Letters on the writings of the Fathers of the first two centuries : with reflections on the Oxford tracts, and strictures on "The records of the Church"

Front matter

PRINCETON, N. J.

SAMUEL AGNEW,

BX 5055 .L477 184A Misopapisticus , Letters on the writings of the Fathers of the first

Preface

Ov yap KoXavevovres v^as Bia tuv Se tcov ypaixfiarojv, ouSe irpos Xop"' ofXiX-riiTovTis, a\\' aTraiTijirofTft Kara rov aKpiji-q km (^sracTTiKOi' Koyov ri]v KptiTiv iroiTtaaaeai, irpoaeAyiAvdeifid' , fin] vpoK-nii ei,nri5' avdputrap((JKeia rriSaiaiZaipLOVav KOTCX'o/iefous. — " For wc come not to you, to flatter you by these letters, (writings,) or to address you for favour, but to ask of you to form judgment according to accurate and scrutinizing reason, being not restraincl hy prejudice, nor by a muii-pleasimi diiposi- Uon towards the superstitious.^"— J vsTiy Martyr, Apol. i. Sect. 2.

The writer of these Letters has been encouraged to publish them, from having learnt, that when they appeared in " The Record," they were much approved by many of his brethren, the Clergy. They are now considerably enlarged ; and there are added to them Strictures on " the Records of the Church," — a Letter on Tradition,— and an Appendix, containing copious Notes. The additional Letter was written some time ago, and appeared in tlie first two Numbers of the Christian Observer for this year. Its object is to shew that Tradition is not acknowledged as any authority in our Church.

IV

PREFACE.

The acquired, and not the real Title of the Tracts reflected upon, is here for the most part retained, as they are better known by that, than by their ovra title, " Tracts for the Times."

There is a sort of spell connected with antiquity, which has ever been very injurious to the interest and progress of truth. As it was in Philosophy before the time of Bacon, so it has been, and is stiU in a measure, with respect to religion. The voice of antiquity is by too many deemed oracular ; whereas nothing should be so regarded in religion, but the inspired word of truth. The sentiments of uninspired men, however excellent they may have been, are no more divine than in the degree in which they correspond with the Divine word ; and so far and no farther are we bound to adopt and follow them.

Through undue and extreme respect for the opinions and practices of the early Fathers and of the primitive Church, religion in after times has been greatly impeded in its progress, being much encumbered by mere human appendages, which not only facilitated the introduction and perpetuity of errors and corruption, but rendered it also less capable of accommodating itself to the innovations of time, and to the varied conditions of society-. What is divine is fixed, and cannot be changed. What is human is mutable, and may and ought to be changed, when circumstances require. But to render what is human stable and fixed, is not only a profane attempt to equalize it to what is divine, but proves also highly prejudicial to the

PREFACE.

progress of truth. As the Gospel is intended for all mankind, there is nothing in its original institution that tends to clog its march, or to prevent the freest communication of its blessings.

The modern experiment, tried by the writers of the Oxford Tracts, to revive the sentiments and customs of the primitive Church, is justifiable only on the ground of their being of a divine original. On every other ground, the attempt is extremely absurd, and is calculated to do nothing but evil. It is to give that importance to what is human which is due only to what is divine, to transfer the peculiarities of a rude and superstitious age to another that is highly improved, and to introduce things in themselves for the most part immaterial, that are sure to create disputes and discord. Tlie main design of these Letters is to enable those, not much acquainted with the writings of the primitive Church, to form a correct estimate of its orthodoxy, and to know what importance is justly due to its customs and practices.

Contents

I. PrelimiiiaiT : — Apostolical Succession — The sentiments of Bishop Stii.li.ngi i.eet, Archbishop Cii.iNMER, Hookek, and Archbishop W.utE— Tradition

11. Extracts from the writings of Clement, B.iuN.AB.is, and Hermas

III. Extracts from the writings of Ign.atius and Polvcarp... 33

I. Introductory— Apostolical Succession

Sir.

