mensarum et
" viduarum minister, ut supra eos, se tumidns efferat." For
this purpose he had, in a cursory manner, pointed out some of
those arguments from the New Testament, which I took occa-
sion, in a former discourse, to illustrate. In regard to the
introduction of the episcopal order, as then commonlv under-
stood, in contradistinction to that of presbyter, he signifies,
that it did not exist from the beginning, but was merely an
expedient devised after the times of the apostles, in order the
118 LECTURES ON
Baore efFectualiy to preserve unity in every church, as in case-
of diiFerences among the pastors^ it would be of importance to
have one acknowledged superiour, in whose determination they
were bound to acquiesce. His words are : — " Quod autem
'^'- postea P he had been speaking immediately before of the
times of the apostles, "- unus electus est, qui caeteris prepone-
** retur, in schismatis remedium factum est, ne unus quisque
** ad se trahens, Christi eccltsiam rumperet," Then follows
the passage quoted above concerning the church of Alexan-
dria. Nothing can be plainer than that he is giving an account
of the first introduction of the episcopate, (as the word was
then understood) which he had been maintaining was not a
difierejit order from that of presbyter, but merely a certain
pre-eminence conferred by election, for the expedient purpose
of preventing schism. And in confirmation of what he had
advanced, that this election was all that at first was requisite,
he tells the story of the manner that had long been practised
and held sufficient for constituting a bishop in the metropolis of
Eg)pt. It is accordingly introduced thus : '' Navn et Alexan-
" driae," as a case eniirely apposite, to wit, an instance of a
eburch in which a simple election had continued to be account-
ed sufficient for a longer time ihan in other churches, an
insviirsce which had rf^mained a vestige and evidence of the
once universal practice.
Now if he meant only to tell us, as some would have it,
that there the election of the bishop was in the presbyters,
there was no occasion to recur to Alex.mdiia for an example,
or to a former period, as that continued still to be a very com-
mon, if not the general, practice throughout the church. And
though it be allowed to have been still the custom in most
places, to get also the concurrence or consent of the people,
this shovi's more strongly how frivolous the argument trom
their being electors would have been in favour of presbyters,
as equal in point of order to bishops, and consequently supe-
riour to deacons ; since, in regard to most places, as much a»
this could be said concerning those who are inferiour to dea-
eons, the very meanest of the people, who had all a suffrage in
the election of their bishop. But understood in the way I
have explained it, the argument has both sense and strength in
it, and is in effect as follows : — There can be no essential dif-
ference between the order of bishop, and that of presbyter,
since, to make a bishop, nothing more was necessary at first
(and of this practice the church of Alexandria remained long
an example) than the nomination of his fellow presbyters ; and
no ceremony of consecration was required, but what was per-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 1 19
formed by them, and consisted chiefly in placing him in a high-
er seat, and saluting him bishop*.
Add to this, that the very examples this father makes use of
for illustration, show manifestly, that his meaning must have
been as I have represented it. fiis first instance is the elec-
tion of an emperour by the army, which he calls expressly
making an emperour. And is it not a matter of publick noto-
riety, that the emperours, raised in this manner, did, from that
moment, without waiting any other inauguration, assume the
imperial titles, and exercise the imperial power? And did
they not treat all as rebels who opposed ihem ? If possible, the
Other example is still more decisive. I'o constitute an arch-
deacon in the sense in which the word was then used, no other
form of investiture was necessary, but his election, which was
in Jerom's time solely in his fellow deacons ; though this also,
with many other things, came afterwards into the hands of the
bishop. By this example he also very plainly acquaints uSi,
that the bishop originally stood in the same relation to the
presbyters, in which the archdeacon, in his own time, did to
the other deacons, and was by consequence no other than what
the archpresbyter came to be afterwards, the first among the
presbyters.
But does not Jerom, after all, admit, in the very next sen-
tence, the superiority of bishops in the exclusive privik ge of
ordaining ? True : he admits it as a distinction that then ac-
tually obtained ; but the whole preceding part of his letter was
written to evince, that from the beginning it was not so.
From ancient times he descends to times then modern, and
from distant countries he comes to his own; concluding, that
still there was but one article of moment whereby thjtir powers
were discriminated. " Quid enim tacit, excepta ordinatione,
" episcopus, quod presbyter non faciat?" This indeed proves
sufficiently, that at that time presbyters were not allowed to
ordain. But it can prove nothing more, for in regard to his
sentiments about the rise of this difference, it was impossible
to be more explicit than he had been through the whole epis-
tle. I shall only add, that for my part I cannot conceive ano-
ther interpretation, that can give either weight to his argument,
or consistency to his words. The interpretation I have given
does both, and that without any violence to the expression.
• Was ever any thing more frivolous than Pearson's criticism on the dis*'
tinciion between <i se and ex se, the phrase used in the above quotationf ? Qr
could any thing be conceived more foreign to Jerom's purpose, than the whole
Ijassage, as the bis-liop has thought fit to interpret it?
+ Vindicia: Ignatianz, p. 1, c. x.
120 LECTURES ON
I might plead Jerom's opinion in this case — I do plead only
his testimony. 1 say 1 might plead his opinion as the opinion
of one who lived in an age when the iavestigation of the origin
of any ecclesiastical order, or custom, must have been incompa-
rably easier thin it can be to us at*this distance of rime. I
might plead his opinion, as the opinion of a man who had more
erudition than any person then in ihe church, the greatest lin-
guist, the greatest critick, the greatest antiqu.iry of them all.
But I am no friend to an implicit deference to human autho-
rity in matters of opinion. Let his sentiments be no further
regarded, than the reasons by which the\ are supported are
found to be good. I do plead oni\ his testimony, as a testi-
mony in relation to a matter of fact, both recent and noto-
rious ; since it regarded the then late uniform practice of the
church of Alexandria, a city, which, before Constantinople be-
came the seat of empire, was, next to Rome, the most eminent
in the christian world. To the same purpose the testimony
of the Alexandrian patriarch Eutychius has been pleaded,
who, in his annals of that church, takes notice of the same
practice, but with greater particularity of circumstances
than had been done by Jerom. Eutychius tells us, that the
number of presbyters therein was alwavs twelve ; and that, on
occasion of a vacancy in the episcopal chair, they chose one
of themselves, whom the remaining eleven ordained bishop by
imposition of hands and benediction. In these points, it is
evident, there is nothing that can be said to contradict the
testimony of Jerom. All that can be affirmed is, that the one
mentions particulars about which the other had been silent.
But it will be said, there is one circumstance, the duration as-
signed to this custom, wherein there seems to be a real con-
tradiction. Jerom brings it no farther down than Heracla and
Dionysius ; whereas Eutychius represents it as continuing to
the time of Alexander, about fifts' years later. Now it is not
impossible, that a circumstantiated custom might have been
in part abolished at one time, and in part at another. But ad-
mit that in this point, the two testimonies are contradictory,
that will by no means invalidate their credibility as to those
points on which they are agreed. The difference, on the con-
trary, as it is an evidence, that the last did not copy from the
first, and that they are therefore two witnesses, and nor one,
serves rather as a confirmation of the truth of those P.rticlgs
wherein they concur. And this is our ordinarv method" of
judging in all matters depending on human testimony. "That
Jerom, who probably spoke from memory, though certain as
to the main point, might be somewhat doubtful ;".s to the pre-
cise time of the abolition of the custom, is rendered even pro-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 121
bable bv him mentioning, with a view to mark the expiration
of the practice, two successive bishops rather than one. For
if he had known certainly that it ended with Heracla, there
vrould have been no occasion to mention Dionysius ; and if he
had been assured of its continuance to the time of DionN sius,
there would have been no propriety in mentioning Heracla.
Some have inferred from a passage of Tertuiiian, that, how-
ever general the practice was in the second and subsequent
centuries, of settling in every church all the three orders
above explained, it was not universal that in parishes, where
there were but a few christians remotely situated from other
churches, it was judged sufficient to give them a pastor or bi-
shop only, and some deacons. The presbyters then being but
a sort of assistants to the bishop, might not, in very small
charges, be judged necessary. The thing is not in itself im-
probable, and the authority above-mentioned, before I had ex-
amined it, or seen a more accurate edition, led me to conclude
it real. But on examination I find, that what had drawn me
and others into this opinion, was no more than a false reading
of a sentence quoted in a former lecture. In some editions of
Tertuiiian we read, (De exhort, cast.) " Ubi ecclesiasiici or-
" nis non est consessus, et offert, et tinguit, sacerdos qui eat
*' ibi solus." I need not urge that the expression is quite dif-
ferent in all the best manuscripts, and most correct editions :
this being one of those glaring corruptions, which, after a
careful perusal, betray themselves to an attentive reader of
any penetration. The words, as I have now transcribed them,
considered in connexion with the subject treated in the context,
have neither sense nor coherence in them, whereas nothing can
be more apposite to the author's argument than they are in the
way formerly quoted, " Ubi ecclesiastici ordinis non est con-
sessus et offers, et tinguis, et sacerdos es tibi solus." So sen-
sible of this were the two learned criticks, Petavius and Dod-
well, that though both were violently disposed in their differ-
ent ways to pervert the meaning, neither thought proper to
avail himself of a variation in the reading, which would have
removed at once what to them was a great stumbling-block.
It is indeed a reading which savours more of art than of neg-
ligence, and has much the appearance of those inquisitorial
corrections which were made on several ancient books in the
sixteenth century, especially those published in the papal domi-
nions, or where the holy office was established, in order to adapt
the ancient doctrine to the orthodoxy of the day. Now no-
thing could be more opposite to this, than what seemed to ad-
litiit, that any necessity or exigence whatever could entitle: a
Q
122 LECTURES ON
layman to exercise the functions of a priest.— But this by the
way.
The opinion of Dr. Hammond, (Annotations, Acts xi, 30,)
that the apostles instituted only the office of bishop and dea-
con, and that the intermediate office of presbyter was soon af-
terwards introduced, is not materially different from the doc-
trine which I endeavoured, in a preceding lecture, to prove
from the New Testaments Provided it be allowed, that the
ministry, according to the apostolical arrangement, consisted
of two orders, and not of three, the one properly the ministry
of the word, the other the ministry of tables, it would be no
better than logomachy, or altercation about words, to dispute
whether the minister of the former kind should be called bi-
shop, or presbyter, since it is evident, that these names were
used synonymously by the inspired writers. Were we 'to be
confined to one term, I should readily admit, that the first is
the more proper of the two. The name s^r/c-xaTr®^, bishop, in-
spector, strictly expresses the charge of a flock ; the term 7i-p$i-
^v]ep(^, presbyter, elder, senator, is a title of respect which has
been variously applied. And in the ecclesiastick use it has
been rendered ambiguous, by having been so long misap-
plied to a kind of subordinate ministry, which the true presby-
terian maintains, with Jerom, was not from the beginning in
the church. The only material difference between the doc-
tor's sentiments and mine, on this article, is the following.
That very learned and pious author, misled, as I imagine,
more by the dialect of ecclesiastick writers, when the distmc-
tion had actually obtained, than by the practice of the primi-
tive church, rightly understood, maintains that there was no
more than one bishop or pastor allotted to every church,
whereas, in my judgment, there were allotted several. No-
thing can be more incompatible than his opinion, in this parti-
cular, with the style of the sacred penmen, to which, in sup-
port of that opinion, he is perpetually doing violence in his
commentary. Admitting that the phrases xccT ekxPuj^/^v, and
Kxlct 7roX(V' may be rendered, as he affirms, church by churchy and
city by city^ and that consequently what is called, in the com-
mon translation, " ordaining eiders or bishops in every city,
^'- or in every church," may be understood to imply one in
each, what shall be said of the many passages not in the least
ambiguous, wherein mention is made of the pastors in the
plural number of but one church ? Sometimes they are de-
nominated bishops, sometimes presbyters, sometimes those
that are over them, their guides or directors in the Lord. In-
deed, what we are told, (Acts xx, 17,) that Paul sent from Mile-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 12^3
tus to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church, might (if there
were not another passage to this purpose) serve as a sufficient
confutation of that hypothesis. " Ay but," replies our anno-
tator, " by the church is here meant not the single church of
*' the city of Ephesus, but the metropolitical church of Asia,*'.
Is it possible, that a man of Dr. Hammond's erudition and
discernment, should have been so little acquainted with, or at-
tentive to the idiom not only of all the inspired, but of all the
ecclesiastical, writers of the two first centuries, as, in support
of his interpretation, to recur to such an unexampled phraseo-
logy ? Where will he find all the churches of a province ac
country called the church of a particular city ? But if there
were nothing incongruous in the phrase, there is an absurdity
in the supposition. How could the apostle expect to find at
Ephesus all the bishops of Asia ? Or was he, though in so
great haste to get to Jerusalem before Pentecost, that he could
not conveniently go to Ephesus himself, was he, I say, to wait
till expresses were sent thence by the metropolitan throughout
that extensive region, and till, in consequence of this summon.s,
all the Asiatick bishops were convened ac Miletus ? By this
strange way of wresting the plainest words, the saints at Phi-
lippi (p. 1,1,) are in another place made to mean all the chris-
tians in Macedonia ; and, by parity of reason, I acknowledge,
the bishops and deacons of Philippi are all those in the holy
ministry throughout the Macedonian kingdom. But as am-
plification does not always answer, the opposite method is
sometimes found convenient. When James (Jam. v, 14,) en-
joins the sick person to send for the elders of the church, he
means, according to our learned doctor, the elder, bishop, or
pastor, of that particular flock. What sentiments might not
the words of Scripture be made to favour, by this loose and
arbitrary m,ode of interpreting ? It is strange that one, whose
discernment and impartiality, notwithstanding his prejudices,
led him to discover that, in the sacred writings, there was no
distinction between bishop and presbyter, was not able to dis-
cover (what was fvdly as evident) that they contained not a
single vestige of metropolitical primacy. The language of the
fathers of the fourth and succeeding centuries, (for then all
these degrees were firmly rooted) concerning the offices of
Timothy and Titus, and the current maxim, " one church, one
bishop," which naturally sprang from the distinction of bishop
and presbyter, had entirely warped this interpreter's judgment
in every case wherein the subject of the ministry was con-
cerned,
I must beg leave to add, that if what this gentleman and I
are both agreed in, that there was originally no intervening
124 LECTURES ON
order between bishop and deacon, be admitted to be just, th<*
account given above, of the rise of such an order, has, ab-
stracting from its external evidence, the advantage of his in
respect of internal probability. That a middle order (as that
of presbyter is in the church of England, and the church of
Rome) was, notwithstandmg the silence of history, erected at
once immediately alter the times of the apostles, is, to say the
least, much more unlikely, than that it arose gradually out of
an inconsiderable distinction, which had obtained from the
beginning, Dodwell's hypothesis, that all those ordained by the
apostles were no more than presbyters, in his acceptation of
the term, labours under the like defect with Hammond's. It
is very remarkable, that these two strenuous defenders of epis-
copacy do, in effect, both renounce its apostolical origin, ad-
mitting no subordination among the ministers of the word in
the churches planted by the apostles ; and that they do not
differ more widely from their allies in this cause, than they do
from one another. It is a shrewd presumption, that a system
is ill-founded, when its most intelligent friends are so much
divided about it ; and in order to account for it, recur to hypo-
theses so contradictory. A presumption too, let me add, that
their judgment would lead them soon to adopt the premises of
their adversaries, to which they sometimes approach very near,
if their passions would allow them to admit the conclusion.
Thus we have advanced from the perfect equality, in re-
spect of ministerial powers, in the stated pastors of the
churches, planted by the apostles, to that parochial episcopacy
which immediately succeeded it ; and which, though it arose
gradually from an inconsiderable cause, seems to have assumed
the model of a proper episcopate, as the word is now under-
stood, before the middle of the second century. And this I
consider as the first step of the hierarchy. I shall continue t©
trace its progress in the succeeding lectures on this subject.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 125r
LECTURE VIIL
1 SHOULD not have thought it necessarj^ to be so particular
as I have been, in ascertaining the nature of that polity which
obtained in the primitive church, both in the simple form
wherein it was first settled by the apostles, and in that which
it soon after assumed, and almost universally retained, till the
expiration of the third century, were not this a matter, that is
made a principal foundation of dissent by a pretty numerous
sect in this country. I do not here allude to those amongst us,
who barely prefer the episcopal form of government, whom,
in general, as far as I have had occasion to know them, I have
found moderate and reasQnable in their sentiments on this sub.
ject. Such do not pretend that the external model of the
church (whatever they may think of the antiquity of theirs)
is of the essence of religion. They are sensible, that an
ecclesiastical polity, however necessary, is but a subsidiary
establishment, totally distinct from the spiritual and vital prin-
.ciple, or the religion properly so called, for whose preservation
and advancement it is calculated ; that the merits of any form
can be judged of only from its fitness for answering the end ;
that in this as in all other matters of experience, different
times and different places may require some differences.
The notion that it was the intention of the apostles, that the
particular mould which they gave the church should be held
inviolable, or that it was their doctrine, that the continuance!
of the same mould is essential to the being of the churchy
appears to me not indeed problematical, but utterly incredible.
One might have justly expected in that case (the matter being
of such infinite consequence) a fuller and clearer account not
only of what they did in this way, but also of their doctriniC
in relation to its importance. I shall add a few observations
for the further support of the general point regarding the n^e-
rits of the question.
As to the origin of one of the offices, that of deacon, it is
related in such a manner as bears all the marks of a prudential
expedient, suggested by a present inconvenience. The office
tm LECTURES OIsT
too, on its first erection, was a trust in things merely tempo-
ral ; or what Jerom, not unjustly, though perhaps too con-
temptuously, called, the service of tables and widows.
They were no other than what, in modern language, we should
call the church's almoners. Nor is it any objection to this
representation, that we find both Stephen and Philip, who
were among the seven deacons, that were first presented by
the people to the apostles, exercising spiritual functions, such
as preaching and baptizing. This power they certainly did
not derive from the superintendency of the people's charities,
to which alone they were chosen, with which they were in-
trusted, and which the apostles, in the very institution of the
ofBce, expressly distinguish from the ministry of the word.
" It is not reason," said they, when harassed by the murmurs
of the Hellenists against the Hebrews, on account of the sup-
posed neglect of their widows, " that we should leave the
*•• word of God, and serve tables. Wherefore, brethren, look
*' ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the
*' Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this
" business. But we will give ourselves continually to prayer,
*' and to the ministry of the word." Here the hxxoma rpcfa-e-
^tn-. and the oiouicvtcc A«y»i are manifestly contrasted to each
other> 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<rxvi Fn rt) fjLiyccht). The same persons are in the same
sentence declared to be both the Xcca and the xAs??e5- What,
says the canonist, at once laymen and clergy ? That is certainly
absurd ; the characters are incompatible : yet it did not then
appear so to Moses. Nov/ v/ould it be thought reasonable or
just, that what was allowed to be the privilege and the glory
of every Israelite, under the more servile establishment of
Moses, should, under the more liberal dispensation of the
gospel, be disclaimed by all those disciples of Jesus, who have
not been admitted into the sacred order, which they, for this
reason, have called clerical.
When we recur to the use of the term in the New Testa-
ment, we find one passage, and but one, wherein it is applied
to persons. The passage is in the first epistle of Peter, the
fifth chapter, and third verse, which is thus rendered in our
version. " Neither as being Lords over God's heritage, but
'* being ensamples to the flock." The words in the origii-al
are, (v^^ ue, Kvpicvoilii rav x,?i>;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<ko*,
after speaking of the several orders of the Jewish priesthood,
impoi ts neither more nor less than if he had said, "• And all
*' the Jewish people." So that his manner of using this erm
affords no foundation for the distinction that was long after his
time introduced ; no more than the general argument against
the encroachment of the people, or of the pastors, on each
other, taken from the rigid observance which the different
classes, under the Mosaic k economy, had of their respective
functions, affords a foundation (as some have ridiculously
urged) for concluaing that the orders in the christian ministry,
were the same in number with the Jewish. So far indeed is
Clement from giving any insinuation of this kind, that, in a
passage formerly quoted, he expressly mentions the christian
orders as being two, and as having been clearly and bv name
predicted in the prophetical writings of the Old Testament.
But to return to the distinction of the whole church into
clergy and laity ; in after ages they even improved upon their
predecessors. The schoolmen (a modest race, all clergymen)
thought it was doing the laymen too much honour to derive
the name from XMi- populus. It suited their notions better
to deduce it from xxxi, lapis, a stone. Take for a specimen a
few things adi'anced on this subject bv some celebrated doc-
tors, as quoted by Alteusfaig in his Lexicon Theologicum.
" Capitur clericus pro viro docto, scientifico, perito, scientia
*' pleno, repleto et experto. K contra laicus capitur pro viro
*' inciocto, imperito, insipiente etlapicleo. Unde laicus dicetur
*' a A«:«£$, Grsece, quod est lapis Latine. Et sic omnis clericus,
*' if quantum clericus, est laudabJlis ; laicus vero, in quantum
*' laicas, est vituperandus. Clerici quoque a toto genere de
*'jure prseponuntur, et debent pra^poni laicis." To these -I
shall add the sentiments of cardinal Bona, in relation to
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 155
the care that ought to be taken by the clei^gy, that laymen may
not be allowed to do themselves harm by studying the pro-
founder parts of scripture, which their stupidity is utterly inca-
pable of comprehending. He kindly mentions, at the same
time, the books which he thinks they will not be the worse for«
and which, therefore, they may be permitted to peruse. " De
'' laicis in quibus mater csecitatis superbia regnat, quatenus ad
" ea qvae -^unt tidei et moram. Cum ehim siciit idiotse presu-
" munt sacnun scripturam exponere, quae est profundissima
" omnium scripturarum. Cum iterum habeant quandaiti ho-
" nestatem exteriorem, contemnunt vitam omnium aliorum,
" et merito hujus duplicis superbia exeag'antur, ut incidant in
** errorum istum pessimum, per quern excaecantur a Deo, ut
" nesciant discernere quid bonum est et quid malum, Quare
*' non omnes scripturse libros legant laici. Quoniam nihil est
" tam sanctum et salubre etpium quo nbn contingat abuti, sic
" de libris evenit, quorum non est culpa, neque s' ribentium,
*' sed scoelus est in abusu : non tamen arcendi videntur ab op-
" usculis moralibus et devotis, nuUam in se difiicultatem, nee
*' ambiguicatem, nee absurditatem in translatione gerentibus,
" cujusmodi sunt historiee, vel vits, vel legendse sanctorum^
" ijec non meditationes sanctge." How condescending is the
good doctor ! He does not absolutely prohibit the stupid and
conceited generation of laAmen from reading some of the plain-
er books of Scripture, and indulges them freely in what is bet-
ter f(jr them, story-books and godly meditations, and the le-'
gends of the saints.
I shall have occasion afterwards to trace a little further the
iriost material changes, to which those above-mentioned, as
well as other novel nam^s and distinctions, were rendered
subservient.
156 LECTURES ON
LECTURE X.
1 HAVE met with the observation, though I do not at pre*
sent recollect where, that the world is ruled by names. It
matters not who said so : but experience shows us, that there
is more truth in the remark than any one, at first hearing,
would be apt to imagine. When names are first assigned to
offices, or even to orders of men, there is commonly an asso*
ciation of ideas favourable or unfavourable in some respect or
other, which is derived from the more ancient to the more re-
cent application of the term. And even if the term should be
coined for the occasion, the materials whence it is taken, that
is, the known etymology, produces the same effect. It inva-
riably gives rise to certain associations ; these influence opi-
nion, and opinion governs practice. We have seen the ten-
dency, which the distinction of mankind into clergy and laity
had to heighten, in the minds of the populace, that is, more
than nine-te jths of the people, the reverence for the sacred or-
der. The effect thus actually produced, in ignorant ages,
through the arrogance of the one side, and the superstition of
the other, is sufficiently manifest, and perfectly astonishing.
I shall proceed to take notice of the consequences of some
other innovations in the style adopted on these subjects.
A close resemblance, both in titles and functions, to the
Jewish priesthood, came soon to be very much affected by the
pastors of the church. The very names of high-priest, priest,
and Levite, which the inspired writers had never once applied
to any class of ministers, ordinary or extraordinary, in the
christian commonwealth, appeared to have a wonderful fasci-
nation in them, that rendered them incomparably superiour to
any appellations which Jesus Christ, or his apostles, had
thought fit to bestow. Beside the fancied dignity, the sacer-
dotal titles had been always understood to convey the notion
cf certfiin rights, which conduced both to the honour, and to
the emolument, of those to whom these titles belonged. Now
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. iSf
having availed themselves of the supposed analogy, they
thought thev had the best right in the world to extend their
claims mu< h further ; arguing, that because the bishops, pres-
byters, and deacons, were the high-priests, priests, and Levites,
of a superiour, a more heavenly and spiritual dispensation,
they ought to possess more of the unrighteous mammon, that
is, more earthly treasure, and greater tem.poral power. And,
what is still more extraordinary, by such wretched reasoning
the bulk of mankind v/ere convinced.
It is worth while to remark the great difference between the
style adopted by the apostles, in relation to all sacred matters,
and that which, in the course of a few ages, crept into the
church, and even became universal in it. Under the Mosaick
economy, which exacted the rigid observance of a burden-
some ritual, the onl)' place devoted to the ceremonial and tem-
porary service, consisting in sacrifices and oblations, ablutions,
aspersions, and perfumes, was the temple of Jerusalem, for no
where else could the publick cremonies be lawfully performed.
The places that were dedicated to what maybe called compa-
ratively the moral and unchangeable part of the service, con-
sisting in prayers and thanksgivings, and instructive lessons
from the law and the prophets, were the synagogues, which, as
they were under no limitation, in point of number, time, or
place, might be built in any city, or village, where a suitable
congregation of worshippers could be found ; not only in
Judea, but wherever the Jewish nation was dispersed, and that
even though their temple and their polity should subsist no
longer. The ceremonies of the law being represented in the
gospel as but the shadows of the spiritual good things dis-
closed by the latter, and its corporal purifications, and other
rites, as the weak and beggarly elements, intended to serve but
for a time, and to be instrumental in ushering a more divine
and rational dispensation, it was no wonder that they borrow-
ed no names from the priesthood, to denote the christian mi*
nistry, or from the parade of the temple-service much calcu-
lated to dazzle the senses, to express the simple but spiritual
devotions and moral instructions, for which the disciples of
Jesus assembled under the humble roof of one of their bre-
thren. On the contrary, in the name they gave to the sacred
offices, as well as to other things, regarding their religious ob-
servances, they showed more attention to the service of the
S)'nagogue, as in every respect more analogous to the reasona-
ble service required by the gospel. The place where they met
is once, James ii. 2, called a synagogue, but never a temple.
" If there come into your assembly," e/5 ryv a-wxye^nv CfMiy. And
it is well known, that the names teacher, elder, overseer, at-
158 LECTURES ON
tendant, or minister, and even angel^ or messenger, of the coils
gregation, were, in relation to the ministry of the Jewish syna-
gogue, in current use.
When we consider this frequent recourse to terms of the
one kind, and this uniform avoidance of those of the other;
and when at the same time we consider how much the sat red
writers were inured to all the names relating to the sacerdotal
functions; and how obvious the application must have been,
if it had been proper ; it is impossible to conceive this conduct
as arising from any accidental circumstance. We are compel-
led to say with Grotius, (De imperio sum. Potest, cap. ii 5,)
" Non de nihilo est, quod ab eo loquendi gencre, et Christus
" ipse, et apostoli semper abstinuerunt." It is indeed most
natural to conclude, that it must have sprung from a sense of
the ansuitableness of such an use to this divine economy,
which, like its author, '' is made not after the law of it carnal
" commandment, but after the power of an endless liie." I
may add, it must have sprung from a conviction that such an
application might mislead the unwary into misapprehensions
of the nature of the evangelical law.
In it Jesus Christ is represented as our only priest ; and as
he ever liveth to make intercession for us, his priesthood is
unchangeable, untransmissive, and eternal. A priest is a me-
diator between God and man. Now we are taught, m this
divine economy, that as there is one God, there is one mediator
between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. The unity of
the mediatorship, and consequently of the priesthood, in the
strictest sense of the word, is as realh/ an article of our reli*
gion as the unity of the Godhead. I do not deny that in a
looser sense every minister of religion may be called a mediator,
or, if you please, a priest ; inasmuch as he is the mouth of the
congregation, in presenting their prayers to God, and is, as it
were, also the mouth of God, on whose part he admonishes
the people. The great reason against innovating by the intro-
duction of these names is, not because the names are in no
sense applicable, (that is not pretended) but because first, they
are unnecessary ; secondly, their former application must un-
avoidably create misapprehensions concerning the nature of
the evangelical ministry; and thirdly, because the inspired
penmen of the New Testament, who best understood the
nature of that ministry, never did apply to it those names.
But to return, the only proper sacrifice, under the ne\v cove-
nant, to which all the sacrifices of the old pointed, and in which
they were consummated, is the death of Christ. This, as it
cannot, like the legal sacrifices, be repeated, neither requires
Bor admits any supplement. " For by one offering he hath
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, 1S9
J>^ 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)^-<vav y£V05 fC-jM.EV ']ii Bsa.
In this allusive way, also, the terms circumcision, passover,
unleavened bread, altar, sabbath, and the like, are sometimes
allegorically applied by the sacred penmen. But no where are
the terms high-priest, priest, or Levite, applied peculiarly to
the ministers of Christ,
Doctor Hickes, a zealous asserter of what he calls the chris-
tian priesthood, has a wonderful method of solving this diffi-
culty. He supposes, that Christ and his apostles acted the
politicians in this particular. According to him they were
afraid, that with all the miracles and supernatural gifts they
could boast, it was an imdertaking too bold 16 be hazarded, to
appear as rivals to the Jewish priests. Here he inadvertently
ascribes a conduct to Jesus Christ, which, in my apprehension,
reflects not a little on the sincerity of that spotless character.
*' As a Jew," says he, (Let. 1, chap. iii. § 1.) " he was to ob-
" serve the law and the temple worship, and live in communion
*' with the Jews ; which, though he could do as a king and a
*' prophet, yet he could not do it with congruitv, had he declar-
*' ed himself to be their sovereign pontif, that very high-priest,
" of which Aaron himself was but a type and shadow." But
allow me to ask. Why could he not ? Was it because there was
a real incongruity betwixt his conforming to the Jewish wor-
ship, and his character of high-priest? If there was, he acted
incongruously, for he did conform ; and all he attained by not
declaring himself a priest, was not to avoid, but to dissem*
ble, this incongruity. And if there was none in conforming,
where was the incongruity in avowing a conduct which was in
itself congruous and defensible ? We are therefore forced to
conclude, from this passage, either that our Lord acted incon-
gruously, and was forced to recur to dissimulation to conceal
160 LECTURES ON
it, or that Doctor Hi ekes argues very inconsequentially. The
true christian can be at no loss to determine which side of the
alternative he ovight to adopt.
But, to consider a little the hypothesis itself, the apostles
might boldly, it seems, and without such offence as could en-
danger the cause, call their master the Messiah, the king, (a
name with the Jews above every other human title.) They
might, in this respect, say safely, that though their chief priests
and rulers had killed the Lord of life, God had raised him
from the dead, nay, had done more, had exalted him to his
own right hand, to be a prince and a saviour, to give repent-
ance to the people, and the remission of sins. I'hey might
thus openly, if not put him in the place of the priest, put him
in the place of the Almighty, to whom the priests arc bound
to minister, and from whom ultimately all the blessings must
be obtained ; nay, and represent his power as more extensive
in procuring divine forgiveness and favour, (the great object
of all their sacrifices) than any that had ever been experienced
through the observance of the Mosaick rites ; inasmuch as
" by him all that believe are justified from all things, from
*' which they could not be justified by the law of Moses."
Yet, says the doctor, they durst not call him priest. Now we
know that the usurping of this title was not, by the Jewish
institute, either treason or blasphemy ; whereas, the titles and
attributes, which the apostles gave their master, were account-
ed both treasonable and blasphemous by the unbelieving Jews,
and with too much appearance of truth, if Jesus, had been the
impostor they imagined him ; for the disciples set him in their
representations above every thing that is named, either in the
heaven, or upon the earth. I might say further, Did the first
preachers hesitate to maintain the cause of their master, not-
withstanding that by implication it charged the guilt of his
blood on the chief priests and rulers, as those rulers themselves
but too plainly perceived ? But why do 1 say by implication ?
They often most explicitly charged them with this atrocious
guilt. It was in the midst of the sanhedrim that Stephen bold-
ly said. Which of the prophets have not your Jaf hers persecuted ?
and they have slain them who showed before of the coming of the
Just one^ ofxohom ye have been noxo the betrayers and murderers^
Might thev thus with safety to the cause, at least, though not
with impunity to their persons, exhibit those priests as homi-
cides, parricides, regicides, and, if I may be allowed a bold ex-
pression, even deicides ; and yet durst not, without involving
the whole in one general ruin, so much as insinuate that they
also had their priests ? Credat Judscus Apella,
ECCLESIASTICAL HIStORYi i6i
$--'^'!iti shbrt, the whole pretext of this learned doctor is precisely
■'&s if one should say, that if in a country like this, for instance,
one were to raise a rebellion in favour of a pretender to the
Ibrown^ the partisans might, with comparatively little danger
Or offence, st\le the sovereign in possession a tyrant aiid usur-
per, and proclaim the man they would set up. King of Great
Britain, France^ and Ireland, and even add. Defender of the
Faith. But it would be imminently hazardous, and would
rJ^robably ruin the cause, to insinuate that he had the patronage
bf any ecclesiastick benefices. They may with safety denomi-
nate him the head of the church, and of the law, the source of
all honours and authority in the state, and even give him
higher titles than ever monarch had enjoyed before : they may
assume to themselves the names of all sorts of offices, civil or
military, under him ; but if they would avoid inevitable per*-
dition, let them not style any of themselves his chaplainsi In
fact, the absurdity here is not equal to the former.
Let it not be imagined, Gentlemen, from what has beeii ad"
vanced above, that I mean to contend with any man about
words and names. I know they are in themselves but mere
isounds, and things indifferent. And, doubtless, any one
sound is naturally as fit to serve as the sign of any idea as ano-
ther. It is a matter of no moment to us, at present^ whether
we call a minister of religion, bishop, prelate, presbyter, priest,
or clergyman. And pertinaciously to refuse the use of the
na^nes which custom, the arbiter of language^ has authorize
ed, might be thought to savour of puritanical fanaticism. The
allusion they plamiy bore at first is now scarcely minded, and
their etymology ife, in regaM to most people, either unknown
or forgotten. But in deducing the train of changes which, in
process of time, was effected both in things and in opinions, it
is pertinent to take notice of the purpose originailv served by
the introduction of such novel names and phrases, as those on
which we have been remarking once were, as well aS of the
Wieanings originally conveyed by them. To tauses in appear-
ance the most trivial often effects the most important are to
be ascribed.
I might add to the above observations, that some carried
this species of innovation so far as even, one would think, to
envy the pagans the appellations they bestowed on the mihi-
isters of an idolatrous worship, and on those who presided in
their secret and abominable rites. The learned doctor lately
quoted, though a sincere christian in his way, possessed much
of that spirit, and seems to regret exceedingly that we have no
such fine words and high-sounding titles as hierophant, hiero-
myst, and mystagogue. It was the same spirit that prompted,
X.
162 LECTURES ON
in the pastors, the affectation of epithets, added to their names,
expressive of their virtues, and of the esteem and veneration
of those that approached them, such as most holy, most bles-
sed, most religious, most worthy of God, beloved of God, re#
verend, venerable, and many others, which it were tedious to
enumerate, together with certain ceremonies, such as bowing
the head, kissing the hands, and the like. Of these I shall
only say, that though some of them became afterwards, as
words of course, mere marks of civil respect for the office,
they were, in their application at first, entirely personal. If
we were to settle a sort of spiritual barometer for determining
the precise quantity at which piety and virtue, at any given
time, arrived in the church, I could not assign a better than
the use of these epithets and ceremonies, holding it as an in-
variable canon, that in proportion as the external signs multi-
plied, the substance of internal religion decreased. At no
time could the pharisaical scribes be accused of greater osten-
tation, or more desire of greetings in the markets, and to be
called of men. Rabbi, Rabbi, than were, a few ages afterwards,
the ministers of the humble Jesus, who had so expressly warn-
ed his followers against the imitation of their vain-glorious
manners. Yet such are the manners which even, in these more
enlightened times, the priestly pride of some prelatical preach-
ers has instigated them to write whole volumes to revive.
One of the natural consequences of all those great distinc-
tions of the sacred order was, that they made way for another,
by which the ministers of religion, in a manner, appropriated
the term church to themselves. I have had occasion, in these
lectures, to lay before you the only undoubted acceptations,
wherein I find the word eKK^a-ioc employed in the New Testa-
ment, and have observed, that when applied to the disciples
of Christ, it always denotes either the whole christian com-
munity, or all those of a particular congregation, under the
guidance of their own pastors. I have also pointed out one
deviation from the latter of these original meanings naturally
consequent on the change that in a few centuries ensued, when
the bishop, instead of the oversight of one congregation, had
the superintendency of many congregations, that is, when his
one congregation, on account of the increase of proselytes, was
split into several, and when the habit of applying the word in
the singular number to the whole of a bishop's charge prevail-
ed over strict propriety, and the primitive use of the terra.
This prepared men for a still farther extension of the name to
all the congregations of a province under the same metropoli-
tan, and afterwards to all those of a civil diocess under the
same patriarch or exarch.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 163
I now intend to point out another still more remarkable de-
viation not from the latter, as those now mentioned were, but
from the former of the two primitive senses, whereby the
word is applied to the christian commonwealth. Then it
means, as is pretended, either the church collective, that is, the
whole community of christians, or the church representative,
that is, say some, the whole clerical orders, say others, the
church judicatories, especially the supreme. And this, I ac-
knowledge, is a distinction that is favoured not only by those of
the Romish communion, but by most sects of protestants also.
To many, however, and I acknowledge myself one of the num-
ber, it is manifest, that it is no less a novelty than the former,
having no foundation in the scriptural usage.
The Hebrew word Vnp exactly corresponds to the Greek
sKKXi}Ttx, and is commonly rendered by it in the septuagint, the
only Greek translation of the Old Testament in use in the
davs of our Saviour. Its idiom and phraseology was conse-
quently become the standard, in all matters that concerned
religion, to all the Jewish writers who used the Greek language,
and were commonly distinguished by the name of Hellenists.
From them the term was originally borrowed by the penmen of
the New Testament. From their manner of using it, there-
fore, the general meanings of the word are to be sought. But
though the phrases h^'^Uf'> 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<rix. B-ia and 0 Astos 3-f» the church of God and the people of
God. A distinction between these would have been pro-
nounced by them inconceivable, as being a distinction between
the church and its constituent members. In the Latin trans-
lation, called the Vulgate, the date of which, or a great part of
which, if I mistake not, is about the beginning of the fifth cen-
tury, the Greek word is commonly retained, having been long
before naturalized among christians. Accordingly they ren-
dered those phrases in the Old Testament omnis ecclesia Israel
and ecclesia Dei.
I know not for what reason our English translators have
never admitted the word church into their version of the Old
Testament, notwithstanding the frequent use they have made
of it in their translation of the New. They have always
rendered the Hebrew word above-mentioned by the English
words congregation, assembly, or some synonymous term. I
do not mean to say,t tat la so doing, they have mistranslated
164 LECTURES ON
the word. Either of these English names is, perhaps, as well
adapted to express the sense oi the Hebrew, as the appellatives
of one language commonly are to convey the ideas suggested
by those of another. But these English words were altoge-
ther as fit for expressing the sense of the word eKicXni-iot, in the
!Ntw i estament as of the word bnjJ in the Old, the former
being the term by which the latter had been rendered almost
uniformly in the septuagint, and which had been employed as
equivalent by all the Hellenist Jews. What I blame, therefore,
in our translators, is the want of uniformity. They ought
constantly to have rendered the original expression either
church in the Old Testament, or congregation in the New.
Terms so perfectly coincident in signification, as those Hebrew
and Greek names are, ought to have been translated by the
same English word. There is one advantage at least resulting
from suih an attention to uniformity, which is this, that if the
application of the word should, in a few passages, be dubious,
a comparison with the other passages wherein, it occurs, ohcn,
serves entirely to remove the doubt. They are the more inex-
cusable, in regard to the present instance, t'lat they do not re-
fu'^e the title of church to the Israelitish commonwealth, when
an occasion of giving it occurs in the New Testanivent, though
they would take no occasion in the Old. Thus they have ren-
dered the words of Stephen, who says, speaking of Moses,
Acts vii. .38, '•'- This is he that was in the church in the wilder-
ness. Ov](^ eg-iv 0 ytvofA-tvoi ev It) ix.i<,Xr,Tict. ev % Bfii/AM.
But in the use neither of the Greek word in the New Testa-
ment, nor of the correspondent Hebrew word in the old, do
we find a vestige of an application of the term to a smaller
part of the communit)> 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<noc,^ by a common metonymy, the thing
contained for the thing containing, came to be universally em-
plpyed in this acceptation.
£GCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, in
LECTURE Xi,
J. HE steps I have already mentioned and explained, ad^
vancing from presbytery to parochial episcopacy, thence to
prelacy or diocesan episcopacy, from that to metropolitical
primacy, and thence again to patriarchal superintendency^
together with those methods I have pointed but to you, where-
by the ministers of religion distinguished themselves from
their christian brethren, insensibly prepared the minds of the
people for the notion, that in ordination there was something
exceedingly mysterious, and even inscrutable. It came at
length not to be considered as a soleinn manner of appointiiig
a fit person to discharge the duties of the pastoral office
aniongst a particular flock or congregation, and of committing
them to his care ; but to be regarded more especially as the
imprinting of a certain character, or uhperceivable and inc6ra=
prehensible signature on a person, a character which, though iii
consequence of human means employed by the proper mirii^~
ter it was conferred, could by no power less than omnipotence
be removed. And though at first hearing, One would be apt
to imagine, that by this tenet they derogated as much fronl the
ecclesiastick power on one hand, as they enhanced it on th6
other, since they maintained, that the persons who gave this
character, could not take it away, the effect on men's concept
tions was very different. If a single ceremony, or forni of
words, could with as much facility withdraw as confer a gift
in its nature invisible, nobody would be impressed with the
conception, that any thing very wonderful had been either
<iven or taken. The words or ceremony of ordaining would
e considered as nothing more than the established mode oi
nvesting a man with the right of exercising cai^onically the
icred function 5 and the \vords or ceremony used in the depo--
; tion, as the mode of stripping him of that right, or privilege,
. o that he should ho longer oe entitled to exercise it. In this
^ ay he would be under the same canonical incapacity he lay
1 ider before his ordination, which answers to what was foi:
i any ages calWd in the church, reducing a clergyman to lay-
172 LECTURES ON
communion. There would be nothing more extraordinary
here, than the creating of a lord high steward, for instance,
by certain solemnities accompanying' the delivery of a white
batoon into his hands, and placing him on an eminent seat, and
his putting an end to his office, by publickly breaking the
batoon, and coming down from his seat. Whereas for a man
to do a thing, which nothing less than omnipotence can undo,
and which even that in fact will never be employed in undo-
ing, to imprint a character, a something which in spite of
angels, men, and devils, shall, to eternity, remain indelible,
appears the result of a power, inconceivable indeed, and little
less than divine.
Whence ideas of this kind originated, ideas that do not
seem to quadrate with the so much boasted power of the
keys, which implies, alike, that of opening, and that of shut-
ting, admitting and excluding, binding and loosing ; ideas, of
which the apostles and evangelists have no where given us
the slightest hint, and of which it is plain they had not them-
selves the smallest apprehension, is a matter of curious in-
quiry, and closely connected with the subject of the hierarchy.
I shall therefore endeavour briefly (in this lecture) to trace
the rise and progress of so strange a doctrine.
Ecclesiastical degrees were not instituted originally under
the notion of dignities, pre-eminencies, or honours, as they
became afterwards, but as ministries, charges, and what the
apostle Paul called cpyx, works, 1 Tim. iii, 1. " If a man desire
the office of a bishop," says he, " he desireth a good work."
Consequently if, in any thing denominated the office of a
bishop, there be no work to do, it cannot be the office whereof^
the apostle speaks ; for the misapplication of the name can
never alter the nature of the thing. The persons accordingly
possessed of such offices were styled, both by our Loi-d and
by Paul his apostle, spyulxt labourers, workmen. " The labourers
are few," says the former, " and the workman is worthy of
*' his meat." The latter recommends it to Timothy to acquit
himself as " a workman that needeth not be ashamed."
For some time, indeed, it could hardly enter into the mind
of any man, to think himself entitled to decline executing
personally, whilst able to execute, a trust solemnl}^ committed
to him, and which he had himself undertaken. For the terms
ordination and appcintnient to a particular pastoral charge were
perfectly synonymous. If one, however, in those truly pri-
mitive times, (which but rarely hapijened) found it necessary
to retire from the work, he never thought of retaining either
the title, or the emoluments. And though the ministers were
of two kinds, the one X-alled anciently the ministry of the
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 173
word, and, in later times, the cure of souls, and the other a
ministry in things temporal, for the support and relief of the
poor and infirm, as was the deaconship, those in both offices
were equally held bound to personal service. Nor would any
one have thought, in the earliest ages, of serving by a deputy,
unless for a short time, and on account of some remarkable
and unavoidable impediment ; much less would he have ac-
cepted another charge that was incompatible with his former
one. But to be made a bishop, and in being so to receive no
charge whatever, to have no work to execute, could have been
regarded no otherwise than as a contradiction in terms.
Indeed, the name of the office implied ^he service, without
which it could not subsist, that is, withotfrwhich there was no
office. The name bishop, as I have observed, means overseer,
and this is a term manifestly correlative to that which ex-
presses the thing to be overseen. The connexion is equally
necessary and essential as between father and child, sovereign
and subject, husband and wife. The one is inconceivable
without the other. You cannot make a man an overseer to
whom you give no oversight, no more than you can make a man
a shepherd, to whom you give the charge of no sheep, or a
husband to whom you give no wife. Nay, in fact, as a maa
ceases to be a husband, the moment that he ceases to have a
wife, and is no longer a shepherd than he has the care of
sheep, so in the only proper and original import of the words,
a bishop continues a bishop only whilst he continues to have
people under his spiritual care. These things, indeed, are so
plain, that one is almost ashamed to attempt to illustrate
them. Yet the changes that too soon ensued, have turned
matters so entirely off their original bottom, that propositions
which, in the age of the apostles, must have appeared self-evi-
dent, require a careful development to us moderns ; so much
is the import of names and phrases altered in the course of
some successive centuries. Let us therefore endeavour to
investigate the source of these alterations.
When, as it happened in a few ages, the church was become
populous and extensive; and when released from persecution,
it was "beginning to taste the sweets of ease and affluence ;
when men, by consequence, were growing less zealous and
more remiss ; as the several congregations were supplied by
their respective presbyteries, which were a sort of colleges of
ministers, who under the bishop had the charge in common j
it happened sometimes that one of these, without creating
great inconvenience to his colleagues, retired from the service,
and either for the sake of study and improvement, or from
some other reason, resided elsewhere. The presbyters had
not then separate charges, and the consistory could sufficiently
lU LECTURES ON
supply the necessary functions with one more or one fewefe
But he, who in this manner retired from the parish, did not
retain any charge of the people j as little did he draw thence
?jny emolument whateveri. Thus Jerom, a presbyter of An-
tioch^ Ruffinus, in like manner, of Aquileia, and Paulinus of
Barcelona, resided little in those places^
Afterwards, as evil customs always spring from small begin-
nings, the number of such absentees daily increasing, this de-
generated into a very gross abuse ; and those nominal pastors
having become odious, on account of their idle way of living,
got the name of vagabond clerks^ of whom frequent mention
is made in the laws and novels of Justinian, But before the
commencement of the sixth century, none ever thought of
holding the title, and enjoying the profits of an office, without
serving. Then, indeed, in the western church, the condition
of ecclesiastical ministries underwent a considerable change^
and came to be regarded as degrees of dignities, and honours,
and rewards of past services. As formerly, in ecclesiastick
promotions, the need of a particular church being considered,
a person fit for the charge was provided, so now the rule was
inverted, and the condition and rank of the person being con-
sidered, a degree, dignity, or benefice, was provided, which
suited his quality and expectations, whence sprang very na-
turally the custom of doing the work by a delegate. And as
one abuse commonly ushers in another, the assistance, the
presence, nay, the residence of the principal, came also gra-
dually to be dispensed with. Indeed, when the man is not
chosen, because fit for the charge, but when the charge is
chosen, or (to speak more properly) when the rank, the titles,
and the revenues are chosen as convenient for the man, things
must inevitably take that course. The primitive view is totally
reversed. The man's accommodation is then become the pri-
mary object, the people's accommodation, if an object at all, is
but the secondary at the most* That is the end, this is only
the means.
In process of time, this became so frequent in some t)lacds^
and particularly in some of the richest diocesses, and parishes,
wherein, for several successions, the residence of the occupant
had been dispensed with, that through the gradual, but sure
operation of custom, he came to be considered as not obliged
to perform any pastoral function, or so much as to reside
among the people, of whom he was denominated the pastor,
and from whom he drew a considerable stipend, or revenue.
The apostle's maxim was a maxim no longer. "If a man
*' desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work."
Many then desired the office of a bishop, if without absurdity
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, 17S
^e can say so, who desired no work at all, good or bad, and
they desired it for that very reason, because they chose to be
idle. Indeed, it must be owned, the term I'^iFKOTrt! charge, over-
sight, vised by the apostle, necessarily implies work. These
two are indistinguishable. But in the times we now speak of,
men were become much more refined than the apostles, both
in distinguishing and in separating. First sprang the distinc-
tion, then the separation of the order from the ojice. Hence
arose the odious distinction of benefices with residence, and
benefices without residence. Of much the same import is the
distinction of benefices cum euro., and those sine cura anima-
mm ; from the last of which comes the English name sinecure.
This corruption in practice was followed by the absurdity in
doctrine, which some did not blush to maintain, that one
might acquire an ecclesiastical title and salary, without coming
under any obligation. The absurdity here was the more
glaring, that it had been an old and established maxim of the
canonists, " beneficium datur propter officium." The benefice
is given f6r the office. In order, however, to palliate, though
ineffectually, their contrj^dicting a maxim so reasonable, and
so universally approved, they explained the office to mean his
reading the horary prayers of the breviary ; so that for once
taking into his hand the breviary, and reading the prayers in
publick, in a muttering voice, as quick as his tongue .was able tp
utter them, which they explain to be doing the office, (for thus
the best laws are eluded) he was entitled to a yearly rent of, per-
haps, ten thousand crowns. There is a practice in England,
when a man is presented to a rectory, which is there called
reading himself in, that has but too clqse an affinity to the
former.
But this was not all ; there came insensibly into use, probably
through the influence of such examples as thqse of Jerom and
Paulinus above-mentioned, what was called loose or absolute
ordination, wherein a man received the degree of presbyter,
though of no particular church, and equall|^ without a be-
nefice, and without a charge. Some time ifter, for things
always advance from less to greater, the qegree of bishop
yras conferred in the same manner. Thi^ may be said,
in some respect, to be much more pardonably than the former
abuse, because here, if there was no office or duty required,
there was no benefice given. Nothing, hcwever, could be
more repugnant both to primitive practice, and to the only mean-
ing which the word originally bore. To ordgin a man was no-
thing else but, in a solemn manner, to assign him a pastoral
charge. To give him no charge, and not to d^rdain him, were
perfectly identical. It has been urged in support of these hono-
rary degrees, that a bishop is not so much to be considered
i7Q LECTURES ON
under the notion of the pastor of a particular church or congre»
gation as under the notion of a catholick bishop, or pastor of
the universal church ; that this last being the more important
relation, ought to be regarded as the principal. But I beg ta
know what we are to understand by the term catholick^ or uni-
versal bishop. In the strictest acceptation, it is applicable only to
the apostles, as I had occasion formerly to observe. Nor was
the title in that sense, after their time, assumed by any, till in
the decline of all rational religion and useful knowledge, it
was, to the great scandal of the better part of christians, arro-
gated first by the bishop of Constantinople, and afterwards by
the bishop of Rome. But though it may be allowed, that in a
looser sense every bishop may be styled a catholick bishop,
that is, a pastor, belongmg to the catholick church, and one
who hath a share in its government, he is not otherwise ac-
counted so, but as he has the charge of a particular church,
lyhich is a component part of the cadiolick church. The
catholick, or universal church, is no other than the aggregate
of all the individual churches, and the one christian episcopate,
wherein all bishops have been said to be sharers, is the aggre-
gate of all the individual episcopates possessed by the several
bishops. Thus Cyprian (Epist. 55^) denominates the church
of Christ, " Una ecclesia in multa membra divisa ;" and the
episcopal office, (De unitate ecclesise) " Unus episcopatus, cu-
" jus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur." One episcopate
whereof each bishop occupies a distinct part ; or still more
explicitly in our language, One great superintendency, where-
of each is the superintendent of a part. He therefore can have
no share in this one episcopate, vi'ho is bishop or pastor of no
part, and has nothing to superintend. Again the same father
tells us, " Singulis pastoribus portio gregis adscripta est, quam
"' regat unusquisque, rationem actus sui Domino redditurus."
He consequently can be no bishop or pastor in the church, to
whom no portion of Christ's flock is committed, and who has
none to govern or instruct. That only is a member, which has
in the body a particular function, by the proper discharge
whereof the good of the whole is promoted. Any thing else,
such as a wen, or other excrescence, though in the body, is no
member, with wlatever name you may please to dignify it.
We have seen, lowever, that from a few instances at first, in
which men, for urgent reasons, obtained exemptions from
ministring, when there did not seem to result any inconve-
niency from dispensing with their service, and when they
readily renounced both the title and the profits of the place,
there gradually sprang the abuse of ordaining more presbyters
and deacons than the particular church, wherein they wei-e or-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 17f
dained, could have any occasion ftir, and to the care of which
they were not considered as being destined. Some found
their account in being once named of the order. Itw^asa kind
of episcopal testimonial of their qualifications and abilities.
And, indeed, if those ordinations had been universally under-
stood as importing no more, and the persons so ordained had
been regarded not as actual ministers, but as licentiates in the
ministry, properly tried and attested, the practice, to say the
least, might have admitted some plausible excuses. But this
was not the footing on which they stood. Worldly tnotives,
exemptions from secular jurisdictions, and other privileges,
often induced men to court this distinction. The bishops, too,
beginning to consider if^s a sort of addition to their dignity,
to have a numerous clergy under them, even though some of
these were rather nominally than really such, were often too
easily persuaded, to grant this favour to those who asked it.
Sometimes, as I observed, even bishops were ordained at large
v/ithout a diocess.
This abuse, when once it had gotten footing, increased dai"
ly, insomuch, that it became necessary at last to give a check
to it. Accordingl)^, in the council of Chalcedon, it was pro-
hibited, and all such loose ordinations were declared, (Canon
6th,) I say not irregular or uncanonical, but absolutely null.
The words are, taq uTroXvlag x^t^olo]i>}fA.£Viii upta-iv 71 otyta crvvooog xx,vpov
tx^tv Tjjy roiAv%v ^upoB-ecrietV) 3^ (Mj^ccfAii ^vvot.<r-6xi evipyetv. Nothing in lan-
guage can be more express, aKvpcv x.^ipoB-icixv, irritam ordinatiO'
nem, a void ordination.
Further they do not say, that when men, so ordained, of-
ficiate, their conduct is criminal, as was the style some cen-
turies afterwards, in regard to those who officiated, in con-
tempt of church-censures, but they affirm that such can no
where officiate, nijS'a.f^ ^vvx^Sat evepyeiv, and consequently, that
their ministrations are no ministrations at all. It deserves our
notice, that, notwithstanding the corrupt practice which had
prevailed, there still remained so much of the primitive no-
tion of ordination to the episcopal office, (for they had long
considered the presbyters as only the bishop's curates and as-
sistants) as- the solemn assignment of a person to a particular
congregation, to discharge among them the functions of a pas-
tor, that they could not conceive it to be an ordination, where
no such charge was given, and when a man properly got no
office to exercise. It appeared a mere illusion^ the name with=
out the thing. Nothing can be plainer, than that as yet they
had no conception of the mystick character impressed by the
bishop's hand in ordaining, which no power on earth can can«.
eel. The canon above-mentioned was confirmed by m&tif
z
irs LECTURES oisr
posterior canons. Hence it came to be regarded as an es"
tablished rule, or maxim, in the church, that none could be
ordained without a title, which, though at first it was applied
only to bishops, came, after the subdivision of his parish into
separate charges, to be also sometimes applied to presbj^ters.
By a title was then understood the actual charge of some con-
gregation. I had occasion, in a former lecture, to observe,
that the Latin word titulus was the name that was given to the
inferiour churches, or chapels, allotted to presbyters, when it
was found necessary, on account of the vast accession of new
converts, that the bishop's charge, anciently a parish, and hav-
ing but one church, should be divided and apportioned to the
several presbyters. A man was said then to have a title, when
he had obtained a chapel or church wherein, and a people for
whose behoof, he was to execute the ministry. But as the
import of words gradually changes with the manners and the
times, by the term title^ people came at length to understand
only a living, whether there was any charge, any cura anima-
rum, or not. Thus the canons originally intended to prevent
any, under the denomination of clergy, from being idle, were
construed in such a manner, as though they had been intended
to prevent any, under the denomination of clergy, from be-
ing indigent. And the reason they then gave for the rule was,
lest such clergymen should be compelled, by necessity, to ac-
(^uire a livelihood, by manual labour, and thus derogate from
the dignity of the priesthood. Idleness, in their apprehension,
was no way derogator}^' ; manual labour was. Paul's notions
were surely very different ; for he did not think that he brought
any disgrace on the apostleship, when he worked with his
hands at the humble trade of tent-making. But this by the
way.
Some ages afterwards Pope Alexanderthe third, adoptingthe
aforesaid interpretation, gave to the rule this turn, that none
should be ordained without a title from which he could draw
a subsistence ; and added this exception, unless he has enough
of his own, dr by paternal inheritance ; an exception, doubt-
less, very r^sonable, if the sole purpose of a title was to af-
ford a man whereon to live. Henee sprang new abuses, and
some of the vilest artifices for making that pass for a patri-
mony, which had been lent to a man merely for the purpose
of assisting him fraudulently to obtain ordination. In conse-
quence whereof, there were numbers of these notninal and fic-
titious clergy, shepherds that had no sheep, and overseers
that had nothing to oversee, who lived in indigence as well
as in idleness, to the no small scandal of the people, and dis-
honour of those functions of which they bore the name. At
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 179
kngth, however, the import of the word title seems to have
sunk so low, as to imply neither church, nor charge, nor liv-
ing, but a bare name j insomuch, that a titular priest, or a ti-
tular bishop, came universally to denote a priest, or a bishop,
who (in all the former acceptations of the term) has no title.
Such were those Utopian clergy, whom Pauormitan has not
improperly, though derisively, styled nullatenentes, holding
nothing, and who have been sometimes honoured with the ad-
dition of bishops, in partibus injidelium^ this serving as a con
venient sort of general designation, to supply the name of a
particular bishoprick. Indeed the custom still uniformly re-
tained in the church of Rome, of annexing some such addi-
tion, is an irrefragable evidence of the ideas which were from
the beginning entertained of the oflEice, as incapable of sub-
sisting without a charge.
In the latter ages the policy of the court of Rome came to
be concerned in supporting this with many other irregular
practices. The power of dispensing with ecclesiastical ca-
nons was a prerogative, which that ambitious see had for some
time arrogated, and not without success. It found its account
in it in more ways than one. When once the minds of men
became familiarized to this usage, (however much the wiser
part would condemn it on account of its consequences) it would
be no longer viewed in the same light. People would still be
Sensible of the irregularity and faultiness, but would no lonr
ger perceive the absurdity and nullity of it. Not only the
commonness of the practice, but the very epdthets and titles
given to these nominal pastors, together with the sameness in
respect of privileges, and of the jurisdiction to which they
were amenable, with those properly of the clerical body, would
all serve to cover the defect. People would no longer be
apt to think with Leo, who was bishop of Rome about the
middle of the fifth century, and is, on account of his writings,
considered as a doctor of the church, who affirms positively
in one of his letters, (Epist. 92, ad Rustick. cap. 1,) " Vana
*' est habenda ordinatio, quae nee loco fundata est, nee aucto^
" ritate mUnita." That you may better understand the phrase
he 0 fundata^ it may be proper to observe, that among the La-
tins, at that time, when a man, in being ordained, was as-
signed to a particular parish, or charge, it was called ordina-
tio localis, and the incumbents, by way of distinction from the
nullatenentes, were called locales. However much the vague
kind of ordination, opposed to localis, was, from ambitious
motives, patronised by his successours, this pope does not he-
sitate to style it, not illicita, but vana : not unlawful, (though
this might also have been said with truth) but of no eftcct.
180 LECTURES ON
To have said the former only, would have implied no Kiore,
than that there was a fault in granting such orders ; what he
did say implies, that there was no real ordination in them.
The doctrine of the character had not yet been discovered.
One will perhaps be surprised to hear, that our Scotch epis"
copal party, who have long affected to value themselves on the
regular transmission of their orders, have none but what they
derive from bishops nierely nominal. I do not mention this
with a view to derogate from their powers, but only as an ar™
gumentum ad hominem, to show how much their principles
militate against themselves. It does not suit my notion 'of
Christianity, to retaliate on any sect, or to forbid any to cast
out devils in the name of Christ, because they follow not us.
If the lust of power had not with churchmen more influence
than the spirit of the gospel, greater attention would have been
given to the decision of their master in a like case. Even their
own writers acknowledge, that immediately after the death of
Doctor Ross, bishop of Edinburgh, the last of those ordain-
ed before the revolution, there were no local bishops in Scot-
land, not one appointed to any dioeess, or having the inspec-
tion of any people, or spiritual jurisdiction over any district.
But there were bishops who had been ordained at large, some
by bishop Ross, others by some of the Scotch bishops, who,
after the revolution, had retired to England. The warmest
partisans of that sect have not scrupled to own, that at that
gentleman's decease all the diocesses in Scotland were become
vacant, and even to denominate those who had been ordained
in the manner above-mentioned, Utopian bishops ; a title not
differing materially from that I have given them, merely nomi-
nal bishops. For as far as I can learn, they were not titular,
even in the lowest sense. No axiom in philosophy is more in-
disputable than that ^uod nullibi est^ non est. The ordination,
therefore, of our present Scotch episcopal clergy, is solely
frona presbyters ; for it is allowed, that those men who came
under the hands of bishop Ross had been regularly admitted
ministers or presbyters, in particular congregations, before
the revolution. And to that first ordination, I maintain that
their farcical consecration by doctor Ross, and others, when
they were solemnly made the depositaries of no deposite, com*
manded to be diligent in doing no work, vigilant in the over-
sight of no flock, assiduous in teaching and governing no peo-
ple, and presiding in no church, added nothing at all. Let no
true son of our church be offended, that I acknowledge our
nonjurors to have a sort of presbyterian ordination ; for I
would by no means be understood as equalising theirs to that
which obtains with us. Whoever is ordained amongst us is
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Ut
ardained a bishop by a class of bishops. It is true we neither
assume the tities, nor enjoy the revenues, of the dignified
clergy, so denominated in other countries ; but we are not the
less bishops in every thing essential, for being more confor-
mable to the apostolical and primitive model, when every bi-
shop had but one parish, one congregation, one church oi'
place of common worship, one altar or communion table, and
was perhaps as poor as any of us. Whereas the ordination of
our nonjurors proceeds from presbyters, in their own (that is,
in the worst) sense of the word^ men to whom a part only of
the ministerial powers was committed, and from whom parti-
cularly was wi'th-held the right of transmitting orders to others.
When we say that our orders are from presbyters, we do not
use the term in their acceptation, but in that wherein we find
it used by Luke, in the acts of the apostles, by Paul in his
epistles, and (if the name of fathers be thought to add any
weight) by the purest and earliest fathers, Clemens Romanus,
Polycarp, and others, presbyters, in short, whom the Holy
Ghost has made bishops of the flock. But when we say their
orders are from presbyters, we use the word not in the apos-
tolical, but in the more recent sense, for a sort of subordi-
nate ministers, who are not authorized to ordain, and who,
on Dr. Hammond's hypothesis, as well as ours, were not ori«i
ginally in the church.
Pope Leo's way of thinking, on this subject, is indeed the
way that every man would naturally think, previously to the
impression which habit never fails to produce. For example,
what would one think of the pretext of making a man a king,
ci7i'o>^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<i^ wherein, if you will admit
the absurdity of the expression, which, in these cases, is una-
voidable, you make a man a husband, or marry him without
giving him a wife, what would really have been conferred on
the man by such a ceremony ? By marriage, indeed, you lay
him under certain obligations, and give him certain rights. But
as the wife is the object of the one, and the source of the other,
where there is no wife they can have no existence. The case
of the bishop is precisely the same. If you give him no charge,
tiie obligations to superintendency, and the claims of submis-
sion and support, for want of a subject, can have no existence.
Vvhat then is there in the one ceremony more nugatory than in
the other? For if unmeaning words will satisfy, why may not
the mvstical, invisible, indelible character of husband be im-
printed by the first, as that of priest or bishop is by the second ?
Holy writ gives just as much countenance to the one as to the
ether. But we may venture to affirm, that if it had not suited
Ecclesiastical history. iss
the church's policy to have some examples of such ordinations,
unauthorized alike by Scripture, and by the nature of the
thing, the notion of the character, in the way it has been pro-
pounded by the schoolmen, had never been heard of.
When those merely titular bishops and priests came to be
elected into diocesan or parochial charges, the question was,
in what manner were they to be received ? To re-ordain them
would have thrown an imputation on the first ordination, as
though it had been of no significancy, and little better than a
solemn farce. This (though manifestly for some a^es the doc-
trine of the church concerning them) was now by all means to
be avoided, as it might tend both to correct an abuse, which
the rulers of the church found their account in supporting, and
to derogate from the people's reverence for the soleinnities of
religion. Therefore, beside what maj' be said to be conferred
visibly and intelligibly in all regular ordinations, the charge of
a certain district, in what regards spiritual matters, and the
oversight of the people, there must be something invisible and
Unintelligible, which is nevertheless the principal, else aU
those loose ordinations would be mere nullities. This myste-
rious something they call the character impressad, which was
no sooner discovered or devised, than it constituted the essence
of the sacrament ; the other particulars relating to the charge
of a flock, which to an ordinary understanding might appear to
be the whole, were then found to be but circumstances. And
as the general practice of the church came at length to be, (for
in this they were for several ages far from being uniform) to
disapprove re-ordaining, as well as re-baptlaing and re-confirm-
ing; and that even though the baptism, confirmation, or ordi-
nation, had been given by a heretick, or schismatick, or though
the receiver had afterwards apostatized, they cqnceived that a
character, though not the same character, was the immediate
result of all these ordinances, and that being indeliblcj it need-=
ed not to be renewed.
It were in vain to lcx)k for this tenet in Scripture, wher^
there is not the faintest trace of any such conception. It were
no less vain to search for it in the fathers, who were unacquaint-
ed alike with the name and the thing. This even some of the
Romish doctors themselves have not scrupled to admit, found-
ing the doctrine solely ou the authority of the church. But
indeed on this (as on many ether articles) the doctrine of the
church has varied with the times. The council of Nice, the
first of the ecumenical councils, expresslv decreed, that such
bishops and presbyters as had been ordained by Miletius, a
deposed bishop, for the merely nominal or Utopian bishops
were not then known, sliould not be admitted tu serve the
184 LECTURES OK
church as either bishops or presbyters, till they had beeii duly
re-ordained, f^Lvs-mali^x x^'?"'^"^"* 'oe^'^taFSevleci*. If an overture of
this kind, in regard to any degraded prelate, had been made at
Trent, in the last of their councils, it would have been received
with universal abhorrence, and considered aS proceeding either
from the rankest heresy, or from the grossest ignorance. But
that it was no heresy for man)' centuries after the Nicene sy-
nod, is manifest from the uniform style on this subject, both
of the ecclesiastical writers, arid of the councils. Would we
then track this nonsense to its source ? We must dip, or rather
dive, into the futile logomacbies of the schoolmen ; for it will
be found to be the genuine production of the darkly subtle
metaphysico-scholastical theology of the middle ages. No-
thing could be idler than to attempt the refutation of a dogma;
for which a vestige of evidence has never been produced. But
were the business of refuting incumbent upon us, a little fur=
ther examination of the subject, and of the opinions that have
been advanced concerning it, Would entirely supersede the ne-
cessity.
Two puzzling questions have been moved on this subject,
which were hotly agitated, but not solved, in the council of
Trent, where it was thought necessafy, however, to make a
decree, affirming the character in opposition to one of the
Lutheran articles denying it. One question is, wherein it
consists ; the other, whereon it is imprinted. In answer to
the former, relating to the quiddity of the character, as these
sophisters love to express it, it has been observed, first nega-
tively, that it cannot be an infusion of grace, as of faith, hope,
or charity, because, say our profound disquisitors, all the seven
sacraments confer grace, whereas it is on the three that cannot
be repeated, the unreiterable, which imprint a character ; be-
sides, it can be neither grace nor virtue for this other reason :
both these may be lost, whereas, the character is indelible. As
little can it be a particular qualification, which fits the person
for the discharge of the duties of the office, for a man may
become totally unqualified by age and infirmities, or he may
unqualify himself by vice. Besides, it has never been denied
that persons, very ill qualified, have been ordained, and never
appeared one jot better qualified after their ordination than
before. It could not be the gift of justification, because this
is what the impenitent, in mortal sin, does not receive in any
sacrament ; and yet an impenitent, in mortal sin, may be or-
dained and receive the character. But to consider the thing
positively, there were who maintained that it was a quality
* Tbeodor. Hist. 1, 1, c. ij£.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. iss
Among those there were four different opinions, according to
the four sorts of qualities distinguished in the schools. Some
affirmed that it is a spiritual power, others a habit or disposi-
tion, others a spiritual figure ; nor was the notion that it is a
sensible metaphorical quality without its advocates. Some
would have it to be a real relation, others a fabrick of the
mind ; though it was by no means clear how far these consi-
dered it as removed from nothing.
As to the second question, the ubi of the character, there
was no less variety of sentiments than about the first, some
placing it in the essence of the soul, others in the understand-
ing ; some in the will, and others more plausibly in the imagi-
nation ; others even in the hands and the tongue ; but, by the
general voice, the body was excluded. So that the whole of
what they agreed in amounts to this, that in the unreiterable
sacraments, as they call them, something, they know not what,
is imprinted, they know not how, on something in the soul of
the recipient, they kno\v not where, which never can be deleted.
In regai-d to the indelibility all agreed, insomuch, that
though a bishop, priest, or deacon, turn heretick or schismatick,
deist or atheist, he still retains the character, and though not
a christian man, he is still a christian bishop, priest, or deacon ;
nay, though he be degraded from his office and excommuni-
cated, he is, in respect of the character, still the same. Though
he be cut off from the church, he is still a minister in the
church. In such a situation to perform any of the sacred
functions, would be in him a deadly sin, but these would be
equally valid as before. Thus he may not be within the pale
of the church himself, and yet be in the church a minister of
Jesus Christ. He may openly and solemnly blaspheme God,
and abjure the faith of Christ ; he may apostatize to Judaism,
to Mahometism, or to Paganism, he still retains the character.
He may even become a priest of Jupiter, or a priest of Baal,
and still continue a priest of Jesus Christ. The character,
say the schoolmen, is not cancelled in the damned, but remains
with the wicked to their disgrace and greater confusion ; so
that even in hell they are the ministers of Jesus Christ, and
the messengers of the new covenant. Nor is it cancelled in
the blessed, but remains in heaven with them for their greater
glory and ornament.
I have been the more particular on this topick, because it is
a fundamental article, with a pretty numerous class (and these
not all Romanists.) I was willing to explain it, as for as it is
explicable, from the writings of its defenders, being persuaded
that on those who do not discover there a sufficient confutation,
teason, and argument, Scripture and common sense will raaif©
A a
lag LECTURES ON
no impression* An author, of whose sentiments I took some
notice in my last lecture, has observed*, that as the civilians
have their fictions in law, our theologists also have their fictions
in divinity. It is but too true, that some of our theological
systems are so stuflFed with these, that little of plain truth is to
be learnt from them. And I think it will be doing no
injury to this dogma of the character, to rank it among
those fictions in divinity. God forbid I should add in
the not very decent words of that author, (though I really be-
lieve he meant no harm by them) " which infinite wisdom and
*' goodness hath devised for our benefit and advantage." The
God of truth needs not the assistance of falsehood, nor is the
cause of truth to be promoted by such means. The use of
metaphorical expressions, or figurative representations, in
Scripture, give no propriety to such an application of a terra
so liable to abuse.
* Hickes, Christian Priesthood, 1. 1, ch. ir, § 8,
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. i8t
LECTURE XII.
XN the prelections I have already given on the ecclesiastical
history, I have traced the progress of the hierarchy as far up
as the patriarchate, and shown by what steps that kind of oli-
garchy arose in the church. The only article that now remains
to be considered, and which completes the edifice of spiritual
despotism, is the papacy. You all know the common plea, on
which the retainers to Rome have, not indeed from the begin-
ning, but for many ages past, founded the right of papal domi-
nion ; namely, first, the prerogatives they affirm to have been
given by our Lord to the apostle Peter ; and secondly, the suc-
cession of their bishops to that apostle, and consequently td
those prerogatives. Every judicious and impartial inquirer
must quickly discover, that both the premises, by which their
conclusion is supported, are totally without foundation. Nei-
ther had Peter the prerogatives which they pretend he had,
nor have their bishops the shadow of a title to denominate
themselves his successours.
I acknowledged, in a former lecture, that Peter appears to
have been honoured by his master to be the president of the
sacred college of his apostles, and the first in announcing the
doctrine of the gospel, both to the Jews and to the Gentiles.
I have also shown, that this is the highest prerogative of which
there is any vestige in the writings of the New Testament, and
that there was not any particular species of power which was
given to him, that was not also, by their common Lord, commu-
nicated to the rest. They are all represented as alike founda-
tions of this new Jerusalem, which, in their master's name, and
as his spiritual kingdom, was to be reared. They all receive
from him the same commission for the conversion and instruc-
tion of all nations. They are all encouraged by the same
promises and the same privileges. Nay, as a convincing
proof that Peter, far from claiming a superiority over the
18|5 LECTURES ON
other apostles, did, on the contrary, subject himself to their
commands, we see (Acts viii, 14,) that " when the apostles,
" which were at Jerusalem, heard that Samaria had received
" the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John."
Nor did Peter, any more than John, disdain to serve in the
capacity of legates from that sacred body. Now whether is
greater, the sender, or the sent ? Canonists, and other Romish
writers, affect much to compare the pope and his cardinals to
Peter and his fellow-apostles. Yet I suppose, they will ac-
knowledge, it would look very oddly in the pope, and be in
fact incompatible v^^ith papal dignity, to be sent ambassadour
from the conclave, though nothing be more common, in the
members of that college, than to receive legatine commissions
from him. But passing this, whatever were the prerogatives
of Peter, they were manifestly personal, not official, in reward
of the confession which he was the first to make, that Jesus is
the Messiah, the Son of God ; a confession which may justly
be denominated the foundation of the whole christian edifice.
Besides, the apostleship itself, as I showed at some length,
was an office in its nature temporary, extraordinary, and in-
capable of succession. In point of right, therefore, no peculiar
privilege can be claimed by any church as derived from this
apostle.
And if from the question of right we come to the matter of
fact, the special relation of the see of Rome to this eminent
ambassadour of Christ, the partisans of papal ambition have
never been able to support their affirmations by any thing that
deserves the name of evidence. It has been questioned whe-
ther Peter ever was at Rome. The only ground on which the
papist builds his assertion, that he was in that city, and found-
ed the church in it, is tradition ; and such a tradition as must
appear very suspicious to reasonable christians, being accom-
panied with a number of legendary stories, which are totally
unworthy of regard.
In opposition to such traditionary legends, it has been urged,
that mention is no where made in Scripture, that this apostle
was ever there ; notwithstanding that there were so many fa-
vourable occasions of taking notice of it, if it had been fact,
that one is at a loss to conceive how it could have been avoided.
No hint is there of such a thing in the Acts of the Apostles,
though a great part of that book is employed in recording the
labours of this apostle for the advancement of the gospel, and
mention is made of different places, Jerusalem, Samaria, Lyd-
da, Joppa, and Csssarea, where he exerted himself in this ser-
vice. In the first of these he assisted at the consultation,
which the apostles, elders, and brethren, held in regard to cir-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 189
cumcision, and the ceremonies of the law ; though this hap-
pened a good deal later than the time when the Romanists
suppose his charge at Rome to have commenced. When
Paul afterwards cajne himself to Rome, mention is made of
the christians he found there, but not a syllable that Peter
either then was, or had been formerly among them. Paul, in
his long epistle to the Romans, or the church of Christ at
Rome, does not once mention the person whom these men
pretepd to have been their bishop. This silence is the more
remarkable, that towards the close of the epistle he seems
solicitous, not to omit taking particular notice of every one by
name, who, residing there, could be denominated, in any re^
spect, a fellow-labourer in the common cause. Nay more, in
the beginning of that epistle, he expresses the earnest desire
he had to visit them, that he might impart to them some spi-
ritual gifts, that they might be established. This, if we con-
sider the purpose for which Peter and John were sent by the
apostles to the Samaritans, converted by Philip, as recorded
in the eighth chapter of the Acts, will appear at least a strong
presumption, that no apostle had been yet at Rome. Paul
afterwards wrote from Rome, where he was twice a prisoner,
to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians., to the
Colossians, to Philemon, to Timothy, without taking notice
of Peter in any of the six letters, or sending any salutations
from him, notwithstanding the attention, in this respect, he
pays to others. When he said to Timothy, " At my first
*' answer," to wit, before the emperour at Rome, " no man
^' stood with me, but all men forsook me," — there would
surely have been an exception in favour of Peter, if any
such person had been there. Would he have said, in writing
to the Colossians from the same place, that Tychicus, Onesi-
mus, Aristarchus, Marcus, and Justus, were his only fellow-
labourers to the kingdom of God, who had been a comfort to
hin^, if Peter had been in Rome ? Or lastly, when he told his
beloved son Timothy, that the time of his departure v/as at
hand, and sent him salutations from all the brethren, naming
Eubulus, Pudens, Linus, and Claudia, would have omitted
Peter,, if, agreably to that very tradition formerly alluded to,
he had been not only in that capital at the time, but a fellow-
prisoner in the same jail ?
The only pretence of scriptural evidence advanced by the
Romanists, is indeed a very poor one, not to call it ridiculous.
Peter, say they, in his first epistle, presents the salutations of
the church at Babylon, by which they would have it, that he
must certainly have meant Rome. If they think he spoke pro-
phetically, they do not, by this interpretation, pay a great com-
im LECTURES ON
pliment to the throne of the hierarchy. The propriety of the
application, in this view, we do not mean to controvert. But
®ur adversaries, on this question, must be sensible, that their
explanation is merely conjectural. And is not the conjecture,
which others make, at least as plausible, that by Babylon is
here meant Jerusalem, which the apostle so denominates on
sccount of its apostacy, by the rejection and murder of the
Messiah, and on account of its impending fate, so similar to
that denounced against Babylon ? But why, say others, should
we, without necessity, recur to a figurative sense, when the
words are capable of being literally interpreted ? To do sot
would seem the more unreasonable, in this case, as the epistle is
written in a simple, and not an allegorical, style. Why must the
apostle be supposed not to mean the ancient Babylon, in Chal-
dea,, which was still in being, and was then, I may say , the head-
quarters of the Jews in the east ; a place famous for the resi**
dence of many of their most celebrated doctors, and for giving
feirth to some of their most learned performances on the law ?
That the apostle of the circumcision should go to preach the
gospel in Babylon, the capital of the Jews in dispersion, will
be thought to have a degree of probability, which it would re-
quire positive evidence to surmount. Yet I have heard no-
thing, on the opposite side, but supposition, founded on vague
and obscure traditions. But setting aside the imperial seat of
the Chaldeans, there was, at that time, a Babylon in Egypt, a
city of considerable note. What should make it be thought
improbable, that this epistle was written there ? That either of
these was the fact, appears to me beyond comparison more
I;ikcly, than that the apostle should date a plain letter in so enig-
matical a manner, as could not fail either to mislead his read-
ers or to puzzle them. A tolerable reason for this conduct
I have never heard. For had there been any danger to the
writer from what was contained in the letter, it would have
led him rather to suppress his own name, than to disguise the
place where it was written, a thing of no imaginable conse-
quence. But the openness with which he introduces hi&
name and addition at the head of the epistle, ought, in my
opinion, to remove every suspicion of that kind. The case is.
very difTerent in the interpretation of prophetick writing, such
as the Apocalypse, in which the style is purposely symbolical
and obscure. Thus we are fully warranted to say, that there
is no notice taken in Scripture, notwithstanding the numerous
occasions there were of doing it, that Peter ever was in Rome.
I add, that there is not the least notice of such a thing to be
found in the writings of any of the apostolick fathers, who had
been in the former part of their lives contemporaries of the
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 191
apostles, and had survived them, and consequently of all the
ecclesiastical writers had the best opportunity of knowing, Cle-
mentof Rome, itistrue, mentions Peter's martyrdom as aknowa
fact, without specifying the place. It had, besides, been fore-
told by our Lord. I am inclined to think that it must have
been at Rome, both because it is agreeable to the unanimous
voice of antiquity, and because the sufferings of so great an
apostle could not fail to be a matter of such notoriety in the
church, as to preclude the possibility of an imposition in re*
gard to the place. But with this opinion I see no way of re-
conciling the silence of Scripture, but by saying that Pe-
ter's journey to Rome was posterior, not only to the period
with which the history of the Acts concludes, but to the writ-
ing of Paul's epistles. In this case it is manifest, that he
could not have beea the founder, nor even one of the earliest
instructors of the Roman church. It is astonishing, that at
the very time, as is pretended, of the institution of the papal
supremacy, and of the instalment of the first hierarch, from
whom all the rest in succession derive their authority, an au-
thority by which the whole church, to the end of the world,
was to be governed, at the time when among christians it
ought to have been most conspicuous, and to have attracted
the greatest attention, so profound a silence, in regard to it, 13
observed on every side. No hint is given of such a thing, or
of any circumstance relating to it, by apostle, evangelist, or
father. And that mighty sovereign the pope, that king of"
kings, the sublime head of the church universal, whose throne
was erected at Rome, is treated alike by all, as one utterly
unknown and unheard of. No one seems to have formed the
least conception of any such personage.
I shall admit, however, that all that has been advanced, can-
not be accounted a proof either that Peter, in the course of his
apostolical peregrinations, was never at Rome, or even that he
was not the founder of that church ; but I believe that every
candid and capable inquirer will consider it as perfectly suffi-
cient to evince, first, that he W3S not the bishop of the place,
according to the proper acceptation of the term, and secondly,
that their bishop, whoever he was, was not, by any prerogative
whatever, distinguished from any other bishop. If, setting
aside the apostles, Linus, agreeably to the common opinion,
was the first bishop of that see, and was ordained before the
martyrdom both of Peter and of Paul, the latter, when writing
to Timothy, a very little before his own death, as he acquaints
us himself, seems to have had very odd conceptions of the
papal dignity, when he could huddle the name of the sovereign
pontiff with certain obscure names, no where else to be found
m LECTURES o]sr
in the annals of history. " Eubulus," says he, " greeteth thee,
" and Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia, and all the brethren."
He does not so much as give the pope the precedency. Is this,
the manner in which Paul would have treated the vicar of
Christ, had he known or acknowledged any such character r
With regard to Peter, if, what has been said does not satisfy,
that he could not be the Roman prelate, the Avords Of Paul, irl
his epistle to the Galatians, (Gal. ii. 7, 8, 9,) an epistle written
from Rome, are perfectly decisive. There Peter is expressly
denominated the apostle of the circumcision, and is said to
have had the conversion of the Jews, throughout the world,
eminently intrusted to his care* In this his mission is con-
trasted with that of Paul, who is styled, by way of eminence,
the apostle of the Gentiles. That Peter then should be fixed
in the metropolis of the Gentile world, as their particular pas-
tor, the pastor of a church consisting mostly of converts from
idolatry^ is palpably irreconcilable with the account given of
him by his brother Paul. Some ancient writers, in order to
remove this difficulty, have supposed, that there were at first
two distinct churches at Rome, one of believing Jews, of
which Peter, the other of believing Gentiles, of which Paul,
was the teacher. But this, for aught appears, is unexampled
in apostolical antiquity. Though the Jewish converts, by
themselves, continued for some time in the observance of
rites to which the converts from heathenism were not obliged,
these rites nowise entered into, or affected, their social worship,
as christians. Being one in Christ Jesus, and members one of
another, it is much more probable, that they all assembled in
the same congregation, communicated with one another, and.
had their pastors in common. To have done otherwise could
not fail to occasion a schism between the two parties.
And in regard to the other point, that Peter was not the
bishop of that city, those very testimonies evince, which have
been pleaded by the Romanists, to prove that he was there,
and that he was the founder of their church ; so that when
any ecclesiastical writers style him bishop, (which by the way
is not done by the earliest) it is manifest that they use the
term not in the strict sense, but with a certain latitude, denot-
ing only that whilst he remained there, he took a concern in
regulating the affairs of that church. Ireneus, one of the''
most ancient authorities that have been produced in support'
of the tradition that Peter was at Rome, shows manifestly, in
the passage quoted from him by Eusebius, that Peter was not
considered, in his time, which was near the end of the second
century, as having been bishop of that church, or even as its
sole founder. His words are these (1« v, c. 6,) (dsfAtxtc-iTdvliz sv
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 19$
1^ .«<«9^«(i*»jo-«ty7f5 o'i f-uiKM^ioi ci'^oro?iOi ex.y.Xi/i<rta,Vi Aivm r^v tsj5 £'?n<rK07ajc,
■Aeils^yniv m%it^i<^civ. " The blessed apostles," (observe he
speaks in the plural number, as he had mentioned a little
before both Peter and Paul) " having founded arid constructed
" that church, delivered the episcopal ofHce into the hands of
" Linus." Accordu-igly, in mentioning some of her first bishops,
he always counts from Linus, not from Peter, calling Anar
cletus the second bishop, and Clement the third. All these
three are mentioned also by Rutfinus, in the fourth century, as
succeeding one after another during Peter's life-time, and not
as succeeding Peter himself. Nay, he affirms still more parti-
cularly, that Peter committed to them the office of bishop,
that he might not be detained from discharging the duties of
the apostleship. Several of the ancients, with Ireneus, ascribe
the founding of that church equally to both apostles, whom, in
a looser style, some denominate bishops as well as apostleso
In this manner both Epiphanius and Eusebius speak of them.
The apostolical constitutions, a compilation ascribed to Cle-
ment of Rome, but manifestly of a much later date, though
probably extracted in part out of the old apocryphal writings,
called didascalies^ attributed to the apostles, and to apostolick
men, say, that Linus was the first bishop of Rome, and was
ordained by Paul, and that Cle.nent was the second, and or-
dained, after Linus' death, by Peter. That most of these
constitutions, as we now have them, were not compiled sooner
than the end of the fourth, or the beginning of the fifth, cen-
tury, bishop Pearson* and Dr. Grabef have put beyond a
doubt. That the order about the observance of easterj is
copied from a canon to that purpose of the council of Nice,
and stands in direct opposition to the primitive practice in the
east, and to an express injunction in that more ancient writing,
called Maz*} aTcotsoXm, some fragments whereof are preserved iii
Epiphanius, is manifest, and sufficiently shows that the com-
pilers made no scruple of making such alterations in those
didascalies, as they judged proper for adapting them to the-
doctrine and usages of their owii time. In the end of the
fourth century, therefore, Peter and Paul were equally ho-
noured by tradition as the founders of the Roman church,
but neither of them was numbered among the bishops pro-
perly so called.
But it does not satisfy the ambitious views of Rome, t0
say, that Peter was the founder of their church ; for they will
readily acknowledge, that he was the founder also of the
church at Antioch, and indeed of many others, in the dif-
*' Vind. Ign. Pars i, c. 4. f Spicileg. patrum. sec. 1. | Lib. v, cap. 17.
Bb
194 LECTURES OJST
ferent places where this eminent apostle first published the
gospel. Paul too was the founder, though not the bishop, in
the ordinary and proper acceptation of the term, of many
churches in Asia Minor, in Macedonia, and in Greece. And
though we have not so particular information about the rest,
we have reason to believe, that every one of the apostles was
the founder of some.
But, says the romanist, is it not agreeable to the voice of
antiquity, that James an apostle was the first bishop of Jeru-
salem ? And if that see had one aposde for their bishop, why
might not Rome have another for theirs ? This, if the fact
from which they argue were, as they suppose it to have been,
proves only, that the point which they would establish in the
conclusion, might have been, that there was nothing incom-
patible in it, but by no means that it was. The fact itself,
however, on which they build, must appear, even on their own
principles, an absolute uncertainty. It is universally agreed,
that the name of the first bishop of Jerusalem was James, and
that he was surnamed the Just, but it is not agreed that this
James was an apostle. Eusebius, Hegesippus, Epiphanius,
Jerom, Gregory of N;/sse, Chrysostom, have been numbered
among those who held, that this James was only one of the
seventy disciples. Some criticks have thought, and Math great
appearance of reason, that out of the seventy, and after them
out of the five hundred, to whom Paul tells us, our Lord ap-
peared at once after his resurrection, all the first pastors of
the churches of Judea in particular were selected. This, too,
is entirely agreeable to what Clemens Romanus, in a passage
I had occasion formerly to quote, acquaints us, was the uni-
form custom, that those who were the first fruits to the faith
of Christ, were constituted the bishops of the congregations,
planted by the apostles and evangelists. Whereas, to suppose
that an apostle, who, v/ith his fellows in that sacred college,
had received this express commission, as the last orders from
the mouth of his Master, " Go throughout all the world,
*' teach (rather convert, make disciples yf^xB-nle^vtrctls) all nations,
" and preach the gospel to every creature," to be confined to
the charge of a particular flock, is to suppose him either volun-
tarily to resign his important commission, or to be deprived
of it, and thus to undergo a real degradation. For beside the
difl"erence in respect of extent between these two missions, the
department of an apostle is chiefly amongst infidels, whom he
is commanded jUMB-Jjevnv to convert, the department of a bishop
is chiefly among believers, whom he is appointed h^ctrKtiv to
teach.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 195
An argument hath sometimes been formed in support of the
papal pretensions, on the ancient use of such appellations as
these applied to Rome, apostolick see, chair, throne, and the
like. But it is too well known to require illustx-ation, that
these phrases, though, in after ages, appropriated by the
bishops of Rome to their own charge, were, in the first three
centuries, applied to all the churches indiscriminately, in
which bishops had at first been placed by the apostles. Such
were Ephesus, Smyrna, Antioch, Corinth, Thessalonica, Phi-
lippi. Afterwards these titles were still further extended to
distinguish the metropoiitical churches throughout the chris-
tian world from the sees of their suffragans. Of the same
futile kind are the arguments drawn from the title pope^ (a
Greek word signifying father^ and from the ascription of
holiness and blessedness in the form of addressing the bishop
of Rome. These thiugs, it is well known to all who are
conversant in church-history, were at first common to most
bishops, especially metropolitans and patriarchs, and were
given, as well as received, by the Roman pontiff himself ;
though afterwards they were gradually, with many other
things, arrogated by Rome as her peculiar prerogatives.
Indeed, it is so evident to those who are ever so little ac-
quainted with these matters, that the true source of the gran-
deur of the Roman bishop was the dignity of the place, and
not any honours he derived from Peter, that to attempt to
illustrate so clear a point, would on the one hand be, to the
impartial and intelligent, but a misspending of time, and
would, I fear, on the other, have no effect on persons whose
minds are, either by prejudice or interest, swayed to the oppo-
site side of the question. If the succession to Peter could be
fairly claimed by any, the church of Antioch, beyond all com-
parison, would have a preferable title. We have express scrip-
tural evidence that Peter, was there, (see Gal. ii, 11,) and at
least as clear a tradition that he was the founder of that see.
I do not say that Peter, if he was the founder, could properly
be called the bishop of Antioch any more than of Rome ;
but I say, that in whatever sense he can be styled bishop of
Rome, we have much better ground to denominate him bishop
of Antioch.
Pope Innocent, who, about the beginning of the fifth century,
appears to have been the first who thought of deriving the
prerogatives of his see from the apostle Peter, acknowledges,
in a letter to the patriarch of Antioch, that that church, as
well as Rome, had properly been the see of St. Peter, and that
it was, on that account, of very great dignity, and entitled to
a very extensive jurisdiction ; nay, further, that it yielded to
19S LECTURES ON
the see of Rome only because Peter had accomplished there
what he had begun at Antioch. I cannot help thinking, how-
ever, that this was a dangerous confession, made bj' Innocent;
for it does not seem so clear a case, that it should be the last
church that the prince of the apostles had founded and pos-
sessed, and not the first, which had the best title to priority
in respect of honour and power. I believe most people would
think it more reasonable to consider the first foundation of
the first of the apostles as entitled to the preference, or first
place, if there was to be a primacy in the church. Indeed,
by the pontiff's manner of expressing himself concerning this
great apostle, one would imagine he were talking of a mere
modern, who, though settled at Antioch as bishop of the
place, had no scruple to accept a call to a better bishoprick,
and therefore came soon afterwards to be translated (how,
when, or by whom, we know not) to the metropolis of the
empire.
No historical fact, however, can be more evident, than that
the origin of the superiority of one episcopal see over another
arose from the secular division of the empire, and from no
other consideration whatever. Hence the pre-eminence of the
see of Rome, whose bishop, before the conversion of Constan-
tine, had only the precedency among the prelates, as bishop
of the imperial city; but no jurisdiction beyond the bounds
of the provinces, lying within the vicariate of Rome, as it was
called, which was properly no patriarchate, being but the half
of the civil diocess of Italy, and considerably inferiour in ex-
tent to some of the patriarchates. In every thing we may
observe the dignity of the episcopal see was determined by
the rank which the city itself held in the empire. Otherwise
whv should Alexandria have been ranked as it was before
Antioch? The latter they acknowledge to have been founded
by him, whom they denominate the prince of the apostles,
whereas the former was not founded by any of the apostles :
its erection is universally ascribed to the evangelist Mark.
But the true reason is, that Alexandria was the second city
in the Roman empire, and the prefect of that capital had the
precedency of the prefect of Antioch.
But above all, why was not Jerusalem vested with the supre-
macy- Jerusalem, the mother of churches, where our blessed
Lord, by his death and resurrection, laid the foundations not
of a particular church only, but of the church universal? I may
add, where the Holy Ghost first descended on the apostles,
where they were commanded to commence their ministry,
*' beginning at Jerusalem," and whence the faith was propa-
gated and diffused, as from its fountain, throughout all the
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 19?
workl. And even with regard to the particular church of that
city, it was surely entitled to the highest honours, ina£n)>.: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 f7ri<rK07rov ly^fiv ret, TC^io-^itct tsj; r/jM,»;5 fjudct rov rs;; Vi)[^'/ii nris-xJi-
^ov. hx.ro eivat oivhv v-ccv VufMjv. " The bishop of Constantinople
shall enjoy the honour of precedency next after the bishop of
Rome, because it is new Rome." The first place is given to
Rome as the elder sister, and that frtjm which the empire s'.ill
continued to be named., The second is given to Constanti-
nople, because now an imperial city as well as the other. In
thi- reason assigni^d for giving 'lie second place to the hitter,
they clearly indicate the only reason then known for giving
the first place to the former. This is still more explicitly
tn LECTURES ON
expressed in the twenty- eighth canon of the council of Chal-
cedon, holden in 451, being the fourth ecumenical council.
