§ 12. Of all these contests, the greatest and most important seems to have been that upon the means of attaining to justification and salvation, which Jewish teachers excited at Rome and in other Christian churches. For while the apostles every where inculcated, that every hope of obtaining justification and salvation must be placed solely in Jesus Christ and his merits; these Jewish teachers ascribed to the law and to the works which it enjoined, the chief influence in procuring everlasting happiness. This error not only led on to many others, which were prejudicial to the religion of Christ, but also it was connected with the highest dishonour to the Saviour. For they who maintained that a life regulated according to the law, would give a title to eternal rewards, could not consider Christ as the true Son of God, and the Saviour of mankind; but merely as a prophet, or a divine messenger among men. It cannot therefore appear at all strange, that St. Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans and elsewhere, took so much pains to extirpate this capital error.

§ 13. The controversy respecting the necessity of the Mosaic rites in order to salvation, was wisely decided by the apostles. But great as the apostolic influence was, that inbred love of the law which Moses enacted, and their fathers handed down, could not be wholly eradicated from the minds of the Jewish Christians, and especially of those who lived in Palestine. It diminished a little after Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans, and the temple ruined; yet it did not wholly subside. Hence it was, as we shall see hereafter, that a part of the Jewish Christians separated from the other brethren, and formed a distinct sect from adherents to the Mosaic law.

7 Acts xv.

:

CHAPTER IV.

HISTORY OF RITES AND CEREMONIES.

§ 1. Baptism and the Lord's Supper appointed by Christ.-§ 2. Rites instituted by the apostles.-§ 3. The Jewish rites retained.-§ 4. Public assemblies of Christians, and times for meeting.-§ 5. Places of meeting. § 6. Mode of worship.— § 7. Lord's Supper and agapæ. - § 8. Baptism. § 9. Anointing the sick.—§ 10. Fasting.

§ 1. ALTHOUGH the Christian religion has the greatest simplicity, and requires nothing but faith and love; yet it could not wholly dispense with external rites and institutions. Jesus himself established only two ceremonies, which it is not lawful either to change or to abrogate; namely, baptism and the holy supper. He did not, however, mean them as naked forms, or to be merely significant, but also to have the power of changing men's minds. From his pleasure to establish no more, we should infer, that ceremonies are not essential to his religion, and that this business has been committed by him to the discretion and free choice of Christians.

§ 2. Many considerations leave us no reason to doubt, that the friends and apostles of the Saviour sanctioned in various places the use of other rites; which they either tolerated from necessity, or recommended for good and solid reasons. Yet we are not to suppose that they any where laid down some system of pontifical jurisprudence to be always ready, and neverending; or that the same institutions were prescribed to all Christian societies. On the contrary, various things go to show, that Christian worship was from the beginning regulated and conducted differently in different places; unquestionably under authority of the apostles, their friends, and disciples; and that in this matter, much regard was paid to the ancient opinions, customs, and laws of the several nations.1

1

[It appears that even so late as the third and fourth centuries, there was considerable difference in the mode of

conducting religious worship among Christians. See Irenæus, quoted by Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. 1. v. cap. 24.

§3. I am therefore induced to dissent from those who think that the Jewish rites and forms were every where transferred by the apostles and their disciples to the Christian assemblies. In those churches, indeed, which were composed either wholly or principally of Jews, I can easily believe the Jewish rites to have been so far retained as the different characters of the two religions would permit. And this may be confirmed by a good many examples. But that the same took place in other churches, in which 'either no Jews, or only a few were found, is not merely uncertain, but also incredible. Different religious regulations were, in fact, necessary for those early times, in order to suit the peculiarities of genius and character in different

nations.

