THE Church, in her Collect for this day, directs us how to pray
for stability in sound doctrine, as a sign, and indispensable
requisite, of something better than mere childhood in religion. She
would not have Christians to content themselves with a consciousness
of faith, however devout, or with a feeling of love, however
fervent, but she wishes every man to prove his faith and love; i. e.
to see to it, that he believe the genuine Gospel, and love and adore
the true and only Saviour. Daily experience shows that it is very
possible for men, and serious men too, forgetting this caution, to
think all is right, if only certain pious impressions are produced,
sufficient, apparently, to lead the mind upwards, and, at the same
time, to enforce the relative duties of life. If that be done, say
they, all is done. Why go on to perplex good people with questions
of mere doctrinal accuracy? This is a very common way of speaking
and thinking just at present: and it finds ready acceptance,
especially among, the many who dislike trouble. For in Christian
doctrine, as in other things, it is some trouble to be accurate.
Common, however, and acceptable as the notion is, that the temper
of faith in the heart is every thing, and the substance of
faith in the creed comparatively nothing; it is a notion at once
proved unscriptural and wrong, were it only by this simple
consideration; that so much care has been taken in Scripture, and by
GOD'S Providence guiding His Church in all ages, to guard the
doctrines once for all delivered to the Saints, and keep men steady
and uniform in them. If this were not a principal object in the eye
of Divine Wisdom, is it conceivable that the great Apostle should
have introduced it as he has done when speaking to the Ephesians as
one main result of the coming of the HOLY GHOST, the very bond
between heaven and earth? It is one of the passages, in which he
writes like one soaring majestically upward, flight after flight
beyond what he had at first intended:—"Unto every one of us is given
grace according to the measure of the gift of CHRIST ;" i. e.,
according to that portion of special infused grace which GOD sees
needful for our several callings in His Church. "Wherefore he saith,
When He ascended up on high, He led captivity captive, and gave
gifts to men." What gifts? Surely, to those who think slightly of
Apostolical order in the Church, the answer must appear very
surprising. "He gave some, Apostles, and some, Prophets, and some,
Evangelists, and some, Pastors and Teachers." I do not of course
press this text as proving by itself the Apostolical authority of
our three orders. But thus much, undoubtedly, it proves, that some
kind of order was instituted in the beginning, of so important and
beneficial tendency, as to deserve a very high place in the
enumeration of those royal gifts, by which the Holy Comforter
solemnized the inauguration of the SON of GOD. We may, or we may
not, enjoy that order still. We may have irrecoverably lost it by
God’s Providence justly visiting human abuse of it: in which case it
might not strike us as a practical topic of inquiry: but to suppose
that it still exists, or may be recovered, and yet to speak of it as
an idle dream, a worn out theory, or (still worse) a profane
superstition—this is not what one should expect from those who
reverence the Divine Inspirer of this and similar passages in St.
Paul. But to proceed; the Apostle goes on to mention unity of
doctrine, as one main final cause of the institution of this
Apostolical system. The Apostles, Prophets, and the rest, were given
to the Church by the Holy Ghost, "that we henceforth be no more
children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of
doctrine, by the sleight of men, by cunning craftiness, according to
the wily system of deceit: but speaking the truth in love, may grow
up unto Him in all things, which is the Head, even Christ:" i. e.
may daily go on unto perfection in serving and copying our adorable
Saviour, and in nearer and nearer communion with Him.
It is clear that if the Apostolical ministry does guard
effectually the foundations of our faith, it so far gives room and
opportunity for all to go on to perfection. It puts men on a vantage
ground, disencumbers them of cares and anxieties about that which is
behind, and enables them with undivided energy to press forward to
that which is before. As a mere witness, the Apostolical system,
supposing it really such, must have this effect: and we must not
forget, that, on the same supposition, especial helps from Divine
Grace may be looked for as likely to be vouchsafed to those who
humbly endeavour to go on by its aid. Now, that the great Head of
the Church has hitherto made use of the succession of Bishops as a
singular mean for guarding the doctrine of His Incarnation in
particular, was shown on a former occasion, by reference to the
ancient Church: where it was proved, that both as indisputable
witnesses, and as commissioned and responsible guardians, the
Bishops of the three first centuries effectually maintained the
truth for us. The same conclusion is now to be deduced from a more
painful set of experiments, in which modern times, unfortunately,
have too much abounded. We are to consider what has been the
doctrinal result in those Churches which have been so bold as to
dispense with primitive discipline and government. If we find them
marked, in the great majority of cases, by great unsteadiness and
vacillation of doctrinal views, even on those points which contain
the very essence of our faith: will not this be an additional lesson
to us, that by forsaking the Apostolical ministry we are but giving
ourselves up to be "tossed to and fro, and carried about with every
wind of doctrine?"
