"P, 
 
 ^ 
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES 
 
 GIFT OF 
 
 
 K. D. KIRSDIKAM
 
 V 
 
 
 
 
 **
 
 %vfoi Slagistros. 
 THE DOCTRINE 
 
 OF 
 
 The Church of England 
 
 AS TO 
 
 THE NATURE OF THE CHRISTIAN 
 MINISTRY, 
 
 TBSTED BY THE WRITINGS OF THE REFORMERS AND 
 
 OTHER LEADING DIVINES FROM THE SIXTEENTH 
 
 CENTURY TO THE PRESENT TIME. 
 
 WITH AN ESSAY ON THE ARGUMENT FROM THE NEW 
 
 TESTAMENT 
 
 AND TWO LETTERS FROM BISHOP WHITE. 
 
 COMPILED AND PRINTED FOR THE 
 
 PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL SOCIETY FOR THE PROMOTION 
 
 OF EVANGELICAL KNOWLEDGE. 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 T. WHITTA.KER, 
 
 No. 2 Bible House.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 . 
 
 Paob 
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY ON THE ARGUMENT FROM 
 THE NEW TESTAMENT 5 
 
 I. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF BISHOP WHITE, IN TWO LETTERS TO 
 DR. HOBART, 31 
 
 II. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF THE REFORMERS AND MARTYRS- 
 Cranmer Ridley Latimer T yndale Becon Brad- 
 ford Philpot Hutchinson, 73 
 
 JUL 
 
 TESTIMONY OF THE LEADING ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 
 Coverdai.e Sandys Pilkinoton Address to the 
 Queen against Altars Jewel Hooker Whitgift, . 87 
 
 IV. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF DIVINES OF THE SEVENTEENTH AND 
 EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES Hales-Stillingfleet 
 Leighton Burnet Wake Waterland, .... 99 
 
 V. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF DIVINES OF THE PRESENT CENTl'KY 
 Arnold Wh ately Thirlwall Lightfoot Pe- 
 rowne Jacob 113 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 Bishop Lee's Essay on the Ministry, 1C9 
 
 546749
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 It must be evident to every discriminating 
 mind, that the essential fibre of that Romaniz- 
 ing doctrine which is so boldly thrusting itself 
 forward in all branches of the Anglican com- 
 munion, is the notion that the Christian minis- 
 ter is a priest, endowed with strictly sacerdotal 
 functions and standing as a mediator between 
 the people and God.* The doctrines of au- 
 ricular confession, and of the true and proper 
 sacrifice in the Lord's Supper, draw their nutri- 
 ment from this. Indeed, the existence of the 
 system which is popularly known as Ritualism, 
 would be impossible, if this notion of a caste of 
 sacerdotal priests were effectually eliminated. 
 
 * "There is ;i complete difference of conception as to 
 the position of the clergy and the nature of the powers 
 which they claim, according as we do or do not regard 
 them as having the ' priestly character. ' And this T take 
 it is the real question we have now to face in tin' Church 
 of England. All the other questions which have of late 
 been debated with so much heat and acrimony . . . 
 after all only mask the real question." Canon Pehowne.
 
 6 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 The citations contained in the following 
 pages go far to show that the above view of 
 the powers and functions of the Christian min- 
 istry is an alien and an intruder in the Angli- 
 can Church, that it gained no footing in the 
 Church until the time of Archbishop Laud, 
 and that it is, moreover, at variance with the 
 theology of many of our best divines since 
 that period. 
 
 The strong and clear testimony of Bishop 
 White is put in the forefront of this Catena, 
 because the deliberate judgment of the most 
 illustrious of the fathers of our American 
 Church cannot but have great weight with all 
 sober-minded Churchmen. 
 
 A brief statement of the argument from the 
 New Testament may form an appropriate in- 
 troduction to the Testimonies which follow. 
 The real question at issue, let it be borne in 
 mind, is simply this : Is the Christian minister 
 a priest in the same, or a similar, sense that the 
 Levitical priest was ? Does he stand between 
 the people and God as a necessary medium ? 
 Is his office vicarial, or only representative f 
 Is his function absolute and indispensable i 
 
 Now, when we open the New Testament 
 we look in vain for any hint that the Christian 
 minister succeeds to the powers and functions
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 7 
 
 of the Jewish priest, or to any similar ones. 
 Two-and-thirty times is the word Hiereus 
 (priest) used in the New Testament, but never 
 once is it employed to designate the ministers 
 of the Gospel. They are called " prophets," 
 " evangelists," "pastors," " teachers," " min- 
 isters, " " heralds, " " ambassadors, ' ' but never 
 "priests."* Not only so, but the inspired 
 writers carefully avoid the use of the word, 
 where the connection would have led them to 
 employ it, at least in a figurative sense. Thus 
 St. Paul (1 Cor. ix. 13) says : " Do ye not 
 know that they which minister about holy 
 things live of the things of the temple, and 
 they which wait at the altar are partakers with 
 the altar?" Now, if the apostle had held 
 with our sacerdotalists, it would have been 
 easy for him to apply his argument in such 
 fashion as this : " Even so the Lord hath or- 
 dained that Christian priests who wait at the 
 altar of the new dispensation should be partak- 
 ers with the altar" (viz., of the " alms" which 
 the " priests" " offer" on the " altar"). But 
 he carefully shuns such language, and gives a 
 
 * " It has been reckoned," says Canon Perowne, " that 
 there are no less than one hundred and forty of such 
 references [viz., to priests or a priesthood] in the Acts 
 and Epistles."
 
 8 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 totally different turn to the sentence, viz. : 
 " Even so hath the Lord ordained that they 
 which preach the Gospel should live of the 
 Gospel" (v. 14). 
 
 It is alleged, however, that we have an ex- 
 ception to the above statement in a passage 
 from St. Paul (Eom. xv. 16) where he speaks 
 of himself as " ministering as a priest (ispovp- 
 yovvroi) the Gospel of God, that the offer- 
 ing up of the Gentiles might be acceptable." 
 Now, it is perfectly true that this word (which 
 is a anaB, Xeyojusvov in the New Testament) 
 signifies here, as in Josephus, Philo, and pro- 
 fane authors generally, to "do the work of a 
 priest." But, as Tholuek well points out, 
 while the Jewish priests clean the altar, kin- 
 dle the fire, slay the victim, and then present 
 it to God, the sole priestly office of the apostle 
 consists in proclaiming the Gospel, and the 
 Gentiles are the oblation which follows. He 
 does not represent himself as offering a sacri- 
 fice for the people as the eucharist for in- 
 stance but as offering the people themselves 
 as a sacrifice to God. 
 
 To serve the purposes of our opponents' 
 argument, this priestly administration of the 
 apostle should be peculiar to his office as a 
 minister of Christ. That this is not the case
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 9 
 
 is evident from the circumstance that in an- 
 other place in this epistle he exhorts the laity to 
 do the very same thing, viz., to " offer a liv- 
 ing sacrifice" (Rom. xii. 1 ; see also Phil, 
 ii. 17). In this sense it may be admitted that 
 St. Paul was a priest, but in this sense all 
 Christians are priests as well. It follows that 
 the passage in question lends no support to 
 the sacerdotal theory, and must be pronounced 
 irrelevant to the discussion. Dean Alford 
 thus comments upon it : " The language is 
 evidently figurative, and can by no possibility 
 be taken as a sanction for any view of the 
 Christian minister as a sacrificing priest other- 
 wise than according to that figure, viz., that 
 he offers to God the acceptable sacrifice of 
 those who by his means believe on Christ." 
 It remains true, then, that neither the word 
 " priest " (lepsvs) nor any of its derivatives 
 (leparela, uparev/ua, ieptxreuGJ, npovpytoo) 
 are ever used in the New Testament to de- 
 scribe the peculiar functions of the Christian 
 ministry. 
 
 Now it will not do to reply, as Sadler and 
 others do, that this is a question not of names, 
 but of tltliHj.s. and hence that " it matters not 
 a straw whether the name of priests were 
 given" to Christian ministers or no ; for, as
 
 10 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 the Bishop-elect of Durham well says, ' ' Words 
 express things, and the silence of the apostles 
 still requires an explanation." If it indeed 
 pertain to our ministry to offer sacrifice for 
 the people or to " dispense the benefits of the 
 atonement" in any exclusive and peculiar 
 sense, we cannot but join with honest old Lati- 
 mer when he said, " I can never wonder 
 enough that Peter and all the apostles would 
 forget thus negligently the office of sacrificing, 
 if they had thought it necessary. ' ' We find 
 not a little in the New Testament about " sac- 
 rifices" and " offerings," but the laity as well 
 as the clergy are said to present them. The 
 whole body of believers is by St. Peter de- 
 clared to be a royal priesthood to offer up 
 " spiritual sacrifices." To this it is no suffi- 
 cient reply to allege that the same privileges 
 were conferred upon the Jews when the Lord 
 said by Moses unto them, " Ye shall be to me 
 a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation, ' ' and 
 thence to argue that " the fact that all mem- 
 bers of the Church of Christ are priests of God, 
 does not for a moment clash with another fact, 
 that God selects a certain order of men out of 
 His Church and makes them priests in a spe- 
 cial sense" (Sadler, p. 216) ; for in the one 
 case the priestly functions of the nation were
 
 INTROD UCTOR Y E88A Y. 11 
 
 concentrated in, and confined to, a definitely 
 appointed order ; and so far as tlie people at 
 large were concerned, their priesthood was in 
 abeyance until, by the coming of the Messiah, 
 the way into the holiest should be opened ; 
 whereas in the other case there is no record of 
 any order of priests, but, on the contrary, an 
 assurance that now the promise made to the 
 fathers was realized, and the whole people con- 
 stituted a priesthood. And even though it 
 were admitted that the universal priesthood of 
 believers does not necessarily clash with a spe- 
 cial priesthood, it remains true that the New 
 Testament recognizes the former, but not the 
 latter ; and not only so, but, as we shall pres- 
 ently see, it teaches us that the special order of 
 priesthood has found its fulfilment and absorp- 
 tion in the one great Priest, our Lord and 
 Saviour Jesus Christ. However, whatever 
 view maybe taken of the passage from Exodus 
 just quoted, this much cannot be denied ; 
 that when the Israelite had fallen into sin 
 e.g., falsehood, perjury, violence he could 
 only obtain forgiveness through the interven- 
 tion of the priest ; he was required to bring 
 his trespass offering to the priest that he might 
 " make atonement for him" (Lev. vi.). But 
 th< Christian is permitted direct access to the
 
 12 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 Father without any priestly intervention. He 
 has ' ' boldness' ' to " enter into the holiest by 
 the blood of Jesus' ' to enter as a consecrated 
 priest and offer the blood of Christ as an atone- 
 ment for his sin. 
 
 The advocates of the sacerdotal theory, how- 
 ever, endeavor to break the force of the argu- 
 ment from the silence of the New Testament 
 writers, by citing as a parallel their usage in 
 regard to the word " Sabbath." This word 
 occurs much more frequently in the New 
 Testament than the word " priest ;" but it is 
 never once employed to designate the Lord's 
 Day. And yet, say these Laudians convert- 
 ed, strangely enough, for the time into Sab- 
 batarians who will deny that there is a Chris- 
 tian Sabbath ( Even so there is a Christian 
 priesthood, notwithstanding the silence of the 
 New Testament writers upon the subject. 
 
 We reply : To use such an argument is to 
 illustrate that which is plain and clear by that 
 which is dark and difficult. Upon few sub- 
 jects has there been more controversy, and 
 more wide divergence of opinion, than upon 
 the Sabbatical question. Many, as Dean Al- 
 ford and Dr. Hessey, would answer : The rea- 
 son why the Lord's Day is not called the Sab- 
 bath is because the Sabbath is abolished ; and
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 13 
 
 our Sunday or Lord's Day is not the Sabbath. 
 And a large class of writers, who would not go 
 so far as that, would yet insist that the spirit 
 of the Lord's Day is essentially different from 
 that of the Sabbath. Even Hooker was of 
 opinion that the Jewish Sabbath was probably 
 observed as a fast. 
 
 But even if we grant the inference from 
 the supposed parallel, that as there is an 
 analogy between the Lord's Day and the 
 Jewish Sabbath, so there is an analogy be- 
 tween the Christian ministry and the Jewish 
 priesthood, the crucial question yet remains,- 
 In what sense and how far arc they analogous ? 
 a question which must be determined inde- 
 pendently and upon its own merits, and may 
 receive very different answers in the two 
 cases. Hooker admitted a certain analogy 
 or proportion between the office of the Jewish 
 priest and that of the Christian minister, and 
 yet he emphatically declares that i% sacrifice is 
 now no part of the church ministry" (v. 78, 2), 
 and that " the word presbyter doth seem 
 more lit and in propriety of speecli more 
 agreeable than priest, with the drift of the 
 whole Gospel of -Jesus Christ" 1 (v. 7 s . 3). 
 And Archbishop Leighton himself speaks of 
 an analogous dignity between " the ministry
 
 14 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 of the Gospel" and " the priesthood of the 
 law ;" and yet he holds that " the external 
 priesthood of the law is abolished by the com- 
 ing of this great High Priest, Jesus Christ 
 being the body of all those shadows" (Comm. 
 on 1 Peter ii. 9). 
 
 Equally futile is the reason given by writers 
 of this school for the silence of the New 
 Testament writers. ' ' While, ' ' says Mr. Car- 
 ter, " there was danger to be apprehended 
 from Jewish ideas becoming attached to the 
 new system, from mere confusion, or from 
 the appearance of antagonism, the Jewish 
 terms were suspended, though the ideas 
 of priesthood and Sabbath passed into the 
 Christian system, and when this danger no 
 longer existed, and the separation of the two 
 systems was complete, the terms themselves 
 were again freely used " (Doc. of the Priest- 
 hood, p. 122). This explanation has not even 
 the merit of being plausible. For, so far from 
 creating " confusion ," it would have mani- 
 festly made the Gospel system seem plainer to 
 the Jew to tell him that though the Jewish 
 priesthood was abolished, yet it was replaced 
 by another order of priests under the new Dis- 
 pensation. St. Paul has told us that he was 
 all things to all men that he might win some.
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 15 
 
 To the Jews he became as a Jew. Now, hav- 
 ing taught them that the Levitical system was 
 ready to " vanisli away" (Heb. viii. 13), how 
 natural and proper an accommodation to their 
 prejudices it would have been to show that 
 the new covenant offered a human priesthood 
 as well as the old ; that the Jew could still 
 have an earthly mediator standing at an earth- 
 ly altar, to whom he could bring his " gifts 
 and sacrifices, ' ' and to whom he could look, as 
 before to the Aaronic priests, to make inter- 
 cession for him ! How it would have softened 
 the opposition of the Jew to the Christian sys- 
 tem if the apostle could have said, "While 
 the Temple stands and the Aaronic priests 
 continue to offer the daily sacrifice, we will 
 not call the ministers of the new dispensation 
 ' priests,' but they really are priests ; and 
 when the temple service is finally abolished, 
 then Christians will have an order of men 
 to stand at their altars and make intercession 
 for them and perform every office of sacer- 
 dotal function possible on earth." In short, 
 if St. Paul cmikl have taught the sacerdotal 
 theory as expounded by Sadler and his school, 
 it is a marvel that he did not teach it ; for, 
 making the Christian ministry a perpetuation 
 of the essential principles of the Levitical
 
 16 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 priesthood, as that theory does, it would have 
 been admirably adapted to remove the preju- 
 dices of both Jews and Gentiles to a religion 
 which else offered neither priest not altar nor 
 victim on earth, and was for that very reason 
 contrary to the ideas which to them were most 
 familiar and most dear. 
 
 It may farther be asked why St. John, who 
 lived more than twenty years after the destruc- 
 tion of Jerusalem and the consequent final 
 abolition of the Jewish priesthood, did not 
 supply the sad omission of the rest of the New 
 Testament writers upon this momentous sub- 
 ject of the nature of the Christian ministry ? 
 Surely there was no longer occasion to keep 
 back the truth " in order to avoid confusion !" 
 There were no longer Jewish priests, altars, 
 or sacrifices with which their Christian coun- 
 terparts could be confounded. But neither in 
 his epistles not in the Apocalypse (both written 
 after the destruction of Jerusalem) is there any 
 correction of that view of the Christian minis- 
 try which would naturally be derived from the 
 rest of the New Testament. 
 
 "We are not, however, left by the inspired 
 writers to frame our own explanation of the 
 silence which the strained hypothesis just ad- 
 verted to seeks to account for. The Epistle
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESS AT. 17 
 
 to the Hebrews supplements and interprets 
 that silence, and effectually disposes of Mr. 
 Carter's argument. The object of that book 
 may be summarily defined to be the exhibition 
 of the spiritual meaning of the Mosaic econ- 
 omy and its consequent abolition. As the 
 shadow gives place to the substance, as the 
 flower falls off to make way for the fruit, as 
 the starlight fades before advancing daylight, 
 so the writer shows that the Levitical system 
 and the priesthood as part of it " decayed " 
 and " vanished away" when in the fulness of 
 time the Gospel was brought in. Now if we 
 turn to the seventh chapter of that epistle we 
 find an account of the abolition of the Leviti- 
 cal priesthood because of its " inlperfection. , '' 
 But are we told that it is replaced by a Chris- 
 tian priesthood ? Not at all. The inspired 
 writer informs us that the "priesthood" gave 
 place to a " priesf (v. 11). Tie speaks of many 
 priests under the law, but makes mention of 
 only One under the Gospel. Throughout the 
 epistle he contrasts this One priest and His 
 office with the order of priests and their min- 
 istrations under the Law ; shows with elaborate 
 care that all the offices and ministrations of the 
 Levitical priests met their fulfilment in the 
 offices of Christ ; and nowhere hints anv thing 
 2
 
 18 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 about any other priest under the Gospel. Thus 
 (v. 11) : " If perfection were by the Levitical 
 priesthood, . . . what further need that anoth- 
 er priest should arise ?" Again (v. 21): "Those 
 priests were made without an oath, but this 
 with an oath. . . . Thou art a priest forever. " 
 Still more strongly (v. 23, 24) : " They truly 
 were many priests, because they were not 
 suffered to continue by reason of death ; but 
 this man . . . hath an unchangeable (untrans- 
 ferable) priesthood." But the argument is 
 rendered conclusive and unanswerable when 
 we note that the priesthood of Christ is again 
 and again declared to be " after the order of 
 Melchisedek, " who is described as "having 
 neither beginning of days nor end of life," as 
 "one that abideth a priest continually," and 
 hence has no successor in his office. Indeed, 
 there are only two orders of priests mentioned 
 in the Bible as of divine appointment the 
 order of Aaron and the order of Melchisedek. 
 The former is abolished, the latter is filled by 
 Christ, and there is no hint of any creature 
 being His partner in it, as it is expressly de- 
 clared that he has no successor. 
 
 To what order of priesthood, then, do the 
 ministers of the Gospel belong ? And where 
 is the record of their appointment \ Where
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESS AT. 19 
 
 is the prescription of their priestly functions ? 
 Even Christ glorified not himself to be made 
 an high-priest. Shall men, then, assume this 
 office to themselves without express warrant of 
 Holy Writ '. 
 
 To what has been said above of the scope of 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews that "Commen- 
 tary on Leviticus " let us add the words of a 
 learned English divine. " The whole of the 
 Jewish ceremonial law was of a typical charac 
 ter and prefigured the work and -offices of the 
 Saviour who was to come: The legal sacrifices 
 pointed to the one great sacrifice to be offered 
 upon the cross. The Levitical priesthood was 
 a type of the heavenly priesthood of Christ. 
 He it is, the object both of type and prophecy, 
 who is the true priest and mediator between 
 God and man. Through Him all Christians 
 have direct and immediate access to God. As 
 we need not, so we have not, any other priest, 
 any other advocate with the Father. For the 
 antitype being come, the reality supersedes the 
 figure" (Litton's Church of Christ, p. 412). 
 
 When the true priest had offered the true 
 sacrifice, of which all priesthood and sacri- 
 fice in the Jewish ritual were but the symbol 
 and the shadow, there was an end of all mere 
 typical or representative priesthood and sacri-
 
 20 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 fice. From the moment of the triumphant cry 
 of the dying Redeemer, "It is finished,'''' all 
 priestly intervention for the forgiveness of sins 
 was at an end. As well carry torches in the 
 sunlight as talk of a sacrifice now ! As well 
 expect the stars to shine after the sun has 
 reached its zenith as to suppose a human priest- 
 hood necessary for the Church when she has a 
 Priest ever living and divine, at the right hand 
 of God ! The substance is ours : what need 
 any longer of the shadows ? 
 
 Examined then in the light which streams 
 from the Epistle to the Hebrews upon the 
 whole subject of priestly functions under the 
 Old Testament and the New, this question 
 ceases to be a question, because it is con- 
 clusively answered in the negative. 
 
 But it is necessary to dispose of an objection 
 drawn from this very epistle, ch. xiii. 10, 
 where the apostle says, " We have an altar." 
 The objection is, that an altar implies a priest 
 and a sacrifice, so that if under the Christian 
 dispensation we have " altars," we must also 
 by necessity have ' ' priests. ' ' 
 
 "We answer, first : If this were the meaning 
 of this verse it would be plainly in conflict with 
 the whole tenor of the rest of the epistle. 
 Such an interpretation therefore must be
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 21 
 
 looked upon with great suspicion, and before 
 being accepted must be required to vindicate 
 itself as the only possible interpretation of the 
 passage. But, secondly, the interpretation 
 alluded to is not even the natural and obvious 
 one, much less the only one. The apostle is 
 contrasting those who still adhered to Judaism 
 with those who accepted Christianity. In 
 this connection he says, " We (Christians) 
 have an altar whereof they have no right to 
 eat which serve the tabernacle." After the 
 sacrifice under the law there was a feast ; and 
 the priests and Levites who " served the tab- 
 ernacle" had an official right to eat of the 
 victims slain on the altar. Now the apostle 
 insists that of the Christian's altar these ser- 
 vants of the tabernacle had no right to eat. 
 What is that altar? "The Lord's Table," 
 say the advocates of the sacerdotal view of 
 the ministry. .Not so, we reply. The 
 Lord's table is not the altar upon which the 
 sacrifice is made whereof the Christian ' w eats 
 and lives forever," unless the doctrine of the 
 mass be no longer " a blasphemous fable and 
 a dangerous deceit.'' Tiik Cross on which 
 the body of Jesus Christ was offered, a sacri- 
 fice full, perfect, and sufficient, and '' once
 
 22 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY 
 
 for all," that is the altar, and the only altar 
 which Christianity either knows or needs. 
 
 Of the victim slain on that altar they who 
 serve the tabernacle have no right to eat ; 
 but every Christian eats thereof. By faith 
 he eats the flesh and drinks the blood of the 
 Lamb that was slain (John vi. 54).* 
 
 This interpretation is in perfect harmony 
 with the rest of the epistle, whereas the other 
 is totally at variance with it. Indeed, it pre- 
 sents another beautiful instance of the cor- 
 respondence between the Levitical system of 
 types, and Christianity as the great Antitype. 
 " We have an altar," says the apostle. Xot 
 many altars not an altar in every church 
 but one altar ; even as the Jews had not an 
 altar in every synagogue, but one only, the 
 great altar of Sacrifice which stood at the door 
 of the sanctuary- 
 There are, however, certain Old Testament 
 passages (Ezek. xli. 22 and Mai. i. 7) in which 
 "the altar of the Lord" and "the table 
 of the Lord " are used as convertible ex- 
 pressions ; and it* is hence argued that they 
 
 * This interpretation is approved by D'Oyly and Mant, 
 in which commentary a passage from Bishop Hall is 
 quoted to the same effect as the above. It was accepted 
 even by Thomas Aquinas, as now by Alford and De- 
 litzsch.
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 23 
 
 are equally convertible in the New Testament. 
 But surely there is a gulf between the prem- 
 ises and the conclusion of this argument, 
 which logic cannot bridge over. What are 
 the facts of the case ? In the Old Testament 
 the terms Altar of the Lord and Table of the 
 Lord are often used indiscriminately as equiv- 
 alent and convertible expressions. In the 
 New Testament, though both terms occur, 
 they are never used indiscriminately, never 
 employed to describe the same thing ; the 
 one being applied exclusively in connection 
 with Judaism (with the single exception of 
 Ileb. xiii. 10, which is irrelevant), the other 
 exclusively in connection with the Christian 
 ordinance of the Lord's Supper. What is 
 the natural, if not the necessary, inference 
 from this ? Surely the reverse of that which 
 has been mentioned above. 
 
 This marked difference of language between 
 the two Testaments implies a difference of 
 doctrine: implies that while the Lord's Altar 
 was the Lord's Table under the Levitical sys- 
 tem, under the Christian system it is not so. 
 And thus these passages from the prophets 
 confirm instead of weakening our argument. 
 The reason for the discrimination is obvious. 
 The Jewish altar, after a sacrifice was made,
 
 24 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 was a table, because there was a feast upon a 
 sacrifice. The victim, first offered, was then 
 eaten. But under the Gospel it was not so. 
 Here there was but one victim, once offered, 
 and hence but one altar and one sacrifice. 
 Although, therefore, the feast of the Lord's 
 Supper is to be continually repeated for the 
 refreshment of His people to the end of the 
 world, the sacrifice is not repeated, and there- 
 fore the Lord's table is not the Lord's altar. 
 
 It appears therefore that the testimony of 
 the Xew Testament upon this question is 
 clear and consistent, and that it gives an em- 
 phatic rebuke to the notion that the Chris- 
 tian minister stands as a mediator between the 
 people and God, that his office is vicarial, or 
 that he is empowered to dispense the benefits 
 of the atoning sacrifice in any exclusive sense. 
 