It is said to have consisted of 630 bishops, and, consequently,
was the most numerous that had yet been assembled. The
reason on which the fathers ground their resolve, is thus ex-
pressed in the canon : K«j< ya^ rut B-pova Tyji-^pea-^vjepoi/i VaifMig hxro
^cCTi?iiv$iv Tijv -sroXtv eKstnpi ej zrcc]ioei eiKoloic x7rodsa'6>Kciiri rcc ZTpeTJ^eta, id ra
a.v](» Q-K.o'TVoi Ksvuf^ivoi ot pv BsopiM'^ciloi iTTioriioToii rcc i<rx, zrpea-^eioi XTrevni/Mvru
T'/ii VBCi(i P*,M,i}? iyiMJoilM B-povdj, evMyiA>i 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?iiive<r9ci,c -zs-pxyf^Mo-t, d'svlepxv |K.er'
srMViiv uTirxp^sTxv- — ''• Whereas the fathers, with great propriety,
" bestowed the chief honours on the see of Old Romcy be-
*' CAUSE IT WAS THE IMPERIAL CITY, and whercas the 150
" (Constantinopolitan) fathers beloved of God, actuated by the
" same motive, conferred the like dignity on the most holy see
*' of New Rome, (that is, Constantinople) judging it reason-
" able, that the city honoured to be the seat of empire, and of
^ the senate, and equal in civil privileges with ancient royal
" Rome, should be equally distinguished also by ecclesiastical
" privileges, and enjoy the second place in the church, being
*' next to Old Rome — we ratify and confirm," &c. And as
the council of Constantinople had given rank to that patriarch,
this of Chalcedon proceeded to add jurisdiction. My prin-
cipal reasons for adducing this passage are to show first, that
the rank and dignity of the several bishops was, at that time,
considered by them as conferred by the church, and not as
derived from Jesus Christ, St. Peter, or the college of apostles,
none of whom are so much as mentioned by them ; that there-
fore it is of human, not of divine institution : and, secondly,
that the only reason assigned for the preference given is the
dignity of the city, and the rank it bears in the empire. It is.
to no purpose to urge, that the bishop of Rome could never
be prevailed on to ratify this canon of Chalcedon, It obtained,
notwithstanding his opposition, was engrossed in the acts of
the council, and remained u rule in the east ever after. It
was no wonder, that the sudden rise of this new dignitary
roused the jealousy of Rome. Constantinople, from a place
of no consideration, was, in half a century, become the prin^
cipal see in the east. An obscure suffragan was made chief
o-f the Greek patriarchs, and next in rank to the Roman pon-
tiff. Since the removal of the seat of empire, Constantinople
was grown a great and flourishing city, and still appeared to
be increasing ; Rome was as evidently on the decline. It was
natural for the pope to argue in this manner : " If things
'* proceed thus, can it be doubted, that a bishoprick, scarcely
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. I£f9
** named in former ages, which has, with so little ceremony,
" been at one step exalted above all the patriarchates of the
*' east, and had the second place in the church assigned it, will,
" at the next, with as little ceremony, be raised above the
" Roman see, and made the first ?" There appeared some
danger in overlooking tl^ese alterations, and therefore, under
pretence of defending the rights of the sees of Alexandria
and Antioch, and the canons of Nice, which, by the way, had
not a syllable relating to the question, he warded off the evil
which he suspected it would bring upon Rome. It is, howe-
ver, sufficient for my purpose to show, what may be justly
called the sense of the universal church at that time on this
article ; for the above canon was subscribed by ail the bishops
of that numerous council, with the exception of a very few,
who favoured Rome. Allow me to add, that these councils,
the Constantinopolitan and the Chalcedonian, are two of the
four which pope Gregory the Great declared he held in equal
veneration with the four gospels, and which are to this day in
the highest authority in the Romish church. I pass the consi-
deration of the validity of those canons, leaving it to the dis-
cussion of scholastick sophisters and Roman canonists. I regard
them solely as the unanimous testimony of the leading men,
and, consequently, of the church in those periods, concerning
the source of the prerogatives enjoyed by particular sees, and
the grounds on which they were bestowed. And in this view
they are certainly of the greatest moment.
Indeed, so notorious it is, that the dignity and authority of
the sees were almost entirely correspondent to the dignity and
authority of the civil governours of the place, that when the
emperour judged it proper to divide a province into two, a thing
which often happened, giving them separate magistrates ; the
ecclesiastical polity underwent the like alteration, and the
bishop of the new metropolis was raised to the dignity of a
metropolitan. The provincial churches also were divided, and
all those situated within the province newly erected, were
withdrawn from their old metropolitan. This would not fail
to create great animosities and discontents among the clergy,
as well as to prove a strong incentive to ambitious prelates,
who had interest at court, to apply for such a division of the
province, as would raise their city to a metropolis. But as this
practice was attended with gross inconveniences, and produc-
tive of very great abuses, a timely check was put to such alte-
rations in the ecclesiastical jurisdiction, by the council of
'Chalcedon, that very council which established the preroga-
tives of the Constantinopolitan patriarch. Nothing, however,
can be more evident, or is more ujaiversally admitted by all
^Oi LECTURES ON
who know any thing of these nlatters, than that the whole fa^
brick of ecclesiastical government was raised on the model of
the civil polity, that the very manner in which power was dis-
tributed, and apportioned to the great officers of the state, was,
in most cases, servilel}^ copied by the rulers of the church.
Nay, the very erection of their dignities, and the investiture
of the dignitaries, were generally effected by the imperial
edict ; for those never hesitated to acknowledge the power of
the emperour in these matters who were themselves benefited
by his power. Afterwards, indeed, when perfectly secured by-
long possession, tht possessors were not so willing to acknow-
ledge the source whence their wealth and honours were oi-igi-
nally derived.
In regard to Rome iii particular, it is astonishing to think
how suddenly, upon the establishment of Christianity, its bi»-
shops arose, by the munificence of the emperours, and the
misjudged devotion of some great and opulent proselytes,
especially among the ladies, from a state of obscurity to the
most envied opulence and grandeur. Ammianus Marcellinus,
a pagan and contemporary writer, speaking of the horrible con-
flict betwixt Damasus and Ursinus for the episcopal chair of
Rome, which happened about the middle of the fourth cen-
tury, a conflict in which the prefect of the city was compelled
to take refuge in the suburbs, and which ended in the cruel
massacre of a hundred and thirty-seven people in the basilick
of Liberius, says, in order to account, in some measure, for
the violence and fury with which this contest had been con-
ducted, " I must acknowledge, that when I reflect on the pomp
" attending that dignity, I am not surprised, that those who
" are fond of parade should quarrel and fight, and strain every
" nerve to attain this office, since they are sure, if they succeedj
" to be enriched with the presents of the matrons, to appear
" abroad no more on foot, but in stately chariots, and gorge-
" ously attired, to keep sumptuous tables, nay, and to surpass
" kings themselves in the splendour and m<ignificence of their"
" entertainments. But how happy would they be, if despising
*' the voluptuousness and show of the city, which they plead
" in excuse for their luxury, they followed the example of
" some bishops in the province^., who, by the temperance and
" frugality of their diet, the poverty and plainness of their
" dress, the unassuming modesty of their looks, approve
" themselves pure and upright to the eternal God, and all his
*' genuine worshippers*." I bring this quotation the raiher,
because it affords the testimony of a heathen, (who, therefore^
* Lib. xxvii. cap. 3.
^CLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 201
i^annot be supposed partial to the cause of Christianity) that to
■^vhatever pitch of pride and arrogance the church potentates,
in the great cities, were now arrived, there were not wanting
christian pastors in the country whose lives did honour to their
profession, showing, that the spirit of the meek and humble
Jesus was not totally extinct among those who were denomi-
nated his followers and servants. Let me add, that the rea-
diness with which that author gives so honourable a testimony
to the temper and manners of several ministers of Christ,
raises hini above the suspicion of being actuated by malice to
the cause, iri the reproaches lie throws on the ostentation and
sensuality of others.
Iri confirmation, if it be thought necessary, of the account
given by an infidel, of the grandeur, and even riiore than royal
state, in which the Roman pontiff then lived, I shall add what
is told by Jerom, a christian writer, and a father of the church,
■who was also a contemporary and an intimate friend of the
bishop. Prsetextatus, a noblerrian of the highest rank, and
honoured with the greatest and most lucrative employ-
ments of the empire, but zealously attached to paganism, con-
Versing once familiarly with Damasus, the sticcessful candi-
date^ on the subject of their different religions, said to the
prelate, in a sort of pleasantry, " Make me but bishop of
*' Rome, and I will turn christian immediately." Now it de-
serves to be 1-emarked, that Christianity, considered as an
establishment, supported by legal sanctions, and enjoying the
countenance of the magistrate was then only of about fifty
years standing; It was no longer since the church had emer-
ged put of obscurity, and been released from a most bloody
persecution, begun by Dioclesian, about the beginning of the
century, and continued with little interruption for ten succes-
sive years. That in so short a conapass this episcopal see
should have mounted almost to the summit of earthly gran-
deur, would be looked upon, if not so amply attested, as a
thing incredible.
But whatever its wealth and splendour rriight be even at this
early period, its power was yet but in its infancy. It is, how-
ever, certain, that a remarkable superiority in respect of pro-
perty, is the surest foundation on which a permanent domi-
nion can be raiised. But to account, in some measure, for the
suddenness of this acquisition of riches, it ought to be ob-
served, that it had been, long before, customary for all chris-
tians that were capable, but especially the more wealty, to
make liberal offerings to the church, as on other occasions, so
particularly at the celebration of the more solemn festi^s^
■^tiese offerings, after supplying the needs of the chui'chj' and'
c c
20a LECTURES ON
supporting its ministers, were understood, at first, to be de*
voted to the relief of the distressed and needy, strangers, or-
phans, widows, prisoners, and sick. Accordingly, with these
truly pious and charitable donations, the bishops of Rome
used, in earlier times, in the first place, to relieve the poor
of their own church, and when that end was attained, to send
the overplus to other churches, where the poor were nume-
rous, the people in general less affluent, and, consequently,
the offerings insufficient.
Of this humane and generous practice, the duration was
only whilst the church itself remained in affliction and obscu-
rity. It may appear a paradox, but it is too well confirnaed
by experience, that nothing is a greater enemy to generosity,
than the unexpected acquisition of boundless wealth. This
proves almost invariably the parent of ambition. And when
ambition comes to supplant charity, and a pompous species
of superstition to be substituted for rational devotion, the
poor are forgotten on all sides. 1'he exaltation of the priest-
hood, the exteriour glory of the sacred service, magnificent
temples, richly furnished and decorated, gorgeous vestments^
with whatever can dazzle the senses of those present at the
publick ministrations, appear even to the bulk of the people
the noblest object of their liberality, as tending more than any
other to the honour of God, and the advancement of religion.
In consequence of this gradual change in men's sentiments,
the oblations made to the church would be gradually alienated
from the primitive purpose, not onl)'" with impunity, but even,
with general approbation. Though the support of the minis-
ters, in many places, did not nov/, as formerly, depend on the
voluntary contributions of the people, all the principal sees
having fixed revenues and temporalities annexed to them, the
ministers were still, by a kind of prescription, or immemori-
al custom, considered as having a personal interest in the sa-
cred offerings. And though these were not wanted for the,
supply of the necessaries, or even of the conveniences of life,
there is no imaginable limit can be set to its luxuries, and for
the supply of these there would ever be occasion. The thoughts,
of these upstart princes would then naturally fix on splendid
equipages, numerous retinues, princely apparel, expensive ta-
bles, superb palaces, and whatever else couid feed their vani-
ty, and put them upon the level (as in a few cities, Rome and
Constantinople in particular, they were quickly put upon the
level) with the greatest monarchs.
But to take a brief survey of the principal causes which con-
tri hinted to raise the papacy to that zenith of glory, which it
actually reached, shall be reserved for the subject of some
other lectures. In this I have only examined the foundation.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 203
LECTURE XIIL
AN my last lecture, I entered on the consideratron of the rise
of papal dominion. I showed that the pretensions made by
papists, in regard to the distinguishing prerogatives of the
apostle Peter, and in regard to the title which the Roman
pontiff derives from him, are equally without foundation : that
neither had that apostle any such prerogatives as they ascribe
to him, nor has the bishop of Rome a better title to be called
his successour than any other pastor in the christian church. I
took notice, that the very first pontiff, who advanced this plea
as the foundation of his primacy and power, lived no earlier
than the fifth century ; I showed particularly, that the true
origin of the pope's supremacy was the dignity of the see, and
not of its founder, the wealch and temporal advantages deriv-
ed from the congregation of that great metropolis, and not
any spiritual authority and jurisdiction, transmitted from the
fisherman of Galilee, who was styled the apostle, not of the
nations, but of the circumcision. I showed further, that this
account of the origin of Romish dominion perfectly corres-
ponds with the model that the church very soon assumed in
conformity to the civil constitution of the empire ; the digni-
ty and secular power of the magistrate, in every city, especi-
ally in every capital, almost invariably determining the dignity
and spiritual jurisdiction of its pastor. Hence the different
degrees among the biaipps, of suffragan, primate, or me-
tropolitan, and exarch. Hence also among those of the same
class, the exarchs, a lew, who presided in the principal cities
of the empire, such as Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria,
and Antioch, were dignified with the title of patriarch. And
even among these, the precedency was always regulated by the
rank of their respective prefects. To these, indeed, was ad-
ded Jerusalem, from respect to the place where Christ had con-
summated his ministry, and our redemption had been accom-
plished, that is, where expiation had been made for the sin of
man by the sacrifice of the Son of God, where the first fruits
of the resurrection had been produced in him who vvas*oth
the founder and the finisher of the faith, where the Holy Spi*
$04 LECTURES ON
rit was first given, and whence the gospel issued, as from its
fountain, to bless, with its salutary streams, the remotest
parts of the habitable world. But this was the only city which
v/as honoured with any pre-eminence from other considerations,
than such as were merely secular. And even Jerusalem came
but in the fifth place.
1 observed before, that power has a sort of attractive force,
which gives it a tendency to accumulate, insomuch that what,
in the beginning, is a distinction barely perceptible, grows, in
process of time, a most remarkable disparity. In every new
and doubtful case that may occur, the bias of the imagination
is in favour of him who occupies the higher place, were the
superiority ever so inconsiderable. And what was originally
no more than precedency in rank, becomes at length a real su-
periority in power. The effect will be considerably accelerated,
if superiour opulence join its aid in producing it. This was
eminently the case with Rome, the wealthiest see, as well as
the most respectable, because the seat of empire, of any in
the church.
But it may be urged on the other side, that when the im-
perial throne was transferred from Rome to Constantinople,
it might have been expected, that this latter place would rise
to a still greater eminence than the former. That indeed, not-
withstanding its obscurity for ages, it did rise to very great
eminence, in consequence of the translation of the seat of
empire, is itself a very strong confirmation of the doctrine
here maintained. That though the youngest of the patriar-
chal sees, it did, through the favour of the emperours, arise
to such distinguished grandeur and authority, as long to ap?
pear a formidable rival to haughty Rome, and often to awake
her most jealous attention, is a point which will not be dis-
puted by an)" who is but moderately conversani in ecclesiastick
history. But then it is to be observed, that Rome had been
a church in the highest estimation for ages before the name of
Constantinople had been heard. Ai4 as for Byzantium, the
name by which the place had formerly been known, it never
was a see of any note or consideratron. In regard to the
Romans, however uncertain it may be who it was that first
preached the gospel to them, and founded a church among
them, there can be no doubt of the antiquity of this event,
since Paul, as we learn from the Acts of the Apostles, on his
first coming prisoner to Rome, found a church there already
planted ; and since, in one of his longest letters, manifestly
wri'ten some time before, and directed to that church, he
mentions their faith as even, at that early period, celebrate^
throughout the world. Rome may therefore be justly reckon-^
ECCLESIASTICAI. HISTORY. 205
^d neaHy coeval with the oldest gentile churches. Certain i
is, that the tradition which prevailed most concerning thi
church, in the days of Constaiuine, and ior a considerabfe
time before, was, that it had been founded by the two apostles,
Peter and Paul. These were considered as the most emirent
in the apostolical college, the one a^ the doctor of the J-ws,
the other of the Gentiles ; the people therefore seem-d to
think, that it v^as an honour due to the n>stress 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<g after these disputes were terminated,
well knew how to ava d themselves of a canon so favourable to
the exaltation of thei r see. Not many years afterwards, Va-
lentinian, the more effectually and speedily to crush the dis-
sensions and schisms that obtained, in his time, among the
prelates, especially in Italy, and the west, enacted a law, em-
powering the bishop of Rome to examine and judge odier
bishops, that religiou«5 and ecclesiastical disputes might not
be decided by profane and secular judges, but by a christian
pontiff, and his colleagues. For this immunity, and the pow-
er thus conferred on the order, a considerable number of bi-
shops, mostly indeed 1{ alian, soon after synodically convened
at Rome, expressed a grateful sense of the ernperour's gene-
rosity and indulgence. The opinion, that the order had a su-
periour, even a divine, ;right to be independent of the civil
powers, a notion so prevalent some ages afterwards, had not
yet been broached. Ihe single agreeable circumstance, that
the imperial edict gave ,;m exemption to the clergy from the
power of laymen, made them overlook a very fatal circum-
stance in it, which was, it s tendency to enslave the whole or-
der, (not to say the christian community) by subjecting them
to the tyranny of one of their own number. Bat the bitter
■Ma LECTURES OM
was surmounted by the sweet, or more properly, the poiso^
was ^5^rediiy svvaUowed, as it was hidden under a vehicle ex-
tremely pal-ttable. But no advantage, once obtained, was ever
overlooked by that politick and watchful power.
It is tvident, that neither the canon of Sardica, nor the
imperial rescript, produced at first much effect beyond Italy,
and its immediate dependencies. For a long time no regard
was paid in die east, or even in Africa, to these new regula-
tions. And their influence over the clergy in the west, it
must be owned, advanced by very slow degrees. The subor-
dination of bishops to their own metropolitan, along with the
other comprovincial bishops, and of metropolitans to their
own exarch, with the other diocesan prelates, had by this
time been so well established, that it Was no easy matter to
remove foundations so firmly laid. Indeed, about thirty-foui^
years afterwards, in the pontificate of Damasus, the primi-
tive order was expressly restored;, and the canon of Sardica
virtually revoked by a council assembled at Constantinople,
greatly more numerous, and held for many ages in much high-
er estimaiion, than the council of Sardica^
One thing, however, in the policy of Rome, to which they
sacredly adhered, was never to lose sight of any privilege or
advantage once obtained^ never to be disheartened at any par-
ticular check. Or present want of success, in asserting a right,
but carefully to watch their opportunity, and anew to urge a
plea that appeared favourable to their pretensions, however
often they had been baffled in urging it before. This perse-
(verance never failed, on some occasion or other, to be of use
to their cause. And one instance of success (the increase of
the ignorance and superstition of the people keeping pace with
the superiority of the Roman pontiffs) did them more service,
than twenty defeats did them hurt.
To this unabated perseverance they added another maxim,
namely, to make the raising of the papal power their primary
object, to which it behoved every othtr consideration to give
way. As this showed itself ort numberless occasions, so on
none more eminently than on the difference which arose be-
twixt the eastern churches and the western, on the subject of
^Acacius. This Constantinopolitan pontiff, who lived towards
the end of the fifth century, had, in some of those absurd and
unintelligible logomachies, with which the christian world, in
those ages, was without intermission pestered, taken the side
opposite to that espoused by the Roman pontiff. The conse-
quence was, they first disputed, and, by a very usual progress,
from disputing they came to quarrelling, and from quarrelling
to an- open breach. These holy priests, at last, most piously/
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY* ^09
^liccDirditig to the fashion of the times, abused, cursed, and ex-
tommunicated each other. The Roman bishop, indeed, at
this time, made a bold attempt for surpassing all that his pre-
decessours had enterprised hitherto. He summoned before
himself, and a synod of Italian bishops, who were his depend-
ants, and, on non-appearance, tried, condemned, and deposed
a patriarch, nay, the first patriarch of the east, an order over
which even the insatiable ambition of that restless power had
never, till then, dared to claim any jurisdiction. The reci-
procal anathemas followed of course. This produced a most
memorable schism between the oriental churches and the oc-
cidental, a schism which continued for no less than five and
thirty years, and subsisted through no fewer than five succes-
sive pontificates. The seeds of the dissension may be said to
have been sown in the time of pope Simplicius. It was by
his successour, Felix the second, that the patriarch was cited,
judged, and deposed.
Though it was impossible that such exti-avagant jjroceed-*
ings should take effect, in opposition to the emperour, and all
the oriental churches, they showed but too clearly to what
height of pride and arrogance the boundless and ill-judged pro-
fusion of former emperours, senators, matrons, and opulent
cities, had already raised this novel but formidable power.
On this there ensued immediately a division of the church into
two : the west adhering to the pope, and the east declaring for
the patriarch, both obstinately refusihg to communicate with
each other. It was but too visible, by the sophistical evasions
and subterfuges, which the Roman pontiff, and his immediate
successour, employed in the manifestoes published to apologize
to the world for this conduct, that they began to be apprehen*.
sive lest the papal power had been stretched too far, and be-
yond what the world was yet prepared to bear. For this rea-
son they were fain to vindicate it on principles which the see
of Rome has now, for several ages, absolutely disclaimed*
But what was to be done ? They had gone too far to retreatf
without giving a mortal wound to all their high pretensionsi
And to persiist, had the appearance of entailing a perpetual
schism on the church. This last effect, however, was, on many
accounts, rather to be hazarded. Their maxim seems to have
been, Better be absolute de.spots in a narrower territory, than
have, in an extensive empire, an authority not only more limit*
ed, but co-ordinate, with that of other potentates.
It was a practice in the churches, at that time, and had been
for some ages before, to enrol the names of those, who died
in the communion of the church, in certain records, whicli
they called diptychs, wherein the bishops were registered by
D d
21& LECTURES ON
themselves. And of these, publick commemoration was mad«a,
by the officiating deacon, at a certain part of the service. After
the death of Acacius, repeated attempts, both in Felix's life-
time, and after his death, in the time of his successours, were
made on the part of the Greeks, to restore the amity that had
formerly subsisted between Greeks and Latins. And, in effect,
the whole ground of the quarrel, the henaticon, or decree of
union, a compromise by observing silence on some disputed
points, the objections against the synod of Chalcedon, and
against the doctrine contained in a letter of pope Leo, on the
controverted articles, were given up. The only thing, that
served to obstruct the proposed union, was, that the names of
Acacius, and the bishops who succeeded hirn, during the con-
tinuance of the schism, were in the oriental churches still re-
tained and read in the diptychs.
This, though it did not in the least affect the doctrine in de-
bate, affected what more nearly touched Rome, the supremacy
she aspired at over all otlier churches. Whilst the names of
those prelates continued there, they were acknowledged as
lav/ful bishops, notwithstanding that they had all been either
deposed by the Roman pontiff, or at least refused his
communion. And though nothing could be a more bare-
faced usurpation than the power then, for the first time, arro-
gated by the pope, it was, after repeated trials, found impossi.'
ble to obtain reconciliation on any other terms. This obsti-
nacy, or, if you will, firmness, in the pontiff, will appear the
more remarkable, when the other circumstances of the case
are attended to. The Constantinopolitans were so attached
to the memory of Acacius, that for many years no successour
could permit his name to be erased, without endangering not
only his own life, but the tranquillity both of the city, and of a
great part of the empire. The emperours, themselves, long
considered it as too hazardous a thing even for them to au-
thorize. Besides, the east was at this time divided into two
great factions, the eutychians and the orthodox. It gave the
former no sm.all subject of triumph, and no little advantage,
over the latter, their antagonists, that these, whilst the va-
riance subsisted, could reap no benefit or assistance from the
western churches, though of the same sentiments, in the pro-
found disputes of the time, with themselves. It was in vain
for the Greeks to urge the impossibility of a compliance, with-
out raising a combustion in the then capital of the empire. It
was in vain to urge, that the continuance of the breach would
endanger the total subversion of orthodoxy in the east, that is,
throughout the better half of Christendom. The pope remain-
ed inflexible.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 211
The truth is, these arguments served rather to confirm him
in the resolution he had taken, than to induce him to relinquish
it. The more difficult the accomplishment of the condition
was, on the part of tlie orientals, the more complete would
be the victory of Rome. In like manner, the greater the cla-
mour and the disturbances it migtit raise in the imperial city,
and other Grecian churches, the more signal would be both
the triumph af the Latins, and the mortification of the Greeks;
and the less, in time to come, would the latter be disposed to
hazard a breach with the former. And as to the arguments
from the imminent dangers to which the orthodox faith, in
the east, would be exposed by the conlinuaBce of this unnatural
division, nothing can be plainer, tlian that this very circum-
stance hardened the obstinacy of the pontiff into downright in-
flexibility. He saw but too well the necessity the Greeks were
under of obtaining peace on any terms, that they might be able
to withstand and surmount so formidable a faction as that of
the Eutychians, sprung up in the heart of their own country,
and daily gathering strength from the divisions of the or-
thodox.
But, may on« say, is it possible that the Romans should,
from such selfish and political considerations, have made so
small account of endangering, throughout the half of the chris-
tian world, what they reckoned the purity of the faith, and
absolutely necessary to salvation? That in reality they acted
this part, is an historical fact incontrovertible. So far
from abating of their terms, as the danger of the faith increase
ed, they, on the contrary, raised their demands, in the p'^rsua-
sion that the Greeks, from the urgency of the necessity, would
be disposed to yield them every thing. In fact, by this artful
management, more was obtained at last than had at first been
insisted on.
To one who reads the history of the church with attention
and understanding, nothing can be more manifest, than that,
with the Romans, power was uniformly the primary object,
doctrine was always but the secondary. Their great political
talents and address were constantly exerted in modelling and
employing the latter in such a manner as to render it instru*
mental in promoting the former. This cannot, with equal
truth, be affirmed of the Greeks. The many philosophick sects
which had arisen among them, when in a state of paganism,
had produced the pestilent itch of disputation, togetlier with
that species of subtlety, which enables those possessed of th's
miserable cacoethes, to find, on every subject, materials fov
gratifying it. Such were the disposition and habits which, o;)
their conversion to Christianity, they brought with them into
21^ LECTURES ON
the new religion ; every doctrine of which was, by this frivo-
lous, though ingenious, inquisitive, loquacious, and disputa-
tious people, most unnaturally perverted into matter of meta-
physical discussion. Hence sprang those numerous sects into,
which the christian community was sq early divided^
It deserves our notice, that for several ages all the contro-
versies, almost without exception, originated among the
Greeks. I use the term Greeks in the same latitude wherein
it is generally used, in ecclesiastick history, for the oriental
churches which spoke the Greek language, as contradistin-
guished to the occidental, which spoke the Latin. Almost the
only exception to the remark I have made is the pelagian
heresy, which doubtless arose in the west. The origin of thp
African sect of the Donatists was more properly a difference,^
in regard to discipline, than in the explanation of any article
of faith. It may also deserve our notice, that though th<t.
Jewish state, from the time of Moses, had subsisted, for man^
centuries, in very different situations, and under different
forms of government, yea, and in difJPerent countries, there
were no traces of different sects, or of any theological disputes
among them, till after the Macedonian conquests, when they
became acquainted with the Grecians.
But some remarks on the origin, the nature, and the con™
sequences of the controversies, that arose in the church, an4
on the methods that were taken to terminate them by dioce-
san synods,and ecumenical councils, which constitute a most es-
sential part of ecclesiastical history, and therefore require to be
treated more particularly, shall be reserved for a separate
discourse.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 21^
LECTURE XIV.
T^HE subject of the present ecture is remarks on the origin,
the nature, and the consequemes of the controversies, that, in
the early ages, arose in the churh,and on the methods that were
taken to terminate them by docesan synods, and ecumenical
councils. Though this may, it first sight, appear a digression
from the examination of the loman policy, exercised in rais-
ing the wonderful fabrick of spritual tyranny, yet, on a nearer
view, it will be found to be inimately connected with that po-
licy, insomuch, that the progess of the latter is, without a
competent knowledge of the ftrmer, scarcely intelligible.
I observed, in my last prele.tion, that for several centuries
almost all our theological dsputes originated among the
Greeks : that to this sort of exrcitation their national charac-
ter, their education, and early labits, conspired to inure them.
They spoke a language which vas both copious and ductile to
an amazing degree. Let me dd, that the people in general,
especially since they had been brought under a foreign yoke,
were become extremely adulattry in their manner of address,
abounding in titks and complmental appellations. To this
their native speech may be saic, in some respect, to have con-
tributed, by the facility wherevuth it supplied them with com-
pound epithets, suited to almat every possible occasion, and
expressive of almost every possible combination of circum-
stances. This peculiarity, in the genius of their tongue,
gratified also their taste both br variety and for novelty ; for
they were thereby enabled to form new compositions from
words in use, almost without end j and when they formed
them analogically, were not lia)le to the charge of barbarism.
Hence sprang up the manj flattering titles they gave to
their saints and clergy, lefofMtplta, ti^oi^v^oi-, rpto-otfi.®^, T^iir/^Kct^t@''i
B^oTrpeTTes-etloii ^etfAMXcift^olotlo^i x?'^>?''^oi> Xfi^o<Pop<^, %pf?-oKiv^<^', and
a thousand others. The same mode of adulation they in-
214 ^ LECTURES ON
troduced into their publick worship; for though no terms
can exceed, or even equal, the majesty and perfections
of the Supreme Being, the practic« of loading their addres-
ses with such epithets, betrayed but loo evidently their tenden-
cy to think God such a one as themselves, to be gained by fair
speeches and pompous titles : for it is a common and just ob-
servation, that they are the greatest flatterers who love most
to be flattered. An exuberance o/ inadequate and vain words
does but injure the simplicity and the dignity of worship. In
thtir explanations of the mysterieij as they were called, and in
their encomiums on the saints, tley abounded in such terms,
and were ever exercising their in/ention in coining new ones.
The genius of the Latin tongue, on the contrary, did not
admit this freedom ; nor had th< people, who spoke it, to do
them justice, so much levity aid vanity as to give them the
like propension. What they afttrwards contracted of this dis»
position, they derived solely from their intercourse with the
Greeks, and the translation of thiir writings. Indeed, in their
versions from the Greek, as the translator was often obliged,
in order to express in Latin sucl compound epithets, to recur
either to circumlocution, or to fome composition, which the
analogy of the language could iiardly bear, those things ap-.
peared awkward and stiff in a Litin dress, which in a Grecian,
habit moved easily and agreeable
Now several of the early dispites, it may be remarked, took
their rise from the affectation of employing these high-sounds
ing titles. Hence, in a great miasure, the noise that wasrais,
ed about the terms «ft«iiro-<(^, ojit«yo-/(^, vTroo-lxcri^^ v7roi-x] iK(^y S-eo-
loMi;, ;;k;ff5-o7fls«:e5, when first introduced into their theology. To
these terms the Latins had nosingle words properly corres-
ponding. Augustin, one of tie most eminent of the Latin
fathers, seems to have been so^ensible of this defect in dis-
coursing on the trinity, (L. v, i 9) that he apologizes for his
language, and considers the expressions he employs, as only
preferable to a total silence on t|ie subject, but not as equally
adapted with the Greek. " Dijtum est," says he, " tres per-
" songe, non ut illud diceretur, led ne taceretur." The truth
is, so little do the Greek terms,^nd the Latin, on this subject,
correspond, that if you regard the ordinary significations of
the words, (and I know not Whence else we should get a
meaning to them) the doctrine ^f the east was one, and that of
the west was another, on this irticle. In the east it was cne
essence, cmd three substances, f^tc}fi(rici, rpeis iiTrerxFeii ; in the west
it was one substance and three ^rsons, " una substantia, tres
persons." The phrases r^io, Tr^oc^Ta, in Greek, tres substanttcey
in Latin, would both, I imagiiie, have been exposed to the
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 21S
charge of tritheism. But which of the two, the Greek or the
Latin phraseology, was most suited to the truth of the case, is a
question 1 will not take upon me to determine. I shall only say
of Augustin's apology, that it is a very odd one, and seems to
imply, that on subjects above our comprehension, and to which
all human elocution is inadequate, it is better to speak nonsense
than be silent. It were to be wished, that on topicks so sub-
lime, men had thought proper to confine themselves to the
simple but majestick diction of the sacred scriptures.
It was then the extravagant humour of these fanciful and
prating orientals, assisted by their native idiom, which pro-
duced many of the new fangled and questionable terms I have
■ been speaking of j the terms produced the controversies j and
these, in return, gave such consequence to the terms that gave
them birth, and created so violent an attachment in the party
that favoured them, that people could not persuade themselves
that it was possible, that the doctrine of the gospel should sub-
sist, and be understood or conveyed. by any body without them.
Men never seemed to reflect, that the gospel had been both
better taught and better understood, as well as better practised,
long before this fantastick dress, borrowed from the schools
of the sophists, was devised and adapted to it. However,
the consequence which these disputes gave to the Greek terms,
occasioned an imitation of them in the less pliant language of
the occidentals. Hence these barbarisms, or at least unclas-
sick words, in Latin, esaentialis^ siibstantialis^ consubstantialiSy
Christipara^ Deipara^ and several others of the same stamp, to
be found in the writings of the ecclesiastick authors of the
fifth and following centuries. All those subtle questions,
which so long distracted and disgraced the church, would then,
we may well believe, both from the character of the people,
and from the genius of the tongue, much more readily origi-
nate, as history informs us that they did, among the Greeks
than among the Latins. Indeed the latter were often slower
than we should have expected in coming into the dispute. For
this we may justly assign, as one principal reason, the general
ignorance of the Latins at that time. Letters had, long before
Constantine, been in their decline at Rome ; insomuch, that at
the period I allude to, when those controversies were most
hotly agitated, the greater part, even of men in respectable
stations, understood no tongue but their owxs.. If they had
studied any other, doubtless it would have been Greek which
was become the language of the imperial court now at Con-
stantinople ; and not only of Greece itself, but of almost all the
east, particular!}^ of all the men of rank and letters in Asia,
Syria^i and Egypt. And if even Greek was iktle understood \n
816 LECTUE£S ON
Rome, we may safely conclude, that other languages trei^
haraly known at all.
Yet that it was very little known in the fifth century^ ill thfe
time of pope Celestine, whea the controversy betwixt Cyril
and Nestorius broke out, is evident from this single circum-
stance : When Nestorius v/rote to the pope, sending him an
account of the contest, together with a copy of his homilies,
containing his doctrine or the point in question, all in Greek,
his mother tongue ; not only was the pontiff himself ignorant
of that language, but, it would seem, all the Roman clergy,
consisting of many hundreds, knew no more of it than he*
And, though we cannot suppose, that there were not theft
many in Rome who understood Greek, yet there seem to have
been none of that consider^ition, that the pope could decently
employ them in a business of so great consequence. Accor-
dingly, he was obliged to send the whole writings to Cassian, a
fnan of learning, a native of Thrace, who then resided at
Marseilles in Gaul, to be translated by him into Latin. This
delay gave Cyril no small advantage ; for though he wrote to
the pope after Nestorius, yet knowing better, it would seem,
the low state of literature at that time in Rome, he prudently
employed the Latin tongue, in giving his representation of thd
affair ; and, in this way, produced a prepossession in the
mind of the pontiff, which it was impossible for Nestorius
afterwards to remove.
Perhaps, too, it may have contributed to make the Latins
less disposed, at first, to enter with warmth into the controver-
sies which sprang up, that the terms whereby the Greek words,
on both sides of the question, were latinized, rather than trans-
lated, appeared so uncouth and barbarous, that they had little
inclination to adopt them. But when time had familiarized
their ears to them, we find they could enter into the subject
as passionately as the Greeks.
When controversies once were started, the natural vanity of
the disputants, together with the conceived importance of the
subject, as relating to religion, (an importance which every one,
in proportion to the resentment contracted from the contra-
diction he had met with, was disposed to magnify) inflamed
their zeal, and raised a violence in the parties which the world
had never witnessed before. In whatever comer of Christen-
dom the controversy originated, the flame came by degrees to
spread throughout the whole, so that the Latin as well as the
Greek churches never failed, sooner or later, to be involved in
the dispute. As the former, hov\rever, for the reasons above-
mentioned, came almost always last into the contest, they had
previous opportunity of knowing both on what side those who,
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 2if
fbr learning, parts, and piety, had attained the highest reputa-
tion, declared themselves, and to what side the people gene-
rally swayed. With these advantagies, the Latins, though less
intelligent in philological and nietaphysical disputes, yet being
more united among themselves, a consequence, in a great
measure, of their ignorance, which made them more implicit
followers, (these I say) when they did declare in favour of a
side, commonly, by their number, decided the question, there-
by ascertaining what was orthodox, and what was not.
It may also account in part for their greater unanimity, that
they had fewer leaders. There were several eminent sees in
the east, which were a sort of rivals to one another, for not to
mention the ej^archal sees of Ephesus and Cesarea, there were
the patriai-chates of Alexandria^ Antiochj and Constantinople,
each considerable enough to be a check upon the rest. In the
west, there was no see whatever that could cope with Rome*
But it must be owned, that there was not only a closer union,
but in general more steadiness^ among the Latins, than among
their rivals, the Greeks. This may be accounted for partly
from the same causes, partly from the difference of national
character* The Romans were as remarkable for their gravi-
ty, as the Greeks for thieir levity. Indeed, the Raman pontiffs,
who were the chief leaders in the west, did not often renounce
a cause, in favour of which they had once declared themselvesi
I say they did not often 5 for that they acted this part some-
times, is unquestionable. However far, therefore, this argu-
ment may go, in support of the policy of Rome, it cannot be
urged iti support of her infallibility, as it admits several gla-
ring exceptions. Nothing is more notorious than Rome's
desertion of the side which she had long maintained, on the
ridiculous question about the three chapters : in regard to
which, pope Vigilius, as is observed by Maimburg *, shifted
isides no fewer than four times. It is well known, that pope
Honorius was, after his death, by a council holden at Constan*
tinople, towards the end of the seventh centuiy, comnlonly
called the sixth general council, condemned as a heretick, and
ian organ of ti>e devil, for holding the doctrine of the Mono-
thelites; To this judgment the then reigning pope Agatho
consented, not only by his legates, but by the reception and
approbation he gave to the decrees of that assembly. Also
Leo the second, Agatho's successour, declared his cbneur-
rence in the anathema pronounced by the council against pdp^
Honorius,
* Traite Historiqne del'Eglise de Rome, chap, Viii
218 LECTURES ON
Were it necessary to produce an instance of change in the
same pontiff, beside Vigilius above-mentioned, Liberius fur-
nishes a most apposite example. This pope, about the middle
of the fourth century, when the Arian controversy was at its
height, intimidated by the power of the reigning emperour
Constantius, whom he knew to be a zealous disciple of Arius,
declared pubiickly in favour of that party, and excommuni-
cated Athanasius, whom all the orthodox regarded as the pa-
tron and defender of the catholick cause. This sentence he
soon after revoked, and after revoking it, his legates, at the
council of Aries, overawed by the emperour, concurred with
the rest in signing the condemnation of Athanasius, yielding,
as they expressed it, to the troublesome times. Afterwards,
indeed, Liberius was so far a confessor in the cause of ortho-
doxy, that he underwent a long and severe banishment, rather
than lend his aid and countenance to the measures which the
emperour pursued for establishing Arianism throughout the
empire. But however firm and undaunted the pope appeared
for a time, he had not the magnanimity to persevere, but was
at length, in order to recover his freedom, his country, and his
bishoprick, induced to retract his retractation, to sign a second
time the condemnation of Athanasius, and to embrace the
Arian symbol of Sirmium. Not satisfied with this, he even
wrote to the Arian bishops of the east, excusing his former
defence of Athanasius, imputing it to an excessive regard for
the sentiments of his predecessor Julius ; and declaring, that
now, since it had pleased God to open his eyes, and show him
how justly the lieretick Athanasius had been condemned, he
separated himself, from his communion, and cordially joined
their holinesses, (so he styled the Arian bishops) in supporting
the true faith. Before he returned from exile, meeting with
the emperour, who was by this time turned semiarian, the
pliant pontiff, impatient to be again in possession of his see,
was induced to change anew, and subscribe the semiarian con-
fession.
This apostacy of Liberius, which has given .infinite plague
to the prostitute pens employed in support of papal usurpa-
tions, whose venal talents are ever ready for the dirty work of
defending every absurdity, that can gratify the views of their
superiours, this, which in their hands has proved a copious
' Source of sophistry, chicane, and nonsense, whilst, as Bower
'^well expresses it, like men struggling for life in deep water,
and catching at every twig, they flounce in vain from quibble to
quibble, and from one subterfuge to another ; this apostacy, I
say, was acknowledged and lamented by all the contemporary
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 219
fathers, who take occasion to mention these transactions, even
by those who have since been canonized, and are, at this day»
worshipped in the Romish church, as saints of the first mag-
nitude. A plain proof, that the plea of infallibility had not
then been heard of. Jerom, Athanasius, Hilarius, all in one
voice, accuse this po}>eof giving the sanction of his name to
heresy. The last of these, St. Hiiarius, cannot refrain, whem
he mentions him, from anathematizing him, and all his peifi-
dious adherents. All the ancient historians concur, in like
manner, in attesting, that he apostatized from the faith.
Moreover, the same Liberius afterwards admitted to his
communion, being, pi'obably, ignorant of their sentiments, the
Macedonians, who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit.
Last of all, after the death of the Arian emperour, and the
accession of Julian, commonly called the apostate, who, though
not a christian, professed to be a friend to toleration, the vene-
rable, the infallible head of the church universal, as the parti-
sans of Rome now denominate their pontiff, made one change
more, and returned to orthodoxy.
To give but one instance more, pope John the twenty-second,
in two sermons, (for even so low as the fourteenth century,
popes sometimes preached) maintained, that the saints depart-
ed are not admitted to the beatifick vision till after the resur-
rection. This doctrine gave great and general offence. One
Wallis, an Englishman, was the first who ventured to preach
publickly against it. This he did in Avignon itself, where the
pope then resided. Wallis, for his uncommon audacity, was
thrown into prison, and condemned to live on bread and water.
Afterwards the question was canvassed by several theologians
of character, particularly by those of the university of Paris,
with all the bishops and abbots then in that metropolis, and
also by a synod assembled at Vincennes, who unanimously
condemned the pope's opinion as repugnant to scripture, and
heretical. Philip, the sixth king of France, sent the pontiff
an authentick copy of this decision, signed by twenty-six emi-
nent divines, requiring his holiness to acquiesce in their judg-
ment, and (if cardinal d'Ailly ma)^ be credited) threatening,
that in case he did not, he would cause him to be burned for
heresy. The pope at first attempted to vindicate his doctrine,
but finding, soon after, that the dissatisfaction, and even scan-
dal, which it had given, were almost universal, he was ind'.iced
to declare, in a publick consistory, that he never intended to
support any tenet contrary to the scriptures and the catholick
faith J but that if he had inadvertently dropt any such thing ia
his sermons, he retracted it. This, though not an acknowledg-
ment of his errour, was a plain acknowledgment of his falli-
220 LECTURES ON
bilitjr. In his last illness, however, a few hours before hk,
death, he made a publick and solemn retractation of his erro-^
neons doctrine, in pi-esence of all the cardinals and bishops
then at Avignon, called together on purpose, declaring, that
the saints departed were admitted to the sight of God's es-
sence, (such was the jargon of the time) as soon as they were
purged from their sins ; and retracting whatever he had said,
preached, or written, to the contrary. His successour, Bene-
dict the twelfth, that his own orthodoxy might not be suspect-
ed, took an early opportunity of preaching on the heatifick
vision, and, in his sermon, showed his sentiments to be the
reverse of those which had given so much scandal in his prede-
cessor. Not satisfied with this, he caused the point to be
discussed in a consistory, to which he invited all who had
adopted pope John's opinion, that they might produce what
they had to offer in its defence. Afterwards he published a,
constitution, wherein, without naming his predecessor, he ex-
pressly condemned his doctrine, commanding all to be prose-
cuted as hereticks, who should thenceforth obstinately maintaia;
or teach it. I might produce another instance from the same
pope John, who maintained, in a decretal, that the Franciscan
friars had property, in direct contradiction to a decretal of his
predecessor Nicolas the fourth, affirming, with other popes,
that they had none, and was not less zealous for the side he took
in this profound controversy than if the whole of Christianity
had depended on it ; commanding the inquisiters to extirpate^
by all possible means^ the contrary, pestilential, erroneou&j^
heretical, and blasphemous doctrine.
But to return to our subject, it is certain that the Bishops
of Rome cannot be accused of having often acted so weak a
part as pope Liberius, pope Vigiliiis, or pope John. Besides,
the case of the first, and that of the church, in his time, were
particular. Heterodoxy had then a powerful and bigotted
prince for its protector, who stuck at no means by which he
could accomplish the extirpation of the faith of Nice, and the
establishment of Arianism in every part of his dominions ;
and, in fact, what with persuasion, what with compulsion, the
defection was become universal, insomuch, that before the
death of that violent antitrinitarian persecutor, there was, in
the whole church, but one orthodo5^ bishop who kept possesr^
sion of his see, Gregory of Elvira, in Andalusia. However
justh^, therefore, the versatility of Liberius may be considered
as totally subversive of the plea of infallibility, it does not in-
validate what has been said in regard to the profound policy
and address generally maintained by that watchful power^
The case of Vigilius was, in some respects, siwiilar.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 22t
We have seen with what steadiness, and at how great a risk,
the re-union of the eastern church and the western was so ef-
fected as to give a very considerable ascendancy to the latter,
which she had never enjoyed before. The manner of conduct-
ing the measure did but too manifestly show, that it was a
matter of no consequence to her, whether the Greeks were or-
thodox or heterodox, whilst they continued independent of her
authority, and did not dread her displeasure. These, at least
the greater part of their doctors, were a race of quibbling so-
phists, engrossed with the imaginary importance of their un-t
intelligible speculations, and futile disquisitions who did not
conceive a nobler object of their pursuit, than that their par-
ticular explanations and phraseology should be adopted into
the system and language of the church.
Though the Greeks taken together were, in all literary mat*
ters, an overmatch for the Latins, yet, as the latter kept pretty
close united, whilst the former were split into parties, eternally
disputing and squabbling, the Latins derived hence an incon-
ceivable advantage. For however much the Greeks in general
affected to despise them as rude and illiterate, compared with
themselves, no sooner did they take a side in any controversy,
than they were sure to gain over that party of the Greeks
whose side they took ; the general rivalship between Greeks
and Latins was swallowed up in the love of victory, so natural
to professed combatants, and in the particular emulation that
each entertained against a hated antagonist in the controvejsy.
Though both nations were greatly degenerated from what they
had been in the Augustan age, the vestiges of their original and
respective national characters, as described by the prince of
J^atin poets, were still discernible j
Excndent alii spirantia mollius sera :
Credo equidem: vivos ducent de marmore vultus, i.
Orabunt causas melius : ccelique meatus
Describent radio, et surgentia sidera dicent.
Tu regere imperio populos, Romane, memento,
(Hse tibi erunt artes) pacisque imponere morem ;
Parcere subjectisji et deb^Uare superbos.
. iEN. L. 6.
That the Romans, by their valour, their publick virtue, and
their immense superiority in the art of war, should have rais-
ed an empire over the undisciplined surrounding nations, who
were all, except the Greeks, so much their inferiours in every
thing but animal courage and brute force, is not so very as-
tonishing, as to a careless eye it may at first appear. But that
after their extraordinary success had enriched them with the
spoils of all nations ; after their riches had introduced luxury,
S2;2 LECTURES ON
effeminacy, and Indolence; after they had, by their vices^^
become, in their turn, a prey to the barbarians they had for-
merly subdued ; after the empire came to be torn to pieces
by Goths, Vandals, Huns, and Lombards ; when the sun of
science was now set, and the night of ignorance, superstition,
and barbarism, was fast advancing ; that out of the ruins of
every thing great and venerable, there should spring a new
species of despotism never heard of, or imagined before,
avhose ineans of conquest and defence were neither swords
nor spears, fortifications nor warlike engines, but definitions
and canons, sophisms and imprecations, and that by such
weapons, as by a kind of magick, there should actually be
reared a second universal monarchy, the most formidable the?
world ever knew, will, to latest ages, afford matter of asto-
nishment to every judicious inquirer.
Of the numerous controversies wherewith the church was,
for several ages, pestered, some related only to things cere-
monial. Of this sort was the contention abaut the time of the
observance of Easter, which, so early as the second century,
raised a flame in the church. Others, doubtless, concerned
essential articles in the christian theology. Such were the
Arian controversy and the Pelagian. Whether Jesus Christ,
was a divine person, and existed from eternitj^, or a mere
creature, and had a beginning ; whether by grace in scripture
we are to understand advantages with regard to us properly
external, such as the remission of sins, the revelation of God's,
will by his Son, the benefit of the examples of Christ, and his
apostles, the promises of the gospel, and the gifts of Provi-
dence, or whether we ought also to comprehend, under that
name, as things equally real, certain internal benefits conferred
on the mind by the invisible operation of the Holy Spirit ; are
momentous questions, which nearly affect the substance of
christian doctrine.
But from this fund many other questions may, by men
more curious than wise, be easily started, which no modest
man will think himself capable of answering, and no pious
man will think it his duty to pry into. Such are some of those
that have been moved in regard to the manner of the spirit's
operation, in regard to the generation of the second person of
the trinity, and the procession of the third. To this class
may be added, those impertinent inquiries which have some-
times produced as great a ferment as the most momentous
would have done. Of this sort is the question concerning the
natural corruptibility of the body of Christ, and that about
the palpability of the bodies of the saints after the resurrec-
tion.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ^2.1
There is afourth set of questions, which are fnere logoma-
chies, in regard to which the different combatants have either
no fixed meaning to the words they employ, or mean precisely
the sartie thing under different expressions. In this last case,
the controversy is either absolutely nonsensical, or purely
verbal. Nor has this been the least fruitful source of conteri-
tion in the church. What could be a more flagrant example
of this than the question which created, in the time of pope
Hormisdas and some of his successours, so much animosity
and strife ? The point was, whether we ought to say, " One
*' of the trinity suffered in the flesh," or, " One person of
*' the trinity suffered in the flesh." On this pretty puzzle
tTiere were four different opinions. One set approved both
•e^xpressions, a second condemned both, a third maintained
the former expression to be orthodox, the latter heterodox,
and a fourth affirmed the reverse. In this squabble, emperours,
popes, and patriarchs, engaged with great fury. The then
reigning emperour Justinian was as mere a dotard on all the
sophistical trash then in vogue among the theologians, as any
scholastick recluse, who had been inured to wrangling from his
cradle, and had nothing else to mind. Luckily, however, no
council was convened to discuss the point, and give it suffi-
cient importance. In consequence of this cruel neglect it
died away.
The dispute with Nestorius, though equally frivolous,' being
treated differently, took deeper root. The point in debate at
first was. Whether the Virgin Mary might be denominated
more properly the mother of God, or the mother of him that
'% .God ? It is plain, that there could not arise a question
which might be more justly said to turn merely on grammati-
cal propriety. Both sides admitted, that Jesus Christ is God
as well as man ; both sides admitted, that his human nature
was born of the Virgin, and that his divine nature existed
from eternity ; both sides admitted the distinction between
the two natures, and their union in the person of Christ.
Where then lay the difference? It could be no where but in
phraseology. Yet this notable question raised a conflagration
in the church, and proved, in the east, the source of infinite
mischief, hatred, violence, and persecution. It is reported of
Constantine Copronymus, in the eighth century, that he one
day asked the patriarch, " What harm would there be in
" calling the Virgin Mary the mother of Christ ?" God pre-
serve your majesty^ answered the patriarch, with great emo-
tion, from entertaining such a thought. Do you not see hoxv
Nestorius is anathematized for this by the xvhole church^ " t
" only asked for my own information," replied the emperour.
S24 LECTURES OH
*' but let it go no farther." A few emphatical strokes likfe
this are enough to make the people of that age appear to those
of the present as not many removes from idiocy. Had NeS"
torius, whose correctness of taste (for opinion is out of the
question) made him isensible of the irreverence of an expres-
sion, which seemed greatly to derogate from the divine ma-
jesty, and tended manifestly to corrupt the religious senti-
ments of the vulgar, vrho are incapable of entering into meta-
physical distinctions ; been but a better politician, (for to do
him justice, JRome herself cannot accuse him of the most
unclerical sin of moderation) and, consequently, had he been
a more equal match for his adversary St. Cyril, the decision
of the church had infallibly been the reverse of what it was*
and we should at this day find Cyrilianism in the list of
heresies, and a St. Nestorius in the kalendar of the beatified.
On such accidental circumstances it often depended, whether
a man should be deemed an heresiarch or a saint, a devil or
an angel. " I shall only remark," says a modern Roman
Catholick author, (Richard Simon, not Father Simon of the
Oratory, Des ceremonies et coutumes des chretiens orien-
taux, Ch, 7,) "that some might infer, that nestorianism is
*' but a nominal heresy, and that if Nestorius and St. Cyril
*' had understood one another, they might have reconciled
*' their opinions, and prevented a great scandal in the church.
" But the Greeks were aUvays keen disputants, and it was by
" them that most of the first heresies were broached. Com-
" monly their disputes consisted in a sort of metaphysical
*' chicanery on ambiguous phrases* Hence they drew infer-
" ences after their manner, and from inferences, proceeded to
" personal abuse, until the parties at last became irreconcile-
" able enemies. Had they but coolly explained their thoughts^
*' they would have found that, in most cases^ there was no
" scope for the imputation of heresy on either side* This is
*' what some allege to have happened in the affair of Nestorius
" and St. Cyril." True, indeed, Mr. Simon, and for a speci-
men of their spirit and coolness, let us but hear the final
judgment of the council of Ephesus in this famous cause.
" Our Lord Jesus Christ, against whom the most wicked
*' Nestorius has levelled his blasphemies, declares him, by the
" mouth of this council, deprived of the episcopal dignity, and
" cut off from the communion of the episcopal order." The
note bearing this sentence was thus directed: " To Nestorius^
a second Judas." In every thing they were guided by Cyril,
whom, in respect of meekness, they might, wit;h equal truth,,
have denominated a second Moses«
£CCLESiASTICAL HISTORt. 33^
Nobody is 9.t a I083 to perceive the opinion of the French
author above quoted in regard to this affair. Yet we may ob-
serve in passing, in what an indirect manner he is obliged to
express it. Some tnig/it infer ahd some allege. And no wonder
that he should take this method of suggesting a principle to-
tally subversive of the doctrine of the infallibility, wheresoever
placed i a doctrine which now, among the learned of that com-
munion, seems to be regarded as purely of the exoterick kind,
that is, as proper, whether true or false, to be inculcated on
the people, as an useful e'spedient in governino; them* This
Frenchman's principle plainly subverts the pope s pretensions ;
for Celestine freely acceded to the sentence, condemning Ne-
Storius as a most pestilent heretick. It subverts the preten-
sions of an ecumenical council, which that of Ephesus^ how-
ever disorderly and tumultuous, has always been acknowledg-
ed by the Romanists to be. It subverts the pretensions of the
church collectively, which did, for many ages, universally (the
not very numerous sect of Nestorius only excepted) receive
the decrees of that synod. This Ephesian council was one of
the four, concerning which pope Gregory^ who is also called
St. Gregory, and Gregory the Great, declared, that he receiv-
ed them with as much veneration as he did the four gospels*
Yet so little of consistency in speculations of this sort is to
be expected from either popes or councils, that when so late
as the pontificate of Clement the eleventh, in the beginning of
the present century, some affected to style St. Ann the grand-
jnother of God, (no doubt, with the pious view of conferring
an infinite obligation on her) his holiness thought fit to sup-
press the title, as being, in his judgment, offensive to pious
«ars. Yet it is impossible for one, without naming Nestorius j
,t0 give a clearer decision in his favour* For what is the mean-
ing o£ grandmother P Is it any more than saying, in one word,
what mother^s mother^ ox father'' s mother^ expresses in two ? To
.$ay then of Ann, that she was the ynother of the mother of Godj,
which they admit, and to say that she was God^s grandmother,
which they reject, are absolutely the same. The sole spring
of offence is in the first step i if that be admitted, the propriety
,Oif such expressions, as God's grandmother or grandfather,
tincle, aunt, or cousin, follows of course. The second council
of Nice, with greater consistency, in quoting the epistle of
James, do not hesitate to style the writer God^s brother^ Kefloe.
Tov d^eXipoB-eov icmu^oi, are their very words. Only from this more
recent circumstance, we may warrantably conclude, that if the
phrase, mother of God^ had never been heard till the time of
Clement the eleventh, it had fared well with the author, if he
had not been pronounced both a blasphemer and a her.etie?^^
iF f
226 LECTURES ON
What made the case of Nestorius the harder was, that he was,
in no respect, the innovator. He was only shocked at the in-
novations in language, if not in sentiments, of the new-fangled
phrases introduced by others, such as this, of the mother of
God^ and the eternal God was borii ; the impassible suffered ; the
immortal and only true God expired in agonies. I have seen a
small piece, called, if I remember right, " Godly riddles," by
the late Mr, Ralph Erskine, one of the apostles and founders
of the Scotch secession, written precisely in the same taste.
** There is nothing new," says Solomon, "under the sun."
In the most distant ages and remote countries, kindred geni-
uses may be discovered, wherein the same follies and absurd-
ities, as well as vices, spring up and flourish. To men of shal-
low understandings, such theologick paradoxes afford a plea-
sure not unlike that which is derived from being present at
the wonderful feats of jugglers. In these, by mere sleight of
hand, one appears to do what is impossible to be done ; and in
those, by mere sleight of tongue, (in which the judgment has
no part) an appearance of meaning and consistency is given to
terms the most self contradictory, and the incredible seems to
be rendered worthy of belief. I'o set fools a staring, is alike
the aim of both. I shall only observe, that of the two kinds
of artifice, the juggler's and the sophister's the former is much
the more harmless.
To proceed ; the contention that arose soon after, on occa-
sion of the doctrine of Eutyches, appears to have been of the
same stamp. The whole difference terminated in this, that
the one side maintained, that Christ is o/"two natures, the
other, that he is of and in two natures, both agreeing, that in
one person he is perfect God and perfect man. Yet this dis-
pute was, if possible, conducted with more fury and rancour
than the former. Much need, in those days, had the rulers of
the church, who called themselves the followers and ministers
of the meek and humble Jesus, to go and learn what this
meaneth, (2 Tim. ii, 14,) Charge them before the Lord^ that they
strive not about -words to no profit^ but to the subverting of the
hearers. They acted, on the contrary, as if they could not
conceive another purpose for which a revelation had been given
them, but to afford matter of endless wrangling, and to foster
all the most malignant passions of human nature. Had they
so soon forgotten the many warnings they had received from
inspiration, of the mischievous tendency of such a conduct,
that profane and vain babblings would increase to more un-
godliness, that their pitiful logomachies, their oppositions of
science, falsely so called, their foolish and unedifying ques-
tions and vain j anglings, could only gender strife \ Is it possible
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 227
they could be so blind as not to see their own character, as
well as the consequences of their conduct, so distinctly deli-
neated in these words of the apostle : If any man consent ?iQt
to wholesome uoords^ practical and useful instructions, not idle
speculations, even the -words of our Lord Jesus Christy and the
doctrine that is according to godliness; he is proud^ knowing no-
things but doting about questions and strifes of words ^ xvhereof
Cometh envy^ strife^ railings^ evil surmisings^ perverse disputings
of men of corrupt minds^ and destitute of the truth^ who think
that gain is godliness ? Could they read these things and not be
struck with so bright a reflection as they exhibited of their own
image ? We must think, that at that period, these things were
but little read, and less minded.
From the fifth century downwards, it became the mode, in
all their controversies, to refer to the councils and fathers, in
support of their dogmas, and to take as little notice of sacrecj
writ, as if it no way concerned the faith and practice of a chris-
tian. But their despicable and unmeaning quibbles (to say
the truth) were not more remote from the doctrine of the gos-
pel, than the methods whereby they supported their dogmas
were repugnant to the morals which it inculcates. Let us hear
the character given of their councils, their procedure, and the
effects produced by them, by a contemporary author, a bishop
too, who spoke from knowledge and experience. St. Gregory
Nazianzen, writing to Procopius, thus excuses his refusal to
attend a synod, at which his presence was expected : " To tell
*' you plainly, I am determined to fly all conventions of bi-
*' shops ; for I never yet saw a council that ended happily. In-
*' stead of lessening, they invariably augment the mischief.
*^ The passion for victory, and the lust of power, (you'll per-
*' haps think my freedom intolerable) are not to be described
" in words. One present as a judge, will much more readily
*' catch the infection from others than be able to restrain it in
*' them. For this reason I must conclude, that the only st;-
** curity of one's peace and virtue is in retirement." Thus far
Nazianzen. How a man, who, in the fifth century, could talk
so reasonably, and so much like a christian, came to be saint-
ed, is not, indeed, so easily to be accounted for.
On the whole, when one seriously considers the rage of
dogmatizing, which, for some ages, like a pestilential cpnta-
gion, overspread the church ; when one impartially examines
the greater part of the subjects, about which they contended
with so much vehemence, and their manner of conducting the
contest, especially in those holy convocations, called synods,
it is impossible not to entertain a low opinion of their judg-
ment and abhorrence of ther disposition. At the same time.
m LECTURES ON
it is but doing them justice to remark, that in cases wherein
Iheir imaginations were not heated by controversy and party«
Spirit, when they kept within their proper sphere, the making;
of regulations or canons for maintaining order and disciplinfe
in the church, they did not often betray a want of judgment
iand political capacity- On the contrary, they frequently give
ground of admiration to the considerate, that the same persons
should, in the one character, appear no better than sophisters
^d quibblers, fanaticks and furies, and, in the other no lessi
tlian prudent statesmen and wise legislators.
But it is time to return from this digression, if it can be
called a digression, about councils, to the policy of Rome,
and the means by which she rose to the very pinnacle of
worldly prosperity and grandeur, I thought it of consequence
to give in passing a slight sketch of the general nature, and
rise, and consequences of those disputes, which constitute s6
essential a part of ecclesiastical history, I shall, in my next,
proceed in tracing the causes and maxims which contrihutedi
to the establishi^ent of the Rorxian hier^chy.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, 2^9
tECTURE XV.
1
N my last discourse, 1 gave you a general account of the
nature, rise, and progress, of those controversies, which con-
tinued for many ages to disturb the peace of the church, and
which were, in a great measure, the consequence of a defection
from the genuine spirit of the gospel, from the primitive sim-
plicity of its doctrine, and purity of its morals, and no less
evidently the cause of still greater corruptions, and a more
flagrant apostacy, though men still retained the abused name
of christian. I took notice also of the methods taken to ter-
minate those disputes by synods and councils, a remedy which
commonly proves worse than the disease ; rather, I should
Say, a prescription of that kind, which instead of curing,
inflames the distemper, and renders it epidemical ; nay, is
often productive of several others. The very convoking of
such numerous assemblies, from all the corners of the em-
pire, for the discussion of such senseless debates, as the greater
part of them manifestly were, gave, in the eye of the world,
a consequence to their logomachies, and drew an attention to
them, which it was impossible they should ever otherwise
have acquired. Besides, the sophistry and altercation em-
ployed by both parties in the controversy naturally gave birth
to new questions, insomuch, that they sprang up faster on
every side, than it was in their power to terminate them.
What the poets feigned of the hydra was here verified. By
lopping off one of the heads of the monster, they gave rise at
least to two others. " Keges ignari (says Le Clerc, Ars Grit,
p. 2, s. 2, c. 5,) "■ nee, inter bonos principes numerandi, con-
♦' vocarunt Graeculos, qui linguae acuendse per totam vitam
** operam dederant, rerum ipsarum ignaros, contendendi stu-
" diosos, perpetuis rixis inter se divisos ; et bardos aliquot
*' homines ex occidente, rudiores quidem illis, sed non meli^-
230 LECTURES ON
" ores ; iique post pudendas contentiones, obscurissima quse—
" dam dogmata, verbis ssepe parum aptis, auctoritate sua
" firmant ; quae stupidi populi sine examine adorent, quasi
" divinitus accepta. Non ficta me loqui norunt qui synodoram
'*^ historias iegerunt ; nee certe vanus erat qui dixit ;
Ovai Ti ■zsm c-vvoooia-iv ofMB-povoi; eo'Tof*,' eyaye
Xijvaiv j; yspxvav c6y,pi]ce. f^x^vaf^i^mv
Ev3-' epi^. ivB-et. i^aS-o? ri x.ci( onT^ia icpvyrlcc -^etpdlB-ev
E<5 ha a'vrf^svea^v ^a^ov ctyetpoi^svcc.
" Nunquam ego sedebo in synodis anserum aut gruum temere
*' pugnantium. Illic contentio, illic rixa, et probra antea
" latentia saevorum hominum in unum locum collecta." I shall
make a supposition, which may at first appear extravagant,
but which will, I hope, on examination, be found entirely
apposite to the case in hand. Suppose that a single province
in the empire had been visited with the pestilence, and that
the distemper raged with so much violence, that few in that
neighbourhood escaped ; suppose further, that the ruling
powers had, in their great wisdom, determined to summon,
from all the provinces infected and uninfected, the whole
medical tribe, phvsicians, surgeons, and apothecai'ies, sound
and diseased indiscriminately, in order to consult together,
and fix upon the most effectual method of extirpating the
latent poison ; would it have been difficult to foresee the con-
sequences of a measure so extraordinary ? The diseased in
that assembly would quickly communicate the infection to the
sound, till the whole convention, without exception, were in
the same wretched plight ; and when all should be dispersed
and sent home again, they would return to their respective
countries, breathing disease and deach wherever they went ;
so that the malignant contagion which had, at first, afllicted
only a small part, would, by such means, be rendered univer-
sal, and those who ought to have assisted in the cure of the
people, would have proved the principal instruments of poi-
soning them. Exactly such a remedy were the decisions of
councils, to the plague of wrangling, at that time not less
terrible, if its consequences were duly weighed.
What an ecumenical council is, has never yet been properly
ascertained. If we are to understand by it an assembly,
wherein every individual church is represented, there never
yet was such a council, and v/e may safely predict never will
be. There was so much of independency in the primitive
churches, before the time of Constantine, that at first their
provincial and diocesan synods (for they had not then any ge?-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 231
neral councils) claimed no authority over their absent mem-
bers, or even over those present, who had not consented to
the acts of the majority* Thus they were, at tirst, more pro-
perly, meetings for mutual consultation and advice, in what
concerned the spiritual conduct of their flocks, than societies
vested with legislative powers, even over the members of their
own community. In proportion as the metropolitans rose
above the suffragans, and the patriarchs above the metropoli-
tans, the provincial synod, in concurrence with the metropo-
litan, and the diocesan synod, in concurrence with the patri-
arch, acquired more authority and weight.
But when, after the establishment of Christianity, ecumeni-
cal councils, or what, in a looser way of sptaking, were cal-
led so, were convoked by the emperour, (which continued for
ages to be the practice in the church) if the patriarchs, or ex-
archs themselves, were divided, as each was commonly fol-
lowed by the bishops of his diocese, there was no one persoa
of weight enough to unite them. Sometimes, indeed, th6
emperour, when bigotted to a side, interfered in their debates ;
and when he did, he rarely failed, by some means or other,
to procure a determination of the dispute in favour of his
opinion. But this, though commonly vindicated by those
who were, or who chose to be of the emperour's opinion, was
always considered by the losing side as violent and uncanoni-
cal, notwithstandmg that his right to convene them was allow-
ed on all hands. However, as it never happened, even ia
their most numerous councils, that every province, nay, that
every civil diocese, or exarchate, I might say, that every
christian nation had a representation in the assembly, so there
was not one of those conventions which could, with strict pro-
priety, be called ecumenical. With those who were not sa-
tisfied with their decisions, there were never wanting argu-
ments, not only specious, but solid, against their universality,
and, consequently, against their title to an universal submis-
sion.
Certain; it is, that no party was ever convinced of its errours
by the decision of a council. If the church came to an ac-
quiescence, the acquiescence will be found to have been impu-
table more to the introduction of the secular arm, that is, of
the emperour's authority, who sometimes from principle, some-
times from policy, interposed in church affairs, than to any
deference shown to the synodical decree. Accordingly, wheu
the imperial power was exerted in opposition to the council'^
determination, as was frequently the case, it was, to the fuli^
as effectual in making the council be universally rejected, as,
on other occasions, in making it be universally received. I
^32 LECTURlfcS O"^
•may say further, that this power was equally effectual in coil*
yoking councils to establish the reverse of what had been
established by former councils* In what passed in relation
both to the Arian and to the Eutychian controversies, and af-
terwards in those regarding the worship of images^ these
points are, to every intelligent reader, as clear as day.
Indeed, the doctrine of the infallibility of councils is, com-
paratively, but a novel conceit. Those of the ancients, who
paid the greatest deference to their judgment, did not run in-
to diis extravagance. What was St. Gregory Nazianzen's
opinion of the matter, may be learnt from the quotation I gave
you from that author in the preceding prelection. But the
futility of recurring to this method for terminating disputes is
what the whole christian world, Greek and Latin, Protestant
and Papist, seems now to be sufficiently convinced of, inso-
much, that without the spirit of prophecy, one may venture
to foretel, that, unless there is a second dotage which the
church has yet to undergo, the council of Trent will remaia
the last under the name of ecumenical, assembled for the pur*
pose of ascertaining articles of faith.
But to return to the steps and maxims by which the papal
power arose. I have already mentioned two things very re-
markable in the Roman policy ; one is, the steadiness witK
which they pursued a measure once adopted, the other, thfik
sacrifice they always made of every other consideration to the
advancement of their authority and grandeur. In the contro-
versies that sprang up, I have observed the advantages the
Latin church derived from the following circumstances, to wit,
that they were commonly later than the Greeks, in becoming
acquainted with the subject in debate, had much less of a con-
troversial genius, and were more united among themselves.
In many of the disputes, especially the earlier disputes, we
cannot say of one of the two opposite tenets more than of the
other, that it tended to advance the hierarchy. Several of
them, as we have seen, were either mere verbal cavils, or
such jumbles of ill-adapted ideas, into the form of proposi-
tions, as were quite incomprehensible, and no otherwise con-
nected with practice than in the general, but very strong ten-
dency they had, to divert men's attention and zeal from what
was essential and useful, to what was entirely imaginary and
frivolous. Nevertheless in these, however unimportant in
themselves, it was of great importance to Rome, for the ad-
vancement of her authority, that her explicit declaration on
either side should prove decisive of the question. In the lat-;
ter controversies, indeed, such as those concerning purgatoryij;
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 233
image worship, transubstantiation, indulgences, the indelible
character, the efficacy of the opus operatum^ that is, the exte-
rior of the sacramental action, and some others, we may-
say with truth, that ecclesiastical authority was clearly interest-
ed on one side of the question. It would even imply an un-
common degree of stupidity not to discern hov/ much in those
questions the victorious side, or that which obtained the sanc-
tion of Catholicism, tended to exalt the priesthood. But be-
fore these controversies came upon the carpet, the power of
Rome was so far advanced, that she had not the same occasion
as formerly for reserve and caiition in making her election*
Accordingly her election was invariably on the side which
most advanced her power. It is for this reason that the very
origin of such doctrines, as well as the methods she ernploved
in supporting them, are not improperly imputed to priestcraft..
In regard to the maxim above-mentioned, lAvhich is, indeed,
of the essence of priestcraft, namely) to make every conside-
ration give way to the aggrandizement of her priestly authori-
ty, we have already produced one strong evidence of it, in
the manner wherein the peace was affected, after what is called
the great schism of Acacius, or the first schism of the east.
But in nothing does this Roman maxim appear more glaring,
than in the encouragement invariably given to those who,, from
any part of the world, could be induced to appeal to the Roman
pontiff. For many centuries, always indeed rill the right of
receiving such appeals came by custom to be firmly established,
it was the invariable maxim of the Roman court, without pay-
ing the smallest regard to the merits of the cause, often without
examining it, to decide in favour of the appellant. No maxim
could be more unjust. At the same time for a power which
had, by her opulence and arts, and some peculiar advantages,
become so formidable, no maxim, ere the practice of appealing
to her judgment had taken root, could be more politick, or more
effectually tend to encourage and establish that practice.
That you may be satisfied I do not wrong the Romish hier-
arch, do but examine a little how the case stood in some of the
first causes that were in this manner brought before his tribu-
nal. Indeed, in the very first of any note, his holiness was
rather unfortunate in following the maxim I have mentioned.
The appeal I allude to was that of the heresiarch Pelagius, and
his disciple Celestius, from the sentence of an African synad,
by which their doctrine, had been condemned, and they them-
selves, and all the teachers and holders of their teiaetg, had
been excommunicated. From this sentence they appealed to;
Rome, Zozimus, then pope, agreeably to. the maxims of his
<X)urt, immediately, but very unfortunately for himself, de-
Gg
f^Si LECTURES ON
dared in their favour, vindicated their doctrine, and, in a letter
directed to the African bishops, upbraided these prelates in
the strongest terms for the temerity of their procediire, order;-
ed the accusers of Pelagius and Celestius, v/ithiu two months,
tQ repair to Rome, to make good their charge before him,
declaring, that if they did not, he would reverse the sentencp
which had been pronounced. And as to Heros and Lazarus,
who had taken a principal part in the prosecution ; pien who,
if we may credit the testimony of St. Prosper and St. Jeroin,
(for Rome is in this confronted by her own saints) were em^
nenl for the purity of their lives, as well as for their faith and
zeal ; the pope, in ^. summary manner, without so much as
giving them a hearing, or assigning them a day for offering
what they had to plead in their own defence, deposed and ex-,
communicated them. The steadiness of the Africans, how^^
ver, co-operating with other causes, at last compelled the pon-
tiff not only to relax, but totally to change his style and eon-
duct. Though neither the bishops, nor Paulinus the accuser^
whom the pope had summoned by name, paid the least regard
to his summons, or to his declared intention of haying the
cause tried anew at Rome, they gave it a rehearing in another^,
and a very numerous African synod, convened at Carthage,
wherein, without showing any deference to the sentiments of
the Roman bishop, they unanimously adhered to their former
judgment. . ^ -,^j
The ardour of the pontiff to favour an appellant did mani^.
festly, in this instance, carry him beyond the bounds of pru-
dence. The condemnation of the Pelagian doctrine had
been, in some respect, ratified by his predecessor Innocent.
Two African synods, and one Numidian synod, assembled at
Milevis, had with one voice condemned it. Celestius, after
his condemnation in Africa, having taken refuge in Ephesus,
was soon driven thence in consequence of the general odium
which his opinions raised, and had afterwards no better trea|??
ment in Constantinople, when he thought proper to betake
himself thither. Besides, the emperour HonoriuSj without
waiting the judgment of Rome, was induced by a deputation
from the African synod, not only to approve their decrees, but
to enact a very severe law against the Pelagians, ordering all
that should be convicted of this heresy, to be sent into exile.
Add to all this, that the two greatest lights qf the Latin church,
Jerom and Augustin, whose judgment was of very grea^
weight all over the west, had openly declared against them. ; ;, ,
The pontiff therefore discovered, though late, that he had
been precipitate, and had (through an excessive attachment t,&
what in the main would be admitted by politicians to be a wis«
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY* ^3^
irittiaxim) engaged in a desperate cause, and had so many and
ftowerful' enemies to encbuntet*, Sis the papacy, in so early a
period, was not a match for. It was become, therefore, abso-
lutely necessary for him to retreat, lest, by grasping unseasona-
bly at too much, he should lose every thing, and even be
deserted by those who, on bth^r Occasions, firmly supported
him. Thiis he endeavouired tO do with the best grace he could ;
but to do it with a good grace wais impbsisible. Accordingly,
he was at length under a necessity tb anathetnatize as ithpious,
what he had formerly, in the most explicit tehhs, pronounced^
innocent. In the whole affair, Rome evidentlj" showed the
truth of an observation I formerly made, that with hei-, doc-
trine was ever but a matter of siecoridary consideration, the
primary object was invariably pb^fer.
The conduct of ZozimuS, on the appeal of Apiarius, a pre&°
byter of Sica, in Africa, who had been deposed and excom-
municated foir several heirious crimes, was very remarkable^
The pope, without so much as hearing his adversaries, restored
hfm not only to the communion of the church, but to the rank
frbm which he had been degraded. The vile arts bf lying and
forgery, which, on this occasion^ were employed by the holy
see, never weakly scrupulous about means, and the cotnpromises
which the African bishops, though not deceived by papal arti-
fices, were, for peace sake, compelled to make ; the second
deposition of that irreclaimable profligate, his second appeal tb
Rbme, and his second hasty restoration by popie C destine^
without hearing his accusers, the methbds taken by Rorne to
patronise and reinstate him, and the defeat of those methods^
by the explicit confession, which, in an African synod, the cul-
prit made, of the most atrocious crimes, tb the unspeakable
Cbnfusioh of the pope's legate^ Sent to defend his innocence ;
all these, I say, furnish a scene, wherein the very arcatia of
Roman policy may be thoroughly penetrated by the discerning
mind. Nothing could tnore clearly demonstrate, than did thei
conduct of Rome in the whole tt-ansaction, that she paid no
more regard tO guilt or ihnbcence, in the judgments she prb*
iibunced, than she did to truth or falsehood, in the itieans she
employed* With no person or slate did the maxim, ascribed
by Suetbhiu^ tb Julius Csesar, more exactly cjiiadrate than with
the see of Rome. " Si violahdum est jus^ reg;nandi gratia vio'i
>* landiim est, aliis rebus pietateih colasi" With her all was
just, and all was true, that promoted the great object, power j
all was false, and all was criminal, that opposed it. Indeed^
the black confession which Apiarius publickly madcj of crimes
judged too shocking to be recorded, tetided to give but a very
*i*ifavourable impression rf the decisions of a tribunal, since
23^ LECTURES ON
called infallible. For let it be observed, that this man at Rome
was twice absolved as guiltless, (both times indeed without a
trial) first by pope Zozimus, then by pope Celestine, both now
worshipped as saints by the Romanists.
It were easy to show, were it proper to descend into mor^j
particulars, that the conduct of Leo, on occasion of the appeal
of Celedonius, of Besancon, from the diocesan synod of Aries,
in reversing their sentence, restoring the deposed bishop, and
the procedure of the pontiff soon after against Hilarius, bishop
cf Aries, and exarch of the seven Narbonnese provinces, who
had presided at the synod above-mentioned ; whom he not
only cut off from his communion, and, as far as in him lay, de-
graded, but every where defamed by his letters, were equally
precipitate, unjust, and scandalous. In this attempt, however,
on the rights of the Gailican church, Rome seems to have been
more successful, through a peculiar felicity in the juncture,
than in those formerly made on the churches of Africa. The
prince then upon the throne, Valentinian the third, was both
weak and credulous, and one over whom the pontiff appears
to have had an unlimited influence. The pope, therefore, on
this occasion, glad to recur to the secular arm, easily obtained
from the emperour a rescript, exactly in the terms he desired,
confirming ail that he had done, commanding all the Gailican
bishops to yield implicit obedience to the decrees and awards
of the pontiff, and enjoining the magistrates of the several
provinces to interpose their authority, in compelling those who
should be summoned to Rome to obey the summons. Many
attempts were used by Hilarius to effect a reconciliation ; but
he found it was utterly impracticable, except on such condi-
tions as an honest man will ever account totally unworthy of
regard, the sacrifice of truth, and the surrender of those rights
and liberties of his church and people, with which, as a most
sacred depositum, he had been intrusted. In this state, there-
fore, which surely a modern papist would think desperate,
unreconciled to Christ's vicar, and as a rotten member cut off
from the body of the faithful, being cutj off from all connexion
with the church's visible head, died the famous Hilarius, bi-
shop of Aries. And what shall we say of Roman consistency,
when we reflect, that this very excommunicated, cursed, ana-
thematized Hilarius, (i cannot say by what strange oversight)
as well as pope Leo, who, to the last, treated him in the man-
ner we have seen, are both at present first rate saints in the
Roman kalendar ? What account can the Romish church give
of this ? If you be curious to know, you may consult Baronius,
or any other of the hireling writers of that communion, whose
business in brief it was to explain nonsense, darken facts, con-
found the judgment, and reconcile contradictions.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 237
In what further concerns the matter of appeals, I shall only,
\yithout multiplying instances, refer you to what happened in
the, cases of Talia, bishop of Alexandria, charged with simony
and peijury ; the two Gallican bishops, Salonius and Sagitta-
rius, who had been convicted, before a synod at Lyons, of the
crimes only of murder, adultery, robbery, and house-breaking,
but whose merit in appealing to the apostolick see cancell'ed all
in an instant, and procured, without further inquiry, a declara-
tion of their innocence, and restoration to their bishopricks;
and who, (1 speak of the two last) in confidence of their secu-
rity under the pope's protection, soon relapsed into the same
enormities, were deposed a second time, and shut up in a mo-
nastery to prevent a second recurrence to Rome. You may
observe, also, the case of Hadrian, bishop of Thebes, in Thes-
saly ; of Honoratus, archdeacon of Saloni, in Dalmatia ; that
of John, bishop of Lappa, in Crete ; and that of Wilfrid, of
York, in England. For many centuries you will find, that the
judgment of the apostolick see, as it affected to be styled, in
contradistinction to others, was uniformly in favour of the
appellant.
If history had given us no information about the persons, or
cases, there would still be a strong presumption that, in so
considerable a number, some had deserved the treatment they
had received from the provincial, diocesan, or national synod^
to which they had belonged. As the matter stands, there is
the clearest historical evidence, that the far greater part of
them had been justly degraded, and could never have obtained
the patronage or countenance of any power, which did not
make every consideration of religion and equity give way to
her ambition.
What but this favourite maxim can account for the many
falsehoods and forgeries, to which she so often recurred, in
support of her exorbitant claims. The ignorance and super-
stition of the dark ages that ensued, (for those I have had
occasion to refer to in this, and my two preceding lectures,
are but as the evening twilight, compared with those which
followed) soon gave scope for attempting the very grossest
kinds of imposition. And the friends and patrons of the
hierarchy were not remiss in using the opportunity while it
lasted. The fruits of their diligence, in this way, were ficti-r
tious councils as well as canons, and fictitious decrees of real
councils, false deeds of gift, such as the instrument of dona-
tion of Rome and all Italy, made, as was pretended, by the
emperour Constantine to pope Sylvester, and his successours
in the popedom, the decretal epistles of the popes, not to men-
tion the little legerdemain tricks of false miracles, and other
238 LECTURE'S Ol^^
such like artifices. For the lying spirit, which had ^dtteti
possession of the head, quickly diffused itself throughout the
members ; and every petty priest supported his particular
credit among the people by the same arts, exhibited, as it
were, in miniature^ which were on a larger scale displayed by
the pontiff, for the support of the great hierarchal empire. It
must be owned^ the greater part of their forgeries, especially
Constantine's donation, and the decretal epistles, are such
barefaced impostures, and so bunglingly executed, that nothing
less than the most profound darkness of those ages could
account for their success. They are manifestly written in the
barbarous dialect, which obtained in the eighth and ninth cen-
turies, and exhibit those poor, meek, and humble teachers,
who came immediately after the apostles, as blustering, swag-
gering, and dictating to the world in the authoritative tone of
a Zachary, or a Stephen.
But however gross the artifices were, they were well suited
to the grossness of the people, in times wherein almost all
vestiges of literature and arts were buried in the ruins of the
fallen empire. These acts and decretals had accordingly, for
several centuries, a powerful effect in imposing on mankind ;
an effect which continued, whilst its continuance was of prin-
cipal moment, when all the little remains of knowledge in the
world were in the hands of those, who considered it as their
interest to deceive the people, and keep them in ignorance.
Thus the progress, as well as the coming, of this power, has
been indeed after the working of Satan, in signs and lying
wonders, and all deceivableness of unrighteousness.
Indeed, such sacrifices of truth to what was called the cause
of the church have always been regarded as among the most
harmless of their innumerable expedients. The term pious
fraud was, in most places, and for several ages, not introduced
sarcastically, as it is used with us at present *, nor was it ima-
gined to connect ideas incompatible with each other ; but em-
ployed to denote an artifice not only innocent but commenda-
ble. The patrons of sacerdotal power had every advantage
therefore : their tricks, when undiscovered, wrought power-
fully in their favour ; and when discovered, (such was the
woful superstition of the times) were, on account of the sup-
posed holy purpose to be effected by them, easily excused by
all, and highly approved by many.
It is true, that now, since the restoration of letters, men's
sentiments, on these subjects, are very much altered. Those
graceless devices have been, for the most part, fully detected
and exposed ; insomuch, that all the learned and ingenuous
part, even of Roman catholicks, quite ashamed of them, have
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 259
Jong since abandoned their defence. But Rome may now
laugh at a detection, which can never restore things to the
state they were in before those frauds were employed. What
has been at first produced solely by imposture, comes, through
the slow but sure operation pf time and immemorial custom,
to acquire a stability totally independent of its origin. When
that is the case, the discovery is not able to shake the fabrick,
to which the imposture originally gave a being. Antiquity
supplies the place of truth. Custom rules the world, and is
the principal foundation of obedience in all the governments
that are, and ever were, upon the earth. It is but one of a
thousand that is capable of examining into the origin of things :
the remaining nine hundred and ninety-nine have no reason to
assign for their obedience but custom, or what they are wont to
see exacted on the one hand, and complied with on the other,
A set of customs, gradually established, may, in like manner,
be gradually abolished ; but the discoveries of the learned
(though not totally ineffective) have not a very sudden, and a
very sensible effect upon them.
I shall, in my next lecture, proceed to illustrate, in other
instances, the particular attention which Rome invariably gave
to the great object, power ; and consider how far the very best
pf her pontiffs sacrificed every other consideration to its ad-
yapcement.
^40 LECTURES ON
LECTURE XVL
1 •»(,".
'■.rft
I
PROCEED, in this lecture, to illustrate^in other instance§^
the particular attention which Rome invariably gave to the
great object, power. The proof that I am now to produce is
different in kind from the former, but still corroborative of the
same capital point in her policy, which was to make every con»^
sideration of truth and right give place to her ambition, ■ ■'■<',
For this purpose, I shall not recur to those pontiffs, who were
far from reaching even the low standard of virtue, recom-
mended in the latter part of the Julian maxim, aliis rebus pie-
iatem colas. And that there were popes, who, in no part of
their conduct, showed that they either feared God, or regarded
men, all persons, popish and protestant, who have the least ac-
quaintance with church history, will readily admit. But I shall
recur to one, who was thought, as much as any that ever sat in,
the papal chair, to mind the better part of the apophthegm,
and was observant of piety, equity^ and charity, in cases which
did not interfere with the favourite pursuit ; and shall clearly
evince, that he was not a less rigid observer of the former part
of it, regnandi gratia jus violandum est ; that he did not hesitate
at any means, falsehood, and injustice, the prostitution of reli-
gion, and of the most sacred rites of humanity, when these
could be rendered instrumental in promoting the primary papal
object, POWER.
The pope I intend to produce as an example, is no other
than Gregory the first, a man at present adored in the church
of Rome, as one of her most eminent saints, and respected as
one of her most learned doctors. The Greeks, I know, were
wont to style him, (as it v/ould seem) contemptuously, Gregory
Dialogue, on account of some silly dialogues which he wrote.
Yet even those are not inferiour to some of the productions of
their own approved authors in the same period. His pontifi-
cate commenced towards the end of the sixth century, and
extended to the beginning of the seventh.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 241
Who knows not the extraordinary zeal which this pope mani-
fested against the Constaniinopolitan patriarch, who in those
days began to assume the title of universal bishop ? For who
is so great an enemy to the pride and ambition of others as
the proud and ambitious ! That a relentless jealousy was
at the bottom of the violence which he showed on that
occasion, there was no considerate and impartial person
who did not discern then, and there is none of this cha-
racter who does not discern still. It v/ere unnecessary here
to mention all the odious epithets, by which he stigmatized
that obnoxious appellation. Suffice it to observe, in general,
that he maintained strenuously, that whoever assumed that
heretical, blasphemous, and infernal title, (so he expressly
terms it) was the follower of Lucifer, the forerunner and herald
of Antichrist, and that it neither did nor could belong to any
bishop whatever. He had nothing, it appears, of the pro
phetick spirit, else he would have spoken more cautiously of
a title so soon afterwards assumed by some of his own succes-^
sours. It must be owned, indeed, that in this conduct the
Grecian patriarch was the precursor of the Romish. If there-.
by, the pope is rendered antichrist, it is a deduction from pope
Gregory's reasoning, and not from mine.
Gregory, when that title was first assumed at Constantino-
ple, was quite indefatigable in his applications by letter, and by
the intervention of his nuncios, with the patriarch, himself, and
with the emperour, to effect the suppression of it. But all was
to no purpose. The matter could never be made appear to
them as of that moment, which Gregory was so immoderately
solicitous to give it. They considered it only (like most of
the titles then conferred on the potentates of the church) as a
Gomplimental and respectful manner of address, well befittingp
the bishop of the imperial city. Rome's remonstrances were
accordingly made light of. The other patriarchs, particularly
the Antiochian and the Alexandrian, Gregory endeavoured,
by all possible means, but to no purpose, to engage in the quar-
rel. The bishop of Alexandria, probably with a vieAV to mollify
his incensed brother at Rome, gave him a title, which he
thought would be deemed equivalent, calling him universal
pope. But his holiness had proceeded too far to be taken in
by so simple a device, and therefore he did not hesjtate to re-
ject it with disdain, as being in the same way derogatory, with
the other title, to the whole episcopal order. He did more :
for, in order to show how different a spirit he was of, he as-
sumed, for the first time, (and herein he has been followed by
his successours) this humble addition, the servant of the ser-
vants of God: servus servorum Dei. We have heard of pco-
H h
242 LECTURES ON
pie's making humility the subject of their vanity, and mortifi-
cation the ground of their pride. The pharisees were osten-
tatious ot their dirty and disfigured faces when they fasted,
and tiiere are even some christian sects who seem to make the
pharisees, in this respect, their pattern. The pope always
since, to this day, introduces his bulls with the modest title
assumed by Gregory. One would expect from it, that they
should consist only of entreaties, and lowlv petitions, to those
whom he acknowledges to be his supcriours, and his masters.
Instead of this, you find him commanding imperiously, even
with menaces, denunciations, and curses. Is this like a ser-
vant to his masters ? If we could consider the title, therefore,
as any thing but words, we should pronounce the using it as a
sort of refinement in the display of power ; adding insult to
tyranny, like those despots, who, when they are inflicting tor-
tures on their slave, mock him with the title of sovereign and
lord.
About this time the emperour Mauricius, whom the pope
could by no arts prevail on to enter into his views, nay, whom
he found rather favourable to the use of a title, by which an
honourable distinction was conferred on the bishop of the im-
perial residence, was first dethroned, and then murdered, by a
centurion, one of his subjects and soldiers, who usurped his
throne. The usurper Phocas (for that was his name) was a
man stained with those vices, which serve most to blacken hu-
man nature. Other tyrants have been cruel from policy, and
through want of regard to justice and humanity ; the cruelties
of Phocas are not to be accounted for, but on the hypothesis
of the most diabolical and disinterested malice. Witness the
inhuman manner wherein he massacred five of his predeces-
sor's children, all that were then in his power, before the
eyes of the unhappy father, whom he reserved to the last, that
he might be a spectator of the destruction of his family before
his death. The slaughter of the brother, and of the only re-
maining son of the emperour Mauricius, with all the patricians
of any name who adhered to his interest, the methods by which
Phocas got the empress Constantina, and her three daugh-
ters, into his power, with the murder of whom he closed the
bloody scene, manifest a mind totally corrupted, incapable of
being wrought upon by any principle of religion, sense of jus-
tice, or sentiment of humanity.
Unluckily for the Constantinopolitan patriarch, the innocent
consort of his late sovereign, with the three princesses, her
daughters, had taken refuge in one of the churches of the city.
The prelate, moved partly by compassion to the royal sufFet-
ers, partly by the reverence of the place, would not permit
them to be dragged by force from their asylum ; but defended
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 243
them, whilst there, with great spirit and resolution. The ty-
rant, one of the most vindictive and inexorable of mankind, and
who could therefore ill brook this spirited opposition from the
priest, thought it prudent then to dissemble his resentment, as
it would have been exceedingly dangerous, in the beginning
of his reign, to alarm the church. And he well knew how im-
portant and even venerable a point it was accounted, to pre-
serve inviolate the sacredness of such sanctuaries. He de-
sisted, therefore, from using force ; and, by means of the most
solemn oaths, and promises of safety, prevailed at length upon
the ladies to quit their asylum. In consequence of which,
they soon after became the helpless victims of his fury, and
suffered on the same spot whereon the late emperour, and five
of his sons, had been murdered a short while before.
Now what should we expect would be the reception, which
the accounts of this unnatural rebellion, the dethronement of
Mauricius, the horrid butchery of the whole imperial family,
the usurpation and coronation of such a sanguinary fiend as
Phocas, would meet with at Rome, from a man so celebrated
for piety, equity, and mildness of disposition, as pope Grego-
ry ? Look into his letters of congratulation on the occasion,
and you will find them stuiFed with the most nauseous adula-
tion. Were we to learn the character of Phocas only from St.
Gregory, we should conclude him to have been rather an angel
than a man. But if we recur to facts, if we take our Sav iour's
rule, and judge of the tree by the fruits, (and I know no rule
we can so safely follow) we shall rather conclude him to have
been a devil incarnate. The actions, on which this judgment
is founded, are not only incontrovertible, but uncontroverted.
You may read the account that is given of the earliest and the
principal of these murders, by Gregory himself, in the pream-
ble to the eleventh book of his epistles ; where, to say the
truth, they are recited with as much coolness, as though they
were matters of the utmost indifference, and as though religion
and morality could be nowise affected by such enormities.
Observe, then, in what manner the sanctity of a Gregory
congratulates the blood-thirsty, but successful, rebel, regicide,
and usurper. I shall give you a specimen of his manner in
his own words. (!,• 11, Ep. 360 The classical scholar will
make the proper allowances for the low latinity of the seventh
century. " Gregorius Phocse Augusto." His exordium is,
*' Gloria in excelsis Deo, qui juxta quod scriptum est, mutat
*' tempora et transfert regna : et quia hoc cunctis innotuit,
" quod per prophetara suum loqui dignatus est, dicens. Quia
*^dominatur excelsus in regno hominum, et cui voluerit, ipse
" dat illud." After this preamble, he observes, that God, in
244 LECTURES ON
his incomprehensible providence, sometimes sends kings to
afRict his people, and punish them for their sins. This, says
he, we have known of late to our woful experience. Some-
times, on the other hand, God, in his mercy, raises good men
to the throne for the relief and exultation of his servants.
Then applying his remark to the present juncture, he adds,
" De qua exultationis abundantia, roborari nos citius credi-
" mus, qui benignitatem pietatis vestrae ad imperiale fasti-
" gium pervenisse gaudemus."-^rhen breaking out in a rap-
ture, no longer to be restrained, he exclaims, '* Laetentur coeli
"• et exultet terra, et de vestris benignis actibus, universse rei-
" publicse populus nunc usque vehementer afflictus hilarescat.
*' Comprimantur jugo dominationis vestrse superbse mentes
" hostium. Releventur vestra misericordia contriti et depres-
*' si animi subjectorum." Proceeding to paint their former
miseries, he concludes with wishing, that the commonwealth
may long enjoy the present happiness. A few instances, and
but a few, of the benignity, and piety, and mercy, of this em-
perour, here so highly extolled by Gregory, may be learnt
from the the treatment above related, given to his predeces-
sor's family. Another letter to Phocas, written soon after,
the pope begins in this manner. (Ep. 43.) " Considerare cum
*•• gaudiis et magnis actionibus gratiarum libet, quantas omni-
" potenti Domino laudes debemus, quod remoto jugo tristitiae
" ad libertatis tempora sub imperiali benignitatis vestr» pietate
" pervenimus." His not having a nuncio at Constantinople,at
the time of the emperour's accession, he excuses from the in-
supportable tyranny of the former reign, and concludes in this
manner : " Sancta itaque Trinitas vitam vestram per tempora
'■' longa custodiat, ut de bono vestrae pietatis quod tarde susci-
" pimus diutius gaudeamus."
" As a subject, and a christian," says Mr. Gibbon*, " it
" was the duty of Gregory to acquiesce in the established
*^ government ; but the joyful applause with which he salutes
"• the fortune of the assassin, has sullied with indelible disgrace,
" the character of the saint. The successour of the apostles
*' might have inculcated, with decent firmness, the guilt of
" blood, and the necessity of repentance : he is content to cele-
*■'■ brate the deliverance of the people, and the fall of the
*' oppressor ; to rejoice that the piety and benignity of
*' Phocas have been raised by Providence to the imperial
" throne ; to pray that his hands may be strengthened against
" all his enemies ; and to express a wish, that, after a long tri-
" umphant rftign, he may be transferred from a temporal to an
*' everlasting kingdom." He proceeds ; — '■' I have traced the
* Historjr, chap. xlvi.
ECCI.ESIASTICAL HISTORY. 245
" steps of a revolution, so pleasing, in Gregory's opinion, both.
♦* to heayen and eanh ; and Phocas does not appear less hate-
" ful in the exercise than in the acquisition of power. The
" pencil of an impartial historian has delineated the portrait
*' of a monster, his diminutive and deformed person, &c. Ig-
" norant of letters, of laws, and even of arms, he indulged, ia
*' the supreme rank, a more ample privilege of lust and drunk-
*' enness ; and his brutal pleasures were either injurious to
" his subjects, or disgraceful to himself. Without assuming
*' the office of a prince, he renounced the profession ot a soi-
" dier ; and the reign of Phocas afflicted Europe with ignomi-
** nious peace, and Asia with desolating war. His savage
*' temper was inflamed by passion, hardened by fear, exaspe-
" rated by resistance or reproach. The flight of Theodosius,
" the only surviving son of Mauritius, to the Persian court,
" had been intercepted by a rapid pursuit, or a deceitful mes-
" sage : he was beheaded at Nice ; and the last hours of the
" young prince were soothed by the comforts of religion, and
" the consciousness of innocence."
