網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

Now, with all deference to the editor, I must beg leave to say, that this note conveys either no information at all, or a false impression to those who read it. The elders whom Titus was to ordain were not to be presbyters, in that acceptation of the term which has been received ever since the days of Polycarp and Ignatius. St. Paul, in verse 7, calls them bishops; and that they were so is established beyond a doubt by the ancient ecclesiastical historians and commentators. Of these it will probably be sufficient to adduce Chrysostom, who says on Tit. i. 1, Των Παύλῳ συνόντων δόκιμος οὗτος ἦν, εἰ μὴ γαρ ἦν δόκιμος, οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ τὴν νῆσον ολόκληρον ἐπέτρεψεν ...... οὐκ ἂν τοσούτων ἐπισκόπων κρίσιν ἐπέτρεψεν. Other testimonies are cited by Bishop Taylor in his "Episcopacy Asserted." Sec. xv. I feel quite sure that any candid person who reads that treatise attentively, and examines the passages of scripture cited in it, will see reason enough to agree with the author that there is abundant evidence of bishops being employed in the foundation of churches; but very little, if any, of the existence of priests, till, the original congregations becoming too numerous to be properly attended to by one person, the bishops, as they felt the necessity, ordained presbyters to assist them, admitting them in partem sollicitudinis, at first casually and cursorily, and then by station and fixed residence, when parishes were divided and endowed. It does not appear that it required any very great numerical magnitude, or any very considerable distance from an episcopal see, to entitle a congregation to be made independent, under a pastor of its own; for the province of Asia Proconsularis, though not above 200 miles long, by 50 in breadth, was soon divided among forty-two bishops; and in the neighbourhood of Rome, which, though now desolate, was then thickly peopled, the apostles or their immediate successors appear to have marked out the dioceses of no greater size than about ten or twelve miles square. It is very true that, in other parts of Christendom, they were of larger extent, but nowhere any thing like those of our prelates, for* if a diocese was so large that a bishop could not visit all his country churches annually, that was thought a reasonable cause to divide the diocese, and lay some part of the burden upon a new bishop. In short, an ancient bishop, instead of having his time engrossed by a perpetual round of business, and being compelled to trust implicitly to others,+ lived principally at his cathedral, performing (of course with assistants) the ordinary functions of a spiritual pastor, and having his eye upon all that passed, not only there, but also in the tituli which were served by his presbyters. And when a mission was to be sent to evangelize some distant country, no one bishop was expected or allowed to depute mere presbyters for that important and extraordinary duty, so as to be responsible for the

* Bingham, b. ix. ch. vii. sect. 21.

* Conc. Carth. Can. 74, Έδοξε μηδενα ἐπισκοπον, καταλιποντα την αυθεντικήν καθέδραν, προς έτεραν μεταχωρειν.

I do not find that in those days a bishop was received as a guest in his own church, or that the precincts of it were exempt from his jurisdiction, to be subjected to the pseudo-episcopal authority of a dean and a chapter.

actions of men who should go completely out of his reach, but all the pastors of a province met together, and sent forth a band of apostles, armed with the highest and holiest gifts of God which their united hands could convey, to go and found genuine and perfect churches wherever it pleased God to collect at their preaching congregations of believers.

I am sure, my dear Sir, that neither you nor your readers will accuse me of advancing any new or heterodox opinion, when I assert that, humanly speaking, there is no safety for the church of England but in maintaining its identity with the catholic church of the fathers. There is, however, another part of our religious polity which is not subject to the control of Parliament, and in which it does not appear that there need be any difficulty in recurring completely to true principles. I allude to the foreign missions and colonial religious establishments, maintained by the contributions of societies, or by endowments held in trust by them. We must thankfully acknowledge that a great improvement has, of late, taken place in that department ;--but why is it that the congregations of Newfoundland, for example, are not allowed the benefit of a bishop resident among them? Why is there no higher spiritual person than an archdeacon at Bermuda, at New Brunswick, in Van Diemen's Land, in Ceylon? Why is there not, at least, one bishop in New Zealand? It must be a matter of indifference to the adversaries of the church in the House of Commons whether a clergyman be of a higher or a lower order, provided that no increase of salary is demanded. Why, then, is there not a bishop stationed at each of our foreign embassies as well as at Paris? Why are the English inhabitants of Geneva as sheep without a shepherd? Why do we not take advantage of our military stations in the south of Europe to establish protestant churches at Gibraltar, in Malta, in Corfu ?