 His office is indeed designated " The min- 
 istry of reconciliation ;" but it is as an ambas- 
 sador of Christ, not as a mediating priest, that 
 he exercises this function. It is true, also, 
 that he is commissioned to " declare and pro- 
 nounce to His people, being penitent, the ab- 
 solution and remission of their sins ;" but 
 this is not injudicial, but a purely ministerial 
 function, and it is the promulgation of the
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 25 
 
 general terms of absolution, and not the con- 
 veyance of absolution in any individual case. 
 
 Any doctrine of the sacraments, therefore, 
 which contradicts this fundamental view of the 
 nature of the Christian ministry must be fun- 
 damentally at fault. And any interpretation 
 of special passages of New Testament Scrip- 
 ture which is in conflict with its general tenor, 
 as above exhibited, falls at once under just sus- 
 picion of being a perversion of their real sig- 
 nification.* 
 
 A brief consideration of some of these pass- 
 ages will appropriately close this essay. 
 
 Mr. Sadler occupies the larger part of his chap- 
 ter on " The Christian Priesthood"f in proving 
 the Thesis that a system of Ministerial Agency 
 in the Christian Church is only what might 
 
 * The Latin title of the Thirty-second Article, " De 
 C<mjugio Sacerdotum," is alleged as a ground for the 
 opinion that the Church of England adhered to the 
 sacerdotal view of the ministry. But this is disproved 
 by the fact that the word "Sacerdotum" here is in- 
 tended to include Deacons as well as Bishops and Priests 
 " Episcopis, Presbyteris, et Dutcom's." As to the ex- 
 pressions in the Institution Office in the American Prayer- 
 Book, we are compelled either frankly to admit that they 
 are not in harmony with the rest of the Prayer-Book, or 
 to hold that the terms are used "abusive et improprie," 
 as Ridley said of like expressions in the Early Fathers. 
 
 t " Church Doctrine Bible Truth."
 
 26 - JNTROD UCTOR Y E88A Y. 
 
 have been expected from the analogy of the 
 patriarchal and Mosaic Dispensations a prop- 
 osition which is obvious and not questioned by 
 any school among us. The matter which is 
 really at issue concerns the nature of this 
 agency, whether it be, properly speaking, sac- 
 erdotal or no, whether it be a necessary chan- 
 nel of grace, and whether it be appointed to 
 make atonement for the people, or only to 
 point to the Atonement ; to convey absolution 
 to the penitent, or only to declare the terms 
 of absolution. We may not hesitate to admit 
 that our Lord constituted His Apostles " His 
 ministers, His fellow-workers, and His repre- 
 sentatives" (Sadler, p. 220) ; but when it is 
 asserted that he " employed them to do the 
 things which He Himself did" (id.), we must 
 call attention to this very important exception 
 He never made them the channels of absolution 
 to the penitent : He fed the multitudes by 
 their hands, but He reserved to Himself the 
 dispensing of absolution- from his own lips, 
 not from those of the Apostles, fell the words, 
 which gave peace to the erring woman, " Thy 
 sins be forgiven thee." We are referred, 
 however, to the power of the hey s (Matt. xvi. 
 19), and to that of binding and loosing (Matt. 
 xviii. 18), as if these established the sacerdotal
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 27 
 
 principle. But as to the former of these pass- 
 ages, whether, with Professor Plumptre, we 
 interpret it by the Jewish custom of delivering 
 a key to the scribe when he was admitted to 
 his office, because he was henceforth to open 
 the treasures of Divine Wisdom to the people, 
 or whether, with Canon Perowne, we explain 
 it by the parallel passages of Isa. xxii. 22 and 
 Rev. i. 18, where the key is evidently the 
 symbol of rule and government the conclu- 
 sion is the same ; it has no reference to any 
 absolving power, but to that of teaching or 
 ruling. And as to the second passage, it is ob- 
 viously to lie explained by the usus loquendi 
 of Jewish authors, with whom it is a very fre- 
 quent expression in the sense of forbidding 
 and permitting ; that which was bound was 
 forbidden ' that which was loosed was al- 
 lowed ; and thus understood, the passage has 
 no reference to any sacerdotal act of absolution. 
 The supposed absolution of sin in and by bap- 
 tism may be dismissed from the discussion, 
 inasmuch as the advocates of priestly abso- 
 lution are compelled to admit that, if any such 
 power existed, it would in that case be exercised 
 by deacons, and even by laymen, in cases of 
 emergency which is inconsistent with the 
 natural sense of their theory. The Apostolic
 
 28 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 Commission (John xx. 21-23) remains the only- 
 passage which gives any show of sanction to 
 sacerdotalism. ^Sow, when we come to ex- 
 amine this critically, we discover, in the first 
 place, that it is most probable that the words 
 of our Lord were not addressed to the eleven 
 alone, but to the whole Church (cf. Luke 
 xxiv. 33, which apparently describes the same 
 scene as that recorded in John xx. 21-23), and 
 then Mr. Sadler's principles bring us to the 
 conclusion that this gift of absolving power 
 was bestowed upon others besides the Apostles 
 which is fatal to his theory. Without press- 
 ing this view of the case, let it be observed that 
 the language of our Lord, " As my Father hath 
 sent me, even so send 1 you," draws our 
 minds to the idea of ambassage, not of priestly 
 authority the Apostles were sent by Christ, 
 to be witnesses and ambassadors, etc., of His 
 Gospel. And, further, the remitting and re- 
 taining of sins can only be consistently under- 
 stood as having reference to the entire mission 
 of the Church in the world, and to till the offices 
 of the Christian ministry. This is the view 
 of so profound a scholar and so great a master 
 of theology as Bishop Thirl wall, who holds 
 that in preaching and teaching and ruling this 
 power is exercised as well as in declaring and
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 29 
 
 pronouncing the terms of absolution, and who 
 does not hesitate to say that " every Christian 
 has a warrant to say to his brother, ' Repent 
 and believe, and thy sins shall be forgiven thee ;' 
 but before he can say with certainty ' Thy 
 sins are forgiven thee, ' he must either have re- 
 ceived some supernatural assurance of the fact, 
 or he must qualify the declaration with the 
 condition, ' If thou repentest and believest. ' " * 
 Such a view of this passage is the only one 
 which is consistent with the doctrine of the 
 rest of the New Testament. It is also the only 
 one which comports witli the practice of the 
 Apostles, for we have no record in the New 
 Testament of their exercising any such power 
 as is claimed to be conferred by this commission. 
 Peter and John healed the sick and instructed 
 the multitudes after the example of the Master, 
 but they did not venture to say to any, as 
 Jesus so often did, " Thy sins be forgiven 
 thee. " On the contrary, they directed them to 
 the Lord for forgiveness ; as when Peter re- 
 buked Simon Magus, he did not tell him to 
 come to him as ;i mediator by whom he mia'ht 
 be reconciled, but instructed him to go himself 
 to his offended God for pardon. 
 
 * Sec the extract in the following pages from his ser- 
 mon on this text.
 
 30 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 These passages, then, when fairly considered, 
 lend no support to that view of the ministry 
 which it is the object of this essay to oppose, 
 and we may, therefore, undoubtingly conclude 
 that, judged at the bar of the New Testament, 
 sacerdotalism must be condemned, since neither 
 " the name''' nor " the thing'''' can be found 
 within its pages as forming any part of the 
 ministry of reconciliation established by the 
 Lord and exercised by His apostles.
 
 TESTIMONY OF BISHOP WM. WHITE 
 
 IX TWO LETTEES TO MV. JOHN HOBART, D.D. 
 
 (Afterward Bishop of New York). 
 CALLED FORTH BY^TIIE PERUSAL OF 
 
 DR HICKES ON THE CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD ASSERTED" 
 
 DR. JOHNSON ON THE UNBLOODY SACRIFICE."
 
 TESTIMONY OF BISHOP WM. WHITE. 
 
 LETTER I. 
 
 Philadelphia, October 30, 1806. 
 
 Dear Sir : 1 return your two volumes of 
 Dr. Hickes, with thanks for the loan of them. 
 Indeed, I am ashamed that I had been so long 
 without having read a work of so much celeb- 
 rity. The perusal has confirmed my opinion 
 of the author, that he was a learned, an inge- 
 nious, a sincere, but, in some points, a mistaken 
 man ; and therefore I cannot send von back the 
 work without intimating to you the general 
 tenor of my objections to some leading matters, 
 in regard to which I hope that you will not only 
 consider them fully before you finally adopt 
 them, but be aware of the consequences to 
 which they lead. 
 
 The part of the work which I have partic- 
 ularly in view is that entitled " The Christian 
 Priesthood Asserted," the leading sentiment 
 of which is. that a bishop and a presbyter are 
 :5
 
 34 NATURE OF 
 
 " priests" in the Levitical sense of the words ; 
 that is, each of them is " 'ispsvs " or " Sac- 
 erdos. ' ' For as to the word ' ' priest, "it is 
 correct on the ground of either system, being 
 the word " TlpfO'ySyrepos" Englished, and yet 
 used as the translation of the Greek and Latin 
 words above mentioned. 
 
 Can you be seriously satisfied with Dr. 
 Hickes' conjectural reason for the not calling 
 the Christian clergy 'lepeis, in the New Testa- 
 ment ? Had the cause of the reserve been 
 such as Dr. Hickes imagines respect to the 
 Jewish prejudices so long as the temple wor- 
 ship was in being surely the cause had ceased 
 when St. John wrote his Gospel, which was 
 long after the destruction of Jerusalem ; and 
 there are many places in which the change of 
 language might have been seasonably insinuat- 
 ed. Supposing a reason could be assigned, 
 though I cannot imagine any, to this omission 
 of the Evangelist, was it not high time when 
 Barnabas, when Hennas, when Clement, 
 when Ignatius, and when Justin wrote, that 
 the new name should appear ? In the writ- 
 ings of all these authors there is reference 
 more or less to the person vested with the 
 ministerial character, but never are they desig-
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 35 
 
 nated as " 'Iepsis ;" unless, indeed, like Daille, 
 we should so apply the word as it stands in a 
 particular passage of St. Ignatius, and which 
 Daille accordingly alleged as an argument 
 against the genuineness of his epistle. But 
 what says his learned vindicator, Bishop 
 Pearson ? He impliedly admits the validity 
 of the objection, on the supposition that the 
 sense given by the objector to the passage 
 were the true one. But this he positively, and 
 with great reason, denies, as Dr. Hammond, 
 in answer to another writer, had done before 
 him. 
 
 I confidently express my opinion, that for 
 one hundred years after the destruction of the 
 Temple, the date to which the reason of the 
 reserve is limited, there is no evidence of a 
 Christian minister's being called " 'lepevi " or 
 " Sacerdos. " Although these words were in- 
 troduced not long afterwards, yet they were 
 used sparingly for a while ; and when they 
 became a part of the established phraseology 
 of the Church, I cannot help thinking that it 
 was accompanied by a change of sentiment, 
 comprehending the seeds of the errors, which 
 became so deplorably prevalent in the succeed- 
 ing ages. So far was the change of language 
 from being complete, when Tertullian wrote.
 
 36 NA'IURE OF 
 
 that, having used the words " sumrnus sacer- 
 dos," he explains himself by adding, " qui est 
 episcopus," which would have been unneces- 
 sary some time afterwards. 
 
 What I have said concerning " priest," may 
 be applied, in respect to the same tract of 
 time, to " sacrifice ;" distinguishing it, how- 
 ever, from oblation, which Dr. Hickes does 
 not, although the doing so is frequent among 
 writers, and the distinction is obvious in Le- 
 viticus. If there be any exception to my 
 propositions, it is in what Dr. Hickes has cited 
 from Justin Martyr, who wrote a very few 
 years within the period mentioned. Concern- 
 ing this venerable author I have to remark, 
 that although his language, strictly taken, ap- 
 plies to material sacrifice, yet he elsewhere 
 speaks as if there could be no Christian sacri- 
 fice but that of the heart. Hence some have 
 not scrupled to accuse him of inconsistency. 
 But this I avoid, if there be any expedient to 
 reconcile him to himself ; and this seems to 
 me to have been well done, with the exclusion 
 of material sacrifice, by Dr. Waterland, to 
 whom I refer you on the point. Certain it is, 
 that Clemens Alexandrinus, Irenseus, and Ter- 
 tullian, who wrote not many years after Jus- 
 tin, speak very strongly of there being no
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 37 
 
 other sacrifices than holy dispositions of the 
 mind. And that these should be designated 
 by Justin, under the name of a material offer- 
 ing accompanying them, may be the easier 
 conceived, as the like is done in Scripture, for 
 instance, where the alms of Cornelius are said 
 to have come up for a memorial, meaning not 
 surely the alms of themselves, but the mental 
 benevolence from which they derived their 
 value. 
 
 It seems to me that the remark concerning 
 " priest" and " sacrifice" may be extended to 
 the word ' ' altar. ' ' There are, indeed, some 
 passages in St. Ignatius which speak of 
 " altar," in a form that looks more like his 
 having a material altar in view, than any pas- 
 sage that appears in any other quarter. They 
 may bear this sense, but they may also bear 
 the metaphorical, which I prefer, on the con- 
 siderations that nothing could have been more 
 natural than for Christians to take their meta- 
 phor from the Old Testament economy ; that, 
 if the contrary interpretation be correct, Igna- 
 tius is the only instance within the time of 
 which we are speaking of such a use of the 
 word; and that "priest" (lepsv?), being 
 correlative to " altar," I cannot otherwise 
 account for his never applying of the former
 
 38 NATURE OF 
 
 word to the Christian ministers, although he 
 has occasion to speak of them so often. I feel 
 more satisfaction in the opinion now expressed, 
 than in joining with Mosheim, who says that 
 ' ' the question concerning the authenticity of 
 Ignatius' epistles is embarrassed with many 
 difficulties ;" or with our judicious Jortin, 
 who " hesitates to affirm that they have un- 
 dergone no alterations at all." 
 
 On the subject generally, there has been a 
 passage quoted from St. Clement, although I 
 forget whether Dr. Hickes notices it. To me 
 the passage, which is in ch. 40, 41, speaks 
 merely the language of comparison, applied to 
 the single point of every man's discharging 
 his official duty in the proper time and place. 
 On reading formerly the use made of it by Mr. 
 Johnson, in his " Unbloody Sacrifice," 1 had 
 the curiosity to look into Bona, and found the 
 zeal of the Romish cardinal less in this respect 
 than that of the Protestant presbyter ; the 
 former not citing Clement to his purpose, 
 which might have been expected, had the pas- 
 sage been applicable, in his opinion. 
 
 Let me not be misunderstood, in regard to 
 the words spoken of, as if I objected altogether 
 to the use of them as applied to the Christian 
 Church. There are so manv circumstances in
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 39 
 
 her economy analogous to that of the law, that 
 such a use seems natural and unexception- 
 able ; and therefore I join with Mr. Hooker 
 in saying : " The names themselves may be 
 retained without sin, in respect to that pro- 
 portion which things established by our Sav- 
 iour have unto them which are abrogated ; 
 and so, throughout all the writings of the an- 
 cient fathers, we see that the words which 
 were do continue ; the only difference is that, 
 whereas before they had a literal, they now 
 have a metaphorical use, and are so many notes 
 of remembrance unto us, that what they did 
 signify in the letter is accomplished in the 
 truth.' 1 Yes, let us in moderation use the 
 words, but let them be understood in meta- 
 phor, meaning this as opposed to the letter 
 and not to the reality, which is not injured by 
 the distinction. But when the words are 
 taken literally, we may learn from the case of 
 Dr. Tlickes to what mistakes they lead, as in 
 his making of Christian ministers, intercessors, 
 mediators, and expiators. 
 
 In what sense are ministers intercessors for 
 their Hocks, in which these may not be inter- 
 cessors for them also ? St. Paul in several 
 places asks those whom he addresses to pray 
 for him, and in one place he hopes, as the
 
 40 NATURE OF 
 
 effect of their prayers, that he may be restored 
 to them the sooner. There is no notice in the 
 New Testament of more than " one Mediator 
 between God and men." The Jewish priest- 
 hood was different in this respect from the 
 Christian ministry. Under the law, the sacri- 
 fice or the oblation was brought by the wor- 
 shipper to the priest, and though there was, 
 doubtless, exacted sincerity in the former, 
 yet the act of sacrificing was performed ex- 
 clusively by the latter. Analogous to this is 
 the mass of the Romish Church, in which the 
 sacrifice is performed entirely by the priest, it 
 not being held necessary that the people should 
 understand a syllable of what is said. But 
 what is there like this in the worship of our 
 Church ? Or what are the remains which we 
 possess of the early Church \ Certainly noth- 
 ing ; for in both the language of the service 
 shows that the minister is the mouth of the 
 congregation, who are supposed not only to 
 say " amen" at the conclusion, but to accom- 
 pany him through the whole. And as to 
 ministerial expiation, it seems to me not only 
 an utterly inadmissible idea, but particularly 
 alien from the service of the eucharist, to 
 which it is especially applied by Dr. Ilickes, 
 and those who think with him ; for it seems
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 41 
 
 agreed on all hands, that this holy ordinance 
 answers not to sacrifice of expiation, but to 
 that of the peace-offerings, which are never 
 said to make atonement, but, on the contrary, 
 suppose the worshipper in a state of reconcilia- 
 tion. I forbear to dilate on the consequences 
 of our leading of the people to believe that at 
 every celebration of the Lord's Supper we are 
 making atonement for sin. Xo ; let it be a 
 commemoration of an atonement made once 
 for all ; an interest in which is to be judged 
 of by every man, according to his conscious- 
 ness of what he is and does. 
 
 I will give you, as briefly as I can, my sense 
 of the texts which Dr. Ilickes has enlisted in 
 his service. 
 
 His first is Matthew v. 23, 24 : " Therefore 
 if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there 
 rememberest that thy brother hath aught 
 against thee ; leave there thy gift before the 
 altar, and go thy way ; first be reconciled to 
 thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift." 
 Now, if we were to suppose our Saviour speak- 
 ing in language accommodated not to an exist- 
 ing, but to a future economy, which, however, 
 seems very unreasonable, yet it would be evi- 
 dent that the passage is then inconsistent with 
 Dr. Ilickes' supposed reserve of our Saviour
 
 42 NATURE OF 
 
 on this subject. For although Dr. Hickes 
 truly remarks, that the Sermon on the Mount 
 was to the Lord's disciples, yet, as annotators 
 notice, the term must be understood with a 
 latitude, since it is said, on the finishing of 
 the discourse, " the multitude were astonished 
 at His doctrine." By the disciples were ac- 
 cordingly meant those generally who had re- 
 ceived His instructions. Where, then, would 
 have been the wisdom of the supposed secrecy 
 concerning a new altar and a new priesthood 
 to be in due time set up '( 
 
 The same remark applies to another of 
 Dr. Hickes' texts that of Hebrews xiii. 10 : 
 " We have an altar, whereof they have no right 
 to eat which serve the tabernacle. " Here, it 
 seems, the secret was divulged to the whole 
 body of Hebrew Christians, in the very teeth 
 of all their prejudices. But no ; that the 
 sacrifice of the altar spoken of could not have 
 been the eucharist, is evident in the circum- 
 stance that this has nothing answering, even in 
 a spiritual sense, to those sacrifices in which 
 the bodies of the victims " were burnt without 
 the camp.'" But I refer you to Dr. Ham- 
 mond for an explanation of that text. 
 
 In Romans xv. 15, 16 [" Nevertheless, 
 brethren. I have written the more boldly unto
 
 TEE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 43 
 
 you in some sort, as putting you in mind, be- 
 cause of the grace that is given to me of 
 God, that I should be the minister of Jesus 
 Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the Gospel 
 of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles 
 might be acceptable, being sanctified by the 
 Holy Ghost"], there is a noble figure, the 
 beauty of which is very much lessened if we 
 depart from the usual translation and interpre- 
 tation, of the offering being of the persons of 
 the Gentiles, and if we apply it to their eu- 
 eharist or to their devotions generally. 
 
 In 1 Corinthians ix. 13 [" Do ye not know 
 that they which minister about holy things 
 live of the things of the temple ? and they 
 which wait at the altar are partakers with the 
 altar ?"] there is a parallel drawn between 
 Jewish priests and Christian ministers, in 
 the single point of their being alike entitled 
 t<> a maintenance. What is more common 
 than in the making of a comparison, where 
 there is nothing common to the subjects, ex- 
 cept the circumstance for which the compari- 
 son is made \ 
 
 In 1 Corinthians x. 20, 21 [" But I say, 
 that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice 
 they sacrifice to devils, and nol t> God : and I 
 would not that ye should have fellowship with
 
 44 NATURE OF 
 
 devils. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, 
 and the cup of devils : ye cannot be partakers 
 of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils"], 
 it is sufficient to the apostle's reasoning if the 
 bread and wine of the eucharist are an ap- 
 pointed memorial of the body and blood of 
 Christ. For then the partaking of them is 
 inconsistent with the partaking of heathen sac- 
 rifice. 
 
 Dr. Hickes' remarks on " itouTv'" are at 
 best too slight a ground on which to erect a 
 theory. Besides, his explanation of it, as ap- 
 plied to the eucharist, seems fully satisfied by 
 the idea of an oblation in that ordinance. 
 
 He understands an expression in 1 Peter 
 ii. 9 [" But ye are a chosen generation, a 
 royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar 
 people ; that ye should shew forth the praises 
 of Him who hath called you out of darkness into 
 His marvellous light"], as synonymous with 
 a kingdom of priests, or a priestly government. 
 But the passage receives a different interpre- 
 tation from Revelation i. 6 [" And hath 
 made us kings and priests unto God and His 
 Father ; to Him be glory and dominion for- 
 ever and ever. Amen"], which makes priests 
 in the accommodated sense intended of all the 
 people of the seven churches. It seems to
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 45 
 
 me that there is no explaining of those passages 
 but in allusion to the eminent holiness which 
 Christianity exacts, and the dignity of charac- 
 ter which it bestows. And these are coinci- 
 dent with the apostle's train of sentiment in 
 the passage first mentioned. 
 
 We have heard much of the Epistle to the 
 Hebrews as describing a prefiguration of the 
 Christian priesthood in that of the law. But 
 the analogy there traced is declared to be ac- 
 complished in the priesthood of Christ ; that 
 is, in His sacrifice of the cross, and His presen- 
 tation of it in heaven. The part of the epistle 
 alluded to has no reference to the Christian 
 ministry, unless on the principle of a continued 
 priestly offering of the true atonement, as is 
 pretended in the mass. But this must be 
 proved through some other medium, for there 
 is nothing of it in the epistle. 
 
 Dr. Ilickes cites Revelation v. 8 [" And 
 when he had taken the book, the four beasts 
 and four and twenty elders fell down before 
 the Lamb, having every one of them harps, 
 and golden vials full of odors, which are the 
 prayers of saints"], and viii. 'A ["And an- 
 other angel came and stood at the altar. 
 having a golden censer ; and there was given 
 unto him much incense, that he should offer it
 
 46 NATURE OF 
 
 with the prayers of all saints upon the golden 
 altar which was before the throne"]. But was 
 it unobserved by him that all matters relating 
 to the Christian Church in that book are fig- 
 uratively represented under terms of the 
 Jewish economy ? The scene is laid in the 
 Temple ; the names of the Israelitish tribes 
 are ascribed to Christian people ; the martyred 
 saints repose under the altar ; and, in short, all 
 the circumstances are accommodated to the 
 figure. 
 
 In regard to Dr. Hickes' texts generally, it 
 may be remarked that his interpretation de- 
 stroys the ground of the reserve supposed by 
 him. If his interpretation be correct, a new 
 sacrifice, a new priesthood, and a new altar 
 were explicitly declared, and there was no 
 reason against making the names correspond 
 with the subjects. But if that interpretation 
 be wrong, I appeal to you whether, at least 
 after the destruction of Jerusalem, there 
 might not be expected from an apostle or some 
 apostolic man I need not say an explicit dec- 
 laration, but at least an intimation of the in- 
 tended change, and that it should not have 
 been left to be discovered by human ingenuity 
 after the lapse of above a century. 
 
 And let me remark on what different
 
 TIIE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 47 
 
 ground the question stands from that between 
 Episcopacy and Presbytery. According to 
 the pretensions of the latter, a change took 
 place all at once in all parts of the world, and 
 affecting rights and duties in daily exercise, 
 and all without opposition or even historic 
 notice. Such a change could never have hap- 
 pened among mankind, constituted as we see 
 them. But it is otherwise in regard to new 
 names, easily reconciled by analogy, perhaps 
 introduced by writers of celebrity, by them 
 used at first metaphorically and sparingly, 
 with an intermixture of the old ; the change 
 at the same time wearing the specious appear- 
 ance of a tendency to the increase of piety, 
 however afterward made the instrument of 
 the most inordinate ambition. 
 
 In all here said, I have been aware of the 
 solemn caution given by Dr. Hickes to Chris- 
 tian ministers not to lessen the dignity of their 
 calling. But if it is the scriptural definition 
 of the Jewish high-priest, that he was " or- 
 dained from among men for things pertain- 
 ing to God," is it less honorable, as Dr. Out- 
 ram is represented by Dr. Hickes saying of 
 the Christian minister, that he is " ordained 
 by God for things pertaining to men "? And 
 is not the superiority of the ministry of the
 
 48 NATURE OF 
 
 latter, in comparison of that of the former, 
 sufficiently supported by the comparative 
 merits of their respective dispensations ? 
 
 When Dr. Hickes pronounced it disgrace- 
 ful in a minister of the Church of England to 
 reject priesthood, sacrifice, and altar, in the 
 strict and proper sense, why did he not crimi- 
 nate the Church herself ? That neither sacri- 
 fice nor altar is found in her liturgy is evident. 
 And as to the word "priest," that she con- 
 siders it as " n pea fivr epos," with an English 
 termination, appears in the circumstance that 
 in the Latin Prayer-Book, which is of equal 
 authority with the English, "Priest" is not 
 " Sacerdos," but Presbyter ; this, even in the 
 sacramental service, which in the estimation 
 of Dr. Hickes and those who think with him 
 is in the most eminent degree sacerdotal. 
 