§ 4. Since the discipline of Christians was various, it is very difficult to form such notions upon the form of their public worship, with others of their customs and institutions, as will be equally applicable to all the countries in which Christianity flourished. Yet there are a few regulations which may be considered as common to all Christians; and of these we shall give a brief account.-The Christians in this century assembled for the worship of God, and for their advancement in piety, on the first day of the week, the day on which Christ re-assumed his life; for that this day was set apart for religious worship by the apostles themselves, and that after the example of the church of Jerusalem, it was generally observed, we have unex

Sozomen, Hist. Eccles. 1. vii. cap. 19. Socrates, Hist. Eccles. 1. v. cap. 22. Augustine, Epist. 54, Opp. tom. ii. p. 93. A part of this difference in rites and ceremonies appears to have come down from the apostolic times. For when a contest arose in the second century, between the oriental and the occidental Christians, respecting the day on which Easter should be observed, we are informed by Eusebius, (Hist. Eccl. 1. v. cap. 23, 24,) that the former maintained, that John was the author of their custom; and the latter, that Peter and Paul were the authors of theirs. Both churches were probably correct : for it is very probable that John, for certain reasons, did ordain in Asia, that the feast of Easter should be kept at the time the Jews kept it, and that Peter and Paul ordered otherwise at Rome. Further, the Greek and Latin Churches had a contest on the question, whether

leavened or unleavened bread should be used in the sacred supper. And both churches claimed to have their customs handed down to them from the apostles; and for the reasons before mentioned, both were probably in the right.—Even the Catholics often admit this diversity of ceremonies in the apostolic church; e. g. Jo. Bona, Rerum Liturg. l. i. c. 7, § 2. Opp. p. 208; and the Jesuit, Jo. Harduin, makes no scruple to assert, that Paul enjoined on the Greeks one form for the consecration of priests; and Peter, on the Romans, another. His book is entitled, La dissertation du P. le Courayer sur la succession des Evesques Anglois et sur la validité de leur ordination, réfutée, tom. ii. p. 13. Paris, 1725,8vo. Tr. -Add A. Krazer, de Apostolicis, nec non antiquis eccl. occident. Liturgiis, sect. i. cap. i. § 2, p. 3, ed. Augusta Vind. 1786. See Mosheim's Institut. majores hist. Christ. p. 375. Schl.]

ceptionable testimony. Moreover, those congregations, which either lived among Jews, or were composed in a great measure of Jews, were accustomed also to observe the seventh day of the week as a sacred day3: for doing which, the other Christians taxed them with no wrong. As to annual religious days, they appear to have observed two; the one in memory af Christ's resurrection; the other in commemoration of the descent of the Holy Spirit on the apostles. To these may be added those days on which holy men met death for Christ's sake; which, it is most probable, were sacred and solemn days from the very commencement of the Christian church.5

4

§ 5. The places of assembling were, undoubtedly, the private houses of Christians. But as necessity required, when a congregation was formed and duly regulated, that some fixed, uniform place should be designated for its meetings, and as some furniture was requisite for holding them, such as books, tables, and benches, which could not conveniently be transported from one situation to another, especially in those times, undoubtedly the consequence was, that these places soon became, instead of private rooms, in a manner, public ones. These few remarks, I conceive, are sufficient to determine that long controversy,

2 Ph. J Hartmann, de Rebus gestis Christianor, sub Apostolis, cap. xv. p. 387. J. Hen. Böhmer, Diss. I. juris eccles. antiqui de stato die Christianor. p. 20, &c. [See also Acts xx. 7; ii. 1. 1 Cor. xvi. 1, 2. Apoc. i. 10. Pliny, Epist. lib. x. ep. 97, n. 7. Schl.]

3

Steph. Curcellus, Diatriba de esu sanguinis; Opp. Theol. p. 958. Gabr. Albaspinæus, Observatt. Eccles. lib. i. obs. xiii. p. 53. In vain, some learned men labour to persuade us, that in all the early churches, both days, or the first and last days of the week, were held sacred. The churches of Bithynia, mentioned by Pliny, devoted but one stated day to their public worship: and beyond all controversy, that was what we call the Lord's day, or the first day of the week.

Although some have doubted whether the day called Pentecost (WhitSunday) was a sacred day, so early as the first century, (See J. Bingham, Origines Eccles. lib. xx. cap. 6.) yet I am induced, by very weighty reasons, to believe, that from the beginning it was held equally sacred with the Passover

(or Easter day). Perhaps also Friday, as the day on which our Saviour died, was, from the earliest times, regarded with more respect than other days of the week. See J. Godefroi, in Codicem Theodos. tom. i. p. 138. Asseman, Biblioth. orient. Vatican. tom. i. p. 217. 237. Martine, Thesaur. Anecdotor. tom. v. p.