*

I should occupy too much of your time and that of your readers were I to follow out this subject to its full extent. Allow me, therefore, further only to entreat the leading members of our religious societies to give their earnest attention to it, and to subscribe myself Your faithful friend,

Χωροπρεσβύτερος.

DR. BURTON'S HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

SIR,-I am anxious to call attention, through your Magazine, to certain statements in Dr. Burton's "History of the Christian Church,” (which I happen to have just been reading,) which seem open to serious objection. For, considering how many readers of ecclesiastical

No bishop is stationed at Paris by any authority of the church of England. On what primitive ground could such a step be defended under existing circumstances? Could it even be said that a large body of persons belonging to the diocese of Paris had attained, like ourselves, to views which made it necessary for them to separate, and that they then appealed to us not to leave them without an episcopate?—ED.

history justly assign no small weight to the writings of the late Divinity Professor in Oxford--that this work appears before the public under the sanction of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge-and that it is in a style and compass so accessible and interesting to readers of every description, it is particularly to be desired that there should be nothing in it likely to cause any injurious misconception of the subjects on which it speaks. Let this, then, be my apology for troubling you with the following remarks. I shall quote the passages, and add a few comments explaining the objection made against them.

Before entering, however, upon the immediate object before us, I am most desirous to remove any appearance of want of respectful feeling towards the memory of the author in making these observations, and also to point out why it seems very important, if they are just, to call attention to them. This work, from the weight of the author's name, and the patronage of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, is likely to have a large and continued circulation, and to be the first, perhaps the only, ecclesiastical history read by many; and therefore it is very advisable that any expressions or statements which seem ill-advised should be altered. I conceive it also due to the memory of Dr. Burton that these passages should be noticed, for it appears, from the advertisement to the work, that the proof sheets never passed through his hands; and every one knows how often persons who compose rapidly, and are too much occupied to allow careful reconsideration of MS. compositions, will make material alterations when their writings are in print-that being, in fact, a revision, in which they will not only examine the mere typographical correctness, but carefully weigh the substance of the text also. Moreover, from what I have heard others say, who had the advantage of the late professor's acquaintance and friendship, there was so much unassuming kindliness in him, that a slight representation would prevail upon him to alter statements in his writings which gave pain, -supposing always that the alteration of these statements was no compromise of principles. Lastly, Dr. Burton has so admirably stated in his introduction the right tone in which the ecclesiastical historian should write, that I cannot but think he would have been anxious to be made aware of it, if statements of his were conceived likely to leave on the mind of any reader conceptions at all irreverent concerning holy scripture, its doctrines, or the characters there spoken of. His words are "He [the ecclesiastical historian] is to write as a Christian addressing himself to Christians. He is not required to speak of Christianity as if it were merely one of the numerous forms of religion which had appeared in the world. . . . . He supposes his readers not only to know the principles of the doctrines of Christ, but to believe them." One may feel sure that Dr. Burton would never have been desirous to make the history of the church, in the time of the apostles, palatable to those readers who like reading church history only as they would other history-i.e., as accounts of opinions prevalent in the world at different times, and of persons distinguished in their particular line and degree, but who do not like to have religion

brought in too much, in order to explain anything that can be otherwise explained-who do not like to be obliged to contemplate the persons about whom they are reading in the light of responsible beings in all the concerns of life, and as subjects of a particular superintending

Providence.

Having made this apology, by way of preface, I may now proceed to enumerate the passages of which I complain.

