diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-14 19:07:10 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-14 19:07:10 -0700 |
| commit | 73373e7b25549b8ba6e7bf818a4b0f6eaf5fcb73 (patch) | |
| tree | c4fc08a1ca4b007c583bec7ace1880551ecbfb71 /49115-h | |
Diffstat (limited to '49115-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 49115-h/49115-h.htm | 5018 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 49115-h/images/fpb.jpg | bin | 0 -> 26730 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 49115-h/images/fps.jpg | bin | 0 -> 13040 bytes |
3 files changed, 5018 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/49115-h/49115-h.htm b/49115-h/49115-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..7b1ee48 --- /dev/null +++ b/49115-h/49115-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,5018 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html + PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> +<head> +<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII" /> +<title>Eight Sermons on The Priesthood, Altar, and Sacrifice, by Mayow Wynell Mayow</title> + <style type="text/css"> +/*<![CDATA[ XML blockout */ +<!-- + P { margin-top: .75em; + margin-bottom: .75em; + } + P.gutsumm { margin-left: 5%;} + P.poetry {margin-left: 3%; } + .GutSmall { font-size: 0.7em; } + H1, H2 { + text-align: center; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + } + H3, H4, H5 { + text-align: center; + margin-top: 1em; + margin-bottom: 1em; + } + BODY{margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; + } + table { border-collapse: collapse; } +table {margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto;} + td { vertical-align: top; border: 1px solid black;} + td p { margin: 0.2em; } + .blkquot {margin-left: 4em; margin-right: 4em;} /* block indent */ + + .smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} + + .pagenum {position: absolute; + left: 92%; + font-size: small; + text-align: right; + font-weight: normal; + color: gray; + } + img { border: none; } + img.dc { float: left; width: 50px; height: 50px; } + p.gutindent { margin-left: 2em; } + div.gapspace { height: 0.8em; } + div.gapline { height: 0.8em; width: 100%; border-top: 1px solid;} + div.gapmediumline { height: 0.3em; width: 40%; margin-left:30%; + border-top: 1px solid; } + div.gapmediumdoubleline { height: 0.3em; width: 40%; margin-left:30%; + border-top: 1px solid; border-bottom: 1px solid;} + div.gapshortdoubleline { height: 0.3em; width: 20%; + margin-left: 40%; border-top: 1px solid; + border-bottom: 1px solid; } + div.gapdoubleline { height: 0.3em; width: 50%; + margin-left: 25%; border-top: 1px solid; + border-bottom: 1px solid;} + div.gapshortline { height: 0.3em; width: 20%; margin-left:40%; + border-top: 1px solid; } + .citation {vertical-align: super; + font-size: .5em; + text-decoration: none;} + img.floatleft { float: left; + margin-right: 1em; + margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; } + img.floatright { float: right; + margin-left: 1em; margin-top: 0.5em; + margin-bottom: 0.5em; } + img.clearcenter {display: block; + margin-left: auto; + margin-right: auto; margin-top: 0.5em; + margin-bottom: 0.5em} + --> + /* XML end ]]>*/ + </style> +</head> +<body> +<pre> + +The Project Gutenberg eBook, Eight Sermons on The Priesthood, Altar, and +Sacrifice, by Mayow Wynell Mayow + + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most +other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions +whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of +the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at +www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have +to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. + + + + +Title: Eight Sermons on The Priesthood, Altar, and Sacrifice + + +Author: Mayow Wynell Mayow + + + +Release Date: June 2, 2015 [eBook #49115] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-646-US (US-ASCII) + + +***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EIGHT SERMONS ON THE PRIESTHOOD, +ALTAR, AND SACRIFICE*** +</pre> +<p>Transcribed from the 1867 James Parker and Co. edition by +David Price, email ccx074@pglaf.org</p> +<h1>Eight Sermons<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">ON</span><br /> +THE PRIESTHOOD, ALTAR, AND<br /> +SACRIFICE.</h1> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p style="text-align: center"><span class="GutSmall">BY</span><br +/> +MAYOW WYNELL MAYOW, M.A.,</p> +<p style="text-align: center"><span class="GutSmall">PERPETUAL +CURATE OF ST. MARY’S, WEST BROMPTON, AND LATE</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">STUDENT OF CHRIST CHURCH, +OXFORD.</span></p> + +<div class="gapshortline"> </div> +<blockquote><p>“The principles of Christianity are now as +freely questioned as the most doubtful and controverted points; +the grounds of faith are as safely denied as the most unnecessary +superstructions; that religion hath the greatest advantage which +appeareth in the newest dress, as if we looked for another faith +to be delivered to the saints: whereas in Christianity there can +be no concerning truth which is not ancient, and whatsoever is +truly new, is certainly false.”—(<span +class="smcap">Bp. Pearson on the Creed</span>: <i>Epistle +Dedicatory</i>.)</p> +</blockquote> + +<div class="gapshortline"> </div> +<p style="text-align: center"><b>Oxford and London</b>:<br /> +JAMES PARKER AND CO.<br /> +1867.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p style="text-align: center"> +<a href="images/fpb.jpg"> +<img alt= +"Decorative graphic" +title= +"Decorative graphic" + src="images/fps.jpg" /> +</a></p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p style="text-align: center"><a name="pageiii"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. iii</span><span class="GutSmall">TO +THE</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">RIGHT REV. FATHER IN GOD,</span><br /> +WALTER KERR,<br /> +LORD BISHOP OF SALISBURY,<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">IN GRATEFUL REMEMBRANCE OF A CONNECTION +WITH HIS</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">DIOCESE FOR NEARLY A QUARTER OF A +CENTURY,</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">AS A TOKEN OF REVERENCE FOR HIS OFFICE, +AND UNFEIGNED</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">RESPECT FOR HIS CHARACTER,</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">AS SOME LITTLE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF +MANY</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">KINDNESSES RECEIVED,</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">AND AS A HUMBLE TRIBUTE TO HIS +CONSTANCY</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">IN DEFENDING THE FAITH IN</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND,</span></p> +<p style="text-align: center"><b>This Volume</b></p> +<p style="text-align: center"><span class="GutSmall">IS (BY +PERMISSION) INSCRIBED,</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">BY HIS LORDSHIP’S VERY FAITHFUL AND +GRATEFUL SERVANT,</span></p> +<p style="text-align: center">M. W. MAYOW.</p> +<h2><a name="pagev"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +v</span>ADVERTISEMENT.</h2> +<p><span class="smcap">The</span> following Sermons were preached +at St. Mary’s, West Brompton, in November and December, +1866. They are now printed as a humble contribution towards +the defence of the Catholic doctrine of the priesthood, the +altar, and the sacrifice, in days when there seem no limits to +assault upon it, when there prevails every conceivable confusion +between what is Catholic and what is Roman, and when there is the +widest misapprehension of the principles of our +Reformation. If this small volume should contribute in any +way to a better understanding of those principles, and to the +vindication of the loyalty to our own Church of such as, +maintaining its Catholic character, desire equally to be loyal to +the Church Universal, (and believe in truth that there is no +antagonism between them,) it will not, I trust, be wholly +useless. If, further, it should lead any, in the spirit of +candour and of prayer, to give more consideration to this +doctrine than perhaps hitherto they have done, and especially to +consult larger and more learned works upon the subject, I shall +have great additional reason to be thankful.</p> +<p>It is, I hope, hardly necessary to add that there is no +intention or desire in anything here said to pass judgment upon +individuals, either within or without our own communion. It +will be found <a name="pagevi"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +vi</span>stated in the following discourses how readily we +believe that many receive the benefits of the Christian altar and +sacrifice who are yet unconscious of them; whilst it is also +willingly acknowledged, even as regards those who more directly +deny Catholic doctrine, that the present divided state of +Christendom, and the wide differences of teaching within our own +communion, make it a very different thing to be unable to see, +(or even to oppose,) the truth than would be the case if the +Church were still united, as of old, in one harmonious voice and +one external communion, or if there were a perfect unanimity +among ourselves. When, alas, even priests are found to +repudiate their priesthood, it must be admitted, without reserve, +that there is too much excuse for the laity being uncertain and +perplexed. Whilst this teaches us to award the largest +measure of charitable construction to those who differ from us, +it gives only the more urgent cause both to state and vindicate +the ancient faith, and to shew that it was in God’s mercy +preserved to us at the Reformation.</p> +<p>I must not omit to say that I am indebted to Mr. +Carter’s excellent treatise for many facts, suggestions, +and illustrations, even beyond those which the references given +explicitly acknowledge.</p> +<p style="text-align: right">M. W. M.</p> +<p><span class="smcap">St. Mary’s</span>, <span +class="smcap">West Brompton</span>.<br /> + <i>February</i> +7, 1867.</p> +<h2><a name="pagevii"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +vii</span>CONTENTS.</h2> +<table> +<tr> +<td><p style="text-align: center">SERMON I.</p> +<p style="text-align: center">(p. <span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page1">1</a></span>.)</p> +<p style="text-align: center"><b>Treasure in Earthen +Vessels.—Faith, not Sight, the Recogniser of the +Priesthood.</b></p> +<blockquote><p style="text-align: center">“But we have this +treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may +be of God, and not of us.”—2 <i>Cor.</i> iv. 7.</p> +</blockquote> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p style="text-align: center">SERMON II.</p> +<p style="text-align: center">(p. <span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page23">23</a></span>.)</p> +<p style="text-align: center"><b>The Witness of the World, before +Christ, to the Doctrine of Sacrifice.</b></p> +<blockquote><p style="text-align: center">“Thus did Job +continually.”—<i>Job</i> i. 5.</p> +</blockquote> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p style="text-align: center">SERMON III.</p> +<p style="text-align: center">(p. <span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page45">45</a></span>.)</p> +<p style="text-align: center"><b>The Witness of the New Testament +to the Doctrine of Sacrifice.</b></p> +<blockquote><p style="text-align: center">“Are not they +which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the +altar?”—1 <i>Cor.</i> x. 18.</p> +</blockquote> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p style="text-align: center">SERMON IV.</p> +<p style="text-align: center">(p. <span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page63">63</a></span>.)</p> +<p style="text-align: center"><b>The Testimony of the Early +Church to the Doctrine of the Priesthood.</b></p> +<blockquote><p style="text-align: center">“Thus saith the +Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, +where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest +for your souls.”—<i>Jer.</i> vi. 16.</p> +</blockquote> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p style="text-align: center"><a name="pageviii"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. viii</span>SERMON V.</p> +<p style="text-align: center">(p. <span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page79">79</a></span>.)</p> +<p style="text-align: center"><b>The Testimony of our Formularies +to the Doctrine of the Priesthood.</b></p> +<blockquote><p>“And when He had said this, He breathed on +them, and saith unto them Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose soever +sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins +ye retain, they are retained.”—<i>St. John</i> xx. +22, 23.</p> +</blockquote> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p style="text-align: center">SERMON VI.</p> +<p style="text-align: center">(p. <span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page97">97</a></span>.)</p> +<p style="text-align: center"><b>The Christian Altar.</b></p> +<p style="text-align: center">“We have an +altar.”—<i>Heb.</i> xiii. 10.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p style="text-align: center">SERMON VII.</p> +<p style="text-align: center">(p. <span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page113">113</a></span>.)</p> +<p style="text-align: center"><b>The Christian Altar.</b></p> +<p style="text-align: center">“We have an +altar.”—<i>Heb.</i> xiii. 10.</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p style="text-align: center">SERMON VIII.</p> +<p style="text-align: center">(p. <span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page135">135</a></span>.)</p> +<p style="text-align: center"><b>God Incarnate our Great High +Priest.</b></p> +<p style="text-align: center">“In whom are hid all the +treasures of wisdom and knowledge.”—<i>Coloss.</i> +ii. 3.</p> +</td> +</tr> +</table> +<h2><a name="page1"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 1</span>SERMON +I.<br /> +Treasure in Earthen Vessels.—Faith, not Sight, the +Recogniser of the Priesthood.</h2> +<blockquote><p style="text-align: center">2 CORINTHIANS iv. 7.<br +/> +“But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the +excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p><span class="smcap">The</span> words rendered “in +earthen vessels,” are easy enough as to their general +sense. <i>Ἐν +ὀστρακίνοις +σκεύεσιν</i>, +(the Apostle says,) where +<i>σκεύος</i> may stand +for any kind of utensil or household stuff. It is the word +used in St. Matthew, “How can one enter a strong +man’s house and spoil his <i>goods</i>;” <a +name="citation1"></a><a href="#footnote1" +class="citation">[1]</a> any of his household stuff or +possessions; whilst +<i>ὀστράκίνοιν</i>, +(the same word which gave its name to the well-known Grecian +<i>ostracism</i>, from the mode of voting,) signifying in its +first sense that which is made of shell and therefore brittle, is +often used in a derived sense for anything frail and liable to +break, and when broken not to be re-joined. Therefore, +again, it represents anything poor and mean, as compared with +other stronger or more precious material. Thus, in his +second Epistle to Timothy, St. Paul uses the very same word to +denote those inferior vessels which are made for less honourable +use: <a name="page2"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +2</span>“But in a great house, there are not only vessels +of gold and silver, but also of wood and of earth; +<i>ὀστράκινα</i>;—and +some to honour, and some to dishonour.” <a +name="citation2a"></a><a href="#footnote2a" +class="citation">[2a]</a></p> +<p>We cannot, then, err as to the general meaning of the text, if +we take it to express the fact that great gifts of +God—treasure—may be, and are, according to His will, +and for good and wise reason, lodged in weak and frail tenements, +giving little outward sign of that which is hid within: great +riches enshrined in poor and mean caskets, even as the soul of +man dwells in the earthy tabernacle, (that red earth or clay +which gave its very name to Adam,) when “the Lord God +formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his +nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul.” +<a name="citation2b"></a><a href="#footnote2b" +class="citation">[2b]</a></p> +<p>But St. Paul’s application of the figure here is +somewhat different from the illustration just used. It is +not life, or an immortal soul shrouded in a mortal body, of which +he speaks, but some special gift or gifts of God for the use of +His Church and people, which he declares had been entrusted to +vessels of little “form or comeliness.” And it +will be of much interest and importance both to trace out what +this treasure is, and what are the vessels in which it is placed, +as well as to insist upon the fact that the treasure is not the +less, because thus shrouded or obscured; and that it gives no +cause to deny the existence of the treasure, that those who bear +it seem either so <a name="page3"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +3</span>like other men as they do, or so little worthy in +themselves of what they bear.</p> +<p>Now, to see what the treasure is, we need turn back but a +little way. In the preceding chapter, speaking of himself +and others charged with the ministry of the Gospel, the Apostle +says, deprecating all high thoughts in those so honoured: +“Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think anything +as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God, who also hath +made us able ministers of the New Testament;” and then, +after thus disclaiming all personal merit or glory, he goes on +immediately to contrast the glory of the Gospel with the glories +of the earlier dispensation. “For if the ministration +of death,” he says, “written and engraven in stones +was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly +behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which +glory was to be done away: how shall not the ministration of the +Spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of +condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of +righteousness exceed in glory.” <a name="citation3a"></a><a +href="#footnote3a" class="citation">[3a]</a> Pursuing this +thought a little further, and enlarging upon the glories of the +ministration of the Spirit of the Lord which giveth life, he +comes back; at the opening of the fourth chapter, more closely to +the subject of his ministry, and says: “Therefore, as we +have received this ministry, we faint not;” <a +name="citation3b"></a><a href="#footnote3b" +class="citation">[3b]</a> and after a word on the effect of the +Gospel which he preached, that it <a name="page4"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 4</span>led to the “renouncing the +hidden things of dishonesty;” <a name="citation4a"></a><a +href="#footnote4a" class="citation">[4a]</a> and another, as to +its being sufficiently manifested to every willing heart, and so, +if hidden, hidden only “to them that are lost, whom the God +of this world hath blinded;” <a name="citation4b"></a><a +href="#footnote4b" class="citation">[4b]</a> he returns once more +to what it was which he preached, and declares how this great +treasure,—“the unsearchable riches of Christ,” +as he elsewhere describes it,—was entrusted to poor and +weak instruments; “for we preach,” he says, +“not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves +your servants for Jesus’ sake. For God, who commanded +the light to shine out of darkness,” (that is, in the +natural world when He said, “Let there be light:”) +“hath shined in our hearts,” (that is, in the new +creation of the spiritual world,) “to give the light of the +knowledge of the glory of God, in the face of Jesus +Christ.” <a name="citation4c"></a><a href="#footnote4c" +class="citation">[4c]</a> And then, in the text, he seems +to meet an objection, that if his call and ministry in the Gospel +were of so glorious a nature, the instruments thereof would bear +more or higher marks of glory themselves, he adds the words of +our text: “But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, +that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of +us.” <a name="citation4d"></a><a href="#footnote4d" +class="citation">[4d]</a></p> +<p>And now, brethren, again I ask, what is the treasure, and to +whom committed? Surely the ministry of the glorious Gospel +of Jesus Christ, entrusted to human stewardship!</p> +<p><a name="page5"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 5</span>And who +shall disparage this, or overlook it, or deny the gifts and +treasure of and in those who bear it, though they be but as +earthen vessels; though they look simply like other men; though +they are “men of like passions;” though they have few +or no high marks or tokens, to be discerned by man’s eye, +of the greatness of the treasure which nevertheless they +bear?</p> +<p>This thought, this warning against denying God’s gifts +when lodged in earthen vessels, and so speaking against them as +actually to make a new Gospel totally unlike to that which has +been from the beginning, is especially a danger of our day: a day +when men live so much by sight, and, alas, so little by faith; +when restless and free enquiry ranges over every subject, and men +pride themselves upon their refusal to submit to any authority +but their own reason, or their own mere opinion, or to receive +anything beyond that of which they can understand the mode and +assign the use.</p> +<p>Not, perhaps, the most unfrequent of these attacks of the +present time is directed against almost the very subject of our +text: the reality of the treasure or gifts bestowed upon the +ministers and stewards of Christ’s mysteries, because they +are contained in earthen vessels. Whereas St. Paul fully +claims and asserts that there is this treasure, and gives as the +sufficient reason for its being so lowlily enshrined, that +thereby it would be seen indeed that “the excellency of the +power <a name="page6"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 6</span>is of +God, and not of man;” <a name="citation6"></a><a +href="#footnote6" class="citation">[6]</a> these objectors deny +there can be any such treasure as it is asserted there is, +because it is not to their eye exhibited in or by, glorious, or +sufficiently distinctive, instruments.</p> +<p>Take a case in illustration, very near indeed to the argument +of the Apostle in this place. If our Christianity in our +beloved Church of England is, and is to be, the Christianity +which has been from the beginning, it cannot be without a +priesthood, and an altar, and a sacrifice. I do not propose +at this moment to go into the proofs of this, but rather to +notice an objection which is sometimes triumphantly put forward, +by modern infidelity or ignorance, as fatal to all such +claims. It is said, that if it were so that there is a +priesthood, (which it is intended to deny;—O sad and +fearful thought! That any should be found to deny and +refuse the chiefest means of applying to us the pardon of the +Cross): but if it were so, then, it is said this priesthood must +be seen to be such by some peculiar exhibition of its powers, by +some glorious or distinctive appearance in the treasure-bearing +vessels. So it is said, Whatever there may be elsewhere, +the Church of England at least has no priesthood, and no +priests. No! Can any one believe (it is added) that +they are priests who are young men, as others, one day; and are +ordained, with so little outward difference, the next? <a +name="page7"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 7</span>Can it be that +prayers and a laying on of hands, even by bishops, can effect +such a change when all looks so nearly the same? No, +truly! If such there were, if such there be, if we are to +believe in a power given of this kind, if the priest can +consecrate, and offer upon the altar of God, let us see the +difference. Let the young, who are to fill such an office, +be educated, not as other young men are, living with them in +social life at our schools and Universities, but as set apart for +this from their earliest days. Let them be known of all as +a separate kind or caste; let them have a distinctive dress; let +them give up social life; let them, above all, renounce the +married state, and give themselves up to pursue their avocation +in the single life; and then, perhaps, we may be more inclined to +believe in their sacrificial function; in their power to +officiate sacerdotally at the altar; in the committal to them of +the power of the keys, and all which is included in the idea of a +distinct order and a priestly authority. Now all this, +brethren, is mere man’s wisdom, setting forth, in truth, +not what it really desires to find as the mark of a priesthood, +if it might have this in vessels of gold or silver, but simply, +if it may not disparage and deny a priesthood of Christianity +altogether, (which yet it desires to do), at least delighting to +deny it to <i>us</i>; to raise a prejudice against it, and to +drive from the Church of England (if it were possible) all those +who cleave to the statements of our formularies <a +name="page8"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 8</span>as they are, +and to the faith once for all delivered and handed down to +us.</p> +<p>But observe, brethren, what all this really amounts to. +I am not saying whether there should not be (unto the more +edification), a more distinctive theological education for the +future priesthood than very often there is among us. I am +not saying whether there might not, with advantage, be some +greater distinction in outward appearance or dress, than we have +among us generally, for those who minister in holy things. +(Let it, however, here be remarked, that the greatest objection +and hindrance as to this proceeds, as we well know, from the +clamours of those who would first deny us all priestly character, +and then reproach any who, claiming it, are anxious to mark it +also by some outward difference.) I am not, however, now +dwelling upon these things, nor even on what are the advantages +or disadvantages of a celibate clergy, but I say that to suppose +the presence or absence of these outward signs or marks should +affect the essence of the priesthood, and men being in reality +and truth ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of +God, in the full sense in which these words are understood in all +the primitive writings and liturgies of the Church of Christ, +shews, not only an ignorance of the very first principles of +Christian worship, but a strange overlooking of the truth taught +in the text, and confirmed to us in so many other places of Holy +<a name="page9"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +9</span>Scripture. If St. Paul confessed that, even with +him, his ministry was confided to an earthen vessel; if there +were no need and no likelihood that any of the primitive stewards +of God’s mysteries should be distinguished as by a star +upon their breast, or any insignia of their rank in the Apostolic +band, then it can amount to nothing as a disproof of the +priesthood of the ministry of the Church of England, that those +who serve at her altars have but the outward look and bearing of +other men.</p> +<p>We may even carry this argument further, if it may be so done +with due reverence and humility. We may take, not merely +prophets and Apostles, but our blessed Lord Himself,—our +King as well as our great High Priest,—and say of Him, +that, although of course it is not objectively true that He had +any of His gifts or powers in an earthen vessel, (save in the +sense that He took upon Him man’s nature, and so being of +Adam’s race—yet without sin—had His share of +the earth of which Adam was created); but though, I say, except +thus, He held not anything in an earthen vessel objectively, +still, on the other hand, subjectively, to man’s sight and +apprehension, He veiled His Godhead, He emptied Himself of His +glory, He obscured His greatness, so that nearly throughout His +life and ministry He was passed over as a common man, or His +claims denied, and Himself treated as an impostor. In spite +of the <a name="page10"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +10</span>holiness of His life, the tenderness of His compassion, +the purity of His precepts, the marvels of His teaching, the +abundance and power of His miracles, yet He was not received or +accepted generally as other than a common man. The Jews +were offended at Him. He was to them “a stumbling +block,” as He was to the Greeks +“foolishness.” He came in no outward +manifestation of glory; He was not in kings’ courts; He had +no armies or numerous followers; He won no carnal victories; He +did nothing “to restore the kingdom to Israel,” in +any sense which the Jewish nation could observe or recognise; +nay, in His very priestly acts, and in that greatest of them in +which He did in truth offer up the great sacrifice of all, He +appeared to man’s eye in no such aspect. Even as a +victim, He was only considered as a malefactor put to death, +whilst it may be well doubted whether even His own Apostles had +the least insight at the time into the nature of the sacrifice He +made; and none of them had a single thought or perception of the +priesthood which He exercised. So, indeed, He seemed to +have “no form nor comeliness;” <a +name="citation10a"></a><a href="#footnote10a" +class="citation">[10a]</a> “His visage was so marred more +than any man, and His form more than the sons of men.” <a +name="citation10b"></a><a href="#footnote10b" +class="citation">[10b]</a> He seemed to have all He had in +an earthen vessel, undistinguished and undistinguishable by the +vulgar eye from others who were around Him, or who had preceded +Him, <a name="page11"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 11</span>with +some pretensions to be teachers, or reformers of manners, but who +had disappeared and left no trace behind them. Is it, then, +so certain that those who now “seek after a sign” +before they admit any claim to “the office of a priest in +the Church of God,” and who look for various marks and +distinctions in outward show or appearance before they will +entertain the doctrine as belonging to the Church of England; is +it, I say, so certain that they would not have rejected Christ +Himself, as not coming up to their mark and requirement, if they +had seen Him in the days of His ministration upon earth?</p> +<p>But let us pass on from the priesthood of our Lord and +Saviour, and turn again for a moment to the Apostles and their +fellow-labourers. Observe, I am not engaged in proving now +their priestly character, nor the truth of the sacrifices, or +altars of the Christian religion; (we may come to this another +day;) but I am merely meeting the preliminary objection that +there can be no such things, at least, none such in the Church of +England, because our priesthood is not more manifestly set forth +in outward show to the eye of the world, by a more distinctive +priestly education, or a more distinctive priestly dress, or a +more distinctive (as is supposed) priestly life as separated from +social life; and this particularly by the exhibition of an +unmarried clergy. As I have before said, I am not even +giving an opinion on the advantages or disadvantages of <a +name="page12"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 12</span>some of these +things; but I am asking the plain broad question, What right have +we, from Scripture and Scriptural example, to say these +differences are needful to the existence of a priesthood? +Be the priesthood and ministerial powers of St. Peter and St. +Paul, and others their companions, what they may, did they shew +them forth as in vessels of gold and silver, or were they not +what we may call obscured, undistinguished, not (in many +particulars at least) dissevered from social life, but just like +other men; in short, with their treasure borne in earthen +vessels, however really great and precious in itself?</p> +<p>Carry your mind back, brethren, to Simon Peter with Andrew his +brother, to James and John, the sons of Zebedee, fishing on the +sea of Galilee. There is no reason, at I know of, to +suppose that they wholly gave up this their occupation +immediately upon their endowments at the day of Pentecost. +They certainly pursued them as long as their Lord was with them, +and after the Crucifixion. Nay, after the Resurrection; +after Jesus had appeared unto the Eleven; after He had +“breathed on them and said, Receive ye the Holy +Ghost,” and conveyed to them, (if any thing could do so,) +the priestly power, saying, “Whose soever sins ye remit, +they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, +they are retained,” <a name="citation12"></a><a +href="#footnote12" class="citation">[12]</a> still Simon Peter +said to the rest, “I go a fishing; and they said unto him, +We also <a name="page13"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 13</span>go +with thee.” <a name="citation13a"></a><a +href="#footnote13a" class="citation">[13a]</a> Will any one +dare to say, Had they been true priests of God, they must have +pursued another mode of life, and borne the marks of their office +more demonstratively and visibly before the eyes of men? +Will any say, We cannot receive it that the hands, engaged one +day in casting a hook into the sea, or spreading or mending nets, +can be those which exercise, the next, (or the same if so it be,) +the Christian ministerial office,—in breaking of bread, and +celebrating the most holy Christian mysteries? Will any say +that the lips which called to their partners for help, or in +direction as to the safety or management of their boats and +fishing, must therefore be incapable of preaching the glad +tidings of the Gospel, or of exercising the commission given them +of binding and loosing in the name of Christ? Or, think of +St. Paul, with his fellow-helper and companion in labour, Aquila, +working with their hands at their craft, “for by their +occupation they were tent-makers;” <a +name="citation13b"></a><a href="#footnote13b" +class="citation">[13b]</a> aye, even “working night and +day,” that they “might not be chargeable” to +others: and will any say, Herein they shewed themselves too like +to other men to put forward any pretence or claim to have or +exercise any priestly or sacerdotal function. Will any +again call to mind that St. Peter was certainly a married man; +(“Peter’s wife’s mother,” we read at one +time, “was sick of a fever;”) as also certainly was +Aquila the companion <a name="page14"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 14</span>in labour of St. Paul, (for he came +“with his wife Priscilla;”) or, once more, St. +Paul’s own claim to the right (though he did not exercise +it, but still the right) to marry if he thought fit; as he says, +“Have we not power to eat and to drink? Have we not +power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other Apostles, +and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?” <a +name="citation14"></a><a href="#footnote14" +class="citation">[14]</a> will any consider so much, and then +say, you must needs have a celibate priesthood, if you are to +have any priesthood at all in the Church of Christ; or, if there +be one, it must be one so separated from all earthly pursuit as +to be recognised at a glance as of a different order?