 I have already intimated that I distinguish 
 between sacrifice and oblation. And, there- 
 fore, I never could perceive any reason in the 
 objection which some have made to that part 
 of our consecration of the elements, in which 
 we offer them to the Father, as typical of Ilis 
 blessed Son's body and blood. On this point 
 of oblation the testimony of the apostolic 
 Clement is express ; and it seems involved in 
 the act of our Saviour, when, in the original
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 49 
 
 institution, He invoked a blessing on the ele- 
 ments, in which act there must have been a 
 religious presentation of them. 
 
 To me, indeed, it seems surprising, that the 
 very pains which some authors have taken to 
 show the eucharist answerable to the nnJE 
 under the law, did not show, at the same 
 time, that it cannot answer to the j-Q] of the 
 same economy, which always involved the 
 taking of animal life. And there is a consid- 
 eration which should call our attention to the 
 distinction. It is the countenance which may 
 be given by the latter *word to the gross ideas 
 founded on our Saviour's calling the bread and 
 wine His body and blood. From the conjunc- 
 tion of this error with that of considering the 
 eueharistic service a sacrifice, there seems to 
 me to arise, by a natural train of sentiment, 
 the monstrous opinion of the propitiatory sac- 
 rifice of the mass. 
 
 I beg you to remark, in your reading, how 
 authors puzzle themselves to frame a definition 
 of sacrifice after they have lost sight of that 
 essential property of it the death of the vic- 
 tim. Mr. Johnson h;is recited a variety of 
 definitions, all of which seem grounded on no 
 other circumstances than their suiting the 
 theories of their respective authors. Bishop 
 4
 
 50 NATURE OF 
 
 Pearce says lie lias seen " almost hundreds of 
 definitions ;" and, after all, I am sorry to say 
 of this ingenious prelate, that he seems to 
 have chosen or made one principally accom- 
 modated to a favorite point with him the ex- 
 cluding of the passover from the account of 
 sacrifice. 
 
 When I require the death of the victim as 
 essential to this rite, I am not ignorant of the 
 criticisms on the Greek word u bv(jia." > But 
 I have nothing to do with them. My stress 
 is on the Hebrew word, which confessedly in- 
 volves slaughter. And besides, whatever may 
 have been the original application of the 
 Greek wcrd to inanimate (as it is said) as well 
 as to animate objects, I believe that, when the 
 seventy adopted it for the rendering of the 
 Hebrew word, it had become appropriate to 
 the sacrifice of animals. 
 
 As to Dr. Hickes 1 long definition, it seems 
 to me evidently drawn from the contempla- 
 tion of his own theory, rather than having any 
 correspondency with the institution of sacrifice 
 in Leviticus. I admit Dr. Hickes' alleged 
 difficulty of an exact definition. But when 
 we perceive a circumstance applying to all 
 sacrifice, and without which there can be no
 
 TBM CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 51 
 
 sacrifice, all the purposes of a definition may 
 be answered. 
 
 Before I finish let me request you to be as- 
 sured that, when I speak so freely of great 
 names, it is with a sense of my own weakness, 
 notwithstanding which it is incumbent on me, 
 in respect to subjects of difference between 
 men of the same grade of talents and learn- 
 ing, to make an opinion for myself. 
 
 In what I have written, my purpose is to 
 bring some little aid to your own reflections. 
 And so, committing myself to your candor 
 and imploring the divine benediction on your 
 inquiries, I remain your affectionate friend 
 and brother. 
 
 Wm. White. 
 Rev. John Hobart, D.D., New York. 
 
 LETTEE IT. 
 
 Philadelphia, June 15, 1S0T. 
 Reverend and Deak Sir : When I wrote 
 my letter of the 30th of October, I made a 
 memorandum of a few particulars connected 
 with the subject of it, on which I wished to 
 express my opinion ; but delayed this because 
 of engagements which then pressed. Your
 
 52 NATURE OF 
 
 letter, acknowledging the receipt of mine, in- 
 timated that you laid some stress on the argu- 
 ments adduced in it. This aided my deter- 
 mination to take up the subject again. It has, 
 however, been prevented by avocations suc- 
 ceeding upon one another ; but now, expect- 
 ing a favorable opportunity within these few 
 days, I resume the correspondence. 
 
 The points which I propose to handle are 
 these : Is there in the Eucharist a sacrifice ? 
 If not, is there a feast on sacrifice ? And if 
 neither, what is the import of its being the 
 commemoration of a sacrifice ? 
 
 The introducing of the third question shows 
 that I answer the first and the second in the 
 negative ; and in regard to the first, I con- 
 sider it as no small objection to the doctrine 
 of the eueharistic sacrifice, in the strict and 
 proper sense, that they who affirm it find so 
 great difficulty in agreeing in a definition of 
 the word If we look at the different defini- 
 tions of learned men, as cited by Mr. John- 
 son in his " Unbloody Sacrifice," they are 
 clearly arbitrary. So is his own ; and in 
 order to prove this, I will detain you with an 
 attention to its contents. 
 
 His first descriptive circumstance of a sac- 
 rifice is its being some material thing, animate
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 53 
 
 or inanimate, offered to God. Here I recur 
 to the principles of my former letter ; on the 
 ground of which I still venture to express my 
 persuasion that the Hebrew word denoting sac- 
 rifice means animal sacrifice only. Mr. John- 
 son, indeed, mentions the frequent use of 
 " dvcria" by the seventy ; and he wishes that 
 our translators had followed their example, 
 putting " sacrifice" for their " dvaia ;" it be- 
 ing to be presumed that their knowledge both 
 of Hebrew and of (4 reek was adequate to the 
 occasion. But it is easy to account for their 
 conduct in this matter, without questioning 
 their skill in either language. Mr. Johnson 
 himself shows, and Potter's Antiquities, to 
 which lie refers will vouch, for him, that the 
 word " Ova)" had anciently a more extensive 
 signification than that of slaughter. I presume 
 that it had not become limited to this when 
 the seventy translated, although I have inad- 
 vertently and unnecessarily expressed the op- 
 posite idea in my former letter. The; error is 
 of no consequence, as to the matter there 
 treated of ; but ii* writing 1 forgot the appli- 
 cation of the word to inanimate offering in the 
 Septuagint, which is indeed xvvy frequent. 
 
 Mr. Johnson's second circumstance is, " for 
 the acknowledging the dominion and other
 
 54 NATURE OF 
 
 attributes of God, or for procuring divine 
 blessings, especially remission of sins. ' ' If this 
 mean no more than that in the eucharist the 
 devout worshipper has a view to both these 
 objects, it is certainly correct ; but it is what 
 the ordinance possesses in common with other 
 acts of homage, such as should be offered 
 daily. 
 
 The third circumstance is that of " a proper 
 altar ;" but in unfolding the sentiment he has 
 said more against than in favor of it, as in- 
 volved in the idea of sacrifice. 
 
 His fourth is " by a proper officer and with 
 agreeable rites" certainly fit attendance on 
 all public exercises of devotion ; yet no fur- 
 ther entering into the idea of all sacrifices than 
 in the sense in which any head of the family 
 may be called a proper officer, and a most 
 simple expression of devout affection an agree- 
 able rite. 
 
 His last circumstance, that of consumption, 
 seems to have been invariably a property of 
 sacrifice, but it cannot be said to be confined 
 to it. I believe our best writers consider the 
 red heifer, in Num. xix. 2, as not a sacrifice. 
 
 You may see what arbitrary accounts of the 
 subject are the consequence of losing sight of 
 the true discriminating circumstance that of
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 55 
 
 animal slaughter in a divinely instituted act of 
 devotion. But let the attention be confined 
 to this, and you have a clear view of the na- 
 ture of an institution coeval with our race, 
 but of which no rational account can be given, 
 except as prefigurative of the great sacrifice 
 of the cross, which dispenses with every other, 
 .although to be itself commemorated by a spir- 
 itual sacrifice to the end of time. 
 
 Before my sentiments on the present sub- 
 ject became settled, as I trust they have been 
 these many years, with little probability of 
 change, the only authority adduced from 
 Scripture which appeared to me to have weight 
 in favor of the doctrine which 1 here reject, 
 is the well-known passage in the tenth chapter 
 of the First Epistle to the Corinthians. It ap- 
 peared to me for some time that, as in the 
 parallel drawn, there was a real sacrifice of the 
 heathen and a real sacrifice of the .lews, so 
 there was apparent ground for the affirming of 
 a real sacrifice in the eucharist. But this 
 difficulty yielded to the consideration that 
 nothing is more common than for a matter to 
 be predicable, alike of the things signified and 
 of its sign. A dishonor to a picture may ex- 
 tend in an equal degree to the person whom if 
 represents ; and the slighting of a token may
 
 56 NATURE OF 
 
 be hostile to the friendship of which it was 
 designed to be the remembrancer. In like 
 manner, let it be admitted that the death of 
 Christ is a sacrifice in the strict and proper 
 meaning of the word ; and that through the 
 merits of this sacrifice the body of His profess- 
 ing followers are related to Him and to one 
 another. Let it be further admitted that the 
 elements of bread and wine are the appointed 
 figure of His body and of His blood ; and that 
 by partaking of these symbols we recognize 
 our relation to Him and our common tie among 
 ourselves ; and immediately the figurative 
 sacrifice of Christians admits of a comparison 
 with the real sacrifices of the heathen, as to 
 the purpose in contemplation of the apostle 
 the dissuading from being partakers of the 
 heathen sacrifices ; to which there was a con- 
 trariety in the figurative sacrifice of the Gos- 
 pel, because of their being a contrariety in the 
 real sacrifice represented by it. 
 
 But if it should be granted to me that the 
 passage referred to is the only one which can 
 be said to be explicit to the point of sacrifice, 
 still I may be told that there are other pas- 
 sages from which we may deduce the doctrine ; 
 and for the application of those passages I 
 mav be referred to the decision of the fathers.
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 57 
 
 from whose works very many authorities have 
 been cited. Here I make a distinction be- 
 tween the earlier and the later fathers ; and 
 am astonished at the manner in which they 
 are cited by Mr. Johnson and others, as if 
 they were of equal authority in religions con- 
 troversy. If our Church is right in the deci- 
 sion which she makes, with such clear evi- 
 dence of her sense of its importance, that 
 Scripture is the only rule of faith, the ground 
 on which the fathers can be at all appealed to 
 is as witnesses of the faith transmitted to them 
 from the beginning ; and that their testimony, 
 on the general principles of evidence, may 
 very much assist in determining the sense of 
 Scripture, is what I am very far from being 
 disposed to deny. But it must he confessed 
 that in this point of view the effect of the tes- 
 timony depends on the distance from the 
 source : and it is a mistake to put a father 
 of the fourth century on a level with one of 
 the second. To illustrate this by an allusion 
 to civil matters : Suppose there were a ques- 
 tion as to the interpretation of a law, enacted 
 in the beginning of the reign of Henry VIII., 
 and it were made appear that one sense were 
 more favored than another by the opinion of 
 learned counsel 'and by tin' practice of the
 
 58 NATURE OF 
 
 courts in the reign of James I., and this were 
 said to be the doctrine of the intervening 
 time, it is a consideration which would have 
 weight with every mind ; while much less 
 would be allowed to the opinion and the prac- 
 tice of the present day. So, in bringing apos- 
 tolic faith and practice to the standard of the 
 current sense of the succeeding times, I per- 
 ceive a clear distinction between the opinions 
 of a Clement, an Ignatius, an Irenseus, and a 
 Justin, and those of a Chrysostom, a Cyril, 
 and an Austin. 
 
 Even if the opinion of early writers should, 
 as such and distinct from testimony, be 
 thought to have any weight, it ought surely 
 to be confined to the times in which not a 
 single considerable error had pervaded the 
 Christian Church in general. Xow, when you 
 come down to the fourth century, I think I 
 can point out at least two errors, which had a 
 general sway at an early period of it ; of which 
 one is the lawfulness of persecution, and the 
 other the celibacy of the clergy. On the for- 
 mer subject I distinguish between the not ad- 
 mitting to a share of power, and the inflicting 
 of pains and penalties. The former may, 
 under some circumstances, be lawful and even 
 necessary : but I contend, and think you will
 
 THE CHRISTIAN 'MINISTRY. 59 
 
 agree with me, that the latter is in contrariety 
 to the Gospel, and yet that it was favored by 
 the general sense of the Christian Church long 
 before the middle of the fourth century. On 
 the other subject I do not mean to say that 
 they as yet obliged the clergy to put away their 
 wives ; and we have an evidence to the con- 
 trary in the celebrated story of Paphnutius at 
 the Council of Nice. But even the story im- 
 plies, and other incidents prove, that the 
 Church had adopted those sentiments concern- 
 ing mariage which ended soon afterwards in 
 prohibiting it to the priesthood. Now yon 
 know we Protestants consider this as one of 
 the tokens of apostacy prophesied in Scripture. 
 These remarks seem to me to assist in esti- 
 mating the sense of the fathers of different 
 periods. In regard to those of the first two 
 or three centuries, T am particularly aware of 
 what lias been said by Justin, by Iivmeus. and 
 by Tertullian. But I find nothing which 
 may not be brought under the idea of obla- 
 tion, that is. the commemorative presentation 
 of the elements, or wherein the application of 
 the word " sacrifice" (Ovaia) may not fairly 
 be nnderst 1 of them, as in the New Tes- 
 tament, of alms. Resides, it is not surprising 
 that Jnstin should be found giving to the
 
 60 NATURE OF 
 
 word the same extensive signification which 
 it bore in the Greek translation of the Scrip- 
 tures in daily use, and there standing for 
 different subjects denoted in the Hebrew by 
 different words. I beg you to consider fur- 
 ther how difficult it has been found by the 
 writers from whom I dissent to bend to their 
 system what Barnabas lias said concerning the 
 abolishing of the legal sacrifices, to make way 
 for " a human oblation " which he defines 
 to be " an humble and a contrite heart ; in 
 addition to tins, the circumstance in the obla- 
 tion spoken of by Clement, that they were 
 such even before consecration, which seems to 
 imply a reference to devotion as that which 
 principally constituted them an offering ; and 
 further, the affirmation of Justin that " the 
 only perfect and acceptable sacrifices are pray- 
 ers and thanksgivings ;" with expressions to 
 the same effect in Ireimeus and several others. 
 On these authorities I might be tempted to 
 enlarge for their elucidation, were it not that 
 I can more expeditiously refer you to Dr. 
 Waterland's treatise on the Eucharist, in 
 which you will find the above-mentioned 
 fathers cleared from the supposition of their 
 having asserted a material sacrifice. 
 
 In regard to later ecclesiastical writers, "al-
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. Gl 
 
 though I lay less stress on their opinions, yet 
 it would not be difficult to show that what 
 they have said rhetorically is often improperly 
 quoted, to the neglect of passages in which a 
 different sense is spoken. No father has de- 
 livered himself more rhetorically than Chry- 
 sostom, as where he talks of " the tremendous 
 sacrifice lying on the altar ;" and yet, intend- 
 ing to distinguish between the Jewish system 
 and the Christian, he says, " We do not offer 
 another sacrifice, but always the same, or 
 rather we perform a memorial." 
 
 I began with remarking how difficult certain 
 writers had found it to agree among them- 
 selves in a definition of sacrifice. On this ac- 
 count there was a time when I was disposed 
 to look on the present question as merely one 
 of words. But when I came to consider ma- 
 turely the opinions which go along with the 
 affirmative side of the question, in the writings 
 of those who hold it ; and when J perceived, 
 as I thought, a train of sentiment which by 
 a consistent progression, ended in the worst of 
 all the bad tenets of Roman Catholic supersti- 
 tion, I became uneasy at the appearance in our 
 Church of any of that leaven which has shown 
 itself capable of leavening the whole lump. 
 For this reason I the more venerate the wis-
 
 62 NATURE OF 
 
 dom of our reformers in their having been so 
 careful to clear our system of every thing 
 which participated of the alarming sentiment. 
 In my former letter I noticed instances of this 
 in the Latin Prayer-Book, in their carefully 
 substituting of " presbyter" for " sacerdos," 
 and of " table" for " altar." I will now give 
 you another instance from the homily on the 
 sacrament, in which we are charged to " take 
 heed lest of the memory it be made a sacri- 
 fice." To the best of my recollection this 
 continued a universal sentiment to the time of 
 Archbishop Laud. I am aware that ever since 
 Ins day there have been a proportion of the 
 English clergy who have gone into the senti- 
 ment ; but am mistaken if it have at any pe- 
 riod pervaded the body, and especially if it 
 have been ever prevalent on the Episcopal 
 bench. I am sorry to find it pressed of late 
 by some writers ; and, among them, am par- 
 ticularly sorry that Mr. Daubeny. whom I 
 much admire in some respects, should be one. 
 In regard to our own Church, 1 cannot help 
 anticipating bad consequences from the ex- 
 ploded error, as I consider it, being taken up 
 by any of our clergy. For the error does not 
 end in itself, but [has sundry kindred errors, 
 some of which I proceed to specify.
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 63 
 
 One of them is the remission of sins, as an 
 end of the celebration of the eucharist. That 
 the general design of the Gospel is to make 
 known the forgiveness of sin, and that the 
 ministry are clothed with power and authority 
 to declare it, are truths not to he denied. 
 But I do not perceive how this applies to the 
 sacrament any more than to ordinary occasions 
 of public worship, when we confess our sins 
 and listen to the authoritative absolution. 
 What occasion for this if there be a more sol- 
 emn institution for the accomplishing of the 
 end ? In the Jewish religion there was no 
 such ordinary and constant provision for the re- 
 lieving of the troubled conscience of the peni- 
 tent. Tie had no resource but the appointed 
 sacrifice ; and if the eucharist be a sacrifice in 
 the sense of his, it seems to make superfluous 
 every other instrument of pardon. 
 
 Another doctrine connected with it is that 
 of a federal rite, holding out tbe idea that 
 every celebration is a covenanting anew. But 
 on this I content myself with referring you to 
 Bishop Pearce, by whom it has been, as I 
 think, satisfactorily confuted. 
 
 T might bring up to you again all those dan- 
 gerous sentiments, as 1 consider them, of Dr. 
 Ilickes which I stated in my former letter ;
 
 64 NATURE OF 
 
 as, that ministers are mediators and interces- 
 sors for the people. Bat there strikes my mind 
 with the most force, on the score of danger, 
 that in consequence of the metaphysical words 
 of the institution many exju-ess themselves so 
 obscurely concerning the elements, as shows 
 that they have confused notions of something 
 more than what the senses perceive of mere 
 bread and wine. Now, you no sooner throw 
 in among their indistinct conceptions the 
 notion of a material sacrifice, than it looks so 
 much like that of a propitiatory sacrifice for 
 the dead and living, as must he a preparation 
 of the mind for the error in all its absurdity 
 and mischievous tendency. 
 
 Had I intended a full discussion of the sub- 
 ject, I have written far too little ; but I fear, 
 considering my plan, far too much, and shall, 
 therefore, be brief on the next question of a 
 feast on sacrifice. 
 
 I am aware how very eminent the characters 
 are who have patronized the affirmative of the 
 question ; and I flatter myself that I differ 
 from them in language only. That the eu- 
 charist resembles the peace-offerings, and not 
 the sin-offerings of the Jews, I am satisfied ; 
 and it makes a considerable part of the ground 
 on which I reject the opinions before spoken
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 65 
 
 of. Now, this distinction enters into the 
 whole argument of a feast on sacrifice ; and 
 although I do not perceive any material error 
 resulting from it, yet I am dissatisfied with 
 the mode of stating the subject, because it 
 seems to make an unnatural conjunction of 
 literal language with the figurative. In this 
 opinion the sacrifice is of the real body and 
 blood of Christ upon the cross ; but the par- 
 taking of the sacrifice is spiritual manducation, 
 that is, the due contemplation of the subject 
 with suitable affections; for I never could 
 perceive what else this could mean. 
 
 I have an ingenious treatise on the Lord's 
 Supper, written by Dr. Bell, Prebendary of 
 "Westminster, a gentleman with whom I re- 
 member to have dined at the Bishop of Lan- 
 daff's table. Dr. Bell attacks the doctrine of 
 a feast on sacrifice on another ground, which 
 requires the supposition that even the sacri- 
 fices of the peace-offerings were for the pur- 
 pose of expiation. This is inconsistent with 
 the idea of them which I have derived from 
 the best authorities, and which seem to me 
 agreeable to the injunction in Leviticus. I 
 wish Dr. Bell had been more full on this 
 point ; but not perceiving the correctness of 
 what he says on it. I must object to the
 
 66 NATURE OF 
 
 doctrine on my own principles, and not on 
 his. 
 
 You see I am reduced to the necessity of 
 resting the eucharist on the mere ground of a 
 memorial. I am aware that by this I subject 
 myself to the censure of Mr. Daubeny and 
 others, who accuse me of narrowing the sub- 
 ject to the mere memory of a deceased friend. 
 Before I either deny the charge or acknowl- 
 edge any reproach in it, I must demand an 
 explanation of the terms. Suppose I were 
 told that you had introduced into your family 
 the stated celebration of the memory of a 
 friend, cherished by you with affection, which 
 you took this way of expressing and perpetuat- 
 ing. From this I should learn no more of the 
 motive of your proceeding than extraordinary 
 regard. But if it were in consideration of 
 some signal benefit, I should be sensible that 
 this might have been far short of any thing 
 involving life and fortune. But suppose me 
 further informed that the favor consisted in 
 dying that you and your whole family might 
 live, and this without your having merited any 
 favor at his hands, and even under the weight 
 of great demerit ; and then I perceive that it 
 is a case which, beyond any other that con- 
 cerns your temporary being, challenges the un-
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 67 
 
 bounded love of you and yours. Now, apply 
 this to the* subject, and you will perceive that 
 the doctrine of a mere memorial gives no 
 such degrading representation as is supposed 
 in the language which has been bestowed on it. 
 
 And yet the comparison does not reach all 
 the points comprehended in the sacramental 
 commemoration. For the very circumstance 
 that the eucharist is a memorial makes it "an 
 outward and visible sign of an inward and 
 spiritual grace." The grace is involved in 
 the subject commemorated, and therefore 
 must be imparted by the mean of the celebra- 
 tion. Not only so, the promises of Cxod are 
 hereby visibly signed and sealed. For what 
 less is the matter commemorated than the 
 death of Christ, as *' a full, perfect, and suffi- 
 cient sacrifice, propitiation, and satisfaction 
 for the sins of the whole world." 1 On what 
 are the divine promises founded, but on the 
 merits of this transaction '. And how then 
 can it be celebrated by an external, appointed 
 rite, without this rite's being significant of 
 promises resting on a truth which cannot fail ? 
 
 Bishop Jloadly h;us been censured for giving 
 a diminishing representation of the ordinance 
 in question, in his k ' Plain Account of the 
 Lord's Supper ;" and the same objection has
 
 68 NATURE OF 
 
 been made to Dr. Bell. But it appears to me 
 that the ground they have given for the eharge 
 is their neglecting a view of the important 
 truths comprehended in the idea of a memo- 
 rial. Whether their faith were imperfect in 
 this respect, is more than I shall venture to 
 decide on. But if it were, or if their reserve 
 were mere omission ; in either case there is a 
 fallacy in ascribing to their doctrine of the 
 sacrament that which may more properly be 
 ascribed to their inattention to the truths 
 which the sacrament was intended to suggest. 
 
 Let the decisions and the services of our 
 Church be carefully attended to, with a view 
 of selecting every sentiment and every expres- 
 sion which can be thought to ascribe due im- 
 portance to the holy institution, and to its 
 beneficial tendency, and then, if there should 
 be any thing not clearly involved in, or deduci- 
 ble from, the idea of a memorial, I shall at 
 least think myself deficient in the character of 
 a minister of the Episcopal Church. But if 
 nothing further should be found, I claim the 
 acknowledgment that what is believed beyond 
 it should be held and taught with great mod- 
 esty and forbearance. 
 
 When I look back to the earlier times of 
 the Church, I think I perceive the gradual
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 69 
 
 manner in which there were introduced the 
 notions of sacrifice, priest, and altar, with the 
 kindred notion of the succession of the Chris- 
 tian clergy to the legal priesthood, and of this 
 being an intended figure of the other. No 
 doubt there was an unperceived bias to this in 
 the minds of holy men, on account of the uses 
 which they thought connected with it. But 
 whatever temporary uses there may have 
 been, the abuses, as a natural result, have 
 been enormous and prominent, and this 
 should be a warning to us, who have happily 
 escaped the evil, by a reformation which 
 would never have been achieved, unless by 
 men who perceived not only existing errors, 
 but the unsoundness of the foundation on 
 which they stood. 
 
 What the sense of the reformers was I con- 
 sider as clear as it could have been made, and 
 what my former letter stated to you, concern- 
 ing the words " tepsvs" " sacerdos," and 
 "presbyter," and I revert to it merely to 
 mention an idea that lately occurred to me, on 
 accidentally casting my eye over a passage 
 from Dr. Ilickes, quoted with approbation by 
 Mr. Daubeny, in the 312th page of his second 
 volume. What could Dr. II., and what could 
 Mr. D., thought I, have made of that passage
 
 70 NATURE OF 
 
 if it had been written in Latin ? They surely 
 would not, in defiance of the sense of their 
 Church, have given " sacerdos" for " priest ;" 
 and yet had they, with the Church, taken 
 the word ' ' presbyter, ' ' the whole passage 
 would have been nonsense. Is it not evident, 
 that, so far as our system is concerned, gentle- 
 men avail themselves of the word "priest" 
 in its application to two different characters ? 
 Although, therefore, I consider our use of the 
 English word justifiable by its etymology, yet 
 1 cannot but think with Mr. Hooker (book 
 5, sect. 78), that the word " presbyter" is 
 " more fit and, in propriety of speech, more 
 agreeable than ' priest,' with the whole drift 
 of the Gospel of Jesus Christ ;" still, how 
 ever, acknowledging, with the same extraordi- 
 nary man, that, " as for the people, when 
 they hear the name, it draweth no more their 
 minds to any cogitation of sacrifice, than the 
 name of a senator or an alderman causes them 
 to think upon old age, or to imagine that 
 every one so termed must needs be ancient, 
 because years were respected, in that first 
 nomination of both." 
 