Now that we may be satisfied, that all Gregory's fulsome and
detestable flattery was not without a view, we need only peruse
the congratulatory letter to the empress Leontia, immediately
following ; for, by this channel, he thought it most prudent to
suggest, for the first time, the distinguishing favour he expect-
ed they would show, in return, to the see of St. Peter, as the
popes had now, for some centuries, affected to denominate the
church planted at Rome. He begins this, as the other letters
above-mentioned, with such high strains of praise and thanks-
giving, as suited only the birth of the Messiah : his expres-
sions are generally borrowed from those used in scripture, ia
relation to that memorable event ; and he never forgets to con-
trast the present happiness with the evil times which had pre-
ceded. " Reddatur ergo creatori omnium ab hymnidicis ange-
" lorum choris, gloria in coelo, persolvatur ab omnibus gratia-
" rum actio in terra, &c."
His manner of applying to this lady is indeed very artfuL
After recommending to her, and her most pious lord, the see
of the blessed apostle Peter, he signifies his persuasion, that
what he had said was quite unnecessary, that their own piety-
must have suggested the same thing to them before. He take*
notice of the great prerogatives of Peter in such a manner,
(which was now become common at Rome, though no where
else in the church) as though they had been his peculiarly ;
namely, the founding of the universal church, the power of the
keys, the power of retaining sins, and of remitting them, or
of binding and loosing; whence he takes occasion indirectly,
^46 LECTURES ON
but with great address, to insinuate, that their hopes of those
favours, whicn none bat Peter could bestow, must be in propor-
tion to their zeal for his honour. " Unde nobis dubium non
" est, quam forti amore ad eum vos stringitis, per quern soivi
*■'■ ab omnibus peccatorum nexibus desideratis. Ipse ergo sit
"■ vestri custos imperii ; sit vobis protector in terra, sit pro vo-
" bis intercessor in coelo." It was then from Peter only they
were to expect remission. To his guardianship their govern-
ment was recommended, and their persons to his protection on
the earth, and intercession in heaven. There is (you must
know) much less word of the providence and protection of
God, and of the intercession of Jesus Christ, now that people
had got themselves so liberally provided in guardians, protec-
tors, and intercessours, among the saints. The abuse thrown
with such an unsparing hand on the unfortunate emperour, who
had preceded, as though he had been one of the worst of ty-
rants, naturally leads one to inquire into his 'character. The
fault, of which he is principally accused by contemporary histo-
rians, and which, doubtless, proved the cause of his untimely
fate, was too much parsimony : than which, no vice could ren-
der him more odious to the soldiery, who were, in those de-
generate times of the empire, lazy, undisciplined, debauched,
rapacious, and seditious. As the government was become
militaiy, the affection of the army v/as the principal bulwark of
the throne. It was ever consequently the interest of the reign-
ing family, to secure the fidelity of the legions as much as
possible. This, in times so corrupt, when military discipline
was extinct, was to be effected only by an unbounded indul-
gence, and by frequent largesses. These the prince was not in
a condition to bestow, without laying exorbitant exactions on
the people. For levying these, the army were, as long as they
shared in the spoil, always ready to lend their assistance.
Hence it happened, that among the emperours, the greatest op-
pressors of the people were commonly the greatest favourites
of the annv. The revolt of the legions, therefore, could be but
a slender proof of mal-admini£tration. It was even, in many
cases, an evidence of the contrary.
But it is more to our present purpose, to consider the charac-
ter, which this very pope Gregory gave of Mauricius, when in
possession of the imperial diadem. For if the former and the
latter accounts, given by the pontiff, cannot be rendered con-
sistent, we must admit, that, first or last, his holiness made a
sacrifice of truth to politicks. Now it is certain, that nothing
can be more contradictory than those accounts. In some of
his letters to that emperour, you will find the man, whom he
now treats as a perfect monster, extolled to the skies, as one of
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 247
t^e most pious, most religious, most christian princes, that
ever lived ; and withal, (which deserves particular notice) as the
most gracious and bountiful. In proof of this, I could adduce
a variety of passages from several letters of the pontiff, written
at different times, some earlier, and some later. Take a few
for a specimen. Let the first be (L. 5, Kp. 63,; to Mauricius.
'•'- Inter armorum curas et innumeras sollicitudines, quas inde-
*' fesso studio, pro Christianas reipublicse regimine sustinetis,
*' magna mihi cum universo mundo laetitise causa est, quod
*' piecas vestra custodi^ fidei, qua dominorum fuiget iraperium,
*' praecipua sollicitudine semper invigilat. Unde omnino con-
" tido, quia sicut vos Dei causas religiosse mentis amore tue-
*' mini, ita Deus vestras majestatis suae gratia tuetur et adju-
*' vat." Here the emperour's pious zeal, solicitude, and vigi-
lance, for the preservation of the christian faith, being such as
no publick cares, no tumults of war, could ever divert his atten-
tion from, are represented as the glory of his reign, as a sub-
ject of joy, not to the pontiff only, but to all the world. Again,
(L. 6. Kp. 30,) to the same, he concludes in these words : —
" Omnipotens autem Deus serenissimi domini nostri vitam, et
'* ad pacem ecclesias et ad utilitatem reipublics Romanae, per
" tempora longa custodiat. Certi enim suraus, quia si vos vivi-
" tis, qui cceli dominum timetis, nulla contra veritatem superba
*' prsevalere permittitis." Could any man suspect, that one
who writes in so earnest a manner, did not entertain the
highest opinion of the emperour's piety and zeal, as well as the
most fervent wishes for his welfare. I shall produce bvit one
other example (L. 8, Ep. 2,) to the same. The subject of the
letter is thus expressed in the title : " De denarils sancto Petro
** transmissis." After the warmest expressions of gratitude,
on account of the pious liberality and munificence of his impe-
rial majesty, and after telling how much the priests, the poor,
the strangers, and all the faithful, were indebted to his pater-
nal care, he adds, " Unde actum est, ut simul omnes pro vita
" dominorum concorditer orarent, quatenus omnipotens Deus.
*' longa vobis et quieta tempora tribuat, etpietatis vestrse faeli-
*' cissimam sobolem diu in Romana republica florere conce-
*' dat." Yet he no sooner hears, which was not long after, of
the successful treason of Phocas, in the barbarous murder of
his sovereign, and his family, an event, the mention of which,
even at this distance, makes a humane person shudder with
horrour, than he exclaims, with rapture, '*• Glory to God in the
*' highest." He invites heaven and earth, men angels, to join
in the general triumph. How happy is he, that the royal race
is totally exterminated ; for whom, but a little before, he told
us, that he poured out incessant and tearful prayers, riavhry"
246 YHOTLECTURES ON
mabili prece is one of his expressions) that they might, to latest
ages, flourish on the throne, for the felicity of the Roman
commonwealth. Surely truth and sincerity had no part in this
man's system of morality
An honest heathen would at least, for some time, have
avoided any intercourse or correspondence with such a ruffian
as Phocas ; but this christian bishop, before he had the regu-
lar and customary notice of his accession to the purple, is
forward to congratulate him on the success of his crimes.
His very crimes he canonizes (an easy matter for false reli-
gion to effect) and transforms into shining virtues, and the
criminal hiinself into what I may call a second Messiah, he
that should come for the salvation and comfort of God's
people. And all this was purely that he might pre-engage
the favour of the new emperour, who (he well knew) enter-
tained a secret grudge against the Constantinopolitan bishop,
for his attachment to the preceding emperour Mauricius ; ^
grudge which, when he saw with what spirit the patriarch
protected the empress dowager, and her daughter, soon
settled into implacable hatred.
But Gregory, who died soon after the aforesaid revolution,
did not live to reap the fruits of his accursed policy. Indeed,
Boniface the third, the next but one who succeeded him for
the pontificate of his immediate successour was very short,
did very soon obtain of the emperour not only the revocation
of the edict, by which the title of universal bishop had been
conferred on the patriarch of Constantinople, but the issuing
of a new decree, whereby that title was entailed in perpetuity
on the Roman pontiff, who was vested with the primacy of
all the bishops of the empire. And the church of Rome, by
accepting these, not only declared that she derived her honours
from the secular powers, but proclaimed herself, in the opi-
nion of Gregory, who is acknowledged to have been as great
a pontiff as ever filled the chair of St. Peter, to be vain-
glorious, proud, profane, impious, execrable, blasphemous,
antichristian, heretical, diabolical ; for these are some of the
epithets he bestows on whosoever shall accept the title of
universal bighop.
Now if such was the conduct of a Gregory, who, it must
be owned, in cases wherein their politicks did not interfere,
appears to have been endowed with several virtues and good
qualities, what are we to expect from other popes ? We need
not be surprised, that a Zachary, in the middle of the eighth
century, should, for the interest of the holy see, assist with
his counsel, and countenance the usurper Pepin, to depose his
master and benefactor Childerick, king of France, with all his
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 249
familv', and to possess himself of his crown and kingdom ; a
favour which Pepin, in the very next pontificate, returned in
kind, assisting the pope to usurp the imperial dominions in
Italy ; or that pope Stephen and king Pepin became recipro-
cally guarantees of each other's usurpations, the former by
the sanction of religion, the latter by an arn^ed force. As
little need we wonder at the many flagrant injustices of other
pontiffs, when they happened to be influenced by the like
motives.
After so much has been said of Gregory, it may not be
amiss to make some remarks on his character, that we may
not be thought to attribute to him things absolutely incom-
patible. To me be appears to have been a man, whose
understanding, though rather above the middle rate, was
much warped by the errours and prejudices of the times
wherein he lived. His piety was deeply tinctured with super-
stition, and his morals with monkery. His zeal was not pure,
in respect either of its nature, it was often intolerant ; witness
the sanguinary measures he warmly recommended against the
Donatists ; and in respect to its object, it is manifest, that his
attachment was more to the form than to the power of reli-
gion, to the name than to the thing. His aim was not so
much to turn men from sin to God, and from vice to virtue,
as to bring them by any means within what is called the pale
of the church, and, consequently, under the dominion of its
rulers; to draw them from the profession of paganism to the
profession of Christianity. If this was effected, he cared not,
though they remained more than half heathen still. His zeal
was exactly that of those pharisees, who compassed sea and
land to make a proselyte, which, when they had accomplished,
they rendered him twofold more a child of hell than them-
selves. Witness the advice he gave to the monk Augustine,
who had been sent into Britain for the conversion of the
Anglo-Saxons, not to abolish their paganish ceremonies, but
rather to adopt them, and give them a new direction, that so
the conversion of the people might be facilitated, and their
relapse to the superstition of their fathers prevented. The
plain language of this conduct is, if they are but called chris-
tians, and are subjects of the church, to which they yield an
external conformity, it matters not what sort of christians
they are at bottom, or how much of the pagan they may still
retain in their heart, principles, and conduct.
I must own, that this turn of thought has a very natural
connexion with that kind of zeal, which has for its object the
erection, or preservation, of a hierarchy, or what is called an
ecclesiastical polity. With zealots of this stamp, a bare ex-
I i
250 LECTURES ON
terior will serve the purpose. Obedience, whether voluntary
or extorted ; attachment, whether sincere or dissembled ; sub-
mission, whether it proceed from love or from fear, equally,
as in other worldly politicks, tend to support the secular
honours and emoluments of the different orders, which are
the great pillars of the fabrick. >'
This kind of zeal is, in like manner, the true source of per-
secution for conscience sake, and of a maxim inseparably
connected with the principle of intolerance, that the end will
sanctify the means. That Gregory had, through the misfor-
tune and errour of the times, thoroughly imbibed both these
principles, will never be doubted by any person, who, with
judgment and impartiality, reads his history. Indeed, in the
sacrifices which he made, as appears from the above observa-
tions, of truth, humanity, and integrity, we can hardly, at
present, though the maxim were admitted, consider the end
as having goodness enough to justify the means. His object
in the contest with the Constantinopolitan patriarch, about the
title of universal bishop, was not the advancement of Chris-
tianity, or so much as the profession of it, it was not the en-
largement of the pale of the church, or the increase of the
number of her nominal children. It was purely the honours
and pre-eminence of his see. But such was the infatuation of
the times, that even this was become, in their imaginations,
an important and a religious object.
Nor was this the case only with the see of Rome, though it
was evident that she had drank most deeply of this spirit, but
in some measure, of every particular church. It was become
a popular and plausible cloak, for the pride and ambition of
churchmen, that they acted out of a principle of zeal for the
dignity of the see with which they were intrusted, that is,
said they, for the honour of the founder. This was thought
^ to be of great weight, if the founder happened to be a saint iti
the kalendar ; of greater still, if he was, or (which is all one)
if he was believed to have been, a scripture saint, or an
evangelist ; and greatest of all, if an apostle. They acted on
the supposition, that they could not more effectually ingratiate
themselves with their patron, though in heaven, than by ex-
alting the church he had erected or endowed vtpon the earth,
above the churches erected or endowed by others, and, con-
sequently, in exalting him above his fellow saints. They, in
this way, were disposed to excuse their interferences with
one another, thinking it reasonable, that each should do his
best for the saint to whom he was most indebted, and who,
from being the founder, commonly became the tutelar saint
of his diocese, or parish. And then, as to the idea they sup~
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 251
posed those saints to entertain of the dignity of their respec-
tive churches, it was altogether secular, or suited to the
apprehensions of mere men of the world. This dignity con-
sisted not at all in the virtue and piety of the parishioners,
but in the opulence and pre-eminences of the clergy, in the
extent and populousness of the parish or diocese, the magnifi-
cence of the churches, sacred utensils, and vestments, parti-
cularly the rjmk, the titles, the privileges, the prerogatives,
and the riches of the pastor.
It is true, the apostles, when on this earth, before they were
fully instructed concerning the kingdom of heaven, and the
spiritual nature of the Messiah's government, were found
contending with one another who should be greatest. And
it is equally true, that their Lord and Master severely re-
prehended this conduct, and taught them, that unless they
were converted, and acquired a very different disposition,
as well as different sentiments concerning true greatness,
far from being great in that kingdom, they should never
enter it. And it is to be believed, nay, their conduct de-
monstrates, that they were soon after far superiour to thoughts
so grovelling, to an ambition so ill adapted to their profession.
But from the sentiments which gradually sprang up in the
church, on the decline of true knowledge and genuine piety,
men seemed universally to be convinced, that in these squab-
bles for greatness, eminence, and precedency, the apostles and
saints were still as keenly engaged in heaven as ever thev had
been on the earth ; and that they could not be more highly
gratified, than by the successful struggles of their clients
here in maintaining their respective honours and pre-emi-
nences.
Nor does any person seem ever to have entered more into
these views than the celebrated pope Gregory. He was ever
holding forth the prerogatives of St. Peter, (who was, in his
time, acknowledged as the founder of his church) nor did he
make any ceremony of signifying, that this prime minister of
Jesus Christ, like other prime ministers, would be most libe-
ral of his favours to those who were most assiduous in making
court to him, especially to them who were most liberal to his
foundation at Rome, and most advanced its dignity and
power. So much for St. Gregory, and for the nature and
extent of Roman papal virtue.
252 LECTURES ON
LECTURE XVIL
An the preceding lecture, I illustrated, at some length, in the
instance of Gregory, one of the best of the Roman pontiffs,
how far the maxim could go, of reckoning every thing just and
lawful, by which the papal power could be advanced, and the
supremacy of Rome secured. But it was not in one or two
ways only, that they showed their attention to the aforesaid
maxim, but in every way wherein they could apply it to advan-
tage. I have also observed to you some of their other prac-
tices of the like nature and tendency. The only artifice I
shall consider at present, is the claims which Rome so long
and so assiduously affected to derive from the prerogatives of
the apostle Peter, the pretended founder of that see. 1 have
hinted at this, by the way, once and again ; but as it was one
of her most potent engines, it will deserve our special at-
tention.
In my first discourse, on the rise of the pontificate, I showed
sufficiently how destitute this plea is of every thing that can
deserve the name of evidence, and observed, that the first
pontiff who seemed directly to found the honours of his see
on the privileges of Peter, was pope Innocent, about the
beginning of the fifth century. As to the apostolick age, and
that immediately succeeding, there is not a vestige of either
authority or precedency in the Roman pastor, more than in
any other bishop or pastor of the church. Nor is this to be
imputed to a defect of evidence through the injury of time,
in relation to the point in question. So far from it, that
next to the sacred canon, the most ancient and most valuable
monument we have of christian antiquity, is a very long letter
to the Corinthians from a bishop of Rome, Clement, who
had been contemporary with the apostles, and is mentioned
by Paul, in one of his epistles. So much the reverse do we
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 253
find here of every thing that looks like authority and state,
that this worthy pastor, in the true spirit of primitive and
christian humility, sinks his own name entirely in that of the
congregation to which he belonged, and does not desire that he
should be considered otherwise than as any other individual
of the society ; a manner very unlike that of his successours,
and quite incompatible with their claims. The letter is titled
and directed thus : " The church of God, which sojourns at
" Rome, to the church of God, which sojourns at Corinth."
The words of the congregation were then considered as of
more weight than those of any bishop, even the bishop of
Rome. Nor 'is there, in the whole performance, any trace of
authority lodged either in him, or in his church, over the
church of Corinth, or, indeed, over any person or community.
In every part, he speaks the language not of a superiour to his
inferiours, a master to his servants, or even a father to his
children, but of equal to equal, friend to friend, and brother
to brother. He uses no dictating and commanding ; he only
exhorts and entreats. To the contraveners there are no menac-
ing denunciations, such as have, for many centuries, accom-
panied the papal bull of the vengeance of Almighty God, and
the malediction of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul. The
modesty of the style of this truly primitive pastor, is an infal-
lible index of the modesty of his pretensions ; and, let me add,
a very strong evidence of the great antiquity, and perfect au-
thenticity of the epistle.
The first who appeared to claim any thing like authority was
Victor, bishop of Rome, (or pope, if you please to call him so,
though that name was not then peculiar) who lived near the
end of the second century. This man, the first noted stickler
for uniformity, quarrelled with the Asiatick bishops for fol-
lowing a different rule in the observance of Easter, or the feast
of the passover, from that followed in the west. This festival
appears from the beginning to have been distinguished by
christians, not on its own account as a Jewish solemnity, in
commemoration of their deliverance from Egypt, but on ac^
count of its coincidence in respect of time, with those most
memorable of all events, the death and resurrection of Christ.
In the east, they were accustomed to observe the 14th day of
the first month, on whatever day of the week it h.^ipened. In
the west, when the 14th did not fall on Sunday, they kept
it the first Sunday after. When Victor found that the orien-
tals were no more impelled by his menaces than persuaded bv
his arguments, to relinquish the custom they had been taught
by their founders, and to adopt implicitly the Roman practice,
he, in a rage, cut them off from his communion. It is of im-
254 LECTURES ON
portance here to observe, that this phrase, as used then, was
not (as it is often misunderstood by modern readers) of the
same import with excommunicating, in the strictest sense. It
only denotes refusing, in respect of one's self, to join with such
a person in religious exercises. And this every bishop what-
ever considered himself as entitled to do^ in regard to those
whom he thought to err in essential matters. That the pope
himself considered it in this manner, is manifest from the
pains he took (though to no purpose) to induce other bishops
to follow his example ; sensible, that his refusal of communi-
cating with the Quartodeciraans, as they were called, did nei-
ther exclude them from the communion of the church, unless
the resolution had become universal, nor oblige any other bi-
shop to exclude them, till satisfied of the propriety of the mea-
sure. Accordingly, he is not considered by his contempora-
ries as assuming an extraordinary power, but as using very ab-
surdly and uncharitably a power which every one of them had
as well as he. Even those of the same opinion with him, in
regard to Easter, would not concur in this measure. They
looked on the time of observing that festival as merely circum-
stantial, and therefore not a sufficient reason for a breach.
Such had been the opinion of his own predecessors, and
such also was the opinion of all his successours, till the time
of Constantine, when, by the emperour's influence with the
Nicene council, the practice of the west was established
throughout the church. So far, therefore, is this passage of
history, as some have represented it, from being an evidence
of power in the Roman pastor at that early period, that it is a
very strong evidence of the contrary. In Victor, we have a
pope that was wrong-headed and violent enough to attempt an
extraordinary exertion, if he had had but as much influence as
would have secured to his endeavours some probability of suc-
cess. But in any other way than that of example and persua-
sion, he knew that his endeavours could only serve to render
himself ridiculous. Of so little account, however, were his
judgment and example made, that, in this step, to his no small
mortification, he remained singular. All were ashamed of it,
and his immediate successour did not judge it proper to adopt
it. I need not add, that on this occasion we hear not a sylla-
ble of the auihority of St. Peter, or of any right in the Roman
see, to direct and command all other churches.
Of no greater consequence was the excommunication of St.
Cypi'ian, and most of the African bishops, about half a century
afterwards, by pope Stephen, on occasion of the question about
the validity of heretical baptism. These sentences were mere
brutafulmijiai had no consequences, and, as Augustin observes,
produced no schism. The pope's excommunication, whea un-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 255
supported by other bishops, did, in effect, rebound upon him-
self, and he himself was properly the only person cut off by
such a sentence from the full communion of the church. No-
thing can be j aster than the sentiment of Firmilian on this sub-
ject. " O Stephen," says he, " by attempting to separate
" others from thee, thou hast separated thyself from all other
" churches. He is the true schismatick who departs, as thou
" hast done, from the unity of the church." When the bishop
of Rome acted unreasonably, no person considered himself as
under an obligation to follow his example more than that of
any other pastor in the church. Nor was Stephen's conduct,
any more than Victor's, imitated by his successour j for though
the African bishops rebaptized, and most others did not, they
lived peaceably in communion with each other till rebaptiza-
tion was condemned in the folloiviug century, fii'st by the synod
of Aries, and then by the council of Nice.
Even as far down as the pontificate of Daraasus, towards
the end of the fourth century, when the see of Rome was,
through the munificence of the emperours and persons of opu-
lence, greatlj* increased in riches and splendour, and conse-
quently, in dignity and power, a synod of Italian bishops, with
the pope at their head, in a letter to the emperour Gratian,
thus express themselves in regard to the superiority of the
see of Rome : '' The bishop of Rome is above other bishops,
." in respect of the prerogatives of his apostolick see, but on a
" level with them in respect of his ministry." Let it be ob-
served, that the terva apofitotick was not yet peculiarly appro-
priated to the Roman see, but was conceived to belong to it,
as has before been observed, in common not only with all the
churches that had been founded by apostles, but even with
all patriarchal and metropolitical churches. By his superiority,
therefore, no more is meant than such a precedency as they
supposed Peter to have enjoyed amongst his fellow-apostles.
As to the latter part of the declaration, the equality of the
ministry in the bishops, though it be the doctrine of all anti-
quity, nothing can be more repugnant, to what has been the
doctrine of Rome, for many centuries, namely, that all power,
both spiritual and temporal, is lodged in the pope ; that all the
bishops are no more than his deputies ; that all the authority
and jurisdiction they are vested with, are but emanations
from the plenitude of power lodged in him. But Damasus,
who, though far from being unambitious, had not formed a
conception of so exorbitant a claim, appears to have been well
satisfied with the respect shown to his see in the above de-
claration.
256 LECTURES ON
From this event, to the time of Innocent, in the beginning
of the fifth century, though the popes piqued themselves not
-a little on the tradition they had, however implausible, that
their see was founded by the apostle Peter, they did not pre-
tend to derive any peculiar authority from him ; but in main-
taining their power, always recurred to the dignity of Rome,
the queen of cities, the capital of the world, to the imperial
rescripts, the decrees of Sardica, which, on some occasions,
they wanted to impose on mankind for the decrees of Nice,
and to canons, real or superstitious, of ecumenical councils.
That there were real canons, which gave the bishop of Rome
a precedency before other bishops, is not denied ; but in these
it is never assigned as a reason, that this church had Peter fo^!
its founder, but solely, that the city was the world's metropolis.
But no sooner was this other foundation suggested, than its
utility for the advancement of the papal interest was perceived
by every bod}'. First, this was a more popular plea. It made
the papal authority much more sacred, as being he-ld directly
jtire divino^ whereas, on the other plea, it was held merely jWe
hwnano. Secondly, this rendered that authority immovable.
What one emperour gave by his rescript, another might resume
in the same manner ; the canons of one council might be re-
pealed by a posterior council. Such alterations, in matters
of discipline, arrangement, and subordination, had been often
made. But who durst abrogate the prerogatives granted by
his Lord and Master to the prince of the apostles, and by hirri
transmitted to his church ? Thirdly, the power claimed in this
way was more indefinite, and might be extended, nobody
knows how far, as long as there was found enough of ignorance
and superstition in the people to favour the attempts of the
priesthood. Besides, when the claim was of divine right, the
pontiff had this advantage, that he alone was considered as the
proper interpreter of his own privileges. The case was totally
different with all human decrees, authority, and claims what-
ever. Add to this, that whilst they derived from any terres-
trial power, they could never raise their claims above the
authority which was acknowledged to be the source. But
when the source was believed to be in heaven, no claim over
earthly powers, however arrogant, could endanger their exceed-
ing in this respect. And though I believe, that all these con-
side;-ations were not fully in view at the beginning, yet it is
certain, that for these purposes they employed this topick, in
the course of a few centuries, when they would have all power,
secular as well as spiritual, to have been conferred by Peter, a
poor fisherman of Galilee, upon the pope.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. kSf
it was some time, however, before the old ground of canons^
imperial edicts, and ancient custom, was entirely deserted,
Xozimus, the successour of Innocent, and a most aspiring pon-
tiff, recurred to these as the sole foundation of his pretended
right of judging in the last resort. It was, perhaps, prudent,
not to desert a plea at once which had great weight with many,
and to risk all upon a novelty, which, till men's ears were fami-
liarized with it, might, for aughc he knew, be but little regard-
ed. In process of time*, however, the credulity of the people
keeping pace with their degeneracy in knowledge, and virtue^
and rational religion, dispelled all apprehensions on this head,
and the repeal or the canons of Sardica by other councils, com-
pelled his holiness to recur to the new ground pointed out by
Innocent, which was found, upon trial, to afford a much firmer
bottom, whereon to erect the wonderful fabrick of the hier-
archy.
Accordingly, in less than fifty years after this plea had beeii
ushered in by Innocent, it began to be a common topick with
the pontiffs, and all the advocates of pontifical jurisdiction.
Hilarius, in the first letter he wrote after his accession to the
papal chair, mentions, with much exultation, the primacy of
St. Peter, and the dignity of his ste. There was the greater
need of this alteration, as Rome was, both in riches and splen-
dour, daily declining, and, from being the imperial city, was
become only the capital of Italy, a Gothick kingdom, as Con-
stantinople was, in strictness, the only imperial city, and was
now become much superiour to the other in pdpulousness and
wealth. Accordingly, in the time of pope Gelasius, about the
close of the fifth century, in a synod, consisting mostlv of
Italian bishops, and dependents on the pontiff, a decree was
obtained, declaring boldly, (as if, says Bower, all records had
beim destroyed, and men knew nothing of what had happened
but a few years before) " that it was not to any councils, or the
** decrees of any, that the holy roman catholick and apostolick
*' church owed her primacy, but to the words of our Saviour,
" saying, in the gospel, * Thou art Peter^ &c.' and thereby
*' building the church upon him, as on a rock which nothing
*' could shake ; that the Roman church not having spot or
** wrinkle, was consecrated and exalted above all other
** churches, by the presence as well as by the death, martyr-
** dom, and glorious triumph of the two chief apostles, St.
" Peter and St. Paul, who suffered at Rome under Nero, not
" at different times, as the hereticks say, but at the same time,
*' and on the same day ; and that the Roman church is the first
*' church, being founded by the first apostle, the church of
" Alexandria the second, being founded by his disciple, St4,
K k .
25^ LECTURES ON
'^ Mark, in his tiame, and that of Antioch the third, because
^ St. Peter dwelt there before he came to Rome, and in that
" city the faithful were first distinguished by the name of
*' christians."
Why was there no mention here, I must beg leave to ask, of
the church of Jerusalem, which had been infinitely more highly
honoured, even in their own way of estimating honours, than
any or all of those churches put together ? It had been honour-
ed by the presence, the ministry, the martyrdom, the resurrec-
tion, and glorious triumph of the Lord Jesus Christ, the sole
founder and king of the church universal, honoured by the
descent of the Ifoly Ghost, on the whole college of apostles,
whereby they were both authorized and qualified to commence
their ministry, honoured further by the express command of
Jesus Christ to all his apostles, to begin the discharge of their
office at Jerusalem.
But, says the Romanist, it was for this very reason, the
murder of the Lord of glory, that the Jews were rejected from
being God's people, and Jerusalem in particular humbled, in
being denied the honours she had otherwise enjoyed, as the
Capital of the church of Christ. Is it then reasonable, that
Jerusalem should be punished for the death of the master, and
Rome rewarded and honoured for the slaughter of his ser*-
vants ? Shall that be pleaded as a merit to the one, which iS
accounted a dishonour to the other ? And if not the guilt of
the murderers, but the testimony given to the truth by the
sufferers, and the importance of the oblation, are the things td
be considered, the martyrdom of Jesus Christ was infinitely
more important, in respect both of the victim, and of the con-
sequences, than that of all his apostles and followers put toge-
ther. It is true, the infidel Jews were rejected as a nation,
because they had previously rejected the Lord's Messiah, and,
in this fate, the unbelieving inhabitants of Jerusalem justly
shared, when their temple and polity were destroyed ; but this
was no reason why the church of Jerusalem, that is, the be-
lieving inhabitants and believing Jews, a church which Christ
himself had planted, and which was, for some time, watered
by the joint labours of all his apostles, should be involved in
that punishment. On the contrary, their faith, their fortitude,
their glory, are enhanced by the unbelief, apostacy, and unre-
lenting cruelty of their countrymen and fellow-citizens. And
that our Lord himself meant to show a particular respect to
his faithful servants or church in that city, is manifest fronn,
what has been observed, the order he gave to his disciples, to
wait there the fulfilment of the Father's promise, the effusion
of the spirit in a variety of miraculous gifts, after which they
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ^5^
were there to begin their ministry. For out of Zion this new^
law was to issue, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
I adduce all this more as an argumerUum ad hominem to the
papist, than as implying, that it was intended that one church
ought to have jurisdiction over another, by whomsoever found-
ed. The disciples were commanded to call no man father
upon the earth, because they had only one Father, who is in
heaven, and they themselves were all brethren ; and to call
no one master, teacher, or guide ; because Christ alone was
their master, their teacher, their guide. It is scarcely worth
while to criticise minutely this decree of Gelasius. It founds
their whole claim on a tradition, which has been shown to be
not only uncertain, but exceedingly improbable. It is some-
what remarkable, that he takes just as much of tradition as.
will suit his purpose, and no more. The tradition was as
universal, and much more probable, that Peter was likewise
the founder of Antioch ; but this he did not judge convenient
to admit. Besides, that Mark founded Alexandria in Peter's
name, had never been heard of in the church before. In this
pitiful manner he was obliged to mutilate and misrepresent
tradition, that by all means he might avoid letting it appear^
that the dignity of those several cities in the empire, and that
alone, had determined the rank of their respective bishops.
With a gross and ignorant people, such as the Romans were
now become, bold assertions would supply the place both of
arguments and of testimonies. The pope had also this further
motive in this new conceit, to mortify, as much as possible,
the patriarch of Constantinople, (the only prelate powerful
enough to be a rival) by exalting the bishops of Alexandria
and Antioch above him ; and, doubtless, by this expedient, he
hoped the more easily to gain the two last mentioned bishops
to his side.
Nothing from this time forwards was heard from the patro-
nisers of Romish usurpation but Thou art Peter^ and I give
to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven^ and so forth. These
things began now to be echoed from every quartei". What is
often repeated, how weak soever, never fails to make some
impression, especially on the illiterate. The hard stone is at
length hollowed by the eave's drop, however feeble and unper-
ceivable the effect of a single drop must be accounted.
Matters were advanced so far at the beginning of the sixth
century, that when pope Symmachus was summoned to ap^
pear before an assembly of bishops, and undergo a trial for
■several crimes of which he was accused, it was pleaded by
some, (for the first time, indeed) that no synod, or council
h«l.d a right to judge the pope, that he was accountable for hjs
actions to God alone. It must be owned, that this iiici">;i^
26Q LECTURES ON
though at present like an article of faith with every genuine
son of Rome, (I mean not every Roman catholick] appeared
to the generality of christims, at the time it was broached, ex-
ceedingly extravagant and absurd. But the synod (for it was
not a general council) which Theodorick, king of the Goths,
had convened, consisting entirely of Italian bishops, who were,
in several respects, dependant, and had now, of a long time,
considered the exaltation of the Roman see as the exaltation
of their country, and the only means left of raising themselves
above the eastern part of the empire ; though they were not
inclinable to give a positive decision in this extraordinary
question, were satisfied to supersede the necessity of deciding
it, by absolving the pontiff from all the charges brought against
him, and restoring him to all his authority both within and
■without the city.
It was impossible to foresee how far the advocates for the
hierarchy would carry the privileges they derived from the
prince of the apostles, as they commonly affected to style St.
Peter. What shall we think of this high prerogative, the ti-
tle, the absolute jus divinum, to commit all crimes with im-
punity, at least in this world, being amenable to no jurisdic-.
tion, temporal or spiritual ? Yet nothing less than this was the
pope's benefit of clergy ! Some, to avoid one absurdity in giv-
ing an unbounded licence, have run into another, maintaining;
the impeccability of popes in action, as well as their infallibi-
lity in judgment. But let any man who has read their history,
even as written by their own friends and favourers, believe
them to be either impeccable, or infallible, if he can. I shall
only remark, by the way, that, in an Italian synod, assembled
little more than a century before the pontificate of Symma-
chus, the bishops, however partial to the pope, were so far
from exempting him from the jurisdiction of a council, that
they presented a petition to the emperour Gratian, begging it,
as a special favour, that the bishop of Rome might not be
judged by a subordinate magistrate, but either by the emper-
our himself, or by a council. And to obtain so much as this
was then thought a very great acquisition, though now it would
be accounted extremely derogatory to the holy see.
The progrtss of the pontiffs was indeed rapid. One attain,
ment, though, at the time it was made, it appeared the ut-
most extent of their ambition, alwavs served but as a step to
facilitate the acquisition of something still higher. '' A per-
" son never mounts so high," said Cromwell, " as when he
*' does not know himself how far he desires to go." Nothing
is more certain than that, in later centuries, there were many
prerogHtlves strenuously contended for by ihe papal see, which
the popes of earlier ages explicitly disclaimed.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 261
But to return to the new plea, in support of the hierarchy,
first suggested by Innocent, and afterwards solemnly ratified
in a synod by Gclasius, there was even a gradation in the use
they made of this, and in the consequences they deduced
from it. At first, it was litde more than a sort of divine title,
in the see of Kome, to that honour and precedencv , whicK
she had for several ages enjoyed by such a human title as I
have formerly explained. The altering of their ground, ihere-^
fore, seems not at first to have been so much intended for ei^;
tending their prerogatives, as for rendering them more vene-
rable, and more unassailable, by every human power. But
matters did not long rest here.
For some ages the primacy of Peter was understood by no-
body to imply more than that he was a president, chairman,
or first in rank, in the apostolick college. But now that his
prerogatives were considered as the ground-work of the Ro-
man claims, every true Romanist was disposed to stretch
them as much as possible. The primacy they first raised into
a superintendency, then the superintendency into a suprema-
cy ; and the supremacy they at length exalted into despotism,
or an absolute and uncontroulable jurisdiction. Again, what
Wa.s granted to Peter, by hi^ master, was no longer consider-
ed in the way it had been formerly, as a personal reward for
the important confession he was the first to make. Every
prerogative, which they fancied to have belonged to him, they
now ascribed to the pope, as the representative of his person,
and the inheritor of all that was his. What a wonderful de-
duction from a number of premises, every one of them as-
fetimed without proof, and some of them in direct opposition
to the clearest evidence.
As their claims advanced, their style varied. In the pri-
mitive ages, ;he utmost that was pretended, was, that the
church, or christian society in Rome, was founded by the
apostle Peter ; that is, in other words, that the first converts
to Christianity, in Rome, were made by his preaching and
ministry. But not satisfied with what is implied in this ac-
count, that he was the first who preached the gospel to them,
they qifterwards would have that capital to be the peculiar see
of St. Peter, where he was settled as the bishop, or fixed pas-
tor, of the congregation. The Romans were denominated
the peculiar peoj.ie of St. Peter. The pontiff was become his
successour in office. Nay, as if this were not enough, they
quickly affected to talk of Peter as still personally present
there, and of the pope as the organ through which he spoke.
Their episcopal throne is arcordingly the chair ol St. Peter*
What is given to thai church is given to St. Peter. To dis-
obey the pope is to affront St. Peter ; nay, it is to rebel against
262 LECTURES ON
God, and to renounce his son Jesus Christ, and is therefore
no better than total apostacy. This was now become their
manner universally.
Nay, so far did pope Stephen the second, about the middle
of the eighth century, carry this matter, that in writing to
Pepin, king of France, on a very urgent occasion, he thought
proper to use the apostle's name instead of his own, and thus
begins his letter : *' Simon Peter, the servant and apostle of
**■ Jesus Christ, to three most excellent kings, Pepin, Charles,
*' and Carioman, to all the holy bishops, abbots, &c. to all
**• the dukes, counts, and captains of the army, and to the
*' whole people of France, grace to you and peace be multi-
*' plied. I am the apostle Peter, to whom it was said, Thou
*' art Peter^ and upon this rock will I build my churchy and the
'-'' gates of hell shall not prevail against it.^ And to thee will I
*' give the keys of the kingdom of heaven ; and whatsoever thou
*' shalt bind on earthy shall be bound in heaven^ ajid -whatsoever
*' thou shalt loose on earthy shall be loosed in heaven. Feed my
'* sheep. As all this was said to me peculiarly, all who hear-
** ken to me, and obey my exhortations, may be certain that
" their sins are forgiven, and that they will be admitted into
" everlasting life, cleansed from all guilt, &c." He proceeds to
enjoin them to assist the pope, his vicar, and the Romans,
his favourite people, his chosen flock, by making war upon
the Lombards, those ravening wolves, as they would hope for
remission here, or admission into heaven hereafter ; and as-
sures them, that in this entreaty and command, he is joined
by our lady, the virgin Marv, the mother of God, the thrones
and dominions, the principalities and powers, and the whole
multitude of the heavenly host. Now this, on pope Stephen's
authority, you may call the third epistle of Peter. But on
comparing it with the former two, we cannot help remarking
the wonderful change in the apostle's style. In this he is a,
perfect braggart ; whereas in those we find not a syllable of
his high prerogatives and claims. So far was he then from
assuming any superiority, that he put himself on a level not
only with apostles, but with every minister of the word. The
e/f/fr* (says he. Pet. v. 1,) that are amongst you ^ lexhort^ who
am also an elder. The Greek words are more emphatically
expressive of equality than the English, Trpio-^vls^airin a uf^iv ttx^m'
kccXm 0 (rvf^yr^ir^vls^K^. The '' presbyters amongst you," he says not
I their archpresbyter command, but " I their fellow-presbyter
exhort." And to what does he exhort them ? " To feed the
" flock of God, which was among them, acting the parts of
" bishops or overseers, not of lords over God's heritage, but
'* serving as patterns to the flock, teacliing them not so much
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ^g
"b)^ precept as by example." Was it not, however, as under
shepherds, that ihev were to feed and guide the christian com-
munity ? Undoubtedly. Who then was the chief shepherd ?
This also we learn from his words. It was not Peter himself.
He is very far from giving such a suggestion. But it was Je-
sus Christ, his and their common master. " When the chief
** shepherd, i eipx,i^eifM)*, shall appear, you shall receive a crown
** of glory that tadeth not away." Nothing here of that arro-
gant and imperious style, which his pretended successours so
soon assumed, and so injuriously fathered upon him. In re-
gard to the spirit of the epistles, 1 say not how dillerent, but
how opposite, are they ! 1 his, transmitted by pope Stephen,
is an incentive, by every means, the grossest flattery not ex-
cepted, to war, bloodshed, and vengeance. Those we have
in the sacred canon, breathe nothing but humility, peace, and
love, a meek and patient submission to the worst evils that
men could inflict. In regard to the new fangled titles confer-
red on Mary, of our lady^ and the mother of God, so foreign
from the simple manner of the inspired penmen, I suppose a
Romanist would account for them by saying, that the apostifc
must have learnt these improvements on his language from St.
Cyril, who had, long ere now, carried to heaven the news of
the Nestorian controversy, and his own triumph at the coun-
cil of Ephesus.
To give yoa a specimen of the mode of proving which now
xame in vogue. The pope is the sole foundation of the chris-
tian edifice ; for Christ said to Peter, On this rock I will build
my church. In other places, hoAVcA'er, all the apostles are re-
presented equally as foundations. Again, the pope alone has
the whole jurisdiction ; for Christ said to Peter, To thee ■will
I give the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and -whatsoever thou
srhalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven. Yet the same
power is, almost in the same words, in another passage giveu
to all the apostles, nay, and to the whole church. The pope is
the chief shepherd, the only apostle and pastor, that derives his
power from Christ : all other bishops are under shepherds
that derive their power from the pope. And how is this evinced?
Alter the shameful full of Peter in thrice denying his master, Je-
sus Christ judged it meet to bring him thrice solemnly to profess
his love, and subjoined this precept, as aff^ording the apostle
the means of giving the only satisfactory evidence of the truth
of his profession : Feed my sheep, and feed ray lambs. Hence
the Romanist sagely concludes, that this charge belonged only
to Peter. He might with equal reason have maintained, that
as the question, Lovest thou me ^ was put only to Peter, and
the threefold profession required of none, and given by none
but him, it was not a duty incumbent on the other apostles, to
love their master, or to confess him. It is on this ground ,
264 |.]|eTURES OI^
also, that some have dared to advance, in contradiction equat-*
ly to the sense and to the words of scripture, that Peter was
proper!, the only apostle of Jesus Christ, and that all the rest
were the apostles of Peter. Seriously to refute such a princi-
ple would be almost as absurd as to maintain it.
Nay, to show a little more of their wonderful dexterity in
reasoning, and the surprising advantages they derive from
this fund of St. Peter, the pope's infallibility is thus demon-
strated by them. Our Lord said to Peter, before the denial,
as being the only disciple who was in imminent danger, (for
the traitor is out of the question) SimoUy Simon^ Satan hath
desired to have you^ that he may sift you as wheat ; hut I have
prayed for thee^ that thy faith fail not ; and xvhen thou art con'
verted^ strengthen thy brethren^ Those who think it necessary
to mind the scope of the place, and the principles of reason,
allege, that the prayer that his faith might not fail, means evi*
dently that he might not proceed so far as to make a total de-
fection from Christianity, which he would soon, by repeatedly"
abjuring his master, appear on the brink of doing. But who
thinks it necessary to mind these in disputing ? The import of
this passage, says the Romanist, is, Christ prayed that Peter
might have the gift of infallibility, or, as they also term it,
inerrability, in his judgment concerning all articles of chris-*,
tian doctrine. Peter then alone was, and consequently the
pope, his sole heir and representative, alone is, infallible.
I shall give but one other specimen of this Romish logick.
When in the ages of the church, posterior to those I have yet
remarked on, the popes claimed to be the true depositaries of
all secular as well as spiritual jurisdiction, how satisfactory
was the proof they produced in support of their claim, from
this passage. They said^ Lord^ behold here are two swords.
And he said. It is enough. Here they shrewdly ask, Why
were there neither more nor fewer than two swords ? The an-
swer is plain : It was to denote that there were two sorts of
power, neither more nor fewer, deposited with the church, the
temporal and the spiritual ; and that these two were sufficient
for all her occasions. But why are these supposed to be in-
trusted solely to the pope ? If they were intrusted to Peter,
they are certainly intrusted to the pope. And that they were
intrusted to Peter is manifest from this, that Peter afterwards
used one of them, as we learn from the evangelist John, in
cutting off the right ear of Malchus, a servant of the high
priest. And if he had one of these swords, what good rea-
son can be given why he should not have both ? Thus, by a
regular deduction, as convincing to a Romanist as demon-
stration, it is proved, that the pope is the only fountain of all
authority, both temporal and spiritual.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ^03?
LECTURE XVIIL
tiriTiiimiininimmi
X N my preceding lectures, on the rise and progress of thfe
papacy, I have been more particular, and treated things more
in detail, than I had at first intended. But on so complex a
subject, to which so great a variety of different and even dis*
similar circumstances contributed, it is not easy to consult at
once brevity and perspicuity. Besides, in this deduction, I
have found it impossible to elucidate the latent causes, which
eo-operated in rearing this wonderful fabrick, in a narrative
of its advancement, according to the order of time. To have
attempted this would have led me to make an abridgment of
ecclesiastick history, and to interweave with it such critical
inquiries, as would serve to expose the secret springs and pro*
gress of that enormous power. But this would have occa*
sioned a still more minute detail, and would, after all, have
scarcely been so satisfactory as the manner I have adopted. A
number of different springs, in the great machine, which ope-
rated separately, though simultaneously, I have been obliged^
for the sake of distinctness, to consider separately. In the
deductions I have given of each, I have conformed myself,
as much as possible, to the order of time, that the different
phases, if I may so express myself, of the same plea, at dif*
ferent periods, might be considered and compared. Some-
thing of this kind you may have observed from what has been
said on the subject of appeals, and on the different founda^
tions on which Rome, at different periods, raised her title to
jurisdiction. But when leaving one topick I recurred to ano-*
ther, I have been obliged to turn back, as it were, in order
to resume the history of that particular, also, from the begin*
ning. My object, in these discourses, is not to give a narra^
tive of facts, but from known facts, with their attendant cir*
cumstances, by comparing one with another, to deduce prin»
& 1
256 LECTURES ON
ciples and causes. I have ah-eady gone so far this way, not
with a view to supersede the accounts given by the historian,
but rather to enable you to read those accounts with greater
attention and advantage. Many circumstances, apparently
trivial, in a detail of facts, are apt to be overlooked by a has-
ty reader, which yet may be of very considerable consequence
for bringing to light the springs of action, and accounting for
other things vi'ith which, at first, to a superficial observer,
they may appear to have little or no connexion. In what re-
mains of this inquiry into the Roman hierarchy, 1 do not
intend to be so particular, but shall briefly take notice of some
of tlie principal causes (for to name all would be impossible)
which co-operated in rearing this strange medley of divine (as
it was called) and human, spiritual and secular, dominion.
There is none who has read church history with the least
attention, but must be sensible, that, from the very beginning
of papal power, it has been much more considerable and con-
spicuous in the west, than in the east. Indeed, for some
centuries, the Roman pontiff hardly made any pretensions in
the east, except in regard to his precedency, which, as it had
been setiled by early but tacit consent, ancl preserved by cus-
tom, the eastern prelates were not disposed to controvert.
But when from a bare precedency, in point of rank, he came
to extend his claim to jurisdiction, he always met from them
a vigorous and often successful opposition. The case was
not entirely similar with the western bishops, over whom the
pope obtained a considerable ascendant, much earlier than it
was in his power to do, in regard to his oriental brethren.
Several causes may be assigned for this difference.
In the first place, in some of the earliest ages, if we except
the inhabitants of Rome, Carthage, and some principal cities,
those in the west were in general, beyond all comparison,
itiferiour both in knowledge and acuteness to the orientals,
and were therefore much better adapted to be implicit fol-
lowers, first, during the church's worldly obscurity, of the
most respectable characters, afterwards, during her worldly
splendour, of the most eminent sees. Victor, bishop of Rome,
in the violent measures he adopted against the Quarto-deci-
mans, in Asia, in the second century, seems to have had no
adherents, even among those, who, in the observance of
Easter, the only point in dispute, followed the same custom
■with himself. As little had Stephen the first, in the third
century, in his measures against the African rebaptizers of
those vvho had been baptized by hereticks or schismaticks.
Ireneus, bishop of Lyons, on account of his personal charac-
ter, was of ten times more authority even in the west than
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ^sm
pope Victor ; and Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, than pope
Stephen. But matters underwent a very great change after
Christianity had received the sanction of a legal establish-
ment. Then indeed the diiference between one see and
another, both in riches and in power, soon became eaormous.
And this could not fail to produce, in the sentiments of man-
kind, the usual consequences. Such is the constant progress
in all human polities whatever. In the most simple state of
society, personal merit, of some kind or other, makes the
only noticeable distinction between man and man. In polities,
purely republican, it is still the chief distinction. But the
farther you recede from these, and the nearer you approach the
monarchical model, the more does this natural distinction, give
place to those artificial distinctions, created by riches, office,
and rank.
When Rome was become immensely superiour both in splen-
dour, and in opulence, to every western see, she would, with
great facility, and, as it were naturally, (if nothing very un-
usual or alarming was attempted) dictate to the other sees in
the west ; the people there having had, for several ages, very
little of the disputatious, dogmatizing, humour of their bre-
thren in the east. It no doubt contributed to the same effect,
that Rome was the only see of very great note, which concurred
with severalof them in language, Latin being the predominant
tongue among the western churches, as Greek was among the
eastern. It was natural for the former, therefore, to consider
themselves as more closely connected with the Roman patri-
arch than with the Constantinopolitan, or any of the other
oriental patriarchs. A similar reason, when not cotmteracted
by other causes, operated among the Greeks, to make them
prefer a Grecian patriarch before a Latin one.
I acknowledge, as I hinted before, that this natural bias Avas
frequently surmounted by other causes. When the orientals
were divided into parties by their disputes, as was often the
case, the Romans could then obtain almost any thing from
the side they favoured, such was the violence of the parties
against each other. But this humour, though it ^vas not en-
tirely without effect, was but temporary with them, nnd com-
monly lasted no longer than the controversy which gave rise
to it. Like an elastick body, though it may be vtry much
bent by the proper application of external force, no sooner vis
the force removed, than of itself it resumes its former state.
Nevertheless, on bodies of this sort, such violence, frequently
repeated, will produce some change.
One thing, which rendered it very difficult to effect a hearty
coalition between Greeks and Latins, was the contempt which
268 ^^OT^^CmmES ON •- '
the former were, from early chil(ihood, inured to entertain of
the genius and understanding of the latter. Notwithstanding
the superiority the Romans had obtained over theni by sub-
duing their country, and all the eastern monarchies which had
sprung out of the Macedonian conquests, the Grecians could
not help considering them as no better than a sort of barbar
rians, a little more civilized than the Scythians, or the
Tartars. " These men," said Photius, the Greek patri-
arch, who, in the ninth century, proved the occasion of
the schism between the oriental churches and the occidental ;
these men, speaking of the Latins, " sprung from the darkness
*' of the west, have corrupted every thing by their ignorance,
" and have even proceeded to that pitch of impiety and mad-
*' ness, as to foist words into the sacred symbol confirmed by
>* all the councils." The Greeks often bragged that the Latins
were their scholars. " They have nothing," said they " which
*' they have not gotten from us, not even the names of their
'* ceremonies, mysteries, and dignities, such as baptism, eu-
** charist, liturgy, parish, diocese, bishop, presbyter, deacon,
** monk, church, which they often stupidly misunderstand, and
" wretchedly misapply." But though the Greeks never show-
ed much inclination to a cordial union with the Latins, they
were far from being so closel\ united among themselves as the
Latins generally were. I have already hinted at some of the
causes of this difference in the Greeks, such as their ingenuity
Itself, which could ill brook the dictatorial manner, and their
disputative and inquisitive turn of mind.
But there was another remarkable cause arising from the
different constitutions of these two great parts of the empire,
the oriental and the occidental. The former, as being beyond
all comparison the richest, the most populous, and the most
civilized, was sooner brought to a regular form of government,
ecclesiastical as well as civil. I had before occasion to ob-
serve, that the ecclesiastick polity was, in a great measure,
modelled upon the civil. All the cities of greatest eminence,
as well as the most ancient churches, were situated in the east:
Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople, Cesarea,
Ephesus, were cities of that note, with which nothing in the
west, if we abstract Rome itself, was worthy to be compared.
Accordingly, except Milan in Italy, and Carthage in west
Africa, there does not appear to have been any bishop in the
occidental churches above the rank of a metropolitan.
And even those I have named, Milan and Carthage, were
considerably inferiour, both in jurisdiction and in wealth, not
only to the three great patriarchal sees in the east, Constanti-
nople, Alexandria, and Antioch, but even to the principal of
those called exarchal, such as Ephesus and Cesarea. Conse-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 269
quently, the pope had not in the west a single bishop, of con-
sideration and rank, sufficient to be, in any degree, qualified
for either a rival, or a check. It is manifest, that in Gaul,
Spain, and Britain, there were not, at least for some ages, any
who had the inspection of more than a single province. The
disparity, therefore, was so exceedmgly great in the west, as
to give the utmost scope for. the ambition of a see, which in
respect of worldly circumstances, had been so remarkably
distinguished.
When there is an equality, or even nearness, in riches and
power among those who share it, we may be assured, there will
always be emulation ; but it you raise one of the possessors
distinguishably above the rest, you not only destroy their emu-
lation, but give a contrary direction to their ambition, and
make them fain to court the man whom they cannot hope
successfully to emulate. Nay, the very rivalship which the
rest entertain of one another, leads them to act this part with
regard to him whom more fortunate circumstances has raised
into their superiour ; that, by his means, they may the more
easily surmount their equals. Rome, it must be owned, was
not at first considered as a patriarchate. The whole of Italy
made but one civil diocese, which, as I observed once before,
was on account of its extreme populousness, as well as opulence,
divided into two lieutenancies, or vicariates. The one was
called the vicariate of Rome, the other that of Italy : the capi-
tal of this last was Milan. The first title, therefore, the pope
enjoyed, after the church, in Constantine's time, had been mo-
delled in this manner, was the vicar of Rome, as the bishop
of Milan was called the vicar of Italy ; nor was the pope, if I
remember right, honoured with the name of patriarch, though
he was always allowed the precedency till the synod of Chal-
cedon in the fifth century. But as he had been time immemo-
rial denominated the vicar^ and as it is not easy to suppress a
title firmly established by custom, it is not improbable that the
bishops of Rome, near that period, have judged it more poli-
tical not to attempt the suppression ; but to add to vicar ^ by
way of explanation, in order to disguise its inferiority, the
words, of Jesus Christy and with this addition to arrogate it
as peculiar.
The bishop of Milan, who, by that first division, was vickr
of Italy, was on a foot of equality, in respect of his title, and
even of the nature, though not of the extent of his jurisdiction,
with the bishop of Rome ; insomuch, that nothing but the im-
mense disparity there was in riches and splendour, and ulmost
all external circumstances, could have prevented him from be-
ing a rival. This disparitv, hov/ever, did effectually prevejit
,2r© LECTURES ON
all rivalry, and make it conducive both to the interest and to
the ambition of the former, to forward, instead of opposing,
the designs of the latter. It is evident, therefore, that the
popes, even from the beginning, had in the west incomparably
a more advantageous situation for the acquisition of power,
than any patriarch in the east was possessed of. It is, in like
manner, evident, and might almost have been concluded be-
forehand, that he could not, without a concurrence of events
quite extraordinary, have brought the oriental to the same im-
plicit submission and obedience to which he actually brought
the occidental churches.
It is proper also here to observe another fortunate circum-
stance, which operated very early for the advancement of his
authority. To the vicarage of Rome belonged ten provinces,
including the islands Sicily, Corsica, and Sardinia. As in
these there were no metropolitans, as all were under the im-
mediate jurisdiction of the capital itself, and thence were de-
nominated suburbicary provinces, the vicar of Rome, or pope,
as he was called, had not only all the power of an exarch over
the v/hole ten provinces, but that also of the primate in every
province. There was in him a coalition of both jurisdictions,
the metropolitical and the patriarchal. As the metropolitan
had the charge of ordaining the bishops of his province, and
the patriarch that of ordaining the metropolitans, the bishop
of Rome had the charge, either by himself, or by his delegates,
of ordaining every bishop within the provinces of his vicariate.
These rights he gradually extended, as circumstances favour-
ed his views, first to the whole prefecture of Italy, which in-
cluded west Illyricum, and west Africa, afterwards to all the
occidental churches, Gaul, Spain, and Britain ; and lastly, as
of divine right, and therefore unalienable, over the whole ca-
tholick church. This last claim, however, hath subsisted only
in theory.
That these pretensions were introduced gradually is a fact
indisputable. Pope Leo, in one of his letters still extant, to
the bishops of Gaul, explicitly disclaims tht- right of ordaining
them. That pontiff was not deficient either in ambition or in
abilities. And one would have thought he might have been
better instructed in the divine and unalienable rights of his see,
if any conception of such rights had been entertained in his
time. But the zenith of the hierarchy was too sublime a pin-
nacle to be attained by a few bold leaps. It was by innumer-
able steps, not considerable, taken severally, that that amazin'g
and dizzy height at length was reached. It was not till after
repeated successes in the attainments of objects far below the
summit, that this great antitype of Lucifer said in his heart,
I will ascend into heaven^ Ixvill exalt my throne above the stars
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 271
of God ; I will sit upon the mount of the congregation^ (or
cliurch, as the word imports) / will ascend above the heights
of the clouds^ I will be like the Most High. But to return,
there can be no doubt that the want of patriarchs in the west
did greatly facilitate the attempts of the Roman pontiff to sup-
ply their place, first in consecrating their metropolitans, and
afterwards even in ordaining the suffragans.
Again, one great advantage which Rome derived from her
vast opulence and rich domains, both in Italy and in the neigh-
bouring islands, was the power she acquired of employing and
supporting missions, in distant parts of Europe, for the pro-
pagation of the gospel. When by means of missions and ex-
pence churches were planted in any country, they were always
accounted dependent on that as the mother church by whom
the missionaries were employed. In this manner, by the monk
Augustine, a missionary of Gregory the first, the Anglo-Saxons
in Britain were converted from idolatry near the end of the
sixth century. The Britons, or ancient inhabitants, had in-
deed been christians for some ages before. But they were
ere now dispossessed of their ancient habitations, and confined
by those new comers to a small part of the island, the princi-
pality of Wales. In the beginning of the eighth century, the
Germans were, in like manner, converted by Winfrid, or Bo-
niface, a missionary of Gregory the second, which Boniface, I
may remark in passing, is the first ecciesiastick on record, who
took a solemn oath of fealty to St. Peter, that is, to the Roman
see, a security which was afterwards exacted by the pope, not
only of all legates and servants of his court, but of all bishops
whatever ; and the more effectually to prevent its being omit-
ted,' it was engrossed in the pontifical, among the riles to be
observed in consecration. Nor did a question of this kind of
pre-occupancy prove, about a century afterwards, the least con-
siderable cause of the great schism till subsisting between the
oriental and the occidental churches. The disputed titles of
Ignatius and Photius to the patriarchate of Constantinople,
and even the differences in doctrine and ceremonies between
the Latins and the Greeks, vv ouid have been much more easily
adjusted than the lucrative pretensions that both Rome and
Constantinople made to the superiority and patronage of the
new converted churches of Bulgaria. That of right from all.
the principles which then prevailed, they should have been de-
pendent on the Constantinopolitan patriarch, can scarcely be
made a doubt. But Rome was ever interfering ; and this was
too great an acquisition to lose sight of. Paul, indeed, avoid-
ed to promulge the gospel in places where Christ had already
been made known, lest he should build ou another man's foun-
2i?2 LECTURES ON
datlon, and thereby bestow his time and labour less profitably'
for the common cause. That maxim answered admirably,
when the end v»^as the advancement of a spiritual kingdom,
peace, and truth, and righteousness, the honour of God, and
happiness of mankind. He might then well say, that Christ
is preached, wheresoever and by whomsoever, I do, and will,
rejoice. But the case was quite altered v/hen conversions to a
nominal more than real Christianity, were made the instru-
ments of a new sort of conquest, mere engines for extending
ecclesiastical dominion. Constantinople could do a good deal
in this way, but Rome still more.
I shall mention another excellent piece of papal policy, first
introduced by Damasus, near the end of the fourth century,
and commonly called the legatine power. Fhe introduction of
this pi-actice, and what gave rise to it, I shall give you from
our English biographer's history of that pope. — " Acholius,
*' bishop of Thessalonica, was the first who enjoyed, under
" Damasus, the title of the pope's vicar. He was nominated
" to this office, in east lUyricum, on the following occasion :
*' lUyricum, comprising all ancient Greece, and many pro-
" vinces on the Danube, whereof Sirmium was the capital,
" had, ever since the time ol Constantine, belonged to the
"western empire. But in the year 379, Dacia and Greece
" were, by Gracian, disjoined from the more westerly pro-
" vinces, and added, in favour of i'heodosius, to the eastern
*' empire, being known by the name of east lUyricum, whereof
" Thessalonica, the metropolis of Macedon, was the chief
" city. The bishops of Rome, as presiding in the metropolis
" of the empire, had begun to claim a kind of jurisdiction, or
" rather inspection, in ecclesiastical matters, over all the pro-
" vinces of the western empire ; which was the first great step
" whereby they ascended to the supremacy, ihey afterwards
*' claimed and established. This Damasus was unwilling to
" resign, with respect to Illyricum, even after that country
" was dismembered from the western, and added to the eastern
" empire. In order, therefore, to maintain his claim, he ap»
" pointed Acholius, bishop of Thessalonica, to act in his
" stead ; vesting in hira the power whith he pretended to have
*' over those provinces. Upon the death of Acholius, he con-
**■ ferred the same dignity on his successour Anysius, as did
" the following popes on the succeeding bishops of Thessalo-
"nica; who, by thus supporting the pretensions of Rome,
" became the first bishops, and, in a manner, the patriarchs of
*' east Illyricum, for thev are sometimes distinguished with
" that title. This, however, was not done without opposition,
" the other metropolitans not readily acknowledging for their
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 2f3
** superiour 6fae who, till that time, had been their equal. Sy-
*f ricius, who Succeeded Damasus, enlarging the power clj^im-
^■'^"^d by his predecessor, decreed, that no bishop should be
"^ ordained in east Illyricum without the consent and approbd.^
" tion of the bishop of Thessalonica. But it Was some time
" before this decree took place. Thus Were the bishops of
" Thessalonica first appointed vicegerents of the bishops of
" Rome, probably in the year 382. Ihe contrivance of Da-
*' masus was notably improved by his successours, who, in
*' order to extend their authority, conferred the title of theit-
" vicars, and the pretendedpower annexed to it, on the most
-** eminent prelates of other provinces arid kingdoms, engaging
'* them thereby to depend upon them, and to promote the
*' authority of their see, lo the Utter suppression of the ancient
" rights and liberties both of bishops and synods. This dig-
" nity was, for the most part, annexed to certain sees, but
*' sometimes conferred on particular persons. The institutioii
" of vicars was, by succeeding popes, improved into that of
*' legates ; or, to lise De Marca's expression, the latter institu-
" tion was grafted on the former. The legates were vested
*' with a far greater power than the vicars ; or, as pope Led
*' expresses it, were admitted to a far greater share of his care,
** though not to the plenitude of his power- They were sent,
*' oil proper occasions, into all countries, and never failed ex-
" etting, to the utmost stretch, their boasted power, oppress-
** ing, in virtue of their paramount authority, the clergy as
** #ell as the people, and extorting from both large sums, to
"support the pomp and luxury in which they lived."
Thus far our historian. Nothing, indeed, could be better
calculated, for both extending and securing their authority,
tJian thus engaging all the most eminent prelates in the differ-
titt countries of Christendom, from a principle of ambition, as
wfeU as interest, to favour their claims. Rome was already
gotten too far, as we have seen, above the episcopal sees of the
iw^est, for any of them to think of coping with her, and was,
besides, too distant to excite their envy. But it would greatly
gratify the covetousness, as well as the pride and vanity, of
those bishops whom she was thus pleased to distinguish, to be,
by her means, raised considerably above their peers and neigh-
tidurs.
Add to this, that not only the ambitious views of individuals
served to promote the schemes of Rome, but the general am-
bition of the clerical order greatly forwarded her view*s. The
western empire soon came to be divided into a number of in-
dependent states and kingdoms. Now in the form into which
the church had been moulded before the division, a foundatioji
34 m
274 LECTURES ON
had been laid for incessant interferings and bickerings, in
every country, between the secular powers and the ecclesias-
tical. In these interferings, the principal advantage of the
latter arose from the union that subsisted among the churches
of different countries, as members of one great polity. And
even this connexion, (however possible it might have been to
preserve it for the single purpose of promoting piety and vir-
tue) it was absolutely impossible to preserve, for the purpose
of spiritual dominion, unless they were united under a com-
mon head. The republican form of any kind, democratical
oraristocratical,could never answer in such a situation of affairs.
Not are only commonwealths slower in their operations than the
exigencies of such a state would admit, but they can do nothing
without the authority of a legislative council ; and this it
would be in the power of a few temporal princes totally to ob-
struct, either by preventing them from assembling, or by dis-
persing them when assembled. And from any state, or king
dom, it would be in the power of the chief magistrate to pre-
vent a deputation being sent. The monarchical form, there-
fore, supported b}- the prejudices and superstition of the peo-
ple, was the only adequate means both of preserving and of
extending the high privileges, honours, titles, and immunities,
claimed universally by the sacred order, and which they most
strenuously contended for, as the quintessence of Christianity,
the sum of all that the Son of God had purchased for man-
kind. This could not fail to induce them to put themselves
under the protection of the only bishop in the west, who was
both able and willing to support their bold pretensions.
I must likewise add, however unlikely, that the ambition
of secular princes concurred in the establishment and exalta-
tion of the hierarchy. Nothing can be more evident, than
that it was the interest of the princes of Christendom, and
their people, to combine against it. But though this was the
general and most lasting interest of all the states of Europe,
what was, or at least was conceived to be, the immediate in-
terest of a particular prince, or state, might be to favour the
hierarchy. Let it be observed, that the European monarchs
were almost incessantly at war with one another. Neighbour
and enemy, when spoken of states and kingdoms, were, and
to this day too much arc, terms almost synonymous. The
pope, therefore, could not make even the most daring attempt
against any prince, or kingdom, which would not be powerful-
ly backed by the most strenuous endeavours of some other
prince, or kingdom, whose present designs the pope's at-
tempts would tend to forward.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 275
If England was the object of papal resentment, if the en-
raged ecclesiarch had fulminated an excommunication, or in-
terdict, against the kingdom, or issued a bull deposing the
king, and loosing his subjects from their oaths and allegiance^
(for all these spiritual machines were brought into use one af-
ter another) France was ready to take advantage of the gene-
ral confusion thereby raised in England, and to invade the
kingdom with an armed force. The mors? to encourage the
French monarch to act this part, the pontiff might be prevail-
ed on (and this hath actually happened) to assign to him the
kingdom of which he had pretended to divest the owner. A
mun mav afford to give what never belonged to him. But i£
the owner found it necessary to make submissions to the priest,
the latter was never at a loss to find a pretext for recalling the
grant he had made, and re-establishing the degraded mon-.
arch. In like manner, when France was the object of the
pontiff's vengeance, England was equally disposed to be sub-
servient to his views. Nay, he had the address, oftener than
once, to arm an unnatural son against his father. Such was
the situation of affairs all Europe orer. Those transactions,
which always terminated in the advancement of papal power,
could not fail, at last, to raise the mitre above the crown.
Every one of the princes, I may say, did, in his turn, for
the gratifying of a present passion, and the attaining of an
immediate object, blindly lend his assistance, in exalting a po-
tentate, who came, in process of time, to tread on all their
necks, and treat both kings and emperours, who had foolishly
given their strength and power to him, as his vassals and
slaves.
It were endless to take notice of all the expedients, which
Rome, after she had advanced so far, a^ to be esteemed in the
west the visible head of the church universal, and vested with
a certain paramount, though indefinite authority, over the
whole : devised, and easily executed, both for confirming and
extending her enormous power. It is true, she never was ab-
solute in the east ; and, from about the middle of the ninth
century, these two parts of Christendom were in a state of to-
tal separation. But that became a matter of less consequence
to her every day. The eastern, which may be said to have
been the only enlightened, and far the most valuable part of
the empire, in the days of Constanttne, was daily declining,
whilst the western part was growing daily more considerable.
In the eastern empire, one part after another became a prey to
Turks and Saracens, — Egypt, Barbary, Syria, Asia, and at
length Greece, Macedonia, and Thrace. The only part of-
the western empire that not only was, but still continues to be,^
276* LECTURES ON
subjected to the depredations of these barbarians, is proconsular
and west Africa. Whereas, in the western, and northern
parts of Europe, there were, at the same time, springing up
some of the most powerful and polished, and, I may now add,
the most enlightened monarchies and states, with which the
world has ever been acquainted. The very calamities of the
east, particularly the destruction of the eastern empire, the
last poor remains of Roman greatness, and the taking of
Constantinople by the Turks, left the western patriarch total-
ly without a rival, and Christendom without a vestige of the
primitive equality and independence of its pastors.
When Rome had every thing, in a manner, at her disposal,
it was easy to see that all canons, in regard to discipline, and de-
crees, in relation to doctrine, would point invariably to the
support of this power. Hence the convenient doctrines of
transubstantiation, purgatory, prayers and masses for the dead,
auricular confession, the virtue of sacerdotal absolution.
Hence the canons extending so immensely the forbidden de-
grees of marriage, the peculiar power in the popes of dispens-
ing with these, and other canons, the power of canonization,
the celibacy of the clergy, the supererogatory merits of the
saints, indulgences, and many others.
There is indeed one right that has been claimed, and sucess*
fully exerted, by Rome, which, as being a most important
spring in this great and complex machine of the hierarchy, will
deserve a more particular notice. I mean, the pope's pretended
title to grant exemptions to whomsoever he pleases, from sub-
jeetion to their ordinary ecclesiastical superiours. But this X
shall reserve for the subject of another lecture.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. fi77
LECTURE XIX.
JC ROM what has been discovered, in the course of our in-
quiries into the rise, the progress, and the full establishment
of the papacy, we may justly say, that if happiness consist in
dominion, (which it certainly does not, though all mankind,
by their conduct, seem to think it) what a wonderful good
fortune has ever attended Rome ! From the first foundation
of the city, by a parcel of banditti, she rose but to command,
s^nd gradually advanced into an empire of such extent, renown,
and duration, as has been unexampled in the world, either be-
fore or since. And from the first declension of that enormous
power, for it could not subsist always, she is insensibly become
the seat of a new species of empire, which, though not of equal
celebrity with the former, is much more extraoi dinary, and
perhaps more difficult to be surmounted, being deeply rooted
in the passions and sentiments of men.
Nay, how fortunate has been this queen of cities in what
concerned both the formation and the advancement of this se-
cond monarchy. She continued the imperial city during the
nonage of the hieraT':h\, that is, as long as was necessary to
give her priest, though under the humble title of pastor, the
primacv, or precedency among his brethren, for these two
terms were at first synonymous, and by the wealth and splen-
dour to which she raised him, to lay the foundation of those
higherfclaims he hath since made, of supremacyand jurisdiction
over them. And she ceased to be the seat of empire at the
critical period, when the nsidence of a court must have eclips-.
ed his lustre, confined him to a subordinate part on the great
theatre of the world, and stifled, in the birth, all attempts to
raise himself above the secular powers. Had the eastern em-
pire remained to this da\', and Constantinople been the impe-
rial residence, it would h,iv^ been impossible that her patri-
archs should ever have advanced the claims which the Roman
278 LECTURES ON
patriarch fiot only advanced, but compelled the christian world
to admit. When Rome was deserted by the emperours, her
pontiiF quickly became the first man there ; and in the course
of a few reigns, the inhabitants came naturally to consider
themselves as more connected with him, and interested in
him, than in an emperour who, under the name of their sove-
reign, had his residence and court in a distant country, who
spoke a different language, and whose face the greater part of
the Romans did not so much as know. Nor was the matter
much mended in regard to them after the division of the em-
pire, as the royal residence, neither of the emperour of the
West, nor afterwards of the king of the Goths, was Rome^
but either Milan or Ravenna.
And when in succeeding ages the pope grew to be, in some
respect, a rival to the German emperour, the Romans, and
even many of the Italians, came to think, as it might have
been foreseen that they would, that their own aggrandize-
ment, the aggrandizement of their city, and of their country,
were more concerned in the exaltation of the pontiff, who,
by the way, was then, in a great measure, a creature of their
own making, (for the office was not then, as now, in the
election of the conclave) than in that of a monarch, who, from
whatever origin he derived his power, was, in fact, an alienj^'
and not of their creation, and who was as ill situated for
defending them against their enemies, as the successours of
Constantine had been before. Of the inability of both to
answer this purpose, the invasions and conquests made at
different times by Goths and Lombards, Franks and Nor-
mans, but too plainly showed. In short, had Rome never
been the imperial city, its pastor could never have raised
himself above his fellows. Had it continued the imperial
city, he might, and probably would have had, such a primacy,
as to be accounted the first among the patriarchs, but without
any thing like papal jurisdiction over church and state. Had
Rome remained the seat '.f empire, the pope's superiority to
councils had never been heard of. The convocation of these,
whilst the empire subsisted, would, in all probability, have
continued, as it was for several ages, in the hands of the em-
perour. The dismemberment of the empire tended but too
visibly to subvert the emperour's claim, and occasion the
setting up of another in its stead. A sovereign has no title
to convoke the subjects of another sovereign, of whatever
class they be, and call them out of his dominions, whatever
title he may have to assemble any part of his own subjectSi
within his own territories. Now whatever weakened the
emperour's claim, strengthened the pope's. Immemorial cua-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 270
torn had taught men to consider councils as essential to the
church. And if the right to call them could no longer be
regarded as inherent in any secular prince, where would they
so readily suppose it to inhere as in him, to whose primacy in
the church they had been already habituated ? And even afteij^
the dismemberment of the empire, and the succession of a
new power over part, under the same title, had it been possible
for the emperours of Germany, who, in the former part of the
eleventh century, made and unmade popes at their pleasure,
to have made Rome their residence, and the capital of their
empire, the pope, as Voltaire justly observes, had been no
other than the emperour's chaplain. Nay, much of the power
which the former, in that case, would have been permitted to
exercise, would have been more nominal than real, as it would
have been exercised under the influence of a superiour. But
luckily for the pope and for Italy, to reside at Rome, was
what the emperour could not do, and at the same time retain
possession of his German dominions, of which he was only
the elective sovereign.
The obscurity of the western, in the beginning, compared
with the oriental churches, occasioned that their ecclesiastick
polity was left imperfect, so as to give Rome too great an
ascendancy in that part of the world ; the gradual but inces-
sant decline of those eastern nations, whose opulent sees were
alone capable of proving a counterpoise to the power of Rome;
and, on the other hand, the slow, but real advancement of the
occidental countries, after the power of the pontiff had been
firmly established; their real, but late advancement, • in arts,
populousness, wealth, and civilization, all alike conspired to
raise him. His rivals sank, his subjects rose.
For many ages he seemed to have conceived no higher
aim than to be at the head of the executive and the judicial
power in the church. No sooner was that attained than his
great object came to be the legislative power. You do not find,
for several centuries, the least pretext made by the pope, of a
title to establish canons, or ecclesiastical laws ; his pretence
was merely, that he was intrusted with the care, that the laws
enacted by councils should be duly executed. He was then
only, as it were, the chief magistrate of the community ;
nothing now will satisfy him but to be their legislator also, A
doctrine came accordingly much in vogue with the partisans
of Rome, that the pope was not subject to councils, nay, that
he was not only independent of them, but above them ; that
he was himself entitled to make, canons, to declare articles
of faith, to pronounce what was orthodox, what heterodos^,
and that he needed not the aid of any council.
28® LECTURES ON
^tI£ such were really the case, all the world, popes as well as
others, had been greatly deceived for many ages. When an
effectaal remedy was at hand, they had thought it necessary
to take a very ditficult and circuitous method to attain a cure,
at most not more certain. To what purpose bring such a
multitude together from all the quarters of the globe, with
great expense and infinite trouble, to tell us, after whole days
spent in chicane, sophistr}', and wrangling, what one single
person could have told us at the first, as soon as he was con-
sulted; In all these diflPerent claims, made, at different periods
by the pontiff, though he generally succeeded at last, he never
failed to encounter some opposition. It has, however, on
this article of the pope's authority, been justlv observed, that
tlie advocates for it have been much more numerous than
those for the authority of councils. The manner in which
jEneas Sylvius, who was himself afterwards raised to the
popedom, under the name of Pius II, accounted for this dif-
ference, is strictly just : " Because," said he, " the popes have
"benefices to give, and the councils have none." Whether
he would have returned the same answer, after he had reached
the summit of ecclesiastical preferment, may be justly made
a question. Certain it is, that the pontiffs cannot be charged
with want of attention to those who have stood forth as cham-
pions for their authority. Whereas there is hardh' a motive,
except a regard to truth, which can induce any one, in Roman
catholick countries, to defend the other side of the question.
For on this article there are different opinions even among
Roman catholicks. This, however, is a point of which there
has never been any decision that has been universallv ac-
quiesced in ; and, indeed, on the footing whereon matters
now stand in that church, we may affirm, with great proba-
bility, that it will alvva\s remain undecided.
In the conclusion of mv last lecture, I mentioned orte great
engine of papal policy, the exemptions p-ranted by the pontiffs
to particular ecclesiasticks or communities, bv which their
subjection to the ordinary was dispensed with, and their
dependence rendered immediate upon Rome. The legatine
power, of which I have already spoken, was somcvhat of the
same nature, though it had a more plausible excuse. Rut
exemptions were not limited to tho'^e who might be con-
sidered as a sort of agents for the pontiff, and employed tc»
represent his person. He pretended a title to make such'
alterations in the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of any country as
he should judge proper, and particularly to exempt bishops,
when he found it convenient, from the jurisdiction of the
archbishop, priors and abbots, from, that of the bishop. This
ECCLESiASTiCAL HISTORY. 281
privilege came at length to be so far extended, that almost all
the orders of regulars, and the universities, were taken, as it
was termed, under the pope's immediate care and protection,
that is, released from all subordination to the secular clergy,
in whose dioceses they were situated, or might happen to
reside.
For several ages after the church had been modelled on th<i
plan of the civil government under Constantine, it was con-
sidered as a thing totally inadmissible, that a presbyter should
withdraw his obedience from his bishop, a bishop from his
metropolitan, or a metropolitan from his exarch or patriarch^
where there was an ecclesiastick vested with that dignity.
Accordingly, in the oriental churches^ nothing of this sort
was ever attempted. And, indeed, if the aristocratical form:
then given to the church had continued unviolated also in the
west, such an attempt never had been made. But to say thie
truth, there was no possibility of supporting the monarchical
form now given to the occidental churches, without some
measure of this kind.
It is true, there had been established a subordination in all
the clerical orders, from the pope downwards to the most me-
nial officer in the church. The pope was the judge in the last
resort, and claimed the exclusive title to give confirmation and
investiture to all the dignitaries. Rome, by her exactions, as
well as by the frequent recourse to her from all parts, for dis-
pensations, and the like trumpery, as we should call them,
which had gradually obtained, and were then of the most seri*
ous consequence, had taken all imaginable care, that the seve*
ral churches might not forget their subjection and dependence.
Yet however sufficient this might have proved in a single king*
dom, or country, such as Italy, where the whole is more im-
mediately under the eye of the governours, who can quickly
giet notice of, and provide against a rising faction, before it
bring any purpose to maturity, it is far from being sufficient
in a wide-established empire. The primates, or archbishops,
and even some of the wealthiest bishops. Were like great feu*
datory lords. They owed a certain acknowledgment and duty
to their liege-lord the pope ; but the dependence of the infe-
riour clergy, the suffragans and priests, like that of the Vassals
upon the barons, was immediately or directly on the prelates,
and but indirectly and remotely upon the pope. As whilst the
feudal government subsisted, the greater barons, in most king-
doms, with their train of vassals and dependants, by whom
they were sure to be attended, found it an easy matter to rebel
against their sovereign, and often to compel him to accept
terms very humiliating to royalty, we may conclude^ that si
m2 LECTURES ON
subordination pretty similar in a sovereignty so much wider,
could not have subsisted so long without some additional and
powerful check. This was the more necessary in the present
case, because, if there had arisen any factions or discontents
among the more poctnt eccles:asticks against their spiritual
lord, the)- would, in most cases, h ve had the assistance of the
secular powers of the country, who in spite of thtir supersti-
tion and ignorance, could not brook the reflection, that they
were tributary to a foreign power, and a power which even
claimed a sort of superintendency, or what was equivalent to
superintendency, over their judicatures and senates. 1 he
different claims set up by Rome, under the name of annats,
tithes, peterspence, reservations, resignations, expectative
graces, beside the casualties arising from pilgrimages, jubilees,
indulgences, the dues of appeals, confirmations, dispensations,
investitures, and the like, were so many sorts of tribute ; nor
could any nation which paid them to another, be said to be in-
dependent of the nation to which they were paid, or to possess
sovereignty within itself. The right of appeals, not only in all
cases ecclesiastical, but in most cases wherein ecclesiasticks
were concerned, the many clerical privileges, of which Rome
pretended to be both the guardian and the judge, laid a re-
straint both on the judiciary powers, and on the legislative.
No wonder, then, that in the different states of Christendom,
there should subsist, in the civil powers, an inextinguishable
jealousy of Rome. As the pretensions of the latter were ex-
orbitant, it was necessary that her resources for supporting
her pretensions should be powerful.
Now the right of exemption I have been speaking of, prov-
ed exactly such a resource, being an effectual check on the se-
cular, or established clergy. Accordingly, when in the coun-
cil of Trent, an attempt was made by some bishops to have
this abuse, as they accounted it, totally removed, the pope's
legates, and all those who supported papal authority, saw but
too clearly that the scheme of those bishops, if they were grati-
fied in it, would undermine the hierarchy, and make, as they
expressed it, every bishop a pope in his own diocese ; for when
papal exemptions should be abrogated, every person would de-
pend on his bishop, and none immediately on the pope, the
consequence whereof would be, that people would soon cease
altogether to recur to Rome. And this consequence had,
doubtless, long ago taken place, had not the monastick orders
come very opportunelv, though, in some respect, accidentally,
to support a fabrick, become at length so unwieldy, as to ap-
pear in the most imminent danger of falling with its own
Weight. They proved as so many buttresses to it, which,
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 283
though originally no part of the building, added amazingly to
its strength.
As some of the largest and loftiesi trees spring from very
small seeds, so the most extensive and wonderful effects some-
times arise from very inconsiderable causes. Of the truth
of this remark, we have a striking example in the monasticfc
order, of the rise and progress of which I am now to speak.
In times of persecution in the church's infancy, whilst the hea-
then yet raged, and the rulers took council together against
the Lord, and against his anointed, many pious christians^
male and female, married and unmarried, justly accounting,
that no human ft:licity ought to come in competition with their
fidelity to Christ, and modestly distrustful of their ability to
persevere in resisting the temptations wherewith they were in-
cessantly harassed by their persecutors, took the resolution to
abandon their possessions and worldly prospects, and, whilst
the storm lasted, to retire to unfrequented places, far from
the haunts of men, the married with, or without their wives,
as they agreed between them, that they might enjoy in quiet-
ness their faith and hope, and without temptations to aposta-
cy, employ themselves principally in the worship and service
of their Maker. The cause was reasonable, and the motive
praise-worthy. But the reasonableness arose solely from the
circumstances. When the latter were changed, the former
vanished, and the motive could no longer be the same. When
there was not the same danger in society, there was not the
same occasion to seek security in solitude. Accordingly,
when the affairs of the church were put upon a different foot-
ing, and the profession of Christianity rendered perfectly safe,
xnahy returned without blame from their retirement, and lived
like other mefti. Some, indeed, familiarized by time to a so-
litary and* ascetick life, as it was called, at length preferred,
through habit, what they had originally adopted through ne-
cessity. They did not waste their time in idleness ; they sup-
ported themselves by their labour, and gave the surplus in
charity. These likewise, without blame, remained in their
retreat. But as it was purely to avoid temptation and danger
that men first took refuge in such recesses, thev never thought
of fettering themselves by vows and engagements, because,
by so doing, they must have exposed their souls to new temp-
tations, and involved them in more, and perhaps greater dan-
gers, a conduct very unlike that self-diffidence which certainly
gave rise to so extraordinary a measure. This, therefore,
was not monachism in the acceptation, which the word came
soon afterwards to receive, though, most probabl)', it sug-
384 LECTURES ON
gested the idea of it, and may justly be considered as the first
step towards it.
Such signal sacrifices have a lustre, which dazzles the eyes
of the weak, and powerfully engages their imitation. The
imitators, regardless of the circumstances which alone can
render the conduct laudable, are often, by a strange depravity
of understanding, led to consider it as the more meritorious,
the less it is reasonable, and the more eligible, the less it is
useful. Nay, the spirit of the thing comes to be reversed.
What at first, through humble diffidence, appeared necessary
for avoiding the most imminent perils, is, through presump-
tion, voluntarily adopted, though itself a source of perpetual
peril. This I call monachism^ according to the common accep-
tation of the term, of the progress of which I propose to give
some account in the sequel.
Monachism, one of the most natural shoots of superstition,
which, viewing the Deity as an object of terrour rather than of
love, regards it as the surest recommendation to his favour, that
men become both burdens to society, and torments to them-
selves, and which, in some shape or other, may be found in
all religious, was not, in its original state, even in the chris-
tian church, considered as clerical ; nor were the monks, as
monks, accounted ecclesiasticks of any order or denomination.
They were no other than people who had bound themselves by
a vow to renounce the world, to live in poverty and chastity,
to confine themselves in respect of meat, and drink, and ap-
parel, to what appeared merely necessary, and to devote their
time to prayer and penance, reserving a small portion for
works of industry. This way of life was, in its commence-
ment, open to the laity of all conditions, and even of both
sexes. But it was not open to the clergy, whose parochial
duties were incompatible with such a seclusion from society.
For it must be (ibserved, that they had not then, as after-
wards, any clergy merely nominal, or, to speak more proper-
ly, clergymen, who were no ministers of religion, having no
charge or office in the church of Christ.
This engagement, at first, led many unhappy fanaticks to
fly the world without necessity, to pass their lives in solitude,
in remote and desert places, whence they were called hermits^
from the Greek word t^^f*a(; signifying desert, and monks, from
noixxoi denoting a solitary, from|i*«v«5 alone. They were also
named anchorets, from eoctx.<i^pij]r,<i, a recluse. Every one of their
ancient names, or titles, bears some vestige of this most dis-
tinguishing trait in their character, their secession from the
world and society. They sheltered themselves accordingly in
some rude cell or cavern, and subsisted on herbs and roots.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 28S
the spontaneous productions of the soil, covering themselves
with the skins of beasts, for defending their bodies from the
inclemencies of the weather.
But things did not remain long in this state. Give but time
to fanaticism, and its fervours will subside. It was soon
found convenient to relax this severity, to fail on a method of
uniting society with retirement, property with indigence, and
abstinence with indulgence. They then formed communities
of men, who lived together in houses, called monasteries ;
where though the individuals could acquire no property for
themselves individually, there was no bounds to the acquisi-
tions which might be made by the community. The female
recluses also had their nunneries, and were named nuns. The
word we have borrowed from the French nonne ; its etymolo-
gy I know not. Thus people fell, at length, on the happy ex-
pedient of reconciling loud pretences to sanctity and devotion,
not only with laziness and spiritual pride, but with the most
unbounded and shameless avarice ; unbounded, because ap-
parently in behalf of a publick interest ; and shameless, be-
cause under the mask of religion. And if they excluded some
natural and innocent gratifications, the exclusion, as might be
expected, often served to give birth to unnatural lusts. Hard-
ly, one would think, can an imposition be too gross for de-
ceiving a gross and superstitious people. So much was the
world infatuated by the sanctimonious appearance of the rcr
cluses, (which consisted chiefly in some ridiculous singularity
of garb) that men thought they could not more effectually
purchase heaven to themselves, than by beggaring their off-
spring, and giving all they had to erect or endow monasteries/;
that is, to supply, with all the luxuries of life, those who
were bound to live in abstinence, and to enrich those who had
solemnly sworn, that they would be for ever poor, and who
professed to consider riches as the greatest impediment in the
road to heaven.
Large monasteries, both commodious and magnificent,
more resembling the palaces of princes than the rude cells
which the primitive monks chose for their abode, were erect-
ed and endowed. Legacies and bequests, from time to time,
flowed in upon them. Mistaken piety often contributed to the
evil ; but oftener superstitious profligacy. Oppression herself
commonly judged, that to drvote her wealth at last, when it
could be kept no longer, to a religious house, was a full atone-
ment for all the injustice and extortion by which it had been
amassed. Bu- what can set in a stronger light the pitiable
brutishness, to which the people were reduced by the reigning
superstition, when men of rank and eminence, who had
285 LECTURES ON
shown no partiality to any thing monastical, during their lives,
gave express orders, when in the immediate views of death,
that their friends should dress them out in monkish vestments,
that in ihese thev^ might die, and be buried, thinking, that the
sanctity of their garb would prove a protection against a con-
demnatory sentence of the omniscient judge. It is lamentable,
it is humiliating to think, that we have unquestionable evi-
dence, thac human nature can be sunk so low. The igno-
rance and superstition of the times, by degrees, appropriated
the term religious to those houses and their inhabitants.
I have often observed to you, how great an influence names
and phrases have on the opinions of the generality of mankind.
I should have remarked, that soon after things were put upon
this footing, it was, on many accounts, judged expedient, that
the religious should be in orders. For the absurdity of shep-
herds without a flock, pastors without a charge, was an absur-
dity no longer ; so much can men be familiarized by custom to
use words with any latitude, and even to assign a meaning to
them incompatible with their primitive use. Accordingly the
companions in the monastery had commonly what was called
priest's orders, and were termed Jriari.,fratres^ brethren ; the
head, or governour of the house, was denominated abbot, from
a Svriack word, signifying father. Sometimes he was only a
priest, and sometimes had episcopal ordination. Hence the
distinction between mitred abbots and unmitred. All these,
on account of the rules to which they were bound by oath, were
styled regular clergy, whereas those established as bishops and
priests over the dioceses and parishes, were called secular. I
know that some distinction is also made between monks and
friars. Suffice it to observe at present, that the rules of the
former are stricter than those of the latter.
When spacious monasteries were built, and supplied with A
numerous fraternity, governed by an abbot of eminence and
character, there often arose a jealousy between the abbot and
the bishop, in whose diocese the abbey was situated, and to
whom, as things stood at first, the abbot and the friars ovvetl
spiritual subjec tion. Out of their mutual jealousies sprang
umbrages, and these sometimes terminated in quarrels and in-
juries. In such cases, the abbots had the humiliating disad-
vantage, to be under the obligation of canonical obedience to
him, as the ordinary of the place, with whom they were at va-
riance.
That they might deliver themselves from these inconveni-
ences, real or pretended, and might be independent of their
rivals, they applied to Rome one after another, for a release
from this slavery, as they called it, by being taken under th«
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 28f
protection of St. Peter ; that is, under immediate subjection
to the pope. The proposal was, with avidity, accepted at
Home. That politick court saw immediately, that nothing
could be better calculated for supporting papal power. Who-
ever obtains privileges is obliged, in order to secure his pri-
vileges, to maintain the authority of the grantor-
Very quickly all the monasteries, great and small, abbeys,
priories, and nunneries, were exempted. The two last were
inferiour sorts of monasteries, and often subordinate to some
abbey. Even the chapters of cathedrals, consisting mostly of
regulars, on the like pretexts, obtained exemption. Finally,
whole orders, those called the congregations of Cluni and Cis-
tertio, Benedictines and others, were exempted. This effec-
tually procured a prodigious augmentation to the pontifical au-
thority, which now came to have a sort of disciplined troops m
every place, defended and protected by the papacy, who, in re-
turn, were its defenders and protectors, serving as spies on
the bishops as well as on the secular powers. Afterwards the
mendicant orders, or begging friars, though the refuse of the
whole, the tail of the beast, as Wickliff termed them, whereof
the Roman pontiff is the head, obtained still higher privileges,
for they were not only exempted every where from episcopal
authority, but had also a title to build churches wherever they
pleased, and to administer the sacraments in these indepen-
dently of the ordinary of the place. Nay, afterwards, in the
^t^imes immediately preceding the convention of the aforesaid
council, things had proceeded so far, that any private clerk
could, at a small expence, obtain an exemption from the super-
intendency of his bishop, not only in regard to correction, but
In relation to orders, which he might receive from whomsoever
he pleased, so as to have no connexion with the bishop of any
Icind.
jj. What had made matters still worse was, th*t the whole bu-
siness of teaching the christian people had, by this time, fallen
into the hands of the regulars. The secular clergy had long
since eased themselves of the burden. Preaching and reading
the sacred scriptures properly, made no part of the publick offi-
ces of religion. It is true, it was still the practice to read, or
rather chant, some passages from the gospels and epistles, in
an unknown tongue; for all in the western churches must
now, for the sake of uniformity, to which every thing was sa-
crificed, be in Latin. Now, for some centuries before the
council of Trent, Latin had not been the native language of
any country or city in the world, not even of Italy or of Rome.
That such lessons were not understood by the people, was
thought an objection of no consequence at all. They were not
288 LECTURES ON
the less fitted for making a part of the solemn, unmeaning mum-
mery, of the liturgick service. The bishops and priests ha-
ving long disused preaching, probably at first through laziness,
seem to have been considered at last as not entitled to preach ;
for, on the occasion above-mentioned, they very generally com-
plained, that the charge of teaching was taken out of their
hands, and devolved upon the friars, especially the mendicants,
who were a sort of itinerant preachers, licensed by the court of
Rome.
How the friars discharged this trust, we may learn from the
most authentick histories, which sufiiciently show, that the re-
|)resentations of the scope of their preaching, made by the
Bishops in that council, were not exaggerated, when they
said, that the end of their teaching was not to edify the people,
but to collect alms from them, either for themselves or for their
convents ; that in order to attain this purpose, they solely
considered not what was for the soul's health, but what would
please, and flatter, and sooth the appetites of the hearers, and
thereby bring most profit to themselves ; so that the people,
instead of learning the doctrine of Christ, are but amused,
said they, with mere novelties and vanities. But whatever be
in this account, the pope could not fail to draw an immense ad-
vantage from this circumstance, that the instruction of the peo-
ple was now almost entirely in the hands of his own creatures.
How great, then, must be the advantage of a similar but still
more important kind, resulting from the exemptions granted to
universities, who being taken, as it were, under his immediate
patronage, were engaged from interest to instil principles of
obedience to the pope into the minds of the youth, of whose
education they had the care.
Now if the chain of dependence of the secular clergy on
the head, be similar to that which subsists in a civil, particular-
ly a feudatory constitution, where the obligation of every infe-
riour through the whole subordination of vassallage is consi-
dered as being much stronger to the immediate superiour than
to the sovereign, the dependence of the regulars may justly be
represented by the military connexion which subsists with the
sovereign in a standing armv. There the tie of every soldier
and subaltern is much stronger to the king than to his captain
or his colonel. If, then, the secular clergy, in Romish coun-
tries, may be called the pope's civil officers, the regulars are
his guarde. This matter was too well understood by the friends
of Rome, who were the predominant party in the council of
Trent, ever to yield to anv alteration here that could be called
material. Some trifling changes, however, were made, in or-
der to conciliate those who were the keenest advocates for re-
feCCLl&SIASTlCAL HISTORY. 2fi&
forming the discipline of the church, or at least to silence their
clamours. The exemptions given to chapters were limited a
little. The bishops were made governours of the nunneries
within their bishopricks, not as bishops of the diocese, but as
the pope's delegates ; and friars, who resided in cloisters, and
were guilty of any scandalous excess without the precincts of
the cloister, if the supefiour of the convent, whether abbot or
prior, refused, when required, to chastise them within a limi-
ted time, might be punished by the bishop.
I have now traced the principal causes, which co-operat-
ed to the erection of the hierarch\ , and shall, in what remains
to be observed on the subject, in a few more lectures, consider
both the actual state of church power, and the different opinions
concerning it at the time of the council of Trent, which shall
terminate our inquiries into the rise and establishment of the
J^ierarchy-i
J90 L.ECTURES ON
LECTURE XX.
J, Have now, in a course of lectures, endeavoured, with all
possible brevity, to lay before you the principal arts, by which
the Roman hierarchy was raised, and have also pointed out
some of the most remarkable events and occurrences, which
facilitated the erection. It is chiefly the progress of ecclesi-
astical dominion, that I have traced. The papal usurpation
on the secular powers, though I have explained its source in
the erection of episcopal tribunals, and glanced occasionally at
its progress, I have, for several reasons, not so expressly ex-
amined. One is, it does not so immediately affect the subject
of the hierarchy, with which I considered myself as princ-pally
concerned. Another is, that the usurpation here is, if possi-
ble, still more glaring to every attentive reader of church his-
tory, and therefore stands less in need of being pointed out.