Now, first, although, as I said before, the heretics of the first
ages dared not openly dispense with Apostolical succession, the
times, as they well knew, not enduring it: yet they showed in some
remarkable instances, how little they really cared for it. The
following is the complaint of Tertullian in the second century:—"It
may be right here to add some account of the practical system of the
heretics, how futile it is, how altogether earthly and human;
destitute of weight, of authority, of discipline: as well agreeing
with their system of doctrine. First, who among them is a
Catechumen, who a complete Christian, is a thing uncertain: they
come to Church: hear the sermon, join in the prayers,
indiscriminately: even should heathens chance to come in, they will
throw their holy things to the dogs, and their pearls (\which,
indeed, are but counterfeits) before swine. They hold the overthrow
of discipline to be [Christian] simplicity; and our reverence for
the same, meretricious art. Every where, and with all kinds of
persons, they affect to be on good terms. For it makes no difference
to them how they disagree in their own expositions, provided they
can but unite for the overthrow of one thing, viz. TRUTH. All
are puffed up: all profess knowledge. Their Catechumens become
complete Christians before they have quite learned their lessons.
The very women among the heretics, how forward are they! daring to
teach, to dispute, to exercise, to make show of gifts of healing:
perhaps, even to baptize. Their ordinations are off-handed,
light, variable; sometimes mere novices are raised by them to
Church office, sometimes men engaged in worldly business, sometimes
deserters from our ranks; whom they hope to make sure of by the
compliment, having no reality" [of spiritual power] "to offer. In
fact, promotion is nowhere so easy as in the camp of rebels; since
the very act of being there is rewardable service. Accordingly, one
man shall be their Bishop to-day, another to-morrow: to-day a
Deacon, to-morrow a reader: to-day a Presbyter, to-morrow a mere
layman. For in laymen also they will vest the powers and
functions of the Priesthood."
As an instance of what is thus generally stated by Tertullian,
take the behaviour of Novatian, Presbyter in the Church of Rome,
who, about the year 252, was the founder of a sect which professed
especial strictness of moral discipline. The testimony concerning
him, of his own Bishop, Cornelius, a prelate of the highest
character in the Church, is as follows:—" Never in so short a time
was so great a change seen, as we witnessed in Novatian. He was
continually pledging himself by certain fearful oaths, that the
Bishoprick was no object to him: and now, on a sudden, as it were by
some stage trick, he comes forward in public a Bishop! Reformer as
he is of doctrine, and champion of pure Church principles, having
entered on a scheme for making himself a Bishop, without Divine
sanction, by underhand means, he selects two, as desperate as
himself, and sends them into certain small and insignificant
dioceses of Italy: where, lighting on three Bishops, (the requisite
number for consecration,) " men rustic, and very simple, he
persuades them to come with all speed to Rome, as though by their
mediation some present dispute in that Church might be composed.
Being there come he surrounds them with men like himself, provided
for the purpose; and at a late hour, after a full meal, when they
were off their guard, compels them to make him Bishop, by I know not
what imaginary and vain ordination."
Is it not plain that this person would have rejected the
episcopal succession at once, if he could have compassed his ends
without it? So far, therefore, he is an instance of the fact, that
disrespect to that succession is a part of the heretical character.
And although it is not exactly to the present purpose, I cannot
refrain from adding also a circumstance which betrays his mind
regarding the sacraments of CHRIST. Having set himself up as a
schismatical rival to Cornelius, the true Bishop of Rome, this was
his method of securing to himself partisans: in the act of
solemnizing the holy Eucharist, "when he had made the offerings, and
was distributing to each communicant his portion, and conveying it
to him, he compels the unfortunate men, instead of giving thanks, to
utter the following oath: he holding both their hands, and not
letting them go until they repeated the words of asseveration after
him: and these are his very words:—'Swear to me by the body and
blood of our LORD JESUS CHRIST, that thou wilt never forsake me and
return to Cornelius.' Nor is the poor man allowed to taste, before
he shall have thus pronounced an imprecation on himself. And when he
receives that bread, instead of saying, Amen, he is made to say, I
will never return to Cornelius."