</p> +<p>Nay, my brethren, such things are surely no arguments of even +a feather’s weight in the mouth of any man against a true +priesthood in the Church of England; and one can hardly see how +they can be supposed, by any sober-minded thinker, to be either +contained in, or deduced from, Holy Scripture. They are, in +fact, objections merely playing with the prejudices of those who +have already come to a foregone conclusion, and intended rather +to point an unjust shaft at the Church of England, through a mock +admiration of the Church of Rome, than to advance the cause of +truth. And this with no justice, even towards Rome herself, +either in praise or blame; for Rome herself may have something to +say in defence of her practice as to the distinctions <a +name="page15"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 15</span>with which +she marks her priesthood, if looked on merely as matters of +expediency and not of faith or doctrine; and at the same time, we +certainly have no little reason to maintain that in many of these +things, (and however there may be incidental disadvantages which +we need not deny, on the ground of expediency also,) yet we come +the nearer of the two to the following of the Apostles, in the +not making too broad an outward distinction between priests and +people, and in the not having laid a yoke hard to be borne, +perhaps, as a wide and extended rule, too hard to be borne, upon +our priesthood’s neck; and, in short, that we are at any +rate close upon the very type and pattern which St. Paul mentions +in our text, in that we too have our treasure in earthen vessels, +and may, in one sense at least, rejoice that it is so, inasmuch +as thereby it may be seen by all “that the excellency of +the power is of God, and not of us.”</p> +<p>Further, it needs surely no words to prove that such +objections and such line of argument in denial of our priesthood, +can have but one effect, if they have any, namely, to forward the +interests of the Church of Rome. This, I presume, ought in +consistency to be the last wish of those who use them. But +so it is, and in this way. There is no more possibility of +any one, who has the knowledge of what Christianity has been from +the beginning, being moved by such assertions to disbelieve the +great doctrines of the <a name="page16"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 16</span>priesthood, the altar, and the +sacrifice, as belonging, and necessarily belonging, to the Church +Universal, than there is of the words of the objectors moving +mountains or drying up seas. We can no more unlearn the +very first elements of the appointed mode of our applying to +Christ for His intercession on high for us miserable +sinners,—no more believe the Catholic truths which we have +drunk in to be mere human figments and superstitious +inventions,—than we could return to the system of Ptolemy, +and believe the earth to be the centre round which the sun and +the stars revolve. Nothing, therefore, can be gained in +this direction by those who propound such views. But if it +should be that any, who know what the Church Universal holds and +has ever held on these points, should, by weakness or +inadvertence, be shaken in their belief that the Church of +England maintains these doctrines and preserves this sacerdotal +order,—if any should come to think that perhaps after all +she has not a priesthood, and an altar, and a sacrifice, then +such would no doubt begin to fail in their allegiance to her, and +be afraid longer to trust their souls to her teaching or her +keeping. No well-instructed, patient, humble-minded member +of the Church of England can, I think, be deceived by so +sophistical an argument as that which we have been considering; +but, of course, all are not well instructed, nor, perchance, are +all patient or humble minded, and hence it may be, there +<i>is</i> a danger. <a name="page17"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 17</span>But if there be this danger, or if +any defections should follow upon such defamation of our Church, +those who put forth the libel must have upon their conscience the +weight of having aided the Church of Rome against their Mother +Church of England.</p> +<p>But to return; take but two brief illustrations further of our +subject. You will remember the contention between St. Paul +and St. Barnabas concerning “Mark, sister’s son to +Barnabas,” whom “Paul thought not good to take with +them,” and how it “was so sharp between them that +they parted asunder one from the other.” <a +name="citation17a"></a><a href="#footnote17a" +class="citation">[17a]</a> Again, you will recollect the +occasion when at Antioch St. Paul (as he says), +“withstood” St. Peter “to the face because he +was to be blamed;” saying to him “before them all, If +thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and +not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as +do the Jews?” Consider that “the other Jews +dissembled likewise with him, insomuch that Barnabas also was +carried away with their dissimulation;” and to such a point +did this reach, that St. Paul declares he “saw that they +walked not uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel;” +<a name="citation17b"></a><a href="#footnote17b" +class="citation">[17b]</a> put all this together and then say +whether, upon the grounds of the objection urged, any one might +not far more plausibly have denied to the Apostles themselves any +just power or fitness to rule or teach authoritatively <a +name="page18"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 18</span>in the Church +of God, than any man can deny the priesthood of the Church of +England because its power is not more demonstratively shewn among +us.</p> +<p>Or, for a second point, note this:—Does, or did ever, +the admission to the Christian covenant, and the wondrous gift of +God, the new birth of water and of the Spirit, by which, as the +Apostle plainly teaches, Christians are made the temples of the +Holy Ghost; does it, or did it ever, make such outward show of +difference as will enable man to decide, immediately and +infallibly, who are Christ’s, and who are forfeiting or +have forfeited the gift bestowed? Then, if there be not +this palpable manifestation as to the Christian life in each, why +should there be a more manifest and outward demonstration of the +treasure of the priesthood? If the grace of Baptism be not +thus self-evident, and ever recognised by sight, why must the +grace of Orders be so either? Oh! when shall we learn to +believe instead of to cavil; to use the blessings God gives us, +not to dispute about them; to judge, not according to appearance, +but to judge righteous judgment; to believe there is a treasure, +even the treasure which the Church has ever believed and declared +to be in her ministry and stewardship, though it be contained in +earthen vessels?</p> +<p>One word more, brethren, of most serious weight and import, as +to such objections and I objectors. Carry your mind back to +the time <a name="page19"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +19</span>of Christ, to the labours of Apostles and Evangelists, +and the infancy of the Church, and see of what Spirit they +are. I am not speaking, remember, of all who may, from one +cause or other, not be able to receive the doctrine of the +Christian priesthood and altar, and who, we may well hope and +believe, many of them receive the blessing of these gifts of +Christ, though they know it not; but I speak of the particular +objection with which I have all along been dealing,—that +there cannot be a Priesthood, unless marked by striking outward +differences visible by all. And I ask, what would have been +the part taken, if the framers of such a test, being consistent +in their objection, had lived in the days of Christ on +earth? Surely we should have heard them saying, aye, in +spite of His mighty works and great High Priesthood, “Is +not this the carpenter’s Son? Is not His mother +called Mary, and His brethren James, and Joses, and Simon, and +Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us?” <a +name="citation19a"></a><a href="#footnote19a" +class="citation">[19a]</a> What is He different from +another? Or what more likely than that expecting something +different in show and demeanour in the great Apostle of the +Gentiles, they would have joined in the reproach: “His +bodily presence is weak and his speech contemptible!” <a +name="citation19b"></a><a href="#footnote19b" +class="citation">[19b]</a> and have rejected Him?</p> +<p>If these things shew us the dangers of such a line of +argument, let them keep us from any <a name="page20"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 20</span>word said to countenance or support +it. It is a solemn thought that we cannot, by even the most +careless word of levity, express approval of such assaults upon +the ancient faith, or sympathy with those who make them, without +becoming sharers in their responsibility. For it is thus, +by a few words here and a few there, that public opinion is +formed or strengthened; and what can be more awful than to have +helped to form it adversely to the truth of God, and in +derogation of that “ministry of reconciliation,” and +those means of grace, which He has appointed. Surely the +sin of such must be, like that of the sons of Eli, “very +great before the Lord,” when a prejudice is raised by which +men, if they do not “abhor,” are at least taught to +deny and despise, “the offering of the Lord.” +At the same time, let us pray earnestly for them, for, we will +hope and trust, “they know not what they do.” +Let us not wish that they went out from us, but let us hope and +pray that they may be turned to better things. Let us +remember, too, as a ground of charity, that many fall into error +here because too much, for many years, the teaching of the +primitive Church and of Catholic antiquity has been overlooked as +a guide to the due understanding of the Scriptures; and again, +because the face of Christendom, alas, is not now so one and +undivided as to present all truth in due form, and mode, and +weight, to each man’s acceptance. The glory <a +name="page21"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 21</span>of our +Reformation is, indeed, that it appeals to antiquity, and carries +us back to the early Church; but these later days have too much +overlooked this great principle of the Reformation. So it +has happened, that what is, alas, the misfortune and the reproach +of Christendom—I mean its divided state—may be, and +we will hope is, some palliation before God for defect in those +who wish to follow the truth, but are unable at the present +moment to see or to accept it. So let us above all pray to +the one great Lord of all, that in His good time the Church may +again be one, not only in its essence, which it must be, (we +believe in but “one holy Catholic and Apostolic +Church,”) but also in its life, and in a re-established +communion of the Saints; that being indeed, if it may be so, once +more one, our Lord’s own prayer for it may be fulfilled, +and His promise accomplished, and “the world believe that +God hath sent Him.” <a name="citation21a"></a><a +href="#footnote21a" class="citation">[21a]</a> And let us +ourselves, brethren, ever remember that all we have in treasure +is indeed in earthen vessels, and let us for ourselves be content +to be reviled and threatened (yes, as the holy Apostle was, and +his Lord and Master before him), for “the disciple is not +above his Master, nor the servant above his Lord.” <a +name="citation21b"></a><a href="#footnote21b" +class="citation">[21b]</a> Neither, indeed, let us count it +a strange thing, “as though some strange thing happened +unto us,” <a name="citation21c"></a><a href="#footnote21c" +class="citation">[21c]</a> if we have to “go forth bearing +<a name="page22"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 22</span>the +reproach of Christ” <a name="citation22a"></a><a +href="#footnote22a" class="citation">[22a]</a> and His Apostles; +nay, rather, “being reviled, let us bless; being +persecuted” (if so it be), “let us suffer it; being +defamed, let us intreat;” yea, let us be willing to be +“made as the filth of the world, and the off-scouring of +all things,” <a name="citation22b"></a><a +href="#footnote22b" class="citation">[22b]</a> so that we may but +do our Master’s work, and preserve His truth in the midst +of a crooked and perverse generation, and win souls to Christ, +and, if it may be so indeed, “finish our course with joy, +and the ministry, which we have received of the Lord Jesus, to +testify the Gospel of the grace of God.” <a +name="citation22c"></a><a href="#footnote22c" +class="citation">[22c]</a></p> +<h2><a name="page23"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 23</span>SERMON +II.<br /> +The Witness of the World, before Christ, to the Doctrine of +Sacrifice.</h2> +<blockquote><p style="text-align: center">JOB i. 5.<br /> +“Thus did Job continually.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p><span class="smcap">That</span> which such a man as Job +“did continually,” we shall naturally conclude was +well-pleasing in the sight of God. The Almighty’s own +witness to his character is given in His Word addressed to Satan: +“Hast thou considered My servant Job, that there is none +like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that +feareth God, and escheweth evil?” <a +name="citation23"></a><a href="#footnote23" +class="citation">[23]</a> And when we couple this with the +circumstances to which the text relates, and the tone of the +whole narrative, we shall find, I think, more than a <i>prima +facie</i> probability that the act so mentioned was not only +right in itself, but that it bore a significant import, not +merely to those who lived near Job’s own time or in his own +country, but to the world at large.</p> +<p>What then is it to which the text alludes?</p> +<p>Job, we read, was a man of great substance as well as great +integrity, living in a very early time <a name="page24"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 24</span>in the land of Uz. Moreover, +besides his great possessions, we are told that he had seven sons +and three daughters. And we find that his sons were used, +“to feast in their houses, every one his day;” and +that on these occasions it was their custom to “send and +call for their three sisters to eat and to drink with +them;” a token, (as a well-known commentator has fairly +enough conjectured,) both of their harmonious family affection +and of the good order and conduct which prevailed in their +feastings, or so holy a man as Job would not have permitted his +daughters to join in their festivity. But, nevertheless, we +read that Job in his anxious care was mindful to intercede for +them, even in case they might have erred or sinned in the fulness +of their rejoicing, or in the exuberance of their mirth. +“And it was so, when the days of their feasting were gone +about, that Job sent and sanctified them, and rose up early in +the morning, and offered burnt-offerings according to the number +of them all: for Job said, It may be that my sons have sinned, +and cursed God in their hearts. Thus did Job +continually.” <a name="citation24"></a><a +href="#footnote24" class="citation">[24]</a></p> +<p>Here, then, we have no doubtful witness, not merely to the +usage of sacrifice, but to its acceptableness also in the sight +of God, as a part of worship and intercession. And this is +all the more, not merely curious, but important, when we reflect +upon the very early date almost universally <a +name="page25"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 25</span>assigned to +the events related in the Book of Job. Whether the record +itself may have been composed at a somewhat later period, as some +have thought, yet all authorities are, I believe, agreed that the +time of Job’s life was contemporaneous with even the +earliest part of the life of Moses, and, therefore, that he did +not derive his knowledge of God from the institutions of the +Jews, or live under the Mosaic dispensation. The consenting +witness, both of the Jews themselves and of the early Christian +writers accepting their testimony, is that Job is the same as +Jobab, mentioned in the first book of Chronicles, who is there +named as the third in descent from Esau; so that he, as well as +Moses, was the fifth in descent from Abraham,—the one in +the line of Esau, and the other in the line of Jacob. +Moreover, it would appear that this Job or Jobab was, if not +absolutely what may be termed a king, yet a ruler and a prince in +the land called Uz, or Ausitis, a country on the confines, +probably, of Idumæa and Arabia. If this be so, he +would seem, from the summary given in the first book of +Chronicles, to have succeeded Balaam in the sovereignty or +chiefdom of that country. “For,” (says that +narrative,) “these are the kings that reigned in the land +of Edom, before any king reigned over the children of Israel; +Bela the son of Beor,” (undoubtedly the same as Balaam); +“and the name of his city was Dinhabah. And when Bela +was dead, Jobab the son <a name="page26"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 26</span>of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his +stead.” <a name="citation26a"></a><a href="#footnote26a" +class="citation">[26a]</a> Now we find in the book of +Numbers, that Balaam the son of Beor was killed in battle, +fighting on the side of Midian in the last year of the +Israelites’ wandering in the wilderness, <a +name="citation26b"></a><a href="#footnote26b" +class="citation">[26b]</a> and supposing Job’s trial to +have taken place (as some ancient writers assert) some few years +after the Exodus, as he lived one hundred and forty years after +those events, he may very well have succeeded to the chief place +among the Idumæan or Uzzite people upon the death of +Balaam. The importance of this to our present purpose lies +in the fact, that he is thus a witness to the antiquity and the +use of sacrifice and burnt-offering, quite independently of the +institutions and commands of the Mosaic law. If Job were of +man’s estate, and had sons and daughters of like estate +also, (as the narrative unquestionably implies,) even before his +sufferings, he must have been born not far in time from the birth +of Moses, probably some little while before him; and what he +“did continually” in his own country, and apart from +Moses, is a witness to the practice and acceptableness of +sacrifice, anterior to the enactments of the law from Sinai; and +a witness, not merely, let us observe, to the use of sacrifice, +but to sacrifice by burnt-offering, when the victim was killed +and consumed upon the altar of God.</p> +<p>Now this leads us back to consider what is the probable origin +of sacrifice, and sacrifice of this <a name="page27"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 27</span>kind, altogether; for it is thus +evident, that it was adopted into, and not originated by, the +peculiar institutions of the Jewish nation and law.</p> +<p>Now, of course we see at once where we must turn for the first +account of sacrifice. The primal exercise of this mode of +approach to God, is that recorded in the fourth chapter of the +book of Genesis, which shews at once the need which the Fall had +brought upon man of drawing nigh to God, not without a +propitiation; and at the same time exhibits, in sad prominence, +the first-fruits of that corruption of nature entailed by it, +which provoked the eldest-born of the world, in malignant envy of +heart, to slay his next born brother.</p> +<p>Let us turn, then, to a brief consideration of those events, +as illustrative of the origin and nature of sacrifice.</p> +<p>Look first to St. John’s and St. Paul’s account of +the cause of Cain’s quarrel against his brother Abel. +“And wherefore slew he him?” (says St. John), +“Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s +righteous.” <a name="citation27a"></a><a +href="#footnote27a" class="citation">[27a]</a> And St. Paul +tells us wherein Abel’s righteousness and superiority +consisted: “By faith he offered unto God a more excellent +sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was +righteous, God testifying of his gifts.” <a +name="citation27b"></a><a href="#footnote27b" +class="citation">[27b]</a> The narrative in the Book of +Genesis tells us the same thing as to the fact that Cain’s +offering was rejected and Abel’s accepted; <a +name="page28"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 28</span>but without +the Apostle’s comment we should not have precisely traced +the cause of this rejection and acceptance: but we know now that +it was <i>faith</i> in the one and a <i>want of faith</i> in the +other, in which the distinction lay; and also that somehow this +difference was exhibited in the gifts which they brought: +“God” (of Abel) “testifying of his +gifts.” By this, too, St. Paul tells us, “He +being dead still speaketh;” a statement which brings the +whole matter home to ourselves. The narrative then is this: +“And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of +the ground. And in process of time it came to pass, that +Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the +Lord. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his +flock and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto +Abel and to his offering: but unto Cain and to his offering He +had not respect.” <a name="citation28"></a><a +href="#footnote28" class="citation">[28]</a></p> +<p>This takes us back to the origin of sacrifice; and the first +remark which occurs is, that it would seem highly probable that +its institution was a matter of revelation from God to Adam; for +though mere reason and moral feeling might make the creature see +the propriety of offering to the Creator something of that which +His bounty had bestowed, and possibly might lead to the thought +that it should be not mean, but good and precious, yet there are +so many attendant circumstances in the institution, which it does +not <a name="page29"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 29</span>appear +possible to account for upon the hypothesis of the mere dictates +of reason and feeling, that we can hardly ascribe the practice to +anything short of a communication of the divine will to +man. However, be this as it may, it is plain that both Cain +and Abel were conscious of the duty of offering sacrifice or +oblation in some kind to God. And each brought of that +which he had. So far, it might be thought, Cain was not +behind his brother. “Abel was a keeper of sheep, but +Cain was a tiller of the ground.” Cain brought of the +fruit of the ground, but Abel brought of the firstlings of his +flock, and (it is added) “of the fat thereof.” +Now it may be we are intended to note a difference +here,—that Abel’s offering, the firstlings and the +fat, denotes the earliest and the best: as if he hastened to +acknowledge, in all thankfulness and humility, that he was not +worthy to touch or use anything he had, until he had sanctified +it by first offering of it to God; and this, the first he had, +and the best: whilst the more scanty narrative as to Cain, that +he merely brought of the fruit of the ground, may mark that he +took no heed to bring of the first, nor of the best. He +would offer <i>something</i> as an acknowledgment of God’s +power,—perhaps, too, of His goodness,—but not in that +due spirit of unmeasured humility and thankfulness, which alone +was becoming in a son of Adam. But this, if it were so, +does not seem to be all which is implied as to his lack of +faith. To understand <a name="page30"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 30</span>wherein this lay, we must remember +the promise made to our first parents after the Fall, of +“the seed of the woman” who should “bruise the +serpent’s head.” <a name="citation30a"></a><a +href="#footnote30a" class="citation">[30a]</a> Faith in +this seed, the hope, the only hope of the world after +Adam’s transgression, seems to be the thing intended; and +if we suppose that God was pleased to reveal to our first parents +some further particulars as to the mode of the atonement to be +made by shedding of blood, by which this hope was to be +fulfilled, and the victory to be obtained, we shall be furnished, +not merely with a clue to the difference in the acceptableness of +the offerings of the two, but also with a key to a large part of +the Holy Scriptures, and an understanding what manner of faith +should be in every one of us, as well as to much that is +important as to the history and design of sacrifice. Let it +be granted, then, as highly probable, that to Adam a revelation +was given that in him, as the federal head of mankind, and by his +transgression, as deteriorating the whole race to spring from +him, were all men lost by nature, and further, that +“without shedding of blood should be no remission;” +<a name="citation30b"></a><a href="#footnote30b" +class="citation">[30b]</a> but that by a worthy sacrifice and +blood-shedding should the promised seed of the woman in due time +effect a reconciliation for them and their descendants, and +reverse the evil and the curse of their transgression. +Surely, then, from that time <a name="page31"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 31</span>forward, a faith in the efficacy of a +sacrifice by blood would be required, and would be acceptable to +God. Cain, then, would be evidently one who had not this +faith, who denied, and disbelieved, and did not look forward to, +this sacrifice, or cast himself upon this mercy. By +bringing of the fruits of the ground, he may be considered to +have made acknowledgment of the power and goodness of God, in +causing the seed to grow and the corn to ripen; he may have done +as much as we do, when we merely confess that we must look to God +for rain, and sunshine, and “fruitful seasons, filling our +hearts with food and gladness;” (therefore, by the way, let +us not think too highly of ourselves if we do confess so much; it +is right, but it is a very small part of religion:) he may have +meant to express thankfulness for blessing, but observe what he +did not express. He made no acknowledgment of sin; he +exhibited no sense of unworthiness; he confessed no shortcomings; +he gave no sign of sorrow or repentance; he asked no mercy; above +all, he turned to no one out of himself—no intercessor, no +mediator between his God and him. He shewed no sign of +looking to a Saviour to make atonement, atonement by blood: he +looked to no “Lamb of God to take away the sins of the +world” in general, and his own sins in particular. He +ignored, then, the whole promise which was the sole hope of +man. He may have said, “God, I thank Thee,” but +he shewed <a name="page32"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +32</span>himself to be wholly without the feeling “God be +merciful to me a sinner.”</p> +<p>But, on the other hand, Abel brought of the sheep or goats +which were of his flock. He offered up not an unbloody +sacrifice. He laid the victim on the altar, and believing +God, as well as feeling his need of a Saviour, he looked forward +with the eye of faith to an expiation greater than that of kids, +or lambs, or bulls, or goats, to take away sin. Nay more, +he shewed his sense of the need of an atonement out of and beyond +himself; for the blood of the victim offered described at once +the sense of his own blood being required as a penalty, if +justice only held its course and no expiatory sacrifice were +found, and represented also, in true type and figure, that better +sacrifice, that more precious blood, which should be shed in the +fulness of the time to make such an expiation, even that of +“the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the +world.”</p> +<p>Now I have gone through this history with what I think is its +probable and satisfactory explanation, because not merely does it +serve to shew what the Apostle means when he tells us it was by +faith that Abel pleased God, and that God testified of his gifts, +but also because the very same remarks seem to apply to the whole +history and intention of sacrifice, as either commanded or +accepted, or both, by Almighty God from the beginning. Take +such to be the origin of propitiary sacrifice, and I think +nothing can <a name="page33"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +33</span>more fully agree with, or illustrate, or be illustrated +by, the further progress both of the fact and doctrine as we find +them, first in the Holy Scripture, and, secondly, in the world at +large, even though by the world’s wickedness so fearfully +perverted. In perfect accordance with such beginning of +acceptable sacrifice we have the same used and practised, and +with the like acceptance, by Noah, Abraham, Melchizedek, Isaac, +and Jacob, <a name="citation33a"></a><a href="#footnote33a" +class="citation">[33a]</a> and, indeed, by all the patriarchs +until the institution was embodied in the law of Moses. As +we know, also, it was practised by all the heathen nations of +antiquity of whom we have any record, though with them its true +meaning and intention were fearfully lost and perverted. +Nor does the difference in the instance of Abraham on one +occasion, as to his being ready to offer a human sacrifice in the +person of his son (which was of course a wholly exceptional case +as regards the sacrifices of those knowing the true God), make +any difference as to the witness of the acceptableness of +sacrifice by blood, or the consuming the victim upon the +altar. It has, indeed, been disputed whether Abraham were +not the more easily reconciled to the idea of sacrificing his +son, or even incited to it, by the customary “fierce +ritual” of the Syrians around him; but independently of the +utter contradiction which this view would give to the account in +Holy <a name="page34"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +34</span>Scripture, by the attribution of any other motive for +Abraham’s conduct than the command of God, received in all +faith, and leading to all obedience, it may well be doubted +whether a perverse misinterpretation of the sacrifice which +Abraham was thus ready to make, and an utter inattention to the +real circumstances of that case, may not have been, instead of in +any way the <i>consequence</i>, rather the <i>cause</i> of the +nations around falling into the practice of human +sacrifice. But, be this as it may, we have the plain +witness to the usage of sacrifice, and its efficacy when +performed according to the will of God. Also, that it +prefigured the great sacrifice by the blood of a pure victim, as +well as in itself taught the lesson that (as afterwards expressed +by the Apostle to the Hebrews) “without shedding of blood +is no remission.” <a name="citation34"></a><a +href="#footnote34" class="citation">[34]</a></p> +<p>And all this we see consolidated and confirmed, as well as +more fully expanded and defined, under the Law. And +especially there, a certain new element in its administration is +introduced, in the appointment of a particular order for the +performance of the service. In all the earlier usage, it +would seem that the head of the family or tribe acted as the +ministering priest. And there is no disproof of this, as +far as I see, in the account of even the first sacrifice of +all. For there is nothing in the narrative in the Book of +Genesis to shew that Cain and Abel were themselves the <a +name="page35"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 35</span>acting +priests (if we may so term it) in the sacrifice. They may +each, for aught that appears to the contrary, have brought their +offering to Adam, and it may have been by his hand that the +different oblations were placed before God, and presented or +devoted to Him. Such as the office and privilege of the +head or chief, would seem to have been the recognised right and +duty of such persons throughout the patriarchal age; but as the +rule of patriarchs in secular matters merged in that of kings, as +nations grew out of families, so the office of chiefs as priests, +however thus exercised by Noah, Abraham, Melchizedek, or Job, +seems to have been afterwards restricted to a tribe, or family, +or other persons, set apart for the special service, and +denominated priests, +ἱερεῖς, or +<i>sacerdotes</i>; names implying their dedication to holy +things, and their exclusive rights in many particulars to deal +with them. And this theory of worship, if we may so call +it, was not merely reduced to a system by God’s law among +the Jews, but also prevailed universally among the heathen world +from the very earliest times of which any records are +preserved. Hesiod, Homer, Herodotus, bear witness to it, +and the universal practice of all nations substantiates it, +whether in the barbarian forms of the ancient Druidical or other +worship in the ruder peoples of the world, or in the more refined +practice of Greece and Rome, or in the grotesque or cruel rites +of the eastern countries, or absolutely barbarian tribes. +<a name="page36"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 36</span>They all +have their altars, their priests, and their sacrifices, and in +most, if not in all, the notion of propitiation by the blood of +the victim has prevailed.