Hey on Article XXVI: Of the Unworthiness of the Ministers, which hinders not the effect of the Sacrament

painting it, to themselves and others, in the darkest colours, amongst other things, suggested and main- taintained, that such wicked ministers as the Popish Priests were, must shock very serious man by their preaching, instead of amending his heart ; and must vitiate even the Sacraments themselves. —Our Church shewed its moderation and good sense in not running the lengths of such reformers, being soon aware of the difficulties to which their notion must lead. But before we refer to any authorities, let us look to early times, and fee whether anything similar appears. Til Fhe idea that sacraments administered by Priests of immoral character, debauched, drunken, lovers of pleasure more* than lovers of God,” should be something different from what they ought to be, and were intended to be, seems not unnatural.— A sacrament must appear to the mind, an hol ordinance, administered to devout Christians, by a sacred officer {till more devout : whatever de- ranged this conception must seem, at first, to destroy the vital spirit of the whole ordinance.— And though reason might suggest what is urged in our Article, yet the feelings and prejudices would {carce ever be reconciled to a Sacrament given by a bad man: nay difficulties would arise on all sides, and would continue to harass the mind, Is this, (a communicant would always ask himself) the representative of God ? of Christ ? or even of the Church? No; they must all disclaim him! can the wicked be attended to by Him who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity? by him who knew no fin? or can any man be considered as bearing the commission of that Religious Society, whole sanctity he profanes? Such arguing, I say, is not unnatural : it has, in truth, occasioned the difficulties

2 2 Tim. iii. 4.

252 BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT, 1.

difficulties which have made it worth while to compose an Article on our present subject. But our immediate business is with the History of early times. . &

Cyprian, who is placed in 248, Bp. of Carthage, a man of an excellent character, fell into disputes with other Christian leaders, about re-baptizing those, who had been baptized in any Se#, out of the main body of Christians, or according to the language of the times, out of the communion of the Catholic Church. These disputes must be about the effect of Sacraments being hindered by some imperfection or unworthiness in those who adminis- tered them; for there seems nothing peculiar to Baptism in the question. Cyprian was of opinion, that the sacraments, in this case, were inesfectual; or, in other words, he was for the re-baptizing of those, who had been baptized by Heretics. His chief opponent was Stephen Bishop ot Rome, whose opinion, in all its particulars, is not exactly * known.

The Donatists are placed by Lardner in 312. Their separation from the Church was owing, to no difference about doctrine, but at first to a contest about the appointment of a Bishop of Carthage, This appointment was made by some Africans (the mhabitants* of Africa Proconsularis) without con- sulting the churches of Numidia: these latter, thinking themselves ill used, made all possible ex- ceptions to the appointment, and then disputes arose about the reasonableness of such exceptions. The Numidians, amongst whom were one or two

}-ading

d Lard. Cred. Cyprian : or Works, Vol. 3, page 137.

c In Africa there were six Roman Provinces; one of which was Africa Proconsularis, another Numidia : Bingham, Ant. | 9. 2. 5.— Carthage was the Metropolis of Africa Procon-

ularis,

leading men of the name of Donatus, excepted particularly to the new Bishop {whose name was Cæcilianus) as a man of immoral character, in some respects; and they excepted to his conse- cration, as having been performed by a Traitor, or Traditor, that 1s, one who had through fear de- livered up the scriptures, in the times of persecu- tion, to those who meant to destroy them. A church governed by such persons, they said, could be no true church; all its ordinances, even the sacraments themselves, must lose their proper effect under such administration, Nay, when heated with dispute, they went so far as to re-baptize those Africans, who came over to their party, if not Europeans who had communicated with them; which was professing, in the most open manner, the invalidity of the sacramental forms when used by their adversaries. The Donatists were very nu- merous, so as to be governed by 400 Bishops. (Mosheim.)

They had also a very formidable force amon | them; a large band of Fanatics, called Circumcel- bones, who used violence, and were guilty of ex- tensive and numerous massacres : these were also so wild as to fancy, that they suffered martyrdom if they destroyed themselves, or compelled others to destroy them.