It is frightful, but surely it is very instructive, to see how
one kind of profaneness thus draws on another. Contempt of
Apostolical authority was joined, we see, in this case, with
contempt of the Sacraments of CHRIST. In the worse case which
followed, that of Arius, the same evil temper led, as every one
knows, to a direct assault on the holiest truths of Christianity.
The immediate occasion of Arius' promulgating his blasphemy is said
to have been his vexation at failing to succeed to the episcopal
throne of Alexandria. This exasperated him so, that he laid in wait
for an opportunity of disturbing the person preferred to him,
Alexander, a man of true primitive energy. And he took occasion from
certain expositions of Scripture, in which, as he, Arius, pretended
to think, the Bishop had too much magnified the SON of GOD. The
first spring, therefore, of his heresy was a rebellious and envious
feeling towards his Bishop. And although for the same reason,
probably, as Novatian, his followers never renounced the Apostolical
succession; their proceedings were marked all along by a thorough
disdain of Apostolical privileges. Witness their unscrupulous use of
the civil power, or even of the fury of the populace, wherever it
suited their purposes to carry an episcopal election, or control a
synod, by such means: witness again the licence they encouraged of
profane and libellous scoffing, both in prose and verse: by which,
added to their improper appointments, they gradually depreciated the
character of the most sacred office; so that it is quite melancholy
to read the accounts given of what Bishops were at Constantinople in
381, as compared with what they had been at Nicea, about sixty years
before. All was no more than might be expected from a party, whose
first overt proceedings are thus related by an eye-witness. "They
could not endure any longer to remain in submission to the Church;
but having builded for themselves dens of thieves, there they hold
their meetings continually, by day and by night exercising
themselves in calumnies against CHRIST and us.... They try to
pervert those Scriptures which affirm our LORD'S eternal Godhead and
unspeakable glory with His FATHER. Thus encouraging the impious
opinions of Jews and Heathens concerning CHRIST, they lay themselves
out to the uttermost to be praised by them: making the most of those
points, which the unbelievers are most apt to ridicule; and daily
exciting tumults and factions against us. One of their methods is,
to get up actions at law against us, on the complaint of simple
women, disorderly persons, whom they have perverted. Another, to
expose the Christian profession to scorn, by permitting the younger
persons among them to run irreverently about all the streets," i.
e., as it would seem, from one conventicle to another .... "And
while they thus set themselves against the Divinity of the SON of
GOD, of course they shrink not from uttering unseemly rudeness
against us. Nay, they disdain to compare themselves even with any of
the ancients, or to be put on a level with those, whom we from
children have reverenced as our guides. As to their fellow-servants
of this time, in whatever country or Church, they do not consider a
single one to have attained any measure of true wisdom: calling
themselves the only wise, the only disdainers of worldly wealth, the
only discoverers of doctrinal truths to themselves, they say, alone
are revealed things which in their nature never could have come into
the mind of any other under the sun."
Such were the original Arians, the first powerful impugners of
the Divinity of JESUS CHRIST; such their conduct towards their
Bishops, and their reverence for Apostolical authority. The list of
examples might be greatly enlarged; but it is time to go on to more
modern times, and see what the result has been, where that was done,
(I do not say from motives like theirs,) which Novatian and Arius
clearly would have done if they had dared.
The largest experiments yet made in the world on the doctrinal
result of dispensing with episcopal succession, are the Lutheran
Churches of North Germany, the Presbyterian or Reformed Churches of
Switzerland, Holland and Scotland, with their offshoots in France,
Germany, England and Ireland, and the Congregational or Independent
Churches, in this island, and in America. I am not now going to
dispute the necessity of what was done at the Reformation, (although
it would be wrong to allow such necessity, without proof quite
overwhelming,) but simply to state, as matter of fact, what has
ensued in each instance in regard of the great doctrine of our
LORD'S Incarnation.
