On the apostolical succession

credit Transcribed from the 1847 Joseph Masters edition by David Price, email [email protected] On the Apostolical Succession. * * * * * PAROCHIAL LECTURES. (_SECOND SERIES_.) * * * * * BY WILLIAM J. IRONS, B.D., INCUMBENT OF THE HOLY TRINITY, BROMPTON, MIDDLESEX. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * LONDON: JOSEPH MASTERS, 33, ALDERSGATE STREET. MDCCCXLVII. * * * * * TO EDWARD BOUVERIE PUSEY, D.D. (LATE FELLOW OF ORIEL COLLEGE) CANON OF CHRIST CHURCH, AND REGIUS PROFESSOR OF HEBREW IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD; THIS VOLUME (BY HIS PERMISSION) IS PRESENTED; WITH A DEEP FEELING OF THE AUTHOR'S OBLIGATION TO HIM FOR THE BLESSINGS OF HIS LEARNED INSTRUCTION, HIS CHRISTIAN EXAMPLE, AND HIS HONEST FRIENDSHIP. PREFACE. VERY little needs to be said to introduce these Lectures to the reader. They were delivered in Advent last, at Saint Mary's, Newington; and there is the same reason for publishing, which there then was for writing and preaching them. I desire to assist, as far as I am able, those who are seeking to clear and define their thoughts, respecting the origin, nature, and power of the Christian Ministry. I have aimed only at plainness and fairness in the statement of the argument; and have adopted that arrangement of the subject, in which, as far as I can judge, it originally came before my own mind. In the Dedication of this Volume to the Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford, I have acknowledged my great obligation to him for the instruction which I hope I have derived from his writings--an acknowledgment which, happily, I am so far from being singular in making, that I suppose every one who has studied them, might make the same statement. But it is right that I should say, that as I have not learned a lesson by rote, but, from the first, thought patiently and freely for myself, so the Public must not consider the Professor answerable for every opinion which I may have expressed. And it may be well also to add, that the general doctrine here set forth is not hastily taken up on any man's authority; but was maintained by the writer, both in private and public, as many will bear witness, long before he had the happiness and advantage of being acquainted with the works, or characters, of the present leading Divines of the University of Oxford. _St. Peter's_, _Walworth_, _Surrey_. CONTENTS. PAGE LECTURE I. THE DOCTRINE. The Method of the Argument--Importance of a 1 Ministry--Scriptural aspect of the subject--Apostolical language concerning it--Compared with the Modern--What the safe inference--The original Ministry possibly still exists--And if so, what constitutes a Ministry--Scripture Language--Compared with Popular and Modern notions--Theory of the Inward Call--Erastian theory--The Common principle of all such Theories--Illustrated--The Catholic DOCTRINE of the Ministry--Compared with the Modern, and with Scripture--The Continuance of the Ministry--DOCTRINE of the SUCCESSION stated and explained--Reasons for the present Inquiry LECTURE II. THE EVIDENCE. Importance of not hastily prejudging--Argued from the 41 parallel case of the Jewish Church--Necessity of considering the Evidence for the SUCCESSION--Evidence of Scripture, how far Important--Historical Evidence--Popular Difficulties--A General reply.--On Evidence--Popular Notions--The expected Evidence of the SUCCESSION--Illustrated by a parallel case--Impossible--And even if attainable, not satisfactory--What kind and amount of Evidence should be looked for--Parallels of Evidence--For the Scriptures--The Sacraments, and the Ministry of the Church--On what Evidence the Common People must of necessity receive the Bible--And the Apostolic Church--Literary Evidence of the Bible, difficult--And of the SUCCESSION--Analysis of it, Theoretical and Historical--Accumulation of the Evidence--Moral Certainty--Conclusion LECTURE III. THE OBJECTIONS. Necessity of considering OBJECTIONS--Classification of 69 them--(1.) As connected with the FACT of the Succession, and its Consequences.--(2.) And the DOCTRINE, and its Consequences. (1.) General Corruption--Idolatry--Schism--Infringement of Private Judgment--Popery and Superstition. (2.) Judaistic Doctrine--Carnality--Technicality--Scriptural Uncertainty--Exclusiveness--Uncharitableness--Unchurching other Protestants--among whom may be seen many Evidences of God's Blessing and Religious Success--Explanation. Catholic Charity--Theoretical and Practical--Review LECTURE IV. THE SUMMARY. The Summary--Mistakes of the Ideality of 109 Christianity--Erroneous popular Notions and Arguments--Contrast of Rationalist and Catholic theories--Comparison--And with Scripture--Analytical Review of the Catholic Religion, illustrating the Doctrine of the Ministry--Synthetical View of the same--Conclusion NOTES 145 I. THE DOCTRINE. FROM THE EPISTLE. {1}--"How, then, shall they call on HIM in Whom they have not believed?--and, How shall they believe in Him of Whom they have not heard?--and, How shall they hear without a preacher?--and, How shall they preach except they be SENT?"