On the apostolical succession / Parochial lectures, second series

by William J. Irons

NOTES.

No. I.

It seems alike congruous to human nature, and consistent with every Divine dispensation to say, that man is more effectually influenced by the personal instrumentality of his fellow man, than by any other means. Statesmen and politicians seem to have seen this; and in every age have acted upon it; and have thought it necessary to give their sanction and support to a priesthood, even for the attainment of worldly ends. The lower classes of the community also, bear unequivocal testimony to the same truth—the suitability of the living Priesthood as the effective means of influencing human nature. Even among those classes of our own people, who affect to make light of the authority of the Ministry, it is remarkable how much that authority is felt after all; and how much even the systematic rejecters of the established Priesthood, are accustomed to impute high power and efficacy to the ministrations, and often to the very persons, of their own self-sent ministers. Books have their use—but Man directly influences man, in a more vital way.

And more than this. Some men naturally influence their fellows more than others: and some men Divinely; that is by Divine appointment. It is true, for instance, that by the very necessity of our social nature and condition, we affect one another in a very important degree; and that it is even a duty sometimes to exert our moral influence on our brethren. And the degree in which we are able to accomplish this, will be variously determined. But beyond the natural influence which we thus exercise, there is an instituted influence, as much a matter of fact as the former. Keeping to the religious view of this question only, I would thus further explain:

It is evident that in every age, one man may be a blessing to another, by personally instructing him to the best of his power: or by praying for him, to Almighty God. Every good man may possess this power of mediately blessing his fellow men; but some men more than others.—A Howard may thus bless very “effectually.” And, generally, the “effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” But some there have been in every age, who, according to the Divine testimony, have had POWER to give authoritative blessing. (1 Sam. iii. 19.) Some have been from time to time appointed and endowed by the Deity, “to bless, and to curse, in the name of the Lord.” (1 Chron. xxiii. 13.) Generally this was the assigned function of the Priesthood, and was declared to pertain to them “for ever.” But “from the beginning it was so;” Job blessed his three friends, (Job xlii. 8.) and Noah his sons, (Gen. ix.) and before the Levitical priesthood was set up, Melchisedec “blessed Abraham.” Isaac “blessed Jacob and could not reverse it” though he heartily wished to do so: and Joseph, again, blessed his two sons, officially, and contrary to his own intention. (Gen. xlviii. 9.) Balaam, we see, also, was sent for to “curse” Israel, and he “blessed them altogether,” though he wished not to do it: (Num. xxii. 11.) so that it was no peculiar privilege of the Jewish nation or their ancestors to be able to impart an authoritative blessing. (Matt. xxiii. 3.) And we find the same to hold in the Christian dispensation. (Acts x. 41.) Being reviled “we bless,” said the Apostle. Say “Peace be to this house,” was our Lord’s direction to His Ministers; “and if the Son of peace be there, YOUR PEACE shall rest upon it.” So that at the end of his epistles St. Paul sends his Apostolic blessing “under his own hand.” And “without all contradiction (he argues) the less is blessed of the better.” (Heb. vii. 7. Deut. xxi. 5; xxvii. 14.) All men can pray for blessing, but some can “bless.” So, every man can read “the Absolution,” but “God hath given POWER and commandment to His MINISTERS, to declare and PRONOUNCE it.” (So St. James says, “If any man (not, if any poor man, only, as some seem to take it) be sick, let him call for the Priests of the Church.”)—And this depends not on the goodness of the MAN. A Judas was an Apostle.

Let any one follow out in his own mind these hints; and he will see nothing either unphilosophical or unscriptural in expecting in these days also the blessings of an instituted Priesthood. God’s plan ever is, to use men as instruments of good to men. Revelation has ever recognized such an institute as the living Ministry. All infidelity is an attempt at “codification.”

II.

At the close of the fourth Lecture I have made some observations on the Intention of the Church Catholic, as constituting, in a measure, the essence of the validity of certain of Her Ordinances. It will be difficult to clear this statement from the possibility of misrepresentation, and even misapprehension: I would request that what I have said at p. [128], &c. may be re-read and considered. The Doctrine of Laying on of hands is recognized in Scripture; but there is no command of Christ concerning this, in the same way that there is a command concerning Baptism and the Eucharist. It seems an institute of the Apostles and the Primitive Church; and may perhaps be looked on as an instance of the early exercise of the Church’s inherent power and grace; for the institute certainly received the sanction of Scripture, before the close of the Sacred Canon. So that it would be impossible to say how dangerous it might not be, to depart from the Church’s Ordinance of Laying on of hands. I trust therefore that none will imagine, that what is here said can fairly be made to sanction the loose notion, that any part of the Church Catholic can now voluntarily originate and ordain a Ministry in a new way; and without imposition of hands. The uncertainty, not to say peril of presumption in any such case, will be quite sufficient to guard against the fatal folly of such a thought. How far the grace of the Apostolate is ordinarily now allied even to the very act of “laying on of hands,” it may be impossible to say; still it is important in many respects to observe, that the Laying on of hands is not so strictly of the nature of a proper sacrament, as that the divine grace is always necessarily allied to that form of ordination exclusively. There is advantage in considering that in theory it may not be so, though there could be no safety or certainty in deliberately acting on such a doubtfully understood theory.

Even the Roman Controversialists do not agree that the Laying on of hands is the specifically Sacramental act;—the outward form to which only of necessity the inward grace is allied. Though I cannot help thinking that it would much benefit their argument, if they were agreed on this point. The Doctrine which attributes the essence of Ordination to the uniform Intention of the Church Catholic may be, of course, very easily cavilled at; but still even the Romanist must, to a certain extent, rely on some such Doctrine, and such a Doctrine is that, perhaps, which alone will harmonize the conflicting Roman theories. In its very nature it is a Doctrine which admits not of strict definition. It rises simply out of the truth, that the gifts of Christ were to the Church, and not primarily or inherently in individuals, as such.

This theoretical conception of these ordinances will serve greatly to assist us in meeting a theoretical difficulty, not unfrequently brought against the Doctrine of the Succession. It is said: ‘Is it not very conceivable, after all that has been urged, that during the long course of ages, in some countries at least, some one break in the Apostolic chain might have occurred? Is it not a consequence, in that case, that all subsequent Ordinations would be very doubtful?’ To which we reply, ‘Point out the fact.’ We challenge you to find it; a bare supposition can have but little force as an argument. And then, supposing the fact to be discovered, That a certain Bishop had obtained his place in the Church by invalid means—what is the consequence? Could he perpetuate such an invalid Succession? Certainly not; for in Ordaining others, he would be associated with two other Bishops, whose valid grace would confer true Orders, notwithstanding the inefficacy of the third coadjutor in the Ordination. But, putting the case at the very worst, even if such an instance could be found, it would only affect the condition of the single Church over which the nominal Bishop presided; and that only so far as the particular functions of that Bishop were concerned; and it would be corrected at his death. And all this may be urged in reply even by Romanists. But we who deny Holy Orders to be a proper Sacrament of Christ, can add more than this. We suggest, that in the case of a Bishop obtaining his place in the Church by some invalid means, which the Church had mistaken for valid, the Church’s INTENTION might avail sufficiently, for the time being at least, to counteract the effects of man’s sin; and so give value even to the ministrations of the Church which had been so severely visited, as to have such a Bishop set over them. So we meet the theoretical difficulty by a theoretical answer.