A third reason is, that though the claims of superiority over
the civil powers, formerly advanced by Rome with wonderful
success, have never been abandoned, but are, as it were, re-
served in petto for a proper occasion, yet, at present, the most
sublime of their pretensions are little minded, and are hardly,
as affairs now stand in Europe, capable of doing hurt. No-
thing can be better founded than the remark, that the thunders
of the Vatican will kindle no conflagration, except where
there are combustible materials. At present there is hardly a
country in Christendom so barbarously superstitious (I do not
except even Spain and Portugal) as to afford a sufficient quan-
tity of those materials for raising a combustion. We nevef
hear now of the excommunication and deposition of princes,
of kingdoms laid under an interdict, and of the erection and
the disposal of kingdoms by the pope. Such is the difference
of times, that these things, which were once the great engines
of raising papal dominion, would now serve only to render it
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 291
contemptible. The foundation of all is opinion, which is of
great ^nsequence in every polity, but is every thing in an
ecclesrastick polity. To the above reasons, I shail add a
fourth. It is only a part, and not the greater part neither, of
the Roman Catholicks, who acknowledge that the pope, as
pope, or bishop, has any kind of authority in secular matters
over the civil powers. They make but a party comparatively
small, who carry the rights of the papacy so far as to include
therein a paramount authority over all the powers of this
earth, spiritual and temporal. A gentleman of the house of
commons, in a celebrated speech on the affairs of America,
in the beginning of the American revolt, speaking of the re-
ligious profession of those colonies, denominated it the pro-
testantism of the protestant religion. In imitation of the
manner of this orator, I shall style the system of that high-
flying party in the church of Rome, the popery of the popish
religion. It is the very quintessence of papistry. Nay, we
have some foundation even from themselves for naming it
so; for those who hold it are, even among Roman Catholicks,
distinguished by the name pontificii^ or papists^ and mostly
consist of the people and clergy of Italy, the immediate de-
pendencies on the papal see, and the different orders of regu-
lars. It was in a particular manner the system strenuously
supported by the order of Jesuits now abolished. The doc-
trine of the more moderate Roman Catholicks, which is that
of almost all the laity, and the bulk of the secular clergy in all
European countries, except Italy and its islands, is unfavour-
able to those high pretensions of the Roman pontiff. But
even these are far from being entirely unanimously in regard to
the spiritual power and jurisdiction, which they ascribe to
him. The bounding line, which distinguishes the civil from
the ecclesiastick, is one of the arcana of that church's policy,
and therefore never to be precisely ascertained. I shall then,
in order to give you some idea ere I conclude, of the subli-
mity and plenitude of the ecclesiastick power, claimed in
behalf of his holiness over the ministers of the church, by the
advocates of that see, and to give you some notion of their
.manner of supporting those claims, exhibit to you the sub-
stance of a speech on episcopal jurisdiction, delivered in the
council of Trent, by father Lainez, general of the Jesuits,
translated from the Italian of Fra Paolo Sarpi. Afterwards
I shall take a little notice of the encroachments made on the
civil powers.
" Lainez," says that historian, " spoke more than two hours
, *' with great vehemence, in a distinct but magisterial tone.
^^ The argument of his discourse consisted of two parts. The
29a I.ECTURESON
** first was employed in proving, that the right of jurisdiction
** over Christ's kingdom here had been gi^ en entirely^ the
** Roman pontiff, and not a single particle of it to an^)th€r
"in the church. The second contained his answers to all
*' the arguments on the opposite side, adduced in former
<* meetings.
*' The substance was, that there is a great difference, nay,
** a contrariety between the church of Christ and civil com-
*' munities, inasmuch as these have an existence previous to
"the formation of their government, and are thereby free,
*' having in them originally, as in its fountain, all the jurisdic-
'> tion, which, without divesting themselves of it, they com*
*' municate to magistrates. But the church did neither make
" herself, nor form her own government. It was Christ the
" prince and monarch who first established the laws whereby
** she should be governed ; then assembled his people, and,
" as scripture expresses it, built the church. Thus she is
" born a slave, without any sort of liberty, power, or jurisdic-
*' tion, but every where, and in every thing, subjected. la
*' proof of this he quoted passages of scripture, wherein the
*^ gathering of the church is compared to the sowing of a
*' field, the drawing of a net to land, and the rearing of aa
" edifice ; adding, that Christ is said to have come into the
** world to assemble his faithful people, to gather his sheep^
•' to instruct them both by doctrine and by example. Then
*' he subjoined : the first and principal foundation whereon
*' Christ built the church, was Peter and his succession, ac.
" cording to the word which he said to him, Thou art PeteTy
*' and upon this rock I will build my church; which rock though
*' some of the fathers have understood, to he Christ himself,
<* and others the faith in him, or the confession of the faith,
" it is nevertheless a more catholick exposition to understand
*^ it of Peter himself, who, in ffebrew or Svriack, is called
" Cephas^ that is. Rock, tie affirmed, in like manner, that
*t whih" Christ lived in mortal flesh, he governed the church
" with despotick and monarchical government, and leaving this
** earth, he left the same form, constituting St~ Peter, and the
♦' successours of St. Peter, his vicars successively, to adml-
" nister it, as it had been exercised by him, giving them
«» r'en^r^' power and jurisdiction, and subjecting to them the
** church in the way wherein it is subjected to him. This he
** proved from what we are told of Peter, because to him alone
^' were given the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and by conse-
** q>;ence, power to admit and exclude, which is jurisdictic^n ;
*' and to him alone it was said, Feed, that is, rule my sheep j
^* silly aoimals, which have no part, no choice whatever in
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 293
^* conducting themselves. These two things, namely, to be
" porMtatand pastor, being perpetual offices, it was necessary
" thac^ey should be conferred on a perpetual person, that is,
" not on the first only, but on the v/hole succession. Hence the
" Roman pontiff, beginning from St. Peter to the end of the
" world, is true and absolute despot with plenary power and
"jurisdiction ; and the church is subject to him as it was to
*' Christ. And as when his divine majesty governed it, it
** could not be said, that any of the faithful had the smallest
♦' power or jurisdiction, all being in total subjection, the samC
" mav be said in all perpetuity. Thus we ought to under-
** stand these declarations, that the church is a sheepfold,
" that it is a kingdom, and what St. Cyprian says, that the
" episcopate is one, and that a part thereof is held by every
" bishop ; that is, that the whole undivided power is placed
" in one single pastor, who apportions and communicates it to
*' associates in the ministrv as exigencies require ; and that,
♦"^ in allusion to this St. Cyprian compares the apostolick see to
*' the root, the head, the fountain, the sun ; showing, by these
" comparisons, that the jurisdiction is essentially in her alone;
^ in others, only by derivation or participation. And this is
"the meaning of that most usual expression of antiquity, that
*' Peter and the pontiff possess the plenitude of power, others
*' do but participate in the cure. And that he is the sole shep-
*' herd, is demonstrated by the words of Christ, who said,
" that he had other sheep, which he would gather, that there
*' might be but one sheepfold, and one shepherd. The shep-
*' herd spoken of here cannot be Christ himself, because it
*' could not be said, in the future tense, that there shall be one
" shepherd, he being already the shepherd. It must, there-
** fore, be understood of another sole shepherd, to be consti-
*' tuted after him, who can be no other than Peter with his
" succession. He rem;irked here, that the precept to feed
" the fiock, occurs but twice in scripture, once in the singular
*^ number, when Christ said to Peter, Feed my sheep ; once in
" the plural, when Peter said to others. Feed the ^och a-i.signed
'"'• to you. Now if the bishops had received any jurisdiction
" from Christ, it would be equcd in them all, which would
*' destroy the difference betv/cen patriarch, archbishop, and
« bishop ; besides, the pope could not intermeddle with that
" authority, either by diminishing it, or b) removing it en-
*' tirely, as he cannot intermeddle with the power of orders
*' which is from God. Wherefore the greatest caution is
" necessary here, lest by making the institution of bishops de
''''.jure divino^ they should subvert the hierarchy, and introduce
" into the church an oligarchy, or rather an anarchy. He
^94 LECTURES OlSr
*' added, To the end that Peter might govern the church
*' well, so that the gates of hell should not prevail agaij|t her,
" Christ, a little before his death, prayed efficacious^ that
** his faith might not fail, and ordained him to confirm the
*' brethren ; in other words, he gave him the privilege of
*' infallibility, in judging of faith, manners, and the whole of
" rehgion, obliging all the church to obey him, and stand firm
" in whatsoever should be decreed by him. He concluded,
" that this is the true foundation of the christian doctrine,
" and the rock whereon the church is built. He proceeded
" to censure those who hold that bishops have received any
*' power from Christ, an opinion subversive of the privilege of
** the Roman church, whose pontiff is head of the church uni-
** versal, and the only vicar of Christ upon earth. It is very
" well known, that by the ancient canon, omnes sive patriarchce^
** &c. it is enacted, that whoever takes away the rights of other
"churches, commits injustice, but whoever takes away the
•' privileges of the Roman church, is a heretick. He added,
" that it is an absolute contradiction to maintain, that the pon-
*' tiff is head of the church, and its government is monarchi-
'* cal, and to affirm, that there is either power or authority in
*' it, which is received from others, and not derived from
" him.
*' In refuting the arguments, on the opposite side, he ad-
" vanced, that, according to the order instituted by Christ, the
** apostles must have been ordained bishops, not by Christ, but
*' by Peter, receiving jurisdiction from him alone ; an opi-
" nion, he said, extremely probable, and held by many catho-
♦' lick doctors. Others however, who maintain that the apos-
*' ties were ordained bishops by Christ, add that his divine ma-
" jesty , in so doing, exercised, by prevention, Peter's office, doing
*' for once what belonged to Peter to do, giving to the apostles
*' himself that power which they ought to have received from
" Peter, just as God took of the spirit of Moses, and imparted
" it to the seventy judges, so that it was as much as if they
*' had been ordained by Peter, and had received all authority
.*' from him ; and therefore they continued subject to Peter,
" in regard to the places and modes of exercising their autho-
" rity. And though we do not read that Peter corrected
*' them, it was not through defect of power, but because they
.*' exercised their office properly, and so did not need correction.
*' Whoever reads the celebrated canon, Ita Dominus^ will be
" assured, that every catholick ought to believe this ; and thus
" the bishops, who are successours of the apostles, receive the
" whole from the successour of Peter. He observed, also,
" that the bishops are not called successours of the apostles,
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 295
^ unless, as being in their places, in the way that a bishop suc-
" ceedllhis predecessors, and not as being ordained by them.
** He replied to what some had inferred, that the pope might
" then leave off making bishops, choosing to be the only bi-
" shop himself. He admitted that ordination is divine, that
** in the church there is a multitude of bishops, coadjutors of
*' the pontiff, and therefore that the pontiff is obliged to pre-
*' serve the order, but that there is a great difference between
*' saying that a thing is de jure divino^ and that it is appointed
" of God. Things instituted dejure divino^ are perpetual, and
" depend on God, alone, at every time, both universally and
** particularly. Thus baptism, and all the other sacrau.ents,
" wherein God operates singularly in each particular, are de
'•^ jure divino. Thus the Roman pontiff is of God. For when
^* one dies, the keys do not remain with the church, for they
"were not given to her. Bui when the new pope is created,
" God immediately gives them to him. But it happens other-
" wise in things barely of divine appointment ; inasmuch as
*' from God comes only the universal, whereas the particulars
*' are executed by men. Thus St. Paul says, that princes and
^' temporal powers are ordained of God ; that is, from him.
"alone comes the universal precept, that there should be
'♦ princes ; nevertheless, the particulars are made by civil laws.
'^ In the same manner bishops are ordained of God ; and St.
" Paul says they are placed by the Holy Ghost for the govern-
** ment of the church, but not de jure divino. The pope, how-
** ever, cannot abolish the universal precept for making bi-
*' shops in the church, because it is from God ; but each par-
** t.icular bishop, being only dejure canonico^ may, by pontifical
" authority, be removed. And to the objection made, that
*' the bishops would be delegates, and not ordinaries, he an-
*' swered : It behoveth us to distinguish jurisdiction into fun-
** damental and derived, and the derived into delegated and
" ordinary. In civil polities, the fundamental is in the prince,
'" the derived is in all the magistrates. And in these, ordina-^
*' ries are different from delegates, because they receive the
** authority diversly, though they all derive equally from the
•* same sovereignty ; but the difference consists in this, that
** the ordinaries are by perpetual laws, and with succession :
** the others have singular authority either personal or casual.
** The bishops, therefore, are ordinaries, being instituted, by
" pontifical laws, dignities of perpetual succession in the
^^ church. He added, that those passages, wherein Christ
" seems to give authority to the church, as that wherein he
" says, that it is the pillar and basis of the truth^ and that other,
^* Let him xvho tvill n9t hetur the church be to thee as a heathen mid
zm . LECTURES ON
*' a publican^ are all to be understood solely in respect of \H
*' head, which is the pope. For this reason the church is in^
*' fallible, because it ihas an infallible head. And thus he is
" separated from the church who is separated from the pope,
" its head. As to what had been urged, that the council could
" have no authority from Christ, if none of the bishops had
" any, he answered, that this was not to be regarded as an ob-
*' jection, bat as a certain truth, being a very clear and neces-
" sary consequence of the truly catholick doctrine he had
" demonstrated ; nay, added he, if each of the bishops in coun-
" cil be fallible, it cannot be denied, that all of them together*
" are fallible ; and if the authority of the council arose from the
" authority of the bishops, no council could ever be called ge-
*•'- neral, wherein the number of those present is incomparably
" less than the number of those that are absent. He mention-
" ed, that in that very council, under Paul the third, the most
" momentous articles concerning the canonical books, the au-
<* thority of translations, the equality of tradition to scripture,
*' had been decided by a number less than fifty : that if multi-
*' tude gave authority, these decisions had none at all. But
" as a number of prelates, convened by the pontiiF, for the pur-
'* pose of constituting a general council, however few, derives
*' not the name and efficacy of being general from any other
*' cause than the pope's designation, so likewise he is the sole
" source of its authority. Therefore, if it issue precepts, or
" anathemas, these have no effect, unless in virtue of the pon*
^* tiff's future confirmation. Nor can the council bind any by
<* its anathemas, further than they shall be enforced by the con-
** firmation. And when the synod says, that it is assembled
«' in the Holy Ghost, it means no more than that the fathers
" are assembled, by the pope's summons, to discuss matters,
" which, when approved by him, will be decreed by the Holy
" Ghost. Otherwise, how could it be said, that a decree is
*' made by the Holy Ghost, which may, by pontifical authority^
*' be invalidated, or has need of further confirmation : and
" therefore, in councils, however numerous, when the pope is
*' present, he alone decrees, nor does the council add any thing
*' but its approbation ; that is, it receives. Accordingly, the
" authentick phrase has always been, Sacro approbante concilio ;
*^ nay, in determinations of the greatest weight, as was the de-
*' position of the emperour Frederick the second, in the gene-
" ral council of Lvons, Innocent the fourth, a most wise pontiff,
♦^refused the approbation of the synod, lest any should ima-
**;gine it necessarv : he thought it enough to say, sacro presente
*' conciiw. Nor ought we .hc;nce to conrhide, that a coiincil i&
"superfluous. It is convened for the sake of stricter inquisi-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY.
•"^^ lion, easier persuasion, and for giving the members some
*' notion oi" the question. And when it judges, it acts by vir-
" tue of the pontifical authority, derived from the divine, given
*■'- it by the pope. For these reasons, the good doctors have
" subjected the authority of the council to the authority of the
*' pontiff, as totally dependent thereon. Without this, it has
" neither the assistance of the Holy Spirit, nor infallibility,
*' nor the power of binding the church. It has nothing but
" what is conceded to it by him alone, to whom Christ said,
*' Feed viy sheep.''''
Such was the famous discourse of Lainez, in which I must
own, we have much greater reason to admire Jesuitical im-
pudence than even Jesuitical sophistry. So many bold asser-
tions, some of which are flatly contradicted bj' sacred writ,
and others by the most unquestionable records of history,
required a man of no common spirit, or, as scripture strongly
expresses it, who had a brow of brass, to advance them. Is
it possible, that he himself was so ignorant as to believe what
he advanced ? Or could he presume so far upon the ignorance
of his audience, as to think of making them believe it ? Of
did he imagine that his hearers would be so overborne by his
eloquence, his assuming tone and dictatorial manner, as to be
thrown into a kind of stupor, and rendered incapable of dis-
covering the notorious falsehoods with which his oration was
stuffed ? Passing the contradictions to holy writ, a book with
which the divines of his clay were but beginning to be ac-
quainted, was it prudent to ascribe a power to the papacy tiot
only unheard of in former ages, but which popes themselves
had explicity disclaimed ? Nothing can be more express than
the words of Gregory, surnamed the great, who, though re-
markably tenacious of the honours of his see, says, in arguing
against the Constantinopolitan patriarch, for assuming the ti-
tle of universal bishop, " Si unus episcopus vocatur universa-
*'' Hs, universa ecclesia corruit, si unus universus cadet." If
one should fall, the universal church falls with him. Here,
taking it for self-evident, that all bishops, without exception,
are fallible, he infers the absurdity there is in any one calling
himself universal. Again, " Absit a cordibus christianorum
*' nomen istud blasphemise, in quo omnium sacerdotum honor
" adimitur, dum ab uno sibi dementer arrogatur ;" where he
no less plainly arraigns the impious usurpation of any one,
who, by claiming such a superiority, would strip all other
priests of their dignity, and madly arrogate the whole to
himself. Was it well-judged to misrepresent so common an
author as Cyprian in so flagrant a manner, and make him com-
pare the apostolicfc (that is^, in the Jesuit's dialect, the Roman)
298 LECTURES ON
see to the root, the head, the fountain, the sun, in a passage
where Cyprian mentions no see whatever, but speaks solely of
the necessity of union with the universal church ? Cyprian, in
wi'iting to popes, and of them, uniformly shows, that he
considered them as, in respect of their ministry, entirely on
a foot of equality with himself, denominating them brethren,
colleagues, and fellow-bishops. Whether he paid an implicit
deference to their judgment, let the dispute he had with pope
Stephen, about the rebaptization of those who had been bap-
tized by hereticks, testify. By this firmness, he incurred ex-
communication from the pope ; and, in this state, he died,
though now worshipped as a saint and a martyr by the very
church which excommunicated him.
But not to enter farther into particulars, was it judicious in
Lainez, to trust so much to the ignorance of the whole assem-
bly, as not only to quote such men as Cyprian, an eminent and
inflexible opposer of papal arrogance, but to talk of the
pope's power in convoking councils, and confirming their de-
crees, as what had always obtained in the church, and was es-
sential to the very being of a council, when every smatterer in
ecclesiastick history, and in ancient ecclesiastick writers,
must have known, that this practice was comparatively recent?
Passing the custom of the earlier, ages, when the imperial
authority was used, was it already quite forgotten, that in the
very preceding century, the council of Pisa was not convened
by any pontiff, and yet proceeded so far as to try and depose
two pretenders to the popedom, and elect a third in their
stead ? Or, had they now no knowledge of the council of
Constance, which was still later, and, in like manner, depos-
ed two claimants, one of them the pope, who had convoked
it, and, after accepting the resignation of a third, proceeded
to the election of a fourth ? Or coidd it be imagined, that the
whole audience was so stupid, as not to be sensible, that, if
those proceedings at Constance were null, there was no va-
cancy made by the deposition of John and Benedict, conse-
quently that the council's election of Martin, following there-
on, was null, consequently that Pius the fourth, the pope then
reigning, had no right, as he derived his title lineally from an
usurper, who, by creating cardinals whilst he himself was
destitute of authority, had perpetuated, in his succcssours,
the failure of his own title, and consequently, that there was
an irreparable breach made in the succession to the popedom?
Was it possible, that they should not perceive, that the sub-
versioxi of the authority of that council, an authority claimed
over popes, was the subversion of the title of Martin the fifth,
and that the subversion of the title of Martin the fifth, was
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 299
tlie subversion of the title of all succeeding popes to the end
of the world ?
How curiously does Lainez argue from the metaphor of
sheep^ that the christian people, indeed the whole church,
clergy as well as laity, (the pope, the one shepherd of the one
sheepfold, alone excepted) have no more judgment in directing
themselves than brute beasts. He does not, indeed, so cle-
verly account how that superiour sort of being, the pope, can
think of choosing any of these irrational animals, as partners
in the ministry with him, to assist in guiding and directing
their fellow-brutes. I admire the wonderful fetch by which
he makes Jesus Christ, when he commissioned the twelve apos-
tles, act in ordaining eleven of them, (though no distinction
is pointed out in the history) merely in the name of Peter,
and as Peter's substitute ; borrowing back, for this purpose,
part of the authority exclusively conferred on him. He is,
indeed, greatly at a loss (these deputy-apostles, or apostles
of the apostle Peter, unluckily behaved so propeily) to find an
instance of Peter's so much boasted authority in judging and
correcting them. But we are at no loss to find an instance
wherein, on Peter's behaving improperly, Paul not only op-
posed, but publickly and sharplv rebuked him. The passage
well deserves your notice. You will find it in the epistle to
the Galatians, ii, 11, &c. When Peter was come to Antloch^
says Paul, I -withstood him to the face^ because he was to be
blamed : for before that certain came from fames^ he did eat
•with the Gentiles^ but when they were come^ he withdrew, and
separated himself^ fearing them which wiere of the circumcision.
And the other Jews dissembled likewise zvith hiyn^ insomuch^ that
Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. But
when I saw that they "walked not uprightly^ according to the
truth of the gospel.^ I said to Peter ^ before them all^ If thou be-
ing a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles^ and not as do
the jfews^ why compellest thou the Gefitiles to live as do the
Jews ? Was this a treatment from a mere delegate to his
principal, nay more, from one of the sheep, those stupid i ir-
rational animals, to his shepherd, (for mark, that according
to Lainez, Peter was the sole shepherd, they all, in respect of
him, were sheep) from a fallible member of the church to
Christ's only vicar, to the infallible head and pcistor ? Whiit
matter of triumph would there have been here to the Ro-
manist, if the case had been reversed, and Peter had, in a man-
ner, to appearance, so authoritative judged and rebulced
Paul? Our ears would have been stunned with the repetition
of a demonstration, so irrefragable, of the supremacy of Pe-
ter, and consequently of Rome. Yet there would have been
no real ground of triumph had it been so. If any regard is
300 LECTURES ON
to be had to the accounts pf insplratton, it is manifest, that
none of them, though apostles, were infallible ; and that as
the) were all, by their vocation, brethren and equals, and ex-
pressly called so by their master, in a passage wherein he pro-
hibits their either giving or assuming a superiority one over
another, it was their duty to correct one another in love, and
not permit a brother unadmonished to persist in any practice
truly blame-worthy. Passing, however, the article of correc-
tion, of which it appears, that Peter, the only infallible apostle,
was the only person of the society that ever stood in need ;
what evidence have we, of any authority, in other respects,
exercised by Peter over the sacred college ? Does he ever call
them together, to assign them their several charges, and give
them instructions in relation to the duties of their oflict ? or.
Do they ever have recourse to him for tiie proper information
in regard to these ? Not a vestige, to this purpose, do we find
in the acts of the apostles, where, if there had been such a
thing, it couid hardly have been omitted ; nor is there the
least suggestion, that points this way, in any of the epistles.
Nay, not one of the apostles do we find sent on any missioo
whatsoever by him. We have, indeed, as I had occasion to
remark in a former discourse, a notable instance, in which Pe-^
ter and John were sent on a mission by the other apostles, who
were at Jerusalem at the time, but not a single example of an
apostle, who received either direction or orders of any kind
from Peter.
But it would be trifling to enter more into particulars. Who
sees not that, by this Jesuit's way of commenting, not orJy
there is no evidence, that any powers were conferred on the
other apostles, or on the church, but it would have been im-
possible for the inspired writers themselves to give us evidence
that there were ? For, however clear and decisive their ex-
pressions might have been, this brief reply would have cut
them down at once : " All such passages are to be understood
" solely in respect of the church's ht-ad, which is the pope "
Suffice it then to say of the whole piece, as we may say with the
greatest justice, that it is a mass of falsehoods and chiccsnery.
Some things are affirmed in opposition to the fullest evidence,
many things are assumed without any evidence, and nothing is
proved.
But it is of some consequence to consider the reception it
met with in the council, as this consideration will serve to
show the different sentiments whirh prevailed at that time
among Roman catholicks, in relation to hierarchy, and eccle-
siastical dominion. This, together with s< me remarks on the
present state of the papacy, shall be reserved for the subject, of
another lecture.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. SOI
LECTURE XXI.
XN my last lecture, in order to give you some idea of the sub-
limity and plenitude of the spiritual power and prerogatives,
claimed in behalf of his holiness, by the partisans of th^ see of
Rome, and, at the same time, to give you some taste of their
manner of supporting their claims from scripture and antiquity,
I exhibited to you the substance of a speech on episcopal ju-
risdiction, delivered by the jesnit Lainez in the council of
Trent. I made also a few strictures on his mode of probatioB.
But as it is of more consequence, for understanding the pre-
sent state of parties and opinions in the Romish church, to
know the reception which the Jesuit's sentiments met with in
the council, I reserved this for a principal part of the subject
of my present lecture. I shall therefore begin with it.
" Of all the orations that had yet been delivered in the coua-
" cil, there was not one, says our historian, more commended,
" and more blamed, according to the different dispositions of the
••* hearers, than was this of Lainez. By the pontificii, or pa-
'* pists, (so do even Roman catholicks term the minions of
" Rome, and sticklers for every claim made by the papacy) it
" was cried up as most learned, bold, and well-founded ; by
*' others it was condemned as adulatory, and by some even as
" heretical. Many showed that they were offended by the as-
" perity of his censures, and were determined, in the following
" congregations," (so the meetings holden for deliberation and
debate were named) " to attack his speech on every occa-
*' sion, and point out the ignorance and temerity which it be-
" trayed.
" The bishop of Paris having, when he should have given
'' his sentiments, been confined by sickness, said to every body
*' who came to see him, that when there should be a congrc
** gation that he could attend, he would deliver his opinion
302 LECTURES ONT
" against that doctrine without reserve, a doctrine which, un-
" heard of in former ages, had been invented about fifty years
** before by Gaetan, in hope of being made a cardinal, and had
" been censured, on its first publication, by the theological col-
*' lege in Paris, called the Sorbon, a doctrine which, instead
*' of representing the church as the heavenly kingdom, agree-
** ably to the denomination given her in scripture, exhibits her
*' as not a spiritual kingdom, but a temporal tyranny, taking
*' from her the title of the chaste spouse of Christ, and making
^' her the slave and prostitute of one man."
It was not difiicult to discover what man he alluded to. In-
deed, methinks, this Parisian theologist was not far from the
opinion of those protestants, who interpret the whore of Ba-
bylon, in the Apocalypse, to be the church of Rome. He
plainlv acknowledges, that the accounts given of this church
by the pope's partisans, are exactly descriptive of such a cha-
racter. And may we not justly say, that a church, which
could tamely bear such treatment from Lainez, or any of the
creatures of papal despotism^ deserved to be branded with the
disgraceful appellation ? Or may we not rather say, that her
bearing it in the manner she did, was a demonstrative proof,
that the representation, given of her state at that time, was
just ? It may, indeed, excite some wonder, that the above-
named Jesuit should have chosen to adopt a style on this sub-
ject, so directly contradictory to the style of holy writ. Our
Lord promises freedom to his disciples. *' You shall know the
" truth, and the truth shall make you free." By convincing
your judgment, it shall powerfully operate upon 5'our will, and
make your duty to become your choice. Herein lies the most
perfect freedom. " Again, " If the Son make you free, you
*' shall be free indeed." The service of his disciples is not
like that of a slave by constraint, arising solely from fear, it is
entirely voluntary, proceeding from the noblest of motives,
love. He therefore calls them not servants, so much as friends,
and treats them as such, communicating his purposes to them,
and engaging them, not by coercive methods, but by persua-
sion. His law is, for this reason, styled a law of liberty : and
those who receive it are required to act as fret., yet not u&ing
their liberty for a cloak of maliciousness., but as the willing ser-
vants of God. Not the most distant hint has he any where gi-
ven of his people's slavery. But Lainez tells you, judging of
the conduct of Christ from that of Rome, the very worst mo-
del he could have taken, that Jesus Christ has made his church
(that is, the whole community of his disciples) a mere slave,
that has not any sort of liberty, but is ever^'^ where, and in every
thing, subjected to the dominion of an absolute despot. So
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 303
diflferent is the language of this son of Loyola from that of the
Son of God. Yet not more different than is the spirit of the
different religious institutions which they teach.
But to return to the bishop's remarks, " Lainez," said he,
" maintains, that there is only one bishop instituted by Christ,
** and that the other bishops have no power unless dependently
" on him. I'his is as much as to say, that one only is bishop,
*' the rest are but his vicars, removable at his pleasure. For
" his own part, he acknowledged, he wished to rouse the whole
*' council, to consider how the episcopal authority, so much
" depressed, could be preserved from annihilation, since every
" new congregation of regulars, which springs up, gives it a
" violent shock. The bishops had maintained their authority
*' entire till the year 1050." With this good prelate's leave,
their authority was, by the gradual encroachments of Rome,
long before that period greatly reduced. Her supreme juris-
diction, both as lawgiver, and as judge, were, ere then, pretty
firmly established. Her orders and canons were generally,
throughout the western churches, promulged and obeyed ;
recourse was had to her for dispensations, for confirmation,
and collation, in ecclesiastick offices, and for judgment by ap-
peals. But these usurpations were, long before the time of this
council, acquiesced in as rights. An acquiescence, thus far,
may be considered as at least virtually comprehended in the
solemn oath of fidelity, subjection, and obedience, to the pope,
exacted of, and given by, prelates immediately before their
consecration. In regard to these, therefore, however objec-
tionable, they had precluded themselves, and could not decent-
ly object to them. Whereas, those claims, to which the Pa-
risian alluded, being more recent, though they had surmounted
the force of opposition, had not yet survived the murmurs and
discontents which the introduction of them had created.
I resume the prelate's account of the matter : " It was then
" in 1050, that the Cluniack and Cistertian congregations, and
" others, which arose in that century, gave a signal blow to
" the episcopal order : many functions, proper and essential to
" bishops, being, by their means, devolved upon Rome. But
" after the year 1200, when the mendicants arose, almost the
*' whole exercise of episcopal authority has been taken away,
*' and given to them by privilege. At length, this new congre-
" gation, (the Jesuits) a society of yesterday, which is scarcely
" either secular or regular, as the university of Paris, eight
" years ago, knowing it to be dangerous in matters of faith,
" pernicious to the peace of the church, and destructive of mo-
" nachism, has well observed, (this congregation, I say) that it
'' might ouido its predecessors, has attempted to subvert en-
304 LECTURES ON
♦'tirely episcopal jurisdiction, denying it to be from God, and
" wanting it to be acknowledged as from men, and therefore
" precarious and mutable.
" These things," says the historian, " repeated by the bishop
*' to different persons, as occasion offered, moved many others
**^ to reflect, who had at first given little attention to the subject.
*' But among those who had any knov/ledge of history, not a
** little was spoken concerning that observation, saxiro prxsente
*' concUio^ which appeared in all the canonical codes, but not
*^ having been attended to, seemed new to every body. Some
** approved the Jesuit's interpretation, some interpreted it in a
^* sense quite contrary, that the council had refused to approve
** that sentence : others, taking another route, argued, that as
** the matter treated on that occasion was temporal, and the
'* contentions were worldly, one could not infer from its pro-
" cedure, in that instance, that the same thing ought to be done
*•• in treating matters of faith, and ecclesiastical rites ; especi-
*' ally, when it is considered, that in the first council of the
*^ apostles at Jerusalem, which ought to be our rule and exam-
" plar, the decree was not made by Peter, either in presence of
" the council, or with its approbation, but was entitled the epis-
** tie, with the addition of the names of three degrees assem-
*' bled in that congregation, apostles, elders, and brethren ; and
** Peter unnamed was, without prerogative or distinction, in-
*^ eluded in the first degree, apostles ; an example which, in
•* respect of antiquity and divine authority, ought to discredit
" all the examples, on the opposite side, that can be deduced
^ from subsequent times.'*
I have observed how degrading and dishonourable, accord-
ing to the bishop, the picture was which Lainez had drawn of
the church of Christ, and taken notice of the strong resem-
blance, though perfectly unintended, which from the Parisian's
comment, appears, in the Jesuit's sentiments, to what was
then affirmed by their adversaries, the protestants, in regard
to the church of Rome. It may not be improper to observe
here, that even an avowed coincidence with these, if we may
judge from the language they used, was at that time not un-
frequent in some of those who, though greatly dissatisfied,
never chose to separate from the Romish communion. It
mav not be improper to give one specimen of the complaints
then so common, in order to show how great the dissatisfaction
was at the torrent of corruption which universally prevailed,
and to suggest what was the general opinion in regard to the
fountain whence the prevalent corruption flowed. Among
many instances, that might be given, i shall select one oi a
very publick nature, the s^jeech pronounced by the French
IKCCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. mi
ambassadour Ferrier, when he produced his credentials in the
above-named council. Let it be remarked, that France was
then involved in a civil war between the Roman catholicks and
the Hugonots, the name then given to the reformed in that
country by their enemies. After a preamble, in which he ex-
patiates ori the pious intentions of the king, his master, his
great merits in respect of the zeal he had shown for the ca-
tholick church, and even for the dignity and authority of the
sovereign pontiff; he, on the matter, acknowledges, that it is
this zeal alone which occasioned all the intestine broils where-
with his reign was at that time disturbed > for that if he had
no further aim, than securing due obedience to his own civil
authority, and maintaining the peace of the kingdom, every
thing might be settled to his satisfaction in three days. In
this his excellency gave a more honourable testimony to the
dispositions of the protestants, in his country, than probably he
had intended. At least, he showed that the aggression and
persecution were entirely on the other side, and that the pro-
testants, whether right or wrong in resisting, acted merely on
the defensive. When coming towards a conclusion, after
many free and spirited things, he adds, " The most christian
' king demands of this council nothing but what all the chris-
' tian world demands, what the great Constantino demanded
* of the fathers of the Nicene council. His Majesty's re-
' quests are all comprehended in the sacred scriptures, the
' ancient councils of the catholick church, the old constitu-
' tions, decrees, and canons, of the pontiffs and fathers. He
' demands of those whom Christ hath constituted judges, the
* entire restoration of the catholick church, not by a decree
' in loose and general terms, but according to the forni of the
' express words of that perpetual and divine edict, against
which usurpation or prescription can have no place ; so that
those good ordinances, which the devil has violently robbed
us of, and long concealed, may at length return, as from
captivity, into the holy city of God, and the light of men."
He adduced the example of Darius, who quieted the tumults
of Judea, not by arms, but by executing the ancient edict of
Cyrus. That of Josiah also, who reformed religion by caus-
ing the book of the law, which had been hidden through the
malice of men, to be read to the people, and observed by them*
Then, continues the historian, he made use of a very cutting
expression : " If the fathers," said he, " should ask, why
*' France is not in peace, no other answer can be given, than
*' that which Jehu gave to Joram, What peace can there be so
■••' long as " Here he stopped, and after pausing a lit-
tle, added, " You know the rest." The story referred to we*.
306 LECTURES ON
have in the ninth chapter of the second book of Kings. The
words to which he pointed so distinctly that they could not be
mistaken, but which he judged it convenient to suppress, we
have in the twenty-second verse, where we are told, that when
Jehu was asked by Joram, whether there was peace, he an-
swered, What peace, so long ae the whoredoms of thy mother
Jezebel, and her witchcrafts, are so many ? It was impossible,
considering when, where, and to whom, the ambassadour was
directing his discourse, to entertain a doubt concerning his
meaning. The respectable appellation of mother had been
given to the church time immemorial, individual christians
were denominated her children. In regard to particular
churches, they had been for ages, in the west, considered as
the daughters of Rome. The Roman church was their com-
mon mother, so that this gentleman, addressing himself to the
Tridentine fathers, who represented their respective churches
in the council, and in the midst of whom the pope's legates sat
as presidents, had the boldness to call the church of the
haughty and imperious Rome, not in so many words, but as
intelligibly and manifestly a harlot, a sorceress, a Jezebel, the
source of all their calamities. Indeed, the happy aposiopesis
he employed, rendered the invective more energetical, and the
intended application more unquestionable, than if he had spo-
ken out. If he had spoken out, there would have been still
room for suspicion, that (however unlikely) he must have had
some other meaning to the words, else he could not, to their
faces, have employed terms so opprobrious. The method he
took, at the same time that it left no doubt as to the expression
to be supplied, betrayed a consciousness, that he considered it
both as incapable of any other application, and as too gross for
utterance. Would not one be tempted to think, that either the
French monarch had mistaken the principles of the servant he
employed on this occasion, or that the latter had mistaken to-
tally the intent of his embassy, and was actually pleading the
cause of the protestants before the council, and not that of his
master, who was endeavouring, by all possible means, to exter-
minate them ? He concluded with declaring, that if the refor-
mation he proposed was not quickly and seriously applied to,
all the assistance of the king of Spain, (by arms doubtless he
meant) of the pope, and of the other princes, would be to no
purpose, and that the blood of those who should perish, though
deservedly, on account of their own sins, would be required at
the hands of the fathers then assembled. This discourse, as
may well be imagined, excited very great indignation ; but
matters were then so critically circumstanced, and the fear of
offending the king of France, and perhaps provoking him to
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 307
adopt less sanguinary measures with his revolted subjects,
made even the keenest advocates for the papacy to stifle their
resentments, and take no notice of the offensive expressions.
Having exhibited to you the state of the papal claims of
jurisdiction over the clergy, at that most memorable era, the
reformation in the sixteenth century, I shall now attempt to
convey some idea of the claims then advanced in behalf of the
clergy, in the first instance, and ultimately of the pope, in
whom they all terminated, over the laity, especially over the
secular powers. P'or this purpose, I shall here lay before you
the scheme prepared in the same convention, for the reforma-
tion of princes and civil magistrates, which, though in the
situation of things at that time, and on account of the strenu-
ous opposition from the temporal powers, it was not found
convenient to push, yet has never been departed from, nor
abandoned, by those of that establishment ; on the contrary,
the several articles have, for ages, afTorded matter of con-
tention and struggles in all nations of Christendom. Much
has been attained, and hardly has a proper opportunity been
omitted of asserting even the most extravagant of them. The
bill prepared for this purpose, contained a preamble, thirteen
decrees, and a conclusion. It was in substance as follows :— -
The council, beside the statutes enacted for reforming per-
sons ecclesiastical, have judged it their duty to reform also
secular persons of those abuses, which have been introduced
against the immunities of the church, confident that princes
will acquiesce, and cause due obedience to be rendered to the
clergy. To this end they are admonished, before other things,
to oblige their magistrates, delegates, and other temporal lords,
to render their pastors that obedience, which those princes
themselves are bound to perform to the sovereign pontiff; and
for this purpose anew enforces whatever has been decreed by
the sacred canons, and the imperial laws in favour of ecclesias-
tical immunities, which ought to be observed by all under pain
of anathema. The principal decrees are the following : that
persons ecclesiastical, even though their clerical title should
be doubtful, and though they themselves should consent, can-
not, under any pretext, even that of publick utility, be judged
in a secular judicatoiy. Even in cases of notorious assassina-
tion, or other excepted cases, their prosecution must be pre-
ceded by a declaration of the bishop of the diocese. That in
causes spiritual, matrimonial, those of heresy, tithes, &c. civil,
criminal, mixed, belonging to the ecclesiastical court, as well
over persons as over goods, tenths, &c. pertaining to the church,
the temporal judge cannot intermeddle, notwithstanding any
appeal, &c. j and those who, in such causes, shall, recur to the,
M^ LECTURES ON
secular power, shall be excommunicated, arid deprived of the
rights contended for. Secular men cannot constitute judges
. in causes ecclesiastical, and clergymen, who shall accept such
offices from laymen, shall be suspended from orders, deprived
of benefices and incapacitated. The secular cannot comman4
the ecclesiastical judge not to excommunicate without licence,
or to revoke, or suspend, an excommunication fulminated.
No king or emperour can make edicts, relating to causes or
persons ecclesiastical, or intermeddle with their jurisdiction,
or even with the inquisition, but are obliged to lend their arra,
to the ecclesiastical judges when called on. Rulers may not',
put their hand to the fruits of vacant benefices, under pre--,!
tence of custody, protection, Stc. ; secular persons, who shall
accept such offices, shall be excommunicated, and clergymen
suspended and deprived. Ecclesiasticks shall not be con-
strained to pay taxes, excise, &c. not even under the name of
free gifts, or loans, either for patrimonial goods, or the goods
of the church. The letters, sentences, and citations, of the
ecclesiastick judges, especially of the court of Rome, shall,'
immediately on being exhibited, be, without exception, inti-
mated and executed, &c. If there be any doubt that the letters
are forged, or that tumults will arise, the bishop, as apostolick
delegate, may order the needful precautions. Princes and
magistrates shall not quarter their officers, &c. on the houses,
or monasteries of ecclesiasticks, nor draw thence aught for
victuals, or passage money. There were several other articles
of the saxne stamp, which it is not necessary to enumerate.
The above will sufficiently serve for a specimen.
By way of conclusion, there was an admonition to all
princes, to have in veneration the things which are of eccle-
siastical right, as pertaining to God, and not to allow others
herein to offend, renewing all the constitutions of sovereign
pontiffs, and sacred canons in favour of ecclesiastical immu-
nities ; commanding, under pain of anathema, that, neither
directly nor indirectly, under any pretence, aught be enacted
or executed against ecclesiastical persons, or goods, or against
their liberty ; any privilege or immemorial exemption to the
contrary notwithstanding.
Such was the famous bill of rights, (if I may so express
myself) of the clergy of Christendom in the sixteenth century,
on which I shall beg leave to make a few remarks. In the
first place, it is evident, that these articles imply a total inde-
pendence of the ecclesiastick on the secular powers, inasmuch
as the latter could, on this plan, use no coercive measures,
either for preventing the commission of crimes by the former,
or for punishing them when committed, could not, even for
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 309
the eviction of civil debts, or discharge of lawful obligations,
affect the clergy either in person, or in property, moveable or
immovable, could exact from them no aid for the exigencies
of the state, however urgent. Now allowing that the inde-
pendence were equal on both sides, it might admit a question,
whether it be possible that two such independent states,
whereof the subjects of each live together as members of the
same community, and are blended in all the ordinary duties
and concerns of life, could subsist any time on that footing.
I observe, secondly, that the independence was solely on the
side of the clergy. The laity could not, by their civil sanc-
tions, affect the clergy without their own concurrence ; but
the clergy, both by their civil and by their religious sanctions,
could affect the laity, and, in spite of their opposition, whilst
the people had any religion, bring the most ol)stinate to their
terms. The civil judge could not compel a clergyman to
appear before his tribunal, the ecclesiastick judge could com-
pel a layman, and did, daily, compel such to appear before
him. And in all the interferings and disputes between indi-
viduals of the different orders, the clerical only could decide.
The ecclesiastick powers could command the aid of the secu-
lar, the secular could not that of the ecclesiastical. I obsei've,
thirdly, that though the kinds of power, in the different orders,
were commonly distinguished into spiritual and temporal, the
much greater part of the power of ecclesiasticks was strictly
temporal. Matters spiritual are those only of faith and man-
ners, and the latter only as manners, that is, as influencing
opinion, wounding charity, or raising scandal. Whereas,
under the general term spiritual^ they had got included the
more important part of civil matters also, affairs matrimonial
and testamentary, questions of legitimacy and succession,
covenants and conventions, and wherever the interposition of
an oath was customary. Add to these, that they were the
sole arbiters of the rights avowedly civil of the church and
churchmen, and in every thing wherein these had, in common
with laymen, any share or concern. Though these privileges
{weakly called immunities, since they imply dominion) had,
for centuries, been claimed by the clerical order, many of
them in most countries actually obtained, and the rest made
.matter of incessant broils and contentions j yet all of them
were never any where acquiesced in by the secular powers.
Had they, indeed, admitted them in their full extent, the
abolition of the secular authority would have quickly ensued ;
the priesthood would have engrossed every thing. Christen-
dom would have then become in a sense very different from
that of the apostle, a royal priesthood^ or, as some like to ren-
310 LECTURES ON
der his words, a kingdom of priests. In scripture the church
is so denominated in the same sense, wherein it is said of all
christians witliout exception; that they, are made kings and
priests to God ; because all have free access to him through
the blood of his Son ; not because our instructors in holy-
things, men specially called to be ensamples to the flock, in
faith and patience, in resignation and humility, were consti-
tuted lords with plenary power, both temporal and spiritual,
over God's heritage. I observe, in the last place, that an
ordinary reader, who has not entered thoroughly into the
spirit of those times, cannot fail to be exceedingly surprised,
(as I acknowledge I was myself) on the first perusal of the
aforesaid overtures. They are ushered in as pious resolutions
to be adopted by the council, for the reformation of princes
and secular persons. One is naturally led to expect, that in
such a writing, calculated purely to reform the great, their
faults will, with christian freedom, but in the spirit of meek-
ness, be animadverted on ; that one shall find a just censure
on the pride, the luxury, the impiety, the extortion, the envy,
the revenge, and the other vices which so often abound among
those in high rank and authority; or that one shall see branded
with proper severity, that unchristian ambition, which leads
sovereigns so often, though fellow-christians in profession, to
make war on one another, on the most trivial pretences, to
the destruction of one moiety of their subjects, the oppression
of the other, and dishonour of the christian name. But not a
syllable of these. Was there nothing of this kind, then, among
the powers of Europe ? Never, perhaps, was there more.
Yet this venerable body seemed to think, that there was
nothing in their earthly potentates which would need correc-
tion, were they sufficiently submissive to their ghostly fathers,
the bishops and the priests, that is, in effect, would they but
resign to them their whole authority, and consent to become
their humble slaves, a virtue, it seems, more successful, in
the eyes of their reverences, than charity itself in covering
sins.
In the same spirit, the seventeenth canon of general refor-
mation, passed in the last session of that council, has these
words : " Against those bishops, who in church, or out of it,
" behave themselves meanly towards the ministers of kings,
" persons of quality, and barons, and with too much indignity,
" not only give place to them, but do them personal service,
" the synod, detesting this conduct, and renewing the canons
" concerning the decorum of episcopal dignity, commands
" bishops to beware of such practices, and every where to
" challenge due respect to their degree., remembering they-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 311
** are pastors ; and also commands princes and all others to
** bear them the honour and reverence due to fathers." How
high their claims went, we learn from a canon of the council
of Troyes, in the ninth century, which orders, that no man
shall presume to sit in the presence of a bishop, unless he
command it. We know who they were in ancient times that
sought honour one of another, who affected the principal seats
in the synagogues, and the uppermost rooms at feasts, who
loved greetings in the markets, and to be called of men.
Rabbi, Rabbi. We know also who it was that expressly pro-
hibited, amongst his disciples, such unbecoming emulation and
worldly vanity, who enjoined them not to seek honour from
men, or to contend who, in the judgment of men, should be
greatest, but to seek that honour only which cometh from
God ; we know also who it was that made usefulness the
standard of greatness, and pronounced him to be possessed of
the highest dignity, who is most humble and most service-
able ; who, instead of courting, is solicitous to avoid such
enviable distinctions. On which of these models the con-
vention at Trent, and other preceding councils, were formed,
I shall leave to the candid and impartial to determine. I
shall conclude this lecture with a story, homely indeed, but
apposite: An English country parson was bragging, in a large
company, of the success he had had in reforming his pari-
shioners, on whom his labours, he said, had produced a won-
derful change to the better. Being asked in what respect, he
replied, that when he came first among them, they were a set
of unmannerly clowns, who paid him no more deference than
they did to one another, did not so much as pull off their hat
when they spoke to him, but bawled out as roughly and
familiarly as though he were their equal ; whereas now, they
never presumed to address him but cap in hand, and, in a
submissive voice, made him their best bow, when they were
at ten yards distance, and st\ led him your reverence^ at every
word. A Quaker, who had heard the whole patiently, made
answer: *' And so, friend, the upshot of this reformation, of
" which thou hast so much carnal glorying, is, that thou hast
** taught thy people to worship thyself." So much for clerical
and papal claims. But, in order to know more exactly the
state of those times, we must be acquainted with the senti-
ments of both sides on every principal question. I shall,
therefore, in my next lecture, take notice of the reception,
which those articles of reformation I have read to you» met
with from the secular powers.
312 LECTURES ON
LECTURE XXIL
XN my two last prelections, I laid before you, in their utmost
extent, the papal claims of jurisdiction over the clergy, and the
clerical claims not only of independence, but of authority over
the secular powers. I promised to take notice, in the present
lecture, of the reception which the last mentioned claims over
the secular powers met with from those against whom they
were aimed.
Copies of those articles, for the reformation of princes and
magistrates, having been sent Iiy the ambassadours to their re-
spective courts, they were instructed to give them all the oppo-
sition in their power. In this resolution, none were more de-
termined than the emperour, and the king of France. The
former wrote to cardinal Moron, that neither as emperour,
nor as archduke, would he ever consent, that they should
speak in council of reforming the jurisdiction of princes, or
of divesting them of their right to draw contributions from
jithe clergy ; that he considered all their past evils as having
sprung from the oppressions attempted by ecclesiasticks, both
on the people and on the princes. The French anibassadours
prepared a protestation, which they were commanded to make,
if there should be occasion for it.
In one of their meetings called congregations, one of the
fathers, in a long speech, advanced, that the cause of all their
corruptions proceeded from the princes, who, of all men, had
the greatest need of reformation ; adding, that the heads of a
scheme for this purpose were already digested, meaning that
which I gave you in a preceding lecture, and that it was now
'time to propose them, and not suffer so important a design to
come to nothing through their dilatoriness. As here the rights
^ of sovereigns were touched, the ambassadour Ferrier, of whose
Vehemence, as well as freedom in speaking I have already
given you a specimen, interposed, and, in a ver)^ resolute tone,
supported the rights of the secular powers in general, and of
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 31^
his master the king of France in particular. Though he was
by no means destitute of eloquence, his eloquence was not al-
ways adapted to time and place.
The liberty of expression, in which he indulged himself,
was too great for the prejudices of the age in which he lived ;
and the reflections which he threw out were too galling, to be
t)orne by men of so much importance as those reverend fa-
thers, who looked on themselves as the only rightful legislators
of the universe, and whose authority they deemed it treason,
or what was still worse, sacrilege, even in sovereigns to dis-
pute.
Ferrier, in his oration, lamented, that christian kings had
now, for more than a hundred and fifty years, at the councils
of Constance, Basil, Lateraa, and Trent, been earnestly re-
quiring of popes the reform of ecclesiastick discipline, and
that all their endeavours had proved abortive. They had, in-
deed, got a large return of decrees and anathemas. They de-
manded one thing, and they are put off with another ; inso-
much, that in all probability, for three hundred years to come,
the same grievances will be lamented, and the same requests
of redress will be made to no better purpose. In regard to
the huge mass of reforms which had occupied the council for
some months past, they had sent their opinion of it to the king,
who, in return, wrote them, that he found therein few things
conformable, but many contrary to ancient discipline.
F'errier maintained further, that the plaster which they had
been preparing, far from being adapted to heal the wounds of
the church, could serve only to make them fester, and to cause
even sores that had been healed, to break out afresh : particu-
larly that those expedients of excommunicating and anathema-
tizing princes were unexampled in the primitive church, and
solely calculated for opening a wide gate to rebellion in every
state ; that the whole chapter of the reformation of kings and
princes had no other aim, than to divest their temporal rulers
of all authority. Yet by such rulers some excellent ecclesias-
tick laws had been made, which even popes had not disdained
to adopt, honouring their authors with the name of saints ; that
by those laws the church had been governed, not only since
the times of the pragmatick and the concordate, but before,nay,
for more than four hundred years before the book of decretals,
which later popes had got substituted into their place, had been
so much as heard of. He then attempted a comparison between
the ancient canons and the modern, particularly the regulations
made for the reform of discipline in the preceding sessions of
the present council, exposing the futility of their new canons
in a strain of contemptuous irony, the most provoking imagi-
R r
S14 LECTURES ON
nable. He maintained, that the king, his master, the founder
and patron of ahnost all the churches of France, may, for the
instant and urgent necessities of the state, in consequence of
the power given him of God, and by the most ancieat laws of
the kingdom, freely avail himself of even the ecclesiastical
goods and rents of his subjects. He said, that the king was
particularly surprised at two things ; that those fathers adorned
■with great ecclesiastical power in the divine ministry, and as-
sembled solely for restoring ecclesiastical discipline, not atten-
ding to that, had turned aside to reform those whom, though
wicked, it behoved them to obey and pray for ; and he was
surprised still more, that they should imagine themselves en-
titled, without admonition, to excommunicate and anathema-
tize princes, who are given them of God, a thing not to be
done even to a plebeian, who perseveres in a heinous transgres-
sion ; that Michael the archangel did not dare to curse the
devil, neither did Michaiah or Daniel curse the most impious
kings, yet those fathers vented all their curses against kings
and princes ; nay, their maledictions were levelled even
against his most christian majesty, for defending the laws of
his ancestors, and the liberties of the Gallican church. He
concluded, that the king required them not to decree anything
against those laws and liberties, and, if they should, comman-
ded his ambassadours to oppose their decrees, as they then did^
adding, that if, not meddling with sovereigns, they would at-
tend to that which all the world expected of them, their con-
duct would be most agreeable to his majesty, and should have
the utmost aid of his ministers. Hitherto he spoke in the
nam( of the king. Then, in a bold epiphonema, he invoked
heaven and earth, and the fathers themselves, to consider whe-
ther it suited the time, to show no sympathy with the church,
in the present distractions, or with France, involved in a civil
war on account of religion, but to have all their sensibility
engrossed by their own dignities, and honours, and revenues,
which cannot be preserved by other arts than those whereby
they were acquired ; that in such confusions, it was their duty
to repent, and when Christ cometh, not to bawl out, Send us
into the herd of swine ; that if they would restore the church
to its ancient reputation, bring adversaries to repentance, and
reform princes, they should follow the example of good king
Hezekiah, who did not imitate his impious father, nor the
first, counting backwards, second, third and fourth of his very
deficient progenitors, but went further back to the imitation
of his remote, but more perfect ancestors ; in like manner it
behoved those fathers not to attend to their immediate prede-
cessors, however learned, but to ascend to an Ambrose, ao
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 315
Aug^istin, a Chrysostome, who conquered hereticks, not by the
modern method of instigating princes to slaughter them, but
by methods more primitive, by their prayers, by the example
of a godly life, by preaching pure doctrine ; for if the fathers
whom he addressed M^ould first form themselves into Am-
broses, Augustines, and Chrysostomes, and thus purify the
ehurch of Christ, they would soon transform princes into
Theodosiuses, Honoriuses, Arcadiuses, Valcntinians, and Gra-
tians. This he prayed that with the help of God they might
eflfectuate, and so concluded.
We cannot wonder, that this bold, and even dictatorial lan-
guage, should irritate, as in fact it did, in a very high degree,
not the pontificii only, but the other nrelates, even the French
clergy themselves. The historian tells us, that he had no
sooner ended, than there arose such a general murmur, that
it was found necessary to dismiss the congregation. Some
taxed the discourse with heresy ; others said it looked very
suspicious ; almost all agreed that it was offensive to pious
cars, (meaning, no doubt, their own) and could be calculated
only to break up the council ; that he attributed to kings more
than belonged to them ; that he inferred the pope's authority
not to be necessary to entitle them to ecclesiastical goods ; that
he made the king of France like the king of England, Harry
the eighth, head of the church within his own dominions.
Above all, nothing offended more grievously than his suggest-
ing, that the authority of the king of France over persons
and goods, was not founded on the pragmatick, concordate,
and papal privileges, but on the law of nature, the sacred
scriptures, the ancient councils, and laws of christian empe-
rours. As his speech was every where attacked, and often
misrepresented, he was obliged to disperse some copies of it
for his own vindication. This occasioned a formal answer in
writing, to which he made a spirited reply.
The principal instruction to be drawn from such altercations,
is the knowledge they afford of the opinions and the spirit of
the times, and of the mode of reasoning employed in their
controversies. We are sometimes surprised to observe, that
the things which proved matter of reprehension, were such
as we should have least suspected. Thus what he affirmed of
princes that they were given of God, was combated with great
keenness as heretical, and condemned by rmam sane tarn, one
of the decrees very happily named extravagantes of pope Bo-
niface the eighth. He ought, said they, to have distinguish-
ed, bv affirming, they, are of God, mcdiante sua vicario. Ah
easy device for making all power, temporal and sniritual, to
be immediately from the pope, and but mediately IVom God.
31& LECTURES ON
To their exceptions on this head, his excellency's answer wa&
very brief. He had not said more simply and absolutely, that
princes are from God, than the prophet Daniel and the apostle
Paul had said before him, and that if there be no heresy in
their expressions, there can be none in his ; that for his own
part, the distinction of mediate and immediate, and the ex-
travagant constitutions of Boniface, never entered into his
mind. His apology, instead of diminishing, only increased
the odium and clamour against him. He obstinately defends,
said they, those errours \vhich he ought penitently to recant.
His opposition, however, and the alarm taken by sovereigns,
were sufficient to prevent those attempts on the secular power
being carried further. In the other questions agitated, as
those about residence, and the jurisdiction of bishops, there
was a division of the clergy into two parties, the pontificii, or
patrons of papal despotism, on one side, and those on the
other, who maintained, that the bishops had a divine right to
a share in the jurisdiction. But in the struggle between the
spiritual power and the temporal, the ambassadours had the
whole council for antagonists. Both the contending factions
were united on this head. It had been, indeed, uniformly
the policy of Rome to exert herself in supporting the at-
tempts, made in every country, to draw both power and pro-
perty out of the hands of the laity into those of the clergy.
When this was once effected, she was never at a loss for ex-
pedients, whereby she might again draw the whole, or the
greater part, out of their hands into her own. By the first,
she secured in her interest the clergy of every nation, and laid
the foundation of such a close dependance on herself, as ren-
dered the exertion necessary for obtaining the second object
much easier, than what had been employed for obtaining the
first.
To adduce some instances : with what infinite labour and
contention did the pope, aided by the bishops, (always ready,
at his instigation, to rebel against the civil powers) wrest the
investitures in church livings out of the hands of princes, in
order, as appeared at the time, to restore them to the chap-
ters of the several dioceses ; and with v/hat ease, compara-
tively, w^ere the chapters afterwards wormed out of that right
by the pope ? First, he employed the gentler method of re-
commendation. When this was ineffectual, he commanded.
As even commands were sometimes disregarded, he proceed-
ed to cause his commands to be conveyed by nuncios, empow-
ered to give collation, if necessary ; and armed with the
highest censures against the disobedient. Thus the clergy
found, to their cost, that the last errour was worse than the
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Sif
first, and that, under the appearance of recovering their li-
berty, they had brought themselves (as is often deservedly the
case with rebels) into greater bondage. The monarch had
commonly some regard to the merits of the candidate. The
pope acknowledged no merit but that of a weighty purse.
Natives were formerly preferred, now often aliens and stran-
gers, who could not speak the language. Thus Roman cour-
tiers, minions of the pontiff, men who resided constantly in
Italv, frequently drew the richest benefices of distant coun-
tries, whilst the duties of the charge lay neglected. We have
another example in the monks, who, at first, under pretence
of vowed poverty, acquired great credit with the, publick, as
aiming at no temporal advantage, but doing all through cha-
rity, for the service of the people. Afterwards, when their
credit was fully established, Rome quickly devised reasons for
dispensing with their vow. From that time they enriched
themselves. When they were become opulent, the pope treat-
ed them as he treated bishopricks ; bestowed them on his
favourites, sold them to the highest bidder, or gave them in
commendam. Rome always asserted resolutely, and, in most
cases, successfully, the clergy's right of exemption from be-
ing taxed by the secular powers ; but it was in order to slip
into the place of those powers, and assume the prerogative of
taxing them herself. This, though always controverted by
temporal rulers, she so effectually secured, that sovereigns^,
in any remarkable exigency, especially when they could plead
some holy enterprise, such as a crusade for the massacre of
infidels or hereticks, were fain to recur to the pope, as the
easiest and surest way of obtaining the assistance of their
own clergy. This also gave the pope an easy method of brib-
ing princes to his side, when he wanted to destroy or mortify
any adverse power. It was his usual game, to ply the bishop
against the king. But this, when his subalterns proved mu-
tinous, he could successfully reverse, and ply the king
against the bishop. At the time of this very council, he was
forced to recur to these artifices. Both the Spanish clergy
and the Freitich, having proved refractor)^, on the article of
episcopal jurisdiction, his holiness did not find it a fruitless
expedient, for preventing their obtaining the countenance and
support of their respective sovereigns, to give hopes to the
latter, of the aids solicited from him, for extirpating heres)',
and securing the catholick faith, namely, the tenths of the
ecclesiastick revenues, in their own dominions.
Thus I have, in this and the two preceding lectures, given
you a sketch of the state at which the papal authority was ar-
rived in the sixteenth century, at the time of the witting of
318 LECTURES ON
the council of Trent, the last which, under the name of
ecumenical, (though not universally received even by the Ro-
man Catholicks) has been holden in the church, I have also
given you some idea of the different sentiments on this arti-
cle, entertained by different parties of Romanists ; for, on
this subject, and on some others, they are far from being una-
nimous. I shall now add a few things on the present state
of the hierarchy, in regard to the form, particularly on the
dignity and office of cardinal, which has naturally sprung up
out of the changes gradually effected in the constitution of the
Roman church, in respect both of the extent of her dominion,
and of the exaltation of her power, concluding with some ac-
count of the manner in which the hierarch was wont to be in-
stalled in his sublime station.
As to the office of cardinal, there can be no doubt, that for
several hundred years, there was no appearance in the church
either of the name or of the thing. Though some other ac-
counts have been given of its origin less honourable for the
office, what appears to me the most plausible is the following.
When the distinction of patriarchs and metropolitans, and
their suffragans, came to be established, it naturally gave rise
to some distinction in the presbyters and deacons of the ar-
chiepiscopal churches, whether patriarchal or metropolitical,
from the presbyters and deacons of the ordinary, that is, of
the suffragan bishops. The dignity' of an archiepiscopal see,
as it raised its bishop above the other bishops of the province,
would readily be conceived to confer some share of superiori-
ty, at least in honour and precedency, on the presbyters and
deacons belonging to it, above the presbyters and deacons of
the subordinate bishopricks of the province. The former
were counsellors and assessors to a man, who had a certain
jurisdiction over those to whom the latter were counsellors
and assessors. In consequence of this, the presbyters and
deacons, which constitute what, in the primitive church, was
called the presbytery, or bishop's senate, came to be denomi-
nated in some capital cities, where the primates resided, (for
the custom was neither universal nor confined to Rome) car-
dinal presbyters and cardinal deacons, that is, according to
the original import of the name, chief, or principal presbyters
and deacons ; being accounted such when compared with their
comprovincials of the same order. But still the more essen-
tial difference of the orders deacon, presbyter and bishop, was
sacredly preserved. Thus a cardinal deacon, though superi-
our to the other provincial deacons, was held inferiour to an
ordinary provincial presbyter, and a cardinal presbyter, though
superiour to the other provincial presbyters, was inferiour to
KeCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 319
a suffragan bishop. Accordingly, in the most noted councils
held at Rome, we find, that the cardinal Roman priests al-
ways signed under the Italian bishops. Nor did anv bishop
then accept at Rome the office of cardinal priest, though it be
not uncommon now for those who are bishops in other cities,
to be priests or deacons in the Roman conclave.
As gradually a number of titles, that had before been enjoy-
ed by many, were engrossed by Rome, whose supereminence
came in process of time, to swallow up all other distinctions ; as
the term pope^ and the epithets most blessed., most holy ^ which had,
for several centuries, been attributed to all bishops, at least to
all patriarchs and metropolitans, were arrogated by Rome, as
belonging peculiarly to her pontiff ; so the title cardinal was,
from the like principle, assumed as belonging peculiarly to her
clergy. Yet it remained at Ravenna till the year 154-3, when
it was abrogated by Paul III. Indeed, as the Roman see rose
in power and riches, the revenues of all belonging to it rose in
proportion, and the patrimony annexed to a deaconship in
Rome was far more considerable, than the revenue of an or-
dinary bishoprick in the provinces. And if such was the case
with the deacons, we may be assured, that not only no pro-
vincial bishop, but very few metropolitans, were able to vie in
splendour and magnificence with a Roman presbyter.
Exorbitant wealth annexed to offices may be said universally
to produce two effects. There are singular exceptions ; but
these cannot affect the general truth. I'he two effects are,
arrogance and laziness. When the priests of Rome were
made petty princes, one might be assured, they would be no
longer officiating priests. Opulence is never at a loss to find
expedients for devolving the burden of the incumbent service
on others shoulders. Another effect is arrogance. When
Roman presbyters and deacons could live in greater pomp and
magnificence than most bishops, or even archbishops could
afford to do, they would soon learn to assume a state and supe-
riority in other respects unsuited to the different functions.
Accordingly we find, that in the three last councils of note,
to wit, Pisa, Constance, and Trent, there were many and warm
complaints on the haughtiness, and even insolence of these new
dignitaries, who affected to be styled the princes of the church,
and who thought themselves well entitled to this distinction.
For they were both the electors and the counsellors of the sove-
reign pontiff, and had got it pretty well established, that in
every vacancy one of their college should be chosen pontiff.
It could not easily, for some time, be relished, that those whos,
by canonical rules, belonged to a lower order, as priests and
deacons, sboald treat the greatest prelates in the; church as
^20 LECTURES ON
their inferiours and vassals. The honourable distinctions
conferred on them by popes still widened the distance. They
got the red hat from Innocent IV, in 1244. Paul II added
the red cap and scarlet housings ; and Urban VIII, in the last
century, dignified them with the title of eminence.
At the same time it must be observed, on the other handj
in excuse of their uncommon exaltation, that when the bishop
of Rome, that is, the pastor of a single diocese, or, as it was
still more properly called at first, a single parish, a single
church, or congregation, was risen insensibly into the head of
the church universal, or, at least, the greater part of it ; and
when his presbytery, that is, his small consistory of colleagues
and ministers, who assisted him in conducting the affairs of the
parish, was, by the same insensible degrees, advanced into the
senate by whose assistance and consultations the affairs of the
whole church were to be conducted, the members must, of
necessity, become men of another sort of importance. This
gave rise to the consequences I have mentioned, and these
again gave rise to regulations in which (unless men's view had
been to overturn the fabrick of the hierarchy altogether, and
bring things back to their primitive model) it was proper, and
even nesessary, to consider more what the office of cardinal
then was, than what it originally had been when the church of
Rome was no more than the church of Corinth, or any other
christian congregation.
At different periods there have been made changes, both in
the number of the members of this college, and in their func-
tions. The footing whereon it now stands is this : the con-
clave, which is the name of the court constituted by the car-
dinals, consists of seventy members, exclusively of the pope
their head. Of these there are six bishops ; for though this
could not have been from the beginning, or rather from the
time that the distinction between bishop and presbyter was
first settled ; for then no more than one bishop was allowed
to one church, it was not unreasonable, to have also some of this
order in the number, when it was no longer the presbytery of
a single church, but the privy council of the monarch for the
management of the whole. There are fifty priests, and four-
teen deacons. They are, on occasion of vacancy by death,
nominated by the pope, and may be of any country whatever.
That they should be, as much as possible, taken from the dif-
ferent countries of Christendom, or rather, the different Ro-
man catholick countries, since they have a share in the govern-
ment of the whole Roman catholick church, is entirely suitable,
and is now in a manner established by custom.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 32t
But the very great alterations made in this college, or
society, are a demonstration of the prodigious change that
krose in the nature and destination of the office. The bishop
bf Rome, for several ages after the time of Constantine, was
elected, as most others were, by the presbytery, that is, the
officiating clergy within the bishop's cure, and by the people
of Rome, which, with the concurrence of the com-provincial
bishops, and the emperour's ratification, were always sufficient
for settling their proesid^ or president, as he was frequently
denominated. Indeed, for an office of such immense wealth
and eminence, as it quickly rose to, after the establishment of
Christianity, the election continued too long in such improper
hands. The consequence was that for. some centuries the choice
of a bishop was almost as necessarily attended with a civil war
in Rome, as that of a king was in Poland. The election is
now in none of the societies it was in formerly. The officiat-
ing priests, who serve the several cures in Rome, with their
subordinate ministers or deacons, have no concern in it. As
little has any temporal monarch, the bishops of the provinces,
br the Roman people. And though the conclave may be said
to have sprung out of the presbytery, yet, by a thousand suc-
cessive alterations, they are at length so completely changed,
that, except the election of the pope, there is not one office
they have in common; and even this, when examined critically.
Is no otherwise the same but in name. The ancient presby-
tery's concern was only in giving a pastor to the Romans, the
modern conclave's concern is in giving a sovereign to the
church.
I. need not mention the expedients that have been devised,
by pluralities, bishopricks in commendam, and the like, for
increasing the splendour and luxury of those princes of the
church and electors of its moiirirch. In the time of a vacancy
in the papal chair, the practice is now, that all the cardinals in
Rome are shut up together in a place called, from this usage,
the conclave^ where they are to remain (there being all neces-
sary accommodation for them) till they elect a pontiff". Car-
dinals, who arrive before before the election is over, are
enclosed with the rest. They give their votes by ballot.
And if, upon scrutiny, none of the candidates has two thirds
of the votes, the balloting must, after a stated interval, be re-
peated. And this continues to be reiterated, if they should
remain shut up for years, always till one of them attains the
superiority I mentioned.
It may not be amiss to subjoin here, the description of the
pope's consecration, given by cardinal Rasponi, in his book
concerning the church of the Lateran, which is also related by
% s
LECTURES on
la:ther Bonanni, in his medalUck history of the popes, and by
jLenfant, in his history of tht council of Constance. " Before
*' the usage of the conclave was introduced by Gregory the
" tenth," says cardinal Rasponi, " the cardinals, three days
*' after the obsequies of the former pope, convened in the La-
f tergn church, where, after the invocation of the Holy Spirit,
^' and the celebration of mass, they proceed to the election of
*' a pope. The election being made, the first cardinal deacon
" invested the pope elect in his pontifical habits, and announc-
" ed the name which he chose to take :" for it has been the
custom now, for several centuries, that the pope should assume
a new name on being elected. " Afterwards, two cardinals,
*' the most eminent in dignity, one on his right hand, the
." other on his left, conducted him to the altar, where he pro-
*' strated himself in adoration of God, whilst they sang the Te
" Deum. After the Te Deum^ the cardinals seated the pope
." in a marble chair, which was behind the altar, under a sort
" of dome, or vault, where the pope, being set, admitted the
" cardinals, the bishops, and some others, to kiss his feet, and
^' to receive the kiss of peace. Then the pope rising, the car-
" dinals conducted him through the portico to another chair,
" bored like what is called in French, selle percee. This
" chair was thence very properly named stercoraria., the ster-
** corary. It was formerly placed before the portico of the
*' patriarchal basilick, and is now to be seen in the cloister of
«■' that basilick. The use of these chairs, however, was after-
" wards abolished by Leo the tenth, probably for this, amongst
*' other reasons, because the perforated chair was become con-
" nected with the fabulous story of the female pope. That,
^' however, is not aprotestant fable, as some persons ignorantly
^' pretend, for it was current long before the days of Luther.
" Bat the continuance of the use of that chair preserved the
I' memory of the story, and might appear to the credulous an
4' evidence of its truth. Whilst the pope sat on the stercorary,
«' the choir sang these words of scripture ; Suscitat de pulvere
*' egenum, et de stercore erigit pauperem, ut sedeat cum prin-
« cipibus, et solium glorite teneat. Psalm cxiii, 7. The la&t
" clause is not in the Psalm. He raiseth the poor out of the
f dust^ and Uftelh the needy off the dunghill^ that he may set hinj^
« with the princes of his people^ and that he may possess the
t' throne of glory. The intention of this ceremony, it was
" said, was to insinuate to the pope the need there is of the
" virtue of humility, vmich otight to be the first step of his
« greatness. After remaining some time in this chair, the
" pope received from the hands of the chamberlain three de-
" niers, which he threw to the people, pronouncing these
ECCLESrAStiCAL fllSTORY. S^S
■^'^ words : Silver and gold I have none for niy pleasure ^^ but vjhat
** / have I give you. Afterwards, the prior of the Lateran'
" basilick, and one of the cardinals, or one of the canons of
*' that basilick, took the pope between thein, and whilst they
" walked in the portico, shouts of acclamation were raised
" near the basilick, and the election was declared, with the
*' name which the pope had taken. In this manner they con-
*' ducted the pope to the basilick of St. Sylvester, where, be-
'' ing placed before this basilick in a chair of porphyry, the
*' prior of the basilick put into his hands a ferula^- in sign of
*' correction and government, and the keys, to denote the
*' power which God gave to St. Peter, Prince of the aposdes,
*' of opening and shutting, of binding and loosing, and which
*' passes (according to our historian) successively to all the'
*' Roman pontiffs. Thence the pope, carrying the ferula!, and
*' the keys, went to place himself in another chair, reseniblihg
*' the former; and after remaining there some tixne, restored
*' the ferula and the kevs to the prior, who girt him with a
* girdle of red silk, giving him a parse of the same colour and
' stuff, wherein there were twelve precious stones, and a small
' bit of musk. Onuphrius, in his treatise on the basilick of
*' the Lateran, says, that it was the prior of this basilick who
*' gave these things to the pope. His sitting in the two chairs^
*' denoted the primacy which St. Peter conlerred on him, and
*' the power of preaching the gospel conferred by St. PauU
*' The girdle signified continence and chastity, the purse de-
*' noted the treasure, out of which the poor were to be nourish-
*' ed, the twelve precious stones represented the power of
" the twelve apostles, which resides totally in the potitiH';
*' in fine, the musk denoted the fragrancy of good works^
*' according to that saying, We are to God a sxvevt savour
** of Christ. In this chair the pope elect admitted the mi-
*' nisters of the palace the to kiss his feet, and to receive
*' the kiss of peace. There, too, several pieces of silver werd
*' delivered to him by the chamberlain, to the value of teii
*' pence. These he threw to the people at three diiTererit
** times, pronouncing these words, He hath scattered ; he haih
^^ given to the poor ; his righteousness remaihetli for esoer. All
" this being done, the pope elect went next Sn.ndaY, attended
*' by all the orders of the sacred palace, and the principal pt^o-
*' pie of the city, to the basilick of the Vatican, and therf^, be-
" fore the confession of St. Peter, he was solemnly consecrated
*' by the bishop of Ostia, to whom this office speciall\ i^elongs.
** After this function, the archdeacon and the second deacori
*' gave the pall to the pope, the archdeacon prdnciuncing these
*' words, Receive the pall, which is the plenitude ofthcpo)itififal
324 LECTURES ON
*' office^ to the honour of Almighty God^ of the most happy virgin
*' his mother^ oj the biest,ed apostles St. Peter and St. Paul, and
*' of the holy Roman church?"*
After this description, cardinal Rasponi adds these words :
— " This is what was done when the pontiff was announced
*•■ or proclaimed in the church of the Lateran ; but when the
" election was made in the Vatican, the pope, immediately af-
*' ter being conducted to the aitar by tv/o cardinals, or after
*' having performed his adoration, and offered a secret prayer,
*' kneeling, was placed in a chair behind the altar, where he
*' admitted the cardinal bishops, and the others, during the
" singing of the Te Deum^ to kiss his feet, and to receive the
*' kiss of peace. The following Sunday they assembled in the
*' same church, and the pope, crov/ntd according to the cus-
*' torn of his ancestors, Avent to the Lateran palace ; but before
*' entering it, he seated himself in the stercorary^ where, sitting
" down thrice, according to custom, he was introduced by the
*' cardinals into the basilick, distributing nioney to the popu-
*' lace. There he ascended a throne behind die altar, where
'' he admitted the canons of the basilick to kiss his feet, and
*' to receive the kiss of peace : which being done, he went to
*' place himself in the chairs that were before the oratory of
*' St. Silvester, where all was performed that has been recited
*' above. But if it happened that the pope was created out of
*' Rome, all the clergy, when he made hxs entry into that city,
*' and before entering the gate ol the Lateran, went to meet
" him without the gate, in pontifical habits, vvith the standard
*' of the cross and censers ; and, entering thus into the Lateran
" church, they observed, though in an order somewh-t dif-
*' ferent, all the ceremonies mencioued above. And if »ne
*' pope, coming to Rome after his consecration, went to ihe
*' church of St. Peter, the same rites M-ere .jsed there as in
*' the Lateran church, except only that he did not receive ihe
<' canons of St. Peter to kiss his feet iathe portico, and r')at
" he did not sit dov/n on the stercorary^ xvhich is not in that
*' church. For this reason, the next da) after mass, he vvent
*' without the tiara to the Lateran pabre, and before enter'ng
<' the basi^-ick, he placed himself on the stercorary, with the
** accustomed ceremonies."
These ceremonies, it must be owned, appear to us very silly,
and some of them absolutely ridiculous. But you may depend
on it, that there is neither exaggeration nor misrepresentation
in the account above given. It is not given by an enemy to
that profession, or by a stranger to the custom? used on such
occasions, who could relate them only from hearsay. It is a
relation given by a friend, a cardinal too, one who had proba-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 321
bly witnessed them oftener than once, and who had himself a
principal part to act on those occasions. The ceremonies of
consecration as bishop, in case the pope elect had, previously
to his election, been only in priest's or deacon's orders, have
not been related by the cardinal, as not differing materially
from those used in the ordination of bishops, which are to be
found in the Roman pontifical. There was, besides, a cere-
mony of coronation used in the instalment of the popes, which
seems not to have been introduced earlier than the thirteenth
century ; and it was in the following century, the fourteenth,
that the triple crown was devised. Benedict the twelfth seems
to have been the first pope that wore it. The reasons which
the canonists give for the use of the triple crown are so di-
verse, and so fantastick, that it is not worth while to report
them.
The rites employed in coronation I shall give you some
notion of, from the account given by Lenfant, in his history
of the council of Constance, of the coronation of Martin the
fifth, created pope in a peculiar manner, agreed on by that
council, in the room of John the twenty-third, whom they had
deposed. " There was erected in the court of the palace,"
says our historian, " a grand theatre, which could contain
*' about a hundred persons. Close to the wall was a very
" high throne, above which there was a canopy of cloth of
*' gold, the seat destined for his holiness. On the right hand,
*' and on the left, were ranged several other seats, a little
*' lower, but magnificent, for the princes and the prelates to sit
*' on. At eight o'clock in the morning, the two patriarchs,
*' (for since the time of the crusades, they had got titular
" Latin patriarchs in the eastern patriarchal sees subdued by
*' the Mahometans) the twenty-two cardinals, (for there were
*' no more then present) the archbishops, the bishops, the
*' mitred abbots, entered the court of the palace, on horseback,
*' in pontifical habits. The emperour, and the other princes,
*' followed on foot. When all the people were assembled, the
*' pope mounted the theatre, preceded by the clergy, carrying
" the cross and waxen tapers. On the forepart of the theatre
" there was an excellent choir of musick, which sang and
*' played on all sorts of instruments. The pope had on his
*' head a superb tiara, seeded with gold crowns, with a golden
" cross on the top. At his right hand, a little behind, were
" cardinal Viviers, and a patriarch ; at his left, cardinal Bran-
" cas, with another patriarch. Then marched the other car-
*' dinals, and the grand master of Rhodes, who were all re-
" ceived by the emperour, the electors, and the princes. The
*' pope being placed on the throne, the patriarch of Antioch
326 E.ECTURES ON^
*' took his tiafa^ or crown, off his head, and kneeled before
" him, holding this crown in his hand. Near him other car-
" dinals kneeled also ; one of whom carried some tow ai the
*' end of a stick, another a cross, and the rest wax tapers. At
*' the pope's right hand sat cardinal de Brancas, with eight
*' other cardinals ; at his left, the grand master of Rhodes,
*' with eight cardinals. Next them, on the right, the empe-
*' rour, on the left, the elector of Brandenburg, both attended
*' by archbishops. Next them, electors, princes, bishops, and
*' other prelates, as many as the place could contain. The
*' rest sat on the stairs, which had been made very wide for
" the purpose. There was, beside these, in the court, a great
" number of archbishops, bishops, and other greai lords, both
*' ecclesiastick and secular, who surrounded the theatre on
*' horseback* There was, likewise, an immense crowd of
" people, who could not get mto the court. When the musick
" had ceased, one of the cardinals, who was kneeling before
" the pope, and who carried the tow, lighted it, and twice
" said aloud, addressing himself to the pope Sancte pater ^ sic
*' transit gloria mundi. After which, three cardinals, who
*' had been selected for putting the crown on the pope's
*' head, standing up with the grand master of Rhodes, and
** taking the crown from the hands of the pope, they all four
*' kneeled on the highest step of the throne, whence, after
" saying a prayer, they arose, and put the crown on the
*' pope's head : after which, resuming their former places
** they heard the Te Deum, and the musick. When they left
** the place, the pope mounted his white horse, which was pre-
" ceded by three led horses, that were also white, and had
" red caparisons. The inferiour clergy walked before, followed
** by the abbots, bishops, archbishops, and cardinals, on horse-
*' back. The emperour, on foot, held the reins of the pope's
" bridle on the right, walking in the dirt, (which is particu-
*' larly observed by the historian) whilst the elector of Bran-
*' denburg did the same on the left. Thus the pope was
*' carried in procession from the cathedral to the Augustin
** monastery, and thence reconducted to the episcopal palace.
'' Here ended the ceremony." And here shall end our ac-
count of the rise and establishment of papal dominion.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. afr
LECTURE XXIII.
JpLAVING now given you some account ol* the rise and e&*
jabiishment of the Romish hierarchy, it is but reasonable,
that before I dismiss the subject of ecclesiastick history, I
^hould consider the causes which have contributed to the de-
clension of that wonderful empire. This will lead me to re-
mark a little on the latent springs, the progress, and the
effects of the reformation.
In all governments, of what kind soerer, it may be justly
said, that the dominion of the few over the many is primarily
founded in opinion. The natural strength among beings of
the same order, which is equal in the individuals, or nearly
so, lies always in the multitude. But the opinion both of
right and of occupancy, or secure possession, can and does
universally invest the smaller with the direction or govern-
inent of the gi^eacer number. By the opinion of right, we are-
restrained, through justice, or a sense of duty, from divesting-
a man of what we think him entitled to enjoy. By the opinioii
qi occupancy, we are restrained, through prvidence, or a sense
of danger, from disturbing a man in the possession of what
we think he has a firm hold of. Either opinion, when strong,
is generally sufficient to ensure peace ; but they operate most
powerfully in conjunction. When the two opinions are dis-
joined, that is, when fortunately, under any government, it is
the general opinion, that the right is in one, and the occupancy
iii another, there frequently ensue insurrections and intestine
broils.
The above remarks hold equally with regard to property,
which is in effect a species of power. Now these opinions,
which, from the influence of custom, and insensible imitation,'
328 LECTURES ON
men have a natural tendency to form, prove, in all ordinary
cases, a sufficient security to the few rich and great, in the
enjoyment of all their envied advantages, against the far su-
periour force, if it were combined, of the many poor and
small. Indeed, it is opinion that prevents the combination,
and makes that a master may sleep securely amid fifty servants
and dependents, each of whom, perhaps, taken, singly, is,
both in bodily strength, and in mental abilities, an overmatch
for him. It is this which vests a single person with the
command of an army, who, in contradiction to their own
will, give implicit obedience to his ; notwithstanding that
they carry in their hands what would prove the instruments of
working their own pleasure, and his destruction. It will not
be doubted, that it is in the same way, b)^ means of opinion,
that ecclesiastical power has a hold of the minds of men.
There is, however, this remarkable difference in the two
sorts of power, that knowledge and civilization, unless ac-
companied with profligacy of manners, add strength to those
opinions on which civil authority rests, at the same time that
they weaken those opinions which serve as a basis to a spiri-
tual despotism, or a hierarchy like the Romish. The more
a people becomes civilized, the more their notions of justice
and property, prescription and peaceable possession, become
steady, the more they see the necessit}' of maintaining these
inviolate, and the ruinous consequences of infringing them.
The love of peace and science, the encouragement of indus-
try and arts, the desire of publick good and order, the ab-
horrence of crimes, confusion, and blood, all co-operate to
make those opinions take deep root. Nothing seems to en-
danger them so much as tyranny and oppression in the rulers.
These tending directly to undermine the opinion of right,
(for no man is conceived to have a right to tyrannize over his
fellows) leave only in the minds of the people, in favour of
their superiours, the opinion of occupancy. Thus one of the
great pillars by which magistracy is supported, the sense of
duty, is removed, and the whole weight is left upon the other,
the sense of danger. Virtue^ in that case, we consider either
as out of the question, or as in opposition to the powers that
be, and consult only prudence. Now wherever the present
evils of oppression, wherein a people is involved, appear into-
lerable, and greater than any, or even as great as any which
they dread from opposition, the other support, prudence^ is
removed also ; and men will both think themselves entitled to
revolt, and, after balancing the chances on both sides, be dis-
posed to hazard every thing.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 52»
O^i the other hand, the opinions, which are the great bul-
warks of spiritual tyranny, are founded in ignorance arid su-
perstition, which are always accompained with great credulityi
Of these, nothing can be so subversive as knowledge and
improvement. Virtue, and even piety itself, when its exalted
and liberal spirit begins to be understood, become hostile td
opinions which, under the sacred name and garb of religion^
prove the bane of every virtue, and indeed of eVery valuable
quality in human nature, as well as the nurse of folly and
malevolence^, Luxury and vice are often pernicious to the
best constituted civil governments, because whilst, on one
hand, thev strengthen and inflame the passions, the great in-
centives to criminal attempts, they, on the other hand, loosen
and undermine our regards to equity and right. But no kind
of vice in the people, if accompanied with ignorance, is an
enemy ; every kind is, on the contrary, a friend to the reign
of superstition. Consciousness of profligacy will at times ex-
cite terroiir even in the most obdurate. Superstition, especi-
ally when formed into a politick system, like the Romish, is
n€ver deficient in expedients for conjuring down that terrour^
and rendering it subservient to the invariable aim, priestly
dominion. It requires but little knowledge, in the history of
Christendom, to enable us to discover, that many of those
persons, both princes and others, most highly celebrated by
ibcclesiasticks as the great benefactors of the church, were the
most worthless of the age wherein they lived, the most tyran-
nical, the most rapacious, the most profligate, men who have:
concluded a life stained with the blackest crimes, by beggar-
ing their offspring, and devoting all that they had, by way o^
atoning for their sins, to one of those seminaries of sloth^
hypocrisy, and unnatural lusts, commonly called convents ; or
by enchancing, in some other way, the power and wealth of
churchmen. Few contributed more to the erection and es-
tablishment of the hierarchy than the emperour Phocas ; and
a greater monster of cruelty and injustice never disgraced the
human form.
That the great enemy which superstition has to overcome is
knofjoledge^ was early perceived by those, who found their ac*;
count in supporting her thronei Nor were they slack in tak-
ing measures for stifling this dangerous foe. Among the
chief of these measures were the following :— 1st, They
judged it proper to confine to a few those divine illuminations^
which they could not totally suppress, and which they could
not deny had originally been given for the benefit of all. 2dly,'
When that formidable thing, knowledge^ in spite of all their
efforts, was making progress, they, in order to give it a time^i
T t
S30 LECTURES ON
ly check, affixed a stigma on all the books which tended to ex-
pose their artifices, and open the eyes of mankind. 3dly,
For the more effectual prevention of this danger, through the
terrour of example, persecution was employed, which has, in
their hands, been digested into an art, and conducted with a
cool, determinate, systematick cruelty, that defies alike all
the principles of justice and humanity ; and of which, among
Jews, Mahometans, or Pagans, the world has hitherto fur-
nished us with nothing that deserves to be compared.
In what regards the first method, we comprehend under it
the means that have been used to render the scriptures inac-
cessible to the common people, by discouraging, as much as
possible, translations into the vulgar tongue ; and, by con-
fining the whole publick service to a dead language, thereby
rendering it to the congregation no better than insignificant
mummery. Nothing is more evident from the scriptures
themstlves, than that they were written for the benefit of all.
Accordingly, all are commanded to read and study them.
And indeed, soon after the different books came abroad, one
of the first effec s of the pious zeal, with which the primitive
christians were inspired, was, in every country, to get those
inestimable instructions, as soon as possible, accurately
translated into the language of the country. It is astonishing
to observe how early this was effected in most of the langua-
ges then spoken. Indeed, there was nothing in those purer
times which could induce any one, who bore the christian
name, to desire either to conceal, or to disguise, the truth.
To propagate it in its native purit)^, and thus diffuse to others
the benefit of that light which they themselves enjoyed, was
the great ambition, and constant aim, of all the genuine dis-
ciples of the Lord Jesus.
As no tongue (the Greek excepted, which is the original of
the New Testament) was of so great extent as Latin, — into
this a translation seems very early to have been made. It was
commonly distinguished by the name Italick^ probably because
undertaken for the use of the christians in Italy. It is not
known who was the author. This is also the case of most of
the old translations. About three centuries after, a new ver-
sion into Latin was undertaken by Jerom. Our present vul-
gate consists partly of each, but mostly of the latter. No
version whatever could, in early times, be more necessary
than one into Latin. This was not the language of Italy only ;
it had obtained very generally in all the neighbouring coun-
tries, which had long remained in subjection to Rome, and in
which Roman colonies had been planted. But in the other
western churches, where Latin was n,ot spoken by the people,
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 331
the scriptures were translated into the vernacular idiom of the
different nations, soon after their embracing the christian doc-
trine. There were, accordingly, Gothick, Prankish, or old
German, Anglo-Saxon, and Sclavonick versions. In like
manner, in the east, they had very early Syriack, Armenian,
Arabick, Persick, Ethiopick, and Coptick. The same may
be said of the divine offices, or prayers and hymns, used in
publick in their churches. It is pretty evident, that for some
centuries these were, in all the early converted countries, per-
formed in the language of the people. But in the first ages
there were no written liturgies.
Indeed, nothing can be more repugnant to common sense
than the contrary practice. For if the people have any con-
cern in those offices, if their joining in the service be of any
consequence, it is necessary they should understand what is
done : in an unknown tongue, the praises of God, and the
praises of Baal, are the same to them. In like manner, in
regard to the reading of the scriptures, if the edification of
the people be at all concerned, still more if it be the ultimate
end, how can it be promoted by the barbarous sounds of a
foreign or dead language ? How can instructions, covered by
such an impenetrable veil, convey knowledge or comfort, pro-
duce faith, or secure obedience ? The apostle Paul, (1 Cor.
xiv,) has been so full and explicit on this head, that it is im-
possible for all the sophistry, that has been wasted on that
passage, to disguise his meaning from any intelligent and in-
genuous mind.
" The church," says the Romanist, " by this averseness to
*' change so much as the external garb, the language of the
** usages introduced soon after the forming of a christian so-
*' ciety at Rome, demonstrates her constancy, and inviolable
*' regard, to antiquity, and consequently ought to inspire us
*' with a greater confidence in the genuineness and identity of
" her doctrine." But so far in fact is this from being an evi-
dence of the constancy of that church, in point of doctrine,
that it is no evidence of her constancy even in point of cere-
monies. It is the dress, the language only, in which she has
been constant, the ceremonies themselves have undergone
great alterations, and received immense additions, (as those
versed in church history well know) in order to a commodate
them to the corruptions in doctrine, which, from time to time,
have been adopted. Nor has it been the most inconsidi:'ra!)le
motive for preserving the use of a dead language, tliat the
whole service might be more completely in the power ot the
priesthood, who could thereby, with the greater facility, and
without alarming the people, make such alterations in their
liturgy, as should, in their ghostly wisdom, be judged proper.-
332 LECTURES ON
It may at first appear a paradox, but on reflection is mani-^
fest, that this mark of their constancy, in what regards the
dead letter of the sacred ceremonies, is the strongest evidence
of their mutability, nay, actual change, in what concerns the
vitals of religion. Consider the reason why Latin was first
employed in the Italian churches. It was not the original
language of any part of sacred writ. They had the New Tes-
tament in the original Greek. There were also forms of
publick prayer, or liturgies, in that language, before any ap-
peared in Latin. What then could induce them to usher into
their churches a fallible translation of the scriptures, in pre-
ference to the original, acknowledged to have been written by
men divinely inspired, and consequently infallible r I ask this
the rather, because the Romanist admits, that the original was
written by inspiration. He agrees with us also, in not affirm-
ing the same thing of any version whatever. For, though the
council of Trent has pronounced the Lntin vulgate to be
authentick, it has not declared it perfect, or affirmed that the
translator was inspired. By the authenticity, therefore, no
more is meant, in the opinion of their most learned doctors,
than that it is a good translation, and may be used, by those
who understand Latin, safely and profitably. But that this is
not considered by themselves as signifying that it is totally
exempt from errour, is manifest from this, that the criticks of
that communion use as much freedom in pointing out and
correcting its errours, as the learned of this island do, in re-
gard to the common English version. I return to my question
therefore, and ask the Italians, of the present age. Why did
their forefathers, in the early ages, prefer a Latin version ; a
performance executed indeed by pious, but fallible, men, with
the aid of human learning, to the Greek original, which they
believed to contain the unerring dictates of the Holy Ghost ?
Why was not the latter read in their churches in preference
to the former? The ansvver which they would return, or which
at least their progenitors would have returned, is plain and
satisfactory. " We do not dispute that the Greek was in itself
*' preferable ; but to our people it was useless, because not
*' understood. Latin was their mother tongue. Much, there-
*' fore, of the mird of the spirit they might learn from a good
*' Latin version, notwithstanding its imperfections. Nothing
*' at all could they acquire from hearing the sounds of a lan-
" guage with which they were unacquainted. And better, as
*' the apostle says, speak but five words with understanding,
*' that is, intelligiblv, or so as to teach others, than ten thou-
" sand, in an unknown tongue, by which nobody can be
*' edified." Nothing can be more pertinent than this answer,
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 333
with which Paul has furnished us, only make the application
to the case in hand. Latin is not now your native tongue. It
is not at present the language of any nation or city in the
world. Your people understand it no more now than they do
Greek. If the Romans, sixteen hundred years ago, thought
it necessary to reject the publick use of an infallible original,
because unintelligible to the hearers, and to admit in its place a
fallible version, because intelligible ; and the Romans nov/
refuse to reject one fallible version, that is become unintelli-
gible, for another not more fallible, which may be understood
by every body ; can there be a stronger demonstration of the
total difference of sentiments, in regard to religious worship
in the present Romans, from the sentiments of their ancestors
in those early ages ? Can there, consequently, be a stronger
demonstration of the truth of the paradox I mentioned, namely,
that this mark of Roman constancy, in what regards the dead
letter, is the strongest evidence of their mutability, nay, actual
change, in what concerns the vitals of religion ? Their ances-
tors considered religion as a rational service, the present
Romans regard it merely as a mechanical operation. The
former thought that the understanding had a principal con-
cern in all religious offices : the latter seek only to attach the
senses. With them, accordingly, the exercises of publick wor-
ship are degenerated into a motley kind of pantomime, wherein
much passes in dumb show, part is muttered so as not to be
audible, part is spoken or chanted in a strange tongue, so as
not to be intelligible ; and the whole is made strongly to re*
semble the performance of magical spells and incantations, to
which idea, their doctrine of the opus operatum is wonderfully
harmonized. But the smallest affinity to the devotions of a
reasonable being to his All-wise and Almighty Creator, it is
impossible to discover in any part of it. Well may we address
them, therefore, in the words of Paul to the Galatians, " Oh !
'* infatuated people, who hath bewitched you ; having begun
*' in the spirit, are ye made perfect by the flesh."
If any thing could be more absurd than worship in an un-
known tongue, it would be the insult offered to the people's
understanding, in pretending to instruct them by reading the
scriptures to them in such a toiogue. The people are thus
mocked with the name of instruction without the thing. The)"^
are tantalized by their pastors, who give and withhold at the
same time. They appear to impart by pronouncing aloud
what they effectually conceal by the language. Like the an-
cient doctors of the Jewish law, they have taken away the
key of knowledge: they entered not in themselves, and those
that were entering they hindered. Ah blind guides ! Unna-
334 LECTURES ON
tural fathers ! for you affect to be styled fathers, how do you
supply your children with the food of their souls? When they
ask bread of you, you give them a stone. They implore of
you spiritual nourishment from the divine oracles, that they
may advance in the knowledge of God, in faith and purity ;
and you say, or sing to them, a jargon, (for the best things are
jargon to him to whom they are unintelligible) which may
make them stare, or nod, but must totally frustrate their ex-
pectation. They starve, as it were, in the midst of plenty;
and are shown their food, but not permitted to taste it; They
seek to have their souls edified, and you tickle their ears with
a song.