</p> +<p>It need hardly be added that in the provisions of the Mosaic +Law all these principles were embodied, so that, with every +safeguard introduced against the perversions, the sensuality, the +materialism, and the cruelty, which pervaded all forms and +systems of idol worship, yet the true worship of Jehovah, as +established by Himself, embraced, and contained, and stereotyped +under the mark of His own approval, nay, of His absolute command, +the same three points, of an altar, a priesthood, and a +sacrifice; yes, a sacrifice in the sense of more than a mere +oblation or offering,—a sacrifice by blood of a victim +slain, and consumed in the very act of the commanded +worship. For it ought never to be forgotten that amid all +other offerings that were permitted,—nay, for certain +purposes enjoined, as, for instance, for thank-offerings, or for +mere legal purification,—yet, under the Jewish Law, the +particular sacrifice which was appointed for expiation of any +moral offence was the burnt-offering, where the victim, as I have +said, was killed, and afterwards consumed by fire upon the altar; +<a name="citation36"></a><a href="#footnote36" +class="citation">[36]</a> and this appears to have no exception, +unless it were in the case of the extremely poor, who might offer +the tenth part of an ephah of meal; but even then, I believe, it +is considered <a name="page37"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +37</span>that this was placed upon a victim offered by others, or +by the priest, for the sins of the people, and so may be deemed +to have made a part of a sacrifice with blood. So that, in +truth, as St. Paul says to the Hebrews, “almost all things +are by the law purged with blood, and without shedding of blood +is no remission.”</p> +<p>We might say much on this head, and more particularly upon the +appointment of the Passover, and the light thrown by this +institution upon the typical character of sacrifice generally, +and its relation to the great sacrifice of all,—the Lamb +slain, once for all upon the cross, for the sins of the world; +but the outline already given of the doctrine taught by the +sacrifice of Abel will readily suggest a key to the true +intention of the ever-recurring sacrifices of the Jews, and to +the manner in which they (although “the blood of bulls and +of goats could never take away sin,” yet) pointed to, and +prepared the way for, our understanding the nature of the +sacrifice of Christ, and, indeed, were the great means to elicit +and foster faith in Him who should come, and to teach all the +world daily and continually to look to Him who alone is its +salvation, without whom, and whose mercy, no flesh should be +saved at all.</p> +<p>We have brought, then, our statement, and I may say our +argument, to this point; first, generally that the whole world, +with one consent, bears witness to the usage of sacrifice. +The <a name="page38"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 38</span>whole +world from Adam to Christ,—Patriarchal, Jewish, Gentile, +Barbarian, Civilized, North, South, East, and West, together (for +the new world when discovered was found herein not to be +divergent from the old),—testifies, I say, with one mind +and one mouth, as to the Being of a God, so likewise to this +usage of sacrifice. And again, secondly, and more +particularly, the witness agrees, that the sacrifice is made, (to +speak generally,) not without blood, and made for the purpose of +reconciliation, after sin committed, with the supernatural being +or beings invoked, or for propitiation and intercession in cases +of favour sought. Even, still further is there accordant +and consenting witness; that there will be, as necessary +accompaniments to the sacrifice, an altar on which it is to be +made, and a specially set apart order of men: priests +(ίερεῖς, +<i>sacerdotes</i>, or however particularly designated), by whom +these sacrifices should be offered up, and intercessions made on +behalf of the people. So much the whole world testifies +generally, in spite of certain differences of usage, and the +fearful abominations which prevailed amongst those who did not +retain the true God in their knowledge:—the cruelty, +licentiousness, and abhorrent vice into which this worship, when +it degenerated into idol worship, everywhere sunk; which, +however, it is plain, is no more an argument against sacrifice, +holily and obediently offered in accordance with God’s +appointment, than the superstitions of heathen <a +name="page39"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 39</span>invocation +are an argument against godly prayer and intercession. And +thus, too, we see that this very idea of sacrifice, (without the +vicious accompaniments,) prevailed among God’s children +from the first,—as with Abel, Noah, Melchisedek, Abraham, +Isaac, Jacob, and Job; whilst by God’s own sanction and +special command, and, with what in human affairs we should call +the most laborious care and pains, the whole system was, under +Moses, recognised, enlarged, defined, and embodied in a whole +code of laws, to be in their very minutest details carried out +until the Mediator of a new covenant should come, when that which +was old should be ready to vanish away.</p> +<p>But it is well worthy of all our care in examination, to see +whether it is the essence of this idea, and even mode, of worship +which is done away, or only its ceremonial and local detail, as +established in the Jewish Church and polity; whether—as all +sacrifices before Christ were intended to look forward to Him, +and His precious, inestimable, expiation, to be once made by +blood and suffering upon the altar of the cross—whether, I +say, so it has not been His will to continue an altar and a +priesthood, and therewith and thereby a sacrifice +commemorative—but, though commemorative, nevertheless +perfectly real and true—by which the Christian Church may +both look back to Him, then dying once for all, and ever plead +afresh the merits of <a name="page40"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 40</span>His death before the throne of God on +high. As Abraham looked forward, and “rejoiced to see +His day, and saw it, and was glad;” <a +name="citation40a"></a><a href="#footnote40a" +class="citation">[40a]</a> what if, so likewise, the Christian +Church is to look back on Him, and to rejoice; not merely to see +Him and be glad, but to be allowed also, according to His own +will and ordinance,—(aye, brethren, observe, of and by His +own very appointment, whereby His very body and blood are truly +offered up to God,)—allowed thus to plead, week by week and +day by day, the very all-prevailing merits of that same sacrifice +upon the cross; yea, and be the means of Himself graciously +pleading it for His people ever afresh before the mercy-seat of +His Father. O, my brethren, if this be so, who can +undervalue this great thing, or disparage it, or attempt to throw +it off, or deny it, or trample it under foot, without a sacrilege +fearful to think of? But, again, if this be so, how is the +Lamb of God, and His precious blood-shedding, made, more than in +any other way which we can conceive, the centre towards which the +whole world looks, from its earliest to its latest day; from the +moment of the promise that the seed of the woman should bruise +the serpent’s head, <a name="citation40b"></a><a +href="#footnote40b" class="citation">[40b]</a> until that awful +hour when that same seed of the woman, the Son of Man, shall come +in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory? I do +not say, it is not conceivable that <a name="page41"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 41</span>the whole system and machinery (so to +call it), of priest, and altar, and sacrifice, might have +fulfilled its purpose at the hour of the crucifixion, and nothing +remain of it, or like it, in the Christian Church; nothing in the +Christian ministry to answer to the previous priesthood; nothing +in it, but a set of teachers or expounders of the Christian +faith; a faith, however, be it remarked, in that case, a very +different thing from that which the Church has ever supposed it +to be, or (as I think) the Holy Scripture sets before us. +But even if all this be conceivable, I do say, and I think no +unprejudiced person should dispute it, that the whole testimony +and usage of all previous time in this matter, the whole of what +holy men “did continually” in relation to it, not +merely with God’s manifest approval, but even with His +especial sanction, and by His positive command, raises a very +strong <i>prima facie</i> presumption, that all this was not +intended to be, and was not, thus abrogated and done away; and +that, at the very least, we ought to have shewn us the most +express and distinct proofs of its being thus abrogated, before +we can accept its abrogation. We have been accustomed to +see, rather, that instead of being abrogated, the usage is +changed and glorified; changed from the shadow to the image, from +wood and stone to silver and gold, from a comparatively dead +state to a glorious living one, from the ministration of death to +the ministration of life; but, if this be not so, then, indeed, +<a name="page42"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 42</span>we may +surely ask to see this reversal of all which the economy of +God’s dealings would seem to lead us to, expressly +promulgated and proved by the word of Christ or His Apostles; so +plainly set down as to need no explanation further; or else, so +explained by those who immediately followed them, and had the +best means of understanding their sense and design, as to leave +us no ground for reasonable doubt, or we must be excused if we +cannot accept the mere assertion of so improbable a thing as +true, or believe the unchangeable God to be so like a Man that He +should thus repent.</p> +<p>A fair examination into this question is most important, but +we cannot enter upon it at the present moment. We must +necessarily defer it to another day. I trust, with +God’s help and guidance, to resume our subject on Sunday +next, and endeavour further to see how the doctrine really +stands, taking, briefly but carefully, into consideration these +three points:—</p> +<p>1. What is the testimony of the Holy Scripture as to the +doctrine of the Christian priesthood, altar, and sacrifice?</p> +<p>2. How this has been understood by the Church from the +beginning? and,</p> +<p>3. How it has been received by our own branch of the +Church Catholic, the Church of England?</p> +<p>And I will only add now, whilst I pray that we may all strive +simply to know the will of God <a name="page43"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 43</span>that we may do it, that there can be +no more practical matter than this to engage our thoughts and +hearts. For, if it be so, that Christ has left Him no +priests now on earth to minister at His altars, and no sacrifice +with which His people are concerned, a great part of what so many +believe, I might say, of what the Church of God for eighteen +hundred years and more has believed, to be of the essence of our +faith, is a mere fable and superstition; whilst if, on the other +hand, “it be truth, and the thing certain,” <a +name="citation43"></a><a href="#footnote43" +class="citation">[43]</a> that a Christian priesthood, ordained +by Christ Himself, and these sacrificial powers, and altar and +sacrifice, remain and must remain ever in His Church, what words +shall describe the misery and sin of those who are endeavouring +to rob a whole nation of their belief in such truth of God, and +to pour more than slight and contempt upon the ordinances of +Christ; so that, in fact, they would, if they could have their +will and way, unchurch the Church of God in this land, deny the +virtue of His mysteries, and starve the children of God who seek +to receive at His altar the benefits of His sacrifice, humbly +waiting on Him there, and partaking of the sacrifice and feast +ordained by Him.</p> +<p>Oh! let us pray indeed that we may come to the consideration +of so weighty a matter, casting away all passion and prejudice +and preconceived opinion, and whatsoever may hinder us from <a +name="page44"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 44</span>seeing the +truth of God, to which may He of His mercy guide us. And +may He grant us also that we may not merely know the truth, but +when we know it follow it, in our daily life and conversation, +without turning aside to the right hand or to the left.</p> +<h2><a name="page45"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 45</span>SERMON +III.<br /> +Witness of the New Testament to the Doctrine of Sacrifice.</h2> +<blockquote><p style="text-align: center">1 CORINTHIANS x. 18.<br +/> +“Are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the +altar?”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>I <span class="smcap">resume</span> the subject upon which I +have spoken on two previous Sundays—the reality of the +Christian priesthood, altar, and sacrifice.</p> +<p>I endeavoured to shew in the first of these discourses that it +was no argument against the truth of the priesthood that they who +hold it have “this treasure in earthen vessels,” that +a priest is like and “of like passions” with others, +nay, is “weak as another man.” In the second, I +pointed out that sacrifice was an institution as old as the days +of our first parents, and in all probability appointed directly +by the Almighty upon man’s fall, with some revelation of +its predictive significance; that certainly it met with His +approval when duly and religiously performed; and that it was by +faith that those who took part in it “obtained the witness +that they were righteous:” <a name="citation45"></a><a +href="#footnote45" class="citation">[45]</a> whence we were led +to consider <a name="page46"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +46</span>more particularly its relation to the sacrifice upon the +Cross of “the Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the +world,” and how from the beginning it looked forward, in +its inner meaning, with a preparing and expectant eye and heart, +to that wonderful consummation. We saw, too, that thus +among God’s own chosen people, by special and minute +provision, this doctrine and usage of sacrifice were preserved +even as long as the elder dispensation lasted; whilst, though in +terrible and wicked perversion, both as to the object and the +mode of worship, they yet prevailed universally throughout the +heathen world. Admitting it to be conceivable that in the +Almighty’s will it might be intended that sacrifice should +altogether cease when once the great sacrifice was completed; +that, although He had appointed foreshadowing and predictive +rites of that wonderful event, He did not intend that there +should be any reflective or commemorative sacrifice to carry us +back to it, or to apply its virtue, or to plead its merits ever +afresh before the throne of God; we yet saw great reason to think +this to be highly unlikely, and reserved the point more +particularly for further examination. What is the testimony +which has been furnished to us upon it? You will remember +that I proposed to consider this testimony under the three heads: +first, what Holy Scripture tells us; secondly, what has been the +understanding by the Church from the beginning of the +declarations of Holy Writ; and thirdly, <a +name="page47"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 47</span>what is the +mind of our own Church in this matter?</p> +<p>Before, however, coming to these particulars, let me premise +that it can be but a brief summary of such evidences which it is +possible to give here. The subject is so large, and the +full testimony so extensive, that it would require volumes to go +through it. Those who would study it in a more complete +manner will find it elaborately discussed in the discourses on +“The Government of Churches and on Religious +Assemblies,” of Dr. Herbert Thorndike, Canon of +Westminster, about the middle of the seventeenth century, (a very +learned theologian); and in the three octavo volumes of +“Treatises on the Christian Priesthood,” by Dr. +Hickes, Dean of Worcester, some fifty years later; whilst there +is a very thoughtful and condensed statement of the whole matter +in a small book by the Rev. T. T. Carter, called “The +Doctrine of the Priesthood.”</p> +<p>Let us now turn to our own enquiry, as some help (if it please +God) to those who may not be so likely, possibly may not have +leisure or opportunity, to consult larger works, but may yet have +a godly anxiety amid the bold assertions, and I fear we must say, +in no small measure, the irreverent scoffing of a free and +licentious time, to learn the will of God herein, that they may +neither think nor do anything but what is pleasing and acceptable +in His sight.</p> +<p>Our question is, Has God willed, and has He <a +name="page48"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 48</span>revealed to +us His will, that in His Church, since the death of His Blessed +Son upon the cross, there shall be no priesthood, no altar, and +no sacrifice? And first, “What saith the +Scripture?” <a name="citation48a"></a><a +href="#footnote48a" class="citation">[48a]</a> I must take +but a few out of many passages.</p> +<p>1. We have, in our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount, the +following direction: “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.” <a name="citation48b"></a><a href="#footnote48b" +class="citation">[48b]</a> Now if this direction be +intended to be a guide of conduct for Christian people in the +Christian Church, can it be denied that our Lord speaks of an +altar to be used, and an offering to be made thereon; and that, +speaking to those who were constantly accustomed to altars and +sacrifices, His words must have conveyed to them the meaning that +an altar and a sacrifice would remain for them whilst they should +be practising the precepts of His religion? If He did not +intend so much by this precept, the question surely arises, How +shall we, with any certainty, know what other portions of that or +any of our Lord’s discourses were designed for the +instruction merely of the Jews who were around Him, or should +receive His teaching during the time that their covenant lasted, +but became immediately inapplicable and void in and under the +Christian dispensation? Will any say that the <a +name="page49"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 49</span>precepts +concerning purity, meekness, government of the tongue, charity, +are thus limited? as, “Whoso looketh on a woman to lust +after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his +heart;” or, “Whosoever is angry with his brother +without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment;” or, +again, “Let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, +nay;” or, once more, “Resist not evil; love your +enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate +you, and pray for them that despitefully use you and persecute +you.” <a name="citation49"></a><a href="#footnote49" +class="citation">[49]</a> That these and other divine +precepts of that same discourse were injunctions to bind the +Jews, to whom primarily they were spoken, but require other proof +or repetition before they can be conclusively accepted as +designed for Christians would seem strange indeed. If no +one will say so, surely we must confess to a strong presumption +in favour of the doctrine of an altar and a sacrifice remaining +in the Christian Church.</p> +<p>But perhaps it may be said, Not so: we accept those other +precepts as belonging to the Christian Church, because they are +simply moral precepts applying to the heart, but the former +passage relates to a ceremonial usage of the Jewish polity, and +may well be taken to be a mere adaptation of what was then in +well-known use; to inculcate, not an act or mode of worship, but +figuratively a frame of mind that would be required in +Christians. So that, as the Jew would literally <a +name="page50"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 50</span>understand, +he should go his way from the temple and the altar, and be +reconciled to any one to whom he had done wrong, before he could +there make his offering; so the Christian in all time, though +having no altar to which to come, and no real offering or +sacrifice in which to join, should yet learn to be in peace and +charity with all men, before he should esteem himself fit to lift +up his voice or heart in prayer to God; and that therefore our +Lord’s words, spoken “while as the first tabernacle +was yet standing,” <a name="citation50"></a><a +href="#footnote50" class="citation">[50]</a> do not sufficiently +prove any altar designed to exist in the Christian Church. +Well, let us allow the utmost weight to such an argument, and +grant that the words in and by themselves might possibly be so +explained, and yet bear just a tolerable though not, I think, at +all a likely interpretation in such sense; but then, let us yet +turn and see whether the other and more natural meaning be not +corroborated elsewhere, where this gloss will not avail. +Remember the objection to the proof of a Christian altar from +those words is, that they were spoken whilst the Jewish polity +subsisted, and before the Christian Church was set up, and +therefore that it is only (as is asserted) by a figure, suitable +enough to Jewish ears, but not as really enunciating a truth or +principle to endure in the Christian Church, that they were +uttered. But shall we not find a witness in Holy Scripture +to the existence of this altar in the new dispensation, which <a +name="page51"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 51</span>is free from +this exception or construction? I turn to the Epistle to +the Hebrews, and I find the Apostle writing, “We have an +altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the +tabernacle.” <a name="citation51a"></a><a +href="#footnote51a" class="citation">[51a]</a> Was not this +written to Christians? Does it not speak to them expressly +of their altar at which they are to eat? Was it not set +down for their guidance and instruction? Was it not written +after the great sacrifice upon the altar of the cross had been +made, and made once for all?</p> +<p>Was it not after the setting up of the Christian Church, and +the establishment of Christian worship? Nay, is it not in +an Epistle, the very whole drift and scope of which is to +contrast the usages and provisions and teaching of the elder +covenant with those of the new, and to shew the superiority in +each respect of that which had been ordained, not by angels, but +in the hand of the Son of God Himself. <a +name="citation51b"></a><a href="#footnote51b" +class="citation">[51b]</a> And can it therefore be that the +inferior part or type in the one can lack the corresponding +superior part, or antitype, in the other with which it is +contrasted, and on which correspondency and contrast the whole +argument depends? Will any one say, Yes, but still the +Jewish temple had not then been destroyed; the Jews’ +visible altar and worship still existed, and it is only by +(again) an adaptation, as a mode of speech particularly +intelligible to the Hebrews, and by a very natural economy, that +such terms were employed. But granting that the date of <a +name="page52"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 52</span>the Epistle +is, with all probability, rightly put some little time before the +destruction of Jerusalem, yet does not the very turn both of the +argument and of the expression of the Apostle shew that he is not +making an application of a figure, but a declaration of a +fact? Addressing Hebrews, but most evidently converted +Hebrews, Christians, to keep them firm in the faith, and to +enlighten them to the more full understanding in it, he presses +on them this point, that they have an altar; and not only so, but +one distinguished from the altar of the Jew; one at which +“they have no right to eat which serve the +tabernacle.” Take the whole passage together and see +its force: “We have an altar, whereof they have no right to +eat which serve the tabernacle. For the bodies of those +beasts whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the High +Priest for sin, are burned without the camp. Wherefore +Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with His own blood, +suffered without the gate.” Where evidently the type, +the great day of atonement under the law, is contrasted with its +antitype, the great sacrifice of Christ upon the cross. So +far it might be perhaps thought that our altar is only the cross; +but then he continues: “Let us go forth, therefore, unto +Him without the camp, bearing His reproach; for here we have no +continuing city, but we seek one to come. By Him, +therefore, let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God +continually, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His +<a name="page53"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +53</span>name.” <a name="citation53"></a><a +href="#footnote53" class="citation">[53]</a> Here it is +evident another sacrifice is to be made, even the sacrifice of +praise (which we must remember is the very phrase universally +used in the ancient Church for the Holy Eucharist). Let us +therefore (surely we are to understand) follow after Christ, +being content to bear His reproach even as we offer to Him, +ourselves, our souls and bodies, in and by the sacrifice of His +own appointing, the Eucharistic Sacrifice in the supper of the +Lord, at the enduring Christian altar as well as table.</p> +<p>But perhaps some may still say, We are not convinced. +The allusion to an altar here may yet be figurative, or only +adapting language to the mind of the Jew, “while as the +first tabernacle was yet standing;” and the sacrifice of +praise need not necessarily mean the Holy Eucharist, or, if it +do, may point to no altar or sacrifice by means of a priest, but +merely denote the lifting the heart in sincerity to God.</p> +<p>Now, although putting the whole argument together and reading +the passage by the light which the continuous belief of the +Church throws upon it (as we shall see presently), nothing, I +think, can be more unlikely or untenable than such an +interpretation, still, for the moment, let us allow it to throw a +doubt upon the sense of the passage. Let us, then, turn to +yet another place, and see if the witness of the Apostle is not +unmistakeable as to the doctrine of which we speak.</p> +<p><a name="page54"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 54</span>Take +that passage in the first Epistle to the Corinthians in which our +text occurs, and see if it be possible to understand it in any +sense but in that which speaks of a present altar and a +continually recurring sacrifice, in which Christians have an +interest and bear a part: “Are not they which eat of the +sacrifice,” says he, “partakers of the altar?” +<a name="citation54"></a><a href="#footnote54" +class="citation">[54]</a> and this especially in contrast as to +the conduct of those engaged in idol worship, and those in +Christian worship. As truly, then, as the idolater partook +of his altar (though his idol be nothing), so, only much more, +does the Christian of the Christian altar. And this cannot +be the one offering on the cross alone, however deriving all its +virtue and power from it, because in that case the Christian +could not be said to eat of the sacrifice in any continuous or +recurring act. The sacrifice would be wholly past, and not +present as the idol sacrifices were, and so there would be no +true parallel between the two things brought into +comparison. Mark the progress of the argument: “What +say I then? that the idol is anything, or that which is offered +in sacrifice to the idol is anything? But I say that the +things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils and +not to God;” that is, under the symbol of the senseless +wood or stone there lurked an acknowledgment of demoniac power, +so that, in fact, in the heart of those worshippers there was a +homage paid to Satan and his angels, and this was something <a +name="page55"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 55</span>wickedly +real, even though the idol was nothing. For he immediately +adds what shews that this worship was not without its effect, an +effect impressing a character on those who shared in it; for he +says, “And I would not that ye should have fellowship with +devils,” and why? because thus they would lose all +fellowship with God. “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.” <a +name="citation55"></a><a href="#footnote55" +class="citation">[55]</a> Let it make no difficulty that it +is called a table here, as an altar above. It is both, just +as the other, the heathen altar, was both, because in each case +there was not merely a sacrifice, but a feast upon a +sacrifice. As truly, then, as the Apostle says that there +is a heathen idolatrous sacrifice which Christians can never have +to do with, because if they do they would have fellowship with +devils, so does he, by the very parallel he draws, and the whole +scope of his argument, imply that Christians have a sacrifice, at +which they can be, and are to be, continually present; in and by +which they have fellowship with the Lord, which also is offered +continually in their assemblies, and of which they eat. For +as in the one there were the heathen feasts upon the victims or +offerings offered to devils; so in the other there is the feast +upon the Christian sacrifice, the offering made in that +continually recurring commemorative oblation to God of the body +and blood of Christ. If this <a name="page56"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 56</span>be not to be offered up continually, +since the one sacrifice completed as the propitiation by blood +made once for all upon the cross, then there is no coherency or +force in the Apostle’s argument; for there would be nothing +in the Christian dispensation like, or answering to, those +sacrifices to devils which the heathen used, and in which they +were forbidden to join. The teaching surely is, and must +be, as they who join in the heathen altar-worship are partakers +of it, and have fellowship thereby with those to whom it is +really offered, so they who join in the Christian sacrifice (not +so made and passed in point of time as to be incapable of +continued and continual recurrence by commemorative but real act) +are thereby partakers in and of their feast upon their sacrifice, +and have therein fellowship with the Lord. So this is the +continual memorial of the one “sacrifice upon the cross, +and of the benefits which we receive thereby,” also the +appointed means of our receiving those benefits. And it +would be absurd to think of the Apostle describing the worship of +idols as a real act of adoration and sacrifice to devils, and as +impressing a real character by a power upon them for evil in +those who join in such worship, and not to see that he must allow +an equal act of sacrifice, adoration, and homage in the sacrifice +and the altar which he speaks of as the Christian’s +constant privilege to frequent; and which is as much greater to +impress a character for good upon the Christian and to nourish <a +name="page57"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 57</span>him to life +eternal, as the real presence of the Body and Blood of Christ is +greater than the idol, which is nothing, or the things offered to +idols, which are nothing.</p> +<p>Nor is there any escape, that I can see, from the force of +this argument of St. Paul, unless any one will try to evade it by +saying: “Look back a moment, and see if the whole argument +does not belong to the Jew, and not to the +Christian.” Will any one take this line and appeal to +the words immediately before the text? True, it is written, +“Behold Israel after the flesh. Are not they which +eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?” But if +this be urged, I say, go back a little further still, and observe +the flood of light thrown upon the whole passage, in connection +not merely generally with Christianity, but especially and +particularly with the sacrifice of the Body and Blood of Christ, +in this true commemorative Sacrament, which is exactly where and +how, we say, the Christian sacrifice is offered by the Christian +priests upon the Christian altar. After exhortation against +yielding to temptation, and declaration of the ever-ready help of +God for those who will use it, “who will not suffer us to +be tempted above that we are able, but will with the temptation +also make a way to escape, that we may be able to bear it,” +the Apostle adds: “Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from +idolatry. I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I +say.” (Oh, let us also be wise to hear and <a +name="page58"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 58</span>learn! +“Judge ye what I say.”) “The cup of +blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the Blood of +Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion +of the Body of Christ? For we, being many, are one bread +and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.” +<a name="citation58"></a><a href="#footnote58" +class="citation">[58]</a> And then all but immediately he +adds, “are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers +of the altar?” Can anything be clearer than that, to +the blessed Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, he +attaches the teaching which follows so directly as to the nature +of the sacrifice and the altar? Ah! but, it is said, he +interpolates words that you have omitted which alter the +application:—“Behold Israel after the flesh;” +he says, and then adds, “are not they which eat of the +sacrifice partakers of the altar?” Well, and what do +the parenthetical words mean? Surely they must mean merely +this,—that, as his readers would allow such was the case +under the law, and with Israel after the flesh; and that Israel, +as well as the heathen, had an altar and a sacrifice, so it is +also with Christians: as if he had said, We Christians, by this +blessed sacramental bond, are one body, even as we are all +partakers of that one Bread; and as you will all allow, the +partaking of a common sacrifice (for instance, that of the +Paschal Lamb,) signified this under the law and with +“Israel after the flesh,” so you must be prepared to +admit as <a name="page59"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +59</span>much under the Gospel, and with the true Israel born +anew of the Spirit. Thus the interpolation does not for one +moment break the sequence or invalidate the force of the argument +as to the Christian sacrifice, but merely illustrates it by a +parenthetical allusion to what his hearers or readers would allow +at once to have been the case with Jewish rites, sacrifices, and +altars: and the conclusion from the whole is distinct and +inevitable, that St. Paul,—speaking to the Christians at +Corinth as to men who would understand the whole force of his +argument, as being acquainted with Jewish customs, and living +also in the very midst of heathen idolatrous +worship,—teaches as plainly that Christians use a Christian +altar, and offer up a Christian sacrifice, and feast together +upon it, and that this is undoubtedly the cup of blessing which +we bless, and the bread which we break, and that thereon follows +the blessedness of fellowship with the Lord; I say, teaches this +as plainly as he says there is, or has been, in Jewish worship a +Jewish altar and sacrifice, and as there is in heathen worship an +altar and a sacrifice to devils, and a partaking of the cup of +devils, and of the table of devils, and thereby the having +fellowship with them. And, (what is particularly to the +purpose of my citing this passage), herein is the proof that the +sacrifice referred to cannot be the one meritorious, painful, +bloody sacrifice upon the cross, once made and never to be +repeated; both because this was not (no one can <a +name="page60"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 60</span>say it was) +the literal breaking of bread, and the blessing the cup in the +Holy Eucharist, and because also, if that one sacrifice had been +intended, there would have been no parallel at all between the +heathen sacrifices to which the people were often called, and +that sacrifice to which Christians on this supposition could +never be called. Whereas if we do but allow, according to +the plain meaning of the words and of the argument, that there is +a true sacrifice to God, commemorative, but real, as ordained and +appointed by Christ Himself,—no repetition of blood or +agony, but the presenting afresh, and pleading afresh, yea, +causing Christ Himself to plead afresh for us in heaven, the +merits of that one precious death,—then we have the most +manifest recognition and declaration of the very doctrine for +which we contend, and both many other passages of Holy Writ are +made perfectly clear,—(who will now doubt the sense of the +other two Scriptures which we examined?)