{1} 2 St. Matt. xii. 29.
{2a} 2 Tim. ii. 20.
{2b} Gen. ii. 7.
{3a} 2 Cor. iii. 5, 6–9.
{3b} 2 Cor. iv. 1.
{4a} 2 Cor. iv. 2.
{4b} Ibid., 3, 4.
{4c} Ibid., 5, 6.
{4d} Ibid., 7.
{6} 2 Cor. iv. 7.
{10a} Isaiah liii. 2.
{10b} Ibid. lii. 14.
{12} St. John xx. 22, 23.
{13a} St. John xxi. 3.
{13b} Acts xviii. 3.
{14} Cor. ix. 4, 5.
{17a} Acts xv. 36, 39.
{17b} Gal. ii. 11–14.
{19a} St. Matt. xiii. 55.
{19b} 2 Cor. x. 10.
{21a} St. John xvii. 21.
{21b} St. Matt x. 25.
{21c} 1 Pet. iv. 12.
{22a} Heb. xiii. 13.
{22b} 1 Cor. iv. 12, 13.
{22c} Acts xx. 24.
{23} Job i. 8.
{24} Job i. 5.
{26a} 1 Chron. i. 43, 44.
{26b} Numbers xxxi. 8.
{27a} 1 John iii. 12.
{27b} Heb. xi. 4.
{28} Gen. iv. 2–4.
{30a} Gen. iii. 15.
{30b} Heb. ix. 22.
{33a} Gen. viii. 20, xii. 8, xiii. 4, xiv. 18, xxii. 13, xxvi. 25,
xxxiii. 20.
{34} Heb. ix. 22.
{36} Calmet, under the head ‘Sacrifice.’
{40a} St. John viii. 56.
{40b} Gen. iii. 15.
{43} Deut. xiii. 14.
{45} Heb. xi. 4.
{48a} Rom. iv. 3.
{48b} St. Matt. v. 23, 24.
{49} St. Matt. v. 32, 37, 43, 44.
{50} Heb. ix. 9.
{51a} Heb. xiii. 10.
{51b} Gal. iii. 19; Heb. ii. 2, 3.
{53} Heb. xiii. 10–15.
{54} 1 Cor. x. 18.
{55} 1 Cor. x. 19–21.
{58} 1 Cor. x. 13–17.
{66a} Heb. v. 4.
{66b} Carter on the Priesthood, p. 71.
{66c} Ibid.
{68} See Carter’s “Doctrine of the Priesthood,” p. 6.
{70} _Vitringa de Synagogâ vetere_. _Prolegomena_, cap. 2, quoted
Carter, pp. 54, 55
{71} Palmer’s _Origines Liturgicæ_. See Carter, p. 58.
{72a} Palmer’s _Origines Liturgicæ_. See Carter, p. 59.
{72b} Carter, p. 60.
{74a} St. John vi. 52.
{74b} St. Luke xviii. 8.
{75a} St. Matt. x. 25.
{75b} Heb. x. 36.
{75c} St. Luke xxi. 19.
{75d} St. Matt x.
{75e} 1 Tim. iv. 1.
{75f} 2 Tim. iv. 3.
{75g} 1 John i. 1.
{75h} Ibid. ver. 3.
{76} Jer. vi. 16.
{77} Gal. i. 10.
{80} Heb. vii. 1–3.
{81a} Coloss. ii. 8.
{81b} Job xxxviii. 2.
{85a} Ordering of Deacons in the Church of England.
{85b} Ordering of Priests.
{85c} Ibid.
{85d} Ibid.
{86} St. John xx. 21.
{87} St. John xx. 21–23.
{89} Second Exhortation in Communion Office.
{90} Office for Visitation of Sick.
{95a} 1 Tim. iii. 15.
{95b} St. Matt. xvi. 18.
{95c} Ibid. xxviii. 20.
{95d} Ps. cxxii. 6.
{97} Sermon III.
{101} Carter on the Priesthood, p. 61.
{102} Some attempts have been lately made to throw doubt upon the
authenticity of the copies of the ancient liturgies which have come down
to us, as not certainly uninterpolated in places in later times. But
whether there may be any ground at all for such suspicion or not, it is
evident that the inferences drawn from the liturgies, both in this
passage and in a former sermon, will not be affected. For the argument,
as used in these sermons, is not dependent upon a phrase or a sentence
here or there, which, it may be alleged, is open to question, but is
based upon doctrine interwoven with their whole system, and pervading
their whole structure, and is what moreover is borne witness to, as thus
pervading them, by the whole mass of contemporary Christian writing. The
liturgies, therefore, must not merely have been interpolated in places,
but almost entirely re-written in another sense, and the great bulk of
the writings of the Fathers forged to agree with this change, if the
argument above is to be shaken by the question raised concerning them.
I find a passage in Hickes’s Treatise, “The Christian Priesthood
Asserted,” which, though written more than a hundred and sixty years
before Mr. Carter’s book, seems almost as if it were a comment upon the
passage just cited, and the application which I have made of it. He
says, “I believe no man in the world that was of any religion where
sacrifice was used, and that by chance should see the Sacrament of the
Holy Eucharist administered among Christians, as it was administered in
the primitive times, or as it is administered according to the order and
usage of the Church of England, but would take the bread and wine for an
offering or sacrifice, and the whole action for a sacrificial
ministration; and the eating and drinking of the holy elements for a
sacrificial entertainment of the congregation at the table of their God.