 If I were to give vent to the various con- 
 siderations which occur to my mind, accord- 
 ing to the various points of view in which the
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 71 
 
 subject may be placed, my letter would swell 
 beyond all reasonable bounds. I therefore 
 give over, and subscribe myself, 
 
 Your affectionate brother, 
 
 m. White. 
 
 P.S. I hope it will not be understood that 
 I object to the words " sacrifice" and " altar," 
 as applied figuratively to ecclesiastical subjects 
 This may often be done with great propriety 
 and beauty, without danger of our being mis- 
 understood. In regard to both words the 
 Scriptures have set us an example.
 
 II. 
 
 TESTIMONY 
 
 REFORMERS AND MARTYRS.
 
 TESTIMONY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 REFORMERS AND MARTYRS. 
 
 Thomas Ceanmer, 
 Archbishop of Canterbury. Martyred 1556. 
 
 "This is the honor and glory of this our 
 High-priest, wherein He admitteth neither 
 partner nor successor. For by his own ob- 
 lation He satisfied His Father for all men's 
 sins, and reconciled mankind unto His grace 
 and favor. . . . Another kind of sacrifice 
 there is which doth not reconcile us to God, 
 but is made of them that be reconciled by 
 Christ, to testify our duties unto (rod, and to 
 show ourselves thankful unto Him. And, 
 therefore, )they be called sacrifice of laud, 
 praise, and thanksgiving. The first kind of 
 sacrifice Christ offered unto God for us; the 
 second kind we ourselves offer to God by 
 Christ. And by the first kind of sacrifice 
 Christ offered also us unto His Father; and bv
 
 76 NATURE OF 
 
 the second we offer ourselves and all that we 
 have unto Him and His Father. And this sac- 
 rifice generally is our whole obedience unto 
 God, in keeping His laws and commandments. 
 And St. Peter saith of all Christian 
 people, that they be ' an holy priesthood, to 
 offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by 
 Jesus Christ. ' . . . And Erasmus calleth 
 anapafiarov ' quod in alium transire non 
 potest.'' And so doth adiadoxov signify 
 'quod successions caret f that is to say, 'a 
 thing that hath no succession, nor passeth to 
 none other. ' And because Christ is a perpet- 
 ual and everlasting Priest, that by one obla- 
 tion made a full sacrifice of sin forever, there- 
 fore His priesthood neither needeth, nor can 
 pass to any other wherefore the ministers 
 of Christ's Church be not now appointed 
 priests to make a new sacrifice for sin, as 
 though Christ had not done that at once suffi- 
 ciently forever, but to preach abroad Christ's 
 sacrifice, and to be ministers of His words 
 and sacraments. " Works, pp. 346, 363. 
 
 Bishop Ridley. 
 Martyred 1555. 
 
 Ridley's Injunctions, a.d. 1550. His opin- 
 ion of the ministry may be safely inferred from
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 7? 
 
 the following passage : " Item, Whereas in di- 
 vers places some nse the Lord's board after the 
 form of a table, and some of an altar, where- 
 by dissension is perceived to arise among 
 the unlearned ; therefore, wishing a godly 
 unity to be observed in all our diocese, and for 
 that the form of a table may more move and 
 turn the simple from the old superstitious 
 opinions of the Popish Mass, and to the right 
 use of the Lord's Supper, we exhort the cu- 
 rates, churchwardens, and questmen here pres- 
 ent to erect and set up the Lord's board 
 after the form of an honest table, decently cov- 
 ered, in such place of the quire or chancel as 
 shall be thought most meet by their discretion 
 and agreement, so that the ministers, with the 
 communicants, may have their place separated 
 from the rest of the people, and to take down 
 and abolish all other by altars or tables.^ 
 
 Ridley is sometimes appealed to as an au- 
 thority for eucharistical adoration on the 
 ground of the following passage : " We do 
 handle the signs reverently, but we worship 
 the Sacrament as a sacrament, not as a thing 
 signified by the Sacrament." But he uses the 
 word " worship" as it was used by our trans- 
 lators in Luke xiv. 10 : " Thou shalt have 
 worship in the presence of them that sit at
 
 78 NATURE OF 
 
 meat with thee," where it plainly means no 
 more than respect or honor. He himself ex- 
 plains his meaning thus : " There is a deceit 
 in this word adoramus. We worship the 
 symbols when we reverently handle them." 
 " 1 also worship Christ in the sacrament, but 
 not because He is included in the sacrament, 
 like as I worship Christ also in the Scrip- 
 tures, not because He is really included in 
 them." (Works, p. 235.) 
 
 Again : " He left us His flesh. This you 
 understand of His flesh, and I understand the 
 same of grace. He carried His flesh into 
 heaven, and left behind the communion of 
 His flesh unto us." (lb., p. 225.) 
 
 Yet again : "I, being fully by God's words 
 thereunto persuaded, confess Christ's natural 
 body to be in the sacrament indeed by spirit 
 and grace, because that whosoever receiveth 
 worthily that bread and wine receiveth effec- 
 tuously Christ's body, and drinketh His blood 
 (that is, he is made effectually partaker of His 
 passion)." (lb., p. 274.) 
 
 Bishop Latimer. 
 Martyred 1555. 
 
 On the 18th April, 1554, Bishop Latimer 
 was brought out of prison, that he might
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 79 
 
 publicly answer before Queen Mary's com- 
 missioners for his faith. " He was very faint, 
 and desired that he might not long tarry. 
 He durst not drink for fear of vomiting." In 
 the course of the disputation the following 
 passage occurred : 
 
 " Weston. So through the whole heretical 
 translated Bible ye never make mention of 
 priest till ye come to the putting of Christ to 
 death. Where find you then that a priest or 
 minister (a minstrel I may call him well 
 enough) should do it of necessity ? 
 
 " Latimer. A minister is a more lit name 
 for that office, for the name of priest importeth 
 a sacrifice." (Remains of Bishop Latimer, 
 p. 264.) 
 
 In the " Protestation" given up in writing 
 concerning certain questions to him proposed, 
 Latimer writes thus : " What meaneth St. 
 Paul when he saith (1 Cor. ix.), ' They that 
 preach the Gospel shall live of the Gospel ? ' 
 Whereas he should rather have said, The Lord 
 hath ordained that they that sacrifice at mass 
 should live of the sacrificing. . . . For 
 Christ Himself, after lie had suffered and made 
 a perfect sacrifice for our sins, . . . com- 
 manded Ilis disciples to go preach all the world 
 over. . . . But He spake never a word
 
 80 NATURE OF 
 
 of sacrificing, or saying of mass. 
 Therefore sacrificing priests should now 
 cease forever : for now all men ought to 
 offer their own bodies a quick sacrifice, 
 holy and acceptable before God." (lb., 
 p. 255.) Another manuscript of this " Prot- 
 estation" reads thus : "So that it appeareth 
 that the sacrificing priesthood is changed by 
 God's ordinance into a preaching priesthood, 
 and the sacrificing priesthood should cease 
 utterly, saving inasmuch as all Christian men 
 are sacrificing priests." (lb., p. 255.) 
 
 William Tyndale, 
 Translator of the New Testament, Martyred 1536. 
 
 Tyndale, the martyr, and translator of the 
 Scriptures, said, so early as a.d. 1528 : " An- 
 other word is there in Greek called Presbyter, 
 in Latin Senior, in English an Elder, and is 
 nothing but an officer to teach, and not to be 
 a mediator between God and us. . . . By 
 a priest, then, in the New Testament under- 
 stand nothing but an elder to teach the younger, 
 and to bring them unto the full knowledge 
 and understanding of Christ, and to minister 
 the sacraments which Christ ordained, which
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 81 
 
 is nothing but to preach Christ's promises. " 
 (Works, p. 256, vol. i., P. S.) 
 
 Thomas Becon, S.T.P., 
 
 Chaplain to Archbishop Cranmer. 
 
 "What is the Church of Christ? The 
 whole number of the faithful believers in 
 Christ's coming, sufferance, and resurrection ; 
 members of the mystical body of Christ, 
 grains to make one loaf, grapes to make 
 one wine, lively stones to build on a spirit- 
 ual house, in Christ to offer spiritual sac- 
 rifices acceptable to God through the same 
 Christ Jesus. . . . What signilieth this name 
 Christ ? Anointed ; whereby it may be gath- 
 ered that our Saviour Christ is a king, a priest, 
 and a prophet. ... A priest, because He 
 once for all hath entered in sancta sanctorum, 
 into the most holy and innermost tabernacle of 
 God, and hath offered once for all a perpetual, 
 sufficient sacrifice to satisfy for all men's sins, 
 and to purchase all men's redemption, not 
 ceasing now to be a perpetual Mediator and 
 Intercessor to God His Father for man, . . . 
 making an end of all and abolishing all sacri- 
 6
 
 82 NATURE 10F 
 
 fices and ceremonies, which were butf shadows 
 and signification to put the Jews in remem- 
 brance of His coming before He came. 
 
 " By His priesthood, with the holy oil of His 
 Spirit He hath made and anointed us priests 
 to offer to God the Father acceptable sacri- 
 fices through Him, which are the sacrifices of 
 righteousness, of praise, of thanksgiving, of 
 an humble and contrite heart, of faith, and 
 wholly to crucify and offer up ourselves unto 
 Him ; and by the same office we, being made 
 partakers by Him of the same, may be bold to 
 come into the sight of God to offer up our 
 sacrifice and prayer. 
 
 ' ' What is a priest '. An officer appointed and 
 licensed of God to present himself to the sight 
 of God, for to obtain His favor by interces- 
 sion, or to pacify His wrath by offering up of 
 sacrifice acceptable to Him. 
 
 ' ' What is a prophet ? A messenger of God 
 to declare the will of God, either in showing 
 the threatenings or opening the promises, or 
 expounding and declaring the mysteries con- 
 tained in His holy Word or will to us His chil- 
 dren." (Works, p. 615.) 
 
 ' ' The true and Christian absolution is noth- 
 ing else but the preaching of free deliverance
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY, 83 
 
 from sin by the death of Jesus Christ." 
 (Ibid.) 
 
 John Bradford. 
 Martyred 1555. 
 
 Bradford, speaking of the order of Mel- 
 chisedec, which belongs alone to Christ, says : 
 " Other orders of priests I read none, save 
 that which all Christians he, to offer up 
 themselves to God, and other spiritual sacri- 
 fices by Christ, and the order of ' Priests of 
 Baal,' whose successors indeed the masses be ; 
 for else if they were, as they would be taken, 
 of the order of the apostles, then should they 
 be ministers and not massers, preachers and 
 not traitors, as they be both to God and His 
 Church. God amend them." (Writings, p. 
 313, vol. ii., P. S.) 
 
 John Piiilpot. 
 
 Martyred 1555. 
 
 "For where hath Christ ordained it that 
 any person, clothed after the manner of 
 players, and counterfeited, turned from the 
 people, standing at the altar, upon the which 
 is set a certain hallowed stone, polished with 
 an iron instrument contrary to the law, and
 
 84 NATURE OF 
 
 the same covered with two or three altar 
 cloths, and decked to play, as it were, apart 
 in an interlude, walking now in this side and 
 then in that side, and turning himself hither 
 and thither, mumbling verses, I cannot tell 
 what ; and at length he must hold up a round 
 piece of bread, which they call an host, and a 
 cup finely made for the people to gaze upon, 
 which kneeling behind his back, worshippeth it 
 after that he hath lifted it with his hands as 
 high as he can above his head. ... I dare 
 boldly affirm that there is nothing among all 
 the devised things of the Papists, which be 
 innumerable, more ungodly and foul / by the 
 which wretched men be perverted from the 
 true worship of God, and by the which God 
 is more displeased, the benefit of Christ's pas- 
 sion more obscured, than by this which Flore- 
 bell calleth '(and not he only) a daily sacrifice 
 instituted for to worship God." (Exam., p. 
 408, P. S.) 
 
 Rogek Hutchinson. 
 
 01). 1555. 
 
 Mr. Hunt, in his History of Religious 
 Thought (i., p. 38), says: "Hutchinson 
 was a rational Protestant, and what in the
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 present day would be called a sober Church 
 of England man. The Scriptures, he said, 
 allowed three orders of ministers bishops, 
 presbyters, and deacons ; but priest, in the 
 sense of sacerdos, is never found in the New 
 Testament, except when applied to the min- 
 isters of the Jewish law. The law with its 
 priesthood is now annulled. Christ alone is 
 priest. There is no priesthood but his, and 
 that which belongs to all Christian men, 
 whether ministers or lay people. They have 
 all but one sacrifice to offer, which is the 
 sacrifice of thanksgiving and the living obla- 
 tion of their own bodies."
 
 III1. 
 
 TESTIMONY 
 
 LEADING ELIZABETHAN DIVINES.
 
 TESTIMONY 
 
 LEADING ELIZABETHAN DIVINES. 
 
 Miles Coverdale, 
 Reformer and Translator. Ob. 1580. 
 
 " So that, as ye have now Christ's one 
 only sacrifice, which He Himself on the 
 cross offered once as sufficient for all that 
 do believe, and never more to he reiter- 
 ated ; so have yon that for the applying of it 
 to His Church the ministers should preach, 
 and pray that their preaching might he effec- 
 tual in Christ. 1 ' (Works, p. 257, vol. ii., 
 
 r. s.) 
 
 Archbishop Sandys. 
 
 Ob. 1588. 
 
 This prelate shows that the priesthood of 
 Melcliisedec and Levi belongs only to Christ, 
 and then says : " The third priesthood is
 
 90 NATURE OF 
 
 that which is common to all Christians; 
 for ' He hath made us kings and priests nnto 
 God and to His Father.' Where the Popish 
 priesthood taketh footing, in what ground the 
 foundation thereof is laid, I cannot find in 
 Scriptures. Antichrist is the author of that 
 priesthood ; to him they sacrifice, him they 
 serve." (Sermons, p. 411.) 
 
 Bishop Pilkixgtox. 
 Ob. 1575. 
 
 " And because altars were ever used for 
 sacrifices, to signify that sacrifice which was 
 to come, seeing our Saviour Christ is come 
 already, has fulfilled and finished all sacri- 
 fices, we think it best to take away all oc- 
 casions of that Popish sacrificing mass (for 
 maintaining whereof they have cruelly sacri- 
 ficed many innocent souls) to minister on 
 tables, according to these examples. " (Works, 
 p. 517, P. S.) 
 
 A.DDBESS TO THE QuEEN AGAINST ALTARS. 
 
 The following extract from a paper pre- 
 sented to the queen by them will indirectly 
 show their opinion of the nature and func- 
 tions of the Christian ministry :
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 91 
 
 " Reasons why it was not convenient that 
 the communion should be ministered at an 
 altar : First. The form of a table is most 
 agreeable to Christ's example, who instituted 
 the sacrament of His body and blood at a 
 table, and not at an altar. Secondly. The 
 form of an altar was convenient to the Old 
 Testament, to be a figure of Christ's bloody 
 sacrifice upon the cross ; but in the time of 
 the New Testament Christ is not to be sac- 
 rificed, but His body and blood spiritually 
 to be eaten and drunken in the ministra- 
 tion of the holy supper. For representation 
 whereof, the form of a table is more conven- 
 ient than an altar. Thirdly. The Holy Ghost 
 in the New Testament, speaking of the Lord's 
 Supper, doth make mention of a table, 1 
 Cor. x., Jlensa Domini, i.e., the table of 
 the Lord ; but in no place nameth it an altar. 
 Fourthly. The old writers do use also the name 
 of a table ; for Augustine oftentimes calleth 
 it Mensam Domini, that is, the Lord's table. 
 And in the Canons of the Xicene Council it is 
 divers times called Divina Mensa. And 
 Chrysostom saith, Baptismus wins eat et 
 Mensa ><n<f, i.e., there is one baptism and one 
 table. And although the same writers do 
 sometimes term it an altar, vet are tliev to be
 
 92 NATURE OF 
 
 expounded to speak abusive et improprie. 
 For, like as they expound themselves, when 
 they term the Lord's Supper a sacrifice, that 
 they mean by this word sacrijicium, i.e., a 
 sacrifice, recordation em saerificii, i.e., the re- 
 membrance of a sacrifice ; or Similitudinem 
 saerificii, i.e., the likeness of a sacrifice, and 
 not properly a sacrifice ; so the same reason 
 enforceth us to think that, when they term it 
 an altar, they mean it a representation or re- 
 membrance of the altar of the cross, and not 
 the form of a material altar of stone. And 
 when they name it a table they express the 
 form then commonly in the Church, used ac- 
 cording to Christ's example. Fifthly. Fur- 
 thermore, an altar hath relation to a sacrifice, 
 for they be eorrelativa : so that of necessity, 
 if we allow an altar, we must grant a sacrifice, 
 like as if there be a father, there is also a son ; 
 and if there be a master, there is also a servant. 
 Whereupon divers of the learned adversaries 
 themselves have spoken of late that there is 
 no reason to take away the sacrifice of the mass 
 and to leave the altar standing, seeing the 
 one was ordained for the other. Sixthly. 
 Moreover, if the communion be administered 
 at an altar, the godly prayers, etc., spoken by 
 the minister cannot be heard of the people,
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 93 
 
 especially in great churches ; and so the people 
 should receive no fruit of this part of English 
 service : for it was all one to be in Latin, and 
 to be in English not heard nor understood by 
 the people." (See Blakeney, Book of Com- 
 mon Prayer, p. 64.) 
 
 Bishop Jewel. 
 Ob. 1571. 
 
 "But as touching the inward priesthood 
 and the exercise of the soul, we say, even 
 as St. Peter and St. .John and Tertullian 
 have said, in this sense every Christian man 
 is a priest, and offereth unto God spiritual sac- 
 rifices ; inthis sense, I say, and none otherwise. 
 
 " Xow, if any man shall think it strange to 
 hear a layman in any sense called a priest, may 
 it please him to peruse some part of that here- 
 after followeth in this defence. There shall 
 he tind by the authorities of St. Augustine, 
 St. Ambrose, St. Ilieronie, and St. Ohrysos- 
 tom, that whosoever is a child of the Church, 
 whosoever is baptized into Christ and beareth 
 1 lis name, is fully invested with this priesthood, 
 and therefore may justly be called a priest. 
 And wheresoever there be three such together, 
 as Tertullian saith, " Yea, though they be only
 
 94 NATURE OF 
 
 laymen, yet have they a Church. ' ' The old 
 Father Origen saith : Omnes quicunque un- 
 guento sacri chrismatis delibuti sunt, fiunt 
 sacer dotes ("All they that are bathed with 
 the ointment of holy chrism are made 
 priests"). St. Augustine saith : Ilolocaustum 
 Dominicw jpassionis offert quisque pro pec- 
 catis suis, etc. (" Every man offereth up 
 the sacrifice of our Lord's passion for his 
 sins''). Likewise St. Cyprian : Omnes, qui 
 Christi nomine dicuntur Christiani, offerunt 
 Deo quotidicmum sacrijicium, ordinati a Deo 
 sanctimonies sacerdotes (" All men that of the 
 name of Christ he called Christians offer up 
 unto God the daily sacrifice, being ordained of 
 God the priests of holiness"). Thus we see 
 all Christian men are priests, and offer up to 
 God the daily sacrifice, that is, the sacrifice of 
 Christ's passion. . . . 
 
 " But you Protestants," ye say, " have no 
 external sacrifice, and therefore ye have no 
 church at all. " To which Jewel answers : " We 
 have the sacrifice of prayer, the sacrifice of 
 alms-deeds, the sacrifice of praise, the sacrifice 
 of thanksgiving, and the sacrifice of the death 
 of Christ. We are taught to jn-esent our own 
 bodies as a pure, and a holy, and a well-pleas- 
 ing sacrifice unto God, and to offer up unto
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 95 
 
 him the burning oblation of our lips. ' These, ' 
 saith St. Paul, ' be the sacrifices wherewith 
 God is pleased.' These be the sacrifices of 
 the Church of God. ' ' (Jewel, vol. iv. , pp. 458, 
 459 ; see also vi., 357.) 
 
 Richard Hooker. 
 
 Ob. 1600. 
 
 "Touching the ministry of the Gospel of 
 Jesus Christ, the whole body of the Church 
 being divided into laity and clergy, the clergy 
 are either presbyters or deacons. I rather 
 term the one sort presbyters than priests, 
 because, in ;i matter of so small moment, I 
 would not willingly offend their ears to whom 
 the name of priesthood is odious, though with- 
 out cause. . . . And if we list to descend to 
 grammar, we are told by masters in those 
 schools that the word priest hath his right 
 place in him whose function or charge is "the 
 service of God." llowbeit because the most 
 eminent part both of the heathenish and Jew- 
 ish service did consist in sacrifice, when learn- 
 ed men declare what the word priest doth 
 properly signify, according to the mind of the 
 first imposer of that name, their ordinary 
 scholies do well expound it to imply sacrifice.
 
 96 NATURE OF 
 
 1 ' Seeing, then, that sacrifice is now no part 
 of the Church ministry, how should the name 
 of priesthood be thereunto rightly applied ? 
 The Fathers of the Church of Christ, with like 
 security of speech, call usually the ministry 
 of the Gospel p?*iesthood, in regard of that 
 which the Gospel hath proportionable to an- 
 cient sacrifices, namely, the communion of the 
 blessed body and blood of Christ, although it 
 have properly now no sacrifice. As for the 
 people, when they hear the name, it draweth 
 no more their minds to any cogitation of sac- 
 rifice than the name of a senator or alderman 
 causeth them to think upon old age, or to im- 
 agine that every one so termed must needs be 
 ancient because years were respected in the 
 first nomination of both. 
 
 " Wherefore, to pass by the name, let them 
 use what dialect they will, whether we call it 
 a priesthood or presbytership, or a ministry, it 
 skilleth not. Although in truth the word 
 presbyter doth seem more fit and in propriety 
 of speech more agreeable than priest with the 
 whole Gospel of Jesns Christ. What are 
 churches but His families ? Seeing, therefore, 
 we receive the adoption and state of sons by 
 their ministry whom God hath chosen out for 
 that purpose ; seeing also that when we are
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 97 
 
 the sons of God our continuance is still under 
 tlieir care which were our progenitors, what 
 better title could be given to them than the 
 revered name of jpresbyters, or fatherly guides ? 
 The Holy Ghost throughout the body of the 
 Xew Testament making so much mention of 
 them, doth not anywhere call them priests. 
 The prophet Esay 1 grant doth, but in such 
 sort as the ancient fathers, by way of analogy. " 
 (Hooker, Eccl. Pol. v. lxxviii., 2.) 
 
 John Wiiitgift, 
 Archbishop of Canterbury. Ob. 1603. 
 
 The name of priest need not be so odious 
 unto you as you would seem to make it. I 
 suppose it cometh of this word presbyter, 
 not of sacerdos, and then the matter is not 
 great. (Ibid., p. 470.) 
 
 I am not greatly delighted with the name, 
 nor so desirous to maintain it, but yet a truth 
 is to be defended. I read in the old Fathers 
 that these two names, sacerdos and presbyter, 
 be confounded. I see also that the learned 
 and the best of our English writers such, I 
 mean, as write in these our days translate 
 the word presbyter so ; and the very word 
 itself, as it is used in our English tongue,
 
 98 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 soundeth the word presbyter. As heretofore 
 use made it to be taken for a sacrifice, so will 
 use now alter that signification and make it to 
 be taken for a minister of the Gospel. But it 
 is mere vanity to contend for the name when 
 we agree of the thing." (Ibid., p. 470.)
 
 IV. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF DIVINES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH 
 
 CENTURIES.
 
 TESTIMONY OF DIVINES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH 
 
 CENTURIES, 
 
 John Hales, 
 Of Eton. Ob. 1656. 
 
 Principal Tulloch, in his Rational Theol- 
 ogy, etc. , vol. i. , p. 242, says of him : 
 
 " The brief ' Essay concerning the Power of 
 the Keys ' is also highly characteristic. It is 
 a clear, sharp, sensible treatment of a subject 
 which hundreds of pens have obscured rather 
 than illuminated. A single passage will suffi- 
 ciently show this and indicate its line of inter- 
 pretation. The " Power of the Keys" is sim- 
 ply the privilege of declaring or opening the 
 message of divine love to mankind. It has no 
 relation to any priestly or judicial function in 
 the Christian ministry. And all who have 
 themselves received the divine message, or to 
 whom the kingdom of heaven has been open-
 
 102 NATURE OF 
 
 ed, have equally with the clergy the keys of 
 this kingdom committed to them. ' ' Every 
 one, of what state or condition whatever, that 
 hath any occasion offered him to serve another 
 in the way of life, clergy or lay, male or fe- 
 male, whatever they be, hath these keys, not 
 only for himself, but for the benefit of others. 
 
 ... To SAVE A SOUL EVERY MAN IS A PRIEST. 
 