If witnesses were necessary to evince the contrariety of this
their present practice to the intention of their forefathers, as
well as the natural purpose of reading the scriptures in the
congregation, I would ask no witness but themselves. They
still retain a memorable testimony against thexnselves, in the
form of ordaining readers enjoined in the pontifical, for with
them this office is one of the minor orders. In the charge
given to the readers by the bishop at their ordination, we
have these words : " Studete igitur verba Dei, videlicet lec-
*' tiones sacras distincte, et aperte, ad intelligentiam et sedifi-
" cationem fidelium, absque omni mendacio falsitatis proferre;
*' ne Veritas divinarum lectionum, incuria vestra, ad instruc-
" tionem audientium corrumpatur. Quod autem ore legitis,
*' corde credatis, atque opere compleatis j quatenus auditores
*' vestros, verba pariter et exemplo vestro, docere possitis,
*' IdeoqUe, dum legitis, in alto loco ecclesiae stetis, ut ab om-
*' nibus audiamini et videamini." Instructions entirely appo-
site when they were first devised, for then Latin was their
mother tongue ; but which now can serve only as a standing
reproach upon their practice, bv setting its absurdity in the
most glaring point of view. For what can it avail for the
edification of the people, that the reader pronounces distinctly
and openly, and stands in a conspicuous place, when he pro-
nounces nothing but unmeaning words? Is this teaching them
by word, verbo ^ Can ihis be called addressing the understand-
ings of the faithful ? Out of thy own mouth will I judge thee,
thou pageant of a teacher.
What shall we say of the power of prepossessions, when an
abuse, so palpable, is palliated by such a writer as father Si-
mon ? I can bear to hear the most absurd things advanced by
weak and illiberal minds. I can make great allowance for the
power of education over such, and am led more to pity than
to condemn. But it must awake real indignation, to see parts
and literature prostituted to the vile purpose of defending
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. m$
what the smallest portion of common sense shows at once to
be indefensible, and giving a favourable gloss to the most flag-
rant abuses and corruptions. Simon acknowledges, (Hist.*
Crir. des Versions du N. T. chap. 1,) that when Christianity
was first planted, it was found necessary, for the instruction of
the people, to translate the scriptures, especially the New Tes-
tament, into the language of each country that received this
doctrine ; and adds, that this remark must be understood as
extending lo the service performed in the churches, which, ia
those early days, was every where in the language of the peo-
ple. The same thing, he affirms, cardinal Bona* had observed
in his work upon liturgies. Now if the case was so, it will not
be easy to account, without recurring to papal usurpations, for
the uniformity in using Latin in all the publick offices of reli-
gion, that had been introduced, and actually obtained, through
all the occidental churches, for ages before the reformation.
Will Simon say, that Latin v/as the language of Britain for
example, when Christianity was first planted among the Bri-
tons ; or, indeed, of any of the northern countries of Europe ?
So far from it, that, for the service of those countries, there
were, by his own confession, translations made into Gothick,
Anglo-Saxons, Frankish, Sclavonick, &c. Yet these versions
(whatever they were formerly) are no where used at present,
nor have they been used for many centuries, though fragments
of some of them are still to be found in the libraries of the
curious,
^' Nothing," says Mr. Simon, " is more extravagant, than
" what Pierre du Moulin has written on this subject against
" cardinal du Perron. * The end^ says this minister, * which
*' the pope has- proposed to himself, in establishing the Latin
*■'- tongue in the publick service, has been, to plant atnongst his con^
*' qxiered nations the badges of his empire i* as if," subjoins
Simon, " it had been the popes by whom the Latin language
** had been extended throughout all the west." Now to me
* Bona, however, does not say so much as seems here to be attributed tO
him by Simon. All that his words necessarily denote, is, that the apostles,
and their successours, in converting the nations, taught the people, and of-
ficiated every where, in the idiom of the country. But this does not imply
that they used, for this purpose, either a written translation of the scriptures,
or any written lirurgy. What he says afterwards, that in all the western
churches they had no liturgy but in Latin, evidently implies the contrary.
He knew well, that Latin was never the language of the people, in most
countries of the western empire. Even in Africa^ where, for manifest rea-
sons, that tongue must have been much more generally spoken than in the
northern parts of Europe, he acknowledges, on Augustina^s authority, that it
was not- understood by the common pe "ple. ♦' In Africa etiam Latinae lin-
*' gUK usus in sacris semper viguit, licet earn populus non intelligeret, ut Ay-
** SRstinns testis est." L. 1, C v. M-
m6 LECTURES ON
there appears great extravagance in this censure of Simon's,
none in Pierre du Moulin's remark. For if the priest of the
Oratory mean, bv the Latin being extended throughout the
west, that it was become the language of the people in all the
western nations, nothing can be more evidently false. It was
never the language of Scandinavia, of the greater part of Ger-
many and Gaul ; nor was it ever the language of this island in
particular. The common language here, at least of the south-
ern part of the island, when the nation was subject to the
Romans, was not Latin, but the ancient British^ a dialect of
the Celtick, which the people, when driven out of the greater
and better part of their own country by their conquerors the
Saxons, carried with them into Wales ; which, in confirmation
of what I say, is still spoken there, though, doubtless, in so
many ages, considerably altered, and is now called Welsh.
The Anglo-Saxon, the language of the invaders, succeeded it,
which, after the conquest, being blended with the Norman
French, hath settled at last into the present English. The
like changes might be shown to have happened in most other
European countries. Nor is this hypothesis of Simon^s more
contrary to fact, than it is inconsistent with his own conces-
sions. For if the Latin had been so widely extended in the
west, as his reflection on Pierre du Moulin manifestly implies,
where had been the occasion for the versions into Gothick,
Anglo-Saxon, Prankish, Sciavonick, &c., of which he himself
has made mention ?
Further; Mr. Simon's account, that men, after their lan-
guage had been totally vitiated by the irruptions of barbarians,
and the mixture of people that succeeded, still retained the
practice of reading the scriptures and liturgies in the language
which their forefathers spoke, when Christianity was first in-
troduced among them, is absolutely incompatible with the
universal use of Latin for so many ages in the west ; and is,
consequently, the amplest vindication of the remark of du
Moulin, which he had so severely and unjustly censured.
For, on this hypothesis, it would not be Latin in any of the
northern countries that would be used in their churches ; for
Latin never was, in those countries, the language of the peo-
ple. In Wales it would be ancient British, in England the
Ar glO"Saxon, in Sweden the Gothick, in France and Germany
the Prankish. Nor can any thing be more foreign to the
cause in hand, than the examples brought from the different
churches and sects in Asia, who still retain the scriptures in
their ancient na'^ive tongues. Had all these churches and
sects been, by any address or management, induced to employ
Greek, some resemblance might have been fairly pleaded } for*
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 33?
that language, to say the least, had as great a currency in the
^ast as Latin ever had in the west. Nor do I conceive any
thing a stronger evidence of an undue ascendant that one
church had obtained over other churches, than that she had
influence enough to make them either adopt at once a jargon
they did not understand, or, which is worse, abandon their an-
cient versions, not for the sake of others more intelligible into
the modern language of the people, but to make way for what
was to them foreign, as well as unintelligible, being in the lan-
guage of the Romans.
I can make allowance for the prepossession, though unrea-
sonable, that the present Armenians, Syrians, Copts, and
Ethiopians, may retain, for books held venerable by their
forefathers, though now no longer understood. For the same
reason I can make allov^ance for the attachment of the people
of Italy and its dependencies to the Latin vulgate and ritual,
as Latin was once the language of their country. And though
it arise in them all from a silly prejudice, which manifestly
shows, that the form/ of religion has supplanted the power; yet
I can easily, without recurring to authority or foreign influence,
especially in the decline of all literature and science, account
for it from the weakness incident to human nature. But to-
tally different is the case of the northern regions, whose lan-
guage Latin never was, and who, by the confession of Romish
criticks, once had the scriptures and sacred offices in their na-
tive tongues* Their admitting this foreign dress in their re-
ligious service, and submitting to wear the livery, and babble
the dialect of Rome, is the surest badge of their slavery, and
of the triumph of Roman policy over the combined forces of
reason and religion both. That the natural consequence of
this practice would be to promote ignorance and superstition
among the people, it would be a mispending of time to at-
teir>pt to prove.
But would there not be some hazard, that those sage politi-
cians should overshoot the mark ? Religion, the christian reli-
gion in particular, has always been understood to require faith
in its principles ; and faith in principles requires some degree
of knowledge or apprehension of those principles. If total ig-
norance should prevail, how could men be said to believe that
of which they knew nothing ? The schoolmen have devised an
excellent succedaneum to supply the place of real belief, which
necessarily implies, that the thing believed is, in some sort,
apprehended by the understanding. This succedaneum they
have denominated implicit faiths an ingenious method of recon-
ciling things incompatible, to believe every thing, and to know
nothing, not so much as the terms of the propositions which
V u
3,38 LECTURES ON
we believe. When the sacred lessons of the gospel were no
longer addressed to the understandings of the people ; when,
in all the publick service, they were put off with sound in-
stead of sense, when their eyes and ears were amused, but
their minds left uninstructed ; it was necessary that something
should be substituted for faith, which always presupposes
knowledge ; nay, that it should be something which might still
be called Jaith ; for this name had been of so great renown, so
long standing, and so universal use, that it was not judged
safe entirely to dispossess it. Exactly such a something is im-
plicit faith. The name is retained, whilst nobody is incom-
moded with the thing.
The terms implicit faith are used in two different senses.
With us protestants, at least in this country, no more is com-
monly me;.nt by them than the belief of a doctrine, into the
truth of which we have made no inquiry, on the bare authority
of some person or society declaring it to be true. But this
always supposes, that one knows, or has some conception of
the doctrine itself. All that is denoted by the term implicit in
this acceptation is, that in lieu of evidence, one rests on the
judgment of him or them by whom the tenet is affirmed. No
ignorance is implied but of the proofs. But the implicit faith^
recommended by the schoolmen is quite another thing, and is
constituted thus ; if you believe that all the religious principles,
whatever they be, which are believed by such particular per-
sons, are true ; those persons who hold the principles are ex-
plicit believers, yon are an implicit believer of all their princi-
ples. Nor is your belief the less efficacious, because you arc
ignorant of the principles themselves. Perhaps you have
never heard them mentioned, or have never enquired about
them. For it does not hold here as in the faith whereof the
apostle speaks, Hotv shall they believe in him of whom they have
not heard? In the presence of those profound doctors the
shoolmen, the apostle would be found to be no other than an
arrant novice. The transcendent excellency of /m/;/zai ya/YA
consists in this, that you have it then in the highest perfection,
when, in regard to its object, you know nothing, and have
even heard nothing at all. In brief, it is neither more nor
less than being a believer b)' proxy. Scripture saith, " You
" are saved through faith," and " without faith it is impossible
" to please God." Now implicit faith is a curious device for
pleasing God, and being saved by the faith of others. It is,
in fact, imputative faith ^ at least as extraordinary as the impu-
tative justice^ which brought so much obloquy on some of the
reformers. It is as if I should call one an implicit mathemati'
ci^Uy who knovt's not a tittle of mathematicks, not even the de«
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 339
finitions and axioms, but is convinced of the knowledge of
some other person who is really, or whom he supposes to be
an adept in that science.
" To believe implicitly," says Bona, " is to believe in ge-
■*' neral universally all that holy mother church believes ; so as
*' to dissent from her in nothing, nor disbelieve any of her ar-
" tides. And though it be convenient {lictt opportuniim sit)
*' for all, not only to believe all the articles implicitly, but even
'* some of them, since the coming of Christ, explicitly ; vet it
*' is not necessary (jion tatnen est necessarium) for all, especial-
*' ly the common people, to believe them all explicitly. It is
" proper rather for those, who assume the office of teaching
*' and preaching, as they have the cure of souls." Further,
to show the wonderful virtues and efficacy of such a faith,
another of the doctors, Gabriel Byel, maintains, that, " if he
" who implicitly believes the church, should think, misled by
**• natural reason, that the Father is greater than the Son, and
*' existed before him, or that the three persons are things lo-
" cally distant from one another, or the like, he is not a here-
*' tick, nor sins, provided he do not defend this errour perti-
*' naciously. For he believes what he does believe, because
*' he thinks that the church believes so, subjecting his opinion
** to the faith of the church. For though his opinion be er-
*' roneous, his opinion is not his faith, nay, his faith, in con-
" tradiction to his opinions, is the faith of the church. What
*' is still more, this implicit faith not only defends from heresy
*' and sin, but even constitutes merit in heterodoxy itself, and
** preserves in that merit one who forms a most heterodox
" opinion, because he thinks the church believes so." Thus
far Byel. It is then of no consequence what a man's explicit
faith be ; he may be an Arian, a Socinian, an Anthropovnor-
phite, a Polytheist, in short, any thing, he cannot err, whilst
he has an implicit faith in the church. This they give as their
explanation of that article of the creed, " I believe in the ho-
" ly catholick church ;" though, agreeably to this interpreta-
tion, there should have been no other article in the creed.
This point alone supersedes every other, and is the quintes-
sence of all. Implicit faith has been sometimes ludicrouslv
styled fides carbonaria^ from the noted story of one who, ex-^
amining an ignorant collier on his religious principles, asked
him what it was that he believed. He answered, " I believe
" what the church believes." The other rejoined, '' What
" then does the church believe J" He replied readily, *•• The
" church believes what I believe." The other desirousi, if
possible, to bring him to particulars, once more resumes his
" inquiry; '^ Tell me then, I pray you, what it is which you
340 LECTURES ON
" and the church both believe." The only answer the collier
could give Vv^^ as, " Why truly, Sir, the church and 1 both —
*•' believe the same thing." This is implicit faith in perfec-
tion, and in the estimation of some celebrated doctors, the
sum of necessary and saving knowledge in a christian.
It is curious to consider the inferences, which they them-
selves deduce from this wonderful doctrine. A person, on
first hearing them, would take thtm for the absurd conse-
quences objected by an adversary, with a view to expose the
notion of implicit faith as absolutely nonsensical. But it is
quite otherwise, they are deductions made by friends, who
are very serious in supporting them. One of these is, that a
man may believe two propositions perfectly contradictory at
the same time, one explicitly, the other implicitly. Another
is, that in such a case, the implicit (which, to a common un-
derstanding, appears to include no belief at all) not the expli-
cit, is to be accounted his religious faiih. " It may be," says
Gabriel, '' that one may believe implicitly a certain truth, and
*' explicitly believe the contrary." Put the case that a man
believes, that whatever the church believes is true ; at the
same time disbelieving this proposition, Abraham had more
wives than one^ and believing the contrary, as thinking it the
belief of the church ; such a man implicitly believes this pro-
position, Abraham had two xvivesy because the church believes
so, and explicitly he disbelieves it. Now the great virtue of
implicit faith in the church lies here, that it saves a man from
all possible danger, in consequence of any explicit erroneous
opinions, and renders it, indeed, unnecessary in him to be so-
licitous to know whether his opinions be right or wrong, or-
thodox or heterodox. No wonder, then, that the utility of
this simple principle is so highly celebrated by the schoohnen.
" Ha;c fides implicita, qua fidelis credit quicquid ecclesia cre-
'^ dit, utilissima est ficleli. Na n si fuerit in corde, dei'endit
" ab omni hseretica pravitate, ut dicit Occam in tractata de sa-
*' cramentis, et post eum Gerson. Non enim aliquatenus
*'' hsercticari valet, qui corde credit quicquid ecclesia catholica
'''• credit, id est, qui credit iilam veritatem, quicquid ecclesia
'* credit est verurn,''^ And, indeed, its efficacy must be the
same, as the reason is the same, in protecting from the conse-
quences of every errour, even in the most fundamental points,
as in protecting from what might ensue on that trifling errour,
that Abraham had but one wife.
We must at least confess not only the consistency, but even
the humanity of the Romish system, in this amazing method
of simplifying all the necessary knowledge and faith of a
christian. For surely, when the means of knowledge were,
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 341
in effect, put out of the reach of the people ; when in publick
they were tantalized with the mere parade of teaching, by hav-
ing instructions chanted to them in an unknown tongue ; when
ic was not the understanding, but the senses solely, which
were employed in religious offices ; when every thing rational
and ediiying was excluded from the service ; it would have
been unconscionable, worse than even the tyranny of Egyptian
taskmasters, to require of the people any thing like real faith,
which always pre-supposes some information given, and some
knowledge acquired, of the subject. A merely nominal faith
(and such entirely is this scholastick fiction of implicit faith)
suited much better a merely mechanical service. In this man-
ner the knowledge of God, which is declared in scripture to
be more valuable than burnt offerings, and faith in him, and
in the doctrine of revelation, are superseded to make room
for an unbounded submission to, and confidence in men, to
wit, those ghostly instructors, whom the populace must inva-
riably regard as the mouth of the uaerring church.
I would not, however, be understood as signifying by what
has been now advanced on the subject of implicit faith, that
in this point all Romanists are perfectly agreed. What I have
adduced is supported by great names among their doctors, and.
mostly quoted in their words. Nor was the doctrine, though
every where publickly taught in their schools and in their writ-
ings, ever censured by either pope or council, ecumenical or
provincial. But though all the Romish doctors pay great de-
ference, they do not all, I acknowledge, pay equal deference
to implicit faith. Some seem to think it sufficient for every
thing ; others are curious in distinguishing what those articles
are, whereof an explicit faith is requisite, and what those are,
on the other hand, whereof an implicit faith will answer.
But it is not necessary here to enter into their scholastick
cavils.
So much shall suffice for the first expedient employed b;^
superstition for the suppression of her deadly foe knowledge^
which is, by perverting the rational service of religion into a
mere amusement of the senses.
>42 LECTURES ON
LECTURE XXIV.
JDUT though by such means as those now illustrated, reli>^
gious knowledge might long be kept low, it was not so easy a
matter to suppress it altogether. Such a variety of circum-
stances have an influence on its progress, that when the things
which have been long in confusion begin to settle, it is impos-
sible to guard every avenue against its entrance. One particu-
lar art, and one particular branch of science, has a nearer con-
nexion with other arts and other branches of science than is
commonly imagined. If you would exclude one species of
knowledge totally, it is not safe to admit any. This, how-
ever, is a point of political wisdom, which, luckily, has not
been sufficiently understood even by politicians. When the
western part of the Roman empire was overrun, and rather
desolated than conquered by barbai'ians ; matters, after many
long and terrible conflicts, came by degrees to settle ; and se-
veral new states and new kingdoms arose out of the stupen-
dous ruin. As these came to assume a regular form, the arts
of peace revived and were cultivated, knowledge of course
revived with them. Of all kinds of knowledge, I own that
religious knowledge was the latest. And that it should be so,
we cannot be surprised, when we consider the many terrible
clogs by which it was borne down. But notwithstanding these,
the progress of letters could not fail to have an influence even
here. History, languages, criticism, all tended to open the
eyes of mankind, and disclose the origin of many corruptions
and abuses in respect of sacred as well as profane literature.
How much this was acclerated by the invention of printing,
which renders the communication of knowledge so easy, bring-
ing it within the reach of those to whom it was inaccessible
before, it would be superfluous to attempt to prove. Suffice
it to remark, that towards the end of the fifteenth and begin*
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 3M'
ning oF the sixteenth century, the visible face of things in
Europe was, in respect of cultivation, and the liberal as well
as useful arts, very much altered.
The change had been insensibly advancing for some centu-
ries before. As this was an indication of a second dawn of
reason, and the return of thought, after a long night of barba-
rity and ignorance, it proved the means of preparing the
minds of men for a corresponding change in greater matters.
Indeed, there began to be disseminated such a dissatisfaction
with the corruptions that had invaded all the provinces of reli-
gion, that murmurs and complaints were almost universal.
In every part of Christendom, the absolute necessity of a
reformation in the church was become a common topic. It is
true, the clamour regarded chiefly discipline and manners, but
by no means solely. It had, indeed, long before that time,
been rendered very unsafe to glance at received doctrines,
though in the most cursory, or even guarded manner. Yet it
was impossible, that the abuses in practice should not lead to
ihose errours in principle, which had proved the parents of
those abuses. The increase of knowledge brought an increase
of curiosity. The little that men had discovered, raised an
insatiable appetite for discovering more. The increase of
knowledge, b)^ undeceiving men in regard to some inveterate
prejudices, occasioned, not less infallibly, the decrease of cre-
dulity ; and the decrease of credulity sapped the very founda-
tions of sacerdotal power. Now as the principal means of
conveying knowledge was by books, the spiritual powers were'
quickly led to devise proper methods for stopping the progress
of those books, v/hich might prove of dangerous consequence
to their pretensions.
This was the second expedient above-mentioned, adopted
by superstition, or rather by spiritual tyranny, of whose throne
superstition is the chief support, for checking the progress of
knowledge. The origin and growth of this expedient, till it
arrived at full maturity, I shall relate to you nearly in the
terms of a celebrated writer, to whom I have oftener than
once had recourse before. In the earliest ages of the church,
though there was no ecclesiastical prohibition in regard to
books, pious persons, from a principle of conscience, always
thought it right to avoid reading bad books, that they might
not transgress the sense of the divine law, which prohibits us
from spending the time unprofitably, and which commands us
to abstain from all appearance of evil, to avoid everything by
which we may be led, without necessity, to expose ourselves
to temptation, and be drawn into sin. These are obligations
arising froni the principles of the law of nature, and therefore
^4 LECTURES ON
perpetually in force. We are all, doubtless, obliged, though
there were no ecclesiastical law to that purpose, to beware of
mispending the precious hours in the perusal of worthless
writings. But, in process of time, when these considerations
were less minded than at the beginning, Dionysius, bishop of
Alexandria, a celebrated doctor, about the year 240, being
reproved by his own presbyters, for reading books which they
accounted dangerous, found it convenient to plead in his ex-
cuse, that his doubts on this head had been removed bv a
vision, wherewith he had been favoured from heaven, which
permitted him to read any book, because he had discernment
sufficient to enable him to do it with safety. It was, hov/ever,
the general opinion in those days, that there was greater dan-
ger in the books of pagans, than in those of hereticks, which
were much more abhorred.
The reading of the former, the Greek and the Latin books
which we now call classicks, was more severely censured, not
as being intrinsically worse than the other, but because those
books were more engaging, and the reading of them was more
frequently practised by many christian doctors, through a de-
sire of learning eloquence, and the rules of composition.
And, for indulging himself in this practice, Jerom was said
to have been either in vision, or in dream, buffeted by the
devil. Much about that time, to wit, in the year 400, a council
in Carthage prohibited the bishops from reading the books of
gentiles, but permitted them to read those of hereticks. This
is the first prohibition in form of a canon. Nor is there any
thing else, on this subject, to be found in the fathers, except
in the way of advice, on the general principles of the divine
law, as represented above.
The books of the hereticks, whose doctrine had been con-
demned by councils, were indeed often, for political reasons,
prohibited by the emperours. Thus Constantine prohibited
the books of Arius. Arcadius those of the Eunomians and
Manichees. Theodosius those of Nestorius, and Martian
the writings of the Eutychians. In Spain, king Ricaredo
prohibited those of the Arians. Councils and bishops thought
it sufficient to declare what books contained doctrine condemn-
ed or apocryphal. They proceeded no further, leaving it to
the conscience of every one either to avoid them entirely, or
to read them with a good intention. After the year 800, the
Roman pontiffs, who had usurped the greater part of ecclesi-
astical government, expressly forbade men to read, nay, gave
orders to burn the books whose authors they had condemned
as guilty of heresy. Nevertheless, till the age of the reforma-
tion, the number of books actually prohibited was but small.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 345
Of^ The general papal prohibition, on pain of excommunication^
fend v/ithout any other sentence, to all those who read books
containing the doctrine of hereticks, or of persons suspected
of heresy, was grown into disuse. Martin the fifth, in his
bull, excommunicated all heretical sects, especially Wickliffites
and Hussites ; but made no mention of those who read their
books, though many of them were then every where circulated*
Leo the tenth, when he condemned Luther, prohibited, at the
same time, > on pain of excommunication, the keeping and the
reading of his books. The succeeding pontiffs, in the bull
called in ccena^ having condemned and excommunicated all
hereticks, did, together with them, excommunicate also those
who read their books. This produced greater confusion, be-
cause the hereticks not being condemned by name, the books
would be discovered rather by the quality of the doctrine con-
tained in them, than by the names of their authors. Now the
qudity of the doctrine contained could not be known till the
book was read, and consequently, till the excommunication
was incurred, if the doctrine was heretical. Besides, the
doctrine might appear very different to different readers.
Hence arose innumerable scruples in the minds of those weak
but conscientious persons, who paid an implicit deference to
the authority of the church. The inquisitors, who were more
diligent than others, made catalogues of such as came to
their knowledge, which, however, as the copies taken of those
catalogues were not collated, did not entirely remove the diffi-
culty. King Philip of Spain was the first who gave them a
more convenient form, having enacted a law in 1558, that the
catalogue of books, prohibited by the Spanish inquisition,
should be printed. After this example, Paul the fourth ordered
the inquisition in Rome to prepare, and cause to be printed,
an index of books proper to be forbidden, which was executed
in the following year 1559. In this they proceeded much fur-
ther than had ever been done before, and laid the foundations
of a very curious system of policy for maintaining and exalt-
ing, to the utmost, the authority of the court of Rome, by
depriving men of the knowledge necessary for defending
themselves against her usurpations.
Hitherto the prohibition had been confined to the books of
hereticks, nor had any book been prohibited whose author
had not been condemned. They now judged it expedient to
go more boldly to work. Accordingly, the new index, which^
from its known purpose came to be called index expurgatorius^
was divided into three parts. The first contained the names
of those authors, v/hose whole works, whether the subject
were sacred or profane, were forbidden j and in this number
X X
346 LECTURES ON
are included not only those who have professed a doctrine
contrary to that of Rome, but even many who continued all
their life, and died in her communion. In the second part
were contained the names of particular bo(?lcs which are con-
demned, though other books of the same authors be not. In
the th<rd, beside some anonymous writings specified, there is
one general rule, whereby all those books are forbidden,
which do not bear the author's name, published since the year
1519. Nay, many authors and books are condemned, which
for three hundred, two hundred, or one hundred years, had
passed through the hands of all the men of letters in the
church, and of which the Roman pontiffs had been in the
knowledge for so long a time without finding fault. Nay,
what is still more extraordinary, some modern books were
included in the prohibition, which had been printed in Italy,
even in Rome, with the approbation of the inquisitors, nay,
of the pope himself, signified by his brief accompanying rhe
publication. Of this kind are the annotations of Erasmus on
the New Testament, to which Leo the tenth, after having
read them, gave his approbation in a brief, dated at Rome
1518. Above all, it is worthy of notice, that under colour of
faith and religion, those books are prohibited, and their au-
thors condemned, wherein the authority of princes and civil
magistrates is defended against ecclesiastical usurpations ;
those wherein the authority of bishops and councils is de-
fended against the usurpations of the court of Rome ; and
those wherein are disclosed the tyranny and hypocrisy with
which, under pretence of religion, the people is abused either
by deceit, or by violence. In brief, a better expedient was
never devised, (had it been a little more capable of being
carried into effect) for employing religion, so as to divest
men not only of all knowledge, but of every vestige of ration-
ality. So far did the Roman inquisition, at that time, proceed,
that they made a list of sixty-two printers, prohibiting all the
books printed by them, of whatever author, subject, or lan-
guage, with an addiiioaal clause still more comprehensive, to
wit, and all the books printed by other such like printers,
who have printed the books of hereticks. In consequence of
which, there hardly remained any books to read. Nay, to
show the incredible excess of their rigour, thr prohibition of
every book, cootained in the catalogue was on pain of excom-
munication to the reader ipso fncto^ reserving to the pope the
power of inflicrir.g the deprivation of offices, and benefices,
incapacitation, perpetual infamy, and other arbitrary pains.
Thus was the court of Rome, in defence, as was falsely pre-
tended, of the doctrine of Christ, but in reality of her own
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 34f
despotism, as the Turks and Saracens, in defence of the
superstition of the impostor Mahoroet, engaged in a war
against literature and knowledge, tending evidently to the ex-
termination of arts and sciences, and to the transformation of
men, in every thing but external form, into brutes. And with
equal reason was this the aim of both mahometism and'
popery. False religion, of every kind, must be a mortal
enemy to knowledge : for nothing is more certain, than that
knowledge is a mortal enemy to all false religion.
How similar have been the aims and the pretensions of
pagan and of papal Rome ! Both aspired, and with amazing
success, at universal empire. But how dissimilar have been
the means employed for the attainment of the end. The
former pagan Rome, secured the superiority which her arms
had gamed, by diffusing knowledge, and civilizing the con-
quered nations : thus making, as it were, compensation to
them by her arts for the injustice she had done them by her
arms. The latter, papal Rome, who, for a long time indeed,
employed more fraud than violence, (though far from reject-
ing the aid of either) secured her conquests by lulling the
people in ignorance, diverting their curiosity with monstrous
legends, and monkish tales and by doing what she could to
render and keep them barbarians.
In regard to the expedient, of which I have here been
treating, the prohibition of books by an index expurgatorius,
there seem to have been two capital errours in Rome's method
of managing this affair, notwithstanding her political wisdom.
But nothing human is on all sides perfect. One was, that she
was some centuries too late in adopting this measure. It
would be difficult to say what might have been effected, had
the attempt been earlier made, and supported with her usual
firmness. The other errour was, that things had proceeded
too far for so violent a remedy. Had less been attempted,
more would have been attained. The inquisitors, in the true
spirit of their calling, and in compliance with the impetuous
temper of the reigning pontiff, breathed nothing but extirpa-
tion and perdition. They had not so much knowledge of
legislation as to perceive, that when a certain point is exceeded
in the severity of laws, they are actually enfeebled by what
was intended to invigorate them. Hardly was there a man
that could read, who was not involved in the excommuiiica-.
tion denounced by an act so extravagant. Nor could any
thing render the sentence more contemptible, or prove a
greater bar to its execution, than its being made thus to com^
prehend almost every body.
34a LECTURES ON
This errour was quickly perceived. Recourse was had,
not without effect, to Paul's successour, Pius the fourth, who,
being a man of more temper than his predecessor, remitted
to the council of Trent, then sitting, the consideration of the
affair. They, accordingly, committed to some of the fathers
and doctors the examination of suspected books, and the re-
visal and correction of that absurd act of pope Paul, acknow-
ledging, that it had produced scruples, and given cause for
complaints. Since that time, the prohibitory laws, though,
in other respects, far from being more moderate, have avoided
the most exceptionable of those indefinite and comprehensive
clauses complained of in the former ; and I suspect, have by
consequence proved more effectual, at least in Italy and Spain,
in retarding the progress of knowledge.
Indeed, for some ages past, no heresy has appeared so
damnable in Italy to the ghostly fathers, to whom the revisal
of books is intrusted, us that which ascribes any kind of au-
thority to magistrates, independent of the pope ; no doctrine
so divine, as that which exalts the ecclesiastical authority
above the civil, not only in spiritual matters, but in secular.
Nay, the tenet on this subject, in highest vogue, with the
canonists, is that which stands in direct opposition to the
apostle Paul's. The ver}' pinnacle of orthodoxy with those
gentlemen is, that the lawful commands of the civil magistrate
do not bind the conscience; that our only motive to obedience
here is prudence, from fear of the temporal punishment de-
nounced by him ; and that, if we have the address to elude
his vigilance, and escape the punishment, our disobedience is
no sin in the sight of God. It is impossible for any thing to
be more flatly contradictory to the doctrine of all antiquity,
particularly that of the great apostle, who commands us to be
subject to those powers, not only for fear of their wrath, but
for conscience sake. It was lucky for Paul, the apostle I
mean, not the pope, that he had published his sentiments, on
this subject, about 1500 years before that terrible expedient
of the index was devised. He had, by this means, obtained
an authority in the christian world, which Rome herself,
though she may, where her influence is greatest, for a time,
elude it, cannot totally destroy. Otherwise that missionary
of Christ must have long ago had a place in the Index expur-
gatorius.
But to return ; Rome has obstructed the progress of know-
ledge, not only by suppressing altogether books not calculated
to favour her views, but by reprinting works, which had too
great a currency for them to suppress, mutilated and grossly
adulterated. Those editions, when they came abroad, being
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 34^
foif the most part neatly, many of them elegantly, printed, and
well executed, were ignorantly copied by the printers of other
countries, who knew not iheir defects. In this way those
corruptions have been propagated. Besides, Rome wants not
her instruments in most countries, protestant as v/ell as popish,
such as priests and confessors, Avho are always read} to lend
their assistance in forwarding her views. Hence it is often
rendered extremely difficult to distinguish the genuine editions
from the spurious. For let it be observed, that their visitor*
of books do not think it enough to cancel whatever displeases
them in the authors they examine : they even venture to foist
in what they judge proper, in the room of what they have
expunged. In the year 1607", the index expiirgatorius^ -pub-
lished at Rome, specified and condemned all the obnoxious
places in certain authors, which were judged worthy to be
blotted out. This, to those who possess that index^ shows
plainly what were the things which, in several authors of re-
putation, were either altered or rased. But such indexes,
which, in the hands of a critick, would prove extremely use-
ful for restoring old books to their primitive purity and inte-
grity, are now to be found only in the libraries of a very few,
in the southern parts of Europe. Whether there be any of
them in this island I cannot say. But the consequence of the
freedom, above related, which has been taken by the court of
Rome with christian writers of the early ages, (for it luckily
did not answer their purpose to meddle with the works of pa-
gans) has rendered it, at this day, almost impossible to know
the real sentiments of many old authors of great name, both
ecclesiasticks and historians : there being of several of them
scarcely any edition extant at present, except those which have
been so miserably garbled by the court of Rome, or, which
amounts to the same thing, editions copied from those which
they had vitiated by their interpolations and corrections.
But what would appear the most incredible of all, if the act,
were not still in being, pope Clement the eighth, in the year
1595, in his catalogue of forbidden books, published a decree,
that all the books of catholick authors, written since the year
tS\5^ should be corrected, not only by retrenching what is
not conformable to the doctrine of Rome, but also by adding
what may be judged proper by the correctors. That you may^
see I do not wrong him, (for that, in corruptions of this kind,
they should be so barefaced is indeed beyond belief) it is ne-
cessary to subjoin his own words : In Ubris cathoJicorum re-
centiorum^ qui post annum Christianas salutis 1515 conscripti
sint, si id quod corrigendum occurrit^ paucis demptis ant additis
emendari posse videatur, id correctores faciendum curent ; sin
35© LECTURES ON
minus^ omnino deleatur. The reason why the year 1515 is par-
ticularly specified, as that after which the writings, even of
Roman catholicks, were to undergo a more strict examination
and scrunity than any published by su -h before, is plainly this:
It was in the year immediately following, that Luther began
to declaim against indulgences, which proved the first dawn
of the reformation. His preaching and publications produced
a very hot controversy. Now many of those who defended
what was called the catholick cause, and strenuously maint.iin«
ed the perfect purit}^ of the church's doctrine, did not hesitate
to acknowledge corruptions in her discipline, and particularly
in the conduct of Rome, which needed to be reformed. They
affected to distinguish between the court and the church of
Rome, a distinction no way palatable to the former. Now it
would have been exceedingly imprudent to suppress those con-
troversial pieces altogether, especially at that time, when they
were universally considered as being, and in fact were, the
best defence of the Romish cause against the encroachments
of protestantism, and the reformation. On the other hand,
the concessions made in them, in regard to discipline, and
the court of Rome, and the distinctions they contained, bore
an aspect very unfavourable to Roman despotism. Hence the
determination of correcting them, not only by expunging what
was not relished at court, but by altering and inserting what-
ever was judged proper to alter, or insert, by the ruling pow-
ers in the church. Authors had been often falsified before,
and made to say what they never meant, nay, the reverse of
what they actually said : but of a falsification so imprudently
conducted, this of pope Clement was the first example. Their
interpolations, however, of the works even of Roman catho-
licks, though not so avowedly made, have by no means been
confined to those who have written since the year 1515, Plati*
na, a writer of the fifteenth, and therefore of the former cen-
tury, who gave the world a history of the popes, though far
from being unfavourable to the pretensions of Rome, has not
escaped unhurt their jealous vigilance. For though he had
said very little, as Bower well observ^es, that could be sus-
pected of being any way offensive, that very little has been
thought too much. Accordingly, he has been taught, in all
the editions of his v/ork, since the middle of the sixteenth
century, to speak with more reserve, and to suppress, or dis-
guise, some truths which he had formerly told.
Hence it happens, that in regard to all the books which have
passed through the hands of Roman licensers, or inquisitors,
we can conclude nothing from what we find in them, in re-
gard to the sentiments of their authors, but solely in regard
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 351
Ib'the sentiments of Rome, to an exact conformity to which,
it was judged necessary, that by all possible methods of
squeezing and wrenching, maiming and interpolating, they
should be brought. Nor has the revisal been confined to books
written on religious subjects, but extended to all subjects, po-
liticks, history, works of science, and of amusement. Nay,
what is more, the pope came at last to claim it as an exclusive
privilege, to prohibit, and to license, not for Rome only, and
the ecclesiastical state, but for all Christendom, at least for all
the countries wherein his authority is acknowledged, insisting,
that what he prohibits, no prince whatever, even in his own
dominions, dares license, and what he licenses, none dares
prohibit. The first of these has been generally conceded to
him, though not perhaps punctually obeyed.
The second occasioned a violent struggle in the beginning
of the last century, between the pope and the king of Spain,
on occasion of a book written by cardinal Baronius, containing
many things in derogation of that monarch's government and
title, and traducing, with much asperity, many of his ancestors,
the kings of Arragon. The book was licensed at Rome, but
prohibited in the Spanish dominions. The monarch stood
firm in his purpose, and the pope thought fit to drop the con-
troversy, but not to renounce the claim. This Rome never
does, actuated by a political maxim formerly suggested, of
which she has often availed herself when a proper opportunity
appeared. A more particular account of this contest you
have in father Paul's discourse on the constitution and rules
of the inquisition at Venice. How great would be the conse-
quence of this papal privilege, if universally acquiesced in,
any person of reflection will easily conceive. Who knows not
the power of first impressions on any question, the influence
of education, and the force of habit, in rivetting opinions form-
ed in consequence of being uniformly accustomed to attend to
one side only of the question. All these advantages the pontiff
would have clearly in his favour, could he but secure to him-
self that high prerogative, and become, in effect, our supreme
•r only teacher.
352 LECTURES OH
LECTURE XXV.
XX AVING discussed, in the two preceding lectures, what re*
lates to the concealment of scripture, and of all the publick
offices of religion, by the use of an unknown tongue, and to
the check given to the advancement of knowledge by the /n-
dex expurgatorius^ I intend, in this discourse, to consider the
third grand expedient adopted by Rome for securing the im-
plicit obedience of her votaries, namely persecution.
Nothing is clearer, from the New Testament, than that
this method of promoting the faith is totally unwarranted, as
well by the great author, as by the first propagators of our re-
ligion. His disciples were sent out as sheep amidst wolves,
exposed to the most dreadful persecutions, but incapable oi
ever giving to their enemies a return in kind, in a consistency
with this signature of Christ's servants ; for in no change of
circumstances will it suit the nature of the sheep to persecute
the wolf. As it was not an earthly kingdom which our Lord
came to establish, so it v/as not by carnal weapons that his
spiritual warfare was to be conducted. The means must be
adapted to the end. My kingdom^ said he, is not of this world;
if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight*
Worldly weapons are suited to the conquest of worldly king-
doms. But nothing can be worse adapted to inform the
understanding, and conquer the heart, than such coarse im-
plements. Lactantius says with reason, Defendenda est reli-
gio non occidtndo, sed moriendo, non scevitia sed patientia. To
convince, and to persuade, both by teaching and by example,
was the express commission given to the apostles. The only wea-
pons which they were to employ, or which could be employed,
for this purpose, were arguments and motives from reason
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 353
and, scripture. Their only armour, faith and patience, pru-
dence and innocence, the comforts arising from the conscious-
ness of doing their duty, and the unshaken hope of the pro-
mised reward. By means of this panoply, however lightly it
may be accounted of by those who cannot look beyond the
present scene, they were, in the spiritual, that is, the most im-
portant sense, invulnerable ; and by means of their faith, as
the spring which set all their other virtues in motion, they
obtained a victory over the world.
Beside the declared enemies from without, pagans and infi-
del Jews, whom christians had, from the beginning to contend
with, there arose very early, in the bosom of the church, as
had been foretold by the apostles, certain internal foes, first to
the primitive simplicity of christian doctrine, and afterwards
by a natural progress, to the unity, sympathy, and love, which,
as members of the same society, having one common head,
they were under the strongest obligations to observe inviolate.
From the very commencement of the church, the tares of
errour had, by divine permission, for the exercise and proba-
tion of the faithful, been sown among the good seed of the
word. The only remedies which had been prescribed by the
apostles against those who made divisions in the christian
community, founding new sects, which commonly distinguish-
ed themselves by the profession of some erroneous doctrine,
.or at least some idle and unedifying speculation, were first,
repeatedly to admonish them, and afterwards, when admoni-
tions should prove ineffectual, to renounce their company, that
is, to exclude them from their brotherhood, or excommunicate
them ; for the original import of these expressions is nearly
the same. On this footing matters remained till Constantine,
in the beginning of the fourth century, embraced the faith,
and gave the church a sort of political establishment in the
empire.
From the apologies of the fathers before that period, (so the
defences of our religion written by them are named) it is evi-
dent, that they universally considered persecution for any opi-
.nions, whether true or false, as the height of injustice and
oppression. Nothing can be juster than the sentiment of Ter-
tullian, which was, indeed, as far as appears, the sentiment of
all the fathers of the first three centuries. " Non religionis est
" cogere religionem, quae sponte suscipi debeat, non vi." And
. to the same purpose Lactantius, " Quis imponat mihi necessi-
'' tatem vel colendi quod nolim, vel quod yelim non colcndi ?
" Quid jam nobis ulterius relinquilur, si etiam hoc, quod vo-
" luntate fieri oportet, libido extorqueat aliena?" Again,
, *' Non est opus vi.et injuria ; quiareligio cogi non potest, ver-
■ . , Y y
^4 LECTURES OK
" bis potius quam verberibus res agenda est, ut sit voluntas.'''
Once more, " Longe diversa sunt carnificina et pietas, nee
" potest aut Veritas cum vi, aut jpstitia cum crudelitate con-
*' jungi." Their notions in those days, in regard to civil go-
vernment, seem also to have been much more correct than they
became soon after. For all christians, in the ages of the mar-
tyrs, appear to have agreed in this, that the magistrate's only
object ought to be the peace and temporal prosperitj^ of the
commonwealth.
But (such alas ! is the depravity of human nature) when the
church was put on a different footing, men began, not all at
once, but gradually, to change their system in regard to those
articles, and seemed strongly inclined to think, that there was
no injustice in retaliating upon their enemies, by employing
those unhallowed weapons in defence of the true religion,
which had been so cruelly employed in support of a false : not
considering, that by this dangerous position, that one may
justly persecute in support of the truth, the right of persecut-
ing for any opinions will be effectually secured to him who
holds them, provided he have the power. For what is every
man's immediate standard of orthodoxy but his own opinions ?
And if he have a right to persecute in support of them, because
of the ineffable importance of sound opinions to our eternal
happiness, it must be even his duty to do it when he can. For
if that interest, the interest of the soul and eternity, come at
all within the magistrate's province, it is unquestionably the
■most important part of it. Now as it is impossible he can
have any other immediate directory, in regard to what is or-
thodox, but his own opinions, and as the opinions of different
men are totally different, it will be incumbent, by the strongest
of all obligations, on one magistrate to persecute in support of
a faith, which it is equally incumbent on another by persecution
to destroy. Should you object, that the standard is not any
thing so fleeting as opinion : it is the word of God, and right
reason. This, if you attend to it, will bring you back to the
very same point which you seek to avoid. The dictates both
of scripture and of reason, we see but too plainly, are differ-
ently interpreted by different persons, of whose sincerity we
have no ground to doubt. Now to every individual, that only
amongst all the varieties of sentiments can be his rule, which
to the best of his judgment, that is, in his opinion, is the im-
port of either. Nor is there a possibility of avoiding this
recuiTence at last. But such is the intoxication of power, that
men blinded by it, will not allow themselves to look forward
to those dreadful consequences. And such is the presumption
of vain man, (of which bad quality the weakest judgments
have commonly the greatest share) that it is with difficulty any
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 3S5
one person can be brought to think, that anjj^ other person has,
®r can have, as strong conviction of a different set of opinions,
as he has of his.
But to return to our ' narrative. When the secular powers
had changed sides, and were now come to be on the side of
Christianity, this was the manner, on the subject of religion^
in which some men among the clergy began to argue. Princes
ought to be considered in a twofold capacity ; one is, that of
christians, the other, that of princes, in both which characters
they are bound to serve God : as christians, by observing the
divine commandments, like every other disciple of Christ : as
princes, by purging the church of all schisms, heresies, and
blasphemies, punishing all transgressors of the divine precepts,
but more especially those who, by the transgressions above-
mentioned, violate the first table of the decalogue ; for as those
sins are committed more immediately against God, they are
much more heinous than theft, adultery, murder, or any sins
committed against our neighbour. Now under the general
denomination of sins of the first table, every sect (were their
verdicts to be severally taken) would comprehend almost all
the distinguishing tenets of every other sect. And though, In
support of their plea, they might have many specious things
to advance, they would all be found to lean on a false hypo-
thesis.
First, it is false, that the concerns of the soul and eternity
fall under the cognizance and jurisdiction of the magistrate.
To say that they do, is to blend the very different and hardly
compatible characters of magistrate and pastor in the same
person ; or, which is worse, to graft the latter upon the for-
mer, the sure method of producing a most absurd and cruel
despotism, such as obtains in all Mahometan countries : nor
is that much better which prevails more or less in popish
countries, especially in the ecclesiastical state, and in Spain
and Portugal, where the magistrate is grafted on the pastor,
or rather on the priest.
> Secondly, it is false, that spiritual concerns, if they did fall
Cinder the cognizance of the magistrate, are capable of being
regulated by such expedients as are proper for restraining the
injuries of violence and fraud, and preserving tranquillity and
good order in society. Though, by coercion, crimes, which
are outward and overts acts, may effectually be restrain-
ed, it is not by coercion that those inward effects can be
produced, conviction in the understanding, or conversion
in the heart. Now these in religion are all in alL By
racks and gibbets, fire and faggot, we may as rationally
propose to mend the sight of a man who squints, or is
purblind, as by these means to enlighten the infidel's or the
S5S LECTURES ON
heretick's understanding, confute his errours, and bring him
to the belief of what he disbelieved before. That by such nte-
thods he may be constrained to profess what he disbelieves
still, nobody can deny, or even doubt. But to extort a hypo-
critical profession, is so far from being to promote the cause
of God and religion, that nothing, by the acknowledgment of
men of all parties, can stand more directly in opposition lo it.
Nihil est tam voluntarium quam religio, says Lactantius, m qua^
si animus sacrijicantis aversus est^ jam sublata^ jam nulla est.
Thirdly, it is a false, though a very common notion, that
errours concerning the divine nature and perfections ought
to be denominated blasphemies, or considered as civil crimes.
Blasphemy, in regard to God, corresponds to calumny in regard
to man. The original name for both is the same. As the
latter always implies what, in the language of the law, is
called mains animus^ a disposition to calumniate, so does the
former. Mere mistake, in regard to character, especially
Ivhen the mistake is not conceived by hivii who entertains it to
derogate from the character, constitutes neither of those
crimes. That no imputation, however, is commoner, can be
afscribed solely to that malevolence, which bigotry and con-
tention never fail to produce. Thus the arminian and the
calvinist, the protestant and the papist, the Jesuit and the jan-
senist, throw and retort on each other the unchristian reproach
of blasphemy. Yet each is so far from intending to lessen, in
the opinion of others, the honour of the divine majesty, that
he is fully convinced that his own principles are better adapted
to raise it than those of his antagonist, and for that very rea-
son he is so strenuous in maintaining them. But to blacken,
as much as possible, the designs of an antagonist, in order the
more easily to bring odium on his opinions, is the too com-
mon, though detestable, resource of theological controvertists*.
I proceed to show the advances which, from time to time,
were made, till that system of persecution which, in a great
part of the world, still obtains, was brought to maturity and
established. For ages after the opinion first took place among
christians, that it was the magistrate's duty to restrain here-
ticks by the infliction of civil penalties, they retained so much
moderation, as not to think that the punishment could justly
extend to death, or mutilation, or even to the effusion of
blood. But now that the empire was become christian, there
gradually arose in it diverse laws against this new crime
heresy^ which are still extant in the codes of Theodosian and
Justinian, imposing on the delinquents fines, banishments, or
• For the scripture import of blaspliemy, and the narure of that crime,
see " Preliminary Dissertaiions to a Version of t]ie four Gospels," by the
Author, vol. 1, p. 395, &c.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ZS7.
ponfiscations, according to the circumstances, and supposed
degree, of the delinquency. All that regarded the execution
of those laws, the trial as well as the sentence, devolved on the
magistrate. Only the nature of the crime, what was heresy or
schism, was determined by the ecclesiastical judge. One step
in an evil course naturally leads to another. The first step was
made when civil penalties were denounced against particular
opinions and modes of thinking. This may be considered as
the hrst stage of the doctrine and practice of intolerance, ii^
the christian church. Nor could any thing be more explicitly^
or more universally, condemned than this had been, by the fa-
thers of the first three centuries, and several of the fourth.
Humani juris et naturalis potestatis est^ said TertuUian, in the
beginning of the third century, uniciiique quod putaverit colere^
and Hilary of Poitiers, in the fourth, in opposition to those
who favoured the interposition of the magistrate. Deus cog-
nitionem sui docuit^ potius quam exegit^ et operationum ccelestium
admiratione, prceceptis suis concilians auctoritatem coactam conji-
tendi se aspernatus est voluntatem. Again, Deus universitatis
est^ obsequio non eget necessario, non requirit coactam confes-
sionem ; non falkndus est sed promerendus^ simpUcitate queer en-'
dus est^ confessione discendus est^ charitate amandus est, timore
venerandus est, voluntatis probitate retinendus est. At vera
quid istud, quod sacerdotes timere Deum vincidis coguntur, pcenis
jubentur ? Sacerdotes carceribus cojitiiientur ? Men's system of
conduct may come, we see, to be totally reversed. But this
is'always the work of time. Every advance has its difficulty,
and is made with hesitation. But one difficulty surmounted
enaboidens a man, and renders it easier for him to surmount
another. That again makes way for the next, and so oii till
the change be total.
Several bishops and pastors, who had not yet been able to
divest themselves of the more pure and harmless maxim.s of
primitive times, or rather of their divine master, who totally
reprobated all secular weapons in this warfare, thought, that
after they had declared opinions heretical, and denied their
communion to those who held them, they could not innocently
intermeddle further, or give information to the magistrate,
dreading that such a conduct would be irreconcileable to the
great law of charity. Others more hardy, (for there will
always be such differences among men) resolved, by any
means, to silence such as they could not confute, and to com-
pel those to dissemble, whom they despaired of convincing;
the plain language of which conduct was. If yve cannot make
them better, we will make them worse, — If they will not be
believers, they shall be hypocrites. And whoever will not be
induced to be of what we accoimt the family of God, we shall
S58 LECTURES dN
be sure to render twofold more the childreji of the devil thatt
they were before.
People of this stamp, possessed of a pride, (misnamed zeal)
which cannot brook contradiction, were forward in giving in-
formation to the magistrate on those whom they called here-
ticks, and in prompting him, where there appeared a remiss-
ness, to inffict the punishments which the imperial edicts had
denounced. To such are these words of Hilary very perti-
nently addressed : Misereri licet nostrce cetatis lahorem^ et prcE'
sentium temporum stultas opinioncs congemiscere^ quibus patro-
Cinari Deo humana creduntur^ et ad tuendam Christi ecclesiam
amhitione seculari laboratur. Oro vos^ episcopi^ quibusnam siif-
fraglis ad proedicandwn evangelium apostoli usi sunt ? ^ibus ad-
juti potestatibus Christum prcedicaverunt., gentasque fere omnes
ex idolis ad Deum tra?istu/erimt ? Anne aliquam sibi assumebant
e palatio dignitatem^ hymnum Deo in carcere inter catenas et
jlagella cantantes ^ Edictisque regis Paidus Christo ecclesiam
congregabat P Nerone se^ credo ^ out Vespasiano patrocinantibus^
tuebatur^ quorum in nos odiis confessio divince prcedicationis ef-
Jlaruit P At nunc^ proh dolor ! divinam Jidem suffragia terrena
commendant inopsque virtutis suae Christus^ dum ambitio nomini
suo conciliatur, arguitur. 'Ferret exiliis et carceribus ecclesia^
credique sibi cogit^ quce exiliis et carceribus credita est ; pendtt a
dignatione communicantium^ quce persequentium est consecrata
terror e ; fugat sacer dotes ^ quce fug atis est sacerdotibus propa-
gata^ diligi sese gloriatur a mundo^ quce Christi esse non potuit,
nisi mundus earn odisset. Such were the sentiments of St.
Hilary, for he has obtained a place in the kalendar, which I
take notice of the rather, that we may perceive, in the stronger
light, the different temperaments which prevailed in the saints
acknowledged by Rome, who belong to different ages. Light
and darkness are not more opposite than the spirit of a Su
Hilary, in the fourth century, and the spirit of a St. Dominick,
the inventor of the inquisition, and the butcher of the Albi-
genses, in the thirteenth. But this by the vi^ay. I return to
the early times.
It happened, not often at first, that on account of sedition,
real or pretended, the person accused of heresy was punished
capitally. This, if people were not satisfied of the reality of
the sedition, rarely failed, for some ages, to raise against the
informers, especially if pastors, much clamour and scandal.
Our Lord's words, / came not to destroy merits lives ^ but to
^ave them^ had not yet totally lost their force among christians.
The spirit of the master, and that of the servant, made too
glaring a contrast to escape the notice of those who had any
knowledge and reflection. Indeed, for several ages, those
ministers who thought themselves warranted to call in the se-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 35>
pular arm, did not think themselves authorized to proceed so
far, as to be aiding in what might affect either life or members.
They therefore abstained not only from giving information
where there was any danger of this kind, but from appearing
at the secular tribunal in any capacity, unless that of interces-
sor in behalf of the accused. And this office was not in them,
as it is in the clergy of some Romish countries at present,
under a disguise of mercy, quite transparent, a downright in-
sult upon misery. But a long tract of time was necessary be-
fore matters could be brought to this pass. St. Martin, in
France, (another instance of humanity and moderation, even
in those whom Rome now adores as saints) excommunicated a
bishop in the fifth century, for accusing certain hereticks to
the usurper Maximus, by whose means he procured their
death. That worthy minister declared, that he considered
any man as a murderer, who was accessary to the death of
another, for being unfortunate enough to be mistaken in his
opinions. On this foot, however, things remained till the
year 800. It belonged to councils and synods to determine
what is heresy, but (except in what relates to church censures)
the trial, as well as the punishment, of the heretick, was in
the magistrate. Neither was the punishment legally capital,
unless when the heresy was accompanied with crimes against
the state. That this pretence was often made without foun-
dation, by men of an intolerant temper, there is little ground
to doubt.
About this time happened what is called the great schism
of the east, the breach betwixt the Greek and the Latin
churches, since which time, till the destruction of the eastern
empire by tlie Turks, the cause of heresy and schism remained
in the Greek churches on the same footing as before. In the
west, however, it has undergone immense alterations; inso-
much, that the popular sentiments concerning zeal and charity
have long stood in direct opposition to those which obtained,
and rendered the christian character so completely amiable, as
well as venerable, in the days of the martyrs. Indeed, for
$ome centuries, particularly the eighth, ninth, and tenth, re-
markable for nothing so much as the vilest superstition and
grossest ignorance, and for insurrections, revolutions, and
confusions, every where, hereticks and sectaries made but lit-
tle noise, and were as little minded. With the revival oi
knowledge, even in its dawn, these also revived. There is no
human blessing without some foil. But considering the gross-
ness of the reigning superstition, one might be at a loss to
say, whether any new absurdity could be, comparatively, pro-
nounced an evil. Whatever served to rouse men out of theii:
letliargy, seemed to promise good in its consequenqes.
360 * LECTURES ON
LECTURE XXVL
jfxFTER the year 1100, in consequence of the perpetual
jars which had been betwixt the popes and emperours for
more than fifty years back, and which still subsisted, and in
consequence of the frequent wars and scandals in the christian
world, and the irreligious lives of the clergy, innumerable he-
reticks sprang up, whose heresies (as they are called) were
commonly levelled against ecclesiastical authority, the abuse
of which was, indeed, so excessive, and so flagrant, as to give
but too much weight with every body, to the severest re-
proaches that could be uttered. All attacks upon received
doctrines mast ultimately affect the power by which they are
established. But when the assault is made directly on that
power, the fabrick of church authority is in the most imminent
danger. The aim of the former is only to make a breach in
the wall of the edifice, but that of the latter is an attempt to
sap the foundation. As we have seen all along that the dar-
ling object of Rome is power, to which every other considera-
tion is made to yield, we may believe that attempts of this
kind would excite a more than ordinary resentment. This,
in fact, was the consequence : an unusual degree of rancour
in the ecclesiasticks, more especially in the pontiff and his
minions, mingled itself with their bigotry or mistaken zeal,
{for it would be unjust to impute the effect to either cause
separately) and produced the many bloody, and, till then, un,
exampled scenes of cruelty, which ensued. The popes, by
letter, frequently excited the bishops as well as princes, the
bishops instigated the magistrates, by all possible means, to
subdue or exterminate the enemies of the church. When the
number of these enemies was so great, that it vras impossible
ECCLEStAS riCAL HISTORY. 361
to attain this end by means of judicatories, civil or ecclesias-
tical, princes were enjoined, on pain of excommunicationj
interdict, deprivation, &c., to make war upon them, and extir-
pate them by fire and sword. And in order to allure, by re-
wards, as well as terrify by punishments, the same indulgences
and privileges were bestowed on them who engaged in those
holy battles, and with equal reason, as had been bestowed on
the crusaders, who fought for the recovery of the holy sepul-
chre against the Saracens in the east«
It was not till the year 1200 that the names inqmsition into
heresy, and inquisitor^ were heard of. The bishops and their
vicars being, in the pope's apprehension, neither so fit nor so
diligent as he desired and thought necessary in such a cause,
there were, at that time, opportunely for his purpose, two ne\V
orders of regulars instituted, those of St. Dominick, and those
of St. Francis, both zealously devoted to the church, and men
with whom the advancement of Christianity, and the exaltation
of the pontifical power, were terms perfectly synonymous^
To St. Dominick, indeed, the honour of first suggesting the
erection of this extraordinary court, the inquisition, is com-
monly ascribed. It was not, however, in the beginning, on the
same footing on which it has been settled since, and still conti-
nues. The first inquisitors Were vested with a double capacity,
not very happily conjoined in the same persons ; one was,
that of preachers, to convince the hereticks by argument ; the
other, that of persecutors, to instigate magistrates, without
intermission, to employ every possible method of extirpating
the contumacious, that is, all such as were unreasonable enough
not to be convinced by the profound reasonings of those mer-
ciless fanaticks and wretched sophisters. I may add a third,
that of being spies for Rome, on the bishops, on the secular*
powers, and on the people, both Romish and heretical* They
had it in charge to make strict inquiry, and report to his holi-
ness the number and quality of the hereticks, the zeal disco-
vered in those called catholicks, the diligence of the bishops,
and the forwardness or backwardness which they found in the
secular powers, to comply with the desires of the pope. It
was from this part of their charge in particular, that they were
denominated inquisitors. They had, however, no tribunals.
Only they stirred up judges to banish, or otherwise chastise
those hereticks, whom they brought before them. Sometimes
they excited potentates to arm their subjects against them ; at
other times they addressed themselves to the mob, and inflam-
ed the populace whom they headed, to arm themselves, and
join together in extirpating them. For this purpose they put a
cross of cloth upon the garments of those, who were willing
z z
362 LECTURES ON
to devote themselves to this service, and titled them crusaders.
This badge (for a nadge in such cases is of great consequence,
it matters little what it be, whether a red cross, or a blue
cockade) operated like a charm on those holy idiots, (pardon
the misapplication of the epithet holy in conformity to the
style of the barbarians spoken of) and gave the finishing
stroke to their delusion. If they were inflamed before, they
now became infuriate, and raised to a supercelestial sort of
virtue, which defies all the humbler restraints of reason and
humanity. In this way things continued till the year 1250,
that is, for half a century.
The attempts of the fathers inquisitors during that period,
were greatly aided by the emperour Frederick the second,
who, in the year 1224, being in Padua, had promulged four
edicts in relation to this matter, taking the inquisitors under
his protection, imposing on obstinate hereticks the punishment
of fire, and perpetual imprisonment on the penitent, commit-
ting the cognizance of the crime to the ecclesiastical, and the
condemnation of the criminal to the secular judges. This
was the first law which made heresy capital. This, however,
at first, by reason of the circumstances of the times and the
differences which soon arose betwixt the pope and the empe-
rour, had not all the effect that might have been expected from
it. However, it proved very pernicious in example, in de-
nouncing against heresy the punishment of death, to which,
before that time, it had never been by law subjected. The
example was, besides, of a most cruel death ; which, never-
theless, came gradually to be adopted, almost universally, into
the laws of other countries.
After the death of Frederick, which happened about the
middle of the century, pope Innocent the fourth remaining,
as it were, sole arbiter of affairs in Lombardy, and iome
other parts of Italy, applied his mind to the extirpation of
heresies, which, during the late troubles in the state, had in-
creased exceedingly. And, considering the labour which had
hitherto been employed in this service, by the Franciscan
friars, as well as the Dominican, whose zeal and diligence,
unrestrained by either the respect of persons, or the fear of
dangers, by any regards to justice, or feelings of humanity,
recommended them highly to the pontiff; he judged it the
surest remedy, to avail himself of their ardour and abilities,
not as formerly, in preachin ;, or even enlisting crusaders, and
inflicting military executior , but by erecting them into a stand-
ing tribunal, with very ( xtensive authority, and no other
charge than that of the expurgation of heretical pravity.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 363
There were two objections against this expedient. One
was, that this judicatory appeared an encroachment on the
jurisdiction of the ordinary, or bishop of the place ; the other
was, that it was unprecedented, that the secular magistrate,
to whom the punishment of hereticks was committed, should
be excluded from the trial and judgment. All the imperial
laws hitherto, even the last severe law of Frederick, and the
municipal statutes of every country, had put the cognizance
of the fact, and the trial of the accused, though not the des-
cription of the crime, into the hands of the magistrate. For
removing the first difficulty, the pope devised this tempera-
ment : he made the tribunal consist of the inquisitor, and the
bishop of the place ; .wherein, however, the inquisitor was not
only to be principal, but, in effect, every thing, the bishop
having little more than the name of a judge. For removing
the second, and in order to give some appearance of authority
to the secular powers, they were allowed to appoint the officers
to the inquisition, but still with the approbation of the inqui-
sitors, and to send with the inquisitor, when he should go in-
to the country, one of their assessors, whom the inquisitors
should choose. A third part of the confiscations was to go to
the community, in return for which the community was to be
at all the expense of keeping the prisons, supporting the pri-
soners, &c. These things made the magistrate, in appear-
ance, co-ordinate with the inquisitor, but, in reality, his ser-
vant. The infliction of the legal punishment was also in the
magistrate, after the heretick had been tried and condemned
by the inquisitors. But this was so much a thing of course,
and which he well knew he could not avoid executing, with-
out incurring the vengeance of the church, that in this he was,
in fact, no better than the spiritual judge's executioner. His
office was, in no respect, magisterial, it was merelv servile.
On this footing the inquisition was erected in the year 1251,
in those provinces in Italy most under the pope's eye, Roma-,
nia, Lombardy, Marca Trevigiana, and intrusted to Domi'»
nican friars. Afterwards it Vv-as extended to more distant pro-
vinces. Thirty-one rules, or articles, defining the powers
and jurisdiction, and regulating the procedure of this new
judicatory, were devised ; and all rulers and magistrates were
commanded, by a bull issued for the purpose, to give, under
pain of excommunication and interdicts, punctual obedience,,
and every possible assistance to this hoK' court. The inquisi'*
tors were empowered to fulminate against the refractory.
Afterwards, in the \ear 1484, king Ferdinand the catholick,
'having put a period tc the reign of the Mahometans in Gra-
364' LECTURES ON
nada, did, to purge his own, and his consort Elizabeth's do-
minions, from both Moors and Jews, erect, with consent of
pope Sextus the fourth, a tribunal of inquisition in all the
kingdoms possessed by him, which took cognizance not only
of Judaism and mahometism, but also of heresy and witch-
craft. The form of the judicatory then introduced, and still
remaining there is, that the king nominates an ecclesiastick
to be general inquisitor for all his dominions, and his holiness
confirms him, if he approve the choice ; for he may reject
him if he please. The inquisitor named by the king, and con-
firmed by the pontiff, names the particular inquisitors destined
for every place, who, before entering on their office, must ob-
tain the royal approbation. The king, besides, deputes a
council, or senate over this business, who sit where the court
resides, and of which the inquisitor general is president. This
council has supreme jurisdiction, makes new regulations when
it sees occasion, determines differences between particular
inquisitors, punishes the faults of their officers, and receives
appeals. From Spain it extended to its dependences, and
was introduced into Sicily, Sardinia, and the Indies.
Attempts, however, of this kind, have not proved equally
successful in all Roman Catholick states, or even the greater
part of them. It was never in the power of the pope to ob-
tain the establishment of this tribunal in many of the most
populous countries in subjection to the see of Rome. In
some it was introduced, and soon after expelled, in such a
manner as effectually to preclude a renewal of the attempt.
The difficulties arose from two causes ; one was, the conduct
of the inquisitors, and their immoderate severity, as well as
their unbounded extortion and avarice, to which I may add,
the propensity they showed, on every occasion, to extend, be-
yond measure, their own authority; insomuch, that they were
proceeding to engross, on one pretext or other, all the crimi-
nal jurisdiction of the magistrate. Under heresy, they in-
sisted that injideUtij^ blasphemy^ perjury^ sorcery^ poisonings
bigamy^ usury^ were comprehended. I'he other cause was,
that the tribunal was found to be so burdensome, that the
community refused to be at the expense. In several places it
was found necessary to ease the publick of this charge, and iij
order to abate somewhat of the excessive rigour, which had
raised so much clamour against it, a greater share of the
power was given to the bishop. These things served to faci-
litate its introduction into Tuscany and Arragon, and even in-
to some cities of 1' ranee ; but in this last country it was not
long permitted to remain.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 3$^
It is not entirely on the same footing m the difFereat
places where it has been received. In Spain and Portugal
this scourge and disgrace of humanity glares, monster like,
with its most frightful aspect. In Rome it is much more
tolerable. Papal avarice has served to counterbalance pap^l
tyranny, and, in defect of a better principle, produced what^
if it do not deserve the name, has some of the good conse-
quences of moderation. The wealth of modern Rome arise^s
very much from the constant resort of strangers of all coun-
tries and denominations, and, for the most part, of the highej"
ranks. Nothing would prove a more effectual check to that
resort, and, consequently, to the unceasing influx of riches
into that capital, than such a horrid tribunal as those which,
from Lisbon and Madrid, diffuse a terrour which is felt in
the utmost confines of those miserable kingdoms. In Venice
it is, indeed, as moderate as it is possible for a judicatory to
be, which is founded on a principle not more false than tyran-
nical, that men are responsible for their opinions to any
human tribunal. But the particular constitution of that court
was settled by an express stipulation between the pontiff and
the state. The Venetian senate would not admit an inquisi-
tion into their dominions on any other terms, than such as
secured at least some regard to justice and humanity in their
proceedings, and prevented them from extending their juris-
diction beyond the original limits, or arriving at an indepen-
dency on the secular powers. With so much caution and
jealousy did that wise aristocracy guard against the encroach^
ment of the church.
It is no more than doing justice to many Roman Catholick
states to acknowledge, that they are almost as much enemies
to that infernal tribunal, as even protestants themselves. Nor
can I in this be justly accused of advancing any thing rashly,
the tumults which the attempts to introduce it into some parts
of Italy, Milan and Naples in particular, and afterwards into
France, and other countries called catholick, and its actual
expulsion from some places, when, to appearance, settled, are
the strongest evidences of the general sentiments of the
people concerning it. It is only to be regretted, that those
who, in this matter, think as we do, should be inconsistent
enough to imagine, that a despotism, which required for its
Support such diabolical engines, could, with any propriety, be
said to come from God; But so far have those called chris-
tians departed from the simplicity that is in Christ, that they
will admit any rule forjudging of the title of prophets, or
teachers, in divine things, rather than the rule given by him
whom they call Master. Bi/ their fruits shall ijou know them.
366 LECTURES ON
Do men gather grapes of thorns^ or Jigs of thistles ? No test,
of a divine mission, if Jesus Christ may be credited, is of any
significance without this.
It may not be improper to conclude our account of the
origin of the inquisition, with a few things in illustration of
the spirit in which it proceeds^ thai every one may have it in
his power to judge, whether the relation it bears to the spirit
of Christ be denominated more properly resemblance, or con-
trariety. It is so far from following the rules of almost all
other tribunals, where any regard is shown to equity, or the
rights of human nature, thaty in every respect, where the ec-
clesiastick power has not been checked by the secular, those
rules have been reversed. The account is entirely just, as
far as it goes, which is given by Voltaire of the Spanish
inquisition, and he might have added, of the Portuguese, for
both are on the same model. " Their form of proceeding
is an infallible way to destroy whomsoever the inquisitors
please." And let it be observed, that they have strong mo-
tives for destroying a rich culprit, as their sentence of con-
demnation is followed by the confiscation of all his estate,
real and personal, of which two-thirds go to the church, and
one-third to the state ; so that it may be said, with the
strictest propriety, that the judges themselves are parties,
having a personal interest in the issue against the prisoner,
** The prisoners are not confronted with the accuser or in-
former." Nay, they are not so much as told who it is that
informs. His name is kept secret to encourage the trade of
informing. And, surely, a better expedient could not have
been devised for promoting this dark business, than by thus
securing at once concealment and gratification, with impunity,
to private malice, envy, and revenge. Further, " there is
** no informer, or witness, who is not listened to. A public^
** convict, a notorious malefactor, an infamous person, a com-
*' mon prostitute, a child, are in the holy office, though no
*' where else, creditable accusers and witnesses. Even the
*' son mav depose against his father, the wife against her
*' husband." The detection of the grossest prevarication in
the delator and witnesses is hardly ever punished, unless with
a very gentle rebuke ; let it be observed, by the way, that to
the profligate and abandoned they can be very gentle, for they
dread, above all things, to do aught that might discourage
informers, spies, and witnesses. And that there may be no
risk of a want of information, they have, in all parts of the
kingdom, spies of all different qualities, who are denominated
the familiars of the holy office, a place of which even men of
high rank are sometimes ambitious, from different motives.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY* 367
some for the greater personal security, others because it em-
powers them to take a severe revenge on their enemies, and
others, no doubt, because they think they do God good ser-
vice. The wretched prisoner is no more made acquainted
with his crime than with his accuser. His being told the one,
might possibly lead him to guess the other. To avoid this,
he is compelled, by tedious confinement, in a noisome dun^^
geon, where he never sees a face but the jailor's, and is not
permitted the use either of books, or of pen and ink, or, when
confinement does not succeed, he is compelled, by a train of
the most excruciating tortures, '' to inform against himself;
*' to divine and to confess the crime laid to his charge, of
*' which often he is ignorant." An effectual method to bring
nine-tenths of mankind to confess any thing, true or false,
which may gratify their tormentors, and put an end to their
misery. *' This procedure," adds our historian, " unheard
*' of till the institution of this court, makes the whole king-
** dom tremble. Suspicion reigns in every breast. Friend-
" ship and openness are at an end. The brother dreads his
*' brother, the father his son. Hence taciturnity is become
** the characteristick of a nation endued with all the vivacity
*' natural to the inhabitants of a warm and fruitful climate,
** To this tribunal we must likewise impute that profound ig-
** norance of sound philosophy, in which Spain lies buried,
" whilst Germany, England, France, and even Italy, have dis-
** covered so many truths, and enlarged the sphere of our
" knowledge. Never is human nature so debased, as where
** ignorance is armed with power."
In regard to the extent of power given to inquisitors by
papal bulls, and generally admitted by the secular authority in
those countries where the inquisition is established, I shall
give the few following instances out of many that might be
produced. First, it is ordered, that the convicts be burnt
alive, and in publick ; and that all they have be confiscated ;
all princes and rulers who refuse their concurrence in execu-
ting these and the other sentences authorized by the church,
shall be brougL. under censure, that is, anathematized and
excommunicated, their states or kingdoms laid under an inter-
dict, &c. The house also, in which the heretick is appre-
hended, must be razed to the ground, even though it be not
his, but the property of a person totally unsuspected. This
ferocious kind of barbarity, so utterly irreconcilable to all the
principles of equity, is, nevertheless, extremely politick, as it
is a powerful means of raising horrour in the ignorant popu-
lace, and of increasing the awe of this tribunal in men of all
denominations, who must consider it as extremely dangerous
sm LECTURES ON
to have the smallest connexion with any pferson sfQspected o£
heresy, or so much as to admit him into their houses. The
inquisitors are also empowered to demand of any person
whom they suspect, (and, for their suspicions, they are not
obliged to give a reason) that he solemnly adjure heretical
opinions, ?.nd even give pecuniary security that he shall con-
tinue? a good catholick. The court of inquisition are also
priviL;ged to have their own guards, and are authorized to
give licences to others to carry arms, and to enlist crusaders.
One of Paul the ivth's bulls does not allow a reprieve froiA
the sentence to one who, on the first conviction, recants his
opinion, if the heresy be in any of the five articles mentioned
i"n that bull. But what is, if possible, still more intolerable,
is that, by a bull of Pius the vth, no sentence in favour of the
accused shall be held a final acquittal, though pronounced
after canonical purgation ; but the holy office shall have it ill
their power, though no new evidence or presumption has ap-
peared, to recommence the trial, on the very same grounds
thev had examined formerly. This ordinance ensures to the
wretch who has been once accused, a course of terrour and
rorraent for life, from which no discovery of innocence, though
clear as day, no judgment of the court can release him.
Another bull of the same pontiff ordains, that whoever shall
behave injuriously, or so much as threaten a notary, or other
servant of the inquisition, or a witness examined in the court,
shall, beside excommunication, be held guiltv of high treason,
be punished capitally, his goods confiscated, his children ren-
dered infamous, and incapable of succeeding to any body by
testament. Every one is subjected to the same punishment,
who makes an escape out of the prison of the office, or who
attempts, though unsuccessfully, to make it ; and whoever
favours or intercedes for any such. In these clauses, persons
of the highest rank, even princes, are comprehended.
Every one must be sensible, that there is something in the
constitution of this tribunal so monstrouslv unjust, so exorbi-
tantly cruel, that it is matter of astonishment, that in any
country, the people, as well as the secular powers, would not
rather have encountered any danger, than have submitted to
receive it. Nor can there be a stronger evidence of the
brutish ignorance, as well as gross depravity of any nation,
than that such a judicatory has an establishment among them.
The exorbitance of their power, as well as the pernicious ten-
dency of their rules, are, in effect, acknowledged by their su-
periours at Rome. In a directory printed there, by authority,
i'n 1584, it is said expresslv, that if the inquisitors were re-
solved to exercise their power in its utmost extent, they couH,
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 369
\vith facility, drive the whole people into rebellion. Now if
the power be so excessive and so hazardous, what shall we say,
to this additional circumstance that attends it, that it is, in
Several instances, so ill defined, as to furnish a pretext to him
who is possessed of it, whenever his ambition or inclination
leads him, of stretching it to any extent. This, indeed, may
be said to be consequent on all exorbitant powej. Though
all the power of a state or nation be not formally given to one
jparticular branch or member, if so much is given to it, that
what remains is too weak to serve as a control upon it, the
whole is virtually given to it. And if, in Spain and Portugal,
the ecclesiastical power has not swallowed up the secular, and
thereby engrossed the whole authority, they are more indebted
to the light which has been diffused through the rest of Europe,
in these latter centuries, and the jealousy of the other Eu-
ropean states, than to any remains of either sense or virtue in
those nations themselves. It must be attended to, that the
ecclesiastick power, in every country, which acknowledges the
pope, is but a branch of a foreign jurisdiction, namely, that of
Rome. Now it is the interest of the seciUar powers, in every
kingdom and state, to take care that the foreign power^ th«.
papal, (absurdly called the spiritualj do not quite overwhelm
the temporal, either among themselves, or in any other king^
dom or state. For if it should in any country, there would be
ground to dread, that with such acquisitions it might gradually
prove an overmatch for the civil powers in every other. Now
this is a danger to which popish countries are much more eX«
posed than protestant. In the former, Rome is already possess-
ed of a considerable share of jurisdiction, and has great influ<k
ence on the minds of the people ; whereas, in the latter, she
has neither jurisdiction nor influence ; andj consequently,
could have no hold for effecting a revolution in her favour.
With these she could do nothing but by invasion and conquest,
for which, with all her advantages, she is very ill furnished*
That Spain and Portugal, therefore, as civil powers, are of any
weight in the balance of Europe, they owe more to the discern-
ment, the vigilance, and the virtue of others, than to their
own.
From what has been said, we may remark by the way, the
injustice there is in so connecting, or associating the Romish
religion with the inquisition, as to conclude, that to be a Ro-
manist, and to be a friend to that tribunal, denote one and the
same thing. The case is so far otherwise^ that we are, on the
best grounds, warranted to affirm, that nine-tenths of that com-
munion detest the inquisition as much as we do. And of this
the most irrefragable evidences have been given in France, ia
A a a
3r« LECTURES ON
Germany, and eyen in Italy itself. How they should have
the inconsistency, notwithstanding this, to acknowledge a
power as from God, which has found it necessary to recur to
expedients so manifestly from hell, so subversive of every
principle of sound morality and religion, can be regarded only
as one of those contradictions, for which human characters,
both in individuals and in nations, are often so remarkable.
That the policy of Rome bears the marks not of the wisdom
which is from above, which is first pure, then peaceable, gen-
tle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits,
without partiality, and without hypocrisy ; but of that which
flows from a very different source, and is earthly, sensual,
devilish, is so manifest, that the person who needs to be con-
vinced of it, seems to be beyond the power of argument and
reason.
Upon the whole, how amazingly different, nay, how per-
fectly opposite in disposition, in maxims, and in effects, are the
spirit of primitive Christianity, and the spirit of modern Rome?
Let any considerate and ingenuous mind impartially examine
and say. Are heaven and hell, Christ and Belial, more adverse
than the pictures I have, in this discourse, and the preceding,
exhibited to your view ? Let it be observed also, that thes.e
are not caricatures drawn by enemies, but the genuin^e feature}^,
as exhibited in the works of their own authors.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. sVV
LECTURE XXVII.
X' HAVE now given you some account of the riie and pi^i
gress of the spirit of persecution in the church, and have par-
ticularly traced the origin, and unfolded the constitution of
that dreadful tribunal, the inquisition. You must have per-
ceived, that in every thing which relates to the procedure of*^
that court, there is an unrelenting barbarity, which bids de-
fiaiice to all the principles of justice ; and as, in all respects, it'
is without example in past ages, so I hope it will remain with-
out a parallel in future. The favourers of ecclesiastick ty-
ranny, sensible of the horrid appearance which the rapacity, as
well as the ferocity of this tribunal exhibits, and the very un-v
favourable conclusion it suggests to the discerning, have put
their ingenuity to the rack to devise reasons, or what may pass
with their votaries for reasons, in support of it.
According to Fra Paolo, in his account of the inquisition of
Vtenice, amongst other peculiarities of the holy office in that
state, which were, I may say, extorted by the secular from the
ecclesiastick power, one is, that they do not admit the confisca-
tion of the property of the accused, whether he be present and
convicted, or declared contumacious, and condemned in ab-
sence ; but appoint that his estate, both real and personal, shall
g6 to his lawful heirs, as though he had died a natural death.
He says, verv justly, in vindication of this article, that it is
always pernicious, to mingle pecuniary matters with what con-
cerns religion, which ought to proceed solely from a view to
the glory of God. For when men see, that the 2;eal of the
judges, in consigning hereticks to the flames, is the sure means
of procuring great acquisitions of worldly pelf, it will be im
possible to prevent their being scandalized, or to persuade-
them, however true, that the service of God was the sole, oi
3rj% LECTURES ON
even the primary motive. He adds, the court of Rome never
ceases, on every occurrence, to blame this Venetian ordinance,
reckoning, that the moderation enjoyed by the most serene
republick reproaches the Roman ordinance with excessive
severity. That, says he, which their partisans maintain in
publick in defence of their own practice is, that heresy is trea-
son against the divine Majesty, v/hich it is proper to avenge
more severely than treason committed against a human crea-
ture ; and that therefore it is a perversion of order, when he
who offends man receives a greater punishment than he who,
offends God. Now treason against man is punished with the
confiscation of goods, much more then ought treason against
God, a crime always incurred by heresy, to be so punished.
I shall give you this author's answer, rendered literally from
his own words, in a work written in Italian, published at Ve-
nice, a Roman Catholick state, and composed by order of the
Doge, the chief magistrate of the republick, to whom it is
dedicated. And I desire you further to take notice, that the
author is not only a Roman Catholick, but a priest, nay, a
friar. When this is considered, you will be surprised much
more at what he controverts with the advocates of papal des-
potism, than at what he yields to them. "• This argument,"
says he, " more specious than solid, is as a shadow without
*' a body. For it would condemn their own constitutions,
*' which pardon heresy the first time, upon being recanted ;
" whereas treason against the sovereign is not, on any terras,
*' pardoned even the first time ; whence it would follow, that
" by their own reasoning, they make less account of offending
** God than of offending man. But the truth is, that in im-.
*' posing punishments, respect is had not solely to the heinous-,
*' ness of the transgression, but to the attendant circumstances
** of the injury done to others, of the baseness wherewith the
*' action was accompanied, or of the malignity of disposition
*' shown by it. Royal majesty is not injured, unless through
" the evident malice and intention of the offender, whereas ;
*' heresy is commonly the effect of ignorance. Hence this
*"' almost always merits compassion, that never. Penalties are
*' intended more for an example to others, than for the chas-
*' tisement of the delinquent. The confiscation of goods for
" treason terrifies others, who are restrained, through love to
*' their offspring, preferring their interest to the gratification
*' of those passions, which instigate them against the prince.
" But in the case of heresy, every one conceives himself incit-. ■
" ed by spiritual motives, to which all regards to family ought
*' to be postponed. 1 he event demonstrates, that through
** divine grace, this most happy state of Venice, whose cle-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 373
*' mency gives great and universal satisfaction, remains as free
*' from the tares of heresy, without pillaging any man, as other
*' states where this pillage is made with the utmost rigour.
" Wherefore, without regard to the rules, examples, or reflec- ,
'' tions of others, it is proper for us to preserve those usages,
*' of whose utility we are ascertained by experience."
Thus far our author. He admits the argument used by
Rome to be specious. And so it is, doubtless, to a Roman
Catholick. It falls in with his earliest and most rooted pre-
judices, and suits the mode of reasoning, to which he has been.
habituated from his infancy. To a judicious and consistent
protestant, it is a palpable sophism, and has as little specious-
ness as solidity. It is, in effect, the same argument, of which
I showed the futility in a former discourse, with only the
change of the term. There the misapplication was of the
word blasphemy ; here it is of the word treason. The abuse
of the term is, in this instance, if possible, still more flagrant,
than in the other. In treason there is always a malicious de-
sign against the life or crown of the sovereign ; there is no-
thing analogous to this in what they call heresy. On the con-,
trary, the principal inducement with the alleged heretick, to
bear his suffering patiently, is an opinion (which, whether true
or false, is genuinely his opinion) that he thereby honours God,
does his duty, and discharges his conscience. What they call
obstinacy^ he cannot avoid considering as perseverance and
christian fortittide^ both of which are incumbent, and very
important duties, A retractation not produced by conviction,
but extorted by terrour, for himself and his children., he does
and must consider, as a real defection from God, a betraying
of the rights of conscience and of the interests of truth, as
the vilest hypocrisy and impiety. Nay, it cannot be consider-
ed otherwise even by his tormentors themselves, who are
always ready to acknowledge the guilt of a false confession,
(to which they are doing their utmost to bring the prisoner).
At the same time, I acknowledge, that there is a sort of trea-
son in heresy ; but it is not treason against God, nor is it trea-
son against the state, but it is treason against the priesthood ;
for whatever calls its infallibility in question, as an avowed
difference in religious opinions undoubtedly does, is an attack
upon the hierarchy, and, consequently, subversive of the more
than royal pretensions of church authority. This is the true
source of that rancour and virulence, with which this ima-
ginary crime has been persecuted by popes and ecclesiasticks,
and by none more than bj- those, whose whole lives bore wit-
ness, that they regarded no more the principles than tht- pre^
cepts of that religion, for which they seemed to be inflamed
with a zeal so violent.
37^ LECTURES ON
r sliallonly add on this subject, that if there were no other
article, (as there are more than fifty) we should have here suf=.
ficient ground for confuting those bold pretensions to constancy
and uniformity in religious sentiments, in v/hat is called the
Cfatholick church, with which the bishop of Meaux introduces
his history of the variations of protestants*. Opinions, on
the subject I' have been treating, more opposite to those held
universally by christians of the first three centuries, than those
openly avowed by the Romish church in latter ages, and stre-
nuously supported by her rulers, it would be impossible to con-
ceive. But of this I have given sufficient evidence in the two
preceding discourses. The difference is, indeed, great in this
respect, between romanists of the two last ages and christians
of the fourth and fifth ; but in these there cannot be said to be
a direct contrariety. Changes of this kind are always gradual.
In regard to the present century, there are some evident'^
symptoms, that even in Roman Catholick countries, the tidei*
of opinion on these articles begins to turn, and that theii"'
notions are becoming daily more favourable to right reason,
justice, and humanity. Every sincere protesttmt will rejoice
in the change. But how much, on the other hand, will it
prove to such a subject of heart-felt sorrow, when he sees, in
any protestant nation, (as sometimes undeniably happens, and*
of which we had some terrible examples in this very island, nd.^
farther back than the years seventeen hundred and seventy-'
nine, and eighty) a strong propensity to those very principles,;
which are the surest badge of spiritual tyranny, and have long|
remained the distinguishing disgrace of Roman usurpation,
I have now illustrated, with as much brevity as the subject'
would admit, Rome's three great engines for promoting ca-
tholick ignorance, and preventing every acquisition in know-
ledge which might prove subversive of her high pretensions ;
first, the concealment of scripture from the people, and even
of the impoi't of the forms of publick worship, by the daily use '
of a dead language ; secondly, the prohibition, under the sei"
verest penalties, of every thing which might serve to enlightetf*
and undeceive the world ; and thirdly, their system of' perse-^
cution. The first two were chiefly calculated for preventing^^
all intercourse with that most formidable enemy of supersti-'
tion, knowledge ; the third intended principally for checking"
its progress wherever it appears to have made any advances ;,
and that both by silencing all who had ventured to listen t6"
her dictates ; and, by deterring others from the' imitation of^
those over-curious inquirers, who are not satisfied to see witHf'
* See the preface to that work.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 3.7§
othe.r men's eyes, and hear with other men's ears, but would
have more light and information on the most interesting of all
subjects, than their ghostly fathers think their organs capable
of bearing.
The second expedient, however, is of a later date than the
other two ; for, though there were prohibitions of books some
centuries before the reformation, they were very general, and
related only to the books of those, who had been by the church
declared hereticks. It was not till after the invention of print-
ing, nay, and after the reformation, that the indices expiirgatorii
were devised. These have improved this engine, by giving it
all the perfection whereof it is susceptible. If they had timely
thought of smothering the art of printing in its infancy, which
was about the middle of the fifteenth century, I believe this
preventive device, as it was simpler, would have been more
easily executed, and more effectual, than that corrective expe-
dient of the indeXy which was adopted afterwards. Simpler^
because preventive, doing the business at once ; whereas, the
corrective method stands incessantly in need of additions
made to it, on account of the many volumes which are annu-
ally, in all parts of Europe, issuing from the press ; and which,
from the easy intercourse that now obtains between different,
and even distant, nations, are quickly circulated through the
whole. It might also have been more easily executed j for,
though there were many of those called hereticks then scatter-
ed through the world, they were not persons of any rank or
influence, nor was there, at that time, any nation in the westj
which had separated from Rome. And though, as was before
observed to you, every state had not admitted the inquisition,
the paramount authority of Rome, in spirituals, was acknow-
ledged, and in matters that- seemed to regard solely the purity
of the faith, very implicitly submitted to by all.
Nay, the ignorance and most absurd prejudices of the age
might have been of great service to the ecclesiasticks in secu-
ring success to the preventive remedy, if it had but occurred,
to their reverences, and been attempted in time. There was
then not only a strong, and, I may say, an universal belief in
sorcery, and judicial astrology, but the first specimens that
were exhibited of the typographical art were, in fact, strongly
suspected to be derived from the suggestion of evil spirits.
And this itself proved the foundation of a great deal of trou-
ble and persecution to John Faust, the inventor, (whom some
of you perhaps will know better by the name of Doctor Faus-
tus.) Nor did his acquittal by the parliament of Paris, when
prosecuted before them for magick, remove the suspicions,
wliich the people had entertained concerning him ; insomuch,
$7& LECTURES ON
that there was no defect of combustible materials for the eccle-
siastick thunders to set on fire, if the matter had been timely
attended to. But Mentz, the city where printing was first
attempted, lay luckily at a great distance from Rome ; in con-
sequence of which, this admirable invention had advanced
too far, was grown too considerable, and had gotten too many
rich, and great, and learned patrons, to support it, before ail
alarm of sufficient force to destroy it could be given; vrhere-
as, had the attempt at printing been first made in the heart o^
Italy, where that terrible Argus, the pope and conclave, is ever
on the watch, or in Spain, or Portugal, under the eye of a
vigilant and able inquisitor, capable of foreseeing the conse-
quences to the empire of ignorance and superstition, there is
reason to believe, that the inventor, though in effect a greater
benefactor to the human race, than all the conquerours and
heroes that ever existed, one who has done more to enlighten
and civilize mankmd than even the wisest legislators, had, in
reward of his ingenuity, been put to an ignominious and tor-
menting death, his name branded with indelible infamy, and
this most useful and beautiful invention had been stifled in the
cradle, and never more heard of. If this had been accom-
plished, no body can doubt, that it would have been a much
more effectual method than the index for answering their pur-
pose ; for that would have struck at the root of the evil,
whereof this serves only to lop off the branches.
But it pleased providence to bless with success the noble
discovery, which has brought learning, formerly inaccessible
to all but men of princely fortunes, within the reach of persons
in moderate circumstances, and has diffused, almost every
where, a knowledge which has proved more baneful to the
cause of superstition and tyranny, than any event that has hap-
pened since the first promulgation of the gospel. Knowledge
had, indeed, been gaining ground for some centuries before,
but its progress was slow. This served to accelerate its pro-
gress to an inconceivable degree. Light, acquired by one,
was quickly diflPused every where, and communicated to mul-
titudes. Nor was it only by a wider diffusion, but by occa-
sioning also an immense increase of knowledge, that the dis-
covery of the typographick art proved the source of the
changes, which were soon after effected. When, by the re-
markable facility of communication, learning was brought
within the reach of the middle ranks, the dead languages
became a very general study. The scriptures were read by
most students in the Latin vulgate, and, by a few deeper
scholars, in the Greek. The early writers of the church
were also wad. Reading naturally brought reflection, and
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 5r7
«>ccasioned comparison. They could hardly avoid comparing
the simplicity, and poverty, and meanness, in respect of world-
ly circumstances, ot our Lord, and his apostles, and most of
the primitive saints and martyrs, with the pomp, and splen-
dour, and opulence, of the rulers of the church in their own
days. It is said, that a picture which Huss had procured, and
exhibited to the people, wherein the entry of our Lord into
Jerusalem, riding on an ass, attended by his disciples on foot,
in a very homely garb, was contrasted by a procession of the
pope and cardinals, in their pontifical habits, and magnificently
mounted on the finest horses, richly caparisoned, and adorned
with gold and silver and jewels, did not a little contribute to
excite the indignation of spectators against their spiritual
lords, as bearing no resemblance to those meek, humble, and
unassuming men, from whom they pretended to derive all
their high powers and prerogatives.
But the difference, in respect of wealth and worldly grandeur
between the predecessors and their pretended successours,
would not have had a great effect, had this been the only dif-
ference. It was but too evident, that the disparity was not
less in disposition and character than in external circum-
stances. When once the clergy of any note had gotten con-
siderably above the middling ranks of life, and lived not only
in ease, but in opulence, and even in splendour, it was but too
visible, that, in proportion as they became more rich and
powerful, they grew less active and useful. They lived in
luxury and idleness, often in the most gross and scandalous
vices. As to what were properly the duties of their charge,
the instruction of the people, and presiding in the publick wor-
ship, and sacred offices among them, these were but too com-
monly considered as a sort of drudgery, very unsuitable to
men of their dignity and figure, and were therefore either to-
tally neglected, or devolved on those whose poverty, however
ill qualified they were, might induce them, for a living, to un-
dertake the task. At the same time, whatever could be con-
sidered as a prerogative, or privilege of the office, whatever
could contribute to the augmentation of their riches, or of
their power, was contended for with such an earnestness and
zeal, as the apostles and primitive martyrs never displayed,
unless in support of the faith and religious institution once de-
Ipered by their master unto the saints.
Thus every thing had run into extremes among them. The
dignified clergy, as they were both wealthy and powerful, were
generally lazy, proud, ambitious, envious, vindictive, and
sometimes profligate. Those again, on whom the burden of
the service was devolved, as they were both needv and depend-
B bb
378 LEjCTURES ON
ent, and often ignorant, had a share of the vices, which com-
monly accompany those circumstances. They were false,
mercenary, and servile. How much men were confirmed in the
very worst opinions, which had been formed of the order, by
the great schism in the papacy, which lasted about half a cen-
tury, when the christian world was divided between two, at
first, and afterwards three, rival popes, some nations adhering
to one, and others to another, each claiming to be the only
true head of the church, and calling every other an usurper, it
would be superfluous to remark. It was this division in the
popedom, both in the head, and in the members, which, as
much as anything, exposed, in the strongest light, the irreli-
gion, the worldly ends, the vile intrigues, and even the inlamy,
of ecclesiastick leaders. I would not, however, be understood,
in the character now given, as meaning to include all without
exception. I know that, even in the worst times, there were
both in the higher and in the lower ranks of clergymen, ex-
ceptions of persons, whose characters "^ ere irreproachable, and
lives exemplary. But what I say regards the generality, or
the much greater number, of the clerical body. And for the
truth of it, I desire no other vouchers, than their own most
celebrated historians and writers, men who not only lived and
died in the communion of Rome, but also were zealous for
preserving her unity, and advancing her honour. It will
readily be admitted, as a circumstance of additional weighty
that the different kingdoms and states of Europe had, at
length, attained a better defined and more settled constitution
than formerly ; that statesmen had begun to entertain more ex-
tensive views of policy, and princes to understand better their
own rights and interests. As men's eyes were opened, they
saw more clearly the encroachments and usurpations of the
priesthood. This discovery, co-operating with the abhorrence
and contempt they entertained of many of the priests them-
selves on personal accounts, namely, the neglect or prostitution
of the sacred functions, and the dissoluteness of their lives, led
them to inquire a little into the foundations of the high powers
and privileges which they claimed. This was a subject, that
would not bear examination. As the great foundations of the
hierarchy were in the people's ignorance, superstition, and
credulity, when these are removed, the whole fabrick falls to
pieces.