I am extremely thankful to you, for the able, bold, and uncompromising maimer, in which you have offered your remarks on the British Magazine and the Tracts for the Titnes ; —the two wooden props of superstition and Popery in our Protestant Church. They have both not only adopted some of the doctrines of the Romish Church ; but they do also imitate the tone, spirit, and what I may call the xlang of Popery : so that one thinks while reading them, that he is reading the writings of some monk or Jesuit, the tenor and substance being so very like. There is a high-toned pretension, combined with a vast show of humility — an apparent candour, united with a narrow-minded exclusiveness — a puling display of zeal, accompanied by a supercilious apathy towards all the grand essentials of truth — and a sanctimonious gravity, evidently produced by superstition, rather than by any

APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

vital principle of genuine godliness. That this is the character of these publications, no one who possesses any really spiritual discernment, can deny. There is much in them to allure the unwary, and those naturally disposed to superstition, and to impose on the young and inexperienced. There is in them a sort of rehgious tone, which is very captivating to those who are more led by their feelings than by their understanding. Tliis, combmed with great display of zeal, is calculated to be very winning. Whatever the subject be, zeal has always a very attractive power, and has often proved the means either of doing great good, or of producing great evils.

There is scarcely any thing which has been so effective as Zeal, having often produced amazing results. It is a mighty instrument, a machine of vast power ; but whether its working be for good or e\'il, will depend wholly on what sets it in motion. If true religion be the mo^^ng power, its working will be beneficial ; promotive of honour to God, and of good to man. But if superstition, ambition, selfishness, bigotry, or interest, sets it in motion, dishonour to God, degradation to religion, and imtold injury to the wellbeing of man, will be the inevitable consequences. When we see it displayed, we should always try to ascertain its character. The Jews were zealous ; but it was for traditions. Tlie papists are verj^ zealous ; but it is for foolish rites, traditionary doctrines, and useless ceremonies. Tlie professors of heathenism are often extremely zealous ; but it is for things truly degrading to human nature. The writers in these pubhcations are also very zealous ; but for what For the spiritual truths of the Gospel — for the grand essentials of religion ? By no means. They speak.

APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

indeed, of some of these ; but evidently their zeal is for otlier things, for outward rites and ceremonies ; for false doctrines, such as Baptismal Regeneration, and Popish notions about the Lord's Supper ; for foolish old customs of a barbarous age ; for Tradition and Apostolical Succession. Vide Such seem to be the things which mainly put their zeal in a' ' motion, and continue to propel its movements. And woe be to us, if we are captivated by its attractions. How necessary it is in the present day to say to all religious people, " Beware of false prophets !"

What you said lately on Apostolical Succession, was much to the purpose. To infer the character of the Christian ministry from an abrogated priesthood, as the writer in the British Magazine does, is surely an absurdity which might have well been left to the mother of absurdities, the Church of Rome. Apostolical succession ought to have been "proved by the witer, instead of being assumed. The subject has more difficulties tlian those who thus deal with it seem to know. It has no direct proof from the Scriptures. If they plead that it has, let them produce it. The text in 2 Tim. ii. 2, is sometimes quoted for this purpose : " The things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also." But this does not refer to " orders," but to doctrines. He was to convey to them the same truths which he had received from Paul, that they also might convey them to others. This is a transmission of doctrines, and not a conferring of orders. The fact is, and let them disprove it if they can, that there is no command, no rule, no regulation in the New Testament, on the subject of apostolical succession, in the sense intended by them. And why so .''

B 2

APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

The answer is, because the God of wisdom did not tliink it right or needful to appoint any thing specifically on the subject ; and his wisdom has been abundantly proved by the event. As it is, where there is no command, no rule on the subject, the assumptions of men have produced mischiefs that are incalculable. Thev have prided themselves on their supposed exclusive privilege, hedged themselves in by an enclosure alleged to be Divine, and anathematized all others. God has never raised such an inclosure. We have, indeed, the example of the apostles appointing ministers, and appointing others, such as Timothy and Titus, to ordain ministers, without any command to perpetuate that example. That mode was suitable to the state of things at that time ; and it may be suitable Stilling- oi'der and regularity. Bishop Slillingfleel, in his