I. Speaking of the judgment by which the sin of Ananias and Sapphira was so awfully punished, Dr. Burton observes (p. 33) :The judgment may appear severe, but we may be sure it was necessary. The sufferers had, in the first instance, been seeking for applause under the mask of charity, and then thought to impose upon the very persons whose miracles had been the cause of their own conversion. The times did not allow of such cases being multiplied, or escaping with impunity. Treachery from within might have made it impossible to resist the attacks which were threatening from without." I would remark, first, on the tone of apology which this passage takes. The terms are those which would be used respecting a severe measure justifiable and necessary from the peculiar circumstances of the times. Surely, if one thinks a moment who was the executor of this sentence, there is something which one must call unsatisfactory and disrespectful in such an explanation. For, so far as the words of St. Peter, (Acts, v. 3, 4,) he may have been as unconscious of what would immediately follow upon Ananias as any one else present; though, it is true, he prophesied the death of his wife when she came in. So to speak, judgment was executed immediately from heaven, without sentence of punishment first pronounced. Yet the "superhuman power of the apostles" is spoken of as exhibited in this matter. (2.) If anything is to be said in explanation, do not St. Peter's words suggest a better? Why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost? ...... Thou hast not lied unto man, but unto God."* As if there was an exceeding and hardened impiety in Ananias' coming forward to practise a lie on the apostles, who, in so much that they had said and done since the day of Pentecost, shewed that they were not acting by their own wisdom or power. It was a deliberate proof that he did not believe the hand of God was with the apostles, or how could he have dared to try this fraud? One knows, too, how, in the taking the water of jealousy, (Numb. v. 11,) a lie to one of God's priests was to be followed by a dreadful and extraordinary death. (3.) Or, again, might it not have seemed good unto God, by this solemn warning, to impress on men's minds ever after, that the threats denounced in scripture on all liars will be assuredly brought

[ocr errors]

There is greater severity in St. Peter's address to Simon Magus than here— something in them approaching nearer to a declaration of punishment, rò dρyúρióv σov ovv oor eiŋ eiç àñwλɛiav. By the way, is it not a pity, in an ecclesiastical history for very general reading, that the offence of Simon Magus should be so very shortly dismissed? "He even offered the apostles money, if they would sell him the power of communicating these extraordinary gifts of the Spirit. It is needless to say that his offer was rejected." (p. 54.) Might not the nature of this sin have been very usefully and plainly explained?

to pass? (e. g., Rev. xxi. 8, 27.) And this is the rather suggested, because, in the quotation given above, it seems implied, that in the circumstances of the times, then, we are to find the reason of this severity. "The times did not allow of such cases being multiplied, or escaping with impunity." If a person be disposed to question the severity of a punishment in this world, on a deliberate and gross lie, solemnly uttered, will he acquiesce in what is revealed of the infinitely severer punishment to which liars will be condemned hereafter? I may just add, that, in the opinion of many, the sin of Ananias and Sapphira combined sacrilege with their lie.

II. (p. 50.) "They [the Samaritans] held that He might be worshipped in Mount Gerizim as effectually as on Mount Sion; in which opinion they may be said to have come near, though without being conscious of it, to one part of that law of liberty which was established by the gospel." It can hardly be meant that the Samaritan notions about worshipping God rather-not only "as effectually"-on Mount Gerizim as at Jerusalem, were correct, yet the wording of the sentence just quoted carries an appearance of it. The answer of our Saviour to the woman of Samaria, (John, iv. 21, 22,) on this subject, amounts, I conceive, to this" There will be a time, though it is not yet, when neither this mountain nor Jerusalem shall claim pre-eminence as places for the worship of God; meanwhile, however, you Samaritans are in the wrong. Ye worship ye know not what; you have no assurance of the acceptableness of the service you offer here, for it is irregular we know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews." Further, I will add a few remarks upon the expression," a law of liberty," as here used. It is applied to the gospel as if it was a relaxation of Jewish strictness-a system leaving more things to a person's free choice to do or not to do, as he pleased, without there being a greater propriety in the stricter than in the less strict course, or, if any thing, rather the contrary. Now, if any one will carefully consider the only two passages (I believe) in which this phrase occurs, he will, I think, see a striking incorrectness in so using it as to countenance the notion of its indicating, in any way, that a Christian may relax one tittle in circumspection, or in a rigorous consideration of duty in what are called small things, as well as great-in external as well as in internal matters of religion. In the first place (James, i. 25), one is struck with the strict care and attention with which this law is to be examined, and also with the practical duties which go along with it. ὁ παράκυψας εἰς νόμον τέλειον τὸν τῆς ἐλευθερίας, he that hath stooped down, and bent himself to the study of a perfect law, the law of liberty, that he may have a closer and more exact view of it—Kaì Tapaμɛivas—and that hath kept to the practice which the law thus studied points out. As to the second place (James, ii. 12), I would ask any one merely to look at it, especially in connexion with the three preceding verses, and then say whether it does not plainly imply that, seeing we are to be judged by the law of liberty, we have need to keep a stricter restraint upon our words and actions than those who are under any other law of simpler or more express enactments? The latitude of expression and interpretation in the provi

« 上一頁繼續 »