--ROMANS x. 14. AT this season of preparation for the ADVENT, the Apostolical Ministry is one of the subjects especially brought before us by the CHURCH, as doubtless peculiarly calculated to fit our minds for the right reception and reverent contemplation of our SAVIOUR'S first and second Coming. It would be needless to enlarge on the suitability of the Epistle selected for this Introductory Festival, opening and leading the way, as it does, to those of the whole "glorious company of the Apostles." We can scarcely read the passage now quoted, without recognizing at once much of its appropriateness. It contains a brief vindication both of the moral necessity and the Divine authority of the Christian Ministry; and so plainly, that, to some extent, all must perceive it. But it may be highly profitable to us to draw out and examine with attention the subject, which St. Paul thus lays before us in epitome only; concerning which we know that there is much diversity of thinking among professing Christians, and, consequently, great danger of wrong thinking. It is too much the practice of modern theologians to refer to the New Testament, almost as if it were a book of aphorisms; and so, when a quotation is made therefrom, it seems to be inquired, what meaning it will _bear_; or what use can be _made_ of it; rather than, what meaning it _must_ have had in such a connection; or what use _must_ have been intended, under such circumstances. And hence has resulted this fatal consequence, that the apostolic writings are commonly interpreted by modern opinions, instead of modern opinions being tested by the apostolic writings. There is but too painful evidence of this, in the manner in which some men set about "proving" their peculiar system by the Scriptures; evidently assuming from the first that their system is _right_, and so (unconsciously, we trust,) sorting and arranging the "best texts" to establish it. Surely an attempt to treat any other ancient book as the Holy Scriptures are thus treated, would not be borne with. Suppose, for example, any disciple of the schools of the modern scepticism should attempt to show, from selected passages of some leading treatise of ancient philosophy, that his own opinions precisely coincided with those of the sage from whom he was quoting; it is evident that he would hereby deceive no one but himself. On a reference to the treatise in question, it would be at once apparent, that it was written by one who held opinions widely different from the modern. Now since, among Christians, there is an universal appeal to the Scriptures, would it not be a rational method of testing the opinions of any of the various classes among us, to inquire, whether it is likely that such writings _would_ have proceeded from the pens of men holding such and such opinions? Might we not thus arrive at as sure a conclusion, notwithstanding all arguments from texts and passages, that some nominally Christian opinions now received, were not the opinions of the sacred writers--as that the opinions of Locke were not the opinions of the ancient Epicureans, notwithstanding the coincidences that might be found? And if it should be seen that any class of opinions exactly harmonizes with the literal writings of the Apostles, so that we may imagine the men who held them to have naturally written what the Apostles wrote; then, should we not have a highly probable argument for the Scriptural character of those opinions? Such an argument will in some degree pervade these Lectures. Few, perhaps, will fail to perceive some wide difference between that state of mind which is implied by our popular Christianity, and that which is implied by the Apostolic Epistles. The complete unworldliness, the quiet, elevated self-denial, the earnest humility, the obedience on the one hand and authority on the other, which are the evident characteristics of practical Christianity as it appears in the inspired records, are strikingly different from all which we see now in our popular religion; and may at times well suggest the fear that we may have lost much of that faith which the first Christians possessed. And in no particular is this difference more remarkably seen, than in the language held respecting the MINISTRY of the CHURCH; which from its undeniable importance deserves no light consideration. Of course it may be said, that much of the difference of tone respecting the Ministry may be ascribed to the "cessation of apostolic authority strictly so called." But however this be, which we pass for the present, it is apparent to all, that there _is_ a difference: and so, men attempt to "account for the fact," rather than deny it. To account, for example, for the "magnified importance" plainly attributed in Holy Scripture to the living voice of an APOSTOLIC MINISTRY, above and beyond, and often without reference to other means of Christian instruction. Not only the plea just mentioned, but other similar ones are urged, as the "change of circumstances," the "alteration in the times," and the like, to account for the fact. How dangerous all such arguments and evasions are, to those who seek a religion exactly, or as nearly as possible, such as the first Christians had, needs scarcely to be urged on any thoughtful mind. For after all these suppositions and reasonings, it will still remain very possible that THE MINISTRY first Divinely set up in the CHURCH, was _not_ intended essentially to change with the changing circumstances of this world; very possible that this might have been given as one permanent if not paramount means of grace for mankind, notwithstanding the subsequent introduction of other means, however efficacious and invaluable. And then, the actually existing ministry, its historical continuity, its unconcealed pretensions, are facts not to be lightly set aside when viewed in connection with this possibility only; even if it were nothing more. How much of Apostolical grace is lost from the ministry, it may be impossible to say; but so also it would be equally impossible to say how much is retained. Hence, it must ever remain the _safest_ course for a Christian man to adhere to an Apostolically descended Ministry. Let us not pass too hastily from these thoughts; let us follow them out, into minuter detail; in order to enter into the state of mind apparently implied by language such as that in the passage, for instance, which constitutes our text.