Now it is remarkable, that in all the heresies which sprang
up in the different parts of Europe, since the revival of letters,
church power seems to have been the principal object struck
at. Whereas, in ancient times, it v/as only incidentally affect-
ed. This will appear manifest to one who considers t^ aC|<
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 379
cusations brought against Waldo, of Lyons, or at least his fol-
lowers, Wickliff of England, Huss of Bohemia, Lather of
Germany, and Zuinglius of Switzerland ; and compares them
with those brought against the heresiarchs of the primitive
ages, such as Arius, Pelagius, Nestorius, Eutychius, in none
of whom was there any direct or pointed aim against ec-
clesiasticks. In those early times, indeed, church power,
far from being grown up to such an enormous picch as it
arrived at afterwards, was but in its nonage ; nor were church-
men themselves become obnoxious to universal odium, by
their laziness and arrogance, as well as by the immorality
of their lives. This difference of circumstances gave a taint
to the modern sects, which plainly distinguished them from
the ancient, and contributed not a little to the virulence,
which their disputes excited in their adversaries. The
wounds given to these were the deeper, and the more apt
to fester, inasmuch as they awaked in their breasts a con-
sciousness, that they were not unmerited. Those antago-
nists saw but too clearly, that the majority, even of their
friends, who would not admit the conclusions drawn by
the reformers^ (as they called themselves, or hereticks, as
their enemies called them) agreed but too much with them
in their premises : a reflection which could not fail to gall
them exceedingly.
The usurpation and tyranny of ecclesiastical superiours, the
ignorance in which they kept the people, were at first almost
the only topicks. From this they proceeded to censure prac-
tical abuses in ceremonies and discipline. The third and
last step of their progress was to expose errours in doctrine.
In these, indeed, when once they were propounded for dis-
cussion to the publick, they laid the principal stress of their
cause. These they considered as the source of every thing
else that was amiss. But it was not with them that ihey
began. The shameful incontinence and debauchery of thd
clergy were the occasion, that very early and verv generally
the canons, which enjoin celibacy, became the subject of of-
fence and clamour. The absurdity of reading the scriptures
to the people, and performing the publick offices of religion in
a language which they do not understand, it required but a
small share of knowledge, or rather of reflection and com non
sense, to enable them to discover. The manifest inconsistency
of the practice, which had been introduced, had grisdaatly
spread, and was at last become universal, of administrating the
eucharist to the people in o*c kind only, the bread, (the iu-
consistency of this I say) with the express words of tlie
380 LECTURES ON
institution, recorded in no fewer than four books of scripture;
the exorbitant power and immunities, which, through the cri-
minal, as well as weak, indulgence of the secular powers,
clergymen had obtained, and of which they made so bad a
use, afforded matter of loud and universal outcry.
For some centuries before Luther's days, these, and the
like corruptions, had been the subj^t of complaint and mur-
mur in various places. But|frora the time of Wickliff 's preach-
ing in England, and sending abroad his sentiments to the
world in Latin tracts, which was near a century and a half
before the reformation, men's attention was roused to such
topicks, and people grew bolder every day in speaking out
their opinions. What they had ventured only to mutter, as
it were, in a whisper before, they did not hesitate to proclaim
in the most publick manner. You know the influence which
Wickliff's doctrine had, even in the remote kingdom of Bohe-
TOiia, and the unhappy fate (I mean to outward apnearance) of
his two famous disciples, John Huss and Jerom of Prague,
I do not say that in all things they adhered to the opinions of
the celebrated English doctor. But as in what relates to the
corruptions of the church, and of the clergy, the exorbitance
and abuse of ecclesiastick power, they were evidently his fol-
lowers ; so by his writings and example they were embol-
dened to give an open testimony to the truth in their native
country, and to seal it with their blood in Constance. This,
though it be not considered as the era of the reformation, for
it happened about a century before the publick remonstrances
of Luther, is justly regarded as having paved the way for it.
Wickliff had left a seed of reformation in England, which it
was not in the power of the combined rulers, both spiritual
and temporal, to destroy. The martyrdom of Huss and Jerom
by the Romish sanhedrim, at Constance, confederated with the
imperial authority basely prostituted in violation of plighted
faith, through the accursed casuistry of those bloody and
deceitful men, proved, as in primitive times, the means of
promoting, and not of obstructing, the cause. In short, men
were now arrived at such a measure of knowledge, as ren-
dered the methods employed to keep their minds in subjec-
tion, formerly so successful, perfectly ridiculous. The clergy
had lost that veneration and respect from the people, which
mere external trappings, and arrogant pretensions, had once
been found sufficient to secure to them. Nay, so much were
the sentiments of many of the laity changed in regard to
those articles, that the spiritual denunciations and curses,
(when unaided by the secular arm) which would have made
their forefathers tremble, served only to make them smile.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. S81
Thus stood matters, in regard to religion, throughout
Europe, about the end of the fifteenth, and beginning of the
sixteenth century. Nothing could be more evident to men of
discernment, than that Christendom was ripe for a revolution
in its ecclesiastical polity, and seemed only to wait for a
favourable occasion. Such an occasion, the avarice of pope
Leo the tenth, and the impiety, as well as indiscretion, of his
ministers and agents, soon furnished. The use that was
made of that occasion, and the effects produced by it, I shall
briefly consider in my next lecture.
382 LECTURES ON
LECTURE XXVIIL
An spite of all the endeavours, so assiduously used by Rome,
to shut out the light of the understanding, and to keep men's
minds in bondage, in spite of all her affected mysteriousness
in religious offices, and even in the lessons she gives publickly
from the word of God, by employing a language unknown to
the vulgar, in spite of her prohibitions with regard to books,
and her inquisitions into heresy, it was impossible for her so
to exclude the dawn of truth, now rising on the world, after
a long and dreary night of superstition and ignorance, as to
prevent the discovery both of the weakness of her empire,
and of the badness of the foundation on which it stands.
Men were become at length pretty generally disposed to listen
to those, who declaimed against their spiritual guides, whose
faults they could not now ai'oid perceiving. They no longer
entertained for them the blind veneration, wherewith they
had formerly been affected. Nay, they seemed to be running
fast into the opposite extreme, that of entertaining for their
ecclesiastical superiours an immoderate aversion and con-
tempt. The pride, the avarice, the ambition, the laziness,
and the sensuality of the clergy were never-failing topicks of
satire every where.
If things had not been in this train, when Luther began his
publick declamations against the validity of indulgences, and
other pov/ers, which Rome had usurped over the christian
people, converting their ignorance and brutishness into useful
engines for filling her coffers ; that great reformer had never
been so successful amongst all ranks and degrees of people,
as he evidently proved. But as the knowledge and personal
experience of the much greater part of his hearers perfectly
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. s§3
confirmed the severest of his censures, he found no difficulty
in fixing their attention, and in exposing, to the conviction of
ntiany, the total want of support from scripture, reason, and
antiquity, of the arrogant claims to dominion, which had been
raised by their spiritual guides. It is indeed manifest, that
when Luther first assumed the character of reformer, he had
no intention, nor even idea, of proceeding so far as he after-
wards found himself under a necessity of going. He first
struck only at the abuse, which had proved the immediate
handle of examining the papal prerogatives. And though
from the beginning he did not ascribe to the pope that omni-
potence, which has not very decently been attributed to him
by the canonists, he was, on the other hand, far from disput-
ing his primacy, or even his supremacy, in any sense short of
absolute despotism.
It has often been objected to him, and his followers, under
which denomination the Romanists are wont to include all
protestants, that he himself appealed to the pope from the
judgment of his antagonists, that he declared repeatedly, that
he would be determined by his judgment ; and yet, when his
holiness interposed, and gave judgment on the question in
debate, he did not depart, in the smallest circumstance, from
the doctrine he had maintained in direct contradiction to that
judgment. The truth, I believe, is : when Luther declared
his submission to Rome, he spoke sincerely, though unadvis-
edly : he flattered himself, that the reasons which had influ-
enced his opinion were exceedingly plain, and could not fail
to influence the pontiff's, when examined seriously. I do not
question, that he was then willing to impute the scandals and
abuses committed in preaching the indulgences, more to the
instruments employed than to the employer ; and persuaded
himself, that when the pope should be informed of the whole,
he could not avoid being ashamed of the conduct of his
agents, and would justify Luther, so far, at least, as either
to recal, or to qualify, the powers which had been given
in relation to indulgences, and to pronounce no censure
on the principles, which, on this subject, had been maintain-
ed by that appellant. Perhaps he even thought that, through
the superintendency of providence, (for at that time he seems
to have entertained no sentiments hostile to the monarchical
form of church government) such a scandal would be prevent-
ed, as the publick justification of a doctrine of the most per-
nicious tendency, disseminated by many of the monks on this
occasion.
But whatever was his opinion in regard to the conduct which.
would be held by Rome, certain it is, that he was egregiously
384 LECTURES ON
disappointed. His doctrine was solemnly anathematized and
condemned by the pope as heretical ; he himself was com-
manded, within a limited time, to recant, on pain of incur-
ring all the censures and pimishraents denounced against ob-
stinate hereticks. Luther then but too plainly perceived, that
he had not sufficiently known himself, when he professed such
implicit submission to the pope. By his preaching and publi-
cations he had involved himself in controversy, and brought
a number of adversaries upon him. This set him upon in-
quiring into the foundations of the received doctrine, and ex-^
amining the fabrick of ecclesiastick dominion which had been
erected. Both these he had, before that time, received as
subrnissiveiy as any the most implicit son of the church. Nei-
ther of them could bear a critical examination. Of this, the
further he went, he had the fuller evidence.
It was not easy for any man, especially a man of so sanguine
ii temper, and of so great acuteness, to confine himself
entirely to those topicks, which gave rise to the debate. We
must be sensible, it would have been the more difficult, when
the humour of his antagonists is duly considered. They ar-
gued from principles generally received at the time, and
which he thought himself under a necessity either to admit or
to deny. This led him to inquire into those principles, and
the inquiry often terminated in a detection, as he thought, of
their falsehood. He was too honest, and too intrepid, not to
avow the discovery, and this always engaged him in a new
controversy. The scholastick art of disputation then in vogue,
which abounded with subtle, but unmeaning, distinc-
tions, might have given him considerable assistance in eluding
the address and malice of his enemies, without explicitly de-
claring himself on several points, which they had very artfully
dragged into the dispute. That this should be their method
we cannot be surprised. The more articles of the received
doctrine thev could, by plausible inference, show his princi-
ples to be subversive of, the more they exposed him to popu-
lar odium, and embarrassed him for a reply. The success,
however, of his preaching, and of his writings, was so far
bevond expectation, that he was not discouraged from going
as far into every question as his adversaries could desire.
Nav, now that he was led into the discussion, now that
Rome had gone all the lengths which his enemies could de-
sire, now that the rupture was complete, he seemed forward
to examine every thing to the bottom. He was no longer de-
sirous of keeping any measures with the ecclesiastical estab-
lishment. The whole fabrick appeared ruinous. No sound-
ness in the materials of which it had been raised. Rotten-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 385
ness was discernible in every part. In spite of all the arts of
his enemies, who to argument were not slow in employing
more formidable weapons, in spite of the power, as well as
number, of those he had to contend with, his doctrine spread
and gained proselytes every day. Among these were some
of high rank and consideration, who were able to protect him,
and did protect him, against all the dangers with which he
was environed. The influence of his doctrine is not to be
judged of barely by the converts which he made. The con-
version of so many kingdoms and principalities to his system,
though the greatest, was not the only effect of his teaching. It
waked men thoroughly out of that profound sleep, in which,
the understandings of the far greater part lay buried, and
roused a spirit of inquiry, that has not been without effect in
countries which still continue Roman catholick, in humaniz-
ing the spirit, and bringing even their theologians to extenu-
ate, by refined explanations, not dreamt of in former ages,
the absurdities of popery itself.
It has been objected to protestants, that Luther preserved
no uniformity, or even consistency, of conduct, with regard
to Rome : that he professed the utmost submission to what-
ever sentence she should pronounce, before it was pronounced,
and paid no regard to common decency afterwards ; allowed
himself to be so much transported by passion and resentment,
as to give vent to the grossest scurrilities and abuse ; nay,
that adopting the very spirit of that power against which he
declaimed, he, as it were, erected himself into a counter-
pope, retaliated upon the Roman pontiff, by returning excom-
munication for excommunication, and burning the pope's bulls
and decretals, in return for the burning of his books.
Rational protestants do not hesitate to acknowledge both the
inconsistency of his conduct, and the violence of his passion.
Their faith standeth not in the wisdom of man, but in the
power of God. It pleased God to make men the instruments,
of effecting the wonderful revolution, which, in the course of
his providence, was to be produced. And doubtless, those
men are entitled to some honour, on account of the character
which they bore, and the virtues which they displayed, as in-
struments of providence for promoting our good. They ser-
ved as monitors from God, for rousing our attention to the
dangers wherewith we were surrounded, for bringing us to as-
sert the rights of men, and of christians, of using the reason
which God hath given us, in judging for ourselves, in what
concerns our highest interest, for time and for eternity. But
then, we say, they were sent, not to command us to receive
the doctrine of eternal life implicitly from them, but to cx-
c cc
390 ^^ XU^TURES ON
cite VIS to search the scriptures, to inquire and decide for our-
selves. Their interposiiion., in offering their sentimenis in
contradiction to their superiours, could be defended onl) on
t^ie right of private judgment, and on this fundamental tenet,
that God, having given us his written word ror our rule, had
seen no necessity for empowering any man, or number of mei^.
to serve as an infallible interprtter of his will. A character,
therefore, which they had declared unnecessary, and wViich
they found no man or society entitled to assuine, they could not
consistently arrogate to themselves. And if any of thtm pre^
Bumed to do so, or acted in such a manner as implied this pre*-,
sumption, they were entitled to no regard from their hearers.
Protestants, so far from asserting the infallibility of the refor-
mers, do not affirm that they were inspired. They were ad-
mpnishers, not dictators. If even of the apostles, v/ho were
endowed with the miraculous gifts of the spirit, and often both
spoke and wrote by inspiration, much naore of the reformers,^
concerning whom the same things cannot be affirmed, we ought
t|d be followers no further than they were of Christ. They
^poke as to wise men — it belonged to the hearers to judge
what they said.
It is admitted also as undeniable, that the reformers, who.
arose about the same time in diff'erent places, differed on several
articles in the doctrine which they taught. This was particii^'
larly the case of Luther and Zuinglius, the two earliest. As
Jong as they confined themselves to the abuses which had, frona
worldl'., motives, been introduced into the church, there was a
wonderful harmony among them all. The sale of indulgences,
t^e celibacy of the clergy enforced by canon, the withholding
of the eucharistical cup from the people, the religious service
in an unknown tongue, the worship paid to images and relicks,
the invocation of saints and angels, the clerical usurpations o^
secular power, the rendering of church censures subservient
to the avarice and ambition of ecclesiasticks, were practical
corruptions in worship and discipline, wherein all the refornj-
ers were agreed. In these points, and several others such af^
these, a majority of the people would, I am persuaded, ia
most christian countries, have been found to concur.
We ought to consider it as a vcrv strong proof of this, thaj
some of those articles had afforded matter of geiieral com-
plaint for a long time before. Thus the permitting of thq
clergy to marr\ , the allowing of the c\ip to the people, th^
perlbrming of the religious offues in the lariguage of the
country, had afforded matter of application to popes and coun.-
cils for more than a century back. In regard to the corrupt
use so flagrantly made, of, excoiiimunications and indulgences,
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. S8Y
the scandal was in a manner universal ; nor was there a couri-
try, province, or city of note, where there were not frequeiit
murmurs against the exorbitant power and Wealth, aqd the
fconsequent laziness and arrogance, of churchmen. And it
their idolatries and superstitious usages did hot excite the like
general offence, it is more to be ascribed to this consideration.
that the knowledge of the scriptures had hardly yet descended
to the lower ranks. But we may rest assured of it, that the
increase of this knowledge, and the decrease of superstition
And idolatry, must have accompanied each other.
When a man enters keenly into controversy on any subject,
it is impossible to say (unless he is uncommonly circumspect)
how far it may carry him. It generally leads to the discussion
of questions little connected with that which began the dis-
pute. In ihis warfare, a man is so much at the mercy of his
afitagoaist, that if he enter into it with more warmth than cir-
cumspection, he will follow his eneniy that he may fight him,
Wheresoever he shall shelter himself; and in this way, botH
Combatants come to be soon off the ground on which the com-
Sat began. Exactlv such a disputant was Luther. And thi^
jiiay be said, in a great measure, of all who had a leading hand
Hi the reformation. To conquer the foe, wherever he was,
tarfie, ere the}'^ were aware, to be more an object to them, thari
to drive him off the field, and keep possession of it. In con-
sequence of this tendency, they were often diverted froni the
subject. From plain and practical questions, both parties soon
turned aside into the dark recesses of metaphysicks, where
£hey quickly bewildered themselves in a labyrinth of words.
Siich v^as the unhappy consequence of their dogmatizing on
abstruse, not to say unintelligible, points of scholastick theolo-
^v, wherein it might often admit a doubt, whether the same
tning was theant by them under different expressions, or dif-
ferent things under the same expression ; nay, sometime^
\v|hether either party had any meaning at all to what he said.
Though the reformers, and Luther in particular, were far
from being deficient in the powers of reasoning, they were
tnen of strong passions, and great ardour of spirit. This ren-
dered them liable to be drawn off from the subject ; and, when
neated with contradiction, to go such lengths as cool reflection
could hot justify. V/e ought to remember too, that, being
6'cclesiasticks, some of them regulars, they had been inured
to all the scholastick quibbles and chicanery in vogue at the
time, and from which it was impossible, that, without a mira-
cle, they should entirely emancipate themselves. We ought,
susb, to make allowances for some theological opinions, with
388 LECTURES ON
which their minds had been stronglj^ prepossessed, Icng before
they thought of a breach with Rome.
Of this sort of rooted prejudices was the doctrine of the
real presence^ as it was called with the reformer Luther.
This, on the one hand, seems with him to have been a favou-
rite principle, at the same time that, on the other, the hatred
he had contracted to Rome, made him that he could not bear
to think of agreeing with her almost in any thing. Therefore,
though he would have a real presence of Christ in the eucha-
rist, it must not be the popish real presence. His mgenuity
soon devised another. Accordingly, transuhstantiation was
rejected, and consubstantiation adopted in its stead. That is,
the bread and wine were not transubstantiated, or changed
into the substance of the body and blood of Christ, but the
body and blood of Christ were consubstantiated, that is, ac-
tually present in, with, and under, the elements of bread and
wine, and were therefore literally eaten and drunk by the com-s
municants. In no part of Luther's conduct does he appear
so extravagant as in this absurd conceit, as to which 1 agree
with the bishop of Meaux, that it has all the disadvantages
which the Romanists, and the Sacramentarians, charge on one
another, without having a single advantage that can be claimed
by either. It has all the absurdity which the latter charge upon
the former, inasmuch as it represents the same body existing
in different places at the same time, and inasmuch as it repre-
sents a substance existing without its accidents, or under the
accidents of another substance, but has not the advantage of
simplicity which the Romish doctrine has, in interpreting lite-
rally the words. This is my body. The expression on the
Lutheran hypothesis, ought to have been, not This is my body^
but /n, w/fA, and under ^ this is my body. For they maintain,
that the bread remains unchanged, and is that which is seen,
touched, and tasted ; but that the body of Christ, the same
which he had upon the earth, and has now in heaven, accompa-
nies the bread. It has all the obscurity which the Romanists
charge upon the Sacramentarians, na}^, a great deal more, in-
asmuch as the words are to be understood neither according
to the letter, nor according to any figure of speech ever heard
of before. For, by their account, it is neither literally Christ's
body, nor figuratively the sign or symbol of his body; but it
is something with which his body is accompanied. Indeed,
this novel hypothesis is, in everj^ vieAv, so extravagant, that it .
is impossible to conceive whence it could have originated, but v
from the collision (if I may so express mvself) of a strong
prejudice in favour of the real presence^ and a violent inclination
to dissent from Rome, as much as possible, on every subject.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. 389
The controversies in which this novelty of consubstantiation
involved him, not onl) with the papists, but with the Zuingli-
ans, and other reformers, drew him at last to take refuge in a
doctrine, if possible, still niore extraordinary, the ubiquity^
that is, the omnipresence, and consequently, the immensity,
of the body and human nature of Christ : hence they were
called ubiquitarians. This monstrous hypothesis was ima-
gined to remove all difficulties ; as though a less absurdity (if
there be degrees in absurdities^ could be removed by substi-
tuting a greater in its place. But if this did in fact solve the
difficulty, in regard to the presence of Christ in the eucharistj
it solved it by annihilating the sacrament. For what, I pray,
on that hypothesis, were the sacramental elements ? They will
not call them signs, or figures, for that suits only the language
of those whom they denominated sacramentarians. They
could not, with the church of Rome, call them the identical
body and blood of Christ ; for they do not think the elements
changed or transubstantiated. They remain as they were.
And if they should call them barely accompaniments of the
body and blood of Christ, wherein do they raise them abo\'e
any other kind of food ; for according to the ubiquitarian
doctrine, the body and blood of Christ being every where, may
be justly said to be /n, with^ and under ^ every morsel we eat,^
and every drop of liquor we drink, and every breath we draw.
Instead of raising the sacrament, therefore, by this extrava-
gant conception, they destroy the distinction between it and
every ordinary meal. Nothing more common, when one at-
tempts to explain what is inexplicable, and to defend what is
absurd, than to multiply absurdities, as one advances, and to
give one's self every moment more nonsense to explain, and
more to defend.
Let it not be imagined, that by these free remarks on that first
and most eminent reformer, I mean either to lessen his cha-
racter, or to depreciate his work. Few, on the contrary, have
a greater veneration for the one, or set a higher value on the
other. Luther had certainly great qualities and virtues : he
had also great faults ; but the former much preponderated.
His penetration and abilities were considerable. I mean his
knowledge, his eloquence, his skill in disputation, and his
readiness in finding resources, even in the greatest difficulties.
But these are only intellectual talents j he was largely supplied
with those active virtues, which are necessary for putting the
afore-named qualities to the best account. An unconquerable
zeal for what he believed to be truth, constancy- in maintain-
ing it, intrepidity in facing danger, an indefatiga'ile industry
in employing every opportunity that offered for exposing er-
rour and superstition, and defending what he thought the un-
396 LECTURES ON
adulterated religion of Jesus Christ. But his virtties \*^er^
riot without defects. Nay, his great qualities themselves Wer|
ftot untainted with those vices, to which they are thought t6
&ear an affinity. His logical acuteness sornetimes degenerated
ihto chicane. But this was the fault of the age he lived ift^
and of his education. His zeal, and the warmth of his teitt-
per, often betrayed him into an unjustifiable violence. Hi^
magnanimity was not untinctured with pride alid resentment.
His transports of rage, arid even his buffooneries, against the
piDpe, did unspeakable injury to his cause with the wiser and
more intelligent part of mankind ; even with those who desill-i
ed nothing more ardently than a reformation from the corrup-
tions which prevailed, and a defence of christian liberty against
the too well established tyranny of ecclesiastical superiourS;
His perseverance would, perhaps, on some 6ccasions, be mo^^
properly termed obstinacy. When he had once publickl\>'
supported si tenet, he seemed incapable of lending an impartial
car to any thing advanced in opposition to it. In short, What Hi
did, and what he was, notwithstanding his errours, justly
merit our admiration, Especially when we consider the tinieii
in which, and the people amongst, whom he lived ; t rti^f
add, the kind of education he had obtained.
No true protestant considers him, or any of the refofmer^,
as either apostle or evangelist. It is a fundamental principli^
with such, to call no man upon the earth master^ knoU'ing thaflt
we have one master, one only infallible teacher, in heaverfi
\^ho is Christ. All human teachers are no further to be rc^
garded, than they appear, to the best of our judgment, on inii
partial examination, to be his interpreters, and to speak hig
words. The right of private judgment, in opposition to all
human claims to a dictatorial authority, in matters of faith, H
a point so essential to protestantism, that were it to be gjiveii
up, there would be no possibility of eluding the Worst i*^-
proaches, with which the Romanist charges the reformation ;
namely, schism, sedition, heresy, rebellion, and I know noi
•What. But if our Lord, the great author and finisher of thid
faith, had ever meant that we should receive implir itly its ar-
ticles from any human authority, he would never have so E^
pressly prohibited our calling any man upon the earth mast'irf^
«»S-sjysj7?}5, leader, or guide. ^ _:^
A general dissatisfaction prevailed a^t the liVrie. ^ univi^f*
sal acknowledgment, things w^re not as' they ought to be.
Abuses and corruptions were on every hand complained of!,
and a cry for reformation was every where raised. Such meil
as Luther, at such a time, were well entitled to a fair and pa-
tient hearing. But, on the other hand, the hearers were alsti'
entitled to put this honour upon themselves ; namely, to rd-
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. ^
celyp what was spoken both by them, and by their ^tagonists,
as spoken to wise men, to weigh and judge what was said.
We are doubtless now, when the ferment of disputation is
over, in a better situation for judging coolly and equitably of
the merits of those extraordinary preachers, than the people
who lived in that age. And upon the most deliberate exami-
nation, I believe the unprejudiced will admit, that, with all
their imperfections, they did unspeakable service to the in^sjv
rests of knowledge, of Christianity, and of human liberty.
Having said so much of their talents and virtues, I shall,
With all the deference due lo the judgment of my hearers,
coffer a few things in regard to their defects and blemishes,
particularly considered as teachers. The first I shall observe
is an unavoidable consequence of the education they had re-
ceived, and the habits to which they were inured ; a sort of
metaphysical reasoning, or rather sophistry, the genuine
spawn of the scholastick logick, which had for ages been ii^
vogue, and which, in some measure, tainted all their disputes.
This led them to dogmatize on every point, and was that
which first produced dissension among themselves. As long
a^ they confined their declamation to church tyranny, to the,
correction of superstitious and idolatrous practices, to those
clerical artifices for enhancing power and wealth, which were,
subversive of sound morality, they concurred harmoruousiy
ip every thing ; hut no sooner did they enter on the endles^
aifnd unprofitable discussion of a.bstruse and unedifying ques-.
tions, of which holy writ has either said nothing, or given no
decision, than their harmony was at an end. They subdivided
immediately. They alarmed those who were inclined to think
favourably of their ca,use. They made many retrez^t who hajd
ijaade advances. They supplied their enemies with arms
against them., and made enemies of friends ; inasmuch a^ ma-
ny became enemies one to another. I'hen arose the distinc-
tions of Lutheran, and Zuinglian, and Calvinist, and Sacra^
i][ientarian, and Ubiquitarian : the first three as implying not
barely the disciples of such particular teachers, but as the par-
tisans of different systems. J^y this conduct, a,lso, they fur-
n^ished an argument to the common enemy, to which I do not
hpd that any sect has yet given a satisfactory reply. " If these.
" nice and abstract questions," said the Romanist, "about which.
" you make so great a bustle, are really so essential to salva-
" tion, as you pretend, it is impossible that the scriptures can
"•be so perspicuous as you account them, else you would ne-
" ver, after a careful examination, entertain sentiments so
" opposite in regard to those questions." What made the im-
3aa LECTURES ON
not treat those differences in opinion as matters of small mb4
ttieiit, as curious speculations with which the pious and con-
templative might amuse themselves, but on which^ without
affecting their christian character, persons might think differ-
entl)-- Far otherwise ; they treated them as equally funda-
mental with those which they itiade the subject of their decla-
mations against the corimon foe ; and were often transported
with equal fury against one another, on account of those dif-
ferences, as they were against him. " You all appeal" (said
Erasmus, whom they wanted to gain, and who at first appear-
ed favourable, being as much an enemy to superstition and
eccle^iastick tyranny as any of them, you all appeal, said he)
*'^ to the pure word of God, whereof you think yourselves true
" interpreters. Agree then amongst yourselves about its
*' meaning, before you pretend to give law to the world."
" It is of importance," said Calvin, in a letter to his friend
Melancthon, " that no suspicion of the divisions which are
^* amongst us descend to future ages ; for it is ridiculous be-
" yond imagination, that, after having broken with all the
" world, we should, from the beginning of our reformation,
" agree so ill amongst ourselves." Indeed, this bad agree-
mem., as it was a great stumbling-block in the way of those,
who inclined to examine the matter to the bottom, so it prov-
ed a greater check to the cause of the reformers, than any
which the open or the secret assaults of their enemies had
yet, either by spiritual weapons, or by carnal, been able to
give it.
But unfortunately, (for the truth ought, without respect of
persons, to be spoken) they had not sufficiently purged their
own minds from the old leaven ; they still retained too much
of the spirit of that corrupt church which they had left. As
they were men, we ought to form a judgment of them not on-
ly with candour, but with all the lenity to which their educa-
tion, the circumstances of the times, the difficulties they had
to surmount, and the adversaries, they had to encounter, so
justly entitle them. But as they were teachers of religion,
we ought to be at least as careful not to allow an excessive ve-
neration for their great and good qualities, to mislead us into
a respect for their errours, or to adopt implicitly the system
of any one of thexn ; that we must learn not to think of men
above that which is written, that no one of us be puffed up for
one against another. The spirit of the church, especiall) that
nourished in the cloisters, was a spirit of wrangling and al-
tercation. Never could any thing better suit the unimportant
and undeterminable questions there canvassed by the recluses,
than the words of the apostle, vain Janglings and oppositions
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY* m^
^f science falsely s& called. As therefore they had not avoid*
ted these, nor taken the apostolical warning not to dote about
^questions and strifes of words, they soon experienced in them-
selves, and in their followers, the truth of the apostolical pre-
diction, that envy, contention, railings, evil surmisings, and
perverse disputings, would come of them ; but that they would
never minister to the edifying of themselves in love ; that so
far would their disputations be from answering the end, and
terminating their differences, that they would incessantly give
birth to new questions, and would increase unto mor€ ungodli-
ness. This contentious spirit, derived from the schoolmen,
and commonly accompanied with spiritual pride, and a vitiat-
ed understanding, did not fail of producing its usMal conse-^
quences, uncharitableness in judging of others, on account
of difference of opinion, and intolerance in the manner of
treating them. Of the first of these^ the evidences are c6e-
Val with the questions, and perfectly unequivocal j and of the
last, that is, of the intolerant spirit they had retained of the
church they had deserted, it must not be dissembled, that
they gave but too manifest jproofs as soon as they had power.
You will do me the justice to believe me, when I add, that
it proceeds not from any pleasure in depreciating, that I have
taken so much of the invidious task of exposing the blemishes
m those truly meritorious characters. But of men so much ex*
posed to publick view, and so highly distinguishable, as were
our reformers from popery, there is a considerable danger on
either side in forming a wrong judgment. One is, indeed,
that a prejudice against the instruments may endanger out
contracting a prejudice against the cause. Of this exttettte,
in this protestant country^ I imagine, we are in little danger.
To prevent it, however, their faults ought not to be mention-
ed without doing justice to their virtues. The other is, lest
a prepossession in favour of the cause prove the source of a
blind devotion to the instruments. Of this extreme, the dan*
ger here is, I think, very great. Nay, though different men's
attention, according to their various circumstances, has beeli
fixed on different instruments in the hand of providence, iit
effecting the wonderful revolution then brought about) yet an
immoderate attachment to one, or other, has been, since the
beginning, the rock on which the far greater part of protes«
tants have split.
u d d
DISSERTATION
ON
MIRACLES:
CONTAINING,
AN EXAMINATION OF THE PRINCIPLES ADVANCED BY
DAVID HUME, ESQ.
IN AN
. ESSAY ON MIRACLES.
The works that I do in my Father's name, they bea?
witness of me. yobn x. 25.
Advertisement.
1 T is not the only^ nor even the chiefs design of these sheets^
to refute the reasoning and objections of Mr. Hume^ -with regard
to miracles : the chief design of them is^ to set the principal ar-
gument for Christianity in its proper light. On a subject that
hath been so often treated^ ^tis impossible to avoid saying many
things •which have been said before. It may^ hoivever^ with
reason be affirmed^ that there still remains^ on this subject^ great
scope for new observations. Besides^ it ought to be remembered^
that the evidence of any complex argument depends very much on
the order into -which the material circumstances are digested^ and
the manner in which they are displayed.
The Essay on Miracles deserves to be considered^ as one of
the mast dangerous attacks that have been made on our religion.
The danger results not solely from the merit of the piece ; it
results much more from that of the author. The piece itself
like every other work of Mr. Hume^ is ingenious ; but its merit
is more of the oratorial kind than of the philosophical. The me-
rit of the author, / acknowledge is great. The many useful
volumes he hath published of history, a.y -well as on criticism,
politicks, awf/ trade, have justly procured him^ -with all persons
of taste and discernment^ the highest reputation as a writer.
What pity is it^ that this reputation should have been sullied by
attempts to undermine the foundations both of natural religion
and of revealed !
For my own part^ I think it a' piece of justice in me, to ac-
knowledge the obligations I ewe the author^ before I enter on the
proposed examination. I have not only been much entertained
and. instructed by his works ; but^ if lam possessed of any ta-
lent in abstract reasonings lam not a little indebted to what he
hath written on human nature, for the improvement of that
talent. If therefore^ in this tracts I have refuted Mr. Hume's
Essay, the greater share of the merit is perhaps to be ascribed
to Mr. Hume himself. The compliment xuhich the Russian mo-
narchy after the famous battle of Poltoxva^ paid the Swedish
generals^ when he gave them the honourable appellation of his
masters in the art of war, I may^ xvith great sincerity ^ payt
my acute and ingenious adversary.
ADVERTISEMENT.
/ shall add a few things concerning the occasion and form of
the following dissertation.
Some of the principal topicks here discussed^ were more hriefly
treated in a sermon preached before the Synod of Aberdeen,
and are now made publick at their desire. To the end that an
argument of so great importance might be more fully and freely
canvassed than it could have been^ with propriety^ in a sermon^
it was judged necessary to new-model the discourse^ and to give
it that form i?i zvhich it noxv appears.
The edition of Mr. Hume^s essays to which I always refer in
this Ivor ky is that printed at L.ondon^ in duodecimo^ 1750, enti"
tled^ Philosophical essays concerning human understanding.
I have ^ since finishing this tract^ seen a later ^^xCvoxi^ in which
there are a few variations. None of them appeared to me so
material^ as to give ground for altering the quotations and re-
ferences here used. There is indeed one alteration, -which can-^
dour required that I should mention : I have accordingly men"
tioned it in a note.
The arguments of the essayist I have endeavoured to refute
hy argument, ^iere declamation / know no zvay of refutingy
but by analyzing it ; nor do I conceive how inconsistencies can
he anszvered otherzvise than by exposing them. In such analysis
and exposition, tuhich^ J ozvn, I have atteinpted without cere-
mony or reserve^ an air of ridicule is unavoidable : but this ridi-
cule, I am zvell aware^ if founded in misrepresentation, zvill
at last rebound upon myself. It is possible y that^ in some
things I have mistaken the author"* s meaning; I am conscious^^
that I have not., in any things designedly misrepresented it.
INTRODUCTION.
'' Christianity," it hath been said, « is not foundea
in argument." If it were only meant by these words, that the
religion of Jesus could not, by the single aid of reasoning,
produce its full effect upon the heart ; every true Christian
would cheerfully subscribe to them. No arguments unaccom-
panied by the influences of the Holy Spirit ; can convert the
soul from sin to God ; though even to such conversion, argu-
ments are, by the agency of the Spirit, rendered subservient.
Again, if we were to understand by this aphorism, that the
principles of our religion could never have been discovered,
by the natural and unassisted faculties of man ; this position, I
presume, would be as little disputed as the former. But if, on
the contrary, under the cover of an ambiguous expression, it
is intended to insinuate, that those principles, from their very
nature, can admit no rational evidence of their truth, (and.
this, by the way, is the only meaning which can avail our an-
tagonists) the gospel, as well as common sense, loudly re-
claims against it.
The Lord Jesus Christ, the author of our religion, often,
argued, both with his disciples and with his adversaries, as
with reasonable men, on the principles of reason, without this
faculty, he well knew, they could not be susceptible either of
religion or of law. He argued from prophecy, and the confor-
mity of the event to the prediction*. He argued from the tes-
timony of John the Baptist, who was generally acknowledged
to be a prophet f. He argued from the miracles which he
himself performed!, as uncontrovertible evidences, that God
Almighty operated by him, and had sent him. He expostu-
lates with his enemies, that they did not use their reason on
this subject. Why^ says he, even of yourselves^ judge ye not
what is right ^t In like manner we are called upon by the
apostles of our Lord, to act the part oiwise vien zr\d Judge im-
partially of zvhat they say^. Those who do so, are highly com-
mended, for the candour and prudence they discover, in an af-
fair of so great consequence •[[. We are even commanded, to
• Luke xxiv. 25. &c. John v. 39, & 46. f Jo^" v. 32. & 33. \ John v. 36.,
X. 25, 37. 38. xiv. 10, 11. || Luke xii. 57. §lCorx.l5. ^ Acts xvli. H.
400 INTRODUCTION.
be always ready to give an answer to every man that asketh us ct
reason of our hope* ; in meekness to instruct them that oppose
themselves'f ; and earnestly to contend for the faith -which was
once delivered to the saints\. God has neither in natural nor
revealed religion, left himself without a zvitness ; but has in both
given moral and external evidence, sufficient to convince the
impartial, to silence the gainsayer, and to render inexcusable
the atheist and the unbeliever. This evidence it is our duty to
attend to, and candidly to examine. We must prove all things
as we are expressly enjoined in holy writ, if we would ever
hope to holdfast that -which is good ||.
Thus much I thought proper to premise, not to serve as an
apology for the design of this tract, (the design surely needs
no apology, whatever the world may judge of the execution)
but to expose the shallowness of that pretext, under which the
advocates for infidelity in this age commonly take shelter.
Whilst therefore we enforce an argument, which, in support of
©ur religion, was so frequently insisted on by its divine found-
er, we will not dread the reproachful titles of dangerous friends^
or disguised enemies of revelation. Such are the titles, which the
writer whose sentiments we propose in these papers to can-
vass, hath bestowed on his antagonists^ ; not, I believe, through
malice against them, but as a sort of excuse for himself, or at
least a handle for introducing a very strange and unmeaning
compliment to the religion of his country, after a very bold
attempt to undermine it. We will however do him the justice
to own, that he hath put it outof our power to retort the charge.
No intelligent person, who hath carefully perused the Essay
sn Miracles^ will impute to the author either of those igno-
minious characters.
^ly primary intention in undertaking an answer to the afore-
said essay, hath invariably been, to contribute all in my power
to the defence of a religion^ which I esteem the greatest bless-
ing conferred by Heaven on the sons of men. It is at the
same time a secondary motive of considerable weight, to vin-
dicate philosophy^ at least that most important branch of it
which ascertains the rules of reasoning, from those absurd
consequences, which this author's theory naturally leads us to.
The theme is arduous. The adversary is both subtle and
powerful. With such an adversary, I should on very unequal
terms enter the lists, had I not the advantage of being on the
side of truth. And an eminent advantage this doubtless is.
It requires but moderate abilities to speak in defence of a
50od cause. A good cause demands but a distinct exposition
*1 Peter iii. 15. t 2 Tim. u. 25. :^Jude3. |1 I Thess. v. 21. ^p.204-.
INTRODUCTION. 401
and a fair hearing ; and we may say with great propriety, it
will speak for itself. But to adorn errour with the sem-
blance of truth, and make the worse appear the better reason^
requires all the arts of ingenuity and invention ; arts in which
few or none have been more expert than Mr Hume. It is
much to be regretted, that on some occasions he hath so ill
applied them.
Hi e e
DISSERTATION
ON
M I R A C L E S.
PART I.
Miracles are capable of proof from testimony, and religious
miracles are not less capable of this evidence than others.
SECTION L
Mr» Hume^s favourite argument is founded on a false hypothesis,
XT is not the aim of this author to evimce, that miracles, if
admitted to be true, would not be a sufficient evidence of a
divine mission. His design is solely to prove, that miracles
which have not been the objects of our own senses, at least
such as are said to have been performed in attestation of any
religious system, cannot reasonably be admitted by us, or be-
lieved on the testimony of others. " A miracle," says he,^
*' supported by any human testimony, is more properly a sub-
** ject of derision than of argument."* Again, in the conclu-
sion of his essay, *' Upon the whole, it appears, that no testi-
*' mony, for any kind of miracle, can ever possibly amount to
" a probability, much less to a proof."f Here he concludes
against all miracles. " Any kind of miracle" are his express
words. He seems however immediately sensible, that in as-
serting this, he hath gone too far ; and therefore, in the end of
the same paragraph, retracts part of what he had advanced in
the beginning, " We may establish it as a maxim that no hu«
" man testimony can have such force, as to prove a miracle,
" and make it a just foundation for any system of religion."
In the note on this passage, he has these words. <' I beg the
* Page 194. t P- 202.
404 MIRACLES CAPABLE OF Part L
*' limitation here made, may be remarked, when I say, that a
*' miracle can never be proved, so as to be the foundation of a
*' system of religion. For I own that otherwise there may
*' possibly be miracles, or violations of the usual course of na-
" ture, of such a kind, as to admit of proof from human testi-
*' mony."
So much for that cardinal point, which the essayist labours
so strenuously to evince ; and which, if true, will not only be
subversive of revelation, as received by us, on the testimony
of the apostles, and prophets, and martyrs ; but will directly
lead to this general conclusion : ' That it is impossible for God
* Almighty to give a revelation, attended with such evidence
* that it can be reasonably believed in after-ages, or even in the
* same age, by any person who hath not been an eye-witness of
* the miracles, by which it is supported.'
Now, by what wonderful process of reasoning is this strange-
conclusion made out ? Several topicks have been employed for
the purpose by this subtle disputant. Among these there is
one principal argument which he is at great pains to set off
to the best advantage. Here indeed he claims a particular
concern, having discovered it himself. His title to the honour
of the discovery, it is not my business to controvert ; I confine
myself entirely to the consideration of its importance. To
this end I shall now lay before the reader, the unanswerable
argument, as he flatters himself it will be found ; taking the
freedom for brevity's sake, to compendize the reasoning, and
to omit whatever is said merely for illustration. To do other-
wise would lay me under the necessity of transcribing the
greater part of the essay.
* Experience,' says he, * is our only guide in reasoning con-
' ceming matters of fact*. Experience is in some things va-
* riable, in some things uniform, A variable experience gives
* rise only to probability j an uniform experience amounts to a
* proof-j-. Probability always supposes an opposition of experi-
' ments and observations, where the one side is found to overr
* balance the other, and to produce a degree of evidence pro-
' portioned to the superiority. In such cases we must balance
* the opposite experiments, and deduct the lesser number from
* the greater, in order to know the exact force of the superiour
* evidencej. Our belief or assurance of any fact from the re-
* port of eye-witnesses, is derived from no other principle than
* experience ; that is, our observation of the veracity of human
* testimony, and of the usual conformity of facts to the reports
* of witnessesil. Now, if the fact attested partakes of the
* marvellous, if it is such as has seldom fallen under our ob-
* P. 174. t p- 175, ire. I ibid, y p, 176.
Sect. 1. PROOF FROM TESTIMONY. 405
* servation, here is a contest of two opposite experiences, of
* which the one destroys the other, as far as its force goes,
* and the superiour can only operate on the mind by the force
* which remains. The very same principle of experience,
* which gives us a certain degree of assurance in the testimony
•• of witnesses, gives us also, in this case, another degree of
•• assurance, against the fact which they endeavour to establish j
' from which contradiction, there necessarily arises a counter-
*■ poise, and mutual destructionof belief and authority^. Fur-
' ther, if the fact affirmed by the witnesses, instead of being
' only marvellous, is really miraculous ; if besides the testi-
* mony considered apart and in itself, amounts to an entire
;*^ proof ; in that case there is proof against proof, of which the
* strongest must prevail, but still with a diminution of its force,
.' in proportion to that of its antagonist. A miracle is a viola-
' tion of the laws of nature ; and as a firm and unalterable expe-
' rience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle
' from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument
* from experience can possibly be imaginedj-. And if so, it is
^ an undeniable consequence, that it cannot be surmounted by
* any proof whatever from testimony. A miracle, therefore,
* however attested, can never be rendered credible, even in the
* lowest degree.' This, in my apprehension, is the sum of the
argument on which my ingenious opponent rests the strength
;Qf his cause.
>• In answer to this I propose first to prove, that the whole is
built upon a false hypothesis. That the evidence of testimony
is derived solely from experience, which seems to be an axiom
of this writer, is at least not so incontestable a truth as he sup-
poses it ; that, on the contrary, testimony hath a natural and
■original influence on belief, antecedent to experience, will, I
imagine, easily be evinced. For this purpose let it be remark-
ed, that the earliest assent, which is given to testimony by
children, and which is previous to all experience, is in fact the
most unlimited, that by a gradual experience of mankind, it is
gradually contracted, and reduced to narrower bounds. To
say, therefore, that our diffidence in testimony is the result of
experience, is more philosophical, because more consonant to
truth, than to say that our faith in testimony has this founda-
tion. Accordingly youth, which is unexperienced, is credu-
lous ; age, on the contrary, is distrustful. Exactly the reverse
would be the case were this author's doctrine just.
Perhaps it will be said. If experience is allowed to be the
only measure of a logical or reasonable faith in testimony, the
* P. 179. t P- 180.
405 MIRACLES CAPABLE OF Part L
question, Whether the injluence of testimony on beliefs be original
or derived? if it is not merely verbal, is at least of no import-
ance in the present controversy. But I maintain it is of the
greatest importance. The difference between us is by no
means so inconsiderable, as to a careless view it may appear.
Accordirig to his philosophy, the presumption is against the
testimony or (which amounts to the same thing) there is not
the smallest presumption in its favour, till properly supported
by experience. According to the explication given, there is the
strongest presumption in favour of the testimony, till properly
refuted by experience.
If it be objected by the author, that such a faith in testimony
as is prior to experience, must be unreasonable and unphilo-
sophical, because unaccountable ; I should reply, that there are,
and must be in human nature, some original grounds of belief,
beyond which our researches cannot proceed, and of which
therefore it is vain to attempt a rational account. I should de-
sire the objector to give a reasonable account of his faith in
this principle, that similar causes al-ways produce similar effects ;
or in this, that the course of nature -will he the same to-morrow^
that it was yestcrdat^^ and is to-day : principles, which he him-
self acknowledges, are neither intuitively evident, nor deduced
from premises ; and which nevertheless we are under a
necessity of presupposing, in all our reasonings from ex-
perience*. I should desire him to give a reasonable ac-
count of his faith in the clearest informations of his memory,
which he will find it alike impossible either to doubt, or to ex-
plain. Indeed memory bears nearly the same relation to ex-
perience, that testimony does. Certain it is that the defects
and misrepresentations of memory ari often corrected by ex-
perience. Yet should any person herice infer, that memory
derives all its evidence from experience, he would fall into a
manifest absurdity. For, on the contrary, experience derives
its origin solely from memory, and is nothing else but the ge-
neral maxims or conclusions, we have formed from the com-
parison of particular facts remembered. If we had not pre-
viously given an implicit faith to memory, we had never been
able to acquire experience. When therefore we say that me-
mory, which gives birth to experience, may nevertheless in
some instances be con-ected by experience, no more is im-
plied, bat that the inferences formed from the most lively and
perspicuous reports of memory, sometimes serve to rectify
the mistakes which arise from such reports of this faculty, as
* Sceptical doubts. Part 2'*.
Sect.1, PROOF FROM TESTIMONY. 40^
sire most languid and confused. Thus memory, in these in-
stances, may be said to correct itself. The case is often much
the same with experience and testimony, as will appear more
clearly in the second section, where I shall consider the am-
biguity of the word experience^ as used by this author.
But how, says Mr. Hume, is testimony then to be refuted ?
Principally in one or other of these two ways : j^r^?, and
most directly, by contradictory testimony ; that is, when an
equal or greater number of witnesses, equally or more cre-
dible, attest the contrary : secondly^ by such evidence either
of the incapacity or baseness of the witnesses, as is sufficient
to discredit them. What, rejoins my antagonist, cannot then
testimony be confuted by the extraordinary nature of the fact
attested ? Has this consideration no weight at all ? That this
consideration hath no weight at all, it was never my intention
to maintain ; that by itself it can very rareh , if ever, amount
to a refutation against ample and unexceptionable testimony,
I hope to make extremely plain. Who hath ever denied, that
the uncommonness of an event related, is a presumption
against its reality; and that chiefly on account of the ten-
dency, which, experience teacheth us, and this author hath
observed, some people have to sacrifice truth to the love of
wonder*? The question only is. How far does this presump-
tion extend? In the extent \vhich Mr. Hume hath assigned it,
Jhe hath greatly exceeded the limits of nature, and conse-
quently of all just reasoning,
;« In his opinion, ** When the fact attested is such as has
*' seldom fallen under our observation, there is a contest of
** two opposite experiences, of which the one destroys the
** other, as far as its force goes, and the superiour can only
*' operate on the mind, by the force which remainsf ." There
is a metaphysical, I had almost said, a magical balance and
arithmetick^ for the weighing and subtracting of evidence, to
which he frequently recurs, and with which he seems to fancy
he can perforai wonders. I wish he had been a little more
explicit in teaching us how these rare inventions must be
used. When a writer of genius and elocution expresses him-
self in general terms, he will find it an easy matter, to give a
•plausible appearance to things the most unintelligible in na-
ture. Such sometimes is this author's way of writing. In
the instance before us he is particularly happy in his choice of
«netaphors. They are such as are naturally adapted to pre-
possess a reader in his favour. What candid person can think
<jf suspecting the impartiality of an inquirer, who is for
* p. IM. f |). 179.
408 JVIIRACLES CAPABLE OF Parti.
•weighing in 1^& scales of reason, all the arguments on either
side ? Who can suspect his exactness who determines every
thing by si numerical computation^ Hence it is, that to a super-
ficial view his reasoning appears scarce inferiour to demonstra-
tion ; but, when narrowly canvassed, it is impracticable to find
an application, of which, in a consistency with good sense, it
is capable.
In confirmation of the remark just now made, let us try
how his manner of arguing on this point can be applied to a
particular instance. For this purpose I make the following
supposition. I have lived for some years near a ferry. It con-
sists with my knowledge that the passage-boat has a thousand
times crossed the river, and as many times returned safe. An
unknown man, whom I have just now met, tells me in a
serious manner, that it is lost ; and affirms, that he himself
standing on the bank, was a spectator of the scene ; that he
saw the passengers carried down the stream, and the boat
overwhelmed. No person, who is influenced in his judgment
of things, not by philosophical subtilties, but by common
sense, a much surer guide, will hesitate to declare, that in
such a testimony I have probable evidence of the fact asserted.
But if leaving common sense, I shall recur to metaphysicks,
and submit to be tutored in my way of judging by the es-
sayist, he will remind me, " that there is here a contest of
" two opposite experiences, of which the one destroys the
*' other, as far as its force goes, and the superiour can only
*' operate on the mind by the fdrce which remains." I am
warned, that " the very same principle of experience, which
'* gives me a certain degree of assurance in the testimony of
*' the witness gives me also, in this case, another degree of
" assurance, against the fact, which he endeavours to estab-
*' lish, from which contradiction there arises a counterpoise
" and mutual destruction of belief and authority*." — Well, I
would know the truth, if possible ; and that I may conclude
fairly and philosophically, how must I balance these opposite
experiences, as you are pleased to term them ? Must I set
the thousand, or rather the two thousand instances of the
one side, against the single instance of the other ? In that
case, it is easy to see, I have nineteen hundred and ninety-
nine degrees of evidence that my information is false. Or,
is it necessary, in order to make it credible, that the single
instance have two thousand times as much evidence, as
any of the opposite instances, supposing them equal among
themselves ; or supposing them unequal, as much as all the
two thousand put together, that there may be at least an
• p. 179.
Sect. L PROOF FROM TESTIMONY. 409
equilibrium ? Tiiis is impossible. I had for some of those
instances, the evidence of sense, which hardly any testimony
can equal, much less exceed. Once more, must the evidence
I have of the veracity of the witness, be a full equivalent to
the two thousand instances, which oppose the fact attested ?
By the supposition, I have no positive evidence for or against
his veracity, he being a person whom I never saw before.
Yet if none of these be the balancing, which the essay-writer
means, I despair of being able to discover his meaning.
Is then so weak a proof from testimony incapable of being
tefuted ? 1 am far from thinking sc : tho' even so weak a
jproof could not be overturned by such a contrary experience.
How then may it be overturned ? Firsts by contradictory tes-
timony. Going homewards 1 meet another person, whom I
know as little as I did the former ; finding that he comes fro«t
the ferry, I ask him concerning the truth of the report. He
affirms that the whole is a fiction ; that he saw the boat, and
all in it, come safe to land. This would do more to turn the
scale, than fifty thousand such contrary instancesj as were.
Supposed. Yet this would not remove suspicion. Indeed, if
we were to consider the matter abstractly, one would thinkj
that all suspicion would be removed, that the two Opposite
testimonies would destroy each other, and leave the mind
entirely under the influence of its former experience, in the
^ame state as if neither testimony had been given. But thia
is by no means consonant to fact. When Once testimonies
are introduced, former experience is generally of no account
in the reckoning ; it is but like the dust of the balance, which
hath not any sensible effect upon the scales. The nlind hangs
in suspence between the two contrary declarations, and con*
siders it as one to one, or equal improbability, that the report
is true, or that it is false. Afterwards a third, and a fourth,
and a fifth, confirm the declaration of the second. I aiti then
quite at ease. Is this the only effectual way of confuting^ false
testimony ? No. I suppose again^ that instead Of meeting
with any person who can itiform me concerning the fact^ 1 get
from some, who are acquainted with the witness inforrriation
concerning his character. They tell me, he is notorious for
lying ; and that his lies are commonly forged, not with a view
to interest, but merely to gratify a malicious pleasure, which
he takes in alarming strangers. This, though not so direct
a refutation as the former, will be sufficient to discredit his
report. In the former, where there is testimony contradict-
ing testimony, the author's metaphor of a balance may be used
with propriety. The things weighed are homogeneal : and
when contradictory evidences are presented to the mind,
I- ff
410 MIRACLES CAPABLE OF Part I.
tending to prove positions which cannot, be both true, the
mind must decide on the comparative strength of the opposite
evidences, before it yield to either.
But is this the case in the supposition first made ? By no
means. The two thousand instances formerly known, and
the single instance attested, as they relate to different facts,
though of a contrary nature, are not contradictory. There is no
inconsistency in believing both. There is no inconsistency in
receiving the last on weaker evidence, ^if it be sufficient evi-
dence) not only than all the former together, but even than
any of them singly. Will it be said, that though the former
instances are not themselves contradictory to the fact recently
attested, they lead to a conclusion that is contradictory ? I
answer, It is true, that the experienced frequency of the con-
junction of any two events, leads the mind to infer a similar
conjunction in time to come. But let it at the same time be
remarked, that no man considers this inference, as having
equal evidence with any one of those past events, on which it
is founded, and for the belief of which we have had sufficient
testimony. Before then the method recommended bv this
author can turn to any account, it will be necessary for him to
compute and determine with precision, how many hundreds,
how many thousands, I might say how many myriads of
instances, will confer such evidence on the conclusion founded
on them, as will prove an equipoise for the testimony of one
ocular witness, a man of probity, in a case of which he is
allowed to be a competent judge.
There is in arithmetick a rule called reduction, by which
numbers of different denominations are brought to the same
denomination. If this ingenious author shall invent a rule
in logick^ analogous to this, for reducing different classes of
evidence to the same class, he will bless the world with a
most important discovery. Then indeed he will have the
honour to establish an everlasting peace in the republick of
letters ; then we shall have the happiness to see controversy
of every kind, theological, historical, philosophical, receive
its mortal wound : for though, in every question, we could
not even then determine with certainty, on which side the
truth lay, we could always determine (and that is the utmost
the nature of the thing admits) with as much accuracy as
geometry and algebra can afford, on which side the probability
lay, and in what degree. But till this metaphysical reduction
is discovered, it will be impossible where the evidences are of
different orders, to ascertain by .subtraction the superiour evi-
dence. We could not but esteem him a novice in arithmetick,
who being asked, whether seven pounds or eleven pence make
Sect. I. PROOF FROM TESTIMONY. 411
the greater sum, and what is the difference? should, by attend-
ing solely to the numbers, and overlooking the value, conclude
that eleven pence were the greater, and that it exceeded the
other by four. Must we not be equal novices in reasoning, if
we follow the same absurd method ? Must we not fall into as
great blunders ? Of as little sigrificancy do we find the
balance. Is the value of things heterogeneal to be deter-
mined merely by weight ? Shall silver be weighed against
lead, or copper against iron ? If in exchange for a piece
of gold, I were offered some counters of baser metal, is it
not obvious, that till I know the comparative value of the
metals, in vain shall I attempt to find what is equivalent, by
the assistance either of scales or arithmetick ?
It is an excellent observation, and much to the purpose,
which the late learned and pious bishop of Durham, in his
admirable performance on the analogy of religion to the
course of nature, hath made on this subject. " There is a
*' very strong presumption," says he, *' against the most
" ordinary facts, before the proof of them, which yet is over-
*' come by almost any proof. There is a presumption of
*' millions to one against the story of Csesar, or of any other
*' man. For suppose a number of common facts, so and so
*' circumstanced, of which one had no kind of proof, should
" happen to come into one's thoughts every one would, with-
" out any possible doubt, conclude them to be false. The
** like may be said of a single common fact*." What then, I
may subjoin, shall be said of an uncommon fact ? And that
an uncommon fact may be proved by testimony, hath not yet
been made a question. But in order to illustrate the obser-
vation above cited, suppose, first, one at random mentions,
that at such an hour, of such a dav, in such a part of the
heavens, a comet xvill appear; the conclusion from experience
would not be as millions, but as infinite to one, that the pro-
position is false. Instead of this, suppose you have the tes-
timony of but one ocular witness, a man of integritr, and^
skilled in astronomy, that at such an hour, of such a day, in
such a part of the heavens, a comet did appear ; you will not
hesitate one moment to give him credit. Yet all the presump*
tion that was against the truth of the first supposition, though
almost as strong evidence as experience can aflord, was also
against the truth of the second, before it was thus attested
It is necessary to urge further, in support of this doctrine,
that as the water in the canal cannot be made to rise higher
than the fountain whence it flows ; so it is impossible, that
the evidence of testimony, if it proceeded from experience,,
* Part 2. chap. 2. S3.
413 MIRACLES CAPABLE OF Par,t L
should ever exceed that of experience, which is its source ?
Yet that it greatly exceeds this evidence, appears not only
from what hath been observed already, but still more, from
what I shall have occasion to observe in the sequel. One
may safely affirm, that no conceivable conclusion from ex-i»
perience, can possess stronger evidence, than that which as-.v
certains us of the regular succession and duration of daN- andp
pight. The reason is, the instances on which this experience
is founded, are both without number and without exception.
Yet even this conclusion, the author admits, as we shall see
in the third section, may, in a particular instance, not only be
surmounted, but even annihilated by testimony.
Lastly, let it be observed, that the immediate conclusion
from experience is always ge7i€ral^ and runs thus : •■ This is
* the ordinary course of nature.' ' Such an event may rea-
* sonably be expected, where all the circumstances are entirely
similar.' But when we descend to particulai-s, the conclusion
becomes weaker, being more indirect. For though all the
known circumstances be similar, all the actual circumstances
may not be similar : nor is it possible in any case to be
assured (our knowledge of things being at best but superficial,)
that all the actual circumstances are known to us. On the
contrary, the direct conclusion from testimony is always
particular^ and runs thus ; ' This is the fact in such an indi-
' vidual instance.' The remark noAv niade will serve both to
throw light on some of the preceding observations and to
indicate the proper sphere of each species of evidence. Ex-
perience of the past is the only rule whereby we can judge
concerning the future : And as when the sun is below thai
horizon, we must do the best we can by light of the moonj
or even of the stars ; so in all cases where we have no testi-
mony, we are under a necessity of recurring to experience,
and of balancing or numbering contrary observations*. But
* Wherever such balancing or numbering can take place, the opposite evi-
dences must be entirely similar. It will rarely assist us in judging of facts sup-
ported by testimony ; for even where contradictory testimonies come to be con-
sidered, you will hardly find that the characters of the witnesses on the opposite
sides are so precisely equal, as that an arithmetical operation will evolve the
credibility. In matters of pure experience it hath often place. Hence the com-
putations that have been made of the value of annuities, insurances, and several
other commercial articles. In calculations concerning chances, the degree of pro-
bability may be determined with mathematical exactness. I shall here take the
liberty, though the matter be not essential to the design of this tract, to correct
an oversight in the essayist, who always supposes, that where contrary evidences
must be balanced, the probability lies in the remainder or surplus, when the less
number is subtracted fromi the greater. The probability doth not consist in the
surplus, but in the ratio, or geomerricai proportion, which the numbers on the
opposite sides bear to each other. I explain myself thus. In favour of one sup-
Sect. 1. PROOF FROM TESTIMONY. 413
the evidence resulting hence, even in the clearest cases, is ac-
knowledged to be so weak, compared with that which results
from testimony, that the strongest conviction built mere!) on
the former, may be overturned by the slightest proof exhibited
by the latter. Accordingly the future hath in all ages and
nations been denominated the province of conjecture and un-
certainty.
From what hath been said, the attentive reader will easily
discover, that the author's argument against miracles^ hath
not the least affinity to the argument used by Dr. Tiilotson
against transubstantiation^ with which Mr. Hume hath intro-
duced his subject. Let us hear the argument, as it is related
in the Essay, from the writings of the Archbishop. " It is
*' acknowledged on all hands, says that learned prelate, that
*' the authority either of the scripture or of tradition, is
*>^ founded merely on the testimony of the apostles, who were
*' eye-witnesses to those miracles of our Saviour, by which he
" proved his divine mission. Our evidence then for the truth
*' of the Christian religion, is less than the evidence for the
" truth of our senses ; because even in the first authors of our
*' religion, it was no greater ; and it is evident, it must dimi-
*' nish in passing from them to their disciples ; nor can any
^' one be so certain of the truth of their testimony, as of the
*' immediate objects of his senses. But a weaker evidence
*' can never destroy a stronger ; and therefore, were the doc-
^' trine of the real presence ever so clearly revealed in scrip-
*' ture, it were directly contrary to the rules of just reasoning
^' to give our assent to it. It contradicts sense, though both
*' the scripture and tradition, on which it is supposed to be
** built, carry not such evidence with them as sense, when they
*' are considered merely as external evidences, and are not.
*' brought home to every one's breast, by the immediate ope-
" ration of the Holy Spirit*." That the evidence of testimony
is less than the evidence of sense^ is undeniable. Sense is the
source of that evidence, which is first transferred to the me-
mory of the individual, as to a general reservoir, and thence
transmitted to others l)y the channel of testimony. That the
original evidence can never gain any thing, but must lose, by
the transmission, is beyond dispute. What hath been rightly
posed event, there are 100 similar instances, against it 50. In another case undeir
consideration, the favourable instances are 60, and only 10 unfavourable. Though
the difference, or arithmetical proportion, which is 50, be the same in both cases,'
the probability is by no means equal, as the author's way of reasoning implies.
The probability of the first event is as 100 to 50, or 2 to 1. The probability of
the second is as 60 to 10, or 6 to 1. Consequently on comparing the different
examples, though both be probable, the second is thrice as probable as the first.
* p. 173, m.
414. MIRACLES CAPABLE OF Part L
perceived, may be misremembered ; wh it is rightly remem-
bered may, through incapacity, or through ill intemion, be
misreported ; and what is rightly reported may be misunder-
stood. In any of these four ways therefore, either by defect
of memory, of elocution, or of veracity in the relater, or by
misapprehension in the hearer, there is a chance, that the truth
received by the information of the senses, may be misrepre-
sented or mistaken ; now every such chance occasions a real
diminution of the evidence. That the sacramental elements
are bread and wine, not flesh and blood, our sight and touch,
and taste, and smell concur in testifying. If these senses are
liot to be credited, the apostles themselves could not have evi-
dence of the mission of their master. For the greatest ex-
ternal evidence they had, or could have, of his mission, was
that which their senses gave them, of the reality of his mira-
cles. But whatever strength there is in this argument with
regard to the apostles, the argument with regard to us, who,
for those miracles, have only the evidence, not of our own
senses, but of their testimony, is incomparably stronger. In
their case, it is sense contradicting sense ; in ours it is sense
contradicting testimony. But what relation has this to the
author's argument? None at all. Testimony, it is acknow-*
ledged, is a weaker evidence than sense. But it hath been
already evinced, that its evidence for particular facts is infinite-
ly stronger than that which the general conclusion from expe-
rience can afford us. — Testimony holds directly of memory
and sense. Whatever is duly attested must be remembered
by the witness ; whatever is duly remembered must once
have been perceived. But nothing similar takes place with
regard to experience, nor can testimony, with any appearance
of meaning, be said to hold of it.
Thus I have shown, as I proposed, that the author's reason-
ing proceeds on a false hypothesis. It supposeth testi-
mony to derive its evidence solely from experience, which is
false.- It supposeth by consequence, that contrary ob-
servations have a weight in opposing testimony, which the
first and most acknowledged principles of human reason, or^
if you like the term better, common sense, evidently shows
that they have not. It assigns a rule for discovering the
superiority of contrary evidences, which, in the latitude there
given it, tends to mislead the judgment, and which it is impo$^
sible, by any explication, to render of real use.
Sect. 2. PROOF FROM TESTIMONY. 41^
SECTION II.
Mr. Hume charged -with some fallacies in his way of managing
the argument.
AN the essay there is frequent mention of the word experience^
and much use made oi it. It is strange that the author hath
not favoured us with the definition of a term of so much mo-
ment to his argument. This defect I shall endeavour to sup-
ply ; and the rather, as the word appears to be equivocal, and
to be used by the essayist in two very different senses. The
first and most proper signification of the word, which, for dis-
tinction's sake, I shall caW personal experience, is that given in.
the preceding section. ' It is,' as was observed, ' founded in
* memory^ and consists solely of the general maxims or conclu-
* sions, that each individual hath formed, from the comparison
' of the particular facts he hath remembered.' In the other
signification, in which the word is sometimes taken, and which
I shall distinguish by the term derived, it may be thus defined.
* It is founded in testimony^ and consists not only of all the ex-
' periences of others, which have through that channel been
' communicated to us, but of all the general maxims or con-
* elusions we have formed, from the comparison of particular
* facts attested.'
In proposing his argument the author would surely be un-
derstood to mean only personal experience ; otherwise, his
making testimony derive its light from an experience which
derives its light from testimony, would be introducing what
logicians term a circle in causes. It would exhibit the same
things alternately, as causes and effects of each other. Yet
nothing can be more limited, than the sense which is conveyed
under the term experience, in the first acceptation. The merest
elown or peasant derives incomparably more knowledge from
testimony, and the communicated experience of others, than
in the longest life he could have amassed out of the treasure,
ol his own memory. Nay, to such a scanty portion the savage
himself is not confined. If that therefore must be the rule,
the only rule, by which every testimony is ultimately to be
judged, our belief in matters of fact must have very narrow
bounds. No testimony ought to have any weight with us,
that doth not relate an event, similar at least to some one ob-
servation, which we ourselves have had access to make. For
example, that ther.^ are such people on the earth as negroes,
could not, on that hypothesis, be rendered credible to one who
had never seen, a negro, not even by the most numerous and,
Miracles capable of PanL
the most unexceptionable attestations. Against the admission
of such testimony, however strong, the whole force of the
author's argument evidently operates. But that innumerable
absurdities would flow from this principle, I might easily
evince, did I not think the task superfluous.
The author himself is aware of the consequences ; and
therefore, in whatever sense he uses the term experience in
proposing his argument ; in prosecuting it, he with great dex-
terity shifts the sense, and ere the reader is apprised, insinu-
ates another. " It is a miracle," says he, " that a dead mart
*' should come to life, because that has never been observed
*' in any age or country. There must therefore be an uniform
" experience against every miraculous event, otherwise the
" event would not merit that appellation*." Here the phrase,,
an uniform experience against an events in the latter clause, is
implicidy defined in the former, not what has never been ob-
served BY us, but (mark his v/orcis) xvhat hafi never been observ-^
ed IN ANY AGE OR COUNTRY. — Now, what has becin observed,
and what h'is not been observed, in all ages and countries, pray
how can you, Sir, or I, or any man, come to the knowledge of?
Only I suppose by testimony, oral or written. The personal
experience of every individual is limited to but a part of one
age, and commonly to a narrow spot of one country. If there
be any other way of being made acquainted with facts, it is to
me, I own, an impenetrable secret ; I have no apprehension of
it. If there be not any, what shall v/e make of that cardinal
point, on which his argument turns ? It is in plain language^
*: Testimony is not entitled to the least degree of faith, but as
* far as it is supported by such an extensive experience, as if
' we had not had a previous and independent faith in testi-
* mony, we could never have acquired.'
How natural is the transition from one sophism to another !
You will soon be convinced of this, if you attend but a little to
the strain of the argument. " A miracle," says he, '' is a
*' violation of the laws of nature ; and as a firm and unaltera-
" ble experience hath established these laws, the proof against
" a miracle is as entire, as any argument from experience can
" possibly be imaginedf." Again, " As an uniform experi-
" ence amounts to a proof, there is here a direct and full proof,
*' from the nature of the fact, against the existence of any mi-
'' raclej." I must once more ask the author what is the pre-
cise meaning of the words j^rm, unalterable^ uniform P An
experience that admits no exception, is surely the only experi-
ence, which can with propriety be termed uniform^ frm^ unal-
* p. 181. tP'180- tP'181.
^edt.^. pnt)0^ PR5M TESTIMONY. iif
Wrdble. Now since, as was remarked above, the Far greiatci*
part of this experience^ which compiiseth every age and eVery
couniry, must be derived to us from testimony ; that the ex-
perience may be Jirm^ unifotm^ unalterable^ ih< re must be nb
contrary testimony whatever. Yet by the author's own hypo-
thesis, the miracles he would thus confute, are supported by
testimony. At the same time to give Strength to his argues
ment, he is under a necessity of supposing, that there is no
exception from the testimonies against them. Thus he falls
into that pat-alogism, which is called begging the question.
What he gives with one hand, he takes with the other. He
admits, in opening his design, what in his argument he impli*
citly deniesi
fiut that this, if possible, may be still mOre manifest, let u&
attend a little to some expressions, which one would imagine
lie had inadvertently dropt. '■'• So long,*' says he, " as the
*' world endures, I presume, will the iiccounts of miracles and
** prodigies be found in all profane history*.'* Why does he
presume so? Amah so much attached to experience, can
nardly be suspected to have any other reason than, because
Such accounts have hitherto been found in all the histories^
profane as well as sacred, of times past. But we need not
recur to an inference to obtain this acknowledgment. It is
often to be met with in the essay^ In One place we learn, that
tlie witnesses for miracles are an infinite number-]- ; in anotheirj
that ail religious records of whatever kind abound with them j,
I leave it therefore to the author to explain, with what con-
sistency he can assert, that the laws of nature are established
t)y an uniforni experience, (which experience is chiefly the
Result of testimony) and at the same time allow, that almost all
Kuman histories are full of the relations of miracles and pro-
digies, which are violations of those laws. Here is, by his
to\^n confession, testimonv against testimony, and very ample
on both sides. How then can one side claim a firm, uniform^
and unalterable support from testimony ?
tt will be in vain to object, that the testimony in support of
the laws of nature, greatly exceeds the testimony for the vio-
I^ions of these laws ; and that, if we are to be determined
by the greater number of observations, we shall reject all mU
racles whatever. I ask. Why are the testimonies much more
numerous in the one case than in the other ? The answer iS
obvious : Natural occurrences are much more frequent than
such as are preternatural. But are all the accounts we have
of the pestilence to be rejected as inctedible, because, in thi*
• p. 174. t p. 190. t p. 191.
egg
4ls MIRACLES CAPABLE OF Part I.
country, we hear not so often of that disease, as of the fever?
Or, because the number of natural births is infinitely greater
than that of monsters, shall the evidence of the former be
regarded as a confutation of all that can be advanced in proof
of the latter ? Such an objector needs to be reminded of what
was proved in the foregoing section ; that the opposite testimo-
nies relate to different facts, and are therefore not contradic-
tory ; that the conclusion founded on them, possesseth not the
evidence of the facts on which it is founded, but only such a
presumptive evidence, as may be surmounted by the slightest
positive proof. A general conclusion from experience is in
comparison but presumptive and indirect ; sufficient testimony
for a particular fact is direct and positive evidence.
I shall remark one other fallacy in this author's reasoning,
before I conclude this section. " The Indian prince," says
he, *' who refused to believe the first relations concerning the
*' effects of frost, reasoned justl} ; and it naturally required
*' very strong testimony to engage his assent to facts, which
" arose from a state of nature, with which he was unacquaint-
** ed, and bore so little analogy to those events, of which he
*' had had constant and uniform experience. Though they
" were not contrary to his experience, they were not conform-
** able to it*." Here a distinction is artfully suggested, between,
what is contrary to experience, and what is not confortnahlt to
it. The one he allows may be proved by testimony, but not
the other. A distinction, for which the author seems to have
so great use, it will not be improper to examine.
If my reader happen to be but little acquainted with Mr.
Hume's writings, or even with the piece here examined, I
must intreat him, ere he proceed any farther, to give the essay
an attentive perusal ; and to take notice paticularly, whether
in one single passage, he can find any other sense given to the
terms contrary to experience^ but that which has not been expe'
rienced. Without this aid, I should not be surprised, that I
found it difficult to convince the judicious, that a man of so
much acuteness, one so much a philosopher as this author,
should, with such formality, make a distinction, which not only
the essay, but the whole tenour of his philosophical writings,
shows evidently to have no meaning. Is that which is con-
trary to experience a synonymous phrase for that which im-
plies a contradiction ? If this were the case, there would be
no need to recur to experience for a refutation ; it would refute
itself. But it is equitable that the author himself be heard,
who ought to be the best interpreter of his own words.
* p. 179.
Sect. 2. PROOF FROM TESTIMONY. 41^
** When the fact attested," says he, '' is such a one, as has
•* seldom lallen under our observation, here is a contest of t\yo
*' opposite experiences*." In this passage, not the being never
experienced, but even the being seldom experienced constitutes
an opposite experience. I can conceive no way but one, that
the author can evade the force of this quotation ; and that is,
by obtruding on us, some new distinction between an opposite
and a contrary experience. In order to preclude such an at-
tempt, I shall once more recUr to his own authority. " It is
*' no miracle that a man in seeming good health, should die of
*' a sudden." Why ? "• Because such a kind of death, though
** more unusual than any other, hath yet been frequently ob-
** served to happen. But it is a miracle that a dead man should
" come to life." Why? Not because of any inconsistency in
the thing. That a body should be this hour inanimate, and
the next animated, is no more inconsistent, than the reverse
that it should be this hour animated, and the next inanimate ;
though the one be common, and not. the other. But the author
himself answers the question : *' Because that has never been
** observed in any age or countryj-." Ail the contrariety then
that there is in miracles to experience, doth, by his own con-
cession, consist solely in this, that they have never been ob-
served ; that is, they are not conformable to experience. To
his experience personal or derived, he must certainly mean j
to what he has had access to learn of different ages and coun-
tries. To speak beyond the knowledge he hath attained,
would be ridiculous. It would be first supposing a miracle,
and then inferring a contrary experience, instead of concluding
from experience, that the fact is miraculous.
Now, I insist, that as far as regards the author's argument,
a fact perfectly unusual, or not conformable to our experience,
such a fact as, for aught we have had access to learn, was ne-
ver observed in any age or country, is as incapable of proof
from testimony, as miracles are ; that, if this writer would
argue consistently, he could never, on his own principles, reject
the one and admit the other. Both ought to be rejected or
neither. I would not, by this be thought to signify, that there
. is no difference between a miracle and an extraordinary event.
I know that the former implies the interposal of an invisible
agent, which is not implied in the latter. All that I intend, to
assert is, that the author's argument equally affects them both.
Why doth such interposal appear to him incredible ? Not
from any incongruity he discerns in the thing itself. He doth
not pretend it. But it is not conformable to his experience.
*p. 17&, tP-181.
4§% >|mAGL|:S CAFABiLE 0^W^ Bart I*
** A miracle," says he, "■ is a transgression o£ the hiw of wi-t
*' ture*." But how are the laws oi nature known^ to us ? ^y,
experience. What is the criterion, whereby we must judge,
i!S;hether the laws of nature are transgressed ? Solely the cock
formity or disconformity of events to our experience, Thi%
writer surely will not pretend, that we can have apy knowledge
c^priori^ either of the law, or of the violation.
Let us then examine by his own principles, w.hether tlA%
I^ing of Siam, of whom the story he alludes to, is related bj?
j^pckef, could have sufficient evidence from testimony, of a
fact so contrary to his experience as the freezing of water.
He could just say as much of this event, as the author can say
of a dead man's being restored to life. * Such a thing was
' never observed, as far as I could learn, in any age or coun-?
^ try,* If the things themselves too are impartially considere.4;
apd independently of the notions acquired by us in the^-
northern climates, we should account the first at least as extKs^i*
pi;dinary as the second. That so pliant a body as water shoul^i
b/ecome hard like pavement, so as to bear up an elephant on it;%
sprface, is as unlikely in itself, as that a body inanimate to-da}5
should be animated to-morrow. Nay, to the Indian monarcjti^
I must think, that the first would appear more a miracle, mQre»x
contrary to experience than the second, If he had been ap/sh
quainted with ice or frozen water, and afterwards seen it b.e^
come fluid j but had never seen nor learned, that after it waj^v
melted, it became hard again, the relation must have appeared;
marvellous, as die process from fluidity to hardness never hja^
been experienced, though the reverse often had. But I be,n.
lieve nobody will question, that on this supposition it woujy^
not have appeared quite so strange, as it did. Yet this suppo-
sition makes the instance more parallel to the restoring of tho-
dead to life. The process from animate to inanimate we are?,
all acquainted with ; and what is such a restoration, but the;
reversing of this process? So little reason had the author tq.
insinuate, that the one was only not conformable^ the other cour-
trary to experience. If there be a difference in this respect^,
the first to one alike unacquainted with both, must appear the^^
niore contrary of the two.
Does it alter the matter, that he calls the former "a facti
*' which arose from a state of nature, with which the Indiagj,
" was unacquainted ?" Was not such a state quite uncon^
formable, or (which in the author's language I have shqwn tar
be the same) contrary to his experience? Is then a etste- of
* p. 182, in the note.
t Essaj on human underst^b^ding, book 4. ch2(p.S,§^.
S*Q|^«. PROOF FROM TESTIMONY. 42t
i^atttr© whkh i& coatrary to experience, more crediMe th3m atr
saagle fact contrary to experience ? I want the solution of on&
fi'iMculty : I'he author, in order to satisfy me, presents vae-
^vith a thousand others. Is this suitable to the method fe«
paripposesi, in another ^jlace, of admitting always the less mdra-
cle and rejecting the greater* ? Is it. not, on the coB,t3-ary, adi-
nftitting without any dilficulty the greater miracle, and thercbjfr
re^moving the difficulty, which he otherwise would have had ini
ailmit'<jin.g the less ? Does he forget, that to exhibit a state q£
nature entirely different from what we experience at present^
is, one of those enormous prodigies, whicli, in. his- account^i
rqnder th& Pentateuch unworthy of credit.-j- ? "iNoi Indian,'*"
s^ys hie in the note, " it is evident, could have experience thajJ,
*' water did not freeZtC in cold climates. This is placing nature;
*^in a situation quite: unknown to him, audit is impossible for:
^* bim to tell a priariy wh^t will result from it." This is pre*-
cisely, as if, in reply to the author's objection from experience
against the raising of a dead man (sjippose Lazarus) to life, I.
should retort:, ' Neitlier you, Sir, nor any who live in this
* ce^ntury can have experience, that a dead man could not be;
* restored to life at the command of one divinely commission-
* ed to give a revelation to men. This is placing nature in a
* situation quite unknown to you, and it is impossible for yovL
* to tell a priori what will result from it. This therefore is not'
^ contrary to the course of nature, in cases where all the cir-
* cumatances are the same. As you never saw one vested
* with such, a commission, you are as unexperienced, as igno-
^ rant of this point, as the inhabitants of Sumatra are of the
^ frosts in Muscovy ; you cannot therefore reasonably, any
*.more than they, be positive as to the consequences.' Shoukl
he rejoin, as- doubtless he would, * This is not taking away the
* difficulty ; but, like the elephant and the tortoise, in the ac-
' count given by some barbarians of the manner in which the
* earth is supported, it only shifts the difficulty a step further
' back. My objection still recurs. That any man should be
* endowed with such power is contrary to experience, and.
* therefore incredible :' Should he, I say, rejoin in this man-
ner, I could only add, ' Pray, Sir, revise your own words lately
* quoted, and consider impartially whether they be not as glar-
' ingly exposed to the like reply.' For my part, I can only
perceive one difference that is material between the two cases.
You frankly confess, that with regard to the freezing of water^
besides the absolute want of experience, there would be from
artalogj^ a. presumption against it, which ought to weigh with a
* p. 182; t p. 306.
422 MIRACLES CAPABLE OF Parti,
rational Indian. I think, on the contrary, in the case supposed
by me of one commissioned by Heaven, there is at least no
presumption against the exertion of such a miraculous power.
There is rather a presumption in its favour.
Does the author then say, that no testimony could give the
King of Siam sufficient evidence of the effects of cold on wa-
ter ? No. By implication he says the contrary: " It required
very strong testimony." Will he say, that those most aston-
ishing effects of electricity lately discovered, so entirely un-
analogous to every thing before experienced, will he sa}', that
such facts no reasonable man could have sufficient evidence
from testimony to believe ? No. We may presume, he will
not, from his decision in the former case ; and if he should,
the common sense of mankind would reclaim against his ex-
travagance. Yet it is obvious to every considerate reader, that
his argument concludes equally against those truly marvellous,
as against miraculous events ; both being alike unconformable,
or alike contrary to former experience*.
Thus I think I have shown, that the author is chargeable
with some fallacies, in his way of managing the argument j
* 1 cannot forbear to observe, that many of the principal terms employed in
the essay, are used in a manner extremely vague and unphilosophical. I have re-
marked the confusion I find in the application of the words, experience, contrarie-
ty, conformity : I might remark tlie same thing of the word, miracle. " A mira-
** cle," It issai'l, p. 182, in the note, " may be accuratelv defined, a tkaxsgkes-
*' sio_^ of a la\u of nature, l>y a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interpoaul of
" some invisible agent." The w rU transgression invariably denotes a'cri ;U ai op-
position to authority. The author's accuracy in representing God as a transgres-
sor, I have not the perspicacity to discern. Does he intend, by throw n.g some-
thing monstrous into the definition, to infuse into the reader a prejudice against
the thing defined? But supposing that through inadvertency, he had used the
term transgression, instead '>f suspension, which would have been both intelh^^ible
and proper ; one would at least expect, tha' the word miracle in the essay, al-
ways exprest the sense of the definition. B r this it evidently does not. Tnus
in the instance of the miracle supposed (p 203, in the note) he calls it, iii the
beginning of the paragraph, " A violation of the usual c urse of nature ;" but
in the end, after telling us that such a miracle, on the evide-ice supposed, " our
"present philosopiiers ought to receive for certain," he subjoi' s, (how consist-
ently, let the reader judge) " and ought to search for the causes, whence it might
•• be derived." Thus it is insinuated, that though a fact apparently miraculous,
and perfectly extraordinary, might be admitted by a philosopher, stid the reality
of the miracle must be denied. For if the interposal of the Deity be the pro-
per solution of the phenomenon, why should we recur to natural causes ? Hence
a careless reader is insensibly led to think that there is some special incredibility
in such an interposal, distinct from its uncommonness. Yet the author's great
argument is built on this single circumstance, and places such an interposition
just on the same footing wirh every event that is equally uncommon. Atone
time, he uses the word miracle to denote a bare improbability, as will appear
in the sixth section : at another, absurd and viiraculous are, with him, synony-
mous terms ; so are also the miraculous nature of an event, and its absolutt
impossibility. Is this the style and manner of a reason?!?
Sect. S. PROOF FROM TESTIMONY.
that he all along avails himself of an ambiguity in the word
experience ; that his reasoning includes a petitio principii ia
the bosom of it ; and that, in supporting his argument, he
must have recourse to distinctions, where, even himself being
judge, there is no difference.
SECTION III.
Mr» Hume himself gives up his favourite argument.
JVaR. Hume himself,' methinks I hear my reader repeating
with astonishment, ' gives up his favourite argument? To
* prove this point is indeed a very bold attempt.' Yet that
this attempt is not altogether so arduous, as at first hearing,
Ke will possibly imagine, I hope, if favoured, a while with
his attention, fully to convince him. If to acknowledge, af-
ter all, that there may be miracles, which admit of proof from,
iiuman testimony; if. to acknowledge, that such miracles
ought to be received, not as probable only, but as absolutely
certain ; or, in other words, that the proof from human tes-
timony may be such as that all the contrary uniform experience,
should not only- be overbalanced, but, to use the author's ex-
pression, should be annihilated ; if such acknowledgments as
these, are subversive of his own principles ; if by making
them, he abandons his darling argument ; this strange part
the essayist evidently acts.
" I own," these are his words, '* there may possibly be
** miracles, or violations of the usual course of nature, of such
*' a kind as to admit a proof from human testimony, though
" perhaps" (in this he is modest enough, he avers nothing ;
perhaps) *' it will be impossible to find any such in all the re-
" cords of history." To this declaration he subjoins the fol-
lowing supposition : '' Suppose all authors, in all languages,
*' agree, that from the 1st of January 1700, there was a total
*' darkness over the whole earth for eight days ; suppose that
*' the tradition of this extraordinary event, is still strong and
*' lively among the people ; that all travellers, who retura
*' from foreign countries, bring us accounts of the same tra-
*' dition, without the least variation or contradiction : it is
*' evident, that our present philosophers, instead of doubting
*' of that fact, ought to receive it for certain, and ought to
** search for the causes, whence it might be derived*.'*
•p. 208, in th^ note.
424 MIRACLES CAPABLE 6V iPart t*
Could one imagine, that the person who had made the above
acknowledgment, a person too who is justly allowed by all
who are acquainted with his writings, to possess uncommtJh
penetration and philosophical abilities, that this were the same
individual, who had so short while before affirmed, that ** u.
miracle," or a violation of the usual course of nature, " sup-
*' ported by any human testimony, is more properly a subject
" of derision than of argument* ;'* who had insisted, that
*' it is not requisite, in order to reject the fact, to be able ac-
" curately to disprove the testimonv, and to trace its false-
*' hood ; that such an evidence carries falsehood on the very
" face of itj-;" that " we need but oppose even to a cloud of
"witnesses, the absolute impossibility, or," which iS all one,
*' miraculous nature of the events, which they relate ; that
** this in the eyes of all reasonable people, will alone be re-
" garded as a sufficient refutation^;" and who finally to put ati
end to all altercation on the subject had pronounced this oracle,
** No TESTIMONY FOR ANY KIND OF MIRACLE can
" EVER POSSIBLY AMOUNT TO A PROBABILITY, MUCH LESS TO
'* A PROOF ." Was there ever a more glaring contradiction !
Yet for the event supposed by the essayist, the testimony,
in his judgment, would amount to 2l probability ; nay to more
than a probability, to 2l proof ; let not the reader be astonished^
or if he cannot fail to be astonished, let him not be incredulous,
when I add, to more than a proofs more than a full, entire and
direct proof; for even this I hope to make evident from the
author's principles and reasoning. *' And even supposing,*'
says he, that is, granting for argument's sake, " that the testi-
*' mony for a miracle amounted to a proof, it would be opposed
** by another proof, derived from the very nature of the fact,
" which it would endeavour to establish**." Here is then,
by his own reasoning, proof against proof, from which there
could result no belief or opinion, unless the one is conceived
to be in some degree superiour to the other. " Of which
" proofs," says he, " the strongest must prevail, but still with
" a diminution of its force in proportion to that of its antago-
" nist.j-j-" Before the author could believe such a miracle as
he supposes, he must at least be satisfied that the proof of it
from testimony is stronger than the proof against it from ex-
perience. That we may form an accurate judgment of the
strength he here ascribes to testimony, let us consider what,
by his own account, is the strength of the opposite proof from
experience. *•' A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature ;
** and as a firm and unalterable experience has established
• pw 194. t ib. { p. 196, &c. || p. 203. •* ib. ft P- 180.
qe9t.3. PROOF FROM TESTIMONY. 42S
•' these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature
*:*■ of the fact, is as e/jfzVt?, as any argument from experience
"'can possibly be imagined*." Again, " As an uniform ex-
" perience amounts to a proof, there is here a direct and full
" proof, from the nature of the fact, against the existence of
**• any miraclej-." The proof then which the essayist admits
from testiinony, is, by his own estimate, not only superiour to
a direct iwidjull proof; but even superiour to as entire a proof,
as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined.
Whence, I pray, doth testimony acquire such amazing evi-
dence ? * Testintony,' says the author, ' hath no evidence, but '
''what it derives from experience. These differ from each'
* other only as the species from the genus.' Put then for tes-
timony^ the word experience^ which in this case is equivalent,
and the conclusion will run thus : Here is a proof from experi-
ence^ -which is superiour to as entire a proof from experience as
can possibly be imagined. This deduction from the author's
words, the reader will perceive, is strictly logical. What the
meaning of it is, I leave Mr. Hume to explain.
What hath been above deduced, how much soever it be ac-
counted, is not all that is implied in the concession made by
the author. He further says, that the miraculous fact so at-
tested, ought not only to be received, but to be received for
certain. Is it not enough, Sir, that you have shown that your
most full, most direct, most perfect argument may be over-
come ; will nothing satisfy you now but its destruction ? One
would imagine, that you had conjured up this demon, by
whose irresistible arm you proposed to give a mortal blow to
religion, and render scepticism triumphant, (that you had con-
jured him up, I say) for no other purpose, but to show with
what facility you could lay him. To be serious, does not this
author remember, that he had oftener than once laid it down
as a maxim, That when there is proof against proof, we must
incline to the superiour, still with a diminution of assurance,
in proportion to the force of its antagonist! ? But when a fact
is received ybr certain^ there can be no sensible diminution of
assurance, such diminution always implying some doubt and
uncertainty. Consequently the general proof from experience,
though as entire as any argument from experience can possi-
bly be imagined, is not only surmounted, but is really in com-
parison as nothing, or, in Mr. Hume's phrase, undergoes an-
nihilation, when balanced with the particular proof from testi-
mony. Great indeed, it must be acknowledged is the force of
truth. This conclusion, on the principles I have been endea-
* p. 180. t P- 181. t P- 178. 180.
Hhh
426 MIRACLES CAPABLE OF Part L
vouring to establish, has nothing in it, but what is conceivable
and just; but on the principles of the essay, which deduce all
the force of testimony from experience, serves only to con-
found the understanding, and to involve the subject in mid-
night darkness.
It is therefore manifest, that either this author's principles
condemn his ovm method of judging, with regard to miracu-
lous facts ; or that his method of judging subverts his princi-
ples, and is a tacit desertion of them. Thus that impregnable
fortress, the asylum of infidelity, which he so lately gloried in
having erected, is in a moment abandoned by him, as a place
untenable.
SECTION IV.
There h no peculiar presumption against such miracles as are
said to have been wrought in support of religion.
I
-S it then so, that the decisive argument, the essayist flatter-
ed himself he had discovered*, which with the wise and
learned, was to prove an everlasting check to all kinds of su-
perstitious delusion, and would consequently be useful, as
long as the world endures ; is it so, that this boasted argument
hath in fact little or no influence on the discoverer himself!
But this author 'may well be excused. He cannot be always
the metaphysician. He cannot soar incessantly in the clouds.
Such constant elevation suits not the lot of humanity. He
must sometimes, whether he will or not, descend to a level
with other people, and fall into the humble track of common
sense. One thing however he is resolved on : If he cannot
by metaphj'sick spells silence the most arrogant bigotry and
superstition ; he will at any rate, though for this purpose he
should borrow aid from what he hath no liking to, trite and
popular topicks ; he will at any rate free himself from their
impertinent solicitations.
There are accordingly two principles in human nature, by
which he accounts for all the relations, that have ever been in
the world, concerning miracles. These principles are, the
passion for the marvellous^ and the religious affection^ •■, against
either of which singly, the philosopher, he says, ought ever to
be on his guard ; but incomparably more so, when both hap-
pen to be in strict confederacy together. " For if the spirit
" of religion join itself to the love of wonder, there is an end
* p. 174; . t p. 16'i. 185.
Sect. 4. PROOF FROM TESTIMONY. 427
" of common sense ; and human testimony, in these circum-
*' stances, loses all pretensions to authority.*" Notwithstand-
ing this strong affirmation, there is reason to suspect that the
author is not in his heart, so great an enemy to the love ol
wonder, as he affects to appear. No man can make a greater
concession in favour of the wonderful, than he hath done in
the passage quoted in the preceding section. No man was
ever fonder of paradox, and, in theoretical subjects, of every
notion that is remote from sentiments universally received.
This love of paradox, he owns himself, that both his enemies
and his friends reproach him withf. There must surely be
some foundation for so universal a censure. If therefore, in
respect of the passion for the marvellous, he differs from other
people, the difference ariseth from a particular delicacv in this
gentleman, which makes him nauseate even to wonder with
the crowd. He is of that singular turn that where evei-y body
is struck with astonishment, he can see nothing wondrous in
the least ; at the same time he discovers prodigies, where no
soul but himself ever dreamt that there were any.
We may therefore rest assured of it, that the author might
be conciliated to the love of -wonder^ provided the spirit of re-
ligion be kept at a distance, against which he hath unluckily
contracted a mortal antipathy, against which he has resolved
to wage eternal war. When he but touches this subject, he
loseth at once his philosophick composure, and speaks with an
acrimony unusual to him on other occasions. Something of
this kind appears from the citations already made. But if
these should not satisfy, I shall produce one or two more,
which certainly will. There is a second supposition the au-
thor makes of a miraculous event, in a certain manner cir-
cumstanced and attested, which he declares, and I think with
particular propriety, that he would " not have the least indi-
" nation to believej." At his want of inclination the reader
will not be surprised, when he learns that this supposed mira-
cle is concerning a resurrection ; an event which bears too
strong a resemblance both to the doctrine and to the miracles
of holy writ, not to alarm a modern Pyrrhonist. To the above
declaration he subjoins, " But should this miracle be ascribed
** to any new system of religion, men in all ages have been so
*' much imposed on by ridiculous stories of that kind, that this
" verycircumstancewoaldbeafullproof of acheat,and sufficient
*' with all men of sense, not only to make them reject the fact,
'' but even reject it ivithout further examination^''' Again, a
little after, " As the violations of truth are more common in
* p, 164. 185, + Dedication to the four disEertalions. \ p. 204. in tiie note.
42« MIRACLES CAPABLE OF Part I.
" the testimony concerning religious miracles, than in that
*' concerning any other matter of fact," (a point which the au-
thor is positive, though lie neither produceth facts nor argu-
ments to support it) "• this must diminish ver); much the au-
*' thority of the former testimony, and" (pray observe his
words) " make us form a general resolution, 7iever to lend,,
*' any attention to it, xvith ivhatever specious pretext it may biS
*' covered.''''
Never did the passion of an inflamed orator, or the intem-
perate zeal of a religionist, carry him further against his ad-
versary, than this man of speculation is carried by his preju-
dice against religion. Demagogues and bigots have often
warned the people against listening to the arguments of an
envied and therefore detested rival, lest by his sophistry they
should be seduced into the most fatal errours. The same part
this author, a philosopher, a sceptick, a dispassionate inquirer
after truth, as surely he chooseth, to be accounted, now acts ia
favour of infidelity. He thinks it not safe to give religion
even a hearing. Nay so strange a turn have matters taken of
late with the managers of this controversy, that it is now the
TREETHiNKER who preaches implicit faith ; it is the infidel,
who warns us of the danger of consulting reason. Beware,
says he, I admonish you, of inquiring into the strength of the
plea, or of bringing it to the deceitful test of reason ; for
*' those who will be so silly as to examine the affair by that
*' medium, and seek, particular flaws in the testimony, are al-
*' most sure to be confounded*." That religion is concerned
in the matter, is. reckoned by these sages sufficient evidence of
imposture. The proofs she offers in her own defence, we are
told by these candid judges, ought to be rejected, and rejected
without examination. The old way of scrutiny and argument
must now be laid aside, having been at length discovered to
be but a bungling, a tedious, and a dangerous way at best.
What then shall we substitute in its place ? The essayist hath
a most admirable expedient. A shorter and surer method he
recommends to us, the expeditious way oi resolution. ' Form,'
says he, * a general resolution, never to lend any attention
* to testimonies or facts, urged by religion, -with whatever spe-
' cious pretext they may he c-overed.''
I had almost congratulated Mr. Hume, and our enlightened
age^ on this happy invention, before I reflected, that though
the application might be new, the expedient itself, of resolv-
ing to be deaf to argument, was very ancient, having been
often with great success employed against atheists and here-
• p. 197. ir. tlie note.
Sect. 4. PROOF FROM TESTIMONY. 429
ticks, and warmly recommended by Bellarmine and Seotus,
and most others of that bright fraternity the schoolmen : Per-
sons, I acknowledge, to whom one could not, perhaps in any
other instance, find a resemblance in my ingenious opponent.
