PREFACE.
Very little needs to be said to introduce these Lectures to the reader. They were delivered in Advent last, at Saint Mary’s, Newington; and there is the same reason for publishing, which there then was for writing and preaching them. I desire to assist, as far as I am able, those who are seeking to clear and define their thoughts, respecting the origin, nature, and power of the Christian Ministry. I have aimed only at plainness and fairness in the statement of the argument; and have adopted that arrangement of the subject, in which, as far as I can judge, it originally came before my own mind.
In the Dedication of this Volume to the Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford, I have acknowledged my great obligation to him for the instruction which I hope I have derived from his writings—an acknowledgment which, happily, I am so far from being singular in making, that I suppose every one who has studied them, might make the same statement. But it is right that I should say, that as I have not learned a lesson by rote, but, from the first, thought patiently and freely for myself, so the Public must not consider the Professor answerable for every opinion which I may have expressed. And it may be well also to add, that the general doctrine here set forth is not hastily taken up on any man’s authority; but was maintained by the writer, both in private and public, as many will bear witness, long before he had the happiness and advantage of being acquainted with the works, or characters, of the present leading Divines of the University of Oxford.
St. Peter’s, Walworth, Surrey.
CONTENTS.
| PAGE |
LECTURE I. THEDOCTRINE. | |
The Method of the Argument—Importance of aMinistry—Scriptural aspect of the subject—Apostolicallanguage concerning it—Compared with the Modern—Whatthe safe inference—The original Ministry possibly stillexists—And if so, what constitutes aMinistry—Scripture Language—Compared with Popular andModern notions—Theory of the Inward Call—Erastiantheory—The Common principle of all suchTheories—Illustrated—The Catholic Doctrine of the Ministry—Compared withthe Modern, and with Scripture—The Continuance of theMinistry—Doctrine of the Succession stated andexplained—Reasons for the present Inquiry | |
THEEVIDENCE. | |
Importance of not hastily prejudging—Argued from theparallel case of the Jewish Church—Necessity of consideringthe Evidence for the Succession—Evidence of Scripture, howfar Important—Historical Evidence—PopularDifficulties—A General reply.—OnEvidence—Popular Notions—The expected Evidence of theSuccession—Illustrated by aparallel case—Impossible—And even if attainable, notsatisfactory—What kind and amount of Evidence should belooked for—Parallels of Evidence—For theScriptures—The Sacraments, and the Ministry of theChurch—On what Evidence the Common People must of necessityreceive the Bible—And the Apostolic Church—LiteraryEvidence of the Bible, difficult—And of the Succession—Analysis of it, Theoreticaland Historical—Accumulation of the Evidence—MoralCertainty—Conclusion | |
LECTURE III. THEOBJECTIONS. | |
Necessity of considering Objections—Classification ofthem—(1.) As connected with the Fact of the Succession, and itsConsequences.—(2.) And the Doctrine, and its Consequences. (1.) GeneralCorruption—Idolatry—Schism—Infringement ofPrivate Judgment—Popery and Superstition. (2.) JudaisticDoctrine—Carnality—Technicality—ScripturalUncertainty—Exclusiveness—Uncharitableness—Unchurchingother Protestants—among whom may be seen many Evidences ofGod’s Blessing and Religious Success—Explanation. Catholic Charity—Theoretical andPractical—Review | |
THESUMMARY. | |
The Summary—Mistakes of the Ideality ofChristianity—Erroneous popular Notions andArguments—Contrast of Rationalist and Catholictheories—Comparison—And withScripture—Analytical Review of the Catholic Religion,illustrating the Doctrine of the Ministry—Synthetical Viewof the same—Conclusion | |
Notes | |
I.
THE DOCTRINE.
From the Epistle. [1]—“How, then, shall they call on Him in Whom they have not believed?—and, How shall they believe in Him of Whom they have not heard?—and, How shall they hear without a preacher?—and, How shall they preach except they be SENT?”—Romans x. 14.
At this season of preparation for the Advent, the Apostolical Ministry is one of the subjects especially brought before us by the Church, as doubtless peculiarly calculated to fit our minds for the right reception and reverent contemplation of our Saviour’s first and second Coming. It would be needless to enlarge on the suitability of the Epistle selected for this Introductory Festival, opening and leading the way, as it does, to those of the whole “glorious company of the Apostles.” We can scarcely read the passage now quoted, without recognizing at once much of its appropriateness. It contains a brief vindication both of the moral necessity and the Divine authority of the Christian Ministry; and so plainly, that, to some extent, all must perceive it. But it may be highly profitable to us to draw out and examine with attention the subject, which St. Paul thus lays before us in epitome only; concerning which we know that there is much diversity of thinking among professing Christians, and, consequently, great danger of wrong thinking.
It is too much the practice of modern theologians to refer to the New Testament, almost as if it were a book of aphorisms; and so, when a quotation is made therefrom, it seems to be inquired, what meaning it will bear; or what use can be made of it; rather than, what meaning it must have had in such a connection; or what use must have been intended, under such circumstances. And hence has resulted this fatal consequence, that the apostolic writings are commonly interpreted by modern opinions, instead of modern opinions being tested by the apostolic writings. There is but too painful evidence of this, in the manner in which some men set about “proving” their peculiar system by the Scriptures; evidently assuming from the first that their system is right, and so (unconsciously, we trust,) sorting and arranging the “best texts” to establish it. Surely an attempt to treat any other ancient book as the Holy Scriptures are thus treated, would not be borne with. Suppose, for example, any disciple of the schools of the modern scepticism should attempt to show, from selected passages of some leading treatise of ancient philosophy, that his own opinions precisely coincided with those of the sage from whom he was quoting; it is evident that he would hereby deceive no one but himself. On a reference to the treatise in question, it would be at once apparent, that it was written by one who held opinions widely different from the modern. Now since, among Christians, there is an universal appeal to the Scriptures, would it not be a rational method of testing the opinions of any of the various classes among us, to inquire, whether it is likely that such writings would have proceeded from the pens of men holding such and such opinions? Might we not thus arrive at as sure a conclusion, notwithstanding all arguments from texts and passages, that some nominally Christian opinions now received, were not the opinions of the sacred writers—as that the opinions of Locke were not the opinions of the ancient Epicureans, notwithstanding the coincidences that might be found? And if it should be seen that any class of opinions exactly harmonizes with the literal writings of the Apostles, so that we may imagine the men who held them to have naturally written what the Apostles wrote; then, should we not have a highly probable argument for the Scriptural character of those opinions? Such an argument will in some degree pervade these Lectures.