The writings of Augustin and Optatus seem to have had great effect on the Donatists; which shews, that they had some good principles,

This affair of the Donarifts being similar to that in which Cyprian was engaged, and both happen- ing in Africa (in the larger sense) the latter re- newed the idea of the former; and the writers in the controversy with the Donatists, become expo- sitors of Cyprian and Stephen. —The chief writers on the fide of the Donatists were Parmenianus,

| Petilianus,

254 BOOK IV. It.

Petilianus, Cresconius, &c. Their adversaries were Augustin and Optatus, whose writings must be studied by any one that wishes to be fully informed on the {ubject. He would find them rational and spirited, and agreeing with our“ church.

Now it does not appear to me, that these two celebrated cafes are exactly parallel to ours; be- caule in both, the Ministers are supposed disqua-

lificd ab initio, whereas our Ministers, in the present

Articie, are supposed to be regularly ordained. —

But yet these cates would produce arguments which would affect the subsect now before us; especially as Cæcilianus was accused of immora- lities, though perhaps unjustly. It would thence come to be argued generally, whether vice, in a minister, hinders - the effect of his ministerial acts.

11. But not to detain you longer from the age of the Reformation. I have not the works of Wickliffe at hand, but I suspect, that, inveighing against the wickedness of — Romish Priests, he used, as one topic, the notion, that their profli- acy mult vitiate the Sacraments; or he said some- thing which his enemies might represent as mean- ing that. The council of Constance made decrees against him, and determined to dig up his bones on account of certain propositions :—-Qne of them was, If a Bishop or Priest live in mortal fin, he? ordaineth not, bantizeth not, consecrateth not.“ Another proposition said to be taken out

of Wicklifte, as to the sum*, is, The ill Life of a Prelate

2 Take a specimen in Forbes, 10. 1. 8. from Aug. de Unico

Baptismo contra Petilianum. © ‘These are the words in Baxter’s Hist, of Councils, page 431.— Those in page 438, are there said to be © charged on

John Hu/5,” but in page 439, ** taken out of Wickliffe.”

Page 438 ; see alto page 439.

BOOK IV. Ak r. XXVI. SECT. 11. 255

a Prelate subtracteth the subjects acceptation of orders, and other sacraments;“ —* and yet in case of necessity,” &c. But the Council of Constance might misrepresent the sayings of the Reformers.

In the Necessary Doctrine, &c. we have a passage to our purpole, on the subject of the Romish Sacrament of Orders*, in which mention is made of the Donatists, and the opinions of some ancients introduced, as Chrysostom, Ambrose, and Gregory of Nazianzum. This work agrees with the doc- trine of our Church.

The Anabaptists, at the time of the Reforma- tion, ran into this error, that the vices of Ministers must annull the force of Sacraments; as might be expected from their unthinking severity and mo- roseness. Luther says of them“, (Anabaptistæ) « propter hominum vitia vel indignitatem (“e un- worthiness,” the expression of our Article) damnant verum Baptisma.” And Forbes’, in his tenth Book and second Chapter, speaks of the old controversy, de fide et probitate baptizantis,” being renewed by the Anabaptists at the Retormation; whose fundamental principle I judge (from Masbeim’s account of them) to be, that the visible church of Christ, must be perfect in fact as well as in Theory. In the Reformatio Legum (de Hzrefibus, Cap. 15.) the Anabaptists are charged with seceding from the Church, and Sacraments, saying, that they are kept away, „vel ministrorum wugprobitate, vel aliorum fratrum. | |

The Council of Trent anathematizes those who say, that a Priest living in mortal fin, cannot confer a Sacrament. The Catechism is expressed not

unlike

About three pages from the beginning of the subject. b Works, Vol. 2, fol. 503. : | |

Forbes, 10. 2. 1. and 10. 4. It.

256 BOOK IV. 11.

unlike our own* Article. —Those who follow the confession of Augsburg, damnant Donatistas et similes, qui negabant licere populo uti ministerio in Ecclesia, et sentiebant ministerium malorum inutile et […] The Helvetic says *, that the perfection of Sacraments does not depend on the worthiness or unworthiness of those who give them. And the Scotch, that for the right #/e of Sacraments, 1t 1s requisite that their end and design should be rightly understood by Minister and people, The presbyterians do not seem to condemn the error heartily.

Heylin, in his introduction to his Life of Arch- bishop Laud®, says, that the Church of England joins with the Church of Rome in several points, in opposition to Sectaries of various kinds; amongst other Articles, he mentions that © of hinderin the effect of the Sacraments by unworthy Minil ters.”—And Du Pin, in his commonitorium?, makes no objection to our twenty-sixth Article.