I am afraid that after such a declaration, I must not presume
to consider myself as arguing with the author, who haih, in so
peremptory a manner, resolved to attend to nothing that can
be said in opposition to his theory. ' What judgment he has,'
to use his own expression, * he has renounced by principle, in
' these sublime and mysterious subjects*.' If however it should
prove the fate of these papers, the forbidding title of them
notwithstanding, to be at any time honoured with the perusal
of some infidel, not indeed so rivetted in unbelief as the es-
sayist, I would earnestly intreat such reader, in the solemn
style of Mr. Hume, " To lay his hand upon his heart, and
" after serious consideration declaref ," If any of the patrons
of religion had acted this part, and warned people not to try
by argument the metaphysical subtleties of the adversaries,
affirming, that ' they who were mad enough to examine the
' affair by that medium, and seek particular flaws in the rea-
*• soning^ were almost sure to be confounded ; that the only
* prudent method was, to form a general resolution, never
* to lend any attention to what was advanced on the opposite
*• side, however specious;^ whether this conduct would not have
afforded great matter of triumph to those gentlemen the de-
ists; whether it would not have been construed by them, and
even justly, into a tacit conviction of the weakness of our
cause, which we were afraid of exposing in the light, and
bringing to a fair trial. But we scorn to take shelter in ob-
scurity, and meanly to decline the combat ; confident as we are,
that REASON is our ally and our friend., and glad to find that
the enemy at length so violently suspects her.
As to the first method, by which the author accounts for the
fabulous relations of monsters and prodigies, it is freely ac-
knowledged, that the Creator hath implanted in human nature,
as a spur to the improvement of the understanding, a princi-
ple of curiosity^ which makes the mind feel a particular plea-
sure in every new acquisition of knowledge. It is acknow-
ledged also, that as every principle in our nature is liable to
abuse, so this principle will often give the mind a bias to the
marvellous, for the more marvellous any thing is, that is, the
more unlike to all that hath formerly been known, the more
new it is ; and this bias,Jn many instances, may induce belief
on insufficient evidence.
* p. 185. t P- 206.
430 MIRACLES CAPABLE OF iPart L
But the presumption that hence ariseth against the marvel-
lous is not stronger in the case of miracles (as will appear from
an attentive perusal of the second section) than in the case of
every fact that is perfectly extraordinary. Yet how easily this
obstacle may be overcome by testimony, might be illustrated,
if necessary, in almost every branch of science, in physiolo-
gy, in geography, in history. On the contrary, what an im-
mense impediment would this presumption prove to the pro-
gress of philosophy and letters, had it in reality one fiftieth-
part of the strength which the author seems to attribute to it.
I shall not tire my reader or myself by recurring to the philo-
sophick wonders, in electricity, chymistry, magnetism, which,
all the world sees, may be fully proved to us by testimony, be-
fore we make the experiments ourselves.
But there is, it seems, additional to this, a peculiar pre-
sumption against religious miracles. " The wise," as the au-
thor hath observed with reason, *' lend a very academick faith
*' to every report, which favours the passion of the reporter,
" whether it magnifies his country, his family, or himself, or
** in any other way strikes in v/ith his natural inclinations and
" propensities*." Now, as no object whatever operates more
powerfully on the fancy than religion does, or works up the
passions to a higher fervour ; so, in matters relating to this
subject, if in any subject, we have reason to suspect that the
understanding will prove a dupe to the passions. On this
point therefore we ought to be peculiarly cautious, that we be
not hasty of belief. In this sentiment we all agree.
But there is one circumstance, which he hath overlooked,
and which is nevertheless of the greatest consequence in the
debate. It is this, that the prejudice resulting from the reli-
gious affection, may just as readily obstruct^ as promote our
faith in a religious miracle. What things in nature are more
contrary, than one religion is to another religion ? They are
just as contrary as light and darkness, truth and errour. The
affections, with which they are contemplated by the same per-
son, are just as opposite, as desire and aversion, love and ha-
tred. The same religious zeal which gives the mind of a
Christian, a propensity to the belief of a miracle in support
of Christianity, will inspire him with an aversion from the be-
lief of a miracle in support of Mahometism. The same prin-
ciple, which will make him acquiesce in evidence lesa than suf-
ficient in the one case, will make him require evidence more
than sufficient in the other.
*p. 200.
Sect. 4. PROOF FROM TESTIMONY. 431
Before then the remark of the author can be of any use in
directing our judgment, as to the evidence of miracles at-
tested, we must consider whether the original tenets of the
witnesses would naturally have biassed their minds in favour
of the miracles, or in opposition to them. If the former was
the case, the testimony is so much the less to be regarded ; if
the latter, so much the more. Will it satisfy on this head to
acquaint us, that the prejudices of the witnesses must have
favoured the miracles, since they were zealous promoters of
the doctrine, in support of which those miracles are said to
hare b^en performed ? To answer thus would be to misunder-
stand the point. The question is. Was this doctrine the faith
of the witnesses, before they saw, or fancied they saw the mi-
racles ? If it was, I agree with him. Great, very great al-
lowance must be made for the prejudices of education, fof
principles, early perhaps, cai'efuUy, and deeply rooted in their
minds, and for the religious aifection founded in these princi-
ples ; which allowance must always derogate from the weight
of their testimony. But if the faith of the witnesses stood
originally in opposition to the doctrine attested by the mira-
cles ; if the only account that can be given of their conver-
sion, is the conviction which the miracles produced in them ; it
must be a preposterous way of arguing, to derive their con-
viction from a religious zeal, %vhich would at first obstinately
withstand, and for some time hinder such conviction. On the
contrary, that the evidence arising from miracles performed
in proof of a doctrine disbelieved, and consequently hated be-
fore, did in fact surmount that obstacle, and conquer all the
opposition arising thence, is a very strong presumption in fa-
vour of that evidence : just as strong a presumption in its fa-
vour, as it would have been against it, had all their former
zeal, and principles, and prejudices, co-operated with the evi-
dence, whatever it was, in gaining an entire assent.
Hence there is the greatest disparity in this respect, a dis-
parity which deserves to be particularly attended to, betwixt
the evidence of miracles performed in proof of a religion to
be established, and in contradiction to opinions generally re-
ceived ; and the evidence of miracles performed in support of
a religion already established, and in conjirmation of opinions
generally received. Hence also the greatest disparity betwixt
the miracles recorded by the evangelists, and those related by
Mariana, Bede, or anv monkish historian.
There is then no peculiar presumption against religious mi-
racles merely as such ; if in certain circumstances there is a
presumption against them ; the presumption ariseth solely
from the circumstances, insomuch that, in the opposite .cir-
cumstances, it is as strongly in their favour.
432 MIRACLES CAPABLE OF Part I.
SECTION V.
There is a peculiar presumption In favour of such miracles as
are said to have been wrought in support of religion.
xN this section I propose to consider the reverse of the ques-
tion treated in the former. In the former I proved that there
is no peculiar presumption against religious miracles ; I now
inquire whether there be any in their favour. The question is
important, and intimately connected with the subject.
The boldest iniidel will not deny, that the immortality of
the soul, a future and eternal state, and the connexion of our
happiness or misery in that state, with our present good or bad
conduct, not to mention the doctrines concerning the divine
unity -and perfections, are tenets which carry no absurdity in
them. They may be true for aught he knows. He disbelieves
them, not because they are incredible in themselves, but be-
cause he hath not evidence of their truth. He pretends not
to disprove them, nor does he think the task incumbent on
him. He only pleads, that before he can yield them his assent,
they must be proved.
Now, as whatever is possible, may be supposed, let us sup-
pose that the dogmas above-mentioned are all infallible truths ;
and let the unbeliever say, whether he can conceive an object
worthier of the Divine interposal, than to reveal these truths
to mankind ? and to enforce them in such a manner, as may
give them a suitable influence on the heart and life. Of all
the inhabitants of the earth, man is incomparably the noblest.
Whatever therefore regards the interest of the human species,
is a grander concern, than what regards either the inanimate
or the brute creation. If man was made, as is doubtless not
impossible, for an after state of immortality ; whatever relates
to that immortal state, or may conduce to prepare him for the
fruition of it, must be immensely superiour to that which con-
cerns merely the transient enjoyments of the present life.
How sublime then is the object which religion, and religion
only, exhibits as the ground of supernatural interpositions !
This object is no other than the interest of man, a reasonable
and moral agent, the only being in this lower world which bears
in his soul the image of his Maker ; not the interest of an
individual, but of the kind ; not for a limited duration, but for
eternity : an object at least in one respect adequate to the ma-
jesty of God.
Sect. 6. PROOF FROM TESTIMONY. 433.
Does this appear to the essayist too much like arguing a
priori^ of which I know he hath a detestation? It is just such
an argument, as, presupposing the most rational principles of
Deism, results from those maxims concerning intelligent
causes, land their operations, which are founded in general
experience, and which uniformly lead us to expect, that the
end will be proportionate to the means. The Pagans of Rome
had notions of their divinities infinitely inferiour to the opi-
nions concerning God, which in Christian countries are main-
tained even by those, who, for distinction's sake, are called
Deists. Yet such of the former as had any justness of taste,
were offended with those poets, who exhibited the celestials on
slight occasions, and for trivial purposes, interfering in the af-
fairs of men. Why ? Because such an exhibition shocked all
the principles of probability. It had not that verisimilitude
which is absolutely necessary to render fiction agreeable. Ac-
cordingly it is a precept, with relation to the machinery of the
drama, given by one who was both a critick and a poet, That
a god must never be introduced^ unless to accomplish some import-
ant design which could not be otherwise e^ectuated*. The foun-
dation of this rule, which is that of my argument, is therefore
one of those indisputable principles, which are found every
where, among the earliest results of experience.
Thus it appears, that from the dignity of the end, there
ariseth a peculiar presumption in favour of such miracles, as
are said to have been wrought in support of religion. -»
SECTION VI.
Inquiry into the meaning and propriety of one of Mr, Hume's
favourite maxims,
A HERE is a method truly curious, suggested by the author,
for extricating the mind, should the evidence from testimony
be so great, that its falsehood might, as he terms it, be ac-
counted miraculous. In this puzzling case, when a man is so
beset with miracles, that he is under a necessity of admitting
one, he must always take care it be the smallest ; for it is an
axiom in this writer's dialectick, That the probability of the
fact is in the inverse ratio of the quantity of miracle there is in
it. " I weigh," says lie, " the one miracle against the other,
* Nee deus intersit> nisidignus vindice nodus
Incident. HonxT.
I i i
434 MIRACLES CAPABLE OF Part L
" and according to the superiority which 1 discover, I pro-
'' nounce my decision, and always reject the greater miracle*."
Now, of this method, which will no doubt he thought by
many to be very ingenious, and which appears to the essayist
both very niomentous and very perspicuous, I own, I am not
able to discover either the reasonableness or the use.
First, I cannot see the reasonableness. ' A miracle,' to
adopt his own definition, ' implies the transgression,' or rather
the suspension, ' of some law of nature ; and that either by
* a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interposal of
* some invisible agent f.' Now, as I should think, from the
principles laid down in the preceding section, that it would be
for no trifling purpose, that the laws of nature would be sus-
pended, and either the Deity or an invisible agent would inter-
pose ; it is on the same principles, natural to imagine, that the
means, or miracle performed, should bear a proportion in re-
spect of dignity and greatness, to the end proposed. Were I
therefore under such a necessity as is supposed by Mr. Hume,
of admitting the truth of a miracle, I acknowledge, that of two
contradictory miracles, where all other circumstances are
equal, I should think it reasonable to believe the greater. I
shall borrow an illustration from the author himself. " A mira-
" cle," he says, " may either be dhcoxierable by men or not.
" This alters not its nature and essence. The raising of a
" house or ship into the air is a visible miracle ; the raising of
" a feather, when the wind wants ever so little of a force requi-
*' site for that purpose is as real a miracle, though not so sen-'
" siblt with regard to usj." Surely if any miracle may be
called little^ the last mentioned is entitled to that denomination,
not only because it is an undiscoverable and insensible miracle,
but because the quantum of miraculous force requisite, is,
by the hypothesis, ever so little^ or the least conceivable. Yet
if it were certain, that God, angel, or spirit, were, for one of
those purposes, to interpose in suspending the laws of nature ;
I believe most men would join with me in thinking, that it
v/ould be rather for the raising of a house or ship than for the
raising of a feather.
But though the maxim laid dov*'n b}^ the author were just, I
cannot discover in what instance, or by what application, it can
be rendered of any utility. Why ? Because we have no rule,
whereby we c;'.n judge of the greatness of miracles. I allow,
that in such a singular instance, as that above quoted from the
essaA', we may judge safely enough. But that can be of no
practical use. In almost every case that will occur, I may
* p. 182. t lb. in the note. \ ib. in the notei
Sect. 6. PROOF FROM TESTIMONY. 435
warrantably aver, that it will be impossible for the acutest in-
tellect to decide, which of the two is the greater miracle. As
to the author, I cannot find that he has favoured us with any-
light in so important and so critical a question. Have we not
then some reason to dread, that the task will not be less diffi-
cult to furnish us with a measure^ by which we can detei'mine
the magnitude of miracles ; than to provide us with a balance,
by which we can ascertain the comparative weight of testimo-
nies and experiences ?
If leaving the speculations of the essayist, we shall, in order
to be assisted on this subject, recur to his example and deci-
sions : let us consider the miracle which vi^as recited in the
third section, and which he declares, would, on the evidence of
such testimony as he supposes, not only be probable, but cer-
tain. For my part, it is not in my power to conceive a greater
miracle than that is. The whole universe is affected by it ;
the earth, the sun, the moon, the stars. The most invariable
laws of nature with which we are acquainted, even those which
regulate the motions of the heavenly bodies, and dispense
darkness and light to worlds, are violated. I appeal to the au-
thor himself, whether it could be called a greater, or even so
great a miracle, that all the writers at that time, or even all
mankind, had been seized with a new species of epidemical
delirium, which had given rise to this strange illusion. But
in this the author is remarkably unfortunate, that the princi-
ples by which he in fact regulates his judgment and belief, are
often the reverse of those which he endeavours to establish in
his theory.
Shall I hazard a conjecture ? It is, that the word miracle, as
thus used by the author, is used in a vague and improper
sense, as a synonymous term for improbable ; and that believ-
ing the less, and rejecting the greater miracle, denote simply
believing what is least, and rejecting what is most improbable ;
or still more explicitly believing what we think most worthy
of belief, and rejecting what we think least -worthy. I am
aware, on a second perusal of the author's words, that my
talent in guessing may be justly questioned. He hath in
effect told us himself what he means. " When any one,"
says he, " tells me, that he saw a dead man restored to life,
" I immediately consider with myself, whether it be more"
'•'•probable, that this person should either deceive or be de-
"" ceived, or that the fact he relates, should really have hap-
" pened. I weigh the one Tniroclc against the other ; and
" according to the superiority which I discover, I pronounce
" my decision, and always reject the greater miracle. If the
*' falsehood of his testimony would be more miraculous than
436 MIRACLES CAPABLE &?c. Part L
" the event which he re ate s ; then, and not till then, can he
" pretend to command my belief or opinion*." At first indeed
one. is ready to exclaim, What a strange revolution is here !
The belief of miracles then, even by Mr. Hume's account, is
absolutely inevitable. Miracles themselves too, so far from
bein;;^ impossible, or even extraordinary, are the commonest
things in nature ; so common, that when any miraculous fact
is attested to us, we are equally under a necessity of believing
a mirrtcle, whether we believe the fact, or deny it. The
whole ciifterence between the essayist and us, is at length
reduced to this single point. Whether greater or smaller
miracles are entitled to the preference. This mystery how-
ever vanishes on a nearer inspection. The style, we find, is
figurative, and the author is all the while amusing both his
readers and himself with an unusual application of a familiar
term. What is called the weighing of prohahilities in one
sentence, is the weighing of miraclea in the next. If it were
asked. For what reason did not Mr. Hume express his senti-
ment in ordinary and proper words ? I could only answer, I
know no reason but one, and that is, To give the appearance
of novelty and depth to one of those very harmless proposi-
tions, which by philosophers are called identical^ and which,
to say the truth, need some disguise, to make them pass upon
the world with tolerable decency.
What then shall be said of the conclusion which he gives as
the sum and quintessence of the first part of the essay ? The
best thing for aught I know, that can be said, is, that it con-
tains a most certain truth, though at the same time the least
significant, that ever perhaps was ushered into the world with
so much solemnity. In order, therefore, to make plainer
English of his plain consequence^ let us only change the word
miraculous^ as applied to the falsehood of human testimony,
into improbable^ which in this passage is entirely equivalent,
and observe the effect produced by this elucidation. " The
" plain consequence is, and it is a general maxim, worthy of
*' our attention^ That no testimony is sufficient to es-
" TABLISH A MIRACLE ; UNLESS THE TESTIMONY BE OF SUCH
*' A KIND, THAT ITS FALSEHOOD WOULD BE MORE IMPRO-
" BABLE, THAN THE FACT WHICH IT ENDEAVOURS TO ES-
** TABi.iSH'f-." If the reader tbisiks himself instructed by this
discovery, I should be loth to envy him the pleasure he may
derive from it.
* p. 132. t lb.
DISSERTATION
ON
MIRACLES.
PART II.
The miracles on which the belief of Christianity is founded,
are sufficiently attested.
SECTION I.
There is no presumption^ arising from human nature^ againsi
the miracles said to have been wrought in proof of Chris-
tianity,
X ROM what hath been evinced in the fourth and fifth sec-
tions of the former part, with regard to religion in general,
two corollaries are clearly deducible in favour of Christianity.
One is, That the presumption arising from the dignity of the
end, to say the least of it, can in no religion be pleaded with
greater advantage, than in the Christian. The other is, That
the presumption arising from the religious aflfection, instead
of weakening, corroborates the evidence of the gospel. The
faith of Jesus was promulgated, and gained ground, not with
the assistance, but in defiance, of all the religious zeal and
prejudices of the times.
In order to invalidate the second corollary, it will possibl);-
be urged, that proselytes to a new religion, may be gained at
first ; either by address and eloquence, or by the appearance
of uncommon sanctity, and rapturous fervours of devotion ;
that if once people have commenced proselytes, the transition
to enthusiasm is almost unavoidable ; and that enthusiasm
will fully account for the utmost pitch both of credulity and
falseness.
438 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part 11.
Admitting that a few converts might be made by the afore-
said arts, it is subversive of ail the laws of probability, to
imagine, that the scrongest prepossessions, fortified with that
vehement abhorrence which contradiction in religious princi-
ples rarely fails to excite, should be so easily vanquished in
multitudes. Besides, the very pretext of supporting the doc-
trine by miracles, if a false pretest, would of necessity do
unspeakable hurt to the cause. The pretence of miracles will
quickly attract the attention of all to whom the new doctrine
is published. The influence which address and eloquence,
appearances of sanctity and fervours of devotion, would other-
wise have had, however great, will be superseded by the con-
sideration of what is infinitely more striking and decisive.
The miracles will therefore first be canvassed, and canvassed
with a temper of mind the most unfavourable to conviction.
It is not solely on the testimony of the evangelists that Chris-
tians believe the gospel, though that testimony appears in all
respects such as mei-its the highest regard ; but it is on the
success of the gospel, it is on the testimony, as we may justly
call it, of the numberless proselytes that were made to a re-
ligion, opposing all the religious professions then in the world,
and appealing, for the satisfaction of every body, to the visible
and miraculous interposition of Heaven in its favour. The
witnesses considered in this light, and in this light they ought
to be considered, will be found more than '- a sufficient num-
*■ ber :' and though perhaps there were few of them, what the
author would denominate * men of education and learning ;-
yet, which is more essential, they were generallj' men of good
sense, and knowledge enough to secure ihem against all delu-
sion, as to those plain facts for which they gave their testi-
mony ; men who, fin the common acceptation of the words)
neither did, nor could derive to themselves either interest or
honour by their attestations, but did thereby, on the contrary,
evidently abandon all hopes of both.
> It deserves also to be remembered, that there is here no
contradictory testimony, notwithstanding that both the foun-
der of our religion, and his adherents, were from the first
surrounded by inveterate enemies, who never ' esteemed the
* matter too inconsiderable to deserve their attention or re-
* gard ;' and who, as they could not v^ant the means, gave
evident proofs that they wanted not tire inclination to detect
the fraud, if there had been any fraud to be detected. They
were jealous of their own reputation and authority, and fore-
saw but too clearly, that the success of Jesus would give a
fatal blow to both. As to the testimonies themselves, we may
Sfect. 1. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 439
permit the author to try them by his own rules*. There is
here no opposition of testimony ; there is no apparent ground
of suspicion from the character of the witnesses ; there is no
interest which they could have in imposing on the world j
there is not a small number of witnesses, they are innumera-
ble. Do the historians of our Lord deliver their testimony
with doubt and hesitation ? Do they fall into the opposite
extreme of using too violent asseverations? So far from both,
that the most amazing instances of divine pbwer, and the
most interesting events, are related without any censure op
reflection of the writers on persons, parties, actions, or opi-
nions ; with such an unparalleled and unaffected simplicity, as
demonstrates, that they were neither themselves animated by
passion like enthusiasts, nor had any design of working on
the passions of their readers. The greatest miracles are re-
corded, with as little appearance either of doubt or wonder in
the writer, and with as little suspicion of the reader's incre-
dulity, as the most ordinary incidents : A manner as unlike
that of impostors as of enthusiasts ; a manner in which those
writers are altogether singular ; and I will add a manner
which can on no supposition be tolerably accounted for, but
that of the truth, and not of the truth only, but of the notoriety,
of the events which they related. They spoke like people,
who had themselves been long familiarized to such acts of
omnipotence and grace. They spoke like people, who knew
that many of the most marvellous actions they related, had
been so publickly performed, and in the presence of multitudes
alive at the time of their writing, as to be uncontrovertible,
and as in fact not to have been controverted, even by their
bitterest foes. They could boldly appeal on this head to their
enemies. Aman^ say they, speaking of their master-|-, approved
of God among you-, by miracles and xvonders and signs^ xvhich
God did by him in the midst of you^ as you yourselves also
KNOW. The objections of Christ's persecutors against his
doctrine, those objections also which regard the nature of his
miracles, are, together with his answers, faithfully recorded
by the sacred historians ; it is strange, if the occasion had
been given, that we have not the remotest hint of any objec-
tions against the reality of his miracles, and a confutation of
those objections.
But passing the manner in which the first proselytes may
be gained to a new religion, and supposing some actually
gained, no matter how to the faith of Jesus ; can it be easily
accounted for, that, even with the help of those early converts,
* p. ire. f Acts ii. 22.
440 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part IL
this religion should have been propagated in the world, on the
false pretence of miracles I Nothing more easily, says the au-
thor. Those original propagators of the gospel have been de-
ceived themselves ; for " a religionist may be an enthusiast,
** and imagine he sees what has no reality*."
Were this admitted, it would not in the present case, re-
move the difficulty. He must not only himself imagine he
se^s what has no reality, he must make every body present,
those who are no enthusiasts, nor even friends, nay he must
make enemies also imagine they see the same thing which he
imagines he sees ; for the miracles of Jesus were acknowledg-
ed by those who persecuted him.
That an enthusiast is very liable to be imposed on, in what-
ever favours the particular species of enthusiasm, with which
he is affected, none, who knows any thing of the human heart,
will deny. But still this frailty hath its limits. For my own
part, I cannot find examples of any, even among enthusiasts,
(unless to the conviction of every body they were distracted)
who did not see and hear in the same manner as other people.
Many of this tribe have mistaken the reveries of a heated
imagination, for the communications of the Divine Spirit,who
never, in one single instance, mistook the operations of their
external senses. Without marking this difference, we should
make no distinction between the enthusiastic^ character and
the frantick^ which are in themselves evidently distinct. How
shall we then account from enthusiasm, for the testimony given
by the apostles, concerning the resurrection of their master,
and his ascension into heaven, not to mention innumerable
other facts ? In these it was impossible that any, who in the
use of their reason were but one remove from Bedlamites^
should have been deceived. Yet, in the present case, the un-
believer must even say more than this, and, accumulating ab-
surdity upon absurdity, must affirm, that the apostles were
deceived as to the resurrection and ascension of their master,
notwithstanding that they themselves had concerted the plan
of stealing his body, and concealing it.
But this is not the only resource of the infidel. If he is dri-
ven from this strong hold, he can take refuge in another.
Admit the apostles were not deceived themselves, they may
nevertheless have been, through mere devotion and benevo-
lence, incited to deceive the rest of mankind. The religionist,
rejoins the author, " may know his narration to be false, and
*' yet persevere in it, with the best intentions in the world, for
« the sake of promoting so holy a causef ."
» p. 185. t Jb.
Sect. 1. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. Ht,
Our religion, to use its own nervous language, teacheth
us*, that we ought not to lie, or speak wickedly, not even Jbr
God; that we ought not to accept his person in judgment, or
tali, or act deceitfully for him. But so very little, it must be
* owned, has this sentiment been attended to, even in the
Christian world, that one would almost think, it contained a
strain of virtue too sublime for the apprehension of the multi-
tude. It is therefore a fact not to be questioned, that little
pious frauds, as they are absurdly, not to say impiously, called,
have been often practised by ignorant zealots, in support of a
cause, which they firmly believed to be both true and holy.
But in all such cases the truth and holiness of the cause are
wholly independent of those artifices. A person may be per-
suaded of the former, who is too clear-sighted to be deceived
by the latter : for even a full conviction of the truth of the
cause is not, in the least, inconsistent with either the con-
sciousness, or the detection of the frauds used in support of it.
In the Romish church, for example, there are many zealous
and orthodox believers, who are nevertheless incapable o£
being imposed on by the lying wonders, which some of their
clergy have exhibited. The circunistances of the apostles
were widely different from the circumstances, either of those
believers, or of their clergy. Some of the miraculous events
which the apostles attested, were not only the evidences, but
the distinguishing doctrines of the religion which they taught.
There is therefore in their case an absolute inconsistency be-
twixt a conviction of the truth of the cause, and the conscious-
ness of the frauds used in support of it. Those frauds them-
selves, if I may so express myself, constituted the very essence
of the cause. What were the tenets, by which they were dis-
tinguished, in their religious system, particularly from the
Pharisees, who owned not only the unity and perfections of the
Godhead, the existence of angels and demons, but the general
resurrection, and future state of rewards and punishments?
Were not these their peculiar tenets. That * Jesus, whom the
* Jews and Romans joined in crucifying without the gates of
' Jerusalem, had suffered that ignominious death, to make
' atonement for the sins of men j-? that, in testimony of this,
* and of the divine acceptance, God hath raised him from the
* dead ? that he had exalted him to his own right hand, to ht
* a prince and a saviour, to give repentance to the people, and.
* the remission of their sins| ? that he is now our advocate
* with the fatherll ? that he will descend from heaven at thfe
, * Job xiii. 7, 8. t Rom. v. 6. &c. 1 Acts ii. 32. hz. v, T^0. &c, x. 40. &c>
llJohnri.l. 1 + ;
K k k
442 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part II.
* last day, to judge the world in righteousness*, and to receive
* his faithful disciples into heaven, to be for ever with him-
* self -|- ?' These fundamental articles of their system, they
must have known, deserved no better appellation than a string
of lies, if we suppose them liars in the testimony they gave
of the resurrection and ascension of their master. If, agree-
ably to the Jewish hypothesis, they had, in a most wonderful
and daring manner, stole by night the corpse from the sepul-
chre, that on the false report of his resurrection, they might
found the stupendous fabrick they had projected among them-
selves, how was it possible they should conceive the cause to
be either true or holy ? They must have known, that in those
cardinal points, on which all depends, they were false witnes-
ses concerning God, wilful corrupters of the religion of their
country, and publick, though indeed disinterested incendiaries,
whithersoever they went. They could not therefore enjoy
even that poor solace, ' that the end will sanctify the means :' a
solace with which the monk or anchoret silences the remon-
strances of his conscience, when in defence of a religion which
he regards as certain, he, by some pitiful juggler-trick, im-
poseth on the credulity of the rabble. On the contrary, the
whole scheme of the apostles must have been, and not only mu3t
have been, but must have appeared to themselves, a most auda-
cious freedom with their Maker, a villanous imposition on
the world, and I will add, a most foolish and ridiculous project
of heaping ruin and disgrace upon themselves, without the pro-
spect of any compensation in the present life, or reversion in
the future.
Once more, can we account for so extraordinary a phenome-
non, by attributing it to that most powerful of all motives, as
the author thinks it^, " an ambition to attain so sublime a cha-
" racter, as that of a missionary, a prophet, an ambassadour
*' from heaven ?"
Not to mention, that such a towering ambition was but ill
adapted to the mean rank, poor educ tion, and habitual cir-
cumstances, of such men as the apostles mostly had been ; a
desire of that kind, whatever wonders it may effectuate when
supported by enthusiasm, and faith, and zeal, must soon have
been crushed by the outward, and to human appearance insur-
mountable difficulties and distresses they had to encounter ;
when quite unsupported from within by either faith, or hope,
or the testimony of a good conscience ; rather, I should have
5aid, when they 'themselves were haunted from within by a
consciousness of the blackest guilt, impiety, and baseness.
Strange indeed it must be owned without a parallel that in
• Acts X. 42. xvJi. 31. t John xiv. 3. | p. 200.
Sect. 2. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 44a
such a cause, and in such circumstances, not only one, but al],
should have the resolution to persevere to the last, in spite of
infamy and torture ; and that no one among so many confede-
rates should be induced to betray the dreadful secret.
Thus it appears, that no address in the founder of our reli-
gion, that no enthusiastick credulity^ no pious frauds^ no ambi-
tious views^ in the pjrst converts, will account for its pro-
pagation on the plea of miracles, if false ; and that consequently
there is no presumption arising from human nature against the
miracles said to have been wrought in proof of Christi-
anity.
SECTION IL
There is no presumption arising from the history of mankindj
against the miracles said to have been wrought in proof of
Christianity,
XN the foregoing section, I reasoned only from the knowledge
that experience affords us of human nature^ and of the motives
by which men are influenced in their conduct. I come now
to the examination of facts, that I may know whether the his-
tory of mankind will invalidate or corroborate my reasonings.
The essayist is confident, that all the evidence resulting
hence is on his side. Nay so unquestionable a truth does this
appear to him, that he never attempts to prove it : he always
presupposeth it, as a point universally acknowledged. ' Men
* in all ages,' we learn from a passage already quoted, ' have
* been much imposed on, by ridiculous stories of miracles as-
' cribed to new systems of religion*.' Again he asserts, that
* the violations of truth are more common in the testimony
* concerning miracles, than in that concerning any other reli-
* gious matter of factf .' These assertions, however, though
* used for the same purpose the attentive reader will observe,
are far from conveying the same sense, or being of equal
weight in the argument. The difference hath been marked in
the fourth section of the first part of this tract. The oracular
predictions among the ancient Pagans, and the pretended
wonders performed by capuchins and friars, by itinerant or
stationary teachers among the Roman Catholicks, the author
will doubtless reckon among religious miracles ; but he can
with no propriety denominate them, miracles ascribed to a new
* p. 204, in the note. f p. 205. in the note.
M4f THE MIRACLES OF THE Part 11.
system of religion*. Now it is with those of the class last
mentioned, and with those only, that I am concerned ; for
it is only to them that the miracles wrought in proof of Chris-
tianity bear any analogy.
I shall then examine impartially this bold assertion, that
' men in all ages have been much imposed on, by ridiculous
' stories of miracles ascribed to new systems of religion.'
For my part, I am fully satisfied, that there is not the shadow
of truth in it : and I am utterly at a loss to conceive what
could induce an author, so well versed in the annals both of
ancient and modern times as Mr. Hume, in such a positive
manner to advance it. I believe it will require no elaborate
disquisition to evince, that these two, Judaism and Christi-
anity, are of all that have subsisted, or now subsist in the
world, the only religions, which claim to have been attended
in their first publication with the evidence of miracles. It de-
serves also to be remarked, that it is more in conformity to
common language, and incidental distinctions which have
arisen, than to strict propriety, that I call Judaism and Chris-
tianity, two religions. It is true, the Jewish creed, in the days
of our Saviour, having been corrupted by rabbinical traditions,
stood in many respects, and at this day stands in direct oppo-
sition to the Gospel. But it is not in this acceptation that I
use the word Judaism. Such a creed, I am sensible, we can
no more denominate the doctrine of the Old Testament, than
we can denominate the creed of Pope Pius the doctrine of the
New. And truly the fate which both institutions, that of
Moses, and that of Christ, have met with among men, hath
been in many respects extremely similar. But when, on the
contrary, we consider the religion of the Jews, not as the sys-
* Should the author insist, that such miracles are nevertheless meant to establish,
if not a new system, at least some ne^v point of religion ; that those which are
wrought in Spain, for example, are not intended as proofs of the gospel, but as
proofs of the efficacy of a particular crucifix or relick ; which is always a new
point, or at least not universally received: I must beg the reader will consider,
•what is the meaning of this expression, a ne-iv point of religion, It is not a new
system, it is nnt even a new doctrine. We know, that one article of faith in the
church of R me is, that tlie nnages and reiicks of saints ought to be worshipped.
We know also, that in proof of this article, it is one of their principal arguments,
that miracles are wrought by means of such reiicks and images. We know fur-
ther, that that church never attempted to enumerate her reiicks and other trum-
pery, and thus to ascertain the individual objects of the adoration of her votaries.
The producing therefore a ?iew relick, image, or crucifix, as an object of worship,
implies not the smallest deviation from the faith established ,- at the same time the
opinion, that miracles are performed by means of such relick, image, or crucifix,
proves, in the minds of the people, for the reason assigned, a very strong conjirtn-
aiien of the faith established. All such miracles therefore must be considered, as
■wrought in support of the received superstition, and accordingly are always fa-
voured by the popular prejudi<:es.
Sect. 2. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. US
tern of faith and practice, which presently obtains, or hereto-
fore hath obtained among that people ; but solely as the reli-
gion that is revealed in the lazu and the prophets^ we must
acknowledge, that in this institution are contained the rudi-
ments of the gospel. The same great plan carried on by the
Divine Providence, for the recovery and final happiness of
mankind, is the subject of both dispensations. They are by
consequence closely connected. In the former we are ac-
quainted with the occasion and rise^ in the latter more fully
with the progress and completion of this benign scheme. It is
for this reason that the scriptures of the Old Testament^ which
alone contain the authentick religion of the synagogue, have
^ver been acknowledged in the church, an essential part of the
gospel-revelation. The apostles and evangelists in every part
of their writings, presuppose' the truth of the Mosaick econo-
my, and often found both their doctrine and arguments upon
it. It is therefore, I affirm, only in proof of this one series of
revelations, that the aid of miracles hath with success been
pretended to.
Can the Pagan religion, can, I should rather say, any of
the numberless religions (for they are totally distinct) known
by the common name of Pagan^ produce any claim of this
kind that will merit our attention ? If the author knows of
any, I wish he had mentioned it ; for in all antiquity, as far
as my acquaintance with it reacheth, I can recollect no such
claim. However, that I may not, on the one hand, appear
to pass the matter too slightly ; or, on the other, lose myself,
as Mr. Hume expresses it, in too wide a field ; I shall briefly
consider, whether the ancient religions of Greece or Rome
(which of all the species of heathenish superstition are on ma-
ny accounts the most remarkable) can present a claim of this
nature. Will it be said, that that monstrous heap of fables
we find in ancient bards, relating to the genealogy, produc-
tions, amours, and achievements, of the gods, are the mira-
cles on which Greek and Roman Paganism claims to be
founded ?
If one should talk in this manner, I must remind him, jfrsf,
that these are by no means exhibited as evidences, but as
the THEOLOGY itself; the poets always using the same affirma-
tive style concerning what passed in heaven, in hell, and in the
ocean, where men could not be spectators, as concerning what
passed upon the earth : secondly^ that all those mythological tales
are confessedly recorded many centuries after thev are sup-
posed to have happened ; no voucher, no testimony, nothing
that can deserve the name of evidence having been produced,
Pir even alleged, in proof of them : thirdly^ that the intention
445 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part IL
of the writers seems to be solely the amusement, not the con*'
viction of their readers ; that accordingly no writer scruples
to model the mythology to his particular taste, or rather ca-
price ; but considering this as a province subject to the laws
of Parnassus, all agree in arrogating here the immemorial pri-
vilege of poets, to say and feign, unquestioned, what they
please ; zrxd fourthly^ that at least several of their narrations are
allegorical, and as plainly intended to convey some physical
or moral instruction, as any of the apologues of ^sop. But
to have said even thus much in refutation of so absurd a plea,
will perhaps to many readers appear superfluous.
Leaving therefore the endless absurdities and incoherent
fictions of idolaters, I shall enquire, in the next place, whe-
ther the Mahometan worship (which in its speculative prin-
ciples appears more rational) pretends to have been built on the
evidence of miracles.
Mahomet, the founder of this profession, openly and fre-
quently, as all the world knows, disclaimed such evidence.
He frankly owned that he had no commission nor power to
work miracles, being sent of God to the people only as a preach-
er. Not indeed but that there are things mentioned in the
revelation he pretended to give them, which, if true, would
have been miraculous ; such are the nocturnal visits of the
angel Gabriel, (not unlike those secret interviews, which
Numa, the institutor of the Roman rites, affirmed that he had
with the goddess Egeria) his getting from time to time parcels
of the uncreated book transmitted to him from heaven, and
his most amazing night-journey. But these miracles could be
no evidences of his mission. Why ? Because no person was
witness to them. On the contrary, it was because his adhe-
rents had previously and implicitly believed his apostleship,
that they admitted things so incredible, on his bare declara-
tion. There is indeed one miracle, and but one, which he
urgeth against the infidels, as the main support of his cause ;
a miracle, for which even we, in this distant region and peri-
od, have not only the evidence of testimony, but, if we please
to use it, all the evidence which the contemporaries and coun-
trymen of this military apostle ever enjoyed. The miracle I
mean is the manifest divinity, or supernatural excellence, of
the scriptures which he gave them; a miracle, concerning
which I shall only say, that as it falls not under the cognisance
of the senses, but of a much more fallible tribunal, taste in
composition, and critical discernment, so a principle of less
efficacy than enthusiasm, even the slightest partiality, may
make a man, in this particular, imagine he perceives what
hath no reality. Certain ifis, that notwithstanding the many
Sect. J. GOSPEL FULLY ATTEST. 40.
defiances which the prophet gave his enemies sometimes to
produce ten chapters, sometimes one, that could bear to be
compared with an equal portion of the perspicuous book*,
they seem not in the least to have been convinced, that there
was any thing miraculous in the matter. Nay this sublime
performance, so highly venerated by every Mussulman, they
were not afraid to blaspheme as contemptible, calling it, " A
" confused heap of dreams," and " the silly fables of ancient
*' timesf".
* Alcoran. The chapter 'of the cow,- of Jonas, of Hud.
f Of cattle, of the spoils, of the prophets. That the Alcoran bears
a very strong resemblance to the Talmud is indeed evident ; but I hardly think,
we can have a mosre striking instance of the prejudices of modern infidels, than
in their comparing this motley composition to the writings of the Old and New
^Testaments. Let tfce reader but take the trouble to peruse the history of Joseph
by Mahomet, which is the subject of a very long chapter, and to compare it with
the account of that patriarch given by Moses, and if he doth not perceive at once
the immense inferiority of the former, I shall never, for my part, undertake by
argument to convince him of it. To me it appears even almost incredible, that
the most beautiful and most affecting passages of holy writ, should be so wretch-
edly disfigured by a writer whose intention, we are certain was not to burlesque
them. But that every reader may be qualified to form some notion of this mira-
cle of a book, I have subjoined a specimen of it, from the chapter of tie ant ;
where we are informed particularly of the cause of the visit which the queen of
Sheba (there called Saba made to Solomon, and of the occasion of her conver-
sion from idolatry. I have not selected this passage on account of any special
futility to be found in it, for the like absurdities may be observed in every page of
the performance ; but I have selected it, because it is short, and because it con-
tains a distinct story which bears some relation to a passage of scripture. I use
Mr. Sale's version, which is the latest and the most approved, omittmg only, for
the sake of brevity, such supplementary expressions, as have been without neces»
sity inserted by the translator. •< Solomon was David's heir ; and he said, O
** men, we have been taught the speech of birds, and have had all things be-
■*' stowed on us; this is manifest excellence. And his armies were gathered to-
" gether to Solomon, consisting of genii, and men, and birds; and they were
•« led in distinct bands, till they came to the valley of ants. An ant said, O
" ants, enter ye into your habitations, lest Solomon and his army tread you un-
** der foot, and perceive it not. He smiled, laughing at her words, and said, O
** Lord, excite me, that I may be thankful for thy favour, wherewith thou hast
** favoured me, and my parents ; and that I may do that which is right and well
*' pleasing to thee : and introduce me, through thy mercy among thy servants the
" righteous. And'he viewed the birds, and said. What is the reason that I see
" not the lapwing ? Is she absent ? Verily I will chastise her with a severe chas-
*' tisement, or I will put her to death; unless she bring me a just excuse. And
" she tarried not long, and said, 1 have viewed that which thou hast not viewed ;
«' and I come to thee from Saba, with a certain piece of news. I found a wo-
*' man to reign over them, who is provided with every thing, and hath a magni-
" ficcnt throne. I found her and her people to worship the sun, besides God :
*' and Satan hath prepared their works for them, and hath turned them aside
" from the way, (wherefore they are not directed) lest they should worship God,
" who bringeth to light that which is hidden in heaven and earth, and knoweth
*' whatever they conceal, and whatever they discover. God ! there js no God
** but he ; the Lord of the magnificent throne. He said. We shall see whether
" thou haat spoken the truth or whether thou art a liar. Go with this my letter,
" and cast it down to them ; then turn aside from them, and wait for their an-
448 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part Hi
Passing therefore this equivocal miracle, if I may call if
so, which I imagine was of very little use in making prose-
lytes, whatever use it might have had, in confirming and tu"
taring these already made ; it may be worth while to enquire,
what were the reasons, that an engine of such amazing uiflu-
ence was never employed by one who assumed a character so
eminent, as the chief of God^s apostles^ and the seal of the prO'
"svver. The queen said, O nobles, verily an honourable letter hath been deliver-
" ed to me; it is from Solomon, and this is the tenour thereof. In the name of
" the most nnerciful God, rise not up against me : but come, and surrender yourselves
" to me. She said, O nobles, advise me in my business: I will not resolve on
" any thing, till ye be witness thereof. They answered. We are endued with
'• strength, and endued with great prowess in war ; but the command appertairi-
" eth to thee: see therefore what thou wilt command. She said. Verily kings,
*' when they enter a city, waste the same, and abase the most powerful of the
" inhabitants thereof: and so will these do. But I will send gifts to them : and
" will wait for what those who shall be sent, shall bring back. And when the
" ambassadour came to Solomon, that prince said. Will ye present me with rich-
" es ? Verily that which God hath given me is better tlian what he hath given
"you: but ye glory in your gifts. Return to your people. We will surely come
" to them with forces which they shall not be able to withstand ; and we will
" drive them out humbled ; and they shall be contemptible. And Solomon said,
" O nobles, which of you will bring me her throne, before they come and sur-
" render themselves to me ? A terrible genius answered, I will bring it thee, be-
" fore thou arise from thy place. And one with whom was the knowledge of the
" scripture said, I will bring it to thee, in the twinkling of an eye. And when
" Solomon saw it placed before him, he said, This is a favour of my Lord, that
" he ma> make trial of me, whether I will be grateful, or whether I will be un-
" grateful: and he who is grateful, is grateful to his own advantage ; but if any
" shall be ungrateful, verily my Lord is self-sufficient and munificent. And he
*• said, Alter her throne that she may not know it, to the end we may see whe-
" ther she be directed, or whether she be of those who are not directed. And
•' when she was come, it was said, Is thy throne like this ? She answered, As
*' though it were the same. And we have had knowledge bestowed on us before
" this, and have been resigned. But that which she worshipped besides Ood,
" had turned her aside, for she was of an unbelieving people. It was said to her,
" Enter the palace. And when she saw it, she imagined it to be a great water,
*' and she discovered her legs. Solomon sajd. Verily this is a palace, evenly floor^
" ed with glass. She said, O Lord, verily I have dealt unjustly with my own
" soul ; and I resign myself together with Solomon, to God, the Lord of all
" creatures." Thus poverty of sentiment, monstrosity of invention, which al-
ways betokens a distempered not a rich imagination, and in respect of diction the
most turgid verbosity, so apt to be mistaken by persons of a vitiated taste for true
sublimity, are the genuine characteristicks of the book. They appear almost in
every line. The very titles and epithets assigned to God not exempt from them.
The Lord of the daybreak, the Lord of the magnificent throne, the King of the
day of judgment, Is'c. They are pompous and insignificant. If the language of
the Alcoran, as the Mahometans pretend, is indeed the language of God, the
thoughts are but too evidently the thoughts of men. The reverse of this is the
character of the Bible. When God speaks to men, it is reasonable to think that
he addresses them in their own language. In the Bible you will find nothing in-
flated, nothing afiected in the style. The words are human, but the sentiments
are divine. Accordingly there is perhaps no book in the world, as hath been of-
ten justly observed, which suffers less by a literal translation into any other lan-
guage.
Sect. 2. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 449
phtt.-i ? Was it the want of address to manage an impositioa
of this nature ? None who knows the history of this extraor-
dinary personage, will suspect that he wanted either the geni-
us to contrive, or the resolution and dexterity to execute, any
practicable expedient for promoting his grand design ; which
was no less than that extensive despotism, both religious and
political, he at length acquired. Was it that he had too much
honesty to concert and carry on so gross an artifice ? 1 hose
who believe him to have been an impostor in pretending a di-
vine mission, will hardly suspect him of such delicacy in the
methods he would take to accomplish his aim. But in fact
there is no colour of reason for such a suggestion. There
was no prodigy, no miraculous interposition, which he hesi-
tated to give out, however extravagant when he saw it would
contribute to his ends. Prodigies of which they had no other
evidence but his own allegation, he knew his adversaries might
deny^ but could not t/z.9/?roye. His scruples therefore, we may
well conclude, proceeded not from probity^ but from prudence;
and were solely against such miracles, as must be subjected
to the scrutmy of other people's senses. Was it that miracle-
working had before that time become so stale a device, that
instead of gaining him the admiration of his countrymen, it
would have exposed him to their laughter and contempt? The
ihost cursory perusal of the Alcoran, will, to every man of
sense, afford an unanswerable confutation of this hypothesis.*
* It it observable, that Mahomet was very much harassed by the demands and
reasonings of his opposers with regard to miracles. They were so far from des-
pising this evidence, that they considered the power of working miracles as a ne-
ver-failing badge of tl\e prophetical office ; and therefore often assured him, by
the most solemn oaths and protestations, tliat they would submit implicitly to his
guidance in religion, if he would once gratify them in this particular. This artful
roan, who doth not seem to liave been of the same o[)inion with the essayist, that
it was easy for cunning and impudence to impose, in a matter of this kind, on
the credulity of the multitude, even though an ignorant and barbarous multitude,
absolutely refused to subject his mission to so hazardous a trial. There is no sub-
ject he more frequently recurs to in his Alcoran, being greatly interested to re-
move tlie doubts, which were raised in the minds of many by his disclaiming this
power ; a power which till then had ever been looked upon as the prerogative of
the prophets. The following are some of the reasons, with which he endea-
vours tosatisfy the people on this head. 1st, The soniertfignty of God, who is not
to be called to account for what he gives or withholds. 2d, The usefulness of
miracles, because every man is foreordained either to believe, or to remain in un-
belief; and this decree no miracles could alter. 3d, The experienced iriejicacy o£
miracles in former times. 4th, The mercy of God, who had denied them this
evideiice, because the sin of their incredulity, in case he had granted it, would
have been so heinous, that he could not have respited or tolerated theiri any longer.
5th, The abuse to which miracles would have been exposed from the infidels, who
would have either charged them with imposture, or imputed them to magick. See
the chapters cf cattle, of thunder,— —of AU Hejir, of liie night-
jourftey>— — jf the spider,' of the prophets.
L 1 1
4^0 '^HE MIRACLES OF THE Part II.
Lastly, was it that he lived in an enlightened age, and
amongst a civilized and learned people, who were too quick-
sighted to be deceived by tricks, which among barbarians
might have produced the most astonishing effects ? Quite the
reverse. He lived in a barbarous age, and amongst an illite-
rate people, with whom, if with any, he had reason to be-
lieve the grossest deceit would have proved successful.
What pity was it, that Mahomet had not a counsellor so
deeply versed in human nature as the essayist, who could have
assured him, that there needed but effrontery and enterprise ;
that with these auxiliaries he had reason to hope the most im-
pudent pretences would be crowned with success ? The too
timid prophet would doubtless have remonstrated against this
spirited counstl^ insisting, that it was one thing to satisfy
friends^ and another thing to silence or convert enemies ; that
it was one thing to impose on men's intellects^ and another
thing to deceive their .sf;^*^^ ; that though an attempt of the
last kind should succeed with some, yet if the fraud were de-
tected by any, and he might expect that his adversaries would
exert themselves in order to detect it, the whole mystery of
craft would be divulged, his friends would become suspicious,
and the spectators of such pretended miracles would become
daily more prying and critical ; that the consequences would
infallibly prove fatal to the whole design ; and that therefore
such a cheat was on no account whatever to be risked. To
this niethinks I hear the other replying with some earnestness,
' Make but the trial, and you will certainly find, that what
' judgment, nay and what senses your auditors have, they will
* renounce by principle in those sublime and mysterious sub-
' jects ; they will imagine they see and hear what has no reality,
' nay whatever you shall desire that they should see and hear.
' Their credulity (forgive a freedom which my zeal inspires)
* will increase your impudence, and your impudence will over-
* power their credulity. The smallest spark may here kindle
' into the greatest llame ; because the materials are always
* prepared for it. The avidum genus auricidarum swallow
* greedily, without examination, whatever sooths superstition
' and promotes wonder.' Whether the judicious reader will
reckon that the prophet or his counsellor would have had the
better in this debate, I shall not take upon me to decide. One
perhaps (if I might be indulged in a conjecture) whose notions
are founded in metaphysical refinements, or whose resolutions
are influenced by oratorical declamation, will incline to the
opinion of the latter. One whose sentiments are the result
of a practical knowledge of mankind, will probably subscribe
to the judgment of the former, and Avill allow, that in this iii-
Sect. 2. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 451
stance the captain-general and prophet of Islamism acted
the more prudent part.
Shall we then say, that it was a more obscure theatre on
which Jesus Christ appeared ? Were his spectators more ig-
norant^ or less adverse P The contrary of both is manifest. It
may indeed be affirmed with truth, that the religion of the
wild Arabs was more repugnant to the doctrine of Mahomet,
than the religious dogmas of the Jews were to those of Jesus.
But we shall err egregiously, if we conclude thence, that to
this repugnancy the repugnancy of disposition in the professors
of these religions must be proportionate. It is a fine obser-
vation of the most piercing and comprehensive genius, which
hath appeared in this age, That " though men have a very
** strong tendency to idolatry, they are nevertheless but little
** attached to idolatrous religions ; that though they have no
*' great tendency to spiritual ideas, they are nevertheless
t\ strongly attached to religions which enjoin the adoration of
** a spiritual being*." Hence an attachment in Jews, Chris-
tians, and Mahometans to their respective religions, which
was never displayed by polytheists of any denomination.
But its spirituality was not the only cause of adherence which
the Jews had to their religion. Every physical, every moral
motive concurred in that people to rivet their attachment, and
make them oppose with violence, whatever bore the face of
innovation. Their religion and polity were so blended as
scarce to be distinguishable : this engaged their patriotism.
They were selected of God preferably to other nations : this
inflamed their pride\. They were all under one spiritual
head, the highpriest, and had their solemn festivals celebrated
in one temple : this strengthened their union. The ceremo-
nies of their publick worship were magnificent : this flattered
their senses. These ceremonies also were numerous, and oc-
cupied a great part of their time : this, to all the other grounds
of attachment, superadded the force o{ habit. On the contrary,
the simplicity of the gospel, as well as the spirit of humility^
and moderation^ and charity^ and universality^ (if I mav be al-
lowed that term) which it breathed, could not fail to alarm a
people of such a cast, and awaken, as in fact it did, the most
furious opposition. Accordingly, Christianity had fifty times
more success amongst idolaters, than it had among the Jews.
I am therefore warranted to assert, that if the miracles of our
Lord and his apostles had been an imposture, there could not
• De I'esprit des loix, liv. 25. chap. 2.
j" How great influence this motive had, appears from Luke iv. ''25. Isfc- and
yjrom Acts xxii. 21, 22.
452 THE MIRACLES OF THE Fait II.
on the face of the earth, have been chosen for exhibiting them,
a more unfavourable theatre than Judea. . On the other hand^
had it been any where practicable, by a display- of false won-
ders, to make converts to a new religion, no where could a
project of this iiature have been conducted with greater pro-
bability of success than in Arabia' So much for the contrast
there is betwixt the Christian Messiah and the orphan
CHARGE of Abu Taleb. So plain it is, that the mosque yields
entirely the plea of miracles to the f^ynagogue and the church.
But from Heathens and Mahomei ans, let us turn our eyes
to the Christian world. Fhe only object here, which merits
our attention, as coming under the denomination of miracleg
ascribed to a new system, and as what maybe thought to rival
in credibility the miracles of the gospel, are those said lo have
been performed in the primitive churchy after the times of the
apostles, and after the finishing of the sacred canon, i hese
will probably be ascribed to a new system, since Christianity,
for some centuries, was not (as the phrase is) establiahed^ or
(to speak more properly) corrupted by human authority ; and
since even after such establishment, there remained long in
the empire a considerable mixture of idolaters. We have the
greater reason here to consider this topick, as it hath of late
been the subject of very warm dispute, and as the cause of
Christianity itself (which I conceive is totally distinct) seems
to have been strangely confounded with it. From the manner
in which the argument hath been conducted, who is there that
would not conclude that both must stand or fall together ? No-
thing however can be more groundless, nothing more injuri-
ous to the religion of Jesus, than such a conclusion.
The learned writer who hath given rise to this controversv,
not only acknowledges, that the falsity of the miracles men-
tioned by the fathers, is no evidence of the falsity of the mira-
cles recorded in scripture, but that there is even a presumption
in favour of these, arising from those forgeries, which he pre-
tends to have detected*. The justness of the remark contain-
ed in this acknowledgment, will appear more clearly from the
following obsei'vations.
Let it be observed, first, that supposing numbers of people
are ascertained of the truth of some miracles, whether their
conviction arise from sense or from testimony, it will surely
be admitted as a consequence, that in all such persons, the pre-
sumption against mii'acles from uncommonness must be
greatly diminished, in several perhaps totally extinguished.
* Dr. Middleton's prefatory discourse to liis letter from Rome.
Sect. 2. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 453
Let it be observed, secondly, that if true miracles have been
employed successfully in support of certain religious tenets,
this success will naturally suggest to those, who are zealous
of propagating favourite opinions in religion, to recur to the
plea of miracles, as the most effectual expedient for accom-
plishing thv=ir end. This they will be encouraged to do on a
double account : firsts they know, that people from recent ex-
perience, are made to expect such a confirmation ; secondly^
they know, that in consequence of this experience, the incredi-
bility, which is the principal obstruction to such an undertak-
ing, is in a manner removed : and there is, on the contrary, as
in such circumstances there certainly would be, a promptness
in the generality to receive them.
Add to these, that if we consult the history of mankind,
or even our own experience, we shall be convinced, that hardly
hath one wonderful event actually happened in any country^
even where there have not been such visible temptations to
forgery, which hath not given rise to false rumours of other
ev^ents similar, but still more wonderful. Hardly hath any
person or people achieved some exploits truly extraordinarj', to
whom common report hath not quickly attributed many others,
as extraordinary at least, if not impossible. A.%fame may, ia
this respect, be compared to a multiplying glaas^ reasonable
people almost always conclude in the same way concerning
both ; we know that there is not a real object corresponding to
every appearance exhibited, at the same time we know that
there must be some objects to give rise to the appearances.
I should therefore only beg of our adversaries, that, for
argument's sake, they will suppose that the mii'acles related in
the New Testament were really performed ; and then, that
they will candidly tell us, what, according to their notions of
human nature, would, in all likelihood, have been the conse-
quences. They must be very partial to a darling hypothesis^
or little acquainted with the world, who will hesitate to own^
that, on this supposition, it is not barely probable, but certain^
that for a few endowed with the miraculous power, there would
soon have arisen numbers of pretenders ; that from some mi-
racles well attested, occasion would have been taken to propa-
gate innumerable false reports. If so, with what colour of
justice can the detection of many spurious reports among the
primitive Christians be considered as a presumption against
those miracles, the reality of which is the most plausible ; nay
the only plausible account that can be given of the origin of
such reports ? The presumption is too evidently on the oppo-
site side to need illustration.
454> THE MIRACLES OF THE Part II.
^ttt is not my intention here to patronize either side of the
question which the Doctor's Free inquiry hath occasioned.
All that concerns my argument is, barely to evince, and this I
imagine hath been evinced, that granting the Doctor's plea to
be well founded, there is no presumption arising hence, which
tends in the lowest degree to discredit the miracles recorded
in holy writ ; nay, that there is a contrary presumption. In
further confirmation of this truth, let me ask, Were there ever,
in any region of the globe, any similar pretensions to miracu-
lous powers, before that memorable era, the publication of the
gospel ? Let me ask again. Since those pretensions ceased,
hath it ever been in the power of the most daring enthusiast,
to revive them any where in favour of a new system ? An-
thentick miracles will, for a time, give a currency to counter-
feits ; but as the former become less frequent, the latter become
more suspected, till at length they are treated with general
contempt, and disappear. The danger then is, lest men, ever
prone to extremes, become as extravagantly incredulous, as
formerly they were credulous. Laziness, the true source of
both, always inclines us to admit or reject in the gross, without
entering on the irksome task of considering things in detail.
In the first instance, knowing some such events to be true, they
admit all without examination ; in the second, knowing some to
be false, they reject all -without examination. A procedure
this, which however excusable in the unthinking herd, is alto-
gether unworthy a philosopher.
But it maybe thought, that the claim to miracles in the early
ages of the church, continued too long to be supported solely
on the credit of those performed by our Lord and his apostles.
In order to account for this, it ought to be attended to, that in
the course of some centuries, the situation of affairs, with
regard to religion, was really inverted. Education, and even
superstition, and bigotry, and popularity, which the miracles of
Christ and his apostles had to encounter, came gradually to be
on the side of those wonders, said to have been performed in
after times. If they were potent enemies, and such as we
have reason to believe nothing but the force of truth could
vanquish ; they were also potent allies, and may well be sup-
posed able to give a temporary triumph to falsehood, especially
when it had few or no enemies to combat. But in discoursing
on the prodigies said to have been performed in primitive
times, I have been insensibly carried from the point, to which
I proposed in this section to confine myself. From inquiring
into miracles ascribed to new systems, I have proceeded to
•> those pleaded in confirmation of systems previously established
'■" and generally received.
Sect. 2. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 455
Leaving so remote a period, I propose, lastly, to inquire,
whether, since that time, any heresiarch whatever, any founder
of a new sect, or publisher of a new system, hath pretended
to miraculous powers. If the essayist had known of any
such pretender, he surely would have mentioned him. But as
he hath not afforded us any light on this subject, 1 shall just
recall to the remembrance of my reader, those persons who,
either as innovators or reformers, have made some figure in
the church. They were the persons from whom, if from any,
a plea of this kind might naturally have been expected ; espe-
cially at a time when Europe was either plunged in barbarism,
or but beginning to emerge out of it.
Was ever then this high prerogative, the power of working
miracles, claimed or exercised by the founders of the sects of
the Waldenses and Albigenses ? Did Wickliff in England
pretend to it ? Did Huss or Jerom in Bohemia ? To come
nearer modern times. Did Luther in Germany, Zuinglius in
Switzerland, Calvin in France, or any other of the reformers,
advance this plea ? Do such of them as are authors, mention
in their writings any miracles they performed, or appeal to
them as the evidences of their doctrine? Do contemporary
historians allege,^ that they challenged the faith of their au-
ditors, in consequence of such supernatural powers ? I admit,
if they did, that their miracles might be ascribed to a new sys-
tem. For though they pretended only to re-establish the
Christian institution, in its native purity, expunging those per-
nicious interpolations, which a false philosophy had foisted into
the doctrinal part, and Pagan superstition into the moral and
the ritual ; yet as the religion they inculcated, greatly differed
from the faith and worship of the times, it might, in this re-
spect, be denominated a new system ; and v. ould be encoun-
tered by all the violence and prejudice, which novelties in reli-
gion never fail to excite. Not that the want of real miracles
was presumption against the truth of their doctrine. The
God of nature, who is the God of Christians, does nothing in
vain. No new revelation was pretended to; consequently
there was no occasion for such supernatural support. They
appealed to the revelation formerly bestowed, and by all par-
ties acknowledged, as to the proper rule in this controversy,
they appealed to the reason of mankind as the judge ; and the
reason of mankind was a competent judge of the conformity
of their doctrine to this unerring rule.
But how, upon the author's principles, shall we account for
this moderation in the reformers ? Were they, in his judg-
ment, calm inquirers into truth ? Were they dispassionate
reusoners in defence of it ? Far otherwise. He tells us, " They
456 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part II.
*♦ aiay safely be pronounced to have been universally inflamed
" with the highest enthusiasm *." And doubtless we cannot
expect from this hand a more amiable picture of their disci-
ples. May not we then, in our turn, safely pronounce, this
writer himself being judge, that for a man to imagine he sees
-what hath no reality, to impose in this manner not only on his
own understanding, but even on his external senses, is a pitch
of delusion higher than the highest enthusiasm can produce,
and is to be imputed only to downright frenzyj- ?
-' Since the world began, there hath not appeared a more ges-
neral propension to the wildest fanaticism, a greater degree of
credulity in every claim that was made to the illapses of the
Holy Spirit, or more thorough contempt of all established
modes of worship, than appeared in this island about the
middle of the last century. It is astonishing, that when the
minds of men were intoxicated with enthusiasm ; when every
new pretender to divine illuminations was quickly surrounded
by a crowd of followers, and his most incoherent effusions
greedily swallowed as the dictates of the Holy Ghost ; that
in such a Babel of sectaries, none are to be found, who ad-
vanced a claim to the power of working miracles ; a claim
'^rhich, in the author's opinion, though false, is easily support-
* Hist, of Great Britain, James I. chap. 1.
' f Perhaps it will be pleaded that the working of miracles was considered by the
leaders in the reformation as a Popish artifice, and as therefore worthy of being
discarded with the other abuses which Popery had introduced. That this was
not the light in which miracles were viewed by I.uther, who justly possesses the
rirst place in the list of reformers, is evident from the manner in which he argues
against Muncer, the apostle of the Anabaptists. This man, without ordination,
had assumed the office of a Christian pastor. Against this conduct Luther re-
monstrates, as being in his judgment, an usiu-patipn of the sacred function.
" Let him be asked," says he, *' Who made him teacher of religion ? If he an-
*' swers, God ; let him prove it by a visible miracie: for it is by such signs that God
" declares himself, when he gives an extraordinary mission." When this argu-
ment was afterwards retorted on himself by the Romanists, who desired to know
Jiow his own vocation, originally limited and dependent, had become not only
,',ijnlimited, but quite independent of the hierarchy, from which he had received it;
his reply was, Tiiat the intrepidity, with which he had been enabled to brave So
raany dangers, and the nuccess with which his enterprise had been crowned,
ought to be regarded as miraculous : And indeed most of his followers were of
this opinion. But whether this opinion w^as errjneous, or whether the argument
"against Muncer was conclusive, it is not my business to inquire. Thus much is
^evident from the story : first, That this reformer, far from rejecting miracles as a
rllomish trick, acknowledged, that in some religious questions, they are the only
medium of jjroof ; secondly. That notwithstanding this, he never attempted, by a
show of miracles, to impose on the senses of his hearers ; (if they were deceived
in thinking that his success and magnanimity were miraculous, it was not their
senses, but their understanding that was deceived) ; lastly. That the Anabaptists
themselves, though perhaps the most outrageous fanatic<xs that ever existed, did
not pretend to the power of working miracles^^ Sleidan, lib. 5, LutA. De votis
mmast. '<:^i. Epist. ad Frid, Sax. Dacem, a^. Chytraeum.
$tdt, ^ GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. W
td, and wonderfully successful^ especially among enthusiasts*
Yet to Mr. Hume himself, who hath written the history o^
that period, and who will not be accused of neglecting to mark
the extravagances effected by enthusiasm, I appeal whether
this remark be just.
Will it be alleged as an exception that one or two frantick
people among the Quakers, not the leaders of the party, did
actually pretend to such a power ? Let it be remenabered, that
this conduct had no other consequences, but to bring upon the
i>retendjrs such a general contempt, as in that fanatical and
gloomy age, the most unintelligible jargon or glaring nonsense
Would never have been able to produce.
Will it be urged by the essayist, that even itt the beginning^
of the present century, this plea was revived in Britain by the
French prophets, a set of poor visionaries, who, by the barba*
rity with which they had been treated in their oWn country,
had been wrought up to madness, before they took refuge in
this ? I must beg leave to remind him, that it is manifest, froiik
ifhe history of those delirious and unhappy creatures, that by
DO part of their conduct did they so effectually open the eyeh
of mankind naturally credulous, discredit their own inspira*
tions, and ruin their cause, as by this, not less foolish than pre-
sumptuous pretence. Accordingly they are perhaps the only
6ect, which hath sprung up so lately, made so great a bustle fot
a while, and which is nevertheless at this day totally extinct.
It deserves also to be remarked concerning this people, that
though they were mad enough to imagine that they could re*
Store a dead man to life ; nay though they proceeded so far,
CIS to determine and announce beforehand the day and the hour
of his resurrection ; yet none of them were so distracted^ ^
t!b imagine, that they had seen him rise ; not one of them after-
Wards pretended, that their prediction had been fulfilled. Thus
'iHven a frenzy, which had quite disordered their intellects,
could not in this instance overpower their senses.
Upon the whole, therefore, till some contrary example is
produced I may warrantably conclude, — that the religion df
tJte BiiLfi is the only religion extant, which claims to have
been recommended by the evidence of miracles ; — that though
in diiOferent ages and countries, numberless enthusiasts have
itisen, extremely few have dared to advance this plea ; — ^that
■^^herever any have had the boldness to recur to it, it hath
JjTOved the bane, and not the support, of their cause. Thus it
hath been evinced, as was proposed, that there is no presump-
tion arising from the history of the worlds which can in the
least invalidate the argument from miracles, in defence of
Chriiitianity.
M m m
458 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part II.
SECTION III.
No miracles recorded by historians of other religions are subver-
sive of the evidence arising from the rniracles wrought in
proof of Christianity y or can be considered as contrary testi'
mony»
W HY is a miracle regarded as evidence of a religious
' doctrine ?' Or, * What connexion is there between an act
* of power admitted to be supernatural, and the truth of a pro-
* position pronounced by the person who exerts that power?'
These are questions, which some of our infidels have exulted
in as unanswerable : and they are questions, which it is proper
to examine a little ; not so much for their own sake, as because
a satisfactory answer to them may throw light on the subject
of this section.
A man, I suppose, of an unblemished character, advanieth
doctrines in religion, unknown before, but not in themselves
apparently impious or absurd. We interrogate him about
the manner wherein he attained the knowledge of those doc-
trines. He affirms. That by no process of reasoning, nor in
any other natural way, did he discover them ; but that they
were revealed to him by the Spirit of God. It must be owned,
there is a very strong presumption against the truth of what
he says; and it is of consequence to inquire, whence that
presumption ariseth. It is not primarily from any doubt of
the man's integrity. If the fact he related, were of an ordinary
nature, the reputation he has hitherto maintained would se-
cure him from being suspected of an intended deceit. It is
not from any absurdity or immoral tendency we perceive in
the doctrine itself. It ariseth principally, if not solely from
these two circumstances, the extreme uncommonness of such
Si revelation, and the great facility with which people of strong
fancy, may in this particular impose upon themselves. The
man, I supposed, acquaints us further, that God, when he
communicated to him the truths he publishes, communicated
also the power of working miracles ; such as, of giving sight
to the blind, and hearing to the deaf, of raising the dead, and
making whole the maimed. It is evident, that we have pre-
cisely the same presumption against his being endued with
such a power, as against his having obtained such a revelation.
Two things are asserted : there is one presumption, and but
one, against them ; and it equally affects them both. What-
ever proves either assertion, removes the only presumption
Sect. 3. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 45$
which hinders our belief of the other. The man, I suppose,
lastly, performs the miracles before us, which he said he was
commissioned to perform. We can no longer doubt of a su-
pernatural communication. We have now all the evidence
which the integrity of the person could give us, as to an ordi-
nary event attested by him, that the doctrine he delivers as
from God, is from God, and therefore true.
Nay, we have more evidence than for any common fact,
vouched by a person of undoubted probity. As God is both
almighty and all-wise, if he hath bestowed on any so uncom-
mon a privilege, it is highly probable, that it is bestowed for
promoting some end uncommonly important. And what
more important end than to reveal to men that which may be
conducive to their present and eternal happiness ? It may be
said. That, at most, it can only prove the interposal of some
power superiour to human : the being who interposeth is per-
haps a bad being, and intends to deceive us. This it may be
allowed, is possible; but the other is probable. Y or ^ Jirst^
From the light of nature, we have no positive evidence of the
existence of such intermediate beings, good or bad. Their
existence is therefore only possible. Of the existence and
perfections of God, we have the highest moral assurance.
Secondly^ If there were such beings, that raising the dead, and
giving sight to the blind, should come within the verge of
their power, is also but possible ; that they are within the
sphere of omnipotence is certain. Thirdly^ Whatever seems
to imply a suspension of any of the established laws of nature,
we may presume, with great appearance of reason, proceeds
from the author of nature, either immediately, or which
amounts to the same thing mediately : that is, by the interven-
tion of some agent impowered by him. To all these there
will also accrue presumptions, not only, as was hinted already,
from the character of the preacher, but from the apparent ten-
dency of the doctrine, and from the effect it produceth on those
who receive it. And now the connexion between the miracle
and the doctrine is obvious. The miracle removes the impro-
bability of a supernatural communication of which it is in fact
an irrefragable evidence. This improbability, which was the
only obstacle, being removed, the doctrine hath, at least, all
the evidence of a common fact, attested by a man of known
virtue and good sense. "
In order to illustrate this further, I shall recur to the ftiS.
stance I have already had occasion to consider, of the Dutch-
man and the King of Siam. I shall suppose, that, besides the
account given by the former of the freezing of water in HoU
land, he had informed the prince of the astonishing effects
4^ THE MIRACLES OF THB P«rtfX|%i
Ijroduced by gunpowder, with which the latter had been entiren-
^ unacquainted. Both accounts appear to him alike incredi*
ble, or, if you please, absolutely impossible. Some time
afterwards, the Dutchman gets imported into the kingdom s^
§ufHcient quantity qf gunpowder, with the necessary artillery,
J^e informs the monarch of this acquisition ; who having per-
mitted him to make experiments on some of his cattle andi^
buildings, perceives, with inexpressible amazement, that all
tt^e European had told him, of the celerity and violence witi*
Ijrhith this destructive powder operates, is strictly conformabli^
tp truth. I ask any considerate person. Would not this ba
^ppugh to restore the stranger to the Indian's good opinion,
which, I suppose, his former experienced honesty had entitledt
him to ? Would it not remove the incredibility of the account
l^e had given of the freezing of water in northern countries £
yet, if abstractly considered, what connexion is there betweea^
tjje effects of gunpowder and the effects of cold I But the pre^
sumption arising from miracles, in favour of the doctrine pub-
lished by the performer, as divinely inspired, must be incom*
parably stronger ; since, from what hath been said, it appears
to have several peculiar circumstances, which add weight to
it. It is evident, then, that miracles are a proper proof, and
perhaps the only proper proof, of a revelation from Heaveij^
But it is also evident, that miracles may be wrought for other
purposes, and may not be intended as proofs of any doctrint
i^hatso^ver.
Thus much being premised, I shall examine another, verjf
curious argument of the essayist : " There is no testimony,''
says he, ** for any prodigy-, that is not opposed by an infinite
" number of witnesses ; so that not only the miracle destroys
" the credit of the testimony, but even the testimony destroys
*' itself*." In order to illustrate this strange position, h«
observes, that, " in matters of religion, whatever is different
** is contrary; and that it is impossible the religions of ancient
*' Rome, of Turkey, of Siam, and of China, should all of
*' thtm be established on any solid foundation. Every miracle
** therefore pretended to have been wrought in any of these
*' religions, (and all of them abound in miracles) as its direct
<* scope is to establish the particular system to which it is
" attributed, so it has the same force, though more indirectlyi
•' to overthrow every other system. In destroying a rival
" system, it likewise destroys the credit of those miracles, on
<* which that system was established ; so that all the prodigies
" of different religions are to be regarded as contrary facts,
* p. 190, &c.
aeGt.S. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 461
" and the evidences of these prodigies, whether weak oc;
»* strong, as opposite to each other." Never did an authoi?
more artfully avail himself of indefinite expressions. With
vhat admirable sleight does he vary his phrases, so as to make
the inadvertent reader look upon them as synonymous, when
in fact their significations are totally distinct ? Thus what, by
a most extraordinarj idiom, is called at first, * miracles
* wrought in a religion,' we are next to regard, as ' miracles
*| attributed to a particular system,' and lastly, as ' miracles
* the direct scope of which is to establish that system.' Every
l?ody, I will venture to say, in beginning to read the sentence,
if he forms any notion of what the author means by a ' miracle
* wrought in a religion,' understands it barely as a ' miracle
* wrought among those who profess a particular religion,' the
words appearing to be used in the same latitude, as when w«
call tke traditional tales current among the Jews, though they
should have no relation to religion, Jewish tales ; and those in
like manner Mahometan or Pagan tales, which are current
among Mahometans of Pagans. Such a miracle, the reader,
ere he is aware, is brought to consider as a miracle attri^-
buted to a particular system : nay further, as a * miracle,
* the direct scope of which is to establish that system.' Yet
nothing can be conceived more diiferent than the meaning
of these expressions, which are here jumbled together as
equivalent.
It is plain, that all the miracles of which there is any record^
come under the first denomination. They are all supposed
to have been wrought before men, or among men; and where-
ever there are men, there is religion of some kind or other.
Perhaps too all may, in a very improper sense, be attributed
to a religious system. They all imply an interruption of the
ordinary course of nature. Such an interruption wherever it
is observed, will be ascribed to the agency of those divinities
that are adored by the observers, and so may be said to be
attributed by them to their own system. But where are the
miracles (those of holy writ excepted) of which you can say
with propriety, it is their direct scope to establish a particular
system? Must we not then be strangely blinded by the charms
of a few ambiguous terms, if we are made to confound things
so widely different ? Yet this confusion is the very basis, on
which the author founds his reasoning, and rears this tremen-
dous doctrine ; That ' a miracle of Mahomet, or any of his
* successours,' and, by parity of reason, a miracle of Christ, or
any of his apostles, * is refuted (as if it had been mentioned,
* and had in express terms, been contradicted) by the testi-
* mony of Titus Livius, Plutarch, Tacitus, and of all the
*^ jiuthors, Chinese, Grecian, and Roman Catholick, who have
THE MIRACLES OF THE Part H.
* related any miracles in their particular religions.' Here all
the miracles, that have been related by men of different reli-
gions, are blended, as coming under the common denomina-
tion of miracles, the direct scope of which was to establish
those particular religious systems ; an insinuation, in which
there is not even the shadow of truth.
That the reader may be satisfied on this point, I must beg
his attention to the following observations concerning the
miracles of profane history. Firsts Many facts are related
as miraculous, where we may admit the fact, without acknow-
ledging the miracle. Instances of this kind we have in rela-
tions concerning comets, eclipses, meteors, earthquakes, and
suchlike. Secondly^ The miracles may be admitted as genuine,
and the manner in which historians account for them, rejected
as absurd. The one is a matter of testimony, the other of
conjecture. In this a man is influenced by education, by-
prejudices, by received opinions. In every country, as was
observed already, men will recur to the theology of the place,
for the solution of every phenomenon supposed miraculous.
But, that it was the scope of the miracle to support the
theology, is one thing ; and that fanciful men thought they
discovered in the theology the causes of the miracle, is
another. The inhabitants of Lystra accounted, from the
principles of their own religion, for the miracle performed in
their city by Paul and Barnabas*. Was it therefore the scope
of that miracle to support the Lycaonian religion ? Thirdly^
Many miracles are recorded, as produced directly by Heaven
without the ministration of men : by what construction are
these discovered to be proofs of a particular system ? Yet
these also, wherever they happen, will be accounted for by the
natives of the country, from the principles of their own su-
perstition. Had any of the Pagan citizens escaped the ruin
in which Sodom was miraculously involved, they would doubt-
less have sought for the cause of this destruction in the estab-
lished mode of polytheism, and would probably have imputed
it to the vengeance of some of their deities, incurred by the
neglect of some frivolous ceremony. Would it therefore
have been the scope of the miracle to confirm this nonsense ?
Fourthly^ Even miracles said to have been performed by a
man, are no evidences of the truth of that man's opinions j
such, I mean, as he pretends not to have received by revela-
tion, but by the exercise of reason, by education, or by infor-
mation from other men ; no more than a man's being endowed
with bodily strength greater than ordinary, would prove him
* Acts xiv. 8. &c.
Sict. 3* GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 463
to be superior to others in his mental faculties. I conclude
with declaring, that if instances shall be produced, of miracles
wrought by men of probity, in proof of doctrines which they
affirm to have been revealed to them from Heaven, and which
are repugnant to the doctrine of the Bible, then 1 shall think
it equitable to admit, that religious miracles contradict one
another. Then will reasonable people be reduced to the
dilemma, either of disproving the allegations on one side, or
of acknowledging that miracles can be no evidence of revela-
tion. No attempt however hath as yet been made by any
writer to produce an instance of this kind.
* But will nothing less satisfy ?' replies the author. * Will
'■ not the predictions of augurs and oracles, and the intimations
Vsaid to have been given by the gods or saints in dreams and
.^visions, of things not otherwise knowable by those to whom
* they were thus intimated ; will not these, and suchlike prodi-
* gies, serve in some degree as evidence ?' As evidence of
what ? Shall we say of any religious principles conveyed at the
same time by revelation ? No, it is not even pretended, that
there were any such principles so conveyed : but as evidence
of principles which had been long before entertained, and
which were originally imbibed from education, and from
education only. That the evidence h^re, supposing the truth
of the facts, is at best but very indirect, and by no means
on the same footing with that of the miracles recorded in the
gospel, might be easily evinced, if there were occasion. But
there is in reality no occasion, since there is no such evidence
of the facts as can justly entitle them to our notice. Let it
be remembered, that, in the fourth section of the first part, it
was shown, that there is the greatest disparity, in respect, of
evidence, betwixt miracles performed in proof of a religion
to be established, and in contradiction to opinions generally
received; and miracles performed, on the contrary, in support
of a religion already established, and in conjirmation of opinions
generally received ; that, in the former case there is the
strongest presumption for the miracles, in the latter against
them. Let it also be remembered, that in the preceding
section it was shown, that the religion of the Bible is the only
religion extant which claims to have been ushered into the
world by miracles ; that this prerogative neither the Pagan
religion, the Mahometan, nor the Roman Catholick, can,
with any appearance of reason, arrogate j and that, by conse-
quence, there is one of the strongest presumptions possihleyor
the miracles of the gospel, which is not onl}' wanting in the
miracles of other religions, but which is contrasted by the
strongest presumption possible against these miracles. And
464 THE MIRACLES OF THE fart II»
though this presumption should not, in all cases, be accounted
absolutely insuperable, we must at least say, it gives an im*
mense superiority to the proofs of Christianity. It were aa
endless and a fruitless task to canvass particularly the evi-
dence of all the pretended miracles either of Paganism or
Popery, (for on this head Mahometism is much more modest)
but as the author hath selected some, which he considers as
the best attested, of both religions, these shall be examined
severally in the two subsequent sections. From this exami*
nation a tolerable judgment may be formed concerning the
pretensions of these two species of superstition.
But from what hath been said, it is evident, that the con-
trariety which the author pretends to have discovered in th6
miracles said to have been wrought, as he expresseth it, in
different religions, vanishes entirely on a close inspection.
He is even sensible of this himself; and, as is customary with
orators, the more inconclusive his reasons are, so much the
more positive are his assertions. " This argument," says he,
** may appear over subtile and refined ;" indeed so subtile and
refined, that it is invisible altogether ; *' but is not in reo»
" lity different from the reasoning of a judge, who supposes
" that the credit of two witnesses maintaining a crime against
" any one, is destroyed by the testimony of two others, who
♦* affirm him to have been two hundred leagues distant, at the
** same instant when the crime is said to have been commit*
** ted." After the particle huty with which this clause begins,
the reader naturally expects such an explication of the argu«
ment, as will convince him, that though subtile and refined^ it
hath solidity and strength. Instead of this, he hath only the
author's word warranting it to be good to all intents : " But«9
not in reality different," ^c. The analogy between his exarrv'
ple and his argument seems to be but very distant ; I shall
therefore, without any comment, leave it with the reader as I
find it.
Thus it appears, that, for aught the author hath as yet prov-
ed, no miracles recorded by historians of other religions are
subversive of the evidence arising from the miracles wrought
in proof of Christianity, or can justly be considered as caiv-
trary testimony.
Sect.^. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 4BX'
SECTION IV.
Examination of the Pagan miracles mentioned by Mr. Hume^
OHOULD one read attentively the Easay on Miracles^ ^lXx^
consici. r it solely as a philosophical disquisition on an ai'stract
question, like most of the other pieces in the same collection;
hfe could not fail to wonder, what had induced the author so
suddenly to change sides in the debate, and, by doing so, to
contradict himself in terms the inost express. Does he not,
in the latter part of that performan::e, as warmly contend for
the reality of some miracles, as he had pleaded in the former
part, for the impossibility of all I It is true, he generally con-
cludes conceruiug chose, that they are ' gross and palpable
falsehoods.' But this serves only to render his conduct the
more mysterious, as that conclusion is always preceded by an.
attempt to evince, that v/e h ive the greatest reason to receive
them as ' certain and infallible truths.* Nay, so entirely doth
his zca/ make him forget even his most positive assertions,
(and what inconsistencies may not be dreaded from an excess
of zeal I) that he shows minutely we have those very evidences
for the miracles he is pleased to patronize, which, he had
strenuously argued, were not to be found in support of any
miracles whatever.
" There is not to be found," he affirms*, " in all history, a
** miracle attested by a sufficient number of men, of such un-
*' questioned good sense, education, and learning, as to secure
" us against ail delusion in themselves ; of such undoubted
*' integrity, as to place them beyond all suspicion of any design
' ** to deceive others ; of such credit and reputation in the eyes
;^ of mankind, as to have a great deal to lose, in case of be-
** ing detected in any falsehood ; and at the same time attest-
** ing facts performed in such a publick manner, and in so ce-
*' lebrated a part of the world, as to render the detection un-
*' avoidable." We need only turn over a few pages of the Es'
say^ and we shall find the author taking great pains to con-
vince us, that all these circumstances concurred in support of
certain miracles, which, notwithstanding his ^e/zera/r^w/wf/owy
he has thought fit to honour with a very particular attention.
He has not indeed told us how many witnesses, in his way
of reckoning, will constitute '■ a sufficient number ;' but for
some miracles which he relates, he ^ves us clouds of witnesses,
one cloud succeeding another : for the jyiolinists, who
• p. 183.
N nn
466 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part II.
tried to discredit them, " soon found themselves overwhelm-
" ed by a cloud of new witnesses, one hundred and twenty in
*' number*." As to the character of the witnesses, " most
" of them were persons of credit and substance in Parisf ;"
" again, those miracles " were attested by witnesses of credit
*' and distinction, before judges of unquestioned integi-ity J;"
" and, they were proved by witnesses, before the ofticialt) or
" bishop's court of Paris, under the eyes of Cardinal Noail-
** les, whose character for integrity and capacity was never
*' contested even by his enemies ; ;" again, *"■ the secular cler-
*' gy of France, particularly the rectors or cures of Paris, give
** testimony to these impostures, than whom no clergy are
" more celebrated for strictness of life and manners ^." Once
more, one principal witness, *' Monsieur de Montgeron, was
" counsellor or judge of the parliament of Paris, a man of
" figure and character**;" another " no less a man than the Due
*' de Chatillon, a Duke and Peer of France, of the highest
" rank and familyfj-." It is strange, if credit^ and substance,
and distinction^ and capacity, are not sufficient securities to us,
that the witnesses were not •■ themselves deluded ;' it is strange,
if uncontested integrity^ ^nd. eminent strictness of life and man-
ners, cannot remove '■ all suspicion of any design in them to
deceive others j' it is strange, if one who was counsellor of the
parliament of Paris, a man of figure and character, and
if another was a Duke and Peer of France, of the highest
rank and family, had not ' a great deal to lose, '- in
case of being detected in any falsehood :' nay, and if all
those witnesses of credit and distinction^ had not also a great
deal to lose ; " since the Jesuits, a learned body, supported
" by the civil magistrate, were determined enemies to those
*' opinions, in whose favour the miracles were said to have
" been wroughtJJ ;" and since *' Monsieur Herault, thelieuten-
" ant de police^ of whose great reputation, all who have been
" in France about that time, have heard ; and whose vigi-
" lance, penetration, activity, and extensive intelligence, have
*' been much talked of; since this magistrate, who by the na-
** ture of his office is almost absolute, was invested with full
*' powers on purpose of suppress these miracles, and fre-
*' quently seized and examined the witnesses and subjects of
*' them ; though he could never reach any thing satisfactory
** against them||i|." As to the only remaining circumstance,
* their being performed in a publick manner, and in a celebrat-
• p. 197. in the note. '^ f ib. \ p. 197.
H p. 196. in the note. § p. 199. in the note.
•• p. 295. in the note. tt P- 1^9. in the note.
\\ p. 195. jjl) p. 197. in the note.
Sect. 4. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 467
* ed part of the world,' this concurred also- They were per-
formed, we are told, " in a learned age, and on the most emi-
" nent theatre that is now in the world* ;" besides " twenty-
" two rectors or curea of Paris, with infinite earnestness
" pressed the Archbishop, an enemy to the Jansenists, to ex-
*' amine those miracles, which they assert to be known to the
" whole world, and indisputably certain f ."
Thus the essayist hath laid us under the disagreeable neces-
sity of inferring, that he is either very rash in his general as-
sertions, or useth very great amplification in his particular
narrations. Perhaps in both inferences, we shall find, upon
inquir) , that there is some truth. In his History of Great
Britain^ he gives us notice^:, that he addressed himself " to a
" more distant posterity, than will ever be reached by any lo-
" cal temporary theology." Why did he not likewise, in
writing the Essays^ entertain this grand idea? It would have
been of use to him. It would have prevented his falling
into those inconsistencies, which his too great attention and
antipathy to what he calls a local temporary theology^ only
could occasion ; and which, when that theology, according
to his hypothesis, shall be extinct, and when all our religious
controversies shall be forgotten, must appear unaccountable
and ridiculous. People will not then have the means of dis-
coveringj what is so obvious to us his contemporaries, that
he only assumes the appearance of an advocate for some
miracles, which are disbelieved by the generality of Protes-
tants, his countrymen, in order, by the comparison, to vilify
the miracles of sacred writ, which are acknowledged by them^
But to descend to particulars, I shall begin with consider-
ing those miracles, for which the author is indebted to the an-
cient Pagans. First, in order to convince us, how easy a mat-
ter it is for cunning and impudence to impose by false mira-
cles on the credulity of barbarians, he introduces the story of
Alexander of Pontus|l. The justness of the account he gives
of this impostor from Lucian, I shall not dispute. But that
it may appear, how little the Christian religion is affected by
this relation, notwithstanding some insinuations he hath inter-
mixt with it, I shall make rlie following remarks.
It is of importance to know, what was the profession of this
once so famous, though now forgotten Paphlagonian. Was
he a publisher of strange gods ? No§. Was he the founder of
• p. 175. f p. 196, in the note.
\ James I. chap. 2. || p. 188. &c.
\ The learned and judicious author of the Observations on the conTerslcn and
apostleship of Saint Paul, hath inadvertertly said of Alexander, that he introduced
ii nevi god, into Pontus. The truth is, he only exhibited a reproduction of Escula-
1168 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part 11.
a new system in religion ? No. What was. he then ? He was
no otht r than a professed fortune-teller. What were the arts
by which he carried on this gainful trade ? The essayist justly
remarks, that '^ it was a wise policy in him to lay the first scene
' of his impostures in a country, where vhe people were ex-
' tremely ignorant and stupid, and ready to swallow the gross-
* est delusion.' For '' had Alexander fixed his residtnce at
*' Athens, the philosophers of that renowned mart of learning,
*' had immediately spread through the whole Roman empire
" their sense of the matter ; which, being supported b , so
" great authority, and displayed by all the iorce of reason and
" eloquence, had entirely opened the eyes of mankind." I
shall beg leave to remark another instance of good polic^• in
him. He attempted noi to gain the veneration of the multi-
tude by opposing, but by adopting their religious prejudices.
His whole plan of deceit was founded in the established si-per-
stition. The author himself v;ill acknowledge, it would have
been extreme folly in him to have acted otherwise : and all
the world, I believe, will agree in thinking, that, in that case,
he could not have had the smallest probability of success.
"What were the miracles he wrought? I know of none, unless
/we will dignif)' with that name, some feats of legerdemain,
performed mostly by candle light ; which, in many parrs of
Europe, we may daily see equalled, nay far exceeded, b) those
of modem jugglers. Add to these some oracles he pronounc-
ed, concerning which, if we may form a judgment from the
account and specimen given us by Lucian, we should conclude,
that, like other Heathen oracles, they were generally iminielli-
gible, equivocal, or false. Before whom flid he exhibit his
wonders ? Before none, if he could heip it, that were not
thorough believers in the popular svstem. His nocturnal mys-
teries were , always introduced with an avaunt to Atheists^
Christians, and Epicureans : and indeed it was dangerous for
anj' such to be present at them. Mr. Hume says, that, *' from
*' his ignorant .Paphlagor,i,.ns, he v^as enabled to proceed to
*' the enlisting of votaries among the Grecian philosophers."
On what authority he advance this, I have not been able to
discover. He acids, "• and men oj the most eminent rank and
*' distinction in Rome." Lucian mentions one man of rank,
Rutilianus, among the votaries of the prophet ; an honest man
pius, a well Icnown deity in those parts, tr, whom he gave indeed the weiu na7ne
Glycon. In this rhere was nothirg unsuiable to the ger.ius of the mjthclogy.
Accordir.gly, we do not find, that either the priests, ^r tbe people, werein thelea»t
alarmed for the religion of che country, cr charged Alexander as an innovator in
rehgious matters. On the contrary, the greatest enemies he had to encounter,..
"Were not the religionists, but the latitudinarians.
Sect. 4. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 469^
he calls him, but at the same time the weakest, the most su-
perstitious that ever lived. As to the military expedition,
which one would imagine from Pvir. Hume's expression, the
Emperour had resolved on, in consequence of the encourage^
ment which the delusive prophecies of this impostor gave
him, we find, on the contrary, it v/as undertaken, before those
prophecies were uttered. But further. Did Alexander risk
any thing in assuming the character of the interpreter of Es-
CULAPius ? Did he lose, or did ht- suffer any thing in defence
of it? Quite the reverse. He enriched himself by this most
ingenious occupation. I shall say nothing of the picture
which Lucian gives of his morals, of the many artifices v. hich
he used, or of the atrocious crimes which he perp-'trated.
It must be owned, that the principal scope for calumny and de-
traction is what concerns the private life and moral character.
Lucian was an enemy, and, by his own account, had received
the highest provocation. But 1 avoid every thing, on this
topick, that can admit a question.
Where, I would gladly know, lies the resemblance between
this impostor and the first uublishers of the gospel ? Every
one, on the most superficial review, may discover, that, in all
the material circumstances, they are perfect contrasts. There
appears not therefore to be great danger in the poignant re-
mark with which the author concludes this relation : " Though
*' much to be wished^ it does not always happen, that evtr\ Al-
*' exander meets with a Lucian ready to expose and detect his
*' impostures." Lest the full import of this emphatiral clause
should not be apprehended, the author hcth been btill more ex-
plicit in the note: "• It may here perhaps be objected, that I
*' proceed rashly, and form my notions of Alexander, merely
*' from the account given of him by Lucian, a professed enemy.
** It -were indeed to be wished^ that some of the accounts pub-
*' lished bv his followers and accomplices had remained. The
*' opposition and contrast betwixt the character and conduct
** of the same man, as drawn by a fi'iend or an enemy, is as
*' strong, even in common life, much more in these religious
" matters, as that betwixt anv two men in the world, betwixt
*' Alexander and St. Paul for instance " Who can forbear to
lament the uncommon distress of an author, obliged every
moment to recur to unavailing wishes ? Mr. Hume, however,
in this calamitous situation, solaceth himself, as well as he
can, by supposing what he cannot assert. He snpposeth what
would have been the case, if his wishes could have been grati-
fied J and artfully insinuates, in this manner to his readers ;
that if we had the character and conduct of the aposde, deli-
neated by as able an enemy as Lucian, we should find the por-^
trait as ugly as that of Alexander,
470 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part 11.
Let us then for once suppose, what the author so ardently
wishes, that such an enemy had undertaken the history of
Paul of I'arsus. I can easily conceive what a different repre-
sentation we should, in that case, have had, of the mental en-
dowments and moral disposition, as well as of the inducements
and views of this Christian missionary. I can conceive also,
that both his actions and discourses might have been strangely
disfigured. But if the biographer had maintained any regard,
I say not, to truth, but to probability ; there are some things,
we may be absolutely certain he would never have advanced.
He would not surely have said of Paul, that he was by profes-
sion a cunning man, or conjurer ; one who, for a little money,
either told people their fortunes, or taught them how to reco-
ver stolen goods. He would not, I suppose, have pretended,
that wherever the apostle went, he flattered the superstition of
the populace, in order to gain them, and founded all his pre-
tensions on the popular system. He would not have alledged,
that Paul enrklied himself, or that he could ever have the
prospect of enriching himself, by his vocation ; nay, or that he
risked nothing, or suffered nothing, by it. He could not have
said concerning him, that he declined the audience or scrutiny
of men, whose opinions in religion differed from those on
which his mission was founded. He durst not have imputed
to him the xuise policy of laying the scene of bis impostures,
only where ignorance, barbarism, and stupidity prejVailed : as
it is unquestionable, that our apostle traversed great part, not
only of Asia Minor, but of Macedonia, and Achaia ; fixed his
residence eighteen months at Corinth, a city not less celebrated
for the polite arts, than for its populousness and riches ;
preached publickly at Athens before the Stoicks and the Epi-
cureans, and even before the Areopagus, the most venerable
judicature in Greece ; not afraid of what the philosophers of
that renowned mart of learning, might spread through the
whole Roman empire, concerning him and his doctrine ; nay,
and lastly preached at Rome itself, the mistress and metropo-
lis of the world.
The reader will observe, that, in this comparison, I have
shunned every thing that is of a private, and therefore of a
dubious nature. The whole is founded on such actions and
events as were notorious ; Avhich it is not in the power of con-
temporary historians to falsify; such with regard to Alexan-
der, as a votary could not have dissembled ; such with regard
to Paul, as an enemy durst not have denied. We are truly in-
debted to the essayist, who intending to exhibit a rival to the
apostle, hath produced a character which, we find on making
the comparison, serves only for a foil. Truth never shines
Sect. 4. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 471
with greater lustre, than when confronted with falsehood.
The evidence of our religion, how strong soever, appears not
so irresistibly, considered by itself, as when by comparison we
perceive, that none of those artifices and circumstances attend-
ed its propagation, which the whole course of experience shows
to be necessary to render imposture successful.
The next topick on which the ingenious author hath be-
stowed some flourishes, is the miracle '■' which Tacitus reports
" of Vespasian, who cured a blind man in Alexandria, by
" means of his spittle, and a lame man by the mere touch of
" his foot, in obedience to a vision of the god Serapis, who
" had enjoined them to have recourse to the emperour, for
" these miraculous and extraordinary cures*." The story he
introduces with informing us, that it is *■' one of the best attested
'^ miracles in all profane history." If so, it will the better serve
for a sample of w^hat may be expected from that quarter.
*' Every circumstance," he tell us, '' seems to add weight to the
*-V testimony, and might be displayed at large, with all the force
*^ of argument and eloquence, if any one were now concerned
" to enforce the evidence of that exploded and idolatrous su-
** perstition." For my part, were I concerned to enforce the
evidence of that exploded and idolatrous superstition, I should
aot wish the story were in better hands than in the author's.
