Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

zeal, endeavour to establish, sometimes auricular confession, sometimes excommunication, sometimes jurisdiction, sometimes the right of legislation, and sometimes indulgences The former passage they allege to support the primacy of the Roman see. They are so expert in fitting their keys to any locks and doors they please, that it should seem as if they had followed the business of locksmiths all their lifetime.

III. The opinion entertained by some persons, that these things were only temporary, while all civil magistrates were strangers to the profession of Christianity, is a mistake, for want of considering the great distinction, and the nature of the difference, between the ecclesiastical and civil power. For the Church has no power of the sword to punish or to coerce, no authority to compel, no prisons, fines, or other punishments, like those inflicted by the civil magistrate. Besides, the object of this power is, not that he who has transgressed may be punished against his will, but that he may profess his repentance by a voluntary submission to chastisement. The difference therefore is very great; because the Church does not assume to itself what belongs to the magistrate, nor can the magistrate execute that which is executed by the Church. This will be better understood by an example. Is any man intoxicated? In a well-regulated city, he will be punished by imprisonment. Has he com'mitted fornication? He will receive the same, or a severer punishment. With this, the laws, the magistrate, and the civil judgment, will all be satisfied; though it may happen that he will give no sign of repentance, but will rather murmur and repine against his punishment. Will the Church stop here? Such persons cannot be admitted to the sacred Supper without doing any injury to Christ and to his holy institution. And reason requires, that he who has offended the Church with an evil example, should remove, by a solemn declaration of repentance, the offence which he has excited. The argument adduced by those who espouse a contrary opinion, is of no force. They say, that Christ assigned this office to the Church, when there was no magistrate to execute it. But it frequently happens that the magistrate

is too negligent, and sometimes that he even deserves to be chastised himself; which was the case with the emperor Theodosius. Besides, the same argument might be extended to the whole ministry of the word. Now then, according to them, pastors must no longer censure notorious crimes; they must cease to chide, to reprove, to rebuke: for there are Christian magistrates, whose duty it is to correct such offences by the civil sword. But as it is the duty of the magistrate, by punishment and corporeal coercion, to purge the Church from offences; so it behoves the minister of the word on his part to relieve the magistrate by preventing the multiplication of offenders. Their respective operations ought to be so connected as to be an assistance, and not an obstruction to each other.

IV. And indeed whoever will closely examine the words of Christ, will easily perceive that they describe the stated and perpetual order, and not any temporary regulation, of the Church. For it is unreasonable for us to bring an accusation before a magistrate, against those who refuse to submit to our admonitions; yet this would be necessary if the magistrate succeeded to this office of the Church. What shall we say of this promise, "Verily, I say unto thee, whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven?" Was it only for one, or for a few years? Besides, Christ here instituted nothing new, but followed the custom always observed in the ancient Church of his own nation; thereby signifying, that the spiritual jurisdiction, which had been exercised from the beginning, was indispensable to the Church. And this has been confirmed by the consent of all ages. For when emperors and magistrates began to assume the profession of Christianity, the spiritual jurisdiction was not in consequence abolished, but only regulated in such a manner as neither to derogate from the civil power, nor to be confounded with it. And that justly; for a pious magistrate will not wish to exempt himself from the common subjection of the children of God, which in no small degree consists in submitting to the Church, when it judges by the word of God: so very far is it from being his duty to abolish such a judicature. "For what is more honourable," says Ambrose, "than for

the emperor to be called the Son of the Church? For a good emperor is within the Church, not above the Church." Wherefore those, who to exalt the magistrate despoil the Church of this power, not only pervert the language of Christ by a false interpretation, but pass a most severe censure on all the holy bishops who have lived since the time of the apostles, for having usurped to themselves, under a false pretext, the honour and dignity which belonged to the magistrate.