Barclay, in his Apology for the Quakers, treats the distinction used in our Article between the Man and the Minister, as frivolous; and seemingly runs into the notion lately mentioned as held by the first Anabaptists, that because the Church of Christ is perfect in Theory, it must be so in fa#:

that

• See also Catech. on the Eucharist ; Se. Lxx1v, page 232. — Adds of the Council, Session vii. Canon 12; on Sacraments in general,

Syntagma, Aug. Conf. Art, viii, or page 13. of second t. ; m The Helvetic Churches were founded by Zuinglius ; the Dutch have much of Calvin’s notion in their doctrine: the French Protestants are called Calvinists in France. (Voltaire, Louis XIV. Calvinisine . —Calvin, Inst. 17. 16. agrees with us: See a passage in Bingham’s Works, Vol. 2, page 565, from Archbishop Whitgift, expressing the opinion of Calvin.

n Page 37. o Append, to Mosheim.

BOOK IV. ART. XxXxVI. SECT. Ill, 257

that is, no imperfect church must be allowed to be a true Church. One sees what the scope of the reasoning is; to depreciate all facraments, by heightening the defects to. which they may be liable in some particular cases, in the present faulty state of things; in order to draw men from ex- ternals, and bring them to trust only to the in- ternal ligit.— The idea was not new in Barclay’s time. In the Helvetic Confession are these words; Neque eos probamus, qui propter inwis vilia, asper- nantur in sacramentis vi/ibilia, &c. quaies Messa- lian? suisse dicuntur.

111. But though we may agree with the Church of Rome as to the perfection of sacraments admi- nistered by imperfect men; yet there is another thing, very nearly allied to this, in which we oppose them: that 1s, the effect of the Intention of a Priest when he administers Sacraments.

Intention is not the fame with Probity; because a man of a general good character, might not intend to give a sacrament, as such, on a particular occa- fion, or he might be absent in mind, &c.—and a bad man might intend it. But yet these are con- nected? : ordinarily, a good man will have the purest intention in all offices of religion. The Romanists mention worthiness and intention to- gether, And they describe their meaning by laying, that a Minister must intend, in order to have his acts effectual, what the Church* intends ; the Church, I suppose, from which he receives

his

? For Messaliani, or Euchitz, see Art. xxv. Sect. 11. where there is mention of the Quakers, and of this passage : for some half converted Quakers, see the sixth Section of this Article.

9 Forbes, 10. 1. 18.

See Council of Trent, Sess. 7. Can. 11, 12 a Cate- chism, Part. 2. Sect. 23, of Sacraments in general.

Council and Catcchism, ibid. |

253. BOOK iv. ART, XXVI. SECT. 111.

his commission : but the Romanists conceive only one true church. — This idea of what the Minister is to intend, was delivered by Pope Eugenius* in the Council of Florence, in the year 1438.—And, though the Council of Trent adopted it, yet Caterini* argued, in that Council, as a Protestant would now argue“.

We must not, however, think that the question about the intention of the Minister, was first started even in the Council of Florence. So lon ago as the time of Athanasius, it was discussed. — Athanasius, when a Boy, at Alexandria, bap- tized? some Boys, in the way of boyish imitation; by way of playing, as we should say, at christening. But Bishop Alexander, by the advice of his Clergy, held the Baptism to be valid: and would not have the boys re-baptized.— Amongst the Schoolmen, our countryman Duns* speaks of a distinction be- tween attual* and habitual intention, as established, and proposes an intermediate fort, which he calls virtual. — Cardinal Bona, in his Book on the Mals“, lays, of the Priest’s intention, © habitualis suffi ciens non est; actualis optima atque laudabilis; {ed non neceflaris : sufficit enim virtualis, illa nimirùm quæ ab actuali proveniens et non revocata adhuc remanet secundum suam virtutem.” —I give this sentence at length in order to shew what nice- ties the subject of Intention admits of, Indeed it is so far from being limited to free forts, that it

| contains

t Forbes, 10. 1. 14. u Forbes, 10. 1. 27.

x See Trent, Sess. 14 Chap. 6. about a Confefor not having a due Intention.

Forbes, 10. 1. 15. from Ruffinus, Sozomen, &c.

2 Duns Scotus.— See Forbes, 10. 1. 22.

2 Locke’s distinction between actual and habitual knowledge, is similar to this; on the understanding, 4. 1. 8.

» Card. Bona died 1674, Et, 65: — De Misa, cap. 1. Sec. 5. page 180, col. 2.