fleet. Irenicum, strongly maintains, that neither our Saviour nor his apostles have appointed or settled any particular mode in this respect. I shall make a few quotations from him: Iremc. " Nothing is founded on divine right, nor can bind Chris- ^ ' tians directly or consequently as a Divine law, but what may be certainly known to have come from God, with an intention to obhge believers to the world's end." " Example Ibid. doth not bind us as an example. There can be no duty ^' " ' without a law making it to be a duty ; and, consequently, it is the law, making it to be a duty to follow such examples, which gives a Divine right to those examples, and not barely the examples themselves." " Those who plead the obliga- Ibid. toi'y nature of Scripture examples, must either produce P- the moral nature of those examples ; or else a rule, binding us to foUow those examples."

Ibid. " That Christ hath appointed officers in his Church, and p. 177.

APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

invested them with authority to preach, and baptize, and administer the Gospel ordinances, is clearly made known to us in the word of God. But whether any shall succeed the a])ostles in superiority of power over presbyters, or all remain governing the Church in an equality of power, is nowhere determined by the will of Christ in Scripture, which contains his royal law." " The main duties and ordinances are prescribed, but their circumstances and manner of performance are left as matters of Christian liberty, and only couched under some general rules : which is a great difference between the legal and Gospel state. Under the law, all ceremonies and circumstances are exactly prescribed ; but in the Gospel we Kead of some general rules of direction for Christians' carriage in all circumstantial things." " Any particular form of government is neither ^^^'^ expressed in any direct terms by Christ, nor can be ^' deduced by just consequence ; therefore no such form of government is instituted by Christ. If there be any such law, it must be produced, whereby it is determined in Scripture, either that there must be superiority or equality among cliurch officers, as such, after the apostles' decease."

" The essentials of Church government are such as are IW^^ necessary to the preservation of such a society. Now, all ^' these things have been proved to be contained in Scripture : but whatsoever is not so necessary in itself, can only become necessary by virtue of God's express command ; and what is not so commanded is accidental and circumstantial, and a matter of Christian liberty : and such we assert the form of Church government to be."

The learned Bishop also adduces on the subject, " the confession of two canonists, who," he says, " are the .yj'd highest among the Papists," and who must of course be very high in the estimation of the writers in the British Magazine and of the Oxford Tracts. These canonists are Gratian and Johannes Seneca. The passages he quotes are the following : — Gratian. " ' Sacros ordines dicimus Deaconatum et Presbj-teratum; hos quidem solos in Ecclesia primitiva habuisse dicitur. — Gratian. We call deaconship and eldership holy orders ; it is indeed said, that these alone existed in the primitive Seneca. Church.'"—" • Dicunt quidem quod in Ecclesia prima primitiva commune erat officia episcoporum et sacerdotum, et nomina erant communia. Sed in secunda primitiva cceperunt distingui, et nomina et officia.— Joh. Seneca. We say, indeed, that in the first primitive Church the office of bishops and priests was common, and that the names were common. But in the second primitive (Church) both the names and the offices began to be distinguished.' " Iremc. " Estius," says the Bishop, " a no mean school-man, fairly quits the Scriptures, and betakes himself to other weapons : ' Quod autem jure divino sint Episcopi presbyteris superiores, etsi non ita clarum est e sacris Uteris ; Estius. aliunde tamen satis efficaciter probari potest. — That bishops are by Divine right superior to Presbj-ters, though it be not so clear from the Holy Scriptures, can vet be sufficiently proved from other quarters.' " Upon this the Bishop shrewdly remarks, " The difficulty is, how a jus divinum (a Divine right) should be proved, when men leave the Scriptures."

Irenic. " that I have to say," observes the Bishop m another p. 287. place, " concerning the course taken bv the apostles, lies in these tliree propositions ; Tliat neither can we have

APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

that certainty of apostolical practice, which is necessary to constitute a Divine right : nor, secondly, is it probable that the apostles did tie themselves up to any one fixed course in modelling Churches : 7ior, thirdly, if they did, doth it necessarily follow that we must observe the same."