—and the whole +sense and usage of the Church from the beginning is both +explained and justified.</p> +<p>Our time has been so much taken up in examining what was, of +course, the most important question of all, the teaching of Holy +Scripture upon this point, that we have left ourselves no time +to-day to consider the further portion of our proposed subject, +viz., what is the teaching of the Church Catholic from the +beginning, and its understanding of the written word on this <a +name="page61"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 61</span>doctrine of +sacrifice; and, yet again, what is the witness of our own Church +to her having most carefully preserved, held, and maintained the +same. To this we will recur, if God will, another day; in +the meanwhile commending ourselves ever to His mercy, and all we +think or do to His grace and guidance.</p> +<h2><a name="page63"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 63</span>SERMON +IV.<br /> +The Testimony of the Early Church to the Doctrine of the +Priesthood.</h2> +<blockquote><p style="text-align: center">JEREMIAH vi. 16.<br /> +“Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and +ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, +and ye shall find rest for your souls.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p><span class="smcap">The</span> next division of our enquiry +is, the understanding of Holy Scripture in the primitive Church +as to the priesthood, the altar, and the sacrifice, and its +consequent doctrine thereupon. Before, however, proceeding +to this examination, let me briefly remind you of the point in +the argument from Holy Scripture at which we have arrived, for +our time on Sunday last hardly permitted me to sum up the remarks +then made. The last passage which we considered asks in the +tone of unquestionable affirmation, “Are not they which eat +of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?” The +parallel, as I then pointed out, lies between those on the one +hand, who, eating of the heathen sacrifices, are partakers of the +heathen altar, and thus have fellowship <a +name="page64"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 64</span>with devils; +and those, on the other hand, who, eating of the Christian +sacrifice, are partakers of the Christian altar, and thus have +fellowship with God. For, I must repeat, if St. +Paul’s argument have not this meaning and significance, +there is no coherency in the things brought into juxtaposition, +and nothing on the one side to answer to the requirement of the +other. Observe further, before we pass on, how the +Apostle’s whole reasoning, as it stands, excludes, and must +exclude, the sense of the Christian sacrifice being a mere +figurative expression, and that which is eaten in it a mere +subjective thing, dependent upon the mind of the recipient for +its being there at all; for, if it were so in the Christian +sacrifice, it must be so in the idol sacrifice also. But is +it so in the latter? Is it that what is there eaten is a +mere nothing in itself, dependent upon the mind of the +eater? Is the partaking of the idol altar not an effect of +an actual eating? Is the consequent fellowship with devils +not the result of such actual feasting upon an actual objective +sacrifice? And, therefore, if the parallel has any force at +all, must it not be that there is a real objective presence of a +sacrificial thing at the Christian altar,—the <i>res +sacramenti</i>, as in strict theological phraseology it is +termed,—by which he that eateth is partaker of the altar, +and the result of which is, his having fellowship with Christ and +God? From which our inference <a name="page65"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 65</span>was plain and direct that in St. +Paul’s understanding there is a Christian altar and a +Christian sacrifice. Such was the conclusion from Holy +Scripture at which we arrived.</p> +<p>I proceed now to shew further, that this, the natural and, as +I think, the necessary sense of that passage (supported by +numerous other passages of Holy Writ, some of which we have +noticed, though many others we have not had time particularly to +examine), is the sense in which the Church Catholic has ever +understood the doctrine of the Scripture upon this subject, and +which our own Church carefully guarded and preserved at her +Reformation; thus maintaining, on so essential a point, her +connection with the Church from the beginning and in all +times.</p> +<p>But yet, before we go into the proof of this, let it be +remarked (for it is very important in order to our seeing the +full weight and bearing of the facts and records to which we are +about to refer) that these three things—the priesthood, the +altar, and the sacrifice—are what we may call correlatives, +and reciprocally imply one another. As the word parent +implies a child, or brother, brother or sister; so, if there be +an altar, there will be a sacrifice, for the altar would be +unmeaning without it, would miss its aim and be purposeless if +there were nothing to be offered on it; and in like manner, if +there be a sacrifice there will be an altar, for it is contrary +to the whole sense and usage of the word to make such sacrificial +<a name="page66"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 66</span>offering +to God, and not withal to sanctify some special place and mode of +oblation. Again, if there be an altar and a sacrifice, +there will be a priesthood; unless the voice of the whole world +(over and above the constraining teaching of the Scripture) be in +error, and any man that pleases may “take this honour unto +himself,” <a name="citation66a"></a><a href="#footnote66a" +class="citation">[66a]</a> and offer up “gifts and +sacrifices” acceptably to God.</p> +<p>Premising, then, thus much, I proceed to call attention to the +fact, that the whole literature of Christianity from the +beginning either states or implies the doctrine of the +priesthood, the altar, and the sacrifice, which we have deduced +also from Holy Scripture. It is true that in the very +scanty writings which remain to us from the first century, we may +not find the word ‘priest’ applied to the Christian +ministry. But, as Mr. Carter has well observed, “the +real question is not whether the name, but whether the idea, of +priesthood is found to exist in the extant writings of the +Apostolic Fathers;” <a name="citation66b"></a><a +href="#footnote66b" class="citation">[66b]</a> whilst for the +absence of the name it is not hard to assign satisfactory +reasons. In the first place, the extant writings of that +century are too few to let a negative conclusion be built upon +them. They amount, I believe, in all, (if we exclude the +“Shepherd of Hermas,” a confessedly mere allegorical +work,) to not more than what would make about thirty pages of an +octavo volume. <a name="citation66c"></a><a href="#footnote66c" +class="citation">[66c]</a> Over and above this paucity of +material on which to found an argument, other reasons <a +name="page67"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 67</span>may readily +be given for the term ‘priest’ not occurring. +It may be sufficient here just to touch upon two. First, +there might be great cause why the earliest Christian writers +should not designate those who ministered at their altars by a +term which might have been understood to imply that they claimed +for them a descent from the house of Aaron according to the +flesh; which claim the Jews around them would know in many +instances to be unfounded, and which, therefore, to be supposed +to make, would lay them open to a charge of imposture; whilst +again, secondly, they might equally desire to keep clear of all +mistake as to their being confounded with the priesthood of the +Gentiles, or heathen world, so likely to involve them in the +charge of offering up bloody sacrifices like them; a charge which +in fact we know, as it was, they did not wholly escape; a +wonderful and most unsuspicious witness by the way (for it comes +from those who had no thought to forward any interests of +Christianity), that Christians claimed to make a true sacrifice +in the Eucharist, for it is evidently this, perverted and +mistaken by the persecuting heathen, (as if, when they offered +the Body and Blood of Christ, they confessed to offering a human +victim,) which led to the accusation; a great evidence surely to +the doctrine of the real presence of Christ therein, for who +could mistake the Eucharistic doctrine of a large portion of +modern Christianity for anything open to such a charge, under +which we know, <a name="page68"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +68</span>upon the testimony of heathen writers, the early +Christians suffered reproach?</p> +<p>These two reasons, then, may suffice as to the term +‘priest’ not being so early applied to the Christian +ministry, and indeed we need no defence upon the subject, because +the whole idea of the priesthood prevails in those early writings +whether the word ‘priest’ be used or not, inasmuch as +there is constant mention of the sacrifice and the altar as in +use in the Christian Church.</p> +<p>As we proceed with the stream of Christian writing there is +ample proof of the universal holding and teaching of this +doctrine.</p> +<p>I cannot, of course, pretend here to go through this evidence +in detail. We must rather look for a summary which may give +the result of a fair examination into the records left us, than +make a series of extracts from them. We shall perhaps +hardly find a more unexceptionable witness than the learned +writer Vitringa, cited by Mr. Carter in his work already +mentioned. Speaking of the age shortly succeeding the +Apostles, Mr. Carter says: “As to the usage of this period +there can be no surer authority than that of Vitringa. His +extensive learning, directed assiduously to this very point, and +his zeal as a partizan, make his testimony to be peculiarly +conclusive.” <a name="citation68"></a><a href="#footnote68" +class="citation">[68]</a> His zeal as a partizan, be it +observed, was not in favour of the Catholic sense of the +writings, nor of any priesthood or altar, for Vitringa was a +Dutch <a name="page69"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +69</span>Presbyterian, who lived about the middle of the last +century, and wrote expressly to explain away the evidence which +nevertheless he adduces. He acknowledges that his own views +are opposed to the unvarying testimony and belief of the Catholic +Church for sixteen hundred years. His theory excludes all +idea of priesthood and equally of bishops, (not the name only, +but also the office,) chancels, altars, and oblations, and, +indeed, any stated ministry. In fact, he regards the whole +subject as a staunch Presbyterian, and it is, therefore, +certainly not with any bias in favour of the doctrine which we +are considering that he thus sums up the results of his enquiries +into the writings of those early centuries:—</p> +<p>“That Tertullian, in the beginning of the third century, +calls the bishop ‘chief priest,’ (<i>summus +sacerdos</i>); that before his time, in the second century, +Irenæus calls the gifts made at the Holy Eucharist, +‘oblations,’ (<i>oblata</i>,) and when consecrated by +the prayer of the bishop, ‘a sacrifice,’ +(<i>sacrificium</i>); and that in Justin Martyr, a still more +ancient writer, the gifts are called ‘offerings,’ +(<i>προσφοραὶ</i>); +are facts so certainly known to the learned, that it is needless +to speak of them at greater length. In the subsequent +writings of the Fathers, the terms ‘priesthood,’ +‘Priest,’ ‘Levites,’ +‘altars,’ ‘offertories,’ +‘sacrifices,’ ‘oblations,’ used in +reference to the Church of the New Testament, are so obvious and +frequent that it can escape no one who has even <a +name="page70"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 70</span>cursorily +examined their writings. In Eusebius, moreover, and the +rest of the ecclesiastical historians, and the canons of +Councils, such frequent mention occurs of these phrases, that it +is evident they must have struck deep root into the minds of men +in those ages.” <a name="citation70"></a><a +href="#footnote70" class="citation">[70]</a> So much is the +testimony of a very learned man, and a most unsuspicious +witness.</p> +<p>But there is a separate line of evidence to be drawn from +another and perhaps even still more convincing source: I mean the +ancient liturgies of the Church which have come down to us, and +tell us in what way the early Christians worshipped God; the +place which they assigned to the Holy Eucharist, and the light in +which they regarded it in connection with sacrifice, altar, and +priesthood. There are four liturgies, (and we are to +remember, the word in all ancient writings means merely and +simply the Eucharistic service,) which have been shewn to have +been reduced to writing in the course of the fourth century, and +one of them in the earliest part of it. They bear their +witness to the Church’s faith and hope and teaching in +those days, and even earlier, because it is generally conceded +that they were in use long before they were put into writing, the +days of persecution rendering it unsafe for the Christians to +have documents which might be seized, and turned against them; or +perhaps still more, <a name="page71"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +71</span>the desire to preserve the mysteries of their faith, and +especially of the Holy Eucharist, from the inquisition of heathen +scoffing, indisposing them to keep any records which could be +thus profanely used. Of course, after the Empire became +Christian, under Constantine, this reason ceased, and it was only +what was natural that the services which had been orally in use +for years should now be reduced to writing. Now, these four +liturgies were used at the four great central sees of +Christendom, and their subordinate branches, and so pervaded the +whole Catholic world. “The first,” to use the +words of a learned writer, Mr. Palmer, the author of the +<i>Origines Liturgicæ</i>, “is the great Oriental +liturgy, as it seems to have prevailed in all the Christian +Churches, from the Euphrates to the Hellespont, and from the +Hellespont to the southern extremity of Greece; the second was +the Alexandrian, which from time immemorial has been the liturgy +of Egypt, Abyssinia, and the country extending along the +Mediterranean Sea to the West; the third was the Roman, which +prevailed throughout the whole of Italy, Sicily, and great part +of Africa; the fourth was the Gallican, which was used throughout +Gaul and Spain, and probably in the exarchate of Ephesus, until +the fourth century.” <a name="citation71"></a><a +href="#footnote71" class="citation">[71]</a></p> +<p>Now, the especially important bearing of these liturgies upon +our subject is this, that in spite of enough of difference to +shew that they are independent <a name="page72"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 72</span>witnesses, they yet correspond most +closely with one another in all main features, and particularly +in their witness to the sacrificial doctrine, and the priestly +office, in relation to the Holy Eucharist. And (as Mr. +Palmer has pointed out), with regard to the one first named, the +Oriental, existing documents enable us to trace this liturgy to a +very remote period indeed, almost or quite to the Apostolic age; +for he reminds us that in the time of Justin Martyr, whose +writings are the “existing documents” of which he +speaks, the Christian Church was “only removed by one link +from the Apostles themselves.” <a name="citation72a"></a><a +href="#footnote72a" class="citation">[72a]</a> Nor even is +this all; for there is yet a fifth liturgy, of a date still +earlier than these four already named, called the Clementine, and +what is particularly remarkable in it is, that it agrees with +those four great liturgies in all points where they agree with +each other, as well as in their general structure.</p> +<p>“Now, in all these liturgies alike,” says Mr. +Carter, “the ancient sacerdotal terms in question are +ordinarily used. In reading them, we open upon a scene +which represents a priesthood of different degrees, with a +complete ritual, ministering before God on behalf of the people, +offering sacrifices, and communicating heavenly gifts and +benedictions.” <a name="citation72b"></a><a +href="#footnote72b" class="citation">[72b]</a></p> +<p>I must forbear both any quotations to shew this, as well as +defer any further remarks upon <a name="page73"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 73</span>the progress of events, or (which +also is part of our subject) on the careful attention, by our own +Reformers and Revisers, to preserve the teaching of the primitive +Church in this matter. If it please God, yet once more we +may return to the subject, and see how this stands, as well as +make some little practical application of the doctrine to +ourselves at this day, to some of our dangers and temptations in +an age so free-thinking and free-handling as the present. +Without anticipating these things in any detail, let me yet just +remind you that the mere fashion, or usage, or clamour, or +forgetfulness, or unbelief of any age or time can make no +difference in the truth of God, or in the doctrine which has been +from the beginning, or in the mysteries of His kingdom. +That men should try to bring all things, however divine and holy, +however deep and mysterious, to the level of their own +understanding, and discard all which they may be unable to +explain, need be to us no matter of surprise. The very same +temper which in one induces a disbelief in the doctrine of the +Holy Trinity, because the doctrine is beyond the human +understanding to fathom,—or leads another to reject the +mystery of the Incarnation, because it is ineffable and above his +comprehension,—or another to deny the regenerating gift and +efficacy of holy baptism, saying, “How can these things +be?”—may readily bring others to that hard state of +scepticism which robs the Holy Eucharist at once of its deep +mysteriousness and of its hidden <a name="page74"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 74</span>virtue; which therefore rejects, and +too often ridicules, the very idea of a priesthood and an +availing sacrifice, saying, “How should man have power with +God?” or, “How can this Man give us His flesh to +eat?” <a name="citation74a"></a><a href="#footnote74a" +class="citation">[74a]</a> even though the priestly power be +derived from Christ’s own commission, and the mysterious +virtue assured by His own Word of Truth. That there should +be some who, leaning too much to their own understanding, forsake +the old ways, and dislike and accuse those who desire to cleave +to them; that they should frame worldly arguments for worldly +men, and even deceive some who in heart and wish are not worldly, +but rather unwary, or led away by the mere voice of the +multitude, or swayed by prejudice, or betrayed through an +ignorance of what has been from the beginning; that <i>some</i> +should scoff when they cannot reason, and ridicule that which +they have not the heart to understand,—all this, I repeat, +need not fill us with either surprise or dismay, though perchance +it may make us (not wholly unwarrantably) deem that the latter +days are come, or close coming, upon us. I say all this +need not surprise us, for have not our Lord and His Apostles +warned us that such things must be? “When the Son of +Man cometh,” He said Himself, “shall He find faith on +the earth?” <a name="citation74b"></a><a +href="#footnote74b" class="citation">[74b]</a> as though it would +exist but in a remnant. And again, “If they have +called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall +they call <a name="page75"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +75</span>them of his household?” <a +name="citation75a"></a><a href="#footnote75a" +class="citation">[75a]</a> Why, then, should we expect to +escape such things? But I said, also, we need not be +dismayed at them. Is there not the exhortation, “Ye +have need of patience?” <a name="citation75b"></a><a +href="#footnote75b" class="citation">[75b]</a> and again the +encouragement, “In your patience possess ye your +souls?” <a name="citation75c"></a><a href="#footnote75c" +class="citation">[75c]</a> and again the gracious promise, +“He that endureth to the end shall be saved?” <a +name="citation75d"></a><a href="#footnote75d" +class="citation">[75d]</a> What though in the latter times +some shall depart from the faith? <a name="citation75e"></a><a +href="#footnote75e" class="citation">[75e]</a> What though +“the time will come when men will not endure sound +doctrine.” <a name="citation75f"></a><a href="#footnote75f" +class="citation">[75f]</a> Shall this make any difference +in our faith, or cast any gloom upon our hope? No! +Brethren, let us ever remember that what we have to rely upon is, +not “man’s wisdom,” nor “an arm of +flesh:” what we have to cleave to with all constancy is +“that which was from the beginning;” <a +name="citation75g"></a><a href="#footnote75g" +class="citation">[75g]</a> for it is this which gives us +“fellowship with the Father, and with His Son Jesus +Christ.” <a name="citation75h"></a><a href="#footnote75h" +class="citation">[75h]</a></p> +<p>And surely here we may see and bless the goodness of God +towards us in this our Church of England that He put it into the +hearts of our Reformers not for one moment to think of making a +new religion or a new Church, but only (throwing off errors and +corruptions) to go back to the teaching of the early ages, and +embrace the doctrine of the Church universal. If the Church +of England had <i>begun</i> at the Reformation, (as sometimes <a +name="page76"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 76</span>men speak,) +no man, who knew anything of the essentials of Christianity could +belong to her for a moment. But, blessed be God, He put it +into the heart and minds of those who, in His providence, guided +the course of the English Reformation, to make it a maxim, +<i>Stare super antiquas vias</i>, to give heed to the injunction +of the prophet: “Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, +and see, and ask for the old paths where is the good way; and +walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls.” <a +name="citation76"></a><a href="#footnote76" +class="citation">[76]</a> It is this which has been, under +God, our safeguard. From time to time assaults have been +made to destroy our true Catholic character and our bond of union +with primitive Christianity; but God has, of His mercy, hitherto, +ever kept it in the heart of the rulers in our Church to +“ask for the old ways, and to walk in them.” +That our Church has kept to the old ways is manifest from this, +that the very persons who disbelieve and desire to drive us from +the ancient faith, are the same who, as the means of doing so, +are striving to new model our formularies and alter our +Prayer-book. They feel no less than we that, whilst we +retain these, we cleave to the doctrine which has been of old; +and they, desiring to deprive us of the doctrine, are as anxious +to alter our formularies as we are to keep them unchanged. +And many of them would perhaps, even more openly than they do, +advocate extensive measures of liturgical revision, <a +name="page77"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 77</span>in a +doctrinal sense, but for the consciousness that to shew too great +anxiety on the point is too like a confession of how much the +Prayer-book is against them. Surely these things are of +great weight when we would know what doctrine is most according +to the mind of the Church of England. “I speak as to +wise men; judge ye what I say.” It is this same +principle, too, of preserving the one faith once delivered, which +makes it so important to examine, as we are attempting to do, the +sense of Holy Scripture as attested by the consent of the Church +from the beginning, and as accepted by our own Church, upon so +grave and practical a subject as the priesthood, the altar, and +the sacrifice. May God give us His illumination to see His +truth as He has seen fit to reveal it to us, and grace that where +we see it, we may boldly confess it; so shall we pass in safety +the waves of this troublesome world, so may we, perchance, be +delivered from the strife of tongues; or, if not, yet shall we +learn not to fear man, nor be troubled even if we cannot please +men, remembering the witness of St. Paul, that “if he +pleased men, he should not be the servant of Christ.” <a +name="citation77"></a><a href="#footnote77" +class="citation">[77]</a></p> +<p>And, brethren, let us all pray for an humble, meek, gentle, +teachable, believing heart, that we may not despise or refuse, or +disbelieve God’s mighty works, though His treasure be +placed in earthen vessels; nor turn our back upon His mysteries, +<a name="page78"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 78</span>though +they transcend our utmost powers of conception, nor neglect His +call, be it what it may; to go forth, if it be so, like Abraham, +we know not whither; or, like him, to sacrifice our dearest hope, +if God demand it; or, like Daniel, to be cast even into the den +of lions; or, like the Apostles, to be made the very refuse of +the earth and the offscouring of all things,—so that we may +but hold fast the faith, and yet hand on again to those who shall +come after the good deposit committed to our charge. If +this, indeed, we are enabled to do, we may well “thank God +and take courage.”</p> +<h2><a name="page79"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 79</span>SERMON +V.<br /> +The Testimony of our Formularies to the Doctrine of the +Priesthood.</h2> +<blockquote><p style="text-align: center">ST. JOHN xx. 22, 23.<br +/> +“And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and saith +unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose soever sins ye remit, +they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, +they are retained.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p><span class="smcap">In</span> the brief outline which I have +submitted in these discourses of the evidences for the doctrine +of the Christian priesthood, altar, and sacrifice, I first met +the objection sometimes made to there being any such treasure (in +our Church at any rate) because lodged in earthen vessels; +secondly, I traced, at least in part, the witness of the whole +world before Christ’s coming to the belief in, and usage +of, sacrifice and altar, with the necessarily attendant +priesthood; and thirdly, I adduced some very small portion of the +proofs both from Holy Scripture and from the universal consent of +the early Church in its interpretation of Scripture, that +priesthood, altar, and sacrifice did not expire with the law, but +were intended to be continued, and were continued in and under +the Christian dispensation, in and under Him who <a +name="page80"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 80</span>was and is a +High Priest of surpassing power and dignity, not after the +pattern or lineage of the priests of the sons of Aaron, but +“called an High Priest for ever after the order of +Melchizedek;” of Him who, fulfilling that royal type, was +“King of Righteousness,” and after that also +“King of Salem, which is King of Peace,” and yet, +again, in like manner, “priest of the Most High God,” +and who “abideth a priest continually.” <a +name="citation80"></a><a href="#footnote80" +class="citation">[80]</a></p> +<p>We brought our examination of this evidence to the fourth +century of the Christian era by, as I think it must be allowed, +the summary of an unexceptionable witness to the substance of the +early Christian writings upon that point, and by a reference to +the five most ancient liturgies of the Christian Church. It +is unnecessary to say a word as to the same doctrine being the +universally received doctrine of the Church from the fourth +century to the sixteenth, because its very opponents adduce the +teaching of that thousand or twelve hundred years, in this among +other things, as proving the great darkness and corruption which +had then fallen upon the Church, and obscured, in their view, the +simplicity of the Gospel. So that, whatever may be thought +of its orthodoxy, the fact is not disputed, that for such period +the whole of Christendom, with the most insignificant exceptions, +believed in the doctrine which we are considering. Whether, +as is affirmed by such objectors, this universal belief <a +name="page81"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 81</span>were a mark +of the corruption and ignorance of “the dark ages,” +as the self-complacent pride of later times has designated them, +(when perchance in God’s judgment they may be as light +itself compared with much of the “philosophy and vain +deceit” <a name="citation81a"></a><a href="#footnote81a" +class="citation">[81a]</a> of this free-handling nineteenth +century, which so often “darkens counsel by words without +knowledge” <a name="citation81b"></a><a href="#footnote81b" +class="citation">[81b]</a>); or whether such consent, following +the track of the earliest ages, be not rather the mark of a true +understanding of the mind of the Spirit pervading that body with +which Christ has promised to be, “even to the end of the +world,” is another question. It is one which I need +not now pursue, as what we have to say of the course taken and +the doctrine maintained by the Church of England at her +Reformation will throw a light upon the whole matter, which +ought, I think, to be sufficient for any understanding and +faithful member of our Church.</p> +<p>Thus we are brought to the immediate subject of our further +enquiry. It being admitted, as I think I have shewn it must +be, that this doctrine of the priesthood, altar, and sacrifice, +is a doctrine founded upon, and supported by, Holy Scripture; so +understood by the Church at large from the earliest times, so +maintained with no faltering lips to at least the sixteenth +century; what, we ask next, is the evidence of the mind of our +own Church at the Reformation and since, as to her preserving or +rejecting it?</p> +<p><a name="page82"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 82</span>You +will hardly expect me to go through all the evidence. +But—remembering what we said on Sunday last, that these +three things are correlatives, reciprocally implying each other, +or each one the other two, (the priest; the altar and the +sacrifice;—the altar; the sacrifice and the +priest;—the sacrifice; the priest and the altar;)—let +us turn to some portion of the proof that our Church has fully +intended and intends, has accounted and accounts, those who in +her carry on the services of the sanctuary to be priests of +God.</p> +<p>Now, observe, the three great offices embraced in the idea of +a priest are these:—first, that he is one who has +commission to rule and teach; secondly, one who has power to +absolve; thirdly, one who has authority to offer up +sacrifice. The first of these functions, though belonging +to the priesthood, is hardly to be called distinctive of it (as +we may see more clearly presently); the other two are of its +essence, that is, pertaining to none else; so that, on the one +hand, he who has them both, or even he who has, if it were so, +either of them, is necessarily in a true sense a priest; and, on +the other, he who is a priest will have one or other, or both of +these powers, not indeed of himself, but committed to him. +To see how this stands with us, who are ministers and stewards of +God’s mysteries in this our Church of England, we must turn +to our service-books, and especially to the Service for Ordaining +<a name="page83"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 83</span>Priests, +to see what is the commission given to each, and what we learn +from this to be the mind of the Church concerning them who are +admitted to that holy function.