V. But on the other hand, it is also worth while to examine, what was the true and ancient use of the jurisdiction of the Church, and what a great abuse of it has been introduced; that we may know what ought to be abrogated, and what ought to be restored from antiquity, if we would overturn the reign of Antichrist, and re-establish the true kingdom of Christ. In the first place, the object to be secured is the prevention of offences, or the abolition of any that may have arisen. In the use of it, two things require to be considered; first, that this spiritual power be entirely separated from the power of the sword; secondly, that it be administered, not at the pleasure of one man, but by a legitimate assembly. Both these things were observed in the purer ages of the Church. For the holy bishops never exercised their authority by fines, imprisonments, or other civil punishments; but, as became them, employed nothing but the word of the Lord. For the severest vengeance, the ultimate punishment of the Church, is excommunication, which is never resorted to without absolute necessity. Now excommunication requires no external force, but is content with the power of the word of God. In short, the jurisdiction of the primitive Church was no other than a practical exposition of the description which Paul gives of the spiritual authority of pastors. This power he represents as conferred for the purpose of "casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; and having in readiness to revenge all disobedience." (u) As this is accomplished by the preaching of the (u) 2 Cor. x. 5, 6.

doctrine of Christ, so to preserve that doctrine from fallling into contempt, they who profess themselves of the household of faith ought to be judged by what that doctrine contains. That cannot be done, except the ministry be accompanied with the power to take cognizance of those who are to be privately admonished, or more severely censured, and also to exclude from the communion of the Supper those who cannot be admitted without a profanation of such a solemn sacrament. Wherefore when he denies, in another place, that we have any right "to judge them that are without," (v) he makes the children of the Church subject to the censures, by which their faults are chastised, and implies the existence at that time of judicatures from which none of the faithful

were exempt.

VI. This power, as we have stated, was not in the hands of one man, for him to act according to his own pleasure, but resided in the assembly of the elders, which was in the Church what a senate is in a city. Cyprian, when he mentions by whom it was exercised in his time, generally unites all the clergy with the bishop; but in other passages he also shews, that the clergy presided in such a manner, that the people were not excluded from this cognizance. For he expresses himself in these words; "From the commencement of my episcopate, I have determined to do nothing without the council of the clergy and the consent of the people." But the common and usual custom was for the jurisdiction of the Church to be exercised by the council of the presbyters; of whom, as I have observed, there were two classes: for some were ordained to the office of teaching, others were only censors of manners. This institution gradually degenerated from its original establishment; so that in the time of Ambrose, the judicial administration of the Church was wholly in the hands of the clergy; of which he complains in the following language. "The ancient synagogue, and afterwards the Church, had elders, without whose advice nothing was done. I know not by what negligence this practice has been discontinued, except from the indolence of the

(v) 1 Cor. v. 12.

doctors, or rather from their pride, while they wish none but themselves to be seen." We perceive the indignation of that holy man, that there had been some declension from a better state of things, while they still retained an order that was at least tolerable. What would he say now, if he were to see the present deformed ruins, which exhibit scarcely a vestige of the ancient edifice? What a complaint would he make? First, in opposition to law and justice, that which had been given to the Church, the bishop usurped entirely to himself. This resembles the conduct of a consul or president expelling the senate, and seizing the sole administration of a government. But as the bishop is superior to other persons in honour, so the assembly or congregation possesses more authority than one individual. It was a gross outrage therefore, for one man to tranfer to himself all the power of the community, and thereby to open a door to licentious tyranny, to deprive the Church of its rights, and to suppress and abolish an assembly appointed by the Spirit of Christ.

VII. But as one evil always produces another, bishops disdaining this charge as unworthy of their attention, have delegated it to others. Hence the creation of officials, to discharge that duty. I say nothing at present of the characters of the persons, I only assert, that they differ in no respect from civil judges; yet they still call it a spiritual jurisdiction, where all the contention is about secular affairs. Though there were no other evil, what effrontery must they have, to call a court full of litigation, the judicature of the Church? But it is alleged, it employs admonitions, and pronounces excommunication. Is it thus that they trifle with God? Does a poor man owe a sum of money? He is cited. If he appear, he is condemned: after the condemnation, if he do not pay, he is admonished: after the second admonition, they proceed to excommunication. If he do not appear to the citation, he is admonished to be forth coming: if he delay, he is admonished a second time, and soon after is excommunicated. I ask, what is there in this that bears any resemblance to the institution of Christ, the ancient usage, or the order of the Church? It is further alleged, that this court also corrects vices. I reply, that acts of fornication, lasciviousness, and VOL. III. 2 G

« PredošláPokračovať »