I do not deny that we may, by a sort of intuitive light of faith, distinguish some doctrines of revelation as greater and more sublime than others; but it seems exceedingly dangerous to attempt by human reasoning to weigh the importance of truths certainly revealed by Christ, relatively to each other. It may be possible that the Holy Spirit should so far enlighten the understanding of some saints, as to enable them to measure those truths immeasurable by human wisdom; but a process of theological reasoning for this purpose seems scarcely consistent with the simplicity of faith. It constitutes man as it were the judge of his Creator, and it must be impossible to the infinite majority of men, because there is a much more practical and important question first to be determined: What are all the doctrines actually revealed by Christ? Few men, perhaps, have completely mastered this question; and yet it is a necessary preliminary to any examination of the relative importance of doctrines, because Christian doctrines are so concatenated, that without a perfect view of all, it would be impossible even to attempt their compariAs it has been truly observed by an eminent and excellent writer: "The sacred building is so divinely though invisibly cemented, that for aught we know, it is impossible to remove any portion, either of scriptural or traditionary truth, without weakening the whole arch. We, to whom the whole is committed, . . let us above all things, beware of the presumption of selecting for ourselves among the truths and laws of the Most High, which we will retain, and which we may venture to dispense with P." Whatever foundation there may be for the notion, that some doctrines are more impor

son.

P Sermon on Primitive Tradi- fessor of Poetry, p. 46. tion, by the Rev. J. Keble, Pro

tant in themselves than others, it cannot be supposed that any doctrine certainly revealed by Christ is unimportant to us, or that it may be safely disbelieved, or that we may recognize as Christians those who obstinately disbelieve such a doctrine. If, indeed, there be some special and strong reason, which exempts them from the imputation of pertinacity in opposition to the manifest truth; or if it be only probable that the doctrine in question was revealed by Christ, while there is also a probability that he did not reveal it; in such a case error is tolerable; but if there be not any such evident excuse, the denial of any truth of faith or morality revealed by Christ is heretical, anti-christian, and destructive of salvation.

CHAPTER VI.

ON THE SANCTITY OF THE CHURCH.

THE sanctity of the church may be considered in several different points of view. First, the sanctity of its Head, and of those who founded it; secondly, the holiness of its doctrine; thirdly, the means of holiness which it has in the Sacraments; fourthly, the actual holiness of its members; and fifthly, the divine attestations of holiness in miracles.

1. The Divine Head and Founder of the church is the essential origin and source of all its holiness. "He gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good works." The glorious efficacy of his sacrifice procured the mission of the Eternal Comforter, the author of every good gift, and the source of all heavenly grace in the word and sacraments of Christianity. The apostles of our Lord were commissioned by Him, with the authority which he had received from the Father, to found the Christian church; and all churches must therefore derive their origin from the apostles, either by proving that they were originally founded by the apostolic preaching, and have perpe

Tit. ii. 14.

tually existed as societies from that moment to the present; or else they must be prepared to show that, at their origin, they were derived peaceably and with Christian charity from the apostolical churches, or that they were subsequently received into Christian communion by such churches. These are the only conceivable ways in which any church can pretend to prove that it was founded by the apostles immediately or mediately. If any society was not founded actually by the apostles, nor yet founded by the successors of the apostles and the apostolical churches, but in the moment of its birth separated itself from the communion and religion of all such churches; if it was never received afterwards, and engrafted into the communion of churches, apostolical in their origin or derivation; it is impossible that such a society can in any way show that it was founded by the apostles of Jesus Christ. This is a point which may be easily determined in any particular case by the facts of history, and it affords an excellent sign or test of the church of Christ.

b "

2. It is undeniable that the end of Christ's mission on earth was the sanctification of his people. He "called us with a holy calling His will is "our sanctification "." Therefore if it could be clearly shown that any society professing to be Christian, denied the obligation of good works, and taught its members that they might freely indulge in wickedness, such a society would be evidently anathema from Jesus Christ. Nothing further could be required to prove it.

3. The means of sanctity in the sacraments cannot with propriety be reckoned among the signs of the

b 2 Tim. i. 9.

C 1 Thess. iv. 3.

church, for before we determine whether a society is deficient in any of these means, we must enter on the whole subject of the sacraments, which would lead to a discussion much too lengthened, and beyond the capacity of the majority of men. Romanists argue that

the true and valid administration of the sacraments is not a note of the church, therefore they cannot consistently enter on the discussion of those sacraments as a means of holiness.

4. I now come to the question of the actual holiness of the members of the church. It is asserted by some that a society which includes a number of unholy men cannot be a church of Christ, that the true church comprises only saints or perfect Christians, and that sinners cannot be members of it. The Novatians and Donatists considered all who were guilty of great sins as forming no part of the church. The Pelagians held the church to consist only of perfect men free from sin. The Wickliffites taught that the church includes only the predestinate. The Anabaptists and the English dissenters asserted, that it consists only of those who are visibly holy in their lives; and the latter founded their separation from the church on the principle that she comprised so many sinners in her communion. Therefore they departed from her, to form a pure society of saints in which no sinner was to find place. Their whole system was founded, and continues to be maintained on the fiction that their communities are all holy, pure, perfect saints, incapable of passion, strife, tyranny, &c. Against these principles, which have

d Tournely, de Ecclesia, tom. i. p. 63, &c. Bailly, Tractatus de Eccl. Christ. tom. i. p. 62. Bouvier, de vera Ecclesia, p. 79.

Collet, Inst. Theolog. Scholast. tom. ii. p. 450.

* See Chapter XIII.