BOOK iv. ART. xxvt. SECT: IV. 259

contains an infinity of degrees, and an endless variety of mixtures, | |

If all the Romanists said no more than that a Priest ought to intend what the Church intends, it might be taken as meaning only, that whoever acts by commission, ought to follow the intention of his principal z but in some writings composed for the People, the business of Intention is much abused. We need not a stronger instance than the Rubric produced by Bishop Burnet, on the Article. — Bishop Porteus’s account also is worthy to be read®. —And in the year 1788, a French Protestant Clergyman told a friend of mine, that the then Archbishop of Paris had given great offence to the generality of his Clergy by reviving, in a note on one of his Mandemens, the doctrine, that the efficacious Grace of the Sacrament was divided into three Portions; one of which was for the offi- ciating Priest, one for his assistants, the third for him who received : but that the Priest might, if he thought proper, by his Intentio, and the private act of his mind, take the last portion to himself, and cheat the communicant of it.“

Iv. I will trouble you with no more History.

Let us now see what may be wanted in the way of Explanation,

In this twenty-sixth Article we must conceive the subject of Sacraments in general, to be con- tinued. Though what has now been said may leem to relate to one or the other Sacrament in particular, yet it ought to relate to one only as a Sacrament: if it does that, it may be affirmed of lacraments in general.

The fille is expressed in terms which were usual at the time: the passages cited may shewy | that; © Brief Confutation, page 70.

R 2

260 BOOK IV. ART. XxxVI. SECT. IV.

that; particularly the margin of the Trent Cate- - chism. a |

In this Article it is supposed, that the Ministers spoken of, are though real, yet wrworthy Minil- ters; and that those who receive a Sacrament, are worthy receivers: whereas in the twenty-ninth Article, we shall find the Ministers are supposed worthy, the receivers unworthy.

For © visible church,“ see the nineteenth Article, Sect. rv. “ Have chief authority“ in Latin it is only © præsint,“ which might seemingly have been translated prefide. The English, as it stands at present, directs our views to the highest Prelates, but the Latin, to any Minister who happens to preside 1n giving Sacraments.

The latter paragraph seems intended to obviate an objection which might be made to the former. Men might say, you esteem the wickedness of Ministers too lightly : no, says the latter para- graph (in effect), the evil of wicked Ministers is very great and important; but if you apply a wrong remedy. to it, you make it still greater. — Punish the guilty, not the innocent. Proceed against the Ministers, but do not prevent the people from benefiting by those institutions, which are intended for their Benefit. Let no man be hindered from doing his part; whatever stumbling- blocks may lie in his way, every man will be sure to get good if he does his best to proceed in the paths of duty.

The idea of the efficacy of ministerial acts, has been confounded with that of the duty of Minis- ters; certainly it 1s wrong for Ministers to be vicious, but if they continue to act by com- mission from Heaven, benefits may be received

through

BOOK 1V. v. 261

through their agency“. It is wrong for any Magis- trate to be vicious, but yet the people may re- ceive redress and protection from warrants signed by him. 1

When we speak of * the effect of the sacra- ments,” we should distinguish between their effects as such, and their accidental effects; a sacrament given by a good Minister, will have more effect in raising pious affections, than given by a bad one; but this I call accidental: its effect as a sacrament, that effect which no sacrament can fail to produce when intire and regular, will be pro- duced, though the Minister be not a good man. This distinction, between accidental good effects, and such as may be called essential, Augustin seems to have been master of*.

v. It does not seem as if our Proof need run into any great length.

• Sacraments are not to be neglected by the People, because they think Ministers blameable.”

We may look at Matt. vii. 22.— Acts iu. 13.— 1 Cor. iii. 5.—or we may, with Bishop Burnet, use the reductio ad absurdum, and fay, if faults of Ministers vitiate sacraments, a man can never know whether he has been baptized or not, or whether he has received the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper; he cannot even know whether he be a Christian.ä— We may add, that as all men are faulty, there can be ro true Church of Chrilt. But the Article itself contains sufficient Proof of what it asserts. If an Article contains only pro- positions which are assertions, our business is to

give

• Trent, Sess. 7. Can. 11. we have, “ requiri intentionem:“ now Intention may be required as Duty, or in order to 2fficacy ; does the Council mean at all to leave such an ambiguity ?