 To whom, I pray you, is that said in Leviticus, 
 ' Thou shalt not see thy brother sin, but thou 
 shaft reprove and save thy brother '? And if 
 the law binds a man when he saw his enemy's 
 cattle to stray to put them into their way, how 
 much more doth it bind him to do the like for 
 the man himself ! Doth not every father 
 teach his son, every master his servant, every 
 man his friend ? How many of the laity in 
 this age, and from time to time in all ages, 
 have by writing for the public good propa- 
 gated the Gospel of Christ as if some secret 
 instinct of nature had put into men's mind 
 thus to do ? You conceive that forthwith up- 
 on this that 1 have said must needs follow 
 some great confusion of estates and degrees ; 
 the laity will straightway get up into our pul- 
 pits ; we shall lose our credit, and the adora- 
 tion which the simple sort do yield us is in dan- 
 ger to be lost. Sir, fear you not the sufficient
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 103 
 
 and able of the clergy will reap no discounte- 
 nance, but honor, by this ; for he who knows 
 how to do well himself will most willingly ap- 
 prove what is well done by another. It is 
 extreme poverty of mind to ground your repu- 
 tation upon another man's ignorance ; and to 
 secnre yourself you do well, because you per- 
 ceive, perchance, that none can judge how ill 
 you do. Be not angry, then, to see others 
 join with you in part of your charge. ' I 
 would all the Lord's people did preach,' and 
 that every man did think himself bound to 
 discharge a part of the common good, and 
 make account that the care of other men's 
 souls concerned him as well as his own." 
 
 Bishop Stillinoflekt. 
 
 Ob. 1699. 
 
 hi his " Irenicum" (p. '2\2) he writes : 
 " The priests under the law were never or- 
 dained by imposition of hands, as the elders 
 and rulers of the synagogue were ; and if any 
 of them came to that office, they, as well as 
 others, had peculiar designation and appoint- 
 ment to it. It is, then, a common mistake to 
 think that the ministers of the Gospel succeed 
 by vows of correspondence and analogy to the
 
 104 NATURE OF 
 
 priests under the law which mistake hath 
 been the original of many errors. ' ' 
 
 He argues also that the application of the 
 name of priests to Christian ministers, natural- 
 ly following the usage of the term among both 
 Jews and Gentiles, has led in process of time 
 to all the sacrificial ideas connected with it, 
 and, finally, to the mass itself. (See Tulloch, 
 " Rational Theology in England in Seven- 
 teenth Century," p. 451.) 
 
 Archbishop Leighton. 
 Ob. 1084. 
 
 [Com. on 1 Peter ii. 9.] " It is true that 
 the external priesthood of the law is abolished 
 by the coming of this great High Priest, 
 Jesus Christ being the body of all those 
 shadows. But this promised dignity of spirit- 
 ual priesthood is so far from being annulled 
 by Christ, that it is altogether dependent on 
 Him ; and therefore fails in those that reject 
 Christ, although they be of that nation to 
 which this promise was made. But it holds 
 good in all of all nations that believe, and 
 particularly, says the apostle, it is verified 
 in you. You that are the believing Jews, 
 by receiving Christ, do also receive this dig-
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 105 
 
 nity. As the legal priesthood was removed 
 by Christ's fulfilling all that it prefigured, so 
 He was rejected by them that were at His com- 
 ing in possession of that office ; as the stand- 
 ing of that their priesthood was inconsistent 
 with the revealing of Jesus Christ, so they 
 that were then in it, being ungodly men, 
 their carnal minds had a kind of antipathy 
 against Him. 
 
 " A royal priesthood. .] That the dignity of 
 believers is expressed by these two together, 
 by priesthood and royalty, teaches us the worth 
 and excellency of that holy function taken 
 properly, and so, by analogy, the dignity of 
 the ministry of the Gospel which God hath 
 placed in His Church, instead of the priesthood 
 of the law ; for therefore doth this title of 
 spiritual priesthood fitly signify a great privi- 
 lege and honor that Christians are promoted 
 to, and is joined with that of kings, because 
 the proper office of priesthood was so honor- 
 able. . . . And the apostle, we see, 2 
 Cor. iii., prefers the ministry of the Gospel to 
 the priesthood of the law. 
 
 " They are not shut out from God as they 
 were before ; but being in Christ are. brought 
 near unto Him, and have free access to the 
 throne of His grace (Heb. x. 21, 22). They
 
 106 NATURE OF 
 
 resemble in their spiritual state the legal 
 priesthood very clearly : 1. In their consecra- 
 tion ; 2. In their service ; and, 3. In their 
 laws of living. . . . " 
 
 Bishop Bttenet. 
 Ob. 1715. 
 
 " In the Epistle to the Hebrews there 
 is a very long discourse concerning sacri- 
 fices and priests, in order to the explaining 
 of Christ's being both priest and sacrifice. 
 There a priest stands for a person called and 
 consecrated to offer some living sacrifice, and 
 to slay it, and to make reconciliation of 
 sinners to God by the shedding, offering, or 
 sprinkling the blood of the sacrifice. This 
 was the notion that the Jews had of a priest ; 
 and the apostles, designing to prove that the 
 death of Christ was a true sacrifice, brings this 
 for an argument that there was to be another 
 priesthood after the order of Melchisedec. 
 He begins the fifth chapter with settling the 
 notion of a priest according to the Jewish 
 ideas ; and then he goes on to prove that 
 Christ was such a priest, ' called of God, and 
 consecrated.' But in this sense he appropri- 
 ates the priesthood of the new dispensation
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 107 
 
 singly to Christ, in opposition to the many 
 priests of the Levitical law : ' and they truly 
 were many priests, ' because ' they were not 
 suffered to continue by reason of death : but 
 this man, because he continueth ever, hath an 
 unchangeable priesthood. ' 
 
 "It is clear from the whole thread of that 
 discourse that, in the strictest sense of the 
 word, Christ Himself is the only Priest under 
 the Gospel ; and it is also evident that His 
 death is the only sacrifice, in opposition to the 
 many oblations that were under the Mosaical 
 law, to take away sin ; which appears very 
 plain from these words : ' Who needeth not 
 daily, as those high-priests, to offer up sacri- 
 fice, first for His own sins, and then for the 
 people ; for this He did once, when He offered 
 up Himself.' He opposes that to the annual 
 expiation made by the Jewish high-priest, 
 ' Christ entered in once to the holy place, 
 having obtained redemption for us by His own 
 blood ;' and having laid down that general 
 maxim that ' without shedding of blood there 
 was no remission,' he says, ' Christ was offered 
 once to bear the sins of many ; ' he puts a 
 question to show that all sacrifices were now 
 to cease, ' When the worshippers are once 
 purged, then would not sacrifices cease to be
 
 108 NATURE OF 
 
 offered ? ' and lie ends with this, as a full con- 
 clusion to that part of his discourse : ' Every 
 priest stands daily ministering and offering 
 oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never 
 take away sin : but this man, after he had 
 offered up one sacrifice for sins, forever sat 
 down on the right hand of God. ' Here are 
 not general words, ambiguous expressions, or 
 remote hints, but a thread of a full and clear 
 discourse, to show that, in the strict sense 
 of the words, we have but one Priest, and 
 likewise but one Sacrifice, under the Gospel ; 
 therefore how largely soever those words of 
 priest or sacrifice may have been used, yet, 
 according to the true idea of a propiatory sac- 
 rifice, and of a priest that reconciles sinners to 
 God, they cannot be applied to any acts of 
 our worship, or to any order of men upon 
 earth. Nor can the value and virtue of any 
 instituted act of religion be carried, by any 
 inferences or reasonings, beyond that which is 
 put in them by the institution : and, there- 
 fore, since the institution of this sacrament has 
 nothing in it that gives us this idea of it, we 
 cannot set any such value upon it : and since 
 the reconciling sinners to God and the par- 
 doning of sin are free acts of his grace, it is 
 therefore a high presumption in any man to
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. IO9 
 
 imagine they can do this by any act of theirs, 
 without powers and warrants for it from Scrip- 
 ture. Nor can this be pretended to without 
 assuming a most sacrilegious sort of power over 
 the attributes of God : therefore, all the virtue 
 that can be in the sacrament is, that we do 
 therein gratefully commemorate the sacrifice 
 of Christ's death, and, by renewed acts of 
 faith, present that to God as our sacrifice in 
 the memorial of it, which lie Himself has ap- 
 pointed ; by so doing we renew our covenant 
 with God, and share in the effects of that 
 death which lie suffered for us. All the an- 
 cient liturgies have this as a main part of the 
 office, that being mindful of the death of 
 Christ, or commemorating it, they offered up 
 the gifts." (Expos, of Articles, p. 461.) 
 
 William Wake, 
 
 Archbishop of Canterbury. Ob. 1737. 
 
 " The Epistle to the Hebrews (ch. x. 14) 
 tells us that Christ ought to be but once 
 offered, because by that one offering lie has 
 fully satisfied for oar sins, and has per- 
 fected forever them that are sanctified. If, 
 therefore, by that first offering lie hath fully 
 satisfied for our sins, then is there no more
 
 110 NATURE OF 
 
 need of any offering for sin. If by that first 
 sacrifice He hath perfected forever them that 
 are sanctified, the mass certainly must be al- 
 together needless to make any addition to that 
 which is already perfect. In a word, if the 
 sacrifices of the law were therefore repeated, as 
 this Epistle tells ns, because they were imper- 
 fect and had they been otherwise they should 
 have ceased to have been offered what can 
 we conclude, but that the Church of Rome, 
 then, in every mass she offers, does violence 
 to the cross of Christ ; and in more than one 
 sense, crucifies to herself the Lord of glory ? 
 Lastly, the Council of Trent declares, that 
 because there is a new and proper sacrifice to 
 be offered, it was necessary that our Saviour 
 Christ should institute a new and proper 
 priesthood to offer it. And so they say He 
 did, after the order of Melchisedec, in opposi- 
 tion to that after the order of Aaron under 
 the law. Xow, certainly nothing can be more 
 contrary to this epistle than such an assertion : 
 both whose description of this priesthood 
 shews it can agree only to our blessed Lord ; 
 and which indeed in express terms declares it 
 to be peculiar to Him. It calls it an xmchange- 
 dble priesthood, that passes not to any other, 
 as that of Aaron did from father to son, but
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. Ill 
 
 continues in him only, because that he also 
 himself continues for evermore." 
 
 Rev. Daniel Waterland, D.D. 
 Ob. 1740. 
 
 This distinguished and able divine is not 
 cited as holding a view of the ministry in 
 entire harmony with that advocated in the 
 introduction to this book. Pie held indeed 
 " that Christian ministers are priests in as 
 high and proper a sense as any before them 
 have been (Christ only excepted), authorized 
 to stand and minister between God and his 
 people, and to bless in Go<Ps name, and exe- 
 cute all other sacerdotal functions, but in a 
 more spiritual and heavenly way than other 
 priests had done' 1 (Works, vol. v., p. 181), 
 yet he vehemently rejected Mr. Johnson's 
 doctrine of " The Unbloody Sacrifice," 
 and maintained that the only sacrifice in the 
 Christian system, even in the Eucharist itself, 
 was a spiritual one, the sacrifice of ourselves, 
 of obedience, of a good life. Moreover, lie 
 affirms that tk it is self-evident that while 
 we have Christ, we want neither sacrifice, 
 altar, nor priest : FOR in him we have all" 
 (Ibid., p. 120) ; and again, " that even lay
 
 112 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 Christians, considered as offering, spiritual 
 sacrifices, are so far priests, according to the 
 doctrine of the New Testament confirmed, by 
 Catholic antiquity (p. 1 28). And again, in a 
 noble passage : " The shadows have disap- 
 peared : and now it is our great gospel privilege 
 to have immediate access to the true sacrifice, 
 and to the true expiation without the inter- 
 vention of any legal expiation or legal sacrifice. 
 To imagine any expiatory sacrifice now to 
 stand between us and the great sacrifice is to 
 keep us still at a distance when we are allowed 
 to draw near : it is dishonoring the grace of 
 the Gospel ; and, in short, is a fiat contradic- 
 tion to both Testaments" (p. 1-48).
 
 V. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF DIVINES 
 
 PRESENT CENTURY
 
 TESTIMONY OF DIVINES 
 
 OP THE 
 
 PRESENT CENTURY. 
 
 Dk. Arnold. 
 
 " The Christian Church was absolutely and 
 entirely, at all times and in all places, to be 
 without u human priesthood. The relations 
 subsisting between God and man were fixed 
 for the Christian Church from its very foun- 
 dation, and they bar, for all time, the very 
 notion of an earthly priesthood. They bar it 
 because they establish the everlasting priest- 
 hood of our Lord, which leaves no place for 
 any other ; they bar it because priesthood is 
 essentially mediation, and they establish one 
 Mediator between God and man the Man 
 Christ Jesus. And therefore the notion that 
 the sacraments derive their efficacy from the 
 apostolical sin-cession of the minister* is so ex- 
 
 * So far is it from true that the necessity of apostoli- 
 cal succession, in order to give efficacy to the sacrament,
 
 116 NATURE OF 
 
 tremely unchristian, that it actually deserves to 
 be called antichristian ; for there is no point 
 of the priestly office, properly so called, in 
 which the claim of the earthly priest is not 
 absolutely precluded. Do we want him for 
 sacrifice? Nay, there is no place for him at 
 all ; for our one atoning Sacrifice has been 
 once offered, and by its virtue we are enabled 
 to offer daily our spiritual sacrifices of our- 
 selves, which no other man can by any possi- 
 bility offer for us. Do we want him for inter- 
 cession ? Nay, there is One who ever liveth 
 to make intercession for us, through whom we 
 have access to the Father, and for whose sake 
 Paul, and Apollos, and Peter, and things pres- 
 ent, and things to come, are all ours already. 
 His claim can neither be advanced uor received 
 without high dishonor to our true Priest and 
 to His blessed Gospel. If circumcision could 
 not be practised, as necessary, by a believer in 
 Christ without its involving a forfeiture of the 
 
 may be clearly deduced from any recorded words of our 
 Lord, that there are no words of his from which it can 
 be deduced, either probably or plausibly ; none with 
 which it has any the faintest connection ; none from 
 which it could be even conjectured that such a tenet had 
 ever been in existence. That this doctrine conies from 
 God is a position altogether without evidence, proba- 
 bility, or presumption, either internal or external.
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 117 
 
 benefits of Christ's salvation, how mush more 
 does St. Paul's language apply td the inven- 
 tion of an earthly priesthood a priesthood 
 neither after the order of Aaron nor yet of 
 Melchisedek ; unlawful alike under the law 
 .and the Gospel ! 
 
 " In order to prevent the possibility of mis- 
 understanding, it is proper to say in this con- 
 nection what has been often said by others, 
 that the English word " priest" has two sig- 
 nifications the one according to its etymology, 
 through the French pretre or jprestre and the 
 Latin presbyterus, from the Greek 7rpsff/JvT- 
 pos in which sense it is used in our Liturgy and 
 Rubrics, and signifies merely " one belonging 
 to the order of presbyters," as distinguished 
 from the other two orders of bishops and 
 deacons But the other signification of the 
 word " priest," and which we use, as I think, 
 more commonly, is the same with the meaning 
 of the Latin word sacerdos and the Greek 
 word u/jf-v?, and means " one who stands as a 
 mediator between God and the people, and 
 brings them to God by the virtue of certain 
 ceremonial acts which lie performs for them, 
 and which they could not perform without 
 profanation because they are at a distance from 
 God, and cannot, in their own persons, veil-
 
 118 NATURE OF 
 
 ture to approach towards Him." In this sense 
 of the word " priest" the term is not applied 
 to the ministers of the Christian Church, either 
 by the Scripture or by the authorized formu- 
 laries of the Church of England ; although in 
 the other sense, as synonymous with presby- 
 ters, it is used in our Prayer-Book repeatedly. 
 Of course, not one word of what I have writ- 
 ten is meant to deny the lawfulness and im- 
 portance of the order of presbyters in the 
 Church ; I have only spoken against a priest- 
 hood in the other sense of the word, in which 
 a " priest" means " a mediator between God 
 and man ;" in that sense, in short, in which 
 the word is not a translation of 7rpff(3vTepos, 
 
 but Z/3US." 
 
 Archbishop Whately. 
 
 " The introduction into Christianity of sac- 
 erdotal priests, altars, saeritices. and temples, 
 which is so utterly repugnant to the whole 
 character of the Gospel, may be traced both 
 to Judaism and to Paganism. For all these 
 things were common to them both : though 
 the Jewish priests offered sacrifices to the 
 true God, and the pagan priests to idols. 
 
 " The priests of the Israelites were ap-
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 119 
 
 pointed by the Almighty Himself, for the ex- 
 press purpose of offering sacrifices in the name 
 and on the behalf of the people ; they alone 
 were allowed to make oblations and burn in- 
 cense before the Lord ; it was through them 
 that the people w T ere to approach Him, that 
 their service might be acceptable. A very 
 great portion of the Jewish religion consisted 
 in the performance of certain ceremonial rites, 
 most of which could only be duly performed 
 by the priests, or through their mediation and 
 assistance ; they were to make intercession 
 and atonement for offenders ; they, in short, 
 were the mediator.* between God and man. 
 
 " And among the pagans, whose institutions 
 appear to have been in great measure corrupt 
 imitations of those of the patriarchal religion, 
 we find, in like manner, priests, who were 
 principally if not exclusively the offerers of 
 sacrifices in behalf of the State and of indi- 
 viduals intercessors, supplicating and making 
 atonement for others mediators, as before, 
 between man and the object of his worship. 
 
 " The office of priest, then, in that sense of 
 the word which we are now considering, viz., 
 as equivalent to hpi-v:, being such as lias 
 been described, in that sense is Jesus Christ 
 Himself, to whom consequently, and to whom
 
 120 NATURE OF 
 
 alone under the Gospel, the title is applied by 
 the inspired writers. He alone has offered up 
 an atoning sacrifice for us, even the sacrifice 
 of His own blood ; He ' ever liveth to make 
 intercession for us ;' He is the ' one Mediator 
 between God and man ;' ' through Him we 
 have access to the Father ; and no man 
 cometh unto the Father but by Him.' As for 
 the ministers whom He and His apostles and 
 their successors appointed, they are completely 
 distinct from priests in the former sense, in 
 office as well as in name. Of this office one 
 principal part is, that it belongs to them (not 
 exclusively, indeed, but principally and espe- 
 cially) to preach the Gospel to instruct, exhort, 
 admonish, and spiritually govern Christ's flock. 
 His command was to i go and teach all nations,' 
 ' to preach the Gospel to every creature ' ; and 
 these Christian ministers are called in the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews " those that bear rule 
 over them, and watch for their souls as they 
 that must give an account.' Now, it is worthy 
 of remark that the office we are at present 
 speaking of made no part of the especial duties 
 of a priest, in the other sense, such as those of 
 the Jews and of the pagans. Among the for- 
 mer, iiwas not so much the family of Aaron, 
 as the whole* tribe of Levi, that seem to have
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 121 
 
 been set aside for the purpose of teaching the 
 law ; and even to these it was so far from be- 
 ing in any degree confined, that persons of any 
 tribe might teacli publicly in the synagogues 
 on the Sabbath day : as was done by our Lord 
 Himself, who was of the tribe of Judah, and 
 Paul, of the tribe of Benjamin, without any 
 objection being raised ; whereas an intrusion 
 into the priest's office would have been vehe- 
 mently resented. 
 
 " And as for the pagan priests, their busi- 
 ness was rather to conceal than to explain the 
 mysteries of their religion ; to keep the people 
 in darkness than to enlighten them. Accord- 
 ingly, the moral improvement of the people, 
 among the ancients, seems to have been consid- 
 ered the proper care of the legislator, whose 
 laws and system of public education generally 
 had this object in view. To these and to the 
 public disputations of philosophers, but not at 
 all to the priests of their religion, they appear 
 to have looked for instruction in their duty. 
 
 " That the Christian ministry, on the con- 
 trary, was appointed in great measure, if not 
 principally, for the purpose of giving religious 
 instruction and admonition, is clearly proved 
 both by the practice of the apostles themselves.
 
 122 NATURE OF 
 
 and by Paul's directions to Timothy and to 
 Titus. 
 
 " Another, and that a peculiar and exclusive 
 office of the Christian ministers, is the admin- 
 istration of the sacraments of baptism and of 
 the Lord's Supper. But this administration 
 does not at all assimilate the Christian priest- 
 hood to the pagan or the Jewish. The former 
 of these rites is, in the first place, an admission 
 into the visible Church, and therefore very 
 suitably received at the hands of those whose 
 especial business is to {'instruct and examine 
 those who are candidates for baptism, as 
 adults, or who have been baptized in their in- 
 fancy ; and, in the second place, it is an admis- 
 sion to a participation in the gifts of the Spirit, 
 which constitute the Church, ' the temple of 
 the Holy Ghost.' The treasury, as it were, 
 of divine grace is then thrown open, to which 
 we may resort when a sufficient maturity of 
 years enables us to understand our wants, and 
 we are inclined to apply for their relief, ft 
 is not, let it be observed, through the media- 
 tion of an earthly priest that we are ad- 
 mitted to offer our supplications before 
 God's mercy-seat ; we are authorized, by 
 virtue of this sacred rite, to appear as it were 
 in 1 1 is presence ourselves, needing no inter-
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 123 
 
 cessor witli the Father but His Son Jesus 
 Christ, both God and man. ' Having there- 
 fore,' says Paul, ' boldness to enter into the 
 holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and 
 living way which He hath consecrated for us, 
 and having an High Priest over the house of 
 God, let us draw near with a true heart, in 
 full assurance of faith, having our hearts 
 sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our 
 bodies washed with pure water.' 
 
 " The sacrament of the Lord's Supper, 
 again, is not, as the Romanists unwarrantably 
 pretend, a fresh sacrifice, but manifestly a 
 celebration of the one already made. And 
 the rite seems plainly to have been ordained 
 for the express purpose (among others) of fix- 
 ing our minds on the great and single oblation 
 of Himself, made by the only High Priest 
 "once for all," that great High Priest 
 who has no earthly successor. And all the 
 communicants are alike partakers, spiritually, 
 of the body and blood of Christ (i.e., of His 
 Spirit), of which these are the emblems, pro- 
 vided they theinxclves are in a sanctified and 
 right frame of mind. It is on the personal 
 holiness of the communicant, not of the min- 
 ister, that the efficacy of the sacrament de- 
 pends : ht\ so far from offering any sacrifice
 
 124 NATURE OF 
 
 himself, refers them to the sacrifice already 
 made by another. 
 
 " Such, then, being the respective offices of 
 these two orders of men (both now commonly 
 called in English ' priests '), but originally dis- 
 tinguished by the names Iliereus and Presby- 
 teros, we may assert that the word in question 
 is ambiguous, denoting, when thus applied to 
 both, two things essentially distinct. It is 
 not merely a comprehensive term, embracing 
 two species under one class, but rather an 
 equivocal term, applied in different senses to 
 two things of different classes. At least it 
 must be admitted that what is most essential 
 to each respectively is wanting in the other. 
 The essential characteristic of the Jewish 
 priests was (not their being ministers of re- 
 ligion, for that, in a certain sense, all the 
 Levites were ; but) their off ering sacrifices and 
 making atonement and intercession for the 
 people ; whereas of the Christian minister the 
 especial office is religious instruction, and the 
 administration of rites altogether different in 
 their nature from the offering of sacrifices, 
 totally precluding the idea of his being the 
 mediator between God and man. And the 
 contrast on this point between the Christian 
 religion on the one hand, and all that exists or
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 125 
 
 ever existed besides it (including the Jewish) 
 on the other, will afford, if we rightly consider 
 when and by whom our faith was intro- 
 duced, one of the most powerful evidences of 
 its truth. 
 
 " The apostles, though attentive to the 
 regular government of the churches they 
 founded, ordaining for various services elders 
 and other ministers, male and female (the lat- 
 ter being known by the title of " Widows"), 
 yet appointed no order of priests in the sense 
 of Hiereus (familiar as they must have been 
 with the name), answering to the sacrificing 
 priests of the Jewish and of the pagan relig- 
 ions. The same observation will apply to the 
 temple. The term was familiar to the New 
 Testament writers, hut it is never once ap- 
 plied by them to a Christian place of worship ; 
 always to the worshippers themselves collec- 
 tively to the Christian congregation, as, e.g., 
 i Know ye not that ye are the temple of the 
 Holy Ghost which dwelleth in you V ' Your 
 body is the temple of the Holy Ghost. 1 ' Ye, 
 as lively stones, are builded together into an 
 holy temple,' etc. 
 
 " All this is indeed perfectly intelligible to 
 any one who understands the character of our 
 religion. It is perfectly consistent with the
 
 126 NATURE OF 
 
 gospel scheme ; but it is utterly at variance 
 with the notions which would naturally have 
 occurred to the unassisted mind of man. A 
 further proof of this, if further could be 
 needed, is furnished by the changes which 
 were introduced in after ages. The very in- 
 stitution which Christianity in its pure state 
 had abrogated was grafted in it as it became 
 corrupted with human devices. An order of 
 priests in the ancient sense, offering pretended 
 sacrifices on a pretended altar, in behalf of 
 the people, was introduced into the Christian 
 scheme, in such utter contradiction both to 
 the spirit and the very letter of it, that they 
 were driven to declare the bread and wine of 
 the eucharist miraculously changed into literal 
 flesh and blood offered up day by day repeat- 
 edly ; although the founders of our religion 
 had not only proclaimed the perfection of the 
 one oblation of our Lord by Himself, but had 
 even proved the imperfection of the Levitical 
 sacrifices from the very circumstance of their 
 being repeated ' year by year continually ;' 
 inasmuch as they would have ceased, (says the 
 apostle) to be offered, if, like the sacrifice of 
 Christ ' once for all,' they could ' have made 
 the comers thereunto perfect." Now, if when 
 the religion had actually been established
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 127 
 
 without altar, without sacrifice, without Priest 
 on earth, all these were introduced into it in 
 opposition to its manifest character, through 
 the strong craving (if we may so speak) of ' the 
 natural man ' after them ; how much more 
 might we expect with what complete cer- 
 tainty that men brought up Jews, and having 
 never seen or heard of any religion, true or 
 false, without priests, would have instituted, 
 had they been left to themselves, an order of 
 sacrificing priests in their new religion ? And 
 how certain that, since they carefully abstained 
 from this and provided against it in terms they 
 employed how certain that they were not 
 left to themselves, but proceeded under the 
 guidance of a divine director \ 
 
 " The corruptions then subsequently intro- 
 duced into Christian churches in respect of the 
 priesthood do in reality, by showing what the 
 tendency of human nature is, go to prove the 
 superhuman origin of the original institution. 
 These have, however, afforded ground for 
 cavil against Christianity itself, to those who. 
 ignorantly or designedly, confound the religion 
 itself with this perversion of it. 
 