To see bread and wine . . . so solemnly brought to the table, and then . . .
brought by the deacon, in manner of an offering to the liturg or
minister, which he also taking in his hands as an offering, sets them
with all reverence on the table; and then, after solemn prayers of
oblation and consecration, to see him take up the bread, and say, in a
most solemn manner, ‘This is My Body,’ &c., and then the cup, saying as
solemnly, ‘This is My Blood,’ &c., and then to hear him with all the
powers of his soul offer up praises, and glory, and thanksgiving, and
prayers to God the Father of all things, through the Name of His Son, and
Holy Spirit, which they beseech Him to send down upon that bread and cup,
and the people with the greatest harmony and acclamation saying aloud,
‘Amen:’ after which also, to see the liturg, first eat of the bread and
drink of the cup, and then the deacon to carry about the blessed bread
and wine to be eaten and drunk by the people, as in a sacrificial feast;
and, lastly, to see and hear all concluded with psalms and hymns of
praise, and prayers of intercession to God with the highest pomp-like
celebrity of words; I say, to see and hear all this would make an
uninitiated heathen conclude that the bread and wine were an offering,
the whole Eucharistic action a sacrificial mystery, the eating and
drinking the sanctified elements a sacrificial banquet, and the liturg
who administered a priest.”—_Hickes’s_ “_Priesthood Asserted_,” _Library
of Anglo.-Cath. Theol._, _Oxford_, vol. ii. p. 105–7.
{103} The scantiness of statements in the Articles, as to the
inspiration of Holy Scripture, may illustrate this. Had it been possible
to foresee the boldness of unbelief which these days have brought to
light on this subject, or had our Reformers been now drawing up the
Articles, we may feel very certain they would not have been content to
leave that matter as it there stands. But they were engaged with
practical errors of their own day, and not in stating all dogmatic truth
upon other points. Many things were so fully assumed to be true as to
need no assertion of their truth.
{104} 1 Cor. xi. 26.
{106} Heb. vii. 25.
{107} Mede’s “Christian Sacrifice,” lib. ii. cap. 4, quoted in Carter,
p. 65.
{108} Cardwell’s “Documentary Annals,” chap. vii, prop. 2.
{109} Carter, p. 25, note 1.
{110} Hickes’s Treatises, vol. ii. pp. 183, 184.
{111a} Bramhall’s “Protestant Ordination Vindicated.” Discourse vii. 3.
{111b} St. Jerome, adv. Lucif. c. 8. Carter, pp. 22, 23.
{111c} James i. 17.
{111d} Ps. xliv. 3.
{111e} Ps. cxv. 1.
{114} Acts iii. 12.
{118} Carter, p. 28.
{123a} Hickes’ “Christian Priesthood Asserted,” pp. 184, 185.
{123b} Rom. xi. 20.
{125a} 1 Sam. ix. 11–13.
{125b} 1 Kings viii. 62–66.
{125c} 2 Kings xxiii. 22.
{125d} “But the man that is clean, and is not in a journey, and
forbeareth to keep the passover, even the same soul shall be cut off from
among his people: because he brought not the offering of the Lord in his
appointed season, that man shall bear his sin.” (Numb. ix. 13.)
{129} St. John vi. 53.
{131a} Heb. viii. 1.
{131b} Mal. i. 11.
{132} Zech. xiv. 7.
{133} Ps. lxxx. 19.
{135} The following sermon, although perhaps in strictness hardly one of
this course, was preached almost immediately after the others, and, in
some measure, as a sequel to them. It is evidently not unconnected with
their subject, inasmuch as the whole Doctrine of the Priesthood,—Christ
our High Priest, through His Manhood “able to be touched with the feeling
of our infirmities,” and the sacerdotal powers derived from Him to “the
ministers and stewards of His mysteries,”—is intimately related to, and
dependent upon, the doctrine of the Incarnation.
{136} Col. ii. 9.
{137a} Acts xx. 28.
{137b} Ephes. i. 7.
{137c} Heb. ix. 12.
{138} 2 St. Peter ii. 1.
{139a} St. John xvii. 2.
{139b} 1 Cor. ii. 8.
{139c} Acts xx. 28.
{139d} “Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles,” by E. Harold, Lord
Bishop of Ely, Art. II. p. 69.
{140} Owen’s “Introduction to the Study of Dogmatic Theology,” pp. 265,
266. See also, “Pearson on the Creed,” Art. iii. § 3.
{141} Philip, ii. 7, 8.
{142a} St. Luke ii. 52.
{142b} St. Mark xiii. 32; St. Matt. xxiv. 36.
{144a} Rom. ix. 5.
{144b} It may be observed that the above explanation does not in any way
impair the argument in our Lord’s reply to His disciples. It furnishes
quite a sufficient reason why such mysteries as “when shall these things
be, and what shall be the sign of Thy coming, and of the end of the
world?” should be unrevealed to flesh and blood, that they are unknown to
be angels of heaven, and even to the Son of Man, if His humanity be
contemplated apart from His Divinity.
{147} Ps. xlix. 7, 8.
{148a} Joel ii. 2.
{148b} Mal. iv. 2.
{148c} St. Luke i. 78, 79.
{148d} 2 Tim. i. 10.
{148e} Isa. ix. 6.
{148f} Heb. ii. 11.
{148g} Ibid. 17.
{149a} Heb. iv. 14, 15.
{149b} St. John xviii. 37.
{150} Rom. v. 9, 11.
{152} Rom. iii. 25, 26.
{153a} Art. XII.
{153b} Art. XVIII.
{156} St. Luke ii. 11.