66.

5

[These were called Natalitia martyrum (the martyrs' birth-days). Sce Casp. Sagittarius, de Natalitiis martyrum, republished by Crenius, Syntagma i. Diss. philol. 1699. In the second cen

tury, these natalitia were every where observed; and they are often mentioned by Tertullian and Cyprian. Nay, in the epistle of the church of Smyrna to Philomelius, in Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. 1. iv. c. 15, the observance of the day of Polycarp's martyrdom is spoken of. Schl.]

See Camp. Vitringa, de Synagoga vetere, 1. i. pt. iii. cap. 1, p. 432. [It may be inferred from Acts xix. 8, 1 Cor. xi. 22, xiv. 35, and Ja. ii. 2, that Christians then had certain determinate places for holding public worship. Schl.]

If the word

part of one,

whether the early Christians had temples or not?" temple may denote a dwelling-house, or even a devoted to the public exercises of religion, yet neither with any idea of holiness attached to it, nor separated from every profane use, then I can readily admit that the earliest Christians had temples.

§ 6. In these public assemblies of Christians, the Holy Scriptures were read, which, for that purpose, were divided into certain portions. Then followed an exhortation to the people, neither eloquent nor long, but full of warmth and love. If any declared themselves under the Spirit's influence, they were allowed successively to state what the Lord commanded; the other prophets who were present judging how much authority was due to them. Afterwards, the prayers which constituted no inconsiderable part of public worship, were repeated after the bishop. To these succeeded hymns, which were sung,

8

7 See Dav. Blondell, de Episcopis et Presbyt. sect. iii. p. 216. 243. 246; Just. Hen. Böhmer, Diss. ii. Juris eccles. antiq. de antelucanis Christianorum cœtibus, § iv. p. 39; Jos. Bingham, Origines Eccles. lib. viii, ch. i. and others.

8 1 Cor. xiv. 16.

See Justin Martyr, Apologia secunda, p. 98, &c.] Bp. Kaye thus gives Justin's account: "And on the day called Sunday," (τοῦ ἡλίου λεγομένῃ ἡμέρᾳ,) "there is an assembling together of all who dwell in the cities and country; and the memoirs of the apostles, and the writings of the prophets, are read as long as circumstances permit. Then, when the reader has ceased, the president" (pоeσTs) "delivers a discourse, in which he admonishes and exhorts (all present) to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray,” εὐχὰς πέμπομεν) "and as we before said," (in describing the service after a baptism,) "prayer being ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president" (¿ πроEOTWs) "offers prayers in like manner, and thanksgivings according to his ability,” εὐχὰς ὁμοίως καὶ εὐχαριστίας, ὅση δύναμις αὐτῷ, ἀναπέμπει, “ and the people express their assent by saying Amen; and the distribution of that over which the thanksgiving has been pronounced, takes place to each; and each partakes, and a portion is sent to the absent by the deacons. And they who are wealthy, and choose, give as much

66

66

as they respectively deem fit; and whatever is collected" (тò σvλλeyóμevov) “is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows, and those who are in bonds, and the strangers sojourning among us; and, in a word, takes care of all who are most in need." (Some account of the Writings and Opinions of Justin Martyr, Camb. 1829, p. 89.) This very interesting statement really relates to the former half of the second century; but Mosheim is probably right in considering it applicable to the first also. The term πроστs, Bingham considers identical with bishop, which appears to be the fact (Antiqq. II. ii. 9.); but Justin so uses it, in his account of the service after a baptism, (p. 96. ed. Thirlby,) as to furnish, perhaps, with a handle, such as would make the president not differ in order from the rest of the congregation. In describing the service after a baptism, he says, "Bread is then brought to that brother who presides, and a cup of wine, mixed with water." (Bp. Kaye's transl.) pocφέρεται τῷ προεστῶτι τῶν ἀδελφῶν ἄρτος καὶ ποτήριον ὕδατος καὶ κράματος. It might, perhaps, be rendered, to him who presides over the brethren, which would suggest no suspicion of identity in order with the congregation generally. But whatever might be the president's general relation to the rest of the brethren, it is clear that from him proceeded the prayers and thanksgivings which converted, according to Justin,