</p> +<p>Turn first, then, for a moment to the Preface, to “The +Form and Manner of making, ordaining, and consecrating of +Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, according to the order of the +United Church of England and Ireland.” We find it +there said: “It is evident unto all men diligently reading +the Holy Scripture and ancient authors, that from the +Apostles’ time there have been these Orders of Ministers in +Christ’s Church; Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. Which +offices were evermore had in such reverend estimation, that no +man might presume to execute any of them, except he were first +called, tried, examined, and known to have such qualities as are +requisite for the same; and also by public prayer, with +imposition of hands, were approved and admitted thereunto by +lawful authority. And therefore, to the intent that these +Orders may be continued, and reverently used and esteemed, in the +United Church of England and Ireland; no man shall be accounted +or taken to be a lawful Bishop, Priest, or Deacon, in the United +Church of England and Ireland, or suffered to execute any of the +said functions, except he be called, tried, examined, and +admitted thereunto, according to the form hereafter following, or +hath had formerly episcopal consecration, or +ordination.”</p> +<p><a name="page84"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 84</span>Now +this shews, I think, beyond dispute, that the Church of England +holds that no one, according to her mind and rule, is to be +accounted or taken to be a lawful bishop, priest, or deacon, +without episcopal ordination or consecration; for those who are +ordained or consecrated according to the forms which follow, +unquestionably have it; and those who are or have been admitted +by any others, are not to be accounted lawfully admitted to those +Orders unless they have at some time been episcopally +ordained.</p> +<p>We therefore find the authority and commission, in each case, +given by the laying on of a bishop or bishops’ hands, +though, according to the Scriptural warrant, accompanied also, in +the ordination of priests, by the laying on of the hands of the +priests present. Still it is evident that these, without +the bishop, are not esteemed competent to convey the gift of Holy +Orders.</p> +<p>But, next, what is the commission given? Observe the +difference between that to deacons and to priests, and you will +see the more clearly what is of the essence of the +priesthood.</p> +<p>To the deacon it is said, with the laying on of hands: +“Take thou authority to execute the office of a deacon in +the Church of God committed unto thee; in the Name of the Father, +and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;” and then, further: +“Take thou authority to read the Gospel in the Church of +God, and to preach <a name="page85"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +85</span>the same if thou be thereto licensed by the bishop +himself.” <a name="citation85a"></a><a href="#footnote85a" +class="citation">[85a]</a></p> +<p>But to the priest the corresponding, but far higher +commission, is: “Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and +work of a priest in the Church of God, now committed unto thee by +the imposition of my hands.” <a name="citation85b"></a><a +href="#footnote85b" class="citation">[85b]</a></p> +<p>Yes, it may be said, but what work? We grant there is +the use of the word ‘priest,’ but the whole question +turns upon the sense in which it is used. Oh, brethren, +listen with simple hearts of reverence, loving and seeking only +the truth, to the solemn and awful words which follow: +“Whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven; and whose +sins thou dost retain, they are retained; and be thou a faithful +dispenser of the Word of God, and of His holy Sacraments: in the +Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. +Amen.” <a name="citation85c"></a><a href="#footnote85c" +class="citation">[85c]</a></p> +<p>And then, further, delivering the Bible into the hand of each: +“Take thou authority to preach the Word of God, and to +minister the Holy Sacraments in the congregation where thou shalt +be lawfully appointed thereunto.” <a +name="citation85d"></a><a href="#footnote85d" +class="citation">[85d]</a></p> +<p>Now, not only is there evidently in all this a general +superior commission given, but there is the particular and +specific difference which I affirm can only be accounted for by +the intentional full recognition of the priestly idea and <a +name="page86"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 86</span>priestly +office as we have all along explained and taken those terms.</p> +<p>And the words settle, as it seems to me, beyond dispute, +another question,—which yet is not another, though it may +bear a separate word of comment in our argument,—namely, +whether the Church of England considers our Lord’s +ministerial commission to His Apostles to have been confined to +them, or whether it was His will, by virtue of His words, +“As My Father hath sent Me, even so send I you,” <a +name="citation86"></a><a href="#footnote86" +class="citation">[86]</a> that they should again transmit the +powers of the priesthood on to others after them? For +observe particularly what words they are which are used by the +bishop to give this commission to the priest. +“Receive,” he says, “the Holy Ghost for the +office of a priest, in the Church of God;” and then, +“Whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven; and whose +sins thou dost retain, they are retained.” Now from +whence do these words come? Who used them before, and to +whom did they then give a commission? Let us turn to the +twentieth chapter of St. John’s Gospel, and we shall find +the Divine record: “Then said Jesus to them again,” +(viz. to the Apostles,) “Peace be unto you; as My Father +hath sent Me, even so send I you. And when He had said +this, He breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the +Holy Ghost: whose soever <a name="page87"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 87</span>sins ye remit, they are remitted unto +them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.” +<a name="citation87"></a><a href="#footnote87" +class="citation">[87]</a></p> +<p>Now is there any one who denies that our Blessed Lord thus +gave such power to those to whom He then spoke, and on whom He +then breathed? I suppose not. It would be wholly to +explain away and contradict His word to say so. It would be +to prevent any one relying upon the plainest meaning of anything +to say so. It would be to make every injunction He ever +gave, and every truth He ever uttered, without sense or force, so +to read such a passage, as that it gave no commission even to the +Apostles. If His Apostles did not receive from that +commission a power to bind and loose, to remit and retain sins, +it must, I think, be hopeless for any one to imagine any duties +can be proved or any doctrines declared in Scripture, or, we +might add, by any words anywhere set down. But then it is +said, We do not deny the commission as a personal thing to the +Apostles, but we say that it extended no further. We say +that if any imagine such a power and authority to have been +intended to be transmitted further, or to be capable of being +thus transmitted, he is in a grievous error and mistake. +Now I am not arguing this question, whether mine be the right +understanding of the Scripture, but I say, is it not as plain as +the sun at noon-day that, right or wrong, it is the understanding +of the Church of England? Surely her meaning here <a +name="page88"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 88</span>can no more +be questioned as to those to whom she applies them, than our +Blessed Lord’s intention can be questioned as to those to +whom He addressed them. What possible explanation is there +of her appointing those words to be solemnly used in her Ordinal +at the time of, and in the ordaining a man to be a priest, but +that she believed the powers of the priesthood, as to absolution, +to be then and thereby given to that man according to the will of +God and Christ? “I speak as to wise men; judge ye +what I say.” Would it not shew either an ignorance of +the force of words which is inconceivable, not merely in eminent +theologians, which assuredly many of our Reformers were, but in +any one of sane mind, if the words appointed to be so solemnly +used, yet mean absolutely nothing? Or, if not this, must it +not argue an impiety amounting to blasphemy for the Church of any +country to draw up for use a service such as this, and, playing +unmeaningly or deceitfully with such holy words, not to suppose +any gift of the Holy Ghost, or any power of absolution, to be +conveyed to those to whom they are addressed? What could we +esteem such a barren equivocation with the holiest of things, if +there were such design, but impious mockery towards God and +deceit towards man?</p> +<p>But further, we are not even left to such proof that our +Church intends no such mockery. Turn to the work of the +priest on this very point of absolution, and what is the light +thrown by this <a name="page89"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +89</span>upon the words of ordination? I will pass over the +Absolution both in our Morning and Evening Prayers and in the +Office of Holy Communion, as, though in each case specifically +limited to being given by the priest, they may be thought to be +capable of a sense chiefly or only declaratory, or +precatory. But I ask you to turn to two other +places—1. to the end of the second Exhortation, as to the +coming to Holy Communion; and, 2. to the Office for the +Visitation of the Sick.</p> +<p>In the former place, after explanation of the preparation, +“the way and means” to come worthily to that Holy +Sacrament, we find the following: “And because it is +requisite, that no man should come to the Holy Communion but with +a full trust in God’s mercy, and with a quiet conscience; +therefore if there be any of you, who by this means” +(namely, his own private examination of his life) “cannot +quiet his own conscience herein, but requireth further comfort or +counsel, let him come to me, or to some other discreet and +learned minister of God’s Word, and open his grief; that by +the ministry of God’s holy Word, he may receive the benefit +of absolution,” (What is the benefit if there be no power +to absolve?) “together with ghostly counsel and advice, to +the quieting of his conscience, and avoiding all scruple and +doubtfulness.” <a name="citation89"></a><a +href="#footnote89" class="citation">[89]</a></p> +<p>Here then, surely, he who has been ordained a priest, and +received the Holy Ghost that he may <a name="page90"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 90</span>remit or retain sins, is to exercise +his ministry in the absolution of the penitent soul.</p> +<p>But if it be said, There is no minute description or account +of the mode of absolution, it may still be but declaratory or +precatory; I say, then, turn once again to another place, and see +if the form and method of the absolution be not there actually +all which we can suppose even an Apostle himself could use. +In the Office for the Visitation of the Sick, when the sick man +is in the full contemplation of death, and perhaps death very +near at hand, the priest being solemnly engaged in his office of +preparing him for it, the distinct direction is given that the +sick person shall be “moved to make a special confession of +his sins, if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty +matter. After which confession, the priest shall absolve +him (if he humbly and heartily desire it) after this +sort.” And the words are: “Our Lord Jesus +Christ, who hath left power to His Church to absolve all sinners +who truly repent and believe in Him, of His great mercy forgive +thee thine offences;” (so far we have the declaration of +the power left to the Church, and either, it may be said, +declaratory or precatory words, “forgive thee.” +But this is not all; immediately it is added), “And by His +authority committed to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins; in +the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy +Ghost. Amen.” <a name="citation90"></a><a +href="#footnote90" class="citation">[90]</a></p> +<p><a name="page91"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 91</span>Now, +brethren, I do not desire to say much in comment on such words as +these. But I do say, and I know not how to avoid saying, +first, if such authority was committed to the priest, when was it +committed to him, or how, but at his ordination, and in and by +“the form and manner of ordering priests,” which we +have before noted? And, secondly, can any reasonable being +believe that the Church could have drawn up such a service, and +put such words into the priest’s mouth when dealing +solemnly and truly with a sick or dying man, and yet believe that +such power of absolution, as a part of the priest’s +distinctive character and endowment by God, had not been +conferred upon him? or maintain that she thought our Blessed +Lord’s commission extended no further than to its first +recipients, and died out with the Apostles themselves, when still +she uses the words continually in her “ordering of +priests?” If it be said,—Well: still we cannot +believe this, and can only say that we heartily desire to remove +from our Prayer-book and Ordinal, as a blasphemous fable and a +dangerous deceit, all traces of such authority being +given,—I can only reply that this argument is wholly beside +our present question. I am not now arguing whether such an +interpretation and use of Holy Scripture be the right +interpretation and use, (though I have given reasons before for +feeling sure it is,) but I am shewing what is the mind and +understanding herein of the Church of England. I am <a +name="page92"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 92</span>silencing, if +I may, (and in the judgment of right reason I cannot conceive +that I should fail in doing so,) the calumny that they who +maintain the doctrine of the priesthood are disloyal to the +Church of England, or deviating from the principles of the +Reformation. For, not merely according to what right reason +must, I think, enforce to be the intention of those who drew up +our formularies, but according to the simple sense of those +formularies, this doctrine and none other is the only doctrine +which can be made consistent with the documents themselves, or +which they can justly be taken to enunciate. We have at +times heard not a little of the dishonesty of those who, it is +said, have taken our formularies in a non-natural sense, on the +Catholic side, though in a sense which they deemed they would +fairly bear. If this argument be good for anything, against +whom can it so conclusively be brought as against such as will +affirm that, when in the most solemn exercise of a bishop’s +office, the bishop says, “Receive the Holy Ghost for the +office and work of a priest in the Church of God,” the +Church intends that there is no gift of the Holy Ghost bestowed, +and no priest made at all? Or, again, when he says, +adopting Christ’s own words of +commission,—“Whose sins thou dost forgive they are +forgiven unto them, and whose sins thou dost retain, they are +retained;”—that in this there is no intention to +teach that the commission of Christ extended beyond the Apostles +themselves, and that no <a name="page93"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 93</span>power of binding or loosing is +conferred by this solemn act? Or, yet again, who tell us +that when the priest is instructed to exercise this holy function +of absolving penitents, either that they may come “with a +full trust in God’s mercy and with a quiet +conscience” to the Holy Eucharist, or, in the solemn +moments of serious sickness, perhaps the near prospect of death, +(things and times surely beyond all others to drive away the very +notion of unreal or unmeaning words, which must also, if they be +such, be to the poor penitent most deceitful and misleading words +also); that then the Church gives her instruction to use the word +of absolution, and say, “By His authority committed unto +me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, in the name of the Father, +and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” and yet means +hereby only a mockery and a delusion; that there is no such +power, no such authority, no such absolving at all; surely all +this is not a mere non-natural sense which the words will bear, +though it may not be the most obvious at first sight, but is a +non-natural sense so monstrous that they will not bear it at +all.</p> +<p>So much I say in proof of the mind of the Church of England +upon the subject of the priesthood, as involved in the priestly +function of absolution. It is but a small part of what +might be said, but it is as much perhaps as our time will now +permit, and I cannot understand it to be less than sufficient +(unless our Reformers in the sixteenth <a name="page94"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 94</span>century, and the Revisers of our Book +of Common Prayer and offices since, are to be esteemed either as +the most incompetent or the most impious of men,) to prove the +point for which I have adduced the wording of our Ordinal, and +the comment upon this given by other parts of the Prayer-book, +namely, that our Church unmistakably maintains the doctrine of +the Christian priesthood, not merely the name but the thing, in +the same reality and power in which the Church universal has ever +claimed and ever maintained it.</p> +<p>And this remark may give us, if it please God, a wholesome +thought with which to conclude this morning. Let us ever +strive and pray, that we may never for a moment be severed in +heart or hope, or even in thought, from the universal +Church. Let us love it, and cleave to it, as we contemplate +it one and undivided of old, however, alas, now distracted by +unhappy divisions. Let us beware of encouraging a +self-sufficient or self-reliant temper, as if we shewed our +wisdom or independence, by isolating ourselves from that which +has been the faith of the Church, not here or there, but +everywhere from the beginning. If we can discover (as in +most points of importance we may if we will,) what are the truths +which have been held always, everywhere, and by all, +(<i>semper</i>, <i>ubique</i>, <i>ad omnibus</i>, according to +the well-known rule of St. Vincentius,) we may be certain that we +shall run into no serious error, nor perverted interpretations of +Holy Scripture dangerous to our souls. <a +name="page95"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 95</span>Individuals, +however gifted, may go astray. Individual Churches may err, +and have erred, even in matters of faith; but the whole Church at +large, the Church Catholic, we may be sure, has not done so, nor +ever shall, or how should it be, what St. Paul tells us +“the Church of God” is, “the pillar and ground +of the truth,” <a name="citation95a"></a><a +href="#footnote95a" class="citation">[95a]</a> or how should be +fulfilled our Blessed Lord’s word and +promise,—“The gates of hell shall not prevail against +It;” <a name="citation95b"></a><a href="#footnote95b" +class="citation">[95b]</a> and again, “Lo! I am with +you alway, even unto the end of the world.” <a +name="citation95c"></a><a href="#footnote95c" +class="citation">[95c]</a> So, indeed, let us look upon Her +with tender reverence as the spouse of Christ. “Oh! +pray for the peace of Jerusalem: they shall prosper that love +Thee.” <a name="citation95d"></a><a href="#footnote95d" +class="citation">[95d]</a></p> +<h2><a name="page97"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 97</span>SERMON +VI.<br /> +The Christian Altar.</h2> +<blockquote><p style="text-align: center">HEBREWS xiii. 10.<br /> +“We have an Altar.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>I <span class="smcap">resume</span> our subject: the +priesthood, altar and sacrifice in the Christian Church, and the +mind of the Church of England upon it. On Sunday last we +treated of this in part, shewing in relation to it what were the +“old paths,” and pointing to the proof that our +Church walks in them, recognising and maintaining a true +priesthood in those who minister at her altars, by the solemn +committal to them of the power of absolution, a thing which she +would not do upon any other hypothesis than that of their +possessing a true sacerdotal character. We had not time to +say much upon the altar or the sacrifice. Our text, +however, now leads us by no uncertain course to this portion of +our subject, especially when placed in connection with St. +Paul’s emphatic question in another place: “Are not +they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the +altar?” You will remember that we examined both those +passages on a former occasion, <a name="citation97"></a><a +href="#footnote97" class="citation">[97]</a> when we were +regarding the scriptural <a name="page98"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 98</span>testimony to the doctrine, and I need +not repeat what I then said. But they will lead us on now +naturally,—after the remarks I made last week upon the +Christian priesthood, as borne witness to by the primitive +Church, and maintained in the Church of England,—to some +consideration of the sacrifice also, as borne witness to and +maintained in like manner.</p> +<p>“We have an altar,” says the Apostle. Of +course it is in the celebration of the Holy Eucharist that this +altar is used, and the sacrifice made; the great commemorative +sacrifice of the Christian Church, wherein we do not repeat, or +attempt to repeat, (God forbid,) the one sacrifice, oblation, and +satisfaction once for all made upon the Cross, but yet are +allowed to present before God the Father, the memorial of that +ever-blessed offering, by the Body and Blood of Christ really +present, (though not after the manner of any “corporal +presence of Christ’s natural flesh and blood,” but) +after a true though mystical and heavenly manner; to present +this, I say, according to His will and ordinance, by which it is +granted us to apply to ourselves the merits of His death and +passion, and to obtain His own prevailing intercession for us +before the throne of God; whereby, too, our souls and bodies, as +we “eat of the sacrifice are partakers of the altar,” +and gain heavenly nourishment and sustenance unto everlasting +life.</p> +<p>We have seen already that such is the judgment <a +name="page99"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 99</span>and doctrine +of the primitive Church in its understanding of Holy Scripture, +as shewn by the early Christian writers, and by the ancient +liturgies. Also, that the doctrine was maintained +continuously for fifteen hundred years. Our question now +is, What has our own Church said and done in this matter at or +since the Reformation? Does she maintain, or does she +reject, the previous teaching of the Church Universal, and put +something else in the place of its doctrine, and its +understanding of Holy Scripture upon the subject?</p> +<p>We cannot here go into a minute history of all which was done +at the Reformation in this regard. But I think we may, +within reasonable compass, arrive at a satisfactory general +conclusion. If we compare our Church’s Eucharistic +Office with the ancient liturgies which have been preserved to +us, we may see, I might almost say, at a glance, whether in +prayer, in praise, in oblation, in general design and structure, +we follow in their steps, or make “some new +thing.” It cannot be disputed that in design and +structure those liturgies all proclaim the doctrine of priest, +sacrifice, and altar. This is interwoven with their whole +system. It was the one understanding of Christians in those +days as to what their liturgies contained. If, then, we +find that the Church of England follows carefully in their steps, +and maintains in her Eucharistic Office the whole substance of +those liturgies,—at <a name="page100"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 100</span>any rate, all the main points in +which they agree together, even though it be with some +differences of arrangement, such as might naturally be +expected,—surely we prove our point, and cannot doubt that +our Reformers had no design to break away from the ancient faith, +though they would cast off Roman error and Roman usurpation, and +therefore that our Church not only does not condemn, but adopts +and continues, (as in truth she never dreamed of any other +thing,) the doctrine of the Church Universal in this matter.</p> +<p>Take, then, the following short account of the structure, +form, and usage of the ancient liturgies. I extract it from +Mr. Carter’s book, as I know of no better way to place it +before you:—“The following brief digest,” he +says, “may give some idea of this system of devotion into +which the mind of Christendom was habitually casting itself in +its communion with God. It will be readily seen how the +outline corresponds with our own Eucharistic Office. One or +more collects; lessons from Holy Scripture; a sermon, sometimes +preceded by a hymn or anthem; prayers for the catechumens, +penitents, and others, who, with a benediction, were then +dismissed; the creed, the offertory, with the oblations of bread +and wine” (observe, first offered by being placed upon the +altar); then, “thanksgivings and intercessions, with a +commemoration of the dead in Christ. Then, the more +mystical portion of the <a name="page101"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 101</span>Liturgy commenced, and in all cases +with the very same words, <i>Sursum corda</i>, (‘Lift up +your hearts’); a thanksgiving, closing with the <i>Ter +sanctus</i>, (‘holy, holy, holy’); intercessory +prayers; consecration of the elements, with the repetition of our +Lord’s words of institution; a second oblation of the now +consecrated elements, (this was not always expressed in +words,—sometimes silently, and in act only); an invocation +of the Holy Ghost. This is not found in the Roman nor in +the Gallican Liturgies;”—(so, observe, we do not +forsake the doctrine of the sacrifice if we have it not, for no +one will suspect the Roman Church, which was equally without it, +of denying or disparaging that doctrine;)—then, +“intercessory prayers for the whole Church, the dead as +well as the living;”—(this, however, would be praying +only for the dead in Christ, for none other would be considered +as part of the Church after the time of probation is over: though +in this world, and in the Church on earth, the good and evil, the +wheat and tares grow together, it is not so in the Church beyond +the grave:)—“the Lord’s Prayer; a benediction; +administration or communion; thanksgiving; <i>Gloria in +excelsis</i>; final benediction.” <a +name="citation101"></a><a href="#footnote101" +class="citation">[101]</a></p> +<p>Now will any one take this account of the liturgies and usage +of the ancient Church, which on all hands confessedly is admitted +to have held the doctrine for which we contend, and then, +comparing <a name="page102"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +102</span>these with the Eucharistic Service of our own Church, +doubt for a moment that the Church of England at the Reformation +intended to preserve, and did preserve, the ancient form and +practice, and therefore the ancient faith, in this matter? <a +name="citation102"></a><a href="#footnote102" +class="citation">[102]</a></p> +<p><a name="page103"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 103</span>The +Articles and Catechism of our Church are perfectly in accordance +with this conclusion. Although the former, as we well know, +were drawn up rather to guard against current errors of that day +than to state doctrine upon points not brought into controversy, +<a name="citation103"></a><a href="#footnote103" +class="citation">[103]</a> they indirectly confirm <a +name="page104"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 104</span>what has +been said. For instance, the Twenty-fifth Article, guarding +against the notion of a gross carnal presence of Christ in the +Holy Eucharist, expressed by the term +‘transubstantiation,’ might not be called upon, +within its proper scope, to say anything in the way of dogma +asserting the doctrine of sacrifice; but yet we find in it the +statement that sacraments “be not only badges or tokens of +Christian men’s profession, but rather they be certain sure +witnesses and effectual signs of grace,”—that is, +signs effecting what they signify, and therefore, in the case of +the Holy Communion, effecting or procuring for sinners pardon +through Christ’s body broken and blood shed, even as there, +“as often as we eat that bread and drink that cup we do +shew the Lord’s death till He come,” <a +name="citation104"></a><a href="#footnote104" +class="citation">[104]</a> all which is in perfect accordance and +harmony with the doctrine of a true propitiatory commemorative +sacrifice therein offered up to God.</p> +<p>One point further in relation to the Articles I will notice, +lest I seem to overlook an objection. It is sometimes said, +If the doctrine of a true and propitiatory sacrifice in the Holy +Eucharist be admitted, there is a contradiction to the +Thirty-first Article, which tells us that “the sacrifices +of masses, in which it was commonly said that the <a +name="page105"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 105</span>priest did +offer Christ for the quick and dead, to have remission of pain or +guilt, were blasphemous fables and dangerous +deceits.” It is assumed that any doctrine of a real +and true sacrifice of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Holy +Eucharist must come under this condemnation, and so it is +sometimes thought that the whole question is thus decided. +But, not to notice other points not without importance, but which +we can hardly spare time to go into now, one thing surely is +evident,—that the whole Article must be read together if we +would rightly understand it. It is: “The offering of +Christ once made is that perfect redemption, propitiation, and +satisfaction for all the sins of the whole world, both original +and actual; and there is none other satisfaction for sin but that +alone. Wherefore the sacrifices of masses, in the which it +was commonly said that the priest did offer Christ for the quick +and the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt, were +blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits.” Now it is +plain that the contrast here is between the one satisfaction for +sin made by agony and blood upon the cross, and any supposed +repetition of that painful and bloody sacrifice. +“There is none other but that alone;” wherefore, for +which reason, such attempts at sacrifice as would repeat it, or +such teaching as would imply that Christ repeats it and suffers +again, “are blasphemous fables and dangerous +deceits.” If, then, in anything we say there were a +doctrine of its repetition, if we did not absolutely and entirely +<a name="page106"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 106</span>disclaim +(as we all along have done) any such attempt and any such view of +the sacrifice of the Christian altar, there would be a +condemnation by the Article of our teaching. But certainly +neither its terms nor its scope deal with any view of a merely +unbloody commemorative sacrifice, appointed to be continually +made in the Church of God so long as the world lasteth, by which +the sacrifice upon the cross is never supposed to be repeated, +but its sole merits applied to the believing and obedient heart, +and the prevailing pleading and intercession of the Son of God +presenting our prayers and praises, our penitence and offerings, +before the throne of the heavenly grace are secured, and He +Himself, our Advocate with the Father, is our propitiation. +This no more interferes with the one “full, perfect, and +sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction for the sins of +the whole world, once offered” upon the cross, than His own +continued intercession at the right hand of God (and certainly +“He ever liveth to make intercession for us,”) <a +name="citation106"></a><a href="#footnote106" +class="citation">[106]</a> interferes with, or is inconsistent +with, the same.</p> +<p>So much I have thought it well to say on the Thirty-first +Article, because it is sometimes misunderstood and +misapplied.</p> +<p>Next, I would say just a word as to the teaching of the Church +Catechism, which it would not be right to pass over. I +think it throws a further light upon the doctrine of the +sacrifice and the <a name="page107"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +107</span>altar, for it not only tells us that “the Body +and Blood of Christ are verily and indeed taken and received by +the faithful in the Lord’s Supper,” (that is, the +baptized, Christian people, for so the word is always used in +strict theological language,) and therefore certainly that there +is a real presence of His Body and Blood; but it also says that +that Holy Sacrament was ordained “for the continual +remembrance of the sacrifice of the death of Christ, and of the +benefits which we receive thereby,”—where, as in the +Communion Office itself, the term ‘remembrance’ is +also to be understood in its complete theological sense as the +memorial, the continual memorial before God, which by the +offering up of the sacrifice is made in the Holy Eucharist; all +which is strictly accordant with the doctrine of the primitive +Church and the ancient liturgies; for, to sum up with the words +of the learned Mede, “They (the ancient Fathers) believed +that our blessed Lord ordained the Sacrament of His Body and +Blood as a rite to bless and invocate His Father by, instead of +the manifold and bloody sacrifices of the Law, . . . the mystery +of which rite they took to be this, that as Christ, by presenting +His death and satisfaction to His Father, continually intercedes +for us in heaven, so the Church semblably (i.e. in a like manner) +approaches the throne of grace by representing Christ unto His +Father in those holy mysteries of His death and passion.” +<a name="citation107"></a><a href="#footnote107" +class="citation">[107]</a></p> +<p><a name="page108"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 108</span>If +further proof still be required of our Church’s mind from +the Reformation downward, let it be noted how often this doctrine +has been assailed, and yet how, on every occasion, the Church has +refused to depart from the ancient rule and faith. As one +instance, take the fact, that at the last revision in 1662, when +the real meaning of the Puritan objections was well and fully +understood, and when the demand was absolutely made by their +leaders, both that the absolution by the priest should plainly be +made only declaratory, and that the word ‘priest’ +should be wholly omitted and ‘minister’ substituted, +the Church refused both these demands: the bishops replying to +the first, that the words as standing in the Visitation Service +were far nearer to those of Christ Himself in the commission +given, as these were, not, whose soever sins ye declare to be +remitted, but, “whose soever sins ye remit,” and to +the second, “It is not reasonable that the word +‘minister’ should be only used in the liturgy; for +since some parts of the liturgy may be performed by a deacon, +others by none under the order of a priest, viz. absolution and +consecration, it is fit that some such word as +‘priest’ should be used for these offices, and not +‘minister,’ which signifies at large every one that +ministers in that holy office, of what order soever he be;” +<a name="citation108"></a><a href="#footnote108" +class="citation">[108]</a> whilst yet again, it has been well +noted, that the care of the Church was increased in this last +revision to preserve the distinction and the doctrine dependent +<a name="page109"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 109</span>upon the +word ‘priest,’ now that the objections to it were the +better understood. For it has been pointed out that the +word ‘priest’ occurs ninety times in the first book +of King Edward the Sixth; fifty-five times in the second book, +when the Puritan influence of the foreign reformers obtained its +height; whilst in our present Prayer-book it occurs eighty-eight +times: and an examination in detail would shew that this +restoration was made on principle, and that wherever the term +‘priest’ is employed, more or less of the sacerdotal, +or strictly priestly character and authority is implied; whilst +where the term ‘minister’ is used, it is either as to +simply a ministerial, as distinguished from a sacerdotal act, or +the meaning of the term is determined by the previous use of the +word ‘priest.’ <a name="citation109"></a><a +href="#footnote109" class="citation">[109]</a> So that as +to this whole ministration, we may well adopt the weighty and +persuasive language of Dr. Hickes, where, summing up a detailed +argument against Cudworth, who had invented the theory that the +Holy Eucharist was only a feast upon a sacrifice, and not a +sacrifice itself, he says: “I have said all this in defence +of the old, against the Doctor’s new notion of the Holy +Eucharist, much more out of love to that old truth than to prove +Christian ministers to be proper priests. For, it will +follow even from this,” (that is, from Cudworth’s own +view,) “that they must be proper priests, because, as none +but a priest can offer a sacrifice, <a name="page110"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 110</span>so none but a priest can preside and +minister in such a sacrificial feast as he allows the Holy +Sacrament to be. Who but a priest can receive the elements +from the people, set them upon the holy table, and offer up to +God such solemn prayers, praises, and thanksgivings for the +congregation, and make such solemn intercessions for them as are +now, and ever were, offered and made in this Holy +Sacrament? Who but a priest can consecrate the elements and +make them the mystical Body and Blood of Christ? Who but a +priest can stand in God’s stead at His table, and in His +Name receive His guests? Who but a priest hath power to +break the Bread, and bless the Cup, and make a solemn memorial +before God of His Son’s sufferings, and then deliver His +sacramental Body and Blood to the faithful communicants, as +tokens of His meritorious sufferings, and pledges of their +salvation? A man authorized thus to act ‘for men in +things pertaining to God,’ and for God in things pertaining +to men, must needs be a priest; and such holy ministrations must +needs be sacerdotal, whether the holy table be an altar, or the +Sacrament a sacrifice or not.” <a name="citation110"></a><a +href="#footnote110" class="citation">[110]</a></p> +<p>To what conclusion, then, can we come but to that of the +learned Archbishop Bramhall? “He who saith, Take thou +authority to exercise the office of a priest in the Church of God +(as the Protestant consecrators do), doth intend all things <a +name="page111"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 111</span>requisite +to the priestly function, and, among the rest, to offer a +representative sacrifice, to commemorate and apply the sacrifice +which Christ made upon the Cross:”<a +name="citation111a"></a><a href="#footnote111a" +class="citation">[111a]</a>—or to the brief but weighty +saying of St. Jerome? “Ecclesia non est, quæ +non habet Sacerdotes.” <a name="citation111b"></a><a +href="#footnote111b" class="citation">[111b]</a></p> +<p>Once more, brethren, we must pause, and as we do so, let us +pray to Him from whom “cometh down every good and every +perfect gift,” <a name="citation111c"></a><a +href="#footnote111c" class="citation">[111c]</a> that He may give +us His grace more and more to realize, and more and more to thank +Him for the great privileges which He has vouchsafed to us in His +“holy Catholic Church.” “We have an +altar” to which we may come, the same blessed feast, of +which we may partake, the same blessed sacrifice, in which we may +join, which has ever been in His Church from the beginning. +As the Israelites were taught to remember, as to their land +flowing with milk and honey, that they “gat it not in +possession through their own sword, neither was it their own arm +that helped them;” <a name="citation111d"></a><a +href="#footnote111d" class="citation">[111d]</a> Oh, so let us +ever say with heart and voice, “Not unto us, O Lord, not +unto us, but unto Thy Name give the praise, for Thy loving mercy, +and for Thy truth’s sake.” <a +name="citation111e"></a><a href="#footnote111e" +class="citation">[111e]</a></p> +<h2><a name="page113"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +113</span>SERMON VII.<br /> +The Christian Altar.</h2> +<blockquote><p style="text-align: center">HEBREWS xiii. 10.<br /> +“We have an Altar.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p><span class="smcap">It</span> may be well, before we proceed +with our general subject, to call your attention to one +particular as to the course of our argument. You may have +observed that I have not, except here and there incidentally, +entered into any examination of the nature of the Christian +sacrifice itself, any more than I have into any details or +particulars of the doctrine of absolution, such as its power and +effect, or the necessary limitations to be understood in its +application. And this has been done advisedly, because I +was not so much concerned, for instance, with the doctrine of +absolution in itself, as with it in relation to, and as a proof +of, the necessary existence of a sacerdotal power in those to +whom it is entrusted; and therefore if I shewed that such +authority is, in and by the Church of England, considered to be +vested in those who minister at her altars, I inferred thence, I +think justly, the existence of a priesthood in the mind of our +Church. This has been the object with which I have referred +<a name="page114"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 114</span>to that +doctrine in illustration, and not to discuss the nature or define +the powers of absolution itself. As, however, I have here +touched upon it again, I may add, lest any mistake or +misconception arise, that no one pretends the efficient power to +absolve, (any more than to offer sacrifice,) lies in the priest +himself. He is but the instrument administering the grace +of God. The history of the cure of the lame man at the +beautiful gate of the Temple (which we lately read) may well +illustrate this. Surely no one will deny that the power to +heal him was vested in St. Peter and St. John, whilst it is clear +also, beyond all dispute, that not by their “own power or +holiness had they made that man to walk.” <a +name="citation114"></a><a href="#footnote114" +class="citation">[114]</a> What, then, is there incredible +in the affirmation that the power of the keys is vested in a +priest as the instrument, though all the authority and absolving +power is from God only; so that it is God and not man who +pardons, and makes any man whole from sin. “Who, +indeed, can forgive sins but God only?” But he who is +invested with such authority, even instrumentally, is exactly +what we term a ‘priest;’ and our argument has been +(to recur to it thus for a moment) that the Church, which regards +men as so endowed, regards them as priests of God.</p> +<p>I return more generally to the declaration of the text, +“We have an altar;” and I will adduce one further +illustration of the mind of the Church <a +name="page115"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 115</span>of England +hereon, by a reference to the foreign Reformation. Take the +two systems of Luther and Calvin, and what do we find? +Luther was already a priest before he began the Reformation, and +he had no design to cast off the priestly element and character +in his Reformation. He and other priests who joined him did +not cease to administer Sacraments, or to teach their +efficacy. The Confession of Augsburgh, which embodies the +principles of the German Reformation, asserts regeneration in +baptism, private confession to a priest, the grace of absolution, +and the real presence in the Holy Eucharist. It also fully +recognises (as with this teaching we should expect it would) the +priesthood in its true meaning. Luther did not design or +promulgate a change of system in any of these doctrines. +What he did declare, under the exigencies of his position, +because no bishop joined him, was, that for the purposes of +continuing the priesthood and its powers, no episcopacy was +necessary, but that priests could make priests; as Mr. Carter +observes, a perfectly new doctrine in the Church of God. +But the whole proceeding shewed that a sacramental system was +maintained after the pattern of the Church, nay, with true +priests to administer it for a time, but without the only +ordained means of transmitting the same powers to the succeeding +generation. Now how great a testimony is this to the true +doctrine, and how much light does it throw upon the acts of our +<a name="page116"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 116</span>own +reformers at home, who, with a true episcopate and the power of +succession unimpaired, were not likely to design a less perfect +system than the German Reformer admitted and maintained in his +theory, though he failed in the appointed means validly to carry +it out.</p> +<p>And Luther’s testimony is all the more weighty when we +remember that he was one who had so little reverence for +antiquity or authority, that at one time he rejected and denied +the inspiration of the Epistle of St. James, because he could not +make its teaching as to good works square with his own theory of +justification; and, at another time, absolutely exhorted the +elect to sin boldly and shamelessly that they might be fit +objects for the mercy of God, and because no sin which they could +commit could frustrate the grace of God toward them! and yet even +such a man wholly received and enforced the ancient doctrine of +the priesthood, and its accompaniments, the altar and the +sacrifice.</p> +<p>Glance for a moment at the teaching of Calvin, and you will +find another theological aspect. Calvin was not a priest; +he had, therefore, no authority to administer Sacraments; so he +took the bold line of rejecting the doctrine of a priesthood +altogether. He taught that Christ was the only Priest of +the New Testament, and that Christian ministers were only, what +such names as elders and pastors might denote, rulers and +teachers that is, in the Church of Christ. This <a +name="page117"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 117</span>is the +first of those three functions which we spoke of in a former +discourse, as connected with the priesthood, but is just that one +which we then said lacked the distinctive character of the +priesthood,—the power of absolution and of offering +sacrifice. So much Calvin allowed to his ministry, but all +else he denied!</p> +<p>Now, it is obvious, that besides his own defect in point of +orders, (that he was not, like Luther, a priest,) his system was +one to dispose him to reject this doctrine; for what need of a +priesthood, or any external means of approaching God acceptably, +when his theory and teaching was that of individual election and +reprobation, determined from all eternity, according to the mere +purpose of God? How naturally would such a system dispense +with the priesthood? Aye, and there seems hardly room to +doubt that it would equally well have dispensed with +Sacraments. But here both the testimony of Holy Scripture, +and the whole usage of the Christian world, as to fact, were too +strong for him. He saw he could not actually reject +Sacraments, although his system might well do without them. +It is true, there was evidence of the same kind, both in +Scripture and in antiquity, for the priesthood also. But it +was much easier to discard the doctrine as a mere matter of +opinion, (so he might call it,) than to set aside things so +plainly presented to the sight, as the facts of the use of +baptism, and the celebration of the Lord’s <a +name="page118"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 118</span>Supper, +everywhere established. The bodily eye could see those +usages, but could not see the inner impress of the +priesthood. He could elude or deny the one, but he dared +not, even if he wished it, displace the other. To what, +then, did he have recourse? He kept the outward form and +show of Sacraments, as we may say, but denuded them of all their +truth, mystery, and power. “He taught that they were +bare signs; symbolizing, but not conveying grace; or rather, he +separated the sign from the thing signified, making the one +independent of the other.” <a name="citation118"></a><a +href="#footnote118" class="citation">[118]</a> Yet, as he +wished to keep them, so he saw that he must teach that there was +some good in them. How did he contrive to give them this +use in his system? Why, he invented and taught that the +faith of the receiver, and not the act of consecration, is the +cause of grace in Sacraments; not in the sense that Sacraments do +not profit the unworthy (which is true), but that this subjective +faith in the recipient is the sole cause of their having power or +virtue, (which is not true). Thus he, in effect, +constituted every man his own priest, and led directly to the +conclusion further, that unless in each individual case, the +receiver were predestinated to life eternal, there was nothing in +the Sacrament at all. And so, again, we see the Christian +ministry became, in Calvin’s system, nothing but an organ +of government and instruction, which the term ‘elder’ +or ‘presbyter’ might <a name="page119"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 119</span>sufficiently describe. And all +this, with full deliberation and design on his part, because +Calvin was far too learned and able a man not to know that, if +there were an altar and a sacrifice, there must needs be a +priesthood, which he had not, and was determined to do +without.</p> +<p>I should hardly have gone into this statement as to Calvin for +its own sake, but I think it worthy of notice, for the sake of a +practical lesson as to those who decry or deny the doctrine of +the priesthood, call Christ our only Priest, and make every man, +in fact, his own Priest. Surely we may see that the root of +all this is, not the teaching of the Church of England, but +absolute Calvinism and the teaching of the Helvetic Confession, +the embodiment of the views of the Swiss Reformers. Those +who accept this teaching may, or may not, adopt with it, the +predestinarian part of Calvin’s scheme; but certainly they +are adopting to the letter his denial of a Christian priesthood, +which denial, equally certainly, the English Reformation did not +accept. “We,” then, “have an +altar,” however it may be that others may have rejected and +cast it off, and perhaps, alas, some among ourselves may be +unconscious of it, or may disbelieve it.</p> +<p>And this leads us to a few words further as to our position, +when—I fear there is no denying or concealing it—when +some of the priests themselves among us repudiate their +priesthood, and thus follow the Swiss instead of the English <a +name="page120"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +120</span>Reformation! What must we say as to the effect of +such unbelief; first as to their ministrations and the effect +upon their flocks, and, secondly, as to themselves?</p> +<p>And, first, as to the first point. Brethren, blessed be +God, we do not, and we need not, think that, even on this +account, they do not offer up the true sacrifice. Turn, for +your comfort, to the Twenty-sixth Article of our Church, and you +will see why I say so. It is headed, “Of the +unworthiness of the ministers, which hinders not the effect of +the Sacraments;” and it tells us of them, as to +“their authority in ministration of the Word and +Sacraments,” that “forasmuch as they do not the same +in their own name, but in Christ’s, and do minister by His +commission and authority, we may use their ministry, both in +hearing the Word of God, and in receiving of the +Sacraments. Neither is the effect of Christ’s +ordinance taken away . . . nor the grace of God diminished from +such as by faith and rightly do receive the Sacraments ministered +unto them; which be effectual, because of Christ’s +institution and promise. . . .”</p> +<p>Thus, even such have received the priesthood, and its +indelible impress, the +<i>χαρακτὴρ</i>, (as it +is theologically termed,) which cannot be destroyed in them by +any act or will of theirs. Thus, their ministration at the +altar (so long as it be according to the rule and order of the +Church of England) is the offering a valid sacrifice, <a +name="page121"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 121</span>and their +distribution of the consecrated elements is the giving to be +“verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful, the +Body and Blood of Christ.” However, therefore, we may +mourn for them, however we may feel in addition to sorrow a godly +shame on their account, yet we need not fear that the flock is +deprived of the needful food, nor defrauded of the blessed +intercession of the Lamb, pleading for His people at the right +hand of God, as often as the oblation is made, and the dread and +blessed sacrifice is (even thus) offered up.</p> +<p>As to such themselves (our second anxious question) what shall +we say? I will say nothing of my own mind or thought, but +rather adduce a weighty passage which I have found upon the +matter in the work of the learned Dr. Hickes, whom I have +mentioned more than once, as having so largely treated on our +present subject. Even in his day, more than a +hundred-and-fifty years ago, these deniers of the grace given +them, were not unknown; and he thus speaks of them, going, you +will observe, not so much as I have done here, into the question +of the effect of their misbelief upon their ministrations to +their flocks, but more particularly into its effect upon +themselves. “I desire,” he says, “your +late writer,” (the author whom, in his dissertation, he was +answering,) “and such others as he, who have been led into +their errors by these and other writers since the +Reformation,” (Cudworth he <a name="page122"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 122</span>means more particularly, and the +novel theory propounded by him,) “to consider that, if the +Holy Eucharist be a sacrifice, as the Catholic Church believed in +all ages before that time, how far the defect of administering it +only as a sacrament may affect the holy office and the +administration of it; and whether the Communion administered by a +priest, who neither believes himself to be such, nor the +Sacrament to be an oblation or sacrifice, can be a Communion in +or with the Catholic Church? I say, I leave it to +themselves to consider these things, and I think they deserve +their consideration, and hope they will seriously and impartially +ruminate upon them, lest they should not ‘rightly and duly +administer that Holy Sacrament.’ The best of the +Jewish writers tells us” (i.e. Maimonides), “that it +was a profanation of a sacrifice, if the priest thought, when he +offered up one sacrifice, that it was another; as if, when he +offered a burnt-offering, he thought it was a peace-offering; or +if, when he offered a peace-offering, he thought it was a +burnt-offering. Whether that obliquity of thought, when it +happened, had such an effect or no, I shall not now enquire; but +this I dare say, if a Jewish priest, who did not believe himself +to be a proper priest, nor the Jewish altar a proper altar, nor +the sacrifices of the Law true and proper sacrifices, had +presumed to offer while he was in this unhappy error, that he had +profaned the sacrifice, so far as he was concerned in it, and not +<a name="page123"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 123</span>offered +it up <i>ὁσίως +καὶ +ἀμέμπτως</i>, (holily and +unblameably,) according to the will of God, though according to +all the appointed rites, nor in unity and conjunction with the +Jewish Church. For the Jewish Church would not have +suffered such priests, if known, to minister among the sons of +Aaron and Zadoc; nor would the ancient Catholic Church have +endured bishops and presbyters without censure, who durst have +taught that the Christian ministry was not a proper priesthood, +the Holy Eucharist, not a proper sacrifice, or that Christian +ministers were not proper priests.” <a +name="citation123a"></a><a href="#footnote123a" +class="citation">[123a]</a></p> +<p>Oh, my brethren, for those who may have fallen into such error +(not knowing what they do), let us pray, in all tenderness and +charity, that they may be forgiven and enlightened; and for us +all, priests and people alike, let us make our petition that we +may never fall into it; whilst, as to whatever truth or privilege +or blessing God has shewn or given to us, let us “not be +high-minded, but fear,” <a name="citation123b"></a><a +href="#footnote123b" class="citation">[123b]</a> not being puffed +up because of our advantages, but all the more careful, because +we confess we have them, diligently to use them.</p> +<p>And this brings us to the great practical question to which +this whole enquiry leads. “We have an +altar.” Do we, as we ought, use and profit by our +great privilege? Do we indeed, individually and one by one, +value the altar, use the altar, bring our gift to the altar, join +in the services <a name="page124"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +124</span>of the altar, become partakers of the altar, and +thereby have fellowship with the Lord?</p> +<p>Such questions, seriously considered, may furnish us with a +most important test as to our true state, particularly whether we +believe the doctrine, and whether we so live day by day as to be +meet to take our place and part in the altar worship. Let +me say a few words on these points before I conclude.</p> +<p>First, do we really believe the doctrine? If we do, +surely we must frequent the sacrifice. We must see in the +altar service the highest act of our devotion. We must +perceive that here is the crown and completion of all other +worship, the sum and substance of our praises and thanksgivings, +the prevailing mode of petition for ourselves and of intercession +for others, the greatest and highest means of applying to our +individual wants and individual sins the mercies of God through +the ever-availing sacrifice of Christ. Such persuasion of +their dignity and power has ever pervaded those who have believed +in a priesthood, an altar, and a sacrifice. Heathen +testimony witnesses to this, even amidst all the corruption and +debasement of idol worship. The solemn, gorgeous, awful +sacrifice has ever been the central act of all devotion, that to +which all the people congregated, and to which, if they had any +religion, they delighted to be called. We cannot here, and +we need not, go into the proofs of this from the poets or +historians of antiquity. <a name="page125"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 125</span>We hardly need adduce any proofs +further than we have done already from Holy Scripture to +it. We may, however, just recall the manner of the +sacrifice offered by Samuel previous to the anointing of Saul to +be king over Israel, when all the people would not eat until the +Prophet came, “because he doth bless the sacrifice.” +<a name="citation125a"></a><a href="#footnote125a" +class="citation">[125a]</a> And the majesty of the great +feast and sacrifice at the dedication of Solomon’s temple; +<a name="citation125b"></a><a href="#footnote125b" +class="citation">[125b]</a> and again, the solemn renewal of the +covenant and worship of God by Josiah, King of Judah, when he +held the feast of the Passover unto the Lord, such as had not +been “from the days of the judges that judged Israel, nor +in all the days of the kings of Israel, nor of the kings of +Judah.” <a name="citation125c"></a><a href="#footnote125c" +class="citation">[125c]</a> Let us remember, too, that the +great Paschal sacrifice and feast, itself the type of the true +Lamb of God, was ordained to be annually kept under the earlier +dispensation, and was assuredly so great and central a scene and +act of Jewish devotion that to it the whole nation was called, +and called so stringently that he who observed it not was to be +cut off from the people. <a name="citation125d"></a><a +href="#footnote125d" class="citation">[125d]</a> What an +intimation that he who keeps not its far greater antitype, the +Christian Passover in the Eucharistic Sacrifice and feast, is <a +name="page126"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 126</span>cutting +himself off from the people of God under the new and better +covenant! Do we, then, all of us thus frequent and delight +in the Christian altar? and if not, why not? Do we suppose +that holiness of life, less than that which may allow us to come +worthily to the Holy Eucharist, will be sufficient to let us come +to heaven? Do we think that, though we are without the +marriage garment which we feel is needful for us to go to the +Supper of the Lord on earth, we can enter without it, to sit down +at the great marriage of the Lamb in the courts of heaven? +Can we believe that a heart less devoted to God, and a love and +obedience less perfect toward Christ than will permit us to join +in the highest act of thanksgiving in this world, will allow us +to join in the everlasting Hosannas of the world to come? +Or do we imagine that such a service as that of the Christian +altar is not intended for us all, but is to be restricted to a +certain few out of the whole body of the baptized? Surely, +however widely such may seem to be the practical belief (rather, +I should say, unbelief) of our day, there is no support for any +such notion in either the Holy Scripture, or the faith and usage +of the Church Catholic, or in the principles of the +Reformation. Not only is the whole teaching of the Bible, +of the primitive Church, and of our Articles, Canons, and +Catechism against any such view, but our very Eucharistic Office +itself speaks plainly against it also. Not to mention more +<a name="page127"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 127</span>direct +proofs in other ways, it is a great mistake to suppose that +office to design any division in its midst where ordinary +Christians have licence to depart, and a few select or chosen are +bidden to remain. The not unfrequent custom of using a +collect and benediction after the sermon may perhaps, however +well intended, have fostered an error here. This may seem +to make an authorized close to the service at that point, as if +one service were now ended and another were to begin. It +has, therefore, enabled people the more easily to forget that we +are then in the middle of the Office for Holy Communion, whilst +the usage itself (as well as the custom of saying a collect and +the Lord’s Prayer before the sermon) is certainly without +authority, and rather against than according to the mind of our +Church; and although we may perhaps not unreasonably, to avoid +confusion, make a pause whilst children and those who may be +unable, at any particular time, to remain for the celebration may +leave, we are not to think that a certain barrenness or +awkwardness felt by such as then depart is without its value in +instruction. If they who thus habitually absent themselves +from the sacrifice and feast of the altar, may be led to reflect +from this very feeling that the Church herself, by the gentle +remonstrance of the structure of her service, reminds them that +they are leaving before the service in which they are engaged is +ended, this may surely give a wholesome lesson. Oh, <a +name="page128"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 128</span>if any +<i>one</i> even may be thus led to think, Why do I depart? why +need I go away? why do I refuse to join in the Christian +sacrifice, the highest act of thanksgiving and praise? why do I +turn my back upon my Saviour, present to pardon, to feed, and to +save me?—if any feel this, until meditating upon the love +and the command of Christ, he resolves, instead of departing, to +come with his gift to the altar, and taste and see how gracious +the Lord is, shall he not find reason to bless and praise God +that He thus brings him to himself, and thankfully acknowledge +the wisdom of our Church, which has not appointed even the +semblance of a finished service in the middle of her holy +Eucharistic Office?</p> +<p>The opposite conduct to that of those who depart without +communicating, I mean that of such as remain without +communicating, has, as we know, been the subject of no small +controversy in the present day. I do not desire here to +enter into that dispute, but just so much I would observe: first, +that if any desire to remain, having perhaps already communicated +at an earlier service, or in a serious anxious wish to learn the +will of God better as to the Christian sacrifice, with a view to +the becoming a partaker of it; or, if any desire to join so far +in it as to unite his heart and voice with those who offer it, +being a communicant, though he may not design on that occasion to +communicate, I do not conceive that the priest would have the +wish, or if he had, would have <a name="page129"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 129</span>any authority, to bid him +depart. Whilst, nevertheless, I deem it needful to observe, +secondly, that I see no warrant to think they are in anything but +a dangerous error who imagine (if, indeed, any do so) that the +presence of any one as a gazer upon, or witness of, the holy +mysteries, is in any way equivalent to communicating. I do +not see how such presence of one looking on, even joining in +words of praise, but habitually and constantly doing no more; of +one who is not a communicant, nor seeking to become a +communicant; of one who does not eat of the sacrifice though +present, perhaps often, at the offering of it, can be an act of +worship or adoration well-pleasing to Almighty God; can, in any +way, make up for his lack of understanding, or preparation, or +obedience in that he does not “eat the flesh of the Son of +Man and drink His blood,” without which, our Lord Himself +has told us, we have “no life in us.” <a +name="citation129"></a><a href="#footnote129" +class="citation">[129]</a> To be present in order to learn, +and to learn in order to obey, we may indeed hope will be an +acceptable service, so far as it goes; but to gaze constantly +without obeying ever, and then to think nevertheless that we +“are partakers of the altar,” seems to me nothing +less than a dangerous self-deceit, and therefore certainly a +practice not to be encouraged.