The learned Bishop brings forward the testimonies of several reformers, EngUsh and foreign; but the most interesting to us is the opinion of Archbishop Cranmer, which he gives as follows :

" ' The bishops and priests were (the same) at one time, Cranmer. and were not two things, but both one office in the beginning of Christ's religion. A bishop may make a priest by the Scriptures ; and so may princes and governors also, and that by the authority of God committed unto them ; and the people also by their election. And the people, before Christian princes were, commonly did elect their bishops and priests. In the New Testament, he that is appointed to be a bishop or priest, needeth no consecration by the Scripture ; for election or appointing thereto is sufficient.' "

" Thus we see," adds Stillingfleet, after giving a more lengthened extract, " by the testimony chiefly of him who Irenic. was instrumental in our Reformation, that he owned not ^' Episcopacy as a distinct order from Presbytery, of Divine right, but only as a prudent constitution of the civil magistrate for better governing in the Church." In the same page he says : " After our Reformation had truly undergone the fiery trial in Queen Mary's days, in the Articles of Rehgion agreed upon, our English form of Church government was only determined to be aijreeablc to God's holy word ; which liad been a very low and

APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

diminishing expression, had they looked on it as absolutely prescribed and determined in Scripture, as the only form to be observed in the Church."

I shall make a few extracts more from Bishop Stillingfleet's Irenicum: — " I handle now only the testimony of antiquity ; and herein I shall endeavour to show the incompetency of this testimony, as to the shewing what certain form of Church government was practised by the Apostles : for that I shall make one of that fourfold argument, from the defectiveness of this testimony, from the antiquity of it, from the partiality of it, and from the repugnancy of it to itself." Then as to defectiveness, he notices it as to places, times and persons ; and makes this observation : — " If but one place varied, it were enough to overthrow the necessity of any one form of government, because hereby it would be evident, that they obser\-ed no certain or constant course, nor did they look upon themselves as obliged so to do. We have already made it appear that there is no law of Christ absolutely commanding one form and forbidding all other." Tlie Bishop goes through all the above particulars, and shews clearly that there is a great uncertainty on the subject from the testimony of antiquity. And quoting a sentence from Eusebius, in which he acknowledges it hard to find out who succeeded the Apostles in the churches planted by them, except those mentioned in St. Paul's writings, he proceeds thus:—" Is it come to pass at last that we have nothing certain but what we have in Scriptures and must the tradition of the Church be our rule to interpret Scripture by } An excellent way to find out the truth doubtless, to bend the rule to the crooked stick, to make the judge stand to the

APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

opinion of his lacquey, what sentence he shall pass upon the cause in question ; to make Scripture stand up in hand to tradition, to know whether it may have leave to speak or not ! Are all the great outcries of Apostohcal Tradition, of personal succession, of unquestionable records, resolved at last into the Scripture itself, by him from whom all these long pedigrees are fetched ? Then let succession know its place, and learn to vail bonnet to the Scriptures. And withal let men take heed of over-reaching themselves, when they would bring down so large a catalogue of single bishops, from the first and purest time of the Church ; for it will be hard for others to believe them, when Eusebius professeth it is so hard to find them."

The testimony of the celebrated Hooker is not very different from that of the Archbishop, and I shall add it here : —

" Another kind of extraordinary vocation is, where the Hooker

Ecc. Pol.

exigence of necessity doth constrain to leave the usual book viii. ways of the Church, which otherwise we wovild willingly keep, — where the Church must needs have some ordained, and neither hath nor can have possibly a bishop to ordain. In case of such necessity, the ordinary institution of God hath given oftentimes, and may give, place. And therefore we are not, simply without exception, to urye a lineal descent of power from the apostles by continual succession of bishops in every effectual ordination." —

I am also tempted to give an extract from the wi itings of another great and good man. Archbishop Wake. The following is taken from the Christian Observer for 1820, pp. 379, 381.

