Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

has been pressed into the opposite service. It is his exhorting of the people to "one prayer and one supplication; the meaning of which is fully explained by his object in writing. This was unity of prayer, suited to the unity of the Church: that is, according to the faith, and not defiled by heretical pravity. A more strict sense would bring it to a form of prayer; which might be the same in different congregations.

It seems useless to dwell on the scanty remains of those times, when the position extends to a period so much later. Accordingly, in descending about a century lower, there is found a very striking testimony in the Apology of Tertullian,† in which the following appeal is made, as to an indubitable fact-" Your cities, your islands, your forts, towns and assemblies, and your very camps, wards, companies, palace, senate, forum, all swarm with Christians; your temples, indeed, we leave to yourselves, and they are the only places you can name, without Christians.

If we go about half a century lower; it is impossible to read the letters of St. Cyprian, on the subject of the lapse during the persecution; and not perceive, that of those who fell during the crisis-and independently on the greater part, who stood firm-the number was very considerable. At about this time, there occurs a fact in ecclesiastical history, which exposes in a very glaring light the fallacy of the scheme. Cornelius, bishop of Rome, in an epistle preserved by Eusebius, giving an account of the novatian schism, found it incidentally to his purpose to mention, that there were in the said city forty-six presbyters, seven deacons, seven sub-deacons, and other officers; who, with widows and impotent persons dependent on the Church, made up about one thousand and fifty souls. It must have been a vast mass of worshippers, which subsisted all these; and at a time when the Church had no possessions, and was occasionally under persecu

tion.

* Μια προσευχη

Mia dencis. Cap. 37. Lib. vi. cap. 43.

Attached to the above fact, there is another, alike overbearing in its consequences. The leader in the said novatian schism despaired of accomplishing his design, without his being ordained a bishop. Accordingly he contrived this, by ensnaring to the act three simple bishops of Italy. Why, being a presbyter of Rome, should he have taken that step; when, according to the scheme, he was already, in grade, on a level with the person whom he aspired to supplant in office.

Many consenting facts might be mentioned; and all far within the period, to which congregational Episcopacy is seriously affirmed to have extended.

The dissertation would end here; were it not, that much has been made on the other side, of some expressions of an author, who lived about a century after Eusebius; and whose supposed testimony against original Episcopacy has been often thrown into the balance, against the host of testimonies of authors who were nearer to the times, and better judges of the facts. The subject was slightly noticed in the lecture.

The author referred to, is St. Jerome: and there are two passages produced from his numerous works. In one place he says, that in the Church of Alexandria, from the time of St. Mark [its first bishop] to the times of Heraclas and Dionysius, who lived within memory, it had been the custom of the presbyters of that Church, on the demise of the bishop, to chuse his successour from among themselves; as if an army should chuse an emperour, or the deacons an archdeacon. In each of the two supposed cases, the choice created the character, without any sanction of persons coordinate with the emperour, or with the archdeacon elect. Accordingly it has been inferred, that the new bishop became such with no other ordination, than that which had formerly made him a presbyter.

Anti-episcopalians do not seem aware, how much they concede by resting on this passage of Jerome. For if any stress is to be laid on it, the result must be, that in Alexandria, from the time of St. Mark, to the

time within the memory of the learned father, there was no regimen of presbytery; and that the only point in which the said Church differed from other Churches, was in the dispensing with an appropriate ordination.

But it is here believed, that Jerome had no such matter in his mind, and that his sense is otherwise interpreted by the connexion. In the Church of Rome, of the concerns of which he was writing, it had been customary to put some of its wealthy members into the deaconship. In consequence of this, the seven deacons of that Church considered themselves as superiour to the presbyters. It was to the purpose, in stating the evidences of the superiority of grade of the latter, to introduce a known fact concerning one of the four principal Churches-its so far differing in custom from Churches in general, that whereas in these, the whole Church gave their voices in the election of a bishop, who was also sometimes made such from a deacon, and sometimes from a lay-man; in the said Church of Alexandria, the presbyters only chose, and always from their own body; which would have been to the last degree absurd, if the excluded deacons had been their superiours. As to the comparison with the cases of an emperour and an archdeacon; it is to be considered, that the question of episcopal ordination made no part of the argument. No question had been raised concerning episcopal prerogative, or the manner in which it should be conferred. The single fact, that the deacons had no share in the choice, and that none of them could be chosen, was sufficient to establish their inferiority; so far as the sense of the eminent Church of Alexandria, known to and not censured by other Churches, was concerned.

Another passage brought from the same author, is where he affirms-what Episcopalians generally admit -that "bishop" and "presbyter" were originally descriptive of the same character: proceeding to state, that when parties in religion arose, so that they said"I am of Paul," and "I of Apollos," and "I of Cephas," it was determined throughout the world, that

of the body of presbyters, one should be chosen, and elevated above the rest. And this change is said by him to have taken place gradually. The whole of the statement is consistent with the Episcopal scheme. If a certain disorder existed, and a certain remedy was applied to it; the obvious supposition is, that the one followed at no great distance from the other. And then its being said by Jerome to have been by degrees, answers exactly to the accounts handed down of the increase of local bishops, in proportion as apostolick superintendence decreased by death. All this brings Jerome's sayings strictly within the bounds of the system contended for. And yet it may be remarked, in regard to this very learned but very cholerick father, that aiming in one of his arguments to humble the arrogancy of certain deacons, and in another, to moderate the claims of bishops-for both of which he seems to have had sufficient cause; if he had carried the matter further than strict propriety warranted, it would not have been the only instance, in which his zeal hurried him into the extreme of rashness.

In the discussion of the subject, the author has confined himself to the single point of establishing two distinct orders of the ministry; resolved into one order, by many bodies of professing Christians. To have extended the inquiry to the ascertaining of the rights exclusively attached to the grade of the Episcopacy, would have rendered the discussion too extensive. All who affirm that order to have been from the beginning, consider as attached to it alone, the authority to confer the ministerial character of any grade. As to the exercise of jurisdiction; the author of the present work, deriving his principles from the Church of England, considers it as a subject which should be regulated by ecclesiastical laws. All reasonable laws to this effect, must be founded on general maxims, essentially belonging to the subject; and yet, in their subordinate provisions, may be accommodated to different times and circumstances.

DISSERTATION XI.

OF TRADITION.*

Equivocal Use of the Word.-Design of perpetuating by written Records. - Testimony of the Fathers.-Preservation of Scripture.--Traditions, some dropped, and some opposite to others.-Some Things erroneously affirmed to rest on Tradition.

ON the question between the Church of Rome

and the Protestant Churches, concerning the present subject; the latter might surrender their opinion, without giving up a particle on any important point of doctrine. It is conceded on the other side, that to make a tradition binding, it must be uninterrupted. But Protestants deny, that during the first three centuries-to say the least-there were any traditions in favour of transubstantiation, the worship of images, auricular confession, purgatory, and other matters which might be named. Yet the integrity of Christian truth calls for opposition to the dangerous doctrine, that tradition goes along with scripture, in making up the rule of faith.

In the lecture, this subject was considered only as it relates to rites and ceremonies. But the same test having been applied to doctrine; and it being contended, that the rule of faith is not scripture alone, but this and the other taken together; it falls in with the design of these Dissertations, to investigate the proposition.

One great source of controversy, is the equivocal use of words. This is confessed on all hands, and is especially conspicuous on the present subject. The word translated "Tradition," is used in the

* See Lecture VIII. † Παραδοσις,

« AnteriorContinuar »