</p> +<p>I sum up our remarks then, brethren, in this conclusion, that +we should all of us, with a depth of feeling beyond our words to +express it, thank <a name="page130"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +130</span>our merciful God for His tender care and providence +over us in this our Church of England. He has given us the +treasure of the priesthood, though in earthen vessels, handed +down from His very Apostles themselves by the laying on of hands, +even according to the powers of their own commission from Christ +Himself. He has shewed us the witness to the doctrine of +sacrifice, as exhibited in the world from Adam to Christ. +He has confirmed the doctrine and the usage of the sacrifice and +altar in the Christian Church by His holy Word in the New +Testament, and by the records preserved to us of the early +Church, telling us unmistakeably how the Church, from the +Apostles’ time downward, understood the Scriptures in this +respect. He has let us know the mind of the Church at large +to have been one upon the doctrine for nearly sixteen hundred +years; and, blessed be His name, He “so guided and governed +the minds” of those in authority among us at the momentous +period of our Reformation, and in all revisions since, that our +Church has ever maintained, and does maintain, the doctrine of +the Church Universal on the deep and mysterious, but, at the same +time, most important practical subject of the priesthood, the +altar, and the sacrifice. Thus, in His mercy, our Church +has made no “new thing,” nor departed from “the +old paths.” She is one with the Church of God in all +times in this matter, and we need have no fears but that if we +come, one by one “with <a name="page131"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 131</span>true penitent hearts and lively +faith,” to the altar of God and the table of the Lord among +us, we may and do eat of the sacrifice, are partakers of the +altar, and have fellowship with the Lord; that we have indeed +preserved to us, in spite of the unbelief among us, and the +strife of tongues around us, all that true and holy thing which +the Church has ever had as Christ’s own appointed means for +the pardon of our sins and the sustainment of our spiritual life, +by the which we, with His “whole Church militant here on +earth,” are allowed to offer up the never-ceasing, +unbloody, commemorative, propitiatory sacrifice which the Church +has ever offered, and by which she pleads before the throne of +God the power of the one great sacrifice upon the cross for the +pardon of sin, yea, even procures the pleading thereof for our +individual sins and transgressions by the Son of God Himself, our +“High Priest set on the right hand of the throne of the +majesty in the heavens,” <a name="citation131a"></a><a +href="#footnote131a" class="citation">[131a]</a> who “ever +liveth to make intercession for us;” so that we thus, in +common with the whole Church of God, fulfil the Prophet’s +word, “From the rising of the sun even unto the going down +of the same, My name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in +every place incense shall be offered unto My name, and a pure +offering: for My name shall be great among the heathen, saith the +Lord of Hosts.” <a name="citation131b"></a><a +href="#footnote131b" class="citation">[131b]</a></p> +<p>And if God has been thus gracious to us in all straits and +perils in time past, it would surely be <a +name="page132"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 132</span>a grievous +want of faith not to put our trust in Him for the time to +come. Though we know that for sin persisted in the +candlestick of a church may be removed, yet we will hope +confidingly that where He has preserved His truth so long He will +still watch over it and keep it; where, too, in the ordering of +His providence, so great a door seems set open before us; where, +by our power and extended empire, our vast colonial possessions +and daily increasing colonial Church, (all His own gift,) we seem +fitted to be the means of His “way being known upon earth, +His saving health among all nations,” He will still cause +the light of His countenance to shine upon us; where, again, +thousands, as we verily believe, come before Him daily in +humility, penitence, and prayer, (like Daniel, interceding for +his country and his people,) “crying mightily unto +Him” for support in all dangers, and aid in all +adversities; I say, we will hope indeed that He “will hear +their cry and will help them.” Even in the day of +thick darkness He can cause that “at evening time it shall +be light.” <a name="citation132"></a><a href="#footnote132" +class="citation">[132]</a> Whatever be our trial we need +not, on that account, deem ourselves forsaken. Nay, unless +we see it plainly written that for our sins He has turned His +face wholly from us, we will not doubt, in all faith though in +all humility, that He will allow us to hand on to our +children’s children, and to the “generations which +are yet for to come,” the same good deposit which we <a +name="page133"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 133</span>have +ourselves received. If ever we seem to be disheartened or +ready to faint by the way, we will remember on whose word we rely +and on whose arm we lean; we will call to mind His wonders of old +time; we will ever with all faith and hopeful trust, knowing how +with Him “all things are possible,” make the prayer +of the Psalmist continually our own, saying, “Turn us +again, O Lord God of Hosts: shew the light of Thy countenance, +and we shall be whole.” <a name="citation133"></a><a +href="#footnote133" class="citation">[133]</a></p> +<h2><a name="page135"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +135</span>SERMON VIII. <a name="citation135"></a><a +href="#footnote135" class="citation">[135]</a><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">(Preached on Christmas Day.)</span><br /> +God Incarnate our Great High Priest.</h2> +<blockquote><p style="text-align: center">COLOSSIANS ii. 3.<br /> +“In Whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and +knowledge.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p><span class="smcap">The</span> preceding verses will tell us +“of whom speaketh” the Apostle this. Having +declared what great conflict he had for his converts at Colosse +and “for them at Laodicea, and for as many as had not seen +his face in the flesh,” he tells them that this his +conflict and desire for them was, that their “hearts might +be comforted; being knit together in love, and unto all riches of +the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgment of the +mystery of God, and of <a name="page136"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 136</span>the Father, and of Christ; in +Whom,” he adds, “are hid all the treasures of wisdom +and knowledge.”</p> +<p>As there is nothing on which men may not make a controversy, +so there has been a question raised whether the meaning be, +“in Whom,” viz. in Christ, or, “in +which,” viz. in the mystery of God, and the Father, and +Christ, “are hid all the treasures of wisdom and +knowledge?” But we may well be excused if we do not +desire on such a day as this to run into criticism of this kind; +and I shall therefore take it at once for granted that the plain +and natural sense of the words is the true one, and that we have +here the Apostle’s declaration of and concerning Him of +Whom he says just afterwards unmistakeably, that “in Him +dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,” <a +name="citation136"></a><a href="#footnote136" +class="citation">[136]</a> that He is the same “in Whom are +hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” And +if they be so in Christ, as He is, at the right hand of God, (for +He was there undoubtedly when the Apostle wrote this of Him,) so, +being ever one and the same Eternal God, “the same +yesterday, and to-day, and for ever,” they were equally in +Him in the days of His humiliation, “when for us men and +for our salvation” He took upon Him man’s +nature. As the Second of our Articles of Religion, in the +strictest theological language, expresses it: “The Son, +which is the Word of the Father, begotten from everlasting of the +Father, <a name="page137"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +137</span>the very and eternal God, and of one substance with the +Father, took man’s nature in the womb of the blessed +Virgin, of her substance: so that two whole and perfect Natures, +that is to say, the Godhead and Manhood, were joined together in +one Person, never to be divided, whereof is one Christ, very God +and very Man;” whereof, too, be it well observed, the just +and immediate consequence is, that He—“Who truly +suffered, was crucified, dead and buried, to reconcile His Father +to us, and to be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but +also for all actual sins of men,”—was this same one +Person, very God, and very Man. So that we speak simple +truth (though a mystery beyond even angelic powers fully to +understand or appreciate) when we say that God Himself was born +of the Virgin Mary; God Himself lay in that manger at Bethlehem; +God Himself grew up from infancy to manhood before men’s +eyes; God Himself shed His Blood, and died upon the Cross, to +save the lost and guilty race of Adam, whom by His Incarnation He +made His brethren: even as the Apostle declares to the disciples +at Miletus, that God had “purchased His Church with His own +Blood;” <a name="citation137a"></a><a href="#footnote137a" +class="citation">[137a]</a> and again, tells the Ephesians, that +through Christ “we have redemption through His +Blood;” <a name="citation137b"></a><a href="#footnote137b" +class="citation">[137b]</a> and again, the Hebrews, that +“by His own Blood entered in once into the holy place, +having obtained eternal redemption for us.” <a +name="citation137c"></a><a href="#footnote137c" +class="citation">[137c]</a></p> +<p><a name="page138"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 138</span>This +perfect union for ever of the two Natures in the one Person of +Jesus Christ our Lord it is of the highest importance for us to +receive, or we shall have unworthy notions of God, and what He +has done for us. We shall, if we “divide the +Substance,” making two Persons to be in Christ, be in +danger of believing that a mere man died for us; or else, that +the death of Christ was not, in a true sense, death at all; so +that there would be either a propitiatory sacrifice made for the +sins of the world by one less than God, or else no propitiatory +sacrifice made at all. In either case, a denial of +“the Lord that bought us.” <a +name="citation138"></a><a href="#footnote138" +class="citation">[138]</a> In the one, that He is the Lord; +in the other, that He bought us. For, as we see at once, +God, as God only, cannot die; and man, as man only, cannot make +propitiation for sin. It is, of course, true that the +Godhead, considered in itself, is incapable of suffering, and +therefore, the Son of God, for this reason, (among many others, +as we may well believe,) took upon Him man’s nature, which +was capable of suffering and death. And not less true or +less plain is it, that the Manhood, even in its best and most +perfect state, could not make atonement to God for sin, or enable +any man to “save his brother.” But when God +became Flesh, when the Son of God became also the Son of Man, +when the two natures in their Perfection were thus joined in the +Person of Jesus Christ: then God being man could die, and man <a +name="page139"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 139</span>being God +could not only live but give life. So Christ not only +liveth ever, but He “giveth eternal life” <a +name="citation139a"></a><a href="#footnote139a" +class="citation">[139a]</a> to as many as are His. +“Thus,”—to use the words of the well-known +commentator on our Articles, the present Bishop of +Ely,—“thus we understand the Scripture when it says +that men ‘crucified the Lord of Glory,’ <a +name="citation139b"></a><a href="#footnote139b" +class="citation">[139b]</a> when it says that ‘God +purchased the Church with His own Blood,’ <a +name="citation139c"></a><a href="#footnote139c" +class="citation">[139c]</a> because though God in His Divine +Nature cannot be crucified, and has no blood to shed; yet the Son +of God, the Lord of Glory, took into His Person the nature of +man, in which nature He could suffer, could shed His blood, could +be crucified, could die.” <a name="citation139d"></a><a +href="#footnote139d" class="citation">[139d]</a> All this +being done and suffered by that one Person—Christ Jesus, +God and Man—it is no figure or fallacy but a simple truth, +however wonderful, to say that God was born in Bethlehem and died +upon the cross at Calvary. Thus, too, He the one +ever-blessed Son of the Highest, “in Whom were hid all the +treasures of wisdom and knowledge,” could become unto us +“wisdom and righteousness and sanctification and +redemption;” our Prophet, Priest and King, our Sacrifice, +our Mediator, our Intercessor, our ever-merciful and +ever-enduring Saviour, Who sitteth at the right hand of God, +until He shall come again with power and great glory to be also +our Judge.</p> +<p><a name="page140"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 140</span>So +very far have modern times gone in forgetfulness of the ancient +faith, that, I believe, it is sometimes considered a strange +thing to give to the Blessed Virgin the title of “the +Mother of God,” as if it were a novelty so to designate +her. Whereas, to deny her this title, and so in fact to +make two Persons to be in Christ,—one, God, not born of +her; and one, man, born of her,—is precisely the very and +exact heresy of Nestorius condemned by the Third General Council +held at Ephesus in the year 431, which decision was, and has ever +since been, received by the whole Church. So that it is not +merely truth so to designate her, but it is absolutely heretical +to maintain the contrary. “Ever since the Council of +Ephesus, the Church has consecrated the peculiar title of +‘Theotokos’ (God’s parent, or Mother of God,) +to denote the incommunicable privilege of the Blessed Virgin +Mary, in that she became the mother of Immanuel, ‘God with +us.’ . . . For, though it is as man that Christ is of +the substance of His Mother born in the world, yet, inasmuch as +the Word took man’s nature in the womb of the Blessed +Virgin of her substance, she may truly be styled ‘Mother of +God,’ because ‘two whole and perfect +natures—that is to say, the Godhead and Manhood—were +joined in One Person never to be divided, whereof is one Christ, +very God and very Man.’” <a name="citation140"></a><a +href="#footnote140" class="citation">[140]</a></p> +<p><a name="page141"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 141</span>But +let us turn back again for a moment to the thought of the text, +that in Christ “are hid all the treasures of wisdom and +knowledge.” There is surely an emphatic force in the +words “are +hid,”—“<i>εἰσὶν +ἀπόκρυφοι</i>,” +not merely ‘contained,’ but ‘laid up,’ +‘concealed,’—and if in a certain sense, even +now they are hid, because Christ our Lord does not manifest +Himself to the eye of sense in any visible form of glory, though +He has all wisdom and all knowledge ever inherent in Him, it may +be said that they were even more obscured, when, emptying Himself +of His glory, “He took upon Him the form of a servant, and +was made in the likeness of men, and was found in fashion as a +man.” <a name="citation141"></a><a href="#footnote141" +class="citation">[141]</a> Look upon Him as He was on this +day eighteen hundred and three-score and more years ago! +Think of Him as a little infant, in the arms of His blessed +Mother, or laid under her watchful eye upon some rude pillow in +the manger, and then consider that <i>there</i> was the God of +all flesh, the great God of heaven and earth, God the Son, ever +one with the Father and the Holy Ghost, all-powerful, +all-knowing, all-creating, all-upholding, all-preserving, and say +if these treasures were not indeed hid and obscured!</p> +<p>But though obscured, the treasures were there +nevertheless. It were impious to doubt or deny it. +When, then, we hear it asked, as sometimes in these latter days +of almost unlimited free enquiry it is, Are we to imagine that in +that little <a name="page142"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +142</span>infant was centred the knowledge of all history, all +learning, all the secrets of nature as we term them, all the +devices of art, all the developments of science? I think we +cannot doubt that the answer is, There was. For what is +there in any kind or department of knowledge or science, or of +things past, present, or to come, which we can suppose the +Almighty not to know? This would be to deny His attribute +of Omniscience; and, therefore, to deny it of Christ, God and +Man, would be to deny His Godhead. People think to escape +this consequence by saying that it is merely His human nature +which was ignorant,—that whilst as God He knew, yet as Man +He did not know,—not seeing that thus immediately they must +fall into that other error before mentioned. For if they do +not deny the Godhead, they must divide the Substance of the +Son. Perhaps in their defence they will urge such passages +of Holy Scripture as that in which it is written, “Jesus +increased in wisdom and stature;” <a +name="citation142a"></a><a href="#footnote142a" +class="citation">[142a]</a> or where He Himself said, concerning +the Judgment, “Of that day and that hour knoweth no man, +no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the +Father,” <a name="citation142b"></a><a href="#footnote142b" +class="citation">[142b]</a> of which it may be sufficient to +remark to-day, that the first passage seems to imply no more than +that His wisdom, as He grew in years, and of course appeared to +acquire human knowledge, increased, in the sense of its being +more manifested in <a name="page143"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +143</span>the eyes of men, just as His bodily stature increased +in visible presence before them: whilst of the other, (without +going into all which may be said on a passage confessedly +difficult,) it may be enough to point out that He does not say +even of the Day of Judgment, that He, the God-Man, Christ Jesus, +ever undivided in His divinity and humanity, did not know it: but +that the Son (Who must be taken of course here to be the Son of +Man), knoweth it not. And if it be thought that this +admission grants all that the objector asked, and is in fact but +the enunciation of his own view, I should maintain that it is not +so, and for this reason, that it is a very different thing to say +of the One Person, Jesus Christ, that He, thus one and undivided, +was ignorant of anything, and to <i>contemplate apart</i> His +Godhead and His Manhood, and so, in some sort, their attributes +apart. And I conceive that here our Blessed Lord using the +term “the Son” (not ‘<i>I</i> know not,’ +but <i>the Son</i> knoweth not,) contemplates Himself as the Son +of Man, and speaks of Himself as viewed in that relation. +What modern unbelief seems to delight to assert, is, that our +Blessed Lord, as He stood and talked and reasoned with the +people, was ignorant or mistaken. What we affirm to be the +really just and consistent sense of the passages adduced, is, +that <i>if</i> His human nature be contemplated apart from His +Divine, it <i>might</i> be taken to be thus ignorant; so, I would +repeat, He is not thus proclaiming <a name="page144"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 144</span>that He, the God-Man, the One +Christ, is ignorant, nor yet dividing His Substance and becoming +two, but merely contemplating apart the Divine and human natures, +which may well be done; and we may even go so far as to say that +<i>if</i> we contemplate them as separated, then there would be +things unknown to the one, though known to the other, and +<i>if</i> they could be divided there would be a separate +province of knowledge in each; but that, as we must believe the +two natures have ever been united in one Person from the time of +His taking our nature of the substance of the Blessed Virgin +Mary, so no one can ever predicate of Him, the thus born Son of +God and Son of Man; of Him “in Whom dwelleth all the +fulness of the Godhead bodily;” of Him “in Whom are +hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge;” of Him +“Who is over all, God blessed for ever,” <a +name="citation144a"></a><a href="#footnote144a" +class="citation">[144a]</a> that it is possible there was, or is, +or shall be anything, whether “of things in heaven, or +things in earth, or things under the earth,” of which He +was, or is, or shall be ignorant. <a name="citation144b"></a><a +href="#footnote144b" class="citation">[144b]</a></p> +<p>Turn then again, brethren, to the stable at Bethlehem. +Cast away, at least on such a blessed <a name="page145"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 145</span>day as this, the thoughts of +controversy. Come to the sight which is to be seen in that +lowly habitation “where the stalled oxen feed.” +See the blessed Mother! See the glorious Infant, glorious +and divine in Himself, howbeit He may look like any other child +of man, and with the eye of faith “behold thy +God!” Think of the wonders of love in the +condescension that He should be found in such an humble guise and +lowly place, only excelled by the marvel that He should abase +Himself to become man at all! And then think that all this +is no barren spectacle, to be gazed upon indeed with wonder, but +in which we have no practical interest. No, it all belongs +to us, and has to do with us, in matters of the very highest +moment. It is so important to us, that we might say all +other things are mere bubbles and trifles compared with it. +What should we be, and what would be our hope, if we had not the +Christmas season, and all which it has brought, to gild our year, +and gladden our hearts? Think of what we are, and what are +our prospects by nature! The children of Adam in his fallen +state, and therefore “born in sin and children of +wrath.” A degenerate race, from our very birth, with +the sure seed of the first and second death implanted in us, with +a corrupt nature, a depraved will, a heart estranged from God, +exiles from Eden, unable to return to it. Even if we had +the heart to seek it, only doomed to find it barred against us, +and “cherubims and <a name="page146"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 146</span>a flaming sword turning every way to +keep the way of the tree of life,” on account of both the +original guilt and actual sins of men. Thus, in ourselves +with no access again to God. Placed, it is true, in a world +of wonders, a world adapted by Almighty wisdom to supply our +wants and minister to our comfort and gratification, apparently +capable of almost unlimited development in these things under the +fertile mind and ever-busy hand of man, yielding thus much +enjoyment for the time, if we give ourselves to enjoy it. +Even in more than such external things adapted to our +constitution, as furnishing the food for absorbing pursuit and +high aim in the acquisition of wealth or power, or in +intellectual cultivation; nay, more and more widely still, +meeting the cravings of our nature by supplying the field for +sweet sympathies and home affections in the varied scenes of +domestic life and mutual love; but yet, after all, not satisfying +the yearnings of man’s heart or the aspirations of his +being. A world, too, however framed with all these means of +comfort or enjoyment, yet with much of pain, sorrow, sickness, +bereavement, trial, fear, and weakness in the lot of every child +of Adam. All this without; and within, a conscience enough +alive to make us uneasy, when we have yielded to temptation, and +broken the law written in our hearts, though of no sufficient +power to prevent our yielding to the one and breaking the other, +joined with a certain consciousness, indeed, <a +name="page147"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 147</span>of +God’s greatness and goodness, but not the heart to love +Him. So, with no light in ourselves to see our way clearly, +nor in ourselves any strength to throw off our chains and turn to +God; with dim forebodings of and even earnest yearnings after +something higher, better, and more enduring than this world, and +this earthly life and being, but with no apprehension to grasp +it, and no power to attain to it. And then, as life wanes, +and death draws on, and conscience, it may be, pricks, and the +evil one himself, perchance, mocks and triumphs, and no remedy, +in either external things or in our own selves, is to be +found,—how darkly and sadly does the night close in upon +man in his mere natural condition! Survey him in such +aspect from his life’s beginning to its end, and what is +there for him but either blank despair or reckless levity (often +the direct fruit of despair), or a dark and corrupting +superstition calling “evil good and good evil, saying +Peace, peace, when there is no peace,” and resulting in the +utmost dishonour to God, and the greatest licence of an unbridled +sensuality, even under the plea of religion? or else, if not +this, an utter unbelief, merely falling blindfold into judgment +and eternity? Yes: for when once man was lost by the Fall, +no one could save himself and no one could save his fellow. +As it is written, “No man may deliver his brother, or make +agreement unto God for him; for it cost more to redeem their +souls, so that He must let that alone for ever.” <a +name="citation147"></a><a href="#footnote147" +class="citation">[147]</a></p> +<p><a name="page148"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 148</span>But +now, men and brethren, think of Christmas-tide, and all it tells +and brings to us, and what a change is there! On this +appalling picture, on this “day of darkness and gloominess, +of clouds and of thick darkness, as the morning spread upon the +mountains,” <a name="citation148a"></a><a +href="#footnote148a" class="citation">[148a]</a> “the Sun +of righteousness hath arisen with healing in His wings;” <a +name="citation148b"></a><a href="#footnote148b" +class="citation">[148b]</a> “the day-spring from on high +hath visited us; to give light to them that sit in darkness and +in the shadow of death.” <a name="citation148c"></a><a +href="#footnote148c" class="citation">[148c]</a> As we +raise our eyes to the Christmas morning the light dawns not +merely on our eyes but on our hearts. Here we find the +“seed of the woman” who reverses our curse, and the +curse upon the earth, by “bruising the serpent’s +head.” He comes, He comes, the Saviour of the world, +bringing “life and immortality to light through the +Gospel,” <a name="citation148d"></a><a href="#footnote148d" +class="citation">[148d]</a> because He is God and Man. +“Unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given: the +government is upon His shoulder: His Name is called Wonderful, +Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of +Peace.” <a name="citation148e"></a><a href="#footnote148e" +class="citation">[148e]</a> What can more declare His +Godhead? But nevertheless He is “not ashamed to call +us brethren;” <a name="citation148f"></a><a +href="#footnote148f" class="citation">[148f]</a> nay, we are +told, it even “behoved Him to be made like unto His +brethren,” and this, that “He might be a merciful and +faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make +reconciliation for the sins of the people.” <a +name="citation148g"></a><a href="#footnote148g" +class="citation">[148g]</a> Yes, and although He is such <a +name="page149"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 149</span>“a +great High Priest, the Son of God passed into the heavens,” +yet is He not one “which cannot be touched with the feeling +of our infirmities, but was in all points tempted like as we are, +yet without sin.” <a name="citation149a"></a><a +href="#footnote149a" class="citation">[149a]</a> What can +more declare His Manhood? Like unto us in all points, sin +only excepted. Like unto us, with perfect manhood, human +body and soul taken into the Godhead, so to be unto us +“both a sacrifice for sin, and also an ensample of godly +life.” As the new federal Head of the human race; as +the one, and only one, of the descendants of Adam in whom sin +found no place, and whose obedience was perfect, “He is +able to save to the uttermost all them that come to God by +Him.” Thus is God Incarnate our great High Priest and +only Saviour. “To this end was He born, and for this +cause came He into the world,” <a +name="citation149b"></a><a href="#footnote149b" +class="citation">[149b]</a> and such is the mercy which we this +day commemorate. By this, the Incarnation of the Eternal +Son, is the cloud of thick darkness rolled aside; by this, as the +first manifested step (so to say) in our redemption, is the veil +lifted; by this, is hope revived; by this, joy spread; by this, +is Satan defied; by this, and by the consequences to which it led +and leads, is he conquered; by this, is the sting taken from +death, and victory wrested from the grave; this, is peace made +for man with God, and peace brought to man within himself; by +this, is he enabled to please God, for by the death of the Son +made Man was the purchase and gift of the <a +name="page150"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 150</span>Spirit, +whereby alone he can be sanctified. By Him, then, +(“the great God and our Saviour,” as St. Paul terms +Him,) are “we reconciled, and have peace with God through +our Lord Jesus Christ;” by Him, “being now justified +by His Blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him:” +and so truly “we joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, +by Whom we have now received the Atonement.” <a +name="citation150"></a><a href="#footnote150" +class="citation">[150]</a> He is the great High Priest, +with power in Himself as none other has, or can have, to offer up +the sacrifice and “make reconciliation for the sins of the +people.” He is the immaculate Victim, the one only +meritorious Sacrifice, “once offered to bear the sins of +many,” Whose “Blood speaketh better things than that +of Abel.” He is the true Paschal Lamb, “without +blemish and without spot;” “the Lamb of God that +taketh away the sins of the world;” the Lamb +“slain,” (in God’s design, and His own +ever-merciful intention,) “from the foundation of the +world,” but manifested for this purpose “in the +fulness of the time.” He is the great Physician, +causing joy wherever He goeth, because He can heal all diseases; +He is the great Lawgiver, proclaiming His will; He is the great +Prophet, ordaining and promulgating His method of salvation; He +is the great King, setting up His kingdom, marking out its +boundaries, and ruling His subjects; He is the great Captain, +ordering His armies, displaying His banners, giving out His +weapons, going forth “conquering and to <a +name="page151"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +151</span>conquer;” He is the one Mediator, He is the +availing Intercessor; He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life; He +is the Sun and Centre of the whole mediatorial kingdom; He is the +Lord of this world and of the world to come!—And all this, +because He is (as He is and ever hath been) “God the Son: +God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God; of one +substance with the Father;” and because, in mercy to us, He +became also the Son of Man, “conceived by the Holy Ghost, +and born of the Virgin Mary.”</p> +<p>Surely, then, this is a day “to be much observed unto +the Lord,” a day in which we do well indeed “to make +merry and be glad;” so only that our mirth be with +sobriety, and our gladness with godliness. If, indeed, He +had not come, if we had no Christmastide, and Christmas memories, +and Christmas teaching, and Christmas faith, where should we +place our hope? Truly, we should be “of all men most +miserable.” Whether God could have forgiven man in +any other way, without Himself becoming Flesh, and doing all +which Christ has done, we know not. But it seems to be +unlikely, according to His attributes and will, inasmuch as St. +Paul plainly says, “without shedding of blood is no +remission,” and (as we know,) “the blood of bulls and +of goats could never take away sin;” whilst again it is +declared, that God set forth His Son “to be a propitiation +through faith in His Blood, that He might be just, and the +justifier of him which <a name="page152"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 152</span>believeth in Jesus:” <a +name="citation152"></a><a href="#footnote152" +class="citation">[152]</a> from which it would seem that +God’s attribute of justice could not be satisfied unless by +the payment, by some one able to pay it, of the penalty due to +man’s transgression. But whether it could have been +otherwise or not, otherwise it is not. This is God’s +way, and undeniably it tells us more of God’s love, Who +gave His only-begotten Son; and of Christ’s tender +compassion, Who shrunk not back from all which He undertook, than +if we had been saved by a forgiveness, without an atoning +sacrifice at all. Therefore this mode, God’s mode of +pardon, as it supplies us with greater proofs of His love, so it +gives us higher motives for our own love and gratitude than any +other mode which we can conceive. Therefore this day calls +upon us all the more for praise, adoration, thanksgiving, joy, +and obedience. Whatever else we do, or learn, or think, we +can never think aright, unless—in praising and thanking God +for all His mercies, and for the birth of Christ in human nature, +as the source, if we may so term it, of the Gospel scheme of +Redemption,—unless, I say, we attribute all we are in +sanctification, and all we have in hope, and all we feel in +peace, to God and Christ. Whatever be His way to bring us +pardon, whatever laws He has set up in His Kingdom, whatever +means He has appointed,—whether His Holy Word, or His +Church, or His ministry of instruction or +reconciliation,—all <a name="page153"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 153</span>these are but His instruments, and +He Himself is the only efficient cause of our salvation. +“Not unto us, not unto us, but unto His Name give the +praise.” No; even the fruits of the Spirit, wrought +in us by Him, “albeit, indeed, they are the fruits of +faith, and follow after justification, though they are acceptable +and pleasing to God in Christ, yet can they not put away our +sins, and endure the severity of God’s judgment.” <a +name="citation153a"></a><a href="#footnote153a" +class="citation">[153a]</a> Nay, not faith itself can do +this; for though, as the means and instrument to lay hold on +eternal life, faith may be said to save us, yet, as the efficient +cause of our salvation it would be heresy to say so. For it +is plain, we are not saved by anything of ours, even when wrought +in us by God’s Spirit. As one of our Articles says, +they are in grievous error “who say that every man shall be +saved by the law or sect which he professeth, so that he be +diligent to frame his life according to that law and the light of +nature,” for that “Jesus Christ is the only Name +whereby men must be saved;” <a name="citation153b"></a><a +href="#footnote153b" class="citation">[153b]</a> so, truly, no +one may affirm that we are saved, except instrumentally or +conditionally, either by good works, (even if they were good, in +the sense of being blameless, which none of ours are,) or by +knowledge, or by the priesthood, or by sacraments, or by the +Church, or by the Bible, or by prayer, or even by faith itself, +for it is manifest that we are saved by Christ only, and by none +else, either thing or person. He may have set forth, as He +has done, <a name="page154"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +154</span>certain conditions of salvation; He may have appointed, +as He has done, certain means of applying to Him for mercy, and +of obtaining mercy from Him; He may have ordained, as He has +done, certain channels of help by which His grace flows to us, +and enables us to receive His favour, and the reconciliation with +God, which He has purchased for us; but it is <span +class="smcap">He</span>, and He only, Who is the sole meritorious +cause of all we have, and all we are, and all we hope for. +So, truly, again we may repeat in the words of the Apostle, that +it is “Christ Jesus, Who, of God, is made unto us Wisdom +and Righteousness and Sanctification and Redemption;” not +as if He could be this to us (God forbid the thought!) if we +persist in sin, or in neglect of His way of life; but, as if +(which is the truth), even if we had done all, we should be but +unprofitable servants; as if (which is the truth) we are very far +from having done all; as if (which is the truth) anything we have +done to please God has been only of Him and through the purchased +gift of His Spirit, and the communication to us of Himself. +So that, indeed, we owe all to Him, and without Him are and must +be lost indeed.