 "The Greek and Roman, and some other 
 churches, have in fact, in some great degree, 
 transformed the I'resbyteros, the priest of the
 
 128 NATURE OF 
 
 gospel dispensation, into the Hiereus, or Le- 
 vitical priest ; thus derogating from the honor 
 of the One great High Priest, and altering 
 some of the most characteristic features of His 
 religion into something more like Judaism or 
 paganism than Christianity." (" Corruptions 
 of Christianity," Cyc. Britt., pp. 510-13.) 
 
 Bishop Thlrlwall. 
 
 In a sermon on " The Apostolical Com- 
 mission," interpreting the words, "Receive 
 the Holy Ghost," as used in our ordination 
 service, he says : ' ' This is no vain and bold 
 assumption of any power which belongs solely 
 to Him ; but, on the contrary, it is a hum- 
 ble and faithful repetition of His own gra- 
 cious promise : it is a solemn declaration 
 that the persons to whom these words are 
 addressed are hereby invested with this office 
 and ministry of reconciliation, and, with all 
 the rights and privileges pertaining to it, are 
 authorized dispensers of the means of grace 
 committed to His Church" (Remains, iii., 
 364). Again : " Consider for a moment the 
 object to which the authority in question (viz., 
 in John xx. 21-23) relates the remission of 
 sins and recollect that it is nothing less than
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 129 
 
 the object of the whole gospel dispensation. 
 In the remission of sins every blessing of the 
 Christian covenant is virtually included. . . . 
 The procuring, therefore, of this highest good 
 of fallen man is the one great end of all the 
 institutions and ordinances of the Church of 
 Christ. The preaching of the Word, the ad- 
 ministration of the sacraments, the services of 
 the sanctuary, the ghostly counsel and advice, 
 the rules and exercise of holy discipline are 
 all designed to be instrumental to the remission 
 of sins. All, in their various parts and de- 
 grees, are parts of the ministry of reconcili- 
 ation ; and there seems to be no reason for sup- 
 posing that the words we are considering apply 
 to oue more than to another. The authority 
 given may well be considered as an authority 
 to dispense these manifold means of grace, 
 coupled with an assurance that whenever they 
 are rightly received they shall be effectual for 
 the purpose for which they were appointed 
 the remission of sins ; while those by whom 
 they are wilfully and obstinately rejected, shall 
 forfeit the proffered benefit, shall find the gate 
 of mercy closed against them, shall remain 
 unreconciled, unpardoned shall die in their 
 sins. And then the gift of the Holy Ghost, 
 which accompanies this authority, is a promise 
 9
 
 130 NATURE OF 
 
 that this Divine Agent, on whose operation 
 the efficacy of all the means of grace entirely 
 depends, shall never cease to abide in the 
 Church where they are ministered, shall be 
 ever ready to impart His gracious influence, 
 and to shower upon them the quickening dew 
 of His blessing." (Ibid., p. 363-4.) 
 
 In another part of the same sermon he ex- 
 presses himself yet more strongly : " It is cer- 
 tain that none can forgive sins but God only. 
 This is not denied in theory even by those 
 whose language and practice appear to trench 
 most upon this divine prerogative. And from 
 this it follows that no absolution given by man 
 can be any thing more than a declaration, either 
 general or particular, that sin has been for- 
 given by God. Now such a declaration is 
 made in general terms whenever the Gospel is 
 faithfully preached. Such preaching is in 
 substance a statement of the conditions on 
 which forgiveness is bestowed. But if the 
 declaration relates to a particular case, it is evi- 
 dent that, without a special divine revelation, 
 it can only be a conditional declaration of for- 
 giveness, made on the supposition that the re- 
 quired conditions have been fulfilled. Every 
 Christian has a warrant to say to his brother, 
 ' Repent and believe, and thy sins shall be
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 131 
 
 forgiven thee ;' but before he can say with 
 certainty, ' Thy sins are forgiven thee,' he 
 must either have received some supernatural as- 
 surance of the fact, or lie must qualify the dec- 
 laration with the condition, ' if thou repentest 
 and helievest,' and this condition must always 
 be understood to be implied where it is not ex- 
 pressed ; so that absolution, in whatever form 
 it may be pronounced, can effect no real 
 change in the state of any man before God. 
 It can only convey the same kind of comfort 
 as is imparted by every proclamation of the 
 Gospel, when it is brought home to a truly 
 penitent and believing soul." (Ibid., p. 363.) 
 The Bishop thereupon asks, with great perti- 
 nence, " But then, if this is the whole amount 
 of the authority conferred by the words of the 
 text, . . . why should it [the gift of the 
 Holy Ghost] be needed for this exercise of the 
 Christian ministry more than for any of its 
 other functions ?" (Ibid., p. 363.) 
 
 Dr. Lightfoot, 
 
 Bishop of Durham. 
 
 " The kingdom of Christ . . . has no sac- 
 erdotal system. It interposes no sacrificial tribe 
 or class between God and man, by whose in-
 
 132 NATURE OF 
 
 tervention alone God is reconciled and man 
 forgiven. Every individual member holds per- 
 sonal communion with the Divine Head. To 
 Him immediately he is responsible, and from 
 Him directly he obtains pardon and draws 
 strength." (Essay on the Christian Ministry, 
 p. 1.) 
 
 " So it was also with the Christian priesthood. 
 For communicating instruction and for pre- 
 serving public order, for conducting religious 
 worship and for dispensing social charities, it 
 became necessary to appoint special officers. 
 But the priestly functions and privileges of 
 the Christian people are never regarded as 
 delegated to these officers. They are called 
 stewards and messengers of God, servants or 
 ministers of the Church, and the like ; but the 
 sacerdotal title is never once conferred upon 
 them. The only priests under the Gospel 
 designated as such in the Xew Testament are 
 the saints, the members of the Christian broth- 
 erhood. (Ibid., p. 12.) 
 
 " On no subject has more serious error arisen 
 from the confusion of language. The word 
 ' priest ' has two different senses. In the 
 one it is a synonym for presbyter or elder, 
 and designates the minister who presides over 
 and instructs a Christian congregation ; in the
 
 THE CHBISTIAN MINISTRY. 133 
 
 other it is equivalent to the Latin sacerdos, the 
 Greek ispevs, or the Hebrew iro, the officer 
 of sacrifices, who also performs other media- 
 torial offices between God and man. . . . Ety- 
 mologically, indeed, the other meaning is alone 
 correct. In the apostolic writings we find the 
 terms " offering,'' " sacrifice," applied to cer- 
 tain conditions and actions of the Christian lif e. 
 These sacrifices and offerings are described as 
 spiritual ; they consist of praise, of faith, of 
 almsgiving, of the devotion of the body, of 
 the conversion of unbelievers, and the like. 
 Thus, whatever is dedicated to God's service 
 may be included under this metaphor. In one 
 passage also the image is so far extended that 
 the apostolic writer speaks of an altar pertain- 
 ing to the spiritual service of the Christian 
 Church. If on this nuble scriptural language 
 a false superstructure has been reared, we have 
 here only one instance out of many where the 
 truth has been impaired by transferring state- 
 ments from the region of metaphor to the 
 region of fact. 
 
 "Though different interpretations may be put 
 upon the fact that the sacred writers through- 
 out refrain from applying sacerdotal terms to 
 the Christian ministry, 1 think it must be 
 taken to signify this much at least : that this
 
 134 NATURE OF 
 
 ministry, if a priesthood at all, is a priesthood 
 of a type essentially different from the Jewish. 
 Otherwise we shall be perplexed to explain 
 why the earliest Christian teachers should have 
 abstained from using these terms, which alone 
 could adequately express to their hearers the 
 one most important aspect of the ministerial 
 office. It is often said in reply that we have 
 here a question, not of words, but of things. 
 This is undeniable ; but words express things, 
 and the silence of the apostles still requires an 
 explanation. However, the interpretation of 
 this fact is not hard to seek. The Epistle to 
 the Hebrews speaks at great length on priests 
 and sacrifices in their Jewish and Christian 
 bearing. It is plain from this epistle, as it 
 may be gathered from other notices, Jewish 
 and heathen, that the one prominent idea of 
 the priestly office at this time was the function 
 of offering sacrifices and thereby of making 
 atonement. Xow, this apostolic writer teaches 
 that all sacrifices had been consummated in 
 the one Sacrifice, all priesthoods absorbed in 
 the one Priest. The offering had been made 
 once for all, and as there were no more vic- 
 tims, there could be no more priests. All 
 former priesthoods had borne witness to the 
 necessity of a human mediator, and this sen-
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 135 
 
 timent had its satisfaction in the person and 
 office of the Son of man. All past sacrifices 
 had proclaimed the need of an atoning death, 
 and had their antitype, their realization, their 
 annulment, in the Cross of Christ. This ex- 
 plicit statement supplements and interprets 
 the silence elsewhere noticed in the apostolic 
 writings. 
 
 ' ' Strictly accordant, too, with the general 
 tenor of his argument is the language used 
 throughout by the writer of this epistle. He 
 speaks of the Christian sacrifices and of a Chris- 
 tian altar : but the sacrifices are praise and 
 thanksgiving and well-doing ; the altar is the 
 congregation assembled for common worship. 
 If the Christian ministry were a sacerdotal of- 
 fice, if the holy eucharist were a sacerdotal act in 
 the same sense in which the Jewish priesthoods 
 and Jewish sacrifice were sacerdotal, then his 
 argument is faulty and his language mislead- 
 ing. Though dwelling at great length on the 
 Christian counterparts to the Jewish priest, 
 the Jewish altar, the Jewish sacrifice, lie omits 
 to mention the one office, the one place, the 
 one act which on this showing would be their 
 truest and liveliest counterparts in the every- 
 day worship of the Church of Christ, lie has 
 rejected these, and chosen instead moral and
 
 136 NATURE OF 
 
 spiritual analogies for all these sacred types. 
 Thus in what he has said and what he has left 
 unsaid alike, his language points to one and 
 the same result." (Ibid., pp. 141, 142.) 
 
 " Yet it would be vain to deny that a very 
 different conception prevailed for many cen- 
 turies in the Church of Christ. The apostolic 
 ideal was set forth, and within a few genera- 
 tions forgotten. The vision was only for a 
 time, and then vanished. A strictly sacerdotal 
 view of the ministry superseded the broader 
 and more spiritual conception of their priestly 
 functions. From being the representatives, 
 the ambassadors, of God, they came to be re- 
 garded as His vicars." (Ibid., p. 146.) 
 
 Rev. Canon Pekowne, D.D. 
 
 There seems then no tenable ground for 
 Bishoj) JSIoberly's distinction between the pos- 
 session of revealed truth and the possession of 
 the power of absolution. 
 
 To exalt the latter as the special gift, the 
 undoubted prerogative of the clergy, appears 
 to me to be a complete inversion of the true 
 position of the Christian ministry. 
 
 According to the view which I am com- 
 menting on, " authoritative teaching" is not
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 137 
 
 so specially the prerogative of the clergy as are 
 the formal acts of absolution and the adminis- 
 tration of the sacraments. How can this be 
 maintained ? In the first place, what is preach- 
 ing itself but the " authoritative declaration" 
 of the forgiveness of sins and the retaining of 
 sins ? St. Paul, speaking of the ministration 
 of the Gospel at large, but with special refer- 
 ence to the preaching of the Gospel, says : 
 " We are a savour of life unto life, or a savour 
 of death unto death" (2 Cor. ii. 12, 16). Un- 
 less, then, the power of preaching is a part of 
 the " sacerdotal" element in the ministry, it 
 is in vain to contend that it is the sacerdotal 
 element which is the constituting force in the 
 ministry. In the next place, taking St. Paul 
 and the rest of the New Testament writers as 
 our guides, we shall find ourselves placed in 
 this dilemma : of that which according to the 
 theory is supposed to be the characteristic 
 feature, the special and surpassing privilege, 
 of the Christian ministry, they are wholly 
 silent ; whereas the other, which is not re- 
 garded as any special prerogative of the min- 
 istry, is in their eyes its glory and its strength. 
 Thus St. Paul, writing to the Corinthians, 
 thanks God that he had baptized but few, 
 adding, " For Christ sent me not to baptize,
 
 138 NATURE OF 
 
 but to preach the Gospel," on any fair inter- 
 pretation of the words implying that in his 
 estimation the preaching of the Gospel was 
 more distinctively, more necessarily, a part of 
 his office than the administration of the sacra- 
 ments. Again, in that most solemn charge 
 which he addresses toTimothy, as chief pastor of 
 the Church, what is it that holds the first place 
 in his thoughts ? The power of absolution ? 
 the administration of the sacraments as chan- 
 nels of grace ? l*so, the preaching of the Gos- 
 pel : "I charge thee before God, and the Lord 
 Jesus Christ, who shall judge both the quick 
 and dead at his appearing and kingdom, preach 
 the word." 
 
 The Apostles must have known, one would 
 suppose, what was the nature of their commis- 
 sion, as given them on the resurrection day. 
 If they believed that they were then consti- 
 tuted priests, somewhere we should find them 
 insisting upon this character of their office. 
 But it is the entire absence of any trace of 
 such a view of the Christian ministry in the 
 Acts or the Epistles which, one would have 
 thought, must strike the least attentive reader 
 of the ]S'ew Testament. Xowhere is the name 
 of " priest" given to the Christian minister ; 
 nowhere is his office described as "a priest-
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 139 
 
 hood. ' ' This is not because the mentions of 
 priests or a priesthood are few. It has been 
 reckoned that there are no less than one hun- 
 dred and forty of such references in the Acts 
 and Epistles. Yet not mice, I repeat, is the 
 Christian minister ever called a " priest" 
 (upevs), or his office a "priesthood." St. 
 Paul abounds in names and designations of the 
 ministry. He calls the Christian clergy am- 
 bassadors for Christ, stewards of the mysteries 
 of God, overseers of the nock, shepherds, 
 evangelists, ministers, prophets, but never 
 priests. When he speaks of the end and pur- 
 pose for which that office was instituted, how 
 docs he describe those who hold it ? " And 
 he gave some, apostles ; and some, prophets ; 
 and some, evangelists ; and some, pastors and 
 teachers, for the perfecting of the saints, for 
 the work of the ministry, for the edifying of 
 the body of Christ, till we all come in the 
 unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of 
 the Son of God unto a perfect man, unto the 
 measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ" 
 
 Eph. iv. LI 13). [t is impossible to conceive 
 of an ampler description of the sublime purpose 
 for which the Christian ministry was instituted. 
 
 And yet those who are sent to do this work 
 surelv the greatest work to which man can be
 
 140 NATURE OF 
 
 called are not designated as ' ' priests. ' ' They 
 are apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, 
 teachers, who build up the body of Christ, and 
 bring it to its destined perfection, but they are 
 not ' ' priests. ' ' Whereas if the later theory, 
 and esj)ecially the mediaeval theory, be true, 
 the building power, the power of edification, 
 the power of remitting sins, and of comforting 
 and guiding each individual penitent, resides 
 in the Christian minister emphatically as a 
 " priest, " not as a "prophet," or "evange- 
 list," or "pastor," or "teacher." It is 
 scarcely possible to conceive of any more glar- 
 ing contradiction than that which is to be 
 found between the sacerdotal theory on the 
 one hand and the language of St. Paul on the 
 other. With the one the pretension to be the 
 sole channel of divine forgiveness, and even, 
 according to the mediaeval scholastic and Rom- 
 ish doctrine, the power to offer sacrifice for the 
 quick and dead, occupies the first, if not the 
 exclusive, place in the office of the ministry. 
 With the other there is not the most distant 
 allusion to either of these prerogatives. 
 
 We turn next to the Epistles of St. Peter. 
 If the Apostles, as a body, were invested with 
 the "priestly" character, to him individually 
 the priestly powers were of course assigned in
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 141 
 
 a very marked and emphatic manner. We 
 should expect him to claim and to exercise 
 these powers if he deemed that they had been 
 solemnly bestowed upon him by his Lord. 
 Yet what is his language ? Addressing the 
 saints of the dispersion, without any distinction 
 of order or office, he says : " Ye are a chosen 
 generation, a royal priesthood" (1 Peter 
 ii. 9). Here we have the spiritual priesthood 
 of the whole body recognized. Addressing 
 the clergy, he writes : " The presbyters that 
 are among you, I, who am your co-presbyter, 
 exhort" (chap. vi.). In the earlier portion of 
 the Epistle, where he is enlarging on the privi- 
 leges of all Christians, he tells them that they, 
 as " living stones," are built up to be a spirit- 
 ual house, an holy priesthood, to offer spirit- 
 ual sacrifices. If he is Peter (a stone), so are 
 they ; if he is a member of a holy priesthood, 
 so are they (chap. ii. 5). But as an ordained 
 apostle and minister, he calls himself a pres- 
 byter, and nothing more. The Epistle to the 
 Hebrews is full of the typical significance of 
 the Jewish priesthood. Put not once is it said 
 that that priesthood has its counterpart in the 
 Christian ministry ; it is fulfilled in Christ, and 
 in Christ alone. He is the One High Priest 
 of the Church, offering the one perfect sacrifice
 
 142 NATURE OF 
 
 for sin, making the one all -pre vailing interces- 
 sion in heaven. Christians are spoken of as 
 those who offer spiritual sacrifices, the sacrifice 
 of themselves, the sacrifice of praise and 
 thanksgiving and good works through the One 
 Eternal Mediator. In this sense all are 
 priests, but the Christian clergy are in no 
 sense priests in which the Christian laity are 
 not the same. And in the Epistle to the He- 
 brews the only allusion to the Christian clergy 
 is to them as exercising rule and having 
 authority in the body (chap. xiii. 7), " Remem- 
 ber them that have the rule over you. ' ' 
 
 If, then, we are to interpret the passage in 
 St. John's Gospel (xx. 23), on which so much 
 stress is laid, by the light of the Epistles, we 
 must come to the conclusion that the Apostles 
 never regarded the commission of the resur- 
 rection day as a sacerdotal commission. They 
 did indeed magnify their office. They looked 
 upon it as one of unspeakable grandeur and 
 importance, but mainly because they con- 
 sidered themselves as " ambassadors' ' of the 
 ' ' King of Kings. " " As my Father hath sent 
 me, even so send I you." Those words could 
 only be understood with their proper limita- 
 tions. For, obviously, the apostles were not 
 sent to discharge that work of redemption
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 143 
 
 which was the one prerogative of their Lord. 
 But they were sent as He was sent to proclaim 
 God's love to sinners. This was how they 
 understood their commission, and this was how 
 they exercised it. When their Lord ' ' breathed 
 on them," what did the act signify ? The 
 " breath" is the " spirit." The breathing is 
 inspiration in the highest sense. But inspira- 
 tion is in an emphatic sense the gift of the 
 prophet, not of the priest. It is the gift of 
 the preacher of righteousness. It is the power 
 to discern spirits, it is the power to read the 
 heart, it is the power to work mightily on the 
 conscience, to penetrate beneath the hard crust 
 of ungodliness and sin, to lay the sinner bare 
 to himself and to God, whether that be done 
 in the public preaching of the Word, or in the 
 private ministration to individual men. The 
 prophetical spirit is the spirit of the Christian 
 ministry. It is as a prophet, as a messenger 
 from God, that the Christian minister dis- 
 charges every part of his office. There is no 
 more force or efficiency in private absolution 
 than there is in public ; there is no more neces- 
 sary conveyance of grace in the sacraments 
 than there is in the preaching of the Gospel. 
 All are parts of one great and merciful pro- 
 vision for the recovery of man to God. The
 
 144 NATURE OF 
 
 grace of the sacraments, it is admitted, is not 
 confined to their administration by the clergy. 
 Why, then, draw this distinction ? Why in- 
 vest the sacramental remitting or retaining of 
 sins with a priestly character, and regard the 
 preaching that sins are remitted or retained as 
 if it were inferior, because not sacerdotal in 
 its nature ? Neither is sacerdotal. The Chris- 
 tian ministry, as depicted in the Acts and 
 Epistles, is incompatible with, is directly op- 
 posed to, the nature of a priesthood and sacri- 
 fices. 
 
 The question I have been discussing is not 
 a question about words, but about things. 
 There is a complete difference of conception 
 as to the position of the clergy in the Church 
 and the nature of the powers which they 
 claim, according as we do or do not regard 
 them as having the k ' priestly character. ' ' 
 And this, I take it, is the real question we 
 have now to face in the Church of England. 
 All the other questions which have of late 
 been debated with so much heat and acrimony, 
 the use of vestments, of lights and incense and 
 crucifixes, the ritual of divine service, the 
 eastward position these, after all, only mark 
 the real question. That is behind all these, 
 and they would have no importance apart from
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 145 
 
 it. What are the clergy ? Are they the pos- 
 sessors of certain mysterious powers, special 
 gifts, awful prerogatives which separate them 
 from the laity ? Are they " priests" to exer- 
 cise at will the tremendous power of absolu- 
 tion, to call down Christ from heaven at their 
 bidding, to offer sacrifice for sins ? or are they 
 ministers sent by Christ to preach His Gospel, 
 and solemnly set apart to this work by those 
 " who have public authority given unto them 
 in the congregation to call and send ministers 
 into the Lord's vineyard V Are they inter- 
 mediaries between man and God without 
 whose intervention pardon and grace cannot 
 be obtained ? or is it their office to preach not 
 themselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord, to 
 invite, to persuade, to entreat men, in Christ's 
 name, to be reconciled unto (iod ? Taking 
 the Xew Testament as our guide, there can be 
 no doubt about the answer. The answer 
 which is given by the Church of Koine, and 
 by too many in our own Church, is drawn 
 from the treatises of mediaeval scholasticism, 
 seeking to find support for a gigantic system 
 of fraud, imposture, and corruption. The 
 sacerdotal system is the fruit and the growth 
 of ages of ignorance, superstition, immorality, 
 and crime. That arrogant lording it over 
 10
 
 146 NATURE OF 
 
 God's heritage is directly opposed to the apos- 
 tolic conception of the ministry. If the 
 Church of England is true to herself, if she 
 will shine forth in her Reformation splendor, 
 if she will maintain her place as God's best 
 gift to England, she can only do so by holding 
 fast to that conception of the Christian min- 
 istry, its authority, and its nature, which is to be 
 found in the inspired writings of those who first 
 received and handed down the apostolical com- 
 mission. Contemporary Heview, Dec. 1877. 
 
 G. A. Jacob, D.D., 
 
 Late Head-Master of Christ's Hospital. 
 
 The simple account of the public services 
 of Christian ministers, which is given by Jus- 
 tin Martyr, towards the middle of the second 
 century, shows that very little deviation from 
 the apostolic practice had then taken place ; 
 and from the testimony of other Christian 
 authors, together with the taunts of Pagan 
 adversaries, it appears probable that during 
 the course of this century the essential charac- 
 ter of the original office continued to be pre- 
 served. By the commencement of the third 
 century, however, this apostolic simplicity had 
 begun to be greatly marred by the assumption
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 147 
 
 of a more ostentatious style of ministration, 
 and a more imposing authority. The Chris- 
 tian ministry was now changed into a Priest- 
 hood niter the model of the Levitical Law.* 
 Bishops, presbyters, and deacons, became 
 high-priests, priests, and Levites, and were 
 gradually more and more regarded as a medi- 
 ating, sacrificing, and absolving order, stand- 
 ing between God and the general body of 
 Christian men. Before this the reproach cast 
 by Pagans against the Christian Church, that 
 it had no temples, altars, priests, or sacri- 
 fices, had been its praise and glory ; for its 
 temple was the whole world, or wherever two 
 or three were gathered together in the Sav- 
 iour's name ; its altar was the cross ; its priest 
 the Lord Jesus Christ, at once the Priest and 
 the all-sufficient sacrifice. And the only 
 earthly priesthood was confined to no sacerdo- 
 tal cast, or tribe, or separated order ; but was 
 
 * Jerome expressly says that the seheme of a priest- 
 hood in the Christian Church was taken from the Old 
 Testament. "Et ut sciamus traditiones apostolicas 
 sumptas de veteri testamento, quod Aaron, et rilii ejus, 
 atque Levitae in templo fuerunt, hoe sibi Episeopi, et 
 Presbyleri, et Diaeoni vindicent in Ecclesia." " Epist. 
 ad Evagrium," the end. 
 
 Accordingly a bishop was then often called 'A/^ifptOS 
 or Summits Sdcerdos, a presbyter 'lepeis or S<irenlos, and 
 a deacon Aevirr/S or Levita.
 
 148 NATURE OF 
 
 coextensive with the whole community of the 
 faithful, who in a figurative or spiritual mean- 
 ing were kings and priests unto God in Christ. 
 But now the leaven of Jewish and of Pagan 
 influences, which from the first had been 
 working insidiously in the Church, although 
 the religious systems from which they sprang 
 were formally renounced and resisted, began 
 to make itself felt and seen ; and as the inner 
 life of the Church declined in spirituality, and 
 lost its firm hold of apostolic truth, its out- 
 ward form and show became more prominent 
 and presuming, and challenged more attention 
 from the world. 
 