First, in North Germany, whatever may be supposed the
cause, it is notorious that a lamentable falling off from the
simplicity of evangelical truth prevailed during a considerable part
of the eighteenth century. Views prevailed, which are commonly
called Rationalist: i. e. which pretend to give an account, or
principles of mere human reason, of Christianity and every thing
connected with it. Of course the union of GOD and man in the Person
of JESUS CHRIST was an object of scorn to a nation so led away by
"philosophy and vain deceit." But it is a point well worth
remarking, that, according to some who know much of German
literature, the mischief was occasioned in good measure by the
importation of Deistical books and opinions from England: books and
opinions which England herself had rejected. Why so great a
difference in the reception of the same error by two kindred races
of people, lying very much under the same temptations? Is it
unreasonable to suppose that the Apostolical succession and
safeguards arising out of it, which England enjoys, had something to
do with her comparative exemption from that most alarming error?
The next which occurs is the case of the Church of Geneva
and it is, indeed, a most startling case. It appearing at the time
morally impossible to get a sufficient number of episcopally
ordained Pastors, Calvin was induced to neglect the Apostolic;
Commission in his plan for the reformation of Geneva; or rather to
search holy Scripture for a new view of that commission, which might
make him quite independent of Bishops. In so doing, he made out for
himself the platform of Presbyterian Discipline. Having once
established that as of exclusive divine right, he precluded himself
from taking advantage of the avenue for returning to the true
succession, which was soon after opened to him by his intercourse
with the English reformers. It should seem that he could not help
feeling how irreconcileable this his new form, Church government was
with the general witness of the Fathers and hence, among other
reasons, he contracted a kind of dislike of the ancient Church, and
an impatience of being at all controlled by her decisions, which
ultimately has proved of the worst consequence to the Genevan Church
in particular. For example, he feared not, in his prime work, the
Institutes, to speak contemptuously of the Fathers of the Council of
Nicaea, and to designate the capital article of their majestic creed
as little better than "an affected and childish sing-song." Another
time he uttered a wish that the word "TRINITY" might be discontinued
in the formularies of the Church. These and other symptoms of a
desire to take liberties with antiquity were not unnoticed by a new
sect, just then creeping out of the ground in Italy. Socinus and his
partisans, one after another, betook themselves to Geneva, as the
soil most congenial to them: and the later years of Calvin, and
almost all those of his successor, Beza, were disturbed by that
heresy and others akin to it, both at home and among their spiritual
colonies abroad: especially those in Poland and Transylvania. It is
well known how violently some of these false teachers were attacked
by Calvin, even to the death: and his letters altogether betray a
soreness and anxiety on the subject, as if he were aware that the
system of his Church was incomplete, and did not feel quite sure
that it was not his own fault. If such were Calvin's misgivings, the
experience of later times has furnished a sad verification of them.
After a gradual declension of many years, the Church of Geneva has
now, it appears, sunk down to the very lowest standard of doctrine
consistent with nominal Christianity. The Trinity, the Atonement,
the Incarnation of the SON of GOD, are, or were lately, absolutely
proscribed by authority as topics of preaching in the congregations
there considered orthodox. Could such a downfall so easily have
taken place, had not the authority of the Primitive Church, as a
witness and interpreter of holy writ, been intentionally disparaged
from the beginning, and private, that is to say, popular and
fashionable judgment, set up instead, for strictly Presbyterian
purposes? Episcopal sway, appealing as it must to antiquity, was
surely just the thing needed to watch and check that evil leaven
before it had spread so far.
A like effect, proceeding as it may be thought very much from the
same cause, may be seen in Holland, in the rise and growth of
that school of divinity, commonly called Liberal or Latitudinarian:
which began with Episcopius and others in the seventeenth century,
and which has greatly tended to encourage a habit of explaining away
the mysteries of the faith in almost all Protestant countries. The
fact seems to be, that the extremes of the Predestinarian doctrine,
violently pressed as they were at the Synod of Dort, produced their
natural result, a violent reaction: and the minds of men not being
prepossessed with the salutary antidote of reverence for primitive
tradition, (which antidote had been systematically withholden, lest
Presbyterianism should lose influence through it,) were ready to
give up any thing else, when they had once given up the creeds and
definitions of their own Churches. When these divines were pressed
with the testimonies of the Fathers, the spirit of their answers
were such as the following: "Never shall any advice drive me into
the fruitless toil of studying the Fathers; which is more like
grinding in a prison-house than any thing else I envy no man the
credit he may acquire in such a frivolous insignificant pursuit.