He is by no means deficient in eloquence ; and if sometimes
there appear a deficiency in argument, that is not imputable
to him, but to the subject, which cannot furnish him with any
better : and though I do not suspect him to be in the least con-
cerned to re-establish Paganism, yet it is well known, that
hatred to his adversary may as strongly animate an advocate
to exert himself, as affection to his client.
But to proceed to the story : First, the author pleads the
*' gravity, solidity, age, and probity of so great an emperour,
" who, through the whole course of his life, conversed in a
" familiar wav with his friends and courtiers, and never aiTect-
" ed those extraordinary airs of divinity assumed by Alexander
" and Demetrius." To this character, the justness of which
I intend not to controvert, I shall beg leave to add, what is
equally indubitable, and much to the purpose, that no empe-
rour showed a stronger inclination to corroborate his title by
a sanction of the gods, than the prince of whom he is speak-
ing. This, doubtless, he thought the more necessary in his
case, as he was of an obscure family, and nowise related to
any of his predecessors. How fond he was of pleading visi-
* p. 292. &c.
47^ A;*rHE MIRACLES OF THE Part II.
o«5, and presages^ and auguries, in his favour, all the world
Jcnows*. . *
The author adds, *' The historian, a contemporary writeuf
''noted for candour and veracity, and withal the greatest and
';'- most penetrating genius perhaps of all antiquity, and so free
^*^ from any tendency to superstition and credulity, that he evert
J:Mies under the contrary imputation of atheism and profane-
'f ness." This would say a great deal, if the character of the
historian were of any mDraent in the question. Doth Tacitus
pretend that he was himself a witness of the miracle ? No.
Doth he mention it as a thing which he believes i No. In
either case i acknowledge, that the reputation of the relater
for candour and penetration, must have added weight to the
relation, whether considered as his testimony, or barely as his
opinion. J3ut is it fair to plead the veracity of the writer ia
proot of every popular rumour mentioned by him ? His vera*
city is only concerned to satisfy us, that it was actimlly report-
ed, as he relates ; or that the attempt was made, and the mi-
racle pretended i a point which, I presume, nobody would
have disputed, although the authority had been less than that
of Tacitus. Indeed the historian doth not say directly, whe-
ther he believes the miracle or not ; but by his manner of tel-
ling it, he plainly insinuates, that he thought it ridiculous. In
introducing it, he intimates the utility of such reports to the
Emperour's cause. " By which," says he, " the favour of
*' heaven, and the appointment of the gods, might be urged
" in support of his title|." When he names the god Serapis^
as warning the blind man to recur to Vespasian, he adds, ia
evident contempt and derision of his godship, '' Who is ador-
f' ed above all others by the Egyptians, a people addicted to
*' superstition J." Again he speaks of the emperour, as in-
duced to hope for success, by the persuasive tongues of flat-
terersll. A serious believer of the miracle would hardly have
used such a style in relating it. But to what purpose did he
then relate it? The answer is easy. Nothing could be more
characteristick of the Emperour, or could better show the arts
he had recourse to, and the hold which flattery had of him ;
nothing could be more characteristick of the Alexandrians^i^
the people amongst whom the miracle is said to have been
wrought. '^'
• Auctoritas, et quasi majestas quxdam, ut scilicet inopirvato et adhuc novo prin-
cipl decrat, haecquoque accessit. Sueton.
t Quels coelestis favor, et qusedam in Vespasianuni incUnattb tiuminum ostende-
retur.
\ Quern dedita superstitionibus gens ante alios colit.
II Vocibus adiUanuura in spem iuduci.
Sect34. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 47S
* **»^ The persons," says the essayist, *' from whose testimony-
** he related the miracle, of established character for judg-
"merit and veracity, as we may well suppose; eye-witnesses
*' of the fact, and confirming their verdict, after the Flavian
" family were despoiled of the empire, and could no longer
** give any reward as the price of a lie." Persons of establish"
ed character for judgment and veracity ! Who told Mr. Hume
so i It was not Tacitus. He only denominates them in gene-
ral* I " They who were present," and *' a crowd of bystani
f ders." The author, conscious that he advances this with-
out even the shadow of authority, hath subjoined, in order to
palliate the matter, as we may well suppose. An admirable ex-
pedient for supplying a weak plea, with those convenient cir-
cumstances that can give it strength ! When facts fail, which
is>not seldonj the case, we need but apply to supposition, whose
help is always near. But if this be allowed to lake the place
of argument, I see no reason why I may not avail myself of
the privilege of supposing, as well as the author. The wit-
nesses then, I will suppose, were mostly an ignorant rabble :
but I wrong my cause ; I have a better foundation than sup-
|)osal, having Tacitus himself, and all antiquity on my side,
•when I add deeply immersed in superstition^ particularly at-
tached to the worship of Serapis^ and keenly engaged in sup-
port of Vespasian^ Alexandria having been the first city of
note that publickly declared for him. Was it then matter of
surprise, that a story, which at once soothed the superstition
of the populace, and favoured their political schemes, should
gain ground among them ? Can we justly wonder, that the
wiser few, who were not deceived should convive at, or even
contribute to promote a deceit, which was highly useful to the
cause wherein themselves were embarked, and at the same
time highly grateful to the many ? Lastly, can we be surpris-
ed that any, who, for seven and twenty years, had, from mo-
tives of interest, and ambition, and popularity, propagated a
falsehood, should not afterwards be willing to expose them-
Stlves as liars ?
The author finishes the story thus : " To which if we add
" the publick nature of the facts related, it will appear, that
** no evidence can well be supposed stronger for so gross and
**■ so palpable a falsehood." As to the nature of the facts, we
are told by Tacitus, that when Vespasian consulted the phy-
sicians, whether such maladies were curable by human artj
they declared-j-, that " in the one the power of sight was not
* Qui interfuere.— — Quae astabat tnultitudo.
t Huic non eaesam vim lumims, et red'turam, si pellerentur obstantia: illi
elapsos in pravum artus, si salubris vis adhibeatur, posse integrari.
900
4/4 THE MIRACLES OF THE Pa?t U.
"extinct, but would return, were the obstacles remaved';'fhat
" in the other, the joints had suffered some dislocation, which
" by a salutary pressure might be redressed." From this ac-
count we are naturally led to conclude, that the disorders were
not so conspicuous, but that either they might have been feign-
ed, where they were not ; or that cures might have been pre-
tended, where none were performed. I think it is even a fur-
ther presumption of the truth of this conclusion, that Sueto-
nius, the only other Roman historian who mentions the mira-
cle, (1 know not how he hath been overlooked by Mr. Htime)
differs from Tacitus, in the account he gives of the lameness.
The one represents it as being in the hand, the other, as in
the leg*.
There are other circumstances regarding this story on which
I might make some remarks ; but shall forbeart as it is im-i
possible to enter into a minute discussion of particulars, that
appear but trivial, when considered severally, without grow-
ing tiresome to the bulk of readers. I shall therefore only
subjoin these simple questions. Firsts What emperour or
other potentate was flattered in his dignity and pretensions by
the miracles of our Lord ? What eminent personage foun^
himself interested to support, by his authority and influence,
the credit of these miracles ! Agam^ What popular supersti-
tion or general and rooted prejudices were they calculated to con-
firm ! These two circumstances, were there no other, make
the greatest odds imaginable betwixt the miracles of Vespa-
sian and those of Jesus Christ.
So much for the Pagan miracles mentioned by the author.
SECTION V.
Examijiation of the Popish miracles mentioned by Mr. Hume.
X HE author soon descends from ancient to modern times,
and leaving Paganism, recurs to Popery, a much more fruitful
source of lying wonders.
The first of this kind he takes notice of-]-, is a Spanish mi-
racle recorded in the memoirs of Cardinal de Retz. The sto-
ry, he says, is very memorable, and may well deserve our
consideration. " When that intriguing politician fled into
■ * Manum seger. Tacitus, Debili crure. Suitonius. Mr. Hume, in
the last edition of the Essay mejitions Suetonius> but takes no ncftice of this
difference between his account and that of Tacitus,
t p. 193. &c.
Sect.^. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 475-
" Spain, to avoid the persecution of his enemies, he passed
" through Saragossa the capital of Arragon ; where he was
" shown in the cathedral church, a man, who had served
" twenty j^ears as a door-keeper of the church, and was well
" known to every body in town, that had ever paid their de-'
" votions at that cathedral. — He had been for so long a time
*' wanting a leg ; but recovered that limb, by the rubbing of
" holv oil upon the stump ; and^ when the cardinal examined-
*' /V, he found it to be a true natural leg^ like the other.'''' Would
not any person imagine, from the last words of the sentence,
that the cardinal had ordered the man to put oif his shoes and
stockings, that, by touch as well as by sight, he might be sa.-
tisfied, there was no artifice used, but that both his legs con-
sisted of genuine flesh and bone ? Yet the truth is, his Emi-
nency did not think it worth while to examine any one circum-
stance of this wonderful narration, but contented himself-
with reporting it precisely as it had been told him. His words
literally translated are, " In that church they showed me a
*' man, whose business it was to light the lamps, of which
" theV have a prodigious number, telling me, that he had
*' been seen seven years at the gate, with one leg only. I saw
" him there with two*." Not one word of trial or examina-
tion, or even so much as a single question asked on the sub-
ject ; not a syllable of his finding the leg to be either true or
false, natural or artificial, like the other or unlike. I have a
better opinion both of the candour and of the good sense of
Mr. Hume, than to imagine, he would have designedly mis-
represented this story, in order to render it fitter for his pur-
pose. I believe the source of this errour hath been solely the
trusting to his memory in the relation which he gave, and not
taking the trouble to consult the passage in the memoirs. This
conjecture appears the more probable, as he hath made some
other alterations, which are nowise conducive to his design ;
such as, that the man had been seen in the church twenty vears
wanting a leg, and that he was a door-keeper ; whereas the
memoir-writer says only seven years, and that he was one xvho
lighted the lamps-\.
* L'on m'y montra iin homme, qui servoit a allumer les lampes, qui y sont en
nombre prodigieux ; et l'on me dit, qu'on I'y avoit vu sept ans a la porte de cet-
te eglise, avec une seule jarnbe. Je I'y vis avec deux. Liv. 4. fun. 1654.
f Since finishing this tract, I have seen an edition of Mr Hume's essays, &.c.
later than that here refeired to. It is printed at London 1760 I must do the au-
thor the justice to observe, that, in this editioij, he liath correcied the niisr'ike,
as to the cardinal's examining the man's leg, of which he only says, " I'he cardi-
" nal assures us, that he saw him with two legs." He still calls liim a door- keeper y.
and says, that he had served tvjenty years in this capacity.
iT6 THE MIRACLES OF THE PartH.
*' This miraele was vouched," says the author, " by all the
** canons of the church ; and the whole company in town
*' were appealed to, for a confirmation of the fact, whom the
** Cardinal found, by their zealous devotion, to be thorough
'^ believers of the miracle." It is true, that the company in
town were appealed to, by those ecclesiasticks ; but it is also
true, that De Retz^ by his own account, seems not to have ask-
ed any man a question on the subject. He acknowledges in-
deed, that an anniversary festival, instituted in commemora-
tion of the miracle, was celebrated by a vast concourse of peo*.
pie of all ranks.
** Here," continues the essayist, " the relater was aiso con-
** temporary to the supposed prodigy, of an incredulous and
** libertine character, as well as of great genius." But of
what weight, in this affair, is either the genius or the incre-.
dulity of the relater, since, by Mr. Hume's Confession, he had
no faith in the relation ? Strange indeed is the use which the
essayist makes of this circumstance !
'' What adds mightily" says he, " to the force of the evidence,
** and may double our surprise on this occasion, is, that the
*' cardinal himself, who relates the story, seems not to give
*' any credit to it." It doth not in the least surprise me, that
the cardinal gives no credit to this relation ; but I am beyond
measure surprised, that Mr. Hume should represent this cir-
cumstance as adding mightily to the force of the evidence. Is
then a story which is reported by a man of genius, the mor«
credible that he doth not believe it ? Or, Is it the more incre-
dible that he doth believe it? What would the author have
said, if the cardinal had told us, that he gave credit to the re^^
lation ? Might he not, in that case, have very pertinentljr
pleaded the great genius, and penetration, and incredulity of
the relater, as adding mightily to the force of the evidence ? On
that hypothesis, he surely might, for pretty obvious reasons.
Uncommon penetration qualifies a man for detecting fraud ;
and it requires evidence greater than ordinary to surmount in-
credulity. The belief therefore of such a person as the cardi-
nal, who had not only the means of discovering an imposture^
as he was contemporary and on the spot, but the ability to
discover it, as he was a man of genius, and not over-credulous ;
his belief, I say, would evidently have been no small presump-
tion of the truth of the miracle. How his disbelief can be in
like manner a presumption of its truth, is to me incomprehen-
sible. Ay but, rejoins the author, *' as he seems not to give
*' any credit to it, he cannot be suspected of any concurrence
** in the holy fraud." Very well. I am satisfied that a man's
TESTIMONY is the mere to be regarded, that he is above being
Sect. & GOSPEI. FULLY ATTESTED. 4fr
suspected of concurring in any frauds call it holy or unholy.
But I want to know why, on the very same account, his opi-
nion is the less to be regarded ? For my part, 1 find no diffi-
culty in believing every article of the narration for which the
cardinal gives his testimony : notwithstanding this, i may be
©f the same opinion with him ; that the account given by the
dean and canons, which is their testimony, not his, was all a
fiction. But it is not with the cardinal's testimony we are
here concerned : about that there is no dispute. It is with his
opinion. Are then a man's sentiments about a matter of facti
I must insist on it, the less worthy of regard, either because
he is a man of genius, and not at all credulous, or because he
cannot be suspected of any concurrence in a holy fraud ? Are
they the more improbable on these accounts ? The essayist,
when he reflects, will be the last man in the world, that would
assist in establishing a maxim so unfavourable, not only ta
candour, but even to genius and scept'cism : and indeed there
are few, if any, that would be greater sufferers by it thatl
kitnself.
But leaving this, as one of the unfathomable depths of the"
essay, 1 proceed to the other circumstances. " The miracle,"
says the author, *•'■ of so singular a nature, as could scarce
** admit of a counterfeit." He did well at least to use the
word scarce ; for if every visitant was as little desirous of
prying into the secret, as the cardinal, nothing could be more
easily counterfeited : " And the witnesses very numerous, and
" all of them, in a manner^ spectators of the fact, to which:
** they gave their testimony," By the very numerous witnesses^
I suppose he means the whole company in town, who were
appealed to. They were all, in a manner^ spectators of the
fact. What precise abatement the author intended we should
make, from the sense of the word i<pectators^ on account of the
qualifying phrase, in a manner^ I shall not presume to deter-
mine ; but shall observe, from the memoirs, that it was not
so much as pretended by the canons, that any of the citizens
had seen the miracle performed ; it was only pretended, that
they had seen the man formerly at the gate of the church,
wanting a leg. Nor is it alleged, that any of them was at
more pains in examining the matter, either before or after the
recovery of the leg, than the cardinal was. They were there-
fore properh no spectators of the fact. The phrase, in a
manner^ ought I imagine to have been placed in the end of the
sentence, which would have run thus : " to which they, in a
^^ manner J give their testimony ;" for no direct testimony was
either asked of them, or given by them; their belief is inferred
from their devotion.
478 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part IL
I have been the more particular in my remarks on the cir-
cumstances of this stor)^, not because there was need of these
remarks : for, though to the essayist the relation appeared
very memorable^ to me, and, I believe, to most people, it ap-
pears very trifling ; but that the reader might have this
further specimen of the author's talents in embellishing. To
the above-mentioned, and all other such idle tales, this short
and simple answer will, by every man of sense, be thought
sufficient. The country 7uhere the miracle Is said to have been
wrought^ Is Spain; the people xvho propagated the faith of Ity
"Were the clergy. Wh.'t comparison, in point of credibility,
can be made between miracles, which, with no visible support
but their own evidence, had at once to encounter, and did in
fact overcome the abhorrence of the priest, and the tyranny
of the magistrate, the insolence of the learned, and the bigotry
of the superstitious : what comparison, I say, can be made
between such, and any prodigies said to have been performed
in a country, where all the powers of the nation, secular and
ecclesiastical, the literature of the schools, such as it is, and
the prejudices of the people, conspire in estsblishing their
credit ; a country sunk in the most obdurate superstition that
ever disgraced human nature*, a country where the awe of the
inquisition is so great, that no person, whatever be his senti-
ments, dares mutter a syllable against any opinion that hath
obtained the patronage of their spiritual guides ? But that I
may not be accused of prepossession, or suspected of exagge-
rating, I shall only give the sentiments of two eminent
foreigners (who were not Protestants, and may therefore be
supposed the more impartial) concerning that nation, and the
influence which the holy tribunal has both on their character
* This perhaps will appear to some to be too severe a censure on a country-
called Christian, and may be thought to reflect nn Christianity itself. I do not
think it fairly capable of such a construction. That the corruption of the best
things produces the worst, hath grown intoaproverb; and, on the most impartial
enquiry, I do not imagine it will be found, that any species of idolatry ever
tended so directly to extirpate humanity, gratitude, natural afFectior, equity, mutual
confidence, good faith, and every aiv.iable and generous principle from the human
breast, as that gross perversion of the Christian religion which is established in
Spain. It might easily be shown, that the human sacrifices offered by Heathens,
had not half tiie tendency to corrupt the heart, and consequently deserve lot to
be viewed with half the horrour, as those celebrated among the Spaniards, with
so much pomp, and barbarous festivity, at an auto dafe. It will not surely be
affirmed, that our Saviour reflected on the Mosaick institution, or germi: e Ju-
daism, when^ie said. Wo untayou scribes and pharisees , hypocrites ; for ye compass
sea and land to make one proselyte, and lohcn he is made, ye make him tvjofold
more the child of hell than yourselves. Ye: ihe words plainly imply, thi^' even
Pagansy by being converted to the Judaism that was then professed, were tnade
children of hell, and consequently corrupted, instead of being reformed. See
Matth. xxiii. 15.
Sect. 5. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 479
and manners. Voltaire*, speaking of the inquisition as estab-
lished in Spain, says, *' Their form of proceeding is an infal-
** lible way to destroy whomsoever the inquisitors please. The
*' prisoners are not confronted with the informers ; and there
" is no informer who is not listened to. A publick criminal,
" an infamous person, a child, a prostitute, are creditable
*' accusers. Even the son may depose against his father ; the
" wife against her husband. In fine, the prisoner is compeiledl
*' to inform against himself, to divine, and to confess, the
*' crime laid to his charge j of which often he is ignorant.
*' This procedure,' unheard of till the institution of this court,
"makes the whole kingdom tremble. Suspicion reigns in
" every breast. Friendship and openness are at an end. The
" brother dreads his brother, the father his son. Mence taci-
*' turnity is become the characteristick of a nation endued
" with all the vivacity natural to the inhabitants of a warm
" and fruitful climate. To this tribunal we must likewise
*' impute that profound ignorance of sound philosophy, in
*' which Spain lies buried, whilst Germany, England, France,
" and even Italy, have discovered so many truths, and enlarged
" the sphere of our knowledge. Never is human nature so
*' debased, as when ignorance is armed with power." — " It is
"necessary," says Montesquieu-|-, in the humble remonstrance
to the inquisitors of Spain and Portugal, "that we advertise
" you of one thing ; it is, that if any person, in future times,
*' shall dare assert, that in the age wherein we live, the Euro-
" peans were civilized, you will be quoted to prove that they
*' were, barbarians, and the idea people will form of you, will
" be such as will dishonour your age, and bring hatred on all
" your contemporaries."
I come now to consider the miracles said to have been per-
formed in the church-yard of Saint Medard, at the tomb of
Abbe Paris. On these the author hath expatiated with great
parade, exulting, that he hath found in them, as he imagines,
what, in respect of nunaber, and nature, and evidence, may
outvie the miracles of holy writ. Yet shoidd we admit them
to be true, how they can be considered as proofs of any doc-
trine, or how they can affect the evidence of the miracles
recorded in scripture, it will not perhaps be easy to discover.
But setting that question aside, I propose to examine their
evidence ; and that, not by entering into a particular inquiry
concerning each separate fact mentioned in Montgeron's col-
lection, as such an inquiry would appear, to every judicious
* EsSai sur i'h'istoire generale, chap. 118.
f De I'eSprit de loi.v, liv. 26, chap. 13.
48d THE MIRACLES OF THE Part U.
reader, both tedious and impertinent ; but by making a few
general observations, founded in unquestionable fact, and
mostly supported even by the authority of Montgeron, that
doughty champion of the Jansenist saint*.
I^ir.'it, Let it be remarked, that it was often objected by the
enemies of the saint, and scarce contradicted, never confuted,
by his friends, that the prostrations at his sepulchre produced
more diseases, than they cured. The ingenious author lately
quoted, in the account he gives of the affairs of the church in
the ninth century, taking occasion incidentally to mention the
miracles of the Abbe, speaks of this circumstance, as a thing
universally known, and undeniable-j-. '•'- I should not take no-
" tict," says he, '^' of an epidemical folly with which the peo-
*' pie of Dijon were seized in 844, occasioned by one Saint
*' Bfiiignus, who threw those into convulsions who prayed on
*' his tomb ; I should not, I say, m^ention this popular super-
*' stition, had it riot been furiously revived in our days, in pa-
" rallel circumstances. It seems, as if the same follies were
'' destined to make their appearance, from time to time, oa
*' the theatre of the world : but got>d sense is also the same at
^' all times ; and nothing so judicious hath been said, concen*-
" ing the modern miracles wrought on the tomb of 1 knovr
" not what deacon at Paris, as what a bishop of Lyons said,
" concerning those of Dijon. A strange saint indeed, that
" maims those who pay their devoirs to him* I should thinky
" miracles ought to be performed for the curings and not for the
'' inflicting of maladies^''
The second observation is, That the instances of persons
cured are extremely few^ compared with the multitudes of
people in distress, who night and day attended the sepulchre-,
imploring in vain the intercession of the saint. The crowds
of sick and infirm, who flocked to the tomb for relief, were,
by all accounts, innumerable : whereas all the cures which the
zealous and indefatigable Montgeron could procure vouchers
of, amounted only to NineJ. The author therefore must be
understood, as speaking with great latitude, when he says,
• The character of his book is very justly and very briefly expressed in Le Sit'
de de Louu XIV. in these words : " Si ce livre subsistait un jour, et que les autres
" fussent perdus, Ja posterire croirait que notre siccle a ete un terns de barbarie/'
chap 33.
f Essai sur I'histoire generale, chap. 21.
\ It must be owned tha' the author of the Recueil after-mentioned, hath pre-
sented us with a much greater number ; but let it be remarked, that that author
doth not confine himself to the cures performed openly at the tomb of the deacon,'
he gives us also those rhat were wrought i.: the private chambers of the sick, by
virtue of his relicks, by images of him, or by earth brought frr.. under his monu-
ment Nor is the collecnon restricted only to the cures effected by the saint ; it
iiicludes also the judgments inflicted by him.
S^t;^, GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 481
** There surely never was so great a number of miracles
** ascribed to one person, as those which were lately said to
** have been wrought in France, upon the tomb of Abbe Paris,
'' the famous Jansenist, with whose sanctity the people were
*' so long deluded*." If thousands of diseased persons had
applied for medicine to some ignorant quack, in the assurance
of His extraordinary abilities, would it be matter of surprise
to a reasonable man, that, of so many, eight or nine should be
found, whose distempers had taken a favourable turn, whilst
they were using his specificks, and had thereby given counte-
iiance to the delusion? I think it would be matter of surprise
that there were so few.
I shall observe, thirdly^ That imposture wzs actually detect-
ed, and proved in several instances. That the reader may be
satisfied of this, I must intreat him to have recourse to the
Archbishop of Sens' Pastoral instructions ; a book which M r»
Hume could not, with propriety, take any notice of, having
positively asserted that " the enemies to those opinions, in
^ whose favour the miracles were said to have been wrought,
« were never able distinctly to refute or detect them-j'." This
prelate, on the contrary, hath not only given a distinct refuta-
tion of some of these pretended miracles, but hath clearly
detected the deceit and little artifices by which their credit
was supported. I intend not to descend to particulars, and
shall therefore only refer the reader to the book itself, and beg
that he will peruse what relates to the cases of Jaeques Lau-^
rent Menedrieuz^ yean Nivet^ Sieur le Doulx^ Laleu^ Anne Cou-
hn^ the widow de Lorme^ as well as Mademoiselle le Franc^ of
whom the essayist hath made mention in a note. In this pe-
rusal, the reader will observe the shameful prevarications of
some Jansenist witnesses, for whom Mr. Hume would fain apo-
logize, by telling us pleasantly, they were tampered with^.. I
shall only add on this head, that the detection of fraud in
some instances, justly brings suspicion on all the other in-
stances. A man whom I know to have lied to me, on several
occasions, I shall suspect, on every occasion, where I have
not access to discover, whether what he affirms be true or false.
It is in the same way we judge of the spirit and conduct of
parties, as of individuals.
I observe, fourthly^ That all the cures recorded by Mont*
geron, as duly attested, were such as might have been effected
by natural means.. There are two kinds of miracles, to which
Mr. Hume hath alluded in a note, though he does not directly
Avafce the distinction. One is, when the event, considered by
* p. 195. t ib. \ p. 197. in the note.
Ppp
^a^ THE MIRACLES OF THE l»art II.
itself, is evidently preternafural. Of this kind are, raising the
dead, walking on water, making whole the maimed ; for by-
no natural causes can these effects be produced. The other
kind is, when the event, considered by itself, is natural^ that is,
may be produced by natural causes, but is denominated mira-
culous, on account of the manner. That a sick person should
be restored to health, is not, when considered singly, preter-
natural ; but that health should be restored by the command
'of a man, undoubtedly is. Let us hear the author on this
point : " Sometimes an event may not, in itself^ seem to be
*' contrary to the la vs of nature, and yet, if it were real, it
*' might, by reason of some circumstances, be denominated a
** miracle ; because, infact^ it is contrary to these laws. Thus,
*' if a person claiming a divine authority, should command a
" sick person to be well, a healthful man to fall down dead,
*' the clouds to pour rain, the winds to blow, in short, should
" order ir.any natural events, which immediatel}' follow upon
"* his command ; these might justly be esteemed miracles, be-
*' cause they are really, in this case, contrary to the laws of
** nature. For if any suspicion remain, that the event and
*' command concurred by accident, there is no miracle, and no
*' transgression of the laws of nature. If this suspicion be
" retnoved, there is evidently a miracle, and a transgression
*' of these laws ; because nothing can be more contrary to
*' nature, than that the voice or command of a man, should
*' have such an influence*." From what hath been said, it
appears, that these two kinds of miracles must differ consi*
derably in respect of evidence, since the latter naturally gives
room for a suspicion, which is absolutely excluded from the
former. In the former, when the fact or event is proved, the
miracle is unquestionable. In the latter, the fact may be prov-
ed, and yet the miracle may be justly questioned. It therefore
merits our attention, that all the miracles recorded in Montge-
ron's collection, were of the second kind. One of the most
considerable of those cures, was that of Don Alphonso de Pa-
lacios, who had lost one eye, and was distressed with an in-
flammation in the other. The inflamed eye was cured, but the
lost eye was not restored. Had there been a reproduction of
the member which had perished, a sufficient proof of the fact,
would have been a sufficient proof of the miracle. But as the
case was otherwise, the fact vouched may be admitted, without
admitting any miracle. The cures said to have been perform-
ed on those patients who were afflicted with paralytick or drop-
sical disorders, or that performed on Louisa Coirin, who had a
tumour on her breast, will not appear to be entitled to a rank
* p. 181. in t,he note..
Sect, ^, GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 48^-
in the first class. As little can the cure of Peter Gautier
claim that honour. One of his eyes had been pricked with an
awl ; in consequence of which the aqueous humour dropped
cut, and he became blind of that eye. His sight was restored,
whilst he paid his addresses to the Abbe. But that a puncture
in the cornea of the eye will often heal of itself, and that the
aqueous humour, after it hath been quite lost, will be recruit**
ed, and consequently, that the faculty of vision will, in such a
case, be recovered, is what every oculist can assure us of. The
loss of the watery humour, is the constant effect of a very
common operation in surgery, couching the cataract. Hence
we may learn, how we ought to understand these words of the
author, " The curing of the sick, giving hearing to the deaf,
"and sight to the blind, were every where talked of as the
'* usual effects of that holy sepulchre**" As therefore the
alleged miracles were all of the second class, it is onlv from
the attendant circumstances we can judge, whether the facts,
though acknowledged, were miraculous or not.
In order to enlighten us on this point, I observe, fifthli}^
That none of the cures were instantaneous. We have not in-«
deed the same hold of the deceased Abbe, as of a living pro-
phet, who pretends to work miracles. Those who attend the
latter, can know exactly, to whom he grants the benefit of his
miraculous aid. They can judge also, whether the supplicant's
recovery be coincident, with the prophet's volition or com-
mand. In the former case, we have not access to judge of
either ; and consequently, there is much greater scope for
fancy and credulity to operate. No voice was ever said to
have proceeded from the tomb of the blessed deacon, as his
votaries styled him. They obtained no audible answer to
their prayers. There are however some circumstances, by
which a probable conjecture may be made concerning the
efficiency of the saint in the cures ascribed to him. One is,
if the cure instantaneously followed the first devotions at the
tomb. Supernatural cures differ, in this particular, as much
as in any other, from those which are effected by natural
means, that they are not gradually^ but instantli/, perfected.
Now of which kind were the cures of St. Medard ? From the
accounts that are given, it is evident, that they were gradual.
That some of them were sudden, is alleged ; but that any of
them were instantaneous, or immediately followed the first
application, is not even pretended. All the worshippers at
the tomb, persisted for days, several of them for zveels, and
some for months successively, daily imploring the interces-
» p. 195.
484 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part II,
sion of the Abbe^ before they received relief from their com-
plaints J and the rehef which was received, is, in most cases, ^
acknowledged to have been gradual.
I observe, sixthly, 1 hat most of the devotees either had
been using medicines before, and continued to use them, dur-
ing their applications to the saint ; or, that their distempers
had abated^ before they determined to solicit his help. 7 hat
the Spanish youth had been using, all the while a medicine
prescribed by an eminent oculist, was proved by the deposit
tions of witnesses ; that Gautier had begun to recover his
sight, before he had recourse to the sepulchre, was attested,
not only by his uncle, but even by himself, when, as the Arch-
bishop of Sens informs us, he signed a recantation of what he
had formerly advanced. With regard to the rest, it appears
at least probable, from the circumstances of the proof, that
they were using the prescriptions of the physicians, whom they
had consulted before applying to the deacon, and who were
afterwards required to give their testimony, concerning the
nature and malignancy of the different diseases.
The seventh observation is, That some of the cures attested
were incomplete. This was manifestly the case of the Spaniard,
who was relieved only from the most inconsiderable part of
his complaint. Even the cure of Mademoiselle Thibault, which
was as great a subject of exaltation to the partisans of the Abbe
as any other, was not complete. Not only was she confined
to her bed, for many days, after the decrease of her dropsy j
but she still remained incapable of moving two of her fingers,
Silva, physician to the Duke of Orleans aitt sted this ; adding
expressly, th^t he could not look on her as being cured.
The eighth and last observation i shall make on this subjectis,
That the relief granted some of them was but temporary.
This was clearly proved to be the case of the Spanish gentle-
man. That soon after his return home, he relapsed into his
former malady, the prelate I have often quoted, hath, by the
certificates and letters which he procured from Madrid, put
beyond controversy. Among these, there are letters from a
Spanish grandee, Don Francis Xavier, and from the patient's
uncle, besides a certificate signed by himself.
After the above observations, I believe, there will be no
occasion for saying much on this subject. The author has, in
a note, artfully enough pointed out his aim, that it might not
be overlooked by the careless reader*. "■ There is another
'' book," says he, " in three volumes, (called Recutil des mira-
" cles de PAbbe Paris^J giving an account of many of these
* p. 196.
8ect. 5. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. i*sr
*' miracles, and aecompanied with prefatory discourses, which
" are very well wrote*." He adds, " There runs however,
" through the whole of these a ridiculous comparison betwixt
" the miracles of our Saviour and those of the Abbe ; wherein
* I am surprised that Mr. Hume hath taken no notice of the profound erudition
displayed in the Recueil, as I imagine its author is much more eminent for this than
for his talent in writing. Besides, his learning deserves our regard the more, that
it is of a kind rarely to be met with in the present century. Where shall we find
in these dregs of the ages, to adopt his own emphatical expression, such an exten-
sive knowledge, as he hath exhibited, of all the monkish and legendary writings
of the darkest and most barbarous, or, according to him, the most devout ages of
the church ? Or whence else, but from those productions, could he have selected
such admirable materials for his work ? The lives and writings of the saints are
an inexhaustible treasure for a performance of this kind. It is true, St. Matthew,
St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. John, have said little to his purpose, and he makes as
little use of them. But is not this want richly supplied in St. Cudbert, St. Edildride,
St. ■ Wiliibrord, St. Baudri, and five hundred others of equal note ! One thing how-
ever I would gladly be informed of, being utterly at a loss to account for it. What
entitled this author, who seems not to be deficient in a veneration truly catholick
for ignorance, superstition, and barbarism, to speak contemptibly of Capgravius,
Colganus, and Jacobus de Voragine author oi The golden legend? To be plain with
him, this is a freedom which doth not at all become him : for of the Jew readers
in this age, who happen to be -icquainted with the authorities quoted in the He-
cueil, most, if not all, will, I am afraid, be of opinion, that the writers last men-
tioned are fully as credible, not less famous, and much more ingenious, than many
of those to whom he is so greatly indebted for his m.c st extraordinary narrative.
Was it for him then to scandalize these few? It is pity that a writer of such un-
common reading and application should act so inconsistently, and undermine his
own cause. But passing his literature, which is unquestionable, I shall give the
reader a specimen of his talent in disputation To the objection that had been
Wade, that the miracles of the deacon were gradual, he replies, *' So was the crea-
" tion, the first of miracles, which employed no less than six days." As all that
was dune jn that time, is comprehended under mie name, the creatiox, he
concludes very sagely, that it ought to be denominated one miracle. A writer of
this stamp would no doubt despise the answer which an ordinary reader might
ihuke h'.m,— -/?rsf. That every single production was a peifect m\rsic\t,— secondly.
That nothing could be more instantaneous than those productions, God said. Let
there be light, and there was light, yc.—and lastly, That the world was not created
by the ministration of man, nor in the presence of men, nor in order to serve as evi-
dence ot any doctrine. I must be forgiven to remark, that in the whole of this
author's reply, he hath unfortunately mistaken the meaning of the objectors, who
inteud not to say, that God may not perforru a miracle gradually, but that what
IS su performed, hath not the same evidence of its being miraculous, as what is
done ill an instant, and therefore cannot so well serve asevidenceof any doctrine.
Now that the miracles of Monsieur de Paris were intended as evidence of his doc-
trine, and consequently of that of the appellants from the bull Unigenitus, he every
where vehemently maintains. Another specimen of this author's acuteness and
ingenuity I shall give in a literal translation from his own v»?ords. " But, it will
be said, ill the earliest times of the church, miraculous cures weve commonly
•' periected in an instant. True ; and it is this which confirms my doctrine. As
" it was ordinary then to convert great sinners all of a sudden. But such won-
*• ders ill both kinds are for the commencement of the church, or for the renova-
" tion promised her. In these days, which the French clergy have justly styled
" the dregs of the ages, it is much that God convert many sinners, and cure many
" sick, b> slow degrees, at the same time that he shows by some more shining ex-
*' amples that his arm is not shortened."
48S THE MIRACLES OP THE f'art Ih
♦* it is asserted, that the evidence for the latter is equal to that
'' for the former*." At first reading, one is apt, with surprise,
tt- ■
* I am sorry to be again so soon laid nnder the necessity of observing, that the
essayist, by confiding too much in his memory, often injures the writers whom he
tjuotes. It is but doing justice to the author of the RecueiU to observe, that he
hath, in no part of his performance, asserted that the evidence for the miracles of
Monsieur de Paris is equal to that for the miracles of Jesus Christ. Perhaps my
reader will be surprised when I tell him, for I own I was exceedingly surprised
when I discovered, that he hath not only in the plainest terms asserted, but stre-
nuously maintained, the contrary. And for this purpose he hath employed no
less than twelve pages of his work. He introduces the subject (Discourse 2. part
1.) with observing, that he and the rest of his party had been traduced by their
adversaries, as equalling the miracles of the deacon to those of our Saviour The
impiety of such a comparison he mentions with horrour, and treats the charge as
an absolute calumny. Hence he takes occasion to enumerate those peculiar cir-
cumstances in the miracles of our Lord, which gave them an eminent superiority,
not only over those of his saint, but over those of every other saint, or prophet
whatsoever. To this enumeration he subjoins, Tons ceux qui recourent a Monsieur
de Paris ne sont pas gueris, nous dit-on ; plusieurs ne le sont qu'en partie, oil
d'une maniere lente, et moins eclatante; it n'a point ressuscite de morts. Que
5'ensuit-il de-la, sinon que les miracles que Dieu a operes par lui sont inferieurs a
ceux que notre Seigneur a operes par lui meme? Nous I'avouons, nous inculquons
tette verice. "All ihose, we are told, who recur to Monsieur de Paris are not cured ;
■^ several are cured but in part, or in a slow and less striking manner ; he hath raised
*' no dead. What follows, unless that the miracles which God wrought by him, are
*' inferiour to those which our Lord wrought by himself ? We acknowledge, we
" inculcate this truth." Afterwards, speaking of evidence, he owns aI»o, that the
miracles of the deacon are not equally certain with those of Jesus Christ. The
latter, he says, are more certain in many respects. He specifies the natural noto-
xiety of some of the facts, the publick and instantaneous manner in which most of
them were effecied, the number, the quality, the constancy of the witnesses, and
the forced acknowledgment of his most spiteful enemies. He concludes this subr
ject in these memorable terms. Au reste ce que je viens d'exposer sur la superi>
orite des merveilles operes par le Sauveur, je I'avois reconnu avec plaisir dans le
premier discours. J*y ai dit en propres termes, qu'il y avoit une difference infinie
'9itre les miracles c(e jfesus Christ et ceux de Monsieur de Paris. J'ai promis de ne
jamais oublier cette difference, et j'ai tenu parole. J'ai remarque, dans le lieu ou
il convenoit de le faire, que cette difference infinie regardoit I'evidence des prodiges
aussi bien que leur grandeur ; et que les incredules pouvoient nous dire, que ceux
que nous produisions n'ont point le meme eclat qu'ont eu ceux de notre Seigneur.
*' Finally what 1 have just now evinced on the superiority of the wonders per-
« forrried by our Lord, I had acknowledged with pleasure in the first discourse,
'* I said there in express terms, th« there was an infinite difference hefween the
}* miracles of Jesus Christ and those of Monsieur de Paris. I promised never to
*• forget this difference, and 1 have kept my promise. I remarked in its proper
♦* place, that this infinite difference regarded the evidence as well as the. greatness of
'« the prodigies ; and that the incredulous might object, that those which we pro-
" duce, have not the same lustre with those of our Saviour.** I have been the
more particular on this point, not so much to vindicate the author of the Secueil,
as to show the sense which the most bigotted partisans of the holy deacon had of
the difference between the miracles ascribed to him, and those performed by our
Lord. I cannot avoid remarking also another difference, I mean that which ap-
pears between the sentiments of this author as expressed by himself, and his senti-
ments as reported by the essayist. It is indeed, Mr. Hume, a judicious observa-
■'tion you have given us ; that we ought to • lend a very academick faith to evei^y
» repnrt which favours the passion of the reporter; in whatever way it strikes ip!'
-twith his natural inclinatiena »nd propensijies,* p. ?.00; ;
jS6Ct.B, GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 48?
;to imagine, that the author is going to make some atonement
for the tenets of the essay, by turning advocate for the miracles
of Jesus Christ; and by showing, that these are not affected
by his doctrine. But on this point we are not long held in
•suspense. He subjoins, " As if the testimony of men could
'M ever be put in tke balance with that of God himself, who
V conducted the pen of the inspired writers." An ingenious
piece of raillery without question. Is it possible, in a politer
manner, or in more obliging terms, to tell the Christian world,
^hey are fools ; and that all who are silly enough to believe
the miracles recorded in scripture, are not entitled to be argu-
ed with as men P How ? They are so absurd as to believe the
scriptures to be the word of God, on the evidence of the mi-
racles wrought by our Lord and his apostles ; and that these
miracles were wrought, they could not believe on any testimo-
ny, less than that of God, reporting them in the scriptures i
and thus, by making inspiration and miracles reciprocally foun-
<iations to each other, they, in effect, admit both without any
foundation at all. After this handsome compliment to the
friends of holy writ, he thinks himself at liberty to be very
explicit on the comparative evidence of the miracles of the
Abbe, and those of Jesus : " If these writers indeed were to
>* be considered merely as human testimony, the French au-
^ thor is very moderate in his comparison ; since he mighty
;*' xvitk some appearance of reason^ pretend, that the Jansenist
'** miracles much surpass the other, in evidence and authority.'*
Was ever so rough an assault, preceded by so smooth, but so
insidious a preamble? Is it then still the fate of Jesus to be
betrayed with a kiss? But notwithstanding chis author's decia-
j-ation, no Christian will have reason to dread the issue of i;he
comparison, Mr. Hume hath not entered on particulars, nei-
ther shall I enter on them. I should not incline to tire my
jreader with repetitions, which, in a minute inquiry, would be
inevitable. I shall therefore only desire him, if he think it
needful, to peruse a second time the eight foregoing observa-
tions. Let him try the miracles of our Lord by this touch-
stone ; and I persuade myself, he will be satisfied, that there is
p,o appearance of reason to pretend, that the Jansenist miracles
■imuch surpass the other, or even equal them, in evidence and
l^authority.
V The author triumphs not a little in the observation, that the
reports of the prodigies performed by the deacon, were vio-
lently opposed by the civil magistrate, and by the Jesuits, (he
inost learned society in the kingdom. He could see the im-
portance of this circumstance in the case of Abbe Paris,
though not in fhe case of Jesas Christ. But that (he di|QS«t-
4SS THE MIRACLES OF THE Part I L
ence of the cases as well as their resemblance, may better ap-
pear; it ought likewise to be observed, that Jansenism, though
not the ruling faction, was at that time the popular faction ;
that this popularity was not the effect of the miracles of the
Abbe^ but antecedent to those miracles ; that, on the contrary,
the Jesuits were extremely unpopular ; and that many, who
had no more faith in the miracles of Saint Medard than Mr,
Hume hath, were well pleased to connive at a delusion, which
at once plagued and mortified a body of men, that were be-
come ahnost universally odious.
I shall only add, that nothing could more effectually expose
the folly of those pretensions, than the expedient by which
they were made to cease : In consequence of an order from
the King, the sepulchre was inclosed with a wall, and the vo-
taries were debarred from apfproaching the tomb. The author
says, in relation to this*, "• No Jansenist was ever embarrassed
*■'• to account for the cessation of the miracles, when the
" churchyard was shut up by King's edict." Certain it is, that
" God is master of his own graces and works." But it is
equally certain, that neither reason nor the gospel leads us tox
think, that any human expedient will prove successful, which
is calculated to frustrate the decrees of Heaven. Both, on
the contrary, teach us, that men never more dirtci^y promote
the designs of their Maker than when they intend directly to
oppose them. It was not thus, that either Pharisees or Sad-
ducees, Jews or Gentiles, succeeded in their opposition to the
miracles of Jesus and his apostles. The opinion of Gama-
liel-j- was undoubtedly judicious : If this counsel or this work
be of men^ it will come to nought ; hut if it be of God^ ye can-
not overthrow it; beware therefore^ lest ye be found fighting
even against God. To conclude ; Did the Jansenist cause de-
rive any advantage from those pretended miracles ? None at
all. It even suffered by them. It is justly remarked by Vol-
taire^;, that " the tomb of the deacon Paris, proved in effect,
*' in the minds of all people of sense, the tomb of Jansenjsm :"
How unlike in all respects the miracles recorded by the Evan-
gelists !
Thus I have briefly inquired into the nature and evidence,
first of the Pagan^ and next of the Popish miracles, mention-
ed by Mr. Hume ; and have, I hope, sufficiently evinced, that
the miracles of the New Testament can suffer nothing by the
comparison ; that, on the contrary, as, in painting, the shades
serve to heighten the glow of the colours ; and, in musick,
* p. 198. in the note. f Acts v. 38. 39.
% Siecle da Louis XIV. chap. 33.
S6ct. 6. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 4^9
the discords to set off the sweetness of the harmony; so the
vakie of these genuine miracles is enhanced by the contrast of
those paltry counterfeits.
SECTION VL
Abstracting from the evidence for particular facts^ -we have ir-
refragable evidence^ that there have been miracles in former
times ; or such events as, zvhen compared with the present
constitution of the xuorld^ would by Mr. Kiim,e be denominat-
ed miracidous.
\ READILY concur with Mr. Hume in maintaining, that
when, merely by the force of reason, we attempt to investi-
gate the origin of worlds*, we get beyond our sphere, and
rtiust infalliby bewilder ourselves in hypothesis and conjec-
tare. Reason indeed (v/hich vainly boasts her all-sufficiency)
hath sometimes pretended to carry men to this amazing height.
But there is ground to suspect, that, in such instances, the
ascent of reason, as the author elegantly expresseth itf, hath
been aided by the wings of imaginatio72. If we will not be
indebted to' revelation, for our knowledge of this article,
we must, for aught I can perceive, be satisfied to live in igno- '
ranee. There is, however, one question distinct from the
former, though akin to it, which, even from the principles of
reason, we may with great probability determine. The ques-
tion I mean is, Whether the world had an origin or not ?
That there hath been an infinite, eternal, and independent
series of finite, successive, and dependent beings, such as
itien, and consequently that the world had no beginning, ap-
pears, from the bare consideration of the thing, extremely
incredible, if not altogether absurd. The abstract argument
used on this head, might appear too metaphysical and refined:
i shall not therefore introduce it ; but shall recur to topicks
which are more familiar, and which, though they do not de-
ihonstrate, that it is absolutely impossible that the xvorld hath
existed frojn eternity, clearly evince that is highly improbable,
orjather, certainly false. These topicks I shall only mention,
as they are pretty obvious, and have been often urged with
great energy by the learned, both ancient and modern. Such
are, the late inveiition of letters, and of all the sciences and
* Essay 12. Of the academical or sceptical philosophy, part 3.
t Essay 11. Of a particular providence and future state.
C^qq
THE MIRACLES OF THE Part I L
arts by which human life is civilized ; the known origin of
most nations, states and kingdoms ; and the first peopling of
many countries. It is in our power at present to trace the his-
tory of every people, backwards to times of the greatest bar-
barity and ignorance. Europe, though not the largest of the
four parts into which the earth is divided, is, on many ac-
counts, the most considerable. But what a different face doth
Europe wear at present, from what it wore three thousand
years ago ? How immense the odds in knowledge, in arts, in
policy, in everything ? How easy is the intercourse, and how
extensive the acquaintance, which men can now enjoy witk
all, even the remotest regions of the globe, compared with
what was, or could have been enjoyed, in that time of dark-
ness and simplicity ? A man diiTers not more from a child,
than the human race now differs fromi the human race then.
Three thousand years ago, appear indeed to mark a very disr
tant epoch ; and yet it is but as yesterday, compared with eteri"
nit^^ This, when duly weighed, every thinking person will,
acknowledge to be as strong moral evidence, as the subject
can admit, (and that I imagine is very strong) that the world
had a beginning.
I shall make a supposition, which will perhaps appear whim-
sical, but which will tend to elucidate the argument I am
enforcing. In antedeluvian times, when the longevity of man
was such as to include some centuries, I shall suppose, that a
few boys had been imported to a desert island, and there left
together, just old enough to make shift to sustain themselves,
as those in the golden age are fabled to have done, on acorns,
and other spontaneous productions of the soil. I shall sup-
pose, that they had lived there for some hundreds of years,
had remembered nothing of their coming into the island, nor
<pf any other person whatsoever ; and that thus they had never
had access to know, or hear, of either birth or death. I shall
suppose them to enter into a serious disquisition concerning
their own duration, the question having been started. Whether
they had existed from eternity, or had once begun to be ?
They recur to memory, but memory can furnish them nothing
certain or decisive. If it must be allowed that it contains no
trace of beginning of existence, it must also be allowed, that
it reaches not beyond a few centuries at most. They observe
besides, con. erning this faculty, that the further back it goes,
it becomes the more indistinct, terminating at last in confusion
and darkness. Some things however they distinctly recollect,
and are assured of. They remember, they were once of much
lower stature, and of smaller size ; they had less bodily
strejigth J and all their mental faculties were weaker* Th^^
Sect. 6. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 491
know, that, in the powers both of body and of mind, they have
advanced, by imperceptible degrees, to the pitch they are now
arrived at. These considerations, especially when fortified by
some analogous observatioi>s they might have made on the
growth of herbs and trees, would have shown the probability
to be entirely on the side of those who asserted, that their
existence had a beginning : And though, on account of the
narrow sphere of their knowledge and experience, the argu-
ment could not have appeared to them in all its strength, we,
from our long acquaintance with nature, even abstracting from
our knowledge of man in particular, must be satisfied, that it
would have been strictly analogical and just. Exactly similar^
the very same, I should rather say, is the argument I have
been urging for the origination of the species. Make but a
few alterations in phraseology : for memory, substitute history
and tradition; for hundreds o/' years, say thousands; for the
powers of body and mind, put the arts and sciences ; and, v/ith
these, and perhaps one or two more such variations, you will
find the argument as applicable in the one case, as in the other.
Now, if it be granted, that the human species must have had
a beginning, it will hardly be questioned, that every other ani-
mal species, or even that the universe, must have had a begin-
ning.
But in order to prove the proposition laid down in the title
of this section, it is not necessary to suppose, that the world
had a beginning. Admit it had not, and observe the conse-
quence. Thus much must be admitted also, that not barely for a
long continued^ but for an eternal, succession of generations,
mankind were in a state little superiour to the beasts ; that of
a sudden, there came a most astonishing change upon the spe-
cies ; that they exerted talents and capacities, of which there
appeared not the smallest vestige, during the eternity preced-
ing; that they acquired such knowledge as procured them a
kind of empire, not only over the vegetable and animal worlds,
but even, in some respect, over the elements, and all the un-
wieldy powers of matter ; that, in consequence of this, they
were quickly raised, much more above the state they had been
formerly and eternally in, than such their former and eternal
state was above that of the brute creation. If such a revolu-
tion in nature, such a thorough, general, and sudden change as
this, would not be denominated miraculous, it is not in my
power to conceive what would. I could not esteem it a greater
miracle, hardly so great, that any species of beasts, whicii have
hitherto been doomed to tread the earth, should now get
wings, and float aboitt in the air.
492 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part II.
Nor will this plea be subverted by that trite objection. That
mankind may have been as much enlightened, perhaps myriads
of years ago, as they are at present ; but that by some univer-
sal calamity, such as deluge or conflagration, which, after the
rota.iion of many centuries, the earth possibly becomes liable
to, all traces of erudition and of science, all traces both of the
elegant and of the useful arts, may have been effaced, and the
human race, springing from a few who had escaped the com»
inon ruin, may have emerged anew, out of barbarity and igno-
rance. This hypothesis doth but substitute one miracle in the
place of another. Such general disorder is entirely uncon-
formable to our experience of the course of nature. Accor-
dingly the destruction of the world by a deluge, the author
hath numbered among those prodigies, or miracles, which
render the Pentateuch perfectly incredible.
If, on the contrary, we admit that the world had a beginning,
(and will not every thinking person acknowledge, that this
position is much more probable than the contrary ?) the pro-
duction of the world must be ascribed either to chance^ or to
intelligence.
Shall we derive all things, spiritual and corporeal, from a
principle so insignificant as blind chance? Shall we say, with
Epicurus, that the fortuitous course of rambling atoms hath
reared this beautiful and stupendous fabrick ? In that case,
perhaps, we should give an account of the origin of things,
which, most people will think, could not properly be styled
miraculous. But is it, because the formation of a grand and
regular system in this way, is conformable to the experienced
order of nature ? Quite the reverse. Nothing can be more
repugnant to universal experience, than that the least organick
body, not to mention the glorious frame of nature, should be
produced by such a casual jumble. It has therefore, in the
highest degree possible, that particular quality of miracles,
from which, according to the author's theory, their incredibility
results, and may doubtless, in this loose acceptation of the
word, be termed miraculous. But should we affirm, that, to
account thus for the origin of the universe, is to account for
it by miracle ; v*'e should be thought, I am afraid, to speak both
weakly and improperly. There is something here, if I may
so express myself, which is far beyond the miraculous ; some-
thing, for which I know not whether any language can afford a
proper appellation, unless it be the general appellations of
absurdity and nonsense.
Shall we then at last recur to the common doctrine, that the
world was produced by an intelligent cause P On this supposi-
tion also, though incomparably the most rational, it is evident;
Sect. 7. GOSPEL FUI.LY ATTESTED. *5»
that in the creation, formation, or first production of things,
call it by what name you please, a power must have been eX"
erted, which, in respect of the present course of nature, may
be styled miraculous. I intend not to dispute about a word,
nor to inquire, whether that term can, in strict propriety, be
used of any exertions before the establishment of the laws of
nature. I use the word in the same latitude, in which the
author commonly useth it in his reasoning, for every event
that is not conformable to that course of nature with v/hich
we are acquainted by experience.
Whether, therefore, the world had^ or had not, a beginning i
whether, on the ^r^? supposition, the production of things be
ascribed to chance, or to design; whether, on the second, in
order to solve the numberless objections that arise, we do, or
do not, recur to universal catastrophes ; there is no possibility
of accounting for the phenomena that presently come under
our notice, without having at last recourse to miracles ; that
is, to events altogether unconformable, or, if you will, con-
trary to the present course of nature known to us by experi-
ence. I cannot conceive an hypothesis, which is not reducible
to one or other of those above-mentioned. Whoever ima-
gines, that another might be framed, which is not comprehend-
ed in any of those, and which hath not as yet been devised by
any system-builder ; let him make the experiment, and I will
venture to prognosticate, that he will still find himself clogged
with the same difficulty. The conclusion therefore above de-
duced, may be justly deemed, till the contrary is shown, to be
not only the result of one, but alike of every hypothesis, of
which the subject is susceptible.
Thus it hath been evinced, as was proposed, that abstracting
from the evidence for particular facts, we have irrefragable
evidence that there have been, that there must have been, mi-
racles in former times, or such events, as when, compared
with the present constitution of the world, would by Mr.
Hume be denominated miraculous.
SECTION VII.
Revisal of Mr. Hume's examination of the Pentateuch^
jryLLOWING to the conclusion deduced in the foregoing
section its proper weight, I shall also take into consideration
the Pentateuch, or five books of Moses ; or rather, I shall en-
deavour impartialh'' to revise the examination which those
JLU THE MIRACLES OF THE Part 11,
books have already undergone by the essayist*. It is, in this
case, of the greatest importance to know, whether the evidence
on both sides hath been fairly stated.
" Here then we are first to consider a book," which is ac^
knowledged, on all hands, to be the most ancient record in thie
world, " presented to us," We admit, " by a barbarous and
**» ignorant peoplej-," at the same time exhibiting a system of
Theism^ or natural religion, which is both rational and sublime;
with which nothing that was ever compiled or produced, on
this subject, in the most enlightened ages, by the most learned
and polished nations, w^ho were unacquainted with that book,
will bear to be compared.
Mr. Hume himself must allow, that this remark deserves
attention, since his reasoning in another performance, which
he calls. The natural history of religion^ would lead us to ex-
pect the contrary. He there maintains, that Polytheism and
Idolatry^ are, and must be, the religion of rude and barbarous,
and consequently of ancient :iges ; that the true principles of
Theism^ or the belief of one almighty and wise Being, the
creator, the preserver, and the ruler of heaven and earth,
results from the greatest improvements of the understanding
in philosophy and science. To suppose the contrary, says he
3S supposing, that "^ while men were ignorant and barbarous,
'*' they discovered truth ; but fell into errour, as soon as they
*' acquired learning and politeness^." This reasoning is just,
w^herever religion is to be considered as the result of human
reflections. What account then will the author give of this
wonderful exception ? That the reverse is here the case, it is
impossible for him to dissemble. The people he himself calls
ignorant and barbarous ; yet they are not idolaters or poly-
theists. At the time when the book, which he examines,
was composed, he seems to think, they even exceeded them-
selves in barbarity ; yet the sentiments of these barbarians on
the subject of religion, the sentiments which that very book
presents to us, may well put to silence the wisdom of the
politest nations on earth. Need I remind Mr. Hume of his
express declaration, that if a traveller were transported into
any unknown region, and found the inhabitants '' ignorant and
*' barbarous, he might before hand declare them idolaters, and
■*' there is scarce a possibility of his being mistakenjl ?" I
*p.205.
•}• The aiitlior adds, " wrote in an age, when they were still " more barbarous.**'
These words I have omitted in the revisal, because they appear to me unintelli-
gible. The age in which the Pentateuch was v/ritten, is indirectly compared to'
another age, he says not what : and all we can inake of it is, that this people wetf
mere barbarous at that time, than at some other time nobody knows when-.
.„^ Natui's! history of reUgion. t. j| Ibiii.
Seet. r. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED.
know no satisfactory account that can be given of this excep-
tion, on the principles of the essayist. Nevertheless, nothing
is more easy, than to give a satisfactory account of it, on the
Christian principles. This account is that which is given by
the book itself. It is, that the religious tenets of that nation
were not the result of their reasonings, but proceeded from
divine revelation. The contrast we discern betwixt the
Israelites, and the ancient GREEks and Romans, is remark-
able. I'he Greeks and Romans, on all the subjects of humairi
erudition, on all the liberal and the useful arts, reasoned like
men; on the subject of religion, they prated like children.
The Israelites, on the contrary, in all the sciences and arts,
were children; but, in their notions of religion, they were
7nen; in the doctrines, for example, of the unity, the eternity, the
omnipotence, the omniscience, the omnipresence, the wisdom,
and the goodness of God ; in their opinions concerning provi-
dence, and creation, the preservation and government of the
world ; opinions so exalted and comprehensive, as, even by
tlie author's acknowledgment, could never enter into the
thoughts of barbarians.
But to proceed in the revisal : We have here a book, says
the essayist, " wrote in ail probability long after the facts it
relates." That this book was written long after some of the
facts it relates, is not indeed denied : that it was written long
after all, or even most of those facts, I see no reason to be-
lieve. If Mr. Hume meant to signify, by the expression quo-
ted, that this was in all probability the case,, why did he not
produce the grounds on which the probability is founded ?
Shall a bold assertion pass for argument ? or can it be expect-
ed, that any one should consider reasons, which are only iii
general supposed, but not specified ?
He adds, *' corroborated by no conairrhig testimony ;" as
little, say I, invalidated by any contradicting testimony ; and
both, for this plain reason, because there is no human coirpo-
&ition, that can be compared with this, in respect of axTitiquity^
But though this book is not corroborated by ihe concurrent
testimony of any coeval histories, because, if there ever were
such histories, they are not now extant; it is not therefore
destitute of all collateral evidence. The following examples
of this kind of evidence deserve some notice. The division
of time into weeks, which hath obtained in many countries,
for instance among the Egyptians, Chinese, Indians, and nor-
thern barbarians ; nations whereof some had little or no in-
teteoorse with others, and were not even known by name t(>
496 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part II.
the Hebrews* : the tradition which in several places prevailed
concerning the primeval chaos from which the world arose
the production of all living creatures out of water and earth,
by the efficiency of a supreme mindj, the formation of man
* The judicious reader will observe, that there is a great difference between the
«»o;'icur!-ence of nations, in the divis-ioa of time into weeks, and their concurrence
la the other periodical divisions, i.ito years, racnths, days. These divisions arise
from such natural causes, as are every where obvious ; rhe annual and diurnal re-
voiutions of the sun, and the revolution of the moon. The division into iceeit,
on the contrary, seems perfectly arbitrary : consequently its prevailing in distant
countries, among nucioi^s which had no communication with one another, afford
a strong presumpuun, that it muse have been derived from some tradition (as that
ot the creation) which hath been older than the dispersion of mankind into dif-
ferent regions. I; is easy to conceive, that the practice, in rude and barbarons
ages', might remain through habit, when the tradition, on which it was founded,
was entirely lost ; it is easy to conceive, that afterwards, people addicted to
idolatry, or who, like the Egyptians, had become proficients in astronomy, should
ass'gn to the dilFerent days of the week, ihe names of their deities, or of the
planets.
jr This in particular merits our attention the more, that it cannot, by any ex-
plication, be made :y aa^ree with the doctrine which obtained among the Pagans,
commonly called tbe M)>tbo'.ogy. Ovid is so sensible of this that, when he men-
tions a deity as the eificienc cause of the creation, he leaves him, as it were, de-
tached from those of the popular system, which it was his business as a poet to
deliver, being at a loss what name to give him, or what place in nature to assign
him. Quisquis suit ille deorum. Whichever of the gods it ivas. He well knew
that, in all the catalogue of their divinities, the god who madethe world was
not to be found> that these divinities themselves were, on the contrarj", produced
out of the chaos, as well as men and beasts. Mr. Hume in his Natural history of
religion, IV. remarks this conduct in Ovid, and ascribes it to his having lived in a
learned age, a,nd having been instructed by philosophers in the principle of a
ilivine formation of the world. For my part, I very much question, whether any
rtatiort was ever yet indebted, for this priuciple, to the disquisitions of philoso-
phers. Had this opinion never been heard of, till the Augustan age, it might
indeed have been suspected, that it was the daughter of philosophy and science,
bat so far is this from being the case, that some vestiges of it may be traced even
in the earliest, and most ignorant times. Thaies the Milesian, who lived many
centuries before Ovid, had as Cicero, in his first book De natura deorum, informs
us, attributed the origin of all things to God. Anaxagoras had also denominated
the forming principle, which severed the elements, created the world, and brought
order out of confusion, intelligence or mind. It is therefore much more probable
that these ancients owed this doctrine to a tradition handed down from the
earliest ages, which even all the absurdities of the theology they had embraced
had not been able totally to erase, though these absurdities could never be made
t(J coalesce with this doctrine. At the same time I acknowledge, that there i»
something so noble and so rational in the principle, Ihat the viorld mai produce^
by an intelligent cause, that sound philosophy will ever be ready to adopt it, when
once it is proposed. But that this opinion is not the offspring of philosophy, may
be reasonably deduced from this consideration also, that they were not the most
lightened or philosophick nations, amongst whom it was maintained in greatest
pOi-ity. I speak not of the Hebttws. Even the Parthians, Medes and Persians,
whom the Greeks considered as barbarians, were genuine theists, and notwith-
standing many superstitious practices which prevailed among them, they held the
belief of one eter-nal God the creator and the lord of the universe If this prmci-
ple is to be derived from the utmost improvement of the mind in ratiocination and
science, which is Mr. Hume's hypothesis, the phenomenon just now observed is
Sect, ii GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 49f
last of all, in the image of God, and his being vested with
dominion over the other animals, the primitive state of inno-
cence and happiness : the subsequent degeneracy of mankind:
their destruction by a flood : and the preservation of one
family in a vessel. Nay, which is still stronger, I might plead
the vestiges of some such catastrophe as the deluge, which the
shells and other marine bodies, that are daily dug out of the
bowels of the earth, in places remote from the sea, do clearly
exhibit to us : I might urge the traces, which still remain in
ancient histories, of the migration of people and of science
from Asia (which hath not improperly been styled the cradle
of the arts) into many parts both of Africa and Europe : I
might plead the coincidence of those migrations, and of the
origin of states and kingdoms, with the time of the dispersion
of the posterity of Noah.
But to return : The author subjoins, " resembling those fa-
" bulous accounts, which every nation gives of its origin."
It is unluckily the fate of holy writ with this author that both
its resemblance, and its want of resemblance, to the accounts
of other authors, are alike presumptions against it. He hath
not indeed told uS) wherein it resembles fabulous accounts :
and, for my part, though the charge were just I should ima-
gine, little or nothing to the disadvantage of the Pentateuch,
could be deduced from it. It is universally agreed among the
learned, that even the most absurd fables of idolaters, derive
their origin from facts, which having been, in barbarous ages,
transmitted only by oral tradition, have come at length to be
grossly corrupted and disfigured. It is nevertheless probable^
that such fictions would still retain some striking features of
unaccountable. If on the contrary, it is to be derived originally from revelationj
preserved by tradition, through successive generations, nothing can move easily
be accounted for. Traditions are always longest retained, and n;cst purely trans-
initted, in or near the place where they were first received, and amongst a people
who possess a strong attachment to their ancient laws and custom?. Migrations
into distant countries, mixture of ditierent nations, revolutions in government
and rnanners, yea and ingenuity itself, all contribute to corrupt tiaditiou, ami do
sometimes wholly efface it. This 1 take to be the only admissible acccurt, why
so rational and so philosopkical a principle prevailed most in age? and countries
in which reason and philosophy seemed to be but in their infancy. The notior,
that the Greeks borrowed their o])inions on this subject from the books of Mo-
ses, a notion for which some Jewish writers, some ChriFtian fathers, ard even
some modems have warmly contended, appears void of all foundation. These
opinions in Greece as hath been observed, were of a very early date ; v. htieas
that there existed such a people as the Jews, seems scarce to have been known
there till about the time of the Macedonian conquests. No sooner were they
Icnown than they were hated, and their laws and customs universally despised.
Nor is there the shadow of reason to think, that the Greeks knew any thn g of
the Mcred writings till a considerable time, afterwards, when that version of thelh
was made into their language which is called The tramlatian of the ^(xcntji.
R r r
4^8 THE MIRACLES OF THE Part 11.
those truths, from which they sprung. And if the books of
Moses resemble, in any thing, the fabulous accounts of Oiher
nations, it would not perhaps be difficalt to prove, that they
resemble only whatever is least fabulous in these accounts.
That this will be found to be the case, we may reasonably pre-
sume, even from what hath been observed already ; and if so,
the resemblance, so far from being an argument against those
books, is evidently an argument in their favour. In order to
remove any doubt that may remain on this head, it ought to
be attended to, that, in a number of concurrent testimonies,
(where there could have been no previous concert) there is a
probability independent of that which results from our faith IQ
the witufsses . nav, should the witnesses be of such a character
as to merit no faith ar ail. This probabilit) ariseth from the con-
currence itself. Thai such a concurrence should spring frona
chance^ is as one to infinite, in other words, morally impossi-
ble : if therefore concert be excluded, there remains no other
cause but the reality of the fact.
It is true, that " upon reading this book, we find it full of
" prodigies and miracles :" but it is also true, that many of
those miracles are such, as the subject it treats of, must una-
voidably make us expect. For a proof of this position, I
need but refer the reader to the principles established in the
preceding section. No book in the world do we find written
in a more simple st}le ; no where does there appear in it, the
least affectation of ornament; yet nowhere else is the Almighty
represented, as either acting or speaking in a manner so be-
coming the eternal ruler of the world. Compare the account
of the CREATION which is given by Moses^ with the ravings of
Sanchoniatho the Phenician philosopher, which he had digni-
fied with the title of cosmogony: or compare it with the
childish extravagancies of the Greek and Latin poets, so just-
ly likened by the author to a sick man^s dreams*; and then say,
whether any person of candour and discernment will not be dis-
posed to exclaim in the word, of the prophet. What is the
CHAr F to the wHEATf! The account is what we should call i»
reference to experience, miraculous. But was it possible it
should be otherwise ? I believe the greatest infidel will not
deny, that it is at least as plausible an opinion that the world
had a beginning, as that it had not. If it had, can it be ima-
ginedby anyman in his senses, that that particular quality should
be an objection to the narrative, which he previously knows it
must have? Must not the first production of things, the ori-,
• Natural history of religion. XV.
t JcF. xxiii. 28.
jSect.7. GOSPEL FULLY ATTESTED. 499
ginal formation of animals and vegetables, require exertions
of power, whit.h, in preservation and propagation, can never
be exemplified?
It will perhaps be objected, That if the miracles continued
no longer, and extended no further, than the necessit\ of
creation required, this reasoning would be just ; but that in
fact they both continued much longer, and extended much
further. The answer is obvious : it is impossible for us to
judge, how far the necessity of the case required. Immedi-
ately after the creation, things must have been in a state ve-
ry different from that which they are in at present. Hon I'ng
that state might continue, we have not the means of dis,r;\cr-
ing : but as, in human infancy, it is necessary that the feeble
creature should, for some time, be carried in the nurse's arms,
and afterwards, by the help of leading strings, be kept from
falling, before he acquire strength to walk ; it is not unlike-
ly, that in the infancy of the world, such interpositions should
be more frequent and requisite, till nature attaining a certain
maturity, those laws and that constitution should be establish*
ed, which we now experience. It will greatly strengthen this
conclusion, to reflect, that in every species of natural produc-
.^itions, with which we are acquainted, we invariably observe a
similar feebleness in the individuals on their first appearance,
-and a similar gradation towards a state of greater perfection
and stability. Besides, if we acknowledge the necessity of
the exertion of a power, which only in reference to our expe-
rience is called miraculous, the question, as is well observed
by the judicious prelate formerly quoted*, "• whether this pow-
*' er stopped immediately, after it had made man, or went on
*' and exerted itself farther, is a question of the same kind,
" as whether an ordinary power exerted itself in such a parti-
" cular degree and manner, or not." It cannot, therefore, if
we think reasonably on this subject, greatly astonish us, that
such a book should give " an account of a state of the world,
*' and of human nature, entirely different from the present j
*' of our fall from that state ; of the age of man extended to
*' near a thousand years ; and of the destruction of the world
" by a deluge."
Finally, if, in such a book, mingled with the excellencies
I have remarked, there should appear some difficulties, soirle
things for which we are not able to accoimt ; for instance,
*' the arbitrary choice of one people, as the favourites of Hea-
*' yen ; and their deliverance from bondage by prodigies the
'* most astonishing imaginable ;*' is there any thing more ej.-
• Analogj of religioDj ib^t. part2. chap. 3. sect. 2.
5D0 THE MIRACLES, Ssfc. Part II.
traordinary here, than, in a composition of this nature, we
might have previously expected to find ? We must be immo-
derately conceited of our own understandings, if we imagine
otherwise. Those favourites of Heaven, it must be likewise
owned, are the countrymen of the writer ; but of such a wri-
ter, as of all historians or annalists, ancient or modern, shows
the least disposition to flatter his countrymen. Where, I pru) ,
do we find him, either celebrating their virtues, or palliating
their vices ; either extolling their genius, or magnifying th^ir
exploits ? Add to all these, that, in every thing which is not
expressly ascribed to the interposal of Heaven, the relation is
in itself plausible, the incidents are natural, the characters arid
manners such as are admirably adapted to those early ages of
the world. In these particulars, there is no affectation of the
marvellous ; there are no " descriptions of sea and land mon-
*' sters ; no relations of wonderful adventures, strange men^
" and uncouth manners*." r
When all these things are seriously attended to, I persuade
myself, that no unprejudiced person will think, that the Pen-
tateuch bears falsehood on the face of it, and deserves to be
rejected without examination. On the contrary, every unpre-
judiced person will find (I say not, that its falsehood would be
more miraculous, than all the miracles it relates ; this is a
language which I do not understand, and which only serves
to darken a plain question ; but I say, he will find) very many
and very strong indications of authenticity and truth ; ancl
will conclude, that all the evidences, both intrinsick and ex-
trinsick, by which it is supported, ought to be impartially can-
vassed. Abundant evidences there are of both kinds ; some
hints of them have been given in this section ; but to consi-
der them fully, falls not within the limits of my present pur-
pose.
• p. 185.
CONCLUSION.
W HAT is the sum of all that hath been now discussed? It
is briefly this : That the author's favourite argument^ of which
he boasts the discovery^ is founded in errour*^ is managed -with
sophistry\^ and is at last abandoned by its inventorXt as fit only
for show^ not for use ; that he is not more successful in the col-
lateral arguments he employs ; particularly^ that there is no pe-
culiar presumption against religious miracles\\ ; that on the
contrary^ there is a peculiar presumption in their favour^; that
the general maxim^ whereby he would enable us to decide betwixt
opposite miracles^ -when it is stript of the pompous diction^ that
serves it at once for decoration^ and for disguise^ is discovered
to be no other than an identical proposition^ which-, as it conveys
no knowledge^ can be of no service to the cause of truth** ; that
there is no presumption^ arising either from human natureff^
or from the history of mankind\^^ agairist the miracles said to
have been wrought in proof of Christianity ; that the evidence
of these is not subverted by those miracles^ which historians of
other religions have recorded\\\\ ; that neither the Pagan\\,
nor the Popish*** miracles^ on which he hath expatiated^ will
bear to be compared -with those of holy writ ; that., abstracting
from the evidence for particular facts., xve have irrefragable evi-
dence^ that there have been miracles in former times'\-\\ ; and.,
lastly, that his examination of the Pentateuch is both partial
and imperfect^ and consequently stands in need of a revisalX^X,
" Our most holy rtligion," says the author in the conclu-
sion of his essay, " is founded on faith, not on reason ; and
*' it is a sure method of exposing it, to put it to such a trial,
*' as it is by no means fitted to endure." If, by our most holy
religion, we are to understand the fundamental articles of the
Christian system, these have their foundation in the nature
and decrees of God ; and, as they are antecedent to our faith
or reasonings, they must be also independent of both. If
they are true, our disbelief can never make them false ; if they
are false, the belief of all the world will never make them
true. But as the only question between Mr. Hume and the
defenders of the gospel, is. Whether there is reason to believe
• Part I. sect. 1. ' + Sect 2. | Sec!. .3. |! Sect. 4.
S Sect. 5. ** Sect. 6. tt t*art 2. sect. 1 . :j^ Sect. 2.
nil Pan2. sec!.3. \\ Sect. 5. *•* Sect. 6. ttt !^«i F-
those articles ? he can only mean by our most holy religion^ o\S^
belief of the Christian docttine: and concerning this belief we
are told, that it is founded on faiths not on reason ; that is, our
faith is founded on our faith ; in other words, it hath no
foundation, it is a mere chimera, the creature of a distemper-
ed brain. I say not on the contrary, that our most holy reli-
gioti is founded on reason^ because this expression, in my opi-
nion, is both ambiguous and inaccurate ; but I say that we
have sufficient reason for the belief of our religion ; or, to
express myself in the words of an apostle, that the Christian,
if it is not his own fault, may be ready always to give an an-
szuer to every man^ that asketh him a reason of his hope.
So far therefore am I from being afraid of exposing Chris-
tianity by submitting it to the test of reason ; so far am I
from judging this a trial, which it is by no means fitted to
endure, that I think, on the contrary, the most violent attacks
that have been made upon the faith of Jesus, have been of
service to it. Yes : I do not hesitate to affirm, that our reli-
gion hath been indebted to the attempts^ though not to the
intentions^ of its bitterest enemies. They have tried its
strength indeed, and, by trying, they have displayed its
Strength ; and that in so clear a light, as we could never have
hoped, without such a trial, to have viewed it in. Let them
therefore write, let them argue, and, when arguments fail, even
let them cavil against religion as much as they please : I should
be heartily sorry, that ever in this island, the asylum of liberty,
where the spirit of Christianity is better understood (however
defective the inhabitants are in the observance of its precepts)
than in any other part of the Christian world ; I should, I say,
be sorry, that in this island, so great a disservice were done to
religion, as to check its adversaries, in any other way, than by
returning a candid answer to their objections. I must at the
same time acknowledge, that I am both ashamed and grieved,
when I observe any friends of religion, betray so great a dif-
fidence in the goodness of their cause (for to this diffidence it
can only be imputed) as to show an inclination for recurring
to more forcible methods. The assaults of infidels, I may
venture to prophesy, will never overturn our religion. They
will prove not more hurtful to the Christian system, if it is
allowed to compare small things with great ^ than the boisterous
winds are said to prove to the sturdy oak. They shake it im-
petuously for a time, and loudly threaten its subversion;
whilst, in effect, they onlv serve to make it strike its roots thev
deeper, and stand the firmer ever after.
One word more with the essayist, and I have done. '' Upon
" the whole," says he, " we may conclude, that the Christimn
CONCLUSION. 5Cli
*-^ rdigioriy not only was at first attended with miracles, but
*' even, at this day, cannot be believed by any reasonable per-
** son without one. Mere reason is insufficient to convince
*' us of its veracity ; and whoever is moved by faith to assent
*' to it :" that is, whoever by his belief is induced to believe it,
" is conscious of a continued miracle in his own person,
** which subverts all the principles of his understanding, and
" gives him a determination to believe, what is most contrary
*' to custom and experience." An author is never so sure of
writing unanswerably, as when he writes altogether unintelli-
gibly. It is impossible that you should fight your enemy be-
fore you find' him ; and if he hath screened himself in dark-
ness, it is next to impossible that you should find him^
Indeed, if any meaning can be gathered from that strange
assemblage of words just now quoted, it seems to be one or
other of these which follow : either^ That there are not any in
the world, who believe the gospel ; or. That there is no want
of miracles in our own time. How either of these remarks, if
just, can contribute to the author's purpose, it will not, I sus-
pect, be easy to discover. If the second remark is true, if
there is no want of miracles at present, surely experience can-
not be pleaded against the belief of miracles said to have been
performed in time past. Again, if the first remark is true,
fif there are not any in the world who believe the gospel, be-
cause, as Mr. Hume supposeth, a miracle cannot be believed
•ivithout a new miracle, why all this ado to refute opinions
which nobody entertains ? Certainly, to use his own words,
*' The knights-errant, who wandered about to clear the world
"of dragons and giants, never entertained the least doubt
*' concerning the existence of these monsters*."
Might I presume faintly to copy but the manner of so ini-
mitable an original, as the author hath exhibited in his conclud-
ing words, I should also conclude upon the whole, That
miracles are capable of proof from testimony, and there is ^
full proof of this kind, for those said to have been wrought in
.support of Christianity ; that whoever is moved, by Mr.
Hume's ingenious argument, to assert, that no testimony can
give sufficient evidence of miracles, admits for rea^on^ though
perhaps unconscious, a mere subti/ty^ which subverts the evi-
dence of testimony, of history, and even of experience itself,
giving him a determination to deny, what the common sense
of mankind, founded in the primary principles of the under-
standing, would lead him to believe.
■ ' * $ee the first paragjaph of Essay 12. Of the aca^Jemical orswpfical pViilO-
fiWphjl,
THJl' END.
INDEX.
A A. Page
BBOTS - - - 286
Acjcius, patriarch of Constantinople, cited, judged, and deposed by the pope 208 .
Ach<ilius, the first who had the title of the pope's vicar 272
Alexandria, the first place where every church had one presbyter 133
Altensfaig, quoted - - • 154'
Ambrosiaster - - - - 116
Ammianus Marcellinus, quoted - - 200
Anchorets - - - 284
Angels, meaning of the term - - 82, 113
Apiarius, declared innocent by two popes, though convicted of the most
heinous crimes - - - 235
Apocaiypse.epistles to the Asian churches in the - - 82,87
Apostles, what . . » 75
Apostolical constitutions, the . . - 193
Appropriation, what - . - 134
Archbishop, use of the term - - - 146
Archdeacons . . - 139
Arian controversy - - - 218, 222
Asceticks, - - - . - 283
Athanasius condemned as a heretick - - 218
Augustine, his sentiments respecting episcopal jurisdiction 36
anecdote of him - - 132
his expressions concerning the trinity - ■^ 214 '
the monk, converts the AngloSaxons in Britain 271
Authority, just, supported by knowledge - - 328
B.
Babylon, mentioned by Peter, what city - - 189
liaruabas, his admission to the aposileship - -78
Baronius . . _ - 149, 351
Basnage quoted .... 148
Beatiiick vision, the - - - 219
Becket, Thomas ... - 167
Bible, its trequent and attentive perusal recommended - 1.1
how it should be studied - - ,12
account of it - - - 16
remarks on the English translation of it - - 1^
Biblical studies necessary to the theologian - ^
both for illustrating and confirming Christianity ib.
Bingham, criticism on - - - 86, 112
Bishop, universal, opinion of Gregory i, on the title 240, 297
title of given to Boniface iii. - 34S
S S S
INDEX.
©jsliops, their juridical authority, established by Constantine 34
Augustine's seiitinents concerning it 36
checked by Arcadius and rioaorius ib.
and still more by Valeulianus ib.
re established by Justinian - 37
prirnitive signification of the name - 66
not successours of the apostles - - 75
nature of their office in ihe second and third centuries SO
Slasphemy, what - - - 356
Bona, cardinal, quoted - - 147, 154-, 335, 339
Boniface iii. obtains the title of universal bishop - 548
VIII. his decrees - - - 315
See Winfrid.
jfooks, too mai'.y, detrimental to a student - _. 9
first formal prohibition of - - 344
mutilated and adulterated by the Romish hierarchy 349
Bossuet, stricture on - - - 374
B wcr quoted - - - 218, 257, 350
Brirnia, conversion of - - - 271
Burn's ecclesiastical law ... 133
Jyel, Gabriel, quoted - ' - - 339
Calvia quotad - - - - 392
Canon, sacred, history of the r - 16
Canons of a cathedral - •- - 138
ecclesiastical, what _ - 146
Cardinals, their origin ... 318
Cathedral, what . - - 133
Celedonius, consequence of his appeal from a synod to the pope 236
Celestine, pope, restores Apiarius - - 235
Chalcedon, council of - - - 198
Changes, whence they arise ... 12f
Chapters - - . , 138, 139
Chorepiscopi ... 130, 141
Christian temperance and self-denial, essay on - 399
Christianity, study of the biblical records necessary for its confirmation
and illustration ... 6
its promulgation ... /^,
evidence - • - - 7
moral precepts - - - 24
essence ... 47
Chrysostnm - - - - 114
Church and state - - - 21
history of the, what - - - 22
its origin and primitive nature . - 24
rise of its distinction from the state - - 24, 27
signification of the word - - 26
its form of g(>vernme>n - - - 46
may subsist m different forms . - 50
undergo alterations with propriety - SO, 127
form of, first instituted by Christ and his apostles 61
apostolick, constitution of . - 90
use of the word in the early ages - 100, 105
alteration in its use . - 137, 162
schism between tlie eastern and vvestera - 209
controversies in the early ages in - - 213
INDEX.
Clemens AleiandrinujB
Romamis
element viti. his act for altering books
Clerc, le, quoted
Clergy, origin of the term
Collier's faith
Comnigs's sermons
Coficlvive, why so called
Conge d'elire
Consistory, what
Constantine, the founder of ecclesiastical jurisdiction
's donation
Copronynius, anecdote of
Constantinople, council of
Consi.itucions, apostolical, the
Consubstantiatior, docrrineof
Controversy, observations on
Councils, ecumenical
what
Courts, ecclesiastical
Cromwell, maxim of his
Cyprian
excommunicated by pope Stephen
Cyril, his controversy with Nestorius
Page
104
70, 153, 194
349
229
151
339
58
321
139
ib.
34
237
223
197
193
388
87. 387
147, 149. 213
230
142
260
92, 115, 267, 297
254
216, 223
D.
Dariasus, legatine power introduced by
Deacons, what
how chosen
Deaconesses
Deans and deaneries
Decretal epistles
AictMiei, what
Didascalies
Diocese, what
Dodwell, strictures on
his interpretation of TertuUian
quoted
Dominick, St., the inventor of the inquisition
order of
Doaatists
272
66, 90, 125
92
127
138
238
66
193
107
48, 52, 73, 97, 115, 124
65
165
358, 361
361
212
Kaster, observance of - .
Ecclesiastical judicature - -
polity
courts . _ .
degrees, at first offices, not dignities
Ecclesiasticks, rise of their authority
superiour orders ff
inferiour orders of
decrees of the council of Trent respecting their privileges
reception given to their claims by the secular powtrs
E'cnmehical councils
what
193, 222, 253
34
46
143
172
29
147
j6.
307
312
147, 149, 213
230
INDEX.
Page
England, ecclesiastical judicature in - - 39
Ephesus, council of - - - 324
Episc'.ipacy, see bishops
'Eirtirx^'Troi, what - . - . . - 66
Erasmus, his annotations on the New Testament - 346
answer to the protestants - - 392
Eucharist, doctrine of the real presence in the - 388
Eusebius - _ - - 143
Eutychian controversy - - _ 226
Evaiigelist, office of an - - - 78
Exarchs, what ... 146
F.
Faith, implicit .... 337
exp icit ... 338
Collier's . - - - 339
Ferdinand, the catholick, introduced the inquisition into Spain - 363
Ferrier, the French ambassadour, his speeches at the council of Trent 305, 313
Firmihan - - - 114,255
Fleury, Claude, quoted . - 168
France, inquisition soon driven out of - - 364
Francis, St., order of - - - 361
Fraud, pious . . - - 238
Fretltrick II. emperour of Germany, takes the inquisitors under his pro-
tection - . - - 362
Friars ..... 286
G.
Oelasius, pope, decree obtained by him - - 257
Germans converted by Boniface or Winfrid - - 271
Gerson, quoted ... 340
Gibbon, quoted - - - - 244
Gospel, it's promulgation accompanied by miracles - 7
Gospels, many have been written - 19
Grabe, Dr. ... 193
Greeks, given to disputation - 211
almost all the early controversies originated among them 212, 214
Gregory Nazianzen, his opinion of synods - 227
I, pope, his character and conduct ' - - 240
opinion respecting the title of universal bishop 241, ii97
H.
Hadrian, bishop of Thebes - - - 237
Hammond, Dr. - - - 68, 122
Heresy - - - - 356
Hermits - . - .284
Hickes, Dr. . - - 159, 186
Hierarchy, it's rise and progress - .46
Hilary - . , .63, 116, 219
blunder respecting him - Ho
bishop of Aries, excommunicated by one pope, sainted by another 236
Poitiers,, quoted - - ^S7 , 358
Honoratus, archdeacon of Saloni 237
INDEX.
Hoornbeck de Episcopatu 5^
Houbigant's Prolegomena - .. ■^ 19, 21
Huss, John 3S0
satirical picture exhibited by r 377
Ignatius - - - 73,96,99,100
Implicit faith ^^7
Index expurgatorius _ - - 345
Innocent, pope, advances the claim of prerogatives derived from St. Peter 256
IV, tribunal of the inquisition established by - 362
Inquisition, invented by Dominick 358, 361
it's rise and progress - ^^0
proceedings 366
Ii^eqs- - - ^ 99,193,266
James, bishop of Jerusalem, not the apostle - 194
Jerom 344
Jerom of Prague - - - 340
Jesuits, speech of their general, at the council of Trent, on the papal
authority - - - 291
'■' remarks on them - - - 303
Jewish history - - - - 6
its necessity to theological students - T
priesthood - - - 156
Jews, no sects among them, before they became acquainted with the Greeks 212
John, pope, his fallibility - - - 219
threatened to be burned for a heretick - i6.
bishop of Lappa - - - - 237
Josephus recommended, and how he should be read • 13
his character - -» - {/,,
Julian, the emperour - - - 219
Justinian re-established episcopal authority - - 37
his character . w . 233
K.
"Knowledge, tends to the support of civil authority - 328
an enemy to superstition - . 329
measures taken for its suppression by the Romish hierarchy 329, 343
L.
•Lactantius, quoted - - - 352, 353, 356
iainez, general of the Jesuits, his speech in the council of Trent 291
Laity, used as a distinctive term for the people - • 151
its etymology - - _ . 154
.Latins, differed in character as well as language from the Greeks 214
Legatine power introduced by Damasus ■> - 272
Lenfant quoted . . - 325
X-eo, pope, his conduct towards Hilarius ^ - 236
X, gave occasion to the reformation - - 381
Liberius, pope, hrs versatility - - 218
Ttt
INDEX.
. . P^^
Littleton, lord, quoted - . - 168
Logic, romish - - - 263
Luther, his first step against papacy - 350, 382
the reformat! on eflfected by him - 383
his character - - - 389
M.
Maccabees, books of - - - 15
Mahometism - , - . - 24
Martm, St., his humanity - - 359
Martin v, pope, account of his coronation - - 325
Mauricius, the emperour, dethroned and murdered - 342
• ; ■ his character - - 246
Memoiy, mode of exercising and strengthening - 12
Meiidicant friars - - - 287, 288
Metropolitan, rise of the term - _ 145
Michaelis's Introduction to the New Testament - 21
Mill's Prolegomena - - - 19
Ministers, study their duty, and what - - 6, 8
their office - - - 8
how chosen in the early ages - - 92
Miracles did accompany the publication of the gospel - 7
MonaStick orders, of great help to the papacy - - 282
their rise and progress - - 283
Monks - - . . 286
Mosaick institution - - - 22
Moulin, Pierre du, quoted _ - - 335
N.
Names have great influence - - 94, 131, 156
Nestorius, his controversy with Cyril - 216,223,226
Nuni.eries - - ., 287
Nuf.s - - - - 285
O.
Occam, quoted - - - 340
Officials, what - - . . - . 139
Orders holy, curious questions respecting - 184
Ordination, false notions entertained respecting - - . 17l
without a charge, declared null by the council of Chalcedon 177
Osius, bishop of Cordoua, his conduct at the council of Sardica 20i
Papacy, its rise and progress - - 187, 313
conflict for the - - - 200
its early splendour - - 200, 201
falsehoods and forgeries recurred to in its support 237
its decline ... 327
Parish, what - - - 106, 107, 135
Patriarctis, their rise - - - 146
Paul, his judgment on the incestuous person - .31
quuiifications for an apostle - - 7S
INDEX.
Paul, his appointment to the apostleship . . '73
IV. pope, his attempt at suppressing knowledge 345
Paulus Samosatenus, his expulsion . . I43
Pearson, his Vindiciae Ignatianse - . 7j^ gg^ ig3
stricture on - - - 119, fwte.
Pelagians - - - 212, 222, 333
Pepin, countenanced in his usurpations by two popes - 248
Persecution, employed as an engine by Rome . _ 353
Petavius's remarks on Tertullian - - 64,
Peter, president of the apostolical college - , 84
pretences of the papists respecting - - IS?
his ever having been at Rome doubtful - . 188
pr'/babl/ martyred at Rome - . jgj
claims that Rome affected to derive from - - 252
de Blois, his abuse of the word church . 168
Philip, an evangelist - . - 78
king of France, his answer to pope Boniface - 169
threatens a pope to have him burned for a heretick 219
Phocas, the usurper, his character and conduct - 242
Photius, the Greek patriarch - _ , 268
Picture, satirical, exhibited by Huss - - 377
Pious fraud - - - . 238
Pius, bishop of Rome - . . IO3
Platina, his history mutilated ... 35O
Polycarp, his epistle to the Philippians - - 73, 96
Popes, not infallible - . . 217
, their versatility - . . n,^
one threatened to be burned for a heretick - . 219
defence of their claims by the general of the Jesuits 291
how elected - - _ _ 32I
consecrated - - . i^^
Power, its tendency to increase - r - 94
Praetextatus, anecdote of - _ _ 201
Prebendaries and prebends - _ . 133
prelacy, its origin and progress - - 108, 140
Ilf fo^y/ff «5» what . - - - 66
Presbytery, what - - - 93
Prideaux's Connexion - _ - 13
Primate, what - - . I45
Printing, might have been suppressed at its commencement - 375
benefits of it - - - 376
Priories - - _ . • 287
Protestants, divisions among - - 39I
Pseudambrose - - - - hq
Quaker, anecdote of one - - . 511
Quartodecimans - - . - . 254
R.
Rasponi, cardinal, quoted - . - 321
Reading and learning not synonymous - - 10
Real presence, doctrine of the - - - 388
Reformation, its commencement and progress - 350, 376
Religious, abuse of the term - - - 286
INDEX.
Religious, establishments -- - „. 8
persecution - -: ^ 252
Romans, their character - . . 221
Rome, her good fortune with respect to dominion - - 277
RufEnus - - - . 293
Sacraments of the Romish church - - 182, 184
unreiterable - » _ 184
Sacred canon, history of the - - 16
history - - - - 5
Sagittarius, a Galilean bishop, his enormities - 237
Salonius, a Gallican bishop, his enormities _ . i^_
Salvation depends on a man's belief and obedience to the gospel, not on the
church to which he belongs - - 47
Sardica, council of - - - > 206
Sarpi, Paolo, his character - - - 44
works - - - 4^
quoted - - li9, 291, 371, 372
Scotland, civil powers of ecclesiasticks in - 38, 40
church judicatories in - - I44
episcopalians in - - . ^ 18(^
Scriptures, very soon translated - - 3^Q
Sectaries - - - 49, 56, 5B
who - - - 58
Simon, father - '- 19, 334
Richard, quoted 224
Sinecures . _ - - 175
Solitaries - . - . - - 283
Stephen I. pope, excommunicates St. Cyprian - - 254
II. his friendship to the usurper Pepin 2*9
uses the name of Peter the apostle - 262
Studies, theological, how to be prosecuted - 9
Superstition, the support of tyranny - - 329
Symmachus, pope, disowns the authority of a synod - 259
Synagogues . - _ - 157
Synods - - - - 145,213
Gregory Nazianzen's opinion of - - 227
Talia, bishop of Alexandria - - 237
Tertullian - . 64,65,88,121,353,357
Test-act . . . • 39
Theodoret , - . - 67
Theologian, study of the biblical records necessary to the ,6
how his studies should be prosecuted - .JO
profane history useful to - - tS
Timothy, an evangelist . - - 78
Title, use and signification of the word - 133, 178
Tituli, what . . - 132
Titus, an evangelist - > - 78
Treason, what ... 373
Trent, council of, speech in the, respecting the pope's authority 391
reception this speech met with - 301
decrees of it, respecting the privileges of the clergy -307
INDEX.
Trinity, expressions significant of . . 214
Troyes, canon of the council of - - » ' Sll
Tyranny requires ignorance and superstition for its support 223
U.
Ubiquitarlans - - - S8S
V.
Valens enlarged the jurisdiction of the bishops - 36
Valentianus checked the authority of bishops - • «A,
Valentinian, his law in favour of the pope's authority - 207
Venice, caution of its government in admitting the inquisition - 365
wise regulation respecting the inquisition in - 371
Victor, his dispute about the observance of Easter - 353
Vigilius, pope, his versatility - - 217
Vision, beatifick - - - - 219
Voltaire, quoted _ » - 366
W.
Wallis, preached at Avignon against a doctrine held by the pope 219
Wet stein's Prolegomena ... 19
Whitby, Dr. - - - - 80
WicklUf - - - - 380
Wilfrid, archbishop of York - - - 237
Wihfrid converts the Germans - - 271
V the first ecclesiastick on record, who took an oath of fealty to the
Roman see • - > - ib,
Z.
Zachary, pope, assists the usurper Pepin - - 248
Zozimus, pope, his conduct with respect to Pelagius - 233
on the appeal of Apiarius - 235
recurs to St. Peter as the sole founder of the papal autho-
rity .... 257
Zuinglius, his controversy with Luther - - 386, 388
INDEX
OF THE
DISSERTATION ON MIRACLES.
Page
Introduction _ - . - "399
PART I.
Miracles are capable of proof from testimony, and religious miracles are not
less capable of this evidence than others - 403
Sect.
I. Mr. Hume's favourite argument is founded on a false hypothesis ib.
II. Mr. Hume charged with some fallacies in his way of managing the
argument - . - - 415
III. Mr. Hume himself gives up his favourite argument - 423
IV. There is no peculiar presumption against such miracles as are said to
have been wrought in support ot religion - - 426
V. There is a peculiar presumption in favour of such miracles as are said
to have been wrought in support of religion - 432
VI. Inquiry into the meaning and propriety of one of Mr. Hiune's favourite
maxims - - - 433
PART II.
The miracles on vihicb the belief of Christianity is founded, are suff,ciently at-
tested .... 437
Sect.
I. There is no presumption arising from human nature, against the mira-
cles said to have been wrought in proof of Christianity ib.
II. There is no presumption arising from the history of mankind, against
the miracles said to have been wrought in proof of Christianity, 443
III. No miracles recorded by historians of other religions are subversive
of the evidence arising irom the miracles wrought in proof of
Christianity or can be considered as contrary testimony 458
IV. Examination of the Pagan miracles mentioned by Mr. Hume 465
V. Examination of the Popish miracles mentioned by Mr. Hume 474
VI. Abstracting from the evidence for particular facts we have irrefraga-
ble evidence, that there have been miracles in former times ; or such
events as, when compared with the present constitution of the
world, would by Mr. Hume be denominated miraculous 489
VII, Revisa; of Mr. Hume's examination of the Pentateuch 493
Conclusion - - - -501
■^ v,:^
-'•* •Jk*k.ff
-■ -^^-
•J ■
■*■■■> i .-5 ■;«*♦;»
\VC'
r^y-*'^'^