 Tertullian* is the first Christian author by 
 
 * This change had been gradually approaching, but 
 distinctly appears first at the beginning of the third 
 century. Thus TertullTan, " Dandi baptismum quidem 
 jus habet summus Sicsrdos, qui est Episcopus." " De 
 Bapt." 17. 
 
 " Vani erimus si putaverimus, quod sacsrdohbv s non 
 liceat, Lai'cis licere." " Exhort. Cast." 7. 
 
 The system, once introduced, soon developed itself in 
 strength and pretensions. Cyprian in his time contrib- 
 uted greatly to establish the sacerdotal position and 
 power in the Church. " Yel eligendi dignos sacerdoies, 
 
 vel indignos recusandi ut sacerdos, plebe pre- 
 
 sente, sub omnium oculis deligatur. " Cyp. " Ep. " 08. 
 
 " Utique ille sacerdos vice Christi vere fungitur." Ep. 
 63, (id Cceeilium.
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 149 
 
 whom the Church ministry is directly asserted 
 to be a priesthood. By Cyprian an undis- 
 guised sacerdotalism is maintained ; and in the 
 fourth century the sacerdotal system took deep 
 root in the Church, and grew and flourished, 
 until it culminated at last in the overbearing 
 pretensions of the priesthood in the later 
 Church of Rome. 
 
 In order, therefore, to a right appreciation 
 of the true nature of the ministerial offices in 
 the Christian Church, and of the ministrations 
 essentially belonging to them, it is necessary 
 to inquire more particularly what the Apostles 
 really intended their Church officers to be and 
 to do, and what they purposely and altogether 
 excluded from the sphere of their authority 
 and duties, and so to arrive at a just and sober 
 judgment respecting the claims and assertions 
 of post-apostolic times. 
 
 And herein, with a view to bringing the 
 question in as distinct and clear a manner as 
 possible before those who may be inclined to 
 give it a careful consideration, I will at once 
 state that the proposition which I undertake 
 to prove from the New Testament, and from 
 the teaching and practice of the Apostles there 
 recorded, is that, acording to Scripture truth, 
 the Christian m'mistry is not a priesthood, and
 
 150 NATURE OF 
 
 Christian ministers are not priests, are not in- 
 vested with any sacerdotal powers, and have 
 no sacerdotal functions to perform. 
 
 The English word " priest" is indeed only 
 the word " presbyter" abbreviated in its pass- 
 age into our modern language ; and were it 
 not for the equivocal meaning of the term, 
 and the consequent confusion of thought, and 
 the excuse for erroneous teaching, which it 
 favors, there could be no objection to our thus 
 using it to designate the truly apostolic office 
 of the presbyter, or elder, of the New Testa- 
 ment.* But I here use the words priest and 
 
 * The word " presbyters" became " prester ;" then in 
 Norman French " prestre ;" and from this the modern 
 French " pretre," and the English " prest," afterwards 
 " priest." 
 
 The circumstance that this word is used to denote the 
 Jewish and Pagan sacrincers, as well as Christian minis- 
 ters, indicates that the nations which thus use it were 
 Christianized after sacerdotalism had gained a settled 
 place in the Church. 
 
 The word " priest," from its equivocal meaning, is still 
 employed amongst ourselves to prove by an argument 
 weak, indeed, and illogical, yet not without its influ- 
 ence on weak and illogical minds that the Church of 
 England retains all the sacerdotalism of the older Church. 
 Thus the Church of England declares certain of her 
 ministers to be " priests ;" a priest must offer sacrifices 
 (Heb. 8 : 3 ; 10 : 11), and must have an altar whereon to 
 offer them ; the altar in our churches must be the Com-
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 151 
 
 priesthood only iu the other and more com- 
 mon meaning, as the equivalents of the Greek 
 lepevs and lepareia, as they are used through- 
 out our English Bible. A priest in this ac- 
 ceptation of the word is one whose office it is 
 to act as a mediator, or medium of acceptable 
 communication, between God and man in 
 sacred things, to offer acceptable sacrifices to 
 God for the people, and to impart to them by 
 the power of his official acts the grace or bless- 
 ing which God is ready to bestow, especially 
 the absolution or forgiveness of their sins, 
 when they have confessed, and repented of 
 them. And in this sense it is that I undertake 
 to prove that the Christian ministry is not a 
 priesthood. 
 
 1. The first evidence which I adduce in 
 
 munion Table, and the Lord's Supper the sacrifice ; and 
 then any amount of sacerdotal and sacramental super- 
 stitions can be introduced ad libitum, in direct opposition 
 to our Prayer-Book's teaching. It is most desirable, 
 therefore, that this equivocal word should be avoided, 
 and the honest, original " presbyter" be restored to its 
 place. 
 
 It is much to be lamented that good and learned men, 
 while acknowledging that a Christian minister is not a 
 sacrificing priest a Ieqevc or mcerdos but an Elder, a 
 nptoflvTepoS or presbyter should yet have countenanced 
 the continued use of the word " priest ;" thus giviug a 
 handle to those who well know how to use it for evil.
 
 152 NATURE OF 
 
 proof of this proposition is supplied by a con- 
 sideration of the source from whence the 
 form and shape (so to speak) of the Christian 
 ministry was derived ; the model which the 
 Apostles saw lit to imitate in the offices which 
 they instituted in the Church. 
 
 As the Christian religion rose up out of the 
 very depth and essence of Judaism, following 
 it as its foreordained end and consummation, 
 it might reasonably be expected that such 
 forms and regulations of the Jewish Church 
 as were not inconsistent with the principles of 
 the Gospel Dispensation would be retained 
 and adapted to its use. And the Apostles 
 being men deeply imbued with Jewish feel- 
 ings, and (it may even be said) with Jewish 
 prejudices, must have been inclined to deviate 
 no further from the customary observances of 
 their law than their Divine Instructor taught 
 them to be absolutely required. And they 
 must have felt that it was wise to give their 
 new religious life and worship as little innova- 
 tion and strangeness to Jewish minds as possi- 
 ble, by continuing whatever could consistently 
 be continued of their accustomed ceremonial. 
 
 But when we proceed to trace how far these 
 anticipations were realized in the apostolic 
 ordering 'of the Christian societies, we meet
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. .153 
 
 with a peculiarity in the Jews' religion, which 
 must be clearly apprehended before the reten- 
 tion or rejection of Jewish ordinances can be 
 rightly understood ; but which, when clearly 
 apprehended, throws great light not only on 
 the origin of the Christian ministry, but also 
 on all the powers and functions which were 
 assigned to it at the first, or which it could 
 ever afterwards legitimately claim. 
 
 The religious life of the Jews in its outward 
 practice and operation at the commencement 
 of the Christian era, and for at least several 
 centuries before it, exhibited a remarkable 
 Dualism a twofold system each part of 
 which was quite independent of the other, 
 though their operation and effects were har- 
 moniously combined. These two parts were 
 respectively centred in 
 
 The Temple and Tin- Siji\a<jo<jue. 
 
 The religious system of the Temple was 
 altogether of divine appointment, and all its 
 services divinely ordered, even in their mi- 
 nute details, without an authority being vested 
 anywhere on earth for altering any of the reg- 
 ulations originally prescribed. 
 
 The religious system of the Synagogue 
 was of man's appointment, its services being
 
 154 NATURE OF 
 
 ordered by no divine law, but originating in 
 the wisdom of man, and by man's authority 
 and discretion regulated and maintained. 
 
 In the Temple was the priest consecrated 
 according to a precise regulation, and a sacer- 
 dotal succession laid down by God Himself, 
 with the altar and its sacrifices at which he 
 officiated, the incense which he burned, the 
 holy places into which none might enter, but 
 those to whom it was especially assigned. 
 
 In the Synagogue was the reader of the 
 Scriptures, the preacher or expounder of re- 
 ligious and moral truth, the leader of the com- 
 mon devotions of the people, unconsecrated 
 by any special rites, and unrestricted by any 
 rule of succession ; with a reading-desk or 
 pulpit at which he stood, but with no altar, 
 sacrifices, or incense, and no part of the build- 
 ing more holy than the rest. 
 
 And without attempting now to dwell upon 
 all the remarkable contrasts thus displayed, it 
 may suffice to say that the Temple exhibited 
 in a grand combination of typical places, per- 
 sons, and actions, God dwelling with man, rec- 
 onciling the world unto Himself in the person 
 and work of Christ, and pardoning, justify- 
 ing, and graciously receiving those who come 
 to Him through the appointed Saviour ; while
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 155 
 
 the Synagogue exhibited a congregation of 
 men, already reconciled to God, assembled 
 as devout worshippers for prayer and praise, 
 for instruction in divine knowledge, and edi- 
 fication in righteous living. And the two 
 systems the one divine, the other human ; 
 the one gorgeous and typical, the other sim- 
 ple and real ; in the one, God drawing near 
 to man ; in the other, man drawing near to 
 God never clashed or interfered with each 
 other, were never intermingled or confounded 
 together. " In the Temple there was no pul- 
 pit, in the Synagogue there was no altar.'' 
 
 Now it was the Temple system with its im- 
 posing aesthetic services, its associations of awe 
 and mystery, and not the simple unexciting 
 worship of the Synagogue, that naturally ap- 
 pealed to the imagination and feelings of men. 
 And accordingly, from the beginning of the 
 third century portions of this system began and 
 continued increasingly to be introduced into the 
 Church ; and in particular the idea of the 
 Temple service was imported into the worship 
 of Christian congregations ; the Christian min- 
 istry, as already mentioned, was represented to 
 be a Hierarchy: the form and arrangements 
 of the buildings for public devotions were as- 
 similated as much as possible to those of the
 
 156 NATURE OF 
 
 Hebrew sanctuary ; and a system of sacerdo- 
 talism grew up, and became so inveterate in 
 the Church, *hat it still lingers and revives 
 even amongst ourselves, purified indeed from 
 its grosser superstitions, but not altogether re- 
 moved by the happy influence of the Refor- 
 mation. 
 
 Xot so, however, was it in the Apostles' 
 days, or with any of their ordinances and in- 
 stitutions. They retained and adapted to 
 Christian use some Jewish forms and regula- 
 tions ; but they were taken altogether, not 
 from the Temple, but from the Synagogue. 
 The offices which they appointed in the 
 Church, and the duties and authority which 
 they attached to them, together with the regu- 
 lations which they made for Christian worship, 
 bore no resemblance in name or in nature to 
 the services of the priesthood in the Temple. 
 The Apostles had been divinely taught that 
 those priests and services were typical forms 
 and shadows, which were all centred and ful- 
 filled and done away in Christ : and to rein- 
 state them in the Christian Church would 
 have been in their judgment to go back to 
 the bondage of " weak and beggarlv ele- 
 ments" from the liberty, strength, and rich 
 completeness of the Gospel Dispensation.
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 157 
 
 They saw that as the ordinances of the Temple 
 represented the work of God wrought out for 
 man, not man's work for God, to continue 
 them, after that work was finished in the life 
 and death of Jesus, would be in effect so far 
 to deny the efficacy of the Saviour's mission, 
 and to thrust in the miserable performances 
 of men to fill up an imagined imperfection in 
 the Son of God. 
 
 The Apostles therefore took nothing from 
 the Temple system for the machinery of their 
 Church government ; hut the offices which 
 they appointed, and the duties and authority 
 which they attached to them, together with the 
 regulations which they made for Christian 
 worship, corresponded in a remarkable and 
 unmistakable manner with the whole system 
 of the Jewish synagogue. 
 
 It would be too long to enumerate here all 
 the particulars of this similarity. They may 
 be found at length, with the whole subject 
 exhaustively discussed in a spirit of great 
 fairness in Vitringa's treatise " On the Syna- 
 gogue."* It will be sufficient for our present 
 
 * The agreement of the Christian Church with the 
 Synagogue, anil its disagreement with the Temple sys- 
 tem, are specially seen in the following particular- : 
 
 1. The name* oftlu office-be/trem in the Church, before
 
 158 NATURE OF 
 
 purpose to observe that a Jewish synagogue 
 was governed by a body of elders, some of 
 whom acted especially as rulers or judges, 
 others were the public religious ministers, and 
 led the prayers of the people, and took care of 
 the reading of the law ; and such an officer was 
 called the angel of the Church, and the chazan 
 or bishop of the congregation. There were 
 also deacons or almoners, on whom the care 
 of the poor devolved. And these offices with 
 their ministrations the Apostles transferred to 
 
 the third century, were those of the Synagogue, not of 
 the Temple. 
 
 2. The places of worship only one Temple, but Syna- 
 gogues anywhere ; so Churches. 
 
 8. Xo different degrees of sanctity in the Synagogues 
 or in the Churches. 
 
 4. The services in the Synagogue, but not in the Tem- 
 ple, corresponded with those of Christians. 
 
 5. Vestments were necessary for priests in the Temple ; 
 but no particular dress was used in the Synagogue, nor 
 in Christian Churches. 
 
 0. Xo restriction of persons to a particular tribe or class 
 in the Synagogue, but any fit person might be ap- 
 pointed to minister there ; so also in Christian Churches. 
 
 7. Xo fixed rule about the age of those who officiated 
 in the Synagogue ; nor in the Christian Churches. 
 
 8. Xo exclusion on the ground of bodily defects in the 
 Synagogue ; or in the Christian Church. 
 
 9. The Synagogue had a raised desk or pulpit for the 
 reader, but no altar ; so Churches had only an Ambo or 
 pulpitum of the same kind.
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 159 
 
 the Christian Churches. Nor is it an unrea- 
 sonable supposition that " whenever a Jewish 
 synagogue existed which was brought, the 
 whole or the chief part of it, to embrace the 
 Gospel, the Apostles did not there so much 
 form a Christian Church (or congregation, 
 eHxAt/Gia), as mcike an existing congregation 
 Christian, by introducing the Christian sacra- 
 ments and worship, and establishing whatever 
 regulations were requisite for the newly adopt- 
 ed faith ; leaving the machinery (if I may so 
 speak) of government unchanged, the rulers 
 of synagogues, elders, and other officers 
 (whether spiritual or ecclesiastical, or both) 
 being already provided in the existing institu- 
 tion.' " That such was sometimes the casein 
 Jerusalem and other Jewish towns is highly 
 probable ; and this possibly is the reason why 
 St. James calls the place where Christians met 
 for public worship, or the congregation itself, 
 their Synagogue, as lie does in his epistle 
 addressed especially to Hebrew disciples. 
 
 The Apostles, therefore, having adopted 
 the official arrangements of the Synagogue, 
 and discarded those of the Temple, in the in- 
 stitution of Church offices, plainly showed by 
 this circumstance that no priestly powers or 
 duties were attached to their ministrations.
 
 160 NATUBK OF 
 
 2. Another argument which lands us in the 
 same conclusion is deduced from the condition 
 of the lay members of the Church as it ap- 
 pears in the New Testament, and the equality 
 of privilege or standing-ground in Christ 
 which Christians of all orders or degrees pos- 
 sessed. The way of access to God being open 
 to all without distinction through the priest- 
 hood of Christ, there was nothing for a priest 
 to do no sacerdotal work or office for him to 
 undertake. But the substance of this argu- 
 ment, being specially connected with the posi- 
 tion of the Christian laity, will be more fully 
 considered in the following Lecture. 
 
 3. A third distinct proof that the office- 
 bearers in the Church of the Apostles were 
 not, and could not be, priests, or perform any 
 sacerdotal duties, is seen in a condensed form 
 in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and is found at 
 large in the whole of the Old and New Testa- 
 ments, of which that epistle, as far as its sub- 
 ject reaches, is so valuable an epitome. "We 
 there learn that from the very nature of the 
 priestly office it is necessary for those who 
 hold it to be specially called and appointed by 
 God, either personally by name, or according 
 to a divinely instituted order of succession ; 
 and that, since the patriarchal dispensation,
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 161 
 
 only two orders of priesthood have ever had 
 this necessary divine sanction granted to 
 them. These two orders are the Order of 
 Aaron and the Order of Melchizedec. The 
 priests of the former Order belonged to the 
 Jewish dispensation only, and have indisput- 
 ably passed away. The only priest after the 
 Order of Melchizedec, ever mentioned in the 
 Bible, is our Lord Jesus Christ the " Priest 
 upon His throne," without a successor, as He 
 had none before Him, in the everlasting priest- 
 hood of His mediatorial reign. This argu- 
 ment appears to me to be conclusive. It ap- 
 pears to me that the Epistle to the Hebrews 
 shuts out the possibility of there being any 
 other priest in the Christian Church besides 
 Christ Himself. But this does not so appear 
 to a large number of our clergy. Bishops, as 
 far back as the third century, claimed to be 
 successors or vicegerents of Christ on earth ;* 
 
 * In the estimation of Cyprian, in the middle of the 
 third century, the Bishop was the absolute vicegerent of 
 Christ upon earth in spiritual things. 
 
 " Nam si Jesus Christus Dominus et Deus noster ipse 
 est summas sacerdos Dei patris, et sacrificium patri 
 se ipsum primus obtulit, et hoc fieri in sui commemora- 
 tionem prsecipit, utique ille sacerdos vice Christi vere 
 fungitur. " " Cyp. Ep. " 03, ml Ccecilium. 
 
 And again, " Neque enim aliunde hsereses obort? 
 11
 
 162 NATURE OF 
 
 and our presbyters now do not hesitate to de- 
 clare that they are Priests after the Order of 
 Melchizedec. To my mind and feeling this is 
 an impious claim ; but countenanced as they 
 are by numberless past and present examples, 
 good men are not conscious of impiety in mak- 
 ing it. But then it is necessary to ask these 
 " priests" for their credentials. Where is 
 the record of their divine appointment to the 
 sacerdotal office ? In what part of the New 
 Testament, and in what form of words, is the 
 institution of such priests, and the manner of 
 
 sunt, aut nata sunt schismata, quam inde quod sacerdoti 
 Dei non obtemperatur ; nee unus in ecclesia ad tempus 
 sacerdos et ad tempus judex vice Christi cogitatur. " 
 " Cyp. Ep. " 65, ad Cornelium. 
 
 These pretensions were not diminished in the fourth 
 century, for which the testimony of Ambrose will be 
 sufficient. He declares that a Bishop performs the part 
 of Christ in the Church, and is the vicegerent of the Lord. 
 
 " In ecclesia propter reverentiam Episcopalem non 
 habeat caput liberum, sed velamine tectum ; nee habeat 
 potestatem loquendi ; quia Episco\ms personam habet 
 Christi. Quasi ergo ante judicem, sic ante Episcopum, 
 quia vicarius Domini est, propter reatus originem sub- 
 jecta debet videri." " Ambros. Com." in 1 Cor. 11 : 10. 
 
 The interpolator of the Ignatian epistles, whatever was 
 his date, " had used almost the highest possible language 
 about Episcopacy ;" but from Cyprian's time and on- 
 wards the addition of sacerdotalism raised it to a higher 
 level.
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 163 
 
 their succession, to be found ? And to such 
 inquiries no satisfactory answer has been or 
 can be given. 
 
 But there is still another way in which the 
 priestly claims of the Christian ministry are 
 presented, and which is thought to be less 
 arrogant in its pretensions than the one just 
 noticed. Christian priests, it is urged, are 
 representatives of the whole Christian body ; 
 even as under the Jewish law the priestly tribe 
 held their position as representatives of the 
 whole people, who were " a kingdom of priests 
 a holy nation." And since in a secondary 
 and spiritual sense all those who are in Christ 
 are " kings and priests unto God" " a holy 
 nation, a royal priesthood," the clergy as a 
 representative order, and delegates from the 
 whole Christian community, have a priestly 
 office in the Church. 
 
 But if this were so, then the Christian min- 
 ister, as such a representative priest, could at 
 any rate only exercise the powers of the body 
 which he represented ; lie could therefore 
 offer only spiritual sacrifices, without any 
 material altar or material sacrifice to put upon 
 it, only such sacrifices as that of praise and 
 thanksgiving, which every individual Christian 
 is to give ; and for this purpose a separate
 
 164 NATURE OF 
 
 order of priests is useless. * Besides this, the 
 idea of the spiritual priesthood of each indi- 
 vidual Christian being delegated to the clerical 
 order is only a fond imagination, put forward 
 to support a favorite claim. There is no 
 ground for supposing that the priestly func- 
 tions and privileges of the Christian people 
 ever were or can be thus transferred or dele- 
 gated. Although the Jewish people were a 
 nation of priests, it was only by a divine com- 
 mand expressly and distinctly given that one 
 tribe was selected to minister for the nation in 
 
 * " The sacrifice of praise" is a Scriptural expression, 
 and our Communion |Service speaks of " this our sacri- 
 fice of praise and thanksgiving." Such spiritual sacri- 
 fices are offered up by all and each of the faithful from 
 the altar of the heart ; and there is no place for any 
 other priest, besides the worshippers themselves, in such 
 a sacrifice. This is the old Christian view before sacer- 
 dotalism infected the Church. Justin Martyr (a.d. 155) 
 says that prayers and thanksgivings are the only accept- 
 able sacrifices, and that they are offered by Christians 
 (not by a priest or minister) in the memorial of the 
 bread and wine, in which they remember what Christ 
 suffered for them. 'On fjev ovv nal ei'xcu nal Evxupiariai, 
 vtt6 tu>v u.'tG>v yev6p.evai, -e/.eiai fiovai nal eiapeoroi e'tai ru> 
 Qe> Ovoiai, nal avrof $7]/it, ravra yap fibvu nal Xptoriavol 
 nape:?.a ; 3ov kole'iv, kcli iix' uvafivrjOEL 6k rr/g TpoQr/Z avrcjv 
 %ripaS te kui vypdi, tv y, kuI tov rca r )ovi, b ttettovOe dt' avrovS 
 6 vlds tov Qeov, nEjivrivTai. "Justin M. Dial. c. Tryph." 
 
 sin.
 
 1HE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 165 
 
 sacred tilings, and one family out of this tribe 
 was appointed for the priesthood. No such 
 divine selection or appointment for a priest- 
 hood in the Christian Church is anywhere to 
 be found ; and the want of this, plead what 
 we will, is absolutely destructive to all priestly 
 claims. 
 
 4. And this brings us to a fourth and con- 
 clusive proof of my proposition, to be found 
 among the remarkable omissions of Holy 
 "Writ. In nothing is the speaking silence of 
 the New Testament more complete and sig- 
 nificant than in the fact that never there are 
 Christian ministers of any degree called priests. 
 Neither the Apostles themselves, nor any 
 office -bearers whom they appointed, are ever 
 spoken of as having sacerdotal powers, or sac- 
 erdotal duties, omitted to them. In no single 
 instance is any one of the words, which de- 
 scribe the priesthood and its work, assigned to 
 the office of the Christian ministry or to its 
 ministrations.* Familiar as the Apostles were 
 
 * Such words as iepevc, lepareia, lepdrevfia, lepovpyeu, 
 Qvu, f Jvala, Ovataari/ptov, or any others of sacerdotal 
 meaning, are never so much as once in the New Testa- 
 ment spoken of the ministerial services in the Christian 
 Church. 
 
 They are used when speaking of the priesthood of 
 Jesus Christ ; and the following obviously figurative ex-
 
 166 NATURE OF 
 
 with the striking ceremonial of the Temple 
 worship, and sometimes deriving from it a 
 figurative language of the greatest force, they 
 never employ terms of priestly import in any 
 manner which countenances the supposition 
 that they, or the presbyters of their Churches, 
 were acting as Priests in the congregations of 
 Christian people. 
 
 pressions are found applied to Christians in general, 
 not Christian ministers. Thus 
 
 Bvaiu, a sacrifice. ' ' Present ,your bodies a living sac- 
 rifice." tjvoiav faoav. (Rom. 12 :*1.) 
 
 The contribution sent by the Philippians to St. Paul is 
 called ' ' a sacrifice (Ovaiav) acceptable, well-pleasing to 
 God." (Phil. 4:18.) 
 
 ' ' The sacrifice (Ovaiav) of praise : ' ' and "to do good 
 and to distribute forget not, for with such sacrifices 
 (OvaiaiS) God is well pleased." (Heb. 13 : 15, 16.) 
 
 " To offer up spiritual sacrifices" dvrjiag nvevfinriKai^ 
 (1 Pet. 2:5.) 
 
 'lEpei'S and^lepurev/ua priest and priest7iood, said of all 
 Christians. J " Ye are a holy' priesthood " lepdrev/ia: 
 and " a royal priesthood " lepurevfia. (1 Pet. 2 : 5, 9.) 
 
 " Hath made us kings and priests (iepelc) unto God." 
 (Rev. 1:6.) 'And also in Rev. 5 : 10 ; 20 : 6. 
 
 St. Paul, on one occasion, in a very grand figure of 
 speech, represents the whole body of Gentile Christians 
 as a great sacrifice offered up to God, and himself as a 
 priest ministering at it ; thus, " That I should be the 
 minister (?.iirovpydv, not a sacerdotal word) of Jesus 
 Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the Gospel of God" 
 ('lepovpyovvra rd Evayye'ubv acting as a priest with re-
 
 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 167 
 
 This omission is acknowledged by High 
 Churchmen to be a " difficulty ;" but it is 
 far more than a difficulty : it is an insuperable 
 bar to all sacerdotal assumptions. For when 
 it is considered that before the Apostles' times 
 neither they nor any one else had even so 
 much as ever heard of a religion without a 
 visible priesthood and its necessary accom- 
 paniments, and that after the Apostles were 
 gone the Church turned back to this conspicu- 
 ous element of all other religions ; when it is 
 considered also that a priesthood requires not 
 merely a non-prohibition, but a positive and 
 express appointment of divine authority, I am 
 justified in affirming that this negative argu- 
 ment from the omissions of the New Testa- 
 ment proves as strongly as any historic evi- 
 dence can demonstrate, that in the Christian- 
 
 spect to the Gospel) ' ' that the offering up of the Gen- 
 tiles" (npoaipopa tuv tOvuv) "might be acceptable." 
 Rom. 15 : 16. 
 