© See passages quoted in Forbes, 10. 2. 14. and 10. 3. 6.

give proofs; but when the propositions which an Article contains, are themselves arguments, or proofs, all additional arguments are superfluous.

Bishop Burnet also reasons, in the same form, on the other point, of the Intention of the Priest being necessary towards the complete effect of a Sacrament. If the secret acts of the Priest’s mind can prevent admission into the Christian Covenant, no one can tell whether he be a Christian or nor. Nay, who can tell whether he who acts as a Priest be a Christian ?—Salvation at the discretion of Priests, not only good but wicked, is not con- ceivable. More need scarce be added on such a notion. |

vi. Wecome then to our Application.

A form of Assent does not seem necessary; but something may be said on the subject of mutual concessions. —It we take in the subject of Intention, which does not properly belong to our Article (if it did Du Pin would scarcely be filent,) we have two adversaries; on the subject of unworthi- ness, some Dissenters; on that of Intention, the Romanists.

1. To such Dissenters, or Sectaries, we might grant, that they have good motives for ascribing great evil to the unworthiness of Ministers; and that, in one sense, the good effects of Sacraments are really hindered by vicious Clergy; that is, sacraments ill administered, make a weaker im- pression on the heart than when well administered, And their © spiritual Grace” does partly consist in their good effects on the mind according to the natural course of things*.

But then we mult expect to have it granted, on the other hand, that no man is to absent himselt from any sacramental institutions under Been i : Art. xxv. Set. 17,

BOOK IV. vt. 263

of the wickedness or unworthiness of Ministers. That every man is to do his own part in the best manner poflible.- And that a person, as an Agent, or under a commission, may do valid acts, though he be of an immoral private® character.

2. To Romanists, with regard to Intention, we may grant, that a mere casual, jocular sprinkling, though with a sacred form of words, does not constitute a Baptism. That the receivers of Sacra- ments should have reason to think, that those who administer, act under commission from God, or Christ, or from a religious Society. Whence we are led to call the boyish sprinkling of Athanafins, no Baptism, because he could not, whilst a boy, have any commission to administer Sacraments.

But we must expect the Romanists to grant, in return, that the people have reason to think a man regularly commissioned, who appears in a sacred place, habited for sacred purpoles, under autho- rity.— We must expect to have it allowed, that Salvation, laboured for by Christian obedience, cannot be capriciously put out of the reach of the pious and virtuous, the faithful and diligent, by those, who are perhaps more frail than themselves. . Lastly, as to Improvement, it seems as if some might be drawn from observing cafes in human life, in which men a& by commission, where the

same

Charles Leslie has a discourse intitled, . who they are that are now qualified to administer Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.“ (Works, Vol. 2. fol. page 719).— He says some Quakers, after reading on Baptism, * stand chiefly upon the per/onal holiness of the administrator :? he means private virtue; for he says, that besides personal holiness, sacerdotal is required: — these half- converted Quakers thought, that the spiritual effects of Bap- tism cannot be conveyed by means of an unsanctified instru- ment.“ This is to our purpose, but the Discourse is chiefly to prove, that Ministers ordained by Bikops, are the persons duly qualified, The fifth Section, however, page 735, is upon our Question, R 4

264 BOOK IV. vi.

same difficulties occur, but occasion no dispute. An Ambassador acts for his Sovereign; if he be a worthless man his vices do harm, but his acts are valid. They are not valid without some kind of zn/ention; and he must intend what his Sovereign in- tends; yet he may be absent in mind while he is signing a treaty; nevertheless his inattention will not make his signature of no force.

Improvement might also arise from reflecting how very practical subjects are, which are treated as speculative. Who maintains any doctrine about unworthiness or intention of Ministers, but with some farther view ?—Let then Practice be pro- fessed, and then we can urge, do your best; en- deavour to prevent unworthiness of every kind; to prevent men from depending on mere external acts, done without any intention or meaning of virtue or piety. But judge no man. Indeed it must not be denied, that when men do ule their best endeavours to attain the highest good, they are liable to great obstructions and hindrances from others, even in things of a moral and spiritual nature: but yet if they act with honesty and dili- gence, they may assure themselves that nothing

which they do, will be lost on him to whom they look up for a reward.

BOOK 1V. ART, XXVII, SECT, 1. 11. 266