Others, for me, may have all the glory of much reading and great
memory, whoever they are, who can find pleasure in wandering and
rocking about in that vast ocean of Fathers and Councils." And (let
it be well observed) this founder of the liberal school goes on
distinctly to avow, that "he takes no great pains," nor ever did,
"to acquaint himself with the writings of the Fathers:" whom,
indeed, he grudges to call "the Fathers," accounting it a name of
too much reverence. On this, our learned Bishop Bull remarks, what
is much to our present purpose, as showing how cheap thoughts of the
Primitive Church might naturally lead some steps towards heresy.
"Much, indeed, were it to be wished that Episcopius had excepted the
Fathers and writers of the three first centuries, at least. Had he
spent more time on them, it would never have been regretted either
by himself or the Church. For it would have saved him from
representing the Arian and Socinian doctrines, regarding the Person
of our SAVIOUR, as having been in the Judgment of the early
Churches, erroneous indeed, but not so bad as heretical."
Passing over to our own island, we are met, at once, by a fact,
which appears at first, as far as it goes, to tell against the
preceding conclusions. The Church of Scotland, ever since the
Revolution, has been altogether Presbyterian; and yet, by God's
blessing, her Ministers never have been accused of such a defection
as took place at Geneva. Allowing the many good parts of her system
(which, be it observed, are all in a primitive spirit) full credit
for this, yet one may be permitted to observe, that something
naturally must be ascribed to the vicinity of our own Church
diffusing a kind of wholesome contagion, the benefit of which has
been acknowledged by some of the great lights of the Scottish
establishment. And it may be doubted whether many of the laity of
that country? and especially whether the leading schools of
education, have not been all along gradually verging towards
something like Genevan profaneness. A little time will probably
show—certainly there are symptoms in Scotland at this moment, which
would make an orthodox Englishman more than ever unwilling to part
with that outwork of Apostolic Faith, which England, under
circumstances in many respects peculiarly untoward, has hitherto
found in the Apostolical Commission of her Clergy.
In England itself, it is hardly necessary to do more than
notice the acknowledged state of the Presbyterian Churches. Not
being subjected to the control of so strict a discipline as those of
their communion in Scotland, and being moreover thrown into more
hostile contact with the principles of ancient episcopal order, they
have subsided, one after one another, into a cold and proud
Socinianism. Three years ago, it was stated on dissenting authority,
that the whole number of Presbyterian chapels in England was 258,
out of whom 235 were in reality Unitarian.
Among the Independent or Congregational Churches (in which
denomination, when speaking of Church government, the Baptists are
of course included) no such avowed defection prevails. But
their systematical disparagement of the holy Sacraments, their
horror (for it is more than disregard) of authority and antiquity,
and the tendency of their instructions and devotions to make Faith a
matter of feeling rather than a strict relative duty towards
the persons of the HOLY TRINITY: these and other causes are, I
suspect, not very gradually preparing the way for lamentable results
among them also. And it is most evident that all such causes act
more strongly for the want of that check which a controlling
Episcopacy supplies; such an Episcopacy I mean as may confidently
make a continual appeal to the very Apostolical age.
But we are not left quite to conjecture on the doctrinal tendency
of Congregational views of Church government. The experiment has
been tried on a large scale in America; and in one part of it (New
England) with something of that advantage which endowments may be
supposed to yield towards stability of Orthodox doctrine. The result
may be given in the words of a Socinian writer. "In the United
States, where there are no obstructions to the progress of knowledge
and truth, the spread of liberal doctrines has exceeded our most
sanguine expectations." An account which is confirmed by the
testimony of all parties. Now, it is allowed, that in the same
United States the Independents and Baptists put together greatly
exceed all other denominations of Christians. The only country,
therefore, of Christendom where congregational principles of
government entirely prevail, is likewise the only country which
witnesses the rapid and unmitigated growth of Unitarian principles
of doctrine. In other countries, generally speaking, the
"God-denying, apostasy" finds more or less acceptance, in proportion
as less or more remains of primitive order and respect for the
Apostolical commission.