" Far from me," says the benevolent and liberally-minded Wake. Archbishop, " be the iron heart, that for such a defect

APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

(Episcopacy) I should think any one of them (the reformed Churches) to be cut oflF from our communion, or with certain raving writers among us, think them to possess no valid Sacraments, and so to pronounce them scarcely Christian. Who am I, that I should dare to pronounce a sentence of reprobation against any one in whom there appear all the other characters of an humble, upright, sincere Christian, only because he has not perhaps met -w-ith the same instruction, or does not argue in the same way ; or, in a word, because he is not so wise, or it may be, is wiser than I am, and sees further than I do ; and therefore

Vide is not exactly of my opinion in every thing ? "

jpriuli.K, These are great names, and they bear directly against the extravagant sentiments of the British Magazine and the Oxford Tracts. And they have been adduced here not merely because they are great names, but because they seem to have Scripture, reason, and common sense on their side. What would Archbishop Wake, were he now living, think of the authors of these pubhcations ? Of course the same as he thought of men of similar sentiments in his day ; men of " iron hearts," and " raving wTiters." For they clearly have such " iron hearts," however smooth their tongues may be, as that they can unchurch " humble, upright, and sincere Christians." And their ravings on High-Church, or rather Romish principles, are quite equal to those of any of the Romanists themselves, with whom they seem anxious to fraternise, while they deny that any except Episcopalians possess " any vahd Sacraments," and declare, that " orders" are the only " external mark of a Christian minister."

They have indeed very soft and tender hearts towards

APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

ceremonies and traditions, and even towards the silly practices and gross errors of the Romish Church; but they have no such hearts towards Protestants that are not Episcopal, however excellent they may be, and correct in the essentials of religion. It is not with faith, and love, and heavenly-mindedness, that they feel any sympathy, but with sacramental rites, outward forms and matters of disciphne : these they seem to venerate with the same ardent and extravagant devotion as the superstitious heathens their wooden idols, and to regard with as much fondness as infants their pretty dolls . It is amazing with what superstitious feelings some people regard rites and outward forms, ascribing to them such virtues as are wholly unwarranted, and paying them a sort of idolatrous adoration similar to what the Israelites formerly did to the brazen serpent.

Two things seem to me to combine to form such characters—ambition and a superstitious spirit. Learning has been ascribed to these men, and piety too ; and hence some conclude, as the Bishop of Lincoln in his late charge, that what they advance is entitled to much attention. But leamuig is no guarantee for truth ; for the most learned have often been the most erroneous ; and they have mostly been the authors of heresies in all ages. Tei'tiillian, for instance, was certainly one of the most learned of the primitive fathers, and possessed a genius evidently superior to them all ; and yet he became a prey to strange chimeras. Piety, when genuine, is a far better guarantee ; but a ^^pj^^ spurious piety, the offspring of superstition, is of all things C. the most prolific of errors and folly. The piety of forms and ceremonial rites, of fasting and sacramental ordinances, was the parent of most of the extravagancies and fooleries

APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

of Popery. Ambition is rather increased than lessened by learning. Knowledge puffeth up. And ambitious men, in order to raise themselves, if possible, above others, will often do strange things ; and the more learned they are, the more dangerous their schemes and their influence. If, in solid attainments and real excellences, they cannot attain superiority, they will have often recourse to some peculiar and unimportant privileges, or to something out of the common way, such as the customs and practices of antiquity, whether wise or foolish, useful or useless, suitable or imsuitable to present circumstances. When men fail to excel others in any of the great and important quaUfications for the ministry, they pique themselves on their ordination, and claim to themselves the exclusive right of preaching and of ministering the sacraments : and to swell the measure of this kind of superiority, they attach, especially to the sacraments, an importance which nothing but Romish traditions can justify. Standing on this pinnacle, raised for them by the Romish Church, they seem as self-complacent as if they had fully gained their ambitious object, while they become in reality objects of compassion or dread to all enlightened Protestants — of compassion, as it respects themselves—of di-ead, in relation to the effect of their labours on the unstable and ill-informed.