</p> +<p>Brethren, as we think of these things, and of all we owe to +Him in and for His abasement and humiliation in His Incarnation, +should not “our hearts burn within us?” Oh, let +them do so, with a reverent, loving, grateful, joyful sense of +His goodness; Who, “though He was rich, yet for our sakes +became poor;” Who has gladdened <a name="page155"></a><span +class="pagenum">p. 155</span>and cheered this otherwise dark and +gloomy World by His presence in it in human form and nature; Who, +since He came to it thus, has (though absent so far as the eye of +sense discerns) yet never left it to be as it was before, but, by +the very means of His Incarnation, dwelleth in it +still,—dwelleth, aye, in us, and we in Him, if we be His by +the Spirit. And all this, though He be so wonderful, high, +and mighty—nay, because He is so,—the very and +eternal God, born as on this day in the stable at +Bethlehem! In Whom, lying there, in all appearance, a mere +helpless, unknowing, human babe, in Whom were still “hid +all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge;” and “in +Whom,” then as always, “dwelt all the fulness of the +Godhead bodily.”</p> +<p>Oh, my brethren, believe that He sees and knows every one of +us; and how we think of Him this day, and how we love and honour +Him. He loves and longs for every one of us. He wills +us to rejoice (and “again I say rejoice”) at the +“good tidings of great joy which should be to all +people” from that day at Bethlehem. Let our joy be, +then, such as He sanctions, such as leads us nearer and nearer to +Him, both in the exercise of dear and holy home affections, and +in love to Him Himself; and then we may hope we shall indeed +bless Him, not only now but for ever, that He has again brought +us to this great and happy day.</p> +<p>When we gather, then, our families around us <a +name="page156"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 156</span>and see the +aged, whom we love, still permitted to be with us, (though, it +may be, now infirm and feeble,) let us rejoice in that hope, and +the object of their faith, which gilds and cheers their old +age. When we meet our fellows and companions of our own +time of life, knit with us in the tenderest bonds of human +affection, and enjoy with them some of that good which +God’s bounty allows us, let us rejoice in the thought that +they and we have a mutual share in things better than all which +this world has to give, and are heirs together of the same common +salvation. When we gather round us our little ones, and +thank God for the blessing He has given us in them, and look +forward not without anxious expectation to the future of their +life, yet let us not forget to bless and praise His name that, by +the Incarnation of His Son, He has permitted us to make our +children His children, and has made sure to them all the +privileges of their adoption and the promises of His +covenant. So may we, whichever way we look and whatever +meets our eyes, ever overflow with thankful joy that unto us +“is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is +Christ the Lord.” <a name="citation156"></a><a +href="#footnote156" class="citation">[156]</a></p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p style="text-align: center"><span class="GutSmall"><b>Printed +by James Parker and Co., Crown-yard, Oxford.</b></span></p> +<h2>FOOTNOTES.</h2> +<p><a name="footnote1"></a><a href="#citation1" +class="footnote">[1]</a> 2 St. Matt. xii. 29.</p> +<p><a name="footnote2a"></a><a href="#citation2a" +class="footnote">[2a]</a> 2 Tim. ii. 20.</p> +<p><a name="footnote2b"></a><a href="#citation2b" +class="footnote">[2b]</a> Gen. ii. 7.</p> +<p><a name="footnote3a"></a><a href="#citation3a" +class="footnote">[3a]</a> 2 Cor. iii. 5, 6–9.</p> +<p><a name="footnote3b"></a><a href="#citation3b" +class="footnote">[3b]</a> 2 Cor. iv. 1.</p> +<p><a name="footnote4a"></a><a href="#citation4a" +class="footnote">[4a]</a> 2 Cor. iv. 2.</p> +<p><a name="footnote4b"></a><a href="#citation4b" +class="footnote">[4b]</a> Ibid., 3, 4.</p> +<p><a name="footnote4c"></a><a href="#citation4c" +class="footnote">[4c]</a> Ibid., 5, 6.</p> +<p><a name="footnote4d"></a><a href="#citation4d" +class="footnote">[4d]</a> Ibid., 7.</p> +<p><a name="footnote6"></a><a href="#citation6" +class="footnote">[6]</a> 2 Cor. iv. 7.</p> +<p><a name="footnote10a"></a><a href="#citation10a" +class="footnote">[10a]</a> Isaiah liii. 2.</p> +<p><a name="footnote10b"></a><a href="#citation10b" +class="footnote">[10b]</a> Ibid. lii. 14.</p> +<p><a name="footnote12"></a><a href="#citation12" +class="footnote">[12]</a> St. John xx. 22, 23.</p> +<p><a name="footnote13a"></a><a href="#citation13a" +class="footnote">[13a]</a> St. John xxi. 3.</p> +<p><a name="footnote13b"></a><a href="#citation13b" +class="footnote">[13b]</a> Acts xviii. 3.</p> +<p><a name="footnote14"></a><a href="#citation14" +class="footnote">[14]</a> Cor. ix. 4, 5.</p> +<p><a name="footnote17a"></a><a href="#citation17a" +class="footnote">[17a]</a> Acts xv. 36, 39.</p> +<p><a name="footnote17b"></a><a href="#citation17b" +class="footnote">[17b]</a> Gal. ii. 11–14.</p> +<p><a name="footnote19a"></a><a href="#citation19a" +class="footnote">[19a]</a> St. Matt. xiii. 55.</p> +<p><a name="footnote19b"></a><a href="#citation19b" +class="footnote">[19b]</a> 2 Cor. x. 10.</p> +<p><a name="footnote21a"></a><a href="#citation21a" +class="footnote">[21a]</a> St. John xvii. 21.</p> +<p><a name="footnote21b"></a><a href="#citation21b" +class="footnote">[21b]</a> St. Matt x. 25.</p> +<p><a name="footnote21c"></a><a href="#citation21c" +class="footnote">[21c]</a> 1 Pet. iv. 12.</p> +<p><a name="footnote22a"></a><a href="#citation22a" +class="footnote">[22a]</a> Heb. xiii. 13.</p> +<p><a name="footnote22b"></a><a href="#citation22b" +class="footnote">[22b]</a> 1 Cor. iv. 12, 13.</p> +<p><a name="footnote22c"></a><a href="#citation22c" +class="footnote">[22c]</a> Acts xx. 24.</p> +<p><a name="footnote23"></a><a href="#citation23" +class="footnote">[23]</a> Job i. 8.</p> +<p><a name="footnote24"></a><a href="#citation24" +class="footnote">[24]</a> Job i. 5.</p> +<p><a name="footnote26a"></a><a href="#citation26a" +class="footnote">[26a]</a> 1 Chron. i. 43, 44.</p> +<p><a name="footnote26b"></a><a href="#citation26b" +class="footnote">[26b]</a> Numbers xxxi. 8.</p> +<p><a name="footnote27a"></a><a href="#citation27a" +class="footnote">[27a]</a> 1 John iii. 12.</p> +<p><a name="footnote27b"></a><a href="#citation27b" +class="footnote">[27b]</a> Heb. xi. 4.</p> +<p><a name="footnote28"></a><a href="#citation28" +class="footnote">[28]</a> Gen. iv. 2–4.</p> +<p><a name="footnote30a"></a><a href="#citation30a" +class="footnote">[30a]</a> Gen. iii. 15.</p> +<p><a name="footnote30b"></a><a href="#citation30b" +class="footnote">[30b]</a> Heb. ix. 22.</p> +<p><a name="footnote33a"></a><a href="#citation33a" +class="footnote">[33a]</a> Gen. viii. 20, xii. 8, xiii. 4, +xiv. 18, xxii. 13, xxvi. 25, xxxiii. 20.</p> +<p><a name="footnote34"></a><a href="#citation34" +class="footnote">[34]</a> Heb. ix. 22.</p> +<p><a name="footnote36"></a><a href="#citation36" +class="footnote">[36]</a> Calmet, under the head +‘Sacrifice.’</p> +<p><a name="footnote40a"></a><a href="#citation40a" +class="footnote">[40a]</a> St. John viii. 56.</p> +<p><a name="footnote40b"></a><a href="#citation40b" +class="footnote">[40b]</a> Gen. iii. 15.</p> +<p><a name="footnote43"></a><a href="#citation43" +class="footnote">[43]</a> Deut. xiii. 14.</p> +<p><a name="footnote45"></a><a href="#citation45" +class="footnote">[45]</a> Heb. xi. 4.</p> +<p><a name="footnote48a"></a><a href="#citation48a" +class="footnote">[48a]</a> Rom. iv. 3.</p> +<p><a name="footnote48b"></a><a href="#citation48b" +class="footnote">[48b]</a> St. Matt. v. 23, 24.</p> +<p><a name="footnote49"></a><a href="#citation49" +class="footnote">[49]</a> St. Matt. v. 32, 37, 43, 44.</p> +<p><a name="footnote50"></a><a href="#citation50" +class="footnote">[50]</a> Heb. ix. 9.</p> +<p><a name="footnote51a"></a><a href="#citation51a" +class="footnote">[51a]</a> Heb. xiii. 10.</p> +<p><a name="footnote51b"></a><a href="#citation51b" +class="footnote">[51b]</a> Gal. iii. 19; Heb. ii. 2, 3.</p> +<p><a name="footnote53"></a><a href="#citation53" +class="footnote">[53]</a> Heb. xiii. 10–15.</p> +<p><a name="footnote54"></a><a href="#citation54" +class="footnote">[54]</a> 1 Cor. x. 18.</p> +<p><a name="footnote55"></a><a href="#citation55" +class="footnote">[55]</a> 1 Cor. x. 19–21.</p> +<p><a name="footnote58"></a><a href="#citation58" +class="footnote">[58]</a> 1 Cor. x. 13–17.</p> +<p><a name="footnote66a"></a><a href="#citation66a" +class="footnote">[66a]</a> Heb. v. 4.</p> +<p><a name="footnote66b"></a><a href="#citation66b" +class="footnote">[66b]</a> Carter on the Priesthood, p. +71.</p> +<p><a name="footnote66c"></a><a href="#citation66c" +class="footnote">[66c]</a> Ibid.</p> +<p><a name="footnote68"></a><a href="#citation68" +class="footnote">[68]</a> See Carter’s +“Doctrine of the Priesthood,” p. 6.</p> +<p><a name="footnote70"></a><a href="#citation70" +class="footnote">[70]</a> <i>Vitringa de Synagogâ +vetere</i>. <i>Prolegomena</i>, cap. 2, quoted Carter, pp. +54, 55</p> +<p><a name="footnote71"></a><a href="#citation71" +class="footnote">[71]</a> Palmer’s <i>Origines +Liturgicæ</i>. See Carter, p. 58.</p> +<p><a name="footnote72a"></a><a href="#citation72a" +class="footnote">[72a]</a> Palmer’s <i>Origines +Liturgicæ</i>. See Carter, p. 59.</p> +<p><a name="footnote72b"></a><a href="#citation72b" +class="footnote">[72b]</a> Carter, p. 60.</p> +<p><a name="footnote74a"></a><a href="#citation74a" +class="footnote">[74a]</a> St. John vi. 52.</p> +<p><a name="footnote74b"></a><a href="#citation74b" +class="footnote">[74b]</a> St. Luke xviii. 8.</p> +<p><a name="footnote75a"></a><a href="#citation75a" +class="footnote">[75a]</a> St. Matt. x. 25.</p> +<p><a name="footnote75b"></a><a href="#citation75b" +class="footnote">[75b]</a> Heb. x. 36.</p> +<p><a name="footnote75c"></a><a href="#citation75c" +class="footnote">[75c]</a> St. Luke xxi. 19.</p> +<p><a name="footnote75d"></a><a href="#citation75d" +class="footnote">[75d]</a> St. Matt x.</p> +<p><a name="footnote75e"></a><a href="#citation75e" +class="footnote">[75e]</a> 1 Tim. iv. 1.</p> +<p><a name="footnote75f"></a><a href="#citation75f" +class="footnote">[75f]</a> 2 Tim. iv. 3.</p> +<p><a name="footnote75g"></a><a href="#citation75g" +class="footnote">[75g]</a> 1 John i. 1.</p> +<p><a name="footnote75h"></a><a href="#citation75h" +class="footnote">[75h]</a> Ibid. ver. 3.</p> +<p><a name="footnote76"></a><a href="#citation76" +class="footnote">[76]</a> Jer. vi. 16.</p> +<p><a name="footnote77"></a><a href="#citation77" +class="footnote">[77]</a> Gal. i. 10.</p> +<p><a name="footnote80"></a><a href="#citation80" +class="footnote">[80]</a> Heb. vii. 1–3.</p> +<p><a name="footnote81a"></a><a href="#citation81a" +class="footnote">[81a]</a> Coloss. ii. 8.</p> +<p><a name="footnote81b"></a><a href="#citation81b" +class="footnote">[81b]</a> Job xxxviii. 2.</p> +<p><a name="footnote85a"></a><a href="#citation85a" +class="footnote">[85a]</a> Ordering of Deacons in the +Church of England.</p> +<p><a name="footnote85b"></a><a href="#citation85b" +class="footnote">[85b]</a> Ordering of Priests.</p> +<p><a name="footnote85c"></a><a href="#citation85c" +class="footnote">[85c]</a> Ibid.</p> +<p><a name="footnote85d"></a><a href="#citation85d" +class="footnote">[85d]</a> Ibid.</p> +<p><a name="footnote86"></a><a href="#citation86" +class="footnote">[86]</a> St. John xx. 21.</p> +<p><a name="footnote87"></a><a href="#citation87" +class="footnote">[87]</a> St. John xx. 21–23.</p> +<p><a name="footnote89"></a><a href="#citation89" +class="footnote">[89]</a> Second Exhortation in Communion +Office.</p> +<p><a name="footnote90"></a><a href="#citation90" +class="footnote">[90]</a> Office for Visitation of +Sick.</p> +<p><a name="footnote95a"></a><a href="#citation95a" +class="footnote">[95a]</a> 1 Tim. iii. 15.</p> +<p><a name="footnote95b"></a><a href="#citation95b" +class="footnote">[95b]</a> St. Matt. xvi. 18.</p> +<p><a name="footnote95c"></a><a href="#citation95c" +class="footnote">[95c]</a> Ibid. xxviii. 20.</p> +<p><a name="footnote95d"></a><a href="#citation95d" +class="footnote">[95d]</a> Ps. cxxii. 6.</p> +<p><a name="footnote97"></a><a href="#citation97" +class="footnote">[97]</a> Sermon III.</p> +<p><a name="footnote101"></a><a href="#citation101" +class="footnote">[101]</a> Carter on the Priesthood, p. +61.</p> +<p><a name="footnote102"></a><a href="#citation102" +class="footnote">[102]</a> Some attempts have been lately +made to throw doubt upon the authenticity of the copies of the +ancient liturgies which have come down to us, as not certainly +uninterpolated in places in later times. But whether there +may be any ground at all for such suspicion or not, it is evident +that the inferences drawn from the liturgies, both in this +passage and in a former sermon, will not be affected. For +the argument, as used in these sermons, is not dependent upon a +phrase or a sentence here or there, which, it may be alleged, is +open to question, but is based upon doctrine interwoven with +their whole system, and pervading their whole structure, and is +what moreover is borne witness to, as thus pervading them, by the +whole mass of contemporary Christian writing. The +liturgies, therefore, must not merely have been interpolated in +places, but almost entirely re-written in another sense, and the +great bulk of the writings of the Fathers forged to agree with +this change, if the argument above is to be shaken by the +question raised concerning them.</p> +<p>I find a passage in Hickes’s Treatise, “The +Christian Priesthood Asserted,” which, though written more +than a hundred and sixty years before Mr. Carter’s book, +seems almost as if it were a comment upon the passage just cited, +and the application which I have made of it. He says, +“I believe no man in the world that was of any religion +where sacrifice was used, and that by chance should see the +Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist administered among Christians, as +it was administered in the primitive times, or as it is +administered according to the order and usage of the Church of +England, but would take the bread and wine for an offering or +sacrifice, and the whole action for a sacrificial ministration; +and the eating and drinking of the holy elements for a +sacrificial entertainment of the congregation at the table of +their God. To see bread and wine . . . so solemnly brought +to the table, and then . . . brought by the deacon, in manner of +an offering to the liturg or minister, which he also taking in +his hands as an offering, sets them with all reverence on the +table; and then, after solemn prayers of oblation and +consecration, to see him take up the bread, and say, in a most +solemn manner, ‘This is My Body,’ &c., and then +the cup, saying as solemnly, ‘This is My Blood,’ +&c., and then to hear him with all the powers of his soul +offer up praises, and glory, and thanksgiving, and prayers to God +the Father of all things, through the Name of His Son, and Holy +Spirit, which they beseech Him to send down upon that bread and +cup, and the people with the greatest harmony and acclamation +saying aloud, ‘Amen:’ after which also, to see the +liturg, first eat of the bread and drink of the cup, and then the +deacon to carry about the blessed bread and wine to be eaten and +drunk by the people, as in a sacrificial feast; and, lastly, to +see and hear all concluded with psalms and hymns of praise, and +prayers of intercession to God with the highest pomp-like +celebrity of words; I say, to see and hear all this would make an +uninitiated heathen conclude that the bread and wine were an +offering, the whole Eucharistic action a sacrificial mystery, the +eating and drinking the sanctified elements a sacrificial +banquet, and the liturg who administered a +priest.”—<i>Hickes’s</i> “<i>Priesthood +Asserted</i>,” <i>Library of Anglo.-Cath. Theol.</i>, +<i>Oxford</i>, vol. ii. p. 105–7.</p> +<p><a name="footnote103"></a><a href="#citation103" +class="footnote">[103]</a> The scantiness of statements in +the Articles, as to the inspiration of Holy Scripture, may +illustrate this. Had it been possible to foresee the +boldness of unbelief which these days have brought to light on +this subject, or had our Reformers been now drawing up the +Articles, we may feel very certain they would not have been +content to leave that matter as it there stands. But they +were engaged with practical errors of their own day, and not in +stating all dogmatic truth upon other points. Many things +were so fully assumed to be true as to need no assertion of their +truth.</p> +<p><a name="footnote104"></a><a href="#citation104" +class="footnote">[104]</a> 1 Cor. xi. 26.</p> +<p><a name="footnote106"></a><a href="#citation106" +class="footnote">[106]</a> Heb. vii. 25.</p> +<p><a name="footnote107"></a><a href="#citation107" +class="footnote">[107]</a> Mede’s “Christian +Sacrifice,” lib. ii. cap. 4, quoted in Carter, p. 65.</p> +<p><a name="footnote108"></a><a href="#citation108" +class="footnote">[108]</a> Cardwell’s +“Documentary Annals,” chap. vii, prop. 2.</p> +<p><a name="footnote109"></a><a href="#citation109" +class="footnote">[109]</a> Carter, p. 25, note 1.</p> +<p><a name="footnote110"></a><a href="#citation110" +class="footnote">[110]</a> Hickes’s Treatises, vol. +ii. pp. 183, 184.</p> +<p><a name="footnote111a"></a><a href="#citation111a" +class="footnote">[111a]</a> Bramhall’s +“Protestant Ordination Vindicated.” Discourse +vii. 3.</p> +<p><a name="footnote111b"></a><a href="#citation111b" +class="footnote">[111b]</a> St. Jerome, adv. Lucif. c. +8. Carter, pp. 22, 23.</p> +<p><a name="footnote111c"></a><a href="#citation111c" +class="footnote">[111c]</a> James i. 17.</p> +<p><a name="footnote111d"></a><a href="#citation111d" +class="footnote">[111d]</a> Ps. xliv. 3.</p> +<p><a name="footnote111e"></a><a href="#citation111e" +class="footnote">[111e]</a> Ps. cxv. 1.</p> +<p><a name="footnote114"></a><a href="#citation114" +class="footnote">[114]</a> Acts iii. 12.</p> +<p><a name="footnote118"></a><a href="#citation118" +class="footnote">[118]</a> Carter, p. 28.</p> +<p><a name="footnote123a"></a><a href="#citation123a" +class="footnote">[123a]</a> Hickes’ “Christian +Priesthood Asserted,” pp. 184, 185.</p> +<p><a name="footnote123b"></a><a href="#citation123b" +class="footnote">[123b]</a> Rom. xi. 20.</p> +<p><a name="footnote125a"></a><a href="#citation125a" +class="footnote">[125a]</a> 1 Sam. ix. 11–13.</p> +<p><a name="footnote125b"></a><a href="#citation125b" +class="footnote">[125b]</a> 1 Kings viii. 62–66.</p> +<p><a name="footnote125c"></a><a href="#citation125c" +class="footnote">[125c]</a> 2 Kings xxiii. 22.</p> +<p><a name="footnote125d"></a><a href="#citation125d" +class="footnote">[125d]</a> “But the man that is +clean, and is not in a journey, and forbeareth to keep the +passover, even the same soul shall be cut off from among his +people: because he brought not the offering of the Lord in his +appointed season, that man shall bear his sin.” +(Numb. ix. 13.)</p> +<p><a name="footnote129"></a><a href="#citation129" +class="footnote">[129]</a> St. John vi. 53.</p> +<p><a name="footnote131a"></a><a href="#citation131a" +class="footnote">[131a]</a> Heb. viii. 1.</p> +<p><a name="footnote131b"></a><a href="#citation131b" +class="footnote">[131b]</a> Mal. i. 11.</p> +<p><a name="footnote132"></a><a href="#citation132" +class="footnote">[132]</a> Zech. xiv. 7.</p> +<p><a name="footnote133"></a><a href="#citation133" +class="footnote">[133]</a> Ps. lxxx. 19.</p> +<p><a name="footnote135"></a><a href="#citation135" +class="footnote">[135]</a> The following sermon, although +perhaps in strictness hardly one of this course, was preached +almost immediately after the others, and, in some measure, as a +sequel to them. It is evidently not unconnected with their +subject, inasmuch as the whole Doctrine of the +Priesthood,—Christ our High Priest, through His Manhood +“able to be touched with the feeling of our +infirmities,” and the sacerdotal powers derived from Him to +“the ministers and stewards of His +mysteries,”—is intimately related to, and dependent +upon, the doctrine of the Incarnation.</p> +<p><a name="footnote136"></a><a href="#citation136" +class="footnote">[136]</a> Col. ii. 9.</p> +<p><a name="footnote137a"></a><a href="#citation137a" +class="footnote">[137a]</a> Acts xx. 28.</p> +<p><a name="footnote137b"></a><a href="#citation137b" +class="footnote">[137b]</a> Ephes. i. 7.</p> +<p><a name="footnote137c"></a><a href="#citation137c" +class="footnote">[137c]</a> Heb. ix. 12.</p> +<p><a name="footnote138"></a><a href="#citation138" +class="footnote">[138]</a> 2 St. Peter ii. 1.</p> +<p><a name="footnote139a"></a><a href="#citation139a" +class="footnote">[139a]</a> St. John xvii. 2.</p> +<p><a name="footnote139b"></a><a href="#citation139b" +class="footnote">[139b]</a> 1 Cor. ii. 8.</p> +<p><a name="footnote139c"></a><a href="#citation139c" +class="footnote">[139c]</a> Acts xx. 28.</p> +<p><a name="footnote139d"></a><a href="#citation139d" +class="footnote">[139d]</a> “Exposition of the +Thirty-nine Articles,” by E. Harold, Lord Bishop of Ely, +Art. II. p. 69.</p> +<p><a name="footnote140"></a><a href="#citation140" +class="footnote">[140]</a> Owen’s “Introduction +to the Study of Dogmatic Theology,” pp. 265, 266. See +also, “Pearson on the Creed,” Art. iii. § 3.</p> +<p><a name="footnote141"></a><a href="#citation141" +class="footnote">[141]</a> Philip, ii. 7, 8.</p> +<p><a name="footnote142a"></a><a href="#citation142a" +class="footnote">[142a]</a> St. Luke ii. 52.</p> +<p><a name="footnote142b"></a><a href="#citation142b" +class="footnote">[142b]</a> St. Mark xiii. 32; St. Matt. +xxiv. 36.</p> +<p><a name="footnote144a"></a><a href="#citation144a" +class="footnote">[144a]</a> Rom. ix. 5.</p> +<p><a name="footnote144b"></a><a href="#citation144b" +class="footnote">[144b]</a> It may be observed that the +above explanation does not in any way impair the argument in our +Lord’s reply to His disciples. It furnishes quite a +sufficient reason why such mysteries as “when shall these +things be, and what shall be the sign of Thy coming, and of the +end of the world?” should be unrevealed to flesh and blood, +that they are unknown to be angels of heaven, and even to the Son +of Man, if His humanity be contemplated apart from His +Divinity.</p> +<p><a name="footnote147"></a><a href="#citation147" +class="footnote">[147]</a> Ps. xlix. 7, 8.</p> +<p><a name="footnote148a"></a><a href="#citation148a" +class="footnote">[148a]</a> Joel ii. 2.</p> +<p><a name="footnote148b"></a><a href="#citation148b" +class="footnote">[148b]</a> Mal. iv. 2.</p> +<p><a name="footnote148c"></a><a href="#citation148c" +class="footnote">[148c]</a> St. Luke i. 78, 79.</p> +<p><a name="footnote148d"></a><a href="#citation148d" +class="footnote">[148d]</a> 2 Tim. i. 10.</p> +<p><a name="footnote148e"></a><a href="#citation148e" +class="footnote">[148e]</a> Isa. ix. 6.</p> +<p><a name="footnote148f"></a><a href="#citation148f" +class="footnote">[148f]</a> Heb. ii. 11.</p> +<p><a name="footnote148g"></a><a href="#citation148g" +class="footnote">[148g]</a> Ibid. 17.</p> +<p><a name="footnote149a"></a><a href="#citation149a" +class="footnote">[149a]</a> Heb. iv. 14, 15.</p> +<p><a name="footnote149b"></a><a href="#citation149b" +class="footnote">[149b]</a> St. John xviii. 37.</p> +<p><a name="footnote150"></a><a href="#citation150" +class="footnote">[150]</a> Rom. v. 9, 11.</p> +<p><a name="footnote152"></a><a href="#citation152" +class="footnote">[152]</a> Rom. iii. 25, 26.</p> +<p><a name="footnote153a"></a><a href="#citation153a" +class="footnote">[153a]</a> Art. XII.</p> +<p><a name="footnote153b"></a><a href="#citation153b" +class="footnote">[153b]</a> Art. XVIII.</p> +<p><a name="footnote156"></a><a href="#citation156" +class="footnote">[156]</a> St. Luke ii. 11.</p> +<p>***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EIGHT SERMONS ON THE PRIESTHOOD, +ALTAR, AND SACRIFICE***</p> +<pre> + + +***** This file should be named 49115-h.htm or 49115-h.zip****** + + +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: +http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/4/9/1/1/49115 + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will +be renamed. + +Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright +law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, +so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United +States without permission and without paying copyright +royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part +of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm +concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, +and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive +specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this +eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook +for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, +performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given +away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks +not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the +trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. + +START: FULL LICENSE + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full +Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at +www.gutenberg.org/license. + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or +destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your +possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a +Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound +by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the +person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph +1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this +agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the +Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection +of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual +works in the collection are in the public domain in the United +States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the +United States and you are located in the United States, we do not +claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, +displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as +all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope +that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting +free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm +works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the +Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily +comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the +same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when +you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are +in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, +check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this +agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, +distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any +other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no +representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any +country outside the United States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other +immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear +prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work +on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, +performed, viewed, copied or distributed: + + This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and + most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no + restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it + under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this + eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the + United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you + are located before using this ebook. + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is +derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not +contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the +copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in +the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are +redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply +either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or +obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm +trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any +additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms +will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works +posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the +beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including +any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access +to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format +other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official +version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site +(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense +to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means +of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain +Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the +full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +provided that + +* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed + to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has + agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project + Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid + within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are + legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty + payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project + Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in + Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg + Literary Archive Foundation." + +* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all + copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue + all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm + works. + +* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of + any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of + receipt of the work. + +* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than +are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing +from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The +Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm +trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project +Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may +contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate +or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other +intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or +other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or +cannot be read by your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium +with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you +with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in +lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person +or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second +opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If +the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing +without further opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO +OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT +LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of +damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement +violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the +agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or +limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or +unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the +remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in +accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the +production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, +including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of +the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this +or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or +additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any +Defect you cause. + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of +computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It +exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations +from people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future +generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see +Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at +www.gutenberg.org + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by +U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the +mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its +volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous +locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt +Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to +date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and +official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact + +For additional contact information: + + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND +DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular +state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To +donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project +Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be +freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and +distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of +volunteer support. + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in +the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not +necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper +edition. + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search +facility: www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + +</pre></body> +</html> diff --git a/49115-h/images/fpb.jpg b/49115-h/images/fpb.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..b104245 --- /dev/null +++ b/49115-h/images/fpb.jpg diff --git a/49115-h/images/fps.jpg b/49115-h/images/fps.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..2dfaa45 --- /dev/null +++ b/49115-h/images/fps.jpg |