"But," it will be said, "what then becomes of the opposite case
of the Church of Rome? She, too, has her grave doctrinal errors,
deeply trenching on scriptural truth, awfully dangerous to the souls
of men; and yet she is generally considered as the great champion of
the Apostolical commission." The answer to this lies in the fact,
well-known, however little considered, that in the same degree as
the Romish Church swerved as a church from Christian verity,
she laboured also to induce her subject Bishops to part with their
claim to a succession properly Apostolical. Many and earnest were
the debates on this point, at Trent, in the year 1562: the Papal
Legates labouring, on the one hand, to enforce a declaration that
Episcopal authority was not of divine right immediately, but
mediately through the See of Rome, the Bishops of Spain more
especially, insisting on the contrary tenet. The matter was quieted
by a kind of compromise through the intervention of the French
Bishops, and is accordingly left undecided in the decrees of that
Council. The debates, however, remain on record, a remarkable proof
that the spirit of Popery, as of all Anti-Christian corruptions,
shrinks back, as it were instinctively, from the presence of
Apostolical principles of order.
If any one ask, " Why should all this be so? What has the
Episcopal succession to do with doctrines, with the doctrine
of our LORD'S Incarnation more especially?"—the answer has been
partly given in the course of this brief sketch, especially in what
related to Geneva. But, in general, the following considerations
would appear to suffice.
First, As matter of direct argument, when once men have
learned to think slightly of the testimony borne by the ancients to
the primitive discipline, they will naturally lose some part of
their respect for the testimony borne by the same ancients to the
primitive interpretation of Scripture. Now the questions between us
and Unitarians are, in a great measure, questions of Scripture
interpretation. Is it not clear, then, in how great additional
jeopardy we place the irreverent and the wavering, when, from
whatever cause, we shake their confidence in the express testimony
of the early Fathers?
Secondly, Looking at the whole subject as matter not of argument,
but of feeling and temper; boldness and
self-sufficiency in dealing with those who came next to the Apostles
will prepare the mind to lay aside some portion of that deference
with which we should approach the holy Apostles themselves. They and
their writings will be treated more and more with a sort of hasty
familiarity: inspiration will be less and less thought of; and
naturally restless in discussion, and tormented with thoughts of his
own ingenuity, the result is all but morally certain.
Thirdly: (the point must not be omitted, however the majority may
agree to scoff at it, and however gravely some may blame it as
uncharitable:) if there be such a thing as a true Apostolical
commission, truly connected with the efficacy of CHRIST'S holy
Sacraments; then we must suppose, that where that commission is
wanting, especially if the want be through men's presumption or
neglect, then the gracious assistance of the HOLY GHOST cannot be so
certainly depended on, as for other sanctifying purposes, so for the
guiding of the mind to doctrinal truth. Of course, then, the evil
spirit and the tempting sophistry of the world will have the more
power over men: so that if for no other reason, yet through the want
or imperfection of the ordinary channels of grace, schism might be
expected to lead to false doctrine and heresy.
Can it be necessary to add the obvious remark, that if the Church
system were needful heretofore, it is but rendered the more
evidently necessary for every advance in intellectual light and
liberty, which the present age, from day to day, prides itself on
making? Alas! if the appetite for knowledge of good and evil be
indeed the great snare of all, then all the supernatural means and
aids which our LORD has provided in His Church, instead of having
gone out of date, are more than ever necessary to us; and those more
heavily than ever responsible, who scorn any of those aids, or teach
and encourage others to do so.
It is of GOD'S great mercy, that to such a perversion of mind is
generally annexed what makes it its own punishment here, and so far
gives it a fairer chance of better and more humble thoughts in time
for hereafter. We are plainly taught by St. Paul, that those who
permit themselves to disparage the heavenly gifts, conveyed to us by
the SPIRIT of CHRIST through his Apostles, may expect to be, if no
worse, yet all their lives "children, tossed to and fro, and carried
away by every wind of doctrine:" or, as he elsewhere expresses it,
"ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of truth."
Let us remember these things, when we hear, as we too often have
heard, and must more and more expect to hear, of ingenious men
letting go their hold, first, of Christian order, and then of
Christian faith: and let us fear and prayer both for them and for
ourselves.
OXFORD,
The Feast of the Annunciation.
[With gratitude to
Project
Canterbury for this text.]