But, as a cloak for this ambition, superstition comes in, which has never failed to win adherents by being extremely devotional. The men of " mint, and anise, and cummin," have ever been notorious for fasting, making long prayers, and talking and writing most rehgiously, or rather superstitiously, especially about the traditions of the elders, outward rites, forms, and ceremonies. A truly religious devotion is

APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

the progeny of faith, love, and hope : that which is superstitious is the offspring of puerile and overweening reverence for mere outward ordinances, old customs, and traditionary rites. The latter is often more apparent, showing itself at Vide the comers of the streets, or by crossings, and genuflexions, ^PP^^*^' and is always obtrusive and plausible, as what is shallow and fictitious makes invariably greater noise, show, and display, than what is real and genuine.

But to return to apostolical succession. We have seen that even Hooker gives up the point, as being not indispensably necessary for a Christian ministry : and Archbishop Cranmer breaks the chain completely, and makes very little account of it. And the truth is, that orders are made very little of in the New Testament, and the main stress is laid on the necessary qualifications for the ministry. We find men preaching, and baptizing too, without orders, as the first deacons, whose appointment, by laying on of the hands of the Apostles, was not to preach or baptize, but to minister the alms of the Church. And what are we to think of Paul, who was never ordained by men } or if what is recorded in Acts xiii. was an ordination, it was not by apostolical succession, for there was no Apostle present, but " certain prophets and teachers." It is true, that he was called and appointed, in an extraordinary manner, by our Saviour ; but still, if apostolical succession was of such importance, why was he not ordained by the first Apostles ? And when he came to Jerusalem, as recorded in Gal. ii., how was he acknowledged as an Apostle ? Did they examine into his ordination ? Had they done so, they would have had no testimony as to his appointment from heaven, but his own ; for the men who were with him, though they

APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

heard the voice, did not, as it appears, understand what was said ; and no man's testimony, in his ovm case, can be received. What, then, were his credentials ? The effects of his ministry, God owning him in his work. This satisfied them, and they acknowledged him as a true minister. And though I wholly subscribe to the high propriety of ordination by men, as an useful practice, and, in ordinary circumstances, a necessary means of that good order in the Church, so strongly enforced in the word of God, yet I am fully persuaded that many not episcopally ordained, and not ordained at all by men, are sent and ordained by a higher power, for God owns and blesses them for the conversion of souls, as he did St. Paul. And all that preach the truth, and can produce credentials of this kind, ought to be owned by all as time Christian ministers. To do otherwise, would be to act directly contrary to the practice of our Lord's own Apostles, which is with me a practice of far higher authority than that of succeeding ages. But it may be said, that extraordinary gifts attended St. Paul's ministrj'. This is very true. But what were they ? They were secondary things as to time and importance. They were conferred on none but those who were first converted, or professed to be so ; and they were only given for a time, to answer a temporaiy purpose, and were in value nothing, when compared with converting grace, which accompanied his ministry.

To say, therefore, that "there is no other external mark of a Christian minister," is to say what the best antiquity does in no degi-ee countenance. It is exactly the same thing, in my view, as to say that a man of straw is a real man, because a coat is put on him ; or that a scarecrow is

APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

a real man, because a hat is put on its head. Ordination is well in its place ; but make too much of it, make it the only " external mark," and you make it worse than no ordination at all. For my part, I would prefer a simple layman, who "rightly divided the word of truth," who "held faith and a good conscience," who was " apt to teach, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate," and who " ruled well his own house," which are the apostolic outward marks of a Christian minister, — I would far prefer such an one to all those who think that orders is the only external mark. When people adopt and propagate such antiscriptural notions, there is no wonder that others leave the Church, and that some turn Quakers, and allow of no ministry at all. And may we not expect that God, in his providence, will degrade the office and do away with orders altogether.' yea, were orders as much his appointment as some would have them to be, when they are thus abused by extravagance ? Did not God distinctly appoint the sacrifices under the law ? and what did he do with them, when the Jews placed most of their rehgioii in the mere acts of sacrificuig } He caused them to be discontinued, by removing the people into a distant countiy. And what did he say of them, previous to his making them thus void.' "To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices to me.''— Bring no more vain oblations ; incense is an abomination to me." And was not the temple built with the express approbation of God } And what did he do to the temple, when the people thought that to be a sufficient external mark of their being his people ? He destroyed it. And when mere " orders" are made of such consequence, what are we to expect } and what, indeed, has actually taken place already in this coun-