 He also uses a similar metaphor in writing to the 
 Philippians, " And if I be offered (airiv6o/xai, am poured 
 out as a libation or drink offering) upon the sacrifice 
 (bvaia) and service of your faith." (Phil. 2 : 17.) 
 
 And he uses the word onivdo/xai in the same sense in 
 2 Tim. 4 : 6, " I am ready to be offered " fj6r] oxevdofiai. 
 
 These are all the instances in which words occur in 
 connection with Christians, except in Heb. 13 : 10, for 
 which see Introductory Essay.
 
 168 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 
 
 ity which the Apostles preached and taught 
 there was no priesthood or priestly ministra- 
 tions, but those of Jesus Christ Himself the 
 one great and sufficient High-priest of the 
 whole Church of God. . . . 
 
 And these four proofs, each one by itself 
 complete, must be taken together in their ac- 
 cumulative force, in considering the question 
 whether the Christian ministry is a priesthood 
 or not. 
 
 But this is not all. There is other collat- 
 eral or secondary evidence by no means void 
 of weight, though not bearing so directly on 
 the subject as the preceding testimony. Thus 
 it is a significant fact that neither presbyters 
 nor deacons were anointed, like the Jewish 
 priests, to consecrate them for their ministerial 
 work ; but they were admitted to their sacred 
 offices by a solemn but simple form of ordi- 
 nation. "Ecclesiastical Polity of the Xew 
 Testament," pp. 87-109.
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 AN ESSAY, 
 
 BY THE 
 
 Rt. Rev. ALFRED LEE, D.D., 
 
 BISHOP OF THE DIOCESE OF DELAWARE.* 
 
 " THE PKOl'ER FUNCTION OF THE CHRISTIAN 
 MINISTRY." 
 
 Before the coining of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ there existed in the Jewish Church an 
 order of men set apart for the public service 
 of God. The duties of this class were very 
 particularly specified in the Mosaic Ceremo- 
 nial Law. They served in the variou offices of 
 the tabernacle and temple worship, and espe- 
 cially officiated in the offering of sacrifices. 
 This was pre-eminently their function, and all 
 that pertained thereto was exactly and minute- 
 ly set forth. If they took any part in pub- 
 lic religious instruction it was of secondary 
 
 * Delivered in the Church of the Epiphany, Philadel- 
 phia, Oct., 187(5.
 
 170 APPENDIX. 
 
 importance, and very little is said about it.* 
 The office was hereditary. The qualifications 
 mainly required are not of a moral and spirit- 
 ual nature, but freedom from bodily imper- 
 fection, and well-attested family descent. 
 
 The religious instruction of the people was 
 intrusted in the first instance to each head of 
 a family. Children were to be trained by 
 their parents in the nurture of the Lord ; and 
 an order of men known as prophets were 
 raised up from time to time, and specially 
 commissioned to instruct and admonish the 
 people. Sometimes, not often, the prophet 
 was taken from among the priests. 
 
 Was a like priestly order to be perpetuated 
 under the gospel dispensation, and the Jewish 
 to be succeeded by a Christian priesthood ? 
 This opinion gained early favor in the Church, 
 and as the truth of Christ was dimmed and 
 corrupted by pagan admixtures and worldly 
 influences, rapidly strengthened and devel- 
 oped. Rome makes the priestly hierarchy a 
 fundamental doctrine, and her whole system 
 is pervaded and controlled by this dogma. By 
 the reformers of the sixteenth century it was 
 maintained that the sacrificial system of the 
 Old Testament was simply typical, a fore- 
 
 * Such passages as Lev. 10 : 10, 11 ; Dent. 33 : 10, 
 seem applicable rather to informing .the people respect- 
 ing points of ritual and sacrifice than moral duties. 
 " That you may, by your example in j r our ministrations, 
 preserve the minds of the Israelites from confusion in 
 regard to the distinctions made by the divine Law." 
 Speaker's Commentary on Lev. 10 : 11.)
 
 APPENDIX. 171 
 
 shadowing of the realities of Kedemption ; 
 that the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, as He is 
 the great High Priest, so He is in truth the 
 only priest under the "Gospel. By His one 
 oblation of Himself, once offered, He hath 
 perfected forever them that are sanctified, 
 and there remaineth no more offering for sins. 
 In a figurative sense, every Christian is a 
 priest, as well as a living sacrifice, but there is 
 no order, distinct from the rest of the congre- 
 gation, set apart for this function, like the 
 Aaronic priesthood. The Lord Jesus did 
 institute and ordain a ministry, who were to 
 continue until the end of the world. Their 
 duties are clearly defined. First of all, they 
 are to announce to men everywhere the amaz- 
 ing and glorious fact that the living " God 
 hath sent His Son into the world, not to con- 
 demn the world, but that the world through 
 Him might be saved." In connection with 
 this great truth they are to set forth the out- 
 growing doctrines of which this is the root 
 and stem. They are to gather believers into 
 a visible fold, and to watch over their faith 
 and conduct, teaching them what manner of 
 persons they ought to be in all holy conversa- 
 tion and godliness. So far as the features of 
 the old dispensation are preserved, they repre- 
 sent the prophetical rather than the sacerdotal 
 order. 
 
 I will not occupy you at this time by going 
 into the scriptural arguments which so fully 
 establish this position. The question has never
 
 172 APPENDIX. 
 
 been answered, I am bold to say never will 
 be, never can be answered, why, if the 
 Christian ministry be a priesthood, it is never 
 so entitled in the New Testament. The name 
 itself is of frequent occurrence, and the abso- 
 lute, unvarying denial of this name to the gos- 
 pel ministry must have been designed and in- 
 tentional. Various appellations are employed 
 to designate those invested with it ; never that 
 of priest. Much is said about the duties de- 
 volved upon them ; no mention of sacrifice. 
 They are represented as bearers of God's mes- 
 sage to the people, not as mediators through 
 whom the people approach God. The vast 
 structure of spiritual despotism, built up by 
 Home upon the fiction of a human priesthood 
 still existing, is as devoid of real foundation as 
 the baseless fabric of a vision. You search 
 for it in the words of the Lord Jesus Christ 
 and His apostles, and it is not there. Just as 
 little is it to be found in the standards of the 
 Protestant Episcopal Church inherited from 
 the Reformation era. The attempt to take 
 advantage of the ambiguity of the word priest, 
 a contracted form of presbyter, is a piece of 
 dishonest sophistry unworthy of the name of 
 argument. 
 
 Without pursuing further the scriptural evi- 
 dence upon this subject, I call your attention 
 for a few moments to the effect of these oppo- 
 site views upon the men themselves who sus- 
 tain the office of Christian ministers, and to the 
 estimation in which they are likely to be held.
 
 APPENDIX. 173 
 
 If I mistake not, there are some considerations 
 of this kind of no small importance. 
 
 What is the natural effect upon the men 
 themselves ? 
 
 I claim that the view which contemplates 
 the Christian minister as an ambassador for 
 Christ, a herald of His salvation, a preacher of 
 the faith, an expositor of the Word of God, a 
 pastor and watchman of the flock, tends to 
 develop the man mentally, morally, and spirit- 
 ually, to call out all his powers and energies, 
 to promote his growth in knowledge and 
 grace. The duties of such an office call for 
 diligent study, especially study of the Scrip- 
 tures ; for mental discipline and reflection ; 
 for study of men, that he may adapt the truth 
 to varying characters and situations ; for 
 study of the age, its special needs and dan- 
 gers ; for lively sympathy with the wants, 
 weaknesses, snares, and trials of humanity; for 
 conscientious fidelity, proof alike against 
 frowns and seductions. If you sum up all the 
 qualifications conducive to legitimate influ- 
 ence, effectiveness, and success in the minis- 
 ter, you describe the noblest type of manhood. 
 When you ordain a person to this work, you 
 summon him to aim at a lofty mark, and 
 prove himself fit for this high calling. And 
 to approach in any good degree the ideal, he 
 must stir up the gift that is in him, whether 
 by native endowment or by divine grace. 
 While ready to exclaim from the depth of the 
 heart, " Wno is sufficient for' these things?"
 
 174 APPENDIX. 
 
 and putting his whole reliance upon help from 
 above, he knows that this help and blessing 
 can only be expected in the diligent and faith- 
 ful discharge of his appointed duties. God 
 does not bless ignorance, indolence, negli- 
 gence, imbecility. He requires for this ser- 
 vice men apt to teach, thoroughly furnished, 
 workmen that need not to be ashamed, rightly 
 dividing the word of truth. "While He may 
 make use of humble instruments, that no flesh 
 may glory in His presence, yet His ministry is 
 a rational service. Nowhere is the impression 
 countenanced that it is a matter of little 
 moment what sort of men are ordained, or 
 with what attainments and in what spirit they 
 engage in their work. Nowhere is the im- 
 pression countenanced that stupidity and sloth 
 will be acceptable, or that equal blessings will 
 descend upon the worker and the idler, the 
 zealous and the indifferent. 
 
 And intimately connected with intellectual 
 improvement, in one who feels himself moved 
 to this work by the Holy Ghost, is the cultiva- 
 tion of devout affections, the keeping of the 
 heart with all diligence, close and trustful com- 
 munion with the unseen Saviour, personal abid- 
 ing in Christ through faith and love. Under 
 this aspect of his calling the minister is to im- 
 press by his life as well as by his doctrine. 
 Character is one grand element of usefulness. 
 He is to be a burning and shining light, a liv- 
 ing epistle of Christ, a pattern of good works. 
 And this he cannot be unless the life of God
 
 APPENDIX. 175 
 
 in his own soul is a blessed reality. Out of 
 the abundance of his own heart his mouth 
 must speak, if he speak to the hearts and con- 
 sciences of his fellow-men. And while the 
 help is pledged of Him without whom nothing 
 is strong, nothing is holy, yet upon the ser- 
 vant is devolved the responsibility of trading 
 with the talent and stirring up the gift. He 
 ust take heed to himself and to the doctrine, 
 if he would save himself and those who hear 
 him. Thus the mightiest motives press upon 
 the man who receives the office with this 
 understanding, and if he be a true, sincere 
 man, will tell with power and lead to the con- 
 secration of soul, body, and spirit to his sacred 
 duties. 
 
 What is the tendency of the opposite view ? 
 The minister regards himself as a priest, like 
 those of the Aaronic family. His grand 
 function is the offering of sacrifice : as lie is 
 fond of representing it, the tremendous, un- 
 bloody sacrifice of the crucified Christ. By 
 his words and acts, as the Romish priest 
 believes, bread and wine in the Eucharist be- 
 come the body, soul, and divinity of the Land) 
 of God. According to the theory of his Angli- 
 can copiers, while not transubstantiated, they 
 embody and comprehend in an unintelligible, 
 mysterious manner the present Christ. In 
 them Christ is entitled to adoration. The 
 ocmnnmicants, receiving from the priest the 
 consecrated elements, are, ipso facto, partakers 
 of the body and blood of Christ. Other kin-
 
 176 APPENDIX. 
 
 dred and subordinate functions are claimed and 
 assumed. Now, however vast and wonderful 
 these powers and functions, yet the efficacy 
 and virtue of the priest's acts are not at all 
 dependent upon his moral and spiritual char- 
 acter. The sacrifice is equally perfect and avail- 
 ing whether the officiator be an ignorant man or 
 a learned, a devout man or a graceless, a saint or 
 a libertine. True, he hears exhortations to a 
 holy life, as befitting his calling, but his man- 
 ner of life has nothing to do with the miracles 
 of which he is the pretended instrument. For 
 the accomplishment of this prodigious result 
 he needs not scholarship, wisdom, spiritual 
 discernment, zeal, love, tenderness, a clean 
 heart, and a right spirit. All that he needs is 
 punctilious and minute adherence to his direc- 
 tory. He must attend carefully to gesture and 
 posture. He must kneel, genuflect, bow, 
 cross himself, elevate the elements precisely at 
 the right time and place. His soul is to be 
 absorbed, not with the presence of God, the 
 love of Christ, the great oblation offered upon 
 the cross once for all, but with a minute and 
 complicated ceremonial. The feeding of his 
 flock is not with the truth as it is in Jesus, pre- 
 sented to their hearts and understandings, but 
 with the sacramental elements put into their 
 mouths. The required preparation for holy 
 duties is not study, meditation, and prayer, 
 but the rehearsal of certain performances, 
 many of them trivial and minute. 
 
 Where the two ideas are not whollv dissev-
 
 APPENDIX. 177 
 
 ered, and the sacrificing priest is supposed to 
 coexist with the preacher and pastor, the in- 
 fluences upon the man will he of twofold char- 
 acter. But the sacerdotal is in its nature en- 
 croaching, and usually gains and grows until 
 it becomes predominant. There is a constant 
 gravitation toward the character of the mere 
 functionary. The preacher dwindles, while 
 the sacrificer dilates. The sermon is dispar- 
 aged, while the ceremonial is exhalted ; and 
 correspondent therewith grows the temptation 
 to neglect mental application, moral purity, 
 and spiritual watchfulness. Now, there may 
 be causes at work to hinder or modify the 
 effect of these different systems upon individ- 
 uals. Some minds are so energetic and vigor- 
 ous that they will not acquiesce contentedly in 
 slavish routine. Some spirits are so sanctified 
 and pure that they will resist the most unfavor- 
 able and benumbing influences. These pro- 
 clivities may be modified or cheeked by vary- 
 ing situations and circumstances. I am speak- 
 ing of the innate tendencies of the two 
 strongly marked and contrasted systems the 
 scriptural and the sacerdotal views of the 
 Christian ministry. The one, I maintain, 
 tends to produce the intelligent, large-hearted, 
 spiritually-minded, manly advocate of truth, 
 the painstaking, sympathizing pastor ; the 
 other, the heartless, ignorant, undevout func- 
 tionary, expending his soul upon a histri- 
 onic performance, upon washing cups and 
 patens, and straining out u:uats. There may 
 VZ
 
 178 APPENDIX. 
 
 be, indeed, notable and noble exceptions. 
 But if certain qualities are not needed for the 
 discharge of an office, as a general thing they 
 will not be cultivated and developed, and the 
 system against which I contend conduces in- 
 evitably to dwarf the scholar and preacher, to 
 develop the posture r and ritualist. 
 
 Now, let us glance at the position likely to 
 be accorded to a sacerdotal class, compared 
 with that given to an intellectual and godly 
 ministry. 'No doubt, where a community is 
 little advanced in knowledge and culture, the 
 influence of the former will be great. So is 
 the influence of a pagan priest or an Indian 
 medicine-man. The peasant in Italy or Rus- 
 sia supposes his salvation to be in the hands 
 of his spiritual director. But this hold upon 
 darkened and superstitious minds will diminish 
 just as light dawns, and the recoil from exag- 
 gerated reverence to unbelief and contempt is 
 sure to come, sooner or later. When the idol 
 ceases to be dreaded, it is hurled in derision 
 from its pedestal. In countries comparatively 
 enlightened there will be classes predisposed 
 to admit huge sacerdotal pretensions, not only 
 the uninformed and credulous, but the imagi- 
 native and dreamy, the lovers of mystery, 
 those with whom religion is a matter of taste 
 and fancy, and those who prefer to be religi- 
 ous by proxy, and rest in the service and sacri- 
 fice of the priest to supply the deficiencies of 
 the layman. Others, again, will seek a refuge
 
 APPENDIX. 179 
 
 from sectarian strife and controversy in an 
 ecclesiastical sepulchre. 
 
 "But these classes will be but an inconsider- 
 able fraction of a community in which the 
 Bible is freely circulated, and where intellect 
 is quickened and investigation open. As in- 
 quirers after truth become persuaded that 
 " the kingdom of God is not meat and drink, 
 but righteousness and peace, and joy in the 
 Holy Ghost," the claims of priestly preroga- 
 tive will be questioned and discarded. And 
 even in lands where the system is in the 
 ascendant it is found that, however the office 
 be blindly reverenced, the individuals who ex- 
 ercise it are not very highly estimated. They 
 stand upon a very different level from that 
 occupied by an unpretentious, Christ-exalting 
 ministry, not claiming to have dominion over 
 the faith of their people, but helpers of their 
 joy and watchers for their souls. 
 
 These premises warrant a further inference. 
 As the ministry is presented mainly in the 
 sacerdotal aspect, it will cease to have attrac- 
 tions for the highest order of mind and char- 
 acter. To a young man of warm piety, culti- 
 vated intellect, and generous aspirations, the 
 ministry as it is exhibited in the Epistles and 
 in the life of such a man as Paul the Apostle, 
 and by those of like spirit, is full of attraction. 
 With all of self-denial and worldly loss that 
 are involved, it stands out as the worthiest and 
 noblest occupation in which redeemed man 
 can engage. The life of the fervent preacher
 
 180 APPENDIX. 
 
 of Christ, the undaunted pleader for truth and 
 righteousness, the well-qualified expounder of 
 the divine Word, the rescuer of immortal 
 beings from degradation and eternal ruin, the 
 commissioned herald of the returning Christ 
 and His glorious reign, be it longer or shorter, 
 peaceful or troublous, is wondrously impres- 
 sive and inviting. Men of superior minds, 
 extensive acquirements and nattering prospects, 
 will cheerfully give up all to follow the Mastei 
 in such a work. 
 
 But there is little attraction to such men 
 when the priestly function is the dominant 
 idea. The enthusiastic and sentimental, the 
 lovers of pomp and ceremonial, minds capti- 
 vated with artistic beauty or thrilled with 
 morbid reverence for ghostly pretensions, may 
 be captivated. But upon the sober-minded, 
 clear-headed, and truth-loving, the effect will 
 be to repel, not to attract. A sacerdotal caste, 
 separated by a great gulf from the body of 
 Christians, grows narrow, bigoted, and arro- 
 gant, and laymen of vigorous intellects and 
 sympathizing natures are not strongly drawn 
 to enlist in its ranks. 
 
 May we not perceive a connection between 
 the introduction of such a theory of the min- 
 istry and the paucity of candidates for Holy 
 Orders, which lias of late occasioned so much 
 remark and disquietude ( I have a statement 
 with regard to this diminution, prepared by the 
 secretary of " The Society for the Increase of
 
 APPENDIX. 181 
 
 the Ministry. " The facts, as he reports them, 
 are as follows : 
 
 1 ' FACTS AND FIGURES. 
 
 " In the year 1830 our Church had 534 
 clergymen ; in 1840 it had 1020 ; that is, at a 
 time when we had only nine bishops, seven- 
 teen dioceses, and three young, struggling 
 theological seminaries, we succeeded in adding 
 fifty a year to the clergy list, and doubled the 
 number in ten years. 
 
 " In the next decade, bishops, dioceses, and 
 seminaries were multiplied, and yet only sixty 
 a year were added, an increase of only six j)er 
 cent per annum. From 1850 to 1871, more 
 bishops, more dioceses, and more missionary 
 jurisdictions were made, and the annual in- 
 crease of the clergy came down to four per 
 cent. And now, in 1876, it has fallen to less 
 than two per cent. In other words, forty -five 
 years ago ,with only five hundred clergy, in a 
 population of less than thirteen millions, we 
 added fifty a year, a percentage which, if con- 
 tinued, would have given us ten thousand 
 clergymen in L876. But now. with a popu- 
 lation three times as large, and six times as 
 many bishops, six times as many clergy, and 
 six times as many training schools, and not- 
 withstanding the efforts of this and other edu- 
 cation societies, we add, not six times fifty 
 that is. three hundred ministers a year but 
 only forty-five ; and our Candidates for Orders 
 have fallen off in three years from four hun-
 
 182 APPENDIX. 
 
 dred and sixty-two to about three hundred, 
 and that, too, at a time when the demand for 
 more men is most imperative. 
 
 " Now, why this deplorable falling off ? Is 
 it from want of interest in the progress of the 
 Church ? By no means. For during all this 
 time our people have contributed liberally to 
 missions, foreign, domestic, diocesan, and paro- 
 chial. Is it because we do not prize an edu- 
 cated ministry, and will not furnish the means 
 of theological education ? No, not at all. For 
 our money has been poured out lavishly for 
 this very purpose. To say nothing of the 
 large sums given to church colleges like Trin- 
 ity, Hobart, Kenyon, St. Stephen's, and the 
 University of the South, there has been add- 
 ed, by donations, legacies, and rise of prop- 
 erty, to the endowments of the three elder 
 seminaries at least a million of dollars ; and 
 there has been contributed to the establish- 
 ment of the newer schools, like Nashotah, 
 Berkeley, Philadelphia, Faribault, and Cam- 
 bridge, no less than two million live hundred 
 thousand dollars ; making, in thirty-live years, 
 a total of thirty-live hundred thousand dollars 
 for buildings, libraries, and professorships. 
 But, notwithstanding all these vast expendi- 
 tures, the ministry has not been proportion- 
 ately increased. 1 ' 
 
 From this discouraging exhibit, the Rev. 
 Secretary argues that the difficulty lies in the 
 limited incomes of our education societies. 
 He says, " Thousands of young men, willing,
 
 APPENDIX. 183 
 
 suitable, and devoted, have been lost to the 
 ministry because they could not get the means 
 of subsistence while pursuing their studies." 
 But this inference certainly is not sustained by 
 the fact that at the period of largest increase 
 which he notes, from 1830 to 1840, our pres- 
 ent principal education societies were not in 
 existence. Without questioning the need and 
 importance of such societies, it is apparent 
 from these statistics that the difficulty does 
 not lie there. From personal knowledge, I 
 can bear witness that not only did the number 
 of our ministers rapidly increase from 1830 to 
 1840, but that a large proportion came from 
 other professions and callings ; from law, 
 medicine, mercantile life, even from the army 
 and navy, and not a few had been nurtured in 
 affluence. The inference, to my mind, is irre- 
 sistible, that the ministry of tin; Protestant 
 Episcopal Church had attractions then which 
 it has not had since. These attractions were 
 not of a worldly nature, for the Church has 
 been since growing in wealth, as well as en- 
 larging its borders. Yet its ministry has not 
 drawn to itself, in correspondent degree, men 
 of position and culture, nor have our youth 
 been so ready to renounce temporal advan- 
 tages and sacrifice worldly interests for the 
 sake of preaching the Gospel of Christ. 
 
 Now, is it n mere coincidence, without 
 meaning or significance, that what is known as 
 the Tractarian or Oxford movement dates 
 from the epoch when this falling off is first
 
 184 APPENDIX. 
 
 noticed ? The decade from 1830 to 1840 was 
 a period of unity and prosperity, of hopeful 
 confidence and growing favor, such as our 
 Church has never known before or since. 
 Then the revival of Laudian theology, under 
 the specious name of Church principles, began 
 to make itself felt on this side of the Atlantic. 
 One of the prominent features of this system 
 was the investing the Christian ministry with 
 the sacerdotal character. The different medi- 
 aeval features then advocated, with ill-omened 
 success, had nearly all relation to this assump- 
 tion. Because the ofnciator was a priest in 
 the sense of Rome, the Lord's Supper became 
 a sacrifice, and the Lord's table became the 
 altar, a designation so carefully avoided by 
 our Church throughout her Communion 
 Office. The presbyter, ordained with such 
 impressions, would represent his mission in 
 words the reverse of those used by the Apos- 
 tle Paul, and say, " The Lord sent me not to 
 preach the Gospel, but to baptize and offer the 
 Eucharistic sacrifice." Ostensibly, the office 
 was magnified. Greater reverence was de- 
 manded. Awful prerogatives were asserted. 
 But, however positive and loudly proclaimed, 
 these pretensions did not prove effectual in re- 
 cruiting the ministry with large and desirable 
 accessions. External respect and confidence 
 gave way to widespread distrust, and the roll 
 of our Candidates for Orders shrank as popu- 
 lation increased, openings were multiplied, 
 and resources were enlarged. Is there no les- 
 son for us here ? Is not this experience well
 
 APPENDIX. 185 
 
 worthy the attention of all lovers of our 
 Church ? Put the facts side by side. Prior 
 to 1840 our ministry doubled in ten years. 
 After that date, the theology of Archbishop 
 Laud supplanted, in the minds of many of 
 our clergy, that of Cranmer and Ridley. The 
 idea was instilled that the great business of the 
 ministry is to oifer sacrifice, administer sacra- 
 ments, and pronounce absolution. Since that 
 period, in spite of new education societies and 
 multiplied instrumentalities, the ratio of in- 
 crease has been constantly diminishing. 
 Thoughtful men are beginning to fear that, if 
 this state of things goes on, the losses by death, 
 discipline, and defection will not be made good, 
 and the number of our available clergy will 
 decrease instead of augmenting. If positive, 
 decrease, be escaped by filling the ranks with 
 an inferior class of men, the state of things 
 will be not better, but worse. What a posi- 
 tion is this for a Church which boasts such a 
 history, and which has been indulging such 
 fond anticipations ! 
 
 " O Almighty God, who by Thy Son Jesus 
 Christ didst give to Thy apostle Saint Peter 
 many excellent gifts, and commandedst him 
 earnestly to feed Thy flock, make, we beseech 
 Thee, all bishops and pastors diligently to 
 preach Thy holy Word, and the people obedi- 
 ently to follow the same, that they may re- 
 ceive the crown of everlasting glory, through 
 Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. 
 
 END.
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 Form L9-25m-9,'47(A5618)444 

 
 BX Protestant Epis< 
 _5175 _ copal ^Society, 
 for the Promo- 
 tion of Evan- 
 
 P94d 
 
 H 
 
 ^elical Knowledge - 
 The doctrine of the 
 
 Church 6T 
 
 England 
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 A A 000 093 445 5 
 
 BX 
 
 5175 
 
 P94d